According to Machiavelli, prowess is an individual’s own talents and ability, whereas fortune is simply chance or luck. The idea of prowess suggests that an individual is able to use his/her talents to help determine his/her own destiny, contrary to the pre-humanistic notion of a divine being single-handedly controlling human fate. Machiavelli maintains that “a prince wins them [dominions] either with the arms of others or with his own, either by fortune or by prowess” (Machiavelli 7). Here Machiavelli acknowledges that even though a prince may win land because of his own skill, luck still plays a hand in one’s destiny occasionally; however, the fact that he puts so much emphasis on prowess and free will clearly demonstrates the influence of humanism in his political treatise. His aim is to investigate just how much of a prince’s success or failure is caused by his own free will, and how much is determined by chance or outside forces. Machiavelli comes to the conclusion that “it is probably true that fortune is the arbiter of half the things we do, leaving the other half or so to be controlled by ourselves” (Machiavelli 79). This exemplifies that the Renaissance truly was a time of change, seeing as people never really thought they had any control over their own destinies during the Middle Ages. Renaissance Man Machiavelli was evidently confident in the power of human beings to shape their own destinies, but equally confident that human control over outcomes is never absolute. Machiavelli even employs Christian beliefs to explain why human beings do, in fact, possess free will: “God does not want us to do everything Himself, and take away from us our free will and our share of the glory which belongs to us” (Machiavelli 83). While he promotes the idea of free will, he does not entirely dismiss religion. Although the Renaissance was a time of increased
According to Machiavelli, prowess is an individual’s own talents and ability, whereas fortune is simply chance or luck. The idea of prowess suggests that an individual is able to use his/her talents to help determine his/her own destiny, contrary to the pre-humanistic notion of a divine being single-handedly controlling human fate. Machiavelli maintains that “a prince wins them [dominions] either with the arms of others or with his own, either by fortune or by prowess” (Machiavelli 7). Here Machiavelli acknowledges that even though a prince may win land because of his own skill, luck still plays a hand in one’s destiny occasionally; however, the fact that he puts so much emphasis on prowess and free will clearly demonstrates the influence of humanism in his political treatise. His aim is to investigate just how much of a prince’s success or failure is caused by his own free will, and how much is determined by chance or outside forces. Machiavelli comes to the conclusion that “it is probably true that fortune is the arbiter of half the things we do, leaving the other half or so to be controlled by ourselves” (Machiavelli 79). This exemplifies that the Renaissance truly was a time of change, seeing as people never really thought they had any control over their own destinies during the Middle Ages. Renaissance Man Machiavelli was evidently confident in the power of human beings to shape their own destinies, but equally confident that human control over outcomes is never absolute. Machiavelli even employs Christian beliefs to explain why human beings do, in fact, possess free will: “God does not want us to do everything Himself, and take away from us our free will and our share of the glory which belongs to us” (Machiavelli 83). While he promotes the idea of free will, he does not entirely dismiss religion. Although the Renaissance was a time of increased