How Does Machiavelli Define Fortuna

In The Prince, Machiavelli discusses ways in which a ruler should obtain power and maintain power, emphasizing the concept of gaining power through virtue versus fortune. Virtue, or virtu in the original Italian, is defined as the masculine quality of power, and not necessarily tied to ideas of morality as it is in the English definition.

In chapter XV Machiavelli discusses how it is important to appear as a virtuous ruler, but to not actually possess these qualities. He states, “ one is considered a giver, the other rapacious; one cruel, another merciful; one treacherous, another faithful; one effeminate and cowardly, another bold and courageous; one humane, another haughty; one lascivious, another chaste; one trustworthy, another cunning; one harsh another lenient; one serious another frivolous; one religious another unbelieving; and the like. And I know that everyone will admit that it would be a very praiseworthy thing to find in a prince, of the qualities mentioned above, those that are held to be good; but since it is neither possible to have them nor observe them all completely, because human nature does not permit it, a prince must be prudent enough to know how to escape the bad reputation of those vices that would lose the state for him” (The Portable Machiavelli 127). In this chapter Machiavelli is suggesting that a good ruler can’t be virtuous at all times because it would not be in the best interest of the people.

Niccolo Machiavelli’s The Prince give the world an insight on his thought about those who rule, virtue, military power, and human nature. He elaborates on his ideal prince who must take power, but also maintain power. The Prince is extremely relevant in modern society and often looked upon as the beginning of modern political thinking. Machiavelli gives this prince an outline of the tools needed to maintain power and reinforces these ideas by giving examples of other leader’s successes and failures. Machiavelli believes that the prince must complete understand the balance between war and government. Understanding this balance and being fluent in both politics and war is crucial for maintaining power. Politicians today still use some of the tactics given by

Niccolò Machiavelli was an activist of analyzing power. He believed firmly in his theories and he wanted to persuade everyone else of them as well. To comment on the common relationship that was seen between moral goodness and legitimate authority of those who held power, Machiavelli said that authority and power were essentially coequal.9 He believed that whomever had power obtained the right to command; but goodness does not ensure power. This implied that the only genuine apprehension of the administrative power was the attainment and preservation of powers which indirectly guided the maintenance of the state. That, to him, should have been the objective of all leaders. Machiavelli believed that one should do whatever it took, during the given circumstance, to keep his people in favor of him and to maintain the state. Thus, all leaders should have both a sly fox and ravenous wolf inside of him prepared to release when necessary.10

There is, however, a troubling aspect to this kind of scale, leading to an important question for those seeking more virtù. If one copies the actions of another person, how is it that one can ever be greater than the person whom he imitates; at the very least, how can human history itself escape being a story of increasingly mediocre statesmen? The only way to resolve this seeming issue is to understand how Machiavelli first conceives of virtù. In Chapter Six, the majority of the discussion regarding virtù centers on the value of the abstract notions of skill and strength of character. Even in the passages that deal with Moses, Romulus, Cyrus, Theseus, and Hiero, the only tangible, imitable advice the reader receives is to disband an old militia, drop old friends, and arise at an opportune moment. This hardly seems enough to take over a state given the immense difficulties with which such an action is associated. Machiavelli, at least in the beginning, has removed the scaffolding from the building he has created, leaving the reader to wonder what exactly he should replicate to gain virtù.

People are unlikely to overthrow a ruler that they fear, for they dread the punishments of failure. If the ruler is not feared by the people, he will eventually upset enough of them that they will rise up against him. They will overthrow him because of his perceived weakness, and his name and image will be shamed in the eyes of both his government and his people. Machiavelli believes that the state is completely separate from the ruler’s private life. No matter how immoral or heartless the ruler may be in private, only his public image is important. A ruler can be a terrible, sleazy person on their own time, and when not involved with matters of the state, but at any time when the leader is involved in politics and the state, you cannot afford to injure the image of the ruler or else anarchy will develop. With this kind of rebellion can come revolution, war, and many other tragedies that could be otherwise avoided.

In The Prince, Machiavelli begins by defining virtue as being able to lead with fear and not invoking hate. As evidence he conjures a situation where a prince will give his citizens “hope that the evil will not be for long” (73) which in turn makes his subjects keener toward him. However, virtue is more than this initial definition. In Chapter 3 Machiavelli suggests that a prince needs to be able to see into the future of his people and should live on their land so they are able to understand the needs of their people. (44) By living with his people Machiavelli implies that they the prince will be more understanding of the issues and will be able to overcome them before it turns into something catastrophic. A prince must form strong bonds with their citizens, and not become hated.

The concept of fortuna is important in understanding Machiavelli's views of makes a good an effective prince. Rather than write about how a prince can help the people who he rules in times of bad fortune, he gives the prince advice about how he can preserve

While Machiavelli was a Catholic nobleman and Prince a singer and a Jehovah’s Witness(member of a Christian-based religious movement), they were alike in that they explored realms beyond their respective religions. Machiavelli pioneered the study of political science, something quite unheard-of in a time when monarchical power was believed to be a divine right. Prince, while a devout Christian, also spent time studying Afrocentric interpretations of history and some Eastern spiritual ideas.(Hiatt) In addition, Prince’s attitude towards fate bears striking similarity with Machiavelli’s theory of fate. The Prince explains that “fortune is the ruler of half our actions, but that she allows the other half or thereabouts to be governed by us.”(104) According to Machiavelli, there are some things in life that are within man’s control and some things beyond; which is well in accord with Prince’s beliefs. When asked whether he would marry again, Prince said, “that’s another thing that’s up to God. It’s all magnetism anyway- something would pull me into its gravity, and I wouldn’t be able to get out from

Finally Machiavelli notes that inherent power of the public, which exists despite the dictatorial power that any prince exercises. When discussing fortresses, he states that "the best fortress a ruler can have is not to be hated by the people, for if you possess fortresses

A family of monarchy which tortured Machiavelli for months causing him great suffrage and sorrow. He writes to Lorenzo “May I trust, therefore, that Your Highness will accept this little gift in the spirit in which it is offered: and if Your Highness will deign to peruse it, you will recognize in it my ardent desire that you may attain to that grandeur which fortune and your own merits presage for you.” This enough is confusing because if this is the same principality that caused so much suffering why dedicate a book to let their reign continue into longevity? As to add to this confusion, Machiavelli explains how a prince should use cruelty and violence correctly against the people. To use cruelty and punishment all at once so that the people learn to respect you by fear. He includes that if you had a choice on either being loved or feared, be feared for love can change as quick as it came. Fear of punishment, people would avoid and be subservient. He also goes on to put out that a prince must be cunning like a fox yet strong and fearsome like a lion. To use Realpolitik, morality and ideology left out for the world is not these things as you should not be as well. Furthermore, Machiavelli explains what must happen when a new ruler overtakes a new city and the people in it. “And whoever becomes the ruler of a free city and does not destroy it, can expect to be destroyed by it,

In Machiavelli’s depiction of virtu, regarding the womanly fortuna, he proves the need for the virtuous man to use his freewill to exercise ruthlessness over Fortune in order to control the partial sphere of influence he has over her. For at times, when having the end in mind while picking the means, a resistor to Fortune may be required to pick a cruel means in order to obtain successful resistance against Fortune. For instance, an admiral of Machiavelli’s virtu may see it proper to use a blitzkrieg tactic in order to defeat an enemy. He would realize the likelihood of the military operation ending in great causalities for his troupes, but would also see the bloodbath necessary to defeating his enemy. If the admiral were too cautious or fearful as to make such a bold move, he could face lesser odds of victory. Machiavelli shows this approach to be successful more often than not backed by his reference to Pope Julius II, who acted impetuously in his dealings, and deemed successful. So we see that resisting Fortune can require a level of virtu that is able to make tough and risky decisions in an unflinching manor; Virtu that is unafraid of the possible injuring

Relying on the needs of the society of that time, Machiavelli comes to the conclusion that the most important task is the formation of a single Italian state (Machiavelli 15). Developing his thoughts, the author comes to the following inference: only a prince can become a leader capable of leading people and building a unified state. It is not a concrete historical personality but someone abstract, symbolic, possessing such qualities that in the aggregate are inaccessible to any living ruler. That is why Machiavelli devotes most of his research to the issue of what qualities should the prince possess to fulfill the historical task of developing a new state. The written work is constructed strictly logically and objectively. Even though the image of an ideal prince is abstract, Machiavelli argues that he should be ruthless, deceiving, and selfish.

Virtù is the human energy or action that is contrary to the idea of luck. Although Machiavelli did not exclude the idea of goodness or virtuous behavior in the word, it does not necessarily include it, either. Virtù is the skill, talent, or ability administered toward the achievement of certain goals, and according to Machiavelli, the most significant quality for a prince. Even villains such as Agathocles or barbaric rulers like Severus can possess virtù. It can be inferred from Machiavelli’s work that virtù could defeat fortuna if it was done correctly. A prince would always be successful if he could modify his virtù to the current circumstances. But then again, his works imply that there is a connection between virtu and fortuna. He stated that virtù is wasted if there is no fortuna, and vice versa, which means that there is some sort of collaboration between the two forces. The two forces are dependent on each other.It is difficult and nearly impossible to completely avoid or change the effects of Fortuna, but it could be prepared for and decrease its negative effects.

When reading Niccolo Machiavelli’s The Prince, one can’t help but grasp Machiavelli’s argument that morality and politics can not exist in the same forum. However, when examining Machiavelli’s various concepts in depth, one can conclude that perhaps his suggested violence and evil is fueled by a moral end of sorts. First and foremost, one must have the understanding that this book is aimed solely at the Prince or Emperor with the express purpose of aiding him in maintaining power. Therefore, it is essential to grasp his concepts of fortune and virtue. These two contrary concepts reflect the manner in which a Prince should govern while minimizing all chance and uncertainty. This kind of governing demands violence to be taken, however this