**I totally forgot that the
independent reading was supposed to be nonfiction! So instead of continuing on
the second portion of the Westing Game
by Ellen Raskin, I decided to completely change the book to The Prince by Machiavelli.
A political theorist and diplomat in
the 16th century, Niccolò Machiavelli wrote The Prince in Italy during a time when the nation became the scene
of intense political conflict. Composed as a guide for rulers on the basics and
understandings on how to govern, he dedicated The Prince to the ruler of Florence, Lorenzo de’ Medici. His
underlying purpose on this dedication was to win the favor of Lorenzo as he
hoped to land an advisory position within the Forentine government. The
straightforward tone of the piece laid a stable foundation for the validation
of his advices.
When
Machiavelli released The Prince in
1532, he received several criticisms and was not as recognized as he is today. As
the word of the book spread, Machiavelli’s piece began to be criticized as
immoral, evil, and wicked. Some of the critiques included the objection of the
Catholics as they interpreted the piece as an attack against the church as
Machiavelli degraded the church’s power. The main factor that drove the church
to denounce The Prince was
Machiavelli’s dislike of strong power of the Catholic church. Many authors,
including Machiavelli, lived in a world where Christianity became filled with
undesirable religious outlook, causing many to object and dislike the
Christianity. This caused Machiavelli to set an anti-Christianity view. His
belief established tone of attack toward the church, making the church to set
the idea that Machiavelli was indeed attacking the church.
Besides
Machiavelli’s tone, the result of weakened Italy was due to the rise of the
power for the church. Machiavelli advised that the increasing power of the
church brought separation and frail nation, “when in these later times the
Imperial control began to be rejected by Italy, and the temporal power of the
Pope to be more thought of, Italy suddenly split up into a number of separate
States…Hence Italy, having passed almost entirely into the hands of the
Church…began to take foreigners into her pay (Machiavelli 96). Machiavelli
previously favored princes to rule their nation as nationalized country. But
bringing foreigners to one’s nation will, in Machiavelli’s perspective, allowed
decline of the country since there was no loyalty existing among the civilians.
Not only that, a split nation also causes a nation to be vulnerable against
other nations, where there would not be coherent decisions made. When the
church took power of Italy, the church divided the nation instead of joining
together. Machiavelli, then, indirectly suggested that huge power of the church
will only bring destruction toward nations, and in conclusion, princes should
not offer such ordeal amount of powers to the church.
Machiavelli’s
writing brought great shock toward religious society. People of the church saw
his work as an attack, and the mass of believers believed that he was sinful
and immoral. It was evident that his work revealed his notion of degrading the
church and going against the Catholic moral conducts. People now read this
piece academically, but back then, reading this book without any religious
pious was difficult.
No comments:
Post a Comment