1. The writing
and editing of my remarks
2. Related material on this site
3. Machiavelli on the internet and elsewhere
4. Introduction to Machiavelli and background
literature:
5. Pictures of Machiavelli and "The
Prince"
6. Copyright notice:
Back to Contents
1. The
writing and editing of my remarks: My remarks were
originally written
July 11 - July 13, 2000. I
suppose they are as readable as Machiavelli's text, and indeed one
way of approach to Machiavelli is by starting to read my remarks, that
all have links to Machiavelli's text (where most paragraphs have
links to my remarks).
The present version is of November
13, 2006, and is mostly the old version minus some typos, plus some
stylistical improvements, and with the format adjusted to what has
become the standard format of my
site.
Back to top.
2. Related
material on this site: There is some related material,
partially in Dutch, on several places on my
site.
First, in the section Politics
there is an English excerpt from a satire by T.H. White plus
my comments, and a Dutch excerpt of Etienne de la Boétie's
"De la servitude volontaire". The excerpts and
comments mostly are concerned with what men are, on average, and
why, and specifically why so many men and women have so willingly
served dictators, tyrants, and incompetent leaders.
Next, in the section Philosophy
there are my aphorisms in reply to the aphorisms of La
Rochefoucauld, who was a cynical wit from the 17th Century, who
wrote a booklet of cynical aphorisms called "Maximes".
This again addresses the question: What manner of beast is man?
(This is a question few men dare to look honestly and deeply into
the eyes, and many men like not at all to consider or repress, e.g.
while enjoying a horror movie).
Third, in the section Essays
most of my published essays of the
year 1989 are relevant, notably "Waarheid
en waarde", "De
ideologische aap" en "Yahooisme
en democratie". The last is mostly in English; the others
are in Dutch.
3.
Machiavelli on the internet and elsewhere: The only text of
Machiavelli I found in English is a version of an old translation of
"The Prince", which I used myself. This is rather
disappointing, since Machiavelli's "Discourses" and
"History of Florence" are in many ways better, and
better expressions of Machiavelli's own thinking, than is "The
Prince".
So, if you are in any way interested
in Machiavelli (whether you agree or disagree - and many modern men
are first put off by Machiavelli's cynical realism, that indeed is
very unfashionable these days) you ought to consult real books. If
you have access to a good library, it should have reasonable
editions of most of Machiavelli's works. If not, you may be in luck
in antiquarian bookshops. And you may consider books referred to in
the next section.
4.
Introduction to Machiavelli and background literature: I
will soon add an introduction to Machiavelli, in which there will be
a fairly extensive bibliography.
Meanwhile, here are some references
about Machiavelli and his type of ideas:
Sidney Anglo: Machiavelli
is by and large the best treatment
of him I have read. I have read at least 5 or 6 other biographies of
him and discussions of his works, I will say more about in my
introduction to Machiavelli. All I wish to do here is to remark that
it seems to me you can do well without Sebastian de Grazia's book
about Machiavelli: De Grazia is the sort of man who enjoys
addressing Machiavelli continuously as "Nicolo", and who
is interested in psycho-analysis. This is to me rather like writing
a thick tome on Shakespeare, and calling him "Willy" or
"Billy" all the time, while psycho-analysing him. Anyway: Mr De Grazia is a great man,
no doubt, and far greater than Machiavelli, in his own opinion, and
since you now know this, you don't need to read his books, which are
not so great at all.
In most academic introductions to
politics, Machiavelli is mentioned but he seems rarely dealt with in
a serious manner. Someone who was much influenced by him, and who
wrote a fine book about politics:
Gaetano Mosca: The Ruling Class
Mosca was an Italian, like
Machiavelli. His book is late 19th Century, but not outdated, except
in its references.
If you are seriously interested in
Machiavellian ideas, you should find
James Burnham: The
Machiavellians
This also treats Mosca, and
some others (notably Michels, Sorel and Pareto)
and does so in a clear and lively style. Burnham himself was an
interesting man: An American who turned from communism to radical
conservatism, who wrote a book every time he acquired a new
political philosophy, that whatever its other (de)merits at least
was well-written.
I suppose scholars will tell you -
especially if they are themselves Politically Correct, and can't
write well - that Burnham was not a great scholar, not politically
correct, and more to the same effect. In this they might well be
partially right (I am no Burnham specialist, but have read some very
minor sociological academic lights on him, and the grapes were sour,
for them), but I care far more for a good style, a good mind, and
personal courage than I care for meticulous scholarship, that mostly
only pleases pedants anyway. And those who can't write well, can't
think well either.
Next, talking of style, and clarity,
and politics, the reader should dip into
C. Wright Mills: Power,
Politics and People
which is a thick volume of essays by
Mills, who was a radical American sociologist of the leftist kind,
who died young but wrote very well and was no conventional mind nor
a follower of popular ideas. He wrote quite a few other books, all
well worth reading, if only because so few scientists can write,
while he could. I won't list these books here, since they are mostly
sociological.
In any case, I have now referred you
to a standard introduction to Machiavelli that got considerable
praise from specialists when it was first published (Anglo);
to a classical conservative liberal and one of the founders of the
science of politics (Mosca); to a more or less right-wing
conservative (Burnham); and to a more or less left-wing
sociologist (Mills).
My three most important reasons for
recommending books, incidentally, are emphatically not that I
agree with their authors, but that I think they have interesting
ideas, relevant knowledge and they are well written. (Indeed, I have
reached the age were I refuse to read anything that pretends to be
serious, but was written by a mind who can't even write well. The
reader will find, once he has reached that maturity, how much more
interesting life grows, after such a wise decision, and how much
less there is to read.)
Here are some other books that are
tolerably well-written, about political leaders, according to the
Machiavellian type:
Allan Bullock: Hitler and
Stalin
Zhisui Li: The Private Life Of Chairman Mao
Especially the last is very
revealing about the qualities of a great leader - and written by his
private doctor of long standing, who knew him and his surroundings
quite well.
Perhaps it is well, for some naive
readers, to add that Machiavelli did not approve of
such types: he described how they do in fact acquire power
and remain in power. (See also my Remarks
on Chapter VII for Machiavelli and Borgia).
5. Pictures:
Although I haven't found much about Machiavelli on the net that was
really well done (and I admit I skipped a lot), I did find some nice
illustrations:
Machiavelli's Standard
Portrait + face
This is the portrait mostly given of Machiavelli. It is also on the
cover of the paperback edition of Anglo's "Machiavelli",
but he tells us that there are no absolutely certain portraits of
Machiavelli. There are others, also to be found on the net, and not
like the present one.
A manuscript page from
"The Prince"
One reason the handwriting is
interesting, in these days of computers, is that in Machiavelli's
days and until the invention of the typewriter everything
written that was not printed (which was long a cumbersome
labor-intensive process) was handwritten. Of course, the men it was
intended for read either Machiavelli's own handwriting or that of a
copyist. "The Prince" was printed first only after
Machiavelli's death.
Incidentally, the manuscript page
comes from:
http://www.rain.org/~karpeles/machaivelli.html
who have trouble with Machiavelli's name.
6. Copyright
notice: My own remarks are copyright. By this I mean
essentially the following:
You are herewith declared free
to copy my work to your computer, read it, and print it for your
own personal use (the last essentially because this often makes it
easier to study a text).
You are herewith forbidden to
pretend my texts or any part thereof is yours; forbidden to sell
or offer my texts for money without my prior written and signed
permission; and forbidden to remove my copyright notice in case
you send or give my texts to others.
And you should reckon with the
fact that my texts are circulating on commercially sold CDs while
it is my intention to see my texts on Machiavelli published on
paper: If you do plagiarize, as I cannot prevent you, it is not
pleasant for you if you are found out. (And it is unlikely you are
known to coin aphorisms as easily as I do.)
Finally, if you make a link to part
of my site on your site, I'd like to be informed of this fact.
I wish you pleasure in reading.
Amsterdam,
July 15, 2000
Maarten Maartensz
email: maartens@xs4all.nl
P.S. of Nov 13, 2006:
I have today reformatted
Machiavelli's text and my comments to the present format of my site,
and have removed some typos and some stylistical infelicities.
Meanwhile, my edition and comments have been used in a Scotch
university, and those interested in politics may note that since the
year 2000 at least two relevant texts have been added to my site,
also with my remarks:
Burckhard's "The Civilization of the Renaissance in Italy",
which is an excellent history of Machiavelli's time, and
Mill's "On Liberty",
which is a classic on human freedom in a free society.
Maarten Maartensz
last update: Nov 18, 2006