Hiero's Virtue
A great leader should care for the people and act in their best interest. They should not care about becoming powerful, but would rather see the power at the hands of his people so they may all have a voice. In The Prince, Machiavelli does not believe a leader, or “prince,” in terms, should be righteous, but should rather focus on the importance of maintaining his state or principality. Despite the lack of a specific definition, we are able to conclude that the virtue Machiavelli presents us with is more about ones power than morals. Machiavelli refers to virtue as a prince strength and his ability to be triumphant and succeed. Virtue is not a trait that we are born with, but skills and experiences we learn from others. Virtue is instead a
…show more content…
set of qualities and has no moral connotations. In Chapter VI of our assigned passage, Machiavelli emphasizes the emphasis of virtue in order to gain and attain power through force because one needs to have either fortune or ability to reach their height of authority.
Machiavelli states that in order to become a successful leader, one needs to show greatness and pretend to be a skillful commander so they will at least get a sense of their power. Machiavelli’s analogy of the archer shows us “how far the virtue of their bow reaches” (Machiavelli, 55). A leader has to aim high even though he doesn’t achieve as much excellence as a successful leader does, but he would probably be able to achieve the goal in maintaining power. Machiavelli mentions that “the less a man relied on fortune the stronger he has made his position” (Machiavelli, 55). Fortune gives a leader the opportunity to control and command his soldiers, yet only certain skills of power are capable of utilizing it to their convenience for an extended amount of time. Furthermore, to obtain power rigorously by ones skills is more ambitious to accomplish, but one still has a better chance in keeping their power.
Machiavelli states that Moses is one of the best rulers to imitate because he had great and virtuous leadership qualities that made him become an effective ruler. He emphasizes that although the other successful leaders are admirable, Moses is an exemplary figure that other man follow to achieve virtue. Machiavelli asserts that since Moses was a “mere executor of the things that were order of him by God, yet he should be admired, if only for that grace” (Machiavelli, 55). Moses “found the people of Israel enslaved” (Machiavelli, 56) that he was able to lead them out of Egypt. If he did not find them in trouble and in need of escape, he wouldn’t have received this opportunity through fortune. This underlines the notion in how virtue is needed in preserving power, but to have an opportunity to be a leader fortune has to be established as well. Therefore, a leader can now become successful with fortune, but not just and only through fortune. If a prince only received his power by fortune and didn’t have virtue he didn’t earn his position, because power was instead somehow just handed to him.
In addition, Machiavelli describes Savonarola as a religious genuine historical figure that loses and falls out of power. He was “ruined in his new orders when the multitude began not to believe in him and he had no way to hold firm those who had believed, nor to make the unbelieving believe” (Machiavelli, 57). Savonarola had virtue, but he didn’t use force when it was necessary. There will be moments that people will not follow a successful leaders orders. Even if the prince is cherished, when people are influenced by others, the prince is in danger that his people might change their judgment about the love they have for him. Thence, a leader that has virtue is required to use force to attain their power, so his soldiers wouldn’t take advantage of them. When a country gets weakened, Savonarola forms a more powerful alliance with Rome and comes to power through his own tactician. Force, in a virtuous man is used so people can fear him, but force cannot go to the limit and say that his own people hate him. Machiavelli’s leaders may not appear to be devotional or have some kind of philosophical wisdom, but they should be leaders with remarkable personal characteristics which will allow them to bring laws, develop new skills and improve the control of men’s lives.
Machiavelli concisely deemphasizes virtue in a moral sense and describes how one receives an opportunity through fortune.
Machiavelli states that Hiero “eliminated the former military” but still succeeded because “he established a new one” through his military tactician (Machiavelli, 57). Hiero wasn’t really a virtuous moral leader, but a private citizen who rose to power through his leadership qualities, and later acquired fortune when the people of Syracuse appointed him king. Hiero had the power to take out any alliance and soldier from their social orders. He trusted the people he found and he knew that they weren’t going to deceive him or bring him down. Yet, it is always better for the prince to start his own arms than to depend on others that cannot be trusted. Machiavelli explains how starting something new can be difficult, but if the virtuous leader is successful then no one will be able to take his power away. Furthermore, Hiero is seen as a ruler who deeply depended on his troops. That is to be said, that Hiero of Syracuse did not really obtain the high status of a skillful society founder just as Moses or Savonarola did, but his procedures still show, on a lower rank what these greater man could have also done to
improve.
In The Prince, we are introduced to a variety of different concepts of virtue. It may difficult to understand what Machiavelli is trying to explain at first, but once you begin to use the context clues we realize that he does not use the conventional definition of virtue, as opposed to the encyclopedia of Dictionary.com, where virtue comes to mean ones “moral and ethical principles; uprightness; and rectitude.” Throughout the book, Machiavelli continuously uses virtue as the prince ability to keep and maintain their power. In this instance, a prince not only acquires strength to maintain a new principality, but it also gives one the opportunity to do whatever it takes to become successful. A virtuous prince should be strategic and clever, but also powerful and demanding to his soldiers and people. With these qualities he would be able to secure his new principality. When speaking about these exemplary princes, Machiavelli brings up an interesting point: without the opportunity, the leader’s “virtue of their spirit would have been wasted; and without that virtue, the opportunity would have come in vain” (Machiavelli 55). This is an interesting thought because virtue is basically the prince’s ability to succeed and accomplish what he sets out to do. Machiavelli describes how fortune gives one the opportunity to become a prince, but in order for them to maintain their power, virtue is necessary. Although Moses and Hiero received an opportunity through fortune, they were still considered excellent leaders with the decisions they made. Moses was such a powerful example of a virtuous prince because he had some virtue that enabled God to give him some orders. Hiero, in the other hand used his leadership abilities to gain and maintain power by reforming the military. Moreover, Machiavelli shows us that Savonarola’s great virtue enabled him to gain power through the popular will of the people, but he lost power because he lacked his own arms to enforce his orders; therefore he is considered a virtuous man. In general, Machiavelli helps us understand the concept of virtue by giving us great examples of successful leaders that have succeeded in some way or another, whether it was by their will of maintaining power through fortune, force, or virtue.
set of qualities and has no moral connotations. In Chapter VI of our assigned passage, Machiavelli emphasizes the emphasis of virtue in order to gain and attain power through force because one needs to have either fortune or ability to reach their height of authority.
Machiavelli states that in order to become a successful leader, one needs to show greatness and pretend to be a skillful commander so they will at least get a sense of their power. Machiavelli’s analogy of the archer shows us “how far the virtue of their bow reaches” (Machiavelli, 55). A leader has to aim high even though he doesn’t achieve as much excellence as a successful leader does, but he would probably be able to achieve the goal in maintaining power. Machiavelli mentions that “the less a man relied on fortune the stronger he has made his position” (Machiavelli, 55). Fortune gives a leader the opportunity to control and command his soldiers, yet only certain skills of power are capable of utilizing it to their convenience for an extended amount of time. Furthermore, to obtain power rigorously by ones skills is more ambitious to accomplish, but one still has a better chance in keeping their power.
Machiavelli states that Moses is one of the best rulers to imitate because he had great and virtuous leadership qualities that made him become an effective ruler. He emphasizes that although the other successful leaders are admirable, Moses is an exemplary figure that other man follow to achieve virtue. Machiavelli asserts that since Moses was a “mere executor of the things that were order of him by God, yet he should be admired, if only for that grace” (Machiavelli, 55). Moses “found the people of Israel enslaved” (Machiavelli, 56) that he was able to lead them out of Egypt. If he did not find them in trouble and in need of escape, he wouldn’t have received this opportunity through fortune. This underlines the notion in how virtue is needed in preserving power, but to have an opportunity to be a leader fortune has to be established as well. Therefore, a leader can now become successful with fortune, but not just and only through fortune. If a prince only received his power by fortune and didn’t have virtue he didn’t earn his position, because power was instead somehow just handed to him.
In addition, Machiavelli describes Savonarola as a religious genuine historical figure that loses and falls out of power. He was “ruined in his new orders when the multitude began not to believe in him and he had no way to hold firm those who had believed, nor to make the unbelieving believe” (Machiavelli, 57). Savonarola had virtue, but he didn’t use force when it was necessary. There will be moments that people will not follow a successful leaders orders. Even if the prince is cherished, when people are influenced by others, the prince is in danger that his people might change their judgment about the love they have for him. Thence, a leader that has virtue is required to use force to attain their power, so his soldiers wouldn’t take advantage of them. When a country gets weakened, Savonarola forms a more powerful alliance with Rome and comes to power through his own tactician. Force, in a virtuous man is used so people can fear him, but force cannot go to the limit and say that his own people hate him. Machiavelli’s leaders may not appear to be devotional or have some kind of philosophical wisdom, but they should be leaders with remarkable personal characteristics which will allow them to bring laws, develop new skills and improve the control of men’s lives.
Machiavelli concisely deemphasizes virtue in a moral sense and describes how one receives an opportunity through fortune.
Machiavelli states that Hiero “eliminated the former military” but still succeeded because “he established a new one” through his military tactician (Machiavelli, 57). Hiero wasn’t really a virtuous moral leader, but a private citizen who rose to power through his leadership qualities, and later acquired fortune when the people of Syracuse appointed him king. Hiero had the power to take out any alliance and soldier from their social orders. He trusted the people he found and he knew that they weren’t going to deceive him or bring him down. Yet, it is always better for the prince to start his own arms than to depend on others that cannot be trusted. Machiavelli explains how starting something new can be difficult, but if the virtuous leader is successful then no one will be able to take his power away. Furthermore, Hiero is seen as a ruler who deeply depended on his troops. That is to be said, that Hiero of Syracuse did not really obtain the high status of a skillful society founder just as Moses or Savonarola did, but his procedures still show, on a lower rank what these greater man could have also done to
improve.
In The Prince, we are introduced to a variety of different concepts of virtue. It may difficult to understand what Machiavelli is trying to explain at first, but once you begin to use the context clues we realize that he does not use the conventional definition of virtue, as opposed to the encyclopedia of Dictionary.com, where virtue comes to mean ones “moral and ethical principles; uprightness; and rectitude.” Throughout the book, Machiavelli continuously uses virtue as the prince ability to keep and maintain their power. In this instance, a prince not only acquires strength to maintain a new principality, but it also gives one the opportunity to do whatever it takes to become successful. A virtuous prince should be strategic and clever, but also powerful and demanding to his soldiers and people. With these qualities he would be able to secure his new principality. When speaking about these exemplary princes, Machiavelli brings up an interesting point: without the opportunity, the leader’s “virtue of their spirit would have been wasted; and without that virtue, the opportunity would have come in vain” (Machiavelli 55). This is an interesting thought because virtue is basically the prince’s ability to succeed and accomplish what he sets out to do. Machiavelli describes how fortune gives one the opportunity to become a prince, but in order for them to maintain their power, virtue is necessary. Although Moses and Hiero received an opportunity through fortune, they were still considered excellent leaders with the decisions they made. Moses was such a powerful example of a virtuous prince because he had some virtue that enabled God to give him some orders. Hiero, in the other hand used his leadership abilities to gain and maintain power by reforming the military. Moreover, Machiavelli shows us that Savonarola’s great virtue enabled him to gain power through the popular will of the people, but he lost power because he lacked his own arms to enforce his orders; therefore he is considered a virtuous man. In general, Machiavelli helps us understand the concept of virtue by giving us great examples of successful leaders that have succeeded in some way or another, whether it was by their will of maintaining power through fortune, force, or virtue.