Questions Concerning The Prince

1. Which of the following would be most successful in business today? And what kind of business would they run (Internet startup, chain store, international conglomerate, NGO, mafia)? Remirro da Orca (chapter 7), Oliverotto da Fermo (chapter 8) Cesare Borgia.

Ramiro d’Orco

Ramiro d’Orco is a man in “The Prince” who is only involved shortly in the story, but is still altogether important. Ramiro was brought in by Cesare Borgia to govern the country of Romagna, which was “was full of robbery, quarrels, and every kind of violence” (Chapter 7 – Machiavelli ) from its previous, week ruler. Ramiro was brought in because he was “a swift and cruel man” (Chapter 7 –Machiavelli ), who would be perfect for uniting the now distraught country. Ramiro did a great job at uniting this country, showing his managing prowess and charisma. Even though Ramiro’s days ended via execution, he still had a knack for administering many people. In today’s world, Ramiro would seem most likely to run a business similar to a chain store. He would be a man who is able to control many different stores, and also not fall behind his competition.

Oliverotto da Ferno

Oliverotto da Ferno was another character in the Prince who was not a key part to the story, but important nonetheless. He was a man who was orphaned at an early age, and raised by his uncle. Giovanni Fogliani. At a young age, he entered into the military, training him in fighting and combat. He was a man who started with little, and worked his way up through the ranks. Once Oliverotto felt that he wanted more power, he arranged a meeting wherein he betrayed his uncle and the man who raised him, Giovanni, along with other important political figures. This then allowed Oliverotto to proclaim himself Prince. Oliverotto seems like a man who would be most fitting in the mafia in today’s world. He is a man who is not afraid to get his hands dirty or to go against the rules to get what he wants. He came from nothing and eventually became a Prince, doing whatever he needed to do to get there, with betrayal, assassinations, anything that was necessary. He would not settle for anything less than the best, thinking that it was “a paltry thing to serve under others.” (Chapter 8 –Machiavelli)

Cesare Borgia

Unlike the prior two men, Cesare Borgia was more frequently found in this story. He was a man who was born into power, being the son of Pope Alexander VI, and was made the Duke of Valentino. He was given more and more power, due to his father’s growing strength and command. Cesare was described as a “man who rises on the fortune of others” (Introduction – Machiavelli), riding his father’s power into power of his own. Borgia seems like a man who would be most successful in an international conglomerate, where he would be able to oversee a vast number of people and stores. “Cesare Borgia was considered cruel; notwithstanding, his cruelty reconciled the Romagna, unified it, and restored it to peace and loyalty” (Chapter 17 – Machiavelli) Cesare was a good ruler, who knew he had to be fierce and strong when he had to you, in a way, ruling with tough love. He was able to rule large numbers of people flawlessly, which would be an invaluable asset in running a business in today’s world.

2. Who is a prince's greatest ally? (Chapters 9, 19, 20, 21)

Throughout the Prince, Machiavelli states many assets that may help the prince, but perhaps the most important aid to the Prince is his own people. Without his people, the prince would have nothing. If the Prince was hated or disdained by his people, he would have nothing to do, for he could not quell their displeasure due to the sheer number. On the other side of the people are the nobles, who only look to oppress the people in order to keep their power. If the Prince sided with the nobles, he would be at ends with his people. “A prince can never secure himself against a hostile people, because of their being too many, whilst from the nobles he can secure himself, as they are few in number” (Chapter 9 – Machiavelli). Albeit the nobles are important to the Prince, he cannot put them above the people, for it would undermine his reign. He can avoid these nobles because their numbers are dwindled when compared. To be a successful Prince, he must also remain on the good side of these people. He must “entertain the people with festivals and spectacles at convenient seasons of the year” (Chapter 21 – Machiavelli) in order to make sure they are willing to stand by him. If he ever loses his support the Prince will not be able to survive. Another important aspect of having a large mass of people on the Prince’s side is that if someone wished to go against the Prince and kill him, he would be shunned and hunted by the people for killing a loved leader. A conspirator would not do this if he knew that he would be exiled by his people. In conclusion, above all those involved with the Prince, his people truly are the most vital.

3. According to Machiavelli, when is generosity a good thing? (Be specific, identify, and cite his argument).

In The Prince, Machiavelli views generosity as a quality that must be used selectively by a Price. He must be neither too generous nor too oppressive to his people. To be successful a Prince must learn to balance both of these. It is always good to be viewed favorably by your people, but a Prince cannot be too lenient with his people, and must keep them in order. If a Prince is too kind, he could become too trusting of a person who is in a prime position to overthrow him or betray him. Machiavelli says that “every prince ought to desire to be considered clement and not cruel” (Chapter 17 – Machiavelli). This is saying how a Prince should not want to be feared and viewed harshly as his people, but pleasing and agreeable. With this being said, a Prince also has to make hard decisions which may harm his image as a kind king, but still vital to his staying in power. A Prince can never win in being generous or not, but he must simply choose the one in which has the least downsides. Another important thing for a Prince to do, in respect to generosity, is to not take from the people, instead taking from someone who is not in his kingdom whenever possible. It is best to let his people keep their goods, and only take when necessary. All in all, generosity is most important to a Prince when coming into power, in order to gain support and followers, and less used when already obtaining such followers.

4. Use The Beatitudes to argue against Machiavelli.

Throughout Machiavelli’s story, he portrays an idea that is not in line with the Beatitudes. A key idea that Machiavelli expresses is that the end justifies the means. This is highly disputed in the Beatitudes, saying how those who are persecuted, insulted, and looked down upon are the blessed. The Beatitudes talk about how if a person is in line with God’s law they will be rewarded. These people are blessed and the chosen by God, who receive salvation. This is very contradictory to what Machiavelli believes, where the Prince should go through any means necessary to get what he wants. He believes that the Prince should be as manipulative, corrupt, and scheming as he wants to get into power. Right in the third Beatitude, it says that “Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth.” This is directly arguing with Machiavelli’s ideals, where he views those who are strong and want to rule, will rule. The Beatitudes say that those who are meek and modest will end up with what they want. Machiavelli believes that you must be more demanding in what you want. Yet another contradiction between Machiavelli and the Beatitudes is in the fifth Beatitude, wherein it says “Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy.” Machiavelli believes that a Prince should not be merciful and should rule more fiercely. His ideals are more corrupt than in the Beatitudes and are less focused on morals.

5. Use Machiavelli to argue against The Beatitudes.

In The Prince Machiavelli describes a view that is more centered on politics and a more realistic view. The Beatitudes are a better view on life, and would be better for all people, but it is too unimaginable to be put into use in real life. The Prince is much more useful in regard to political strategy, wherein the Beatitudes are more a way to live your life. According to Machiavelli, a Prince must not be too concerned with being morally correct. They must do what is required of them to obtain their power and to keep hold of it. In the first commandment it says that “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” This is saying how those who do not have much or have not had life go their way will be rewarded through heaven. Machiavelli does not view life at all like this. He believes that the Prince should do all in his power to rise up in life, no matter what. In the fourth Beatitude, it says “Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled.” This is saying that those who do not have something will receive their due in the next life. Machiavelli argues that one should work and toil in this life to get their fill, not wait. He believes in the now, and doing whatever needed to get what you want, in the present. Machiavelli simply does not blend his ideals with those of the Beatitudes, and instead creates an entirely different ideology altogether.

Works Cited

Machiavelli, N. (1984). The Prince (Bantam Classics). New York: Bantam Classics.

(n.d.). [Matthew 5 (New International Version) ]. Retrieved fromhttp://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%205&version=NIV

At the Renaissance Festival...

Elizabeth the First - Movie Trailer

Was Henry VIII justified in divorcing Catherine and making himself head of the Church of England?

Henry VIII of England was a powerful king, who ruled England from 1509 until 1547. In this time, Henry was set upon having a son to succeed him, which his first wife, Catherine of Aragon, never succeeded in giving him. Henry believed that he could fix this problem, if only he could find a way out of this marriage, which was against Catholic law at the time. Henry attempted to get permission from the pope to divorce Catherine, but failed. Now, it may seem that the pope only denied this request because it is simply against the law of the church, but also Charles V, the emperor of the Holy Roman Empire was Catherine of Aragon’s nephew. This led to the pope being forced to deny this appeal form Henry. Henry then went against the will of the church, divorcing Catherine and marrying a new wife, Anne Boleyn, which further separated England from the Church.

Henry was justified in divorcing his wife Catherine of Aragon because he did this because Catherine was formerly Henry’s brother’s wife. When his brother died and Henry obtained the throne, he believed it to be fitting to marry Catherine. However, in the bible it is mentioned that “If a man marries his brother's wife, it is an act of impurity; he has dishonored his brother. They will be childless.” This led Henry to believe that this is the reason why his wife could not bear him a son. He then believed that first off, this marriage could not be legitimate because he had married his brother’s widow, and also the only way to have a son would be with another woman. So Henry attempted to go throughout his divorce by the church, but when it could not be done, he took matters into his own hands. Henry divorced Catherine against the Church, and also remarried to Anne Boleyn, again against the Church.

Henry then also made another large, important movement away from the Catholic Church. He declared himself the head of the Church of England. This was the yet another huge impact on the relationship between the Catholic Church and England. This then allowed Henry to be with his now wife Ann Boleyn. Now, as when Henry had gone about and divorced his wife, this was already viewed as a questionable act on his part. But now, with Henry announcing himself as the head of a religion seems to have gone over the top. It is just showing Henrys obsession with power, with it not being enough that he was the head of a country, he also had to be the head of an entire religion. Now it seems that Henry is only in these ordeals for selfish reasons, no longer for his country.

This entire ordeal that Henry had effectively brought his country into seems to be only for himself, and personal reasons. Even though he was justified in divorcing his wife, Catherine of Aragon, he was not justified in announcing himself the head of an entire religion of people.

Works Cited

"The Act of Supremacy." Then Again. . . Web. 05 Oct. 2010. .

"Medieval Sourcebook: Letter of Thomas Cranmer, 1533." FORDHAM.EDU. Web. 05 Oct. 2010. .

"Primary Sources - Letter of Katharine of Aragon to Her Husband, King Henry VIII, 7 January 1536." EnglishHistory.net. Web. 05 Oct. 2010. .

"Primary Sources: The Coronations of King Henry VIII and Katharine of Aragon, 1509." EnglishHistory.net. Web. 05 Oct. 2010. .

Information on the War of the Roses

Part I: Historical background on the War of the Roses

Henry V – Henry the fifth was a Lancastrian king who was crowned in 1413, at the age of 26. He spent most of his kingship involved in the hundred year’s war in France, with his most notable victory being the Battle of Agincourt.

Henry VI – Henry the sixth was an infant king who was crowned in 1422 (and later in 1470). He was the king who lost the hundreds year war. He also clashed with Richard, Duke of York, who believed he was the rightful king. He was eventually captured by the Yorkist and forced to admit Richard as the rightful heir to the throne. He eventually lost the throne in battle the Richard son, Edward IV.

Edward IV – Edward was a Yorkist king who came into power in 1461. To come into power, Edward and his father led the Yorkist in battle in the 1450s, until with the victory at the battle of Mortimor’s Cross. He was king until 1470, when the Lancastrian army forced Edward to flee to Holland, ending his kingship…for now.

Henry VI – Henry became King again for a short time in 1470, after Edward had left England. However, in 1471 Edward returned and captured Henry, having him executed.

Edward IV – In 1471 Edward returned to England, defeated the Lancastrian forces, executed King Henry, and regained his kingship. He was king until 1483, with his death.

Edward V – Edward was only 12 years old when his father died, leaving him to become the next King of England. However, he was taken by his uncle, Richard III and eventually murdered.

Richard III – Richard forcefully takes the crown after his brother’s death by taking his heirs and imprisoning them. He took over in 1483 after Edwards’s death, and was killed by Henry VII two years later.

Henry VII – Henry was the first Tudor named king, in the year 1485. Henry was now the head of the Lancastrian family. Henry then tried to unite the Lancastrians and Yorkist by marrying Elizabeth of York in 1486. He was king until his death in 1509.

Part II: Richard III: Fact and Fiction

Shakespeare portrayed Richard as a hunchback, sly, and evil individual because that was the way in which history remembered him. The Lancastrians wrote history, and viewed their enemies in a negative light, which was passed down through history.

Ricardian – This is a source that supports Richard III and wants to change the image portrayed of Richard, They believe that the view of Richard as a deformed, evil person is a fallacy, formed by the Lancastrians who came into reign after him.

Lancastrian – This is a source which does not support Richard III, and is more in line with the house of Lancaster, and does not view him in a favorable manor.

Traditionalist – Traditionalists are those who stood by the Yorkist and Richard III during his time, and were against a change in power.

Revisionist – Revisionists are those who wanted change from the York’s and Richard III as the reigning power.

from Vergil, Polydore. Anglica Historia, Books 23-25. London: J. B. Nichols, 1846.

This first passage is written in the Lancastrian point of view. This writing views Richard III as a less than favorable individual.

“ And so was thinnocent chyld pullyd owt of his mothers armes. Richard having by this meane obtaynyd almost his hartes desire, convaighed his nephewys from the bysshop of Londons howse unto the Towr”

This quote talks about how Richard forcefully took the thrown and had those who stood in his way, executed.

Horace Walpole (1768)

This passage is written in the from the Ricardian point of view. This passage believes that the recorded history of Richard as an evil, deformed, sly fellow is inaccurate and wishes to correct it. Right from the beginning it states how his figure may have been misrepresented by his actions.

“With regard to the person of Richard, it appears to have been as much misrepresented as his actions. “

It also talks about how some viewed Edward as “the handsomest man in the room except his brother Edward, and was very well made”. This severely contradicts the idea that Richard was deformed, and seems that these descriptions were dramatized to represent an evil man.

Part Three: The Battle of Bosworth Field

Poem on King Edward III

I am Edward, King of my land,

My most precious land, my land of England.

This is the land of my fathers, the land of my kin

Here is my story, and now I shall begin. [1]

Ah, I remember how it all began

The year of 1483, ‘twas so grand.

My brother, poor Edward has passed

But now, I had the throne within my grasp [2]

Now I must do away with my nephews

They cannot spoil the plot I am about to brew.

With them gone, I can seize the throne

Now my might shall be known! [1]

How dare they say that I am not the rightful king?

Why would they ever say or think such a thing!

I obtained the thrown through power

If they argue, send them to the tower! [3]

Now they are uprising against me?

Henry Tudor thinks that the rightful ruler is he?

He thinks he is the one in command?

We shall see after this battle, who controls our land [2]

This cannot be!

I am the King and I believe not what I see.

My men have fallen, my enemy risen,

All right in front of me. [1]

I am Edward! I cannot be defeated!

Especially by this man, my most hated adversary

How could I have been so unwary?! [3]

Now I fall, on my loved country

I have lost, to put it bluntly

My kingdom, my land, my home,

All taken, along with my throne. [1]

Now I lay under Henry’s sword,

With him grasping for my crown as his reward

I realized this was my last breath

Now, I shall finally meet my death. [2]

"RICHARD III - A MAN AND HIS TIMES." Web. 30 Sept. 2010. . [1]

"The Richard III and Yorkist History Server." Richard III Society - American Branch. Web. 30 Sept. 2010. . [2]

"Richard III." Richard III Society - American Branch. Web. 30 Sept. 2010. . [3]

Poem on King Henry Tudor

Henry Tudor am I

And this land of England shall be mine

This, you cannot deny. [1]

In the year of 1457 was I born.

I knew one day the crown I would adorn

I would then become the leader of my family, the wonderful Tudors

For my enemies, their shall be none left to mourn [1]

We will go and make battle Richards men

We shall battle, defeat him, and then…

I will be king! I will be king!

I shall have control over everything! [2]

We are victorious! We have won!

We have defeated close to everyone.

Now where is Richard, where is this man?

I must find him to fulfill my plan. [2]

Here you are Richard, my hated rival

Now, I must quell your hopes of survival

With you gone, I will now be supreme

This feels more wonderful than a dream [3]

Here is my crown, it gleams so bright

It certainly and surely was worth the fight

My enemies have fallen, that are nowhere in sight

Oh my, oh my, this is simply such a delight. [3]

Now, I must go on to rule, and unite these to houses

First I shall marry Elizabeth of York, and we shall be spouses.

Our families will now be united, as one.

An entire new era has begun. [4]

My reign has began, and it shall be ever so grand!

It feels wonderful to be the man, the man in command

I shall take England in to a wonderful time

I will not stop until the last bell has chimed. [2]

"Primary Sources: The Death of Elizabeth of York and the Betrothal of Princess Margaret to the King of Scots, 1503." EnglishHistory.net. Web. 30 Sept. 2010. . [4]

"Primary Sources: The Obituary of King Henry VII, 1509." EnglishHistory.net. Web. 30 Sept. 2010. . [1]

"Richard III Society- The Ballad of Bosworth Field." Richard III Society - American Branch. Web. 30 Sept. 2010. . [3]

"Tudor Monarchs - Henry VII, One." EnglishHistory.net. Web. 30 Sept. 2010. . [2]

What do primary sources during and after the plague suggest about the direct effect of the Black Death on European society?

The Black Death was a horrible disease that overwhelmed European societies, specifically social, religious, and political affairs.

One large factor of the Black Plague was that it severely diminished the amount of workers, which created a need to farm the land of the wealthy. This allowed the workers to now be in control of their employment, making wages their choice, not of the landowners. If the owner would not give into the demands, the workers could simply move on to an owner that would.

During the Black Plague, the serfs and peasants realized that they were no longer held down by the Kings, Queens, and knights of the land. In the midst of the chaos, there were large rebellions and riots, rising up against their former leaders. They went on brutal raids, murdering knights, violating their families, and killing them also. The peasants rebelling believed that what they were doing was justified, due to the horrible treatments they received prior to the plague. Those who were bystanders or being persecuted viewed these acts as appalling and absurd acts of violence.

In the time of the Black Plague, many people needed a scapegoat to blame the event on, looking for any way to solve their problem. In this time, the unlikely people were the Jews, who suffered a large deal due to this improper persecution. The Jews were then tortured until they had to reveal false confessions, which would then further the blame on them, stating that they created the plague with poison. This then led to large numbers being rounded up and killed.

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/seth/ordinance-labourers.html

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/froissart2.html

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/jewish/1348-jewsblackdeath.html

DBQ - English Views Vs. Scots Views

What do the following primary sources tell us about English views of the Scots and the Scots' views of themselves? Please write a DBQ.

In the early 14^th Century, the Scottish and English were constantly butting heads, and had very demeaning views on each due to this conflict. The English viewed the Scots as inferior and the Scots them viewed themselves as greater because of this.

The English then labeled the Scottish war-hero William Wallace as an evil man, murderer, and felon. Then they represent his form of battle as him leaving his fellow Scots to be slaughtered, with him running from the scene. They specifically word the deeds that William Wallace has committed to seem as if he did them for no reason, and disregarded that he was fighting for Scottish freedom against the English.

Robert the Bruce was viewed similarly as William Wallace, being misjudged and having his endeavors viewed as evil, malicious acts done, without proper motives. The ways that the English worded these statements creates a hatred for the Scots, which would be a common theme among the English.

Now, with as much as the English despised the Scottish and viewed them as savages, the Scots viewed themselves as great people. They believed that had the right to rule and govern themselves, they would not be second-class citizens to the English.

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/1307bruce.html

http://www.geo.ed.ac.uk/home/scotland/arbroath_english.html