u/Fickle-Buy6009

Machiavelli begins his classification of principalities by first describing the hereditary principality, which is essentially your basic royal dynasty running the show.

Before he goes into further detail, he stresses that he will not be reasoning on republics as he has done that "at another time", which is the first in text reference to The Discourses on Livy.

He states that the hereditary prince has less difficulties than the new prince as the people are accustomed to his bloodline ruling the state. As long as he runs the government in the same manner as his predecessors and does not act outside of the long standing laws, he would have secured himself in his principality. Thus the only way he can be overthrown is if an "excessive and extraodinary" force deprives him of his dominion. And in the case this does happen to the hereditary prince, he need not worry. Machiavelli states that if "any mishap" whatsoever happens, then the new prince could easily be overthrown.

He then lists examples, such as the duke of Ferrara, whom did not succumb to the aggressive attacks of the Venetian Republic in 1484 or Pope Julius in 1510.

Machiavelli concludes by saying that the hereditary prince has "less cause to offend" his subjects, and as such, will always have the good will of his subjects.

So, seeing as the new prince will always have difficulty in conquering territories held by old dynasties, he should just pack it up and go home, right?

Wrong.

Not only will Machiavelli not be faithful to his claim of not reasoning about republics, but he will also reveal that being a hereditary prince is not as easy as he just made it seem.

Disclaimer

Chapters 1 and 2 are relatively short, therefore the essays did not take me as long to write out.

Chapters 3 and beyond will not be as easy to write out. They have loads of intellectual material and I will not be able to just churn out an essay fast, because then I will be risking leaving important stuff out. They will need time to make.

Fortunately, I have other important essays that I will be able to post with no problem, so stay tuned.

Machiavelli's Prince starts off with a seemingly simple and ostensibly mundane statement on the forms of government:

> All states, all dominions that have held and do hold empire over men have been and are either republics or principalities.

Machiavelli explains that the principalities are either:

• Hereditary (ruled by the prince's bloodline)

or

• New (a new monarch comes to power)

He then says that the new principalities are:

• Altogether New (those who seized power, like Francesco Sforza in Milan)

or

• Conquests of another prince (i.e., a prince from an old bloodline conquers a new state, like the King of Spain conquering Naples)

He then finishes by contrasting dominions which used to be "free" (that is to say, used to be republics) and those that were formerly held by a prince, those that were acquired by "ones own arms" or the arms of others, and those acquired by fortune and those acquired by virtue.

My analysis:

This chapter, while it seems short, procedural, and even mundane, is one of the most important chapters of the book. Machiavelli not only defines what he views a "state" is, but he also differs from all the other classical (and modern) political theorists in that he does not list the good and the bad forms of government, as did the ancients. This is especially shocking considering that Machiavelli gives a general overview on the various species of principalities, but at no point does he ever mention tyranny.