No description available.

This work presented the question: to what extent did each period and its events have on the development of the various schools of thought concerning Niccolo Machiavelli. The age of Reformation in its quest for theological purity gave birth to the myth of the evil Machiavelli. The Enlightenment, a period which sought reason and science, founded the myth of the scientific Machiavelli. The eruption of nationalism in the nineteenth century created Machiavelli, the patriot, and this was quickly followed in the twentieth century, an age of unrest, by the rebirth of all previous interpretations. These schools of thought developed as much from the changing tide of events as from the scholarly research of the writers. One of the reasons for the diversity of the Machiavellian literature was that each writer sought his antecedents on the basis of myth rather than where it might realistically be found. Machiavelli and Machiavellianism were abused and misused because modern man did not know himself. He viewed his origin incorrectly and thus could rest on no one explanation for himself or -Machiavelli. Machiavellianism developed from a collection of myths, each started in an attempt to explain the unexplainable, man. Not Machiavelli's politics, but what man appeared to be in them, was the drawing power of Machiavelli's work. What Machiavelli meant to say or did not mean to say was unimportant when compared to what scholars believed him to have said.

No description available.

No description available.

The association of the name of Francis Bacon with that of Niccolo Machiavelli is no novelty to the modern reader. But in most instances this association is brief and fleeting, possessed of a will-o'-the-wisp character that is at once unsatisfying and challenging. The natural conclusion to which one is tempted to leap is that Bacon, since he is the more recent in point of time, was influenced by the great Florentine in matters of philosophy and style. A second possibility is that both men were influenced by similar conditions of political and cultural backgrounds. A still further consideration lies in the belief that certain ideas are "in the air", so to speak, and descend upon different minds in various times and places without implying any necessity of relationship. It seems advisable to study the two men and their works in the light of these three possibilities. It is not the purpose of this thesis to assert the influence of Machiavelli upon Bacon's philosophy as a whole. This study is rather an attempt to bring together in comparative consideration the personalities and philosophies of two outstanding minds of their respective ages, and to draw such conclusions as seem logical. To this end I propose to examine the theories of Machiavelli set forth in The Prince and the Discourses on Livy, and from this background to view Bacon's philosophy relating to civil business as set forth in his Essays, especially "Of Truth," and "Of Great Place," and in the Advancement of Learning. I have here used the term, philosophy, to refer to the principles of human conduct by which Bacon's life was governed, rather than in a metaphysical sense.

The evolution of the State was a process which went through many stages. Analysis of the modern State tends to begin with the Enlightenment; however, Dante Alighieri, Niccolo Machiavelli, and Martin Luther each represented early phases of this evolution. The theories of these men were closely tied to their evaluation of man's nature. Their main objectives were separation of the State from the Church and the definition of the rulers obligations to his subjects. Although humanism influenced all of them to varying degrees, each developed unique views of the State. Elements of these views can be detected in more modern theorists.

Giovanni Boteros (1544-1617) treatise <i>The Reason of State</i> (1589) seemed somewhat uncharacteristic of sixteenth-century political thought, considering the pride of place given to economics in his text. The Age of Reformation constituted not only a period of new ideas on faith but also one of new political thinking, and as the research into the influences on Boteros economic thought progressed, I began to consider the period as one where economic thinking was becoming more common among theologians of the reforming churches and bureaucrats of the developing states. Having been trained in the schools of the Jesuits, Botero was exposed to one of the most potent and intellectually uniform of all the reforming movements of the period, and I argue it was here that he first considered economics as an aspect of moral philosophy. While it cannot be proven positively that Botero studied or even considered economics during his association with the Jesuits (roughly from 1559-1580), the fact that a number of those who shaped the Jesuit Order in its first few generations discussed economics in their own treatises leads one to a strong circumstantial conclusion that this is where the economic impulse first rose up in his thinking. Indeed, it was this background that readied Botero to consider economics as an important part of statecraft with his reading of Jean Bodins (1530-1596) <i>The Six Books of the Republic</i> (1576), in which economics is featured quite prominently. Bodins own economic theory was informed primarily by his experience as a bureaucrat in the Parlement of Paris, where questions on the value of the currency and on the kings ability to tax his subjects were in constant debate among the advocates. I argue further that, upon his reading of Bodins <i>Republic</i>, Botero saw how economics could be fused with politics, and he then set out to compose his own treatise on political economy (although he certainly would not have called it such). In <i>The Reason of State</i>, Botero brought his Jesuit conception of economic morality together with Bodins writings on political economy to create a work, neither wholly Jesuit nor wholly Bodinian, which in the end outlined an overall political and economic structure of society quite distinct from the sum of its parts.

Giovanni Boteros (1544-1617) treatise <i>The Reason of State</i> (1589) seemed somewhat uncharacteristic of sixteenth-century political thought, considering the pride of place given to economics in his text. The Age of Reformation constituted not only a period of new ideas on faith but also one of new political thinking, and as the research into the influences on Boteros economic thought progressed, I began to consider the period as one where economic thinking was becoming more common among theologians of the reforming churches and bureaucrats of the developing states. Having been trained in the schools of the Jesuits, Botero was exposed to one of the most potent and intellectually uniform of all the reforming movements of the period, and I argue it was here that he first considered economics as an aspect of moral philosophy. While it cannot be proven positively that Botero studied or even considered economics during his association with the Jesuits (roughly from 1559-1580), the fact that a number of those who shaped the Jesuit Order in its first few generations discussed economics in their own treatises leads one to a strong circumstantial conclusion that this is where the economic impulse first rose up in his thinking. Indeed, it was this background that readied Botero to consider economics as an important part of statecraft with his reading of Jean Bodins (1530-1596) <i>The Six Books of the Republic</i> (1576), in which economics is featured quite prominently. Bodins own economic theory was informed primarily by his experience as a bureaucrat in the Parlement of Paris, where questions on the value of the currency and on the kings ability to tax his subjects were in constant debate among the advocates. I argue further that, upon his reading of Bodins <i>Republic</i>, Botero saw how economics could be fused with politics, and he then set out to compose his own treatise on political economy (although he certainly would not have called it such). In <i>The Reason of State</i>, Botero brought his Jesuit conception of economic morality together with Bodins writings on political economy to create a work, neither wholly Jesuit nor wholly Bodinian, which in the end outlined an overall political and economic structure of society quite distinct from the sum of its parts.