What if Machiavelli and Voltaire met for lunch to discuss war and politics - Essay Example

?Machiavelli and Voltaire Meet for Lunch to Discuss War and Politics. Index Introduction Method…..2 Biography of Machiavelli……3 Biography of Voltaire……5 How the two men might react to each other……7 The Protestant Reformation and the Roman Catholic Counter Reformation……9 The Age of Enlightenment. ……10 Possible Topics of Conversation……10 Conclusion…….13 Works Cited ……16 Introduction Niccolo Machiavelli, born 1469 in Florence and died 1527, and Voltaire, real name Francois Marie Arouet, born in Paris in 1694 and died in 1778, would obviously never have met in life, despite the fact that Machiavelli , the statesman as well as political theorist, traveled widely as a representative of his native Florentine state, and Voltaire traveled to various European countries. 1 However it is possible that, though coming from geographically and chronologically separate places, they may have shared some ideas, despite the differences of their backgrounds and the more than 200 years which separate their births. They both for instance had problems with authority. Both outspoken men, this imaginary luncheon might not have gone well unless they could find common ground. It must be asked what language would they speak? Which wines would they prefer? What would the menu be? Both had traveled. Would Italian, French, German or even English food be on the menu? Where would they meet? Switzerland, always neutral, seems the ideal place, in distance, as well as being a place where both had traveled. Presumably one of them could suggest a good place to meet. This essay will consider which ideas were important to these two profound thinkers whose influence has extended beyond their own generation, topics they feel to be so important that they would be discussed when they met, wherever and whenever that might be. Method By looking as the lives, works and words of these two men, as well as the social, religious and historical context in which they lived, it should be possible to come up with topics and ideas about them these two thinkers and philosophers might come up with over a leisurely lunch together. Biography of Machiavelli . According to his biographer on Literature Network Machiavelli2 was born into an influential, but poor family in Florence. I t is assumed by biographers3, but not proved, that he, attended the university in Florence. He certainly received a good education somewhere. In 1498 Florence became a republic and Machiavelli became a clerk in the republic’s service, quickly rising through the ranks. He would have been one of several intellectuals who considered historical and political problems in detail . Between 1498 and 1512 Machiavelli was entrusted with several missions on behalf of the Florentine republican state. While in France he was able to observe at first hand how a country was ruled by only one person., something at that time not happening in Florence. The first inklings then of ‘the Prince’ that was to come in 1513. When he returned home he found the republic in great trouble, as Cesare Borgia was attempting top carve out for himself a state he could rule as a prince in the area of Italy lying south of Florence as described by on the web page ‘Machiavelli’s “The Prince” a summary with quotations’ – anonymous and undated. In 1513 things had changed when the powerful Medici family again took charge. Machiavelli was arrested and accused of conspiracy, possibly even tortured. . He was known as an analyzer of political powers, perhaps he analyzed too closely for the comfort of his rulers. Soon pardoned he withdrew himself from the public arena and turned to a literary life, creating plays, comedies and poetry. He is best known for ‘The Prince’ was not published until 1532, well after his death . The main thrust of the work is that in order to maintain his authority any acts of a ruler are justified. He must have ‘virtu’. This is not the same as virtue, i.e. goodness, rightness or morality, but rather can be translated as prowess, skill or strength.4 This he claims is because of the treachery of those the prince governs. The emphasis is not upon individual morality which makes a good man, but on the somewhat different qualities needed by a good ruler. True virtue Machiavelli seems to have felt was wasted, because others would not be so morally circumspect and would merely take advantage. A prince must , he says give the appearance of one thing , while actually being another – seeming to be generous for instance, while actually keeping a very careful check on hi s fortune for instance. Whether or not one thinks of this as a rather cynical view or merely realistic depends upon your own starting point with regard to morals and a fair society. The book is concerned with the centralization of power once gained, and then how to maintain it. It was dedicated to Lorenzo d’Medici, who himself acted as a prince. Despite the dedication the work was condemned by the then pope, Clement VII, otherwise known as .Giulio di Giuliano de' Medici, another member of that family. Machiavelli was even denounced as an ‘apostle of the devil’ according to an unnamed biographer. 5 Later in 1564 his writing was still considered so dangerous by the authorities that they were placed on the Church Index of Banned Books. By 1519 the differences with the Medicis were more or less reconciled and Machiavelli was even asked to write a history of Florence. In 1527 the Medicis were deposed and probably Machiavelli hoped for employment with the new government, but he was not trusted enough, because of his previous association with the deposed rulers. Even in modern times Machiavelli was described as a ‘teacher of evil’, 6because his ideas can be seen as promoting the use of fear and violence, as well as deception, rather than such positive qualities as justice, love, wisdom. Machiavelli was impatient with abstract perfectionism, with vague thinking about how things ought to be in an ideal world. His focus was on the way the world around him actually worked. According to Kemerling ‘the social benefits of stability and security can be achieved even in the face of moral corruption.’ 7 Biography of Voltaire David Crystal describes Voltaire as ‘the embodiment of the 18th century Enlightenment’8. The Academie Francaise 9 includes him among their ‘Immortals’, the most revered ever of French citizens. He was educated in a Jesuitical school, Louis –le-grand, in Paris where he claimed to have learnt ‘nothing but Latin and stupidities’10. He then went on and studied law in the first instance, before becoming a writer. Like Machiavelli his ideas were not always appreciated. In his case he lampooned the Duc d’Orleon , a member of the then ruling Bourbon family in France and was thrown into prison as a result. . While a prisoner he rewrote ‘Oedipe’ a tragedy, which brought fame, but further problems, and he was forced to flee to England, only returning in 1729. He compiled a wide range of writing including philosophy, plays and poetry and even scientific treatises. Even a book about England was seen as decrying France. Voltaire eventually was once again accepted by the court , becoming the royal family’s historiographer. Later, already a member of the elevated ‘Academie Francaise’11 he moved to Berlin, having been invited by Frederick the Great, King of Prussia, but eventually, after about 4 years, Voltaire settled near the French border in Geneva Switzerland.. In later life he produced a series of anti-religious writings and in 1764 his ‘Dictionaire Philosophic’ Like Machiavelli some of his works were placed on the Roman Catholic Church’s Index of Banned Books , the Index Librorum Prohibitorum, so that would be something to discuss. The list was supposedly compiled in order to prevent the faith of Catholic believers being affected negatively or have their morals corrupted through the reading of works which were considered to be theologically erroneous or immoral. Books were being added to the list as late as the 1940s. The list was finally abandoned as late as 1966 under the papacy of Pope Paul VI and was part of wider reaching church reforms. Voltaire hated injustice and famously supported the case of Jean Calas, a Huguenot, falsely accused of murder by an angry Catholic mob, as described in the Encyclopedia Britannica. 12. They believed that the son of Calas, who had in fact committed suicide, was murdered in order to prevent him becoming a Roman Catholic. Voltaire fought to prove that there had been a false trial and that Calas was innocent of the charges, which was the eventual verdict in Paris. Voltaire’s aim was religious toleration and his efforts led eventually to reform of the law. Detzler 13describes how his ideas ‘fanned the fires of discontent by suggesting social change’, but his aim would not have been to overthrow the monarchy, as eventually occurred, but rather to promote a benevolent , constitutional monarchy. Towards the end of his life Voltaire settled on an estate at Ferney, in France, but very close to the French/Swiss border. From here he wrote literally hundreds of letters, as well as various books, leaflets and other literary matter and as his biographer describes, always being the voice of reason14. The place very quickly became a center for intellectuals – the Lucidcafe biographer describes it as becoming ‘the intellectual center of Europe.’ 15Eventually, a the age of 83 , Voltaire, to great public acclaim, but dies very soon afterwards. He is now entombed in the Pantheon - originally designed as a church, but taken over by the Revolutionaries as a place of interment for great citizens of France. How the two men might react to each other. Both men were courtiers, at least for part of their lives, so they would undoubtedly give the appearance of being polite and courteous. If we can suppose that each was aware of the other’s works and history, they would be able to admire the intellectual abilities of each other, even if they did not agree about everything. Voltaire for instance was a great advocate of fair play, but Machiavelli can be quoted as saying ‘A Prince never lacks legitimate reasons to break his promise.’16 – hardly a fair attitude for a ruler with regard to his subjects Voltaire might say . However this is only one quotation. Does it really reflect Machiavelli’s political attitude? Voltaire on the other hand, although he predates the French Revolution by several years, and did not himself promote the idea of overthrowing the monarchy, was one whose ideas and work promoted such action and revolutionary thinking, whereas, at one point at least , Machiavelli was accused, falsely or not, of being too close to corrupt rulers. .On the other hand he can also be quoted as saying :- A return to first principles in a republic is sometimes caused by the simple virtues of one man. His good example has such an influence that the good men strive to imitate him, and the wicked are ashamed to lead a life so contrary to his example.17 It seems therefore that he would have appreciated the way in which Voltaire had stood up for what he believed was correct and just. He does seem on balance though to have seen life from the point of view of a strong ruler, rather than from that of an ordinary , oppressed citizen as Voltaire obviously did. He also had quite a poor opinion, at least in his writings, of the general population :- ‘Of mankind we may say in general they are fickle, hypocritical, and greedy of gain.’18However in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy the Machiavelli biographer ( anonymous)19 pointed out how contradictory his writings are. Voltaire on the other hand was able to tolerate the viewpoints of others ‘Love truth, but pardon error.’ 20 He spent much of his life fighting against intolerance in any form. Although not an atheist, but had a particular view of religion which did not make him popular with clerics. He did after all say ‘Almost everything that goes beyond the adoration of a Supreme Being and submission of the heart to his orders is superstition’ so would be against various Church rituals and beliefs. It is not surprising therefore he was often found to be against the Catholic Church in France as it was at that time, but was what he perceived as a religion which was against freedom of thought. He would send letters to all sorts of people and sign them ‘Ecraser l'infame!’, that is ’Crush the infamous thing’21 i.e. the intolerance in France. When elsewhere, in Holland, England, Switzerland and Prussia, he found that it was possible to express oneself about matters such as religion and politics, as he could not do in France. In this he may have found that Machiavelli agreed. He used his knowledge of history, as expressed in his book ‘An Essay on the Manners and Spirit of Nations’,22 to point out that both intolerance and persecution of minorities were not only unfair they were useless. He pointed to the early Medieval period, when the church held total sway, as being the Dark Ages. Machiavelli used similar documents to prove his points. The Protestant Reformation and the Roman Catholic Counter Reformation These two events had tremendous influence upon how people, especially those in Western Europe, thought about a whole range of subjects, religious and otherwise. Machiavelli died before changes really came about, dying only 10 years after Martin Luther made his momentous act of defiance by attaching hi s famous 95 theses to a church door in Witternberg, Germany. 23The Council of Trent, called together by Pope Paul III, out of which came the perceived reforms of the Counter Revolution , did not come along until 1546,.almost 30 years after his death. 24 Machiavelli would however have been aware of the precursors of the Reformations – Wycliffe, John Huss etc. He may even have heard about Luther and the reaction of both Church and people. Would this fit into his apparent ideas that people in general were not to be trusted. It is known that Voltaire spent time in both Germany and Switzerland where reformed ideas were widely held. In Geneva where he spent some years the Reformation was being lived out all around him, which would have perhaps strengthened his ideas about superstition in the Roman Catholic Church as opposed to the emphasis on personal faith promoted by reformers such as Luther. So strong were these ideas that upon hi s death in 1778 that he was at first refused a burial in consecrated ground, although later his body would be re-interred at an abbey in Champagne, before later being removed once more to the Pantheon in Paris.. He lived at the very end of that time of new ideas in many areas of life – the Renaissance. The Age of Enlightenment A stronger influence though were probably ideas Voltaire heard spoken of in Geneva, a large and lively city and of course a center for new religious ideas at that time. When Voltaire resided there it was in the middle of the Age of Enlightenment., a period which laid the foundations for modern ways of thinking.25 This, although Brians traces influences as far back as Aristotle and other ancient Greeks, was based to a large extent upon the thinking of humanists who applied logic to their ideas from the 14th century onwards. Scientists such as Galileo used such logic to defend their ideas and conclusions. Many of these humanists however came up with ideas that the church, and others in authority, considered to be dangerous - dangerous to those in high positions who were at risk of being toppled as would soon happen in the awfulness of the French Revolution. . Also across the Atlantic in the American colonies, new ideas were to lead to the Revolution which began in 1776, but which had caused rumbles for some years before that, rumbles, and cried of unfairness that people such as Voltaire would undoubtedly have been aware of. Possible Topics of Conversation The changes in the world that had occurred would undoubtedly be a main topic of conversation if we assume this conversation takes place any time after Voltaire has reached adulthood. Assuming they are both aware of what has occurred would they agree as the reasoning behind the occurrences? Would Machiavelli for instance believe that George III had every right to rule as he considered best and whether or not the Americans had the franchise would not be a consideration if he really was Machiavellian in his thinking? .Voltaire on the other hand is likely to have taken the part of the Revolutionary forces – the oppressed fighting back at authority. Also it is to do with fairness – the right to express themselves in their own way – something he had always promoted. On the other hand he did not approve of killing or war , “It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets."26 and in any Revolution people will die. Voltaire , although very concerned with religious ideas, was violently anticlerical, a fact which he debated at length with French Catholics 27 As far as can be ascertained Machiavelli was not greatly involved in such religious controversies, but if Voltaire expounded things from his point of view I’m sure Machiavelli would be able to answer him in an erudite and witty way. He did have religious opinions as is clear from what he said when Pope Julius II imprisoned Cesare Borgia. Machiavelli is known to have approved of this act as he had said ‘He deserved as a rebel against Christ’.28 Machiavelli was interested in military matters rather than religious ones, so that might be a topic he would favor. In 1520 he produced ‘L'Arte della guerra 29 in which ‘he offered wide ranging advice on the subject of acquiring, managing , and employing an army of the state. He formed a militia, believing that this was more likely to be successful than the use of mercenaries. He led his troops against Pisa which he successfully recaptured on behalf of the Florentine state. 30Soon after his release from prison Machiavelli began to work on ‘The Prince’. He intended the pages of ‘The Prince’ to serve as guidelines as to how a united state might be created and held. In his perception how well off were the ordinary people of France under one ruler. He felt that they benefited indirectly from this absolute method of ruling. He wanted this for his homeland of Italy. He also hoped that if the powerful Medicis read his work he would once again be placed in a high position and be able to carry out some of the ideas he had written about, according to his anonymous biographer. 31Some of those ideas though might be considered unethical, if practical. How about ‘It is necessary for a prince, wanting to maintain himself, to learn how to be able to be not good and to use this and not use it according to necessity.’ This was realism, what Machiavelli referred to as ‘effective truth’ 3233, i.e. pragmatic truths about real life, rather than abstract ideas of ethical living, and apparently rather at odds with Voltaire’s ideas of fairness in all matters. Schaub quotes one of many commentators on Machiavelli’s ideas :- an approach to politics rooted in a cynical view of human motives and possibilities, and devoted to advancing the interests of a state without regard for moral or religious strictures. 34 Machiavelli had a poor opinion of the papacy. McNair35 quotes him as having said that the closer one got to Rome the more corruption one found, something Luther would have echoed. Schaub certainly percives him as anti-Christain , yet willing to use the church’s tactics to achieve his ends :- The Prince is the work of a polemicist, intent on replacing Christianity with "a new ethical framework structured by the concepts of necessity and usefulness."36 Conclusion Although there are lots of differences between these two , there is also much that is similar. Both for instance had influence long after their own time. Both were writers on philosophy, even if their subjects and conclusions were rather different. They lived at different times, but even the earlier Machiavelli can be said to have lived at the very beginning of the modern era – times when men could think for themselves, and not just accept what others told them. A time of questioning and self determination. Wealth and a great name were still important, but also a time where a great mind could rise through society and establish himself by the work of his mind, rather than simply depend upon who his grandfather was. How this lunch went would perhaps depend upon what knowledge of the other each brought to the table. Do we assume a kind of omniscience on the part of these protagonists in the after life? Otherwise Voltaire would have to do so much explaining of what had happened after Machiavelli’s death. He could at least tell him that his works are still read, translated and debated and are even included on some college syllabuses. What language would they use? A French man who presumably spoke German on one side and an Italian on the other side of the table. Would Latin be a lingua franca? Voltaire had after all had a Jesuit education and presumably Machiavelli had some knowledge of Latin too. How tolerant would they be of each others points of view – perhaps that would depend upon what wine was drunk and how much? Any good company is helped along by good food and drink in pleasant surroundings and the wine would presumably help them to what they would perceive as even greater heights of wit and erudition. At least we know they would have had plenty of time to talk – this is after all a continental lunch for two people who no longer have any responsibilities or appointments to be met. Can they see the world as we now have it? If Machiavelli could do so he would perhaps come to the conclusion that his ideas of practicality before ethics prevail. They do to some extent, but not entirely. There are still those who are out for themselves first of all, the exploitative tycoons, and corrupt politicians, but there are also many fighting for the rights of others, charity workers, fundraisers, those who simply care for others in whatever way they can. From these Voltaire could perhaps take heart - but the church is still strongly present , if not as all pervading as it once was. France, Voltiare’s homeland, has been described as ‘Post Christian’, i.e. a place in which Christianity no longer a dominant force, but even there signs of lively revival can be found among both Protestants and Catholics.37Even pilgrimage is being undertaken – though perhaps to new places such as Taize 38- a French based ecumenical community, near Cluny, once site of a great monastery in medieval times, but with links back to Geneva, a very Protestant city. Taize is timeless sort of a place where Voltaire would be likely to have found the fairness in society he fought for. The world has changed since these men lived - it is difficult to imagine them using Twitter or Facebook, getting on a jet plane, or settling down in front of the television with a takeaway. Some things however are eternal in almost any society in which one finds oneself. There will always be some who will fight with all their strength for a fairer society, at whatever cost to themselves. Other however accept the unfairness of society and make the best of it in a pragmatic way. Meanwhile there is another bottle of wine, some good cheese and still plenty to talk about, before the afternoon is over. . The arguments can continue. Was Voltaire right when he said :- ‘The safest course is to do nothing against one's conscience. With this secret we can enjoy life and have no fear from death.39 Or is it Machiavelli who is correct, the man who is perhaps speaking of himself as the humble man rising through society? The man of whom Voltaire said had taught Europe the art of war40.:- A prince ought to have no other aim or thought, nor select anything else for his study, than war and its rules and discipline; for this is the sole art that belongs to him who rules, and it is of such force that it not only upholds those who are born princes, but it often enables men to rise from a private station to that rank.41 Could even the best food and drink in the world bring about the reconciliation of these two very different ideas from men with almost directly opposing points of view, yet both of which worked in the worlds in which they lived. Bibliography Academie Francaise, http://www.academie-francaise.fr/ ( accessed 23rd March 2011) Atkinson, J., Reform, The History of Christianity, Dowley,T ( editor), Tring, Lion Publishing , 1977, Bokenkotter, T. A Concise History of the Catholic Church, London and New York, Doubleday, 2005 Brians, P., The Enlightenment, 1998 , http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/hum_303/enlightenment.html ( accessed 19th March 2011) Christian Community Foundation of France, 2010, http://www.ccfof.org/evangelicalfrance/evangelicalfrance.html ( accessed 21st March 2011) Crystal,D. The Cambridge Biographical Encyclopedia , Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1994 Jean Calas, Encyclopaedia Britannica, http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/88798/Jean-Calas ( accessed 19th March 2011) Detzler, W. Europe in Revolt, editor Dowley,T., The Lion History of Christianity, Tring, Lion Publishing1977 Kemerling, G., Machiavelli: Principality and Republic., Philosophy Pages, 2001, http://www.philosophypages.com/hy/3v.htm ( accessed 22nd March 2011) Linder, R, Rome Responds, The History of Christianity, Dowley,T ( editor), Tring, Lion Publishing, 1977, page 408 , undated, Machiavelli, N, L'Arte della guerra, 1520 Machiavelli’s “The Prince” a summary with quotations’ http://www.emachiavelli.com/The%20Prince%20and%20Machiavelli%20with%20Quotes.htm ( accessed 21st March 2011) McNair, P. Seeds of Renewal, Editor, Dowel, T. The Lion History of Christianity, Tring, Lion Publishing, 1977, Niccolo Machiavelli, Brainy Quotes http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/n/niccolo_machiavelli.html ( accessed 19th March 2011) Niccolo Machiavelli, Literary Network, http://www.online-literature.com/machiavelli/ ( accessed 19th March 2011) Niccolo Machiavelli, Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy, 8th September 2009, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/machiavelli/ ( accessed 19th September 2011) Schaub, D, Machiavelli’s realism, Moneywatch.com, 1998, http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2751/is_n53/ai_21223157/ ( accessed 21st March 2011) Strauss, L. Thoughts on Machiavelli, Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.1958 Timeline , 1520, The Art of War , Machiavelli , 2010, http://www.timelineindex.com/content/view/598 ( accessed 23rd March 2011) Voltaire, http://www.thecaveonline.com/APEH/voltairebiography.html ( accessed 19th March 2011) Voltaire, Lucidcafe Library, undated, http://www.lucidcafe.com/library/95nov/voltaire.html ( accessed 22nd March 2011) Voltaire, Quotation Details , http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/2418.html ( accessed 23rd March 2011) Voltiare Quotes, Goodreads, http://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/11619.Voltaire (accessed 19th March 2011) Read More