Machiavelli enjoyed a season of popularity even at Rome. The Medicean

popes refused all official employment to one who had been the brain of a

hostile government; but they encouraged him to write, and were not

offended by the things he wrote for them. Leo's own dealings with the

tyrant of Perugia were cited by jurists as a suggestive model for men

who have an enemy to get rid of. Clement confessed to Contarini that

honesty would be preferable, but that honest men get the worst of it:

"Io cognosco certo che voi dicete il vero, et che ad farla da homo da

bene, et a far il debito, seria proceder come mi aricordate; ma

bisognerebbe trovar la corrispondentia. Non vedete che il mondo e

ridutto a un termine che colui il qual e piu astuto et cum piu trame fa

il fatto suo, e piu laudato, et estimato piu valente homo, et piu

celebrato, et chi fa il contrario vien detto di esso; quel tale e una

bona persona, ma non val niente? Et se ne sta cum quel titulo solo di

bona persona.--Chi va bonamente vien trata da bestia." Two years after

this speech the astute Florentine authorised _The Prince_ to be

published at Rome.

It was still unprinted when Pole had it pressed on his attention by

Cromwell, and Brosch consequently suspects the story. Upon the death of

Clement, Pole opened the attack; but it was not pursued during the

reaction against things Medicean which occupied the reign of Farnese.

Machiavelli was denounced to the Inquisition on the 11th of November

1550, by Muzio, a man much employed in controversy and literary

repression, who, knowing Greek, was chosen by Pius V. for the work

afterwards committed to Baronius: "Senza rispetto alcuno insegna a non

servar ne fede, ne charita, ne religione; et dice che di queste cosi,

gli huomini se ne debbono servire per parer buoni, et per le grandezze

temporali, alle quali quando non servono non se ne dee fare stima. Et

non e questo peggio che heretica dottrina? Vedendosi che cio si

comporta, sono accetate come opere approvate dalla Santa Madre chiesa."

Muzio, who at the same time recommended the _Decamerone_, was not acting

from ethical motives. His accusation succeeded. When the Index was

instituted, in 1557, Machiavelli was one of the first writers condemned,

and he was more rigorously and implacably condemned than anybody else.

The Trent Commissioners themselves prepared editions of certain

prohibited authors, such as Clarius and Flaminius; Guicciardini was

suffered to appear with retrenchments; and the famous revision of

Boccaccio was carried out in 1573. This was due to the influence of

Victorius, who pleaded in vain for a castigated text of Machiavelli. He

continued to be specially excepted when permission was given to read

forbidden books. Sometimes there were other exceptions, such as

Dumoulin, Marini, or Maimbourg; but the exclusion of Machiavelli was

permanent, and when Lucchesini preached against him at the Gesu, he had

to apply to the Pope himself for licence to read him. Lipsius was

advised by his Roman censors to mix a little Catholic salt in his

Machiavellism, and to suppress a seeming protest against the universal

hatred for a writer _qui misera qua non manu hodie vapulat_. One of the

ablest but most contentious of the Jesuits, Raynaud, pursued his memory

with a story like that with which Tronchin improved the death of

Voltaire: "Exitus impiissimi nebulonis metuendus est eius aemulatoribus,

nam blasphemans evomuit reprobum spiritum."

In spite of this notorious disfavour, he has been associated with the

excesses of the religious wars. The daughter of the man to whom he

addressed _The Prince_ was Catharine of Medici, and she was reported to

have taught her children "surtout des traictz de cet athee Machiavel."

Boucher asserted that Henry III. carried him in his pocket: "qui

perpetuus ei in sacculo atque manibus est"; and Montaigne confirms the

story when he says: "Et dict on, de ce temps, que Machiavel est encores

ailleurs en credit." The pertinently appropriate quotation by which the

Queen sanctified her murderous resolve was supplied, not by her father's

rejected and discredited monitor, but by a bishop at the Council of

Trent, whose sermons had just been published: "Bisogna esser severo et

acuto, non bisogna esser clemente; e crudelta l' esser pietoso, e pieta

l' esser crudele." And the argument was afterwards embodied in the

_Controversies_ of Bellarmin: "Haereticis obstinatis beneficium est,

quod de hac vita tollantur, nam quo diutius vivunt, eo plures errores

excogitant; plures pervertunt, et majorem sibi damnationem acquirunt."

The divines who held these doctrines received them through their own

channels straight from the Middle Ages. The germ theory, that the wages

of heresy is death, was so expanded as to include the rebel, the

usurper, the heterodox or rebellious town, and it continued to develop

long after the time of Machiavelli. At first it had been doubtful

whether a small number of culprits justified the demolition of a city:

"Videtur quod si aliqui haeretici sunt in civitate potest exuri tota

civitas." Under Gregory XIII. the right is asserted unequivocally:

"Civitas ista potest igne destrui, quando in ea plures sunt haeretici."

In case of sedition, fire is a less suitable agent: "Propter rebellionem

civitas quandoque supponitur aratro et possunt singuli decapitari." As

to heretics the view was: "Ut hostes latronesque occidi possunt etiamsi

sunt clerici." A king, if he was judged a usurper, was handed over to

extinction: "Licite potest a quolibet de populo occidi, pro libertate

populi, quando non est recursus ad superiorem, a quo possit iustitia

fieri." Or, in the words of the scrupulous Soto: "Tunc quisque ius habet

ipsum extinguendi." To the end of the seventeenth century theologians

taught: "Occidatur, seu occidendus proscribatur, quando non alitur

potest haberi tranquillitas Reipublicae."

This was not mere theory, or the enforced logic of men in thrall to

mediaeval antecedents. Under the most carnal and unchristian king, the

Vaudois of Provence were exterminated in the year 1545, and Paul Sadolet

wrote as follows to Cardinal Farnese just before and just after the

event: "Aggionta hora questa instantia del predetto paese di Provenza a

quella che da Mons. Nuntio s'era fatta a Sua Maesta Christianissima a

nome di Sua Beatitudine et di Vostra Reverendissima Signoria, siamo in

ferma speranza, che vi si debbia pigliare qualche bono expediente et

farci qualche gagliarda provisione.--E seguito, in questo paese, quel

tanto desiderato et tanto necessario effetto circa le cose di Cabrieres,

che da vostra Signoria Reverendissima e stato si lungamente ricordato et

sollicitato et procurato." Even Melanchthon was provoked by the death of

Cromwell to exclaim that there is no better deed than the slaughter of a

tyrant; "Utinam Deus alicui forti viro hanc mentem inserat!" And in 1575

the Swedish bishops decided that it would be a good work to poison their

king in a basin of soup--an idea particularly repugnant to the author of

_De Rege et Regis Institutione_. Among Mariana's papers I have seen the

letter from Paris describing the murder of Henry III., which he turned

to such account in the memorable sixth chapter: "Communico con sus

superiores, si peccaria mortalmente un sacerdote que matase a un tirano.

Ellos le diceron que non era pecado, mas que quedaria irregular. Y no

contentandose con esto, ni con las disputas que avia de ordinario en la

Sorbona sobre la materia, continuando siempre sus oraciones, lo pregunto

a otros theologos, que le afirmavan lo mismo; y con esto se resolvio

enteramente de executarlo. Por el successo es de collegir que tuvo el

fraile alguna revelacion de Nuestro Senor en particular, y inspiracion

para executar el caso." According to Maffei, the Pope's biographer, the

priests were not content with saying that killing was no sin: "Cum illi

posse, nec sine magno quidem merito censuissent." Regicide was so

acceptable a work that it seemed fitly assigned to a divine

interposition.

When, on the 21st of January 1591, a youth offered his services to make

away with Henry IV., the Nuncio remitted the matter to Rome:

"Quantunque mi sia parso di trovarlo pieno di tale humilita, prudenza,

spirito et cose che arguiscono che questa sia inspiratione veramente

piuttosto che temerita e leggerezza." In a volume which, though recent,

is already rare, the Foreign Office published D'Avaux's advice to treat

the Protestants of Ireland much as William treated the Catholics of

Glencoe; and the argument of the Assassination Plot came originally from

a Belgian seminary. There were at least three men living far into the

eighteenth century who defended the massacre of St. Bartholomew in their

books; and it was held as late as 1741 that culprits may be killed

before they are condemned: "Etiam ante sententiam impune occidi possunt,

quando de proximo erant banniendi, vel quando eorum delictum est

notorium, grave, et pro quo poena capitis infligenda esset."

Whilst these principles were current in religion as well as in society,

the official censures of the Church and the protests of every divine

since Catharinus were ineffectual. Much of the profaner criticism

uttered by such authorities as the Cardinal de Retz, Voltaire, Frederic

the Great, Daunou, and Mazzini is not more convincing or more real.

Linguet was not altogether wrong in suggesting that the assailants knew

Machiavelli at second hand: "Chaque fois que je jette les yeux sur les

ouvrages de ce grand genie, je ne saurais concevoir, je l'avoue, la

cause du decri ou il est tombe. Je soupconne fortement que ses plus

grands ennemis sont ceux qui ne l'ont pas lu." Retz attributed to him a

proposition which is not in his writings. Frederic and Algernon Sidney

had read only one of his books, and Bolingbroke, a congenial spirit, who

quotes him so often, knew him very little. Hume spoils a serious remark

by a glaring eighteenth-century comment: "There is scarcely any maxim in

_The Prince_ which subsequent experience has not entirely refuted. The

errors of this politician proceeded, in a great measure, from his having

lived in too early an age of the world to be a good judge of political

truth." Bodin had previously written: "Il n'a jamais sonde le gue de la

science politique." Mazzini complains of his _analisi cadaverica ed

ignoranza della vita_; and Barthelemy St Hilaire, verging on paradox,

says: "On dirait vraiment que l'histoire ne lui a rien appris, non plus

que la conscience." That would be more scientific treatment than the

common censure of moralists and the common applause of politicians. It

is easier to expose errors in practical politics than to remove the

ethical basis of judgments which the modern world employs in common with

Machiavelli.

By plausible and dangerous paths men are drawn to the doctrine of the

justice of History, of judgment by results, the nursling of the

nineteenth century, from which a sharp incline leads to _The Prince_.

When we say that public life is not an affair of morality, that there is

no available rule of right and wrong, that men must be judged by their

age, that the code shifts with the longitude, that the wisdom which

governs the event is superior to our own, we carry obscurely tribute to

the system which bears so odious a name. Few would scruple to maintain

with Mr. Morley that the equity of history requires that we shall judge

men of action by the standards of men of action; or with Retz: "Les

vices d'un archeveque peuvent etre, dans une infinite de rencontres, les

vertus d'un chef de parti." The expounder of Adam Smith to France, J.B.

Say, confirms the ambitious coadjutor: "Louis XIV. et son despotisme et

ses guerres n'ont jamais fait le mal qui serait resulte des conseils de

ce bon Fenelon, l'apotre et le martyr de la vertu et du bien des

hommes." Most successful public men deprecate what Sir Henry Taylor

calls much weak sensibility of conscience, and approve Lord Grey's

language to Princess Lieven: "I am a great lover of morality, public and

private; but the intercourse of nations cannot be strictly regulated by

that rule." While Burke was denouncing the Revolution, Walpole wrote:

"No great country was ever saved by good men, because good men will not

go the lengths that may be necessary." All which had been formerly

anticipated by Pole: "Quanto quis privatam vitam agens Christi similior

erit tanto minus aptus ad regendum id munus iudicio hominum

existimabitur." The main principle of Machiavelli is asserted by his

most eminent English disciple: "It is the solecism of power to think, to

command the end, and yet not to endure the means." And Bacon leads up to

the familiar Jesuit: "Cui licet finis, illi et media permissa sunt."

The austere Pascal has said: "On ne voit rien de juste ou d'injuste qui

ne change de qualite en changeant de climat" (the reading _presque_ rien

was the precaution of an editor). The same underlying scepticism is

found not only in philosophers of the Titanic sort, to whom remorse is a

prejudice of education, and the moral virtues are "the political

offspring which flattery begat upon pride," but among the masters of

living thought. Locke, according to Mr. Bain, holds that we shall

scarcely find any rule of morality, excepting such as are necessary to

hold society together, and these too with great limitations, but what is

somewhere or other set aside, and an opposite established by whole

societies of men. Maine de Biran extracts this conclusion from the

_Esprit des Lois_: "Il n'y a rien d'absolu ni dans la religion, ni dans

la morale, ni, a plus forte raison, dans la politique." In the

mercantile economists Turgot detects the very doctrine of Helvetius: "Il

etablit qu'il n'y a pas lieu a la probite entre les nations, d'ou

suivroit que la monde doit etre eternellement un coupe-gorge. En quoi il

est bien d'accord avec les panegyristes de Colbert."

These things survive, transmuted, in the edifying and popular epigram:

"Die Weltgeschichte ist das Weltgericht." Lacordaire, though he spoke so

well of "L'empire et les ruses de la duree," recorded his experience in

these words: "J'ai toujours vu Dieu se justifier a la longue." Reuss, a

teacher of opposite tendency and greater name, is equally consoling:

"Les destinees de l'homme s'accomplissent ici-bas; la justice de Dieu

s'exerce et se manifeste sur cette terre." In the infancy of exact

observation Massillon could safely preach that wickedness ends in

ignominy: "Dieu aura son tour." The indecisive Providentialism of

Bossuet's countrymen is shared by English divines.

"Contemporaries," says Hare, "look at the agents, at their motives and

characters; history looks rather at the acts and their consequences."

Thirlwall hesitates to say that whatever is, is best; "but I have a

strong faith that it is for the best, and that the general stream of

tendency is toward good." And Sedgwick, combining induction with

theology, writes: "If there be a superintending Providence, and if His

will be manifested by general laws, operating both on the physical and

moral world, then must a violation of those laws be a violation of His

will, and be pregnant with inevitable misery."

Apart from the language of Religion, an optimism ranging to the bounds

of fatalism is the philosophy of many, especially of historians: "Le

vrai, c'est, en toutes choses, le fait." Sainte-Beuve says: "Il y a dans

tout fait general et prolonge une puissance de demonstration

insensible"; and Scherer describes progress as "une espece de logique

objective et impersonelle qui resout les questions sans appel." Ranke

has written: "Der beste Pruefstein ist die Zeit"; and Sybel explains that

this was not a short way out of confusion and incertitude, but a

profound generalisation: "Ein Geschlecht, ein Volk loest das andere ab,

und der Lebende hat Recht." A scholar of a different school and fibre,

Stahr the Aristotelian, expresses the same idea: "Die Geschichte soll

die Richtigkeit des Denkens bewaehren." Richelieu's maxim: "Les grands

desseins et notables entreprises ne se verifient jamais autrement que

par le succes"; and Napoleon's: "Je ne juge les hommes que par les

resultats," are seriously appropriated by Fustel de Coulanges: "Ce qui

caracterise le veritable homme d'etat, c'est le succes, on le reconnait

surtout a ce signe, qu'il reussit." One of Machiavelli's gravest critics

applied it to him: "Die ewige Aufgabe der Politik bleibt unter den

gegebenen Verhaeltnissen und mit den vorhandenen Mitteln etwas zu

erreichen. Eine Politik die das verkennt, die auf den Erfolg verzichtet,

sich auf eine theoretische Propaganda, auf ideale Gesichtspunkte

beschraenkt, von einer verlorenen Gegenwart an eine kuenftige

Gerechtigkeit appellirt, ist keine Politik mehr." One of the mediaeval

pioneers, Stenzel, delivered a formula of purest Tuscan cinquecento:

"Was bei anderen Menschen gemeine Schlechtigkeit ist, erhaelt, bei den

ungewoehnlichen Geistern, den Stempel der Groesse, der selbst dem

Verbrechen sich aufdrueckt. Der Maassstab ist anders; denn das

Ausserordentliche laesst sich nur durch Ausserordentliches bewirken."

Treitschke habitually denounces the impotent Doctrinaires who do not

understand "dass der Staat Macht ist und der Welt des Willens angehoert,"

and who know not how to rise "von der Politik des Bekenntnisses zu der

Politik der That." Schaefer, though a less pronounced partisan, derides

Macaulay for thinking that human happiness concerns political science:

"Das Wesen des Staates ist die Macht, und die Politik die Kunst ihn zu

erhalten." Rochau's _Realpolitik_ was a treatise in two volumes written

to prove "dass der Staat durch seine Selbsterhaltung das oberste Gebot

der Sittlichkeit erfuellt." Wherefore, nobody finds fault when a State in

its decline is subjugated by a robust neighbour. In one of those telling

passages which moved Mr. Freeman to complain that he seems unable to

understand that a small State can have any rights, or that a generous or

patriotic sentiment can find a place anywhere except in the breast of a

fool, Mommsen justifies the Roman conquests: "Kraft des Gesetzes dass

das zum Staat entwickelte Volk die politisch unmuendigen, das civilisirte

die geistig unmuendigen in sich aufloest." The same idea was imparted into

the theory of ethics by Kirchmann, and appears, with a sobering touch,

in the _Geschichte Jesu_ of Hase, the most popular German divine: "Der

Einzelne wird nach der Groesse seiner Ziele, nach den Wirkungen seiner

Thaten fuer das Wohl der Voelker gemessen, aber nicht nach dem Maasse der

Moral und des Rechts.--Vom Leben im Geiste seiner Zeit haengt nicht der

sittliche Werth eines Menschen, aber seine geschichtliche Wirksamkeit

ab." Ruemelin, both in politics and literature the most brilliant Suabian

of his time, and a strenuous adversary of Machiavelli, wrote thus in

1874: "Fuer den Einzelnen im Staat gilt das Princip der Selbsthingabe,

fuer den Staat das der Selbstbehauptung. Der Einzelne dient dem Recht;

der Staat handhabt, leitet und schafft dasselbe. Der Einzelne ist nur

ein fluechtiges Glied in dem sittlichen Ganzen; der Staat ist, wenn nicht

dieses Ganze selbst, doch dessen reale, ordnende Macht; er ist

unsterblich und sich selbst genug.--Die Erhaltung des Staats

rechtfertigt jedes Opfer und steht ueber jedem Gebot." Nefftzer, an

Alsatian borderer, says: "Le devoir supreme des individus est de se

devouer, celui des nations est de se conserver, et se confond par

consequent avec leur interet." Once, in a mood of pantheism, Renan

wrote: "L'humanite a tout fait, et, nous voulons le croire, tout bien

fait." Or, as Michelet abridges the _Scienza Nuova_: "L'humanite est son

oeuvre a elle-meme. Dieu agit sur elle, mais par elle." Mr. Leslie

Stephen thus lays down the philosophy of history according to Carlyle,

"that only succeeds which is based on divine truth, and permanent

success therefore proves the right, as the effect proves the cause."

Darwin, having met Carlyle, notes that "in his eyes might was right,"

and adds that he had a narrow and unscientific mind; but Mr. Goldwin

Smith discovers the same lesson: "History, of itself, if observed as

science observes the facts of the physical world, can scarcely give man

any principle or any object of allegiance, unless it be success." Dr.

Martineau attributes this doctrine to Mill: "Do we ask what determines

the moral quality of actions? We are referred, not to their spring, but

to their consequences." Jeremy Bentham used to relate how he found the

greatest happiness principle in 1768, and gave a shilling for it, at the

corner of Queen's College. He found it in Priestley, and he might have

gone on finding it in Beccaria and Hutcheson, all of whom trace their

pedigree to the _Mandragola_: "Io credo che quello sia bene che facci

bene a' piu, e che i piu se ne contentino." This is the centre of unity

in all Machiavelli, and gives him touch, not with unconscious imitators

only, but with the most conspicuous race of reasoners in the century.

English experience has not been familiar with a line of thought plainly

involving indulgence to Machiavelli. Dugald Stewart raises him high, but

raises him for a heavy fall: "No writer, certainly, either in ancient or

in modern times, has ever united, in a more remarkable degree, a greater

variety of the most dissimilar and seemingly the most discordant gifts

and attainments.--To his maxims the royal defenders of the Catholic

faith have been indebted for the spirit of that policy which they have

uniformly opposed to the innovations of the reformers." Hallam indeed

has said: "We continually find a more flagitious and undisguised

abandonment of moral rules for the sake of some idol of a general

principle than can be imputed to _The Prince_ of Machiavel." But the

unaccustomed hyperbole had been hazarded a century before in the

obscurity of a Latin dissertation by Feuerlein: "Longe detestabiliores

errores apud alios doctores politicos facile invenias, si eidem

rigorosae censurae eorum scripta subiicienda essent." What has been,

with us, the occasional aphorism of a masterful mind, encountered

support abroad in accredited systems, and in a vast and successful

political movement. The recovery of Machiavelli has been essentially the

product of causes operating on the Continent.

When Hegel was dominant to the Rhine, and Cousin beyond it, the

circumstances favoured his reputation. For Hegel taught: "Der Gang der

Weltgeschichte steht ausserhalb der Tugend, des Lasters, und der

Gerechtigkeit." And the great eclectic renewed, in explicit language,

the worst maxim of the _Istorie Fiorentine_: "L'apologie d'un siecle est

dans son existence, car son existence est un arret et un jugement de

Dieu meme, ou l'histoire n'est qu'une fastasmagorie insignifiante.--Le

caractere propre, le signe d'un grand homme, c'est qu'il reussit.--Ou

nul guerrier ne doit etre appele grand homme, ou, s'il est grand, il

faut l'absoudre, et absoudre en masse tout ce qu'il a fait.--Il faut

prouver que le vainqueur non seulement sert la civilisation, mais qu'il

est meilleur, plus moral, et que c'est pour cela qu'il est vainqueur.

Maudire la puissance (j'entends une puissance longue et durable) c'est

blasphemer l'humanite."

This primitive and everlasting problem assumed a peculiar shape in

theological controversy. The Catholic divines urged that prosperity is a

sign by which, even in the militant period, the true Church may be

known; coupling _Felicitas Temporalis illis collata qui ecclesiam

defenderunt_ with _Infelix exitus eorum qui ecclesiam oppugnant_. Le

Blanc de Beaulieu, a name famous in the history of pacific disputation,

holds the opposite opinion: "Crucem et perpessiones esse potius

ecclesiae notam, nam denunciatum piis in verbo Dei fore ut in hoc mundo

persecutionem patiantur, non vero ut armis sint adversariis suis

superiores." Renan, outbidding all, finds that honesty is the worst

policy: "En general, dans l'histoire, l'homme est puni de ce qu'il fait

de bien, et recompensee de ce qu'il fait de mal.--L'histoire est tout le

contraire de la vertu recompensee."

The History of Freedom, and Other Essays · 第 23 / 63 段