What role do the concepts of virtu and fortuna play in Machiavellis political thought?

He wanted to move his reader, often through rhetoric. As consequence, he never settled on precise and stable meanings of virtu and fortuna, the two fundamental, organising concepts in his work1 Niccolo Machiavelli was writing during a brave new Europe, known as the Renaissance, Europe was giving birth to a cultural revolution with art, science, religion, philosophy, literature and politics at the fore front. However in Machiavellis state of Florence there was civil and political unrest and The Prince caused much controversy in the Italian states and throughout western Europe. To understand the Prince and the response it provoked one must view the book in the context in which it was written, written in the sixteenth century the book was a sign of the times, as it expressed what Machiavelli was experiencing in Florence at the time. The great modern political theorist Leo Strauss says of The Prince. The Prince is a scientific book because it conveys a general teaching that is based on reasoning from experience and that sets forth that reasoning2 The book was somewhat of a how to guide for the Prince to maintain power in his state. He seemed to blaze a new trail, with regards practical politics and how one would apply them. Machiavelli secularised politics, the church and ethics no longer went hand in hand with the governance of a state and this is ultimately were virtu and fortuna tie in. In The Prince he seems to champion the idea of realpolitik, leaving behind the idea of virtue, but adopting a mantra that one must be bold, intelligent, cunning and not afraid to get their hands dirty. From this the term Machiavellian was born, which means someone being crafty, deceitful and cunning. Niccolo Machiavelli is many things to many people; some regard him as an atheist, one who endorsed fear and violence, to others hes a humanist, a shrewd political analyst and someone who rebelled against the status quo, though whether good or bad he was very much a renaissance man. Italy in the fifteenth century was not yet a unified country, looking back now one could draw comparisons to the wild west, with governments constantly at the mercy of political coups. Machiavelli witnessed the over-throwing of the Medici family in 1494, this lead to the rise of Girolamo Savonarola, who was Dominican
Alistair Edwards, Jules Townshend, Interpreting Modern Political Philosophy From Machiavelli to Marx, Palgrave MacMillan, 2002, p9 2 Leo Strauss, Thoughts of Machiavelli, University of Chicago Press, 1958 ,p54-55
1

friar, he was also a zealot. During Savonarolas reign the unified Italy was witnessing much unrest, with many of the major cities and the papacy including Florence vying for control of Italy. Savonarola was excommunicated by Pope Alexander VI for criticising the popes leadership. Machiavelli became a member of the Florentine government in 1498 he was the head of the Second Chancery, this job meant that he met with the diplomats of Europe notably King Louis XII and Pope Alexander VI. Machiavelli helped broker a deal between the French king and the pope. Alexander VI granted Louis the XII an annulment and in exchange the king help establish Alexander XIs son Cesare Borgia as the duke of Romagna. Borgia was a divisive character he also shaped Machiavellis ideas on political practice, as he was believed to be a cruel, cunning and ruthless individual an embodiment of virtu. Maureen Ramsay notes Cesare Borgia is admired for his virtu3. Machiavelli discusses at length Cesare Borgia in length in chapter seven of The Prince, with his skill and prowess being centre focus. To explain the role that virtu and fortuna played in Machiavellis work one must define them first. Virtu and fortuna raise questions about virtue. Some scholars claim that virtu and fortuna are technical terms of a rational system of political thought 4.Machiavelli believed both concepts were necessary to succeed. The word virtu when translated from Italian to English is generally translated as virtue, is the crudest sense, basically meaning an idea of moral goodness. However when using virtu is the context of The Prince it is clear, the word takes on a whole new meaning. Virtu is now a range of traits, Machiavelli stresses the need for the prince to possess these qualities if hes to maintain the rule of the state. At the beginning of chapter three, its noted that maintaining a new principality is very difficult. But in the new principality difficulties do arise.....What happens is that men willingly change their ruler, expecting to fare better. This expectation induces them to take up arms against him.
5

The first sign shows a need for political awareness and intuitivism, ultimately the need for virtu. A skilled political leader is one that knows how to quell civil unrest by any means necessary according to Machiavelli this is essentially virtu. He believes that the two bench marks for a leader were to maintain his state and to achieve greatness. As a result of this, a virtuous leader is not something
Maureen Ramsay ed,Alistair Edwards, Jules Townshend,Interpreting Modern Political Philosophy From Machiavelli to Marx,Palgrave MacMillan, 2002, p36 4 Maureen Ramsay, ed,Alistair Edwards, Jules Townshend,Interpreting Modern Political Philosophy From Machiavelli to Marx,Palgrave MacMillan, 2002 p29 5 Machiavelli, trans Georgre Bull, The prince, Penguin, 1999, p25
3

Machiavelli has in mind. A truly great leader of a state must be vicious and when asked of, must immerse himself in evil deeds. One must never rule out the possibility of heinous acts. The prince must cultivate, not traditional virtue, but Machiavellian virtu. He must be bold, resolute, flexible, prepared to break promises and act against charity, truth, religion and humanity. The prince must combine the cunning of a fox with the strength of the lion and be devious, ruthless, violent or cruel as the situation demands.6 Cesare Borgia, the prince in question, was a notorious character, a man who acted with great conviction; this was none more apparent in his dealings with Remirro de Orco. The state of Romagna had threatening to cause problems for Borgia. Remirro was entrusted with a great deal of authority by Borgia, as a result of this Remirro quashed any civil unrest with the state of Romagna. This would ultimately work against him as Borgia later stripped of his control and his fate was sealed thusly. Then, one morning, Remirrios body was found cut in two pieces on the piazza at Cesena, with a block of wood and a bloody knife beside it. The brutality of this spectacle kept the people of the Romagna at once appeased and stupefied. 7 However as much as Machiavelli seems to promote an idea of do what youve got to do he is ultimately of the view that the Prince must acquire a flexible disposition. I feel this is best summed with by the phrase, the iron fist in the velvet glove. The ruler of the state must be capable of altering their conduct from bad to good as fortune and circumstance dictate. This introduces the question is it better to be loved or fear by the masses? He [a prince] should appear to be compassionate, faithful to his word, kind, guileless, and devout. And indeed he should be so. But his disposition should be such that, if he needs to be the opposite, he knows how. . . . And so he should have a flexible disposition, varying as fortune and circumstances dictate.8 Through introducing the concept of virtu, one could claim Machiavelli to be the first political spin doctor, as he dissects and analyses politics as if it were mathematics or a science. The prince must be aware of strategy and technique
, Maureen Ramsay, ed Alistair Edwards, Jules Townshend, , Interpreting Modern Political Philosophy From Machiavelli to Marx, 2002 ,p22
6 7 8

Machiavelli, trans George Bull, the Prince, penguin, 1999 p 25 Machiavelli, trans George Bull, the Prince, penguin, 1999 p 25

akin to a military general, possessing virtu gives one an insight into how to deal with a particular circumstance. Because of this virtu translated in English means strength opposed to the Italian translation of virtue. Virtu represents a kind of strength of will that can oppose chance circumstance or fortuna and bring about political success irrespective of either right or probability. Machiavelli believed that to hold power governments whether republics or principalities must be able to take action resolutely, not wavering or seeking always the middle way. In chapter 15 Machiavelli summarises, the need for a ruthless streak to succeed. The fact is that a man who wants to act virtuously in every way necessarily comes to grief among so many who are not virtuous. Therefore if a prince wants to maintain his rule he must be prepared not be virtuous, and to make use of this or not according to need.9 Machiavelli seems to lambast the virtuous, noble idea that moral goodness is sufficient to be a lawful ruler. He stresses the need to rule with an iron fist, to maintain power and to achieve greatness, this should be, for Machiavelli the aim of all leaders. This opposes what John Locke claims about those in power. Where-ever Law ends, Tyranny begins, if the Law be transgressed to anothers harm. And whosoever in Authority exceeds the Power given him by the Law and makes use of the Force he has under his Command, to compass that upon the Subject, which the Law allows not, ceases in that to be a Magistrate, and acting without Authority, may be opposed, as any other Man, who by force invades the Right of another.10 Where Locke adopts a liberal view for the good of all the people, Machiavelli asserts the role of the ruler. His belief that fortuna controls half our lives and the need to display virtu as a countervailing force has important political and moral implications. It raises questions virtue the kind of behaviour necessary for political success and about what kind of government best sustains virtu and vice versa11 Like virtu, fortuna has been understood in many different ways and many have debated the meaning of the concept. The reasons for their ambiguity are over use, their context and also the relationship between virtu and fortuna. It has been said that when Machiavelli was unable to explain an event he would put it down to the workings of fortuna, though its often summed up as chance. In Interpreting
Machiavelli, trans George Bull, The prince, penguin 1999 p50 John Locke treatise class notes 11 Maureen Ramsay ,Alistair Edwards, Jules Townshend, Interpreting Modern Political Philosophy From Machiavelli to Marx, Malgrave MacMillan, 2002 , p29
9 10

Modern Political Philosophy, Maureen Ramsay makes the claim that the antithesis of virtu is fortuna12. Fortuna is regarded as the nemesis of political order, its counter intuitive to the well being of the republic or principality. It also seems to be linked with the concepts of free will and determinism. In chapters seven and eight Machiavelli contrasts virtu with fortune in the sense of luck or the favour of powerful people, fortuna is closely linked to virtu and fortuna is closely linked to the princes success and his failures. In chapter twenty five of The Prince, Machiavelli, offers an analogy to give us an insight into fortuna and arguably the most interesting understanding of fortuna. So it is with fortune. She shows her potency where there is no well-regulated power to resist her, and her impetus is felt where she knows there are no embankments and dykes built to restrain her.13 Machiavelli has presented the concept of fortuna as some sort of mythical goddess, this harks back to roman mythology, were she was associated with fortune, though she did have a dark side and was often fickle and somewhat unpredictable, as much as she would bring good fortune she could dash ambitions and hopes, the goddess has been compared to a wheel of fortune. This was best expressed by the Christian Philosopher Boethius, who believed inconstancy was lifes essence and that the wheel or fortuna summed this up best. One can climb the wheels spokes and rise to the top though they must expect to brought back down to earth as that is Fortunas nature. In chapter twenty five Machiavelli seems to criticise those that rely solely on the grace of fortune again, cementing a need for virtu. We see that some princes flourish one day and come to grief the next, without appearing to have changed in character or any other way. This I believe arises, first, for the reasons discussed at length earlier on namely, that those princes who are utterly dependant on fortune come to grief when their fortune changes.14 In The Prince, Machiavelli, notes fortuna assertion when something is beyond the control of characters in the story and is directly linked to the princes success and failures. When he could not explain events, he attributed them to the quasisuperstitious workings of fortune.15

Alistair Edwards, Jules Townshend, Maureen Ramsay, Interpreting Modern Political Philosophy From Machiavelli to Marx, p30 13 Machiavelli, trans George Bull, the Prince, p79 14 Machiavelli, trans George Bull, the Prince, p80 15 Alistair Edwards, Jules Townshend, Maureen Ramsay, Interpreting Modern Political Philosophy From Machiavelli to Marx, p29
12

Machiavelli offers his reader an analogy for understanding fortuna better and for understanding the human situation in the face of events. He states that fortune is in essence like the nature of a river. I compare fortune to one of those violent rivers which, when they are enraged, flood the plains, tear down trees and buildings, wash soil from one place to deposit it in another. Everyone flees before them, everybody yields to their impetus, there is no possibility of resistance.16 However for all the destruction, this is not to say that it is beyond human control. It is possible to take such precautions to prevent or suppress the outcome of natural disaster. Much like the princes role as the leader of the state, an uprising may be foreseeable, so one must take necessary action. Machiavelli emphasizes the association of fortuna with the blind strength of nature by explaining that political success depends upon appreciation of the operational principles of fortuna. He draws upon his experience when he says that it is better to be impetuous than circumspect; because fortune is a woman and if she is to be submissive it is necessary to beat and coerce her.17 In other words, fortuna demands a violent response of those who would control her and Machiavelli says of this, Experience shows that she is more often subdued by men who do this than by those who act coldly. Always, being a woman, she favours young men, because they are less circumspect and more ardent, and because they command her with greater audacity.18 Fortunas reckless behaviour is a reaction to those who try to get the better of her. One can draw a number of conclusions from the Machiavellian view of fortuna, in The Prince its portrayed as some sort of primal source of violence and destruction, which seems directed at humanity. Like virtu is to fortuna, the goddess Fortuna seems to be the antithesis to reason. For Machiavelli virtu and all its callousness that comes with it seems to be the only response to fortuna. To conclude on the concept of fortuna, one can set aside the abstract mythical force of nature presented by Machiavelli; fortuna usually represents notions of contingency, chance, serendipity and unpredictability. Referencing my opening paragraphed I claim Machiavelli to be a Renaissance man, certainly a man for the ages, as he revolutionised politics and can claim to be pioneer in divorcing ethics from politics. Machiavelli seemed to be highlighting the fact paganism and Christian doctrine could not work in harmony together, in this instance one could claim Machiavelli to be a liberal, though ultimately Machiavelli
16 17 18

Machiavelli, trans George Bull, the Prince, p79 Machiavelli, trans George Bull, the Prince, p81 Machiavelli, trans George Bull, the Prince, p81

was a political pessimist, like Burke who believed humans to be flawed, however he did ask the question, was it best to rule with cruelty or compassion, he claimed every prince must be merciful but not too merciful, the iron fist in the velvet glove, though it seemed for Machiavelli the iron fist was ultimately to prevail, as he believed cruelty would ultimately provide sovereignty and help maintain the ruling of the state with the avoidance of being the subject of hate among the masses. So, on this question of being loved or feared, I conclude that since some men love as they please but fear when the prince pleases, a wise prince should rely on what he controls, not on what he cannot control. He must only endeavour, as I said, to escape being hated.19 Returning to the concepts of virtu and fortuna, theyre central to his thesis on how a ruler should act. Cesare Borgia, carried out his duties with Machiavellis virtu in his mind and in his heart, he was ruthless in dealing with Remirro, he acted with great cunning, his actions to outsiders may have been unprovoked but he always worked with a plan in mind and for Machiavelli is executed with conviction however chance and the unpredictable fortuna was his down fall. Virtu and fortuna are terms pivotal to Machiavellis thought since together they comprise the polarities of, and the framework for , all human experience.20

19

Machiavelli, trans George Bull, the Prince, p56

Alistair Edwards, Jules Townshend, Maureen Ramsay, Interpreting Modern Political Philosophy From Machiavelli to Marx, p29
20