Machiavelli's Art of War: A Reconsideration*
Abstract Machiavelli's Art of War contains an unexplored and unexplained paradox: the dialogue's chief interlocutor is Fabrizio Colonna, a condottiere in the employ of Ferdinand of Aragon, who played a critical role in the Spanish conquest of northern Italy and in the collapse of the Florentine republic led by Piero Soderini, in which Machiavelli worked as a civil servant. Yet, Machiavelli chooses Fabrizio to defend the superiority of the citizen militia, which he associates with republican civic virtue, over mercenary troops. This paradox has remained unaccounted for because literary scholars have ignored the historical background underlying the text's assorted political subtexts, while historians have ignored the nature of Quattrocento dialogue, as a literary genre, in contextualizing the work. Once these historical and literary dimensions of the Art of War are brought together, it can be seen why Fabrizio Colonna would have been perceived, by Machiavelli and his audience, as the ideal representative of a military position which he espoused neither in theory or in practice.
Bernardo Rucellai and the Orti Oricellari: A Study on the Origin of Modern Political Thought
n his Florentine History, Francesco Guicciardini, writing almost simultaneously with events in which he himself had participated, describes the clashes of personalities and the conflicts of the factions involved in the disintegration of the regime of the Gonfaloniere Piero Soderini. The reader of Guicciardini's narrative sees Bernardo Rucellai, a leading representative of the Florentine aristocracy, emerge as one of the leading figures in the struggle against Soderini; and Guicciardini follows with special attention the activities of Rucellai in these crucial years.1 The historian mentions at one point that Rucellai, who had absented himself from Florence and gone into voluntary exile, sent the Florentine Government a letter ofjustification, in order to fend off an accusation of treason. In this letter Guicciardini says Rucellai explained his political attitude in the times of Lorenzo il Magnifico, Piero de' Medici and Savonarola and tried to show his aim had always been the maintenance of peace and freedom in Florence.2 This letter is still in existence in the Florentine archives, a striking tribute both to the historical exactitude of Guicciardini and to the efficiency of the Florentine Chancellery.3 The main point in the document is correctly stated by Guicciardini.4 In addition, however, to asserting his consistent adherence to the republican ideal, Rucellai emphasizes that on various occasions during his travels in France and Italy he has tried to get in touch with the Florentine Government in order to warn it against certain hostile conspiracies being hatched abroad. Hence, the letter provides a rather comprehensive itinerary of Rucellai's travels and is an important source for any attempt to retrace the story of his life.5 Rucellai's career is worth investigating. Neither his political activities nor his efforts as a writer and humanist deserved to be so completely forgotten as they have in fact been. He was not, to be sure, one of the chief political protagonists in the time of Florence's greatness, on a par with the Medici,
ON MACHIAVELLI'S USE OF ORDINI
AbstractIn the sixteenth century there was a crisis in the editing of Boccaccio, when Rome, having reduced the publishable novelle to 99, proposed addition of a story from some other work than the Decameron to reach the sacred figure of a hundred. But pedantry in Florence then demurred: only in the Decameron was Boccaccio's greatness found, and all the minor works were ciphers to this great accompt. There is something of a parallel to this in the treatment given to Machiavelli, for he is amongst the most-read Italian authors, by virtue of the Prince; yet at the same time amongst the most neglected, in respect of the Discorsi, the Arte della Guerra, even the Istorie Fiorentine. When people talk of Machiavelli they do not mean the author of those works, but only one of them; and this has happened with the useful recent study by Prof. Chiappelli of Machiavelli's language. From this investigation of his language there will come a clearer understanding of his thought, and his intentions. But we are still at a ...