HAVING already mentioned that it is possible for a prince to possess a wide variety of different traits, Machiavelli explains that whilst generosity is a positive characteristic it is worthless if it leads to problems of its own. Of course, the Italian is forced to admit that acts of generosity cannot take place without the prince having to extract more from the people:

If one shows generosity honestly and as it should be shown, it may not become known, and you will not avoid the criticism of its opposite, meanness. Therefore, anyone wishing to maintain the reputation of being generous has to keep on being more and more generous. As a result a prince thus inclined will consume all his property in such acts. In the end, he will have to unnecessarily exploit his people, and tax them, and do everything he can to get money. This will soon make him disliked by his subjects, and becoming poor he will be little valued by anyone.

Once again, the inner working of Machiavelli’s own mind are laid bare and it is clear that he lives by the selfish maxim that a prince should only give to receive. In fact he believes that there is no harm in being considered mean and that it is preferable to an increase in taxation. At no point does Machiavelli really consider that it is possible for a prince to make sacrifices of his own in order to express his generosity. In fact as he sees it, the idea of generosity only exists in the sense that a prince who is considered mean inevitably has to demand less from his people:

A prince, therefore, provided that he does not have to rob his subjects, can defend himself, does not become poor and despised, and is not forced to exploit the people, ought not to worry about having a reputation for being mean, because it is one of those bad characteristics which will enable him to govern.

Machiavelli continues by stating that a prince should only give away that which he has obtained from others and always ensure that he retains his own possessions. Whilst a mean prince will receive criticism, he argues, he will not invite the hatred that comes from those who always demand more.

Conversely, Frederick recounts the story of two Greek sculptors – Phidias and Alcamenes – who each produced a carving of Minerva. In order to choose which of the designs should go on top of a column, the Athenians held a vote and Alcamenes came out victorious. However, after Phidias discovered that his sculpture had been considered too vulgar, he accepted the decision but nonetheless asked whether it was still possible for his own piece of art to be mounted on a different column. A second vote was held and Phidias was granted his wish:

Phidias owed his success to the study of optics and perspective. Rules of proportion must also be observed in policy. The differences of the places put different meanings in the maxims; applying one of them generally would make it a bad one. What would be admirable for a large kingdom would not be appropriate for a small State. The luxury which is born from abundance and which makes the riches circulate through all the veins of a State, makes a large kingdom flower; it is this kind of principality which both maintains industry, and multiplies the needs of the poor.

In other words, Frederick is suggesting that it all comes down to perspective and that Machiavelli’s comments about practising either generosity and meanness are far too generalised. What is appropriate for the large state, therefore, may not be appropriate for its smaller counterpart. He also rejects Machiavelli’s assertion that a prince should not be afraid of appearing mean:

To display avarice says to the men: do not expect anything of me; I will reward your services badly. This extinguishes the heat with which any subject naturally serves their prince.

Alternatively, Frederick says, although a spendthrift wishes to appear as someone who is merely ensuring the economic stability of a given territory, the result is that one can be regarded as a miser and if money is not circulated it could seriously end up harming trade and manufacture. Meanness, then, is not only selfish but economically unsound. Frederick concludes with another swipe at Machiavelli’s inexperience with the very subject matter discussed in his book:

Machiavel says that liberality will make the prince contemptible: here is the statecraft of a usurer. But this is how a private man must speak when he mixes with princes to give lessons to them.

TO BE CONTINUED…