A very popular topic of debate in literature and history circles is how did Machiavelli intend the Prince to be read? Some people like to insist that Machiavelli wrote it as a piece of satire, while others insist that it was a sincere reflection of his genuine political beliefs. I disagree with both – The Prince is best understood as a performative work intended to get Niccolo a job.
You know the guys who post stuff on LinkedIn like "B2B sales is my passion" or "Rise and Grind! Thank God its Monday!" These posts are fundamentally performative – I don't know if you really like B2B sales or not, but I know that posting about liking B2B sales is intended to make you look good to recruiters. When you look at the historical context behind The Prince, you'll find that it is really the renaissance version of Niccolo hustleposting on Linkedin.
The Prince belongs to a genre of books called "Mirrors for Princes", essentially, an instruction guide for Princes on how to do the job when they become king. These books are typically written for an audience of 1 (the prince), and are typically written by the King or a government official (often at the request of the king). After all, there is no "king school" for princes to attend, and each country has their own laws, politics, and customs that make it important for each prince to get a personalized guide on how to do the job.
Now let's look at the historical context behind The Prince.
The book is explicitly written for Lorenzo de Medici, Duke of Urbino, and Lord of Florence. Lorenzo became Lord of Florence in 1513 after his uncle, Giuliano de Medici, the Duke of Nemours took the city back from the republicans headed by the dictator Pier Soderini. Soderini's official title was gonfaloniere for life, but you can probably think of it as dictator.
Under the Soderini regime, Machiavelli was second chancellor, a high-level government official. But Soderini's government was defeated on the battlefield and Florence was retaken by the Medicis in 1512. Naturally, Machiavelli lost his job, was briefly tortured and imprisoned, and was thrown out of Florence.
Machiavelli then wrote The Prince in 1513, sending it to Lorenzo. But we don't know if Lorenzo actually read the book or not. Notably, The Prince was not published in Machiavelli's lifetime, the book was published years after Machiavelli's death in 1532.
So we can see that The Prince was not intended to promote Machiavelli's political opinions, nor was it intended as satire (either to amuse, or to attack his political enemies), since The Prince was not published for a wide audience.
Instead, The Prince was written for an audience of 1, the new ruler of Florence after Machiavelli lost his job and got thrown out of the city. So it is best understood as a performative work, Niccolo wanted to impress the new ruler of Florence so he can get his job back.
In a way, whether Machiavelli himself genuinely believes what he wrote is besides the point. This is a performative work, no different than when people write "I am passionate about B2B sales" on their cover letter. It doesn't matter if you actually are passionate about B2B sales, you write this because you think this will impress the employer and get you the job.
Similarly, Machiavelli wrote what he wrote in The Prince to try and impress Duke Lorenzo into giving him a job (remember, this was not a published book, the intended audience is 1 person). Thus, it doesn't matter if Machiavelli believes what he wrote, it matters that he thinks writing what he wrote will impress the Duke enough to get him a job.
by Uptons_BJs