The Story Behind Machiavelli's Philosophy - Dr Alexander Lee | Modern Wisdom Podcast 321

1. 0:00 – 2:26

   Introduction

   1. ALDr Alexander Lee0:00

      A central theme running through all of Machiavelli's writings is fortune and the vicissitudes of fortune. Fortune, he says, is what rules the world around us. But she, it's always... he always imagines her as a, as a woman. She is very unpredictable and very capricious. You never know when she's going to rise you up to the highest heights and when she's going to knock you down on your knees.

   2. CWChris Williamson0:26

      Why is an Italian man from the 15th century worth writing about?

   3. ALDr Alexander Lee0:32

      Um, I think there are, uh, at least two good reasons, uh, for that. Um, on the one hand, Machiavelli, uh, has, uh, exerted, uh, an influence over the development of Western political thought, um, like very few others. Um, there are not many discussions about, uh, realpolitik, uh, the nature of rulership, uh, the role of virtue or the lack thereof in public life, which do not, at some point, come back to Machiavelli in his writings. The second reason is closely connected with that. When we think of Machiavelli, um, it's quite natural for us to think of the adjective Machiavellian. Uh, that is to say someone who is shrewd, cunning, a little bit amoral, willing to do things that they probably shouldn't do in other areas of life. Uh, and that, uh, association, uh, which I'm sure we'll discuss in, in further detail later on in the show, um, has often colored the way we perceive the man. His life, however, uh, is quite different or gives us a quite different idea of, uh... or gives us a quite different impression. Um, although he often did things which were, um, questionable, he was far from being this infallible political genius, uh, that we may think of. Uh, in actual fact, uh, he was, uh, a very human person, uh, a flawed personality who was often getting things wrong, who was often finding himself in the wrong place at the wrong time, doing the wrong thing with the wrong people and getting found out. Um, so I think, yeah, uh, on the one hand we should look at Machiavelli from the point of view of his, uh, enduring relevance. So, I'm not really keen on the, the idea of relevance as a, as a criterion of historical study. If he's relevant to, to political discourse and on the other hand, because of the extent to which his life does, uh, sort of jars with

2. 2:26 – 4:15

   Machiavellis enduring relevance

   1. ALDr Alexander Lee2:26

      that a little bit.

   2. CWChris Williamson2:27

      It seems like some of the established thought was that he was kind of born with this immutable characteristics, this, uh, amazing political thinker. And yet upon reading about his life, it seems like he kind of blunders and blunders and slowly gets less worse and less worse and less worse, and then eventually ends up at some degree of capability.

   3. ALDr Alexander Lee2:49

      Um, I, I, um... Less worse. Uh, uh, he is always making blunders. Uh, from the beginning of his political career to the last moment, he is always getting things wrong. It doesn't... That's not to say, that's not to say he doesn't get thing, a lot of things right, but he is always making miscalculations. He's better, I think, on paper than he is in his own political career. Um, but it is certainly true that because of Machiavelli's enduring, uh, resonance, uh, within the field of political thought or history of political thought, um, many people even today, um, have been inclined to believe that he was born, um, you know, uh, (laughs) like Athena from the head of, uh, the, uh, of the philosophy gods, um, with this great insight. And, and it is... I mean, I'm not saying it's, it's completely wrong because one can detect the genesis of his ideas, um, in his thinking from a comparatively early date. But it is, I think, mistaken to believe that he was a man without flaws, without personal failings, uh, without, um, problems and difficulties. But for me, as I hope I've shown in the book, that makes him all the more relatable, all the more engaging and personable. I often say that, you know, I, uh... there are very few political thinkers in the world that I'd like to go for a, a pint with, but Machiavelli is certainly

3. 4:15 – 10:45

   Why is he so notorious

   1. ALDr Alexander Lee4:15

      one of them.

   2. CWChris Williamson4:16

      Is that why he's still notorious today, then? Why, why is it there's lots of Renaissance figures that could have been still used in common parlance? I mean, Machiavellianism, his surname has become-

   3. ALDr Alexander Lee4:28

      (laughs) .

   4. CWChris Williamson4:28

      ... an entire topic within its own right. Why is he so notorious?

   5. ALDr Alexander Lee4:32

      Sure. Well, um, Machiavelli's, uh, significance, um, as a political thinker and his unfortunate reputation stems from the fact that he broke quite significantly in many respects, um, with earlier traditions of political thought, particularly with earlier ideas of rulership. Um, prior to Machiavelli's birth, it was, uh, quite common to believe that, uh, princes who wished to rule properly and to remain in power should do so by acting virtuously, and virtue was understood in, um, a mixture of kind of Stoic and Christian terms. That is to say, it was believed that a ruler should evince those virtues which we should all, uh, manifest in our lives. We should, we should be honest, they should be decent, they should be prudent, they should be wise, continent, et cetera, et cetera. They should, um, act always with justice. Um, Machiavelli, uh, for very pragmatic reasons, thinks that while this might be a very good approach to adopt as a private citizen, he thinks that experience has showed that in practice it's not such a good idea. In fact, in times of turbulence, such as those which, in which he was living, um, it can actually be disadvantage to act honestly or with generosity or with, uh, mercy or compassion, et cetera.So in The Prince, um, his most famous work, I should say, notorious work, he suggests that it is... A, a prince who wishes to stay in power should, as well as having, um, an independent military force of his own citizens, he should, um, be, uh, parsimonious rather than generous. He should be, um, cruel rather than compassionate. Um, Machiavelli does say that if he can make himself loved by the people, that's a lovely thing, but love is a less reliable sentiment, uh, as a basis for political power than, uh, fear. Um, better oka- to be ready to be dishonest than honest, um, et cetera, et cetera. Um, so Machiavelli is breaking, uh, with this early tradition in saying that a, a prince needs to act in a way that is, um, not always in conformity with traditional ideas of virtue or of, of, of, of, uh, ethical goodness. He wasn't, I should stress, the absolute first, uh, to make these points. Um, when at the very early on in his career, um, in 1499, Florence sacks and arrests one of its leading military commanders, a guy called Paolo Vitelli. And Paolo Vitelli is responsible for, um, leading a campaign to recapture Pisa, which has rebelled against France little bit before. For whatever reason, Vitelli throws away a golden opportunity to capture Pisa and the Florentines attribute this either to incompetence or to treachery and so they arrest him and they bring him for trial to Florence. And there's a big debate about whether he should just be executed straight off, even though there are doubts about his guilt or whether, you know, you should give him the benefit of the doubt. And there are very good argu- powerful arguments made in the councils that while an individual, private individual should act with compassion and understanding and justice, things are different for a state. A state should act, uh, in such a way that, um, it preserves its own interest and so they decide to execute Vitelli. (French) . And we can see in this idea, this idea of reason of state later becomes known, that, um, the state should follow a different set of moral precepts to private individuals, an early, um, foretaste of ideas that Machiavelli is going to develop more fully. And in The Prince, he really works out all the implications of this. Unfortunately, um, well, I should say, he's, he's writing against, as I said earlier, a very, very, very specific set of, of political circumstances. Um, when he's writing, um, he's lost his job, uh, Florence has changed hands from being a republic, it's now gone back into the hands of the Medici, uh, it's beset by factional, uh, divides and the whole of Italy is in, uh, the, the grip of, of, of a very complex series of wars. It's evident that Machiavelli needs a job and that to get a job, he needs to persuade the Medici that he's a good advisor. And to do that, he needs to show them how to stay in power within these circumstances and that's why he suggests, uh, being, uh, you know, uh, cruel, dishonest, et cetera, et cetera, when necessary, I should stress. Um, but the work is written in a deliberately discreet and subtle way. Machiavelli knew very well that he couldn't simply say to the Medici, "Um, hi, I'd like a job. Here's what I think about your situation." So he dresses it up in a very abstract way, as if he's writing a very disinterested piece of political philosophy and that has made it very easy for people from soon after it was written to read it, um, in, uh, out of its context, if I can put it that way, to see it as a repository of universal ideas rather than an attempt to address very precise concerns. And the problem, I mean, that's a legitimate way of reading anything, I'm not going to cast aspersions on my colleagues in political science, no matter what I might feel. Um, but as soon as you take that step of reading it out of its context, um, then there's a tendency or a temptation, I should say, to project your ahistorical reading of The Prince back onto Machiavelli and that does lead us to, um, misrepresent, uh, his ideas, his background, um, his intentions.

4. 10:45 – 14:31

   Machiavellis personality

   1. ALDr Alexander Lee10:45

   2. CWChris Williamson10:46

      What was his personality like? It seems like someone-

   3. ALDr Alexander Lee10:48

      Oh.

   4. CWChris Williamson10:48

      ... who would have, who would write this sort of stuff, would be very game playing, you know, high on the dark triad score, narcissistic, no empathy. What sort of a man can write this sort of a work?

   5. ALDr Alexander Lee11:03

      Um, well, the short answer is he's a clever one. Um, but a, a pleasant one. If I were to describe Machiavelli in a word, I would say that he was a bit of a lad. Um-

   6. CWChris Williamson11:20

      (laughs) That's so good, that, that, that three, that three-letter word that every university student rugby player desires to be called, that's, that's Niccolo Machiavelli.

   7. ALDr Alexander Lee11:31

      Well, I, I, I, I say it a little bit in jest, of course, but it, it is meant seriously because, I mean, let, let's go back to the circumstances in which it was written, It- The Prince was written 'cause it's a good insight in the type, into the type of guy he was. A little bit before, he, uh, is loses his job, he loses his job as, um, a senior bureaucrat within the Florentine government because he has aligned himself with, um, a series of republican, uh, a sys- a, a republican system of government. Um, and, um, afterwards, foolishly, uh, allowed himself to get caught up in or implicated in a conspiracy against Florence's new rulers, the Medici.So he gets arrested after that and thrown into prison and tortured. Um, that shows straight off that he's in the wrong place at the wrong time, uh, and the wrong time. Other bureaucrats who worked in the same o- offices, him such as his boss, Marco, uh, di Virgilio Adriani did not lose their jobs, let alone get thrown into jail. So he's doing the wrong thing. While he's in jail he writes a series of poems, two poems to his old friend Giuliano de' Medici, who he knew as a kid. And these are very, very, very funny verses. For somebody who's been tortured, lying in a stinking prison cell, they're very amusing. Um, they poke fun at himself, he pokes fun at himself, he contrasts himself, he, he adopts he, the form of heroic poetry at certain moments to mock himself because he's not being heroic, he's being cowardly. You know, eventually he gets let out and because he doesn't have much cash and he's very miserable, he goes to sell his farm in the countryside. In the countryside, uh, he writes a letter to, um, to a friend of his a little bit later, uh, in which he describes a difficult day. What does he do in the countryside? Well, he gets up in the morning, he goes and catches birds in the, in the, in the countryside, uh, uh, by the side of a river and in the fields. He reads some poetry, all very nice. Then comes lunch, he goes home, has a bite to eat, and in the afternoon he goes to the pub, uh, in the local village. Uh, there he gambles and drinks with all the good-for-nothings, his words, uh, and they, you know, they get drunk and they have fights or whatever. He- he's, he's not quiet about this, he's quite open. What he doesn't mention in that letter is that a little bit later he also, he has le- several children at this point, he's married, he also has an affair with, uh, with a local-ish girl, one of many affairs he had. And then later in the evening when everything's kind of settled down, he goes into his study and he puts on the, the clothes of, uh, the court and he starts to read and write. So in that moment we can see all the rich, very human contradictions and failings of, of, of this man. Um, he is very, very clever, um, but he also, you know, he likes a drink, he has affairs, he's, he's a bit of a lad, uh, what

5. 14:31 – 15:51

   Machiavellis affairs

   1. ALDr Alexander Lee14:31

      can I say? (laughs)

   2. CWChris Williamson14:31

      He has affairs with both men and women, right? He's got tons of kids, he's got a wife that loves him, and it seems like he loves too, but he's also, uh, spraying it around for want of, want of a better word.

   3. ALDr Alexander Lee14:44

      Yeah, that's absolutely right. Um, he certainly has a lot of affairs with, uh, with other women. Um, he, uh, some of them are very, very intense affairs. Um, so towards the end of his life, he has a, a long, long affair with a woman 20 odd years, I think 20 odd years his junior called Barbara Salutati and he writes, again, a lot of poems to her that are, that are very self-mocking, very acutely aware of his own failings. In- indeed in one poem he even seems to allude to the fact that he may have been suffering some erectile dysfunction at the time. Um, we think he also had some, uh, relations with guys too. There is a little bit of uncertainty here, um, but I think there's probably enough evidence that it, that, that we can, that, that we can be pretty sure about it. Um, was this unusual? At the time, well, officially homosexuality and all homosexual relations are, uh, illegal, um, although there is a certain ambiguity in the legislation, but nonetheless it, it is quite common, um, under the radar effectively. So he's certainly not, not strange, not, uh, not out of the ordinary in that regard.

6. 15:51 – 22:13

   What goes wrong

   1. ALDr Alexander Lee15:51

   2. CWChris Williamson15:51

      What are some of the other big catastrophes that he goes through? I want to get onto his philosophy and his successes in a bit, but it seems like he has a, a nice litany of things that go wrong. He's in the wrong place at the wrong time, and he seems to have a knack for being able to do that.

   3. ALDr Alexander Lee16:05

      Sure. Um, well, one of the important parts of Machiavelli's, uh, job, uh, as a bureaucrat, as the second chancellor of the Florentine Republic, um, was, uh, going on embassies. He, he was usually... I mean, I think on one occasion towards the end of his life he was actually an ambassador, but on all the other occasions he was simply an emissary. So in other words, he couldn't agree things on his own, uh, uh, on the strength of his own name, he had to keep working on the instructions of people back home. Um, and to start with, he's pretty bad at this actually. We can't blame him too much because you know, he's, um, his early missions, uh, he's still in his late 20s, um, late 20s and very early 30s, um, so he... and he's never done that kind of thing before, but still he is pretty naive. One of his first missions is to a woman called Caterina Sforza, known as The Tigress of Forlì, and she is a formidable woman. Um, she's been holding, uh, protecting, defending the, the independence of her little tiny state, uh, in the midst of near constant threats from all sides. Um, anyway, Machiavelli goes along, she has to, he has to secure a deal whereby, uh, she'll let her son who's a mercenary fight for Florence on similar terms, and he has to try to avoid giving away too much on France's behalf. And Caterina, who's a wily old woman, not much, not old, a wily woman, um, very well-educated, keeps sort of dropping hints. She, she has to drop hints because, um, there are other people present at these meetings who can't be allowed to hear everything. So she keeps dropping hints and Machiavelli just doesn't notice, just doesn't pick up on them. So she keeps having to send her secretaries to, you know, have a word with him and say, "You know, what we're really trying to say is this. Pay attention." Anyway, he gets a bit better in time, but he, he's... in later missions, he still kind of misjudges the tone. So, uh, later he goes on a mission to... several missions to the King of France and, uh, the basic point of these missions is to get the King of France, who is-... often, um, mounting expeditions to Italy, uh, in pursuit of his claims to the Kingdom of Naples and the Duchy of Milan to defend France against its enemies. Anyway, on one of these missions, he has to, um, gain the favor of, um, uh, the king's, uh, chief minister, uh, Georges d'Amboise. And he catches Georges at one point outside and he says, you know, "Let me explain, uh, Italian politics to you." What the king really has to understand is this, y'know, this is a, a guy in his mid-30s who has... y'know, he's, he's not a fool, but he's lecturing one of Europe's foremost political figures, and Georges d'Amboise listens and he says, uh, "Yeah, thanks. Uh, I (laughs) don't need any lessons from you, chum," jumps on his horse and rides off. Anyway, and it goes on like this. Uh, perhaps the most famous mission is where he meets Cesare Borgia for the first time. Uh, this is in, uh, mid, um, I think it's mid-1502, uh, Cesare Borgia, the son of Alexander VI, uh, the pope at the time is trying to carve out an estate for himself in Central Italy. He's just captured a city called Urbino, beautiful, beautiful city on a high, uh, high hi- uh, uh, uh, a, a kind of plateau, uh, uh, towers above the, the, the surrounding countryside. Um, Machiavelli and his, uh, companion, um, uh, uh, who is, um, a bishop, arrive late at night. They don't arrive when they're supposed to. They have to creep in through a back gate in the middle of the- of a rainstorm and they're caught by guards and they're dragged before Cesare, you know, soaking wet, covered in mud in the middle of the night, having not even managed to get into the city correctly, and Machiavelli is just in awe, in awe of Cesare at that moment. And, um, that does color... He, he gets over it quite quickly, but, but that does kind of color his relations with Cesare. More broadly speaking, his political errors, um, are, um, more fundamental and I've already alluded to some of them. Um, so for much of his political career, as a officially, uh, objective, a- apolitical, uh, bureaucrat, um, he, uh, just kind of does his job, but in time, he aligns himself more and more and more with, um, the defense of a republican system of governance. And, uh, he becomes quite vehement, uh, in, around 1509, 1510, 1511. And there's good reason for that. It's because the republic is under threat from foreign attack. But it's also exactly the wrong time to be doing that. The wrong time to be aligning himself with the public, because everything falls apart and the Medici come back and the republic falls, and as I've said, he gets sacked and, and, um, and arrested. Spends a lot of time trying to get a job with the Medici, because he's not a rich man. He needs to work. Um, unfortunately, uh, he doesn't do very well. The Prince is written, as I said earlier, as a job application. Um, but when he comes to present the, The Prince to the person to whom it's dedicated, Lorenzo de' Medici, um, he comes at the wrong time. Lorenzo has just received a gift of two hunting dogs from somebody else and he doesn't even look at the book. So Machiavelli is really angry and he goes off saying, "Damn these Medici..." Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Anyway, years later, he eventually earns their trust and he's sent on a few relatively minor missions, but is involved in, in, uh, their plans to... their, their, their campaign to defend Florence from their enemies. And ju- y- y- you know, he's just wormed his way back into their circle when lo and behold, they're kicked out of Florence as well. So he's again on the wrong side. By then, however, it's too late and, uh, he dies sadly, um, uh, rather disappointed.

7. 22:13 – 24:22

   Turbulent times

   1. ALDr Alexander Lee22:13

   2. CWChris Williamson22:13

      So what's the highest office that he gets to? It seems like he's constantly selling lows and buying highs and doing an awful lot of work (laughs) to try and climb back up. O- also-

   3. ALDr Alexander Lee22:28

      That's right.

   4. CWChris Williamson22:28

      ... if you are listening somewhere beyond the grave, Niccolo, I don't... t- it sounds like such a turbulent environment that it would have been very difficult to have weathered those storms. That period would have been m- almost impossible without the, the foresight of clairvoyance.

   5. ALDr Alexander Lee22:43

      Um, it wasn't impossible. There were people who did manage to, um, weather the constitutional shifts in France without suffering too much hardship. His boss, for example, Marcello di Badile Adriani who was just senior to him, uh, stays in office, uh, as France's top bureaucrat, um, through, um, uh, uh, through several changes of government or changes of regime, at least. But you're right in saying that these were very, very, very turbulent times. It was extremely hard to stay on your feet. Um, it was hard enough for people of, um, some wealth and political, independent political standing, but it was particularly harder for somebody like Machiavelli who, um, who came from a fairly modest background. He wasn't poor, but nor was he a... nor was he rich by any stretch of the imagination. Um, who, you know, began life under a bit of a shadow because of his father's indebtedness and possible illegitimacy, et cetera. Um, he really had to, to, to work to get, to get anything, really, um, and that was difficult. Um, there were various routes to achieve security and stability if you were an intelligent guy at the time. Um, it was not unusual for those who had some education and literary ability to seek the patronage of more powerful rulers or more powerful figures. Um, alternatively, you could seek, um, office as a secretary or a chancellor as Machiavelli did, but in that case, it was difficult to weather the storms and it was difficult to know when to involve yourself in the political fray and when not

8. 24:22 – 25:38

   Misconceptions

   1. ALDr Alexander Lee24:22

      to.

   2. CWChris Williamson24:23

      What are the most common misconceptions about his phil- philosophical stances?

   3. ALDr Alexander Lee24:29

      Um, well, the most common one, uh, we've already touched upon, um, and that is to say that, uh, Machiavelli was a kind of prophet of, if not evil, certainly amorality. Um, this is a, a reading of The Prince, uh, that has been common from very shortly after it, uh, appeared in print. It, it was never published in his lifetime, but it was, it was published very shortly afterwards. Um, he was, uh, you know, attacked from both sides of the confessional divide during the Reformation, attacked by, um, Catholics because they saw this as an enemy of the virtuous rulership they were trying to defend in the pre-Turantine period. He was attacked by Protestants who saw this as an emblem of all the kind of awful things that Catholics were doing. Um, so, uh, in France, um, many of your listeners may, may perhaps be familiar with the Saint Bartholomew's Day massacre, uh, in, in, in France where, um, on one particular night of the feast of Saint Bartholomew, um, the, uh, Protestants of, of Paris were, were butchered. And those who survived, um, often described the, the, the, the, the, um, the king, the king of France's actions as very Machiavelli. So,

9. 25:38 – 27:30

   Was Machiavelli immoral

   1. ALDr Alexander Lee25:38

      uh, that gives you a, a sense of the way in which, the extent to which within a few decades of his death, he's already become a kind of shorthand for wickedness and evil. Um-

   2. CWChris Williamson25:47

      So was he, he wa- he wasn't called immoral during his own lifetime-

   3. ALDr Alexander Lee25:51

      Uh-

   4. CWChris Williamson25:51

      ... because the work wasn't sufficiently widely passed around for people to work out what he was up to?

   5. ALDr Alexander Lee25:57

      Well, it, it, it was, um... it did generate a bit of a stir, uh, after he, he began circulating it, but nothing compared to what was ha- what happened in later decades.

   6. CWChris Williamson26:08

      What do you think-

   7. ALDr Alexander Lee26:08

      Um, this-

   8. CWChris Williamson26:09

      ... what do you, what do you think he would have thought of that? What do you think he would have thought of where his work was taken after his death?

   9. ALDr Alexander Lee26:17

      Well, this a- this is, um, a, a n- interesting question because it, it, it comes back to the issue of whe- uh, of for whom Machiavelli was writing, or who he thought he was writing for. M- those who have been inclined to see him as a kind of prophet of amorality have supposed that he was writing for posterity. Um, uh, Leo Strauss, uh, and Harvey Mansfield have been particularly, um, keen to, uh, uh, advocate this line of thought. And it wasn't uncommon for people at the time to write for posterity. Um, one of Machiavelli's favorite authors was a guy called Francesco Petrarca, who we know in English as Petrarch. And he was, you know, an incredibly important poet, second only to Dante in importance, in fact. And he wrote, during his lifetime in the 14th century, a letter to posterity. He was constantly reediting his letters to ensure that they were read in exactly the way he wanted them to be read after his death. He spoke frequently about, um, how it was possible to sort of have an existence beyond the grave, uh, and he was always comparing himself to people who had an enduring legacy.

10. 27:30 – 29:07

    Was Machiavelli writing for posterity

    1. ALDr Alexander Lee27:31

       But I don't think Machiavelli was like that. I don't think he was writing for posterity at all. He v- occasionally alludes to, um, people in the future, but it's always very clear that he's writing for a specific moment against a very specific cons- that kind of very specific constellation of circumstances. So I think, um, each of his major works was intended to address an immediate, uh, objective. The Prince, uh, you know, uh, was designed to respond to the challenges facing the Medici after they returned to power in Florence in 1512. The Discorsi, his other major work, uh, was, um, dedicated to some of the friends he made in the Orto Archaio, in the gardens where he met young men who were either a mixture of people who were on the periphery of the Medici circle or those who were opposed to Medici. Uh, and there is a suggestion that it's intended to, um, cultivate, um, a new set of political sensibilities, uh, in their hearts. Um, I think he prob- as confident as I think he probably would have been surprised, um, at, uh, the fact that, that he has had such an enduring, uh, appeal, that he had a readership lasting, you know, five centuries after his death. Do I think he would be surprised by... that his work was read as, um... or misread as praise o- of amorality or even immorality? I'm not sure about that because he was very conscious of the extent to which he was breaking with tradition in The Prince. He was, you know, very, very well aware of it. He, he signals it himself. So the answer

11. 29:07 – 35:16

    Most common misconceptions

    1. ALDr Alexander Lee29:07

       is, I think, uh, I think he, he would have been both surprised and unsurprised. Sorry, that was a typical historian's answer. Yes, and-

    2. CWChris Williamson29:13

       Very diplomatic. Yeah, indeed.

    3. ALDr Alexander Lee29:15

       (laughs)

    4. CWChris Williamson29:15

       Um, back to the misconceptions.

    5. ALDr Alexander Lee29:17

       Um, in, in what sense? I'm sorry. (laughs)

    6. CWChris Williamson29:22

       The most common misconceptions of his philosophy.

    7. ALDr Alexander Lee29:25

       Oh, the most com-... Well, um, the, uh, th- as I said, the most common misconception arises from The Prince that he is attempting to suggest that rulers who wish to remain in power should be, uh, um, absolutely immoral in all, in all circumstances. Um, that, um... as I said, if you read it out of its context, then you can make that argument. Um, but I'm, I'm not convinced it's, it's completely true because i- in fairness, if you actually read The Prince in detail, um, he is very, very careful to qualify these, you know, kind of scare quotes that they're often pulled out. Um, he says, "Yeah, I mean, it's nice for a prince to be loved. I mean, that's obviously that's what we should, should aim for. But if you can't, then the next best thing is to be feared, so, you know, weigh a doubt against a certainty." Um, however, he also says that if you're going to make yourself feared, be, be careful not to push that too far because if you make yourself into a monster, then you're going to arouse a whole bunch of, of, of animosity amongst, uh-... your, your subjects and they're going to, to, at some point, um, decide that it's better to take the risk of ousting you, even though that is extremely uncertain, he says it somewhere, than to remain under your yoke. Um, he doesn't, of course, a- again a- or say that it is necessary always to reject the precepts of amorality. He merely says, uh, uh, reject the precepts of conventional morality, he merely says that a prince should know how to act contrary to the dictates of conventional morality when necessary, um, and how to be virtuous in a new sense, virtuous in a sense, uh, uh, of being a man, being manly, in his words. Um, so yeah, the common misconceptions, uh, th- that's the most common misconception. Um, I, I mean, I- I- I think we can... there are... it's perhaps worth noting that even those who, who do present Machiavelli as a, as an advocate of amorality or a prophet of evil, if you like, um, have difficulties in reconciling The Prince with some of his other works, which offer a somewhat different view of political action. Like the Discorsi, for example. Um, the Discorsi is, uh, nominally a, um, a, an explanation of how one should read the first 10 books of Livy's History of Rome. I won't go completely... But in actual fact, it's an analysis of how states of all kinds, not just principalities, um, become great and stay great. Um, and that ends up, the answer to that is they have to stay free, in his words, because you can't be great unless you're free. So the question is, how do you become free, uh, and keep your, your liberty? And the answer is, once again, virtue. Um, obviously virtue not in the traditional sense, but virtue in the sense of being willing to do anything for the defense of the republic, being, uh, a true vir, willing to sacrifice even yourself, uh, in defense of the republic. Willingness to, as Machiavelli says, you know, kill, rape, steal, whatever necessary to protect the republic. And then he talks about the way in which you can cultivate that virtue because people tend to be self-interested. The more, in fact, the more prosperous people become, he says, uh, the more likely they are to think only of themselves. So the question is how to cultivate this virtue in the people more generally. Um, and although he does return to some of the ideas he, uh, he, uh, made in the, uh, he, he raised in The Prince, um, such as that leaders, charismatic leadership is an important, um, means of cultivating virtue in people, and charismatic leaders, uh, should occasionally be quite cruel. He doesn't suggest that it's the be-all and end-all. Um, in fact, he addresses, introduces a whole range of other ideas like the need to eliminate great disparities of wealth, um, the need to use law as a form of education, um, the need to cultivate a vigorous religious belief, uh, et cetera, et cetera. So, um, the, the, the challenge of people who have read The Prince as a, uh, defense of, um, amoral, uh, princely, uh, uh, uh, rulership have often struggled to, to explain how The Prince, uh, tessellates with, with the Discorsi, which is, seems ostensibly to be more concerned with republics and other forms of government. Um, and it's challenging. It's challenging for those who see Machiavelli as this prince, prophet o- of evil because, um, if you read it out of context, it can appear that he's advancing two completely contradictory viewpoints. Whereas the reality is, A, he is writing in response to different circum- slightly different circumstances for slightly different audiences and also, in the context, um, the problem which, the problems which he's addressing are essentially identical, um, in the 16th century. Um, there is less of a sense of a, of a radical, uh, difference between princely and republican senses, uh, forms of government, much less pronounced than, than we, we think today. Um, so in actual fact, all he's trying to do is answer the question of how does a state of any kind, uh, ruled in whatever way, um, maintain some kind of stability in this mad and changing world where fortune can, you know, do whatever she likes?

12. 35:16 – 35:42

    Machiavelli as a philosophical political prophet

    1. CWChris Williamson35:16

       It seems interesting to me that he is being held up by many people as a, a philosophical, political philos- philosophical prophet in one way, and yet in his own deployment of these strategies, appears to fail quite consistently. I mean, he, he does okay, but he's, he doesn't seem to have the foresight that he's professing others should take on.

13. 35:42 – 37:34

    Selfhonesty

    1. ALDr Alexander Lee35:42

       He doesn't have foresight, but what he does have is an extraordinary sense of self-honesty. Um, he is not the sort of person who is, um, unwilling to recognize where he's gone wrong or so, you know, arrogant that he cannot see fault in his closest allies and dearest friends. So in, um, the Discorsi, for example, he takes issue with his former boss, um, th- the head of the re- of, of the republic, uh, with which, which he served so loyally for, for 13 years. Uh, 13 or a bit years, um, a man called Pier Soderini, um, is, is castigated quite, quite severely in the Discorsi.... um, for, admittedly, not for the worst thing in the world, but for being too kind and being too nice and being unwilling to, um, uh, act ruthlessly towards his, his, uh, opponents. Um, but nonetheless, this, this, uh, is evidence of somebody who's willing to question, um, his previous experiences. And indeed, he makes this very clear, um, both in The... in The Prince and in Viscontarsi. He says, you know, "I've been around a bit. I've seen things and here's what I've learned."

    2. CWChris Williamson37:07

       Yeah, yeah, yeah.

    3. ALDr Alexander Lee37:07

       And indeed, this is really the, the things he's w-... this is something that you come across time and time again in his other works. Uh, at around the same time he's writing these books, he also writes a note to, um, uh, somebody who's about to go away, uh, on his first diplomatic mission. And Machiavelli says, you know, "These are the, this is the stuff I've learnt. Um, take heed." He doesn't say he's always got it right. Indeed, he's aware that he's often learnt from his own errors. Um,

14. 37:34 – 38:20

    Main Lessons

    1. ALDr Alexander Lee37:34

       but there it is.

    2. CWChris Williamson37:35

       What are some of the main lessons that we should take away?

    3. ALDr Alexander Lee37:43

       Um, it's very difficult to, to answer that because, uh, it kind of invites, um, an answer which, uh, which (laughs) which commits the kind of ahistorical sin that I have criticized already. But let's play the game anyway. Um, I think... I think two serious ones and one less serious one. A central theme running through all of Machiavelli's writings, uh, is fortune and the vicissitudes of fortune.

15. 38:20 – 43:11

    What rules the world

    1. ALDr Alexander Lee38:20

       "Fortune," he says, "is, uh, what rules the world around us." Uh, "But she..." It's always... he always imagines her as a, as a woman. "She is very unpredictable and very capricious. You never know when, uh, she's going to rise you up to the highest heights and when she's going to knock you down on your knees. She can't be won over," he says. "She's not gonna be placated with, uh, imprecation. She's not going to be placated with, uh, you know, virtue or anything like that. You, you are not going to be able to affect her, her decisions. So, the only thing you can do is be ready to adapt, to be changeable, to be flexible and when the moment comes, not to be timid. To act decisively when necessary." And that, I think, is, um, one of, uh, one of the very f-... He first voices that in relation to, um, a Pope Julius II who he admires for a time for his decisive action. But it is one of the very few points that you can abstract as a, as a kind of universal principle and I think is one which we can all apply to a certain extent in our lives, particularly at a moment of instability such as now. The second one perhaps is, um, a little bit historical but not too ahistorical. Um, in many of Machiavelli's works he displays an acute awareness of a, um... that the Florentine state and indeed all polities, uh, are weakened by great disparities of wealth. Uh, in Florence, uh, since very early times, um, society had been divided between two groups. Uh, the, uh, the, uh, the popolo, um, and the, the grassi. The, the people and the, the fat cats, if you like. This is a rather simplistic way of, of looking at Florentine society but it's not invalid. It's pretty, pretty okay as a model for looking at it. And he says this is problematic because each of these two groups has totally opposed objectives. The, the fat cats, um, the oligarchs, they want to dominate and the popolo want not to be dominated. Now, obviously we're not all living in 15th, 16th century Florence. Uh, and the circumstances enjoyed by, experienced by each of these groups is not duplicated today, but it is true that in today's political environment, we do see great disparities of wealth creating a series of political problems. Um, you know, if governments, uh, who... which are obliged to look at almost any area, either of fiscal policy or social policy, are obliged to, um, particularly at a point in a... such as now when we are recovering from a terrible economic shock of how to balance the interests of these two groups. And, um, Machiavelli obviously says, you know, "If you (laughs) if you can, can please both of them, that's hunky-dory." Um, but he also says that, um, on balance, uh, it is better to stick with the, um, the, the, the, the, the have-nots, um, for a variety of reasons that I, as I went into at the moment. And that I... You know, you, people might disagree with that, but nonetheless, I do think his analysis of, um... his, his, his, his contention that disparities of wealth constitute a major problem for any polity wishing to establish stability remains true today as it has always done. The less serious point is this. (laughs) Machiavelli, as you said, was often getting things wrong. It was always in the wrong place at the wrong time and he often got very depressed. He, he was quite frank about that. In, in his voluminous correspondence he often said how, how low he was and how miserable he was, but he always bounces back. He always keeps a smile on his face. He's always joking and laughing and that, I think, is, is reassuring. Um, I think it's reassuring because...When we think of somebody like Machiavelli, you know, it's a name that ranks alongside Aristotle, Plato, Marx, Hegel, et cetera, in importance. But knowing that he was a very human chap, who got down, who had a laugh, et cetera, I think he's somehow... I don't want to say inspirational, but it, it... it makes it seem as if these Olympian figures aren't so far beyond our reach.

16. 43:11 – 45:39

    Humanising figures

    1. ALDr Alexander Lee43:11

    2. CWChris Williamson43:11

       I really like that. I spent my last birthday last year in Athens walking around the Agora and the Stoa Poikile, and then the year before that in the Roman Forum walking around the Colosseum and, and the Sistine Chapel. So for two birthdays in a row until COVID came in and, and spoiled it all, um, I was adding context to things that I'd learned and read.

    3. ALDr Alexander Lee43:33

       Sure.

    4. CWChris Williamson43:34

       And I think I had undervalued how much that contributes to a greater, deeper understanding. It's only really when you can feel what... And I, I hope to go to Florence so... I, I would have gone this year. That would probably be my birthday this year had travel not been, uh, restricted. And I want to walk around the streets, and I want to think and, and feel and, you know, have an audiobook on Kindle with me or whatever.

    5. ALDr Alexander Lee43:57

       Sure.

    6. CWChris Williamson43:57

       And, um, yeah, I, I, I understand what you mean. I think that by humanizing these figures, it makes their achievements feel closer. It makes them seem more mortal. It reminds us that they're not performative figures, although the performative nature of The, The Prince is particularly, like, funny I suppose in terms of a mirroring here. But they're not just performative figures. They're not these celebrities or... Like WWE wrestlers, you know? They kind of feel a little bit like that, larger than life.

    7. ALDr Alexander Lee44:28

       Yeah. Sure.

    8. CWChris Williamson44:29

       They, they become caricatures of themselves, and we see this with Machiavelli's work.

    9. ALDr Alexander Lee44:34

       Absolutely.

    10. CWChris Williamson44:35

        And to hear that he's just a man who has... sometimes doesn't get it up for his missus and he, he goes and gets in fights and-

    11. ALDr Alexander Lee44:42

        Not, not, not his missus. Not his missus.

    12. CWChris Williamson44:44

        Okay, his mistress. Sorry, yes. No, he got it... Made, made sure that he performed for the missus. You've got to do that. If you're going to cheat on her, at least perform when you get your hands on her. Um, yeah, I just thought... I, I think that's really, that's really right. But that's the thing that, that strikes me as why people are tending to misread his work, especially when they don't view it in the wider context, because they don't understand just how performative it was, that it was written as this thinly veiled low-key job application with a very specific set of, of parameters for the person that he was trying to write it for. And presumably as well, if you're doing that for essentially one person or one group of people, you're not intending for it to be (laughs) still read half a millennium later and published to the entire world to see.

    13. ALDr Alexander Lee45:34

        Sure, I-

    14. CWChris Williamson45:34

        So it makes sense why people are misrepresenting that, or at least misunderstanding or misinterpreting

17. 45:39 – 47:14

    Humanising Machiavelli

    1. CWChris Williamson45:39

       it.

    2. ALDr Alexander Lee45:40

       I would put a rider on that, actually. Um, I, I agree with everything you say. Absolutely. Um, but I, I don't want to suggest that there is any one way of reading The Prince at all. The great benefit of placing Machiavelli in his context and humanizing him, uh, and recognizing that His Prince and all his other works were written against a very set of, specific set of circumstances is important not because I think that necessarily leads you to a true understanding of it... Though I have my own opinion of it, and if I didn't think it was right, I wouldn't have written, written the biography. But I think by humanizing any, uh, political philosopher, it becomes easier to engage with their works at a meaningful substantive level critically, rather than viewing them as works of some Olympian genus far beyond our reach or, you know, our, our humble experiences, but as the scribblings of someone who was troubled or having difficulties or whatever. We can, you know, effectively talk to them. I mean, like Cicero said of his books, you know, you talk to, talk to your books. Um, you criticize them, you challenge them, and maybe you produce something outside of it y- of, of your own. And that, I think, is, is much more valuable and a much more useful, um, way of reading, uh, political philosophy, whether it be Machiavelli's or somebody else's, than simply looking at it as, um... reading it as a passive, uh, consumer.

18. 47:14 – 52:23

    Criticism and pushback

    1. ALDr Alexander Lee47:14

    2. CWChris Williamson47:14

       What do you disagree with most? Talking about criticism and, and pushback, what do you degree, uh, disagree with most that was in Machiavelli's work, or assumptions that he held about the world or philosophy at large?

    3. ALDr Alexander Lee47:28

       Oh, golly. I hadn't really thought about that. What do, what do I disagree with? Um, one of the reasons I haven't given a great deal of thought to that, I should confess, is because I actually find his lesser works much more exciting. I really like his poems and his plays, and, uh, they're very funny and very engaging.

    4. CWChris Williamson47:42

       You can't really disagree with a play, can you?

    5. ALDr Alexander Lee47:44

       Not really. Um-

    6. CWChris Williamson47:44

       You can just say, you can just say it's shit or good. That's, that's really the spectrum. (laughs)

    7. ALDr Alexander Lee47:48

       (laughs) Uh, yeah. Yes, yeah, I think there are some literary critics who might disagree with that.

    8. CWChris Williamson47:53

       (laughs)

    9. ALDr Alexander Lee47:53

       But yes, yes, essentially. Um, but there are little problems. Um, I think, uh... What would I disagree with? Um, I think there are some, um... there are many aspects of his, uh, works which do not necessarily interpret his own times in an accurate way. Um, say, for example, his tremendous faith in a citizen army, um, which is one of the, the, the most important points he makes, uh, in The Prince, the Discorsi, and in The, um, The Art of War Above all. Um, he was very keen on this, uh, because, partly because he had... helped re-establish a citizen militia in France for the first time.

    10. CWChris Williamson48:41

        Can you just explain what a citizen army is?

    11. ALDr Alexander Lee48:44

        A mi- a militia, sorry. Of course. Um, at, at the time, it was common for states, uh, like France to, uh, not have a standing army of their own.Instead, they employed mercenaries, often dozens of mercenaries, each with a couple of, you know, 20 or so horsemen, uh, knights, soldiers, whatever under their command, and cobbled together an army in this kind of imperfect way. And these were hugely unreliable. Um, they were very, very bad.

    12. CWChris Williamson49:10

        Were these just pay- are these just pay-to-play guys?

    13. ALDr Alexander Lee49:12

        Yeah, they were. Exactly. Um, you paid these guys to fight on your behalf. They worked for the highest bidder. Um, they were necessary, um, predominantly because wars were becoming, uh, bigger in scale and more professionalized with, uh, more expensive equipment like, uh, cannons, uh, crossbows, uh, rudimentary firearms, et cetera, et cetera. So you needed professionals and these guys had, uh, professionalism in spades. But because they were working for money, um, you couldn't always guarantee that they weren't going to betray you to-

    14. CWChris Williamson49:41

        To a higher bidder, yeah.

    15. ALDr Alexander Lee49:42

        ... a higher bidder or just not fight in the end or whatever. Um, so Machiavelli argues, uh, vigorously throughout his life for a citizen militia. Now, what does that mean? That means your own citizens fight for you. Nowadays, this seems like a bloody obvious idea. And indeed, many modern states have made this the absolute cornerstone of their existence. The, um, uh, America, for example, you know, the right to bear arms, uh, is absolutely fundamental to American existence. Uh, and the idea of fighting, uh, for your, your, your nation, uh, in defense of its liberty is, you know, axiomatic. Um, but for Machiavelli, it was very new and he gives the impression that any state that does- that has a citizen army, uh, is going to be stronger than one with a bunch of mercenaries. Except that at the time, that just wasn't true. Um, Florence develops, under his, uh, uh, um, oversight, a citizen militia, and it may have had contributed a bit to some successes like the recapture of Pisa, but when push comes to shove when it really has to show its mettle, it doesn't live up to expectations at all. Um, when in 1512, um, France is attacked by an enormous, uh, Spanish papal army and, um, the militia is basically the only thing that's there standing between, um, uh, Florence and, and, and this crisis. Uh, and they're locked in, in a place, um, called Prato, not, not, not far away and they just don't do anything. They don't do anything. Um, he repeatedly despises, he repeatedly argues for it in other contexts. Um, uh, he tries to persuade the Pope to set up a, a militia in, in Romagna, but it's not gonna happen. It- it needs a- an apparatus that's completely different. Why is he wrong? Well, there's a- that's a different argument altogether. I think it was basically because it was too small and, uh, he wasn't well enough trained and... though he does talk about training. Um, but, uh, that I think he got wrong. And, and that was in fact kind of recognized by, by, um, by many of his- the early readers of The Art of War. Um, he- his view of military tactics, his view of mercen- uh, his view of mercenaries, et cetera, is he doesn't enjoy a great deal of popularity by readers of The Art of War, although it is hugely, hugely popular as a book. Um, instead read as more interested in his, um, his view of, uh, you know, virtue or whatever. So why I disagree with that as a reading of how to fight a war in the 16th century, nice idea, doesn't work in

19. 52:23 – 58:02

    Favorite stories from Machiavelli

    1. ALDr Alexander Lee52:23

       practice.

    2. CWChris Williamson52:23

       I like it. What are some of your favorite stories from him with the... You've got him turning up to as an emissary covered in mud, sneaking in through the back door. Are there any other favorite stories you've got of his?

    3. ALDr Alexander Lee52:36

       Um, oh, there's lots, many of which aren't suitable for our family audience. (laughs)

    4. CWChris Williamson52:42

       This isn't a family audience. Don't worry, Alex. This is a-

    5. ALDr Alexander Lee52:44

       (laughs)

    6. CWChris Williamson52:44

       This is a very mature audience and it's got the explicit rating on iTunes, so you're good to go.

    7. ALDr Alexander Lee52:49

       I'm glad to hear that. Um, well, there's an absolutely horrible story actually (laughs) of when he's, uh, late in his, his, uh, his career as second chancellor of France, he is sent to deliver a bunch of cash to the emperor in Northern Italy. And while he's on his way back, he, uh, experiences, um, what he calls conjugal famine, which means he hasn't had sex for a while and he's feeling randy.

    8. CWChris Williamson53:12

       (laughs) Conjugal famine.

    9. ALDr Alexander Lee53:15

       Famine. It's a beautiful circle of cagé, isn't it?

    10. CWChris Williamson53:17

        (laughs)

    11. ALDr Alexander Lee53:17

        It's really nice. Uh, (laughs) anyway, and, um, he's walking back home and one day and stops to stay in this, uh, this old lady who does his shirts for him, who he does his laundry for. And she approaches him and says, uh, "Hello, sir. Uh, can I interest you in, in, in anything?" And, uh, and she says, "I think I have something that, that might appeal to you in the cellar, oh, in, in- down in my place." And so he follows her and, um, he, uh, she pulls back a curtain to reveal this, um, uh, a, uh, a, a, um, uh, prostitute, uh, sitting on a bed. And he, the light's very dim and he doesn't really think she's- she's very attractive and her breath stinks a bit. Um, it's not very appealing, but he's so randy that he thinks, "What the hell?" Anyway, so the inevitable happens. And, uh, then when he's done, um, he thinks, "I, I think I better, better, better take a look at this lady." So he pulls the light closer and the description he gives is just, just awful. The poor woman.

    12. CWChris Williamson54:28

        (laughs)

    13. ALDr Alexander Lee54:28

        He feels so sorry for her. He says, "Oh, it's, it's, it's just horrible." And anyway, it's- I won't get into it, but it's so disgusting that he is sick all over her. (laughs)

    14. CWChris Williamson54:39

        Oh, that's bad.

    15. ALDr Alexander Lee54:40

        And then he runs out. Um, it's a horrible story. It's a horrible, horrible story. But that is kind of the guy he was. Um, I think it's, um, he, he-I, I've already mentioned how much I like his poems and plays, but, but these are the repositories of, of, of really lovely stories that may not necessarily have been indebted to his, his life, but were certainly in ... or reflect his life, but they're certainly indebted to some of his experiences. Um, so for example, he writes a play called the, uh, The Mandragola, um, where ... I won't give it ... too much detail because I know time's running on, but basically, um, a student who's just come back from Paris has heard about this really attractive lady, um, and he wants to see if she's as beautiful as, um, uh, as everyone says. And it turns out she's even more gorgeous. Problem is, she's married to a, a, an old fuddy-duddy of a lawyer who's a bit, a bit dim. Anyway, he decides that he's got to seduce her, and so he enlists the support of, uh, a good-for-nothing. Um, and they consider all kinds of different plans of how to ... how, how he can get into bed with her. And they eventually hit upon a, an idea, which is to say that, um, this couple, um, have long wanted a child but have never been able to conceive. And so, our hero dresses himself up as a doctor and offers them a solution, which is, um, uh, uh, a potion made from mandrake root. Make, whatever, of that what you like. And he says, "Drink this. As soon as you drink this, you will conceive. There'll be no problem." But there's a catch. There's a catch. The first person to sleep with you, lady wife, um, after you drink this, will die. So obviously, it can't be your husband. So (laughs) his accomplice, uh, suggests a, a way around this, this threat, which is to say that they will kidnap somebody who will draw out the poison and save the husband from the, the, the danger. And inevitably, it's the same guy as the student. And, uh, he allows him to be kidnapped, he sleeps with this woman, and she's ... you know, eventually he reveals himself and she's so happy with it that they carry on their affair. And, uh, the husband thinks this is ... you know, thinks that he's been saved and so he's hugely grateful and blah, blah, blah. So, you know, another awful, um, sexual story I suppose, um, but it's ... that kind of bawdy humor is very (laughs) very emblematic of, um, of, of Machiavelli's way of looking at the world and his life. Um, he, h- h- it's interesting that in that story, we would expect him to project himself onto the student, but actually, it isn't the case. Um, the husband whom he gulls is called Mezzanicchia, and there are lots of reasons why he's called nicchia, but one of them could be that it sounds very similar to Niccolo. So, in actual fact, he's putting himself in the position of somebody who is trapped. Um, and again, that's evidence of his, you know, his willingness to laugh at himself. Um, so, there you go. The, the ... there are lots of other stories as well, which I won't, won't go into, but if you haven't read them, they're a little bit difficult to find, but, but they're really worth reading. They're all hilarious, the plays and, and the, uh, and the,

20. 58:02 – 1:01:01

    Metacognizance

    1. ALDr Alexander Lee58:02

       the, the poems.

    2. CWChris Williamson58:02

       It seems like he's got ... hi- his unique weapon is his metacognizance. It's his ability to think about thinking and to see where he stands within the movement of things. He's obviously able to watch human nature and perceive it. Even if he's not able to deploy the skills required to manipulate it himself, he's obviously very perceptive, and even perceptive of himself and his own f- failings-

    3. ALDr Alexander Lee58:28

       Sure.

    4. CWChris Williamson58:28

       ... which ... Yeah, I mean when you hear these sort of stories about someone that, you know, is a titan of the Renaissance, um ... yeah, it really does, it really does humanize him in, in quite a sort of endearing way.

    5. ALDr Alexander Lee58:42

       Yeah, exactly. He, he ... You're right in saying that his self-awareness and his awareness of his place in his times is extraordinary. His greatest strength, yet in a, in a funny way also perhaps reflective of his greatest weakness at the same time, and, you know, very, very endearing. I'm not saying that everyone should aspire to be like Machiavelli in his private life. Let's be, let's be clear about that, because he was an absolute rotter. He was a fiend. Not a fiend in the way that we think of, but he was a, he was ... uh, (laughs) as Alan Clark's wife said, he was an S-H-one-T.

    6. CWChris Williamson59:18

       (laughs)

    7. ALDr Alexander Lee59:21

       Um, (laughs) and, uh, yeah, he, he was. I'm not saying he's a, he's a model, but he's certainly more endearing, more, more human, more fallible. Um, I think one of the reasons that I, I enjoyed writing this biography more than almost any other book I've written is because I found it much easier to relate to somebody fallible than to somebody who had taken great care to craft their image, blah, blah, blah. And, you know, we've all, we all have nu- setbacks. We've all taken a, a, a blow or two from fortune. Maybe not the same kind, but it's much easier to empathize with someone of that nature, and that's why I enjoy writing it and why I hope people enjoy reading the biography.

    8. CWChris Williamson1:00:05

       I think that they will do. Alex, I really enjoyed this. Machiavelli: His Life and Times, in brand new paperback edition, uh, will be linked in the show notes below. Is there anything else that you want to plug? Any other places people should go to check out your stuff?

    9. ALDr Alexander Lee1:00:19

       Um, uh, there's another, uh, book I wrote a little while ago called The Ugly Renaissance: Sex, Disease, and Excess in an Age of Beauty, um, which explores some of the, um, ex- you know, hidden backstories behind the Great After-Renaissance, uh, the seedy, uh, underside of, of the, the Renaissance belly, if I can put it that way. So if you like the, the, the, the naughtier bits of Machiavelli's life, that's, uh, another place that you, you might like to turn.

    10. CWChris Williamson1:00:44

        Perfect. I love it. Alex, thank you very much.

    11. ALDr Alexander Lee1:00:47

        Thanks so much to you, Chris.

    12. CWChris Williamson1:00:49

        Thank you very much for tuning in. If you enjoyed that, then press here for a selection of the best clips from the podcast over the last few months, and don't forget to subscribe. It makes me very happy indeed. Peace.

Episode duration: 1:01:07