Machiavellis and Christine de Pizans Views on Virtue

Table of Contents

Introduction
Machiavellian Virtue
Christine de Pizans Virtue
Importance of Gender in understanding Virtue
Conclusion
References

Introduction

Virtue is explicitly expressed in different terms and analyses from The Prince and The Book of the City of Ladies and other Writings. The two pieces of literary writings are the works of Niccolo Machiavelli and Christine de Pizan respectively. Empirically, de Pizen describes virtue in a homiletic perception that can be compared to other moral philosophers views. On the other hand, Machiavelli has a twisted view of morality and his notion of the virtue is one with no moral tone, and advocates for adaptation to a situation that one finds himself in. However much Pizen and Machiavelli disagree on the materialization of virtue, they both attribute it to powerful some individuals. The two writers ideas on the association between glory and virtue are similar to the extent at which they agree the virtue leads to glory. In studying both Pizens and Machiavellis opinions through their writings, it is important to note the differences and the similarities of their understanding of virtue and the importance of gender to their constructions.

Machiavellian Virtue

Machiavelli believed that there were no man-made moral rules which individuals were supposed to abide by. As Wotton (1994) writes, Machiavelli opined that the rules or laws that exist are those that are made by governments or other powers acting under necessity, and they must be obeyed out of the same necessity (p. XI). Machiavelli meant that whatever that is obligatory may be referred to as just and reasonable but justice is no more than what an individuals judgment tells him he must obtain for himself, or acquiesce (Wootton, 1994). By implication, he was hypothesizing that people cannot afford justice in any way that oversteps their own safety and protection. Nonetheless, Machiavelli did not attempt to contrive a new definition of justice grounded on the self-protectionist theory. As such, no reputation can be gained by conformity to artificial policies and guidelines but only through human force.

Moreover, Machiavelli propounded on his virtues proposition that a prince or rather a ruler must be feared and loved at the same time. Cruelty and mercy define his explanation on virtue as he attach both fear and love to be the results of the princes savagery and clemency. Machiavelli supposes that when necessity forces a prince to choose between fear and love, the leader should choose the former because subjects love at their convenience but fear at the convenience of their ruler (Wootton, 1994). To stress on his theory, he postulates that cruelty can be well used and also be badly employed. Notably, Machiavelli broaches the idea that good viciousness can be used for self-defense while improperly used barbarity can accentuate ferocity in the society (Wootton, 1994). Accordingly, the avoidance of hatred by subjects makes the prince to have people obligated to him for what he does not do to them rather than the comfort he provides them.

Furthermore, Machiavelli gives a new meaning to virtue that is totally different and detached from the morality. According to Machiavelli (1985, as cited in Wootton, 1994), virtue seems to be a prudent or well taught combination of vice and virtue as per the classical or Christian tradition (p. XIX). Virtue is not the average between two opposites of vice. From the explanation, it can be deduced that virtue cannot shine of itself as opposed to when it is done for its own purpose. More precisely, virtue as it works, its verity lies in the efficacious truth and becomes constructive only when it is viewed in contrast to its opposite. For instance, magnanimity, forbearance, and love are impressive only when one expects rapacity, barbarity, and fear (Wootton, 1994). Without doubt, the contrast in itself makes virtue to be ostensible and enables anyone wielding authority over his subjects to be able to gain reputation for the virtuous acts.

For a Machiavelli, it is not necessary for one to have all virtuous qualities but what is important is appearing to possess all of them. Having what many people consider as virtuous characteristics may prove dangerous but appearing to have them is beneficial to the individual (Wootton, 1994). As evident, Machiavelli was championing for deception as it suites the prince. Instead, Machiavelli was supporting maintenance of ones inborn traits so that when need arises he knows how to change and incorporate the traits that are regarded as virtuous (Wootton, 1994). The reason that is behind Machiavellian theory is that people act out of necessity to maintain their state of acting against indoctrination, philanthropy, humanity and religion. And so a leader needs to have a spirit inclined to change as the currents of fortunes and variations of things dictates to him.

Christine de Pizans Virtue

Unlike Machiavelli, Christine believed that there exist moral principles through which human behavior was to be judged. She uses allegorical characters such Lady Rectitude, Lady Justice, and Lady Reason to further her thematic concern of virtue (Borgault & Kingstone, 2018). Through the characters that are collectively referred to as virtues, Christen clearly shows how much value is virtue to a leader both at public and individual levels. Undeniably, virtue is held in high regards and as the yardstick through which suitability and performance of a leader is measured. Christens virtue originates from God and exhibits itself via morally virtuous characteristics of the characters she uses (Borgault & Kingstone, 2018). Illustratively, she refers to the women as the most outstanding of the city (p. 219). Evidently, the characters in the Book of the City of Ladies and other Writings have a similar striking quality of being virtuous.

While Machiavelli propagates for cruelty as a means to instigate fear for leaders by their subjects, de Pizen explains that barbarism and misogynistic ideas are faulty perceptions. Indeed some males blame their female counterparts with good intentions but the errors that arise from the objectives cannot be taken as the excuse for the defects those particular men do to the women (Borgault & Kingstone, 2018). Besides, other men denigrate women and hoping to dissuade other men from associating with them probably because such people dissipated their youths in debauchery and total dedication to promiscuity (Borgault & Kingstone, 2018). All these are acts of barbarism towards women and a clear pointer to the cruelty with which women are treated by some men (Borgault & Kingstone, 2018). Ironically, the men who vilify women have an abject heart because they act against reason and nature which have made it ideal for two creatures, male and female, to be bound by love.

Christines explanation of the virtue gives it attachment to morality and religious doctrines as opposed to Machiavelli who separates the two. Christine states that one of the key benefits of women to the world is that they were able to open Paradise doors to the entire humanity (Borgault & Kingstone, 2018). In this example, Virgin Mary is the center-stage of the argument. Christine also argues that Mosaic Laws came into being after Prophet Moses to whom the laws were given, was saved by a woman (Borgault & Kingstone, 2018). The illustrations clearly show that virtue is related with spirituality and Deity. Most importantly, God is being recognized as the giver of speech which exclusively form part of womens lives (Borgault & Kingstone, 2018). Christines linking of the religion and virtues is pegged on the belief that God is the originator and the creator of everything and as such, He could not give something that was not good.

According to Machiavelli, appearing to have virtuous qualities is of more importance than actually possessing them. This view is challenged by Christine who in a subtle way mocks the deception that may be harbored in a mans heart. She gives an example of those men that would criticize women, not because they want to, but rather as a way of showing how much knowledge they have acquired through reading (Borgault & Kingstone, 2018). The deception in these mens habits is hidden in the fact that they quote familiar authors to repeat what has been said before (Borgault & Kingstone, 2018). The deceitful nature of some men towards women allows them to view a woman as evil compared to her good deeds, yet some of the men are more devious than they actually appear. Assuming the qualities that one does not have, have resulted in harsh treatment for women by their male counterparts.

Importance of Gender in understanding Virtue

Gender is an important aspect in understanding Machiavellis view of virtue. As much as The Prince is revolutionary in the field of political revolution and leadership, it carries some snippets which are grounded on Machiavellis misogynistic tendencies. For instance, the title itself is the prince, with no referral to any alternative gender that may incorporate women into leadership within the text. The gendered usage of the prince does much to fortify sexual intonations and patriarchal thinking that ultimately results to The Prince being clearly misogynistic.

Similarly, gender plays a critical role in the work of Christine de Pizen, The Book of the City of Ladies and other Writings more so on its understanding. By using allegorical heroine ladies, Christine was using the female gender to stress on the female space in the society, self-preservation, and development of female history. For example, she gives a narration of Novella, whose father had lived sixty years before and gave an opportunity for his daughter to be educated in the law profession (Borgault & Kingstone, 2018). From her examples such as the Novellas and others, it is clear that Christines literary work was a reaction to the misogynistic tendencies that may have existed at that time.

Conclusion

In summary, the parallelism and dissimilarities between Christines and Machiavellis literary writings exist based on their views on virtue and how each one of them views either of the two genders. Through The Prince, Machiavelli shows that there are no specific laws and guidelines which are morally-centered that any man must abide by. Christine on the other hand, argues that there is virtue that is based on moral principles which govern the lives of women. Additionally, Machiavelli hypothesized that fear and cruelty is important for a prince to rule over his subjects unlike Christine who views barbarism as faulty perceptions of man. Through The Prince, virtue is seen as a combination between classical virtues and vices while The Book of the City of Ladies and other Writings differentiates between the two by labeling some misdeeds as evil. Therefore, there are many dissimilarities than there are similarities between Machiavellian views of virtue and Christines own perceptions.