1626.] [ 283 ] 



LEAVES TORN OUT OF A COMMON-PLACE BOOK. 



Machiavel as a Politician. — I believe that the great cause of this is, 

 that (to use a homely, but most significant expression) the greatest 

 part of his readers do not knoiv what he ivould be at ; or, if they arrive 

 at the most probable conclusion which seems to be furnished by his 

 writings, as taken all together, find that as unsatisfactory as uncertainty 

 itself. For it is surely less satisfactory to follow one advocate who makes 

 the best of whatever cause he undertakes, wiiether he be influenced 

 by avarice or ambition, than one whom we know to be in earnest, 

 though he should even be fanatical and extravagant in the support of 

 that which he maintains. We ought certainly to attend to the doctrine, 

 and not to the character of him who inculcates it ; but such is not 

 the general disposition of mankind. Moreover Machiavel is deficient 

 in that quality which they most appreciate ; to wit, in apparent con- 

 sistency, which is necessarily the great idol of the multitude, for few 

 among them can take distinctions. Perseverance of opinion appears to 

 them to be indicative of manly character under all charges of circum- 

 stances, and they worship it, because they find in it some protection 

 for their ignorance, and think they know where to have them who are 

 possessed of it. In short the}'^ do not like a man who fences some 

 times in cart and sometimes in tierce. 



These are no doubt the motives which weigh with the multitude ; 

 but ought they so to weigh even with them ? Even admitting the justice 

 of the motives (as far as they can be deemed admissible) by which the 

 judgments of mankind are actuated, Machiavel is inconsistent : granted, 

 on a general view of his works. But is he inconsistent in his separate 

 works ? No " Then read his separate works as those of separate authors — 

 decide upon each as such." This appears to be the obvious answer to 

 the objections I have supposed. 



Where shall we find such a treasure of political wisdom, where 

 shall we find, as in his commentaries upon Livy, such original thinking? 

 and where, uninspired prophecies which have been so fully verified, 

 Notwithstanding all the singular modifications and changes which society 

 has, since his period, undergone ? 



Read his History of Florence, and say if there can be a finer model 

 of that severe and simple style at which he aimed. The substratum 

 of thought and sentiment, which runs through it, is but what we expect 

 from such a statesman : but no one can anticipate that charm which 

 arises from pure unornamental diction, and mere propriety and consis- 

 tency of parts. There is the description of a tempest which visited 

 Florence, in this work, which conveys the most vivid and precise idea of a 

 storm which we ever received. Yet there is not an epithet employed 

 which could be spared : the merits of the description consist in the 

 apparent accuracy of the picture — to read it is to witness it. Judging 

 him b}'^ the short specimens he has given us of his powers, and making 

 a due allowance for the taste of his age, Machiavel would probably have 

 been as distinguished as a dramatic author, as he was as a political 

 writer and an historian. Nay, I cannot but rate him highly as a 

 poet, if deep feeling, expressed in strong and picturesque language, con- 

 stitute poetry. Take as an example his CapUolo upon Occasion, or, as 

 we should term her, Fortune. 



2 2 



