256

MACHIAVELLI.

1469—1522.

Thebe is no more delightful literary task than thejustifying a hero or writer, who has been misrepresentedand reviled ; but such is human nature, or such is thesmall progress that we have made in the knowledge ofit, that in most instances we excuse, rather than excul-pate, and display doubts instead of bringing forwardcertainties. Machiavelli has been the object of muchargument, founded on the motives that impelled him towrite his celebrated treatise of the “ Prince,” which hedeclares to be a manual for sovereigns, and Rousseau has named the manual of republicans. The questionof whether he sat down in cold blood, and as approvingthem, or whether he wrote in irony, the detestablemaxims he boldly and explicitly urges, has been dis-puted by many. Voltaire has joined in the cry againsthim, begun by our countryman cardinal Pole. It is acurious question, to be determined only by the authorhimself. We must seek in the actions of his life, andin his letters, for a solution of the mystery. Ample ma-terials are afforded, and if we are unable to throw aclear light on the subject, at least we shall adduce allthe evidence, and, after summing it up impartially, leavethe jury of readers to decide.

The family of Machiavelli carried back its origin tothe ancient marquesses of Tuscany , and especially to amarquis Ugo, who flourished about the year 850, whowas the root whence sprung various nobles, who pos-sessed power over territories, which the growing stateof Florence speedily encroached upon. The Machia­ velli were lords of Montespertoli; hut preferring therank of citizens of a prosperous city, to the unprofitablepreservation of an illustrious ancestry, they submitted