Machiavellian Rhetoric PDF
Preview Machiavellian Rhetoric
MACHIAVELLIANRHETORIC This page intentionally left blank MACHIAVELLIAN RHETORIC FROM THE COUNTER-REFORMATION TO MILTON Victoria Kahn PRINCETON UNIVERSITY PRESS PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY COPYRIGHT(cid:211) 1994BYPRINCETONUNIVERSITYPRESS PUBLISHEDBYPRINCETONUNIVERSITYPRESS,41WILLIAMSTREET, PRINCETON,NEWJERSEY08540 INTHEUNITEDKINGDOM:PRINCETONUNIVERSITYPRESS, CHICHESTER,WESTSUSSEX ALLRIGHTSRESERVED LIBRARYOFCONGRESSCATALOGING-IN-PUBLICATIONDATA KAHN,VICTORIAANN. MACHIAVELLIANRHETORIC:FROMTHECOUNTER-REFORMATIONTOMILTON/ VICTORIAKAHN. P. CM. INCLUDESBIBLIOGRAPHICALREFERENCESANDINDEX ISBN:0-691-03491-5(ALK.PAPER) 1. RHETORIC—1500–1800.2. MACHIAVELLI,NICCOLn, 1469–1527—POLITICALANDSOCIALVIEWS.3. MACHIAVELLI,NICCOLn, 1469–1527—CRITICISMANDINTERPRETATION.4. POLITICS ANDLITERATURE.I. TITLE. PN173.K33 1994 93-45883 320.1¢092—DC20 CIP THISBOOKHASBEENCOMPOSEDINADOBESABON PRINCETONUNIVERSITYPRESSBOOKSAREPRINTEDONACID-FREEPAPER ANDMEETTHEGUIDELINESFORPERMANENCEANDDURABILITYOFTHE COMMITTEEONPRODUCTIONGUIDELINESFORBOOKLONGEVITYOFTHE COUNCILONLIBRARYRESOURCES PRINTEDINTHEUNITEDSTATESOFAMERICA 1 3 5 7 9 10 8 6 4 2 FOR HELENE SILVERBERG AND NEIL SACCAMANO This page intentionally left blank CONTENTS PREFACE ix ACKNOWLEDGMENTS xiii ABBREVIATIONSANDNOTEONSPELLINGANDTRANSLATIONS xv Introduction 3 PARTONE:MACHIAVELLI 13 ONE:ThePrince 18 TWO:TheDiscourses 44 THREE:RhetoricandReasonofState:Botero’s ReadingofMachiavelli 60 PARTTWO:ENGLISHMACHIAVELLISM 85 FOUR:ReadingMachiavelli,1550–1640 93 FIVE:MachiavellianDebates,1530–1660 132 PARTTHREE:MILTON 167 SIX:ARhetoricofIndifference 171 SEVEN:VirtueandVirtùinComus 185 EIGHT:MachiavellianRhetoricinParadiseLost 209 CODA:RhetoricandtheCritiqueofIdeology 237 APPENDIX:ABriefNoteonRhetoricandRepublicanismin theHistoriographyoftheItalianRenaissance 243 NOTES 249 INDEX 311 This page intentionally left blank PREFACE T HIS BOOK is about how Machiavelli was read in the Renais- sance, what Machiavelli came to symbolize in Renaissance cul- ture,andwhy.IarguethatMachiavelliofferedRenaissancewrit- ers a rhetoric for thinking about politics, and that once we recover the ways Machiavelli was read, wegain adeeperunderstanding of howRe- naissancethinkersconceptualizedandrespondedtocontemporarycrises of political and religious authority. Machiavelli was reviled, approved, misrepresented, and appropriated precisely because his work spoke to manyofthecentralconcernsoftheage:thelegitimacyofdefactopolitical power, the role of persuasion in acquiring and maintaining that power, therelationship of forcetoethics,andof dispassionate politicalanalysis to criticism of the status quo. In a justly famous book, J.G.A. Pocock defined “the Machiavellian moment” of early modern political thought as the moment when the secular political agent confronts the difficulties of actingin timeandtherepublicconfronts itsown“temporalfinitude” (MM,viii).IcontendthattheMachiavellianmomentofRenaissancecul- ture is a rhetorical moment rather than a moment of specifically secular self-consciousness, and that this insight has implications for the way we thinkaboutRenaissancepoliticalthoughtandcultureingeneral.Inpar- ticular, it requires us to revise many of the usual assumptions regarding theincompatibilityofhumanistrhetoricandseriouspoliticalanalysis,the secularism of Renaissancerepublicanism, andtheirrelevanceoftheMa- chiaveltothehistoryofRenaissancepoliticalandreligiousthought. This book is the counterpart to my earlier work, Rhetoric, Prudence, andSkepticismintheRenaissance.InthatbookIwasconcernedwiththe humanists’ reception of Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics and with the ways in which the humanists’ deliberative rhetoric (argument in utram- quepartem,oronbothsidesofaquestion)wasdesignedtoreflectandto educatethe reader’sprudential judgmentor practicalreason. Describing whatInowunderstandasmerelyonestrainofRenaissancehumanism,I argued that dialogue andargumenton bothsides of aquestion wereas- sumed to fostersocialandpoliticalconsensus. Thus whileCicerorecog- nized that such argument in utramque partem could take the form of ironyifbothsidesorpointsofviewweremaintainedatthesametime,for many humanists the ambiguity of irony was held in check by rhetorical andsocialconstraints.Forexample,GiovanniPontano,animportanthu- manistatthecourtofNaplesinthefifteenthcentury,sawSocrates’ironic indirection notasaninstanceofrhetoricthatthreatensthepossibilityof community,ofsharedmeaningandaction,butratherasarhetoricalinvi-
Description:The list of books you might like
