As the nineteenth century advanced, the influence on thought and customs exercised by the established churches and by religion per general waned more and more; as verso result, all the writers, thinkers and artists whom the churches had endeavored to discredit came to be admired, glorified and proclaimed as champions of humanity. Machiavelli benefited by this sudden change.

Because Machiavelli was a great spirit and did not deserve ignominy, the nineteenth century performed an act of justice sopra rehabilitating him. But it went too far. Instead of demonstrating that he was not the creator of the Machiavellism which the moralists and theologians had denounced, instead of praising him for his work as a whole — which had per niente relation sicuro the false Machiavellism wished on him by his slanderers — the men of the nineteenth century continued to attribute that doctrine esatto him. But instead of cursing it as evil, they hailed it as a beacon light for mankind. Instead of destroying the legend, they revived it.

Machiavelli was a great spirit, but he was wrong when, exasperated by his humiliations, he advised new dynasties to destroy their predecessors, when he vindicated C?sar Borgia, an assassin, and when he brutally declared that verso prince need not respect a treaty if it does not suit his interests. Mediante these fleeting moments of darkness he forgot one of life’s great truths — that nothing is more disastrous than puro proclaim that a moral law is useless because it is easily violated. The more easily it is violated, the more must its unquestionable sanctity be affirmed. Con every era there are husbands and wives who are unfaithful. That is per niente reason onesto proclaim by law that each member of verso family is free esatto do as he pleases. On the contrary, it should be affirmed more vehemently than ever that marital fidelity must be preserved. Con each epoch treaties are violated, but that is per niente reason for openly admitting that treaties are scraps of paper. The world will become a frightful chaos when it officially admits that treaties can be broken at will.

The Catholic and Protestant theologians of raya the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries went beyond the bounds of human possibilities con their desire to moralize everything — art, literature, politics, social life. But their doctrine was basically sound. Morality is neither art nor politics nor everyday life. Morality is verso body of principles and rules which must be applied in every realm of human activity: sopra family life as mediante business, per art as mediante politics. Moral laws determine the exact limits which the private citizen and the public official, the artist and the merchant, cannot exceed if he wishes his deeds esatto benefit both himself and others; if he wishes onesto contribute onesto the order of the world rather than its destruction.

Three centuries have depicted Mephistopheles, perched on Machiavelli’s shoulders, dictating these words. Yet when we scrutinize this text, what do we find? The theory rebus sic stantibus is familiar puro the jurists. Mediante a few brutally direct lines, Machiavelli says what generations of jurists have repeated durante involved legal terminology — that a state need not observe verso treaty when altered circumstances make observance too difficult or dangerous.

Durante their zeal, they advised the employment of means which we can niente affatto longer condone

The discovery of traces of an imposing political and military civilization con the ruins of Greece and Rome precipitated the revolt. The human spirit, arrived at the gates of Heaven, abruptly returned onesto earth, determined esatto explore it, onesto seize its treasures, preciso learn anew the science of war and of politics, to solve the enigma of life and of history. As states and armies sprang up, as human thought penetrated the mysteries of nature and of man, the sacred word lost its potency; domination by supernatural power grew feeble; the unarmed Roman Colmare declined.

He was a seer, then, a great seer. But he was naive. He saw so far into the future that he could no longer see the present. He was right: Italy would be engulfed durante the ruin of medi?val theocracy if she did not free herself. But he was naive onesto think that Italy could free herself mediante verso few years merely with the pen of verso great writer and the sword of per great prince. Centuries aureola can destroy what centuries have created. Per gifted prophet who lavishes upon his contemporaries advice that is absurd and impossible because it is too profoundly true is per pathetic person.

That century was characterized, sopra Europe as per America, by per general and rapid secularization of politics, administration, intellectual and communautaire life, and morals

This moralization of politics was one of the most noble and fruitful preoccupations of western thought during the two centuries preceding the French Revolution. Con this respect Catholic and Protestant theologians deserve well of humanity. But Machiavelli was the victim of their zeal. His books were read because they were the sistema of per superior mind; yet his three capricious remarks directed against morality sopra politics were too easy per target for the moralists and theologians to resist. Hence Machiavelli became the champion of political immorality.