Machiavelli

Skinner argues that Machiavelli's sinister reputation as a teacher of duplicity obscures his deeper commitment to a neo-classical theory of political liberty . He rejects the view that Machiavelli's 'willingness to do evil' stems from cynicism or amorality. Instead, Machiavelli is a moralist of a different kind: he holds up a picture of virtue and effectiveness in which he passionately believes, aiming to mount a crusade against the moral lethargy and soft decadence of his Italian contemporaries . The 'Machiavellian revolution' lies in his claim that a leader must stand ready 'to be not good' when necessity dictates .

Skinner emphasizes the pivotal concept of princely virtù, which he explores through classical and Renaissance humanist texts . For Machiavelli, virtù is not Christian virtue but the capacity to achieve greatness through effective action—a willingness to do whatever may be necessary to maintain a position of power . This concept connects Machiavelli's advice to princes with his republican theory: in the Discourses, Skinner shows that a city-state must be self-governing and possess civic virtù, inculcated through laws and the example of great individuals . Liberty and greatness depend on the people's capacity for virtuous action.

Skinner's book does not choose between Machiavelli the adviser of princes and Machiavelli the theorist of liberty—it shows they are two sides of the same project. The chapter on 'The Theorist of Liberty' examines the Discourses, where Machiavelli argues that a city-state must be self-governing and able to pursue the common good . The civic body must possess virtù, which can be inculcated through laws and the example of great individuals; the constitution should balance social forces and prevent excessive power or wealth of any one citizen . Liberty and the quest for empire are connected: liberty can only be protected through military expansion .

Skinner places Machiavelli among the not-unrelated thoughts of lesser Florentine humanists and contemporaries, examining the influence of Roman moral thought on his work . This contextualization might be expected to level his reputation, but Skinner shows that the salient thinker remains salient: Machiavelli's calculated brutality of tone and sharpness of argument raised him above his forgotten contemporaries . The shock he administered came from a changed perspective on human life—life seen as lived entirely down here, mired in the ups and downs of Fortune, with the founding or preservation of a state as uniquely glorious .

A significant criticism, voiced by reviewers like Stuart Hampshire, is that Skinner underemphasizes the threat to established values conveyed by Machiavelli's worldliness. Hampshire notes that 'the tone is rather too calm, and the concluding paragraphs too judicious, to present vividly the shock and unease which still arise naturally' around Machiavelli's amoralism . Skinner's contextualist method, while illuminating, may domesticate Machiavelli's bite. Some critics from the Straussian tradition argue that Skinner's Cambridge School approach misses Machiavelli's deliberate philosophical radicalism by treating him too much as a product of his intellectual milieu .