Unit 3 Content:
Unit 3 Power Point (Absolutism/Constitutionalism)
Mckay Textbook on Absolutism/Constitutionalism
Unit 3 Documents:
Peter the Great Video
Peter the Great Video approx. 20 mins. Great source for his rise to power and Russian History.
128 comments:
Machiavelli suggested to rulers that they rule as both “like a lion” and “like a fox.” He believed that you could not rule as just a lion, or just a fox; you needed to have both of the traits to be successful. The lion’s side drove off enemies and was strict with the people, and the fox side was the wise and thoughtful side that was able to evade traps. Two European rulers that have successfully followed Machiavelli’s suggestion were King Henry IV of France and Queen Elizabeth I of England.
Elizabeth was a good Machiavellian ruler who led as both a fox and a lion. She cared for the welfare of her people first, and she always tried to make it so that everyone was happy and wouldn’t try to start and uprisings. Since she was a politique, she was very careful when it came to making her decisions about religious toleration in England. Elizabeth never married, but since many men believed they could have a chance at being the King of England, Elizabeth was able to use them in plots and she never lost her power. Elizabeth I made an alliance with France during the Religious Wars even though France had a Catholic background. When Elizabeth acted upon her lion side, she didn’t go easy on her enemies. There were rumors that her cousin, Mary Stuart, was going to try to kill Elizabeth, so Elizabeth I immediately had her killed to keep her order. Not only that, but she sent Francis Drake to attack the Spanish Armada and England held a high victory. It was said that Elizabeth I ruled during England’s “Golden Age”, so no doubt she followed Machiavelli’s advice.
Another ruler who followed Machiavelli’s words of wisdom was King Henry IV of France. While the wars of religion went on, Henry IV showed off his fox side. King Henry IV was also politique, and he switched from being a Calvinist to a Catholic just to please his people. Even though he switched religions, he wrote the Edict of Nantes to protect the Calvinists and grant them religious tolerance. Henry IV ruled France as a mainly Catholic country, but he took the smart political move, and joined the Protestant side of the Religious Wars and allied with England. Henry IV also saw the Religious Wars as an opportunity to divide up the Holy Roman Empire so he attacked as the lion side of Machiavelli’s theory and really only battled over politics and not religion. He basically lived by "the ends justify the means" because he saw his chance to succeed politically and used religion as an excuse to carry it out.
Obviously, both Elizabeth I of England and Henry IV of France are two European rulers who successfully followed Machiavelli’s suggestion.
Henry IV of France behaved like a lion and like a fox. He behaved like a lion because he was a very courageous and strong leader. What made him courageous and strong is the way he rebuilt and reunited France after the 30 years war. Another example is how he sponsored expeditions, which shows his courageousness, he also regulated finance and promoted agriculture, which shows he was a strong leader.
He behaved like a fox because he was very sly. He was a skillful politique, because he brought peace to France by the Edict of Nantes.
Likewise Elizabeth I of England behaved in a lion and fox way. She behaved like a lion because she was defensive and protective, she behaved like a fox because she was very sly. She was defensive of England because she fought off many invasion and rebellion attempts.Being a politique made her very sly and sneaky, because she was very quiet about religion, and focused more on foreign relations.
Machiavelli believed that a ruler should behave both "like a lion" and "like a fox." He must be a fox to discern toils and a lion to drive off wolves. This would help a ruler keep their spot and not get overthrown like the previous rulers. Henry IV of France was the first bourbon king and he acted like a fox and lion. He acted like a lion by defeating the catholic league which made him who he was which was Henry IV of France. What made him like a fox was how he passed the edict of nantes to let the huguenots have religious freedom, he was trying to please everyone also by converting to catholicism to make the people that he was ruling happy. The second person that followed Machiaveli's suggestion was Elizabeth of England. What made her like a lion was how she was able to keep her spot at the throne even though people kept trying to overthrow her such as Mary Stuart it was like a lion driving off wolves to keep her spot.once she knew Mary's plot she took action and had her killed right away. Even though philip sent the spanish armada to kill elizabeth that didn't succeed either. She was like a fox because she tried to please the people she was ruling and she tried to do whatever she could to keep her spot and to keep the people of France from going against her.
I believe Henry IV of France is both "like a lion" and "like a fox" he cared for his people and he was a very well known leader. Becoming well liked as a leader in a country is not easy, but you couldn't always satisfy everybody. He was strong like a lion, but yet again he was skillful and got people to like him like a fox. He played it not only just by his power, but he played it with trust. It was not always the best, but he did enact the Edict of Nantes allowing protestants religious rights, but some catholic didn't agree with that so they assassinated him. Though overall he did probably please a lot more people in his time than most could have imagined.
Catherine the Great of Russia was definitely a very very strong ruler. Her lion side was definitely solid, but not her fox side. It isn't talked about with huge significance, but if you look between the lines she did get a few people to like her. She did trust on her great nobles and she built mansions for them. It didn't talk an extreme amount about people under the nobles. Though she never exactly terrorized them and she helped keep people safe so I believe people weren't sad about living in a powerful country.
Elizabeth I displayed characteristics of a fox through her reign in England. Her being a politique, she used cunning to provide a middle ground for both Catholic and Protestant religions. This avoided internal conflict within England. Elizabeth also remained unmarried, using this as a tactic for diplomatic advantages. However she also showed traits of a lion if her rule was threatened. She was able to deal with the Puritans in a strict, but still with intelligence. that it did not interfere with her power over the Church of England. Additionally, the famous Sir Francis Drake and John Hawkins were sent to sabotage Spanish shipping to the Americas.
One can say that Frederick II of Prussia was mostly a lion. One of his predecessor, Frederick William, had a great army, but he also patronized the arts and was somewhat of a politique. However, Frederick II only focused on the military for foreign adventures and aggression. Frederick the did not use much of intelligence or critical thinking outside the use of the military.
Italian statesmam and poltical advisor, Niccolo Machivelli, wrote books regarding what approaches leaders should take in order to effectively govern and maintain rule. In his book, The Prince, Machiavelli suggested that leaders must able to behave both like lions and foxes. leaders must behave like a foxes, which are cunning and allusive, in order to think of aways to appease the populace and void conflict. However when people begin to question them, rulers must react like lions, which are fearsome and ruthless, in order to crush rebllions and assert authority. Two such rulers whose actions and tactics are reinscent of Machiavelli's teachings include Fredrick II the Great Elector of Prussia and Elizabeth I the virgin queen of England.
Fredick II behaved both like fox and a lion during his reign and, as a result, he was able to build his kingdom into a strong and prosperous nation. He behaved like a fox in that he mangaged to reunify a divide Prussia with his negoitaton skills. He also established religous harmony by decreeing that Prussians can chose their own faith in order to ensure no religous conflict in Prussia. Moreover he shrewdly formed temporary alliances with other powerful nations such as France and Austria in order to achieve specific goals. However when it came to warfare and conflict, King Fredrick displayed mostly lion-like qualities. Fredrick II built up a very large national army that was very loyal to him in order that he could defend his lands and also suppress rebellions. With his army, he struck swiftly and conquered many of German states that recently achieved soveringty after the Thirty Years and also put down all resistance to his occupations of foreign lands. All of these actions allowed Fredrick to rule Prussia without fear of losing his power.
Another prominent ruler, who behaved both like a lion and fox was Elizabeth I of England. ELizebth displayed fox-like characteristics in her handling of the social turmoil that was ensuing in England of the time. She settled disputes between Anglican Protestants and Catholics by ordering that all must practice their religon in private. Elizabeth's lion-like quailties showed when she decided to support the Dutch against the Spanish to secure English influence and goals in that area and in her execution of Queen Mary I of Scotland when the Scot attempted to assinated and overthrow her. Elizabeth I's sucess as leader and in preserving her rule cand be attributed to her following of Machivelli's advice.
Conclusively, Machivelli's advice about behaving like lion and fox proved to very benefical to rulers who folled it correctly such as Elizabeth I and Fredrick II
Machiavelli believed that a ruler should be both "like a lion," and "like a fox." Elizabeth I of England and Henry IV of France were politiques who behaved like a lion and a fox. Elizabeth I was a lion when she defended herself against Mary Stuart who wanted her killed. She was also a lion because she was brave enough to rule by herself without a man by her side. Elizabeth was like a fox because of the way she put religious toleration upon England to make everyone happy.Henry IV of France was a politique who ruled like a lion and a fox. He ruled like a fox because of how he developed the Edict of Nantes which gave religious toleration and more religious freedom. He was like a lion because of the way he rebuilt France and how he funded many expeditions. Both rulers were great rulers and they both represented the lion and the fox in their certain way of ruling.
Leilah Clark,
I agree with your statement that Frederick II of Prussia did not exhibit the traits of a fox as much as he did a lion's traits. However, his increase in noble power through the appointment of "Junkers" into the bureaucracy increased support from these powers within his region. This action created much support in his endeavors to expand Prussian lands. Because of this, it can be argued that he did act as a fox in some cases.
-Valerie Kwee
Niccolo Machiavelli suggested in his work, The Prince, in 1513 that rulers behave both "like a lion" and "like a fox." This offers the idea that, with the nature of a lion, a leader must lead with complete power, instilling fear within their subjects. However, due to a lion’s unintelligent characteristic, a fox-like trait must also be expressed within a leader in order for the individual to lead effectively and prevent being taken advantage of. Many leaders of northern Europe exemplified these characteristics, some of which including Elizabeth I of England and Henry IV of France.
Elizabeth, though a woman, was an effective leader due to her decisions made to benefit the people. For example, she had a diplomatic advantage during her reign because she refused to marry. Others saw the possibility of diplomatic marriage, and were cautious to remain in her favor, hoping to take advantage of this potential alliance with England. She acted as a politique during her reign as well despite her Catholic favorism, due to her subordination of religion to politics. Despite her religious tolerance and political priorities, she showed little mercy to any threats to her rule, forcing subjugation of rebels through tools such as the Conventicle Act of 1593. Elizabeth I was well-educated as well, with fluency in Latin, French, and Italian. Her understanding of these major languages allowed for a cultural diversity and expanse in foreign policies. Overall, Elizabeth acted cunningly and intelligently, similar to a fox, with her political tactics to establish peace and maintain the upper hand against other regions. However, she acted relentlessly and gave no opportunity for rebellion, exhibiting her strength like a lion.
Henry IV of France acted cautiously and cunningly, like a fox, through his politique characteristic. Despite his strong belief in Protestant beliefs, Henry converted to the Catholic faith in public in order to establish a tolerance to prevent religious strife. His act of creating the Edict of Nantes allowed religious freedom, if not complete tolerance. Because he was well liked, Henry IV did not need to exhibit the characteristics of a lion. However, he did act to prevent the Spanish attempt to convert the country into a Catholic and politically weak state. Though he seemed to display more fox-like characteristics, Henry IV seemed to act like a lion through his protection of the people’s values.
-Valerie Kwee
Kinsey,
Though Elizabeth I was a politique, she did not seem to be careful with her decisions regarding religion to make her subjects happy. It seemed as though she did this in order to prevent religious strife and disunity within the regions of her reign. I believe it was stated that she seemed to have a more Catholic bias, overall. Her actions as a fox didn't seem to be for the welfare of her people, but for the political unity resulting in it.
-Valerie Kwee
Machiavelli suggested that as a ruler you should be "like a lion" and "like a fox." He believed that in order to succed as a ruler you needed to be strong, and you also needed to be caring to your people, but you must have both qualities to succed. As a lion, your should be strong, srict, and united as one, but as a fox you sould be caring and try your best to please the people.
I believe that Henery lV of france was a great ruler because he was greatly influenced by machiavellis statement. Henery lV was a politique because he pleased his people. Eventough he was Catholic he would switch religions in order to get the people to agree with him. This was the "fox" side of him. On the other hand he formed alliances with england, created a very strong army, and took place in many religious wars. These events show his power and strength and his "lion" side.
Louis lVX was one leader who did not believe in Machiavelli's suggestion to rule as a "lion" and a "fox." Louis lVX definanitly showed his "lion" sie of ruling. Louis was very ambitious, so he created a strong army, and fought in many wars. On the other hand he did not have a very strong "fox" quality. He never pleased the people. He said he was the "sun king" and he believed that he got his power from god, but he was not very caring. When he formed rules he didnt care if they helped the people, he only wanted to benifit himself, and his people had no voice. Because Louis didnt have all the characteristics as a great leader,he was not well liked by his people.
I strongly believe in Machiavelli's statement to rule as a "lion" and a "fox," and henery lV is definanitly proof that, that way of ruling is certainly effective.
Machiavelli believed a king should rule like a "lion and a fox." He believed there were two types of kings. One was proper to men; that the king followed accordance to laws which meant he went by the rules and wasn't very harsh. Machiavelli believed this hardly was ever effective. the second way to rule would be proper to beasts; which was basically to rule with an iron fists. you had to be able to u=install fear in your subjects. not only fear but also gain trust. A king was like a lion in gainin respect and fear among his people. he was a fox when he wanted to get things done and was very sly. One monarch that ruled like a "lion" and a "fox" was Frederick the ll of prussia. he ruled as an absolute monarch and was a lion because he focused on military aspects and was a very rural leader yet he was a fox because he gave the people religious tolerance. Another monarch that was a "lion" and a "fox" was Henry the lV of France he aswell ruled as an absolutist and had a strong army but forced catholicism which overall made him a succesfull monarch.
Two rulers that used Machiavelli's philosophy of using both the man and the beast were Elizabeth and Frederick II.Both were able stratigeically act "like a lion" and "a fox" to be successful rulers.
Elizabeth was one of the few that was able to use come into rule with many disadvantages and through her politique ways still raise a successful country. She used the ways of the sneaky ruthless fox when needed , even if it meant having one of her own kin executed and be a lioness with her religious tolerance.
Frederick II leaned upon the teachings of machiavelli as well. he created one of the most efficient armies in all of europe with his iron clad fist way of ruling. by keeping the princes' power over the boyars on a tight leash and his absolutist rule he channeled more of his desicive fox. As head of his own respective animal kingdom (haha lion pun) he was able to create strong defenses and instill national pride.
in all each leader was able to turn themselves into the perfect boss whos power was feared but respected at the same time
unnamed is jackie camuy
@ yanetzy :
i agree with you on frederick and henry . i can see why they are machievallian inspired leaders by your statement that a ruler must be feared and respected
- jackie camuy
@ val:
i agree with your argument of henry not needed to out upon his lion side, though he may not have actually ever taken action with his lion mind set , you make it well aware that if a situation brought it to be needed , henry would have used that machivallien teaching
- jackie camuy
Two rulers that used Machiavelli's philosophy of using both the man and the beast were Elizabeth and Frederick II.Both were able stratigeically act "like a lion" and "a fox" to be successful rulers.
Elizabeth was one of the few that was able to use come into rule with many disadvantages and through her politique ways she still raised a successful country. She used the ways of the sneaky ruthless fox when needed , even if it meant having one of her own kin executed and be a lioness with her religious tolerance and put the country first before her religious beliefs.
Frederick II leaned towards the teachings of machiavelli as well. he created one of the most efficient armies in all of europe with his iron clad fist way and his way of ruling. by keeping the princes' power over the boyars on a tight leash and his absolutist rule he channeled more of his desicive fox. As head of his own respective animal kingdom he was able to create strong defenses and instill national pride into his ruling.
in all each leader was able to turn themselves into the perfect leader whos power was feared but respected at the same time
@ Kinsey McElhaney
I agree with you completly that even though King Henry IV of France switched to catholisism he instilled the edict of nantes to assure tolerance to the calvanists, this showed that he was thinking about his people and working the fox.
@Samantha Timothy
I completly agree with you statement that Louis the IXV did not act out on "fox" side as much as the other rulers but more on the "lion" side and this showed that he had more efficient defences because of it. :)
*defenses
During Elizabeth’s reign she predominately showed characteristics of both a fox and a lion. Her fox side was the politique that she is known for being during her time. Her strong confedent outward ruling led her to create a middle ground of religion within England. Her lion side came out when she went to defend her land. In instances such as the spanish armada elizabeth clearly prevails at being a fearless lion for her country.
As others may say henry vi was a clearer follower of machiavelli's word in being both a fox and a lion. Henry was also a politique and he made decisions in the best interest of her country. For example he switch religions to show his country his loyality. After changing religions he produced documents to create safty to his original religion. Henry's lion side came out when he was faced with religious wars. He was a powerful ruler of his time and he acomplished the ideas in which he had set out to fulfill.
@kinsey McElhaney I completely agree with your statement that Elizabeth was strong as both a fox and a lion. She was a strong leader that followed the words of Machiavelli. During her reign her counrty thrived and she was a strong base for that because she cared about the people more than she cared for herself. Her decisions influenced a massive golden age as you said undoubtedly caused by her strong power as a lion and slickness as a fox.
@amanda clegg
I also agree with you statement about elizabeth. She was a sly cunning leader in the way she defended her word. She ruled to the advantage of her and her country. Being a politique created a massive wave of crafty choices that excelled her country beyond other during her reign.
-bailey
Niccolo Machiavelli once said that a good ruler had to be half human and half beast. When he decides to become a beast he has to learn how to become like two different animals. He must learn how to be clever and cunning like a fox and he must learn how to be fierce like a lion. When the ruler's people put him at a disadvantage, he must become a beast and t do what is best for his country despite whether or not the people favor the choices he makes. A prince should be deceptive and manipulative. When the people get out of hand the ruler can no longer keep and rely on promises. Because people are evil and dishonest the king must keep them in check by any means necessary. Elizabeth I showed some machiavellian like qualities by siding with the protestants. Even though the catholic people were not pleased, the toleration of the different religion would benefit England and change the future. Eventually the bill of rights in England would state that rulers were required to be protestant. Frederick II of Prussia showed some machiavelian traits by using the military power of Prussia and upset the pragmatic sanction and invaded Silesia. By doing that he cemented the Austrian-Prussian rivalry for the control over Germany. It dominated European affairs even though it was not a popular choice to the people.
Elizabeth I is one of the few rulers that followed Machiavelli's suggestion as she ruled with both the characteristics of a fox and lion. She led like a fox because she had clever use for laws and could find her way around things or people. For example, she was a very successful politique in the way that she put politics in front of religion, which helped her keep her people happy. This also making her a lion for she was a very determined leader, and did not let anyone come in between her decisions or actions. This can be seen by her response during the Spanish Armada which was when Phillip II attempted to make England catholic again. She managed to defeat them and win victory for England with her smart and forceful replies.In addition, she might have resembled the lion more than the fox for she did not put up with any threats ,such as those from Mary Stuart,and established the image of a great leader that should not be made an enemy.
Another great Machiavellian ruler would be Henry IV of France. He also followed the rule of both a fox and a lion. For example, he acted as a fox as he turned down his own religion, being Calvinism, and converted to Catholicism to satisfy the wishes of most of France. He then stated that "Paris was worth a mass" meaning that he would do anything to keep his country together, no matter what the religious cost might be to him. This established him as a politique as well as a fox. He showed the strength of the lion by being a cautious and brave leader and being able to rebuilt and keep united France after the long lasting Thirty Years' War. In addition, he showed the characteristic of a lion by being able to take over the nobility during the French Wars of Religion by using bribery, persuasion, and simply the threat of pure force like a true politique would. I think he mostly resembled the lion as opposed to the fox, for he made various sacrifices for his country and fought to make it a united living where there was peace and unity even within religion.
- Marie Sanchez
As stated, Machiavelli was adamant in his beliefs that a ruler should possess both the traits of a grand, courageous lion, as well as that of a cunning, clever fox.
It is obvious that Elizabeth I ruled England with such characteristics. She was able to calm the turmoil caused by her predecessor Mary I. She, re-instituted the Church of England, uplifted the persecuted Protestants, and pursued a middle ground between Catholicism and Protestantism that prevented major religious conflict. She also did not marry, utilizing the possibility of a royal marriage to her advantage. In addition, she was able to avoid the hostile ambitions of radicals and other rivals. In this way, she exemplified her cunning and cautious mentality. Not only so, but she also had an aggressive side to her. In order to maintain her rule, she ordered the execution of her cousin Mary Stuart. She also sponsored Francis Drake in his attacks on Spanish ships, and under her rule, the English were able to defeat the Spanish Armada and establish themselves as a major naval power.
King Henry IV of France is a corroborate example of a ruler who possessed the traits of the fox and the lion. He was charming and charismatic, and was willing to convert from his Protestant faith to Catholicism, stating that "Paris is worth a Mass." However he was quick to establish the Edict of Nantes, granting Huguenots religious rights and freedoms. Although he mainly showed characteristics of that of the fox, he also behaved like a lion. He was brave and zealous in defending the rights and welfare of his people against one another, as well as against foreign nations such as Spain.
Elizabeth I and Henry IV are ideal paradigms of a Machiavellian ruler- manipulative and clever like a fox, and aggressive and persistent like a lion. Both of them set aside their own beliefs for the welfare of their state, and followed that Machiavellian mindset that "the ends justifies the means."
@kinsey
I completely agree with your point on Elizabeth I being a very wise leaser in religious toleration. However, I do not think her major point was to keep the people happy with religion but instead with politics. As a politique she kept politics as the main issue even some of the religious battles that broke out had to do with something politically. Despite that I agree with many of your points.
@amanda
I completely agree with all of our points and also believe that Henry IV of France was a very courageous leader. He was able to rebuilt France after the thirty years' war very successfully, mostly because of his great sacrifice of switching from Calvinism to Catholicism just to keep his people happy.
@Amanda
I agree with your statement that Henry IV ruled like a lion and a fox. He converted to Catholicism, the major religion of France, and established the Edict of Nantes to protect Huguenots. However, he did not show his aggressiveness and cunning by rebuilding France after the 30 Years War. On the contrary, Henry IV ruled before the 30 Years War began.
I completely agree with your statement regarding Elizabeth I. She was able to balance on a middle ground between Catholicism and Protestantism, and was protective of her rule and her country, thus making her a versatile and dexterous ruler.
@Justin
I agree with your statement on Henry IV. Becoming a popular leader and satisfying your subjects is certainly not easy in any way. Henry attempted to become well-liked by the majority by implementing methods that ultimately defined him as a politique. He agreed to set his own beliefs and preferences aside and convert to Catholicism, and established the Edict of Nantes to preserve the peace. He ended up dying a tragic death, assassinated by unhappy Catholic radicals. However, he still demonstrated traits of that of the lion and the fox throughout his reign over France.
One of the few rulers that successfully followed Machiavelli's suggestion was Catherine the Great of Russia. She demonstrated several aspects of Machiavelli's political ideals. For one, Catherine the Great displayed the cunning behavior of a fox when, in 1762, her husband Peter III became the tsar of Russia. She approved the assassination of Peter III in order to rule Russia on her own. By this initial act of Machiavellian behavior, in which she showed that "the ends justifies the means," Catherine the Great went on to rule Russia as an absolute monarch. Under her leadership, Russia was able to mercilessly put down peasants' revolts, defeat the Ottomans, expand Russia's southern border, and gain control of the Black Sea and the straits that led to the Aegean Seas. These acts of leadership during her reign characterize Catherine the Great's ability to rule as a lion, due to her power and strength to fight off those who opposed her, as well as a fox, in which she recognized the situation and dealt with it accordingly.
Another European ruler that behaved like a lion and a fox was Elizabeth the I of England. She exhibited her ferocity and cleverness to effectively rule England after the turmoil and religious tensions produced by her predecessors. Elizabeth I displayed the behavior of a cunning fox by encompassing the attributes of a politique and successfully navigated the middle ground between Anglicanism and Protestantism. Also, Elizabeth I demonstrated her power against the opposing Catholics, who attempted assassination and invasions against Elizabeth I and wanted Mary Stuart, Elizabeth's cousin, to replace her. In response to this threat to her reign, Elizabeth I displayed the characteristics of a merciless lion and had Mary Stuart executed. For these reasons, Elizabeth I was able to successfully oversee the development of Protestantism in England and maintain her powerful reign.
J_Nguyen,
I agree with some of your points regarding Henry IV and Catherine the Great. However, it is important to consider that before Henry IV became the king of France he displayed the cunning behavior of a fox when attempting to unify the Guise and Bourbon families by marrying Margaret of Guise. In addition, he further demonstrated these behaviors by converting to Catholicism, thus proving that he was a politique. Also, Henry IV showed ferocity and power when he defeated the Catholic League and became the king of France. As for Catherine the Great, she did display behaviors of a fox when she approved the assassination of her newly appointed husband, Peter III. In this instance, Catherine the Great was able to "discern toils," meaning she recognized how weak a ruler Peter III was and took matters into her own hands.
rosalinehabashy
I completely agree with your points about Henry IV. He definitely displayed the behaviors of a lion and a fox during his rule of France. It is also important to understand that Henry of Navarre, before he became Henry IV, attempted to unify the Guise and the Bourbons by marrying Margaret of Guise. This helps prove that Henry IV was a politique who was eventually able to cater to the needs of both the Catholics and the Huguenots in France by passing the Edict of Nantes. In addition, I fully agree with what you said about Elizabeth I. She certainly and completely demonstrated the natures of a fox and a lion and continued to rule England successfully and effectively.
One ruler who behaved in the manner of a lion and a fox was Elizabeth I of England. One action that portrayed her as a fox was the reinstatement of the Acts of Supremacy, ultimately making Elizabeth the Supreme Governor of the Church of England. With this she cunningly instituted an Oath of Supremacy which made everyone who sought a position in the church swear allegiance to her. She also made a clever decision to not marry anyone especially during her reign. She knew that if married her power would transfer to the real ruler, the king. Remaining unmarried protected her power as the queen of England. Although Elizabeth was as wise as a fox, she conveyed a dominant lion side. Elizabeth executed Mary Queen of Scots in order to sustain her power as queen, when she feared that the French planned to invade England and put Mary on the throne. As well as executing Mary, she passed the Convenctile Act of 1593 which gave Puritans the choice of either complying to the practices of the Church of England or death. In addition Elizabeth defeated the Spanish Armanda with the help of the “English Wind”.
Catherine the Great of Russia conveyed Machiavelli’s suggestion to behave as both a lion and a fox. She established a successful Russian military which brought her a lot of domestic political support. Catherine agreed to leave her conquered Danuban areas in exchange for a large piece of Poland. This decision eventually helped Russia gain even more land and wipe Poland off the map. She also destroyed the serfs in Russia who revolted for rights. Not only was Catherine a strong “lion” she was cunning like a fox. She controlled the nobles by passing a law that allowed nobles control over serfs. Similar to Peter the Great she ranked her nobles according to the amount of service they did for the state. Due to all the support it cleverly allowed Catherine to rule as an absolute monarch.
Machiavelli thought that a good ruler should rule like a fox and like a lion. In his book “The Prince,” Machiavelli says that for a ruler to rule like a fox they must be cunning and for a ruler to rule like a lion, they must be strict. Both Elizabeth I and Catherine the Great have successfully followed Machiavelli’s suggestion of ruling like a fox and a lion. Elizabeth I of England and Catherine the Great of Russia both had satisfied Machiavelli’s condition of a good ruler by being both firm and sly.
Elizabeth I had used merciful and tolerant policies against the peasants in order to avoid the revolts. She was caring, merciful, and cautious. She distributed the poor in the order of neediness. She was cautious about wars and tried to avoid them but had Francis Drake plunder Spanish fleets loaded with gold and silver. She used her moderate policies against the religion and avoided conflicts. She protected herself from Mary Stuart by having her killed because of Mary Stuart attempted to kill her.
Catherine the Great used force to crush the revolts and suppressed the serfs. She expanded serfdom. She used her strong army to occupy Poland and to expand her empire. She defeated the Turks. She also used her policies in order to settle the Muslim nomadics.
Nicolo Machiavelli believed a ruler should have certain qualities that resemble a lion and a fox. They must be intelligent and cunning like a fox, able to determine the right decisions, while also being courageous and powerful like a lion, crushing the opposition and instilling fear into those who dared to attack. Any ruler who did not have both of these qualities was at a disadvantage because they were essential to be an effective ruler. These traits would portray a ruler as an unstoppable force for its opponent, and “feared, rather than loved” for its people.
Elizabeth I of England was a prime example of a successful Machiavellian ruler. She created a strong, peaceful government and was an accomplished scholar that spread her wisdom to the people. Elizabeth increased the literacy rate, significantly expanded overseas trade, and was cunning enough to avoid a scandal involving Thomas Seymour, the husband of her stepmother. Able to resolve religious conflicts between Catholics and Protestants, they were allowed to practice their own religions in peace. She was especially feared in the sea, due to her connections to Sir Francis Drake, Sir John Hawkins, and many others. She defeated the Spanish Armada with 34 English fleets and countless merchant vessels. Defeating invasions of 1596 and 1597, and rebellions of the Irish, it is obvious that her reign was effective.
King Henry IV of France, a Machiavellian ruler, displayed lion and especially fox-like qualities. He was able to rebuild France after the war of religions with the Edict of Nantes, which granted religious freedom to Protestants, allowing them to practice their religion in a Catholic kingdom. Under his rule, he controlled state finances, promoted agriculture, and increased foreign trade for the nation. He rid France’s debt from continual wars and building, as well as achieving overall peace for his nation and his people. Like a blind man has increased senses, his deficiency as a powerful authority figure was balanced out by his cunning decisions and his charismatic demeanor.
@ Alex
I agree with your statement that King Henry IV resembled a fox more than a lion. He greatly benefited his nation by creating religious peace, and increasing economic factors such as agriculture and overseas trade.
@ Gary
I agree with your statement that rulers should be half human and half beast. The cunning and manipulative ways of the fox must also accompany the fierce, powerful traits of an effective ruler. I also agree with your example of different circumstances in which lion and fox traits should be displayed.
@Valerie
I agree with your statement on Elizabeth I’s portrayal as a lion and a fox. Her ruling as a politique and decision to not marry in order to maintain queen of England was very wise which represented her fox side. Actions such as the Conventicle Act and being trilingual to allow her expand in foreign policies embodied her as a lion. She was persistent and showed no sympathy to those who were seen as threats. Overall you did a great job in explaining how Elizabeth I behaved as a lion and a fox.
@Karmen
I agree with the points you have made about Catherine the Great of Russia successfully following Machiavelli’s suggestion to be a lion and a fox. Her cunningness to allow the assignation of her husband Peter III to rule Russia portrayed her as a fox. She was dominant in the way she established a strong Russian army to defeat the Ottomans and expand Russia’s southern border. She was not afraid to fight those who opposed her showing her powerful lion side. Catherine truly lived up to Machiavelli’s suggestion and ruled greatly with both traits. You clearly stated the ways in which she is both a lion and a fox.
henry iv was strong like a lion in the sense that he was authoritative. by fox he using his strength to his advantage and got people to go for him. he passed the edict of nantes and beat the catholic league. this shows his qualities of being a keen yet strong individual that ruled.
Niccolo Machiavelli once suggested that in order to rule successfully, he or she had to behave "like a lion" and "like a fox". Being like a lion and a fox meant that one had to be strong and fierce similar to a lion while also sly and cunning similar to a fox. Two rulers who followed his advice were Elizabeth I and Henry IV. Elizabeth I behaved as a Machiavellian as she was able to settle many disputes in England. She put the general welfare of her country as the number one priority before anything else. In addition, she was able to solve the problem of religion by allowing people to practice in private if the religion was not Catholic. Her characteristics of a politique helped her maintain power in England as well as being a favored ruler. She ruled as a lion when war arose, such as executing Mary I and fighting against the Spanish. Lastly, her tactics of not marrying showed her intelligence as it made her never lose power. Henry IV also showed Machiavellian traits. He displayed fox like characteristics by becoming a Catholic although he secretly believed in Calvinist ideals. He was also a politique like Elizabeth, pleasing the people of France by granting religious tolerance. However, he showed his lion like characteristics by siding with with England in the Religious Wars. Plus, he realized that this was his chance to to destroy the Holy Roman Empire so he sought out and attacked it. In conclusion, both Elizabeth and Henry were rulers who ruled based off of Machiavelli's suggestions.
@Kinsey - I agree with you on the fact that Henry was able to gain power because of his fox like qualities such as changing his religion and siding with Protestants. By acting like a fox, he was able to maintain his throne in France
@John - I agree with you on the fact by taking action against the Dutch and Mary I, Elizabeth showed she was a lion. Following Machiavelli's advice surely benefited her and her rule.
@Kinsey I agree with you that Elizabeth I has ruled like a fox and a lion and that her not getting married was a good thing because if she were to get married the king would have all the power and staying unmarried was a great way to protect her power.
@Christian Hassan I agree with you that Henry IV used Machiavelli’s suggestion for rulers to rule like lions when he attacked the HRE. And I believe that was his lion because he was strong, strict, and he attacked his enemies.
As Machiavelli stated from the excerpt, “The Lion and the Fox” from “The Prince” he believed that a ruler should behave both “like a lion” and “like a fox.” Elizabeth I of England and Henry IV of France were examples of rulers whom acted “like a lion” and “like a fox.”
Elizabeth I of England is an example of Machiavelli’s belief. She acted as a lion by being very protective and defended England from any forgiven invaders. Queen Elizabeth was able to maintain her position of the throne without getting overthrown. For example, her cousin, Mary Stuart had plotted to murder Elizabeth but Elizabeth found out and killed her immediately. She was very defensive of her own position within the kingdom. Foxes are known as sly animals, and Elizabeth was “like a fox” in a couple of ways. She formed secret alliances with other clans and was known as the “virgin queen,” but she was soon discovered to be sleeping with few men. She also made deals with the Anglican Protestants and the Catholics by allowing them to practice their beliefs if they promised to do it in private, and not to the public.
The second ruler who had followed Machiavelli’s guidelines of ruling a kingdom was King Henry IV of France. He had displayed examples of acting “like a fox.” He had had many actions “like a fox” throughout his rein. During the Religious Wars of France, he had bribed the nobility and had taken control of their entire power. Henry IV had also turned against his original protestant beliefs, and converted into a Catholic. Like Elizabeth, he was a politiques and had given the citizens their rights of religious freedom as long as they had practiced their religion in secret. He rarely had any characteristics that categorized him as “like a loin.” He had gained power and strength by being involved in many wars and had a strong army formed for his religious wars.
Elizabeth I of England and Henry IV of France are example of Machiavelli’s beliefs. Though Elizabeth was a stronger example of a “lion” and “fox,” Henry IV also carried traits of acting “like a fox and lion.”
Valerie Kwee,
I agree with your statement of Henry IV of France and his “fox-like” characteristics. His actions were cautious and cunning like a fox, and he had allowed religious toleration. However, I have to disagree with you and how he did not hold any “lion-like” characteristics. In fact, Henry IV had formed a strong and powerful army to take play in the Religious Wars of France. These wars he had taken action in had gained Henry IV an abundance of power and made him more of a fearful ruler in his successes of the wars.
Amanda Clegg,
I agree with your statement of Elizabeth I of England completely. She both showed characteristics of both a lion and fox. I agree on your point of how Elizabeth I was a politique and how she secretly allowed other religions take practice within her kingdom and how her lion-like characteristic was how she was extremely defensive.
Niccolo Machiavelli suggested that a ruler his/herself should behave like a "Lion" and like a "Fox" in order to rule efficiently. There are several rulers that behave in the manner and the two rulers that display these attributes are Elizabeth I of England and Henry IV.
Because both of these rulers put forth the people first. For this tactic that both of these rulers to make the people happy first is cunning like a fox because its a sly action to build a strong nation by bribing the people to allow them to fall under their lead. For the attributes of a lion both of these rulers were strong and powerful leaving their mark to make sure that the citizens know they are in power. For example, Elizabeth did not hesitate to kill Mary when she plotted an attack to kill her. Which showed the "Lion" Side of Elizabeth. Also the Act of supremacy or Henry's actions to fight showed a valiant strong side to him as well, displaying Machiavelli's 'Lion" description.
Machiavelli suggest that rulers be both a lion and a fox. Meaning that one must be both strict with the people yet, be wise and thoughtful to them as well. With the balance between the two, rulers would successfully have control over their subjects for a long amount of time. Two rulers that fit the description of Machiavelli's beliefs were King Henry IV and Queen Elizabeth because they both share the leadership skill of a politique.
King Henry was both a lion and fox because he made decisions that would benefit the people before putting his desire first. He was able to meet the needs of the divided by publishing the Edict of Nantes which allowed religous toleration to the Huguenots (Calvinists). This shows the fox side to King Henry as he made wise decisions to unify France and regain a title of nationalism and patriotism in his country. He shows the characteristics of being a lion as he divided the Holy Roman Empire. This event was very vital to his reign because the Holy Roman Empire would finally cease to exist and there would be religous freedom for many.
Additionally, Queen Elizabeth contained the traits of both a lion and fox as she was very loyal to her country, yet was very intelligent and knew how to manipulate her power to have a long reign. As a woman, she was greatly targeted. Such as in the Spanish Armada when a fleet in 1588set sails to overthrow her. Along with Mary Stuart who had tried killing her. However, with the queen's lion like attitude she was able to resist both and instead sentenced Mary Stuart to death. Like Machiavelli says, one must be wise and make smart decisions such as a fox would. With Queen Elizabeth's call for religious toleration she accomplished the fox like demeanor. Her efforts to unify the country gave her a long reign in power and increased her likeability amongst the people.
In conclusion, as there are many rulers that may have followed the ideas of Machiavelli, King Henry IV and Queen Elizabethe were the most successful.
@Devon Marez and @Kinsey McElhaney
I strongly agree with the both of you regarding why Queen Elizabeth and King Henry both fit the ideas of a lion and fox. I strongly believe that by them equally sharing the leadership style of a politique, it helps them create the idea of a successful ruler that Machiavelli had in mind because they appeal to most of the different opinions/beliefs of the people.
@Gary Goa
As I do agree that Queen Elizabeth did show qualities of a lion and fox. It is also important to note that she was very much like a lion when killing Mary Stuart and when attacking the Spanish Armada after their plans had foiled in their attempts to overthrow her.
Niccolo Machiavelli sent his letter (yes letter, it wasn't considered a book at the time) to Lorenzo De Medici because he liked him and believed that he was capable of ruling his land quite sufficiently. Because he had faith in him, Machiavelli sent him what is now known as the novel The Prince, stating to him that his style of ruling must be like both a lion and a fox.
He was to be a lion in the case in which he is to intimidate his followers, because fear is one of the many ways in which people will give their ultimate attention to another person; fear, in Machiavelli's mind, was the way in which people will be able to stay under your control because they know the consequences concerning their very life if they were to even think of displeasing or acting out against him.
Niccolo Machiavelli also instructed Lorenzo De Medici that he was supposed to act like a fox, by which he meant that he was supposed to be sly; he was supposed to be secretive, in a way, that if he wanted to do something out of the ordinary or wrong to others, that he would be capable of easily getting away with it.
A ruler who was capable of being both a 'lion' and a 'fox' in my mind was Elizabeth I because she was capable of using her politique methods of ruling to control the religious aspects of thinking, while at the same time, she was capable of holding control over her family members and region if they were to ever rebel against her rules. An example of this is when she had her cousin, Mary, killed after she attempted to kill her. Elizabeth showed no mercy towards others in some instances, but she was also a sufficient ruler, which would make Machiavelli very proud.
Many great monarchs listened to Machiavelli becasue of the way he suggested they rule. He suggested they should rule as both like a "lion" and "fox". But a ruler should have both of theese traits to have a successful reign. There are two monarchsthat followed the way of Machiavellians teachings, Elizabeth the I of England and Catherine the Great of Russia.
Elizabeth the first was a very well liked Queen which is we she didnt get overthrown like her family before her, Mary Tudor. Mary Tudor had secret assasination plots to try to kill Elizabeth, with none of them succeeding becasue Elizabeth had found out. And Elizabeth also protected her kingdom from for outside invaders such as the Spanish Armada she sent out her naval army to destory the spanish navy which they did, leading England to becoming the greatest military group in all of Europe. Theese two events show how Elizabeth the I was like a "lion during her rule marking her ground and deafeating enemies that threatened her. Elizabeth the I was like a foz becasue foxes are known for being sneaky. Thast exactly how Elizabeth was, she allowed many religous groups to practice their beliefs in peaces and private eventhough it wasn't the countries religion.
Catherine the Great of Russia was not the original heir, she married Peter the greats grandson who was heir to the throne. This is where Catherine's "like a fox" ruling takes place, since foxes are sneaky and sly she overthrows her husband from the throne and she became empress. After she overthre her husband from the throne, he was secretly killed and many people have suspiciouions that Catherine did it. Catherine during her time of rule expanded her country and began westernizing it. A rebellion begun in western Europe but Catherine got her army to deafeat it therefore being "like a lion" and protecting her country.
Elizabeth I of England and her policies followed Machiavelli's suggestion of behaving both "like a lion" and "like a fox." She was a strong and powerful ruler who scared and shut down most of those who disagreed with her. If they could not be stopped, Elizabeth I would find a middle ground and strike up an agreement. Another ruler that successfully followed Machiavelli's suggestion was Henry IV of France. He granted religious toleration to Calvinists in a primarily Catholic nation by enacting the Edict of Nantes. Henry was more "fox like" because he had been able to reach an agreement between Huguenots and Catholics and promoted civil unity.
“The Prince” by Niccolo Machiavelli displays how he acknowledges a prince who honors his word id general accepted by others. He must learn to and like two types of beasts: the lion and fox. A fox is defenseless against physical threats and a lion is defenseless against mental ones. In dealing with people, a prince must break his promises when they put him at a disadvantage and when the reasons which he made the promises no longer exist. In any case, promises are really something that one should rely on. A prince should be a master of deception.
A ruler who was quite good at exuding a virtuous aura that he believed to be a deceitful mind was Pop Alexander VI. A prince should present the appearance of being a compassionate, trustworthy, kind, and strong leader. So long as the prince appears to act virtuously to people, it will be easier to maintain his control of the state. People tend to judge based off of appearance and results. Therefore meaning that underhanded ways in order to achieve greatness didn't matter. If a ruler doesn't posses the correct qualities in order to successfully pick out deceivers and cheats, then the fact that he has much power and is able to make major decisions is useless since that they don't have an intelligent head on their shoulders. Likewise, even if a ruler is very cunning and smart, then it would be no use if the people are not willing to listen since the ruler doesn't maintain an iron fist over his country.
Niccolo Machiavelli implied that rulers should govern "like a lion" and "like a fox". Just as a lion, lions show dominance by strength and power of its community and represents itself as a feared figure. A fox however, is a stealthy, evading, cunning, and intellectual figure that can out think its opponent without strength, but technique. Two rulers that display Machiavelli's proposition was King Henry IV of France (1st Bourbon King) and Queen Elizabeth I of England.
Firstly, Henry IV displayed Machiavelli's suggestion very strongly. As a fox, Henry IV purposely converted to Catholicism just to keep himself in power and his country unified. In addition, Henry IV also issued the Edict of Nantes in which granted religious freedom to protestants. This effectively displayed Henry's fox side because he efforts to keep his people happy and trust in him, in which titles him as a politique. However, as a lion, Henry IV took advantage and effectively quashed the divided parts of the Holy Roman Empire, along with his allies of the Protestant side. Another addition, is that Henry IV battled aside from religion, only politics.
Another Machiavellian ruler in which displayed a lion and a fox was Queen Elizabeth I. As a fox, Elizabeth gained the trust of nobility but carefully questioning only the closest of her consultants. Another reason why she ruled like a fox is she always tried to keep her people happy in what also titled her as a politique. However, as a lion, Elizabeth takes a different turn. For example, Elizabeth heard that was a rumour flowing around that her cousin, Mary Stuart, was plotting against her. In short conclusion, Elizabeth quickly smited her to display dominance and attacked england against Phillip II.
Machiavelli, whom believed that to be a good ruler from his book "The Prince", one must have the specific qualities that of a lion and a fox, which both represent certain characteristics. To be one like a cunning fox, they must be very intelligent and have quick decisions to ensure that calamity won't develop. But at the same time, they must pertain characteristics of a lion in the sense that they must be well aware and strict of what goes on in the environment and maintains control by instilling fear within the citizens so that they will listen to whatever they say. A prime example of these type of leaders would be Elizabeth I of England and Henry IV of France.
Elizabeth I of England could be suggested as a Machiavellian leader through her use of defensive and protective strategies to protect England from any foreign invaders, and to keep her position throughout her leadership. Even when Mary Stuart attempted to overthrow and kill Elizabeth, when she found out she had her executed immediately. She also resolved many religious conflicts between Catholics and Protestants, allowing citizens to practice whatever they pleased. This displayed a significant role of having characteristics of a fox and lion.
Likewise, Henry IV also followed similar characteristics told from Machiavelli's thoughts on how to be a good ruler. An example of how he displayed these characteristics was how he had switched his beliefs from protestant to Catholic in order to please the people more sufficiently. He also published the Edict of Nantes, in order to allow Huguenots religious toleration. By pleasing others during his reign, he secured the trust of people in which he could now be more cunning to make sure things run smoothly. Although he may have showed mainly "fox" characteristics, he was also a very courageous, and determined man in which he defended the rights of his people, and protected his nation from foreigners.
Machiavelli's lion and fox philosophy would guide the methods for which monarchs would rule. Take, for example, Elizabeth I of England. The last of the tudor dynasty, Elizabeth believed in and supported the people she ruled over. A politique, Elizabeth believed in the power of the state before any religious matters were accounted for. Choosing to seek political unification over absolute religious authority, she was tolerant and developed a protestant doctrine while simultaneously abiding by catholic traditions. In this way, she displayed her "fox like" qualities. Yet, Elizabeth was not afraid to assert her "lion" side. She was unmerciful when it came to matters that may threaten the unity of her state. For example, Elizabeth had her cousin, Mary Stuart executed because her existence threatened her rule. In this way she flaunted both traits that Machiavelli described in what he believed was an ideal monarch.
Elizabeth was not the only politique of her time. Henry the IV of France would live up to the goals Machiavelli had lay before him and other rulers. He, like Elizabeth, put the people before religion, going as far to abandon protestantism, claiming "France is worth the mass". His fox like qualities were further exemplified in his Edict of Nantes on the 13th of April, 1598. In his edict, Henry granted religious leeway for the Huguenots living under his rule, a move that sparked great debate within his state. Henry's lion like attitude was also existent, but not to the extent of his "fox" persona, he helped bring about the ended of the French religious wars as a lion, fighting fiercely for his beliefs, however these were overshadowed by the "fox" methods he utilized in uniting his state.
Overall, Elizabeth I of England displayed a more balanced form of Machiavelli's lion/fox personalities. Henry IV, although displaying both personas, was more lopsided in terms of the fox.
I agree with Kinsey when she asserted her belief in that Elizabeth ruled in England's "Golden Age". As a testament to this assertion, one can see that the methods with which Elizabeth ruled brought about political unity that, for so long, had been non-existent in England. She was as revolutionary as her father when she brought about the ideals of religious unity. Once analyzed, one can witness the mass change England experienced under her rule. Although she would be the last of her dynasty, the politique's legacy would carry on through the political unification she helped established. (albeit for awhile.)
John
I agree with you on your comment concerning Elizabeth and her naval prowess. The Spanish Armada was the epitome of naval power, and they should have been able to quickly hold dominion over the Atlantic. However, under Elizabeth's reign, England was able to quell any Spanish attempt to establish authority over England. I agree that this event is a paradigm of Elizabeth's lion persona in that it facilitated the naval authority that England would possess from this moment on.
Queen Elizabeth I of England was greatly influenced by the standard of a successful leader set by Niccolo Machiavelli. She is cunning and witty like a fox and strict like a lion. She knew that her sex would have outsiders underestimate her, so she hired Sir Francis Drake to defeat all invaders, (such as the Spanish Armada in 1588), thus showing us that she is able to defend her country using her lion-like strength. She also portrays the traits of a fox, for example when she realized that the people did not like Mary Tudor, she had her assassinated, for the people.
Another example of a person who implemented Machiavelli-style leadership, was Catherine the Great. She focused in conquering land and appointed great generals in order to secure her power. With the lion-like traits, she forced her strong army into Poland to expand her empire. Similar to a fox, she also listened and pleased the people, while still using fear to rule her people to keep them in their place. Her toleration towards all faiths also made her likable.
An ideal ruler in Machiavelli's eyes ruled with the fierceness of a lion, yet the cunning mentality of a fox. Among several powerful monarchs, Elizabeth I of England met the criteria of this statement. Elizabeth pursued a politique in which she put the matters and well-being of the state over herself. This wise decision ceased religious disputes within her kingdom due to the non-Catholics being permitted to practice their religion in private. The fierce, lion qualities of Elizabeth were anything but mild. Whenever she felt threatened, i.e the Spanish Armada or Mary Stuart, Elizabeth set out for the threats to be terminated. This ensured the security of her position and kingdom of England.
Frederick II of Prussia is considered to be another model of Machiavelli's concept of the proper way of ruling. He wanted to see his territory to be richly different and craved variety. By conveying religious tolerance, many religions other than Catholicism were allowed to prosper. Frederick saw the educational benefits coming from the Society of Jesus, or Jesuits, and supported them. This contributed to the educational system of Prussia, which was seen as the best educational system of Europe. Again, the lion qualities in Frederick II were anything but weak. In order to unite the once divided Prussia, he issued wars against mainly Austria and the German states. He succeeded in creating the modernized and educationally advanced Prussia.
-Tamara AbuZaineh
Machiavelli suggested that rulers act like both a lion and a fox. A lion to make them fierce and strong and to help them get out of sticky situations. And a fox to make them sly and cunning and to help keep their people and enemies in line.
Elizabeth I was one ruler known for taking Machiavelli's advice. She acted like a lion when having to deal with Catholics who wanted Mary, Queen of Scots, to overrule her and she dealed with it by executing her. Elizabeth I acted like a fox when she kept England Catholic but maintained a Calvinist doctrine. She tried to make a compromise between Protestants and Cathoics to keep her people happy and from revolting.
Henry IV was another ruler who took Machiavelli's suggestion into account. He acted like both a lion and a fox. Acting like a fox, he issued the Edict of Nantes, which let french Calvinists (Huguenots) practice publicly. Even though he converted to Catholicism he issued the Edict of Nantes to please his people. Henry IV acted like a lion because he was a politique, which meant that he cared more about political matters than relgiious. This helped him when he decided to take down the Holy Roman Empire while it was divided.
I believe that Machiavelli's beliefs on ruling like a "lion" or a "fox" ressambles the monarchs Elizabeth I of England and Henry IV of France. Elizabeth had both fox and lion qualities when it came to ruling England. Elizabeth uses her aggressive political actions to solve both religious and political issues. This shows how militant and devious Elizabeth is, showing lion and fox characteristics. Henry IV exhibits lion like qualities by creating religious tolerance for the Hugenots. Buliding religious toleration creates a stronger kingdom, an example of Henry IV's dominance as a lion.
Ashley Chen(pls)--
I agree with your response regarding Henry IV of France. Not only did he sacrifice his own religious preference for the good of his country, but he made sure the followers of his previous religion still had rights. By pursuing the Edict of Nantes, both Catholics and Hugenots were granted religious rights. Also, your point of Henry being more of a "fox" is right on point. He did more regarding the well-being of his country from a social aspect than anything else.
Alicia Resendez --
Catherine the Great of Russia is indeed a prime example of the "fox" aspect of Machiavelli's suggestion to rulers. I assume that she actually did murder her husband in order to have the full authority of Russia. By doing so, she possibly showed the domiant "fox" trait among the other monarchs. Being able to pursue what she thought was right for her country, she prevailed as the great ruler of Russia during her reign.
-Tamara AbuZaineh
In the terms of Machiavelli a ruler must be cunning like a fox with the strength of a lion. Henry IV exemplified Machiavelli's ideals by being a politique. A politique is a monarch who puts the state over religion. This shows his characteristic of being cunning, religion can cause tension between a country and through the Edict of Nantes he allowed Huguenots to practice their religion: which ended their strife. He showed the strength of a lion when he made it through the St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre alive.
Elizabeth demonstrated the traits of a Machiavellian ruler as well since she was a politique like Henry IV. Her strength was shown through the defeat of Phillip II's Spanish Armada. Additionally, decision to execute Mary Stuart who was threatening her position adds to her strength.
I agree completely with Amanda, Amanda fully understood how Elizabeth had both characteristics Machiavelli believed a leader should have. Which Elizabeth shows with connecting her political and religious issues with her political policies to bulid a stronger country.
I agree with Jordan Brown how Henry met the needs of his people, creating the Edict of Nantes which was fox like and then spliting up the Holy Roman Empire was lion like.
All in all, both Elizabeth and Henry were indications of Machiavelli's ideal rulers.
Tamara, I agree with your statement on how Elizabeth exemplifies the Machiavellian traits of a ruler. She had executed those that had threatened her country, which you had said in the examples you showed. By termination the Spanish Armada and Mary Stuart England had been kept safe.
Uriel, I agree with your opinion on Henry IV. He was cunning in his decision to create the Edict of Nantes which put his country through less religious tension and created peace. Through being a politique he had exemplified Machiavelli's rules to being a leader.
Alicia,
I agree with you on how Catherine the Great was acting ike a fox when she overthrew her husband. Catherine was very sneaky in her deciet. The way she became empress did play a part in the ruler she was.
Devon,
I agree with you on how Elizabeth I settled disputes through her politique ways and because she was a politique it did help her when she was trying to be more like a "lion".
According to Machiavelli, rulers should behave both like a lion and a fox. Like a lion, they must show dominance and power to show they are strong. Like a fox, they must be smart and cunning to notice traps that appear.
One ruler that this applies to is Elizabeth I of England. She was like a lion when she took action after hearing her cousin, Mary Stuart, who was plotting to assassinate Elizabeth. She had her executed immediately. She was like a fox because she fought out any invaders and she was a politque, which definitely helped her rule the way she wanted to and get her own way.
Another ruler that showed these traits is Henry IV of France. He was like a fox when he converted from Protestant to Catholic. He also issued the Edict of Nantes, which granted religious tolerance to the Huguenots. Although he mainly showed more “like a fox” traits, he was like a lion because he protected his nation in wars.
As it was stated in the article, "The Lion and the Fox", by Machiavelli, he wrote about how a ruler should rule with traits of cunning and boldness to be able to succeed. Queen Elizabeth I of England was a prime example of ruling like a fox and a lion during her rule. Elizabeth was wise in her choices regarding religion, for she kept her own preference behind the scenes and sated the majority's needs. She put her own views and religious beliefs on the back burner, and focused on the people's welfare and views instead. In doing so, she managed to satisfy both religious sides, and demonstrated her thought and wisdom. As for lion-like traits, Elizabeth I protects her country, and does what is needed. She takes action when things need to be done, such as when Mary Stuart planned to kill her. She retaliates harshly against war, and it also powerful and orderly.
Another example of a ruler following Machiavelli's lion and fox traits was Henry IV. Henry shows his powerful and bold traits through his revival of France after the 30 years war. He was able to exercise his power and bring France back to prosperity during his rule. As for his foxy side, Henry IV was a politique as well. He made it a priority to satisfy both religious sides of the people, especially during the age of religious wars. He even went as far as to switch religions just to please his people. Not only did he switch religions, he also wrote the Edict of Nantes, which protected the rights of Calvinist citizens.
Sunni, I agree with your statement regarding Elizabeth I. Her politique rule and her wisdom in resolving religious conflict was an obvious trait of Machiavellian rule.
Alex, I also agree with your verdict towards Henry IV. He displayed traits of resolving internal conflict, and did a good job of it. Not only was he well liked, he was also wise and bold during his rule.
Not every expanse of Europe followed the process of national consolidation under a gradual, centralizing monarchy. The Italian peninsula remained divided throughout this period, and thus it became vulnerable prey for ambitious powers such as France and Spain, propelling sixteenth-century Italy to become the battlefield in which they fought for dominance. The collapse of Italian independence was the historical context in which Niccolò Machiavelli wrote what is generally seen as the first work of modern political thought, The Prince. Machiavelli was genuinely intimidated by the overwhelming foreign sovereignty of Italy and believed that only a strong leader using morally degenerating means could unify Italy to expel foreign rule. He was passionately emphatic in that rulers should “choose both the lion and the fox; for the lion cannot guard himself from the toils, nor the fox from the wolves. He must therefore be a fox to discern toils, and a lion to drive off wolves.” Two rising monarchs of his contemporary adopted his words into their sanctions. As “politiques,” Henry IV of France and Queen Elizabeth I of England both pursued the Machiavellian mindset that “the ends justified the means” by diverging the moral from the political.
Henry IV, before he claimed power to France, was engaged in a violent religious turmoil within France. Witnessing the devastation of his country firsthand by the ardently Catholic Catherine de Medici’s persecution of the Huguenots, Henry IV was prompt to establish religious tolerance and peace within France. As Machiavelli argued that to “rely wholly on the lion is unwise; and for this reason a prudent prince neither can nor ought to keep his word when to keep it is hurtful to him and the causes which led him to pledge it are removed,” King Henry IV converted from Calvinism to Catholicism in order to appease his people. His motives were explained in his famous quote, “Paris is worth a Mass,” because by choosing the necessary evil, France enjoyed religious equality. He possessed foxlike qualities more than anything: establishing the Edict of Nantes to grant rights to the war-torn Huguenots, solidifying France sovereign, and preventing external invasion. His bravery and integrity in protecting his people proved him to be a charismatic and advocated monarch, so he did not have to resort to much tyrannical means of instilling power as a lion does.
Queen Elizabeth I of England embodied the very essence of Machiavelli’s wisdom as she not only governed England with an iron fist, allowing it to prosper and thrive under her rule, but also employed any means necessary to institute her authority. She was a woman and a monarch ahead of her time, and her sound political decisions wrought the English an age of peace and accomplishments. Her foxlike ruthless determination to remain unbetrothed had garnered an interest from the other rising powers of Europe hoping to rule England, which she cunningly used to her advantage. Pursuing a religious middle ground for the Catholics and Protestants, she clearly disregarded her personal beliefs in order to protect the welfare of all groups under her reign. Worldly and educated, Elizabeth I advocated for an effective foreign policy. What she did not tolerate was threats to her authority, providing little mercy by completely decimating rebels through well executed policies such as the Conventicle Act of 1593. She acted relentlessly, exhibiting her strength like a lion when she ruthlessly(but necessarily) ordered the execution of her cousin Mary Stuart and crushed Phillip II’s Spanish Armada and introduced England as a rising major naval power. While she may have not been a significant direct patron of the following English Renaissance, the stability she established for England during her reign potentially allowed it to occur, introducing one of the most legendary figures of all time, such as Bill Shakespeare.
Lawerence,
I agree with what you said about Elizabeth I. She definitely showed strong characteristics of how she was like a lion and a fox. I like how you said she used defensive and protective strategies to show how she behaved like a lion and a fox.
Amanda,
I agree with you that Henry IV was a ruler who showed the traits of being a lion and a fox. I agree that with you that he was a very much skillful politique, as he did try to protect his nation.
@Alicia Rescendez: I wholeheartedly agree with you that Catherine was a prime example of Machiavellian virtues. Her violent actions to obtain power has made her like the beasts that Machiavelli emphasizes.
@Leilah Clark: Indeed, Frederick II of Prussia was exuberant mostly in intimidation tactics and acts of aggression more so than cleverness. He is too much of a lion to be an ultimately Machiavellian ruler.
One European ruler who resembled Machiavelli's idea in being both "like a lion" and "like a fox" would be Elizabeth I of England. She was like a lion because she uses her wits as a ruler. For example, she used marriage to become the ruler of England which outwitted her enemies. She also used religion to avoid wars. Elizabeth passed rules like the Act of Supremacy which made others swear loyal to her and she would be supreme ruler. Elizabeth is also aggressive like a lion. For example, she defeated the Spanish navy during the Spanish Armada and sent Francis Drake to counter attack. She also did things like siding with Henry VI in the French Wars of Religion
Another European ruler who was both the lion and the fox would be Henry IV of France. He behaved like a fox in certain areas. For example with religion, he was originally a Calvinist but he converted to Catholicism in order to please the people and to also save himself. He also passed the Edict of Nantes allowing Protestants to have rights keeping things in peace. Henry also acted like a lion. He showed this during the religious wars. He also proved to be a powerful ruler by reuniting his nation.
These are two European rules who behaved both "like a lion" and "like a fox" in which Machiavelli suggested. They both used their cunning wits and strength to rule which proved to be successful.
"...he ought of the beasts to choose both the lion and the fox..." stated by Niccolo Machiavelli where he says that a ruler must be both a lion and a fox not just one. A lion to be strong and a fox to be cunning. Both Elizabeth the first of England and Henry the fourth of France had displayed traits of a "Machiavellian ruler." For starters they were both politiques, which meant they had cared more about the nationalism of their country rather than what religion to force on their citizens causing a war. Like when Henry the fourth had openly converted to a catholic but was secretly a Calvinist, only for his country to be unified. Elizabeth was very clever when she had allied along with France during religious wars even though France was catholic during the time.
So they both in their own way had lived up to the standards in a "Machiavellian ruler." Both were more like a fox rather than a lion however.
@bailey
I agree that Henry IV had conveyed a few of Machiavellian traits however I do not believe that he was both a lion and a fox. True he did convey the traits of a fox because he was clever in changing religions to Catholicism in order to unite his country, however there are no examples of him being a lion also.
Gary
I agree that Elizabeth had shown some very Machiavellian traits by siding with protestants during the time. Even if it meant that the Catholics would be upset at this decision.
According to Machiavelli, rulers should rule with the qualities of both a fox and a lion in order to rule the most sufficiently. Machiavelli suggested that rulers should use the combined thoughtful mind of a fox to be rational and wise in order to avoid traps while also using the aggressive mind of a lion to drive off oppositions and be strict to the people to display their authority.
One ruler that displayed Machiavelli's "Lion and the Fox" way of rule is Elizabeth I of England. Elizabeth displayed these qualities of both a Lion and Fox and was a successful leader. Elizabeth displayed the mind of a Fox in the way that she was a Politique ruler. Elizabeth was rational and put the affairs of the state before religion, which kept the people happy under her rule. Elizabeth also kept the people satisfied with her rule by allowing religious tolerance. The mind of a lion was displayed by Elizabeth when she was quick to rid of any opposition to re-ensure her authority, such as when she killed her own cousin, Mary Stuart, after learning of her plot to kill her. Her Machiavellian way of rule obviously helped her rule successfully.
Another successful ruler that showed off both the qualities of a fox and lion is Henry IV. Henry IV displayed qualities of a fox when he created the Edict of Nantes, granting religious tolerance to Calvinists in a dominantly Catholic state in order to keep much of the populace happy. He also displayed qualities of a lion by taking over the Holy Roman Empire swiftly in order to gain territory and power.
Both these rulers obviously conveyed the success of the Machiavellian way rule by displaying qualities of a lion and a fox.
@Lawrence: I agree with your statement that Elizabeth displayed Machiavellian rule through her defensive strategies against foreign invaders. The qualities of a lion include defending its territory, which Elizabeth showed by defending the state against invaders.
@Vivien, I agree with you that Elizabeth conveyed the mind of a fox with the way she put affairs of the state before her own personal beliefs. This displayed her rational thought that helped her successfully rule by keeping the populace happy.
@Vivien: I agree with you on how Elizabeth was a dominant femal ruler of her time by using Machiavelli's "like a fox" and "like a lion" teachings. She definately made an impact during her time as queen. She was a true politique.
@Trinity i agree with you, i believe Henry IV was very effective during his rule, issusing things that were better for the the people of his country. Such as a the Edict of Nantes. Which was very effective becasue he put the people before himself which is known as a politque.
Audrey, I agree with you on both of your Monarchs and I believe you provided good facts to back up your point.
Ethan, I agree with you in how Elizabeth and Catherine were like a for and a lion. But, I believe you can analyze them even further and explain even more how successful they were.
Machiavelli said a leader should have traits like a lion and a fox. A lion is someone who is agressive, brave, and strikes fear into their enemies. While a fox is someone who can use sneaky tactics and find ways out of any situation.
Elizabth I of England acted like a fox because she would pretend she would be interested in a person and use that for diplomacy, which was very sneaky. When there was a rebellion led by Thomas Wyatt, Elizabeth insisted that it was her sister who had been active in the revolts. So Elizabeth was able to get out of that situation. Elizabeth also acted as a lion because she prosecuted many protestants during her reign. She was nicknamed "Bloody Mary". She also helped make England the prominent naval force in the world.
Henry IV acted as a lion because he delcared the Edict of Nantes, which gave Huguenots religious rights, which ended the civil war. This was a very brave and risky move. To win control over the nobles he would often use things like force. He also acted like a fox because he was politique. Henry also switched religions which was very sneaky but smart because it made many people happy.
In his book, "The Prince", Machiavelli expressed his opinion and advice that rulers should rule like a lion and a fox. In order to have these successful traits, a ruler needs to be intimidating and controlling over his people, like lion, and wise and cunning as a fox is. The two rulers that seem to be examples to Machiavelli's ruling standards are Frederick the II of Prussia and Queen Elizabeth I of England.
Frederick the II acted as both a fox and a lion and that resulted in him building up Prussia from its ruins and creating a strong military based system. His wise, fox skills allowed him to create a strategy that built Prussia up from its downfall. Also, he was religiously tolerant in order to lure in people into Prussia so they can be taxed to help built up the government and military. Another way be behaved like fox is the way he made alliances with France and Austria to gain there support and respect to prevent conflict and war. Although Frederick was involved with wars, it gave him the intimidating lion effect. He also built up his strong army in order to keep Prussia safe but also gain them land by taxing constantly throughout Prussia.
Queen Elizabeth I is another great Machiavellian ruler with behavior as both a lion and fox. She was a politique which made her extremely cautious about her decisions of religious tolerance in England. Her being a powerful woman made it extra difficult to rule with such success and respect from her people. She did not take disrespect from anyone. For example her cousin, Mary Stuart, had planned to have her killed, she immediately had her killed to protect her honor. She also led England into a victory regarding the Spanish Armada. Therefore, she is a superb example of Machiavelli's ideal ruler.
@Lawrence I fully agree with your analysis about Elizabeth I of England resolving many conflicts regarding Catholics and Protestants in order to keep both sides at peace.
@Yanetzy I agree with your statement about Frederick's lion-like traits with his military aspects, making him a feared yet respected ruler.
Henry IV behaved like a lion because he was a very courageous and strong leader. What made him courageous and strong is the way he rebuilt and reunited France after the 30 years war. Another example is how he sponsored expeditions, which shows his courageousness, he also regulated finance and promoted agriculture, which shows he was a strong leader.He behaved like a fox because he was very sly. He was a skillful politique, because he brought peace to France by the Edict of Nantes. Catherine the Great of Russia was definitely a very strong ruler. Her lion side was definitely solid, but not her fox side. It isn't talked about with huge significance, but if you look between the lines she did get a few people to like her. She did trust on her great nobles and she built mansions for them. It didn't talk an extreme amount about people under the nobles. Though she never exactly terrorized them and she helped keep people safe so I believe people weren't sad about living in a powerful country.
Kinsey,
Though Elizabeth I was a politique, she did not seem to be careful with her decisions regarding religion to make her subjects happy. It seemed as though she did this in order to prevent religious strife and disunity within the regions of her reign. I believe it was stated that she seemed to have a more Catholic bias, overall. Her actions as a fox didn't seem to be for the welfare of her people, but for the political unity resulting in it.
Yanetzy
i agree with you on Frederick and Henry . i can see why they are Machiavellian inspired leaders by your statement that a ruler must be feared and respected
Machiavelli believed that a true and good ruler should be both like a lion and like a fox. Two of the people who show these traits are Elizabeth 1 of England and Henry IV of France. Elizabeth showed her lion-like characteristics by staying strong through all the trouble with her cousin Mary Queen of Scotts. She had to make the fatal decision of killing her own cousin after Mary tried to kill her. She is a fox because she is smart by getting all of her people to like her because she puts them before her thoughts and rules as a politique. She is clever because listening to her people gets more people on her side which makes her stronger. Henry IV is also a ruler who ruled as both a lion and a fox. He was smart because he also ruled as a politique and put the political stand forth of his country before his own bias. He also created the Edict of Nantes to protect his people's religions. He was a strong lion because he chose his battles wisely and attacked based on political reasons and not religious reasons.
Sam C,
I see your view on Catherine the Great of Russia and I agree however, how is it that she can be a great ruler when she only focuses on her noble class and what about her peasants? If she does not please them or think about them, she is just going to cause more rebellions and such forth.
Jackie Camuy,
I see your arguments about Fredrick 2 but he only focused on his army and let the rest of his kingdom crumble, as it cause more and more peasant revolts and that lead to his overall end. I believe Fredrick had a strong army, and he gained a lot of land from that but he really didn't help his country.
Several monarchs during this time period favored Machiavelli’s ideas, which dealt with the ways a monarch should rule. Machiavelli stated that a ruler should rule as both a “loin” and a “fox”.
One ruler that followed his teachings was Elizabeth I of England. She was one of the most favored rulers during this time period. The fact that she accepted both catholic and protestant practices made the people of England respect her. She was a very powerful leader, which individuals feared. She successfully protected England from foreign invaders. After finding out that her cousin, Mary Tudor, had secret assassination plots to kill her, Elizabeth immediately had her executed.
Henry IV of France also displayed characteristics of a “lion” and a “fox”. By issuing the Edict of Nantes to give the Huguenots religious tolerance he displayed the characteristic of a “lion”. He also converted from a Calvinist to a Catholic to both keep himself safe and keep the people happy.
A ruler who had the attributes of a fox would be Henry IV. Henry IV showed religious toleration by granting the Edict of Nantes, which shows the traits of a fox. Also, he was supposed to be catholic, but he was secretly Calvanist, just to please the people. This aslo showed traits of a fox. Elizabeth I showed traits like a lion by never getting married, yet still having lovers, showing her authority over the church. Machiavelli 's vision of a ruler should be cunning and able to trick others while also being forceful to show their authority.
Devon,
I completely agree with you. Both rulers were successful and both followed Machiavelli’s suggestions on the ways a ruler should rule.
Karissa,
I agree with your analysis of Catherine the Great of Russia. She displayed both characteristics of a lion and a fox.
Machiavelli proposed in his book, The Prince, that in order for a ruler to govern victoriously, they must rule with the traits of both a lion and a fox. The traits of the lion was to be fearless and drive off enemies while the traits of a fox was to be wise and discern toils. He believed that with these traits the ruler would rule successfully. He also believed that there were two types of rulers. One that was proper to men and the other to beasts. Two European rulers that followed Machiavelli's beliefs were Elizabeth I of England and Henry IV of France.
Elizabeth had both the qualities of a lion and a fox. She had the traits of a fox by being a successful politique when she would put the issues of politics ahead of religion. She was very wise in caring for her people and trying to pursue on keeping everyone content. She shows the traits of a lion on being a very determined leader. An example would be when she defeated sided with the Dutch to defeat the Spanish Armada. Also when she had her cousin, Mary Stuart, executed for her involvement in trying to kill her. Clearly, Elizabeth I surely ruled according to Machiavelli's beliefs.
Another ruler who followed Machiavelli's advice was King Henry IV of France. King Henry displayed his fox-like characteristics when he developed the Edict of Nantes to grant religious toleration and to satisfy his people. Henry had characteristics like a lion by being bold and strong. He also demonstrated a lion's characteristics when he rebuilt France from the ground up after the 30 years war. Another example is when sought to divide the Holy Roman Empire during the Religious Wars. Overall, Henry IV also ruled accordingly to Machiavelli's writings.
Sam C.,
I agree with you on Catherine the Great of Prussia's not so fox-like side.
Amanda Clegg,
I completely agree with you on Elizabeth I's sly characteristics and focusing more on foreign relations rather than the religious ones.
Machiavelli states that a ruler must have the strength of a lion and the wit of a fox. A ruler cannot rely only on their intelligence alone, and cannot rely solely on their strength. He says they must balance out these two beasts to tame the challenges of a leader. I believe that the two leaders who demonstrate this ability to balance out their lion and fox are Elizabeth I of England and Frederick II of Prussia.
Elizabeth was a successful leader. She was able to please and nurture the concerns of her people while still staying firm to her own beliefs. As a politique, she saw that the needs of the state were taken care of before any religious concerns. This shows her fox-like intelligence, demonstrating how she had the needs of the people in mind so they wouldn’t try to disagree with her. Another aspect of this is how she did not “make windows into men’s souls,” meaning that it didn’t matter what people believed as long as it wasn’t Catholic. To display her role as a Lion, she had her own cousin, Mary, Queen of Scots, killed. She had this commanded because the Catholics held many rebellions against her and they wanted Mary, a devout Catholic, as their leader. Overall, Elizabeth displays many aspects of a Machiavellian leader as she is able to balance out the lion and the fox in her time as ruler.
Fredrick II of Prussia’s philosophy of government came directly from that of the beliefs of Machiavelli. This becomes apparent when he writes, “Machiavelli maintains that, in this wicked degenerate world, it is certain ruin to be strictly honest. For my part, I affirm that in order to be safe, it is necessary to be virtuous. Men are commonly neither wholly good nor wholly bad, but both good and bad.” He also believed that the ruler existed for the state and that he must be the “first servant of the state.” To show his characteristics of a fox, he pondered on questions of religion, morality and power. To combine the two aspects of a Machiavellian ruler, he ordered an attack on Silesia in December 1740, a couple of months after Emperor Charles VI passed away. This guaranteed the throne to Maria Theresa. After this, Prussia came to a point of much loss. He ends up once again displaying aspects of a fox, when he himself supplied funds to rebuild towns and reforming to fix what he had broken. This just goes to show that Fredrick II truly cared about the status of the state and his people. In the end, Prussia became one of the most powerful nations in Europe.
Henry IV of France
One Method Henry IV used was being a politique. He put being a good ruler before any of his or anyone else's religious views. This can be applied to being a fox because it is wise and uses control over others for the better. Also, his use of being a politique can be drawn to a lion because he does not bother anyone with religious views because he knows that could be harmful to his rule. Although, he does not keep to much from his people.
Elizabeth I of England
A method that Elizabeth the I used was strengthening the Anglican church. This won the favor of some but meant harsh treatment for Catholics. However, it applies to The Lion and the Fox because she was doing what she believed was right and didn't care if anyone tried to interfere. This made her a strong and wise ruler.
Machiavelli explains how rulers should rule more like a lion and a fox in order to balance out the empire. In order to rule like a fox you have to be clever and smart and watch out. Most things are taking for granted which later in life they become bad unless you watch out. This explains how if you rule like a fox nothing can over come you.
Ruling like a lion means you take action and don’t just say thing. Basically doing things and being in charge and doing things your way. An example when she took action after she heard her cousin. She didn’t even bother to doubt if it was a mistake ans just jumped into conclusions. Even though this can be bad sometimes.
In my opinion I think the author showed being a fox was more important. But I can see where she explained being a lion because he protected his people.
In Niccolo Machiavelli's work"The Lion and the Fox" states how a monarch must have both traits to be successful.I believe that Elizebeth I and Catherine the Great of Russia are two monarchs that inquired both these traits.First, Elizebeth I was a protestant, but was a politique as she found a middle ground between the catholics and the puritans in England which shows how she is like a fox. What makes her a lion like Machiavelli said monarchs are suppose to evade foriegn invasion and she did this as she fought off and defended her country from Philip II and the Spanish Armada. Secondly, Catherine the Great of Russia was a great admirerof Peter the Great continued to modernise Russia along Western European lines. However, military conscription and economy continued to depend on serfdom, and the increasing demands of the state and private landowners led to increased levels of reliance on serfs is how she is a fox. She also expanded Russia by conquests to beat The Ottoman Turks and getting land in the Black and Azov Seas is how she is a lion. This is how both of these monarchs had both these traits.
Niccolo Machiavelli's piece, The Prince, suggested that a ruler should behave like a lion and a fox. Two European rulers who make a good example of this are Elizabeth I of England and Henry IV of France.
Elizabeth I portrayed herself as a fox by achieving the characteristics of a politique, in which she carefully navigated a middle ground between Anglicanism and Protestantism. Also, she did not marry throughout her reign in which she used the possibility of a royal marriage to her advantage. Her fearlessness and power represents the lion within her. This is so by how she executed Mary Queen of Scots to maintain her power despite the fact that Mary was her cousin.
Not only was Elizabeth I an excellent example of Machiavelli's views on what an ideal ruler should be but Henry IV of France exemplifies this as well. He represents the fox in which he willingly converted from Protestantism to Catholicism. He states that "Paris is worth a mass" which shows that he is a politique as well, meaning that the interest of the state comes first before any religious considerations. In addition, he passed the Edict of Nantes which granted religious freedom to Huguenots. He expresses the lion within him through the numerous battles he's gone through, especially by the fact that he ended Spanish interference in France.
Chloe even though i agree with you on Henry IV being a lion and fox and the same as Elizibeth I i dont believe she strengthened the Anglican Church.
When i read "The Lion and the Fox" I immediately thought of Queen Elizabeth I. She is definitely a perfect example of acting as the lion and the fox because of how she worked her way up to her success. She knew how to get what she wanted in a manipulative way and perceived herself to be the girl no one really wanted to mess with.I don't believe this is relevant to specific actions i think it's the way they actually did what they did.
The other ruler i believe would match up to these standards is Henry IV of France. Henry was very demanding and did exactly what he wanted like a mad man. I feel that as a powerful leader you should be constructive with what all needs to be done and take care of business plain and simple no if's, and's, or but's. henry most definitely did that with the war's he was involved in and The Edict of Nantes. he "scared away the wolves" for sure.
Two European rulers that resemble Machiavelli's suggestion of behaving "like a lion" and "like a fox" were Elizabeth I of England and Henry IV
of France. Elizabeth was a powerful ruler who scared and silenced anyone who disagreed or disobeyed her. If anyone was idle, she would pursue a middle way. Another ruler that followed Machiavelli's suggestion was Henry IV. Henry allowed religious toleration to the Calvinists and issued The Edict of Nantes. He also accomplished agreements with the Huguenots.
The theory created by Machiavelli in The Prince advocated that when you are given the power and the control of a leader, you must be like a lion and a fox to succeed as a prevailing ruler. This means that you must have the courage of a lion and the attentiveness of a fox. Two leaders that showed these characteristics were Henry IV and Elizabeth I.
Henry IV was a great example of Machiavelli’s ideal leader because he was very cautious but disciplined. He was willing to change his religion so that the people of Paris would admire him and perceive him as an understanding leader. His politique actions accentuated the fox-like way he ruled. Henry IV also represented the lion because he was very cunning when it came to fighting wars. He would always find ways to confuse rebels and attack them when their guard was down.
Elizabeth I was also an amazing example of Machiavelli’s ideal leader because her actions exemplified those of a fox and a lion. Her politique characteristics illuminated her fox-like way of ruling because she slowly but surely made sure that everyone would be on her side and listen to everything she said by establishing the mix of Protestantism and Anglicanism. She was like a lion as well because of how daring and bold she was. When it came to protecting what was rightfully hers (in this case the throne) she wasn’t afraid to exterminate anyone in her way. For example, when her cousin Mary Queen threatened to take her power, she killed her immediately withought any mercy or compassion. This really expressed her lion-like qualities.
-Divina Mesropian
Denise,
I agreed with you completely when you said that Elizabeth and Henry were great examples of Machiavelli’s ideal leader. Machiavelli did indeed express that in order for a leader to succeed, you must be like a lion and a fox. In the end, they both exemplified this because they were both politiques and had a courageous yet sly way of ruling.
-Divina Mesropian
According to Machiavelli's idea, "The Lion and the Fox", a ruler should act with the strength of a lion, yet be evasive and cunning like a fox. To obtain the qualities of the lion, the ruler must be able to drive off his foes, and be feared by his people, yet still be respected in return. Obtaining the qualities of the fox requires the ruler to be able to negotiate well among his subjects and be intelligent while doing so. Two prime examples of successful followers of Machiavelli's belief were Elizabeth I of England and Henry IV of France.
Elizabeth I is considered a good example of what a ruler should be because she did what she thought was best for the people. She wanted to settle arguments amongst her subjects and prevent any further conflicts for her people and herself. She demonstrated the trait of a lion when she found out her cousin Mary Stuart was plotting to kill her. She immediately sentenced her to death for doing so. She was able to defend herself and wage war against the Spanish Armada leading to a glorious victory for England. She also was able to act like a fox because of her position as a politique. She used this title to take part in religious affairs and relations.
Henry IV of France is another example of Machiavelli's idea because of trade of faiths, from being a Calvinist to a follower of Catholicism. He was a politique, just like Elizabeth I, and was able to bring peace among his people by writing the Edict of Nantes, which granted Calvinists religious tolerance. He joined with England during the Religious Wars as he saw a grand opportunity to divide the Holy Roman Empire.
Queen Elizabeth I and Henry IV were good examples of a "lion" and a "fox".
Briana,
I agree with everything you said about Elizabeth I’s characteristics of ruling. She was definitely a politique leader that new how to meet the concerns of people. You also were right when you said that she was like a lion as well because of her authoritarian actions she committed during her rule.
-Divina Mesropian
The European ruler, Elizabeth I of England, satisfied Machiavelli's condition of being a good ruler, or was both a "fox" and a "lion". She was both firm and had sly policies against the peasants or serfs, religions, and foreign countries.
Elizabeth I had used merciful and tolerant policies against the peasants in order to avoid the revolts. Even though she was a strong protestant, she used her moderate policies against the religion and avoided conflicts. This was shown in the way Elizabeth's religion policy wavered between toleration and repression according to the needs of the moment. In a similar way, her foreign policy was systematic only in the sense that it was designed to keep her in power. She portrayed herself as Machiavellian like, when she fully took on board in the way that a prince's surest safeguard is the love of his people. She strives to build an image for herself which would secure as much loyalty as possible.
Catherine the Great of Russia also had the characteristics of a "lion" and a "fox". She used her wisdom in order to judge when to use her powers for the benefit of Russia. Catherine suppressed the revolt of serfs in Russia by passing a law that gave nobles control over serfs for loyalty to Russia. She had great success in her military which brought her much domestic political support. She succeeded in the partition of Poland; Catherine received a large portion of Poland in return for leaving conquered areas. She acted as a fox in the sense of controlling the nobles and as an enlightened ruler. She gained loyalty from nobles by giving them control over their serfs, ranking her nobles like Peter the Great, stressed her idea of the character in nobility, and based their status on the amount of service they did for the sate. Overall, the support lead her to rule absolutely over Russia. She allowed Russia to be part of international relations in Europe.
There are two different leaders who have both traits like a “lion” and a “fox”. The first ruler is Elizabeth I, she acts like a lion because she made wise decisions about England, making her the best English monarch in history. She acted as a fox when she was forced to make cutthroat decisions such as the murder of Catherine Medici because Catherine had made several attempts to kill Elizabeth. The second ruler is Henry IV. He also made very wise decisions that greatly benefitted his country which also made him one of the best monarchs in history. Acting as a lion is similar to his politque ways, making wise decisions for the benefit of his country. He also ruled as a lion by making sometimes deadly decisions that would ultimitaly benefit his country.
Trinity,
I agree that Elizabeth made some very foxlike and lion decisions. I also believe that she demonstated her cutthroat side when she murdered several people in order to protect herself and her country. These decisions help show her foxlike personality. Also her lionlike traits are showed by the fact that she was a politque ruler, this form of ruling involves very levelheaded and well thought out decisions.
Amanda,
I also believe that Henry IV shows both foxlike and lion;like traits. Along with what you stated I also believe that his politque way of ruling displayed his lionlike personality. Since he is a politque he made very smart decisions that would benefit his country. The way of ruling also shows his ability to rule well while still being liked by his country.
Niccolo Machiavelli stated that a ruler must be both "like a lion" and "like a fox" in order to be a sucessful ruler. Two great examples of this form of ruler were Elizabeth I of England and Henry IV of France.
Elizabeth of England acted as a lion when she decided to aid Henry VI in the French Wars of religon. When Spain sent the spanish armada Elizabeth sent Francis Drake to attack the ships stopping at nothing to protect her people.These acts showed hern taking charge in an agressive and powerful way or being a lion. Her Act of Supremacy in 1558 mad anyone wanting a position in the church swear to remain loyal to her. She also compromised with the puratians even though their demands of purging England of Catholics. When she did this she was able to make most people in England happy because she was being fair to both groups of religions showing the fox side of ruling.
Henry VI of France is also another great example of someone ruling like a "lion and a "fox". the Edict of Nantes was passed allowing Calvinist to have rights.
Henry also made a bold move converting from protestant to catholic to please his subjects demonstrating "acting like a fox".
He was also able to rebuild France after the end of the 30 Years War staying strong for his kingdom showing him ruling likea lion.
-joe velasco
Niccolo Machiavelli stated that a ruler must be both "like a lion" and "like a fox" in order to be a sucessful ruler. Two great examples of this form of ruler were Elizabeth I of England and Henry IV of France.
Elizabeth of England acted as a lion when she decided to aid Henry VI in the French Wars of religon. When Spain sent the spanish armada Elizabeth sent Francis Drake to attack the ships stopping at nothing to protect her people.These acts showed hern taking charge in an agressive and powerful way or being a lion. Her Act of Supremacy in 1558 mad anyone wanting a position in the church swear to remain loyal to her. She also compromised with the puratians even though their demands of purging England of Catholics. When she did this she was able to make most people in England happy because she was being fair to both groups of religions showing the fox side of ruling.
Henry VI of France is also another great example of someone ruling like a "lion and a "fox". the Edict of Nantes was passed allowing Calvinist to have rights.
Henry also made a bold move converting from protestant to catholic to please his subjects demonstrating "acting like a fox".
He was also able to rebuild France after the end of the 30 Years War staying strong for his kingdom showing him ruling likea lion.
-joe velasco
Brandon,
I agree what you said about elizabeth ruling like a lion by sentancing Mary Queen of Scots to death before Mary killed her. This showed she was able to rule and make very strong decisions while keeping her and her country in mind
Ashley Chen,
I agree with you about saying that Henry VI of france was able to rule like a fox when he converted to Catholicism this not only saved his life but it pleased his people.
Machiavelli suggested that a ruler should rule "like a lion" and "like a fox". In saying this he means that as a ruler, more specifically a successful ruler, he or she must be cunning in frightening off and suppressing any future uprising aimed at him. Machiavelli also states that one must also recognize "traps" or situations that will put him at a disadvantage. All-in-all a ruler must be a master of deception, in spotting it, avoiding it, and using it to his or her advantage.
One example of a ruler, who was successful in following the suggestion made by Machiavelli, was Elizabeth I of England. She was known by many as being a politique, or a ruler in a position of power who puts the success and well-being of her state above all else. Although she was at a disadvantage due to the poor ruling of her predecessor, she still managed to keep things in order. In being "like a lion" she noticed that her close relative, Mary Stuart, planned to overthrow her, and took aggressive action by ordering the execution of Mary.
In addition to the first follower of Machiavelli's suggestion, another ruler who followed in his footsteps was Fredrick II of Prussia, otherwise known as Fredrick the Great. He was very much "like a lion" because of his aggressiveness when it came to warfare. He saw war as being a sport and used it to both protect his country and expand it. Furthermore, he used his army to frighten reformers into submission, securing his place on the throne. He was also "like a fox" because he was one of the greatest tactical geniuses of all time due to his knowledge in the field of warfare and ability to use it to further increase and secure his power.
@Nerissa Ortiz I agree with your comment about about Elizabeth I and Henry VI being successful politiques who behaved "like a lion" and "like a fox"
@Miguel Butiu I agree with your statement saying that Henry VI was more "fox-like" because he issued the Edict of Nantes and I agree with you saying that Elizabeth always found a middle ground.
@Alex Tung
I agree with your statement that King Henry IV resembled a fox more than a lion. He greatly benefited his nation by creating religious peace, and increasing economic factors such as agriculture and overseas trade. Had he been more cunning and able in using deception to his advantage, he may have fully resembled both a fox and a lion.
@Denise_Lorenzo
I agree with your statement in saying that Elizabeth I portrayed herself as a fox by achieving the characteristics of a politique, in which she carefully navigated a middle ground between Anglicanism and Protestantism. By not solely choosing one side, she was able to avoid revolts due to bias and favoritism in a particular religion. A good ruler is able to put aside his or her bias' in able to succeed.
Machiavelli thought that the rulers should act both "like a lion" and "like a fox." Elizabeth I is an example of having traits both as a fox and lion. Elizabeth is a politique and shows shes like a lion by defending herself and being strong. She also showed traits of a lion by ruling without any man at her side. She is also like a fox by having her devious side. By her killing many people makes her have a foxlike trait. Henery VI is also a polique who acted like both fox and lion by being a strong leader but having a sly side. He acted like a fox by developing the Edict of Nates which gave religous freedom. Being a strong and brave leader made him have a more lionlike side.
Niccolo Machiavelli advised rulers to act “like a lion” and “like a fox” in his book, The Prince. By behaving like a lion and fox, a ruler is able to lead effectively throughout his nation. The act of behaving like a lion allows a ruler to defend from enemies and by being like a fox, one can solve internal problems in his or her nation. Two European rulers who followed Machiavelli’s idea to an extent are Elizabeth I of England and Frederick II of Prussia.
Elizabeth I ruled England successfully by behaving like a lion and a fox. She acted like a lion in a few situations which in doing so protected her nation and herself. When she was in a war between England and Spain, she defended her country from Spain’s forces effectively. Also, when Elizabeth discovered that Mary, Queen of Scots, was plotting to assassinate her, she decided to execute Mary to end any plotting against her. Elizabeth also attempted to attack England with a great, powerful Spanish Armada but failed. Although she didn’t succeed, this still justifies how she acted like a lion. Elizabeth I acted like a fox when she acted like a politique and supported both Catholics and Protestants to avoid internal conflicts. In addition, Elizabeth ruled for the better of the nation without having her personal opinions override her decisions. Even though she increased Protestantism in England, she executed very few Catholics showing her fox-like qualities.
Frederick II followed Machiavelli’s ideals to a degree while ruling Prussia. He behaved like a lion but did not act like a fox which caused problems that would continue even after his reign was over. Frederick acted like a lion by attacking Silesia with the most powerful army of Europe that Frederick William I built. He then fought with Austria for many years and effectively defended his nation from their attacks. Frederick II continued to fight with Austria for control of Germany through these years showing his lion-like characteristics. He violated the Pragmatic Sanction though which caused a rivalry between Prussia and Austria. This could have been avoided if he behaved like a fox.
Overall, Elizabeth I acted like both a lion and a fox which allowed her to rule successfully while Frederick II behaved like a lion but not like a fox, enabling him to rule effectively but caused problems also.
Two rulers that ruled like a "lion" and a "fox" were Elizabeth I and Henry IV of France. Elizabeth I was a very strategic and wise ruler, giving her fox qualities. And her Wicked ways to rise above opposing rulers gave her lion qualities. Henry IV of France also had both qualities of both animals. He was a very favorable leader which represent a fox. Also his enforcing of Catholicism made his powerful and beastly like a lion.
Post a Comment