3 Answers

  1. I can't judge Nietzsche because I don't know him very well, but I can tell you about Cesare Borgia and Machiavelli.

    Machiavelli's sympathies were mainly dictated by his own personal political ambitions — after Cesare's death, he also praised Mr. Bande Nere, for example, as the future unifier of Italy. It is clear that at one time Cesare seemed the most likely potential king of Italy and even after his very inglorious death (“Sovereign” was written later, of course) remained the closest to that.

    And in general, it is harmful to take Machiavelli's opinion too seriously. He himself was not a sovereign and did not raise a single one, his political career was limited to diplomatic work and was as a result very incompetent… It was only after that that he switched to the book “The Sovereign”, and his bold concepts were repeatedly refuted by practice (although many of them got their meaning much later, in radically different general conditions, this must be admitted).

    I think it is much more useful and interesting to read the numerous works of Machiavelli's contemporaries, who actually dealt with politics, war and other things that he so loved to teach everyone “from the couch”, while for some reason almost always failing in practice.

    About Cesare.

    He was, of course, an outstanding person in terms of talents and character, but still his main asset was always the position of his father — who was the Pope. Almost immediately after his death, Cesare lost everything, in the last years of his life no longer having any political potential, and in military terms being interesting only to the ruler of Navarre in the fight against local rebels (so-so scale).

    His historical significance is not personal in fact, it is part of the overall significance of his extremely influential family, in which Cesare was only one of the active figures. Initially, not even the main one — no wonder his father made him a cardinal, and the military-political stake was placed on another son (if he hadn't killed him… someone, yeah). Without Rodrigo / Alexander, it didn't cost much, as practice has shown. Although it is impossible to call him a pure bubble, he was at least a good commander and a man of extremely determined, ambitious character. In addition, of course, Cesare had great charisma, and this is the most important thing for a person of his profession.

    Nevertheless, in general, the scale of this figure is greatly exaggerated due to the general romantic and piquant fleur, all these stories about incest and so on. In fact, Italy in those years was full of at least not the worst (and sometimes the best) politicians and generals.

    I have a fairly detailed article about Cesar-I advise you to read it.

  2. To feel the unprecedented magnetism of this historical figure, I advise you to read Raphael Sabatini's most detailed biographical work ” The Life of Cesare Borgia “or watch the series (almost perfectly close to historical facts and not allowing any liberties)” Borgia ” with Mark Ryder in the title role.�

    Both the book and the film adaptation cover in detail not only Cesare's personal prowess in his own military campaigns, but also his extraordinary intelligence in the intricacies of politics. What Machiavelli admired, the previous commentator described in detail, and Nietzsche, as it seems to me, admired precisely the unprecedented charisma of the Borgias. Perhaps also his life motto, to which he quite rightly corresponded: “Either Caesar or nothing/Aut Ceasar Aut Nihil”.�

    Associatively, the whole personality of the Borgias, in general, comes across the famous quote of Nietzsche: “In a person you can only love that he is a transition and death.” Based on this category of assessment of Cesare, it becomes quite clear what the author of Zarathustra admired so much.

  3. Copy Paste:

    Persistent — and sometimes violent-from childhood, he had the ability to soberly assess the situation and make quick decisions. He was able to appreciate people, bringing closer to himself those whom he really could trust, and never forgot to reward for loyal service. He had a hot Spanish temperament, the ability to grasp any science on the fly. Relative wealth and an aristocratic upbringing (which Rodrigo Borgia took care of for all his children) helped him develop the qualities of an independent and strong personality. He gained a reputation for being unpredictable and dangerous. Rumours of his extraordinary physical strength were spreading throughout Rome — if not all of Italy. He took part in a competition of wrestlers and, according to eyewitnesses, came out the winner. It is said that when Cesare was in a good mood, he could honor the townspeople by coming to the festival. Despite the fact that he had a great spiritual potential and, of course, could achieve a lot in the service of the Church, Cesare saw himself as a commander. He had a well-trained army at his disposal, and the soldiers liked him for his generosity and attention to their needs. With an excellent memory, the duke knew almost every soldier who had been in serious battles with him, not only by face, but also by name. Cesare was an excellent swordsman and, even as a cardinal, had fought in several battles.

    According to the evidence of the time, Cesare was definitely good — looking-a combination of Roman refinement, inherited from his mother, and the strength of the Spanish aristocrats, inherited from his father. Tall, black-haired, with a mysterious look in his dark eyes — this is how he is represented in the portraits.

    Borgia was smart, handsome, athletic, sometimes charming, and always completely unscrupulous and unscrupulous. He is credited with the only good deed that he did in his life: he opened a special hospital ward in which old prostitutes who retired due to poor health or old age could live and be treated.

    Cesare Borgia's only sexual interest was in women. He has had many sexual relationships, but there is no hint that he ever loved at least one of the women who met him on the path of life. His sexual behavior was scandalous even in Renaissance Italy. There were persistent rumors that he, for example, maintained sexual relations with his sister Lucrezia. On October 30, 1501, he hosted a reception, the so-called Chestnut Banquet, where 50 naked courtesans danced for him and his guests. At the same reception, prizes were given out to those guests who were able to surpass all the others in terms of the number of prostitutes with whom they had sexual relations here in the hall. On another occasion, four stallions and two mares were put into a small paddock by Cesare's order. Cesare, his sister, and their father were all watching with interest.

    Machiavelli chose Cesare Borgia as the model of his “Sovereign”; he admired in Cesare the ability to manage the most shameless methods, ” combining the strength of a lion and the cunning of a fox.”He wrote in particular the following:

    “Reviewing the actions of the duke, I do not find anything to reproach him with… For, having a great plan and a high goal, he could not act otherwise: only the premature death of Alexander and his own illness prevented him from carrying out the intention. Thus, those who need to protect themselves from enemies in the new state, gain friends, win by force or cunning, inspire fear and love to the people, and the soldiers — obedience and respect, have a loyal and reliable army, eliminate people who can or should harm; to renew the old order, to get rid of an unreliable army and build up their own, to show severity and mercy, generosity and generosity, and finally to make friends with rulers and kings, so that they can render services with courtesy or refrain from attacks — all of them can not find a more vivid example for themselves than the actions of the duke”

Leave a Reply