Impact of Machiavelli, Massacre, and Execution on Sovereignty

This essay delves into the concept of sovereignty, examining its evolution through the lens of Niccolò Machiavelli's 'The Prince', the St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre of 1572, and the execution of Charles I in 1649. The essay explores how these pivotal historical events influenced European views on governance, techniques of rule, and the balance of power. It analyzes Machiavelli's arguments regarding the relationship between politics and morality, contrasting them with the actions of rulers during the massacre and the execution. Furthermore, the essay discusses the contributions of Jean Bodin and Thomas Hobbes, highlighting their theories on absolute sovereignty and the establishment of a legitimate single hierarchy. The analysis covers how the execution of Charles I and the subsequent English Civil War shaped the demand for central authority, re-emerging the concept of sovereignty and its legal status. The essay concludes by discussing the shift in European sovereignty and the influence of rulership techniques, emphasizing the importance of sovereignty for economic development and the changing political landscape.

With reference to
Machiavellis Prince 1513
documents relating to the St
Bartholomews Day Massacre
1572 the execution of Charles
I 1649 and Hobbess

TABLE OF CONTENT
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................1
MAIN BODY..................................................................................................................................1
CASE EXAMPLES.........................................................................................................................2
CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................5
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................7

INTRODUCTION
Sovereignty can be defined as a state and quality of being sovereign or having a supreme
authority or power. It can also be referred as full power and right of any governing body for itself
and without any interferences from other bodies or sources. Having sovereignty can give a ruler
a permission to see a big picture without any constraints of urgency and it also helps avoiding the
politics for a ruler. The Price was written by Machiavelli in 1513 which discusses about the
relationship that exists between the politics and politics and the basis of discussion and
relationship is taken from various historical and contemporary leaders of that time. Also, asks
various questions about how a leader should be, will a prince who has been generous or
trustworthy as well as honest can actually be capable for taking power. This essay discusses
about two historic events such as St. Bartholomews Day massacre, 1572 and execution of
Charles I 1649 and based on these events this essay explains about how it has changed the views
on sovereignty on technique of rule and state.
MAIN BODY
The massacre of St. Bartholomews Day 1572 was noted be the one of brutal massacre in
the history and the reason of the massacre were religion and politics rivalries of French court.
The main history behind the massacre was that Admiral Gaspard II de-Coligny which was a
Huguenot leader which was in support of war against Spain that took place in low countries in
order to prevent beginning of civil war. This plan has to be approved by the French King named
as Charles IX in 1572 but Charles mother feared that Admiral Coligny was coming the influence
of her son due to which she gave an approval that Roman Catholic has been planning to
assassinate Coliny as she held him responsible for murdering Francois de Guise in year 1563
(Waymack, 2018). In 1572 during a marriage of Catherine's daughter with Hugenot future
Henry IV an attempt to kill was made on Admiral Colingy which failed 4 days later and was
wounded badly which lead to the extermination of Hudgenot leaders which angered them a lot
and On August 24, 1572 the bell rang and massacre began.
So, on this event Machiavelli argued that behaving in a moral way is hindering a ruler to
rule and if each and every one acted morally can be disadvantages for a ruler. As, attempt of
Colingny was not properly investigated and Catherine secretly met a group of nobles in order to
plot extermination of leaders of Hudgenot, which was the main reason for beginning of
massacre. Also, it has been stated by Machiavelli that in order to keep things under control it is
1

really important to dominate them like he gave an example of “Women” in order to keep a
woman in control it is necessary to hit her. This is referred as fortuna, which is also called as
whim of fate. Unless and until a ruler controls his virtue, he can't be successful. Also,
Machiavelli believed that politics is not a realm of moral but a realm of action. Like in massacre
1572, there were certain actions taken by leaders which lacked morality like attempt to kill
Admiral and extermination of Hudgenot leaders which gave rise to massacre (Jouanna, 2016).
On the other hand, Machiavelli has also exposed hypocrisy of power and also stated that any
tyrants which say they are saint are just sweetening their tyranny.
So, based on this event Europeans changed their views of sovereignty, as before and
during massacre there has been a full right for a ruler to take action without any sort of
interferences from others. This gave a supreme authority to rulers due to which common people
and followers of the leader has to suffer. This massacre resulted in killing of many people and
one of the first victim was Colingy who was killed under the supervision of Henry de Guise.
Also, during the massacre shops and homes of Hudgenots were ransacked and also their
occupants were brutally murdered. Bloodshed continued which resulted in killings of thousands
even the stop killing order was passed on 25th of August. This is what forced the people of Paris
and rest of Europeans to change the views of sovereign state and techniques of ruling. People
started to demand the noble and just ruler who uses politics to safeguard people but not for their
personal interests (Jouanna, 2016). As, Machiavelli was the first man to introduce the concept of
society exists for serving the needs of man which is referred as root of liberalism. The Prince
enabled people to realise that power and morality of a leaders is unconnected and the ruler can
choose only one. People reading The Prince can also help in becoming more keener participants
within the political process for example if a political leader claims any moral authority,
Machiavelli has prompted to question them such as why is this being claimed. The Prince casts
harsh light on politics but cynical light is justified as well.
CASE EXAMPLES
The major concern of Thomas Hobbes and Jean Bodin was to establish the legitimacy of
single hierarchy. Both of them accepted the existence and concept of natural law and divine.
Though the work of Machiavelli did not have direct relation with the idea of sovereignty issues
but it helped in deducing various of sovereignty from his variegated and long suggestions to
prince. When Bodin witnessed Bartholomew Massacre he concluded that unrestricted power can
2

be used to control unruly behaviour of individuals or particular groups (Jackson and Grace,
2018). Bodin also believed that when sovereign power is provided with unlimited authority at
disposal then they can easily solve conflicts, civil issues and religious outbreaks.
The concept that government or sovereignty must have uncontrolled and unlimited power
for formulating laws to establish peace and harmony in the society. The concept was well
adopted in the European society. Thus, Bodin presented the concept of well ordered government
which has absolute sovereign powers. He had belief that French government at that time was
incapable to control the recalcitrant elements. Political turmoil during English civil wars made
Leviathan Hobbes fearful and to produce the most influential text during 17th century. After the
political instability due to civil wars it was demanded by Leviathan that absolute sovereignty
must emerge as necessity.
The execution of Charles I in 1649 is also considered as significant event which also
caused various conflicting and controversial tensions in Europe resulting in civil war. When
Charles I dissolved parliament on various occasions then in 1642 struggle between him and
parliament for the matter of supremacy resulted in first English civil war (Constantinidou,
2017). In 1648 when Charles I was executed then monarchy was abolished and it was assumed
that Cromwell will take the control of new English commonwealth. However, son of Charles I
was crowned and monarchy was restored. Thus, the theory of Hobbes and Bodin was influenced
by the prevailing circumstances.
On the basis of their work they concluded that for resolving or addressing the harmful
and undesirable conflicts and situations there is only one solution which is absolute sovereign
power. The foundation of nation state was also laid by Hobbes. The response of European
statesmen towards execution of Charles I was universally negative. All rules and princes of
Europe was terrified and made attempts to raise their concern for their fear. However, no
significant actions were taken against the foreign and new English government. The Leviathan
by Hobbes became controversial because it seemed to be supporting monarchy restoration in
Europe during the time was when English republic was at its peak.
One of the important claim made by Hobbes in his work includes the belief that civil war
is the result of disagreements in philosophies of political concepts and knowledge (Munck,
2019). Thus, divisiveness must be terminated by reformation of philosophies so that war
situations can come to an end. Leviathan created a controversy in science and politics by
3

challenging contemporary government and associated philosophies. Hobbes also created the idea
of having a civil society in which sovereign powers are placed at the top. However, he stated the
significance and equal priority of both law and power and thus he stated that sovereigns must
have law book in one hand and sword in other. The key perspective for such type of arrangement
of civil society is to establish peace. English civil war gave rise to strong demand for central
authority when monarchs were giving preference to power at the cost of nobility. At that time the
concept of sovereignty was re-emerged. In the same context Bodin stated that sovereignty must
be absolute and perpetual (Aguilera-Barchet, 2015). However, the idea of sovereignty became
legal and stronger as moral force during enlightenment age. During this period social contract
were began to be accepted by some nations such as France and US while in remaining part of
Europe the idea was accepted very lately. Hobbes also presented the similar concept of
sovereignty as proposed by Bodin in Leviathan which received legal status in “Peace of
Westphalia”. In conclusive frame Hobbes also presented a hypothesis for sovereignty that when
rulers failed, people have ability to form new contract for their protection. Thus, the sovereignty
of ruler is contracted by people and is bounded to maintain their physical safety by as a return
favour. The execution of Charles I was also perceived as extended negotiation to achieve
settlement with the ruler and failure in that attempt was depicted by the execution which was
taken in reluctantly and contingent manner. The ideas presented by Hobbes against sovereignty
are considered as real politic which were simply associated with the security (Jackson and Grace,
2018). The presented ideas do not have any association with the religion or morality. Through
the various events it was also declared that even in the presence of anarchy and without security
it will be impossible to mark development in economy, communication, transport and commerce.
Change in sovereignty of Europe
Sovereignty refers to power of ruling a nation. It includes specific laws and regulation
implied on state. The state that is ruled is without any interference from external bodies.
However, in Europe the concept of Sovereignty came in earlier times when each state was ruled
by King. In that there was no involvement of outer government. Due to King rule there was
change in democracy. The rise of Sovereignty practice was through Peace of Westphalia in 1648.
It started from Machiavellis Prince 1513 in which concept of Prince was described. Here,
manuscript of prince rule was written. It contained philosophy, doctrine, etc. of Sovereignty. this
was completely written in Italian language. This brought change in politics in European country.
4

King holds supreme power and this can be transferred easily. The Bartholomew’s Massacre
stated revolutionized the politics in Europe. It was done to obtain power on French. The victory
reflected that how King rule can be ended. Moreover, with times things changed. The ruler
power came to end and changed way of politics. Hobbes argued that Sovereignty is not supreme
authority. Moreover, in 20th century several philosophies were also introduced. He also said that
authority of people can be transferred permanent. Apart from it, during World War times, several
political philosophies were introduced. It was stated that Sovereignty is important in modern
authority. Here, disputes within states must be cooperated. But in Europe Sovereignty creates
insuperable difficulties.
Thus, there was shift in Sovereignty. In this rulership technique also influenced on it. The
dominance power of King made allowed transfer of power. It is argued that Sovereignty is
required to make things easy. With change in France and Italy in entire Europe political scenario
changed. The monarch was given preference more on basis of authority. In this way, state was
controlled. So, other state also started forcing to change rulership technique. This allowed other
state to get interfere in their politics. It highly impacted on other states. King and Prince were
given more authority. The Prince casts harsh light on politics but cynical light is justified as well.
It has been evaluated that the three incidents reflect how Sovereignty was followed in
ancient times. Also, how people dominance resulted in changing power of King. Besides this, the
technique of rulership was issue due to which politics changed. The interference of external
parties impacted on people. This is because they brought new rules and laws due to which
Sovereignty was difunctionalised. In addition, power of sovereign state was complete democratic
notion of accountability. There are many challenges that occurred in ancient Europe. In British
concept of Sovereignty is related to power. Along with it, EU follows specific legislation
provision. It is separated from UK. So, when European countries changes their policies, it
impacts on UK as well. The laws and legislation are formed. Likewise, supreme power remains
in hand of EU. However, transfer of power refers from parliament to EU is amendment. It
enabled in identifying power and on basis of that laws are formed. Additionally, with authority
comes power. Therefore, Prince possess more power and authority. There are things related to
how rulership technique affect on state. The way of communication, forming policies, etc.
depends on King technique. When authority is transferred it refers to change in rulership
technique. The key perspective for civil society is to establish peace. English civil war gave rise
5

to strong demand for central authority when monarchs were giving preference to power at the
cost of nobility.
CONCLUSION
It can be concluded that Sovereignty means to rule a state without having interference of
outside parties. Each case states that how it was followed in ancient times, how power of state
impacted on politics, etc. Also, practice of Sovereignty started in early 15th century. With
evolution in time, European Sovereignty evolved. This changed the context of authority in
different states of Europe. It started focusing towards formal and legal Sovereignty. Thus, there
was changes in views of people and government. A new status of British legal system was
emerged. Maritian argued that Christian philosophers of Europe highly criticised Sovereignty.
with rise in state power and authority should be limited.
6

REFERENCES
Books and journals
Jackson, M. and Grace, D., 2018. Machiavelliana: The Living Machiavelli in Modern
Mythologies. BRILL.
Aguilera-Barchet, B., 2015. The Apogee of Royal Power: Absolute Monarchy (The Sixteenth
and Seventeenth Centuries). In A History of Western Public Law (pp. 211-256). Springer,
Cham.
Munck, T., 2019. Conflict and Enlightenment: Print and Political Culture in Europe, 1635–
1795. Cambridge University Press.
Constantinidou, N., 2017. Responses to religious division, c. 1580-1620: public and private,
divine and temporal. Brill.
Jouanna, A., 2016. The Saint Bartholomew’s Day Massacre: The mysteries of a crime of state
(24 August 1572).
Waymack, A., 2018. Paradoxes, Pibrac and Phalaris: Reading beyond Sidney's Silence on the St.
Bartholomew's Day Massacre. Sidney Journal. 36(2).
Konnert, M. W., 2017. St Bartholomew and its aftermath. In Local Politics in the French Wars
of Religion. (pp. 123-144). Routledge.
7

8

9

10

11