Comparing the Bible with Machiavelli’s The Prince

 
Project description
This is the topic

In Chapter 13 of The Prince, Machiavelli offers his version of the story of David and Goliath. It deliberately departs in obvious ways from that of the Bible (I Samuel 17), and of course the context of Machiavelli’s treatment differs from that of the Bible. State the important differences between the Machiavellian and Biblical accounts, and explain the significance of those differences. (For what purpose does David act? Upon what does he depend?) What light is Machiavelli’s version intended to shed on the full meaning of his injunction to use “one’s own arms”?

Note: When writing your paper, please bear in mind the following. Machiavelli is not attempting to “prove” anything with this example; examples rarely “prove” anything. He is allowing careful readers to deepen their understanding of what he means by the term “one’s own arms.” Second, Machiavelli could have used one of thousands of historical examples, without any changes, if he merely wished to give us an example of someone using his own arms. Please do not suppose, therefore, that Machiavelli is, like some hack journalist, “distorting” the David and Goliath story in order to “make it fit” his argument, or to “support” a pet “theory.” Try instead to discern and present what the Bible intends to teach its readers with the story, and then to understand the significance of Machiavelli’s changes to the story, and how those changes help us better to understand the full meaning of “one’s own arms,” and hence what Machiavelli is teaching over and against the Bible.