GONZAGA-IN-FLORENCE SYLLABUS - SUMMER 2015
Course:
Credits:
Instructor:
Machiavelli and the Romans (Pols 345)
3 credits
Dr Bernard Gbikpi, PhD ([email protected])
Study Abroad, 502 E. Boone Ave. Spokane, WA 99258-0085 – (800) 440-5391 – www.gonzaga.edu/studyabroad - [email protected]
OFFICE HOURS:
SCHEDULE:
By appointment
MTWTH 10:00 – 11:35 am
PREREQUISITES: None
COURSE DESCRIPTION
The course offers a thorough reading of The Prince and of excerpts from the Discourses on the Ten
First Books of Titus Livius, as well as a reading of scholarly articles about these books and the main
topics and issues they contain.
The course includes a visit to Machiavelli’s then property and place of exile at San Andrea in
Percussina where he wrote The Prince -15 kms from south Florence.
COURSE OBJECTIVES
This course intends to introduce the students to Machiavelli’s political thought and “pessimistic
humanism” and to familiarize them with his Renaissance historical context, with some key notions
such as those of fortuna and virtù, with his doctrine of imitation, his veneration for the Romans, and
his republicanism, as well as with his legacy to contemporary political thought and political science.
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
Students should be able to address most questions about Machiavelli’s political thought contained in
The Prince and in the Discourses, and be familiar with the main interpretations of, and disputes about,
these books and notably about the many bridges that exist between them. Students should also be able
to make cogent connections between Machiavelli’s political thought and the 21st century political
actuality and political thought.
TEACHING METHOD
Sessions mainly consist in discussions: a) on a group of chapters from The Prince and the Discourses;
or b) on a commentary article of the day; and c) in lectures that recapitulates the main themes
discussed through the chapters and readings.
TEACHING COMMITMENT
I aim at obtaining serious and joyous interactive discussions in class on the basis of everybody’s
actual knowledge of the reading of the day. In my experience, such readings and discussions are an
effective pedagogical tool for learning and practicing political thought, its methods, its concepts, and
Machiavelli’s political thought in particular. Not the least, when successful, each class becomes an
agreeable time and nice record for everybody. On my behalf it requires well prepared courses and
thorough comments of all the students’ written pieces. On the students behalf it requires the reading of
the assigned texts, their written review and their active discussion.
DECORUM
Cell-phones, e-mail boxes, and web browsers must be off as we are in class for encountering and
exchanging with “real” people.
Gonzaga-in-Florence – Summer 2015 - Pols 345: Machiavelli and the Romans (3 credits) Prof. Bernard Gbikpi
ATTENDANCE POLICY
Students are presumed to have sufficient maturity to recognize their responsibility for regular class
attendance. Gonzaga University’s standard policy on absences stipulates that the maximum allowable
absence is two class hours (100 minutes) for each class credit. My course being a three credit course
and being scheduled to meet for 1.5 hours each class the maximum allowable absence is three classes
in the semester. The grade given for exceeding absences is a “V”, which has the same effect as “F”
(Fail) and is counted in the GPA. This outcome can be appealed to the Dean. Please, I need you to
give me the precise reason for any of these two absences. For any absence that is not due to illness or
extraordinary event the participation grade for the missed class will be 0.
COURSE GRADING
Daily readings’ outlines count for 25% of the total grade
Oral participation counts for 25% of the total grade.
The mid-term exam and the final exam contribute each to 25% of the total grade. They consist in two
parts: a take-home review paper and an essay in class.
THE DAILY READINGS
The daily readings must be outlined. Outlines are a thorough restatement of the reading (chapters
from The Prince and the Discourses and/or journal article) and a thoughtful reaction to them. There
is no required length for the outline as it depends on the readings that are outlined. And there is no
special requirement for the reaction besides being reflective and besides their ability to launch and
nourish the discussion.
THE REVIEW PAPER
Each student is required to handle two review papers in the semester of about 4 pages.
The review paper is a thoughtful account of the assigned piece of writing you have read. The point
of the review is to analytically restate the argument(s) and the contents of the reading, to discuss it,
and to propose research issue and question and bibliographical sources for further research. Your
review paper should have the following structure:
1) Report the complete bibliographical reference of the piece you are reviewing: author(s), year
of publication, title of the article, name of the journal, volume number, issue number, page
numbers, and the author(s)’s professional position.
2) The issue and main argument(s): a. What is the issue discussed in the writing? b. Formulate the
argument into a few sentences. Or what is the author trying to convince us of?
3) How does the author lead the argument? or What the demonstration consists in? a. Describe in
one paragraph the structure of the article; (the article includes n sections: an introduction (pp.);
section 1 entitled (pp.); section 2 entitled (pp.); etc… b. Restate the content of the article section by
section (and sub-section by sub-section). If necessary, identify by yourself sections in the article.
The scope of this exercise is to follow and restate the author’s reasoning step by step.
4) We aim to make an assessment of the argument in two parts that are strengths and weaknesses.
Indicative questions toward such assessment are: Does the argument convince us? Is only part of it
convincing? Why? Is it cogent/logical? Do we think it helps us understanding something
fundamental about the issue at stake? Is there any particular assumption that is important for the
argument that we think should be strengthened? Are the empirical facts reported by the author
relevant, accurate? Are they any alternative or counter-arguments mentioned by the author
her/himself? Does the author use particular words or concepts that are particularly important for
his/her argument/demonstration? What does s/he mean by these words or concepts? Is s/he
consistent in her/his use of them?
5) Further research: Write down a research question that you are genuinely curious about and
that stems from the article’s argument. A research question should reflect an underlying tension
and should force to weigh evidence and compare different opinions. State your thesis that is what
kind of argument you hope to make through your research question. Identify and indicate at least
2
Gonzaga-in-Florence – Summer 2015 - Pols 345: Machiavelli and the Romans (3 credits) Prof. Bernard Gbikpi
two bibliographical sources that are likely to address your question. Say why you think the sources
in question are apposite. Such sources must, preferably, be found among those reported by the
article under review for this is one main sign that your research question copes with the author’s
argument. Fully report their bibliographical references.
NB: Specific questions for writing the assessment and/or the research question may also be
assigned by the instructor.
Review paper grading
Full point (FP): the work well addresses each point of the review.
¾ of the point (3/4 pt): some point of the review is addressed wrongly, superficially or not at all.
Half point (HP): many points of the review are addressed wrongly, superficially or not at all.
¼ of the point (1/4 pt): there are more points of the review addressed wrongly, superficially or
not at all than points that are well addressed.
0 point: The work was not done
ORAL PARTICIPATION
Oral participation consists in participating to the discussion. It basically consists in “voicing” the
issues and arguments the reading has triggered in you and to react to each other’s argument.
Participation grading
The point on participation (FP) is granted if you have expressed your opinion on any point of the
argument (HP) and engaged somebody else’s argument (HP).
EXAMS
They consist in an essay that elaborates upon an argument provided in an assigned journal article
on Machiavelli’s The Prince or/and Discourses that you have read and reviewed in preparation of
the exam.
Basically the essay is the extension of the points 4 of a review paper, i.e. an extended assessment of
the article’s argument.
The essay should be structured like the review paper but with your argument, that is: a title of
yours; the issue and argument of your essay; an outline of it; the unfolding of your argument
along entitled sections; a conclusion that reassesses your point and that provides bibliographical
clues for further reflection. It should include a bibliography.
NB: A specific questions for writing your essay may also be assigned by the instructor.
Essay grading
The essay will be evaluated along the clarity of its argument, the clarity of its structure, the
consistency of its follow-up, its engagement with the literature of the field, and the perspectives it
opens for further reflection.
FINAL GRADES CONVERSION
92.5 – 100
=
A
90.0 - 92.4
=
A87.5 – 89.9
=
B+
82.5 – 87.4
=
B
80.0 – 82.4
=
B75.5 – 79.9
=
C+
72.5 – 77.4
=
C
70.0 – 72.4
=
C67.5 – 69.9
=
D+
60.0 – 67.4
=
D
0.00 – 59.9
=
F
Exceeding absences
V
Excellent
Good
Average
Poor
Failing
Failing
4.0
3.7
3.3
3.0
2.7
2.3
2.0
1.7
1.3
1.0
0.0
0.0
ACADEMIC HONESTY
3
Gonzaga-in-Florence – Summer 2015 - Pols 345: Machiavelli and the Romans (3 credits) Prof. Bernard Gbikpi
Academic honesty is essential to education and represents the bond of trust between the university, the
instructor and the student.
Academic dishonesty is any action by which a student seeks to claim credit for the intellectual effort
of another person or uses unauthorized materials or fabricated information in any academic exercise.
It includes unauthorized assistance in tests and examinations; intentionally impeding or damaging the
academic work of others; submitting another person’s work as your own, or providing work for this
purpose; submitting work of your own that has been substantially edited and revised by another
person, or providing such an editing and revision service for others; submitting material from a source
(books, articles, internet sites) without proper citation and bibliographic reference; paraphrasing
material from a source without appropriate reference and citation; submitting substantially the same
piece of work in more than one course without the explicit consent of all the instructors concerned;
assisting other students in any of the above acts; plagiarism, defined as claiming intellectual property
on somebody else's work, in other words as cultural theft. Written assignments will be submitted to
the plagiarism detection procedures of TurnItIn.com., activated on Blackboard.
Students who are academically dishonest will receive “0”, zero on the work in question or a failing
grade for the course as a whole, depending on the importance of the work to the overall course grade
and the judgment of the instructor. A plagiarized assignment/paper, research project, etc will be
graded 0 (zero) and sent to the Main Campus accompanied by a report.
SPECIAL ACCOMMODATION FOR STUDENTS WITH LEARNING DISABILITIES
Documented learning disabilities or other medically certified problems that need special
accommodation for any of the student's expected academic performances will be treated with the due
attention.
REQUIRED READINGS
- Peter Bondanella and Mark Musa, 1979, The Portable Machiavelli, New York, Penguin Books
(paperback ISBN-13-978-0-14-015092-6) (required)
- Other required readings are available on Blackboard and listed here below in the Course
Outline and schedule section.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
- Machiavelli, The Prince, translated and edited by Robert M. Adams, 1992, London & New
York, W. W. Norton & Company, (paperback ISBN-13: 978-0393962208)
- Machiavelli, The Chief Works and Others, translated by Allan H. Gilbert, 3 vol., Durham, N.C., Duke
University Press, 1989, 2nd ed.
-
Machiavelli, The sweetness of power : Machiavelli's Discourses & Guicciardini's
Considerations, translated by James V. Atkinson and David Sices, Dekalb, Ill. : Northern
Illinois University Press, 2002, (paperback ISBN-13: 978-0875806181)
Most Recent
- Ryan Alan, 2014, On Machiavelli: The Search for Glory, New York – London, Liveright
Classic (978-0-87140-705-4)
- Vatter, Miguel, 2013, Machiavelli’s The Prince, London, New Delhi, New York, Sydney,
Bloomsbury (978-0-8264-9877-9)
- Benner, Erica, 2013, Machiavelli’s Prince: A New Reading, Oxford, Oxford University Press
- Najemy John M., ed., 2010, The Cambridge Companion to Machiavelli, Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press, (9780521678469 (pbk.)
- McCormick John P., 2010, Machiavellian Democracy, New York, Cambridge University
Press, (9780521530903 (pbk.)
Historical Context
4
Gonzaga-in-Florence – Summer 2015 - Pols 345: Machiavelli and the Romans (3 credits) Prof. Bernard Gbikpi
-
Gilbert Felix, Machiavelli and Guicciardini: Politics and History in Sixteenth Century
Florence, New York, Norton, 1984
Hale J.R., Florence and the Medici, London, Phoenix Press, 2001
Rubinstein Nicolai, The Government of Florence under the Medici 1434-1494, 2nd ed., Oxford,
Oxford University Press, 1998
Biographies
- Vivanti Corrado, Niccolò Machiavelli: An Intellectual Biography, Princeton & Oxford,
Princeton University Press, 2013
- Quentin Skinner, Machiavelli. A Very Short Introduction, Oxford, Oxford Univ. Press, 2000
(paperback ISBN-13: 978-019285407-0)
- Najemy John M., Between Friends: Discourses of Desire and Power in the MachiavelliVettori Letters of 1513-1515, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1993
- Viroli Maurizio, Niccolò’s Smile, New York, Hill and Wand, 2000
Scholarly Studies
- Jensen de Lamar, ed., Machiavelli: Cynic, Patriot, or Political Scientist, Boston, D.C. Heath,
1960
- Bock Gisela, Quentin Skinner, and Maurizio Viroli, eds., Machiavelli and Republicanism,
Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1990
- Patricia Vilches and Gerald Seaman, eds., Seeking Real Truths: Multidisciplinary Perspectives
on Machiavelli, Leiden and Boston, Brill, 2007 (9789004158771)
- On line academic IR resources:
Machiavelli • The Prince • The Common Sense of Politics (full documentary)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdFaeCPKTks&feature=related
- Bibliographic Databases
Academic Search Complete
JSTOR
5
Gonzaga-in-Florence – Summer 2015 - Pols 345: Machiavelli and the Romans (3 credits) Prof. Bernard Gbikpi
COURSE OUTLINE AND SCHEDULE
May 18, 2015
 Introduction to the course
 Film The Prince (I)
 Discussion of the film and identification of main topics (I)
May 19, 2015
 Film The Prince (II)
 Discussion of the film and identification of main topics (II)
 The Various Interpretations of The Prince
 Background reading: Isaiah Berlin, (1979), “The Question of Machiavelli,”
(Blackboard)
May 20, 2015
 Discussion of students’ own preferred interpretation
 Historical and political background - Machiavelli’s Life
 Background reading: Peter Bondanella & Mark Musa, (1978), “Introduction: An
Essay on Machiavelli,” (Textbook)
May 21, 2015
 Reading and discussing Letter to Francesco Vettori, 10 December 1513 (126-29)
and The Dedicatory Letter: Niccolò Macchiavelli to His Magnificence Lorenzo de’
Medici (Outline is due)
 Background reading: Mark Jurdjevic, 2014, Virtue, Fortune, and Blame in
Machiavelli’s Life and The Prince, Social Research: An International Quarterly,
81, 1, 1-30 (Blackboard)
May 25, 2015
 Reading and discussing The Prince: Chapters I-V (Outline is due)
 Background reading: Ernst Cassirer, 1973, “Implications of the New Theory of the
State,” (Blackboard)
May 26, 2015
 Reading and discussing The Prince: Chapters VI-VIII (Outline is due)
 Background reading: John McCormick, 2014, The Enduring Ambiguity of
Machiavellian Virtue: Cruelty, Crime, and Christianity in The Prince, Social
Research: An International Quarterly, 81, 1, 133-64 (Blackboard)
May 27, 2015
 Reading and discussing The Prince: Chapters IX-XI (Outline is due)
 Background reading: John T. Scott and Vickie B. Sullivan, 1994, Patricide and the
Plot of The Prince: Cesare Borgia and Machiavelli's Italy, The American Political
Science Review, 88, 4, 887-900 (Blackboard)
May 28, 2015
 Reading and discussing The Prince: Chapters XII-XIV (Outline is due)
 Background reading: Mikael Hornqvist, 2010, “Machiavelli’s Military Project and
the Art of War,” in John M. Najemy, ed., The Cambridge Companion to
Machiavelli, Cambridge, CUP, pp.112-27 (Blackboard)
June 01, 2015
6
Gonzaga-in-Florence – Summer 2015 - Pols 345: Machiavelli and the Romans (3 credits) Prof. Bernard Gbikpi
 Reading and discussing The Prince: Chapters XV-XVIII (Outline is due)
 Background reading: Catherine Zuckert, 2014, Machiavelli and the End of Nobility
in Politics, Social Research: An International Quarterly, 81, 1, 85-106
(Blackboard)
June 03, 2015
 Reading and discussing The Prince: Chapters XIX-XX (Outline is due)
 Background reading: Nathan Tarcov, 2007, “Freedom, Republics and Peoples in
Machiavelli’s Prince,” in Richard L. Velkley (ed.), Freedom and the Human
Person, Washington DC, Catholic University of America Press, 122-42
(Blackboard)
June 04, 2015
 Reading and discussing The Prince: Chapters XXI-XXIII (Outline is due)
June 08, 2015
 Reading and discussing The Prince: Chapters XXIV-XXVI (Outline is due)
 Discussion: Peter Breiner, 2008, Machiavelli's "new prince" and the primordial
moment of acquisition, Political Theory, 36, 1, 66-92 (review paper is due)
June 09, 2015
 Review paper is due - Mid-term essay at Machiavelli’s property at San Andrea in
Percussina --15 kms from south Florence-- where he wrote The Prince
June 10, 2015
 Introduction to the Discourses
June 11, 2015
 Reading and discussing The Discourses: Introduction – Book I chapters 1 to 10
(Outline of 2 and 6 is due)
 Background reading: Nikola Regent, 2011, Machiavelli: Empire, Virtù and the Final
Downfall, History of Political Thought, 32, 5, 751-72 (Blackboard)
June 15, 2015
 Reading and discussing The Discourses: Book I chapters 11 to 15 and 27 (Outline is
due)
 Background reading John Najemy, 1999, Papirius and the Chickens or Machiavelli
on the Necessity of Interpreting Religion, Journal of the History of Ideas, 60, 4, pp.
659-681 (Blackboard)
June 16, 2015
 Reading and discussing The Discourses: Book I chapters 28-29-37 (Outline is due)
 Background reading: Michelle T. Clarke, 2013, The Virtues of Republican
Citizenship in Machiavelli’s Discourses on Livy, The Journal of Politics, 75, 2,
317-29 (Blackboard)
June 17, 2015
 Reading and discussing The Discourses: Book I chapters 55, 58-59 (outline is due)
June 18, 2015
 Discussing: John McCormick, 2001, Machiavellian Democracy Controlling Elites
with Ferocious Populism, The American Political Science Review, 95, 2, 297-313
(Review paper is due)
7
Gonzaga-in-Florence – Summer 2015 - Pols 345: Machiavelli and the Romans (3 credits) Prof. Bernard Gbikpi
June 22, 2015
 Reading and discussing The Discourses: Book II chapter 13and Book III Chapters 8
and 9 (Outline is due)
 Background reading: Cary J. Nederman, 2000, Machiavelli and Moral Character:
Principality, Republic and the Psychology of Virtù, History of Political Thought,
21, 3, 349-64
June 23, 2015
 Make-up session
June 25, 2015
 Discussion of the article for the final (TBA)
June 26, 2015
 Final exam
8