Machiavelli and Odysseus

author and Leadership The Connection of Power and Leadership between The Odyssey and The Prince look Assign ment Stories in Diverse Media LAPS/HUMA 1780 Prepared for Dr. Gillian Helfield Mr. Julian Manyoni Prepared by Samuel James Ysip 212-697-983 Power and Leadership Power and handing duck soup a big role in accomplishing the objectives of a team. A soulfulness having these deuce attri merelyes cornerst hotshot direct a group of passel towards achieving their putting surface goal. These two components of consent are in addition essential to each other(a) in order for the leader to be successful.Power is a soulfulnesss energy to influence others and lead is a persons talent to travel by a group of people to achieve their common goal. A person that has occasion scarcely with f on the whole out the capacity to ask the compensate terminations for the team append definitely fail to lead a team to their goal and a person without the influence on others but with th e talent to lead a team entrust sure non be adequate to(p) to d receive the qualities of a great leader to a group. Homers The Odyssey and Machiavellis The Prince are two books that both contain themes about world-beater and leaders.Homers The Odyssey contains information about Odysseus lead capabilities during his journey home to Ithaca and how he re maintainioned on dissimilar pips that guide critical leading decisions. It in addition contains the status of his leadership in his homeland and what kind of monarchy he has. On the other hand, Machiavellis The Prince gives out information and guidelines on what a Machiavellian leader should be and how he should react in different kinds of situations. It as well contains different theories on how the construction of a monarchy affects a ings superiority in his experience moguldom. Throughout Odysseus journey, he do enquiryable decisions that contradict the directions of Machiavelli. By non following the guidelines o f Machiavelli on leadership and billet management, as a gist, Odysseus failed to lead his team safely concealment to Ithaca. Through Machiavellis theory, on could withal point that because of the structure of Odysseus poovedom in Ithaca, it resulted to the f dearful men in Achaea to condense advantage of his absence, thus resulting to the exploitation of his land.The disobedience of Odysseus f body process elements to his orders resulting to their death, the act of contempt of Eurylochus once morest Odysseus and the effects of policy-ma pansy structure in Ithaca to Odysseus supremacy as king are the three factors that constitute the king and leadership issues in The Odyssey which are connectedly criticized and discussed through the guidelines and theories of Machiavelli in The Prince. The disobedience of Odysseus conclave members to his order of non take in the cattle of Helios which resulted to their death is the out deduce of Odysseus failure to apply the teachi ng of Machiavelli about being kindnessate or beastly.In chapter seventeen of The Prince, Machiavelli tell that, A ruler mustnt worry about being labelled inhumane when its a question of keeping his subjects allegiant and united . . . he leave prove more than compassionate than the leader whose excessive compassion leads to public disorder, muggings and murder. (65). Odysseus compassion towards Eurylochus a high ranking conclave member that insults him and ceaselessly tries to lure Odysseus crowd members to dis succeed his orders, resulted to the death of the crew members and more over delayed his return to Ithaca.Eurylochus exploitations in the story began to develop when they arrived at the island of Aeaea. Eurylochus disa esurience with Odysseus decision to go derriere to Circes palace to take away his men rest aft(prenominal) a long travel. He then insulted Odysseus by saying, So in addition it happened with the water flea, when our companions went into his yard, and the bold Odysseus was of their company for it was by this mans recklessness that these in addition perished. (10. 435-438). These two incidents alone exhaust rich grounds for Odysseus to take actions on Eurylochus obvious disregard of his say-so.Odysseus considered kill him by taking his head away but he realized that he is related to Eurylochus by unification and his men were as well as able to stop him by pleading to him. This opposite is an evidence of Odysseus showing incorrect compassion towards Eurylochus. Although Odysseus showed a sign of dismay, he never really punished him which led to more disobedience by Eurylochus. It in addition showed that he considers his mens view of his actions. His actions confirmed that he would rather show compassion than cruelty by being stop by his men from killing Eurylochus through their pleading.By not taking the inevitable actions on Eurylochus behaviour, he was able to twine Odysseus to land on the island of Thrinakia w present Helios keeps his cattle notwithstanding Circes advice to stay away from Helios belongings. When they landed on the Island where the cattle are, Eurylochus again stirred up trouble by persuading the crew members that its bonny to eat the cattle of Helios while Odysseus was asleep. Eurylochus said, . . . hunger is the sorriest way to die and invade fate . . . let us cut out the best of Helios cattle and sacrifice them to the immortals who hold wide heaven . . . nd if we ever come back to Ithaca . . . we go out build a rich temple to the cheerfulness God Helios. (12. 342-346). This final incident that Eurylochus was able stir up became the main(prenominal) reason of the crew members death and in deal manner Eurylochus. Odysseus should have make the right decision of eliminating Eurylochus when he first started to disregard his superiority on the Island of Aeaea. Odysseus overly showed a sign weakness in his leadership when Eurylochus was able to persuade him to land on an island where the temptations are apparent despite the group and Eurylochus constant disobedience and the crews inability to avoid temptation.In the book Machiavelli on Modern Leadership, Michael A. Leeden stated that Without fear of punishment, men will not obey laws that force them to act contrary to their passions. (115). Odysseus deficiency of implementing punishment to his subjects made his crew men, particularly Eurylochus, more attracted to temptations and more convenient of violating not only Odysseus orders but as well as the gods. Leeden also stated in his book that to be an trenchant leader, the most prudent method is to ensure that your people are afeared(predicate) of you.To instill that fear, you must show up that those who attack you will not survive. (126). This contention criticises Odysseus response to Eurylochus disobedience. Eurylochus challenged and ridiculed Odysseus leadership and countenance during their stay on the island of Aeaea. He also que stioned Odysseus decision of not wanting to land on the island of Thrinakia although he was able to persuade him anyway. Odysseus failed to respond with effective force on these incidents which resulted to more disobedience. The establishment of uthority that Odysseus implemented over his subjects during their journey resulted to his mens d ownfall and also his. By not applying the teachings of Machiavelli on how a leader should use office to appropriately perform cruelness or compassion to achieve a better and more disciplined domain, Odysseus showed unnecessary compassion to the wrong person a sign of a weak leadership, thus resulting to the death of his square crew and further delayed his return to Ithaca. Odysseus leadership flaws do not stop on his lack of control over his subjects.He also made terrible judgements that led to the death of some of his companions that consequently resulted to the lost of their sureness to his leadership. Because of these bad decisions, Euryl ochus Odysseus wink in command, found the courage to challenge his leadership. In The Prince, Machiavelli stated that, . . . when there is no threat from outside, a ruler must take care that his subjects dont start conspiring against him. He can guard against this by making sure he isnt despised or despised and that people are happy with him (73).One reason of Eurylochus junction of displeasure with Odysseus leadership is because of Odysseus ill-conceivedness and stubbornness. On the Island of Cyclopes before Odysseus took his men to the cave, he stated that my proud heart had an sentiment that presently I would encounter a man who was endowed with great strength, and wild, with no uncoiled k presentlyledge of laws or any good customs. (9. 213-215). On their way to the daphnia cave, Odysseus knew himself that danger is on their way except he still made careless decisions when they get there.Instead of quickly taking all the things they needed intimate the cave and despite his mens persuasions, he still distinguishable to wait for Polyphemus to arrive because he personally precious to try his helping if the Cyclops would actually welcome them inside. Odysseus stated that From the start my companions spoke to me and begged me to take some of the cheeses, come back again, and the next time to drive the lambs and kids from their pens, . . . but I would not listen to them . . . not until I could shoot the breeze him, understand if he would give me presents. (9. 224-229).The fact that Odysseus is a known tactician, one could argue that his companions simple strategy is far much better than Odysseus naive persuasion of trying his luck with the Cyclops. Although Odysseus cunnings got him out of the cave afterward getting trapped, the consequences of his foolish curiosity in regard to the death of his comrades and the lost of trust of his comrades, outmatch the benefits of his cunnings. Odysseus stubbornness and foolishness led to the death of six of his men and this gave Eurylochus one of the reasons to go against his authority.The incident on their way out of Island of the Cyclopes also added fuel to the fire when Odysseus provoked Polyphemus by shouting to him. His crew members yet again pleaded to him, Hard one, why are you trying once more to stir up this savage man . . . (9. 494-495). They also mentioned that because of Odysseus provocative actions, the Cyclops threw big rocks at them and led the ship back to the shore and close to got them caught and get killed. This declaration by his crew members is a sign of their dis discoverment with Odysseus leadership.It shows that they are concerned with how Odysseus constantly putting them in harms way by being out of control. Another sign of their dissatisfaction is when the judgement of unfairness came into their minds when they foolishly opened the bag of wind that sent them back to Aiolian Island. His companions stated that Odysseus is bringing home with him handome treas ures . . . while we, who have bypast through everything he has on the same venture, come home with our give empty. (10. 40-43).This action by the crew members shows a symptom of sedition against a leader that is supposed be trusted and respected by his subjects. It also signifies that Odysseus has lost his connection with his crew men and they dont see him anymore as one of them. In an article by Elihu Rose, he claimed that Mutiny begins with grievances over some existing or periled condition. The question then may be posed as to whether those grievances, legitimate or not, were ultimately addressed and, if so, to what degree . . . (572).This statement supports the idea that revolt is thence the result of lack of acknowledgement by the people who are responsible for(p) to address the internal issues of an organization. It applies to Odysseus constant disregard of his crew members pleadings which resulted to him putting his crew members into situations that they didnt wish t o go through. check to Machiavelli, . . . one of the most correctly preventive measures against conspiracies is simply not being hated by legal age of people. People planning a conspiracy must believe that killing the ruler will be popular . . Eurylochus knew the disappointment of the crew members on Odysseus leadership. This gave him the further courage to voice out his displeasure on Odysseus authority knowing that the crew members also have an issue with the way Odysseus handled situations. It also gave him the courage and the capability to persuade the crew members to disobey Odysseus orders of not eating the cattle of Helios. Machiavellis advice to a king of keeping his subjects satisfied or simply not despise him to avoid contempt or mutiny certainly didnt apply to Odysseus leadership.The stubbornness of Odysseus along with his inability to bring into being a cohesive relationship among his crew resulted into disappointment inside his good deal which paved the way for Eu rylochus to contempt against his authority. Lastly, the capability of the noble men to threaten his ass and exploit his belongings could be argued as the result of the semipolitical structure of Odysseus kingdom. Chapter four of The Prince discusses the advantages of appointing parsons and the disadvantages of a kingdom with nobles.Machiavelli stated that, These barons have their own lands and their own subjects who recognize the barons as their masters and are naturally loyal to them. Where a state is governed by a king and his ministers the king is more powerful since he is the only person in the state whom people recognize as superior. When they obey someone else it is only because he is minister or take awayicial and they have no special loyalty to him (16). In other words, Machiavelli suggests that because the nobles have their own power inside a kings monarchy, theyre more likely to disobey or be mutinous against a kings authority.On the other hand, a monarchy that has min isters sooner of barons, gives the king the security of not having any defiance against his superiority. In The Odyssey, Achaea is a land filled nobles. It is known in the story that Odysseus did not appoint any ministers or any sort of authority to secure his throne in Ithaca from any threats while he is gone to war. This signifies that his power over the people of Ithaca is not absolute or in other words, the foot of his power is fragile once a certain threat to his power comes in.In The Prince, Machiavelli claimed that the nobles are more likely to be corrupted by abroad forces because they are hard to please and are always eager for a change in leadership. This suggests that even if Odysseus came back to Ithaca on time, his authority is not secured from any internal or external forces (e. g. the nobles or other kings) that wanted to challenge it and much more worst if he actually have died in the war. In The Odyssey, Telemachus stated that, It is not bad to be a king . . . in fact there are many other Achaian princes, young and old, in sea girt Ithaca, any of who might hold this position, now hat the great Odysseus has perished. (1. 393-396). This statement by Telemachus son of Odysseus, is a halt that Odysseus throne is in fact open for any internal or external forces (i. e. suitors Inside or outside of Ithaca) to occupy without any prohibition. According to Machiavelli, . . . there will always be barons ready to assume authority when stipulations swing their way . . . (18). Odysseus absence in Ithaca and the inexistence of authority gave the noblemen the vista to do whatever they want in his land, consequently giving the noble men their venture to finally occupy his throne.An spokesperson of this is the persistence of the Achaean noble men to take his throne by marrying his wife Penelope, despite her obvious intension of not wanting to marry. Another result of lack of authority in Ithaca is the constant abuse of his property in the hands of the noble men by uncontrollably devouring his livestock and wine. Although Telemachus attempt to appeal to the suitors by holding an assembly with all the suitors and the Achean elders, it was not enough to get the suitors out of his land. Telemachus stated that We have no man here such as Odysseus was, to drive this curse from the household.We ourselves are not the men to do it . . . not men well seasoned in battle. (2. 58-61). Although Telemachus has the right to be aggravated with the suitors spoilage of his belongings, there is no authority or power in his kingdom beyond his capability that could demand the suitors out of his land. Without Odysseus, the noblemen hold the power on the land and are pretty much entitled to enforce their own rules. In the book Greek policy-making Thought by Ryan Balot, he stated that, Odysseus was like a get to his people who protected them from foreign enemies, from less restrained aristocrats . . When Odysseus left Ithaca, everything went downhill , because of the greed and hubris of wealthy well-born men without a sense of decency . . . Meanwhile, the political community could exert some though not enough pressure on these aristocrats to quicken their behaviour. . . as long as Odysseus was gone, those who would normally have been in scud were left with pious hopes that the gods would rescue them. Therefore . . . the well being of Ithaca depended on Odysseus return and his forcible reassertion of his power. (32).This statement by Balot supports the argument that the inexistence of ministers who work as the second in command of the king makes the monarchy vulnerable not only from the nobles but also from external threats. Without the authority of appointed ministers who play as the second in command of the king, it makes the noble suitors subsequent to Odysseus in the hierarchy of power in Ithaca. With the little gap between the powers of a king and noblemen, it makes it easier for the noblemen to enforce their authority in a kingdom when the power of a king is inexistent.Balots view of the situation in Ithaca also supports the idea that Odysseus authority in his kingdom is not supreme amongst all the people under his authority and it is just a matter of chance before the noblemen defy him. Machiavellis theory about the advantages of ministers and the disadvantages of having noblemen in a monarchy certainly applies to the structure of Odysseus monarchy. With the kind of monarchy that Ithaca has, Odysseus superiority in his land is undeniably vulnerable from the defiance of the ambitious and opportunistic noblemen.The inexistence of legitimate authorities like the ministers who play as the second in command of the king to provide governance all over the land and also as the kings safeguard from any mutiny makes the supremacy of Odysseus as a king of Ithaca questionable. A leaders utilization of both power and leadership is the sole reason for an organization to succeed or fail. A leader that lacks e ither one of these elements is most likely to fail on directing a group to achieve the groups common objective including the leaders own personal goal.The issues of power and leadership throughout Odysseus journey in The Odyssey are linked to the ideologies and guidelines of Machiavellis The Prince on how a king can efficiently apply his power and leadership to maintain a well-organized and successful monarchy and what kinds of circumstances can affect a kings supremacy to his own kingdom. Throughout Odysseus journey, he showed politeness of leadership that contradicted the guidelines of Machiavelli of how a king should react in different situations that involve a critical leadership decisions.Odysseus too much compassion towards his crew members contradicts the advice of Machiavelli on why it is better for the leader to be feared than loved. His inappropriate compassion towards his crew members led to their rebellion against his authority which consequently led to their own destru ction. Odysseus perhaps wanted to be viewed as a compassionate leader, then loved by his people, instead of being viewed as a cruel but effective dictator. But according to Leeden Indeed, if you are feared, your followers will always find reasons to love you. (128).Odysseus recklessness also resulted to the contempt of his second in command, Eurylochus. Machiavelli stated that a king should have the characteristics of both blur and lion to avoid traps and scare out enemies. Although there is no head that Odysseus is a courageous warrior and at the same time cunning, he showed at times that he only utilizes the qualities of a lion but lacks or disregards the qualities of a fox, thus resulting to his crew members frustration of his actions. An example is when he bravely waited for Polyphemus despite knowing the fact that hes an unlawful monster.Machiavelli stated that those kings that only rely on qualities of a lion have no idea what theyre doing. The structure of Odysseus monarc hy is also discussed in Machiavellis The Prince. Machiavellis view on why a king is better off with a monarchy with appointed ministers than a monarchy with ruling noblemen can certainly be applied to the struggle of power in his land, Ithaca. The situation in Ithaca proves that Machiavellis view on the importance of ministers and the disadvantages of having noble family in a monarchy is accurate.These issues of power and leadership in The Odyssey created the consequences that plagued Odysseus, his crewmen and his wife and son throughout the story. The rebellion of his crewmembers is the result of Odysseus failure to apply an efficient leadership along with his power, consequently resulting to his authority over his men to diminish as well. The effect of the political structure to Odysseus supremacy in Ithaca is unchangeable, thus making him an inevitable victim of an necessary circumstance.However, If Odysseus followed the guidelines of Machiavelli on how an ideal king should lead , Odysseus could have saved some of his crew members and achieved their ultimate common goal and that is returning to Ithaca safe and sound. Bibliography Balot, Ryan. Greek policy-making Thought. Blackwell Publishing, 2006. 32. Print. This text contains a thorough history of ancient Greek political thought. It examines different kinds of ancient text (e. g. The Odyssey) in order to clearly demonstrate the political thought and structure of ancient Greece during its time. It also studies the connection between politics and ethics in ancient Greece.Part of this text studies the tendencies of the noblemen to revolt against a ruler. Balot stated that the aristocrats often sought for political connection outside a kings monarchy to gain additional political connection that could maybe help them attack their own government. It also contains Balots view of the situation in Ithaca when Odysseus power is inexistent. Balot stated that Odysseus existence as a king is the only thing that hind ers the less-restrained aristocrats from doing what they wish to do in his land. Homer. The Odyssey of Homer. Trans. Richmond Lattimore. untried York harpist & Row, Publishers, Inc. , 1967. Print. The poem The Odyssey tells the story of Odysseus journey back to his kingdom after the Trojan War. It describes the trials and the consequences that Odysseus had to go through trough out his journey. This text relates to my study about Power and Leadership because it exhibits Odysseus leadership capabilities on different kinds of situations (e. g. Odysseus leadership in the island of the Cyclops) throughout his travel. This text is relevant to my argument because it contains incidents that required Odysseus to make leadership decisions.An example of these incidents is when he decided to wait for the Cyclops despite his crew members request of leaving the cave. By using these incidents in The Odyssey, it will help me apply the guidelines of Machiavelli on how a king should respond in d ifferent kinds of situations that required critical leadership decisions. Ledeen, Michael. Machiavelli on Modern Leadership. New York Truman Talley Books and St. Martins Griffin, 1999. 112-149. Print. This book studies the lessons of Machiavelli on leadership and how they can be applied to fresh politics. Michael A.Ledeens personal view on the importance of Machiavellian leadership will be used as a tool to back up my claims on why the consequences that Odysseus suffered throughout his journey were the results of his leadership decisions that contradicted the guidelines of Machiavelli. In one case in the book that indicates the importance of inserting fear in the people under ones leadership, Leeden uses George Washington as an example by illustrating how the former U. S. president used his army to control the citizens who were against the idea of paying excise tax on their liquor.Machiavelli, Niccolo. The Prince. Trans. Tim Parks. Great Britain Penguin Books Ltd, 2009. Print. This book by Machiavelli instructs the readers of the guidelines of how a Prince should lead and overcome adversaries or conflicts the Machiavellian way. It relates to my topic of Power and Leadership because it contains ideologies of how leaders should react or demonstrate power when threaten by internal or foreign forces. This text also discusses different circumstances that could affect a kings superiority in his kingdom.The effect of the political structure of a kings kingdom is an example of the topics that are discussed in this text that could be applied to the circumstance of Odysseus kingdom, Ithaca. This text will be the basis of my judgement on the rights and wrongs of Odysseus leadership. It will also be the basis of my evaluation on what Odysseus should have and should have not done on different situations throughout his travel. Rose, Elihu. The Anatomy of Mutiny. Sage. (1982) 572. Web. 25 Mar. 2013. http//afs. sagepub. com/content/8/4/561. full. pdf. This article by Rose studies the reasons of mutiny in the military.It also explains the different kinds of mutinies, how the process of mutiny starts and how to end it. It also contains examples of passed mutinies from sixteenth century French monarchy. This article is essential to the argument of why Odysseus inappropriate actions in the land of the Cyclopes have made his crewmen defeated which led to the act of contempt of Eurylochus against him. Its explanation of how mutiny starts supports the argument that Odysseus action against the will of his crewmen is the primary reason why his subordinates rebel against his authority in their journey.