Comparison between Machiavelli's Prince and Plato's RepublicMany people in history have written about ideal rulers and states and how to maintain them. The most talked about and compared works are perhaps those of Machiavelli, The Prince and Plato, The Republic. Machiavelli lived at a time when Italy was suffering from its political destruction. The Prince was written to describe the means by which a leader can gain and maintain power. In Plato's Republic, he reveals the definition of justice. Plato believed that a ruler could not be completely just unless he lived in a society that was also just. Its state and its leader were created to better understand the meaning of justice. It was not intended to be practiced like Machiavelli's. Machiavelli, recognizing this, explains that his intention is to write something true, real and useful to anyone who might read it, and not something imaginary, "for many have represented republics and principalities which, in fact, have never been known or seen." (Machiavelli 375)." Therefore, because one ruler is realistic and the other imaginary, the characteristics of Machiavelli's ruler compared to Plato's are markedly different. Machiavelli's model for his ideal prince was Cesare Borgia, also known as Duke Valentino and son of Pope Alexander VI He believed that Cesare Borgia possessed all the qualities of a prince destined to rule and maintain power in his state. He believed that politics had its own morality. There is no consideration of justice or injustice, cruelty or mercy, approval or humiliation, which should interfere with the decision to defend the state and preserve its freedom. Therefore, the only one. responsibility of the ruler/prince...... middle of paper ...... to mingle with each other (Plato 99) In The Prince, Machiavelli was speaking to a monarchical ruler and offering him advice intended? to keep this. ruler in power He believed that Cesare Borgia was the model of the perfect prince. He was able to give concrete examples of how princes ruled in his time and how they failed or succeeded in doing so. Plato, on the other hand, may have been unrealistic. Its ruler and state could only be used to better understand the meaning of justice. This could never be practiced in real life because he overlooks the fact that everyone sins and fails to mention it in his ideal ruler and state. Works Cited1) Marra, James L., Zelnick, Stephen C. and Mattson, Mark T. IH 51 Source book: Plato, The Republic, pp. 77-1062) Nicole Machiavelli, The Prince, pp. 359-386. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, Dubuque, Iowa, 1998.