A Machiavellian Manual for Charles II

[@skadiwarrior2053]

Interesting. Had never heard of that little book before today.

[@JustineBrownsBookshelf]

It’s quite an intriguing work, especially in view of the Restoration

[@JohnnyRecently]

Like your mix of history, religion, and philosophy.

[@maudietriplett]

Very good advice. In fact, QEII might well have done better by following it... particularly the “mystery” part.

[@christophmahler]

Thank You, Justine for putting this together. 0:41 I noticed that grasping the various Protestant sects, involved in the English Revolutions isn't common knowdledge. Everyone can hold apart Catholicism versus Protestantism, but it's less obvious *why the Scottish Protestant **_Presbyterians_** were in conflict with Protestant Puritan Cromwell* , to the degree that their stance mattered in later Jacobite uprisings, much more so than 'Catholicism' - which is in complete contrast to the contemporary shrill _Whig propaganda_ , still believed later e.g. by Winston Churchill, a descendant of a 'Duke of Marlborough' who climbed society by _manouvering between the factions_ of restoration and the _de facto military coup_ of 1689 by the 'Orange Order'. The period of restoration under Charles the II. - which is the showcase of how Jacobite rule could have looked like if 'Bonnie', grandson to the overthrown and slandered James the II. had marched straight into London - is also indebted to individuals like *George Monck* , 'Duke of Albemarle' - who had served Charles the I. , before leading Cromwell's troops in Scotland and Ireland - but who realized the *_increasing fragmentation_* within Cromwell's 'Commonwealth', *_perpetuating civil war_* and turning him sympathetic to the idea of monarchic restoration (which _legitimacy_ is to counter the rise of mere _tyrants_ from the lawlessness of _anarchy_ ). www.britannica.com/biography/George-Monck-1st-duke-of-Albemarle Biographies of that period are far from showing the _grotesque partisanship_ that is propagated by Whigs - then and now... When Newcastle's 'mirror of princes' is introduced as 'Machiavellian', one should remember that the genre predates republics, the political system so admired by Nicollo Machiavelli who wanted to emphasize _realism_ in politics, instead of merely stressing Christian 'virtues'. John of Salisbury e.g. - who fled England after the murder of Thomas Beckett - wrote aside the first advice on teaching methodology, the *'Polycratius'* in the 12th century, naming the conditions of _legitimate revolt_ to political rule... css.cua.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Taylor-John-of-Salisbury-the-Policraticus-and-Political-Thought.pdf The video is a fair introduction into _the feudal way of life_ of martial service and patronage of arts whenever relieved from military deployment. To point out the religious tolerance of Queen Elizabeth Tudor as a role model of the restoration is a fine observation, too - again in complete contrast to Whig propaganda that 'splits' Elizabeth and Mary into a cultural dichotomy while the _iconoclastic_ Puritans were the one's who wanted to establish themselves as the sole agents of 'universal' values. And to conclude that England became less stable, politically by seizing Christian ritual from the traditional realm of a 'spiritual sword' - turning secular 'Caesars' literally into Anti-Christs - is a crucial insight, given here as well. When it comes to 'standing armies' - a talking point of Whig propaganda while simultaneously mustering the largest navy in compare to other powers, combined - current republics maintain them de facto again as _the United States doesn't apply the draft_ in favour of an all professional force, usually recruited from low income, 'proletarian' classes - the same is true of 21st century Germany - much in contradiction to the civil virtues and loyalties, Machiavelli intented to evoke when he praised the Roman - pre-Marian - military. That the Renaissance concept of a 'Leviathan' can be related to *_urbanization_* and _merchant banking_ is, again something that wouldn't be adressed by Whig historiography. While Newcastle's advice on _ceremony_ goes back to *Richard the II* . who - not so ironically - had rebuilt _Westminster Hall_ for that very purpose - it contrast to the _folkloristic relatibility_ of the later Jacobite leadership with it's devotion to _local, rural and peasant customs_ versus continental court protocols. 'Glamour' - e.g. that of James the VI./I. - is not the reason why the _Jacobite memory is still popular in Scotland_ - just as it doesn't make e.g. the Duchess of Sussex more relatable. www.britannica.com/biography/Richard-II-king-of-England On the other hand, Newcastle's understanding of *_'Merry England'_** folk culture* as a sanctioned vent for private frustration reflects a sound observation of man and historical customs - or 'based' as the 'toad kissing' generation calls it.

[@JustineBrownsBookshelf]

Thanks Christoph

[@JonathanSaxon]

The part about being seen rarely is interesting. Total opposite of our current prime ministers who are visible on the TV screen very day. Perhaps the PM should hide away more - I remember David Cameron once told us what music he has on his personal ipod, and I found that repulsive.

[@JustineBrownsBookshelf]

Haha and Morrissey disavowed him when he mentioned The Smiths!…yes, the Stuarts limited their public appearances to things like Touching For the King’s Evil. Although Charles II did win hearts when he came out to fight the Fire of London personally (with James Duke of York).

[@JonathanSaxon]

@@JustineBrownsBookshelf Yeah him coming out for the fire was a good move. Of course thats a once in a century or more event, so nothing like having to see/hear BoJo on the daily....