In this week of the course, you will be studying the Renaissance.  Historians periodize
the Renaissance in different ways with some finding a starting point in the
mid-fourteenth century and ending around 1600.  Personally, I prefer to date the
Renaissance as occurring from 1450 to 1550, give or take fifty years on either side of
the equation.  

The Renaissance was marked by the rebirth of interest in the literary, philosophical and
artistic classics of the ancient world.  And if it had not been for the work of Thomas
Aquinas, the Renaissance might never have occurred.  The Renaissance originated in
the cities of northern Italy which were undergoing an economic revival in the fifteenth
century.  As trade expanded and money flowed into the cities, patronage of art
increased dramatically.  

The defining philosophy, or movement, of the Renaissance was something called
humanism.  At first, humanism meant nothing more than an interest in the ancient
Greek and Roman literary classics, but over time humanism came to mean more and
more an appreciation of everything that was human:  the human form in art, the human
creative mind in poetry or literature and the human scientific mind in philosophy. 
Increasingly, intellectuals searched for inspiration in the works of the classics and
turned to the ancient Greeks and Romans for their understanding of humanity and their
portrayal and depiction of humanity.  You see that clearly in Renaissance sculpture, art
and literature, all of which showed a fundamental appreciation for everything that was
classic and everything that was human in nature.  If you think closely about this, this
was fundamentally at odds with the teaching of the church which held that everything
that was human was by nature sinful, evil and nasty and that the only things that could
possibly be good, pure and beautiful were spiritual and involved God and the church.  

For this week's assignment, you need to read Machiavelli's political treatise, the Prince
and answer the specific question:  citing specific evidence from Machiavelli, identify,
and briefly explain, the qualities of the ideal "Prince."  Machiavelli wrote The Prince
essentially as a political prescription for the Medici family to unify Italy and begin the
re-creation of the Roman Empire in the medieval world, once again making Italy the
predominant power in Europe.  Of course that did not occur, but it was something that
Benito Mussolini would attempt again in the twentieth century.  Of course, Machiavelli
wrote the book while he was in political exile and no longer had any real political
influence.

The question is relatively straightforward in that you have to identify the key qualities
that you feel Machiavelli identified for the ideal ruler, and your paper should be based
on the qualities that you identify and your explanation of those qualities.  Please do not
just provide a list of ten to fifteen qualities.  Before writing the paper, you should review
the style rules for history papers in the course.  Your paper should include an
introduction, paragraphs (each of which deals with a specific point you are trying to
make) and quoted evidence from the text to support your analysis.  Interestingly, the
Prince is one of the most oft-quoted books in history and one of the least read books
too.  The crude interpretation of Machiavelli as saying that "the ends justify the means"
in politics is far from the reality of what he actually wrote, and you will see that after
reading the Prince.