1G0xxeB

1 3 4 I n t e r p r e t a t i o n Volume 41 / Issue 2by the “pious cruelty” of the Spanish monarchs and inquisitors. 61 Accordingto Strauss, Machiavelli believes that “pious cruelty” is the inevitable outcomeof an authentic concern for the fate of the souls of men, concern that hasdetermined the Inquisition to burn heretics at the stake in order to preventthe spreading of the heresy and, therefore, the subsequent drawing of evermore souls into perdition. 62The divine tyranny and a blind and therefore cruel fate are, in a sense,equivalent, since they are experienced by man in pretty much the same wayand appear as two possible explanations for man’s suffering in the world.But if God’s place is taken by a cruel, although far from omnipotent, fate,then “pious cruelty” is cruelty badly used, or unnecessary cruelty, which onlyincreases the quantity of already existing suffering. However, Machiavellireproduces the theological cynicism of the Inquisition in his own politicalcynicism. In this sense, he praises Cesare Borgia who, through his cruelty,“restored the Romagna, united it, and reduced it to peace and to faith,”while the mercy of other princes led in the end to greater political turmoiland therefore greater suffering. 63 Cruelty well used is then secularized cruelty,directed towards secular purposes. And cruel fate can be conqueredthrough cruel but well-thought means. But in order for this to happen, man,according to Machiavelli, must come to terms with his condition. Acceptingthe limitations of his nature and abandoning all transcendent illusions,man must stop searching for the imaginary kingdoms of the classical andChristian tradition, redirecting his energies towards the gradual transformationof his environment. 64 Forsaking prayers, modern men must “stand bythemselves,” 65 for “fortune is a woman” and “she lets herself be won moreby the impetuous.” 66 Indeed, one can already anticipate at the dawn of theEnlightenment the lyrics of the International: “No savior from on high delivers/ Our own right hand the chains must shiver.”According to Strauss, Machiavelli’s reference to the foundation of theRoman religion by Numa, who “pretended to be intimate with a nymph“against Christianity” in the eighteenth century (Jean-Yves Pranchère, L’autorité contre les Lumières:La philosophie de Joseph de Maistre [Geneva: Librairie Droz, 2004], 414; my translation).61Machiavelli, The Prince, chap. 21.62Strauss, Thoughts on Machiavelli, 49, 188.63Machiavelli, The Prince, chap. 17.64Tanguay, Leo Strauss, 202–3.65Machiavelli, The Prince, chap. 6.66Ibid., chap. 25.