Liam Collins
In his seminal work, The Prince, Italian political theorist Niccolò Machiavelli famously asked “whether it is better to be loved than to be feared, or the reverse.”1 Machiavelli answered that it is better to be feared than loved but warned against fear spurring hatred. In The Prince, he offered a number of other useful insights, and his work has been so influential that Machiavellian is now a word defined as “being or acting in accordance with the principles of government analyzed in Machiavelli’s The Prince, in which political expediency is placed above morality and the use of craft and deceit to maintain the authority and carry out the polices of a ruler” or “characterized by subtle or unscrupulous cunning, deception, expediency, or dishonesty.”2 His treatise, or discourse, aims to advise a prince, the sixteenth-century city-state ruler in Italy, how to remain in power. Ultimately, he argues that the ends justify the means.
Who was Machiavelli? Machiavelli was an Italian philosopher, politician, diplomat, historian, author, and has been called the father of modern political science.3 He was “born in a tumultuous era in which popes waged acquisitive wars against Italian city-states, and people and cities often fell from power as France, Spain, the Holy Roman Empire, and Switzerland battled for regional influence and control. Political-military alliances continually changed, featuring condottieri (mercenary leaders), who changed sides without warning, and the rise and fall of many short-lived governments.”4 In many ways, it was not unlike the world of Westeros.
When addressing “whether it is better to be loved than feared, or the reverse,” in chapter 17 of The Prince, Machiavelli starts with an idealistic approach, similar to that of a Greek philosopher, stating, “I say that every prince ought to wish to be considered kind rather than cruel.”5 But he quickly transitions to a more pragmatic, or Machiavellian, approach when he writes, “Nevertheless [the prince] must take care to avoid misusing his kindness. Cesare Borgia was considered cruel; yet his cruelty restored Romagna, unified it in peace and loyalty.” He continues, “If this result is considered good, then he must be judged much kinder than the Florentines who, to avoid being called cruel, allowed Pistoia to be destroyed.”6 In other words, the prince and the people are better off when ruled by fear, as opposed to love.
Machiavelli quickly dispenses with the notion that you can be both feared and loved, “since the two rarely come together.” He argues that “anyone compelled to choose will find greater security in being feared than in being loved.”7 In making his elegant case that fear always trumps love, Machiavelli writes,
[Men] are ungrateful, fickle, dissembling, anxious to flee danger, and covetous of gain. So long as you promote their advantage they are all yours, as I said before, and will offer you their blood, their goods, their lives, and their children, when the need for these is remote. When the need arises, however, they will turn against you. The prince who bases his security upon their word, lacking other provision, is doomed; for friendships that are gained by money, not by greatness and nobility of spirit, may well be earned, but cannot be kept; and in time of need, they will have fled your purse. Men are less concerned about offending someone they have cause to love than someone they have cause to fear. Love endures by a bond which men, being scoundrels, may break whenever it serves their advantage to do so; but fear is supported by the dread of pain, which is ever present.8
While many kings and lords of Westeros heeded Machiavelli’s words and prized fear over love, they failed to mind the advice from the second half of the chapter, in which Machiavelli states, “Still a prince should make himself feared in such a way that, though he does not gain love, he escapes hatred.”9 King Aerys Targaryen, the Mad King, lost the throne when he was slain by Jaime Lannister, a member of his own Kingsguard. While Game of Thrones starts long after Aerys Targaryen was deposed, it is clear that while he inspired fear throughout the kingdom, there was little love for him. Even his own daughter, Daenerys, said of him, “I know what my father was. What he did. I know the Mad King earned his name.”10
King Joffrey was both feared and hated, and thus, he lasted less than three years on the Iron Throne before being poisoned by Petyr Baelish and Lady Olenna Tyrell at his wedding feast. His own acting Hand called him “a vicious idiot for a king.”11 Tywin Lannister, Lord of Casterly Rock, probably the most feared of all the lords, wasn’t even loved by his own family. In fact, he inspired so much hatred that it ultimately resulted in his own son killing him with a crossbow.
King Robert Baratheon didn’t appear to be personally loved or feared, as he spent most of his time drinking and whoring, but he wasn’t particularly hated either. Given that he deferred the duties of running the kingdom to his Hand and his Small Council, it seems likely that the council was able to administer an appropriate level of fear within the population of Westeros, since he was able to maintain his rule for seventeen years.
Both Ned Stark, as Warden of the North, and his son, Robb Stark, as King in the North, chose to rule by love, as opposed to fear, but this did not bear well for either of them. Ned ultimately found his head on a spike, while Robb’s decapitated body was unceremoniously paraded around on a horse with his own dire wolf’s head above his body. Robb was betrayed by both Theon Greyjoy, whom he viewed as a brother, and Lord Bolton, one of his bannermen. This would come as no surprise to Machiavelli given his belief that men “are ungrateful, fickle,” and “cowardly” and will “turn against you” and that “relying entirely on their promises” brings ruin. Given that so few followed Machiavelli’s advice, it should come as no surprise that many leaders of Westeros came to a premature end. The Starks failed to grasp that fear works best because you can’t trust people to always be loyal through affection.
Likewise, Orys I attempted to rule by love, having been described as a just leader. He was applauded for his reforms by nobles and commoners alike, but in the words of Tywin Lannister, “he wasn’t just for long.” Shortly after Joffrey’s death, Tywin described Orys’s fate to Tommen: “He was murdered in his sleep after less than a year by his own brother. Was that truly just of him, to abandon his subjects to an evil that he was too gullible to recognize?”12
So why did the rulers in Westeros fail so miserably? One thought might be that it was a tough environment and leaders simply didn’t last long. Sure, it was a Hobbesian world in which “the life of man [was] solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short,”13 but even in that era, Robert Baratheon maintained his reign for seventeen years and the Mad King lasted twenty-four. A more plausible explanation is that many of the rulers failed because they simply lacked an adviser like Machiavelli with “subtle or unscrupulous cunning, deception, expediency, or dishonesty.” Simply put, success largely depended on having a Machiavellian Hand, and Tyrion Lannister was the rare Machiavellian in Westeros.
Like Machiavelli, Tyrion was a historian, politician, diplomat, and philosopher. While he was disadvantaged, having been born a dwarf in that era and hated by his father for “killing” his mother, he was still a Lannister, so he never had to want for money or work a steady job, at least until his father appointed him acting Hand of the King. When not whoring or drinking, he was a voracious reader. On the ride north to Castle Black, Tyrion told Jon Snow, “My brother has his sword, and I have my mind, and a mind needs books like a sword needs a whetstone. That’s why I read so much.”14 While Tywin was away fighting Robb Stark’s Army of the North, Tyrion performed superbly as acting Hand to King Joffrey. He found that his study of history made him well suited for the job and that he had a knack for deceit and deception. His genius ultimately saved King’s Landing from nearly certain defeat, and he was able to magnificently manage despite a boy king who lacked the maturity to rule.
By comparison, most other Hands failed miserably. Ned Stark was too idealistic and principled to serve as Hand, lacking “unscrupulous cunning” and “deceit.” He may have been a great warrior, battlefield leader, and friend to King Robert, but he was a terrible Hand. He refused to condone the killing of Daenerys on the moral ground of her being a child and, thus, left a threat with a legitimate right to the throne alive. And rather than arresting Cersei upon discovering that the father of her children is not the king but her brother, he did the honorable thing and allowed her twenty-four hours to flee the city. A much more cunning Cersei used this time, instead, to consolidate power and plot against Ned. As Cersei tells him, “When you play the game of thrones, you win or you die. There is no middle ground.”15 Ned simply failed to understand how to play the game, and it led to his demise.
Likewise, the Onion Knight, Davos Seaworth, failed as a Hand. Born in Flea Bottom, the poorest slum in King’s Landing, Davos lacked the formal education of Tyrion, and in fact, he couldn’t even read until the third season. Too often his advice was clouded by his disdain for the Lord of Light religion. Prior to the attack on King’s Landing, he convinces Stannis to leave the red priestess behind. While it can’t be certain that the outcome would have been different had she accompanied Davos, it is reasonable to conclude that her sorcery likely would have changed the outcome, given that she was able to defeat Renly’s numerically superior army without a single sword being drawn. Like Ned, Davos was too principled for the Machiavellian environment of Westeros, where the ends justify the means, and focusing on principled means can often result in death, as Machiavelli writes, “The way men live is so far removed from the way they ought to live that anyone who abandons what is for what should be pursues his downfall rather than his preservation.”16
Tywin Lannister’s performance, having served stints as Hand of the King to the Mad King, King Robert, and King Joffrey, was somewhat mixed. He was a master at placing “political expediency . . . above morality and [using] craft and deceit to maintain the authority and carry out the policies of a ruler.” However, the manner in which he executed deceit to accomplish “political expediency” only incited hatred. Tyrion wisely argued that the treacherous feast of the Red Wedding violated acceptable norms of the day. The dialogue between the two shows the nuanced but extremely important difference and why Tyrion is the Machiavelli of Westeros. While discussing the Red Wedding, Tywin asked, “Do you disapprove?” Tyrion responded, “I’m all for cheating; this is war. But to slaughter them at a wedding. . . . The Northerners will never forget.” To which Tywin responded, “Good. Let ’em remember what happens when they march on the South.”17 Tyrion understood that even during this anarchic period there are rules as to how the game is played and that you put yourself and your family at great risk with the hatred that is spawned if you violate the rules.
What of the Spider and Littlefinger? While both were on the Small Council and both were exceedingly cunning and operated in a Machiavellian manner, they had different clients from that of Machiavelli’s prince. When Varys visited Ned Stark in his cell after being imprisoned, Ned asked, “Who do you truly serve?” Varys’s response was clear: “The Realm, my lord. Someone must.”18 While the Spider served the realm, Petyr Baelish, perhaps the most dangerous man in Westeros, served only himself. In the end, both rivaled Tyrion for the ability to operate effectively in the Machiavellian world of Westeros, but only Tyrion’s goal was to help “the prince” maintain his rule.
What else can be learned from Machiavelli? Machiavelli is very critical of conscripts, stating, “Mercenaries and auxiliaries are useless and dangerous; and any ruler who keeps his state dependent upon mercenaries will never have real peace or security, for they are disorganized, undisciplined, ambitious, and faithless. Brave before their allies, they are cowards before the enemy.”19 In Westeros there is much debate about the reliability of mercenaries, but their record is fairly strong. When discussing them, Barristan Selmy argues that “men who fight for gold have neither honor nor loyalty; they cannot be trusted.” However, Jorah Mormont argues, “They can be trusted to kill . . . if they’re well paid.”20
Yet in Game of Thrones, mercenaries and sellswords performed remarkably well and were more reliable than many lords. The Stone Crows, led by Shagga, son of Dolf; the Burned Men, led by Timett, son of Timett; and the Black Ears, led by Chella, son of Cheyk, were reliable and fought valiantly for Tyrion at the Battle of the Green Fork, for the price of a few weapons and a small amount of gold. Likewise, Bronn was extremely loyal to Tyrion, and it was clear that his loyalty was not tied to gold alone. Bronn was anything but “ungrateful, fickle, dissembling, [and] anxious to flee danger.”21 Tyrion put him in constant danger, and never once did Bronn attempt to evade. By contrast, nobles, including Theon Greyjoy, Lord Bolton, and Lord Walder Frey, turned out to be much less reliable.
While the world today is much different from sixteenth-century Italy, or the imaginary world of Westeros, Machiavelli’s words still hold true. During the Iraq War, fear held greater persuasive power than love. While al-Qaeda in Iraq subscribed to a twisted version of Sunni Islam, a vast majority of the more moderate Sunni population had no love for al-Qaeda in Iraq, but those same moderates supported the terrorist group out of fear. The brutal tactics carried out by its leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi held the population in check. But eventually his brutality turned fear into hatred, and the Sunni population turned on him.
There were at least four isolated attempts by Sunni tribes to realign with coalition forces prior to the Sunni Awakening, but each attempt failed, as they were unable to muster the required strength to defeat al-Qaeda. With the coalition unable to provide security, the attempts quickly fell apart, and the Sunni tribes returned to tacit support for al-Qaeda out of fear. The fourth attempt failed when al-Qaeda killed most of the group’s leaders. The Sunni Awakening only succeeded because the U.S. surge provided the additional forces necessary to safeguard the Sunni tribes and protect them from al-Qaeda retaliation for supporting the coalition.22 Had al-Qaeda practiced less brutality, it might have been able to maintain its hold over the Sunni population. Likewise, if the United States understood the power of fear sooner, it might have been quicker to surge troops to support the tribes.
While modern nation-states do not use mercenaries per se, they do use proxies. The United States has used proxy forces in Syria; Iran supported proxies in Iraq; and Russia uses South Ossetian forces to advance its interests in Georgia, as well as street gangs and thugs in the Donbas region of eastern Ukraine and elsewhere. Machiavelli, however, would not be surprised to find that the performance of these modern-day mercenaries can be extremely poor. Criminals often make poor agents, as they are often extremely unreliable and may look for ways to exploit their state sponsor.23 While the United States might avoid criminal proxies, it is not immune to problems; the United States spent over $500 million to train what ultimately amounted to a mere five fighters in Syria, before shutting down the program in 2015.24
In the end, the many kings and lords of Westeros would have fared better if they had had a Machiavelli to advise them. The Stark lords failed because they thought it was better to be loved than feared. Lord Tywin and King Joffrey were right in their belief that it was better to be feared than loved, but they failed because their actions inspired hatred. The most important action that a king or lord of Westeros could have done to ensure regime stability was to select the right Hand and Small Council and heed their advice. As Tywin wisely advised Tommen, “A wise young king listens to his counselors and heeds their advice until he comes of age. And the wisest kings continue to listen to them long afterwards.”25 Unfortunately, few possessed the skills to be a Machiavellian Hand. It required cunning, deception, education, and perhaps most importantly, an understanding that the ends justify the means, and sometimes immoral means must be used to achieve the desired ends. Given that Tyrion was one of the few Machiavellians in Westeros, it should come as no surprise that life in Game of Thrones was “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.”
1. Niccolò Machiavelli, The Prince, trans. Daniel Nonno (1966; repr., New York: Bantam Books, 2003), 65.
2. Dictionary.com, s.v. “Machiavellian,” accessed May 22, 2018, https://www.dictionary.com/browse/machiavellian.
3. Mikko Lahtinen, Politics and Philosophy: Niccolò Machiavelli and Louis Althusser’s Aleatory Materialism (Chicago: Haymarket Books, 2009), 115.
4. “Niccolò Machiavelli—A Brief Introduction,” Niccolò Machiavelli Blog, October 13, 2017, https://nicolomachiavelliblog.wordpress.com/2017/10/13/first-blog-post/.
5. Machiavelli, The Prince, 65.
6. Machiavelli, The Prince, 65.
7. Machiavelli, The Prince, 66.
8. Machiavelli, The Prince, 66.
9. Machiavelli, The Prince, 66.
10. David Benioff and D. B. Weiss, “Hardhome,” season 5, episode 8, dir. Miguel Sapochnik, Game of Thrones, aired May 31, 2015, on HBO.
11. Tyrion tells Joffrey, “We’ve had vicious kings, and we’ve had idiot kings, but I don’t know if we’ve ever been cursed with a vicious idiot for a king!” Vanessa Taylor, “The Old Gods and the New,” season 2, episode 6, dir. David Nutter, Game of Thrones, aired May 6, 2012, on HBO.
12. David Benioff and D. B. Weiss, “Breaker of Chains,” season 4, episode 3, dir. Alex Graves, Game of Thrones, aired April 20, 2014, on HBO.
13. Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan; or, The Matter, Forme, and Power of a Common-Wealth Ecclesiastical and Civill (1651; Project Gutenberg, 2009), https://www.gutenberg.org/files/3207/3207-h/3207-h.htm.
14. David Benioff and D. B. Weiss, “The Kingsroad,” season 1, episode 2, dir. Tim Van Patten, Game of Thrones, aired April 24, 2011, on HBO.
15. David Benioff and D. B. Weiss, “You Win or You Die,” season 1, episode 7, dir. Daniel Minahan, Game of Thrones, aired April 24, 2011, on HBO.
16. Machiavelli, The Prince, 61–62.
17. David Benioff and D. B. Weiss, “Mhysa,” season 3, episode 10, dir. David Nutter, Game of Thrones, aired June 9, 2013, on HBO.
18. George R. R. Martin, “The Pointy End,” season 1, episode 8, dir. Daniel Minahan, Game of Thrones, aired June 5, 2011, on HBO.
19. Machiavelli, The Prince, 52.
20. David Benioff and D. B. Weiss, “Second Sons,” season 3, episode 8, dir. Michelle MacLaren, Game of Thrones, aired May 19, 2013, on HBO.
21. Machiavelli, The Prince, 66.
22. Stephen Biddle, Jeffrey Friedman, and Jacob Shapiro, “Testing the Surge: Why Did Violence Decline in Iraq in 2007?” International Security 37, no. 1 (2012): 7–40.
23. Mark Galeotti, “The Kremlin’s Newest Hybrid Warfare Asset: Gangsters,” Foreign Policy, June 12, 2017.
24. Paul McLeary, “The Pentagon Wasted $550 Million Training Syrian Rebels. It’s About to Try Again,” Foreign Policy, March 18, 2106.
25. Benioff and Weiss, “Breaker of Chains.”