Ironside 09:44 09-16-2007
Originally Posted by AntiochusIII:
Though I'm still wondering what Machiavelli meant by that passage. Was he really distinguishing "national" armies -- including full-time salaried professionals -- and the condottieri, or was I reading too much into the passage? Machiavelli was a very innovative political thinker and I wouldn't put it pass him; then again The Prince is actually a work based very much on Renaissance thoughts of the time, especially on the Italy that Machiavelli knew, when and where "national" armies have yet to exist in concrete form...
From what I've understood it the problem with the
condottieri is that if you got them on both sides they won't have any interest of winning for you, but to prolong the conflict (less risk of dieing and more payments). The merc loyalty is slightly improved in the way that you can only betray once, after that none will hire you, so I doubt that issue was common (that said, if you look like losing they won't stick around as much as you could hope for).
So his "national" armies were rather armies that had some benefit of winning.
Single Sign On provided by
vBSSO