Comparison of Machiavelli's The Prince and Plato's RepublicMany people in history have written about ideal rulers and states and how to maintain them. Perhaps the most discussed and compared are Machiavelli's The Prince and Plato's The Republic. Machiavelli lived in a time when Italy was suffering its political destruction. The Prince was written to describe the ways in which a leader can gain and maintain power. In Plato's Republic, he reveals the definition of justice. Plato believed that a ruler could not be entirely just unless he belonged to a just society. His state and ruler was invented to better understand the meaning of justice. It was not intended to be practiced like Machiavelli's. Machiavelli, recognizing this, explains that it is his intention to write something true, real and useful to anyone who reads it and not something imaginary,"? Why have many imagined republics and principalities that in reality have never been known or seen? (Machiavelli 375)." Therefore, since one ruler is realistic and the other imaginary, the characteristics of Machiavelli's ruler compared to Plato's are markedly different. Machiavelli's model for his ideal prince was Cesare Borgia, also known as Duke Valentino and son of Pope Alexander VI. He believed that Cesare Borgia possessed all the qualities of a prince destined to rule and maintain power in his state. He believed that politics had its own morality. There is no regard for justice or injustice, cruelty or mercy, approval or humiliation, which should interfere with the decision to defend the state and preserve its liberty. Therefore, the sole responsibility of the ruler/prince... in the center of the paper... to argue with each other (Plato 99).? In The Prince, Machiavelli addressed a monarchical ruler and offered advice aimed at keeping him sovereign in power. He felt that Cesare Borgia was the model of the perfect prince. He was able to give concrete examples of how the princes governed during his time and how they failed or succeeded in doing so. Plato, on the contrary, was perhaps unrealistic. Its ruler and state could only be used to better understand the meaning of justice. It could never be practiced in real life because it neglects the fact that everyone sins and does not mention it in its ideal ruler and state. Works Cited1) Marra, James L., Zelnick, Stephen C. and Mattson, Mark T. IH 51 Source Book: Plato, La Repubblica, pp. 77-1062) Nicole Machiavelli, The Prince, pp. 359-386. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, Dubuque, Iowa, 1998.