Abstract

This paper engages the debate within the ‘democratic turn’ in Machiavelli scholarship, where an ‘institutional’ approach has celebrated Machiavelli's theorisation of the institutions under which the people can rule while a ‘no-rule’ approach has traced Machiavelli's attention to the popular capacity to subvert all relations of rule. What do we make of Machiavelli's concurrent reception as a champion of popular rule and an antagonist to all rule? I argue that both institutionalising and subversive impulses appear simultaneously in Machiavelli's works, though in a dynamic for which neither of the democratic approaches adequately accounts – namely, a rhetorical dimension of Machiavelli's works wherein political knowledge unfolds from a continuous multiplicity of perspectives and the ensuing implication that perspective is crafted and shaped through political action. Perspectival readings of Machiavelli's accounts of the Capuan debate and the Ciompi rebellion thus reveal that both democratic approaches have neglected to question certain ‘princely’ orientations toward political action inherited in their conceptualisations of Machiavellian democracy. In contrast, I suggest that Machiavelli's comedy La Mandragola offers an opportunity to reframe perspective as a uniquely democratic phenomenon. Reading the comedy alongside the democratic turn, I argue that it enacts, satirises and even casts doubts on Machiavelli's princely lessons, in turn proposing a popular capacity to cultivate perspective in a newly organised public space.