text:
The Prince

The Prince (Il Principe ; De Principatibus) is a 16th-century political treatise written by the Italian diplomat, philosopher, and political theorist Niccolò Machiavelli in the form of a realistic instruction guide for new princes. As a remarkable general theme, The Prince appears to take it for granted that immoral acts are justified if they can help achieve political glory.

From Machiavelli's correspondence, a version appears to have been distributed in 1513, using a Latin title, De Principatibus (Of Principalities). However, the printed version was not published until 1532, five years after Machiavelli's death. This was carried out with the permission of the Medici pope Clement VII, but "long before then, in fact since the first appearance of The Prince in manuscript, controversy had swirled about his writings".

Although The Prince was written as if it were a traditional work in the mirrors for princes style, it was generally agreed as being especially innovative. This is partly because it was written in the vernacular Italian rather than Latin, a practice that had become increasingly popular since the publication of Dante's Divine Comedy and other works of Renaissance literature. Machiavelli illustrates his reasoning using remarkable comparisons of classical, biblical, and medieval events, including many seemingly positive references to the murderous career of Cesare Borgia, which occurred during Machiavelli's own diplomatic career.

The Prince is sometimes claimed to be one of the first works of modern philosophy, especially modern political philosophy, in which practical effect is taken to be more important than any abstract ideal. Its world view came in direct conflict with the dominant Catholic and scholastic doctrines of the time, particularly those on politics and ethics.

This short treatise is the most remembered of Machiavelli's works, and the most responsible for the later pejorative use of the word "Machiavellian". It even contributed to the modern negative connotations of the words "" and "" in Western countries. In subject matter, it overlaps with the much longer Discourses on Livy, which was written a few years later. In its use of near-contemporary Italians as examples of people who perpetrated criminal deeds for political ends, another lesser-known work by Machiavelli to which The Prince has been compared is the Life of Castruccio Castracani.

Summary
Each part of The Prince has attracted extensive commentary over centuries. Machiavelli's writings continue to provoke examination of leadership and government, posing age-old issues regarding the nature of power and the decisions that rulers must make to preserve it.

Letter to Lorenzo de' Medici, Duke of Urbino
Machiavelli prefaces his work with an introductory letter to Lorenzo de' Medici, Duke of Urbino, the recipient of his work.

The subject matter: New Princedoms (Chapters 1 and 2)
The Prince starts by describing its subject. In the first sentence, Machiavelli uses the word "state" (Italian stato, which could also mean "status") to cover, in neutral terms, "all forms of organization of supreme political power, whether republican or princely". How the word "state" acquired its modern meaning during the Renaissance has been the subject of much academic debate, with this sentence and similar ones in the works of Machiavelli being considered particularly important.

Machiavelli explained here that The Prince is about princedoms, indicating that he has written about republics elsewhere, which is a reference to the Discourses on Livy. Commentators note that in fact he mixes discussion of republics into this work in many places, effectively treating republics as a type of princedom with many strengths. More importantly, and less traditionally, he distinguishes new princedoms from established hereditary princedoms. He deals with hereditary princedoms quickly in Chapter 2, saying that they are much easier to rule. For such a prince, "unless extraordinary vices cause him to be hated, it is reasonable to expect that his subjects will be naturally well disposed towards him". , comparing this claim to traditional presentations of advice for princes, wrote that the novelty in chapters 1 and 2 is the "deliberate purpose of dealing with a new ruler who will need to establish himself in defiance of custom". Normally, these types of works were addressed only to hereditary princes. He thinks Machiavelli may have been influenced by Tacitus as well as his own experience.

This categorization of regime types is also "un-Aristotelian" and apparently simpler than the traditional one found for example in Aristotle's Politics, which divides regimes into those ruled by a single monarch, an oligarchy, or by the people, in a democracy. Machiavelli also ignores the classical distinctions between the good and corrupt forms, for example between monarchy and tyranny.

"Mixed" princedoms (Chapters 3–5)
New princedoms are either totally new, or they are "mixed", meaning that they are new parts of an older state, already belonging to that prince.

New conquests added to older states (Chapter 3)
Machiavelli generalizes that there were several virtuous Roman ways to hold a newly acquired province, using a republic as an example of how new princes can act:
 * to install one's princedom in the new acquisition, or to install colonies of one's people there, which is better.
 * to indulge the lesser powers of the area without increasing their power.
 * to put down the powerful people.
 * not to allow a foreign power to gain reputation.

More generally, Machiavelli emphasizes that one should have regard not only for present problems, but also for the future ones. One should not "enjoy the benefit of time", but rather the benefit of one's virtue and prudence, because time can bring evil, as well as good.

Machiavelli notes in this chapter on the "natural and ordinary desire to acquire" and as such, those who act on this desire can be "praised or blamed" depending on the success of their acquisitions. He then goes into detail about how the King of France failed in his conquest of Italy, even saying how he could have succeeded. Machiavelli views doing harm to enemies as a necessity, stating, "if an injury is to be done to a man, it should be so severe that the prince is not in fear of revenge".

Conquered kingdoms (Chapter 4)

In some cases, the old king of the conquered kingdom depended on his lords; 16th-century France, or in other words France as it was at the time of writing of The Prince, is given by Machiavelli as an example of such a kingdom. These are easy to enter, but difficult to hold.

When the kingdom revolves around the king, with everyone else his servant, then it is difficult to enter, but easy to hold. The solution is to eliminate the old bloodline of the prince. Machiavelli used the Persian empire of Darius III, conquered by Alexander the Great, to illustrate this point, and then noted that the Medici, if they think about it, will find this historical example similar to the "kingdom of the Turk" (Ottoman Empire) in their time – making this a potentially easier conquest to hold than France would be.

Conquered free states, with their own laws and orders (Chapter 5)
notes that this chapter is quite atypical of any previous books for princes. Gilbert supposed the need to discuss conquering free republics is linked to Machiavelli's project to unite Italy, which contained some free republics. As he also notes, the chapter in any case makes it clear that holding such a state is highly difficult for a prince. Machiavelli gives three options:
 * Ruin them, as Rome destroyed Carthage, and also as Machiavelli says the Romans eventually had to do in Greece.
 * Go to live there and rule it personally.
 * Keep the state intact, but install an oligarchy.

Machiavelli advises the ruler to go the first route, stating that if a prince does not destroy a city, he can expect "to be destroyed by it".

Conquests by virtue (Chapter 6)
Princes who rise to power through their own skill and resources (their "virtue") rather than luck tend to have a hard time rising to the top, but once they reach the top they are very secure in their position. This is because they effectively crush their opponents and earn great respect from everyone else. Because they are strong and more self-sufficient, they have to make fewer compromises with their allies.

Machiavelli writes that reforming an existing order is one of the most dangerous and difficult things a prince can do. Part of the reason is that people are naturally resistant to change and reform. Those who benefited from the old order will resist change very fiercely, and those who may stand to benefit from the new order will be less enthusiastic in their support, because the new order is unfamiliar and they are not certain it will live up to its promises. Moreover, it is impossible for the prince to satisfy everybody's expectations. Inevitably, he will disappoint some of his followers. Therefore, a prince must have the means to force his supporters to keep supporting him even when they start having second thoughts, otherwise he will lose his power. Only armed prophets, like Moses, succeed in bringing lasting change. Machiavelli claims that Moses killed uncountable numbers of his own people in order to enforce his will.

Machiavelli was not the first thinker to notice this pattern. Allan Gilbert wrote: "In wishing new laws and yet seeing danger in them Machiavelli was not himself an innovator," because this idea was traditional and could be found in Aristotle's writings. But Machiavelli went much further than any other author in his emphasis on this aim, and Gilbert associates Machiavelli's emphasis upon such drastic aims with the level of corruption to be found in Italy.

Conquest by fortune, meaning by someone else's virtue (Chapter 7)
According to Machiavelli, when a prince comes to power through luck or the blessings of powerful figures within the regime, he typically has an easy time gaining power but a hard time keeping it thereafter, because his power is dependent on his benefactors' goodwill. He does not command the loyalty of the armies and officials that maintain his authority, and these can be withdrawn from him at a whim. Having risen the easy way, it is not even certain such a prince has the skill and strength to stand on his own feet.

This is not necessarily true in every case. Machiavelli cites Cesare Borgia as an example of a lucky prince who escaped this pattern. Through cunning political maneuvers, he managed to secure his power base. Cesare was made commander of the papal armies by his father, Pope Alexander VI, but was also heavily dependent on mercenary armies loyal to the Orsini brothers and the support of the French king. Borgia won over the allegiance of the Orsini brothers' followers with better pay and prestigious government posts. To pacify the Romagna, he sent in his henchman, Remirro de Orco, to commit acts of violence. When Remirro started to become hated for his actions, Borgia responded by ordering him to be "cut in two" to show the people that the cruelty was not from him, although it was. When some of his mercenary captains started to plot against him, he had them captured and executed. When it looked as though the king of France would abandon him, Borgia sought new alliances.

Finally, Machiavelli makes a point that bringing new benefits to a conquered people will not be enough to cancel the memory of old injuries, an idea Allan Gilbert said can be found in Tacitus and Seneca the Younger.

Of Those Who Have Obtained a Principality Through Crimes (Chapter 8)
Conquests by "criminal virtue" are ones in which the new prince secures his power through cruel, immoral deeds, such as the elimination of political rivals.

Machiavelli's offers two rulers to imitate, Agathocles of Syracuse and Oliverotto Euffreducci. After Agathocles became Praetor of Syracuse, he called a meeting of the city's elite. At his signal, his soldiers killed all the senators and the wealthiest citizens, completely destroying the old oligarchy. He declared himself ruler with no opposition. So secure was his power that he could afford to absent himself to go off on military campaigns in Africa.

Machiavelli then states that the behavior of Agathocles is not simply virtue, as he says, "Yet one cannot call it virtue to kill one's citizens, betray one's friends, to be without faith, without mercy, without religion; these modes can enable one to acquire empire, but not glory. [...] Nonetheless, his savage cruelty and inhumanity, together with his infinite crimes, do not permit him to be celebrated among the most excellent men. Thus, one cannot attribute to fortune or virtue what he achieved without either."

Machiavelli then goes to his next example, Oliverotto de Fermo, an Italian condottiero who recently came to power by killing all his enemies, including his uncle Giovanni Fogliani, at a banquet. After he laid siege to the governing council and terrified the citizenry, he had then set up a government with himself as absolute ruler. However, in an ironic twist, Oliverotto was killed the same way his opponents were, as Cesare Borgia had him strangled after he invited Oliverotto and Vitellozzo Vitelli to a friendly setting.

Machiavelli advises that a prince should carefully calculate all the wicked deeds he needs to do to secure his power, and then execute them all in one stroke. In this way, his subjects will slowly forget his cruel deeds and the prince can better align himself with his subjects. Princes who fail to do this, who hesitate in their ruthlessness, will have to "keep a knife by his side" and protect himself at all costs, as he can never trust himself amongst his subjects.

remarks that this chapter is even less traditional than those it follows, not only in its treatment of criminal behavior, but also in the advice to take power from people at a stroke, noting that precisely the opposite had been advised by Aristotle in his Politics (5.11.1315a13). On the other hand, Gilbert shows that another piece of advice in this chapter, to give benefits when it will not appear forced, was traditional.

Becoming a prince by the selection of one's fellow citizens (Chapter 9)
A "civil principality" is one in which a citizen comes to power "not through crime or other intolerable violence", but by the support of his fellow citizens. This, he says, does not require extreme virtue or fortune, only "fortunate astuteness". For this is one of the four means of coming about a principality (the other three being by virtue, fortune, and criminality).

Machiavelli makes an important distinction between two groups that are present in every city, and have very different appetites driving them: the "great" and the "people". The "great" wish to oppress and rule the "people", while the "people" wish not to be ruled or oppressed. A principality is not the only outcome possible from these appetites, because it can also lead to either "liberty" or "license".

A principality is put into place either by the "great" or the "people" when they have the opportunity to take power, but find resistance from the other side. They assign a leader who can be popular to the people while the great benefit, or a strong authority defending the people against the great.

Machiavelli goes on to say that a prince who obtains power through the support of the nobles has a harder time staying in power than someone who is chosen by the common people; since the former finds himself surrounded by people who consider themselves his equals. He has to resort to malevolent measures to satisfy the nobles. "One cannot by fair dealing, and without injury to others, satisfy the nobles, but you can satisfy the people, for their object is more righteous than that of the nobles, the latter wishing to oppress, while the former only desire not to be oppressed."Also a prince cannot afford to keep the common people hostile as they are larger in number while the nobles smaller.

Therefore, the great should be made and unmade every day. Two types of great people might be encountered: How to win over people depends on circumstances: Machiavelli advises:
 * 1) Those who are bound to the prince: Concerning these it is important to distinguish between two types of obligated great people, those who are rapacious and those who are not. It is the latter who can and should be honoured.
 * 2) Those who are not bound to the new prince: Once again, these need to be divided into two types – those with a weak spirit (a prince can make use of them if they are of good counsel) and those who shun being bound because of their own ambition (these should be watched and feared as enemies).
 * Do not get frightened in adversity.
 * One should avoid ruling via magistrates, if one wishes to be able to "ascend" to absolute rule quickly and safely.
 * One should make sure that the people need the prince, especially if a time of need should come.

How to judge the strength of principalities (Chapter 10)
The way to judge the strength of a princedom is to see whether it can defend itself, or whether it needs to depend on allies. This does not just mean that the cities should be prepared and the people trained; a prince who is hated is also exposed.

Ecclesiastical principates (Chapter 11)
This type of "principality" refers explicitly to the Catholic Church as an example, which is of course not traditionally thought of as a principality. According to Machiavelli, these are relatively easy to maintain, once founded. They do not need to defend themselves militarily, nor to govern their subjects.

Machiavelli discusses the recent history of the Church as if it were a princedom that was in competition to conquer Italy against other princes. He points to factionalism as a historical weak point in the Church, and points to the recent example of the Borgia family as a better strategy which almost worked. He then explicitly proposes that the Medici are now in a position to try the same thing.

Defense and military (Chapters 12–14)
Having discussed the various types of principalities, Machiavelli turns to the ways a state can attack other territories or defend itself. The two most essential foundations for any state, whether old or new, are sound laws and strong military forces. A self-sufficient prince is one who can meet any enemy on the battlefield. He should be "armed" with his own arms. However, a prince that relies solely on fortifications or on the help of others and stands on the defensive is not self-sufficient. If he cannot raise a formidable army, but must rely on defense, he must fortify his city. A well-fortified city is unlikely to be attacked, and if it is, most armies cannot endure an extended siege. However, during a siege a virtuous prince will keep the morale of his subjects high while removing all dissenters. Thus, as long as the city is properly defended and has enough supplies, a wise prince can withstand any siege.

Machiavelli stands strongly against the use of mercenaries, and in this he was innovative, and he also had personal experience in Florence. He believes they are useless to a ruler because they are undisciplined, cowardly, and without any loyalty, being motivated only by money. Machiavelli attributes the Italian city states' weakness to their reliance on mercenary armies.

Machiavelli also warns against using auxiliary forces, troops borrowed from an ally, because if they win, the employer is under their favor and if they lose, he is ruined. Auxiliary forces are more dangerous than mercenary forces because they are united and controlled by capable leaders who may turn against the employer.

The main concern for a prince should be war, or the preparation thereof, not books. Through war a hereditary prince maintains his power or a private citizen rises to power. Machiavelli advises that a prince must frequently hunt in order to keep his body fit and learn the landscape surrounding his kingdom. Through this, he can best learn how to protect his territory and advance upon others. For intellectual strength, he is advised to study great military men so he may imitate their successes and avoid their mistakes. A prince who is diligent in times of peace will be ready in times of adversity. Machiavelli writes, "thus, when fortune turns against him he will be prepared to resist it."

The Qualities of a Prince (Chapters 14–19)
Each of the following chapters presents a discussion about a particular virtue or vice that a prince might have, and is therefore structured in a way which appears like traditional advice for a prince. However, the advice is far from traditional.

A Prince's Duty Concerning Military Matters (Chapter 14)
Machiavelli believes that a prince's main focus should be on perfecting the art of war. He believes that by taking this profession an aspiring prince will be able to acquire a state, and will be able to maintain what he has gained. He claims that "being disarmed makes you despised." He believes that the only way to ensure loyalty from one's soldiers is to understand military matters. The two activities Machiavelli recommends practicing to prepare for war are physical and mental. Physically, he believes rulers should learn the landscape of their territories. Mentally, he encouraged the study of past military events. He also warns against idleness.

Reputation of a prince (Chapter 15)
Because, says Machiavelli, he wants to write something useful to those who understand, he thought it more fitting "to go directly to the effectual truth ("verità effettuale") of the thing than to the imagination of it". This section is one where Machiavelli's pragmatic ideal can be seen most clearly. Machiavelli reasons that since princes come across men who are evil, he should learn how to be equally evil himself, and use this ability or not according to necessity. Concerning the behavior of a prince toward his subjects, Machiavelli announces that he will depart from what other writers say, and writes: "Men have imagined republics and principalities that never really existed at all. Yet 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; for a man who strives after goodness in all his acts is sure to come to ruin, since there are so many men who are not good." Since there are many possible qualities that a prince can be said to possess, he must not be overly concerned about having all the good ones. Also, a prince may be perceived to be merciful, faithful, humane, frank, and religious, but most important is only to seem to have these qualities. A prince cannot truly have these qualities because at times it is necessary to act against them. Although a bad reputation should be avoided, it is sometimes necessary to have one. In fact, he must sometimes deliberately choose evil: "He who neglects what is done for what ought to be done, sooner effects his ruin than his preservation."

Generosity vs. parsimony (Chapter 16)
If a prince is overly generous to his subjects, Machiavelli asserts he will not be appreciated, and will only cause greed for more. Additionally, being overly generous is not economical, because eventually all resources will be exhausted. This results in higher taxes, and will bring grief upon the prince. Then, if he decides to discontinue or limit his generosity, he will be labeled as a miser. Thus, Machiavelli summarizes that guarding against the people's hatred is more important than building up a reputation for generosity. A wise prince should be willing to be more reputed a miser than be hated for trying to be too generous.

On the other hand: "of what is not yours or your subjects' one can be a bigger giver, as were Cyrus, Caesar, and Alexander, because spending what is someone else's does not take reputation from you but adds it to you; only spending your own hurts you".

Cruelty vs. Mercy (Chapter 17)
Machiavelli begins this chapter by addressing how mercy can be misused which will harm the prince and his dominion. He ends by stating that a prince should not shrink from being cruel if it means that it will keep his subjects in line. After all, it will help him maintain his rule. He gives the example of Cesare Borgia, whose cruelty protected him from rebellions. He does not contrast this example with the leaders of Florence, who, through too much mercy, allowed disorders to plague their city.

In addressing the question of whether it is better to be loved or feared, Machiavelli writes, "The answer is that one would like to be both the one and the other; but because it is difficult to combine them, it is far safer to be feared than loved if you cannot be both." As Machiavelli asserts, commitments made in peace are not always kept in adversity; however, commitments made in fear are kept out of fear. Yet, a prince must ensure that he is not feared to the point of hatred, which is very possible.

This chapter is possibly the most well-known of the work, and it is important because of the reasoning behind Machiavelli's famous idea that it is better to be feared than loved. His justification is purely pragmatic; as he notes, "Men worry less about doing an injury to one who makes himself loved than to one who makes himself feared." Fear is used as a means to ensure obedience from his subjects, and security for the prince. Above all, Machiavelli argues, a prince should not interfere with the property of their subjects or their women, and if they should try to kill someone, they should do it with a convenient justification.

Regarding the troops of the prince, fear is absolutely necessary to keep a large garrison united and a prince should not mind the thought of cruelty in that regard. For a prince who leads his own army, it is imperative for him to observe cruelty because that is the only way he can command his soldiers' absolute respect. Machiavelli compares two great military leaders: Hannibal and Scipio Africanus. Although Hannibal's army consisted of men of various races, they were never rebellious because they feared their leader. Machiavelli says this required "inhuman cruelty" which he refers to as a virtue. Scipio's men, on the other hand, were known for their mutiny and dissension, due to Scipio's "excessive mercy" – which was, however, a source of glory because he lived in a republic.

In what way princes should keep their word (Chapter 18)
Machiavelli notes that a prince is praised for keeping his word. However, he also notes that in reality, the most cunning princes succeed politically. A prince, therefore, should only keep his word when it suits his purposes, but do his utmost to maintain the illusion that he does keep his word and that he is reliable in that regard. Machiavelli advises the ruler to become a "great liar and deceiver", and that men are so easy to deceive, that the ruler won't have an issue with lying to others. He justifies this by saying that men are wicked, and never keep their words, therefore the ruler doesn't have to keep his.

As Machiavelli notes, "He should appear to be compassionate, faithful to his word, guileless, and devout. And indeed he should be so. But his disposition should be such that, if he needs to be the opposite, he knows how." As noted in chapter 15, the prince must appear to be virtuous in order to hide his actions, and he should be able to be otherwise when the time calls for it; that includes being able to lie, though however much he lies he should always keep the appearance of being truthful.

In this chapter, Machiavelli uses "beasts" as a metaphor for unscrupulous behavior. He states that while lawful conduct is part of the nature of men, a prince should learn how to use the nature of both men and beasts wisely to ensure the stability of his regime. In this chapter however, his focus is solely on the "beastly" natures. In particular, he compares the use of force to the "lion", and the use of deception to the "fox", and advises the prince to study them both. In employing this metaphor, Machiavelli apparently references De Officiis by the Roman orator and statesman Cicero, and subverts its conclusion, arguing instead that dishonorable behavior is sometimes politically necessary.

Avoiding contempt and hatred (Chapter 19)
Machiavelli divides the fears which monarchs should have into internal (domestic) and external (foreign) fears. Internal fears exist inside his kingdom and focus on his subjects, Machiavelli warns to be suspicious of everyone when hostile attitudes emerge. Machiavelli observes that the majority of men are content as long as they are not deprived of their property and women, and only a minority of men are ambitious enough to be a concern. A prince should command respect through his conduct, because a prince who raises no contempt of the nobles and maintains the satisfaction of the people, Machiavelli assures, should have no fear of conspirators working with external powers. Conspiracy is very difficult and risky in such a situation.

Machiavelli apparently seems to go back on his rule that a prince can evade hate, as he says that he will eventually be hated by someone, so he should seek to avoid being hated by the commonfolk.

Roman emperors, on the other hand, had not only the majority and ambitious minority, but also a cruel and greedy military, who created extra problems as they demanded iniquity. While a prince should avoid being hated, he will eventually be hated by someone, so he must at least avoid the hatred of the most powerful, and for the Roman emperors this included the military who demanded iniquity against the people out of their own greed. He uses Septimius Severus as a model for new rulers to emulate, as he "embodied both the fox and the lion". Severus outwitted and killed his military rivals, and although he oppressed the people, Machiavelli says that he kept the common people "satisfied and stupified".

Machiavelli notes that in his time only the Turkish empire had the problem of the Romans, because in other lands the people had become more powerful than the military.

Whether ruling conquests with fortresses works (Chapter 20)
Machiavelli mentions that placing fortresses in conquered territories, although it sometimes works, often fails. Using fortresses can be a good plan, but Machiavelli says he shall "blame anyone who, trusting in fortresses, thinks little of being hated by the people". He cited Caterina Sforza, who used a fortress to defend herself but was eventually betrayed by her people.

Gaining honours (Chapter 21)
A prince truly earns honour by completing great feats. King Ferdinand of Spain is cited by Machiavelli as an example of a monarch who gained esteem by showing his ability through great feats and who, in the name of religion, conquered many territories and kept his subjects occupied so that they had no chance to rebel. Regarding two warring states, Machiavelli asserts it is always wiser to choose a side, rather than to be neutral. Machiavelli then provides the following reasons why: Machiavelli also notes that it is wise for a prince not to ally with a stronger force unless compelled to do so. In conclusion, the most important virtue is having the wisdom to discern what ventures will come with the most reward and then pursuing them courageously.
 * If your allies win, you benefit whether or not you have more power than they have.
 * If you are more powerful, then your allies are under your command; if your allies are stronger, they will always feel a certain obligation to you for your help.
 * If your side loses, you still have an ally in the loser.

Nobles and staff (Chapter 22)
The selection of good servants is reflected directly upon the prince's intelligence, so if they are loyal, the prince is considered wise; however, when they are otherwise, the prince is open to adverse criticism. Machiavelli asserts that there are three types of intelligence:
 * The kind that understands things for itself – which is excellent to have.
 * The kind that understands what others can understand – which is good to have.
 * The kind that does not understand for itself, nor through others – which is useless to have.

If the prince does not have the first type of intelligence, he should at the very least have the second type. For, as Machiavelli states, "A prince needs to have the discernment to recognize the good or bad in what another says or does even though he has no acumen himself".

Avoiding flatterers (Chapter 23)
This chapter displays a low opinion of flatterers; Machiavelli notes that "Men are so happily absorbed in their own affairs and indulge in such self-deception that it is difficult for them not to fall victim to this plague; and some efforts to protect oneself from flatterers involve the risk of becoming despised." Flatterers were seen as a great danger to a prince, because their flattery could cause him to avoid wise counsel in favor of rash action, but avoiding all advice, flattery or otherwise, was equally bad; a middle road had to be taken. A prudent prince should have a select group of wise counselors to advise him truthfully on matters all the time. All their opinions should be taken into account. Ultimately, the decision should be made by the prince and carried out absolutely. If a prince is given to changing his mind, his reputation will suffer. A prince must have the wisdom to recognize good advice from bad. Machiavelli gives a negative example in Emperor Maximilian I; Maximilian, who was secretive, never consulted others, but once he ordered his plans and met dissent, he immediately changed them.

Why the princes of Italy lost their states (Chapter 24)
After first mentioning that a new prince can quickly become as respected as a hereditary one, Machiavelli says princes in Italy who had longstanding power and lost it cannot blame bad luck, but should blame their own indolence. One "should never fall in the belief that you can find someone to pick you up". They all showed a defect of arms (already discussed) and either had a hostile populace or did not know to secure themselves against the great.

How Much Fortune Can Do in Human Affairs, and in What Mode It May Be Opposed (Chapter 25)
As pointed out by it was traditional in the genre of Mirrors of Princes to mention fortune, but "Fortune pervades The Prince as she does no other similar work". Machiavelli argues that fortune is only the judge of half of our actions and that we have control over the other half with "sweat", prudence and virtue. Even more unusual, rather than simply suggesting caution as a prudent way to try to avoid the worst of bad luck, Machiavelli holds that the greatest princes in history tend to be ones who take more risks, and rise to power through their own labour, virtue, prudence, and particularly by their ability to adapt to changing circumstances.

Machiavelli even encourages risk taking as a reaction to risk. In a well-known metaphor, Machiavelli writes that "it is better to be impetuous than cautious, because fortune is a woman; and it is necessary, if one wants to hold her down, to beat her and strike her down." Gilbert (p. 217) points out that Machiavelli's friend the historian and diplomat Francesco Guicciardini expressed similar ideas about fortune.

Machiavelli compares fortune to a torrential river that cannot be easily controlled during flooding season. In periods of calm, however, people can erect dams and levees in order to minimize its impact. Fortune, Machiavelli argues, seems to strike at the places where no resistance is offered, as had recently been the case in Italy. As points out that what Machiavelli actually says is that Italians in his time leave things not just to fortune, but to "fortune and God". Machiavelli is indicating in this passage, as in some others in his works, that Christianity itself was making Italians helpless and lazy concerning their own politics, as if they would leave dangerous rivers uncontrolled.

Exhortation to Seize Italy and to Free Her from the Barbarians (Chapter 26)
Pope Leo X was pope at the time the book was written and a member of the Medici family. This chapter directly appeals to the Medici to use what has been summarized in order to conquer Italy using Italian armies, following the advice in the book. showed that including such exhortation was not unusual in the genre of books full of advice for princes. But it is unusual that the Medici family's position of Papal power is openly named as something that should be used as a personal power base, as a tool of secular politics. Indeed, one example is the Borgia family's "recent" and controversial attempts to use church power in secular politics, often brutally executed. This continues a controversial theme throughout the book.

Analysis
As shown by his letter of dedication, Machiavelli's work eventually came to be dedicated to Lorenzo di Piero de' Medici, grandson of "Lorenzo the Magnificent", and a member of the ruling Florentine Medici family, whose uncle Giovanni became Pope Leo X in 1513. It is known from his personal correspondence that it was written during 1513, the year after the Medici regained control of Florence, and a few months after Machiavelli's arrest, torture, and banishment by the in-coming Medici regime. It was discussed for a long time with Francesco Vettori – a friend of Machiavelli – whom he wanted to pass it and commend it to the Medici. The book had originally been intended for Giuliano di Lorenzo de' Medici, young Lorenzo's uncle, who however died in 1516. It is not certain that the work was ever read by any of the Medici before it was printed. Machiavelli describes the contents as being an un-embellished summary of his knowledge about the nature of princes and "the actions of great men", based not only on reading but also, unusually, on real experience.

The types of political behavior which are discussed with apparent approval by Machiavelli in The Prince were regarded as shocking by contemporaries, and its immorality is still a subject of serious discussion. Although the work advises princes how to tyrannize, Machiavelli is generally thought to have preferred some form of republican government. Some commentators justify his acceptance of immoral and criminal actions by leaders by arguing that he lived during a time of continuous political conflict and instability in Italy, and that his influence has increased the "pleasures, equality and freedom" of many people, loosening the grip of medieval Catholicism's "classical teleology", which "disregarded not only the needs of individuals and the wants of the common man, but stifled innovation, enterprise, and enquiry into cause and effect relationships that now allow us to control nature".

On the other hand, notes that "even if we were forced to grant that Machiavelli was essentially a patriot or a scientist, we would not be forced to deny that he was a teacher of evil". Furthermore, Machiavelli "was too thoughtful not to know what he was doing and too generous not to admit it to his reasonable friends".

Machiavelli emphasized the need for looking at the "effectual truth" (verita effetuale), as opposed to relying on "imagined republics and principalities". He states the difference between honorable behavior and criminal behavior by using the metaphor of animals, saying that "there are two ways of contending, one in accordance with the laws, the other by force; the first of which is proper to men, the second to beast". In The Prince he does not explain what he thinks the best ethical or political goals are, except the control of one's own fortune, as opposed to waiting to see what chance brings. Machiavelli took it for granted that would-be leaders naturally aim at glory or honour. He associated these goals with a need for "virtue" and "prudence" in a leader, and saw such virtues as essential to good politics. That great men should develop and use their virtue and prudence was a traditional theme of advice to Christian princes. And that more virtue meant less reliance on chance was a classically influenced "humanist commonplace" in Machiavelli's time, as says, even if it was somewhat controversial. However, Machiavelli went far beyond other authors in his time, who in his opinion left things to fortune, and therefore to bad rulers, because of their Christian beliefs. He used the words "virtue" and "prudence" to refer to glory-seeking and spirited excellence of character, in strong contrast to the traditional Christian uses of those terms, but more keeping with the original pre-Christian Greek and Roman concepts from which they derived. He encouraged ambition and risk taking. So in another break with tradition, he treated not only stability, but also radical innovation, as possible aims of a prince in a political community. Managing major reforms can show off a Prince's virtue and give him glory. He clearly felt Italy needed major reform in his time, and this opinion of his time is widely shared.

Machiavelli's descriptions encourage leaders to attempt to control their fortune gloriously, to the extreme extent that some situations may call for a fresh "founding" (or re-founding) of the "modes and orders" that define a community, despite the danger and necessary evil and lawlessness of such a project. Founding a wholly new state, or even a new religion, using injustice and immorality has even been called the chief theme of The Prince. Machiavelli justifies this position by explaining how if "a prince did not win love he may escape hate" by personifying injustice and immorality; therefore, he will never loosen his grip since "fear is held by the apprehension of punishment" and never diminishes as time goes by. For a political theorist to do this in public was one of Machiavelli's clearest breaks not just with medieval scholasticism, but with the classical tradition of political philosophy, especially the favorite philosopher of Catholicism at the time, Aristotle. This is one of Machiavelli's most lasting influences upon modernity.

Nevertheless, Machiavelli was heavily influenced by classical pre-Christian political philosophy. According to Machiavelli refers to Xenophon more than Plato, Aristotle, and Cicero put together. Xenophon wrote one of the classic mirrors of princes, the Education of Cyrus. wrote: "The Cyrus of Xenophon was a hero to many a literary man of the sixteenth century, but for Machiavelli he lived". Xenophon also, as Strauss pointed out, wrote a dialogue, Hiero which showed a wise man dealing sympathetically with a tyrant, coming close to what Machiavelli would do in uprooting the ideal of "the imagined prince". Xenophon however, like Plato and Aristotle, was a follower of Socrates, and his works show approval of a "teleological argument", while Machiavelli rejected such arguments. On this matter, gives evidence that Machiavelli may have seen himself as having learned something from Democritus, Epicurus and classical materialism, which was however not associated with political realism, or even any interest in politics.

On the topic of rhetoric Machiavelli, in his introduction, stated that "I have not embellished or crammed this book with rounded periods or big, impressive words, or with any blandishment or superfluous decoration of the kind which many are in the habit of using to describe or adorn what they have produced". This has been interpreted as showing a distancing from traditional rhetoric styles, but there are echoes of classical rhetoric in several areas. In Chapter 18, for example, he uses a metaphor of a lion and a fox, examples of force and cunning; according to, "the Roman author from whom Machiavelli in all likelihood drew the simile of the lion and the fox" was Cicero. The Rhetorica ad Herennium, a work which was believed during Machiavelli's time to have been written by Cicero, was used widely to teach rhetoric, and it is likely that Machiavelli was familiar with it. Unlike Cicero's more widely accepted works however, according to, "Ad Herennium ... offers a model of an ethical system that not only condones the practice of force and deception but appears to regard them as habitual and indeed germane to political activity". This makes it an ideal text for Machiavelli to have used.

Influence
To quote : "...there were in circulation approximately fifteen editions of the Prince and nineteen of the Discourses and French translations of each before they were placed on the Index of Paul IV in 1559, a measure which nearly stopped publication in Catholic areas except in France. Three principal writers took the field against Machiavelli between the publication of his works and their condemnation in 1559 and again by the Tridentine Index in 1564. These were the English cardinal Reginald Pole and the Portuguese bishop Jerónimo Osório, both of whom lived for many years in Italy, and the Italian humanist and later bishop, Ambrogio Caterino Politi." Machiavelli's ideas on how to accrue honour and power as a leader had a profound impact on political leaders throughout the modern West, helped by the new technology of the printing press. Pole reported that it was spoken of highly by his enemy Thomas Cromwell in England, and had influenced Henry VIII in his turn towards Protestantism, and in his tactics, for example during the Pilgrimage of Grace. A copy was also possessed by the Catholic king and emperor Charles V. In France, after an initially mixed reaction, Machiavelli came to be associated with Catherine de Medici and the St Bartholomew's Day Massacre. As reports, in the 16th century, Catholic writers "associated Machiavelli with the Protestants, whereas Protestant authors saw him as Italian and Catholic". In fact, he was apparently influencing both Catholic and Protestant kings.

One of the most important early works dedicated to criticism of Machiavelli, especially The Prince, was that of the Huguenot, Innocent Gentillet, Discourse against Machiavelli, commonly also referred to as Anti Machiavel, published in Geneva in 1576. He accused Machiavelli of being an atheist and accused politicians of his time by saying that they treated his works as the "Koran of the courtiers". Another theme of Gentillet was more in the spirit of Machiavelli himself: he questioned the effectiveness of immoral strategies (just as Machiavelli had himself done, despite also explaining how they could sometimes work). This became the theme of much future political discourse in Europe during the 17th century. This includes the Catholic Counter Reformation writers summarised by Bireley: Giovanni Botero, Justus Lipsius, Carlo Scribani, Adam Contzen, Pedro de Ribadeneira, and Diego de Saavedra Fajardo. These authors criticized Machiavelli, but also followed him in many ways. They accepted the need for a prince to be concerned with reputation, and even a need for cunning and deceit, but compared to Machiavelli, and like later modernist writers, they emphasized economic progress much more than the riskier ventures of war. These authors tended to cite Tacitus as their source for realist political advice, rather than Machiavelli, and this pretense came to be known as "Tacitism".

Modern materialist philosophy developed in the 16th, 17th and 18th century, starting in the generations after Machiavelli. The importance of Machiavelli's realism was noted by many important figures in this endeavor, for example Jean Bodin, Francis Bacon, Harrington, John Milton, Spinoza, Rousseau, Hume, Edward Gibbon, and Adam Smith. Although he was not always mentioned by name as an inspiration, due to his controversy, he is also thought to have been an influence for other major philosophers, such as Montaigne, Descartes, Hobbes, Locke and Montesquieu.

In literature:
 * Machiavelli is featured as a character in the prologue of Christopher Marlowe's The Jew of Malta.
 * In William Shakespeare's tragedy Othello, the antagonist Iago has been noted by some literary critics as being archetypal in adhering to Machiavelli's ideals by advancing himself through machination and duplicity with the consequence of causing the demise of both Othello and Desdemona.

Amongst later political leaders: 20th-century Italian-American mobsters were influenced by The Prince. John Gotti and Roy DeMeo would regularly quote The Prince and consider it to be the "Mafia Bible".
 * The republicanism in seventeenth-century England which led to the English Civil War, the Glorious Revolution and subsequent development of the English Constitution was strongly influenced by Machiavelli's political thought.
 * Most of the Founding Fathers of the American Revolution are known or often proposed to have been strongly influenced by Machiavelli's political works, including Benjamin Franklin, James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton and John Adams.
 * Under the guidance of Voltaire, Frederick the Great of Prussia criticised Machiavelli's conclusions in his "Anti-Machiavel", published in 1740.
 * At different stages in his life, Napoleon I of France wrote extensive comments to The Prince. After his defeat at Waterloo, these comments were found in the emperor's coach and taken by the Prussian military.
 * Italian dictator Benito Mussolini wrote a discourse on The Prince.
 * Soviet leader Joseph Stalin read The Prince and annotated his own copy.

Rapper Tupac Shakur studied in depth the teachings of The Prince while in prison recovering from an attempt on his life and was so inspired by it that once released from prison he changed his stage name to a pseudonym "Makaveli" stating, "Like, Machiavelli. My name is not Machiavelli. My name is Makaveli. I took it, that's mine. He gave me that. And I don't feel no guilt". "That's what got me here, My reading. It's not like I idolize this one guy Machiavelli. I idolize that type of thinking where you do whatever's gonna make you achieve your goal." Only eight weeks after Tupac Shakur died from gunshot wounds, Death Row released The Don Killuminati: The 7 Day Theory the posthumous album under the name of Makaveli.

Satire
This interpretation was famously put forth by scholar Garrett Mattingly (1958), who stated that "In some ways, Machiavelli's little treatise was just like all the other "Mirrors of Princes", in other ways it was a diabolical burlesque of all of them, like a political Black Mass."

This position was taken up previously by some of the more prominent Enlightenment philosophes. Diderot speculated that it was a work designed not to mock, but to secretly expose corrupt princely rule. And in his The Social Contract, the French philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau said: "Machiavelli was a proper man and a good citizen; but, being attached to the court of the Medici, he could not help veiling his love of liberty in the midst of his country's oppression. The choice of his detestable hero, Cesare Borgia, clearly enough shows his hidden aim; and the contradiction between the teaching of the Prince and that of the Discourses on Livy and the History of Florence shows that this profound political thinker has so far been studied only by superficial or corrupt readers. The Court of Rome sternly prohibited his book. I can well believe it; for it is that Court it most clearly portrays."

Whether or not the word "satire" is the best choice, the interpretation is very rare amongst those who study Machiavelli's works. For example Isaiah Berlin states that he cannot find anything other than Machiavelli's work that "reads less" like a satirical piece.

Deceit
Mary Dietz, in her essay Trapping The Prince, writes that Machiavelli's agenda was not to be satirical, as Rousseau had argued, but instead was "offering carefully crafted advice (such as arming the people) designed to undo the ruler if taken seriously and followed." By this account, the aim was to reestablish the republic in Florence. She focuses on three categories in which Machiavelli gives paradoxical advice:
 * He discourages liberality and favors deceit to guarantee support from the people. Yet Machiavelli is keenly aware of the fact that an earlier pro-republican coup had been thwarted by the people's inaction that itself stemmed from the prince's liberality.
 * He supports arming the people despite the fact that he knows the Florentines are decidedly pro-democratic and would oppose the prince.
 * He encourages the prince to live in the city he conquers. This opposes the Medici's habitual policy of living outside the city. It also makes it easier for rebels or a civilian militia to attack and overthrow the prince.

According to Dietz, the trap never succeeded because Lorenzo – "a suspicious prince" – apparently never read the work of the "former republican."

Other interpretations
The Italian Marxist philosopher Antonio Gramsci argued that Machiavelli's audience for this work was not the classes who already rule (or have "hegemony") over the common people, but the common people themselves, trying to establish a new hegemony, and making Machiavelli the first "Italian Jacobin".

Hans Baron is one of the few major commentators who argues that Machiavelli must have changed his mind dramatically in favour of free republics, after having written The Prince.

Other works by Machiavelli

 * The Girl from Andros
 * Discourses on Livy
 * The Art of War
 * The Mandrake

Additional reading

 * Excerpt, reviews and Text search shows Machiavelli's Discourses had a major impact on shaping conservative thought.
 * – excerpt and text search
 * Excerpt, reviews and Text search shows Machiavelli's Discourses had a major impact on shaping conservative thought.
 * – excerpt and text search
 * Excerpt, reviews and Text search shows Machiavelli's Discourses had a major impact on shaping conservative thought.
 * – excerpt and text search
 * Excerpt, reviews and Text search shows Machiavelli's Discourses had a major impact on shaping conservative thought.
 * – excerpt and text search
 * Excerpt, reviews and Text search shows Machiavelli's Discourses had a major impact on shaping conservative thought.
 * – excerpt and text search
 * Excerpt, reviews and Text search shows Machiavelli's Discourses had a major impact on shaping conservative thought.
 * – excerpt and text search
 * Excerpt, reviews and Text search shows Machiavelli's Discourses had a major impact on shaping conservative thought.
 * – excerpt and text search
 * – excerpt and text search
 * – excerpt and text search
 * – excerpt and text search
 * – excerpt and text search

Translations
 * Machiavelli, Niccolò (1908), "The Prince", Translated by W.K. Marriot (1847–1927).
 * . Translated by Allan Gilbert.
 * . Translated by George Bull.
 * . Translated by Harvey Mansfield.
 * . Translated by Robert M. Adams (A Norton Critical Edition, 2nd ed., with "Backgrounds, Interpretations, Marginalia").
 * . Translated and Edited by Stephen J. Milner. Introduction, Notes and other critical apparatus by J.M. Dent.
 * . Translated into Spanish by Marina Massa-Carrara.
 * Machiavelli, Niccolò (2009), The Prince, Penguin Classics. Translated by Tim Parks.
 * . 2d rev. ed. Translated and edited by William J. Connell.

title: The Prince


text: Talk:The Prince

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Talk:The Prince


text:
Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back

Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back is a 2001 American satirical stoner buddy comedy film written, co-edited, and directed by Kevin Smith and produced and co-edited by Scott Mosier. The film is the fifth set in the View Askewniverse, a growing collection of characters and settings that developed out of Smith's cult-favorite Clerks. It stars Jason Mewes and Smith respectively as the two eponymous characters. The film also stars Shannon Elizabeth, Jason Lee, Ben Affleck, Matt Damon, Will Ferrell, Eliza Dushku, Ali Larter, and Chris Rock, among many others, most of which in cameo appearances. The title and logo for Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back are direct references to The Empire Strikes Back.

Originally intended to be the last film set in the Askewniverse, or to feature Jay and Silent Bob, Strike Back features many characters from the previous Askew films, some in dual roles and/or reprising roles from the previous four entries. The film received mixed reviews from critics.

Smith announced in February 2017 that he was writing a sequel called Jay and Silent Bob Reboot and started filming in February 2019   and was released on October 15 that same year. From February to June 2019, Smith additionally re-adapted the plot of the film to the character of Mindy McCready / Hit-Girl in the relaunched Image comic book series, titled Hit-Girl: The Golden Rage of Hollywood, with Dave Lizewski filling the role of Banky Edwards.

Plot
Dante Hicks and Randal Graves put a restraining order on Jay and Silent Bob, finally fed up with their drug dealing antics outside the strip mall they work at after the duo tell a pair of teenagers that they were married in a Star Wars themed wedding. Not allowed within 100 feet of the strip mall for at least a year, Jay and Silent Bob visit Brodie Bruce at his comic shop where they learn that Miramax Films is adapting Bluntman and Chronic, the comic book based on their likenesses.

The pair visit Holden McNeil, co-creator and co-writer of Bluntman and Chronic, and demand that he give them their royalty money from the film, but Holden explains he sold his half of the rights to co-creator and artist Banky Edwards. Seeing the film's negative reception online, the pair set out for Hollywood to prevent the film from ruining their image, or at least to receive the royalties owed to them.

En route, they befriend an animal liberation group: Justice, Sissy, Missy, Chrissy, and Brent. The organization is a front; Brent is a patsy, who will free animals from a laboratory as a diversion while the girls rob a diamond depository. Jay throws Brent out of their van to get closer to Justice, to whom he is attracted to. Justice is fond of the pair, but reluctantly accepts them as new patsies. While the girls steal the diamonds, Jay and Silent Bob free the animals, stealing an orangutan named Suzanne. They escape as the police arrive and the van explodes, believing the girls have perished.

Federal Wildlife Marshal Willenholly (whose name is taken from Land of the Lost characters ) arrives at the crime scene; oblivious to the diamond heist, he claims jurisdiction due to the escaped animals, all of which have been recovered but Suzanne. The police find footage of a video Sissy made of Jay claiming to be "the clit commander", with "Clit" edited to be an acronym for Coalition for the Liberation of Itinerant Tree-Dwellers. Willenholly declares the crime an act of terrorism and calls for backup to hunt "the two most dangerous men on the planet." He finds Jay and Silent Bob at a diner near Vasquez Rocks, and chases them into the sewer system of a nearby dam. Suzanne helps the duo in losing Willenholly by luring him off the dam, but is subsequently abducted by a Hollywood animal acting agency.

The duo then hitch a ride and arrive in Hollywood, and eventually, the Miramax lot. Chased by a team of security guards through the lot and several movie sets, including Good Will Hunting 2: Hunting Season, and reclaiming Suzanne from the set of Scream 4, Jay and Silent Bob end up in the dressing room of Jason Biggs and James Van Der Beek, the actors playing Bluntman and Chronic respectively in the film. Suzanne beats up the actors, knocking them out, and Jay and Silent Bob assume the roles while Van Der Beek and Biggs are arrested after getting mistaken for the duo.

Meeting the film's anti-white director Chaka Luther King, who mistakes them for Biggs and Van Der Beek's stunt doubles, Jay and Silent Bob are then escorted onto the set and forced to fight Mark Hamill, playing the supervillain of the film Cocknocker (a combination of Hamill's roles as The Joker, The Trickster, and Luke Skywalker) in a Star Wars-esque battle. Willenholly, armed with a shotgun, arrives to capture the pair, but Justice protects them, admitting the CLIT organization was only a diversion. The other thieves arrive and a climactic gun fight ensues. Jay and Silent Bob locate Banky and demand that he shut down production of the movie. Banky refuses on account of both the large sum of money Miramax offered him for the film and that the internet will continue to troll them regardless. Silent Bob then informs Banky that he violated their original likeness rights contract by selling the film rights of Bluntman and Chronic to Miramax without their permission, and therefore could face legal trouble if he doesn't give them their legally entitled royalties. Banky finally relents and agrees to give the duo half of his payment for the film.

Justice then turns herself and her former team in to Willenholly in exchange for a shorter sentence and dropping the charges on Jay and Silent Bob. The duo spend their royalty money locating everyone who mocked them, their characters, and the movie on the internet, including children and members of the clergy, and travel to assault them. The scene cuts to the El Rey theater where a bunch of people exit, including Dante, Randal, Banky, Steve-Dave Pulski, Walt "The Fanboy" Grover, Willam Black, Hooper LaMonte, and sisters Alyssa and Tricia Jones, having just watched the Bluntman and Chronic movie, to poor reception. Jay and Silent Bob, accompanied by Justice and Willenholly (now an FBI agent), go across the street to enjoy the after party, featuring a performance from Morris Day and The Time.

After the credits, God (Dogma) closes the View Askewniverse book.

Cast

 * Jason Mewes as Jay/Chronic
 * Kevin Smith as Silent Bob/Bluntman
 * Ben Affleck as himself / Holden McNeil / Chuckie Sullivan / voice of Echo Base (Guard Over Radio)
 * Jason Lee as Brodie Bruce / Banky Edwards
 * Shannon Elizabeth as Justice
 * Eliza Dushku as Sissy
 * Ali Larter as Chrissy
 * Jennifer Schwalbach as Missy
 * Will Ferrell as Federal Wildlife Marshal Willenholly
 * Matt Damon as himself / Will Hunting
 * Brian O'Halloran as Dante Hicks
 * Jeff Anderson as Randal Graves
 * Judd Nelson as Sheriff
 * George Carlin as Hitchhiker
 * Carrie Fisher as Nun
 * Seann William Scott as Brent
 * Jon Stewart as Reg Hartner
 * Tracy Morgan as Pumpkin Escobar
 * Chris Rock as Chaka Luther King
 * Jamie Kennedy as Chaka's production assistant
 * Mark Hamill as himself / Cocknocker / voice of Scooby-Doo
 * Marc Blucas as Fred lookalike
 * Matthew James as Shaggy lookalike
 * Jane Silvia as Velma lookalike
 * Carmen Llywelyn as Daphne lookalike
 * Diedrich Bader as Gordon, the Miramax security guard
 * Bryan Johnson as Steve-Dave Pulski
 * Walter Flanagan as Walter "The Fanboy" Grover
 * Scott Mosier as Willam Black / Good Will Hunting 2 assistant director
 * Renee Humphrey as Tricia Jones
 * Joey Lauren Adams as Alyssa Jones
 * Dwight Ewell as Hooper LaMont/Hooper X
 * Scott William Winters as himself / Clark
 * William B. Davis (uncredited cameo) as The Smoking Man
 * Joe Quesada (uncredited cameo) as Pizza Delivery Man
 * Alanis Morissette (cameo) as God

Additionally, Wes Craven, Jules Asner, Steve Kmetko, Gus Van Sant, Jason Biggs, James Van Der Beek, Shannen Doherty, and Morris Day all appear as themselves.

Production
The film's plot was heavily inspired by Chasing Dogma, a comic book miniseries that Smith wrote in 1998 and 1999 to explore events that happened in the Askewniverse between Chasing Amy and Dogma.

The film was originally titled View Askew 5 and the title was changed to Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back. Filming began on January 14, 2001, and ended on April 19, 2001. Filming took in place in New Jersey, and mostly in California.

On his podcast Jay & Silent Bob Get Old, Kevin Smith explained at length about how much of a "headache" the film was to make, mostly owing to Jason Mewes's drug and alcohol abuse turning him into a "ticking time bomb", which threatened to shut the project down at any moment. During pre-production, Mewes would have constant mood swings due to heroin withdrawal, to the point that Smith actually threw him out of his car on their way to the set one day. Mewes would compensate for his lack of drugs by drinking heavily after every day of shooting and nearly got into a fist fight with producer Scott Mosier when he had to come back one night for a re-shoot while drunk. When the shoot wrapped, Smith told Mewes point-blank to get sober or he would never speak to him again.

Box office
Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back grossed $30.1 million in the United States and Canada, and $3.7 million in other territories, for a worldwide total of $33.8 million, against a production budget of $22 million.

The film grossed $11 million in its opening weekend, finishing third at the box office behind two other comedy sequels, American Pie 2 ($12.5 million) and Rush Hour 2 ($11.6 million).

Critical reception
On review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes the film has an approval rating of 52% based on 151 reviews, with an average rating of 5.60/10. The site's critical consensus reads, "Fans can expect a good laugh as the cast from Smith's previous films reunite for Jay and Silent Bob's last bow. The loose plotting and crude language may be too much for others though." On Metacritic the film has a weighted average score of 51 out of 100, based on 31 critics, indicating "mixed or average reviews". Audiences surveyed by CinemaScore gave the film an average grade of "B+" on an A+ to F scale.

Roger Ebert gave the film 3 out of 4 stars, writing that "[w]hether you will like 'Jay and Silent Bob' depends on who you are ... Kevin Smith's movies are either made specifically for you, or specifically not made for you". Adam Smith of Empire gave the film 3/5 stars, writing that "[w]hen it's good it's very, very good, but when it's bad it's offensive", and noting that "the gag hit/miss ratio is really only about 50/50". Scott Tobias of The A.V. Club wrote that "[e]ven at a slim 95 minutes, Jay And Silent Bob lets initially funny scenes trail off into long-winded monologues and silly digressions", and Elvis Mitchell of The New York Times called the film "[may]be the greatest picture ever made for 14-year-old boys. Mr. Smith may have hit his target, but he aimed very low." In August 2001, Mike Schulz of River Cities' Reader wrote that, "for sheer laughs, both mindless and incredibly smart, nothing since 1997's Waiting for Guffman has even compared."

Home media
Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back was released on VHS and on a two-disc DVD set on February 26, 2002, by Dimension Home Entertainment as a part of their "Dimension Collector's Series", presented in its original 2.35:1 widescreen aspect ratio. Among the bonus features on the DVD is an audio commentary by Smith, Mosier, and Mewes, 42 deleted, extended, and alternate scenes, music videos for Stroke 9's Kick Some Ass and Afroman's Because I Got High, storyboards, a gag reel, a behind the scenes special, still galleries, cast and crew filmographies, and TV spots. A Blu-ray version of the film was released on September 19, 2006, with all features carried over from the DVD. As for 2020, the film's home media distribution has been handled by Paramount Pictures Home Entertainment following Paramount Global's purchase of 49% of Miramax (which includes Dimension Films' pre-2006 film and television catalog).

Soundtrack
Music from the Dimension Motion Picture: Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back, the soundtrack to the film, was released on August 14, 2001, by Universal Records. Varèse Sarabande released the original score by James L. Venable. It alternates film dialogue with songs of various genres that appear in the film. It features the 2001 Afroman hit, "Because I Got High", whose music video featured the characters Jay and Silent Bob. 'Tube Of Wonderful' was previously used as the theme song from Smith's 1997 film Chasing Amy.

 * 1) Interlude: Cue Music by Jason Lee (as Brodie Bruce) – 0:03
 * 2) "Jay's Rap 2001" by Jason Mewes (as Jay) – 0:32
 * 3) "Kick Some Ass" by Stroke 9 – 4:05
 * 4) Holden on Affleck by Ben Affleck as Holden McNeil – 0:28
 * 5) "Tube of Wonderful" by Dave Pirner – 1:45
 * 6) Cyber Savvy by Ben Affleck and Jason Mewes (as Holden and Jay) – 0:07
 * 7) "Choked Up" by Minibar – 2:58
 * 8) Doobie Snacks by Jason Mewes (as Jay) – 0:08
 * 9) "Magic Carpet Ride" by Steppenwolf – 2:43
 * 10) Jay & Justice by Shannon Elizabeth and Jason Mewes (as Justice and Jay) – 0:11
 * 11) "Bad Medicine" by Bon Jovi – 3:55
 * 12) Stealing Monkeys – 0:08
 * 13) "This Is Love" by PJ Harvey – 3:45
 * 14) Advice from Above – 0:23
 * 15) "The Devil's Song" by Marcy Playground – 2:52
 * 16) Idiots vs. The Internet – 0:06
 * 17) "Tougher Than Leather" by Run-D.M.C. – 4:23
 * 18) Willenholly's Woe by Will Ferrell (as Willenholly) – 0:09
 * 19) "Bullets" by Bob Schneider – 4:22
 * 20) Touching a Brother's Heart by Jason Mewes and Tracy Morgan (as Jay and Pumpkin Escobar) – 0:23
 * 21) "Hiphopper" by Thomas Rusiak featuring Teddybears STHLM – 4:46
 * 22) Two Thumbs Up by Chris Rock (as Chaka Luther King) – 0:07
 * 23) "Jackass" by Bloodhound Gang – 2:26
 * 24) A Smooth Pimp and a Man Servant by Jason Mewes (as Jay) – 0:16
 * 25) "Jungle Love" (Live) by Morris Day and The Time – 3:03
 * 26) NWP by Chris Rock (as Chaka Luther King) – 0:14
 * 27) "Because I Got High" by Afroman – 3:18 (with hidden track)

MPAA rating and GLAAD controversy
In August 2001, three weeks prior to release, the film came under fire from the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD), for an alleged "overwhelmingly homophobic tone", which included an abundance of gay jokes and characters excessively using the term "gay" to mean something derogatory. The scenes deemed particularly offensive included Jay's vehement refusal of giving oral sex to a male driver when hitchhiking, and Jay chastising Silent Bob for being willing to perform fellatio on him to get the security guard to let them go. Following an advance screening of the film, former GLAAD media director Scott Seomin asked Smith to make a $10,000 donation to the Matthew Shepard Foundation, as well as to include a reference to GLAAD's cause in the ending credits. Ebert responded to this controversy, writing: "GLAAD should give audiences credit for enough intelligence to know the difference between satire and bigotry."

On the bonus DVD, Smith explains in the on-camera intros of the deleted scenes that several scenes had to be cut from the theatrical release, due to the film initially receiving an NC-17 rating from the MPAA. He also mentions in the audio commentary of the feature film that it took three submissions to the MPAA for the film to finally earn an R rating.

title: Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back


text:
Talk:Titanic (1997 film)

December 2023
I edited this recently, but it got reverted. I mean, we can all agree that she doesn't physically reunite with him at the end of the film, right? She's either asleep or passed away, but either way it's clear that it's a spiritual affair after the ship sank. GOLDIEM J (talk) 14:09, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

 * It's already mentioned that she's asleep at that point, so is it necessary to label it as spiritual? DonIago (talk) 14:36, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
 * WP:FILMPLOT says to avoid interpretations. Just stick to what the movie literally shows us.
 * In this case, the movie literally shows them reuniting on the ship, so what's what we should describe in the plot summary. The reader can then decide for themselves whether this is an "actual" event or a metaphorical/spiritual/whatever event — just like the viewer decides that when watching the movie.
 * In the case of the movie, viewers will be inclined to assume it is not an "actual" event as they've just seen Rose seemingly sleeping and it would involve some kind of crazy time travel. In the case of the Wikipedia plot summary, readers will be inclined to assume it is not an "actual" event as they've just read that Rose was seemingly sleeping and it would involve some kind of crazy time travel. Same outcome, and a fair reflection of the plot. Popcornfud (talk) 14:49, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Retrospective section
I found the retrospective section here to be a bit odd (perhaps poorly named). This film was released in December 1997. The "retrospective" section includes one response from a French filmmaker ... made in 1998 ... and also devotes an entire paragraph to James Cameron's response to criticism ... also made in 1998.

FWIW, whether the French filmmaker's comments should be included at all is also maybe worth reconsidering. His full quotation on Winslett's performance: "On top of which, the actress is awful, unwatchable, the most slovenly girl to appear on the screen in a long, long time. That's why it’s been such a success with young girls, especially inhibited, slightly plump American girls who see the film over and over as if they were on a pilgrimage: they recognize themselves in her, and dream of falling into the arms of the gorgeous Leonard." Lots of directors through the years have spoken of Titanic ... why is that pretty flagrantly sexist comment worth highlighting?--96.94.213.161 (talk) 18:02, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

Jon Landau
Should link to Jon_Landau_(film_producer) 2600:4040:7EDC:4600:7DB8:380B:4184:1618 (talk) 08:17, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Titanic (1997 film)


text:
Talk:Mifflin County, Pennsylvania

Untitled
Wondering how to edit this U.S. County Entry? The WikiProject U.S. Counties standards might help.

Allensville, PA NOT LISTED
I WAS WONDERING WHY ALLENSVILLE, PA IS NOT LISTED ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.4.186.174 (talk) 23:58, 19 January 2004 (UTC)

 * Because it's not a city, town, nor even a census-designated place. --Thisisbossi 10:54, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Just checking to see if anyone would have any info on the Yohn Convalescent Home Located in Granville in the 50's and 60's. THANKS  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.95.50.83 (talk) 03:13, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

history of Mifflin County
I suggest a new section on history in Mifflin County. Pete unseth (talk) 19:56, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Mifflin County, Pennsylvania


text:
Talk:Monroe County, Pennsylvania

Untitled
Wondering how to edit this U.S. County Entry? - The WikiProject U.S. Counties standards might help.

Fair use rationale for File:Monroe County pa Seal.gif
File:Monroe County pa Seal.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 22:51, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

name attribution
There is no reference cited for the county being named after the president. What is the attribution? The article for East Stroudsburg states, "The area of Stroudsburg was first permanently settled in 1738, when James Monroe received a warrant of 600 acres in Bucks County, now Monroe County...." Is this really just a coincidence? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.11.36.194 (talk) 20:07, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Monroe County, Pennsylvania


text:
Talk:Montgomery County, Pennsylvania

Untitled
Wondering how to edit this U.S. County Entry? The WikiProject U.S. Counties standards might help.

Hi, I cleaned it up a little bit, but a couple of comments out there are unsubstantiated. I hope someone can help clean up the culture section a bit. I'll be working to try and expand some of the data, but hopefully I can get a hand.Montco 01:32, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Coroner
Hi, I'm David Ewald. I live in Montgomery County, and recently added a note regarding the coroner's refusal to file autopsy reports with the prothonotary. "Dough (some number)" deleted this as "junk". However, if it's appropriate to list the names of the coroner and the prothonotary, it's appropriate to note whether the prothonotary's office has the records it is supposed to have, and whether the coroner's office is functioning properly. It is also appropriate to note the duties of these offices. Those who want to review public records should know when a county office's denial of access is illegal. The links I provided in my post show that the law in this matter is not disputable. It may be carped that I provided no citation for the coroner's refusal. However, you may hear that refusal simply by contacting the coroner's office and asking for these public records. I will delete this edit myself if the coroner decides to obey the law. In the mean time, the article now has information on the functionality of offices of Montgomery County, Pennsylvania.

Intro article
Hello, figured I would chime in. This is a proposed edit I think might be beneficial. I would expand on the statement describing the physical nature of the county's areas. My statement would sound more like this:

"Montgomery County is a very diverse in how it incorporates a wide variety of different types of urban, suburban, and rural neighborhoods. The western portions of the county tend to feature rural areas such as Harleysville, New Hanover, and Hatfield that surround small towns such as East Greenville, Lansdale, and Pottstown. The central portion features the city of Norristown, the county seat, as well as major suburban residential developments and business park centers such as King of Prussia, Plymouth Meeting, Blue Bell, the large borough of Conshohocken, and the borough of Ambler. The eastern portion is defined primarily by the PA-611 corridor which features densely populated older townships such as Cheltenham, Abington, Upper Moreland, and Horsham Townships, and large concentrations of twin homes and some row homes in dense towns and boroughs such as Rockledge, Jenkintown, Willow Grove, and Hatboro. The southernmost tip of the county also features the wealthy suburban Lower Merion Township.

Perhaps this could be incorporated into the Geography or Community section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.11.221.246 (talk) 22:35, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Huntingdon Valley
There's no article yet for Huntingdon Valley, and I'd like to create at least a stub for it in the near future. Once I do that, I'd like to insert this place into the Communities and Census-Designated Places section of this entry. Does a community have to be a census-designated place (CDP) in order to be there? And if so, is there a way I can find out if Huntingdon Valley is such a place? Would Huntingdon Valley have had an entry already if it were a CDP?

While it could be argued that a lot of what can be said is already covered in the Lower Moreland and Bethayres entries, Huntingdon Valley covers more that just these places. Five townships - Abington, Lower Moreland, Lower Southampton, Upper Moreland, Upper Southampton - in two different counties - Bucks and Montgomery - constitute the area known as Huntingdon Valley. Huntingdon Valley is situated so close to two Montgomery County boroughs - Bryn Athyn and Rockledge - and the farthest northeastern part of the city and county of Philadelphia that sometimes the boundaries of these blur.

In fact, while Bethayres does have an entry, albeit a stub, it had not been listed in this section, so I went ahead and added it. Please feel free to revert it if it doesn't qualify as a CDP or other criteria. RSLitman 02:38, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

 * Thanks. CDPs are defined by the U.S. Census Bureau, but other unincorporated communities are also listed with CDPs in PA county articles. My guess is that whoever made the Bethayres article did not think or know to put it in the section. Communities in two counties are listed in both. Ruhrfisch 02:52, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

It occurred to me after I posted this that any Huntingdon Valley entry should also go into any Bucks County lists that exist, even though the proportion of Huntingdon Valley that's in Montgomery County is a lot larger than that which is in Bucks County. I ought to see if any other Post Office designations that cover both counties, but cover one county a lot more than the other, appear in both counties. I know that while the borough of Hatboro is totally within Montgomery County, the Post Office designation of Hatboro extends somewhat into neighboring townships, including at least one, Warminster Township, that is in Bucks County. (The now-closed "Hatboro" office of the state/commonwealth government agency that handles unemployement compensations claims was actually located in Warminster Township.) RSLitman 19:35, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

The Name "Montco"
As a "life-long Montgomery County resident" (20 years and 5 days in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, the remaining time in Montgomery County, Maryland), I've never cared for the abbreviation of "Montco". While it (and similar local county abbreviations such as Chesco, Burlco, and Delco) may do fine as an abbreviation in headlines in the Philadelphia Inquirer and other newspapers, I question its appropriateness in a serious document like this one is supposed to be. RSLitman 19:43, 24 November 2006 (UTC) I went to the Chester County, Delaware County, and Burlington County (New Jersey) entries to see if the above-mentioned abbreviations appeared on their pages. The Burlington County page didn't contain "Burlco" at all. On the Chester County page, the only hit I got came about as a result of "chesco" being embedded in the county's official web site's URL, just as "montco" is embedded in Montgomery County's official web site's URL. On the Delaware County page, I got two "Delco" hits because the various school districts in the county are listed there, and two of them - Penn-Delco School District and Southeast Delco School District - contain "Delco" in their names. I visited the the official district web page for Penn-Delco (the one for Southeast Delco appeared to be down, perhaps because of the holiday weekend), and it appears that the use of "Delco" in the district's name is official, not just a convenient abbreviation of "Delaware County" by whoever wrote this portion of the county's Wikipedia entry. RSLitman 19:53, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * When I hear "MontCo" I think of the Community College, not the County. Passdoubt | Talk 02:21, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I think it is worth mentioning as an abbreviation for these two things, but agree it should not be used in the article and that it does not seem properly encyclopedic. Are there any official examples (for example Southern Lancaster County has the Solanco School District?). Ruhrfisch 02:36, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Article Name
Why "Montgomery County, Pennsylvania"? Why not "County of Montgomery, Pennsylvania"? Small change but shouldn't we use the most correct, not just the vernacular? Awg1010 (talk) 23:12, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I think almost all of the counties in the USA are "X County, Y" where Y is the state name. The rationale is probably that that is how most people would look for them. I also note that County of Montgomery, Pennsylvania is a redirect here. Ruhrfisch ><> ° ° 03:42, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Although not exactly definitive, the County's own official web site (newer than these Talk posts) uses "Montgomery County, Pennsylvania", except for the occasional MontCo babble. ChrisJBenson (talk) 09:34, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Is the Origin of the County Name really uncertain?
The administrative county of Montgomery was created in 1784, but the area had a community named Montgomery for almost a century before that. Originally deeded by William Penn in 1682, the Welsh [Quaker] settlement of Montgomery had only a handful of residents in 1707. It was incorporated and officially designated as Montgomery Township by the Pennsylvania Provincial Assembly in 1714. This information can be found at the Montgomery Township Historical Society web site here and is in turn from "An Erudite Little Township", a pamphlet published in 1979 by Montgomery historian James A Williams.

In light of the timeline information above, I respectfully suggest that this Pennsylvania community's 300 hundred year association with the name Montgomery is unlikely to be derived from a soldier who was born in Ireland 24 years after Montgomery's incorporation. Furthermore, one might consider that even today, at least sixteen places within Montgomery County have Welsh names, with a similar Welsh prevalence in the surrounding counties. I remain with the obvious premise that the County of Montgomery in Pennsylvania is named for the County of Montgomery in Wales (albeit inherited through the earlier naming of Montgomery Township).

I don't believe this article should include speculation associating the county name with Richard Montgomery (born 1738), and I don't agree that Reliable Sources can confirm that view. ChrisJBenson (talk) 09:23, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Montgomery County, Pennsylvania. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090825184301/http://www.census.gov:80/acs/www/Products/Profiles/Single/2003/ACS/Tabular/050/05000US420911.htm to http://www.census.gov/acs/www/Products/Profiles/Single/2003/ACS/Tabular/050/05000US420911.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 14:41, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 one external links on Montgomery County, Pennsylvania. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110531210815/http://www.naco.org/Counties/Pages/FindACounty.aspx to http://www.naco.org/Counties/Pages/FindACounty.aspx
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.forbes.com/2008/06/27/schools-places-family-forbeslife-cz_zg_0630realestate.html
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6YSasqtfX?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.census.gov%2Fprod%2Fwww%2Fdecennial.html to http://www.census.gov/prod/www/decennial.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130911234518/http://factfinder2.census.gov to http://factfinder2.census.gov

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:17, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Montgomery County, Pennsylvania. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/60BeqNBGz?url=http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/42/42091.html to http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/42/42091.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.census.gov/prod/www/decennial.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.census.gov/acs/www/Products/Profiles/Single/2003/ACS/Tabular/050/05000US420911.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131013174056/http://www.rydal-meadowbrook.org/county to http://www.rydal-meadowbrook.org/county

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:22, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Montgomery County, Pennsylvania


text:
Talk:Montour County, Pennsylvania

Untitled
Wondering how to edit this U.S. County Entry? The WikiProject U.S. Counties standards might help.

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Montour County, Pennsylvania. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/60BfIPU8a?url=http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/42/42093.html to http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/42/42093.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141029032029/http://www.csiu.org/index.cfm?pageid=566 to http://www.csiu.org/index.cfm?pageid=566
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120415152248/http://edna.ed.state.pa.us/Entity.asp?txtAUN=216470003&txtSchool=0&txtInst=43405 to http://edna.ed.state.pa.us/Entity.asp?txtAUN=216470003&txtSchool=0&txtInst=43405

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:41, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Montour County, Pennsylvania


text:
Talk:Northampton County, Pennsylvania

Untitled
Wondering how to edit this U.S. County Entry? The WikiProject U.S. Counties standards might help.

Coal Region?!
As a person born and raised in northern Northampton County (Pen Argyl to be specific) I cannot agree with the claim that the northen edge of Northampton County is considered to be part of the Coal Region. To the best of my knowledge, there is no coal mining anywhere in this part of county. The area has always been refered to as "The Gateway to the Poconos" and many people who are not from the area assume that northen Northampton County is part of the Poconos itself. The article on the Coal Region (as of the last time I checked) makes no mention of Northern Northampton County. As such, I have edited the article to reflect this. I realize that this may smack of orginal research; therefore, if someone believes anything to the contrary, I encourage them to change the article, provided they can dig up some citations. Sixtus LXVI 06:02, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Thanks - it may be possible that someone confused Northumberland County, Pennsylvania (which is in the coal region) with Northampton County. My understanding is that the prohibition on original research is aimed more at preventing crackpot theories (gravity is caused by little grren men sucking on straws below my feet - see WP:NOR) from getting on Wikipedia. If you can give a citation for the "Gateway to the Poconos" (Chamber of commerce or tourism board or even a billboard?) it is not original research. Ruhrfisch 12:00, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

 * After some further reflection, I’ve decided to remove any reference the Poconos from this article. Why?  Because only certain areas of northern Northampton County (Wind Gap and Delaware Water Gap come to mind) can, at best, be considered to be the "Gateway to the Poconos."  Area residents, if asked, would claim that northern Northampton County is part of the Lehigh Valley.  Furthermore, the Pocono Mountains Vacations Bureau defines the Poconos as consisting of Carbon, Monroe, Pike, and Wayne Counties .  It makes no mention of Northampton County, even in context of the "Gateway . . ."  Sixtus LXVI 00:26, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

 * OK, two thoughts. 1) The Poconos article says parts of Northanpton County are in the Poconos so that should be changed to be consistent, and 2) I think it is fine to say that Northampton Co. is just south of the Poconos (adjacent counties are part of the Geography, so I don't see why adjacent regions can't be). Ruhrfisch 03:10, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Done and Done. Sixtus LXVI 16:33, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

History
Was Northampton County one of the original Province of PA counties? Didn't it give birth to several other counties, maybe Pike and Wayne? Any others? Thanks, Wordreader (talk) 18:58, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

 * I did some interweb searching for a map of Northampton County when it was created in 1752, but could not find one. Is there one that can used to create a WP map for upload here?

 * Thank you for your time, Wordreader (talk) 01:57, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Northampton County, Pennsylvania. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/60CPxKFYH?url=http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/42/42095.html to http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/42/42095.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:27, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

House bill 13
Please say no from members East bath rod and gun club 24.229.140.206 (talk) 13:34, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Northampton County, Pennsylvania


text:
Talk:Northumberland County, Pennsylvania

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Northumberland County, Pennsylvania. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120323215907/http://portal.acs.org/portal/acs/corg/content?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=PP_ARTICLEMAIN&node_id=925&content_id=CTP_004441&use_sec=true&sec_url_var=region1 to http://portal.acs.org/portal/acs/corg/content?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=PP_ARTICLEMAIN&node_id=925&content_id=CTP_004441&use_sec=true&sec_url_var=region1

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 06:30, 29 August 2015 (UTC)


text:
Talk:Perry County, Pennsylvania

Gallery
Can we keep the gallery the same, or at least only change the size to 160, but not jumble it up? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SusquehannaMan (talk • contribs) 21:22, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Untitled
Wondering how to edit this U.S. County Entry? The WikiProject U.S. Counties standards might help.

title: Talk:Perry County, Pennsylvania