Power and authority, without being dependent on each other or any other in perspective, are both capable of provoking a thesis of some form. This is most likely the source of some people’s discomfort. The thought of performing a marriage ceremony between them – that is, power and authority.

Regardless, power is defined as “the ability to do something,” but authority is described as “the power or right to command.”

2 It’s critical to understand the difference between the two, as they’re frequently misunderstood in both language and cognition. When we say a statute gives a minister “power” to do something, we really mean “authority.” We also talk about going beyond one’s legal authority.

In the work of Jean Bodin in the 16th century, the looseness of usage occurs immediately from the start of the theoretical study of sovereignty. ‘Sovereignty is a state’s absolute and perpetual authority (puissance),’ adds Bodin, referring to the supreme powers to command. It is required to create a definition of sovereignty because no just or political philosopher has done so, despite the fact that it is the most important quality to comprehend in the treatment of the state’.

He goes on to say things like ‘puissance souveraine’ and ‘pussance absolue,’ giving the impression that sovereignty is a power issue in the traditional sense.

Is the ability to issue effective commands, i.e. the ability to have one’s command carried out, what Bodin means by ‘total power’? This, properly speaking, would be power. Is he referring to the authority or right to issue directives and have them carried out? This could be a sign of power. His entire description of sovereignty demonstrates that he intends the second, yet his usage of the term “absolute power” suggests the first. 3

Machiavelli believed that societal cohesiveness and moral regeneration required steady governmental power and order. For this reason, he emphasized the importance of a unified polity as well as a republican and free government dedicated to the people’s liberty. His novel perspective on political behavior.

“Its hist for power, its admiration of success, its carefreeness of means, its rejection of medieval bonds, its honest pragmatism, its confidence that national unity creates for national strength,” Machiavelli grasped the reality of politics. His cynicism, like his appreciation of craftiness, isn’t enough to hide the optimist in him.” He adored Republican liberty, but he was well aware of the dangers that tyranny posed to free institutions in the midst of chaos.

While Machievelli emphasized the need of state security and unity as the fundamental concerns of a ruler in the Prince, the theme of the speeches was liberty and republicanism.

4 Throughout the thesis, the Prince has a prominent position.


“A proposal expressing something must be done” is how a problem is defined. 5 The task at hand is to examine the concepts of power and authority, both outside and inside Machiavelli’s framework. But, once again, why the determination to combine power and authority? This philosophical subject has my respect, and I dare state it is a distinguished matter at hand. Yes, because “to separate (something) into its constituent parts to investigate its structure and functions, etc.” is defined as “to separate (something) into its constituent parts to investigate its structure and functions, etc.” If the aforementioned distinction must preserve its importance in analysis, 6 fusion (which, after all, establishes unity) is a condition sine qua non. So, what is the structure of power and authority, and what are its functions? Is one better than the other or more relevant? If so, which one? To put it another way, to what extent can/should one rely on or be independent of the other? Are power and authority synonymous? If not, what are the differences and to what extent do they exist? Who or what has the ability to wield power and/or authority, and what are their boundaries? What is the point of having power? What is the purpose of authority?… The truth is, there are a lot of questions in this area. However, as this thesis progresses, deliberate attempts will be made to re-enter as many of them as possible and, in some cases, required.


As I previously indicated, power and authority are frequently mistaken at various times and in various ways. This is eerily similar to how Machiavelli’s view of them is sometimes misunderstood. This observation is one of the main reasons why, in this thesis, I hope to achieve the greatest possible clarity regarding the nature and/or extent of power and authority as individual entities in the first instance, as fused entities in the second, as determined by Niccolo Machiavelli in the third, and finally, as less-complicated concepts introduced anew, for the benefit of all interested.


We sometimes see, read, or hear about events in governance, and as one might anticipate, only those with a rudimentary understanding of politics, especially from a philosophical position, can grasp the reality(ies) of such occurrences without falling prey to the enticing hands of deception.

It’s possible that the political jurisdiction in which we now operate is more than just power and authority. However, no amount of denial will change the fact that these individuals instinctively take majority space when the word government is mentioned.

As a result, I plan to reaffirm and hopefully expose more about them (that is, power and authority) than is already self-evident, an accomplishment that I feel will serve as an example for how contact should be conducted.



Even while I am aware that Machiavelli is the essential personality in my much-discussed examination of power and authority, I may have to go off course at random, especially when the necessity to reinforce a point silently requires such swerving.

However, under chapter three (3) of this thesis, Machiavelli’s well-known work “The Prince” will be examined. Is The Prince a series of prescriptions for the successful management of a state through the acquisition of power by Machiavelli? There, he also used the term authority to express meaning at random, and when we come to that area, we should try to figure out whether power and authority are one and the same.


We already know that dividing something into its constituent elements in order to understand its structure and function is part of that analysis (s). As a result, I aim to use this technique to mantle the remaining chapters of this thesis from a historical-analytical angle, conducting extensive research.

Relevant contributions from available sources, such as factual, written, oral, and so on, will be gradually introduced, while assessment, refutation, critique, and so on, will be promptly introduced as and when required.

Leave a Comment