Machiavelli's "The Prince" vs. Aeschly's "The Suppliants" looking at what each book defines as a "good leader"

It is commonly assumed that a good leader possesses certain characteristics and abilities that allow him/her to understand and accomplish what is good for his/her citizens/subjects. Machiavelli, in writing The Prince , is addressing the prince of Florence directly giving him advice on how to be a successful leader. Aeschylus, in writing the suppliants, was writing a play not directing one person in particular, but within the play he displaces what is believed …

…rulers would be able to successfully rule a nation, just at different time periods and in different parts of the world. There is no way to say that one method is better than the other, or that one ruler would be better than another, but it's fair to say that in current times Machiavelli's ruler would be most effective in the current political climate. Aeschylus King of Argos Vs Machiavelli's Prince Chris Speich POSC. 140 Paper