Machiavelli begins The Prince, the classic of Renaissance political thought, with the classification of the existing states, at the same time without defining concept of a state. That left a kind of void which many authors have tried to fill in their different interpretations of Machiavelli's definition of the state. This paper deals with an examination of such interpretations by some of the most important authors in the field of State Theory such as Alessandro Passerin d'Entrèves and Quentin Skinner, but also others such as Ernst Cassirer, Jack Hexter, Harvey Mansfield, Alissa Ardito. They all have demonstrated that Machiavelli's lo stato is personalized type of political regime. However, it is emphasized that Machiavelli's notion of the state is neither common nor traditional since it is derived from the secular foundation. This does not exhaust Machiavelli's contribution to the development of the understanding of the state whose various forms Machiavelli discusses impartially. Since different interpreters have put emphasis on the various aspects of Machiavelli's conception of the state, the overview of all these interpretations suggests that there is no consensus about Machiavelli's conception of the state in The Prince. Starting from Lefort's interpretation of Machiavelli's conception of politics, finally in this paper there has been problematized something which connects different interpretations, and this is reduction of complexity of Machiavelli's thought to force and power.