VI. New Principalities Acquired by One’s Own Arms and Ability
Let no one be surprised if, in speaking of principalities that are entirely new, both in their prince and in their state, I bring forward the very greatest examples. For men almost always walk on paths beaten by others and proceed in their actions by imitation; and since one cannot keep entirely to the paths of others, nor attain the ability of those one imitates, a prudent man should always enter on the paths beaten by great men and imitate those who have been most excellent, so that if his own ability does not reach theirs, it will at least give off some scent of it. He should do as prudent archers do: when the place they mean to hit seems too far away, and they know how far the strength of their bow will carry, they aim a good deal higher than the target, not to reach such a height with their arrow, but to be able, with the help of so high an aim, to hit the mark they intend. I say, then, that in entirely new principalities, where there is a new prince, there is more or less difficulty in keeping them according to whether the one who acquires them is more or less able. And because this event, rising from private station to prince, presupposes either ability or fortune, it seems that one or the other of these two things lessens many of the difficulties to some extent. Nevertheless, the one who has relied less on fortune has held on longer. It also makes things easier when the prince, having no other states, is obliged to come and live there in person. But to come to those who have become princes by their own ability and not by fortune, I say that the most excellent are Moses, Cyrus, Romulus, Theseus, and the like. And although Moses should not be discussed, since he was a mere executor of the things God commanded him, still he must be admired, if only for the grace that made him worthy to speak with God. But let us consider Cyrus and the others who have acquired or founded kingdoms: you will find them all admirable; and if their particular actions and institutions are considered, they will not seem different from those of Moses, who had so great a teacher. And examining their actions and lives, one does not see that they had anything from fortune but the opportunity, which gave them the matter into which they could introduce whatever form they pleased. Without that opportunity the ability of their spirit would have been wasted, and without that ability the opportunity would have come in vain. It was necessary, then, for Moses to find the people of Israel in Egypt, enslaved and oppressed by the Egyptians, so that they would be willing to follow him to get out of servitude. It was fitting that Romulus should find no room in Alba and should have been exposed at birth, if he was to become king of Rome and founder of that nation. Cyrus had to find the Persians discontented with the rule of the Medes, and the Medes soft and effeminate after a long peace. Theseus could not have shown his ability if he had not found the Athenians scattered. These opportunities, therefore, made these men prosper, and their excellent ability made the opportunity known; so their country was ennobled by it and flourished.
Those who, like these men, become princes by the paths of ability acquire their principality with difficulty but hold it with ease. The difficulties they have in acquiring it arise partly from the new institutions and methods they are forced to introduce to found their state and their security. And it should be borne in mind that there is nothing more difficult to handle, more doubtful of success, or more dangerous to manage than to take the lead in introducing new institutions. For the innovator has as enemies all those who do well under the old institutions, and only lukewarm defenders in all those who would do well under the new. This lukewarmness comes partly from fear of their adversaries, who have the laws on their side, and partly from the incredulity of men, who do not truly believe in new things until they have seen them confirmed by experience. Hence, whenever those who are enemies have the opportunity to attack, they do it with partisan zeal, while the others defend lukewarmly, so that the innovator is in danger along with them. It is necessary, therefore, if we want to discuss this part well, to examine whether these innovators stand on their own or depend on others: that is, whether to carry out their work they must beg, or can use force. In the first case they always come to grief and accomplish nothing; but when they depend on their own resources and can use force, they are seldom in danger. That is why all armed prophets have conquered and the unarmed have come to ruin. For besides what has been said, the nature of peoples is changeable: it is easy to persuade them of something, but difficult to keep them in that persuasion. So things must be arranged in such a way that when they no longer believe, they can be made to believe by force. Moses, Cyrus, Theseus, and Romulus could not have had their constitutions observed for long if they had been unarmed, as happened in our own times to Fra Girolamo Savonarola,1 who was ruined with his new institutions as soon as the multitude began not to believe him, and he had no means of holding firm those who had believed or of making the unbelievers believe. Such men, therefore, have great difficulty in making their way; all their dangers lie along the road, and they must overcome them with their ability. But once they have overcome them and begin to be held in veneration, having destroyed those who envied them their qualities, they remain powerful, secure, honored, and happy.
To such lofty examples I want to add a lesser one, but one that will bear some proportion to them, and I will let it stand for all others of its kind: Hiero of Syracuse.2 From private citizen he became prince of Syracuse; and he too had nothing from fortune but the opportunity. For when the Syracusans were oppressed, they chose him as their captain, and from there he earned the right to be made their prince. And he was of such ability, even in private life, that the writer who tells of him says “he lacked nothing to be a king except a kingdom.”3 He did away with the old militia and set up a new one; he gave up his old friendships and made new ones; and as soon as he had friendships and soldiers that were his own, he could build any building on such a foundation. So he took great pains to acquire, and little to keep.
Notes
1. Girolamo Savonarola (1452–1498), Dominican friar and preacher who dominated Florence after the expulsion of the Medici in 1494. He lost his following, was excommunicated, and was hanged and burned in the main square of Florence in 1498.
2. Hiero II, tyrant and then king of Syracuse (c. 270–215 BC).
3. Justin, Epitome 23.4: quod nihil illi deesset ad regnandum praeter regnum.