XXV. How Much Fortune Can Do in Human Affairs, and How It Can Be Resisted

I am not unaware that many have held and still hold the opinion that the things of the world are so governed by fortune and by God that men with their prudence cannot correct them, and indeed have no remedy for them at all; and for this reason they might judge that one should not sweat much over things, but let oneself be governed by chance. This opinion has been more widely believed in our times because of the great changes in things that have been seen and are seen every day, beyond all human conjecture. Thinking about this myself sometimes, I have in some measure inclined to their opinion. Nevertheless, so that our free will may not be extinguished, I judge that it may be true that fortune is the arbiter of half our actions, but that she still leaves the other half, or close to it, for us to govern. And I compare her to one of those ruinous rivers that, when they rage, flood the plains, tear down trees and buildings, take soil from one place and put it down in another. Everyone flees before them, everyone yields to their violence without being able to resist them in any way. And although they are like this, it does not follow that men, when the weather is quiet, cannot make provision against them with dikes and embankments, so that when they rise again, either they will go off through a channel or their violence will not be so unchecked or so harmful. It is the same with fortune, which shows her power where no ability has been organized to resist her, and turns her violence where she knows that no dikes or embankments have been made to hold her. And if you consider Italy, which is the seat of these changes and the one that has set them in motion, you will see that she is a countryside without dikes and without any embankment; for if she had been protected by proper ability, like Germany, Spain, and France, either this flood would not have caused the great changes it has, or it would not have come at all. And I want this to be enough to have said about opposing fortune in general.

But confining myself more to particulars, I say that one sees a prince flourishing today and ruined tomorrow without having seen him change his nature or any of his qualities. This, I believe, arises first from the causes discussed at length earlier: that the prince who leans entirely on fortune is ruined as she changes. I also believe that the one who adapts his way of proceeding to the quality of the times will be fortunate, and similarly that the one whose way of proceeding is out of tune with the times will be unfortunate. For one sees that men, in the things that lead them to the end each one has before him, that is, glory and riches, proceed in various ways: one with caution, another with impetuosity; one by violence, another by art; one with patience, another with its opposite; and each of them can reach it by these different methods. One also sees two cautious men, one of whom attains his goal and the other not; and similarly two who succeed equally well with two different methods, one being cautious and the other impetuous. This comes from nothing but the quality of the times, which either suit their way of proceeding or do not. From this follows what I have said, that two men working differently arrive at the same result, and of two working in the same way, one reaches his goal and the other does not. On this, too, depends the change in their fortunes; for if a man governs himself with caution and patience, and the times and affairs turn in such a way that his conduct is good, he goes on prospering; but if the times and affairs change, he is ruined, because he does not change his way of proceeding. Nor is there any man so prudent that he knows how to adapt himself to this, both because he cannot deviate from what his nature inclines him to, and also because, having always prospered by walking along one path, he cannot be persuaded to leave it. And so the cautious man, when it is time to act impetuously, does not know how, and so he is ruined; for if he changed his nature with the times and with affairs, his fortune would not change.

Pope Julius II proceeded impetuously in all his affairs, and he found the times and affairs so suited to his way of proceeding that he always achieved a happy result. Consider the first enterprise he undertook against Bologna, while Giovanni Bentivoglio was still alive.¹ The Venetians were not happy with it, nor was the king of Spain; Julius was still in talks with France about it; and nevertheless, with his ferocity and impetuosity, he set out on that expedition in person. This move left Spain and the Venetians hesitant and motionless, the latter out of fear and the former because of his desire to recover the whole Kingdom of Naples; and on the other side Julius drew the king of France after him, because the king, seeing him on the move and wanting to make him his friend in order to bring down the Venetians, judged that he could not refuse him troops without openly injuring him. So Julius achieved with his impetuous move what no other pontiff, with all human prudence, would ever have achieved. For if he had waited to leave Rome until everything was agreed and all things in order, as any other pontiff would have done, he would never have succeeded; because the king of France would have had a thousand excuses, and the others would have raised a thousand fears. I want to leave aside his other actions, which were all similar and all turned out well for him; and the shortness of his life did not let him experience the opposite. For if times had come in which he had to proceed with caution, his ruin would have followed; nor would he ever have deviated from the ways to which his nature inclined him.

I conclude, then, that since fortune varies and men remain obstinate in their ways, men are fortunate as long as fortune and their ways agree, and unfortunate when they disagree. I do think this: that it is better to be impetuous than cautious, because fortune is a woman, and if you want to keep her down, you have to beat her and knock her about. And one sees that she lets herself be won more by such men than by those who proceed coldly. And so, like a woman, she is always the friend of young men, because they are less cautious, fiercer, and command her with more audacity.

Notes

1. 1. In 1506 Julius II marched in person against Perugia and Bologna and drove out Giovanni Bentivoglio.