men willingly change their ruler, expecting to fare better, but this induces them to take up arms against him, but they only deceive themselves, & they learn from experience that they have made things worse.
when lands that have rebelled are reconquered, they are not lost so easily, for the ruler, taking advantage of revolt, is less scrupulous in securing himself by punishing the offenders, probing suspects, strengthening himself where he is weakest;
no matter how powerful one's armies, to enter a conquered territory one needs the goodwill of the inhabitants.
if a ruler wants to keep hold of his new conquered territories, he must:
if the culture & language is similar, he must:
destroy the family of the old ruler
neither change their laws nor their taxes
there is nothing more difficult to arrange, more doubtful of success, and more dangerous to carry through than initiating changes in a state's constitution - the innovator makes enemies of all those who prospered under the old order, & olnly lukewarm support from those who would prosper under the new.
set up an oligarchy which will keep the state friendly to you
if the culture & language is NOT similar, he must:
colonise the new territory,
this is cheaper than maintaining a garrison & do less harm
subjects are more satisfied because they have have direct recourse to their new ruler & so have more reason to love him
displacing a few inhabitants makes victims of only a minority who reman poor & scattered and thus can do little harm
the majority left undisturbed, should stay quiet lest they too be dispossessed
otherwise, just having a large garrison controlling it will become too expensive as it risks:
not being able to recognise troubles early - political disorders can be managed better if tackled early
one's officials plundering the land
subjects do not have direct recourse to their new ruler
everyone suffers from the annoyance of “police control”, & everybody is turned into an enemy, those who grow hostile can do harm, because they remain, defeated, in their own homes
make himself the leader & protector of the smaller neighbouring states & weaken those that are strong, ensuring they do not build up too much strength or authority.
take precautions to check an invasion by a foreigner as powerful as himself
the final option, is to devastate the new territory
this is the surest way of all
whoever becomes master of a city accustomed to freedom, and does not destroy it, may expect to be destroyed himself, because when there is a rebellion, such a city justifies itself by calling on the name of liberty & its ancient institutions, never forgotten despite the passing of time & the benefits received by the new ruler.
if the inhabitants are not dispersed & scattered, they will forget neither that name nor those institutions eg. Pisa even after 100yr rule by Florentines.
in republics there is more life, more hatred, a greater desire for revenge, the memory of their ancient liberty does not & cannot let them rest - the surest way is to wipe them out or to live there in person
eg. the Romans destroyed the cities of Capua, Carthage & Numantia & so never lost them
the wish to acquire more is a very natural & common thing, when men succeed, they are always praised rather than condemned, but when they lack the ability to do so & yet want to acquire more at all costs, they deserve condemnation for their mistakes.
to war or not to war:
the Romans saw when troubles were coming, and always took counter-measures. They never, to avoid a war, allowed them to go unchecked, because they knew that there is no avoiding war, it can only be postponed to the advantage of others.
one should never tolerate having one's plans upset in order to escape a war
whoever is responsible for another's becoming powerful, ruins himself, because the power is brought into being either by ingenuity or force, and both of these are suspect to the one who has become powerful
the 1st way to lose your state is to neglect the art of war
principalities are ruled in one of two ways:
by a prince to whom everyone is subservient, & whose ministers, with his favour & permission, help govern
the prince has greater authority, for throughout the whole country, he alone is recognised as being entitled to allegiance; anyone else is obeyed as a minister & an official for whom no special love is felt
it is difficult to win control of such an empire, but once conquered, it can be held with ease
eg. the Turkish empire in 15thC
by a prince & by nobles whose rank is established not by favour of the prince but by their ancient lineage
the prince has less authority
the nobles have states of their own, & these acknowledge them as their lords & bear a natural affection towards them.
it is more easy to take control, but it can only be held with difficulty
eg. the king of France in 15thC
one can become a ruler by either:
hereditary
power - one's own army
prowess
goodwill & fortune of those that elevate him
crime - but whilst they may rule with power, they rarely do so with glory
elected
people are everywhere anxious not to be dominated or oppressed by nobles
nobles are out to dominate & oppress people
these opposed ambitions bring about one of three results:
principality
a free city
anarchy
how a prince should rule:
the 1st way to lose your state is to neglect the art of war
generosity vs parsimony:
a reputation for generosity can lead to downfall, as it requires one to be ostentatiously lavish, which will soon lead to squandering of resources & need to raise taxes & thus burden many people whilst being generous to only a few
he will be recognised as being essentially a generous man, seeing that because of his parsimony, his existing revenues are enough for him, he can defend himself against an aggressor, & he can embark on enterprises without burdening the people.
cruelty vs compassion:
honesty vs dishonesty:
princes who have achieved great things have been those who have given their word lightly, who have known how to trick men with their cunning, and who, in the end, have overcome those abiding by honest principles.
one must be a fox in order to recognise traps, and a lion to frighten off wolves
just acting like a lion is stupid, a prudent ruler cannot honour his word if it places him at a disadvantage & when the reasons for which he made his promise no longer exist.
men are wretched creatures who would not keep their word to you, you need not keep your word to them.
a prince will never lack good excuses to colour his bad faith.
a prince should be careful not to say a word which does not seem inspired by him having the 5 qualities:
5 qualities:
compassion
good faith
integrity
kind
religious
everyone sees what you appear to be, few experience what you really are
the common people are always impressed by appearances and results
avoid contempt & hatred
ensure you surround yourself with good men:
avoid flatterers: