Discourses on the First Decade of Titus LiviusMachiavelli, Niccolò
Philosophy
Discourses on the First Decade of Titus Livius
Machiavelli, Niccolò
Livy. Ab urbe condita; Political science -- Early works to 1800; Rome -- Historiography
Now, then, is your time, while the minds
of all are bent on what is about to happen, to obtain an ascendency
over them, either by punishment or by benefits._”
Upon this motion the senate resolved, in accordance with the advice
given by the consul, to take the case of each city separately, and
either destroy utterly or else treat with tenderness all the more
important of the Latin towns. To those cities they dealt with
leniently, they granted exemptions and privileges, conferring upon them
the rights of citizenship, and securing their welfare in every
particular. The others they razed to the ground, and planting colonies
in their room, either removed the inhabitants to Rome, or so scattered
and dispersed them that neither by arms nor by counsels was it ever
again in their power to inflict hurt. For, as I have said already, the
Romans never, in matters of moment, resorted to half-measures. And the
sentence which they then pronounced should be a pattern for all rulers,
and ought to have been followed by the Florentines when, in the year
1502, Arezzo and all the Val di Chiana rose in revolt. For had they
followed it, they would have established their authority on a surer
footing, and added much to the greatness of their city by securing for
it those lands which are needed to supply it with the necessaries of
life. But pursuing that half-hearted policy which is most mischievous
in executing justice, some of the Aretines they outlawed, some they
condemned to death, and all they deprived of their dignities and
ancient importance in their town, while leaving the town itself
untouched. And if in the councils then held any Florentine recommended
that Arezzo should be dismantled, they who thought themselves wiser
than their fellows objected, that to do so would be little to the
honour of our republic, since it would look as though she lacked
strength to hold it. Reasons like this are of a sort which seem sound,
but are not really so; for, by the same rule, no parricide should be
put to death, nor any other malefactor, however atrocious his crimes;
because, forsooth, it would be discreditable to the ruler to appear
unequal to the control of a single criminal. They who hold such
opinions fail to see that when men individually, or entire cities
collectively, offend against the State, the prince for his own safety,
and as a warning to others, has no alternative but to make an end of
them; and that true honour lies in being able and in knowing how to
chastise such offenders, and not in incurring endless dangers in the
effort to retain them. For the prince who does not chastise offenders
in a way that puts it out of their power to offend again, is accounted
unwise or worthless.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account