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
Again, as regards Brescia, I say that the circumstances attending the
revolt of that town were such as occur but seldom, namely, that the
citadel remaining in your hands after the defection of the city, you
should happen to have a great army nigh at hand, as the French had
theirs on this occasion. For M. de Foix being in command of the king’s
forces at Bologna, on hearing of the loss of Brescia, marched thither
without an hour’s delay, and reaching Brescia in three days, retook the
town with the help of the citadel. But here, again, we see that, to be
of any service, the citadel of Brescia had to be succoured by a de
Foix, and by that French army which in three days’ time marched to its
relief. So that this instance cannot be considered conclusive as
against others of a contrary tendency. For, in the course of recent
wars, many fortresses have been taken and retaken, with the same
variety of fortune with which open country has been acquired or lost;
and this not only in Lombardy, but also in Romagna, in the kingdom of
Naples, and in all parts of Italy.
And, further, touching the erection of fortresses as a defence against
foreign enemies, I say that such defences are not needed by the prince
or people who possess a good army; while for those who do not possess a
good army, they are useless. For good armies without fortresses are in
themselves a sufficient defence: whereas, fortresses without good
armies avail nothing. And this we see in the case of those nations
which have been thought to excel both in their government and
otherwise, as, for instance, the Romans and the Spartans. For while the
Romans would build no fortresses, the Spartans not merely abstained
from building them, but would not even suffer their cities to be
enclosed with walls; desiring to be protected by their own valour only,
and by no other defence. So that when a Spartan was asked by an
Athenian what he thought of the walls of Athens, he answered “that they
were fine walls if meant to hold women only.”
If a prince who has a good army has likewise, on the sea-front of his
dominions, some fortress strong enough to keep an enemy in check for a
few days, until he gets his forces together, this, though not
necessary, may sometimes be for his advantage. But for a prince who is
without a strong army to have fortresses erected throughout his
territories, or upon his frontier, is either useless or hurtful, since
they may readily be lost and then turned against him; or, supposing
them so strong that the enemy is unable to take them by assault, he may
leave them behind, and so render them wholly unprofitable. For a brave
army, unless stoutly met, enters an enemy’s country without regard to
the towns or fortified places it leaves in its rear, as we read of
happening in ancient times, and have seen done by Francesco Maria della
Rovere, who no long while ago, when he marched against Urbino, made
little of leaving ten hostile cities behind him.
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