Let no one be surprised if, in speaking of entirely new principalities as I shall do, I adduce the highest examples both of prince and of state; because men, walking almost always in paths beaten by others, and following by imitation their deeds, are yet unable to keep entirely to the ways of others or attain to the power of those they imitate. A wise man ought always to follow the paths beaten by great men, and to imitate those who have been supreme, so that if his ability does not equal theirs, at least it will savour of it. Let him act like the clever archers who, designing to hit the mark which yet appears too far distant, and knowing the limits to which the strength of their bow attains, take aim much higher than the mark, not to reach by their strength or arrow to so great a height, but to be able with the aid of so high an aim to hit the mark they wish to reach.
No one should be surprised that I use the greatest examples of rulers and states when discussing entirely new principalities. People almost always walk paths others have taken and imitate their actions. Yet they cannot follow those paths exactly or match the power of those they imitate. A wise man should always follow the paths of great men and imitate those who have excelled above all others. Then, even if his ability does not equal theirs, it will at least show some trace of their greatness. He should act like skilled archers who want to hit a target that seems too far away. Knowing the limits of their bows, they aim much higher than the target. They do not expect their strength or arrows to reach that height. Instead, by aiming so high, they can hit the target they want to reach.
I say, therefore, that in entirely new principalities, where there is a new prince, more or less difficulty is found in keeping them, accordingly as there is more or less ability in him who has acquired the state. Now, as the fact of becoming a prince from a private station presupposes either ability or fortune, it is clear that one or other of these things will mitigate in some degree many difficulties. Nevertheless, he who has relied least on fortune is established the strongest. Further, it facilitates matters when the prince, having no other state, is compelled to reside there in person.
I say, then, that keeping an entirely new principality under a new prince can be more or less difficult. This depends on the ability of the man who has acquired it. Rising from private life to become a prince requires either ability or good fortune. Clearly, either will ease many difficulties to some degree. Nevertheless, the prince who has relied least on fortune is the most firmly established. Matters are also easier when the prince has no other state and must therefore live there himself.
But to come to those who, by their own ability and not through fortune, have risen to be princes, I say that Moses, Cyrus, Romulus, Theseus, and such like are the most excellent examples. And although one may not discuss Moses, he having been a mere executor of the will of God, yet he ought to be admired, if only for that favour which made him worthy to speak with God. But in considering Cyrus and others who have acquired or founded kingdoms, all will be found admirable; and if their particular deeds and conduct shall be considered, they will not be found inferior to those of Moses, although he had so great a preceptor. And in examining their actions and lives one cannot see that they owed anything to fortune beyond opportunity, which brought them the material to mould into the form which seemed best to them. Without that opportunity their powers of mind would have been extinguished, and without those powers the opportunity would have come in vain.
Now let us turn to those who became princes through their own ability, not through luck. Moses, Cyrus, Romulus, Theseus, and others like them are the finest examples. Moses cannot really be discussed, since he merely carried out God's will. Yet he deserves admiration, if only for the favor that made him worthy to speak with God. But Cyrus and others who acquired or founded kingdoms will all be found admirable. If we examine their individual deeds and conduct, we will find them no less impressive than those of Moses. This is true even though Moses had so great a teacher. When we examine their actions and lives, we find they owed nothing to luck beyond opportunity. Opportunity gave them the raw material to shape into whatever form they thought best. Without that opportunity, their mental abilities would have gone to waste. Without those abilities, the opportunity would have come to nothing.
It was necessary, therefore, to Moses that he should find the people of Israel in Egypt enslaved and oppressed by the Egyptians, in order that they should be disposed to follow him so as to be delivered out of bondage. It was necessary that Romulus should not remain in Alba, and that he should be abandoned at his birth, in order that he should become King of Rome and founder of the fatherland. It was necessary that Cyrus should find the Persians discontented with the government of the Medes, and the Medes soft and effeminate through their long peace. Theseus could not have shown his ability had he not found the Athenians dispersed. These opportunities, therefore, made those men fortunate, and their high ability enabled them to recognize the opportunity whereby their country was ennobled and made famous.
Moses therefore needed to find the Israelites enslaved in Egypt and oppressed by the Egyptians. Only then would they be willing to follow him to escape bondage. Romulus needed to leave Alba and to have been abandoned at birth. These conditions were necessary for him to become King of Rome and founder of his homeland. Cyrus needed to find the Persians unhappy with Median rule. He also needed to find the Medes weakened and softened by their long peace. Theseus could not have shown his ability if he had not found the Athenians scattered. These opportunities brought those men good fortune. Their great ability enabled them to recognize these opportunities and use them to bring their countries honor and fame.
Those who by valorous ways become princes, like these men, acquire a principality with difficulty, but they keep it with ease. The difficulties they have in acquiring it rise in part from the new rules and methods which they are forced to introduce to establish their government and its security. And it ought to be remembered that there is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things, because the innovator has for enemies all those who have done well under the old conditions, and lukewarm defenders in those who may do well under the new. This coolness arises partly from fear of the opponents, who have the laws on their side, and partly from the incredulity of men, who do not readily believe in new things until they have had a long experience of them. Thus it happens that whenever those who are hostile have the opportunity to attack they do it like partisans, whilst the others defend lukewarmly, in such wise that the prince is endangered along with them.
Those who become princes through courage and ability, like these men, gain their states with difficulty but keep them easily. Part of the difficulty comes from the new rules and methods they must introduce to establish and secure their government. Remember that nothing is harder to undertake, more dangerous to carry out, or less certain to succeed than introducing a new order. The reformer makes enemies of all who prospered under the old conditions. Those who may prosper under the new offer only halfhearted support. This lack of enthusiasm comes partly from fear of their opponents, who have the laws on their side. It also comes from people's disbelief. They do not readily trust new things until they have experienced them for a long time. So whenever opponents have a chance to attack, they do so with fierce commitment. Meanwhile, supporters defend only halfheartedly, putting both themselves and the prince in danger.
It is necessary, therefore, if we desire to discuss this matter thoroughly, to inquire whether these innovators can rely on themselves or have to depend on others: that is to say, whether, to consummate their enterprise, have they to use prayers or can they use force? In the first instance they always succeed badly, and never compass anything; but when they can rely on themselves and use force, then they are rarely endangered. Hence it is that all armed prophets have conquered, and the unarmed ones have been destroyed. Besides the reasons mentioned, the nature of the people is variable, and whilst it is easy to persuade them, it is difficult to fix them in that persuasion. And thus it is necessary to take such measures that, when they believe no longer, it may be possible to make them believe by force.
To discuss this matter fully, we must ask whether these innovators can rely on themselves or must depend on others. In other words, must they plead for help to carry out their plans, or can they use force? In the first case, they always fail and never accomplish anything. But when they can rely on themselves and use force, they are rarely in danger. This is why all armed prophets have conquered, while unarmed prophets have been destroyed. Besides the reasons already given, people are changeable. It is easy to persuade them, but difficult to keep them convinced. So measures must be taken to ensure that, when they no longer believe, they can be forced to believe.
If Moses, Cyrus, Theseus, and Romulus had been unarmed they could not have enforced their constitutions for long—as happened in our time to Fra Girolamo Savonarola, who was ruined with his new order of things immediately the multitude believed in him no longer, and he had no means of keeping steadfast those who believed or of making the unbelievers to believe. Therefore such as these have great difficulties in consummating their enterprise, for all their dangers are in the ascent, yet with ability they will overcome them; but when these are overcome, and those who envied them their success are exterminated, they will begin to be respected, and they will continue afterwards powerful, secure, honoured, and happy.
If Moses, Cyrus, Theseus, and Romulus had been unarmed, they could not have enforced their systems of government for long. This happened in our own time to Friar Girolamo Savonarola. He and his new order were ruined as soon as the people stopped believing in him. He had no way to keep his followers faithful or make unbelievers believe. Leaders like these therefore face great difficulties in completing their task, because all their dangers lie in their rise. Yet with ability, they will overcome these dangers. Once they have done so and killed those who envied their success, they will begin to earn respect. Afterward, they will remain powerful, secure, honored, and happy.
To these great examples I wish to add a lesser one; still it bears some resemblance to them, and I wish it to suffice me for all of a like kind: it is Hiero the Syracusan. This man rose from a private station to be Prince of Syracuse, nor did he, either, owe anything to fortune but opportunity; for the Syracusans, being oppressed, chose him for their captain, afterwards he was rewarded by being made their prince. He was of so great ability, even as a private citizen, that one who writes of him says he wanted nothing but a kingdom to be a king. This man abolished the old soldiery, organized the new, gave up old alliances, made new ones; and as he had his own soldiers and allies, on such foundations he was able to build any edifice: thus, whilst he had endured much trouble in acquiring, he had but little in keeping.
To these great examples I want to add a lesser one, though it resembles them in some ways. I will let it stand for all similar cases. It is the example of Hiero of Syracuse. He rose from private citizen to Prince of Syracuse. He too owed nothing to fortune except the opportunity. The people of Syracuse were oppressed and chose him as their military commander. Later, they rewarded him by making him their prince. Even as a private citizen, he showed great ability. One writer says he lacked nothing but a kingdom to be a king. He disbanded the old army and organized a new one. He abandoned old alliances and formed new ones. With his own soldiers and allies, he could build whatever he wished on these foundations. Thus, although gaining power took great effort, keeping it took little.
Hiero II was born around 307 B.C. and died in 216 B.C.