# XIX explained — Discourses on Livy

> Chapter companion for Discourses on Livy by Niccolò Machiavelli.

## What happens

Machiavelli argues that a weak prince can maintain a kingdom after a strong predecessor, but two consecutive weak princes will lead to ruin, using the examples of Rome's early kings, David and Solomon, and the Ottoman sultans to illustrate the necessity of alternating between martial and peaceful rulers.

## Themes in this chapter

### Leadership and Moral Character

The chapter contrasts the qualities of strong and weak princes, emphasizing that a ruler's valour or lack thereof determines the stability of the state.

### Virtù and Fortune

Machiavelli discusses how a prince like Numa depends on fortune and circumstances, while one like Romulus, fortified with foresight and arms, can hold his state against all but irresistible force.

### Necessity and Reason of State

The necessity for a ruler to resort to arms when neighbours hold him in contempt, as Ancus did, illustrates the principle that a state must adapt to preserve itself.

## Character check-ins

### Romulus

First king of Rome, fierce and warlike, whose valour laid the foundation for the city's strength.

### Numa

Second king of Rome, peaceful and religious, who governed by peaceful arts after Romulus.

### Tullus Hostilius

Third king of Rome, high-spirited and warlike, who renewed Rome's martial fame.

### David

Valiant king of Israel who subdued all his neighbours and left a tranquil state to his son Solomon.

### Selim

Son of Bajazet, who is likely to outdo the fame of his grandfather Muhammad II.

## Key lines

> After a strong prince a weak prince may maintain himself: but after one weak prince no kingdom can stand a second.

A weak ruler can survive if he follows a strong one, but two weak rulers in a row will destroy a kingdom.

_Machiavelli's central thesis on succession and princely virtue._

> David, for example, not only surpassed in learning and judgment, but was so valiant in arms that, after conquering and subduing all his neighbours, he left to his young son Solomon a tranquil state, which the latter, though unskilled in the arts of war, could maintain by the arts of peace, and thus happily enjoy the inheritance of his father’s valour.

David's military prowess secured a peaceful kingdom for Solomon, who could rule without war thanks to his father's conquests.

_Biblical example illustrating how a strong prince enables a weak successor to maintain power._

> But had Selim, son to Bajazet, been like his father, and not like his grandfather, the Turkish monarchy must have been overthrown; as it is, he seems likely to outdo the fame of his grandsire.

If Selim had been as peaceable as his father Bajazet instead of warlike like his grandfather Muhammad, the Ottoman Empire would have collapsed; instead, he may surpass his grandfather's glory.

_Ottoman example showing the danger of two consecutive weak princes and the value of a strong successor._

## Links

- HTML: https://www.betterreads.online/discover/discourses_on_livy_se/chapters/xix
- Book: https://www.betterreads.online/discover/discourses_on_livy_se
- All chapters: https://www.betterreads.online/discover/discourses_on_livy_se/chapters