Discourses on Livy · Chapter
Chapter XXVIII: Whence it came that the Romans were less ungrateful to their citizens than were the Athenians. explained
Machiavelli compares the ingratitude of Rome and Athens toward their great citizens, arguing that Rome's relative leniency stemmed from never having had its liberty subverted by a citizen after the expulsion of the kings, unlike Athens whic
What happens
Machiavelli compares the ingratitude of Rome and Athens toward their great citizens, arguing that Rome's relative leniency stemmed from never having had its liberty subverted by a citizen after the expulsion of the kings, unlike Athens which suffered under Pisistratus and therefore became harshly suspicious. He suggests that if Rome had experienced similar early oppression, it would have been equally ungrateful, citing the exiles of Collatinus and the suspicion against Publius Valerius as evidence.
Themes in this chapter
Ingratitude and Suspicion in Republics
The chapter directly examines why republics show ingratitude toward their great citizens, comparing Rome and Athens and attributing it to the level of suspicion arising from past subversions of liberty.
Historical Cyclicality and Human Nature
Machiavelli suggests that the behavior of republics is shaped by their historical experiences, implying a cyclical pattern where past oppression leads to future harshness.
Characters to notice
- Titus Livius
Referenced as the source of Roman history.
- Marius
Mentioned as a figure from the times of Sylla and Marius, marking the period when Roman liberty was never subverted by a citizen.
- Caesar
Not directly mentioned but implied in the context of Sylla and Marius; however, no direct reference in the excerpt.
- Tarquin
Referenced as the family name of Collatinus, which led to his exile.
- Valerius Corvinus
Mentioned as Publius Valerius, who was suspected because he built a house on the Caelian hill.
Key passages
“For, from the expulsion of her kings down to the times of Sylla and Marius, the liberty of Rome was never subverted by any one of her citizens; so that there never was in that city grave cause for distrusting any man, and in consequence making him the victim of inconsiderate injustice.”
From the overthrow of the monarchy until the era of Sylla and Marius, no Roman citizen ever overthrew the republic, so there was little reason for the state to suspect or unjustly harm its own people.
Machiavelli argues that Rome's lack of internal subversion explains its relative lack of ingratitude.
“For this is most true which is asserted by the writers on civil government, that a people which has recovered its freedom, bites more fiercely than one which has always preserved it.”
Political writers agree that a people who regain their liberty are more aggressive and suspicious than those who never lost it.
This principle explains why Athens, having been freed from Pisistratus, was harsher than Rome.