The Prince · Chapter
V: Concerning the Way to Govern Cities or Principalities Which Lived Under Their Own Laws Before They Were Annexed explained
Machiavelli discusses three methods for holding a state that was previously free: ruin it, reside there in person, or allow it to keep its laws under a tribute and an oligarchy.
What happens
Machiavelli discusses three methods for holding a state that was previously free: ruin it, reside there in person, or allow it to keep its laws under a tribute and an oligarchy. He argues that destroying such cities is the safest way to prevent rebellion, as the memory of liberty and ancient privileges persists and can incite revolt. He contrasts the failures of the Spartans with the success of the Romans, who dismantled rebellious cities, and notes that principalities accustomed to a prince are easier to hold than republics.
Themes in this chapter
The Use of Cruelty and Clemency
Machiavelli advocates for the extreme measure of destroying a free city to prevent rebellion, prioritizing security over clemency.
The Importance of Public Perception
The memory of liberty and ancient privileges serves as a rallying point for rebellion, showing how perception drives political action.
Human Nature and Its Exploitation
Machiavelli notes that citizens of a republic have greater vitality and desire for vengeance, making them harder to control than subjects of a prince.
Characters to notice
- Niccolò Machiavelli
Author and analyst, presenting historical examples to support his argument on governing former free states.
- The Prince
Implied audience for the advice on how to securely hold newly acquired cities or principalities.
Key passages
“for in truth there is no safe way to retain them otherwise than by ruining them.”
The only secure method to hold a formerly free city is to destroy it.
Machiavelli's stark conclusion on the necessity of destruction for security.
“But in republics there is more vitality, greater hatred, and more desire for vengeance, which will never permit them to allow the memory of their former liberty to rest; so that the safest way is to destroy them or to reside there.”
Republics are more dangerous to conquer because their citizens are more spirited and vengeful, so the conqueror must either destroy the city or live there personally.
Contrast between the difficulty of holding republics versus principalities.