# The Prince (Byerley)/Chapter 6

CHAP. VI.
Of new States which a Prince acquires by his Valour and his own Arms.
Let no dne feel surprised if, in what I am going to say of new principalities and of the prince and the state, I only cite examples furnished by the greatest personages. Men generally follow the beaten paths which others have formed, and their conduct is merely imitation. Now as we cannot in every respect become the same, nor arrive at the elevation of those whom we take for models, a wise man ought only to follow the paths traced by superior genius, and imitate those only who have excelled, in order that, if he does not equal them in every thing, he may in some respects at least approach them. He ought to act like the skilful archer, who finding the object of his dim too remote for a point blank shot, duly appreciating the strength of his arm, elevates his arrow higher than the object, only with the intent of reaching it.
I will in the first place observe that in a principality, entirely new, the degree of difficulty experienced by a prince in maintaining himself in it depends on his own perfonal qualities. From a ​vate individual to become a prince presupposes fortune, or talent, and the greater part of the difficulties ought to be removed by one of these two means. Nevertheless, he who has least relied on fortune is the more firmly seated: what in this case gives to a new prince considerable assistance is, that, having no other states, he is obliged to come and inhabit the new principality.
Of those who have solely by their courage and talents become princes, I will place in the first rank Moses, Cyrus, Romulus, Theseus, &c. At the first glance it would seem, that Moses ought not to be placed in this class, as he only executed the orders of Heaven; yethe merits our admiration, if it were only for having been chosen by God to communicate his will to man.
But if we examine attentively Cyrus and the rest, who have acquired or founded kingdoms, we shall find them worthy of the highest praise. We shall find, that their conduct and the steps they each pursued were not different from those of Moses: although his Master was divine, their lives and their actions equally prove that they had no other fortune than opportunity, which furnished them with the means of introducing that form of government which they conceived most appropriate. Without opportunity, their talents and their courage would have been of no avail; and without ​their personal qualities, opportunity had in vain presented itself.
It was consequently necessary that Moses should find the Israelites slaves in Egypt, oppressed by the Egyptians, in order to dispose them to follow him and shake off their bondage. It was necessary that Romulus should not be brought up in Alba, but should be exposed at his birth, to become king of Rome and founder of that empire. It was necessary that Cyrus should find the Persians discontented with the empite of the Medes, and the Medes grown effeminate by a long peace. Theseus could not have shewn his courage if he had not found the Athenians dispersed. These Opportunities furnished those men with the means of success, and their talents profited by an occasion which rendered their several countries for ever illustrious, and at the same time founded their prosperity on a stable basis.
They who become princes by means similar to those of these great personages, acquire a sovereignty with much difficulty, but they preserve it without trouble. The difficulties they experience arise, in part, from thechanges which they are obliged to introduce to establish their government and fix it on a firm foundation.. Now nothing is more difficult or more dangerous to execute, nor is there any thing, the success of which is more doubtful, than the introduction of new laws. He who ​undertakes the task makes enemies of all those who found themselves comfortable under the former code; he finds but feeble defenders in those to whom the new system will be of advantage; and this supineness arises, in part, from the fear. of their adversaries, to whom the ancient order of things is beneficial, and partly from the incredulity of makind, who have no confidence in new ineasures except when founded on long experience: whence it follows, that as often as those who are enemies of the new order of things have an opportunity of attacking it, they do it with all the zeal and enthusiasm of party, while the others defend it with indifference; so that the prince runs as many dangers from the nature of his defenders as he does from that of his enemies.
To enter profoundly into this subject, we must attentively examine whether these innovators of their own accord make those changes, or whether they arise from other motives; that is to say, whether they are under the necessity of employing persuasion, or compelled to resort to force. In the first case. they never succeed; but when they are independent, and have the power to compel, they seldom fail: from whence it arose that all the prophets who had arms in their bands triumphed, while those who had not were unsuccessful. Besides the reasons we have already adduced, the character of a people is unstable, easy to be ​drawn into an opinion, but with difficulty retained in it. And measures ought to be so taken with respect to them, that at the moment when they cease to believe we may force them to continue it. Moses, Cyrus, Theseus, and Romulus, would not so long have been able to obtain an observance of the constitutions they severally formed, had they been without arms. This has been evinced in our days by Brother Jerome Savonarole, who beheld his designs frustrated from the moment the multitude ceased to have faith in him; for he found himself destitute of the means of compelling belief, and of inspiring the most incredulous. The former experience, it is true, great obstacles and dangers at every step, and both talent and courage are necessary to surmount them: but these difficulties once overcome, and having shaken off the envious, they begin to be venerated, and live tranquil, honoured, and powerful. (Vide Appendix A.)
After these examples furnished by such great personages, I will cite one of less note, but which bears, however, some proportion to those which precede it, and which will suffice instead of many similar instances that I could adduce. I allude to Hiero of Syracuse, who, from a private individual, became Prince of Syracuse, and was beholden to no other fortune than opportunity. In fact, the people of Syracuse being oppressed, chose ​him for their leader, and he well deserved to be their prince. In his private conduct he was such that all those who have described it say, that a kingdom was only wanting to make him a monarch. He disbanded the old army, and new organised another; he abandoned their old alliances and formed new ones; and as his friends and the army were entirely devoted to him, it was easy for him to build surely on such foundations; so that though he had much difficulty in obtaining his dignity, it required but little to preserve it.