Chapter 8: Concerning Those Who Become Princes By Evil Means, p 42 “in seizing a state one ought to consider all the injuries he will be obliged to inflict and then proceed to inflict them all at once so as to avoid a frequent repetition of such acts. Thus he will be able to create a feeling of security among his subjects and, by benefiting them, win their approval.”
Chapter 9: Concerning the Civil Principality, p 44 “it is impossible to satisfy the nobles fairly without injuring others, whereas it is indeed possible to do so with respect to the people, for their wishes have more right, since they seek to avoid oppression while the nobles seek to oppress.”
Chapter 10: How the Strength of All Principalities Should be Measured, p 47 – 48 “The cities of Germany enjoy great liberty. They possess but little territory beyond their walls; yet they obey the emperor only when they wish to, fearing neither him nor any other of their powerful neighbors; for they are so well fortified that everyone is convinced it would be a wearying and difficult task to take them. They are all protected with suitable moats and walls and have adequate artillery. They always keep enough food, drink, and fuel in their public depots to last a year. Moreover, so that the common people may be fed without public expense, they have enough work of the sort that is the mainstay of the city to keep the populace engaged at their usual crafts for the space of a year. They also have a high regard for military excercises and have many regulations governing them.”
Chapter 13: Concerning Auxiliary, Mixed, and Native Forces, p 58 “In the end, the arms of another will fall from your hand, will weight you down, or restrain you.”
Chapter 13: Concerning Auxiliary, Mixed, and Native Forces, p 58 “The man who does not recognize ills at their inception does not have true wisdom”
Chapter 13: Concerning Auxiliary, Mixed, and Native Forces, p 58 TACITUS “quod nihil sit tam infirmum aut instabile quam fama potentiae non sua vi nixae” – “nothing is so weak and unstable as a reputation for power which is not based on one’s own strength.”
Chapter 14: A Prince’s Concern in Military Matters, p 59-60 “for among other ills which ensue from being disarmed is contempt […] There can be no proper relation between one who is armed and one who is not; nor is it reasonable to expect that one who is armed will voluntarily obey one who is not, or that the latter will feel secure among servants who are armed. Since these will be inclined to show disdain and the prince to show suspicion, it is impossible that they should function well together. Consequently, a prince who is ignorant of military matters will find, along with the other ills mentioned, that he cannot have the esteem of his soldiers and cannot trust them.
Hence he must never turn his attention away from military exercises. Indeed, he should devote himself to them in time of peace even more than in time of war; and he may do this in two ways: through action and through study. As regards action, besides keeping his troops well disciplined and fit, he should devote himself to hunting, be means of which he may accustom his body to hardships and at the same time learn the topography of places—the slope of mountains, the opening out of valleys, the disposition of plains, the character of rivers and marshes—devoting much attention to these matters. Knowledge of this kind is useful to him in two ways. First of all, he becomes acquainted with the nature of his country and learns how it can be defended; secondly, by means of this acquaintance, he can the more readily understand the nature of any other place which he may subsequently have to reconnoiter. For the hills, valleys, plains, rivers, and marshes of Tuscany, for example, are in some respects like those in other provinces. Thus, from an understanding of the topography of one province he can easily acquire an understanding of others. The prince who lacks this ability lacks the first requirement of a commander, for by this he learns how to locate the enemy, how to choose quarters, how to advance upon the enemy, how to deploy his soldiers, and how to lay siege to cities with advantage.”
Chapter 15: Concerning Things for Which Men, and Princes Especially, Are Praised or Censured, p 61-62 “the way men live is so far removed from the way they ought to live that anyone who abandons what is for what should be pursues his downfall rather than his preservation; for a man who strives after goodness in all his acts is sure to come to ruin, since there are so many men who are not good.”
Chapter 16: Concerning Liberality and Parsimony, p 64 “Either a man is already a ruler or he is on the way to becoming one; if he is already a ruler, liberality will do him harm; if he is on the way, a reputation for liberality will indeed be necessary. […] A prince spends either his own and his subjects’ funds, or he spends those of others. If the first is the case, he must be frugal; if the latter, he must neglect no part of liberality.”
Chapter 17: Concerning Cruelty: Whether it is Better to be Loved than to be Feared, or the Reverse, p 65 “Cesare Borgia was considered cruel; yet his cruelty restored Romagna, uniting it in peace and loyalty. If this result is considered good, then he must be judged much kinder than the Florentines who, to avoid being called cruel, allowed Pistoia to be destroyed.”
Chapter 17: Concerning Cruelty: Whether it is Better to be Loved than to be Feared, or the Reverse, p 66 – 67 “since the two rarely come together, anyone compelled to choose will find greater security in being feared than in being loved. For this can be said about the generality of men: that they are ungrateful, fickle, dissembling, anxious to flee danger, and covetous of gain. […] Men are less concerned about offending someone they have cause to love than someone they have cause to fear. Love endures by a bond which men, being scoundrels, may break whenever it serves their advantage to do so; but fear is supported by the dread of pain, which is ever present. […] since men love as they themselves determine but fear as their ruler determines, a wise prince must rely upon what he and not others can control. He need only strive to avoid being hated”
Chapter 18: In What Way Princes Should Keep Their Word, p 69 “Men are so simple and so much inclined to obey immediate needs that a deceiver will never lack victims for his deceptions.”
Chapter 18: In What Way Princes Should Keep Their Word, p 69 – 70 “[A prince] must never appear to be anything but the very soul of clemency, faithfulness, frankness, humanity, and religion to all who see and hear him. But of all the qualities he must seem to have, none is more important than the last. Generally, men judge by the eye rather than the hand, for all men can see a thing, but few come close enough to touch it. All men will see what you seem to be; only a few will know what you are, and those few will not dare to oppose the many who have the majesty of the state on their side to defend them. In all men’s acts, and in those of princes most especially, it is the result that renders the verdict when there is no court of appeal. Let the prince conquer a state, then, and preserve it; the methods employed will always be judged honorable, and everyone will praise them. For the mob is always impressed by appearances and by results; and the world is composed of the mob.”
Chapter 21: What a Prince Must Do to Be Esteemed, p 84 – 85 “When Antiochus invaded Greece to drive out the Romans at the behest of the Aetolians, he sent envoys to the Achaeans, allies of the Romans, urging them to remain neutral. At the same time the Romans urged them to take up arms on their behalf. When the matter was brought to debate in the council of the Achaeans and Antiochus’ envoys argued for their neutrality, the Roman envoy answered, “What they advise as the best policy, namely, that you avoid taking part in the war, is indeed contrary to your own interests; without friendship, without honor, you will become the prize of the victor.”
Chapter 21: What a Prince Must Do to Be Esteemed, p 85 – 86 “And let no state suppose that it can choose sides with complete safety. Indeed, it had better recognize that it will always have to choose between risks, for that is the order of things. We never flee one peril without falling into another. Prudence lies in knowing how to distinguish between degrees of danger and in choosing the least danger as the best.”
BOOK ONE, 2. Of the Various Kinds of States and of What Kind The Roman Republic Was, p 104 “prudent lawgivers rejected each of these forms individually and chose instead to combine them into one that would be firmer and more stable than any, since each form would serve as a check upon the others in a state having monarchy, aristocracy and democracy at one and the same time.”
BOOK ONE, 4. That the Disorders Between the Plebs and the Senate Made the Roman Republic Strong and Free, p 107 – 108 “It seems to me that those who condemn the conflicts between the plebs and the nobles are condemning the primary source of Rome’s liberty and are giving more consideration to the tumult and thee shouting these conflicts aroused than to the good effects they produced. They fail to observe that there are two different factions in every republic—the common people and the aristocrats—and that all laws enacted to increase liberty derive from the conflict between them”
BOOK ONE, 11. On the Religion of the Romans, p 114 “there was never anyone who ordained new and unusual laws among a people without having recourse to God, for they would not otherwise have been accepted. This is so because prudent men know of many beneficial things which, having no persuasive evidence for them, they cannot get others to accept.”
BOOK ONE, 12. The Importance with which Religion Must Be Regarded and How Italy, Lacking It, Thanks to the Church of Rome, Has Been Ruined, p 116 “The rulers of republics or kingdoms must therefore seek to preserve the principles of their religion. Having done this, they will find it an easy matter to keep the state devout, obedient, and united. They should seek to favor and strengthen every circumstance that tends to enhance religion, even if they themselves judge it to be false. The wiser they are about natural reality, the more they should do this.”
BOOK ONE, 58. The Multitude Is Wiser and More Constant Than a Prince, p 119 “this defect which writers charge the multitude may also be charged to individual men, and particularly to princes, for any man who is not ruled by law would make the same mistakes as the unrestrained multitude. This can easily be sown, for though there have been many princes, there have been few who were wise and good. […] These do not include kings who […] come to hold power under a constitution […] Otherwise we should have to compare kings regulated by law with a multitude similarly regulated, and we would find the same virtues in both. [… p 120] Differences between the conduct of the multitude and the conduct of the princes do not derive from differences in their nature, that being the same in both (though if there be some superiority either way, it will be found on the side of the people); rather, they derive from differences in their respect for the laws under which they live. […] the people show less ingratitude than princes. As to prudence and stability, I say that the people are more prudent, more stable, and more judicious than princes. [… p 121] popular opinion is amazingly reliable in its prognostications, so much so that the people would seem to have hidden powers by which to foresee their future ills and triumphs.”
“it is not the welfare of individuals but the common welfare that makes cities great. And doubtless this common welfare be pursued except in republics because they undertake whatever action may be needed to promote it. However harmful its pursuit may be to this or that individual, those who stand to gain are so numerous that they can pursue it in spite of the few who may be harmed.
The contrary is true where there is a prince. In such a case the things which are of advantage to him more often than not are harmful to the city, and the things which are of advantage to the city are harmful to him.”
BOOK TWO, 2. The People the Romans Had to Fight, and How Obstinately They Defend Their Freedom, p 125 – 126 “Having wondered why people in those ancient times were fonder of liberty than they are today, I have concluded that it is the same reason that explains why men are not less courageous than they were then. I believe it is to be explained b the difference between our education and theirs and by the difference of religion upon which it is based. Our religion, having shown us the truth and the true way, has caused us to have less esteem for worldly honor, whereas the pagans, because they believed worldly honor to be the highest good, showed greater fierceness in their actions. This is demonstrated in many of their customs as compared to ours, beginning with the splendor of their sacrifices and the humbleness of ours. There is more gentleness than magnificence in some of ours, and nothing that is fierce or vigorous. […]
Our religion has tended to glorify humble and contemplative men rather than men of action. Moreover, it has claimed that the highest good lies in humility, humbleness, and contempt of human things. Their religion claimed that it lay in greatness of spirit, physical strength, and in all those things tending to make men brave. […]
though I rather believe a greater cause to be that Roman Empire destroyed all the republics and free forms of civil life.”
BOOK TWO, 2. The People the Romans Had to Fight, and How Obstinately They Defend Their Freedom, p 127 – 128 “everyone willingly increases his property and goods if he believes that he will be allowed to enjoy them. In such circumstances men compete with each other in providing both private and public benefits, with the result that both increase remarkably.
The contrary of all this is true for states that live in servitude, and the harsher their servitude the more reduced is their prosperity. And of harsh servitudes the harshest is to be in subjection to a republic. The first reason for this is that it is the most enduring kind and offers no hope of release. The second is that the aim of a republic is to enervate and weaken its subject lands in order to increase its own prosperity. Such is not the aim of a conquering prince unless he is a barbarian who destroys countries and lays waste all the works of civilized man, as oriental princes do. But if he has common human principles, he will most often have equal regard for all his subject cities and will let them keep their industries and nearly all their institutions.”
BOOK THREE, 21. How It Happened That Hannibal Gained the Same Results in Italy As Scipio Did in Spain by Contrary Means, p 129 “men […] desire novelty. […] men grow weary of good conditions and become dejected with bad ones. This desire, then, opens the doors of a province to anyone introducing change.”
BOOK THREE, 41. That One’s Country Ought to Be Defended, Whether with Shame or Glory, by Whatever Means Possible, p 132 “where the well-being of one’s country is at all in question, no consideration of justice or injustice, of mercy or cruelty, of honor or shame must be allowed to enter in at all. Indeed, every other consideration having been put aside, that course of action alone which will save the life and liberty of the country ought to be wholeheartedly pursued.”