# 8. He who would transform a Republic should take Due Note of the Governed

That a bad citizen cannot do much harm in a republic that is not corrupt has been shown in a previous discourse, and, in addition to the reasons there adduced,58 this conclusion is confirmed by the case of Spurius Cassius and that of Manlius Capitolinus. The former, an ambitious man, desirous of acquiring extraordinary authority in Rome, ingratiated himself with the plebs by conferring on them many benefits, such as dividing among them the lands which the Romans had taken from the Hernici. When the city fathers discovered his ambitious projects and made them known, he became so suspect that, on his addressing the populace and offering to give them the money accruing from the sale of the corn which the public had caused to be brought from Sicily, they refused it outright, since it seemed to them that Spurius was offering it them as the price of their liberty. Whereas, had the populace been corrupt, they would have accepted the money, and would have laid open the way to tyranny instead of closing it.

The example of Manlius Capitolinus is even more remarkable; for from his case it may be seen how the inordinate desire to rule afterwards cancels out virtues of mind and body and services rendered to one’s country, however great they may be. This desire, it is clear, was in his case aroused by the envy he felt for Camillus on whom great honours had been bestowed, and in him it begat so great a mental blindness that without pausing to reflect on the mode of life prevailing in the city, or to inquire with what kind of subjects he had to deal and whether they were yet averse to accept a bad form of government, he set about raising tumults in Rome alike against the senate and against his country’s laws. This incident shows how perfect the city then was and how good the material of which it was composed; for in his case none of the nobles, who were usually very keen to defend one another, rose to support him, nor did any of his relations make a move on his behalf; nor yet, though it was customary in the case of an accused person for his relations to appear in mourning, clad in black, and all of them sorrowing, so as to evoke sympathy in favour of the accused, did anyone at all appear in Manlius’s case. The tribunes of the plebs, who were wont always to look favourably on causes which appeared likely to benefit the populace, and to promote them the more vigorously the more inimical they were to the nobles, in this case joined with the nobles in suppressing a common pest. The Roman populace, looking eagerly to its own interests and sympathetic to projects which might thwart the nobility, in spite of its having been so favourable to Manlius, none the less when the tribunes cited him to appear, and referred his case to the judgement of the populace, this same populace, become now the judge of its defender, paid no attention to this, but condemned him to death.

Hence I do not think that there is any example in the history we are considering, capable of showing more clearly than this, how sound were all the institutions of that republic, in view of the fact that not a soul in that city was disposed to defend a citizen who was replete with virtue of every kind and alike in public and in private had done very many things worthy of commendation. For with all of them love of country weighed more than any other consideration, and they looked upon the present dangers for which he was responsible as of much greater importance than his former merits; with the result that they chose he should die in order that they might remain free. ‘Such,’ says Titus Livy, ‘was the fate of a man who would have been illustrious if he had not been born in a free city.’

There are two things here which should be borne in mind. One is that, in order to obtain glory, a man must use different methods in a city that is corrupt from what he would use in one in which political life is still vigorous. The other, which is almost the same as the first, is that in the way they behave, and especially where deeds of moment are concerned, men should take account of the times, and act accordingly.

Those who owing to bad judgement or to their natural inclinations are out of touch with the times are in most cases unfortunate in their life and unsuccessful in their undertakings. But it is otherwise with those who are in accord with the times. From the words of the historian cited above, it may without hesitation be inferred that, had Manlius been born in the days of Marius or Sulla, when the material was corrupt and it would have been possible to impress on it the form to which his ambition looked, he would have met with the same success that attended the actions of Marius and Sulla and others who, after them, aspired to tyranny. And in the same way, had Sulla and Marius lived in the time of Manlius, they would have been crushed at the very outset of their careers. For a man can easily by his behaviour and his evil devices begin to corrupt the populace in a city, but it is impossible for him to live long enough to corrupt it to such an extent that he himself shall reap the fruits. And, even if it were possible for him to live long enough to do this, it would still be impossible for him to succeed, for men are so impatient in the way they carry on that they cannot restrain their passions for very long. Consequently they make mistakes in handling their affairs, especially when they are too eager; with the result that, either through impatience or through mistakes, they are likely to take premature action and to meet with disaster.

If anyone, then, wants to seize supreme power in a republic and to impose on it a bad form of government, it is essential that he should find there a material which has in course of time become disordered, and that this disorder shall have been introduced little by little and in one generation after another. And this, as we have remarked in a previous discourse, must of necessity come about unless that republic be given fresh life by the example of good men or by fresh legislation be brought back to what it was at the start.

Manlius, therefore, would have been an exceptional and a remarkable man, had he been born in a corrupt city. Hence citizens who in republics take up any enterprise, whether in favour of liberty or with a view to tyranny, should take account of the subjects with which they have to deal and on this should base their estimate of the difficulties their undertaking involves; for it is just as difficult and dangerous to try to free a people that wants to remain servile as it is to enslave a people that wants to remain free.

Since I have remarked above that in human affairs men should study the nature of the times and act accordingly, of this we shall speak at length in the next chapter.