# CHAPTER 34 — What Kind of Fame, Rumour, or Opinion Makes the People Begin to Favour One Citizen; and Whether the People Assign Magistracies With Greater Prudence Than a Prince

We have spoken on another occasion * about how Titus Manlius, who was later called Torquatus, saved Lucius Manlius, his father, from an accusation that was made against him by Marcus Pomponius, tribune of the plebeians. Although the method of saving him was rather violent and extraordinary, * none the less this filial compassion toward his father was so pleasing to the multitude that not only was he not reproached for it, but when they came to select the tribunes for the legions, Titus Manlius was chosen second. Because of his success, I think it would be good to consider the method that the people employ to judge men in assigning offices, and whether, so far as we can see, it is true as was concluded above, that the people make better assignments than a prince.

Let me say, therefore, that in its assignments the people follow what public rumour and reputation says about someone, when they do not know him in a different way through his actions, either on the grounds of presumption or on the grounds of the opinion that it has of him. These two things are caused either by the fact that the fathers of such men have been great men and worthy ones in the city and everyone believes that their sons must be similar to them, until through their actions everyone understands the contrary; or it is caused by the methods used by the one the people are speaking about. The best method that can be employed is to keep the company of serious men of good habits who are considered wise by everyone. Since there can be no clearer indication about a man than the company he keeps, it is only fitting that a man who keeps the company of honest companions acquires a good name, because it is impossible for him not to share some similarities with them. Or this public recognition is truly acquired through some extraordinary and noteworthy deed, even though private, that has met with honourable success. Of all three of these things, which from the beginning give one a good reputation, none bestows a better reputation than this last one. The first method, acquiring a reputation from relatives and fathers, is so prone to error that men are cautious about it, and it vanishes in a short time when the actual ability of the man to be judged does not match his reputation. The second method, in which you become recognized by means of your companions, is better than the first, but much inferior to the third, because as long as you yourself give no indication of ability, your reputation is based upon opinion, which is extremely easy to cancel out. But the third method, being initiated by and founded upon fact and upon your actions, gives you at the outset such a reputation that you must later do many things in contrast to your achievements in order to annul them.

Men who are born in a republic must therefore choose this third method and must strive to begin to distinguish themselves through some extraordinary deed. Many men did this in Rome during their youth, either with the promulgation of a law that worked for the common benefit or by accusing some powerful citizen as a transgressor of the laws, or by doing similar notable and innovative things about which people talked. Nor are such things necessary only in beginning to earn oneself a reputation, but they are also necessary in order to maintain it and to make it grow. And to do this, one needs to renew one’s reputation, as Titus Manlius did throughout his entire lifetime; for, a number of years after he had defended his father so ably and extraordinarily and through this action earned his early reputation, he fought with that Gaul, and once he was dead, removed the collar of gold that won him the name Torquatus. * Even this was insufficient, and later, when already a mature man, he executed his son for having gone into combat without permission, even though he had overcome his enemy. These three actions, then, gave him greater reputation and made him more celebrated through the centuries than any triumph or any other victory, for which he was as decorated as any other Roman. And the reason for this is that in those victories there were a great many men like Manlius, but in these particular actions there were either very few or none at all.

Scipio the Elder did not gain as much glory from all his triumphs as that which he gained when, still a young man, he defended his father on the Ticinus River, * and later after the rout of Cannae, when with sword drawn, he courageously forced the young Romans to swear they would not abandon Italy, as they had already decided among themselves to do; * these two actions were the basis of his reputation, and they served as the stepping-stone to his triumphs in Spain and Africa. His fame was further increased when he sent back the daughter to her father and the wife to her husband in Spain. * This mode of conduct is not only necessary for those citizens who want to acquire fame in order to obtain the honours of their republic, but it is also necessary for a prince to maintain his reputation in his own principate, because nothing earns him more esteem than giving striking examples of himself through some excellent deed or saying that conforms to the common good, which shows a lord to be either magnanimous or generous or just, and which is such that it becomes, as it were, a proverb among his subjects.

But to return to where we began this discourse, let me say that when a people begins to grant some rank to one of its citizens, basing its decision on the three reasons given above, it does not have a poor basis for doing so; but later, when many examples of the good behaviour of one of its citizens makes him better known, it has a better basis for doing so, because in such a case the people can almost never be deceived. I am speaking only of those ranks that are given to men in the beginning, before they are known through steady experience, or before they pass from one sphere of action to a different one; in such a matter and as far as false opinions and corruption are concerned, the people will always commit fewer errors than princes. Since it can come about that the people will be deceived by the fame, judgement, and deeds of a man, deeming them greater than they really are (something which does not happen to a prince, because he will be told and warned by whoever advises him), in order that the people, too, will not lack such advice, the good organizers of republics have established things in such a way that, given the need to appoint men to the supreme ranks in the cities, where it would be dangerous to place unfit men, and seeing popular desire directed to appointing someone unfit, any citizen has the right to make public speeches about that man’s defects—and he will be honoured for doing this—so that the people, with some knowledge of him, can make better judgements. That this was the custom in Rome is attested to by the oration Fabius Maximus delivered to the people during the Second Punic War, when, in the process of appointing consuls, popular favour was turning toward Titus Otacilius; judging him unfit to hold the consulate at that time, Fabius spoke against him, demonstrating his lack of qualifications, to such a degree that the people took away his rank and turned its approval toward a man more meritorious than he was. * In the election of magistrates, therefore, the people judge according to those indications about men they believe most accurate; and when they can be counselled as princes are, they commit fewer errors than princes; and any citizen who wishes to begin to gain the favour of the people must, as Titus Manlius did, gain it for himself with some noteworthy deed.