# CHAPTER IX —_That to enjoy constant good Fortune we must change with

CHAPTER IX.—_That to enjoy constant good Fortune we must change with
the Times._


I have repeatedly noted that the good or bad fortune of men depends on
whether their methods of acting accord with the character of the times.
For we see that in what they do some men act impulsively, others warily
and with caution. And because, from inability to preserve the just
mean, they in both of these ways overstep the true limit, they commit
mistakes in one direction or the other. He, however, will make fewest
mistakes, and may expect to prosper most, who, while following the
course to which nature inclines him, finds, as I have said, his method
of acting in accordance with the times in which he lives.

All know that in his command of the Roman armies, Fabius Maximus
displayed a prudence and caution very different from the audacity and
hardihood natural to his countrymen; and it was his good fortune that
his methods suited with the times. For Hannibal coming into Italy in
all the flush of youth and recent success, having already by two
defeats stripped Rome of her best soldiers and filled her with dismay,
nothing could have been more fortunate for that republic than to find a
general able, by his deliberateness and caution, to keep the enemy at
bay. Nor, on the other hand, could Fabius have fallen upon times better
suited to the methods which he used, and by which he crowned himself
with glory. That he acted in accordance with his natural bent, and not
from a reasoned choice, we may gather from this, that when Scipio, to
bring the war to an end, proposed to pass with his army into Africa,
Fabius, unable to depart from his characteristic methods and habits,
strenuously opposed him; so that had it rested with him, Hannibal might
never have left Italy. For he perceived not that the times had changed,
and that with them it was necessary to change the methods of
prosecuting the war. Had Fabius, therefore, been King of Rome, he might
well have caused the war to end unhappily, not knowing how to
accommodate his methods to the change in the times. As it was, he lived
in a commonwealth in which there were many citizens, and many different
dispositions; and which as it produced a Fabius, excellent at a time
when it was necessary to protract hostilities, so also, afterwards gave
birth to a Scipio, at a time suited to bring them to a successful
close.

And hence it comes that a commonwealth endures longer, and has a more
sustained good fortune than a princedom, because from the diversity in
the characters of its citizens, it can adapt itself better than a
prince can to the diversity of times. For, as I have said before, a man
accustomed to follow one method, will never alter it; whence it must
needs happen that when times change so as no longer to accord with his
method, he will be ruined. Piero Soderini, of whom I have already
spoken, was guided in all his actions by patience and gentleness, and
he and his country prospered while the times were in harmony with these
methods. But, afterwards, when a time came when it behoved him to have
done with patience and gentleness, he knew not how to drop them, and
was ruined together with his country. Pope Julius II., throughout the
whole of his pontificate, was governed by impulse and passion, and
because the times were in perfect accord, all his undertakings
prospered. But had other times come requiring other qualities, he could
not have escaped destruction, since he could not have changed his
methods nor his habitual line of conduct.

As to why such changes are impossible, two reasons may be given. One is
that we cannot act in opposition to the bent of our nature. The other,
that when a man has been very successful while following a particular
method, he can never be convinced that it is for his advantage to try
some other. And hence it results that a man’s fortunes vary, because
times change and he does not change with them. So, too, with
commonwealths, which, as we have already shown at length, are ruined
from not altering their institutions to suit the times. And
commonwealths are slower to change than princes are, changes costing
them more effort; because occasions must be waited for which shall stir
the whole community, and it is not enough that a single citizen alters
his method of acting.

But since I have made mention of Fabius Maximus who wore out Hannibal
by keeping him at bay, I think it opportune to consider in the
following Chapter whether a general who desires to engage his enemy at
all risks, can be prevented by that enemy from doing so.