Lehal Library

Whether fortresses and other strategies rulers frequently adopt are useful To hold power more securely, some rulers have disarmed their citizens; some have kept subject towns divided in fac- tions; some have encouraged hostility towards themselves; others have sought to win over those who were initially sus- picious of their rise to power; some have built fortresses; others have torn them down and destroyed them. And though one can’t pass final judgement on these policies without detailed knowledge of the states where such decisions were taken, all the same I shall try to discuss the matter in general terms as far as is possible. No one new to power has ever disarmed his subjects; on the contrary, finding them disarmed new rulers have always armed them. When you’re the one giving people arms, those arms become yours; men who were potentially hostile become loyal, while those already loyal become your supporters rather than just your subjects. It’s true you can’t arm everyone, but in favouring some you can feel safer about the others too. Seeing that they’ve been preferred, the men you’ve armed will be under an obligation to you. The others won’t be resentful, understanding that the people facing danger for you and binding their lives to yours will inevitably deserve the greater rewards. But when you take arms away from people, then you start to upset them; you show you don’t trust them because you’re frightened or cagey. Either way, they’ll begin to hate you. Then, since you can hardly manage without an