MACHIAVELLI has little interest in discussing republics and sets out to confine his discussion to principalities alone. Power is easier to maintain in a principality, he says, due to the hereditary factors that have already provided the groundwork for what must remain an enduring dynastic tradition. A republic, of course, often denotes a sudden break with tradition and Machiavelli considers that to be a weakness. Ironically, the strength of the family line can also act as a safeguard against weakness itself:
In this way a prince of average powers can maintain himself in his state unless he loses it by some extraordinary and excessive force. If he loses it in this way, whenever anything unfortunate happens to the one who took it from him, he will get it back.
Naturally, he makes an exception for especially wicked rulers who mistreat their subjects and believes that dynastic longevity has an ability to stave off the unpredictability that comes with change. However, this notion is not borne out by the facts and history is full of long-term rulers whose authority is constantly questioned and challenged throughout the course of their reign.
Unsurprisingly, Frederick II is perfectly happy to agree with his counterpart that hereditary states are easier to control, although he understands that it is also important for a prince to maintain good relations with the most powerful family in the principality in order to ensure that he is not replaced by another. It is also vital for him to command the respect of the people, as
it is not enough that the prince is, as Machiavel says, di ordinaria industria, merely in it for the pay. You would think that he would like to make his people happy. Content people will not think of revolting; happy people fear losing a prince who is at the same time their benefactor.
Frederick draws an important contrast between the Neapolitan kingdoms of Machiavelli’s world and those of Lorraine. In the latter, he argues, even when a duke is forced out of power, ordinary folk do not reject the individual completely, but retain a deep emotional attachment to the outgoing ruler on account of being able to see the more traditional aspects that define the entire nation as a single political, cultural and historical unit. In other words, rather than celebrating the removal of a duke who has abused his power, they interpret any aristocratic blemish as a stain upon their own honour.
