This is a modern-English version of The Essays or Counsels, Civil and Moral, originally written by Bacon, Francis. It has been thoroughly updated, including changes to sentence structure, words, spelling, and grammar—to ensure clarity for contemporary readers, while preserving the original spirit and nuance. If you click on a paragraph, you will see the original text that we modified, and you can toggle between the two versions.

Scroll to the bottom of this page and you will find a free ePUB download link for this book.





THE ESSAYS OR COUNSELS,
CIVIL AND MORAL,

OF FRANCIS Ld. VERULAM VISCOUNT ST. ALBANS



Francis Bacon

TO

THE RIGHT HONORABLE

MY VERY GOOD LORD

THE DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM

HIS GRACE, LORD

HIGH ADMIRAL OF ENGLAND

EXCELLENT LORD:





SALOMON saies; A good Name is as a precious oyntment; And I assure my selfe, such wil your Graces Name bee, with Posteritie. For your Fortune, and Merit both, have been Eminent. And you have planted Things, that are like to last. I doe now publish my Essayes; which, of all my other workes, have beene most Currant: For that, as it seemes, they come home, to Mens Businesse, and Bosomes. I have enlarged them, both in Number, and Weight; So that they are indeed a New Worke. I thought it therefore agreeable, to my Affection, and Obligation to your Grace, to prefix your Name before them, both in English, and in Latine. For I doe conceive, that the Latine Volume of them, (being in the Universall Language) may last, as long as Bookes last. My Instauration, I dedicated to the King: My Historie of Henry the Seventh, (which I have now also translated into Latine) and my Portions of Naturall History, to the Prince: And these I dedicate to your Grace; Being of the best Fruits, that by the good Encrease, which God gives to my Pen and Labours, I could yeeld. God leade your Grace by the Hand. Your Graces most Obliged and faithfull Servant,

SALOMON says: A good name is like a precious ointment; and I am confident that your name will be cherished by future generations. Your fortune and merit have both been remarkable, and you have established things that are likely to endure. I am now publishing my essays, which, of all my other works, have been the most popular because they resonate with people's lives and emotions. I have expanded them, both in number and depth, so they truly represent a new work. I thought it fitting, out of my affection and obligation to you, to place your name in front of them, both in English and in Latin. I believe the Latin version, being in a universal language, may last as long as books themselves. I dedicated my "Instauration" to the King, my "History of Henry the Seventh" (which I have also translated into Latin), and my sections on Natural History to the Prince; and these I dedicate to you, as the best fruits that I could offer from the good increase that God grants to my pen and efforts. May God guide you by the hand. Your most obligated and faithful servant,

FR. ST. ALBAN

FR. ST. ALBAN











Of Truth

WHAT is truth? said jesting Pilate, and would not stay for an answer. Certainly there be, that delight in giddiness, and count it a bondage to fix a belief; affecting free-will in thinking, as well as in acting. And though the sects of philosophers of that kind be gone, yet there remain certain discoursing wits, which are of the same veins, though there be not so much blood in them, as was in those of the ancients. But it is not only the difficulty and labor, which men take in finding out of truth, nor again, that when it is found, it imposeth upon men's thoughts, that doth bring lies in favor; but a natural, though corrupt love, of the lie itself. One of the later school of the Grecians, examineth the matter, and is at a stand, to think what should be in it, that men should love lies; where neither they make for pleasure, as with poets, nor for advantage, as with the merchant; but for the lie's sake. But I cannot tell; this same truth, is a naked, and open day-light, that doth not show the masks, and mummeries, and triumphs, of the world, half so stately and daintily as candle-lights. Truth may perhaps come to the price of a pearl, that showeth best by day; but it will not rise to the price of a diamond, or carbuncle, that showeth best in varied lights. A mixture of a lie doth ever add pleasure. Doth any man doubt, that if there were taken out of men's minds, vain opinions, flattering hopes, false valuations, imaginations as one would, and the like, but it would leave the minds, of a number of men, poor shrunken things, full of melancholy and indisposition, and unpleasing to themselves?

WHAT is truth? said joking Pilate, and wouldn’t wait for an answer. Certainly, there are those who enjoy being dizzy and see it as a burden to hold a belief; they aim for free will in thinking as well as in acting. And even though the schools of philosophers like that are gone, some clever minds remain who are similar, though they don’t have as much passion as the ancients did. But it’s not just the difficulty and effort that people put into finding the truth, nor the fact that once it’s found, it demands much from one’s thoughts that make lies appealing; it’s also a natural, albeit warped, love for the lie itself. One of the later schools of Greeks examines the issue and wonders why people should love lies; where lies don’t provide pleasure, like they do for poets, nor advantage, like they do for merchants, but merely for the lie’s sake. But I can’t say; this same truth is like a naked, open daylight that doesn’t display the masks, and tricks, and celebrations of the world nearly as elegantly as candlelight does. Truth may indeed be as valuable as a pearl that looks best in daylight; but it won’t reach the value of a diamond or a carbuncle that shines best in different lights. A touch of a lie always adds some enjoyment. Does anyone doubt that if we stripped away from people’s minds empty opinions, flattering hopes, false valuations, and fanciful imaginings, it would leave many minds as poor, shriveled things, filled with melancholy and displeasure?

One of the fathers, in great severity, called poesy vinum daemonum, because it fireth the imagination; and yet, it is but with the shadow of a lie. But it is not the lie that passeth through the mind, but the lie that sinketh in, and settleth in it, that doth the hurt; such as we spake of before. But howsoever these things are thus in men's depraved judgments, and affections, yet truth, which only doth judge itself, teacheth that the inquiry of truth, which is the love-making, or wooing of it, the knowledge of truth, which is the presence of it, and the belief of truth, which is the enjoying of it, is the sovereign good of human nature. The first creature of God, in the works of the days, was the light of the sense; the last, was the light of reason; and his sabbath work ever since, is the illumination of his Spirit. First he breathed light, upon the face of the matter or chaos; then he breathed light, into the face of man; and still he breatheth and inspireth light, into the face of his chosen. The poet, that beautified the sect, that was otherwise inferior to the rest, saith yet excellently well: It is a pleasure, to stand upon the shore, and to see ships tossed upon the sea; a pleasure, to stand in the window of a castle, and to see a battle, and the adventures thereof below: but no pleasure is comparable to the standing upon the vantage ground of truth (a hill not to be commanded, and where the air is always clear and serene), and to see the errors, and wanderings, and mists, and tempests, in the vale below; so always that this prospect be with pity, and not with swelling, or pride. Certainly, it is heaven upon earth, to have a man's mind move in charity, rest in providence, and turn upon the poles of truth.

One of the fathers, quite sternly, called poetry the wine of demons because it ignites the imagination; yet, it is just a hint of a lie. But it’s not the lie that passes through the mind, but the lie that sinks in and settles that causes the damage, like we mentioned before. However, regardless of how these things appear in people's twisted judgments and feelings, truth, which judges itself alone, teaches that the pursuit of truth, which is the courtship of it, the knowledge of truth, which is its presence, and the belief in truth, which is its enjoyment, is the ultimate good for human nature. The first creation of God, in the works of the days, was the light of the senses; the last was the light of reason; and his ongoing work since then is the illumination of his Spirit. First, he brought light to the void or chaos; then he breathed light into humanity; and he continues to breathe and inspire light into those he's chosen. The poet, who elevated a group that was otherwise lesser than the rest, says excellently: It is a joy to stand on the shore and watch ships tossed on the sea; a joy to stand in the window of a castle and see a battle and its adventures below; but no joy compares to standing on the elevated ground of truth (a hill that cannot be overtaken, where the air is always clear and calm) and observing the errors, wanderings, mists, and storms in the valley below, as long as this view is accompanied by pity, not arrogance or pride. Truly, it is like heaven on earth to have one's mind move with charity, rest in providence, and revolve around the principles of truth.

To pass from theological, and philosophical truth, to the truth of civil business; it will be acknowledged, even by those that practise it not, that clear, and round dealing, is the honor of man's nature; and that mixture of falsehoods, is like alloy in coin of gold and silver, which may make the metal work the better, but it embaseth it. For these winding, and crooked courses, are the goings of the serpent; which goeth basely upon the belly, and not upon the feet. There is no vice, that doth so cover a man with shame, as to be found false and perfidious. And therefore Montaigne saith prettily, when he inquired the reason, why the word of the lie should be such a disgrace, and such an odious charge? Saith he, If it be well weighed, to say that a man lieth, is as much to say, as that he is brave towards God, and a coward towards men. For a lie faces God, and shrinks from man. Surely the wickedness of falsehood, and breach of faith, cannot possibly be so highly expressed, as in that it shall be the last peal, to call the judgments of God upon the generations of men; it being foretold, that when Christ cometh, he shall not find faith upon the earth.

To transition from theological and philosophical truths to the truths of civil matters, it's widely recognized—even by those who don't engage with it—that honesty and straightforwardness are fundamental to human nature. Deceptive practices are like the impurities mixed into gold and silver coins; they may enhance the metal's malleability but ultimately degrade it. These winding and deceitful paths represent the actions of a serpent, which slithers on its belly rather than walking on its feet. There is no vice that brings greater shame than being discovered as false and treacherous. Montaigne aptly remarked when questioning why lying is such a disgrace and a loathsome accusation. He said that, when properly considered, to call a man a liar is essentially to say he is bold with God but a coward before men. A lie confronts God while shrinking away from man. The wickedness of falsehood and betrayal of trust cannot be better expressed than by the fact that it will be the final alarm sounding God's judgment on humanity; it has been foretold that when Christ returns, He will find no faith left on Earth.





Of Death

MEN fear death, as children fear to go in the dark; and as that natural fear in children, is increased with tales, so is the other. Certainly, the contemplation of death, as the wages of sin, and passage to another world, is holy and religious; but the fear of it, as a tribute due unto nature, is weak. Yet in religious meditations, there is sometimes mixture of vanity, and of superstition. You shall read, in some of the friars' books of mortification, that a man should think with himself, what the pain is, if he have but his finger's end pressed, or tortured, and thereby imagine, what the pains of death are, when the whole body is corrupted, and dissolved; when many times death passeth, with less pain than the torture of a limb; for the most vital parts, are not the quickest of sense. And by him that spake only as a philosopher, and natural man, it was well said, Pompa mortis magis terret, quam mors ipsa. Groans, and convulsions, and a discolored face, and friends weeping, and blacks, and obsequies, and the like, show death terrible. It is worthy the observing, that there is no passion in the mind of man, so weak, but it mates, and masters, the fear of death; and therefore, death is no such terrible enemy, when a man hath so many attendants about him, that can win the combat of him. Revenge triumphs over death; love slights it; honor aspireth to it; grief flieth to it; fear preoccupateth it; nay, we read, after Otho the emperor had slain himself, pity (which is the tenderest of affections) provoked many to die, out of mere compassion to their sovereign, and as the truest sort of followers. Nay, Seneca adds niceness and satiety: Cogita quamdiu eadem feceris; mori velle, non tantum fortis aut miser, sed etiam fastidiosus potest. A man would die, though he were neither valiant, nor miserable, only upon a weariness to do the same thing so oft, over and over. It is no less worthy, to observe, how little alteration in good spirits, the approaches of death make; for they appear to be the same men, till the last instant. Augustus Caesar died in a compliment; Livia, conjugii nostri memor, vive et vale. Tiberius in dissimulation; as Tacitus saith of him, Jam Tiberium vires et corpus, non dissimulatio, deserebant. Vespasian in a jest, sitting upon the stool; Ut puto deus fio. Galba with a sentence; Feri, si ex re sit populi Romani; holding forth his neck. Septimius Severus in despatch; Adeste si quid mihi restat agendum. And the like. Certainly the Stoics bestowed too much cost upon death, and by their great preparations, made it appear more fearful. Better saith he, qui finem vitae extremum inter munera ponat naturae. It is as natural to die, as to be born; and to a little infant, perhaps, the one is as painful, as the other. He that dies in an earnest pursuit, is like one that is wounded in hot blood; who, for the time, scarce feels the hurt; and therefore a mind fixed, and bent upon somewhat that is good, doth avert the dolors of death. But, above all, believe it, the sweetest canticle is', Nunc dimittis; when a man hath obtained worthy ends, and expectations. Death hath this also; that it openeth the gate to good fame, and extinguisheth envy.—Extinctus amabitur idem.

MEN fear death like children fear the dark; and just as children's natural fear grows with stories, so does the fear of death. Reflecting on death, as the consequence of sin and a transition to another world, is sacred and religious; yet the fear of it, as a natural instinct, is feeble. However, religious reflections can sometimes be mixed with vanity and superstition. You may read in some friars' books on mortification that a person should consider the pain of just having their fingertip pressed or hurt to imagine what the pains of death are, when the whole body decays and falls apart; yet often, death involves less pain than the torture of a limb, because the most vital parts are not the most sensitive. Someone who spoke merely as a philosopher and a natural man said well, "The show of death terrifies more than death itself." Groans, convulsions, a discolored face, friends weeping, mourning attire, and funerals all make death seem terrifying. It’s worth noting that no emotion in a person's mind is too weak to overcome the fear of death; and thus, death isn’t such a terrifying enemy when one has many companions around capable of battling it. Revenge triumphs over death; love disregards it; honor reaches for it; grief rushes to it; fear preoccupies it; in fact, we read that after Emperor Otho killed himself, pity— the gentlest of emotions— drove many to die out of sheer compassion for their sovereign, as true followers. Seneca adds how distaste and saturation play a role: "Consider how long you’ve done the same thing;" wanting to die isn’t just for the brave or the miserable, but can also happen out of weariness. A man might seek death even if he is neither courageous nor unfortunate, purely out of boredom from repeating the same actions over and over. It’s also significant to observe how little change in good spirits the approach of death brings; they still seem the same until the very last moment. Augustus Caesar died while complimenting: "Livia, in memory of our marriage, live well and farewell." Tiberius did so with pretense; as Tacitus said of him, "Now Tiberius was being abandoned by his strength and body, not by pretense." Vespasian joked while sitting on the stool: "I think I am becoming a god." Galba made a statement; "Strike, if it serves the Roman people," presenting his neck. Septimius Severus was direct; "Be present if there’s anything left for me to do." And so on. Certainly, the Stoics invested too much in death, and through their extensive preparations, made it seem more frightening. Better is the one who considers the end of life as a natural part of life. Dying is as natural as being born; to a little infant, perhaps, one is as painful as the other. Someone who dies while passionately pursuing something is like someone who gets wounded in the heat of battle, who hardly feels the pain at that moment; hence, a mind focused on something good can lessen the sorrows of death. But above all, believe this: the sweetest song is, "Now you dismiss;” when one has achieved worthy goals and expectations. Death also has this: it opens the door to a good reputation and extinguishes envy.—"The one who is dead will be loved the same."





Of Unity In Religion

RELIGION being the chief band of human society, it is a happy thing, when itself is well contained within the true band of unity. The quarrels, and divisions about religion, were evils unknown to the heathen. The reason was, because the religion of the heathen, consisted rather in rites and ceremonies, than in any constant belief. For you may imagine, what kind of faith theirs was, when the chief doctors, and fathers of their church, were the poets. But the true God hath this attribute, that he is a jealous God; and therefore, his worship and religion, will endure no mixture, nor partner. We shall therefore speak a few words, concerning the unity of the church; what are the fruits thereof; what the bounds; and what the means.

RELIGION is the main connection in human society, and it’s a good thing when it is held together by true unity. The disagreements and divisions about religion were problems unknown to the pagans. This is because their religion was more about rituals and ceremonies than any enduring belief. You can imagine what their faith was like when the main teachers and leaders of their religion were poets. But the true God has a characteristic of being a jealous God; therefore, His worship and religion will not tolerate any mixture or partnership. We will, therefore, discuss a few things about the unity of the church: what the benefits are, what the limits are, and what the methods are.

The fruits of unity (next unto the well pleasing of God, which is all in all) are two: the one, towards those that are without the church, the other, towards those that are within. For the former; it is certain, that heresies, and schisms, are of all others the greatest scandals; yea, more than corruption of manners. For as in the natural body, a wound, or solution of continuity, is worse than a corrupt humor; so in the spiritual. So that nothing, doth so much keep men out of the church, and drive men out of the church, as breach of unity. And therefore, whensoever it cometh to that pass, that one saith, Ecce in deserto, another saith, Ecce in penetralibus; that is, when some men seek Christ, in the conventicles of heretics, and others, in an outward face of a church, that voice had need continually to sound in men's ears, Nolite exire,—Go not out. The doctor of the Gentiles (the propriety of whose vocation, drew him to have a special care of those without) saith, if an heathen come in, and hear you speak with several tongues, will he not say that you are mad? And certainly it is little better, when atheists, and profane persons, do hear of so many discordant, and contrary opinions in religion; it doth avert them from the church, and maketh them, to sit down in the chair of the scorners. It is but a light thing, to be vouched in so serious a matter, but yet it expresseth well the deformity. There is a master of scoffing, that in his catalogue of books of a feigned library, sets down this title of a book, The Morris-Dance of Heretics. For indeed, every sect of them, hath a diverse posture, or cringe by themselves, which cannot but move derision in worldlings, and depraved politics, who are apt to contemn holy things.

The benefits of unity (next to pleasing God, who is everything) are twofold: one for those outside the church, and the other for those inside. For the former, it’s clear that heresies and divisions are the biggest scandals, even more than moral corruption. Just as a wound or breach is worse than a mere illness in the physical body, the same applies spiritually. Nothing drives people away from the church or keeps them out of it more than a lack of unity. So whenever it happens that one person says, "Look, here in the desert," and another says, "Look, here in the inner rooms," meaning some people look for Christ among heretics while others just focus on the outward appearance of a church, that warning needs to ring in people's ears: "Do not go out." The apostle to the Gentiles (whose mission focused on those outside) says, "If an outsider comes in and hears you speaking in different languages, won’t he think you’re crazy?" And it’s no different when atheists and disrespectful people hear so many conflicting opinions about religion; it pushes them away from the church and makes them sit among the mocking. It may seem trivial to mention something so serious, but it captures the reality well. There’s a master of mockery who includes a book titled "The Morris-Dance of Heretics" in his fictional library list. Each heretical sect has its own strange practices that only invite ridicule from worldly people and corrupt politicians, who tend to look down on sacred matters.

As for the fruit towards those that are within; it is peace; which containeth infinite blessings. It establisheth faith; it kindleth charity; the outward peace of the church, distilleth into peace of conscience; and it turneth the labors of writing, and reading of controversies, into treaties of mortification and devotion.

As for the rewards for those who are involved, it is peace, which brings countless blessings. It strengthens faith; it inspires love; the external peace of the church translates into inner peace; and it transforms the effort spent on writing and reading debates into practices of self-discipline and devotion.

Concerning the bounds of unity; the true placing of them, importeth exceedingly. There appear to be two extremes. For to certain zealants, all speech of pacification is odious. Is it peace, Jehu,? What hast thou to do with peace? turn thee behind me. Peace is not the matter, but following, and party. Contrariwise, certain Laodiceans, and lukewarm persons, think they may accommodate points of religion, by middle way, and taking part of both, and witty reconcilements; as if they would make an arbitrament between God and man. Both these extremes are to be avoided; which will be done, if the league of Christians, penned by our Savior himself, were in two cross clauses thereof, soundly and plainly expounded: He that is not with us, is against us; and again, He that is not against us, is with us; that is, if the points fundamental and of substance in religion, were truly discerned and distinguished, from points not merely of faith, but of opinion, order, or good intention. This is a thing may seem to many a matter trivial, and done already. But if it were done less partially, it would be embraced more generally.

Regarding the limits of unity, the proper definition of them is very important. There seem to be two extremes. For some zealous individuals, any discussion of peace is unwelcome. Is it peace, Jehu? What do you have to do with peace? Turn away from me. Peace isn’t the issue; it’s about following and taking sides. On the other hand, some indifferent people think they can compromise on religious matters by finding a middle ground and taking parts from both sides, attempting clever reconciliations, as if they can mediate between God and humanity. Both of these extremes should be avoided, which can be achieved if the covenant of Christians, written by our Savior himself, is clearly and straightforwardly explained in its two key clauses: “He that is not with us is against us," and again, "He that is not against us is with us." This means that the fundamental and essential points of religion should be accurately identified and separated from those that are merely about opinion, order, or good intentions. This may seem trivial to many and like something already addressed. However, if it were approached with less bias, it would be more widely accepted.

Of this I may give only this advice, according to my small model. Men ought to take heed, of rending God's church, by two kinds of controversies. The one is, when the matter of the point controverted, is too small and light, not worth the heat and strife about it, kindled only by contradiction. For, as it is noted, by one of the fathers, Christ's coat indeed had no seam, but the church's vesture was of divers colors; whereupon he saith, In veste varietas sit, scissura non sit; they be two things, unity and uniformity. The other is, when the matter of the point controverted, is great, but it is driven to an over-great subtilty, and obscurity; so that it becometh a thing rather ingenious, than substantial. A man that is of judgment and understanding, shall sometimes hear ignorant men differ, and know well within himself, that those which so differ, mean one thing, and yet they themselves would never agree. And if it come so to pass, in that distance of judgment, which is between man and man, shall we not think that God above, that knows the heart, doth not discern that frail men, in some of their contradictions, intend the same thing; and accepteth of both? The nature of such controversies is excellently expressed, by St. Paul, in the warning and precept, that he giveth concerning the same, Devita profanas vocum novitates, et oppositiones falsi nominis scientiae. Men create oppositions, which are not; and put them into new terms, so fixed, as whereas the meaning ought to govern the term, the term in effect governeth the meaning. There be also two false peaces, or unities: the one, when the peace is grounded, but upon an implicit ignorance; for all colors will agree in the dark: the other, when it is pieced up, upon a direct admission of contraries, in fundamental points. For truth and falsehood, in such things, are like the iron and clay, in the toes of Nebuchadnezzar's image; they may cleave, but they will not incorporate.

I can only offer this advice based on my limited perspective. People should be careful about dividing God's church over two types of arguments. The first is when the issue being debated is trivial and not worth the conflict it creates, which usually arises from simple disagreements. As one of the church fathers pointed out, while Christ's robe had no seams, the church's garments come in many colors; thus, he said, “Let there be diversity in the garment, but no tearing.” There are two things at play: unity and uniformity. The second type is when the issue at hand is significant, but it’s debated in an overly complicated and obscure way, making it more of an intellectual exercise than something substantial. An observant person may sometimes listen to uneducated people disagree and realize they actually mean the same thing, yet they can't find common ground. If this distance of understanding exists among humans, shouldn't we consider that God, who knows our hearts, can see that flawed humans, in some of their disagreements, have the same intentions and accepts both sides? St. Paul brilliantly describes the nature of such debates when he warns against “avoiding profane and vain babblings and oppositions of falsely named knowledge.” People create divisions that aren't really there and label them with new terms, where instead of the meaning controlling the terms, the terms end up controlling the meaning. There are also two kinds of false peace or unity: one where peace is based on willful ignorance—after all, all colors can coexist in the dark; the other where agreements are made by directly accepting contradictory beliefs on fundamental issues. In these cases, truth and falsehood are like iron and clay in the toes of Nebuchadnezzar's statue; they can cling together but will never truly merge.

Concerning the means of procuring unity; men must beware, that in the procuring, or reuniting, of religious unity, they do not dissolve and deface the laws of charity, and of human society. There be two swords amongst Christians, the spiritual and temporal; and both have their due office and place, in the maintenance of religion. But we may not take up the third sword, which is Mahomet's sword, or like unto it; that is, to propagate religion by wars, or by sanguinary persecutions to force consciences; except it be in cases of overt scandal, blasphemy, or intermixture of practice against the state; much less to nourish seditions; to authorize conspiracies and rebellions; to put the sword into the people's hands; and the like; tending to the subversion of all government, which is the ordinance of God. For this is but to dash the first table against the second; and so to consider men as Christians, as we forget that they are men. Lucretius the poet, when he beheld the act of Agamemnon, that could endure the sacrificing of his own daughter, exclaimed: Tantum Religio potuit suadere malorum.

Regarding how to achieve unity, people need to be careful that, in the pursuit of religious unity, they don't undermine or ruin the principles of love and human society. Among Christians, there are two swords: the spiritual and the temporal; both have their rightful role in supporting religion. However, we must not take up a third sword, like Muhammad's sword, which means spreading religion through wars or violent persecutions to force belief; this applies only in cases of obvious scandal, blasphemy, or actions against the state. Even less should we encourage riots, authorize conspiracies and rebellions, or incite the people to violence, as these actions threaten to dismantle all government, which is ordained by God. This is effectively to clash the first commandment against the second and to view people only as Christians while neglecting their humanity. Lucretius the poet, witnessing Agamemnon's act of sacrificing his own daughter, exclaimed: "Such is the power of religion to persuade evil."

What would he have said, if he had known of the massacre in France, or the powder treason of England? He would have been seven times more Epicure, and atheist, than he was. For as the temporal sword is to be drawn with great circumspection in cases of religion; so it is a thing monstrous to put it into the hands of the common people. Let that be left unto the Anabaptists, and other furies. It was great blasphemy, when the devil said, I will ascend, and be like the highest; but it is greater blasphemy, to personate God, and bring him in saying, I will descend, and be like the prince of darkness; and what is it better, to make the cause of religion to descend, to the cruel and execrable actions of murthering princes, butchery of people, and subversion of states and governments? Surely this is to bring down the Holy Ghost, instead of the likeness of a dove, in the shape of a vulture or raven; and set, out of the bark of a Christian church, a flag of a bark of pirates, and assassins. Therefore it is most necessary, that the church, by doctrine and decree, princes by their sword, and all learnings, both Christian and moral, as by their Mercury rod, do damn and send to hell for ever, those facts and opinions tending to the support of the same; as hath been already in good part done. Surely in counsels concerning religion, that counsel of the apostle would be prefixed, Ira hominis non implet justitiam Dei. And it was a notable observation of a wise father, and no less ingenuously confessed; that those which held and persuaded pressure of consciences, were commonly interested therein, themselves, for their own ends.

What would he have said if he had known about the massacre in France or the gunpowder plot in England? He would have become even more of an Epicurean and an atheist than he already was. Just as the use of force in matters of religion should be approached with great caution, it’s outrageous to place that power in the hands of the general public. Let that be left to the Anabaptists and other extremists. It was a significant blasphemy when the devil said, "I will rise and be like the highest," but it's even worse to impersonate God and suggest that He says, "I will come down and be like the prince of darkness." What’s the difference in making the cause of religion sink to the cruel and abhorrent acts of murdering princes, butchering innocent people, and overthrowing governments? Surely, this is to misrepresent the Holy Spirit, turning it from a dove into the shape of a vulture or raven; and displaying, from the framework of a Christian church, the flag of pirates and assassins. Therefore, it’s essential that the church, through its teachings and decrees, that princes with their swords, and all knowledge—both Christian and moral—should condemn and send to hell forever those actions and beliefs that support the same, as has already been largely accomplished. In discussions about religion, the apostle's advice should be emphasized: "The anger of man does not achieve the righteousness of God." It’s also worth noting a wise observation, which was candidly acknowledged, that those who advocated for the oppression of consciences were often driven by their own self-interest.





Of Revenge

REVENGE is a kind of wild justice; which the more man's nature runs to, the more ought law to weed it out. For as for the first wrong, it doth but offend the law; but the revenge of that wrong, putteth the law out of office. Certainly, in taking revenge, a man is but even with his enemy; but in passing it over, he is superior; for it is a prince's part to pardon. And Solomon, I am sure, saith, It is the glory of a man, to pass by an offence. That which is past is gone, and irrevocable; and wise men have enough to do, with things present and to come; therefore they do but trifle with themselves, that labor in past matters. There is no man doth a wrong, for the wrong's sake; but thereby to purchase himself profit, or pleasure, or honor, or the like. Therefore why should I be angry with a man, for loving himself better than me? And if any man should do wrong, merely out of ill-nature, why, yet it is but like the thorn or briar, which prick and scratch, because they can do no other. The most tolerable sort of revenge, is for those wrongs which there is no law to remedy; but then let a man take heed, the revenge be such as there is no law to punish; else a man's enemy is still before hand, and it is two for one. Some, when they take revenge, are desirous, the party should know, whence it cometh. This is the more generous. For the delight seemeth to be, not so much in doing the hurt, as in making the party repent. But base and crafty cowards, are like the arrow that flieth in the dark. Cosmus, duke of Florence, had a desperate saying against perfidious or neglecting friends, as if those wrongs were unpardonable; You shall read (saith he) that we are commanded to forgive our enemies; but you never read, that we are commanded to forgive our friends. But yet the spirit of Job was in a better tune: Shall we (saith he) take good at God's hands, and not be content to take evil also? And so of friends in a proportion. This is certain, that a man that studieth revenge, keeps his own wounds green, which otherwise would heal, and do well. Public revenges are for the most part fortunate; as that for the death of Caesar; for the death of Pertinax; for the death of Henry the Third of France; and many more. But in private revenges, it is not so. Nay rather, vindictive persons live the life of witches; who, as they are mischievous, so end they infortunate.

REVENGE is a kind of wild justice; the more a person leans into it, the more the law should work to eliminate it. The first wrong only offends the law, but seeking revenge puts the law out of the picture. When someone seeks revenge, they only match their enemy; but when they let it go, they rise above it—it's a royal act to pardon. Solomon said, it’s a man’s glory to overlook an offense. What’s done is done and can’t be changed; wise people have enough to focus on with what's happening now and what's to come, so they waste their time dwelling on the past. No one does wrong for the sake of causing harm; they do it to gain profit, pleasure, honor, or something similar. So, why should I be upset with someone for prioritizing their own interests over mine? And if someone does something wrong just because they’re mean, it’s like thorns or briars that prick and scratch just because they can. The most acceptable form of revenge is for wrongs that the law can’t address; but one should be cautious that the revenge isn’t something the law can punish; otherwise, the enemy still has the upper hand, and it becomes two against one. Some people, when they seek revenge, want the other person to know where it’s coming from. This is considered more honorable, as the pleasure seems to come from making the other person regret their actions, not just from doing harm. But petty and sneaky cowards are like arrows that fly in the dark. Cosmus, the duke of Florence, had a harsh saying about unfaithful or neglectful friends, suggesting those wrongs are unforgivable: "You will read that we are told to forgive our enemies, but you never read that we are told to forgive our friends." Yet, Job had a better perspective: "Should we accept good from God and not be willing to accept bad as well?" The same applies to friends. It's true that someone who focuses on revenge keeps their own wounds fresh, which would otherwise heal and get better. Public acts of revenge often succeed, like those for the deaths of Caesar, Pertinax, and Henry the Third of France, among many others. But in private acts of revenge, it often doesn’t work that way. Instead, vengeful people live like witches; they may be harmful, but they also end up facing misfortune.





Of Adversity

IT WAS an high speech of Seneca (after the manner of the Stoics), that the good things, which belong to prosperity, are to be wished; but the good things, that belong to adversity, are to be admired. Bona rerum secundarum optabilia; adversarum mirabilia. Certainly if miracles be the command over nature, they appear most in adversity. It is yet a higher speech of his, than the other (much too high for a heathen), It is true greatness, to have in one the frailty of a man, and the security of a God. Vere magnum habere fragilitatem hominis, securitatem Dei. This would have done better in poesy, where transcendences are more allowed. And the poets indeed have been busy with it; for it is in effect the thing, which figured in that strange fiction of the ancient poets, which seemeth not to be without mystery; nay, and to have some approach to the state of a Christian; that Hercules, when he went to unbind Prometheus (by whom human nature is represented), sailed the length of the great ocean, in an earthen pot or pitcher; lively describing Christian resolution, that saileth in the frail bark of the flesh, through the waves of the world. But to speak in a mean. The virtue of prosperity, is temperance; the virtue of adversity, is fortitude; which in morals is the more heroical virtue. Prosperity is the blessing of the Old Testament; adversity is the blessing of the New; which carrieth the greater benediction, and the clearer revelation of God's favor. Yet even in the Old Testament, if you listen to David's harp, you shall hear as many hearse-like airs as carols; and the pencil of the Holy Ghost hath labored more in describing the afflictions of Job, than the felicities of Solomon. Prosperity is not without many fears and distastes; and adversity is not without comforts and hopes. We see in needle-works and embroideries, it is more pleasing to have a lively work, upon a sad and solemn ground, than to have a dark and melancholy work, upon a lightsome ground: judge therefore of the pleasure of the heart, by the pleasure of the eye. Certainly virtue is like precious odors, most fragrant when they are incensed, or crushed: for prosperity doth best discover vice, but adversity doth best discover virtue.

It was a profound statement by Seneca (in line with Stoic thought) that the good things associated with prosperity are desired, while the good things related to adversity are to be admired. Bona rerum secundarum optabilia; adversarum mirabilia. If miracles are defined as mastery over nature, they are most evident in tough times. There is an even greater statement by him, which is quite lofty (perhaps too lofty for a non-believer): true greatness is to embody both human fragility and divine security. Vere magnum habere fragilitatem hominis, securitatem Dei. This idea would fit better in poetry, where such transcendences are more acceptable. Indeed, poets have explored this theme; it is reflected in the intriguing myth of the ancient poets, which seems to hold some deeper meaning, and even resembles the state of a Christian. Hercules, while on his quest to free Prometheus (representing humanity), crossed the vast ocean in a terracotta pot or pitcher, symbolizing the Christian resolve that navigates the fragile vessel of the human body through the turbulent waves of life. However, to put it simply: the virtue of prosperity is temperance, while the virtue of adversity is courage, which is the more heroic virtue in moral terms. Prosperity is the blessing of the Old Testament; adversity is the blessing of the New Testament, carrying greater benediction and a clearer manifestation of God's favor. Yet even in the Old Testament, if you listen to David's harp, you’ll hear as many mournful tunes as joyful ones; and the Holy Spirit has spent more effort illustrating Job's sufferings than Solomon's joys. Prosperity is not without its fears and frustrations, and adversity is not without its comforts and hopes. We see in embroidery that it's more pleasing to have a vibrant design on a somber background than a dark and gloomy piece on a bright background: thus, we can gauge the heart's joy by the eye's pleasure. Truly, virtue is like precious scents, most fragrant when they are burned or crushed: for prosperity reveals vice, but adversity reveals virtue.





Of Simulation And Dissimulation

DISSIMULATION is but a faint kind of policy, or wisdom; for it asketh a strong wit, and a strong heart, to know when to tell truth, and to do it. Therefore it is the weaker sort of politics, that are the great dissemblers.

DISSIMULATION is just a weak form of strategy or wisdom; it requires a sharp mind and a strong heart to know when to speak the truth and actually do it. That's why the weaker types of politicians are the ones who are the biggest deceivers.

Tacitus saith, Livia sorted well with the arts of her husband, and dissimulation of her son; attributing arts or policy to Augustus, and dissimulation to Tiberius. And again, when Mucianus encourageth Vespasian, to take arms against Vitellius, he saith, We rise not against the piercing judgment of Augustus, nor the extreme caution or closeness of Tiberius. These properties, of arts or policy, and dissimulation or closeness, are indeed habits and faculties several, and to be distinguished. For if a man have that penetration of judgment, as he can discern what things are to be laid open, and what to be secreted, and what to be showed at half lights, and to whom and when (which indeed are arts of state, and arts of life, as Tacitus well calleth them), to him, a habit of dissimulation is a hinderance and a poorness. But if a man cannot obtain to that judgment, then it is left to him generally, to be close, and a dissembler. For where a man cannot choose, or vary in particulars, there it is good to take the safest, and wariest way, in general; like the going softly, by one that cannot well see. Certainly the ablest men that ever were, have had all an openness, and frankness, of dealing; and a name of certainty and veracity; but then they were like horses well managed; for they could tell passing well, when to stop or turn; and at such times, when they thought the case indeed required dissimulation, if then they used it, it came to pass that the former opinion, spread abroad, of their good faith and clearness of dealing, made them almost invisible.

Tacitus says that Livia worked well with her husband’s skills and her son’s deceit, attributing strategy to Augustus and deceit to Tiberius. Additionally, when Mucianus encourages Vespasian to take up arms against Vitellius, he states, “We are not rising against the keen judgment of Augustus, nor the extreme caution or secrecy of Tiberius.” These traits of strategy and deceitfulness are indeed different habits and skills that should be distinguished. If someone has the insight to understand which matters should be revealed, which should be kept secret, and what should be shown partially, and to whom and when (which are truly strategies of state and life, as Tacitus aptly calls them), then having a habit of deceit can be a drawback and a weakness. However, if someone cannot achieve such judgment, they are left to be generally secretive and deceptive. When one cannot choose or vary in specifics, it is prudent to take the safest and most cautious route overall, much like someone walking slowly when they cannot see well. Certainly, the most capable individuals throughout history have shown openness and honesty in their dealings and earned a reputation for certainty and truthfulness; however, they were like well-trained horses, knowing very well when to stop or turn. When they felt the situation genuinely called for deceit, if they used it, their prior reputation for good faith and straightforwardness rendered them almost invisible.

There be three degrees of this hiding and veiling of a man's self. The first, closeness, reservation, and secrecy; when a man leaveth himself without observation, or without hold to be taken, what he is. The second, dissimulation, in the negative; when a man lets fall signs and arguments, that he is not, that he is. And the third, simulation, in the affirmative; when a man industriously and expressly feigns and pretends to be, that he is not.

There are three levels of hiding and concealing one's true self. The first is being reserved and secretive; when a person doesn’t reveal anything about who they really are. The second is dissimulation, where a person gives off hints and clues that suggest they are not who they actually are. The third is simulation, where a person actively and deliberately pretends to be something they are not.

For the first of these, secrecy; it is indeed the virtue of a confessor. And assuredly, the secret man heareth many confessions. For who will open himself, to a blab or a babbler? But if a man be thought secret, it inviteth discovery; as the more close air sucketh in the more open; and as in confession, the revealing is not for worldly use, but for the ease of a man's heart, so secret men come to the knowledge of many things in that kind; while men rather discharge their minds, than impart their minds. In few words, mysteries are due to secrecy. Besides (to say truth) nakedness is uncomely, as well in mind as body; and it addeth no small reverence, to men's manners and actions, if they be not altogether open. As for talkers and futile persons, they are commonly vain and credulous withal. For he that talketh what he knoweth, will also talk what he knoweth not. Therefore set it down, that an habit of secrecy, is both politic and moral. And in this part, it is good that a man's face give his tongue leave to speak. For the discovery of a man' s self, by the tracts of his countenance, is a great weakness and betraying; by how much it is many times more marked, and believed, than a man's words.

For the first of these, secrecy; it truly is the virtue of a confessor. And certainly, the secretive person hears many confessions. Who would want to open up to someone who talks too much? But if someone is considered secretive, it encourages others to share; just as air that is more closed draws in the more open. In confession, revealing isn’t for worldly reasons but to ease the heart, so secretive people learn many things in that way; while people prefer to unload their thoughts rather than share them. In short, mysteries belong to secrecy. Moreover, to be honest, being completely open is unappealing, both in mind and body; it also adds a level of respect to a person’s behavior and actions if they aren’t completely transparent. As for gossips and shallow people, they are usually both vain and gullible. Someone who talks about what they know will also talk about what they don’t know. Therefore, consider it established that having a habit of secrecy is both strategic and ethical. In this regard, it’s beneficial for someone’s expression to allow their words. Revealing oneself through facial expressions is a significant weakness and giveaway; it is often noticed and believed much more than a person’s words.

For the second, which is dissimulation; it followeth many times upon secrecy, by a necessity; so that he that will be secret, must be a dissembler in some degree. For men are too cunning, to suffer a man to keep an indifferent carriage between both, and to be secret, without swaying the balance on either side. They will so beset a man with questions, and draw him on, and pick it out of him, that, without an absurd silence, he must show an inclination one way; or if he do not, they will gather as much by his silence, as by his speech. As for equivocations, or oraculous speeches, they cannot hold out long. So that no man can be secret, except he give himself a little scope of dissimulation; which is, as it were, but the skirts or train of secrecy.

For the second type, which is dissimulation; it often comes after secrecy out of necessity. So, someone who wants to keep a secret must, to some extent, be a dissembler. People are too clever to allow someone to maintain a neutral stance and keep secrets without leaning one way or the other. They will bombard a person with questions, draw him out, and extract information until, without completely avoiding the topic, he ends up showing a lean towards one side; or if he doesn’t, they will infer as much from his silence as from his words. As for vague statements or enigmatic responses, they can't last long. So, no one can truly be secretive unless they allow themselves a bit of dissimulation, which is, in a way, just the edges or trailing aspects of secrecy.

But for the third degree, which is simulation, and false profession; that I hold more culpable, and less politic; except it be in great and rare matters. And therefore a general custom of simulation (which is this last degree) is a vice, using either of a natural falseness or fearfulness, or of a mind that hath some main faults, which because a man must needs disguise, it maketh him practise simulation in other things, lest his hand should be out of use.

But for the third level, which is pretending and false claims; I find that more blameworthy and less strategic, unless it’s for significant and rare issues. So, a widespread habit of pretending (which is this last level) is a flaw, stemming from either natural dishonesty or fear, or from a person with major faults that they need to hide. This leads them to practice pretending in other areas, so they don’t lose their touch.

The great advantages of simulation and dissimulation are three. First, to lay asleep opposition, and to surprise. For where a man's intentions are published, it is an alarum, to call up all that are against them. The second is, to reserve to a man's self a fair retreat. For if a man engage himself by a manifest declaration, he must go through or take a fall. The third is, the better to discover the mind of another. For to him that opens himself, men will hardly show themselves adverse; but will fair let him go on, and turn their freedom of speech, to freedom of thought. And therefore it is a good shrewd proverb of the Spaniard, Tell a lie and find a troth. As if there were no way of discovery, but by simulation. There be also three disadvantages, to set it even. The first, that simulation and dissimulation commonly carry with them a show of fearfulness, which in any business, doth spoil the feathers, of round flying up to the mark. The second, that it puzzleth and perplexeth the conceits of many, that perhaps would otherwise co-operate with him; and makes a man walk almost alone, to his own ends. The third and greatest is, that it depriveth a man of one of the most principal instruments for action; which is trust and belief. The best composition and temperature, is to have openness in fame and opinion; secrecy in habit; dissimulation in seasonable use; and a power to feign, if there be no remedy.

The major benefits of simulation and dissimulation are threefold. First, they can keep opposition at bay and catch opponents off guard. When a person’s intentions are made public, it acts like an alarm, rallying anyone who opposes them. Second, they allow a person to maintain a good escape route. If someone commits to an obvious declaration, they have to follow through or face failure. Third, they help in better understanding another person's mindset. Those who open up will find that others are less likely to oppose them; instead, people will let them continue and shift their freedom of speech into freedom of thought. This leads to the clever Spanish proverb: “Tell a lie and find a truth,” implying that sometimes discovery comes only through simulation. However, there are also three drawbacks to keep in mind. First, simulation and dissimulation often create a sense of fearfulness, which can hinder progress in any endeavor. Second, it confuses and complicates the thoughts of many who might otherwise collaborate, leaving a person to navigate their path almost alone. The third and most significant disadvantage is that it robs a person of one of the most important tools for action: trust and belief. The ideal balance is to be open in reputation and opinion; discreet in behavior; use dissimulation when appropriate; and have the ability to pretend when necessary.





Of Parents And Children

THE joys of parents are secret; and so are their griefs and fears. They cannot utter the one; nor they will not utter the other. Children sweeten labors; but they make misfortunes more bitter. They increase the cares of life; but they mitigate the remembrance of death. The perpetuity by generation is common to beasts; but memory, merit, and noble works, are proper to men. And surely a man shall see the noblest works and foundations have proceeded from childless men; which have sought to express the images of their minds, where those of their bodies have failed. So the care of posterity is most in them, that have no posterity. They that are the first raisers of their houses, are most indulgent towards their children; beholding them as the continuance, not only of their kind, but of their work; and so both children and creatures.

The joys of parents are hidden, and so are their sorrows and fears. They can’t voice one, nor do they want to voice the other. Children make hard work sweeter, but they also make misfortunes even harder to bear. They add to the worries of life, yet they lessen the fear of death. While the continuation of life through offspring is shared by animals, memory, achievements, and great deeds are unique to humans. And indeed, one can observe that some of the greatest works and foundations have come from those without children, who have sought to express the thoughts in their minds when their physical legacy has not continued. Thus, the concern for future generations is greatest among those who have none. The founders of their families are often most caring toward their children, seeing them as the continuation not just of their lineage, but of their legacy; and so they view both children and creations.

The difference in affection, of parents towards their several children, is many times unequal; and sometimes unworthy; especially in the mothers; as Solomon saith, A wise son rejoiceth the father, but an ungracious son shames the mother. A man shall see, where there is a house full of children, one or two of the eldest respected, and the youngest made wantons; but in the midst, some that are as it were forgotten, who many times, nevertheless, prove the best. The illiberality of parents, in allowance towards their children, is an harmful error; makes them base; acquaints them with shifts; makes them sort with mean company; and makes them surfeit more when they come to plenty. And therefore the proof is best, when men keep their authority towards the children, but not their purse. Men have a foolish manner (both parents and schoolmasters and servants) in creating and breeding an emulation between brothers, during childhood, which many times sorteth to discord when they are men, and disturbeth families. The Italians make little difference between children, and nephews or near kinsfolks; but so they be of the lump, they care not though they pass not through their own body. And, to say truth, in nature it is much a like matter; insomuch that we see a nephew sometimes resembleth an uncle, or a kinsman, more than his own parent; as the blood happens. Let parents choose betimes, the vocations and courses they mean their children should take; for then they are most flexible; and let them not too much apply themselves to the disposition of their children, as thinking they will take best to that, which they have most mind to. It is true, that if the affection or aptness of the children be extraordinary, then it is good not to cross it; but generally the precept is good, optimum elige, suave et facile illud faciet consuetudo. Younger brothers are commonly fortunate, but seldom or never where the elder are disinherited.

The way parents show affection to their different children is often unequal and sometimes unfair, especially with mothers. As Solomon said, a wise son makes his father proud, but a disobedient son brings shame to his mother. In a house full of children, you’ll typically find one or two of the oldest being favored while the youngest are spoiled; meanwhile, some in the middle go largely unnoticed, who often turn out to be the best. Parents’ stinginess with their children can be harmful; it lowers their character, makes them crafty, associates them with low company, and leads to excessive behavior when they do finally have plenty. Thus, it’s best when parents maintain their authority over their children without being overly generous. Parents, teachers, and caretakers often mistakenly foster rivalry among siblings during childhood, which can lead to discord as they grow up and disrupt family harmony. Italians generally don't differentiate much between their children and their nephews or close relatives; as long as they’re part of the family, they don’t mind if they aren’t biologically theirs. In fact, it can be quite similar in nature, as sometimes a nephew may resemble an uncle or cousin more than his own parent, depending on genetics. Parents should decide early on the professions and paths they want their children to follow because children are most open to influence then; but they shouldn't force their own interests onto their kids, thinking that they will naturally excel in whatever the parents want. It’s true that if children show an extraordinary talent or interest, it’s best not to oppose it; but generally, the rule holds: choose the best option, and practice will make it smooth and easy. Younger siblings often find success, but rarely when the older ones are cut off from inheritance.





Of Marriage And Single Life

HE THAT hath wife and children hath given hostages to fortune; for they are impediments to great enterprises, either of virtue or mischief. Certainly the best works, and of greatest merit for the public, have proceeded from the unmarried or childless men; which both in affection and means, have married and endowed the public. Yet it were great reason that those that have children, should have greatest care of future times; unto which they know they must transmit their dearest pledges. Some there are, who though they lead a single life, yet their thoughts do end with themselves, and account future times impertinences. Nay, there are some other, that account wife and children, but as bills of charges. Nay more, there are some foolish rich covetous men, that take a pride, in having no children, because they may be thought so much the richer. For perhaps they have heard some talk, Such an one is a great rich man, and another except to it, Yea, but he hath a great charge of children; as if it were an abatement to his riches. But the most ordinary cause of a single life, is liberty, especially in certain self-pleasing and humorous minds, which are so sensible of every restraint, as they will go near to think their girdles and garters, to be bonds and shackles. Unmarried men are best friends, best masters, best servants; but not always best subjects; for they are light to run away; and almost all fugitives, are of that condition. A single life doth well with churchmen; for charity will hardly water the ground, where it must first fill a pool. It is indifferent for judges and magistrates; for if they be facile and corrupt, you shall have a servant, five times worse than a wife. For soldiers, I find the generals commonly in their hortatives, put men in mind of their wives and children; and I think the despising of marriage amongst the Turks, maketh the vulgar soldier more base. Certainly wife and children are a kind of discipline of humanity; and single men, though they may be many times more charitable, because their means are less exhaust, yet, on the other side, they are more cruel and hardhearted (good to make severe inquisitors), because their tenderness is not so oft called upon. Grave natures, led by custom, and therefore constant, are commonly loving husbands, as was said of Ulysses, vetulam suam praetulit immortalitati. Chaste women are often proud and froward, as presuming upon the merit of their chastity. It is one of the best bonds, both of chastity and obedience, in the wife, if she think her husband wise; which she will never do, if she find him jealous. Wives are young men's mistresses; companions for middle age; and old men's nurses. So as a man may have a quarrel to marry, when he will. But yet he was reputed one of the wise men, that made answer to the question, when a man should marry,—A young man not yet, an elder man not at all. It is often seen that bad husbands, have very good wives; whether it be, that it raiseth the price of their husband's kindness, when it comes; or that the wives take a pride in their patience. But this never fails, if the bad husbands were of their own choosing, against their friends' consent; for then they will be sure to make good their own folly.

He who has a wife and children has given hostages to fortune; they can be obstacles to great endeavors, whether they are good or bad. Truly, the best work, and the most valuable for the public, has come from men who are unmarried or childless; these men have both the passion and the means to contribute to society. Yet it makes sense that those with children would care most about the future since they know they must pass on their greatest treasures. Some people, though they live a single life, only think about themselves and see future generations as irrelevant. There are others who view having a wife and kids merely as added expenses. Even more foolish are some wealthy, greedy men who take pride in not having children, believing it makes them richer. They might have heard someone say, "That guy is really wealthy," only for someone else to counter, "Yes, but he has a lot of kids to support," as if the children diminish his wealth. The most common reason for a single life is the desire for freedom, especially among certain self-indulgent and whimsical individuals who feel every restriction acutely, treating their belts and garters like chains. Unmarried men are often the best friends, the best bosses, and the best employees; but they aren’t always the best citizens, as they are quick to run away, and most fugitives tend to be single. A single life suits clergymen well; charity may struggle to thrive where it first has to fill a reservoir. It’s okay for judges and magistrates; if they are easy to manipulate and corrupt, then you’ll end up with a servant worse than a bad marriage. As for soldiers, I usually find that generals encourage men to think about their wives and kids; I believe that the disdain for marriage among Turks makes their common soldiers more reckless. Certainly, having a wife and kids teaches a kind of humanity; single men, while they might be more charitable because their resources aren’t spread thin, can also be cruel and hard-hearted (they can be good at severe interrogations), since their compassion isn’t often called into play. Serious individuals, who are guided by tradition and therefore steadfast, are usually loving husbands, as was said of Ulysses, who chose his old wife over immortality. Chaste women can often be proud and difficult, believing in the value of their purity. One of the strongest bonds for both chastity and obedience in a wife comes when she believes her husband is wise; she will never think that if she discovers he is jealous. Wives serve as young men’s lovers, companions for middle-aged men, and caregivers for old ones. So, a man can definitely find a reason to marry whenever he wants. However, it was reputed that one wise man answered the question of when a man should marry by saying—“A young man, not yet; an older man, never.” It’s often the case that bad husbands have very good wives; whether it's that the wife's patience increases the value of her husband's affection when it comes, or that the wives take pride in their endurance. But this is always true if the bad husbands were chosen by the wives against their friends’ advice; those wives will definitely ensure that they make the best of their own poor choices.





Of Envy

THERE be none of the affections, which have been noted to fascinate or bewitch, but love and envy. They both have vehement wishes; they frame themselves readily into imaginations and suggestions; and they come easily into the eye, especially upon the present of the objects; which are the points that conduce to fascination, if any such thing there be. We see likewise, the Scripture calleth envy an evil eye; and the astrologers, call the evil influences of the stars, evil aspects; so that still there seemeth to be acknowledged, in the act of envy, an ejaculation or irradiation of the eye. Nay, some have been so curious, as to note, that the times when the stroke or percussion of an envious eye doth most hurt, are when the party envied is beheld in glory or triumph; for that sets an edge upon envy: and besides, at such times the spirits of the person envied, do come forth most into the outward parts, and so meet the blow.

There are none of the feelings known to captivate or enchant, except love and envy. Both have intense desires; they easily turn into thoughts and suggestions; and they become visible, especially when the objects of those feelings are present, which are the factors that contribute to fascination, if such a thing exists. We also see that the Scriptures refer to envy as an evil eye, and astrologers call the negative influences of the stars evil aspects; thus, it seems to be recognized that in the act of envy, there is a kind of thrust or glare from the eye. In fact, some have been so observant as to note that the times when the impact of an envious gaze hurts the most are when the person being envied is seen in moments of glory or success; because that sharpens envy. Additionally, during such times, the spirit of the person being envied is more pronounced outwardly, making them more vulnerable to the attack.

But leaving these curiosities (though not unworthy to be thought on, in fit place), we will handle, what persons are apt to envy others; what persons are most subject to be envied themselves; and what is the difference between public and private envy.

But setting aside these curiosities (which are worth considering in the right context), we will discuss who tends to envy others, who is most likely to be envied themselves, and what the difference is between public and private envy.

A man that hath no virtue in himself, ever envieth virtue in others. For men's minds, will either feed upon their own good, or upon others' evil; and who wanteth the one, will prey upon the other; and whoso is out of hope, to attain to another's virtue, will seek to come at even hand, by depressing another's fortune.

A man who lacks virtue within himself will always envy the virtue of others. People’s minds will either focus on their own good or on others’ wrongdoings; and if someone can’t find the first, they will feed off the second. Those who have no hope of achieving someone else's virtue will try to level the playing field by bringing down another's success.

A man that is busy, and inquisitive, is commonly envious. For to know much of other men's matters, cannot be because all that ado may concern his own estate; therefore it must needs be, that he taketh a kind of play-pleasure, in looking upon the fortunes of others. Neither can he, that mindeth but his own business, find much matter for envy. For envy is a gadding passion, and walketh the streets, and doth not keep home: Non est curiosus, quin idem sit malevolus.

A man who is busy and curious is often envious. The reason for wanting to know so much about other people's affairs can't be because it directly relates to his own situation; it must be that he finds some kind of amusement in watching the fortunes of others. On the other hand, someone who only focuses on their own business doesn't have much to be envious about. Envy is a restless emotion that roams around and doesn't stay at home: Non est curiosus, quin idem sit malevolus.

Men of noble birth, are noted to be envious towards new men, when they rise. For the distance is altered, and it is like a deceit of the eye, that when others come on, they think themselves, go back.

Noble-born men are often jealous of newcomers when they succeed. The dynamic changes, and it feels like an illusion; as others advance, they think they're falling behind.

Deformed persons, and eunuchs, and old men, and bastards, are envious. For he that cannot possibly mend his own case, will do what he can, to impair another's; except these defects light upon a very brave, and heroical nature, which thinketh to make his natural wants part of his honor; in that it should be said, that an eunuch, or a lame man, did such great matters; affecting the honor of a miracle; as it was in Narses the eunuch, and Agesilaus and Tamberlanes, that were lame men.

Deformed individuals, eunuchs, elderly men, and illegitimate children tend to be envious. Those who can't improve their own situation will do what they can to undermine others; unless these shortcomings happen to be found in someone with a truly courageous and heroic nature, who believes that their natural limitations are part of their honor. It would be said that a eunuch or a disabled man accomplished great things, achieving the honor of a miracle, as seen with Narses the eunuch and the lame leaders Agesilaus and Tamerlane.

The same is the case of men, that rise after calamities and misfortunes. For they are as men fallen out with the times; and think other men's harms, a redemption of their own sufferings.

The same goes for men who rise after hardships and misfortunes. They are like people who have fallen out of sync with the times; they believe that the misfortunes of others somehow justify their own struggles.

They that desire to excel in too many matters, out of levity and vain glory, are ever envious. For they cannot want work; it being impossible, but many, in some one of those things, should surpass them. Which was the character of Adrian the Emperor; that mortally envied poets, and painters, and artificers, in works wherein he had a vein to excel.

Those who want to be great in too many areas, out of foolishness and a desire for recognition, are always envious. They can't help but have rivals, since it's inevitable that many will surpass them in one of those areas. This was true of Emperor Adrian, who was deeply envious of poets, painters, and craftsmen in fields where he had the talent to excel.

Lastly, near kinsfolks, and fellows in office, and those that have been bred together, are more apt to envy their equals, when they are raised. For it doth upbraid unto them their own fortunes, and pointeth at them, and cometh oftener into their remembrance, and incurreth likewise more into the note of others; and envy ever redoubleth from speech and fame. Cain's envy was the more vile and malignant, towards his brother Abel, because when his sacrifice was better accepted, there was no body to look on. Thus much for those, that are apt to envy.

Lastly, close relatives, coworkers, and those who grew up together are more likely to envy their peers when they succeed. Because it highlights their own circumstances, it brings them to mind more often and draws more attention from others; envy only grows through conversation and reputation. Cain's envy toward his brother Abel was even more evil and malicious because, when his sacrifice was favored, no one was around to witness it. This is what I have to say about those who are prone to envy.

Concerning those that are more or less subject to envy: First, persons of eminent virtue, when they are advanced, are less envied. For their fortune seemeth, but due unto them; and no man envieth the payment of a debt, but rewards and liberality rather. Again, envy is ever joined with the comparing of a man's self; and where there is no comparison, no envy; and therefore kings are not envied, but by kings. Nevertheless it is to be noted, that unworthy persons are most envied, at their first coming in, and afterwards overcome it better; whereas contrariwise, persons of worth and merit are most envied, when their fortune continueth long. For by that time, though their virtue be the same, yet it hath not the same lustre; for fresh men grow up that darken it.

Regarding those who are more or less prone to envy: First, individuals of notable virtue, when they achieve success, are envied less. Their fortune seems justly earned, and no one feels envy over the repayment of a debt, but rather over rewards and generosity. Additionally, envy is always tied to comparing oneself to others; where there is no comparison, there is no envy. Therefore, kings are only envied by other kings. However, it's important to note that unworthy individuals are most envied when they first rise to prominence, and they tend to handle it better over time. In contrast, people of worth and merit are most envied when their success lasts for a long time. By that point, although their virtue remains unchanged, it doesn't shine as brightly; new talents emerge that overshadow it.

Persons of noble blood, are less envied in their rising. For it seemeth but right done to their birth. Besides, there seemeth not much added to their fortune; and envy is as the sunbeams, that beat hotter upon a bank, or steep rising ground, than upon a flat. And for the same reason, those that are advanced by degrees, are less envied than those that are advanced suddenly and per saltum.

People of noble birth are less envied when they rise in status. It seems to be a natural consequence of their lineage. Also, it doesn’t significantly change their wealth; envy is like sunlight that shines more intensely on a hill or steep slope than on flat ground. Similarly, those who rise gradually are less envied than those who jump to success suddenly.

Those that have joined with their honor great travels, cares, or perils, are less subject to envy. For men think that they earn their honors hardly, and pity them sometimes; and pity ever healeth envy. Wherefore you shall observe, that the more deep and sober sort of politic persons, in their greatness, are ever bemoaning themselves, what a life they lead; chanting a quanta patimur! Not that they feel it so, but only to abate the edge of envy. But this is to be understood, of business that is laid upon men, and not such, as they call unto themselves. For nothing increaseth envy more, than an unnecessary and ambitious engrossing of business. And nothing doth extinguish envy more, than for a great person to preserve all other inferior officers, in their full lights and pre-eminences of their places. For by that means, there be so many screens between him and envy.

Those who have earned their honors through significant travel, challenges, or dangers are less likely to be envied. People believe that they truly work hard for their achievements and sometimes feel sorry for them; and pity always reduces envy. Therefore, you will notice that more serious and sensible political figures, despite their status, often lament their circumstances, exclaiming how difficult their lives are. Not that they genuinely feel this way, but just to lessen the sting of envy. However, this applies to responsibilities that are imposed on individuals, not those they take on themselves. For nothing fuels envy more than unnecessarily ambitious attempts to take on too much. Conversely, nothing diffuses envy more than a powerful person allowing all their subordinate officials to shine in their roles and prominence. This way, there are many barriers between them and envy.

Above all, those are most subject to envy, which carry the greatness of their fortunes, in an insolent and proud manner; being never well, but while they are showing how great they are, either by outward pomp, or by triumphing over all opposition or competition; whereas wise men will rather do sacrifice to envy, in suffering themselves sometimes of purpose to be crossed, and overborne in things that do not much concern them. Notwithstanding, so much is true, that the carriage of greatness, in a plain and open manner (so it be without arrogancy and vain glory) doth draw less envy, than if it be in a more crafty and cunning fashion. For in that course, a man doth but disavow fortune; and seemeth to be conscious of his own want in worth; and doth but teach others, to envy him.

Above all, those who flaunt their wealth in a boastful and arrogant way are the most likely to attract envy. They can never feel satisfied unless they’re displaying their greatness, whether through outward show or by dominating any opposition. In contrast, wise individuals are more likely to acknowledge envy by occasionally allowing themselves to be overlooked or underestimated in matters that aren’t really important to them. However, it is certainly true that presenting one’s greatness in a straightforward and open manner (as long as it’s not arrogant or vain) generates less envy than doing so in a more sly or manipulative way. When someone approaches it that way, they essentially deny their own fortune; it appears as if they’re aware of their own shortcomings and, in turn, encourage others to feel envious of them.

Lastly, to conclude this part; as we said in the beginning, that the act of envy had somewhat in it of witchcraft, so there is no other cure of envy, but the cure of witchcraft; and that is, to remove the lot (as they call it) and to lay it upon another. For which purpose, the wiser sort of great persons, bring in ever upon the stage somebody upon whom to derive the envy, that would come upon themselves; sometimes upon ministers and servants; sometimes upon colleagues and associates; and the like; and for that turn there are never wanting, some persons of violent and undertaking natures, who, so they may have power and business, will take it at any cost.

Lastly, to wrap up this section; as we mentioned earlier, the act of envy has something witchcraft-like about it, so the only way to cure envy is through a witchcraft remedy; that is, to pass the burden (as they call it) onto someone else. For this reason, the wiser influential people always put someone on the stage to draw the envy that would otherwise fall on them; sometimes it's aimed at ministers and servants; other times at colleagues and associates; and so on. There are always people with ambitious and bold natures willing to take on that role, as long as they can gain power and influence, no matter the cost.

Now, to speak of public envy. There is yet some good in public envy, whereas in private, there is none. For public envy, is as an ostracism, that eclipseth men, when they grow too great. And therefore it is a bridle also to great ones, to keep them within bounds.

Now, let's talk about public envy. There is still some positive aspect to public envy, while private envy has none. Public envy acts like ostracism, overshadowing people when they become too powerful. Therefore, it also serves as a check for those in high positions, keeping them in line.

This envy, being in the Latin word invidia, goeth in the modern language, by the name of discontentment; of which we shall speak, in handling sedition. It is a disease, in a state, like to infection. For as infection spreadeth upon that which is sound, and tainteth it; so when envy is gotten once into a state, it traduceth even the best actions thereof, and turneth them into an ill odor. And therefore there is little won, by intermingling of plausible actions. For that doth argue but a weakness, and fear of envy, which hurteth so much the more, as it is likewise usual in infections; which if you fear them, you call them upon you.

This envy, coming from the Latin word "invidia," translates in modern language to discontentment; we will discuss this when we address sedition. It is like a disease in a state, similar to an infection. Just as infection spreads to healthy things and contaminates them, when envy takes hold in a state, it tarnishes even the best actions and gives them a bad reputation. Therefore, mixing in seemingly positive actions achieves little. This only shows weakness and a fear of envy, which often worsens things, just like with infections; if you fear them, you attract them to yourself.

This public envy, seemeth to beat chiefly upon principal officers or ministers, rather than upon kings, and estates themselves. But this is a sure rule, that if the envy upon the minister be great, when the cause of it in him is small; or if the envy be general, in a manner upon all the ministers of an estate; then the envy (though hidden) is truly upon the state itself. And so much of public envy or discontentment, and the difference thereof from private envy, which was handled in the first place.

This public envy seems to target mainly the top officials or ministers rather than the kings or the states themselves. However, there's a clear rule: if the envy towards a minister is strong even when their wrongdoing is minor, or if the envy is widespread among all the ministers of a state, then the real issue (even if it's not obvious) lies with the state itself. This highlights the nature of public envy or discontent and differentiates it from private envy, which was discussed initially.

We will add this in general, touching the affection of envy; that of all other affections, it is the most importune and continual. For of other affections, there is occasion given, but now and then; and therefore it was well said, Invidia festos dies non agit: for it is ever working upon some or other. And it is also noted, that love and envy do make a man pine, which other affections do not, because they are not so continual. It is also the vilest affection, and the most depraved; for which cause it is the proper attribute of the devil, who is called, the envious man, that soweth tares amongst the wheat by night; as it always cometh to pass, that envy worketh subtilly, and in the dark, and to the prejudice of good things, such as is the wheat.

We can generally say that envy is the most persistent and troublesome of all emotions. Unlike other feelings that only come up occasionally, envy is always at work in some form. It was wisely said, "Envy doesn’t take a holiday," because it’s constantly lurking. It’s also noted that both love and envy can make a person suffer, in a way that other emotions don’t, since they are not as relentless. Furthermore, it’s the most despicable and twisted emotion; for this reason, it’s often associated with the devil, who is called the envious one, sowing weeds among the wheat at night. Envy typically operates in secret and works against good things, like the wheat.





Of Love

THE stage is more beholding to love, than the life of man. For as to the stage, love is ever matter of comedies, and now and then of tragedies; but in life it doth much mischief; sometimes like a siren, sometimes like a fury. You may observe, that amongst all the great and worthy persons (whereof the memory remaineth, either ancient or recent) there is not one, that hath been transported to the mad degree of love: which shows that great spirits, and great business, do keep out this weak passion. You must except, nevertheless, Marcus Antonius, the half partner of the empire of Rome, and Appius Claudius, the decemvir and lawgiver; whereof the former was indeed a voluptuous man, and inordinate; but the latter was an austere and wise man: and therefore it seems (though rarely) that love can find entrance, not only into an open heart, but also into a heart well fortified, if watch be not well kept. It is a poor saying of Epicurus, Satis magnum alter alteri theatrum sumus; as if man, made for the contemplation of heaven, and all noble objects, should do nothing but kneel before a little idol, and make himself a subject, though not of the mouth (as beasts are), yet of the eye; which was given him for higher purposes. It is a strange thing, to note the excess of this passion, and how it braves the nature, and value of things, by this; that the speaking in a perpetual hyperbole, is comely in nothing but in love. Neither is it merely in the phrase; for whereas it hath been well said, that the arch-flatterer, with whom all the petty flatterers have intelligence, is a man's self; certainly the lover is more. For there was never proud man thought so absurdly well of himself, as the lover doth of the person loved; and therefore it was well said, That it is impossible to love, and to be wise. Neither doth this weakness appear to others only, and not to the party loved; but to the loved most of all, except the love be reciproque. For it is a true rule, that love is ever rewarded, either with the reciproque, or with an inward and secret contempt. By how much the more, men ought to beware of this passion, which loseth not only other things, but itself! As for the other losses, the poet's relation doth well figure them: that he that preferred Helena, quitted the gifts of Juno and Pallas. For whosoever esteemeth too much of amorous affection, quitteth both riches and wisdom. This passion hath his floods, in very times of weakness; which are great prosperity, and great adversity; though this latter hath been less observed: both which times kindle love, and make it more fervent, and therefore show it to be the child of folly. They do best, who if they cannot but admit love, yet make it keep quarters; and sever it wholly from their serious affairs, and actions, of life; for if it check once with business, it troubleth men's fortunes, and maketh men, that they can no ways be true to their own ends. I know not how, but martial men are given to love: I think, it is but as they are given to wine; for perils commonly ask to be paid in pleasures. There is in man's nature, a secret inclination and motion, towards love of others, which if it be not spent upon some one or a few, doth naturally spread itself towards many, and maketh men become humane and charitable; as it is seen sometime in friars. Nuptial love maketh mankind; friendly love perfecteth it; but wanton love corrupteth, and embaseth it.

THE stage is more connected to love than human life. In theater, love is often the subject of comedies and occasionally of tragedies; in real life, it causes a lot of trouble—sometimes like a siren, and sometimes like a fury. You can notice that among all the great and admirable people (whose memories endure, whether ancient or modern), there isn’t a single one who has been driven to the extreme of love: this indicates that great minds and significant pursuits keep this fragile emotion at bay. However, you must make exceptions for Marcus Antonius, who shared part of the Roman Empire, and Appius Claudius, the decemvir and lawmaker; the former was indeed indulgent and excessive, while the latter was stern and wise. This suggests (though rarely) that love can penetrate not just an open heart, but also a well-fortified one if vigilance is not maintained. Epicurus's saying, "We are each other’s theater," is a poor expression; as if humans, created to contemplate heaven and all noble things, should spend their time kneeling before a small idol and making themselves a subject—not of the voice (as animals are), but of the eye, which was given for higher purposes. It’s striking to reflect on the intensity of this passion and how it defies the inherent nature and worth of things, as speaking in endless exaggerations is only appropriate in love. This isn’t just about the language; as it has been rightly said, the greatest flatterer, in league with all the minor flatterers, is oneself; yet, the lover is even more so. No proud person ever had such an absurdly high opinion of themselves as a lover does of the beloved; hence it is rightly said that it’s impossible to love and be wise. This weakness is not only evident to others, but most of all to the loved one, unless the affection is mutual. It’s a true principle that love is always rewarded, either with mutual affection or with a private and hidden disdain. Therefore, men should be cautious of this passion, which not only causes the loss of other things but also of itself! Regarding other losses, the poet's story illustrates this well: he who chose Helena forsook the gifts of Juno and Pallas. For whoever overvalues romantic obsession sacrifices both wealth and wisdom. This passion has its peaks during times of vulnerability; both great prosperity and great adversity ignite love and make it more intense, demonstrating that it is a product of folly. Those who manage best are those who, even if they must entertain love, keep it in check and separate it completely from their serious matters and life’s endeavors; for if it once clashes with business, it disrupts fortunes and causes people to stray from their true objectives. I’m not sure why, but warriors tend to fall in love; I think it’s similar to their affinity for wine; as dangers often demand to be counterbalanced with pleasures. In human nature, there’s a hidden drive toward loving others, which, if not directed toward one or a few, naturally spreads to many and fosters humanity and charity, as is sometimes seen in monks. Marital love creates humanity; friendly love perfects it; but lustful love corrupts and degrades it.





Of Great Place

MEN in great place are thrice servants: servants of the sovereign or state; servants of fame; and servants of business. So as they have no freedom; neither in their persons, nor in their actions, nor in their times. It is a strange desire, to seek power and to lose liberty: or to seek power over others, and to lose power over a man's self. The rising unto place is laborious; and by pains, men come to greater pains; and it is sometimes base; and by indignities, men come to dignities. The standing is slippery, and the regress is either a downfall, or at least an eclipse, which is a melancholy thing. Cum non sis qui fueris, non esse cur velis vivere. Nay, retire men cannot when they would, neither will they, when it were reason; but are impatient of privateness, even in age and sickness, which require the shadow; like old townsmen, that will be still sitting at their street door, though thereby they offer age to scom. Certainly great persons had need to borrow other men's opinions, to think themselves happy; for if they judge by their own feeling, they cannot find it; but if they think with themselves, what other men think of them, and that other men would fain be, as they are, then they are happy, as it were, by report; when perhaps they find the contrary within. For they are the first, that find their own griefs, though they be the last, that find their own faults. Certainly men in great fortunes are strangers to themselves, and while they are in the puzzle of business, they have no time to tend their health, either of body or mind. Illi mors gravis incubat, qui notus nimis omnibus, ignotus moritur sibi. In place, there is license to do good, and evil; whereof the latter is a curse: for in evil, the best condition is not to win; the second, not to can. But power to do good, is the true and lawful end of aspiring. For good thoughts (though God accept them) yet, towards men, are little better than good dreams, except they be put in act; and that cannot be, without power and place, as the vantage, and commanding ground. Merit and good works, is the end of man's motion; and conscience of the same is the accomplishment of man's rest. For if a man can be partaker of God's theatre, he shall likewise be partaker of God's rest. Et conversus Deus, ut aspiceret opera quae fecerunt manus suae, vidit quod omnia essent bona nimis; and then the sabbath. In the discharge of thy place, set before thee the best examples; for imitation is a globe of precepts. And after a time, set before thee thine own example; and examine thyself strictly, whether thou didst not best at first. Neglect not also the examples, of those that have carried themselves ill, in the same place; not to set off thyself, by taxing their memory, but to direct thyself, what to avoid. Reform therefore, without bravery, or scandal of former times and persons; but yet set it down to thyself, as well to create good precedents, as to follow them. Reduce things to the first institution, and observe wherein, and how, they have degenerate; but yet ask counsel of both times; of the ancient time, what is best; and of the latter time, what is fittest. Seek to make thy course regular, that men may know beforehand, what they may expect; but be not too positive and peremptory; and express thyself well, when thou digressest from thy rule. Preserve the right of thy place; but stir not questions of jurisdiction; and rather assume thy right, in silence and de facto, than voice it with claims, and challenges. Preserve likewise the rights of inferior places; and think it more honor, to direct in chief, than to be busy in all. Embrace and invite helps, and advices, touching the execution of thy place; and do not drive away such, as bring thee information, as meddlers; but accept of them in good part. The vices of authority are chiefly four: delays, corruption, roughness, and facility. For delays: give easy access; keep times appointed; go through with that which is in hand, and interlace not business, but of necessity. For corruption: do not only bind thine own hands, or thy servants' hands, from taking, but bind the hands of suitors also, from offering. For integrity used doth the one; but integrity professed, and with a manifest detestation of bribery, doth the other. And avoid not only the fault, but the suspicion. Whosoever is found variable, and changeth manifestly without manifest cause, giveth suspicion of corruption. Therefore always, when thou changest thine opinion or course, profess it plainly, and declare it, together with the reasons that move thee to change; and do not think to steal it. A servant or a favorite, if he be inward, and no other apparent cause of esteem, is commonly thought, but a by-way to close corruption. For roughness: it is a needless cause of discontent: severity breedeth fear, but roughness breedeth hate. Even reproofs from authority, ought to be grave, and not taunting. As for facility: it is worse than bribery. For bribes come but now and then; but if importunity, or idle respects, lead a man, he shall never be without. As Solomon saith, To respect persons is not good; for such a man will transgress for a piece of bread. It is most true, that was anciently spoken, A place showeth the man. And it showeth some to the better, and some to the worse. Omnium consensu capax imperii, nisi imperasset, saith Tacitus of Galba; but of Vespasian he saith, Solus imperantium, Vespasianus mutatus in melius; though the one was meant of sufficiency, the other of manners, and affection. It is an assured sign of a worthy and generous spirit, whom honor amends. For honor is, or should be, the place of virtue; and as in nature, things move violently to their place, and calmly in their place, so virtue in ambition is violent, in authority settled and calm. All rising to great place is by a winding star; and if there be factions, it is good to side a man's self, whilst he is in the rising, and to balance himself when he is placed. Use the memory of thy predecessor, fairly and tenderly; for if thou dost not, it is a debt will sure be paid when thou art gone. If thou have colleagues, respect them, and rather call them, when they look not for it, than exclude them, when they have reason to look to be called. Be not too sensible, or too remembering, of thy place in conversation, and private answers to suitors; but let it rather be said, When he sits in place, he is another man.

People in high positions are often trapped in three roles: they serve the government or state, the pursuit of fame, and their jobs. This leaves them with little freedom—in their personal lives, actions, or time. It’s odd to want power and lose freedom or to seek power over others while losing control over oneself. Climbing to a position of power requires hard work, and once you achieve it, it often brings more stress; sometimes it’s undignified, as people rise through indignities to positions of honor. Staying in power is precarious, and falling back down can feel like a collapse or, at the very least, a dimming of one’s status, which is quite depressing. "When you are not who you used to be, there’s no reason to want to live." People can’t always step back when they wish, nor do they often want to, even when it’s reasonable to do so; they become restless in solitude, even in old age and illness, which call for reflection, like old townsfolk who keep sitting on their porches even when they bring ridicule on themselves. Truly, powerful individuals often need to rely on others’ opinions to feel happy; if they were to judge based on their own feelings, they might not find happiness. But if they think about how others view them and that others wish to be like them, they might feel content based on public perception, even if deep down they feel the opposite. They are usually the first to realize their troubles, though they may be the last to see their faults. Indeed, those with high fortunes often lose touch with themselves, and in the chaos of their work, they forget to care for their physical and mental well-being. "Death is a heavy burden for those known to everyone but unknown to themselves." In high positions, you have the freedom to do good or bad; the latter is a curse because even in wrongdoing, the best outcome is not to win; the second-best is to not be able to act. But the true and rightful goal of aspiring is the ability to do good. Good thoughts—though God may accept them—are, to others, little more than dreams unless acted upon, and action requires power and position, like an advantage in a game. Merit and good deeds are the ultimate goals of human action, and becoming aware of them is what gives peace. If a person can partake in God's theater, they will also share in God's rest. "And when God turned to look at the works His hands had made, He saw that everything was very good; and then came the Sabbath." In fulfilling your duties, look to the best examples, as imitation is a broad source of wisdom. After some time, reflect on your own example and examine yourself closely to see if you did your best at the beginning. Don’t ignore the examples of those who have performed poorly in the same role—not to criticize them but to guide what you should avoid. Therefore, reform yourself without fanfare or scandal related to past times and individuals, but also strive to set good examples as well as to follow them. Bring things back to their original purpose, and observe how and why they have changed; seek advice from both past and present—what is best from the past, and what is most appropriate for these times. Strive to make your approach consistent so people know what to expect, but don’t be overly rigid; communicate effectively when you have to deviate from your established norms. Uphold the rights associated with your position, but avoid getting into disputes about authority; it’s better to assert your rights quietly and in practice than to vocalize claims and challenges. Also, respect the rights of those in lower positions and find it more honorable to guide them than to meddle in every detail. Be open to help and advice regarding your responsibilities; don’t dismiss those who offer you information as meddlesome; instead, welcome them warmly. The flaws of authority can mainly be categorized into four areas: delays, corruption, harshness, and excessive leniency. Regarding delays: allow easy access, keep scheduled times, complete what’s currently in progress, and only mix in other tasks when absolutely necessary. Concerning corruption: not only should you prevent yourself and your employees from accepting bribes, but also deter those seeking favors from making offers. Practicing integrity does one thing; professing integrity while clearly rejecting bribery does another. And avoid not just the act of wrongdoing but the mere suspicion of it. Anyone who is found to be unpredictable and changes their stance without clear reason raises suspicions of corruption. So whenever you change your opinion or course of action, be open about it, stating your reasons for the change rather than trying to conceal it. A trusted servant or favorite, if they have no apparent cause for their esteem, is often suspected of being a pathway to hidden corruption. As for harshness: it causes unnecessary discontent; severity generates fear, but harshness breeds hatred. Even reprimands from an authority figure should be serious, not mocking. As for being too lenient: this is worse than accepting bribes. Bribes may happen occasionally, but if a person is swayed by constant pressure or trivial favors, they will never be free from such influence. As Solomon said, "To show favoritism is not good; a person might transgress for a mere piece of bread." It’s very true that it has long been said, "A position reveals the man." Some reveal themselves positively, while others reveal themselves negatively. "By everyone’s consensus, capable of ruling, unless they rule," Tacitus said of Galba; but regarding Vespasian, he said, "Vespasian alone, among rulers, changed for the better"; although the former refers to competence, the latter points to character and disposition. A worthy and noble spirit is the one whom honor corrects. For honor is, or should be, the space for virtue; and just as in nature, things move violently toward their place and calmly within it, so is ambition intense, while authority is peaceful. All ascents to high places are by a winding path; and if factions exist, it’s wise to align with others while you’re rising and to maintain balance once you have gained a position. Treat the memory of your predecessor with fairness and care; if you don’t, that debt will surely be collected once you’re gone. If you have colleagues, respect them, and be more likely to invite them unexpectedly than to exclude them when they have reason to expect your call. Don’t be too aware or too focused on your position in conversation and private responses to requests; instead, let it be said, "When he is in position, he becomes another person."





Of Boldness

IT IS a trivial grammar-school text, but yet worthy a wise man's consideration. Question was asked of Demosthenes, what was the chief part of an orator? he answered, action; what next? action; what next again? action. He said it, that knew it best, and had, by nature, himself no advantage in that he commended. A strange thing, that that part of an orator, which is but superficial, and rather the virtue of a player, should be placed so high, above those other noble parts, of invention, elocution, and the rest; nay, almost alone, as if it were all in all. But the reason is plain. There is in human nature generally, more of the fool than of the wise; and therefore those faculties, by which the foolish part of men's minds is taken, are most potent. Wonderful like is the case of boldness in civil business: what first? boldness; what second and third? boldness. And yet boldness is a child of ignorance and baseness, far inferior to other parts. But nevertheless it doth fascinate, and bind hand and foot, those that are either shallow in judgment, or weak in courage, which are the greatest part; yea and prevaileth with wise men at weak times. Therefore we see it hath done wonders, in popular states; but with senates, and princes less; and more ever upon the first entrance of bold persons into action, than soon after; for boldness is an ill keeper of promise. Surely, as there are mountebanks for the natural body, so are there mountebanks for the politic body; men that undertake great cures, and perhaps have been lucky, in two or three experiments, but want the grounds of science, and therefore cannot hold out. Nay, you shall see a bold fellow many times do Mahomet's miracle. Mahomet made the people believe that he would call an hill to him, and from the top of it offer up his prayers, for the observers of his law. The people assembled; Mahomet called the hill to come to him, again and again; and when the hill stood still, he was never a whit abashed, but said, If the hill will not come to Mahomet, Mahomet will go to the hill. So these men, when they have promised great matters, and failed most shamefully, yet (if they have the perfection of boldness) they will but slight it over, and make a turn, and no more ado. Certainly to men of great judgment, bold persons are a sport to behold; nay, and to the vulgar also, boldness has somewhat of the ridiculous. For if absurdity be the subject of laughter, doubt you not but great boldness is seldom without some absurdity. Especially it is a sport to see, when a bold fellow is out of countenance; for that puts his face into a most shrunken, and wooden posture; as needs it must; for in bashfulness, the spirits do a little go and come; but with bold men, upon like occasion, they stand at a stay; like a stale at chess, where it is no mate, but yet the game cannot stir. But this last were fitter for a satire than for a serious observation. This is well to be weighed; that boldness is ever blind; for it seeth not danger, and inconveniences. Therefore it is ill in counsel, good in execution; so that the right use of bold persons is, that they never command in chief, but be seconds, and under the direction of others. For in counsel, it is good to see dangers; and in execution, not to see them, except they be very great.

IT'S a basic grammar school text, but still worth a wise person's attention. When Demosthenes was asked what the most important quality of an orator is, he replied, "Action." What next? "Action." And again? "Action." He said this, knowing it best himself, and he had no natural advantage in what he praised. It's strange that the aspect of an orator that is just superficial, more like a performer’s skill, is valued so highly above the other important qualities like creativity, eloquence, and the rest—almost as if it were everything. But the reason is clear. In human nature generally, there’s more foolishness than wisdom; therefore, the traits that appeal to the foolish side of people's minds are the most powerful. The same goes for boldness in public affairs: what comes first? Boldness. What second and third? Boldness. Yet boldness comes from ignorance and a lack of depth, and is far inferior to other qualities. Still, it captivates and binds those who lack judgment or courage, which is the majority; it can even sway wise individuals at vulnerable moments. So we see that it has achieved wonders in populist states but has less effect with senates and leaders, and its impact is usually greater when bold individuals first enter the scene than soon after; boldness is a poor keeper of promises. Just like there are con artists for the body, there are also con artists for the political realm—people who take on major challenges and may have succeeded in a couple of cases but lack a solid foundation of knowledge, and therefore can't sustain their actions. You often see a bold person performing what seems like a miracle. A historical example is when Muhammad convinced people he could summon a mountain to him and pray from its summit for his followers. The crowd gathered; Muhammad called for the mountain to come to him, over and over. When the mountain didn't budge, he wasn't flustered but declared that if the mountain wouldn't come to him, he would go to the mountain. Similarly, these individuals promise great things and, when they fail dramatically, if they possess true boldness, they just brush it off and move on without a second thought. For individuals of great judgment, bold people are amusing to watch; even the ordinary public sees a bit of absurdity in boldness. If absurdity is laughable, then rest assured that great boldness is rarely without some level of absurdity. It's especially amusing when a bold person finds themselves embarrassed; it contorts their face into a most awkward, stiff posture; naturally, this happens because, in moments of shyness, spirits fluctuate a bit, while with bold individuals, they remain stagnant—like a chess piece that can't move even though it's not checkmate. However, this last point is better suited for satire than serious observation. It’s important to note that boldness is always blind; it doesn’t recognize danger and disadvantages. Therefore, it's poor in planning but good in action; so the best way to utilize bold people is to ensure they never lead but instead support and follow the direction of others. In planning, it’s wise to recognize dangers, while in action, it’s advantageous not to see them unless they are exceptionally significant.





Of Goodness and Goodness Of Nature

I TAKE goodness in this sense, the affecting of the weal of men, which is that the Grecians call philanthropia; and the word humanity (as it is used) is a little too light to express it. Goodness I call the habit, and goodness of nature, the inclination. This of all virtues, and dignities of the mind, is the greatest; being the character of the Deity: and without it, man is a busy, mischievous, wretched thing; no better than a kind of vermin. Goodness answers to the theological virtue, charity, and admits no excess, but error. The desire of power in excess, caused the angels to fall; the desire of knowledge in excess, caused man to fall: but in charity there is no excess; neither can angel, nor man, come in danger by it. The inclination to goodness, is imprinted deeply in the nature of man; insomuch, that if it issue not towards men, it will take unto other living creatures; as it is seen in the Turks, a cruel people, who nevertheless are kind to beasts, and give alms, to dogs and birds; insomuch, as Busbechius reporteth, a Christian boy, in Constantinople, had like to have been stoned, for gagging in a waggishness a long-billed fowl. Errors indeed in this virtue of goodness, or charity, may be committed. The Italians have an ungracious proverb, Tanto buon che val niente: so good, that he is good for nothing. And one of the doctors of Italy, Nicholas Machiavel, had the confidence to put in writing, almost in plain terms, That the Christian faith, had given up good men, in prey to those that are tyrannical and unjust. Which he spake, because indeed there was never law, or sect, or opinion, did so much magnify goodness, as the Christian religion doth. Therefore, to avoid the scandal and the danger both, it is good, to take knowledge of the errors of an habit so excellent. Seek the good of other men, but be not in bondage to their faces or fancies; for that is but facility, or softness; which taketh an honest mind prisoner. Neither give thou AEsop's cock a gem, who would be better pleased, and happier, if he had had a barley-corn. The example of God, teacheth the lesson truly: He sendeth his rain, and maketh his sun to shine, upon the just and unjust; but he doth not rain wealth, nor shine honor and virtues, upon men equally. Common benefits, are to be communicate with all; but peculiar benefits, with choice. And beware how in making the portraiture, thou breakest the pattern. For divinity, maketh the love of ourselves the pattern; the love of our neighbors, but the portraiture. Sell all thou hast, and give it to the poor, and follow me: but, sell not all thou hast, except thou come and follow me; that is, except thou have a vocation, wherein thou mayest do as much good, with little means as with great; for otherwise, in feeding the streams, thou driest the fountain. Neither is there only a habit of goodness, directed by right reason; but there is in some men, even in nature, a disposition towards it; as on the other side, there is a natural malignity. For there be, that in their nature do not affect the good of others. The lighter sort of malignity, turneth but to a crassness, or frowardness, or aptness to oppose, or difficulties, or the like; but the deeper sort, to envy and mere mischief. Such men, in other men's calamities, are, as it were, in season, and are ever on the loading part: not so good as the dogs, that licked Lazarus' sores; but like flies, that are still buzzing upon any thing that is raw; misanthropi, that make it their practice, to bring men to the bough, and yet never a tree for the purpose in their gardens, as Timon had. Such dispositions, are the very errors of human nature; and yet they are the fittest timber, to make great politics of; like to knee timber, that is good for ships, that are ordained to be tossed; but not for building houses, that shall stand firm. The parts and signs of goodness, are many. If a man be gracious and courteous to strangers, it shows he is a citizen of the world, and that his heart is no island, cut off from other lands, but a continent, that joins to them. If he be compassionate towards the afflictions of others, it shows that his heart is like the noble tree, that is wounded itself, when it gives the balm. If he easily pardons, and remits offences, it shows that his mind is planted above injuries; so that he cannot be shot. If he be thankful for small benefits, it shows that he weighs men's minds, and not their trash. But above all, if he have St. Paul's perfection, that he would wish to be anathema from Christ, for the salvation of his brethren, it shows much of a divine nature, and a kind of conformity with Christ himself.

I understand goodness to mean caring for the well-being of others, which the Greeks refer to as philanthropia; and the term humanity, as it's commonly used, feels a bit too light to capture the essence of it. I see goodness as a habit, while goodness of nature is the inclination towards it. Among all virtues and qualities of the mind, this is the greatest because it reflects the character of the Divine. Without it, a person is nothing more than a troubled, harmful, miserable being; no better than vermin. Goodness aligns with the theological virtue of charity, which knows no excess, only errors. The excessive desire for power caused the downfall of angels; the excessive desire for knowledge led to humanity's downfall. However, there’s no danger in charity, whether for angels or humans. The inclination towards goodness is deeply rooted in human nature; if it doesn’t manifest towards people, it often finds expression towards other living beings. For example, the Turks, who are known for their cruelty, still show kindness to animals, giving to dogs and birds. There’s even a report of a Christian boy in Constantinople nearly being stoned for teasing a bird. It’s true that errors can occur in this virtue of goodness or charity. The Italians have an unfortunate saying, “So good that he’s good for nothing.” One Italian thinker, Niccolò Machiavelli, had the audacity to suggest almost outright that the Christian faith leaves good people prey to tyrants and unjust individuals. He said this because no other law, belief, or opinion elevates goodness as much as Christianity does. Therefore, to avoid scandal and danger, it is wise to recognize the flaws in such an excellent habit. Seek the good of others, but don’t be enslaved by their opinions or whims; that’s just weakness or softness, which traps an honest mind. And don’t give Aesop’s cock a jewel, who would be much happier with a grain of barley. God sets a true example: He sends rain and sunlight on both the righteous and the wicked, but He doesn’t equally distribute wealth or honor. Common benefits should be shared by all, but unique benefits should be given selectively. Be careful not to distort the pattern while creating the image. Divinity sets self-love as the model, while love for our neighbors becomes the image. “Sell all you have and give it to the poor, and follow me,” but don’t sell everything unless you follow me, unless you have a calling where you can do as much good with little as with much; otherwise, by feeding the streams, you’ll dry up the source. There’s not only a habit of goodness governed by reason, but also a natural inclination towards it in some individuals, just as there is a natural malevolence in others. Some have no desire for the well-being of others. The lighter forms of malice result in stubbornness or an aptitude for opposition, but deeper forms lead to envy and pure malice. Such individuals thrive on others’ misfortunes, waiting for others to fall, unlike the dogs that licked Lazarus’ sores; they’re like flies buzzing around anything raw, misanthropes who bring others down without offering any support themselves, as Timon did. Such traits are inherent flaws in human nature; yet, they can be the best material for creating great political schemes, much like knee timber is useful for ships tossed around but not for building sturdy houses. The signs and aspects of goodness are numerous. If someone is gracious and kind to strangers, it shows they see the world as a community rather than an isolated place. If they are compassionate towards others' suffering, it indicates that their heart is like a noble tree that, when wounded, provides healing balm. If they easily forgive and let go of offenses, it shows their mind rises above injuries and cannot be harmed. If they are grateful for small favors, it indicates that they value people, not their possessions. But above all, if they possess St. Paul’s ideal, willing to be separated from Christ for the sake of their brethren’s salvation, it reveals a divine quality within them, reflecting a kind of alignment with Christ himself.





Of Nobility

WE WILL speak of nobility, first as a portion of an estate, then as a condition of particular persons. A monarchy, where there is no nobility at all, is ever a pure and absolute tyranny; as that of the Turks. For nobility attempers sovereignty, and draws the eyes of the people, somewhat aside from the line royal. But for democracies, they need it not; and they are commonly more quiet, and less subject to sedition, than where there are stirps of nobles. For men's eyes are upon the business, and not upon the persons; or if upon the persons, it is for the business' sake, as fittest, and not for flags and pedigree. We see the Switzers last well, notwithstanding their diversity of religion, and of cantons. For utility is their bond, and not respects. The united provinces of the Low Countries, in their government, excel; for where there is an equality, the consultations are more indifferent, and the payments and tributes, more cheerful. A great and potent nobility, addeth majesty to a monarch, but diminisheth power; and putteth life and spirit into the people, but presseth their fortune. It is well, when nobles are not too great for sovereignty nor for justice; and yet maintained in that height, as the insolency of inferiors may be broken upon them, before it come on too fast upon the majesty of kings. A numerous nobility causeth poverty, and inconvenience in a state; for it is a surcharge of expense; and besides, it being of necessity, that many of the nobility fall, in time, to be weak in fortune, it maketh a kind of disproportion, between honor and means.

WE WILL talk about nobility, first as a part of an estate, then as a characteristic of certain individuals. A monarchy without any nobility at all is always a pure and absolute tyranny, like that of the Turks. Nobility tempers sovereignty and draws the people's attention somewhat away from the royal line. However, democracies don’t need it; they tend to be more peaceful and less prone to unrest than places with noble lineages. In democracies, people's focus is on the tasks at hand rather than on the individuals; if they do look at individuals, it’s for the sake of their abilities, not their titles or family backgrounds. We can see this with the Swiss, who function well despite their religious and regional differences. Their unity is based on shared interests, not personal connections. The united provinces of the Low Countries also excel in governance; when there is equality, discussions are more impartial, and taxes and tributes are more willingly paid. A large and powerful nobility adds glory to a monarch but reduces their power and invigorates the people while burdening their fortunes. It’s beneficial when nobles are neither too powerful nor too unjust; they should be maintained at a level where the arrogance of lower classes can be checked before it escalates against the dignity of kings. A large nobility can lead to poverty and issues in a state because it increases expenses. Additionally, since many nobles will inevitably become less wealthy over time, it creates a disconnect between honor and resources.

As for nobility in particular persons; it is a reverend thing, to see an ancient castle or building, not in decay; or to see a fair timber tree, sound and perfect. How much more, to behold an ancient noble family, which has stood against the waves and weathers of time! For new nobility is but the act of power, but ancient nobility is the act of time. Those that are first raised to nobility, are commonly more virtuous, but less innocent, than their descendants; for there is rarely any rising, but by a commixture of good and evil arts. But it is reason, the memory of their virtues remain to their posterity, and their faults die with themselves. Nobility of birth commonly abateth industry; and he that is not industrious, envieth him that is. Besides, noble persons cannot go much higher; and he that standeth at a stay, when others rise, can hardly avoid motions of envy. On the other side, nobility extinguisheth the passive envy from others, towards them; because they are in possession of honor. Certainly, kings that have able men of their nobility, shall find ease in employing them, and a better slide into their business; for people naturally bend to them, as born in some sort to command.

When it comes to the nobility of certain individuals, it’s impressive to see an ancient castle or building still standing strong, or a beautiful tree that is healthy and whole. How much more remarkable is it to witness an ancient noble family that has weathered the storms of time! New nobility is just a result of power, while old nobility is a testament to endurance through time. Those who first attain nobility are often more virtuous but less innocent than their descendants, as their rise usually involves a mix of both good and bad actions. However, it's understandable that the memory of their virtues lives on in their descendants, while their faults fade away with them. Nobility often reduces a person's drive; those who lack ambition tend to envy those who are hardworking. Additionally, noble individuals can't rise much higher, and someone who is stagnant while others are advancing is likely to feel envy. On the flip side, nobility reduces the envy others may feel towards them, as they hold a respected position. Indeed, kings with capable noble subjects find it easier to employ them and integrate them into their plans, as people are naturally inclined to follow those born to lead.





Of Seditions And Troubles

SHEPHERDS of people, had need know the calendars of tempests in state; which are commonly greatest, when things grow to equality; as natural tempests are greatest about the Equinoctia. And as there are certain hollow blasts of wind, and secret swellings of seas before a tempest, so are there in states:

SHEPHERDS of people need to understand the timing of political storms; they usually happen when things are balanced, just like natural storms are most intense around the equinoxes. Just as there are particular gusts of wind and hidden surges in the ocean before a storm, there are also signs in political situations:

     —Ille etiam caecos instare tumultus
     Saepe monet, fraudesque et operta tunescere bella.
 —He often warns that blind chaos is looming, and that treacherous plots and hidden wars are brewing.

Libels and licentious discourses against the state, when they are frequent and open; and in like sort, false news often running up and down, to the disadvantage of the state, and hastily embraced; are amongst the signs of troubles. Virgil, giving the pedigree of Fame, saith, she was sister to the Giants:

Libels and immoral talk against the government, when they are common and public; and similarly, false news that spreads quickly to the detriment of the state and is readily accepted; are signs of unrest. Virgil, explaining the lineage of Fame, says she was the sister of the Giants:

Illam Terra parens, irra irritata deorum, Extremam (ut perhibent) Coeo Enceladoque sororem Progenuit.

Illam Terra, the mother of all, disturbed by the anger of the gods, supposedly gave birth to the final giant, the sister of Coeus and Enceladus.

As if fames were the relics of seditions past; but they are no less, indeed, the preludes of seditions to come. Howsoever he noteth it right, that seditious tumults, and seditious fames, differ no more but as brother and sister, masculine and feminine; especially if it come to that, that the best actions of a state, and the most plausible, and which ought to give greatest contentment, are taken in ill sense, and traduced: for that shows the envy great, as Tacitus saith; conflata magna invidia, seu bene seu male gesta premunt. Neither doth it follow, that because these fames are a sign of troubles, that the suppressing of them with too much severity, should be a remedy of troubles. For the despising of them, many times checks them best; and the going about to stop them, doth but make a wonder long-lived. Also that kind of obedience, which Tacitus speaketh of, is to be held suspected: Erant in officio, sed tamen qui mallent mandata imperantium interpretari quam exequi; disputing, excusing, cavilling upon mandates and directions, is a kind of shaking off the yoke, and assay of disobedience; especially if in those disputings, they which are for the direction, speak fearfully and tenderly, and those that are against it, audaciously.

It's as if rumors are the remnants of past rebellions; but they are no less, in fact, the signs of future rebellions. No matter how accurately he observes it, seditious disturbances and seditious rumors differ only as brother and sister, masculine and feminine; especially when the best actions of a state, the most commendable, which should bring the greatest satisfaction, are received negatively and slandered: for that indicates there is great envy, as Tacitus said; collapses under great envy, whether well or poorly executed. It doesn't necessarily follow that because these rumors are a sign of trouble, suppressing them too harshly should be a solution for troubles. Often, ignoring them is the best way to quell them; trying to silence them only makes the curiosity last longer. Furthermore, that kind of obedience Tacitus talks about should be viewed with suspicion: They were dutiful, but preferred to interpret the orders of their superiors rather than carry them out; debating, making excuses, and nitpicking over orders and directives is a way of shaking off authority and testing disobedience; especially if in those debates, supporters of the directives speak cautiously and gently, while opponents speak boldly.

Also, as Machiavel noteth well, when princes, that ought to be common parents, make themselves as a party, and lean to a side, it is as a boat, that is overthrown by uneven weight on the one side; as was well seen, in the time of Henry the Third of France; for first, himself entered league for the extirpation of the Protestants; and presently after, the same league was turned upon himself. For when the authority of princes, is made but an accessory to a cause, and that there be other bands, that tie faster than the band of sovereignty, kings begin to be put almost out of possession.

Also, as Machiavelli wisely noted, when rulers, who should be acting as the common guardians of their people, take sides and favor one party over another, it's like a boat capsizing due to uneven weight on one side; this was clearly demonstrated during the reign of Henry the Third of France. Initially, he formed an alliance to eliminate the Protestants, but soon that same alliance was turned against him. When the authority of rulers is reduced to just an accessory in a conflict, and there are stronger ties that bind people than those of sovereignty, kings start to lose their power.

Also, when discords, and quarrels, and factions are carried openly and audaciously, it is a sign the reverence of government is lost. For the motions of the greatest persons in a government, ought to be as the motions of the planets under primum mobile; according to the old opinion: which is, that every of them, is carried swiftly by the highest motion, and softly in their own motion. And therefore, when great ones in their own particular motion, move violently, and, as Tacitus expresseth it well, liberius quam ut imperantium meminissent; it is a sign the orbs are out of frame. For reverence is that, wherewith princes are girt from God; who threateneth the dissolving thereof; Solvam cingula regum.

When conflicts, arguments, and factions are displayed openly and boldly, it's a sign that respect for government is lost. The actions of the highest officials in a government should be like the movements of planets under the primum mobile; according to the old belief, each one is driven swiftly by the highest force, yet moves gently in its own way. Therefore, when powerful individuals act violently in their own interests, as Tacitus puts it well, "more freely than they should remember those in power," it's a sign that the system is out of balance. Respect is what equips rulers from God, who threatens its dissolution: "Solvam cingula regum."

So when any of the four pillars of government, are mainly shaken, or weakened (which are religion, justice, counsel, and treasure), men had need to pray for fair weather. But let us pass from this part of predictions (concerning which, nevertheless, more light may be taken from that which followeth); and let us speak first, of the materials of seditions; then of the motives of them; and thirdly of the remedies.

So when any of the four pillars of government are significantly shaken or weakened (which are religion, justice, counsel, and wealth), people need to hope for better times. But let’s move on from this part of predictions (about which, however, more clarity can be gained from what follows); and let’s first talk about the causes of unrest; then about the reasons behind them; and finally about the solutions.

Concerning the materials of seditions. It is a thing well to be considered; for the surest way to prevent seditions (if the times do bear it) is to take away the matter of them. For if there be fuel prepared, it is hard to tell, whence the spark shall come, that shall set it on fire. The matter of seditions is of two kinds: much poverty, and much discontentment. It is certain, so many overthrown estates, so many votes for troubles. Lucan noteth well the state of Rome before the Civil War,

Concerning the materials of revolts. This is something worth considering; the best way to prevent uprisings (if the times allow for it) is to remove the causes of them. If there is fuel ready, it's hard to know where the spark will come from that will ignite it. The causes of uprisings fall into two categories: widespread poverty and significant discontent. It’s clear that with so many fallen states, there will be many calls for trouble. Lucan accurately observes the state of Rome before the Civil War,

     Hinc usura vorax, rapidumque in tempore foenus,
     Hinc concussa fides, et multis utile bellum.
     Hence, the greedy interest and the swift profit from time,  
     Hence, the shaken trust and the war that benefits many.

This same multis utile bellum, is an assured and infallible sign, of a state disposed to seditions and troubles. And if this poverty and broken estate in the better sort, be joined with a want and necessity in the mean people, the danger is imminent and great. For the rebellions of the belly are the worst. As for discontentments, they are, in the politic body, like to humors in the natural, which are apt to gather a preternatural heat, and to inflame. And let no prince measure the danger of them by this, whether they be just or unjust: for that were to imagine people, to be too reasonable; who do often spurn at their own good: nor yet by this, whether the griefs whereupon they rise, be in fact great or small: for they are the most dangerous discontentments, where the fear is greater than the feeling. Dolendi modus, timendi non item. Besides, in great oppressions, the same things that provoke the patience, do withal mate the courage; but in fears it is not so. Neither let any prince, or state, be secure concerning discontentments, because they have been often, or have been long, and yet no peril hath ensued: for as it is true, that every vapor or fume doth not turn into a storm; so it is nevertheless true, that storms, though they blow over divers times, yet may fall at last; and, as the Spanish proverb noteth well, The cord breaketh at the last by the weakest pull.

This same dangerous situation is a clear and undeniable sign of a state that is prone to unrest and trouble. If this poverty and decline among the upper class is accompanied by a lack and desperation among the common people, the danger is imminent and significant. For hunger-driven rebellions are the worst kinds. As for discontent, it's like imbalances in the body; they can build up unnatural heat and lead to an explosion. No ruler should underestimate the threat of discontent based on whether it is just or unjust; that would be to assume people are too reasonable, as they often act against their own interests. Also, rulers shouldn't gauge the severity of the issues causing the unrest as either big or small; the most dangerous discontent arises when fear outweighs actual suffering. In times of great oppression, what tests patience also weakens courage, but with fear, it’s a different story. Furthermore, no ruler or state should feel safe about discontent just because it has occurred frequently or for a long time without resulting in danger; it's true that not every little disturbance leads to a storm, but storms can still strike after multiple warnings. As the Spanish proverb wisely states, “The cord breaks at last with the weakest pull.”

The causes and motives of seditions are, innovation in religion; taxes; alteration of laws and customs; breaking of privileges; general oppression; advancement of unworthy persons; strangers; dearths; disbanded soldiers; factions grown desperate; and what soever, in offending people, joineth and knitteth them in a common cause.

The reasons behind rebellions include changes in religion, taxes, changes to laws and customs, violations of rights, widespread oppression, the rise of undeserving individuals, outsiders, food shortages, discharged soldiers, desperate factions, and anything else that offends the people and unites them in a shared cause.

For the remedies; there may be some general preservatives, whereof we will speak: as for the just cure, it must answer to the particular disease; and so be left to counsel, rather than rule.

For the remedies, there may be some general precautions that we will discuss; as for the appropriate treatment, it should be tailored to the specific illness, so it should be guided by advice rather than strict rules.

The first remedy or prevention is to remove, by all means possible, that material cause of sedition whereof we spake; which is, want and poverty in the estate. To which purpose serveth the opening, and well-balancing of trade; the cherishing of manufactures; the banishing of idleness; the repressing of waste, and excess, by sumptuary laws; the improvement and husbanding of the soil; the regulating of prices of things vendible; the moderating of taxes and tributes; and the like. Generally, it is to be foreseen that the population of a kingdom (especially if it be not mown down by wars) do not exceed the stock of the kingdom, which should maintain them. Neither is the population to be reckoned only by number; for a smaller number, that spend more and earn less, do wear out an estate sooner, than a greater number that live lower, and gather more. Therefore the multiplying of nobility, and other degrees of quality, in an over proportion to the common people, doth speedily bring a state to necessity; and so doth likewise an overgrown clergy; for they bring nothing to the stock; and in like manner, when more are bred scholars, than preferments can take off.

The first solution or way to prevent issues is to eliminate, by any means possible, the main cause of unrest we talked about, which is need and poverty in society. To achieve this, we need to open up and balance trade, support manufacturing, eliminate idleness, reduce waste and excess through spending laws, improve and manage the land, regulate the prices of goods, and moderate taxes and fees, among other things. Overall, we need to ensure that the population of a kingdom (especially if it’s not being cut down by wars) doesn’t exceed the resources available to support them. It’s also important to note that population shouldn’t only be counted by numbers; a smaller group that spends more and earns less can deplete resources faster than a larger group that lives frugally and saves more. Therefore, increasing the number of nobles and other high-status individuals disproportionately compared to the common people can quickly lead a state to hardship; the same goes for an overlarge clergy because they don't contribute to resources, as well as when there are more scholars being trained than there are job positions available.

It is likewise to be remembered, that forasmuch as the increase of any estate must be upon the foreigner (for whatsoever is somewhere gotten, is somewhere lost), there be but three things, which one nation selleth unto another; the commodity as nature yieldeth it; the manufacture; and the vecture, or carriage. So that if these three wheels go, wealth will flow as in a spring tide. And it cometh many times to pass, that materiam superabit opus; that the work and carriage is more worth than the material, and enricheth a state more; as is notably seen in the Low-Countrymen, who have the best mines above ground, in the world.

It's also important to remember that since any increase in wealth must come from someone else (because whatever is gained by one is lost by another), there are only three things that one nation sells to another: raw materials as they come from nature, manufactured goods, and transportation. If these three elements are in motion, wealth will flow like a rising tide. Often, it happens that the work and transportation can be worth more than the raw materials themselves, enriching a nation even more; this is clearly demonstrated by the Dutch, who possess the best above-ground resources in the world.

Above all things, good policy is to be used, that the treasure and moneys, in a state, be not gathered into few hands. For otherwise a state may have a great stock, and yet starve. And money is like muck, not good except it be spread. This is done, chiefly by suppressing, or at least keeping a strait hand, upon the devouring trades of usury, ingrossing great pasturages, and the like.

Above all, good governance should ensure that wealth and money within a state aren't concentrated in just a few hands. Otherwise, a state might have a lot of resources but still face poverty. Money is like manure; it only works well when it's spread out. This can be achieved mainly by regulating or at least keeping a tight grip on destructive practices like usury, monopolizing large areas of pasture, and similar activities.

For removing discontentments, or at least the danger of them; there is in every state (as we know) two portions of subjects; the noblesse and the commonalty. When one of these is discontent, the danger is not great; for common people are of slow motion, if they be not excited by the greater sort; and the greater sort are of small strength, except the multitude be apt, and ready to move of themselves. Then is the danger, when the greater sort, do but wait for the troubling of the waters amongst the meaner, that then they may declare themselves. The poets feign, that the rest of the gods would have bound Jupiter; which he hearing of, by the counsel of Pallas, sent for Briareus, with his hundred hands, to come in to his aid. An emblem, no doubt, to show how safe it is for monarchs, to make sure of the good will of common people. To give moderate liberty for griefs and discontentments to evaporate (so it be without too great insolency or bravery), is a safe way. For he that turneth the humors back, and maketh the wound bleed inwards, endangereth malign ulcers, and pernicious imposthumations.

To address discontent, or at least minimize the risk of it, every society (as we know) has two groups of people: the nobles and the commoners. When one of these groups is unhappy, it’s not a huge threat; the common people are usually slow to act unless stirred by the nobility, and the nobles have little power unless the masses are willing and ready to rise up. The real danger arises when the nobles are just waiting for unrest among the commoners so they can express their intentions. Poets depict a story where the other gods wanted to bind Jupiter, and hearing this, he called upon Briareus, the hundred-handed giant, for help. This is definitely a metaphor illustrating how important it is for rulers to secure the favor of the common people. Allowing some freedom for grievances and discontent to dissipate (as long as it doesn’t lead to too much arrogance or rebellion) is a smart approach. Forcing these emotions inward, which causes repressed feelings, can lead to serious problems and harmful consequences.

The part of Epimetheus mought well become Prometheus, in the case of discontentments: for there is not a better provision against them. Epimetheus, when griefs and evils flew abroad, at last shut the lid, and kept hope in the bottom of the vessel. Certainly, the politic and artificial nourishing, and entertaining of hopes, and carrying men from hopes to hopes, is one of the best antidotes against the poison of discontentments. And it is a certain sign of a wise government and proceeding, when it can hold men's hearts by hopes, when it cannot by satisfaction; and when it can handle things, in such manner, as no evil shall appear so peremptory, but that it hath some outlet of hope; which is the less hard to do, because both particular persons and factions, are apt enough to flatter themselves, or at least to brave that, which they believe not.

The role of Epimetheus could easily suit Prometheus when it comes to dealing with discontentment, as there's no better way to cope with it. When troubles and misfortunes were rampant, Epimetheus eventually closed the lid and kept hope stored at the bottom of the container. In fact, carefully fostering and nurturing hopes, and guiding people from one hope to another, is one of the best remedies against the toxicity of discontentment. It's a clear indication of wise governance when it can hold people's hearts with hope when it can't do so through satisfaction; and when it can manage situations in such a way that no problem seems entirely hopeless, as there’s always some glimmer of hope available. This is not too difficult to achieve, since both individuals and groups tend to indulge in self-deception or at least put on a brave face about things they don’t truly believe.

Also the foresight and prevention, that there be no likely or fit head, whereunto discontented persons may resort, and under whom they may join, is a known, but an excellent point of caution. I understand a fit head, to be one that hath greatness and reputation; that hath confidence with the discontented party, and upon whom they turn their eyes; and that is thought discontented, in his own particular: which kind of persons, are either to be won, and reconciled to the state, and that in a fast and true manner; or to be fronted with some other, of the same party, that may oppose them, and so divide the reputation. Generally, the dividing and breaking, of all factions and combinations that are adverse to the state, and setting them at distance, or at least distrust, amongst themselves, is not one of the worst remedies. For it is a desperate case, if those that hold with the proceeding of the state, be full of discord and faction, and those that are against it, be entire and united.

Also, anticipating and preventing any possibility of a strong leader emerging, one that discontented individuals might rally around, is a well-known but very important precaution. By a strong leader, I mean someone with power and a good reputation, someone who has the trust of the discontented group and is seen as a figure of attention, and who is himself considered discontented. Such individuals need to be either won over and brought back to support the state, in a genuine and steadfast way, or faced with another member of their group who can oppose them and therefore weaken their standing. In general, splitting and fracturing all factions and groups that are against the state, and creating distance or at least distrust among them, is not one of the worst strategies. It would be a dire situation if those supporting the state's efforts are full of division and conflict while those against it are united and cohesive.

I have noted, that some witty and sharp speeches, which have fallen from princes, have given fire to seditions. Caesar did himself infinite hurt in that speech, Sylla nescivit literas, non potuit dictare; for it did utterly cut off that hope, which men had entertained, that he would at one time or other give over his dictatorship. Galba undid himself by that speech, legi a se militem, non emi; for it put the soldiers out of hope of the donative. Probus likewise, by that speech, Si vixero, non opus erit amplius Romano imperio militibus; a speech of great despair for the soldiers. And many the like. Surely princes had need, in tender matters and ticklish times, to beware what they say; especially in these short speeches, which fly abroad like darts, and are thought to be shot out of their secret intentions. For as for large discourses, they are flat things, and not so much noted.

I've noticed that some clever and sharp remarks from leaders have sparked rebellions. Caesar caused himself a lot of trouble with his statement, "Sylla didn’t know how to write, he couldn’t dictate," because it completely destroyed any hope that people had that he would eventually step down from his dictatorship. Galba ruined himself with his comment, "I didn’t buy the soldiers, I chose them," as it made the soldiers lose hope for any rewards. Probus also hurt his standing with the statement, "If I live, there won't be a need for soldiers in the Roman Empire anymore," which was a very despairing message for the soldiers. There are many similar examples. Leaders really need to watch what they say, especially in sensitive matters and tough times, particularly with short statements that spread quickly like arrows and are believed to reveal their true intentions. Larger speeches tend to be less impactful and not as memorable.

Lastly, let princes, against all events, not be without some great person, one or rather more, of military valor, near unto them, for the repressing of seditions in their beginnings. For without that, there useth to be more trepidation in court upon the first breaking out of troubles, than were fit. And the state runneth the danger of that which Tacitus saith; Atque is habitus animorum fuit, ut pessimum facinus auderent pauci, plures vellent, omnes paterentur. But let such military persons be assured, and well reputed of, rather than factious and popular; holding also good correspondence with the other great men in the state; or else the remedy, is worse than the disease.

Lastly, princes should always have at least one or more great military leaders nearby to help suppress rebellions before they start. Without this, there tends to be more anxiety in the court when troubles first arise than is necessary. The state faces the risk of what Tacitus said: "There were few who dared to commit the worst crimes, more who wished for them, and everyone else who tolerated them." However, these military leaders should be trustworthy and respected, rather than being divisive or overly popular. They should also maintain good relationships with other powerful figures in the state; otherwise, the solution could be worse than the problem.





Of Atheism

I HAD rather believe all the fables in the Legend, and the Talmud, and the Alcoran, than that this universal frame is without a mind. And therefore, God never wrought miracle, to convince atheism, because his ordinary works convince it. It is true, that a little philosophy inclineth man's mind to atheism; but depth in philosophy bringeth men's minds about to religion. For while the mind of man looketh upon second causes scattered, it may sometimes rest in them, and go no further; but when it beholdeth the chain of them, confederate and linked together, it must needs fly to Providence and Deity. Nay, even that school which is most accused of atheism doth most demonstrate religion; that is, the school of Leucippus and Democritus and Epicurus. For it is a thousand times more credible, that four mutable elements, and one immutable fifth essence, duly and eternally placed, need no God, than that an army of infinite small portions, or seeds unplaced, should have produced this order and beauty, without a divine marshal. The Scripture saith, The fool hath said in his heart, there is no God; it is not said, The fool hath thought in his heart; so as he rather saith it, by rote to himself, as that he would have, than that he can thoroughly believe it, or be persuaded of it. For none deny, there is a God, but those, for whom it maketh that there were no God. It appeareth in nothing more, that atheism is rather in the lip, than in the heart of man, than by this; that atheists will ever be talking of that their opinion, as if they fainted in it, within themselves, and would be glad to be strengthened, by the consent of others. Nay more, you shall have atheists strive to get disciples, as it fareth with other sects. And, which is most of all, you shall have of them, that will suffer for atheism, and not recant; whereas if they did truly think, that there were no such thing as God, why should they trouble themselves? Epicurus is charged, that he did but dissemble for his credit's sake, when he affirmed there were blessed natures, but such as enjoyed themselves, without having respect to the government of the world. Wherein they say he did temporize; though in secret, he thought there was no God. But certainly he is traduced; for his words are noble and divine: Non deos vulgi negare profanum; sed vulgi opiniones diis applicare profanum. Plato could have said no more. And although he had the confidence, to deny the administration, he had not the power, to deny the nature. The Indians of the West, have names for their particular gods, though they have no name for God: as if the heathens should have had the names Jupiter, Apollo, Mars, etc., but not the word Deus; which shows that even those barbarous people have the notion, though they have not the latitude and extent of it. So that against atheists, the very savages take part, with the very subtlest philosophers. The contemplative atheist is rare: a Diagoras, a Bion, a Lucian perhaps, and some others; and yet they seem to be more than they are; for that all that impugn a received religion, or superstition, are by the adverse part branded with the name of atheists. But the great atheists, indeed are hypocrites; which are ever handling holy things, but without feeling; so as they must needs be cauterized in the end. The causes of atheism are: divisions in religion, if they be many; for any one main division, addeth zeal to both sides; but many divisions introduce atheism. Another is, scandal of priests; when it is come to that which St. Bernard saith, non est jam dicere, ut populus sic sacerdos; quia nec sic populus ut sacerdos. A third is, custom of profane scoffing in holy matters; which doth, by little and little, deface the reverence of religion. And lastly, learned times, specially with peace and prosperity; for troubles and adversities do more bow men's minds to religion. They that deny a God, destroy man's nobility; for certainly man is of kin to the beasts, by his body; and, if he be not of kin to God, by his spirit, he is a base and ignoble creature. It destroys likewise magnanimity, and the raising of human nature; for take an example of a dog, and mark what a generosity and courage he will put on, when he finds himself maintained by a man; who to him is instead of a God, or melior natura; which courage is manifestly such, as that creature, without that confidence of a better nature than his own, could never attain. So man, when he resteth and assureth himself, upon divine protection and favor, gathered a force and faith, which human nature in itself could not obtain. Therefore, as atheism is in all respects hateful, so in this, that it depriveth human nature of the means to exalt itself, above human frailty. As it is in particular persons, so it is in nations. Never was there such a state for magnanimity as Rome. Of this state hear what Cicero saith: Quam volumus licet, patres conscripti, nos amemus, tamen nec numero Hispanos, nec robore Gallos, nec calliditate Poenos, nec artibus Graecos, nec denique hoc ipso hujus gentis et terrae domestico nativoque sensu Italos ipsos et Latinos; sed pietate, ac religione, atque hac una sapientia, quod deorum immortalium numine omnia regi gubernarique perspeximus, omnes gentes nationesque superavimus.

I’d rather believe all the stories in the Legend, the Talmud, and the Quran than think that this entire universe lacks a mind. Therefore, God never performed miracles to convince atheists, because His regular acts are convincing enough. It’s true that a little philosophy can lead a person towards atheism, but deep philosophical thinking often brings people back to religion. When a person’s mind focuses on the secondary causes scattered around, it might occasionally settle on them and stop searching further; but when it sees the interconnected chain of these causes, it inevitably turns to Providence and Deity. In fact, even the school most often accused of atheism actually demonstrates religion the most—like the schools of Leucippus, Democritus, and Epicurus. It’s much more believable that four changeable elements and one unchanging essence, appropriately and eternally arranged, need no God, than that an infinite army of tiny, unorganized particles could create this order and beauty without divine guidance. The Scripture says, "The fool has said in his heart, there is no God"; it doesn’t say, "The fool has thought in his heart." This suggests he repeats it to himself, as if he wishes it to be true, rather than genuinely believing it or being convinced of it. No one denies there is a God except those for whom it benefits to claim there isn't one. Atheism is often more spoken than felt; atheists tend to talk about their beliefs as if they need reassurance from others. Additionally, you'll find atheists trying to recruit followers, just like members of other groups. What’s most interesting is that some atheists are willing to suffer for their beliefs, refusing to change their minds; if they truly believed there was no God, why would they let it bother them? Epicurus has been accused of only pretending to believe in blessed beings for his reputation, asserting that they exist without regard for worldly governance. Critics claim he was simply playing along, secretly thinking there was no God. But that’s unfair; his words are noble and profound: "It is profane to deny the gods of the crowd; rather, it is profane to attribute the opinions of the crowd to the gods." Plato could not have said more. Even though he boldly denied divine governance, he couldn’t deny divine nature. The Indigenous people of the West have names for their gods, even if they don’t have a name for God itself, similar to how the heathens might have names like Jupiter, Apollo, Mars, etc., but not the word for God, showing that even these remote cultures grasp the concept, if not its full scope. Thus, even the most primitive people align against atheists alongside the most sophisticated philosophers. True contemplative atheists are rare; perhaps a Diagoras, a Bion, or a Lucian, among some others; yet they seem to be more numerous than they actually are because anyone who challenges established religion or superstition is often branded as an atheist by the opposing side. But the worst atheists are actually hypocrites who engage with sacred matters without any true feeling and, in the end, must face consequences. The reasons for atheism include: many divisions in religion—multiple serious divisions lead to skepticism, while a single division can create zeal on both sides. Another reason is the scandal involving priests; when it gets to the point where St. Bernard said, “it’s no longer appropriate to say, as the people, so the priest; for neither the people are as the priests.” A third reason is the habit of irreverently mocking sacred matters, gradually eroding the respect for religion. Lastly, educated times, especially during peace and prosperity; turmoil and hardship often draw people closer to religion. Those who deny a God undermine human dignity; for surely, humans are related to beasts physically, and if they are not related to God spiritually, they become lowly and ignoble creatures. This also diminishes nobility and the elevation of human nature; take a dog, for example, and observe the generosity and courage it displays when it feels supported by a human, who for the dog represents a higher nature. That courage clearly depends on its confidence in a superior being. Likewise, when humans rest on divine protection and favor, they gather strength and faith that mere humanity could not achieve on its own. Therefore, while atheism is detestable in every way, particularly because it strips human nature of the means necessary to rise above human weakness. This applies to individuals as well as nations. There was never a state more notable for greatness than Rome. About this state, hear what Cicero said: "As much as we may love ourselves, noble senators, we do not surpass the Spaniards in numbers, the Gauls in strength, the Carthaginians in cunning, or the Greeks in skill, nor, in fact, the Italians and Latins in this very native sense of our land; but we have surpassed all races and nations through piety, religion, and this single insight that we have perceived everything to be governed and directed by the divine power of the immortal gods."





Of Superstition

IT WERE better to have no opinion of God at all, than such an opinion, as is unworthy of him. For the one is unbelief, the other is contumely; and certainly superstition is the reproach of the Deity. Plutarch saith well to that purpose: Surely (saith he) I had rather a great deal, men should say, there was no such man at all, as Plutarch, than that they should say, that there was one Plutarch, that would eat his children as soon as they were born; as the poets speak of Saturn. And as the contumely is greater towards God, so the danger is greater towards men. Atheism leaves a man to sense, to philosophy, to natural piety, to laws, to reputation; all which may be guides to an outward moral virtue, though religion were not; but superstition dismounts all these, and erecteth an absolute monarchy, in the minds of men. Therefore atheism did never perturb states; for it makes men wary of themselves, as looking no further: and we see the times inclined to atheism (as the time of Augustus Caesar) were civil times. But superstition hath been the confusion of many states, and bringeth in a new primum mobile, that ravisheth all the spheres of government. The master of superstition, is the people; and in all superstition, wise men follow fools; and arguments are fitted to practice, in a reversed order. It was gravely said by some of the prelates in the Council of Trent, where the doctrine of the Schoolmen bare great sway, that the Schoolmen were like astronomers, which did feign eccentrics and epicycles, and such engines of orbs, to save the phenomena; though they knew there were no such things; and in like manner, that the Schoolmen had framed a number of subtle and intricate axioms, and theorems, to save the practice of the church. The causes of superstition are: pleasing and sensual rites and ceremonies; excess of outward and pharisaical holiness; overgreat reverence of traditions, which cannot but load the church; the stratagems of prelates, for their own ambition and lucre; the favoring too much of good intentions, which openeth the gate to conceits and novelties; the taking an aim at divine matters, by human, which cannot but breed mixture of imaginations: and, lastly, barbarous times, especially joined with calamities and disasters. Superstition, without a veil, is a deformed thing; for, as it addeth deformity to an ape, to be so like a man, so the similitude of superstition to religion, makes it the more deformed. And as wholesome meat corrupteth to little worms, so good forms and orders corrupt, into a number of petty observances. There is a superstition in avoiding superstition, when men think to do best, if they go furthest from the superstition, formerly received; therefore care would be had that (as it fareth in ill purgings) the good be not taken away with the bad; which commonly is done, when the people is the reformer.

It’s better to have no opinion about God than to hold an opinion that is unworthy of Him. One is unbelief, while the other is disrespect; and definitely, superstition brings shame upon the Divine. Plutarch wisely stated: I would much prefer that people say there was no man named Plutarch at all than that they say there was a Plutarch who would eat his children as soon as they were born, like the poets claim about Saturn. The disrespect towards God is even greater, and so is the danger for humanity. Atheism allows a person to rely on reason, philosophy, natural goodness, laws, and reputation—all of which can lead to outward moral virtue, even without religion; but superstition undermines all of these and establishes a totalitarian mindset in people. Therefore, atheism has never disrupted societies; it makes individuals cautious about themselves, focusing only on their immediate world. History shows that times leaning toward atheism (like during Augustus Caesar's era) were peaceful. However, superstition has caused chaos in many societies and introduces a new driving force that disrupts all areas of governance. The people are the masters of superstition, and in all cases of superstition, wise individuals end up following fools, with arguments being manipulated to fit actions in the wrong order. It was wisely pointed out by some bishops at the Council of Trent, where scholastic doctrine held great influence, that the Schoolmen were like astronomers who invented eccentric orbits and epicycles to explain phenomena, even though they knew these things didn’t exist; likewise, the Schoolmen created intricate and convoluted principles to justify church practices. The causes of superstition include: pleasing and sensual rituals and ceremonies; excessive outward piety and pharisaical holiness; excessive reverence for traditions that burden the church; the schemes of bishops for their own ambition and profit; being too lenient towards good intentions, which opens the door to misguided ideas and innovations; attempting to understand divine matters through human means, which inevitably leads to a mixture of ideas; and finally, barbaric times, especially when accompanied by calamities and disasters. Superstition, laid bare, is an ugly thing; being similar to a human only adds to the deformity of an ape, just as the resemblance of superstition to religion makes it more grotesque. Just as wholesome food can decay into tiny worms, good practices and structures can corrupt into trivial observances. There is a kind of superstition in trying to avoid superstition when people believe they are doing their best by distancing themselves from the previously accepted superstitions; hence, care should be taken that, just as in poor purging, the good isn’t discarded along with the bad, which often happens when the people are the reformers.





Of Travel

TRAVEL, in the younger sort, is a part of education, in the elder, a part of experience. He that travelleth into a country, before he hath some entrance into the language, goeth to school, and not to travel. That young men travel under some tutor, or grave servant, I allow well; so that he be such a one that hath the language, and hath been in the country before; whereby he may be able to tell them what things are worthy to be seen, in the country where they go; what acquaintances they are to seek; what exercises, or discipline, the place yieldeth. For else, young men shall go hooded, and look abroad little. It is a strange thing, that in sea voyages, where there is nothing to be seen, but sky and sea, men should make diaries; but in land-travel, wherein so much is to be observed, for the most part they omit it; as if chance were fitter to be registered, than observation. Let diaries, therefore, be brought in use. The things to be seen and observed are: the courts of princes, especially when they give audience to ambassadors; the courts of justice, while they sit and hear causes; and so of consistories ecclesiastic; the churches and monasteries, with the monuments which are therein extant; the walls and fortifications of cities, and towns, and so the heavens and harbors; antiquities and ruins; libraries; colleges, disputations, and lectures, where any are; shipping and navies; houses and gardens of state and pleasure, near great cities; armories; arsenals; magazines; exchanges; burses; warehouses; exercises of horsemanship, fencing, training of soldiers, and the like; comedies, such whereunto the better sort of persons do resort; treasuries of jewels and robes; cabinets and rarities; and, to conclude, whatsoever is memorable, in the places where they go. After all which, the tutors, or servants, ought to make diligent inquiry. As for triumphs, masks, feasts, weddings, funerals, capital executions, and such shows, men need not to be put in mind of them; yet are they not to be neglected. If you will have a young man to put his travel into a little room, and in short time to gather much, this you must do. First, as was said, he must have some entrance into the language before he goeth. Then he must have such a servant, or tutor, as knoweth the country, as was likewise said. Let him carry with him also, some card or book, describing the country where he travelleth; which will be a good key to his inquiry. Let him keep also a diary. Let him not stay long, in one city or town; more or less as the place deserveth, but not long; nay, when he stayeth in one city or town, let him change his lodging from one end and part of the town, to another; which is a great adamant of acquaintance. Let him sequester himself, from the company of his countrymen, and diet in such places, where there is good company of the nation where he travelleth. Let him, upon his removes from one place to another, procure recommendation to some person of quality, residing in the place whither he removeth; that he may use his favor, in those things he desireth to see or know. Thus he may abridge his travel, with much profit. As for the acquaintance, which is to be sought in travel; that which is most of all profitable, is acquaintance with the secretaries and employed men of ambassadors: for so in travelling in one country, he shall suck the experience of many. Let him also see, and visit, eminent persons in all kinds, which are of great name abroad; that he may be able to tell, how the life agreeth with the fame. For quarrels, they are with care and discretion to be avoided. They are commonly for mistresses, healths, place, and words. And let a man beware, how he keepeth company with choleric and quarrelsome persons; for they will engage him into their own quarrels. When a traveller returneth home, let him not leave the countries, where he hath travelled, altogether behind him; but maintain a correspondence by letters, with those of his acquaintance, which are of most worth. And let his travel appear rather in his discourse, than his apparel or gesture; and in his discourse, let him be rather advised in his answers, than forward to tell stories; and let it appear that he doth not change his country manners, for those of foreign parts; but only prick in some flowers, of that he hath learned abroad, into the customs of his own country.

TRAVEL, for younger people, is part of their education, while for older adults, it's part of their life experience. If someone travels to a country without having a basic understanding of the language, they're really just going to school instead of traveling. I think it's a good idea for young men to travel with a tutor or a responsible servant, as long as that person knows the language and has experience in the country; this way, they can inform the young travelers about what sights are worth seeing, whom they should meet, and what activities or customs the place offers. Otherwise, young travelers will miss out and barely explore. It's strange that people keep diaries during sea voyages, where there's nothing but sky and ocean, but often skip it during land travel, where so much is to be observed, as if it's more important to record random events than to note meaningful experiences. Diaries should definitely become common practice. Important things to see and observe include: the courts of princes, especially when they are hearing ambassadors; courts of justice during their sessions; ecclesiastical councils; churches and monasteries, including their monuments; city walls and fortifications; the heavens and harbors; ancient ruins and artifacts; libraries; colleges and lectures or debates; ships and fleets; state and pleasure gardens near major cities; armories; arsenals; marketplaces; warehouses; activities like horseback riding, fencing, and military training; comedies that attract the upper class; treasure houses of jewels and fine clothing; cabinets of curiosities; and, ultimately, anything memorable in the places they visit. After all that, tutors and servants should make sure to ask questions. As for celebrations, parades, feasts, weddings, funerals, public executions, and similar events, there's no need to remind people about them; however, they shouldn't be overlooked. If you want a young person to make the most of their travel in a short time, here’s what to do. First, as mentioned, they should learn some of the language before they go. They also need a tutor or servant who knows the country, as previously stated. It would be helpful for them to take along a map or book that describes the places they are visiting, which will serve as a good reference for inquiry. They should keep a diary as well. They shouldn’t stay too long in one city or town; they should adjust their stay based on the worthiness of the place but avoid lingering. When they do stay in one location, they should switch accommodations from one part of the city to another, as this encourages social connections. They should avoid mingling with fellow countrymen and eat at places where there’s a good mix of local people. Upon moving from one place to another, they should seek recommendations from well-respected individuals living where they're heading; this way, they can gain access to what they wish to see or learn. This strategy can greatly enhance the value of their travels. Regarding interactions while traveling, the most beneficial connections are with the secretaries and aides of ambassadors because through them, a traveler can gain valuable experiences. They should also meet and visit notable figures who are well-known internationally to compare how their lives align with their reputations. When it comes to conflicts, they should be approached with caution and care, as these often arise from issues related to love interests, toasts, social rank, or words spoken. A traveler should be mindful of keeping company with hot-headed and quarrelsome individuals, as they can pull him into their disputes. When a traveler returns home, they shouldn’t completely cut off the connections they've made in the countries they've visited. Instead, they should maintain communication through letters with the most valuable acquaintances. Their experiences should reflect in their conversations rather than in their clothing or demeanor. In conversations, they should be thoughtful in their replies rather than eager to share stories, and they should show that they haven’t entirely adopted foreign customs but have simply incorporated some of the foreign influences into their own traditions.





Of Empire

IT IS a miserable state of mind, to have few things to desire, and many things to fear; and yet that commonly is the case of kings; who, being at the highest, want matter of desire, which makes their minds more languishing; and have many representations of perils and shadows, which makes their minds the less clear. And this is one reason also, of that effect which the Scripture speaketh of, That the king's heart is inscrutable. For multitude of jealousies, and lack of some predominant desire, that should marshal and put in order all the rest, maketh any man's heart, hard to find or sound. Hence it comes likewise, that princes many times make themselves desires, and set their hearts upon toys; sometimes upon a building; sometimes upon erecting of an order; sometimes upon the advancing of a person; sometimes upon obtaining excellency in some art, or feat of the hand; as Nero for playing on the harp, Domitian for certainty of the hand with the arrow, Commodus for playing at fence, Caracalla for driving chariots, and the like. This seemeth incredible, unto those that know not the principle, that the mind of man, is more cheered and refreshed by profiting in small things, than by standing at a stay, in great. We see also that kings that have been fortunate conquerors, in their first years, it being not possible for them to go forward infinitely, but that they must have some check, or arrest in their fortunes, turn in their latter years to be superstitious, and melancholy; as did Alexander the Great; Diocletian; and in our memory, Charles the Fifth; and others: for he that is used to go forward, and findeth a stop, falleth out of his own favor, and is not the thing he was.

IT IS a terrible mindset to have few things you want and many things you fear; and that’s often the situation for kings. At the top, they lack genuine desires, which causes their minds to feel heavy, while facing numerous dangers and uncertainties, making their thoughts unclear. This also explains why, as the scripture states, a king's heart is difficult to understand. The presence of many jealousies and the absence of a strong desire to organize and prioritize them makes it hard to discern any man's heart. Consequently, princes often create their own desires and focus on trivial matters; sometimes they obsess over a building project, sometimes on establishing a new order, or advancing someone's status; at times, they chase excellence in a specific skill or craft. For instance, Nero with his harp playing, Domitian with his archery, Commodus in fencing, and Caracalla with chariot driving, among others. This seems unbelievable to those who don’t understand that a person is often more uplifted and satisfied by small achievements than by standing still with grand aspirations. We can also see that kings who were once successful conquerors during their early years can’t endlessly move forward; they inevitably face some setbacks in their fortunes. In their later years, they often become superstitious and melancholy, like Alexander the Great, Diocletian, and more recently, Charles the Fifth, among others. A person used to moving ahead, when faced with an obstacle, can easily lose their confidence and become different from who they once were.

To speak now of the true temper of empire, it is a thing rare and hard to keep; for both temper, and distemper, consist of contraries. But it is one thing, to mingle contraries, another to interchange them. The answer of Apollonius to Vespasian, is full of excellent instruction. Vespasian asked him, What was Nero's overthrow? He answered, Nero could touch and tune the harp well; but in government, sometimes he used to wind the pins too high, sometimes to let them down too low. And certain it is, that nothing destroyeth authority so much, as the unequal and untimely interchange of power pressed too far, and relaxed too much.

To talk about the true nature of an empire now, it’s something rare and difficult to maintain; because both stability and chaos involve opposites. But it’s one thing to mix opposites, and another to swap them. Apollonius’s response to Vespasian offers great insight. Vespasian asked him what led to Nero's downfall. He replied that Nero could play the harp beautifully, but as a ruler, sometimes he tightened things too much and sometimes loosened them too much. And it’s clear that nothing undermines authority more than the uneven and poorly timed shifts in power—pushed too far or relaxed too much.

This is true, that the wisdom of all these latter times, in princes' affairs, is rather fine deliveries, and shiftings of dangers and mischiefs, when they are near, than solid and grounded courses to keep them aloof. But this is but to try masteries with fortune. And let men beware, how they neglect and suffer matter of trouble to be prepared; for no man can forbid the spark, nor tell whence it may come. The difficulties in princes' business are many and great; but the greatest difficulty, is often in their own mind. For it is common with princes (saith Tacitus) to will contradictories, Sunt plerumque regum voluntates vehementes, et inter se contrariae. For it is the solecism of power, to think to command the end, and yet not to endure the mean.

It's true that the wisdom of modern times, in matters of leadership, often involves clever tactics and ways to dodge danger and problems when they're close, rather than solid, well-thought-out strategies to keep them at bay. But this is just a gamble with fate. People should be careful not to neglect or allow potential troubles to build up because no one can stop a spark from igniting, nor predict where it might come from. The challenges in leadership are numerous and significant; however, the greatest challenge often lies within their own minds. As Tacitus said, it's common for leaders to want contradictory things, as they often have intense desires that conflict with one another. It’s a paradox of power to think one can dictate the outcome yet not tolerate the means to achieve it.

Kings have to deal with their neighbors, their wives, their children, their prelates or clergy, their nobles, their second-nobles or gentlemen, their merchants, their commons, and their men of war; and from all these arise dangers, if care and circumspection be not used.

Kings have to manage their neighbors, their wives, their children, their clergy, their nobles, their lesser nobles or gentlemen, their merchants, their common people, and their military; and from all these come risks if they are not careful and vigilant.

First for their neighbors; there can no general rule be given (for occasions are so variable), save one, which ever holdeth, which is, that princes do keep due sentinel, that none of their neighbors do ever grow so (by increase of territory, by embracing of trade, by approaches, or the like), as they become more able to annoy them, than they were. And this is generally the work of standing counsels, to foresee and to hinder it. During that triumvirate of kings, King Henry the Eighth of England, Francis the First King of France, and Charles the Fifth Emperor, there was such a watch kept, that none of the three could win a palm of ground, but the other two would straightways balance it, either by confederation, or, if need were, by a war; and would not in any wise take up peace at interest. And the like was done by that league (which Guicciardini saith was the security of Italy) made between Ferdinando King of Naples, Lorenzius Medici, and Ludovicus Sforza, potentates, the one of Florence, the other of Milan. Neither is the opinion of some of the Schoolmen, to be received, that a war cannot justly be made, but upon a precedent injury or provocation. For there is no question, but a just fear of an imminent danger, though there be no blow given, is a lawful cause of a war.

First for their neighbors; no general rule can be given (since situations vary so much), except for one that always holds true: princes need to keep vigilant so that none of their neighbors gain power (whether through expanding territory, engaging in trade, or similar means) to the point where they can threaten them more than before. This is generally the responsibility of standing councils, to foresee and prevent such threats. During the alliance of kings—Henry the Eighth of England, Francis the First of France, and Charles the Fifth, the Emperor—there was such close monitoring that if any one of them gained even a small piece of land, the others would quickly counter it, either through alliances or, if necessary, through war; they wouldn't settle for peace at a cost. A similar situation occurred with the league (which Guicciardini described as the protector of Italy) formed between Ferdinand King of Naples, Lorenzo Medici, and Ludovico Sforza, the powerful leaders of Florence and Milan, respectively. Additionally, the viewpoint of some scholars that war can only be justly waged in response to prior injury or provocation is not valid. Clearly, a legitimate fear of imminent danger, even without any attack taking place, is a valid reason for war.

For their wives; there are cruel examples of them. Livia is infamed, for the poisoning of her husband; Roxalana, Solyman's wife, was the destruction of that renowned prince, Sultan Mustapha, and otherwise troubled his house and succession; Edward the Second of England, his queen, had the principal hand in the deposing and murder of her husband. This kind of danger, is then to be feared chiefly, when the wives have plots, for the raising of their own children; or else that they be advoutresses.

For their wives, there are harsh examples. Livia is infamous for poisoning her husband; Roxalana, the wife of Solyman, was responsible for the downfall of the celebrated prince Sultan Mustapha and caused trouble for his family and heirs. Edward II of England had a queen who played a major role in his deposition and murder. This type of danger is most concerning when wives are scheming to advance their own children or when they are engaging in affairs.

For their children; the tragedies likewise of dangers from them, have been many. And generally, the entering of fathers into suspicion of their children, hath been ever unfortunate. The destruction of Mustapha (that we named before) was so fatal to Solyman's line, as the succession of the Turks, from Solyman until this day, is suspected to be untrue, and of strange blood; for that Selymus the Second, was thought to be suppositious. The destruction of Crispus, a young prince of rare towardness, by Constantinus the Great, his father, was in like manner fatal to his house; for both Constantinus and Constance, his sons, died violent deaths; and Constantius, his other son, did little better; who died indeed of sickness, but after that Julianus had taken arms against him. The destruction of Demetrius, son to Philip the Second of Macedon, turned upon the father, who died of repentance. And many like examples there are; but few or none, where the fathers had good by such distrust; except it were, where the sons were up in open arms against them; as was Selymus the First against Bajazet; and the three sons of Henry the Second, King of England.

For their children, the tragedies stemming from them have often been numerous. Generally, when fathers start to distrust their children, it usually leads to misfortune. The downfall of Mustapha (mentioned earlier) was so devastating to Solyman's lineage that the Turkish succession from Solyman until now is believed to be questionable and of questionable lineage; Selymus the Second was thought to be an impostor. Similarly, the execution of Crispus, a promising young prince, by his father Constantinus the Great, was disastrous for his family; both Constantinus and his sons, Constance, died violent deaths, while Constantius, another son, fared little better; he died of illness, but not before Julianus had revolted against him. The ruin of Demetrius, son of Philip the Second of Macedon, weighed heavily on his father, who died filled with remorse. There are many similar examples, but very few, if any, where fathers benefited from such distrust, except when their sons openly rebelled against them, like Selymus the First against Bajazet, and the three sons of Henry the Second, King of England.

For their prelates; when they are proud and great, there is also danger from them; as it was in the times of Anselmus, and Thomas Becket, Archbishops of Canterbury; who, with their croziers, did almost try it with the king's sword; and yet they had to deal with stout and haughty kings, William Rufus, Henry the First, and Henry the Second. The danger is not from that state, but where it hath a dependence of foreign authority; or where the churchmen come in and are elected, not by the collation of the king, or particular patrons, but by the people.

For their leaders; when they are arrogant and powerful, there's also a risk from them; as it was during the times of Anselm and Thomas Becket, Archbishops of Canterbury; who, with their staffs, nearly faced off against the king's sword; and yet they had to contend with strong and proud kings, William Rufus, Henry the First, and Henry the Second. The threat doesn't come from that status, but where there is dependence on foreign authority; or where the church leaders are appointed not by the king or specific patrons, but by the people.

For their nobles; to keep them at a distance, it is not amiss; but to depress them, may make a king more absolute, but less safe; and less able to perform, any thing that he desires. I have noted it, in my History of King Henry the Seventh of England, who depressed his nobility; whereupon it came to pass, that his times were full of difficulties and troubles; for the nobility, though they continued loyal unto him, yet did they not co-operate with him in his business. So that in effect, he was fain to do all things himself.

For their nobles, it’s wise to keep them at a distance, but putting them down may make a king more powerful but less secure and less capable of achieving what he wants. I noted this in my History of King Henry the Seventh of England, who undermined his nobility. As a result, his reign was filled with challenges and issues because the nobility, although they remained loyal, did not support him in his efforts. So ultimately, he had to do everything on his own.

For their second-nobles; there is not much danger from them, being a body dispersed. They may sometimes discourse high, but that doth little hurt; besides, they are a counterpoise to the higher nobility, that they grow not too potent; and, lastly, being the most immediate in authority, with the common people, they do best temper popular commotions.

For the lower nobility, there's not much risk from them since they are a scattered group. They might talk big sometimes, but that doesn't do much harm; in fact, they help balance out the higher nobility, preventing them from becoming too powerful. Lastly, because they have the closest authority with the common people, they are the best at calming public unrest.

For their merchants; they are vena porta; and if they flourish not, a kingdom may have good limbs, but will have empty veins, and nourish little. Taxes and imposts upon them, do seldom good to the king's revenue; for that that he wins in the hundred, he leeseth in the shire; the particular rates being increased, but the total bulk of trading, rather decreased.

For their merchants; they are the main source of trade; and if they don't thrive, a kingdom may have good resources, but it will have empty veins and provide little nourishment. Taxes and tariffs on them rarely benefit the king’s revenue; what he gains in one area, he loses in another; individual rates may go up, but the overall volume of trade tends to go down.

For their commons; there is little danger from them, except it be, where they have great and potent heads; or where you meddle with the point of religion, or their customs, or means of life.

For their commons, there is little risk from them, except where they have strong and influential leaders; or where you get involved with their beliefs, traditions, or way of living.

For their men of war; it is a dangerous state, where they live and remain in a body, and are used to donatives; whereof we see examples in the janizaries, and pretorian bands of Rome; but trainings of men, and arming them in several places, and under several commanders, and without donatives, are things of defence, and no danger.

For their soldiers; it's a risky situation when they live and function as a group and rely on handouts; we see this in the janissaries and the praetorian guards of Rome. However, training men and equipping them in different locations, under various commanders, and without handouts are measures for defense and pose no threat.

Princes are like to heavenly bodies, which cause good or evil times; and which have much veneration, but no rest. All precepts concerning kings, are in effect comprehended in those two remembrances: memento quod es homo; and memento quod es Deus, or vice Dei; the one bridleth their power, and the other their will.

Princes are like celestial bodies that bring about good or bad times; they are greatly revered but never at peace. All rules about kings can really be summed up in these two reminders: remember that you are human; and remember that you are God, or the vice of God; the first restrains their power, and the second their desires.





Of Counsel

THE greatest trust, between man and man, is the trust of giving counsel. For in other confidences, men commit the parts of life; their lands, their goods, their children, their credit, some particular affair; but to such as they make their counsellors, they commit the whole: by how much the more, they are obliged to all faith and integrity. The wisest princes need not think it any diminution to their greatness, or derogation to their sufficiency, to rely upon counsel. God himself is not without, but hath made it one of the great names of his blessed Son: The Counsellor. Solomon hath pronounced, that in counsel is stability. Things will have their first, or second agitation: if they be not tossed upon the arguments of counsel, they will be tossed upon the waves of fortune; and be full of inconstancy, doing and undoing, like the reeling of a drunken man. Solomon's son found the force of counsel, as his father saw the necessity of it. For the beloved kingdom of God, was first rent, and broken, by ill counsel; upon which counsel, there are set for our instruction, the two marks whereby bad counsel is for ever best discerned; that it was young counsel, for the person; and violent counsel, for the matter.

THE greatest trust between people is the trust of giving advice. In other matters, people share parts of their lives; their land, their belongings, their children, their reputation, or specific issues. But when they choose someone as their advisor, they entrust them with everything, which requires complete faith and honesty. The wisest leaders shouldn't consider it a weakness to seek advice or a mark against their competence. Even God himself embraces it, giving it as one of the significant titles of his blessed Son: The Counselor. Solomon declared that stability comes from good counsel. Issues will undergo their first or second discussions: if they aren't debated through wise advice, they will be tossed around by chance and filled with uncertainty, swaying like a drunk person. Solomon's son experienced the power of counsel, just as his father recognized its importance. The cherished kingdom of God was initially torn apart and shattered by poor advice. From this, we learn the two key indicators of bad counsel: it was young advice in terms of the person giving it, and it was rash advice regarding the issue at hand.

The ancient times, do set forth in figure, both the incorporation, and inseparable conjunction, of counsel with kings, and the wise and politic use of counsel by kings: the one, in that they say Jupiter did marry Metis, which signifieth counsel; whereby they intend that Sovereignty, is married to Counsel: the other in that which followeth, which was thus: They say, after Jupiter was married to Metis, she conceived by him, and was with child, but Jupiter suffered her not to stay, till she brought forth, but eat her up; whereby he became himself with child, and was delivered of Pallas armed, out of his head. Which monstrous fable containeth a secret of empire; how kings are to make use of their counsel of state. That first, they ought to refer matters unto them, which is the first begetting, or impregnation; but when they are elaborate, moulded, and shaped in the womb of their counsel, and grow ripe, and ready to be brought forth, that then they suffer not their counsel to go through with the resolution and direction, as if it depended on them; but take the matter back into their own hands, and make it appear to the world, that the decrees and final directions (which, because they come forth, with prudence and power, are resembled to Pallas armed) proceeded from themselves; and not only from their authority, but (the more to add reputation to themselves) from their head and device.

In ancient times, there's a strong emphasis on the importance of counsel for kings and how wisely they should use it. It’s illustrated by the myth that Jupiter married Metis, which means counsel. This signifies that sovereignty is bound to counsel. The story goes on to say that after marrying Metis, she became pregnant, but Jupiter didn't allow her to give birth; instead, he swallowed her. As a result, he became pregnant himself and gave birth to Pallas, who was fully armed, from his head. This strange myth holds a deep truth about how kings should utilize their advisors. First, they should bring matters to their counsel, which is like the initial conception. But when those issues are fully developed and ready to be resolved, they shouldn’t let their counsel finalize the decisions as if it’s entirely up to them. Instead, they take the matters back into their own hands, making it seem like the wise and powerful decisions (which are compared to armed Pallas) originated from them, enhancing their reputation and authority, as if these conclusions stemmed directly from their own ideas.

Let us now speak of the inconveniences of counsel, and of the remedies. The inconveniences that have been noted, in calling and using counsel, are three. First, the revealing of affairs, whereby they become less secret. Secondly, the weakening of the authority of princes, as if they were less of themselves. Thirdly, the danger of being unfaithfully counselled, and more for the good of them that counsel, than of him that is counselled. For which inconveniences, the doctrine of Italy, and practice of France, in some kings' times, hath introduced cabinet counsels; a remedy worse than the disease.

Let’s talk about the drawbacks of seeking advice and how to address them. The drawbacks that have been noted about calling upon counsel are threefold. First, sharing information makes it less confidential. Second, it undermines the authority of rulers, making them seem less powerful. Third, there’s a risk of receiving biased advice that benefits the adviser more than the person seeking help. To address these issues, Italy's teachings and France's practices during some kings’ reigns have introduced private councils, which can often be a worse solution than the original problem.

As to secrecy; princes are not bound to communicate all matters, with all counsellors; but may extract and select. Neither is it necessary, that he that consulteth what he should do, should declare what he will do. But let princes beware, that the unsecreting of their affairs, comes not from themselves. And as for cabinet counsels, it may be their motto, plenus rimarum sum: one futile person, that maketh it his glory to tell, will do more hurt than many, that know it their duty to conceal. It is true there be some affairs, which require extreme secrecy, which will hardly go beyond one or two persons, besides the king: neither are those counsels unprosperous; for, besides the secrecy, they commonly go on constantly, in one spirit of direction, without distraction. But then it must be a prudent king, such as is able to grind with a handmill; and those inward counsellors had need also be wise men, and especially true and trusty to the king's ends; as it was with King Henry the Seventh of England, who, in his great business, imparted himself to none, except it were to Morton and Fox.

Regarding secrecy, princes aren't obligated to share every matter with all their advisors; they can choose what to reveal and what to keep private. It's also not necessary for someone contemplating their decisions to announce what they intend to do. However, princes should be cautious that leaking their affairs doesn’t come from them. When it comes to private councils, their motto might be "full of secrets": one careless person who takes pride in spilling the beans can cause more damage than many who see it as their duty to keep things under wraps. It’s true there are some matters that require utmost secrecy, often only involving one or two people alongside the king; these councils can still be successful because, in addition to being secretive, they typically move forward consistently, with a unified purpose, without distractions. But a wise king is needed, one who can manage things quietly; and those inner advisors should also be wise, especially loyal and trustworthy regarding the king's goals, just like King Henry the Seventh of England, who only shared his significant matters with Morton and Fox.

For weakening of authority; the fable showeth the remedy. Nay, the majesty of kings, is rather exalted than diminished, when they are in the chair of counsel; neither was there ever prince, bereaved of his dependences, by his counsel, except where there hath been, either an over-greatness in one counsellor, or an over-strict combination in divers; which are things soon found, and holpen.

For the weakening of authority, the fable shows the remedy. In fact, the majesty of kings is actually enhanced rather than reduced when they are in the position of counsel. No prince has ever been stripped of his support by his advisors, except when there has been either an excessive power in one adviser or an overly strict alliance among many; these issues can be quickly identified and resolved.

For the last inconvenience, that men will counsel, with an eye to themselves; certainly, non inveniet fidem super terram is meant, of the nature of times, and not of all particular persons. There be, that are in nature faithful, and sincere, and plain, and direct; not crafty and involved; let princes, above all, draw to themselves such natures. Besides, counsellors are not commonly so united, but that one counsellor, keepeth sentinel over another; so that if any do counsel out of faction or private ends, it commonly comes to the king's ear. But the best remedy is, if princes know their counsellors, as well as their counsellors know them:

For the last issue, men will give advice with their own interests in mind; certainly, "non inveniet fidem super terram" refers to the nature of times, not to every individual. There are people who are naturally trustworthy, sincere, straightforward, and honest, rather than scheming and complicated; princes should attract such individuals above all else. Additionally, counselors are usually not very unified, with one keeping an eye on another; so if anyone advises out of factional or personal interests, it often reaches the king’s ears. But the best solution is for princes to understand their counselors as well as their counselors understand them:

Principis est virtus maxima nosse suos.

Principis is the greatest virtue to know oneself.

And on the other side, counsellors should not be too speculative into their sovereign's person. The true composition of a counsellor, is rather to be skilful in their master's business, than in his nature; for then he is like to advise him, and not feed his humor. It is of singular use to princes, if they take the opinions of their counsel, both separately and together. For private opinion is more free; but opinion before others, is more reverent. In private, men are more bold in their own humors; and in consort, men are more obnoxious to others' humors; therefore it is good to take both; and of the inferior sort, rather in private, to preserve freedom; of the greater, rather in consort, to preserve respect. It is in vain for princes, to take counsel concerning matters, if they take no counsel likewise concerning persons; for all matters are as dead images; and the life of the execution of affairs, resteth in the good choice of persons. Neither is it enough, to consult concerning persons secundum genera, as in an idea, or mathematical description, what the kind and character of the person should be; for the greatest errors are committed, and the most judgment is shown, in the choice of individuals. It was truly said, optimi consiliarii mortui: books will speak plain, when counsellors blanch. Therefore it is good to be conversant in them, specially the books of such as themselves have been actors upon the stage.

And on the other hand, advisors shouldn't delve too deeply into their ruler's personal life. A good advisor is more about being skilled in their master's business than understanding their personality; otherwise, they risk advising based on emotions rather than reason. It’s really beneficial for leaders to gather opinions from their advisors, both individually and collectively. Private opinions are more candid, while opinions shared publicly carry more weight. In private, people tend to express their true feelings more openly; in a group, they are more influenced by others' opinions. So, it's wise to seek both types of feedback—lesser advisors should speak privately to maintain that freedom while higher-ranking ones should speak in a group to uphold respect. It's pointless for leaders to seek advice on issues without also considering the individuals involved because all issues are like lifeless images; the execution of decisions depends on choosing the right people. It's not enough to discuss individuals in general terms, like abstract ideas or mathematical concepts about what their type or character should be; most mistakes happen, and the best judgment is shown in the selection of specific individuals. It’s often said that the best advisors are like the dead: books will clearly communicate when advisors are silent. Therefore, it's good to study them, especially the writings of those who have themselves been active participants in the field.

The counsels at this day, in most places, are but familiar meetings, where matters are rather talked on, than debated. And they run too swift, to the order, or act, of counsel. It were better that in causes of weight, the matter were propounded one day, and not spoken to till the next day; in nocte consilium. So was it done in the Commission of Union, between England and Scotland; which was a grave and orderly assembly. I commend set days for petitions; for both it gives the suitors more certainty for their attendance, and it frees the meetings for matters of estate, that they may hoc agere. In choice of committees; for ripening business for the counsel, it is better to choose indifferent persons, than to make an indifferency, by putting in those, that are strong on both sides. I commend also standing commissions; as for trade, for treasure, for war, for suits, for some provinces; for where there be divers particular counsels, and but one counsel of estate (as it is in Spain), they are, in effect, no more than standing commissions: save that they have greater authority. Let such as are to inform counsels, out of their particular professions (as lawyers, seamen, mintmen, and the like) be first heard before committees; and then, as occasion serves, before the counsel. And let them not come in multitudes, or in a tribunitious manner; for that is to clamor counsels, not to inform them. A long table and a square table, or seats about the walls, seem things of form, but are things of substance; for at a long table a few at the upper end, in effect, sway all the business; but in the other form, there is more use of the counsellors' opinions, that sit lower. A king, when he presides in counsel, let him beware how he opens his own inclination too much, in that which he propoundeth; for else counsellors will but take the wind of him, and instead of giving free counsel, sing him a song of placebo.

Today, meetings of advisors are mostly casual discussions, where things are talked about more than debated. They move too quickly toward decisions. It would be better to introduce important topics one day and not discuss them until the next; in “night, a decision.” This was how the Commission of Union between England and Scotland operated, which was a serious and organized meeting. I suggest having set days for petitions; this gives those seeking help more certainty about when to attend and frees up meetings for matters of state so they can focus on them. When choosing committees to prepare business for the advisors, it's better to pick neutral people rather than create a bias by including strong representatives from both sides. I also recommend having standing committees for trade, finance, military, legal matters, and certain regions; where there are various specific councils but only one main council (like in Spain), they essentially function like standing committees, only with more authority. Those who are to provide information to councils from their specific professions (like lawyers, sailors, and mint workers) should be heard first by committees, and then, as needed, by the council. They shouldn't come in large groups or act in a disruptive way; that just overwhelms the council instead of informing it. The layout of a long table versus a square table or chairs around the walls may seem like a matter of style, but it's significant; at a long table, a few people at the top effectively control the entire discussion, whereas in the other setup, there's a greater opportunity for the opinions of the lower-ranking advisors to be heard. When a king leads a council, he should be careful not to reveal too much of his own opinions on what he proposes; otherwise, the advisors may simply echo what he wants to hear rather than give honest advice, providing him with empty praise instead.





Of Delays

FORTUNE is like the market; where many times if you can stay a little, the price will fall. Again, it is sometimes like Sibylla's offer; which at first, offereth the commodity at full, then consumeth part and part, and still holdeth up the price. For occasion (as it is in the common verse) turneth a bald noddle, after she hath presented her locks in front, and no hold taken; or at least turneth the handle of the bottle, first to be received, and after the belly, which is hard to clasp. There is surely no greater wisdom, than well to time the beginnings, and onsets, of things. Dangers are no more light, if they once seem light; and more dangers have deceived men, than forced them. Nay, it were better, to meet some dangers half way, though they come nothing near, than to keep too long a watch upon their approaches; for if a man watch too long, it is odds he will fall asleep. On the other side, to be deceived with too long shadows (as some have been, when the moon was low, and shone on their enemies' back), and so to shoot off before the time; or to teach dangers to come on, by over early buckling towards them; is another extreme. The ripeness, or unripeness, of the occasion (as we said) must ever be well weighed; and generally it is good, to commit the beginnings of all great actions to Argus, with his hundred eyes, and the ends to Briareus, with his hundred hands; first to watch, and then to speed. For the helmet of Pluto, which maketh the politic man go invisible, is secrecy in the counsel, and celerity in the execution. For when things are once come to the execution, there is no secrecy, comparable to celerity; like the motion of a bullet in the air, which flieth so swift, as it outruns the eye.

FORTUNE is like the stock market; often if you can hold on for a bit, the price will drop. It's also sometimes like Sibylla's offer: at first, it presents the full price, then gradually reduces it while still keeping the price high. Opportunities, as the saying goes, can turn things upside down after showing their best side, with no action taken; or they can turn the handle of the bottle, initially welcoming, but difficult to grab later. There’s no greater wisdom than knowing the right timing for starting things. Dangers don’t become less significant just because they seem small at first; more people have been misled by dangers than have been forced by them. In fact, it’s often better to confront some dangers halfway, even if they seem distant, than to stay on alert for too long; because if a person watches for too long, it's likely they’ll end up falling asleep. On the flip side, being misled by extended shadows (as some have been when the moon is low, shining on their enemies' backs) can cause someone to act prematurely, or to provoke dangers by preparing too early; that’s another extreme. The timing of an opportunity, whether ripe or not, must always be carefully considered; and in general, it’s wise to entrust the beginnings of significant actions to Argus, with his hundred eyes, and the endings to Briareus, with his hundred hands; first to observe, then to execute. For the helmet of Pluto, which makes a wise person go unnoticed, symbolizes secrecy in planning and swiftness in execution. Once actions are underway, there’s no secrecy that compares to speed, like the motion of a bullet through the air, which moves so fast it surpasses the eye.





Of Cunning

WE TAKE cunning for a sinister or crooked wisdom. And certainly there is a great difference, between a cunning man, and a wise man; not only in point of honesty, but in point of ability. There be, that can pack the cards, and yet cannot play well; so there are some that are good in canvasses and factions, that are otherwise weak men. Again, it is one thing to understand persons, and another thing to understand matters; for many are perfect in men's humors, that are not greatly capable of the real part of business; which is the constitution of one that hath studied men, more than books. Such men are fitter for practice, than for counsel; and they are good, but in their own alley: turn them to new men, and they have lost their aim; so as the old rule, to know a fool from a wise man, Mitte ambos nudos ad ignotos, et videbis, doth scarce hold for them. And because these cunning men, are like haberdashers of small wares, it is not amiss to set forth their shop.

WE DEFINE cunning as a kind of twisted or deceptive wisdom. There's definitely a big difference between a cunning person and a wise person; not just in terms of honesty, but also in skills. There are those who can manipulate situations but still can’t perform well; similarly, there are people who excel in politics and groups but are otherwise quite weak. Moreover, it's one thing to understand people and another to grasp actual issues; many are experts in human behavior but aren't very capable when it comes to the core tasks at hand, indicating someone who has focused more on people than on knowledge. Such individuals are better suited for practical work than for giving advice, and they excel only in familiar settings: introduce them to new situations, and they lose their focus, so the old saying, to tell a fool from a wise person, "Send both to unknown people, and you’ll see," hardly applies to them. Since these cunning individuals are like small-time shopkeepers, it makes sense to showcase their abilities.

It is a point of cunning, to wait upon him with whom you speak, with your eye; as the Jesuits give it in precept: for there be many wise men, that have secret hearts, and transparent countenances. Yet this would be done with a demure abasing of your eye, sometimes, as the Jesuits also do use.

It’s clever to keep an eye on the person you’re talking to, as the Jesuits recommend: many wise people have hidden thoughts but open expressions. Still, you should occasionally lower your gaze, similar to how the Jesuits suggest.

Another is, that when you have anything to obtain, of present despatch, you entertain and amuse the party, with whom you deal, with some other discourse; that he be not too much awake to make objections. I knew a counsellor and secretary, that never came to Queen Elizabeth of England, with bills to sign, but he would always first put her into some discourse of estate, that she mought the less mind the bills.

Another way is that when you want to get something done quickly, you keep the person you're dealing with engaged and entertained with some other conversation, so they're not too alert to raise objections. I knew a counselor and secretary who never approached Queen Elizabeth of England with papers for her to sign without first getting her into a discussion about state affairs, so she would pay less attention to the bills.

The like surprise may be made by moving things, when the party is in haste, and cannot stay to consider advisedly of that is moved.

The same surprise can happen when things are moved, especially when someone is in a rush and doesn’t have time to think carefully about what’s being moved.

If a man would cross a business, that he doubts some other would handsomely and effectually move, let him pretend to wish it well, and move it himself in such sort as may foil it.

If a man wants to sabotage a business venture that he thinks someone else might handle well and effectively, he should act like he supports it and interfere in a way that undermines it.

The breaking off, in the midst of that one was about to say, as if he took himself up, breeds a greater appetite in him with whom you confer, to know more.

Cutting yourself off in the middle of what you're saying, as if you're pausing to collect your thoughts, only makes the person you're talking to want to know more.

And because it works better, when anything seemeth to be gotten from you by question, than if you offer it of yourself, you may lay a bait for a question, by showing another visage, and countenance, than you are wont; to the end to give occasion, for the party to ask, what the matter is of the change? As Nehemias did; And I had not before that time, been sad before the king.

And because it’s more effective when someone asks you for something rather than you offering it on your own, you can create an opportunity for a question by displaying a different face and demeanor than usual. This way, you encourage the other person to inquire about why you’ve changed. Just like Nehemiah did; I hadn’t been sad in front of the king before that moment.

In things that are tender and unpleasing, it is good to break the ice, by some whose words are of less weight, and to reserve the more weighty voice, to come in as by chance, so that he may be asked the question upon the other's speech: as Narcissus did, relating to Claudius the marriage of Messalina and Silius.

In situations that are sensitive and uncomfortable, it’s helpful to ease into the conversation with someone whose words carry less significance, saving the more important comments for a later moment, as if it happens unexpectedly, so that they can respond to what the other person has said: like Narcissus did when he mentioned Messalina’s marriage to Silius to Claudius.

In things that a man would not be seen in himself, it is a point of cunning, to borrow the name of the world; as to say, The world says, or There is a speech abroad.

In situations where a man wouldn’t want to be seen himself, it’s a clever tactic to use the world’s name; like saying, The world says, or There’s talk going around.

I knew one that, when he wrote a letter, he would put that, which was most material, in the postscript, as if it had been a by-matter.

I knew someone who, when he wrote a letter, would put the most important information in the postscript, as if it was an afterthought.

I knew another that, when he came to have speech, he would pass over that, that he intended most; and go forth, and come back again, and speak of it as of a thing, that he had almost forgot.

I knew someone else who, when he started to talk, would skip over what he really meant and go away, only to return and speak about it like it was something he had almost forgotten.

Some procure themselves, to be surprised, at such times as it is like the party that they work upon, will suddenly come upon them; and to be found with a letter in their hand, or doing somewhat which they are not accustomed; to the end, they may be apposed of those things, which of themselves they are desirous to utter.

Some people set themselves up to be surprised at moments when it seems like the group they're with will suddenly catch them off guard; they want to be found holding a letter or doing something unusual, so they can be asked about the things they really want to say.

It is a point of cunning, to let fall those words in a man's own name, which he would have another man learn, and use, and thereupon take advantage. I knew two, that were competitors for the secretary's place in Queen Elizabeth's time, and yet kept good quarter between themselves; and would confer, one with another, upon the business; and the one of them said, That to be a secretary, in the declination of a monarchy, was a ticklish thing, and that he did not affect it: the other straight caught up those words, and discoursed with divers of his friends, that he had no reason to desire to be secretary, in the declination of a monarchy. The first man took hold of it, and found means it was told the Queen; who, hearing of a declination of a monarchy, took it so ill, as she would never after hear of the other's suit.

It's clever to use a person's own words against him, making it look like someone else learned and used them to gain an advantage. I knew two guys who were competing for the secretary position during Queen Elizabeth's reign, yet they maintained a decent relationship with each other. They would discuss the matter, and one of them remarked that being a secretary during a monarchy's decline was a risky business and that he wasn’t interested in it. The other immediately picked up on that statement and told several of his friends that he had no reason to want to be secretary during a monarchy's decline. The first guy caught wind of this and found a way to get it to the Queen, who, upon hearing about the decline of a monarchy, took it so poorly that she refused to consider the other man's application afterward.

There is a cunning, which we in England call, the turning of the cat in the pan; which is, when that which a man says to another, he lays it as if another had said it to him. And to say truth, it is not easy, when such a matter passed between two, to make it appear from which of them it first moved and began.

There’s a clever trick that we in England refer to as "turning the cat in the pan," where one person twists what another has said, making it seem like it originated with them instead. To be honest, it’s not easy to figure out who actually started the conversation when such a thing happens between two people.

It is a way that some men have, to glance and dart at others, by justifying themselves by negatives; as to say, This I do not; as Tigellinus did towards Burrhus, Se non diversas spes, sed incolumitatem imperatoris simpliciter spectare.

It’s a way some guys have of looking at others and throwing out judgments, justifying themselves by what they don’t do; like when Tigellinus looked at Burrhus, saying he was focused not on different hopes but simply on the safety of the emperor.

Some have in readiness so many tales and stories, as there is nothing they would insinuate, but they can wrap it into a tale; which serveth both to keep themselves more in guard, and to make others carry it with more pleasure. It is a good point of cunning, for a man to shape the answer he would have, in his own words and propositions; for it makes the other party stick the less.

Some people have so many stories and tales ready that there's nothing they want to imply that they can't wrap up in a story. This helps them to be more cautious and also makes it easier for others to enjoy what they're saying. It's a clever tactic for someone to frame the response they want in their own words and ideas, as it makes the other person less resistant.

It is strange how long some men will lie in wait to speak somewhat they desire to say; and how far about they will fetch; and how many other matters they will beat over, to come near it. It is a thing of great patience, but yet of much use.

It’s odd how long some men will wait to say something they really want to say; and how many roundabout ways they’ll go to get there; and how many other topics they’ll discuss before finally getting to the point. It's a test of great patience, but it’s also quite valuable.

A sudden, bold, and unexpected question doth many times surprise a man, and lay him open. Like to him that, having changed his name, and walking in Paul's, another suddenly came behind him, and called him by his true name, whereat straightways he looked back.

A sudden, bold, and unexpected question often catches a person off guard and reveals their true self. Like someone who has changed their name but is walking in Paul's place, when another person suddenly comes up behind them and calls them by their real name, they immediately turn to look back.

But these small wares, and petty points, of cunning, are infinite; and it were a good deed to make a list of them; for that nothing doth more hurt in a state, than that cunning men pass for wise.

But these small items and minor tricks are endless; it would be helpful to make a list of them because nothing harms a society more than cunning people being seen as wise.

But certainly some there are that know the resorts and falls of business, that cannot sink into the main of it; like a house that hath convenient stairs and entries, but never a fair room. Therefore, you shall see them find out pretty looses in the conclusion, but are no ways able to examine or debate matters. And yet commonly they take advantage of their inability, and would be thought wits of direction. Some build rather upon the abusing of others, and (as we now say) putting tricks upon them, than upon soundness of their own proceedings. But Solomon saith, Prudens advertit ad gressus suos; stultus divertit ad dolos.

But there are definitely some people who understand the ins and outs of business, yet can't fully engage with it; like a house that has nice stairs and entryways, but lacks a decent room. So, you’ll see them uncovering clever loopholes in the end, but they have no real ability to analyze or argue about things. Still, they often take advantage of their lack of ability and want to be seen as clever strategists. Some rely more on misleading others, or as we say now, playing tricks on them, rather than on the soundness of their own actions. But Solomon says, "The wise pay attention to their actions; the foolish are distracted by deceit."





Of Wisdom For A Man's Self

AN ANT is a wise creature for itself, but it is a shrewd thing, in an orchard or garden. And certainly, men that are great lovers of themselves, waste the public. Divide with reason; between self-love and society; and be so true to thyself, as thou be not false to others; specially to thy king and country. It is a poor centre of a man's actions, himself. It is right earth. For that only stands fast upon his own centre; whereas all things, that have affinity with the heavens, move upon the centre of another, which they benefit. The referring of all to a man's self, is more tolerable in a sovereign prince; because themselves are not only themselves, but their good and evil is at the peril of the public fortune. But it is a desperate evil, in a servant to a prince, or a citizen in a republic. For whatsoever affairs pass such a man's hands, he crooketh them to his own ends; which must needs be often eccentric to the ends of his master, or state. Therefore, let princes, or states, choose such servants, as have not this mark; except they mean their service should be made but the accessory. That which maketh the effect more pernicious, is that all proportion is lost. It were disproportion enough, for the servant's good to be preferred before the master's; but yet it is a greater extreme, when a little good of the servant, shall carry things against a great good of the master's. And yet that is the case of bad officers, treasurers, ambassadors, generals, and other false and corrupt servants; which set a bias upon their bowl, of their own petty ends and envies, to the overthrow of their master's great and important affairs. And for the most part, the good such servants receive, is after the model of their own fortune; but the hurt they sell for that good, is after the model of their master's fortune. And certainly it is the nature of extreme self-lovers, as they will set an house on fire, and it were but to roast their eggs; and yet these men many times hold credit with their masters, because their study is but to please them, and profit themselves; and for either respect, they will abandon the good of their affairs.

AN ANT is smart for its own sake, but it can be quite cunning in an orchard or garden. And undoubtedly, people who are very self-absorbed waste resources that belong to everyone. Balance, with careful thought, between self-love and society; and be true to yourself without being deceitful to others, especially to your king and country. It's a poor foundation for a person's actions to revolve solely around themselves. That’s right; it’s a self-centered approach. Because only that kind of person remains steady on their own center, while all other beings that are connected to the heavens revolve around the center of another, which benefits them. When a prince acts in self-reference, it’s somewhat more acceptable, since they encompass more than just themselves, and their actions can impact the public good or misfortune. But it's quite detrimental for a servant of a prince or a citizen in a republic. Any matter that falls into such a person's hands tends to be twisted to serve their own interests, which often diverges from the interests of their master or state. Therefore, rulers or states should choose servants who do not possess this trait unless they intend for their service to be merely supplementary. What makes the situation even worse is the complete loss of balance. It would already be unreasonable for a servant's benefit to take precedence over their master's; however, it's an even greater injustice when a small benefit for the servant outweighs a significant benefit for the master. This is precisely the issue with corrupt officials, treasurers, ambassadors, generals, and other dishonest and unethical servants, who skew their judgment for their own minor goals and resentments, leading to the downfall of their master's crucial affairs. Often, the benefits these servants gain resemble their own fortunes, but the harm they inflict is aligned with their master's fortunes. Indeed, extremely self-serving individuals will go as far as to set a house on fire just to cook their eggs; and yet, these individuals often maintain favor with their masters because they focus solely on pleasing them and benefiting themselves, neglecting the good of their responsibilities.

Wisdom for a man's self is, in many branches thereof, a depraved thing. It is the wisdom of rats, that will be sure to leave a house, somewhat before it fall. It is the wisdom of the fox, that thrusts out the badger, who digged and made room for him. It is the wisdom of crocodiles, that shed tears when they would devour. But that which is specially to be noted is, that those which (as Cicero says of Pompey) are sui amantes, sine rivali, are many times unfortunate. And whereas they have, all their times, sacrificed to themselves, they become in the end, themselves sacrifices to the inconstancy of fortune, whose wings they thought, by their self-wisdom, to have pinioned.

Wisdom for oneself can be pretty twisted in many ways. It's like the wisdom of rats, who always leave a place right before it collapses. It's the cunning of the fox that pushes out the badger, who created space for him. It's the behavior of crocodiles, who fake tears just before they eat. But what stands out is that those who, as Cicero describes Pompey, are self-loving and without rivals often end up unfortunate. While they constantly sacrifice for themselves, they ultimately become victims of the unpredictability of fate, which they mistakenly thought they could control with their own wisdom.





Of Innovations

AS THE births of living creatures, at first are ill-shapen, so are all innovations, which are the births of time. Yet notwithstanding, as those that first bring honor into their family, are commonly more worthy than most that succeed, so the first precedent (if it be good) is seldom attained by imitation. For ill, to man's nature, as it stands perverted, hath a natural motion, strongest in continuance; but good, as a forced motion, strongest at first. Surely every medicine is an innovation; and he that will not apply new remedies, must expect new evils; for time is the greatest innovator; and if time of course alter things to the worse, and wisdom and counsel shall not alter them to the better, what shall be the end? It is true, that what is settled by custom, though it be not good, yet at least it is fit; and those things which have long gone together, are, as it were, confederate within themselves; whereas new things piece not so well; but though they help by their utility, yet they trouble by their inconformity. Besides, they are like strangers; more admired, and less favored. All this is true, if time stood still; which contrariwise moveth so round, that a froward retention of custom, is as turbulent a thing as an innovation; and they that reverence too much old times, are but a scorn to the new. It were good, therefore, that men in their innovations would follow the example of time itself; which indeed innovateth greatly, but quietly, by degrees scarce to be perceived. For otherwise, whatsoever is new is unlooked for; and ever it mends some, and pairs others; and he that is holpen, takes it for a fortune, and thanks the time; and he that is hurt, for a wrong, and imputeth it to the author. It is good also, not to try experiments in states, except the necessity be urgent, or the utility evident; and well to beware, that it be the reformation, that draweth on the change, and not the desire of change, that pretendeth the reformation. And lastly, that the novelty, though it be not rejected, yet be held for a suspect; and, as the Scripture saith, that we make a stand upon the ancient way, and then look about us, and discover what is the straight and right way, and so to walk in it.

AS the birth of living creatures is often imperfect, so too are all innovations, which are the products of time. However, just as those who first bring honor to their families tend to be more deserving than many who follow, the initial example (if it is good) is rarely matched by imitation. For evil, given human nature as it is distorted, has a natural tendency, strongest over time; while good, being a forced action, is strongest at the beginning. Certainly, every remedy is an innovation; and anyone who refuses to embrace new solutions must expect new problems, for time is the greatest innovator. If time inevitably leads to deterioration and wisdom and guidance do not bring improvement, what will the outcome be? It is true that what is established by custom, even if it is not good, is at least suitable, and things that have long coexisted seem to support each other. In contrast, new things do not fit together as well; even if they offer utility, they often cause confusion due to their lack of harmony. Moreover, they are like outsiders; more admired yet less welcomed. All this holds true if time were static; however, time moves so rapidly that stubbornly clinging to tradition is as disruptive as innovation, and those who overly respect the past only mock the present. Therefore, it would be wise for people, in their innovations, to emulate time itself, which indeed innovates significantly, but subtly, in ways that are hardly noticeable. Otherwise, anything new is unexpected; it benefits some while disadvantaging others, and those who gain see it as a stroke of luck, crediting the passage of time, while those who suffer perceive it as a harm and blame the innovator. It is also prudent not to experiment in governance unless the necessity is urgent or the benefit is clear; and to ensure that reform is what drives change, not merely the desire for change disguising itself as reform. Lastly, new ideas, while not outright rejected, should be viewed with suspicion, and, as the Scriptures say, we should pause on the ancient path, then look around to discover what the straight and right way is, and walk in it.





Of Dispatch

AFFECTED dispatch is one of the most dangerous things to business that can be. It is like that, which the physicians call predigestion, or hasty digestion; which is sure to fill the body full of crudities, and secret seeds of diseases. Therefore measure not dispatch, by the times of sitting, but by the advancement of the business. And as in races it is not the large stride or high lift that makes the speed; so in business, the keeping close to the matter, and not taking of it too much at once, procureth dispatch. It is the care of some, only to come off speedily for the time; or to contrive some false periods of business, because they may seem men of dispatch. But it is one thing, to abbreviate by contracting, another by cutting off. And business so handled, at several sittings or meetings, goeth commonly backward and forward in an unsteady manner. I knew a wise man that had it for a byword, when he saw men hasten to a conclusion, Stay a little, that we may make an end the sooner.

Rushed decision-making is one of the most harmful things to business. It's like what doctors call predigestion or hasty digestion, which inevitably leads to problems and hidden issues. So, don’t measure progress by how long meetings take, but by how much actual work gets done. Just like in a race, it's not about taking big strides or lifting high that makes you fast; in business, staying focused and not trying to handle too much at once leads to better results. Some people only care about appearing to be quick in the moment or creating false deadlines to look efficient. But there's a difference between shortening the process by streamlining and cutting important parts out. When business is managed this way, over various meetings, it tends to go back and forth in an inconsistent way. I knew a wise person who often said, when he saw people rushing to finish, "Hold on a bit so we can finish faster."

On the other side, true dispatch is a rich thing. For time is the measure of business, as money is of wares; and business is bought at a dear hand, where there is small dispatch. The Spartans and Spaniards have been noted to be of small dispatch; Mi venga la muerte de Spagna; Let my death come from Spain; for then it will be sure to be long in coming.

On the other hand, true efficiency is valuable. Time is like the currency of business, just as money is for goods; and getting things done takes a lot from you when there’s little efficiency. The Spartans and Spaniards have been known for their slow pace; "Mi venga la muerte de Spagna"—let my death come from Spain; because then it’s guaranteed to take a long time.

Give good hearing to those, that give the first information in business; and rather direct them in the beginning, than interrupt them in the continuance of their speeches; for he that is put out of his own order, will go forward and backward, and be more tedious, while he waits upon his memory, than he could have been, if he had gone on in his own course. But sometimes it is seen, that the moderator is more troublesome, than the actor.

Listen carefully to those who provide the initial information in discussions; it's better to guide them at the start than to interrupt them while they’re speaking. When someone is thrown off their own flow, they will struggle to remember what to say next, becoming more tedious than if they had just continued along their own path. However, sometimes the moderator can be more of a hassle than the person speaking.

Iterations are commonly loss of time. But there is no such gain of time, as to iterate often the state of the question; for it chaseth away many a frivolous speech, as it is coming forth. Long and curious speeches, are as fit for dispatch, as a robe or mantle, with a long train, is for race. Prefaces and passages, and excusations, and other speeches of reference to the person, are great wastes of time; and though they seem to proceed of modesty, they are bravery. Yet beware of being too material, when there is any impediment or obstruction in men's wills; for pre-occupation of mind ever requireth preface of speech; like a fomentation to make the unguent enter.

Iterations often waste time. However, there's no time saved by repeatedly stating the question, as it eliminates many trivial comments before they are expressed. Lengthy and intricate speeches are as suitable for getting things done as a robe with a long train is for a race. Introductions, digressions, excuses, and other references to individuals are significant time-wasters; and while they may seem to stem from modesty, they are merely showy. Yet be careful not to be overly direct when there's any resistance or obstruction in people's willingness; for a distracted mind always requires a preamble, like a warm-up to help the ointment absorb.

Above all things, order, and distribution, and singling out of parts, is the life of dispatch; so as the distribution be not too subtle: for he that doth not divide, will never enter well into business; and he that divideth too much, will never come out of it clearly. To choose time, is to save time; and an unseasonable motion, is but beating the air. There be three parts of business; the preparation, the debate or examination, and the perfection. Whereof, if you look for dispatch, let the middle only be the work of many, and the first and last the work of few. The proceeding upon somewhat conceived in writing, doth for the most part facilitate dispatch: for though it should be wholly rejected, yet that negative is more pregnant of direction, than an indefinite; as ashes are more generative than dust.

Above all else, order, distribution, and highlighting of parts are essential for getting things done efficiently; just make sure the breakdown isn’t overly intricate. Anyone who doesn’t divide tasks will never manage business well, and anyone who breaks things down too much will struggle to succeed. Choosing the right moment is key to saving time; an untimely action is just wasting effort. There are three parts to business: preparation, discussion or evaluation, and completion. If you're looking for efficiency, let the middle part be handled by many people while the first and last parts should be managed by a few. Acting on something written down usually makes getting things done easier; even if the plan gets completely scrapped, that refusal still provides clearer guidance than being vague, just like ashes have more potential for growth than dust.





Of Seeming Wise

IT HATH been an opinion, that the French are wiser than they seem, and the Spaniards seem wiser than they are. But howsoever it be between nations, certainly it is so between man and man. For as the Apostle saith of godliness, Having a show of godliness, but denying the power thereof; so certainly there are, in point of wisdom and sufficiency, that do nothing or little very solemnly: magno conatu nugas. It is a ridiculous thing, and fit for a satire to persons of judgment, to see what shifts these formalists have, and what prospectives to make superficies to seem body, that hath depth and bulk. Some are so close and reserved, as they will not show their wares, but by a dark light; and seem always to keep back somewhat; and when they know within themselves, they speak of that they do not well know, would nevertheless seem to others, to know of that which they may not well speak. Some help themselves with countenance and gesture, and are wise by signs; as Cicero saith of Piso, that when he answered him, he fetched one of his brows up to his forehead, and bent the other down to his chin; Respondes, altero ad frontem sublato, altero ad mentum depresso supercilio, crudelitatem tibi non placere. Some think to bear it by speaking a great word, and being peremptory; and go on, and take by admittance, that which they cannot make good. Some, whatsoever is beyond their reach, will seem to despise, or make light of it, as impertinent or curious; and so would have their ignorance seem judgment. Some are never without a difference, and commonly by amusing men with a subtilty, blanch the matter; of whom A. Gellius saith, Hominem delirum, qui verborum minutiis rerum frangit pondera. Of which kind also, Plato, in his Protagoras, bringeth in Prodicus in scorn, and maketh him make a speech, that consisteth of distinction from the beginning to the end. Generally, such men in all deliberations find ease to be of the negative side, and affect a credit to object and foretell difficulties; for when propositions are denied, there is an end of them; but if they be allowed, it requireth a new work; which false point of wisdom is the bane of business. To conclude, there is no decaying merchant, or inward beggar, hath so many tricks to uphold the credit of their wealth, as these empty persons have, to maintain the credit of their sufficiency. Seeming wise men may make shift to get opinion; but let no man choose them for employment; for certainly you were better take for business, a man somewhat absurd, than over-formal.

There’s a belief that the French are smarter than they appear, while the Spaniards appear smarter than they actually are. Regardless of the differences between nations, it’s definitely true for individuals. Just as the Apostle mentions godliness—having an appearance of piety while denying its true power—there are certainly people who present themselves as wise or capable while doing very little: great effort for trivial things. It’s absurd, and suitable for satire, to observe the lengths these formalists go to and the tricks they use to make superficial things seem substantial, as if they have depth and weight. Some people are so secretive and reserved that they only reveal their ideas under poor lighting, always holding something back; and when they don't truly understand something, they still try to make it seem like they have insight into topics they can hardly discuss. Some rely on facial expressions and gestures, communicating wisdom through signs; as Cicero mentioned about Piso, who raised one eyebrow to his forehead and lowered the other to his chin in response, indicating his disdain for cruelty. Others think they can dominate a conversation by using grand language and being assertive, proceeding to claim things that they cannot substantiate. Some disregard what they don't understand, downplaying it as irrelevant or overly curious, attempting to pass off their ignorance as sound judgment. Some constantly maintain a sense of difference, often dazzling others with their cleverness to obscure the main issue; A. Gellius referred to such individuals as foolish people who dilute the weight of matters with the minutiae of words. Plato, in his Protagoras, mocks Prodicus, who makes a speech consisting purely of distinctions from start to finish. Generally, these individuals prefer to take the negative stance in discussions and aim to gain credibility by pointing out problems; when proposals are denied, the conversation ends, but if they are accepted, it requires more effort—this false sense of wisdom hinders action. In conclusion, no failing merchant or internal beggar has as many tricks to uphold their financial reputation as these empty people do to maintain the facade of their competence. Those who seem wise might gain others’ opinions, but no one should choose them for serious work; it’s better to take on someone who is a bit odd than someone overly formal.





Of Friendship

IT HAD been hard for him that spake it to have put more truth and untruth together in few words, than in that speech, Whatsoever is delighted in solitude, is either a wild beast or a god. For it is most true, that a natural and secret hatred, and aversation towards society, in any man, hath somewhat of the savage beast; but it is most untrue, that it should have any character at all, of the divine nature; except it proceed, not out of a pleasure in solitude, but out of a love and desire to sequester a man's self, for a higher conversation: such as is found to have been falsely and feignedly in some of the heathen; as Epimenides the Candian, Numa the Roman, Empedocles the Sicilian, and Apollonius of Tyana; and truly and really, in divers of the ancient hermits and holy fathers of the church. But little do men perceive what solitude is, and how far it extendeth. For a crowd is not company; and faces are but a gallery of pictures; and talk but a tinkling cymbal, where there is no love. The Latin adage meeteth with it a little: Magna civitas, magna solitudo; because in a great town friends are scattered; so that there is not that fellowship, for the most part, which is in less neighborhoods. But we may go further, and affirm most truly, that it is a mere and miserable solitude to want true friends; without which the world is but a wilderness; and even in this sense also of solitude, whosoever in the frame of his nature and affections, is unfit for friendship, he taketh it of the beast, and not from humanity.

It was hard for the person who said it to combine more truth and lies in so few words than in that statement: "Whoever delights in solitude is either a wild beast or a god." It's true that a natural and secret hatred and aversion to society in any person has some characteristics of a savage beast; however, it's completely false to suggest that it has any quality of the divine nature, unless it comes from not enjoying solitude, but from a love and desire to withdraw oneself for higher conversations. This was falsely and pretentiously seen in some of the ancient figures like Epimenides the Cretan, Numa the Roman, Empedocles the Sicilian, and Apollonius of Tyana; but it was truly and genuinely present in many of the early hermits and holy fathers of the church. But people hardly understand what solitude is and how far it goes. A crowd isn’t true company; faces are just a gallery of pictures; and conversation is merely a loud noise where there’s no love. The Latin saying captures it somewhat: "Great city, great solitude," because in a large town, friends are scattered, and there isn't the same sense of community as in smaller neighborhoods. But we can go further and truly affirm that it's a pitiful solitude to lack true friends; without them, the world is just a wilderness. In this sense of solitude, anyone who is naturally and emotionally unfit for friendship behaves like a beast, not like a human.

A principal fruit of friendship, is the ease and discharge of the fulness and swellings of the heart, which passions of all kinds do cause and induce. We know diseases of stoppings, and suffocations, are the most dangerous in the body; and it is not much otherwise in the mind; you may take sarza to open the liver, steel to open the spleen, flowers of sulphur for the lungs, castoreum for the brain; but no receipt openeth the heart, but a true friend; to whom you may impart griefs, joys, fears, hopes, suspicions, counsels, and whatsoever lieth upon the heart to oppress it, in a kind of civil shrift or confession.

A major benefit of friendship is the relief and release of the overwhelming feelings and emotions that passions create. We understand that blockages and suffocations can be the most dangerous issues for the body; it’s similar for the mind. You can take herbal remedies to soothe the liver, medications to help the spleen, sulfur flowers for the lungs, or castoreum for the brain; but nothing truly opens up the heart like a genuine friend. To them, you can share your troubles, joys, fears, hopes, doubts, advice, and anything else that weighs heavily on your heart, almost like a personal confession.

It is a strange thing to observe, how high a rate great kings and monarchs do set upon this fruit of friendship, whereof we speak: so great, as they purchase it, many times, at the hazard of their own safety and greatness. For princes, in regard of the distance of their fortune from that of their subjects and servants, cannot gather this fruit, except (to make themselves capable thereof) they raise some persons to be, as it were, companions and almost equals to themselves, which many times sorteth to inconvenience. The modern languages give unto such persons the name of favorites, or privadoes; as if it were matter of grace, or conversation. But the Roman name attaineth the true use and cause thereof, naming them participes curarum; for it is that which tieth the knot. And we see plainly that this hath been done, not by weak and passionate princes only, but by the wisest and most politic that ever reigned; who have oftentimes joined to themselves some of their servants; whom both themselves have called friends, and allowed other likewise to call them in the same manner; using the word which is received between private men.

It's odd to see how highly great kings and monarchs value the fruit of friendship we’re talking about; they often pursue it, sometimes even at the risk of their own safety and status. Because princes are so distanced from their subjects and servants by their fortune, they can’t enjoy this fruit unless they elevate certain individuals to be companions and almost equals, which often leads to problems. Modern languages refer to such individuals as favorites or privadoes, implying a matter of favor or connection. However, the Roman term gets to the heart of it, calling them participes curarum, which is what truly binds the relationship. We can clearly see this has been the case not just with weak and emotional rulers but also with the wisest and most strategic leaders in history; they often associated closely with some of their servants, whom they called friends and allowed others to refer to in the same way, using the language typically reserved for private individuals.

L. Sylla, when he commanded Rome, raised Pompey (after surnamed the Great) to that height, that Pompey vaunted himself for Sylla's overmatch. For when he had carried the consulship for a friend of his, against the pursuit of Sylla, and that Sylla did a little resent thereat, and began to speak great, Pompey turned upon him again, and in effect bade him be quiet; for that more men adored the sun rising, than the sun setting. With Julius Caesar, Decimus Brutus had obtained that interest as he set him down in his testament, for heir in remainder, after his nephew. And this was the man that had power with him, to draw him forth to his death. For when Caesar would have discharged the senate, in regard of some ill presages, and specially a dream of Calpurnia; this man lifted him gently by the arm out of his chair, telling him he hoped he would not dismiss the senate, till his wife had dreamt a better dream. And it seemeth his favor was so great, as Antonius, in a letter which is recited verbatim in one of Cicero's Philippics, calleth him venefica, witch; as if he had enchanted Caesar. Augustus raised Agrippa (though of mean birth) to that height, as when he consulted with Maecenas, about the marriage of his daughter Julia, Maecenas took the liberty to tell him, that he must either marry his daughter to Agrippa, or take away his life; there was no third way, he had made him so great. With Tiberius Caesar, Sejanus had ascended to that height, as they two were termed, and reckoned, as a pair of friends. Tiberius in a letter to him saith, Haec pro amicitia nostra non occultavi; and the whole senate dedicated an altar to Friendship, as to a goddess, in respect of the great dearness of friendship, between them two. The like, or more, was between Septimius Severus and Plautianus. For he forced his eldest son to marry the daughter of Plautianus; and would often maintain Plautianus, in doing affronts to his son; and did write also in a letter to the senate, by these words: I love the man so well, as I wish he may over-live me. Now if these princes had been as a Trajan, or a Marcus Aurelius, a man might have thought that this had proceeded of an abundant goodness of nature; but being men so wise, of such strength and severity of mind, and so extreme lovers of themselves, as all these were, it proveth most plainly that they found their own felicity (though as great as ever happened to mortal men) but as an half piece, except they mought have a friend, to make it entire; and yet, which is more, they were princes that had wives, sons, nephews; and yet all these could not supply the comfort of friendship.

L. Sylla, when he was in charge of Rome, promoted Pompey (later known as Pompey the Great) to such a position that Pompey boasted he was better than Sylla. After Pompey secured the consulship for a friend of his despite Sylla's opposition, and Sylla showed some annoyance and began to make threats, Pompey quickly pushed back, essentially telling him to be quiet; more people admire the rising sun than the setting sun. With Julius Caesar, Decimus Brutus had gained such favor that he was named in Caesar's will as the heir after his nephew. This was the man who had enough influence to lead Caesar to his death. When Caesar wanted to dismiss the senate due to some bad omens, particularly a dream from Calpurnia, Brutus gently pulled him up by the arm from his chair, telling him he hoped he wouldn’t dismiss the senate until Calpurnia had a better dream. It seemed Brutus had such favor that Antonius referred to him as a witch in a letter quoted verbatim in one of Cicero's Philippics, suggesting he had bewitched Caesar. Augustus elevated Agrippa (despite his humble origins) to such an extent that when he consulted with Maecenas about marrying his daughter Julia, Maecenas boldly told him he had to either marry Julia to Agrippa or kill him; there was no other option given Agrippa's power. With Tiberius Caesar, Sejanus rose to such a level that they were considered close friends. In a letter to him, Tiberius said, "I have not hidden this for the sake of our friendship," and the entire senate dedicated an altar to Friendship, treating it as a goddess due to their deep bond. A similar or even stronger relationship existed between Septimius Severus and Plautianus. He forced his oldest son to marry Plautianus's daughter and frequently supported Plautianus in insulting his son. He even wrote to the senate saying, "I care for the man so much that I wish he outlives me." If these leaders had been like Trajan or Marcus Aurelius, one might think their actions stemmed from a natural goodness; however, since they were all wise, strong, and intensely self-loving, it clearly shows they felt their own happiness (though as great as any mortal's) was only half of what it could be unless they had a friend to make it whole; and even more striking is the fact that these leaders had wives, sons, and nephews, yet none of these could provide the comfort of friendship.

It is not to be forgotten, what Comineus observeth of his first master, Duke Charles the Hardy, namely, that he would communicate his secrets with none; and least of all, those secrets which troubled him most. Whereupon he goeth on, and saith that towards his latter time, that closeness did impair, and a little perish his understanding. Surely Comineus mought have made the same judgment also, if it had pleased him, of his second master, Lewis the Eleventh, whose closeness was indeed his tormentor. The parable of Pythagoras is dark, but true; Cor ne edito; Eat not the heart. Certainly, if a man would give it a hard phrase, those that want friends, to open themselves unto, are cannibals of their own hearts. But one thing is most admirable (wherewith I will conclude this first fruit of friendship), which is, that this communicating of a man's self to his friend, works two contrary effects; for it redoubleth joys, and cutteth griefs in halves. For there is no man, that imparteth his joys to his friend, but he joyeth the more; and no man that imparteth his griefs to his friend, but he grieveth the less. So that it is in truth, of operation upon a man's mind, of like virtue as the alchemists use to attribute to their stone, for man's body; that it worketh all contrary effects, but still to the good and benefit of nature. But yet without praying in aid of alchemists, there is a manifest image of this, in the ordinary course of nature. For in bodies, union strengtheneth and cherisheth any natural action; and on the other side, weakeneth and dulleth any violent impression: and even so it is of minds.

It shouldn't be overlooked what Comineus says about his first master, Duke Charles the Bold, that he kept his secrets to himself, especially the ones that troubled him the most. He goes on to say that in his later years, this secrecy weakened and somewhat deteriorated his understanding. Certainly, Comineus could have made the same observation about his second master, Louis the Eleventh, whose secrecy was indeed a source of torment for him. The saying of Pythagoras is obscure but true: "Cor ne edito," which means "Eat not the heart." Truly, if one wanted to put it bluntly, those who lack friends to confide in are like cannibals of their own hearts. However, one remarkable thing I want to highlight (where I will end this first exploration of friendship) is that sharing oneself with a friend has two opposite effects: it doubles joy and halves grief. No one who shares their joys with a friend fails to feel even happier; and no one who shares their grief with a friend fails to feel less sorrowful. So, it's genuinely effective for a person's mind, similar to what alchemists attribute to their stone for the human body, as it brings about contrary effects, yet always for the good and benefit of nature. Moreover, without calling on alchemists for support, there’s a clear reflection of this in the usual processes of nature. In physical bodies, unity strengthens and nurtures any natural function, while on the flip side, it weakens and dulls any intense impact; and the same is true for minds.

The second fruit of friendship, is healthful and sovereign for the understanding, as the first is for the affections. For friendship maketh indeed a fair day in the affections, from storm and tempests; but it maketh daylight in the understanding, out of darkness, and confusion of thoughts. Neither is this to be understood only of faithful counsel, which a man receiveth from his friend; but before you come to that, certain it is, that whosoever hath his mind fraught with many thoughts, his wits and understanding do clarify and break up, in the communicating and discoursing with another; he tosseth his thoughts more easily; he marshalleth them more orderly, he seeth how they look when they are turned into words: finally, he waxeth wiser than himself; and that more by an hour's discourse, than by a day's meditation. It was well said by Themistocles, to the king of Persia, That speech was like cloth of Arras, opened and put abroad; whereby the imagery doth appear in figure; whereas in thoughts they lie but as in packs. Neither is this second fruit of friendship, in opening the understanding, restrained only to such friends as are able to give a man counsel; (they indeed are best;) but even without that, a man learneth of himself, and bringeth his own thoughts to light, and whetteth his wits as against a stone, which itself cuts not. In a word, a man were better relate himself to a statua, or picture, than to suffer his thoughts to pass in smother.

The second benefit of friendship is that it’s healthy and powerful for the mind, just as the first benefit is for our emotions. Friendship really does create a beautiful day in our feelings, soothing stormy weather; but it also brings clarity to our understanding, dispelling darkness and confusion of thought. This isn’t just about getting helpful advice from a friend; before you even reach that point, it’s clear that anyone whose mind is filled with many thoughts finds that talking things over with someone else helps clear and unravel those thoughts. It makes it easier to sort through them, organize them, and see how they sound when expressed in words. Ultimately, a person becomes wiser from an hour of conversation than from a day's worth of deep thinking. Themistocles wisely told the king of Persia that speech is like an open tapestry, displaying its imagery clearly, while thoughts remain bundled up. Also, this second benefit of friendship in clarifying understanding isn’t limited to those friends who can offer advice (though they are the best); even without that, a person learns about himself, brings his thoughts into the light, and sharpens his mind like a blade against a stone that doesn’t cut itself. In short, a person would be better off relating to a statue or a picture than letting their thoughts lie buried.

Add now, to make this second fruit of friendship complete, that other point, which lieth more open, and falleth within vulgar observation; which is faithful counsel from a friend. Heraclitus saith well in one of his enigmas, Dry light is ever the best. And certain it is, that the light that a man receiveth by counsel from another, is drier and purer, than that which cometh from his own understanding and judgment; which is ever infused, and drenched, in his affections and customs. So as there is as much difference between the counsel, that a friend giveth, and that a man giveth himself, as there is between the counsel of a friend, and of a flatterer. For there is no such flatterer as is a man's self; and there is no such remedy against flattery of a man's self, as the liberty of a friend. Counsel is of two sorts: the one concerning manners, the other concerning business. For the first, the best preservative to keep the mind in health, is the faithful admonition of a friend. The calling of a man's self to a strict account, is a medicine, sometime too piercing and corrosive. Reading good books of morality, is a little flat and dead. Observing our faults in others, is sometimes improper for our case. But the best receipt (best, I say, to work, and best to take) is the admonition of a friend. It is a strange thing to behold, what gross errors and extreme absurdities many (especially of the greater sort) do commit, for want of a friend to tell them of them; to the great damage both of their fame and fortune: for, as St. James saith, they are as men that look sometimes into a glass, and presently forget their own shape and favor. As for business, a man may think, if he win, that two eyes see no more than one; or that a gamester seeth always more than a looker-on; or that a man in anger, is as wise as he that hath said over the four and twenty letters; or that a musket may be shot off as well upon the arm, as upon a rest; and such other fond and high imaginations, to think himself all in all. But when all is done, the help of good counsel, is that which setteth business straight. And if any man think that he will take counsel, but it shall be by pieces; asking counsel in one business, of one man, and in another business, of another man; it is well (that is to say, better, perhaps, than if he asked none at all); but he runneth two dangers: one, that he shall not be faithfully counselled; for it is a rare thing, except it be from a perfect and entire friend, to have counsel given, but such as shall be bowed and crooked to some ends, which he hath, that giveth it. The other, that he shall have counsel given, hurtful and unsafe (though with good meaning), and mixed partly of mischief and partly of remedy; even as if you would call a physician, that is thought good for the cure of the disease you complain of, but is unacquainted with your body; and therefore may put you in way for a present cure, but overthroweth your health in some other kind; and so cure the disease, and kill the patient. But a friend that is wholly acquainted with a man's estate, will beware, by furthering any present business, how he dasheth upon other inconvenience. And therefore rest not upon scattered counsels; they will rather distract and mislead, than settle and direct.

Now, to complete this second benefit of friendship, let's talk about another point that's more obvious and commonly noticed: receiving honest advice from a friend. Heraclitus wisely said in one of his riddles, "Dry light is always the best." It's true that the insight we gain from advice given by someone else is clearer and purer than what comes from our own understanding and judgment, which is always influenced and clouded by personal feelings and habits. There’s a significant difference between a friend’s advice and the advice we give ourselves, just as there is a difference between the counsel of a friend and that of a flatterer. No flatterer can be as effective as our own self, and there’s no better remedy for self-flattery than the honesty of a friend. Advice comes in two forms: one related to behavior and the other related to practical matters. In terms of behavior, the best way to keep our minds healthy is through the honest feedback of a friend. Holding ourselves to account can be harsh and painful. Reading good moral books can feel dull and lifeless. Observing our faults in others might not apply to us at all. But the best remedy—both the most effective and the most acceptable—is a friend’s honest feedback. It’s astonishing to see how many serious mistakes and ridiculous errors people (especially those in higher positions) make due to the lack of a friend willing to point them out, causing great harm to their reputation and fortune; as St. James says, they are like people who look in a mirror and immediately forget what they look like. As for practical matters, one might mistakenly believe that two eyes see no more than one, or that a player sees more than an observer, or that someone who is angry is as wise as someone who can recite the alphabet, or that a gun can be fired just as well while being held as when resting on a support. Such foolish thoughts can lead to a deluded sense of superiority. However, at the end of the day, it’s good advice that straightens out issues. If someone thinks they can take advice piecemeal—asking one person for advice on one matter and another person on a different matter—that's okay (probably better than asking no one at all), but it comes with two risks: first, they may not get honest advice, as it’s rare to receive truly straightforward counsel unless it comes from a genuine and complete friend; in most cases, the advice given will be slanted to suit the agenda of the person giving it. Second, they may receive advice that’s harmful and risky (even though well-intentioned), mixing good and bad advice, much like calling a doctor who seems suited to treat your condition but isn’t familiar with your body, which may lead to immediate relief but ultimately worsens your overall health. A true friend who understands your situation will make sure that focusing on one immediate issue doesn’t create further problems. Therefore, don’t rely on scattered advice; it will confuse and mislead you instead of helping to settle and guide you.

After these two noble fruits of friendship (peace in the affections, and support of the judgment), followeth the last fruit; which is like the pomegranate, full of many kernels; I mean aid, and bearing a part, in all actions and occasions. Here the best way to represent to life the manifold use of friendship, is to cast and see how many things there are, which a man cannot do himself; and then it will appear, that it was a sparing speech of the ancients, to say, that a friend is another himself; for that a friend is far more than himself. Men have their time, and die many times, in desire of some things which they principally take to heart; the bestowing of a child, the finishing of a work, or the like. If a man have a true friend, he may rest almost secure that the care of those things will continue after him. So that a man hath, as it were, two lives in his desires. A man hath a body, and that body is confined to a place; but where friendship is, all offices of life are as it were granted to him, and his deputy. For he may exercise them by his friend. How many things are there which a man cannot, with any face or comeliness, say or do himself? A man can scarce allege his own merits with modesty, much less extol them; a man cannot sometimes brook to supplicate or beg; and a number of the like. But all these things are graceful, in a friend's mouth, which are blushing in a man's own. So again, a man's person hath many proper relations, which he cannot put off. A man cannot speak to his son but as a father; to his wife but as a husband; to his enemy but upon terms: whereas a friend may speak as the case requires, and not as it sorteth with the person. But to enumerate these things were endless; I have given the rule, where a man cannot fitly play his own part; if he have not a friend, he may quit the stage.

After these two valuable aspects of friendship (emotional peace and support of judgment), we come to the final aspect, which is like a pomegranate, full of many seeds; I mean assistance and sharing in all actions and occasions. The best way to depict the diverse benefits of friendship is to consider how many things a person cannot do alone; it becomes clear that it was a wise saying by the ancients to state that a friend is another self, for a friend is much more than just an extension of oneself. People have their own time and often experience many disappointments in pursuits that they deeply care about; whether it’s raising a child, completing a project, or similar tasks. If someone has a true friend, they can feel somewhat assured that these concerns will be looked after even after they are gone. So, in a way, a person has two lives in their ambitions. A person has a body, which is limited to one place; but where there is friendship, all aspects of life seem to be accessible to him and his representative. He can fulfill these through his friend. How many things are there that one cannot, with any dignity or charm, say or do for oneself? It's hard to modestly mention one’s own achievements, let alone boast about them; sometimes one struggles to ask for help or beg; and there are many similar situations. But all these actions seem acceptable coming from a friend, which would be embarrassing if spoken by oneself. Likewise, a person has many personal relationships that cannot be easily dismissed. One cannot speak to their child except as a parent; to their spouse only as a partner; to their enemy only under certain conditions: while a friend can speak based on the situation and not according to the relationship involved. To list all these examples would be endless; I’ve provided the guideline where one cannot suitably play their own role; if they don’t have a friend, they might as well leave the stage.





Of Expense

RICHES are for spending, and spending for honor and good actions. Therefore extraordinary expense must be limited by the worth of the occasion; for voluntary undoing, may be as well for a man's country, as for the kingdom of heaven. But ordinary expense, ought to be limited by a man's estate; and governed with such regard, as it be within his compass; and not subject to deceit and abuse of servants; and ordered to the best show, that the bills may be less than the estimation abroad. Certainly, if a man will keep but of even hand, his ordinary expenses ought to be but to the half of his receipts; and if he think to wax rich, but to the third part. It is no baseness, for the greatest to descend and look into their own estate. Some forbear it, not upon negligence alone, but doubting to bring themselves into melancholy, in respect they shall find it broken. But wounds cannot be cured without searching. He that cannot look into his own estate at all, had need both choose well those whom he employeth, and change them often; for new are more timorous and less subtle. He that can look into his estate but seldom, it behooveth him to turn all to certainties. A man had need, if he be plentiful in some kind of expense, to be as saving again in some other. As if he be plentiful in diet, to be saving in apparel; if he be plentiful in the hall, to be saving in the stable; and the like. For he that is plentiful in expenses of all kinds, will hardly be preserved from decay. In clearing of a man's estate, he may as well hurt himself in being too sudden, as in letting it run on too long. For hasty selling, is commonly as disadvantageable as interest. Besides, he that clears at once will relapse; for finding himself out of straits, he will revert to his custom: but he that cleareth by degrees, induceth a habit of frugality, and gaineth as well upon his mind, as upon his estate. Certainly, who hath a state to repair, may not despise small things; and commonly it is less dishonorable, to abridge petty charges, than to stoop to petty gettings. A man ought warily to begin charges which once begun will continue; but in matters that return not, he may be more magnificent.

WEALTH is meant to be spent, and spending should be for honor and good deeds. Therefore, extraordinary expenses should be limited to the value of the occasion, since voluntary loss can benefit a man's country as much as the kingdom of heaven. However, regular expenses should be limited by a person's means, managed thoughtfully to ensure they are within reach and not susceptible to deceit or misuse by servants, and organized in a way that expenses appear less than expected. Certainly, if a person wants to keep a balanced budget, their regular expenses should be no more than half of their income; and if they hope to get rich, only a third. It's not shameful for those in high positions to check on their own finances. Some avoid this, not just out of negligence, but fearing that they might find their situation is worse than they thought. But wounds can't be healed without examination. A person who can’t look into their own finances at all needs to choose their employees carefully and change them often, as newcomers tend to be more cautious and less clever. Someone who only occasionally checks their finances should make everything as certain as possible. If a person tends to overspend in one area, they should cut back in another; for instance, if they indulge in food, they should save on clothing; if they spend a lot in the dining room, they should save in the stables, and so on. Those who spend excessively in all areas will find it hard to avoid financial decline. In managing one’s finances, acting too quickly can be as harmful as dragging it out for too long. Quick sales are often as disadvantageous as accruing interest. Moreover, someone who clears everything at once may fall back into their old habits after feeling relief, while someone who makes gradual changes fosters a habit of frugality, benefiting both their mindset and their finances. Certainly, those with financial issues should not overlook small matters; usually, it's less shameful to cut small expenses than to resort to minor earnings. A person should be cautious when starting expenses that will keep going once begun, but they can be more extravagant in matters that don’t recur.





Of the True Greatness Of Kingdoms And Estates

THE speech of Themistocles the Athenian, which was haughty and arrogant, in taking so much to himself, had been a grave and wise observation and censure, applied at large to others. Desired at a feast to touch a lute, he said, He could not fiddle, but yet he could make a small town, a great city. These words (holpen a little with a metaphor) may express two differing abilities, in those that deal in business of estate. For if a true survey be taken of counsellors and statesmen, there may be found (though rarely) those which can make a small state great, and yet cannot fiddle; as on the other side, there will be found a great many, that can fiddle very cunningly, but yet are so far from being able to make a small state great, as their gift lieth the other way; to bring a great and flourishing estate, to ruin and decay. And certainly whose degenerate arts and shifts, whereby many counsellors and governors gain both favor with their masters, and estimation with the vulgar, deserve no better name than fiddling; being things rather pleasing for the time, and graceful to themselves only, than tending to the weal and advancement of the state which they serve. There are also (no doubt) counsellors and governors which may be held sufficient (negotiis pares), able to manage affairs, and to keep them from precipices and manifest inconveniences; which nevertheless are far from the ability to raise and amplify an estate in power, means, and fortune. But be the workmen what they may be, let us speak of the work; that is, the true greatness of kingdoms and estates, and the means thereof. An argument fit for great and mighty princes to have in their hand; to the end that neither by over-measuring their forces, they leese themselves in vain enterprises; nor on the other side, by undervaluing them, they descend to fearful and pusillanimous counsels.

The speech of Themistocles, the Athenian, which was boastful and proud, had a serious and wise observation and criticism that applied broadly to others. When asked at a feast to play the lute, he replied that he couldn’t play, but he could turn a small town into a large city. These words (a bit metaphorical) highlight two different skill sets in those involved in governance. If you take an honest look at advisors and politicians, you can find (though rarely) those who can elevate a small state to greatness, but cannot play an instrument; conversely, there are many who can play very skillfully, yet lack the ability to grow a small state, as their talents lead the other way, driving a prosperous estate into ruin and decay. Certainly, the underhanded tactics and schemes that many advisors and leaders use to gain favor with their bosses and approval from the public deserve no better name than "fiddling"; they are often just enjoyable for the moment and pleasing to themselves, rather than contributing to the welfare and advancement of the state they serve. There are also surely advisors and leaders deemed capable, able to handle affairs and prevent crises and obvious problems, yet they are still far from the ability to enhance the power, resources, and status of a state. Regardless of the workers' capabilities, let’s focus on the work itself; that is, the true greatness of kingdoms and nations, and the ways to achieve it. This is a topic that should be in the hands of great and powerful princes, so that they neither overestimate their capabilities and get lost in pointless ventures, nor underestimate them and resort to fearful and timid strategies.

The greatness of an estate, in bulk and territory, doth fall under measure; and the greatness of finances and revenue, doth fall under computation. The population may appear by musters; and the number and greatness of cities and towns by cards and maps. But yet there is not any thing amongst civil affairs more subject to error, than the right valuation and true judgment concerning the power and forces of an estate. The kingdom of heaven is compared, not to any great kernel or nut, but to a grain of mustard-seed: which is one of the least grains, but hath in it a property and spirit hastily to get up and spread. So are there states, great in territory, and yet not apt to enlarge or command; and some that have but a small dimension of stem, and yet apt to be the foundations of great monarchies.

The greatness of an estate, in terms of size and land, can be measured; and the greatness of finances and income can be calculated. Population can be assessed through censuses; and the number and size of cities and towns can be shown on maps. However, there is nothing in civil affairs that is more prone to error than the accurate valuation and true assessment of an estate's power and resources. The kingdom of heaven is compared not to a large kernel or nut, but to a grain of mustard seed: which is one of the smallest seeds, yet has the ability and energy to quickly grow and spread. Similarly, there are states that are large in land but are not capable of expanding or exerting control, and others that may have a small size yet serve as the foundation for great empires.

Walled towns, stored arsenals and armories, goodly races of horse, chariots of war, elephants, ordnance, artillery, and the like; all this is but a sheep in a lion's skin, except the breed and disposition of the people, be stout and warlike. Nay, number (itself) in armies importeth not much, where the people is of weak courage; for (as Virgil saith) It never troubles a wolf, how many the sheep be. The army of the Persians, in the plains of Arbela, was such a vast sea of people, as it did somewhat astonish the commanders in Alexander's army; who came to him therefore, and wished him to set upon them by night; and he answered, He would not pilfer the victory. And the defeat was easy. When Tigranes the Armenian, being encamped upon a hill with four hundred thousand men, discovered the army of the Romans, being not above fourteen thousand, marching towards him, he made himself merry with it, and said, Yonder men are too many for an embassage, and too few for a fight. But before the sun set, he found them enow to give him the chase with infinite slaughter. Many are the examples of the great odds, between number and courage; so that a man may truly make a judgment, that the principal point of greatness in any state, is to have a race of military men. Neither is money the sinews of war (as it is trivially said), where the sinews of men's arms, in base and effeminate people, are failing. For Solon said well to Croesus (when in ostentation he showed him his gold), Sir, if any other come, that hath better iron, than you, he will be master of all this gold. Therefore let any prince or state think solely of his forces, except his militia of natives be of good and valiant soldiers. And let princes, on the other side, that have subjects of martial disposition, know their own strength; unless they be otherwise wanting unto themselves. As for mercenary forces (which is the help in this case), all examples show, that whatsoever estate or prince doth rest upon them, he may spread his feathers for a time, but he will mew them soon after.

Walled towns, stocked arsenals and armories, good breeds of horses, war chariots, elephants, cannons, artillery, and the like—all of this is just a sheep in a lion's skin, unless the people themselves are brave and ready for battle. In fact, having a large army doesn't mean much if the soldiers have weak courage; for, as Virgil said, a wolf isn't bothered by how many sheep there are. The Persian army at the plains of Arbela was such a massive sea of people that it surprised the commanders in Alexander's army, who came to him suggesting they attack at night. He replied that he wouldn't steal the victory, and the defeat was easy. When Tigranes the Armenian was camped on a hill with four hundred thousand men and spotted the Roman army, which had only about fourteen thousand approaching, he laughed and said, "Those guys are too many for a messenger and too few for a fight." But by the time the sun set, he found they were enough to chase him down with immense slaughter. There are many examples showing the great difference between numbers and courage, so one can genuinely conclude that the key to greatness in any state is to have a strong military class. Money isn't the main support of war (as people often say) where the strength of men's arms in weak and effeminate people is lacking. As Solon wisely said to Croesus (when he ostentatiously displayed his gold), "Sir, if someone comes along with better iron than yours, he’ll take all that gold." Therefore, any prince or state should focus solely on its military, unless its native militia consists of strong and valiant soldiers. And for princes who have subjects with a martial spirit, they should understand their own strength; otherwise, they will be lacking in themselves. As for mercenary forces (which are helpful in this context), all examples show that whatever estate or prince relies on them may seem successful for a time, but they will soon lose that advantage.

The blessing of Judah and Issachar will never meet; that the same people, or nation, should be both the lion's whelp and the ass between burthens; neither will it be, that a people overlaid with taxes, should ever become valiant and martial. It is true that taxes levied by consent of the estate, do abate men's courage less: as it hath been seen notably, in the excises of the Low Countries; and, in some degree, in the subsidies of England. For you must note, that we speak now of the heart, and not of the purse. So that although the same tribute and tax, laid by consent or by imposing, be all one to the purse, yet it works diversely upon the courage. So that you may conclude, that no people overcharged with tribute, is fit for empire.

The blessing of Judah and Issachar will never coexist; the same people, or nation, cannot be both the lion’s cub and the burdened donkey. Nor will a nation weighed down by taxes ever become brave and warrior-like. It’s true that taxes imposed with the agreement of the people affect courage less; this has been notably seen in the excise taxes in the Low Countries and, to some extent, in the subsidies in England. What you need to understand is that we’re talking about the spirit, not the finances. So, even though the same tax, whether agreed upon or enforced, might be the same in terms of money, it has different effects on courage. Therefore, you can conclude that no nation excessively burdened by taxes is suitable for leadership.

Let states that aim at greatness, take heed how their nobility and gentlemen do multiply too fast. For that maketh the common subject, grow to be a peasant and base swain, driven out of heart, and in effect but the gentleman's laborer. Even as you may see in coppice woods; if you leave your staddles too thick, you shall never have clean underwood, but shrubs and bushes. So in countries, if the gentlemen be too many, the commons will be base; and you will bring it to that, that not the hundred poll, will be fit for an helmet; especially as to the infantry, which is the nerve of an army; and so there will be great population, and little strength. This which I speak of, hath been nowhere better seen, than by comparing of England and France; whereof England, though far less in territory and population, hath been (nevertheless) an overmatch; in regard the middle people of England make good soldiers, which the peasants of France do not. And herein the device of king Henry the Seventh (whereof I have spoken largely in the History of his Life) was profound and admirable; in making farms and houses of husbandry of a standard; that is, maintained with such a proportion of land unto them, as may breed a subject to live in convenient plenty and no servile condition; and to keep the plough in the hands of the owners, and not mere hirelings. And thus indeed you shall attain to Virgil's character which he gives to ancient Italy:

Let states that want to achieve greatness pay attention to how fast their nobility and gentlemen are multiplying. This causes the average person to become a peasant and a lowly worker, disheartened, and in reality, just a laborer for the gentlemen. It’s like in coppice woods; if you let your undergrowth grow too thick, you’ll end up with only shrubs and bushes instead of clean underwood. Similarly, in countries, if there are too many gentlemen, the common people will be of lower status, leading to a situation where not a hundred men will be fit for a helmet, especially the infantry, which is the backbone of an army. This results in a large population but little strength. This point is best illustrated by comparing England and France; even though England is much smaller in land and population, it has still proven to be stronger because the middle class in England makes better soldiers, which the French peasants do not. King Henry the Seventh's approach (which I have discussed in detail in his Biography) was wise and impressive; he established farmhouses and agricultural lands at a set standard, maintaining a balance of land that allows citizens to live comfortably without being in servitude, while ensuring that the plow remains in the hands of landowners rather than mere hired workers. By doing this, you will indeed capture Virgil's description of ancient Italy:

Terra potens armis atque ubere glebae.

Terra, rich in weapons and fertile soil.

Neither is that state (which, for any thing I know, is almost peculiar to England, and hardly to be found anywhere else, except it be perhaps in Poland) to be passed over; I mean the state of free servants, and attendants upon noblemen and gentlemen; which are no ways inferior unto the yeomanry for arms. And therefore out of all questions, the splendor and magnificence, and great retinues and hospitality, of noblemen and gentlemen, received into custom, doth much conduce unto martial greatness. Whereas, contrariwise, the close and reserved living of noblemen and gentlemen, causeth a penury of military forces.

That situation (which, as far as I know, is almost unique to England and rarely found elsewhere, possibly only in Poland) shouldn't be overlooked. I'm talking about the situation of free servants and attendants to noblemen and gentlemen, who are no less capable in arms than yeomen. Therefore, it's clear that the splendor, magnificence, large retinues, and hospitality of noblemen and gentlemen play a significant role in fostering military strength. On the other hand, the secluded and reserved lifestyles of noblemen and gentlemen lead to a shortage of military forces.

By all means it is to be procured, that the trunk of Nebuchadnezzar's tree of monarchy, be great enough to bear the branches and the boughs; that is, that the natural subjects of the crown or state, bear a sufficient proportion to the stranger subjects, that they govern. Therefore all states that are liberal of naturalization towards strangers, are fit for empire. For to think that an handful of people can, with the greatest courage and policy in the world, embrace too large extent of dominion, it may hold for a time, but it will fail suddenly. The Spartans were a nice people in point of naturalization; whereby, while they kept their compass, they stood firm; but when they did spread, and their boughs were becomen too great for their stem, they became a windfall, upon the sudden. Never any state was in this point so open to receive strangers into their body, as were the Romans. Therefore it sorted with them accordingly; for they grew to the greatest monarchy. Their manner was to grant naturalization (which they called jus civitatis), and to grant it in the highest degree; that is, not only jus commercii, jus connubii, jus haereditatis; but also jus suffragii, and jus honorum. And this not to singular persons alone, but likewise to whole families; yea to cities, and sometimes to nations. Add to this their custom of plantation of colonies; whereby the Roman plant was removed into the soil of other nations. And putting both constitutions together, you will say that it was not the Romans that spread upon the world, but it was the world that spread upon the Romans; and that was the sure way of greatness. I have marvelled, sometimes, at Spain, how they clasp and contain so large dominions, with so few natural Spaniards; but sure the whole compass of Spain, is a very great body of a tree; far above Rome and Sparta at the first. And besides, though they have not had that usage, to naturalize liberally, yet they have that which is next to it; that is, to employ, almost indifferently, all nations in their militia of ordinary soldiers; yea, and sometimes in their highest commands. Nay, it seemeth at this instant they are sensible, of this want of natives; as by the Pragmatical Sanction, now published, appeareth.

It's essential to ensure that the foundation of Nebuchadnezzar's tree of monarchy is strong enough to support the branches and boughs. This means that the natural subjects of the crown or state should be in a sufficient proportion to the foreign subjects they govern. Therefore, all states that are welcoming towards naturalization of foreigners are suitable for an empire. Believing that a small group of people can, with all their courage and strategy, handle a vast territory may work for a while, but it will eventually break down. The Spartans were very selective about naturalization; as long as they stayed within their limits, they remained strong. However, when they expanded and their branches grew too large for their trunk, they faced sudden collapse. No state was as open to incorporating foreigners as the Romans were, which led them to become the greatest empire. Their approach to naturalization (which they called jus civitatis) was comprehensive; they granted not just rights to trade, marriage, and inheritance, but also voting and honorific rights. This wasn't just extended to individuals but also to entire families, cities, and sometimes even nations. Additionally, they had the practice of establishing colonies, which allowed Roman influence to spread into other lands. When considering both strategies, it becomes clear that it wasn't the Romans who forced their presence on the world; rather, the world integrated into the Roman framework, which was a solid path to greatness. I've often wondered how Spain manages to maintain such vast territories with so few native Spaniards; indeed, the entire reach of Spain is a massive structure, far larger than what Rome and Sparta initially experienced. Moreover, even though they haven't historically had such a generous approach to naturalization, they do employ nearly all nations in their military forces, even at high levels of command. It seems that they are aware of their lack of natives, as indicated by the recently published Pragmatical Sanction.

It is certain that sedentary, and within-door arts, and delicate manufactures (that require rather the finger than the arm), have, in their nature, a contrariety to a military disposition. And generally, all warlike people are a little idle, and love danger better than travail. Neither must they be too much broken of it, if they shall be preserved in vigor. Therefore it was great advantage, in the ancient states of Sparta, Athens, Rome, and others, that they had the use of slaves, which commonly did rid those manufactures. But that is abolished, in greatest part, by the Christian law. That which cometh nearest to it, is to leave those arts chiefly to strangers (which, for that purpose, are the more easily to be received), and to contain the principal bulk of the vulgar natives, within those three kinds,—tillers of the ground; free servants; and handicraftsmen of strong and manly arts, as smiths, masons, carpenters, etc.; not reckoning professed soldiers.

It's clear that sedentary, indoor activities and delicate crafts (which rely more on the fingers than on strength) naturally conflict with a military mindset. Generally, all warriors tend to be a bit lazy and prefer danger over hard work. They shouldn't be overly restrained from this, if they want to stay strong. This is why it was a huge advantage in ancient states like Sparta, Athens, Rome, and others to have slaves who typically handled those tasks. However, this practice has largely been discontinued due to Christian law. What comes closest to this now is leaving those crafts mainly to outsiders (who can be more easily influenced for this purpose) and keeping the majority of the local people focused on three main roles: farmers, free laborers, and skilled tradespeople engaged in robust and manly crafts like blacksmithing, masonry, carpentry, etc.; excluding professional soldiers.

But above all, for empire and greatness, it importeth most, that a nation do profess arms, as their principal honor, study, and occupation. For the things which we formerly have spoken of, are but habilitations towards arms; and what is habilitation without intention and act? Romulus, after his death (as they report or feign), sent a present to the Romans, that above all, they should intend arms; and then they should prove the greatest empire of the world. The fabric of the state of Sparta was wholly (though not wisely) framed and composed, to that scope and end. The Persians and Macedonians had it for a flash. The Gauls, Germans, Goths, Saxons, Normans, and others, had it for a time. The Turks have it at this day, though in great declination. Of Christian Europe, they that have it are, in effect, only the Spaniards. But it is so plain, that every man profiteth in that, he most intendeth, that it needeth not to be stood upon. It is enough to point at it; that no nation which doth not directly profess arms, may look to have greatness fall into their mouths. And on the other side, it is a most certain oracle of time, that those states that continue long in that profession (as the Romans and Turks principally have done) do wonders. And those that have professed arms but for an age, have, notwithstanding, commonly attained that greatness, in that age, which maintained them long after, when their profession and exercise of arms hath grown to decay.

But above all, for an empire and greatness, it’s most important that a nation makes arms their main honor, study, and occupation. The things we talked about earlier are just preparations for arms; and what is preparation without intention and action? Romulus, after his death (as the story goes), sent a message to the Romans that they should focus on arms above all else; then they would achieve the greatest empire in the world. The structure of the Spartan state was entirely (though not wisely) built for that purpose. The Persians and Macedonians had it briefly. The Gauls, Germans, Goths, Saxons, Normans, and others had it for a time. The Turks have it even today, though it’s in significant decline. Among Christian Europe, those who have it are basically just the Spaniards. But it’s so obvious that everyone benefits from what they focus on most, that it doesn't need much explanation. It’s enough to point out that no nation that doesn’t directly commit to arms should expect greatness to fall into their hands. On the other hand, it’s a well-known truth that those states that stick with the profession of arms for a long time (like the Romans and Turks primarily have) achieve amazing feats. And those that have only embraced arms for a short time have still generally reached a level of greatness during that time, which has continued long after when their commitment and practice of arms has started to decline.

Incident to this point is, for a state to have those laws or customs, which may reach forth unto them just occasions (as may be pretended) of war. For there is that justice, imprinted in the nature of men, that they enter not upon wars (whereof so many calamities do ensue) but upon some, at the least specious, grounds and quarrels. The Turk hath at hand, for cause of war, the propagation of his law or sect; a quarrel that he may always command. The Romans, though they esteemed the extending the limits of their empire, to be great honor to their generals, when it was done, yet they never rested upon that alone, to begin a war. First, therefore, let nations that pretend to greatness have this; that they be sensible of wrongs, either upon borderers, merchants, or politic ministers; and that they sit not too long upon a provocation. Secondly, let them be prest, and ready to give aids and succors, to their confederates; as it ever was with the Romans; insomuch, as if the confederate had leagues defensive, with divers other states, and, upon invasion offered, did implore their aids severally, yet the Romans would ever be the foremost, and leave it to none other to have the honor. As for the wars which were anciently made, on the behalf of a kind of party, or tacit conformity of estate, I do not see how they may be well justified: as when the Romans made a war, for the liberty of Grecia; or when the Lacedaemonians and Athenians, made wars to set up or pull down democracies and oligarchies; or when wars were made by foreigners, under the pretence of justice or protection, to deliver the subjects of others, from tyranny and oppression; and the like. Let it suffice, that no estate expect to be great, that is not awake upon any just occasion of arming.

Related to this point is the idea that a state should have laws or customs that address legitimate reasons (as might be claimed) for going to war. There is a sense of justice inherent in human nature that people do not embark on wars (which bring about so many disasters) without at least somewhat believable grounds for conflict. The Turk has at his disposal the justification for war through the spread of his law or religion; a reason he can always rely on. The Romans valued expanding their empire as a significant honor for their generals, but they never solely based their decisions to start a war on that. First, nations that claim to be great should be aware of wrongs, whether against their borders, merchants, or political representatives, and not let provocations linger for too long. Secondly, they should be prepared and ready to provide support to their allies, as the Romans always were; so much so that if an ally had defense agreements with various other states, and sought their help during an invasion, the Romans would always be the first to respond, ensuring that they alone received the honor. As for the wars fought in ancient times on behalf of certain groups, or through implied support, I don’t see how they can be justified: such as when the Romans waged war for Greece's freedom; or when the Spartans and Athenians fought to establish or dismantle democracies and oligarchies; or when foreign powers initiated conflicts under the guise of justice or protection, claiming to free other subjects from tyranny and oppression. It suffices to say that no state can expect to be great if it is not vigilant about just reasons for taking up arms.

No body can be healthful without exercise, neither natural body nor politic; and certainly to a kingdom or estate, a just and honorable war, is the true exercise. A civil war, indeed, is like the heat of a fever; but a foreign war is like the heat of exercise, and serveth to keep the body in health; for in a slothful peace, both courages will effeminate, and manners corrupt. But howsoever it be for happiness, without all question, for greatness, it maketh to be still for the most part in arms; and the strength of a veteran army (though it be a chargeable business) always on foot, is that which commonly giveth the law, or at least the reputation, amongst all neighbor states; as may well be seen in Spain, which hath had, in one part or other, a veteran army almost continually, now by the space of six score years.

No one can stay healthy without exercise, whether in the body or in the state; and for a kingdom or territory, a just and honorable war is the real workout. A civil war is like having a fever; but a foreign war is like exercising, helping to keep the body healthy. In a lazy peace, both courage and character can weaken and decline. Regardless of how it impacts happiness, there's no doubt that for greatness, it’s beneficial to mostly remain armed; a strong, veteran army (even though it’s costly) consistently on alert is what usually sets the standards or at least earns respect among neighboring states, as seen in Spain, which has maintained a veteran army in one form or another for nearly sixty years.

To be master of the sea, is an abridgment of a monarchy. Cicero, writing to Atticus of Pompey his preparation against Caesar, saith, Consilium Pompeii plane Themistocleum est; putat enim, qui mari potitur, eum rerum potiri. And, without doubt, Pompey had tired out Caesar, if upon vain confidence, he had not left that way. We see the great effects of battles by sea. The battle of Actium, decided the empire of the world. The battle of Lepanto, arrested the greatness of the Turk. There be many examples, where sea-fights have been final to the war; but this is when princes or states have set up their rest, upon the battles. But thus much is certain, that he that commands the sea, is at great liberty, and may take as much, and as little, of the war as he will. Whereas those that be strongest by land, are many times nevertheless in great straits. Surely, at this day, with us of Europe, the vantage of strength at sea (which is one of the principal dowries of this kingdom of Great Britain) is great; both because most of the kingdoms of Europe, are not merely inland, but girt with the sea most part of their compass; and because the wealth of both Indies seems in great part, but an accessory to the command of the seas.

To be in control of the sea is like having a piece of a monarchy. Cicero, writing to Atticus about Pompey’s plans against Caesar, said, "Pompey’s strategy is clearly reminiscent of Themistocles; he believes that whoever controls the sea controls everything." And without a doubt, Pompey could have outlasted Caesar if he hadn't foolishly abandoned that approach. We see the significant outcomes of naval battles. The battle of Actium determined the fate of the world. The battle of Lepanto halted the rise of the Turks. There are countless examples where naval battles have been decisive in wars, but that only happens when kings or nations rely on those battles. What’s certain is that whoever commands the sea has great freedom and can engage in the war as much or as little as they choose. In contrast, those who are strongest on land often find themselves in difficult situations. Today, in Europe, having strength at sea (which is one of the major assets of Great Britain) is immensely valuable; not only because most European kingdoms are not solely inland but are largely surrounded by the sea, but also because the wealth of both the East and West Indies seems, for the most part, to depend on controlling the seas.

The wars of latter ages seem to be made in the dark, in respect of the glory, and honor, which reflected upon men from the wars, in ancient time. There be now, for martial encouragement, some degrees and orders of chivalry; which nevertheless are conferred promiscuously, upon soldiers and no soldiers; and some remembrance perhaps, upon the scutcheon; and some hospitals for maimed soldiers; and such like things. But in ancient times, the trophies erected upon the place of the victory; the funeral laudatives and monuments for those that died in the wars; the crowns and garlands personal; the style of emperor, which the great kings of the world after borrowed; the triumphs of the generals, upon their return; the great donatives and largesses, upon the disbanding of the armies; were things able to inflame all men's courages. But above all, that of the triumph, amongst the Romans, was not pageants or gaudery, but one of the wisest and noblest institutions, that ever was. For it contained three things: honor to the general; riches to the treasury out of the spoils; and donatives to the army. But that honor, perhaps were not fit for monarchies; except it be in the person of the monarch himself, or his sons; as it came to pass in the times of the Roman emperors, who did impropriate the actual triumphs to themselves, and their sons, for such wars as they did achieve in person; and left only, for wars achieved by subjects, some triumphal garments and ensigns to the general.

The wars of recent times seem to lack the glory and honor that warriors gained from battles in ancient times. Nowadays, there are some ranks and orders of chivalry for military recognition, but they are given randomly to both soldiers and non-soldiers, along with perhaps a few honors on coats of arms and some hospitals for injured soldiers, among other things. However, in ancient times, the trophies set up at the victory site, the funeral praises and monuments for those who died in battle, the personal crowns and garlands, the title of emperor that great kings adopted later, the triumphs of generals upon their return, and the generous handouts when armies were disbanded were all powerful motivators for men. Above all, the Roman triumph was not just a show or spectacle but one of the wisest and noblest institutions ever. It included three key elements: honor for the general, riches for the treasury from the spoils, and gifts for the army. However, that kind of honor might not be suitable for monarchies unless it involved the monarch or their children, as it happened during the time of the Roman emperors, who reserved actual triumphs for themselves and their sons for wars they personally led, leaving only some ceremonial garments and insignia for generals of wars fought by others.

To conclude: no man can by care taking (as the Scripture saith) add a cubit to his stature, in this little model of a man's body; but in the great frame of kingdoms and commonwealths, it is in the power of princes or estates, to add amplitude and greatness to their kingdoms; for by introducing such ordinances, constitutions, and customs, as we have now touched, they may sow greatness to their posterity and succession. But these things are commonly not observed, but left to take their chance.

To wrap it up: no one can, through worrying (as the Scripture says), make themselves taller in this small model of a person's body; however, in the larger context of kingdoms and nations, it is within the power of rulers or governments to enhance and expand their realms. By implementing certain laws, regulations, and traditions that we've discussed, they can cultivate greatness for their descendants and future generations. But usually, these actions are overlooked and left to chance.





Of Regiment Of Health

THERE is a wisdom in this; beyond the rules of physic: a man's own observation, what he finds good of, and what he finds hurt of, is the best physic to preserve health. But it is a safer conclusion to say, This agreeth not well with me, therefore, I will not continue it; than this, I find no offence of this, therefore I may use it. For strength of nature in youth, passeth over many excesses, which are owing a man till his age. Discern of the coming on of years, and think not to do the same things still; for age will not be defied. Beware of sudden change, in any great point of diet, and, if necessity enforce it, fit the rest to it. For it is a secret both in nature and state, that it is safer to change many things, than one. Examine thy customs of diet, sleep, exercise, apparel, and the like; and try, in any thing thou shalt judge hurtful, to discontinue it, by little and little; but so, as if thou dost find any inconvenience by the change, thou come back to it again: for it is hard to distinguish that which is generally held good and wholesome, from that which is good particularly, and fit for thine own body. To be free-minded and cheerfully disposed, at hours of meat, and of sleep, and of exercise, is one of the best precepts of long lasting. As for the passions, and studies of the mind; avoid envy, anxious fears; anger fretting inwards; subtle and knotty inquisitions; joys and exhilarations in excess; sadness not communicated. Entertain hopes; mirth rather than joy; variety of delights, rather than surfeit of them; wonder and admiration, and therefore novelties; studies that fill the mind with splendid and illustrious objects, as histories, fables, and contemplations of nature. If you fly physic in health altogether, it will be too strange for your body, when you shall need it. If you make it too familiar, it will work no extraordinary effect, when sickness cometh. I commend rather some diet for certain seasons, than frequent use of physic, except it be grown into a custom. For those diets alter the body more, and trouble it less. Despise no new accident in your body, but ask opinion of it. In sickness, respect health principally; and in health, action. For those that put their bodies to endure in health, may in most sicknesses, which are not very sharp, be cured only with diet, and tendering. Celsus could never have spoken it as a physician, had he not been a wise man withal, when he giveth it for one of the great precepts of health and lasting, that a man do vary, and interchange contraries, but with an inclination to the more benign extreme: use fasting and full eating, but rather full eating; watching and sleep, but rather sleep; sitting and exercise, but rather exercise; and the like. So shall nature be cherished, and yet taught masteries. Physicians are, some of them, so pleasing and conformable to the humor of the patient, as they press not the true cure of the disease; and some other are so regular, in proceeding according to art for the disease, as they respect not sufficiently the condition of the patient. Take one of a middle temper; or if it may not be found in one man, combine two of either sort; and forget not to call as well, the best acquainted with your body, as the best reputed of for his faculty.

THERE is wisdom in this; beyond the rules of medicine: a person's own observations about what makes them feel good and what harms them is the best way to maintain health. However, it's safer to conclude, "This doesn’t agree with me, so I won’t continue it," than to say, "I don't find it harmful, so I can use it." The strength of youth can overlook many excesses that catch up with a person as they age. Recognize the progression of years, and don’t think you can keep doing the same things; age cannot be ignored. Be cautious of sudden changes in any significant aspect of your diet, and if you have to make a change, adjust the rest accordingly. It's a truth in both nature and society that it's safer to change many things than just one. Examine your habits regarding diet, sleep, exercise, clothing, and similar matters; and if you identify something you find harmful, try to cut back slowly. But if you experience any problems from the change, go back to what you were doing; it's tough to know what is generally good and wholesome versus what is particularly beneficial for your own body. Being open-minded and maintaining a cheerful attitude during meal times, sleep, and exercise is one of the best principles for longevity. Regarding emotions and mental pursuits: avoid envy, anxious fears; internalized anger; complex and convoluted inquiries; excess joy and excitement; and unshared sadness. Cultivate hope; prefer cheerfulness over joy; seek a variety of pleasures instead of overindulgence; embrace wonder and admiration, and therefore new experiences; engage in studies that inspire with impressive and bright ideas, like histories, fables, and reflections on nature. If you completely avoid medicine while healthy, it may become foreign to your body when you need it. Conversely, if you rely on it too much, it won’t have any significant effect when you get sick. I recommend following specific diets for certain seasons instead of relying on constant medication, unless it has become routine. These diets tend to change the body more substantially and cause less disruption. Don't dismiss any new changes in your body; seek opinions on them. In sickness, prioritize health above all; and in health, prioritize activity. Those who train their bodies to withstand strains while healthy can often be treated for most non-severe illnesses with diet and care. Celsus could not have stated it as a physician without being wise himself when he advised one of the great principles of health and longevity: that a person should vary and alternate extremes, but lean towards the more beneficial one: practice fasting and full meals, but prefer full meals; balance wakefulness and sleep, but lean towards sleep; switch between sitting and exercise, but prefer exercise; and so on. This way, nature will be nurtured while also being taught to be in control. Some doctors are so agreeable and accommodating to the patient’s temperament that they neglect to pursue the true cure of the illness; while others are so strict in following medical protocols for the illness that they don't sufficiently consider the patient’s condition. Choose a physician of moderate temperament; or, if you can't find such a person, combine two practitioners of either approach; and remember to consult both the one most familiar with your body and the one with the best reputation for their expertise.





Of Suspicion

SUSPICIONS amongst thoughts, are like bats amongst birds, they ever fly by twilight. Certainly they are to be repressed, or at least well guarded: for they cloud the mind; they leese friends; and they check with business, whereby business cannot go on currently and constantly. They dispose kings to tyranny, husbands to jealousy, wise men to irresolution and melancholy. They are defects, not in the heart, but in the brain; for they take place in the stoutest natures; as in the example of Henry the Seventh of England. There was not a more suspicious man, nor a more stout. And in such a composition they do small hurt. For commonly they are not admitted, but with examination, whether they be likely or no. But in fearful natures they gain ground too fast. There is nothing makes a man suspect much, more than to know little; and therefore men should remedy suspicion, by procuring to know more, and not to keep their suspicions in smother. What would men have? Do they think, those they employ and deal with, are saints? Do they not think, they will have their own ends, and be truer to themselves, than to them? Therefore there is no better way, to moderate suspicions, than to account upon such suspicions as true, and yet to bridle them as false. For so far a man ought to make use of suspicions, as to provide, as if that should be true, that he suspects, yet it may do him no hurt. Suspicions that the mind of itself gathers, are but buzzes; but suspicions that are artificially nourished, and put into men's heads, by the tales and whisperings of others, have stings. Certainly, the best mean, to clear the way in this same wood of suspicions, is frankly to communicate them with the party, that he suspects; for thereby he shall be sure to know more of the truth of them, than he did before; and withal shall make that party more circumspect, not to give further cause of suspicion. But this would not be done to men of base natures; for they, if they find themselves once suspected, will never be true. The Italian says, Sospetto licentia fede; as if suspicion, did give a passport to faith; but it ought, rather, to kindle it to discharge itself.

SUSPICIONS among thoughts are like bats among birds; they always fly in the twilight. They definitely need to be controlled or at least kept in check because they cloud the mind, cost friendships, and interfere with tasks, preventing work from continuing smoothly and consistently. They lead kings to tyranny, husbands to jealousy, and wise men to indecision and sadness. These are flaws not of the heart but of the mind, as they can arise even in the strongest personalities, like Henry the Seventh of England. He was one of the most suspicious people but also very strong. In such a mix, they do little damage because they usually aren't accepted without some scrutiny as to whether they're justified. However, in fearful personalities, they take hold too quickly. Nothing makes a person more suspicious than knowing very little; thus, people should address their suspicions by seeking more knowledge instead of keeping their doubts bottled up. What do people expect? Do they think those they engage with are saints? Don't they realize these individuals will prioritize their own interests and be truer to themselves than to others? Therefore, the best approach to manage suspicions is to treat them as if they’re true while still controlling them as though they’re false. A person should use suspicions to prepare for the possibility that they could be true, without letting them harm them. Suspicions that arise naturally in the mind are just vague thoughts, but suspicions that are artificially fed and planted in people's minds through rumors and gossip can be very harmful. The best way to navigate through this web of suspicions is to openly discuss them with the person one suspects. This way, one will gain a clearer understanding of the truth than before, and it will encourage the other person to be more careful not to give further reasons for suspicion. However, this approach shouldn’t be taken with those of low character, as they will never be trustworthy if they feel suspected. The Italians say, Sospetto licentia fede; as if suspicion gives a pass to belief, but it should rather ignite a need to prove oneself.





Of Discourse

SOME, in their discourse, desire rather commendation of wit, in being able to hold all arguments, than of judgment, in discerning what is true; as if it were a praise, to know what might be said, and not, what should be thought. Some have certain common places, and themes, wherein they are good and want variety; which kind of poverty is for the most part tedious, and when it is once perceived, ridiculous. The honorablest part of talk, is to give the occasion; and again to moderate, and pass to somewhat else; for then a man leads the dance. It is good, in discourse and speech of conversation, to vary and intermingle speech of the present occasion, with arguments, tales with reasons, asking of questions, with telling of opinions, and jest with earnest: for it is a dull thing to tire, and, as we say now, to jade, any thing too far. As for jest, there be certain things, which ought to be privileged from it; namely, religion, matters of state, great persons, any man's present business of importance, and any case that deserveth pity. Yet there be some, that think their wits have been asleep, except they dart out somewhat that is piquant, and to the quick. That is a vein which would be bridled:

SOME people, in their conversations, prefer to be praised for their cleverness in discussing all topics rather than for their ability to judge what is true. It's as if knowing what can be said is commendable, while understanding what should be thought is not. Some individuals have certain standard points and themes where they excel, yet they lack variety; this type of monotony is usually tiresome and, once recognized, quite silly. The most admirable aspect of conversation is to set the agenda and then smoothly transition to other topics because that’s when someone truly leads the discussion. It’s beneficial in conversation to mix and match discussions of the current situation with arguments, stories with reasons, inquiries with sharing opinions, and jokes with seriousness; it becomes tedious to overwork any topic. For humor, there are certain subjects that should be off-limits, such as religion, politics, important figures, someone’s significant personal matters, and any situation deserving compassion. However, there are some who believe their minds have been idle unless they come up with sharp, biting remarks. That’s a tendency that should be restrained:

Parce, puer, stimulis, et fortius utere loris.

Parce, kid, with the spurs, and use the reins more strongly.

And generally, men ought to find the difference, between saltness and bitterness. Certainly, he that hath a satirical vein, as he maketh others afraid of his wit, so he had need be afraid of others' memory. He that questioneth much, shall learn much, and content much; but especially, if he apply his questions to the skill of the persons whom he asketh; for he shall give them occasion, to please themselves in speaking, and himself shall continually gather knowledge. But let his questions not be troublesome; for that is fit for a poser. And let him be sure to leave other men, their turns to speak. Nay, if there be any, that would reign and take up all the time, let him find means to take them off, and to bring others on; as musicians use to do, with those that dance too long galliards. If you dissemble, sometimes, your knowledge of that you are thought to know, you shall be thought, another time, to know that you know not. Speech of a man's self ought to be seldom, and well chosen. I knew one, was wont to say in scorn, He must needs be a wise man, he speaks so much of himself: and there is but one case, wherein a man may commend himself with good grace; and that is in commending virtue in another; especially if it be such a virtue, whereunto himself pretendeth. Speech of touch towards others, should be sparingly used; for discourse ought to be as a field, without coming home to any man. I knew two noblemen, of the west part of England, whereof the one was given to scoff, but kept ever royal cheer in his house; the other would ask, of those that had been at the other's table, Tell truly, was there never a flout or dry blow given? To which the guest would answer, Such and such a thing passed. The lord would say, I thought, he would mar a good dinner. Discretion of speech, is more than eloquence; and to speak agreeably to him, with whom we deal, is more than to speak in good words, or in good order. A good continued speech, without a good speech of interlocution, shows slowness: and a good reply or second speech, without a good settled speech, showeth shallowness and weakness. As we see in beasts, that those that are weakest in the course, are yet nimblest in the turn; as it is betwixt the greyhound and the hare. To use too many circumstances, ere one come to the matter, is wearisome; to use none at all, is blunt.

And generally, guys should be able to tell the difference between being salty and being bitter. Definitely, someone with a sarcastic streak might scare others with their wit, but they should also be wary of what others remember about them. Someone who asks a lot of questions will learn a lot and keep others engaged, especially if they direct their questions to someone knowledgeable; this lets the other person enjoy talking while that person gathers insights. However, their questions shouldn't be annoying, which is something only a show-off would do. They should also make sure to let others have their turn to speak. If someone tries to dominate the conversation, they should find a way to redirect the discussion and bring other people into it, just like musicians do when dancers are going on too long. If you sometimes pretend not to know something that you do, people might think you're actually clueless about things you should know. Talking about oneself should be rare and well thought out. I once knew someone who would mockingly say that if a person talks a lot about themselves, they must be wise: there's really only one situation where someone can praise themselves gracefully, and that’s when they commend virtue in someone else, especially if it’s a virtue they aspire to themselves. Commenting about others should be done sparingly; conversation should be like a field without coming back to any one person. I knew two noblemen from Western England, one of whom loved to joke but always hosted grand meals, while the other would ask guests who had dined at the first's table, “Honestly, was there any teasing or sarcasm?” The guest would respond with specific things that happened. The nobleman would say, “I thought he would ruin a good dinner.” Choosing the right words is more important than being eloquent, and speaking respectfully to someone is more valuable than just using fancy words or a pleasing structure. A long speech without good back-and-forth shows slowness, and a sharp reply or a good follow-up without a solid main point shows superficiality and weakness. Just like with animals, the ones that might struggle in a race can still be quickest in making sharp turns, as we see with greyhounds and hares. Using too many details before getting to the point is tiresome, while skipping them entirely can come across as blunt.





Of Plantations

PLANTATIONS are amongst ancient, primitive, and heroical works. When the world was young, it begat more children; but now it is old, it begets fewer: for I may justly account new plantations, to be the children of former kingdoms. I like a plantation in a pure soil; that is, where people are not displanted, to the end, to plant in others. For else it is rather an extirpation, than a plantation. Planting of countries, is like planting of woods; for you must make account to leese almost twenty years' profit, and expect your recompense in the end. For the principal thing, that hath been the destruction of most plantations, hath been the base and hasty drawing of profit, in the first years. It is true, speedy profit is not to be neglected, as far as may stand with the good of the plantation, but no further. It is a shameful and unblessed thing, to take the scum of people, and wicked condemned men, to be the people with whom you plant; and not only so, but it spoileth the plantation; for they will ever live like rogues, and not fall to work, but be lazy, and do mischief, and spend victuals, and be quickly weary, and then certify over to their country, to the discredit of the plantation. The people wherewith you plant ought to be gardeners, ploughmen, laborers, smiths, carpenters, joiners, fishermen, fowlers, with some few apothecaries, surgeons, cooks, and bakers. In a country of plantation, first look about, what kind of victual the country yields of itself to hand; as chestnuts, walnuts, pineapples, olives, dates, plums, cherries, wild honey, and the like; and make use of them. Then consider what victual or esculent things there are, which grow speedily, and within the year; as parsnips, carrots, turnips, onions, radish, artichokes of Hierusalem, maize, and the like. For wheat, barley, and oats, they ask too much labor; but with pease and beans you may begin, both because they ask less labor, and because they serve for meat, as well as for bread. And of rice, likewise cometh a great increase, and it is a kind of meat. Above all, there ought to be brought store of biscuit, oat-meal, flour, meal, and the like, in the beginning, till bread may be had. For beasts, or birds, take chiefly such as are least subject to diseases, and multiply fastest; as swine, goats, cocks, hens, turkeys, geese, house-doves, and the like. The victual in plantations, ought to be expended almost as in a besieged town; that is, with certain allowance. And let the main part of the ground, employed to gardens or corn, be to a common stock; and to be laid in, and stored up, and then delivered out in proportion; besides some spots of ground, that any particular person will manure for his own private. Consider likewise what commodities, the soil where the plantation is, doth naturally yield, that they may some way help to defray the charge of the plantation (so it be not, as was said, to the untimely prejudice of the main business), as it hath fared with tobacco in Virginia. Wood commonly aboundeth but too much; and therefore timber is fit to be one. If there be iron ore, and streams whereupon to set the mills, iron is a brave commodity where wood aboundeth. Making of bay-salt, if the climate be proper for it, would be put in experience. Growing silk likewise, if any be, is a likely commodity. Pitch and tar, where store of firs and pines are, will not fail. So drugs and sweet woods, where they are, cannot but yield great profit. Soap-ashes likewise, and other things that may be thought of. But moil not too much under ground; for the hope of mines is very uncertain, and useth to make the planters lazy, in other things. For government; let it be in the hands of one, assisted with some counsel; and let them have commission to exercise martial laws, with some limitation. And above all, let men make that profit, of being in the wilderness, as they have God always, and his service, before their eyes. Let not the government of the plantation, depend upon too many counsellors, and undertakers, in the country that planteth, but upon a temperate number; and let those be rather noblemen and gentlemen, than merchants; for they look ever to the present gain. Let there be freedom from custom, till the plantation be of strength; and not only freedom from custom, but freedom to carry their commodities, where they may make their best of them, except there be some special cause of caution. Cram not in people, by sending too fast company after company; but rather harken how they waste, and send supplies proportionably; but so, as the number may live well in the plantation, and not by surcharge be in penury. It hath been a great endangering to the health of some plantations, that they have built along the sea and rivers, in marish and unwholesome grounds. Therefore, though you begin there, to avoid carriage and like discommodities, yet build still rather upwards from the streams, than along. It concerneth likewise the health of the plantation, that they have good store of salt with them, that they may use it in their victuals, when it shall be necessary. If you plant where savages are, do not only entertain them, with trifles and gingles, but use them justly and graciously, with sufficient guard nevertheless; and do not win their favor, by helping them to invade their enemies, but for their defence it is not amiss; and send oft of them, over to the country that plants, that they may see a better condition than their own, and commend it when they return. When the plantation grows to strength, then it is time to plant with women, as well as with men; that the plantation may spread into generations, and not be ever pieced from without. It is the sinfullest thing in the world, to forsake or destitute a plantation once in forwardness; for besides the dishonor, it is the guiltiness of blood of many commiserable persons.

PLANTATIONS are some of the most ancient, basic, and heroic works. When the world was young, it created more inhabitants, but now that it is older, it produces fewer. I can rightly consider new plantations to be the offspring of previous kingdoms. I prefer a plantation on untainted soil; that is, where people are not removed from one place to be planted in another. Otherwise, it is more like extermination than a plantation. Establishing countries is like planting forests; you must be prepared to lose nearly twenty years of profits and hope for rewards in the end. The main reason most plantations fail is the quick and greedy pursuit of profit in the initial years. It’s true that quick profit should not be ignored, as long as it benefits the plantation, but not beyond that. It is shameful and unblessed to gather the dregs of society and condemned criminals to create your population; not only does it ruin the plantation, but they will always behave like rogues, being lazy, causing trouble, wasting resources, and growing tired quickly, which will then damage the plantation's reputation back home. The people you cultivate should be gardeners, farmers, laborers, blacksmiths, carpenters, builders, fishermen, hunters, along with a few pharmacists, doctors, cooks, and bakers. In a plantation country, first assess what food the land provides naturally, like chestnuts, walnuts, pineapples, olives, dates, plums, cherries, wild honey, and similar items; and make use of them. Then consider what foods grow quickly and within the year, like parsnips, carrots, turnips, onions, radishes, Jerusalem artichokes, corn, and the like. Wheat, barley, and oats require too much labor, but peas and beans are a good start since they demand less work and can be used for food as well as for flour. Rice also gives a substantial yield and is a source of food. Above all, plenty of biscuits, oatmeal, flour, and similar items should be brought at the beginning until bread can be produced. For livestock or birds, choose those least prone to disease and that reproduce quickly, such as pigs, goats, roosters, hens, turkeys, geese, and pigeons. Food in plantations should be allocated as if in a besieged city, with a set allowance. The majority of land used for gardens or crops should be shared among all, stored up, and then distributed accordingly, along with a few plots that individuals can cultivate for their own use. Also consider what products the soil naturally yields, which could help cover the plantation's costs (as long as it doesn't interfere with core operations as happened with tobacco in Virginia). Timber is often plentiful, making it a suitable resource. If there are iron ore deposits and running water for mills, iron becomes a valuable product where wood is abundant. Producing bay salt could be tested if the climate is suitable. If silk can be grown, that can also be a promising commodity. Pitch and tar can be harvested from fir and pine trees. Likewise, various herbs and fragrant woods can yield great profits. Soap ashes and other possibilities should also be considered. However, avoid digging too much underground; the prospect of mines is very uncertain and tends to make planters lazy about other responsibilities. For governance, it should rest with one leader, supported by some advisory counsel, and they should have the authority to implement martial laws with some limitations. Most importantly, those involved in the wilderness should always keep God and His service in mind. The plantation's governance should not rely on too many advisors or investors from the country planting, but rather a moderate number, preferably noblemen and gentlemen rather than merchants, who are always focused on immediate gains. Provide tax exemptions until the plantation is established and ensure freedom to trade their goods where they can get the best results, unless there's a specific concern. Don't overwhelm the area by sending too many people in too quickly; pay attention to how the population is faring and send supplies accordingly, ensuring that the number of people can thrive in the plantation without leading to shortages. It has greatly endangered the health of some plantations that they have situated themselves near the sea and rivers in marshy and unhealthy areas. Therefore, while starting there might help avoid transportation issues, it's better to build further inland from the waterways. The plantation's health also benefits from having a good supply of salt for food when necessary. If you settle where there are indigenous people, don't just entertain them with trinkets; treat them fairly and kindly, but ensure you have sufficient protection. Don’t win their favor by helping them attack their enemies, but assisting in their defense is acceptable; also, send them to the country that is planting so they can see a better life and promote it upon returning. Once the plantation is strong, it’s time to introduce women alongside men so that the plantation can grow generationally, rather than always relying on outsiders. It is the most sinful act to abandon a plantation once it is underway; beyond the dishonor, it results in the suffering of many unfortunate individuals.





Of Riches

I CANNOT call riches better than the baggage of virtue. The Roman word is better, impedimenta. For as the baggage is to an army, so is riches to virtue. It cannot be spared, nor left behind, but it hindereth the march; yea, and the care of it, sometimes loseth or disturbeth the victory. Of great riches there is no real use, except it be in the distribution; the rest is but conceit. So saith Solomon, Where much is, there are many to consume it; and what hath the owner, but the sight of it with his eyes? The personal fruition in any man, cannot reach to feel great riches: there is a custody of them; or a power of dole, and donative of them; or a fame of them; but no solid use to the owner. Do you not see what feigned prices, are set upon little stones and rarities? and what works of ostentation are undertaken, because there might seem to be some use of great riches? But then you will say, they may be of use, to buy men out of dangers or troubles. As Solomon saith, Riches are as a strong hold, in the imagination of the rich man. But this is excellently expressed, that it is in imagination, and not always in fact. For certainly great riches, have sold more men, than they have bought out. Seek not proud riches, but such as thou mayest get justly, use soberly, distribute cheerfully, and leave contentedly. Yet have no abstract nor friarly contempt of them. But distinguish, as Cicero saith well of Rabirius Posthumus, In studio rei amplificandae apparebat, non avaritiae praedam, sed instrumentum bonitati quaeri. Harken also to Solomon, and beware of hasty gathering of riches; Qui festinat ad divitias, non erit insons. The poets feign, that when Plutus (which is Riches) is sent from Jupiter, he limps and goes slowly; but when he is sent from Pluto, he runs, and is swift of foot. Meaning that riches gotten by good means, and just labor, pace slowly; but when they come by the death of others (as by the course of inheritance, testaments, and the like), they come tumbling upon a man. But it mought be applied likewise to Pluto, taking him for the devil. For when riches come from the devil (as by fraud and oppression, and unjust means), they come upon speed. The ways to enrich are many, and most of them foul. Parsimony is one of the best, and yet is not innocent; for it withholdeth men from works of liberality and charity. The improvement of the ground, is the most natural obtaining of riches; for it is our great mother's blessing, the earth's; but it is slow. And yet where men of great wealth do stoop to husbandry, it multiplieth riches exceedingly. I knew a nobleman in England, that had the greatest audits of any man in my time; a great grazier, a great sheep-master, a great timber man, a great collier, a great corn-master, a great lead-man, and so of iron, and a number of the like points of husbandry. So as the earth seemed a sea to him, in respect of the perpetual importation. It was truly observed by one, that himself came very hardly, to a little riches, and very easily, to great riches. For when a man's stock is come to that, that he can expect the prime of markets, and overcome those bargains, which for their greatness are few men's money, and be partner in the industries of younger men, he cannot but increase mainly. The gains of ordinary trades and vocations are honest; and furthered by two things chiefly: by diligence, and by a good name, for good and fair dealing. But the gains of bargains, are of a more doubtful nature; when men shall wait upon others' necessity, broke by servants and instruments to draw them on, put off others cunningly, that would be better chapmen, and the like practices, which are crafty and naught. As for the chopping of bargains, when a man buys not to hold but to sell over again, that commonly grindeth double, both upon the seller, and upon the buyer. Sharings do greatly enrich, if the hands be well chosen, that are trusted. Usury is the certainest means of gain, though one of the worst; as that whereby a man doth eat his bread, in sudore vultus alieni; and besides, doth plough upon Sundays. But yet certain though it be, it hath flaws; for that the scriveners and brokers do value unsound men, to serve their own turn. The fortune in being the first, in an invention or in a privilege, doth cause sometimes a wonderful overgrowth in riches; as it was with the first sugar man, in the Canaries. Therefore if a man can play the true logician, to have as well judgment, as invention, he may do great matters; especially if the times be fit. He that resteth upon gains certain, shall hardly grow to great riches; and he that puts all upon adventures, doth oftentimes break and come to poverty: it is good, therefore, to guard adventures with certainties, that may uphold losses. Monopolies, and coemption of wares for re-sale, where they are not restrained, are great means to enrich; especially if the party have intelligence, what things are like to come into request, and so store himself beforehand. Riches gotten by service, though it be of the best rise, yet when they are gotten by flattery, feeding humors, and other servile conditions, they may be placed amongst the worst. As for fishing for testaments and executorships (as Tacitus saith of Seneca, testamenta et orbos tamquam indagine capi), it is yet worse; by how much men submit themselves to meaner persons, than in service. Believe not much, them that seem to despise riches; for they despise them, that despair of them; and none worse, when they come to them. Be not penny-wise; riches have wings, and sometimes they fly away of themselves, sometimes they must be set flying, to bring in more. Men leave their riches, either to their kindred, or to the public; and moderate portions, prosper best in both. A great state left to an heir, is as a lure to all the birds of prey round about, to seize on him, if he be not the better stablished in years and judgment. Likewise glorious gifts and foundations, are like sacrifices without salt; and but the painted sepulchres of alms, which soon will putrefy, and corrupt inwardly. Therefore measure not thine advancements, by quantity, but frame them by measure: and defer not charities till death; for, certainly, if a man weigh it rightly, he that doth so, is rather liberal of another man's, than of his own.

I can't say that wealth is better than the burden of virtue. The Roman term is more fitting: impedimenta. Just as baggage is essential for an army, wealth is to virtue. It can’t be left behind, but it slows progress; indeed, worrying about it can sometimes cause the loss of victory. There’s no true use for great wealth unless it’s given away; the rest is just vanity. As Solomon said, where there’s a lot, there are many to spend it; and what does the owner really have, but the sight of it? A person can’t truly enjoy great wealth; they either safeguard it, have the power to distribute it, or gain a reputation from it, but there’s no real benefit to them. Don’t you see the fake prices placed on small stones and rare items? And the extravagant displays made just to show there could be some use for great wealth? But you might argue that wealth can help people out of danger or trouble. As Solomon states, wealth is like a fortress in the imagination of the rich. But it’s crucial to recognize that it's only in imagination—not always in reality. In truth, great wealth has trapped more individuals than it has saved. Don't seek out ostentatious wealth, but instead aim for what you can earn justly, use wisely, share joyfully, and leave behind contentedly. Yet don’t feel a disdainful contempt for wealth. But understand, as Cicero wisely pointed out about Rabirius Posthumus, the aim of accumulating wealth should be not out of greed but as a means to do good. Listen to Solomon’s warning and be cautious about hastily acquiring riches; as it says, "He who rushes to get rich will not go unpunished." Poets suggest that when Plutus (representing Wealth) is sent by Jupiter, he limps and moves slowly; but when sent from Pluto, he rushes and is quick. This means that wealth earned through honest means and hard work comes slowly, but riches gained through the misfortune of others—like through inheritance and wills—come crashing down upon a person. This can also relate to Pluto, seen as the devil; for when wealth comes through deceit and wrongdoing, it arrives swiftly. There are many shady ways to get rich. Thriftiness is one of the better options, but even that isn’t innocent; it can keep people from acts of generosity and charity. Improving the land is the most natural way to gain wealth, as it is the blessing of Mother Earth, but it's a slow process. Yet when wealthy individuals take up farming, it can significantly increase their riches. I knew a nobleman in England who had the highest profits of anyone in my time; he was a major grazier, sheep farmer, timber merchant, coal miner, grain trader, and lead producer, among other agricultural pursuits. It seemed as if the earth was a sea to him because of the constant influx. It was noted by someone that he himself reached small wealth with great difficulty, but large wealth came easily. If a person's assets get to the point where they can anticipate the best market prices and make substantial deals, becoming involved in ventures of younger individuals, they will undoubtedly grow significantly. The earnings from regular trades are honest and supported mainly by two things: diligence and a good reputation for fair dealing. However, the profits from deals can be more questionable; when people exploit others' needs, using middlemen to lure them, pushing away better buyers using cunning tactics, those are all dishonest practices. In terms of dealing, if someone buys just to resell, they typically exploit both the seller and the buyer. Partnerships can greatly increase wealth if the right people are trusted. Usury is often the most reliable source of income, though it's one of the worst since it involves profiting off others' hard work, and it’s akin to harvesting on Sundays. Yet, while it's dependable, it has its pitfalls because lenders and brokers may exploit those who are unreliable for their own benefit. Being the first to invent something or hold a privilege can sometimes lead to remarkable wealth, as was the case with the first sugar producer in the Canaries. So if a person can think logically, combining both judgment and creativity, they can achieve great things—especially if the timing is right. Relying solely on guaranteed profits will likely prevent someone from achieving significant wealth, while putting everything at risk can lead to financial ruin; thus, it's wise to balance risky ventures with reliable options to mitigate losses. Monopolies and buying up goods for resale, when uncontrolled, can be great ways to amass wealth, especially if one knows what items are likely to be in demand and stocks up in advance. Wealth gained through service is typically the best kind, but when it comes through flattery, pandering, or servitude, it can rank among the worst. Fishing for wills and executor positions is even worse, as it involves submitting to lesser individuals than in standard service. Don’t believe those who seem to scorn riches; often it’s those who despair of wealth who truly disdain it, and none are worse than those who suddenly acquire it. Don’t be overly frugal; wealth is fleeting; sometimes it disappears on its own, and other times it needs to be set in motion to generate more. People leave their wealth either to their family or to the community, and moderate amounts tend to thrive best in both cases. A significant estate bequeathed to an heir is like bait to every opportunist around, ready to swoop in unless the heir is wise and mature. Similarly, grand gifts and foundations lack substance and are like unseasoned sacrifices, merely hollow displays of charity that will quickly decay. So don’t measure your progress by quantity but evaluate it by quality: and don’t wait until death to do charitable acts; for, if considered thoughtfully, doing so makes one more generous with someone else’s wealth than with one’s own.





Of Prophecies

I MEAN not to speak of divine prophecies; nor of heathen oracles; nor of natural predictions; but only of prophecies that have been of certain memory, and from hidden causes. Saith the Pythonissa to Saul, To-morrow thou and thy son shall be with me. Homer hath these verses:

I don't intend to talk about divine prophecies, or pagan oracles, or natural predictions; I'm only referring to prophecies that are well-remembered and stem from hidden causes. The medium tells Saul, "Tomorrow you and your son will be with me." Homer has these lines:

At domus AEneae cunctis dominabitur oris, Et nati natorum, et qui nascentur ab illis.

At the house of Aeneas, it will rule over all shores, both the children of children and those who will be born from them.

A prophecy, as it seems, of the Roman empire. Seneca the tragedian hath these verses:

A prophecy, it appears, of the Roman Empire. Seneca the tragedian has these lines:

       —Venient annis
     Saecula seris, quibus Oceanus
     Vincula rerum laxet, et ingens
     Pateat Tellus, Tiphysque novos
     Detegat orbes; nec sit terris
     Ultima Thule:
       —In the years to come
     Future ages, when the Ocean
     Loosens the chains of things, and the vast
     Earth is revealed, and Tiphys uncovers
     New worlds; and there will be no
     Ultimate Thule for the lands:

a prophecy of the discovery of America. The daughter of Polycrates, dreamed that Jupiter bathed her father, and Apollo anointed him; and it came to pass, that he was crucified in an open place, where the sun made his body run with sweat, and the rain washed it. Philip of Macedon dreamed, he sealed up his wife's belly; whereby he did expound it, that his wife should be barren; but Aristander the soothsayer, told him his wife was with child, because men do not use to seal vessels, that are empty. A phantasm that appeared to M. Brutus, in his tent, said to him, Philippis iterum me videbis. Tiberius said to Galba, Tu quoque, Galba, degustabis imperium. In Vespasian's time, there went a prophecy in the East, that those that should come forth of Judea, should reign over the world: which though it may be was meant of our Savior; yet Tacitus expounds it of Vespasian. Domitian dreamed, the night before he was slain, that a golden head was growing, out of the nape of his neck: and indeed, the succession that followed him for many years, made golden times. Henry the Sixth of England, said of Henry the Seventh, when he was a lad, and gave him water, This is the lad that shall enjoy the crown, for which we strive. When I was in France, I heard from one Dr. Pena, that the Queen Mother, who was given to curious arts, caused the King her husband's nativity to be calculated, under a false name; and the astrologer gave a judgment, that he should be killed in a duel; at which the Queen laughed, thinking her husband to be above challenges and duels: but he was slain upon a course at tilt, the splinters of the staff of Montgomery going in at his beaver. The trivial prophecy, which I heard when I was a child, and Queen Elizabeth was in the flower of her years, was,

a prophecy about the discovery of America. Polycrates' daughter dreamed that Jupiter bathed her father, and Apollo anointed him; and it happened that he was crucified in a public place, where the sun made his body sweat, and the rain washed it. Philip of Macedon dreamt he sealed up his wife's belly, which he interpreted as meaning his wife would be barren; but the seer Aristander told him his wife was pregnant because people don’t seal empty vessels. A vision that appeared to M. Brutus in his tent said to him, "You will see me again at Philippi." Tiberius told Galba, "You too, Galba, will taste the empire." During Vespasian's time, a prophecy circulated in the East that those who would come out of Judea would rule the world: although it may have referred to our Savior, Tacitus interpreted it as relating to Vespasian. Domitian dreamed the night before he was killed that a golden head was growing out of the back of his neck; in fact, the succession that followed him for many years brought golden times. Henry the Sixth of England remarked about Henry the Seventh, when he was a boy and gave him water, "This is the lad who will wear the crown for which we strive." When I was in France, I heard from Dr. Pena that the Queen Mother, who was into curious arts, had her husband's birth chart calculated under a false name; the astrologer predicted he would be killed in a duel, which made the Queen laugh, thinking her husband was above challenges and duels. But he was killed during a joust when Montgomery's lance splintered and struck him. The trivial prophecy I heard as a child, when Queen Elizabeth was in her prime, was,

     When hempe is spun

     England's done:
     When hemp is spun

     England's done:

whereby it was generally conceived, that after the princes had reigned, which had the principal letters of that word hempe (which were Henry, Edward, Mary, Philip, and Elizabeth), England should come to utter confusion; which, thanks be to God, is verified only in the change of the name; for that the King's style, is now no more of England but of Britain. There was also another prophecy, before the year of '88, which I do not well understand.

where it was widely believed that after the princes who held the main letters of the word hempe (which were Henry, Edward, Mary, Philip, and Elizabeth) reigned, England would fall into complete chaos; but, thank God, this has only been seen in the change of the name, since the King's title is now no longer of England but of Britain. There was also another prophecy, before the year '88, which I don't fully understand.

     There shall be seen upon a day,
     Between the Baugh and the May,
     The black fleet of Norway.
     When that that is come and gone,
     England build houses of lime and stone,
     For after wars shall you have none.
     On a certain day,  
     Between Baugh and May,  
     The black fleet of Norway will appear.  
     When that has come and gone,  
     England will build houses of lime and stone,  
     Because after the wars, there will be none.  

It was generally conceived to be meant, of the Spanish fleet that came in '88: for that the king of Spain's surname, as they say, is Norway. The prediction of Regiomontanus,

It was commonly believed to be referring to the Spanish fleet that arrived in '88: because the king of Spain’s last name, as some say, is Norway. The prediction of Regiomontanus,

     Octogesimus octavus mirabilis annus,
Eighty-eighth wonderful year,

was thought likewise accomplished in the sending of that great fleet, being the greatest in strength, though not in number, of all that ever swam upon the sea. As for Cleon's dream, I think it was a jest. It was, that he was devoured of a long dragon; and it was expounded of a maker of sausages, that troubled him exceedingly. There are numbers of the like kind; especially if you include dreams, and predictions of astrology. But I have set down these few only, of certain credit, for example. My judgment is, that they ought all to be despised; and ought to serve but for winter talk by the fireside. Though when I say despised, I mean it as for belief; for otherwise, the spreading, or publishing, of them, is in no sort to be despised. For they have done much mischief; and I see many severe laws made, to suppress them. That that hath given them grace, and some credit, consisteth in three things. First, that men mark when they hit, and never mark when they miss; as they do generally also of dreams. The second is, that probable conjectures, or obscure traditions, many times turn themselves into prophecies; while the nature of man, which coveteth divination, thinks it no peril to foretell that which indeed they do but collect. As that of Seneca's verse. For so much was then subject to demonstration, that the globe of the earth had great parts beyond the Atlantic, which mought be probably conceived not to be all sea: and adding thereto the tradition in Plato's Timaeus, and his Atlanticus, it mought encourage one to turn it to a prediction. The third and last (which is the great one) is, that almost all of them, being infinite in number, have been impostures, and by idle and crafty brains merely contrived and feigned, after the event past.

was also believed to have succeeded in sending out that massive fleet, which was the strongest ever to sail the seas, even if not the largest in number. As for Cleon's dream, I think it was a joke. He dreamed he was eaten by a long dragon, and a sausage-maker interpreted it, which troubled him a lot. There are plenty of other such dreams, especially if you count dreams and astrological predictions. But I've only noted these few credible examples. In my opinion, they should all be disregarded; they ought to serve just as winter gossip by the fireside. When I say disregarded, I mean in terms of belief; otherwise, spreading or publicizing them shouldn't be dismissed. They have caused a lot of harm, and I see many strict laws created to suppress them. What has given them credibility and some respect comes down to three things. First, people remember when they get it right and ignore when they get it wrong, just like they do with dreams. The second is that plausible guesses or vague traditions often turn into prophecies; human nature, which craves divination, finds it safe to predict what they are really just piecing together. This is illustrated in Seneca's verse. At that time, so much was proven that large parts of the earth existed beyond the Atlantic, which could reasonably be conjectured not to be all ocean; coupled with the tradition from Plato's Timaeus and his Atlanticus, it could inspire one to see it as a prediction. The third and final reason (which is the most significant) is that almost all of these predictions, countless in number, have been fabrications, created purely by lazy and clever minds after the fact.





Of Ambition

AMBITION is like choler; which is an humor that maketh men active, earnest, full of alacrity, and stirring, if it be not stopped. But if it be stopped, and cannot have his way, it becometh adust, and thereby malign and venomous. So ambitious men, if they find the way open for their rising, and still get forward, they are rather busy than dangerous; but if they be checked in their desires, they become secretly discontent, and look upon men and matters with an evil eye, and are best pleased, when things go backward; which is the worst property in a servant of a prince, or state. Therefore it is good for princes, if they use ambitious men, to handle it, so as they be still progressive and not retrograde; which, because it cannot be without inconvenience, it is good not to use such natures at all. For if they rise not with their service, they will take order, to make their service fall with them. But since we have said, it were good not to use men of ambitious natures, except it be upon necessity, it is fit we speak, in what cases they are of necessity. Good commanders in the wars must be taken, be they never so ambitious; for the use of their service, dispenseth with the rest; and to take a soldier without ambition, is to pull off his spurs. There is also great use of ambitious men, in being screens to princes in matters of danger and envy; for no man will take that part, except he be like a seeled dove, that mounts and mounts, because he cannot see about him. There is use also of ambitious men, in pulling down the greatness of any subject that overtops; as Tiberius used Marco, in the pulling down of Sejanus. Since, therefore, they must be used in such cases, there resteth to speak, how they are to be bridled, that they may be less dangerous. There is less danger of them, if they be of mean birth, than if they be noble; and if they be rather harsh of nature, than gracious and popular: and if they be rather new raised, than grown cunning, and fortified, in their greatness. It is counted by some, a weakness in princes, to have favorites; but it is, of all others, the best remedy against ambitious great-ones. For when the way of pleasuring, and displeasuring, lieth by the favorite, it is impossible any other should be overgreat. Another means to curb them, is to balance them by others, as proud as they. But then there must be some middle counsellors, to keep things steady; for without that ballast, the ship will roll too much. At the least, a prince may animate and inure some meaner persons, to be as it were scourges, to ambitious men. As for the having of them obnoxious to ruin; if they be of fearful natures, it may do well; but if they be stout and daring, it may precipitate their designs, and prove dangerous. As for the pulling of them down, if the affairs require it, and that it may not be done with safety suddenly, the only way is the interchange, continually, of favors and disgraces; whereby they may not know what to expect, and be, as it were, in a wood. Of ambitions, it is less harmful, the ambition to prevail in great things, than that other, to appear in every thing; for that breeds confusion, and mars business. But yet it is less danger, to have an ambitious man stirring in business, than great in dependences. He that seeketh to be eminent amongst able men, hath a great task; but that is ever good for the public. But he, that plots to be the only figure amongst ciphers, is the decay of a whole age. Honor hath three things in it: the vantage ground to do good; the approach to kings and principal persons; and the raising of a man's own fortunes. He that hath the best of these intentions, when he aspireth, is an honest man; and that prince, that can discern of these intentions in another that aspireth, is a wise prince. Generally, let princes and states choose such ministers, as are more sensible of duty than of using; and such as love business rather upon conscience, than upon bravery, and let them discern a busy nature, from a willing mind.

AMBITION is like anger; it's a feeling that makes people active, eager, full of energy, and motivated if it isn’t held back. But if it is blocked and can’t find a way, it becomes bitter and, therefore, harmful and toxic. Ambitious people, when they see a path open for their advancement and continue to move forward, are more engaged than dangerous; but if their desires are stifled, they grow secretly resentful, viewing those around them with suspicion, and are happiest when things go awry, which is the worst trait in a servant to a leader or government. So, it’s wise for leaders to manage ambitious people in such a way that they remain on the rise and not in decline; which, because it can bring problems, means it might be better not to use such individuals at all. If they don’t succeed alongside their efforts, they will take steps to ensure their downfall. However, since we’ve stated that it’s better not to engage ambitious individuals unless absolutely necessary, we should discuss when they are indeed necessary. Skilled military leaders must be chosen, regardless of their ambition; their services justify the rest, and choosing a soldier without ambition would be like removing his spurs. Ambitious individuals can also serve to protect leaders from threats and jealousy because no one will take on that role unless they are like a blind dove, soaring endlessly without awareness of their surroundings. They are also useful in diminishing the power of any subjects who become too dominant, as Tiberius did with Marco in bringing down Sejanus. Therefore, since they are essential in such situations, we need to address how they can be controlled to minimize their danger. They are less risky if they come from humble backgrounds rather than nobility; if they are more harsh by nature than charming and well-liked; and if they are more newly elevated than shrewd and entrenched in their power. Some consider having favorites a weakness in leaders, but it is, above all, the best way to counter ambitious individuals. When the ability to please or displease lies with a favorite, it’s impossible for anyone else to become too powerful. Another way to keep them in check is to balance them with equally proud figures. However, there must also be some mediating advisors to maintain stability; without that balance, everything could easily tip too far. At a minimum, a leader might empower some lesser individuals to act almost as punishments for ambitious people. As for making them susceptible to downfall, if they are naturally timid, it might be effective; but if they are bold and audacious, it could backfire and complicate matters. Regarding their removal, if the situation requires it and safety cannot be ensured swiftly, the best method is to constantly mix favors with disfavor, keeping them uncertain and disoriented. Among ambitions, the desire to succeed in significant matters is less harmful than the ambition to stand out in everything; the latter creates chaos and disrupts productivity. Nevertheless, it’s less dangerous to have an ambitious person involved in affairs than one who is simply very dependent. Those who seek to shine among capable individuals have a tough challenge, but that is always beneficial for the common good. Conversely, those who aim to be the sole standout among unremarkable individuals are detrimental to an entire era. Honor consists of three elements: the opportunity to do good; access to leaders and important figures; and the improvement of one’s own fortunes. The person with the best of these motivations when aspiring is an honorable individual; and the leader who can recognize these motivations in an aspiring individual is a wise leader. Generally, leaders and governments should choose ministers who are more mindful of their responsibilities than of self-interest; those who embrace their roles out of a sense of duty rather than for show, and who can tell the difference between a busy nature and a willing spirit.





Of Masques And Triumphs

THESE things are but toys, to come amongst such serious observations. But yet, since princes will have such things, it is better they should be graced with elegancy, than daubed with cost. Dancing to song, is a thing of great state and pleasure. I understand it, that the song be in quire, placed aloft, and accompanied with some broken music; and the ditty fitted to the device. Acting in song, especially in dialogues, hath an extreme good grace; I say acting, not dancing (for that is a mean and vulgar thing); and the voices of the dialogue would be strong and manly (a base and a tenor; no treble); and the ditty high and tragical; not nice or dainty. Several quires, placed one over against another, and taking the voice by catches, anthem-wise, give great pleasure. Turning dances into figure, is a childish curiosity. And generally let it be noted, that those things which I here set down, are such as do naturally take the sense, and not respect petty wonderments. It is true, the alterations of scenes, so it be quietly and without noise, are things of great beauty and pleasure; for they feed and relieve the eye, before it be full of the same object. Let the scenes abound with light, specially colored and varied; and let the masquers, or any other, that are to come down from the scene, have some motions upon the scene itself, before their coming down; for it draws the eye strangely, and makes it, with great pleasure, to desire to see, that it cannot perfectly discern. Let the songs be loud and cheerful, and not chirpings or pulings. Let the music likewise be sharp and loud, and well placed. The colors that show best by candle-light are white, carnation, and a kind of sea-water-green; and oes, or spangs, as they are of no great cost, so they are of most glory. As for rich embroidery, it is lost and not discerned. Let the suits of the masquers be graceful, and such as become the person, when the vizors are off; not after examples of known attires; Turke, soldiers, mariners', and the like. Let anti-masques not be long; they have been commonly of fools, satyrs, baboons, wild-men, antics, beasts, sprites, witches, Ethiops, pigmies, turquets, nymphs, rustics, Cupids, statuas moving, and the like. As for angels, it is not comical enough, to put them in anti-masques; and anything that is hideous, as devils, giants, is on the other side as unfit. But chiefly, let the music of them be recreative, and with some strange changes. Some sweet odors suddenly coming forth, without any drops falling, are, in such a company as there is steam and heat, things of great pleasure and refreshment. Double masques, one of men, another of ladies, addeth state and variety. But all is nothing except the room be kept clear and neat.

These things are just distractions in the midst of serious discussions. However, since princes enjoy such things, it’s better they are done with elegance than just extravagance. Dancing to a song is a grand and enjoyable affair. I believe the song should be sung by a choir positioned above and accompanied by some informal music, with lyrics that match the theme. Performing in song, especially in dialogues, has a great charm; I refer to acting, not dancing (since that's common and lowbrow). The voices in the dialogue should be strong and masculine (a bass and a tenor; no treble); the lyrics should be dramatic, not delicate or fussy. Having multiple choirs positioned opposite each other, harmonizing in rounds, provides great enjoyment. Turning dances into choreographed figures is a childish fancy. In general, it's important to note that the elements I mention here should naturally appeal to the senses and not just pursue trivial astonishments. It’s true that changing scenes, if done quietly and without disruption, can be beautiful and enjoyable; they refresh the eye before it grows bored of the same scene. The scenes should be bright, especially with a variety of colors; and those who are to enter from the backdrop should have some movements on stage before they make their entrance, as it captivates the audience’s attention and makes them eager to see what they can’t fully see. The songs should be loud and joyful, not whiny or muted. The music should also be sharp, loud, and well-organized. The colors that look best in candlelight are white, light pink, and a sort of sea-green; and simple decorations, while not overly costly, can be quite stunning. Rich embroidery tends to go unnoticed. The costumes of the performers should be graceful and suitable for their appearance when masks are off, not imitating well-known outfits like Turks, soldiers, or sailors. Anti-masques should be brief; they often portray fools, satyrs, monkeys, wild men, clowns, beasts, spirits, witches, Ethiopians, dwarfs, turks, nymphs, peasants, Cupids, moving statues, and similar characters. Angels aren't comical enough for anti-masques, and anything hideous, like devils or giants, is equally inappropriate. Above all, the music should be entertaining and feature some unusual twists. A sudden burst of sweet scents, without any drops falling, brings great pleasure and refreshment in a warm gathering. Double masques, one with men and the other with women, add elegance and variety. But all of this is meaningless unless the space is kept clean and tidy.

For justs, and tourneys, and barriers; the glories of them are chiefly in the chariots, wherein the challengers make their entry; especially if they be drawn with strange beasts: as lions, bears, camels, and the like; or in the devices of their entrance; or in the bravery of their liveries; or in the goodly furniture of their horses and armor. But enough of these toys.

For jousts, tournaments, and contests; their main glory lies in the chariots that the challengers ride in, especially if they're pulled by exotic animals like lions, bears, camels, and the like; or in the creative designs of their entries; or in the impressive outfits they wear; or in the beautiful equipment of their horses and armor. But that’s enough of these distractions.





Of Nature In Men

NATURE is often hidden; sometimes overcome; seldom extinguished. Force, maketh nature more violent in the return; doctrine and discourse, maketh nature less importune; but custom only doth alter and subdue nature. He that seeketh victory over his nature, let him not set himself too great, nor too small tasks; for the first will make him dejected by often failings; and the second will make him a small proceeder, though by often prevailings. And at the first let him practise with helps, as swimmers do with bladders or rushes; but after a time let him practise with disadvantages, as dancers do with thick shoes. For it breeds great perfection, if the practice be harder than the use. Where nature is mighty, and therefore the victory hard, the degrees had need be, first to stay and arrest nature in time; like to him that would say over the four and twenty letters when he was angry; then to go less in quantity; as if one should, in forbearing wine, come from drinking healths, to a draught at a meal; and lastly, to discontinue altogether. But if a man have the fortitude, and resolution, to enfranchise himself at once, that is the best:

NATURE is often concealed; sometimes conquered; rarely erased. Force makes nature more intense in its comeback; teaching and discussion make nature less demanding; but habits are what truly change and control nature. If someone wants to overcome their nature, they shouldn't take on tasks that are too big or too small; the first will lead to disappointment from frequent failures, and the second will result in slow progress, even with some successes. At first, they should practice with aids, like swimmers do with floaties or reeds; but after a while, they should practice with challenges, like dancers do in heavy shoes. It leads to greater excellence if the practice is harder than the actual use. Where nature is strong, and so overcoming it is tough, the steps should be to first pause and restrain nature in time; similar to someone trying to recite the alphabet when they're angry; then to gradually reduce efforts; like someone who, when stopping drinking, moves from toasting to just having wine with meals; and finally, to stop completely. But if a person has the courage and determination to free themselves all at once, that is the best approach.

     Optimus ille animi vindex laedentia pectus
     Vincula qui rupit, dedoluitque semel.
     That hero who freed the troubled heart
     Broke the painful chains and suffered just once.

Neither is the ancient rule amiss, to bend nature, as a wand, to a contrary extreme, whereby to set it right, understanding it, where the contrary extreme is no vice. Let not a man force a habit upon himself, with a perpetual continuance, but with some intermission. For both the pause reinforceth the new onset; and if a man that is not perfect, be ever in practice, he shall as well practise his errors, as his abilities, and induce one habit of both; and there is no means to help this, but by seasonable intermissions. But let not a man trust his victory over his nature, too far; for nature will lay buried a great time, and yet revive, upon the occasion or temptation. Like as it was with AEsop's damsel, turned from a cat to a woman, who sat very demurely at the board's end, till a mouse ran before her. Therefore, let a man either avoid the occasion altogether; or put himself often to it, that he may be little moved with it. A man's nature is best perceived in privateness, for there is no affectation; in passion, for that putteth a man out of his precepts; and in a new case or experiment, for there custom leaveth him. They are happy men, whose natures sort with their vocations; otherwise they may say, multum incola fuit anima mea; when they converse in those things, they do not affect. In studies, whatsoever a man commandeth upon himself, let him set hours for it; but whatsoever is agreeable to his nature, let him take no care for any set times; for his thoughts will fly to it, of themselves; so as the spaces of other business, or studies, will suffice. A man's nature, runs either to herbs or weeds; therefore let him seasonably water the one, and destroy the other.

The old rule about shaping our nature is still relevant: sometimes you have to push it to the opposite extreme to get it back on track, understanding that the opposite extreme isn't always a bad thing. A person shouldn't try to force themselves into a habit continuously without breaks. Taking a pause makes it easier to start fresh. If someone who isn't perfect practices all the time, they'll reinforce their mistakes just as much as their strengths, mixing both habits together. The only way to combat this is through timely breaks. But a person shouldn't get too confident in overcoming their nature; it can stay dormant for a long time and then come back when tempted. Just like Aesop's girl who turned from a cat to a woman and sat quietly at the table until a mouse ran by. So, a person should either completely avoid temptation or face it regularly so they aren't easily swayed by it. You can see a person's true nature in private because there's no pretense, during strong emotions since they lose their self-control, and in new situations where they aren't influenced by habit. Those who have a nature that aligns with their profession are fortunate; otherwise, they might feel out of place when dealing with things they don't enjoy. In study, whatever a person takes on for themselves, they should set specific times for it; but for what comes naturally, they shouldn't worry about scheduling it. Their mind will naturally drift to it, fitting it into the gaps of other tasks or studies. A person’s nature tends to lean toward either good things or bad, so they should focus on nurturing the positive and eliminating the negative.





Of Custom And Education

MEN'S thoughts, are much according to their inclination; their discourse and speeches, according to their learning and infused opinions; but their deeds, are after as they have been accustomed. And therefore, as Machiavel well noteth (though in an evil-favored instance), there is no trusting to the force of nature, nor to the bravery of words, except it be corroborate by custom. His instance is, that for the achieving of a desperate conspiracy, a man should not rest upon the fierceness of any man's nature, or his resolute undertakings; but take such an one, as hath had his hands formerly in blood. But Machiavel knew not of a Friar Clement, nor a Ravillac, nor a Jaureguy, nor a Baltazar Gerard; yet his rule holdeth still, that nature, nor the engagement of words, are not so forcible, as custom. Only superstition is now so well advanced, that men of the first blood, are as firm as butchers by occupation; and votary resolution, is made equipollent to custom, even in matter of blood. In other things, the predominancy of custom is everywhere visible; insomuch as a man would wonder, to hear men profess, protest, engage, give great words, and then do, just as they have done before; as if they were dead images, and engines moved only by the wheels of custom. We see also the reign or tyranny of custom, what it is. The Indians (I mean the sect of their wise men) lay themselves quietly upon a stock of wood, and so sacrifice themselves by fire. Nay, the wives strive to be burned, with the corpses of their husbands. The lads of Sparta, of ancient time, were wont to be scourged upon the altar of Diana, without so much as queching. I remember, in the beginning of Queen Elizabeth's time of England, an Irish rebel condemned, put up a petition to the deputy, that he might be hanged in a withe, and not in an halter; because it had been so used, with former rebels. There be monks in Russia, for penance, that will sit a whole night in a vessel of water, till they be engaged with hard ice. Many examples may be put of the force of custom, both upon mind and body. Therefore, since custom is the principal magistrate of man's life, let men by all means endeavor, to obtain good customs. Certainly custom is most perfect, when it beginneth in young years: this we call education; which is, in effect, but an early custom. So we see, in languages, the tongue is more pliant to all expressions and sounds, the joints are more supple, to all feats of activity and motions, in youth than afterwards. For it is true, that late learners cannot so well take the ply; except it be in some minds, that have not suffered themselves to fix, but have kept themselves open, and prepared to receive continual amendment, which is exceeding rare. But if the force of custom simple and separate, be great, the force of custom copulate and conjoined and collegiate, is far greater. For there example teacheth, company comforteth, emulation quickeneth, glory raiseth: so as in such places the force of custom is in his exaltation. Certainly the great multiplication of virtues upon human nature, resteth upon societies well ordained and disciplined. For commonwealths, and good governments, do nourish virtue grown but do not much mend the deeds. But the misery is, that the most effectual means, are now applied to the ends, least to be desired.

Men’s thoughts often align with their inclinations; their conversations and speeches reflect their learning and ingrained opinions; but their actions are shaped by what they are used to. As Machiavelli wisely points out (though in a rather grim context), we can’t rely solely on natural instinct or impressive words unless they are backed by consistent behavior. He argues that for carrying out a risky conspiracy, one shouldn’t depend on someone’s fierce nature or determined efforts but should instead rely on someone who has already committed violence. Yet, Machiavelli wasn’t aware of figures like Friar Clement, Ravillac, Jaureguy, or Balthasar Gerard; still, his principle remains valid: nature and eloquent commitments aren’t as powerful as routine. Nowadays, superstition is so deeply rooted that people of high status can be as resolute as butchers, and devoted determination is considered equal to habit, even in matters of violence. In other aspects, the dominance of habit is evident. One would be surprised to hear people profess, protest, commit, and make grand statements only to act as they have in the past, almost like lifeless statues, moved solely by the gears of routine. We also see the power or oppression of habit in various contexts. The Indians (referring to their wise sect) peacefully lie on a wooden pyre to sacrifice themselves by fire. Furthermore, wives compete to be cremated with their husbands' remains. Young Spartans in ancient times were accustomed to being whipped at the altar of Diana without so much as flinching. I recall that at the beginning of Queen Elizabeth's reign in England, an Irish rebel on death row petitioned the deputy to be hanged with a rope rather than a noose, as had been done with previous rebels. In Russia, some monks will spend an entire night sitting in a vessel of water until they are encased in solid ice as a form of penance. There are many examples showcasing the power of habit on both the mind and body. Thus, since habit is the chief director of human life, individuals should strive to cultivate good habits. Certainly, habits are most effective when developed in youth: this is what we call education, which is essentially just an early form of habit. We observe that the tongue is more adaptable to all sounds and expressions and the body is more agile for physical activities in youth than later in life. It’s true that late learners struggle more to adapt, unless they have kept their minds open and ready for continuous improvement, which is quite rare. Moreover, the combined force of habit, when joined with others, is significantly stronger than that of solitary habit. In such environments, example teaches, companionship comforts, rivalry inspires, and glory elevates: thus, in such contexts, the force of habit reaches its peak. Indeed, the great proliferation of virtues in human nature relies on well-organized and disciplined societies. Well-functioning governments can nurture grown virtue but typically don’t significantly improve behavior. Unfortunately, the most effective methods are often directed towards aims that are least desirable.





Of Fortune

IT CANNOT be denied, but outward accidents conduce much to fortune; favor, opportunity, death of others, occasion fitting virtue. But chiefly, the mould of a man's fortune is in his own hands. Faber quisque fortunae suae, saith the poet. And the most frequent of external causes is, that the folly of one man, is the fortune of another. For no man prospers so suddenly, as by others' errors. Serpens nisi serpentem comederit non fit draco. Overt and apparent virtues, bring forth praise; but there be secret and hidden virtues, that bring forth fortune; certain deliveries of a man's self, which have no name. The Spanish name, desemboltura, partly expresseth them; when there be not stonds nor restiveness in a man's nature; but that the wheels of his mind, keep way with the wheels of his fortune. For so Livy (after he had described Cato Major in these words, In illo viro tantum robur corporis et animi fuit, ut quocunque loco natus esset, fortunam sibi facturus videretur) falleth upon that, that he had versatile ingenium. Therefore if a man look sharply and attentively, he shall see Fortune: for though she be blind, yet she is not invisible. The way of fortune, is like the Milken Way in the sky; which is a meeting or knot of a number of small stars; not seen asunder, but giving light together. So are there a number of little, and scarce discerned virtues, or rather faculties and customs, that make men fortunate. The Italians note some of them, such as a man would little think. When they speak of one that cannot do amiss, they will throw in, into his other conditions, that he hath Poco di matto. And certainly there be not two more fortunate properties, than to have a little of the fool, and not too much of the honest. Therefore extreme lovers of their country or masters, were never fortunate, neither can they be. For when a man placeth his thoughts without himself, he goeth not his own way. An hasty fortune maketh an enterpriser and remover (the French hath it better, entreprenant, or remuant); but the exercised fortune maketh the able man. Fortune is to be honored and respected, and it be but for her daughters, Confidence and Reputation. For those two, Felicity breedeth; the first within a man's self, the latter in others towards him. All wise men, to decline the envy of their own virtues, use to ascribe them to Providence and Fortune; for so they may the better assume them: and, besides, it is greatness in a man, to be the care of the higher powers. So Caesar said to the pilot in the tempest, Caesarem portas, et fortunam ejus. So Sylla chose the name of Felix, and not of Magnus. And it hath been noted, that those who ascribe openly too much to their own wisdom and policy, end infortunate. It is written that Timotheus the Athenian, after he had, in the account he gave to the state of his government, often interlaced this speech, and in this, Fortune had no part, never prospered in anything, he undertook afterwards. Certainly there be, whose fortunes are like Homer's verses, that have a slide and easiness more than the verses of other poets; as Plutarch saith of Timoleon's fortune, in respect of that of Agesilaus or Epaminondas. And that this should be, no doubt it is much, in a man's self.

It cannot be denied that external factors play a big role in fortune; factors like luck, opportunity, and even the misfortune of others can contribute significantly. However, the primary control over a person's fortune lies in their own hands. As the poet says, "Every man is the architect of his own fortune." Often, one person's mistakes lead to the success of another, as no one succeeds as quickly as through others' errors. A serpent doesn't become a dragon unless it consumes another serpent. Obvious and visible virtues attract praise, but there are also secret and hidden virtues that create fortune—certain qualities within a person that don’t have a name. The Spanish term "desemboltura" somewhat captures these qualities; it refers to a person who is not rigid or hesitant in nature but instead has a mindset that aligns with their fortune. Livy, after describing Cato Major as having such strength of body and mind that wherever he was born, he would seem destined to create his own fortune, notes that he had a versatile spirit. Therefore, if a person looks closely and attentively, they will see Fortune, for although she may be blind, she is not invisible. The path of fortune is like the Milky Way in the sky—a collection of small stars that, when combined, shine brightly together. Similarly, there are many subtle, small virtues or personal qualities that bring luck. The Italians recognize some of these qualities in unexpected ways; for instance, when referring to someone who can do no wrong, they might add that he has "Poco di matto" (a little foolishness). Indeed, having a bit of folly and not being overly honest seem to be two lucky traits. Extreme devotion to one’s country or leaders rarely leads to fortune; when someone places their focus outside themselves, they lose their own path. Quick fortune makes a person a doer or a mover, but practiced fortune creates a capable individual. Fortune deserves respect, especially for her two daughters: Confidence and Reputation. The former grows from within a person, while the latter is what others feel toward him. Wise individuals, to avoid the jealousy of their own virtues, tend to attribute their successes to Providence and Fortune. This allows them to embrace those qualities more fully, and it also reflects a sense of importance when a person is cared for by higher powers. As Caesar told the pilot in the storm, "You carry Caesar and his fortune." Similarly, Sulla chose to be known as Felix rather than Magnus. It has also been observed that those who overtly credit too much to their own wisdom and skill often meet with misfortune. It is said that Timotheus the Athenian, after frequently asserting in his account to the state that "Fortune played no part," encountered failure in every endeavor that followed. Some people's fortunes resemble the smooth verses of Homer, which flow more easily than those of other poets, as Plutarch notes in comparing Timoleon’s fortune to that of Agesilaus or Epaminondas. This is undoubtedly greatly influenced by a person's own character.





Of Usury

MANY have made witty invectives against usury. They say that it is a pity, the devil should have God's part, which is the tithe. That the usurer is the greatest Sabbath-breaker, because his plough goeth every Sunday. That the usurer is the drone, that Virgil speaketh of;

MANY have made clever insults against usury. They argue that it’s a shame the devil takes what's God's, which is the tithe. That the usurer is the biggest Sabbath-breaker since his plow is at work every Sunday. That the usurer is the drone that Virgil referred to;

     Ignavum fucos pecus a praesepibus arcent.
     Ignavum fucos pecus a praesepibus arcent.

That the usurer breaketh the first law, that was made for mankind after the fall, which was, in sudore vultus tui comedes panem tuum; not, in sudore vultus alieni. That usurers should have orange-tawny bonnets, because they do judaize. That it is against nature for money to beget money; and the like. I say this only, that usury is a concessum propter duritiem cordis; for since there must be borrowing and lending, and men are so hard of heart, as they will not lend freely, usury must be permitted. Some others, have made suspicious and cunning propositions of banks, discovery of men's estates, and other inventions. But few have spoken of usury usefully. It is good to set before us, the incommodities and commodities of usury, that the good, may be either weighed out or culled out; and warily to provide, that while we make forth to that which is better, we meet not with that which is worse.

That the moneylender breaks the first law made for humanity after the fall, which was, “By the sweat of your brow, you will eat your food”; not “by the sweat of someone else’s brow.” That moneylenders should wear orange-tawny hats because they are like the Jews. That it goes against nature for money to make more money; and similar points. I say this only to note that usury is a concession due to the hardness of people’s hearts; because there must be borrowing and lending, and since people are so unwilling to lend freely, usury has to be allowed. Some others have proposed suspicious and crafty ideas about banks, revealing people’s assets, and other schemes. But few have talked about usury in a helpful way. It’s important to look at the drawbacks and benefits of usury, so we can assess the good versus the bad; and to carefully ensure that while we strive for the better, we don't end up with something worse.

The discommodities of usury are, First, that it makes fewer merchants. For were it not for this lazy trade of usury, money would not be still, but would in great part be employed upon merchandizing; which is the vena porta of wealth in a state. The second, that it makes poor merchants. For, as a farmer cannot husband his ground so well, if he sit at a great rent; so the merchant cannot drive his trade so well, if he sit at great usury. The third is incident to the other two; and that is the decay of customs of kings or states, which ebb or flow, with merchandizing. The fourth, that it bringeth the treasure of a realm, or state, into a few hands. For the usurer being at certainties, and others at uncertainties, at the end of the game, most of the money will be in the box; and ever a state flourisheth, when wealth is more equally spread. The fifth, that it beats down the price of land; for the employment of money, is chiefly either merchandizing or purchasing; and usury waylays both. The sixth, that it doth dull and damp all industries, improvements, and new inventions, wherein money would be stirring, if it were not for this slug. The last, that it is the canker and ruin of many men's estates; which, in process of time, breeds a public poverty.

The drawbacks of usury are, first, that it reduces the number of merchants. If it weren't for the lazy practice of usury, money wouldn't be stagnant but would mostly be used for trade, which is the lifeblood of wealth in a society. Second, it makes merchants poorer. Just as a farmer can't manage his land effectively if he has to pay a high rent, a merchant can't run his business well if they're burdened by high interest rates. The third point is related to the first two: it causes a decline in the revenue customs of kings or states, which rise and fall with trade. The fourth issue is that it concentrates the wealth of a realm or state into a few hands. Since the usurer has guaranteed returns while others face uncertainties, by the end of the day, most of the money will be in those few hands; and a state is always healthier when wealth is more evenly distributed. The fifth issue is that it drives down land prices, since the main uses of money are either for trade or for buying property, and usury undermines both. The sixth point is that it stifles all industries, advancements, and new inventions that would thrive if it weren't for this hindrance. Finally, it becomes a blight and destroys many people's livelihoods, which eventually creates widespread poverty.

On the other side, the commodities of usury are, first, that howsoever usury in some respect hindereth merchandizing, yet in some other it advanceth it; for it is certain that the greatest part of trade is driven by young merchants, upon borrowing at interest; so as if the usurer either call in, or keep back, his money, there will ensue, presently, a great stand of trade. The second is, that were it not for this easy borrowing upon interest, men's necessities would draw upon them a most sudden undoing; in that they would be forced to sell their means (be it lands or goods) far under foot; and so, whereas usury doth but gnaw upon them, bad markets would swallow them quite up. As for mortgaging or pawning, it will little mend the matter: for either men will not take pawns without use; or if they do, they will look precisely for the forfeiture. I remember a cruel moneyed man in the country, that would say, The devil take this usury, it keeps us from forfeitures, of mortgages and bonds. The third and last is, that it is a vanity to conceive, that there would be ordinary borrowing without profit; and it is impossible to conceive, the number of inconveniences that will ensue, if borrowing be cramped. Therefore to speak of the abolishing of usury is idle. All states have ever had it, in one kind or rate, or other. So as that opinion must be sent to Utopia.

On the other hand, the effects of usury are, first, that while usury can hinder trade in some ways, it also promotes it in others; it’s clear that a large part of commerce depends on young merchants borrowing at interest. If the moneylender calls in his loans or holds onto his cash, it would immediately cause a significant halt in trade. The second point is that without the option to easily borrow at interest, people’s urgent needs would lead to their quick downfall, forcing them to sell their property (whether land or goods) at a huge loss; in this way, usury only nibbles at their finances, while bad markets would completely wipe them out. As for mortgaging or pawning, that doesn't really help; either people won’t take pawns without interest, or if they do, they’ll expect strict repercussions for defaulting. I remember a ruthless wealthy guy in the area who would say, “The devil take this usury, it keeps us from forfeitures of mortgages and bonds.” The third and final point is that it’s foolish to think that there could be regular borrowing without profit; it’s hard to even imagine the range of problems that would arise if borrowing were restricted. So, discussing the elimination of usury is pointless. All societies have always had it, in some form or another. So that idea should be dismissed as unrealistic.

To speak now of the reformation, and reiglement, of usury; how the discommodities of it may be best avoided, and the commodities retained. It appears, by the balance of commodities and discommodities of usury, two things are to be reconciled. The one, that the tooth of usury be grinded, that it bite not too much; the other, that there be left open a means, to invite moneyed men to lend to the merchants, for the continuing and quickening of trade. This cannot be done, except you introduce two several sorts of usury, a less and a greater. For if you reduce usury to one low rate, it will ease the common borrower, but the merchant will be to seek for money. And it is to be noted, that the trade of merchandize, being the most lucrative, may bear usury at a good rate; other contracts not so.

Let's talk about reforming and regulating usury; how to minimize its downsides while keeping the benefits. It seems that to balance the pros and cons of usury, we need to reconcile two things. One, usury’s grip needs to be loosened so it doesn’t harm too much; two, we need to create an incentive for wealthy individuals to lend to merchants, helping to sustain and boost trade. This can’t happen unless we introduce two different types of usury: a lower rate and a higher rate. If we set usury to just one low rate, it will help everyday borrowers, but merchants will struggle to find funding. It’s also important to recognize that trade, being the most profitable, can handle usury at a higher rate; other types of contracts cannot.

To serve both intentions, the way would be briefly thus. That there be two rates of usury: the one free, and general for all; the other under license only, to certain persons, and in certain places of merchandizing. First, therefore, let usury in general, be reduced to five in the hundred; and let that rate be proclaimed, to be free and current; and let the state shut itself out, to take any penalty for the same. This will preserve borrowing, from any general stop or dryness. This will ease infinite borrowers in the country. This will, in good part, raise the price of land, because land purchased at sixteen years' purchase will yield six in the hundred, and somewhat more; whereas this rate of interest, yields but five. This by like reason will encourage, and edge, industrious and profitable improvements; because many will rather venture in that kind, than take five in the hundred, especially having been used to greater profit. Secondly, let there be certain persons licensed, to lend to known merchants, upon usury at a higher rate; and let it be with the cautions following. Let the rate be, even with the merchant himself, somewhat more easy than that he used formerly to pay; for by that means, all borrowers, shall have some ease by this reformation, be he merchant, or whosoever. Let it be no bank or common stock, but every man be master of his own money. Not that I altogether mislike banks, but they will hardly be brooked, in regard of certain suspicions. Let the state be answered some small matter for the license, and the rest left to the lender; for if the abatement be but small, it will no whit discourage the lender. For he, for example, that took before ten or nine in the hundred, will sooner descend to eight in the hundred than give over his trade of usury, and go from certain gains, to gains of hazard. Let these licensed lenders be in number indefinite, but restrained to certain principal cities and towns of merchandizing; for then they will be hardly able to color other men's moneys in the country: so as the license of nine will not suck away the current rate of five; for no man will send his moneys far off, nor put them into unknown hands.

To meet both objectives, here's a brief outline. There should be two types of interest rates: one that is free and applies to everyone, and another that is restricted to certain people and specific trading areas. First, let the general usury rate be set at five percent; this rate should be declared as free and widely accepted, and the state should refrain from imposing any penalties for it. This will prevent any widespread borrowing issues or stagnation. It will greatly benefit countless borrowers across the country. This will also help increase the value of land since land bought at sixteen years’ worth of income will generate six percent or more, while this interest rate only yields five percent. This reasoning will encourage industrious and profitable ventures, as many would rather take risks in this area than settle for five percent, especially if they’re used to earning more. Secondly, there should be certain licensed individuals allowed to lend to recognized merchants at a higher interest rate, but with the following precautions. The rate should be slightly lower than what merchants previously paid, allowing all borrowers, be they merchants or others, to benefit from this reform. It should not be a bank or a common fund, but rather, each person should manage their own money. I don’t completely dismiss banks, but they come with certain mistrust. The state could collect a small fee for the license, leaving the rest to the lenders; a small reduction won’t discourage lenders. For instance, someone who previously charged ten or nine percent will likely drop to eight percent rather than abandon their lending business for risky earnings. These licensed lenders can be numerous but limited to key cities and trading towns, ensuring they can’t easily take advantage of others' money in less populated areas. This way, the nine percent rate won’t undermine the prevailing rate of five percent, as no one would send their money far away or into the hands of unknown individuals.

If it be objected that this doth in a sort authorize usury, which before, was in some places but permissive; the answer is, that it is better to mitigate usury, by declaration, than to suffer it to rage, by connivance.

If someone argues that this kind of allows usury, which was previously just tolerated in some places, the reply is that it's better to manage usury through clear rules than to let it run rampant through negligence.





Of Youth And Age

A MAN that is young in years, may be old in hours, if he have lost no time. But that happeneth rarely. Generally, youth is like the first cogitations, not so wise as the second. For there is a youth in thoughts, as well as in ages. And yet the invention of young men, is more lively than that of old; and imaginations stream into their minds better, and, as it were, more divinely. Natures that have much heat, and great and violent desires and perturbations, are not ripe for action, till they have passed the meridian of their years; as it was with Julius Caesar and Septimius Severus. Of the latter, of whom it is said, Juventutem egit erroribus, imo furoribus, plenam. And yet he was the ablest emperor, almost, of all the list. But reposed natures may do well in youth. As it is seen in Augustus Caesar, Cosmus Duke of Florence, Gaston de Foix, and others. On the other side, heat and vivacity in age, is an excellent composition for business. Young men are fitter to invent, than to judge; fitter for execution, than for counsel; and fitter for new projects, than for settled business. For the experience of age, in things that fall within the compass of it, directeth them; but in new things, abuseth them.

A young man might be old in experience if he hasn’t wasted any time, but that’s pretty rare. Generally, youth is like first thoughts—they’re not as wise as second thoughts. There’s a youthfulness in ideas just like there is in age. However, young people's creativity is often more vibrant, and their imaginations flow more freely and, in a way, more divinely. Those with a lot of passion and intense desires often aren’t ready for action until they’re beyond their prime years, as was the case with Julius Caesar and Septimius Severus. The latter is said to have lived his youth filled with errors, truly full of impulsive actions. Still, he was one of the most capable emperors on record. However, composed individuals can excel in their youth, as seen in figures like Augustus Caesar, Cosimo de' Medici, Gaston de Foix, and others. On the flip side, being passionate and dynamic in later years can be a great asset in business. Young people are better at coming up with ideas than at evaluating them, more suited for execution than planning, and better for new ventures than for established routines. The experience that comes with age helps guide them in familiar situations, but it can mislead them in novel ones.

The errors of young men, are the ruin of business; but the errors of aged men, amount but to this, that more might have been done, or sooner. Young men, in the conduct and manage of actions, embrace more than they can hold; stir more than they can quiet; fly to the end, without consideration of the means and degrees; pursue some few principles, which they have chanced upon absurdly; care not to innovate, which draws unknown inconveniences; use extreme remedies at first; and, that which doubleth all errors, will not acknowledge or retract them; like an unready horse, that will neither stop nor turn. Men of age object too much, consult too long, adventure too little, repent too soon, and seldom drive business home to the full period, but content themselves with a mediocrity of success. Certainly it is good to compound employments of both; for that will be good for the present, because the virtues of either age, may correct the defects of both; and good for succession, that young men may be learners, while men in age are actors; and, lastly, good for extern accidents, because authority followeth old men, and favor and popularity, youth. But for the moral part, perhaps youth will have the pre-eminence, as age hath for the politic. A certain rabbin, upon the text, Your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams, inferreth that young men, are admitted nearer to God than old, because vision, is a clearer revelation, than a dream. And certainly, the more a man drinketh of the world, the more it intoxicateth; and age doth profit rather in the powers of understanding, than in the virtues of the will and affections. There be some, have an over-early ripeness in their years, which fadeth betimes. These are, first, such as have brittle wits, the edge whereof is soon turned; such as was Hermogenes the rhetorician, whose books are exceeding subtle; who afterwards waxed stupid. A second sort, is of those that have some natural dispositions which have better grace in youth, than in age; such as is a fluent and luxuriant speech; which becomes youth well, but not age: so Tully saith of Hortensius, Idem manebat, neque idem decebat. The third is of such, as take too high a strain at the first, and are magnanimous, more than tract of years can uphold. As was Scipio Africanus, of whom Livy saith in effect, Ultima primis cedebant.

The mistakes of young men ruin businesses, while the mistakes of older men just mean that more could have been accomplished, or done sooner. Young men tend to take on more than they can handle, create more chaos than they can manage, rush to the end without considering the steps along the way, follow a few principles they’ve stumbled upon irrationally, avoid necessary innovations that could bring unforeseen issues, use drastic solutions too quickly, and, to make matters worse, they refuse to recognize or correct their mistakes, much like an unruly horse that won’t stop or change direction. Older men, on the other hand, tend to overanalyze, deliberate too long, take too few risks, regret too quickly, and rarely see projects through to completion, settling instead for a mediocre level of success. It’s definitely beneficial to combine the strengths of both age groups; this would be advantageous in the present, as the strengths of each age could balance each other’s weaknesses; it’s also good for the future, allowing young people to learn while older individuals take the lead; and finally, it’s good for external influences, since older men have authority, while youth often attract favor and popularity. Yet morally speaking, youth might have the advantage, just as older individuals do in politics. A certain rabbi, referencing the text, "Your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams," suggests that young men are closer to God than older men because visions represent clearer revelations than dreams. Indeed, the more someone dives into the world, the more it can intoxicate them, and aging tends to improve understanding rather than the will and emotions. Some people mature too quickly in their youth, which fades before long. These include those with fragile minds, which can become dull quickly; an example is Hermogenes the rhetorician, whose clever writings became less insightful over time. Another group consists of those with natural talents that shine better in youth than in old age, such as fluent and elaborate speech, which suits the young but not the old. As Cicero remarked about Hortensius, "He remained the same, but he did not suit his age." The third group comprises individuals who start out too ambitious and noble, more than their years can sustain, like Scipio Africanus, of whom Livy essentially said, "The later years surpassed the early ones."





Of Beauty

VIRTUE is like a rich stone, best plain set; and surely virtue is best, in a body that is comely, though not of delicate features; and that hath rather dignity of presence, than beauty of aspect. Neither is it almost seen, that very beautiful persons are otherwise of great virtue; as if nature were rather busy, not to err, than in labor to produce excellency. And therefore they prove accomplished, but not of great spirit; and study rather behavior, than virtue. But this holds not always: for Augustus Caesar, Titus Vespasianus, Philip le Belle of France, Edward the Fourth of England, Alcibiades of Athens, Ismael the Sophy of Persia, were all high and great spirits; and yet the most beautiful men of their times. In beauty, that of favor, is more than that of color; and that of decent and gracious motion, more than that of favor. That is the best part of beauty, which a picture cannot express; no, nor the first sight of the life. There is no excellent beauty, that hath not some strangeness in the proportion. A man cannot tell whether Apelles, or Albert Durer, were the more trifler; whereof the one, would make a personage by geometrical proportions; the other, by taking the best parts out of divers faces, to make one excellent. Such personages, I think, would please nobody, but the painter that made them. Not but I think a painter may make a better face than ever was; but he must do it by a kind of felicity (as a musician that maketh an excellent air in music), and not by rule. A man shall see faces, that if you examine them part by part, you shall find never a good; and yet altogether do well. If it be true that the principal part of beauty is in decent motion, certainly it is no marvel, though persons in years seem many times more amiable; pulchrorum autumnus pulcher; for no youth can be comely but by pardon, and considering the youth, as to make up the comeliness. Beauty is as summer fruits, which are easy to corrupt, and cannot last; and for the most part it makes a dissolute youth, and an age a little out of countenance; but yet certainly again, if it light well, it maketh virtue shine, and vices blush.

VIRTUE is like a precious gem, best when it's unadorned; and truly, virtue is at its finest in a person who is attractive, though not necessarily conventionally beautiful, and who has more dignity in their presence than beauty in their appearance. It's rare to see that very beautiful people possess great virtue; it seems as though nature was more focused on not making mistakes than on producing excellence. Therefore, they tend to be well-rounded, but not especially admirable; they prioritize appearance over virtue. However, this is not always the case: Augustus Caesar, Titus Vespasian, Philip the Fair of France, Edward IV of England, Alcibiades of Athens, and Ismail the Sophy of Persia were all remarkable and notable figures, and they were also the most handsome men of their times. In terms of beauty, attractiveness matters more than complexion, and grace in movement matters more than mere attractiveness. The true essence of beauty is something a picture cannot capture, nor can the first glance at a living person. There is no remarkable beauty that doesn’t have a certain uniqueness in its proportions. It’s hard to say whether Apelles or Albrecht Dürer was more superficial; one would create a figure based on geometric proportions, while the other would take the best features from different faces to create one ideal face. I believe such creations would please no one except the artist who made them. Not that I think a painter can’t create a more beautiful face than ever existed; they just have to achieve it through a kind of artistry (similar to a musician crafting a beautiful melody) rather than through formulas. A person can have a face that, when examined closely, has no appealing features, yet looks great as a whole. If the essence of beauty indeed lies in graceful movement, it’s no wonder that mature individuals often appear more charming; the autumn of beauty is beautiful; for youth can only be charming through forgiveness and by considering their youthfulness to balance its charm. Beauty is like summer fruit, which is easily spoiled and doesn’t last; often, it leads to a reckless youth and an aging person who feels a bit out of sorts; yet, if it’s aligned properly, it highlights virtue and makes vices feel ashamed.





Of Deformity

DEFORMED persons are commonly even with nature; for as nature hath done ill by them, so do they by nature; being for the most part (as the Scripture saith) void of natural affection; and so they have their revenge of nature. Certainly there is a consent, between the body and the mind; and where nature erreth in the one, she ventureth in the other. Ubi peccat in uno, periclitatur in altero. But because there is, in man, an election touching the frame of his mind, and a necessity in the frame of his body, the stars of natural inclination are sometimes obscured, by the sun of discipline and virtue. Therefore it is good to consider of deformity, not as a sign, which is more deceivable; but as a cause, which seldom faileth of the effect. Whosoever hath anything fixed in his person, that doth induce contempt, hath also a perpetual spur in himself, to rescue and deliver himself from scorn. Therefore all deformed persons, are extreme bold. First, as in their own defence, as being exposed to scorn; but in process of time, by a general habit. Also it stirreth in them industry, and especially of this kind, to watch and observe the weakness of others, that they may have somewhat to repay. Again, in their superiors, it quencheth jealousy towards them, as persons that they think they may, at pleasure, despise: and it layeth their competitors and emulators asleep; as never believing they should be in possibility of advancement, till they see them in possession. So that upon the matter, in a great wit, deformity is an advantage to rising. Kings in ancient times (and at this present in some countries) were wont to put great trust in eunuchs; because they that are envious towards all are more obnoxious and officious, towards one. But yet their trust towards them, hath rather been as to good spials, and good whisperers, than good magistrates and officers. And much like is the reason of deformed persons. Still the ground is, they will, if they be of spirit, seek to free themselves from scorn; which must be either by virtue or malice; and therefore let it not be marvelled, if sometimes they prove excellent persons; as was Agesilaus, Zanger the son of Solyman, AEsop, Gasca, President of Peru; and Socrates may go likewise amongst them; with others.

Deformed individuals often feel equal to the rest of humanity; just as nature has treated them unfairly, they, in turn, act against nature. Most of them, as the Scripture says, lack natural affection, seeking their revenge on it. There is definitely a connection between the body and the mind; when nature falters in one, it tends to falter in the other. However, since individuals have the ability to choose their mindset while their physical form is determined by necessity, natural inclinations can sometimes be overshadowed by the influence of discipline and virtue. Therefore, it’s important to view deformity not merely as a misleading sign but as a cause that reliably leads to certain effects. Anyone who possesses a physical trait that invites contempt also carries a constant motivation to rise above that scorn. Consequently, all deformed individuals tend to be very bold. Initially, it’s a form of self-defense against ridicule, but over time, it becomes a general habit. This boldness also drives them to be observant and to identify the weaknesses of others, providing them with opportunities to retaliate. Furthermore, it diminishes envy from their superiors, as those in power often think they can easily look down on them, and it puts their rivals and competitors at ease, as they do not believe those with deformities could ever achieve success until they see them in positions of power. Essentially, for someone with great intellect, deformity can actually be an advantage for advancement. In ancient times, and even in some present-day societies, kings would often place a great deal of trust in eunuchs because those who harbor envy for everyone else tend to be more loyal and helpful to a single individual. However, this trust has typically been more about them being good spies and informants rather than effective leaders or officials. The same reasoning applies to deformed individuals. Ultimately, the key point is that if they have spirit, they will seek to free themselves from scorn, which they can do either through virtue or malice. So it's no surprise that occasionally they turn out to be remarkable individuals, like Agesilaus, Zanger the son of Solyman, Aesop, Gasca, the President of Peru, and Socrates, among others.





Of Building

HOUSES are built to live in, and not to look on; therefore let use be preferred before uniformity, except where both may be had. Leave the goodly fabrics of houses, for beauty only, to the enchanted palaces of the poets; who build them with small cost. He that builds a fair house, upon an ill seat, committeth himself to prison. Neither do I reckon it an ill seat, only where the air is unwholesome; but likewise where the air is unequal; as you shall see many fine seats set upon a knap of ground, environed with higher hills round about it; whereby the heat of the sun is pent in, and the wind gathereth as in troughs; so as you shall have, and that suddenly, as great diversity of heat and cold as if you dwelt in several places. Neither is it ill air only that maketh an ill seat, but ill ways, ill markets; and, if you will consult with Momus, ill neighbors. I speak not of many more; want of water; want of wood, shade, and shelter; want of fruitfulness, and mixture of grounds of several natures; want of prospect; want of level grounds; want of places at some near distance for sports of hunting, hawking, and races; too near the sea, too remote; having the commodity of navigable rivers, or the discommodity of their overflowing; too far off from great cities, which may hinder business, or too near them, which lurcheth all provisions, and maketh everything dear; where a man hath a great living laid together, and where he is scanted: all which, as it is impossible perhaps to find together, so it is good to know them, and think of them, that a man may take as many as he can; and if he have several dwellings, that he sort them so that what he wanteth in the one, he may find in the other. Lucullus answered Pompey well; who, when he saw his stately galleries, and rooms so large and lightsome, in one of his houses, said, Surely an excellent place for summer, but how do you in winter? Lucullus answered, Why, do you not think me as wise as some fowl are, that ever change their abode towards the winter?

HOUSES are built to live in, not just to look at; so functionality should be prioritized over uniformity, unless both can be achieved. Leave the beautiful designs of houses, meant purely for aesthetics, to the enchanting palaces of poets, who create them at little cost. A person who builds a nice house in a bad location is essentially trapping themselves. I don’t consider a bad location just one with unhealthy air; it can also be a place where the air isn’t steady. You often see lovely homes on a hill surrounded by taller hills, which can trap the sun's heat and create wind currents like troughs. This leads to abrupt swings in temperature, making it feel like you live in entirely different places. It’s not only unhealthy air that makes a location bad; poor roads, insufficient markets, and if you consult with Momus, problematic neighbors can too. I’m not even bringing up other concerns like lack of water, absence of trees, shade, and shelter; lack of fertility, and varied land types; lack of a good view; uneven terrain; lack of nearby areas for hunting, bird watching, and racing; being too close to or too far from the sea; issues with navigable rivers, or their potential flooding; being too far from major cities which can complicate business, or too close to them, which drives up prices and makes everything expensive; living in a large area but being short on resources: all of these factors are likely impossible to find in one place, but it’s good to be aware of them so one can choose as many as possible. If you have multiple homes, try to arrange them so that what you lack in one, you can find in another. Lucullus responded wisely to Pompey, who, upon seeing the grand galleries and brightly lit rooms in one of his houses, remarked, "This is surely a great place for summer, but how do you manage in winter?" Lucullus replied, "Well, don’t you think I'm as smart as some birds that migrate for the winter?"

To pass from the seat, to the house itself; we will do as Cicero doth in the orator's art; who writes books De Oratore, and a book he entitles Orator; whereof the former, delivers the precepts of the art, and the latter, the perfection. We will therefore describe a princely palace, making a brief model thereof. For it is strange to see, now in Europe, such huge buildings as the Vatican and Escurial and some others be, and yet scarce a very fair room in them.

To move from the seat to the house itself, we will follow Cicero's approach in the art of oratory; he wrote books called De Oratore and one titled Orator, where the first provides the principles of the art and the latter illustrates its perfection. So, we will describe a grand palace, creating a brief model of it. It’s surprising to see such massive buildings in Europe, like the Vatican and the Escorial, and yet hardly any truly beautiful rooms within them.

First, therefore, I say you cannot have a perfect palace except you have two several sides; a side for the banquet, as it is spoken of in the book of Hester, and a side for the household; the one for feasts and triumphs, and the other for dwelling. I understand both these sides to be not only returns, but parts of the front; and to be uniform without, though severally partitioned within; and to be on both sides of a great and stately tower, in the midst of the front, that, as it were, joineth them together on either hand. I would have on the side of the banquet, in front, one only goodly room above stairs, of some forty foot high; and under it a room for a dressing, or preparing place, at times of triumphs. On the other side, which is the household side, I wish it divided at the first, into a hall and a chapel (with a partition between); both of good state and bigness; and those not to go all the length, but to have at the further end, a winter and a summer parlor, both fair. And under these rooms, a fair and large cellar, sunk under ground; and likewise some privy kitchens, with butteries and pantries, and the like. As for the tower, I would have it two stories, of eighteen foot high apiece, above the two wings; and a goodly leads upon the top, railed with statuas interposed; and the same tower to be divided into rooms, as shall be thought fit. The stairs likewise to the upper rooms, let them be upon a fair open newel, and finely railed in, with images of wood, cast into a brass color; and a very fair landing-place at the top. But this to be, if you do not point any of the lower rooms, for a dining place of servants. For otherwise, you shall have the servants' dinner after your own: for the steam of it, will come up as in a tunnel. And so much for the front. Only I understand the height of the first stairs to be sixteen foot, which is the height of the lower room.

First, I say you cannot have a perfect palace unless you have two different sides; one side for banquets, as mentioned in the book of Esther, and the other side for the household; one side for feasts and celebrations, and the other for everyday living. I see both these sides not only as returns but as parts of the front; they should look uniform from the outside, even though they are divided inside; and they should be on both sides of a grand and impressive tower that connects them together on each side. On the banquet side, I envision a large, beautiful room upstairs, around forty feet high; beneath it, a space for dressing or preparation during celebrations. On the household side, I want it divided to have a hall and a chapel (with a partition in between); both should be spacious and grand; they shouldn't stretch all the way to the end, but have at the back, a winter and a summer parlor, both lovely. Below these rooms, there should be a nice, large cellar, sunk underground; and also some private kitchens, along with butteries and pantries, and similar spaces. As for the tower, I want it to have two stories, each eighteen feet high, rising above the two wings, with a beautiful roof on top, bordered with statues placed in between; and the tower should be divided into rooms as deemed appropriate. The stairs leading to the upper rooms should have a nice open newel, elegantly railed in, with wooden images painted in a brass color; and there should be a lovely landing area at the top. This is provided you don’t designate any of the lower rooms for the servants' dining area; otherwise, you’ll smell their meals while you’re eating, as the steam will rise like in a tunnel. And that covers the front. I just want to clarify that the height of the first stairs should be sixteen feet, which matches the height of the lower room.

Beyond this front, is there to be a fair court, but three sides of it, of a far lower building than the front. And in all the four corners of that court, fair staircases, cast into turrets, on the outside, and not within the row of buildings themselves. But those towers, are not to be of the height of the front, but rather proportionable to the lower building. Let the court not be paved, for that striketh up a great heat in summer, and much cold in winter. But only some side alleys, with a cross, and the quarters to graze, being kept shorn, but not too near shorn. The row of return on the banquet side, let it be all stately galleries: in which galleries let there be three, or five, fine cupolas in the length of it, placed at equal distance; and fine colored windows of several works. On the household side, chambers of presence and ordinary entertainments, with some bed-chambers; and let all three sides be a double house, without thorough lights on the sides, that you may have rooms from the sun, both for forenoon and afternoon. Cast it also, that you may have rooms, both for summer and winter; shady for summer, and warm for winter. You shall have sometimes fair houses so full of glass, that one cannot tell where to become, to be out of the sun or cold. For inbowed windows, I hold them of good use (in cities, indeed, upright do better, in respect of the uniformity towards the street); for they be pretty retiring places for conference; and besides, they keep both the wind and sun off; for that which would strike almost through the room, doth scarce pass the window. But let them be but few, four in the court, on the sides only.

Beyond this front, there will be a fair courtyard, but it will only have three sides, and those will be a much shorter structure than the front. In all four corners of that courtyard, there should be nice staircases that lead up into turrets on the outside, not within the row of buildings. However, these towers should not be as tall as the front but should be in proportion to the shorter building. The courtyard should not be paved, as that creates a lot of heat in the summer and cold in the winter. Instead, there should be some side paths arranged in a cross, along with grassed areas that are kept neatly trimmed, but not too closely. The row of spaces on the banquet side should consist of impressive galleries, in which there should be three or five elegant cupolas along its length, spaced evenly apart, and colorful windows with various designs. On the household side, there should be rooms for receiving guests and everyday gatherings, along with some bedrooms; all three sides should have a double structure with no direct light coming in from the sides, allowing for rooms that benefit from sunlight in both the morning and afternoon. It should also be designed so that there are rooms suitable for both summer and winter; shaded for summer and warm for winter. Occasionally, you will find beautiful homes filled with so much glass that it's hard to find a spot away from the sun or cold. For bowing windows, I think they are quite useful (though in cities, upright ones work better for the sake of uniformity along the street); they create nice secluded spots for conversations and also shield you from the wind and sun; what would almost shine directly into the room barely makes it through the window. But keep the number limited, only four in the courtyard, placed on the sides.

Beyond this court, let there be an inward court, of the same square and height; which is to be environed with the garden on all sides; and in the inside, cloistered on all sides, upon decent and beautiful arches, as high as the first story. On the under story, towards the garden, let it be turned to a grotto, or a place of shade, or estivation. And only have opening and windows towards the garden; and be level upon the floor, no whit sunken under ground, to avoid all dampishness. And let there be a fountain, or some fair work of statuas, in the midst of this court; and to be paved as the other court was. These buildings to be for privy lodgings on both sides; and the end for privy galleries. Whereof you must foresee that one of them be for an infirmary, if the prince or any special person should be sick, with chambers, bed-chamber, antecamera, and recamera joining to it. This upon the second story. Upon the ground story, a fair gallery, open, upon pillars; and upon the third story likewise, an open gallery, upon pillars, to take the prospect and freshness of the garden. At both corners of the further side, by way of return, let there be two delicate or rich cabinets, daintily paved, richly hanged, glazed with crystalline glass, and a rich cupola in the midst; and all other elegancy that may be thought upon. In the upper gallery too, I wish that there may be, if the place will yield it, some fountains running in divers places from the wall, with some fine avoidances. And thus much for the model of the palace; save that you must have, before you come to the front, three courts. A green court plain, with a wall about it; a second court of the same, but more garnished, with little turrets, or rather embellishments, upon the wall; and a third court, to make a square with the front, but not to be built, nor yet enclosed with a naked wall, but enclosed with terraces, leaded aloft, and fairly garnished, on the three sides; and cloistered on the inside, with pillars, and not with arches below. As for offices, let them stand at distance, with some low galleries, to pass from them to the palace itself.

Beyond this courtyard, there should be an inner courtyard, same square shape and height; it should be surrounded by the garden on all sides, and inside, enclosed with beautiful arches, as tall as the first floor. On the lower level, facing the garden, it should be designed as a grotto or a shaded area for relaxation. There should be openings and windows only towards the garden, and the floor should be level, not sunken underground to prevent dampness. In the center of this courtyard, there should be a fountain or a beautiful arrangement of statues, and it should be paved like the other courtyard. These buildings will serve as private quarters on both sides, with private galleries at the end. You should ensure that one of these is for an infirmary in case the prince or any important person falls ill, featuring chambers, a bedroom, an ante-room, and a connecting room on the second floor. On the ground level, there should be an airy gallery supported by pillars, and on the third floor, another open gallery on pillars to enjoy the view and freshness of the garden. At both corners on the far side, there should be two elegant or richly decorated cabinets, finely paved, richly draped, with crystal-glass windows, and a beautiful dome in the center, along with all other possible refinements. I also wish for the upper gallery to have, if space allows, some fountains flowing from various points in the wall, with decorative drains. This is the layout for the palace; however, before reaching the front, there should be three courtyards. The first should be a simple green courtyard enclosed by a wall; the second, similar in size, but more adorned with small turrets or embellishments on the wall; and a third courtyard, forming a square with the front, but not built or enclosed by a bare wall, instead surrounded by elevated terraces that are elegantly decorated on three sides; and it should be cloistered on the inside with pillars, not arches below. As for the service areas, they should be set apart, with some low galleries to connect them to the palace itself.





Of Gardens

GOD Almighty first planted a garden. And indeed it is the purest of human pleasures. It is the greatest refreshment to the spirits of man; without which, buildings and palaces are but gross handiworks; and a man shall ever see, that when ages grow to civility and elegancy, men come to build stately sooner than to garden finely; as if gardening were the greater perfection. I do hold it, in the royal ordering of gardens, there ought to be gardens, for all the months in the year; in which severally things of beauty may be then in season. For December, and January, and the latter part of November, you must take such things as are green all winter: holly; ivy; bays; juniper; cypress-trees; yew; pine-apple-trees; fir-trees; rosemary; lavender; periwinkle, the white, the purple, and the blue; germander; flags; orange-trees; lemon-trees; and myrtles, if they be stoved; and sweet marjoram, warm set. There followeth, for the latter part of January and February, the mezereon-tree, which then blossoms; crocus vernus, both the yellow and the grey; primroses, anemones; the early tulippa; hyacinthus orientalis; chamairis; fritellaria. For March, there come violets, specially the single blue, which are the earliest; the yellow daffodil; the daisy; the almond-tree in blossom; the peach-tree in blossom; the cornelian-tree in blossom; sweet-briar. In April follow the double white violet; the wallflower; the stock-gilliflower; the cowslip; flowerdelices, and lilies of all natures; rosemary-flowers; the tulippa; the double peony; the pale daffodil; the French honeysuckle; the cherry-tree in blossom; the damson and plum-trees in blossom; the white thorn in leaf; the lilac-tree. In May and June come pinks of all sorts, specially the blushpink; roses of all kinds, except the musk, which comes later; honeysuckles; strawberries; bugloss; columbine; the French marigold, flos Africanus; cherry-tree in fruit; ribes; figs in fruit; rasps; vineflowers; lavender in flowers; the sweet satyrian, with the white flower; herba muscaria; lilium convallium; the apple-tree in blossom. In July come gilliflowers of all varieties; musk-roses; the lime-tree in blossom; early pears and plums in fruit; jennetings, codlins. In August come plums of all sorts in fruit; pears; apricocks; berberries; filberds; musk-melons; monks-hoods, of all colors. In September come grapes; apples; poppies of all colors; peaches; melocotones; nectarines; cornelians; wardens; quinces. In October and the beginning of November come services; medlars; bullaces; roses cut or removed to come late; hollyhocks; and such like. These particulars are for the climate of London; but my meaning is perceived, that you may have ver perpetuum, as the place affords.

GOD Almighty first created a garden. And truly, it is the purest of human pleasures. It brings the greatest refreshment to the human spirit; without it, buildings and palaces are merely rough creations; and one will always notice that as societies develop civility and elegance, people tend to build impressive structures before they cultivate gardens, as if gardening represents a higher form of perfection. I believe that in the proper arrangement of gardens, there should be gardens for every month of the year, showcasing different beauties that are in season. For December, January, and the latter part of November, you should include plants that stay green all winter: holly, ivy, bay laurel, juniper, cypress trees, yew, pineapple trees, fir trees, rosemary, lavender, periwinkle (in white, purple, and blue), germander, flag iris, orange trees, lemon trees, and myrtles if kept warm; and sweet marjoram, grown in warm conditions. Then, for late January and February, there’s the mezereon tree which then blooms; crocus vernus in both yellow and grey; primroses, anemones; the early tulip; hyacinth; chamaris; and fritillaria. In March, violets appear, especially the single blue ones, which are the earliest; the yellow daffodil; daisies; almond trees in bloom; peach trees in bloom; cornelian trees in bloom; and sweet briar. In April, you’ll see double white violets; wallflowers; stock gilliflowers; cowslips; flowerdelices; and lilies of all kinds; rosemary flowers; tulips; double peonies; pale daffodils; French honeysuckle; cherry trees in bloom; damson and plum trees in bloom; white thorn in leaf; and lilacs. In May and June, there are pinks of all sorts, especially blush pinks; all kinds of roses, except for musk roses, which come later; honeysuckles; strawberries; bugloss; columbine; French marigolds; cherry trees bearing fruit; ribes; figs; raspberries; flowering vines; lavender in bloom; sweet satyrian with white flowers; herba muscaria; lily of the valley; and apple trees in bloom. In July, all varieties of gilliflowers appear; musk roses; lime trees in bloom; early pears and plums bearing fruit; and varieties such as jennetings and codlins. In August, all sorts of plums, pears, apricots, barberries, filberts, musk melons, and monkshood in all colors come to bear fruit. In September, you’ll find grapes; apples; poppies in every color; peaches; melocotones; nectarines; cornelian cherries; wardens; and quinces. In October and early November, there are service berries; medlars; bullaces; late-blooming roses; hollyhocks; and similar plants. These specifics apply to the climate of London; but my point is clear, that you can achieve perpetual beauty, as the location allows.

And because the breath of flowers is far sweeter in the air (where it comes and goes like the warbling of music) than in the hand, therefore nothing is more fit for that delight, than to know what be the flowers and plants that do best perfume the air. Roses, damask and red, are fast flowers of their smells; so that you may walk by a whole row of them, and find nothing of their sweetness; yea though it be in a morning's dew. Bays likewise yield no smell as they grow. Rosemary little; nor sweet marjoram. That which above all others yields the sweetest smell in the air is the violet, specially the white double violet, which comes twice a year; about the middle of April, and about Bartholomew-tide. Next to that is the musk-rose. Then the strawberry-leaves dying, which yield a most excellent cordial smell. Then the flower of vines; it is a little dust, like the dust of a bent, which grows upon the cluster in the first coming forth. Then sweet-briar. Then wall-flowers, which are very delightful to be set under a parlor or lower chamber window. Then pinks and gilliflowers, especially the matted pink and clove gilliflower. Then the flowers of the lime-tree. Then the honeysuckles, so they be somewhat afar off. Of beanflowers I speak not, because they are field flowers. But those which perfume the air most delightfully, not passed by as the rest, but being trodden upon and crushed, are three; that is, burnet, wildthyme, and watermints. Therefore you are to set whole alleys of them, to have the pleasure when you walk or tread.

And because the scent of flowers is much sweeter in the air (where it comes and goes like the sound of music) than in your hand, nothing beats knowing which flowers and plants best perfume the air. Roses, whether damask or red, often don’t release much scent; you can walk past a whole row of them and not notice their sweetness, even in the morning dew. Bay leaves have little smell as they grow, and neither does rosemary or sweet marjoram. The sweetest scent in the air comes from violets, especially the white double violet, which blooms twice a year—around mid-April and at the end of August. Next is the musk rose. Then there are the dying strawberry leaves, which give off a delightful cordial scent. Following that is the flower of the vine; it has a fine dust, similar to the dust of bent grass, that appears when the clusters first emerge. Then there’s sweet-briar. Wallflowers are also lovely to plant under a parlor or lower chamber window. Next come pinks and gilliflowers, especially the matted pink and clove gilliflower. Then the lime tree flowers. Lastly, honeysuckles, as long as they are placed a bit farther away. I won't mention bean flowers because they grow in fields. However, the plants that most delightfully perfume the air and shouldn’t be overlooked are three: burnet, wild thyme, and water mint. So, you should plant whole paths of them for enjoyment when you walk or tread on them.

For gardens (speaking of those which are indeed princelike, as we have done of buildings), the contents ought not well to be under thirty acres of ground; and to be divided into three parts; a green in the entrance; a heath or desert in the going forth; and the main garden in the midst; besides alleys on both sides. And I like well that four acres of ground be assigned to the green; six to the heath; four and four to either side; and twelve to the main garden. The green hath two pleasures: the one, because nothing is more pleasant to the eye than green grass kept finely shorn; the other, because it will give you a fair alley in the midst, by which you may go in front upon a stately hedge, which is to enclose the garden. But because the alley will be long, and, in great heat of the year or day, you ought not to buy the shade in the garden, by going in the sun through the green, therefore you are, of either side the green, to plant a covert alley upon carpenter's work, about twelve foot in height, by which you may go in shade into the garden. As for the making of knots or figures, with divers colored earths, that they may lie under the windows of the house on that side which the garden stands, they be but toys; you may see as good sights, many times, in tarts. The garden is best to be square, encompassed on all the four sides with a stately arched hedge. The arches to be upon pillars of carpenter's work, of some ten foot high, and six foot broad; and the spaces between of the same dimension with the breadth of the arch. Over the arches let there be an entire hedge of some four foot high, framed also upon carpenter's work; and upon the upper hedge, over every arch, a little turret, with a belly, enough to receive a cage of birds: and over every space between the arches some other little figure, with broad plates of round colored glass gilt, for the sun to play upon. But this hedge I intend to be raised upon a bank, not steep, but gently slope, of some six foot, set all with flowers. Also I understand, that this square of the garden, should not be the whole breadth of the ground, but to leave on either side, ground enough for diversity of side alleys; unto which the two covert alleys of the green, may deliver you. But there must be no alleys with hedges, at either end of this great enclosure; not at the hither end, for letting your prospect upon this fair hedge from the green; nor at the further end, for letting your prospect from the hedge, through the arches upon the heath.

For gardens (talking about those that are truly majestic, just like we discussed buildings), the area should ideally be at least thirty acres. It should be divided into three sections: a green entrance, a heath or an open area at the exit, and the main garden in the center; there should also be pathways on both sides. I suggest allocating four acres to the green; six to the heath; four on each side; and twelve to the main garden. The green offers two advantages: first, nothing is more pleasing to the eye than well-trimmed green grass; second, it creates a lovely pathway down the middle, allowing you to walk towards a grand hedge that will surround the garden. However, since the path will be long and during the hot days of the year, you shouldn't have to endure the sun’s heat just to reach the shade in the garden. Therefore, on either side of the green, you should plant a shaded pathway made of wooden structures, around twelve feet high, that will lead you into the garden in the shade. As for creating knots or designs with different colored soils under the windows of the house that faces the garden, those are merely trifles; you can see just as beautiful sights in pastries. The garden is best when it's square, enclosed on all four sides by a striking arched hedge. The arches should be supported by wooden pillars, about ten feet high and six feet wide; and the spaces between should match the width of the arch. Over the arches, there should be a continuous hedge about four feet high, also constructed from wood; and on the top of each arch, a small turret that has enough space to hold a birdcage: and above each space between the arches, another small figure with large plates of round colored glass, designed to catch the sunlight. This hedge should be raised on a gentle bank, not steep, about six feet high, adorned with flowers. Additionally, I believe this square garden shouldn't take up the entire width of the land, but should leave enough space on either side for various side pathways that connect to the two shaded pathways of the green. However, there shouldn't be any paths with hedges at either end of this large enclosure; no path at the entrance to preserve the view of the beautiful hedge from the green, and none at the far end to maintain the view from the hedge through the arches onto the heath.

For the ordering of the ground, within the great hedge, I leave it to variety of device; advising nevertheless, that whatsoever form you cast it into, first, it be not too busy, or full of work. Wherein I, for my part, do not like images cut out in juniper or other garden stuff; they be for children. Little low hedges, round, like welts, with some pretty pyramids, I like well; and in some places, fair columns upon frames of carpenter's work. I would also have the alleys, spacious and fair. You may have closer alleys, upon the side grounds, but none in the main garden. I wish also, in the very middle, a fair mount, with three ascents, and alleys, enough for four to walk abreast; which I would have to be perfect circles, without any bulwarks or embossments; and the whole mount to be thirty foot high; and some fine banqueting-house, with some chimneys neatly cast, and without too much glass.

For the layout of the garden within the large hedge, I leave it up to your creativity; however, I suggest that whatever design you choose, it shouldn't be too busy or cluttered. Personally, I’m not a fan of images cut out of juniper or other garden materials; those are more for kids. I like small, rounded hedges, resembling welts, along with some attractive pyramids. In certain areas, I envision nice columns made from woodwork. I also prefer wide and beautiful pathways. You can have narrower paths on the side areas, but not in the main garden. I would also like a nice mound in the center, with three paths leading up to it, wide enough for four people to walk side by side. These paths should be perfect circles, without any walls or protrusions, and the entire mound should be thirty feet high, topped with a lovely banquet house featuring neatly crafted chimneys and not too much glass.

For fountains, they are a great beauty and refreshment; but pools mar all, and make the garden unwholesome, and full of flies and frogs. Fountains I intend to be of two natures: the one that sprinkleth or spouteth water; the other a fair receipt of water, of some thirty or forty foot square, but without fish, or slime, or mud. For the first, the ornaments of images gilt, or of marble, which are in use, do well: but the main matter is so to convey the water, as it never stay, either in the bowls or in the cistern; that the water be never by rest discolored, green or red or the like; or gather any mossiness or putrefaction. Besides that, it is to be cleansed every day by the hand. Also some steps up to it, and some fine pavement about it, doth well. As for the other kind of fountain, which we may call a bathing pool, it may admit much curiosity and beauty; wherewith we will not trouble ourselves: as, that the bottom be finely paved, and with images; the sides likewise; and withal embellished with colored glass, and such things of lustre; encompassed also with fine rails of low statuas. But the main point is the same which we mentioned in the former kind of fountain; which is, that the water be in perpetual motion, fed by a water higher than the pool, and delivered into it by fair spouts, and then discharged away under ground, by some equality of bores, that it stay little. And for fine devices, of arching water without spilling, and making it rise in several forms (of feathers, drinking glasses, canopies, and the like), they be pretty things to look on, but nothing to health and sweetness.

For fountains, they are truly beautiful and refreshing; however, pools spoil everything and make the garden unhealthy, filled with flies and frogs. I plan for the fountains to have two types: one that sprays or shoots water, and the other a nice water basin, about thirty or forty feet square, but without fish, slime, or mud. For the first type, decorative images, either gilded or made of marble, work well; but the most important thing is to ensure the water flows continuously, so it never stagnates in the bowls or cistern, preventing it from turning green, red, or any other color, or from getting mossy or putrid. Additionally, it should be cleaned by hand every day. Some steps leading up to it and nice pavement around it are also good. As for the second type of fountain, which we can call a bathing pool, it can allow for a lot of creativity and beauty, although that's not our main focus: the bottom should be finely paved, with images; the sides too, adorned with colored glass and other shiny elements; surrounded by elegant low railings or statues. But the key point is the same as mentioned for the first type of fountain: the water must be in constant motion, supplied from a higher source and delivered into the pool through beautiful spouts, then drained away underground through evenly spaced outlets to keep it moving. As for creative features of arching water without splashing and making it rise in different shapes (like feathers, drinking glasses, canopies, and similar designs), they are lovely to look at, but don't contribute to health or cleanliness.

For the heath, which was the third part of our plot, I wish it to be framed, as much as may be, to a natural wildness. Trees I would have none in it, but some thickets made only of sweet-briar and honeysuckle, and some wild vine amongst; and the ground set with violets, strawberries, and primroses. For these are sweet, and prosper in the shade. And these to be in the heath, here and there, not in any order. I like also little heaps, in the nature of mole-hills (such as are in wild heaths), to be set, some with wild thyme; some with pinks; some with germander, that gives a good flower to the eye; some with periwinkle; some with violets; some with strawberries; some with cowslips; some with daisies; some with red roses; some with lilium convallium; some with sweet-williams red; some with bear's-foot: and the like low flowers, being withal sweet and sightly. Part of which heaps, are to be with standards of little bushes pricked upon their top, and part without. The standards to be roses; juniper; holly; berberries (but here and there, because of the smell of their blossoms); red currants; gooseberries; rosemary; bays; sweetbriar; and such like. But these standards to be kept with cutting, that they grow not out of course.

For the heath, which is the third part of our plot, I want it to be designed to reflect as much natural wildness as possible. I don’t want any trees in it, just some thickets made up of sweet-briar and honeysuckle, along with some wild vines. The ground should be filled with violets, strawberries, and primroses because they’re sweet and thrive in the shade. These plants should be scattered throughout the heath, without any specific arrangement. I also like little mounds, similar to molehills, found in wild heaths, with some covered in wild thyme, some with pinks, some with germander that has nice flowers, others with periwinkle, violets, strawberries, cowslips, daisies, red roses, lily of the valley, red sweet-williams, and bear's-foot, among other low flowers that are both fragrant and visually appealing. Some of these mounds should have small bushes on top, and some should not. The bushes should include roses, juniper, holly, barberries (but sparingly due to the smell of their blossoms), red currants, gooseberries, rosemary, bay, sweetbriar, and similar plants. However, these bushes should be pruned to keep them under control.

For the side grounds, you are to fill them with variety of alleys, private, to give a full shade, some of them, wheresoever the sun be. You are to frame some of them, likewise, for shelter, that when the wind blows sharp you may walk as in a gallery. And those alleys must be likewise hedged at both ends, to keep out the wind; and these closer alleys must be ever finely gravelled, and no grass, because of going wet. In many of these alleys, likewise, you are to set fruit-trees of all sorts; as well upon the walls, as in ranges. And this would be generally observed, that the borders wherein you plant your fruit-trees, be fair and large, and low, and not steep; and set with fine flowers, but thin and sparingly, lest they deceive the trees. At the end of both the side grounds, I would have a mount of some pretty height, leaving the wall of the enclosure breast high, to look abroad into the fields.

For the side gardens, you should fill them with a variety of paths, some private, to provide plenty of shade wherever the sun shines. You should also create some paths for shelter, so when the wind is harsh, you can walk through them like in a gallery. These paths should be enclosed at both ends to block the wind, and they need to be well-graveled without any grass, to avoid getting muddy. In many of these paths, you should plant all kinds of fruit trees, both against walls and in rows. It's important to ensure that the borders where you plant your fruit trees are nice and wide, low, and not steep; also, plant fine flowers sparingly to avoid overshadowing the trees. At the end of both side gardens, I would like a small hill that’s tall enough to let you look out over the fields while leaving the enclosure wall at waist height.

For the main garden, I do not deny, but there should be some fair alleys ranged on both sides, with fruit-trees; and some pretty tufts of fruit-trees, and arbors with seats, set in some decent order; but these to be by no means set too thick; but to leave the main garden so as it be not close, but the air open and free. For as for shade, I would have you rest upon the alleys of the side grounds, there to walk, if you be disposed, in the heat of the year or day; but to make account, that the main garden is for the more temperate parts of the year; and in the heat of summer, for the morning and the evening, or overcast days.

For the main garden, I don’t disagree that there should be some nice pathways lined on both sides with fruit trees, and some attractive clusters of fruit trees, along with arbors that have seats arranged in a pleasant way. However, these shouldn’t be too crowded; the main garden should remain open so that the air feels free and fresh. As for shade, I suggest you enjoy the pathways in the side areas, where you can stroll if you like, during the heat of the year or day. Just remember that the main garden is meant for the milder parts of the year, and during the heat of summer, it’s best suited for the morning, evening, or cloudy days.

For aviaries, I like them not, except they be of that largeness as they may be turfed, and have living plants and bushes set in them; that the birds may have more scope, and natural nesting, and that no foulness appear in the floor of the aviary. So I have made a platform of a princely garden, partly by precept, partly by drawing, not a model, but some general lines of it; and in this I have spared for no cost. But it is nothing for great princes, that for the most part taking advice with workmen, with no less cost set their things together; and sometimes add statuas and such things for state and magnificence, but nothing to the true pleasure of a garden.

I don’t really like aviaries unless they’re big enough to include turf and have living plants and bushes. This way, the birds can have more space and nest naturally, and the floor of the aviary stays clean. So, I’ve designed a platform for a grand garden, using some guidelines, not a detailed model, and I’ve not held back on spending. But it’s not much for wealthy princes, who often just consult with workers and spend a lot to put things together, sometimes adding statues and other things for show, but it doesn’t really contribute to the true enjoyment of a garden.





Of Negotiating

IT IS generally better to deal by speech than by letter; and by the mediation of a third than by a man's self. Letters are good, when a man would draw an answer by letter back again; or when it may serve for a man's justification afterwards to produce his own letter; or where it may be danger to be interrupted, or heard by pieces. To deal in person is good, when a man's face breedeth regard, as commonly with inferiors; or in tender cases, where a man's eye, upon the countenance of him with whom he speaketh, may give him a direction how far to go; and generally, where a man will reserve to himself liberty, either to disavow or to expound. In choice of instruments, it is better to choose men of a plainer sort, that are like to do that, that is committed to them, and to report back again faithfully the success, than those that are cunning, to contrive, out of other men's business, somewhat to grace themselves, and will help the matter in report for satisfaction's sake. Use also such persons as affect the business, wherein they are employed; for that quickeneth much; and such, as are fit for the matter; as bold men for expostulation, fair-spoken men for persuasion, crafty men for inquiry and observation, froward, and absurd men, for business that doth not well bear out itself. Use also such as have been lucky, and prevailed before, in things wherein you have employed them; for that breeds confidence, and they will strive to maintain their prescription. It is better to sound a person, with whom one deals afar off, than to fall upon the point at first; except you mean to surprise him by some short question. It is better dealing with men in appetite, than with those that are where they would be. If a man deal with another upon conditions, the start or first performance is all; which a man cannot reasonably demand, except either the nature of the thing be such, which must go before; or else a man can persuade the other party, that he shall still need him in some other thing; or else that he be counted the honester man. All practice is to discover, or to work. Men discover themselves in trust, in passion, at unawares, and of necessity, when they would have somewhat done, and cannot find an apt pretext. If you would work any man, you must either know his nature and fashions, and so lead him; or his ends, and so persuade him; or his weakness and disadvantages, and so awe him; or those that have interest in him, and so govern him. In dealing with cunning persons, we must ever consider their ends, to interpret their speeches; and it is good to say little to them, and that which they least look for. In all negotiations of difficulty, a man may not look to sow and reap at once; but must prepare business, and so ripen it by degrees.

IT’S usually better to communicate by speaking rather than writing, and to involve a third party rather than dealing directly with someone. Letters can be useful when you want a written response or when you might need to refer back to what you wrote for justification later; or when it’s risky to be interrupted or to speak piecemeal. Speaking in person is beneficial when your appearance commands respect, especially with those lower in status; or in sensitive situations, where observing the other person's facial expressions can guide how far to go; and generally, when you want the flexibility to retract or clarify what you've said. In choosing representatives, it's better to select straightforward individuals who are likely to handle their tasks well and report back honestly on the outcomes, rather than those who are clever and might twist situations to their advantage in their reports to make themselves look good. Also, use people who are passionate about the task at hand, as this increases motivation; and select those who are suited to the task—daring individuals for confrontations, eloquent speakers for persuasion, shrewd people for investigation, and those who are obstinate or unconventional for problematic tasks. Engage those who have been successful in similar endeavors before, as this builds trust and they’ll want to uphold their track record. It’s better to gauge someone's stance before diving into a direct discussion, unless you plan to catch them off guard with a short question. Dealing with people who are eager is preferable to engaging those who are already content with their situation. When negotiating under conditions, the initial agreement or action is crucial, which you can't reasonably demand unless the nature of the situation requires it to precede, or you can persuade the other party that they will still need you for something else, or that you’re considered the more trustworthy individual. The goal of any strategy is to reveal or influence. People disclose their true selves in trust, in moments of passion, unexpectedly, and out of necessity, especially when they want something accomplished but lack a suitable excuse. If you want to influence someone, you must understand their nature and habits to guide them; their goals to persuade them; their weaknesses and vulnerabilities to intimidate them; or the interests of those around them to manage them. When dealing with cunning individuals, it’s important to consider their motives to interpret their words correctly, and it’s wise to say little to them, especially things they least expect. In all challenging negotiations, you shouldn’t expect to plant seeds and reap the rewards at the same time; instead, you must prepare the groundwork and gradually nurture it to maturity.





Of Followers And Friends

COSTLY followers are not to be liked; lest while a man maketh his train longer, he make his wings shorter. I reckon to be costly, not them alone which charge the purse, but which are wearisome, and importune in suits. Ordinary followers ought to challenge no higher conditions, than countenance, recommendation, and protection from wrongs. Factious followers are worse to be liked, which follow not upon affection to him, with whom they range themselves, but upon discontentment conceived against some other; whereupon commonly ensueth that ill intelligence, that we many times see between great personages. Likewise glorious followers, who make themselves as trumpets of the commendation of those they follow, are full of inconvenience; for they taint business through want of secrecy; and they export honor from a man, and make him a return in envy. There is a kind of followers likewise, which are dangerous, being indeed espials; which inquire the secrets of the house, and bear tales of them, to others. Yet such men, many times, are in great favor; for they are officious, and commonly exchange tales. The following by certain estates of men, answerable to that, which a great person himself professeth (as of soldiers, to him that hath been employed in the wars, and the like), hath ever been a thing civil, and well taken, even in monarchies; so it be without too much pomp or popularity. But the most honorable kind of following, is to be followed as one, that apprehendeth to advance virtue, and desert, in all sorts of persons. And yet, where there is no eminent odds in sufficiency, it is better to take with the more passable, than with the more able. And besides, to speak truth, in base times, active men are of more use than virtuous. It is true that in government, it is good to use men of one rank equally: for to countenance some extraordinarily, is to make them insolent, and the rest discontent; because they may claim a due. But contrariwise, in favor, to use men with much difference and election is good; for it maketh the persons preferred more thankful, and the rest more officious: because all is of favor. It is good discretion, not to make too much of any man at the first; because one cannot hold out that proportion. To be governed (as we call it) by one is not safe; for it shows softness, and gives a freedom, to scandal and disreputation; for those, that would not censure or speak ill of a man immediately, will talk more boldly of those that are so great with them, and thereby wound their honor. Yet to be distracted with many is worse; for it makes men to be of the last impression, and full of change. To take advice of some few friends, is ever honorable; for lookers-on many times see more than gamesters; and the vale best discovereth the hill. There is little friendship in the world, and least of all between equals, which was wont to be magnified. That that is, is between superior and inferior, whose fortunes may comprehend the one the other.

COSTLY followers are not to be appreciated; for while a person extends his entourage, he may also shorten his support. I consider costly followers not only those who strain the wallet but also those who are tiresome and pushy with their requests. Regular followers should expect no more than respect, recommendations, and protection from harm. Factional followers are even less desirable; they don’t follow out of affection for the person they associate with but out of dissatisfaction with someone else, which often leads to the conflicts we frequently witness among powerful figures. Similarly, attention-seeking followers, who act like loudspeakers for the praise of those they follow, create many problems; they compromise matters due to their lack of discretion and take away honor from a person, leaving them with envy in return. There are also a type of followers who are dangerous, acting as spies; they investigate the secrets of the household and share them with others. Yet these individuals are often well-liked, as they are helpful and often trade stories. Following individuals different from one’s own status—like soldiers aligning with someone experienced in warfare—has always been considered acceptable and even respected, even in monarchies, as long as it isn’t overly showy or popular. However, the most honorable type of following is to be recognized for promoting virtue and merit among all kinds of people. Still, when there isn’t a significant difference in ability, it’s better to align with those who are more approachable rather than those who are just more capable. Moreover, to be honest, in lesser times, active individuals are often more useful than virtuous ones. It's true that in governance, it’s best to treat individuals of the same rank equally; for favoring some disproportionately can make them arrogant and the others resentful, as they may feel entitled to similar treatment. On the contrary, in terms of favor, treating people with noticeable differentiation and selectivity is beneficial; this makes the favored individuals more grateful and the rest more accommodating, as it all stems from favoritism. It is wise not to overvalue anyone at the outset since one cannot sustain that level of appreciation. Relying on a single individual for guidance is not safe; it indicates a weakness and opens the door to gossip and negativity; those who wouldn’t criticize someone directly will speak more freely about those who are closely connected to them, thereby damaging their reputation. Yet being swayed by too many is even worse, as it causes individuals to remain indecisive and changeable. Consulting a few trusted friends is always honorable; bystanders often see more than players do, and the valley better reveals the hill. There is little true friendship in the world, especially among equals, where it used to be lauded. True friendship exists between those of different ranks, where one’s fortunes can influence the other.





Of Suitors

MANY ill matters and projects are undertaken; and private suits do putrefy the public good. Many good matters, are undertaken with bad minds; I mean not only corrupt minds, but crafty minds, that intend not performance. Some embrace suits, which never mean to deal effectually in them; but if they see there may be life in the matter, by some other mean, they will be content to win a thank, or take a second reward, or at least to make use, in the meantime, of the suitor's hopes. Some take hold of suits, only for an occasion to cross some other; or to make an information, whereof they could not otherwise have apt pretext; without care what become of the suit, when that turn is served; or, generally, to make other men's business a kind of entertainment, to bring in their own. Nay, some undertake suits, with a full purpose to let them fall; to the end to gratify the adverse party, or competitor. Surely there is in some sort a right in every suit; either a right of equity, if it be a suit of controversy; or a right of desert, if it be a suit of petition. If affection lead a man to favor the wrong side in justice, let him rather use his countenance to compound the matter, than to carry it. If affection lead a man to favor the less worthy in desert, let him do it, without depraving or disabling the better deserver. In suits which a man doth not well understand, it is good to refer them to some friend of trust and judgment, that may report, whether he may deal in them with honor: but let him choose well his referendaries, for else he may be led by the nose. Suitors are so distasted with delays and abuses, that plain dealing, in denying to deal in suits at first, and reporting the success barely, and in challenging no more thanks than one hath deserved, is grown not only honorable, but also gracious. In suits of favor, the first coming ought to take little place: so far forth, consideration may be had of his trust, that if intelligence of the matter could not otherwise have been had, but by him, advantage be not taken of the note, but the party left to his other means; and in some sort recompensed, for his discovery. To be ignorant of the value of a suit, is simplicity; as well as to be ignorant of the right thereof, is want of conscience. Secrecy in suits, is a great mean of obtaining; for voicing them to be in forwardness, may discourage some kind of suitors, but doth quicken and awake others. But timing of the suit is the principal. Timing, I say, not only in respect of the person that should grant it, but in respect of those, which are like to cross it. Let a man, in the choice of his mean, rather choose the fittest mean, than the greatest mean; and rather them that deal in certain things, than those that are general. The reparation of a denial, is sometimes equal to the first grant; if a man show himself neither dejected nor discontented. Iniquum petas ut aequum feras is a good rule, where a man hath strength of favor: but otherwise, a man were better rise in his suit; for he, that would have ventured at first to have lost the suitor, will not in the conclusion lose both the suitor, and his own former favor. Nothing is thought so easy a request to a great person, as his letter; and yet, if it be not in a good cause, it is so much out of his reputation. There are no worse instruments, than these general contrivers of suits; for they are but a kind of poison, and infection, to public proceedings.

Many negative matters and projects are taken on, and personal lawsuits harm the public good. Many good initiatives are started with bad intentions; I mean not just corrupt intentions but also clever ones that don't aim for actual results. Some people take on lawsuits without the intention to genuinely engage with them; they may just see potential if it could lead to something else, and they'll be satisfied with just a thank you, or a small reward, or at the very least, they'll make use of the plaintiff's hopes in the meantime. Some pursue lawsuits purely as an opportunity to undermine someone else or to gather information they otherwise wouldn't have a reason to seek, without worrying about the outcome of the case once they achieve their goal; or, generally, to use others' business as a means to promote their own interests. In fact, some take on lawsuits with the clear intention of letting them fail, just to please the opposing party or competitor. Clearly, there is a kind of right in every lawsuit; either it's an equitable right if it's a matter of dispute or a right of merit if it's a petition. If someone's bias leads them to support the wrong side in a legal matter, they should instead use their influence to mediate rather than push for a verdict. If someone's bias makes them favor the less deserving party, they should do so without undermining or discrediting the more deserving party. In matters that someone does not fully grasp, it's wise to refer them to a trusted friend with good judgment, who can determine whether it’s honorable to engage with the case; but one must choose their advisors wisely, or they may end up being led astray. Plaintiffs are so frustrated with delays and abuses that being straightforward—declining to get involved in lawsuits from the start, reporting the outcome honestly, and asking for no more credit than what’s deserved—is now viewed as not only honorable but also commendable. In favor-seeking lawsuits, the first to come forward should have limited influence; however, consideration may be given to their trustworthiness, so that if the information about the case could only have been obtained from them, they shouldn't be taken advantage of, but rather allowed to seek other avenues, and in some way compensated for their insight. Being unaware of the value of a lawsuit shows naivety; being ignorant of the rightness of it reflects a lack of ethics. Keeping lawsuits confidential is a significant strategy for achieving success; making them public can deter certain plaintiffs but inspire others. However, the timing of the lawsuit is crucial. Timing, I mean, not only concerning the person who should grant it but also regarding those who are likely to oppose it. In choosing how to approach a lawsuit, one should prefer the most suitable method rather than the most impressive one, and favor those who specialize in specific matters rather than those who are more generalized. The remedy for a refusal sometimes equals the initial approval, provided one appears neither discouraged nor unhappy. "Demand the unreasonable so you can accept the reasonable" is a good principle when someone has strong support; but otherwise, it’s better for a person to pursue their lawsuit; for someone who would have initially risked losing a case will likely end up losing both the plaintiff and their previous support. There’s nothing so easily requested from someone important as a letter; yet, if it's not for a good cause, it draws significantly on their reputation. There are no worse agents than these general schemers of lawsuits; they are merely a source of poison and corruption to public affairs.





Of Studies

STUDIES serve for delight, for ornament, and for ability. Their chief use for delight, is in privateness and retiring; for ornament, is in discourse; and for ability, is in the judgment, and disposition of business. For expert men can execute, and perhaps judge of particulars, one by one; but the general counsels, and the plots and marshalling of affairs, come best, from those that are learned. To spend too much time in studies is sloth; to use them too much for ornament, is affectation; to make judgment wholly by their rules, is the humor of a scholar. They perfect nature, and are perfected by experience: for natural abilities are like natural plants, that need proyning, by study; and studies themselves, do give forth directions too much at large, except they be bounded in by experience. Crafty men contemn studies, simple men admire them, and wise men use them; for they teach not their own use; but that is a wisdom without them, and above them, won by observation. Read not to contradict and confute; nor to believe and take for granted; nor to find talk and discourse; but to weigh and consider. Some books are to be tasted, others to be swallowed, and some few to be chewed and digested; that is, some books are to be read only in parts; others to be read, but not curiously; and some few to be read wholly, and with diligence and attention. Some books also may be read by deputy, and extracts made of them by others; but that would be only in the less important arguments, and the meaner sort of books, else distilled books are like common distilled waters, flashy things. Reading maketh a full man; conference a ready man; and writing an exact man. And therefore, if a man write little, he had need have a great memory; if he confer little, he had need have a present wit: and if he read little, he had need have much cunning, to seem to know, that he doth not. Histories make men wise; poets witty; the mathematics subtile; natural philosophy deep; moral grave; logic and rhetoric able to contend. Abeunt studia in mores. Nay, there is no stond or impediment in the wit, but may be wrought out by fit studies; like as diseases of the body, may have appropriate exercises. Bowling is good for the stone and reins; shooting for the lungs and breast; gentle walking for the stomach; riding for the head; and the like. So if a man's wit be wandering, let him study the mathematics; for in demonstrations, if his wit be called away never so little, he must begin again. If his wit be not apt to distinguish or find differences, let him study the Schoolmen; for they are cymini sectores. If he be not apt to beat over matters, and to call up one thing to prove and illustrate another, let him study the lawyers' cases. So every defect of the mind, may have a special receipt.

STUDIES are for enjoyment, decoration, and skills. Their main purpose for enjoyment is in solitude; for decoration, it’s in conversation; and for skills, it's in judgment and handling tasks. Skilled individuals can execute and perhaps assess details one by one, but the overall strategies and organization of matters come best from those who are educated. Spending too much time on studies is laziness; using them purely for decoration is pretentious; relying solely on their rules for judgment is a trait of a scholar. They enhance natural abilities and are refined by experience, as natural talents are like natural plants that need to be pruned by study, and studies themselves offer too broad guidance unless kept in check by experience. Cunning individuals look down on studies, naive individuals admire them, and wise individuals utilize them, as they don’t teach their own use; that wisdom is gained without and above them through observation. Read not to contradict and argue; nor to accept blindly; nor to simply find conversation, but to weigh and reflect. Some books are meant to be sampled, others to be read quickly, and a select few to be read thoroughly and thoughtfully; in other words, some books should be read only in sections, others to be read without deep scrutiny, and a few to be read fully, with diligence and attention. Some books can also be read through others, with summaries made from them; but this should only apply to less significant topics and simpler books, as otherwise distilled books are like ordinary distilled waters, lacking substance. Reading makes a well-rounded person; discussions make a quick thinker; and writing makes a precise individual. Therefore, if someone writes little, they need a strong memory; if they discuss little, they need to be sharp-minded; and if they read little, they need a lot of cleverness to appear knowledgeable when they are not. Histories make people wise; poetry makes them clever; mathematics makes them subtle; natural philosophy makes them profound; morals make them serious; and logic and rhetoric enable them to argue effectively. Different studies can resolve different mental blocks, much like how physical ailments can benefit from specific exercises. Bowling is good for kidney issues; shooting is beneficial for lungs and chest; gentle walking is good for digestion; horseback riding is good for the mind; and so on. So, if someone's mind is wandering, they should study mathematics; for in demonstrations, if their focus wanders even slightly, they must start over. If someone struggles to distinguish or identify differences, they should study the Scholastics; they are experts at detailed analysis. If they have trouble organizing ideas and connecting them to support others, they should study legal cases. Thus, every mental shortcoming can have a specific remedy.





Of Faction

MANY have an opinion not wise, that for a prince to govern his estate, or for a great person to govern his proceedings, according to the respect of factions, is a principal part of policy; whereas contrariwise, the chiefest wisdom, is either in ordering those things which are general, and wherein men of several factions do nevertheless agree; or in dealing with correspondence to particular persons, one by one. But I say not that the considerations of factions, is to be neglected. Mean men, in their rising, must adhere; but great men, that have strength in themselves, were better to maintain themselves indifferent, and neutral. Yet even in beginners, to adhere so moderately, as he be a man of the one faction, which is most passable with the other, commonly giveth best way. The lower and weaker faction, is the firmer in conjunction; and it is often seen, that a few that are stiff, do tire out a greater number, that are more moderate. When one of the factions is extinguished, the remaining subdivideth; as the faction between Lucullus, and the rest of the nobles of the senate (which they called Optimates) held out awhile, against the faction of Pompey and Caesar; but when the senate's authority was pulled down, Caesar and Pompey soon after brake. The faction or party of Antonius and Octavianus Caesar, against Brutus and Cassius, held out likewise for a time; but when Brutus and Cassius were overthrown, then soon after, Antonius and Octavianus brake and subdivided. These examples are of wars, but the same holdeth in private factions. And therefore, those that are seconds in factions, do many times, when the faction subdivideth, prove principals; but many times also, they prove ciphers and cashiered; for many a man's strength is in opposition; and when that faileth, he groweth out of use. It is commonly seen, that men, once placed, take in with the contrary faction, to that by which they enter: thinking belike, that they have the first sure, and now are ready for a new purchase. The traitor in faction, lightly goeth away with it; for when matters have stuck long in balancing, the winning of some one man casteth them, and he getteth all the thanks. The even carriage between two factions, proceedeth not always of moderation, but of a trueness to a man's self, with end to make use of both. Certainly in Italy, they hold it a little suspect in popes, when they have often in their mouth Padre commune: and take it to be a sign of one, that meaneth to refer all to the greatness of his own house. Kings had need beware, how they side themselves, and make themselves as of a faction or party; for leagues within the state, are ever pernicious to monarchies: for they raise an obligation, paramount to obligation of sovereignty, and make the king tanquam unus ex nobis; as was to be seen in the League of France. When factions are carried too high and too violently, it is a sign of weakness in princes; and much to the prejudice, both of their authority and business. The motions of factions under kings ought to be, like the motions (as the astronomers speak) of the inferior orbs, which may have their proper motions, but yet still are quietly carried, by the higher motion of primum mobile.

Many people have an unwise opinion that for a prince to govern his territory, or for a powerful person to manage their affairs according to the preferences of factions, is a key aspect of politics. In reality, the greatest wisdom lies in either addressing matters that are universal and where people from different factions can still find common ground, or in dealing with individuals on a case-by-case basis. However, I do not suggest that the concerns of factions should be ignored. Ordinary people, as they rise, need to stick together; but influential individuals, who have their own strength, are better off remaining impartial and neutral. Even those who are just starting out should join a faction moderately, aligning themselves with the faction that gets along best with others, as this often yields the best outcomes. The weaker faction tends to be more united; often, a small number of stubborn individuals can wear down a larger group that is more accommodating. When one faction is defeated, the remaining faction often divides; for instance, the faction led by Lucullus and the other nobles in the Senate (known as the Optimates) managed to hold out for a while against the faction of Pompey and Caesar. However, when the Senate’s power diminished, Caesar and Pompey quickly fell out. The faction of Antonius and Octavianus Caesar, against Brutus and Cassius, also lasted for a time; but once Brutus and Cassius were defeated, Antonius and Octavianus soon after split as well. These examples stem from wars, but the principles apply to private factions too. Therefore, those who are secondary figures in factions can often become leaders when the faction divides; but they can also end up insignificant and sidelined, since many people’s strength relies on opposition, and when that support fades, they become irrelevant. It is often seen that when individuals gain a position, they align themselves with the opposite faction than the one that brought them in, believing they have secured their initial support and are now ready for another gain. A traitor within a faction can often get away with it; when matters have been in a stalemate for a long time, winning over just one person can tip the balance, and that individual receives all the credit. Maintaining a neutral stance between two factions is not always a result of moderation, but rather a tactic to benefit from both sides. In Italy, it is considered slightly suspicious when popes frequently mention “common father,” as it is viewed as a sign of one who intends to elevate his own family's importance. Kings need to be careful about how they position themselves and the factions they associate with; internal alliances within the state are always harmful to monarchies because they create obligations that take precedence over the obligation to sovereignty, making the king like one of the common people, as seen in the League of France. When factions become too intense and aggressive, it indicates weakness in princes and significantly harms both their authority and their affairs. The dynamics of factions under kings should resemble the movements of celestial bodies, which may have their own motions, but are still guided peacefully by the higher motion of the primum mobile.





Of Ceremonies, And Respects

HE THAT is only real, had need have exceeding great parts of virtue; as the stone had need to be rich, that is set without foil. But if a man mark it well, it is, in praise and commendation of men, as it is in gettings and gains: for the proverb is true, That light gains make heavy purses; for light gains come thick, whereas great, come but now and then. So it is true, that small matters win great commendation, because they are continually in use and in note: whereas the occasion of any great virtue, cometh but on festivals. Therefore it doth much add to a man's reputation, and is (as Queen Isabella said) like perpetual letters commendatory, to have good forms. To attain them, it almost sufficeth not to despise them; for so shall a man observe them in others; and let him trust himself with the rest. For if he labor too much to express them, he shall lose their grace; which is to be natural and unaffected. Some men's behavior is like a verse, wherein every syllable is measured; how can a man comprehend great matters, that breaketh his mind too much, to small observations? Not to use ceremonies at all, is to teach others not to use them again; and so diminisheth respect to himself; especially they be not to be omitted, to strangers and formal natures; but the dwelling upon them, and exalting them above the moon, is not only tedious, but doth diminish the faith and credit of him that speaks. And certainly, there is a kind of conveying, of effectual and imprinting passages amongst compliments, which is of singular use, if a man can hit upon it. Amongst a man's peers, a man shall be sure of familiarity; and therefore it is good, a little to keep state. Amongst a man's inferiors one shall be sure of reverence; and therefore it is good, a little to be familiar. He that is too much in anything, so that he giveth another occasion of satiety, maketh himself cheap. To apply one's self to others, is good; so it be with demonstration, that a man doth it upon regard, and not upon facility. It is a good precept generally, in seconding another, yet to add somewhat of one's own: as if you will grant his opinion, let it be with some distinction; if you will follow his motion, let it be with condition; if you allow his counsel, let it be with alleging further reason. Men had need beware, how they be too perfect in compliments; for be they never so sufficient otherwise, their enviers will be sure to give them that attribute, to the disadvantage of their greater virtues. It is loss also in business, to be too full of respects, or to be curious, in observing times and opportunities. Solomon saith, He that considereth the wind, shall not sow, and he that looketh to the clouds, shall not reap. A wise man will make more opportunities, than he finds. Men's behavior should be, like their apparel, not too strait or point device, but free for exercise or motion.

The person who is genuinely real needs to have a lot of virtue, just like a gemstone needs to be remarkable when it's displayed without any embellishments. But if you pay close attention, it's true in praising and recognizing people, just as it is in making money: the saying goes, "Small gains fill up big wallets," because small gains come easily and often, while bigger ones are rare. Likewise, little acts lead to a lot of praise because they're constantly acknowledged, whereas opportunities for great virtues come up only occasionally. Having good manners greatly boosts a person's reputation, and as Queen Isabella said, it's like having constant letters of recommendation. To achieve good manners, it’s almost enough not to disregard them; by observing them in others, one can trust themselves to adopt them. If someone tries too hard to show good manners, they'll lose their charm, which relies on being natural and genuine. Some people's behavior feels overly calculated, like poetry where every syllable is measured; how can someone grasp significant matters if they're too focused on trivial details? Ignoring social niceties altogether teaches others not to use them, which reduces respect for oneself, especially since these niceties shouldn't be omitted with strangers and formal people; however, overemphasizing them can be tedious and can undermine the trust and credibility of the speaker. There’s definitely a way to effectively convey impactful messages through compliments, which can be incredibly useful if one gets it right. Among peers, it’s good to show some familiarity, so maintaining a bit of distance is helpful. With those of lower status, it's wise to foster some familiarity to ensure respect. Being too much of anything can make one seem less valuable. Engaging with others is important, as long as it's clear that it's intentional and not done casually. A good rule of thumb when supporting someone else is to add a bit of your own insight; if you agree with someone's opinion, offer a unique perspective; if you follow their suggestion, set a condition; if you endorse their advice, provide additional reasoning. People should be cautious about being overly complimentary—no matter how competent they are in other areas, their critics will make sure to label them as overly flattering, which can undermine their more significant virtues. Excessive respectfulness or fussiness about timing and opportunities can also be detrimental in business. Solomon said that anyone who looks to the wind won’t sow, and anyone who watches the clouds won’t reap. A wise person creates more opportunities than they find. People’s behavior should be like their clothing—not too tight or overly styled, but relaxed enough for movement.





Of Praise

PRAISE is the reflection of virtue; but it is as the glass or body, which giveth the reflection. If it be from the common people, it is commonly false and naught; and rather followeth vain persons, than virtuous. For the common people understand not many excellent virtues. The lowest virtues draw praise from them; the middle virtues work in them astonishment or admiration; but of the highest virtues, they have no sense of perceiving at all. But shows, and species virtutibus similes, serve best with them. Certainly fame is like a river, that beareth up things light and swoln, and drowns things weighty and solid. But if persons of quality and judgment concur, then it is (as the Scripture saith) nomen bonum instar unguenti fragrantis. It fireth all round about, and will not easily away. For the odors of ointments are more durable, than those of flowers. There be so many false points of praise, that a man may justly hold it a suspect. Some praises proceed merely of flattery; and if he be an ordinary flatterer, he will have certain common attributes, which may serve every man; if he be a cunning flatterer, he will follow the archflatterer, which is a man's self; and wherein a man thinketh best of himself, therein the flatterer will uphold him most: but if he be an impudent flatterer, look wherein a man is conscious to himself, that he is most defective, and is most out of countenance in himself, that will the flatterer entitle him to perforce, spreta conscientia. Some praises come of good wishes and respects, which is a form due, in civility, to kings and great persons, laudando praecipere, when by telling men what they are, they represent to them, what they should be. Some men are praised maliciously, to their hurt, thereby to stir envy and jealousy towards them: pessimum genus inimicorum laudantium; insomuch as it was a proverb, amongst the Grecians, that he that was praised to his hurt, should have a push rise upon his nose; as we say, that a blister will rise upon one's tongue, that tells a lie. Certainly moderate praise, used with opportunity, and not vulgar, is that which doth the good. Solomon saith, He that praiseth his friend aloud, rising early, it shall be to him no better than a curse. Too much magnifying of man or matter, doth irritate contradiction, and procure envy and scorn. To praise a man's self, cannot be decent, except it be in rare cases; but to praise a man's office or profession, he may do it with good grace, and with a kind of magnanimity. The cardinals of Rome, which are theologues, and friars, and Schoolmen, have a phrase of notable contempt and scorn towards civil business: for they call all temporal business of wars, embassages, judicature, and other employments, sbirrerie, which is under-sheriffries; as if they were but matters, for under-sheriffs and catchpoles: though many times those under-sheriffries do more good, than their high speculations. St. Paul, when he boasts of himself, he doth oft interlace, I speak like a fool; but speaking of his calling, he saith, magnificabo apostolatum meum.

PRAISE is a reflection of virtue, but it's like a mirror or body that gives the reflection. If it comes from the general public, it's usually false and unworthy; it tends to follow vain people more than virtuous ones. The general public doesn't recognize many excellent virtues. They notice the lowest virtues, feel astonished or admire the middle virtues, but they have no grasp of the highest virtues at all. Instead, superficial shows and appearances are what appeal to them. Certainly, fame is like a river that lifts up lightweight and inflated things while sinking heavy and solid ones. But when people of quality and good judgment agree, it becomes, as the Scripture says, a good name is like a fragrant ointment. It captures attention all around and is hard to forget. The scents of ointments last longer than those of flowers. There are so many misleading forms of praise that one can justifiably view it with suspicion. Some praise comes solely from flattery; if the flatterer is just an ordinary one, they will use common traits that apply to anyone. If they’re a clever flatterer, they'll reflect the self-praise of the person they're addressing; where someone has the highest opinion of themselves, that's what the flatterer will emphasize. But if they’re a bold flatterer, they’ll exploit the areas where a person feels most inadequate, disregarding their own conscience. Some praise comes from genuine good wishes and respect, which is something expected in civility towards kings and important figures, by telling them what they are, they show them what they should aspire to be. Some individuals are maliciously praised, leading to envy and jealousy: the worst kind of enemies are those who praise you. There’s even a saying among the Greeks that someone who is praised to their detriment will have a bump appear on their nose, just like it’s said that a blister will form on the tongue of a liar. Certainly, moderate praise, when used appropriately and not excessively, is what truly benefits someone. Solomon says that praising a friend loudly and early in the morning will be no better than a curse for them. Over-praising a person or matter tends to provoke contradiction and invite envy and scorn. It's generally inappropriate to praise oneself, except in rare situations; however, one can praise their role or profession gracefully and with a sense of nobility. The Cardinals of Rome, who are theologians, friars, and scholars, disdain civil affairs; they refer to all temporal matters like wars, diplomacy, courts, and other duties as "sbirrerie," meaning under-sheriff duties, as if they are just tasks for under-sheriffs and bailiffs, even though often those lower roles do more good than their grand theories. St. Paul, when he boasts about himself, frequently adds, "I speak like a fool," but when discussing his calling, he says, "I will magnify my apostleship."





Of Vain-glory

IT WAS prettily devised of AEsop, The fly sat upon the axle-tree of the chariot wheel, and said, What a dust do I raise! So are there some vain persons, that whatsoever goeth alone, or moveth upon greater means, if they have never so little hand in it, they think it is they that carry it. They that are glorious, must needs be factious; for all bravery stands upon comparisons. They must needs be violent, to make good their own vaunts. Neither can they be secret, and therefore not effectual; but according to the French proverb, Beaucoup de bruit, peu de fruit; Much bruit little fruit. Yet certainly, there is use of this quality in civil affairs. Where there is an opinion and fame to be created, either of virtue or greatness, these men are good trumpeters. Again, as Titus Livius noteth, in the case of Antiochus and the AEtolians, There are sometimes great effects, of cross lies; as if a man, that negotiates between two princes, to draw them to join in a war against the third, doth extol the forces of either of them, above measure, the one to the other: and sometimes he that deals between man and man, raiseth his own credit with both, by pretending greater interest than he hath in either. And in these and the like kinds, it often falls out, that somewhat is produced of nothing; for lies are sufficient to breed opinion, and opinion brings on substance. In militar commanders and soldiers, vain-glory is an essential point; for as iron sharpens iron, so by glory, one courage sharpeneth another. In cases of great enterprise upon charge and adventure, a composition of glorious natures, doth put life into business; and those that are of solid and sober natures, have more of the ballast, than of the sail. In fame of learning, the flight will be slow without some feathers of ostentation. Qui de contemnenda gloria libros scribunt, nomen, suum inscribunt. Socrates, Aristotle, Galen, were men full of ostentation. Certainly vain-glory helpeth to perpetuate a man's memory; and virtue was never so beholding to human nature, as it received his due at the second hand. Neither had the fame of Cicero, Seneca, Plinius Secundus, borne her age so well, if it had not been joined with some vanity in themselves; like unto varnish, that makes ceilings not only shine but last. But all this while, when I speak of vain-glory, I mean not of that property, that Tacitus doth attribute to Mucianus; Omnium quae dixerat feceratque arte quadam ostentator: for that proceeds not of vanity, but of natural magnanimity and discretion; and in some persons, is not only comely, but gracious. For excusations, cessions, modesty itself well governed, are but arts of ostentation. And amongst those arts, there is none better than that which Plinius Secundus speaketh of, which is to be liberal of praise and commendation to others, in that, wherein a man's self hath any perfection. For saith Pliny, very wittily, In commending another, you do yourself right; for he that you commend, is either superior to you in that you commend, or inferior. If he be inferior, if he be to be commended, you much more; if he be superior, if he be not to be commended, you much less. Glorious men are the scorn of wise men, the admiration of fools, the idols of parasites, and the slaves of their own vaunts.

IT WAS cleverly conceived by Aesop, The fly sat on the axle of a chariot wheel and said, “Look at all the dust I’m making!” Some arrogant people are just like that; no matter what happens by itself or with more resources, if they have even a tiny part in it, they think they’re the ones making it happen. Those who seek glory must inevitably create conflict, because all bravado relies on comparisons. They must be aggressive to back up their own boasts. They can’t be discreet, and therefore aren’t effective; as the French proverb says, "Much noise, little fruit." Yet, there is certainly a usefulness to this trait in public affairs. When a reputation for virtue or greatness is to be established, these people are good at making noise. Moreover, as Titus Livius notes in the case of Antiochus and the Aetolians, great outcomes can arise from bold lies; for instance, someone negotiating between two leaders to unite them against a third may overly praise each leader's forces to the other. Sometimes, a person negotiating between two individuals raises their own status with both by pretending to have greater influence than they possess with either. In these situations, it often happens that something emerges from nothing; for lies can create opinions, and opinions lead to reality. In military leaders and soldiers, vanity is crucial; just as iron sharpens iron, glory sharpens courage. In significant ventures that involve risk, a mix of glorious personalities energizes the mission, while those who are serious and practical provide more stability than flair. In the realm of learning, progress can be slow without some showmanship. Those who write books about the contempt of glory still inscribe their names. Socrates, Aristotle, and Galen were all people of significance. Clearly, vanity helps to preserve a person's memory; virtue has never owed so much to human nature as it does when it’s recognized secondhand. The fame of Cicero, Seneca, and Pliny the Elder would not have endured so well if it weren't tied to some vanity on their part; like varnish, it makes surfaces not only shine but also last. However, when I refer to vanity, I’m not talking about the trait that Tacitus attributes to Mucianus; who, in all he said and did, was a skillful show-off. That doesn’t come from vanity, but from natural nobility and wisdom; in some individuals, it’s not only fitting but appealing. For excuses, concessions, and well-managed modesty are merely forms of showmanship. Among those forms, none is better than what Pliny the Elder mentions, which is being generous in praising others where one has any excellence. As Pliny wittily states, “By praising another, you do yourself a favor; for the person you praise is either better than you in that aspect, or worse. If they are worse and deserving of praise, then you are even more so; if they are better and not deserving, then you are much less.” Glorious individuals are the objects of wise men’s scorn, fools' admiration, parasites' adoration, and slaves to their own boasts.





Of Honor And Reputation

THE winning of honor, is but the revealing of a man's virtue and worth, without disadvantage. For some in their actions, do woo and effect honor and reputation, which sort of men, are commonly much talked of, but inwardly little admired. And some, contrariwise, darken their virtue in the show of it; so as they be undervalued in opinion. If a man perform that, which hath not been attempted before; or attempted and given over; or hath been achieved, but not with so good circumstance; he shall purchase more honor, than by effecting a matter of greater difficulty or virtue, wherein he is but a follower. If a man so temper his actions, as in some one of them he doth content every faction, or combination of people, the music will be the fuller. A man is an ill husband of his honor, that entereth into any action, the failing wherein may disgrace him, more than the carrying of it through, can honor him. Honor that is gained and broken upon another, hath the quickest reflection, like diamonds cut with facets. And therefore, let a man contend to excel any competitors of his in honor, in outshooting them, if he can, in their own bow. Discreet followers and servants, help much to reputation. Omnis fama a domesticis emanat. Envy, which is the canker of honor, is best extinguished by declaring a man's self in his ends, rather to seek merit than fame; and by attributing a man's successes, rather to divine Providence and felicity, than to his own virtue or policy.

Winning honor is really just showing a person's true virtue and worth, without any drawbacks. Some people seek honor and reputation through their actions, but they tend to be talked about more than truly admired. Others, on the other hand, hide their virtue by showing it, which leads to them being undervalued. If someone accomplishes something that's never been done before, or tried and then given up on, or has been done but not as well, they'll earn more honor than by completing a more difficult task where they’re just following others. If a person balances their actions in a way that satisfies all groups of people, the outcome will be much richer. A person mismanages their honor if they engage in any action that could disgrace them more than successfully completing it could honor them. Honor that is gained and then diminished through someone else has a swift impact, like diamonds cut with facets. Therefore, a person should strive to outshine their competitors in honor by outperforming them, if possible, in their own area. Smart followers and servants contribute a lot to reputation. All reputation comes from those close to you. Envy, which eats away at honor, is best overcome by being clear about one’s intentions, focusing on earning merit rather than fame, and attributing success more to divine Providence and luck rather than personal virtue or strategy.

The true marshalling of the degrees of sovereign honor, are these: In the first place are conditores imperiorum, founders of states and commonwealths; such as were Romulus, Cyrus, Caesar, Ottoman, Ismael. In the second place are legislatores, lawgivers; which are also called second founders, or perpetui principes, because they govern by their ordinances after they are gone; such were Lycurgus, Solon, Justinian, Eadgar, Alphonsus of Castile, the Wise, that made the Siete Partidas. In the third place are liberatores, or salvatores, such as compound the long miseries of civil wars, or deliver their countries from servitude of strangers or tyrants; as Augustus Caesar, Vespasianus, Aurelianus, Theodoricus, King Henry the Seventh of England, King Henry the Fourth of France. In the fourth place are propagatores or propugnatores imperii; such as in honorable wars enlarge their territories, or make noble defence against invaders. And in the last place are patres patriae; which reign justly, and make the times good wherein they live. Both which last kinds need no examples, they are in such number. Degrees of honor, in subjects, are, first participes curarum, those upon whom, princes do discharge the greatest weight of their affairs; their right hands, as we call them. The next are duces belli, great leaders in war; such as are princes' lieutenants, and do them notable services in the wars. The third are gratiosi, favorites; such as exceed not this scantling, to be solace to the sovereign, and harmless to the people. And the fourth, negotiis pares; such as have great places under princes, and execute their places, with sufficiency. There is an honor, likewise, which may be ranked amongst the greatest, which happeneth rarely; that is, of such as sacrifice themselves to death or danger for the good of their country; as was M. Regulus, and the two Decii.

The true ranking of degrees of sovereign honor is as follows: First are the founders of states and commonwealths, like Romulus, Cyrus, Caesar, the Ottoman, and Ismael. Second are the lawmakers, also known as second founders or perpetual princes, because they govern through their laws long after they're gone, such as Lycurgus, Solon, Justinian, Eadgar, and Alphonsus of Castile, the Wise, who created the Siete Partidas. Third are the liberators or saviors, who end the long suffering of civil wars or free their countries from foreign oppressors or tyrants, like Augustus Caesar, Vespasian, Aurelian, Theodoric, King Henry VII of England, and King Henry IV of France. Fourth are the expanders or defenders of the empire, who, through honorable wars, enlarge their territories or defend against invaders. Lastly, there are the fathers of the country, who rule justly and improve the times they live in. There are so many examples of these last types that none need to be given. The degrees of honor among subjects include first the co-managers, those whom princes trust with the heaviest responsibilities; their right-hand people, as we say. Next are the great military leaders, who act as the princes' lieutenants and serve them notably in wars. The third type are the favorites, who are there to provide comfort to the sovereign and pose no harm to the people. The fourth are those who hold significant positions under princes and manage their responsibilities competently. Additionally, there exists a rare honor among the greatest, which is for those who sacrifice themselves to death or danger for the benefit of their country, like M. Regulus and the two Decii.





Of Judicature

JUDGES ought to remember, that their office is jus dicere, and not jus dare; to interpret law, and not to make law, or give law. Else will it be like the authority, claimed by the Church of Rome, which under pretext of exposition of Scripture, doth not stick to add and alter; and to pronounce that which they do not find; and by show of antiquity, to introduce novelty. Judges ought to be more learned, than witty, more reverend, than plausible, and more advised, than confident. Above all things, integrity is their portion and proper virtue. Cursed (saith the law) is he that removeth the landmark. The mislayer of a mere-stone is to blame. But it is the unjust judge, that is the capital remover of landmarks, when he defineth amiss, of lands and property. One foul sentence doth more hurt, than many foul examples. For these do but corrupt the stream, the other corrupteth the fountain. So with Solomon, Fons turbatus, et vena corrupta, est justus cadens in causa sua coram adversario. The office of judges may have reference unto the parties that use, unto the advocates that plead, unto the clerks and ministers of justice underneath them, and to the sovereign or state above them.

JUDGES should remember that their role is to declare the law, not create it; to interpret laws, not to make or give them. Otherwise, it becomes like the authority claimed by the Church of Rome, which, under the guise of explaining Scripture, often adds and changes things; they declare what they don’t actually find, and introduce new ideas while pretending to rely on tradition. Judges should be more knowledgeable than clever, more respected than agreeable, and more thoughtful than overly confident. Above all, integrity is their essential virtue. The law says, "Cursed is the one who moves the boundary stone." The one who misplaces a boundary marker is at fault. But the unjust judge is the true remover of boundaries when they misinterpret land and property. One bad ruling does more damage than many bad examples because the former corrupts the source, while the latter only taints the stream. As Solomon said, "A disturbed fountain and a corrupted well is a just person falling in their case before an adversary." The role of judges involves the parties involved, the lawyers who represent them, the clerks and officials of justice beneath them, and the government or state above them.

First, for the causes or parties that sue. There be (saith the Scripture) that turn judgment, into wormwood; and surely there be also, that turn it into vinegar; for injustice maketh it bitter, and delays make it sour. The principal duty of a judge, is to suppress force and fraud; whereof force is the more pernicious, when it is open, and fraud, when it is close and disguised. Add thereto contentious suits, which ought to be spewed out, as the surfeit of courts. A judge ought to prepare his way to a just sentence, as God useth to prepare his way, by raising valleys and taking down hills: so when there appeareth on either side an high hand, violent prosecution, cunning advantages taken, combination, power, great counsel, then is the virtue of a judge seen, to make inequality equal; that he may plant his judgment as upon an even ground. Qui fortiter emungit, elicit sanguinem; and where the wine-press is hard wrought, it yields a harsh wine, that tastes of the grape-stone. Judges must beware of hard constructions, and strained inferences; for there is no worse torture, than the torture of laws. Specially in case of laws penal, they ought to have care, that that which was meant for terror, be not turned into rigor; and that they bring not upon the people, that shower whereof the Scripture speaketh, Pluet super eos laqueos; for penal laws pressed, are a shower of snares upon the people. Therefore let penal laws, if they have been sleepers of long, or if they be grown unfit for the present time, be by wise judges confined in the execution: Judicis officium est, ut res, ita tempora rerum, etc. In causes of life and death, judges ought (as far as the law permitteth) in justice to remember mercy; and to cast a severe eye upon the example, but a merciful eye upon the person.

First, regarding the causes or parties that sue. There are those who turn judgment into bitterness, and surely there are also those who turn it into vinegar; for injustice makes it bitter, and delays make it sour. The main job of a judge is to suppress force and fraud; force is more harmful when it’s open, and fraud is more dangerous when it’s hidden and disguised. Additionally, there are contentious lawsuits that should be rejected, like the excesses of courts. A judge should pave the way to a fair sentence just as God prepares His path, by lowering hills and raising valleys: so when there's a show of force, aggressive prosecution, cunning advantages taken, collusion, power, or influential counsel from either side, then a judge’s ability to restore balance is revealed, so he can base his judgment on an even ground. Those who squeeze too hard will draw blood; and where the wine press is pressed too hard, it produces a harsh wine that tastes of the grape pit. Judges must be cautious of harsh interpretations and strained conclusions; there is no worse agony than the agony of laws. Especially in cases involving penalties, they should ensure that what was intended to instill fear does not become excessively harsh; and that they do not bring upon the people that shower of snares mentioned in Scripture. Therefore, if penal laws have been dormant for too long, or if they have become inappropriate for the current time, wise judges should limit their enforcement: It is a judge's duty to consider not just the matters at hand, but also the timing of those matters, etc. In matters of life and death, judges should (as far as the law allows) remember mercy in their pursuit of justice; they should look sternly at the example, but with compassion upon the person.

Secondly, for the advocates and counsel that plead. Patience and gravity of hearing, is an essential part of justice; and an overspeaking judge is no well-tuned cymbal. It is no grace to a judge, first to find that, which he might have heard in due time from the bar; or to show quickness of conceit, in cutting off evidence or counsel too short; or to prevent information by questions, though pertinent. The parts of a judge in hearing, are four: to direct the evidence; to moderate length, repetition, or impertinency of speech; to recapitulate, select, and collate the material points, of that which hath been said; and to give the rule or sentence. Whatsoever is above these is too much; and proceedeth either of glory, and willingness to speak, or of impatience to hear, or of shortness of memory, or of want of a staid and equal attention. It is a strange thing to see, that the boldness of advocates should prevail with judges; whereas they should imitate God, in whose seat they sit; who represseth the presumptuous, and giveth grace to the modest. But it is more strange, that judges should have noted favorites; which cannot but cause multiplication of fees, and suspicion of by-ways. There is due from the judge to the advocate, some commendation and gracing, where causes are well handled and fair pleaded; especially towards the side which obtaineth not; for that upholds in the client, the reputation of his counsel, and beats down in him the conceit of his cause. There is likewise due to the public, a civil reprehension of advocates, where there appeareth cunning counsel, gross neglect, slight information, indiscreet pressing, or an overbold defence. And let not the counsel at the bar, chop with the judge, nor wind himself into the handling of the cause anew, after the judge hath declared his sentence; but, on the other side, let not the judge meet the cause half way, nor give occasion to the party, to say his counsel or proofs were not heard.

Secondly, for the advocates and lawyers who represent clients, having patience and a serious demeanor during hearings is a vital part of justice; a judge who talks too much is not properly fulfilling their role. It’s not fitting for a judge to find out something they could have heard in due time from the lawyers or to show eagerness by cutting off evidence or arguments too abruptly, or to block information with questions, even if they are relevant. The judge's responsibilities during a hearing include four main tasks: guiding the evidence, managing the length and focus of speech, summarizing and organizing the key points of what has been said, and delivering the ruling or judgment. Anything beyond these tasks is excessive and stems from a desire for recognition, impatience to listen, poor memory, or lack of steady and fair attention. It’s surprising to see that the confidence of advocates can sway judges; they should aim to emulate God, whose role they occupy, who silences the arrogant and rewards the humble. It’s even stranger that judges have noted favorites, which inevitably leads to increased fees and raises suspicions of favoritism. Judges owe some acknowledgment and praise to advocates when cases are well presented and argued, especially towards the side that doesn’t win, as this maintains the client’s respect for their lawyer and deflates any overconfidence they might have in their case. Additionally, the public deserves a respectful reprimand of advocates when there’s evident cunning, gross negligence, inadequate information, overzealous arguments, or overly aggressive defenses. Advocates in the courtroom should not argue with the judge or try to rehash the case after the judge has made a ruling. Likewise, judges should not compromise or give the party a reason to claim that their counsel or evidence was not fully considered.

Thirdly, for that that concerns clerks and ministers. The place of justice is an hallowed place; and therefore not only the bench, but the foot-place; and precincts and purprise thereof, ought to be preserved without scandal and corruption. For certainly grapes (as the Scripture saith) will not be gathered of thorns or thistles; neither can justice yield her fruit with sweetness, amongst the briars and brambles of catching and polling clerks, and ministers. The attendance of courts, is subject to four bad instruments. First, certain persons that are sowers of suits; which make the court swell, and the country pine. The second sort is of those, that engage courts in quarrels of jurisdiction, and are not truly amici curiae, but parasiti curiae, in puffing a court up beyond her bounds, for their own scraps and advantage. The third sort, is of those that may be accounted the left hands of courts; persons that are full of nimble and sinister tricks and shifts, whereby they pervert the plain and direct courses of courts, and bring justice into oblique lines and labyrinths. And the fourth, is the poller and exacter of fees; which justifies the common resemblance of the courts of justice, to the bush whereunto, while the sheep flies for defence in weather, he is sure to lose part of his fleece. On the other side, an ancient clerk, skilful in precedents, wary in proceeding, and understanding in the business of the court, is an excellent finger of a court; and doth many times point the way to the judge himself.

Thirdly, regarding clerks and ministers. The place of justice is a sacred space; therefore, not only the bench but also the footrest and its surroundings should be kept free from scandal and corruption. As the Scripture says, grapes won’t be gathered from thorns or thistles; similarly, justice cannot produce sweet results among the thorns and thickets of greedy clerks and ministers. The functioning of courts suffers from four negative influences. First, there are individuals who create lawsuits, causing the court to overflow and the community to suffer. The second group involves those who entangle courts in jurisdictional disputes; they are not true friends of the court but rather exploit it for their own gain. The third group consists of those who can be seen as the left hand of the courts—people who employ crafty and underhanded tactics that distort the straightforward processes of courts and lead justice into complicated and confusing paths. The fourth is the person who collects and demands fees, which is why people often compare courts of justice to a bush where a sheep, seeking shelter from a storm, inevitably ends up losing some of its fleece. On the other hand, an experienced clerk, knowledgeable about precedents, cautious in proceedings, and well-versed in court matters, is a valuable asset to the court and often guides the judge in making decisions.

Fourthly, for that which may concern the sovereign and estate. Judges ought above all to remember the conclusion of the Roman Twelve Tables; Salus populi suprema lex; and to know that laws, except they be in order to that end, are but things captious, and oracles not well inspired. Therefore it is an happy thing in a state, when kings and states do often consult with judges; and again, when judges do often consult with the king and state: the one, when there is matter of law, intervenient in business of state; the other, when there is some consideration of state, intervenient in matter of law. For many times the things deduced to judgment may be meum and tuum, when the reason and consequence thereof may trench to point of estate: I call matter of estate, not only the parts of sovereignty, but whatsoever introduceth any great alteration, or dangerous precedent; or concerneth manifestly any great portion of people. And let no man weakly conceive, that just laws and true policy have any antipathy; for they are like the spirits and sinews, that one moves with the other. Let judges also remember, that Solomon's throne was supported by lions on both sides: let them be lions, but yet lions under the throne; being circumspect that they do not check or oppose any points of sovereignty. Let not judges also be ignorant of their own right, as to think there is not left to them, as a principal part of their office, a wise use and application of laws. For they may remember, what the apostle saith of a greater law than theirs; Nos scimus quia lex bona est, modo quis ea utatur legitime.

Fourthly, concerning what may impact the government and society. Judges should always keep in mind the conclusion of the Roman Twelve Tables: Salus populi suprema lex; and recognize that laws, unless they serve this purpose, are merely tricky items and poorly inspired oracles. Therefore, it’s a good situation in a state when kings and governments frequently consult with judges; and likewise, when judges often consult with the king and government: the former when legal issues arise in matters of state, and the latter when state considerations influence legal matters. Often, issues brought to judgment may affect individual rights but also have implications for the state. When I refer to matters of state, I mean not only aspects of sovereignty but anything that could bring about significant changes or dangerous precedents, or that clearly concerns a large segment of the population. And let no one mistakenly think that just laws and sound policy are at odds; they are like the muscles and tendons that work together. Judges should also remember that Solomon’s throne was flanked by lions on both sides: let them be like lions, but lions who are under the throne, ensuring that they don’t challenge or oppose any sovereign matters. Judges should not be unaware of their rights, for it is a crucial part of their role to wisely use and apply laws. They might recall what the apostle said about a greater law than theirs; Nos scimus quia lex bona est, modo quis ea utatur legitime.





Of Anger

TO SEEK to extinguish anger utterly, is but a bravery of the Stoics. We have better oracles: Be angry, but sin not. Let not the sun go down upon your anger. Anger must be limited and confined, both in race and in time. We will first speak how the natural inclination and habit to be angry, may be attempted and calmed. Secondly, how the particular motions of anger may be repressed, or at least refrained from doing mischief. Thirdly, how to raise anger, or appease anger in another.

TO try to completely eliminate anger is just a bold stance from the Stoics. We have better advice: Be angry, but don’t sin. Don’t let the sun go down while you’re still angry. Anger should be controlled and kept within limits, both in duration and intensity. First, we will discuss how to recognize and manage our natural tendency to get angry. Next, we'll look at how to suppress specific feelings of anger or at least avoid causing harm. Finally, we’ll explore how to provoke anger or calm someone else’s anger.

For the first; there is no other way but to meditate, and ruminate well upon the effects of anger, how it troubles man's life. And the best time to do this, is to look back upon anger, when the fit is thoroughly over. Seneca saith well, That anger is like ruin, which breaks itself upon that it falls. The Scripture exhorteth us to possess our souls in patience. Whosoever is out of patience, is out of possession of his soul. Men must not turn bees;

For the first, the only way is to think deeply and reflect on how anger affects a person's life. The best time to do this is after the anger has completely passed. Seneca wisely said that anger is like a wrecking ball, destroying everything in its path. The Scriptures encourage us to stay calm and in control. Anyone who lacks patience has lost their grip on their own self. People shouldn’t act like bees;

... animasque in vulnere ponunt.

... and they place souls in the wound.

Anger is certainly a kind of baseness; as it appears well in the weakness of those subjects in whom it reigns; children, women, old folks, sick folks. Only men must beware, that they carry their anger rather with scorn, than with fear; so that they may seem rather to be above the injury, than below it; which is a thing easily done, if a man will give law to himself in it.

Anger is definitely a form of weakness; it clearly shows in the frailty of those who are dominated by it: children, women, the elderly, and the ill. Men, however, should be careful to express their anger with disdain rather than fear, so they appear to rise above the offense instead of being brought down by it. This is easily achievable if a person can control themselves in this regard.

For the second point; the causes and motives of anger, are chiefly three. First, to be too sensible of hurt; for no man is angry, that feels not himself hurt; and therefore tender and delicate persons must needs be oft angry; they have so many things to trouble them, which more robust natures have little sense of. The next is, the apprehension and construction of the injury offered, to be, in the circumstances thereof, full of contempt: for contempt is that, which putteth an edge upon anger, as much or more than the hurt itself. And therefore, when men are ingenious in picking out circumstances of contempt, they do kindle their anger much. Lastly, opinion of the touch of a man's reputation, doth multiply and sharpen anger. Wherein the remedy is, that a man should have, as Consalvo was wont to say, telam honoris crassiorem. But in all refrainings of anger, it is the best remedy to win time; and to make a man's self believe, that the opportunity of his revenge is not yet come, but that he foresees a time for it; and so to still himself in the meantime, and reserve it.

For the second point, the causes and motivations behind anger are mainly three. First, being too sensitive to hurt; no one gets angry without feeling hurt themselves, so people who are more sensitive and delicate tend to get angry often. They have plenty of things that upset them, which tougher individuals might not even notice. The next reason is the perception and interpretation of the injury as being full of contempt; contempt intensifies anger, just as much or even more than the hurt itself. So, when people are clever in highlighting aspects of contempt, they really fuel their anger. Lastly, the perception of an attack on a person’s reputation tends to amplify and sharpen anger. The remedy for this is that one should adopt, as Consalvo used to say, a thicker web of honor. However, the best way to manage anger is to buy time and convince oneself that the chance for revenge hasn't arrived yet, but that there will be an opportunity for it later, allowing one to calm down in the meantime and hold onto that feeling.

To contain anger from mischief, though it take hold of a man, there be two things, whereof you must have special caution. The one, of extreme bitterness of words, especially if they be aculeate and proper; for cummunia maledicta are nothing so much; and again, that in anger a man reveal no secrets; for that, makes him not fit for society. The other, that you do not peremptorily break off, in any business, in a fit of anger; but howsoever you show bitterness, do not act anything, that is not revocable.

To manage anger from mischief, even when it takes hold of a person, there are two key things you need to be careful about. First, avoid using extremely harsh words, especially if they are pointed and direct; general insults aren't as damaging. Secondly, don’t let your anger cause you to reveal any secrets; doing so makes you untrustworthy in society. The other thing is to avoid making any final decisions in a fit of anger; no matter how bitter you feel, don’t do anything that you can’t undo.

For raising and appeasing anger in another; it is done chiefly by choosing of times, when men are frowardest and worst disposed, to incense them. Again, by gathering (as was touched before) all that you can find out, to aggravate the contempt. And the two remedies are by the contraries. The former to take good times, when first to relate to a man an angry business; for the first impression is much; and the other is, to sever, as much as may be, the construction of the injury from the point of contempt; imputing it to misunderstanding, fear, passion, or what you will.

To provoke and calm someone else's anger, it's mainly done by picking the moments when people are most irritable and least open to reason. Also, by bringing together everything you can find to amplify the feeling of contempt. The two solutions are quite the opposite. The first is to choose the right moments to discuss something that makes someone angry because first impressions matter a lot. The second is to separate the injury from the feeling of contempt as much as possible; attributing it to misunderstandings, fear, emotion, or whatever you think fits.





Of Vicissitude Of Things

SOLOMON saith, There is no new thing upon the earth. So that as Plato had an imagination, That all knowledge was but remembrance; so Solomon giveth his sentence, That all novelty is but oblivion. Whereby you may see, that the river of Lethe runneth as well above ground as below. There is an abstruse astrologer that saith, If it were not for two things that are constant (the one is, that the fixed stars ever stand a like distance one from another, and never come nearer together, nor go further asunder; the other, that the diurnal motion perpetually keepeth time), no individual would last one moment. Certain it is, that the matter is in a perpetual flux, and never at a stay. The great winding-sheets, that bury all things in oblivion, are two; deluges and earthquakes. As for conflagrations and great droughts, they do not merely dispeople and destroy. Phaeton's car went but a day. And the three years' drought in the time of Elias, was but particular, and left people alive. As for the great burnings by lightnings, which are often in the West Indies, they are but narrow. But in the other two destructions, by deluge and earthquake, it is further to be noted, that the remnant of people which hap to be reserved, are commonly ignorant and mountainous people, that can give no account of the time past; so that the oblivion is all one, as if none had been left. If you consider well of the people of the West Indies, it is very probable that they are a newer or a younger people, than the people of the Old World. And it is much more likely, that the destruction that hath heretofore been there, was not by earthquakes (as the Egyptian priest told Solon concerning the island of Atlantis, that it was swallowed by an earthquake), but rather that it was desolated by a particular deluge. For earthquakes are seldom in those parts. But on the other side, they have such pouring rivers, as the rivers of Asia and Africk and Europe, are but brooks to them. Their Andes, likewise, or mountains, are far higher than those with us; whereby it seems, that the remnants of generation of men, were in such a particular deluge saved. As for the observation that Machiavel hath, that the jealousy of sects, doth much extinguish the memory of things; traducing Gregory the Great, that he did what in him lay, to extinguish all heathen antiquities; I do not find that those zeals do any great effects, nor last long; as it appeared in the succession of Sabinian, who did revive the former antiquities.

SOLOMON says, There’s nothing new under the sun. Just as Plato imagined that all knowledge is merely remembrance, Solomon asserts that all novelty is just forgetfulness. This shows that the river of Lethe flows both above and below the earth. There’s a deep-thinking astrologer who claims that if it weren’t for two things that remain constant (first, the fixed stars are always the same distance apart and never get closer or farther from each other; second, the daily motion keeps time consistently), no individual would last even a moment. It’s clear that matter is in a constant state of change and never remains still. The great shrouds that bury everything in forgetfulness are two: floods and earthquakes. As for fires and severe droughts, they don’t just depopulate and destroy. Phaeton's chariot lasted only a day. The three-year drought during the time of Elijah was just specific and left people alive. Regarding the large fires caused by lightning that often occur in the West Indies, they are fairly limited. But in the other two types of destruction, floods and earthquakes, it’s important to note that the remaining people who survive are usually ignorant and isolated communities that can’t recall the past, making their forgetfulness similar to that of a completely wiped-out population. If you think about the people of the West Indies, it’s very likely they are a newer or younger population compared to those from the Old World. It’s also much more probable that the devastation in that region in the past was due not to earthquakes (as the Egyptian priest told Solon about the island of Atlantis being swallowed by one) but rather that it was caused by a particular flood. Earthquakes are rare in those areas. However, they have such powerful rivers that the rivers of Asia, Africa, and Europe seem like small streams by comparison. Their Andes mountains are also far taller than ours, suggesting that the remnants of mankind were saved during that specific flood. Concerning Machiavelli's observation that the rivalry between factions greatly diminishes the memory of events and his criticism of Gregory the Great for trying to erase all pagan antiquities, I find that these zealot actions don’t have significant effects and don’t last very long, as shown in the succession of Sabinian, who revived former antiquities.

The vicissitude of mutations in the superior globe, are no fit matter for this present argument. It may be, Plato's great year, if the world should last so long, would have some effect; not in renewing the state of like individuals (for that is the fume of those, that conceive the celestial bodies have more accurate influences upon these things below, than indeed they have), but in gross. Comets, out of question, have likewise power and effect, over the gross and mass of things; but they are rather gazed upon, and waited upon in their journey, than wisely observed in their effects; specially in, their respective effects; that is, what kind of comet, for magnitude, color, version of the beams, placing in the reign of heaven, or lasting, produceth what kind of effects.

The ups and downs of changes in the upper world aren't relevant to this discussion. It’s possible that Plato's great year, if the world lasts that long, might have an impact; not in renewing the state of similar individuals (because that’s just the fancy idea of those who think celestial bodies have more precise influences on earthly matters than they actually do), but on a larger scale. Comets undoubtedly have power and influence over the overall mass of things; however, they are more often watched and awaited in their travels than carefully analyzed for their effects, especially their specific effects. This means looking at what type of comet, based on size, color, direction of its light, position in the sky, or duration, produces what kinds of effects.

There is a toy which I have heard, and I would not have it given over, but waited upon a little. They say it is observed in the Low Countries (I know not in what part) that every five and thirty years, the same kind and suit of years and weathers come about again; as great frosts, great wet, great droughts, warm winters, summers with little heat, and the like; and they call it the Prime. It is a thing I do the rather mention, because, computing backwards, I have found some concurrence.

There's a toy I've heard about, and I wouldn't want to give it up just yet, so I'll hold on for a bit. They say that in the Low Countries (I'm not sure exactly where), every thirty-five years, the same type of weather and seasons return—like severe frosts, heavy rain, long droughts, mild winters, and cool summers; they call it the Prime. I bring it up because, when I look back, I've noticed some interesting patterns.

But to leave these points of nature, and to come to men. The greatest vicissitude of things amongst men, is the vicissitude of sects and religions. For those orbs rule in men's minds most. The true religion is built upon the rock; the rest are tossed, upon the waves of time. To speak, therefore, of the causes of new sects; and to give some counsel concerning them, as far as the weakness of human judgment can give stay, to so great revolutions. When the religion formerly received, is rent by discords; and when the holiness of the professors of religion, is decayed and full of scandal; and withal the times be stupid, ignorant, and barbarous; you may doubt the springing up of a new sect; if then also, there should arise any extravagant and strange spirit, to make himself author thereof. All which points held, when Mahomet published his law. If a new sect have not two properties, fear it not; for it will not spread. The one is the supplanting, or the opposing, of authority established; for nothing is more popular than that. The other is the giving license to pleasures, and a voluptuous life. For as for speculative heresies (such as were in ancient times the Arians, and now the Arminians), though they work mightily upon men's wits, yet they do not produce any great alterations in states; except it be by the help of civil occasions. There be three manner of plantations of new sects. By the power of signs and miracles; by the eloquence, and wisdom, of speech and persuasion; and by the sword. For martyrdoms, I reckon them amongst miracles; because they seem to exceed the strength of human nature: and I may do the like, of superlative and admirable holiness of life. Surely there is no better way, to stop the rising of new sects and schisms, than to reform abuses; to compound the smaller differences; to proceed mildly, and not with sanguinary persecutions; and rather to take off the principal authors by winning and advancing them, than to enrage them by violence and bitterness.

But let's put aside nature and focus on people. The biggest change in society is the shift in groups and religions. These beliefs have the most influence on people's minds. The true religion is solid as a rock; the others are tossed around by the waves of time. So, let's discuss the reasons behind new sects and offer some advice on them, however limited human judgment may be in guiding such significant changes. When the established religion is torn apart by disagreements and when the integrity of its followers has declined and become scandalous, especially in times that are ignorant and barbaric, you can expect the rise of a new sect—especially if an odd or radical leader claims authority. This was the case when Muhammad introduced his teachings. If a new sect lacks two key traits, don't worry; it won't gain traction. One is challenging or replacing established authority, which is often popular. The other is allowing indulgence and a hedonistic lifestyle. Speculative heresies (like the ancient Arians or today’s Arminians) can influence people’s thoughts, but they don't cause significant changes in society unless civil circumstances help them. There are three ways to establish new sects: through signs and miracles, through persuasive speech and wisdom, and through violence. I consider martyrdoms to be a kind of miracle since they seem to surpass human strength, and I can say the same about extraordinary and admirable holiness in someone's life. The best way to prevent new sects and divisions from arising is to reform abuses, resolve smaller disagreements, approach issues calmly rather than with violent persecution, and instead of attacking the main leaders, try to win them over and elevate them.

The changes and vicissitude in wars are many; but chiefly in three things; in the seats or stages of the war; in the weapons; and in the manner of the conduct. Wars, in ancient time, seemed more to move from east to west; for the Persians, Assyrians, Arabians, Tartars (which were the invaders) were all eastern people. It is true, the Gauls were western; but we read but of two incursions of theirs: the one to Gallo-Grecia, the other to Rome. But east and west have no certain points of heaven; and no more have the wars, either from the east or west, any certainty of observation. But north and south are fixed; and it hath seldom or never been seen that the far southern people have invaded the northern, but contrariwise. Whereby it is manifest that the northern tract of the world, is in nature the more martial region: be it in respect of the stars of that hemisphere; or of the great continents that are upon the north, whereas the south part, for aught that is known, is almost all sea; or (which is most apparent) of the cold of the northern parts, which is that which, without aid of discipline, doth make the bodies hardest, and the courages warmest.

The changes and ups and downs in wars are numerous, but mainly fall into three areas: the locations of the battles, the weapons used, and the strategies employed. In ancient times, wars tended to shift from east to west, as the Persians, Assyrians, Arabians, and Tartars—who were the invaders—were all from the east. While it's true that the Gauls were from the west, we only hear about two of their invasions: one into Gallo-Grecia and the other into Rome. However, east and west don’t have fixed points, and neither do wars coming from those directions have any reliable patterns. In contrast, north and south are definite, and it’s rare—if ever—that people from the far south have invaded the north, but the opposite has frequently happened. Thus, it’s clear that the northern part of the world is naturally more warlike, whether due to the stars in that hemisphere, the large landmasses in the north, or (most obviously) the cold in the northern regions, which, without any need for training, toughens bodies and warms spirits.

Upon the breaking and shivering of a great state and empire, you may be sure to have wars. For great empires, while they stand, do enervate and destroy the forces of the natives which they have subdued, resting upon their own protecting forces; and then when they fail also, all goes to ruin, and they become a prey. So was it in the decay of the Roman empire; and likewise in the empire of Almaigne, after Charles the Great, every bird taking a feather; and were not unlike to befall to Spain, if it should break. The great accessions and unions of kingdoms, do likewise stir up wars; for when a state grows to an over-power, it is like a great flood, that will be sure to overflow. As it hath been seen in the states of Rome, Turkey, Spain, and others. Look when the world hath fewest barbarous peoples, but such as commonly will not marry or generate, except they know means to live (as it is almost everywhere at this day, except Tartary), there is no danger of inundations of people; but when there be great shoals of people, which go on to populate, without foreseeing means of life and sustentation, it is of necessity that once in an age or two, they discharge a portion of their people upon other nations; which the ancient northern people were wont to do by lot; casting lots what part should stay at home, and what should seek their fortunes. When a warlike state grows soft and effeminate, they may be sure of a war. For commonly such states are grown rich in the time of their degenerating; and so the prey inviteth, and their decay in valor, encourageth a war.

When a large state or empire starts to crumble, you can count on there being wars. Big empires, while they’re intact, weaken and destroy the strength of the local people they’ve conquered, relying on their own military for protection. But when those forces also fail, everything falls apart, and they become easy targets. This is what happened in the decline of the Roman Empire, and also in the empire of Germany after Charlemagne; everyone took a piece of the pie. Spain could face a similar fate if it breaks apart. The merging and expansion of kingdoms also lead to wars because when a state becomes too powerful, it’s like a massive flood that’s bound to overflow. We’ve seen this happen in the states of Rome, Turkey, Spain, and others. When the world has the fewest barbaric groups, typically those who won’t marry or reproduce unless they have a way to survive (which is almost everywhere today, except for Tartary), there’s no risk of population overflow. But when there are large numbers of people who continue to grow without planning for how to sustain themselves, it’s inevitable that at some point, they’ll push a portion of their population onto other nations. The ancient northern peoples used to decide by lot who would stay home and who would seek their fortunes. When a warlike state becomes soft and complacent, it’s a sure sign a war is coming. Usually, these states grow wealthy during their decline, which makes them targets, and their loss of strength invites conflict.

As for the weapons, it hardly falleth under rule and observation: yet we see even they, have returns and vicissitudes. For certain it is, that ordnance was known in the city of the Oxidrakes in India; and was that, which the Macedonians called thunder and lightning, and magic. And it is well known that the use of ordnance, hath been in China above two thousand years. The conditions of weapons, and their improvement, are; First, the fetching afar off; for that outruns the danger; as it is seen in ordnance and muskets. Secondly, the strength of the percussion; wherein likewise ordnance do exceed all arietations and ancient inventions. The third is, the commodious use of them; as that they may serve in all weathers; that the carriage may be light and manageable; and the like.

When it comes to weapons, they can hardly be controlled or monitored, yet we see that they also have ups and downs. It's certain that artillery was known in the city of the Oxidrakes in India, and the Macedonians referred to it as thunder, lightning, and magic. It's well known that the use of artillery has been in China for over two thousand years. The characteristics of weapons and their advancements are: first, their ability to hit from a distance, which avoids danger, as seen with artillery and muskets. Second, the power of the impact; in this regard, artillery surpasses all battering rams and ancient inventions. The third is their ease of use; they should be effective in any weather, with a lightweight and manageable design, and similar features.

For the conduct of the war: at the first, men rested extremely upon number: they did put the wars likewise upon main force and valor; pointing days for pitched fields, and so trying it out upon an even match and they were more ignorant in ranging and arraying their battles. After, they grew to rest upon number rather competent, than vast; they grew to advantages of place, cunning diversions, and the like: and they grew more skilful in the ordering of their battles.

For conducting the war: at first, people heavily relied on numbers; they based the wars on brute force and bravery, setting specific days for battles and testing their strength in fair fights, while they were less knowledgeable about organizing and arranging their armies. Later, they started to focus on a more suitable number of troops rather than just large numbers; they began to take advantage of the terrain, clever distractions, and similar tactics; and they became more skilled in organizing their battles.

In the youth of a state, arms do flourish; in the middle age of a state, learning; and then both of them together for a time; in the declining age of a state, mechanical arts and merchandize. Learning hath his infancy, when it is but beginning and almost childish; then his youth, when it is luxuriant and juvenile; then his strength of years, when it is solid and reduced; and lastly, his old age, when it waxeth dry and exhaust. But it is not good to look too long upon these turning wheels of vicissitude, lest we become giddy. As for the philology of them, that is but a circle of tales, and therefore not fit for this writing.

In the early days of a state, military power is strong; in the middle days, education thrives; and then both exist together for a while; in the later days of a state, practical skills and trade take over. Education has its infancy, when it is just starting and somewhat naive; then it enters its youth, when it is flourishing and vibrant; next comes its peak, when it is solid and refined; and finally, its old age, when it becomes dry and worn out. However, it’s not wise to stare too long at these changing cycles, or we might get dizzy. As for the study of language and literature, that’s just a series of stories, and so it's not suitable for this writing.





Of Fame

THE poets make Fame a monster. They describe her in part finely and elegantly, and in part gravely and sententiously. They say, look how many feathers she hath, so many eyes she hath underneath; so many tongues; so many voices; she pricks up so many ears.

THE poets portray Fame as a monster. They describe her beautifully and elegantly at times, and seriously and thoughtfully at others. They say, look at how many feathers she has, how many eyes she has hidden beneath; how many tongues; how many voices; she raises so many ears.

This is a flourish. There follow excellent parables; as that, she gathereth strength in going; that she goeth upon the ground, and yet hideth her head in the clouds; that in the daytime she sitteth in a watch tower, and flieth most by night; that she mingleth things done, with things not done; and that she is a terror to great cities. But that which passeth all the rest is: They do recount that the Earth, mother of the giants that made war against Jupiter, and were by him destroyed, thereupon in an anger brought forth Fame. For certain it is, that rebels, figured by the giants, and seditious fames and libels, are but brothers and sisters, masculine and feminine. But now, if a man can tame this monster, and bring her to feed at the hand, and govern her, and with her fly other ravening fowl and kill them, it is somewhat worth. But we are infected with the style of the poets. To speak now in a sad and serious manner: There is not, in all the politics, a place less handled and more worthy to be handled, than this of fame. We will therefore speak of these points: What are false fames; and what are true fames; and how they may be best discerned; how fames may be sown, and raised; how they may be spread, and multiplied; and how they may be checked, and laid dead. And other things concerning the nature of fame. Fame is of that force, as there is scarcely any great action, wherein it hath not a great part; especially in the war. Mucianus undid Vitellius, by a fame that he scattered, that Vitellius had in purpose to remove the legions of Syria into Germany, and the legions of Germany into Syria; whereupon the legions of Syria were infinitely inflamed. Julius Caesar took Pompey unprovided, and laid asleep his industry and preparations, by a fame that he cunningly gave out: Caesar's own soldiers loved him not, and being wearied with the wars, and laden with the spoils of Gaul, would forsake him, as soon as he came into Italy. Livia settled all things for the succession of her son Tiberius, by continual giving out, that her husband Augustus was upon recovery and amendment, and it is an usual thing with the pashas, to conceal the death of the Great Turk from the janizaries and men of war, to save the sacking of Constantinople and other towns, as their manner is. Themistocles made Xerxes, king of Persia, post apace out of Grecia, by giving out, that the Grecians had a purpose to break his bridge of ships, which he had made athwart Hellespont. There be a thousand such like examples; and the more they are, the less they need to be repeated; because a man meeteth with them everywhere. Therefore let all wise governors have as great a watch and care over fames, as they have of the actions and designs themselves.

This is a flourish. There follow great parables; for example, she gains strength as she moves; she walks on the ground while keeping her head in the clouds; during the day she sits in a watchtower, and she flies most at night; she mixes what has been done with what has not been done; and she strikes fear in great cities. But what surpasses all the rest is this: They say that the Earth, mother of the giants who waged war against Jupiter and were destroyed by him, out of anger gave birth to Fame. For it is certain that rebels, represented by the giants, and seditious rumors and slanders, are just brothers and sisters, male and female. Now, if a person can tame this monster, feed her from their hand, control her, and use her to hunt down other hungry birds of prey and eliminate them, it’s somewhat valuable. But we are influenced by the style of poets. Speaking now in a serious manner: There is no topic in politics less addressed and more deserving of attention than that of fame. Therefore, we will discuss these points: What are false reputations; what are true reputations; how to best discern them; how reputations can be created and raised; how they can be spread and multiplied; and how they can be restrained and extinguished. And other matters regarding the nature of fame. Fame is so powerful that there’s hardly any significant action in which it does not play a large role, especially in war. Mucianus defeated Vitellius through a rumor he spread that Vitellius intended to move the legions from Syria to Germany and the legions from Germany to Syria; as a result, the legions in Syria were greatly inflamed. Julius Caesar caught Pompey off guard and lulled his efforts and preparations to sleep by spreading a rumor that he cleverly manufactured: Caesar's own soldiers did not love him, and being weary from war and burdened with the spoils from Gaul, would abandon him as soon as he set foot in Italy. Livia arranged everything for her son Tiberius's succession by continuously claiming that her husband Augustus was recovering; it’s a common tactic for pashas to hide the death of the Great Turk from the janizaries and military men to prevent the looting of Constantinople and other cities, as is their way. Themistocles forced Xerxes, the king of Persia, to flee from Greece by claiming that the Greeks planned to destroy his bridge of ships across the Hellespont. There are thousands of similar examples; and the more there are, the less they need to be repeated, because one encounters them everywhere. Therefore, let all wise leaders keep as vigilant a watch over reputations as they do over actions and plans themselves.

[This essay was not finished]

[This essay isn't finished]





A Glossary Of Archaic Words And Phrases

     Abridgment: miniature
     Absurd: stupid, unpolished
     Abuse: cheat, deceive
     Aculeate: stinging
     Adamant: loadstone
     Adust: scorched
     Advoutress: adulteress
     Affect: like, desire
     Antic: clown
     Appose: question
     Arietation: battering-ram
     Audit: revenue
     Avoidance: secret outlet
     Battle: battalion
     Bestow: settle in life
     Blanch: flatter, evade
     Brave: boastful
     Bravery: boast, ostentation
     Broke: deal in brokerage
     Broken: shine by comparison
     Broken music: part music
     Cabinet: secret
     Calendar: weather forecast
     Card: chart, map
     Care not to: are reckless
     Cast: plan
     Cat: cate, cake
     Charge and adventure: cost and
     risk
     Check with: interfere
     Chop: bandy words
     Civil: peaceful
     Close: secret, secretive
     Collect: infer
     Compound: compromise
     Consent: agreement
     Curious: elaborate
     Custom: import duties
     Deceive: rob
     Derive: divert
     Difficileness: moroseness
     Discover: reveal
     Donative: money gift
     Doubt: fear
     Equipollent: equally powerful
     Espial: spy
     Estate: state
     Facility: of easy persuasion
     Fair: rather
     Fame: rumor
     Favor: feature
     Flashy: insipid
     Foot-pace: lobby
     Foreseen: guarded against
     Froward: stubborn
     Futile: babbling
     Globe: complete body
     Glorious: showy, boastful
     Humorous: capricious
     Hundred poll: hundredth head
     Impertinent: irrelevant
     Implicit: entangled
     In a mean: in moderation
     In smother: suppressed
     Indifferent: impartial
     Intend: attend to
     Knap: knoll
     Leese: lose
     Let: hinder
     Loose: shot
     Lot: spell
     Lurch: intercept
     Make: profit, get
     Manage: train
     Mate: conquer
     Material: business-like
     Mere-stone: boundary stone
     Muniting: fortifying
     Nerve: sinew
     Obnoxious: subservient, liable
     Oes: round spangles
     Pair: impair
     Pardon: allowance
     Passable: mediocre
     Pine-apple-tree: pine
     Plantation: colony
     Platform: plan
     Plausible: praiseworthy
     Point device: excessively precise
     Politic: politician
     Poll: extort
     Poser: examiner
     Practice: plotting
     Preoccupate: anticipate
     Prest: prepared
     Prick: plant
     Proper: personal
     Prospective: stereoscope
     Proyne: prune
     Purprise: enclosure
     Push: pimple
     Quarrel: pretext
     Quech: flinch
     Reason: principle
     Recamera: retiring-room
     Return: reaction
     Return: wing running back
     Rise: dignity
     Round: straight
     Save: account for
     Scantling: measure
     Seel: blind
     Shrewd: mischievous
     Sort: associate
     Spial: spy
     Staddle: sapling
     Steal: do secretly
     Stirp: family
     Stond: stop, stand
     Stoved: hot-housed
     Style: title
     Success: outcome
     Sumptuary law: law against
     extravagance
     Superior globe: the heavens
     Temper: proportion
     Tendering: nursing
     Tract: line, trait
     Travel: travail, labor
     Treaties: treatises
     Trench to: touch
     Trivial: common
     Turquet: Turkish dwarf
     Under foot: below value
     Unready: untrained
     Usury: interest
     Value: certify
     Virtuous: able
     Votary: vowed
     Wanton: spoiled
     Wood: maze
     Work: manage, utilize
     Abridgment: miniature  
     Absurd: stupid, unpolished  
     Abuse: cheat, deceive  
     Aculeate: stinging  
     Adamant: loadstone  
     Adust: scorched  
     Advoutress: adulteress  
     Affect: like, desire  
     Antic: clown  
     Appose: question  
     Arietation: battering-ram  
     Audit: revenue  
     Avoidance: secret outlet  
     Battle: battalion  
     Bestow: settle in life  
     Blanch: flatter, evade  
     Brave: boastful  
     Bravery: boast, ostentation  
     Broke: deal in brokerage  
     Broken: shine by comparison  
     Broken music: part music  
     Cabinet: secret  
     Calendar: weather forecast  
     Card: chart, map  
     Care not to: are reckless  
     Cast: plan  
     Cat: cate, cake  
     Charge and adventure: cost and risk  
     Check with: interfere  
     Chop: bandy words  
     Civil: peaceful  
     Close: secret, secretive  
     Collect: infer  
     Compound: compromise  
     Consent: agreement  
     Curious: elaborate  
     Custom: import duties  
     Deceive: rob  
     Derive: divert  
     Difficileness: moroseness  
     Discover: reveal  
     Donative: money gift  
     Doubt: fear  
     Equipollent: equally powerful  
     Espial: spy  
     Estate: state  
     Facility: of easy persuasion  
     Fair: rather  
     Fame: rumor  
     Favor: feature  
     Flashy: insipid  
     Foot-pace: lobby  
     Foreseen: guarded against  
     Froward: stubborn  
     Futile: babbling  
     Globe: complete body  
     Glorious: showy, boastful  
     Humorous: capricious  
     Hundred poll: hundredth head  
     Impertinent: irrelevant  
     Implicit: entangled  
     In a mean: in moderation  
     In smother: suppressed  
     Indifferent: impartial  
     Intend: attend to  
     Knap: knoll  
     Leese: lose  
     Let: hinder  
     Loose: shot  
     Lot: spell  
     Lurch: intercept  
     Make: profit, get  
     Manage: train  
     Mate: conquer  
     Material: business-like  
     Mere-stone: boundary stone  
     Muniting: fortifying  
     Nerve: sinew  
     Obnoxious: subservient, liable  
     Oes: round spangles  
     Pair: impair  
     Pardon: allowance  
     Passable: mediocre  
     Pine-apple-tree: pine  
     Plantation: colony  
     Platform: plan  
     Plausible: praiseworthy  
     Point device: excessively precise  
     Politic: politician  
     Poll: extort  
     Poser: examiner  
     Practice: plotting  
     Preoccupate: anticipate  
     Prest: prepared  
     Prick: plant  
     Proper: personal  
     Prospective: stereoscope  
     Proyne: prune  
     Purprise: enclosure  
     Push: pimple  
     Quarrel: pretext  
     Quech: flinch  
     Reason: principle  
     Recamera: retiring-room  
     Return: reaction  
     Return: wing running back  
     Rise: dignity  
     Round: straight  
     Save: account for  
     Scantling: measure  
     Seel: blind  
     Shrewd: mischievous  
     Sort: associate  
     Spial: spy  
     Staddle: sapling  
     Steal: do secretly  
     Stirp: family  
     Stond: stop, stand  
     Stoved: hot-housed  
     Style: title  
     Success: outcome  
     Sumptuary law: law against extravagance  
     Superior globe: the heavens  
     Temper: proportion  
     Tendering: nursing  
     Tract: line, trait  
     Travel: travail, labor  
     Treaties: treatises  
     Trench to: touch  
     Trivial: common  
     Turquet: Turkish dwarf  
     Under foot: below value  
     Unready: untrained  
     Usury: interest  
     Value: certify  
     Virtuous: able  
     Votary: vowed  
     Wanton: spoiled  
     Wood: maze  
     Work: manage, utilize  











Download ePUB

If you like this ebook, consider a donation!