after explaining the foundations of a monarchical dominion, i have taken in hand to prove here in order the fitness of such foundations. and to this end the first point to be noted is, that it is in no way repugnant to experience, for laws to be so firmly fixed, that not the king himself can abolish them. for though the persians worshipped their kings as gods, yet had not the kings themselves authority to revoke laws once established, as appears from daniel, 1 and nowhere, as far as i know, is a monarch chosen absolutely without any conditions expressed. nor yet is it repugnant to reason or the absolute obedience due to a king. for the foundations of the dominion are to be considered as eternal decrees of the king, so that his ministers entirely obey him in refusing to execute his orders, when he commands anything contrary to the same. which we can make plain by the example of ulysses. 2 for his comrades were executing his own order, when they would not untie him, when he was bound to the mast and captivated by the sirens' song, although he gave them manifold orders to do so, and that with threats. and it is ascribed to his forethought, that he afterwards thanked his comrades for obeying him according to his first intention. and, after this example of ulysses, kings often instruct judges, to administer justice without respect of persons, not even of the king himself, if by some singular accident he order anything contrary to established law. for kings are not gods, but men, who are often led captive by the sirens' song. if then everything depended on the inconstant will of one man, nothing would be fixed. and so, that a monarchical dominion may be stable, it must be ordered, so that everything be done by the king's decree only, that is, so that every law be an explicit will of the king, but not every will of the king a law; as to which see chap. vi. sects. 3, 5, 6.

2. it must next be observed, that in laying foundations it is very necessary to study the human passions: and it is not enough to have shown, what ought to be done, but it ought, above all, to be shown how it can be effected, that men, whether led by passion or reason, should yet keep the laws firm and unbroken. for if the constitution of the dominion, or the public liberty depends only on the weak assistance of the laws, not only will the citizens have no security for its maintenance (as we showed in the third section of the last chapter), but it will even turn to their ruin. for this is certain, that no condition of a commonwealth is more wretched than that of the best, when it begins to totter, unless at one blow it falls with a rush into slavery, which seems to be quite impossible. and, therefore, it would be far better for the subjects to transfer their rights absolutely to one man, than to bargain for unascertained and empty, that is unmeaning, terms of liberty, and so prepare for their posterity a way to the most cruel servitude. but if i succeed in showing that the foundation of monarchical dominion, which i stated in the last chapter, are firm and cannot be plucked up, without the indignation of the larger part of an armed multitude, and that from them follow peace and security for king and multitude, and if i deduce this from general human nature, no one will be able to doubt, that these foundations are the best and the true ones (chap. iii. sec. 9, and chap. vi. sects. 3, 8). but that such is their nature, i will show as briefly as possible.

3. that the duty of him, who holds the dominion, is always to know its state and condition, to watch over the common welfare of all, and to execute whatever is to the interest of the majority of the subjects, is admitted by all. but as one person alone is unable to examine into everything, and cannot always have his mind ready and turn it to meditation, and is often hindered by disease, or old age, or other causes, from having leisure for public business; therefore it is necessary that the monarch have counsellors to know the state of affairs, and help the king with their advice, and frequently supply his place; and that so it come to pass, that the dominion or commonwealth may continue always in one and the same mind.

4. but as human nature is so constituted, that everyone seeks with the utmost passion his own advantage, and judges those laws to be most equitable, which he thinks necessary to preserve and increase his substance, and defends another's cause so far only as he thinks he is thereby establishing his own; it follows hence, that the counsellors chosen must be such, that their private affairs and their own interests depend on the general welfare and peace of all. and so it is evident, that if from every sort or class of citizens a certain number be chosen, what has most votes in such a council will be to the interest of the greater part of the subjects. and though this council, because it is composed of so large a number of citizens, must of necessity be attended by many of very simple intellect, yet this is certain, that everyone is pretty clever and sagacious in business which he has long and eagerly practised. and, therefore, if none be chosen but such as have till their fiftieth year practised their own business without disgrace, they will be fit enough to give their advice about their own affairs, especially if, in matters of considerable importance, a time be allowed for consideration. besides, it is far from being the fact, that a council composed of a few is not frequented by this kind of men. for, on the contrary, its greatest part must consist of such, since everyone, in that case, tries hard to have dullards for colleagues, that they may hang on his words, for which there is no opportunity in large councils.

5. furthermore, it is certain, that everyone would rather rule than be ruled. "for no one of his own will yields up dominion to another," as sallust has it in his first speech to c?|sar. 3 and, therefore, it is clear, that a whole multitude will never transfer its right to a few or to one, if it can come to an agreement with itself, without proceeding from the controversies, which generally arise in large councils, to seditions. and so the multitude does not, if it is free, transfer to the king anything but that, which it cannot itself have absolutely within its authority, namely, the ending of controversies and the using despatch in decisions. for as to the case which often arises, where a king is chosen on account of war, that is, because war is much more happily conducted by kings, it is manifest folly, i say, that men should choose slavery in time of peace for the sake of better fortune in war; if, indeed, peace can be conceived of in a dominion, where merely for the sake of war the highest authority is transferred to one man, who is, therefore, best able to show his worth and the importance to everyone of his single self in time of war; whereas, on the contrary, democracy has this advantage, that its excellence is greater in peace than in war. however, for whatever reason a king is chosen, he cannot by himself, as we said just now, know what will be to the interest of the dominion: but for this purpose, as we showed in the last section, will need many citizens for his counsellors. and as we cannot at all suppose, that any opinion can be conceived about a matter proposed for discussion, which can have escaped the notice of so large a number of men, it follows, that no opinion can be conceived tending to the people's welfare, besides all the opinions of this council, which are submitted to the king. and so, since the people's welfare is the highest law, or the king's utmost right, it follows, that the king's utmost right is but to choose one of the opinions offered by the council, not to decree anything, or offer any opinion contrary to the mind of all the council at once (chap. vi. sec. 25). but if all the opinions offered in the council were to be submitted to the king, then it might happen that the king would always favour the small cities, which have the fewest votes. for though by the constitution of the council it be ordained, that the opinions should be submitted to the king without mention of their supporters, yet they will never be able to take such good care, but that some opinion will get divulged. and, therefore, it must of necessity be provided, that that opinion, which has not gained at least a hundred votes, shall be held void; and this law the larger cities will be sure to defend with all their might.

6. and here, did i not study brevity, i would show other advantages of this council; yet one, which seems of the greatest importance, i will allege. i mean, that there can be given no greater inducement to virtue, than this general hope of the highest honour. for by ambition are we all most led, as in our ethics we showed to be the case. 4

7. but it cannot be doubted that the majority of this council will never be minded to wage war, but rather always pursue and love peace. for besides that war will always cause them fear of losing their property and liberty, it is to be added, that war requires fresh expenditure, which they must meet, and also that their own children and relatives, though intent on their domestic cares, will be forced to turn their attention to war and go a-soldiering, whence they will never bring back anything but unpaid-for scars. for, as we said (chap. vi. sec. 31), no pay is to be given to the militia, and (chap. vi. sec. 10) it is to be formed out of citizens only and no others.

8. there is another accession to the cause of peace and concord, which is also of great weight: i mean, that no citizen can have immovable property (chap. vi. sec. 12). hence all will have nearly an equal risk in war. for all will be obliged, for the sake of gain, to practise trade, or lend money to one another, if, as formerly by the athenians, a law be passed, forbidding to lend money at interest to any but inhabitants; and thus they will be engaged in business, which either is mutually involved, one man's with another's, or needs the same means for its furtherance. and thus the greatest part of this council will generally have one and the same mind about their common affairs and the arts of peace. for, as we said (sec. 4), every man defends another's cause, so far as he thinks thereby to establish his own.

9. it cannot be doubted, that it will never occur to anyone to corrupt this council with bribes. for were any man to draw over to his side some one or two out of so great a number of men, he would gain nothing. for, as we said, the opinion, which does not gain at least a hundred votes, is void.

10. we shall also easily see, that, once this council is established its members cannot be reduced to a less number, if we consider the common passions of mankind. for all are guided mostly by ambition, and there is no man who lives in health but hopes to attain extreme old age. if then we calculate the number of those who actually reach their fiftieth or sixtieth year, and further take into account the number that are every year chosen of this great council, we shall see, that there can hardly be a man of those who bear arms, but is under the influence of a great hope of attaining this dignity. and so they will all, to the best of their power, defend this law of the council. for be it noted, that corruption, unless it creep in gradually, is easily prevented. but as it can be more easily supposed, and would be less invidious, that a less number should be chosen out of every clan, than that a less number should be chosen out of a few clans, or that one or two clans should be altogether excluded; therefore (chap. vi. sec. 15) the number of counsellors cannot be reduced, unless a third, fourth, or fifth part be removed simultaneously, which change is a very great one, and therefore quite repugnant to common practice. nor need one be afraid of delay or negligence in choosing, because this is remedied by the council itself. see chap. vi. sec. 16.

11. the king, then, whether he is induced by fear of the multitude, or aims at binding to himself the majority of an armed multitude, or is guided by a generous spirit, a wish that is, to consult the public interest, will always confirm that opinion, which has gained most votes, that is (sec. 5), 5 which is to the interest of the greater part of the dominion; and will study to reconcile the divergent opinions referred to him, if it can be done, that he may attach all to himself (in which he will exert all his powers), and that alike in peace and war they may find out, what an advantage his single self is to them. and thus he will then be most independent, and most in possession of dominion, when he most consults the general welfare of the multitude.

12. for the king by himself cannot restrain all by fear. but his power, as we have said, rests upon the number of his soldiers, and especially on their valour and faith, which will always remain so long enduring between men, as with them is joined need, be that need honourable or disgraceful. and this is why kings usually are fonder of exciting than restraining their soldiery, and shut their eyes more to their vices than to their virtues, and generally, to hold under the best of them, seek out, distinguish, and assist with money or favour the idle, and those who have ruined themselves by debauchery, and shake hands with them, and throw them kisses, and for the sake of mastery stoop to every servile action. in order therefore that the citizens may be distinguished by the king before all others, and, as far as the civil state and equity permit, may remain independent, it is necessary that the militia should consist of citizens only, and that citizens should be his counsellors; and on the contrary citizens are altogether subdued, and are laying the foundations of eternal war, from the moment that they suffer mercenaries to be levied, whose trade is war, and who have most power in strifes and seditions.

13. that the king's counsellors ought not to be elected for life, but for three, four, or five years, is clear as well from the tenth, as from what we said in the ninth section of this chapter. for if they were chosen for life, not only could the greatest part of the citizens conceive hardly any hope of obtaining this honour, and thus there would arise a great inequality, and thence envy, and constant murmurs, and at last seditions, which, no doubt, would be welcome to kings greedy of mastery: but also the counsellors, being rid of the fear of their successors, would assume a great licence in all respects, which the king would be far from opposing. for the more the citizens hate them, the more they will cling to the king, and be ready to flatter him. nay, the interval of five years seems even too much, for in such a space of time it does not seem so impossible to corrupt by bribes or favour a very large part of the council, however large it be. and therefore it will be far safer, if every year two out of every clan retire, and be replaced by as many more (supposing that there are to be five counsellors of each clan), except in the year in which the jurist of any clan retires, and a fresh one is chosen in his place.

14. moreover, no king can promise himself more safety, than he who reigns in a commonwealth of this sort. for besides that a king soon perishes, when his soldiers cease to desire his safety, it is certain that kings are always in the greatest danger from those who are nearest their persons. the fewer counsellors, then, there are, and the more powerful they consequently are, the more the king is in danger of their transferring the dominion to another. nothing in fact more alarmed david, than that his own counsellor ahitophel sided with absalom. 6 still more is this the case, if the whole authority has been transferred absolutely to one man, because it can then be more easily transferred from one to another. for two private soldiers once took in hand to transfer the roman empire, and did transfer it. 7 i omit the arts and cunning wiles, whereby counsellors have to assure themselves against falling victims to their unpopularity; for they are but too well known, and no one, who has read history, can be ignorant, that the good faith of counsellors has generally turned to their ruin. and so, for their own safety, it behoves them to be cunning, not faithful. but if the counsellors are too numerous to unite in the same crime, and are all equal, and do not hold their office beyond a period of four years, they cannot be at all objects of fear to the king, except he attempt to take away their liberty, wherein he will offend all the citizens equally. for, as antonio perez 8 excellently observes, an absolute dominion is to the prince very dangerous, to the subjects very hateful, and to the institutes of god and man alike opposed, as innumerable instances show.

15. besides these we have, in the last chapter, laid other foundations, by which the king is greatly secured in his dominion, and the citizens in their hold of peace and liberty, which foundations we will reason out in their proper places. for i was anxious above everything to reason out all those, which refer to the great council and are of the greatest importance. now i will continue with the others, in the same order in which i stated them.

16. it is undoubted, that citizens are more powerful, and, therefore, more independent, the larger and better fortified their towns are. for the safer the place is, in which they are, the better they can defend their liberty, and the less they need fear an enemy, whether without or within; and it is certain that the more powerful men are by their riches, the more they by nature study their own safety. but cities which need the help of another for their preservation are not on terms of equal right with that other, but are so far dependent on his right as they need his help. for we showed in the second chapter, that right is determined by power alone.

17. for the same reason, also, i mean that the citizens may continue independent, and defend their liberty, the militia ought to be composed of the citizens only, and none of them to be exempted. for an armed man is more independent than an unarmed (sec. 12); and those citizens transfer absolutely their own right to another, and entrust it entirely to his good faith, who have given him their arms and the defences of their cities. human avarice, by which most men are very much led, adds its weight to this view. for it cannot be, that a mercenary force be hired without great expense; and citizens can hardly endure the exactions required to maintain an idle soldiery. but that no man, who commands the whole or a large part of the militia, should, except under pressure of necessity, be chosen for the extreme term of a year, all are aware, who have read history, alike sacred and profane. for there is nothing that reason more clearly teaches. for surely the might of dominion is altogether entrusted to him, who is allowed enough time to gain military glory, and raise his fame above the king's, or to make the army faithful to himself by flattery, largesses, and the other arts, whereby generals are accustomed to procure the enslavement of others, and the mastery for themselves. lastly, i have added this point for the greater safety of the whole dominion, that these commanders of the militia are to be selected from the king's counsellors or ex-counsellors — that is, from men who have reached the age at which mankind generally prefer what is old and safe to what is new and dangerous. 9

18. i said that the citizens were to be divided into clans, 10 and an equal number of counsellors chosen from each, in order that the larger towns might have, in proportion to the number of their citizens, a greater number of counsellors, and be able, as is equitable, to contribute more votes. for the power and, therefore, the right of a dominion is to be estimated by the number of its citizens; and i do not believe that any fitter means can be devised for maintaining this equality between citizens, who are all by nature so constituted, that everyone wishes to be attributed to his own stock, and be distinguished by race from the rest.

19. furthermore, in the state of nature, there is nothing which any man can less claim for himself, and make his own, than the soil, and whatever so adheres to the soil, that he cannot hide it anywhere, nor carry it whither he pleases. the soil, therefore, and whatever adheres to it in the way we have mentioned, must be quite common property of the commonwealth — that is, of all those who, by their united force, can vindicate their claim to it, or of him to whom all have given authority to vindicate his claim. and therefore the soil, and all that adheres to it, ought to have a value with the citizens proportionate to the necessity there is, that they may be able to set their feet thereon, and defend their common right or liberty. but in the eighth section of this chapter we have shown the advantages that the commonwealth must necessarily derive hence.

20. in order that the citizens may be as far as possible equal, which is of the first necessity in a commonwealth, none but the descendants of a king are to be thought noble. but if all the descendants of kings were allowed to marry wives, or beget children, they would grow, in process of time, to a very large number, and would be, not only burdensome, but also a cause of very great fear, to king and all. for men who nave too much leisure generally meditate crime. and hence it is that kings are, on account of their nobles, very much induced to make war, because kings surrounded with nobles find more quiet and safety in war than in peace. but i pass by this as notorious enough, and also the points which i have mentioned in secs. 15-27 of the last chapter. for the main points have been proved in this chapter, and the rest are self-evident.

21. that the judges ought to be too numerous for a large proportion of them to be accessible to the bribes of a private man, and that they should not vote openly, but secretly, and that they deserve payment for their time, is known to everyone 11 but they everywhere have by custom a yearly salary; and so they make no great haste to determine suits, and there is often no end to trials. next, where confiscations accrue to the king, there frequently in trials not truth nor right, but the greatness of a man's riches is regarded. informers are ever at work, and everyone who has money is snatched as a prey, which evils, though grievous and intolerable, are excused by the necessity of warfare, and continue even in time of peace. but the avarice of judges that are appointed but for two or three years at most is moderated by fear of their successors, not to mention, again, that they can have no fixed property, but must lend their money at interest to their fellow-citizens. and so they are forced rather to consult their welfare than to plot against them, especially if the judges themselves, as we have said, are numerous.

22. but we have said, that no military pay is to be voted 12 for the chief reward of military service is liberty. for in the state of nature everyone strives, for bare liberty's sake, to defend himself to the utmost of his power, and expects no other reward of warlike virtue but his own independence. but, in the civil state, all the citizens together are to be considered as a man in the state of nature; and, therefore, when all fight on behalf of that state, all are defending themselves, and engaged on their own business. but counsellors, judges, magistrates, and the like, are engaged more on others' business than on their own; and so it is but fair to pay them for their time. besides, in war, there can be no greater or more honourable inducement to victory than the idea of liberty. but if, on the contrary, a certain portion of the citizens be designated as soldiers, on which account it will be necessary to award them a fixed pay, the king will, of necessity, distinguish them above the rest (as we showed. sec. 12) — that is, will distinguish men who are acquainted only with the arts of war, and, in time of peace, from excess of leisure, become debauched, and, finally, from poverty, meditate nothing but rapine, civil discord, and wars. and so we can affirm, that a monarchy of this sort is, in fact, a state of war, and in it only the soldiery enjoy liberty, but the rest are slaves.

23. our remarks about the admission of foreigners (chap. vi. sec. 32) i believe to be obvious. besides, no one can doubt that the king's blood-relations should be at a distance from him, and occupied, not by warlike, but by peaceful business, whence they may get credit and the dominion quiet. though even this has not seemed a sufficient precaution to the turkish despots, who, therefore, make a point of slaughtering all their brothers. and no wonder: for the more absolutely the right of dominion has been conferred on one man, the more easily, as we showed by an instance (sec. 14), it can be transferred from one to another. but that in such a monarchy, as we here suppose, in which, i mean, there is not one mercenary soldier, the plan we have mentioned provides sufficiently for the king's safety, is not to be doubted.

24. nor can anyone hesitate about what we have said in the thirty-fourth and thirty-fifth sections of the last chapter. but that the king must not marry a foreigner 13 is easily proved. for not to mention that two commonwealths, although united by a treaty, are yet in a state of hostility (chap. iii. sec. 14), it is very much to be avoided that war should be stirred up, on account of the king's domestic affairs, both because disputes and dissensions arise peculiarly from an alliance founded on marriage, and because questions between two commonwealths are mostly settled by war. of this we read a fatal instance in scripture. for after the death of solomon, who had married the king of egypt's daughter, his son rehoboam waged a most disastrous war with shishak, king of the egyptians, who utterly subdued him. 14 moreover, the marriage of lewis xiv., king of france with the daughter of philip iv. was the seed of a fresh war. 15 and, besides these, very many instances may be read in history.

25. the form of the dominion ought to be kept one and the same, and, consequently, there should be but one king, and that of the same sex, and the dominion should be indivisible. 16 but as to my saying that the king's eldest son should succeed his father by right, or (if there be no issue) the nearest to him in blood, it is clear as well from chap. vi. sec. 13, as because the election of the king made by the multitude should, if possible, last for ever. otherwise it will necessarily happen, that the supreme authority of the dominion will frequently pass to the multitude, which is an extreme and, therefore, exceedingly dangerous change. but those who, from the fact that the king is master of the dominion, and holds it by absolute right, infer that he can hand it over to whom he pleases, and that, therefore, the king's son is by right heir to the dominion, are greatly mistaken. for the king's will has so long the force of law, as he holds the sword of the commonwealth; for the right of dominion is limited by power only. therefore, a king may indeed abdicate, but cannot hand the dominion over to another, unless with the concurrence of the multitude or its stronger part. and that this may be more clearly understood, we must remark, that children are heirs to their parents, not by natural, but by civil law. for by the power of the commonwealth alone is anyone master of definite property. and, therefore, by the same power or right, whereby the will of any man concerning his property is held good, by the same also his will remains good after his own death, as long as the commonwealth endures. and this is the reason, why everyone in the civil state maintains after death the same right as he had in his lifetime, because, as we said, it is not by his own power, but by that of the commonwealth, which is everlasting, that he can decide anything about his property. but the king's case is quite different. for the king's will is the civil law itself, and the king the commonwealth itself. therefore, by the death of the king, the commonwealth is in a manner dead, and the civil state naturally returns to the state of nature, and consequently the supreme authority to the multitude, which can, therefore, lawfully lay down new and abolish old laws. and so it appears that no man succeeds the king by right, but him whom the multitude wills to be successor, or in a theocracy, such as the commonwealth of the hebrews once was, him whom god has chosen by a prophet. we might likewise infer this from the fact that the king's sword, or right, is in reality the will of the multitude itself, or its stronger part; or else from the fact, that men endowed with reason never so utterly abdicate their right, that they cease to be men, and are accounted as sheep. but to pursue this further is unnecessary.

26. but the right of religion, or of worshipping god, no man can transfer to another. however, we have treated of this point at length in the last chapters of our theologico-political treatise, which it is superfluous to repeat here. and herewith i claim to have reasoned out the foundations of the best monarchy, though briefly, yet with sufficient clearness. but their mutual interdependence, or, in other words, the proportions of my dominion, anyone will easily remark, who will be at the pains to observe them as a whole with some attention. it remains only to warn the reader, that i am here conceiving of that monarchy, which is instituted by a free multitude, for which alone these foundations can serve. for a multitude that has grown used to another form of dominion will not be able without great danger of overthrow to pluck up the accepted foundations of the whole dominion, and change its entire fabric.

27. and what we have written will, perhaps, be received with derision by those who limit to the populace only the vices which are inherent in all mortals; and use such phrases as, "the mob, if it is not frightened, inspires no little fear," and "the populace is either a humble slave, or a haughty master," and "it has no truth or judgment," etc. but all have one common nature. only we are deceived by power and refinement. whence it comes that when two do the same thing we say, "this man may do it with impunity, that man may not;" not because the deed, but because the doer is different. haughtiness is a property of rulers. men are haughty, but by reason of an appointment for a year; how much more then nobles, that have their honours eternal! but their arrogance is glossed over with importance, luxury, profusion, and a kind of harmony of vices, and a certain cultivated folly, and elegant villainy, so that vices, each of which looked at separately is foul and vile, because it is then most conspicuous, appear to the inexperienced and untaught honourable and becoming. "the mob, too, if it is not frightened, inspires no little fear;" yes, for liberty and slavery are not easily mingled. lastly, as for the populace being devoid of truth and judgment, that is nothing wonderful, since the chief business of the dominion is transacted behind its back, and it can but make conjectures from the little, which cannot be hidden. for it is an uncommon virtue to suspend one's judgment. so it is supreme folly to wish to transact everything behind the backs of the citizens, and to expect that they will not judge ill of the same, and will not give everything an unfavourable interpretation. for if the populace could moderate itself, and suspend its judgment about things with which it is imperfectly acquainted, or judge rightly of things by the little it knows already, it would surely be more fit to govern, than to be governed. but, as we said, all have the same nature. all grow haughty with rule, and cause fear if they do not feel it, and everywhere truth is generally transgressed by enemies or guilty people; especially where one or a few have mastery, and have respect in trials not to justice or truth, but to amount of wealth.

28. besides, paid soldiers, that are accustomed to military discipline, and can support cold and hunger, are likely to despise a crowd of citizens as very inferior for storming towns or fighting pitched battles. but that my dominion is, therefore, more unhappy or less durable, no one of sound mind will affirm. but, on the contrary, everyone that judges things fairly will admit, that that dominion is the most durable of all, which can content itself with preserving what it has got, without coveting what belongs to others, and strives, therefore, most eagerly by every means to avoid war and preserve peace.

29. but i admit that the counsels of such a dominion can hardly be concealed. but everyone will also admit with me that it is far better for the right counsels of a dominion to be known to its enemies, than for the evil secrets of tyrants to be concealed from the citizens. they who can treat secretly of the affairs of a dominion have it absolutely under their authority, and, as they plot against the enemy in time of war, so do they against the citizens in time of peace. now that this secrecy is often serviceable to a dominion, no one can deny; but that without it the said dominion cannot subsist, no one will ever prove. but, on the contrary, to entrust affairs of state absolutely to any man is quite incompatible with the maintenance of liberty; and so it is folly to choose to avoid a small loss by means of the greatest of evils. but the perpetual refrain of those who lust after absolute dominion is, that it is to the essential interest of the commonwealth that its business be secretly transacted, and other like pretences, which end in the more hateful a slavery, the more they are clothed with a show of utility.

30. lastly, although no dominion, as far as i know, has ever been founded on all the conditions we have mentioned, yet from experience itself we shall be able to prove that this form of monarchy is the best, if we consider the causes of the preservation and overthrow of any dominion that is not barbarous. but this i could not do without greatly wearying the reader. however, i cannot pass over in silence one instance, that seems worth remembering: i mean the dominion of the arragonese, who showed a singular loyalty towards their kings, and with equal constancy preserved unbroken the constitution of the kingdom. for as soon as they had cast off the slavish yoke of the moors, they resolved to choose themselves a king, but on what conditions they could not quite make up their minds, and they therefore determined to consult the sovereign pontiff of rome. he, who in this matter certainly bore himself as christ's vicar, blamed them for so obstinately wishing to choose a king, unwarned by the example of the hebrews. however, if they would not change their minds, then he advised them not to choose a king, without first instituting customs equitable and suitable to the national genius, and above all he would have them create some supreme council, to balance the king's power like the ephors of the lacedaemonians, and to have absolute right to determine the disputes, which might arise between the king and the citizens. so then, following this advice, they established the laws, which seemed to them most equitable, of which the supreme interpreter, and therefore supreme judge, was to be, not the king, but the council, which they call the seventeen, and whose president has the title of justice 17 this justice then, and the seventeen, who are chosen for life, not by vote but by lot, have the absolute right of revising and annulling all sentences passed upon any citizen by other courts, civil or ecclesiastical, or by the king himself, so that every citizen had the right to summon the king himself before this council. moreover, they once had the right of electing and deposing the king. but after the lapse of many years the king, don pedro, who is called the dagger, by canvassing, bribery, promises, and every sort of practice, at length procured the revocation of this right. and as soon as he gained his point, he cut off, or, as i would sooner believe, wounded his hand before them all, saying, that not without the loss of royal blood could subjects be allowed to choose their king 18 yet he effected this change, but upon this condition, "that the subjects have had and shall have the right of taking arms against any violence whatever, whereby any may wish to enter upon the dominion to their hurt, nay, against the king himself, or the prince, his heir, if he thus encroach." by which condition they certainly rather rectified than abolished that right. for, as we have shown (chap. iv. secs. 5, 6), a king can be deprived of the power of ruling, not by the civil law, but by the law of war, in other words the subjects may resist his violence with violence. besides this condition they stipulated others, which do not concern our present design. having by these customs given themselves a constitution to the mind of all, they continued for an incredible length of time unharmed, the king's loyalty towards his subjects being as great as theirs towards him. but after that the kingdom fell by inheritance to ferdinand of castile, who first had the surname of catholic; this liberty of the arragonese began to displease the castilians, who therefore ceased not to urge ferdinand to abolish these rights. but he, not yet being accustomed to absolute dominion, dared make no such attempt, but replied thus to his counsellors: that (not to mention that he had received the kingdom of arragon on those terms, which they knew, and had most solemnly sworn to observe the same, and that it was inhuman to break his word) he was of opinion, that his kingdom would be stable, as long as its safety was as much to the subjects' as to the king's interest, so that neither the king should outweigh the subjects, nor yet the subjects the king; for that if either party were too powerful, the weaker would not only try to recover its former equality, but in vexation at its injury to retaliate upon the other, whence would follow the ruin of either or both. which very wise language i could not enough wonder at, had it proceeded from a king accustomed to command not freemen but slaves. accordingly the arragonese retained their liberties after the time of ferdinand, though no longer by right but by the favour of their too powerful kings, until the reign of philip ii., who oppressed them with better luck, but no less cruelty, than he did the united provinces. and although philip iii. is supposed to have restored everything to its former position, yet the arragonese, partly from eagerness to flatter the powerful (for it is folly to kick against the pricks), partly from terror, have kept nothing but the specious names and empty forms of liberty.

31. we conclude, therefore, that the multitude may preserve under a king an ample enough liberty; if it contrive that the king's power be determined by the sole power, and preserved by the defence of the multitude itself. and this was the single rule which i followed in laying the foundations of monarchy.