geographical region and share the same language. If it is and the language is shared, the territory will be much easier to hold on to, especially if its people are not used to the freedom of self-government. In that case all you have to do is eliminate the family of the previous ruler and your hold on power is guaranteed. Everything else in the territory can then be left as it was and, given that there are no profound differences in customs, people will accept the situation quietly enough. Certainly this has proved true in Burgundy, Brittany, Gascony and Normandy, all of which have now been under French rule for many years. Even where there is some difference in language, the customs of these territories are similar and people can get along with each other. So a ruler who has taken territories in these circumstances must have two priorities: first, to eliminate the family of the previous rulers; second, to leave all laws and taxes as they were. In this way the acquired territory and the kingâs original possessions will soon form a single entity.
But when a ruler occupies a state in an area that has a different language, different customs and different institutions, then things get tough. To hold on to a new possession in these circumstances takes a lot of luck and hard work. Perhaps the most effective solution is for the new ruler to go and live there himself. This will improve security and make the territory more stable. The Turkish sultan did this in Greece, and all the other measures he took to hold on to the country would have been ineffective if he hadnât. When youâre actually there, you can see when things start going wrong and nip rebellion in the bud; when youâre far away you only find out about it when itâs too late. Another advantage is that the new territory wonât be plundered by your officials. Its subjects will be happy that they can appeal to a ruler who is living among them. So, if theyâre intending to be obedient, theyâll have one more reason to love you, and if theyâre not, all the more reason to fear you. Anyone planning an attack from outside will think twice about it. So, if you go and live in the new territory youâve taken, youâre very unlikely to lose it.
Another good solution is to establish colonies in one or two places. These work rather like chains to bind the captured state to your own. If you donât do this youâll have to keep large numbers of infantry and cavalry in the territory. Colonies donât cost a great deal. You can send and maintain them very cheaply and they only arouse the hostility of the people whose houses and land are expropriated to give to the colonists. Since that will only be a very small proportion of the population, and since these people will now be poor and will have fled to different places, they can hardly cause much trouble. Everyone else will be unaffected (hence prone to keep quiet) and at the same time frightened of stepping out of line for fear of having their own houses and land taken away. In conclusion, colonies are cheap, more loyal, provoke less hostility among your new subjects, and, as Iâve said, those few who are provoked canât fight back since theyâll be dispossessed refugees. In this regard itâs worth noting that in general you must either pamper people or destroy them; harm them just a little and theyâll hit back; harm them seriously and they wonât be able to. So if youâre going to do people harm, make sure you neednât worry about their reaction. If, on the other hand, you decide to send an occupying army rather than establish colonies, the operation will be far more expensive and all the revenues from the new territory will be used up in defending it, turning what should have been a gain into a loss. And youâll provoke more hostility: an army moving about and requisitioning lodgings will do damage across the entire territory, something that has
But when a ruler occupies a state in an area that has a different language, different customs and different institutions, then things get tough. To hold on to a new possession in these circumstances takes a lot of luck and hard work. Perhaps the most effective solution is for the new ruler to go and live there himself. This will improve security and make the territory more stable. The Turkish sultan did this in Greece, and all the other measures he took to hold on to the country would have been ineffective if he hadnât. When youâre actually there, you can see when things start going wrong and nip rebellion in the bud; when youâre far away you only find out about it when itâs too late. Another advantage is that the new territory wonât be plundered by your officials. Its subjects will be happy that they can appeal to a ruler who is living among them. So, if theyâre intending to be obedient, theyâll have one more reason to love you, and if theyâre not, all the more reason to fear you. Anyone planning an attack from outside will think twice about it. So, if you go and live in the new territory youâve taken, youâre very unlikely to lose it.
Another good solution is to establish colonies in one or two places. These work rather like chains to bind the captured state to your own. If you donât do this youâll have to keep large numbers of infantry and cavalry in the territory. Colonies donât cost a great deal. You can send and maintain them very cheaply and they only arouse the hostility of the people whose houses and land are expropriated to give to the colonists. Since that will only be a very small proportion of the population, and since these people will now be poor and will have fled to different places, they can hardly cause much trouble. Everyone else will be unaffected (hence prone to keep quiet) and at the same time frightened of stepping out of line for fear of having their own houses and land taken away. In conclusion, colonies are cheap, more loyal, provoke less hostility among your new subjects, and, as Iâve said, those few who are provoked canât fight back since theyâll be dispossessed refugees. In this regard itâs worth noting that in general you must either pamper people or destroy them; harm them just a little and theyâll hit back; harm them seriously and they wonât be able to. So if youâre going to do people harm, make sure you neednât worry about their reaction. If, on the other hand, you decide to send an occupying army rather than establish colonies, the operation will be far more expensive and all the revenues from the new territory will be used up in defending it, turning what should have been a gain into a loss. And youâll provoke more hostility: an army moving about and requisitioning lodgings will do damage across the entire territory, something that has
Similar Books
