Rome

Rome occupies a decisive place in the book’s political geography: it is at once the seat of imperial authority, the destination toward which armies march, the arena in which the Senate confers legitimacy, and the center from which a new ruler must manage competing provinces, nobles, and military forces. Its significance lies less in description of the city itself than in the concentration of political mechanisms that unfold there. Rome reveals how conquest becomes government, how fear can produce obedience, and how military power can elevate a commander while also making the stability of the state dependent on the army.

Rome as the Imperial Center

Rome appears as the capital of a political system whose authority extends across widely differing territories. The discussion of Alexander the Great’s conquest of Asia distinguishes between states governed by a single prince and states divided among hereditary barons. In the former model, authority is concentrated in the sovereign, while officials possess power only as delegated servants. The Roman imperial experience is used to show how a central power could gradually transform conquered regions into secure possessions: Spain, Gaul, and Greece repeatedly resisted while memories of their former princes and local political structures remained alive, but prolonged Roman rule eventually erased those rival claims to allegiance.

This logic makes Rome more than a geographical capital. It is the institutional center of an imperial order whose durability depends on replacing local loyalties with recognition of a single ruling authority. Once the old lines of princes had disappeared and the memory of independent rule had weakened, the provinces could be treated as Roman possessions rather than as collections of competing states. The city therefore stands behind the book’s distinction between the initial seizure of territory and its lasting incorporation into a dominion.

Military March and Seizure of Power

Rome is the immediate objective of Severus when he turns an army in Illyria toward Italy. He tells his soldiers that they must avenge Pertinax, who had been killed by the Praetorian Guard, while concealing his design on the Empire. The march is therefore presented as both a military operation and an act of political disguise: the public justification is vengeance for a murdered emperor, but the underlying result is Severus’s own elevation.

The speed of the movement is essential to its success. Severus reaches Italy before his departure is known, depriving opponents of the time needed to organize resistance. When he arrives in Rome, the Senate, acting through fear, elects him Emperor and puts Julianus to death. The city thus converts military presence into constitutional recognition. The Senate’s decision does not erase the coercive circumstances; rather, it demonstrates how an institution that appears to confer legitimacy can be compelled by an army already at the gates.

Rome is also the place from which Severus manages the remaining threats to his supremacy. Niger commands the armies of the East and has proclaimed himself Emperor, while Albinus holds power in the West and also seeks the imperial title. Severus attacks Niger openly but deals with Albinus through deception, promising to share the dignity of Emperor and sending him the title of Caesar. After defeating Niger and restoring tranquillity in the East, Severus returns to Rome and accuses Albinus before the Senate of treachery and ingratitude. He then goes to Gaul, strips Albinus of his dignities, and kills him. Rome therefore functions as the political hinge between battlefield victory, public accusation, and the legal language used to justify the elimination of a rival.

Administration, Alliances, and Political Control

The city is also linked to the problem of controlling a wider dominion whose parts differ in language, customs, and laws. The book argues that a ruler who acquires a state resembling his own ancient dominions can retain it more easily if he eliminates the former ruling line while changing neither laws nor taxes. Where the conquered country differs substantially, the ruler faces greater difficulty and must rely on fortune as well as skill. Residence in the acquired province allows disorders to be detected early, prevents officials from pillaging the population unchecked, and gives subjects immediate access to the prince.

Rome’s importance within this framework is inseparable from the network of nobles and institutional authorities gathered around it. Cesare Borgia plans to secure himself against a future pope by winning over the Roman nobles, bringing the College of Cardinals as far as possible under his control, and establishing his authority before Pope Alexander VI’s death. Three of these measures are already substantially achieved when Alexander dies: Borgia has killed nearly all reachable relatives of dispossessed lords, gained the Roman nobility, and secured a majority in the College of Cardinals. Rome is thus represented as a city in which territorial power depends on relationships with aristocratic and ecclesiastical intermediaries, not solely on possession of land or command of troops.

Borgia’s projected expansion also reaches toward Tuscany. He already holds Perugia and Piombino and has assumed the protectorship of Pisa, intending to move against the city. If Pisa fell, Lucca and Siena might yield through jealousy of Florence or fear, leaving the Florentines in a desperate position. Although these plans concern central Italian territories beyond Rome, they show the city’s role as the political base from which control of neighboring states could be consolidated through alliances, intimidation, and carefully timed expansion.

Armies, Legitimacy, and the Limits of Rule

Rome exposes the danger of dependence on forces that the prince does not fully control. Cesare Borgia first enters Romagna with French auxiliary troops and takes Imola and Forli. Distrusting these forces, he hires the Orsini and Vitelli as mercenaries, but finds them equally fickle, false, and treacherous. He finally turns to troops of his own raising. His reputation rises as he moves from French dependence to hired forces and then to command of an army that is unmistakably his own; he is never more respected than when everyone sees him as sole master of his forces.

The same principle appears in the Roman imperial succession. Severus succeeds because he combines the lion’s force with the fox’s craft: he uses military strength to seize Rome, deception to neutralize Albinus, and direct action to remove both rivals and the uncertainty surrounding them. His cruelty and rapacity oppress the people, but his strength of character preserves the soldiers’ loyalty and produces a reputation powerful enough to shield him from popular hatred. Rome is therefore not simply the reward of military power; it is the setting in which military power must be transformed into an enduring public reputation.

The later imperial examples sharpen the warning. Commodus, Severus, and Caracalla are described as cruel and rapacious rulers who wronged the people to satisfy the soldiery, although Severus alone maintained power through the force of his character. Maximinus is eventually destroyed when Africa, the Senate, the people of Rome, and Italy combine against him, while his own army joins the conspiracy during the siege of Aquileja. The contrast shows that Rome’s institutions and population can become a counterweight to the army, but only when fear of the ruler’s ferocity is weakened by a broad coalition.

Narrative and Political Significance

Rome’s recurring function is to make abstract rules visible through decisive reversals. It is the city that receives an army before its arrival is known, compels the Senate to elect a new Emperor, becomes the platform for accusing a former ally, and gathers the social forces that may either sustain or destroy a ruler. Its political meaning is consequently double. Centralization can make a state more secure by removing rival centers of allegiance, yet the same concentration of power makes the capital the critical point at which military authority, senatorial recognition, aristocratic support, and popular hostility collide.

The treatment of Rome also supports the book’s comparative method. Alexander the Great can secure the kingdom of Darius because its government resembles a centralized monarchy: once the ruling family is defeated, few independent authorities remain capable of leading a rebellion. Rome, by contrast, appears as the mature center of a composite imperial structure, one that must absorb provinces with different histories while balancing the claims of Senate, people, nobles, and armies. Its history supplies the book’s central lesson about political power: conquest may begin with force, but lasting rule depends on institutions, loyalties, reputation, and the ruler’s ability to anticipate the next source of disorder.