Christianity (II.2.2) – Machiavelli at least ostensibly still understands his task as
explaining what “decisions” “the Roman people made pertaining to the increase of their
empire” (II.1.3). For these reasons, then, Machiavelli must present a reason as to why he
begins his discussion of expansion not with Rome but with the Tuscan league.
His reason, again, is that the “Romans made war with the Tuscans very often.”
But a quick glance at the list Machiavelli provides of the wars the Romans fought in II.1
reveals that in fact the Romans made war with the Tuscans only once (II.1.1, 126-27).
Machiavelli’s justification thus proves to be no justification at all, but rather a pretense
for introducing a discussion that he would under other circumstances not be able to
introduce. We conclude from this that Machiavelli very much wants to “expatiate in
giving knowledge” of the Tuscan league, to “show better the qualities of this first mode,”
and that he goes out of his way to make room for this discussion. Why does he do so? Let
us turn to the beginning of his discussion of the Tuscan league’s “qualities.”
The Question of “Greatness”: Part 1
“Before the Roman Empire,” Machiavelli tells us, “the Tuscans were very
powerful by sea and land” (II.4.1; 135). Already preparing us, perhaps, for the discussion
of Discourse II.5, he then tells us that no particular history of their affairs exists; still, he
also notes, there is “some little memory and some sign of their greatness.”
introductory remark that the Tuscans were great “before the Roman Empire,” as well as
4
We note that Machiavelli’s account of how much “memory” there is of the Tuscans changes as II.4 and
II.5 – which, as we shall argue soon, is a continuation of the argument that begins in II.4 – proceed. Here he
tells us that there is “some little memory and some sign of their greatness.” By the end of II.4, however, he
tells us that “although two thousand years the power of the Tuscans was great, at present there is almost no
memory of it,” and then he takes up the topic of “whence arises this oblivion of things” (II.4.2; 138). By the
end of his treatment of this topic in II.5, he says of Tuscany that “the memory of its name alone remains of
it” (II.5.2; 140). The memory that is available of the Tuscans thus seems to diminish as Machiavelli’s
discussion proceeds. What accounts for this?
3
Convention