Scipio is humane toward the Spaniards, and they revere and support him; Hannibal is cruel, yet the Italian provinces join him and rebel against Rome. Opposite approaches can work; what matters is the excellence of he who uses them, for great ability “cancels all those errors that he commits in order to make himself either loved or feared too much” (307).

The drawback for humane Scipio is that, though his men love him, they have no fear of him, and at one point they mutiny; the advantage for cruel Hannibal is that, though Rome and Italy despise him, his men always obey him. 

Manlius Torquatus is a cruel Roman commander who gets excellent results from his men in battle. Valerius Corvinus is humane and friendly, and his soldiers get the same good results.

In a republic, Torquatus’s approach is safer, because “no one can acquire supporters through this method, showing himself always to be harsh and to love the common good alone” (312), where a Corvinus might, in a weak country, use his popularity among the troops to gain undue power. In a principality, though, Corvinus’s approach is better “because a