"He who knows not how to dissimulate, can not reign"

Louis XI’s assertion, “He who knows not how to dissimulate, can not reign,” encapsulates a pragmatic approach to power and governance rooted in the realities of human nature and political survival. To dissimulate is not merely to lie, but to conceal one’s true intentions, feelings, or plans behind a mask of ambiguity or calculated behavior. By emphasizing the necessity of dissimulation for a ruler, Louis XI highlights the complex interplay between honesty and deception inherent in leadership.

Leadership at the highest levels often demands a careful balance between candor and discretion. Throughout history, rulers have contended with allies who may become enemies, courtiers with their own ambitions, and subjects with shifting loyalties. Openly revealing every motive or strategy can render a leader vulnerable to manipulation, betrayal, or premature opposition. Mastery of dissimulation allows a sovereign to navigate treacherous court intrigues, diplomatic negotiations, and the unpredictable tides of public opinion. Concealment can be essential for the element of surprise in military strategy, for maintaining unity when divisions threaten to surface, or for testing the loyalty of those around the throne.

Moreover, Louis XI’s France was a realm rife with internal conflict and external threats. The success of a ruler could hinge on the ability to mask true aims, to sow confusion among adversaries, or to maneuver deftly through plots both real and imagined. In such an environment, transparency could equate to naivety, while a shrewd understanding of human motives, coupled with the discipline to withhold one’s thoughts, often served as tools of survival and dominance.

Yet, the axiom also raises enduring ethical questions. Is deception justified in the pursuit of stability or order? Does such dissimulation corrode the moral fiber of leadership, or is it a regrettable but necessary aspect of human governance? Louis XI’s words continue to spark debate on the relationship between authenticity and effective rule, and whether the mask of power is ever fully removable.