Liber II, Pars III — Qualia aedificia debent reges, et principes, et universaliter omnes cives quantum ad operis industriam, et aeris temperamentum. Cap. III.

Liber II, Pars III — Qualia aedificia debent reges, et principes, et universaliter omnes cives quantum ad operis industriam, et aeris temperamentum. Cap. III.

From what has been said, it can be understood that in this third part of this second book, we need to discuss both the ministers and the things that serve for conservation and for the sufficiency of life. The things that serve for conservation and the sufficiency of life can be reduced to three categories: for such are buildings, possessions, and money. Therefore, we must discuss four things. First, we will discuss what kinds of houses and what kinds of dwellings kings and princes, and indeed all citizens, ought to have. Secondly, we will determine the nature of their possessions. Thirdly, we will discuss money. Fourthly, we will address the ministers. Among other considerations regarding buildings, as Palladius teaches. In the book. About agriculture. The work's quality is that the building should be constructed skillfully and properly; and the climate should be suitable for it. That kings and princes should have remarkable homes, constructed with skill, is proven by the Philosopher. For two reasons. The first is taken from the aspect of royal magnificence. The second is from the aspect of the people. We can also add a third reason, from the perspective of the family and the servants. The first way is clear. For according to the Philosopher. In the chapter on Magnificence in Ethics, it is fitting for the most glorious and noble to be magnificent: therefore, kings and princes, who ought to be noble and distinguished, should especially be magnificent. Others, however, who have moderate possessions, can be generous, because generosity can exist even in small expenses; but kings and princes, who are rich in possessions, must be magnificent, since magnificence pertains to great expenditures. But the magnificent, as it is said in the same work. In Ethics. It is necessary to prepare a decent dwelling: however, a dwelling is not decent unless it is constructed with magnificent work and remarkable skill. Therefore, it is clear from the nature of royal magnificence that kings and princes should have remarkable dwellings in terms of the effort involved. Other citizens should have homes that are more or less remarkable, depending on their means. The second way to investigate this is taken from the perspective of the people themselves. In the Politics, it is stated that princes should make their buildings magnificent, so that the people, seeing them, are almost left in awe due to their grandeur. For the people are less likely to rise up against a prince when they see him so magnificent; for anyone from the populace, upon seeing this, thinks that the prince is so great that it would be almost impossible to attack him, and since there is no choice or counsel regarding impossible things, as the Philosopher says. In the Ethics, anyone from the populace is deterred from causing dissent against the prince if they only see him as so magnificent. For the greatness of buildings, although it should not be done for show or empty glory, still requires that kings and princes make magnificent buildings, as is fitting for the dignity of their status. The third way is taken from the perspective of the ministers and the household. For where there are many riches, there are many who consume them. In the homes of kings and princes, there should be many ministers present. So that not only the persons of the king and prince but also a multitude of ministers can properly reside in the constructed buildings, they must be magnificent. Having seen what kind of buildings should exist in terms of magnificence and the industriousness of the work, it remains to consider what they should be like regarding the temperance of the air. Palladius touches on three things in his book on Agriculture, by which we can know in what kind of air a building should be constructed. He states that the salubrity of the air is first declared by places that are free from low valleys. For if buildings are constructed in low valleys, because the air there is thick due to the surrounding mountains, it happens that it is not healthy. Thus, we should imagine that just as running water is healthier than standing water, because standing waters mostly become thick and rot, so the air trapped in valleys, because it does not have free movement, becomes thick and is rendered unhealthy. Therefore, it is necessary to consider the salubrity of the air when constructing buildings, so that such construction does not take place in unhealthy valleys. Secondly, it must be considered that the place where the building is to be constructed should be free from the darkness of clouds. For in some parts of the earth, either because that area is more marshy or due to some other condition of the land, the air is often more obscured by clouds and vapors than in higher regions; therefore, the air there becomes unhealthy. Thus, if it can be avoided, buildings should not be constructed in such places. The third consideration that indicates the healthiness of the air is the assessment of the inhabitants living in that area. For if we wish to build somewhere, and it happens that people live in that region, we must consider their physical condition: whether they have a healthy and beautiful complexion, whether they possess a firm and clear-headed disposition, and whether they have sharp vision, pure hearing, and a clear voice. Through all these signs, the goodness of the air is indicated; and conversely, the air is shown to be unhealthy through its opposites. For if the inhabitants do not have a healthy complexion but a sickly one, they may easily suffer from headaches; if they have disturbed vision, impure hearing, and a hoarse voice, all these signs indicate the impurity of the air.