Liber III, Pars I — Quod non oportet possessiones in civitate esse aequatas, ut Phaleas statuebat. Cap. XVII.

Liber III, Pars I — Quod non oportet possessiones in civitate esse aequatas, ut Phaleas statuebat. Cap. XVII.

If we consider the sayings of philosophers. As far as current politics are concerned, we can pursue three ways to argue that possessions should not be equal, as Phaleas suggested. The first way is taken from the aspect of procreation of children. The second is from the aspect of injustices. The third is from the aspect of virtues, which it is fitting for citizens to possess. The first way is clear if it is evident. For, regarding the proper governance of the state, a law cannot be imposed that citizens should have equal possessions unless it is established that they have equal children; for it is in vain that a law is set forth which cannot be maintained. For according to the philosopher. In political matters, it’s not only important that laws are established, but also that they are obeyed and followed. Therefore, if individual citizens have equal possessions, and one has more children than another, the law of Phaleas will be rendered ineffective when the children inherit their parents' estates. For this reason, they will not have equal possessions. When something is divided into more parts, each person will receive less of it; thus, it is impossible for citizens to have equal possessions unless the same number of children come from each citizen. As many as come from one: but because some marriages are entirely barren, while others are more fruitful than others, it is not possible to establish that all citizens in the city have an equal number of children. For this reason, it is clearly shown that the aforementioned law is not congruent in terms of procreation; because it cannot be properly observed. The second point is taken from the aspect of injustices that can arise in the city, which the legislator must take great care to prevent. For it concerns the ruler to take care that citizens are not insolent and do not inflict injuries on one another; but if it is established in the city that the poor are to be treated equally with the rich in possessions, by receiving large dowries from them and not giving dowries to them, it often happens that the rich become poor, and vice versa. For if some wealthy people have more children than the poor, the possessions of the wealthy will be divided into more parts than those of the poor, and the children of the wealthy will be poorer than the children of the poor. From this, injustices and conflicts will arise in the city. First, because the poor, when they become wealthy, do not know how to handle their fortunes, as the Philosopher clearly shows. 2. Rhet. Therefore, injustices will arise against others. For the sons of the poor, feeling inflated because they see themselves having more wealth than others, will unjustly act against them, and injustices will occur in the city. Moreover, such injustices and insults will arise among citizens not only from the sons of the poor but also from the sons of the wealthy, because, as it is said, 2. In politics. It is necessary for the peace of the city that the children of the wealthy not be insolent. For when the children of the wealthy are often magnanimous and of great heart, if they see themselves as being looked down upon and the poor exalted, unable to contain themselves, they will become insolent and disturb others. The third way to demonstrate that the law of Phaleas is not appropriate regarding the equality of possessions is taken from the virtues that citizens ought to have: for it is fitting that they be generous and temperate; therefore, it is not rightly said that for the good governance of the city it suffices for citizens to have equal possessions unless something is determined about the quantity of those possessions; for citizens might have such modest possessions that they would be compelled to live so frugally that they could not easily practice acts of generosity. Again, by having equal possessions, they might so abound in them and live so luxuriously that it would not be possible for them to be temperate.