Liber I, Pars II — Quod est mansuetudo, et circa quae habet esse, et quod decet reges et principes esse mansuetos. Cap. XXVII.

Liber I, Pars II — Quod est mansuetudo, et circa quae habet esse, et quod decet reges et principes esse mansuetos. Cap. XXVII.

After we have discussed the virtues that pertain to external goods and shown how kings and princes should be adorned with those virtues, it remains to speak about meekness, which concerns external evils. It is blameworthy to be angry with anyone at all, to always seek revenge, and to do so over any matter, as the hot-tempered do. On the other hand, never being angry and not wanting to punish anyone in any way is not commendable, because it goes against the order of reason. Reason dictates that some punishments must be carried out and that one should be angry with the right person, at the right time, and in the right way. To be angry in the right place and at the right time is the work of virtue. Therefore, in the passions of anger, and in the desire for punishments and revenge, it can happen that one overflows or falls short: there must be some virtue present to restrain the excesses and moderate the deficiencies. This is what meekness is: just as courage is the mean between fear and recklessness, so meekness is the mean between anger, through which we desire revenge, and irritability, through which we forgive the evils done to us. The truly meek person is one who neither desires revenge for everything nor so completely refrains from punishment that they never want others to be punished, but is forgiving and punitive according to the order of reason. It's wrong to get angry at anyone and to always demand punishment for anything, as the angry do. Moreover, it's not commendable to never get angry or to want anyone punished in any way, because that goes against the order of reason. For reason dictates that some punishments should be carried out, and it determines who should be punished, when, and how. Getting angry at the right time and in the right way is the work of virtue. Therefore, in the passions of anger, and in the desire for punishments and revenge, it can happen that one overreacts or falls short; we must provide some virtue that restrains excesses and moderates deficiencies. This is what meekness is: just as courage is a mean between fear and boldness, so meekness is a mean between anger, through which we desire revenge. And it includes the ability to forgive the wrongs done to us. But the truly meek person is one who neither desires revenge for everything nor so completely refrains from punishment that they never want others to be punished; rather, they are forgiving and punitive according to the order of reason. Therefore, just as courage restrains fears and moderates boldness, so gentleness restrains anger and moderates irritability. To see what gentleness is, it is clear from a slight examination what it ought to be. For it is indeed (as has already been said) about anger and its opposite, which is irritability. However, it is primarily about anger. Gentleness primarily and chiefly aims to restrain anger; consequently, it also seeks to moderate the passions that oppose anger. For it is natural for us to desire punishment and revenge for the wrongs done to us. Moreover, since the wrong done to us seems hardly to be so slight that it should be disregarded, we are not only naturally inclined to want to punish those who inflict any harm on us, but it is also somewhat natural for us to desire punishment beyond what is deserved. For it seems to us that the harm done to us is greater than it is; we want our wrongdoers to be punished more than they should be. It is therefore very difficult to suppress anger and not desire punishments for wrongs beyond what reason dictates. Many therefore sin by desiring more: few, however, sin by desiring less. For if virtue is about what is good and difficult, meekness primarily opposes anger and intends to suppress it; consequently, it also opposes irritability and intends to moderate it, which the very name designates: for if we consider the force of the name, meekness designates the temperament of anger. However, it is inappropriate for kings and princes to be angry, since reason and understanding ought to prevail in them. For just as we see that an infected tongue cannot rightly judge flavors, so too, an appetite infected by immoderate anger or other excessive passions distorts our judgment of reason. If therefore it is inappropriate for the rule to be perverted and misled, a king, who ought to be like a mirror and a model of living, and who ought to be the rule of conduct, it is inappropriate for him to be angry, lest through anger he be perverted and misled. Likewise, if in no way he were irascible, and in no way would he be stirred to carry out punishment, it would be inappropriate: for if punishments were not carried out in the kingdom, men would become wrongdoers toward others, and the state could not endure. No one should become angry out of hatred, nor should anyone seek punishment out of hatred; rather, one should become angry for love and zeal, and punishment should be sought. Punishment is to be sought for the sake of love and zeal for justice, or for the love of the republic. For without this, the republic cannot endure. Therefore, if someone were so gentle that they would rather see justice perish than demand justice, they would not be virtuous. Thus, it is even more fitting for kings and princes to be moved to enact punishment, as it is more appropriate for them to be guardians of justice and protectors of the republic. Therefore, kings should not be irascible, and they should be moved according to the order of reason, so that punishments and retributions may occur, as this is what gentleness does; it is fitting for them to be gentle. Thus, it is necessary for them to be gentle, as this aligns with their role as leaders.