Liber I, Pars IV — Quot sunt mores divitum, et quomodo reges, et principes debeant se habere ad mores illos. Cap. VI.

Liber I, Pars IV — Quot sunt mores divitum, et quomodo reges, et principes debeant se habere ad mores illos. Cap. VI.

The Philosopher narrates. Rhetoric. There are five bad traits of the rich. For, as the Philosopher says, the rich are proud. Secondly, the rich are contemptuous. Thirdly, they are soft and intemperate. Fourthly, they are boastful, looking down on others. Fifthly, they consider themselves worthy of leadership. The wealthy are indeed proud. For (as the philosopher says) they are disposed this way because, having acquired some wealth, they believe they have obtained all good things. Thus, it is said in the Rhetoric that wealth is like a certain price and a certain dignity of others. It seems that in common opinion, everything is measured by money, and everything is valued at the price of coins. Therefore, having money, they think they possess all good things, because they consider money to be dignity and the price of all others, which is why they become proud and haughty in their hearts, believing themselves to be superior to everyone. Secondly, the wealthy are contemptuous. For they are haughty and wish to appear excellent; since from this, someone can seem to excel if they can inflict insults: the wealthy want to be seen as superior to others. And so they act to make themselves appear superior to others, moving to inflict insults on others. Third, the wealthy are soft and indulgent. This happens because they live in luxury. For they are so accustomed to living delicately that they cannot endure any discomfort. Therefore, they quickly become compassionate, they fall into excess, and they become followers of their passions, unable to resist their desires, because they are used to living delicately and without modesty. For this reason, they are not manly and temperate; rather, they are more womanly or soft, and they pursue their passions. Fourth, the wealthy are boastful and look down on others. For as the philosopher suggests, 2. The wealthy are often boastful and look down on others. They have the greatest incentive to be such. For it also happens that even wise people find themselves in need of the goods of the wealthy, so that the wealthy are lifted up in their hearts, looking down on others and believing themselves to be superior, because they see others in need of their goods. For the philosopher states, In the Rhetoric, it was asked by a certain woman whether it is better to become rich than wise. She answered that wise people are more often seen frequenting the doors of the wealthy than the wealthy are seen at the doors of the wise. Wealth, therefore, is considered a more tangible good by the common people, who know nothing but material goods, and is regarded as an excellent and supreme good; so much so that they prefer wealth over other goods. Fifth, the wealthy consider themselves worthy of leadership. For, as the philosopher says, they believe that having what makes someone worthy of leadership is wealth. They think that wealth is the only good, and whoever has this good in abundance is worthy of leadership. Therefore, all these bad traits belong to the wealthy because they are deceived about wealth, believing it to be a greater good than it is. Therefore, it is fitting for kings and princes to flee from these bad traits. For if they are wealthy, they should not be exalted for that reason. Nor should they believe that they are worthy of leadership just because of this. For the dignity of leadership is fundamentally based on virtues and wisdom, which are inner goods; it is not primarily based on wealth, which are outer goods. Therefore, if wealth is directed toward virtuous actions, it serves our happiness and becomes a means to it, contributing to a certain clarity of it. But if they are directed toward boasting, or insult, or excess, or other wicked deeds, then they make a person more miserable than happy. Therefore, a person is considered worthy of leadership if they are good and wise, not if they are wealthy. Thus, kings and princes are not worthy of leadership unless they flee from the wicked ways of the wealthy and unless they direct their wealth toward good and virtuous deeds. Having seen the wicked ways of the wealthy and what is fitting for kings and princes to flee from, it remains to see what their good ways are. The philosopher, however, states this. In rhetoric, it seems that the only good quality attributed to the wealthy is that they behave well toward divine matters. Indeed, since wealth is seen as a good of fortune, human effort alone does not seem sufficient for someone to become rich; for we sometimes see industrious people becoming less wealthy. Therefore, since this is the case, the acquisition of wealth is said to be such. In rhetoric, it should be attributed more to fate and divine ordering than to human cleverness. Therefore, the wealthy should rightly conduct themselves well regarding divine matters. This is what is meant by the saying. In rhetoric, One excellent way the wealthy achieve this is by conducting themselves well regarding divine matters, as they are somewhat guided by fate, that is, through divine ordering to possess such goods. This philosophical statement should be considered carefully. For wealth and any good things we possess should be referred more to divine order and divine providence than to our own efforts; if the wealthy would pay attention to doing great things regarding the divine, they wouldn't believe they are giving gifts to God, but rather consider that they are returning to Him what they have received from Him. This good habit of properly attending to divine matters is especially fitting for kings and princes, since they must give an account to the highest judge, God, for many things.