Liber II, Pars I — Qualis sit communitas domus, et quod oportet domum ex pluribus constare personis. Cap. IIII.

Liber II, Pars I — Qualis sit communitas domus, et quod oportet domum ex pluribus constare personis. Cap. IIII.

It has been somewhat explained in the previous chapter what kind of community a household is: since it has been shown that a person is naturally a domestic animal, and that the community of a household is in some way natural. However, because this does not sufficiently explain what kind of community such a household is, we intend to say something about domestic community. Therefore, it must be noted, according to the philosopher. The philosopher describes the community of a household in this way. Namely, that a household is a community according to nature, established indeed for every day. In this description, something has been declared in the previous chapter, and something further remains to be declared. For the fact that a household is such a community according to nature has been demonstrated broadly and figuratively above, and it will be shown more clearly below. Where all parts of the household will be distinguished, and it will be proven that each such part is something natural. Therefore, it remains to explain in the aforementioned description how the home is a community established for every day. To clarify this, it should be noted that in human activities, and in what is required for the sustenance of life, which human community is directed towards, it seems necessary to distinguish. The Philosopher I. In the Politics, some things are daily necessities, such as those we need every day, which include eating, drinking, and other forms of sustenance and bodily services that we require regularly. However, there are some things that are not daily necessities, which we do not need every day, such as buying and selling. For if some people living in a certain house are in daily need of buying and selling for their sustenance, this seems to indicate a deficiency and corruption of the house: for they do not seem to behave as residents or citizens, but rather as pilgrims and travelers, if they are continually in need of sustenance through buying or selling. Thus, the community of the home was established for those things we need every day. However, because in one house not all necessities for life are found, the domestic community was not sufficient, and it was necessary to establish the community of the village, so that when a village consists of many houses, what is not found in one house may be found in another. For this reason, the Philosopher says, in the Politics, it is stated that just as the community of a household is established for daily activities, so the community of a village is established for non-daily activities. However, because even in a single village not all necessities for life are found, besides the community of the village, it was necessary to establish the community of the city. Therefore, the community of the city seems to exist to supply the needs of life in its entirety. Thus, it seems that a perfect city is one in which all that is universally necessary for life can be found. Moreover, since it happens that cities have wars, it is useful for one city to ally itself with another city to conquer a third city. For this reason, since the alliance of cities is useful for waging war against enemies and for removing corrupting influences, besides the community of the household, village, and city, the community of the kingdom and principality was established, which is the alliance of many castles and cities existing under one prince. Thus, there will be this order: that the household is a community established by nature for daily life. A village, however, is a community established for non-daily activities. A city, on the other hand, is a community established to provide for the needs of all life. But a kingdom is a community established not only to meet the needs of life but also to remove corrupting obstacles. For a single city cannot fully suffice to remove what needs to be removed unless many other cities and fortresses are joined to it. It is clear, therefore, what kind of community a household is, because it is a natural community established for daily and ordinary activities. That a household must consist of multiple persons is not difficult to see. For since a household (as is evident from what has been said) is a certain community and society of persons, and it is not properly a community or society unto itself, if we want to preserve the community in the household, it must consist of multiple persons; indeed (as will be shown below, and as the Philosopher I. Polit.) A house is not just a community in itself; rather, it must consist of multiple communities, which cannot exist without a plurality of persons. It is clear, then, that a house consists of many persons. It is also evident what kind of community it is and how it is necessary. For, as is evident from the habits of life, in human life, a household community is not only expedient, but also that of a village, a city, and a kingdom. Whether, however, it is expedient for the community of the city and the kingdom for other reasons than those already mentioned will be explained more fully in the third book. For now, it suffices to touch upon the kingdom and the city in so far as their knowledge has in some way fallen short of understanding the household and knowing how it should be governed. For, as was mentioned above, this second book primarily addresses the governance of the household, not the governance of the city. Having discussed these matters, since the community of the household is so necessary in civil life, it concerns every citizen to know how to govern his own household properly; however, this is even more pertinent for kings and princes, since negligence in their own households can cause greater harm to the city and the kingdom than negligence in others.