Liber II, Pars I — Quod coniuges omnium civium, et maxime Regum, et principum uno viro debent esse contentae. Cap. X.
Liber II, Pars I — Quod coniuges omnium civium, et maxime Regum, et principum uno viro debent esse contentae. Cap. X.
Although among some sects, like the Saracens and perhaps some other barbarous nations, it may not be considered inappropriate for one man to have multiple wives at the same time; yet among no peoples, according to any laws they live by, has it ever been permitted that one woman be joined in marriage to multiple men at once. However, it is not difficult to see how this natural order is disrupted. For according to the natural order (as is clear from the Philosopher in Politics), a man should always be prominent, while a woman should be subordinate. Furthermore, according to the natural order, in the same actions, no one can be equally subordinate to two or more; for if any person is subject to two, this is not equal in itself, but because one is ordered to the other. Thus, if someone is subject to a governor and a king, it is necessary that the governor be ordered to the king, and being under the king contradicts the natural order for the same person to be subject to two. Therefore, if a woman is to be subject to her husband, since she grants the whole power of her body to one man, it is against the natural order for her to be subject to another man. For although one can rule over many, it cannot be that the same person obeys multiple rulers at once; according to the natural order, this is not possible. Thus, while it is detestable for one man to have multiple wives, it is even more detestable for one woman to marry multiple men at the same time. It's not hard to see that the natural order is disrupted by this. For according to the natural order, as is clear from the Philosopher in Politics, a man should always be superior. The man must always be in a position of authority, while the woman must be in a subordinate role. Moreover, according to the natural order, no one can be equally subject to two or more authorities; if a person is subject to two, it is not equal but rather one is subordinate to the other. Thus, if someone is subject to a purpose and a king, the purpose must be directed toward the king, and being under him contradicts the natural order if the same person is subject to two. Therefore, if a woman must be subject to her husband, since she grants total control of her body to one man, it goes against the natural order for her to be subject to another man. For even if one can rule over many, it is impossible for the same person to obey many rulers according to the natural order. Therefore, while it is detestable for many women to be wives of one man, it is even more detestable for one woman to marry many men at once. Therefore, it is fitting for the spouses of all citizens to be content with one husband; much more so for the spouses of kings and princes, because in their marriage it is even more important to uphold the natural order. Secondly, this same point can be seen from the peace and harmony to which marriage is directed. For when anyone is troubled by the use of something delightful, it cannot exist without conflict and discord if one woman is joined in marriage to multiple men. For if one of them were to impede the enjoyment of something delightful, war and enmity would arise between them. Indeed, any of those men would be stirred to enmity against the parents and relatives of his wife because they have subjected their spouse to another man through marriage. Thus, from marriage, which is intended for peace and friendship, strife and discord would arise. Therefore, it is fitting for the spouses of all citizens to be content with one husband; this is even more fitting for the spouses of kings and princes, as the strife and discord among rulers is more dangerous and needs to be avoided more than that of all others. Thirdly, this same point is evident from the generation of offspring, to which marriage is directed. The fertility of children is hindered if one woman is joined to many men. Thus, we see that prostitutes are more barren than other women. Therefore, from the perspective of procreation, it is utterly indecent for one woman to have multiple husbands. For even if one man can father many children with multiple women, a single woman cannot be fruitful with several men; rather, her fertility is hindered by the plurality of husbands. Therefore, if marriage is primarily ordered toward the good of offspring, it is fitting for all citizens to be content with one husband, so that their fertility is not hindered. This is even more fitting for the wives of kings and princes, as the danger of sterility in such marriages is greater. Therefore, women who are married should diligently consider how much care they must take to preserve their chastity and how much effort they should put into being faithful to their husbands, because if it is detestable for a woman to be joined to another man while her husband is alive, it is even more detestable for her to commit fornication with another man. Lastly, we can investigate this from the obligation of providing for children. For this reason, parents are concerned about their children because they firmly believe that these children are their own: whatever undermines the certainty of parentage also prevents fathers from diligently providing for them in inheritance and necessary nourishment. But if one woman marries multiple men, fathers cannot be certain about their children, which is why they won't exercise the diligence they should to provide for their children in nourishment and inheritance. Therefore, it is detestable for one man to have multiple wives; but it is even more detestable for one wife to have multiple husbands, because this greatly undermines the certainty of parentage. Thus, if it is fitting for all citizens to be certain about their children so that they can diligently provide for them in inheritance and nourishment, it is appropriate for the spouses of all citizens to be content with one husband. However, this is even more fitting for the spouses of kings and princes, since negligence regarding their children is more dangerous than that of others.
Read the original Latin
Quamvis apud aliquas sectas, ut apud Sarracenos, et apud forte aliquas alias barbaras nationes non reputetur in congruum unum virum etiam simul habere plures uxores; apud nullas tamen gentes secundum quascunque leges viventes nunquam hoc fuisse indultum, ut simul una mulier pluribus viris per coniugium copuletur; magis enim repugnat apparentibus, et iis ad quae coniugium ordinatur, unam foeminam simul pluribus nubere viris, quam unum virum pluribus foeminis. Immo, et in lege divina, ut in veteri Testamento, ex aliqua divina dispensatione, vel propter aliquam figuram et signationem legimus, unus viri plures fuisse uxores: tamen quod reperitur in paucis, vel quod reperitur inaliquo casu, vel ex aliqua rationabili causa permisum, communem legem turbare non debet. secundum enim commune dictamen rationis detestabile est unum virum simul plures habere uxores: detestabilius tamen esset, si una foemina per coniugium simul pluribus copularetur viris. Coniugium enim ad quatuor comparari potest, ex quibus sumi possunt quatuor rationes, per quas investigare possumus, omnino detestabile esse unam foeminam nuptam esse pluribus viris. In coniugio enim primo reservatur ordo naturalis: nam nautrale est foeminam esse subiectam viro, eo quod vir prudentia et intellectu sit praestantior ipsa Secundo, ex coniugio consurgit pax et amicitia: multas enim guerras, et multas discordias sedari videmus eo quod inter partes contrahuntur coniugia. Tertio, ex coniugio oritur ipsa proles: ordinatur enim coniugium non solum ad conservationem ordinis naturalis, et ad debitam pacem, sed etiam ordinatur ad procreationem filiorum. Quarto, sicut ordinatur coniugium ad filiorum procreationem: sic ordinatur ad eorum debitam nutritionem inconveniens est ergo unam foeminam, coniugem esse plurium virorum, quia per hoc omnia praedicta quatuor impediuntur. Tolletur enim ex hoc naturalis ordo; non resultabit inde pax et concordia, sed magis dissensio et inimicitia; non erit debita ibi procreatio filiorum, non tribuetur filiis debitum nutrimentum.
Quod autem ex hoc tollatur naturalis ordo, videre non est difficile. Nam secundum ordinem naturalem (ut patet per Philosophum in Polit.) semper vir debet esse praeminens, mulier vero debet esse subiecta. Rursus secundum ordienm naturalem in eisdem operibus nullus aeque per se duobus vel pluribus potest esse subiectus: si enim aliqua persona duobus subiicitur, hoc non est aeque per se, sed hoc est, quia unus ad alium ordinatur. ut si quis subiicitur Proposito et regi, oportet Propositum illum ad regem ordinari, et esse sub ipso repugnat ergo ordini naturali eundem duobus esse subiectum. Quare si mulier debet esse subiecta viro; ex quo totam sui corporis potestatem uni viro tribuit, contra ordinem naturalem est, ut viro alteri sit subiecta. Nam etsi idem potest dominari pluribus ut plures sunt, eundem tamen obedire pluribus principantibus ut plures sunt, secundum naturalem ordinem esse non potest. Quare et si detestabile est plures foeminas coniuges esse unius viri, unam tamen nubere simul viris pluribus detestabilius esse debet.
Decet ergo coniuges omnium civium uno viro esse contentas: multo magis tamen hoc decet coniuges Regum et principum, quia in eorum coniugio magis quam in alio decet naturalem ordinem conservare. Secundo hoc idem investigari potest ex ipsa pace et concordia, ad quam coniugium ordinatur. nam cum quilibet moleste ferat, si in usu suae rei delectabilis impeditur; absque dissensione et discordia esse non potest, si una foemina per coniugium pluribus copulareutr viris. Dum enim unus illorum in usu rei delectabilis alterum impediret, inter eos guerra et inimicitia oriretur. immo quilibet illorum virorum contra parentes et consanguineos uxoris ad inimicitiam moveretur, eo quod suam coniugem alteri viro per coniugium subiecerunt. Ex coniugio igitur, quod ordinatur ad pacem et ad amicitiam, lis et discordia oriretur. Quare decet coniuges omnium civium uno viro esse contentas: tanto tamen hoc magis decet coniuges Regum et principum, qunato lis et discordia principantium est periculosior, et magis cavenda quam omnium aliorum. Tertio hoc idem patet ex generatione prolis, ad quam coniugium ordinatur.
Impeditur enim ipsa foecunditas filiorum, si una foemina pluribus coniungatur viris. unde et meretrices conspicimus esse magis speriles, quam alias mulieres. Igitur ex parte procreationis filiorum omnino indecens est unam foeminam plures habere viros. Nam etsi unus masculus potest plures foecundare foeminas: una tamen no sic foecundari potest a pluribus viris, immo impeditur foecunditas eius ex pluralitate virorum. Quare si coniugium principaliter ordinatur ad bonum prolis, decet coniuges omnium civium, ne impediatur earum foecunditas, uno viro esse contentas. tanto tamen hoc magis decet Regum, et principum coniuges, quanto in tali coniugio periculosior est sterilis filiorum. Diligenter ergo advertere debent singulae mulieres, quae suis viris per coniugium copulantur, quanta diligentia debeant ad suam pudicitiam observare, et quanto conatu fidem suis viris observent: quia si esse non potest, et detestabile est etiam per coniugium foemina (vivente viro suo) viro alio copulari, magis detestabile est alicui viro fornicarie commiscere. Quarto hoc investigare possumus ex filiorum debito nutrimento.
Nam ex hoc parentes solicitantur circa pueros, quia firmiter credunt eos esse eorum filios: quicquid ergo impedit certitudinem filiorum, impedit ne patres diligenter eis provideant in haereditate et in debito nutrimento. Sed si una foemina pluribus nubat viris, patres de suis filiis certi esse non poterunt, quare non adhibebunt illam diligentiam quam debent ut suis filiis debite in nutrimento et in haereditate provideant. Detestabile est ergo unam virum plures habere uxores: sed detestabilius est unam uxorem plures habere viros, quia per hoc magis impeditur certitudo filiorum. Quare si decet omnes cives certos esse de suis filiis, ut eis diligenter provideant in haereditate et in nutrimento: decet coniuges omnium civium uno viro esse contentas. tanto tamen hoc magis decet coniuges Regum, et principum, in quantum incuria circa eorum filios periculosior est, quam incuria aliorum.
De Regimine Principum (On the Rule of Princes) companion
A prince read his portion daily. So can you.
Chosen Portion delivers a short daily reading from historic works like this one, free on iOS.
Princes were formed by scheduled daily instruction from this manual; Chosen Portion schedules the same kind of daily formation reading for you.
- One daily reading in under 3 minutes, in modern readable English
- Selections from De Regimine Principum and 77 other royal devotional works
- Finish the 10-day course, then keep a daily formation habit without planning it yourself