Distinguitur multiplex dominium sive regimen
The End of Governance
A multitude is governed rightly when directed toward the common good of free people, but unjustly when a ruler seeks private gain, as the Lord warned through Ezekiel against shepherds who feed themselves.
Now it happens with some things that are directed toward an end that they proceed both rightly and not rightly. And so in governing a multitude, what is right and what is not right are both found. Each thing is directed rightly when it is led toward a suitable end, but not rightly when it is led toward an unsuitable one. But there is another end that is suitable for a multitude of free people and of slaves. For a free person is one who exists for their own sake; a slave, however, is one who belongs to another.1 If, therefore, a multitude of free people is directed by a ruler toward the common good of the multitude, the governance will be right and just, as is fitting for free people. But if the governance is directed not toward the common good of the multitude but toward the private good of the ruler, it will be unjust and perverse — and this is why the Lord threatens such rulers through Ezekiel. Chapter 34, saying: Woe to the shepherds who have been feeding themselves (seeking as if their own private interests): Are the flocks not fed by the shepherds?2
The Forms of Unjust Rule
Unjust rule takes three forms — tyranny by one, oligarchy by the few, and democracy by the many — while just rule appears as polity, aristocracy, or kingship, each distinguished by who rules and for whose good.
Shepherds, you see, should seek the good of the flock, and every ruler the good of the people entrusted to them. So if unjust rule is exercised by only one person who pursues their own advantage from governing, rather than the good of the people under them, that ruler is called a tyrant — a name derived from strength, because such a person oppresses by force, not by justice. That's why, among the ancients, the powerful were also called tyrants.3 But if unjust rule is exercised not by one person but by several — specifically by a few — it's called an oligarchy, that is, the rule of a few, where a few wealthy people oppress the common people, differing from a tyrant only in being more than one. But if unjust rule is exercised by many, it's called a democracy — the power of the people — where the common people, through the strength of their numbers, oppress the wealthy. In this way, the whole people becomes like a single tyrant. Likewise, a just form of rule must also be distinguished. For if governance is carried out by a group, it's commonly called a polity, as when a body of citizens dominates in a city or province.4 But if it's carried out by a few who are virtuous, this kind of rule is called an aristocracy — the rule of the best, or of the best people — and that's why they're called the best.
The Nature of Kingship
A king properly so called is one person who governs a complete community — a city or province — for the common good, as shown by Ezekiel's prophecy of one shepherd and confirmed by the ascending self-sufficiency of household, village, city, and province.
If just rule belongs to one person only, that person is properly called a king; hence the Lord says through Ezekiel: 'My servant David will be king over all of them, and there will be one shepherd over all of them.'✦ From this it's clearly shown that it belongs to the nature of a king to be one person who presides, and to be a shepherd seeking the common good of the multitude rather than his own advantage. Since it's fitting for a person to live in a community — because no one is self-sufficient for life's necessities if left to themselves alone — the more self-sufficient a community is for life's necessities, the more perfect it will be. There's a certain sufficiency for life found in a single household, at least for the natural functions of nourishment, begetting children, and other needs of that kind; in a single village, for the things that belong to one craft; and in a city — which is a complete community — for all the necessities of life; but even more so in a single province, because of the need for alliance and mutual aid against enemies. So whoever governs a complete community — that is, a city or a province — is called a king in the strict sense; but whoever governs a household is not called a king, but a head of the family. Still, a head of household does have some likeness to a king, which is why kings of peoples are sometimes called fathers. From what's been said, then, it's clear that a king is the one who governs the community of a single city or province for the common good; hence Solomon says in Ecclesiastes:
The King of the Whole Earth
The Lord Himself commands even the king of the whole earth, affirming that all earthly kingship is subject to divine authority.
The king of the whole earth commands the one who serves him.✦
Read the original Latin
Contingit autem in quibusdam, quae ordinantur ad finem, et recte, et non recte procedere. Quare et in regimine multitudinis et rectum, et non rectum invenitur. Recte autem dirigitur unumquodque quando ad finem convenientem deducitur; non recte autem quando ad finem non convenientem. Alius autem est finis conveniens multitudini liberorum, et servorum. Nam liber est, qui sui causa est; servus autem est, qui id quod est, alterius est. Si igitur liberorum multitudo a regente ad bonum commune multitudinis ordinetur, erit regimen rectum et iustum, quale convenit liberis. Si vero non ad bonum commune multitudinis, sed ad bonum privatum regentis regimen ordinetur, erit regimen iniustum atque perversum, unde et dominus talibus rectoribus comminatur per Ezech. XXXIV, 2, dicens: vae pastoribus qui pascebant semetipsos (quasi sua propria commoda quaerentes): nonne greges a pastoribus pascuntur?
Bonum siquidem gregis pastores quaerere debent, et rectores quilibet bonum multitudinis sibi subiectae. Si igitur regimen iniustum per unum tantum fiat qui sua commoda ex regimine quaerat, non autem bonum multitudinis sibi subiectae, talis rector tyrannus vocatur, nomine a fortitudine derivato, quia scilicet per potentiam opprimit, non per iustitiam regit: unde et apud antiquos potentes quique tyranni vocabantur. Si vero iniustum regimen non per unum fiat, sed per plures, siquidem per paucos, oligarchia vocatur, id est principatus paucorum, quando scilicet pauci propter divitias opprimunt plebem, sola pluralitate a tyranno differentes. Si vero iniquum regimen exerceatur per multos, democratia nuncupatur, id est potentatus populi, quando scilicet populus plebeiorum per potentiam multitudinis opprimit divites. Sic enim populus totus erit quasi unus tyrannus. Similiter autem et iustum regimen distingui oportet. Si enim administretur per aliquam multitudinem, communi nomine politia vocatur, utpote cum multitudo bellatorum in civitate vel provincia dominatur. Si vero administretur per paucos, virtuosos autem, huiusmodi regimen aristocratia vocatur, id est potentatus optimus, vel optimorum, qui propterea optimates dicuntur.
Si vero iustum regimen ad unum tantum pertineat, ille proprie rex vocatur: unde dominus per Ezech. dicit: servus meus David rex super omnes erit, et pastor unus erit omnium eorum. Ex quo manifeste ostenditur quod de ratione regis est quod sit unus, qui praesit, et quod sit pastor commune multitudinis bonum, et non suum commodum quaerens. Cum autem homini competat in multitudine vivere, quia sibi non sufficit ad necessaria vitae si solitarius maneat, oportet quod tanto sit perfectior multitudinis societas, quanto magis per se sufficiens erit ad necessaria vitae. Habetur siquidem aliqua vitae sufficientia in una familia domus unius, quantum scilicet ad naturales actus nutritionis, et prolis generandae, et aliorum huiusmodi; in uno autem vico, quantum ad ea quae ad unum artificium pertinent; in civitate vero, quae est perfecta communitas, quantum ad omnia necessaria vitae; sed adhuc magis in provincia una propter necessitatem compugnationis et mutui auxilii contra hostes. Unde qui perfectam communitatem regit, id est civitatem vel provinciam, antonomastice rex vocatur; qui autem domum regit, non rex, sed paterfamilias dicitur. Habet tamen aliquam similitudinem regis, propter quam aliquando reges populorum patres vocantur. Ex dictis igitur patet, quod rex est qui unius multitudinem civitatis vel provinciae, et propter bonum commune, regit; unde Salomon in Eccle.
V, 8, dicit: universae terrae rex imperat servienti.
Scripture echoes
Notes
- 1 ↩The phrase 'qui sui causa est' is rendered 'who exists for their own sake'; the reflexive genitive sui with causa is classically 'for his own sake/interest'. Some witnesses may read 'sui causa' as 'for himself' in the sense of being self-directed. The sense 'exists for their own sake' captures the contrast with the slave who exists for another.
- 2 ↩The quotation matches Ezekiel 34:2 in the Vulgate. Chapter number XXXIV supplied from the citation marker. The rhetorical question 'nonne greges a pastoribus pascuntur?' is rendered as 'Are the flocks not fed by the shepherds?' preserving the nonne particle's expectation of an affirmative answer.
- 3 ↩tyrannus rendered 'tyrannus' → 'tyrant' to preserve the political-theological sense; etymology from fortitudine rendered 'derived from strength' rather than 'from force' to stay close to the Latin.
- 4 ↩politia rendered 'polity' to preserve the technical political sense; multitudo bellatorum rendered 'body of citizens' rather than 'warriors' to fit the civic context.
On Kingship, to the King of Cyprus (De regno ad regem Cypri) companion
Read Aquinas a portion a day, free
Chosen Portion serves De Regno and the wider royal-devotional canon as daily readings on iOS.
The app's daily-portion format matches the plan exactly, delivering one chapter of Aquinas's counsel to a king as each day's devotional reading.
- Finish all 21 chapters of De Regno in three weeks of daily readings
- Follow each chapter with pericope headings that mark every turn of the argument
- Move straight into a second classic with your reading streak intact