Quomodo variatum est dominium apud Romanos, et quod interdum apud eos magis aucta est respublica ex dominio plurium
Why Royal Dignity Is Hated
Monarchy contains both the best and worst forms of rule, so royal dignity is hated because of the wickedness of tyrants.
Since, then, both the best and the worst forms of government consist in monarchy—that is, the rule of one—royal dignity becomes hateful to many because of the wickedness of tyrants. Some people, while wanting a king's rule, fall into the savagery of tyrants, and many rulers exercise tyranny under the pretext of royal dignity.
Rome's Example: Liberty Replacing Kings
The Romans expelled their kings out of hatred for tyranny and replaced them with consuls, after which the republic grew remarkably.
An example of this clearly appears in the Roman Republic. For after the Roman people expelled their kings, since they could not bear royal—or rather tyrannical—arrogance, they established consuls and other magistrates for themselves, through whom they began to be governed and directed, wanting to change the kingship into an aristocracy; and as Sallust reports, it is incredible to recall how much the Roman state grew in a short time once it had gained its freedom.
How Self-Governance Inspires Greater Effort
People under a king contribute less to the common good because they see it as belonging to another, whereas shared governance makes each citizen act as though the common good were his own.
For it often happens that people living under a king make less effort for the common good, since they consider that what they devote to the common good benefits not themselves but another, under whose power they see the common goods to be. But when they do not see the common good as being in the power of one person, they do not attend to the common good as though it belonged to someone else; rather, each person attends to it as though it were his own. Hence experience shows that a single city administered by annual magistrates can sometimes accomplish more than any king who held three or four cities; and small levies exacted by kings are borne more heavily than great burdens imposed by the community of citizens.
Rome's Self-Sacrifice in Freedom
The Roman Republic exemplified this civic devotion, as citizens poured private wealth into the public treasury until even the Senate stripped itself of gold.
This was maintained in the advancement of the Roman Republic. For the plebs was enrolled for military service, and they paid wages on behalf of the soldiers; and when the public treasury was insufficient to pay the wages, private wealth flowed into public uses, so that—apart from individual golden rings and the individual bullae, which were insignia of rank—even the Senate itself left itself no gold.
From Republic to Empire: Freedom Lost Through Strife
Internal dissensions and civil wars destroyed Roman liberty, bringing the people under emperors who refused the hated title of king.
But because they were worn down by constant dissensions, which escalated all the way to civil wars, in those civil wars the freedom they had worked so hard for was torn from their hands, and they came under the power of emperors, who from the start refused to be called kings, because the royal title was hateful to the Romans.
Good and Bad Emperors: Faithful Stewards vs. Tyrants
Some emperors governed faithfully and strengthened the state, but most were tyrants who weakened Rome and left it ruined.
Yet some of them administered the common good faithfully in kingly fashion, and through their effort the Roman state was both strengthened and preserved. But most of them were tyrants toward their subjects and proved cowardly and weak against enemies, and they reduced the Roman state to nothing.
Israel's Parallel: From Judges to Captivity
The Hebrew people mirror Rome's pattern: under judges they were plundered and lawless, and when they requested a king, royal wickedness led them into idolatry and captivity.
A similar pattern occurred among the Hebrew people. At first, while they were ruled under judges, they were plundered on every side by enemies. For each one did what was good in his own eyes. But when kings were given to them at their request, because of the kings' wickedness they turned away from the worship of the one God and were finally led into captivity.
The Peril of Choosing — or Refusing — a King
The chapter closes with a warning that either a tyrant is feared and good kingship is avoided, or royal power itself degenerates into tyranny.
So on both sides dangers threaten: either a tyrant is feared and the best kind of kingship is avoided, or, when this is considered, royal power turns into tyrannical wickedness.
Read the original Latin
Quia igitur optimum et pessimum consistunt in monarchia, id est principatu unius, multis quidem propter tyrannorum malitiam redditur regia dignitas odiosa. Quidam vero dum regimen regis desiderant, incidunt in saevitiam tyrannorum, rectoresque quamplures tyrannidem exercent sub praetextu regiae dignitatis. Horum quidem exemplum evidenter apparet in Romana republica. Regibus enim a populo Romano expulsis, dum regium vel potius tyrannicum fastum ferre non possent, instituerant sibi consules et alios magistratus per quos regi coeperunt et dirigi, regnum in aristocratiam commutare volentes et, sicut refert Salustius: incredibile est memoratu, quantum, adepta libertate, in brevi Romana civitas creverit. Plerumque namque contingit, ut homines sub rege viventes, segnius ad bonum commune nitantur, utpote aestimantes id quod ad commune bonum impendunt non sibi ipsis conferre sed alteri, sub cuius potestate vident esse bona communia. Cum vero bonum commune non vident esse in potestate unius, non attendunt ad bonum commune quasi ad id quod est alterius, sed quilibet attendit ad illud quasi suum: unde experimento videtur quod una civitas per annuos rectores administrata, plus potest interdum quam rex aliquis, si haberet tres vel quatuor civitates; parvaque servitia exacta a regibus gravius ferunt quam magna onera, si a communitate civium imponantur. Quod in promotione Romanae reipublicae servatum fuit. Nam plebe ad militiam scribebatur, et pro militantibus stipendia exsolvebant, et cum stipendiis exsolvendis non sufficeret commune aerarium, in usus publicos opes venere privatae, adeo ut praeter singulos annulos aureos, singulasque bullas, quae erant dignitatis insignia, nihil sibi auri ipse etiam senatus reliquerit.
Sed cum dissensionibus fatigarentur continuis, quae usque ad bella civilia excreverunt, quibus bellis civilibus eis libertas, ad quam multum studuerant, de manibus erepta est, sub potestate imperatorum esse coeperunt, qui se reges a principio appellari noluerunt, quia Romanis fuerat nomen regium odiosum. Horum autem quidam more regio bonum commune fideliter procuraverunt, per quorum studium Romana respublica et aucta et conservata est. Plurimi vero eorum in subditos quidem tyranni, ad hostes vero effecti desides et imbecilles, Romanam rempublicam ad nihilum redegerunt. Similis etiam processus fuit in populo Hebraeorum. Primo quidem dum sub iudicibus regebantur, undique diripiebantur ab hostibus. Nam unusquisque quod bonum erat in oculis suis, hoc faciebat. Regibus vero eis divinitus datis ad eorum instantiam, propter regum malitiam, a cultu unius Dei recesserunt et finaliter ducti sunt in captivitatem. Utrinque igitur pericula imminent: sive dum timetur tyrannus, evitetur regis optimum dominium, sive dum hoc consideratur, potestas regia in malitiam tyrannicam convertatur.
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