On the Government of Rulers: De Regimine Principum

323 Pages·1997·4.58 MB·English

by  Ptolemy of Lucca

On the Government of Rulers
De Regimine Principum
THE MIDDLE AGES SERIES
Ruth Mazo Karras,General Editor
Edward Peters, Founding Editor
Acomplete listof books inthe series
isavailablefrom the publisher.
On the Government
of Rulers
De Regiminc Principum
PtolemyofLucca
with portions attributed to
Thomas Aquinas
translated by [ames M. Blythe'
PENN
University of Pennsylvania Press
Philadelphia
Copyright © 1997UniversityofPennsylvaniaPress
Allrights reserved
Printed intheUnited StatesofAmericaonacid-freepaper
109 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 I
Published by
University ofPennsylvaniaPress
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania19104-6097
Library ofCongressCataloging-in-Publication Data
Bartholomew, ofLucca,ca.1236-1327.
[Deregimineprincipum. English]
On thegovernment ofrulers :Deregimineprincipum /Ptolemy ofLucca;
withportions attributed toThomas Aquinas; translated by
JamesM.Blythe.
p. em. - (TheMiddleAgesseries)
Includesbibliographical referencesandindex.
ISBN 0-8122-3370-0(alk.paper)
1.Politicalscience- Earlyworksto 1800. I.Blythe,JamesM., 1948- .
II.Thomas, Aquinas, Saint,1225?-1274.Deregno, adregemCypri. English.
III.Title. IV.Series.
JC121.B2813 1997
320.1'01-dc21 97-2015
CIP
Contents
Preface vii
ANote on the Text xi
Introduction I
Book I 60
Book 2 104
Book 3 146
Book 4 215
Bibliography 289
Index to Aristotle Citations 293
Index to Augustine Citations 295
Index to BiblicalCitations 297
General Index 301
This page intentionally left blank
Preface
WHEN I WAS WORKING ON MY BOOK, Ideal Government and theMixed
Constitution in theMiddle Ages, I was especially drawn to Ptolemy of Lucca
(c.1236-c.1327), whose radical ideas were remarkable for his time, but about
whom very little has been written, and Idevoted achapter to him.' I felt that
atranslation of hiswork waslong overdue, considering itsoriginality and the
fact that it influenced much ofthe political thought ofthe later Middle Ages,
the Renaissance, and the early modern period. Only afew professional medi
evalistshavereadPtolemy's work initsscholastic Latin, but ifitwere available
in English it could benefit allhistorians of political thought aswell asmany
others interested in political theory, the history of ideas, and the history of
constitutionalism. It could also beused in courses in political thought and in
the medieval and earlymodern intellectual tradition. I have already used it in
agraduate readings course in medieval history with excellent results. It might
also begin to redress the serious undervaluation of Ptolemy'S position in the
history of ideas, reflected in what has been at best cursory treatment in gen
eralhistories ofpolitical thought.
More than anyone else, Ptolemy combined the principles of northern
Italian government with scholastic Aristotelian political theory. He was also
the first of his time, or among the first, to state many ideas that were later
to become commonplace. He is the first medieval political theorist not to
endorse kingship as the best form of government . In fact, he attacks it as
the moral equivalent of despotism, totally inappropriate for a virtuous and
freedom-loving people. Believing this, he obviously cannot subscribe to the
dominant medieval appreciation for the Roman Empire. Instead he glorifies
Republican Rome and brands Julius Caesarasatyrant and the Roman Empire
astyranny. These areremarkable assertions for someone writing around 1300,
1. JamesBlythe,IdealGovernment and theMixed Constitution intheMiddle Ages (Princeton,
N.J.: Princeton University Press,1992), 92-II7.
viii Preface
and the harbinger of acommonplace humanist viewof the fifteenth century.
Although he defends republicanism vigorously, he nevertheless believesthat
different circumstances, climates, and national characters may require differ
ent forms ofgovernment andthat most arenot suited to the bestgovernment,
which includes the representation of the few and the many in amixed con
stitution. Ptolemy was also the first to equate the standard Greek models of
mixed constitution-Sparta, Crete, and Carthage-with the Roman Repub
lic, biblical rule, the Church, and medieval government. Again anticipating
the humanists, hewasthe firstto suggest that the perfect republic could beso
inwardly harmonious that itcould transcend the normal imperatives ofdecay
and ultimate destruction. He alsobegan adebate on whether women should
servein the military.
One of the most remarkable things about Ptolemy's book isits wealth
of examples, unique in scholastic works of his time. Almost everything he
writes suggests some new example to him. Many ofthese come from the an
cient or patristic classics,and these are unusual only in their number, their
variety, and the use to which Ptolemy puts them. But he also makes many
references to the history, customs, and attitudes of the Middle Ages. For ex
ample, mentioning that aking should bewealthy inspireshim to discusshow
coins areminted. After stating that climate determines national character, he
demonstrates this with German immigrants to Sicilywho soon became like
the Sicilians. He analyzes northern Italian city-states and the struggles be
tween popes and emperors and touches on such diverse topics asTotila the
Ostrogoth, Tuscan battle formations, the hunting habits of the French and
English kings, the procedure for secret ballots in Florence, and the exchange
between Pope Innocent III and the king ofAragon overdebased money.
I am convinced that Ptolemy today stands in much the same position
Marsilius ofPaduaoncedid. Hewasmentioned brieflyinsomegeneralworks
and afew scholars pointed out that severallater writers referred to him, but
even those who noticed him did not accord him anymajor importance. This
all changed in the 1950S, when Alan Gewirth translated Marsilius's major
work andwrote abook-length introduction to histhought.' Today,Marsilius
is considered to be the great radical political thinker of the fourteenth cen
tury, andexcerpts of hiswork appear ineveryhistorical anthology ofwestern
political thought. In his own way, Ptolemy was every bit as radical and in
fluential asMarsilius, and I think that this translation of his major political
work, On theGovernment ofRulers, perhaps supplemented in the future by a
2. Alan Gewirth, MarsiliusofPadua,theDefenderofPeace,2 vols,Records ofCivilization:
SourcesandStudies 46 (NewYork:Columbia University Press,1951-1956; reprinted NewYork:
Harper andRow, 1967).
Preface ix
translation of his other political treatise, A ShortDetermination oftheJuris
dictionoftheRoman Empire, would contribute to Ptolemy achieving amajor
placeinfuture histories ofpolitical thought.
_ Although Ptolemy did not write Book I and part of Book 2 ofthe trea
tise translated in this volume, I decided to translate the whole, since"it has
appeared in this form since the fourteenth century, and I wanted to show
the difference between the two parts more clearlybyproviding aversion that
maintains a consistent terminology throughout. Whether the other author
wasThomas Aquinas, ashasbeen traditionally assumed, or another, asisnow
often argued, isofsecondary concern inavolume centered on Ptolemy. In the
next fewpagesIwilldiscussthe firstpart anditsauthor, but mymain purpose
is to introduce Ptolemy's thought and the contemporary events, conflicts,
and intellectual trends and paradigms that shaped it. Of necessity,this intro
duction will be brief, but I hope to publish abook-length study of Ptolemy
within the next fewyears.
Ptolemy supported papal supremacy, justified despotic kings for most
peoples, and tied character to birth and geography, but he also began the
theoretical attack against monarchy. Today,American and European peoples
pride themselves on their "democracies;' which reduce monarchy to at most
a ceremonial post. At the same time, their governments sponsor tyrannies,
massacres, and exploitation around the world and immiserate agrowing seg
ment oftheir own citizenry,yetwith no senseofirony use"medieval" to mean
"backward;' "cruel;' and "barbaric." Ptolemy and his successors may have
begun to undermine the almost universal acceptance of monarchy, but the
revolutions they eventually spawned created aresourceful new ruling class.In
its dotage, this classhasbeen able,to adegree not possible inthe recent past,
to rededicate itself to greed and the oppression necessary to sate its mem
bers' individual desires,thanks to the discrediting ofegalitarian ideologies by
totalitarian pseudo-socialist regimes. Almost miraculously ithasbeen ableto
justify this to the massesasthe essenceoffreedom. Aristotle andthe medieval
writers who followed him defined good government asthat which promotes
the common good. What these words mean has changed over the centuries,
but the concept issound and cannever rationally mean the right of afew to
monopolize and destroy the wealth ofthe earth for their own benefit. In that
senseclassicaland medieval political thought stillhasrelevancefor ustoday.
The University of Memphis requires that the following statement be in
cluded: "This work was supported in part by agrant from the University of
Memphis Faculty Research Grant Fund. This support does not necessarily
imply endorsement bythe University ofresearch conclusions."
For advice on afew difficult passages, I thank Brian Tierney and James