THE VALUE OR SUPERIOR EXCELLENCE OF NOBILITY.
With some Remarks on the Power or Influence of High Blood.
I. He would do great service to the nobility, who could separate their vanity from their quality; for it is almost as difficult to find this dignity free from that vice, as it is to find silver in the mines without a mixture of earth. Splendour of ancestry is a fire, which produces much smoke in descendants. There is nothing of which people should be less vain than their high origin, and there is nothing of which they are more so. The best pens in all ages, both sacred and profane, have laboured to persuade, that there is no pride worse founded than that which is built upon high birth. The world perseveres in its error, and there is no flattery better received, than that which compliments a man on the grandeur of his race; nor is there any adulation more hacknied and transcendent; to be convinced of which, you need only read epistles dedicatory to books. Flattery in them, commonly guides the pen, and you will hardly find one, which omits to lay great stress on the nobleness and antiquity of the family of the person to whom he consigns the protection of his book; and they do this, because it is pretty well known, there is scarce any man so candid or modest, as not to be pleased with this eulogium.
II. From hence spring those wild and extravagant genealogies, fabricated by some flatterers, in order to compliment, and by that means, cultivate the favour and protection of great and powerful people. Basil the first, emperor of the East, was a man of obscure birth. The patriarch Phocio, finding himself out of his good graces, endeavoured to regain his favour, by forming a genealogical chain, which made him descended from Tiridates king of Armenia, who reigned in that country eight centuries anterior to Basil. The descent which Abraham Bzovius gives to pope Sylvester the second, which began in Timenus king of Argos, who flourished more than a thousand years before Christ, in all likelihood was not fabricated by Bzovius, but was probably found among some papers written in the life-time of that pope, by some person who composed the thing to flatter him. Roderig Flaharti wrote, a little while since, the history of some transactions relating to Ireland, in which he assigns two thousand seven hundred years of antiquity to the kings of England in their possession of the throne.
III. If you ascend two generations anterior to Rodulfus count of Augsburg, there is no family of more doubtful origin than that of the house of Austria. Upon coming to the grandfather of Rodulfus, historians find themselves surrounded with such thick darkness, that they don’t know which way to turn themselves; nor is it a point beyond contest, who the grandfather of Rodulfus was. Notwithstanding this, there have not been wanting Spanish historians, who, by running up the line of their ancestors, have, without touching or tripping, traced them to the destruction of Troy. Penafiel de Contreras, an author of Grenada, went further than this; for, as Mothe le Vayer informs us, he fabricated a genealogical chain of one hundred and eighteen successions, and made Philip the third descend in a right line from Adam; and because the duke of Lerma, Philip’s favourite at that time, should not be under less obligations to his pen, he formed another of a hundred and twenty-one from Adam to the duke, entwining the sovereign and favourite with two kings of Troy and with Æneas, by means of their two sons Iulus and Asaracus, from one of which he made the king descend, and from the other the duke.
IV. There have not been wanting in other nations those who have flattered their princes to the same excess. John Messanius derived the succession of the kings of Sweden, without the least interruption, from the primitive father of mankind; and William Slater did the same thing, in compliment to James the first of England.
V. Truly one would be apt to think, that such fulsome incense must stink in the nose of the idol to which it is offered; for Vespasian despised some flatterers, who derived him from the stock of Hercules; and Cardinal Mazarin treated with great scorn, one who traced his origin to Titus Geganius Macerinus, and Proculus Geganius Macerinus, ancient consuls of Rome. Thus those lose the fruits of their adulation, who pour it forth without bounds.
VI. But to return to our subject: I repeat, that there is no pre-eminence people have less reason to boast of, than that of nobility; every other is personal, and proper to a man’s self; this is derived, and may be deemed the reflection of a borrowed light. Nobility is a mere extrinsic denomination, and if you would make it an intrinsic one, it must be done by rational means. The virtue of our forefathers was their own, not ours; and Ovid, in the following compendious sentence, expressed all that is capable of being said on the subject:
VII. It is true, that in a certain manner the excellencies of our progenitors illustrate us, but they illustrate us as the sun does the moon, by exposing our spots and blemishes if we degenerate from them. I have seen, in some coats of arms, stars quartered, which seems as if he who acquired this blazon gained it by his merit; because, after the manner of a star, he shone by his own light. It is probable, that in many of his successors they should take away the stars, and substitute moons in their places, to denote that they only shine like this luminary by virtue of a borrowed light. The following eulogium, which Velleius Paterculus bestowed on Cicero, always appeared to me extremely elegant and magnificent: Per hæc tempora Marcus Cicero, qui omnia incrementa sua sibi debuit, vir novitatis nobilissimæ, &c. Cicero owed all his fortune to himself, because although he sprung from an obscure family, he without any other support but that of his own merit ascended to the first honours of Rome. I would much rather this should be said of me, than that I was descended in a right line from Augustus Cæsar.
SECT. II.
VIII. But there is no necessity for dwelling upon a subject which is common, and on which so many and so fine things have been written, that all I could add to them would be like contributing a small fountain to the ocean, or a little stone to the mountain of Mercury. My intention is only to banish a vulgar error which is entertained of this matter, and which ferments greatly in the imaginations of people of quality.
IX. It is commonly said, that good or bad blood has its occult influence on thoughts and actions, and that as in the ordinary course of nature the genus of the tree follows that of the seed, and the fruit that of the tree; so it is with mankind, who, according to the stock from whence they are derived, copy after the customs and manners of their ancestors. This prepossession in favour of nobility is so general among the vulgar, that there are several adages made use of in their common conversation to express it; and you will at every turn, when a man well born has done a bad action, hear them say, he has not behaved like what he is; as on the contrary, if the same thing is related of a poor man, they answer, you could not expect any better of him, considering from whence he sprung.
X. If this was really so, the estimation the nobility enjoy might with great justice be said to belong to them; but this is so far from being the case, that there is scarce any other erroneous opinion that has so many, and so evident testimonies to contradict it. In what kingdom of the world do we not at present see the same thing come to pass, which formerly happened at Rome? a Cicero of obscure extraction, ennobling himself and his country with illustrious actions; and, by way of contrast to him, a most noble Catiline, debasing himself and family by licentiousness and treachery? or the same which was heretofore seen at Athens, a Socrates the son of a blacksmith, replete with virtues, contrasted with a Critias, who was the worthless disciple of so great a master, and an unworthy descendant of a brother of Solon’s, whom neither nobility nor philosophy, could withhold or refrain from behaving like a monster, compounded or made up of abominable vices?
XI. What Plutarch says of the kings, who were the successors of those captains, among whom the empire of Alexander was divided, is very remarkable. What progenitors could be more illustrious than those heroes, to whom, in a great measure, the Macedonian chief owed such glorious conquests? But all the descendants, says Plutarch, of these generous leaders, were people of evil, and perverse customs and manners. All? Yes, all without the least reserve: Omnes parricidiis, et incestis libidinibus, infames fuere. Let the nobility contemplate this, and then say, what dependence they can place on the future virtue of their race.
XII. The reflection of Elius Spartianus is still stronger. This writer says, that by casting your eyes over history, you will see clearly, that there is scarce a great man who has figured in the world, that has left a son who was a worthy successor of his father, that is, one who proved equally good and useful to the state: Et reputanti mihi, neminem prope magnorum virorum optimum, et utilem filium reliquisse, satis liquet. (Spartian, in vita Severi.)
XIII. There is no doubt but you will frequently meet in history, accounts of unworthy children, who were descended from good parents. Germanicus is so generously disinterested, that he refuses the empire when it is offered him by the army; and his daughter Agrippina so determinedly ambitious, that she sacrifices shame, and even life itself, to the thirst of dominion. Octavianus is modest and reserved, and besides possesses many other excellent qualities; his daughter Juliana, scandalizes Rome with her indecencies. Cicero, view, him on which side you will, is a most elevated genius; the son, who only resembled his father in name, was heavy, stupid, and a man of no other ability, but that of drinking a great deal of wine. Quintus Hortensius, was the competitor of Cicero, in oratory, political talents, and zeal for his country; his son departed so widely from the foot-steps of his father, that he was in danger of being disinherited, but, bad as the son was, the grandson was still worse. Septimus Severus, with the exception of his excessive rigour, was an accomplished prince; his son Antoninus Caracalla, neither deserved the name of a prince, nor to be called a man. To the prudent and wise Marcus Aurelius, succeeded the brutal and unbridled Commodus; to the glorious Constantine, the unworthy Constantius; to the magnanimous Theodosius, the timorous Arcadius, and the pusillanimous Honorius. But endeavouring to establish general rules upon these and such like examples, is giving a large scope to the pen.
XIV. Although we may with certainty affirm, that being allied in blood does not produce a similitude of manners, as this truth is invincibly proved, by the great variance of dispositions we frequently meet in brothers. If the children of the same father were to be like him, they would also be like one another. How then can we account for the great difference that is so frequently observed between them? One is courageous, another timid; one liberal, another avaricious; one ingenious, another dull; one rakish, another reserved; and the same in every other instance.
SECT. III.
XV. Of this variety of defects and virtues in the same blood, we have a striking example in the Antonian family, who were people of note and fame in ancient Rome. Marcus Antonius, called the orator, may be said to be the man who raised this house; for the Antonian family, which was so well known in the first ages of Rome, became divided into two branches; the one that was called Patrician became extinct; and from the other, which was called Plebeian, although it is not known by what accident they fell from their ancient splendour, sprung Marcus Antonius. This man, who was of humble extraction, by his rare and excellent qualities, raised himself to the first charges in the republic, and exercised them gloriously; but his two sons Marcus Antonius, called Creticus, and Caius Antonius, degenerated entirely from the excellencies of their great father, and were men without virtue, without conduct, and without valour. To Marcus Antonius Creticus, succeeded Marcus Antonius the triumvir, in whom the vices of his father were augmented, although he inherited part of the virtues of his grandfather, for he was a good soldier, and no bad politician, but a glutton, a drunkard, and lascivious, and this last failing, caused him to sacrifice his life and his fortune to the beauty of the dishonest Cleopatra. From so bad a father, descended an admirable daughter, the wise, beautiful, modest, prudent, and spirited Antonia. This eminent woman, who was beyond doubt the ornament of Rome in her day, had two sons and a daughter, which differed as greatly in their dispositions and manners, as if their blood and education had been diametrically opposite. Germanicus the eldest, turned out an able, discreet, mild, generous, and modest prince. Claudius, who was afterwards emperor, was so stupid, and differed so greatly from his brother and mother, that she was used to say her son Claudius was a monster, for that nature had begun to make him a man, but had never finished the work. Livilla, the sister of these two, was another species of monster, for she was convicted of adultery, and murdering her own husband. But the dissimilitude which we have hitherto remarked among the individuals of this family, may be called trivial, compared to that which appeared between Germanicus and his son Caligula; the first, was an harmonious compound of virtues and graces, the last the tail or fag-end of abominations; in fine, he was so bad, that people were used to say, nature had made him as he was to shew to what a degree mankind could be formed perverse. I have exposed to view, the signal inequality, which in native disposition and manners, there was between the individuals of the Antonian family, in order to illustrate, the little dependance that is to be placed on how the children will turn out, by conjectures, founded on the influence or example of the parents. If we were to make the same analysis of other families, we should find the same inequality with but little or no difference.
SECT. IV.
XVI. I am aware, however, of the argument that may be used in favour of the vulgar opinion. I may be told, that customs and manners are commonly derived from the genius or disposition, and the genius or disposition from temperament. How else could the constitution of parents be communicated to their children, by means of which communication we see them inherit their infirmities? In the same manner then, may their geniuses and dispositions be communicated.
XVII. But this argument fails in many parts of it; first, because by the commixture of the two sexes, which is indispensable in generation, there may result to the children a third temperament, unlike to that of both father and mother. Secondly, because it is not probable, that the seminal matter is in all its parts homogeneous; and to this principle, I think, should chiefly be attributed the notable dissimilarity that we find in some brothers. Thirdly, because many different principles have their influence on the temperament; for example, the accidental disposition of the parents at the time of generation, the various affections of the mother during the formation of the fœtus, the alterations of the atmosphere in this period, childrens aliment in their infancy, and many other things.
XVIII. From hence I conclude, the vulgar prognostic, that the short or long lives of children, depend upon the much or little time their parents lived, is to the last degree fallible and void of all probability; because from all the principles we have pointed out, the temperament of the parents with respect to the children, may be vitiated or amended; for we every day see healthy children born of sickly parents, and sickly children born of healthy ones. It is true, that there are some diseases which have the stamp or mark of hereditary ones; but I conclude, this originates, or is derived from a vitiated quality which pervades the whole seminal matter; but this is proper or confined to very few diseases, nor is it so proper or certain with regard to those few, as not to be many times falsified. My father was gouty, but I am not so, neither is any one of my brothers.
XIX. I add, that even admitting some communication of genius or manners from parents to children, this argument in no shape favours the ancient nobility, who are descended from a very remote origin; the reason is, because in every generation there is a sensible alteration, sufficient to introduce some dissimilitude with respect to the immediate progenitor, and in the accumulation of many, the unlikeness becomes so great, as in a manner to efface all appearance of kindred or relation between them. What expectation then can a man entertain, of inheriting even a small portion of the generosity of his illustrious progenitors, the heroes from whom he derived the lustre of his house, and to whom he looks up, at the remote distance of many centuries? By so many more grandfathers he reckons, by so many more degrees is he removed from the original generous influence. In every generation he goes on to lose a part of it; and when they become very numerous, he at last arrives at losing it intirely. It is most likely that the Thespiades, or sons which Hercules had by the daughters of Thespis, inherited a good portion of the strength of their father; and that, in the sons of the Thespiades, the robustness of the grandfather was more curtailed, and that the descendants of these, in the course of two or three generations, would come to be no stronger that the ordinary race of men.
SECT. V.
XX. I should here conclude this discourse, if none but the nobility were to read it; but as it is my intention to cure the nobles of their vanity, without exempting the humble from paying them all due respect, it is necessary to advert to, and guard against the inconvenience that may result from these last omitting to do it; for although it is just to restrain pride in the nobility, it is right and fit, that the common people should behave to them with respect.
XXI. But strong as the reasons may be, which we have alledged against the intrinsic worth of nobility, it cannot be denied, that the authority which favours it is of more force than all our arguments. Every cultivated and well regulated nation in the world, adopts and countenances this pre-eminence, which amounts to little less, than its being generally assented to by the bulk of mankind; and a universal opinion, rises superior to an ordinary one, and ought to prevail against every thing which is not self-evident, or supported by undeniable testimony.
XXII. The vanity (says the famous Magdalen Scudery, in the fourth volume of her Cyrus) which is derived only from our progenitors, is not well founded; but for all this, this illustrious chimera, which so sooths and flatters the hearts of all mankind, is so universally established throughout the world, that it cannot fail to obtain veneration and regard. It is certain, that in many things common usage hurries us on against reason, but in others, reason dictates to us, that we should conform to the common practice, and this is the predicament with respect to the subject we are treating of, that we find ourselves in at present.
XXIII. It is however true, that I have my doubts, whether this common estimation of nobility has arose of itself, or whether it is derived from an adjunct quality that is annexed to it, which is power. Noblemen are generally rich, and it may be doubted, whether the adoration that is paid to this idol called nobility, was introduced by the respect people bore to the image or figure, or the gold of which it was made. What we see is, that the nobles who fall off in riches, proceed with the same pace that they decrease in these, to lose the estimation in which they were held; and although there will always remain to them some respect, who can determine, whether this proceeds from the occult influence of their generous race, or from a common habit we are in of holding them in esteem? It may also happen, that a noble reduced from opulence to poverty, may be venerated as the relic of an idol, which heretofore had been worshiped.
XXIV. It is therefore necessary, to seek for some more solid ground than any we have hitherto gone over, whereon to build the estimation which should be enjoyed by the nobility, and such, no doubt, is to be found in reason, abstracted from the support of authority. It is a fixed maxim in ethics, that to every kind of excellence some honour is due; the general consent then of mankind, the regard shewn them by princes, and the privileges allowed them by the laws; having placed the nobility in a degree of superiority above that of other people; I say these considerations, ought to make us look upon nobility as a kind of excellence, to which, in consequence of its being such, we owe respect and honour.
XXV. And here it will be proper to remark, that this debt is not barred or cancelled by any uncertainty that may arise concerning the origin of those who are accepted as nobles. The reason is, because their being generally acknowledged and received as such, is sufficient to place them in that degree of superiority; for we cannot require more examination of their descent, in order to respect them, than the laws require which favour them. He would be a very extraordinary man, who could arrive at giving physical proof of who is his father; but his not being able to do this, does not absolve any one from the indispensable obligation of reverencing the man as such, who is generally esteemed and reputed to be his father.
XXVI. This debt of veneration to the nobility, should be understood in all cases, with a reservation of what is due, and properly appertains to virtue, which, according to the constant doctrine of Aristotle, and St. Thomas, is much more worthy of honour than nobility; therefore, even with that civil and extrinsic honour, which in their ethics those two great masters speak of, we ought more to reverence a virtuous Plebeian, than a Nobleman without virtue. Our cardinal Aguirre, when he is explaining philosophy, in the third chapter of his fourth book of ethics, says, that a vicious nobleman is unworthy of all honour and respect; to which sentiment I subscribe, because it is conformable to a maxim of the angelic doctor, who (22 quæst. 145. art. I.) having said, that honour properly and principally was only due to virtue, admits, that other qualities and excellences inferior to her, such as nobility, riches, and power, are only honourable in proportion as they conduce to, and assist the operations of virtue: Alia vero, quæ sunt infra virtutem, honorantur in quantum coadjuvant ad opera virtutis, sicut nobilitas, potentia, & divitiæ. If the nobility then do not assist virtue, but rather foment vanity and nourish pride, by lending their suffrages to vices which obstruct virtue, they render themselves totally unworthy of the least respect.
SECT. VI.
XXVII. But how shall we reconcile what we have just now said against the nobility, with what we said but a little before in their favour? Easily, by saying this prerogative is not laudable, but honourable. The arguments we have just urged impugn its laudabillty, those we are about to use are affirmative of its honour. This is a distinction pointed out by Aristotle, between virtue and all the other excellences which illustrate the human race. Virtue, he says, is laudable; riches, nobility, and power, deserve no praise, but have a pretension to be honoured. So that there is nothing in nobility which a man should boast or be vain of; but there is something in it, which those who are inferior to them in rank should reverence and respect. This distinction will reconcile all difficulties, and assure to the nobility esteem, without fomenting their vanity.
SECT. VII.
XXVIII. The subject of this discourse, especially that part of it which is contained in the second, third, and fourth paragraphs, leads me opportunely to banish an error which is exceedingly vulgarized. The world is so filled with the caprice of the occult influence of the blood, that many people are led away with a notion, that children by the force of it, not only inherit from thence those passions which depend on the temperament, but also a propensity for the religion of their ancestors. They don’t even stop here, for the lower sort extend this influence to the milk with which children are nourished in their infancy, giving credit to this ridiculous maxim, from here and there an uncertain or fabulous experiment or instance, such for example, as a person when he came to the state of manhood having turned Jew, which he imbibed a disposition to do, by having sucked a Jew nurse.
XXIX. There is no error more void of all probability than this. If we speak of the true religion, not only the assent which the understanding gives to its dogmas, but also the pious affection which precedes this assent, are both supernatural; consequently, according to sound theology, neither the blood nor the aliment, nor any other natural cause, can have connexion, either with the assent or pious affection. This is all the work of the divine grace, as a substitute for which, there is not the most remote disposition to be found in the whole sphere of nature, and you can only admit negative natural ones, which concur merely to remove impediments, such as a good understanding, and a good native turn of mind. But these good dispositions, in those who possess them, do not depend upon their fathers having professed the true religion; for if this was the case, all the catholics would have good understandings, and would be naturally good-disposed people.
XXX. The assent to false religions, is beyond a doubt absolutely natural, because error cannot be derived from a supernatural cause. Upon the whole then it is certain, that this assent does not depend, in any manner whatever, either on the temperament, or on the organization, which are the only things, on which the paternal seed, or the infant aliment, can have any influence; the reason is, because giving assent to an error, depends upon the shape or light in which objects appear or are represented to the understanding, which in different temperaments and organizations may be the same, and in such as are alike different. What doubt can there be, that in the great city of Constantinople, there are vast numbers of men unlike in these and other natural dispositions? Notwithstanding which, they have all faith in the same errors.
XXXI. He who will not yield to these arguments, let the experience or example of the Janisaries convince. This military corps, who are the Grand Seignor’s guards, and the best troops in the Ottoman empire, although they at present admit among them people of every nation, were originally all composed of the children of Christians, who in their infancy were either made prisoners of war, or were paid to the Grand Seignor by way of tribute, by the poor Christians who resided in his dominions. These soldiers, who notwithstanding their being the children of Christians, and their having been nourished in their infancy with Christian milk, were always as staunch professors of Mahometism as the children of the Turks themselves; and in the wars in which they were engaged against the Christians, so far was the occult influence of the blood, or the milk they sucked, from restraining their arms, that they fought, I don’t know whether to call it with more valour, or with more fury and rage, than the other Mahometans.
XXXII. The same reflection, may be made on the slaves which are brought from Africa to America to work in the mines, or on the sugar plantations; for they, when educated in the Christian religion, don’t entertain the most distant thoughts of returning to idolatry, which was the religion professed by their ancestors.
XXXIII. What now and then happens is, that some one, who in his infancy was instructed in a religion different from that of his parents, after being arrived at a state of manhood, coming to understand that they professed another faith, has found himself inclined to follow their steps. But it is clear, this was not produced by the seeds of his paternal religion which circulated within his veins, but was rather a proof, that his love and veneration for his progenitors, disposed him to imitate them, and I believe it proceeds from want of reflection, that these examples are not more frequent, for it is natural to suppose, that the example of those who gave people birth, would have more weight with thinking persons, than that of those who had deprived them of their liberty; but such is the force of education, habit, and intercourse, that they prevail over all other considerations and attentions.
SECT. VIII.
XXXIV. It will also be proper in this place, to touch on a complaint very common among poor gentlemen: These frequently say, that now-a-days money is more esteemed than men of family, and that riches are more respected than nobility. This sentence is hardly out of their mouths, before it is followed by a deep sigh, that seems to express their sorrow for the corruption of the times, which has altered and mistaken the true value of things.
XXXV. But they are greatly deceived, who think the world ever was, or ever will be otherwise in this particular, for they always did, and always will, make more professions of esteem and respect to a rich man of humble origin, than to a poor one descended from an illustrious family. This is a consequence attendant on, and naturally produced by the condition of humanity. Men are seldom obsequious or attentive to others, from mere motives of courtesy, and without an eye to their interests, but are generally solicitous to please those, who have it in their power either to favour or injure them. Nobility is not an active quality, but wealth is. A nobleman, merely as a person ennobled, can do neither good nor harm; but a rich man, holds in one hand the thunderbolt of Jupiter, and in the other the cornucopia of Amalthea. Simonides being asked which was most estimable, riches or learning, replied that he was puzzled to give an answer, because he frequently saw the learned running to pay their court to the rich and powerful, but that he never remarked the same attention of the rich to the learned; so that if in those ancient times the learned paid homage to the rich, what must the vulgar have done? Hope and fear, are the two main springs, which give motion to the human heart, but disinterested love, operates in very few individuals. There are at this day idolatrous nations, who worship both God and the Devil; God, that he should bestow benefits on them, and the Devil, because he should not injure them. He then who can neither do good nor harm, must expect no adoration or attention paid to him. The only and most effectual instrument wherewith to do service or injury, is money; thus those who are masters of that, will also be masters of, and command the common respect and homage. Gold is the idol of the rich, and the rich are the idols of the poor; it always was so, and ever will be so.
XXXVI. Let the neglected nobles, however, comfort themselves with the reflection, that the adoration and court which is paid to the rich and powerful, is not sincere. The incense which is offered to them, does not arise from the fire of love, but the blaze of concupiscence; and the breast is always giving the lie to whatever is pronounced by the lips. The body bends with submissive congées, but the will does not incline or stoop to the idol. Obsequies, or the outward shew of respect, is all the invention of art, not the work of nature. What price or value can you set upon adulations, that are articulated by a tongue, which is the vile slave of interest? I don’t deny but there are some men of opulence and power, who have merited their fortune; and that these, on account of the intrinsic worth of their good qualities, may be sincerely and consistently honoured and respected by good men; but such as these are the fewest in number, and the misfortune is, that there is no rich man whatever, who has not been persuaded by the voice of flattery, that he is one of those few.
XXXVII. It may be also necessary to apprize the complaining gentlemen, that the rich, merely as rich people, are in some degree intitled to the respect that is shewn them. The blessing of the Lord, says Solomon in the Proverbs, makes men rich, so that riches is a gift from heaven, and such a gift, as according to the common estimation and opinion of the world, constitutes those who possess it worthy to be honoured and respected. St. Thomas affirms this to be the case in the following sentence: Secundum vulgarem opinionem, excellentia divitiarum facit hominem dignum honore. (22. quæst. 45. art. 1.) The common estimation in this particular, founds a right: and although that judgment should be erroneous, it would be prudent for us to wait till the world is undeceived, before we exempt ourselves from conforming to the usages of it. But this happy time will hardly ever arrive, till God, with his powerful hand, shall bend and incline the hearts of men to esteem virtue, and that only; though if this happy day should arrive, the nobility may probably find a falling-off in the estimation they are at present held in; for every one then, would be respected according to his own deeds, and not according to those of his ancestors. This mode of rating things, would be exceedingly beneficial to the state; for how well would it be served, and what good citizens would it consist of, if there was no other road but that of virtue, whereby to arrive at the public esteem! but as the case stands at present, the merit, or even the fortune of an individual, makes all his descendants glorious and honourable, and when those who succeed in that line, find that by virtue of their birth the public veneration is attached to their family, great numbers of them will consider themselves as excused from negotiating it by some honourable application.
XXXVIII. From hence I infer, that what is speciously urged in favour of the nobility, to wit, that it is just and right to reward in the descendants the virtue of their ancestors, although it may sound well in theory, will have but a bad effect in practice. If only personal virtue was to be rewarded, in the course of twenty descendants, there might probably be ten or a dozen of them, who would labour to acquire glory. But if the first of the twenty gains it for all the rest, he only would be useful to the state. He would serve the public, and the public would become the servants of all the rest.
SECT. IX.
XXXIX. What we have just said, was not intended as an objection against giving the preference to the nobility in appointments to places of dignity and honour, but was only meant, as an argument against their being conferred on them, as a reward for the merits of their ancestors. I do not oppose the thing, but the motive for doing it; for I am rather of opinion, the public utility, the advancement of which, and not rewarding the services of others, should be the leading consideration to direct in making those appointments, would be better answered, by prefering the nobleman to the person of inferior rank, not only in cases of equality of virtue between the parties, but also where their difference in birth is great, and the disproportion in point of virtue but small; and this, for four weighty and important reasons.
XL. The first is, you would avoid by this means, multiplying the number of priviledged persons within a state. If it was frequent and common, to fill posts of consequence with people of humble birth, because they were virtuous and able; as from the elevation of these, would result that of their posterity; in the course of a century and a half, you would create a great multitude of fresh nobility, which is extremely prejudicial to a community; because in proportion as you lessen the number of those, who should apply themselves to business, and the improvement and cultivation of land; you would lessen the assistance of useful people; or what is worse, you would over-load with the burden of the others, such as were dedicated to these employments.
XLI. The second is, because in posts of dignity, a nobleman is obeyed with more resignation, readiness, and good-will, than a person of humble extraction; which is a matter of great importance in every kind of government. What disturbances have been occasioned, by the repugnance men find in obeying the commands of him, who they saw yesterday wear a plain coarse coat, and they see to-day cloath’d with purple; their obedience is sometimes slow, at others ill exerted, and at others not performed at all. The love, or at least the interior condescension with which those who serve, obey him who commands, is extremely useful and necessary in every kind of business. Many fine projects have vanished in smoke, because the instruments appointed to apply the means of executing them, have, stimulated by an occult envy of their superior, wished they should not succeed.
The want of sufferance and condescension in the inferiors, is succeeded by abhorrence and hatred in him who commands, with respect to them; and when he and they, reciprocally come to regard each other as enemies, there is no sort of confusion and danger, that may not be considered as near at hand.
XLII. The third is, because it is much more to be apprehended, that the virtue of an humble person is feigned, than that of a nobleman. The vice of hypocrisy may be said to be allied, or in a manner annexed to narrow fortune; for poor people are under a necessity of concealing their defects; and are obliged, in order to better their lot, to have recourse to the trivial expedient, of putting on the semblance of virtue. On the contrary, opulence and illustrious birth, naturally give relief and enlargement to the mind. People that are ennobled, are generally what they appear to be, because neither necessity nor fear, obliges them to make ostentation of virtues they do not possess.
XLIII. The fourth and last is, that admitting there should not be the least doubt of the truth and reality of an humble man’s virtue, there is always great danger of his losing it by his exaltation. Great leaps of fortune are exceedingly perilous. Those from lofty stations downwards are very hazardous, because in consequence of them, the honour and properties of men may be dashed to pieces; but those from below upwards are more to be dreaded, for they are commonly attended with the destruction and loss of the soul. Every virtuous man, before he is raised from the dust to dignities, should find sureties for his continuing to act uprightly; for the soul by such a transition, is translated to a very different climate; and a very unwholesome one for customs and manners. Many have the seeds of various vices so deeply buried in their temperaments, as even to be concealed from their own eyes, till opportunities and occasions cause them to grow and sprout out. It is rare to find a man of low extraction, who is cruel and proud; and very rare to meet with one who is covetous; for he is so far from being excited by vices which he has no materials to supply the cravings of, that he scarce ever thinks of them; and how should he fix his attention on the superfluous, who is in want of what is precisely necessary for him? To find out whether such a person is tainted with the two first vices, you should place him in authority; and to discover whether he is infected with the third, you should give him a portion of riches. In fact, these three vices have been most frequently remarked in those, who were raised from humble to exalted fortune, although before their elevation, they did not shew the least signs of being tainted with them, or any others.
XLIV. For these reasons, I am of opinion, that a person of humble extraction, should never be preferred to a nobleman or man of family, to fill posts of dignity and honour, except, where the excess of virtue in the first shall be found to be very great. But in the military line, we should make an exception to this rule, for valour, and skill in the art of war, are requisites of great importance in executing and conducting military business; nor can they be lost by a man’s advancement, or counterfeited by hypocrisy. On the other hand, these endowments, for the purpose of exciting respect and obedience in those who are to be commanded, sufficiently supply the want of splendid origin in him who commands; and finally, a great warrior makes double amends to a state for the injury that is sustained by it, by planting therein a new stock of nobility. So that by adverting to these precautions, the four inconveniences we have pointed out would be avoided.