Paradox 6

Paradox VI

That only the wise man is rich

[That only the wise man is rich.]

SECTION 42

Chapter 1

What is this outrageous display you make whenever you mention your money? Are you alone rich? Immortal gods! Should I not rejoice that I have listened and learned something? Are you alone rich? What if you are not even rich? What if you are actually poor? For whom do we understand to be rich? To what sort of man do we apply this word? To someone, I imagine, whose possessions are sufficient for him to live well and be readily content, who seeks nothing, pursues nothing, wishes for nothing more.

SECTION 43

Your own mind must judge itself rich—not other people’s talk, nor your possessions. It thinks it lacks nothing, cares for nothing more, has its fill of money or is at least content with it: I grant that such a man is rich. But if your hunger for money makes you think no profit shameful, although for a man of your rank even honorable profit is out of bounds; if every day you cheat, deceive, demand, bargain, take away, seize; if you plunder our allies and pillage the treasury; if you do not even wait for your friends’ wills but forge them yourself—are these signs of abundance or of need?

SECTION 44

It is a man’s mind, not his strongbox, that we ordinarily call rich. However full that box may be, as long as I see you empty, I shall not consider you rich. For people measure wealth by how much is enough for each person. A man has one daughter: he needs money. Two daughters: more money. More daughters: still more. If he has fifty daughters, as Danaus is said to have had, so many dowries require a great fortune. For, as I said before, the measure of wealth is adjusted to the amount each person needs. How, then, am I to call a man rich who has not many daughters but innumerable desires, capable of draining the greatest resources in a short time, when he himself feels that he is in need?

SECTION 45

Many have heard you say that no one is rich unless he can maintain an army from his own income—something the Roman people, with all their revenues, have long been scarcely able to do. With that as your standard, then, you will never be rich until your estates yield enough to maintain six legions and large auxiliary forces of cavalry and infantry. You therefore admit already that you are not rich, since you lack so much of what would fulfill your wishes. And you have never made any secret of that poverty of yours—or rather, that destitution and beggary.

SECTION 46

Chapter 2

For just as we understand that people who earn money honorably through trade, labor, or public contracts need an income, so consider anyone who sees the bands of accusers and informers joined together in your house; who sees wealthy, guilty defendants plotting to corrupt a trial, with you again directing the affair; who sees your bargains over fees for legal advocacy, † your cuts of the money in alliances between candidates, your dispatching of freedmen to drain the provinces through moneylending and plunder; anyone who recalls the expulsion of neighbors, the robberies in the countryside, your partnerships with slaves, freedmen, and clients, the ownerless estates, the proscription of the wealthy, the devastation of towns, that harvest in Sulla’s day, the forged wills, the many men put out of the way; anyone who recalls, finally, that everything was for sale—an edict, a decree, another man’s verdict or your own, the Forum, your house, your voice, your silence. Who would not think that such a man admits his need for income? And who has ever truly called a man rich when he still needs to acquire more?

SECTION 47

For the benefit of wealth lies in plenty, and plenty is shown by having enough and more than enough. Since you will never attain that, you will never be rich at all. But since you despise my means—and rightly, for in common estimation they are modest, in yours nonexistent, and in mine sufficient—I shall say nothing about myself and speak instead about the question.

SECTION 48

If we must assess and appraise the matter, which should we value more highly: the money Pyrrhus offered Fabricius, or the self-restraint with which Fabricius refused it? The gold of the Samnites, or the answer of Manius Curius? The inheritance of Lucius Paullus, or the generosity of Africanus, who yielded his own share of that inheritance to his brother Quintus Maximus? Surely these examples of the highest virtues must be valued above those things that consist in money. If a man must be considered richest according to his possession of what has the greatest worth, who could doubt that riches lie in virtue? For no estate, no quantity of gold and silver, should be valued more highly than virtue.

SECTION 49

Immortal gods! People do not understand how great an income thrift provides. For I turn now to the extravagant and leave that money-grubber behind. He receives six hundred thousand sesterces from his estates, I one hundred thousand from mine. He installs gilded ceilings and marble floors in his villas and covets statues, paintings, furnishings, and clothing without limit: that income is too little not only for his expenses but even for the interest he owes. From my modest revenue, after the expenses of my desires have been deducted, there will still be something left over. Which of us, then, is richer: the man who has too little, or the man who has something to spare? The man in need, or the man with abundance? The man whose estate requires more for its maintenance the larger it becomes, or the man whose estate supports itself from its own resources?

SECTION 50

But why speak of myself? Through the faults of our habits and our times, perhaps I too share to some extent in the delusion of this age. To avoid always speaking of men like Curius and Luscinus, was Manius Manilius, within our fathers’ memory, really poor? He had a little house in the Carinae and a farm in the Labican territory. Are we therefore richer because we have more? If only we were! But the measure of wealth is determined not by a property assessment, but by one’s manner of living and standard of comfort.

SECTION 51

To be free of greed is money; to be free of the urge to buy is income. But to be content with what one has is the greatest and surest wealth. Indeed, if those shrewd appraisers value meadows and certain building lots highly because property of that kind is, so to speak, almost immune to harm, how highly should we value virtue? It can neither be seized nor stolen, neither lost in shipwreck nor destroyed by fire; neither the turbulence of storms nor the upheavals of the times can alter it!

SECTION 52

Only those endowed with virtue are rich. They alone possess things both fruitful and everlasting; they alone have what is distinctive of wealth: they are content with their possessions. They think what they have is enough; they pursue nothing, need nothing, feel that nothing is missing, ask for nothing more. But the wicked and the greedy, since their possessions are uncertain and subject to chance, since they always pursue more, and since not one of them has yet been found for whom what he had was enough, must be considered not merely lacking in abundance and riches, but destitute and poor.

Paradox VI

The wise alone have wealth.

[Wisdom is the only way to be rich.]

SECTION 42

Chapter 1

Why this arrogant showing off every time you talk about your money? You're the only rich man, are you? Immortal gods! Shouldn't I be glad I've heard a few things and learned something? The only rich man? What if you don't count as rich at all? What if you even count as poor? What do we understand by a rich man, anyway? Who gets that title? I'd say a man who owns enough to feel easily satisfied with a generous way of life, who isn't looking for, reaching for, or wishing for anything beyond it.

SECTION 43

It's your mind that has to find itself rich, not other people's chatter or the property you own. If your mind sees nothing missing, has no further concerns, and has had its fill of money—or is even just satisfied with it—then I'll agree it's rich. But what if your appetite for cash makes every kind of profit seem acceptable, even though your social rank rules out even respectable money-making? What if, day after day, you swindle, trick, demand, strike deals, take things, and snatch them? If you strip our allies and rob the public treasury? If you can't even wait for friends to leave wills, but forge the wills yourself? Do those actions indicate plenty or a shortage?

SECTION 44

When we call someone rich, we usually mean his mind, not his money chest. Fill that chest as much as you like: if I still see emptiness in you, I won't call you rich. People judge how much wealth a person has by how much will satisfy him. Suppose a man has a daughter. He needs money. With two, he needs more; with more daughters, more still. Give him fifty, as Danaus supposedly had: all those marriage portions need a great deal of money. As I said earlier, the standard for wealth adjusts to each person's needs. So how can I describe someone as rich if, instead of many daughters, he has endless desires that could empty the largest fortune quickly? He feels short of money himself.

SECTION 45

Many people have heard your claim that you can't count as rich unless the returns on your own property can feed an army. Even the Roman people, drawing enormous tax revenues, have long struggled to do that. Set that goal and you'll never be rich until your property produces enough to keep six legions, plus substantial additional cavalry and infantry forces. You're already admitting you're not rich: so much is still missing before your wish can come true. You've never concealed this poverty—or rather, this state of destitution and begging.

SECTION 46

Chapter 2

We recognize that someone who makes money honestly through trading, working, or taking public contracts needs to earn. Now look at the teams of accusers and informers linked together in your house. Look at the wealthy, guilty defendants trying to buy a corrupt trial, with you running the affair again. Look at your deals over payment for defending cases, † the money you cut for yourself in candidates' alliances, the freedmen you send to the provinces to strip them through lending and robbery. Think back over the neighbors you've driven out, the banditry in the countryside, the partnerships with slaves, freedmen, and clients, the properties without owners, the wealthy people outlawed, the towns ruined, the harvest you gathered under Sulla, the fake wills, all the people removed. Finally, think of everything on sale: an edict or decree, another person's decision or your own, the Forum, your home, speaking, keeping quiet. Wouldn't anyone take this as your admission that you need earnings? And if a person still needs to acquire more, who has ever truthfully described him as rich?

SECTION 47

Wealth benefits us by giving us plenty. To show you have plenty, you have to have enough to satisfy you and something beyond that. You'll never reach that point, so you'll never become rich at all. You think little of my money, and rightly. To the public it looks middling; to you, nonexistent; to me, an adequate amount. But I'll stop talking about myself and discuss the issue instead.

SECTION 48

If we have to assess and price these things, which deserves the higher value: the payment Pyrrhus offered Fabricius, or Fabricius's self-control in turning it down? The Samnites' gold, or Manius Curius's reply? The property Lucius Paullus left, or Africanus's generosity in handing his share to his brother Quintus Maximus? Surely those acts of the greatest virtue are worth more than those amounts of money. If we must count a man richest when he owns what's most valuable, how can anyone doubt that virtue is where wealth lies? We shouldn't put any property, any mass of silver or gold, above virtue in value.

SECTION 49

Immortal gods! People don't grasp how much income comes from thrift. I'm leaving that profit-hunter now and turning to big spenders. His estates bring in six hundred thousand sesterces; mine bring in a hundred thousand. He puts gold on his country-house ceilings and marble on the floors. His appetite for statues, paintings, furnishings, and clothes has no limit. His revenue isn't enough for his spending, or even for the interest he has to pay. Take the cost of my wants out of my small return, and I'll still have a surplus. So which man is richer? The one with a shortfall or the one with a surplus? The one who needs more or the one who has plenty? The man whose larger holdings demand still more money to keep them up, or the one whose property can support itself?

SECTION 50

But why use myself? Perhaps I too have some share in the mistaken attitude of this age, thanks to our habits and our times. Let's stop always citing men like Curius and Luscinus. Was Manius Manilius, who lived in our fathers' time, really poor? He had a little house in the Carinae district and a farm in the Labican territory. Does having more make us richer than him? I wish it did! But how much money is enough depends on our living habits and upkeep, not on the assessed value of our possessions.

SECTION 51

Being without greed is a fortune. Not wanting to buy is a revenue stream. Being satisfied with your own possessions, though, is wealth of the greatest, most dependable kind. Clever property valuers set a high price on meadows and certain plots because that sort of holding can, so to speak, suffer very little damage. What price, then, should we put on virtue? Nobody can rob you of it by force or steal it secretly. A wreck at sea or a fire won't lose it for you. Neither storms nor disturbances in human affairs can alter it.

SECTION 52

Only people who have virtue are rich. They're the only ones who hold assets that are both productive and permanent. They're also the only ones with the defining mark of wealth: satisfaction with their own possessions. They find their present resources sufficient. They don't reach for more, don't need anything, don't feel anything is missing, and don't look for anything else. Dishonest, greedy people are different. Their holdings are insecure and left to chance. They're always reaching for more. Not one has yet turned up who found his possessions sufficient. We must consider them not simply short of wealth and plenty, but actually needy and poor.