For this reason a careful collation was made of B,1 M,2 and S,3 the latter being used as a late representative of the text. Upon a typewritten copy of S, the variant readings of B and M were indicated interlinearly in inks of different colors. The footnotes to the text explain these textual differences, and notwithstanding the presence in this edition of the photographic repro- duction of S, the variants of S have generally been given for the purpose of showing where S has made mistakes or proper corrections. Accordingly, unless otherwise stated in the footnotes, the text which follows is the text which appears in B and M, and substantially in S. It is true that many of the footnotes are not necessary in themselves, but they have been retained for reference from some other footnote or to show in general how the dif- erent editors have handled the text.
The wording of the footnotes has been made as brief as is consistent with clarity of expression, yet the footnotes themselves differ from those usually employed in critical texts (e. g., the Teubner series or the Oxford series) in that they are somewhat fuller, make explanatory statements, and have corresponding index figures in the text itself. This variance from customary procedure was deemed advisable because of the primary object in including a revised text in the present edition. For this reason also the body of the text in the footnotes is in English instead of Latin and the usual style of type has been reversed by using italics for variant readings and Roman for remarks concerning variants.
The revised text presented herewith falis into three parts: (i) the argument of the author; (2) additions made by editors; and (3) quotations and citations made by the author from the Bible, Canon Law, Civil Law, and other authorities.
With regard to the author’s argument, this has been retained in the text throughout, even when a mistake is evident, provided it is probable that the mistake was Victoria’s and not that of his auditors or editors (e. g., p. 249, n. 8). Because of the repetitions made by the lecturer and the omissions made by the auditors,4 it is impossible sometimes to secure with any surety the words uttered by Victoria. In such cases, the readings preferred by the editor of this revised text have been retained in the text and the others have been recorded in the footnotes with any necessary explanation. The orthography, however, has been changed to conform with modern usage. For this purpose, Bennett’s The Latin Language ’A copy of B is to be found in the Woodstock College Library, Woodstock, Md.
2A copy of M is to be found in the Bouquillon Library of the Catholic University of America, Washington, D. C.
3A copy of S is to be found in the Library of Congress, Washington, D. C., and a photographic reproduction of it is included in this edition.
4See above, p. 198.
Prefatory Remarks.
(Boston, Allyn & Bacon, 1907) has been followed, as having in the most convenient form in English the material covered by Brambach’s Hulfs- buchlein fur Lateinische Rechtschreibung and Die Neugestaltung der Latei- nischen Orthographie in ihrem Ferhaltniss zur Schule. Yet i has been retained for i (cons.) and V for capital u (vocal.). Wherever the spelling of a word is not explicitly found in The Latin Language (§§ 57-61), Harper’s A New Latin Dictionary (New York, 1895) has been followed; and wherever two forms are allowable, the one found in Victoria’s text has been retained.
With regard to additions to Victoria’s text made by Boyer and Munoz and their associates, very little can be established with certainty. Occa- sionally footnotes have been added suggesting the probability of certain phrases having been added or omitted by the one or the other. However, it is fairly certain that the tities of the individual relectiones were not given by Victoria himself.1 Moreover, the summaries which precede the text were supplied by Boyer, as he himself States,2 and the wording of these was changed to a considerable extern by Munoz and the unknown editor of the Ingolstadt edition. Since this was not the work of Victoria, it could have been omitted from the present text or at least relegated to footnotes. The former would have been unwarrantable so far as the history of the text is concemed; the latter would have been inconvenient and undesirable for the present purpose. Consequently the summaries have been retained as a part of the text.3 Boyer also added marginal references to some of the citations from the Bible. This was supplemented by Munoz and further supplemented by the editor of I or a subsequent edition, to the extent of following the argument proof by proof. All of these references have been retained unless manifestly incorrect. However, the orthography has been changed to conform with modern usage.4 With regard to quotations made by Victoria, every instance has been verified, where possible, in the original text of the authority quoted. Wherever there is a well-recognized critical edition, the verification has been made according to it, and notes have been added to show differences between the text of the authority quoted and the text of the quotation. Some of these differences may be accounted for from the fact that Victoria probably used a different edition from the one used for verification. For instance, quotations from the Bible were verified by Fillion’s edition of the Clementine revision of the Vulgate, whereas this revision was made after the Council of Trent many years after Victoria’s death. Moreover, wher¬ ever no well-recognized critical edition is available, verification has been made according to an edition ante-dating Victoria, if possible, though in some cases I considered myself fortunate in having access to any edition whatsoever. The orthography of the quotations has been changed to conform with that used by the authority quoted, but the exact words themselves have not been made to so conform.
The exact words of the authority quoted have been given in full in the footnotes. In some cases, this was very desirable, because of the inac- Prefatory Remarks.
cessibility of the work quoted and the frequent use of abbreviations in the original; in other cases, it was desirable merely for purposes of comparison, to show how accurately Victoria used his sources. Consequently, when Victoria quotes someone’s opinion, it is precisely as he gives it, unless otherwise stated in the footnotes. Citations have also been verified in the same way, although at times this was extremely difficult, owing to the fact that Victoria sometimes merely mentions the author’s name. For instance, he makes no exact reference to the Summa of Agostino Trionfi, a work which is printed in small type with no indention of paragraphs and no index. In some cases, because of their inaccessibility, it was impossible or impracticable for me to make any verification whatsoever. This was the case with the works of the following: Pope Adrian VI, Cardinal Pierre d’Ailly, Jacques Almain, Berosus of Babylon, Conrad of Megenberg (?), Guillaume Durand de Saint Pour^ain (?), Richard Fitzralph of Armagh, Guido de Baysio, Guillaume d’Auvergne (?), Guillaume d’Auxerre, Henry of Ghent, Hervaeus Natalis, Ioannes de Ianduno, William Occam, Petrus Paludanus and Hugo Vercellensis (?).
In any case, references in the text below to the texts of the authorities quoted have been written in a uniform manner in parentheses and footnotes have been added in order to make the reference as exact as possible without adding anything to the text of Victoria. This statement will become ciear from the following explanation of how four of five of the most frequently quoted authorities have been treated in this revised text.
The first of these is the Bible, which Victoria cited by naming the book with varying abbreviations and the number of the chapter. He did not name the number of the verse, because the division into verses was not made by Stephanus until 1545, thirteen years after Victoria delivered the two lectures concerned and probably did not obtain current use for many years thereafter. It would be interesting to find out exactly which edition of the Vulgate Victoria used and knew best, but, aside from mentioning wherein Victoria’s quotations differ from the Clementine revision now in general use, it has not been thought worth while to go into the question further. In the text below, the title of the book has been uniformly abbre- viated by using the first syllable and the first letter of the second syllable; the chapter has been indicated by its number simply. For example, “ Deut., 17,” means Chapter 17 of Deuteronomy. The number of the verse and, when not given in the text, the number of the chapter also, are given in the footnotes together with the exact words of the Vulgate, when these differ from those given by Victoria. These differences are to be accounted for partly from the fact that Victoria occasionally quotes from memory or consciously adapts a quotation and partly from the fact that Victoria used an early edition of the Vulgate, perhaps one of the Stephanus editions (e. g., see p. 220, n. 5). The orthography of the exact words of the Vulgate has not been changed except in the use of i to represent i (cons.).
As would be expected in a work of this character, the second most frequently quoted authority is the Corpus luris Canonici. Victoria quotes this work in the manner usually employed by writers of the fifteenth and Prefatory Remarks.
sixteenth centuries. Part I of the Decretum Gratiani is referred to by distinctio and canon and Part II is referred to by the number of the causa, by quaestio and by the opening words of the canon, thus, “ 1 distin., c. ius gentium,” and “23, q. 1, quid culpatur.” In the present text, the varying abbreviations have been uniformly written, thus, “Dist. 1, can. ius gentium ” and “23, qu. 1, can. quid culpatur” while in the footnotes the references are given in the present method of citing the Decretum and a statement is added containing the name of the author and the work from which the canon has been drawn, thus, “ Decr., 1, 1, 9, which is an excerpt from St. Isidore of Seville, Etymologiae, lib. 5, cap. 6,” and “ Decr., 2, 23, 1, 4, which is an excerpt from St. Augustine, Contra Faustum Manichaeum, lib. 22, cap. 75.” The Decretales Gregorii Papae IX are referred to by titulus and caput and the Liber Sextus Decretalium D. Bonifacii Papae VIII by titu¬ lus and caput with “lib. 6” or “lib. vi” added. These, likewise, have been treated in the manner described above. When the quotation differs from the passage quoted, as given in Friedberg’s edition of the Corpus, the footnotes will show wherein they differ. Here, again the differences are attributable partly to the fact that Victoria occasionally quotes from memory or con- sciously adapts a quotation and partly to the fact that Victoria used an early edition of the Corpus.
The mode of citing the Corpus luris Civilis follows, to a great extent, the method of citing the Corpus luris Canonici. The varying abbrevia¬ tions here likewise have been uniformly written in the text and footnotes have been added using the present method of citing the individual parts of the Corpus: the Institutiones, the Digesta, and the Codex; the other parts of the Corpus do not figure in the present work. When there is a difference between the quotation and the passage quoted, as given in Krueger and Mommsens edition of the Corpus, the footnotes will show wherein they differ.
References to Aristotle are made by the number of the liber and the title of the work, thus, “tertio Ethicorum” i. e., Book 3 of the Ethics. Abbreviations of this have been extended and uniformly written as in the example given. The Sentences of Peter Lombard are similarly referred to, thus, “ Quarto Sententiarum ” i. e., Book 4 of the Sentences, but here the number of the book forms a part of the title, since the work itself is not quoted, but commentaries upon it.
References to the Summa theologiae of St. Thomas Aquinas are made by using the number of the part as title, thus, “ Prima Parte,” “Secunda Secundae,” further reference giving the quaestio and articulus and some- times the answer to objections, thus, “qu. 10, art. 12, ad secundum.”
References to other works and other authors should cause no particular difficulty. Every effort has been made to make the footnotes which explain these as accurate and as ciear as possible. In this connection, the use of the words “p. so-and-so of the edition used” means, of course, the edition used by me for verification.
A few words with regard to certain characteristics of the three editions I have been able to consuit may be worth while. All diphthongs are liga- Prefatory Remarks.
tured in B, M, and S. A tilde placed over a vowel denotes the omission of an n or m in B, M, and S. Initial u is written v and interior v is written u in M. The enclitic -que is frequently written q; in B and M, less frequently in S. The words et, qui, quia, and quod, are written in the usual abbreviated forms in B and M. This may account for the omission of these words occasionally in one edition or another. Two words are joined together in B as if they were considered as one word: revera, adhoc, econtra, siqua, nosipsos, each of which occurs two or more times. Some spellings peculiar to the time are author, authoritas, etc. (B and M), autor, autoritas, etc. (S); imo (B, M, and S); quatuor (B, M, and S); charitas, charis simi (B, M, and S); caussa (S); fcemina (B, M, and S); cceteri (B, M, and S); prcelii (B, M, and S); fcelicitas (M); and poenitere (B, M, and S). Although this orthography has been changed to conform with modern usage, nothing has been done in the way of conforming the syntax.
In this connection, there are several peculiarities of syntax that are worth mentioning. The extension of quod to verba declarandi et sentiendi to express object sentences, which is unusual in classica! Latin,1 is found quite frequently in Victoria’s text, e. g., videtur quod, etc., and notandum quod, etc. This quod is usually repeated, when a subordinate clause inter- venes between it and the rest of its clause. For instance, putant quod, si ponamus ignorantiam invincibilem de baptismo aut fide Christi, quod statim consequitur quod possit aliquis salvari sine baptismo aut fide Christi, p. 250, § 9; videtur sequi quod, si cessarent omnes isti tituli,...quod cessaret tota illa peregrinatio et commercium, p. 268, § 18; videtur quod, si unus velit componere et dividere vel compensare pro parte, quod alter tenetur recipere condicionem, p. 284, § 28; Non enim est intellegendum quod, si Galli exciderint unum pagum aut ignobile oppidum Hispaniae, quod liceat Hispanis (1 etiam si possint ) praedari totam Galliam, sed pro modo et qualitate iniuriae arbitrio boni viri, p. 294, § 51; Et intolerabile esset quod, si Galli agerent praedas in pecora Hispanorum vel incenderent pagum unum, quod liceret occupare totum Regnum Francorum, p. 295, § 56. In many instances, M and later editions omit one quod or the other, perhaps unintentionally, because the abbreviation of quod could very easily be overlooked.
This sort of repetition is natural and is to be expected in lectures or any form of oral discourse, where subordinate clauses are apt to intervene. Consequently, other words are similarly repeated. For example, ergo in the following: Cum ergo omnes illi sint non solum in peccatis, sed extra statum salutis, ergo ad Christianos spectat corrigere et dirigere eos, p. 262, §9; Si ergo hoc ita expedit, ergo spectat ad auctoritatem et potestatem summi Pontificis, p. 262, § 10; Si ergo secundum leges humanas non licet in causa dubia spoliare legitimum possessorem, ergo merito potest obici principibus, “ Patere legem, quam ipse tuleris; quod enim quisque iuris in alios statuit, ipse eodem iure uti debet,” p. 284, § 28. An in the following: Dubitari merito potest an, si plures huiusmodi Respublicae aut principes habeant unum com- ^ee Gildersleeve and Lodge, Latin Grammar (New York, D. C. Heath & Co., 1894), § 521;, Prefatory Reviarks.
munem dominum aut principem, an possint per se inferre bellum sine auctori¬ tate superioris principis, p. 2 77, § 8; An, parta iam victoria et ubi periculum non est ab hostibus, an liceat interjicere omnes, qui contra arma tulerunt, p. 291, § 45. Vtrum in the following: Vtrum qui ex ignorantia secutus est bellum iniustum, si postea constiterit ei de iniustitia belli, utrum teneatur restituere, sive loquamur de principe sive de subdito, p. 286, § 33. Quin 1 in the follow¬ ing: Sed nullus negat quin incestuosus et raptor et deferens arma Saracenis et non solvens vectigalia — quin maneat verus dominus bonorum suorum in foro conscientiae, p. 228, § 14. Quin instead of ut in the following: Vnde non videtur iniquam ut, si oppidum nihil cavendo dedatur, quin mandato principis aut iudicis aliqui, qui fuerunt notiores, occidantur, p. 293, § 49.
Another striking peculiarity is found in the use of correlatives. Ita quod, for example, is found where ita ut would be expected: Haereticus ipso facto perdit dominium bonorum suorum, ita quod in foro conscientiae cadit a dominio, p. 226, § 9; Barbari non ad primum nuntium fidei Christianae tenetur credere, ita quod peccent mortaliter non credentes solum per hoc, etc., p. 250, § 10; Si cessarent omnes isti tituli, ita quod barbari nullam rationem iusti belli darent nec vellent habere Hispanos principes, etc., p. 268, § 18; Bona fide gerunt bellum, ita, inquam, bona fide, quod excusantur ab omni culpa, P- 297, § 59. Talis quod, where talis qualis or talis ut would be expected: Quando bellum est talis condicionis quod licet spoliare indifferenter omnes hostes et occupare omnia bona illorum, etiam licet ducere in captivitatem omnes iFor the use of quin after negative verbs of Saying and Thinking, see Gildersleeve and Lodge, \ Prefatory Remarks.
TEXTS USED TO VERIFY PASSAGES IN AUTHORS REFERRED TO BY VICTORIA.
[The word colophon in brackets means that the Information given is derived chiefly from the colophon.]
Ambrose, St. Opera. Pars Prima. (Rec. Carolus Schenkl). Vienna, Tempsky, 1897. (Corp. Script. Eccles. Lat.)
Antoninus, St. Summa Theologica, in Quattuor Partes Distributa. Pars Secunda. Verona, Augus¬ tinus Carattonius, 1740.
Aristotle. Ethica Nicomachea. (Ed.3 Susemihl-Apelt). Lipsix, Teubner, 1912.
-. Politica. (Ed. Susemihl-Immisch). Lipsix, Teubner, 1909.
Augustine, St. De Civitate Dei Libri XXII. (Rec. et comm. erit, instr. Emanuel Hoffman). Vienna, Tempsky, Vol. I, 1898, Vol. II, 1900. (Corp. Script. Eccles. Lat.)
-. De Diversis Quaestionibus LXXXIII Liber Unus. In Patrologix Cursus Completus (ed.
Migne), Tomus XL. Paris, Migne, 1845, pp. 11-100.
-. Epistulx. (Rec. et comm. erit, instr. AI Goldbacher). Vienna, Tempsky, Pars III, 1904, Pars IV, 1911. (Corp. Script. Eccles. Lat.)
-. Contra Faustum Manicbxum Libri XXIII. In Patrologix Cursus Completus (ed. Migne), Tomus XLII. Paris, Migne, 1845, pp. 207-518.
-. Contra Litteras Petiliani Libri Tres. (Rec. M. Petschenig). Vienna, Tempsky, 1909.
(Corp. Script. Eccles. Lat.)
-. Quaestionum in Heptateuchum Libri VII. (Rec. Ios. Zycha). Vienna, Tempsky, 1895.
(Corp. Script. Eccles. Lat.)
-. Contra Secundinum Liber. (Rec. Iosephus Zycha). Vienna, Tempsky, 1892. (Corp.
Script. Eccles. Lat.)
Baptista Trovamala de Salis or de Rosellis. Summa casuum conscientix utilissima per venerandum patrem fratrem Baptistam de Salis...noviter compilata, qux Baptistiniana nuncupatur...expletum est in Nuremberg imperiali civitate partis Germanix per Antonium Koberger inibi concivem, 1488. [Colophon.]
Bartolus. Omnium luris Interpretum Antesignani Commentaria...Tomus Sextus...Venetiis, Biblia Sacra, juxta Vulgatx exemplaria et correctioria Romana denuo edidit...Aloisius Claudius Fillion. Parisiis, Letouzey et Ane, 1887.
Cajetan, Cardinal. Look under Thomas Aquinas, St.
Carletus, Angelus, of Chiavasso. Summa Angelica de casibus conscientix per venerabilem fratrem Angelum de Clavasio compilata...maxima cum diligentia revisa, et fideli studio emendata...Nurenberge impressa per Anthonium Koberger inibi concivem. Aug. 28, 1488. [Colophon.]
Cicero. De Officiis. (Ed. Miller.) Macmillian, 1913. (Loeb Classical Library.)
Constance, Council of. Acta et decreta generalis concilii Constant, diligenter elaborata et impressa in imperiali oppido Hagenow per industrium Henricum Gran inibi incolam. Expensis providi viri Johannis Rynman. April 11, 1500. [Colophon.]
Corpus Iuris Canonici. (Ed.2 Richter-Friedberg). Lipsix, Tauschnitz, Vol. I, 1879, Vol. II, 1881.
Corpus Iuris Civilis. Vol. I. (Ed.10 Krueger-Mommsen). Berolini, apud Weidmannos, 1905.
Duns Scotus, Ioannes. Opus praeclarissimum in quartum sententiarum...castigatum per venera¬ bilem Thomam Panchet anglicum...Impressione, ductu et impensis Anthonii Koburger Nurenberge fideliter exaratum. May 19, 1481. [Colophon.]
Eymerici, Nicolaus. Directorium Inquisitorum F. Nicolai Eymerici Ordinis Prxdicatorum. Cum commentariis Francisci Peniae...iterum emendatum, auctum et...locupletatum. Venetiis, Apud Marcum Antonium Zalterium, 1595.
de Gerson, Jean Charlier. Opera omnia,...in V tomos distributa;...Quibus accessere...Petri de Alliaco,...ac insuper Jacobi Almaini...Tractatus, partim editi partim inediti;...Opera et studio M. Lud. Ellies du Pin,...Antwerpix, Sumptibus Societatis, Hesiod. Carmina. (Recensuit Aloisius Rzach). Ed. altera. Accedit certamen quod dicitur Homeri et Hesiodi. Lipsix, Teubner, 1908.
Horace. Epistulae. In Carmina. (Ed. Vollmer). Lipsix, Teubner, 1912.
Hugo de S. Victore. Opera. (Ed. Thomas Garzon de Bagnacaballo). Moguntiae, pub. by Antonius Hierat, printed by Ioannes Volmar, 1617, 3 vols.
Prefatory Remarks.
Netter, Thomas, of Walden. Thomae Waldensis Anglici Carmelitae, Theologi Praestantissimi, Doctrinale Antiquitatum Fidei Ecclesiae Catholicae...nunc Reverendissimi P. Ioan. Baptistae Rubei, Ravennatis,...nutu et favore excusum...Tomus Primus. Venetiis, Apud Iordanum Zilettum, 1571.
Sallust. De Catilinae Coniuratione. (Ed.4 R. Dietsch). Lipsiae, Teubner, 1874.
Sylvester. Summa Sylvestrina, quae Summa Summarum merito nuncupatur. (Ed. Petrus Vendra- menus). Venetiis, apud Hieronymum et Nicolaum Polum, 1601.
de’Tedeschi, Nicolo. Nicolai Tudeschii Catinensis Siculi, Panormi Archiepiscopi, vulgo Abbatis Panormitani, Commentaria Primae Partis in Secundum Librum Decretalium...Tomus Tertius, and in Quartum et Quintum Librum Decretalium...Tomus Septimus. Venetiis 1588, Apud Iuntas.
Terence. Eunuchus. In Opera. Vol. I. (Ed. R. Klotz). Leipzig, Schwickert, 1838.
Tertullian. De corona. In Patrologiae Cursus Completus (ed. Migne), Tomus II. Paris, Migne, Thomas Aquinas, St. Opera omnia, iussu impensaque Leonis XIII P. M. edita. Summa Theologiae...Romae, ex Typographia Polyglotta, S. C. de Propaganda Fide, vols. V-XII (1889-1906). This also contains the Commentaries of Cardinal Cajetan.
-. Summa contra Gentiles, seu de Veritate Catholicae Fidei. Ed. nova et emendata. Augustae Taurinorum, ex Typographia Pontificia et Archiepiscopali, Eq. Petri Marietti, 1886.
-. Opera omnia. (Ed. Frette.) Parisiis, apud L. Vives, 1871-1880, 34 vols.
Trionfi, Agostino, of Ancona. Summa de Ecclesiastica potestate edita a fratre Augustino de Ancona...Impressa Venetiis arte et ingenio Joannis Leoviler de Hallis. Impensis Octauiani scoti Modoetienum. Sept. 19, 1487. [Colophon.]
Vergil. Aneidos Libri I-VI. (Apparatu critico in artius contracto iterum recensuit Otto Ribbeck). Lipsiae, B. G. Teubner, 1895.
de Victoria, Franciscus. REVERENDI | Patris F. Fracisci Victoriae or|di. Praed. sacrae Theologiae professoris eximij atq; | in Salmaticensi Academia quondam Chatedrae | primarix moderatoris prxlectorisq; incoparabi|lis Relectiones vndecim. Per R. P. prxsentatum | F. Alfonsum Munoz eiusde ordi. a prodigiosis inlnumerabilibusq; vitijs, quibus Boyeri, hoc est pri|ma xditio, plena erat summa cura repurga|tx, atq; ad germana exemplaria in|tegritati ac sinceritati na|tiux restitutx. | Quarum seriem versa pagella indicabit. | ( Vignette ) | SALMANTICZE, | Apud Ioannem a Canoua. | M. D. LXV. | CVM PRIVILEGIO.
Wycliffe, John. Tractatus de Civili Dominio Liber Primus. (Now first edited from the unique manu- script at Vienna by Reginald L. Poole, M. A.). London, published for the Wyclif Society by Triibner & Co., 1885.
SIGNS AND ABBREVIATIONS.
Arg. = Argumentum, etc. can. = canon, etc. cap. = caput, etc.
Coroll. = Corollarium, etc.
fin. = finalis, etc.
gloss. = glossa, glossator, etc.
I = Ingolstadt edition.
h. e. = hoc est.
lib. = liber, etc.
Prob. = Probatio, probatur, etc. Prop. = Propositio, etc.
Resp. = Responsum, Responsio, etc.
Note. — The black figures in the inside margin of pages 217-297 indicate the corresponding pages of the Photographic Reproduction included in this edition. The pages of the Photographic Reproduc- tion corresponding to pages 209-216 are unnumbered in the original.
Carmen In Lavdem Operis Ad Lectorem Incerto Avctore.
Continet exiguus liber hic quam plurima, lector, Leges, Pontifices theologosque sacros.
Alivd Carmen Extemporanevm Materiam Vtrivsqve Tomi Qvam Brevissime Comprehendens.
Quid veneranda queat docet hic Ecclesia mater Pontificesque liber; Patrum quae rite potestas Concilio in magno; simul et civilia iura Et quae sint belli (neque enim Mars legibus orbus); Legitimumque torum atque hominum connubia tractat.
Haec Francisce tui Victoria prima laboris Est pars et tanti stat adhuc quoque gratia facti.
Quis pietatis amor, quam sit pulcherrima virtus Abstinuisse bonis et legem ponere luxus,