Principal Question Two of Chapter Nine
Why a diversity of customs—that is, of vices and virtues—appears among human beings in different regions
It is asked whether, from the impression of the celestial bodies, vices and virtues are caused as though proper to different regions, and a diversity of customs—that is, of vices and virtues—is caused among human beings.
It seems that the answer to this should be affirmative.
First, thus: foreknowledge of any future things cannot be received except from those things in which those future things exist in some manner, as in their causes. But foreknowledge of the customs of human beings and of human works is received from the impression of celestial bodies, as is evident in astronomers, who predict many things. Therefore.
Likewise, the Philosopher says in the book On the Properties of the Elements that kingdoms have been made empty at the conjunction of the two great planets, namely, Jupiter and Saturn. But this would not be so unless wars and disputes depended upon the stars. Therefore.
Likewise, it pertains to the order of the universe that everything which does not always conduct itself in the same manner be reduced to a cause which always conducts itself in the same manner. But acts dependent upon free choice are exceedingly varied and multiform. Therefore, they must be reduced to the uniform motions of the celestial bodies as to their principles.
And Ptolemy says in Book III of the Quadripartitum that the inhabitants of Asia Major are for the most part chaste and abstinent, and use the most chaste garments, because of the association and aspect of Saturn and Jupiter.
And Ambrose, in the book Hexameron, introduces an astronomer accustomed to say that, if anyone is born under the sign of Aries, he will be considered most outstanding in counsel; that Taurus, accustomed to the yoke, makes laborious and patient those whom it has beheld while they are being born; that he whose birth poisonous Scorpio embraced will be a striker and remover of poisons; that, if anyone is born under Aquarius, he will obtain the office of a fisherman; and that, if anyone is born under the sign of Libra, he will without doubt be a trapezita, or money-changer.
And Augustine, upon Psalm 63, introduces a mathematician accustomed to say that it is not his own will which makes an adulterer, but Venus; that it is not his own will which makes a murderer, but Mars; and that it is not the will which makes a just man, but Jupiter.
And Messahalla, in the book On Reception, answering someone who asks about obtaining a kingdom, says: “It is Saturn who grants him the kingdom.”
And Albumasar, in Book VI, distinction 33, establishes the Sun as lord of the Lord’s day and lord of its first hour, then Venus as lord of the second hour, and so on, by proceeding in like manner through the planets, etc.
Therefore, from all these things it seems that the diversity of customs in us is caused by the impression of celestial bodies.
But to the contrary is the Philosopher in Book III of the Ethics, saying: “It is in our power to be good or evil.” And Seneca says to Lucilius: “He errs who thinks that vices are born with us. They have supervened; they have been introduced. Nature allies us to no vice. It begot us whole and free.”
I answer that certain curious persons who have investigated the characteristic vices and virtues of different regions and the customs of individual peoples answer this question in diverse ways.
First, astrologers answer this question according to their superstitions, saying that virtues and vices proper to different regions, and to the human beings of different regions, arise from the heaven. For, according to them, different stars and different parts of heaven have regard to, or are related to, different regions; and, according to their influences, human beings are naturally constituted or inclined in one region toward virtues and in others toward vices. How much this answer is worth—or, rather, how worthless it is—will be able to appear sufficiently in part from what has been said and from what is to be said.
Second, natural philosophers answer this question, and answer well, that this occurs from the disposition of the elements in their impressions and other conditions, and from the orientation of such things toward the east, north, south, or west.
Third, physicians answer—and answer well according to their considerations—that the contraction of diverse natural inclinations in those who are born in different regions can take its origin from a bad or good, sick or healthy, disposition of the air and waters, and especially from the disposition of things used as food and drink, because their continued use from childhood makes a great impression upon the natural constitution of human beings.
For no physician is ignorant of the fact that the diversification of food and drink, and their disposition in quality and quantity, greatly alter nature, change the complexion, and through this vary the things which follow complexion; rather, all physicians must presuppose it as a principle. Nor does any moral philosopher doubt that from the quality and quantity of food and drink various passions are excited and various vices generated, such as gluttony, drunkenness, lust, anger, and other things which follow from these.
Therefore, in regions where delightful things pertaining to nourishment are found, the consequence is, for the most part, that carnal vices of this kind reign more extensively and that from them the roots of all vices flourish: idleness, blindness of mind, coarseness of understanding, ignorance, negligence, and similar things, from which all the perversity of human beings concerning virtues and vices is accustomed to arise.
So also regions which have a scarcity of things pertaining to the sustenance of life and an abundance of human beings generate certain other vices: namely, rapacity, covetousness, an eagerness to deceive, and things of this kind toward which a scarcity of things is accustomed to impel human beings.
Nevertheless, as a consequence, human beings in those regions are subtler, more prudent, and more ingenious than in the regions described before. For, just as poverty and want are subtle and ingenious, so, conversely, pleasure and abundance of things are coarse and gross, imprudent and foolish.
It follows, therefore, that regions in which there is a suitable mean of well-disposed provisions abound less in thistles, thorns, and sins. But regions in which a superfluous abundance of delightful nourishment can be had almost without labor are that illustrious valley full of the worst human beings, concerning which Genesis 13 says that, before the Lord overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah, it was watered like the Paradise of the Lord and like Egypt for those coming to Segor.
Fourth, jurists, or prudent founders of human laws, answer the aforesaid doubt that, for the most part, the coarseness and bad customs of peoples or regions took their origin from an original lack of wise persons and reasonable laws. Hence certain regions or peoples had prudent men from the beginning, or at least received the laws of prudent men, in which they always remained. But certain others long remained without laws in barbarism, or in the barbarity of vices; these still possess and follow barbarous customs even now. Yet certain other peoples or regions were preoccupied from their origin by perverse laws or superstitious paternal traditions, in which they still remain, either wholly or in part. And this is the answer according to the jurists.
Fifth, Christian moral philosophers answer, saying that the condemned customs of human beings, their disordered life, their pretenses, and the varieties of their evil affections arise inclinatively from the heavens, but impressively from four roots.
The first is the tinder of sin, which is born together with us all as a punishment of original sin.
The second is a disordered complexion contracted from the disordered life of the parents, from which a vicious inclination is often accustomed to arise in the offspring; this inclination sometimes reveals itself in those conceived illegitimately.
The third root is the bad upbringing of the offspring and, after that upbringing, the person’s own disordered government, by which he has voluntarily habituated himself badly.
The fourth root is the temptation of malignant spirits and their manifold, hidden suggestion of vices contrary to all the virtues.
Sixth, practical theologians answer that doubt, saying that sometimes one region, for causes known to God, is less regarded and defended by “gods”—that is, by God’s saints and the good angels—and is more exposed to demons; wherever more power is permitted to these demons, there the populace is more corrupted by vices and errors.
Hence, even in certain cities or regions, more saints are venerated, or saints of greater power or greater merit before God; in some, lesser or less propitious saints are venerated; or similar saints are venerated more solemnly and devoutly in one region. On this account, the human beings of one region or city, through the aid of their saints, are more directed, defended, and assisted against the demons who kindle vices, while the human beings of another region are assisted less.
Again, just as it appears from Scripture, Daniel 10, that through God’s kindness good angels preside over individual regions and cities no less than over individual human beings, so, through the disposition of the princes of the demons, evil angels of Lucifer are assigned to diverse vices—one to lust, another to avarice, another to pride—and preside over individual regions.
Hence a certain gloss upon John 11, as Alexander adduces it, says: “It is not to be thought that one spirit of fornication burns both the man who fornicates in Britain and the man who does so in India or other places, nor that there is one spirit which drives human beings to vices in different places. Rather, I think that there is one principal spirit of fornication and innumerable spirits who obey him in this office and solicit human beings to sins of this kind. Similarly, I judge that there is one prince of anger and innumerable demons of the same office under him, and the same must be said of the other sins.”
Therefore the Apostle speaks not of one principality, but of several, against which we have a continual struggle, battle, and wrestling.
Seventh, speculative theologians answer this by following Thomas and Bonaventure in a distinction of Book II of the Sentences. They say that the claim that human customs—that is, characteristic virtues and vices—and their future outcomes are caused by the stars can be understood in two ways: in one way, necessarily and sufficiently; in another way, dispositively or inclinatively and contingently.
If they are understood in the first manner, it must be denied that human customs are caused by the stars. For, since the motion of the celestial bodies is natural and necessary, the diversity of customs would be natural and necessary, and would not arise from free choice; then counsels would be vain, and there would be neither merits nor praises, as will be seen more fully below.
This also conflicts with the Christian religion, because it would remove reward and merit. It conflicts with sense, because we see those born from the same womb differ in their customs. Finally, it conflicts with the fact that we see and read that many persons were of a most dissolute life in the first years of adolescence and afterward, once their customs had been changed for the better, lived most honorably and splendidly. This can be seen in the examples which Valerius gives in Book VI, chapter 7, On Change of Customs and Fortune, concerning Scipio Africanus, Quintus Fabius Maximus, Quintus Catulus, Lucius Sulla, and Themistocles.
For this reason Solon the philosopher says exceedingly well: “No one, while he lives, can truly be called happy or wretched; for right up to the final day of fate we are subject to uncertain fortune and to continual change of customs.”
But if we speak in the second manner—namely, contingently, inclinatively, or dispositively—then it must be conceded that the customs of countries, the characteristic virtues and vices of human beings, and their future outcomes depend upon the celestial bodies and stars.
For the power of the celestial bodies operates toward the mixture and quality of the complexions of bodies.
But the varied disposition and complexion of bodies contribute much to the variation of the effects and customs of the soul. For the soul is changed, for the most part, in accordance with bodily complexions. The choleric are irascible, the phlegmatic sluggish, the sanguine kindly, and the melancholic envious.
Nevertheless, as we have said, this is spoken of dispositively, contingently, and very remotely, and not necessarily. For the soul rules the body, especially when it is aided by grace. Hence we see many choleric persons who are meek.
From these things, therefore, it is evident whence the characteristic vices of individual regions and cities arise, and whence it originally comes that in certain regions human beings are for the most part good and upright in heart, while in another they are of depraved and perverse customs.
To the first argument, therefore, the consequence is denied, because human acts are foreknown from the stars not sufficiently, but only conjecturally.
To the second, Lord Bonaventure says that the Philosopher attributes this to the stars according to a certain disposition toward such effects, which are readily generated from them. For, from the motion of some humor an affection can be excited in the soul which it is nevertheless not necessary for the soul to follow, since the soul can suppress it. But because many follow their passions, many are therefore subjected to the stars. Astronomers, however, can say few things concerning the wise.
To the third, Thomas answers in Book II of the Sentences, saying that such acts are reduced to the divine will.
But all the authorities adduced to the contrary are understood contingently and dispositively, not necessarily and sufficiently.
These things are from John of Torquemada, Cardinal, and Henry.