22. CHAP. XX. Of Nobility, of Bondage, of Occupying merchandise, and engrossing of wares.
CHAP. XX. Of Nobility, of Bondage, of Occupying merchandise, and engrossing of wares.
A ristotle in his second book of Rhetorics writeth of Nobility, that the same consisteth herein, that a man have excellent and famous
Ancestors. For although that oftentimes even in these our days are found men which achieve notable enterprises of no less excellency than are those mentioned of the forefathers, yet are those ancient acts of greater estimation by reason of their antiquity. For there is a difference between εὐγενεῖς and γενναίους. For they are called εὐγενεῖς which are born of noble parents, but γενναῖοι are those which retain still the virtue of their Ancestors, and do not degenerate from them. We see that in the families of noble men the selfsame thing in a manner happeneth which happeneth in corn: which is accustomed some years to bring forth more plentifully, and some years more barrenly. And sometime it chanceth, that after a few barren years, follow other fertile years. So the families of noble men sometime bring forth many excellent men, as it were a very plentiful harvest; sometime as it were an unfruitful soil, they lie barren and idle: And again afterward they after a sort revive, unto the virtue of their Ancestors. And how this
degenerating cometh, the same Aristotle after this manner declareth: It cometh to pass oftentimes (saith he) that the children or posterity of wise and witty men become fierce and cruel, as it is written of the posterities of Alcibiades. And on the other side, of meek, loving, and gentle Parents, are born children cowardish, sluggish, and blockish: which we read to have happened in the families of Simon and Socrates. The self-same things may we behold in the children of Israel. They had Patriarchs as Princes of their stock, being men endued with great virtues and singular nobility. Of their posterity sprang forth oftentimes excellent men: which posterity although sometimes it seemed to lie still without any notable issue, yet God always between whiles stirred up in it, some, either Judges, or Kings, or Prophets, or Priests which excelled in life, wisdom and godliness. Moreover the same
Aristotle in his first Book of Rhetorics, writeth that the true nobility, or felicity of any nation herein chiefly consisteth, that together with prosperous success it have virtue joined: which two things God gave abundantly unto the Hebrews. He addeth moreover, that the people is called noble, which is not mingled with the mixture and confusion of other nations. For which consideration the Athenians boasted that they were αυτόχθονες, that is, of one and the self-same soil.
2. But there can be showed of no nation which had a stock so pure and unmixed as had the Hebrews. For Abraham was the head of their stock: whose Nephew Jacob had 12 children, of whom came the 12 tribes. Further every tribe had their certain families, Lands, Cities, and Regions, which they inhabited. To be short, as writeth Eusebius De preparatione
Evangelica, there was no commonwealth, neither of the Lacedemonians, nor Athenians: (which two seemed of all other to be most excellent) which had their stock so certain, or their tribes so certainly derived from one
Prince and progenitor. For to nobility is required that the people should live in their own laws: But no nation at any time had their laws so proper as had the nation of the Hebrews. For laws were given them particularly from God, which infinitely excelled the laws of all other nations. And they lived under their own laws so long as they obeyed the Lord. For he then defended them from all misfortunes. But by reason of their sins, they were sometimes led away captive by outward nations. But these captives were not perpetual: since after that they had been punished for their wickedness, they were restored to their old places again. Moreover antiquity commendeth and setteth forth the nobility of a people. For there can be nothing of Antiquity found in the histories of the Ethnics, but that the same followed long time after that the commonwealth of the Jews was established. Before the war of Troy, whatsoever is set forth by Ethnic writers is fabulous. And that war was then made when Jephthe was now Judge over the commonwealth of the Jews. Also it furthereth no small deal unto nobility to have had excellent men of that stock. And there was never either more or more excellent men than among the Jews. I will not speak of the great multitude of children and the goodness in children, which wonderfully flourished among the Jews.
3. I know there be some which despise this nobility derived from Ancestors. For they say that oftentimes of horses are born Mules. And they make mention of Iphicrates, which being a notable Emperor, and hearing one contumeliously and insolently objecting unto him that he was the son of a shoemaker, made this answer: My stock beginneth in me, but thine endeth in thee. And he which upbraideth unto a man either fortune or want of nobility, doth even like him which beateth the garments, but toucheth not the body. For even as garments are without the body, so nobility and fortune are without us, and are accounted among outward good things. Cicero,
although he were a man new start up, yet he made no great account of his nobility. They which give themselves to hunting prepare the best dogs they can get for hunting, and not whelps though they come of never so good a kind. And for battle, strong and war-like horses are sought for, and not the colts of good horses.
Whereto serveth pedigrees, or whereto is it good, Friend Ponticus, to be derived from long descent of blood?
Or what shall it avail to thee to reckon in a row, Great numbers of thine Ancestors that lived long ago?
It is a ridiculous thing for a man to boast that he can reckon up seven great grandfathers. These reasons some use to extenuate the nobility of blood. Neither are these things spoken amiss or yet without profit, especially against them, which only for the virtue of their ancestors will be counted noble: whereas otherwise they themselves live dishonestly, vilely, and obscurely. And if any man have together with virtue obtained nobility of blood, doubtless he hath great commodity by it, since nobility is not a thing altogether outward, as it was objected. For the properties, and marks and motions of the Ancestors are, I know not how, transferred to the posterity, which although that in the next children or children's children do not oftentimes show forth or appear, yet are they still kept by a certain power, and revive again in other of the posterity, so as in them the spirits and courage's of their ancestors are renewed unto virtue. Wherefore, seeing such sparks are still reserved in us, they are not wholly to be accounted among outward good things. Neither agreeth that comparison of the Mule, which they say is procreated of a horse: for that in the Mule the generation is stayed. Neither can the Mule if we consider the common course of nature live long. But they which are begotten of noble parents, although they
themselves degenerate, yet may they afterward bring forth others. And to stay even in that similitude: It no small deal adorneth the Mule, that he is begotten of the horse, seeing for the same cause, they are more commendable than Asses. But Juvenal, Cicero, and Iphicrates spake of those noble men, which when as they themselves had no part at all of their fathers or predecessors virtue and good disposition, would notwithstanding be had in estimation for this cause only, that they came of a noble blood. He which being but of obscure parentage hath made himself honorable by virtues, is of far more excellency, than are they which coming of great nobility, do with vices and wicked acts, and with Idleness and cowardice, dishonor both themselves and their stock. And how much God attributed unto the posterity of the godly, it is manifest not only by a place in the 9th chapter to the Romans, but also by that place in Exodus, where God promised that he would do good even to a thousand generations of the just: but even hereby also in that he decreed, that the Priests and Kings should be chosen out of a certain stock. This prerogative the Ethnics contemned not.
For he which praiseth Alcibiades, (which some think was Euripides,) when he was crowned in the games of Olympus, saith, that he which shall be happy, must come of a noble City. To which purpose I might cite a great many of other things, if need should so require. But what shall we say of our estate? Are we more abject than the Jews? Or may we in comparison of them seem to be without nobility, seeing Paul thus writeth, Consider your calling brethren: Not many noble men, not many wise men are called? I answer, that there is no cause why we should therefore be sorry for our estate. For although (if we consider the stock itself from whence we were cut off, and which we cannot deny but was a wild Olive tree) we be obscure and without nobility: yet after we are once grafted in Christ, all his nobility
is most truly communicated unto us: For we are now not only members of him, but also flesh of his flesh and bone of his bones, so as now all his fathers are made our fathers. Which things, although they have not happened unto us by natural generation: yet unto a godly man it ought to be sufficient, that they were afterward given unto us.
Of Servitude or bondage.
5. The first mention of Servitude or bondage in the holy scriptures is in the 9th of Genesis. And it shall not be unprofitable if we speak somewhat thereof. The name, if we weigh the Latin Etymology was derived of Servando, that is, keeping: because those whom the vanquishers had not slain in war, they kept to themselves, to the intent they might use their labor. Thereof were they called Servants: as saith Florentinus the Lawyer, in the fourth book of the Institutes. By the same reason had Mancipia their name, because they were taken with the hand from enemies, as we have it in the first of the Pandectes of Justinian. Pliny in his 7th book, the 56th chapter, attributed the invention hereof to the Lacedemonians. But our writings which be more ancient, do make us believe that he is deceived. The cause of bondage is sin. For war denounced and made, if it be just, it is done for the repressing of sins: but if it be unjust as touching their part which make it, yet by the dispensation of God it is just, who prepareth thereby to punish those which he hath known worthy to be chastised. This did Daniel and other Prophets most manifestly declare, when they accounted their own iniquities, and the iniquities of their forefathers to be the cause of victory unto the enemies against the people of God. Truly bondage is therefore a punishment, because it is against the nature and condition of man. God ordained man, not that he should serve, but that he should have dominion. Wherefore the good fathers in old time, did not
exercise dominion over men: they were Pastors of the flock, and they ruled men only with love and Counsels. And seeing Man is made to the Image of God, and that it is the property of God to command, not to execute things commanded: it is proved that men also are not of nature to serve. Howbeit, bondage must not be rejected by this Argument, seeing it is invented as a bridle of iniquity, and a medicine unto man's naughtiness. For thou mayest find many things which have had their beginnings of a naughty cause, which must not be altogether rejected, but retained. Hereupon the Apostles
Peter and Paul very oftentimes in their Epistles, put us in remembrance, that subjects and servants should be dutiful towards their Lord's, and that they should not presume to shake off the yoke of bondage: Nay rather as Peter expressly said: We should serve them though they be evil and froward. For the Gospel hath been suspected hereof, even from the beginning, that it rashly called men unto liberty, and thereby raised tumults in Commonwealths. Wherein men were altogether deceived: since Christian piety disturbeth not the state of worldly things. Wherefore consider thou, that bondage got her first original from sin, the mercy of conquerors being applied thereunto. Then seeing God hath decreed by this means to amend perverse manners, it should be wickedly done of men to shake off the same by violence. Add here withal, that our pride and haughtiness is hereby kept under. The people of Israel scarcely at any time converted unto God, unless they were warned by this scourge, as each one may read in the book of Judges. Wherefore, that which is so profitable should be unjustly refused, when it shall be laid upon us by the Lord. But and if it may seem hard to any man to obey froward and unjust Masters, let him consider that the excellent God our father instructeth us by his example, who with his Sun and rain, serveth the commodities, not only of the godly, but also of the
ungodly. And oftentimes, if thou consider the easiness of the state, thou shalt find it a harder matter to rule well (especially if thou govern evil and foolish men) than it is to obey, so that thou shalt many times find the state of serving to be less troublesome: which nevertheless, as well the constitution of our nature not born to serve, as also the haughtiness and pride which everyone of us hath gathered even from the beginning, maketh grievous unto us.
6. But now let us see how servants must be handled by their Masters:
Wherein I allege that the state and condition of things is of two sorts. One which concerneth the salvation of souls, hath respect unto Christ and unto spiritual things. And as touching this, let Masters understand that servants are equal unto them: that is, they are no less than themselves, or their children, wife and kinsfolk: For so much as in Christ there is neither male nor female, neither bond nor free The other is of bodily, or outward and civil things: and about these good things there may and ought to be made some difference in appareling of the body, in diet, and other things of like sort, between freemen and bondmen. Who if they do not their duty, shall be accounted seditious and rebellious, they may be chastised and beaten, that through them, the domestical peace be not disturbed: yet so, as this be not cruelly done, but for their commodity, that they may be restored to the amendment of mind. And Paul as well to the Ephesians as Colossians, exhorteth that even the Masters themselves should be equal towards their servants. And for what cause they ought to do it, he there declareth. Let them consider (saith he) that they themselves also have a Lord in heaven.
As if he should have said: Even as they would that they themselves should be used of him, so ought they to order themselves towards their servants. I beseech you let each one of them remember that while they think they be
not fitly served in all pointes, whether they themselves in all respects according to the commandment prescribed, do obey the heavenly Lord of all things. There is moreover another kind of servitude, whereof the Apostle maketh mention in the 5th chapter to the Galatians: Serve ye one another through charity. And that in very deed is not upon constraint, but voluntary: the which also, if our first parents had not fallen, might have place in mankind. For it is meet that the younger should obey the elder, the unwiser the wiser. Truly it is convenient, that they which be the elder and have more perseverance, should have preeminence, so as we are not to think that this kind of servitude of which we now entreat was brought in by sin, but that other which is found out by power and law. Wherefore that is not taken away, which is spoken both commonly and by Aristotle in his Politics, to wit, the servitude is partly natural and partly by the law: Neither ought we to forget, that the service of God, wherein the faithful do obey and believe him, is called a certain servitude which must be preferred above all the liberty of the flesh. Hereof Paul in the Epistle to the Romans maketh mention at large, when he saith, That we being delivered from sin by Christ, are now the servants of righteousness.
7. Moreover, Servitude was in old time the punishment of sin: And no man is ignorant how it is a common saying: What a number of evils do crave bondage? Even as it was lawful among the Hebrews for a man to sell himself, and his children, when he was brought to extreme poverty: So is it credible, that there was among them a Magistrate, who being required by the Creditors, should constrain the debtors (when they had not wherewith to pay,) that they should sell themselves and their children, that by such means their debts might be all paid. Which is evidently enough gathered by a parable written in the 18th chapter of Matthew, as concerning the king
which commanded a debtor of his together with his children to be sold for the satisfying of him. But how the laws of men and of God have decreed towards debtors, I will touch in few words. At this day an Arrest, as they call it, is in use, whereof notwithstanding the civil laws have made no mention. And thereby the debtors are staid in the same place, where they were apprehended, and are forbidden to depart from thence before they compound with their creditors. And in some commonwealths they which are indebted be cast in prison until they have paid. In the laws of the 12 tables as Aulus Gellius reporteth in the 20th book and 1st chapter, There was appointed by the Judge the space of 30 days, wherein the debtor might seek money for payment of his debts: which if he could not obtain, he was bound in fetters and gives, and delivered to his Creditor, who constrained him to work at home like a laboring beast, until such time as he were satisfied of the debt. And of such bonds Livy maketh mention, and declareth that by reason of them there sprang great sedition, because the people would not be so cruelly handled by their own countrymen, and by them which were rich. The Saxon laws do bind the debtors: but the Roman laws nowhere (so far as I know) have expressly decreed prisons for debtors.
But expressly (I said) because it seemeth to be gathered in some sort. For in the Code [the Title] Qui bonis cedere possint, in the 1st law it is written: that by departing from the goods, imprisonment was avoided. Whereby surly it appeareth, that the debtors which would not yield their goods should be thrust into prison. And thereupon is gathered, that the departing from goods was in place of a benefit unto the Romans, for by it they avoided imprisonment. But they which being condemned by the Judge, were not able to pay the condemnation laid upon them, were punished in the body.
For they were driven to so many and so great labors and works, until such
time as they had satisfied that wherein they were condemned: As we have it in the Digests, in the title De Poenitentia the first law, in the Paragraph,
Generaliter.
8. Howbeit, by the Roman laws, power is not taken away from the Magistrate, but that he may cast them into prison, which by craft do circumvent some, to the intent they may trust them with money, against whom afterward they vaunt: when they show that they have not wherewith to pay. Howbeit, this is done by authority of the Judges, not that the laws have expressly so decreed. But that this should be done by private men, the Roman laws have in plain words forbidden: As we have it in the Digests,
De Reg. Juris, in the law, Non est singulis. Neither were free men brought into bondage, for not paying of debts: As it is in the Code, De Actione & obligatione, in the law, Ob as alienum. Yea and by Justinian very grievous punishments are decreed against them which durst to attempt it, as it is in the Authentics, Ut nulli Judicum liceat, in the Paragraph, Quod vero, Col. 8. where he decreeth that they which have committed this wicked act, should lose their right of demanding that which is due unto them. Further, that they shall pay as much money unto him that hath the wrong [as the debt cometh to.] Neither was any man thrust into prison for public debt: as we may see in the Code, De Exactionibus tributorum, in the law, Nemo. Bartolus also, about the law Alia, in the Digests, De Matrimonio Soluto, saith, that the bargain is of no force, wherein a man bindeth himself to prison, if he pay not the debt within a certain time, so bereaving himself of the benefit of departing from his goods. Of the same opinion is Panormitanus de
Pignoribus, in the chapter Lator. Howbeit, two cases are here excepted. The first is: if he that is not able to discharge the debt, have alienated all his goods before for deceiving of his Creditors: As we have it in the Digests, in
the title, Quae in fraudem Creditorum, in the last law. The other case is, if a debtor, when he got other men's goods into his hands did know that he had not wherewith to pay, as it is written in the Digests, De Jure dotis, in the last law but one. Neither are we to pass over that which is in the Code De captiuis post liminio reversis, in the last law, which was made by Honorius, that if any captive be delivered at the cost or charges laid out by another: he when he shall be returned home, ought to repay the charges to him that hath redeemed him. And if perhaps he shall not be able to repay him, he should satisfy his redeemer by services and labors, and finally by his travel for the space of five years. And thus much as touching the imprisonment or bondage of debtors out of the Roman laws.
9. The laws of God have made no mention of imprisonment of those debtors which have not wherewith to pay, but bondage they have laid upon them. And for better understanding of the matter, we will define a servant or bondman. He is an instrument endued with reason, which being separated from others may execute his office, and is not at his own liberty, but is in subjection of another man. But of servitudes there be many kinds. Some have taken place by the right of victory, and they which took bondmen in the wars, had power over them of life and death. Others are made bondmen, not by the right of war, but because they have sold themselves by reason of poverty. Or else they have been plucked away from their parents, or from their Lord's, or else from the sentence of the Judge, when they were not able to make satisfaction for that which was stolen. Others be bondmen, because they have been procreated of parents being bondmen. Further as touching divine laws, some servants were Hebrews, and others were strangers, as Canaanites, Philistians, and men of Tyrus &c. God by his laws did very much mitigate the servitude of the Hebrew bondmen. First, he
would not that they should be straitly governed by their Masters, that is by proud dominion and haughtiness. Besides he decreed, that deliverance should always be at hand, and that it should not be hindered by any reward.
Moreover the Jews might not be constrained to serve above six years, for the seventh year he was suffered to go free. Neither did he always serve out the 6 years. For if the year of Jubilee had fallen in the third or in the 4th year of the bondage, he escaped free. Besides he would have a bondman of this kind, to be dealt withal like a hired servant, that letteth his labors to hire. Neither was it lawful by the laws of God, to sell a Hebrew unto strangers. And when he was let go free, it was commanded, that he should not be sent away empty, but that a portion of corn, of sheep, and of other goods should be given unto him. And not only he himself was delivered, but together with him, his children, and also his wife, so that she were a Hebrew. For the bondslaves which were strangers were never redeemed nor yet delivered, unless the Master were willing: and the children procreated by them, were kept in perpetual bondage. It is manifest by these things which I have rehearsed, that God did very much ease the bondage as touching his own people the Jews. Unto this lenity it seemeth that Constantine also had respect, as it appeareth in the Code, the second law,
De patribus qui filios distraxerunt. For it suffereth not, that children should be sold by their Parents, unless it be in extreme necessity of hunger. And he will that they should straightway return to freedom, when there shall be offered an opportunity of redeeming, either by restitution of the money unto the byer, or else by putting another bondman in his place. And albeit that the law of God did so mitigate servitude, yet did the widow make request unto Elisha, that it might not happen unto her children: partly because
Mothers covet to have evils though they be easy to be turned away from
their children, and partly because that clemency of God expressed by the laws, was not perfectly kept by cruel Masters. For which transgression,
Jeremiah did earnestly rebuke king Zedekiah, because perhaps he feared least that children being alienated, should by Creditors be driven unto
Idolatry, which then had invaded the 10 Tribes.
Of Traffic, or occupying of Merchandise, and engrossing of wares called Monopolium.
10. Whereas the holy History speaketh of the Traffic of Solomon, that Narration hath two things worthy to be observed. First, that it may be declared how Solomon had such store of horses, seeing Palestine breedeth not many of those beasts. In deeds it hath many Asses, and also many
Moyles and Camels, but very few horses. Wherefore it is declared, that Solomon easily prepared himself horses out of Egypt. Further it is showed, that riches came unto Solomon not only by Navigation, but also by way of Merchandise out of Egypt. The matter was on this wise: In Egypt there is an increase of a great number of horses, and those fierce and courageous, which not only do suffice that Nation: but also other Nations adjoining do fetch from thence. Which was not permitted of them to be done freely: For Pharaoh would have a certain tribute thereby. So as there was a certain appointed custom given for the carrying away of every horse, even as at this day we see in some kingdoms. And forsomuch as Pharaoh was the father in law of Solomon, this prerogative of his, he gave unto him: Namely, that strangers should not carry horses out of Egypt, but by the leave of Solomon, and by paying the custom which he himself had appointed. Wherefore it was easy enough for him, to have plenty of horses in his own kingdom.
Moreover, through that custom, there came very much unto his Treasure.
And he exacted the custom by a certain company of his own Merchants whom he had appointed unto this office.
11. Howbeit this kind of gain seemeth not only to be vile, but also incommodious and hurtful unto Nations and provinces. For it hath respect unto μονοπώλιον, which is then done, when as a certain kind of things are committed to someone man alone to be sold. Engrossing of wares are forbidden by the Roman laws: As it is in the Code De Monopolijs, in the law, Unica. By which very strait law, Zeno the Emperor decreed, that they which used engrossing of wares, should be despoiled of all their goods. And he added, that even the letters of the Emperors should not be heard, if they should seem to give any man license to engross or get all into their hands.
And undoubtedly, they that engross all into their own hands, sell not things according to their value and worthiness, but set a prize upon them at their own pleasure. But how this kind of Traffic serveth to gain and getting of wealth, Aristotle showeth in his first book of Politics, the 7th chapter, bringing the example of Thales Milesius. Against him was poverty upbraided: Namely that whereas he was more studious in Philosophy than the rest, he also seemed to be in more necessity than others. Wherefore he being minded to defend Philosophy from the reproach of ill men, seeing he foreknew by Astrology, that the year following there would be a great plenty of Oil, before that winter should pass away, that is, before the Olive trees should have flowers, hired all the storehouses, the wine presses, and oil mill's. And whenas there followed a great fruitfulness of the fruit of Olives in Chios and Miletum, none could have any storehouse or instruments for Oil, unless it were permitted them by Thales. These things when he set forth to hire, he somewhat raised the price: whereby he got an abundance of money, and gave foolish men to understand that it will be an
easy matter for a wise man, if so he think fit, to gather unto him great store of money. The self-same fact doth Cicero rehearse in his first book, De
Divinatione: but somewhat after another sort than did Aristotle. For he writeth not that the storehouses of Oil were hired, but that the Oil itself was bought. This doth Pliny show in his 18th book the 28th chapter, but he ascribeth it not to Thales, but to Democritus. And he saith, that he did not foresee a great plenty of Oil, but a very great scarcity, and bought for himself all the Oil which should be growing in the country. The same
Aristotle brought an example of him, which bought up all the Iron at Siracusa. And when the Merchants were come to the Fairs, he somewhat advancing the price, got very much gains. This did Dion the Tyrant take in very ill part, and therefore drove him out of the City. For he supposed that the engrossing by private men was not profitable to his exchequer. Strabo in the fourth book of his Geography saith, that the Taurisci, (which at this day we call Taurinati, being a people towards the Alps in the borders of Italy, had in times past excellent Gold mines. And when in the digging of Gold they were holpen by other Italians, who afterward transported into diverse parts of Italy that which they received for their wages: thereof it came to pass, that in the space of two months Gold in Italy was sold a third part better cheap than it had been before. Wherefore the Taurisci ordained an engrossing in their own hands, by means whereof it should be lawful for themselves only to sell their Gold. And there are accustomed to be made engrossing's of salt, and of Alum, and of many other things which belong as well to meat as to drink. And this (as Aristotle teacheth in the place now alleged) have the Commonwealths and princes of Cities attempted, when they have need of money. And this sometime did Charles the 5th within our
age in the low countries: And likewise the king of Portugal as touching spices.
12. But to return to Solomon, He cannot be accused of filthy and hurtful gain: For he used not this μονοπώλιον, of what sort soever it were, within his kingdom, so that he did no harm to his Citizens. But thou wilt say, that by using of this traffic in Egypt he did hurt the Egyptians. No not one whit:
For he prescribed not anything to the Egyptians, for it was lawful for them to buy of whom they would, and that for the usual price. Also it hindered no strong nations at all: Because the Noble men and Princes which were near neighbors, or else merchants might not otherwise bring out horses from thence without the grant and good will of Pharaoh, unto whom also it behooved to pay the custom appointed by him. But if that Pharaoh would grant this right of his unto Solomon, it was free for him to do the same without injury to any man. I am not ignorant of this, that there be some of the Hebrews which think that this right given to Solomon, pertained not only unto horses, but also unto silk. For they judge that the Hebrew word
Micue is even the same in effect that is Ticua, whereby is signified yearn or a thread of silk. In very deed, garments of silk were in great estimation in the east and south Regions, therefore they think, that as well horses as silk might not be brought out of Egypt, unless it were by Solomon or by his agents. Howbeit the matter is uncertain, namely as touching silk: wherefor I will not much strive about that matter. But this I affirm, that even hereby is gathered, (which also other good authors as I showed before have taught,) that the engrossing of wares is a very certain and ready way to make gain.
But of what price the horses were, and for how much they were carried out, it is declared. A Chariot of four horses cost six hundredth shekels of silver or drachmas: That is after the account of our times two hundredth and forty
crowns of the Sun, as Budaeus a very learned man in his book De Asse hath declared, when he purposely took in hand to expound this place. So that they paid for every horse 60 Crowns: which also is in use at this day. For a horse of lusty courage and great, as are barded horses, will be of no less price than threescore crowns.
13. But when as Pharaoh sendeth the people crying out unto Joseph, and he selleth Corn, it is not meet that they which engross wares into their own hands should hereby defend their naughty covetousness. They do therefore use the same because it helpeth to make them very rich. A thing doubtless not beseeming to a man that is wise and of a good nature. For sometimes private men buy of Princes a right of selling this or that kind of thing, so as it may be lawful for them alone, and they themselves set a price, not according to justice, but according to covetousness. Wherefore engrossing of wares must be condemned, as being that which hurteth the public profit, and is against justice. Yet do I not deny, but that the commonwealth itself standing in any necessity, so as it wanteth money, may ordain that certain things be engrossed for a public benefit. For I think there is no difference between this, and to impose a new tax. But here the case is altered. The king commanded that corn should be gotten together and kept for a public safety.
For private men neglected this care, therefore it behooved the Magistrate to have here a great regard. Moreover, he hindered not others which would do this. Herein also was the commandment of God, which excuseth whatsoever may here seem absurd unto man's reason. Justinian forbad engrossing's, because it was brought in not to the utility, but to the destruction of the people. And because it was chiefly used in the Country of Palestine in respect of the slime which there groweth, to wit, that someone man bought all that stuff, that he alone might sell it abroad, and the
Grecians call that slime ἄσφαλτον: hereof it came to pass that those engrossing of things are commonly called Asphalta. But in this place we say that either this was no very engrossing, or else that whatsoever we read here to be done, must not be drawn to an example, seeing we have the commandment of God against it.