t man, and a man is a child, if not by
age, yet by his disordered manners and by the evil or defect of his
life, as the Philosopher teaches in the first book of the Ethics.

There are some foolish people who believe that by this word Noble is
meant that which is to be named and known by many men; and they say
that it comes from a verb which stands for _to know_, that is,
_nosco_. But this is most false, for, if this could be, those
things which were most named and best known in their species would in
their species be the most noble. Thus the obelisk of St. Peter would
be the most noble stone in the world; and Asdente, the shoemaker of
Parma, would be more Noble than any one of his fellow-citizens; and
Albuino della Scala would be more Noble than Guido da Castello di
Reggio. Each one of those things is most false, and therefore it is
most false that _nobile_ (noble) can come from _cognoscere_,
to know. It comes from _non vile_ (not vile); wherefore
_nobile_ (noble) is as it were _non vile_ (not vile).

This perfection the Philosopher means in the seventh chapter of
Physics, when he says: "Each thing is especially perfect when it
touches and joins its own proper or relative virtue; and then it is
especially perfect according to its nature. It is, then, possible to
call the circle perfect when it is truly a circle, that is, when it is
joined with its own proper or relative virtue, it is then complete in
its nature, and it may then be called a noble circle." This is when
there is a point in it which is equally distant from the
circumference. That circle which has the figure of an egg loses its
virtue and it is not Noble, nor that circle which has the form of an
almost full moon, because in that its nature is not perfect. And thus
evidently it is possible to see that commonly, or in a general sense,
this word Nobility, expresses in all things perfection of their
nature, and this is that for which one seeks primarily in order to
enter more clearly into the discussion of that part which it is
intended to explain.

Secondly, it remains to be seen how one must proceed in order to find
the definition of Human Nobility to which the present argument leads.
I say, then, that since in those things which are of one species, as
are all men, it is not possible by essential first principles to
define their highest perfection, it is necessary to know and to define
that by their effects. Therefore one reads in the Gospel of St.
Matthew