IV. Some, indeed, may dispute this; for it is true that poverty is no disgrace in itself, but only when it is a proof of indolence, extravagance, or folly. The poverty of a laborious, upright, temperate statesman combines well with his other virtues, and shows true greatness of mind: for a man whose attention is given to little things, can never succeed in doing great ones; nor can a man help others if he is in need of help himself. A statesman requires, not wealth, but contentment, in order that his attention may not be diverted from public affairs by his own cravings for useless luxuries. God alone is entirely without wants, and we approach nearest to the divine ideal when we can reduce our wants to the fewest possible. Just as a healthy man requires neither excess of clothing or of food, so a man's life and that of his family, if properly regulated, can be maintained at a trifling cost. His income, however, must exactly tally with his requirements; for we cannot call that man contented who earns much, and spends little. He is a foolish man if he troubles himself to amass what he cannot enjoy; while he must be a miserable man if he is able to enjoy the use of wealth, and yet through meanness of spirit forbids himself its use. I would willingly put this question to Cato: "If we ought to enjoy our wealth, why do you make a virtue of simplicity of living when you are a rich man? If, on the other hand, it is a noble thing, as no doubt it is, to eat common bread, to drink the same wine as our servants and farm labourers do, and not to want fine clothes or comfortable houses, then Aristeides and Epameinondus, Manius Curius and Caius Fabricius were to be applauded for their neglect of the wealth, whose use they rejected." Surely it was not necessary for a man who thought turnips made a delicious meal, and who used to boil them himself while his wife baked the bread, to write so much about how to save a penny, and how a man might most quickly make a fortune. The great advantage of simplicity and contentment is, that it prevents our wishing for superfluities, or even thinking about them. Aristeides, when cited as a witness during the trial of Kallias, is said to have observed that those who were poor against their will, ought to be ashamed of it, but that those who, like himself, were poor from their own choice, gloried in their poverty. It would be absurd to suppose that the poverty of Aristeides was not voluntary, when, without doing any criminal act, he might by stripping the body of one dead Persian, or by plundering one tent, have made himself a rich man. But enough of this.