it is defined as ancient riches,
and this is done in the part that begins, "Nor will they admit that a
man lowly born a noble can become." And in the first place, this is
refuted by an argument taken from the very people who are so mistaken;
then to put them to greater confusion this, their argument, is
destroyed; and this is done where it says, "And thus it comes from
what I have said before." Finally it sums up--their error being
evident, and it being, therefore, time to learn the truth--and this it
does where it says, "Because to the healthy mind," etc.

[Footnote 26: From Book IV, Chapter XIV of "The Banquet." Translated
by Katharine Hillard. "The Banquet" is the least known of Dante's
prose writing. It is believed to have been written in his maturity,
but was not completed. Dante's purpose appears to have been to produce
a sort of hand-book, or commentary, on universal knowledge.]

I say then, "Nor will they admit that a man lowly born a noble can
become." Here we must observe that it is the opinion of these mistaken
ones that a man originally a peasant can never be called a nobleman,
and a man who is the son of a peasant can likewise never be called
noble. And here they contradict their own statement when they say that
time is required for nobility, by putting in this word ancient
(riches); because it is impossible by a process of time to arrive at
the generation of nobility, by the reason of theirs here given, which
denies that a man of low birth can become noble by anything he may do
or by any accident; and denies the possibility of a change from a
low-born father to a noble son. For if the son of a peasant be still a
peasant his son also will be a peasant, and thus we can never find a
point at which nobility can begin by process of time.

And if our opponent, wishing to defend himself, shall say that
nobility begins at the moment when the low estate of our ancestors is
forgotten, I answer that this tells against himself, because there
must necessarily be a change here from the low estate to the noble,
from one man to another, as from father to son, which is contrary to
what they assert.

And if our opponent defends himself pertinaciously, saying that he
maintains that the change may take place when the low estate of one's
ancestors has fallen into oblivion, then altho the text takes no
notice of this, it is fitting that the commentary should reply to it.
And therefore I answer thus: that from what they say