THE POLITICS OF ARISTOTLE
p Ff
I?
TO
POLITICS OF ARISTOTLE
A REVISED TEXT
WITH INTRODUCTION ANALYSIS AND COMMENTARY
FRANZ SUSEMIHL
PROFESSOR IN GREIFSWALD
AND
R. D. HICKS
FELLOW OF TRINITY COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE
BOOKS I. V.
Uonfcon :
MACMILLAN AND CO.
AND NEW YORK
1894
\All Rights reservei?\
LU
. _
<
PS
(JTamfcrttige :
PRINTED BY C. J. CLAY, M.A., AND SONS,
AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS.
PREFACE.
IN the work, of which this volume is an instalment, I have
undertaken to reproduce in an English dress Professor Susemihl s
edition of the Politics in Greek and German as issued by him,
with notes explanatory of the subject-matter, in 1879. It is not,
however, a simple reproduction, but a minute and scrupulous
revision, the translation having been dropped and the plan of
the work sensibly modified to adapt it to the wants of English
students. Some changes have been made in the Introduction,
to which a section has been added, though naturally the mate
rials of this section are by no means new. The text (for which
Professor Susemihl is solely responsible) has been corrected in
some hundreds of places, mostly to bring it into agreement with
his later edition in the Teubner series, of which a nova impressio
correctior was issued in 1894, only a few months ago. The great
majority of the changes which distinguish the impressio of 1894
from that of 1883 have, however, to be sought in the Corrigenda.
By the simple device of a change of type it has been found possible
to exhibit to the eye the effect of the numerous transpositions
here recommended, and yet to retain the received order of
the text for facility of reference. In the notes explanatory of
the subject-matter bearing his signature Professor Susemihl has
introduced comprehensive changes. No one therefore should be
surprised if these notes fail to correspond in substance (as they
correspond in appended number) to those of the German edition.
vi PREFACE.
Where it seemed expedient, they have been supplemented from
my own collections. It can be said with truth that difficulties
have never been shirked, numerous as they undoubtedly are.
Wherever a note grew to an inordinate length or threatened to
digress from the context, it has been relegated to an excursus.
In compiling additional notes I have received the greatest
stimulus and advantage from the writings and correspondence
of my collaborator, whose patience and forbearance have not
been exhausted in the long interval preceding publication. He
has always been willing to lavish upon me every assistance from
the stores of his erudition, and to aid me with the latest results
of his experience and ripened judgment. Indeed, it is not too
much to say that not only primarily, but in the additions of
date subsequent to 1879 indirectly, this volume, and the Politics
as a whole, owes far more to him than to all other sources put
together. Next to him I am most indebted to Dr Henry Jack
son, who has never failed to give me encouragement and assist
ance, and in 1880 most kindly placed at my disposal a selection
of valuable notes, critical and exegetical, which are published in
the course of the volume with his signature. Moreover, as in
private duty bound, I acknowledge that it is to the stimulus of
his inspiring lectures that I, like Dr Postgate and Mr Welldon,
owe my first interest in Aristotelian studies. I have naturally
endeavoured to profit by the publications of recent years, so far
as they bore upon my author, and I may especially mention the
contributions to the Transactions of tJie Cambridge Philological
Society and Journal of Philology by Dr Jackson, Professor
Ridgeway, Dr Postgate and Professor J. Cook Wilson. I have
taken the liberty of consulting any materials to which I had
access, such as the marginalia of the late Richard Shilleto in the
Cambridge University Library, and of the late Edward Meredith
Cope in the library of Trinity College, Cambridge. In common
with the publishers I deplore and apologise for the long delay
between the announcement and the publication of this work,
although this delay has enabled me to secure a collation of the
oldest extant source of the text, the fragments of the Vatican
palimpsest, and to incorporate in the Addenda the most import-
PREFACE. vii
ant of the references to the recently discovered Constitution of
Athens. Thus supplemented the commentary will, it is hoped,
be found more adequate than any of its predecessors to our
existing materials and means of information.
Some will be surprised that more attention has not been
bestowed upon the superb Introduction or the full and lucid
commentary upon Books I and II published by Mr W. L.
Newman in 1887. The truth is that, at the time of its ap
pearance the earlier part of this volume had been printed off,
and the publishers did not see their way either to issue this part
(pp. i 460) separately, as I personally should have preferred,
or to incur the heavy expense of cancelling the printed sheets.
Some valuable annotations of Mr Newman s, however, which
I should have been glad to incorporate in the proper place,
receive a brief recognition in the Addenda.
I have further to add that I began to print before Professor
Susemihl had collected into a permanent form his first set of
Quaestiones Aristotcleae I VII, and that for greater clearness I
refer to the invaluable pamphlet issued by him in 1886, in which
the main results of the seven Quaestiones are combined, as
Quaestiones criticae collcctae, although the last word collectae forms
no part of the title proper.
My best thanks are here duly tendered to my friends Mr
William Wyse, late Professor of Greek in University College,
London, for valuable suggestions and criticisms, and numerous
additional references, particularly in all that bears upon Greek
Antiquities ; Miss Alice Zimmern, author of Home Life of the
Greeks, Mr Hartmann W. Just, sometime scholar of C. C. C.,
Oxford, and Mr H. J. Wolstenholme, for timely assistance in
the laborious task of translating from the German ; further, to
my brother-in-law, Mr T. L. Heath, formerly Fellow of Trinity
College, Cambridge, who read most of the earlier proof-sheets.
Occasional notes of his and one by Mr H. W. Just bear the
authors initials. To guard against all misapprehension I should
add that the excursus on Greek Music was already printed off
before the Provost of Oriel s recent work on that subject
reached me.
viii PREFACE.
The want of an index, which renders this instalment of the
work much less useful than it might otherwise have been, will
be remedied when the remaining three books are published.
R. D. HICKS.
TRINITY COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE,
Oct. 15, 1894.
ON REFERENCES TO THE POLITICS BY BOOKS, CHAPTERS,
SECTIONS, PAGES.
THE text of this edition with its double numbering of certain books, its double
system of chapters and sections, and of marginal pages, may well perplex an unfamiliar
reader unless a word or two be added as to the origin of this aggravated confusion and
the various methods by which any given passage may be cited.
The manuscripts exhibit the eight books in the old order, viz. ABFAEZH0
according to the left heading of each page (not in the order of this edition which is
A B T H 6 A Z E). There is no subdivision of the books in the Aldines and other
early printed editions, any more than in the MSS. The Latin translations had been
subdivided before this into chapters and sections, a division almost inevitable when
the continuity of the text is disturbed by paraphrase and commentary. Thus the
second edition of Victorius (Florence 1576) presents the text in a series of short
sections, although these are never numbered or otherwise utilized for purposes of
reference.
The system of chapters here adopted, as cited in the head lines and on the left
hand of the pages of this volume, is that most widely known through its adoption by
Immanuel Bekker in the great edition of the Berlin Academy (quarto 1831), and by
Hermann Bonitz in the Index Aristotelictis to the same edition (1870). It may be
traced back to the editions of Zwinger (1582), Sylburg (1587), Casaubon (1590).
It seems that Zwinger merely modified another arrangement into chapters, derived
from the Latin Aristotle (e.g. the edition of Bagolinus), and found in the third Basel
edition (1550) of Conrad Gesner, also in Giphanius (1608). Sylburg (1587) and
Conring (1656) give both schemes, calling Gesner s "vulgo." In this now obsolete
arrangement Book I. made eight chapters, not thirteen, Book II., ten, not twelve,
Book in., twelve, not eighteen.
The sections into which Bekker s chapters are divided are taken from the Oxford
reprint of Bekker in ten octavo volumes (1837), in which unfortunately Bekker s pages
and lines are wholly ignored. These sections have been retained in this volume
because Liddell and Scott s Greek Lexicon, and some other authorities, cite the
Politics by them. They are numbered on the left side of the page with prefixed.
The chapters (in Roman figures) and sections on the right side of the page are
these introduced by J. Gottlob Schneider in his valuable edition of 1809. Schneider
broke with all his predecessors by adopting longer chapters and fewer of them, e.g. 5
in Book I., 9 in Book II. He was followed amongst subsequent editors by Gottling
J
x ON REFERENCES TO THE POLITICS.
(1824^, Adolf Stahr (1839), Susemihl (1879) : Grote in his history always cites the
Politics by Schneider s edition.
But the tendency in modern times has been not to employ for citation either the
sections of Bekker or the chapters and sections of Schneider, but rather the chapter,
page, column, and line of the quarto of the Berlin Academy above mentioned. In
this edition of all Aristotle the Politics occupies pages 1252 1342. The quarto
volume is printed in double columns, cited as column a, column b. For example,
1-252 a 18, 1276 b 4 (or in the Index Aristotelicus 1252*18, I2y6 b 4) are used to denote,
the one, line 18 of the left column of page 1252, the other, line 4 of the right column of
page 1276. The closer definition which this method of citation by lines secures is a
great recommendation, but it is balanced by one drawback, viz. that to be quite sure
of finding a passage the Berlin Aristotle is required, and after sixty years the
supremacy of even this edition no longer remains unquestioned. In the present
volume the pages and lines of Bekker s quarto are cited on the left hand side of the
page, while in the heading over the right hand page the whole extent of the text on
both left and right pages is recorded : (e.g. 1263 b 23 1264 a 4 for the text upon
pp. 238 and 239 of this volume).
Lastly, there are a few writers, Bernays and Oncken among them, who prefer to
quote passages by the page and line, not of the Berlin quarto, but of the octavo
reprint of it issued a little later, of which a third edition came out in 1855 and a
fourth edition in 1878. For comparison, this system of pages has been recorded on
the right hand margin, the reference being enclosed in a bracket, thus : (p. 31).
For an example of these rival methods of citation take the sentence 5e? de ^de TOUTO
ayvoeiv OTL XPV 7r/3ocre%etz/ TCJ TroXXy XP V V upon p. 239 of this edition. The reference
(i) in the Index Aristotelicus would be 11/35, 1264 a i sq. ; we prefer to cite it as (ii)
Book II, c. 5 16 (or n. 5. 16) by Bekker s chapters and sections : or dropping the
book and chapter (which are really superfluous) as (iii) 1264 a i, 2 by Bekker s pages,
columns and lines. No references in this English edition are given by Schneider s
chapters and sections, which were followed in Susemihl s German edition of 1879 :
but on that method the passage could be cited as (iv) Book II c. ii 10. Lastly,
Bernays or Oncken would refer to it as (v) p. 31, if.
CONTENTS.
PAGE
INTRODUCTION.
I. Manuscripts and editions i
II. Compilation and history n
III. General estimate .......... 19
IV. Economic Slavery and Wealth ....... 23
V. Review of predecessors 32
VI. Leading Principles ......... / 32-
VII. Monarchy and the best state . . . . . . . \ 44
VIII. Pathology opthe existing Constitutions J 56
IX. Date and connexion with Ethics ....... 66
X. Recent criticism of the text.
Comparative worth of manuscripts 71
Dislocations and double recensions . . . . . . 78
ANALYSIS 98
Symbols and Abbreviations 136
TEXT AND COMMENTARY.
BOOK 1 138
Excursus I. Epimenides 204
Excursus II. On i. c. 6 . . . . . . . . 205
Excursus III. The relation of x/o^/xaricm/d} to oiKOvo^in-r) . . . 209
Note on I. 13. 12 . . . . . . . . . .211
Note on i. 2. 13, I253a 20 24 212
BOOK II. 213
Note on Arcadia .......... 322
Excursus I. The matriarchate . . . . . . . .326
Excursus II. Hippodamos . . . . . . . 331
Note on the Celtae 334
Excursus III. Sparta and Crete ....... 335
Excursus IV. Carthage . . 340
Excursus V. Solon 350
Excursus VI. Thaletas ......... 352
xii CONTENTS.
BOOK III 354
Excursus I. Classification of Constitutions 447
Excursus II. Pittacus . . . 451
Excursus III. The Vatican fragments ...... 454
Note on the basis of the text 460
BOOK IV (VII) 469
Excursus I. On e^urepiKol \6yot. 561
Note on iv(vn). 11.6,13301)26 566
Excursus II. The age of superannuation 566
BOOK V (VIII) 569
Excursus I. Aristotle s scheme of education ..... 619
Excursus II. The Compositions of Olympus 621
Excursus III. Ethos or character 622
Excursus IV. Ancient Greek Music 624
Excursus V. Suggestions on the text 638
Note on Kadapacs 641
ADDENDA 659
CORRIGENDA.
Page 8, line 2 : for M. read Isaac
P. 1 8, note 7, line 5 : for TTO\LTLKUV read TroXm/ccji/.
P. 56, line 14 : for Stageira read Stagira (cp. Meisterhans 2 p. 43, n. 373)
P. 69, note 2, line 3 : _/~6>r vbfj.ov read vb^wv
Ib. line 4 : for voKireuav read TroAtreiuij
P. 82, line 2 : _/0r airopiav read eviropiav (cp. below p. 312)
P. 144, text, 1252 b 16, 17: _/0r //.dXtcrra 5 &&gt;t/ce /cara (pvinv
read //.aXicrra 5e /cara (f>v<ni> ot/ce
Ib. commentary, right column, last line : for coecliche read coedichc
P. 146, critical notes, line 3: after 28 insert r/5??]
P. 147, text, 1253 a 3 : omit ecm
Ib. critical notes, line 6 : transpose
6 omitted by II 2 Bk
to precede \\ 3 eVri M s
7>fo/ zV, M<? 6 omitted by II 2 Bk is in 1253 a 2 before avdpuiros. Stohr reads
av$pUTros : cp. Addenda p. 663
P. 150, crit. notes, line 5 : for Qitaest. Cr. in. 3 ff., iv. 3 ff. read Quaest. crit. coll.
(Lips. 1886) p. 334 ff
Ib. line 8 : dele Ar.
P. 151, crit. notes, line 8: after Quaest. Cr. 11. 5 f., IV. 5 f. insert Quaest. crit.
coll. p. 336 ff
P. 153, crit. notes, line 4: after Quaest. Cr. n. 7 ff. insert Quaest. crit. coll. p. 339 f
P. 156, text, 1254 a 8, right margin: for (p. read (p. 6)
P. 157, text, 1254 a 27 : for dirb read VTTO
Ib. crit. notes, line 3: for Dittographia read Dittography
crit. notes, line 9 : after a-rrb read FEE Bk. 1 Susem. 1 --
P. 160, text, 1254 b 14 : omit Kal
P. 161, crit. notes, line i : after 18 insert early]
P. 176, crit. notes, line 9: after Quaest. Cr. in. 5 ff. insert Quaest. crit. co/f.p. 352 f
P. 178, comm. left column, line 9: for KeKTr)<Tdai read KeKrrjcrdai
P. 1 80, crit. notes, line 3 : for t\v read T\V
P. 182, text, 1257 a 38 : for Kal et read K^V d
P. 183, comm. left col. line 8 : for 5, read see
Ib. line 9 : for jJLTari0e|JLvwv read p.Ta0[i vcov
P. 190, comm. left col. line 7 from below: after selling insert and
xiv CORRIGENDA.
P. 195, comm. right col. line 17 : after citizens insert a comma
P. 197, text, 1259 b 32 : for [/cat] read Kal
P. 200, text, 1260 a 30, right margin : remove qfrom line 30 to line 31
Ib. comm. left col. line 5 from below: for jJiepos read jiepos
P. 201, text, 1260 a 35, right margin: remove lofrom line 35 to line 36
P. 209, To Excursus II. also belong remarks on B. I. c. 6 in Addenda p. 672
P. 213, text, 1260 b 31 : for /ecu et read K.O.V et
P. 216, comm. right col. line 14: for III. 8 4, 16 2, read III. 16 2,
iv (vii). 8 4,
P. 231, crit. notes, line 3 : for Bk. read Bk. 1
P. 232, text, 1263 a 2 : f or ?X L > Tra<n read 2%et Tracri,
P. 233, comm. right col. line 26: for I. 126 read I. 141 3
P. 234, comm. left col. line 19: for I. 9. 9 read i. 7. 2, 1255 b 24 f
P. 235, text, 1263 a 29 : for Trpoaedpevovres read irpoaeopevovTos
P. 265, text, 1267 an: for SVVO.I.VTO read f3ov\oii>To
P. 273, comm. left col. line 6 : for n. 9 raz*/ c. 1 1 9
P. 2/9, crit. notes, last line: after Ephesus insert op. c. fol. i86 a p. 610, 16 ft.
ed. Hayduck
P. 281, comm. left col. line 5 : for evidences read evidence
P. 282, text, 1269 b 1 8 : for del vo/j-ifeiv elvai read etVat del vofjdfeti>
P. 284, comm. right col. line 12: read Stacrwfcrat
P. 287, comm. left col. line 21 : for 8 6 read 7 6
P. 297, comm. left col. line 13 : for p. 9 read p. 20
P. 300, comm. left col. last line: for Ottfried read Otfried
P. 301, comm. left col. line 4 : for TroXe/uw* read Trb\ewv
P. 305, text, 1272 b 9 : for dwa&Twv read ovvaruv
Ib. crit. notes, line 7 : after Schneider j| add ovvaffTuv II 1 Susem. lt2 ||
P. 306, text, 1272 b 13: for n read TL
Ib. text, 1272 b 23 : for roaavO^ TJ/UUV elp^ffdd) read elprjcrdu roaavd 1 i)/juv
P. 312, text, 1273 b 6 (bis, line 4 and line 18) : for airopiav read eviropiav
Ib. crit. notes, line 3 : for 6 einroplav I n II-Ar. read
6 aTTopiav FM s Ald. Bk. Susem. 1-1
P. 314, text, 1273 b 25, left margin: dele (12)
P. 317, comm. left col. line 16: dele Aristeides
P. 326, line 9 : for iv. 130 read IV. 180
P. 331, heading, line 13: for II. 7. i read n. 8. i
P- 356, comm. left col. line u : for /SoAcucu read fioKaia.!.
P. 359, text, 1275 b 17, left margin: dele (2)
P. 362, text, 1276 a 5 : for (pa.fj.ev read e<pa.fj.ev
Ib. text, 1276 a 10 : read drj^oKparia (r6re yap
P. 363, text, 1276 a 13: dele *
and read <rvfJ.<f>4pov) e iirep ovv
The parenthesis extends from 1276 a 10 (r6re yap to 1276 a 13 crv^epov)
Ib. text, 1276 a 14 : for Kal read [/cat]
Ib. text, 1276 a 15 : omit <ov>
Ib. text, 1276 a 16: for Tvpavvioos. read rvpavvLdos ;
Ib. crit. notes, line 3: after 14 read [/cat] Niemeyer (untranslated by William)
Ib. crit. notes, line 4 : dele incorrect
Ib. crit. notes, line 5 : after Hayduck add Susem. 1>2
CORRIGENDA. xv
P. 364, text, 1276 a 26: for ryv read \rr\v~\
Ib. crit. notes, line 3: before 27 add [TTJV] Schneider Niemeyery^/ir^./. Phil.
CXLIII. 1891, p. 414 ||
P. 367, text, 1276 b 30 : for Sicnrep read 610
P. 370, comm. left col. last line : for dwavrat read dfoavrai
P. 380, text, 1278 b 8 : for /ecu et read KO.V ei
P. 382, crit. notes, line 2: nfter (corrector) add a semicolon
P. 389, comm. right col. line 18 : for vn(v) read vu\(\}
P. 396, text, 1281 a 16: with change of punctuation read ta-riv (<5oe yap... Status)
P. 397, text, 1281 a 35, 36: transpose <f>av\oi> to precede 2x VTa and read
(pavXov ^xovra ye ret ffv/J.f3alvovTa Tradi] irepl TTJV i/ u^V dXXd, (J.T] vb/J-ov.
P. 430, comm. left col. line 21 : for
Ib. line 23 : for eiridvfda read ti
Ib. line 26 : for 6 read 6
P. 431, text, 1287 a 39 : for TricrTevOfrras read
Ib. crit. notes, line 10 : after right insert a comma and read irt-ffrevdevra.^ II fr.
Bk. 1 Susem. 1 - 2
P. 434, comm. right col. line 7 : for ev read eu
P. 438, comm. left col. line i : after turn out insert anyhow," i.e. "
P. 441, text, 1287 a 39 : for TreHrrevdevTas read jracrdevTa. s
P. 444, crit. notes, line 1 1 : for dittographia read dittography
P. 464, line 44: for 24 read 23
P. 467, line 5 ff. : dele the sentence Again, one might have imagined... TroXtra a.
Not so.
P. 475, text, 1323 b 18 : for /ecu read [/ecu]
P. 497, text, 1327 a 23 : for Trpbs read[irpbs]
Ib. crit. notes, line 2 : for vTvapxovra read virap-^ovra.
P. 503, text, 1328 a 16: for ol 5e read aide
P. 521, text, 1330 b 30 : for iroXiv y.r? Trote?! read /JLTJ iroielv TTO\IV
P. 529, text, 1332 a 13: omit /cat before dycry/fcucu
P. 534, comm. left col. line 14 : for 1284 read 1254
P- 535> text, 1332 b 31 : for TOVTUV irdvruv read TTO.VTWV TOIJTWV
P. 537, text, 1333 a 26 : transpose diyprjo dai to precede Kal TOUTO rb yu^pos
Ib. comm. right col. line 17 : for correlation read correlative
P. 540, comm. right col. line 18 f. : for vui(v). 10, 7 2 read vin(v). i ro, 7 4
P. 541, text, 1334 a 8 : for aviaffiv read afadffiv
P. 545, head line : for 1333 a 40 read 1334 a 40
P. 546, text, 1334 b 24 : for Tre<f)VKei> eyyivevdai read eyyiveaQai
P. 549, text, 1335 a 27 : for xpovos wpifffifros read upicr/ui.ti os xpoj
P. 559, text, 1336 b 34 : for 6 cra avruv read avrwv 6 cra
INTRODUCTION.
I. MANUSCRIPTS AND EDITIONS OF THE POLITICS.
ARISTOTLE S Politics has come down to us in manuscripts for the most
part of the fifteenth century; there are indeed two, P :! and P~ (Bekker s
P), which date from the fourteenth century, but none earlier. There
is the Latin version by Lionardo Bruni of Are. zo (Leonardus Aretinus),
made from the first manuscript brought into Italy from Greece in the
fifteenth century, a manuscript now lost, which was probably older than
the fifteenth century 1 . There is further an older translation, word for
word into barbarous Latin, made in the thirteenth century, before
A.D. 1274", by the Dominican monk William of Moerbeke. Its lost
original was a Greek codex 3 which we will call T ; written, at the
latest, in the early part of the thirteenth or latter part of the twelfth
century, and probably of not much older date 4 . This translation 5 pri
marily, together with four of the existing Greek manuscripts, three at
Paris P 1 --- 3 , one at Milan M s , is now the critical basis for the text.
All that the remaining manuscripts or the translation of Aretinus can
claim is to supply confirmatory evidence in isolated passages : Areti
nus, in particular, is much too free and arbitrary in his rendering, so
that it is often impossible to infer, at least with any certainty, the
reading of his Greek codex; hence many peculiarities of his transla
tion must be passed over or regarded as merely his own conjectures.
1 Very likely Francesco Filelfo brought Thomas Aquinas twice quotes it in the
it from Constantinople in 1429 at the Siunma contra Gentiles^ writing probably
request of Palla Strozzi : see the evidence A.D. 1261 1-265. TR.]
for this in Oncken Die Staatskhre dcs 3 The best manuscript of this Old
Aristotdes (Leipzig 1870. Svo) vol. I. Translation expressly states it. See
p. 78. Compare my large critical edi- Susemihl op.cit. xxxiv. See also below
tion, Aristotclis Politicorum libri octo p. 49 n. 2, p . 71 ff.
cum vetusta translation* Gulidiid dc 4 On the date see Susemihl op. c. xn.
Moerbeka (Leipzig 1872. Svo) p. XV. B With the text restored from manu-
2 See Susemihl op. cit. p. vr. with scripts and old printed editions in my
note 4. [Von Hertling places it about edition above mentioned.
1260, Rhein. Mus. xxxix. 1884. p. 457.
II I
2 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
All these sources of the text fall into two families or recensions.
One of them, on the whole the better, but often the worse in particular
points, seems to be derived from a codex of the sixth or seventh century 1 ,
although in the quotations of single passages in Julian and even as early
as Alexander of Aphrodisias the readings peculiar to this recension are
partially, but only partially, found. Besides P the only manuscripts
which belong, in the main, to this family are the following two :
M s = Mediolanensis Ambrosianus B. 105 2 (in the Ambrosian Library
at Milan), of the second half of the fifteenth century, much corrected
by the copyist himself and in a few passages by a later hand collated
by R. Scholl and Studemund :
P 1 - Parisians 2023 (in the Bibliotheque nationale at Paris), written
by Uemetrios Chalkondylas at the end of the fifteenth century, and then
much corrected with a paler ink from a manuscript, of the other family.
Corrections of this sort are hereafter denoted by p 1 , those made in the
same black ink as the original text by (corr. 1 ), corrections which do not
belong to either of these classes, or at all events are not with certainty
to be reckoned with one or the other, are quoted simply as (corr.). In
regard to this and all the other manuscripts, it is distinctly stated when
any correction stands in the margin. P 1 was last collated by Dahms
and Patzig.
Just as in P 1 the two families are blended 3 , so conversely traces
of the better recension are met with even in some manuscripts which
belong, in the main, to the other family. This is true of many corrections
and most of the glosses which are found in P 2 , the principal manuscript
of this second family 1 ; still more frequently of the readings, corrections,
and variants in P 4 ; so also of Aretinus translation and especially of P 5 ;
to a less extent of the corrections by a later hand in some other manu
scripts, and hardly ever of their original readings. The few excerpts from
1 On the one hand the commentary 3 Or in its archetype, if Demetnos
of the Neo-Platomc philosopher Proclus found the corrections which betray the
(died 485) upon Plato s Republic is quoted second recension in the few cases where
in a gloss on vm (v). 12. 8, which in all they are written with the same ink as his
probability (see note 1 ) proceeds from original text already made,
this archetype : on the other, certain cor- 4 For the same glosses which in P 1 can
ruptions common to nil the sources de- be shown to be derived from the first
rived from this family point to the con- recension meet us again in P 2 , and a
elusion that the archetype was written in similar origin may be proved for others
uncials (pai ticularly in. 14 12, 13 in P 3 in another way. On the other hand
ovaiuv and ot xncu for Ovcriuv and Ova ion}. P- has few glosses in common with P :i ,
Now uncial writing ceased generally in and the number in P :! is but scanty, so
the eighth century. Cp. Susemihl op. c. that the second recension appears to have
xiv f.,XL\ r i f. had only a few glosses altogether. See
- Ordinis superioris. Susemihl op. c. vm f . , xvni f.
MANUSCRIPTS. 3
Aristotle s Politics in Codex Paris. 963, of the sixteenth century, are also
derived from the better recension.
Subject to these exceptions, all other manuscripts but those above-
mentioned are to be reckoned with the second family, the text of which
may be called the vulgate. They may be further subdivided into
two classes, a better and a worse, and the latter again into three different
groups : an intermediate position between the two is taken up by the
translation of Aretinus and in a different way by C 1 . A more precise
statement is afforded by the following summary.
I. Better class : IT.
P 2 = Coislin. 161 (brought originally from Athos : now with the rest
of the Coislinian collection in the Bibliotheque nationale at Paris), of
the 1 4th century; Bekker s I b ; last collated by Susemihl. The corrections
and variants are written partly (i) in the same ink as the original text,
partly (2) in darker ink, partly (3) in paler, yellower, partly (4) in red ink :
these are indicated hereafter by (corr. 1 ), (corr. 2 ), (corr. :i ) and p 3 respec
tively : where the ink appears to be wholly different, or cannot be brought
with certainty under any of these classes, the sign will be (corr. 1 ). But
all without exception, and the glosses as well, are in the same hand
writing as the codex.
P ! = Paris. 2026 of the beginning of the i4th century, for the greater
part written by the same scribe, but finished by another hand ; the oldest
manuscript that we have, but not so good as P 2 , especially in its original
form before it had been corrected by a third and later hand and thereby
made still more like P 2 than it was at first. It is true that most of these
later corrections were subsequently scratched out again or wiped off, yet
even then they remain legible enough. P 3 , like P 2 , was last collated by
Susemihl.
II. Worse class : IF.
i. First group.
P 4 = Paris. 2025 of the i5th century, much corrected but, with the
exception of a single passage, only by the scribe himself, with various
readings in the margin ; last collated by Susemihl.
P 6 = Paris. 1857, written in the year 1492 in Rome by Johannes
Rhosos, a priest from Crete ; last collated by Patzig for the first four
chapters of Book I. Statements as to the readings of this manuscript
in other single passages come from Bekker, from Barthelemy St Hilaire,
and in particular from Patzig.
I -2
4 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
Q-Marcianus Venetus 200 (in the library of St Mark at Venice),
also written by Johannes Rhosos, but as early as 1457 : collated by
Bekker for Book I, and since then afresh for the first four chapters of
that book, as above, by R. Scholl and E. Rohde.
M b = Marcianus Venetus 213, of the beginning of the i5th century,
collated by Bekker for i. c. i c. 6 8 and again by Rohde for i. cc.
r A
i /J..
U b = Marcianus Venetus, append, iv. 3, written in Rome in the
year 1494, collated by Bekker for n. cc. i 7; in. 2 3 (1275 b 32 34),
14 2io ; vi (iv). 3 84 3, 7 28 4 ; vm (v). 3 54 10,
and by Rohde for i. cc. 14.
L s = Lipsiensis (bibliothecae Paulinae) 1335, in the University
library at Leipzig, of the fifteenth or the beginning of the sixteenth
century, most closely related to U b , collated by Patzig for i. i 4 and
other single passages. We have information about readings in other
parts of Books i. u. and v (vni). from Stahr and Schneider.
C c denotes the codex used by Camerarius.
Ar. = Arctinus, who must have used for his translation a codex of a
very peculiar kind in which the two recensions were blended. For the
translation is often in remarkable agreement with the manuscripts of
this group ; though often, too, with the better class. Not seldom again
it agrees with the first family : lastly, it here and there shows pecu
liarities belonging exclusively to itself which can hardly be all set down
to mere conjecture or arbitrariness on the part of the translator.
2. Second group.
C 4 = Florentinus Castiglionensis (in the Laurentian library at
Florence) iv. (Acquisti nuovo), of the fifteenth century, collated by
R. Scholl for i. i 4; n. i 2 3; vi (iv). i: in the opening chapters
it is more in agreement wi Ji the better class.
Q b = Laurentianus Si, 5 (in the Laurentian library at Florence), of
the fifteenth century, collated by R. Scholl for i. i 4 and single
passages elsewhere, by Bekker for Books n. in. vi (iv).
R b = Laurentianus Si, 6, written by Johannes Thettalos in the year
1494 at Florence, collated by Scholl for the same opening part and for
isolated passages elsewhere, by Bekker for Books vn (vi). vm (v). It
bears a great resemblance to Q b , particularly to the corrections of Q b in
a later hand : but it has some peculiarities of its own.
S b = Laurentianus 81, 21, of the fifteenth century, written more
probably before than after Q b , to which it bears an extraordinary resem-
MANUSCRIPTS. 5
blance; collated by Bekker for Books i. iv (vn). v (vm), and again by
Scholl for the first four chapters of Bk. i, and for single passages
elsewhere.
T b = Urbinas 46 (transferred from Urbino to the Vatican library at
Rome), of the fifteenth century, collated by Bekker for the first three
books and for Bk. v (vm), then again by Hinck for Bk. i. i 4 and for
detached passages by Scholl. It seems to be more nearly related to
V b than to Q b , R b , S b .
V b = Vaticano-Palatinus 160 (transferred from the Palatine library to
the Vatican), also written by Johannes Thcttalos in the fifteenth century,
collated by Bekker for Bks. iv (vn). vi (iv). vm (v), by Hinck for
Bk. i. i 4, and by Scholl for several single passages. The corrections
by a later hand in the opening paragraph (Bk. i. i 4) are in striking
agreement with C 4 .
3. Third group, more nearly related to the first group, in particular
to U b L s , than to the second.
W b = Reginensis 125 (Christinae reginae in the Vatican library),
collated by Bekker for Bk. vm (vi), by Hinck for Bk. i. i 4, by
Scholl for several single passages. This manuscript will have to be
wholly neglected for the future, because, as I learn from communi
cations made to me by Von Wilamowitz-Mollendorff, it is no earlier
than the sixteenth or perhaps the seventeenth century, and was un
doubtedly copied from the Aldine edition.
Aid. = Aldina, the first edition of Aristotle published by Aldus
Manutius, Venice, 1498, last collated for Bk. i. i 4 and for numerous
single passages by Susemihl.
Lastly an unique position amongst the manuscripts is taken by
P 5 = Paris. 1858 or Colbert. 2401, dating from the sixteenth century.
On the one hand this codex must be one of the worse manuscripts of
the second family, although it cannot be exclusively assigned to any
one of the three groups into which they fall l . On the other hand it
frequently agrees with the first family, and not seldom alone of all the
manuscripts that have come down to us it agrees with the old trans
lation of William of Moerbeke : here and there it presents single
readings, good or at least deserving of attention, which are to be
found nowhere else, although it may very well be that they are not
derived from earlier sources, but are, wholly or in part, mere con
jectures of the scribe himself or of other scholars of that time. The
1 Nor is P 5 now quoted under II 1 II 2 or II 3 in the critical notes of this edition.
6 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
manuscript now contains only Bk. vm (v). from c. 6 9 onwards,
Bk. vn (vi). Bk. iv (vn). and Bk. v (vm), the preceding part having
been torn away ; the corrections are all by the scribe himself, except
a few which are divided between two later hands. It was last collated
by Susemihl ! .
From all this it may be seen that, leaving out detached passages,
the manuscripts collated, besides F M s p 1 - 2 - 3 - 1 Ar., are :
for i. 14: P 6 C 4 QM b Q b R b S b T b U b V b W b L s Ald.
i. 46 8 : Q M b S b T b . for vi (iv). i : C 4 Q b V b .
i. 6 9-13 16 (end): vi (iv). 2 3 7 : Q b V b .
Q S b T b . vi (iv). 3 84 4: Q b U b V b .
n. i, 2 : C 4 Q b T b U b . vi (iv). 4 47 i : Q b V b .
. 37 21 : Q b T b U b . vi (iv). 7 28 6 : Q b U b V b .
8 m. 2 3 : Q b T b . vi (iv). 8 6 16 8 (end):
2 3: Q b T b U b . Q b V b .
m . 2 3 14 i : Q b T b . vn (vi) : P 5 R b W b .
in. 14 2io : Q b T b U b . vm (v). i3 5 : R b V b .
in. 14 10 18 2 (end): vm (v). 3 5 4io: R b U b V b .
Q b T b . vm (v). 4 1 16 8 : R b V b .
iv (vn): P 5 S b V b . vm (v). 6 912 18 (end):
v(vm): P 5 S b T h . P 5 R b V b .
In addition some readings of three late and bad Paris manuscripts,
2041, 2042, 2043, containing only fragments of the work, have been
made known by Barthelemy St Hilaire.
II denotes the agreement of all the manuscripts we have,
II I that of all the manuscripts of the first family (or at least their first
hand), including r,
IT that of all the manuscripts of the second family (and the Aldine
edition), excluding P r> ,
Ft 3 that of all the worse manuscripts of this second family (/. e. all
the MSS. known except F M s P 1 P 2 P 3 P 5 ), so far as they have been
collated, and the Aldine edition.
Bas. 1 2 3 denotes the three Basel editions of the years 1531, 1539,
1550, the first complete editions of Aristotle published after the Aldine.
Only the third is important, since in it the first use was made of the old
Latin translation, and a great number of mistakes of preceding printed
editions thereby corrected. The text so formed remained essentially,
1 For more precise information on all these manuscripts see Susemihl /. c. pp.
V XXVIII.
MANUSCRIPTS AND EDITIONS. 7
though of course with numerous alterations, the basis for succeeding
editors (who consulted new manuscripts but sparingly and, if at all, for
single passages only), until Gottling s time. He first used collations,
but very insufficient ones, of P 1- - 4 5 and of a few leaves of M s , which
had been made by Hase; and Bekker, while completely ignoring P 1 - 3
M s and almost completely P 4 5 , founded his edition with undue arbitrary
eclecticism either upon P 3 (Bekker s P) or upon that text which pre
ceding editions had made the textus receptus. There was no collection
of critical apparatus at once sufficiently complete and trustworthy before
my critical edition, which rests so far as possible upon II 1 , the con
sensus of the MSS. of the first family, viz. P, M s , P 1 : failing that, upon
P 2 - 3 . There is less need then in a work, where the basis is the same,
to give more than a mere selection of the most important and valuable
readings. I shall, however, quote in full those which are found in
Stobaeus extract (Ed. eth. n. p. 322 foil), and in the few citations of
single passages in ancient writers, as Alexander of Aphrodisias, Julian,
Pseudo-Plutarch -/re/at evyeyetas, etc. 1
But however methodically we turn to account all these authorities
we only obtain a text abounding in errors and defects of every kind.
Accordingly a long series of editors, translators, and commentators
from Sepulveda onwards have not failed to suggest numerous emen
dations and attempts at emendation, of which all the more important
will be found recorded in the present edition. The following is a list
in chronological order of the scholars to whose conjectures an im
proved text is due.
Sepulveda. Latin translation ; first published at Paris, 1548. 4to.
Camot. The fourth complete edition of Aristotle, Aldina minor or Camo-
tiana; Venice, 1552. Svo.
Vettori (Victorius). First edition of the Politics; Florence, 1552. 4: a second
edition with commentary; Florence, 1576 fol. In the copy of the first
edition now belonging to the Munich Library, there are marginal notes
in Vettori s own handwriting, which have been used by me. Where
necessary the two editions are distinguished as Vettori 1 , Vettori 2 .
Morel. Edition, Paris, 1556. 4 ; closely following the first edition of Vettori.
Lambin. Latin translation; first edition, Paris, 1567. 4.
Camerarius. Politicorum ct Oeconomicorum Aristotelis intcrprctationcs ct
explicationcs; Frankfurt, 1581. 4.
Zwinger. Edition of the Politics; Basel 1582 fol.; closely following Vettori s
2nd ed.
1 Further particulars in Susemihl s References to these citations will be found
larger edition as quoted above, p. XLV ff. in Clarendon type in the critical notes.
8 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
Sylburg. Edition of the whole of Aristotle; Frankfurt, 1587.4.
JM. Casaubon. Edition of the whole of Aristotle; Lyon, 1590. fol.
Montecatino. Latin translation and commentary on the first three books
of the Politics; Ferrara, 1587 (Bk. i), 1594 (Bk. n), 1598 (Bk. Ill), fol.
(3 vols.). See Schneider s edition, II. p. v.
RaniUS (Pierre de la Ramee). Edition and Latin translation of the Poli
tics; Frankfurt, 1601. 8.
Giphanius (Van Giffen). Coinmentarii in politician opus Aristotclis; Frank
furt, 1608. 8. A posthumous work: wanting the whole of Bk. v(VIIl).
and Bk. IV (vn). from c. 7 $ 5 to the end.
Scaliger. See Scaligerana published by Oncken in Eos I. 1864. 410 ff.
Piccart. In Politicos Aristotelis libros commentarius; Leipzig, 1615. 8.
D. Heinsius. Edition of the Politics; Leyden, 1621. 8.
Conring. Edition, Hclmstadt, 1656. 4.
Reiske and Gurlitt. In the addenda to Schneider s edition, n. 471 ff.
Reiz. Edition of iv(vil). 17 and the whole of v(VIIl), Trepi rfjs TroXeco? pciKapias
KT\, Leipzig, 1776. 8.
J. G. Schlosser. German translation of the Politics and Oeconomicsj Liibeck
and Leipzig, 1798. 8 (3 vols.). The notes appended are in every respect
of great interest for the reader even now, and have proved especially
valuable. The memory of this excellent man should ever be cherished
in Germany.
Garve. A German translation of the Politics edited by Fiilleborn ; Leipzig,
1799. 1802. 8 (2 vols.).
J. G. Schneider. Edition of the Politics; Frankfurt on the Oder, 1809. 8
(2 VOls.).
Koraes, Edition, Paris, 1821. 8.
F. Thurot. French translation of the Ethics and Politics; Paris, 1823. 8.
Gottling. Edition of the Politics; Jena, 1824. 8. To this must be added
the short dissertations: Commentariolum de Arist. Politiconnn loco
(n. 6. 20); Jena, 1855. 4. De machaera DelpJiica quac cst ap. Arist.
(l. 2. 3); Jena, 1858. 4. De loco quodam Arist. (i. 2. 9); Jena, 1858. 4. (In
his collected writings Opusc. acad. ed. Cuno Fischer, Jena, 1869. 8.
274 ff.)
Barthelemy St Hilaire, Edition of the Politics with French translation ;
Paris, 1837. 8. A second edition of the translation appeared, Paris,
1848. 8.
A. Stahr. Edition with German translation ; Leipzig, 1839. 4- To this
should be added the German trans, by C. Stahr and A. Stahr; Stuttgart,
1860. 1 6.
Lindau. German translation (Oels, 1843. 8), unfortunately not accessible to
me for my critical edition.
Spengel. Ueber die Politik des Aristoteles, in the phil. Abhandl. der
Miinchner A/cad. V. i ff. Aristotelische Studieu III. (ib. XI. 55 ff.);
Munich, 1868. 4. Compare Arist. Stud. II. (ib. X. 626 ff.); Munich,
1865. 4.44 ff.
EDITIONS. 9
Bojesen. Bidrag til Fortolkningcn om Aristoidcs s Bogcr out Statcn;
Copenhagen, 1844. 1845. S (Two Soroer Programmes).
Nickes. De Aristotdis Politicorum libris; Bonn, 1851. 8 (Degree disser
tation).
Eaton. Edition of the Politics; Oxford, 1855. s -
Congreve. Ed. of Politics; London, 1855. 8. A second edition (unaltered),
London, 1874. 8.
Engelhardt. Loci Plato Jiici, quorum Aristotdcs in conscribcudis Politic is
vidctur memor fuisse; Danzig, 1858. 4. 24 p. (In a collection of essays
celebrating the jubilee of the Danzig Gymnasium).
Rassow. Short Gymnasium-Programmes : Observationes criticac in Aris-
totdcm, Berlin, 1858. 4. Bcmerkungcn iibcr ciirigc Stdlcii dcr Politik;
Weimar, 1864. 4. Comp. also his Emcndationcs Aristoteleae, Weimar,
1 86 1. 4 (p. 10) ; and Beitriige zur Nikoin. Ethik, Weimar, 1862. 4.
C. Thurot. Observationes criticae in Arist. politicos libros, an article in
Jahrbiichcr fur Pliilologic, LXXXT. 1860. 749759; and especially
Etudes sur Aristote, Paris, 1860. 8.
Schiitz. Gymn.- Programmes : De fundaincntis rdpublicae, quae priino
Politicorum libra ab A ri stotdc posita sunt, I. n.; Potsdam, 1860. 4. 18 p.,
III. Potsdam, 1860. 4. 12 p.
Oncken. Degree dissertation: Emendationum in Arist. Eth. Nic. ct Polit.
specimen; Heidelberg, 1861. 8 : and the large work in two volumes
Staatsldire dcs Aristotdes ; Leipzig, 1870, 1875. S-
Bonitz. AristotdiscJie Studien II. III.; Vienna, 1863. 8. Zur Aristot. Pol.
II. 3. 1262 a 7, an article in Hermes, VII. 1872. 102 108.
Bernays. Die Dialoge dcs Aristotdcs; Berlin, 1863. 8. A German transla
tion of the first three books, Berlin, 1872. 8. Zu Aristotdes und
Simonides, an article in Hermes, V. 1870. 301, 302; Aristotdes iibcr den
Mittelstand in Hermes, vi. 1871. 118 124.
Hampke. Gymn.-Programme : Bemerkungen iibcr das crste BucJi dcr
Polit., Lyck, 1863. 4; and four articles in Philologus, on Arist. Pol.
IV (vn). cc. 2, 3 in vol. XIX. 1863. 614 622, on n. 5, xxi. 1864. 541543,
on Book i. XXIV. 1866. 170 175, Zur Politik xxv. 1867. 162 166.
Schnitzel. Zu Arist. Pol., an article in Eos; I. 1864. 499 515. His
German translation was published in the series of Osiander and Schwab
at Stuttgart, 1856. 16.
Bocker. Degree dissertation, D-c quibusdam Pol. Arist. locis; Greifswald,
1867. 8. 45 P.
Susemihl. Three editions, see Preface: articles in Rheinisches Museum,
XX. 1865. 504517, xxi. 1866. 551571 ; \Kjahrb.f.Philol. xcm. 1866.
327333, cm. 1871. 790792; in Philologies, xxv. 1867. 385415,
xxix. 1870. 97 119; in Hermes xix. 1884. 576 595; and Indices
Scholarum, De Polit. Arist. quaestionum criticarum part. I vn. ;
Greifswald 1867 9. 1871-2-3-5. 4.
Biichsenschiitz. An article on i. cc. 8 11 in Jahrb.f, Philol xcv. 1867.
477482,713716.
10 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
Chandler. Miscellaneous emendations and suggestions; London, 1866.
Madvig. Adversaria critica ad scriptorcs Graccos; Copenhagen, 1871. 8,
461 ff.
H. Sauppe. Hayduck. M. Vermehren. In communications made to me
for my first critical edition of 1872, together with one or two conjectures
of Godfrey Hermann sent me by Sauppe. Cp. also Sauppe s Epist. crit.
ad G. Hermannum.
Biicheler. In my first critical edition and in Part I. of my Quacstiones
critieae; Greifswald, 1867. 4.
Mor. Schmidt. In communications for my first critical edition; also an
edition of Book I. Arist. Pol. Liber I.; Jena, 1882. 4 (2 parts) ; and an
article in Jahrb. f. P/iilol. cxxv. 1882. Soi 824.
Vahlen. AristoteliscJie Aufsiitze II.; Vienna, 1872.8; reviewed by me in
P/iitol. Anzcigcrv. 1872. 673676; and an article on II. 5, 1264 a i, in
the Zcitschrift f. d. bstr. Gymn. XXL, 1870. 828 830.
Polenaar. Degree dissertation; Tirocinia critica in Arist. Politicaj Leyden,
1873-8.
Trieber. In communications with me by letter.
Henkel. Studicn zur Geschichte der Griechischen LeJire vom Staatj Leipzig,
1872. 8.
Riese. An article in Jahrb.f. PJiilol. cix. 1874. 171 173.
Diebitsch. Degree diss., DC re rum cone.ru in Arist. libra dc re pub.j Breslau,
1875. 8.
Heitland. Notes critical and explanatory on certain passages in Pol. I.j
Cambridge, 1876. 8.
Broughton. Edition of Looks I. in. iv (vn) with short notes, Oxford and
London, 1876. 16.
Bender. Kritische und exegetische Bemerkitngen; Hersfeld, 1876. 4; further
in communications with me by letter.
Freudenthal. In communications with me by letter.
H. Jackson. Articles in the Journal of Philology on I. 3. vn. 1877. 236
243; on IV (vn). 13. 5 7, x. 1882. 311, 312 : also in communications by
letter published in the Addenda of my third edition, Leipzig, 1882.
Postgate. Notes on the text and matter of the Politics; Cambridge, 1877. 8.
Von Kirchmann. German translation with notes ; Leipzig, 1880. 8 (2 vols.).
Tegge. In oral communications to me.
J. Cook Wilson. Article in the Journal of Phil. X. 1881. 8086.
Busse. Degree diss., DC praesidiis Arist. Pol. emcndandi; Berlin, 1881. 8.
52 p.
Ridgeway, Notes on Arist. Pol. in the Transactions of the Cambridge
Philological Society, li. 1882. 124153.
Welldon. English translation with notes; London, 1883. 8.
H. Flach. An article on Book v (vin) in Jahrb. f. PhiloL cxxvir. 1884.
832-839.
INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS. II
II. THE COMPILATION AND SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE TREATISE.
In recent times critics seem more and more disposed to agree that
the systematic writings of Aristotle, that is to say, most of the works
that have come down to us together with others that have perished,
were never actually published by their author himself l . At the end of
the fifteenth chapter of the Poetics he contrasts the exposition there
given with that contained in his published works, to which upon certain
points the student is referred, etp^rat Se Trepl avrwv tv rots eK-SeSo^eVois
Aoyots IKCU/CO?, the reference being undoubtedly to one of his own
dialogues, that namely On Poets 2 . Of the works which had thus been
given to the world some information may be gathered, as that they
chiefly comprised popular writings like the dialogues, adapted to the
intelligence of a wider public; perhaps also descriptive works on natural
science, histories of plants and animals. But not the Poetics, nor
indeed any of the similar treatises strictly philosophical and systematic
which make up " our Aristotle," to use Crete s phrase : we may safely
conclude that they were none of them in circulation at the time. It
has indeed been doubted whether they were primarily written with a
view to publication. They had their origin in the oral lectures of the
Stagirite, and stood in the closest connexion with his activity as a
teacher ; this much is clear, but the precise nature of the connexion has
been sorely disputed. The materials of these works may have been
on the one hand Aristotle s own notes ; either sketches drawn up before
hand for his lectures ; or, which is more likely, reproductions of them
freely revised and enlarged for subsequent study in the school. Or,
again, they may have been merely lecture-notes taken down by pupils
at the time. The former supposition is favoured by the analogy of
Aristotle s master, Plato, who takes this view of his strictly philo
sophical writings in the famous passage in the Phaedrus*. Nor is
there any reason to distrust the evidence that shortly after his masters
1 [What follows has been freely con- Bnrsian s Jahresbericht xvii. 1879. 251
densed from a paper On tlie composition 254 ; and Zeller On the connexion of
of Aristotle s Politics in Verhandlungen the works of Plato and Aristotle with their
der xxx. Philologen-Versammlung, 17 ff. personal teaching in Hermes XI. 1876. 84
(Leipzig, 1876), and from the Introduc- 96.
tion to the Poetics (Greek and German), 2 15 12, 1454!) 17: see note (208) to
edited by Susemihl (Leipzig, 1874. ed. 2) Susemihl s edition of the Poetics.
It is
I 6. It is thus mostly earlier than the 3 2760: eairry re virofj-v^ara drjaavpi-
discussion in the 3rd edition of Zeller, $p.evos, els rb XrjOrjs yr/pas eav I /O/TCU, Kal
Phil: d. Griechen II ii chap. 3. 126 138, iravTlT^TavTov tx^os fj.en6vTi, 278 A: d\\a
which should be compared.] See also T$ OVTL auruiv TOVS /SeXrt crTous
Jahrbiicher f. Phil. CHI. 1871. 122 124; inroij.vi]<nv
12 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
death Theophrastos had Aristotle s autograph of the Physics in his
possession \ Something similar may be inferred for other works if it be
true that Eudemos edited the Metaphysics , and that Theophrastos
(probably also Eudemos) supplemented modified and commented upon
the Prior and Posterior Analytics in writings of his own bearing the
same titles 3 : this is at any rate precisely the relation in which the
PJiysics and EtJiics of Eudemos stood to those of his master. The
writings of Aristotle then were designed to serve as aids to the further
study of his pupils : they were the text-books of the Aristotelian school.
In support of the other hypothesis has been adduced a number of
passages which contrast decidedly with the immediate context by
unusual vivacity or sustained style, or by especially prominent allusions
to an audience as if present. Here the readiest explanation is that the
editors have actually made use of notes taken down by pupils. Such
passages have been collected by Chicken from the N icoinachean Ethics";
the latter part of Politics iv (vii). c. i, and the conclusion, if genuine, of
De Soph. Elench. are further instances. It should be remembered also
that in one catalogue of the Aristotelian writings the Politics appears as
iroXiTiKTi a/cpo aats 5 , while ^V(TLKTJ aKpoa<rts is still the title borne by the
PJiysics in our manuscripts. All these circumstances however can be
satisfactorily explained in other ways, partly upon the former hypothesis,
partly by assuming a merely occasional use to have been made of
pupils lecture-notes as subsidiary sources : an assumption which it is
hardly possible to disprove 1 .
In the Aristotelian writings we find a great diversity of treatment
and language; at one time the briefest and most compressed style
carried to the extreme of harshness, at another numerous needless
redundancies, and often literal repetitions. The careless familiar expres
sions natural in oral discourse alternate with long artistic periods
absolutely free from anacoluthia ; at times the composition of one and
the same book appears strangely unequal, as if the material which at
1 See Ileitz, Die verlorenen Schriften mentary on the Metaphysics 483. 19 eel.
12. Eudemos wrote to Theophrastos to Bonitz : /cat ot/xat KOI raDra /ecu e/cetVots
enquire concerning the reading of a pas- 5et avvTarreadai, /cat t crws VTTO fikv Apicr-
sage in the Physics, Qeofipdcrrov ypd\f/av- roreXous owr^ra/crcu...^? 5 TOV Evdr/-
TOS Evd-f)/j,t}} Trepi TWOS aurou TCOI> dnj/bLaprrj- /u,ov /cexciptcrrat.
ntvuv a.i>Tiypd(pwv /caret TO Tre/j-Trrov /3t- 3 Alexander, ScJwl. in Arist. 158 b 8,
f3\ioi> " virep wj> " (p7]<r[v " eTreVretXas 161 b 9, 184 b 36, and Simplicius ib.
Ke\evi>)v fj.e ypd-^ai /cat ciTrcxrretXcu e/c rwz/ 509 a 6: see Zeller II ii 71.
4
uv, TJTOL eyu ov 1^/77^1, r? fjuKpbv TL 4 Staatslehre des Arist. I. 60 (i).
TrayreXtSs e ^et TOV dva/u-ecrov TOV oirep ripe- 5 DiS Lciert- v. 24.
fj.tlv /caXw TUIV a.Kt.vr)Tuv yuoVoi/." Simpli- 6 See the arguments advanced against
cius Cojnin. in Arist. Physica, 231 a 21, Oncken by Susemihl Jahrb. fur Phil.
Schol. in Arist. (lirandis), 404 b n ft. cm. 1871. 122 124.
2 Alexander of Aphrodisias in his com-
COMPILA TION. 1 3
first flowed abundantly had suddenly become scanty. Such peculiarities
however generally admit of more than one explanation; even where the
same question is treated independently two or three times over (unless
indeed one of the versions is to be regarded as the paraphrase of a
Peripatetic) the inference may be cither that different drafts of
Aristotle s own have been incorporated side by side 1 , or that a pupil
has supplemented the notes which he had actually taken by a statement
in his own words of their substance. Yet at other times the contrast is
unmistakeable, as when we compare the Posterior with the Prior
Analytics, or the third book of the Psychology with the two preceding
books : we seem to have before us nothing but disjointed notes or
rough drafts badly pieced together. Such imperfection in whole
works can hardly be referred to any one but Aristotle 2 . If some
treatises, again, or at least considerable portions of them, prove upon
examination so far advanced that the author s last touches hardly seem
wanting, the inference is irresistible that, granted they arose at first out
of Aristotle s oral lectures, with such fulness of details and elaboration
they must have been intended for ultimate publication, whether in the
author s lifetime or subsequently. Thence it is easy to pass on to
the provisional assumption that Aristotle intended to bring his entire
Encyclopaedia to the same degree of completeness, but was prevented
by death from executing his design. As it is, we seem justified in con
cluding that the unfinished works were brought out by his immediate
pupils from a combination of the materials above mentioned, pieced
together and supplemented by not inconsiderable additions : much in
the same way (to use Eernays instructive analogy) as most of Hegel s
works for the first time saw the light in the complete edition made by
his pupils after his death.
There is a further circumstance which must be taken into account.
From this edition, of which comparatively few copies were ever made or
in circulation 3 , the works as they have come down to us must be allowed
to deviate considerably. Our present text can be traced back in the
main to the revised edition of Andronikos of Rhodes, a contemporary
of Cicero 4 . This edition is known to have differed as to order and
1 As in the Metaphysics, K cc. i 7= n. 5, Dicls Doxographi Gracci 187 f.,
B.T.E; A cc. 15; M cc. 4, 5=A c. 9. 215 ff., Zeller op. c. n ii 138154.
2 In il\Q Physics, Bk. VII, Metaphysics, 4 Strabo /. c., Plutarch Sulla 26, Por-
Nicomachean Ethics, are other instances phyry Vita Plotini 26, Gellius xx. 5. 10;
only less striking than those named. Ptolemaeus as cited by Ibn el-Kifti and
3 So far we may accept Strabo s in- Ibn Abi Oseibia, Rose (in vol. v of the
ferences (xnr. 608, 609), although his Berlin ed.) p. 1473, Casiri Bibliothcca
story of the fate of Theophrastos library Arab.-Hispana p. 308 l>, Wenrich De
contains a gross exaggeration : see now aiictontm Grace, versionibus p. 157; also
Bursiarfs Jahresber. IX. 338; XVI. 253 f. by David and Simplicius Scholia in Arist.
INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
arrangement from the former one; besides, in the intervening 250 years
the text had received considerable damage. Thus may be explained
the appearance of numerous Peripatetic interpolations; also cases where
a series of fragments represents the original work, as in Bk. vn of the
Nicomachean Ethics, and in some measure in the Poetics 1 ; or where
excerpts from another work are inserted, e.g. from the Physics in the
latter part of Bk. xi (K) of the Metaphysics and in part of what is now
Bk. v (A) of the same work 2 .
Only by such a combination of assumptions is it possible satis
factorily to interpret the present condition of the Politics, where traces of
its mode of compilation may clearly be discerned in interpolations,
glosses incorporated in the text, abrupt transitions, inequalities of
execution, frequent lacunae, transpositions and double recensions. Yet
the whole is pervaded by an organic plan w r ell considered even to the
finest details :i , and beyond all doubt the actual execution is mainly based
upon written materials from Aristotle s own hand 4 . There is only one
(vol. iv of the Berlin ed.) 25 b 42 f. , Si a
271"., 404 b 38 f. ; Zeller op. c. II ii 50 ff.
139 1111. ([), (2), in i 620 ff. ; Ileitz Die
I crlorentii Schriften i 53.
1 See Susemihl s ed. of the Poetics,
pp. 36.
- The hypotheses above noticed may
thus be recapitulated. Aristotle did not
himself publish his scientific works. They
may have been tdi\\&. primarily
(i) from Aristotle s own drafts as
revised after his lectures for the use of his
pupils : supplemented by the use, as
(ll) subsidiary sources, of
(a) Aristotle s own sketches, prepared for
use at his lectures :
(/3) lecture-notes taken by pupils (with or
without supplements of their own) :
(7) passages from works by his pupils :
(<5) additions by editors : very rarely
(e) excerpts from his own works.
;J Sober criticism will not be deterred
from attributing the plan to Aristotle
simply because at the beginning of Bk.
Ill there is no oe in the received text to
correspond to a preceding [j.ev ovv, or
because a connecting 5e is sought in vain
in II 1 at the opening of Bk. II, and should
at least be altered to ydp. if this opening
and the close of Bk. I are to be kept side
by side. Such twofold transitions from
one book to another are found in the
Nicomackcan Ethics between iv and v,
vii and vni, ix and x ; while between
vin and IX Grant has good ground for
suspecting the words irepl fj,v ovt> TOVTOJV
tiri Toaovrov elp-f]<T0u 1163 b 27. [On the
transition from Mttaph. VI (E) to vii (Z)
see Bonitz II 294.]
4 That the work in its present shape is
as late as Cicero s time is the opinion of
Krohn Zur Kritik aristotcliscJicn Schriften
I 29 ff. (Brandenburg 1872. 4), and Pole-
mar Tirocinia critica in Aristotelis Po-
litica (Leyden 1873. S), and in one sense
they are not far wrong ; cp. the introduc
tion to my edition of the Poetics, 4 ;/. (i).
They suppose the compiler or compilers
to have had mere fragments of Aristotle s
own composition before them, which they
arranged and pieced together for them
selves into a whole full of contradictions
by borrowing from the writings of Theo-
phrastos and other Peripatetics, or, as
Polenaar thinks, by additions of their
own. Polenaar s arguments, however, rest
almost entirely on misapprehensions, and
this is partly true of Krohn s, while others
do not in the remotest degree suffice
to establish such sweeping assertions.
Krohn does indeed allow that the first
book is by Aristotle; but from 13 15 he
infers that it was originally an independ
ent work, not reflecting that, when taken
in connexion with 3 i, this passage
proves just the opposite ; that further the
first chapter has no sense except as an
introduction to the whole of the Politics,
of which we have also an express antici
pation at the commencement of c. 3,
where there is no trace of a change by
another editor. The greater part of
Bk. II, in which only "isolated pillars"
of Aristotle s structure have been left
COMPILATION.
passage of any length, iv (vn). i, where we seem to catch the tones of
the more animated oral lecture in such marked contrast to all the rest
of the work as forcibly to suggest the idea that here we have the
lecture-notes of a pupil l . But the parts executed are often unequal ;
they never grew to the dimensions of a book actually fit for
publication; and when such a work made its appearance after the
master s death the editors did not refrain from adding a good deal of
foreign matter contradictory of the spirit and interdependence of the
work 2 . Here and there, again, we find a twofold discussion of the
standing, he assigns to Thcophrastos ;
c. 6, lie says, is wholly spurious and of
very late origin, c. 5 defective and largely
interpolated : and that there is much to
offend us in both these chapters is unde
niable : see below p. 33 n. (4). The third
book he seems to regard as a medley
taken from Theophrastos, and various
writers of his school, and from other Pe
ripatetics : c. 14 in particular as an ex
cerpt from Theophrastos, Ilept /Sao-tXeias:
cp. p. i8;/. (7) and //. on in. 14.9 (624). In
the principal part of Bk. IV (vn) he finds
" fragmentary sketches "; he agrees with
Niebuhr (Rom. Altcrth. 578 Isler) in de
ciding that the second and larger part,
if not the whole, of 13k. v (viu) was not
written by Aristotle, any more than a
considerable part of 13k. vi (iv), of which
c. 15 together with vn (vi). 8 is an ex
cerpt from a work by Theophrastos on
magistracies ; while the greater part of
13k. vill (v) probably consists of excerpts
and pieces retouched from Theophrastos,
Ilepi K.ai.pwv : comp. ;///. on III. 14. 9 (624)
and vni (v). n. 9 (1720*). There are
some resemblances to the Areopagitikos
of Isocrates : see on ill. 3 2, 9,
6 10, 7 i, ii 20, iv (vn). 4 5,
vi (iv). 9 7, vn (vi). 5 10, vin (v).
I 2. Yet Spengel s assertion " totum
Isocratis Areopagiticum in usum suum
Aristoteles vertit, tarn multi sunt loci,
qui eadem tradunt " (Aristotdischc Stu-
dien ill. 59) is a gross exaggeration, as un
proved as it is impossible to prove. But
why Aristotle should not be credited with
them, why we must follow Krohn in re
jecting as spurious all the passages where
they occur, is simply inexplicable. Com
pare further my review of Krohn in
Philol. Anzeiger v. 1873. 676 680. The
most material objection which he raises
to the genuineness of Bk. V (vin) is that
ef#ow<rtafeii>, evdovcnav are elsewhere
only found in spurious or semi-spurious
Aristotelian writings, evdovfriaaTiKos only
in the Problems, eVfloi crtacr/xos only in the
dialogue On Philosophy, whereas Theo
phrastos paid great attention to this morbid
state of ecstasy or delirium.
1 13ut a pupil of Aristotle, not neces
sarily of Theophrastos, as Krohn thinks :
see notes on iv (vn). i 2 f., 13.
Another well-written chapter is vi (iv).
1 1 , and this even Krohn reckons as part of
"the well-preserved patrimony of Aristo
telian thought." His attempt even there
to ferret out at least an interpolation,
15, rests upon nothing but a gross mis
conception, as is shown by Susemihl loc.
cit. p. 679.
- To start from the internal connexion
of a work as a whole is the only safe mode
of procedure in all so-called higher criti
cism. By discarding this principle Krohn
and Polenaar lose all solid fooling, pre
ferring, as they do, to regard mere
unconnected fragments as the genuine
kernel of the work : Susemihl loc. cit.
679. Not every contradiction is sufficient
proof of diversity of authorship ; how
ever small the dimensions within which
this genuine Aristotelian kernel is re
duced, we shall never succeed in elimi
nating from it all discrepancies of doc
trine. Nay, Krohn justly reminds us that
" even this original kernel can only be
understood on the assumption of a gradual
advance in the great thinker s develop
ment." After we have detected interpo
lations, and restored by their excision the
connexion which they restored, only an
accumulation of difficulties, or such con
tradictions as strike at the very heart of
the system, need be taken into account.
Further it must be admitted that no hard
and fast line can be drawn here, so that
at times the decision is doubtful. Upon
such considerations a list of spurious or
suspected passages (without reckoning
glosses of later introduction and other
smaller matters) might be drawn up, in
partial agreement with Krohn, as follows:
i6
INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
same topic ; either both were found amongst Aristotle s materials and
then included that nothing might be lost, or else only one was written
by Aristotle and the other was derived from a pupil s notes. The work
is disfigured by numerous lacunae of greater or less extent: entire
sections of some length are wanting altogether 2 . The right order has
often been disturbed 3 . The two grossest instances are that Books vn
and vin should come before Bk. iv, and Bk. vi before Bk. v (counting the
books in the order in which they have come down to us) 4 . No scruple
has been felt about restoring the proper sequence in this edition, though
the dislocation was unquestionably very ancient 5 . For to all appearance
ii. 8 i (ds...j8ovXo/*6i o*), 10 3, 4,
12 614:
iv (vn). 2 3 4 i, 10 19:
v (vin). 7 13, 14:
vi (iv). cc. 3, 4 119.
VII (vi). 2 7 (e T6.../3amucn a), 2 9
36:
vin (v). 6 5, 6 12, 13, 7 510,
12 i6, perhaps also 12 7 18.
To this total of about 515 lines shorter
bits must be added from n. 6 18; in.
14 15, 15 ii ; vi (iv). 7 5, 14 5.
On vi (iv). 14 ii 15 see below p. 65
n. (i). Several of these passages display
historical erudition valuable in itself but
out of place a characteristic of the
school as contrasted with the master.
As to the doubts recently cast upon IV
(vn). 7 by Broughton, and upon iv (vn).
13 by Broughton and Wilson (and earlier
still by Congreve), see the critical notes
and ;/. on iv (vn). 13 8 (88 1).
1 Besides the end of Bk. ill and the
beginning of IV (vn) see II. 7 10 13
= 7 1821, in. 15 7 10= 16 TO
1 3 ; IV (VII). I II, 12=2 I, 2;
viii (v). i i ; 7 i ; 10 24= 10 25.
2 See particularly I. 8 3, 10 r, 12
i ; ii. 2 6, 5 2, ii 5;
in. 3 2, 12 6, 13 3, 6, i6 2;
iv (vn). ii 2, 13 ii, 14 7;
v (vin). 7 15;
vi (iv). 8 7, 8, 10 2, n i, 12 5;
vii (vi). 4 i, 8 24;
vin (v). i 7, 7 9, 10 25, 12 ii,
1 8. Conring saw this, but carried it
too far : "noctem aristoteliam quasi stellis
illustrate sategit" Gottling sneeringly
writes, takingcredit forhavingput all Lhese
" stars " out. But when the asterisks are
removed the lacunae are still plain enough
if the critic has the eye to see them. Cp.
my critical edition p. LII.
3 [On these transpositions see pp. 78
4 The one transposition was first made
by Nicolas Oresme (died 1382) in his
French translation, not published until
long afterwards (Paris 1489): and again
by Segni in his Italian translation (Flo
rence 1549). A more detailed proof of
its correctness was undertaken by Scaino
da Salo Qningue Quaestioncs ad octo libros
de republica (Rome 1577), Conring, Bar-
thelemy St Hilaire, Spengel Ueber die
Politik Transactions of the Munich Acad.
v. i ff. Arist. Stndicn II. 44 ff. (Munich
1865). Nickes De Arist. Politicorum libris
(Bonn 1851), Brandis in his history Griech-
Roui. Philos. n ii 1666 ff., 1679 ff. and
by others. It has been disputed without
success, amongst others by Woltmann in
the Rheinisches JMuscitni (New Series) i.
1842. 321 354, Forchhammer in Philo-
logus xvi. 1861. 50 68, Bendixen in /*/ -
lologns xin. 1858. 264 ff., xiv. 332 ff.,
xvi. 408 ff. and in Der altc Staat des
Aristuteks (Hamburg 1868. 4to), by
Krohn op. c. 30, and Diebitsch De reriim
concxu in Arist. libris dc re pttblica (Bres-
lau 1875).
The other transposition was very nearly
assumed by Conring ; the first who ac
tually made it and tried to demonstrate
it was St Hilaire. He was followed by
Spengel and even by Woltmann, but was
opposed not merely by Bendixen, Forch
hammer, Krohn, and Diebitsch, but even
by Hildenbrand Gcschichte und System
der Rechts- nnd Staatsphilosophie I (Leip
zig 1860) 371 f., and by Zeller op. cit. n
ii 672 f. ;;. (2), although they have ac
cepted the first transposition, Hildenbrand
under certain conditions and Zeller unre
servedly. See below p. 58 ;/. 2.
5 See Jahrbtichcr fur Philologie XCix.
1869. 593610, Ci. 1870. 343 f-, 349 f -
and the following paragraphs in the
text.
S UBSE Q UENT HIS TOR Y. I 7
even the epitome in Stobaeus l presents the traditional arrangement 2 :
and this epitome was taken from a more comprehensive work by Areios
Didymos of Alexandria, the friend of Augustus and of Maecenas :! .
Didymos naturally followed the new recension, the work, beyond all
doubt, of his contemporary Andronikos of Rhodes, in which, as has
been said 4 , the text of the Politics has come down to us. Yet, as we
shall see 5 , in the incomplete sentence with which the third book breaks
off sufficiently clear and certain evidence remains that in the older
edition Bk. iv (vn) still stood in its right place after Bk. in.
But there is another circumstance which makes it very question
able to start with, whether the work ever existed in a more complete
form. There was a Politics in the Alexandrian library attributed by
some to Aristotle, by others to Theophrastos"; consisting, it would
seem, of exactly eight books ; a numerical correspondence not easy to
ascribe to mere accident. This fact we learn from the catalogue
of Aristotle s writings in Diogenes of Laerte 7 and in the Anonymus of
Menage 8 . The catalogue goes back to the biographies of Hermippos
of Smyrna, a pupil of Callimachus, as its ultimate authority ; and no
doubt that author followed closely what he found in the Alexandrian
library". Before this the Peripatetic philosopher Hieronymos of Rhodes
appears to have used the Aristotelian Politics; even Eudemos may
possibly betray an earlier acquaintance with the treatise n . And it is
1 Ed. eth. 326 ff. Berlin Aristotle v. 1467. No. 70). Me-
2 See Henkel s careful investigation nage incorrectly gave K, which Zeller
Zur Politik dcs Aristotelcs (a Gymnasium O p. c . n ii 75 eel. 2 had conjectured to be a
Programme of Seehausen) Stendal 1875. mistake for 1L Rose slu , ge sts that the
4- PP- 10-17. Buchsenschutz in his Anonymus was Hesychios of Miletus,
Studien zu Aristoteles Politik 126 fl< A>D> In Pto]emy > s cata i gue the
(Festschrift zu der it en Sdcularfcicr dcs wo ;: k ()Ccurs as NQ< /?7v; , dg iminc
Fnedrichs - Werderschen Gymnasiums, Citatum ct nommatnr bulitikun tracta-
Berlin 1881) judges differently: but see tns vm (Berlin Aris> vol y _ }>
the review by Cook Wilson in the Philol. 9 See the Intro duction to my edition
Rundschau 1882. pp. 12191224. of the Poctics (e(1> j ^ {
3 See Meineke Zu Stobaeos in the Zeit- 10 He is quoted in Diog. Laert. I 26,
schriftf. Gymnasialw. xm. 1859. 563 ff., cp. Pol. I. n. 9 with the critical notes.
Zeller op. c. in i 614 f., Diels Doxographi n See my third edn. of the Politics xix
GraeciGgft. notef: End. Eth. vn. 2 1238!) 5 ff.
4 See p. 13 n. 4. should be compared with Pol. iv (vn).
5 Seep. 47 f. 13 57: End. Eth. vm. 3 1248 b
6 Zeller suggests that this confusion 26 ff., 1249 a 12, with Pol. iv (vn). 13
may be explained if Theophrastos edited 7. Compare further End. Eth. ill. 2
the work: op.c. n ii 678 (i). 1231 b 38 1232 a 5 with Pol. I. 9 2
7 V. 24: TroXiTLKTJs aKpoaffews [cos] ?? [for 1257 a 6 Jo; End. Eth. II. 11 1227 b
the MS. 17] Qeo<ppacTTov d 77. Cp. Usener 19 23 with Pol. iv (vn). 13 2 1331 b
Analecta Theophrastea 1 6 (Leipzig 1858): 26- 38; End. Eth. vn. 10 1242 a 8 f .
Zeller op. c. II ii 679 (i): Susemihl scriti- with Pol. ill. 6 35 1278 b 21 30,
cal edition of the Politics XLIII n. (73). esp. 21 f., 25 f. See also Zeller \\\ Hermes
8 7roXtrt/c7;s a/cpoacrews rj (so the Am- xv. 1880. 553 ^556, who compares End.
brosian MS. discovered by Rose: see Eth. n. i. 1218 b 32 ff. with Pol. iv
H. 2
INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
highly improbable, to say the least, that in the century (200 B.C. 101
B.C.) which elapsed between Hermippos and Apellikon of Teos, the
precursor of Tyrannion and Andronikos l , this older edition should have
been so completely lost that the new editors had not a single copy
of it at their disposal 2 , while it is equally incredible that they should
intentionally have declined to use it. The exact agreement in the
number of the books would undoubtedly render it a far more reasonable
conclusion that except for the transposition, to which we have now
no clue the new edition of this work differed much less from the old
than was the case with some other Aristotelian writings.
The first distinct traces of actual use of the treatise are next to be
found in Cicero :i . It is true he did not use it directly 4 and the new
recension of Andronikos was riot at the time in existence. Yet we are
not obliged to assume that he drew from an earlier writer who availed
himself of the former edition 5 : it is quite as conceivable that Tyrannion,
with whom he was in frequent intercourse, may have provided him with
extracts from the work suitable for his purpose, and these may have
been his sources <! . Even when the new edition appeared, it found but
few readers ; the traces of its use are extremely scanty 7 , and it is in
(vn). i. 1323 a 23, b 1 8, b 27; and
Eud. Eth. n. i. 1219 a 33 with Pol. iv
(vn). 8. 5, 1328 a 35.
1 See Strabo /. c., Plutarch /. c.
- Polenaar op. cit. p. 78 finds no diffi
culty in this.
3 De fui. v. 4. n, ad Quint, fratr. ill.
5. i, DC leg. in. 6. 14, DC rep. i. c. 25
(comp. Pol. in. 9 n, 12, 6 3 f., i. 2
9), c. 26 (cp. Pol. in. i i, 6 i,
7 i, 2), c. 27 (cp. Pol. in. 9 i, 2,
io $j 4, 5, n 6, 7, 1 6 2), c. 29 (cp.
Pol. vi (iv). cc. 8, n). The doubts of
Ileitz (op. c. 241), whether after all we
get any real evidence from Cicero, are
unreasonable in face of the quotation ad
Quint, fr.
4 See Zeller op. c. n ii 151 n. (6).
5 So Zeller /. c. Whether the author
of the Magna Moralia in i. 4, n84b
33 f. shows any acquaintance with Politics
iv (vn). 13. 5 Zeller rightly regards as
uncertain.
6 Cp. ad Aft. iv. 4 b i, 8a i t adQit.
fr. II. 4 2, in. 4 5, 5 6.
7 Alexander of Aphrodisias On (he
Metaphysics 15, 6 (ed. Eonitz) : Eubulos,
a contemporary of Longinus, ETrto /cei/ is
T(3v UTT ApiffTOTe\ovs ev Seirr^pco ruv TTO-
\iriKWv wpbs TT]v HXdrw^os Tro\ireLav av-
Teiprn^evwv ed. Mai Script, vet. nov. coll.
Vat. n. 671 ff. : Julian Letter to The-
inistios 260 D, 263 D : Scholia Aldina
upon Aristoph. Acharn. 92, 980 : Scholia
on Lucian Dream. 3 (eV Tre^Trroj) : Michael
of Ephesus On the Nicom. Ethics fol.
70 a, 1 86 a, 187!), 188 b, 189 a: Pseudo-
Plutarch De nolnl. c. 6 932 i; ff., c. 8
937 A ff.: Suidas and Pholios s.v. etr%a-
Tiav : Eustathios On the Iliad p. 625, 36,
p. 126, 12 ff . : De Thessal. nrbe p. 281,
60 (ed. Tafel) : Theocloros Metochites
jMisccll. 644, 667 (ed. Kiessling). Thus
Dionysios of Halikarnassos in his descrip
tion of the Greek aiav/j.vv)Teia, Roman
Antiquities V. 73 has not used Aristotle
in. 14 8, 9 as his authority, but the
similar account in Theophrastos irepl /3a-
(TtXems. In his critical edition, p. XLIV
and note (82), Susemihl wrongly followed
Spengel Arist. Stud. II. ,s7 n. (4) in
maintaining that everything which Diony
sios relates /. c. v. 73 f. exactly agrees
with Aristotle in. i4f. , and consequently
that Theophrastos irepl /SaatXetas is bor
rowed altogether from Aristotle. Mean
while Krohn, op. c. 47, pointed out cer
tain essential differences, and Henkel,
op. c. 3 note i, has more accurately ex
plained where Theophrastos line of
thought diverges and becomes original.
Hence what Dionysios has here borrowed
from Theophrastos could not have been
derived from Aristotle. But this only
GENERAL ESTIMATE. 19
keeping with their infrequency that we do not possess a single MS.
of the Politics of earlier date than the fourteenth century. Amongst
the Arabs it remained quite neglected. To the reading public of the
west in the Christian middle age it was introduced by the Latin trans
lation of the Dominican monk William of Moerbeke 1 : on the basis of
his version Albert the Great and Thomas Aquinas wrote commentaries
to the work 2 .
III. GENERAL ESTIMATE.
At the time when the Politics was first made known to mediaeval
students, and for some centuries afterwards, the ground was not pre
pared for a due appreciation of it. It was only by degrees, as the
development of the modern state went on, that the treatise began to be
rightly understood :! , until at last even in its present incomplete and
fragmentary condition we have learnt to recognise in it the richest and
greatest contribution of antiquity, or, allowing for the difference of
the times, perhaps the greatest of all the works we have upon political
science 1 . There is certainly no second work to be named in this
field of enquiry which in a like degree displays the rare combination of
statesmanlike intellect, a scholar s acquaintance with history, and the
observation of a man of science, with the philosopher s systematic
arrangement of phenomena and keen penetration into their inmost
nature 5 . Marvellous student of human nature that he was, Aristotle,
although never actually engaged in public affairs, has observed with all
a statesman s shrewd sense the complicated political and social relations
increases the improbability of Krohn s died 1280.]
assertion mentioned p. 15 n. above, for On this subject generally see Oncken
which these two passages are his sole /. c. I. 64 80. The first beginnings of
authority, that Pol. III. 14 is an excerpt such an appreciation are to be found in
from that very work of Theophrastos. Oresme : cp. Roscher in the Zeitschrift
Compare the note on in. 14. 9 (624). f. d. Staatswissensch. xix. 1863. 305 ff.
1 See above p. i. 4 Zeller op. c. II ii 753 f. Compare
2 That of the two Thomas wrote his Bradley s admirable exposition in Hd-
earlier than his master Albert, between Icnica (Oxford, 1880) 181 183. Lang is
1261 and 1269, was the view of Jourdain certainly not far wrong when he remarks
Recherches critiques sur Ics ancicnncs tra- in the Introductory Essays to Holland s
ductions cTAristote 393 f., 456 (Paris 1819). translation of Bks. I. in. IV (vn) p. 15
Nearly the whole text of the old Latin (London 1877. 8), Indeed, when we
version was incorporated in the commen- come to analyse his method we find
tary of Albert, who in this work imitated three incongruous elements, really scien-
the method of his pupil. Cp. my critical tific enquiry, aristocratic prejudice, and
edition VI nn. (4) & (5). [Von Hertling the dreams of a metaphysic which liter-
in Rh. Mus. xxxix. 1884. 446 457 ally sublimi fcrit sidera verticc, and lis-
argues that the question of relative pri- tens for the eternal harmonies of Na-
ority cannot be decided, but that S. ture . This thought is worked out more
Thomas left his commentary unfinished fully by Grant A ristoth 117 ff.
at his death in 1274. Albertus Magnus 5 Zeller op. c. n ii 707, 708.
2 2
20 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
of his nation, and in part of other nations. He has analysed them with
the cool indifference of the biologist, with the same unwearied calm and
caution which characterize his treatises on natural science. The as
tonishing store of information which he had amassed upon history in
general and the special history of nearly all the Greek communities is
here turned to the best account. At the same time there is diffused
throughout the work a warm genial breath of philosophic and moral
idealism, which, however closely allied to some of its defects, never
theless reconciles us to certain harsh traits in it. From the writer s
peculiar point of view however this very tendency to idealism, so far
from softening such traits, serves only to bring them into stronger
relief: so that every now and then we see the shrewd thinker, elsewhere
so strictly logical, entangle himself in a network of contradictions.
> The peculiarity of his point of view and therewith the distinctive
importance of the work, historically and for all time to come, consists in
this, that Aristotle alone with full and complete success has given
expression in theory to the whole import of the Greek state and of
Greek political life in all its bearings. The only limitation to this is
the decided repugnance he manifests to certain political and social ideas,
the outcome of that development of democracy, whereby we may fairly
admit the Greek state to have been, so to speak, carried beyond itself.
This success deserves to be all the more highly estimated in proportion
as his position is in this respect unique. Certainly even before he
wrote, not to mention Plato s trenchant dialogues, there was a literature
it may be a tolerably large literature upon political, legal and
social questions, as may be learnt from his own 1 and Plato s" cursory
notices, although we know next to nothing else about these writers".
The passages quoted show how many ideas deserving of consideration
they had disclosed, but at the same time how far they fell short of the
goal which Aristotle attained. Here again his dependence on Plato is
] I. 3. 4 with n. (31), I. 6 i 5 (9 11 )- in man Y f the passages cited
tin. (49!)) (50!)), i. 9. ii n. (88b), II. 6 above it is doubtful whether he means
17 19 nn. (219) (221), n. 8. 16 statements in writing. See L. Stein s
;/. (269), II. 9. 33 n. (342), n. 12 2 4 paper Greek theories of political science
nil. (400) (404), in. 3. i ;/. (454), ill. 13. he/ore Aristotle and Plato in the Z.dt-
ii n. (596), iv (vn). 2. 5ff., iv (vn). sell rift f. d. gcsammte Staatsivissensch. IX.
6. i n. (770), iv (vn). 14. 16 n. (911), 1853. 115 182.
vi (iv). i 5, 6 nn. (1118) (1123). - Laws i. 630 E, xn. 972 E. Cp. on
Comp. also in. 4. 8 n. (476), vi (iv). 3. 7 the latter passage n. on ii. 6. 17 (219),
n. (1158). To this list may be added on the former Hildenbrand op. cit. 395
Phaleas n. 7, 12 12, Hippodamos II. 8, n. (2).
Thimbron or Thibron, iv (vn). 14. 17 3 See Henkel s exhaustive collection of
and perhaps Telekles vi (iv). 14. 4. n. facts Studien zur Geschichte der gricch.
(1321). Aristotle makes no mention of Lehre vo/n Staat (Leipzig 1872, 8) p 2 ff .
Xenophon : yet see ;/. on iv (vn). 14. 16
DEPENDENCE ON PLATO. 21
evident; a dependence far greater than was once imagined or than
might be expected from the severity of his polemical criticism, which is
frequently, nay in most cases, successful. For firstly, Aristotle s criti
cism touches what are merely external excrescences of the two pattern
states sketched by Plato in the Republic and the Laws; enough of
common ground still remains on which to raise his own design of an
absolutely best constitution side by side with them 1 . Further, the Laws
proves Plato by no means deficient in exact knowledge of Athenian
public life ; while above all, his descriptions in the Republic of other
constitutions besides the only perfect state , i.e. of the actually
existing forms of government, suffice to show that he did not lack
experience or penetration for judging of political conditions 2 . In
short Aristotle is indebted to his master for numerous ideas in every
department of political speculation :! . But it should not be forgotten
how often these ideas in Plato are mere germs which only received
a fruitful development at the hands of his disciple ; or random state
ments which require to be demonstrated and expanded by Aristotle,
and to be fitted into their place in the whole framework of his system,
before their full scope is attained. When all has been deducted that can
in any way be regarded as an inheritance from Plato, quite enough
remains which Aristotle can claim for his very own. One great differ
ence in the works of these two men is most characteristically pre-
VVTierTTlato comes to deal with existing forms of government
he depicts them in a rough and ready way; whereas Aristotle bestows
1 I may refer to the notes on (192), 6 6 (201), 6 9 (206 b) (207),
i. 13. 16 (F2 7 ) iv (vii). 6. 5 (774), 6 15 (215); 8 21 (273) (274), 3 25
n. 5. 2 (153) iv (vii). 10. 13 (838), (277); 9 2 (279), 9 5 (283) (285),
n. 5. 7 (158) iv (vn). 12. 2 (859), 9 ii (295 b), 9 13 (297), 9 20 (318),
n. 5. 15 (166) iv (vii). 15. 10 (936), 9 25 (330), 9 27 (335), 9 31 (341),
n. 6. 5 (192) iv (vii). 16. i (937), 9 34 (344) :
n. 6. 10(208) iv (vii). 16. 12(944), Bk. III. 3 9 (466); 4 18 (499);
n. 6. 15 (215) iv (vii). 16. 14 (945), 7 i (533); ii 19 (579); 16 2 (673),
n. 7. 6 (236!)) iv (vn). 16. 15 (946), i6 ii (6^2):
11.9.5(285) v (vin). 5. 4 (1024), Bk.IV(VII). 6 5 (774); 782(78.);
ii. 9. 23 (325) v (vin). 5. 5 (1025) : 10 13 (838); 12 2 (859), 12 3 (860),
also to Thurot Etudes sur Aristote 109 ff. 12 8 (866) (867) ; 14 13 (907), 14 14
(Paris 1866. 8), Van cler Rest Platon ct (908); 15 10 (936); 16 i (937), 16
Aristote 451 tt. (Bruxelles 1876. 8). 12 (944), 16 14 (945), 16 15 (946),
2 Zeller 0/. c. ii i 783 (Eng. tr. Plato 16 17 (948); 17 r (050), 17 5 (950):
p. 492). More precise details are given Bk. V (VIII). 4 2 (1006), 4 7
in Steinhart Introductions to Plato s Works (1014), 4 9 (1015) (1016); 5 3 (1022);
v. 238 ff., Susemihl Plat. Phil. n. 226 ff. 6 2 (1064), 6 9 (1071) ; 7 9 (1105) :
3 Reference may be permitted to the Bk. VI (IV). i i (1114); 2 3
notes on the following passages : (i 139) (1140) :
Bk. I. 2 2 . (5) ; 5 9 (46) ; 6 8 Bk. VII (VI). 2 3 (1391) :
(54)5 9 18(93); 10 4 , 5 (98); n 6 Bk. VIII (V). 9 13 (1644); n 10
(103); 13 12 (121), 13 16 (127): (1724) (1725), ii ii (1727), ii !2
Bk. II. 5 i, 2 (153), 5 16 (167), (1729); 12 8 (1763), 12 9 ( 764)-
5 17 (168), 5 1924 (172); 6 5
22 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
he most affectionate care on explaining and reproducing their minutest
details ; it is evident that he lingers over them involuntarily, as if they
,vere his own peculiar province, with far greater pleasure and patience,
n spite of his theories, than when he is treating of his own ideal state.
From the point of view which has just been characterized the
lorizon is to Aristotle necessarily limited. Here, too, it is to the
imitation that he owes most of what he has in common with Plato
upon this subject. In both, the close connexion of_ Politics with Ethics
las a beneficial effect ; in both, it is a weakness that this connexion be
comes, in genuine Greek fashion, too much like entire unity. Each
of them recognises in the state itself the school of morality in the
Greek sense of the word, as the harmonious development of all the
powers with which individuals in different kind and degree have been
endowed ; the preparation, therefore, for true human happiness. Only
from this point can we explain the peculiar assumption, common to
these two thinkers, of a pattern state to be specially constructed in
contrast to all actually existing constitutions ; a state only possible
amongst Hellenes as the most highly gifted race; in which the perfect
citizen is also the perfect man 1 . Further, these two philosophers have
no higher or more comprehensive conception of the state than as
merely a Greek city-community, a canton with hamlets and villages:
hence their ideal of a perfect state never really emerges from this narrow
setting". Nay more, it is saddled with all the conditions of a small
Greek city-state: slavery in the first place; depreciation of labour; con
tempt for commerce, industry, and trade; and the peculiarly Greek con
ception that leisure, to be devoted to the exclusive pursuit of the affairs
of the state, and to the intellectual and moral culture of himself and
his fellow-citizens, free from all compulsion to trouble about a living,
is the only thing worthy of a true freeman ; a conception that to our
present view savours strongly of idleness. Lastly this makes it neces
sary that the minority, consisting of an exclusive body of full citizens,
V should have a secure capital guaranteed to them 3 .
-\ But there is this vast difference between Aristotle and Plato. By the
- 1. latter this very limitation of the Greek city-community is carried to the
1 T may refer the reader to the some- n. (19 b), n. 2. 3 (132), ill. 3. 4 (460).
what daring but ingenious attempt of my Wilamowitz on the other hand endea-
exccllent colleague Von \Vilamowitz-M6l- vours to show, op. c. no 113, that the
lendorff Ans Kydathen 47 54 (Lerlin Athenian state of Cleisthenes and Peri-
1880. 8) to trace the growth of this idea in cles, as it actually existed, was not really
Plato and his predecessors, and the rise subject to this limitation.
of political speculation generally, to the 3 See the notes on I. 9 18, 10 4,
internal history of the Athenian people n 6, 13 13; II. 9 2, u 10; in.
and state. 13 12 (599).
2 Comp. on I. 2. 4 note (n), I. 2. 6
CONTRAST TO PLATO. 23
extreme, and the state as it were forced back into the family, becoming /
hinder the ideal constitution nothing but an expanded family. The
ormer on the other hand gives all prominence to the conception of
the state, so far as the above limitation allows; he is careful to draw the
sharpest distinction between the state and the family at the very time when
ic is demonstrating the true significance of the latter in relation to the
brmer. This is made the starting-point not simply of his whole ex
position, wherein at the outset he assumes a hostile attitude to Plato ,
3Ut in ii. 2 2, 7, of his attack upon Plato s ideal state in particular 2 .
>By exploring, in all directions farther than did his master, the nature of
(the Hellenic state, he has penetrated to the inmost essence cf the state
(in general, of which this Hellenic state was at any rate an important
embodiment. He has thus succeeded in discovering for all succeeding
times a series of the most important laws of political and social life.
Here first, for example, not in Plato, do we find the outlines of
Political Economy. At the same time in this limitation of his point of
view must be sought the reason why from the soundest premisses, from ;
observations of fact most striking and profound, he not unfrequently
deduces the most mistaken conclusions.
IV. ECONOMIC (O IKONOMIKH) SLAVERY AND THE THEORY OF
WEALTH 1 .
The opening chapters, Bk. i. cc. i, 2, form the introduction to the
work, and here we follow our author with undivided assent. In oppo
sition to Plato he traces the origin of the family to a process of organic
natural growth, and next shows how the state arises out of the family
through the intermediate step of the clan-village 4 . At the same time
he states what is the specific difference between the state and the
family, and characterizes the former as the product of no arbitrary
convention, but rather of a necessity arising from man s inner nature.
He proclaims a truth as novel as it was important 5 that man, and
^ See the notes on I. i 2, 3 4, 5 Van der Rest op. c. 372. That from
7 i, 2. this proposition there follows for Avis-
2 See further II. 3 4 4 10, 5 14 totle the natural right of slavery, as
26 and note on II. 2. 2 (131). Oncken (op. c. n. 29 f.) maintains, is un-
3 On this and the following sections deniable : yet he deduces it only by the
comp. Susemihl op. cit. On the conipo- aid of his other assumptions. Oncken
sition of the Politics 17 29. (p. 23) thinks no one would now subscribe
4 Mommsen s account in the History the further proposition that he who is by
of Rome, I c. 3, p. 37 ff. of the Eng. nature outside the state, aTroXis, is either
trans. (London 1877. 8), may be com- exalted above humanity or a degraded
pared. savage. I am of the contrary opinion ;
24 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
properly speaking he alone of all creatures upon the earth, is a being
destined by nature for political society. Nevertheless the actual com
bination to form the state appears (see 2 15) to be man s own
spontaneous act 1 , quite as much as the actual formation of poetry out
of its germs in man s inner nature and the first rude attempts to de
velop e them 2 .
The expositions which form the first main division of the work, the
theory of the household or family as the basis of the state (OLKOVO/^LKTJ I.
cc. 3 13), make a mixed impression upon the reader: especially is this
true of the account of slavery c. 4. ff.
Besides (i) the view of those in favour of simple adherence to
custom, who would maintain the existing slavery due to birth, purchase,
or war, as perfectly justified, and (2) the more moderate view accepted
by Plato, which pronounced against the extension of slavery to Hellenes 3 ,
Aristotle found a third theory already in the field which rejected all
slavery as contrary to nature. However true in itself, this last-named
theory was many centuries in advance of the age 4 ; and beyond all doubt
its defenders had lightly passed over what was the main point, the
possibility namely of making their principle a living reality at the time 5 .
Either Plato was unacquainted with this view or he considered that it
did not require to be refuted; in any case it was an axiom with him,
that within the limits assigned slavery was justified. Thus Aristotle
deserves unqualified approval for having been the first to appreciate the
the proposition is just as true now as amongst Christian nations, one of the
when Aristotle wrote it. most important having only been de-
1 Hildenbrand op. cit. 393 f., Oncken stroyed by the recent civil war in North ^
op.cit. n. i8f. Comp. ;/. on I. 2. 15 America; that serfdom was but lately ^
(28 b). abolished in Russia, and the last rem- ^
- Poet. c. 4 i 6. nants of it in Germany were not removed ^j/
3 See on I. 5 9 n. (46), 6 8 (54). until the present century. [If the status (jf
4 Even in the time of the Roman em- of slavery is not tolerated openly in Chris- ^ .
pi re voices like Seneca s remained un- tenclom, there is much analogy to it in the *r
supported. The whole order of ancient position of uncivilized tribes in relation
society was once for all established on to European peoples in colonial settle-
the basis of slavery, and even Christianity, ments, e.g. that of the South- African
although it contained in itself the prin- natives to the Boers, under the guise
ciple which must lead to its extinction, of indenture. But the system of labour
could make no alteration for the time recruiting in the Western Pacific for
being. The primitive Christian Church Queensland and Fiji, even assuming that
may have indirectly prepared for the no irregularities occur, and the coolie
abolition of slavery (see Lecky History of traffic generally (whether in English,
Rationalism n. 258 ff.), but it was directly French, or Spanish possessions) have
hostile to^such a change. See for proof equally the effect of placing ignorant and
and elucidation of this statement L. unprotected natives entirely at the mercy
Schiller Die Lchre des Aristoteles von dcr of their employers, and that, too, in a
Sklaverd 3 ff. (Erlangen 1847. 4) and strange country. 11. w. j.]
Oncken op. cit. II. 6074. It should be 5 So Hildenbrand rightly thinks op. c.
remembered that even now all the traces 40=;.
of slavery have not as yet disappeared
SLAVERY. 25
difficulties of the question in their full extent. But a successful solution
of it was for him impossible. With a clear and true insight he saw
that the theory referred to could not practically be carried out in the
Greek state; a higher conception of the state, as we have said, he
neither did nor could possess. It was inevitable that this insight should
mislead him into the belief that the view itself was theoretically incor
rect: that he should honestly endeavour to find scientific grounds for this
belief of his, is entirely to his credit. It was just as inevitable that the
attempt merely involved him in self-contradictions, and indeed resulted
in the proof of the exact opposite 1 . In substance he decides in favour
of a view similar to Plato s, which he more exactly determines and modi
fies by saying that there are certain slaves by nature who are to be
sought for amongst non-Hellenes, and that none but these ought actu
ally to be enslaved". The thought that slavery is incompatible with
the dignity of man has occurred to him as well as to the unconditional
opponents of the institution, but not as yet the thought of the univers-
ality of man s dignity 3 . In contradiction to his own psychological
principles he makes the difference between the most perfect and the
least perfect of men as great as that between man and beast, and thinks
that thereby he has theoretically discovered his slaves by nature. But
he has himself to admit that there is no certain practical criterion by
which to distinguish these men from others. It is quite possible that
a slave s soul may dwell in a nobly formed body, and the soul of one of
nature s freemen in an ignoble frame; furthermore men of truly free
and noble mind may be born amongst the non-Hellenes, or men of
servile nature amongst the Hellenes. The consequence is that the
criterion of Hellenic birth, to which on the whole Aristotle adheres,
ought not to serve as an unconditional protection against well deserved
slavery 4 . These, he thinks, are only exceptions to the rule; but he
cannot deny that these exceptions are numerous ; and yet he does not
observe, that therefore of necessity there must be many cases where
slavery as it actually exists is in perpetual conflict with the law of
nature, even as laid down by himself. His remarks on the need of
domestic servants for the house, and on the natural antithesis of ruler
and subject pervading all relations of existence are clear and striking;
but they by no means warrant the conclusion that these servants must
at the same time be slaves or serfs 5 . Yet in all fairness it ought to
1 See on I. 4 2, 5 8, 9 n. (45), 3 Hildenbrand op.cit. 404 f.
6 3, 8 . (55), 9 . (56), 10 n. (57). 4 Comp. the notes on I. 6 9 (56),
Compare also the notes on I. 4 5, 13 and 6 3 (50).
12. 5 See the notes on I. 5 8 (43) and
2 Comp. the notes on I. 5 10 (47), 5 9 (45).
6 8 (54).
26 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
be borne in mind not merely that the Fathers of the early Church used
arguments in favour of slavery which are no better 1 , but that in all ages
attempts have been made to justify serfdom or slavery by similar falla
cies 2 . Nay more, Aristotle s arguments, when properly qualified, are
well suited to become the subject of grave consideration even in
our own day ; to make us aware of contradictions in our present views ;
and thus to suggest some modest restraint upon a too vehement
criticism of the great thinker of antiquity. Or does the conviction,
which is forced upon us by experience, that whole races of men lack
the capacity for civilization, so readily accord with our belief, no less
well founded, in the dignity of human nature everywhere? And does
the interval between the lowest individual of such a race and the great
est spirits of humanity really fall far short of that which separates man
from the animals? If lastly it is not to be denied, that even within the
pale of civilized nations Providence ensures the necessary distinction
between some men adapted to physical toil and others who are suited
to intellectual exertion, should we not be as perplexed as Aristotle if
we were required to set up a valid criterion between the two sorts of
natures? As a matter of fact he who has to live by the labour of his
hands will always be debarred from that complete participation in
political life which constitutes the citizen proper. Even the edu
cated man of our own day is so fully occupied with the discharge of
his professional duties that frequently he has no time to take that share
in politics which the modern state, if it is to prosper, is obliged to
demand from him 3 .
The more general discussions on production and property 4 which
follow the investigation into slavery, i. 8 u, cannot be said to be
attached to it in a fairly systematic manner ", but on the contrary
quite loosely and lightly 6 . It is open to question, however, whether the
passage which we must in all probability assume to be lost a little
further on (i. 12. i) did not originally supplement and complete the
requisite organic connexion of these discussions with the theory of the
family as a whole 7 .
1 Oncken op. cit. II. 73 f. under one or the other of these two
2 Oncken op. cit. n. 38. divisions. But it is convenient to retain
:{ On this subject see some remarks of the established technical term in English
Lang, op. c. 60, and Bradley op. c. 215^, treatises on Political Economy, viz. Pro-
si 7 f., which are quoted in the notes on duction , that is, production of wealth.
I. 5, 10 (47) and in. 5. 7 (511). TR.]
4 [Both are included under xp^ario-rt/o;. 5 As Teichmiiller asserts Die Einheit
The Greek /cr?7<m and the German Er- der aristotdischcn Euddmonie 148 (St
werb more properly mean Acquisition . Petersburg 1859. 8).
Plato indeed, Soph. 219 c, D, opposes (i Zeller op. r. 1111693.
r) to iroirjTiKr), classing all the arts 7 See on I. 12. i n. (107).
SLAVERY AND LABOUR. 27
However that may be, certain it is that the principle of exclusive
slave labour, which Aristotle has adopted, has robbed his economic
theory of precisely that which must be taken to be the soul of the
modern science, the conception of economic labour. It has already been
remarked that he cannot help sharing to the full the national prejudice
of Greece against all industrial labour as something degrading and servile.
As Oncken in particular has excellently pointed out 1 , his sort of dis
tinction between direct or natural production and indirect acquisition
by means of exchange, and further between the subdivisions of the two
species, derives its peculiar colouring from this defect. The axiom
that man must consider himself the born proprietor of all the treasures
of the earth, we also hold to be true ; and the proposition, which Aris
totle is fond of repeating and which we meet with once more here, that
nature makes nothing in vain, should continue to be respected in spite
of the thorough-going or half-and-half materialism of our times. But
one essential side of man s relation to his planet and to the rest of its
productions and inhabitants has escaped Aristotle altogether : of the
important part borne by labour in determining this relation he knows
nothing: in common with all the ancients he lacked the idea of the
gradual acquisition of command over nature and of the gradual unfold
ing of human culture which accompanies it step by step. Hence it is
that he has no presentiment of the epoch-making importance of agricul
ture as the transition to a settled life; he sets this occupation completely
on a level with that of the nomad, the hunter, or the fisherman. He
does not separate settled cattle-breeding from the pastoral life of the
herdsman who wanders without a home ; nor does he bring it into in
separable connexion, as he should do, with agriculture 13 . Agriculture
moreover, he thinks, can be carried on by slaves just like other trades 3 ,
and the owner of a piece of ground tilled in this way stands to the
fruits of the earth in much the same relation as the herdsman, the
hunter and fisherman. He gets them ready made into his hands, and
with even less trouble than they do: thus the notion of individual
labour, of personal acquisition in agriculture, falls into the background
in Aristotle s view. And this explains the gross inexactitude in his
* notion of property, which is disclosed when he treats plunder as a
further natural species of production standing on the same footing with
the former species. Besides, in so doing he overlooks the fact that
1 op.cit. II. 75 114: whence the pas- ov8 dei yecopyovs elvai, 8 dvayKaiov tlvai.
sages with quotation marks are taken. robs yewpyovs dovXovs r/ j3ap@dpovs [77] ?re-
2 Cp. also on vil (vi). 4. n n. (1422). ptot/cous: 10 9 13: further Exc. ill. on
3 See IV (vil). 9 3, 4 ovre [3dvav<rov Bk. I and ;/. (282) on II. 9. 4.
j3iov otfr dyopaioi> 5fi TJV roi)s TroXtras...
28 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
plunder by its very nature cannot possibly be included, as it is by him,
with direct appropriation of the gifts of nature as distinct from sale and
barter, that is, from every kind of voluntary exchange : for it is nothing
else than the transfer of property in the rudest form by violence and with
out compensation. Whoever then regards the most violent form of this
transfer as natural would be bound in all fairness to hold the same of its
milder forms, fraud and theft. Nothing but personal labour creates a
valid and incontestable right to property, and such a right over the soil
can only be won by the plough. Thus Aristotle can make an excellent
defence of the utility of property against Plato and can set it in its true
light; but missing the conception of economic labour he misses therewith
the full and logically clear notion of property. His notion too of what
is natural must under such circumstances lose all definiteness when it
comes to be applied to civilized nations in advanced stages of develop
ment. He certainly never intended to concede to plunder a place in
his model state; but he is exposed to the charge of inconsistency, when
he nevertheless declares it to be something natural on the ground that
it undoubtedly is so to men in a state of nature, without seeing that what
is natural for men in a state of nature is not natural for civilized men 1 .
Indeed he has in general no sort of insight into the nature of historical
development ; for in history he discerns, not the reign of general laws,
but merely the action of individual men, free or even capricious,
although often wrecked on circumstances.
When he comes to treat of exchange, not merely do we find Adam
Smith s distinction between value in use and value in exchange already
anticipated 2 , but the whole discussion is evidence how acutely Aristotle
has thought out a subject which Hellenic philosophy before him
seems at the best to have barely touched. The successive steps in
the rise of commerce and the origin of money could not be exhibited
1 with more of truth to fact or of historical accuracy than has been here
accomplished in a style of unerring precision, piercing to the heart of
the subject to reproduce it with classic brevity and defmiteness, yet so
exhaustively that modern science has found nothing to alter or to
1 add. Besides admitting that exchange of commodities is not con
trary to nature he goes on to show how from it buying and selling
necessarily arose, and from that again a new mode of acquisition,
trade in merchandise. Apparently he would further allow exchange to
be carried on through a coined medium, so long as it is merely to
relieve indispensable barter and not as a business of its own. But here
comes in again his want of clearness and that inconsistency which leads
1 See on I. 8. 7 n. (71) and I. 9. 8 . (82). - Van cler Rest op. c. p. 382.
THE THEORY OF WEALTH. 29
him to see an ever increasing degeneracy and departure from the paths
of nature 1 in what he himself recognises as a necessary development :
starting with the most accurate views on the nature and necessity
of monetary exchange he is led in the end actually to reject all com-
merce and all practical trading with capital. He rightly sees how
essential it is that the article chosen as the medium of exchange
should be useful in itself ", but at the same time as the determinate
value of each coin is regulated by law and convention he is misled into
the belief that nothing but pure caprice has a hand in this convention :
that it was by mere chance that metals have been selected out of
all useful articles, and in particular that amongst all the more highly
civili/ed nations gold and silver are exclusively employed for coining into
money, at all events for foreign trade. Once for all he states the case
in such a way that it might easily be believed he has come, a few lines
further on, in contradiction to himself, to hold that coined money no
longer current loses even its value as a metal :i .
Further, while correctly explaining the origin of money, he never
theless fails to recognise to the full extent the way in which its intro-
duction must naturally react upon the value of natural products : how
they are all without exception thereby turned into wares, whose value
is regulated by their market-price, so that anything which finds no
market, or no sale in the market, possesses no more value than heaps
of gold on a desert island ; the richest harvest of the productions
of nature, if its abundance does not attract a purchaser, being just as
useless rubbish as the wealth called into existence by Midas . After
the later stage of a monetary system has been attained Aristotle makes
the vain attempt to preserve in his conceptions the primitive economy
of nature, which has come to an end simply because it has become
impossible. In the business of the merchant he sees no more than
what lies on the surface, speculation, money-making, the accumulation
of capital : accordingly he condemns it as a purely artificial and
unnatural pursuit. There too he overlooks the mental labour,
the economic service which trade renders, not by any means ex-
clusively to benefit the purses of those engaged in it. The insatiate
nature of unscrupulous avarice he opposes in most forcible language,
but it is in vain that he endeavours to restrict productive labour in
domestic economy within any other limits than those which are set
by the powers and conscience of the individual 5 . Of industry as
1 See on I. 9. 8 n. (82). 4 Cp. on i. 9. n n. (88).
2 See on I. 9. 8 n. (84). 5 Comp. the notes on I. 9 13 (90),
3 But see on the other hand the note 18 (93).
on I. 9. ii (87).
30 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
understood in Political Economy he has no more conception than
of labour. Having failed to recognise the importance of agriculture in
human development he now mistakes still more the benefits introduced
by property, which money first made really capable of transfer, that
second great victory in the struggle between human labour and the
forces of nature 1 . To this great democratic revolution it is impossible
to accommodate his thoroughly aristocratic economic theory, which,
at the expense of toiling slaves and resident aliens, guarantees in true
Hellenic fashion to the handful of privileged citizens their leisure and
the secure provision of their subsistence from their family estates, so that
in fact they need take no trouble to increase their possessions. Aris-
totle s freeholder, in Oncken s words, is not a producer at all, but
consumes what is given by nature. Aristotle has no insight into the
true natural law of economic development, the aim of which is to
overcome nature by freeing industrial life from the vicissitudes of her
smile and frown. Of the importance herein attaching to capital
antiquity generally and the middle age never had an inkling; as little
did they perceive that to receive interest on capital is not really different
from selling the produce of labour. On the perverse view which Aris
totle took of money" it is intelligible, that in accord with all ancient
philosophy and the whole of the middle age 3 , he declares lending money
upon interest to be the most shameful of all modes of gain ; yet it is
certainly true on the other hand that the free community of antiquity
was in reality nothing but an association of capitalists who lived on
the interest of the capital they had invested in their slaves.
Lastly, it is interesting to see how inconsistent this whole economic
theory becomes when it passes over to the practical part . What is
here (i. n ^ i, 2) described as the most natural mode of life is nothing
but cattle-raising and tillage pure and simple on a large scale, which is
impossible without considerable capital, an industrial spirit and a know
ledge of the market. Consequently the separation which Aristotle has
made between artificial and natural modes of life cannot be strictly
maintained even in the case of those who rear cattle and till the soil,
for whom nature herself, in the strictest sense of the word, provides a
field of labour. He proves in his own case the truth of his profound
remark made in this same connexion : that in all such matters, while
speculation is free, practice has its necessary restrictions. It is no less
noteworthy that in his economic theory he completely loses sight of that
1 Cp. n. on I. 9. 1 8 (93). Lang op. c. 59. [See however Cunning-
- Cp. nn. on I. 10 4, 5. ham Christian Opinion on Usury pp.
3 Comp. Lecky op. c. n. 277289, 2633, 36 (Edinburgh 1884).]
THE THEORY OF WEALTH. 31
essential distinction between the family and the state upon which he
insists so much elsewhere. Several times in these discussions he men
tions the TroAm/cos who controls the finances of a state as well as the
OIKOPOJUOS who manages the property of a household, and that too in a
way which forces the reader to assume that the task and the proce-
dure in both cases are completely similar : i. 8 ^ 13 15, 10 i$ i 3,
ii ii. With this agrees the decided irony 1 with which he speaks of
those statesmen whose whole political wisdom lies in their financial
devices, while these devices amount to nothing but keeping the state
coffers constantly filled by all kinds of monopolies. And yet the great
revolution caused by the necessity of exchange he has deduced with
perfect correctness from the fact that entirely new conditions of life
and of production arise as soon as ever a single family developes into a
1 circle of several families (i. 9. 5). What changes then are to be antici-
pated when small communities coalesce into a political unity ; when
intercourse springs up between different political bodies and reacts in
a modifying and transforming manner upon the internal condition of
each of them ! Had Aristotle gone into this question the untenable-
ness of his economic theory would have been made even more glaringly
manifest than is at present the case.
In the last chapter of the first book, when Aristotle conies to enquire
into the treatment of the slave and his capacity for virtue, his peculiar
view of natural slavery involves him in an awkward dilemma, from which
he cannot be said to have escaped very happily. The slave by nature
to a certain extent remains a human being, and yet again to a certain
extent he has, properly speaking, ceased to be one. On the one
hand Aristotle demands that there should be a specific difference, and
not merely one of degree, between the virtue (apery} of the man, the
woman, the child, and the slave (e.g. 13 4, 5). On the other, his own
subsequent elaborate enquiry into ethical virtue 2 ; as soon as the question
is started, wherein consists the distinction between the virtue which
commands and the virtue which obeys, tends far more to a mere
quantitative variation than to really distinct species 3 to say nothing of
the further question, wherein the obedience of the wife differs from that
of the child, and both from that of the slave. And this is not the only
defect which this enquiry displays 4 .
1 Strangely misunderstood by Chicken " On the way in which Aristotle dis-
/. c. II. 113, who in consequence unjustly tinguishes intellectual from moral excel-
accuses Aristotle of a fresh contradic- lence see on I. 13. 6 . (112).
tion here. While admitting that many 3 Van der Rest op. c. 378. Comp. also
states need such devices, Aristotle does nn. on I. 13 7 (114!)) and on 11 13
not thereby imply that he thinks this a (120 122).
proof of the excellence of such states. 4 See the nn. on i. 13. 12.
32 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
V. THE REVIEW OF PRECEDING THEORIES AND APPROVED
CONSTITUTIONS.
With the second book we come at once to the theory of the state
properly so called; divided, according to Aristotle s own statement,
into two parts which treat (i) of the constitution, and (2) of legislation.
From two passages in the later books, in. 15 2, vi (iv). i 9, 10,
it is unquestionable that the philosopher intended to treat of both in
his work ; but in the form in which it has come down to us it has not
advanced beyond the former, and even of this considerable sections are
wanting.
The second book more especially constitutes the critical part, the
remainder of the work the positive or dogmatic part, of the theory of
the constitution. In the former is contained an examination of the
model constitutions proposed by other theorists, Plato, Phaleas, and
Hippodamos, as well as of the best amongst the forms of government
actually established, Sparta, Crete, Carthage, and the Solonian con
stitution ; a criticism which of course gives us glimpses 2 of many of the
positive features of Aristotle s own ideal of a constitution. His attack
upon the polity of pure reason, as it claims to be, in Plato s Repub
lic ranks among the most successful parts of the whole work. In
a higher degree perhaps than anywhere else is here displayed the
philosopher s practical sense, his clear eye open to the conditions
and laws of the actual, his profound comprehension of human
* nature and of political and domestic life 3 / Against every form of
socialism and communism it remains unrivalled in cogency up to the
present day. All the well meaning attempts that have been made to
defend Plato against this criticism 4 have disclosed very little that will
1 If this sense could be disputed for the 4 The oldest attempt of this kind
latter passage, the former at all events known to us is that of the Neo-Platonist
excludes all objection. Cp. the notes on Eubulos, mentioned above p. 18 n. 7. It
these passages, (636) and (1130); also has been submitted to an examination in
Ilildenbrand op. c. 351 f., Zeller op. c. detail by Ehrlich De iudicio ab Aristotele
n ii 677. de republica Platonica facto (Halle 1868.
2 See n. 5 7. (158), 15 n. (\C6], 8). Amongst the moderns similar at-
17 n. (168), 25 n. (182) : 6 7 ff. . tempts have been partially made by Ca-
(207), 10 14 nn. (208 211), 16 merarius, J. G. Schneider, &c. ; more
19 nn. (216 219), 22 n. (230) : 7 5 thoroughly by Schlosser, who displayed a
nn. (234, 236), 6 f. nn. (236 b, 237 b) : singular and singularly unfortunate zeal
9 2 n. (279), 5 n. (285) 14 n. (300), against Aristotle; much more moderately
i8. (313), 30 n. (339), 31 n. (341): and impartially by Fiilleborn ; lastly by
10 8 n. (365), 9 . (368) : ii 3 . Pinzger De Us quac Aristotdes in Pla-
(381), 4 n. (383), 6 . (388), 7 n. tonis politia rcprchendit (Leipzig 1822. 8).
(391), 10 n. (393), 15 : 12 5 n. (413). These have also been answered by Ehr-
3 Zeller op. c. 1 1 ii 697 f. lich, as well as by other writers.
CRITICISM OF EARLIER THEORIES,
o o
stand proof; nor have the charges of sophistry brought against it been
to any extent successfully made out 1 . Only this much is true, that
however forcible this criticism is in general it nevertheless contains
misapprehensions in particulars, some of which are very serious 2 ; and
its author had not the power, if indeed he ever had the will, to transfer
himself to the innermost groove of Plato s thought 3 .
These defects stand out far more forcibly when in the following
chapter he treats of the state described in Plato s Laws. Upon this
criticism we cannot pronounce a judgment by any means so favourable :
indeed it contains some things which are all but incomprehensible 4 .
Even the refutation of community of goods has not altogether that
full cogency, derived from the essential nature of the case, which is
apparent in the refutation of community of wives and children 5 . As
we see from this criticism, and yet more clearly from that upon
Phaleas, 7 6 f , Aristotle is himself in favour of considerable restrictions
upon the rights of property . Every difference of principle in this
respect between his own ideal state and Plato s in the Laws disappears :
when all things are taken into account Aristotle is no further removed
from Plato s first ideal state in the one than Plato himself in the other 7 .
Here, therefore, Aristotle s criticism can only affect what are rela
tively subordinate points, and under these circumstances it frequently
assumes a petty and generally unfair character 8 . The refutation of
1 See on n. 2 4 (133), 3 9 (142) : such a spirit of fraternity that we willing-
4 i (145), 2 (i 4 6) (147), 9(151) ly grant our fellow-citizens a share in the
(152): 5 3 (154), 10 (162), 16 (167), enjoyment of our own possessions, is in-
2023 (172), 25 (181) (182), 27 comprehensible.
(184). 7 It is much to be regretted that all com-
2 See on II. 5 17 (i 68), 19 (170), 24 parisons between the ideal states of Plato
(!79)> 27 (184) : 6 3 (187) (189) ; also andAristotle such as Brock er/WzVzV<w*#z,
on 5 22 (177), 6 5 (195). quae docnerunt Plato et Aristotdes, disqtd-
3 See Zeller Plat Stiidien 203 ff. (Tii- sitio et comparatio (Leipzig 1824. 8),
bingen 1839. 8). Orges Comparatio Platonis et Aristotelis
4 Even Zeller and Oncken do not seem librontm de rcpublica (Berlin 1843. 8),
as yet to have observed this difference. Pierson Vergleichende Charakteristik der
It was fully recognised by Van der Rest Platonischen und der Aristotclischen An-
op. c. 108 ff., 121 f., 221 ff., 348 ff.: but he sicht vom Staate in the Rhcin. Mus. xin.
did not investigate its causes, and in one 1858. i 48, 209 247, Rassow Die
particular he should be corrected by the Republik des Plato und der beste Staat
notes on n. 5. 25. It would be quite des Aristoteles (Weimar 1866. 4) have
possible to suspect with Krohn (see p. 14 either been expressly confined to the
n. 4) that, wholly or in part, c. 6 is not ideal state of the Republic, or, being left
genuine. But it is hard to see who but incomplete, contain no sort of collection
Aristotle could have written 10 15, of the similarities and differences between
and scarcely anywhere are the difficulties the political ideal of the Laws and that
greater. See the notes on these sections. of Aristotle. See further the notes on I.
5 See on n. 5. 5. 13 16 : n. 6 5 (192), 6 (201), 14
6 See on n. 5 7 n. (158), 15 n. (212); 7 5 (234), 6 (236 b) ; 9 5
(166), 76w. (236 b). How Van der Rest (285) : iv (vii). 16 15.
op. c. 349 can blame Aristotle for requiring 8 See the notes on n. 6 3 (188) (189),
the public education to aim at creating 4 (190), 5 (192) (193), 6 (201), 7
H. 3
34 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
Phaleas, again, is enriched with the fruits of extensive observation of
mankind; but, like the review of Plato s Laws, it leaves untouched
the kernel of the matter, the inalienability and indivisibility of the
equal portions of land allotted to the citizens. Furthermore Aris
totle sees with keen perception that if this measure is to be carried
out, a normal number of births and deaths must be calculated and the
surplus population, on the basis of this calculation, removed by a resort
to abortion, in order that the number of citizens may always remain the
same. Nor has he any scruples about recommending this horrible
measure and thus invading far more than Phaleas, or Plato in the Laws,
the sanctities of marriage and family life \ What he further insists upon
in reply to Phaleas is the same thing which he had already insisted
upon when criticizing Plato (c. 5 15), namely that uniformity of
education of the right kind is the main point, while all the other insti
tutions have only a subsidiary importance 2 .
We may admit then with Oncken 3 that Aristotle belonged to the
few privileged spirits of antiquity who were the pioneers of progress
towards that richer and riper humanity which remained foreign to the
heathen world at large. In defending the natural law of marriage
and private property he first discovered the fundamental laws of
the independent life of the community : the position which he assigns
to women goes far beyond the Hellenic point of view : and he was
the first who, by adjustment of the unity of the state to the freedom
of its citizens, at least attempted to determine the limits of the state s
activity. But we must also bring out more forcibly than Oncken has
done how far, even in Aristotle, all these great conceptions fall short of
attaining their clear full logical development to important results. And
the review of Hippodamos shows us how little, after all, he was dis
posed, or even qualified, to follow ideas even then not unknown to
Greek antiquity, the tendency of which was by a sharper limitation
of the field of law and justice so to break the omnipotence of the
state that its legislation should be confined to the maintenance of
justice within these limits; this, rather than education, being made
its function 4 . Here, as in the defence of slavery, we see that along
with the excesses of democracy Aristotle rejected many just concep
tions which had grown out of it 5 . However much to the purpose the
(204), 9 (206 h), 10 (208), 13 (210), (238).
14 (212), 15 (213215), 18 (220), 3 op. c. I. 191 f.
1 9 ( 22 5 22 7)- 4 See the Excursus II on Hippodamos
1 See nn. on n. 6 5 (192), ro (208), at the end of Bk. n.
12, 13(209) (210), 7 5 (234). 5 g ee a bove p. 20; and further the
3 See nn. II. 5 15 (165 b), 7 8 Excursus on Hippodamos just cited.
CRITICISM OF EXISTING CONSTITUTIONS. 35
objections which he brings against Hippodamos with regard to his
division of the civic body 1 , they are defective from the jurist s point of
view 2 ; while he makes not a single attempt to refute what is the real
foundation of the whole scheme, the need for the restriction upon
legislation described above. Evidently he thinks it not worth while to
do so, just as in a later passage (in. 9. 8) he treats every opinion on the
function of the state which implies such a mode of regarding legislation
as ipso facto disproved.
The review of the political institutions of Sparta, Crete, and
Carthage is primarily of great historical value for our knowledge of
their constitutions 3 : indeed apart from it we should know next to
1 Compare the notes on n. 8 i (253),
9 (264), 24 (276): but on the other
hand II. 8 12 n. ^265).
2 See the notes on n. 8 5 (258), 15
(268).
3 Trieber Forschungen znr spartan-
ischen Verfassungsgeschichte 99 f. (Berlin
1871. 8) endeavours to prove that, in his
account of Sparta and Crete, Aristotle
chiefly followed Ephoros. Here I in the
main agreed with him in my critical
edition p. LXII f. , with considerable quali
fications however in regard to Sparta.
Meanwhile Gilbert Studien znr altspar-
tanischen Geschichte pp. 86 109 (Got-
tingen 1872. 8) endeavoured to show that
on the contrary Ephoros made use of the
Polities of Aristotle. Frick in the Jahrb.
fur PJiilol. cv. 1872 p. 65 7 made reply to
him that Ephoros work, as is well known,
only went down to the year 340 B.C. (It
would have been more correct if he had
said to 355 : for all that follows was added
by Demophilos, the son of Ephoros,
probably after his father s death.) But it
can be proved that Aristotle wrote at
his Polities as late as 331, and for the
proof Frick refers to Miiller Fragm. hist.
Gr. II p. 121. Both Gilbert and Frick
ought to have known that, from the dates
there quoted by Miiller on the authority
of Meier, Rose Arisloteles psendepigrapJms
p. 397 ff. had with far greater reason
inferred that the IIoAirercu did not ap
pear until the period between the years
318 and 307, and further that it is only
on account of the uncertainty of the dates
themselves that Heitz Die verlorenen
Schriften des Aristoteles (Leipzig 1865.
8.) p. 247 sq., Aristot. fragm. (p. 242 in
the Paris edition of Aristotle), rejects this
inference. Even if Rose is right we should
conclude from this, not as he does, that
Aristotle cannot have been the true au
thor, but only that the work was first pub
lished after his death with additions by
the editor. For the genuineness of the
groundwork at least has been sufficiently
made out by Ileitz and by Bergk Zur
Aristotelischen Politic der Athcncr (On a
fragment of the Politics found lately,
treating of Athens), in the Rhein. Ahis.
xxxvi. 1881. 87 115: cp. Susemihl in
Bnrsian^s Jahrcsber. xxx. 1882. 20 22.
If the matter rested thus Gilbert would be
completely refuted. But leaving the cor
rectness of these dates an open question,
it is not very probable, to say the least,
that Aristotle should have published
thus early a work like the IIoAtrercu
based upon such comprehensive studies.
On another side Oncken op.c. II p. 330 f,
by the help of fragments of this work
which we still possess on the Polity of
Lacedaemon, has tried to prove that
Aristotle, quite independently of Epho
ros, was the first to investigate Spartan
constitutional history in true scientific
spirit ; that he probably visited Sparta
himself for this purpose and drew infor
mation there from living oral tradition.
The difficulties in connexion with this
hypothesis are patent, and with reference
to Crete at any rate the coincidence be
tween Aristotle and Ephoros is of such a
kind that in accordance with the line
of argument above Aristotle must have
used either Ephoros or his authority :
see the notes on n. 10 i (351), 2 (352,
354), 5 (359). 6 (360)- Even with
reference to Sparta hardly any other con
clusion seems possible : see the notes on
ii. 9 17 (310) ; 10 i, 2 (352, 354),
5 (359) : vnl ( v )- i I0 ( J 498), 7 2
(1592), n 3 (1710), 12 12 (1771),
and compare Rose op. cit. 398, 490.
Only we are not to infer from this that
Ephoros was Aristotle s only authority
32
INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
nothing of the Carthaginian constitution : moreover we are bound on the
whole to subscribe to Aristotle s estimate of them 1 . We shall not ven
ture however to rank his merits quite so highly as Oncken has done.
Certainly there never was before so mercilessly destructive and yet so
just a criticism upon that Spartan state which up till then had been,
most unwarrantably, the idol of all aristocratic and oligarchical circles.
Yet on the one hand we must remember that close as were his
relations with those circles, and although in essentials his own pattern-
states were based upon similar foundations, Plato had been by no means
blind to the defects of the Cretan and Spartan constitutions. Indeed
in important particulars, and even in those of the greatest importance,
Aristotle can but repeat the censure pronounced by his master 2 . On
the other hand it is really necessary to reflect how, after so crushing
a criticism which leaves scarcely anything untouched, Aristotle can
possibly still be content, like Plato, to pronounce the Cretan and
here. On the contrary while it is more banefulness? And the procedure which
than doubtful whether he has Ephoros
in view when he quotes certain opinions
and statements (see on 11. 6. i7 ? n. 9-
n), it is quite certain that in regard
to both states Aristotle diverges consi
derably in details from Ephoros, partly
indeed from all other authorities. This
divergence must be due to another source,
and here and there to one which he alone
has utilized : see on II. 10 6 (360), 10
(369) : VI (iv). ii 15 (*30i).
1 In spite of Oncken s opposition it
will still remain the universal belief that
the picture which Aristotle draws of the
condition of Sparta agrees fully and com
pletely only with the Sparta of later
times. But the extreme view that this
description in no respect applies to the
Sparta of the earlier times should perhaps
be modified. What is to be said, for in
stance, when Trieber op. cit. p. 136 ff.
actually praises Aristotle for having in
his criticism of the Spartan constitution
taken into account simply the existing
historical relations of his age, thereby ful
filling a condition laid down generally by
the science of history in our time ; while
at the same time he would fain persuade
us that this procedure, so far as the his
tory of Spartan antiquity was neglected,
was due to ignorance arid resulted in
misstatement ! Why should not a part
of the mischiefs discovered by him, and
the germ at least of the remainder,
have always existed in the Spartan state,
even if it was not perhaps until after the
Persian wars that this germ developed
with gradually increasing strength and
Trieber commends only deserves to be
praised because in fact even in historical
matters we are fully entitled to argue
from consequences to their causes, from
the end to the beginning. Whoever con
siders the facts collected in the note on
II. 9. 37 (350) will hardly find the sug
gestion of Trieber and others that the
readiness of the Spartan ephors and sena
tors to receive bribes only belongs to later
times particularly credible; but first of
all he will enquire, with what date these
later times ought rightly to commence.
Fulleborn in a note to Garve s translation
II p. 242 says most sensibly : Aristotle s
remarks are very strangely contradicted
by all the famous anecdotes of the hero-
ism and chastity of the Spartan women.
But different periods must be distin-
guished in Spartan history and it
should be borne in mind that Aristotle
after all deserves more credit than
scattered anecdotes of such a kind. But
should not this consideration be extended
to other cases ? Where Aristotle assumes
that Spartan institutions were always
thus and thus, while later writers con
tradict him and even claim to know
the names of those who introduced the
change, should we directly and unhesita
tingly pronounce these later authorities
right? See the notes on n. 9 14 (299,
300)- 15 (303).
2 Of what is really the main point
Aristotle says this himself II. 9 34 (cp.
note). See further the notes on n. 9 5
(283), II (295 b), 20 ( 3 l8), 23 (324),
25 (33). *7 (335). 31 (34i).
CRITICISM OF EXISTING CONSTITUTIONS. 37
Spartan constitutions (with the addition merely of the Carthaginian)
to be the next best after his own model state, and thus himself to
sacrifice to the idol he has just destroyed. As to the socialist
elements in those constitutions, they certainly do not go too far for
him, but on the contrary not far enough; like his master, he is far
more rigidly logical. The social principles of Aristotle s model state
are as strictly deduced as those of Plato s.
It would be quite incredible that, amongst the best approved con
stitutions actually established, Aristotle should not have mentioned
Solon s as well as the other three. For this reason alone it is hardly
conceivable that the section in which it is discussed should not be
genuine: rather is it matter of surprise that the subject is dismissed so
briefly. But the mere list of legislators, with which the second book
ends, is certainly a foreign interpolation which contradicts the clearly
expressed purpose of the book 1 .
VI. THE LEADING PROPOSITIONS OF POLITICAL SCIENCE,
We might naturally expect the exposition of Aristotle s own model
constitution to follow directly upon this criticism of those which claim
that title. But here again, with that characteristic unlikeness to Plato
which was before remarked 2 , our philosopher declines to regard as
comparatively unimportant everything else in political theory except the
perfect state. The positive or constructive side of the theory of the
constitution, to which we now come, includes two parts, one general,
the other special. The former 3 and much shorter portion, ITL__CC. i 13,
treats of the fundamental conditions of the healthy working of constitu
tions, which, as such, apply equally to the best form of state and to all
others 4 . More explicitly, this portion falls into two main divisions : the
firstJA} 1 _cc. i 5, while touching here and there by anticipation 5 upon
the classification of separate constitutions, for the most part merely
prepares for this by a discussion of the fundamental political con
ceptions which must be assumed for all of them: the true citizens cc. i,
1 See further the notes on u. 12 i, solution of the problem of the ut-
10 (421), 12 (423, 425), 13 (427). most importance for all constitutions and
2 p. 21. intimately connected with the subject of
3 On what follows compare Susemihl Bk. I whether and to what extent the
On the Third Book of Aristotle s Politics family and private property, institutions
in Philologits xxix. 1870. 97 119. subserving individual interests, have any
4 Hildenbrand, op. c. 408 f. He rightly right to continue in the presence of the
points out another reason why Bk. in state, the organization for the common
should follow closely on Bk. n; the weal.
latter, at its very outset, along with its 5 ill. i 9 n. (439 b), 3 r, i .
task of criticism attempts a positive (456), 5 57 . (508).
INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
2 : the essential identity of a state c. 3 : the relation between the virtue
of the good citizen and that of the good man cc. 4, 5. Now this
relation will vary under different constitutions and thus determine their
nature and comparative merit. The subject of the remaining chapters
(B), cc. o 13, is, firstly, a definition of constitution (TroXtreta) in general,
and a preliminary classification of the several forms of the state
As we are told in Bk. L, the end of the state is Happiness,
the true well-being and common weal of the citizens. All constitutions
which make the interest of the governed the end of government are
normal constitutions (opOal TroAtretcu) : those which exist for the interest
of the governors are corruptions or degenerate varieties (7mpeK/?ao-eis)
c. 6. Then, by a merely numerical standard, the normal constitutions
are provisionally divided into Monarchy, True Aristocracy and Polity
(Ilo/Weca proper); the corrupt forms into Tyranny (rvpavviY), Oligarchy,
Democracy; according as one man, a minority, or the majority respectively
rule (c. 7). We pass on (c. 8) to consider secondly a series of difficult
problems (arro^ou). From the discussion of the first of these it appears
that it is merely an accident of Oligarchy and Democracy that a
minority governs in the one, a majority in the other. It is essentially
the selfish government of the rich by the poor which constitutes De
mocracy, the selfish government of the poor by the rich which con
stitutes Oligarchy (c. 8). The remaining discussions treat at greater
length three separate inquiries : (a) in c. 9, (ft) in cc. 10, n, (y) in cc. 12,
13 \ Fromjjie- -definitions just framed the first (a) draws the-inference
that in reality the true end of the state is not adequately secured upon
the democratic principle equal political privileges to all citizens..- who
are equal in respect of free birth: nor yet upon the principle of
oligarchy; for the state is no joint-stock trading company: the aristo-
cratical principle of intelligence, virtue, and merit is alone sufficient
1 The subdivisions of in. cc. i 13
may thus be tabulated :
(A) First main division : cc. i ^
(a) Who is the true citizen? cc. 1,2
(/3) What constitutes the identity of
a state ? c. 3
(7) Is the virtue of the good citizen
the same with the virtue of
the good man? cc. 4, 5.
(B) Second main division : cc. 6 13
(I) Constitution defined ; preliminary
classification of constitutions :
cc. 6, 7.
(II) Discussion of difficult problems
(dwopiai) : cc. 813
More precise definitions of Demo
cracy and Oligarchy : c. 8
The comparative merit of consti
tutions : cc. 9 13
(a) the aristocratical principle pre
ferable to that of democracy
and of oligarchy: c. 9
(/3) the mass of the citizens and the
laws in what sense sovereign
on an aristocratical principle:
cc. 10, ii
(7) the claims of the better citizens
and of the mass how best ac
commodated on this principle,
and the varieties (monarchy,
pure aristocracy, polity)
thence resulting : ce. 12, 13.
LEADING PRINCIPLES. 39
(c. 9). This is followed by the inference (/3) that the higher the capacity
of a body of citizens, and consequently of a state, the more as a rule
does the worth of eminent individuals fall short of that of the great mass
of other citizens taken collectively, just as the wealth of the richest
individuals amongst them is outweighed by the total property belonging
to the remainder. Hence, even on an aristocratical principle, sovereignty
belongs to the whole body. Yet this many-headed sovereign, besides
being restrained by the laws, must always in the direct exercise of its
powers be confined to the election of magistrates (apxaipeo-iai) and to
the scrutiny of their conduct, when, at the expiry of their term of office,
they render an account of their stewardship (cvfowu). All the details
of state affairs will be entrusted to the magistrates elected by such a
competent civic body from amongst its ablest members.
A marvellously profound thought this, marking its author s essential
independence of Plato 1 , and proving how powerfully he had been
influenced by democracy and the Athenian polity. However distinctly
he, like Plato, disapproves of its unrestrained development in Athens
and elsewhere subsequently to the time of Pericles 2 , he has nevertheless
laid down for all time the justification of the democratic element in
political life 3 , and has done something at least to set a proper limitation
to it. Moreover this thought has a far wider bearing. A true con
stitutional state combining freedom and order, whether under a mon
archy or a republic, whether prince or people is sovereign within it, is
only conceivable if the sovereign has definite limitations imposed by
law upon the direct exercise of his sovereignty, in keeping with the true
1 Spengel Ucber Arist. Pol. 15 n. 18, recht\>. 463 ff (Leipzig 1860. 8) has really
Henkel, op. cit. So, n. 12, Oncken op. c. shown "the fallacy of his analogies" as
II 165 f., 174. The last rightly remarks Henkel thinks /. c., may be seen from
that with this proposition Aristotle set the note on III. n. 2 (565!)). Zeller (op.
himself free from the conceit of philo- cit. n ii 717) on the other hand finds them
sophic omniscience, while to Plato no- to the point, and Henkel himself con-
thing was so certain as that the Demos tinues ; However, as Spengel remarks
meant the sovereignty of folly, and the
rule of philosophers the reign of wis-
dom itself. But how can Congreve con
ceive of Aristotle s own ideal state if he
thinks (p. 137) that this proposition is only
relatively true (not the slightest trace of
this is to be found in its author), and is
intended only to indicate that of the two
evils, democracy and oligarchy, the for
mer is the lesser ? This is strange ex
egesis.
2 For this reason Oncken s assertion
/. c. 172, that the exposition given n
15, 16 is borrowed from observation of
the Attic democracy, as it was even after
Arist. Stud. ii. 56 n. i, "even Aris-
totle is not disposed to allow the public
a correct judgment on that which is
strictly scientific. But of that which
concerns mankind at large what the
Greeks denote by Koival Zwoiai every
one can judge, and the multitude
often judges more correctly than a spe-
cialist ; who is often prejudiced with-
out knowing it." Or as Goethe in
one passage expresses it, "There is no
doubt this public, so much honoured and
despised, is almost always wrong in
particulars, hardly ever in its broad
views. " That Aristotle s confidence
Pericles time, is not correct. goes somewhat too far is shown in the
3 Whether Trendelenburg in Natur- note on in. 15. 8.
40 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
external and internal relations of power. No doubt the restraints
imposed by a constitutional state of large size in modern times are
very different from those devised by Aristotle for his Greek canton-
state, and suggested by the forms most suited to his purpose amongst
those in actual existence. Yet after all, although the idea was foreign
to him and to all antiquity, it is upon just this principle that representa
tive government rests. Now-a-days the people does not elect the
magistrates, unless it be the president of a republic, the borrowed
monarchical head of the whole state: they are nominated by the monarch
or his republican fac-simile, and there is no popular court to which
they are directly accountable. Legislation again, the settlement of the
state revenue and expenditure, and all that is included therein, are no
longer directly in the hands of the entire body of the citizens. But
even under a strict constitutional monarchy, where the monarch is the
only recognized sovereign, the people have a most substantial share of
political privilege, in that through their representatives they take part
indirectly in legislation, in voting the budget, the ratification of treaties
and the control of the administration. Even the most conservative
modern statesman no longer overlooks the fact that the strange phe
nomenon, changeable as the wind, called public opinion 1 , may in certain
circumstances be consolidated into a firm, enduring, real popular will,
which even under the most absolute monarchy gradually becomes the
most powerful and irresistible of all political forces; and that thus the
so-called sovereignty of the people, which as a legal principle is more than
doubtful, yet in fact indirectly and ultimately ever prevails. No one
knows better than Aristotle that nothing is more foolish than the masses:
but he is quite as well aware, that again there is nothing wiser. Where the
one quality ceases and the other begins he has not attempted to deter
mine and perhaps this is an attempt which no mortal man can make with
success. He is far too well-trained a realist, to fall into the error of
those who treat that Proteus, the public, as if it did not exist, or who
do not know how to reckon with such a force 2 . He was, so far as we
know, the first to expound, prove, sift, and limit this thought which up
till then had only been thrown out by democratic party leaders 3 ; the first
who, while accepting it not with interested views merely but from full
conviction, yet considers it impartially in the spirit of the true statesman
< who has in view only the welfare of all, and of the psychologist who
has an understanding for the instincts of a great people. He believes
^ Demosth. Fah.^ leg. 135:: w o fdv 017- 2 Oncken op. c. n. 168.
/J.QS eanv affraQ^-qroTarov Trpay/ma TUV TTO.V- 3 Compare Athenagoras in Thucyd. VI.
rwv^Kal acrvvderdTaTOV, wo-rrep ev tfaAdrr?? 39. i : also Pericles ib. II. 40, Otanes in
7Ti>evfj.a a/caratrraroi , a>s av rvxfj KivovfJievos. Herod. III. 80 s. Jin.
LEADING PRINCIPLES. 41
1 the individual can be ennobled thro ugk- the common feeling of the
* body-corpCfate Ho which he belongs ; that his powers and intelligence
can be multiplied, his good instincts raised, his bad ones corrected
through being merged in a higher unity; and this is the only ethical
* point of view, under which an intrinsic right to political elevation can
be ascribed to the people^ Aristotle uses an example here (c. 1 1 3)
which contains in itself a great concession. The capacity of the
public for judging in matters of artistic taste he touches upon as a
truth which needs no proof; and yet on this very field the right of
the masses to decide is much more disputed and much more dis-
putable than on that of public life, where the weal and woe of each
individual is in question and .{he healthy instinct frequently sees
further than- all the intelligence of the experts 1 . Plato is of quite
another opinion (Laws in. 700 E ff.) L) , and nothing is easier than by
resolving the public into its elements to show that it really consists of
mere cyphers 3 : but it is impossible to do away with the fact that the
* poet or artist is nothing without this public, which he must conquer in
order to rule, and that the judgments of this court have a force with
which the view of the experts, who are seldom agreed, can never be
matched 4 . Spengel 5 is undoubtedly right : these chapters (in. cc. 9
13) contain doctrines more important than any to be found elsewhere
in the work, doctrines which deserve to be written in letters of gold.
This section ends with the remark (in. n. 20) that all this does not
as yet inform us what kind of laws there ought to be, but simply that
those made in the spirit of the right constitution are the right ones. In
other.words^the orjler of merit of the normal constitutions, and in its
complete form that of the degenerate varieties C 3 is not yet decided. We
1 See however the notes on III. n i (i) Aristotle did not recognize Polity as
(565 b), 15 8 (647). standing on an equality with the other
2 Yet on the other hand see Sy mp. 194. two forms of government, vi (iv). 8. i ;
3 Such a resolution Socrates under- and (2) no greater rights are granted to
takes in Xenoph. Memor. in. 7 i n the the people in a Polity than in an aristo-
caseofthe popular assembly (Vettori). cracy or a moderate democracy, VI (iv)
4 Oncken II. 165 f. What, he rightly 14. 10, 14. And when Oncken made
adds, would have become of the Ger- the assertion (n. 174) that Aristotle in-
man drama of Lessing, Goethe, and variably subordinated to the law and the
Schiller, had its fate rested solely with popular decree the wisdom and virtue of
the critics, from Gottsched and Nicolai even the best individual citizen, he must
down to the romantic school ? It is surely have forgotten the substance of
however a mistake to suppose that the ill. c. 13, c. 17 5 8.
further step from this passive popular 5 Arist. Stud. II. p. 54 (646).
sovereignty to the active sovereignty, 6 In general the result of the preceding
which finds expression in the self-govern- statements is that Democracy is prefer
ment of the Demos by the Demos was able to Oligarchy, and the latter prefera-
also taken by Aristotle, when he re- ble to a Tyranny ; but whether and how
cognized Polity as a form of government far a moderate oligarchy deserves to rank
on an equality with Monarchy and Aris- before an unrestrained democracy has not
tocracy (Oncken II. 169, 239 f.). For yet been decided.
42 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
naturally expect the remaining discussion (y), cc. 12, 13, to give at
least the outlines of such a decision, bringing the whole exposition into
real organic connexion with the previous classification of forms of
government, and thus concluding the general theory of the constitution.
But at first sight this expectation would seem to be wholly disappointed.
Schlosser 1 was the first to find fault, not without reason. So much of
the previous discussion (cc. 8 n) is repeated in cc. 12, 13 that he
conjectured, not very happily, that these chapters had been transposed.
After him Bernays 2 declared cc. 12, 13 to be simply another version
of cc. 9 ii and cc. 16, 17. This view requires careful examina
tion. Against it may be urged that the subject of cc. 14, 15 (indeed
the whole discussion irepi /focriXeux?, cc. 14 17) is quite as closely con
nected by its contents with c. 11 as it is with the latter half of c. 13
( Z 3 2 5)j an( l m uch more so than it is with cc. 12, 13 i 12 ; and
as it most naturally -follows upon c. i3 3 , there would be a tremendous
gap, in accordance with the remark above made, between the end of
c. ii and the discussion on Monarchy at the beginning of c. 14, which
on Bernays view would directly follow. Notwithstanding this, cc. 12,
13 i 12 might well pass for another version of cc. 9 ii, lacking
only the important second question as to the limits to the sovereignty
of a competent body of citizens. In that case, however, the editor
must have made more than a slight change in the passage to adapt it
to its present place. For though the reference in 13 i to c. 9 if. as
preceding might be cut out as a loose addition, that contained in
13 2 is firmly embedded in the context 4 . On the other hand, the
latter part of c. 13 ( 13 25), which is really devoid of all con
nexion with the earlier part as it at present stands 5 , might conveniently
come immediately after c. ii as an exception to the rule there set
forth, thus: if however an individual man is superior to all the
citizens together, then in the best state he stands above the law
as absolute king and ruler. The question of ii 20 noticed
above 13 would then remain unanswered, but it might be urged that
it belongs to the theory of the special constitutions to provide the
answer. But graver considerations remain. From ii 8 it would
1 In his translation vol. I. p. 296 ;/. 79. tioned. But surely it is enough that in
Cp. my note on ill. 13. 12 (599). 13 20 the mention of them as opposed
2 In the note to his translation, p. 172. to the corrupt forms serves to introduce
3 Bernays indeed disputes this. He the whole of the succeeding exposition,
maintains that the sentence which states although at last this stops short ( 24)
the propriety of this transition, (pa.fj.ev yap merely at the antithesis of the best con-
TWf opduv 7roAiTetc3j> fj.iav dva.i ravTTjv i. e. stitution and the corrupt forms.
paffiXdav (in. 14. i) finds no point of con- 4 Cf. the notes on III. 13 I, 2.
nexion in the last words of c. 13, since the 5 As Conring saw.
normal constitutions are not there men- 6 P. 41 : see also p. 43 n. 2.
BOOK HI. cc, 12, 13. 43
follow, ill contradiction to Aristotle s view, that even in the best
state the magistrates might be elected from men of a definite census
only 1 . Further there is one short sentence in c. 13, in its tra
ditional place entirely unconnected with what precedes or follows, 6,
which however would be quite in place immediately before 13. The
close of 12 has no counterpart at present in the previous chapters,
yet it cannot be separated from its immediately preceding context ; and
it is evident that the subsidiary question here raised, Are the best
laws to be made for the advantage of the better citizens or of the
majority? stands in the closest connexion with the main question
at n 2o 2 ; but no less evident that the answer to it here given is
incomplete 3 . There is then in any case a lacuna after 13 12: we
can easily imagine something to fill it, after which what in our present
order stands as 6 followed quite naturally 4 .
If therefore we really have two versions of the same subject-matter
before us, then the older one contained in cc. 12, 13 has been handed
down to us in worse condition and is the more incomplete ; the later
version, cc. 9 11, must have been left unfinished. In any case there
is no redundancy noticeable here, but rather a lamentable deficiency.
But on the other hand, the inquiry as to which is the most normal and
best of the normal constitutions (n 20) can only be conducted by
a more exact determination and modification of the previous result
with regard to the most legitimate holder of sovereign power ; and this
consideration seems to render necessary a certain review of all the
political factors, whatever their justification. It was further stated
expressly, n i, that all the cases except that in which the sovereignty
of the people is justified are to be afterwards discussed. Now it
cannot be denied that c. 12 does make a start in this direction by
first deciding universally which factors really can lay claim to
political rule and thereby granting at the outset that wealth (and
therefore Oligarchy) has a certain justification". The diffuseness
of the repetition is not commendable , but in such works as those
of Aristotle s which have been preserved it has simply to be accepted
1 See the note on in. n. 8 (569). tial dissent in Philologus xxix. 11315
2 7r6TpovTiI)vo/j,odeT-r)i>o/j.o6T r}Teoi>,(3ov- and in the critical edition. It requires
\o,uei>ti)Tide(rda.LTous6pdoTaTovsv6[ji.ovs,7rpbs correction in one important point only
rb rQiv fie\TiQvuv crv/^cpepov 77 -jrpos rb rcGc which does not affect the present ques-
ir\ei6vwv ; in. 13 12. Compare OTTOIOUS tion : see the note on III. 13. 12 (599).
/j-evroi rtras Set "elrai roi>s 6p6<2s Kifj.evovs Compare also Susemihl Compos, dcr
vo/j.ovs, ovSev TTW 5^\oi/...7rA?}i> TOVTO ye Arist. Pol. 23 ff (where however the last
(j)a.vpbv 6 rt del irpos rrjv iro\<.Teia.v /cet<r0cu sentence of n. 19 should be rescinded)
roi)j vopovs, ii -20. and in part Spengel Arist. St^ld. III. 24.
3 See Thurot s excellent and convinc- 4 See again the note on in. 13. 12.
ing analysis Etudes 47 ff., from which 5 Cp. the note on in. 11. i.
Susemihl should not have expressed par- 6 See on ill. 13. 12 n. (599).
44 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
in silence. The main point is that in the lacuna following 13 12,
before 6 (the proper place of which is between 12 and 13), a
convenient place presented itself for a discussion declaring the true
Aristocracy to be an unlimited democracy of none but competent men
and ranking it above Polity (Ho/Weio,) 1 ; as in the latter the inferior
capacity of the body of citizens leads to the introduction of a property
qualification to ensure the election of none but men of special excel
lence as magistrates. Lastly, it is clear from cc. 14 17, that in the
developed Greek state there is only one case where Aristotle admits
monarchy, namely, when the monarch is superior in ability to all the
rest taken together ; and he assumes that only the citizens of the best
state, all men of ability themselves, will accept such a monarchy. It
becomes doubly difficult then, nay almost impossible, that such a case
should ever occur. Still it remains just conceivable, and as long as this
condition of things lasts the best state, instead of being an aristocracy,
is, in this exceptional case, the only true monarchy : this then is the
absolutely best constitution, superior even to Aristocracy 2 .
VII. MONARCHY AND THE BEST STATE.
If the foregoing arguments are sound, the special theory of the
constitution falls into three parts ; the theory (i) of monarchy, (ii) of the
best constitution, (iii) of the remaining constitutions. The first com-
v prises Bk. in cc. 14 17, the second Bkk. iv and v. (in the old order
vn, vin), the third the remaining three books.
Aristotfe s conception of monarchy as explained above not un
naturally determines the very character of his discussion of it. This
discussion has indeed come down to us in the utmost confusion, and
appears somewhat defective : but even after a clear order of thought
has been attained by means of various transpositions, the impression it
makes upon us is, from the standing of our own political development
and experience, highly unsatisfactory. The ciu*&e-e-4kis_. is not far_tp
seek. _The only_true and proper monarchy which Aristotle from his
point of_view can recognise, is absolute^moTTgrchy ; we may for the
most part entirely concur in his objections to this form, and yet con
sider that, treated thus far, the subject has been by no means exhausted.
^ In Aristotle s time the sole monarchies of any note which history had
1 See the note last quoted. ability to all the others together, in-
2 See vi (iv). 2. 2 with nn. (1136, eluding even the best, must certainly be
1137). If this premiss be granted, the absolutely the best.
unlimited rule of a person superior in
MONARCHY. 45
produced, except the Greek tyrannies, were despotism, as found in the
huge empires of the east, and the so-called patriarchal kingship of
the heroic age the rule of a chief over a small clan and territory,
over a Phoenician or Hellenic city-state or canton in prehistoric cen
turies. Even the rule of the Macedonian kings was, by him at least,
regarded in no other light. For the small Greek state, which he
keeps solely in view, monarchy is hardly deserving of much more
consideration than as the imperfect historical starting-point of all subse
quent development 1 . In the organism of the large modern state, abso
lute monarchy, where it lias rightly understood its task, has actually
Helped to educate men for_a_reign of law under a constitutional
monarchy. ~Nowhere~^Tse^could this_jatter anseT Trle~ancient state
had not got so far as its very first condition, which is representation ;
and like all other political thinkers of antiquity even Aristotle, as
was remarked above (p. 40), was as yet far removed from the faintest
idea of this kind 2 . It was his too one-sided conception of the state as
the exclusive means of educating men to mental and moral excellence
that gave rise to his ideal state, and made him set ideal monarchy in
it above ideal aristocracy, thereby declaring the form of government
proper for intellectual minors to be the highest form for the most
enlightened, although, this being so, he can scarcely hide from
himself its impossibility 3 . This however did not hinder him from
seeking, by the adjustment of opposite forces, a further practical
ideal amongst the degenerate constitutions in Polity (IloXtTeta) and
so-called aristocracy. Here he has rightly pursued the thought of
elevating the authority of the state above the strife of divergent in
terests ; yet from the circumstances, the most effective realization of
this thought in limited monarchy never came under his ken. He can
finely describe the functions of the king^Jjut thejreal significance of
this form of government is concealed from him : he gets no farther
1 Spengel Arist. Stud. n. 57: " Bacrt- cussions of cc. 14 16? The way kings
Xet a is to Aristotle a historical tradition govern, their inner life, their influence
rather than a form with any further ca- on the people is quite lost sight of. This
pacity for life in the mental development must be answered in the affirmative with
of his own nation ; and like all Greek one exception, to be afterwards men-
philosophers and political writers he tioned p. 46, for which we can easily
rarely notices any other. Thus he is account. The ideal king, the preeminent-
careful to set forth in various diropiat. the ly best man, can have no instructions given
difficulties involved in the practicability him (c. 13 14, c. 17 2).
and proper limits of this government." 2 And therefore far from any idea that
Our astonishment at this defective me- true popular liberty thrives best under
thod of treatment, which first surprised wisely limited monarchy.
Schlosser, hereupon ceases. Spengel 3 See the notes on ill. 13 14 (601),
put the question Ueb. Arist. Pol. 16 25 (615).
Did Aristotle conceive the theory of 4 See Henkel op. c. 95. n. 25; also
monarchy to be complete with the dis- vm (v). 10 9, 10 with n. (1665).
46 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
.than to base it exclusively upon personal merits 1 , so that no place is
eft for it in the practical ideal of mixed constitutions 2 . This inevitably
causes an internal inconsistency in the work. According to his plan,
the last three books ought to have treated exclusively of the remaining
constitutions other than monarchy and pure aristocracy. But on the
historical ground of revolutions and their prevention he cannot help
^ treating of monarchy over again in Bk. vin (v).
It is abundantly clear from the foregoing that nothing can be a
greater mistake than the assertion, sometimes made of late, that in
his ideal king Aristotle had his own pupil, Alexander, before his mind 3 .
It may be surprising that the philosopher s relations with the court of
Macedon failed so completely to influence his political theory, that he
had no apprehension that he was living right at the close of Hellenic his
tory, with its political development, its system of great and small states;
but on the contrary saw nothing impossible in such a new develop
ment of a Greek city-state as his ideal constitution would present. But
the fact that it is so cannot be altered by our astonishment and in
ability, with the means at our disposal, satisfactorily to explain it. This
idealjrf Aristotle s is in reality a small Hellenic city and not a large
s^fate like Macedon, which ceases to be a state (TTO AIS) in his sense
^"ontre term, and is no more than a race or nationality (eflvos). carrying
out a policy of conquest and not, as he requires, a policy of peace.
If then the ideal king is to arise only in the ideal state, he cannot be
an Alexander. Once no doubt the thought flashes forth, iv (vn). 7. 3,
that the Greeks united in one could conquer the whole world 4 . But
J;p Aristotle the end of the state is, as we said, not the conquest of
the world but something quite different; no longing for such a state
1 See the ff. on III. 13. 9; also vi (iv). last attempts to stamp Aristotle as a
2. 2, vin (v). i ii with n. (1503), 10 Macedonian partizan, made by Bernays
36, 37 n - (1708)- Phokion, pp. 4042 (Berlin 1881), and
Henkel op. c. 86. Wilamowitz Antigonos von Karystos 1 82 f.,
So Hegel Gesch. d. Phil. n. 401, 185 f. (Berlin 1881), have not proved more
Hildenbrand op. c. 426. Recently On- fortunate ; see JBursiarfs Jahresber. xxx.
cken (op.c. I. i6f., i88f., n. 261 ff.) 1882. 11,15 ff. Compare also Hug De-
fancied he had discovered traces of Mace- mosthenes as a political thinker (Studien
donian sympathies completely pervading aus dem dassischen Alterthttm I. 51 103,
the Politics. How unsuccessful this at- Freiburg 1881), who goes still further
tempt was may be judged upon referring than I do. Wilamowitz in a review of
to Torstrik Litt. Centralbl. 1870 coll. 1177 Hug (Deutsche Litteraturzeitnng 1882,
1179; Henkel <?/.<:. 89 . (19), 9 7. ( 2 6); col. 1081 f.) has already somewhat modi-
Bradley op. c. 1 79, 238 f. ; Susemihl in the fied his position : see Jahresber. I.e. 18 f.,
Jahrb. /. Philol. cm. 1871. 133139 where I have also explained why the
(where too much is conceded to Oncken) passage IV (vn). 2. n (cp. the note} is
and Bursian s philol. Jahresber. m. (1874 still important for this question although
-5)- 370 n.; or to the notes on in. 13 the whole chapter, to which it belongs,
13 (601), 25 (615); 14 15 (633); 17 is spurious.
5 (678) : vi (iv). ii 19 (1303). The 4 Cp. the note there (782).
MONARCHY. 47
of united Hellas, which would contradict all the rest of the Politics, is
in the least discoverable in this passage.
On the subject of historical science Aristotle s notions are very
defective : he is in truth still far removed from that which we our-
1 selves have only learned to know within the last century, that which
Turgot and Lessing intended by the improvement and education
of humanity, and Hegel defined as its organic development. He
altogether mistook the true importance of labour, the mightiest lever
in this process. Yet it would be going too far to deny him all
insight into the course of development of the Greek nation from the
state of nature to the state of civilization, and from one grade of civili
zation to another, or into the features of this progress stamped upon
the history of the Greek constitutions 1 . We are set right on this point
by a brief but especially interesting part of the discussion on monarchy
(in. 15 10 13), when taken in connexion with similar passages further
on 2 . Aristotle has not simply observed for himself the career of the
separate states; he knows that they have also a common constitutional
history : that a definite order of polity belongs to an entire period :
that the same development of mental culture, of social and military
organisation, is accomplished all through a group of connected states
and causes their political relations to assume an homogeneous form.
And so he depicts with a few masterly strokes the chief stages of
development through which the political world of Hellas passed 3 .
The first development embraces the normal constitutions as far as
Polity : the second, in another order, the degenerate forms as far as
democracy : the former carrying us to restrained, and the latter to
unrestrained, popular supremacy. The main character of both periods
is republican. In the first of them Monarchy is only a starting-point,
as has been said, for Aristocracy and Polity; in the second Tyranny
|s_only a stage in the transition to Democracy 1 .
Any one who has followed the order of our work up to this point
will be bound to admit that the description of the ideal Aristocracy, or
the normal and absolutely best constitution, can now no longer be
deferred. If so, then the two books containing it, which have come
down to us as the seventh and eighth, should according to Aristotle s
design follow directly as the fourth and fifth. Now the last chapter
of Book in, c. 1 8, forms an immediate transition to this description,
breaking off with an unfinished sentence, which is repeated in another
1 Oncken II. 169, cp. 137 f. description leaves much to be desired, as
2 Cp. the notes on in. 14 12 (627), may be gathered from Oncken s remarks.
15 ii, 12 (662), 13 (663). Cp. also the notes on in. 15 1113.
3 Henkel op. c. 94. But certainly this 4 Henkel op. c. 96 f.
48 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
form at the beginning of the seventh book of the old order 1 , but with
an apodosis here added and the sense complete as follows : Hejvhp
( would investigate wherein the best constitution consists must first
^^Helcrmine what is the best life] since on Aristotle s view of the end of
the state the one serves as an aid to the other 2 . And this circumstance
loses none of its weight by the fact that this transition can hardly be by
Aristotle himself, but by the author of the older edition. For even
then it shows (see above, p. 17) that he at all events found the seventh
and eighth books still arranged correctly as the fourth and fifth.
It can hardly be maintained that the discussion contained in the
first chapter of the seventh or, more correctly, the fourth book, as to
where that best and most desirable life, the life of happiness, is to be
sought, is not by Aristotle : but while appropriate to his oral lectures, as
was remarked above (p. 12), it is to all appearance very foreign to this
written work 3 . And this is no less true of the treatment of a second
preliminary question which follows in close connexion, in cc. 2 and 3 and
the beginning of c. 4 ; namely, whether capacity in war or in peace is
more desirable for the state, and in particular whether the active life of
the practical statesman or the contemplative life of the scientific inquirer
is the happier for the individual. Further, the way in which this subject is
settled or rather left unsettled is quite unlike Aristotle 4 . To the
genuine Aristotle this is no preliminary question, but the really funda
mental problem of his whole ideal of the state. The one side of
it he has himself settled with the most desirable clearness when de
scribing his ideal, iv (vn). 14. 10 if., in such a way that he at the same
time lays down the principles for the solution of the second and much
more difficult question, which is really the cardinal problem of his whole
practical philosophy. For here no less than in what follows 5 , as in the
Ethics and Metaphysics* , he ranks the theoretical life above the life of
practical politics, and yet he considers the individual to be merely one
living member of that corporate body the state : and the reconciliation
ofjhis_antithesis can only be found in a political lileTwhich itself regards
the promotion of art and science as its highest and ultimate aim 7 . Thjs.
1 In the text both versions will be 8 (743), 9 (745), 10 : 4 r.
found at the commencement of Book iv 5 IV (vn). 15 8 10, V (viu). c. 3,
(vn). c. 5 4 with nn. (1023, 1024) 12 14.
2 Cp. in particular Spengel Ueb. Arist. Cp. the notes on IV (vn). 14 8 (903),
Pol. 17 If., Arist. Stud. u. 60 (652) ff., 15 2 (921) : V (vin). 2 i (977) : also on
and Susemihl in the Jahrb. f. PhUol. c. 3 5 (991, 992), 5 10 (1032), and
xcix. 1869. 604 ff. Excursus I upon Bk. v (vili).
3 See the notes on IV (vn). i 2, 10 6 See the passages quoted by Zeller n
(704). i3 J 4- ii 614 n. i.
4 See the notes on iv (vn). 2 36, i Cp. Exc. I at the end of Bk. v (vin).
ii (7^5), 16 (729); 3 3, 6(741),
THE BEST STATE. 49
is really the fundamental thought of Aristotle s ideal state, but we
nowhere find it worked out; nor could the editor to whom we must
"attribute tTTe"sedion in question, cc. 2, 3. He would not else have
attempted in his clumsy manner, unlike Aristotle s 1 , to solve the prob
lem and fill up the lacuna which he had rightly perceived to exist.
This circumstance shows then, either that Aristotle stopped short
on the very threshold of his description of the ideal state, or else
that his continuation of it, which has not come down to us, had dis
appeared remarkably early.
With the fourth chapter the outline of this best constitution really^
begins. Aristotle sets out with the external conditions, treating first
of the natural conditions, of the land and the people (cc. 4 7); then
of the social and socio-political conditions, the exclusion of the citizens
from all work for a livelihood, the proper division of the soil, the proper
qualifications and position of the cultivators, the regulations for the builo-
ing of the city, its small towns and villages (cc. 9 -12). Here at lengjtn
begins the internal development of the best constitution : yet by the.
end of Bk. v (vm). it has advanced no further than its first stage, the"
education of the boys, in the middle of which it comes to a dead stop,
so that the third of the three questions proposed in the last chapter
namely whether melody or rhythm is of greater importance for the
purposes of musical instruction is never discussed at all, and the ques
tion what sorts of time are to be employed for the same purposes
remains undecided 2 . We may at all events be thankful to fate for
sparing us a section of the work, which is rich in interest for the science
of education in all ages, though it fails to satisfy our curiosity as to the
further organisation of the ideal state. Some compensation for the
deficiency in this direction is afforded by many observations not merely,
as has been said before, in Bk. n, but also in Bk. in. Thus in the latter
we learn how this or that ought to be regulated in the state, or some
times even how it should be in the best state or the best constitution,
or in the Aristocracy 3 . And Aristotle s many previous intimations 4 ,
1 See the notes on IV (vn). i 10 does not exist or is at any rate unimpor-
(705) ; 2 6 (717) ; 3 3 (736), 8io. tant. So too Zeller op. c. n ii 676 f.,
2 Cp. the note on v (vm). 7. i (1081). 736 ff. Compare further Spengel Ueb.
Even William of Moerbeke writes at the die Pol. dcs Arist. 8 foil.
end of his translation : residuum huius 3 See in. i 9, 10 nn. (440, 441) ;
operis in greco nondum inveni. Of older 4 4, 5 n. (4/1); n- (49 1 ) on 4 16;
scholars Conring in particular endeavoured 5 2, 3 n. (504), 5 n. (509); 7 3
to determine more accurately the parts nn. (536, 537); n S> 9 n - (569) ;
missing; of the moderns more especially 13 8, 9 n. (595), n, 12 n. (599),
Hildenbrand (op. c. 449 foil.), who at the 24, 25; 15 46, 9, 10; 16 2 12;
same time refutes, most successfully in the 17 i, 2 ; c. 18 with the notes,
main, the arguments by which others have 4 I. 13. 15 with n. (126) cp. n. 9
in vain sought to show that the deficiency 5, 6 . (285) n. 9 i, 10 9 n. (368),
H, 4
50 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
1 taken along with other considerations, give us at least partly to under-
| stand what portions are wanting.
/^ When we consider the very high mission of culture with which
fl Aristotle s ideal state is entrusted in the promotion of the sciences, and
\ the preference which Aristotle expressly concedes to the education of
^he intellect over that of the character 1 , it is surprising that he takes up
the whole of early education until the twenty-first year with gymnastic
and military exercises, so as to leave no more than three years, from the
fourteenth to the seventeenth, for all the other subjects of instruction 2 .
Moreover one of them, music, is so limited that an influence upon
the formation of character, or very little else, is all that is left to it 3 .
Besides this, only reading, writing, numeration, and drawing are noticed ;
and this short course of three years will be wholly taken up with them.
Hence we cannot look for more advanced scientific instruction, and
even poetry can scarcely be employed for anything further than learning
to read and write, or getting by heart lyric pieces to sing 4 . The exclu
sion of comedy, moreover, and of all connected kinds of poetry, from
the domain of youth is expressly mentioned iv (vn). 17. n; and
the same holds of all music with a cathartic effect, v (vm). 7. 3 if. 5 .
On this analogy it can scarcely be doubted that the exclusion must be
assumed to apply in general to all the kinds of poetry to which solely
this sort of effect is ascribed by Aristotle, that is, to epos and tragedy 6
as well as to comedy : and that Aristotle wished to restrict attendance
at the theatre and the recitals of the rhapsodes to grown-up persons,
or at any rate not to allow them to young men until after their
seventeenth year. Thus the use made of poetry for the education
of the young in Aristotle s ideal state could hardly go beyond a mere
chrestomathy from Homer, Hesiod, perhaps also from a few tragedies
and easy prose writers, in learning to read and write. But Aristotle
states, iv (vn). 15. 9, v (vm). 3. 13, that the education of the body
must form the commencement, while the moral education must advance
within the soul, from "which we indirectly learn that a chapter on
iv (vn). 5 2; 10 10, 14; 16 12; 6 i ff. nn. (1061-2-7-8, 1071-3); 7 sff.
17 12 cp. 17 5 7 : v (vm). 3 10 nn. (1086-7, 1098, 1104-5-9): also the
cp- 7 35 6 15, 1 6. Cp. also the note Excursuses I, n, in, iv at the end of Bk.
on v (vm). 2 2 (979). On n. 6 14, v (vm).
in. 3 6 foil, see below. 4 Zeller op. c. n ii 737 should be cor-
1 See iv (vn). 14 8 foil. n. (003), rected by this.
15 8 and generally the passages quoted 5 Cp. v (vm). 6 9 with n. (1073);
on p. 48 n. 5. also nn. on 7 4 and Excursus V at the
2 See v (vm). 4 79 with Exc. I end of Bk. v (vm).
at the end of Bk. v (vni). 6 See the Introduction to my edition
3 See v (vm). 5 47 with nn. of the Poetics pp. 8f., 15, 64 f.
(1024-5-7); 15 foil. nn. (1044, 1045);
THE BEST STATE. 51
scientific education was intended to follow 1 . And the question, how
far the higher sciences are to be considered for educational purposes,
is assuredly not proposed, v (vm). 2. 2, in order to remain unanswered.
Lastly, in v (vm). 3. 10, a later investigation is expressly announced to
decide whether one or more subjects should belong to the more refined
training which aims at the highest intellectual satisfaction : but in the
account which has come down to us we seek in vain for the fulfilment
of this promise. On the other hand every direct influence in this
direction is expressly excluded from the boys education up to their
twenty-first year, v (vm). 5. 4. Hence we may infer from his own
words that Aristotle, like Plato", intended a later training in the higher
sciences for state purposes to follow this lower educational course"; and
this would furnish the solution of the riddle 4 . Even as to the subjects
of this higher instruction Aristotle can hardly have thought differently
from Plato, except that perhaps he added poetry; Pure Mathematics,
however, Astronomy, the Theory of Music, and lastly, for natures most
scientifically endowed, Philosophy proper, were certainly the means
of instruction enjoined. There is ample time for them, as the
active duties of full citizens do not begin until military service is over,
iv (vn). 95f,i45; and no one will be eligible for a civil
magistracy much before his fiftieth year, even if he enters the popular
assembly earlier, 9 9 ;/. Thus their service in the army leaves the
younger man leisure for scientific studies. Only Aristotle must have
maintained, in opposition to Plato, that this extended course should
be different for practical minds and for those whose bent is more to
wards theory ; in order to make of the former officials for the state, and
of the latter its men of science, who in other respects may, and indeed
ought to rest satisfied with the fulfilment of their general civic duties".
In this particular Aristotle approached the modern idea of the state more
nearly than any other ancient thinker. Yet when looked at in the light
of his own premisses this solution of the problem cannot be said to
be altogether happy. If in the best state the best man is to be at the
same time the best citizen and statesman ; if moreover scientific activity
1 Zeller op.c. II ii 737 n. 4. 218 f. He does not see that it is only in
2 See tin. on II. 5. 25 (181), IV (vii). the instruction in practical music and in
17. 15 (970). gymnastic that Aristotle maintains a
3 No previous enquirer has thought of mean which must not be exceeded ; he
this. Oncken alone felt the difficulty, never says a word to the effect that in
but did not also see that with the means the sciences also one can learn too much :
at our disposal the veil may be sensibly see Exc. I at the end of Bk. v (vm).
lifted. See next note. 5 See the note on iv (vn). 3. 8 (743).
4 This disposes for the most part of 6 See in. c. 4 with the notes on r
Oncken s objections op. c. n 204 ff., (468), 5 (471), 16 (491); c. 5 ; 18 i :
42
52 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
is to be the higher, moral and practical excellence the lower, part of
human virtue \ then the only logical consequence is Plato s government
by philosophers which, taken in itself, Aristotle rightly rejects, n.
5- 25 1 -
The chapters on the education of the boys are incomplete: this
theory of the subsequent higher training of our future citizens, as well
as the discussion on female education which was expressly promised
i. 13. 15 (cp. ii. 9 5, 6) 2 , is wanting. We lack too the entire regu
lations for the external life of children and adults whether men or
women, or in other words the whole of civic discipline ; for Aris
totle no less than Plato conceived the state to be an educational
institution. As a necessary consequence, he took this discipline and
moral guidance through the whole of life to be simply a continued
course of education 3 , and both alike to be the proper field of state-
activity. Almost all the other intimations of Aristotle, to which we find
nothing corresponding in the execution, relate to this comprehensive
subject. One special division which he mentions iv (vn). 16 12, 13,
17 12 (comp. 17 5, 7, 10), is the superintendence of the morals of
the boys and their education under Inspectors (TraiSoi/o/xoi), officers
appointed on the Spartan precedent 4 . They are to have their official
quarters near the gymnasium for the young, iv (vn). 12. 5 : to take
care that no stones unseemly to their age are told to children even
under five years of age, c. 17 5; and that they have as little as
possible to do with the slaves, 7. They have also to take precau
tions that no improper statues or pictures are exposed to view within
sight of the children ( 10), from whom even the paintings of a Pauson
with their comical and satirical exhibitions of what is low and hateful
must be kept at a distance : v (vm). 5. 2i 5 . In this part of the work
too we were to have been more precisely informed what habit of body
in the parents is best adapted to give them healthy offspring 6 ; whether
comedies should be exhibited, and the recital of satirical poems (e.g.
allowed, and in what manner ; perhaps also how far drinking
iv (vn). 7 13, 9 3 n . (808): 13 the remarks in iv (vn). 12 46; 17
9, 10; 14 7, 8; v (vm). i i, 2 8, 9, as Zeller op. c. n ii 739 . 4
n. (9/4) : vi (iv) 7 2. rightly reminds us. Cp. nn. on iv (vn).
1 See the note on n. 5. 25 (182): NIC. 12 5 (863), 17 9 (962).
Eth. vi. 7. 7 (vi. 8 n 4 4b nft.} Metaph. 4 See Schomaotis Antiquities of Greece
i. i. 1 1 ff. (981 a 12 ff.j. I. p. 248, Eng. trans, by Mann and Hardy
2 See the notes on both passages (London, 1880. 8).
(126-7), (285). 5 See the notes on iv (vn). 12 5, 16
3 NIC. Eth. x. 9. 9, 1180 a i ff. This 12, 17 5, 10, 12; v (vm). 5 21.
is not expressly stated in the Politics; 6 See on iv (vn). 16. 12.
but the same thought forms the basis of
EDUCATION IN THE BEST STATE. 53*
parties of adults are to be countenanced, iv (vn). 17. 12 . Inspectors
for the women (ywcuKovo /xoi) are also mentioned along with the inspec
tors of boys as officials in aristocracies, vi (iv). 15. 13, viz (vi). 8. 23:
they certainly ought not to be absent from the true Aristocracy 2 . We
can hardly be wrong in assuming that on the decision of these two
boards of officers the exposure or rearing of new-born infants de
pended 3 ; and that for the purpose of maintaining the same fixed
number of citizens they were authorized, nay were bound, to enforce
abortion if necessary : n. 6. 10 ff., iv (vn). 16. 15, iy 4 .
This unalterable number of citizens is bound up with the equally
unalterable number of inalienable and indivisible family properties,
iv (vn). 10. n, of which, as in Plato s Laws 5 , each citizen holds two,
one near the town, and one further off in the country towards the
boundaries of the territory. This indicates a second treatment of the
same subject, comprising the more accurate discussion of property in
general and of national wealth which was expressly promised, iv (vn).
5. 2; and here the propriety of the provisional definition of national
wealth adopted in the passage just cited should have been submitted
to a second and more detailed examination". Here also a place would
no doubt be found for explaining more fully the reasons promised iv (vn).
10 10, 14, why Aristotle was induced to adopt o-vo-o-ma ; why it is
better to promise and grant freedom to serfs and slaves as a reward for
good conduct; together with the discussion of their general treat
ment announced in this passage 7 ; also the consideration of the question
postponed in n. 10. 9, as to what means it may be expedient to tolerate
in order to prevent an increase of population beyond the limits fixed".
But there is an explicit proof, that even the political organization
of the ideal state was to be treated in detail. In one passage, n.
8. 25, the more precise solution of the question whether and under
what conditions and at whose instance changes in the established
laws are admissible is left over for further consideration 9 . What sort
of restrictions Aristotle wished to introduce in this respect we cannot
tell : it is only certain that, while he did not allow the popular assembly
the initiative, he yet made every new law dependent upon their consent 10 .
1 Zeller, op.c.ii ii 739 n. 3, assumes a 5 Cp. the notes on n. 6. 15, iv (vu).
discussion on this last point to be pro- 10. n.
mised. The context does not appear to 6 Cp. the note on iv (vn). 5. 2.
me to warrant this : see the note there. 7 Cp. the notes there.
2 See the notes there. 8 Cp. n. on n. 10. 9 (368).
3 The usage was somewhat different, 9 Cp. the note there, (278).
though still analogous, at Sparta : see n. 10 Of course constitutional changes are
on IV (vn). 16. 15. not permissible if it is seriously meant
4 Seethe notes there; also II. 7. 5 with that this constitution is in all points abso-
n. (236). lutely the best.
r 54 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
Moreover, the powers of the popular assembly were but limited even
in this best of all communities, composed of men not under thirty-
five 1 nor yet over seventy years of age. Apart from the election of
magistrates they were not to extend much beyond the acceptance or
rejection, without further debate or amendment, of treaties, a-nd of
peace or war, as previously determined upon and proposed by the senate
and the highest magistrates 2 . Yet on the other hand popular courts of
justice on the Athenian model were to decide charges brought against
magistrates during the time of their accountability 3 . Equal in birth,
in landed estate, in immunity from all remunerative or productive
labour 4 , and in respect of a public education from their seventh year 5 ,
all citizens of this state enjoy equal rights. Any qualified citizen may,
it seems, vote for any other for any magistracy, such a civic body being
credited with the intelligence and good will to nominate to each branch
of the government the persons most suitable on the ground of the
distinctions in capacity and training which, in spite of equal circum
stances, have manifested themselves . But Aristotle certainly did not
intend to leave undecided at what precise age the entrance upon
full citizenship was to take place ; nor again at what age men were
superannuated, and upon retiring became priests, iv (vn). 9. 9, whereby
almost entire leisure for science was secured to them in their old age 7 .
The figures 50 and 70 which have been tentatively assumed will at least
be not far removed from his view ; and thus this governing civic body
will be considerably in the minority when compared with the total num
ber of citizens superannuated or not yet fully qualified, the boys, younger
men, and the aged of the citizen order 8 . Only foreigners and resident
aliens are allowed to engage in trade, industry, or manual labour : a pro-
1 See nn. on iv (vn). 9 9, 16 9. :> iv (vn). 17 7, and the note on 4;
- This follows from n. n. 6, in. u. 15 n. (970): v (vin). 3 13 n. (1003);
8 ;/., taken in connexion with the other 4 7 ff . and Exc. I at the end of Bk.
passages quoted in Exc. IV at the end of v (viu).
Bk. II. (i See I. 7 i n. (58 b) : in. i 9, 10 ;/.
:: This may be inferred from n. 12. 5, (440,441), n sff., i39. (595), i62
in. n. 8 : see notes there : also Exc. v at n. (672), 13; 17 i, 2 : iv (vil). 8 4;
the end of Bk. n. But Aristotle might 9 7, 8 ; 13 9 u. (885), 14 5 : VI (iv).
have required that the jurors in these n 8: also n. 2 6, 7, and cp. the
courts should be elected instead of being notes on 11. 2. 4 (133) and in. 13. 12.
chosen by lot ; see II. 1 1. 7 n. (391). Other passages seem to contradict this, as
4 n. 9 2ff., ii 10 : 111.5 ^ n.22ff. 4 n. (133): ill. 4 5 n. (471);
11. (504), 3, 5 . (509)5 iv (vu). 9 i, 5 10; 6 i, 2; 7 i, 2; 15 8 10;
sf., 9; 10 13; 12 4: v (vin). 2 18 i: but see the notes: also n. on
3 6 (982); 4 i . (1004) ; 5 8 iv (vn). 9. 9.
;/. (1028); 6 4 ff. ; 16; 7 i with 7 Because old men are no longer of
notes. Cp. also Exc. I at the end of service for government n. 9. 25. See the
Bk. v (vin); n. on i. u. 6 (103) with the note there and on iv (vn). 9. 9 (816).
passages there quoted. 8 Cp. n. on iv (vn). 9. 9 (817).
EDUCATION IN THE BEST STATE. 55
hibition which strikes a severe blow at the cultivation of the imitative
arts, that is, at the fine arts 1 . The soil is to be cultivated by serfs who
are not free, or at all events by vassals of non-Hellenic descent who are
but half free 2 .
But, while emphatically not a conquering military power any more
than a trading community, this state with its one aim of culture :i
makes the largest concessions possible in both these directions. It is
to be a maritime state, iv (vn). 6. i ff. 4 , as well as, like Athens, Sparta,
and Thebes, to exercise an hegemony ; that is, to stand at the head of
a more or less dependent confederation, in which union has been
achieved, if necessary, with the edge of the sword 5 . In this way
Aristotle thinks that the peculiar spirit and core of Athenian social and
political life, that wonderfully noble union of manliness with culture,
has been best preserved and promoted by a partial fusion with Spartan
forms. He may even have counted on the tribute of the allies to fill
the treasury. Otherwise it is not easy to see why, after the wise regu
lation that only a part of the soil should be broken up into family
properties, the rest being reserved as domain land, only the expenditure
upon public worship and the common messes, not that upon any other
state function, is taken into account when he comes to deal with the
revenue from this domain land, iv (vn). 9. 7. The messes (o-uo-crma)
are with Aristotle, as they were at Sparta , at once common meals
and military unions. Some of them are to be held in the guard-
houses inside the city wall 7 . All boards of officials have their messes,
each in its own official quarters : so, too, the priests ; even the
rangers and field-patrols in the country 8 . The rule of a common mess-
* table is binding on all collective members of the political body corpo-
rateV In particular from them springs that voluntary communism
which Aristotle praises in the Spartans 10 , and the entry into them was
undoubtedly to begin with enlistment amongst the recruits at the age
of seventeen 11 . Later on, but yet hardly before the training of these
recruits is completed 12 with their twenty-first year 13 , they are also per-
1 Even vocal and instrumental virtuosi Eng. tran., Trieber op. c. i 26.
in music are classed with manual la- 7 iv (vn). 12. i.
bourers(/3ctWi;<roi),v(viii).58, ;z. (1028)6, 8 iv (vn). 12 2, 7, 8.
4ff., 15, 16; 7 6 : comp. Exc. I at 9 Oncken op. c. n. 198.
the end of Bk. v (vin). 10 n. 5. 5<T., iv (vn). 10. 9, cp. n. 5
2 iv (vn). 9 8, 10 13. 15, 16, with notes, also the notes on
3 [ Culture-state ; one which exists II. 5 6 (156 b), 7 n. (158): also
to promote the higher civilization: seep. vn (vi). 5. 10 with note.
48. TR.] n v (vm). 4. 9, cp. Exc. i at the end
4 Cp. notes on iv (vn). c. 6. of Bk. v (vin).
5 See iv (vn). 14. 21 with ;/. (917). 12 See on iv (vn). 17. n . (966).
6 Cp. Schomann op. c. pp. 272, 279 13 iv (vn). 17. 15.
56 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
mitted to attend drinking-parties 1 and there to sing, which under all
other circumstances is strictly prohibited to adults 2 ; further to visit the
theatre and musical and poetical entertainments of all kinds 3 .
From the foregoing it is also clear now that the passages to which
we are referred in n. 6 12, 13, are still extant 4 , but that more
precise explanations ought to follow. Similarly the promise of future
discussions upon the size of the town and the question whether it is
essential that the citizens should be of the same descent, in. 3 6, is
fulfilled as far as the first part is concerned in iv (vn). c. 4; but the
second part was scarcely to be dismissed with merely the subsequent
remark vm (v). 3 n f. ; it was no doubt to be more thoroughly
discussed in the examination of the absolutely best constitution 5 .
It appears to us, it was remarked before (p. 46), not so easy to
understand how the resident alien of Stageira, the great realist, the friend
of the Macedonian kings under whose spear the last energies of Greek
life were bleeding away, was still Greek and Athenian enough to dream
of the possibility that the nobility of mankind, the Greek nation, had
yet to wait for the future to produce its noblest race, who alone would
be one day capable of creating this pattern state, iv (vn). c. 7. More
intelligible, but all the more repulsive, is it to note how Aristotle sets
about the propagation of this noblest of civic bodies, in true Spartan
or Platonic fashion 6 , by tyrannical marriage-laws and matrimonial
supervision and inhuman exposure of children, as if he were raising
a breed of race-horses : to see the successful defender of the family
and of property, who investigates with admirable profundity the moral
nature of marriage , at the same time hampering and almost stifling
the free use of property and of the mental faculties, and destroying
the healthy vital atmosphere of marriage. And this by measures which,
as we have said (p. 34), go far beyond those of Plato in the Laws,
by fixing a normal number of children which the whole body of citizens
are permitted to have and sanctioning abortion in order to secure that
the number is never exceeded.
VIII. THE PATHOLOGY OF THE EXISTING CONSTITUTIONS.
\ The opening words of thejsixJJL-hjoofe Bk. iv. in the old order are
rjn their most suitable connexion when following directly upon the
1 iv (vn). 17. n. see . (1113).
2 v (vm). 5 8, 6 4 with notes : cp. 3 iv (vn). 17. u.
//. on iv (vn). 17. ii (966). No weight 4 Cp. . on n. 6. 14.
can be given to v (vni). 7. 13 f., as the 5 Cp. n. on in. 3. 6.
passage is conjectured to be spurious ; 6 Cp. Exc. I at the end of Bk. n.
THE EXISTING CONSTITUTIONS. 57
descripjioiL of the ideal state. _The task of Politics, we read, is not
simply confined to an examination of the absolutely (aVXcos) best con
stitution. It equally includes the determination of what is best on the
average (TarT^Xefcrrat^-Tm^^t); and of the best constitution under the
given circumstances" (CK rw mmpx ^ 7 )? or in other words the best for
!i given people or a given population. If finally it happens that even
tls~ourof~the "question, political science has to treat of the best
possible form of some worse constitution ; and hence must investigate
all possible species and even sub-species of constitutions<r""TrIe~lrn73-
book, for exarrrpte, spoke~"oT"democracy and oligarch}^ this is now cor-
"rected l>y the statement that there are several subordinate varieties of
15oth u But while those fundamental distinctions of the third book are
I again resumed, we are expressly told in c. 2 that the first problem has
already been solved by an account of the absolutely best constitution,
or, what is the same thing, of monarchy and aristocracy proper; thus
only the remaining normal constitutions and their corruptions have still
to be discussed. The order in which these stand is as follows: mixed or
sc^called Aristocracies 1 , Polity (noXtreto), Democracy, Oligarchy, Ty
ranny 2 . The problems to be solved are as follows; to determine (i)
nowmany subordinate kinds of constitutions there are; (2) what is on
the average the best constitution; (3) for what different sorts of people
the different forms are adapted; (4) how we ought to set to work in
regulating each form of democracy and of oligarchy; and, last of all,
(5) what are the causes which overthrow and the means to preserve the
various constitutions. Thus, first of all, we here find from Aristotle
himself an express corroboration of the view that the seventh and eighth
books (old order) came fourth and fifth in the work as he wrote it :
and in c. 7 2, he once more repeats the same declaration, that the
absolutely best constitution discussed in those books alone deserves to
be called Aristocracy in the strict sense of the word; just as the interpo
lator of c. 3 4, refers to this part of the work under the name of the
"discussions on Aristocracy" (eV rots irepl rrjv apio-TOKpcmW), and so
must still have had the original order before him. In the next place the
order given in the above arrangement is adhered to most strictly in
the exposition which follows.
For setting aside c. 3 and c. 4 i 19, which certainly do not
contradict this procedure, but, as was just remarked, can hardly 3 be by
1 al 6vofJM^6fJxvau, ApiffroKpartat VI (iv). 4 (1154), 8; 4 i, 4 (1164), 5, 6,
9. 10: see note on vi (iv). 2. 4 . 8 (1176), 12 (1182, 1183), 13 (1185)
2 See the note on vi (iv). i. 4 (1116). 15 (1187), 17 (1189), 19, 20.
3 See the notes on vi (iv). 3 i, 2,
5<S INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
Aristotle himself, there is, first, an enumeration (i) in c. 4 20 31 of
the four varieties of Democracy and at the beginning of c. 5, i 3, of
the four varieties of Oligarchy passing from one resembling Polity to
one which approaches Tyranny ; then, c. 6, it is shown why there can
only be four varieties for each of these two constitutions : next follows
a discussion of mixed or spurious Aristocracy in its two varieties, when
mixed with democratic and oligarchical, or merely with democratic
elements, c. 7; cc. 8, 9, treat of the constitution most nearly allied to
this last, Polity (IToXtTeta) or equal combination of Oligarchy and
TJerribcracy ; and c. 10 of Tyranny and the forms in which it blends
with_Monarchy, Then (2) c. n presents IIoArreta in its character as"
! the rule of the well-to-do middle class, as the best constitution on the
j average. The next investigation (3) breaks off unfinished in 5 of
c. 12 l : the passage which follows (12 6, 13 i n), i.e. all the fol
lowing chapter except 12, does not belong to this subject but to the
regulation of Polity : had it been more correctly edited it would have
been worked into c. 9 to which I would transpose it. Only one circum
stance is out of harmony : in the order which has come down to us,
(5) the theory of revolutions and the safeguards of constitutions does
not come last of all, but takes up the whole of (old) Bk. v> while (4) the
regulation of the different forms of Democracy and Aristocracy does not
appear till the first four chapters of (old) Bk. vi. The last three chap
ters of (old) Bk. iv, cc. 14 1 6, are taken up with fundamental con
siderations of a general kind on the regulation and organization of all
possible constitutions, except Monarchy, Tyranny, and true Aristocracy,
according to each of the three authorities in the state. Thus the
deliberative or decreeing body is treated in c. 14, the administrative
body or the organisation of the officials and magistrates in c. 15,
the judicial power in c. 16. In accordance with this it has been
proposed to transpose the (old) Sixth Book before the (old) Fifth, so
that the former becomes the (new) Seventh and the latter the (new)
Eighth : and this order has been followed in the text 2 . If it is right
1 See the note there, (1315). interlace questions (4) and (5) directly
~ Hildenbrand op. c. p. 372 ff. defends contradicts Aristotle s express announce-
the received order hereby saying that Aris- ment above, makes this whole announce-
totle intended to lay down in vi (iv). cc. ment refer only to the contents of Books
14 1 6 the elements of the constitutions IV and V of the old order : in these two
and then in the first place in Book v of books Aristotle, as he thinks, gives a
the old order, went on to describe their complete discussion of the theory of the
practical working, because upon this de- imperfect constitutions with regard to
pends the right combination of the ele- their general underlying principles; in the
ments which follow in the (old) Book vi. (old) Book VI he acids a more special ex-
Zeller on the other hand op. c. II ii 675 ff., position. I have explained in the Jahrb.
evidently with the right view that thus to /. Philol. ci. 1870. 343346, 349 f. why
THE EXISTING CONSTITUTIONS. 59
it must certainly be assumed that the four references back to the (old)
Fifth Book which we find in the (old) Sixth do not, at least in their
present form, belong to Aristotle, but at the earliest to the author of
the later edition which has come down to us. One of them, vn (vi).
4. 15, is in fact so little suited to its context that it at once proclaims
itself to be a spurious insertion l . Two of the others, vn (vi). i $ i
and i 10, may be removed, at least without much harm, on the
same grounds 2 . But the fourth, vn (vi). 5. 2, is so firmly embedded
in the context that there is no resource but to assume that the inter
polator has changed the future, which Aristotle himself used here, into
the past ;! ; an assumption quite as possible for the third passage as that
of an interpolation 4 . The two parts of the work thus moved into
immediate proximity the three concluding chapters of Bk. vi (iv) and
the first seven chapters of Bk. vn (vi) then become the general and
particular parts of the same discussion :> . But we miss the account,
promised at the beginning of Bk. vii (vi), of the possible combinations
which may arise when in one and the same state the several political
authorities are regulated according to the principles of different consti
tutions, vn (vi). i. 3 f. G Nor is this the only defect. In the eighth
and last chapter of Bk. vn (vi) the theory of the organization of the
executive still remains a rough sketch, not yet worked out in detail.
It certainly brings to a real solution a part of the questions merely
proposed or mentioned provisionally in vi (iv). c. i6 7 : but it contributes
hardly anything towards a more thorough solution of a problem expressly
mentioned there vi (iv). 15 14, as not yet satisfactorily solved ; namely
a discussion of the differences between magistrates in different consti
tutions ; while it omits altogether any mention of the influence of the
various departments of public business on the mode of election to
different offices, which was also expressly promised there, vi (iv). 15.
22 8 . But these are inconsiderable defects, and if on the transposition
I cannot accept this solution: the main chapters contain nothing but repetitions
points of my explanation will be found of propositions enlarged upon long be-
with some modifications in the notes on fore; but this statement is not proved,
vi (iv). 2 5 (1143), 6 (1144). and is quite incorrect.
1 See the note there (1424). 6 E.g. the deliberative body and the
2 Only in the latter passage the 5 election of magistrates on oligarchical,
which follows must be changed into 817, the lawcourts on aristocratical, princi-
or else the whole of the following clause pies. Cp. the last note (1488) at the end
vvvl 8 ra aubfMTa...\{yw/j,ev expunged. of Bk. vii (vi).
3 See the note there, and Spengel 7 Cp. upon this point the more precise
Ueber die Politik 36 ff. explanation in the note on vi (iv.) 15. i
4 In that case the change of 5 into 817, (1343)-
slight as it is, will be unnecessary. 8 Oncken /. c. complains of the way
5 See the note on VI (iv). 2. 6 (1144). in which this sketch, modelled in its main
Oncken, op. c. II. 253, thinks these seven features on the organization of the Attic
60 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
proposed this book, vn (vi), no longer forms the conclusion of the
discussion on imperfect forms of the state it will be most obvious to
treat them like other spaces left blank in the course of, and not at the
end of, principal sections : where we have more reason to conjecture
subsequent losses than to infer that the execution on Aristotle s own
part was deficient
. For the highly artistic construction of Book vm (v) it will be
sufficient to refer to the Analysis] on the transpositions necessary
even in this book, as well as on the spurious passages in all the books,
to the Commentary^, It would be superfluous to commend to the
thoughtful reader the ripe political wisdom shown in the account of the
forms of government actually established ; and this eighth book in
particular preeminently reveals the statesman 2 . In his picture of the
despot of the shrewder type who skilfully copies the genuine king,
vm (v). ii. 17 34, it really looks as if he had anticipated with
prophetic eye the second French Empire and the third Napoleon.
Can these precepts on despotism (rvpawi^) have actually been read
by the latter and turned to account ? That question no one perhaps
is in a position to answer.
There is yet another fact which quite apart from this may be empha
sized here. As Teichmiiller especially has shown 3 , Aristotle recognised
even in his day the importance of the influence which the mode of life
and the social relations of a nation exercise upon the form of its
political development and of its constitution. Yet Zeller s remarks 4 ,
that he nevertheless does not speak of civil society as distinct from the
state, and that the different principles of classification which he assigns
for the forms of government will not quite blend into a unity, appear to
be by no means completely answered by Teichmuller s explanations.
It is true that in in. 5. 9 ff., iv (vn). 7 f, Aristotle draws a definite dis
tinction between social relations and the political relations proper which
government, follows without any intro- is therefore (see p. 59 n. 5) an ungrounded
duction upon what precedes. This is assertion. See the note on VIII (vi). i. i
quite true, but he appears to overlook (1379 b )-
dfj.a re -rrepl e/cetVwf ei n \ourbv, ou x^P ov 1 [See also below, pp. 93 ff.]
Tri<TK\{sa(Tdai in the announcement of the 2 Cp. Hildenbrand op. c. 469 486;
contents vn (vi). i. r, which points to a Zeller op. c. n ii 750; Oncken op. c. II.
supplement with such additions ; since in 241252; Henkel op. c. 91: Van der
the execution it is the first four chapters Rest op. c. 519 ff.
that answer^to the following words /ecu rbv 3 In Die aristotelische Eintheihmg der
oiKelov Kairbv <rv(j,<})povTa.Tpbirov airoSovvcu Verfassimgsformen 12 ff (St Petersburg
irpos eKaa-T-rji , but in reverse order. That 1859. 8). Compare the review by Su-
the whole book is a regular medley of semihl Jahrb.f. Philol. cm. 1871 p. 137
motley elements, which, although per- sqq., from which is taken all of import-
haps of the same date, certainly never ance in what follows.
stood in the same original connexion 4 op. c. n ii 699, 705 foil., 749.
INFLUENCE OF SOCIAL CONDITIONS. 6 1
in various ways depend upon them: vi (iv). 4 20 22, 6 1 3,
1 2 2 ; vii (vi). 4 13, 814; cp. in. 1 2 7 f. ; iv (vn). cc. 8, 9 ;
vi (iv). cc. 3, 4. But he nowhere attributes to the former independent
importance, or a separate province of their own : they are generally
regarded only as the condition which is requisite in order that the life
of the state may take this or that form. But this leaves the distinction
imperfect. In general, where Aristotle discovers a new conception he
also coins his own term for it, or at any rate remarks that there is as
yet no appropriate word for it in Greek. But here, in keeping with this
imperfection, there is no such remark with reference to civil society ;
but, as Teichmiiller l himself quite rightly observes, the word city
or state (770X15) is sometimes used in a narrower sense to exclude
the merely social elements, sometimes with a wider meaning to includ
them. Further, the distinction of Monarchy, Aristocracy and Polity, \
and so also amongsTTrTe degenerate forms, that of Tyranny, Oligarchy
ancl "Democracy, merely according to the number of the rulers (in.
,7. 2 f.), is certainly only provisional. Immediately afterwards (in c. 8,
see above "p. 38) it is described as something merely accidental in the
case of Democracy and Oligarchy, which in the extreme case might
even be absent, the real ground of the distinction being poverty and
wealth. Indeed later on the mere distinction in number is, in the case
of Aristocracy and Polity, completely abandoned. Even in the ideal
Aristocracy the whole civic body rules itself; and although here, as was
remarked above (p. 54), the real governing body of fully qualified
citizens forms a minority of the whole number, yet one can see no
reason why in a spurious Aristocracy the actual civic body must
necessarily be a smaller number than in a Polity. Thus the only
normal constitutions proper that remain are ideal Monarchy and ideal
Aristocracy, see vi (iv). 7 2, 8 i ; spurious Aristocracies and Polity
only occupy the place of intermediate or transitional forms between the
normal constitutions and their corruptions. The so-called Aristocracies
are said to be mixed forms combining aristocratic with democratic
elements or both with Oligarchy, vi (iv). 7 4, 8 9 ; why there should
not also be among them combinations of aristocratic and oligarchical
elements 2 without democratic admixture, is not quite clear. Polity
appears as a mixture of Oligarchy and Democracy : if this is the case,
both these extremes, to which it is intermediate, must be considered
to be perverted forms of it, instead of Oligarchy being a corruption of
Aristocracy and Democracy of Polity, as was said at first (in. 7. i foil.)
and again repeated vi (iv). 8. i. There are however even later passages
1 /. c. 14 ff. 2 See the note on vi (iv). 7. 4 (1238).
62 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
in which Oligarchy is defined as a corruption of Aristocracy; and his
qualification of prevailing views, that it is the rule of the rich rather than
of the minority, is in some measure ignored vm (v). 7. i. 1 In Polity then
no aristocratic element is recognised ; for the principle of Aristocracy is
virtue or superior excellence 2 , while the only excellence discoverable in
Polity is superiority in war; in. 7. 4, comp. vi (iv). 13. 7 foil. 3 This is
just what Aristotle censures in Sparta, u. 9. 34 f, iv (vn) 14 15 if.
i (cp. 2 9) ; and consequently he ought not to have reckoned the
Spartan constitution, as he does, with spurious aristocracies, but with
Polities. But on the other hand how should Polities be counted
amongst normal constitutions of even the second rank unless a certain
excellence of the citizens was also required in them ? Or is the public
education, for which Sparta is praised, v(vin). i. 4 1 , to make the
difference? But there was nothing of the sort at Carthage, and yet
Aristotle classes the constitution there with aristocracies and not with
_
Polities 5 . Again, the rule of the majority and of the minority is repre
sented as quite indispensable to the notions of oligarchy and democracy,
vi (iv). 4 ^ 5, 6; while in vm (v). 7 59, vi (iv). 7 4, 8 3 ff.,
Aristotle is made to adopt at one moment to adopt and then at the
next to contradict a view which is altogether incompatible with such
definitions, viz. that the mixed constitutions which incline more to
democracy should be called Polities, and those which incline more to
\ oligarchy, Aristocracies r \ Such inconsistencies would certainly be too
glaring even for a far less able thinker. They are not made a whit more
intelligible by the fact that the conception of Oligarchy oscillates some
what between a government of wealth, of birth, and of a minority :
on the contrary they bear the clearest marks of interpolation 7 . But
further : the best of the four varieties of democracy is a departure from
Aristotle s conception of democracy, the government of the rich by the
poor, for it represents both as sharing the government equally, vi (iv).
4. 22. Even the conception of a degenerate constitution as government
in the interest of the governors is not at all applicable here, if we follow
the description given in vn (vi). 4 i 7, nor yet in the case of the
best and most moderate oligarchy. Thus both should be reckoned
1 See note there, and on vm (v). 7. 6 6 It is a strange misconception of
(1599)- Oncken s op. c. 11. 236 f., to attribute
- See the note on in. 7. 3 (536). the propositions contained in vi (iv). 8
3 See the note on in. 7. 4 (538). 3, 4 to Aristotle himself, whereas in
4 So Nic. Elh. i. 13. 3, 1102 a 10 f., fact the whole chapter is written to re-
x. 9. 13, nSoaagff. fute them.
5 vi (iv). 7 4. ri, vm (v). 7 4 and 7 See the notes on vi (iv). 4 4
also perhaps 12 15. In n. n 5 the (1164) > 7 4 (1238) : vn (vi). 27 (1402):
expression is more hesitating. vm (v). 7. 6 (1599).
\
THE PERVERTED FORMS. 63
amongst the normal constitutions of the second class : and even the
second and third varieties of oligarchy would have to be included with
them as forming the lowest types of normal constitutions ; since they
are still governed by the laws, and so are constitutional, not arbitrary,
governments 1 . It is surprising how Teichmiiller 8 could overlook the
fact that on his own showing, the social element whether the pre
dominating employment is agriculture and cattle-rearing, or trade and
industry, or something intermediate, the pursuit of both equally only
suffices to distinguish three varieties of democracy, so that Aristotle is
obliged to take other points of view in order to make out four. In
the case of oligarchy the distinction, which Aristotle certainly makes,
between the rich nobles and merchants or manufacturers who have
I made money, does not come into consideration to mark the distinction
! which he draws between the four varieties of this constitution. In place
of it we have merely the ever increasing growth of wealth and its accu
mulation in fewer and fewer hands, and here again in the account which
Teichmiiller 3 himself gives of these varieties this is precisely the case.
In the whole scheme of the successive grades of constitutions from the
Ideal Monarchy downwards, through the genuine and spurious Aristo
cracies, Polity, first Democracy, first Oligarchy, &c., down to the most
extreme Democracy, then the most extreme Oligarchy (government by
Dynasts) 4 , and finally Tyranny, this being the ultimate stage of develop
ment 5 , there is no place where the historical forms of the monarchy
could be fitted in. Lastly, from what precedes it is seen that the early
and provisional statement of the relation of the constitutions to one
another, in. c. 7, has not simply been modified by the further course
of the discussions, but that in the end hardly any part of it is left
standing; so that it may well be asked whether under these circum
stances Aristotle was justified in putting it forward even provisionally.
No doubt all these vacillations, inequalities, and contradictions, affect
the husk rather than the core of Aristotle s political theory : indeed
a certain portion of them are by no means to be regarded as actual
mistakes. The main supports of this political system are, that the
unqualified principle of democracy and the absolute principle of oli
garchy, the latter more even than the former, introduce the same sort
of arbitrary government, which comes to a head in Tyranny that
a good middle class is the foundation of a healthy political life : and
1 Comp. Oncken op. c. n. -252, who cracy from a polity,
however is not altogether right ; he goes - op. c. 18 f.
too far in maintaining that hence under A op. c. 20 f.
certain conditions an oligarchy does not 4 See n. on u. 10. 13.
differ from an aristocracy, nor a demo- 5 See n. on VI (iv). u. 21 (1305).
-
64 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
, their strength has outlasted the storms of centuries. Poets like Pho-
* cylides and Euripides (the latter with a political intention), had, it is
true, sung the praise of the middle class 1 ; but Aristotle is the first
thinker who makes the functions of the middle class in society and in
politics the foundation of his practical political theories, and of his
1 explanation of political history. His love of the mean in all things is
nowhere so systematically and so consistently carried out as here 2 .
He forcibly depicts the equalizing force of the well-to-do middle class
and the permanence of the constitution where it is most strongly repre
sented, that is, IIoXiTeta. The next best condition is one where it is at
least as strong as one of the two contending extremes, rich and poor,
and thereby is enabled to stave off the decisive victory of either. Even
then it is possible to maintain, according to circumstances, either another
Polity, or at least a law-abiding and moderate Democracy or Oligarchy,
as the case may be. But where the middle class is weaker than either
separately a perpetual struggle prevails between the two extremes, with
never-ending revolutions, and the end is the fatal exhaustion of both :
while Tyranny succeeds to their inheritance 3 .
But the more essential the part played by Polity in the philosopher s
political system, the more surprising does it appear that his remarks on
this form of government cannot be combined in all their details into a
consistent whole, a complete picture which shall be quite distinct. At
one time he represents it as being in accordance with an aristocracy and
a polity to fill all offices by election, without a property qualification ;
in the case of polity, therefore, by no higher qualification than is gene
rally requisite here for actual citizenship vi (iv). 9. 5. At another time
however the application of the lot, either alone or accompanied by
election with restriction of the right of voting or being voted for, vi (14).
1 5 1 9 f, is said to be characteristic of Polity. This contradiction may
not be so important perhaps as at first sight appears 4 ; yet we are all
the more surprised to find in the same chapter the restriction of the
popular assembly to the mere election of the council and the magistrates
represented as characteristic of Polity, vi (iv). 14 io 5 , and then to hear
(15) that usually in Polities the resolutions of the popular assembly
may be annulled by the council and the questions which they affect
brought before the former assembly again and again, until it passes a
resolution conformably". In the same place exactly the opposite pro
cedure is recommended as more just, and that, too, for Democracy:
1 See n. on vi (iv). n. 9. (i370-
2 Oncken op. c. n. p. 225. See n. on vi (iv). 9. 5 (1255).
3 Oncken op. c. n. 227, 228. 6 g ee Wi on VI ( IV )_ I4- j^ (1340).
4 See the note on vi (iv). 15. 21
POLITY. 65
thus then the latter, by adopting it, would become even better than the
ordinary Polities. Must we here recognise another of those additions
whereby the school obscured the master s work 1 ? Who again can fail
to be surprised at the great concession which is made to unqualified
popular rule and paid democracy, vi(iv) 9 2, 13 5, when Aristotle
states that the combination of the two measures, payment of the poor
for attendance in the popular assembly the council and the law-courts,
and punishment of the rich for their non-attendance, is appropriate to
Polity ? It may be that he is thinking only of those Polities in which
the middle class is not numerous enough to maintain a decided prepon
derance as compared with the two extreme parties, where consequently
its deficiency must be artificially made good in this way 2 . But this, to
say the least, has never been expressly mentioned by Aristotle :! , and
there is all the more reason to hold 1 , that in the end he has approxi
mated, much more than he himself believes, to unqualified government
by the people, and that his IloXireta is nothing but Attic democracy
without its unfavourable side. Aristotle himself^remarks, in. 15. 13,
that when once states have grown more populous and cities increased in
size it is not easy to call into life any constitution except a democracy ;
and in vn (vi). 5 5, 6, that since then even the older moderate patri
archal democracy of peasant proprietors has come to an end. It is a
result that he laments, but he is aware that it is unalterable. All that
remains is so to shape the most advanced democracy itself that it may
lose as far as may be its arbitrary, despotic character and wear the
appearance of something like IIoAn-eia. This may be done by regu
lating for the advantage of all the system of payment, which cannot
be altogether avoided here, and by checking the demagogues in their
practices of vexatious accusations. The detailed proposals which Aris
totle makes in this direction vn (vi), 5 38, 6 4; vin (v). 8. 15 fif,
9 5 IT ff> prove his lively interest in this question. Oncken 5 lias
well said : " Either renounce freedom and equality, that is, the essential
" nature of the constitutional state in Hellas, and give up the community
" to the despotic rule of violent oligarchs ; or make the whole civic body
" legislators and judges, summon the rich to take honorary magistracies,
" compensate the poor for the service of watching over them. It was
1 The practical proposals in vi (iv). 14 the Polity, to which Oncken appeals, if
1115, which Krohn refuses to attri- these words are rightly taken see the
bute to Aristotle, would certainly not be note there (1269) > anc ^ on 9 3 ( I2 54)-
missed, if omitted altogether. 4 With Oncken op. c. n. p. 240, though
2 As Oncken thinks op. c. n. 239. his assertions require considerable modi-
3 Nor can it be inferred from the fol- fication in accordance with what is stated
lowing words in vi (iv). 13. 7 on the in n. 4 on p. 41.
amount of the property qualification in 5 op. c. II. 259, 260.
H. 5
66 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
" the only alternative which could be found. This once conceded, even
" an opponent could not deny that the embodiment of the Athenian
" spirit in Athens was without parallel in Hellas. With all its failings
" it was the only state in which the political idea of the Hellenes at-
" tained to complete expression, the community in which dwelt the
"heart and soul of the Hellenic race ; with whose power and liberty the
" national life of Hellas became extinct. With deep dislike Aristotle
" watches the great multitude in this mighty city reigning and ruling
" like an all-powerful monarch ; few there are whose observation traces
" the mischiefs of its constitution so clearly to their causes. But the
" idea of this state conquered even him. He investigated, observed,
"described 1 Athens, its history and its organization, as no one ever
" did before him. The study which he devoted to it was the only
" homage which he voluntarily paid it : no word of acknowledgment
" escapes him. But throughout it receives from him involuntary hom-
" age, since it is the only state whose actual life he could or did take
" as a model for his own political design. He imagined himself stand-
" ing as a physician at a sick bed ; but the patient revealed, what no
" healthy subject could teach him, the very idea of the Hellenic state."
IX. DATE OF THE WORK AND ITS ASSUMED CONNEXION WITH THE
NlCOMACHEAN ETHICS.
"There are notices in the Politics of the Sacred War, vm. (v). 4. 7,
" as of something in the past ; of Phalaecus expedition to Crete, which
"took place at the end of it, Ol. 108, 3 (B.C. 346) 2 , as a recent event,
" vecocrrt TroXe/xos ^eviKos 8iafic/3r]Kcv ets rrjv vrja-ov, II. 10. 16 : lastly, of
"the assassination of Philip (B.C. 336), vm. (v). 10. 16", without any
"intimation that it had but very lately happened ." On the other hand
the passage n. 10. 16 appears to have been written before B.C. 333" .
The Politics as a whole must have been written later than the Nico-
machean Ethics^ which is quoted six times, n. 2^4; in. 9 3, 12 i ;
iv (vn). 13 5, 7 ; vi (iv). ii. 3 , and earlier than the Poetics which is
announced as to follow in v (vm.) 7. 3 7 .
1 In his Constitution of Athens in the the Poetics, p. 1 1 f. lleitz objection (in
IIoXiTetcu: see above, p/35 #. 3. Die vcrlorenen Schriften 99 ff.) there
2 Diod. xvi. 62. mentioned in n. 2 on p. 12 has in the
3 Cp. the note there (1673). meantime been answered in detail by
J Zeller op. cit. n ii 154 n. ( 4 ). Vahlen Sitzungsber. der Wiener Akad.
5 See the note there (375). LXVII. 1874. 293 298: he has made it
6 See nn. on these passages. tolerably certain that the chapter on
7 Cp. the Introduction to my edition of KdOapvis in question, which is now lost,
DATE. 67
It must indeed be admitted, and has already occasionally been
pointed out above, that a part of the inconsistencies in the work were,
from Aristotle s general position, inevitable, nay even characteristic;
that on the most careful revision he would never have detected them.
Others again are such as might easily have escaped his notice. Yet
after all, enough inconsistencies repetitions and other discrepancies
remain 1 to compel the inference that not only did Aristotle never give
the finishing touches to this work, but that he must have been a long
time over it, taking it up at intervals and with many interruptions
through other works. In consequence of this he had altered his views
on many points, and had not always the details of the earlier portions
fully present to his mind when he came to write the later ones. The
view here taken would be materially confirmed if the larger sections
which are wanting were never really written, the work never having been
completed as a whole.
It will be hardly possible to substantiate a well-grounded objection
to the Aristotelian origin of the six citations of the Ethics-, and yet that
work itself 3 calls the theory developed in it not Ethics but Politics, and
the same title is confirmed by passages of the Poetics and Rhetoric . For
the intermediate expression of the Rhetoric (i. 4. 5, 1359 b 10 f), r\ -n-tpl
rd yOr) TroAm/0/, is here our guide, by making Ethics and Politics in the
narrower sense appear as parts of Politics in the wider sense. The matter
is thus stated with perfect correctness by the author of the Magna
Moralia at the commencement of his work 5 , and Aristotle himself
explains in the last chapter of the Ethics that a full realization of the
principles laid down in it can only be expected from political education
and legislation.
stood at the conclusion of the whole (1450) :
treatise after the discussion on Comedy, Bk. VIII (V). i i (149.!)? .3 ( I 54)j
and not where I looked for it. Yet my 3 4(1511) ; 5 9 (1559) : 10 3 (1649),
remarks I.e. p. 8 still retain their force. 5 (1650), 6 (1657) ; 1 1 16 (1731); 12
1 Comp. the notes on Bk. II. 4 4 (149); u (1767), 14(1777).
5ii 2 (i53), H ( l6 4); 6 15 (215), 2 See however the notes on iv (vn). 13
18(220); 10 8 (366) : 5, 7 (876,879,881): and //. (1287) on vi
Bk. III. 4 5 (471), 9 (478) : (iv). 1 1. 3 in regard to the citations there.
Bk. IV (VII). 13 4 (872), 8 (881); 3 i. 2. 3 1094 a 24 f.
14 6 (899): i. 3- 5 1095 a 2,
Bk. V (VIII). 3 6 (993), ii (1000); i. 4. i 1095 a 14 f.;
5 4 (1024), 15(1041); 6 14 (1079): cp. i. 13. 2. 1 102 a 7 ff.,
Bk. VI (IV). i 7 (11245); 2 3 vii. ii. i. ii52b i f.
(1140), 5(1143); 4 21 (1194, 1198), 4 Poet. 6. 16. 1450 b 6 sqq. (cp. note
22 (1199 1201), 24 (1203), 25 71 to my edition of this work). Rlict. i.
(1204) ; 6 4 1223; 7 i (1230 b); 9 9 t. 7. 1356 a 26 sqq.
(1265) ; 14 3 (1319), 9 (1331). 10 5 Brandis op. c. II ii 1335 n. certainly
(1334), 13 (i337) J 4 ( J 338); 15 16 expounds his words differently; but sec
(1366), 19 (1369), 21 (1371) ; Zeller op. c. II ii 608 n.
Bk. VII (VI). i 6 (1383); 7 i
52
6cS INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
To regard the EtJiics and Politics however as forming the first and
second parts of one and the same work, as has now and then been done,
is certainly not correct 1 . Yet this view is undoubtedly very old. For
it must even have been adopted by the writer who at the close of
the Ethics appended that introduction to the Politics now to be read
there which may be translated somewhat as follows 2 : "Since then
"previous writers have omitted to make legislation the subject of their
"enquiries, it might perhaps be as well that we should ourselves take
u this subject into consideration together with the theory of the consti-
" tution generally, in order that the philosophy of Man may be as far as
"possible brought to a conclusion. First then let us try to review
"whatever has been rightly stated at various times by our predecessors;
"next from a comparison of the constitutions to investigate what it is
" which preserves and destroys states and individual constitutions, and
"from what causes some are ordered well and others ill. For when
"this has been considered we should perhaps be more likely to gain a
"comprehensive view not only of what constitution is absolutely the
" best, but also how each separate constitution should be regulated, and
" what laws and customs it must adopt (in order to be the best of its
"kind). Let us begin then with our discussion."
Schlosser long since, with good reason, doubted the genuineness of
this patchwork in the forcible and cogent remark 3 : "there is no coher-
"ence between the close of this passage and the beginning of the
" Politics., and Aristotle does not follow the plan here marked out." The
opening of the Politics is only intelligible when regarded as belonging
to an independent work which starts from the notion of its own subject-
matter, the state. We are not told that something similar was stated
rather differently at the commencement of the Ethics ; the state is here
first constructed as the all-comprehensive association which has the
highest good for its end : nor is there the least intimation that for the
realization of unimipeded vrtuous activity, the full meaning of this
highest good, we were referred in the last chapter of the EtJiics to the
Politics. The supposed transition then is pure fancy with nothing here
1 So recently by Nickes for example. TroXets /cat ra iroia. e/cdcrras r(av TroXtraw* ,
- Nic. Elk. X. 9 22, 23 1181 b 12 Kal did rivets alrias at fj.ev /caXws al v Se rov-
f. TrapaXnrovrtov odv rCov Ttporepuv dve- vavriov TroAtreiWrar deuprjdevruv yap
pevvrjrov rb Trepl rr/s vo/modecrias, avrovs rovrwvrdx dv fj.d\\ov (rvvi.8oifji.ei Kal iroia
c Trio Ktyacrdai fj.d\\ov fieXriov t crws, /cat TroXtreta apiary, Kal irus endury ra-^Oelaa^
6 Xws 5r) Trepl TroXtret as, OTTCOS els dvvafj.iv i) Kal rt crt VOUOLS /cat e0eai -^pw^ivr]. \eyw[jt,cv
Trepl ra dvOpwTTiva 0tXocro0fa reXetw#7?. o$v dpdfj.evoi.
trpurov fj.ev odv et rt Kara fj.epos eipyrai 3 In his translation of the Politics I.
/caXws VTTO rwv Trpoyevcarre puv Treipa6wp.ev xviii. His further conjectures need not
e7reX#eti>, elra e/c r(av crvvyyaevcov TroXtretaSi/ be refuted now.
rd Trola <ruei Kal <f)6dpei. rds
CONNEXION WITH THE ETHICS. 69
to support it. In keeping with the announcement contained in it
Aristotle should rather have begun with the second book 1 , making what
is contained in Bk. vm (v). come next, and then developing the
contents of iv (vn), v (vm), and lastly of vi (iv). and vn (vi).
What must be understood by a comparison of constitutions we see
clearly from x 9 20, 21, 1181 a 16, 17, b y 2 ; at the same time we also
see how much the interpolator has misunderstood the expression he bor
rows. There it denotes the combination of different laws and elements
of different constitutions into a new constitution and new legislation :
here it can only denote an accumulation of information on the consti
tutions of as many different states as possible and on the history of
their development, because only from that can we gather what is here
intended to be gathered from this comparison 3 . That before Aris
totle no scientific enquiry into legislation existed is palpably untrue;
and had the absence of such enquiry been the only inducement to the
composition of his work, how could this have sufficed to make him lay
down " the theory of the constitution generally"? That no writers had
been found to elaborate this is not asserted even here ; on the con
trary we are promised an exposition and estimate of all the facts already
discovered by earlier enquirers. Even the words Kal oAws &r/ Trepl
TToXtretas contain an un- Aristotelian idea, for they imply that Legislation
must be a part of the theory of the Constitution, while to Aristotle, we
have seen, both are parts of Politics proper. Of the incredible mode of
expression in the concluding words from /cat TTOLO. iroAiTeia apumy onwards
we will say nothing : it is sufficient to remark that the interpolator has
left out just what is most important, which in the translation above
has been added within brackets. In short, to whatever period this
interpolation belongs its author did not himself know what he was
about, and it would be for the most part lost labour to seek to discover
"method in his madness."
That in spite of their close connexion 4 the Ethics and the Pol Hies are
regarded by Aristotle as two independent works, is sufficiently shown by
the way in which the one is quoted in the other. Until sufficient reason
1 For the interpretation which Nickes, T&V Tro\tTeiwv al <rvi>ayuyai, where the
/. c. pp. 29, 30, puts upon the concluding expression certainly tends to pass over
words, "Let us then follow this state"- into the meaning put upon it by the in-
" ment of ours, but only after prefixing terpolator, but goes no farther.
"a commencement dealing with other * This disposes of the unhappy at-
" matters," is not calculated to inspire tempt of Nickes I.e. 25 f. to interpret the
confidence. passage. In his refutation of the earlier
2 ou5 w $OJ>TO (sc. ol (TO(f>i<TTaL) pq.5iov attempts he is on the whole successful.
flvai TO vofj-oderrja-ai crwayaybvTt TOI)S ev- 4 As Zeller observes op. c. II ii 104 f.
doKi/movvTas TWV i>6/j.<j)i>, and rCiv v6/j.fiv Kal n. (i).
70 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
is adduced for transferring the first chapter of Bk. iv (vn). from Aristotle
to Theophrastos or some one else 1 , the yet more unequivocal mention
of Ethics there ( 13) as another study/ ercpas... cr^oA?? s 2 , has the most
decisive importance : although the term another study would mean
no more when so applied than it does in the case of the Prior or
Pure and Posterior or Applied Analytics, for example. Yet no one has
tried to show from the close connexion between them that these latter
treatises are merely parts of one and the same work. In fact Politics
in Aristotle s sense, so far as the state according to its idea is a means
of training to human virtue and therefore to happiness, is nothing but
Applied Ethics : the problem of Pure Ethics being to show wherein
virtue and happiness consist. But since this idea of the state could
only lie truly realized in the absolutely best state, which does not as
yet exist, which even if it did exist would only be one state amongst
many since therefore the virtue of the citizen is dissociated from the
virtue of the man Ethics has to deal with the moral activity of the
individual, Politics with that of the state".
In Aristotle s classification of the sciences, both studies, in common
with Poetics, have a somewhat uncertain place and worth assigned
them, as Zeller 4 and Walter 5 have shown : nor does it appear that
Aristotle cleared this up sufficiently to himself, or even tried to do so.
It is a peculiar weakness of his Ethics that it has no purely scientific
importance for him ; it merely serves as an introduction to practical
morality 1 : but again, as he himself explains, the direct value of mere theo
retical instruction for this purpose is very slight, nay, quite insignificant 7 .
Yet practical insight (^poV^o-t?), without which there is no moral virtue 8 ,
can be materially promoted by Ethics 9 , although it does not by any
means coincide with Ethics in subject-matter 10 . So too the practical
insight of the leading statesman in political life can exist in a purely
1 See above, p. 15 n. i. 26 b 7, and 1106 b 36 ff. ; II. c. 9.
2 Cp. the note there (709). Comp. also Walter op. c. 151 162 who
3 Cp. Zeller op. cit. n ii 104 f. n. i, certainly should not have relied upon the
182, 607 n. 3 : Oncken op. c. I. 164 ff. probably spurious chapter II. 7.
4 op. c. II ii 176 185. 8 Cp nn% i n T< 5< 9(45),!. 13. 6(112).
5 Die Lchre von der praktischen Ver- 9 Nic. Eth. i. 2. 2 io94a22ff., i.
nunft 537 554 (Jena 1874. 8). But not 3. 7 1095 a iof., I. 4. 6 1095 b 4 13,
every statement in that work is correct. vi. 7. 7 1 141 b 2 1 ff. Comp. Walter op. c.
6 Nic. EtJi. i. 3 58 1095 a 3 ff., 157, 400 ff.
ii. 2. i 1103 b 26 ff. _ Cp. Walter op. c. 10 As Zeller thinks, op. c. n.ii 608;?.; he
151 ff. Zeller op. c. ii ii 631. has been refuted by Walter p. 151. There
7 Nic. Eth. i. 3 58 1095 a 3 ff.; is no doubt that the passage of the Nic.
cp. I. 9. 10 iiooaiff.; ii. i. i 1103 a Et/i. adduced by Zeller, vi. 8 14
14 ff.; II. 4 36, 1105 a 26 b 18 ; x. 1141 b 23 1142 a n, is not by Aristotle,
9 = x. 10 (Bekk.) : cp. Pol. iv (vn). 13. as was long ago shown by Fischer
ir f., Nic. Eth. n. 6 48, 15 1106 a Fritzsche and Rassow.
CONNEXION WITH THE ETHICS. 71
empirical manner without a comprehensive theory of politics ; but on
the other hand there is much to learn from such a theory, and the great
practical statesman will be all the greater the more he has appropriated
it to himself. That the main value of TroXiTiKrj consists in affording this
important contribution to the education of capable statesmen is stated
by Aristotle in. i. i ; vi (iv). c. i ; vn (vi). 5. i ; iv (vn). 13. 5, and in
other passages, and this fully agrees with his analogous view about
Ethics. But his inconsistency with himself does not go so far here as
before; rather he demands of political theory in. 8. i (cp. vi [iv]. 13.
5), that it should exhaust all conceivable cases, even those of which it
can be foreseen that they will seldom or never actually occur 1 .
[X. THE MOST RECENT CRITICISM OF THE TEXT.
The comparative worth of the Manuscripts.
This question, of which some notice will be found above 2 , has
recently been raised anew by Busse in an excellent dissertation De
pracsidiis einendandi Aristotelis Politica*. By a minute analysis of the
old Latin version, Busse proves beyond all doubt that it has been
over-estimated by Vettori and Schneider, and even by Susemihl, and
is by no means so strictly literal or correct as they supposed \
To begin with, William of Moerbeke s ignorance of Greek was
something deplorable 5 . He renders irepl TMV aTrcx^m/xeVcoi/ Trepl KT\,
de pronunciatis de optima civ it at e ; Trpos Se rots aAAois a pud alias;
eiriTiOto-Oai praeferri ; eViS^yueu/ praefectum populi cssc; evidently arriving
at the meaning of a compound by the most rudimentary analysis, as ra
dyaOd rd Trepc/xct^ra bona quae circa res bcllicai . But mere ignorance
whether of the meaning of words or of the construction and it would
seem as if, in n. 12. 8, he made OA^TrtWcv an accusative after rov
qui vicit Olimpiasem 1 ; at any rate he gives super tecta for
1 Comp. nn. on in. 8. i (542) ; in. 13. cies in William s translation and the need
13 (601) ; vi (iv). 15. 4 (1350); see also of caution in inferences from it to the
ill. 2 i 3. original. See also the edition of 1879,
[Here Prof. Susemihl s own Intro- e.g. I p. 204 n. i, 210 ;/. 2.
duction ends. The following section is 5 Yet it is an exaggeration when Roger
mainly an attempt to present succinctly Bacon writes "ut notum est omnibus
some results of his critical labours ; but Parisiis literatis nullam novit scientiam
for its form, and for occasional diver- in lingua graeca de quo praesumit, et
gences of opinion, he is not responsible. ideo omnia transfert falsa et corrumpit
TR. scientiam Latinorum." Cp. Jourdain
pp. i, 2. Recherches p. 67.
Berlin, if"
3 Berlin, 1881.8. 6 Busse op.cit.\>. 36 f. Space permits
4 Susemihl however in the large criti- only a few typical instances to be selected
cal edition (1872) p. XXXIII f. had already from his stock.
pointed out inaccuracies and inconsisten- 7 p. 9. The best MS. gives Olimpiasem.
72 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
dva Sw/xara in v (vin). 3. p 1 does less to obscure the readings of his
original than a fatal inconsistency and fluctuation in the choice of
renderings. The prepositions are changed or confused on almost every
page. So likewise the particles : yap antem in m, yap n. 9. 18, ID-COS
yap IV (Vll). 17. 13, Set yap V (vill). I. 2 2 , ) yap 4>-/#/r, III. 7. 5; 817 *?//#
i. 2. i; oui/ <?//// i. 8. 6 3 , etc.: not to speak of the stock renderings
Kai...Se ct...etiam, /cat rot <?/ quidem. Sometimes he omits particles
(/x,eV, yap, 8e, oirrc); sometimes, ^.^. n. 5. 9 SiKai ws et iuste, he inserts
them. They are most frequently inserted to avoid asyndeton, as in
ii. 3. 7 <paropa ^vXeV^v fratruelem aut contribulem t etc. 4 He is care
less of the order of words ; thus II. 4. 6 /cat yeveo-$ai e/< 87^0 oVrcov
? eVa 6 1 / ambos fieri unnm ex duolnis existentibus ; iv (vn). 3. 8
Kat / dominos (i. e. /cat Kvptov?) 5 . His carelessness leads him
repeatedly to translate the adjectives a ptcrroKpaTtK^, oXtyap^tKry by the
nouns <7 ristocratia , oligarch ia c .
This being the ordinary style of his translation, when he comes to
passages where his Greek original was defective, it is only occasionally
that he transmits the defect faithfully : as in vm (v). 6. 3 h Ou (for
evOa) in tlw, which he took for a proper name; in. n. 3 /c/at^s (for
Kpirovcri, so M s ) Krics ; IT. 9. 30 <}>i\iTia (so M s ) amicalnlia ; v (vm).
T 4 M s av T ipsoruin (he has read the compendium aurwv) ; 6 9 M s
a avros (for avXos) /^/ ipsuni 1 . More frequently he tries to get some
sort of sense by putting in a word or phrase suggested by the context,
or by a parallel passage in the Politics. Take for instance vm (v). i. 3 :
P 1 gives oViVovs e. TI oj/ras, with space for one letter ; M s has slurred
over this defect of the archetype by reading en ; not so William ; from
the immediately preceding e/< rov iarov<s OTLOVV ovras he derives inae-
qiialcs in quocunque existentes. Similarly with natura for SuVa/xts in
iv (vn). ii. 4 (from the adjoining <f>vo-iv), alia quidem esse eadeui for
TO Trao-t [jLCTCivaL VI (iv). 4. 25 (from the following TaXXa /xev eu/ai
TavTa) : see also in. 16 5 universale borrowed from c. 15 4 TO Ka06X.ov,
IV (vn). i 4 quae circa prudcntiam se habent, neqne enim beatificant,
iv (vn). T i i si ad rotum oportet adipisci positionem borrowed from
5 3 rnv Olo-Lv el xpy TToiew KttT* &j^v ; etc. 8 Thus the defects and
false readings of his original, which must have resembled M s though
not so corrupt, are made worse by alterations and superficial remedies.
In iv (vn). 14. 22 r had the same hiatus as M s has now, through
the homoeoteleuton o-7rouS-a eu/, o-xoA-aeiv : William does what he can
1 p. 12. 2 p. ii. at v (vm). 5. 17, where ox... is all that
3 p. 30. 4 pp. 29, 30. stands in M 8 of aK
5 pp. 14, 27. (i p. 9. 8 Busse pp. 15 20.
7 pp. 9, 12, 23. Compare the lacuna
DEFECTS OF THE OLD TRANSLATION.
to conceal this by translating eveKei/ rdy Kal T??? ei/M/nys gratia ordinis
et pads, as if he had read renews. In vi (iv). 4. n M s gives rdV
aSwarwv 77 instead of TCOV aSwcmov 77 ; so too P, for William renders
<minus> quam to make sense. Similarly v (vin). 6. n M s has rjirovro
for ^TTTOVTO ; William sequebantur ; which must be his attempt to make
sense out of ^Vovro 1 .
Another source of divergence between the codices and William s
Latin must also be kept in view, viz. the freedom with which he some
times translates. Thus in n. 9. 20 S^/wxywyetv atmws iJvayKa^ovro KCU ot
/3ao-iAeis 7^v?r<? populum se ipsos (he read aimws) cogebant regcs, he may
perhaps have simply exchanged the passive construction for the active.
This is a not uncommon resource with him : see vn (vi). 7 5 Trpo-
o-KtiaOaL apponcre, 8 i Si^p^o-^ou dividers etc. ; and for the converse
n. 7 6 Set?7 ostendatur, 8 5 ypdfaw scribatiir, vm (v). 8. 9 TTU/KI-
X^(/>eVai comprehendantur^ etc. 2 Though he hardly ever appears to
omit words from P, it can be shown that he sometimes adds: r.^.
i. 5. 8 ?7Tp rots ciprjfievois si quidem ct dictis <creditur>, n. 9.
juteVai? Trept ot/covs (so M s for TreptotKoi;?) possideiitibus <praedia>
domits, etc. 1 Yet additions may be due to glosses, like videro fugientem
proelio, (?) dirdvevOe pd^rj<s votja-^ in the margin of P 1 , etc. 1 Lastly,
how much caution is needed in handling this translation may be judged
from a few characteristic blunders taken almost at random : i. 9. i
ovre Troppo) eKetV^s neque longe <posita>\ n. 8. 13 o-u KaAoGs 8e ovS o
Trepi rrjs Kpt crecos e^et vo/>to5, TO KptWtv d^iovv KT\ noil bcnc (tutcin nccjiic
dc iudido habd lex iudificare dignificans, though here one might suppose
he had o /cpiVeiv a^twi/ before him 5 : ll. II 14 eKacrrov aTroreXetrat TOJK
aurwv -itiiuni qnodque perfidtur ab eisdem : c. 1 1 1 5 ru> TrAovreu/, atet
TI TOV S rj/Jiov jotepo? eK7re//,7rovT5 CTTI ras TroXeis inditando semper al
populi partcm emittentes super urbes, suggested perhaps by TTOLOVVLV
povs in vii (vi). 5. 9 ? : in. 3 2 etVep oui/ B-rj^oKparovvTaL si quidem igitur
in democratiam versae fuerant quaedam : 13 2 OLKOL habctur : iv (vii).
1 6. 14 Trpos ^eo>i/ aTTO^epaTretai/ TOJV eiX^orcov T^F Trept r^? ycvecreo)? Tiprjv
ad deorum reverentiam hits, quae sortitae sunt r//w qui de generatione
honorem (as if rats etX^^ut at? were read) 8 .
From this examination of the old translation Bussc concludes that
it is a less trustworthy representative of the better recension (II 1 /. e.
T P 1 M) than P 1 , the codex of Demetrios Chalkondylas. Its lost
original was slightly better than the very corrupt Ambrosian manuscript
1 pp. 21 23: r may have had ei- 4 p. 34. 5 pp. 24, 43.
TTOJTO, but this is less probable. 6 p. 20. 7 p. 4 r .
2 pp. 2426. 3 p. 32. 8 pp. 43, 20, 41.
74 INTRODUCTION JO THE POLITICS.
M s , but closely resembled it ; the common archetype of the two being
itself very corrupt, with numerous omissions through homoeoteleuta
and one or two glosses inserted in the text 1 . And it was from this
Latin translation and not from another manuscript, he thinks, that
the scribe of P 5 derived those readings wherein he departs from the
second or worse family 2 .
These conclusions however are by no means warranted 3 . The
ignorance and uncritical spirit of William of Moerbeke render it all
the more certain that in the majority of the right readings which are
due solely to his translation he must have followed a codex con
siderably better (as it was also older) than the archetype of P 1 or of
M s . When all deductions have been made for variants arising from
conjectures and mistranslations, the old translation presents the cor
rect reading 18 times unsupported: 7 times in conjunction with P 5
only : once in conjunction with P" only : 3 times with P 1 (or its cor
rections) only; once with Aretinus only: 5 times in conjunction with
more than one of the inferior manuscripts 4 . To these may be added
some 12 other passages where the evidence, though good, is less con
vincing 5 . Whereas the correct reading is due to P 1 alone u times, to
P 1 in conjunction with inferior authorities (Ar., P 2 margin, P :! ) 5 times:
and several of these are such changes as Demetrios or Aretinus could
1 PP- 45 47- from v (vm). 8. i a passage ^yhere the
; fn proof of this Bussc quotes (p. 48) second family IT- exhibits an hiatus
_ P 1 M William P 5 (margin)
7rapa5vofj,^ri subintrans inreiaovova a
Trapavo/j-ia praevaricatio TrapaBacns
rb [uxpov 5a7rdvr/^a parvae expensae at /MKpal dawdvat
dvctipei consumunt
There is nothing new in this observation. (nrovSa<rofj.^vwv, 35 /card, 1296 a 8
Compare Susemihl s large critical edition (rets, b 38 TrK-fjde^ i32ob 9 TT)V lapavri-
(1872) p. xni : "mirum autem est in eis vwv dpxw, T 5 T V S &VTTJS apxys, 1321 a 12
verbis, quae in vulgatae recensionis co- oTrXm/c^, 1303 a 24 eyyus ov (or Zyyi-
dicibus omissa hie liber (P 5 ) cum paucis fov?), 1311 a 6 %p?7 / u,arw^ : rP 5 i328a 5
aliis et vetusta translatione servavit, irapa, 1336 a 6 eiadyeiv, 1340 a 16 5ri\oi>
eum aliis illis interdum accuratius cum 6 rt 5e?, 132 ib 29x0, omitted, 1322 b ^6
hac assentire aut alias eiusdem sensus Trpotrevdfoas (?), 1306!) 39 /cat omitted:
voces quam illos hie illic offerre, ut PP 2 1259!) 28 5e; Pp 1 "1265 a 16 Trapct,
propensus facile fias ad credendum hos 1272 b 39 /ca0 airo: PP* 1 (corrector)
in eo locos non ex codice Graeco anti- 1278 b 22 Trap : PAr. I289b 38 TroX^-
quiore, sed ex ipsa translatione Latina ftovs ; PP 5 Ar. 1336 a 5 5 : PR b 1303 b
esse haustos." 31 rd: P Aldine P 2 (corrector) 1332 a
3 With what follows compare Suse- 33 rc2 : P Ar. P 2 (corr. 3) 1335 a 26 <rc&-
mihl Politico, tcrtinni cdita (1882) Pre- /xaros : Pp 2 1254 a 10 cnrXus (clTrXws 6 Xws
face pp. vin xvin. M s P 1 , 6 Xws cet).
4 P alone gives 1258 b 40 XaprjTidr) 5 Of the disputed cases 1260 b 20 oi/co-
1260 a 4 dpxbvTWv /cat, 1260 b 41 els 6 VO/JLOI, 1262 b 32 TOVS 0uXa/cas, 1274 b 20
TTJS, i266b 2 5 yd?), 1271 a 20 /cdV, 1276 a (a.TrorLvei.v or airorLvveivl), i28oa 29 ra-
33 ZOvos ei>, 1 282 a 27 fj-eycara, 1285 a 7 \dvruv may be mentioned.
auTOKpaTwp, 1 332 a 42 vi.a 5, 1336 a 34
COMPARATIVE WORTH OF THE MANUSCRIPTS. 75
easily make for themselves 1 . In 4, or perhaps 5, places P 2 has alone
preserved the right reading : it is difficult to find a single passage where
it is due to M s or to P 3 alone 2 . From P 5 and from Aretinus unsup
ported a greater number of such cases is derived ; but the uncertainty,
whether we are dealing with a genuine reading of a manuscript or
merely with conjecture, proportionately increases. The latter is more
probable not only for P 5 , but for the few occasional good readings
of the worst manuscripts 3 .
Further it must be noticed that while M s r are often found alone
supporting a variant against P 1 , M s P 1 are less frequently (the number
of such cases being about -J) alone in agreement against P, and it is
very seldom indeed that P 1 P alone support any reading against M s .
What is the right inference to draw from this state of things? Evi
dently that P and M s go back to one common archetype, and P 1 to
another (from which also must be derived the traces of the better
recension in P 4 P a ) : only the immediate ancestor of M s had been
corrected by the latter, while this was not the case with P or the
authorities from which it is derived 4 . The genuine readings of the
family II 1 will be found to have been preserved sometimes in the one
archetype (of M s P), sometimes in the other (of P 1 and of the correc
tions in P 2 P ): and the relationship between the members of the family
may be represented by the following tree.
1 P 1 alone 1259 a r 3 ^awt/jo-ye/aw, the
right order of 1278 a 36 f. (corr. 1 ), 1:>4
corr. 1 (? /cd/ceu/os), I286b 17
(perhaps T also), 1287 b 38 /3<x<ri-
\iK6v, 1328 a 5 ctTrcryxecu, 1335 b 20 yevo-
/j.vuv, 1 338 b 4 irporepov (corr. 1 ), 1340!) 30
Traidtwv, 1299 b 24 eT^puv, I3i4a 35 r6
iroieiv (?) : P 1 Ar. 1263!} 4 r6, I28ob 19
el ?7<rcu> ; P 1 (corr.) Ar. 1255 a 37 Zityovov,
1299 a 14 TToArrei cus ; P X P 2 (margin) P 3
(later hand) 1284 a 37 KoXoljeiv. Of these
{\aiovpyelwv, Trporepov, Traidiuv, TO Troteo ,
ti)<rav, %Kyovov are of slight weight.
2 P 2 1253 a 25 /ecu omitted after 0i <rei,
I27ob 38 enrol, 1325 a 29 auro TO (corr. 1 ),
1339 a T 4 etireitv : perhaps 1338 b 33
3 1267 b 33 rd L 9 , U b (corr.); 1274!)
20 T L TTTCuVuxri L s ; 1275 b 39 TOVTO L s
Aldine and M B (ist hand); 1331 a 24
0eo?s P 4 Ar., 1295 a 28 rj L 8 C c Ar.,
I3i7a 12 ri s R b Ar. 1302 b 39 rd troabv
R b .
4 For proof of this see (beside the criti-
76 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
Few of the readings common to M s P 1 or of those common to T M s
have much to recommend them. Yet this is far from proving P 1 to be
our best authority. Against such a view may be urged (i) the number
of mistakes with which, no less than P or M s , it abounds : (2) the futile
attempts at correction which it sometimes exhibits, e.g. in. 13. 15 ravra? yap
SeT SicoKeu for avrai yap Srj SOKOVCTL SiwKai/ (&OKOVCTL having been omitted
in the archetype of II 1 ) : (3) the fact that, as just shown, P, solely or with
inferior manuscripts, furnishes the true reading at least 34 (perhaps 46)
times whereas P 1 , alone or with inferior manuscripts, does the same
only 1 6 times. These considerations are not to be set aside by an
isolated passage like in. 9. 8, where P 1 Sta/coVovo-t is a trifle nearer right
than M s Sia/covovo-i Will, nii/iistrant 1 .
All existing manuscripts of the Politics, when compared even with
those of the Ethics, are late and bad. Still there are degrees of bad
ness : and if to follow P M s , other things being equal, in preference to
P sometimes leads an editor away from the true reading of IT, he
would yet oftencr go astray if he followed P 1 against P M s . The
relationship between the two families is itself obscure. In some re
spects II 3 is the better of the two, particularly where it preserves words
omitted in II 1 : in such cases it is seldom n 2 that has a gloss inserted,
nearly always it is n 1 that is mutilated 2 . Yet as a general rule II 1 should
be followed in preference to n 3 .
Coming now to Basse s view about P 5 , we must admit that this
manuscript presents most remarkable variants. Take v (vin). 2 5 ff .
(1337!) 17 ff.):
P 1 M s William P 5
ad perfectionem Trpos TO re/Xetoi/
dictis p??$eio-ais
6 ei/e/cev gratia X a / u (Bekk.)
TO fj.lv yap avrov ipsius quidem enirn avrov fj.lv yap (Bekk.)
<iAxoi> amicorum TOOK
C. 3 T rrjv 8e fJLOvcrLKrjv r)^ (le musica autem Trcpl 8e
3 TeXos fmaliter TcXcvTalov
on Set TTOLovvras quod facientes oportetrt 7roio{WasSer(Bekk.) 3
In some of these instances the discrepancy has nothing to do with
cal notes) Susemihl s Third edition (1882) some parts of the treatise, K h O b and
Preface pp. x, xi, where also the diagram IJ M 1 in others.
is given, p. xvi. * Other instances of close agreement
* Quoted by Busse p. 45. with the old translation, in 1327 a 34,
2 The manuscripts of the Nicomachcan 1329 a 17, 18, 1334 a 37, 1336 a 34, b 18,
Ethics show an equally perplexing dis- 1320 a 10, 1307^ 32 f. Susemihl op. c.
crepancy between K b M b and L b O b in v ui.
COMPARATIVE WORTH OF THE MANUSCRIPTS. 77
the old translation : and this is still more plain from the following
variants of P 5 : 1330 a 32 X py for SeZ c. c. 1 ; 1333 b 2 Se K al ra xi>W^
for Kat Ta xPW L f^ a $* (n 1 omit Se); 1335 k 2 3 TatSoTrou as for TCKI/O-
Troaas; 1336 b 5 yap TOU for TOU yap, 1339 a 1 6 x a p tl/ f r weKa,
1340 a 8 SrjXov for <avepoV; 9 dAAwj/ for eVe pwi ; 1342 a 6 aWo-ai? for
Wo-ats; 1309 a 1 8 ov for /x^ . But at the same time this corrupt care
lessly written book has some readings agreeing with P 1 and M s against
the old translation, and others which no Latin version would ever
have suggested. Thus 1338 b 27 AeiTro/xeVots M s P s dcficicntcs William,
1318 b 31 Ti/ATy/xdVcoi Tas /xei^ou? aVo omitted by M s P translated by
Will; 1326 b 4 /xev -rots M s P 1 5 Aid., Tots ftei/ IP ; 1332 b I /zeTa-
/2a AAeii/ M s P 1 - 5 /xeTa/5aAetv II 2 ; 1334 b 2 TC untranslated by Will.,
Ta P 1 5 ; 1335 a 1 6 TO c. c. TOVS M s P 5 ; 1337 a 18 fttXnov M s P 5 Ar.,
/3e ATto-Tov c. c. optiinus Will.; 1319 b 24 Kat Ta P 1 5 and in the margin
of P 4 , KaTa c. c. in Will.; 27 at -rrpoVepat 11 P and the corrector of P 1 ,
at TrpoVepov II 2 ; 1322 a 22 TOIS etp^eVots M s and P 1 (ist hand), T/ys
eip?;/xeV^s c. C. dicto Will.; 1306 a 22 eyxetpiVoj/xei/ ceteri, ey^Lp-qa-wcnv
M s , eyxetpT/ o-oucrti/ P nianus inicccriiit Will.; 1313 b 2 <^)poj/^/xa TC P 1 5
R b , <^)pov7;^,aTa TC c. c. sapicntiac Will.; 1316 a 32 TWV c. c. TOU P 1 Ar.,
in P M s a hiatus. Take even the suspected passage 1334 a 28, 29
Set SiKatOfruj T/s Kat TroAA^s o~oj^>poo"i;vr/s TOUS dpto~Ta SoKouvTas vrpaTTeti^
Kat TrdvTW rwv /xaKapi^o/xe i OJi/ aTroAavovTas C. C., indigent iustitia ct uiulta
teniperantia qui optiine videntur agere et omnibus beat is frni Will. Any
one correcting the text from the Latin version would surely have
written aTroXaveiv ; but P has Seoi Tat ot aptcrra SoKowi^Tes O.TTO-
AavovTes. Or again, 1311 b 7 Sia TO eis TO o~o3jaa aicr^i at (atcrp(^J ai
M s P 1 aivxyvea-Oai Tl 2 ); proptcrca quod aliqui monarcJianiin in corpus
verecundiam fecerunt would have suggested atcr^vat, not ala-^v^iv which
is what we find in P 5 . So again had the scribe wished to emend the
corrupt o-n-XiTrjv of 1321 a 12, William s aruiativain would have sug
gested oVAtTiKT/v or oVAmv, not oVAmKoV which is the reading of P\
Far more probable is it that here traces of the archetype still remain.
Similarly in 1320 b 3 the right reading a<te/x,eVovs seems to have come
down in P 5 as well as in P 1 : it is at least unlikely that William s
respuentes suggested it. Even in vin (v) 8. 2, the passage which Busse
thinks conclusive, but for the reminiscence of a phrase in Plato it is
by no means clear that 7rapaSvop,eVr; should supersede w
1 Consensus codicum. some cases even, e.g. 1336 b 18, 1337 b
2 Bekker, who took P 2 of the second i6f., 34 f., where M 8 ? 1 have a better
or worse family as the foundation of his reading. See p. 76.
text, often adopted readings from P 5 : in
78 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
Dislocations and double recensions.
The text of the Politics, when put into the more coherent shape
which to the German editor most nearly reproduces Aristotle s intention 1 ,
is seen to depart from the order of the manuscripts not merely in the two
great instances of the arrangement of the books 2 , but also in a large
number of other cases. It will be useful here to review, at greater
length than can be done in the critical footnotes, the difficulties for
which transposition seems to be suggested as a natural remedy, especially
as the fullest account of these suggestions has often to be sought in
monographs or magazine articles not always readily accessible.
(i) Bk. i. ii 5, 6. Montecatino, p. 422 of his Commentary on
Bk. i., was the first to enquire what is the connexion between 6, eurt 8e
Te^j/tKcorarat /xev TOUV epyacrioov OTTOV eXa^tcrrov TU^S, /2avavcroTaTai 8 ev
at? TU (rayxaTO, X(o/5a>VTat /xaXicrra, oouA-iKooTarai 8 OTTOV TOU crco/xaros TrAeT-
crrat ^p^o-a?, ayeiWcrraTat 8e OTTOV e\d\io-TOV TrpocrSet aperf/s, and the
context. Piccart, p. 140, proposed to remove it to follow TO) o-wpxri
/xoVw xp?7o-i)ucov 0- 2 7)- As Schneider saw, this will not do; for the third or
mixed sort of xP r )f JLarLa " riK ^ could not be excluded from the epyao-iai of
6. Now the last words of 5, immediately before eto-i 8e TexviKommH
KT\, are, trepl e/cacrrov 8e TOVTWV KaOoXov /x,ev eip^rat Kal vvv, TO Se Kara
(Jitpos aKpifioXoytiorOai ^pv^cri/xoi/ /xev ?rpos ras epyacrias, cfropTLKOv Se TO
e^SiaTpt/?etj/. This reads like the final remark of Aristotle on the sepa
rate branches of ^p^/xaTio-TtKT/, considered not in regard to theory but to
practice (TCI ?rpos TTJV xPW lv i J ) : no new remarks upon them ought to
be added. If so, 6, which consists of such remarks, would be in place
if it preceded vrept IKOLO-TOV B KT\ : or, which is the same thing, if the
sentence Trepl e/cao-Tov 8e...To ei Sia,Tpi / /3av be transposed to follow a
The argument too runs on better to the next sentence eVet 8
eVtois yeypa/x//.Va KT\, 7. "I have here said what was necessary in a
"general way on each of these various branches; to go accurately into
"details would no doubt be useful for the various pursuits themselves,
" but it would be a tedious subject to dwell upon. The reader is
referred for particulars to the separate works which have been written
" upon them 3 ."
1 As may be done by passing over the thus < > .
parts printed in Clarendon type and read- - See above p. 16 n 4.
ing the duplicates of the same passages in 3 Susemihl Quaestiones Criticac i p. 9
their transposed place; where they stand (Greifswald 1867. 4).
in ordinary type between thick brackets
DISLOCATIONS. 79
(2) Bk. i. 13 8. q. v. "It is strange," says M. Thurot 1 , "that
" after having spoken of the deliberative part of the soul, Aristotle does
" not say one word of the dperal Siayo^riKcu which properly belong to it,
"while speaking three times, 11. 15, 17, 20, of iJ0ifoj dptT-rj in the same
" sense. Further, it is singular that in order to prove that he who com-
" mands ought to have ?J0t/o} apervj in perfection, he says that the work
" belongs to him who directs it and that reason (Xoyos) is a directing
" faculty : this reflexion evidently applies to the dper>) Siaz/o^Tt/o} of TO
"Xo yov e xov, elsewhere called <poV?7o-is, in. 4. 17, and not to the rjOiK-r]
TJ of the aXoyoi/." He proposes therefore to transpose 11. 14 17,
TOLVW . . .epyov to follow e7rt/:?aXXet auTots : to omit yOiKr) in line 20,
and change rjOiK-rjv to Siavor/TiKiJv in 1. 17. (The transposition becomes
less needed and less satisfactory if yOtKrjv be retained.) Now there is
no doubt that, on the stricter Aristotelian theory, ^01/170-15 inseparably
involves rjOiKrj apery, Nic. Eth. VI. 13 2, 3, 6 (cp. ib. 12 6, en TO
epyoi/ oVoTeXetTai Kara Trjv (frpovrjo-Lv Kal TTJV t}OiK r i]v dptrtjv) ; SO 1. 20
yOuo) may stand. The dianoetic virtue, in its perfection, seems to
reside solely in the master who commands. Cp. 7, just above the
present passage, d SouXos 6 Xws OVK e^ei TO /3ovXeuTi/<dV, and Pol. in. 4.
17, 1 8, r] Se (frpovycrts ap^ovTOs iSios apeT>) fj^ovfj. ras yp aXXas COIKCI/ avay-
Karov eTvat Kotvas Kal TWV ap^o/xevwv Kat TCOI/ ap^ovToJi/, ap^o/xei/ov 8e ye OUK
eWtv apeTy) (frpovrjvis, aXXa So ^a aX^0^s with the notes.
(3) 11.4. 4, eWe Se /xaXXov.. ./xvy j/ewTept^etv. "It is singular that
"Aristotle supposes here what he has not yet proved and is going to
" prove later on, namely, that communism relaxes the bond of family
"affections. Again in c. 5 24, 1264 b i, he supposes without saying
" so, that community of wives and children will make the labourers
"more obedient" (Thurot) 2 . He therefore suggests that n. 4. 4 should
follow Koii/awW in ii. 5. 24. A better place would seem to be in 4 9,
1262 b 24, after Aristotle has proved that vSapiJs ^tXt a must result from
the Platonic institutions in the absence of the ordinary motives to
mutual kindness. The argument of 59 goes to show
avdyKT) TOVVO.VTLOV (Sv Trpocr^Kei TOWS 6p6<jj$ Kei/x.eVoL>? VOJJLOVS
yivcaOai ; the application to the agricultural class would come in appo
sitely to point this reversal of the effect intended :! .
(4) II. 6 3 sub Jill. KOL Trept TT^S TratSetas, Trotai/ rcva Set yiVecr^at rwv
<uXa/juv. Aristotle would hardly consider a discussion Trept TratSetas to
be extraneous to the main political subject of the Republic. Moreover
1 Etudes sur Aristote 18, 19. Comp. 2 Op. cit. 16, -27.
also Susemihl Quaest. Crit. vi. 9 n. 3 Susemihl Quaest. Grit, \ p. 13.
80 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
in line 37 he exchanges the construction with Trept for a new one OUTOU
SetV. . .777rAr/pto/<e. The clause KCU Trept TratSeta?. . .(frvXaKwv should come
amongst the subjects (irepl oXiyuv Tra/xTrav) on which Socrates in the
Republic has touched, and therefore in i after KT?jo-ea)s 1364 b 30 .
It is possible, however, while admitting that the transposition would
give a better position to these words, to defend their present place.
Aristotle is evidently criticizing in an unsympathetic spirit. He has
reduced the points touched upon to a minimum (Trept oXtywv Tra/xTrai/).
Afterwards, when he complains of the extraneous topics which take up
the bulk of the treatise (criticism on poetry and art, psychology, meta
physics, ethics), he has grudgingly to allow that some of these long
digressions do serve the purpose (or at least are introduced under the
colour) of elaborating the training of the guardians.
(5) ^ 7 I? ^ L f^ v lOWOTwv oi oe (^)iXocro0ojv KO.I TroA-tTtKcov. Gipha-
nius (Van Giffen) 2 comparing c. 12 i, eVtot f^lv OVK eKowwya-av Trpa-
e(jOj/ TroXiTLKwv ovS wi Ttvoji/ow, aAAa oieTeXetrav tStcoTevovTes ToV fiiov...
eVtot Se vofjioOtTai yt.yovo.cnv.. .TroXtrev^evres avroi, proposed to omit
$ 1X00-0$ wv Kat. Spengel 3 simply transposed these words before iStomoy.
(6) n. 7 10 13 -.-. 18 20.
The third objection to Phaleas scheme, 8 13, emphasizes the
necessity for equality of education as well as of possessions. Like the
preceding criticisms, 5 7, it deals with the internal arrangements of
the state. In 14 17 there is a transition to its external relations,
which Phaleas ought not to have overlooked, as he did. It is not
likely then that in 18 20 (with which we must take 21) Aristotle
would return to internal matters and repeat his previous objection in
other words. Yet this is what he has done if the common order be
retained. Let the two passages be read side by side, and it will be
seen that there is no new thought in the latter, but only a reiteration
of the former in different language.
eTret o-Tacrid^ovo-LV ov povov eWt /xei/ ovv TL TCOI/
oia Tf]v avKTOTTyra T/^S KT>y<Teco?, TO ras oi;o~tas to"a? etvat rols
aAAa. Kat Sia, rrfV TOJV Ti/x,aJv, TOV- TroXtrats Trpos TO /tXTy o Tao ia^eiv
VOLVTLOV Se Trept eKaTepov (ot /x.ev yap Trpos dXX-tjXovs, ov fJLrjv /xeya ovStv
vroXXoi Sia TO TreptTa? KTT/O-CIS avio~ov, ws etvretv. Kat yap av 01
1 Compare Victorius Comm. p. 106 bus ad materiam eorum librorum indican-
(ed. of 1 5 76): adiungit autem in extreme dam, non cum inferioribus ut quidam
disputasse ctiam illic Socratem de disci- falso putarunt.
plina quam putaret convenire custodibus 2 In his commentary p. 210.
illius rei publicae : hoc enim coniungi 3 Arist. Stndicn ill. p. 14 (66).
debet cum iis quae nunc repetit facienti-
DISLOCATIONS.
8l
ot Se x a / t/VTS Tpt TCOV Ti/xcoV,
tdv tcrar o$ev Kat
v 5 / Tifj.fj TJfj.ev KCLKOS ^5^ /ecu eV$Aos),
ov /xoVov $ ot aV$pto7roi Sta Ta avay-
Kata aSiKovcriJ , eoV (XKOS eTi/at vo/xt^et
T7/J/ tO-o TT/Ta TT/S OVCTtaS, (OO-T6 /XT/
XtoTroSvTerv Sta TO ptyovv T/ TretVT/v,
aAAa Kat OTTCOS x at/ P wcrt Ka ^ / xr )
7ri^v/xtoo-iv eav yap /xet^co ex 00 "
o~tv eTrt^vyat av TCOI/ arayKat tov, Sta
TT/V TavTT/s taTpetav aSiKr/o ovo ti ,
ov TOIWV Sta TavTT/v /Jiovov, aAAa
Kat avev eTrt^v/xttov tVa ^aLp(j)cn Tats
a^ev AVTTCOV T/Sovats. Tt ovv aKos TCOV
Tpttov TOV TCOV ; TO?S /xei/ ovcrt a j3pa-
veta Kat epyacrta, Tots oe o~cocppoo"vi / T/"
rpirov 8 , et Ttves Svratj/TO St avrtoj/
vaipciv, OVK ar eTri^T/Totev et /XT/ vrapa
aKos, at yap aAAat aV-
Se ovTat. eTret aStKovo"t ye
Ta Sia Tas vTrepySoAas, aAA
ov Sta Ta aVayKata, otov Tvpavvovcrtv
ov"x tVa /XT/ ptycocrtv (Sto Kat at Tt/xat
/xeyaAat, aV aTTOKTeti T/ Tts ov KAe TTTT/v
aAAa Tvpavvov) (o o~Te Trpos Tas /xtK-
pas aStKt as (3or)6r]TiKos (JLOVOV o rpo-
TTOS TT/S X aAe ov TroAtTetas. 7 IO
ayavaKToiej/ [ar] cos OVK to-cov
tx^toi, Sto Kat qWVovTai
eTrtTt^e/xevot Kat crrao-ia^oJ Tes ert 8
7/ TTOVT/pta TO)!/ aF^pOJTTCOV a7rXT/O~TOV,
Kat TO Trpcorov /xev tKarov Stco/SoXta
/xoj/ov, orav 8 T/T/ TOVT ^ 7ra.Tpi.ov,
act oeoi rat TOU TrXetoro?, e cos 15
eX^axrtv. aetpo?
TT/i/ avaTrAT/pcocriv ot TroAAot
TCOI/ OVt* TOtOVTCOV ap^, fJidXXoV TOV
Tas ovcrt as ti/xaAt ^etv, TO TOVS /xev
">/ ^)vcret TotovTOVS vrapa-
itv cocTTe /XT/ /?ovAeo-^at TrAeov-
Svvacr^at TOVTO 8 eo-TtV, txv T/TTOVS
TC cocrt Kat /xr/ aStKcoi/rat. 7 1 8
20.
It seems advisable therefore to remove 18 21 to precede 14
CTI, to treat as parallel versions 10 13, 18 20 cited above, and
to take 21 as coming directly after them but before I4 1 .
(7) ii. ii 12. In 9 Aristotle says that eligibility to office on
the ground of wealth and on the ground of merit are traits of oligarchy
and aristocracy respectively : hence the Carthaginian constitution, where
wealth and ability combined are qualifications for the highest offices,
must be a third and distinct scheme. This, he adds, 10, is a fault in
the legislator, who ought to have made provision that ability should not
be associated with poverty even in citizens in a private station: o poV
O7TCOS Ot /3eA.TlCTTOt Svi/COl/Tttt <T^O\d^LV Kttt /XT/SeV do ^TJIJiOVeiV, /XT/ fJLOVOV
II.
1 Susemihl in Jahrb.fiir Philol. xcvi. 1866. p. 330.
82 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
apxovTts dXXd /xr?S iStwretWre?. Now here, as far as the sense goes, the
clause in 12 belongs : ySe /Yrtov 8 , et KO,! TrpoetTo rrjv pfaopiav TO>V cvrteiKwi/
o vopoOir^, aXXa ap^oWeov ye eVt/x-eXeurtfat r^? o^oX???. " If he was
"forced to neglect the last-mentioned task, at least he might have made
"provision for poor men in office." Then would follow quite naturally
the criticism of 10 : "at all events he should not have allowed these
"high offices to be virtually put up for sale 1 ."
(8) III. 7 3, 4 orav 8e TO 7rX?7$os Trpos TO KOLVOV
o~t /A</>epoi , KaXemu TO Kotvov ovop.a. Tracrwi^ TGJJ/ TroXtTeiojj/, TroXtTCta.
j3a.LVi 8 euXoyco?. eva /xev yap Sta^epeiv KaT* dpeTrjv rj TrAetovs eVSe^eTat,
TrAetous 8 ryS?; ^aXeTroi/ rjKpifiwa-QaL Trpos Tracrav dpertjv, aXXa //.aXio-ra TT]I/
7ro\jJ.LKrjv avrrj yap tv TrXrjOei ytVeTat* SioVep KaTct TavT^v TV}I/ TroXtTetai/
Kupiamrroj/ TO TrpOTroXe/xovi/ Kat fJieT^ovcnv avrr/^ ot Ke/<T^/x,eVot Ta 6VXa.
Spengel 2 first called attention to the difficulty of o-v/x^atvct 8 cuAo-
ycos, when as Aristotle goes on to explain (17877 ^aXeTroV) it is hard
for a large number of citizens to attain a high standard of excellence.
Thurot 3 supposed a lacuna to precede o-iyx/3cuVi, containing a reason
for the name IToXtTeta, something like this : <8ta TO TOT)S Tr-oXm/coi)?
v, aXXa /x?J TOI;S aVXco? a pto-Toi;s>. The parallel passage in in. 17. 4
7r\-fjOo<s iv w Tre^vKer eyytVecr^at TrXrjOos TroXe/xtKoV may have
suggested to Zeller the insertion of TroXe/ziKoV before TrXrjOos in 3. In
any case he is right so far as this, that the remark to which wp.pa.ivti
cvAoyws refers must emphasize the warlike character of HoAtTcta 4 .
Schmidt lastly found such a remark, and the lost subject of the verb
crvfJ,(3a,Lvei, in the last clause of 4, /cat //eTe^ovo-ti/ avrrjs ot KCKT^/xe^ot ra
on-Aa, which he would transpose to come after TroAtrcta.
(9) m - II 20 aXXa yap... 21 Keto-$at TOUS vo /xoug. Schneider
bracketed the clause aXXa yap . . . JStVou? as superfluous and disturbing to
the context. If retained in the present order there appears to be a
double recension aXXa yap...d8t / Kous TrX^v TovTo...T/o/*ous 5 . But it seems
better, with Congreve, to reverse the order of the two sentences.
(10) in. 13 6 et Se ToV api^aoj/,..^ avrw. Thurot 6 sums up his
elaborate examination of the context as follows. Aristotle has proposed,
5, to investigate who ought to have power in a state where all kinds
of superiority are represented wealth, nobility, virtue, numbers. The
discussion continues as follows : (i) If the virtuous are few in number
we must enquire whether there are enough of them to govern the state
1 Susemihl Jahrb. /. Ph. xcvi. 1866. 4 Susemihl Philol. xxix. 1870. 106
P- 9 33 /V 7 ,. , " l6 Quaest. Crit. in. p. 15, iv. p. 12.
I Ueber die Politik p. 23 . 24. B Susemihl Quacst. Crit. m. p. 16.
" ^/^ sur Aristote p. 42, 43. 6 Etudes sur Aristote 4751.
DISL O CA TIONS. 8 3
or to constitute a state by themselves, 6. (ii) No superiority gives
exclusive right to power, 7 10. (iii) The best laws are adapted to
the interest of the whole state and the body of citizens, n, 12.
(iv) Individuals, one or more, of pre-eminent virtue cannot be reduced
to a level of equality, 13, 14 (then follows a digression on ostracism).
Now (i) has no direct bearing on the question proposed : the right of
virtuous men to command must be proved before any enquiry as to what
ought to be done when the virtuous are few in number : (ii) is the
negative solution and (iii) has the germs of a positive solution, which
we may suppose more fully developed in a part now lost. A discussion
of a particular case, analogous to that in (i), is presented in (iv). The
conclusion is that the proper place for (i) will be after (iii), i.e. some
where between aper^V ( 12, end) and ei 8e n s ecrriv, the beginning of
13. For 7 12 are certainly just as much in place immediately after
the question proposed in 5, which they answer from the negative side.
And although in itself 6 might very well follow 5, it must excite
considerable suspicion to find that the important question started in 6
is never fully answered at all and not even noticed until 13 .
(11) III. 13. 22. The sentence coo-re Sia TOVTO...TOVTO opcocrii/, if
genuine, interrupts the thread of the remarks begun in 20 and con
tinued to SiopQovv in 23, to the effect that the problem, what to do
with unduly eminent citizens, is one which is equally urgent in all
constitutions. The words cited coo-re Sia TOVTO . . . TOVTO opcoo-iv, however,
do not bear upon the general problem, but on the particular case of
monarchs. Hence, as Thurot 2 saw, they would be more in place in 23
after SiopOovv, at the end of the general reflexions. Bernays 3 however
found them a place at the end of 20 above, after e xa rpoVoz/.
(12) in. cc. 15, 1 6. On the question of absolute sovereignty,
TrorepdV Trore eVo, cri;/x</)epet Kvpiov eTvat TTOLVTMV i} ov criyxc/jepei, a succession
of aTropiat and a general investigation are promised in 15 3. What
follows in the order of the manuscripts may be briefly summarized as
follows 4 : (a) Is the rule of the best man more advantageous than the
rule of the best laws? 36. (/5) Assuming that in certain directions
the laws are insufficient, should the decision rest with the one best man
or with a number of the more competent citizens, in the extreme case
the whole body of a qualified community? 7 10. Then comes a
historical or antiquarian appendix to this a/ropta, contained in n, 12.
(y) How are the standing difficulties of hereditary succession, 13, 14,
1 Susemihl in Philol. xxix. 1870 pp. 3 In his Translation^. 211.
1134. 4 For a fuller account see the Analy-
2 Etudes sur Aristote 51 53. sis p. 112 f.
62
84 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
and (8) a body-guard, 14, 15, to be dealt with? Aristotle appends
to this last enquiry a sort of digression, 16, showing what would be
the decision in the case of the constitutional monarch. But, as he
explains, resuming his argument with c. 16, it is not the constitutional
monarch, but the absolute sovereign about whom the question is now
being raised ( i, 2, down to the words Kara rrjv eavroi) /SovXya-Lv 6
/3ao-tXeus). Here it seems absolutely necessary to assume a lacuna.
For what immediately follows, 2 SoK-et 8e TLO-IV,.. 4 Travrvw, relates to
a different aVopta altogether : (c) Is not the rule of one an unnatural
anomaly where the citizens are all on the same footing (e o/xoiW
77 Tro Xtg)? Should not power rather pass from hand to hand (oVa
Here the limit of oVopiai distinctly discernible is reached : in the
remainder of c. 16, 4 13, dXXd /Jv...d/xoia)s, no new question is
started, but remarks are jotted down which bear more or less directly
on those formulated in the preceding chapter. Thus all from 4 aXXa
furjv as far as Kara TO 005 in 9 must belong to the first aVopia (a) :
Is the rule of the best man to be preferred to that of the laws ? Not
that it could anywhere find a place as a whole in 15 3 6; but the
earlier part (<?) a XXa p,>}j/... 5 TWV Kei//.eVa>v could suitably be transferred
to the end of 15 5 to follow KaXXiov and precede cm ^lv TOIWV ; the
remainder (/;) 16 5 o j-i^v ovv rov vo/xov... 9 Kara TO c0os might be
inserted a little higher up in 15 5 between Trdo-av and a AX 10-005.
Again, the next piece of c. 16, (t) 9, 10 from dXXd p}r ou Se paStov
as far as o-v/x^paS/xoj/e?, clearly has for its subject that comparison of
the one best man with a number of qualified citizens which is intro
duced in (/?): and this might go in 15 10 after o ets and before d 877.
To this same aVopta further belongs the remainder of c. 16, from
10 eiVi Se Kttt vvv to the end Setr o /Wws; when placed side by side
with c. 15 7 10 KOU yap...o e ets, it is seen to be another recension
of that passage.
KCU yap vvv o-wtovre5 SiKa^ouo-t etat 8e Kai vvv vrept evttov at d
Kal ftovXtvovTai Ko.1 Kpuvovcriv, avrat KvpiaL KptVe^, wo-Trep o 8tKao-T7;5, Trept
8 eicTLV at Kpto-ei5 7rao"at Trept Ttov a)v o vo /xos a8vi/aTeT Stopt^et^, eTrct
Ka0 Kao"TOV. Ka$ eVa /xev ovv CTV/JL- Trepi wv ye 8uvaTO5, oi;8et5 d/j.cfacr firf-
ocrTto-oui/ to-(05 xetpcov Tet Trept TOUTOJV 0)5 OVK av dpicrTa 6
7) 7roXt5 CK 7roXA.d)F, coo"7rep i op.05 ap^ete Kat Kptvetev. a XA. erret
Kat dirXrjs. 8ta ToGro Kat KptVet a- vo /xots Ta 8e aSuvaTa, TOVT eortj/ a
//etvov 0^X05 TroXXa ^ et5 ocrrtaovT. Trotet StaTropetv Kat ,r)Tiv
DISLOCATIONS.
85
/xaXXov a 8ta ($opov TO TroXv,
vSa>p TO TrXeTov, OVTCO /cat TO
TOV aptcTTOV i 0/x.ov ap^etv atpeTcoTepov
rj TOV uYSpa TOV apicrrov. Trept cov
dXtycov a8ta($opcoTepov yap (BovXevovrai,
TOV yap eVds VTT* opy^s KparrjOevros
7} Ttvos erepov TrdOovs TOLOVTOV dray-
Katov Sit(j>0dp6ai rrjv KpiVtv, tKet 8
epyov dfjia. TravTas opyicrOtji aL Kal
dfJMprelv. eo-Tto Se TO vrAr^os ot
(\tvOepoi, pi?7ei/ Trapa, TOV VO/AOV
TrpaTTOVTe?, aXA. ?} Trept cuv eKXetVetv
ai/ayKaTov avToV. et Se 8?^ ytt7^ TOVTO
paStov cv TroXXoT?, aXX et TrXeto^s Swcrtv
eTcv dyaOol /cat aVSpes Kal TroXtTat,
a SwaVcov ecrriv. ov TOIVVV TOVTO y
avTtXe yovcriv, cos OVK avayKatov av-
$po)7roi/ eti/at TOV KptvowTa Trept TCOV
TOIOI;TCOV, a/\X OTI otn^ eva
aXXa TroAAov?. Kpu/et yctp
ap^tov 7re7raiSeiyxei/os 1^710 TOU
/caXto<?, CLTOTTOV T tcrtog uv eTrat So ^etev
ct /^e XTtov e^ot Tts Suotv o/x/xatrt KCU,
KptVcoi , /cat TrpaTTtov
TroXXot TroX-
8ucrt Troal /cat
TTOTepov d ets a8ta^)^opcoTepos ap^cov, Xots, eTret Kat I ^v o(f>0o.\[jiov<; TroX-
17 p:aXXov ot TrXetovs p,ev TOV apt^/xov Xovs ot /xovap^ot Troiorcrtv O.UTOJV Kat
dyaOoi Se TravTes ; r) S^Xov cos ot
TrXet ovs ; a XX ot ju,ev O"Tao"tao~oto"tv
d 8e els acTTacriao-Tos. aXXa Trpos
TOVT avTt^eTeov t o-ojs ort o-TrovSatoi
TT^V i/ar>(?/v, wo-Trep KaKetvos d et?. 15
y IO.
Kat Trooas. TOUS yap
TrJ dp^rj Kat arVou ^>tXovs
avi/ap^ov?. p.7^ <^)tXot p:ev ovv
ov Trot^ o-ovcrt KaTa T^V TOU p:ovap^ov
Trpoat pccrtV et 8e (/>t Xot KaKen/ov Kat
T^S dpfflS, o ye </>t Xos to-os Kat o/xotog,
toW et TOVTOVS ot eTat Setv ap^etv,
TOVS to-ovs Kat d/xotovs a p^etv ot eTai
Setv d/xotcos. 16 10 13.
Such would be the best restoration of the primitive order of these
two chapters, if the order of thought and the connexion were solely to
be followed. Yet undoubtedly the less complicated and artificial
assumption is that of two independent versions combined by an over-
careful or unintelligent compiler. Such a view has been acutely advo
cated by Mr J. Cook Wilson 1 . "It may be that the two chapters belong
" almost wholly to two parallel versions and that instead of being
" combined they should be still further resolved." Thus
(i) 15 2, 3 TO /x,ev ovv...evovo-as 16 I ?rept 8e TOV
(ii) 15 3 6 ap^>j...7ravTas corresponds in subject to
16 3 9 TOV a pa vo //,ov...KaTa TO e#os + IO, 1 1 eto-t Se Kat
...Trept TCOV TOIOVTOJV.
(iii) 15 7 10 Kat yap...o c ets corresponds in subject to
1 6 II 13 a XX oVi...Setv O/AOUDS and to 9, 10 a XXa /x?jv
Journal of Philology n. 1881. pp. 82, 83.
86 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
ov&e paSiov . . . <TVfjL<f>paiSfjLovcs. " Of these passages the third
[16 9, 10] disturbs the context and looks like a parallel
version of the second."
To this arrangement of the contents of the two chapters it may be
objected 1 (i) that the second version is so fragmentary as to present no
statement of the problems under discussion and no intimation when we
pass from one of them to the other. (2) The arrangement destroys
what appears to be one connected sentence beginning 15 16 ra^a /xei/
ovv and continued in 16 i Trepi Se rov /3acriXecog. The sense runs on
without a break from 15 14 e^ei S oVopiW to 16 2 d /3ao-iXeu$.
(3) The resolution into parallel versions is not complete ; it must be
supplemented by transposition: for it has to be admitted that 16 4, 5
a XXa fjirjv o<ra...Tuv /cet/xeVw^ "interrupts the argument of the context:
"it belongs to the same part of the subject as [ 10, n] 1287 b 16 23
" and may be read after rv aSwdVcov eortV 1287 b 23" (in n).
Spengel 2 proposed a simpler remedy for the confusion of cc. 15, 16 :
viz. to transpose 16 49 aXXa /x^i/ oo-a ye... Kara TO e$os to follow
KaXXiov, at the end of 15 5. The passage following Kara TO Wos in
1 6 9 also begins with aXXa p-qv, and there is an actual case, viz. the
MS. A c , where the recurrence of a word (o-uXXoyio-juo s in Rhet. i. 2
1357 a 17 and b 6) led to the omission of the intervening passage and
its insertion in the margin. The inadequateness of this solution of the
difficulty need hardly be demonstrated. For not only (i) does Spengel
propose to insert ov after ^TCIV in 16 n, but (2) when he has trans
posed 1 6 4 9 to follow 15 5, he is obliged to explain that what we
then get is a sort of dialogue between the supporters of personal rule
and of the laws 3 .
(13) iv(vn). i u ? 12 =c. 2 i, 2
e^o/xei/ov 8 eo-Tt KCU TUJV avr&v TroVepov Se TTJV cvBatfioviav rrjv
Aoyoov 8eo[j.vov KOL TroXw evSat/xova avTrjv etvai ^>aTeov ei^os TC e/cao~Toi>
rrfv dpLOTQV cTvat Kat TrpdrTovcrav TCOV dvOpuTrw KCU. Tro Xews rj [*?} rrjv
aSwaTOv yap KaXws Trpdr- CLVTTJV, Xoiirov Icmv flirtiv.
\ \ \ \ \ / oi\\ / * * e
rjv fJLrj Ta KaAa Trparrovcrav oe Kat TOVTO* TravTes yap av ofJiO
8e KaXoV epyov OVT avSpos o-etav et^at rrjv avrrjv. ocrot ycxp e
1 Cp. Susemihl Aristotelis Politico, ter- ov dvvairo yvwplfcw. Objection : dXX
tium ed. p. XXI. ^7rlr?;5es TrcuSeucras o VO/JLGS <f>lffTi)ffl TO.
2 Arist. Stud. in. 26 (78), f. XoiTra T^ Si/catorarT; yvw^ri Kpiveiv Kal
3 d\\ t crws av 0at7? rts ws avrl TOIJTOV SioiKew TOVS apxovras. TI 5 eTravopOov-
povXeva-erai irepl ruv Kad ^/caara /caXXtor. o-^at 5t 5wcrti/, o rt clV SO^T? Treipw^vois a/J.ei-
The reply is : dXXd nty 6<ra ye /XT) 5o/cei vov elvat TW^ Kei^vuv. Final reply and
diopifrw 6 v^os, ou5 dV^/)W7ros decision : o /xej ou^ rbv VO^QV /crX.
DISLOCATIONS. 87
ouT TroXews ^oopts apexes Kat <po- TrXouru) TO t,r]V eu Ti.6f.VTai e^> era s,
* aYSpta Se TroXecos Kat StKato- OVTOL KOL T rjv TTO\LV oXrjv, eaV ^
Kat <^>po^^crts TT^V aurryj/ e^et TrXovcrta, /x,aKaptovcriv. ocrot re ToV
Swa/xiv Kat /xopc^i/, alv /xerao-^ooi/ TvpawiKoi/ /3tW /xaXtoTa rt/xoocrtr,
CKacTTO? TOJV dvOpwiTcov XcycTat StKat- ourot Kat Tro Xii/ Tr}c TrXeurnov ap-
os Kat <poVi/xos Kat o-wc^pcov. C. I ^ovcrav e^Sat/xoveo-rarryv eu at </>atei/
II, 12. ttV. et re rt? TOV o ; a 8t aper^v
ttTroSe^erat, Kat TroXtv v8atp,ove<TTe-
pav ^ cret T^V CTTrovSatorepav. C. 2
Here the language is by no means similar and the thought that virtue
in the state is the same as virtue in the individual seems introduced in
different connexion in the two passages. Nevertheless they cannot
both stand. The latter opens the discussion afresh without any allusion
to the previous chapter, as Spengel observed l . If it is to be fitted into
this part of the work, it must be intended to supersede some part of
c. i. Susemihl is probably right in holding this part to be n, 12 2 .
(14) iv(vn). 4 8, 9. Giphanius (Van Giffen) 3 calls attention to
the difficulty of connecting the last words of 8, eVet TO ye KaXov eV
7rX?J$ei Kat /^eye (9et eta>0e yivc<r0cu, with those immediately preceding.
Schneider proposed to transpose the whole period to the end of the
chapter to follow CVO-UVOTTTOS : in this way 90 Xe^^cls opos would refer
to the number of the citizens. If the words rt...y(Wcr0ai are in their
right place and are to be taken with 8, the preceding sentence 0et as
ydp... TO TraV must be parenthetical. They cannot go with 9 as the
passage stands. Koraes omitted 810 : it is a smaller change, with
Bocker 4 , to transpose eVet...ytVeo-0at to follow aVayKatoi/ in 9.
(15) IV (vil). 8. 2 otoi/ etVe TpO(/>7/ TOIJTO IdTiv etTe xoopas TrX^os etT
aXXo Tt TCOI> TotovToov IvTiv. Bojesen 5 saw that these words should follow
directly upon i oo-a Tats TroXeo-tv aray/<atov vrrdp^ecv which they illus
trate. They are not suitable to be instances of eV Tt KOIVOV Kat Ta^To
TCHS Kotvajvots aXX^s Kotvw^ia?, as on the ordinary arrangement they
might be taken to be.
(16) iv (vn). 8 3, 4 OTO.V 3 ^...KT^ o-eoJs eoriv. The proposal to
make this passage follow TroXtretas at the end of 5 serves to bring the
mention of Kotvwj/ta in 4 nearer to the KOIVCOVOIS of 2 8 .
1 Ueber die Politik, pp. 45, 48. 3 Comm. pp. 921, 2.
2 Jahrb.f. Philol. xcix. 1866 p. 602. 4 op. c. 13, 14.
See also Bocker De quibusdam Pol. Ar. 5 Bidtrag (Copenhagen 1845) pp. 24
locis (Greifswald, 1867) P- 6f., Spengel 26.
Arist. Stud. HI. 30 (82). 6 Susemihl Qitaest. Crit. v. p. 15.
88
INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
(17) iv (vn) cc. 13 15. Wilson 1 regards c. 13 as a shorter dupli
cate of cc. 14, 15. "In each the same question is proposed, what is
"happiness or the chief good? (compare 1332 ay and 1333 a 15, 16);
" and the discussion of it is followed in each by a transition, in almost
"the same terms, to the subject of education (cp. 13 10 13, with
" 15 6, 7 6Vt fjtlv ovv...r)x@ ai )-" These transitional passages stand as
follows :
a AAct /Jirjv dyaOoi ye Kal O-TTOV^OLOL ... <rrjv dperijv,> KCU cm Si avrrfv,
yivovra.1 8 LO. rptcoj/. ( n) ra Tpta <avepoV CK TOUTCOV TTCOS oe Kat Sta
Se ravr ecrTt Averts e$os A-oyos. TtVtov carat, rovro &r) Oewprjreov,
TJ 8t^p^yU,ei/ot Trporepoj/
Kat $ous Kat Xoyou
Se Trotoi;? /xev rtvas
Kat yap <$>vva.i Set Trpoorov otov avOpw- rvy^dvofJiev
TTOI/ a/\Aa /x^ Ttoj/ a A-Xooi/ rt a)toi , etra ore
Kat TrotoV rtva TO croj/x.a Kat TT}I/ Set.
if/v^rjv. erta Se ouSei/ o^>eA.os <f>vva.i elv
ra yap e^r/ /xera/?aXXetv Trotet eyta Trporepov, A.OITTOV Se
yap ecrrt Sta T?7S <^v<rea)S e7ra/x- Tro repov TratSeureot TW Xoya)
^ovra S(a rcov e$a!v CTTI TO Trporepov rj Tots e^ecrtv.
Kat TO /?eA.Ttoi/. ( 12) Ta /xe^
a XA.a TCOV ^wooi/ fjudXicrra ^nev rfj
fi, fJUKpd S evia Kat TOt?
e^ecrtv, ay$pa>7ros Se Kat Xoyw* /xovov
yap e ^et Ao yov.
Set ravra <j-vfJL<>wve iv d\- ravra yap Set Trpos aXXyXa
. TroXXd yap Trapa TOV? o-u/x.^ covet i/ crv/z^toi/t av TT/P aptcr-
Kat TT)I/ <pvcrLV Trpdrrovcn rf\v ei/Se ^eTat yap Sn^apr^KeVai
Sta TOI^ Xoyov, eaV Tretcr^ojcrii aXAw? Kat TOV Aoyoi/ TT^S j3eXTLcrT7)s VTTO-
/5e/\TtOF. ^e cretos Kat Sta TCOV euojv op:otcos
rj^Oai. 15 6, 7.
otovs etvat SeT TOVS
TCO
StooptV/xe^a Trporepov TO Se
epyov ^Sry TratSeta?. Ta
Ta S aKOvovTes. 13 10 13.
There is certainly a striking parallelism here : compare especially
J 3 !3 wi tn Totrrwv Se 7rotoi;?...e^ecriv in the right hand column; but it is
partly covered by the reference back rvyxdvo^ev Se Su/p^eVoi Trporepov,
which Wilson is obliged to suppose inserted or to be, possibly, a reference
Journal of Phil. X. pp. 84, 85.
DISLOCATIONS. 89
to the Ethics. That there is an advance in the treatment of cc. 14, 15
will become apparent on a close comparison with c. 13 : see the
Analysis (p. 116). Similarly in in. c. 9 there is an elaboration of the
earlier sketch in in. c. 6 ; in i. cc. 5 7 the conclusions anticipated in
i. c. 4 are but amplified and supported \
In 13 12 the fact that man often obeys reason in opposition to his
habits and nature is a strange reason why habits and nature should be
in harmony with reason 2 . Hence Docker 3 proposed to transpose wcrre
...aAA?; Aois to follow (3e\TLov at the end of n. In this place it
emphasizes the agreement necessary between the habits and the natural
capacity of our citizens. But Wilson points out that the parallel clause
in c. 15 refers to Aoyos and Wrf } hence he defends the order of the
manuscripts. The meaning then would be : " reason ought to work for
" the end which the legislator has in view in harmony with nature and
" habit ; for men may be induced by reason to do what they would
" never do by nature or by habit."
(18) iv (vn). 16 4, 5 or^e Sov 8e 7rdvTa...TovTovs. This solution of
the whole question discussed in this chapter should surely follow the
difficulties enumerated, and not interrupt the enumeration, as it does at
present. It is proposed to remove it to follow 8 7r\r]6vov In <r) /xic/joV>.
If this be done, (i) 6 TTI 8 o ran/ viuv KT\. will directly explain 4
ert 8 o0ev apxo/zevoi.. .flovXycrtv; (2) the transposed passage will have an
excellent continuation in 9, which fixes the ages for marriage at 18
and 37(?) respectively 4 .
(19) iv (vn). 17 6 Ta? Se Starao-ets...8iaretvo/xei/ot?. These remarks
must apply to the very earliest infancy. If so they ought to come after
3 aa-Kfjo-Lv for in 4 Aristotle goes on to discuss rrjv e xo/xeV^v yXuctav.
The transposition suggested is supported by the fact that then eVt-
o-Korreov 8?? will follow directly upon 5, to which in any case it must be
referred 5 .
(20) IV (vil). 17 T2 vvv fJicv ovv V 7rapaSpo/A77...aVayKaiW. These
remarks are clearly intended to put a close to the whole discussion of
8 14. If so, they should come at the end, i.e. after
(? Svcryei/eiai ) in I4 6 .
(21) V (vill). 4 7. The clause Set Se OVK CK TCOI> Trporepcov
aAA e/c T<JJV vvv a^TaycovtcrTcis yap T^? TraiSeias vvv e
4 Susemihl Quaest. Crit. vn. p. 15.
ed. pp. xxi, xxn. s Susemihl in Philologus xxv. 1867.
2 Cp. Susemihl in PhiloL xxv. 1867. pp. 408 9.
p. 403. 6 Susemihl /. c.
8 op. c. 15.
90 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
TTpoTepov 8 OVK eixov must refer to the Lacedaemonians and their recent
rivals the Thebans. They would stand better directly after the criti
cism on the Lacedaemonians in 4 ; the intermediate remarks, 5, 6,
being of a general character and a deduction from this particular case 1 .
Moreover Se should then be changed to Brj.
(22) V (vill). V 17 en Se aVpocu/xevot rwv (JUfJUja ttiW ytVovrat Travre?
o-ufi7ra$et? Kat ^wpt? rtov pu$/xd>j/ /<at TO)!/ /.teXcoi aura)! . As they Stand,
these words, introduced by en, should give a second reason on yivo^Oa
Trotot rive? ra ^77 Sta T//S /XOVO-IK???, the first being the enthusiasm
inspired by the melodies of Olympos. But the reason alleged is surely
only a generalization of the first : enthusiastic strains inspire en
thusiasm : and, further, all men become attuned to the mood of
musical imitations by listening to them. Now a little further down,
1 8, we are told that "rhythms and melodies afford the best imitations,
" short of the reality, of emotions, virtues, and moral qualities gene-
" rally : which is plain from their effects. For as we listen to music the
" soul undergoes a change." But why should this change of mood in
the soul prove music to be the best means of faithfully pourtraying
morality and emotion? Transfer to this place the words from 17,
and the reason is plain : "because all men are attuned to the mood of
the musical imitations to which they listen, even if there be no words,
but mere rhythm and melody," i.e. a purely instrumental performance 2 .
(23) V (vill). V 25 Kat ns eotKe o-uyyeVeta rats ap/xovuxis Kat rot?
* eTyat (Sio TroAAot <acrt rcoi/ CTO^WV ot fjilv dpfioviav elvai TT/V
rfv, ot 8 x H/ ap/xoi/tav). Bocker 3 recommends that this, the only
clause not at present included in the huge period stretching from 17
to the end of c. 5, should be transposed to a place before the apodosis,
i.e. after 23 and before CK p\v ovv rovruv 24.
(24) vi (iv). cc. 3, 4 119. There are good grounds 4 for be
lieving that this portion of Bk. vi (iv) is not genuine. From the
parallelism of 4 7, on /xev ovv TroXtretat TrXctovs KOL oY r)v atnW, etp^rat
Sion 8e TrXetovs TWV etp^jaevoov, Kat rtVes Kat Sia TI, Xeyco^tev ap^jv Xapovres
rr)v lpY)[j,vr}v TrpoTfpov, to 4 2o (the first words after the suspected
section) on fJi.lv ovv etat TroXtretat TrXet ovs, Kat Sta Ttvas atria?, etp^rat
Trporepov, the inference was drawn that there were two interpolations.
That the second is not a continuation of the first, but rather a parallel
version unskilfully added by the compiler 5 , seems probable from the
1 Susemihl ib. p. 411, Q. C. iv. 20, 3 op. c. p. 18.
also Bocker independently op. c. p. 18. 4 Susemihl in Rhein. Mus. XXI. 1866.
2 Susemihl Philologus xxv. 1867. 411 554 560.
413, Q. C. iv. 20, Spengel Arist. Stud. 5 See Cook Wilson in Joitrnal of
44, 4*. Philol. x. 80, 8 r.
DISLOCATIONS.
TrpcoTOV /uev yap e OIKIOOV cruy/<a-
opaj/zev Tracras ras TroXets,
TraXtv TOUT on TOTJ
fact that the promise made in 4 7 SioVt Se TrXetous KrX, is never
redeemed: instead of this the main subject of c. 3 is treated over
again in 4 7 19. We will here cite only the more exact corre
spondences adduced by Wilson in support of this view.
TOV /zev ovv eivat TrXetous TroXtreias o^oXoyoryxev yap ovy ev uepos
amov OTI Traces ecrTt yu-ep^ TrXetto aXXa 7rXeo Trucraj/ eveiv TroXtv. 4 7.
TroXeoos TOV dpiOfjiov, 3 I. Ka ^ ydp at TroXets OVK. e eVos aXX
IK TToXXcuv cruyKetvTat /xopuov, a) o~7rep
etpirjTQ.i TToXXaKt?. 4^9.
ev /xev ovv IO~TI TO ?rept TT^V rpo^rjv
, ot KaXoi /xevot yetopyot ,
Se TO KaXov/xevov /3avav-
O-OV, KTX
TptVov Se <TO> ayopatov, KTX
TeYapTov Se TO OrjriKov, TT^TTTOV
Se ye vos TO TrpoTroXeya^o-ov, o TOUTWJ/
ovSev yjTTOV avayKaToV eo~Tiv inrdp-
Kr ^ 4 9 ? I0 -
-X ^avepov oVt TO ye
v avayKatov ecrTt T^9
TToXetos pioptov. x * cfiSofJLOV Se TO
Tats ovo-iiais XetTovpyovv, o?rep KaXov-
/xev evTropovs. oySoov Se TO
KTX
/xev euvropovs avay/<atov en at
TOVS S aTro povs TOVS Se yu.eo"ov5, Kat
TOJV ev7ropa>v Se Kat TCOV aVo ptov TO
/xev oVXtTtKov TO V S aOTrXov. Kat
TOV yu,ev yecopytKOV Si^txov o pco/x-ev
oi/Ta, TOV S ayopatov, TOV Se
Sdvavcrov. T. i, 2.
< o yy >
Ti ?rpos Tals KaTa TrXouTov Sta-
(fropcus eo"Ttv ^ yLtev KaTa yeVos ly Se
KttT apCTT^V. * ^ Kat t Tl S^ TOt-
O{)TOV eTepov etp-^Tat TroXews eu at
/xepos ev Tot? Trept TT;V aptcrTOKpaTt aj/
CKe? yap StetXo/xev e/c Troawv p^pwv
eo-Tt Tracra Tro Xts. 3 4.
^avepov rotvuv OT6 TrXetovs avay-
etvat TToXtTeta?, etSet Sta^>e-
poucras aXX^Xajv* Kat yap TavT* etSet
o// \r , e
OLO.(ppL Ta IXepW (T<tHt)V aVTCOV. 3 V ^
Kai
etvat Ttvas apeT7;s TCOV
4 i5i 7-
Xa^etv etS?;, TrpcoTov /xev av a?ro-
Stcopt^o/xev oTrep aVayKatov Trav
O ^> \
4wOV KTA
et SeTOO^avTa etvat Set /xovov,
S etev Sta(^opai, . . . o T^S o"f^
avayKatov apa TroXtTetas etvat TOQ--
oo-at Trep Taeis KaTa ras
TrXetco
\7](f)9<j)CrL TOVTtOV 7TCXVTS Ot evSe^O-
/xevot orwSi;ao-/xot, Trotvfo-ovo-iv ctSr;
^ojou Kat TOO~ai)T etSw TOU 4 <1)t *^ oo"at
Trep at o"u^evets TOOV avayKatcJV /xoptaiv
s eto~i Kat KaTa ras Sia^opa? eto~tv* TOV a^Tov S^ TpoTrov Kat TOJV
3 6.
TToXiTeiwv. 4 8, 9.
92 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
/xaXtcrra Se SOKOVO-LV etyat 8vo, aXXa Trei/ecr^at /cat TrXouTetV
KaOdirep erri TWV Tn/eu/zaTwy Xeyerat avrovs dSvvarov. Sto ravra
ra //iv /Jo peta ra Se vorta, ra 8 /xaXtcrra etVat SoKet TroXeco?, ot ev-
aXXa TOfTtoi/ 7rapeK/3ao~ets, ovrco /cat Tropot /cat ot aTropot. ert Se 8ta TO
Ttor TToXtTetoov 8vo, 8^/xos Kat dXtyap- ws CTTI TO ?roXv TOT)? /xci/ oXtyovs
^ ia. 3 6. eti/at TOT)? 8e TroXXov?, TavTa ivavria
/xepTy (^atverat TOJJ/ T^? TroXcws /xo-
pt (OV. OLKTTe Kttt TttS TToXtTetaS KttTCt
Ta? VTrepo^a? TOVTCOV KaOicrrdcrL, Kat
oVo TroXtTetat 8o/<o{;o-tv etrat, S^/JLO-
KpaTta Kat oXtyap^ta. 4 1 8, 19.
Whereas in 3 4 the one version refers to Bk. iv (vn), ei/ TOIS Trept
Tr}v a pto-TOKpaTiW (whence it may be inferred that its author had the
original order of the books before him), " the second version inserts,
" instead of the reference, a long passage similar to that part of Bk.
" iv (vii) which the first version refers to."
To sum up, there does appear to be sufficient evidence of a parallel
version: it must be remarked, however, (i) that the second version, as
it now stands, plainly refers to the former 4 7 a-px*i v ^a/3oVres -nji>
ei/oTjju.eVip/ 1 : therefore this at least must be due to an editor who wished
to make the two continuous. (2) There seems to be nothing in c. 3 to
correspond with the simile of an animal in 4 7, 8 ; for the sense and
bearing of 3 5, 6, suggested by Wilson, appear very different.
(25) VI (iV). 6 2, 3. Tot? ($ ttXXotS JJLT^LV ^CTTtV, OTOLV
TO Ti/JLTjjjia TO Sttopta/xeVov VTTO rwv vop-wv. Sio Tracrt Tots KT^o-a/xe
. oXws /xev yap TO JJLCV /xr} e^elvai 7ra<riv oXtyap^tKov, TO 8e
The clause Sio,../xeTe;(eiv is omitted by the manuscripts of the second
recension. Either it is an interpolation or, if genuine, out of place ; for
there is nothing preceding 8to of which it could be the effect. Thurot 2
would find a place for it after Trpoo-o Swv ovcrwv, but he has to admit that
f&lvai (T)(o\a.,Lv is forced and unusual ; it is eeu/at /xeTe^ctv wherever
this subject comes up, and the second claim forms no real antithesis to
the first. Rassow 3 gives a more satisfactory contrast by inserting S^/xo-
KpaTiKov after eetvat : " on general grounds to exclude from citizenship
"those who have the requisite amount of property would be an
u oligarchical measure, to admit them democratical." After this rule
1 " The words may perhaps refer to 2 Etudes sur Aristote 60, 6
Bk. iv (vn) " (Wilson). But he does 3 Bemerkungen pp. 13, 14.
not further explain.
DISLOCATIONS. 93
has been laid down the clause 8io...//eTcxv comes in with excellent
sense as stating the practical result. It will be necessary to insert 8
after crxoXaeiv.
(26) vi (iv). c. I2 1 . The subject of this chapter is the third of the
investigations enumerated in c. 2 4 6, eVetTa KOL ruv aXXwv TIS rtVii/
alpeT-ij: what form of government is most adapted to a state under
given circumstances. After the general conditions, that it must be that
supported by TO Kpelrrov whether their preponderance comes from TO
TrotoV or TO TTOOW, Aristotle points out (i) when a democracy is desirable
in the words of 3, OTTOV /xev ovv v7repe^eL...TovT(Dr (2) when an oligarchy
would suit better in the remainder of 3, OTTOV Se TO TOJV evjroptav,..
n-X-tjOovs ; while (3) the circumstances favourable to a Polity (in the
technical sense) are pointed out in 4, 5, OTTOV Se TO ruv /x,eo-oH/...o
jae o-o?. The similarity of their form proves that these three sentences
ought to be taken closely together : (2) and (3) are however separated
by the words Set 8 del TOV vo^oOir-r]v...ro(.^ I o/xois TOUTOIS, the former part
of 4. Not only so, but this sentence has nothing to do with the
special conditions of an oligarchy : eV rfi TroAn-cm must refer to Polity in
the technical sense ; accordingly the sentence belongs to the second
investigation of c. 2, TIS KOivordrr} KT\. Moreover from 12 6, oo-w 8
av a p. e LVOV right on to the end of c. 13, TO ap^co-Oat, Aristotle never
recurs to the enquiry TIS TLO-LV alpcTij. He appears to go off on the
subject of the stability of Polities (in the technical sense), ending with a
brief historical digression, 13 6 12 2 .
The conclusion to which these facts point is as follows : The enquiry
TIS TUTIV alperij is broken off abruptly at o /xeVos in 1 2 5 ; if it was ever
complete cp. VII (vi). I. 5, Kal TUV XOITTCOI/ Tro/Wacoi TIS cru/x.(^epet TLCTIV,
eipT/Tcu Trporepov the rest of it has been lost. The beginning of 12 4,
Set 8 aet...Toi;Toi>?, together with 12 6 and the whole of c. 13, belong
to the previous enquiry. Biicheler with great probability would insert
12 4, Set...TOirroi;s + 12 6, c. 13 I 6, oo-o) 8 at a pe LVOV. . .erepwv
fjiovov in the account of the constitution of Polity given in c. 9 6,
between o e /xei/ ovv T/OOTTOS T-^S /-tttcws OVTOS and TOV 8 eu fjL(ju^O a ^ where
certainly the subject-matter is strikingly similar. For the remainder of
c - : 3> 7 I2 J Set Se TYIV 7roXtTeiav...ttpx eo "^ at > ne finds a fitting place at
the end of c. 9 after oXw?.
(27) vni (v). i 8. There are two ways in which revolutions
arise, Sto /cat at //-eTa/3oXat yivovrai Stews oVe p.\v yap-.-tKetVcov, OTC Se...
1 See Susemihl in Rhein. Mus. xxi. 2 The reader may satisfy himself of this
564 ff. ; also Bocker op. cit. n, pp. 24 by careful examination of the passage :
32. cp. Analysis p. 121 f.
94 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
But in 9 another way is seemingly brought in In Trept TOV
Kal rjTTov KT\, and in 10 another eYi vrpos TO /xe pos n KT\.
Further, these two latter cases properly belong to the first alternative,
when the revolutionary party wish for a change in the government;
they are both equally opposed to the other 6Ve Se /o-X, where the
object is not to overthrow the form of government, but to crush the
present holders of power. If then Aristotle wrote in the proper logical
order, the place for the second leading alternative ore 8e
jUOvap^tW is in II between TroXtreia and Travra-^ov 1 .
Wilson 2 discovers a parallel version of i 2 7, 8et Se
OTacreojv etcriv, in I II 1 6 Travra^ov ydp,..Twv TOLOVTOIV
The most striking correspondences which he adduces are :
Set Se TrpcoToi/ vTroXajSeiV rrjv o/AoXoyowre? Se TO GwrXws eu/at
apx^v, on TroXXat yeyeV^imxt TroXt- StKatov TO Kar a^iaj/, Sia<epoi/-
reTai TravToov /xev o/zoXoy owTtor Tat, KaOairep eXe^^T^ Trporepov,
TO StKator /cat TO /caT* avaXoytai/ ot /x,ev OTI, eav Kara TL ICTOL
tcror, TO^TOU 8 a/xapTa^oi/rojv, too-Trep icrot oXws
ttp^Tat KCU TTpOTtpOV. S^/XOS /XCF
yap eyeveTO e TOV
(on yap eXevOepoi Trai/re?
a/rXw? icro6 etvat vo//t^oL cr(,v), o Xi-
8 CK TOO) avi o oa;? eV TI ot o on, eav KaTa Tt avtcroi,
oXws etyat a vtVo-us VTTO- 7rai/TO)v aj/tVwv cx^toi)o"ti/ eavTOi;?.
Kar ovo-iav yap aVLaoi 810 Kat fJLaXiQ-ra. 8vo ytvovTat ?roXt-
OVTC? avrXoos uVio"ot VTroXa/x^avovo"tv Tetat, 8/y/xos Kat oXtyap^ta.
etrat). 2, 3. 13, 14.
Further " the main thought of these two parallel passages is repeated
" in a shorter form " in 2 2, 3 : " there is here then perhaps another
" re-writing, seemingly by a later hand, of the introduction to the book
" and with this third beginning seems to cohere the rest of cc. 2, 3."
Wilson sees in each of these a probable reference to Bk. in; at i 2,
J 3> 2 2 - It must be observed however (i) that the main difficulty
of c. i lies in 8 n, and is not removed by these suggestions: (2)
there is a real advance in c. 2 as compared; for instance, with i n
16: and yet (as Wilson sees) if i u 16 is another recension of
i 2 7, 2 2, 3 has quite as much right to be so considered. (3) It
is possible that 3 14, o~Tao-iaoro-t 8 eV ^v Tats dXiyap^tai5...tcrot 6Wes,
1 Susemihl Qnaest. Crit. v. p. 10. ~ Journal of Philology x. 84.
DISLOCATIONS. 95
should precede i u, Travra^ov ydp KrX At all events that passage is
out of place where it stands in c. 3 l .
(28) VIII (v). C. 4. In this chapter i 7, ytvovrai /xet/...e7n7pe-
aa-dek, have for their subject the cases where orao-is has arisen from
dissensions amongst the leading men. The subject of 8 12, /xera-
fiaXXovcri Se /<ai...7rpos iroXXous, is wholly different. Aristotle returns to
the case which he calls in C. 3 6 Si avfyatv rrjv Trapd TO dvaXoyov,
when any party in the state has become over-powerful. This averts
may be Kara TO TTOOW or Kara TO TTOIOI/ ; but all the examples in 3 7, 8
illustrate the former kind. It seems best then to transpose 4 8 12,
jjieTa(3d\\ovai Se Kal...7rpos TroA/Ws (which contain examples of the
latter kind) to follow Suracrrettts at the end of 3 S 2 .
(29) VIII (v). 6 IO 13, o/JLOvoovcra Se dAiyap^t a. . .77 !</>iaSov. In
its present place this passage interrupts the orderly enumeration of the
causes which tend to overthrow oligarchy owing to internal dissensions:
(i) 6 2 5 continual decrease of the privileged body, (2) 5 7 rise
of demagogues amongst them, (3) 8, 9 extravagance and reckless
living, (4) 14, 15 insults offered Kara ya /xovs rj SiKas, (5) 16 refusal
on the part of some oligarchs to go the full length in oppression of the
Demos. In 10, n, coming between (3) and (4), the conditions of
permanence in an oligarchy are touched upon ; a better place for them
is after 16 ; while 12, 13 are probably interpolated " .
A few remarks may be useful on the suggestions here passed under
review. Though necessarily an unsatisfactory remedy 4 , transposition
has been used with great effect in some authors (e.g. Lucretius) and has
always been a recognised expedient. But it has been most successful
when applied to verse and to dislocations arising mechanically through
the displacement of leaves or by carelessness of transcribers. Now only
a small part (if any) of those here assumed can have had such an origin.
The most reasonable account of the majority presupposes an editor
dealing unskilfully with Aristotle s materials 5 . In proportion as this is
1 Susemihl Politica tcrt. cd. p. xxiil; tionis ordini inserere sibi proposuerit,
Bocker op. cit. 37. in margine hie illic adnotasse ; posteros
2 Bocker op. cit. 40, 41. autem, qui ediderunt libros, cum nesci-
3 Susemihl Qnacst. Crit. v. 12, 13. rent, quid notis illis uoluisset scriptor,
4 " Before we can prove that a transpo- ineptissime confusas in hunc, quern ho-
sition is correct, we must have shewn die tenent, locum contulisse, quern for-
not only that the passage cannot be tasse reuera mutilatum lacunosumue
placed in its old position, but that it deprehenderant." Bocker op. cit. 32,
must be placed in its new." Postgate 33. There was no place for footnotes in
Notes p. 24. an ancient book : but some instances in
5 "Hoc est uerisimillimum : ipsum the above list e.g. (3) (n) (15) (21)
Aristotelem omnes has particulas, quas (23) (27) (29) have quite the look of
in altera Politicorum recensione sine marginal notes. Compare the remark of
uberius tractare siue continent! exposi- Welldon Translation p. 100 n. 2.
96 INTRODUCTION TO THE POLITICS.
admitted the certainty that a given transposition restores the original
form, due to its being logically required, diminishes : and room must
always be allowed for the misgiving "ne hoc modo ipsum potius Aristo-
" telem corrigamus quam editores eius antiques: certe cur ab eo ipso in
" libris celerrime scriptis, nequaquam diligenter ubique elaboratis, inco-
"hatis potius quam perfectis optimam semper disponendi rationem
" esse inuentam non sane scio cur credam 1 ."
These observations are all the more necessary as the most recent
edition of any part of the Politics" carries still further the disintegration
of the text, transposing and rejecting supposed interpolations in a part
of the treatise hitherto believed not to need these remedies 3 . The most
important change introduced is to make Bk. i. cc. 8 u, 7rep< XPVP- --
Tio-ri/a;?, precede the discussion Trepl SCO-TTOTOU K<H 8ov/\ov, thus inserting
them in i. c. 3 3 between XP^/XXXTIO-T 1/075 and Trpeuroi/ Se. That the
topics of Bk. i. would be thus better arranged may be admitted : but
the probability (not to say the certainty) that Aristotle even intended
ultimately so to arrange them will require cogent proof, especially if it
can be shown that with the present order the transition from topic to
topic is natural, the development logical, the indications of a disposition
of the subject-matter borne out in the sequel. Briefly to sum up,
Schmidt presents Bk. i. in the following order : c. i, c. 2 i 6 TraTSas:
then comes 8 presented as two parallel versions :
iq 8 IK TT\f.iovu>v KCO/XOJV KOIVUIVLOL 07 ^>rf> Trdcrrjs c^ovcra Trepas Trjs
re/Vetos TroXts rj^tq. yivo/^err; /xej/ ovv aurapKeux?, w CTTOS etTretK, I252b 28.
TOU (.rjv eW/cer, ovcra oe rov ev L,rjv
reXos e crrt.] olov yop eacrrov ecrrt
TV/S yei/ecrecos reXeo-^eto-^?, Tavrqv
</>ajUei/ rtjv (frvviv etj/at eKaVrov, <[^y((TTOV ayaO
d> (T7rep av^pcoTrov ITTTTOV otKt as. Sio <yap> o^ evtKa. KOL TO TeXos
TTttcra TroXts cfrvorei coriV, etTrep Kat ai TIVTOV. y 8 avTapKeia [KOL]
TTpomxi Kotvcovt at. TeXog yctp avrrj <a)o~T> Kai p.\Ti<jrov. 2 8,
CKCLVWV. 2 8, 1 252 b 28 34. 1 252 b 34 1 253 a i.
Then follows 2 7 SLO KOL TO 7rpwTov...To)v 6tv. Then another
double recension consisting mainly of 2 13, 14 :
1 Susemihl Politico, tertiiim ed, p. xxvi. what follows Susemihl Politico, terliunt
Cp. also p. xin. ed. (Teubner) pp. xxiv xxvi.
2 Aristotelis Politicorum liber privnis 3 Even Krohn Zur Kritik 33 35 re-
ex recensione M. Schmidt (Jena 1882. gards the first book as Aristotle s. He
4to). The arrangement adopted is justi- nowhere states how far it had been ma-
fied in an article in Jahrb. f, Philol. nipulated by the oiKeiuv
cxxv. 1882. 801 824. Compare with 4 at rt<a> for rt.
D2SL O CA T1ONS.
97
[6Vi jtc^i/ ow T? TroXts /cat <pv<rei Kal Trpore-
pov 7) /ca<rros 5^\ov. ] et yap /XT^ avrdp-
Krjs e/cao-ros ^(opr^et5, o/xotws TOIS
a AAot? /utepecrtv e^et ?rpos TO 6 Aor.
d Se /XT; Swa/aevos KOtycoj/etv, ^ /x?;8ei/
6Y auTapKeiai/ ovSey /xepo?
, [cixrre 17 drjplov rj ^eds.] 2 14 :
1253 a 2529.
a re ?rep aC v ^ ^^ wcrTrep ei/ TreTTOts.
2 10 : i253a 6, 7.
Kat TrpoTepov 877 rrj <u<ret 77 TroAts
r) otKta Kat eKaoros ^/xwv eortV.
TO yap oAov TrpoVepov uVayKaiov
etvat TOV /xepous. aVatpov/xeVoi; yap
TOU 6Aoi> OTJK eo~Tat [TroOs ou Se x 6 / 5 ] t
yu.^ o/xcovv/xoos [wcTTrep et rts \eyoi. T^V
\idivrjv. 5ta0^ape?(ra 7ap <ou/c> carat,
Totaur??.] 7rai/Ta yap T(3 epyw topto"rat
Kat TT; 8wa/>tet, (ioo-Te /X^KCTI Tota^Ta
oi/ra ou AeKTe ov Ta avra eti/ai, aAA
ofj-uvvpa. 2 12, 13: 1253 a 19
-25-
What is left of c. 2 follows in the usual order, /. <?. 9, 10 CK
. . . eTTi^u/.r^T ^ ?, 10 12 Stdrt. . .Tro Atv, 15, 16 t^ucret. . .Kpto~t5 : also
c - 3 r 3 as f ar as x/ 37 7/ xaTto " rtK ^ ? - 1 hen cc. 8 n in the following
order : 8 i 13 -n-purov /xei/ ovv aTrop^crete^ (the preceding sentence of
8 i oAws...^ is enclosed in brackets)... oiKt as : 10 i 3 S^Aoi/...
^ojcov : 8 14, 15; 9 I Kal eotKeF...ytVerat paXXov : 9 12, 13 Kat avrrj...
XP^/xara)!/ KT^ crts : 9 2 12 Aa/?cop:ev...o c Kara (^vcrtv : 9 14 18 TT/S
o otKovoyatK^s ou<o"7s> xP r )l JLO - TLa rLK *)s...opov : 10 4, 5 ; c. 1 1 j c. 12 i
as far as ya/xtK?/. The rest of c. 3 follows, /. . 3, 4 TrpwTov [8e] ?repi
oeo~7roTot;. . .yStatov yap: cc. 4 6 as usual ^ c. 7 2 5 ^ f 16 ^ ^^ SecrTro -
T7^5. ..OrjptvTLKij, after which ]) 8et ^prjcrOaL...Tov TroXefJiov
should be inserted from c. 8 12 : then 7 i, 2 <ayepov 8e...t o-a>i/
lastly cc. 12, 13 from Kat ydp ywatKos (in 12 i) to the end. TR.]
1 The parallel versions here given
hardly deserve that name if compared
with those pointed out by Spengel, Suse-
mihl, Wilson. It is essential that the
same thought, or something very similar,
should be found repeated with a mere
variation of language. Schmidt employs
the two columns to separate genuine
Aristotelian fragments from the additions
of editors. In the right hand column
above, the conception of avrapKeia. is
found three times, and the passages where
it occurs are judged by him to be addi
tions to the original Aristotle (op. c. 804)
because, if the end of the state is eff frjv,
it cannot be avrdpKeia. This then, he
argues, is an instance of two independent
definitions which have been blended into
one. Similarly with other cases where,
according to his view, the present text,
or, as Krohn calls it, our old recension ,
has been formed by the comprehension of
heterogeneous materials.]
H.
ANALYSIS OF THE POLITICS,
INTRODUCTION. B. I. cc. i, 2.
I. As the end and aim of every society is .a good, the end and aim
n oLihfi-State, the highest society under which all the resJ;_aj.eJr)lujied r js
/ the highest good : i i.
II. The assertion (in the Politicus of Plato) that the difference
between the family and the state is merely quantitative, not qualitative,
and hence that there is no essential difference bet^en_2Ljather J _ a
master, a king, and a republican statesman, i 2, disproved by an
analytical enquiry into the origin of the family, the village-community,
and the state : i 3, 2 i.
(a) The family is formed by nature out of the two smallest natural
unions, of husband and wife, and of master and slave, solely for the
support and propagation of life : 2 2 5.
(b) In the same natural manner out of the household or family
grows the village-community, the first in the ascending scale of societies
formed for purposes wider than the satisfaction of mere every-day wants.
Out of the village arises the state, in which the primitive form of govern
ment was accordingly monarchy: 2 5 7.
(c) The state itself then, the most complete society, springing up,
like the rest, to provide the bare means of living, continues to exist for
the full development and perfecting and independence of life. It is,
in a higher sense of the term, most truly a natural growth ; and man
is a being by nature ordained for civil society, 2 8, 9, far beyond all
other animals, because he alone possesses speech and the perception
of good and evil, of right and wrong : 2 10 12.
(d) Moreover the state is in the order of nature prior to the
family and to the individual : 2 13, 14.
(e) Only the actual establishment of the state raises man to what
he really is and endows him with those higher gifts of virtue, in the
absence of which he is no better far worse indeed than any of the
brutes: 2 15, 16.
I. cc. i 8. 99
PART I: OF THE FAMILY: B. I. cc. 313.
A. Of the Family in general. There being three fundamental constituents
of the family, the subject is divided into a consideration of the several relations (i) of
master and slave, (2) of husband and wife (the conjugal relation), (3) of father and
child (the parental relation). To which must be added a consideration of wealth
and its acquisition (xp?7/ucm<rTiK?7) ; the relation of this subject to that of the family
-fi) 1 is a disputed point needing investigation : 3 i 3.
B. Special Exposition : c. 3 3 c. 13 6.
I. Of the relation of master and slave, or of Slavery : 3 37 5.
(a) Transition to this subject, 3 3. Statement of the two main points in the
inquiry, 3 4.
(b) These two points discussed at length : cc. 4 6, c. 7 i 3.
(a) The nature and justification of Slavery : cc. 46.
(i) The nature and character of the slave : he is an animate chattel,
c. 4.
(ii) How far Slavery is in accord with the law of nature : cc. 5, 6.
(a) There are as a fact men whom nature intended to be the slaves of the rest,
c. 5.
(^) But for that very reason slavery imposed simply by the laws of war upon
men who are not of this sort is contrary to nature, c. 6.
(/3) The view quoted in the Introduction from Plato s Politicus that rule
over freemen and over slaves, whether in the family or in the state, is not
essentially different and that it rests upon a science, is now more completely
stated and disproved on the ground of the results just obtained, 7 i, 2.
There are however sciences treating of the functions of master and slave.
Wherein such science consists : 7 3, 4.
II. Of Property and its acquisition : cc. 811.
(Trepi 7ra<rr?s KT^crews /cat xpTifj.aTicm.Kijs : of the acquisition or management of pro
perty, the art of wealth.)
1 [No uniform rendering of these two The more common equivalents are, for
words has been attempted, and the term xp^/mrKTri/cT? finance , money-making
economic science , used a little lower art ; for OLKOVO^LKT] household manage-
down as a virtual reproduction of one of ment , domestic economy . TR.]
them, is without authority in this sense.
72
100 ANALYSIS OF THE POLITICS.
(a) Theoretical discussion. The relation of the art of wealth
to a theory of the family or economic science
cc. 8 10.
(a) The different cases possible : 8 i, 2.
(/3) Proof that the first is inadmissible : acquisition of property does not coin
cide with the whole field of economic science : 8 2 (6 rt ^tv ovi>...).
(y) To decide whether the former is at any rate a branch of the latter (or even
an auxiliary science), it is necessary, 8 3, to distinguish
(i) direct acquisition through production by means of cattle-breeding,
hunting, plundering, fishing, agriculture, and fruit-growing : a species of acquisi
tion belonging as such to economic science and forming a part of it, or an
auxiliary science : 8 3 15,
and (ii) indirect acquisition by exchange, c. 9 :
either (a) simple barter, not in itself unnatural provided it does not go
beyond actual needs, 9 i 6,
or (/ ) exchange through the medium of money, an artificial, though neces
sary, development of barter to facilitate intercourse. So long as it remains true
to this object and no more than a means to the easier satisfaction of actual needs
it does not become unnatural or foreign to economic science, as it does when
trade is carried on as a distinct profession, money is made an independent end,
and exchange simply a means to unlimited accumulation of money and capital :
9 7 1 8.
(5) It is now possible to decide finally between the various alternatives remain
ing, so far as the natural species of acquisition is concerned. This is in one respect
an actual branch of Economic, in another respect, and more truly, only an auxiliary
to it: 10 13.
(e) The most unnatural species of exchange is trading with money in the strict
sense, the lending out of money on interest, which directly makes money out of
money : 10 4, 5.
(b) The art of acquiring wealth in its practical application : c. 1 1.
(a) Classification of the different branches of this art : n i 4.
(i) Production proper : cattle-rearing, agriculture, fruit-growing ; culture
of bees, fish, birds : 11 i, 2.
(ii) Acquisition by means of exchange : 1 1 3.
(a) trade: whether (r) maritime, (2) inland, or (3) retail trade;
(^) the lending of money on interest ;
(c) hired labour (i) of artizans, (2) of day labourers.
(iii) Branches of a mixed nature : forestry, mining, 1 1 4.
(/3) General remark on the different character of these various branches as judged
by an ideal standard, 1 1 6.
(7) For particular information as to the practical exercise of these various
branches of acquisition reference is made to special works upon these subjects and to
I. cc. 813. 10 1
the stories current in various quarters of the means by which individuals have been
enriched : i r 7 13.
III. The management of the household, as it affects the members,
especially in the marital and parental relations ; also in the relation of
master and slave : cc. 12, 13.
(a) Different nature of the rule exercised over the wife and over the children :
c. i?.
(b) The management of a household extends to inanimate property but es
pecially and primarily aims at promoting virtue and excellence in the members of the
family, preeminently in those who are free : 13 i.
(c) Proof that even a slave is capable of a certain mental and moral excellence
and that he requires it : that the virtue of man, woman, child, slave, is different in
kind and degree, 13 2 12, since
(a) although the parts of the soul are the same, they exist, differently in
man, woman, child, and slave, 13 5 9:
(/3) a more detailed investigation shows that by common consent certain
qualities would not be virtues in a man which are so in a woman, a child, or a
slave : 13 10, ir.
(7) The virtue and excellence of a boy and a slave belong to them not in
themselves, but in relation to another : 13 u (eirei 3...).
(d) A more precise statement wherein the excellence of a slave consists. It
is the master s business to train him to it. The right mode of treating slaves:
13 1214.
(e) The right course of training for women and boys is a subject that goes beyond
the limits of the family and more properly belongs to the theory of the best polity :
13 IS, l6 -
102 ANALYSIS OF THE POLITICS.
PART II: OF THE POLITY OR CONSTITUTION: B. II. VIII.
A. CRITICAL PART.
Examination of the schemes of an ideal best polity put forward in
the theories of preceding philosophers, together with those most com
mendable amongst the constitutions actually established. It is shown
that none of them really answers to the best polity : B. n.
I. The object and principles of this review: c. i i, 2.
II. CRITICISM OF THE IDEAL POLITIES : i 3 8 25.
a. PLATO S IDEAL STATE IN THE Republic: i 35 28.
(a) The end which Plato assumes for the state, its utmost possible
unity, really involves, in the form in which he assumes it, the abrogation
of the state, and is thus incapable of realization : c. 2.
(/?) But even granting that this is the true end and practicable it
would not be secured by the means which Plato proposes; viz. the
enforcement, upon the two upper classes, of community of wives and
children and community of property: 3 i 5 13.
(i) Arguments against community of wives and children : cc. 3, 4.
(T) Plato thinks it a proof of perfect unity that all should apply to the same
objects the terms mine , another s . But there is an ambiguity hi the word "all".
Plato s view would not be correct if "all" meant "all collectively", but only if "all"
meant "each individual": a meaning here impossible : 3 i 3. This argument
applies also to community of property.
(2) Men care far less about the things which they share in common than about
what is their own. Hence the community of children will result in the total neglect
of them by all alike : their real or nominal parents will, one and all, feel but slight
interest in what becomes of them. So that a specific real relationship, however
distant, would be of far more service to them than this general indeterminate pa
ternity : 3 47.
(3) Many parents however would inevitably recognise their own children :
3 8, 9-
(4) As a rule violence and outrage are avoided with especial care in the case of
near relations, but when it is not known who these are this heed fulness disappears :
4 i.
II. cc. 15. 103
(5) It is strange that in spite of the community of children Plato does not alto
gether prohibit unnatural love but only its worst excesses ; nor even that because he
is scandalized at its impropriety between the nearest blood-relations : 4 2 6.
(6) The end Plato has in view is the greatest possible unity and harmony
amongst the ruling class of citizens : all are to feel themselves members of a single
family. But the result would be just the opposite, since when thus generalized all
specific affection for kinsfolk would be abrogated and replaced by a feeble attach
ment in the last degree watery and attenuated : 4 5 9. < For Plato s purpose,
then, these institutions would have been better adapted for the third class of the
population, than for the first two as he proposes, in order to make its members
disunited and more obedient : 4 4. >
(7) Plato s regulation for removing children, under certain circumstances, from
the two upper classes into the third, and conversely, would Tie attended by great
difficulties : and as such children are not to be informed that they were born in a
different class, the mischiefs pointed out under (4) and (5) would be more likely to
occur in their case : 4 9 (dXXd fj.r)v...), TO.
(ii) Arguments against community of property : 5 113.
(1) The different forms of communism possible, 5 i, 2.
(2) Community of property is no doubt more conceivable where, as in the
Platonic state, the cultivators are not the owners of the soil: 5 3. But still in all
that relates to social intercourse, to meum and tititin, communism is shown by ex
perience to produce much dissension, 5 4. Far preferable therefore would be that
state of things where property in general remains in private ownership, but the laws
have inspired the citizens with so much public spirit, that they are willing to give up
to their fellow-citizens much of their private possessions for common use : 5 5 8.
(3) Communism destroys the high enjoyment afforded by private property, which
is in itself fully justified and in many respects morally noble : 5 8, 9.
(4) With community of wives, children, and property there could be no such
virtues as chastity (<Tw<ppo<rvvr)}, in respect of one s neighbour s wife, or liberality : 5 ro.
(5) Lawsuits about disputed property, cases arising from perjury, &c. are not
due, as Plato maintains, to the absence of communism, but to the prevalence of moral
corruption : 5 u, 12.
(6) In general Plato s procedure is unfair ; he has before him only the evils of
which we should be rid by communism : the advantages we should lose he overlooks :
5 13-
(y) Further objections to the Platonic institutions generally :
5 14-28.
(i) Their defects are ultimately due to the defectiveness of the end which they
subserve, as pointed out above under (a). But so far as political unity within due
limits must be the object of political institutions it is surprising that, considering
the great importance which Plato attaches to the right education, he should not
seek to attain this unity amongst his citizens by education, the introduction of com
mon messes, &c. instead of the means which he employs : 5 14, 15.
(ii) If the Platonic institutions were really serviceable, they would have been
carried into effect before now : 5 16.
104 ANALYSIS OF THE POLITICS.
(iii) But the experiment would prove beyond all doubt that the practical appli
cation of them could not be carried further than is at present actually the case in some
states: 5 17.
(iv) Besides, the regulations laid down by Plato are extremely imperfect. They
only apply t the two upper classes of citizens, and equal difficulties present them
selves whether they are extended to the third class or not. In the former case the
true foundation of the Platonic state would be annulled ; in the latter the state would
be divided into two hostile camps in direct contradiction of the unity intended, as
the advantages which Plato claimed for his state (see 5 n above) would for the
most part be rendered illusory : 5 18 24.
(v) The analogy of animals, who have no domestic life, does not prove that
women can share the occupations of men : 5 24 (aroTrov Se /ecu...).
(vi) To keep the same rulers always in office is a dangerous measure, but con
sistency on Plato s part requires it : 5 25, 26.
(vii) Plato himself admits that his regulations do not secure the complete hap
piness of the upper classes. If so, then further this is true of the whole state : 5 27, 28.
b. The ideal polity of Plato s Laws : c. 6.
(a) Comparison of the Republic with the Laws ; the relation be
tween the schemes of polity laid down in these two works : 6 i 5.
(/?) Criticism of the state in the Laws : 6 6 22.
(i) It would require far too large a territory : 6 6, 7.
(ii) It is not enough that a code of laws should take account of the land and the
people ; the neighbouring people have also to be regarded: 6 7, 8.
(iii) Again, the principles regulating the limit to be set on possession need to be
expressed more clearly and fully : 6 8, 9.
(iv) There is an inconsistency in demanding equality of landed estate without
at the same time fixing a definite unalterable number of citizens: 6 10 13.
(v) We are not told how the ruling citizens are to receive an education dis
tinguishing them from the rest, nor in what this education should consist : 6 14.
(vi) It is inconsistent to make landed estate inalienable and at the same time
allow moveable property within certain limits to change hands : 6 15.
(vii) The division of each citizen s real estate into two separate establishments is
awkward: 6 15 (/cat rriv rwv olKOTrtSuv...).
(viii) The constitution proposed in the Laivs is a combination of Oligarchy and
Democracy, i.e. a Polity (TroAtreia) technically so called. But
1 i ) this sort of mixed constitution, though perhaps the best on the average,
is by no means the next best after the absolutely perfect scheme : 6 16, 17.
(2) Plato himself calls it a blending of Democracy and Tyranny, which is
self-contradictory and, as a matter of fact, incorrect : 6 18.
(3) The oligarchical element is far too preponderant in this constitution of
Plato s: 6 1921.
(ix) The mode in which the magistrates are elected is politically unsafe : 6 22.
II. cc. 58. 105
c. Phaleas scheme of polity : c. 7.
(a) Brief account of this scheme : 7 i 4.
(ft) Criticism : 7 523.
(i) The objection brought against Plato, 6 10, holds also against Phaleas : if
there is to be a maximum fixed for property, then the number of children must also be
limited : 7 5.
(ii) Although a certain equality of possessions is no doubt of importance for the
state, it is much more important that the estates should on the average be neither too
large nor too small : 7 6, 7.
(iii) Far more important, again, is equality in respect of a good education, which
trains the intellect properly and duly moderates the desires: 7 8, 9, 10 H =
7 1820.
(iv) Moreover Phaleas has never sufficiently defined equality of possessions, as
he makes no allusion to moveable property : 7 21.
(v) In his regulation of property he ought to have taken some account of the
external concerns and relations of the state, but he has left them altogether unnoticed :
7 14-17-
(vi) Phaleas prohibits all handicrafts to his citizens ; but the measures adopted
by him to render this possible are not suited to his object : 7 22, 23.
d. Hippodamos scheme of polity : c. 8.
[(a) Introductory remarks on Hippodamos himself: 8 i.]
(ft) Account of his model constitution : 8 2 7.
(i) Number of the citizens, 8 2.
(ii) Division into artizans, fanners, soldiers, 8 i.
(iii) Division of the land ; a part to belong to the temples, a part to the state, a
part to private individuals, 8 3.
(iv) Legal regulations: 8 4, 5.
(1) The administration of justice to be confined to three objects, 4.
(2) Right of appeal, 4.
(3) Alterations in the mode in which jurymen record their verdicts, 5.
(v) Honorary distinctions for those who are the authors of useful reforms in the
existing laws and institutions : 8 6.
(vi) Maintenance, at the cost of the state, of the orphans whose fathers have
fallen in war : 8 6.
(vii) Election of magistrates : 8 7.
(7) Criticism: 8 7 25.
(i) That all three classes should have an equal share in all the privileges of
citizenship is impossible : 8 7 (a-rrop^ffeie d av...) 10,
T06 ANALYSIS OF THE POLITICS.
(ii) It does not appear what is the end to be answered by such a farmer class
owning the private lands : if it is also to cultivate the state lands its very existence is
contrary to the object in view : yet one is at a loss to know who else could do this :
8 10 (TL oi yeupyoi...).
(iii) Nor is the proposal as to the mode in which the jurymen should vote, 5,
any better: 8 13 15.
(iv) The proposal to reward reforms in legislation, 6, is open to the objection
that while on the one hand the unchangeableness of the existing laws is dangerous,
8 16 22, on the other there is pressing need that any change in them should be
attended by conditions every whit as stringent : 8 23 25.
III. CRITICISM OF THE BEST AMONGST ACTUALLY EXISTING POLI
TIES : cc. 9 12.
(a) The Spartan polity : c. 9.
(a) General prefatory remark upon the twofold standard to be set
up in criticising a polity : 9 i.
(ft) The defects of the Spartan polity : 9 2 36.
(i) Social defects : 9 2 19.
(r) Under a good constitution judged by the first standard there will be
provision that the citizens are released from all manual labour, and hence that the
soil is cultivated by others than the citizens. I>ut the position of the Spartan
peasantry, the Helots, is radically wrong : 9 2 4.
(2) The license of the women, and their virtual supremacy at Sparta, are mis
takes judged by either standard : 9 5 13.
(3) The permission to give away or bequeath land at pleasure, the absence of
any limit to the amount of dower, the unrestricted right of the father (or of the
successor to his rights) to bestow an heiress upon any one he likes; all this combined
has brought two-fifths of the Spartan land into female hands and occasioned more
over terrible inequality of possessions with a frightful diminution in the number of
men capable of bearing arms. In these circumstances the very law which was de
signed to increase as much as possible the body of Spartan citizens serves only to
swell the ranks of paupers : 9 14 19.
(ii) Political defects: 9 19 36.
(1) In the Ephoralty, 9 19 24:
(2) in the Council of Elders, 9 2528 :
(3) in the Kingly office, 9 29, 30.
(4) Bad management of the public messes at Sparta: 9 31, 32.
(5) The Admirals (vavapxoi), 9 33.
(6) All the institutions tend solely to military excellence, 9 34, which is, after
all, but a means to an end and not an end in itself, 9 35.
(7) Defects in the financial administration, 9 36.
II. CC. 812. 107
(V) Criticism of the Cretan polity : c. 10.
(a) How the resemblance between the Cretan and Spartan polities may be
historically explained : 10 i, 2. [Digression on the geographical position of Crete
and its political relations under Minos : 10 3, 4.]
(/3) Comparison of the Cretan and Spartan polities : 10 516.
(i) The resemblances, 10 5 7.
(ii) The differences between the two: 10 7 14.
(1) How far the public messes are better regulated in Crete than at
Sparta. Some other social rules peculiar to the Cretans : ro 7 9.
(2) How far again the magistracy of the K(XT^OL is worse managed even
than the ephoralty : 10 914.
(iii) Nothing but its favourable geographical position has saved Crete
more than once from the outbreak of mischiefs similar to those at Sparta: 10
15, i 6.
(c) Criticism of the Carthaginian polity : c. 11.
(a) General introductory remarks on the excellence of this polity, its resemblance
to the Cretan, and more especially to the Spartan polity: n i, 2.
(/3) Comparison of Carthage and Sparta in respect of the institutions at Carthage
which correspond to the public mess, the ephoralty, the kingship, and the senate :
1 1 3, 4-
(7) To what extent
(1) the democratical element : 5, 6,
(ii) the oligarchical element,
is more strongly represented at Carthage than in Crete or at Sparta
(r) in the Boards of Five, 1 1 7,
(2) in the exaggerated respect paid to wealth in the appointment to the
highest offices, and in the fact that they can be bought a practice mischievous
to a true aristocracy: n 8 10, i 2, 10 12.
(5) One defect very usual at Carthage is that the same individual simultaneously
fills a number of offices : ii 13, 14.
(e) From many of the evils resulting from the defects of their polity the Cartha
ginians are preserved solely by external means, placed at their disposal by the insecure
favour of fortune : n 15, 16.
(</) Criticism of the Solonian constitution : 12 S 26.
(a) Transition to this criticism, 12 i.
((3) There are no good grounds
(i) either for the praise bestowed by its friends : 12 2, 3,
(ii) or for the censure bestowed by its opponents: 12 3 6, upon
Solon s constitution.
IOS ANALYSIS OF THE POLITICS.
[IV. APPENDIX.
On the most prominent legislators, whether they aimed at founding new polities
or not : 12 6 14.
(a) Zaleukos, with remarks upon a supposed school of legislators, Onomakritos,
Thales, Lycurgus, Zaleukos, Charondas : 12 6, 7.
({>) Philolaos, 12 8,
(c) Charondas, 12 8 10,
(</) Thaleas, 12 ir,
(<:) Plato, 12 12,
(/) Draco, 12 13,
(,<, ) Pittacus, 12 13,
(//) Andromadas, 12 14.]
B. POSITIVE CONSTITUTIONAL THEORY: B. III. VIII.
I. FUNDAMENTAL GENERAL PRINCIPLES :
B. III. cc. 113.
First group: the most general conceptions: III. i i 6 2.
a. The essential nature of a polity or constitution, of a state, of a
citizen : cc. i, 2.
(a) The enquiry into the nature of a constitution raises the question What is a
state ? and this introduces the further question What is a citizen? : i i, 2.
(/;) Citizenship is defined by participation in the government of the state, there
being two forms of this government, the one exercised by the general deliberative and
judicial bodies, that is, the popular assembly and the jurymen (5i/ca<rra), the other by
the particular magistrates. Different polities have different regulations as to the
government, and so too as to the right of participation in it. Citizenship not neces
sarily dependent on descent from citizens : i 2 2 5.
II. c. 12 III. c. 6. 109
/?. The true nature of the state is so largely bound up with its
constitution that a change in the latter is sufficient to destroy the
identity of the state, c. 3.
y. Is the excellence (aperr/) of the citizen the same as the excellence
of the man ? 4 i 6 2.
(a) Not unconditionally the same, since
(i) the former varies with the particular polity, while the latter is always
one and the same : 4 i 3.
(ii) It is true that in the highest sense the excellence of the citizen means
the excellence of a citizen of the best polity. Yet even in the best polity the
citizens are not all equally good men, although they may be equally excellent in
their several functions : 4 4, 5.
[(iii) The state consists of very dissimilar elements, which differ in their
degrees of excellence : 4 6.]
(/;) Government in the state must fall to the men who are intellectually and
morally the most capable. Hence the excellence of the citi/en who rules, i.e. his
excellence as a ruler, must coincide with his excellence as a man : 4 7 9.
(() But no one can properly command in the state unless he has first learnt
properly to obey; this then is a further qualification included under the excellence of
the ruler, that is, by (/;), under the excellence of the good man. It follows that the
excellence of the citizen and the excellence of the man are in their inmost nature really
identical and only apparently distinct (and the best polity that in which they are
coextensive). The moral excellences (dperai) displayed in ruling and obeying, though
specifically distinct, are yet generically the same. Only the intellectual or dianoetic
excellence is generically different in the ruler, where it is higher practical insight and
prudence, from what it is in the subject, where it is merely right apprehension of the
command : 4 10 18.
(d) In agreement with these results the best polity refuses to allow its citizens to
engage in agriculture or trade, to be artizans or labourers. Men who are thus occu
pied must have a status assigned them distinct from that of the citizens. In all the
other polities, true civic excellence, identical with the excellence of the good man, can
neither wholly nor approximately be attributed to any of the citizens except those who
are in a position to abstain from such occupations : 5 i 6 2.
Second group of principles. Development of the chief species of
particular constitutions, with their order of merit : 6 2 13 25.
a. Determination of all the possible leading types of polities : 6
2-7 5-
no ANALYSIS OF THE POLITICS.
(a) A polity or constitution is nothing but a form of government, and the separate
polities are especially distinguished by the different supreme authorities in whose
name government is administered. This being so, the difference in polities is mainly
based upon the observance of the end of the state, and upon the different possible
modes of ruling men, whether in the interest of the governed, or in the selfish interest
of the governors. Thus the important distinction is that between normal polities in
which the government is for the good of the governed and so for the true end of the
state, the common weal ; that is, the general happiness and the perfecting of life and
perverted forms : 6 2 u.
(b) The next subdivision is into three normal constitutions Monarchy, Aristo
cracy, Polity and three corresponding perversions Tyranny, Oligarchy, Democracy,
according as the supreme power is vested in one man, in several, or a large number :
c. 7.
ft. Closer investigation into the nature of these constitutions and
their relative values : cc. 8 13.
(a) Democracy more precisely defined as selfish government by the poor,
Oligarchy as selfish government by the rich ; the rule of the majority or the
minority being but a subordinate characteristic, the absence of which, even when
amounting to a reversal of the numerical proportions, would not affect the
essential nature of the case : c. 8.
(b) Which of the normal constitutions is the most normal and the best, and
what is their order of merit : cc. 9 13.
(a) The right (St/ccuo?) recognised by the principles of Democracy and of
Oligarchy respectively, and its divergence in each case from the absolute right
which is based on excellence (TO Kvpiws 5i/couoj>, TO /car dperrji ) : c. 9.
(/3) Who ought to be sovereign, judged by the standard of this absolute
right, and how far his powers should extend : cc. 10, n.
(i) Objections to the exclusive sovereignty of every class or person: c. 10.
Not simply of (i) a tyrant, i or (2) the great masses of the poor,
i, 2 or (3) the rich, 3 ; but also (4) the respectable classes (oi
e?rtet/<:e?s), 4, or (5) the one best citizen (els 6 ffTrovdaioTaros), 5.
If however (6) the law is held to be the true sovereign, precisely the same
questions recur in another form, 5.
(ii) The true normal state of things : the whole body of citizens relatively so
virtuous that the merit of the great majority of them taken collectively will exceed that
of the specially gifted minority. In that case
(1) sovereignty should be vested in this whole body of citizens, n
15: but
(2) its exercise restricted to legislative and judicial powers, more particu
larly the election and control of the responsible magistrates, to whom the
III. cc. 613. I I I
citizens should entrust the details of state business : 1 1 6 9.
(iii) First objection to this arrangement, u 10 12, and reply to the objection,
" 13, 14-
(iv) Second objection, n 15, 16: how disposed of, 16, 17.
(v) Under this arrangement the law must undoubtedly be the truly supreme
sovereign : the unrestricted plenary powers of the human sovereign being exercised
only in the province of the particular and individual which law by its very nature
cannot define. The more precise character of the laws must in each case be deter
mined by the constitution : n 1921.
(7) True constitutional principles more precisely elaborated : cc. 12, 13*.
(i) A claim to political privilege not conferred by all personal advantages, but
only by those which are necessarily connected with the essential nature of a state, viz.
free birth, wealth, and more especially merit (aperr) = capacity and virtue): to which
may be added nobility, as being a higher degree of free birth and a combination of
excellence with affluence: c. 12. Polities where the case is otherwise, are no normal
forms but mere perversions, 1 3 i .
Fuller statement of the claims justified, 13 2 5.
(ii) None of the advantages mentioned can lay exclusive claim to justification
even from the one-sided oligarchical or democratical point of view, much less from
that of the true aristocracy, as even in respect of merit it is always a question
whether the excellence of the pre-eminently good men is or is not outweighed by the
aggregate endowments of the great majority : 13 7 10.
(iii) If it be so outweighed there is a solution of the difficult
question, whether the laws should be made for the advantage of the
majority or of the better men: 13 u, 12.
(iv) This case also provides for
(1) the normal and best polity proper, True Aristocracy:
(2) a Polity, where distinctions of property are also regarded,
will be the utmost attainable in other cases. This whole discussion,
(i) and (2), or something similar, is lost.
(3) In general, the superior merit of a body of men within the state can
only establish its right when this body is large enough numerically to form a
state of itself, or at all events to appoint the magistrates, 1 3 6. When it is
a single citizen, or a few, whose preeminent endowments outweigh those of all
the rest collectively, perverted forms of government resort to ostracism and
other violent measures to remove such men and get rid of them, but in the
best constitution nothing remains except to give them unlimited authority un
fettered even by law. In such a case the best constitution would take the form
of Absolute Monarchy: 13 13 25.
1 [Bernays supposed cc. 12, 13 to be another version of cc. 9 u : see Introd.
p. 42.]
I 12
ANALYSIS OF THE POLITICS.
II. THE SEPARATE POLITIES OR CONSTITUTIONS:
B. III. c. 14 VIII (V).
A. Monarchy and the best constitution in the strict sense, Pure
Aristocracy : III. c. 14-V (VIII).
MONARCHY: III. cc. 14 18.
(a) The questions which come under consideration in the examina
tion of Monarchy: 14 i, 2 (Sia<opas).
(b) The different varieties of monarchy or kingship : 1 4 2 (paSiov . . . )
(a) The office of the Spartan kings; i 5.
(j8) Despotic monarchy amongst non-Hellenic races; 6, 7.
(7) A iffv/j.vr)Teia or elective tyranny; 8 10.
(5) The Hellenic kingship of the heroic age; n 13.
Recapitulation of these four varieties, 14.
(t) True absolute monarchy, with full powers, 15.
(c) Why it is only absolute monarchy that requires fuller considera
tion in this place: 15 i 3.
(d) Objections to its utility: 15^3 16.
(a) In general it is better to be governed by ihe best laws than by the best man:
15 3 5 (jraaav) : if> 5 (6 jj.lv ovv] 9.
(/3) It may be granted that there certainly is one province, that of particular fact,
for which the decision of the laws is insufficient; yet it is always a question whether it
is better that in this province the one best man or the whole body of capable citizens
should have the decision in its own hands:
15 5 (aXX iffus . . . KaXXiov) : 16 4 (aXXd /u,rji> 6 cra ...) 5: 15 6:
15 7 10, 16 9 (dXXa, IM]V ou5e...) 10= 16 10 (eiai 5e) 13 :
15 10 (ei dr]) 13
(i) Many questions are more correctly decided by the great majority than
by an individual: 15 5 (oXX tVws...) 7, and many eyes see more than two:
1 6 10 (clfflSt) 12.
(ii) A large majority of men of comparative excellence cannot be so easily
led astray by personal feelings ; 15 8 10.
(iii) As it is the custom for monarchs to associate their friends with them
in power, they themselves ipso facto allow the claim of those who are equal and
alike to an equal share in the government; 16 12, 13.
III. c. 14 IV. c. i. 113
(iv) Even a monarch cannot be sole ruler; a number of officials is always
required. If so, it is better from the first not to have a monarchy but to appoint
this number of ruling officials by the constitution : 16 10.
(v) If the absolute rule of a single ruler can only be justified on the ground
of merit, several capable men have in general more capacity than one : 16 1 1.
(vi) Historical appendix on the development of the remaining constitutions
out of monarchy: 15 u 13 (Sr]/j.oKpaTiai>).
(7) What opinion should be held of hereditary succession to the throne? 15
3, 14-
(<5) And of the armed force or body-guard to be assigned to a king? 15 14
5 dvoplav) 16 2 (j3a<ri\vs).
(i) This question can easily be settled in a monarchy limited by law: 15
H-i6.
(ii) Here, however, we are discussing absolute, not limited, monarchy: 16
i, 2.
(e) The unrestrained rule of one man over all the rest for his whole lifetime
appears unnatural when these others are more or less his equals : whereas the only
normal course appears to be to divide the government amongst several men under the
restrictions imposed by the laws : 16 2 (SoKei 34 rio-iv) 4.
(e) How far these doubts and objections are well grounded: c. 17.
(a) Monarchy not in itself unnatural any more than the rule of a master over
slaves (Seo-TToreta) or a normal republican government (TroAireta) ; under changed con
ditions each of them becomes appropriate: 17 i.
(j3) In fact, however, as an actual form of government in the developed state,
kingly rule is only conceivable as an absolute monarchy under the most capable citizen ;
yet not actually suitable and natural save in a single exceptional case, namely, in the
state of things explained above (c. 13 13 -25): 17 2.
(y) [Monarchy, Aristocracy, Polity severally adapted to citizens of different kinds:
17 3, 4.] It is only in the single case above-mentioned that Absolute Monarchy
should supersede Aristocracy: 17 5 8.
(f) Transition from Monarchy to the best constitution in the stricter
sense: c. 18.
PURE ARISTOCRACY: THE TRUE NORMAL FORM OF THE ABSOLUTELY
BEST CONSTITUTION: B. IV (VII), V (VIII).
Preliminary Questions : IV (VII) cc. 13.
(a) The best form of polity is that which is auxiliary to the best and most desira
ble life. A definition of the latter is thus required and first obtained: i i 10.
This best life or happiness is shown to be the same for the individual and for the state :
I II, 12 = 2 I, 2.
Summary of the results of this investigation : i 13, 14.
H. 8
114 ANALYSIS OF THE POLITICS.
[(/3) A second preliminary question. Even if happiness is made to depend pre
eminently upon virtue and excellence, we may yet be in doubt whether excellence in
peace or in war is the main thing for the state, whether the active life of the practical
statesman or the contemplative life of the scientific enquirer is the happier for the
individual : 2 3 3 10.
(i) Excellence of the internal administration is the main thing for the state:
military excellence is only needed for self-defence and for acquiring as slaves
those for whom nature intended this lot. The state should not make conquest
and subjugation its aim and end: 2 8 18.
(ii) For the individual it is not the tyrant s life but active employment in
the service of a free and capable state that is alone a great or noble thing. Yet
the scientific life is no less an active life, and is besides an activity of a higher
order than the other: c. 3.]
OUTLINE OF THE ABSOLUTELY BEST CONSTITUTION:
B. IV (VII) c. 4 V (VIII) c. 7.
(a) The External Conditions: IV (VII) cc. 412.
(i) The natural conditions; the land and the people : cc. 4 7.
(A) Prefatory remarks : 4 i 3.
(B) Of the proper number of citizens and inhabitants : 4 4 14.
(c) Of the character and extent of the territory and of its geographical
form: 5 i 3.
(D) The position of the city, 5 3 (TTJS dt TroAews...) 6 8,
(a) on the land side: 5 3, 4,
(b) towards the sea; 6 i 5.
Of the regulation of the naval force: 6 6 8.
(E) The best natural endowment and disposition for the citizens: c. 7.
(ii) The social or socio-political conditions : cc. 8 12.
(A) Exclusion of the citizens from work for a livelihood, and of all who
work for a livelihood from citizenship : c. 8 10 8.
(a) Distinction between the classes which are actual organic members of the
state, and such as are merely indispensable conditions for the existence of the former :
8 i, 2 ; 4 , 5 ; 3, 4.
(/;) Enumeration of the classes indispensable to the state, 8 6 9.
(c) It is a feature of the best polity that only the classes which are from the
nature of the case members of the state, viz. fighting- men and administrators (including
those who administer justice), with the addition of the priests, who form a third,
peculiar element, are in fact recognised as its members, or have the citizenship.
These functions are exercised by them alone, the first in their youth, the second in
their mature age, and the third when they are old men. All other classes farmers,
artizans, tradesmen, etc. are excluded from citizenship. Hence every such employ-
IV. cc. 213. I 15
ment, even agriculture, is prohibited to the citizens, yet so that the soil belongs to them,
although it is cultivated by serfs or dependents (8ov\oi 77 ireptotKoi) of non-Hellenic
descent : c. 9.
[(</) vSuch regulations are no mere innovation ; they are of old standing in
Egypt and Crete, as also are public messes in Italy and Crete : 10 r 9.]
(B) The proper scheme for dividing the land : the right qualifications and
position of those who cultivate it : 10 9 (irepl 5...) 14.
(a) General leading principles : 10 9, 10.
(1) No community of property, only a certain common use granted out of
friendship, 9 ;
(2) No citizen to be in want, 9 :
(3) The common messes to be provided at the public expense, 10.
(4) So also the worship of the gods, ro.
(b) The territory is accordingly divided into public land and private land, and
each of these again into two parts: ro n, 12.
(<) The cultivators of the soil should be either (i) serfs of different races and of
docile temper (^77 tfi^oeiSets), those on the state domain to belong to the state, those
on private estates to the private owners : or failing this, (2) dependent subjects
of similar temper and of non- Hellenic descent: 10 13, 14.
(c) Regulations for the building of the city and the hamlets and villages :
CC. II, 2.
(a) The city: n 112 7.
(1) Its site, on the slope of a hill, if possible, facing the east or else the south :
It ML 9.
(2) Provision for a perennial supply of sufficient wholesome water, n 3 5.
(3) Of fortified positions inside the city : 1 1 5.
(4) Plan for laying out the streets : 1 1 6, 7.
(5) The walls, u 812. Plan of sites in the walls where the guards may
hold their mess, 12 i.
(6) The Upper Market-place, a public square for freemen (dyopa tXevOtpa) with
the principal temples and the gymnasia for the older men, 12 2 5. The Market
place for trade and in it the law courts and official buildings : 12 6, 7.
(b) Public buildings in the country : 1 2 8.
08) A detailed sketch of the internal working of the Best Polity :
IV (VII) C. 13 V (VIII) c. 7 (incomplete].
(i) General introductory remarks: iv (vn) c. 13.
(A) A right knowledge of the end of the best polity is as necessary as of the
means which actually conduce to it : 13 i, 2.
82
Il6 ANALYSIS OF THE POLITICS.
(B) Its end Is the happiness or well-being of all the citizens, which mainly
consists in their highest excellence, though this is impossible apart from favourable
external conditions, under which alone such excellence can be fully realized : 13 3, 4.
These favourable conditions assumed to be at the legislator s disposal include, besides
those already discussed, a happy natural capacity on the part of the citizens (0wris),
whilst the concern and principal task of the legislator is to see how this capacity
can be improved into actual excellence by habituation and instruction : 13 5 13.
(ii) The Education of the citizens : IV (VII) c. 14 V (VIII) c. 7 (left
incomplete],
Its unity : iv (vn) : 14 i 8.
Its aim and end : 14 9 15 6.
The means to be employed : iv (vn) 6 end of v (vm).
(A) Should the education of the rulers and of the ruled be different
or the same, on the principles of the best constitution?
Different, in so far as the two are here different persons : the same,
in so far again as they are the same persons but at different ages, and as
in a government exercised for the common good of the ruled it is not
possible to govern well unless one has learnt to obey well : 14 i 8.
(B) At what should the education of the citizens aim ? What is
the distinctive end and object of a virtuous life ? 14 9 15 6.
(1) The virtues of the non-rational part of the soul (the moral virtues) are
inferior to those of the rational part (the mental excellences or intellectual virtues)
and have their end in the latter just as work has its end in leisure, war in peace :
14 9 J 4-
(2) Hence appears the defectiveness of constitutions like the Spartan, which,
conversely, make war and conquest the object of the state, and strive solely to
educate the citizens to be good soldiers, and nothing more, instead of treating military
excellence as only a means to an end : 14 15, 16. Besides
(i) such principles have already been refuted by experience, namely by the
sudden and lamentable collapse of the Spartan state and its power : 14 17.
(ii) Such principles aiming at the subjugation of other states imply the
perverse opinion that it is nobler to rule over slaves than over freemen :
14 1 8, 19.
(iii) They are also dangerous in their influence on the behaviour of the
citizens towards their own state : 14 19 (n) 21 (wdpwirwv).
(iv) What are the ends for which alone war must be waged and citizens
become good soldiers : 14 21 (T-TIV Te...dov\eveiv).
(v) Another appeal to experience ; states which have not learned to excel
in the arts of peace must necessarily fall as soon as they have acquired their
empire : 14 22.
IV. cc. 1316. 117
(3) The virtues of peace and of leisure must rather have the preeminence; all
the others ought however to be practised, since without the means the end cannot be
attained and many indispensable virtues are easier to practise in war than in peace.
For undisturbed peace easily leads us to rank external goods above virtue. But on
the other hand this same mistake is the foundation for a onesided military tendency
as, for instance, amongst the Spartans : even capacity in war, which is all they strive
to attain, is only a means to an end, to the complete acquisition of external goods :
(c) The right educational means: 15 6 (<on>...) end of
B. v (vui).
(a) Preliminary remarks on the right course of education in general and the
order of succession of educational agencies. Bodily development must precede that
of the mind ; in the latter, again, the training of the irrational soul by habituation
must precede that of the rational soul through instruction : yet in such a way that the
former always regards the latter as its aim and end : 15 6 10.
(b) Means to be employed before birth ; the care requisite for the
procreation of children of mental and bodily vigour and of good
capacity : c. 16.
(1) The proper age for marriage : i6i 10.
(i) The leading principles which determine it : 16 2 4, 6 8.
(a) The difference of age between the parents to be such that their powers of
procreation do not cease disproportionately, 2.
(/3) The difference in age between parents and children not to be too great or too
small, 3.
(7) The educational requirement above mentioned, that the children to be
brought up must be physically strong, 4 (...fiov\Ti<ju>). Whereas the offspring of
marriages between those who are too young is usually stunted, 6.
(5) Further, young mothers invariably suffer greatly in childbirth, 7 : and
(e) cohabitation begun at too early an age is prejudicial to female morality : also
(f) it stunts the growth of the husbands, 8.
(ii) All these considerations may be satisfied by observing the limits of age
within which married people are capable of having children, 16 4, 5, and
thus we arrive at the proper determination, viz. 37(?) for men and 18 for
women : 16 9, 10.
(2) The season of the year and appropriate weather for entrance upon marriage
and its duties: 16 10, n.
(3) The right bodily condition for the parents : 16 12, 13.
(4) Provision for the proper treatment of women with child : 16 14.
(5) Exposure of deformed infants : procurement of abortion to be sanctioned, in
order that the prescribed number of children may not be exceeded : 16 15.
Il8 ANALYSIS OF THE POLITICS.
(6) Further a limit of age should be set beyond which parents are not to have
children : this limit prescribed. Procurement of abortion when conception takes
place beyond this age : 16 16, 17.
(7) Penalty for adultery : 16 17 (o><rre...) 18.
(c) Means to be employed directly after birth, 17 i 14.
(1) In infancy, i 3, 6, 4 .
(2) In the subsequent period to the fifth year, 4 (rriv 5 ^A^ 7 ?"---) 7-
With a preliminary discussion of the question how far all coarseness and indecency is
to be proscribed, and on the other hand how far male adults should be allowed to be
spectators at comedies and the like : 7 14, 13, 14, 12.
(3) Education from the fifth year on to the seventh: 14 (die$e\0&i>Twi>...avTOvs).
(d) The course of Public Education proper from the age of seven
to that of twenty-one : iv (vn). 17 15, 16, v (vm).
(1) General introductory remarks. Two grades of age distinguished. State
ment of the three questions to be discussed in regard to this course of education
proper: iv (vn). 17, 15, 16.
(2) It is more than necessary, it is most essential for the best polity, that a definite
regulation of this educational course should be prescribed by law : v (vm). i r, 2.
(3) It is not to be a domestic private education : it must be a universal and
public course : i 3, 4.
(4) The right educational course : v (vm). cc. 27.
(i) Fundamental considerations : 2 i 3 12.
(a) Difference of views both as to the subjects of instruction, and as to the end
and aim of the training: where there is agreement as to the subjects there are
divergent views as to their practical application and mode of treatment, due to the
difference of opinion as to their end : 2 i, 2.
(P) The pupils must indeed be taught what is indispensable for external life, yet
here the right limits should be observed. The educational means usually employed
should not be used (as, music alone excepted, they all may) with the idea of their con
ferring a purely practical external utility. They ought rather to be regarded as simply
the conditions to the attainment of a higher end : 2 36.
(7) The list of these subjects of ordinary education : reading, writing and
arithmetic, gymnastic exercises, drawing, music : 3 i.
(5) The ultimate end of education is the right occupation of the highest and
truest leisure, which is not merely an interlude to work, but in itself the highest goal
of life. Amusement and pastime serve as recreation to fill the less exalted leisure :
but for the higher leisure the mind requires a different kind of activity, bringing with
it the enjoyment of the highest intellectual gratification. Preliminary proof that
amongst the ordinary subjects taught, music even in the judgment of our ancestors
tends to this end, 3 2 n (S^Xov) ; and that the other subjects should be so used as
not to lead away from it, but, indirectly at least, to conduce to it : 3 1 1 (frt 5t) 12.
IV. c. 1 6 V. c. 6. IIQ
(ii) Athletic exercises (yvfj.va<TTiK^) : cc. 3 13 4 9.
(a) As was stated above, IV (vn). 15 6 10, education must begin with bodily
exercises: 3 13.
(/3) But two errors should be avoided ; the one, of training up the boys like
athletes, as is commonly done ; the other, the Spartan practice of brutalizing them by
excessive exertions : 4 r 7.
(7) We must therefore begin with easier exercises for the first period, and wait
until they have attained puberty, and have been taught the other subjects of instruc
tion for three years, before we commence the more exhausting gymnastic training :
4 7 (on & oiV) 9.
(iii) Music : cc. 5 7.
(a) Statement of the question : Should music serve for pastime recreation
and relaxation, or for moral training, or lastly as a purely aesthetic and theoretic
enjoyment, thereby ministering to the highest intellectual gratification? 5 i 4
(/3) The first and third of these ends are to all appearance foreign to the
education of youth, though something may be said in favour of taking notice of them
too in connexion with it. But it is still a question whether for any of these three
objects it is necessary to learn to be a practical musician oneself: 5 4 (on /ui>
ovv) 8.
(7) Answer to the first question : Music can and should subserve each of those
three aims, not only the highest intellectual gratification, but also mere recreation,
since it is a thoroughly innocent enjoyment ; and considering the frequent need for
recreation in life this alone would suffice to justify its admission to a place in the
instruction of youth. This consideration is not then to be wholly disallowed, as we
supposed above (4): yet it is only subordinate, 5 9 15: and the main point
is that music is, thirdly, an excellent means for the moral training of the young :
5 1625.
(5) From this follows the answer to the second question :
(i) that in general the young should in fact be taught to become practical
musicians : 6 1,2.
(n) and yet the adult citizens of the best state have in general to refrain
from practising music themselves : 3, 4.
(ill) Further this musical instruction should be regulated, 5, 6, as
follows :
(a) With regard to the degree of proficiency to be attained, the pupils
should not be trained up to be professional virtuosi, but only receive the
needful training of their characters and their tastes : 6 6 (<pavepbv...) 8.
(b) For this reason all musical instruments, like the flute, which are
only in use with professional performers, should be excluded from the in
struction of the young : 6 916.
120 ANALYSIS OF THE POLITICS.
(c) Lastly, as to the various modes (dpfJLOvlat} and rhythms :
(1) for musical performances by professional musicians all modes
are permissible, since all serve to promote the homoeopathic purification of
the emotions which procures the educated the highest intellectual grati
fication and the multitude recreation and amusement. Hence for the
sake of the public at large who are not citizens the farmers, artisans,
labourers at such performances even the modes and pieces which gratify
their low taste must be admitted. But for the moral training of the young
only those which best represent, and for that reason best train, character,
the Dorian mode especially. The Phrygian mode should not be allowed :
7 3 I2 - [Perhaps however the Lydian mode may be tolerated, since
we are not excluded from paying some regard to the amusement of a maturer
age, and even adult citizens are on certain occasions allowed to sing : also
the modes which are appropriate to the compass of the voice in mature
life may be allowed as well as those specially adapted to the yo-ung:
7 I315-]
(2) The elucidation of the further question stated in 7 2, whether
the rhythm or the melody and tune is of chief importance for the instruction
of the young, is altogether wanting.
B. THE REMAINING CONSTITUTIONS : B. VI (IV), VII (VI), VIII (V).
Introductory remarks: B. VI (IV) cc. 1, 2.
i. Why it belongs to political philosophy to consider not merely the absolutely
best constitution, but also the best on the average, the best in any given case, and
even the best possible organization of any actually existing polity : i i 7.
ii. This implies an exact acquaintance with all possible forms of government,
and therefore with all the possible varieties of Democracy, Oligarchy, etc., which up
till now have been left out of sight : i 8.
iii. The theory of legislation moreover is based upon this exact acquaintance
with constitutions : i 9 n.
iv. The department of constitutional theory which remains for treatment de
fined : i i. Order of merit of the degenerate forms of government : 2 2, 3.
The arrangement to be followed in the succeeding exposition : 2 4 6.
The actual details of the theory of the established constitutions :
vi (iv). c. 3 vin (v).
i Enumeration of all possible constitutions : VI (IV) cc. 310.
[(i) The difference between polities depends on the extent to
which different classes take part in the government, c. 3.
V. c. 7 VI. c. 12. 121
(n) How Democracy and Oligarchy ought rightly to be de
fined : 4 i6.
(in) The explanation of the fact that Oligarchy and Democracy
come to be regarded as almost the only constitutions. Why there
are more than these two and their sub-species. The classes of
people necessary in the state : 4 7 19.]
(iv) The different species of Democracy and Oligarchy :
4 206 ii.
(a) The basis of the general difference between them, 4 20, 21 (...8ta<f>opai>).
(b) Enumeration of the four kinds of Democracy from the best, which resembles
Polity, down to the worst or unrestrained Democracy, which resembles Tyranny :
4 22 (8woKpa.Tla)% 31.
(c) Enumeration of the four kinds of Oligarchy in corresponding manner, from
the most moderate to that which resembles Tyranny, viz. arbitrary dynastic govern
ment (dwaffreia) : 5 i, 2.
(d) In spite of a constitution externally oligarchical a state may nevertheless
bear a democratic character, and conversely : 5 3, 4.
(e) Reasons assigned why there can only be these four species (a) of Democracy,
6 i6, (j8) of Oligarchy, 6 7 n.
(v) The different species of Mixed Aristocracy and the forms
of Polity: c. 79 5, 12 4, 12 613 6, 9 6 10,
13 7 ii.
(a) Of Aristocracy and Polity in general: 7 I 4.
(b) The species of Mixed Aristocracy : 7 4, 5.
(c) Of Polity : c. 8, 9 15, 12 4, 12 613 6, 9 6 10, 13 711.
(a) Justification of the arrangement by which Polity is reserved for treat
ment to this point and Tyranny comes last of all : 8 i, 2.
(/3) A further and more exact distinction between Polity and the Mixed
Aristocracies. Refutation of the view that those species and varieties of Polity
which incline more to Oligarchy than to Democracy should be included under
Mixed Aristocracies, 8 3 9.
(7) Genesis and organization of Polity : 9 i 5, 12 4, 12 6 13 6,
9 6 10, 13 7 ii.
(i) The three different ways of fusing Democracy and Oligarchy in Polity,
9 I 5- ( u ) The middle class as the proper support of Polity, 12 4.
(iii) On the degree of success in the fusion depends the durability of the Polity.
When therefore Polities or Mixed Aristocracies are established, it is a grave mistake
if out of favour to the rich the claims of the poor are only satisfied in appearance, the
concession made to them being in reality annulled and rendered void by all kinds of
122 ANALYSIS OF THE POLITICS.
illusory devices. Enumeration of such illusory measures and of the similar counter-
measures adopted in democracies with the opposite intent : 12 6 13 6.
(iv) The criterion of a successful fusion in Polity, also in Mixed Aristocracy,
2 6 IO . ( v ) The amount at which the property qualification for the fran
chise should be fixed, 13 7 9 (iro\e/4eti>). (vi) Peculiar constitution of certain
individual Polities, 13 9. (vii) Historical remarks : 13 10, n.
(vi) The different species of Tyranny, c. 10.
ii The best constitution on the average
TroXecri) I C. 11.
(i) This is, in the main, Polity, as the rule of the well-to-do
middle class : n i, 2.
For (a) as in the life of the individual moral virtue and excellence consist in the
right mean between two opposite extremes of error, so the life of the state prospers
best when the well-to-do middle class has the preponderance, whereas the extremes of
wealth and poverty are two main sources of the two opposite kinds of crime and
wrong-doing : n 35.
(b) Excessive wealth leads to despotic ambition, extreme poverty to servile
submission: n 6
(c) The middle class has the most assured existence ; the more strongly it is
represented in the state, the more the state is secured from insurrection and internal
troubles and from the danger of degenerating into one of the three worst perversions
or degenerate types of polity, extreme Democracy, extreme Oligarchy, or Tyranny :
n 8 (/cat cryfovTai) 13. This accounts for the fact that Democracies are ordina
rily more stable than Oligarchies, because in the former the middle class is usually
more numerous and influential than in the latter, 11 14.
(d) The best legislators have come from the middle class, n 15.
(n) All this explains why Polity, although the constitution best
adapted for most states, is yet of rare occurrence : n 16 19.
(a) It frequently happens that the middle class in a state is not very numerous,
ir 16.
(b) In the frequent party conflicts between rich and poor it is invariably the
practice for the victorious side to seize the government for itself, and not to come to
terms with the defeated side, n 17.
(c) Of the two states that were in succession supreme in Greece, the one,
Athens, introduced democracies and the other, Sparta, oligarchies, each in her own
interest : n 18, 19.
(in) The nearer any one of the remaining constitutions stands
to that which is the best on the average, the better it is : the
further it is removed therefrom, the worse it is : n 20, 21.
VI. CC. 12 15. 123
iii What kind of polity is relatively the best for different kinds of
people (ris TroXireia riVt KCU Troia TTOIOIS (rv^fpa): 12 1 3, 4 (orrov . )
-5.
(i) General positions laid down, 12 i, 2.
(ii) Their application (a) to Democracy and its different species, 12 3,
(b) to Oligarchy and its different species, 12 3 (OTTOU...), (c) to Polity, 12 4
(OTTOV St...) 5, (d) to so-called or Mixed Aristocracy (this is wanting}.
Recapitulation of all the previous discussion, 13 12.
iv The theory of the best possible organization of the different
Democracies and Oligarchies, or of that which most corresponds to the
spirit and intent of each of them respectively : VI (IV). 14 VII (VI).
(i) General fundamental positions as to the ordering and
organization of all possible polities : vi (iv). cc. 14 16.
(a) Distinction of the Deliberative, Executive, and Judicial authorities in the
state : 14 i, 2.
(b) Organization of the Consultative or Deliberative body in accordance with
the various polities : 14 3 15.
(a) The department of the Deliberative authority, and the three possibilities that
either the whole body of citizens, or particular magistrates, have to decide upon all
that belongs to this department, or again that it is divided between the one and the
other: 14 3.
(/3) These three possible cases, the different forms under which they may
appear in practical application, and the sphere of action (whether larger or smaller)
assigned to the different deciding factors, how distributed amongst different polities :
i 4 4 -io;
(i) amongst the different species of Democracy, 14 4 7 (Trdvrej) ;
(ii) those of Oligarchy, 14 7 (r6 5^ TIVO.S...) 9 ;
(iii) Mixed Aristocracy, 14 10 ;
(iv) Polity inclining to Aristocracy, and Polity proper, 14 10.
(7) Measures by which at all events to secure that the decrees passed and the
verdicts of the courts shall be good and salutary for the state, (i) in the most extreme
Democracy, where all is decided by decrees of the people, through the adoption
of certain oligarchical elements or of institutions related to Polity, while the demo-
cratical principle is still retained : and (ii) in an Oligarchy, through the adoption of
certain democratical institutions or of others peculiar to Polity, or else by a procedure
the reverse of that usual in Polities : 14 n 16.
(c) Organization of the Executive power, or the magistracies : c. 15.
(a) Statement of the questions to be answered in regard to this subject, 15 i, 2.
(|8) What kind of officials are to be regarded as really magistrates, i.e. as
ministers or authorities of the state : 15 2 (fan 5...) 4.
124 ANALYSIS OF THE POLITICS.
(7) What officials are required for every state, great or small, 15 5 8.
(5) The distinction between different magistracies according as the nature of the
department they administer involves its extension over the whole state or its division
according to definite localities, 15 9 (...rbv auroV), and further according as the same
department controls all the persons affected by it, or different classes are assigned to
different magistrates, 15 9 (K
(e) The difference between magistracies in the various constitutions : 15 10 13.
(i) Certain offices are the same under different forms of the state, only the
mode of appointment to them being different, 15 10.
(ii) Others are generically the same under different forms but specifically
different : i.e. different as to the extent of their powers, 10.
(iii) Others again are peculiar to given forms of the state, n 13.
(f) The different modes of appointing to magistracies and their distribution
amongst the forms of government, 15 14 21.
(i) Each of the three questions to be considered, viz. who have the right to
elect, who are eligible, and what is the mode of election, admits of three possi
bilities : combine each possibility under the first of these heads with each
possibility under the second and third severally, and we obtain as the total
number of conceivable cases nine for each of the three, i.e. 27 in all : 15
14-18.
(ii) These modes classified under (A) Democracy 19, (B) Polity,
not only Polity proper, but also the variety which has an aristocratical, and that
which has an oligarchical character, 19, 20, (c) Oligarchy 20, 21
and (D) Mixed Aristocracy 21.
(77) The duties of its department must determine what mode of appointment is
advantageous for each office, 15 22.
(d) Organization of the judicial authority ; c. 16.
(a) Statement of the questions to be answered in regard to this subject, 16 i.
(ft) The different kinds of courts, 16 25.
(7) The possible differences between them as to who are eligible as jurors (ot
SiKafrvres) ; how they are to be appointed ; whether they are to exercise all possible
judicial functions or only to serve in certain courts, 16 6, 7.
(<5) Classification of them under the different forms of the state, Democracy,
Oligarchy, Aristocracy, and Polity, 16 8.
(ii) Organization of the different species of Democracy and
Oligarchy : vn (vi) cc. i 7.
(a) The discussion of this subject announced : the questions which remain as to
the organization of other constitutions, and as to the blending of different forms when
one power in the state is regulated in accordance with one form, and another in
accordance with another form : i r 4.
VI. c. 15 VII. c. 7. 125
(b) The species of Democracy : i 5 c. 5.
(a) Species are distinguished according to the various occupations of the different
democratic populations, and the degree to which they have severally adopted demo
cratic institutions: i 5 10.
(/3) The principles of Democracy enumerated : 2 i 4.
(7) All the democratic institutions developed from them : 2 5 8.
[(5) Objections to absolute Democracy and recommendation of a peculiar
form of compromise between the claims of Democracy and those of Oligarchy :
2 9-3 6.]
(e) Organization of the best and most moderate species of Democracy, 4
. 1-14:
() of the two intermediate species, 4 15 : and
(77) of the extreme Democracy, 4 15 (T^V re reAeirrcu cu/ . . .) 5 1 1.
(i) The institutions which promote the growth of this form: 4 15 20.
(ii) The measures which tend to neutralize its dangerous effects, and even
impart to it, so far as is possible, a tolerable and durable character : c. 5*
(A) Preliminary remark on the urgent need for such measures: 5 r, 2.
(B) Particular instances of measures of the kind, 5 3 n :
(a) a diminution in the number of political trials, 5 3, 4 :
(i) by not distributing the fines amongst the people, (2) by imposing severe
penalties upon false accusation :
(b) the practice of summoning few popular assemblies and allowing the
courts to sit as seldom as possible in the poorer states, 5 5, 6 ; and in the
richer states of bestowing large sums at rare intervals upon the poor, and freeing
the richer citizens from useless burdens : 5 7 9.
(c) Measures taken at Carthage and Tarentum ; 5 9 n.
(c) The species of Oligarchy : cc. 6, 7.
(a) Organization of the best and most moderate species of Oligarchy : 6 i, 2 ;
(|3) of the several intermediate species, 6 3 ; and
(7) of the most extreme Oligarchy or Dynastic government, 6 3, 4.
(5) Measures more directly affecting oligarchies at large, 6 5 7 7.
(i) The principal safeguard of Oligarchy, 6 5.
(ii) Arrangement as regards the military force and service in the army,
7 1-3-
(iii) Individual members of the popular party may be won over to the
oligarchical government, 7^4.
(iv) To the highest posts in the government should be attached costly
burdens to be defrayed for the commonwealth, 7 5 7.
126 ANALYSIS OF THE POLITICS.
(in) The theory of the organization of public offices : a fuller
account in detail, c. 8 (incomplete}.
(a) The questions to be discussed, 8 i, 2.
(b) The officials necessary in every state, 8 3... 21.
Superintendents (a) of the markets (ayopavb^oi), 3, (/3) of the streets,
public buildings, harbours; the city police (ciaTi/j/o,uoi) 4, 5. (7) Police
officers in the country (dyp6i>o/j.ot, uAwpot) ; (5) financial officers (curod^Krai,
Tct/ucu), 6. (e) Keepers of archives and registers (^^oj/ej, ^Trtararai),
7. () Officers for penal administration, executioners and the like, 8
13. (rj) Military officers (a-Tparrjyoi, TroX^/xapxot, vavapxoi, KT\), 13 15.
(0) Board of control, for scrutiny of the accounts of retiring officials (evdvvoi, \oyiffrai,
cera(TTcu), 1 6. (i) Legislative committee, to summon and direct the popular
assembly, and to bring matters before it (irpo^ovXoL, /JovX?? ), 17. (K) Officers
to superintend public worship (te/aets /crX), 18 20. (X) Recapitulation,
21.
(c) Magistrates peculiar to certain given constitutions, 8 22.
The theoretical treatment of the cases where different forms of polity
are combined in one and the same state, is wanting.
v The causes of decay in the various forms of the state and the
corresponding safeguards : B. VIII (V).
i Preliminary Observations: i i 8, 9 n, 8 :
3 14: i n 16.
(a) Statement of the whole question : i i.
(b) The general cause of all internal political disturbances consists in dissension
as to the extent to which political equality should be carried : the rich and the nobles
claim special privileges over the poor, the latter on the ground of their free birth claim
equality with the rich : i 2 7.
(c) Two species of revolution, i 8 n :
(a) Overthrow of the constitution, 8 n : whether
(i) subversion of the entire polity, 8 ; or simply
(ii) accentuation or relaxation of the same form of government, 9 ; or
(iii) abolition of single parts of the constitution, 10.
(j3) Change merely in the holders of power, 8.
(d) Special application of the remarks in i 2 7 to Democracy and Oligarchy.
Two kinds of equality distinguished : it is necessary to pay attention to both kinds:
3 14, i ii (iravraxov...) 15.
(e) Why Democracy is in general more enduring than Oligarchy, i 16.
VII. c. 8 VIII. c. 4. 127
ii The causes of decay inherent in all polities in common : cc. 2 4.
(a) The three points for general consideration in this inquiry : the tendencies,
the objects in view, and the external occasions which lead to political revolutions,
2I.
(b) The tendencies and claims which lead to intestine disturbances and to re
volutions have been already characterized (i 2 7). How far they are justified, or
not, 2 2, 3.
(c) The objects sought to be attained in rebellions and insurrections : 2 3 (TTWS
(d) The definite occasions of revolution : 2 4 3 8, 4 8 12, 3 9 4 7.
(a) General enumeration : 2 4 6.
(P) Consideration of them in detail : 3 i 8, 4 812, 3 94 7.
(i) Insolence in the rulers, 3 i.
(ii) Their greed for aggrandisement, 3 i.
(iii) Efforts of the subject body to attain higher political honours, 3 2.
(iv) Preponderating influence of individuals, 3 3.
(v) Fear of punishment or of injustice, 3 4.
(vi) Contempt for the governing class on account of their weakness, 3 5.
(vii) Disproportionate growth of separate elements in the polity or classes of the
population, 3 68 ; 4 8 10 : and conversely
(viii) The establishment of an equivalence in point of numbers between opposing
elements in the state.
(ix) Appropriation of offices by electoral intrigues (Sia rots epideias), 3 9.
(x) Neglect of the dangers threatening the constitution from individuals, 3 9.
(xi) Gradual introduction of slight changes unobserved, 3 10.
(xii) Any sort of difference between the inhabitants, 3 ii 13, 15 16.
As (A) difference in race, particularly when alien settlers have been ad
mitted, 1113 :
(B) difference in sentiment, and especially in political sympathies, between
the dwellers in different localities of one and the same state, due to a dif
ference of character in the localities, 15, 16.
(xiii) Private feuds between leading, influential citizens, 4 i 7.
(e) The means usually employed to effect revolutions, 4 12, 13 :
(a) force, () stratagem, (7) stratagem succeeded by force.
128 ANALYSIS OF THE POLITICS.
in The causes of decay and the corresponding safeguards in the
particular forms of government: cc. 5 12.
(a) Positive or dogmatic exposition : c. 5 c. 12 6.
(a) Republics, cc. 5 9.
(i) THE CAUSES OF DECAY, cc. 5 7.
(A) In democracies, c. 5.
(a) Change to Oligarchy due to the continual persecutions of the rich by the
demagogues, 5 i 5.
(6) Change to Tyranny, the demagogues usurping absolute power. Why this
only happened in former times, why it is no longer usual for tyrannies to arise,
5 6io, namely, because
(1) formerly demagogues were also generals, 5 6, 7.
(2) formerly certain officers had too large powers assigned them, 5 8
(3) The states were as yet small, and the people in former times busy with
their occupations in the country, so that it was easier for military chiefs to
seize absolute power, 5 8, 9.
(c) Change from the most moderate to the most extreme form of democracy, due
to the demagogic intrigues of candidates for office, 5 id, n.
(B) In oligarchies, c. 6.
(a) Downfall of oligarchies through ill-treatment of the people, 6 i.
(l>) Downfall through dissensions between the rich oligarchs themselves, 6 2
9, 1416, 10.
(1) If the actual members of the oligarchical government are reduced to a
mere handful, so that even persons belonging to the ruling families are excluded
from it by law, 6 2 5 2 .
(2) If the oligarchs themselves from mutual jealousy adopt demagogic
intrigues, 65 (KLVOVVTO.I....) 7:
(i) one member of the government, or a minority, intriguing to gain over the
rest to his support, 6 6 :
(ii) a part of the oligarchs (or all of them) intriguing with the people,
6 6, 7 :
(a) where the people has the right of electing to the public offices,
6, or if
(P) the law courts are constituted out of the people, 7, or
(7) in case some of the oligarchs are aiming at concentrating the power
of the state in yet fewer hands, 7.
1 Perhaps (2) should properly follow a small number of oligarchs, in spite of
(3). good government, can procure the down-
2 If 5, Kol tv "Epvdpa.?s...Tro\iTia.v, be fall of the oligarchy at the hands of the
genuine we must add : " In the same way people."
VIII. cc. 5 7. I 29
(iii) If individual oligarchs who have squandered their property attempt
to make a revolution or to enrich themselves from the public means, thus
embroiling themselves with the government, or raising a popular insurrection
6 8, 9.
(iv) If members of the oligarchy are involved in private enmity owing to
marriage relations or lawsuits, 6 14, 15.
(v) An oligarchy may be subverted by its own members on account of the
too despotical character of the government, 6 16.
Concluding remark : an oligarchy united in itself is not easily overthrown from
without, 6 10.
(c) Fall of the old oligarchy by the formation of a new one within it, 6 1 1 l .
[(d) Overthrow of oligarchies by the generals of mercenary troops enrolled for
war ; or in time of peace by the generals called in because of the mutual distrust
of the oligarchs; or by a commander appointed on the same grounds to mediate
between them, 6 12, 13.]
(e) Change from Oligarchy to Polity and from Polity to moderate Democracy
due to a depreciation of money, whereby the property qualification required by law
for the franchise ceases to be adequate, 6 16, 17.
(f) Change from one kind of Oligarchy to another : 6 18.
(c) In Mixed Aristocracies and Polities: c. 7 113.
(a) Fall of aristocracies and revolutions in consequence of the number of those
who take part in the government becoming too small, 7 i 4 :
(i) especially when the large body excluded consider themselves equal in
merit, 7 i, 2 ;
or (2) if able and distinguished men are ill-treated by men not superior to
them in desert although occupying higher offices in the state, 7 2, 3 ;
or (3) are excluded from the government in spite of their merits, 7 3 ;
or (4) if some of the citizens are too poor and others too rich, 7 3>
or (5) an individual is so powerful that he is likely to attain supreme power,
7 4-
(l>) The principal danger for Aristocracies of this type and for Polities consists in
the fact that the oligarchical element in them has not quite successfully blended with
the democratical element, but the one of these preponderates over the other, 7 5, 6.
[Consequently a revolution to this preponderating side may easily take place ; that is,
to complete Oligarchy or Democracy. Sometimes however there is a movement in
the opposite direction: 7 7 10.]
(c) Aristocracies of this type are subject, above all other forms of government, to
dissolution brought on by unperceived gradual changes, 7 11 13.
(D) Concluding remark on the changes in republics taken in common.
Sometimes they are of internal origin, sometimes they are brought about by
powerful foreign states, 7 14.
1 Perhaps i o, 1 1 should also be enclosed in the square brackets.
H. 9
130 ANALYSIS OF THE POLITICS.
(ii) THE SAFEGUARDS: cc. 8, 9.
(A) Preliminary remark.
The safeguards are implied in the statement of the causes of destruction : 8 i.
(B) Enumeration of the safeguards : 8 2 9 22.
(a] In Polities and Mixed Aristocracies especial care must be taken that slight
changes and deviations from the existing laws do not gradually creep in unobserved :
8 2, 3.
(b] In the same governments precautions must be taken against those illusory
measures discussed in vi (iv), 12 6 13 6 : 8 4.
(c] In Aristocracies and Oligarchies the government must not only treat the
governed well, but must also treat its own members on a footing of democratic equality,
8 5 : hence many democratic measures are often quite in place even under these con
stitutions, 8 6, 7.
(d] The citizens must be kept in constant vigilance over their constitution, 8 8.
(e] All disputes between the principal men must as far as possible be avoided and
prevented; and, so far as this fails, care must be taken that no others but the original
parties to the quarrel are involved in it, 8 9.
(/) In Polities and Oligarchies a fresh valuation of property must be taken
frequently in order that the property qualification for the franchise, if it is to retain
its relative importance, may undergo the necessary revision at the proper time,
8 10, ii.
(g) No citizen to be disproportionately elevated : in particular, provision
should be made by legislation to prevent the rise of unduly powerful individuals : if
this does not succeed, they should be removed from the state by ostracism : 8 12.
(h) There should be a special board of magistrates to have supervision over the
private lives of the citizens and see that they are in accord with the existing form of
government, 8 13.
(i) Care must be taken that one part of the citizens does not prosper at the
expense of the rest, 8 14 21 ; and hence
(1) that magisterial offices never fall exclusively into the hands of one of
the two opposed classes of the population, 8 14:
(2) that the antagonism between rich and poor is adjusted or else that the
middle class increases, 8 14:
(3) especially that the public offices do not afford any opportunity for
enriching oneself from the public property, 8 15 19.
(4) In democracies the property of the rich must be spared, 8 20 ;
(5) in oligarchies posts with emolument attached to them must be assigned
to the poorer citizens, and the insolence of a rich man towards a poor man must
be punished more severely than if it were towards another rich man, 8 20.
(6) Further in oligarchies the accumulation of landed property in the same
hands must be restrained within limits fixed by law, 8 20,
VIII. cc. 8io. 131
(7) Care must be taken in an oligarchy that the decisive authority rests in
the hands of the rich, and in a democracy that it rests with the poor: but in
other respects equal, nay even higher, -privileges must be conceded in the former
case to the poor, and in the latter case to the rich, 8 21.
(/) It must always be kept in view that attachment to the established form of
government, special knowledge of the subject, and lastly virtue and integrity are
requisite for the highest official positions : the second qualification indeed in certain
offices in a higher degree than the third, in others again the third qualification in a
higher degree than the second : c. 9 i 4.
(/) In a word, every measure that helps the healthy working of a constitution
tends also to preserve it, 9 5.
(tn) The citizens who desire the continuance of the form of government must be
the numerical majority, 9 5.
(n) Even in the worse forms of Democracy and Oligarchy the mean must be pre
served : it is the exaggeration of democratic and oligarchic measures which infallibly
leads to the downfall of Democracy and Oligarchy respectively: 9 6 n (5^/wos).
(o) But the principal thing is to educate the young in the spirit of the established
form of government: 9 u (idyiarov 5e) 16.
(/?) Monarchies : c. 10 c. 12 6.
(i) THE CAUSES OF DECAY: c. 10.
(A) Discussion of certain fundamental points : 10 1
(a) The government of a king is closely related to Aristocracy, but Tyranny
(rvpavvis) combines the evils of the most extreme Democracy and of the most extreme
Oligarchy: 10 i, 2.
(b) The opposite nature of kingly rule and tyranny is at once shown in their
divergent and opposite origin: 10 3 8.
(c) A more precise statement of the antithesis between them : 10 9, 10.
(</) The points which Tyranny has in common with Oligarchy on the one hand
and with Democracy on the other: 10 n 13 (dvaipelv).
(B) Causes of the overthrow of monarchies and of monarchs in general :
10 1328.
(a) General statement
(i) of the motives for conspiracies and attacks upon a sole ruler, 10 13, 14,
and (2) of the objects sought thereby, 10 14.
(3) Some of these attacks are directed against the person of the usurper; in
others the assailant desires to seize the throne for himself, or to effect a revolution in
the government : ioi5.
(b) These points of view presented in detail; 10 15 28.
(1) Attacks in consequence of injuries received, 10 15 20;
(2) from fear of punishment, 10 20;
92
132 ANALYSIS OF THE POLITICS.
(3) from contempt for the ruler, 10 22 25 ;
(4) from greed of gain (largely wanting], 10 25 ;
(5) from ambition, 10 26 28.
(c) Special causes of the downfall of (a) tyrants and tyrannies, (to) of kings and
kingships: 10 29 38.
(a) Tyrants and tyrannies : 10 29 34.
(1) A tyranny is destroyed from without by more powerful foreign states not
tyrannies whether (i) under a royal or aristocratical, or (li) under a democratical
government, 10 29, 30.
(2) It is ruined from within by the members of the ruling family quarreling
amongst themselves, 10 31.
(3) Most tyrants make themselves despised and this most frequently brings about
their fall, 10 32, 33.
(4) Again, every tyrant is necessarily hated ; hatred and righteous indignation
against him often accomplish his overthrow, 10 33, 34.
(5) The same causes which threaten Extreme Democracy and Extreme Oligarchy
are also dangerous to Tyranny: 10 35.
(/>) The government of a king (as distinct from a tyrant) is mostly destroyed
from within.
Either (i) feuds break out between members of the royal family, 10 36: or
(2) the kings overstep the legitimate limits of their authority and aim at making
themselves tyrants, 10 38.
(3) Under an hereditary monarchy it is often impossible to prevent the succession
to the throne of princes who render themselves contemptible, 10 38,
or (4) to exclude others who behave with insolence and violence, forgetting that
they are not tyrants but kings, 10 38.
(5) Why it is that even in recent times tyrannies have sprung up, but no new
monarchies arise, 10 37.
(ii) THE SAFEGUARDS : c. n, c. 12 i 6.
(A) The office of king is best preserved by the gradual diminution of its absolute
authority in keeping with the spirit of the times, n I 3.
(B) The tyrant can only secure his throne, n 4 34,
(a) by employing the most extreme measures of force and corruption, 1 1 4 16:
(1) by getting rid of all the principal men, entirely forbidding the common pur
suit of culture, and putting down all messes and clubs, 1 1 4, 5 :
(2) by compelling all the citizens to live in public, n 6,
and (3) by imitating all the other regulations of Persian and other oriental despot
isms, ii 6:
(4 ) by sending secret spies and detectives amongst the citizens, 1 1 7 ;
(5) by setting all classes of the population against one another, ii 8;
VIII. cc. 10, ii. 133
(6) draining the means of all his subjects, u 9, 10,
and (7) perpetually creating wars, u 10,
(8) by suspecting his own friends most of all, n 10,
(9) by allowing families to be governed by women and by giving slaves license
to indulge all their caprices, just as in the most extreme democracy, n n, 12 ;
(10) by permitting no dignified or free-minded character to remain near him,
ii 13;
(n) by being more intimate with strangers than with his own townsmen, n 14.
(12) The three leading points of view in this policy, n 15, 16.
Or (b) by demagogic devices joined with activity in war, when the tyrant poses as
the friend of the people and makes his usurped power approximate to that of a king,
1 1 i7 34-
(1) Careful management of the state funds ; avoidance of lavish grants to mistresses,
foreigners, or artists ; a statement of accounts presented ; no treasures accumulated for
himself, ii 19 21.
(2) He should endeavour to create the impression that all taxes paid and services
rendered are not for him but for the state, ii 21.
(3) He must inspire reverence by a dignified bearing and by capacity in war,
instead of inspiring fear by severity and rough treatment, ii 22.
(4) He should not merely himself avoid crimes and offences against his subjects,
but he should not allow them to be committed by any of his family or court, especi
ally those who are of the female sex, ii 22, 23.
(5) He should be moderate in his indulgences, or at least should conceal his
excesses from the world, n 23, 24.
(6) In his care for the adornment of the capital he must not seem to have any
ulterior object, 1 1 24.
(7) He should create the impression that though he is free from childish super
stition yet he is very specially concerned to honour the gods, ii 25.
(8) He must award, to those who show themselves deserving, higher honours and
distinctions than they could hope for in a free state, and he must always bestow dis
tinctions and rewards himself, but have punishments inflicted and executed by others,
ii 26.
(9) On the other hand, like monarchs generally, he should especially avoid
raising individuals to greatness, least of all a man of bold and enterprising character,
ii 27.
(10) Of all deeds of violence, personal insults or ill treatment, and seduction
accomplished by force are the most dangerous. If he cannot altogether avoid them,
he should give to the former the colour of paternal chastisement, and seek to succeed
in his intrigues by dint of impassioned persuasion alone, n 28, 29.
(n) He should especially be on his guard against people who imagine that they,
or some one whom they love, have been so deeply wronged by him that they are ready
to hazard their lives in opposing him, 1 1 30.
(12) While he should seek to please rich and poor alike, he should yet prefer to
rest his rule upon the poor where they are the stronger, but where the rich have the
upper hand, upon the rich, n 31, 32.
134 ANALYSIS OF THE POLITICS.
(13) The leading points in this whole policy, and the great advantages which
attend on it, n 33, 34.
[(c) Oligarchy and Tyranny the least enduring forms of government. Historical
survey of the tyrannies which lasted the longest, with the reasons why this was the
case : 12 i 6.]
(b) Criticism of Plato s doctrine
of the successive changes from one form of the state to the other :
i27 18.
(a) His theory of the transition from the best form of polity to the
remaining forms : 12 7 10.
(i) It takes the right point of view for the cause of the decline in the best form;
but the explanation given of the appearance of this cause is
(A) not peculiar to the best form of the state, but applies to all human affairs
in common, 12 8, and
(15) supposing the best form of government to have been introduced into
different states at different times before the period which Plato assumes for the
universal decline, it is scarcely conceivable that, on the approach of this period,
it would be subverted at one and the same time in them all, 12 9, 10.
(ii) No reason can be given why the best form of state should invariably pass
over into that which stands next to it, 12 10.
(/3) The case stands no better with his account of the transitions
from the remaining forms of the state, to one another or to the best form :
12 10 (o e 8 auTos) 1 8.
(i) Plato adheres to the same principle that every form of polity is changed into
the form nearest to it, whereas the change to the opposite form is quite as frequent or
even more so, 12 10, n.
(ii) As to the second point, Plato has said nothing definitely about the change to
the best form of the state; but if the omission is to be supplied in accordance with his
exposition there is nothing for it but to assume that the sole transition from Tyranny
or into the best state is the change when the former passes into the latter: which
would be incorrect, 12 n, 12.
(iii) Further, in regard to the first point, the change from Oligarchy to Tyranny
does take place, 12 13.
(iv) Nor is the reason assigned by Plato for the change from Mixed Aristocracy
to Oligarchy the true one. For
(1) the true motive is different ;
(2) what Plato takes to be the true ground for the transition to Oligarchy
is not present in many oligarchies ; and
(3) where it is found in Mixed Aristocracies experience shows that no such
transition takes place, 12 14.
VIII. CC. II, 12. 135
(v) As regards the transition from Oligarchy,
(a) that the state is divided into two states, one of the rich, the other of
the poor, is not more true of Oligarchy than of the Mixed Aristocracy at Sparta
or of other forms of government : 12 15.
(b) The change from Oligarchy to Democracy is really clue to several causes,
but Plato (i) only cites one of them, which does not hold except under strict
limitations, 12 17, while (2) this cause is not altogether necessary to a revolu
tion from Oligarchy to Democracy, provided there are other causes : 1 2 16, 18.
(vi) Again, the transition from Democracy to Tyranny is not adequately explained,
12 1 8. (This is almost entirely wanting*}
(vii) Plato speaks throughout as if there were only one species of Democracy
and of Oligarchy, 12 18.
PART III. The third main division of the work, treating of Legislation, is
entirely wanting.
Symbols and Abbreviations,
F = codex Graecus deperditus ex quo originem deduxit
vetusta translatio latina Guilelmi de Moerbeka.
M s cod. Mediolanensis Ambrosianus B. 105 ord. sup.
P 1 = cod. Parisinus 2023.
P 1 (corr. 1 ) = correctiones eiusdem cum codicis textu colons.
p 1 = correctiones pallidiores et luteolae.
II 1 = the agreement of FM 8 ? 1 in a reading, presumably that of their archetype.
P 2 = cod. Parisinus Coislinianus 161.
P 2 (corr. 1 )=correctiones eiusdem cum codicis textu coloris.
P 2 (corr. 2 ) = correctiones nigriores.
P 2 (corr. 3 ) = correctiones pallidiores et luteolae.
p 2 = correctiones rubrae.
P 3 = cod. Parisinus 2026. S b = cod. Laurentianus 81, 21.
P 4 = cocl. Parisinus 2025. T b = cod. Urbinas 46.
P 5 = cod. Parisinus 1858. U b = cod. Marcianus Yen. append. IV, 3.
P (i = cod. Parisinus 1857. V b cod. Vaticano-Palatinus 160.
Q = cod. Marcianus Venetus 200. W b cod. Reginensis 125.
M b = cod. Marcianus Venetus 213. C c = cod. Camerarii deperditus.
Q b = cod. Laurentianus 81, 5. Ar. cod. Aretini deperditus.
R b = cod. Laurentianus 81, 6. Ald. = editio princeps Aldina.
II 2 = the agreement of Aid. and all existing MSS. except M 8 ? 1 ? 5 in a reading.
IP= ,, ,, ,, ,, ^^M 8 ? 1 ? 2 ? 3 ? 5 in a reading.
11 = codex archetypus deperditus superstitum librorum et Aldinae.
Bas. 1 = Basel ed. of 1531. Bas. 2 = Basel ed. of 1539. Bas. 3 = Basel ed. of 1550.
Bk. 1 = the Berlin Aristotle in quarto edited by Imm. Bekker in 1831.
Bk. 2 = the Politics reprinted in octavo (3rd edition in 1855 5 4th, unaltered, in i-SyS).
Susem. 1 = Susemihl s critical edition, 1872. Susem. 2 = his edition of 1879.
Susem. 3 = his ed. in Bibliotheca Teubneriana, 1882. Susem. 4 = the present work.
Note that P 4 - 6 (corr.) = the corrector of P 4 and the corrector of P 6 ; but
Y 1 and P 4 (corr.) = the first hand of P 2 and the corrector of P 4 .
[ctpxaw] Bernays = Bernays proposes to omit apx^v from the text.
</cat olKovofUK<> Rassow = Rassow proposes to insert /cat oiKovo^LK^ in the text.
? Susem. Susemihl conjectures; but
F (?) = F may have had the reading in question.
forty * * denotes a lacuna ; that after fortv some word, or words t has been lost.
The passages conjectured to be out of place in our authorities are, as a rule, printed
twice over : where they occur in the MSS. in thick Clarendon type; again, in ordinary
type, but between angular brackets < > , in the place to which the editor would trans
pose them.
APISTOTEAOYS HOAITIKA
ITOAITIK^N A.
Jekker 410.
p. 1252 a
Schn.
c. I.
TTcurav TTO\IV op&fjiev Koivwviav TIVOL ovaav Kal
Trdcrav Koivaviav dyadov nvos Zveicev avveo-Tij/cviav (rov yap
elvai SOKOVVTOS d<ya6ov %dpi,v Trdvra TrpdrTOvcn TrdvTes], Brj-
\ov w? Tracrai fjiev d<ya6ov TLVO? o-ro^d^ovraL, jjud\icrTa 8e
5 Kal rov Kvpuwrarov TTCLVTWV rj Tracrwv fcvpicoTdrr) KOL Tracras
125-2 a i [e7ret-r;...7 TroXtrt/c??] Schmidt || 5 /cat before rou is omitted by II 1 R b Ar. ||
fore iraawv M s P 1
objects in which they have common inter
ests (TOTTOV, wrjs, so a\\ay-rjs /cat ffvfj.fji.a-
;\;t as noivwvelv), or, as it is sometimes put,
formed with a view to certain common
advantages (xprftfeus /mrj efirj/jitpov eveitev :
TTJS /tceraSocrews, crujUfta^tas, KO\UV Trpd^ewv
Xapw)- Hence by a natural transition,
concretely (2) the associated body, the
members who compose the union ; so
that 77 TroXtTt/cTj K., civil society the
couinninity, TO KOIVOV (e.g. II. 3. i com
pared with ii. 2. 2, iv[vn]. 14. i). See
further on i. 2 12, 8 13, in. 9. 12.
3 SOKOVVTOS dva-Oov] seeming good,
which may not really be the agent s
true interest, although he thinks so, cp.
iv(vii). 13. 2. (See this case fully eluci
dated Nic. Eth. in. 4 i4, 17, 20,
the solution being 6 <nrovda ios e/cacrra Kpi-
vei opdiios /cat ev e/cacrrots rdXtjOes avry
(paiverai.) Both SoKelv and (paiveffdac are
often opposed to elvai as semblance to
reality, but while doKelv = putari to be
thought, (paiveffdaL videri to appear, of
an object present to sense; hence r6 5o-
KOVV subjective opinion, rd 0at vo^eva
objective facts. Bonitz Ind. Ar. s. v.
4 irao-ai |i.ev...|Jia,Xi<rTa8] The clause
with 5e gives the true apodosis to e?ret5^ :
while all aim at some good (/card ^prj
rov avfj-(f>epovTos e0/e^rat), the highest and
most comprehensive aims especially at the
highest good.
5 KvpuoTctTOti] Cp. in. 12. i and note
SUSEM. (1)
Aristotle s proof, if we assume ^ TroXt-
Introduction, cc. 1, 2 : -rrepl CHKOVO-
p,Cas, cc. 3 13 (the latter a necessary
preliminary to the rest of the work, Tracra
yap cruyKeirai vro Xts e OIKIUV). The pre
vailing tone is dialectical, and the con
tents of Bk. I. are nearly exhausted by a
list of the problems (aTropiac) started for
discussion; (i) the difference between
a city-state and a family, between TroXtrt-
KOS and OCKOVO/JUKOS, (2) the elements of
the state, TroXts e wv tn^/ceircu, c. 2,
(3) the natural basis of slavery, on elcrl
(pvcrei, TLves ol JJ.GV eXevdepoi, ol de dou\oi,
cc. 4 6, (4) the relation of xP r lt JLa - TiffTI - K: n
to Economic, Trbrepov rj xprj/j.a,TiaTiKr] 17
O.VTT) rrj olKovofj.iKrj KT\ } cc. 8 n, (5) the
capacity of the slave (and the artizan) for
moral virtue, irorepov ZGTIV dper-r] TLS Sou-
Xoi Trapa ras opyaviKas, 13 2 ff. See fur
ther the Analysis and Introd. pp. 23 31.
c. i The city is the highest form of
association, having the highest good for
its end: i. The city not an enlarged
family, biit an essentially distinct organiza
tion, as is evident ivhen it is analysed into
its simplest elements: 2, 3.
1 i iroXiv] A city, but at the same
time a sovereign state. Koivwvia which
includes any form of communication or
social intercourse, /c. dXXa/cn/ca, commer
cial transactions, exchange NIC. Eth. v. 5.
9; ro.vrf]v rrjv K. TT^V ya/JUKrjv 6fj.L\iav,
the marriage union Pol. iv(vii). 16. 2
denotes chiefly in this treatise (i) the
voluntary combination, association, or co
operation of free men with each other in
I. 1. 2]
1252 a 11252 a 16.
d\\a$. avrv Be ecmv
139
(I)
Kal r) KOivwvia r]
2 oaoi jjiev ovv olovrai 7ro\LTiKov Kal j3aa-L\iKov Kal oiKOvofJUKov 2
rov avrov, ov /eaXoJ? \eyovcrLv (7f\r/06i >ydp
Sta(f)epew, a XX OVK etSet TOVTWV
olov av [Jbev o\,i<ya)V, 8o~7r6T7jv, dv 8e TrKeiovtov, olKovo/Aov, av
$ en TrXeiovwv, irdKiriKov r) fiacriKiKov, 005 ovSev Sia^epov-
crav ueyd\r)v oltclav rj fj,iKpdv iro\t,V Kal TTO\LTLKOI> oe Kal
ftaaiKiKoVy orav f^ev auro? ec^ecrrrj Krj , (BaaiKLKov, oTav
1 5 Be Kara roi)? Xo^yof? r^? eTTicrTrjf^ri^ TT;? rotaur^? Kara
Kal dp^o^evo^y 7ro\iTLKov ravra 8 OVK ZUTIV
9 elvat omitted by II 1 (added after rbv by a later hand in M s ) || 14 efaa-rrjKri M s
(ist hand), e&crrrjKe M s (corrector), e0ecrT7?/cet P 4 6 Q (> R b S b Tb U b V b W b L s Aldine ||
15 TOJ>J is omitted bylPBk. || 16 [apxw] Kal dpxo/^evos f, Bernays (cp. III. 17. 7)
needlessly
TtKTj to be the art concerned with 77 KOC-
vuvia. 77 TroX., is given Nic. Eth. I. 2
5 7 ; cp. el yap Kal ravrov earw evi
Kal TroXet, nei$v ye Kal TeXeibrepoit TO TTJS
TToXews KaX\Loi> Kal deioTepov Wvei Kal
TroXeffiv, sc. TO dvdpwTrivov dyaOov : which
is more precisely described in the case of
the city as justice and the interest of the
community, TO KOLVTJ <rvp,(pepov.
r\ iracrwv . . . irdo as irepiex.ovora] See;/,
on n. 2 7, where is explained, from Nic.
Eth. vin. y 4 6, how this supreme
society embraces all the inferior as parts
(uopia) of itself.
2 8 ocroi jiev KT\] Plato Politicus
258 E ff. ; cp. c. 3 4, 7 i, i nn.
Socrates too expresses himself to this
effect in Xenoph. Memorab. in. 4 6 f.
12 77 yap -rQiV ioiwv eirt.U\La ir\"qdei.
ia<pe"pei TTJS TUV KOLVUV. SUSEM. (2)
A practical statesman, a
magistrate in a free city, self-governed
according to Greek ideas; so 8 15,
n 13, II. 7. i TToXm/coi )( 0tX6cro0ot
Kal I8iurai, cp. Nic. Eth. x. 9. 18 )(
aocpLffTal. Occasionally much more than
this, for Aristotle requires that 6 wj 0X77-
0ws TT. should know psychology, JV. E.
! J 3 2 7 legislation, and other
sciences : hence joined with vofj,o6eT r)s, a
theoretical statesman, student of politics :
iv(vn). 4. 3, vi (iv). i 3, VHI(V). 9. 9.
9 irXtfOei KT\] They assume that
a king differs from e.g. a householder
only in having more numerous, not more
heterogeneous, dependents. Tr\i}dos =
numbers: 8 15, Rhet. i. 4. 10 (TO
7r\7j6os rrjs 0uXa/c^s = the strength of the
defensive force), cp. Metaph. I. 9. 24
dpiOfj.6s To TroXi) Kal 6\iyoi>.
10 etSei] or Kara TO el5os, specifically,
in kind ; et Sei dia^epei.i to be essentially
different, because division into species
takes account only of essential qualities.
11 av p.V oXfywv] Schneider sup
plies apxy here, and KaXovcn before 5ecr-
TTOTVJV, but i>o/j,iov<TLi (elfoi) would do just
as well in the latter case, and in line 14,
while either dpxfl or e<peaTr)K-r) must be
understood to follow orav 5e in line 15.
12 ws oiiSev KT\] Whereas the state
is composed e ct Set 5ia0epo^rw;/, II. 2. 3,
where see n. SUSEM. (2 b)
Plato Polit. 259 B fj.eyd\-f]^ ax^ - ot /cry-
ffews 77 fffj,LK.pas av TroXews 07^05 i^wv n
Trpos dpx~n v Sioiaerov ; NE. 2i2. ovdev.
SE. OVKOVV, o VWT) 5ieffKowov/j,eda, (fiave-
pbv ws t ! 7rt<TT77/x,?7 /j.ia ire pi iraur earl ravra.
8e e lre j3a<Ti\iKr)v eire TTO\LTLKJ]V etVe
res dvo/mdfci, fj.7]5ev avrf 8ia(pe-
13 Kal TroXtTiKov 8e Kal pao~i\iKov]
SC. OVK ei oei vouifovffi dia<pepeiv.
15 TTJS 1T TT]S TOLaiJTT]s] l.C. Trjs TOV
/SacriXtKou, not TT;S TOU TroXtn/coO, the regal
science of government (Rassow Bemer-
kungen p. 3). SUSEM. (3)
Cp. 11. on roiaijTrjv c. 8 7- The one
man supreme over the state is called a
king; the ruler who follows out the prin
ciples of the same kingly science (when
in office), but takes his turn (Kara ^epos)
at governing and being governed, is a
republican magistrate.
140
nOAITIKHN A. 1, 2.
[I. 1. 3
3 SrjXov S ea-rai TO \e^6^evov eTTKTKOirovo-i Kara TT/V v<f>r)- 3
ryrj/juevTjv /AeOoSov, S&Trep yap ev rot? aXXot? TO avvOe-
TOV f^e^pi, TWV dcrvvOeTtov dvdjKrj Sicupelv (ravra yap e\d-
20 %i<TTa /j,6pia TOV TravTO^, ovrco Kai TTO\.IV e cov crvyKeiTai
a/coTTOvvTes o^ro^eOa /cal Trepl TOVTWV fjua\\ov, TI re Siacfre-
povcriv aXkfawv, real et TI, TtyviKov eVSe^erat \aftei,v Trepl
GKaCTTOV TGOV f>r]6ivT(DV.
2 el 8r Tt9 e
(i)
25 wdTrep ev rot? aot? Ka ev TOVTOIS, KaXKiaT v OVTW
2 Oewprjcreiev. dvay/cij Srj TrpwTOV avvSvd&crOai, roi)? avev 4
17 TO Xe-yoF^vov] sc. g 6 ri ou
^Youcrti , all between being paren
thetical. When such side-notes are im
bedded in the text the construction of the
main sentence is often difficult to follow :
* 2 2, 9, 4 i, 2, 5 46, perhaps
13 68: ii. 10. 79 : iv(vn). 3 i,
13 24, 16 2-4: v(vm). 5 2
4, 1824, perhaps 6 157 I,
7 68. In in. 9 68, vi(iv).
4 8, 9 and perhaps in ill. 12 i, 2
the interruption of the original construc
tion almost amounts to anacoluthia. See
Bonitz Aristotclische Shidien II. ill.
Kara TTJV v(|)T]-yT]|JLV r]v [JteOoSov] in ac
cordance with the method of inquiry
which has previously been started or
traced out or followed, and so the
usual method of inquiry (Bonitz): De
Gencr. Anini. ill. 9. i, 758 a 28 ff. : rbv
ixpr^ri^ivov rpbirov Pol. I. 8. i, NIC. Eth.
ii. 7. 9. The participle is passive, as is
u0777eircu (v<prj ] yr]Tai Bk.) Pol. I. 13. 6.
See 3 i, 8 i n. (66), in. i. 2 with n.
(434) (Schneider). SUSEM. (4)
1 8 wcrirep -ydp KT\] "As in other
subjects a compound has to be resolved
into its ultimate elements, these being
the smallest parts of the whole, so here
by inquiring of what elements a city,"
which is a compound III. i. 2, "is com
posed, we shall better discover the differ
ence between the four types above-men
tioned (vroXm/cos, /3a<ri\i:6s, efcTpand
whether systematic knowledge can be
attained about them severally." Although
he did not apply the mathematical method
of pure deduction to biological or political
sciences Aristotle derived both the pro
cesses of Analysis and Synthesis and the
terms (dva\6eiv, crvvderov StcupetV) from
geometry : see the instructive passages
Nic. Eth. III. 3 ii, 12 ftTew Kal
ava\viv rbv elpijfdvov rpbirov wcrTrep Std-
(a geometrical problem), Metaph.
VIII (9). 9. 4 1051 a 21 29
5 Kal ra 5iaypd/j,/j,aTa evepyeia,
yap evpia Kova iv.
21 TOVTwv and 23 TWV
should be taken as above and not referred
to c &v fftiyKeirat. (vroXts) as the gramma
tical antecedent.
c. 2 Origin of the city from the
family through the village-community:
i 8. The city a natural institution
8 12, prior in the intention of nature
to the family and individual 13, 14,
and of incalculable litility 15, 16.
We have here the Patriarchal Theory,
as it is called by Sir H. Maine, applied
to the origin of society. The family living
under the headship of the father is taken
as the ultimate social unit. Until quite
recently this was the accepted view : see
Maine Ancient Law c. 5 esp. 122 135,
Early History of Institutions c. 3, Early
Laio and Custom cc. 7, 8. There are
certain difficulties of this derivation of
the state which Aristotle avoids by mak
ing the combination of families of different
stocks (yevr)) depend on contiguity of
residence and on convenience. See J. F.
McLennan s criticisms Studies in Ancient
History, esp. 213227, 235309.
On the origin of civil society there is
something in Plato Rep. II. 369 B ff., Laws
111.676 682, Polybiosvi.cc. 4 7, Cicero
De Rep. i. 25, 26 39 42 (with Lac-
tantius Instit. VI. 10), De Off. I. 17 53,
54, De Fin. ill. 6267. A. C. Brad
ley Hellenica 190 212 gives the best
commentary on cc. 1,2; Oncken Slaats-
lehre II. 3 27 is also helpful,
1 24 TO irpd-y^aTa <j>vop.va]
"things in their growth or origin"
(Shilleto); Plato Rep. 369 A, Laws 7570.
2 26 o-vv8va^(r0ai] Nic. Eth. vm.
12. 7 avdpuTros yap rfj (pvcrei
17 ?roXiTi/c6y.
; 2 .3]
1252 a 17-1252 b 2.
TO
\evov rf)
ravra ^ T
d oe<nroTBf
125a boui; SwtyMrro* TO
TTOtet TOIOVTOI
Tr)V &\<f>l,Kr)V
Susem. 1 - || 32
7T6
"^b aeus (p. 324 ) Susem. 1 - || 32 5taj/o^<Tci 5eovra> ? Susem. ||
Wi] Thurot || 33 raOra after T$ <rt6/*ari II 3 Bk. || wet /cat Ar., /cat
k., &px&nevov, [/cat] 0i5<m Bernays
<t>V<Tf \Tl\\r
" -i-MV. > f , v , , L _, ,
1252 b 2 oi is omitted by II 2 Bk.
27 olov] "namely," introducing the
two relationships (each of which needs
a long parenthetical explanation) into
which the family can be analysed, 5.
28 Kal TOVTO KT\] Cp. Zel ler
Philosophic dcr Gricchcn 1 1 ii 511, who
quotes DC Aniina II. 4. 2, 415 a 26
0f<rt/cwraTOz> yap ru>v 2pya}i> TOIS ^Cxnv
o<ra T^Xeta...TO Trot^crat erepov olov auro,
j~(OV fji^V ^(jJQV (bVTOV & d)VTOV. tVtt TOV
del /cat TOV deiou /xer^wcrtt 17 dvvavrcii..
Individuals perish but the species, the
kind, is immortal. So first Plato Sy-mpos.
206 E, 207 c 208 B. SUSEM. (5)
OVK K irpoaiptVws] not by design, or
of deliberate purpose, 77 yap Trpoatpecrts
fj.Ta \6yov /cat Siavoias: instinctively.
30 apxov KT\] "governor and gov
erned by nature" clearly = " master and
slave " not as i 2 political ruler and
subject.
31 On Aristotle s conception of 0u<rts
in general Zeller Ph. der Gr. ii ii 384
389, 422 431; Grant Ethics I. 279
28(5. Various senses of the term Metaph.
v(A).c. 4 .
8id Ti]V <ro)TT]pCav] "for preservation":
i.e. to secure the means of subsistence.
How far this is true of the slave by
birth on Aristotle s view is explained 5
6 10, as Fiilleborn has correctly
observed: in the case of the master it
should be remembered that without slaves
in his household he can procure at best
but a poor and uncertain subsistence :
see 5 n. (15), 4 r 4. SUSEM. (6)
rd filv yap KT\] Cp. 5 8 10, u
6 . (103). SUSEM. (6b)
33 Tavra^aTo
3 34 816 SetnroTT] KT\] It is
not simply, as Fiilleborn (ii. 75) sup
poses, that both master and slave are
alike interested in the establishment of
this relationship : Aristotle really means
that the master s interest is advantageous
for the slave, and conversely : cp. 6 10
n. (57). Only the advantage to the slave
comes indirectly, /card ffv/uL[3e(3i<]K6s, in. 6.
6 n. (L. Schiller). SUSEM. (7) Cp. 5 2.
1252 b i ov8v -yelp KT\] "For
nature never fashions things niggardly,
for various and dissimilar purposes, as
Delphic cutlers do their knife " (Shilleto).
2 rip/ A\(JHKT]V |xdx.cupav] "Accord
ing to Hesychios, s. v. , the Delphian knife
had the upper part only of iron, \a/j.j3dvov(ra
jj.TTpoffdv /utpos (Tidripovv; the handle, per
haps also the back, was of wood. Gottling
De m. D. quae est apud Aristoteletn (Jenae
1856. 4) maintains it was a knife and
spoon combined, for sacrificial purposes "
(Schnitzer). Hence Gottling proposes
IJivffTpov for ftepos in Hesychios, as
above. Oncken, II. 25 27, dismisses
the obscure words of Hesychios in favour
of Oresme s explanation: "suppose a
piece of iron with a thick end and a
pointed end, with the back left rough
and the other side sharpened to a blade.
Then you have a knife for cutting, you
can file with the rough back, and by
turning it round use the thick end for a
hammer. Such a rough sort of tool
would certainly be cheap enough."
Cp. 6^\LffKo\vx"i.a. Vl(iv). I5/ 8 n.
SUSEM. (8) Ae\0t/cij //.axatpa <^7rt TWV
0t\o/ce/35wj> Makarios ap. Walzium Arsen.
179: with which agrees the explanation
142
A. 2.
&
[1.2.3
5 rb after Kal
in append, prov. I. 94 (ton-r
the Corpus Paroemiograph.
1839) AeX0t/C7j p;dxatpa : e~7rt
KepS&v /cat ctTTO -rravrbs \a^dve
IJL&WV, irapbaov ot AeX0ot r6
lepelwv e\a^a.vov,rb S^
(?for the use of the knife) eTrpdrroz/ro.
Athenaeus iv. 74 p. 173: A%cuos 6
Eperpteus ei> A\Kfj.aiwvi TO? crarupt/ctij xapv-
KOTTOIOVS /caXet TOVS Ae\<f)ovs dia TOVTUV
Kapi//co7rotot)s irpoff[3\e7ru>v /SSeXurrOyUar
Trapocrov ret iepela TrepLrep.vovres djjXov ciis
ejjiayelpevov aura Kal eKap{iKevov. eh ravra
de airofiXeirwv /cat Aptcrro0a,^?7S e 7 ? AXX
(5 Ae\0wt TrXetVras a/coz><2>z | ^or/Se /xa-
%atpas | /cat 7rpoc)tc)cicr/ca>j roi)s crous irpoirb-
Xoi s. It was from Thomas Aquinas a^
locum that Oresme derived the explanation
cited above. See Von Ilertling Rhein.
Mits. xxxix. p. 447. Mr W. Ridgeway
thinks the name given to "a large kind
of knife, which could he used for either
fighting or carving, from the sacrificial
knife having been used as a weapon to
slay Pyrrhus, Pindar Ncm. vii. 42."
3 v irpos v] There are of course
exceptions to this rule, as Aristotle himself
allows De Part. Anim. iv. 6. 13, 683 a 22
OTTOV yap epJexerat xprjaOai dvfflv eiri 5u
^P7a /cat /z?) e/xTroSt ^eti ?rpos erepov, ou-
5ei/ r/ 0ucrts elude iroiflv uxnrep i) %aX-
KevTLKi] ?rpoj eJreXetai/ o/3eXt(r/coXu%i ioi p
dXX OTTOI; p: 1 )) e^5^%erat, /caraxp^rat rw
ai ry eVt TrXetw epya. SlJSEM. (9) See
/)<? Anima II. 8. 10, 420 b 16. We
shall find the rule applied to political
offices n. ii. 13, vi(iv). 15. 6.
4 p/i^ iroXXois ^PYOLS KT\] "if re
stricted in use to a single function." Fiille-
born asserts that the conclusion does not
follow from the premises, even supposing
there is no exception to the rule (see
preceding note). But surely the propa
gation and the preservation of the species
are two different ends. At the same
time Aristotle should have emphasized
the fact that woman is not nearly so far
below man as the natural slave (see 2)
is below his master. SUSEM. (10)
4 5 cv 8* TOIS Pappdpois KT\]
Whereas in Greece wife and slave are
distinct, in barbaria they are not, be
cause all men and women are slaves
(Jackson). In Thrace e.g. the women
did farm-work /j.tjdei 5ta0epoVra;s r&v
avrr/v
is omitted by II 2 Bk.
L P; 393 of
Getting.
s~=:,?s
xes are slaves we should
they 7 " P^ re all equal. (I n this last
deed C jPngreye seriously takes thirds"
supplyiC* T Y avTr >\ *X ra>sc. ro?s
aXXots rots ^"O-P^ecri Kal rots SecrTrorais.)
" Fiilleborn s ^ Abjections arise from his
having been misled b/" the omission men
tioned above, in n. (10), c.q.nd so having
misunderstood the real sense 01 f the pas
sage. Aristotle s meaning is this : ^ e _
cause the barbarian nations are slaves by
nature, the men are not capable of re
specting the freedom of the female sex
in the women, and of according to them
the position which by nature belongs to
the woman in relation to the man ; but
treat them as slaves. And hence neces
sarily arises the perversion of nature, that
in the marriage relation you have one
slave ruling despotically over another.
To the same cause, the servile character
of these nations, or at least of the Asiatics
(i. 6. 8 .), Aristotle attributes the fact
that they themselves are ruled by their
kings as slaves ; or in other words that
the form under which the state exists
amongst them is despotism, ill. 14. 6 n.,
which in reality cannot be considered to
constitute a state at all, a state consisting
of free citizens but not of slaves, 7 i,
in. 9 6, 12 8; cp. vi(iv). 4 n, a
passage which is probably not genuine.
Such a despotism is only an abnormally
expanded family: ( non civitas erit sed
magna familia, Grotius De ^^tre belli ac
pads in. 8. 2). It is a species of that
which Aristotle denotes by edvos, i.e. a
mere aggregate of men of the same race,
a tribe population or nationality, as con
trasted with TroXts, a city-state: 6; 11.
i 35 ni. 3 5, 13 19. H 15;
iv(vn). 4 ii ; vin(v). 10 8 with nn.;
Nic. Eth. i. 2. 8, 1094 b 10; Rhet. i. 5. 5
1360 b 31: cp. Schlosser i. 278. [Cp.
e6vos = federation in Polybios and Dio-
doros, esp. of the Achaean and Aetolian
Leagues : 5t edvLKas xP et as f r federal
purposes Diod. xvin. 13.] See further
. (13): 5 8, 6 46 with nn. (47),
(54), (56): 7 5, 8 12; iv(vn). 2 15,
14 21 with nn." SUSEM. (11)
I. 2. 5]
1252 b 3 1252 b 15.
143
6 rdgiv. ai-riov 8e on TO $vo-ei (ip%ov OVK %ov(Tiv, d\\d ylverai, (I)
77 Koivwvid avTwv SouX??? KOI SovXov. 816 fyacriv ol Troit^ral
j3ap(3apd)V " EXXrjvas ap%fiv ei/toy,
5 ? ravro (fivaei, /3dp/3apov KOI $ov\ov ov. ( etc fjiv ovv rovrcov TWV G
10 Svo KOivaiviwv oiKia Trpwrfj, real 6pQa)<$ f H<j/oSo? etTre
OLKOV p,V TTpWTLCTTCt yWCllKCl T ftoVV
o yap pou? avr oixerov Tot? irevrjcriv ecmv.
TI fjiev ovv et? Trdcrav r^Jiepav avveaTrficvla KOivwvla Kara
<$>VO~iV oZ/CO? CTTLV, Ol)? 6 /JLV Xap&wSa? Ka\L OfAOCriTTVOVS, Evrt-
15 /jLVio~7]s Se o Kp?}? o/jLorcaTTOvs ?j 8 e; TfKeiovwv oi/ciwv /coivwvla 7
oV before TO.VTO P, omitted by M s P 1 || 12 effriv * * Susem. 1 wrongly, see Dit-
tenbcrgcr Gott. gel. Anz. 1874 p. 1372 ff. || 15 b^oKairvovs n 1 P 4 L s Susem. 1 and M b
(corr. ), perhaps rightly, but see Dittenberger p. 1357 ff. and Commentary ;/. (17):
ofto/caTTous = 6/j.oKr)irovs Ridgeway (also Shilleto in unpublished Adversaria: si Epi-
menides epica pocsi utebatur, certe o/Ao/ccnn ous. Nisi forte o / ao/ca7rous = o/
8 Euripides Iphigenia in Anlis 1400
Nauck. The words following are d\X
01) (3ap(3apovs, /ut-^rep, EXX^wj/ TO ytcef yap
5ov\ov, oi 5 \i>depoi. SUSEM. (12)
9 ws Tcujrd KT\] In this Aristotle
only expresses the view which had gradu
ally become universal among the Greeks,
and was not combated until a late period
and then by but few : 3 4 n. (31). This
view is explained by the justifiable con
sciousness they had of their mental su-
periority; it was especially fostered by
the Persian war, and found external con
firmation in the fact that the vast ma
jority of Greek slaves were of barbarian
origin, while in itself again it tended to
hinder the enslavement of Greeks (L.
Schiller). See also n. (47) on i. 5 10.
That slaves are non-Hellenes is assumed
quite as an understood thing in Xenoph.
Mcmor. n. 7. 6, Demosth. xxi (c. Mid.}.
48. See however n. (64) on I. 7 5.
SUSEM. (13)
5 ro irpwTT]] preclicatively, "from
these two relationships," man and wife,
master and slave, "arises primarily the
family." For the sense, irporepov /cat
dvayKaiorepov olida TrdXewj NIC. Eth.
vill. 12. 7. The three stages, oi /a a KW/XT;
TroXis, are given by Plato Laws I. 626 c ff.
HtrioSos] Works and Days 405.
Clearly Aristotle did not know of the
spurious line 406 in our texts, KTTJTTJV
S ov yafj-er-qv, 177-15 Kai fiov<riv ZITOLTO.
SUSEM. (14)
1-2 6 -yd-P P^s KT\] "the ox sup
plies the place of a servant. " Cp. 5 9
11. (46). If with both these passages we
compare 4 i 4, it is evident that
Varro s division DC re rustica I. 17,
which Grotius mentions op. c. I. 5. 3,
is quite in the sense and spirit of Aris
totle : alii in tres partes (sc. diviclunt)
instrument! genus : vocale et semivocale
et mutum. vocale in quo sunt servi :
semivocale in quo sunt boves : mutum,
in quo sunt plaustra. (L. Schiller.)
SUSEM. (15)
12 i] [&V ovv TtrX] yuei^p?^, not 6V,
repeating after the quotation from Hesiod
the clause 9 e/c fj.ev ovv KT\. Take /caret
(f)v<n.v with ffiveo-T-rjKvIa: "thus then the
society which in the order of nature has
arisen to meet every-day needs is the
household : sharers in one meal-jar as
Charondas calls them; joint-holders of
a piece of land in the phrase of Epi-
menides the Cretan. The union of a
number of families first formed with a
view to needs beyond those which are of
daily recurrence is the village." Else
where in Aristotle e(j>irj/JLepos lasting for
a day ; so Bernays here, "for intercourse
of less transitory duration."
14 XapcovSas] II. 12 7, n n.
(416); vi(iv). n 15, 13 2 nn. Holm
Geschichte Siciliens im Alterthum (Leip
zig 1870) i. p. 153 ff., 401. SUSEM. (16)
EmjitviSiis] See Excursus I at the
end of this book, p. 204. SUSEM. (17)
15 op-OKairovs] The reading is doubt
ful." (i) The MSS. of the better family
give 6 / uo/ca7n ous. (2) If Aristotle is quot
ing from a collection of oracles (XpijfffAot)
144
IIOAITIKftN A. 2.
[I. 2. 5
6 Trpwrrj %pij crew? eveicev /JLT) ec^Tj/juepov KCO/JLTJ. //-aXttfra S eoi/ce (I)
17 Kara (frvcriv r) KCO/^TJ aTroiKia o IK las elvai, 01)9 KaXovvi
16 &&gt;e after 17 /card
Comm.
piJPBk. || 17 AT [olKla] Heitland, but see the
ascribed to Epimenides, then, as these
would be written in hexameters, the text
requires a word capable of standing in an
hexameter verse and b^oKairvovs, which
satisfies this condition, appears to possess
a decided advantage. For o/jioxdirovs of
the inferior MSS. is usually taken to be a
compound with KOTTT; a trough, crib;
hence any fccding-placc ; and if this ety
mology be correct nothing but arbitrary
lengthening of the first syllable in arsi
could adapt the word to an hexameter
verse. (3) Gottling, again, thinks that
Epimenides could not possibly have called
the families of the Cretans mess-mates,
because the avaairLa were established
amongst them. But, even assuming that
Epimenides actually wrote the line in
question, there was, as Dittenberger re
marks, no absolute necessity that he should
confine himself in this oracle to the cir
cumstances of Crete, especially as his
influence was actively felt far beyond the
island.
In favour of o/moKdwovs Dittenberger
urges that it is like Aristotle to support
the results of his own inquiries by a sub
sequent appeal to the language of com
mon life, to proverbs, passages in the
poets, or specially significant sayings
and expressions of prose writers. In
this place Charondas and Epimenides are
evidently quoted for this same purpose,
in connexion with the definition of the
family as a society existing for the whole
of daily life. Consequently it is the satis
faction of daily recurring needs which
brings individuals together in a house
hold. The expression of Charondas (and
that of Epimenides also, if we read 6//o-
Kd-rrovs) fits in perfectly with this, by
making common participation in food,
which is the most important daily need,
characteristic of the household. But 6fj.o-
Kairvovs = smoke-fellows could only be
taken as alluding to the common sacri
ficial fire, which would not suit the pre
sent context, although it is true that from
the point of view of the Greek the family
was a society for worship. Yet
O/ULOKCLTTVOVS should be understood of sharers
in the smoke of the common hearth, just
as we might speak of hearths meaning
homes or families*; thus the same idea
of a common participation in food would
be denoted but in a different form.
All these difficulties Ridgeway (Camb.
Philological Soc. Transactions Feb. 23,
1882) seeks to avoid by retaining the
reading 6/j.oKdtrovs (with a), Doric for O/JLO-
/c?77roi;s (K^TTOS) = with a common plot of
ground. SiJSEM. (17)
"The Cretan poet used a Doric form,
for the retention of the dialectic form in
Aristotle cp. GaAeco 1. 11. 12: Krjiros is
the common plot of ground that furnishes
the common food supply ((mrv-rj): cp. II.
5. 2 (yrjTreSov and Kap-rros). The scale of
social development here indicated seems to
be ( i ) original ot /a a : (2) ol/cos=joint family
of Hindus or Slavonic house-community,
where the proceeds of the undivided pro
perty (KTJTTOS) must be brought into a
common chest or purse : vide Sir H.
Maine" (Early Law 237 255): after
that, " (3) the ol/cos breaks up into separate
olKiai forming the KWJJLT] ( the Russian vil
lage community) : all are sprung of believe
themselves to be sprung from a common
ancestor (6/jLoyd\aKTes)" (Ridgeway). For
the undivided family property comp. E.
de Laveleye La propricte primitive cc.
13 15 (Engl. tr. pp. 175 214), Hearn
Aryan Household 176 191, and the criti
cism by D. McLennan Patriarchal Theory
c. 8: also Caillemer Droit de succession
p. 34 ff., Jannet Les institutions sociales
et le droit civil a Sparte (Paris 1880)
p. 88.
q 8 IK irXeiovwv KT\] Instances of
services needed from time to time for
which members of a village community
unite (as distinct from the daily wants
which originate the family) are, to repel
a common enemy or to execute a great
work of common utility (Fiilleborn II.
95, 96). Add the exchange of commodi
ties, which is unnecessary in the house
hold: 9 5 with note. SUSEM. (18)
1 6 7rpwTi] = simplicissima, quae tam-
quam pars inest aliis (Bonitz).
6 1 7 TI Kc6[AT) diroiKfa olKfas] /. e. all
the rest of the village except the original
* So Grote, "each society having its separate
meal-bin and fireplace." Cp. Gaelic teadhloch
and coedich, J. F. McLennan p. 123.
I. 2. 6]
1252 b 16 1252 b 20.
145
6/j,oyd\aKTa<; [TratSo? re Kal Trai&wv TratSa?]. Sib Kal TO Trp&TOv (1)
/3a(ri\6voi>To al TroXei?, ^at vvv GTL TO, Wvv] IK
20 yap \crvvrj\6ov\ Traaa yap oiKia ftaaiXeveTai VTTO TOV
1 8 * * Troudas Schmidt, [ircudds TratSas] Susem. |j 20 avi>rj\dov wanting in
II 1 (added by p 1 in the margin) || TraVa yap] TraVa 5 Schmidt in a former conjec
ture, transposing 18 5to 20 o~vvrj\0oi> to follow 24 $KOVI> (now withdrawn)
household may be most naturally re
garded as a colony or offshoot of the
original household. SUSEM. (18 b)
1 8 6(JLO-yd\aKTas] According to Phi-
lochoros Frag. 91 94 and Frag. 139
in Harpokration and Suidas (s. vv. yei>-
v-fJTai, o/AoydXaKTes, opyeuves) the mem
bers of each of the 360 ancient Attic
yevr) who were afterwards called yevvyj-
rcu = kin, clansmen, were originally called
6/j,oya\aKTes = foster-brothers, fellow-nurs
lings (]. G. Schneider Addenda II. 471).
Pollux VI. 37, VIII. 9 Ot fJ,TXOVTS TOV
yevovs eKaXovvTO yevvrJTai. Kal o/moyaXaK-
res, yevet. fj.ev ou TrpoaTJKOVTes, e/c de rr?y
awodov OVT<JJ Trpoaayopevo/j-evoL. Su-
SEM. (19)
Thus only is the 7eVos hinted at here.
"The identity of the KU/UL-TJ and the yevos
is apparently indicated Hi. 9 12, 14
where we have the TrdXts defined as (a)
?j rou u fyv KQLvwvia Ko.1 Ttt?s ot/ctats /cat
rots ye veer i, and (/>) TJ yev&v /cat
KU/J.UV /coti/wfia" (lieitland Notes 8).
Even then no place in the development
is found for (fiparpiai, <pv\ai, or Aristotle s
associations for common sacrifices and
religious festivals A 7 ic. Eth. vm. 9. 5 ;
cp. Pol. in. 9. 13 (Oncken). Apparently
they are held to be of later origin than
the state. Nor is there any explicit
reference to cru^ot/cto ftds, although, as
Stein suggests, Aristotle has doubtless
been influenced by the history of Attica.
As to the meaning of 6/j.oyd\aKTes,
Aristotle unquestionably understood it
to imply common ancestry in our sense,
even if TratSas re /cat iraiftwv TratSas be
rejected as a gloss. And this may well
have been the sense in which it was
anciently applied to the clansmen (761^77-
TCU). For descent had long been reckoned
through males in Athens, indeed Di-
kaiarchos (Fr. 9 Muller) appears to de
note by Trdrpa what is usually called the
ytvos: and even where individuals not
connected by blood had entered a clan
they may have come to believe the con
trary. (See Maine Early Law p. 272 If.)
H.
Or the word may have first meant those
of kin by descent through females only.
On the evidence of Spartan and Athenian
customs, and from indications in Homer
and the legends, it has been with good
reason inferred that this system of kinship
once prevailed in Greece, McLennan
op. c. 225 309: cp. I,. II. Morgan
Ancient Society c. 8 esp. 230 234. "If
b/u.oyd\aKTe5 = members of a 7^0?, the
name itself demonstrates that this member
ship in the 7^0$ depended on their hav
ing had the same mother s milk" (Ridge-
way). If so, may we similarly interpret
6/u.o(ri7rvoi and ofjiOKairvoi. as survivals from
a time when eating from the same meal-
jar or sharing the same smoke, and not
inheritance of the same father s blood,
constituted in a savage society the earliest
idea of kinship? See Exc. I to B. n.
Another meaning proposed is : those
who offer the same milk , from a com
parison of Sanskrit sapinda, samanodaka
= those who offer the same cake, the
same water: i.e. near kin , distant
kin respectively (I learn op. c. 171) : but
for this there is no evidence.
816 = hence : viz. because the city
arose through the village from the family.
Thus Plato argues Laws ill 680 D ff.: ei>
oh TO TrpeafivTCLTQv o.pxf- 8td TO T-TJV apx^v
avTots e/c Trarpds /cat /j.r]Tp6s yeyovtvai...
(BaaiXelav iraauiv St/catoTctrrji /Sao tXeuo/iej ot.
19 al iroXeis = Hclloiic city-states,
TO. t0VT] = non-Hellenic races or popula
tions. As in iv(vil). 2. 10 ert 5 1 ev rots
6ve<n TroVt rots Swaptvois Tr\OveKTfiv...
olov ev 2/cu#ais /cat UepaaLs /cat Qpa^l /cat
Ke\ro?s, Aristotle uses edvy on the grounds
assigned in n. ( 1 1 ) as equivalent to non-
Hellenes, precisely as the word is used in
the New Testament for Gentiles )( Jews
and Christians r6 irpwrov] Other reasons
assigned in. 14 12, 15 n nn. (657 9),
vui(v). 10 3 (1649). SUSEM. (19 b)
Also, as Postgate suggests, vi(iv). 13 n.
On the advantages of monarchy in a
primitive society, see Bagehot Physics and
Politics 65 f. (Jackson).
IO
146
IIOAITIKftN A. 2.
[I. 2. 6
(i)
7 ware Kal at cnroiKiai 8i rrjv (rwyyeveiav. fcal rovr eo-rlv o X^yet (P. 3)
e exaoros
naidcov 778 dXo^cot .
yap KOI ovrco TO dp^alov WKOVV. Kal rou? #601)9
25 Se Sta TOUTO TTai/re? c^acri ftaoriXevea-Oat,, OTI Kal avrol 01 /juev
en Kal vvv o t Se TO dp^alov ej3a<ri,\6vovTO, wcnrep Se Kal TCL ei&7)
eavrols d(^o^oiovcnv ol dvOpcoTroi, OVTM Kal TOI)? ftiovs rwv Oeatv.
8 TI 8 IK, 7r\eiovwv Kto/jicop Koivwvia reXeto? TroXts rjfir), Trdcrrjs p.
e^ovo-a Trepan Trjs avrapKelas w? eVo? elirelv, ryivofjuevr)
30 ovv rov ^TJV eveKev, ovcra $e rov ev tfjv. SLO iraaa TroXi? (
11 at is omitted by M 8 P 1 , whether rightly, is very doubtful || 24 airopddes yap
Kal O/TTW < 0,7x17 eiVoj>es > Schmidt edits, (TiropdSes -yap Kal OVTOI [r6 apxalov] and
26 wo-Trep yap Schmidt formerly (now withdrawn) || 28 r; 5r) M 8 P 2 -3-4.6. C 4 QM b
QI, R i> S b T t, v t> W b Aldine Bk., y Se IP L 8 || r? 5 ... 1253 a i jSArto-Tov transposed
by Schmidt to follow 18 TratSaj. See his arrangement and alterations Introd. p. 96 |]
29 yevo/j-^r) Schneider || 30 ovv is wanting in M^ 1 , but cp. iv (vn). 10 i, 1329 b 3
2 1 wcrT Kal at air.] Wherefore like
wise the colonies {i.e. the villages] be
cause of their kinship sc. /3a<rtXeuoi Tat.
So II wcrre /cat TO 5t/catoi> (Shilleto).
7 22 The quotation from Homer
Odyss. ix. ii4f. SUSEM. (20) Cited N. E.
x. 9. 13. Plato has it Laws 680 B. Cp.
Maine Ancient Law pp. 4 6, 125.
24 r6 dpxcuov] With the adverbial
use comp
Xen. Hdlen. V. 2. 7 Kaddirep
24 ff. "A reminiscence of the famous
saying of Xenophanes given by Clem.
Alex. VII p. 711 B: "EAX^z/es 5 wairep
dvOp<jjTrofJ,6p(povs OUTW /cat df#pa>7ro7ra$eZs
TOI)S 6*601)5 VTTOTi6evTai. Kal Kaddirep rds
fj-opfids avrwv o^otas eauTOts e/cacrTot 5ta-
(wypa<povcriv" (Ridgeway).
See still stronger statements about the
popular religion in Mctaph. Xil(A). 8
1921, 1074 b 3ff.
8 28 r 8 K irXtiovwv KT\] Cp. n.
2 8 with note and references, also n. on
in. 3 3, 4; 9 10 (554). SUSEM. (20 b)
"The union of several village-com
munities forms, when complete, an actual
city, attaining, so to speak, the limit of
perfect self-sufficience : at the outset a
union for a bare livelihood, it exists to
promote a higher life. " See Grote History
II. 341 344 on city-state )( villages: on
this deduction of the state generally A. C.
Bradley Hellenica 197 199, who observes
194 n. that "freedom", though not in a
mere negative sense, best answers to av-
rapKeia: a life which leaves no want of
man s nature, external or spiritual, un
satisfied. In N. E. I. 7. 7 TO atfrap/ces = 8
fj.ovoufj.evov aiperbv Trotet TOI> fiiov Kal /UT;-
5ev6s tvded, the sole condition of a life
that is desirable and lacks nothing. Cp.
N.E. X. 6. 2 ovSevos evderjs. . . dXX avrapKys.
29 ff. Compare c. 4 i ; u. 2 8 ; in.
i 12, 6 3, 4 ff., 9 5,6, ii 14, esp.
17 yev&v Kal KUfj.&v KOivwvia fays TeXetas
/cat avrdpKovs <xdpi.v>. TOVTO d ecrriv, ws
(pa/j.v, rb rjv ev8ai.fj.6v us Kal /caXws. TWV
Ka\&v dpa Trpd^euv [%dpt^] Oereov elvai rr\v
wo\iTLKr]v KOLvuviav, dXX ov TOV ffu^TJv ;
further in. 12 9, 13 i, 18 i ; iv(vn).
4 1 114, 5 i, 8 4, 8, 9, 9 i , 2 ;
Vl(iv), 4 911; vn(vi). 8 3. These
passages would prove (even if it were not
self-evident) that the perfected and beauti
fied life, made complete self-sufficing and
satisfying, is one with the life of happi
ness or well-being (evdaiuovta) : cp. n.
(284) on n. 9 5. SUSEM. (21)
The implication of eu ffjv and avrdp-
Keia which disposes of Schmidt s athetesis
of the clauses where the latter conception
comes in (Jahrb. f. Phil. cxxv. 1882.
804, cp. Introd. 97 n.} may also be studied
in Nic. Eth. i. 7 68. In De anima
II. 8. 10, 420 b 19 22, TO ev is op
posed to dvayKalov, to e dvayKys in
De part, animal, in. 7. 18, 670 b 23.
30 816 KT\] Two proofs that the city
is natural, (i) It is the outcome and
realization, the final cause, of the previous
societies : they are natural, so also is the
city . (2) It alone is fully self-sufficing
I. 2. 9]
1252 b 21 1253 a 3.
147
eirep
?;
8e
tea a
reXo?
vrpamu Koivwviai. reXo? yap avrrf e/celvwv, (I)
eariv olov yap eKacrrov earn TTJS
rrjv V<TIV elvai eKaaro
9 dvOpwTrov ITTTTOV ot/aa?. ert TO ou kvexg, real TO reXo? {3e\Ti-
1253 a O-TOI/* T; S avrdpKia [xal] reXo? /cat (3e\Tia-TOv. etc TOVTWV ovv (f>a-
vepov OTI, TOJv (j)uo~6i> r] TroXt? ear/, /cat ort 6 dvOpwTros (j)V(TL TroXt-
e#Tt, /cal 6 aTToXt? 3ta fyvcriv /cal ov Sid Tvyrjv IJTOL <fcav\6<$
.eo-T^] Schmidt || 33 ea cu after ^KOCTTOV M s P 1
KCU before rAos omitted by II 1 Bk. Bernays || rAos. /cat <yap>
Kal before jSAricrrov omitted by
* * <k Schmidt, quoting zaySb
ov uvdpuiros CCTTL Schmidt
6 omitted by II 2 Bk. || 0au-
TIKOV ^wov
32 [r?
1253 a
Bernays, avrapKeia * * Biicheler; but see Comm.
W b Aid. || i) ...... P&TUTTOV omitted by O M b T b
i(j 28 H 2 [6 rt ...... 7r6Xts eerri] and ort 0ucret Tr
|| ">3 CO-TI M 8 , omitted by P 1 II 2 Bk. perhaps rightly
? Oncken wrongly || lyrot Kpeirruv TJ &v6. TJ 0au\6s eVr a?/^. Schmidt
but to be self-sufficing is end and highest
good (and end = fully developed nature).
Against whom, we may ask, is this
directed ? No doubt there were Sophists
who criticized political institutions, of
whom Hippias and Thrasymachus may
serve as opposite types. But perhaps
Antisthenes was the first deliberately to
oppose the outcome of civilization and to
advocate a return to a ruder and simpler
.life : Zeller Socrates and Socratics p. 322
5. The anti-social theories of Plato s
Callicles in the Gorgias, of Thrasymachus
and the speakers in Republic B. II, are
not directly subversive of the state : like
Hobbism, they are conservative in their
aim.
32 TI 8* <|>v<ris Tt Xos] Physics n. i. 8
193 a 30 f. <f>v(ns in first sense = v\r) mere
potence ; in second sense = 17 /J-op^rj Kal
r6 eldos TO Kara rov \6yov. ucnrep yap
erai TO /card r^v Tt~xyt\v Kal TO
OVT<JJ Kal <pv(Tis TO icard <pvcnv
X^yercu Kal TO (pvffiKov : II. 2 8, 194 a
28 f. 17 5 0i5cris rAos Kal ov ZveKa wv
yap crvvexovs ri}s KLvqaews ov<n)s ZffTi TL
^crxarov, TOVTO rAos Kal TO ov ^e/ca...
/3oi)\6rat yap ov TTO.V elvat TO crx aTOV 7"Aos,
dXXd TO j3^\Ti<TTov. De anima III. 12. 3.
434 a 32 f. (Eaton). " Is it the bud, or
the blossom, or the ripe fruit that is
natural to a tree ? All three : only it is
unnatural and contrary to the design of
the tree that the bud should wither be
fore coming into bloom and bearing
fruit " (Fiilleborn). SUSEM. (22)
9 34 f. ?Ti...p XTiorov] The whole
connexion requires that this should be a
second proof (or at least an amplification
of the first proof) 6 rt iracra iroXis (pvaei
tarlv. And so in fact it is, only it must
be supplemented from what precedes. It
runs thus : the final cause, that is, the
end, of a thing is best. Now self-suffi
ciency is the end and the best (thus in
cluding under one both the subject and
the predicate of the former premiss).
With this must be mentally supplied
from the foregoing ; the end discloses
the tine nature of the thing , and po
litical society alone (i.e. no society short
of the state) affords to its members
true self-sufficience . Then the conclu
sion follows that the state is by nature.
Similar abbreviations of the steps in an
argument are found elsewhere in Aristotle,
so concise sometimes as to be almost un
intelligible : e.g. Metaph. xn(A). i 2,
5, 1069 a 24, b 5 (Freud enthal). SU
SEM. (23)
1253 a i From this then it appears that
the city is part of the order of nature
and man a social being . N.E. IX. 9. 3 :
no one would choose the possession of
every good to be by himself, KOSTIKOV yap
6 avdpUTTos Kal <TV TJV 7re0u/cos. See also
ib. i. 7. 6. "The dogma TUV (pixrei 77 TroXts
^0rt, Kal 6 avdpwTros (pvaei TTO\I.TLKOV ^wp^as
interpreted by Aristotle, implies (i) that
social organization is not a violation of
nature, (2) that the TroXts differs from the
ot /ct ct in something more than size, (3)
that existing institutions are capable of
improvement, (4) that there is a form or
type or end towards which they may be
improved. It is plain that the exposition
of this dogma appropriately holds a
prominent place in the introduction to a
work which has for its main purpose the
development of a scheme of the normal
TroXts " (Jackson).
3 6 airoXis KT\] "He who is cut
IO 2
148
nOAITIKHN A, 2.
[I. 2. 9
77 KpeiTTwv rj dvOpwTros (wcrTrep teal 6 ixj) QfjLijpov \oL$op7]0els (I)
5 d<ppr)Ta>p dde/j-icrros dvecmos
10 dfjia jap (fevcret TQLOVTOS Kal irdKe/Jbov eiriOv^r^), are irep
av% a)v watrep ev Trerroi?. j SIOTI $e TTO\ITLKOV ^wov o av- 10
^pcoTro? TrdcrTjs /jie\iTT7]s Kal TravTos d^eKaiov %(/>ov ///aAAoz/,
9 $r)\ov. ovSev yap, w? <f>a/Aev, /mdrrjv 77 (frvcris Troiel \6yov
11 Se IJLOVOV avOpwiros e^et TWV %<pu>V rf f^ev ovv (frajvrj rov
6 [yap] Schmidt || [/cat] Spengel partly recognising the fault in the ordinal-
construction: that waTrep...7ri6v^Tr]s is parenthetical was first shown by Jackson
(Journal of Philology VII. 1877, p. 236 ff. ); see Comm. || are irep omitted
by L s , erased in U b || are irep...^ TrerroTs transposed to follow 29 deos Schmidt ||
7 av wv omitted by U b W b L s ; with vacant space left, by P 3>6 QM b Aid. and ist
hand of P 2 Q b S b T b V b ; d> vrerrots omitted by Ar., tav by R b and P 4 (ist hand);
av wi> was inserted by P 3 (corr. 3 ), av by a later hand in Q b S b and by a later hand
in the margin of T b , dvev vyou rvy~x.avwv V b (a later hand), avev fyyov Tvyx&wv C 4
also, avev frevyovs Bas. 2 || Trerots M b , Treretfots P and p 1 in the margin, yp. Treretvots
P 4 (corrector) in the margin, and a later hand in the margin of S b || faov after o
n 2 Bk.
(Arist. Stndien in. 5), that the lover of
domestic strife is clanless lawless hearth-
less; not, that the outlaw or broken man
or rover is pugnacious and aggressive.
The right sense can be secured by a mere
change of punctuation. The parentheti
cal sentence refers by way of illustration to
Homer s TTO\/JLOV eiridv/A riTris eir idrj/j-iov
who is a (pvaec roiouros, i.e. an aTroXts
<pvo-ei, in whom to the unsociable charac
ter is superadded an inclination to war.
Aristotle does not say that the dVoXts is
always or commonly aggressive ; thus there
is no reason for regarding aggression as a
characteristic of the dl> (Jackson). Su-
SEM. (24) (25)
SLOTL here, like 6 rt, "that."
SIOTI 8e -iroAiTiKov] De hist, anini. I.
1 . 12: 7roXtri/cd 5 ^crrt fya uv ev n /cat
KOLVOV ylverai TTCWTUV TO pyov, oirep ov
TraVra Trote? a7eXata. Not all gregarious
animals form a community, but those
which, like bees, wasps, ants, cranes, and
lastly man, are engaged upon some com
mon work (Eaton). SUSEM. (25 b)
9 For parallel passages consult Zeller
II ii 424 n. (3); for Aristotle s teleology,
ib. 422 428, 488497.
11 On the physiological distinction
between fywvi] mere voice, articulate
speech, and X67os rational language, see
De hist. anim. IV. 9. 536 a 20, b 8 ff.,
Probl. x. 39, 895 a 7 ff., Poet. 20 2,
1456 b 22 ff. (TTOixeiov
ov TrdVa 5e dXX e 775
off from civil society by nature, and not
by chance, is either low in the scale of
humanity, or above it (as is also he whom
Homer reproachfully described as clan-
less lawless hearthless ; for he", not the
aTroXts, but 6 u0 0/J<ripov \oi5opri6eLs, "is
at once naturally unsociable and pugna
cious) being in fact solitary, like the
blot at backgammon" (Jackson).
10 7 av] From an epigram of
Agathias (AntlioL Pal. ix. 482, esp. 20
28) Gottling De loco quodam Arts. (Jena
1858) showed that au nearly resembles
the blot of our backgammon an ex
posed piece as contrasted with pieces
guarded or supported, i.e. standing close
together *. Bernays in his translation and
Mahaffy (Academy Jan. 8, 1876) take dv
to mean a rover , /. e. a piece with special
powers of aggression ; but this is incon
sistent with Agathias epigram. More
over they mistake the sense of the quota
tion from Iliad IX. 63, 64, where e/cetVos
os TroA^uou tparai eTriS^tou otcpvoevros is
the subject of which d<ppiJTwp dOt/micrTos
aveffTios are predicates. What Homer
really says is, as Spengel rightly saw
* Whether TroAets was a name for this game or
not, the TraVTroAAai TioAei? of Plato Rep. iv. 422 E
(cp. the scholion) makes it likely that a compact
body of pieces was called woAis ; if an isolated
piece was called aTroAt?, Aristotle s allusion would
be specially appropriate. Oncken, n. 27 f., has
misunderstood Agathias epigram and Gottling s
dissertation no less than the present passage
(Jackson).
I. 2. 13]
1253 a 41253 a 21.
149
Kal \v7rijpov eVrt o-rjiJielov, SLO Kal TO?? aXXoi? virdp- (I)
y a P T VTOV TI Averts avrwv kr)\v6e, rov
\VTrrjpov real T^Seo? KOI ravra arnjbaiveiv\
14 a XX^Xot?), o Se Xtfyo? eVl TCO Sr)\ovv ecm TO av^epov /call
12 TO _J3\al3ep6v, ware KOI TO SiKaiov Kal TO CI^LKOV rovro ydprti
TTpos rd d\\a fco<z Tot? dvOpooTrois ibiov, TO JJLOVOV dyaOov
Kal tca/cov Kal Sifcaiov Kal d$t,Kov Kal rwv d\\a)v
e^eiv rj Se TOVTWV Koivwvia TroieL o IK lav Kal TTO^LV.
19 Kal Trporepov Se rfj (f)vcri vroXt? rj OLKia Kal eKacrros rjf
13 (TTLV. TO yap b\ov nrporepov dvayKalov euvai TOV yu-epof? avai- (P- 4)
pov/Aevov yap rov o\ov OVK ecrrai TTOU? ouSe ^ip, el yu-r) OJJLW-
ii \V7Ttjpov Kal rideos (?}5eu>s P 6 U b and ist hand L s ) II 2 Bk. || e<m (rrjfjie iov... 13
These words are wanting in Q Q b R b (where t stands in the margin) S b T b and
V b (rst hand; added by a later hand) || 12 e\y\vOev W b Aid. Bk. wporjXOev P 4 - 6 M b
U b L s || rov exw aiue-rjcnv] wore alffddveaOai rov P 4 6 M b U b W 1 L s Aid. Bk. ||
14 8r/\oui>] SteXetV ? Oncken, wrongly || 18 rovrwv] ruv roiovrwv Schmidt || 19 Kal
7rp6repov... 2() 6eos transposed to follow 1252 b 27 de<2v Schmidt. See his arrange
ment Introd. p. 97 || <5e Schneider, 5?) F II Bk.
velopment appears imperfect, 6 Xws 5
(paiverai TO yi.vop.evov dre\es Kal evr apx^l 1
lov, (jouTe TO T?/ yeveffei. vcrTepov Trj 0i <m
irpoTepov elvai. See below ill. i. 9, nor
mal constitutions are prior to the di
vergent, imperfect types. SUSEM. (27)
Other passages in Grant Ethics I. 239.
13 20 dvaipo\)p.vou KT\] "for
if the whole body" except the foot or
hand "is destroyed, there will be neither
foot nor hand, except in an equivocal
sense such as that in which we call the
hand of a statue a hand ; because a hand
in such circumstances" i.e. after the de
struction of the rest of the body, "will be
spoilt for use," cp. 5 5 ev TO?S K.O.TO.
(pvcnv e^ofdi, Kal fj.r/ ev TO?? diecpdap-
[j.evois, "and all things are defined by
their function and faculty, so that things
which are incapable of exercising their
functions and faculties (^/ceri Totairra =
HrfKeTi evepya Kal dvvara,*) must not be
said to be the things in question, but to
be equivocally called by their names"
(Jackson). Cp. Manu II. 157 : as an
elephant of wood, as an antelope of lea
ther, so is a Brahmin unread in the Vedas.
These three bear the name (Postgate).
If the text is correct, the above ex
planation, in which Hayduck and Jack
son independently agree, must be
* " Such as they were before, when they
formed part of the whole and fulfilled their
functions" (Cope). See the quotations n. (28).
Kal yap r&v Or/ptwv elfflv
dBiaiperoi (f>wvai. SUSEM. (26)
15 TO SiKaiov governed by dyXovv :
and therefore also (for the purpose of
signifying) justice.
12 16 irp6s = whcn compared with.
aYQ-Gox) Kal KO.KOV alV0T|criv] moral per
ception, N. Eth. II. 9. 8 ; iv. 5. 13, ev Ty
ala6r](Ti rj Kpiffis : not to mention passages
in Bk. VI ; as 1 1 4 TOVTUV ovv Zxew Set
afodrjo iv, avTT) 5 ecrrt vovs.
1 8 r\ 8 TOIJTCOV K.] An objective geni
tive with Kowuvia as in III. 9. 12 AC.
rb-rrov, fellowship in goodness and
justice . The city is regarded as a
moral or spiritual society, church and
state in one.
19 Kal Trpdrepov 8e TTJ <j>ii<ri,] It is
not in order of time yeve&ei (in which
sense N. Eth. vm. 12. 7, quoted on 5
above, asserts the direct contrary), but in
order of thought and of real existence
0u<m, Kara <f>v<nv, T< et 5et, rfj ovcria, that
the state is prior to the family and to the
individual. On this distinction see esp.
Metaph. I. 8 37 989 a 15 ff.: ix(0).
8. 8 1050 a 3 ff . rj evtpyeia irportpa rrjs
dwd/j-ews (the__iajized and actual pre-
cedes_the_ pjossibleJTaTa ytveviv Kal xpb~
vov. dXXa /u.7)i> Kal ovvia ye, Trp&rov fj.kv
OTI Ta rrj yevtffei varepa ry eiSet Kal rrj
ovffia Trpbrepa olov dvrjp TratSos TO /j.t>
yap -rjdr) ?x i T elSos, rb S ovl Phys. VIII.
7. 12, 261 a 14 what is in process of de-
150
24
14 vvfJia.
nOAITIKON A. 2. [I. 2. 13
wairep el n<$ \e<yei rrjv \i9ivr]i> ia<f)6ap<~lcra ( <ydp earai (I)
, rrdvra Be ra> 6/070) wpia-rai Kal rfj Bwapei, ware
roiavra ovra ov \eicreov rd avrd elvai aXX O/JLCO-
ori fjuev ovv r/ 7roXt9 teal (frixrei, [/cal] Trporepov rj efca- 12
$rj\ov el ydp vT /L67) -avrdpicris e/cacrros %GO pier dels, 6//,ot&)9
fjLepecnv e^ei Trpos TO oXoz^, o 8e ur) Bvvc vo9
57 ///7?Sei> Seo/jievos $i avrdp/ceiav , ovBev yu /oo9
15 / (f)vo~ei fjuev ovv
av o $e TrpojTO?
ev iracriv eTrl TTJV TOLavrrjv KOIVWVL-
dyaOatv alno^. wcrTrep <yap
_
Bk. 2 and Susem. - 1 following P 2 and perhaps F || dXXo, 0^ape?cra
Bender, apparently with the following construction: Xidivrjv, dXXd ((pOapelaa yap)
crrat rotai/rT?- Trdvra : hardly right || <ou/c> ^<rrat Rud. Scholl (Comm. de legg.
. Bonn 1865, p. 43) which is not improbable: unless we are to bracket the words
Siafpdapelaa yap e<TTai Totavrtj. But see Comm. and Quaest. Cr. ill. 3 ff., IV. 3 ff. || 23
< 77 > Totaur?7 ? Jackson || de] yap F apparently, adopted by Bender rightly, if we
accept his conjecture or reject 5ia<pd. KT\ || 25 /cat omitted before (pvo-ei in II 1 and
Paris. 963 || /cat omitted before trpbTepov by P 2 Ar. || -rrpoTepa FP 6 QM b T b U b
^**<ArhTs i -D4 4 p(jJ QbJ^bgb || 2 g ^^V II 2 Bk. fJL T)8eV(
3 r irp&Tov P 4 -e- Q M b Q b R b S b T b U b V b L 8
V b L s , 7
[ 2 Bk.
P 4 ,
P 1
F Ar.
ovdh
accepted : dia^Oapelcra must be,
Hay duck thinks, equivalent to rou
effTeprjaevr] /cat TT?S dwd/mews : "in such a
if-ise the hand and the foot are really de-
*^*^p*r1ved of their force. But the essential
nature of an object consists in its function
> and in its capacity to execute that func
tion ; so that where it no longer possesses
the appropriate quality it can no longer
be said to be the same, but only to bear
the same name". But the parallel pas-
* sages De gener. anim. I. 19. 7 726 b 22 ff.
ov8 yap 77 %etp oi)S d XXo TWV fj.opiwv
**/} . ovSev dvev I/ I XT^S T; dXXrjs TWOS dwd/neus
IJ.bpi.ov ov9ev, dXXa udvov
42, 734 b 24 ff. ov yap ecrTi
i;/x.ws Xex^7?cT6Tat r6 fJiev
TO S crdp^, Coffirep Kav el
eylyveTO \i0iva 77 v\iva ; De anima II.
i. 9 412 b iSff. oi/ ews 775 aVoXet7roi;(r77s
OVK eo~Ti.v o(f>6a\fj.6sj TT\TJV 6fj,<j}vvfj.o}s, /ca-
^aTrep o \t6ivos Kal 6 yeypa/j.fj.fros: Meteor.
IV. 12. 3, 390 a 10 ff. d-rravTO. 5 e<TTii>
(Jopi<JIJ.eva Thj epytg TO, fj.ev ydp ovvdfj.f.va
TroLetv Tb avTwv epyov dXyOus e<rTiv ef/cacrra,
olov 6 6(f>da\fws el opa, TO de /J.TJ dwduevov
6fJ.wvvfj.ws, olov 6 TeOvews rj 6 \idivos lead
to the conclusion that diaipdapelaa is sub
ject and TotauTT? is predicate. If so, and
if TotaivT77 = a true hand, the sense requires
the insertion of the negative, although
ccrrt %etp ov
b/ji(j3vv/ui,ov : II.
we should then expect aXXa irdvTa rather
than irdvTa de : "for a hand thus rendered
useless <no longer> has the qualities of a
hand, whereas the definition of every ob
ject is contained in its function." OJJLCOVV-
P.WS] Cp. in. i. 7 n. (438 b). SUSEM. (28)
14 26 xwpurBefe] cut off from society,
living in isolation, HOVUTTJ yap %aXe7roy 6
/Stos. Comp. the discussion in JV. Eth*
IX. c. 9 showing that friends are indis
pensable to Wellbeing : derjaei Tig evdai/j.o-
vrjffovTL (f)i\0}v cnrovoaitev . . .77 TavTy evdeyjs
^crrat, i.e. not aurdp/cTjj.
6[j.otojs TOLS dXXois ^i KT\] will be
related to the state as any other part to
the whole of which it is a part : i. e.,
13, will be relative and subordinate to it,
will be vaTepov not Trpbrepov.
29 T| 0T]p{oV T|| 0OS] SO 9 r/TOl 0ttuXoS
77 KpelTTUv TI avOpwiros. JV. Eth. v. 9.
17 with Jackson s note, rots aev yap OVK
eariv inrep[3o\T] (TUV dir\ws dyaOuv) olov
tcrws Tols Beols, TOis 5 ovdev fj,6piov t60At-
/J.QV, rots dwdrws /cao?s, so that the sphere
of particular justice is restricted to human
society: ib.Vll. i. 2 wvirep ovoe Oypiove ffTiv
Kaxla ovS 1 dpeTrj, OVTWS ovoe 6eov.
15 31 68^ irpwros KT\] Cp. In-
trod. 24, and notes on II. 9 8 (288),
12 (296), 14 (300). SUSEM. (28 b)
oio-ircp -yctp KT\] "Both the grammar
and the sense of TeXewdev and
I. 3. 1]
1253 a 22 1253 b 1.
151
3
1253 b
KOI Te\ew6ev fteXricrTov TWV ^(j>wv o avOpwTros earns, OVTCO teal (I)
vofjiov ical Sl/cys ^eipio-TOv TTUVTWV. ^aXeTrcordrrj yap
e^oucra ovrXa o Se avOpwiros oTrXa e^wv fyverai <j)pov?j-
35 o~L KOI apery, ot? eirl rdvavria ecm XpfjaOai /u/aXtcrra. 816 dv- A^
KOI dypiwTarov avev dperr/^ real 77730? dtppoSlo-La
e$co$r)v ^eipiO Tov. ry Be 8i/caiocrvvr/ iroXLTitcov T/ yap Sltcy f "
KOLV(Ovla<5 rdi<> ecmv [y Se Slier) rov SlKdiOV tcpla is].
etrel 8e (pavepov ef wv fJbQpiwv 77 TroXt? <rvvecrTr]Kev, li
32 [reXeutih] and 33 [x^ptffd^v vb^ov KO! diK-rjs] Jackson || reXew^eis and 33 ^w-
picrffeis Spengel || o wanting in II 2 Bk., but inserted in the margin of P 4 || 35
apery ? clue to 36 dperr??, having displaced a word like r^x v V Freudenthal (cp.
Met. I. r. 6 p. 980 b 27 f.) or Kaprepig. Susem. ; not pwri Lindau, dp^eL Hampke,
nor dpyy Schmidt: hardly Kpdrec Schnitzer. [(ppoi>TJ<rei KO.I apery] Conring Madvig,
[/cat apery] Schneider, <e?rt> <f>povqffet /cat apery Welldon, * * (fipovycrei Thurot,
/cat aperyv Reiske (this makes bad worse, Montecatino protested against it),
/car apery? Oncken. See Susem. Qiiaest. Crit. II. 5f., IV. 5 f . || 38 [77...
s] Hampke, [Ski;] Spengel || 8iKy] 5iKai.o<rvi>y Reiske Thurot
vbuov /cat SiKys appear strange, and 26
Xwpi&deis is used in a different connexion"
(Jackson). Spengel (and lately Ridgeway)
would make the participles masculine.
But the concord is not too harsh ; at
fortasse, ut saepius, liberiore construc-
tione utitur Aristoteles (Susem.). For
the thought, Plato Laws 765 E, Trai/ros yap
dy <f)VTQv y Trpury (3\affry /caXws opuydeTva
TT/SOS dperyv rys avrov 0ucrecos Kupitiirdry
eiri.Qe ivai. TO Trpo<T(popov...Kal
t/cafws 5e y fj.y /caXwj rpa<pe
oiroaa 0i et yy.
16 34 6 8 KT\] Man is born with
weapons to be used by (i.e. to subserve)
wisdom and virtue ; weapons which ai~e,
however, especially liable to abuse (Mon
tecatino) : (ppovyvei the dative of reference
(Jackson). Most editors make it causal
or instrumental. "But (i) what can
weapons for practical wisdom and virtue
mean ? Hardly weapons for the exercise,
but rather such as serve for the attain
ment, of these qualities. Yet dSixfa.
Zxovcra oTrXa shows that the former are
meant. (2.) It is essential to the thought
that we should learn whence man, of all
creatures, gets these dangerous double-
edged weapons, so eminently adapted for
purposes mutually opposed (rd^ai/rta), for
good and for evil. Whereas that they
are for good needs not be stated : Aris
totle s teleological standpoint implies it."
SUSEM. Cp. Rhet. i. i 13 (Spengel).
37 r\ 8i SIKCUOO-VVT] iroXiriKov KT\]
III. 10. 2 oi 5e TO dl.Kai.ov TroXews (f>Oapri.Kov.
SUSEM. (28 c)
Jackson keeping the last clause y Sc
8itcy KT\ (which he holds to be a paren
thetical explanation of 5iKy in y yap SiKy
KT\, rightly placed last in a Greek sen
tence) would translate: "now justice be
longs to a state", i.e. can be found only
in a 7r6Xts, " 5li<y or the administration of
law which is the determination of what
is just being a regulation of the political
community." Cp. Nic. Eth. v. 6. 4 y
yap diKy Kpiffis rov diKaiov /cat TOU dSt /cou
ff. with Jackson s notes.
c. 3 Economic lias three parts treating
of tJic relationships which iake ttp the
household, (i) 5ea"7roriKy (2) ya/j.iKy
(3) TrarpiKy : i, 2. The relation of (4)
XpyuanariKy to economic is obscure:
3. Upon 5eo"7roTLKy, which we take
first, there are widely divergent vieius 4.
Roughly speaking the rest of the book
treats of (T) de<nroriKy in cc. 4 7, (4)
Xpy^o-TLffTLKy in cc. 8 11, (2) and (3) in
cc. 12, 13.
c. 4 The household needs implements
which may be animate or inanimate :
such an implement is called a chattel
(Kry/u,a), and is irpaKTiKbv, for use
not for production : i 4. The thrall
(Kry/m,a e^^vxov} defined^ 5, 6.
c. 5 But are there any persons answer
ing to this definition, (fivcrei dov\ot? I
As it is advantageous to both and to each,
and therefore just and natural that body
should be subject to soul, appetite to reason,
152 nOAITIKHN A. 3. [I. 3. 1
dvayxalov irptoTov irepl olfcovo/^ia^ elirelv Traaa yap crvy- (II)
TToXt? e OLKIWV. OifCOVOfJLiaS $6 f^ep TJ, % &V TTClKlV Y] OLKLa
ol/cla Se reXeto? etc &ov\a)v /cal e\evOepo)i . e vrel
5 S eV rot? e\a%i(7TOis irpwrov ercacrTOv ^TjrTjreoi 1 , Trpwra *
Kal eXd^HTTa uepr/ ol/cla^ SecrTroT??? /cal SoDXo? /cal TTOC ,
teal aXo^o? /cal Trarrjp /cal re/cva, Trepl rpiwv TOVTCOV o-fce-
2 Trreov civ itj rj e/cao-rov Kal TTOIOV el_elvai. ravra 8 eVrl 2
SecrTTOTi/cr) /cal ya/At/cr) (dvcovv/AOV yap rj yvvaiKOS Kal av-
crufeu^?) Kal rpirov Trarpi/crj (/cal ydp avrrf OVK
Sla) ovo/nart). ecrTwcrav $rj avrai, rpet? a? elVo-
3 /ji6v. ecrTi 8e TL [fiepos] o So/eel TO?? uev elvai ol/covojjLia,
1253 b 2 dvdyK-rj P 4 - fi - Q M b U b W b L s Aid, while Q b R b (which has however f in
the margin) S b T b and V b (ist hand) omit dvayKafov...^ <rvvi<rTt)Ktv (a later hand has in
serted the words in the margin of V b ) || Trepl oiKovo/jiias (oiVas 15k. 2 following the
mss. used by Accoromboni and Sepulveda) elirelv irpbrepov P 4 6 Q M b U b W b L B Aid.
Bk. in place of irpurov direiv \\ ffvyKeirai. after 3 OIKIUV P 4l<;> Q M b U b L s Aid.
Bk. H 3 olKovo(j.ia.s\ oldas F P 4 - e< Q M b U b L H Bk. Bernays |] iraXiv r/ oiKia T
apparently, 7rd\w okta P 2>3> C 4 and a later hand in V 1 , rj oiKia iraXiv ]\P P 1 . au^ts owa
P 4 -<5- Q M b U b W b L s Aid. Bk. || 4 o-wArT^ei/] arnVrarac P 4 Q M b U b W b L s Aid.
Bk. || 5 TT/Dwroi ] </cat> TrpuTOLs Bender || 7 TOVTWV ffK7TT^ov after 8 ap II 2 Bk.
|| 9 /cat is wanting before ya/jn.Krj in M. s M b || 10 Trarpt/o? Ar. apparently (cp. c. 12
i), TeKvoiroL-riTiK-f) Bk. following P and the mss. (\V b Aid. omit avdovv^ov re/ci/o-
Troi^riK^), TeKvoiroitKri Dindorf (Steph. Thes.): irarpiK fi was abbreviated TrpT/c?/; this
became TTOU/CT) or Trot^ri/c^, and was then wrongly emended || u ST) Susem. 2 , 5 P II
Ar. Bk. || 12 5 rt or 5^ rt <en> Susem., 5 <5 > rt : i.e. Se <r
ri (after first suggesting 3 e rt <r^rapr6i/> n) Schmidt, probably right
Zeller (Phil. d. Gr. II ii 693 n. 4, ed. 3)
5, 6, &.Y7.T/.5 1 /o man, female to mah, 7, The ot/ctas /w^, as enumerated just after-
so it is better (i.e. n advantageous and wards, are the three pairs of relation-
just) that a man whose function is bodily ships <rufei as (or, 2 5, Koivwvlai).
service, who is a mere adjimct of another, 4 eirel 8* ev TOIS eX. KT\] by the
should be subject to his superior in ex- method noticed i 3 ., 8 i ., Hi. i. 2
cettence0fsoul,8,(). Nature designs to n. (434). SUSEM. (29)
mark this distinction upon the bodies of tJie 5 irpwra] The aavvdeTa of r 3.
two, but does not always succeed: 10, 1 1. 2 9 yafUKr)= conjugal , TrarpiKrj =
On the question of slavery cc. 3 7, paternal relationship: senses obviously
consult Tntrod. pp. 24 26, the excellent more precise than the ordinary use of the
dissertation of L. Schiller Die Lehre des terms warranted. Thus 77 ya/MKrj 6fjii\ta,
Arts, von der Sklaverei (Erlangen 1847. tne marriage union, iv(vn). 16 I
4),Hildenbrand0/>.r.395 4o6,Onckenii. simply cohabitation. Schneider thinks
29 74, Becker and Hermann Charikles ai>5pLKr],Gd\.tYmg7ro<TLaKr)(sic) would better
in. i 12, Eng. tr. 356 373. SUSEM. express the former relation from the side
c. 3 1 1253 b 3 oiKovop-ias 8e KT\] In of the stronger analogously to deo TroriKij,
his lax manner Aristotle means "the or Latin maritalis. Strictly 7rarpi/c6s=:
partsof Economic" or household-manage- hereditary, as e.g. in in. 14. 6: but in
ment ^correspond to those of which the Nic. Eth. v. 6. 8, vm. 10. 4 it is used,
household consists". This at least gives as here, for paternal ,
better sense than to read ot /a as : see 12 i.
I. 4. 1]
1253 b 2 1253 b 23.
153
Oeayp^reov.
tz>a ra re
TO elbevai
&e fjueryia-Tov fjuepos avT^ OTTO)? S
Xe<y&) Se Trept T?7? KCL\OV /jievijs ^pr^/jiaTLcrTLfcrj^.
15 TTpwrov Se ?rept SecrTrorou KOI Sov\ov
Trpo? r?)^ dvay/calav %peiav LSco^ep, KOV el TL
Trepl CLVT&V Svval/jieda \af3etv j3e\TLov TWV vvv i>7ro\a/ji/3avo-
4 fievcov. TO?? /u,ei> yap SoKei e 7^0-^7^77 re Tt? elvai 77 Se<T7roTet a, 3
/cat 77 avrt] ol/covo/jila /cal Se&TroTela teal TroXtTt/c?) /cat /Sa-
20 (7L\iKt^ KaOc lTTep CLTTO/jLeV dp^OjJLGVOi TOt? Se TTdpd (f)V(TlV TO
Seo"7roetzA vo^w <ydpJrov fjiev 8ov\ov eivai TOP & e\ev6epov,
(f)vcr6L & ovSev Siafyepeiv. Siojrep ov8e SiKatov fBicuov <ydp.
4 eirel ovv T; tcr^cris /u-epo? TT;? ol/cias earl [/cal 77 KT^TLKT) 4
15 [5e] Schmidt, who transposes irpuTov [5e] ...... 1256 a i rpoirov (cc. 3 3 7
5) to follow 1259 a 39 ya.fj.iKri (c. 12 l): see Introd. p. 97 || 17 Swa^da. M" P 1
C 4 , 8vvr]ff6/j.0a T (?) Susem. 1 2 , foteriwiis William || 23 e?ret o5^] eiTro/Jiev oZv <OTL>
Schmidt || [/cat ...... 24 ot/coi o/xtas] Suscm. On 23^33 cp. Suscm. Qit. Cr. II. 7 ff .
3 13 TOIS 81
9 12 18, ii 13. SUSKM. (29 b)
15 i va KT\] first in order to observe
what has a direct bearing upon practical
use, and secondly for our theory, to ascer
tain any facts which may enable us to im
prove upon the views at present held .
4 20 KdOdirep el/Trophy KT\] i 2 f .
cp. 7 i nn. SUSEM. (30)
TOIS 81 irapd <|>iJGriv] Comp. below
6 i foil, with nn. The only representa
tive of this view of whom we have certain
knowledge was the rhetorician Alkidamas
of Elaia, a disciple of Gorgias (see ill. 2.
2 .), who gave expression to it in his
Messenian speech delivered on behalf
of Messene after its restoration by Epami-
nondas, in order to overcome the ob
stinate refusal of the Spartans to recognize
the new state : e\ev9povs a<prJKe iravra^
6ebs, ovdeva 6ov\ov 77 (pi/crts TreiroifjKev,
Aristot. Rhct. I. 13. 3, with scholiast.
Compare Spengel (ll. 179) [and Cope]
on that passage : and esp. Vahlen Der
Rhetor Alkidamas (Vienna 1864. 8). 14 ff.
Possibly (see 7 3 n.) Aristotle was ac-
quainted with the lines of the comic poet
Philemon (Fragtn. inc. xxxiv Meineke,
> Meineke s ed. p. 410) KW 5ou\6s ecrn,
lx ec - I ^vcra. yap ouSels
OT \ 77 5 a5 TVX.TI rb
<riofj.a ^areouwcraro. SUSEM. (31)
Zeller Socrates p. 322 n. 3 is inclined
to attribute this view to the Cynics.
21 v6|JLa)...<|>u<ri.] On this famous anti
thesis of the conventional and the natu
ral see Sofh. Elcnch. 13 6 173 a 7 ff.,
.A
,
|
^
Grant Ethics i. 149 151, and esp. Sidg-
wick Journal of Philology v. 73 77.
22 Sioirep KT\] Wherefore slavery
(rb 5e<T7r6fciv) is unjust also, as resting on
mere force (Wyse).
c. 4 1 23 r\ KTTJTLKT] = the theory of
the acquisition of property. Gottling and
Bernays in a more general sense, the
theory of property ; and certainly with
this rendering the words in brackets
would fit better into the context. But in
what follows KTrjTLK-r] everywhere denotes
the same thing as xP" r }f MTia TtK ^ m the
wider sense, the science or art of
acquiring wealth, first introduced 3 3,
see 8 i n. Property, as being indis
pensable for living, belongs to the house
hold : hence by analogy it follows that
every chattel is an instrument for the
householder s use, and that the slave is
an animate instrument of this kind. But
from the fact that the theory of acqui
sition or even the theory of property is a
part of the science of household manage
ment, no such conclusion follows, even
when taken in connexion with the first
premiss, which is sufficient of itself to
prove it in the manner indicated above.
Besides, the words bracketed anticipate
the decision which at 3 3 is distinctly
postponed to c. 8, and the way in
which the question is raised 8 i pre
supposes that no such decision by anti
cipation has yet been given. The state
ment made here does not agree with the
results of cc. 8 n ; for not the whole
theory of property and its acquisition,
154
nOAITIKON A. 4.
[I. 4. 1
(dvev yap TWV dva^Kaiwv dftvparov (II)
25 /cal ^rjv Kal ev &v) cocnrep Srj rat? wpicr /sevens re%vai$
dvayrcalov civ eiy virdp^eiv rd ol/ceia opyava, el /uieX\ei
2 dTroreX.eo drjo ecrOai TO epyov, [OVTCO KOL rat OLKOVO/JUKO)] TWV
& opydvcov rd fnev d-^rv^a rd Se e^^rv^a (olov ru> K
6 ^ev oial; atyvyov 6 Be 7rpa)pevs e^tyv^ov 6
30 vTTTjpeTTj^ ev opydvov eiSei rals Te^yais earriv), OVTCO KOI <TO>
olKOVOfJLLKW>> TO ICTTJ fJLd OpJCtVOV 7T/90? ^GOIJV 6(7Tt, Kal Tj KT?j(7l<>
25 Kal ev ^wanting in FM S and P 1 (first hand, added in the margin) || 677
Susem., 5t H 1 P 2 -3- C 4 M b , 5 ev Q Q b R b S b T b V b Bk. ; wanting in P 4 - 6 - U b W b L 8 Aid.
Hence [5] Susem. 1 - 2 || 26 /xAXot Koraes and perhaps F || 27 r<$ OLKOVO/J,LK^]
ruv oiKovofuicuv P 2 3 6 Q M b Q b R b S b T b U b W b L 8 Aid. Bk., with a later hand in C 4
and the rst hand in V b (the dative in V b by a later hand) ; [oi/Vw /cat T^> OI /COPO/U/COJ]
and 30 ourw Kal <r$ olKovofj.LK<$> Rassow Susem. Thurot once proposed to omit
30 ourw /cat and transpose 27 ourw /cat ...... 30 ecrrtV to follow 31 tarl || 31 [17...
...32 ecrrt, /cat] Schmidt
but only as much of it as relates to the
natural part concerns ot/coi/o/it/c??, and
that only indirectly. My defence of the
words, Rhein. Mus. xx. 510, is exposed
to objections not then foreseen : it would
seem that this is an un-Aristotelian in
terpolation. SUSEM. (32)
24 d vu Y^P KT M Cp- 2 8 n. (21).
Mere life, bare existence, ffiv, is of course
the immediate end of the household and
of household management : good life or
well-being, eiT fa, is the end which the
state has in view : but indirectly the state
and its end is the end of the household
2 2 9. Consequently we find that side
of oiKovo/uia, which is directed towards
securing the fitness of those belonging to
the household, and so towards the per
fecting of life, ranked above the use
and preservation of property, or the side
which is directed to mere living, 13 in.
SUSEM. (33)
25 TCUS wpurp^vais r^x.vais=the arts
which form distinct professions : as the
craftsmen of a particular trade-guild must
be provided with suitable tools &c. Ber-
nays. In any case the phrase means the
arts properly so called ; immediately be
low they are termed productive or creative
(TrotT/cris, TroirjTiKa opyava 4 with n.) as
contrasted with the merely practical ac
tivities to which Economic and the art of
life belong. According to Aristotle these
productive arts are to be subdivided into
(i) the useful, and (2) the imitative or
fine arts . In the sphere of prac
tice the end lies in the activities them
selves, evtpyeiai : in the sphere of the
arts, in certain definite special products,
fyya, distinct from the activities which
produce them : Nic, Eth. I. i. 2, 1094 a
3 f., 5ta0opd 5^ rts 0atVerat TWV re\wv
ra JJL^V yap el<nv evtpyeiai, ra 5 Trap
auras pya riva, I. I. 5 1094 a 16 Sia<ppeL
5 ov5ei> ras evepyeias auras efrat ra rA.?;
rwv Trpa^ewv rj irapa rai ras d XAo rt, /ca$a-
irep 7rt rQiv \^Qei(jQ>v ^Tri(jrt]^wv , II. 4. 3
1105 a 26, VI. 2 5 1139!) 2, II. 5. 3
1140 b 3, 6. In conformity with this dis
tinction Schlosser prefers to explain
wptcr/^i ats T. as arts restricted to de
finite distinctive ends. But can this be
expressed by the one word wptoT^rats ?
Fiilleborn wavers between this explana
tion and his own, which makes top. r^x- =
definite special arts )( the one all-em
bracing art of life. But conduct or the
art of life even if we include in it the
perfecting of life embraces at the most
only the practical activities ; and from
what has been said it follows that the
technical or productive activities, TroiTjcris,
would be excluded from it. Cp. also iv
(vn). 3. 3 n. SUSEM. (34)
2 30 4v dp-yavov el Sei] is classed
with, ranked under the head of, im
plements : cp. rds ev u X^s et Set apxds
Mcta, I. 3. 3 983 b 7, the material sort of
causes; ev /mopiov eidei De Cado I. T. 7
268 a 5. The same idiom frequently
where eldos and the genitive are almost a
paraphrase for the thing in question : vb-
p.wv ^ X.et /j.S.\\ov fldos TJ TroAirei as Pol. III.
15. 2, cp. vi (iv). 6. 9 6\iyapxtas et5os.
31 T<5 KTTjfjia 6 p"Ya,vov KT\] "the
chattel is an instrument to aid him in
I. 4. 4]
1253 b 24 1254 a 2.
155
opydvwv eVrt, /cal 6 SoOXo? /CTr)/J,d n e^v^ov. teal (II)
3 UKTTrep opyavov irpo opydixov Tra? [o] vTryperij^. el yap tf$v- 5
z>aro GKCLCTTOV T&V opydvwv K6\va0ev 77 TrpoaiaOavo^evov avro-
35 reXet^ TO avrov epyov, wcrnrep rd AatSaXou (fracrlv rj TOJ)? TOV
H^a/o-TOU T/HTroSa?, ou? (fryer iv 6 TTO^T?;? auroyu-arou? $etoz;
[u7ro]Suea-#at dywva, ovrcos al KpKi$es e/cepKi&v aural /cat ra
7T\fj/cTpa eiciOdpi^eVy ovSev av e Set cure rofc dp^iTe/crocriv
4 inrrjperwv ovre rot? Se<77rorat9 $ov\wv. rd /jiev ovv \ey6fjieva
I2 54 a ,/ \ ,/ / , \ \ / , v
opyava TroirjTiKa opyava ecm, TO oe Kir^La TrpafCTi/cov CITTO
32 [/cat] before 6 SoOXoj so that the apodosis begins here Thurot || 33 o wanting
in M a , erased in P 4 || 34 Trpoaiadbnevov Koraes [| 35 avrov II || 37 dvecrdai. P 1 II-
Bk. || ovTtos <eZ> Susem. 1 following William s translation sic si, OUTO; /cat Schmidt
|| aurat only T and a later hand in C 4 : the rest have aurat.
1254 a i [TCI /U&/...4 /J.QVOV] Schmidt
living." But it is not true conversely
that every instrument of use for living is
a piece of property or chattel. The
analogy of the distinctive crafts is against
this ; for the helmsman s assistant is not
his property, and the difference between
the ends for which instruments are used
in the two cases does not supply any
reason for this distinction. See further
i. 2 5^z., 6 10 . ^SUSEM. (35)
33 6 p-yavov irp6 op-ydvwv] an imple
ment superior to other implements; see
7 3 and De part, animal. I v. 10. 2 1 687 a
21 <rrt yap (sc. r/ %ep) wcrTrep ftpyavov
irpb opyavwv. For this relation 5ov\os =
/j.\f/vx.ov opyavov, 6pyavoi = a\l/vxos SouXos
Eaton cites N. Eth. vui. n. 6
3 35 Acu8d\ov] Not a real his
torical personage, but only the legendary
personification of the first prominent ad
vance in Greek architecture and more
especially in sculpture. Before him the
human figure had been represented with
the feet together, the arms joined to the
body and the eyes shut. He first made
the eyes look as if open, detached the arms
from the sides, and showed the feet step
ping apart (scholiast on Plato Meno 97 D,
Suidas s. v. AatSciXoi; irotTf/xara). When
contrasted with the archaic style his
figures came to be praised for their
illusive lifelikeness ; and this, or rather
his choice of attitudes of motion and
action for his figures, is all that is meant
by the story to which Aristotle here al
ludes, viz. that his figures moved as if
alive and had to be chained to prevent
their running away (Plato /. c.). See
Brunn History of the Greek Artists I. 14
23. SUSEM. (36)
36 6 TroiT|Tiis] Homer Iliad xvin.
376 6(ppa ot ai)r6yuarot delov Sucrat ar
crywi a. SUSEM. (36 b) There
is a similar ingenious fancy in Lytton s
Coming Race.
4 1 254 a 2 iroit\riKai=for production
(of fresh utilities embodied in material
objects), 7!7>a/crt/c6f for action = merely
for ^lse t i.e. as we see from 8 2 the con
sumption or utilization of commodities.
In Political Economy consumption is
either productive or improductive, and
the definition of wealth will vary accord
ing as we consider it from the producers
or the consumers point of view : Mill I.
c. 3, Sidgwick Principles I. c. 3 7.
On the distinction here made between
7rotT?crts and 7rpa|ts cp. nn. (34, 40) and
Zeller op. c. II ii 164, 177 ff., 580, 586,
652 ff. Consult also the special treatises
Ed. Miiller History of the Theory^ of
Art in Greece n. 38 ff., 374 ff., Teich-
miiller Forschungen {Aristotelian Re
searches] II. 12 62, Reinkens Aristotle
on Art i 12, 169 179; Susemihl in
the Jahrb. f. Philol. cv. 1872. 319 f.,
Rich. Schultz De poetices Aristoteleae
principles (Berlin 1874.8), Walter Theory
of Practical Reason in Gk. Philosophy
(Jena 1874. 8) p. 80 ff., 245 f., 276 ff.,
296 ff., 504 ff. Oncken very
justly remarks, op. c. n. 39 f., that even
from Aristotle s own point of view we
must be surprised at a conception of slave-
labour so one-sided that even its capacity
for production (i.e. of fresh objects of
utility) is denied. " This could not be
maintained in view of the fact that in the
art and industry of Hellas the whole of
the unskilled labour engaged upon the
156 nOAITIKON A. 4. [I. 4. 4
JAGV yap rrj<$ /cep/clSos erepov TL yiveTai irapd rrjv xprjaiv (II)
avrfjs, diro Je rrjs eo-0rJTO<? KOI rfj<; K\ivi]s r] Xprjcrw fio-
5 vov. en S eVet Sia^epei rj Troiycris eibei KOI tf Trpd^is, 6
Kal Seovrcu d^orepai opydvcov, dvdyrci] Kal ravra rr)i>
i 5 avrrjv % tz/ Sia(j)opdv. 6 Se (Bios Trpdfys, ov
/ou 6 SouXo? VTTTjpeTTjs TWV TTOO? T^z/ 7rpa^y...^ ft (P-
V ? v . , V V V / ?-**** v ,
TO oe KTTjfjia \eyeTai wairep KCLI TO /jbopiov. TO re yap /AG
ou /JLOVOV aXXov eorTl ^opiov^ a\\a KCLI aTrXw? d\\ov
Se /cal TO KTrjfJLa. 8to 6 yu/ez/ eo~7roT77? ToO 8oi;Xof
fjiovov, e/ceivov 8 ou/c ecmv o Se SoOXo? ou JAOVOV
oov\6<; ecrTiv, d\\d KOL oXco? e/celvov.
/9 yLtez^ oi;^ 77 (frvcrLs TOV $ov\ov Kal T/? T; (HvvafJbis, etc TOVTWV 7
^ (o 7/3 yLt?) avTov (pvo-et dXX a\Xou av6pW7ro<$ wv, OUTO?
</>i;cret SouXo? e<7TtV, aXXof 8 eaTlv dvOpwrros, o? az^ KTrj/jia rj [Bov-
5 5 wanting in M s and perhaps also in F, hence [5 ] Susem. 1
P 2.3. C 4 W h Ar. Aid., S^oz/rat 5 P 4 6 Q M b Q b R b S b T b U b V b L s Bk.
and p 2 (but epfj.rji>eia [sic] earl TOV oXws mg. 3 P 2 , i.e. a marginal note in dark yellow
ink), cb-Aws SAcos M P 1 , 6 Aws all other sources Bk. Susem. 1 2 [| The clause
15 6... 16 eo-rlv is noticed by Alexander of Aphrodisias on the Metaphys. p. 15,
6 ed. Bonitz || 15 u>v II 1 Paris. 963 Alex, (apparently) and P 4 (corrector in margin),
^ p2-6.QM b Q b R b S b T b U b V b W b L s Ar. Aid. Bk. and the ist hand in P 4 C 4 : no
doubt also in P 3 (an erasure here), yp. 8e p 1 in margin, ecrrtz> a later hand in C 4 ||
16 aAA ouS P 1 6 - W b L 8 Aid., dAA ovdlv M s || 77 T M 8 || SoOAos ta-riv or Sov\os r, T
apparently, dov\os &v M S C 4 and P 1 - 2 - 3 - Q M b ( ist hand), avdpwrros <$v SouAos wv P 4 , uvdpw-
production of fresh utilities was performed aAAov fjv.
exclusively by slaves, and thus the slave \i 6 S...o\ws tKetvou] Eth. Etid.
in the great workshops and manufactories VII. 9. i 1241 b 19 ou yap du ecrriv
was not merely an aid to the use or enjoy- (sc. SetrTror^s /cat SoCAos), aAAd TO /^^ ev,
ment of the goods of life but indirectly a TO de TOV ei>6s...Tov deairoTov 6 SovXos
producer of new commodities, at least in wcnrep ^bpiov /cat opyavov d^aipeTOf, TO 5
the sense in which this is true of the opyavov wairep SovXos d\^vxos.
weaver s shuttle." SUSEM. (37) 6 14 8vva(j.is] essential quality, at-
5 9 KTTJjj.a...fx6piov] Eaton com- tribute: a sense the word acquires because
pares Nic. Eth. v. 6. 8, TO 5e KTrj/j.a Kal the real nature of a thing is denoted
TO TCKVOV, e ws dV y irrfKiKov Kal -^wpitsQ^, by that which it irttyvKe iroielv Kal Trdo-xetz^ :
iSffwep fA^pos avTov; a chattel and a child, Bonitz Ind. Ar. s. v. Cp. Nic. Eth.
until he reaches a certain age and becomes v. i. 6 cv TOJ irpos frepov ^OWL T^V
independent, are as it were parts of one- dvva/Mv, Pol. IV (vn). i. 12 rrjv avrrjv
self. ^X i fivva^Lv Kal /mop(pr]i> , also IV (vn).
10 dirXws x\\ou] "belongs absolutely 4. 10 ; Plato Farm. 134 D r^v fivva/juv
to another". To express relation to and ^x iv V v ^X et ? Rep. IX. 588 B TO -re
dependence upon something else we find dSt/ceu Kal TO 5i /ccua irpaiTTeiv r]v eK&Tepov
(i) the genitive with elvat, as here and $x et - dvvafuv,
PL Rep. iv. 433 B ToiavTa ola elval TOV, 15 6 -yxp p.^ avrov KrX] Conversely
or (2) &&gt;e/ca with the genitive, as in in Metaph. I. i. 19 982 b 25 we have a
Mctapli. I. 2. 19 quoted in n. on 14, or definition of the free man avdpwrros,
(3) Trpos with the accusative, as in the (pa^v, eXevdepos 6 avTov >e/ca Kal fj.rj
technical term for the category Trpo s Ti, ^AAou (L. Schiller). SUSEM. (38)
and Rhet. i. 9. 27 Xev6tpov TO w Trpds
I 5. 3] 1254 a 3 1254 a 28.
157
eortVj, KTrj/na Se opyavov TrpaKTiKov Kal ^wpicrTOv) TTOTepov (II)
e<JT6 Tt? (pvcrei TOLOVTOS rj ov, Kal iroTepov (3e\Tiov Kal SiKaiov
Sov\vew r) ov, d\\d Tracra SouXeta. irapd fyvcriv CCTTL,
20 TavTa crKeTTTeov. ov %a\eTrov Se Kal TW \byw Oewprjaau Kal
2 GK TWV ytvo^evwv KaTa^aOelv. TO ydp dp^eiv Kal dp^eaOai
ov fjiovov TWV dvayKaiwv d\\d Kal TWV av^^epovTwv ICTTI.
Kal v0vs K yVT?js evia 8iecrTrjK Ta fjbev eTrl TO dp^eaOai
Ta 8 eVt TO dp^eiv. (Kal etSTj TroAA-a Kal dp^ovTwv Kal
25 dp^ofjbevwv eGTiv (Kal del (Be\Tiwv r) dp%rj r) TWV {3e\Tiova)v
3 dp^ofjuevwv, olov dvOpwTrov rj dijpiov TO ydp
diro TWV (3e\Ti6vwv (3e\Tiov epyov OTTOV Se TO
TO S dp^eTai, GOTTI, TI TOVTWV epyov} ocra ydp eK r jr\ei6vwv
TTOS uv p 1 P (5 Q b R b S b T b U b V b \V b L s Ar. Aid. Bk. and, with yp. before these words,
corr. 1 in the margin of P 2>3> , a correction in red ink on the margin of Q, and M b (corr.
in margin); [dvOpwiros o$z>] Koraes. Dittographia, whichever of the two SouXoj eo~rlv
or avOpuTTos div gave rise to all the other readings || 23 /cat evOus 24 dp-
Xeiv Susem. 1 transposed to immediately precede 28 ocra, but see Dittenberger op. c.
p. 1375 f. who has now been followed in punctuation. Cp. Comm. || 24 [/cat etSr)
...28 epyov] Schmidt who thinks the proper context is before (pavepov 1259 ^ : ^
and if so conjectures eirei de eldrj \\ 25 [17] dp^r] Koraes || 26 dvOpuiruv rj drjpiuv
Schmidt || 27 VTTO Bk. 2 instead of euro
17 x w P lo " T v ] Hereby opposed to
fjiopiov which when separated can do no
work, as we saw, 2 13 (Shilleto).
Thus the definition of 6 c/aVet SouXos
is opyavov e /mtl/i/xov irpo.KTt.Kov /catx^ptcrror,
5Xws d XXoi; 6V, and this exactly corres
ponds to the limited meaning of /cr^a
chattel , thrall , as for instance in
N. E. v. 6. 8 quoted above.
c. 5. To whom then does this defini
tion apply 1 Are there any (pv<rei 8ov\oi,
for whom a slave s estate is greater good
and just ?
1 2*" TW Xxvyw...^ TWV yivo|ievwv]
Aristotle emphasized the distinction be
tween the abstract and concrete treatment
of a subject. The former is.
as opposed
Organon
n. 354, Zeller Jl. irn 171 n. 2. Eaton
rightly compares IV (vil). i. 6.
2 22 TWV <rv|i<j>p6vTt>v] Under the
limitation laid down in. 6. 6, seen. (7).
24 i!8T] iroXXd] Cp. Nic. Eth. vin.
10 4, 5 : Plato Laws in. 690 A. The
variety implies a gradation.
25 Kal del P\TCVKT\] This passage
is referred to IV (vil). 3. 2, see the note:
cp. IV (Vil). 14. 19 TOV yap
17 TWV e\ev8epwv dpx n Ka\\Luv KO.I
fj.a\\ov /xer apeTrjs. SUSKM. (38 b)
Cp. also VIII (v). ii. 34.
3 26 TO yap diroT. KT\] Cp. Nic.
Eth. II. 6. 4 Tracra apery, ov av fj apeTrj,
auro Te ev e~x. ov aTroTeXe? /cat TO epyov ev
diroSiowaiv (Eaton).
28 TOTJTCOV ^p-yov] The function pro
per to them, the work which they ex
clusively perform in their relation of
government and governed, lies in the
mere exercise of command and tender
of obedience. See Plato Rep. I. 353 A:
TOVTO e/ccurrou epyov, o av 77 fj.6vov TL r) /cctX-
Xtcrra Ti2v aXXwz/ direpyd^Tai.
ocra -ydp] This argument only applies
to the general proposition /cat eidr) TroXXct
/cat dpxovTCov /cat a.p\ofj.ei>wv ecrrt, not to
the particular explanation attached to it
Kaidel (3e\Tiwv...e pyov. SUSEM. (39)
The sentence is parenthetical as in
I. i. 3, where see note, "For wherever
several parts, whether continuous or dis
crete, combine to form a single composite
whole, in all such cases may be discerned
a principal or ruling part and one subor
dinate which is ruled. This follows from
the whole order of nature (e /c causal, as
e.g. e/c Trpoat/^crewj, 2 2) and is seen to
hold good of living things."
158
nOAITIKflN A. 5.
[I. 5. 3
30
4
eo~Ti
8
10
Kal ylveTai ev TL KOLVOV, eiTe K avve^wv etre eV (II)
ev aTraaiv efJu^aiveTai TO dp%ov Kal TO dp%6-
\ >5 e / if > f
Kal TOUT eK T^?9 a7ra(T7] (pvcrews evvTrapj/ei/ Tot?
LS Kal *ydp ev rot? fjur) fieTe^ovcrL t^corjs
olov dp/movlas. d\\d TavTa fjiev laws ej;
*m\ pas e<JTl crKetyeW TO $e ,wov TrpcoTOv avveo TTjKev
35 Kal o~u)fjLaTOS, wv TO fjiev dp%ov eVrl (frvcrei, TO
5 fjuevov oel Se aKOTrelv ev rot? KaTa fyvcriv e^ovai /j,a\\ov
TO <pvo~eLj Kal /A?) ev rot? 8t,e<p0ap/jLevoi<>. Sto KOL TOI> /3e\-
TicrTa oiaKel/jievov Kal KaTa cra/Aa Kal KaTa ^v^v dv-
OpCOTTOV 0C0p7]TeOV } V U> TOVTO $7J\OV TQ)V ^/dp /jLO^OlJpCOV 7)
31 [/cat TOUT . ..32 ^ai/ uxois] Schmidt || 33 <ev> ap/u-ovla ? Susem. || 35 dpxo-
fjLevov (to mark a break in the construction) Bonitz || 39 /uox^pwj 77 /iox^^pws] pes-
tikntium ct prave William; apparently T had 0ctu Aws which Biicheler approves,
4 31 IK TTJS dircta-T^s <j>v(Tws] The
conclusion is based upon the whole order
of nature : it is a universal natural law,
not a special law applying to living orga
nisms (Bernays). SUSEM. (38 c) It
is not probable that CK with genitive = a
partitive genitive (Bonitz hid. Ar. 235 b
n), for the only support for such a use is
the spurious treatise Ilept <PVTUV, 836 a
s, and 828 b 27. It would be an
improvement, but hardly correct, to
render taking the whole of nature this
is preeminently true of living things .
32 TOIS [J^ p.Te x.ov<ri KT\] cu ei TO
X^pov TOV j3e\Tioi>6s effTLV eveKev, Kal TOVTO
(pavepuv OyCiotws v T T ots KaTa ri^vf]v
Kal Tots KaTa <pvaiv IV (vil). 14. 10.
33 ^PX 1 ! ^ ov dpH^ovCas] " Even in
things without life there is a species of
dominance, in music for instance": each
musical mode being ruled by its key
note, TI fj-ffftj (originally the note
struck by the middle string of the hepta
chord *). Compare Probl. xix. 33 920 a
21 T? yap ^af] Kal r/^efiwi/: 36
920 b 9 TO yp/j.oa Oai iariv awdcraLs sc. Ta?s
j, TO 5e ^x iv T^ 5 "Pos Tr\v ^ffj]V.
44 922 a 23 eTreidrj TUV /JLTa^i> r(av
TO H^ffOV [MVOV dpX~n T ^ iffTlV
...27 (pOoyyoL &v i] /ntcrr) Ka\ovuvrj /movrj
apx?l e&Ti OaT^pov TeTpaxopSov. On the
technical sense of apfj.ov[a = eWos dia-
n-aauv see Exc. ill. on Bk. V (vin).
Another political simile from the modes
Eth. End. VII. 9. 4: &TTI TO auTo e-rrl TUV
apiJ.ovi.Cjv Kal ruv ev Tals TroXiTeicus, inas-
* The term dominant for the fifth above the
y-note in a modern scale is quite different.
much as some are opBal, others
aeis. Giphanius and others wrongly take
ap/j.ov[as as qualifying dpx^~ dominance
in the sense, that is, of a blending or sub
ordination of parts. Cp. De Anima i.
4. i TJ]V apuovlav Kpdffiv Kal avvOecnv tvav-
Tiuv elvac. This would be the sense of
&vij,(pwvia, rather than of ap/jiovia, in music:
Probl. Xix. 38 921 a 2.
f i|o)TepiKWTpas t<rr\ o^Kexj/ews] " would
perhaps involve a discussion somewhat
outside the subject ". Obviously the
simple meaning here as in e. Trpd^ecs iv
(vn). 3. 8: not to be pressed (as by
Thurot Etudes 219 f., Ueberweg Hist, of
Phil. Eng. tr. I. 143) to signify those
parts of Aristotle s strictly scientific works
which are "dialectical" i.e. controver
sial, rather than " apodeictical " i. c.
purely scientific.
34 TO 8 u>ov KT\] The enumeration
is interrupted at apxb^evov by the qualify
ing phrase in parenthesis del d aKOTreif...
%X eLV m sucn a wa 7 tnat even the first
member ($$ov} is only quoted by its first
division into soul and body, while the
second subdivision into rational and
irrational parts of the soul is not added
until the enumeration is resumed, 6.
We should expect SevTepov, rplrov to
correspond with Trpurov, in place of them
we find TrdXti and TI e in 7. SUSEM.
(39 b)
5 This does not help us to determine
what is KaTa (pv<riv. But Aristotle s
meaning is the same as in 2 8 oto> yap
tan TTJs yevtaeus T\<r6eta"r]s
TT)p(f)V(Tiv elvai e/cdo"Tou. Cp.
Eth. ix. 9. 8, Cic. Tusc. i 32 (Eaton).
I. 5. 6] 1254 a 29 1254 b 9. 159
So^eiev av ap^eiv 7roXX/a9 TO crw/jia
<^auXo)9 Kal Trapd (pixriv e^etv. kern
8 ovv, wcTTrep \ejo/ji6v, Trptorov ev co&&gt; Oewprfaai Kal Se-
(TTroTiKrjv dp^xfiv Kai TroXiriKrjv rj fjiev yap "^V)(rj rov aw-
/i<ZT09 ap^et SecTTroTiKrjv dp^v, b Se ^01)9 T?;9 ope| : 6ft)9 TTO-
\LTtKrjv Kal fBaaiKiK^V ev ot9 fyavepov eanv OTL Kara (j)v-
aiv Kal (TVfJb^epov TO dp^ecrOai TCO acof^arL VTTO Trjs tyv-
Kal TO) TraOriTLKM l^opla) VTTO rov vov Kal TOV /Jiopiov TOV
e^o^T09, TO 8 ef icrov r) avdircCKiv fiXaffepbv
(II)
erasing 0a^Xws /cat just afterwards; /moxdypus, clue to a mistaken correction written,
over /xox#??pwj>, may have displaced 0auXcoj, as Schmidt once suggested: now he
suspects (j.oxOr)puv 77 : [77 ^ox^r/poJs ex6^rwi ] Studemund
1254 ^ 2 KCt ^^ 05<rtj wanting in M H and P 1 (ist hand), but added in the
margin by p 1 j| p 2 - 3 - have irepl for Trapd \\ 6 [/cai (3a<rt.\iKr]i>] Oncken, perhaps
rightly
6 1254 b 3 f. This analogy is carried
out in Nic. Etk. v. n 9, i. 13 1 8, HI.
3 18, 12 6. Cp. also Plato Phaedo 80
A ttreidav ev r<p aury ucrc ^vxv Kal aw/J.a,
T(f JJLV 5ov\eveiv Kal apxeffdat r)
TT/jocTTaTret, rrj 8e dp%eti Ka
feii ; Pliacdrus 237 f., not to mention
Rep, IX. 589 E, 590 c, D (Eaton). Several
characteristic phrases here come from
Plato. For similar analogies turning on
various forms of dpx n see Nic. Etk. v. 6.
8 f., ii 9 with Jackson s notes ; vm.
10 4, 5, ii \~ 6 - f
8 TW ira9T]TiKw... \6-yov ^x VTOS ] Cp.
iv (vn). 15. 9 with n. (935). More
precisely Aristotle distinguishes in the
human soul (i) the rational part or think
ing soul, yoOs, (2) the sentient appetitive
soul, cp. iv (vn). 7. 5 n. (786), and (3)
the nutritive or vegetative soul. The
lower animals have the two latter merely,
plants have only the third : see Zeller op.
c. n ii 497 f., 509 f., 566 ff. The nutri
tive soul is of no importance for the pre
sent inquiry, compare Nic. JEth. i. 13
n 14; here it is left entirely out of
the question as in c. 13 6, iv(vii). 14
9 f., 15 9, 10, where see the notes,
cp. also in. 4 6 ;/. (472). He further
divides the rational soul into two parts :
i cognitive reason (eTTicrTtj/uiOfiKov), ii re
flective or opining reason (XoyiffriKov,
do^aaTLKov). The latter includes that part
of the speculative reason which attains to
a mere idea or opinion (u7r6X7?i/ is = un
verified belief, assumption, 5o ct) but
falls short of true knowledge, and more
especially the practical reason with its
peculiar faculty of taking counsel or de
liberating with itself (/3ou\eim/coV, see 13
7 n.), or in other voids the faculty of
reflexion from which Aristotle has borrow
ed the name (XoyicrTiKoi*) for all this part
of the reason. It was explained in ;/. (34)
on I. 4. i that the practical reason is
again divided into (i) didvoia Trpa/crtK?/,
practical reason in the strict sense, and
(2) constructive, i.e. technical, reason, 5.
Kri, which when developed becomes
artistic skill*: see A r ic. Eth. vi. i
5f; ^ 3, 55 4:3, 5 8, 12 2;
Metaph. vi. i. 5 1025 b 25 f. Compare
Walter and Zeller as above quoted, and
in modification of their views Susemihl
Studies in the Nic. Eth. in the Jahrb.
f. Philol. cxix. 1879. 737 ff.
If we combine with the above the re
sults stated in the note on I. 13. 6 we
obtain the following scheme of the rational
soul according to Aristotle :
* In the Politics however Te\vT] generally de
notes (i) Art as opposed to Nature, (2) the total
activity in"any~3epartfflenT"WtfaTsdever of techni
cal skill or the construction ofjiew products ;
the exercise ofcfafts and industries orall kinds,
including occasionally even practical^ aptitudes
such as Household Management (ot/coi Oyu.i.Krf).
This is the sense in 4 i above, where the
former or arts proper are accordingly distin
guished from practical aptitudes by the addition
of a3pi<rfxeVais, cp. n. (34). It is only in ii 6
that TexviKajTorai epyacri ou = occupation where
artistic skill is most required : see n. (102).
160
nOAITIKHN A. 5.
[I. 5. 7
7 TrdXiv ev dvOpwTro) /cal TO?? a/v/vot? ^coot? oocravTO) 1 ? TO, 12
ii /n,ev ydp r]fjuepa TWV dyplwv /SeXT/&&gt; TTJV (frvaiv, TOVTOLS Be
/3e\Tiov dp^ecrOai, VTT dvOpwrrov Tvy^dvei ydp cro)-
OVTWS. eTi Be TO dppev Trpos TO 6r)\v <pvcrei TO
TO Be %elpov /cal TO /jiev dp^ov TO Be dp^pfjievov.
15 TOZ^ avTov Be Tpoirov dvayKoiov eivcu KOI ejrl Trdvpwv
8 TTGDV. ooroi fj,v ovv TOCTOVTOV BiecrTdaiv oo~ov tyv xr} crcb/jiaTOS is
Kal dvOpwTTOs Orjpiov (Bid/ceiVTai, Be TOVTOV TOV TpoTrov, bcrwv
13 ecrri Ar. (?) cst igitnr, Suscm. 3 (a misprint) || 14 II- Bk. omit /cai || 16 8ce-
crracri TOGOVTOV M s , Stecrracrt TOLOVTOV I 1 |j / I XTJS crcDjCca /cat avOpdoirov 6-r)piov ? Thurot,
more correctly ; but perhaps an improvement upon Aristotle himself || 1 7 oe
wanting in M s l n 3 Q b T b Ar. Aid. and P 2 (ist hand, supplied by corr. 2 )
(in the wider sense)
= VOVS TTpaKTLKOS
didvoia
(in the strict sense)
Now in the Politics we have to deal
calj cason (in _thc strict sense of tlie_termj|_
nvor~lho_spr.ori7r)nrr nt i lTe_souT7 the cu tr-
_ ^
Zrepov TO opeK.TLKbv i<al (ftevKTiKOv,
OVT a\\r)\wv oure TOV alffOriTiKov dXXo,
TO dvoiL dXXo) in regard to its appetitive
or emotional, and not to its sentient or
percipient side. Obedience to this su
premacy constitutes moral or ethical
virtue, virtue of character, rjOos. Cp. I.
13. 6 ., NIC. Eth. i. 7 12 f., 13 10 f.;
VI. 12 6. SUSEM. (40)
7 10 ira\iv...i3 ^TI 8e] See on 4 a
34 above, cotravrcos] Here again, in man s
relation to the animals we see the same
thing : clearly, from what follows, the
difference between ruler and ruled and
the advantage derived by the one from
the rule of the other. SUSEM. (41, 42)
Cp. i i did TT/V ffWTrjpiav (Congreve).
1 1 TO, Tjp.pa TCOV d-ypicov] Plato Po-
liticus 264 A, difiprjTO TO ^ov rw rt^acrw
/cat dypiy. TCI ptv yap ^x VTa TLdaa-evea-
6ai <f>v<riv r/^epa TrpoffeipyTai, ra oe /j-r/
^X vra tiypia- A division which Aristotle
censures as unscientific De part, animal, i.
3. 13 643 b 3, iravTO. yap u>s direiv, off a
rj/mepa, /cat ciypia Tvyx,dvei OVTO..
13 r6 appev KT\] Cp. 12 i nn. (108,
109), 13 pff. (117, 120). SUSEM. (42 b)
14 KpiTTOv...xipov] Elsewhere
Orj\v is declared to be wcnrep dppev
pcj/mevov, or dvaTnjpia. This is Plato s
doctrine of the natural inferiority of the
sex : Rep. V. 455 E e?rt irdcriv dcrOevecrTepov
yvvrj avopbs,LaiiJSVl. 781 B oacpde r] OtjXaa
ripTiv 0i crts eaTi Trpos dpeTrjv -^eipuv Trjs
T<JJV dppevwv, Tiinaeiis 42 A, r> : TO KpeiT-
TOV TOLOVTOV eitj yevos . . ,dv)jp, 90 E f.
15 e-rrl irdvTwv dvO. sc. in relation to
one another.
8 16 oo-oi. .,17 0i]piov] Cp. in. ii.
5 KO.LTQL T L dicKpepoixnv eVtot T&V Oripiwv, cus
eiros direlv ; How is the existence of such
men possible, on Aristotle s own psycho
logy? There is a difference of kind
between man and the brutes, the latter not
having a rational part of the soul (see n.
on 6 above) ; but between the most
perfect and the least perfect of men there
is at most but a difference of degree, even
when in the latter this rational part is
reduced to the minimum immediately
described, n. (45). We must understand
Aristotle to follow the general current of
Greek ideas- and the usage of language
when "he regards bestial limitationtp
sensual --enpyiri put y callousness to~TnsuiT,
indifferencex) knowleileT^oarsETre^s ami
vulgarism act or speech iff general as a
servile, .. degraded disposition dvdpairo-
5w5ta ^(Schiller, who quotes Orelli Arts-
I. 5. 9]
1254 b 10 1254b 23. 161
teal TOVT eanv air avrwv (II)
epyov ?; rou O-W/JLCITOS
TOL /JL6V i(7L
ravrrjv rrjv dp^rjv, elirep real Tot?
6 &vvdfj,6vos d\\ov elvai
\<TTIV) /cal 6 KOIVWVWV \6jov ToaovTOv ocrov
Q
($10
al<j
ecrri yap
/cat d\X,ov
d\\d
d\\d
18 tffrtv M s , An- P 2 - 3<4 -QM b T b Aid. Bk., e<rrat S b || 20 tfvrrep Biicheler for
efaep, but see Dittenberger <?/. <r. p. i366f. || &m> a/>a ? Susem. ; since no 5k cor
responds to the preceding ^v ovv and p.v Thurot suspects some deeper corruption,
a lacuna, it may be, before OTI yap \\ 216 5uj>a ( aefoj...22 /cat suspected by Schmidt
|| 23 Ao7ou H 2 Ar. Bk. Schneider Spengel, perhaps rightly || [al(r6av6/j,eva] Bender
[a\\d] Spengel al^ddvovrai ? Schneider
totelcs Pddagogik 69). The passages to
consult are ill. 4 u, iv(vn). 17 7,
9; alsov(vm). 6 8, iv(vn). 15 5
with the notes: Nic. Eth. I. 5 3: ill.
10 8, 1 1 3 : iv. 5 6 : and the further
references under avdpcnrodudris Bonitz/;/^.
Ar. 54 b 30 f. SUSEM. (43)
19 OLS (3e \Tiov KT\] Plato Rep. ix.
590 D o;j afj.eii>ov ov TTO.VTI virb deiov /cat
(f>povifj.ov apxecrdai ^ctXtcrra fj.ev olKelov
^XO^TOS ev avr^, el 8 fj.rj, ^udev e0e(rrcu-
ros : a passage which contains something
more than the germ of Aristotle s whole
doctrine of natural slavery.
20 TOIS lp7][X6VOLS] TW CrcO^ClTt, TO) f
TradrjTiKijj /Aopiip, rw Ofjpiw, ry 9?7\et (Con- j
greve).
9 21 816 Kal a XXou <TTUV] As a
general rule slavery is due to a natural
inferiority. But this must not be pressed
too far: from c. 6 an unjust slavery is
possible, cum hi sunt alterius qui sui
possunt esse, Cic. De Rep. in. 37
(Congreve). SUSEM. (44)
22 o(rov al<r0dv(r0cu
In c. 13 14^16 r.npnrity fo ndmit reason
or understand its commands (alcrOdvea--
0at) is ascrTbed to these natural slaves in
a higher_H^ree than to cMMrejir-fe&e
nofe^lor children, while their reason is
still undeveloped, attend too much to
the mere suggestions of the instincts and
passions of sense; Nic. Eth. I. 3. 67"ifi.
12.6. Moreover Aristotle is here assert
ing more than his own psychology justi
fies: for what he here leaves to the
slave s practical reason is more correctly
attributed to the irrational soul, that is,
to speak accurately (see n. on 6), the
appetitive soul, in iv (vn). 14 9, cp.
Nic. Eth. i. [3. 15 f. : namely, the ca
pacity of allowing itself to be guided by
H.
practical reason. As the power to reflect
is to Aristotle amongst the most essential
peculiarities of the practical reason see
n. (40) on 6 this cannot with any con
sistency be wholly denied to the slave as
it is here and c. 13 7 (where see note)
if it be once granted that the slave s soul
has a rational part under which is in
cluded the possession of practical reason.
At the most there can be merely an ap
proximation to the state here described.
See further on c. 13 12. A6yos,
which here = reason, is the jSouXeim/cdi
f 3 7 ( see n -} - rnore precisely, opOos
\6yos in the Ethics, right or sound un
derstanding as the law and criterion of
human action in the sphere of practice
and -morals. Preeminent skill in the ex
ercise of this \6yos is 0p6z/r?crts = insight,
prudence : see Zeller op. c. n ii 652 f.,
Walter op. c. 353 503. Aristotle is
consistent when he allows (ppoviyns to
none but the 0u<ret dea-irorTjs : I. 13. 8 n.
(115), 111.4. 17 n. (497). But if the (f>v(rei
8ov\os were wholly devoid of practical
reason of his own he would, by Aristotle s
own definition, cease to be a human
being and to possess even the scanty
remains of capacity for human and moral
virtue which is left him according to c.
13 114 : cp. *&& c. _ig_ i with
my note (19 b). He would then~be re
duced to the level of the brute, in himself
unable to resist the promptings of sensual
desires. Seew. p. 211. SUSEM. (45)
23 Xxxyw al<r0.] On atcr07;<m, alffdd-
vefftiai. see n. (570) upon ill. n. 9.
SUSEM. (45 b) If \6yov is the right
reading, then the copula is omitted as if
ailaOavbfJieva. were an adjective : "the other
animals (are) not attentive to reason, but
obey their passions.
II
162 nOAITIKHN A. 5. [I. 5. 9
vTrrjpeTel. Kal rj ^peia Se rrapaXXdrTei
25 r) ydp Trpbs rdvayKala TW crcofjiaTi {Sorjdeia ylveTai Trap
dfjifyolv, Trapd Te TWV Sov\a)v Kal Trapd rwv rj/JLepwv foo
10 fBov\erai jJiev ovv r) fyvcris Kal Ta atctfJiaTa Siafyepov,
Troielv Ta TWV e\ev6pwv Kal TWV Sov\coi ) rd pev
Trpo? Trjv dvayKaiav ^prjcnv, TCI 8 opdd Kal d^prjcrra
30 Tft? TOiavTas epyacrias, a\\ci ypYjcriiJia Trpo? Tro\i~riKov
{Blov (OUTO? Se Kal yiverai Siyprj/mevos el ? Te TTJV TTo\efJiiKriv
%peiav Kal rr}v elprjviKrjv), crv/ji/3alvei Se TroXXaKts Kal rov-
vavTiov, TOI)? jJLev Ta o-aiuaTa e^eiv eXevOepcov TOZ)? 8e T? (p. 8)
^rv^d^ errel TOVTO ye fyavepov, co? el TOCTOVTOV yevoivro Sid- 15
35 (f>opoL TO awfJia uovov ocrov al TWV Oewv etVoz^e?, rovs vrro-
\eiTT o/Jievovs TTCLVT^ (fialev dv ctf/ou? elvau TOVTOIS $ov\evei-v.
i 11 el S errl TOV crcu/naTOS TOVT* d\7]0es, TTO\V SiKaiorepov errl
rrjs "^^X^ TOVTO Siajplcrdat XX ov^ 6/u/otw? pdBtov ISeii
TO Te TTIS drwyris /caXXo? Kal TO TOV
28 Troter P 3 - 6 QM b S b T b Ar. Aid. and ist hand of P 2 (emended by corr.-) || ^er
<ra7reti a /cat>, or something similar, Schmidt with great probability; opda]
vwdpa Reiske || 31 /cat wanting in L s . [o5ros...32 elp7)i>iKr]v] Schneider and Schmidt,
perhaps not unreasonably || 33 e\ev0tpuv] erepuv or a little before <rwv ov\wv>
rous /AW Ileitland wrongly : Aristotle s meaning would have been clearer if he had
added /JLOVOV after crw^ara or after ^u^ds i| 36 Oncken thinks the conclusion omitted
after dovXevew ; but it cajne first: /3ou\ercu fj.ev ovv ...... roi)s 8e rds / I xas
24 f. Kal r\ XP 6 ^ a ^^ irapaXXaTTti KT\] and coloured races ! Zeller op. c. II ii
"Moreover the service afforded by the 691 ;/. (2). See on I. 2 4 n. (13).
slave is not very far removed from that of Lang however from another point of
domesticated animals; viz. bo^Ulyait}-4Vf7?j! i view justly remarks op. c. Essays 60:
the dative) towards-- the necessaries of " we must remember no one would have
life." Comp. Plato Polit. 289 B: slaves been more bitter than Aristotle against
and domesticated animals as species of the negro-slavery on plantations of mo-
the same genus Trepl fyuv KTTJCTLV TWV dern days. To turn the servants of the
-r)[jitpwv Tr\rji> 8ov\ui> : also c. 2 5 above . noble life into tools of limitless money-
(15): and 6 10 n. (57). SUSEM. (46) making would have been, in his view,
10 27 POV\TCU] Nature designs, but unnatural. We must remember also, that
is sometimes thwarted. See 6 8 ;/. (56). he would have held up the promise and
32 xptfav] "including services in reward of freedom, to stimulate his serfs
war as well as in peace." to virtuous lives, and, with freedom in
34 eirel TOVTO -ye KT\] Cp. iv (vn). prospect, and friendship in the meantime,
14. 2. Congreve and Eaton compare with every lovely rite of divine service
Herod. V. 47. This remark has a truly performed for their sake, there may have
Hellenic ring. To the Greek, mental been worse lives than those of the Greek
worth is necessarily and naturally pre- slaves." SUSEM. (47)
sented in a harmonious external form ; 11 38 ov\ 6p.os paSiov ISeiv KT\]
and in the very beauty of the race, of Eaton compares Nic. Eth. I. 13. 16 d\\
which he was thoroughly conscious, Ari- iv rots ffufj.a<ri [nkv dpw/xev TO
stotle finds direct proof of its superiority pevov, eiri de TIJS
to the barbarians. What a complete jus- Should we not rather think of Plat.
tirication this for the slavery of the black Phacdr. 250 n E, Xen. Mem. ill. 10. 3?
I. 6. 2]
1254 b 24 1255 a 8.
163
55* OTL fj,ev Tolvvv eldl (frvaei nves 01 fJbev e\evOepot o"i Be Sou- (II)
Xo, (fravepov, ot? KOI crv^^epei TO $ov\eveiv Kal SiKaiov
6 ea-riv on 8e Kal ol rdvavrla fyda-Kovres rpojrov nvd \eyov- is
aiv opOws, ov ^aXerrov ISeiv. S^w? jdp XeyeTat TO 8ov\V6Lv
5 teal 6 8o{)Xo?. eo~Tt ydp T/,<? Kal Kara VOJJLOV SouXo? Kal
8ov\evo)v 6 jdp vofjuos b[Jio\o>yia T/9 eanv, ev w rd Kara
2 7ro\,e^ov Kparovfieva TWV Kparovvrwv elvai ^aaiv. rovro Sr)
TO SiKaiov TroXXot- TWV - ev Tot? vofjiois wcrTrep prjropa ypd-
1255 a 1 oTi...b 3 Svvarai is cited by Pseudo-Plutarch de nobil. c. 6, p. 932 B sq.
5 /cat before /card omitted in II 1 M b Ar. Aid. Plut. and in P 3 (ist hand added by a
later hand) || 6 ev 17 Bas. 3 , e0 $ omitting the following (paalv Bernays; Hampke
punctuates 5ov\eijuv (6...rts eortV), ev y /cr\, cp. Hermes XIX. 577 .
the doctrine of natural slavery (against
Ridgeway 129 f) "do, to a certain ex
tent, argue correctly. For the terms
slavery and slave are used in two senses.
< Besides the natural > there is also the
conventional slave and conventional
slavery; this convention being a species
of agreement whereby the conquered in
war are declared the property of their
conquerors."
6 6 Yap v6[j.os...7 4>acrv] Xenophon
Cyr. VII. 5. 73 vo/uos yap ei> iracnv avdpw-
Trots a t Sto? ecrrtf, orav TroXe/x.oiVrwi TroXts
dXy, TUV eXdvrwv elvai. /cat ra crri/mara rCov
ev r-fi TroXet /cat TO, xpT^ftara (Congreve).
It is well known that customs and usages
purely conventional and resting on mere
tradition were called VO/JLOL by the Greeks
and considered more sacred and venerable
than the written laws: ill. 16 9 ert
Kvpiwrepoi. /cat irepi Kvpt-wrepuv rwv Kara
ypdfj./n-ara vo/uwv ol Kara ra Wt] elfflv, and
vii (vi). 5 2. Yet these "unwritten
laws " are regarded as if each of them
could be derived from a definite law
giver : see on n. 9 12, 14. SUSEM.
(48) Cp. Grote Plato I. 249 f., 252 n.
2 7 " This conventional right is by
many jurisconsults arraigned, like a de
magogue, of unconstitutionalism." Yet
slavery among the ancients was at first
an unmingled blessing an important
conquest of the spirit of humanity. \Yhen
len _were altogether 1 >arhaotts they_
iHpi~trrejl^3H5gHgF^^ : Lecky Hist, of
Rationalism II. 254.
8 -ypd^ovTCU irapavofiw^j This in
dictment was laid against any private
citizen who had proposed or carried an
unconstitutional law or popular decree,
i. e. one which contravened laws or decrees
in force at the time and not previously
II 2
c. 6 77^r^ w then one species of
slavery, which is natural. But there is
another species, conventional slavery : i.
The justice of the convention which allows
prisoners taken in war to be sold for slaves
is unconditionally challenged by some (A]
and defended by others \E] : i. The
reason why there are these conflicting
views, and why nevertheless they have a
common ground, is the implication of
virtue and superior fora. The issue
turns on what constitutes right and jus
tice : 3. Weakness of the one vieiv (A],
which implies a denial of the right of su
perior virtiie to rule: 4. Others (C),
again, argue that all slavery, so far as it
is legal, is just : but the war might be tin-
just, and they would refuse to apply their
principle consistently to captive Greeks :
5. This refusal leads them back to TO
0u(Tct 5ou\oj> : 6. Illustration from the
conception of nobility: 7. Men are
marked off for true freedom and true no
bility by virtue (aperrj) : 8. Recapitula
tion: 9, 10.
See Excursus n. ; Hampke in Philo-
logus xxiv. 1866. 172 175, who com
pares iv(vii). 2 12 18; in The
Transactions of Camb. PJiilol. Soc. II.
1883 Jackson pp. in 116, Postgate pp.
119 123, Ridgeway pp. 128 130; and
Susemihl in ffermesxix. 1884. =,76 ^88.
TteM&ftiJta iuniud^s of AT. /^LCC.
theoretical conclusions by a comparison
with various received opinions.
1 1255 a i ff. " It is thus plain that
in certain cases there are natural freemen
and natural slaves, for the latter of whom
the estate of slavery is both advantageous
and just. And yet it is easy to see that
those who maintain the opposite " viz. of
164
nOAITIKflN A. 6.
[I. 6. 2
<f)oi>Tai Trapavo/jicov, co? Seivbv el TOV fiidaaaOai Swa/juevov (II)
10 /cal KaTcl CivvajJiiv KpeiTTOvos eVrat $ov\ov /cal dp%6 pevov
TO ftiaaOev. /cal roi? fiev ovrcos Sofcel rot? 3e e/celvws, /cal
3 rwv (70(j)cov. CLITIOV Be TavTrjs TTJS d^io-pijTrjo-ews, /cal o 17
?ro//6t TOI)? \6<yovs eTraXXaTTeiv, OTL TpoTrov iiva dperrj TVJ-
[/ccu] Koraes, wrongly
Bernays differently, see p. 209. SUSEM.
(51)
1 3 Xoyovs, often taken as arguments,
or again as = propositions, should be ex
plained more widely as "the propositions
[conventional slavery is just, is unjust]
together with the arguments supporting
them and the conclusions adopted in con
sequence of them," thus nearly = views
or reasonings (Postgate<?/>. c. 121, 123^.),
platforms (Heitland), theories.
liraXXciTTetv, as in I. 9. 15, vi(iv). 10.
2, vii(vi). i. 3; see Ileitland s examina
tion of these passages Notes ii 13, and
the passages collected by Jackson op. c.
114 n. Bonitz Index s.v. compares ^?ra/z-
(poTepi^eiv and explains that from the
sense of "to alternate" it comes to be
applied ad ca quae inter duo genera ita
suut interposita lit cum utroqne cohacrc-
ant. " Said of two different, or even
opposite, things or views which yet have
something in common and again approxi
mate or meet or even cross or run into
each other or are in inseparable con
nexion" (Susem.). Oncken took it of
arguments crossed or traversed by counter
arguments. Heitland and Jackson of
propositions overlapping : but the former
thinks these are the sub-contraries (a) some
slavery is just, (l>) some slavery is unjust:
the latter holds that it is the Xoyot of (A)
and (B) all slavery is unjust, all slavery
is just which overlap : because the
"slaveries which (A) pronounces unjust,
(B) pronounces just." (See by all means
the context of this remark, Ex. II. p. 208.)
Tpoirov nva KxX] "in a sense vir
tue, provided it finds proper appliances,
is in fact best able to subdue by force,
and the conquering side always has ad
vantage in good of some sort." These
two clauses are not opposed (against
Jackson 114 f., Postgate 122), they merely
put the same thing in a different form.
There is always a presumption that j3ia
carries with it dpeT?? : this is the common
ground where the two contending parties
meet, and here Aristotle also agrees with
them. But from this they draw opposite
inferences as to the nature of TO 5i
as to when it is just to use force.
repealed. Proceedings had to be com
menced within a year from the day when
the proposal was made or adopted ; other
wise the proposer escaped a personal
prosecution. The illegality might con
sist in the substance of the proposal, in
its form, or in both at once. A decree
(i/ ?70t(T / ua) would be formally unconstitu
tional if brought before the popular as
sembly without consent of the /3cwX?}
previously obtained, although there might
be no decree proposed by the BOV\T} on
the same subject which it could contra
vene (Meier and Schomann AttiscJier
Process 283 f.). The comparison here
relates to illegality in substance, for the
sense is that the convention or positive
law in question violates natural law.
SUSEM. (49)
9 cos 8tv6v KrX] "on the ground that
it is monstrous if mere ability to subdue
by force, and superiority in might alone,
shall give ownership and rule over that
which it subdues." T.he-j^pj
o C-this vie wL_are_ no_doubJ:_Llie. same as
those_who_declare aJl_slavery to__be_c.ori :
t.rjuX-lo^iaJ^i^L: see 4> T0 s ^ v euVota
SOKCI TO diKaiov elvoiL and 3 i, TCHS 5e
Trapd <pv(nv TO <5e<r7ro-eti>, where see note.
SUSEM. (49 b) Note the genitive after
ap-xpv-tvov, "subject of the coercer".
ii "This then is their view: others
again take the former view"- (e/cet^ws):
namely, that prescribed by the conven
tion or positive law mentioned in i : doKec
eKeivus repeats the ipaalv of line 7. For
convenience we may denote by (A) the
opponents (rots ^fv], and by (B) the
defenders of conventional slavery (TCHS
5e); the view of the latter is shared,
though on other grounds, by a third
party (c) the TLVS of line 22.
3 12 "The reason of the conflict"
between (A) and (B) "and what" at the
same time "makes the (two opposed) views
overlap." The general sense, as explained
p. 206, is that (i) the views of (A) and (B)
stand sharply opposed (cp. 19 diaffTdvTuv
%wpts), and yet (ii) they have a common
point of contact, the two distinct facts (i)
and (ii) being due to one and the same
cause, the implication of virtue and force.
I. 6. 4]
1255 a 9 1255 a 20.
165
KOI (Bid^ecrOai Svvarcu /*\WTa, KOL (II)
15 ecrriv del TO /cparovv eV VTrepo^f) djaOov TWOS, ware Sorcelv
/it?) dvev dpeTrjs elvcu TTJV ftiav, d\\d rrepl rov &IKCILOV fJio-
4 vov elvai rrjv d^io-fB^TTja-iv (bid yap TOVTO rot? fjiev evvoia
So/cei TO SiKdiov elvai, rot? S avTo TOVTO Si/caiov, TO TOP
KpeiTTOva dp xeiv) &rei $iao~TdvTwv 76 y^wpls TOVTWV TCOV \6- IB
20 <ycov ovT6 lo-^ypov ovSev e-^ovcriv OVTC TnOavbv aTepoi \6yoi, co?
17 evvo^ia Lambin, wrongly: < / u,er > evvoias ? Schneider
14 xo/37?7ta = means, resources: 77 e/c-
ros %. favourable external circumstances,
external goods Nic. Eth. x. 8 4; so of
the individual Pol. iv(vn). 13 3. In a
wider sense, anything with which the state
requires to be furnished, even population,
territory iv(vn). 4 2, 4.
13 1 6 6 Ti...piav] Fiilleborn remarks
with truth that the qualifications neces
sary here (amounting in all to cctcris
ing obedience which an inferior renders
to a kind and considerate superior . To
take it solely to mean the goodwill of
governors to governed seriously invali
dates the protest of the anti-slavery party
irapa fyvaiv elvai. TO 3ecr7r6fetz> ; masters
might always urge the plea that they held
their slaves from disinterested motives.
Giphanius notes well : benevolentia et
bona existimatio magistratus et dominos
paribus) really make the whole theory peperit. Cp. vii(vi). 5 4, ro; VIII (v).
C.-L I.-. t t ~ L! 4-1,:.,^ :., *-!,:.-, . _ & . _.. _*>__. _.v_._. > -T . ^_ _
futile, because other things in this
connexion are so seldom equal . Bodily
qualities, superior numbers and wea
pons, all sorts of external circumstances
often largely contribute to victory. Con
quest is no valid proof of the higher
excellence of the conqueror : besides, the
one kind of mental capacity which has
r i : avayKcuov euVous elf at rcus TV-
. TOVS 5ov\ovs /cat rots yvvaiKas.
1 8 TO TOV KpeiTTova dpxiv] Cp.
Thuc. v. 105. 2, Plato Gorgias 483 c f.
19 eirei answers the sentence 15 dWe
SoKelv. . . " If however these two views stand
opposed and apart, the former has neither
force nor plausibility, (implying as it does)
contributed to his victory is no guarantee "\that the superior in virtue has no right to
that he also possesses the other which rule and be master." %w/3ts is used pre-
qualifies him for wise government, above picatively, diao-TavTiov is the opposite of
all for the exercise of despotic rule over a FTraAXdrretj : if the point of contact be-
conquered foe. Nevertheless Aristotle j[ween the two views be lost, if they
would be borne out by a belief in the /stand opposed without any community.
or the sense of separation the passage
quoted by Jackson (see p. 208) DC
long, et brcv. vitae, 464 b 26, is most
instructive: iroTepov TavTa /ua/c/oo/3ta /cat
moral government of the world*: in the
success attends upon The most
a us EM.
15 wo-ToKliv KT\] "hence it seems
that force to coerce is never independent
vyieiva. T&V (pvcrei
of virtue, but that the dispute turns on T? Kexupio-Tai /cat TO
the nature of right and justice.
4 17 f. ("For this reason some take
the mutual goodwill" of governors and
governed "to constitute right, others stand
on the naked right of the stronger to
rule.") The parenthesis is due to Ridge-
way ; Heitland saw that this remark
breaks the course of the argument (p.
14). The grounds for the view of (B),
which had not been stated above i, 2,
are now given by 5id TOVTO.
TOIS nev] Clearly again the unqualified
opponents of slavery. SUSEM. (50 b)
Jackson, 115 ., first proved that one
meaning of eilvoia is loyalty: the will-
* [And no less by the scientific doctrine of
the survival of the fittest.]
rj KO.T
XaTTet TO,
OJ /cat TO
voaovs eira.\-
TT\V tyvcnv crw/xaTa TO?S
s, /car evt as 5 ouSej/ Kw\vti
voG<JoQi.s elvai yu,a/cpo/3toi;s oi>Tas. Others
(Schneider, Jackson, Postgate, Ridgeway)
take 8ia.(FTa.vT(avsi per se ponantur, if
disentangled, each taken separately.
20 drepot \6 < yoi = one of the two sets
of arguments advanced, that of (A).
Postgate (pp. c. 123) thinks aYepos \o7os
would be clearer. Schneider took it =
neutra ratio: to which Hampke rejoined
that this sense requires ouSerepot. Jackson
however still maintains that it is a true
plural as in 13 TOVS \6yovs , but then
we should have d/j.<f>oTpoi: his novel
and ingenious interpretation, op. c.\i f.,
166
nOAITIKON A. 6.
[I. 6. 4
5 ov Set TO (3e\TLOV tear dperrjv dp^eiv Kol Seairo^eiv. oXw? (II)
8 dvTe XpiJievoi rives, o5? oiovrai, SiKaiov TWO? (6 ydp VO/JLOS
Sl/caiov TI) rrjv Kara 7ro\e/jiov 8ov\eiav riOeaai Sitcalav,
cifAa Se ov fyacrLv. rr]v re yap dp^rjv evoe^erat, fir) i-
25 Kaiav elvai rtov 7ro\e/A(ov, teal TOP dvd^iov oovkedeiv ovSa-
fjLO) 1 ? civ (f>ai7j rt9 Sov\ov elvaC el Se fjuij, o-v/ji/Br/creTai rot)? (P. 9)
evyeveardrovs elvai So/covvras oov\ovs elvai teal etc O~OV\CDV, edv
6 <TVfij3y TTpaOrjvai \7j<pOevra^. ^ioirep avrovs ov ftovKovrat,
\e<yeiv oov\ovs, d\\d roi)? /3ap(3dpov$. Kairou orav TOVTO \e-
30 ywcrw, ovBev a\\o fyiTOvcnv TJ TO (frvcret 8ov\ov oTrep e
dp%r)s elTTO/Jbev dvay/cr) yap elvai Tivas $dvcu rou? f^ev
7 Travra^ov Sov Xovs roi)? 8e ovfta/jiov. TOP avTov Be rpoTrov K.CLI 10
24 a/x,a] 6 Xwj II 1 P G M b T b L s (7^. a/xa p 1 in the margin), aTrXws apparently Ar. ||
27 /cat e/c 5ov\uv transposed to follow 1255 b 2 a7a$oV Schmidt |) 28 avTotis Monte-
catino and perhaps P :i . Over this word p 2 has the gloss TOVS evyevds /cat
which M s has in the text after \7](p0frTa.s
O p 1 in the margin
32
e
II 1 , 7p. a
departs widely from that here given.
Ilampke also takes 19 TOVTWV T&V \6ycov
as a singular of one view and hence infers
that aVepoi Xo7ot denotes one view also:
M. Croiset, les opinions de nos adver-
saires .
cos ov Sei, epexegetic of \6yoi, the
view namely that... . But Jackson fol
lowing Heinsius makes it depend on
in.davbi> : " plausibility to shew that it
is not the right of superiority in virtue to
rule". Why does Aristotle expose the
weakness of (A)? lie admits euVota as
the principle regulating the relations of
citizens in the normal TroAtretat, but as
between master and slave it is not to
supersede the right of virtue to rule.
5 21 Take 6 Xws with
" Others again simply holding fast to
something just and right as they suppose
(for whatever is legal is just) admit the
justice of slavery in accordance with the
laws of war, but in the same breath
withdraw the admission. For not only
may the war have had an unjust origin,
but further no one would call him, who
is undeserving of slave s estate, a slave.
Else it will follow that men who are
held to be of the noblest birth are
slaves or come of servile ancestry, if
they" [or their ancestors] "happen to
have been taken prisoners and sold " :
as Plato was by Dionysios. Tl\eyiewof
(c), 22 nvh, is substantially the common
> with Its latent rrreon-
sistencies. 6 Aws was taken by Hampke
= embracing both the former views .
Ridgeway (op. c. 130) objects that if
Aristotle was enunciating another theory
here, he would have used rt 5e . It
will be found upon comparison of DC
Aiiitna I. 5 10, 1 1 410 b 2 and Meteor.
n. 3 14, 15 357 b 10, 12, that 6 Xws
and en de are used in parallel clauses
to introduce distinct objections, the order
of the clauses being indifferent.
6 28 Sioirep KT\] "Hence they
refuse to call their own countrymen
slaves, and only apply the term to bar
barians": avrovs used absolutely foray-
rot s < TOVS "EXX^as > which comes to
the same thing as 33 avrovs. Eaton com
pares the noble conduct of Callicratidas,
Xen. Hell. i. 6, 14.
30 ovSev d XXo KT\] In making this
qualification they are really on their way
to the principle of natural slavery laid
down by us at the first: they are compelled
to admit that in certain cases there is a
distinction between two classes, the one
who are everywhere, the others who are
nowhere, slaves. Having thus reduced the
intermediate view of (c) to its right sense
Aristotle has no need to refute at length
the extreme views of (A) and (B).
7 32 iravraxov] Nic. Eth. V. 7. i,
1 134 b 19, TO fj.kv (fivaei <diKacov> aKivrjTov
/cat Tra.vTa.-xpv T W uvT-riv e xei SiVa^ti^Con-
greve). TOV avrov KT\] Cp. III. 13. 2 17 eu-
yeveia Trap 1 ^/cacrrois oi /cot Tt/iios. S USEM . (52)
I. 6. 8]
f 3 .
1255 a 211255 b 1.
167
Trepl evyevetas avrovs JJLGV jap ov /JLOVOV Trap avrols evye- (II)
veis d\\d Travra^ov vo/Ai^ovcrw, roz)? Se fiapftdpovs O LKOL JJLO-
35 voi>, ok ov TI TO fJiev a r jr\w^ evyeves /cal e\ev9epov TO S
Kal r
deicov 8 OTT d^-Cpolv e.yovov pi
TIS av Trpocrfiire iv d^iwcreiev \arpiv ;
8 oTav Se TOVTO X&yaxriv, ovSevl a\.\* rj dpeTy Kal KaKia 81,0-
40 pi^ovcri TO Sov\ov Kal e\ev6epov Kal TOZ)? evyevels Kal TOU?
255 b Svcryeveis. dfyovcri yap, waTrep et; dvOpwirov avflpcoTrov Kal IK
33 avrovs IT 1 P 4 Pint., avrols P 3 S b T b and ist hand of P 2 (emended by con: 2 ) \\
Trap aurols F M s Plut. and perhaps P 1 || 35 /cat omitted in P 2 - 3 Q M b S b T Aid. and
P 4 (rst hand), Ar. leaves /cat e\evdepov untranslated || 36 /cat before TJ is omitted by
Bk. || e\e\6yr) for EXei T/ F M s || 37 ZK^OVOV Ar., ^Kyovoiv P 1 , exybvoiv T M s
ps.4.6. Aid. Plut. e /c Yoj/otJ* P 2 Q M b , e/cycW S b T b || 38 a^twaete M s P 1 --- 4 - Aid.
Plut. and P 3 (a later hand) j| 39 oMevi II 2 Ar. Plut. Bk., ovSev II 1
35 d>s ov TI] " which implies the exist
ence of an absolute, as well as a relative,
nobility and freedom ".
36 On the tragic poet Theodektcs of
Phaselis, a contemporary and friend of
Aristotle who is rather fond of quoting
from him, see Susemihl s note (103) on
Poetics n i, Bernhardy Griech, Litera-
ttirgesch. II b p. 64 f., Welcker Die
griech. Trag. in. 1069 ff. [also Cope
Journal of CL and Sacred Philol. in.
260 f., Int. to Rhetoric 53 f., note on
Rhet. ii. 23. 3]. These lines are frag. 3 in
Nauck s 7}-ag. Grace, frag. SUSEM. (53)
8 39 OT<XV 8] From vi(iv). 8. 9,
vni(v). i. 7 (cp. in. 13. 3, Rhet. I. 8. 5)
we learn that true nobility is a combina
tion of wealth with high excellence here
ditary in a family, apery Kal TrXouros
ctpxatos. How far this third or
intermediate view of slavery and the
limits within which it is justified as
natural agrees with that of Aristotle
himself, is more clearly seen from the
discussion in IV (vii). 7 i 3, where
see nn. (780, 781). The question there
is, to what are we to ascribe the higher
endowments and virtue which distin
guish the Greeks from other races and
make the latter their born slaves 1 Only
Aristotle there more precisely restricts
this relation to the Asiatic portion of the
non-Hellenic nations, as indeed he does
before in. 14. 6, dovXiKurepoi ra rjOrj ol
, oi 5 irepl TT]V
r&v irepl TT?I> EupwTTT?^. The other
references are i. 2 4, 5 8 f. , 6 4, 7
3 f-, 8 12: iv (vn). 2 15, 1 6, 9
1 8, 14 21 with the not -
In his whole doctrine Aristotle follows,
in the main, the indications of his master.
Plato in like manner condemns the en
slavement of Hellenes by Hellenes ; .
v. 469 B f., 471 A f^,- Ideas which
__ . , A,
Politicus ., J_ ,
see on I. 5 9 n.
(46) and the next note: Introd. p. 24 f. ;
Zeller op. c. II i 755 f. [Eng. tr. Plato
p. 458 f.] SUSKM. "(54)
1255!) i dio{jo-i, KT\] So above 5 10
/3oyXerat...7roXtTt/coi fiiov. Cp. ill. 13 3
n., Rlict. I. 9 33, Theognis 535 f. ouVore
Soi/Xet ?; KefiaXy iOela Tretyvxev | dXX at et
cr/coXt?;, /caux^a Xo^oi/ ^%et. | cure yap e/c
cr/ct XXTjs p65a 0uerat ouS vaKivOos \ oflre
TTOT e/c Soi X^s reKvov e\ev6epi.oi> (Ca-
merarius) : also Plato Cratylus 394 D
(Schiller). Oncken remarks : " what
Aristotle requires however as the visible
and palpable mark of innate slavery is
not the deformity which Theognis has
in view, but a greater endowment of
rough muscular force. He overlooks the
fact that the domestic service of the slave
hardly demands more strength than the
military service of the freeman, who
needs a good deal besides mere erect
stature". SUSEM. (55)
168
IIOAITIKftN A. 6.
[I. 6. 8
TO
ryiveo-Oai Orjplov, ovrw /cal ef dyaOwv dyaOov. rj Se (f>v- (II)
pev TOVTO iroielv, 7ro\\d/c^ pevToi ov Svvarai,.
Tivd \6yov r) dfLfacrjBiJT rjffi i, real 20
Sov\oi ol Se e\ev6epoi,
TO TOLOVTOV, wv a-vfjufyipei TW
iv KOI Slfcaiov /cal Bel TO
r)v 7re(f)VKacriv dp^rjv dp^eiv, wcrre
do-v/jifybpws eVrlz^ dfjifyolv (TO
Kal ro3 o\w Kal crw/aart /cal
Ti TOV SeCTTTOTOV, oloV /Ji ^fV^6l> TL
Sto /cal o-veov 21
9 on /jiep ovv
5 OVK elcrlv 01 /uuev
KOI OTI ev Ticri
$ov\veLV TO) Se TO
dp^eaOai TO
10 Kal Seo-TTO^ew, TO Se
10 d aiiTO av/Ji^epei TO)
TOV
L TL /cal (f)i\ia Sov\w /cal SevTroTrj TT/OO?
rot?
9 1255 b 2 yevecr6ai. M s P 1 - 4 6 Q T b |] dya6ov, <Kal c/c 5ov\w Sov\ov> Schmidt,
f\ a^ cp. a 27 || 3 TOVTO after Tro^lv M s P 1 || 7ro\\d/cts ^VTOL ov Ar. iro\\afas, ov /UL^VTOI
"* m Plut. Bk. which, though unsatisfactory, might perhaps be defended: see Ditten-
A ^^"Tberger <?/>. c. p. 1371!. II 5 The text can hardly be sound : <et oi/ccu> OVK Camot,
Bk. 2 , perhaps the best suggestion; OVK <det>? Susem. 2 , OVK <ai>a/j.<f)i.(T[3r]TriTus> or
oi>x < a-rravTaxov > ? Schmidt formerly: <ort> Bojesen; ou /c is omitted by W b Aid.
Lambin Gottling, el for 4 /cat and <^ ou> before <5?jXoi Lambin, OVK for 4 ovv Gottling, o:
fj.ev <ei yU.7?> Thurot || ot yU^ 0ucret] 0t cret <rtves> ot /xe^ and 6 <d7j\ov de> /cat 6 rt
Schmidt now edits || fivcrei wanting in M 8 and P 1 (ist hand, added in the margin by
p 1 ) || 7 TO is omitted before oeffTro ^Lv by II 3 || TOV ^v and 8 TOV 5 Ar. Nickes,
who would prefer 6 rots ^v...^ rots 5e...roi)j fj,ev...8 TOVS 5 || 8 In M 8 P 1 Ar. apxeiv
and d pxecr^at are transposed || 12 rou o-c^uaros in some older mss. probably came
after (j.epos where it is repeated by T M s and P 1 (ist hand)
2 r\ 8e (}>v(ri-s KT\] So above 5 10
o-v/u<,paivei...\evdtpuv. F i^teloor rTTemar k s
with -truth that this admission quite inva-
lidates all practical application of Aristo-
tie s theory. i It is even pnssi-bte-for-a
Ureek to be a natural slave, for a bar-
barian, though an Asiatic (see on I. 2.
4 and above n. 54), to be a natural free-
man : ^. g. Hermeias, Aristotle s friend
and the uncle of his wife, who had actually
been a slave: seeonii. 7. 17. Hence the
non-Hellene may even prove to be the
natural master of the Hellene. SUSEM.
(56)
9 5 OVK eurlv] Fortunately we can
check the text (see Crit. Notes) by the
directly opposed statement with which
c. 6 opens, by 6, 10, and the next
words, line 6, %v TKTI KrX " in certain
cases there is a clearly marked distinc-
tion of this sort, where namely ...... "
9 TO 8e KaKc3s] sc. dpxetv.
10 TO -ydp avTo KTX] See i 3 n.( j).
ii 6 8e 8ovXos...i2
fxe pos] This is said of property
generally and of the child NIC. Eth. V. 6.
8 quoted on 4 5 above. SUSEM. (57)
See however Jackson s note ad loc.
12 8io...i3 irpos aXXi^Xovs] In Nic.
Eth. vm. n 6, 7, 1161 a 32 ff., itis said
that there can be no friendship between
master and slave qua slave : ev ols yap
/m. rjdev KOIVQV eaTiv ry dpxovTi /cat o.px-
/^w, ovSe 0tXt a f ovdt yap 5t /catof. The
relation is like that of a craftsman to
his tools, of soul to body, of master to
slave. w0eXetrat [tv yap TrdvTa raura
UTTO T&V xp^lJ-tvuv (cp. TO avTo avjji<pepei of
the text), 0tXta 5 OVK (TTiv....6 ydp Sou-
Xos 2/j.^vxov opyavov, TO 5 opyavov d\f/vxos
5ov\os. rj fj,v ovv 8ov\os, OVK CTTIV 0tXta
irpos avTov, 77 avdpuiros- 5o/cet ydp
elvai TI diKacov iravri dvdpuTry irpos irdvTa.
TOV Swd/^evov Koivuvfifrai vo^ov Kal (rvvdrj-
KTJS, Kal (f)i\ta 5??, Ka9* oaov dvOpwTros.
Zeller II ii 692 f., following Ritter, rightly
calls this an inconsistency which does the
philosopher honour. The author of the
32)
I. 7. 2]
1255 b 2 1255 b 21.
TovToyv
rot? 8e /AT) TOVTOV rbv rpoTrov, (II)
7 aXXa /cara VOJJLOV KOI ftiacrOela-i,, rovvavrlov) (fravepov Be
l6 KOI K TOVTWV, OTL OV TdVTOV e(TTL $<T7TOTeia KOI TToXi-
Tifcrj, ovSe nraaai aXX^Xat? al dp^al, wcnrep Tti>e? <f>a- (p. 10)
aiv. r) /jiev yap eXevOepwv (pvcrei, r} Se $ov\cov ecrrlv, KOI
19 77 fjiev oiKOvofjiiKr) fjiovap^ia (/JLOvap^elrai jap vra? oitcos],
2 77 &e 7ro\LTLKr) e\ev6epwv KOL lawv apx*!- o yLtez^ ouz> SecrTro- 22
TT;? oJ \eyerai Kara eTrtcrT^/u,?;^, aXXa T&&gt; roiocrSe elvai,
14 TOUTOJI ] TOtoi/rots Susem. 1 2 , Totoirrots < drat > ? Susem., TotouTots < /cai >
Schmidt at one time: Totiruv was suspected by Schneider and Koraes, ourws c^/cetw-
M^ois Koraes || ij&utdvois transposed to follow 15 vo/ioi Schmidt || 15 cfravepbv
...20 apx 7 ? transposed to follow 1256 a i rpoirov Schmidt || 16 /cat before e/c
would perhaps come better after those words
Eudcmian Ethics, vii. 9. 2 1241 b 17 ff., bute the doctrine, without qualification,
withdraws the concession : since there is
the same relation between soul and body,
craftsman and tools, master and slave, in
these cases there is no association (KOLVU-
via) possible, ou yap 5u ecrrtV, oAAci TO
/u,^ %v, TO 5e TOV evos (the two members of
such a relation are not independent), ovoe
di-aipeTW TO ayaBov e/care/oy, cxXXa d/m.(f)o-
rtpuv TO evos ov &&gt;e/ca ecrTiv (the good of
the one is not separable from the good of
the other, the good of both is the good
of that one of the two for whose sake the
other exists). TO Te yap crw/xd kvriv
opyavov (rvfj.<pvTOv, /cat TOU de&iroTov 6 8ov-
Xos aicTTrep fj.6pt.ov /cat opyavovacpai-
PCTOV. That even a slave is a man is
emphasized in another fragment of Phile
mon, besides the one quoted on 3 4,
viz. Eot/ct~6 / u,ei os 28 : KO.V SouXos 17 Tts,
OV0&V ffTTOV, deCTTTOTa, I dfOpUTTOS OUTOS
tarw, ov dV^pwTroj 77. Cp. Becker Cliari-
kles in. 12 (ed. 2), Eng. tr. p. 357. Con
sult further Pol. IV (vii). 8 14 n.
(801); i. 2. 3 n. (7); in. 6. 6. SUSEM.
(57 b) Comp. F. A. Paley s Euripides,
Pref. to vol. i. pp. xiii f. with reff. there
given, esp. Hd. 728, Melanippe fr. 506
(515), Phrixusfr. 823 (828) : also Oncken
n. 33 ff-
c. 7 AeoTTOTefa. then, or rttle over
slaves, is not the same as statecraft : i .
Nor does the relation of SecriroTTjs depend
lipon science: 2. In ivhat sense there
may be a science of the duties ( i ) of slaves
(2) of slaveowners (the latter quite distinct
from 77 KTrjTiKrj, sc. dovXwv) : 3 5.
1 17 nvls] Plato. See on i i
n. (2). SUSEM. (58)
" It is plain that here and i i Aristotle
is thinking of Plat. Polit. 258 E sq. esp.
259 B. It is however a mistake to attri-
to Plato, who at 268 D introduces a long
and elaborate myth with the express
intention of warning us, that though the
shepherd-king of the theocratic period
exercised all regulative functions indis
criminately, this state of things ended
with the Saturnian age. See by all means
274 E sqq. From this point to the end of
the dialogue the Eleate is mainly en
gaged in discriminating the ?roXiTt/c6s
from a host of rivals. Clearly the doc
trine in question is at variance with the
whole tenor of the Republic, May we
not attribute it, on the strength of Xenoph.
Memorab. in. 4 12, Oecon. 13 5, to
Socrates ? " (Jackson) .
19 TJ (j,ev olKOvofJtiKi^...2o ctpX 1 ]] Com
pare IV (Vii). 8 4 (ef ofJioiwv), VI (IV).
ii 8 (e lawv /cat 6/iotW), also II.2 6,
III. 16 2, i7 i and ;/. (133) on II. 2 4.
On the other hand see in. 4 5 with n.
(471). SUSEM. (58 b)
20 A similar distinction between 77 TWV
\evdp(jjv /cat (ff(jov ap^rj and 77 5e0"7roTt/c?}
is seen in Nic. Eth. v. 6 4, 8, where
Jackson refers to Pol. iv (vii). 14 6, 7,
19. See his notes.
2 21 ov XeyeTCU Kara eincrTTffjLT]v]
As is asserted in the passage of the Poli
tic us ; cp. c. i 2 n. (2), 3 4. dXXd
TO> TOiocrSe etvcu] But does this latter
at once exclude the former ? As was
shown in n. (54) on c. 6 8, Plato is
very far from denying the one because he
asserts the other. He too, like Aristotle,
regards the more capable as the natural
ruler, but for that very reason assigns the
perfect art of ruling, of whatever kind, to
those alone who in the strict sense have
knowledge, i.e. to the philosophers : for,
on the Socratic principle that all virtue or
168
,0 nOMTIKON A. 7. [1.7. 2
cuoici)? $e /cal 6 SouXo? real 6 e\6V0epos eTriarrj /AT] 8 av (II)
eirf Kal SecrTrorLfcr) KOI Sov\iKr), Sov\i/crj uev o iav Trep 6 ev
2 4 ^vparcovcrais eTrai^evo ev (e /cet yap Xaufiavwv rt? [AicrOov
3 e&lSao-fce ra eyKVK\ia ^laKov^^ara TOI)? TratSa?), et?/ 8 z/ Kal
eVl rr\elov rovrcov [JiaOria-is, olov otyorcoiririKr) Kal ra\\a ra
roiavra yewrj rrjs $iaKov[as. ecrrt jap erepa erepcov ra fjuev
evn/Jiorepa epya ra S dvay/caiorepa, Kal Kara rr)v rrapoifjbiav
79 dov\os Trpo dovXov, deo-norrjs rrpo Se(T7rorou.
4 a I uev ovv roiavrai Traaai 8ov\ircal eTricrrrj/jLai, elcri Seajro- 2:1
riKTj S eVtcrT^yLtTy earlv TJ ftprja-ri/cr) Sov\cov. 6 <yap SeaTro-
TT;? OVK ev TCO KrdaOai rot)? $ov\ov$, aXX Iv ru> ^prjaOai,
Soi;Xo69. eari S avrrj rj ImarrifJbri ov$ev /jieya e^ovaa ovSe
34 creuvov a yap rov $ov\ov erricrraaOai $el rroielv, eKelvov 8el
5 ravra erricrraaOai emrarreiv. Sco ocrot? e^ovaia urj avrovs
KaKorraOelv, eTTirpOTros \a[Jb(3dvei ravrrjv rr}v rifJir)V, avrol
23 ev rals M s P 1 Susem. 1 wrongly, see Dittenberger op. c. p. 1362, ev [rais]
Susem. 2 || 24 e-rraidevev II 2 Ek. || 26 TOVTWV} r&v TOLOVTWV II 2 Bk. || OI/ OTTOU/CI}
P ->.3.Qgb T b Ald> Bkf 6^ 07rot7?K7 ) p^ ^OTTOUK^ Ar. || 27 erepa] fy-ya QS T b Aid.
and ist hand in P 3>4> (7^. eVe/aa in the margin of P 4 , the right reading is inserted in P 3
by a later hand, but subsequently erased)
excellence (aperr)} arises from knowledge, tion (Ludw. Schneider). See IV (vil). c.
philosophers have in his eyes the highest 8 f.; c. 14 12 ff. SUSEM. (62)
excellence in every respect. Aristotle 4 32 OVK ev TW KTctcrOcu] Below
has not taken pains enough over his refu- c. 8 2 ris yap eVrai xpv ffo f j -^ >l T0 s
tationhere. In the ^//^/^heismore accu- /card r^v olKiav Trapa rr)v OIK. ; III. 4. 1 1
rate, beginning with a successful attack TTJV irepl TO. avayKaia < dpxw SeffTroTiKrjv > ,
upon the Socratic principle which Plato a iroielv eTrtcrracr^at TOV apxovr OVK
accepted : see Zeller op. c. II ii 627 f. ava-yKcdov a\Xa xP^ ff ^ ai - /^aXXov. Su-
SUSEM. (59, 60) SEM. (63)
Kara in virtue of, as in Ka66. The 33 ovScv (Jte -ya ^x ovo " a ] IV ( VI1 )- 3- 2
term master is not applied to anyone ov8v yap TO ye dovXy, y 5ov\os,
because of his knowledge, but from his ae^ov, VI (iv). 15. 3 at 5
being of a given character. <TWV e7rt/ieAetwv> /cat irpos as, aV
3 27 TO. [Jitv VTi(xoTpa KT\] The crt, rdrrofcrt 8ov\ovs. But see I. 13. 14
latter are the conditions for bare existence, and n. (123). SUSEM. (64)
the former for the ennobling refinement 5 36 The overseer, eTrtrpoTros, or
and perfecting of existence. SUSEM. (61) house-steward, Ta/uLas, was himself a
29 A verse of the Pankratiast , a slave : Pseud. -Arist. Occon. 1.5 i 1344 a
comedy by Aristotle s younger contem- 26, 6 5 1345 a 8 ff., Xen. Occon. 12. 2,
porary Philemon, frag. 2. (J. G. Aristoph. Knights g^ f. : Becker Charikles
Schneider). But if one master thus dif- in. 23 (ed. 2), Eng. tr. p. 363. Yet no
fers from another, it is implied that in the doubt Greeks by birth were readily taken
activities of freemen there is a similar for this office, as well as for that of ?rat-
difference; that thus all human occupa- 07^70?. SUSEM. (64)
tions exhibit an ascending scale from the Translate : hence all who have the
lowest and most mechanical work up to means of escaping personal discomfort
the highest and most intellectual, which employ an overseer to take this charge
Aristotle calls (diaywyfj) employment of and themselves the while engage in pub-
leisure, as distinct from work or occupa- lie affairs or in study.
I. 8. 1] 1255 b 22 1256 a 1.
oe iro\iTevoi>T(iL TI fyCKocro^ovcriv. rj Be
(f)OTepQ)V TOVTWV, OLOV [//] BlKdLa 7rO\/LLlKrj
171
ere pa dp- (I I)
ovaa [rj Orjpev-
8 7rep\ fj,ev ovv Bov\ov KOL SecrTrorov TOVTOV SiwpicrOw TOV III
1256 a rpoTTov o\a)s Be Trepi Trdaqs tcrrjO ews real %pr}/jt,aTicrTifcfjs 6ew-
38 [??] Susem., 77 Schnitzer wrongly: ?[5t/cata] or ?[rts ovaa] Susem. || [77 drjpev-
TiKrj] Susem. 2 , [rj] Jackson || Conring and Spengel suspect the whole sentence 37
77 de KTr)TiKrj...$8 6r)pevTiKr}, Schmidt all from 37 77 8e /CTTiTt/CTj... 1256 a 3 /x^pos Tt ?)i/
37 T] 8e KT\] With KTIJTIKT} supply
8ov\ui>. But it may be inferred from c.
8 12, 5t6 /cat 77 Tro\e/J.iKr} (pvcrei KTrjTiKij TTWS
ZffTat (77 yap OrjpevTLKr} /mepos avrr/s), fj Sec
Xprjcrdai Trpos re TCI Orjpia /cat rw^ dvdpuirnov
6 croi 7re0i /c6Tes apxecr^at ^77 6e\ovcrii>, that
under the one genus offensive war Ari
stotle includes two species: (i) the chase,
a war against wild animals, (2) war con
ducted for the capture of slaves.
irpos roi)s
8ov\ovs
If this be so, he knows nothing of an
art of man-hunting : and the words at
the end, 38 77 O^pevriK^, must be an inter
polation. Cp. further I. 2 4 n. (n), 6
8 nu. (54, 56), iv (vn). 2 15 ou
Set irdvTwv TretpoVtfat deaTrofeiv, d\\a
T&V SecrTrcxTTu;! , tJouirep ovde 6r)peveiv eirl
doivrjv rj Ovcriav dv 6 pcoTrous d\\a TO
rrpos TOVTO dr/pevrbv nu. (727, 728): IV
(vil). 14 21, where one object of military
training is TO 8e(nr6 fei.v TCOV a^iwv 8ov-
\eueii>. SUSEM. (65)
This view, that dr/pevTiKr) is a species
of 7To\e^tt/c77, Jackson cannot accept. On
the contrary, from 8 12 (just quoted) he
infers that to Aristotle (as to Plato Soph.
222 B, Laws 823 B) TroXe/xt/cT? is a species
of 6r/pevTiKr) : see his note on that passage.
He translates here, " the art of acquiring
slaves, that is, the just art of acquiring
slaves, is distinct from both of these,"
from dov\iKr) and 5ea7roTt/c7;, "being a
species of the art of war or the art of
hunting."
cc. 8 n irepl irdiTTjs KTTJ crews KCU
c. 8 In what relation does
aTiKT) stand to Economic? Is it (i) the
same science, or (2) a branch of it, or (3)
a subsidiary science ? It is not the same,
for it serves a different purpose, accumula
tion : i, 2. Whether it is a branch or
not is disputed, and must be decided for
each of the various species q/ xP r )f jiaTiffTLK; h
separately: 3.
Review of the various natural modes of
subsistence: 4 12.
The natural art of production (/o^Tt/CT?),
which has for its object the accumulation
of natural wealth within due limits, is a
branch of Economic : 13 15.
For this section of the work consult
Ludw. Schneider Die staatswirthschaft-
lichen Lehrcn usiv (The theories of Po
litical Economy in the Politics], pt. I
Deutsch-Krone, 1868, pt. n Neu-Rup-
pin, 1873 : Glaser De Aristotelis doc-
trina de divitiis (Konigsberg 1856. 4)
with Bendixen s review in Pkilologus
xvi. 498 f. : Ilampke Bemerkungen (Re
marks on Pol. I.) Lyck, 1863 : Schnitzer
Zu Aristotcles Politik in Eos 1. 1864.
499 516 : Susemihl on Pol. I. cc. 8 n
in Khein. Mits. XX. 1865. 504 517:
Buchsenschiitz Zu Aristote/es Politik i. cc.
8 ii in Jahrb. fiir PInlol. xcv. 1867.
477-482,7136. SUSEM. (66)
There can be little doul.it that Ari
stotle wrote with especial reference to
Plato : Rep. II. 370 B 372 A, Laws XI.
918 A 920 C (cp. vni. 831 E, 849 I)),
Soph. 219 A f., 222 B ff., 223 C, D, Politicus
287 C 290 A, etc.
1 1256 a i xP T !H l aTlorTLK1 l is applied
(i) to the_ whole art of acquisition, being
thus completely identical with /CTTJTJ/CTT".
In this sense the term was introduced at
3 3 ( C P- 4 ! ") an< l this holds through
out c. 8, and in 9 4. In a narrower
sense it is used (2) for the acquisition by
exchang^_jtteTa/3X7/Tt/c77, of the kind of
wealth which in Aristotle s view is un
natural, i.e. not for use, but to exchange
again at a profit. In this sense xpTi/xa-
TiffTiKr) money-making, profit-making
= /caTTTjXt/crj trade. So from c. 9 i
onwards. Again in 9 12, 10 2 it is
used (3) forthat part of the art of ac
quisition which, as opposed to (2), is
directed" solely to natural wealth and is
intimately connected with Economic.
Plainly (3) = 77 dvayxala
172
A. 8.
[I. 8. 1
Kara TOP v^y^/mevov Tpojrov, eireiTrep KOI 6 Bov- (III)
Xo? 1179 KTtjaews /zepo? TI r]V. TrptoTov pev ovv aTroprjcreiev
dv rt? Trorepov r} %prjfjiaTi(TTiKr] r/ avrrj rfj oiKOVo/AiKf) eaTiv
5 f) /Jt,epos TI r) vTrrj per t/cr} , Kal el VTrrjpeTiKr), irorepov w? 77
KepKiBoTroirjTifcr) rfi vfyavTMcf) 77 w? r/ %a\fcovp<yiKr/ rfj dv-
BpiavTOTroiia (ov yap (DaavTCDS VTrrjperovvw, a\V r) pev op-
2 java Trape^ei, rj Be rrjv v\rjv \eyco Be V\TJV TO viroKei-
fjievov, eg ov TI a7TOTe\elrai epyov, olov vtydvrr) fjiev epia
10 dvBpLavTOTTOLO) Se %a\Kov). (p- "
ori, }Jiev ovv ow% i] avrrj rfj OiKovo^iKfj rj ^pr)fJLaTio~TiKr) ) 2
orj\ov (r^? fJLev <ydp TO TropiaacrOai, r^9 oe TO ^pr^o-acrOaL Ti?
<ydp ecrTai r} ^prjao/jievrj rot? KCLTO, Trjv oltclav Trapci TT)V OIKOVO-
14 }JiiKr)v ;) TTOTepov Be fiepos avrr}? earl TI TJ eTepov elSo?, e
1256 a 5 [17] vTrrjperiKov, Kal el VTrr/peTiKov Bender, certainly not right. That M>
omits 97 is quite unimportant || 6 KepKidoirouKr] P 24 QS b T b Aid. Bk. and a later
hand in P 3 , /cep/ctSoTrou/ci} P 3 (ist hand) || 9 Zpiov F P 1 Susem 1 2 * || 10 x a ^ K ^ T P 1
Susem. 1
IJ T ? ocwo/x-i/Cfl ?
TJ corr. 2 of P 2 and Bk.) rf?
t/c?) Sylburg for oiKOVOjMKri (rj OLKO-
13 ?rapd] ?rept M d P 3 S b T b
(2) = 17 jUTj dvajKaia of c. 9 18; and (i)
the widest range of the term includes
both, the getting of goods as well as the
getting of gain. SUSEM. (69)
i Kara TOV vcfxTj-yrjiJievov rpoirov] "in
accordance with the procedure adopted,"
namely, that from part to whole. See
i 3 n- (4); 3 i (29): Hi. i 2 w.
(434). SUSEM. (66)
eireiTrep...^] " since the slave is, as we
saw, included under the head of property,"
being defined as /cr^/xa, a chattel.
5 Kal el UTr-rip. KT\] The more precise
way in which this third possibility is ex
pressed leads us to anticipate a decision
in its favour (Hampke). However when
the decision comes to be made, 10 i
3, it only has a preference given it ; it is not
exclusively adopted, as Hampke thinks.
That the question, in which of the two
senses x/ 37 ?/"-- is auxiliary to Economic, is
never taken up is most surprising. We
can only conjecture the answer from
passing hints : see on 10 2. SUSEM. (67)
7 r\ JJ.6V 6p i ya,va...TJ 8c rr\v v\r\v]
The one provides tools to work with, the
other raw material to work up (Oncken).
SUSEM. (67 to)
This distinction comes from Plato Poli-
ticus 287 C,
8pyava irepl
288 D, E rb 5 iraai rot/rots
Trapexov e u>v Kal ev oh
ovpyovffiv OTTOcrat TWV Texvuiv vvv
(Jackson). So too the conception of
VTrrjpeTCKal rexyat. comes from the Poli-
ticus 281 E : 6 crat ^v TO 7rpay/u.a avrb ^
dTj/j-Lovpyovcri., rals o dTj/ULovpyoixracs opyava.
irapa<TKcvdfav(n.i> ... ravras i^ev ^vvairiovs
<r^x va ^>- The Eleate quotes ras /j.ev
irepi re drpaKrovs Kal /cep/ci <5as as the
first examples of ^vvainai rex- (Eaton).
2 8 vXi^v TO tnroKtp.evov KT\] Plato
denotes this by TO TrpwToyevts avdpuTrois
KTrjfj.a Politicals 288 E : but v\rj occurs in
Phil. 54 C (prifM or) yeveaeoos /u.ei>
J opyava Kal Tracrav vXrjv Trapa
12 TLS ydp KT\] See . (63) on c. 7
4. SUSEM. (68) What art
is to use the household goods if it be not
Economic (Trapd except) ?
14 Two alternatives are given in
i, rf /x^pos TL TJ virrjpeTLKr), and it is
not easy to see what has become of the
latter in the statement here Trbrepov utpos
7) eTepov eTSos and in 3, 17 >)
iroTepov /uepos TI. rj eTepov yevos.
For reasons given in Excursus ill. on Bk.
I. p. 209 q. v., both alternatives of i
should be supposed included under /i^pos,
that term being so loosely used as to in
clude even an auxiliary science. SUSEM.
(69)
I. 8. 5]
1256 a 2 1256 a 23.
173
] 3 j>i(TJBr]rricriv, el^ap/ ecrrt rov ^p^^aTiariKov Oewprjorai TroOev XP*1~
Kal KTrjais ecTTai. r] Se KTrjai? 7ro\\d 7rpLi\ rj(j)6 l^eprj Kal 6
ware rrputTOV r\ yeajpyLKr) irorepov fjuepos n r?;? ol-
rj erepov TL 761/09, Kal Ka06\ov 77 irepl rrjv rpo-
19 <f)r)v eTTifJLeXeia [KCU KTTJCTI^.
4 d\\d fjirjv ei$r) 76 7ro\\a rpo<pf)s, Sib Kal jBiot 7ro\\ol Kal 3
TWV ^(f)0)V Kal TWV dv6pw7rwv elcriv ov yap olov re V/^ dvev
rpo<?79, cocrTe al $ta(j)opal rfjs rpoffrr/s roi)? /3/OU9 7re7roir]Ka(TL &ia-
5 (f)epovra$ T&V ^(pwv. TWV re yap Orjpiwv ra fjiev dyeXaia rd $e (TTTO-
15 el yap] etVep Montecatino needlessly, since Vahlen (Poetic p. i28f. ed. 3) has
shown that el yap can be used in the same sense. Even then Vahlen s comma after
16. &JTCU must be a full stop. But perhaps 5ia / ,0i<T/377T?7(nz . et yap...KTrj<ris Zarai, *
with the punctuation of previous cdcl., is right || 16 &TTCU, 77 8rj KTTJ<TIS Bernays ||
17 * * <l><TTe Conring Susem. 1 The lacuna began with cos or wWe/>, Hampke Schnitzer.
Other proposals fruitless: see my large critical edition, ad loc. and Addenda || OLKOVO-
jtuKTjs Garve, xp^arto TIKTJS F II Ar. Bk. || 19 [/cat Krrj<ns] ? Susem.: /cat
Stahr || 22 7re7rot?7/ca<n after Sta^e/aoiras M s P ] || 23 re omitted by M s P 4
clothing tools, all things in general which
Aristotle calls instruments for life and
wellbeing, including slaves if directly
produced or acquired by plunder without
resort to exchange. If so, Exchange
is the 5eurepoi>. This view is supported
by the actual use of rpo(p-^ in a wider
sense than food, for sustenance generally ;
"subsistence," 8, 10 i, 3. (In these
passages acquisition by exchange must be
understood as well as that branch of XP 1 ?
/xartcTTt/cT} which, because directed to
procuring the requisite subsistence, really
belongs to economic science: but this does
not affect the present question.)
Or, (ii) if all that is meant is direct pro
duction and appropriation of food, in the
strict sense of the term, then we must
look for " secondly " in the remarks on
the procurement of clothing and tools
from the proceeds of the chase or from
animals under domestication, n, and
on the capture of slaves, 12. In any
case, whatever the grounds for supposing
the text defective (see on 12 n. 74),
this is not one. SUSEM. (70)
irorepov is dependent, like iroOev line
15, upon effri TOU %p. Oeuprjcrai.
4, 5 That the way in which animals
support themselves determines their mode
of life is more fully stated Hist, animal. I.
i. 23, 487 b 33 ff., vin. i. n, 589 a
4 ff.; and the proof is given in detail ib.
viii. cc. 2 ii. Under Kapirofidya are
included animals who feed on berries,
3 15 Vahlen (see ciitical notes)
takes ft yap to mean "if namely" as in
Alkidamas DC soph, n, 12 a/o oi)/c evades
rj/ji.as n,\\7]i> TLVO. iroi.f to dai. fj.eXer rji \6ywv ;
el yap oi rots ovofJ-affiv e^eipyaffiMevoi...
aTTtcrrtas /cat (pOovov ras rtDi aKovbvTWv
yvu/nas e/x,7rt7rXao-t, and Aris. AV/t A III. 17.
1 1 el yap A%tAAe"a \eyuv Il^Xea e?rat^e?,
etra Ata/coj/, etra rw ^eo^, o^totws 5^ /cat
fodpiav, TJ (ms. ^) rd /cat ra Trotet 17
roLovSe eariv. Elsewhere 701/9 appears
redundant, or rather, no apodosis is ex
pressed to the sentence introduced by it :
Nic. Eth. vin. 8. 6 ot x/ 3 ^ " 6 /"- ^ Ka i 1 ?-
5e?s e?rt irXelov di.a^evov(nv ews 7ap (so
long namely as) dV iropifactLv -fjdovas TJ
w0e\etas dXX^Xots : so e?ret 701/3 Rlict. II.
25. 10, 77 7ap Pf/. VI (IV). 8. 6, ore /J-ev
yap viii (v). i. 8. " See however Spengel
Aris. Poet. ti. Vahlcns neueste Bearbei-
. 138"." (Susemihl).
1 6 The elements of wealth enumerated
in Rhet. I. 5 7 (and Pol. n. 7 21) are
777$, x ( * } P i0} " KTTJCTIS, en 5e eir i.Tr\wv /cr^crts
/cat ^offKfjf^aTuiv Kal avdpaTroSwv : also vo-
uiff/jiaTos Tr\T)6os which, according to c. 9
below, is not true wealth.
17 irpwrov] There is no word like
detjrepov which expressly corresponds to
this, cp. Poet. 13 2. What, we may
ask, answers to it in substance? Either
(i) the expression is again inexact, and 77
irepl TT)v rpo<t>r)v eTrt^Xeta must be ex
tended to. the industries concerned with
all the other necessaries of life shelter
\
174
IIOAITIKftN A. 8.
[I. 8. 5
d (TTIV, OTrorepws crv^epei Trpos rr)v Tpo<J>r)v avTols $ia TO (III)
25 rd fjiev ^a)o<pdya ra Se Kap7TO(f)dya ra Se 7rafjL(f)dya avr&v elvai,
ware Trpos r9 pacrrwvas /ecu rrjv a ipGcriv Trjv TOVTGOV rj fyvcris roz)?
/3/OU9 avr&v o~iu)pi,(Tv, eVel S ou TGWTO e/cdo-rw rj&v /card $v-
criv a\\a erepa erepois, tcai avrwv TWV ^wocfrdycov KOI rwv
6 /cap7ro(f>dya)v ol {3ioi 777309 d\\rj\a SiecrTao-iv ofJioicos Se
30 fcal TWV dvOpcoTTCov. TTO\V yap biafyepovcriv ol TOVTWV /Slot. 4
ol nev ovv dpyoraroi, vofidc es elcriv (q yap airo TWV rjfjue-
pcov Tpotyr) fypwv dvev TTOVOV ylverat, a"%o\d%ovo"i,v dvayrcaiov
Se o^ro? /ji6ra/3d\\Lv rot? KTrjveort Sid ra? vofjids icai
34 avrol dvay/cd^ovrai crvvaKo\ov6elv> cbcnrep yecopylav ^axrav
7 yewpyovvres) ot 8* aTro Or] pas ftwcrt, xal Or] pas erepoi ere-
pas, olov o i /ji6i> diro \r)(JTeias, o l 8 aft d\ieias, OCTOL \i-
25 TO, 8e 7ra/j.(pd ya omitted by the ist hand in P 1 (supplied by p 1 in the margin), TO,
5e by M s || 26 /cat] /card Bernays, perhaps rightly || 30 TTO\V] TroXXot P 4 S 1 T b
Aid. and probably also Q, mnltis (?) William || 31 ow] yap P apparently || 33
/j,eTaj3d\\ei.i> after rots /cr^ecrt M s P 1 || 36 aXieias Aid. dXecas jVpP 1 - 3 4
roots, fruit and vegetables , so that the
term is wider than Troyfiaya. = herbivorous.
In Hist, animal. crapKO(pdyos carni
vorous is chiefly used : fyofidyos hardly
ever.
5 26 pao-Tcovas facilities : "to enable
them to get at their food and capture it."
By TOVTWV understand fya primarily,
though Kap-n-os would be included. Ber
nays reads /card for /cat : "to give them
facilities for the capture of their food."
6 8 Smith Wealth of nations
Introd. Chap., Mill Pol. Econ. I. pp. n
ff. rightly place lowest in the scale the
savages who depend upon casual hunting
or fishing, although in such a life fits of
prolonged and strenuous exertion alternate
with periods of indolence. In Homer
the cannibal Cyclopes are a pastoral
people. As Aristotle thought that all
domesticated animals had once been wild,
Hist. anim. I. i. 29 488 a 30 ff., he
must have overlooked the labour of
taming them ; cp. n. above on 5 7.
31 The Scythians, or such North
African tribes as Herodotos describes,
IV. 1 86, would represent these vo/j.d8es.
They are wholly distinct from the non-
migratory voyttets of Hellenic democracies,
VII (VI). 4. II.
32 "The cattle being forced to shift
their quarters for pasturage the owners
must also go about with them, as farmers
to whom live-stock serves instead of land."
7 36 \T)<rrias] It is highly charac
teristic of the Greek philosopher that
while he is indignant against trade and
particularly against lending money on
interest, 9 9 ff., 10 4, 5, he includes
piracy as one species of the chase amongst
the direct natural modes of acquisition
or production, and therefore as appro
priate to a householder. He was led to
this by the observation that not only do
certain uncivilized tribes live by plunder,
and combine with a nomad life a life of
brigandage, but also amongst the most
ancient Greeks, as Thuc. I. 5 precisely
informs us, piracy was rather honourable
than disgraceful oi /c %OI>TO ? TTW
TOVTOV TOU epyov (pepovros 5^ n /cat
fj.d\\ov, cp. Horn. Od. in. 73, IX. 2ej2 :
and even later it was usual amongst
the Locrians and other Hellenic peoples
(Thuc. i. 5, ii. 32, iv. 9. 2). Here he
has forgotten his own principle, that the
true nature of a thing must not be sought
in its beginnings, but in its perfect devel
opment, 2 8. A strong national preju
dice is apparent in all this, but it is well
known that the earlier centuries of the
Christian era had the same aversion
to lending on interest (see Introd. 30),
while many barbarities were allowed with
out scruple, as for instance the right to
plunder wrecks, which Schlosser (i. 47 n.)
adduces as a parallel. See Introd. 27 f.
SUSEM. (71)
I. 8. 10]
1256 a 24 1256 b 13.
175
KoL e\rj Kol Trora/ioj)? 97 0d\arTav roiavrrjv Trpoaoi- (III)
/covcriv, O L 8 air opvidcov 77 Qijpl&v d<ypla)v TO Se 7rXei<TTOv
39 761/09 TWV dvOpWTTWV CL7TO T^9 7^? fj KOI TWV T] /JLepWV Kdp-
8 TTWV. ol fjuev ovv /3loL TOCTOVTOL cr^eSoV elaiv, oaot 76 avTO- r>
(f)VTOi> e%ov(TL rrjv epyaaiav /ecu fj^rj St d\\ayTJ$ teal Ka-
1256 b TTT/Xe/a? KO/JLL^OVTCIL T rjv Tpotyrjv, vo/jia&LKos yecopyifcos \y- (p. 12)
(TTpLKOS CtXieVTlKOS 07}pVTLK6$. Ol 6 Kal fJU^VVVTeS K TOV-
TWV ^Sew? %wcri, irpoa avaTrXripovvTes TOP evSeecrrepov {3iov, fj
Tvyftdvei eXXe/Trw^ frpos TO avTapK^s elvai^ olov O L /ULGV
5 vo/JLa^LKov afjia KOI \rjo~TpLKoi>, O L 8e yeatpyLtcov /cal
9TiKov o/JLoiws Se KOI irepl TOV<> aXXou? w? av ?]
d^rj, TOVTOV TOV rpoTrov Sidyovcriv. r) JJLGV ovv roiavTri 6
9 wdTrep KaTa Trjv TrpwT^v <yevecriv
10 Oelcriv. /cal <ydp KaTa TTJV e
TWV
ov dv SuvijTai avTo avTu>
ourco? KOL
yevecriv ra /Aev crvveK-
ft)? iKdvi^v elvai
TO yevvijOev, olov
Tot?
Be
4i [epyaffiav...b I T-TJV] Schmidt
1256 b i iropit;ovTcu II 2 Bk. perhaps rightly || yewpyiKos is wanting in F M B , and
perhaps Spengel is right in transposing it to follow 6-rjpevTiKos \\ 3 TOV evSeeffTepov
PLOV Bernays, TOV evoeccrTaTov j3iov F II Bk. ; TO evSets TOV (3tov Bas. 3 , TO evdees /caret
Tbv ftiov Reiske (better) || [$...4 elvai] Schmidt || 8 StSo^eV?? II 2 Bk. || 13 yevo-
[ 2 Bk. 1
support: see n. (70) on 3. SUSEM. (72)
2 o 8e KT\] "Others select out of
these some which they combine in order to
pass an agreeable existence, supplying by
an addition the deficiency in independence
of a more meagre mode of life " (Cope).
9 7 crvvavayKd^r] constrain : avv
intensive as in av/mir\r}povi>.
10 12 6 <ra O-Kft)XT)KOTOKL q WOTO-
Ki] Aristotle erroneously believed that
insects lay no eggs, but produce worms
or maggots which are then transformed
through several metamorphoses into the
perfect insect : see Aubert and Wimmer
Introd. to the De generationc animal, p.
14, Meyer Thierkiinde des Ar. p. 201 f.
What he says of the difference between
worm and egg serves in particular to ex
plain this passage. Thus De gener. anim.
n. i 812, 732 a 25 ff. : one species of
animals, the viviparous, bring forth young
like themselves fully developed; others
bear offspring not yet organized or of
perfect form, and of these the vertebrates
i] T&V evv-
r/ TWV TTTTI-
Trepl TO, ire^a
v ... /cat /cXw-
See also n, on
37 roiavTTiv] such as before de
scribed i.e. suitable for fishing . The
same use of the pronoun in I. i. 2, and in
II. 4. 4 Set d TOIOVTOVS (i.e. less friend
ly ) eZVcu. See Cope on Rhet. i. 5. 6.
36 38 With this classification of the
different modes of the chase cp. Plato
Laws VII. 823 B : TroAXT?
5pui> (sc. 6r/pa), TroXX?) 5
v&v, Trd/j.Tro\v 8e xai TO
dypev/JLaTa, ov ^bvov dripl
jreiai Kai \rj<r TU)i>...dr}pai.
7 5-
39 i][xepcov] cultivated.
8 40 o<roi y avr6(j>vTov] " derive
their employment from natural growth."
Nature is used now for what is primitive
)( the later development.
41 Ka.irr)\ela = retail trade; e/j.Tropia =
wholesale trade, commerce. The former is
used as a contemptuous term, "huckster
ing", Plato Laws vni. 849 D, xi. 918 D,
Soph. 223 D.
1256 b i r-r\v rpotfniv = subsistence,
174
176
nOAITIKON A. 8.
[I. 8. 10
14 ey^ei rpo^rjv ev avrois ^XP L T ^ ?5 rrjv TOV Kakovfievov yd- (III
11 \CLKTOS (frvcriv. ware o/Wo)<? Sf)\oi>, on /cal [yevo/jievois] olif}- 7
TO. re (frvrd TWV ^ttxov evetcev eivai KOI TO, d\\a c3a.
dvOptoTTCOV %dpiv, rd fJiev rjfjiepa /cal Sid TTJV xpfjaw
/cal Sid TT)V rpo(f)r)V, Ttov Be dyplwv, el jjurj Trdvra, d\\d
19 rd ye TrXetcrro- r^9 rpo^rjs /cal dX\7]s ftoyOelas eve/cev, Iva
12 fcal ecrOrjS /cal d\\a opyava yivrjrai e% avTwv. el ovv TJ
(frvcris jjurj^ev /jiiJTe areXe? iroiei ^r/re /Jbdr rjv, dvay/caiov
Tutv dv0pu)7T(0v eveicev avrd Trdvra TreTroi^/cepai rrjv fyvcriV
23 Sib /cal r] Tro^e/JM/cr) ^ucret /CTT^TL/CTJ TTW? ecrrai (rj yap 6rj- 8
15 [yevopevois] Gottling, reAetwfletVti Ar. Susem. 1 2 yevo/j.evois F M s IT 2 Bk.,
P 1 (ist hand), aXXws yevo/nevois P 1 (corr. 1 in the margin), yivo/mevois
( = the facts) Zell (in his ed. of the Ethics n. p. 405 f.), [/cat yevo/j-tvois] Bernays,
[d-rjXov OTL /cat yevofttvois] Bender || 18 Before Trdvra in II 1 is another rd d XXa (raXXa
P 1 ), a repetition of the preceding: TTO.V (sic) P 4 (ist hand), rd Trdvra P 4 (corrector)
|| 20 yevrjTat. M s P 1 || yovv Conring Susem. 2 , which suits the sense but is against
Aristotle s usage, 701/3? Susem., ovv F II Ar. Bk. Bernays || 23 [<5t6...24 avTrjs] and
23 KTT1TLK7) (f>v(Ti TToXe/JUKrj also 24 [?} oel...i6 TTo\efJiov /cat Trp&Tov] Schmidt, who trans
poses the latter to follow 1255 b 39 dypevTiKr]. See Qu. Cr. in. 5 ff.
tively : see Bonitz Ind. Ar. 838 a 8 ff.
with the examples 837 b 42 ff.
11 J 5 -yevop-e vois] " after they are
born." The crude teleology of ir, 12
is common to all the Socratics and was
probably derived from Socrates himself :
Xen. Mem. I. 4. 5 ff.
12 23 816 KCU i\ TroXejuKi] KT\] This
does not directly follow from the fore
going. Some intermediate thought has
to be supplied : < it must further be as
sumed that amongst men themselves the
less perfect are formed for the service of
the more perfect >. Cp. also n. (70) on
3. SUSEM. (74)
There are at least four ways of taking
this passage. (i) Vettori Giphanius
Schneider Bojesen make avTfjs and 77
both refer to TroXe/j-iK-ij. (2) Lambin,
Schnitzer, Stahr refer avTrjs to Tro\e/j.iKri,
rf to 6tjpevTi.K^. This is plainly absurd : for
if dypevTiK-h can be used against men as
well as wild animals it is no longer /mtpos
7roXe/xt/c^s, but at least as extensive as
vroXe/ut/cT?. (3) Garve, followed by
Hampke p. 16, refers avTijs to KT^TLKT],
and T; to OtjpevTiKT]. There are three
objections to this : (a) It proves too
much ; for if we deduce the right to make
war from the right to hunt, why should
not captives be eaten? a notion which
Aristotle (?) iv (vn). 2. 15 expressly repu
diates with abhorrence. (/3) Wars of
(ra eVatyaa) lay eggs, while the invertebrates
(ra avai^a.) breed worms. The difference
between egg and worm is this : if the
young animal is developed from a part
and the rest serves as nourishment for it,
it is an egg: but if the whole of the
young animal proceeds from the whole of
what is produced, it is a worm. Also
Hist, anini. 1.5.3 4^9 b 6 ff . : a perfect
germ (/c^/xa) is called an egg when one
part of it serves for the formation and
another for the nourishment of the young
animal developed out of it, a worm when
the whole animal is developed out of the
whole of the germ by its organization and
growth : cp. ib. v. 10,. 2 550 b 28 ff.
e/c 5e r&v cr/cwX^/co;^ OVK e/c fj.^povs TWOS
yiverai rb <oi>, ucrTrep e/c T&V ywi/, dXX
b\ov auch erat /cat diapOpov/mevov yiverai.
rb fyov, and DC gener. anim. ill. 2. 4
752 a 27 f. oi>x wcrirep oi cr/ccoX^/ces
5t avTuv (sc. ra yd) Aa/x/3d^et TTJ
It follows from these explanations that
what Aristotle asserts in the present
passage of worms is in reality only true
of eggs. All that the former receive
from the parent worm is that capacity for
perfect self-development which is wanting
in the egg. Cp. also 10 3 n. (96).
SUSEM. (73)
14 TOV Ka\ov/m^vov yd\a.KTos <f)ixnv =
the natural substance called milk. So TOV
dt /)os, roD Oefi^ov 0tfcrts air, heat respec
I. 8. 13]
1256 b 14 125Gb 28.
177
u TT/DO? re rd Orjpia KOI (III)
dpxecrdai pi} deXova-tv, w?
pepos avrf)?), y Set
25 TWV dvOpwirwv oa-oi Tr
<pvcri Sl/caiov ovra TOVTOV TOV
13 ev pev ovv eloos KTT)TiKr)s Kara $v<nv T?}?
ea-Tiv o eel rjroi VTrdp^eiv rj Tropi^euv avrrjv OTTCO?
26 OVTO. after TOVTOV II 2 Bk. On TOVTOV p 2 gives the gloss TOV OrjpevTiKov, this Orjpev-
TIKOI> has crept into the text in F M> after TOVTOV TOV [| irp&Tov is added after TroXe-
MO^ by M B P 1 and P- (corr.), /ecu TrpcSroi/ by F : but, as Schmidt observes, this
has arisen from < = &/ [| 27 KT^TLK^ after /card Qvviv M s P 1 || TTJS olKovo/MKrjs] TOV
OIKOVO/J.IKOV Thurot, [/^/oos] Schneider Hampke Thurot: but see Comm. || 28 [ecmV
...virdpxy] Schmidt || o] Thurot (Revue critique, 1869, p, 84 f.), 5i 6 Schnitzer, -g
Lambin Reiske, 6 <rt> Zwinger, </ca<?>6 Bernays: in Revue critique, 1872, p. 57 f.
Thurot considers the sense given by the last three suggestions necessary : d Rassow,
who transposing d...vTrdpxv to follow oliclas and reading ov for 29 uv has the
following order ecrrtV ov e<m 6r)<ravpio-(ji,bs . . .7) ol/<ias a 5e? 7]Toi...owus
defence or to regain liberty can hardly be
called hunting : the notion of hostility is
the wider. (7) The clause us (pvaei 5i-
KOUOV assigns a separate justification for
the kind of war in question, which is not
therefore deduced from the chase. It
depends upon the view of slavery laid
down in cc. 5, 6. (4) Sepulveda renders:
quo fit ut opes hello etiam parandi ratio
a natura quodain modo proficiscatur, mak
ing TroXe/ztK?) an epithet of KTTJTLKT} and
branch of war which has a natural justifi
cation. lie adds : " The 5iaipe<ns then is
KTIJTlKr]
he also refers y to d-rjpevTiK-r]. But
though this gives excellent sense it in
volves transposing (pvaei after KT-IJTIK^:
and there is hardly good evidence- of two
adjectives in -LKTJ so combined, the one
as attribute the other as substantive. 1
SUSEM. Quaest. Crit. ill. p. 6 f. Then
translate : " hence the natural art of war
will belong in a sense to the art of acqui
sition (for the chase is only one branch of
it)" viz. of natural warfare, and 0r)pev-
TiK ^y 7> is avToQvTos epyacrla. "It"
i.e. war "has to be employed not only
against wild animals but also against all
such men as, though naturally slaves,
refuse submission, this species of war
having a natural justification."
The^view given above as (3) avTrjs =
KTr)TiK7)<>, rj = 6T)pevTiKri is supported by
Jackson, who would extend the parenthe
sis to Tr6\efji.ov. He translates: natural
warfare will in a sense be a branch of
acquisition: for (r) the chase is a mode
of acquisition, and (2) can be applied
either against wild animals (in which case
it is e-npe\rri.Kri proper) or against natural
slaves, who refuse to obey, that being a
H,
6-tipevTi.KTJ proper
From 7 5 it would appear that TTO-
\/m.iKri is still further divided. So Plato,
Soph. 222 C, includes XTjcm/o;, dvopa-rro-
SiaTiKr), and TvpavvLK-rj under the general
head of TroXe/xt/c^, which is one of the
two branches of r//u.epo6r)pt.K >j."
25 cos <J>vcri SIKCUOV] Consult the reff.
given n. (65) on 7 5. SUSEM. (75)
13 27 iv p.v ovv KT\] See Exc.
in. on B. i. p. 210. SUSEM. (75. to)
28 With the changes proposed by
Madvig and Rassow (see critical notes)
translate: "one species of acquisition then
is a branch of economic science, that
branch namely whose task it is to collect
a store of objects necessary for life and
useful for civil or domestic society, objects
which ought therefore to be at hand for
the householder or to be provided to his
hand by his science (Economic)." Others
(Lambin, Zwinger, Bernays, Thurot) either
change 6, or else extract from it the sense
of since , in so far as , taking &v ecm
6r)<r. xP r )/ JL dT<>}v = ihe means to a store of
commodities (or possessions, /cr^/xdrwi ) : a
rendering not very clear, see 14. SUSEM.
Jackson, for the most part agreeing
with Bernays, interprets uv ecrrt Qr\a. XPV
fjidTwv things capable of being stored
(here perhaps anticipated by Gottling
TavTa TO, Ypwuara di/ ecrrt 6tjcr.) ; he
12
178 nOAITIKHN A. 8. [I 8. 13
OrjcravpiO fJib^ XP 7 ] ^drtov Trpbs ^corjv avayKalcov Kal (II
et9 Koivwviav TToXeco? 77 oiKias. Kal eoiKev o 7 d\7j- 9
31 Oivbs TT\OVTOS 6K TOVTCov elvau. 77 <ydp Trj<$ TOiavr?]?
avrdpKeia vrpo? dyaQrjv farjv OVK ciTreipbs e<mv, ooaTrep
\Gt)V (f)7]0rl TTOirjOraS
TT\OVTOV ovdev rep/xa Trf^acr/nevoi/ avdpcicri, Ketrat.
15 Keirat, ydp cocnrep Kal rat9 a XXat? Te%vai$ ovBevydp opyavov
36 pov ovSejjiids ecm re^vri^ ovre 7r\r)0ei ovre /neyeOei, 6 Se
TTX^O? GQ-TLV OIKOVOHIKWV Kal TTOXiTLKCOV.
OTL fJLGV TOIVVV (TTL T? KTTJTIKrj Kara V(JIV TOt? OIKO-^
Kal rot? 7ro\iTLKols, Kal St rjv alrlav, SfjXov
9 eo~Ti 8e <yevo<$ dX\o KTTJTIKTJS, r}v fJid\.io~Ta Ka\ovcri, Kal 10
29 cS^ ecrri] y ZvecrTi Madvig (this I think needed whether we emend with
Lambin, Zwinger, Bernays or transpose with Rassow) : /xepos ecrrtf y fVecrri
pto-^os (H/a as, a Set... inrapxy Susem. 2 provisionally || wf] 6V Schmidt ||
rwv Bernays (perhaps rightly) for xpT^drow |] 32 a7a^o)i P 2 - 3 Q S b T b Ar. and P 1
(ist hand), a-ya9r]v P 1 (corrector 1 ) || 35 /cetrcu omitted by M s , /ce?rat yap oni. by P 1
(ist hand supplied by p 1 in the margin) |] 37 ot /co^o/zi/cciH /cat 7roXirt/ca)i F, ot/co-
VOIJLI.K&V [/cat TToXtrt/ca;! ] Schiitz, but see Comm. [| 38 [6 rt...39 5r/\ov] Schmidt |[
39 /cat ro?s TroXirLKols Schiitz also proposes to bracket, but see Comm.
translates "in so far as Economic must
either find ready to hand, or itself provide
that there may be found ready to hand,
necessaries of life and utilities which are
capable of being stored for the common
use of state or family."
30 True wealth is for use : 6 Xws 5e TO
TrAoi Teu ecrnv iv TO; xprjffOai /uLd\\oi> TJ ev
ry KeKTTjffOaC /cat yap 77 evtpyeid ecrrt TWV
TOLOVTWV Kal 77 x/3?yVts TrXouTos Ithet. I. 5. 7.
14 32 avrdpKia = the amount of such
property absolutely necessary to secure
independence of all external aid.
OVK aimpos] See 9 13, 14. The
notion of a limit to true wealth recurs in
Epicurus apud Diog. Laert. X. 144 : 6
rrjs (pvaews TrXouros Kal wptcrrat /cat euiro-
piffTos ecrTi, 6 5e TOV Ktvdov So^&v ets aTret-
pov e/x.7Tt7rret. The earlier political eco
nomists believed in a possible "glut of
capital": Mill/ 3 . E. I. 5 3.
SoXwv] Frag. 13, 71 Bergk. SUSEM.
(76)
15 35 ovSev -ydp KT\] Cp. iv(vil).
i 5 n (695), i 7 ra fjiev yap e/cros
^%et Trepas, u&Trep 6pyav6v rt, TTO.V yap TO
Xpr)<ri/*ov s Tt, uv rrfv VTrepfioXyv 77 jSXd?r-
Tew avayKcuov rj ^ev 60eXos eft/at avr&v
rots %xov(nv. SUSEM. (76 to)
37 dp-ydvwv irXfOos KT\] in other
words, means and appliances for life, and
for the life of wellbeing and perfection
as the end of the household and of the
state. But cp. Exc. in. SUSEM. (77)
The definition of wealth as "instru
ments" (given also 4 2) is commended
by J. S. Mill Political Economy I. 10 as
adding distinctness and reality to the
common view. His definitions are "any
product both useful and susceptible of
accumulation" with which comp. i256b
29 and "all useful or agreeable things
which possess exchange value." Mill too
restricts the term to material wealth.
38 rots olKOvojxois KT\] See again
Exc. in. p. 211 n. (2). SUSEM. 77 (h)
c. 9. The other species of KT^TLK-TJ, viz.
Xprj^a.TLffTLK r], the art of money -making,
i . Origin of excJiange in the infancy
of society, 2 6. Origin and use of
money: 7 n. Distinction between
natural Kramer/ and this xP r lf J - ario " riK l l
12 15. Cause of the confiision between
them; 16 18.
1 40 rv (xaXuTTa KT\] " which is
especially called money-making" %/a^a-
TKTTI/CT) (2) of 8 i n. "and fairly so
called ; to which is due the opinion that
wealth and property have no limit." But
9 4 the first sense seems to recur.
I 9. 4]
1256 b 29 1257 a 16.
179
41
257 a
SiKaiov avro Ka\iv, xprjjAaricmKrjv, $i rjv ovSev So/eel (III)
Trepas eivai TT\OVTOV Kal Krrja-ews. J]V co? ^lav KCLI rrjv
avrrjv rfj \%d6icrrj Tro/VXot VO/AL^OVCTI, Sid rrjv yeirvlaaiv
ari 8 ovre rj avrr) rfj elpr^fjievrj ovre rroppw etcelvrj^. eo-rt S
r/ JAW (j)vo~i rj S ov (frvaei avrwv, d\\d Si* e/ATreipias
TWOS /cal re%vr)S yiverai fJudXkov. \d^w^ev Be irepl avrfj? n
rrjv ap XTJv evrevOev. eKacrrov jap KTr^fJiaro^ Sirrr) rj
eariv, a^^oTeai Se /ca0* avro fMev a\V
avro
olov
r
yap
TO)
ra>
ol/cela r} 8 OVK ol/cela rov
re iVoSecri? Kal r) fLLTa/3\r)Ti/cr]. afi-
Kal <ydp 6 d\\arro-
avrl ^oyu-tcr/Ltaro? 77 rpoc/)?;?
rj vTroSrj/uia, aXX ov rr)v oliceiav
ov yap d\\ayrj$ eveicev yeyovev. rov avrov &e
X el/ Ka ^ L 7r6 P^ T(3v a\\cov Krrffjiarwv. ecrri yap rj
/*6ra/3\rjriKr) Trdvrcov, dp^a^hri TO fjiev Trpuirov CK rov
Kara fyvcnv, ru> rd /Jiev 7r\eio) rd S e\drru> rwv Itcavwv
41 ourw Bas. 3 in the margin
1257 a i [17^.. .5 /jLaXXov] Schmidt || 3 eKeivris] KeifJ.&v) T (? -posita William)
Susetn. 1 2 |j 6 xp^aros F M s and p l in the margin |j 7 nad" 1 auro] after 6/iot ws
Koraes || 9 vTrodrjais IVPP 1 || 12 [77 uTroSTjjua] Koraes, Scaliger proposed to trans
pose these words to follow XPW 1 -^ which also occurred to Koraes, but see Comm.
2 1257 a 6 K((rTOu yap KT\]
"Compare j5V^/. Eth. ill. 4, 1231 b 38,
where we find the same classification of
though the use in exchange is
Politics
KaQ 1 avro olKela
Ka# auro OVK oiKeia
Kara crvy.fieB nKOS us aV ei rts
. The two
reckoned a species not of r] /ca0 auro
XPWis, but of rj Kara cri^/Se/S
classifications are as follows
End. Eth.
KO.& 1 auro
Kara ffVfJ.j3J3r]KOS
Kara
rtjj viro57]/j.aTL
(Jackson).
9 inrdStoas = wearing, ij [ieTapXiiTiKii =
the use in exchange. The shoe when
used as an article of exchange preserves
its proper nature, it is still to be worn by
somebody ; although as it is not made to
exchange this use is OVK ot /ce?a.
3 10 Kal yap... 12 V7r68i]p.a] This
is true. The question is always how
much money or food the shoe as such,
and not the leather used in making it, is
worth : the labour has to be paid for as
well as the materials (Gottling). Cp. n.
on 8 (83) and Introd. 28. SUSEM. (78)
12 T) viroSTjua] as a shoe.
4 14 &TTI yap...TrdvTWv] sc. XPV
<ris. " All things have a use in exchange."
We now speak of the two values of a
thing, value in use and value in exchange.
15 dpap.e vTi TO plv -irpwTOv )( ro 5
v<TTepoi>, derived in the first instance from
a natural origin [whatever it may after
wards become].
12 2
180 nOAITIKIlN A. 9. [I 9. 4
(in
701)9 dvOputTrovs. fj teal $rj\ov, OTL ovrc ecrn <j)v<ret, rr)<; 12
rj KanrrjXitcr] baov yap LKCLVOV cwTOt9, avay-
5 Kalov r)V TrmelcrOai rr)v d\\ayrjv. ev fJizv ovv rrj jrpaorr}
20 Koivtovia (rovro 8 earlv olrcla) (pavepcv OTL ov&ev eanv epyov
avrfjs, oXX ^TJ 7rA,eiWo9 rfjs /coivcovlas ovarj^. ot i^\v jap
Ttttv avrcov eKOivwvovv jrdvrwv, ol Se Ke^wpia-fJievoi 7ro\\a)v
Tra\iv Kal erepcov # #" &V Kara r9 Se^cret? dvayrcaiov <tfv>
2 4 TToieiaOai ra? /jueTaSoaeis, KaOcnrep eri 7ro\\d Troiei [/cat] ra)v (p- 1
g 6 jSapftapiKwv G0voi)V, /card rrjv d\\aryijv. avrd >ydp rd
olov olvov 7T/30? aLTOv SiSovTes Kal \afjif3dvovTes, /cal
d\\WV TWV TOIOVTCOV eKCLOTOV. Tj fjil> OVV TOiaVTT) fJL6Ta^\,fJ- 13
17 [77 Kal... r 9 d\Xa777i ] Schmidt || Qvaei r^s xp7?^ari(rri/c^s] rts rfrvvei
rtcrrtKTj Schmidt lj 18 xP 7 7A taTtcrTt c ^ s ] /wera/SXTyrt/c^s Bernays || 20 [rouTO...okfa]
Schmidt || ecrr^] ijv Schmidt || 22 TWV omitted in II 1 and Ar., it is supplied
by p 1 in the margin || 23 /cat was left out by Camot, [/cat] Koraes || er^puv
<e5eovTO> Schneider, eTpuv<7)ir6povv> Schmidt, ecrrtpovTO Koraes, <erepot>
Bernays (on which see Comm.) : Fiilleborn saw that something was lost : e
<erepot Jiirbpovit Susem. Well don changes erepwv into t8eoi>To |j Koraes added
r t v |1 24 /cat is wanting in F, [/cat] Susem., /cat <i/0i Schmidt and Bernays (per
haps rightly) : Busse transposes /cat to precede TroXXa not badly || 25 ff. Michael
of Ephesus in his comm. on Arist. Ethic, f. 70 a refers to this passage
17 fj Kal 8TJXov...Ka < m]\iKT]] Barter crerat.
is sufficient for natural wants, as he goes 22 ol 8 Kex^p- KT VI Bernays thought
on to show. Money is an artificial means the addition of a word for " lacked " un-
of facilitating this, not of natural origin necessary, because this idea is implied in
but only due to custom and convention, /cexwptcr/xefot . If so, as /cexwp. <e?repot>
see 8 n nn. (82, 83): though when erepwv separated (or divided) one from
applied within due limits it is not con- this thing, another from that, so nexup.
trary to nature. The whole explanation TroXXuv should mean separated from
would have been clearer, Fiilleborn rightly many things . But as Bernays gives
observes, had Aristotle definitely stated division of possessions i. e. separate
what he means by trade (/caTnjXi/c^^ property was introduced for many things
h
huckstering, retail trade): viz. that it is a he must intend /cexw^tcryLteVot iro\\Q>v to
buying and exchanging "not for one s stand for living in divided possession of ,
own wants, but in order to sell again". or in respect of, many things : a sense
As it is, this is left to be inferred from hardly possible in any case and quite in
die context. SUSEM. (79) conceivable if the participle has a different
1 8 OCT-OV -yo-P KrX] " For the necessity construction with kripwv. SUSEM.
of exchange is confined, as we saw, to Postgate would govern TroXXcGf /cat erepuv
the satisfaction of the exchangers own by CKOIVUVOVV, supposing TTO\\WV to be op-
wants." Cp. rocraur^s = only so much 13 posed to TTCLVTWV (as Tr\eiffTwv is, II. 5. 27),
1-2. and understanding ertpwv of the primary
5 21 dXX* rfST]] but not until the division of the joint-household into two:
society extended. Since trade is intro- " again when the original household split
cluced at a later stage it is not natural . into two, each half continued to hold in
Possibly directed against Plato s primi- common a large part of the stock, viz. all
tive state, the aXydivrj, vyiys, vwi> TroXts, that the other half left it".
Rep. II. 371 A D: ayopa 5-r T^/MV /cat 23 KO.T& ras 8erj<ms] Comp. 2 5 n.
^vufioXov r?7S aXXay^s evena yevrj- (18). SUSEM. (80)
I. 9. 8]
1257 a 17 1257 a 37.
181
29 TiKr) ovT6 Trapa (frvcriv ovre %pr)/j,aTicmKr)<> ecrnv etSo? ovbev (III)
7 (et? avcnr\r)pw<Tiv yap rrjs /card cfrvcriv avrapKeias r)v] e /c
TO.UT77? lyever etcelvrj Kara \6yov. ^evucwrepas yap
r?/? (BorfOeias r&&gt; eiadyecrOai wv eVSeefc KOI eV-
wv e7r\e6va,ov, e dvdyfcrjs 77 TOV ^o/ucrynaro? eVo-
s pio-Orf ^770-49. ov yap V/3d(TTaKTov efcaarov TWV Kara v<jiv
35 dvayicaiwv $10 Trpo? ra? d\\ayd<; TOLOVTOV TI avveQevro u
7T/909 a(f)d<> aurou? SiSovai, /col \ajJi(BdviV) o TWV
avro ov ete r^ ^peiav ev/jLera^elpLcrTov -~ Trpbs TO
32 yeisofJLeviis Koraes, yivo^vrjs H Bk. || .ej SeeZs] W5et Bernays || 37 Koraes
conjectured <ou/c> 6V, but see Int. p. 28 ff. and Comm. n. (87) || ^] </xera-
Ko/jd>fcii> Reiske, certainly right as to the sense, </3acrra>^ei^ Bernays (less good)
7 31 Kara Xo-yov, as one might have
inferred. Linclau by agreement . But
can the words bear this meaning ? The
proof which follows seems to show that
this phrase expresses subjectively the same
thing as 33 e afdyKr/s in objective fashion.
SUSEM. (81) Similarly IV (vil). 16. 10.
Bonitz commenting on 989 a 30: "quod
rationibus ad rem pertinentibus accom-
modatum est et consentaneum."
|viK<OTe pas y^P---] "when the supply
extended to foreign countries."
8 34 ov -y^P t>pdo-TaKTov KT\]
Yet money is not by nature, but has its
origin in mere convention ! Here again
Aristotle falls into the contradiction no
ticed in n. (71), seeking the true nature
of man in violation of his own principle,
before instead of in the normal develop
ment of civilization. Hence he ignores
the fact which on other occasions (Poet.
4 i6) by no means escapes him,
that there is no unconditional antithesis
between nature and art, nature and con
vention, nature and civilization : that
innumerable arts institutions and conven
tions take their origin from man s inmost
nature in the course of its development.
It is precisely so with the state, and as
with the state so with money. That in
history too the law of a rational necessity
controls chance is a thought not suffi
ciently acknowledged in his worke : see
Poet. 9 2, 10, with my notes, and
Reinkens op. c. 289 ff., who somewhat ex
aggerates. Cp. also below on II. 9 12 n.
(296), 30 n. (339), in. 3. 9 n. (466).
SUSEM. (82)
35 816 irpds TCIS dXXa-yds icrX] On
the origin of money compare Nic. Eth.
v - 5 10 16 (1133 a 19 ff.): of which
the substance is as follows,
All things which are to be exchanged
must be somehow commensurable: and
for this purpose money has been intro
duced, which serves as a sort of medium,
for it measures all things, e.g. how many
pairs of shoes are equivalent to a given
house. The standard or common mea
sure is in reality demand ; but demand
is conventionally represented by money
which gets its name (i/o/xicr^a^ currency)
because it is not by nature but by conven
tion (vbfj,<#}, so that it is in our power to
change and demonetize it (i.e. render it
no longer current). If we do not require
a thing now, money is still the guarantee
of a future exchange, to take place if we
require the thing at some other time.
And although the value of money itself
occasionally changes, yet it tends to be
more constant than that of any other
thing. All other commodities should
therefore have a price set on them, that
so exchange may always be possible.
SUSEM. (83)
36 o TWV \pi\<ri\i.<i)v avro ov] Schneider
thinks this is not implied by the nature of
money, since certain tribes use cowries as
a medium of exchange, and the Ethi
opians stones with marks engraved upon
them (\idois eyyey\v/j./j.ti>oi.s Ps-Plato
Eryx. 400 B). We admit the truth of
this ; yet only a metallic currency can
fulfil the proper end of money, and from
the nature of the case the really civilized
races have always availed themselves of it.
Aristotle however has failed to recognise
this sufficiently : see i r n. (87) and In-
trod. 29. SUSEM. (84)
37 xpefav recalls x/r^cn/uwv : a com
modity useful in itself which adapted its
use handily to the purposes of daily life.
182 nOAITIKflN A. 9. [I. 9. 8
(TiSrjpos teal (ipyvpos KOI el TL TOIOVTOV erepov, TO /nev irpw- (III
rov avrXw? bpicrOev peyeOei KOI crraOpw, TO e reXevralov
40 Kal xapa/CT fjpa e7ri{3a\6vTO)v, f iv ajroXvo-rj TT}? ^eTprjcrea)^
9 avTOV? 6 yap %apaKTr)p ereOrj TOV TTOCTOV crrj^eLOV. iropi- is
1257 b o~0evTO<> ovv 77877 vofJiicrfJiaTO^ /c Trjs dvayKaias d\\ayf)<;
Oarepop eZSo? Tr)<$ ^prjfjbaTLcmKri^ eyeveTo, TO KairrfKLKOV, TO
fjiev ovv TrpcoTov 7rXc5? tVco? yivo/juevov, eZra 8t e/jLTreipias
4 97877 Te^ViKOOTepOV, TToOeV KOi TTto? /jLeTaj3a\\6[A6VOV 7T\el(TTOV
10 TTQirjO ei Kepoo<$. $10 $OKl 77 ^prujLCLTicrTiKr) fjia\i(TTa Trepl TO
vojiiio-jLia elvai, KOL epyov avTTjs TO ^vvaaOai Oewpf/aai Trodev
ecrrat 7r\rj0o? [^pTjjuaTWv] TTOL^TIKYJ yap [elvai] TOV TT\OVTOV
Kal xprjjjbdTwv. KOI yap TOV TT\OVTOV 7rd\\aKi$ Tideacri vo- 16
9 fjiio~ /juaTOS 7r\fj6o$, Sia TO Trepl TOVT eivai TTJV ^pij/jiaTio TiKrjv
ll ical TTJV Ka7rr)\LK^v. ore Be T:a\iv A-^o? elvai So/eel TO
Kal vofjios TravTciTrao-i, (frva-ei, 8 ovSev, OTL
38 K&V el M 8 II 2 Bk. (perhaps rightly) || 40 eTrijSaXXovrwv M S II 2 Bk.
1257 b 3 ovv omitted by P 2 3 QS b T b Aid. Bk. and P 4 (ist hand) |
? Susem. || 7 [xp^drwi ] Giphanius || Troi-rjri.Krji [yap] Schmidt, who transposes
TTOLTJTIKTIV . . .8 x/n^aTow to follow ro Ka.Trrj\iKriv I yap] 5 Bernays, inserting yap after
the next following /cat, thus: %p7? y uarwj Troi^rt/o? S 5 elvai rod TT\OVTOV /cat <yap>
XptjfJ-drwV /cat yap /crX. If so, 9 rr/v xp^arto-ri/c?}! /cat must also be omitted || elvai
omitted by II 1 || TOV omitted by M a , bracketed by Koraes; oVrws? Susem. || 8 Giphanius
proposed to omit yap ; Schmidt trans]3oses it to follow 9 5td || TroAXckts after Tideaai
M 8 ? 1 || 9 5ta TO] 5t6 ? Susem. || 10 Thurot proposes to omit /cat before r^v, /cat
<eIVat> ? Susem. ; Schiitz rejects /cat r^ /caTr^Xt/c^ (or r^ xp^artcrTt/c^ /cat) ||
ii j/6/iy Lambin, perhaps rightly: yet see Comm. n. (86)
332 ff. SUSEM. (85)
9 1257 b i Take e/c rrjs dvayK. dX-
\ayfy with TropiirdtvTos rather than with
eytvero, "as soon as a currency was pro-
vided in consequence of the necessary ex-
change, there arose the other branch of
the art of wealth, I mean retail-trade : at
first no doubt in a rude form, but after-
wards improved by experience as to the
quarters from which, and the way in
which, exchange of commodities" not
fJLTa(3a\\6/uei>ov < TO v6ju.icrfj.a> , "will
produce the largest profit ".
10 8 Kal y^P--- 10 Kair-qXiKiiv]
This is the error best known as the Mer-
cantile System : the confusion of money
with wealth exposed by Adam Smith
Wealth of Nations B. IV. Cp. Mill Pol.
Econ. pp. r 4. Even in Rhet. I. 5. 7
i/o/itcr/xaros Tr\7J0os is only one of many
elements of wealth.
11 n VOJAOS iravTaircuri] An allu-
38 o-CSiipos] "Byzantium is an in-
stance of the use of iron money: cp.
Plato Comicus Pels. 3 xaXeTrws &v OIK?)-
crai/mev iv Byfavrt ots | OTTOV cridapeoiai rots
vo/Jilffju,a(nv | xpwj/rai. These coins were
commonly called ot crtSdpeot, cp. Aristoph.
Clouds 249. e i TL TOIOVTOV ^Tpov]
Aristotle has in mind some such coinage
as the Electrum money used at Cyzicus"
(Ridgeway). Electrum was the material
of the earliest known coins of Lydia, before
the time of Croesus, and of the Ionian
cities: see Gardner Types of Gk. Coins
p. 4 ff., Head Coinage of Lydia p. n.
TO" [ikv irpwTOV KT\] This is the old-
fashioned bar-money, like the iron money
at Sparta, Pseudo-Plato /. c. tv Aa/ce5at-
fiovi. ffidvjptt) (Trad/jut) vofjdfrovfft, Cp. Xen.
De Rep. Laced. 7. 5; Plutarch Lys. 17
(6/3eXcr/cot, spits), Lye. 9 ; Polybios VI.
49; and H. Stein On the Spartan iron
money in Jahrb.f. Philol. LXXXIX. 1864.
1257 a 38 1257 b 24.
Sez/o? d
183
I 9. 13]
0fJ,eVG)V re TWV ^pw^vwv ouSez/o? d^iov ov8e %pr)(TLpov TTpo? (Ill)
ovo ev TWV dvcvyieat&v earl, KOI i/o/uayxaro? TT\OVTWV iro\\d-
KI? aTTopr](Tei rfjs dvajKaias rpo(f)rj^ icaiTOi arojrov TOLOVTOV
15 elvai 7r\ovTov ov evTropwv \ifjL<p d7ro\lrai, KaQdirep KOI rov (P. 15)
M.iSav eicelvov fjbv6o\o<yovai Sid rrjv aTrX^cn Lav rfjs ei)^???
12 Travrwv avrcp yivo/j,eva)v TWV TrapaTiOejJihwv ^pvcrcov. $10 17
&TOVOTLV erepov TI TOV TT\OVTOV Kal rr^v ^p^cmcn^/a;^, opOws
fyrovvTes. GCTTL yap erepa rj Xprj^aTicmKrj KOI 6 TrXouro? o
20 Kara fyva-iv, fcal afar) pev OLKOVO/JLIKTJ, r) Se KairrfKiKr)^
ri xpTjfidrcov ov Trdvrcos, aXX rj Sid ^pTj/jidrcov /ji-
. Kal So/eel trepl TO vofjuafjia avrrj elvai TO <ydp
13 vo^io-fjia o-ro^iov Kal Trepan rrjs d\\ayrjs e crrtV. Kal
po? S?) euro? o TrXoOro? 6 diro Tavrrjs
12 ov8e Bk., oure II. || 20 avrrj] 77 ? Schmidt || [/cat aim/. ..24
Schmidt, who transposes /cat avrr)...^o KTTJCTIS to follow 1257 a 5 juSXXo/ || TJ after
/x^ corr. 2 of P 2 || 21 ^ P 4 - G - Q (?) L s Aid., T/ S b , f, Rassow || Bernays omits X PV-
narwv after 5td || 24 5^ Giphanius || ovros omitted by II 1
sionto the derivation of vo^Lff^a = money,
currency, from vo/j.os = convention, current
custom: see n. (83). It may be for the
same reason that money is more pointedly
said to be v6{j.os rather than PO/XCJ, con
ventional , as we should expect. The
same allusion in Pseudo-Plato Eryxias
/. c. 5,;z. (85) (Schneider). SUSEM. (86)
on p.TaTi06[Xvwv KT\] Although Aris-
totle himself, 12, adopts the opinion
that this form of wealth is ov8i> 0wret,
yet here the view is carried much farther
than he goes in 8, see n. (84). He
must hold that money, when no longer
current, loses its value as money, retain
ing only its value in exchange as this or
that metal : its only use now is as metal,
not as coin. SUSEM. (87)
With this comp. N. E. v. 5 n, e0
YJIMV fj.era(3a\e ii> KCU iroirjffai. dxp r n a " rov i X 4
Trdcr^ei nv o$v Kal TOVTO (sc. rb i>6/M<T/JLa)
rb avTo ov yap del law ditvarac 6 uws 5e
fiovXerai (j.freiv /j.d\\ov.
14 Ka^Toi KT\] " And yet it is strange
that there should be wealth of a kind that
with abundance of it a man will never
theless perish of hunger, as the legend
runs about Midas of yore, when in fulfil
ment of his insatiate prayer every thing that
was served up to him turned into gold."
1 6 M8av] This mythical king of
Phrygia is said to have captured Silenos
and restored him to Dionysos, who in
return for the kind treatment of the pri
soner allowed him to wish for whatever
he liked. The fatal boon was subse
quently withdrawn by the god at Midas
request, see Ovid Mctatnorph. XI. 90
145. Aristotle must have had a version
of the story in which, instead of this hap
pening, Midas died from hunger and
thirst. Would the Midas of the legend
have fared any better in the end, if all his
food had been converted into drink, or all
his drink into food ? In the one case he
would have been starved to death, in the
other killed by thirst. SUSEM. (88)
12 17 816 r|TOi)(riv KT\] A possible
reference to previous writers, see Introd.
20 it. (i). SUSEM. (88 b)
19 irepa -\\ XP-] Getting of goods for
use, xP r l/ UiaTia " riK V (3) of 8 i ;/.
21 8td x.pT|[j.aT&)v (XTapoXrjs] "by
exchange of commodities. And this spe
cies, i.e. r/ KaTrr]\LKr), is thought to deal
with money, for currency constitutes and
limits exchange :" i.e. trading begins and
ends with money, aroixriov, main con
stituent, seems to mean indispensable
agent in exchange. Elsewhere called
guarantee, TTJS ^eXXoi/crT/s dXXay??? oro^ ty-
s, N. E. 14 : and viraXXayfJia TTJS
?, representative of demand ib. n.
13 23 Kal dircipos 8-q] l< In the
words of the line from Solon, 8 14"
(Bernays). SUSEM. (89)
184 nOAITIKHN A. 9. [I 9. 13
25 wo-Trep ydp rj larpiKTj rov vyiaiveiv et? aireipov ean teal (III)
e/cdcrrT] rwv re^ywv rov re\ov$ et? aTreipov (on fJbdXicrra yap
e/ceivo /3ov\ovrai Troielv), r&v Be TT^O? TO TeXo? OVK 6t9 arrei-
pov (Trepan ydp TO TeXo? nrdcrai^, ovrw KCLL ravrrjs rfjs
29 XpTjjjiario nK tjs OVK eo~n rov TeXof9 Trepas, TeXo9 Be 6 roiovros
14 7rXoi)T09 KOI ^prjfjbdrwv Krr]o~i^. rrjs 8 OLKovofjiiKijs [ov XP*1~ 18
fjLano nKr]<i] eari Trepas ov ydp rovro rijs ol/covofjiiKfjs epyov.
BLO rrj fj,ev fyaiverat dvayxalov elvai rravros 7r\ovrov Trepan,.
eTrl Be rtov yivofjbevwv opw<p J ev> (rv^ftalvov rovvavriov
34 ydp et9 (irreipov av^ovaiv 01 ^p^/JLan^ofjuevoi TO
15 ainov Be TO avveyyvs avrwv. e7rdX\,drrei ydp rj
25 As Eucken remarks, we should have expected elcri : but this change would
be very bold (see 36 and 1258 a i) || 30 TTJS 5 . ..31 tpyov suspected as an inter
polation Schmidt || ov xpT/^artcrrt/c^ P 2 (corr. 2 ), Reiske first omitted these two
words (but after 31 OIKOVO/J.LKTJS he inserts o /cal T^S xP 7 ]/ JiaTL(! " ri - K W > i n which case
Schneider and Gurlitt recommend ravrb instead of rouro); [ov] Bojesen Thurot
Schiitz, a3 Bernays, ov<ar]s> Schmidt. The case is still undecided || 31 01 ydp
...... Zpyov once transposed by Schmidt to follow 32 Tracts. This however really
involves other and perhaps more serious difficulties || 32 /JLV <<pv<rei.> ? Susem. ||
dia<.ri 5e>r^ ^v * * (paiverai Schmidt || 33 o/ocD/xep Sylburg, opco F II Ar. |] 34
, O.LTIOV * * 5td TO fftiveyyvs avrwv Schmidt
25 TOV v-yLaiveiv depends on et s direi- Qth chapter, " the unpretending germ
pov : medicine is without end in respect of from which two thousand years after-
health; medicine recognises no limits wards grew the science of society ". Cp.
within which its production of health is further IV (vn). i 5 ;/. (695), n. (700).
confined. SUSEM. (90)
27 TO, Trpbs TO rAos = means to the end. 14 30 If ov be changed or omitted,
28 irepas-.- irdo-ais] "For all arts are take rrjs olxovofJUKTJs as an adjective: so
limited by their ends." True in cases perhaps 1.39 below, and undoubtedly i 8,
where, after a certain limit has been 1258 a 17: "but to that branch" of ac-
passed, the number and amount of the cumulation "which concerns the house-
means applied do not contribute anything holder there is a limit ". See however
to the attainment of the end, nay even n. on 8 12, p. 177.
hinder it. But does it also hold for the 31 roi)TO = to attain this limit, xp^ara
all-embracing end of human life, the TroietV as Schneider says, rfj [ikv] " in one
happiness and perfection not of indi- sense", viz. when regarded as an instru-
viduals but of whole nations and finally ment. Lambin Schiitz Bernays take it as
of the human race? Aristotle did not " to the one branch", viz. that which con-
think of that : and no wonder, when cerns the householder.
we consider it is only the discovery of 34 els dimpov] Cp. [Xen.] De Vecti-
modern Political Economy, that capital gal, 4 6, 7 : apyvpcov 8 ovdeis TTW ourw
is simply accumulated labour : that the TTO\I> e/cr^o-aro ware /mrj ZTL Trpovdeladcu.
means to continued progress in national 01 \pi][jLaTi,ofJ.Voi = those who are en-
civilization are guaranteed solely by the gaged in traffic.
transmission and growth of the national 35 TO o-vveyY^S, the close relationship
wealth from generation to generation, between the two branches of XPW --
which money first made possible. We rtcrri/c^ is the cause of this mistake.
ought rather, with Stahr and others 15 eiraXXdrTei] See on I. 6. 3.
(Introd. p. 28), to recognise Aristotle s "The practical application of the two
penetrating insight, the ripeness and ma- kinds of xp r il lJ - aTl(rTlK ^ overlaps, through
turity of many of his conclusions in this being concerned with the same article.
I. 9. 16]
1257 b 25 1258 a 5.
185
auTr/5 (HI)
TOU avTov oucra } e/caTepas Tr)<
ecrTi KTijcrews xprjcris, aXX ov Kara TCIVTOV, aXXa Trj
erepov* TeXo?, T^? 8 77 avfrjan<s. wcrTe So/cec TLCTL TOUT
39 TT;? ol/covo/jLiKijs epyov, KOL SiaTe\ovcriv rj crw^eiv
!6 Set^ ^7 aveiv Trjv TOV vo/nicr/naTO^ ovalav et? ajreipov. CILTIOV 19
oe TavTtjs T^? oiaueo ecos TO crTrovoa^eiv Trepl TO
1258 a yLtry TO U ^7^ fc<? CLTTGipOV OVV 6KC11WJS 1
KOI TCOV TTOLrjTiicwv direlpcov 7ri0v/jLovcn,v. OCTOL $e
^fjv eTTiftaXXovTai, TO 777305 T5 a7roXau<T6t5 r
%7]Tovcriv, (oaT eTrel Kol TOUT ez^ TT? KTijo-ei
5 %etz^, Tracra 77 SiaTpiftrj irepl TOV ^prj/jLaTKr/jiov GCTTL, teal TO (P. 16)
TOU ev
36 Ka.Ttpa.s Ar. and the mss. used by Sepulveda, eKarepa F II Bk. eKarfyq.
Schneider, eKar^pg, and then 7-77 xpy/j.a.Tio TiK f) Bernays, perhaps rightly || 37 /CTT;-
(Tews xpy ffl -s Gbttling (after Schneider, or rather Fulleborn, had proposed to omit the
whole clause 36 rrjs 7^/3. ..37 xPW -^j XP r n (Teus KTrjais FIT Ar. Bk. || 39 oiKovo/j.ias
p4.6. Q Sb T b
1258 a i oixrrjs] iovays Sylburg (but see on 1257 b 2 5) I! 2 o^ 01 ...... 3 eTrifBaX-
Xovrai noticed by Eustath. on the Iliad p. 625, 36 || 4 vTrdpxov Koraes (perhaps
rightly)
Here two x/njVets eTraXXarroim because
they have the same object in common ".
(Postgate).
37 TT]9 p.^v KrX] The one application
has a different end (viz. enjoyment, use)
the other aims at mere accumulation .
39 SiareXoiicriv KrX] " persist through
life in the opinion that they ought at
least to hoard their stock of money if not
to go on adding to it indefinitely " : i>o/u <r.
ovalai> = their substance or capital in
money, Bonitz s. v. Better thus taken
than as a paraphrase of vo/j.i<r/j.a, for
which idiom see Waitz Org. I. 283 and
cp. i) TOV 6pi>idos ovaia 693 b 6.
16 This gives the reason why men
fall into the error just noticed, the ex
ternal cause, the trap into which they
fall, having been stated in 14 : rain-rjs
rfjs ia0&rea>s = rou SiareXe?^ TJ o-yfeiv KT\.
(Postgate).
40 alViov 8 KrX] Perhaps the
thought becomes clearer says Fulleborn
when expressed as follows : men have a
universal desire for long life, and without
setting a definite aim before them, with
out making clear to themselves wherein
the value and happiness of life really con
sist, they work on incessantly to procure
themselves the means of living through
this indefinite series of years. Now if
they would consider how to provide for
present enjoyment and for the ennobling
of life, their desire for gain would be
rendered more definite and limited .
SUSEM. (91)
1258 a 2 6 <roi Si KT\] "those who set
their hearts upon a life of happiness look
for it in sensual enjoyments": whereas
on Aristotle s own theory, the true em
bellishment and perfecting of life, i. c
happiness, consists in the utmost possible
cultivation of mental and moral excellence
of which the highest and noblest enjoy
ments are but a necessary consequence, a
moderate share of external goods and
bodily pleasures being required not as
constituent element but merely as indis
pensable condition : all beyond this hin
ders rather than promotes true Wellbeing.
See Zeller Phil. d. Gr. n ii 609 : cp. iv
(vn). i 7, 8. SUSEM. (92)
3 iri|3ciXXovTai,] throw themselves
upon (cp. Horn. //. VI. 68, evapuv CTTL-
j3aX\6/jivos) desire in the same meta
phorical sense as opeyecrdai, dpT^%ecr#at.
But otherwise n. i. r to adopt . For
the intransitive use of the active see I. 13
8, 13. InA T ic. Eth. i. 5 i, 2 6 awo-
\ava-TLKbs /3os is the life of sensual enjoy-
meHt". As Plato explains Rep. ix. 580
E f\V money is the means to this life, so
that (f)i\oKep5s, 0tAoxp?7/mToi are con
vertible terms with TO eTridv/u.-rjTiKoi : hence
6 xP r lf JLaTLa " riK s &vr)p comes to be com
pared with 6 0iX6ri/uos and d <pi\6(ro<pos.
V
186
nOAITIKON A. 9.
[I. 9. 16
17 eTepov eZSo9 7-779
/3o\fj yap 01/0-779 7-779
i>Trep/3o\ri$ Tro^TLfcr/v
#779 BvvcovTai Tropi^eiv,
10 eKacrrr) ^pw^evot, TWV
Sid TOVT e\r]\vOev. ev VTrep- (III
rrjv Trjs
/cdv pr) Sia 7-779
8t d\\<rj$ alrias TOVTO Treipwvrat,,
Svvd^ewv ov Kara (frvcriv. dvSplas 20
yap ov %pr}/j,aTa iroielv ecrnv d\\d ddpao^, ovSe
18 Kdi larpiKrjs, d\\d 7-779 /Jiev vihcriv 7-779 vyleiav. 01 Be
Trdaas TTOLOVCTI, xprj/jLaTio-Ti/cds, 0^9 TOVTO reXo9 ov, Trpos Ss
TO reX,o9 aTravra Seov CLTTCLVTCLV.
Trep jjiev ovv T7;9 re fjirj vay/caias ^p7j/^aTL(7TLK7^, KOI r9,
1 6 teal SL air lap riva ev XP ^ ^ cr / ji ^ l> avrfjs, eiprjrai, KOI Trepl
T?;9 dvay/caia?, on erepa ^ev avrijs olKOVopiKr) Se /card (pvcriv
TI Trepl rrjv rpo^tjv, ov% waTrep avrrj aTreipos d\\d e%ovcra
10 opov &rj\ov Se teal TO aTropov^evov eg p%^9, TTOTepov TOV 21
12 vydav M a P 1 || 15 [r^s re /XTJ dvayKaias] Schmidt || /HTJ is transposed by
Hampke and Rassow to precede 17 avayKaias but wrongly || 16 [/cat Trepl. ..ig
opov] Schmidt || 17 </ccu>/cara 0i5o-^ Thurot || 18 y Schneider (perhaps
rightly, unless we prefer to omit TJ ...... rpo^v] \\ aur-rj Welldon || 19 Bender
considers the whole of c. 10 drj\ov...b 8 early to be spurious; but see Comm. n, (9,-)
|| Schmidt transposes 19 ^rj\ov...^> ty^v to follow 1256 b 30 ot /aas
carry on such pursuits merely to gain a
living by them? (Glaser). It is true
that if there were no stock exchange
there could be no speculation in stocks,
and then no one would be tempted to
such excessive indulgence in it as is cer-
tainly liable at times to endanger the
morality of whole nations [as e.g. at the
time of the South Sea Bubble]. But^.
without the shadowjio light ; civilization
is itrlp^gSrbfe^^out luxuryT In spite
ofmany great evils "\vtrrdr- money has
brought into the world it is to this inven-
tion alone that we owe the fact that nine-
tenths of mankind are now no longer
forced to serve that fortunate minority,
the owners of real property. Think of the
time when money was still scarce in
Europe; the land then belonged almost
exclusively to the clergy and the no-
bility. Money alone introduced a new
species of commodity of inexhaustible
ownership, which stands open to all to
acquire (Schlosser). " Aristotle forgets,
too, that, even before money was in-
vented, people might find no limit to
wealth-seeking. The fa?) daireros of
Odysseus, Od. xiv. 96, went beyond the
limit of his consumption, and its aim was,
not nurture, but power, as he could make
17 8 Kav [t.^ KT\] "And if they
cannot procure this " (airoXavffTLKriu virep-
po\r)v) "by mere accumulation they at-
tempt it by some other supposed cause,
perverting each of their faculties to at-
tain it."
18 13 irao-as iroiov<ri xpt][xaTur.]
Compare Plato Rep. I 342 D : the true
t arpos no xp r J/ J - aTia " 7 "fl^j an d 34^ C, D: 77
/u,i<r6uTi.Krj accompanies the other arts to
provide ^remuneration.
14 d-iravrdv = meet in, conspire, tend
to : referrc ad.
19 opov = standard, limit. Properly
boundary , definition , like opur/mos.
16 18 In the several points Ari-
stotle is quite right, but in reality all this
makes against him. For it shows that
the fault lies with the men and not with
the arts . If men misuse not medicine
merely, but moral virtues like courage, as
a means to their own avarice and craving
for pleasure ; if they can follow agricul-
ture, cattle-rearing, etc. in the same
spirit; why are commerce trade and
banking to be unceremoniously rejected
merely because they can serve such men
as a still readier and more successful
means to the satisfaction of their desires?
Why should it be culpable in any one to
I 10. 1]
1258 a 6 1258 a 23.
187
] 77 OV, <d\\d * *> (III)
20 OLKOVOfJiiKOV KOI 7TO\ITLKOV eCTTLV r]
d\\d Set rovro jjiev vjrdp^eiv (wcnrep jdp KCU dvOpwTrovs ov
77 7roXm/<;>7, d\\d \a/3ovaa Trapd r^? (frvaecos xprjrai,
, OVTCO KOL rpotyrjv rr)v (frvcriv Set irapaSovvai <yr)v 77
2O [/cat TroXm/cou] Schmidt || oil, x\Xa erlpov. ov yap O.VTOV ecrrt TTOLVTO. TO.
dvayKcua xP^f J - aTa iroieiv> or something similar ? Susem. (see Comm.), ou *
Schmidt. Conring and Schneider suspected some loss [| 21 TOVTO] TO.VTO. (a
conjecture retracted by Schneider) Schmidt Bender ; if taken here, it must be
repeated in 35, and so Bender || 23 < els > rpofity ? Schneider, rplxpov Oncken, but
Avrongly
grants to his comitatus out of his herds
and flocks " (Lang). And is not the total
result attained in itself truly surprising,
namely, that the landowner who sells just
enough produce to defray all his other
household requirements is the sole house
holder (olKovb[jLos) ; whereas the merchant,
the tradesman and the banker are not?
Not unnaturally Plato and Aristotle look
ed only at the dark side of trade. Like
true Greeks (Tntrod. pp. 22, 29 f.) their
standpoint was still that of the fortunate
minority supported by the remaining
nine-tenths who serve : as is seen in their
approval of slavery and their scheme of
a body of citizens living a life of free
leisure, without work, finding exclusive
unpaid occupation in science, aesthetic
enjoyment, and civil administration. Phy
sical labour in Greece was for the most
Eart converted by slavery into slave-
ibour. Thus all respect for it was lost :
"when agriculture, trade, and work in
factories or on board ships, were given
up to serfs and slaves, the contempt for
these occupations was made permanent,
just because men saw them carried on by
such people, as conversely they had ori
ginally been given up to serfs and slaves
because they were thought unworthy for
free citizens to follow" (Schiller). Even
Plato and Aristotle thoroughly despised
physical labour as something servile and,
in the bad sense of the word, mechanical
(banausic), as intellectually and morally
degrading : see c. 1 1 6 with the pas
sages quoted in n. (103). Consequently,
trade and commerce, even the pursuit
of agriculture proper see iv (vn). 9
3) 75 10 9 14, Exc. in on Bk. I,
and Plato Laws vn. 806 D f. all paid
labour, see n. (102), appeared to them
more or less unworthy of true freemen.
It is a further consequence that, though
Aristotle forcibly rejects the extreme de
velopments of Plato s social and political
theories, yet after all he is taking the
same line with more prudence and re
serve. See Introd. p. 21 nn. (i) and (3),
p. 33 n. (7). SUSEM. (93)
c. 10 Decision of tJic question raised
in c. 8 i : i 3. Usury the viost
unnatural form of gain, 4, 5.
1 19 8ri\ov 8^ KT\] " But it will
now be easy to decide the further question
started at the outset, namely, whether
the art of wealth is the concern of the
householder and statesman or not, but"
...Then comes a lacuna which may tenta
tively be filled as follows : " but, <so far
as in general needed for the management
of a household, is the concern of a subor
dinate science. Plainly the latter is the
case, and the former only so far as the
head of the house has to see that the art
of acquiring wealth is practised, without
exercising it himself; for it is his function,
as we said, to use and not to acquire.
Furthermore it is an auxiliary science for
procuring instruments for living and not
the mere materials : these > must be
given already." But the briefer and
somewhat different restoration given in
the critical notes is also admissible: "but
<of some one else. For it is not his
business to procure all that is necessary
for living :> nay there must be definite
materials found him beforehand." SU
SEM. (94)
23 OVTCO K<xl rpocjxi^v KT\] " so nature
must provide land or sea or something
else as means of support." Lambin and
Gottling make yr/v T) daXaTrav epexegetic
of TTJV (pvcnv and Jackson shows that this
is not impossible by citing Plato Laius
891 C, rrfv <pvaiv 6i>o/md^et.v ravra avrd, sc.
irvp Kal v8wp /cat 7771 /ecu dtpa. But the
above rendering best agrees with 8 9,
12, 10 3.
188
nOAITIKON A. 10.
[I. 10. 1
24 OdXaTTav r) d\\o rt), e/c 8e TOVTWV, co9 Set ravra SiaBel- (III
2 vai TrpocrrJKet TOV oiKOVOfJiov. ov ^ a p Trjs v<^aVTiKr]<$ kpia
d\\,d ^prjaao-Oai avTols, Kal <yvwvai Be TO TTOIOV
ical eTTiTrjo eiov rj <fcav\ov /ecu dveTnrr/Seiov. teal <ydp 22
av 7-^9, Sid TI r} uev xprjuaTKTTLKrj uopiov rrjs
29 oiKovofJiias, r] $ larpi/crj ov /Jiopiov tcairoL Set vyiaiveiv TOU?
3 Kara TTJV oitciav waTrep tyjv rj d\\o TL TWV dvayKaiwv. eVet
Se GCTTL aei> W9 TOV oiKovo/jiov Kal TOV dp^ovTO^ Kal Trepl
vryieias ISelv, ecrrt Se w? ov, d\\d TOV laTpov, OVTW Kal Trepl
TO)V rjidTcov ecrTi /Jiev w? TOV olKovo/jiov, eo~Ti Se w? ov, d\\d
35 ()vcrei TOVTO
24 raura] avrriv Glaser (wrongly), -jravra ? Oncken, raXXa Bender (both better,
but hardly correct) H 25 ov\ ou5e ? Schmidt || 29 Set after vyiaiveiv M s P 1 , 5e?j/ P 4 \\
32 vyieias Aid. vyeias M 8 P 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - || TOV larpov] TTJS larpiKrjS P 6 Q L 8 and P 4 (ist
hand yp. TOV laTpov in the margin), while in S b T b V b dXXd ...... OL is omitted \\
Ide ii <eo-Tii and 33 olKovb^ov <eo-ru >Welldon || 33 TUI> omitted by P 4<6> Q L s
I! xPWa-Tw] XP^yttario-Ti/cTjs P 4 and yp. p 1 (in the margin), xp^/zartcrriKou P L s , XPV-
/xarto-rc/ccD Q || 34 After TTJS P 4 - 6 - C c Q L s Ar. (probably also M b U b ) insert ictpdovs
|| 35 TavTa Bender for TOVTO, cp. n. on 1. 21
fJid\io~Ta Se, KaOdirep elprjTai rrpoTepov, Set
<ydp eo~Ti,v epyov Tpocf)r]i> rcG
24 IK 8 roiJTcav] afterwards, postea
(Bonitz) : answering TOVTO jxev. "And
then it is the householder s duty to dis
pose of these materials to the best advan
tage (cus Set)."
2 25 ov-ydpKT\] From this illustra
tion it would be inferred that the domestic
branch of xPV/ J - aTi " rLK ^ is related to
otKovofJUKr) as shuttle-making to weaving,
and not as the production of wool to
weaving. Thus the question proposed
8 i and not expressly taken up after
wards would have to be decided as
follows : the domestic branch of xp^/xa-
TiffTLK-ij provides the household with the
needful raw materials for use, by artificial
appropriation of nature s stores, so far as
nature herself, whose especial function
this is, has made no direct provision. On
the other hand the sum total of the neces
saries of life are certainly called elsewhere,
8 15, 4 i 4, the instruments (opyava)
for living or managing a household. As
however this is not a mode of production
but a practical, utilizing activity of con
sumers (6 de fitos Trpd^is, ov irolyans), the
two answers to a certain degree coincide :
so far, the question which remains unan
swered need not have been proposed. But
there is a difference, again, between earn
ing a livelihood directly and indirectly
procuring the appliances and tools re
quired for it. The latter is undoubtedly
the business of domestic xP r lf JLaTia " r <- Kr l>
and therefore it stands to Economic in the
relation of a subsidiary art that provides,
not simply materials, but also instru
ments. Not only is c. 10 required as an
indispensable conclusion to the entire dis
cussion begun at c. 8, but even beyond
that there is much that we look for in
vain in it ; whether Aristotle himself left
it thus incomplete, or, as is not quite
impossible though indemonstrable, we
have here the inadequate execution of
another hand substituted for a discussion
that has been lost or was never really
written. In the latter case there must
have been a lacuna here. SUSEM. (95)
28 airoprforeitv av] xP r n/ J - aTi(rriK V (3) is
just as much, or as little, a part of Poli
tics or Economic as Medicine is, and no
more. For health is just as necessary to
the state as property, and yet the duty of
providing health is not considered to
belong to Politics or Economic.
3 34 nctXio-Ta] if possible, this
must be found by nature, i.e. without the
trouble of acquiring it.
35 <j>vo-<os -yap KT\] It was explained
in n. (73) on 8 ri that on Aristotle s
own theory it is impossible to see how far
I 10. 5]
1258 a 24 1258 b 5.
189
<yevvr)6evTi 7rape%i,v Travrl ydp> e ov yiveTai, rpocfrr) TO (III)
4 \ei7r6^evov eariv. Sio Kara fyvGiv ecrrlv ?; ^pi^aTicrTiKr] (p. i 7 )
TTCiCnV CLTTO TWV KdpTTWV KOI TWV ^WCOV.
Si7r\fj<; 01/0-779 avrr)S, axrTrep eiTrofJiev, KOI rr;? f^ev KaTrrfKi- 23
40 #779 TJ79 S oltcovofAi/cfjs, teal ravTTjs fJLev dvayicaias /cal eTraivov-
evrj^, rrjs 8e /jiera/3o\Lfcrj^ ^eyo/jLevrj^ Si/calais (ov yap Kara
tt XV avr aXXrjXwv ecrriv), evXoycorara /uUcreLTai i] o/3oXo-
r) Sid TO eV avrov rov vo/jLicrfjiaros elvai rrjv
5 /cal OVK e<^) (ptrep e7ropia-d/j,e0a. yueraySoX^? jap ejever
5 o 8e TO/CO? avro Trotet 7r\eov. oOev /cal rovvo/Jia TOUT
38 <i]> curd Schneider || 39 [KCITF 77X1/07 $...40 ^v~\ Schmidt
1258 b i yeTa/3X?;Ti/n7s II 2 Bk. and yp. p 1 (in margin); [/xeTa/SoXt/c^s] now, perhaps
rightly, /meTa(3\rjTiKT)s </ccu> formerly, Schmidt || 3 CTT Jackson, UTT Bk. 2 , COT
ceteri || TTJV omitted by M s , [T^] Jackson (unnecessary) || KTTJcnv, <eirl T&KOJ
Xpw/x<ffotJ> now, <eirl T. -^pw^v-ri aury> formerly, Schmidt || 4 ajTre
oTrep eiropiffdri II 2 Bk., yirep eiropiffOrj Schmidt || 5 auTo] O.VTOV F Ar.
this is intended to apply to the animals
which according to him are produced
from worms. SUSEM. (96)
36 iravTl-yap KT\] " for every animal
has for its sustenance the remainder of the
matter out of which it grows." Hence
the animal and vegetable world is nature s
reserve for the support of man.
4 1258 b I Ttjs 81 JJLTapo\lKT]Sv{/-
yo[JLe vT]s] Attested in equallygeneral terms
by Plato Laws XI. 918 D : compare
Andoc. I. 137, Diog. Laert. I. 104. An
Athenian would find capital for mercan
tile concerns, but he considered it on the
whole^ disreputable to engage in them
personally (Becker Char . il. 134 ed. 2,
Eng. Tr. p. 281). SUSKM. (97)
2 air <xXXt]X.(ov] If neuter, the profit
made from mutual exchange. But more
likely masculine, derived from men de
frauding and overreaching one another;
the root, probably, of Aristotle s objection
to trade altogether.
p.i<riT<u] Demosth. xxxvil Adv. Pan-
tacndiim 52 : ^tucroucn, (prjaiv, A^vcuot
rot)s avdovTO.s. SUSEM. (97 b)
r\ 6[3oXooTaTiKii = obol weighing, petty
usury; Lysias adv. Thcomn. I. 18 p. 1 1 7
explaining the law TO apyvpiov ardffi.iJ.ov
elvai e0 oVocry av (3ov\r)Tai 6 daveifav
says TO (fTa.ffLfj.ov TOVTO &TIV ov v*y<
iffTO.va.1 dXXa TO KOV TT p drreff at OTTOCTOV
o.v jSouXTjrat. Cp. also Aristoph. Clouds
1146, Antiph. Neot. frag, r, Meineke 92
in Athen. I. 108 E (Cope). The insecu
rity of the principal lent was the main
cause of a high rate of interest. Thus
upon bottomry the average rate charged
was 20 per cent., which would go to
cover insurance, [Xen.] De Vectigal, in.
9. On house-rents the return was only
8A per cent. Partly, too, the absence of
a paper medium of the nature of bills of
exchange, drafts, or bank notes, contri
buted to the same result : BUchsenschUtz
Besitz und Erwerb pp. 98, 496 ff.
3 8id TO err avrov KT\] "According
to the texts both of Bekker and Susemihl
o/SoXoo-rart/v?) is hated because it draws a
profit from coin instead of from commo-
dities exchanged by means of coin. But
the explanatory sentence ^Taj3o\TJs yap
eyefero ^dpii , o 8e TOKOS CLVTO Trotc? TT\^OV
seems to show that o/^oXoo-Tari/c?) is
hated because it seeks to accumulate coin
instead of using it in the furtherance of
exchange. In order to reconcile the
explanatory sentence and the sentence
explained, read in the latter eir instead
of aTr or iV, omit TTJV with M 8 , and restore
Bekker s oirep. In this way we obtain
an appropriate sense : d/SoXocrTcm/c?) is
hated because it is directed to the acqui
sition of coin, instead of to the end with
a view to which coin was invented : for it
was to further exchange that coin was in
troduced, while interest multiplies coin
itself" (Jackson).
5 5 TOKOS] Perhaps from Plato
Rep. VIII. 555 E, ot 5 5?) xP r lf JLaTi(J " ra eyxv-
\f/avTes, ovde 5oi<ovi>Tfs TOVTOVS bpav, TUV
\OLTTUV TOV ctei vTrelKOVTO. e^i^TCS apyvpiov
190
nOAITIKIiN A. 10.
[I. 10. 5
yap rd TiKTOfieva rot? <yevi>u>(Tiv avrd eariv, 6 Se (III
TCATO? ylverai vo^iv^a IK vo^io-^aro^. ware teal pd\io-ra Trapd
(fyvGlV OUTO? TOUV J^pr) [JiaT i<J fJitoV (TTil>.
11 eVel Se rd irpos Tr\v <yvwcnv ^iwpLKa^ev l/cavus, rdlV
10 7T/30? rrjv Xprj(TiV Set &ie\0eiv. Trdvra Se rd TOiavra TTJV
fjiev Oewpiav e\ev6epov e^et, T ^ v ^ fyireiplav dva<yKaiav.
Se r^9 %pr]fjLaTicrTiKrjs fjbepr] ^pr/ai^a TO Trepl rd KT7Jfj,ara
elvai, Trola \vo-iTe\eo-raTa KOI TTOV teal TTW?, olov
14 ILTTTTCOV fCTrjais Trola rt? ^7 fio&v rj Trpofidrayv, ojjioiws Se Kal
2 TWV \onrwv tytov (Bel ydp epTreipov elvai Trpos d\\7]\d re
TOVTCOV Tiva \v<TiTe\e(7TaTa ) /cat, Trola ev TTOLOIS
7 eK is omitted by II 2 Bk. and P 4 (ist hand), perhaps rightly: it is added by P 4
(corrector) || 10 de] yap P Ar., perhaps rightly |) n eXevOepiov ? Jackson || 12
5e] drj Lambin, perhaps rightly [| rrjs omitted by II 2 Bk. || KTrj/jLara] KTrjvii
Be mays
this surplus stock be sold for money it is
with no intention of making a profit, but
only to purchase other necessaries with
the proceeds. The other species is dis
tinguished by the intention of making a
profit, and this exchange with a view to
gain is xp^cmcrrc/ci} in the naiTower sense
or trading proper. It is again subdivided
into two branches: the one includes all
traffic in commodities whether in ex
change for other commodities or for
money, the other is traffic in money
alone by lending it on interest. Aristotle
regards this last as wholly detestable : the
former as less bad, but still bad enough
(Schlosser). SUSEM. (98)
c. ii Production viewed on the prac
tical side. Cp. Analysis $. 100.
1 10 xpijtriv^ practical application,
as in 9 15.
TravTo, 8 KT\] The theory has its
limitations solely in the nature of the
case generally ; but in practice the nature
of the particular locality where we live,
and therefore the climate, the character
of the soil, &c, determine whether we are
chiefly confined to agriculture or to cattle-
rearing, to mining or commerce by sea,
whether there can be preserves of fish
and fishing or not, which sorts of grain or
of cattle must be procured, and so on
(Schiitz). SUSEM. (99)
IT For tXfvdepov }( avayKaiajs, strictly
limited, cp. Mctaph. I. 2 11 982 b 27 :
(First Philosophy) /j.6vr] eXevdepa
wv, and 14 983 a 10, avay-
Iv ovv Trdffai
Karov Trarpos eKyo vovs TO KOVS
TroXXaTrXacrt ous Ko/J.i6/m.i>oi, TroXiV rov Krj-
ipTJva Kal TTTdJxov e^iroLovai rri TroXct. Still
earlier in Aristoph. Thesmoph. 846, d^ia
yovv el TOKOV, reKOvaa TOLOVTOV TOKOV "
(Ridgeway). Cp. also Plato Rep. VI.
507 A, Politic. 276 A.
With 3 8 8id TO KT\ comp. Plato Laivs
V. 742 C, VIII. 842 B. Every one will agree
with Fulleborn that this proof is sophis
tical. But Stahr rightly observes : it
was not until capital itself attained its
complete development, that is, only in
recent times, that the justification and
reasonable necessity of interest became
clear. The history of capital recounts
the gigantic efforts that had to be made,
the difficulties that had to be surmounted,
in order to its formation. From the point
of view of universal history the high rate
of interest in ancient times has perhaps
been a favourable means to that end ; yet
its immediate effect, in conjunction with
a cruel law of debtor and creditor, was
to excite repulsion in men with moral
natures and this led them decisively to
condemn interest altogether, as Plato
did.
All this tends to give Aristotle s whole
theory of exchange the following shape :
he first includes under the term Ex
change (dAXcry??) all buying and selling
barter. Next he subdivides this genus
into two species, the one good and praise
worthy, the other not so. The former
belongs to Economic. It exchanges the
surplus stock of the household for commo
dities which the household needs; or if
I. 11. 4]
1258 b 6 1258 b 29.
191
aXXa <ydp ev aXXat? evOrjvel ^oopai^, elra irepl yewpyias, (IV)
Kal rauTT/? rjSrj tyL\rj$ re teal TretyvTev/jLewrjs, KOI yueXtr-
[g rovpyias, KOI rwv d\\o)v ^wcov TWV 7r\a>TO)i> 77 TTTTJVWV, dtp?
3 OGWV o~TL Tvy^dveiv /3or]Qeias. rr/? fjuev ovv OLKeiordrri^ xpij- 2
21 fjiaTi(TTiKr)<$ ravTct ^bpia KOI Trpwra, r>;5 Be /xera/SX^Tt/c^?
jjueyicrrov fMev euTTOpla (Kal Tavrr/s pepr/ rpia, vavK\7]pla
(fropTrjyia Trapdaraa-^ Bia<pepei, Be TOVTGOV erepa erepwv TM
rd fjiev do-(f)a\e(TTepa elvai, rd Be TrXe/co TTOpi^ew rrjv eVt-
l tcapTriav}, Sevrepov Se TO/ctcryLt09, rpirov Be iJuaOapvia (rav-
26 TT;? S rj jjbev TGOV (Bavavcrwv re^ywv, rj Be roov die^uwv
Kal TO) a-wfJLCLTi fjbovw xprjarifjiwv) rplrov Be et8o? %prj/Aa-
THTTiKris /jierafv ravrrj^ Kal T^? Trpcor^^ (e%et yap Kal TTJS
Kara fyvcnv TL /Ltepo? Kal TTJS /LteraySXT/rt/CT;?), ocra djro 7779
26 Te-xyijjv] Te-xyirCsv Vermehren, perhaps rightly || 27 rpirov} reraprov II 1 and
P 4 (corrector), d XXws rpirov p 1 in the margin || 29 6Va] oucra Bernays
2 17 ev0T]Vi = thrive, have abundant
offspring : see Verrall Trans, of Camb.
Phil. Soc. ir. p. 165.
1 8 q St] and here (when we come to this)
we find two kinds : agriculture proper and
fruit-growing. The technical terms per
haps of Apollodoros, 7.
The cultivation of the olive and in
particular of the vine would be included
under T) ire<pvTevfj,ti>r); see Steitz He.siod s
Works and Days (Leipzig 1871) p. 27 f.
SUSEM. (100)
3 23 <J>opTT)-yux = inland trade. Su-
SEM. This is the view of the commen
tators generally, but Cope disputes it.
He remarks: " (froprrjybs and its deriva
tives ^oprrjyelv, (poprriyiKos, (popraywyos,
<t>opTaywye2i>, seem to be a/ways applied
to commerce carried on by sea, whether
va.vs or TrAoia be expressed or not (the
sense of porter given in the lexx. seems
not necessary in any of the passages, cp.
Theogn. Frag. 679, Aesch. Frag. Phryg.
242). For this reason, and because
commerce by land at Athens and in
Greece generally was so utterly insigni
ficant in comparison that it might well be
passed over without notice, I rather think
that Aris. means by t>avK\r)pia building
and letting out ships for traffic, and by
(poprrjyla commerce proper, the transport
of goods on board of them, perhaps in
cluding also land transport. On this
view Xenophon s distinction De Rep.
Laced. 7 6 ^kv yeupyet, 6 de vavK\T)pei, 6
5t efjuropeverai, would correspond to Ar
istotle s here."
n-apcta-Tcuris virtually = /caTr^Xt/cTj, sta-
taria mercatura, hominum nimirum in foro
consistentium.
24 acr<j>a\e (rT6pa] For definition of
dff(pd\eia in this connexion, see Rhet. I. 5.
7 TO evravda. Kal ovrw xeKTrjcrdai w crr e$>
aury elvai. TTJJ/ xp^crtj avrQiv (Jackson).
e IT L Kdp-rrLa = profit additional to the
principal (Tapxalov): see on n.
[xicrGapvia KT\] Cp. 6 below.
In any case the division is incomplete.
The occupations distinguished in 6 as
rex^KwrciTcu, which are not unskilled
manual labour nor service for wages, are
here omitted : see un. (102, 103). More
over in v(vm). 2. 5, where jj.i.crdapvi.Ka.1
epyacriai are said to be degrading and
pdvavaoi, the term has quite a different
meaning, see n. (981). SUSEM. (101)
4 26 By drcxvoi Kal ry crcfyicm
P.OVOV x/aTjcriyuo Cope understands the
GrJTes in a general division of the popula
tion ; farm-labourers, porters, etc.
29 o<ra KT\ is in loose apposition to
eI5os XPW-1 " all the wealth or property
derived from land and such of its useful
products as are employed by the pro
prietor himself," like the Kapwol of 77 Trefiv-
Tv/m.vtj yewpyia. Even if Bernays od<ra
is right, we cannot accept his punctuation
(a colon after 28 Trpwr^s, no parenthesis,
but a single sentence from x et to 3 1
yueraXXeim/c??) or his translation of ov<ra
airb 7775; directed to the land . SUSEM.
192
nOAITIKHN A. 11.
[I. 11. 4
(IV)
8e, (P. .8)
30 Ka TWV aTTO 7779 yivo/jievcov, xpTrwv yaez>
5 olov vXoro/jiLa re Kal rraaa /jLTa\\evrtKr}. avrT] e TroXXa
?} &?7 7re/He/X?7(/>e <yevr) TroXXa <ydp ei$r] rwv etc 7379 yu-eraX-
\evojneV(Ol> ecrriv. irepl cKacrrov 8r TOVTWV KaGoXou jj,v ci pTjTCU 3
Kal vvv, TO 8e Kara jx^pos aKpipoXo-
6 irpos rds ep-yao-ias, <J>opTiKov 8 TO I
36 Te-^viKwrarai fjiev TWV epryacriwv OTTOV
/3av aver 6 rar a L & ev 0-69 rd crw^ara Xco/Swi Tou /-caXtcrra,
Sov\iKccrarai, Be OTTOV rov <7&)u,aro9 7r\elarai
xP r " l | Jlov K-* v
et crl Se
31 v\oTOfj,ia] 97 Xaro/^a Thomas Aquinas and Susem. 1 , but wrongly || 33 Trepl...
35 fr5ia.Tpl(3eiv Susem. transposes to follow 39 dper^s; so.Qlntrod. p. 78 || 677 Susem.,
de F II Bk., omitted by Ar. |j 35 eiVt...39 dperTjs was first seen by Montecatino to
be out of place, it was erroneously transposed by Piccart to precede 27 rpLrov 8 ||
36 P 4 - 6 - Q Aid. S b T b Bk. insert r^s before TVXW II 38 ayevforarai MT 1 - 4 - Q Aid.,
perhaps rightly
30 ctKap-n-wv] Compare Rhct. I. 5. 7:
xdpTTi/bia 5 Xtyw a(f> &v at Trpbaodoi
(Jackson).
31 iiXoTOfjiia, the growing and cutting
down of timber as distinct from the fruit-
trees of 77 TrefivTevfAevr) yeupyia.
5 32 i yVT], ti Sr) interchanged: cp.
8 2 erepov etSos with 3 erepov y&os.
6 36 07TOV IXdxiO-TOV TV)(T]S]
"where chance has least play": where
nearly everything turns upon acquaintance
with the facts, technical knowledge and
skill; where the skilled craftsman s hand
is guided by intellectual training, which
is the all-important element. Cp. Walter
op. c. 505 f. Clearly Aristotle means what
we call the fine arts and all the higher
technical pursuits, including the sciences
themselves and rhetoric, if followed or
taught professionally for pay. In parti
cular the art of the sophists, for which see
n. (552) on in. 9. 8, also v(vni). 2. 5
with n. (981). SUSEM. (102)
Compare Polos, T? fj.v yap
rkxyW eTTolrjo ei , TJ 5 aTreipia
Metaph. I. i. 8, 981 a 4 (Jackson).
37 pavavo-oTdTai crX] This and
many other passages c. 13 13; ill. 4
12,5 4, 6; iv(vn). 9 3, 14 7;
v(vm). 2 5, 6, 4 6, 6 36, 16,
7 7; vn(vi). 4 n, 12 with notes;
Plato, Laws v. 741 E, 743 D f., cp. vui.
831 c f., 846 D f.; Xenoph. Occ. 4 2 f.,
cp. 6 6, 10 10 show clearly how
closely related were the conceptions of
the servile (cp. n. 43) and the mechanical
both to Aristotle and to the Greeks at large
(see further Herod, n. 167). Servile
occupations like that of the hired labourer,
4, form according to this description
the proper antithesis to those which are
artistic (n. 102); mechanical trades are
intermediate, yet even the artizan, to say
nothing of the labourer, is only a superior
kind of slave. Aristotle has really be
fore him the "sedentary" crafts, re^cu
edpcuai Eiid. EtJi. I. 4. 2, 1250 a 30,
which are not conducive to bodily health
or a noble carriage; v(viii). 2. 4 n. (980).
Similarly we read in Plato Rep. vi. 495 D
that manual labour disfigures the body
and mars the soul; Xen. /. c. says that it
hurts men s bodies by keeping them in
a sitting posture (KaQ^rdai.) cooped up in
doors ((r/aar/9a0eur#cu), or in other cases
standing all day long over the furnace;
and Pseudo- Plato Erast. 137 B that it
makes them go about with stooping
shoulders and backs bent Kvirra^ovTa %r\v
(the references from Eaton). This is to
tally unlike the way in which Socrates
thinks and judges : he speaks as the
son of a poor craftsman, Plato Xenophon
and Aristotle like men of rank and pro
perty , Zeller Phil. d. Gr. n i 142 (Eng.
tr. Socrates and Socratics p. 170 n. i).
Compare Xen. Mem. in. c. 10. With
the definition of servile employments
compare c. 2 2 n. (6b) and c. 5 7 ff.
SUSEM. (103)
For Xcopwvrai see v(vm). 4. i : the
workmen themselves spoil or deprave
their bodies ; i.e. render them feeble and
unfit to do service for the state in war.
I. 11. 9]
1258 b 301259 a 15.
193
39 ararai Se OTTOV e\,d%i(TTOv TrpocrSei dperrjs. (IV)
33 < 7Tpl e/cdcrTOV Si} TOVTWV /ca06\ov JJLCV
34 <KOI vvv, TO Be /card yu-e/oo? a,Kpi[3o\o r yeia 6ai ^pijcriuov /uez>
7 <ra? epyacrias, (fropntcov Se TO 6vSiaTpl/36iv.> eVet S e er eV/ot? -t
40 yeypafi/jbeva Trepl TOVTCOV, olov XapyTiSr) rw Tlapiti) teal
12593 A-TroXXo >&)> &) TGO Aij/jivlq) Trepl ryecopylas Kal i^fX??? #at
Tre^vTev/jLevrjs, 6/W&&gt;? Se AOU a XXot? Trept a\\wv, ravra fjiev
IK TOVTWV deajpeiTO) orw eTTt/xeXe? ert Se /cal ra
4 a7ropd$r]v, Si? wv 7riTeTV%iJKa(Tiv evioi
8 Set cruXXeyetzA iravra yap w^eXi^a ravr ecrrl rot?
TT)^ xpTjfjLaTLcmKijv, olov Kal TO BrtXew TOU
TOUTO fy^ eVri KaTavorjjjia TI %pri fjuaT LCTT LKOV , aXX e/celvq) s
/Lte^ Sia TT}^ crotyiav TrpocraTTTovo t, Tvy^dveL Se Ka06\ov TL
9 oz/. 6vei$L%ovT(dv jap avra) Sid TTJV Trevlav a5?
10 T^9 </>tXoa-o(/Ha? oi/cr?;?,
ecrofAevrjv CK rr;?
ert %eiua)vos
SiaSovvai,
/cat Xt&) TrdvTwv, o\lyov
eVetS?) S o Kaipb?
TO)V r e
/Aia -Owa-dfjievov CLT ovSevos
15 77 /ce,
40 x.o.ptjTi. (x^P Tt M 8 ) 5^ II Ar. Bk. Bernays
1259 a 6 olov ...... 18 o-irovSd^ovcriv seems to have been used by Hieronymos
of Rhodes as quoted by Diog. Laert. I. 26 || 13 eXaiovpyeiwv P 1 and Ilieron.
eXaiovpyuv F Susem. 1 2 *, eXcuovpyw P 4 , t\cuovpyiwi> M 8 Q (?) S b T b , e\aiovpyiwv P - t3 -
Aid. Bk. Bernays, eXeoup ytwi L 8
39 Sirou ... dpcriis] "where excel-
lence" of any kind, and so, where bodily
excellence " is least needed." No doubt
lending money on interest is particularly
he includes
SUSEM.
meant, 10 4. Such business
under the servile occupations.
(104)
7 40 Trepl TOVTWV] With the
transposition this aptly refers to 34 r6
Kara /j.epos a,Kpipo\oyeicr6ai, exact parti-
culars in detail.
1259 a i AiroXXoSwpw TW AtHJLvtw]
Also mentioned by Varro R. R. I. i. 8,
and several times in Pliny s Natural His-
tory. SUSEM. (105)
3 OTCO Imp-eXe s = whoever is interested
in the subject. We are referred to
written works in Rhct. i. 4. 13, 1360 a 30.
8 6 TO dXew] Nic. Eth. vi. 7. 5
1141 b 3 ff. On Thales see Zeller i.
168 ff. [Eng.tr. Pre-Socratics i. p. 211 ff.]
H.
SUSEM. (105 b)
8 810, TI^V o-o<J>av] Aristoph. Cloiids
180, Birds 1009.
Ka06Xov TI] The device (/coravo^/aa) is
of general application, depending (as ex-
plained in 12) on the possession of a
monopoly. See Boeckh p. 52 f. Eng. tr.
9 12 dppapwvas SuaSovvcu KT\]
" paid deposits in advance to engage the
various oil-presses": dpp. = earnest money,
as guarantee for the execution of the con-
tract: 3 taS. because the sums were distri-
buted, paid to various owners. Quite
apart from the external authority for Acu-
ovpyelwv (Hieronymos), it seems more
business-like to engage the oil-mills, six
months beforehand, than the workmen.
13 6\iyov p.io-9.] "taking them at a
low rental, because there was no one to
outbid him": e7ri/3o,XXei> = add, make a
higher bid, run up the price.
13
194
IIOAITIKftN A. 11.
[I. 11. 9
ov TpoTrov TJ/BovXero, 7roXX ^pTJfjiara crvXXe^avTa eTTiBelljai, (IV)
OTL paSiov ecrTi Tr\ovTelv Tot? (friXocrcxjiois, dv /3ov\wvTai, aXX
10 ov TOUT earl Trepl o o-jrov^d^ovo-iv. a\rj$ jjuev ovv \eyeTat TOVTOV c
rov TpoTrov eirlBeifyv 7roirj(7acr0ai T?;? ao^ia^ eorTi S , wcnrep
20 eiTTo/jiev, /ca06\ov TO TOLOVTOV y^prnjuaTivTitcbv, edv Tt? SvvTjTai,
fjLovo7ra)\lav CLVTO) /carao-Keva^ew. Sto KOI TWV 7r6\ecov eviai ( P . i 9 ;
TOVTOV TTOLOVVTCil TOV TTOpOV, OTdV aTTOpUXTl ^p^fJLCLTWV fJLOVO-
11 7rw\iav yap TWV utvlcov TTOIOVO-LV. ev Sfc/^eXta $e Ti? TeOevTos 7
Trap* avTO) vo/jLiajLiaTos crvveirpiaTO Tcavra TOV cri$7]pov K
25 TWV criSrjpeltov, ^Ta Se TavTa o5? CL^IKOVTO K TWV I^TTO-
picov ol e/Jbiropoi, eVcoXet yiioz o?, ov 7ro\\r)v Troirjcras V7rep{3o-
\r)v T^? Tigris d\\ oyu-o)? eVl Tot? TrevTrjKovTa Ta\dvTOi<$
12 e7re\a/3ev etcaTov. TOVTOV JJLGV ovv o kiovvcrios alaOofAevos Ta 8
%pr/{jiaTa eKe\evaev e/cKOfjiiaao-dat, yu,?} fJbivTOL ye eVt
30 fAeveiv ev ^vpafcovcrais, co? Tropovs evpicrKovTa Tot? avTov
TO
opa^a d\eco /cat TOVTO
yp eavTols eTe^yaaav
7rp<y/j,acriv
TavTov ecrTiv
13 /jiovo7ra)\Lav) xprjo-i/jiov 8e yvwpi^eiv TavTa KOI TO??
Titcols. TroXXat? yap vroXecrt Sei ^prj/juaTicr/jiov /cal TOLOVTCOV
35 Tropcov, axiTTep oltcla, ^d\\ov Se. SioTrep Tives /cal TTO\L-
TevovTat, TCOV 7ro\iTevo/jLeva>v TavTa /ULOVOV.
12 eTret oe Tpla pep?) T^? olfcovojAt/cf)? tjv, ev fiev Se- V
rj, Trepl ry? eiprjTai TrpOTepov, ev 8e 7raTpi/cr), TpiTOV oe
P 4 Aid., ffv\\tavres S b T b || 25 e/jnropiwv P 2 - 3 -, ?ro/)W M s ||
6 omitted by MT 1 || 30 O.VTOV II Bk. || 31 opa/ma] evpijfta
? Koraes || OdXy /cat royry Susem. 1 - 2 -, 77w/z ^ Jmic William,
37 fjieprj omitted by II 2 (added by a later hand in S b ) || 38 \irepl
16
28 TOVTO S b Bk.
Camerarius,
perhaps rightly
Schmidt
10 21 Iviai] Selymbria, Byzantium,
and Lampsakos are instances given by Ps.
Aristotle Oeconom. II. 18 1348 b 33, 4 4
1346 b 25, 8 1347 a 32.
11 27 eirl rots ircvTiiKovTa] " on "
or "in addition to his capital of fifty
talents he received a hundred more ": he
made a profit of xoo talents on his origi-
nal fifty. The preposition has the same
force in ro/cot tirtTpiToi Rhet. ill. 10. 7,
and the analogous fractions.
12 28 Undoubtedly Dionysios the
elder who is mentioned III. 15. 16 n.
SUSEM. (106)
31 6 pap.a] discovery : cp. Dem. adv.
Mid. 60 533, 25, ovdeh irwirore TOUT
eWe TO TrXeo^/cr^a had an eye to this
advantage (Postgate). Also Plato Phacdr.
267 A eUov ws Ti^r&t.
13 35 Sidirep KT\] See Exc. III.
and Introd. p. 31 n. (i). SUSEM. (106 b)
Possibly an allusion to Eubulos.
c. 12 The remaining branches of Eco-
nomics : the relations of the head of the
household (1} to his wife, (2) to his children.
1 37 irl...T|v] c. 3 i, 2. SUSEM.
(107) Comp. Nic. Eth. v. 6. 9 8ib fj.a\\ov
Trpbs yvvcuKa eort diKatov TJ irpos TKVCL KOI
KT^CLTO.- TOVTO yap eaTi TO olKovo/uuKov
diKcuov with Jackson s note, "in Pol. in.
6 7 however OI KWO/U/C?) as an epithet of
dpxy is used to include all three rela-
tions." Justice between man and wife is
really avuvvfjiov, 3 2.
1259 a 161259 b 8.
195
I. 12. 2]
yauiKij, * * Kal yap ywaiK&s apyjs.iv Kal reKVWv, GO? e\ev0e- (V)
4 pwv aev du<f)oiv, ov rov avrov Be rporrov TTJS dp%fj$,
dppev <j)vaei rov 0rj\eos r/yeaoviKwrepov, el urj rrov o~vve-
<7Tr)K jrapd fyvo-iv, Kal TO rrpea-fivTepov Kal re\eiov rov veco-
2 repov Kal dre\ovs. ev uev ovv rat? TroXtrt/cat? apyai^ rat? 2
5 TrXe/crrat? fjLera(Ba\\ei TO apypv Kal TO apyo^vov (ef tcrou
ydp eivat, (3ov\erai rrjv (pvaiv Kal Siatyepeiv fjbrj^ev)^ b/u-w?
Be, oTav TO fjbev dpyri TO Be apyrirai, f^ret Biatyopdv elvai
Kal \6yois Kal riuals, wo-jrep Kal "Auao-cs elrre
* * Kal yap Conring; Bernays by altering ap%eti/ into dp/cr^oc, Ar. by
, ignore the lacuna: <TTI.V ap^iv, a Paris ms. 2042. See the Comm.
39 ya.[j,iKrj
translating
1259 b -2 Troy] TTWS II 1 (emended by p 1 )
39 -yaiAiKt]**] There is here a consi
derable lacuna. For the sense some such
restoration as the following may be pro
posed : " Economic science has, we saw,
three branches, treating of (a) the relation
of master and slave which has been dis
cussed above, (/3) the paternal and (7)
the conjugal relation. < Further we saw
that in general a slave is only a piece of
property, persons as well as things being
included under that head ; and it is not
the acquisition but the use and mainte
nance of property which is properly a
part of economic science. This science
may therefore be divided into (i) the
guidance and rule of the persons of the
household, (2) the right use of the pro
perty. The former includes the treatment
of the conjugal and paternal relations :
the relation of master and slave would
come partly under the one, partly under
the other. The householder has to care
for the improvement and excellence of
all that belongs to the household, and
hence for the improvement and excellence
of the property; but property is only a
means to the end which the household
seeks to attain, and the living chattel is
more important than lifeless objects.
It is therefore the householder s main
task to direct aright the free members of
the house. "> In c. 12 the differences in
this rule as exercised over the different
free members of the family are paren
thetically specialized, but in c. 33 the
leading thought itself is resumed and ex
plained. Cp. Thurot Etudes p. 14 f.,
Susemihl in Rhein. Mm. XX. pp. 2 1 2
215 (where however some mistakes need
correction), BiichsenschUtz op. c. 716.
SUSEM. (107 b)
1259 b i iroXiTiKws] like a magistrate
in a republic, or, more precisely, an ari
stocracy, Nic. Eth. vni. 10 5, n 4.
Cp. Zeller II ii 619 n. (i). SUSEM. (108)
2 4 Iv ptv ovv KT\] Here follows
a discussion, as to (r) how far the rule of
the husband over the wife may fitly be
compared with republican government,
despite certain differences between them ;
(2) how far the rule of a father over his
children may be compared with monar
chical government. Cp. further I. 5 7
. (42 b) and 13 9 . (117). SUSEM.
(109) "In most cases where citi
zens rule over citizens rulers and subjects
change places, for they (TO d pxov Kal TO
apxdfievov nom. to /SouXercu and to frrei)
tend to be on an equality in nature and
to differ not at all " : rr^v <pv<riv an ad
verbial accus. as 11. 2. 6 rrjv (pvffii>j<Tovs t
iv(vil). r. IP TTOto? Tt? rr)v~<fivi[n v , r p- T 5
^oj^_ Yet some have
, as subject of_etVcu v to
mearTthe spiriFof republican citizenship,
or the natures of the citizens.
8 <rxii[Aao-i, outward signs, insignia :
\o-yois, titles.
wo-rrep Kai "Ap-ao-is KT\] Herodotos
tells this story, II. 172. Amasis, who
had deposed his predecessor Apries
(Hophra), was at first despised by the
Egyptians on account of his low birth.
Whereupon he had a statue of gold
made out of a foot-bath, in which he and
his guests had been accustomed to wash
their feet. When this statue was set up
the Egyptians paid it due reverence, and
132
196 nOAITIKflN A. 12. [I. 12. 2
3 TOV 7Tpl TOV TToSaVlTTTrjpOS \6yOV TO 8 dppV del 7Tp09 TO 6rj\V (V)
10 TOVTOV e%ei rov TpoiTOV. rj Se TWV TCKVCOV dp^r) /3aai,\i,Kr)
TO yap yevvrjaav real /card (f)i\lav dp%ov Ka ^ KO>TCL Trpe-
<r/3eiav e<TTiv, oTrep ecrrl ft
pos TOV A/a Trpocrrjyopevo-ev
Trarr/p dvdpaiv re $eo3z/ re (p. 20)
15 TOV ftacriXea TOVTCOV dirdvTWV. (fivcrei yap TOV {BaaiXea Sta-
8e2, TO> yevei 8 elvai TOV avTov onrep ireTrovOe TO
Trpo? TO vewTepov /cal 6 yevvrjo-as TT/OO? TO Te/cvov.
13 (fravepbv TOLVVV OTL ir\eiwv r] (nrovBi) T^? OL/covo/jiias 3
irepl TOI)? dvOpajTrovs r) irepl TT/V TWV d^rv^wv KTijaiv, K.CLI
20 Trepl TTJV dpeTrjv TOVTCOV TJ Trepl Trjv T^9 KT^aeo)^, ov /ca\ov/Aev
7T\OVTOV, Kal TCOV \V0epO)V fjid\\OV T) 8oV\0)V.
2 TrpwTov /uiev ovv Trepl Bov\cav diropijo-eLev dv T^?, iroTepov eaTiv
dpeTtj Tt9 Bov\ov Trapd TO.? opyavifcds KOL Sia/covi/cds d\\7j TifJii-
(OTepa TOVTWV, olov atofypoo-vvr] Kal dvopla /cal SifcaLocrvvr) Kal
25 Ttov d\\a)v TWV TOLOVTCOV e^ecov, ff OVK ecrTiv ovBe/jiia Trapd
3 T9 (rca/JLaTifcds VTrrjpeala^ (e%et yap aTroplav djjbfyoTepW etre
yap ecrTiv, TL Siolcrovcri, TWV eXevdepcov J etVe /U-T) eo~Tiv, ovrcov
KOI \6yOV KOLVCOVOVVTCOV aTOTTOV^ O"%$OV Be 4
15 After a-rravTuv p 2 adds as a gloss drj\ovoTL irartpa elir&v, and this Trare pa elir&v
has crept into the text of TM 8 || 17 r6] rbv T P 4 S b Ar. before veurepov |] 18 * *
(pavepov [TOLVVV] ? Schmidt ; see on 1254 a 24 || 26 etre] efrt P 4 S b T b , d TL P 3<(5>
Aid. || 28 8e] Sr, M 8 ? 1 - 3 - 4 - Q S b T b Aid. and P 2 (corr. 2 )
Amasis, calling them together, explained Opwiroi Works and Days 108 (J. G.
to what vile uses the object of their pre- Schneider). See Steitz op. c. 50 f.
sent adoration had once been put. Simi- SUSEM. (110 b)
larly he had risen from the common c. 13 Various degrees of excellence
people to the throne, and as king he requisite in the different members of the
demanded their respect, SUSEM. (110) household; i n. The promotion of
89 del )( /cara f^epos i 2. The hus- this excellence in slaves, 12 14; in
band holds, as it were, permanent office. women and children, 15, 16.
11 Kard <j>.] by right of affection. Cp. Analys. p. 101, Introd. p. 31.
12 oirep ecrrl KT\] = and this gives a 1 18 TOVVV traducendo ad novam
form of monarchy, viz. hereditary monar- cogitationem inservit Eonitz Ind. Ar.
chy,_ni. 14. 6. Bernays takes etSos as es- quoting Physics I. 2 7, 8 185 b 3, g.
sential nature , but compare Nic. Eth. Perhaps it only resumes a thought pre-
VIII. 10. 4, 77 fj.fr yap TraTpos irpos i/te?s viously expressed, then , accordingly :
Koivwvia. /3a<rtXetas ?x e <- "X^/"a- see n. (ro; b). Eernays gives It is clear
1 6 TW -yevi 8 tlvai riv avrov] So beforehand then. SUSEM.
too in Pindar s words, eV dvdpuv v 6euv 20 Here TrXoOros = aperf /crTycrews, but
7^05, K ,w,tas 5e -rrvtofiev /^arpos dfj.(p6- in 8 15 it is TrXydos opydvuv.
repot New. 6. i, men are of one race with 21 jiaXXov TJ 8ov\wv] Cp. n. (33) on
the gods, earth being the common mother 4 i /cat ifiv /cat ev tfv. SUSEM. (Ill)
of both. The same is implied by Ilesiod s 2 25 TWV aXXtov %a)V sc. rts = ra?j
verse ws b/j.60v yeydacri Oeol dvtjTol r dv- aXXw// aperd)^ ; Rhet. I. 6. 9 with Cope s n.
I. 13. 6]
1259 b 91260 a 7.
197
e<jTi TO fyTovuevov KOI rrepl yvvaiKos KOI TratSos, (V)
30 TTOTepa KOI TOVTWV elcrlv aperal, KOI Set rr/v yvvai/ca crdxhpova
elvai Kal dvSpelav /cal StKalav, KOI TTCU? ecrrt teal CLKO-
4 Xa^ro? Kal cruxfrpcov, 1} ov ; [/cat] KaOoKov Srj TOUT ecrrlv e
TTTeov irepl dp^ofjievov (pvcret Kal dp^ovTos, Trorepov TJ
dpeTTj rj erepa. el p,ev yap Set dfjifyoTepovs fJiere^eLV KO\O-
35 KayaOias, Sid TL TOV fjuev dp^eiv Seoi dp TOV Be dp^ecrOai
(ovBe yap T<W ud\\op Kal TJTTOV olov re Sta(f)e-
TO
pew TO /^ev yap dp^ecrOai Kal ap^eiv eiSet,
5 Se paXkov Kal TJTTOV ovBev) el Se TOV fjuev Set TOV Se
Oav^acTTOV. etre ydp 6 cip^wv /LIT) ecrrat (rwfypwv Kal
40 Kaios, TTCO? dp^ei Ka\(3<> ; eW 6 dp%6fj,evo<>, TTCO?
, a/coXaa"TO? ydp wv Kal SetXo? ovSev
Trpoo-rjKovTwv. (fravepov TOLVVV cm dvd^jKi) pJkv
elvau Siacfropds, wcnrep Ka TWV
Kal TOVTO ev6i)s v<pr)yeiTai, nre-
ydp ZCTTI <^vcret TO f^ev dp^ov TO &
elvai dpeTijv, olov TOV \6yov (p. 21)
\ d{i(f)OTepov$ dpeTrjs,
6 (^vcrei ap^ovTwv KCLI
5 pi Tr}V "^V^TIV ev
dp%6[jievov, wv eTepav
Kal TOV d\6yov, Sf)\ov
TOIVVV OTL TOV avTov TpoTrov
30 vuxfrpova after 31 elvai II 2 Bk. || 31 /cat before a/c6XacrTos omitted by II 1 || 32
Kal before Ka66\ov omitted by F M a || 37 dia&pei T$ Ar.
1260 a 4 apxpvrwv Kal omitted by II Ar. Bk. || ixprj-yyTaL II 2 Bk. and p 1 in the
margin, v0r/7eirai<rd> Schiitz; yet vfi-rjye iTai can also be used passively || 6 ^v
elvai <pa/jt.v M H P 1 , f^ev (pa/j.v elvai. P 4 (corrector)
3 31 ircus...o-oS<j>pa>v] Compare Nic.
Eth. in. 12. 5 1119 a 33 : we apply the
term ckoAaaia to the faults of children
so far as they bear a certain resemblance
to the vice of intemperance (d/coAao-ta).
SUSEM. (Ill b)
4 37 ei Sei 8ia<J>e pi] see on i 2.
5 1260 a 3 w<rirpKal...(^p)(ojj.Vwv]
sc. 8ia<popal elcri, as explained 5 2 ff.
6 4 vtjxtyyefrrcu] "this is indicated
(or, given in outline) in the case of the
soul." The participle v^y^yueVos (i 3)
seems evidence that the verb is used pas-
sively (Bonitz Ind. Ar.}\ but Schiitz
suggestion <ra> gives the middle a fair
sense: " to this result the relations which
exist in the soul at once lead us." SUSEM.
6 (5v Tpav..-7 dXo-yov] "and we say
that a different kind of excellence belongs
to the one and to the other of these, I
mean to the rational and irrational parts
of the soul." Namely intellectual or
dianoetic virtue (dperr/ Sia^ov/rt/cij) to the
rational soul : moral virtue (T^I/O? apery,
excellence of character) courage, temper-
ance, etc. to the irrational appetitive
soul ; Zeller II ii 624 658. The clianoe-
tic virtues are discussed in B. vi of the
Nic. Eth. and the latest detailed investi-
gation of this subject, Walter op. c. 283
537> gives the following results.
Each of the three kinds of reason,
theoretic, creative, and practical in the
narrower sense (see n. 40), has its parti-
cular dianoetic virtue, or it may be, vir-
tues. Practical wisdom or insight (<pp6-
PTJCTIS), if not the only virtue, is at all
events the most indispensable and im-
portant virtue of the practical reason
(Walter p. 356 ff.); see on 5 9 n. (45);
ill. 4 7, 8 nn. (4/4 6), 16, 17 nn.
To theoretic reason belongs (i) vovs in
the narrower sense, intelligence, corn-
prehending in itself the two extremes
of all indemonstrable knowledge, which
must be assumed for every syllogism and
198
IIOAITIKX1N A. 13.
[I. 13. 6
7 e^ei KOI eVt TWV a\\cov. war <eVel> </>ucret TrXeto) ra
Kal~\ apvo/Aeva (a\\ov yap TpoTrov TO e\ev6epov TOV Sov\ov
Kal TO appev TOV 0ij\eos /cal avr)p TratSo?), fcai TTCKJIV
8 WOT <&rei> Bernays, while Susem. 1 2 3 had simply ware || 7rXe/w TO, Ramus,
TO, TrXetw F II Bk. || [apxovra /cat] Susem. 4 , especially as otherwise the insertion of
eyrei, 1. 8, is untenable || 10 avrjp\ Trar-rjp ? Koraes
for scientific demonstration ; at the lower
end of the scale the immediate judgment
of perception, and at the other end, by
means of induction, the principles and
axioms on which all demonstration, defi
nition, and division rest : (ii) e-rri.-
cTTifjfj. fj, demonstrated science with the
exception of metaphysic ; and
(iii) <ro(f)ia, wisdom, the highest or meta
physical knowledge which consists of
elements of both kinds, demonstrated
truths and truths immediately known. It
is of slight importance whether Zeller
and Walter are right, that Aristotle re
garded all three as dianoetic virtues ,
or whether, as Doring tries to prove
against Walter in Kunstlehre des Arist.
(Aristotle s Theory of Art] p. 62 f., only
the third, aocpia, was really so considered
by him. In the creative reason, lastly,
T^X^J artistic skill, is not itself a dia
noetic excellence, though it can lead to
one, Nic, Eth. vi. 5. 7, 1140 b 21 f. 1
For the excellences of character cp. 5
6 n. (40) : in regard to temperance in
particular II. 6 9 n. (206 b), 5 10 .
(162), 7 12, in. 4 16 n. (491), IV
(vii). i 4 n. (693). SUSEM. (112)
7 TOIVVV] See on i. But" 1 or
noiv it is clear (Bonitz).
7 8 ff. " Since then there are by nature
various sorts of things subjected to rule
(the rule of a free man over a slave being
different from that of a husband over a
wife, and again from that of an adult
over a child), and all have the elements
of the soul present in them, only in dif
ferent degrees (the slave in general being
destitute of the deliberative faculty, which
in the woman has not sufficient authority
and in the boy is as yet undeveloped) ;
1 Whether this is really Aristotle s theory or
not, Doring does not venture to decide. I see
no ground for doubt. But perhaps Aristotle
wished to restrict this artistic excellence to the
higher group of arts, the imitative arts, see n.
(34). If this be so Walter s conception of them, p.
512, is unaffected by Boring s objection, p. 65 n.
In Nic. Rth. i. 13. 20 trvVecri?, apprehension,
see Pol. in. 4 16, 17 nn. (497, 8), yi(iv). 4.
14 n. (1186) is adduced as a dianoetic virtue
along with cro^La. and ^poVrjcri?. It would take too
long to explain how this is to be understood.
for this reason the ruler requires the intel
lectual virtue in perfection (for the work
belongs simply to the master-workman,
and here this is reason), while each of the
others needs only his fitting share thereof.
And so, too, must it be with the moral vir
tues : we must suppose all to need a share
of them, though not equally, but only in
so far as each requires for his work."
Bernays defending the order of the
mss. translates from 14 o^oiws as follows :
A similar gradation must likewise be
assumed for the moral virtues : all must
possess them, though not equally, but
only in such measure as is necessary for
their respective duties. The ruler must
have moral virtue in its perfection ; for
every work depends in all its parts on
the supreme master, and reason" i.e. that
which makes the ruler a ruler "is su
preme master" ; if then the work is to be
successful, the rider must satisfy the de
mands of reason on all sides, and must
therefore possess complete moral virtue.
" Those again who obey need severally
so much virtue as is proportional to their
share of the total work." This however
does not meet Thurot s objections, Etudes
i6ff. "The transposition is indispensa
ble. From the proposition reason is the
master-workman it first follows that the
ruler must possess the highest intellectual
virtue, and only secondarily that he must
have the highest moral virtue. Aristotle
has been speaking (a 2 7) of a virtue of
the rational, and of a virtue of the irra
tional, part of the soul, and he admits
(a 10 14) that both these parts are pos
sessed by slaves, women, and children.
Before going on to inquire how they all
share in the moral virtue of the irrational
part he must have noticed the manner
in which they share in the intellectual
virtue of the rational part. Indeed the
words which Bernays inserts the de
mands of reason on all sides imply the
dianoetic virtue." Cp. Hermes XIX. pp. /
588 592, Quaest. Crit. vi. p. 9 f. SUSEM/ (
9 d\Xov -yap rpoirov] See 12 i,
ov TOV O.VTQV Tpbirov TTJS apx^s. SUSEM.
(113)
I. 13. 9] 1260 a 81260 a 22. 199
pev rd fjiopia rrjs tyv^s, aXX evv7rdp%ei Sia- (V)
(6 fjiev yap SouXo? 0X0)? OVK e^ei TO ftovKevriKov,
TO Se OrfXv %i pep, aXX dtcvpov, 6 Se Trat? e%ei /JLCV,
8 aXX areXe?) opofcos Totvw dva-yKaiov ^X lv Ka ^ T^ T &s 7
15 tfOiKcis dpTas vTTo\T\irrov 8eiv p.ev p-erexav irdvras, ciXX
1 6 OV TOV ClIJTOV TpOlTOV, dXX O(TOV eKd<TTa> TTpOS TO aVTOU {(p^OV*
SAO TOV [lev apftovra Te\eav e^eiv Set Tr\v <$iavo>r)Ti,Kr)v
apeTrjv (TO yap epyov eo~Tlv aTrXcw? TOV dp^iTe/CTOvos, 6 Se
19 Xofyo? dp^LT6KTcoi>}, TWV 8 d\\a)v e/cacrTOV, o<rov eVt/SaXXet
14 avrot?. <ofjioi(j)<$ Toivvv avayicalov %6iv Kal Trepi ra?
J 5 <r)6i,Kds dpeTas UTroX^Trreo^ Set^ /xei^ yu-ere^etz/ irdvTas, aXX
16 <OU TW CLVTOV TpOTTOV, XX* 0(7O^ 6/CaCTTW 7T/30? TO aVTOU pJOV.>
9 cocTTe fyavepov OTL ecrT\v <GfcdcrTOv ISia r)> rjOiicri dpeTTj TGOV elprj- 8
21 fj,evo)V djrdvTwv, Kal ov% r) avTrj crw^poavv^ yuvaiKos Kal dvSpos,
ovB dvSpta Kal BiKCUoavvr}, KadaTrep wero ^coKpaT^, aXX
14 o^o^ws ...... 16 tpyov Thurot Susem. transpose to follow 20 auro?s : see Introd.
p. 79 i| Bernays transposes avayKauov, Welldon dvayKcuov %x eLV to follow 16 a\X oVof,
and both punctuate 15 aperds \nro\r]TrT^ov dew, rejecting Thurot s proposed transpo
sition. See Comm. || 15 After virdXyirTtov corr. 2 of P 2 inserts yap, Ar. Se (so also
Koraes in his commentary) || i6aurou Bk., avrovT II || 17 dLavorjTiKrjv Thurot,
rjOiKyv T II Ar. Bk. Bernays || 20 <KdffTov idia -?)> yOiKy Susem. 4 t Sta ^ ? Susem.
earlier, olnela or olnela 17 Schmidt, [^^i/c ))] Thurot || 21 (nravrwv II 1 P 4 , irdvruv P 2>3<
Q S b T b Aid. Bk. || 22 6 ZWK/KXTT?? P 4 , which Wilson (perhaps rightly) approves
12 6 [i^v ydp-.-povXevTiKov] Just the have ever so small a share of approximate
same thing is said in other words 5 9 intellectual virtue in the department of
n. (45). See also n. (115). SUSEM. (114) practice, such virtue consists merely in
13 e xi jJ-e v, dXX dKvpov] Cp. n. (117). the fact that one slave understands his
This can establish a difference of degree master s commands and knows how to
only, not a difference of kind, between execute them better, more quickly, and
the virtue of a man and of a woman. more aptly than another. SUSEM. (115)
See in. 4. 17 n. (495). SUSEM. (114 to) 19 ^KCKTTOV] sc. %x etv ^ e T ^ v - ^p.
8 17 TTJV < oiavo> lyriKT^v dpcTi^v] ImpaXXci] so far as is incumbent on
It is self-evident that only the dianoetic them. Impersonal; cp. De long, vitae
virtue of practical life, <j)pdvr)(ns or prac- I. 4, 464 b 33, \eKrov ocrov evrt/SaXXei
tical wisdom, is here treated: see nn. ry ^vaiicy <f>i\o<ro<f>la: Herod, n. 180 roi)s
(45) (112); iv(vil). i. 4 (693). Where AeX0oi)s rj e?re/3aXXe 7rapacr%e?i/.
it is a question of executing another s 16 ocrov eKao-ro)] sc. eTn/ijaXXei.
command, as it is always and uncondi- 9 20 <lKdcrrou ISia TJ> dperi^ KrX]
tionally with the slave, there this virtue " that the moral virtue of each of the
belongs only to him who gives the com- above classes is peculiar to itself." Ber-
mand, he who obeys having merely right nays translates as if he had before him
opinion about it. All the difference now the words inserted.
is, whether he can attain this right ap- 22 2coKpo,TT|s] The historical Socrates
prehension more or less easily, thoroughly unquestionably did so, Xen. Symp. 2. 9;
or carelessly : 111.4. 18 n. (498). Com- cp. Zeller op. c. n i 221 [Eng. tr. So-
pare also nn. on in. 4 16 (493), 17 crates and Socratics p. 145 n. i]. But
(497), 7, 8 (474 6). But so far as a here no doubt Aristotle has in view the
natural slave, who is denied every ca- Platonic Socrates; amongst other pas-
pacity for deliberation, can be said to sages in Meno 71 D f. , to which he alludes
200
nOAITIKHN A. 13.
[I. 13. 9
/} ^ev dp^L/crj dvBpla rj 8 VTrrjpeTifcr}, 6/W&&gt;9 $ e ^et KOI (V)
10 irepl T<2? a XXa?. Bi)\ov Be TOVTO KOI Kara //,6/DO? paXKov eVt-
25 (TKOTTOVCTLV Ka66\ov ydp ol Xeyozre? e^arraTwo-LV eavrovs on
TO ev e%t,v~Trjv *fyv)(f}v ctperr}, rj TO opOoTrpayeiv, rj TI TWV TOLOV-
TWV TroXi) yap d/J,eivov \eyovo~w ol e^apiO/^ovvTes ra? ape-
11 ra9j cocnrep Topylas, TWV o#r&&gt;? opi^o/Aevcov. Bio Bel, coaTrep 6
7roi7]Trj$ eiprjfce Trepl fyvvat/cos, OVTO) vofii^eiv e%iv Trepl rrdvTwv
30 yvvaiid Koo-pov fj o-iyr) <e pei, 9
Brj\ov OTI
a XX dvBpl ovKeTi TOVTO. eirel Be 7ral<$
24 /cat, which Ar. leaves untranslated, Lambin omitted || 26 ^ rb II 1 P 4 6 L 8
W b Ald., ml rb Q Ar., rb p^-S b T b |] TOIOVTOV for TWV TOIOIJTWV M 8 ? 1 || 31 o
before TTCUS omitted by II 1
more distinctly 10 n. (118). Like So
crates in Xenophon /. <:., Plato (Rep. V.
452 E f.) holds that, apart from beget
ting and bearing children, the difference
between the sexes is a difference of de
gree: upon this is based his demand that
women should share in the education of
men, in war and public business, also
(although this is expressly stated only in
the Laws] in the public messes : see n. 5
i . (153), 6 5 ;z. (196), 7 i .
(231 b). Further, community of wives
in the two upper classes of his ideal-state
(ii. i 3 ff., 7 i) is clearly connected
with this ; compare n. (142) on II. 2 9,
Zeller op. c. n i 775 [Eng. tr. Plato p.
481], Susemihl Plat. Phil. n. 168170.
Aristotle on the contrary records the
results of careful scientific observations
on the difference in temperament between
the two sexes in Hist. Anivi. IX. i 5,
7> 8 608 a 21 ff. : rd GrjXea. (CtaXa/cu)-
repa Kal KaKovpyorepa /cat rjTrov ciTrAa /cat
TrpoTrere crrepa /cat Trepl TTJV rdov TKVWV
JJLOV /jLo\\ov TO 6ij\vTov appevos /cat 8vcre\7rL,
/cat dvaideffTepov /cat ^evoearepov, evaira-
rrjTorepov 8e /cat fj.vrnji.ovLK.(jOTepov, TL 8
aypvirvbrepov /crX. Cp. De gener. anim.
iv. 6. 10 f. , 775 a 12, and Zeller II ii 688
with n. (3). SUSEM. (116)
23 TJ JJ.lv ClpXlKT^ KT\J Cp. III. 4
3 n. (470), 1 6 . (491), 17 n. (495):
also i. 5 7 . (42 b), 12 i, 2 nn. See
on the other side n. (120) on i. 13 n.
SUSEM. (117)
10 24 Kara jxepos] in detail .
25 The same protest in Nic. Eth. n.
7 i,cp.2 3, 4 .
26 TO cv ^x iv ] P^to Rep. iv. 444 E
u^tetd rts /cat eveta i/ i X^ 5 : ^^T- 506 D
rdet TeTO.yfJ.tvov ecrrtv r/ dper-Jj e/cdcrrou.
27 ot e^ap. KT\] As Gorgias does in
Plato s -M-W0 71 r> f., where the Platonic
Socrates attacks the doctrine. Aristotle
is here defending Gorgias against that
polemic and expresses his agreement
with him in the main. Schlosser well
observes that the defence certainly misses
the mark, as Plato in the Meno insists
with perfect right that the generic notion
of virtue ought first to be defined, and in
the Ethics Aristotle starts from that. On
Gorgias see n. (448) to in. 2. 2. SUSEM.
(118)
11 28 6 irou]Tijs] Sophocles Ajax
293. See further . (117). SUSEM. (119)
31 errel 8e KT\] "Since the child has
not yet fully developed, his excellence is
not to be referred simply and solely to
himself, but to perfect development and
the standard of his educator."
The slave s moral excellence is re
stricted to that which fits him to be well
employed by his master, the child s to
that which fits him to be well trained by
his father. In the child only the germ of
human virtue is present (Nic. Eth. I. 9.
10, in. 12. 5 ff.); on this see iv(vn). 13.
5 n - (875): but in the adult slave, so far
as he possesses the indispensable mini
mum of such a virtue at all, it is at least
actually developed. Children and slaves
have only to obey ; the wife must indeed
obey her husband, but then she has along
with him to command the remaining
members of the family. This implies
that her virtue is not merely vTr-rjpeTiKr/, as
Aristotle inexactly puts it 9. Further
with 8 n compare Poetics 15 3
and note (191 b) in Susemihl s edition.
SUSEM. (120)
I. 13. 13]
1260 a 231260 a 41.
201
rovrov fjiev KOI 77 dperrj OVK avrov TT/OO? avrov eorriv, d\\d TT/OO? (V)
12 TO reXo? KOI rov tfyov/jievov. o/Ww? Se KOI $ov\ov TT/OO? ^eairoTrjv.
e0{iV Se 7T/90? rdvaj/cala XpijaifJLOV elvai rov &ov\ov,
35 ware &r)\ov on Kal dperrjs Selrai fJUKpas, teal roaavr^ OTTCO? 10
prjre Si d/co^aaiav fAtjre Sid Sei\tav eXXel^y rwv ep<ywv. drro-
ptjcreie 8 civ Tt?, TO vvv elpT]fjL6vov el d\rj6es, dpa /cal TOI)? (p-2 2 )
re%viras SeijcTei ^X l/v dperrjv 7roXXa/a? <ydp Si* dKO\aaiav
\ 13 eXK.eirrova L rwv epycov. rj $ta(})epei rovro rrKelarov ; o /juev ydp
40 SoO/Yo? KOLVWVOS farjs, o Se Troppcorepov, /cal TOCTOVTOV CTTL-
(3d\\ei dpT7J^ oaov Trep /cal Sov\6ia<; 6 yap ftdvavaos re-
32 O.VTOV F (ad se if sum William) 33 rb rAos] rov rtXeiov P 4 6 W b L e Ar. Aid.
Bk. || 36 eXXe^et P 3 (but e\\el\f>Ti corr. 1 ) Gottl. Bk. 2 Susem. 1 2 3 perhaps rightly
|| [d7ro;o?7<reie...b 2 Tex T wi ] Schmidt || 37 apa F II 2 (yet Q perhaps has apa) \\
39 T)<OV. dvayKOiov 5 > cua^e/aei < y > Schmidt. || rourcoi/ II 1 (emended apparently
by P 1 ) II 4 Whether Ar. read aOry in his ms. after TOVOVTOV as I once assumed
from his translation, is more than doubtful: TOO-OVTOV <O.VT$> ? Schneider
j3d\\et] eVi/3aXTcu Schmidt \\ 41 ^- 8ov\iKr)S > or <inrr]peTiK7]S> before
? Susem. (see Comm.); yet in 38 O/JCT^ alone expresses this ?rep omitted by
F M B , hence [irep] Susem. 1
12 35 dpTT]S 36 fp-ywv] But
how on Aristotle s own psychology and
theory of virtue is even this minimum of
moral virtue, which is the condition of
his serviceableness, possible in the slave,
if he shows no trace of deliberation or
purposed action of his own ? See Nic.
Eth. in. cc. 2, 3, Walter op. c. p. 169 ff.,
212 ff., Zeller op. c.\\\\ 590 n. (3). Yet
all goodness or badness of character and
conduct is derived from the quality of
the Trpoaipe<ri.s, i.e. from the bent of the
will in intention and purpose : Poet. 6
5, 6, 17, 15 i, n. (884) on Pol. iv
(vn). 13 9. Plato speaks far more
humanely on this subject Laws vi. 776 D,
where he admits that ere now many a
one has found in his slaves men on
all points of more approved virtue than
his brothers or sons. But in this he
contradicts the fundamental assumptions
which he makes in common with Ar
istotle ; cp. Zeller n i 755 f. [Eng. tr.
Plato p. 459]. Aristotle himself grants
that even slaves may have a noble cha
racter, Poet. 15 i, Ko.1 yap yvvij <TTI
XPW 7 " ? Ka -i SoOXos, Kairoi ye i crws rotf-
rwv TO /x^ x e ?P ov T0 S 6 Xws <pav\ov ^ffriv.
If he is more consistent elsewhere, his con
sistency only involves the whole theory in
self-contradiction in another way, and
discloses all the more its untenableness
on internal grounds: see 5 8 n. (43),
9 n. (45): also p. 211. SUSEM. (121)
39 T| introduces Aristotle s own view :
"or shall we rather say..." more freely;
"surely here is a very great difference."
13 40 KOIVWVOS t w ">is] whereas the
citizens are KOLVWVOL fiiov. Nic. Eth. v. 6.
4, rovro 5 earl KOIVUVUV /3tou irpbs TO
elvai avrdpKeiav : the slave is excluded
from fiios, ib. X. 6. 8 evdai/j.ovias 8 ovSels
ai>5pair68q) /jLeradidwffiv, el /ULTJ /cat /St ou.
o de iroppwrepov] further removed ,
less dependent on his master.
TOCTOVTOV impdXXei apCTfjs] sc. avrtf:
just so much of virtue as of slavery falls to
his share. The verb intransitive but per
sonal. Comp. ill. 6. 3, /ca# b ffov eTTi-
jSciXXet fj.^pos eKcurrto rov ffiv /caXws: iv(vil).
i. 10, e/cdcrry r^s evdacfAovias ^7T6/3dXXei
roaovrov b aovTrep dper^s: Herod. IV. 115,
vii. 23, Dem. DC Cor. 254, p. 312, 2.
"This special virtue, i.e. excellence of
function, of the free workman differs from
the true virtue of man in being something
inferior and approximating to that of the
slave: see 11. (103) on u 6 with the
references, esp. ill. 4. 12 n. (486)."
SUSEM. (122)
Mr T. L. Heath objects to this, that if
roaovrov is the subject of eVt/SdXXet, the
change of subject from 8 de is surely very
harsh. Indeed, without aury, is it not
inconceivably harsh? I think the sen
tence would go much better, if we could
202
nOAITIKflN A. 13.
[I. 13. 13
SovKeiav, Kal 6
jj,ev
SoOXo? (V)
Vi
Set
260 b xyrri^ wpio-fjievrjv TLVCL
TWV (f)V(T6l, (TKVTOTOfJLOS 8
14 fyavepov TOIVVV on rfjs roiavr^ aperr? anov evai et ro> n
Sov\(p TOV SecnroTTiv, d\\ ov <TO* > rrjv SiSacrKaKiKrjv e%ovTa TOOV
5 epycov [Se<T7TOTi/ciji>~\. Sio \eyovori,v ov Ka\w<$ ol \6yov TOI)? SouXou?
cLTroaTepovvTes Kal fyddKOVTes eVtrafet xpvjaOai, JAOVOV vov0e-
TijTeov <yap paXKov rovs $ov\ov$ r) roi/9 TralSas.
15 d\\d Trepl JJLZV TOVTCOV SicopiaOa) TOV rpoirov TOVTOV Trepl
S dv&pbs Kal yvvaiKO$ Kal TCKVCOV Kal Trarpos, 7-17? re
1260 b 4 <rbv> Schneider following Ar. ; rbv for rrjv Scaliger Reiske || 5 [5e-
(nroTiKrjv] Giphanius (cp. the Comm. ); Koraes conjectures ewicrTrj^v, Bender SouXi^ ;
5ea"iroTiKy, transposed to follow eTrtra^ei, Schmidt
sion of its functions. The master may
entrust his steward with the employment
and direction of the slaves in his service,
as Aristotle ironically remarks, 7 5 :
but he must himself develope in them the
minimum of virtue which they require for
this. Cp. n. (64) on 7 5. In line 5 de-
(nroTiKrjv must be wrong : dovXixriv is what
we require, and Bender would accord
ingly insert it in the text. But neither
dovXiKrjv nor decnroriKTii is free from gram
matical objections ; I prefer therefore to
bracket the word. SUSEM. (123)
Here decnroTiKr] or decnrorela. is the art
of making good servants. The house
hold like the state exercises a moral
superintendence over its members, 13
i, and its head is responsible for their
moral improvement.
5 ol \6yov. . .6 piovov] " Those who per
mit no conversation with slaves, and hold
that we should merely give them orders."
Plato Laws 777 E , rty de OIK^TOV Trp^crprj-
aiv xpri cr%eSov eirLra^LV Trdcrav yiyvecrOai.
Elsewhere Plato strongly recommends a
humane treatment of slaves : see n. (121)
on 12. SUSEM. (124)
Plato s view is still from time to time
approved, as notably by George Eliot.
6 vou0TTjTov] Plato ib. Ko\deu> ye
p.T]V ev 8iKrj dov\ovs del Kal /m.r] i>ov0TOvi>Tas
ws e\evdepovs OpvwTeaOai Troiecv.
7 [xdXXov] Because the slave, albeit
unable to deliberate rationally himself,
yet, as an adult, understands better than
the child the rational admonitions con
veyed to him by others (Fiilleborn II.
184). Compare n. (120) on n above,
and ;/. (45) on 5 9. SUSEM. (125)
15 8 Sio>pio-0a> TOV Tpoirov TOVTOV]
Compare the close of c. 7.
make 5 8e the subject of e7ri/3aXXe. I
should translate the artizan is further
removed and entrenches on virtue only
to the same degree as he entrenches on
slavery. Cf. for the supposed use of
e?rt/3aXXet De caelo I. 5io, 272a25 ocrov
yap TI ere pa. [ypa/jifj.r]\ e7Ti/3aXXa rrjs erepas,
/cat i] ertpa eKeLvrjs TOVOVTOV, where iiri-
fta\\eiv contrasts with a7ro\ucr6ai. Is
there any reason why e7ri/3aXXei should
not = eTraXXarret ? " In point of fact
this is perhaps the right construction.
That we require ai/r with the other,
was pointed out by M. Schmidt and by
me in my first edition (1872). At the
same time is not dperrjs by itself also
strange? (See Critical Notes). If some
thing like 5ov\ov or rijs Toiai/Tys has been
lost, a.vT$ may well have been lost with
it. We certainly should expect he shares
in servile virtue in so far as his condition
approximates to a slave s. SUSEM.
1260 b i ct<})wp. TWX ^x l SovXefav^is
under a definite, limited form of slavery.
Cbmp. Rhet. i. i i, 1354 a 3, with
Cope s note : also wptoy^pcus above 4 i,
n. (34). Some interpret wrongly, de
tached from the master. That the slaves
should be ranked as a natural class and
the artizans (who had largely sprung from
them, in. 5. 3) as an artificial class, is
significant of the Greek contempt for
labour. See n. (93).
14 4 <TOV> n^v SiSao-K. ^x VTCt ]
" the person who instructs him in routine
duties." This is the possessor of, or pro
ficient in, the SouXt/CTj eTricm^o? which is
more fully described above 7 2, where
it is distinguished from decriroTiK^. The
discussion on the virtue of the slave
results in a more precise determination of
and its elevation by an exten
1260 b 11260 b 24.
203
I. 13. 16]
10 e fcao-rov avrwv dperrjs Kal rfjs 7rpo9 <7(/>a9 ai;Tou9 o/<ttXta9, (V)
Tt TO /eaXo)9 Kal fir) /eaXw9 ear/, Kal 7TW9 Set TO JJLZV ev Stw-
KCIV TO Se KaKO)<? cfrevyeiv, ev Tot9 Trept [Ta9] ?roXtTe/a9 avay-
Kalov e r jre\6elv. eirel yap oiKia fjiev Trdcra /juepos 7roXe&)9, ravra 12
S otVta-9, rrjv Se TOU /JLepovs TTpos rr]v TOV oXou Set fiXeTreiv
15 dperrjv, dvayKaiov irpbs rrjv r jro\ireiav /3Xe7roz/Ta9 TraiSeveiv
Kal TOU9 7ratSa9 /fat T9 ryvvaiKas, elirep Tt Sta^epet ?rpo9 TO
T?}^ TroXtz^ etz^at crTrovSaiav KOL TOU9 ?ratSa9 elvai
16 /cat T9 yvvaiKas crrrovSaias. dvajKalov Se Siafyepeiv at
fyap yvvaiKes TJ/MLCTV pepo? rcov eXevdepwv, eK Se TCOZ^ ?rai
ryivovrai rrjs TroXtTeiW COCTT eVet Trept yLteiv rovrcov
rrepl Se TW^ \oirrwv ev aXXot9 \eKreov, d(f)evT$ a; 9 TeXo9
T07)9 z^i)^ Xo7ou9, d\\7jv dp^r/v TTOLrjaa/jievoi Xeyw/juev,
il Trpcorov e Trtcr/ee^co/ze^a Trept TcGz^ dTro^Tjvajjievcov Trepl T^9
12 Nickes omits ras, following Ar. || 13 5teX#eu> Schmidt f| 17 /cat is omitted
by II 1 , [/cat] Susem. 1 2 * || 20 oiKovb^oi F, ot KOLVWVOI IT Bk., (/z^ gubernant (ot a/co-
VO/ULOI?) Ar. I] [e?rei...2i Xe/cr^oi ] and 22 [X^w^ej/ /cat] Schmidt H 24 TroXtretas T^S
d/)tCTT7JS II 2 Bk.
11 TI r6 KaXcos sc. 6 / utXe?i (Congreve).
irws Set TO |XV tu <d / u,tXe?i > SLCOKSLV,
how the right intercourse ought to be
followed: cp. TO Se /ca/cws <apxea 0ai Kal
a/3%eii/> dcru / u0o/c)ws ecrrtv d/j.^o iv, 6 10.
12 iv Tots-.-iroXiTeCas] This discus
sion means the scheme of the best state
more especially, as is shown by the reason
subjoined. But so far as that has come
down to us in B. iv(vn) and v(vin),
this point was never reached, nor the
question of the proper training and edu
cation of the women. Cp. Introd, p. 49
n. (4), p. 52. SUSEM. (126)
15 dva-yKcuov] Probably because the
family will then be treated as a part of
the state, and will be better understood in
relation to the whole. Comp. n. (33).
irpos TT|V iroXiTiav KT\] Cp. v(vill).
1. i, vm(v). g. ii ff., and Nic. Eth. v.
2. ii, TO, 5 Troir/TiKa TTJS oXrjs aperrjs
eon r&v vo/j.i/ji.(t)i> oaa vei>o/ut.odtTr)Tai irepi
Traideiav rty irp&s rb KOLVOV KT\, with
Jackson s notes. The all important
term iroKireLa will be fully explained in
B. in (i i, c. 3, 6 i &c). It will
be found to be a much wider term than
constitution or form of government
(rd|ts r&v apx&v), cis indeed the English
word polity is still. See vi(iv). ii.
3, fiios risecm TroXews, and n. (466) on ill.
3- 9-
1 6 8icu}> pi Trpos=is an important
means towards the excellence of the city :
literally "makes a difference with regard
to..." So iv(vil). 14. 7, Trpbs TO Ka\bi>
16 1 8 al |Xv...eXv0pcov] Cp. n. 9
5> 6 n. (285), Plato Laws vi 781 B, ov
yap rj/jiiffv /j-ovov ecrrtV, ws do^eiev d v, TO
irepl TasyvvatKas. SlJSEM. (127)
20 olKovojioi,, administrators, TTJS ?roXt-
ret as suits Aristotle s views elsewhere at
least as well as oi Koivwvol: see in. 4
14, 15; iv(vn). 1 4 4 6.
21 <x<J>VTs KrX] "let us dismiss the
present discussion as complete, and carry
on our subject from a fresh starting-point.
And first let us review those theorists
who have put forward a scheme for the
best form of polity." With TOI)S vvi>
\6yovs cp. TO^J irp&Tovs \6yovs, III. 6. 3.
204
EXCURSUS I.
EPIMENIDES i. 2 5.
THE most detailed account we have of Epimenides is in Diog. Laert. I.
109 115 (cp. Suidas s. z/.), whilst of modern writers Heinrich Epimenides of
Crete (Leipzig 1801. 8), Hock Krcta in. 246 ff., and C. Schultess De Epi-
mcnide Crete (Bonn 1877. 8) give the fullest particulars. He was probably of
Phaistos in Crete, but lived principally at Knosos and was held in unbounded
esteem as an expiatory priest, a prophet, and a worker of magical cures.
At the same time, it would appear, he was shrewd in practical statesmanship,
so that some reckoned him among the seven wise men. His whole history
is mythical. He is said to have reached the age of 154 or 157, or in the
Cretans version of the story, of 299 years, and further to have passed 57 years
of his early life asleep in a cave. The story of his having effected the
purification of Athens about 596 B.C. has been shown to be unhistorical
by Niese Contributions to the history of Solon and of his time pp. 12 14
(in Historische Untersuchungen Arnold S chafer geividmct, Bonn 1882).
Whether he owes his place among the seven sages solely to this work
attributed to him as Solon s coadjutor, which is Niese s opinion, is not so
certain. For to all appearance it is on better authority, at the least, that
he is said to have played an important part in Sparta about 580 B.C.,
where he seems to have pronounced the oracles whereby the transference
of the election of ephors from the kings to the popular assembly 1 re
ceived the requisite religious sanction 2 . In connexion with this he
introduced there the worship of the Cretan moon-goddess Pasiphae and
her oracular dreams : in their ancient official building the ephors had
a memorial to him (Paus. III. 11. 11) and even preserved the hide,
or animal s skin inscribed with oracles which he was alleged to have
written. See Urlichs On the Rhctra of Lycurgus in the Rhein. Mus. VI.
1848. 217230, Duncker History of Antiquity VI. p. 352 ff. ed. 5 (1882),
Schafer De cphoris Lacedaemoniis pp. 14 21 (Leipzig and Greifswald,
1863. 4); also Gilbert Studicn (Studies in the history of ancient Sparta]
p. 185, Frick De ephoris Spartanis p. 31 f. (Gottingen 1872. 8). There is a
curious story which makes him come to Athens only ten years before the
Persian wars, and there prophesy these wars, Plato Laws I 642 D. The works
attributed to him in Diog. Laert. I. in two epics, KovpiJTvv KOI Kop
1 If indeed, considering the strange ably later period. Of course the ephors
method by which the ephors were se- did not attain their new position at a
lected (see n. on n. 9. 23), they can be single blow, as it were, by the mere fact
said to have been elected by the popular that their election was taken out of the
assembly at all. hands of the kings. On the contrary it
2 Trieber (Forschungen Berlin 1871. 8) must evidently have taken long and
Researches into the history of the Spartan arduous struggles to change the dispro-
constitution, p. I3off, has indeed endea- portionate superiority of the kingly power
vourecl to prove that the new position of into corresponding inferiority.
the ephors did not begin until a consider-
EXCURSUS If. 205
yeveais /cot Qeoyovia, and Apyous vavmjyia re KOI idaovos els KoX^ouj o
with prose works Trept Ovo-iav and Trepi r?;? eV Kp^/ TroXireias never had any
existence : they are a mere invention of the romancer Lobon of Argos in
his work Trept Troi^roSz , as Hiller has shown in the Rhein. Mus. xxxni. 1878.
525 ff. Other works really appeared under the name of Epimenides, of
which some were forgeries attributed to him, others the writings of a later
Epimenides. The Fathers mention a work On Oracles, Trepl XPWP&VI which
can hardly be a prose writing by him, but rather a collection of his oracles ;
if it is here that the hexameter Kpfjrfs del ^euo-rat, KCIKCI drjpla, yao-re pe?
dpyai occurs, which the writer of the Epistle to Titus, I. 13, attributes to
one of the Cretan prophets, Wios CWTVV npo^rjTrjs, without mentioning his
name. Theodoret indeed ascribes the verse to Callimachus, but in his hymn
to Zeus (1. 8) only the first words are found : hence Epiphanius (c. haer. I. 14)
and Hieronymus (T. vil A. p. 707 Vail.) remark that Callimachus on the
contrary first took them from Epimenides : cp. Liibeck Hieronymus p. 12 f.
However that may be, the word quoted by Aristotle most probably occurred
in a hexameter, very likely in a collection of oracles which Aristotle had
before him, of which Epimenides was the reputed author. Moreover, in
Rhet. in. 17. 10, 1418 a 23 f., Aristotle says that Epimenides did not divine
the future, but only interpreted the obscurities of the past, Trepl T>V eVopeVcoy
OVK eficuTeveTO, aXXct Trepl TO>V yeyovorcov p-eV, aSr/Xcoy 8e ; and this could hardly
be affirmed except upon the evidence of such a collection. What con
nexion there was between this published collection of his oracles and the one
which was jealously guarded at Sparta, it is impossible to say. SUSEM. (17)
EXCURSUS II.
ON i. 6 i8, 1255 a 5 b 3.
THE recent contributions of Jackson Postgate and Ridgeway to the
explanation of this passage, referred to in n. (51) on 6 i, have not super
seded the more successful results attained by Hampke in ihePMfafogusXXIV.
1866. 172 ff. Jackson however has the credit of clearing up the sense of
cui/ota, and Ridgeway by restoring the right punctuation has helped to correct
Hampke s interpretation and to remove apparent difficulties. He saw that
in 4 the words 17 6ta yap... 19 ap^ei!/ form a parenthesis, and hence that the
eVet following refers not to this parenthesis but to the sentence which pre
cedes it.
Aristotle admits that not every form of actual slavery is natural ; a dis
tinction must be drawn between a slave who is so by nature and a slave
according to convention and law. The two may, but need not necessarily,
coincide. There are natural bondsmen who are not as a matter of fact
enslaved, and people who are not nature s slaves are actually in servi
tude: the former though not in slave s estate deserve to be so; while the
latter, although held in bondage, are undeserving of it. The (unwritten)
law in question consists in the universal agreement that prisoners captured
206 EXCURSUS //
in war are the slaves of their conquerors (ev TO. Kara 7r6\fj.ov
Ta>v KpciTovvToiv eivai <t>a.<Tiv). This brings Aristotle to the two extreme and
opposite views between which his own holds the mean, the views of the
unconditional opponents (A) and of the unconditional defenders (B) of each
and every form of slavery. He first speaks of the former, remarking that
they impeach the legality of the convention or positive law in question,
inasmuch as the better man may become the slave of the stronger or more
powerful, whereas in a rational state of society virtue is the sole title to
rule 1 . This then is their view (11 ovrwr) : the others (B), on the contrary,
take the former view, e/caVoos, that namely prescribed by the foregoing posi
tive law. The two views stand sharply opposed (19 odaravrat X W P LS } anc ^ i n
conflict (dp,<pio-^TT]a-is), yet they have a common point of contact (eVaXXar-
TOVO-I), both facts being due to one and the same cause. Aristotle might
have prevented all misapprehension of these words if he had written rroiel
de in line 13. This common cause of both facts is, namely, that virtue
(apcrr/) is that which primarily gives force and might, and that without
some sort of excellence the exercise of force is impossible (on rponov TWO.
dperrj Tvy^dvovcra ^oprjyias KOI (Sid^eadai 8vvarai /zaXiora, KOL earns del TO Kparovv
fv vnepoxfj dyaQov TLVOS) , only, of course, virtue still requires the indispensable
condition of favourable external circumstances (xopyyia). This then is the com
mon point in the two contending views, the point where Aristotle agrees with
both, that in the first place only virtue deserves to rule, and in the second
place the requisite force to ruleessentiaUydepends upon yirtue_(Mg rg done iv
IJLT) avev aperfyfeirai TTJV (3iav). But from this common point the conflict
between the two theories breaks out on the question, wherein right and
justice consists (dXXa Trepi roO SIKCU OU povov eivai rr)v dp,(pt.(r[BriTr)O iv). Just for
this reason (8ia rouro) the opponents of all slavery make the essence of right
to consist in the mutual good- will of rulers and ruled : i.e. in the^ilctthat the
ruler, on his part, does not govern in his own selfish interests, but for the
welfare of his subjects ; and in the willing obedience, on their part, of the
ruled. In other words they transfer to the relations between master and
servant the principle which Aristotle himself recognizes as the true one in the
state, where he uses it to distinguish " normal polities " from " degenerate
forms " (irapeicpdo-cis). In this Aristotle discovers their mistake :. they assume
that the truly virtuous man cannot desire to exercise any other kind of lord
ship, that it would be a misuse of his force, were he to do So : that he
would thereby cease to be a truly virtuous man. So conversely, from the pro-
1 [Dr Jackson having kindly read this of their common statement /j,rj avev dperTJs
excursus as it was passing through the eivai TTJV fiiav. Further (2) he regards
press remarks upon this last sentence, the two propositions contained in on
that in his opinion this is precisely what rpoirov Tiva...dya6ov TIVOS as the cause
these people do not appreciate and what but not the matter of the partial agree-
Aristotle wishes to impress upon them, ment between (A) and (B): and he demurs
viz. that virtue is the sole title to rule. (3) to the statement that the two views
He objects (i) that the words on rpbirov simultaneously odaravTai and cTraXXdr-
nj>a...u7repo%7; ayadov rivos are not to rovai, (4) to the sense given to d repot
be taken as implying that the two \6yoi, and (5) to the vagueness in which
parties have formulated their views in the whole passage is left, especially in
this way, but as Aristotle s explanation the part about rd
ON I. 6 i8. 207
position virtue gives force the defenders of all slavery argue that might is
right forgetting that it is not virtue alone that gives force, but that it must
have favourable external circumstances ; when this is not the case the better
man may easily succumb to the inferior. Aristotle might well assume this to
be actually the reasoning employed by (B), for no other is logically conceivable.
In regard to (A), the philosopher is not so certain whether they do thus far
agree with (B) and with himself; whether they all really assume that, as a
rule, virtue leads to victory. As therefore the sole right of virtue to rule
became doubtful, he feels obliged to give an explicit justification of his course
in attributing to them the argument above. This is because, if the point of
contact between the two views is lost, and both stand opposed without any
community, the views of (A), arepoi Xoyot, contain nothing tenable or con
vincing, since they would yield this result that those who stand higher in
mental and moral capacity do not deserve to be rulers and masters (eVfi 5m-
(TTavTGdv ye ^copiy TOVTCOV TU>V Xoycov ovre tcr^t>poi> ovdev e^ovcriv ovre mdavov arepot
Xoyot, cos ov SeT TO /3e Xrtov K.CLT dperrjv ap%eiv KCU 8e(nroeiv}. Postgate correctly
remarks that it would have been clearer if Aristotle had written arepos \6yos
for arepot Xoyot.
Aristotle next passes to the view of a third party (C), agreeing in the
practical result with that of (B), though not in the reason assigned, as its
defenders simply (oXcoy to be taken with ai/rf^o/iei/ci) adhere to the principle
"what is legal is right"; while even this result is restricted, because the
principle is not allowed to apply to the case of non-Hellenes conquering Hel
lenes, but only to that of Hellenes conquering non-Hellenes or to the relations
of the non-Hellenes to one another. The view of (C) is thus essentially
nothing else than the popular opinion current in Greece, involved in this
inner contradiction ; and Aristotle shows that, in the main, his own coincides
with it, since it maintains what is true in the popular opinion at the same
time that it gets rid of its inconsistencies. For on Aristotle s theory also
Greeks are, in the main, the natural rulers, barbarians the natural slaves,
though this is a rule which certainly admits of many exceptions (see Introd.
p. 25). SUSEMIHL.
[Some salient features of Dr Jackson s interpretation may here be appended
in his own words. He distinguishes three theories in 1255 a 7 26 : viz.
i. that of (A) who argues that all slavery is unjust and unnatural, because
violence is wrong ; ii. that of (B) who argues that all slavery is just and
natural, because might is right ; iii. that of (C) who argues that all slavery is
just and natural, because what is legal is just 1 : while Aristotle declares that
in practice some slavery is just, some slavery unjust. "In 1255 a 12 21"
he continues "Aristotle seeks to show that the positions of (A) and (B) are
open to attack precisely in so far as they differ from his own.
" Now the Xoyot of (A) and (B)
i. All slavery is unjust
ii. All slavery is just
1 [Dr Jackson s notation X, Y, Z is here altered to (A), (B), and (C), for the
sake of uniformity.]
208 EXCURSUS II.
: i.e. slaveries which (A) pronounces unjust, (B) pronounces
just. How is it, then, that these Xoyoi eVaXXarrouo-iv ? What is the reason
of the controversy between (A) and (B) ?
The reason is, Aristotle tells us, that, as dpe-nj with proper appliances is
able to exert force or violence, while force or violence implies dyadov of some
sort or other, (A) and (B) agree in assuming that where there is /3ta, there
there is aperi;, and consequently suppose that they differ fundamentally in
their notions of diicaiov. That is to say, on the assumption that /3ia is
always accompanied by dptTij, (A), who conceives that in the cases which he
has examined /3/a is detestable, and does not see anything to distinguish
these cases from other cases, condemns all relations between inferior and
superior which are not based upon loyalty , i.e. the willing obedience which
an inferior renders to a kind and considerate superior ; while (B) who
conceives that in the cases which he has examined /3ta is respectable, and
does not see anything to distinguish these cases from other cases, takes as
his principle might is right .
When however the two theories are withdrawn within their proper limits,
so that they Sieo-mo-i x m P^ an< ^ no longer eVaXXarrov<ri, the theory which (A)
advances against (B) and the theory which (B) advances against (A), artpot
Xoyoi, have neither force nor plausibility as against the modified doctrine <os
Set TO fte\Tiov KCIT dpfrrjv ap^eif KGU 8e<r7roi>V )
He adds in a note : " In other words, so long as (A) maintains that All
slavery is unjust, and (B) that All slavery is just, (B) has something io-xypov
and iridavov to urge against (A), (A) has something larxvpov and TrtOavdv to
urge against (B). But when (A) and (B) respectively fall back from their
advanced and untenable positions to the position of Aristotle, (B) has no
longer anything la-xvpov or Triflavov to urge against (A), (A) has no longer
anything lo-xvpov or mdavov to urge against (B). It will be seen that I take
TOVS Xoyov? and rcov \6yvv to be ( the theories of (A) and (B) , arepoi Xoyot
to be { the theory adverse to (A s) theory and the theory adverse to (B s)
theory , i.e. the theories of (B) and (A) ." He agrees with Heitland (Notes
p. 11) that eVaXXarreiz; means primarily to overlap , whether by super
position or by juxtaposition, and continues : " But when may propositions
be said to overlap ? At first sight two cases suggest themselves : (i) All
X is Y might be said to overlap Some X is F, and (2) Some X is Y and
Some X is not Y might be said to overlap one another, provided that these
subcontraries are incompatible. It appears however that eVaXXarretz/ marks
not so much the transgression of a limit, as the invasion of a region beyond,
and consequently that All X is Y could not be said to eVaXXarreii/ Some
Xis Y. For this reason, as well as because eVoXXarrcti understood in the
former of the two senses indicated above, would not find a proper antithesis
1 Apart altogether from my doubts interest the unconditional supporters of
whether the words of 4 (especially slavery, (B), have to contest the right of
eTret, arepot, us ov 8ei as constructed with TO j34\Tioir KO.T dpeTrjv to rule at all, or
iridavov) can grammatically bear the why they should seek to advance anything
meaning which Dr Jackson here assigns possessing force and plausibility against
to them, 1 fail to see what imaginable the modified doctrine. SuSEM.
ON I. 6 i8. 209
in 8ta<rrni/ra>i> x^P^j ^ take eVaAXarrety here in the latter of these senses, the
whole field of slavery being a debatable ground which from opposite quarters
(A) and (B) have overrun. With the phrase Staoroi/rwi/ xa>pi ?, which represents
the relative position of (A) and (B) when they have withdrawn to their own
sides of the field, compare the kindred use of /^copto-rat in /J.K i, 464 b 27.
Thus while I agree with Heitland that overlap is the best English equiva
lent for eVaXXarrft^, I demur to his unqualified statement that the latter
word expresses the relation in which subcontraries stand to one another."]
Bernays rendering of 6 3 5, 1255 a 12 24, mentioned in n. (51), is
as follows (the words in italics being supplied by him to explain the
connexion of thought).
"The reason for the difference of opinions, and the common ground
taken by the divergent views, is that to a certain extent intrinsic merit, when
it attains external means, becomes also most competent to do violence, and
every superior force depends upon the excess of some good quality or other,
so that violence seems not to be devoid of all nobler elements and the
difference of opinion therefore concerns the question of justice only. For the
one side discovers justice in benevolent treatment, which precludes slavery;
the others even hold it to be just that the stronger should rule. Whereas if
the views stood harshly opposed to each other, so that merely external
or brutal violence according to the one, and intrinsic merit according to the
other, justified the claim to rule, then the view which impugns the right of
the man, who is the better by his intrinsic merit, to be ruler and lord would
be unable to adduce anything cogent or even plausible on its own behalf.
Others however fasten wholly on an assumed empirical justice, such as the
law, and declare slavery brought about by war to be just merely because the
law sanctions it; yet in the same breath they are forced to admit that it is
unjust."
EXCURSUS III.
THE RELATION OF XP r ll JI - aTLa " rtK *] TO OiKOi>op.iKTJ : I. 8. 2.
OTL piv ovv ovx r\ o.vrr\ rf olKOvo|uicfj r\ xP 1 H JLaTLCrTI K t i> 8T]\ov...-ir6Tpov 8e
<TTI TL T] ^repov t8os, ^x t 8ia|A<JH<r|3t]TT]<riv. The most obvious course
is to understand erepov efSos as only another expression for a mere auxiliary
science (uTriyperncif), or at least as including the relation of an auxiliary
science under the case that the two are wholly distinct. In this sense all
the commentators take it ; both (i) those who think with Hampke see n.
(67) on i. 8. i that Aristotle simply wished to set up as an auxiliary
science just so much of ^p^arto-rt/o) as stands in a natural relation to OIKO-
?7, an( i consequently in c. 8 13 would set matters right by omitting
, so that the direct branch of xP T ll JiaTta " riK *l * s not there said to ; be
a part of, but only to belong to , OI KOI/O/LUKT/, as that with which it is
concerned : and (2) those who with Biichsenschiitz rely on the received text
H. 14
210 EXCURSUS HI.
of 8 $ 13 and maintain Aristotle s decision to be this : that the direct branch
of xp^arto-rtK?) is really a part of OLKOVO^KTJ, but that the natural part of
indirect xpij/narioriKj), t ^ ie tneor y f exchange, is, on the contrary, merely
an auxiliary science. Now there is no passage in which Aristotle makes
even the slightest allusion to such a difference in the relation of the two to
olKovofjLiKij. But he states explicitly that not until c. 10 does he proceed to
give a definite answer to the question proposed in c. 8 i, viz. how that
branch of xpT/^arioriKJj, with which the householder is concerned, is related
to oiKovofjuitq ; the answer being that it is in one respect a part of OIKOVO/ZI/O/,
in another respect an auxiliary science, 10 I -3. The matter cannot
therefore have been previously decided. And yet he had just said that
has to do with the use or consumption of commodities, XPW* 1
r) with their production, and that hence the two are heterogeneous,
because consumption and production are not the same thing. Now, as
Schiitz remarks, this necessarily implies that for the same reason even the
branch of xp^ario-rt/o) most closely allied to OIKOI/O/MK^ cannot be a part of it
except ina restricted and relative sense 1 . This again is decisively confirmed
by Aristotle s requirement, iv(vn). 9 3, 4, 7, 18 ; 10 9 14, that while
none but landowners are to be citizens and none but citizens landowners,
they shall not themselves carry on agriculture or cultivate their own estates,
since in this way even agriculture really ceases, strictly speaking, to be a
distinctive part of household management or domestic economy. Yet on
another side the connexion still remains so close that Aristotle can distin
guish between the functions of husband and wife in housekeeping by saying
ill. 4. 17 11. (496), that the one has to acquire, the other to keep ; in other
words that the external management of the property is more appropriate to
the husband, the internal management to the wife. From all this it follows
that erfpov eldos denotes something which is not connected with olKovo/juKrj
either as a part of it, or simply as an auxiliary to it : the more subtle distinc
tion between branch and subsidiary science is, for the present, to remain
undecided ; and p.epos is used in a vaguer sense, even covering the case of an
auxiliary science, this being also true of 10 i, so that there is certainly no
need to expunge the word there. Such instances of inexactness and care
less expression frequently obscure Aristotle s meaning ; but in this part of the
work they are unusually numerous. Thus xp^tmcmK?) has three meanings,
(l) = KTr)TiKij, in the widest sense; 3 3 and c. 8 : and, in a narrower sense,
(2)=)Mera/3A?7TiKi7 or KanrjXLKij , rj p,rj avayKaia of 9 1 8 (so from c. 9 I
onwards); and again (3) r\ avayKaia, rj Kara (pvo-iv, 9 12, c. 10 (cp. H. on 8 i).
Several times only accurate observation of the context can determine which
of the three senses the word has. Similarly /xera/SA^Tt/c?) or ^era/SoAtK?) as a
general term for exchange includes under it both the natural and unnatural
species of indirect acquisition, both that which comes under oiKoi/o/xt/cr) and
1 If Buchsenschiitz had definitely put in the negative. To acquire and to spend,
the question to himself, whether acquir- or consume, are really opposed; which is
ing can be a branch of using and con- what Aristotle says briefly, but to my
suming he would no doubt have answered thinking quite clearly.
ON I. 8. 2. 211
that which is alien to it : but sometimes it is found in the narrower accepta
tion of retail trade proper, Kcnr^XtK?/, as in 9 12, 10 4, u 3. Teichmiiller
has some good remarks on the want of a strict terminology in Aristotle
Arist. Forschungen n. 4 ff.
Besides, to ask whether xprj/zano-rifo) is a part of OIKOVO/JLLKIJ, is, as Oncken
has pointed out 1 , a perverse way of raising the question. For x/^/zanorue^,
conversely, has a wider field than OIKOI/O/LUKT; : even the finances of the state
and the labour of the whole society of the citizens are intimately concerned
in it, and the earnings which supply the wants of single households form
only an important part of this sum total of the national income. Aristotle
finds himself accordingly compelled to speak of a xP r IP- aTi0 " rLK -^ (& X 3 15 ;
ii 13) which is not simply for the householder and the family circle, but for
statesmen and the commonwealth. At the same time he is so inconsistent
as to designate the accumulation of a stock of commodities or possessions
which shall be useful for civil society, whether it be by direct production or
by plunder, a branch or a concern of otKovopucij 2 . Cp. the notes on 8
13 J 5> and on u 13. SUSEM. (69)
NOTE ON I. 13 12: REASON AND VIRTUE IN THE SLAVE.
The difficulty pointed out in notes (45) and (121) on 5 9 and 13 12,
may perhaps be removed as follows. If the slave by nature is to be altogether
without that lower part of reason, which Aristotle here calls TO fiovXevriKov, he
would be without reason altogether ; for still less can he be said to have the
higher part, TO eVto-TTj/uoi/tKoV, scientific thought. But then he would quite cease
to be a human being. The expression oXcos OVK e^et TO ftovXevriKov, 13 7,
should therefore be taken as hyperbolical and interpreted in the light of that
other, and itself hyperbolical, statement KOIVWWV \oyov TOO-OVTOV ocrov
alo-OdvearOai dXXd pr\ t\tiv 5 9: reason is present in the slave only, so
to speak, as a dwapis, not as a Zgts ; and Aristotle avails himself of the
1 Staatslehre ii. 81 : "It is just like nance of the household the means, which
putting the question : Is the universal the the other science indicates." It must he
same as the particular, or a part of it, or observed in reply to this, (a) that only the
a distinct species? For that xp r n/ JLaTiffTI - K ^ smaller and less essential branch of oko-
has the wider generality and that Q LKO- VO/JLIKTJ in Aristotle s sense has this func-
vofjuKj] is the particular, is evident. We tion, 13 i, (b) that as it has to do with
should have expected to hear, what xpry- consumption, while xptyjuarumff^ is con-
jtcmcm/a? is in itself, what comes under cerned with acquisition, even this branch
it, and then the relation of OIKOVOIJUKT] to of oiKovofJuKr) is not related to
it would have followed of itself and have rtcm/CT? simply as particular to universal.
been arrived at very simply. Whereas 2 Schiitz alone saw this difficulty and
by adopting the opposite" (?) " procedure, vainly tried to get over it by the omission
we can only with difficulty surmise that of /ecu TTO\ITIKUV and /ecu rot s TroXm/fcus,
Xpwcmcm/cT? is undoubtedly an indepen- 8 15. He failed to see that it was also
dent branch of science, treating quite necessary to reject TroXews r) in 8 13 sub
generally of the means to acquire pro- fincm, that these words indeed must be
perty and increase wealth ; that ot/co- the first to go.
vojj.LK.ri teaches us to apply to the mainte-
142
212 NOTE ON I. 13. 12.
hyperbole ^ e^etv to denote that only the indispensable, or roughly speaking
insignificant, minimum of rational deliberation, and therefore of reason
generally, is found in such men. It is precisely similar with c. 6 of the
Poetics, where first of all 9, 1450 a 7, characters (rjdrj} are said to form a part
of every tragedy, and then a little farther on 14, a 23, we read avev p.ev
Trpa^ecoj OVK av yevoiTO rpaywSta, avfv Se ydcov yeVoir civ. at yap TCOV vecov rutv
TrXeurrcoy d^Oeis rpaycoSiai etcrti/ KOI o\cos TTOL^TOL TroXXoi TOLOVTOL. Comp.
Hermes XIX. 1884, p. 592. SUSEM. Plato too, Rep. IV. 441 A, says \oyio-p.ov
8 CVLOL p.v ep-oiye doKovaiv ouSeVore p.fTa\ap.[3dveiv, ol 8e TroXXot o^e rrore. Taken
strictly this would deny to children and many adults the possession, as well
as the use, of reason.
NOTE ON I. 2 13 : 1253 a 20 24.
clvcupovfjievov "yap TOV oXov OVK &TTCU TTOVS ov8l X ^P? ^^ H 11 ! OJACOVVJJLWS. wtrirep ei
TIS Xe^yti TT]V Xi6iVT)v 8ia<|>0apeia a ya.p ^crrai TOiavTT], iravra 8e (? yap) TW ^p-yaj
copwrTcu Kal TT^ 8vvci[JLi, wcrre fXT|KTt TOiavra ovra oi XCKTCOV rot CVUTO, elvai dXX
6fxwvu|xa. The words of n. (28) p. 150 " if Toiavrr] = B. true hand " will admit of
further elucidation. Scholl, who maintains this to be the meaning of roiavrrj,
tails qualis esse debet vera maims (Susem. Quacst. Crit. IV. p. 5), cites as
analogous the use of rotovro? in De part, animal. I. i 25, 26, 640 b 33 ;
Kairoi Kal o TfQve&s e^et TTJV avrrjv TOV cr^^aros fiop<ptjv, dXX o/xcoy OVK
av 6 POTTOS, eri 6 adiivarov flvai x ^P a < TT]V> OTTUXTOVV dia.KfifJii>r)v, olov
Tj v\ivr)v, TrXrjv op.c0vvp.cos, ooVyrep TOV yeypap,p,evov laTpov. ov yap 8wij(TfTai
Troielv TO eavriys- epyov, cocrTrep ovd* av\ol \idivoi TO eavTtov epyov, ouS o yfypap,-
p,evos laTpos. 6p.oicos $e TOVTOLS ovSe TWV TOV TeOvnKOTOs [JLOptwv ovSev ^TI TWV
TOIOVTWV eo-TL, Xeyco S olov o(p6a\p.6s, x ei/ P (where Scholl has himself added
TT/V}. The citation is the more apposite because Scholl takes diacpdapelaa ^eip
to mean precisely TOV Tedv^KoTos x ei p> manus corporis extincti, dvaipovp,cvov
TOV 6 Xou, quae propter hanc solam causam simul corrupta est appellanda.
There is however another suggestion. Even granting that, as Scholl
contends, SiafpOaptlo-a is subject and ToiavTr) predicate, and that dia^Qapelaa
means a dead man s hand, may not ToiavTij mean simply homonymous/ a
hand in much the same sense as a hand of stone ? Thus explained eVrat
ToiavTT) is parallel to ov Xexreoi/ ra avTa aXX 6p,covvp.a, there is no need to
insert OVK, and ndvTa yap (which the best MSS. of the old translation attest),
is a distinct improvement upon ndvTa de. So in effect Vettori p. 14 (ed.
of 1576) : "posset enim, inquit, aliquis manum vocare e lapide formatam,
quae tamen manus non esse perspicitur : neque enim fungitur munere
manus. manus vero hominis mortui talis profecto est."
B.
260 b 27 eVet [Se] 7rpoaipoi>/j,0a Oewprjcrai irepl rfjs KOLVWVLCLS TV;? (I)
7ro\iTiKrj<?, T/5 Kparidrrj iracr&v rot? Svvafievois "Cfiv on //,-
\KTTCL Kar evfflv, Set /ou T? aXXa? iiTKTK^cKjQai TTO\L- (P. 23)
30 re/a?, at? re ^pwvrai lives TW^ troXewv rcSi/ evvofj-elcrOai
\eyo/jiei>wv, real el nves erepau rvy^avovcriv VTTO TLVWV elprj-
Kai BoKovcrat, /caXw? eetv tva TO r oOcos eov
1260 b 27 Se omitted by II 1 Ar., and ydp would make a better transition. See
Intr. p. 14, n. 3 || 28 TLS II 1 and P 4 (corr. in the margin over an erasure), 17 II-
Bk. P 4 (ist hand) || 31 K&V P 1 II- Bk. (perhaps rightly) [ rvyxavovaiv P 3 (ist hand)
and perhaps T, Tvyx&vwaiv M s P 1 - 4 C 4 Q b T b U b Aid. Bk. 1 and a later hand in P 3 |j
Schneider, but see Dittenberger op. c. p. i36Sf. || 32 T omitted by M s P 1
10 13, ii i, 12 9, 13 9 ; vi(iv).
11 i with notes. SUSEM. (128)
In Plato evxats ofj.oLo.--a chimerical
scheme, e.g. Rep. 456 C, OVK dpa ddvvard
ye ovde circus 6fJ.ota evofj.o6erovfj.ev, 499 c,
5LKaius dv Ka.Taye\(fJ.e6a, cus d XXws
6 fJt.oLa \eyovres ; and in 540 D fj.r]
(IprjKevaL is explained by dXXct
/J.6V, di vard dt irrj. Thus evxv = ^n ideal,
something visionary, impracticable, as in
Demosth. c. Timocr. 722, 19, el yap au
/caXcDs fj.ev e xoi i ^ SVVOLTOV 5e ri (fipdfoL,
evxys ov v6fj.ov dLcnrpdrTOLT dv epyoi .
Similarly optare in Latin. By i)v yudXtcrra
/car ei>x^ Aristotle implies that no re
strictions are placed on the realization of
the scheme by circumstances.
30 rives TWV iroXecov] See iv(vn).
14! 15 n. SUSEM. (128 b)
vvo(iet<r0ai Xe-yoiie vwv] e.g. by the his
torical Socrates Xen. Mem. m. 5. 15, iv.
4. 15: Plato Crito 52 E, Ps.- Plato Minos
320 B. Add Nic. Eth. i. 13. 3.
32 tva KrX] in order to note what
they have of right and useful, and to show
that it is from no love of ingenious specu
lation at all hazards (as the search for
some new form of polity, distinct from
these, might seem to imply) but from the
Book II is the critical portion of the
work, just as an examination of preceding
theories serves for an introduction to other
Aristotelian treatises, Metaphysics Physics
Psychology &c. Here cc. 1 8 deal with
Political Thinkers, cc. 912 with Exist
ing Constitutions. See Introd. p. 32.
c. i Our object is to discover the best
scheme of political society. We must there
fore examine in detail the best existing
forms of government and the theories of
our predecessors : i.
first of all, should the community
which in some measure is implied in every
city ( 2) extend to wives and children and
to property, as in Plato s Republic? 3.
1 1260 b 27 -rrpoa.ipovip.e0a ] This
is evidence (as against Gottling Preface p.
xviii, and others) that Aristotle intended
to construct an ideal state : see Spengel
Ueber die Politik p. u, and compare iv
(vu). 13. 4 .
KoivwvCas THS iroX.] This takes us
back to i. i i . The imperfect associa
tions whose relation to civil society, ij
TroXiTiKY) KOLV., was the preliminary pro
blem, have been dealt with in B. i.
29 KO.T cvxtjv] For this expression see
6 7 n. (202); iv(vn). 4 i, 2, 5 3,
214
KOi TO
nOAITIKHN B. 1.
en
Be
TO
evcti
[II 1. 1
TI Trap avTas eTepov JJLTJ (I)
{3ov\opevcov, d\\d Sid TO /JLTJ
*ud TOVTO
px>i>
TrpwTov iroiriTeov, r] rrep 7re(f)VKV dp^r) TavTrjs
avayKT] yap ^TOL TravTas TTCLVTWV KOivwvelv TOU?
?, rj TIVCOV fiev TIVWV Se fj,rj. TO p,ev ovv yLt^Se^o?
tcoivcovla rt?
yap TOTTO? et?
ToXeCt)?)
[3e\TLov
j
T&KVWV
roi)? TroXtra?
/ce1 yup o
77
40 KOivwveiv fyavepov GO? O^VVCLTOV (rj yap TToXiTela
earl, Kal TTpwrov dvay/crj TOV TOTTOV Kowwvelv o
1261 a 6 T7/9 [Jilds TToXeO)?, Oi )6 TToXlTdl KOlVCOVol
3 d\\d TTorepov oawv
KOU wvelv TI]V fjL6\\ov(rav olfcr}(TO 0a(,
fjiev TLVWV Se ov (Be\Tiov ; e^Se^ero-i ydp /cal
5 yvvaiKwv Kal KTTjfjidTwv Koivwvelv
waTrep ev Trj TroXtre/o- Tfj nXarco^
33 rt P 1 , omitted by F M s , hence [TI] Susem. 1 , perhaps rightly || 36 eiripa-
\ecrdaL n- Ek. (perhaps rightly) || 40 TroXireta IT, TroXts Susem. 1 - 2 Ar. (?) and T (?),
civitas William || 41 rou TOTTOU after Koivwvtiv M 8 ? 1 || ets 6 TTJS F, tVorT/s H
Ar. ||
1261 a 2 a\\a...b 15 alpeTcorepov. Eubulos, in Angela Mai s Script, vet. nov. coll.
} r at. ii. p. 671 sqq., attempts to refute this passage || oaov M s C 4 Q b T b |j
omitted by F, {TT&VT uv\ Susem. 1 but see Dittenberger op. c. p. 1363^ || 6
os TroXtraa ]\l s F 1 , TroXtret a TOV irXdruvos Q b U b W b L 8 Aid.
defectiveness of all schemes hitherto
framed that we have undertaken this in
vestigation.
34 (ro4>Le(r0ai = affect wisdom, show
one s cleverness, whence <ro0tcrT??s. Else
where in the treatise simply to devise,
5 19, vijiy). 13. i, vn(vi). 14. 19.
36 empdXXco-Ocu] Shilleto compares
Thuc. vi. 40, Plato A>///. 264 B, Tim.
48 c, Zr?7cv x. 892 D, for this sense to
take up.
2 37 TJ irep irt ^vKev] The natural
beginning, seeing that every state is a
form of association, KOLVUVLCL, I. i. i
(Eaton). SUSEM. (129)
38 TI TOL iravras irdvTWv KT\] The
same alternatives are given iv(vii). 8 8
-9 2.
41 TOV T^TTOV] The converse is not
universally true. Mere contiguity of resi
dence is not enough to constitute citizen
ship : in. i 3, 9 9. Note here the idea
of territory in the germ.
3 1261 a 3 o iKiio-(r0ai] Eaton
proposes a reflexive sense, "direct itself
aright," comparing Thuc. VI. 18 T-TJV TTO\LV
Tpi^effdac avTi^v Trepl avTyv and other
instances.
6 eKi] Rep. iv 423 E f. v 449 C
466 D. This passage and v(vni). 7. 9
justify the inference that 6 2&&gt;KpaTt]s with
the article v(vin). /. 9, means through
out 6 ev Trj TroXirei^t 2., Socrates, the
character in the Platonic dialogue, in
keeping with Aristotle s cautious manner
of referring controversially to contem
porary thought. Not directly named, as a
rule, Plato lurks under Socrates (cp. nn.
116, 199), as under TII^S, TIS r&v irpoTepov,
and the like. See Campbell s apt remarks
on similar reticence in Plato, Introd. to
TJieactetus p. xxxiv, ed. 2.
cc. 25 An Examination of Plato s
Republic.
c. 2 Communism would not secure
Plato s end, which is the utmost possible
imity. Excessive tinification subverts the
city, reducing it to a family or an indi
vidual : i, 2. The elements of the
city are dissimilar, and thus it is differen-
II 2. 1]
1260 b 33 1261 a 13.
215
Kal T? (I)
$LV Koiva ra refcva real r<7? yvvalicas elvai
rovro Srj rrorepov tw? vvv OVTW f3e\,riov e^ew, TJ
Kara rov ev rfj rrdKireia <ye<ypa[j,/j,evov VOJJLOV ;
2 ^X l/ ^ Bvcr^epeLas aXXa? re TroXXa? TO rrdvrwv elvai ra? 3
n yvvaiKas KQivas, /cal $i rjv air lav <^7]al iv vevofJio9err)o-6ai rov
rporrov rovrov 6 ^WKpar^, ov fyaiverai av^fBalvov GK rwv \6 r ywv.
en 8e rrpbs, TO TeXo? o (frrjcri, rfj TroXet Setv vrrdp^eiv, w? fjiev
10 <?x L --- 1269a 27 8icuj>opcxv noticed by Mich, of Ephesus op. c. f. 188 b H STJ T P 1
II 2 , perhaps rightly || n KOIVO.S </ccu TKVO,> Spengel || 13 TI 8e irpos, TO Bernays,
cp. TOffovTov yap /cat ^rt irpos, DC SopJi. Elcnch. 4 7, 166 a 34 f. : TI 5^ [Trpos] rb
Susem. 1 2 3 , tracing it to a variant wpbs de TOVTOIS of ?ri 5e : yet the punctuation
?r/)6s ro rAos with Thurot s construction ("as regards the end," making us ^v
eiprjTai vvv subject to adiivarov) is not impossible : trpbs o reXos (f>-r}ffl Busse
tiated from an offensive and defensive
alliance (cru/x/xaxta) and a race or tribe
(tdvos) : 3. It is this which makes reci
procity the political safeguard, 4, allowing
the citizens to become alternately rulers
and subjects, although a permanent govern
ing body would be better, 5, 6; allowing
also a change of functions among the offi
cials. 7. further, the greater independ
ence (aurdp/ceta) secured in t/ie city essen
tially defends upon a degree of unity
Icnver than that of the family, 8.
See Grote s Plato c. 35, in. pp. 160
242, Oncken I. 171 193 and various
monographs quoted in the In trod. p.
32 n. 4, p. 33 11. 7. The main defects
of this criticism are at once apparent ;
Zeller, Platonic Studies p. 203, 290, has
rightly traced them to an excessive
striving after logical clearness ; a tendency
to reduce the Platonic utterances to a
number of precise dogmatic propositions
and to test the independent validity of
each empirically, without regard to its
inner connexion with the whole system of
idealism. Hence it comes about that the
spirit of the Platonic teaching is hardly
ever adequately appreciated, while now
and then there is a captious, almost pe
dantic, disposition to get at external
results and to fasten on details with but
little insight into their true relative im
portance. " Several objections urged by
him turn more upon the Platonic lan
guage than upon the Platonic vein of
thought, and if judged by Plato from his
own point of view would have appeared
admissions in his favour rather than objec
tions " (Grote). This is the sober fact,
and serves to account for the piquant
charges of injustice, sophistry, and mala
fides sometimes brought against Aristotle.
1 10 irdvrwv and 11 Koivds are un
intentional misrepresentations of the kind
just criticized. The marriage laws in
question affect only Plato s Guardians,
and do not establish community of wives
at all, in the strictly literal and unfavour
able sense of the term (which would
be a gross libel, we are told, on the philo
sopher who made marriage, so to speak,
a sacrament ). Indeed they seem to aim
at an impossible strictness, hardly less
exacting than vows of celibacy (Zeller
Plato p. 489 Eng. tr. ). And this must
have been Aristotle s judgment: he never
attacks them on the score of license, but
only on grounds of public expediency.
Moreover the aim of these laws and the
arguments by which they are defended
are such as to lay them open to the
inexact and invidious appellation even
at the hands of impartial modern critics.
See e.g. Dr Jowett s remarks Plato ill.
p. i6off.
ii Si rjv atTiav = ctma 8C T\V "that
which he assigns as the reason why
such legislation is necessary does not ap
pear to result from his proposals " : crv/j.-
fBaivov following as if TOVTO 5i o had pre
ceded. In 4 5 is a similar attraction.
The reason in question is the funda
mental assumption of the Platonic state
that the utmost possible unity is desir
able : communism, within certain limits,
is a means to this unity.
13 Thurot would translate: "further
in view of the end which he says ought to
be set before the city his present statement
(of his scheme) is impracticable." But it
is simpler to take rAos as subject ; 7r/o6s
may be adverbial (see Crit. Notes] : " the
216 nOAITIKHN B. 2. [IT. 2. 1
e ipr}Tai vvv, dovvarov, TTOJ? oe Sel SteXetz^, ovSev ^iwpLcrrai. (I)
2 Xe7&) Be TO fjiiav elvai TYJV 7ro\iv w? apia-rov ov OTL paXicrra
16 Trdcrav ^ajjufidvei jap ravr rjp vnrbQecriv 6 SftJ/epar???.
Kairoi (ftavepov ecrriv ok Trpolovcra KOI yivo^evri fjiia /.id\- 4
~kov ovSe 7roXt9 ecrrai TrX^o? 7ap TL rrjv fyvcnv ecrrlv r) TroXt?,
yivofjievri re fJiia i^d\\ov ol/cla fj,ev etc Tro Xeo)? dv9pa)7ros o e
20 oiKias ecrrai /md\\ov yap fjbiav rrjv ol/clav. rrjs TroXew? fyairi^ev (p. 24)
a^, /cal TOZ^ em r^9 olfclas U>O~T el /cal Swaro? rt? eirj rovro
3 S^ttz^, ov TrotrjTeov dvaip^crei yap rr)V vroKiv. ov povov 8 etc
dvOptoTTwv ecrrlv rf TroXt?, aXX KCLL e etSe/. $ia-
ov yap yiverai TroXt? e f ofjioiwv. erepov yap
14 etptjrai] SiypijTai Zwinger || Set omitted by M s and P 1 (ist hand, inserted
by corr. 1 ) || 5teA#etz> AI S P 2 3 C 4 Q b T b , elireiv ? Susem. || 1 5 6V omitted by II 2 Bk.
and the ist hand of P 4 (inserted between the lines and by a later hand in the margin)
II 1 6 Tracrav before 15 o! s d ptcrrov II 2 Bk. (in P 4 corrected by a later hand in the mar
gin) 11 18 ou5e] ov AIT 1 || ij omitted by MT 1 ; hence [77] Susem. 1 2 || 21 eW
<[AaX\ov eVa>? Riese, needlessly || /cat after et omitted by P M s , [/cat] Susem. 1 ;
notwithstanding Dittenberger s protest, op. c. p. 1361, /cat is not indispensable, see in.
16 9, 1287 b 6 I! 22 5 e/c II 2 , e/c omitted by II 1 , <5e [e/c] Susem. 1 2 , perhaps rightly ||
23 et c)et] et Sous C 4 Q b T b , eideiovs P 6 U b , in P 4 the word stands over an erasure
end as there stated by Plato is impossible The discussions in this book supply the
(to attain)." For vvv^in the case sup- further relation that the maintenance of
posed, see 3 ?, 8 TO : vvv <5 (on the the state itself is conditioned by the
scheme of Hippodamos) Idiav exovcriv. maintenance of the family. SUSEM.
14 8iXeiv = analyse, define (by ana- (131)
lysis), more nearly determine : ill. 13 6, 3 The state is an organized unity.
14 2, DC gen. ct corr. I. i. i rets re The plurality of parts which it contains
airias diaipereov . are specifically distinct and properly sub-
2 1 6 Xafj.f3avei -y<xp KT\] Rep. iv ordinated. This however is one distinc-
422 D f., 423 I) f.; v 449 P, f., 462. The tive thought of the Republic, the ground
three general positions which Aristotle of Plato s analogy between the state and
takes up against Plato in i, 2 are the individual.
treated in reverse order in the sequel. 24 ov "yap...!! OJJLOIWV] Apparently
The third, " the end is impracticable" in contradicted by in. 8 4, 16 2, vi(iv).
c. 2; then the second, "the means are n 8; but there equality of rights is
unsuitable" in cc. 3, 4, 5 i 13: intended by 6/zotW (Eaton). The pre-
lastly, "the many other difficulties" in sent statement is repeated in. 4. 5 where
c. 5 14 28 (Thurot). Comp. Analysis uniformity of moral excellence is dis-
pp. 102, 103. SUSEM. (130) claimed : here the sense is similarity of
17 fua p.dXXov] too much of a unity. functions (Postgate), as is illustrated by
1 8 irXTjGos "yap TL] See 5 15, III. i ^V. Eth. V. 5. 9, ov yap e/c dvo iarpdov
2, 12. yiverai. /cot^w^ta, dXX e iarpov /cat yewp-
22 ov n-OLT]Tov... < 7r6Xiv] With these 701), /cat 6 Xws erepwj/ /cat oik ivwv dXXa
words the polemic against Plato i;; re- TOVTOVS Set l<ra<rdv}v<u. It is the basis of
sumed exactly where it had started at the the arrangements proposed Pol. iv(vn)
commencement of the work, I. i. 2 cp. cc. 8, 9. See on I. 7. i n. (58 b).
note (2 b) and Introd. p. 23, i.e. with the <rv[A[Jiax>a] A confederation is a dif-
specific difference between a state and a ferent thing from a state : see ill. 3 5,
family; and this point of view is retained 9 7, 10. It is not an organism but an
in 1> 8? 3 4~4 IO > 5 H 2 4- aggregate of homogeneous members. The
II 2. 4]
1261 a 14 12G1 a 30.
217
25 fJia^la Kal TroTu? TO
TO auTo TCO el
rcev), wGirep av el
Kal TroXt? eOvovs, OTdv fir) Kara
TO 7r\rj0os, aXV otoi^ Ap/caSe?)
i, eibei $ia<f)epei,. SioTrep TO icrov TO
yap TW TTOOTW %prj(ri,fJLov, Kav y (I)
yap X a P LV V ffVfifia%la rrefyv-
TrKelov e^Kvaet ($LOLO-I Se TOO 5
W<JL Ke^wpi-
wv 8e Set ev
26 TtD (T< P 4 ) auTcD P 4 C 4 Q b T b U b || 27 e\Kv<r-r) II 2 Bk., e\KV<rr] M 8 || Sioiaei...
transposed by Susem. 1 to come before ctXXa irbrepov 1261 a 2, but wrongly ||
28 Kal TnSXts] TroXts Kal ? Susem. || 29 dXX ] TrdXcu Schneider, [dXX ] Schlosser Garve
|| Ap/cd<5es * * Coming, olov <vvi Riese; but see Dittenberger op. c. p. 1376 ff. and
the Comm. below || 30 yivevBai ? Susem. || eidei <5et> Siacptpeiv Biicheler (pro
bably right), eidei 8ia<f>pei.i> M s
limiting clause, which excludes from the
comparison the cases where the people
live Kara /cw^as and opposes to the city-
state only such races as the Arcadian.
29 ApKciSes] Who are meant? The
interpretation of the passage turns upon
this. When Plato, Synip. 193 A, writes
Sup KLff dr/fj^e v I Tro Geou Kadairtp Ap/ca5es
VTTO A.aKedaifji,oi>t(i)v the words spaced
show that the Mantineans are meant.
Demosthenes Or. XVI uses ApKcides nine
times and Me7aXo7roX?Tcu seven times of
the same people whose city was entitled
in full f/ /meyaXr/ TroXts T&V ApKadwv.
There everything is clear from the inter
change of terms. But if the words "when
they live like the Arcadians" indicate an
edvos so well known as to spare Aristotle
further explanation the instance chosen
ought, as Dittenberger urges, to be before
all things perspicuous. Understand then
neither the Mantineans with Schneider,
nor the Megalopolitans with Camerarius,
nor with Giphanius the Maenalians and
Parrhasians in the southwest before the
founding of Megalopolis ; none of these
exclusively; but the entire population of
Arcadia, as the word naturally means.
See Note on Arcadia at the end of B. 1 1.
"Further compare I. 2 4 n. (n), 6
(19): in. 13. 19 (607); iv(vn). 4. ii
(760)." SUSEM. (132)
e c5v 8e Sei] Whereas (in the case of
the city-state) the elements which must
coalesce into one are (? must be, see Crit.
Notes] specifically distinct. So that it
would not make a single city, in. 3 5,
9 9, to join by an external tie two such
similar units as the civic body of Corinth
and that of Megara: the conditions for
reciprocity would be wanting.
4 30 TO IVov TO dvTt/TTirov0os]
Not equal retribution but the propor-
separate autonomous states, the Lacedae
monians and their allies, for example,
are homogeneous.
2 ^ TO \ikv answered by 29 e w^ 5e. The
one (the alliance for war) will be of ad
vantage from its mere size however
much alike in kind, just as (it will be of
advantage) if a weight shall pull more
(than another): i.e. like a heavier weight
which turns the scale. The more mem
bers the stronger the alliance.
27 Siourei KT\] " Upon something
similar", the character of the constituents,
whether heterogeneous (so as to allow of
reciprocity) or homogeneous, "will de
pend the difference also between a city
and a race, provided the race does not
live with its population separated over a
number of villages, but like the Arca
dians." Not observing the parenthesis
and taking orav /mr) win /ce^wp. as epexe-
getical of TW TOIOVTU the editors have
referred this remark to the process of
<rvvoLKL(T/ui6s, the change from village life
by which a Greek ZOvos was consolidated
into one city. But (i) the Arcadians
must surely be cited as an example of a
race and not (as they would be upon
that view) of a city : (2) this is riot a dis
tinction between Zdvos and TroXis univer
sally, but between one edvos and another.
(3) We should then expect //Tj/c^rt, or
o!oi <:i ui >or something equivalent : and
the exact force of the future and of TOJ
TOIOVTW (not TOVTU) would be missed.
(4) In that case Arcadians means sim
ply Megalopolitans, whereas Tegeatans,
Mantineans and others might equally
claim to belong to the Arcadian league
(TO ApKadiKov). Hence Dittenberger, in
Gott. gel. Anzcigen 1874 P- I 38 J re
jects the supposed reference to avvoi-
and takes orav M KT\ as a
218
31 (TW^ei T<79
nOAITIKHN B. 2.
W(77Tp l> TO??
[II. 2. 4
(I)
tional adjustment of claims, i.e. reci
procity of services and functions.
"As reciprocal proportion regulates
the exchange of different wares in Nic.
Eth. \ 5, so here it regulates the relations
between the magistrate for the time being
and the ordinary citizen, who render, the
one service, the other TL/ULTJ /cat yepas Nic.
Eth. v 6 7, 1134 b 7. On the applica
tion of the principle of dvTiTreirovObs /car
ava\oyiav, reciprocal proportion , to
commerce, friendship, and exchange
generally, see my edition of the Fifth
Book of the Ethics p. 88 ff. In A T ic. Eth.
v r 6, 1 132 b 32 it is dvTLireTTovdbs /car
di aXoytaz /cat fj.r, /car t crorTjra, i.e. recip
rocal proportion as opposed to the re
taliation of the Pythagoreans, which is
said to hold the TroXts together. The
inconsistency is however only apparent.
Here, where it is not necessary to em
phasize the distinction between dvTiire-
Trovdos /car dva\oyiai>, i.e. /car tcrorTjra
\6ywv, and dvT weir ov 66s /car t <roV??ra, i.e.
/car tcror^ra aTrXcos, TO laov TO avTLireirov-
06s is the equivalent of dvTnreTrovOos /car
dvaXoyiav in the other passage. By a
similar inexactitude in Nic. Eth. ix i i,
1163 b 33 geometrical proportion takes
the place of reciprocal proportion as the
rule of exchange. Just so, although TO
a,7rX<2>$ oiKaLov is TO /car d^iav VIIl(v) I,
1301 b 37, at vn(vi) 2 2, 1317 b 3 r6
Sixaiov TO O-^IJ-OTLKCV is said to consist in rb
LVOV ^X IV KaT dpt.d/Jioi> dXXa JJ.TI /car d^iav,
TO /car d^iav in the former passage in
cluding, and in the latter excluding, TO
/car dpi.dp.Qv laov. See my notes on Nic.
Eth. v 3 7." JACKSON.
From the apparent inconsistency Grant
inferred, Ethics I. p. 52 f., that the remarks
on Retaliation in the Ethics are a de
velopment and improvement of those in
the Politics. The common source may
be Plato s Atos Kpiais, the true TTO\LTIKOV
St/cato^, of Laws VI 757 B, C: ry fj.ev yap
fj.ei^ovL TrXet w raj 5 eXdrroi t ayxt/cporepa
i^/xet, /x^rpta StSoucra irpos Trjv OLVTWV (fivaiv
f/car^pw, /cat dr) /cat rt/xds /xetfocri uei irpbs
dpeTrjv del /meifovs KT\.
31 Iv TOIS TJOiKois] A^V. Eth. v. 5. 6,
where from the nature of the case and
the explanations given TO dvTnreTrovdus is
not to be understood negatively of retalia
tion for evil suffered, but positively as a
recompense for good received. (As there
explained the one, retaliation, repays like
with like ; the other makes requital by
the corresponding term in reciprocal pro-
portion : for in reference to his demand
the builder is to shoes as the shoemaker
to the house.) More precisely thus : of
the different members of a community A
transfers to B the goods which he (A) has
and B has not, receiving in return that
which he lacks himself and B has: thus a
shoemaker exchanges shoes with a baker
for bread. Hence we read in 9 of the
same chapter that an association (/cot-
vwvia) of two similar members, as two
physicians, is impossible : it can only be
formed by a physician and a farmer, or
generally by members dissimilar and un
equal, between whom equality or pro
portion is thus said to be produced.
Now the dissimilar members in the
state are rulers and subjects. The former
afford the latter a wise and intelligent
guidance in return for which they receive
respect (N. E. vni. 14. 3, 1163 b 6),
willing obedience, and skilful execution
of their commands: and the subjects, in
return for this obedience, receive from
their rulers the wise government before
mentioned. On this depends the con
tinuance and well being of the state.
Compare further I. 2. 16, in. 10. 2, with
notes (28 c, 562).
But as the greatest possible equality
amongst the citizens is the aim of Aris
totle s best polity no less than of Plato s
I. 7. i n. (58 b), iv(vn). 8. 4 (797),
vi(iv). n. 8 (1293); in. 16. 2 (672),
17 2, i 10 (440, 441), 13 9 (595),
12 (597-9) a seeming inconsistency
arises; compare also in. 4. 5 n. (471).
The fuller explanation which follows in
the text is intended to remove this in
consistency by showing that even in the
ideal state there is the same difference
between rulers and subjects and the same
adjustment of the difference, and to what
extent this holds. Thus 4 7 dioirep
TO IGOV ...dpxds are a digression, but one
indispensable to Aristotle s argument,
which, putting this aside, runs as follows :
the state has more need than the family
of a plurality, or more precisely of a
plurality of dissimilar members, 2.
Remove the dissimilarity and you destroy
the state which is still more evident if inde
pendence (ai/rdp/ceta) be also taken into
account, 8.
Camerarius, and long before him Eu-
bulos, blame Aristotle unfairly for not see
ing that Plato s unity of the state meant
only the utmost possible unity concord
and unanimity among the citizens. From
II. 2. 6]
1261 a 31 1261 a 39.
219
eVel Kal ev rot? e\ev0epois Kal io~oi<s dvdyKrj TOVT elvai a^a (I)
rydp ov% olov re TrdvTas dp^eiv, XX 77 KCLT eviavTov rj
5 Kara Tiva d\\rjv Ta^uv r) %povov. Kal crvfjiftaivei Srj TOV
35 TpOTTOV TOVTOV WCTTG TCaVTCiS dp^GLV, COO TTep dv el /jiTe/3a\\OV
OL O~KVTels Kai 01 T6KTOV<$ K,ai fJLT) aei Ol aVTol Q-KVTOTOfJLOL
6 Kal TeKTOvjes r)crav. eVet Be * * (3e\Tiov ourw? e^eiv Kal ra Trepl 6
Trjv Koivcovlav TTJV 7ro\t,TLKrjv, Srj\ov w? roi)? aJroz)? del /3eX-
TIOV dp^eiv, el SvvaTOV ev ol? Se /JLT) SvvaTov Sid TO Trjv
32 d /m] dXXd P 1 in the margin || 33 yap] 5e F M s || 34 -ij] Kal Ar. (probably
right) || 35 fj-erepaXov M s P 1 Susem. 1 2 || 36 det after ol avrol P 2 4 C 4 Q b T b
U b Aid. Bk. and a later hand in P :J (omitted by the ist hand in P :j j || 37 eirel] fret
Bernays, who by omitting with Koraes rd which follows skilfully removes all traces of
the lacuna after 5e discovered by Conring and Schneider (viz. e/cet 5e fie\Tioi> ourws
^X eiv Ka -i Trepl rrjv K. TT\V TTO\LTLKT]V 57J\ov) : <ou%> ourws Schlosser equally wrong:
cp. the Comm. <j3^\TLOv ev e/cdcrry yevei ravrbv e"pyov del dtrb rCov avruv
Kal ireipvKe ST?> /3eXrtov or something similar Thurot
after arvftpalvei, as in vi(iv). 5. 3 av^e-
f$T]K.ev uxjre TTJV uev Tro\ireiav elvai, and so
De Sensti i 5, 437 b 8 01) cru/x^atVet wcrre
SoKelv. Similarly with other verbs : Pol.
VIIl(v). 9 8 effTiv coVr eyjtiv t/cavcGj,
Phys. VIII. 6. 2, 258 b 17 tarw 8 evfie-
Xo/J-evov w<rr e^ at wore.
6 37 lirel 8e * *] The difficulty is
that, if no laciina be assumed, OI TWJ pro
perly refers to ay del ol avroi, and this is
against the sense. To take ourws = cos vvv
ourws (see c. i 3), with Lambin, ita ^^t
suut, is as forced as to insert ou% with
Schlosser.
"The sense is satisfied if we supply
something like this : But < as in fact the
work of a carpenter is always done by a
carpenter and never by a shoemaker, and
from the nature of the case each work is
more successful when executed by the
same persons, who make this their sole
business, and as therefore > it is better
it should be so with political society"...
(Thurot). SUSEM. (134)
39 4v ols 8e KT\] " But where it is
not possible, because all are naturally
equal," r-qv <f>v<nv adverbial accus. with
icrovs ; comp. 11. on I. 12 2 " and at the
same time therefore it is but fair, whether
a good or a bad thing for ruling," as op
posed to obeying, "that all should take
a turn at it this retirement in rotation I
of the equal citizens from office imitates
an original dissimilarity." <j>av\ov = an j
unsatisfactory arrangement, c. 7 5,
the thought being perhaps different from
Plato s in Rep. I. 345 DfT., whether office
3 35 4 5 ft, 45 5 it, 14, 15,
19, 20 it is clear that Aristotle was
well aware of this fact. Nevertheless it
may easily be seen that this does not
affect the soundness of his reasoning
which, as even the language shows, is
directed more especially against Republic
v 462, where Plato is showing how the
abolition of family life would be the
means of making all the citizens of his
ideal state feel as the members of a single
family (cp. ;/. 140) or even of a single
man (/cat TJTIS 5-rj eyyvrara wos dvdpu-rrov
^X ei > avrr) sc. TroXis aptora dioixe iTai). Is
this not, as Aristotle rightly puts it, to
prescribe for the state the end of repre
senting so far as possible an individual
man? "Aristotle s argument is that
unity when applied to the state is an
analogical term, and that Plato s use of it
subverts the very ground of the analogy"
(Eaton). Comp. also Oncken I. 173 f.
SUSEM. (133)
32 rovro ro dvrnreTrovdos. There
must needs be reciprocity even amongst
free and equal citizens, as in the ideal
state.
ajjia yc -P--- 39 Svvarov] All cannot
rule at once: the only possible alterna
tives are (a) a perpetual ruling body,
del or KaOdwat; (cp. I. 13 4) roi)s avrovs
ap-%eii> : (^) alternation or rotation of
functions, fj.eTaj3d\\et.i , d pxeti Kal d pxecr-
dai Kara /mtpos (cp. I. i 2, III. 6 9).
Comp. iv(vn). 14 i, 2 where this argu
ment recurs.
5 35 wo-T apparently redundant
220 ITOAITIKHN B. 2. [II. 2. 6
1261 b v<jiv I crov ? elvai Trdvras, d/jia Srj teal Sl/caiov, eir dyaOov
eire $>av\ov TW dp^eiv, Trdvras avTOV yuere^e^, TOVTO e
fjLifjbelTai TO ev /jiepet roi)? fcrou? eifceiv TO avo/AOiovs eivai
7 ef dp^s. o i jjiev <ydp dp^ov(Tiv 01 8 dp^ovTai [/caTa
5 cocrTrep dp aXXoi, yevofjievoi. Kal TOV avTov Srj TpoTrov
eTepoi eTepas dp^ovcnv dp^ds. fyavepbv TOLVVV e/c TOVTWV cJ? 7
ov 7re(j)VK6 jjilav OVTCOS elvai TTJV iro\iv waTrep \eyovcri Tives,
Kal TO \%0ei> co? {Aeyiarov dya9ov ev rat? 7ro\ecnv OTL ra?
9 TroXet? dvaipel KCLITOI TO ye eKacrTov dyaOov crcofet GKCKTTOV.
1261!) i 5}? Susem., e T II Ar. Bk., 5ei Bas. 3 || 2 r Susem., cp. PI. Prof.
334 A c, Euthyd. 292 D; TO F II Ar. Bk., < 777)6? > TO Thurot |] TOUTO] h TOVTOIS
II 2 Ar. Bk. (Montecatino), yp. i> TOVTOIS p 1 in the margin || TOUTO de] ovru 8rj
Welldon |[ S^ ftt/zetTat] de /ni/uclo-dai II 2 Ar. Bk. yp. de [u/melcrdai. p 1 in the margin,
del: fj.LiJ.ela 6 ai Montecatino |) 3 TO ev] TU ev Heinsius Susem. 2 3 , a correction more
plausible than sound, TO to be taken with TOUTO )| oUelv P 2 T b and C 4 (ist hand),
olKelov C 4 (corrector), iKeiv a later hand in P 3 (the ist hand having left a lacuna) ||
TO &VO/JLOIOVS Susem., TO 5 (TO^ F) ws 6/x,otous F M s Susem. 1 in the text and P 1
(ist hand), 6/iot ous P 2 - 3 , o/io/ws H 3 C 4 Bk., yp. d/xotws p 1 in the margin, TO Svcro-
poiovs Schmidt (possibly right; I should adopt it if the word occurred elsewhere in
Aristotle) || elvai FM S and P 1 (ist hand), TO?S P 2 3 4 - 6 Q b T b Ald. Bk. and yp. mg. p 1 ,
TTJS C 4 U b |j 4 KCITCC /nepos omitted by II 1 , Trapd fj.epos Vettori Bk. || 5 Kal omitted
by II 2 Ar. Bk. || 7 cure H 2 Bk. || OUTWS after elvai M s P 1
is or is not a source of individual ad- is equally futile. If object, the sentence
I vantage. TOVTO TO el Kiv = this yielding means where men are naturally equal,
of the retiring magistrates to their sue- there it is better to imitate what happens
cessors, at the expiration of their term of in a state of natural equality ! If subject,
office; (ujieiTcu is the counterpart or re- there is nothing to express what, as a
flexion of original heterogeneity, pro- matter of fact, is imitated by the
[ cluces much the same effect as if rulers rotation of office-holders, viz. natural
j and subjects had always been distinct inequality.
bodies of citizens. 7 5 coo-rrep av dXXoi ytvopevoi] as
1261 b i d fxa 8^ Kal SLKCUOV KT\] if, with taking up or laying down office,
Compare ill. 16 2 4 with ;/. (672), they assumed a new personality: 76^6-
iv(vn). 3 5, 6 n. (740); further n. /j.evos 5 aXXos in Nic. Eth. ix. 4. 4.
(58 b) on i. 7. r, n. (133) and (797) on dpxovTwv] gen. abs. "while (the
IV(VII). 8. 4. SUSEM. (134 b) governors) govern, different officers in-
2 TOVTO Se] This de with the demon- terchange different offices in the like
strative resumes the Se with the relative fashion," i.e. in rotation: TOV avrov Tpoirov
39 ev otj 6V: so iv(vil). 9 5, i? Se = 3 ev fiepei.
...ravT-r/ tie. The two recensions of the 7 Tivts] That is, Plato: see esp.
text here widely diverge ; see the Critical Rep. V 462 B. Cp. ;/. (133). SUSEM. (135)
Notes. Bekker s text is nearly that of Also 464 B /j.e yiaTov ye TroXet avro
P 2 : ev TOVTOIS de //.t/xetcr^ai TO ev /meei TOVS
/mepei TOVS uj/j.oXoyrjffafj.ev dyaOov.
IVous eixeiv 6/u.oius TO?S e dpx.-rjs. Thurot 8 Kai...(<pavepov) 6Vt...is the construc-
Etudes pp. 22 24 has shown the usual tion.
modes of interpreting this text to be un- 9 KaToi...o-wi,2Ka.o-Tov] ovKavanpel.
satisfactory. The infinitive may indeed "Cp. in. 10. 2 ou% rj 7 dpeTrj <p6eipec TO
be governed by fie\TLov, and f ^acn (or e^ov avrrjv with n. (561 b)." SUSEM.
a/^curt) may be understood with TO?S e% (135 b)
dpxTJs : but whether ^...el /ceo/ be taken "What is this unity which seems
as subject or object of /w/Aet<r0at the result to Plato so beneficial, to Aristotle so
II. 2. 8]
1261 b 11261 b 15.
221
e KOL KCLT a\\oi> TpoTrov (fcavepov on TO \iav VOo^ v *- /j
ii relv Tr]v TCO\LV OVK eaTiV ufjieivov. olfcia [juev yap avTap/cecm. ,
pop ei>o?, TroXt? 8 olfcia?, KOI (Bovkerai y ^8r) TOT elvai TroXt?, (P.
OTCLV avrdp/cr) crv/jiftaivr) TTJV KOLVWVICIV elvat, TOV 7T\rj0ov<i
eiTrep ovv alpertoTepov TO avrap/ceaTepov, teal TO TJTTOV ev
15 TOV (JioKkov aipeTWTepov.
mischievous? It is not (i) unanimity ,
i.e. community of political principles and
aims, the 6/xoVota of Nic. Eth. ix. 6, 1167
a 22, as appears from c. 9 22, 1270 b 21
c. Nor is it (2) uniformity , i.e. the
suppression of individuality, so that all
the citizens are of one type : for the dis
crimination of functions, carrying with it
diversity of character, is, under the name
of justice, the very foundation of the
Platonic Tro Xts. Hence it is not (3) or
ganization , as organization implies dis
crimination of functions combined with
unanimity in the sense here given to the
word. Rather it is (4) centralization ! .
Plato is anxious that his citizens should
be bound together by a common interest
in the TroXts, and, with a view toThis,
proposes to eliminate all those inferior
/cotfwj tat which induce subordinate affec
tions and create separate interests, thus,
he conceives, weakening the supreme tie
of patriotism. On the other hand Aris
totle regards the subordinate affections
which are induced in the inferior Koivwviat
for example, ot /a a, cru^TrXot, o~vffTpa-
rtwTcu, 0uXe rcu, ST/^OTCU, <?tacrwrat, epavi-
ffTai Nic. Eth. VIII. 9 4 f , 1 1 60 a 9, q. v.
as valuable in themselves, and therefore
does not desire that they should be
merged in patriotism. Further he main
tains that the elimination of the inferior
KOivuvtai, which /xopt ots eot/cctcrt TT/S TroXt-
rtKTjs sc. KOivuvlas Nic. Eth. viu. 9, 1160
a 9, will not cause the subordinate affec
tions to be merged in patriotism, i.e. to
be transfei red, unimpaired in force, from
the inferior KOIVWVLO.L to the supreme
Koivuvla. He thinks, in fact, that the
TroXis is properly a complex organization
containing lesser organizations within it,
rather than a large family or a colossal
man. It will be observed (i) that Aris
totle s criticisms arise directly from the
theory of the TroXts which he has de
veloped in the first book, and (2) that
they indicate the same appreciation of
<tXt a in all its fofms, ^wtrich- jias led him
to devote to it two out of the^ten books
of the Nic. Eth. T JACKSON. \
\ 8 10 evovvN^ infinitive, thy endea
vour to intensify the unity of the state is
not so desirable.
1 2 povXercu = tends, means ; the mean
ing of a state is then first realised or ful
filled when...
14 el irep ovv KT\] Cp. I. i. 8 nn.
(20 b, 21); III. i 12 Tro Xti TO rwv TOL-
n. (447), 9 14 . (560), iv(yii). 4 ii
elo~0ai /J.7j8ev6s avrapices (764), 8 8 77
yap TroXts 7r\rj06s <TTLV ov TO TV^OV dXXa
Trpos far]i> aura/wees n. (804). SUSEM.
(136)
Add iv(vn). 4. 14 8-f)\ov Toivvv ws eu
ros O~TL TroXews 6 pos apt<TTos, 77 /n,eyio~T7]
TOV TrXrjOovs uTrepfioXr/ Trpos avTapKeiav
cc. 3, 4 Objections to communism,
chiefly to the abolition of separate fami
lies. Even supposing Plato s end, i. e. the
most perfect civic unity, to be desirable, his
communistic scheme is not the best means to
secure it. A series of detached remarks,
so closely allied in some cases that it
would not have been difficult to bring
them together under one and the same
head. See fuller details Analysis pp.
102, 103 ; and compare throughout PL
Rep. v.
The Platonic scheme, as Grote (in. 207)
reminds us, is only partial communism.
Modern communistic theories contemplate
individual producers handing over the
produce of their labour to be distributed
among themselves by official authority.
Butjhe producing_an(l labouring classes
in the Republic are _not_communists at
all : they are private proprietors with
" the
oa yopjiciinc -
tionanes7tTTe guardians" Hence the ar-
guments~~advanced by Aristotle, however
just in themselves, have little direct ap
plication to the scheme which he is os
tensibly criticising ; they belong to a far
wider enterprise on which he has em
barked, an advocacy of the principle of
individualism against socialism in general,
beginning (i 2) with the inquiry into
the limits of community and subsidiary
222
nOAITIKHN B. 3.
[II 3. 1
(I)
f
. cTt;cAff fjurfv ov$ el TOVTO dpiaTOV e<TTL, TO fjiiav OTL /JLCL- 8
elvai rrjv Koivcovlav, ovBe TOVTO diro^eiicvvo-dai
I TOP ~\,6yop, lap TrdpTes a/jua \eywcri TO efiov /cal TO
fjbrj efjiop TOVTO yap oleTai 6 Zco/cpaTTjs (TTj/melop elpau TOV TTJP
2 TroKip reXeco9 elpai fjiiap. TO yap Trdpres SLTTOP. el pep OVP
/cpaTTjs (e/cao~TOS yap VLOP eavTOv (frrjcrei, TOP avTOp /cal yv-
palrca Sr) rrjv avTtjp, /cal Trepl r^9 overlap /cal rrepl e/cdaTOV
o~r) T&P crvfjifiaipopTCOP woravTW^^ vvv 8 oi % OVTGIS (frr/crovaip
25 01 KOipals ^pcofjLPOL rai9 yvpai^l /cal rot9 TZKPOLS, aXXa TTCLV-
T69 /AW, ov% W9 e/cacrT09 8 avTO)p, O/JLOLO)^ 8e /cal TTJP ova lap
/AGP, ov^ W9 e/cacrro9 8 avTwv. OTL JJLCP TOLPVP rrapa-
rt9 ecTTi TO \eyeip rrdpTas, (frapepop (TO ydp Trap-
T69 /cal d/ji^OTepa /cal rrepiTTa /cal dpTia Si.d TO &ITTOP /cal
ig 6 omitted by M^P 1 , [o] Susem. 1 , but see Dittenberger op.c. p. 1359 || 25 rols
omitted by M" P 1 (? rightly) || 27 TraVes omitted by T M" || 28 rts omitted by M 8
P 1 |i 29 OITTOV /cat < dfj.(f)i(3o\ov > or else 30 rots < /card 0tXocro</n ai> > Xo7ots Thurot;
an ingenious suggestion, but not (as I once thought) necessary
to his own constructive theory in B. in.
Again, while the peculiar marriage
system of the Republic would unques
tionably result in the abolition of the
ordinary separate family, Aristotle is
unable, perhaps from a defect of imagi
nation, fully to realize the new state of
things which Plato intended to create.
He persists in attaching the old meanings
to words (3 58, 4 69), whereas
it is Plato s avowed aim by an extension
of the affections into an intimate and
equal sympathy with a whole class (esprit
de corps] to supersede nearer family rela
tionships and extinguish private interests.
1 1 6 TOVTO = TO fJ.iaV OTL ^&\LffTO.
KT\. Even granting the utmost unity in
the (civic) association to be the best, such
unity does not appear to be made out by
the scheme that all shall simultaneously
apply the terms mine and not-mine.
1 8 Kcrrcl TOV Xo-yov] with d-jrodeiK-
vvadai, established by the proposal that
all shall agree in their use of mine and
not-mine: eav 7rdi T6s.../x7/ t^ov is ex
planatory of \6yoi>. For Kara = by, cp.
Metaph. Q. 8 14, /card re dy TOVTQV TOV
\6yov tyavepov on. ..1050 b 3.
19 6 SwKpa.TT]s] In Plato s Repiiblic
V 462 C : ev rjrwc drj TroXet 7rXe?crroi kirl
TO CLVTO /card raurd rouro \tyovffi TO efJLOV
/cat TO oi /c e^Jiov, avTr) d picrTa 5tot/cetrat.
SUSEM. (137)
2 20 All has two senses, (i)
each individual, pro se quisque ; (2) the
whole body collectively. If all is taken
in the former sen.se, this is perhaps more
what Socrates means (" proposes to do").
24 o-\)|j.paLv6vTwv] "circumstances":
the joys and sorrows of life Rep. 462 E.
vvv S ovx OVTWS] But then it is not
in this sense that communists will apply
the term all . The whole body collec
tively, not the individuals exclusively,
will have the right to say "mine " in this
sense.
26 irdvTS )( ws ^KCUTTOS] Another
instance in in. u. 2. Also vi(iv). 4.
26 where the distinction is skilfully
worked in : /jLovapxos yap 6 drjuos yiveTai,
els e/c Tro\\uV oi yap TroXXot
ffLV oi>x us eKaaTos dXXd rravTes.
28 TO yap iravTCs KT\] The
all" and "both" and "odd"
even " by reason of their am
Kvpiol
3
terms
and
biguity tend to make arguments fallacious
even in dialectical discussions (and much
more so when handled by sophists for
purposes of deception).
29 KCU irepiTTo, Kal dpTici] See 5
27 : TOVTO (i.e. TO dpTtov) ei>5x TaL T< ?
6 Xy inrdpxew T&V oe /mep&v /iTjSer^py, De
Soph. El. 4 7, 1 66 a 33: Trapd 5e TTJV
dLatpeffiv OTL rd TTCVT ecrrt ^o /cat rpta,
/cat Treptrrd /cat a prta, to (fallacious) di
vision is due the instance, that five is two
II 3. 4]
1261 b 16 1261 b 37.
223
3 eV roi? Xoyoi? eptcrTi/covs TroieL cri/YXo^oT^oi;? $16 eVrt TO Trav- (I)
Ta9 TO auTo \eyeiv w$l /jij-v Kd\6v, aAA, ov Svvarov, coSl
4 2e ovSev o^ovorjTLKOv) TT/JO? 8e TOVTOIS erepav e^et /3\d/3r]v TO
\eyofjievov. \ rfKLara yap eiri/JLeXeias Tvy^dveu TO Tr\eia Twv 10
KOLVOV TWV yap ISlcov i^aKidTa (frpovTi^ovaiv, TWV Be KOLVWV
35 rjTTOv, rj ocrov eJcdcrTW e7Ti/3d\\e(> Trpo? yap Tot? aXXot? GJ?
eTepov (fcpovTifovTos 6\iycopovcri /JLd\\op, wcrTrep eV Tat? ol/ce-
ol TroXXol depajrovTes eWoTe ^elpov
30 HffT-r) P 2 3 Q b T b I! 34 (ppoi>T[<rov<n PSusem. || 35 IJTTOI 77 (/ess than] T. L.
Heath || ocro?] oVw^ p4T b U b || 36 typovTicrovTos ? Susem.
and (is) three, odd and even (Eaton).
SUSEM. (138)
Walford and Postgate would take ire-
PLTTOL /cat ctprta to be predicates of Travres
and a^orepa. But five in the passage
quoted above is at once an example of
a/j.(poTpa, 2 + 3, and of irepiTTa. As d/x,-
06re/)a=:sum of two things, so Trepirrd
an odd sum total, a/3Tia = an <?? <, sum
total. In all three cases the fallacy is
not really due to ambiguity in the terms
themselves, as Aristotle admits De Soph.
El. 20 2, i7yb 7, ov diTTOv TO irapa dia.i-
pecriv, unless the confusion of two things
as distinct as 8pos and o/m be said to be
due to ambiguity.
30 ev TOIS Xo-yois] in disputations, in
dialectic. SUSEM.
epurriKovs] Because they may be con
strued both collectively and distributively
(Schneider) : in Aristotle s phrase Htliey
admit of <rvv0e(ris and diaipecris, illicit
combination and disjunction. See DC
Soph. El. 4 6 166 a 22, 6 3 168 a 26,
20 i 177 a 33, 30 7 181 b 20: KCU yap
TO a/x0w /cat TO airavTa TrXetw cr^atj et,
the words both and all have several
meanings (Eaton). Further compare
VIIl(v). 8. 3: TrapaXoyifeTai yap-fj didvota
VTT O.VT&V, wairep 6 cro0tcrrt/cos \6yos el
(KaffTov [j.t.Kp6i>, Kal iravTOi (illicit vvvdevi.?).
SUSEM. (139)
3 1 w8l p.lv] as o>s e/cacrros ; cSSl 8^ =
collectively.
32 ovSev opLovoTjTiKov] Since demo-
crats^ may guaffel , aTtrTougTT TravTes IAV,
ovx ws ZKCLCTTOS d they are supreme in
the state. The individuals whose unity
is Plato s main object can call nothing
their own ; it is only the body politic as
a whole, after all, that can say "mine".
4 Then comes a sensible practical
suggestion. Comp. Jowett, lutrod. to
Plato s Republic p. 166 f., who refers to
the statistics of mortality in foundling
hospitals.
irpos 8e TOTJTOLS KT\] In the next
place, the scheme in question has ano
ther disadvantage. The property shared
by the greatest number meets with the
least attention. For men care most about
their private matters and less for the
public concerns. The zeal and attention
of individual owners are checked and
chilled by division of ownership. So
with the sons who are a common pos
session of the Guardians.
35 TJ 6 <rov eKacTTO) e-mpaXXei] or (only
at most) in proportion to their stake in
them. Since the whole clause answers
to ftctXto-ra and TITTOV, the verb would
seem to be impersonal: as much as it
falls to each man s share to care. For
the impersonal use, see I. 13 8. For
the meaning, Herod, vil. 23 /u.6piov oaov
avTolcn eTT^aXXe : hence Herod, iv. 115
avroXaxofres T&V xp-^arwj TO e7rt/3ciX-
Xo^ = their due share. Camerarius cites
Ptolemy as using the word to express
proportional parts in astronomical calcu
lations. The same thought recurs 1 262 a
3 in the words OTTOCTTOS Tvy-^dveL TOV dpiG-
/j.6v u>v. If the society consists of a
thousand members, the interest of each
is represented by the fraction T fnrj- Bvit:
such is the tendency of human nature
that the interest felt and care bestowed
will be even less than this.
irpos v^P Toi:s otXAois KT\] Each is
more likely to neglect them, amongst
other reasons, because there is some one
else to look after them; just as with the
attendance of servants it sometimes hap
pens that the work is not so well done
by many as by few.
5 According to Plato s regulations,
Rep. v 457 C 464 B, all the children of
the Guardians, the two upper classes who
are full citizens of his ideal state, are to
be taken from their mothers directly after
224
HOAITIKON B. 3.
[II 3.
5 -rovai TWP e\arr6pcop. ryivovrai efcdaTw %i\ioi TCOP
viol, Kal OVTOL ov% w? e/cdcTTOv, d\\d rov TV^GPTOS 6
12623 G /Wo)? ecrrlp vlos ware Trapres 6/Wo)<? o\Lya)pjj(70vo-ip, 67rel
eVacrro? eyu>o9 \eyei TOP ev Trpdrropra TWP 7ro\ira)p r] K ax cos,
OTTOCTTO? Tvy%dpei TOP dpiO^ov COP, olop ,1109 r) rov Selpos, TOV-
1262 a i etrd Biicheler, on ? Susem., hi P II Ar. Bk. Bonitz seeks to prove
that this alone is right (Hermes vn. p. 102 ff.), and in the Addenda to my critical
edition, p. Ixix, I somewhat hastily acceded. If en be accepted there must be a
full stop before it || 2 Aeet P (?) Ar. (?) Susem. 1 >2 || 3 r&v dpi6p.uv P 3 and the
ist hand in P 1 - Q b (emended by a later hand in Q b ), T&V dp9fj.wv T b || u>v omitted by
II 2 Ar. || rov delvos II Ar. and also probably P, Jniht s filiits William || In the
whole passage i 14 Schmidt proposes extensive changes thus : 6\iytpri(rov<nv. Kpe lr-
rov a pa. idiov dve^Lov clvai (transposed from 13) evbs rov avrov /novov irpoaayopev-
oi Tos, <i7> cUcrxtAiwf 77 /ecu /Avpiuv rov rpowov rovrov viov. en rovrov rov rpoirov
<vibv> \ey<ovr>wv /cct^ eKQ.a TOv r(av yj\(wv [?}] QQ~UV rj TroXts eor/v, ovrus
e/nous Xe^et <ws /<at> rov ed irpdrrovra ruiv TTO\L~WV rj /ca/cws OTTOCTTOJ
dpi6jj.bv uv, Kal rovro diffrdfav [et fJii] ep.ov rov rov 5e?vos] adr)\ov KT\
birth. The sickly and deformed are to
be exposed, as well as the offspring of
incapable parents and of unions formed in
violation of the laws and magisterial au
thority (provided recourse has not been
had to abortion in this latter case). The
remainder are committed to public nur
series or creches, in order that the real
parents and children may be kept in ig
norance of each other and that no fa
vouritism may be shown. According to
definite gradations of age all the Guardi
ans alike are to treat one another and
feel love for one another as parents and
children, grandparents and grandchildren,
brothers and sisters. See n. (133)- SU
SEM. (140)
38 x^iXioi] Not a fixed number, but
merely suggested as a convenient round
number by J\ep. iv 423 A. Now each
of Plato s citizens has a thousand sons,
not in the sense that each of them is Jus
son exclusively, but (in the sense) that
any of them is just as much a son of any
other of the elder citizens. And the con
sequence will be that all these fathers
alike will be indifferent to him.
39 o^x ws IKCUTTOV] Not as being
children of his individually ; but to any
of the children (of a given year) any of
the fathers (of that year) stands in a
paternal relation.
1262 a i eirel OVTWS KT\] Almost
word for word from Rep. V 463 E, iracriJov
dpa irb\ewv ^udXtara ev aurrj ^v/j,(pu>vrjcroiicriv
ev6s TWOS rj ev r) /ca/ccDs Trpdrrovros, o
(i)
11
vvvdrj e\yo/j<ev ro pij/^a, rb bri, rb
ev TrpdrrcL rj on rb e/j.6v /ca.vws: i.e.
when any individual member fares well
or ill, they will all with one accord use
the expression it is well with mine or
it is ill with mine. Hence translate:
"As [or if en be retained, "Further]
each of the elder citizens, when he uses
the term my son to express his sym
pathy in the joy or sorrow of a younger
comrade, uses it only in the sense of the
fractional part which he himself forms
of the whole body of citizens. That is,
he says my son or so and so s ; and
this so and so s applies equally to each
of the thousand citizens or whatever the
number of which the state consists. " To
take e,uos = my son (not my brother or my
father] is justified by uoj in the preced
ing line, 6 rexvov, 14 viov (cp. 4 7). In
spite of the %i Xtot vioi (b 38) it is the
elder generation, the fathers , that are
meant by r&v xtAwj> r) ocrwv KT\. In fact
the hypothetical round numbers (see 6
Si<rx i A wi Kal /mvpiuv) serve merely to pre
sent the case definitely and vividly. To
our cos corresponds OTTOO-TOS...^, as rovrov
rov rpbTrov to rov delvos] mine or A s or
B s, and so on through all the thousand.
When a father uses the term my
son in Callipolis he will be aware that
he shares the relation with a number of
other fathers .
2 i|j,6s] Editors compare Soph. Antig.
565, dAX rjde /j.evroi /j,r) \eye.
3 otov = I mean.
II. 3. 7] 1261 b 381262 a 9.
TOZ^ TOZ^ rpoTrov \eywv /caB* eKacrroy rwv
225
^, rj oacov 77 (I)
5 Trofc? earl, /cal TOVTO BidTa^coi aSrjXov yap c5 avve/Sij yeve- (P. 26)
6 crOat, re/cvov ical awQ^vai yevofievov. Kairoi TTOTepov ovrco 12
TO e/j,ov \eyeiv eKdO TOv, TO avro JJLGV Trpocrayopevov-
KOI fjbvpwv, rj
GO? vvv ev rat?
7 TO e/j,ov \eyov<nv] o JJLGV yap vlov avrov o Be
avrov
7 [e?/cacr7-oi>...8 /nvpiuv] Schmidt (transposed as above) || ph] ovopa Bonitz, per
haps rightly: yet the instances in which p.ev in Aristotle stands without any de
following have not yet been sufficiently explained : /jiijdev with a comma after (in
stead of before) TO auro Bernays || TrpoaayopevovTa Bernays, perhaps rightly: yet
the plural may be intentional although the participle goes with ZKCLVTOV \\ 8 KCU]
rj Susem. 1 aut William || 9 [TO e,u.oV] Schmidt || vlov avrov M H P 2 - 3 - 4 Aid. and
apparently P 1 || d5e\0oV OLVTOV F and apparently F 1 , d5eA0oi avrov M 8 P 2>3 - 4 Aid.,
a5e\(poi> [auTou] Schmidt
5 Kal TOVTO KT\] And even this he
says dubiously, for it is never certain who
of the citizens actually had a son or whose
son, if born, was reared. At first sight
this seems to make against Aristotle ; for
if less than the thousand had sons, the
fractional interest of each elder citizen,
or father, in the younger generation is
increased. But then his chance of being
childless is proportionately increased.
6 " And yet is it better in this
fashion for each of the 2,000 or 10,000
elder citizens to use the term mine (of
any one), all calling him by the same
name" viz. son or as it is used under
the present system with the addition of
different names, as nephew, cousin, &c?
7 ^Kao~TOv..,8 p.vpCwv] Of course only
those citizens are meant whose age entitles
them to call a boy son and not bro
ther or grandson . Here TO airr6 = son.
SUSEM. (141) With CU TO piv KT\ may
be mentally supplied dXiyiopovvTas d TTO.V-
T0)v (Thurot).
8 SurxiXfav] Is this genitive after
%Ka<rToi>, as above? Is it not more forcible
if taken after TO auTO = the same relation?
Each calls him mine , (which will result
in) the whole body (plural) calling one
person the same relation of some 2,000
people (T. L. Heath).
A different construction of 6 is pro
posed by Bonitz ; viz. to take eKacrrov as
the object, instead of the subject, of \^-
yew, and to make 5i<rxtAtwi the genitive
after T6 CLVT& o vofia, which is a correction
for jxev : "is it better in this sense to
call each (of the younger generation)
mine , using the same name [i.e. son]
for 2,000 or 10,000?" In the same essay
H.
(Hermes vn pp. 102 8) Bonitz defends
the MS. reading ri (a i) on the ground
that a new objection, No. 3, is there in
troduced. The last, No. i ( 4 irpbs d
rovTois...6\L yupr]crov(ri) dwelt on the de
preciation which the term my father
suffers. The multitude of fathers, whom
each of the younger men has, is preju
dicial and fatal to the loving attention
which a son otherwise receives from a
father." In the passage which follows
(i TI OUTWS...I4 vlov) "the fact is viewed
from the opposite side. The name my
son loses all value, as each one who uses
it shares the problematic relationship with
an indefinitely large number." With all
deference to authority so weighty, it may
be doubted if the two sides are opposed :
at all events in a 13 (Kpelrrov yap KT\) the
point of view is the advantage of the
younger generation no less than in a i
(6\Lyup-?l<Tov(n). Comp. Susemihl Quacst.
Crit. vi p. i6ff.
796 |J^v Y^P KT VI " For one
and the same person is called by one man
his own son; by another his own brother,
or cousin ; (by another) according to some
other kinship^either by blood relationship
or by some connexion and affinity to him
self in the first instance or else to his kin:
and furthermore by another his clansman,
his tribesman. For it is better to be actually
an own cousin than in Plato s sense a
son." There is at present a kind of com
munity in relationship : only it does not
extend so far and is compatible with dis
similar individual interests.
" For <j)pa,Topa, <f>v\frr)v consult the
following references: 5 17 n. (169), n
3 with Exc. iv ; in. 2 3 (451), 9 13
15
226
nOAITIKHN B. 3.
[II. 3. 7
10 TTpoaayopevei rov avrov, o 8 dvetyiov, r) /car d\\rjv rivd (I)
crvyyeveiav, rj ?rpo? aLuaros 77 /car olfceiorrjra Kal Krjfteiav
avrov 7rpo)Tov rj roov avrov, 777309 Se rouTot? 6T6p09 (frpdropa,
(f)v\eri^v. Kpelrrov yap iSiov dve^fnov elvcu 77 rov rpoTrov rov-
8 rov vlov. ov fjirjv aTOC ovSe $ia(f)vyeiv Svvarov TO jjur) rivas 13
15 V7ro\a/m,(3dveiv eavrwv aSeX^ou? re Kal Tralbas Kal rrarepa^
/cal /jujrepas Kara yap ra? o/zotor^ra?, at yivovrai rot?
TT^O? TOI)? yevvrjcravTas, dvay/caiov \a^aveiv Trepl
9 d\\tj\a)V ra? Trtcrret?. ovrep (pacrl teal crvfji/BaiveiV rives TOJV
ra? T^9 7779 TreptoSou? Trpayf^arevo/jLevwi elvai yap TKTI
20 TWZ^ ai w Ai/Bvcov /coivds ra? yvvai/cas, rd fjievroi yevopeva
reKva SiaipelcrOai Kara rd<$ o/jiOLorrjra^. elcrl Se nve<; Kal
yvvalites Kal rwv ciXkwv ^qjcov, olov ITTTTOI /cal /3o69, at
a(f)6pa TrefyvKacnv ofjuoia aTroSiBovai rd reKva rot9 yovev-
4 <jiv, warrep r) ev ^apadX.w K\r)0elcra Ai/cala WTTTO?. ert Se 11
25 /cal ra9 roiavras Svcr^epela^ ov paSiov evhaftijOfjvai rots
ravrif]v /carao~Kevd^ovo~L rr)v Koivwviav^ olov al/clas /cal (povov?
[dicovcrlovs 701)9 Se] e/coucr/ou9 Kal l^dyas Kal \oi$opias (Sv
12 avrov ai roG Bk., avrov aurou Til || -^] etra ? Susem. || ^repos Lindau,
T II Ar. Bk., ere/xx Bernays, eralpov Spengel || 13 <^> <pv\<?TT)v Bas. 3 Bk.,
?// contribuletn William || traupov <r}> (pparopa <rj> (frvXeT-rjv Schmidt || 27
[aKoixriovs TOVS Se] Bender, aKovaiovs [rot)s 5e CKOVCTLOVS] Congreve; roi)s 5(^ e/foi;-
0-i ous omitted by P 2 , which proves nothing against their genuineness, still should not
the brackets include all four words? See Comm. || Lambin omitted Kal /u.dxas
(558); vi(iv). 14 4 (1321 b), 15 17
(1367); vn(vi). 4 19 (1427), 5 9
(1437); Vlll(v). i 10 (1499), 4 10
(1526), 5 n (1564), 8 19 (1626)."
SUSEM. (141)
8 Yet after all parents would sus
pect relationship from the likeness of
their own children. Comp. Jowett on
the Republic p. 165 if.
17 Xa[j.pdvLV rds -irurTeis] derive
their convictions; so in iv(vii). i. 6.
9 19 T<XS TT]S yr\S irepioSovs] Books
of travel round the world, as in Rhct. I.
4. 13 (where see Cope s exhaustive note),
Meteor, i. 13. 13, II. 5. 14. Such books
were also called TrepiirXoi and Trepir/yrjaeLS.
Usually Trpay/mareveadai takes repi ; but
once, Khet. I. 2. 5, it has -rrpos. In Pol.
iv(vil). 14. 8 we have roOr av CLTJ rw vo-
fjLoO^Ty 7rpay/j,a.Tevroi>, OTTWS...
20 TUTI TWV d vw Atpuiov] See Exc.
I. to B. II p. 326 ff., as regards the evidence
for these customs. Comp. also i. 2. 4 n.
(n) and n. (116). SUSEM. (142)
24 wo"7rp...l ir7ros] The same remark
in Hist. Anim. vii. 6. 8, 586 a 12
(Schneider). Further compare De Gener.
Anim. IV. 3. i, 767 b 5 : 6 /XT? eoi/ccbs rots
yovevaiv ijdr) rpoirov riva rtpas eariv Trap-
expedite yap TJ (fivcns h TOUTOLS K TOV
ytvovs rpoTrovTivd (Eaton). SUSEM. (143)
AiKaia here probably means "docile":
Xenophon Cyneget. 7 4, Memorab. IV.
4. 5 : (paal d nves Kal LTTTTOV Kal fiovv
TOJ fiovXa/uLfrit) diKaiovs iroL-fjaaffdai. -rravra
yuecrra elv at T&V dida^ovruv (Jackson).
c. 4 1 25 rds Toiavras] the fol
lowing.
27 [aKOVO-l oVS TOVS 8^] CKOVO-fovs]
Can it be said that a divine law forbids
involuntary homicide in the case of
father, mother, &c, but permits it in other
cases ? On the contrary, responsibility
ceases for involuntary acts ; nothing but
negligence is then punishable ; nor can we
talk of such acts being allowed. Bu
II 4. 2]
1262 a It 122a 84.
227
Kal TOU? (I)
ovSev QGIOV ecrTi yiveaOai 77736? Trarepas teal
fj,r) Troppa) Trjs (rwyyevelas oWa?, waTrep 777)09 TOU?
30 a\\a Kal irKelov avuftaivziv dvay/caiov dyvoovvTwv rj <yva)-
pi^ovTCov, /cal yevo/^evayv TWV fj,ev yvwpi^ovTwv evSe^eTai ra?
ha^ yiveaOai Xu<m?, TWV Be fir) <ov>^efjbiav^ ^ CLTOTTOV Be i
TO KOLVOVS TTOLijcravTa TOI)<? viovs TO a-vvelvai, JJLOVOV dfa-
TGOV epwvTwv, TO S epav fjirj KO)\v<Tai, ///^Se ra?
29 diroOev M S P 1 4 L 8 Aid. || 30 dXXd] d II 1 (yp. dXXd corr. 1 in the margin of
P 1 ) II 3 2 W <ov>5eftiav Jackson, <p.r]> fj.tj8efj.iav Schneider, fj.rjSefj.lav II 2 Ar. Bk.
Susem. 1 2 3 , fj.t)5e fj,iav Ii l || 33 Troiriffavras F Ar. and M s (ist hand)
intentional homicide is forbidden by theT"f
law of God and of nature in the case ofj
the nearest blood relations, while under!
certain circumstances it is allowed in the-
case of strangers. So too outrage, blows,|
abuse are all intentional acts. On these!
grounds the words bracketed must bet
regarded as an interpolation (Bender)j
SUSEM. (144)
28 wv oiiSev oo-iov] To this Plato
might certainly reply, that where relation
ship is abolished, crimes (even if they are
still committed) cannot be aggravated by
the fact of being crimes against relations
(Oncken). SUSEM. (145)
32 Xvfis= expiations. Editors com
pare Rep. II 364 E : ws apa \vaeis re Kal
Ka6apfj,ol ddiKrifj.aT(i}v did OvcnCov Kal TTCU-
TeXevTrjffaffLV) ds 8r) re\erds Ka\ovo~t.v :
Eur. Or. 510 <(>6vov (f>bvui Xucrcu, 597 fj.1.-
afffj,a \vcrai. Such purifications for homi
cide were unknown in the Homeric age.
Grote, Hist. I. 34, compares Thuc. I. 126
128 for their great importance.
TV 8 KT\] "All the editors as
sume that the words T&V 5e fj.r)8efj.iav,
whether with or without Schneider s ad
dition, stand for rwv 5e fj.r) yvwp^ovrwv ev-
8^x Tai fJ.riftefj.iav ylveadai \V(TLV, as if
Aristotle wished to say it is possible that
no expiation should be made . He ought
however to say it is not possible that
any expiation should be made . Hence
I conjecture rwv de fj.ri, <oidefj.iav."
JACKSON.
2, 3 oiToirov 8 KT\] Rep. III. 403
A, B: oudev apa irpoffoia T^ov /maviKov
ovde %vyyeves d/coXacrtas ry opdi^
("purl, ov TrpoffOLffreov apa avrr/ TJ -rjdov r]
(sc. ij irepl rd d(ppodi<ria) ovde KOLvwvrjTeov
avTrjs tpaffrrj re Kal TratSt/coZs opdws epQxrl
re Kal p(i)fj,e t>ois...ovT(ij dr}, &s ^ot/ce, VO/JLO-
OeTijffeis iv rr) oiKifrfj.e vrj TroXei
fj,ei> Kal ^vvelvai. Kal d Trreo-^at
i/ie"os TratSt/cwi/ epacrrrjv,
eav Treidr]...ei 5e ^177, ifroy
ctTretpo/caXtas vtp^ovra. With this com
pare v 468 c, where the gallant soldier
is rewarded with the right to kiss his com
rades upon the expedition, Kal fj,rj8eviee i-
vai a.7rapvr)6rjvai. ov av (BovXr/Tai 0tXf?f, iva
Kai, edv T/J TOV rvxTJ e pwv rj appevos rj
Or)\eias, Trpodv/j-orepos ^ Trpos rb rdpia Te ia
(pepew. See also Zeller s Plato p. 455 f.
SUSEM. (146)
34 r6 8 Ipdv [ii] KcoXvoxu KT\] This
objection might apparently be met, like
the last, n.( 145), by some sort of defence.
It would however be open to reply on
behalf of Aristotle that if the relation of
Guardians to one another is seriously to
be taken as that of parents and children,
brothers and sisters, it is unseemly at any
rate to make such strong concessions to
sensual passion whatever may have been
Aristotle s own opinion on the direction
it took in Greece (see on io 9). Besides,
the Platonic institutions take precautions
against the "marriage" of those who are
actually parents and children, a fact
overlooked by Oncken, who (i. 181)
attributes to Aristotle an objection which
he neither did nor could bring against
Plato on that score but none at all
against the "marriage" of actual brothers
and sisters: comp. Rep. V 461 E, dSeX-
(povs 8e Kal d5eX0ds 5o><m 6 v6fj.os crvvoi-
Kelv, Susemihl Plat. Phil. n. 171. As
Aristotle does not take especial exception
to this it must be assumed that he did not
feel his Greek sentiments excessively out
raged, any more than Plato, by incest
under this form. It is also significant
that he has no word of blame for the
deception whereby the rulers in the ideal
state are directed to ensure that as many
as possible of the ablest guardians of both
sexes procreate children, and as few as
possible of those who are inferior, Rep.
IS 2
4
41
1262 b
5
228 nOAITIKHN B. 4. [II. 4. 2
ra? XXa?, a? Trarpl Trpc? woz> eZz^at irdvTtov ecrrlv (I)
/ca e(jc TT/DO? e()v, ee a
IJLOVOV. (iTOTTOV Be /cal TO TTJV avvovcriav dfyeKeiv oY d\\ir]v (P. 27)
/zez; alriav ///^Se/uW, GO? XtW Se tV^fpa? TT/? rjbovrjs yivo-
fjuewrjs OTL 8 o /zez> Trarrjp rj mo?, ol 5 aSeXc^ot
/uirjSev olecrOai Biacfrepeiv. 4 oiKe 8e p.<xXXov rots
ttvcu xpi]cri|jLov TO Koivds etvai ras yuvaiKas Kal TOVS irai-
8as tj rots <|>iiXa|Lv TTTOV "y^P ^trrai <j>i\ia KOIVWV OVTWV
TCOV TKvwv Kal Tc3v ^vvaiKwv, 8i 8^ TOIOVTOVS etvai TOVS dp-
Xojxevovs Trpos TO TrctOapxeiv Kal (AT| VWTepi^iv. bXcu? O 16
crv[Ji(3aLveiv dvdyK?} rovvavriov Bid rov TOIOVTOV VO/JLOV wv Trpocr-
ij/cei, TOVS op0a)<; Kei/jievovs VO/JLOVS alrlovs ywecrOai, fcal Si TJV
alrlav 6 Sco/c/oaTT/? OVTCOS oleTai Seiv TaTTeiv TCL irepl TCL re-
KVCL teal ra? yvvctLKas. <fyi\iav re yap olbfJieOa
elvai TOOV dyaOwv rat9 Tro\eo-iv (OUTGO? yap dv rjKlaTa
Kal TO {jLiav elvai Trjv Trb\iv eTraivel fjid\io-0" 6 Sa>-
35 elvcu omitted by M s and P 1 (ist hand, supplied by p 1 ) || 40 &n/ce...b 3 vewre-
pieiv Thurot transposes this passage to follow 1264 a 40 Koivuviav, Susem. to follow
1262 b 24 TToXtreuo^ois, Introd. 79 || SeTII Bk., drj Susem.; the alteration stands
or falls with the transposition
1262 b 4 <rv/j.l3aivei P 4 T b U b and Q b (ist hand, emended by a later hand) || 6 ou-
TWS omitted by M s P 1 |) 7 re omitted by M 8 ? 1 , quidctn William, but nothing can
be inferred from this with regard to F
v 457 c 461 E. See Zeller s Plato p.
455, 477 8: Susemihl Plat. Phil. II 170.
SUSEM. (147)
Xpilo-ei.s = endearments.
35 as iraTpl ...... a/irpeTrt o-TaTov] But
the words uaTrep vieos, Rep. in. 4031?, do
not bear this implication. Plato permits
to the opdbs fyws only such familiarities
as would be unimpeachable as between
father and son.
36 Kal TO 4pav [Aovov (dirpeTrea Tarov
eo-rtj ) according to Greek ideas. Such
power lay in a little word to extinguish
the fiercest passions, Laws vin 838 B.
3 37 81 aXXt]v p.^v alT^av \ir\Se-
p-iav] True there is no other reason
assigned, but there may well be irony
under the terms d/novaia and direipoKaXia
(see the quotation n. 146) : especially
when viewed in connexion with the noble
conception of Socrates moral character
and the language of gallantry at the same
time put into his lips by Plato. See Ap-
pendix I to Dr. Thompson s Phacdrus,
esp. pp. 153, 161 ff. The attempt to trans-]
figure and etherialize gross passion was
pitched in too exalted a strain of romanti-
cism. Plato himself renounced it after-
wards. His matter-of-fact disciple simply
ignores it.
4 is out of place here; perhaps it is a
later marginal note by the author.
5 1262 b 3 oXws Se] Comp. I. 6.
5 11. "Such a law must bring about the
very opposite to that which ought to be
the result of well-framed laws and to
that which was Socrates own reason (c. 2.
i) for thinking that the institutions re-
garding women and children ought to be
thus ordered."
This criticism seems unfair. Such
private friendships and affections as
Aristotle is thinking of do not, according
to Plato, promote concord in the state
generally, but rather divert men s atten-
tion from the whole community into
private channels, and by creating private
interests tend to selfishness and disunion.
So the Spartan love of domesticity is
censured; Rep. vm 548 A, B.
IT. 4. 8]
1262 a 351262 b 19.
229
10 /c/9T?79, o /cal SoKec KaK&ivo^ elval (j)rjcri, TT;? (f)i\las epyoVy (I)
KaOaTrep ev rot? epwriicow \6<yois tajjuev \eyovra TOV Apt-
o-TO(f)dvr)v W9 TWV epwvTwv Bid TO o-(f>6Spa $L\,elv eTridv/jiovv-
Twv (Tv/jL(pvr]vai /cal yevecrdai /c Svo OVTWV [a/LK^orepof?] eva
7 evravBa JJLGV ovv dvajKij d/jityoTepovs e^Odpdai, r) TOV eva, ev 17
15 $6 TT) 7ro\L TTJV fyiKiav dvay/calov vSaprj <yivea6ai, Sid rr)v
KOivwviav Trjv Toiavryv, KOI r^Kicrra \eyeiv TOV efiov 77 viov
8 Trarepa rj Trarepa vlov. wcnrep <ydp fit/cpov yXv/cv et? TTO\V
vBo)p /jLL^Oev dvaicrOiYTOp TTOLGL rrjv rcpdcrtv, ovrco (TVfJbftaivei
Kal rr)v ol/ceiOTfjTa rrjv Trpo? d\\TJ\ovs rrjv djro TWV ovo^d-
13 (Tvn<t>vvcu P 2l3 Q b T b U b Aid. Bk. (perhaps more correct), <Tv/j,(f>VTJai P 4 (ist
hand), ffv/j.(pvvfjai P 4 (corr.) \\ [d^orepofs] Congreve || 14 el TQV eVa Conring,
ei TOV eva. jvfJL^aivei.> ? Susem., es TOV eva. Tyrrell || 19 /cat] Kara Lambin, /cat
<7re/3t> Koraes in his Commentary; /cat </cara> Bernays and independently, but
hesitatingly, Vahlen (Ztschr. /. d. iistr. Gyiun. xxm. 1872. p. 539), but Bernays
makes avayKcuov 6V (omitting the comma before dia^povTi^eiv) depend on av/j,(3aivei,
while Vahlen takes this as an absolute accusative. This slight alteration is certainly
preferable to that proposed for diacppovTifrw (see below), but, as Vahlen rightly
judges, not absolutely necessary: either dvaiadrjTov etVat can be supplied with Vahlen,
or the ace. rty ot/cetor^ra KT\ taken as the object of SiafpovTifav, with Congreve
and Susem. 1 ; then avayKcuov 8i> is to be construed, as Bernays does, omitting the
comma ; in the former case it is an absolute accusative. Bender (partly anticipated
by Spengel) suspects dvayKcuov 6v \\ rrjv Trpos] etVac TT/OOS Spengel
6 10 (JnXtas] Cp. vi(iv). ii. 7: ij
yo-p Koivuvta, <PI.\I.KOV. SUSEM.
11 4v TOIS ipwTiKois \6-yois] Plato
Syniposion 192 C sq. comp. 191 A. Hug
in p. x of his edition of that dialogue
considers epom/cot Xo7ot to be another
title for the Syniposion; but this could
only be allowed if the text read "Plato
in the discourses on love" whereas it is
"Aristophanes in the discourses on love,"
and there is nothing to hinder our sup
plying "contained in Plato s Symposion."
Moreover Plato s own theory of love in
its fulness and integrity is there given to
Socrates alone, who expressly combats
the suggestion made by Aristophanes that
it is "seeking the other half of ourselves"
205 D; cp. 212 C. Yet no doubt, in so
far as Aristotle here makes use of the
thought expressed by Plato s Aristophanes,
Plato agrees with the latter. This much
is clear, that Aristotle intends to desig
nate Plato as the author of the Sympo
sion. SUSEM. (148)
12 w TCOV epwvTwv KT\] The genitive
absolute after \eyovra, instead of 6Vt or
accusative and infinitive.
7 14 !vT(uj9a KT\] "In this case
either both will be spoiled or at least the
one absorbed in the other."
15 vSaprf] watery, i.e. diluted )( un
mixed, a/cyoaros: Aesch. Again. 770 vdapel
aaiveiv ^tXo r^rt, Poetics 27 13, 1462!:) 7
vdaprj fj.OQoi , a tame spun-out plot.
1 6 T|Kio-Ta X-yeiv = least likely to ap
ply the term mine : 3 5. Owing to a
feeble esprit de corps they would take
little pains to assert the relationship.
"Plato if called upon for an answer to
this reasoning would probably have
allowed it to be just ; but would have
said that the diluted friendship per
vading all the Guardians was apt and
sufficient for his purpose, as bringing the
whole number most nearly into the con
dition of one organism. Strong exclusive
affections between individuals he wishes
to discourage; the unfriendly sentiments
he is bent on rooting out." (Grote in.
220 n.)
8 18 OVTW crufj.(3cuvi. Kal TT)V oi-
Kio n]Ta] So too is it in the end with
the mutual affection implied in these
names : au/u/So/pei sc. o.vo.iaQt]rov dvai.
230
nOAITIKHN B. 4.
[II. 4. 8
20 TCOV TOVTCov, SLacf)povTL^iv~^KL(7Ta dva^Kotov ov ev TTJ 7ro\iTela (I)
rfj TOiavTr) rj Trarepa eo? vlov rj vlov co? Trarpo?, r) co?
9 aSeX^oi)? aXX^XcozA Suo ryap ecm,v a fjuaXidTa TTOLGL Kij^GdOat
TOI)? dvOpcoTTOvs fcal (f)i\6iv, TO re l$iov real TO dyaTT^rov &v
24 ov&erepov olov re itTrdp^eiv rot? oura) Tro^LTevo/jievois. < e ot/ee
4 a 41 <S?) fjLa\\ov rot? yecDpyoL? eivcu %pijcri{jiov TO tcoivas elvai ra? <yv-
b i <val/ca<> teal TOU? vratSa? ?? Tot? cj)v\a%i,v TJTTOV yap ecrrat (j)L\ia
2 <KOLVWV OVTCOV TWV TtKvwv Kcii Tu>v yvvaiicwv, 8e2 Se ToiovTovs elvai
3 <TOU? dp%o/jievovs vrpo? TC TreiOap^eiv /cal JJLTJ vea>Tepi^eiv.> aXXa is
9 25 yu-^y /cal Tre/ol roO neTafyepeiv TCI <yev6[jLeva Tercva, TCL fiev IK
20 TOIJTUV 6t a (ppovri^eLv and [6V] Spengel : TOVTUV <dia<poprjdf)vai> , di.a(f)poi>Tiew
Camerarius : TOVTWV < 5ia<popr)9r)i>a.L or diafiOapTJvat, ws> diaffipoisTifeiv ? Schneider:
TOVTUV ia.<ppelv>, (ppovTi ^Lv Madvig: TOVTUV, <ws> Sta^po^rtfetv Koraes in the
text, but the absolute accus. is also possible without ws 1] wa7/caro/ o?/] a^a7/cc{fetj
Bender (no comma before SiafipovTifciv) \\ 21 utou] vlwv P 2 3 Q b T b Aid. Bk. ||
tbs after 22 d5eX0oi)s Ridgeway || 25 yevo/j-epa Susem., yivo/j-eva II Bekk.,
? Gottling
The special affections would be lost in
the general sense of comradeship. This
seems simplest, though it is also possible
to govern ot /cetorT/ra by 5ta0poj>Ti^~eti ; so
that either 77 warepa KT\ is the subject of
dia(f)povTieiv, as Congreve and Susemihl
think, or as Ridgeway Transactions 11. 132
proposes 77 Trarepa KT\ is to be regarded
as epexegetic of the wider term ot /cetd-
Ttjra. He translates: so the result is
that in such a constitution as Plato s least
of all is it necessary to have regard for
the mutual family feelings implied in
these names (of father and son).
21 irarepa cos vlov KT\] "that one
citizen should care for another as father
for son, or son for father, or as one
brother for another." Ridgeway aptly
compares vm(v). n. 21 Tafj.iav us KOIVWV
dXXd, /XT? ws Idiwv, Mctaph. M. 5 6, 1079 b
34 TWV ws ytvovs elduv, species in relation
to a genus. For other views of the con
struction see Critical Notes.
9 23 TO d-yair-qTov has been taken
to mean (i) only, rare, unique; =iwvov
(Eaton, quoting Odyssey II. 365 fj.ovvos
fibv aycnrrjTos) : and (2) much desired,
dearly prized, precious. SUSEM.
See Cope s note on Rhct. I. 7. 41: /cat
TO dyaTrrjTov (fj.e i^ov ayadov e crri), /cat rots
fj.v fj.ovov rot s 5^ /xer a\\wv, where it
must have the second meaning, as ^m^cus
in Catullus 64. 215.
4 1262 a 40 -yewp-yois] Here as
often the farmers stand for the entire
third class of citizens in Plato s ideal
state, TO rwv ctXAwc TTO\LTUV 7rX??#os of 5
18, all who are neither dpxovTes nor
eTTLKovpoi; properly including ( 9) rex"t-
Tctt and all who are engaged in trade as
well as in agriculture. See 5 20, where
all are enumerated. The strength of this
class excites Aristotle s fears : see 5
19, 20, 22.
41 XP 1 i <rt ( xov ] Cornrj. vm(v). 11.15
(Eaton). This section is the only new
application of the argument in the whole
passage which follows 3. For the rest,
5 9 are essentially a repetition, with
certain distinctive and appropriate nu
ances, of the objections contained in 3
4 7 j Y et tnev are not constructed like
another version simply to supersede them.
Neither passage gives the slightest cause
for suspicion of its genuineness. We must
be content to set down to the occasional
negligences of Aristotle s style this reite
ration of a previous line of argument
without any indication that it has occur
red before. Comp. n. (164) on 5 14.
SUSEM. (149)
1262 b 2 TOIOVTOVS 77TTOV 0lXt/COl/S :
cp. i. 8 7 n. Plato would altogether
disclaim such a policy; see Rep. 416-7,
463 B. See n. on 5 20, 1264 a 27.
9 25 irepl TOV p,Ta<j>epiv] In
Plato s ideal state, as children of the
Guardians grow up they are to be re
moved into the third class of citizens if
they appear to degenerate. Conversely
the rulers are to observe carefully any
exceptional children of this third class,
II. 5. 1]
1262 b 20 1262 b 38.
231
26 rv yewpywv Kal re^vtrwv et? roi)? (jbuXa/ca?, rd S eV rou- (I)
raw et? e /cetVou?, TroXX?}^ ^% 6t Ta P a X ) l v ) riva ecrrai rpoTrov
Kal ryivwcTKeiv dva^Kalov roi)? ^tSo^ra? /cat jjierafyepovras (P. 25
10 r/crt rtW? SiSoacriv. en Be Kal rd rcaXai \e%6evra
30 ejrl rovrwv dvay/caiov (7vjbL/3aiveiv, olov aiKias epwra?
ov <ydp en Trpoa ayopevovcriv aSeX^oi)? Kal reKva Kal Trarepas Kal
fjbr)repa<$ 01 re et? roi)? aXXou? TroXtra? ooOevres roi)? (j>v\a-
tfa? /cat rcahiv ol Trapd rot? <f)v\ai, roi)? aXXof? TroXtra?,
ware ev\a(Bel(r6ai, rwv roLovrwv n irpdrreiv Sid rrjv crwyyevetav.
5 Trepi /^e^ ouz^ r^J? Trept ra reKva Kal ra? yvvaiKas
36 Koivwvias $iwpicr6(jL) rov rpoirov rovrov e^ofjievov II
8e rovrcov earlv erciaK^aaQai Trepl rfjs
rpoTrov Set Kara(TKevd^e<rdaL rot?
28 < 701/3 > ywu
Koraes || 32 roi)s
Bernays, perhaps rightly || 31 Trpo<rayopev<rov<ri.i>
Kas before ot re II 2 Bk.; omitted by M s P 1 || 33 <f>v\at
H 1
p 1 II 2 Ar. Bk.
who as they grow up may display higher
mental and moral qualities, in order that
they may be received amongst the children
of the Guardians and educated along with
them for duties like theirs. See Republic
III 415 15, IV 423 C. SUSEM. (150)
27 iroXXiiv ^x l Tapax^v] Schlosser
remarks that this requires a more detailed
proof. SUSEM. (151)
There does seem some variance be
tween the rule laid down above, Rep.
423 C, Tim. 19 A (TO, 5 ruv K.O.KUV els
r-fjif d\\-r)i> \ddpq. SiaSor^ov -rroXiv, eirav-
$avofJ,fr(i)V Se ffKOTrovvras del TOVS d^Lovs
ird\iv dvdyeiv dew, roi)s de Trapd ff<plcriv
dva^iovs ei s rrjv TUV eiraviovTuv x^P av
fj-eTaXXdrreLv), and that other regulation
about exposure Rep. v 460 C (rd de TWV
, Kal cdi> TL TWV erepwv dvdirTjpoi*
if ev diropprjTij} re Kal d5rj\a} /cara-
28 Kal yiv<a<rK.iv KT\] But what
harm could this knowledge do in the
case of the children of Guardians who
were degraded? As to the children of
the third class adopted as Guardians,
nothing could prevent the whole body of
Guardians from knowing in the end that
they were of different blood. But if we
assume that all the other institutions of this
ideal state are practicable, these adopted
children would suffer no neglect, from
any one or in anything, on that account.
SUSEM. (152)
Aristotle implies that jealousy and dis
union would follow the recognition of the
facts.
29 Ti<ri rivas 8i86a(ri] This clause de
pends on yivuGKeiv.
10 ird\ai = above, I 3. So in
III. 14. 14 rov TraAcu \6yov, VIIl(v). n.
24. Obviously Aristotle shrinks with
horror (as we should) from these crimes
against blood relations: but there is no
evidence that it is on the ground which
Grote ascribes to him, "that serious mis
chief would fall upon the community if
family quarrels or homicide remained
without religious expiation."
34 w(TT ev\a|3ur9ai] "so as to be
on their guard," as they might be if they
used these terms of relationship.
c. 5 Objections to community of pro
perty: i 13. See Analysis p. 103.
1 37 Tiva Tpoirov 8ei KT\] This
issue is not decided in what follows, for
the conclusion adopted in 5 8 ex
cludes the first and third of these alterna
tives in their application to all the land,
but does not necessarily exclude the
second. Later on however, iv(vn). ro.
10 n. (834), we perceive that even the
second suggestion does not by any means
correspond with Aristotle s view, which
is more like the third, provided it be
restricted to a part of the territoiy, where
as Plato had extended it to the whole.
In Plato s Callipolis the Guardians are
forbidden the possession of gold and silver
and of money altogether, and so far they
232
nOAITIKON B. 5. [II. 5. 1
Trorepov KOIVTJV rj //.?} KOW^J (II)
rrjv dpiarrjv TroXiTelav,
2 elvai, Tt]v fcrrjcrtv. rovro
41 rcov Trepi rd re/cva /cal r? yvval/ca^ vevo/jLoOeTrjfAevcov,
1263 a Se [rd 7Tpl rrjv KTr)<Tiv\ irorepov KOLV y e/celva %a)pL$, KaO^
ov vvv TpOTrov %i, Tracn ra? re /erf/Vet? Kowds etvai {3e\-
TLOV Kal ra? yp^cret? * * , olov rd /juev ryr/TreSa vcopt?, TOU? oe
39 17 fj.7] Koivty after etvat M 8 ? 1 . In P Set was perhaps repeated before etrat ||
[-rrorepov 40 KTTja-iv] ? Schmidt and then a colon after vevofj-odeT-rj/n^uv
1263 a i [rd Trepi ryv KTrjcnv] Susem. || 2 irdcras P Susem. 1 2 Freudenthal (per
haps rightly), iraauiv M s || Tracrt <rds /cr^crets 77 rds XP 7 ? " 6 5 7 7 > T( * s or ""^cri <rds
Xp7?<rets 77 rds /cruets 77 > rds Spengel, * * rds Susem. 1 2 |l re] 76 Koraes Oncken
Bernays which gives no sense || XP 7 ? " 6 5 xoivas elvai /SeArtov 77 rds /crrycrets Koraes
Oncken || 3 /cat] 77 Schlosser Koraes Oncken, /card Bernays || XP 7 ? " 645 < 7M^as
rds KTrjcrecs rj rds xP 7 7" ets> Freudenthal, xP 7 ? <rets< ) 7 TC * S /cr?7 crets ^bvov 17
rds xp ? 7 (7ets> Busse, xp ^ (re ^ <r)> Heinsius Hampke
without settled and independent house-^
keeping of one s own. Here he is not so
consistent as Plato, which is easily ex
plained however by the fact that his
whole economic theory rests upon the
basis of slavery in the genuine fashion of
anTiquity, of Greek antiquity especially.
And one consequence of this is that, as 1
Oncken again justly observes, his con
ception of property does not involve that
of personal labour. On this point see
Introd. p. 27. SUSEM. (153)
39 TToXireiav] Cognate accus. after
?roAtreue<T#at. The phrase recurs VI (iv).
i. 4. We find KaO as TroAtreuoj rat, 1 1.
7. i; the accusative in I. u. 13 raura
TToAtreyoi rat, and in rd Trpos avrovs II. 7.
14, is not quite similar.
2 40 x w P us ffK\pa.LTo OTTO] sepa
rately from = independently of. Comp.
Plato Phaedo 98 C 5ta0uds e x 6 X w /^ s a7T
dXArjAwz , "to separate them." This is
the sense of dVo in a7ro0acrts, negative
predication, 5t ypri/dvov rou 6^ros as Aris
totle puts it. Compare rrdppw d0 i]/j.iov
ProMemsxviu. 10, 917 b 14, and Nic.Eth.
IX. 8. i ovdev acf) eavrov Trpdrret, nothing
away from, i.e. unlike, himself.
1263 a i cKetva \(pC<s = the families
are separate.
2 KTTJO-IS )( XPT" 1 S5 ownership, fee-
simple )( usufruct, income returned.
3 olov introduces the application of
the three modes of communism to land
and its produce. "I mean, (i) when the
estates are held separately but the crops
are brought into a common stock for con
sumption, or (2) when the land is held in
common and cultivated by the state as
have no property of their own. Never
theless the connexion of Platonic thought
leaves no doubt that the entire body of
Guardians is the sole proprietor of the
soil, and that thus they hold landed pro
perty in common. The farmers of the
third class are consequently tenants who
pay a rent in kind for the farms they culti
vate, this rent being a definite amount of
the produce supplied to the Guardians,
who have the other indispensable neces
saries of life provided for them by other
members of the third class in lieu of a tax
levied for protection. Lastly, the com
mon dwellings and common meals of the
guardians make community of property
and community of life amongst them an
actual accomplished fact. See Rep. in
416 c, iv 419, v 464 C, and comp.
Zeller s Plato p. 481 Eng. tr. The ex
tension of these common dwellings and
common meals to women is not expressly
mentioned by Plato, but it is implied in
his complete equalization of male and
female Guardians: cp. ;/. (196) and I.
13. 9 n. (116). Thus, as Oncken I. 183
justly observes, "Plato has simply
abolished the possession of capital by a
theoretical fiat, while Aristotle B. i c. 8
has done his best to banish it to the re
motest regions of economic life. Only
landed property with the income derived
from it is of any account in their philo
sophical deliberations." There is this
difference between them that Aristotle
believes community of property to be pos
sible apart from community of families:
whereas the fact is that there cannot be a
true marriage in our sense of the term
II. 5. 3] 1262 b 39 1263 a 11. 233
KapTrovs et? TO KOIVOV (ptepovras dvaKicrjceiv (orrep evia Troiei (II)
5 rwv eOvwv), r) rovvavriov rf}v pev yfjv Koivrjv elvai Kal yecop-
ryelv KOivf), TOV? 8e KapTrovs SiaipelcrOat, TT^O? Ta? t S/a?
aei? (\eyovrai 8e rives Kal rovrov rov rpoTrov KOIVWVZLI
3 /3ap/3dpa)v), 77 Kal rd yijTreBa Kal TOU<? KapTrovs KOLVOVS. erj- 2
pwv [lev ovv OVTWV T&v <y60)p<yovvTG)i> aXXo? av ely Tpovro? Kot
10 pawVy avrwv S]_ auTOi? ^lairovovvTwv , rd rrepl Ta?
8v(7Ko\ias. Kal yap eV Tat?
%w/3is Hampke
public property, but the produce divided
for private uses, or (3) when both lands
and crops are held in common." Of
modern theories, (3) alone answers to
what Mill Pol, EC. II. c. i calls thorough
going Communism : (2) to the milder
forms proposed by St Simon and Fourier.
yi]ir8a, plots of ground, farmsteads,
like otKOTredov, emphasizing the site of the
property.
4 gvia] Editors refer to Lacedaemon
( 7) and Tarentum vn(vi). 5. 10. But
these instances seem hardly sufficient to
establish the first form of communism :
and Wvt\i see n. (11), would suggest here
also non-Hellenic tribes, to whose cus
toms Aristotle paid considerable attention
to judge from the fragments of his No/xtfta
or No ytu^a jSap/3apt/ca ; cp. iv(vil). a. 11.
That work being lost, the most apposite
references are from Diodoros v. 44, of
the Vaccaeans, a Celtiberian tribe : v. 9,
of the exiled Cnidians and Rhodians who
colonized the Aeolian isles (Lipari) : v.
41, of Panchaia, which Strabo thinks a
fiction. Nearchus in Strabo xv. i. 66
testifies to the custom amongst certain
tribes of India. Further, the prevalence
formerly of this system of land-tenure
would serve to explain crwairta.
7 rives] On this second system, if
the soil is to remain common property
there must be a periodic partition, such
as is in force even now in Russia, in some
Swiss cantons (e.g. Glaris) and amongst
the village communities (dessas) of Java.
This was the characteristic feature of the
German mark, first known by Caesar s
account of the Suevi (Bell. Gall. VI. 29).
Strabo VIII. 6. 7 affirms it of the Dalma
tians, and the Greek settlers on the Aeo
lian islands finally adopted this plan,
Diod. v. 9. In fact, "there appears to
be no country inhabited by an Aryan
race in which traces do not remain of the
ancient periodical redistribution," which
preceded and at length ended in per
petuity of occupation : Maine Village
Communities p. 81. To collect these
traces is the object of M. de Laveleye s
Primitive Property: see pp. 109, 1456.
(of the English trans, by Marriott). It
was a modification of this second system
which appears to have prevailed among
the Village Indians of North America at
the time of its discovery. They still
held lands in common : the lands of each
Aztec "group" could not be alienated.
They constructed joint-tenement houses
and lived in large households composed
of a number of related families, some
times fifty or a hundred families together :
and there are grounds for believing that
they practised common living in the
household : i.e. something analogous to
avcrffiria ; L. II. Morgan Anc. Society
pp. 187, 200 ff., 535538.
3 8 T pa)v] a distinct body. CLVTWV =
the citizens themselves ; O.VT&V avrois
d<.airovovi>Twv = w\\en they are avrovpyoi,
Thucyd. I. 126.
"This remark is quite true in itself,
but it makes for Plato rather than against
him. His guardians are a distinct body
from the yewpyoi and are thus in the posi
tion described as most favourable to com
munism" (Oncken). SUSEM. (154)
10 TO, Trepl TOLS /cnjcreis is nomin., the
subject of a.v Trap^xoi and not the object
n. " For where all have not equal
shares in enjoyment any more than in
work, indeed have very unequal shares,
dissatisfaction must needs be felt with
those who have much enjoyment and
little labour, by those who get less and
have more work to do." This is the
standing difficulty of communistic schemes,
see Mill Pol. Econ. n. i 3.
234
nOAITIKHN B. 5.
[II. 5. 3
Kal ev Tot9 epyois ^rj yivofjbevwv LCTCOV a\\ avicrwv avayKaiov (II)
14 Ta?] TroXXa, oXf/ya Se TrovovvTas TOt9 eXaVra) f^ev \a/ui(3dvovcn,
4 TrXeiw Be TTOVQIXJIV. 0X0)9 e TO crv^rjv Kal Koivwvelv TOOV dv- 3
TrdvTwv yaXeTroV, /cat fJudKiaTa TWV TOIOVTWV.
al TCOV o-vva7ro$r}fJLU>v KoivwviaC a^eoov yap ol
TrXetcTTot $iacf)ep6/jievoi eK TWV ev irocrl Kal eK fiLKpwv nrpoo--
KpovovTes aXX^Xo/,9. eVt Se TCOV OepajrovTcov TOVTOIS yu-aXtcrTa (p- 29)
20 7rpo(TKpovo/jLV ot9 7r\elcrTa TTpoo ^pw/jieOa 7r^)09 T9 $LaKovla$
5 T9 eyKVK\lovs. TO (juev ovv Koivas eivau TCLS /cr^<ret9 1 TavTas
T6 Kal aXXa9 ToiavTas e^et Svcr^epela^ ov 8e i^O^ Tpojrov 4
eyet [/cat] eTr LKOCT ^r]0 ev Weal Kal Ta^ei vofjiwv 6p0oov, ov /JLL-
Kpov dv SieveyKai. efet ydp TO e d^oTepcov dyaOov.
25 \eyco Se TO e d^KJ^OTepajv TO GK TOV KQivds elvai T9 KTTJ-
12 dXX dvlffuv omitted by P 2 - 3 Q b T b U b Ar. Aid. Bk. and P 4 (ist hand; added in
the margin) || 13 [TJ \a/j,j3dvovTas] Congreve, ^v rj Xaytt/Sdvovras omitted by U b Aid.
|| 1 8 5ia<pepovTai. Koraes || irpocrKpovovai for -jrpoffKpovovTes Congreve || 20
P 1 || 22 vuv after Tpoirov ZX L M s P 1 || 23 /cat after 2% et omitted by II 1
n 2 Ar. Bk.
might be made. The principle of private
I property has never yet had a fair trial in
)any country."
8v Be vvv rpoirov KT\] 8^ Tpbirov vvv
%X i with the epexegetic ejrLKoo fj. rjdev KT\
is the subject of 5tez>^y/cat : " the order of
things at present existing if improved by-
good manners and the enactment of wise ;
laws would be far superior ": de<n, some- j
what wider than morality, see 15; ways, I
habits, instincts.
" This is in reality not so much proved
as stated ; still it is not laid down simply
on the strength of 4. Oncken i. 184 goes
decidedly too far in saying the attacks on
community of property lack all precision
and point, and that the doctrine is not
refuted on its own merits like the com
munity of families. He fails to notice
what is pointed out by Zeller Platonic
Studies p. 289 that the words of 6 all
will thrive better under a system of private
property because then each one labours
assiduously for his own advantage
apply to property exactly the same argu
ment which was used with most effect to
refute on its own grounds community of
wives and children and was for that reason
twice advanced, 3 4 7, 4 48 .
(149)." SUSEM. (156)
4 15 Koivuveiv governs rQ>v
&V iravTuv ; "to share in all relations
of human life, especially such as affect
property."
17 cruvairoS qiJi.ttv] JV. RtJi. vni. 9
4, 5 ; avfJ.TTOpevovTa.1 yap ewi TIVL avfj,-
(pfpovTi, /cat Tropi^o/nevoi rt TUIV els TOV fiiov.
1 8 8ia(|)p6(avoi...Trpoo-KpotioVTes] Par
ticipial construction with ellipse of copula,
as perhaps in I. 5.9 al<rdav6/JLeva.
TCJV cv irocrl] things near at hand, im
mediately before us : Herod, ill. 79 :
KTLVOV T&V /J.dywi TrdvTa. TWO, TOV ev TTOCTI
Trpoo-KpotiovTcs] Comp. TV. Eth. ix. 4
i, T&V <j)l\uv oi Trpocr/ce/c/aou/c ores = friends
who have broken with each other.
20 rds 8. rds e < Y KVK ^^ ovs ] ^ or the daily
round of services. Cp. I. 9. 9 (Eaton),
also II. 9. 9 n. 291. SUSEM. (155)
5 22 oXXas Toiavras] Aristotle
never urges (i) that communism will
diminish the efficiency of labour, nor (2)
that it will relax the checks on an increase
of population. The Hellenic idea of the
omnipotence of the state precluded these
objections. The conclusion at which he
arrives is endorsed in the remarks of Mill
Pol. EC. ib. p. 128: "We must compare
communism at its best with the regime of
individual property, not as it is, but as it
IL 5.7] 1263 a 12 1263 a 36.
KOI TO 6K TOV I8la<{. $61 jap 7TW? //,<
235
is, oX? (II)
evai
6 S fc Sta?. al jjiev <yap eVt/zeXetaf ^ir^p^fjievai TO,
?rpo? a\X?;Xoi;? ou Troirjcrova-iv, paXkov Se eVtSwo-oucrt^ a;?
tStot 6fcdcrT(t) TrpoaeSpevovres* Bi dperrjv & earou Trpo? TO
30 cr#at Kara- TT)^ irapoifjiiav icoiva ra $i\wv. ecrrt Se /cat
roz/ TpoTrov TOVTOV ev vai$ 7ro\crLV ovTCD?
a5? ou# oi/ a&vvarov, KOI paX-Lara ev T6U
7 ra yu-ez^ ecrrt ra Se <yevoiT aV ISlav >yap efcacrTos rr)v
e^wv ra jjuev %pijai/jLa iroiel rot9 c/nXoi?, rot9 Se
35 /consols, olov teal eV AaKeSafaovi, rot? re SouXot?
rot? aAA^Xcoy a5? eiTrelv ISlois, ert 8 tTTTTOfl? /cat tcwiv, /cap
28 /mXX^re? Susem. || 29 e/cdcrrou TrpocreSpeiWros P 1 H 2 Bk. (perhaps rightly) ||
33 ytvoir ? Susem. || 35 cos /cotrois Susem. 1 2 , tamqiiam William || 36 ws eiri-rrav 1
Susem. u>s a s iraaav ? Schmidt, ws [etVeti ] Giphanius, ucrirep ? Koraes || av (?) F
the main he stops short of the actual
facts as presented in Sparta particularly,
whereas Plato set out from these Spartan
institutions, but only to go far beyond
them. It is also justly observed by
Oncken I. 183, that in general wherever,
as was the case in Greece, the freemen
are principally supported by the labour of
strangers who are not free, there the
ruling caste as a whole stands in a certain
communistic relation as opposed to the
servile caste. Compare further n. (166).
SUSEM. (158)
35 olov KCU ev AdKeScufJiovi KT\]
Xenophon De Rep. Laced. 6 3, 4
relates in the main the same facts, first,
as to slaves and helots; and as to
horses, with the more precise limitation
that a sick man or any one requiring a
carriage or desirous of travelling rapidly
to a given place will, if he sees a horse
anywhere, take it and after using it return
it faithfully unhurt. As to dogs, he still
more definitely restricts this usage to the
chase. Those who require the dogs in
vite their owner to go hunting ; while he,
if he has not the time, readily sends
them off with the pack. There is no such
information in Xenophon about produce
growing in the fields : what he does say
is that after a meal in the country people
left the remainder of the food they had
prepared in store-chambers : others, de
tained while hunting and in need of food,
might, if they had no provisions with
them, break the seals of these store-
chambers and take what they required,
leaving the rest behind and replacing the
seal. SUSEM. (159)
26 For o\(os = in general, almost like
<x7rXu;s, comp. III. g. 4, VIIl(v). i 3,
1 J 3 where it is opposed to /card TL a c
here to TTWS.
6 27 The division of attention will
remove mutual dissatisfaction : the ar
ticle implies those grounds of complaint
specified above. Each will set about his
own task, e.g. the cultivation of land.
29 81 dpr]v KT\] Public virtue will
ensure that, as the proverb has it, in all
that relates to use friends go shares in
property.
"Comp. iv(vn). 10. 9 with n. (831).
Giphanius observes that this favourite
maxim of the Pythagoreans is purposely
introduced here because Plato (Rep. iv
424 A) applied it to the absolute com
munity of property. It is not Aristotle,
however, but Plato who misconstrues it :
in fact after the latter had misinterpreted
it, the former restores it to its original
sense. See Zeller s Pre-Socratics I. p. 345
n. i, Eng. tr." SUSEM. (156 b)
31 v tvfous iroXto-iv] See the com
mendation passed on the Tarentines,
vm(v). 5. 10. SUSEM. (157)
inro-ye ypa K p.evov] prescribed, laid down
as a rule to follow. Often in Plato.
Eaton refers to Lawsv 734 E, v6fj.ovs TroXt-
refrus V7roypa<pLV, Protag. 326 D ij TroXts
v6fj.ovs inroypa^acra ; add Repub. 424 A,
449 C.
32 ws = implying that.
33 rd jx^v...Ta 8] either is or might
become. j-<^w- -
7 34 TOIS 8* XP *i Tai KOIVOIS]
Here even Aristotle s political theory
has a certain dash of socialism ; only in
23G
nOAITIKHN B.
[II 5. 7
8 $7i0co(Tiv efaSiayv, <rot?> eV rot? dypois Kara rrjv ^wpav. fyavepov (II)
Toivvv OTL fte\Tiov elvai pev l$las r9 Krrjo-eis, ry Se xprf-
crei Troielv KOIVCLS OTTO)? Se ^ivwvrai TOLOVTOL, TOV vofjioOerov
4 TOUT epyov iSiov earlv. en Se KOI TT/OO? lySovrjv d/juvO^Tov OGOV 6
Sia(f)epei TO vo/Jbi^eiv iSiov ri. ^rj <ydp ov fjiar^v rrjv
1263 b avrov auTO? e X el/ fy ^av ekao~To<^, a)OC O~TL TOVTO (fo
9 TO Se fyi\avTov zivai tyeyerai, St/caico? ov/c eo~TL Se TOVTO TO
(f)i\eiv eavTov, a\\a TO fj,a\\ov rj Sel fyCKeiv, KaOdjrep
icai TO (^ikoxp^fjiaTov, eVel <f)i\ovcri <ye TrdvTes co? elTrelv
5 e/cao-Tov TOOV TOIOVTCOV. d\\d i^rjv KOL TO yaplvavQai KOI
/3or]0fjcrai 0tXot? r; %evois rj eTaipois r]icrTOV o <ylveTai T^?
10 KTijaecos ISias OUCTT;?. TavTa T6 Srj [ov] avfjiftaivei Tot? \iai> ev 7
Trjv TroKiV,
dpeTalv fyavep&s,
KOI TTyoo? TouTOt? dvatpovcriv epja $VOLL>
JJLGV [TO] irepl Ta?
37 e0o5iwz>] pro viaticis William || <roij> or <7ra<rt ro?s> before /cara
Sauppc, before ev Susem., <rois> iv had also occurred to Vahlen, Ztschr. f. a 7 , ostr.
G. XXV. 1874. p. 487, [ev] TOIS (Hypols Oncken, [ev] TCUS ayopcus Bernays, <ra/xei ots>
ev or <To.fjudots> ev v. Leutsch, eV rats dypcus Busse and Ridgeway independently
|| xupw] Oripav Biicheler, perhaps rightly
1263 b i O.VTOS omitted by II 1 || 3 TO omitted by Q b T b U b and P 2 (ist hand;
added by corr. 3 ) || 4 /cat TO P 1 Ar., /cat rbv T M 8 P 2 3 4 Q b T b U b , TO?/ Aid. || 0tXo-
XpyfJ-aTov <Kal TO <pi\6Ti/moi > ? Koraes, accepted by Bernays || 5 ^/cacrros P 3 4
Qi, T bTjb Alde and pa ( Ist h anc j; emended by corr. 3 ) || 6 ergots II 1 Susem. 1 2 ||
7 ou after 5?} omitted by II 1 || g TO after p.ev omitted by II 1 , r<p Bernays
8 39 TOIOVTOI sc. otot T-TJ XP 7 ?"" 6
Troi?v KOLvds. Above 5t dpeTr)i>.
vo[j.o0Tov ?PYOV] Undoubtedly Aris-
totle hopes for results of human legisla-
tion which now we only expect from the
training of the conscience by morality
and religion ; see on 9 12 . (296).
Herein he agrees with Plato; not how-
ever, like him, from any denial or under-
estimate of the rights or power of indi-
viduality (Oncken). See notes (161) and
(162). SUSEM. (160)
40 ?TL 8e KT\] "Again, even to the
pleasure we feel, the difference that it
makes to call a thing our own is unspeak-
ably great." An expression like ovpavLov
ocrov, 6avfj.d<Tiov offov, nimium quantum.
41 [ir\ ydp ov fiaTt]v] By fj.7) or fj.rj-
Trore with the indicative, no uncertainty is
intended ; ibi quoque adhibita reperitur,
ubi res affirmatur non negatur. " It may
well be that our love for ourselves is not
without a purpose." ^
9 1263 b 2 OVK &TTI 8 TOVTO]
Comp. Nic. Eth. ix. 8. i, 1168 a 28,
Rhet, I. n. 26, 1371 b 18; also Plato
Laws v 731 D (Eaton). Congreve quotes
A^ r. Eth, IX. 4. i, where even friendship
and benevolence are reduced to forms of
self-love, ra 0tXt/ca rd Trpbs rot)? 0t \ous...
eoiKev e/c r&v Trpos eauroi e\rj\vdei>ai.
SUSEM. (161)
3 KaQairep KT\] "just as the love of
money means to love it more than is
right": PI. Rep. I 347 B r6 (piXdpyvpov
elvai. &Wt5os Aeyerat (Vettori). Comp.
also Nic. Eth. iv. 4. 4, (pepo/Aey TO 0iX6-
TL^OV eircuvovvTes /j.ev eiri TO fj.a\\ov r) oi
TroXXot, ij/yoi>Tes de ewl TO yttaXXof 77 del.
10 7 0-vjj.pcUva] of awkward con-
sequences involved in a theory: av^aL-
vew dicitur ubi factis ex aliqua hypothesi
conclusionibus ipsa hypothesis refutatur
(Bonitz).
8 dvaipouffw Hpya.] "destroy the func-
tions."
9 o-wcf>poo-i5vT|s] Even Zeller Phil. d.
Gr. II ii p. 697, n. 7, thinks this an unfair
objection, because in Plato s common-
wealth a guardian is bound to continence
II. 5. 12]
1263 a 37 1203 b 22.
237
(II)
11
15 TTJ
6
10 (epyov yap Ka\ov tiXXorplas ovcnjs aTre^ecrOai Bid (ra)(f)po- (p. 3)
crvvrjv), eXevOepioTijTO? Be [TO] Trepl T<? /cr^o-et? (oure yap ecrrai
cfiavepos e\ev0epto<> wv, OVTC Trpd^ec Trpd^iv e\ev6epiov ovBe-
ev rfj <ydp xprjcrei TWV KTTJ fidrwv TO TTJS eXevOe-
epyov ecrrtV). ) euTrpocrwTro? fjiev ovv j] TOLCLV- 8
vo/jioOecria KOI fyiKdvOpwjros dv elvai Bogeiev
<ydp dtcpow/jievo^ dcrfjievos aTroSe^erat, VO/JLI^COV ecre-
i (>i\Lav Tivd OavfJiacrrriv TCCLGI TT^O? aTrai Tas, d\-
re Kal oTav /caTyyopf) rt? TWV vvv VTrap^ovTcav
ev rat? iro\iTeiai^ tcatcwv w? yivo/jievwv Bid TO fjbrj KOL-
10 vrjv elvau TTJV ovcriav, \eyo) Be Bl/cas re TT^O? d\\rf\ovs
Trepl <jv fju[3o\aiwv Kai tyevBo/jiapTVpiwv Kplaeis real r jr\ov<Tiwv
12 KO\aKeias. wv ovBev yiveTai Bid TTJV d/coivcovrjcrlav d\\do
n e\ev8epi6Ti>)Ta P 1 , e\evQep<.bTa.Ta M s || rb after 5 omitted by II 1 , rw Bernays
|| 13 rrj after 70,^ W b Aid. Bk. and perhaps Q b || 15 dv after elvcu do^eiev M -s P 1 ||
1 7 riva (n.vl M 8 ) before (piXiav M s P 1
in respect of all women to whom he is
not married by the authorities, the Pla
tonic community of wives being the very
, reverse of free indulgence of the appe
tites. Quite true : but then neither is this
the point of Aristotle s objection. What
he urges is that voluntary self-restraint,
which is nowhere possible save where
monogamy is established, and in Plato s
state is out of the question, alone deserves
the name of continence, ffufipoavvri. We
must admit with Oncken that he is right
in this, and that g, 10 make an espe
cially agreeable impression, as a defence
of the individual s moral freedom. Fur
ther, see n. (106 b). SUSEM. (162)
10 fyryov KaXov] Strictly, a goodly
deed, fair to contemplate ; then a moral
action (since the motive makes the act
virtuous; it must be done rod KO\OU
ft e/ca), with that peculiar implication of
nobleness which runs through the NIC.
Ethics.
12 irpfi^iv eXtvOe piov] for which
private property, e.g. money, is required.
Comp. Nic. Eth. x. 8. 4 TUJ ^v eXevdepiy
Se-fjffec ^prifjia.TWv TT/JOS TO irpaTreiv TO. e\ev-
6tyia ib. 7. Can we ascribe acts of
liberality to the gods? rivi 5e duaovffiv ;
droTTOv 5 el Kal &rrcu avrois v6fj.iff^a rj n
TOLOVTOV.
13 v TTJ -ycLp XP 1 1 O "I...I4 ^p^ov to-ri]
for the use of one s possessions is the
field for the exercise of liberality. Cicero s
usus Dirt u fis, Acad.post. 1. 38 is analogous
to fy-yov in this sense.
7ry>os
11 17 <|>iXCav rivet, 0avfj,aom]v]
Comp. Dante Purgatorio xv. 55 57,
che per quanto si dice piu linostro, | tanto
possiede piu di ben ciascuno, | e piu di
caritade arde in quel chiostro; 73 75,
e quanta gente piu lassu s intende, | piu
v e da bene amare, e piu vi s ama, | e
come specchio, 1 uno all altro rende.
aXXws T Kal orav KaTTcyoprj TIS] Here
he evidently has in mind Plato s expres
sions, Republic IV 425 c: rl 5^, raayopaia
re TrtpL /car ayopav e/cao-rot a
vfi(3a\\ov<riv . . .TOVTUV roX-
TL vo/Jioderelv ; 464 D 5t/ccu re Kal
e y/cXTj/x.ara Trpos aXX^Xous OVK oi^ijcreTai e
avTijoV) cl)s ^TTOS etireiv, 8t.a TO fj.f}8i> idiov
eKTTJcrdai TT\TJV TO aw/ma ; Although not
precisely the same evils are enumerated
there and here, nor expressly derived
from the institution of private property,
yet in fact Aristotle s words quite accord
with the view of the Republic. Comp.
20, 21 with nn. (174, 175). SUSEM.
(163)
Add Rep. 465 C : ra 76 /Jirjv ff[j.iKp(>Ta.Ta.
TWV KaKuv OKVW Kal \eyeLi> uv dinj\\ay-
^VOL &v dev, KoXaxeias re 7rXou<nW [TT^T;-
rej] cnropias re Kal a\yr)56vas 6<ras eV...
5ta Tpo(f)r)v ot/cerwi avayKaiav
i, TO, p.kv 5avei6/J.ei>oi, TO, d e^apvov-
Eaton quotes Aristoph. Eccles.
657 sq.
12 22 wv ovS^v ylvtroii] This is
begging the question, though it may
fairly be surmised that communism would
not cure all these evils.
238
nOATTTKflN B. 5.
[II. "5. 12
777^
TToXXco
eirel real TOI)? KOIVCL KeKT7]^evov^ KOI KQL-
afyepojJievovs fjua\\ov opcS/juev rj roi)? %<w/ot?
25 ra? ova-las eftovras d\\d OewpovfJiev o\lyovs rovs ere TGOV KOL-
VWVLWV Bi,a$>epojj,evov<; trpos TroXXot)? o-v/jL^d\\opres TOVS /ce/crrj-
13 jjievovs l$la rds KTijo-eis. ert Se Sl/caiov JJLTJ povov \eyeiv
oo~d)v areprjcrovrai KCLKWV KOivwvijcravTes, aXXa Kal ocrcov
dyaOcav (fralveTai, 8* eZz^at ira^nrav do~vvaros 6 jBios.
30 alriov Se TW ^coKpdret, Trjs TrapaKpov crews %pr) vo^i^eiv
14 Tr]v V7r60eo~iv OVK ovcrav opOrjv. 8et jjuev <ydp eivai TTCO? fjiiav
fcal rrjv ol/clav real rrjv iroXiv, aXX ov nravrir]. ean JJLGV rydp o$?
OVK O"rai. Trpoiovcra . TroXt?, ecrrt 8 w? corral IACV, eyyvs 8 oixra
rov fjiT) TroXt? elvai; ^eipcov ?roXi9, wcrTrep KCLV el rt? TT)Z/
35 av/ji(f)(0viav Troirjcreiev o jJLofywv iav r) roz/ pvOfJiov (Bdcriv
25 roi)s] rcDf P 4 Q b U b Ald. || 32 Trdi>Tus p 1 H 2 Bk. || tffTcu M 8 and P 1 (ist
hand) || 33 Walford (as cited by Eaton) transposes TroXts to follow
/i^j/ || 34 &TTCU was added after eu>cu by Vettori Bk. Susem 1 2 , erit William
~~ f L j
who share property quarrelling
than those who have their
23 errel Kal TOVS Koivd KT\] "Since
we see just those people who are joint
owners and
far more
estates separate." Are these the crvvairo-
drjfjLOL of 4? Or is the reference to com
mercial partnerships?
25 cLXXo. 6ewpoi)|Aev KT\] The cases of
quarrels seen to arise out of partnerships
are few, it is true ; but then we compare
them with the large number of those who
have separate possessions.
13 29 dSvvaros] Compare Grote
in. pp. 217 222. "This supposed im
possibility is the mode of expressing
strong disapprobation and repugnance.
Plato s project contradicts sentiments con
ceived as fundamental and consecrated:
the reasons offered to prove it impossible
are principally founded upon the very
sentiment adverted to. The truly for
cible objection is the sentiment itself."
Plato impugns it and declares it to be
inapplicable to his guardians: amongst
whom as he conceives, a totally different
sentiment of obligation would grow up.
Similarly "if Sparta had never been
actually established and if Aristotle had
read a description of it as a mere project,
he would probably have pronounced it
impracticable."
30 irapaKpovVews] "fallacy" as in
De Soph. El. 17 3, 175 b i, Demosth.
c. Timocr. 194, 760 27 0ei>a/a0 /u.ou Kal
3i T]V vir60<riv KT\] the incorrect
ness of his first principle: see 2 2.
Comp. Grote in. p. 215 f. 217 ., who
from Aristotle s own admissions v(viii).
I. 4, cijiLQ. de ov8e XP^I vofjdfeiv avTov Q.UTOV
nva elvdL T&V TroXiTuSi , dXXd Trdvras TTJS
Tro Xews fj.6pi.ov yap eKacrros TTJS Tro Xews,
and I. 4. 5 TO re yap fnopiov ov /ULCVOV
d\\ov ecrrl /mopiov, dXXd /cat ctTrXcDs aXXou,
argues that "the broad principle is com
mon to him with Plato," though "each
has his own way of applying it."
General Objections to the schetne of
Plato s Republic : 1428.
14 Here too it would have been as
well to state that these remarks are nothing
new, but only a repetition of c. 2, although
as new points arise out of them (see Ana
lysis p. 104) there is much greater justifi
cation than there was in the case of c. 3
4-7 and c. 4 4-8: cp. n. (149).
SUSEM. (164)
33 irpo iovo-a] advancing (to a certain a
degree of unity), "if its unity be carried I
far " ; explained by yLvo^vr} fiia fj.d\\ov
in 2 2.
34 wo-rrep KOLV KT\] "as if one were /
to turn the concord of parts into unison,!
or the rhythm into a single step." Seef
Probl. XIX. 38, 3, 921 a 2, cru/t^wvt a Kpa-
crt s e(rrt \6yov e~x6vTwv evavrluv Trpds d X-
35 (7u//0wi i a = consonance of the toices
singing one part with the instruments
playing another : cp. Probl. xi x. 39,
II. 5. 16]
1263 b 23 1264 a 4.
239
f% 15 d\\d Set , TT\ri6os ov, warrep eiprjrai Trporepov, 8ta rrjv irai- 10
Sclav KOivrjV Kal fjilav iroielv Kal TOV 76 /LteXXo^ra irai&zicLV
> / v /> 5> v >/ /I v /^
eiaayeiv, Kai vofiL^ovTa oia ravrr)^ eaeauai TTJV Trohiv (TTTOV-
Saiav, droTTOV rot9 TOIOVTOIS olecrOai Siopdovv, aXXa /AT) rot?
40 edecri Kal rfj (f)i\o<TO(f)La Kal rot? z o/zot?, wairep rd Trepl
ra? KTrjcreis ev AaKeSalfAOVi Kal Kprjrrj rot? arvcraiTiois 6
1 6 16 vop,o6erri^ eicoivwa-ev. Set Se ^Se rovro avro dyvoeiv, ori ^pr/ ( P . 3 i)
TO) TroXXft) xpovtp Kai rot? TroXXot? erecriv, ev ot? /v^ 1
\adev, el ravra aXdj9 el%ev Trdvra <ydp
{lev, aXXa ra /xei^ 01) crvvfjKTai, rot? 5 01)
39 <deiv> diopdovv Spengel || 40 ^ (9e(ri p 1
1264 a i eKolvwve P 2 - 3 - 4 and P 1 (corr. ), eKowuisycre M s and P 1 (ist hand)
II 1 || Bk. 2 omits avrb || 2 ^ea-tv Ar., 20i>e(nv Bernays (hardly right)
Chappell History of Music pp. n f., 16.
Whereas in 6/io0owia one or more sets
of voices or instruments give the same
noteji. Similarly pv9fj.6s, i) rrjs /co^Tw?
rd^is "(PL Laws II 665 A), is the orderly
succession of steps in dancing or notes
of music of certain definite lengths. The
unit or element of which long succes
sions of times are composed is /Sacrts,
* step in dancing, foot in metre. This
is clear from Metaph. xiv (N) i. 10,
1087 b 33, TO 5 v ore [JL^rpov (Trj/maivei,
(f>ave p6v . Kal ev iravrl ecrrt TL erepovinroKei-
fj.evov, olov ev ap^oviq. diecris (in music a
quarter-tone, the smallest interval), ev
5 /teytOei SOKTV\OS rj TTOVS rj TL TOLOVTOV,
iv 5 pvdfj,ols /Sdcris y ffvX\a(3r). Instead
of the regular orderly sequence of /Sdo-ets,
steps in dancing or feet in recitation,
of various lengths, there will be only a
single monotonous step or a single beat.
15 36 irporepov] 58. SUSEM.
(165)
37 KOIVI]V iroietv] widen it so that all
shall share in it.
TOV Y e jxeXXovTa iraiSefav KT\] Comp.
7 8 n. (238), and below 18, 19.
SUSEM. (165 b)
39 rots ToiovTois = such direct, com
pulsory measures, as Plato proposes.
40 g0<ri, <f>iXoo-o<}>a, VOJJLOIS] Comp.
<f>v(Tis, Zdos, \6yos of iv(vn). 13. ii n.
(887). SUSEM. (166)
4>i\o(ro(|>La] in the wider sense, cul-
^tur as in 7 12. So Rhct.\\. 23. iTi 6f
Epaminondas and Pelopidas, perhaps a
quotation from Alkidamas. An approxi
mation to Isocrates use of the word for
literary training.
rd irpl TO.S KTI]O-IS] Aristotle s fond
ness for social institutions of the Cretan
and Spartan type see 7, n. (158) is
here seen in a new direction, of which we
shall hear more in c. 9 31 n, (341), 10
7, 8, iv(vn). 10 9, 10 and notes.
Compare further notes 168, 192, 208 IT,
234, 236 b. SUSEM. (166)
16 1264 a 3 OVK av 2\a0ev] An
appeal to the evidence of history. It is
like Aristotle to seek for the doctrines
he approves some basis in tradition, au
thority, popular or wide-spread beliefs.
"An institution which has flourished in
many different ages and races must pre
sumably fulfil some want and correspond
to some deeply-seated instinct." Grote
rejoins that the same objection (like the
objection of impossibility) would apply
to the novelties in his own ideal state.
But Aristotle might fairly have argued
that the long time which has elapsed
without a communistic state makes it the
less likely that one ever will be estab
lished, as no originating cause seems
forthcoming adequate to start it.
4 ov o-vvTJKTcu] have not been syste- i
matized. A synthesis is wanting.
rots 8 ov XP" VTCU ] Much that is
known is not introduced because it is
regarded as impracticable. Assuming
that the earth, and doubtless the race of
men upon it (8 21 .), has always ex
isted and always will exist Aristotle
shares the conviction of Plato and most
other Greek thinkers that there has not
been one single historical development of
humanity, but it has begun and been
carried on, in a manner similar if not quite
the same, for innumerable times over and
over again. Hence to a greater or less
240
nOMTIKHN B. 5.
[II. 5. 17
17 tyivwcrKovres. [AaXiara 8 av yevoiro fyavepov, el rt? TO 9 ep-
6 70^9 i$oi rrjv roiavTTjv 7ro\(,Telav /carao-Keva^ofjLevrjv ov jap
Bwrfcrerai fir) fJLepifav avra KOI ^wpi^wv Troirjo ai rrjv TTO-
\w, ra pev et9 crvao-lrLa ra o~e et? cfrparplas KOI (f>v\ds.
ware ovSev a\\o <TVp,(3r)creTai vevo^oOerrujLevov TfXrjv /Jirj ryecop-
10 yeiv roi)? (fivXarcas ojrep Kal vvv AaKeSai/jiovioi iroielv eTri-
18 xeipovaiv. [ov ^v aXX ovSe jo rpoiros r^J? 0X77? TroXtre/a? r/<?
ecrrai rot? KOIVCOVOVCTIV, ovr* etpyfcev 6 ^co/cparr)^ ovre pdftiov
7 avrtSv Aid., avTyv Thorn., avrovs Backer, av Bernays, d rra Jackson, avriKa
Welldon || 8 <f>arpias M s P 2 - ;i Q b T b Aid. Susem. 2 - 3 , 0arptds P 1 || 9 <w<5<^ after
aXXo M S P X |1 10 Kal vvv] roivvv Trieber
extent everything has existed before, and
there is nothing new under the sun : all
discoveries have been already made and
then lost again, so that they need to be
rediscovered. See Zeller II ii 792. Comp.
Susemihl in Jahrb. f. PhiloL vol. cm.
1871. p. 135 ff.: iv(vii). 10 7, 8 ;/.
(828). Plato however would have had
all the more right to reply to this objec
tion that he himself has but made such a
rediscovery: that, as Chicken observes,
he has only followed Aristotle s advice
and collected institutions hitherto widely
scattered : that his innovation consists
solely in this combination of old material,
as all the elements of his ideal state were
to be found previously isolated, some in
Sparta and Crete, others amongst the
Pythagoreans, and others again in So
crates. Comp. Zeller s Plato p. 483 f.
SUSEM. (167)
This view found a strong expression
from K. F. Hermann 77ic historical ele
ments of Plato s ideal of a state > in Gesam.
Abhandl. VII. 140; "Plato has drawn
every single feature in his picture of the
state from the actual political life of
Greece : he has but applied the abstrac
tions of science to produce a formal and
harmonious combination." It is at least
obvious that the Spartan 0,701777 is, in a
manner, the true starting-point of Plato,
as of Xenophon and Aristotle (Grote in.
209 211); but some caution should be
exercised in the choice of precedents.
Thus L. H. Morgan Ancient Society p.
417 conjectures that the system of rela
tionship propounded in Rep. v 461 D,
Tim. 18 C, D was derived from " tradi
tions not known to us " : and Curtius
(History of Greece I p. 181 Eng. trans.)
that the three orders of society Rep. iv
were adopted from Crete (see n. 818):
two features of the scheme which bear in
a high degree the stamp of originality. /
17 5 TOIS ^p-yois] actually in process
of formation." The plural is used as
well as the singular pyu> with or without
the article, in prose or poetry.
8 els o-vo-o-iTia] See n. (166). That
Plato too intended this, was shown in n.
(153) on i. From the expression here
and in 15 we might be led to believe
that this was not the case. Comp. 19 n.
(170), 24 n. (ryg), 27 n. (184) : 6
3 (187), 5 n. (195). SUSEM. (168)
(j>parpias] The form Qarpia (as in
Aeschines II 147), not <pparpia, is sup
ported by the Corpus Inscr. Att. n. No.
599, 1. i with Kohler s remark; Philippi
Contributions to a history of the Athenian
citizenship (Bcitriigcu. s. w. Berlin 1870)
p. 177 nn. 55, 56; Biirmann Three
Studies in Attic Law in Jahrb. f. Phil.
Suppl. ix. p. 615. At the same time <pp
is often written in the cursive MSS. with a
small hook to 0, so that <p and 0p can
hardly be distinguished with certainty
from one another. In such a case there
fore it may be advisable to depart from
the one safe principle of following the
oldest manuscript authority and to retain
the only rational form <f>p even against
the codices. Comp. 3 6 n. (141). SU
SEM. (169)
10 Kal vvv] Here again, as so often
in these chapters and elsewhere, vvv does
not mean at the present time but ac
tually , and 7Toiiv errixeipovo-iv is but a
limiting expression for TTOLOIXTLV.
18 ti 6 rpoiros TTJS oXrjs iroXireCas
KT\] "has never explained what is the
nature of the entire polity which (these)
members of the community share. Yet
the bulk of the state is made up in effect
by the bulk of citizens other than the
guardians." For ol d XXoi TroXtrcu, see
20, and n. on 4 4.
II. 5. 20]
1264 a 5- 1264 a 22.
241
el-jrelv. Kairou (r^ov TO ye ir\rj0o^ r^ TroXew? TO TOW &\- (II)
X*? iro\iT<Sv -/iverai 77X^09, irepl &v ov8ev Su&purnu, 7r6re-
ispov^ KOI roi? ryecopyoK Kowfo elvai Set T fc /CTrjaei? r, [ K al]
KdO HtcacrTOV ISias, en & K al ryvvaiKas teal vra^a? ISiovs
19?) KOivov*. el ^ev jdp rbv avrov rp67rop Koiva irdvra irdv- 12
TG>V, TL Siofoovo-iv oZo etceivwv T&V $v\aKcov; % ri 7r\elov
v avrup , j) ri Tra&We? faofwovai
Idv PJ Tl ao&favrai TOLOVTOV olov Kprjre? ;
e/ceivoi ydp T(l\\a ravrd TO?? SovXois e^eWe? ^ovov dfa-
20piJKao-i, ra ryvpvd(Tia Kal TTJV TWV OTrXcov /crfjo-iv. el Se, /ca-
15 al after rj untranslated by William and Ar. || 16 K <d after 8t omitted by
19 apxovffi or something similar, in the place of inrotfvowi, Lambin
Thurot: Bernays omits 18 tf ri 7r\e?o, ...... cx^V with Ar. and transposes
to follow 20 eM,, || .a.e^re, pi H Bekk. Bernays, but Traces P^ (corr )
1 raura P, 7T,ra Ar. (?), Koraes || a0e TO
P- Qb 1* U* Aid. Lk. and apparently
and I* (ist hand) |
P 4 (ist hand), perhaps rightly
19 17 el fxiv vdp KT\] Aristotle
might well have spared himself the consi
deration of this possibility. It is strange
that he has not learnt from Plato whether
this third order of citizens is to have
community of families and of property ;
whether, in other words, just those
characteristics which, like their educa
tion, are distinctive of the two upper
classes in the ideal state, are to be ex
tended to the third, or not. It is not
easy to imagine -a..^trQnger^case"oTi!Sa-
bihty to" transport oneselfTo an nn.
ponent s sphere of thought. In fact
he cannot be acquitted of very culpable
carelessness in the use of the work he is
criticizing. As regards community of
property at any rate, Plato has most
; expressly said Rep. in 417 A, iv 419
j that nothing of the kind is to exist
i amongst citizens of the third class, leaving
room for no doubt whatever as to his real
opinion. Nor is Aristotle even consistent.
For in 4 4 above he has, with better
reason, raised an objection which is only
intelligible if these institutions are not
supposed existing in the third class of
J^ns- Comp. 24 n. (179); also n.
(108) and the references there given.
SUSEM. (170,)
1 8 i] ri TrXttov KT\] See Critical
Notes. The sense we require is not,
what compensation will those receive
who submit to their rule?" (which is
repeated in the next sentence), but " what
H.
advantage will the rulers have over their
subjects ? " The older commentators en
deavoured to extract this by taking ro?s
VTrofj.ei ovcrc rj]v apx^v^To^ vTro/j.ei>ov<riv
aVx etI/ , " those who undertake to govern."
But this is against the sense of uTro/xe-
vovffi in the next clause: "or what in
ducement will (the rest of the citizens)
have to submit to them ? "
20 <ro<jnvTcu] = devise or contrive
(Eaton).
olov KpTyres] See on 9 3 n. (281)
and Exc. in. This statement is con
firmed by the skolion of the Cretan poet
Hybrias there quoted. See also iv(vn).
10. i n. (820). SUSEM. (171)
21 TOIS 8ov\ois e<j>e vTs] " while al
lowing their serfs the same rights with
themselves in other things, have deprived
them"...(d7rety077/cacri would be have pro
hibited ). As we now know, ot /c^es was
the proper term for these serfs, but they
are called dov\oi passif/i in the inscription
of Gortyn.
"The arguments in 2024 ( ^,
Kada.Trep...yeupyu)v yvvaiKes) are in the
main quite correct, but apply just as much
to Aristotle s ideal state as to Plato s
(Oncken). Yet see n. (177)." SUSEM.
(172)
Comp. Grote in. pp. 213215, who
lays stress on the spiritual pride, and
contempt for the ST^OS, certain to be nur
tured in the breasts of the guardians.
242
nOAITIKHN B. 5.
[II. 5. 20
Odirep ev rat? d\\ais 7ro\ecri, /cal Trap 1 e/celvoi? earai ra (II)
ToiavTd, T/9 6 rpoiros ecrrai rrjs Koivwvias , ev fj,ia yap TTO-
25 \6L Svo TroXet? dva^Kalov elvai,, /cal ravras virevawrias
aXX?;Xcu9. Trotet jap rou9 /^ez^ (f>v\aKa<? olov (fcpovpovs, 7-01)9 Se
21 yecopyovs /cat 7-01)9 re^viras Kal 7-01)9 d\\ov$ TroXtTa?. ery/c\r)- 13
fjiara Se Kal Sl/cai, Kal oaa aXXa rat9 VoXeo-ti/ virdp^eiv
(^rjcrl KdKa, 7rdv0 virdp^ei Kal TOVTOLS. Kairoi \e<yei 6 Seo-
30! tfjoaT??9 W9 oy TroXXtoi SeijcTovrai vo/jiLfjLwv Sid Tr)v TratSelav,
j oloz; do-TWo/jiiKWv Kal dyopavofjLiKoov Kal T&V d\\wv TGOV
TTOie TGOV
TOU9
24 Congreve brackets
^ aTTocfropdv (pepov- (p.
20 23 Kivois = rocs aXXots TroXt-
rcus, the citizens of the third class, rd
roiavra] family life and separate pos
sessions.
24 TLS 6 rpouos TT)S KOivwvias]
What will be the means of uniting them ?
How will they associate as fellow-citizens
with the two upper classes, who have
such dissimilar institutions ?
tv [JLia -yap KT\] This is the very re
proach which Plato levels at the existing
polities : e/cctcrT?; avr&v 7r6Aets et crt ird/uL-
TroAXcu, dA\ ov 7r6XiS...5uo ^ev yap KQ.V
QTLOVV 7, TroXe/ii a dXXvjXoiy, i) /j.ev Trevrjnov,
i) Se Tr\ov<rlwv Rep, IV 422 E; and VIII
551 D (Eaton). SUSEM. (173)
26 olov <}>povpous] Rep. in 415 D, E;
IV 419 dXX drexj cus, (pair) dV, uffwep e-rri-
Kovpot /jucrdwroi ev rrj TroXei <pa.ivovTai. Ka-
6r)<jdai. ovdev dXXo TJ (ppovpou vre s.
SUSEM. (174)
27 iroXtTas is predicate : "his citi
zens are the farmers and the artizans, &c."
As Grote justly remarks, this is a larger
and more generous conception of the
purpose of political institutions than any
we find elsewhere in Greece, even in
Aristotle, who sets aside the rest <jf the
people as not members of the common
wealth, iv(vn). 9. 3. Plato not only
treats them as integral parts of the state,
but in a sense makes them the ultimate
object of his solicitude. It is for them
that he sacrifices the private pleasure of
the guardians, and compels his philo
sophic rulers to descend into the cave.
Both rulers and guardians are truly public
servants, whose duty it is to protect and
benefit their fellows, Rep. 463 B.
21 29 cjnjorl] Rep. V 464 D : rl St ;
5^/cai re Kal yK\-/)fJi.aTa TT/OOS dXX^-
Xous OVK ol xfiffeTQ.i, e avruv, Cp. n.
(163). SUSEM. (175)
Kal TOTJTOLS] just as much to the citi
zens of Callipolis (ib. odev Sr t VTrdp^et. ro6-
rots dcrracridcrrots ovffi) ; for by 1. 27 the
farmers, artizans &c. who make up the
third class, are citizens.
Xe -yei 6 2wKp.] Rep. iv 425 c, D : -fj
Kal TO 7rapdirai> dyopavo/jiiKa d rra ij
&&lt;TTVVOfJi,iK& T) eXXc/xei i/cd 77 ocra aXXa
roiaOra, TOVTUV roX^cro/xev Ttvo/Aodereivi
a\\ ovK^cgiov. Cp. n. (163). SUSEM. (176)
31 do~Tvvo|Ji.iKwv Kal ayop.] Comp.
iv(vn). 12. 7 . (865). SUSEM. (176 b)
" Laws concerning city-police and
market-police." Dionysius says of the
Roman aediles (vi. 90) cr%e5dv eof/cacri
TTWS /card rd TrXeurra rots Trap "EXX^aiV
dyopavo/j.ois.
32 Take IAOVOV with TOIS (pv\a%w. This
objection proceeds from an acute appre
hension that in outward aspect the ideal
state would not greatly differ from an
ordinary Greek city, in spite of its stand
ing army, half Amazons, and its govern
ment of experienced military officers
distinguished as savants, who (like the
Jesuits in Paraguay or the English in
India) are at another stage of develop
ment, and belong intellectually and mo
rally to a wholly different world from
the mass of the population.
22 33 Kvptovs ... <J>e povras] How
precisely the connexion is to be under
stood was explained in n. (153) on i.
Practically the result is much as Aristotle
represents it, and this is certainly man
aged differently in his own pattern state.
SUSEM. (177) PI. Rep. v 464 c :
Trapd T&V d XXw? rpocprji* Xa/xjSdfovras,
TTJS <pv\aK7)s, KOLvrj Trd^ras dva\i-
v, IV 416 D, E : rd 5 7riT7j5eta, ocrwv
II. 5. 25] 1264 a 23 1264 b 7.
ra9 d\\d TTO\V fjud\\oi>
35 fjbdrwv TrXr/pew ^ T<Z? Trap
23 /eal SofXe/a?. aXXa
e/cos evai, %ae7rovs Ka
eVtot? L\a)T6ia<> re Kal
etV dva^Kala ravd* o/zotw?
243
- (II)
erre
76
Kal
Trep
rt? 7;
ourej
eivai
d\\d
TCOV
TOVTWV re 7ro\iTLa /cal 7raio~eia Kal vbfjioi TiVe?. eaTi
39 evpeiv paSiov, ovre TO Siatyepov fJUKpbv, TO TTOLOVS
24 TOiyrof? 7T/309 TO <j<wecr$6U Tr]V TWV (f)v\aKO)v Koivwviav.
1264 bft^ et 76 r9 /Ltez^ yvvaiKas Tcoirjcrei KOivds ra? Se
IBlas, rt? OLKOvo/jiija-ei, waTrep Ta ejrl TWV dypcov ol dvSpes
avTwv ; K,av el Kowal al KTijcreis Kal ai TWV yecopywv yvvai-
/ce9 * *. dTOTrov Se Kal TO 6K Twv 6r)piwv TroieicrOai, TI]V ira- is
5 pa/3o~\rji>, OTL Sel Ta avrd eTriTijBeiiew r9 ^vvaiKa^ rot9
25 dvSpcwtv, ot9 oiKovofJiias ovSev yLterecrrt^. eTTfo-^aXe? Se /cat
rou9 dpftovras co9 tcaOlffTTja-iv 6 ^coKpar^ del yap TTOLGL TOV$
35 Trei/icrm as P 2>3 T b || 36 [/cat SouAet as] or /cai <rotai5ras> SouAa as Susem.,
Kat Trepiot/ci as Schneider, /wan as or </cot; / as~> 5ouXetas Schmidt || 37 Siupiffrai
<KO.I irepi O.VTUI Kal ? Susem. || 39 TTOCOVS TIVO.S P 2 3 " 4 Q b Bk. || elvai <5eZ>
Scaliger <SeI> eti/at Spengel
1264 b 3 /ccu/...7Ufa?/ces. These words in II 1 come before 2 wcrirep (p 1 corrected
this in the margin) : Sylburg and Bk. bracket them ; Schneider and Koraes transpose
them to precede 2 TI S olKovo^rjcei., Koraes reading i et re for d ye. Thurot first
discovered the lacuna
tution and education and code of laws
are in force in the case of the citizens
at large."
^40 sc. 5ta0epet irpos TO cra><r0CH.
The construction as in i26ob 16 ;/.
24 ctXXd pr\v KT\] But supposing
he intends to leave their property in in-
dividual ownership, and yet to introduce
community of wives, where are the wo-
men to be found to superintend house-
hold matters as the men manage the
work in the fields?
"What was said in n. (170) applies
again to this argument in the mutilated
state of the text." SUSEM. (179)
1264 b 4 K TWV 0T]piv] Rep. V
451 D. SUSEM. (180)
Troiio-0at rr}v irapapoXiiv, OTL] should
show by a comparison from the lower
animals that.... In Rhet. n. 20 2, 5
7rapa/3oX^ = simile.
25 7 del yap KT\] In the Plato-
nic state the government is not actually
in the hands of the same individuals in
perpetuity. None except members of the
highest order, the philosophers, are eligi-
ble as rulers, but they enter the ruling
body by rotation. SUSEM. (181)
1 6 2
re Kal avdpe ioi, ra^afMtvovs Trapa rCov a\\wv
TToXtrwi dexeffdai [j,icrdbi> T^S (f>v\aK7Js ro-
ffovrov offov fj.rire Treptet^at avrols et s rbv
eviavrov fj,7)re evSelv.
diro<})opdv] a rent in kind.
34 \a\eirovis KT\] troublesome and
full of arrogance.
35 TO.S irap vtois... irV<rTas] See
9 2 n. (280). SUSEM. (178)
36 SovXeCas] Ridgeway Transactions
p. 132 thinks the word means "the serf
populations of states like Argos and Crete,
called Tv^vrjffLoi. at Argos, and
A^a/xtwrat
in Crete," quoting Thuc. v. 23 where the
word is used of the Helots, r]v d i) 8ov-
Xda C7raj>t<rr??rcu. So also by Plato, Laws
776 D of the Mariandyni.
23 dr dva-yKcua KrX] We are re-
called to 18 ; the question, trepl wv
ou5&&gt; diupurrai, is the tenure of property
amongst the ordinary citizens. "Whether
it is equally necessary here"< as in the
case of the Guardians, to have com-
munism > "or not, has certainly not
been determined, as matters stand." ravra
= Koiva. irdvra of line 17 above.
37 Kal irepl TWV Ixoixt vwv] "Nor
about the following points : what consti-
244
nOAITIKHN B. 5.
[II. 5. 25
, TOVTO Se crracrea)? ainov ^iverai KOL^ Trapd (II)
rot? /jbyev wfjia KeKT7]fjievoLS, iJTrovOev Srj Trapd <ye 6v-
^oetSe<Tt KOI Tro XefjiiKols dvBpd<Tii>. ort, Se dvay/calov avTu>
ii Troielv TOZ)? avTOvs dp^ovras, (fravepov ov ydp ore ^ev d\\oi<$
ore Be aAAot? fjuefjULtcraL rat? i/rt^afc 6 ?rapa TOI) #eo{)
cro9, aXV aet rot? aurot?. c^crl Se rot? //,ez/ ev6v<s
VOL? filial Xpvo-ov, rot? S dpyvpov, %a\Kov Se /cat
27 rot? TexyiTais fjue\\ov(riv eaecrOai /cal yeoopyois. en Be KOL 16
dtyaipov fjuevo^ TU>V (frvXatcw, O\TIV facrl Selv
iroidv r^v 7ro\iv TOP vo^oOerriv. d^vvaTOV Se
9 rj irovdev Sr, T 3 - fi Q b T b U b Aid. and P 2 (corr.-), ij trovdev 8rj P 2 (ist hand), ^
Sr? P 4 , ^Trou^ev 5i) P 1 , etVoufle? 817 TAP, 17 TTO^ 76 5/) Vettori Bk. 1 , ^ ^Oev ?
Gottling, i) 8f,irov6fr ye Spengel ii 13 5e] 7^ ? Susem. II ev8t H 2 Bk. & P 1 (ist hand)
9 ai[Jia = dignity, valuation. There
is no such distinction in Aristotle (as
there is in Thucydides) between your own
estimate, aiu<ns, and that of others,
10 0vp.oiSeo-i...dv8pd<ri] The mem
bers of the second order of citizens,
Guardians in the narrower and inexact
sense ((pv\aKes = eirLKOvpot.) from whom
the first class (<xpx oj/Tes ) are drafted off.
For after they have attained the age of
twenty, only the better qualified amongst
them proceed to the higher education in
mathematics; and out of these again at
thirty only the very ablest receive instruc
tion five years longer in philosophy (dia-
\KTLK-/j). Then after fifteen years more
devoted to practical life, after serving in
higher commands, they are at length re
ceived into the highest order, the rulers
proper: see Rep. vii 536 D ff., comp. .
(970) on iv(vii). 17. 15 and Zeller s
Plato p. 480 n. (69). In the Aristotelian
model-state, however, all citizens in later
life may attain to a share in the govern
ment and administration; provided, that
is, their fellow-citizens elect them to the
particular offices of state for which they
are eligible. See on in. i 10 n. (44) 4
5 (471), J 3 I2 (599) iv(vii). 9 9
(817), T 3 9 (885) and Exc. i to^ B.
v(vili). As Eaton remarks, dvfj.oeLdel s
men of spirit is Plato s own term (Rep.
Ii 375 B, 3760) for his caste of warriors:
comp. in. 16 i n. (641), iv(vii). 7 5
(786), 7 (79). I0 3 (839) *5 9
(935 SUSEM. (182)
26 on 8e dvavK. KT\] "Aristotle
apparently does not observe that Plato s
myth does not answer its purpose, as it
does not recognize the promotion of eiri-
Kovpoi to be 0i XaKes." JACKSON.
13 <j>T]o-l 8e] Rep. in 415 A. SUSEM.
(183)
v0ijs y tv> ] directly they are born, at
the moment of birth : evdv of time is not
good Greek.
27, 28 This relates to one of the
most brilliant and striking episodes of
the Republic: the objection of Adei-
mantus at the opening of B. iv that
Socrates has insufficiently provided for
the happiness of his guardians: 419
421 c.
15 gn 8e...i7 vop.o9eVT]v] Here Aris
totle is guilty of a further piece of care
lessness. Plato certainly says, 420 15, ov ^r\v
-rrpbs TOVTO fi\<;Troi>Tes rrjv TTO\<.V old-
o/j.ev, OTTWS eV TL rj/MV ZQvos <JTO.I 5ia<pe-
P JVTUS evSai/jiOV, o,XX OTTWS OTL ^dXicrra
o\?7 TJ TroXts: but Aristotle has not at
tended to another passage v 465 0466
B, where this thread is taken up (^/j-vrja-ai
odv OTL v ro?s TTpbvdev OVK oI5 OTOV \6yos
7)/UUl> 7TTr\f]^V, OTL TOI>S <f>V\CLKaS OVK
evoaifjiovas iroioifiev) and to the later dis
cussion ix 680 692 B, whence it ap
pears that the former statement is only
provisionally made. Plato s ultimate de
cision is the very opposite: that his
polity is the sole means whereby the
Guardians can attain to perfect happiness
(465 D ri<rov<n TOV /ia/captorou /3tou, 5^ ol
0\v/mTTiov?KaL fwcrt, /m/ca/Hwrepoi ). Thus
this objection breaks down entirely. We
have had instances of similar negligence
already in 17 n. (168), 19 (170), 24
(179) : and there is another in 6 5 (195).
Moreover in iv(vn). 9 7 Aristotle him
self says evoai/uLOva. TTO\LV OVK els
II. 6. 2] 1264 b 8 1264 b 31. 245
0X771 , /W-T) TWV 7r\eia-rwv r) [^r/] TTO.VTWV fjbepwv rj (II)
Trjv evBaifioviav. ov yap TWV avTwv TO evBaL-l
20 /Jiovetv wvirep TO apTLov TOVTO fj,ev yap evBe^erai rw oXco ;
VTrdp^eiv, TOOV Be jjbepwv ^BeTepy, TO Be evBaifAoveiv dBv-
28 va-rov. d\\d fjurfv el ol (j)v\a/ces JJLYJ evBalfjioves, TtVe? ere-
poi ; ov yap Brj O L ye Te^ylTai teal TO TrXr/^o? TO TWV (Bavavcrwv.
6 TI fjiev ovv 7ro\LTeia Trepl r}? 6 ^coKpciTij^ elprjKev, TCUVTCL^ III
25 re r9 dTropias e^ei KOL TOVTCOV OVK eXarrot;? erepa? 1 a"X, e ~ ^ 33)
Sbv Be 7rapa7r\7](TLa)<; KCU TCI Trepl TOU? FO/ZOU? e^eu TOI)? i/crre-
pov ypa$evTas, Bio KOI nrepl r% evravBa TroXtre/a? eVt-
cFKe^aa Ocu, /Ai/cpd /3e\Tiov. teal yap ev Ty TroXtreta Trepl
o\iywv Tca^LTcav Biwpt/cev 6 ^coKpaTrj^, Trepl re yvvaiicwv
30 teal TZKVWV KOLvwvias, TTCO? %iv Bel, KOI Trepl /CT?;cre&K, <fcal
40 <7repl TT)S TratSewi?, Trolav TIVCL Bel ytveaOai TOIV <frv\dKwv,> KOL
! 31 T//? TroXtrei a? r?)^ TCL^IV (Biaipeii~aL Be et? 8uo /J<epr) TO
1 8 /r>) Trat-rwj 17 rwi ir\dffTwv fj-epuiv Boiesen || et /UT) Vettori, but then ei /x?; Traf-
rwi/ should be transposed to come after 19 TLV&V \\ [i^rf] iravrwv Lindau Zeller (P/iil.
d, Gr. ii ii 698 n. 2) the easiest alteration. Busse transposes the second ^ to
precede TIVWV || 77 TLVWV omitted by Bojesen || 20 ua-jrep M P 1 (ist hand
emended by p 1 ), and P 2 (corr. 1 ), wvirep the remaining authorities including F, rendered
quorum ct by William || 26 rd is omitted by II 2 Bk. || 30 KO.L is inserted after
TKVUV by II 3 || After /cr^uews Susem. inserts the clause KO! trepl...<f>v\&K(>}v from
1264 b 40, 1265 a l ; Introd. p. 79 f. || the last /cat] /card 1 Schmidt, accepting the
transposition || 31 <5e] yap II 2 Ar. Bk.
Ti j3\^\l/avras del \eyeiv aur?}s, dXX as be genuine. According to Diog. Laer.
irdvras rous TroXtras : where see note. in. 37 it was published by Philip of Opus
SUSEM. (184) after Plato s death.
18 if TIVWV KT\] "or unless at least 28 ircpl oXi-ytov KT\] "has precisely
certain definite parts," viz. the most im- determined very few things." In this
portant, "attain happiness." SUSEM. comparison of the Republic with the Laws
(185) Aristotle s tendency to look for definite
19 ov yap TWV avrwv XT\] "For results (noticed above, c. 2) is especially
happiness is not a thing of the same sort prominent. lie is in no way concerned
with evenness, which may be an attribute to exhaust the differences between the
of the sum (of two numbers) where it is two polities : indeed the whole discussion
not an attribute of either of the numbers started with the dogmatic inquiry, what
themselves." The sum of two odd num- are the limits of community in civil life ?
bers, 3 + 5, is even. i 2. But one cannot help seeing that
c. 6 Comparison of the Republic and the deepest ground of this difference, the
the Laws : 15. Examination of the altered philosophical standpoint and the
polity proposed in the Laws : 622. change in the conception of the state, has
_See Analysis p. 104, Introd. p. 33 escaped him: had he clearly recognised
with notes; Zeller Platonic Studies p. this, he would not have expressed him-
203 207, and pp. i 144 generally; self as he has in 5 (Zeller). See however
Oncken i. 194209; Van der Rest pp. 4 (T. L. Heath).
181 344. 31 TTJV rd^iv] Understand 8iupiKe,
1 27 vrav9a] In the Laws. though the change of construction is
Evidently Aristotle assumes the work to unusual.
246
nOAITIKON B. 6.
[II. 6. 2
32 7T\7J0os TCOV olrcovvTwv, TO pev els TOVS tyewpyovs, TO Se els TO (HI)
irpoTToXefjiovv f^epos TpiTOV 8 e /e TOVTGOV TO povKevofjievov teal
3fcvpi,ov Trjs TToXeo)?), Trepl Se TO>^ yecopywv real T>V
35 TroTepov ovbe/Jiias r) /jLeTe^ovai TWOS /o%^9, /cat iroTepov
Set K6KTr}(70ai /cal TOVTOVS fcal cri/^TroXeyLte^ 77 /AT;, Trepl rou-
T0)z^ ouSez^ SiwpiKev o ^w/cpaT^s, d\\d ra? yu-ez/ <yvvaiKas
oleTai Sew o-VfJbTTo XeiJielv teal TraiSelas p,eTe%eiv 7-579
TOLS (
39 Xo7<HS after irei
ted by IVPP 1 Bender
Susem. 1 * 3 following William s translation: it is omit
2 32 For the repetition of els
compare iv(vn). 14 12, and possibly
12 6.
33 irpoiroXejJiouv] Plato s word Rep.
IV 423 A.
rpiTOv 8* IK TOTJTWV] Comp. n. 182
SUSEM. (186). Supply earl. "The de
liberative and supreme (executive) body
of the state (is) a third order formed out
of these latter" He quite correctly takes
the apxovres to be a committee chosen
out of the eTriKovpot : specially trained
military officers, of mature experience
and of great eminence in science, are
from time to time coopted into the
governing order. In the individual soul
the gulf is fixed between the Aoyi<TTt/coi/
and the other two parts which make up
TO aXoyov : but in the state the wide dis
tinction is between dpxovres and ewiKovpot
together, i.e. 0uXa/ces in the vaguer sense,
on the one hand, and ot aXXoi TroXtrcu on
the other.
3 34 irepl 8e TWV Y^cop-ywv KrX] Here
Aristotle contradicts himself again : see
on 5 17 11. (168), 19 (170), 24 (179),
6 5 ( J 95)- For at 5 25 above he
recognised quite rightly that even the
members of the second order are to have
no real share in the administration :
whereas now he expresses doubt whether
some part in it may not fall to the third
order, and whether they too are not to
go out on military service ! If there is
one thing which Plato has made clear it
undoubtedly is his principle of the di
vision of labour. This, which he puts
into the foreground, prohibits the shoe
maker from ever attempting to be at the
same time a tradesman or a carpenter or
a farmer: <z fortiori it prohibits the
artizan or farmer from serving likewise as
soldier ; and either of them, or even the
soldier, from ruling. See Zeller Plato p.
470 f. SUSEM. (187)
37 ovS^v 8iwpiKv] Yet see Rep. V
468 A.
dXXd rds jxev KrX] Consult the note
following. SUSEM. (188)
38 o-vjjnroX[j.iv] Rep. V 451 E, 457
A, 466 E, 471 D.
39 rots eD0v KrX] But in the Repub.
Plato treats of the community of children
and wives v 457 B 466 D, of the regula
tion of property relations in 415 D 417
B, of education II 376 E III 412 B, VI
502 c vii 535 A, x 595 A 608 B, of
the division into the three orders of
citizens, n 367 376 E, in 412 c iv
445 E, v 466 D vi 502 c, vii 535 A
541 B (comp. II 376 E ill 412 B, VI
502 c vii 541 B), of the women s share
in the duties of the guardians v 449 A
457 B, so that this whole work is literally
filled with what Aristotle has here cited ;
only the first two books lay the founda
tion for it and the eighth and ninth
enlarge upon the other forms of govern
ment. Thus independently of the dis
cussions on the immortality of the soul
x 608 c 621 D nothing is left which
could come under the head of these dis
cussions which lie outside the subject.
The treatment of the above questions is
no doubt crossed over and over again by
dissertations on metaphysics, the theory
of cognition, psychology, and ethics.
This is what Aristotle really means, and
he might from his standpoint consider
them as not properly belonging to the
subject. But that is no correct standard
of judgment. What should have com
pelled Plato to write a purely political
work in the Republic? Why might it
not have been his intention to present a
work in which the specially political dis
cussion was only an organic member of a
more comprehensive whole? SUSEM.
(189)
"In answering the question What is
II. 6. 4]
1264 b 32 1265 a 3.
247
40 TOP \6yov* Kal irepl TT^S iraiScCas, iroCav rivd 8i Y tv<r0ai ( ni )
12 1 4 T " v ^^K^V- TcS^ Se v6fji(i)v TO fjiev Tr\eicrTov yaepo? VO/JLOL 2
Tvy%dvovanv 6We?, o\i<ya Se Trepl r?9 TroXtrem? elpriKev. KOI
ravrrjv /3ouXo/^ez>o9 KotvoTepav Troielv rat? TroXeo-i Kara /u-
40 ro^ X^o^ untranslated by William, Ar., [ro^ XOYOP] Susem. 1 --; but F is uncer
tain and it is better to follow II 2 , as I now think, or else with M H P 1 to omit \67ots
the subject of a given Platonic dialogue?
it is convenient to distinguish the subject
of the conversation from the subject or
subjects of the work. Thus in the case
of the Republic, though the thesis ws a/xet-
vov 5iKaioff6vi) d5t/a as is the subject of the
conversation between Socrates and his
friends, it may fairly be said that the
work is concerned with the /caXXtVoXts,
the theory of ideas, and some minor
matters. It is however the thesis us a/j,ei-
vov SiKaioavvr) a5u<ias which gives unity to
the composition. Hence, although one
of the incidental discussions may have, in
consequence of its originality, both for
the reader and for Plato himself (ire pi
TroXtra as rjv TO K(f>d\atov Timacus 17 c),
a special interest, it is unreasonable to
regard what is alien to it as in any way
irrelevant. In fact Aristotle s remark is
no more than the expression of his
characteristic dislike of Plato s indirect
method of approaching the doctrines
which he wishes to enforce." JACKSON.
4 1265 a i TCOV 81 v6|j.wv KT\]
, This is quite incorrect: in the Laws
; about equal parts are taken up with
/ constitutional theory and with legislation,
[ and the constitution in the narrower
sense is treated much more fully than in
, the Republic (Suckow Form der plat.
\ Schriften 132 f.). Aristotle (n. 466 on
in. 3. g) agrees with Plato in including
under the constitution, in the wider sense,
the regulation of education. From his
point of view therefore the whole of the
Laws from the middle of B. v to the end
of B. vui with a large part of B. xn
may be said to be irepl TTJS TroXtretas,
while books IX, x, xi and the rest of
B. xn are a code of laws, v6/j.oi. SUSEM.
(190)
Oncken (i. 194 199) appeals to this
passage in support of his view that the
first four books of the Laws, and part of
the fifth, are a later spurious introduc
tion (r6 TrpooLfj,Lov rwv VO/ULUV, 734 E) with
which Aristotle was wholly unacquainted,
k 2 Kal TdvTTjv POV\. KT\] "andwhile
endeavouring to make it more universally
lapplicable to the existing states he gradu
ally works it round to the other polity
once more." KoivoTepa.v = common to
many states, an average polity. Cp. 16
and vi(iv). 2. 4.
" When he wrote the Republic Plato
looked upon the pattern constitution
there described as by no means impracti
cable. He declares that its immediate
introduction might be secured without
difficulty under a definite condition, which
though not indeed easy, nor of frequent
occurrence, was yet by no means impos
sible: V47i cf.,473C, vi 497 A f., 499 B
502 C. In the Republic moreover he
knows nothing of any pattern state of the
second rank, holding an intermediate
position between the first and the existing
constitutions. But in the Laws he has
changed his view on this point. The
form of the state described in the Republic
(though he still holds it to be the best) is
an impracticable ideal: v 739 A f. , vn
807 H, IX 853 C, cp. 874 E f. ; III 691 c f.,
692 15 f. , iv 713 c f . For that reason he
now replaces it by a second best scheme
of constitution which approximates much
more nearly to the actual constitutions,
not without expressing the apprehension
that if the attempt were made to call this
into life much in it would have to be
abandoned, so that the actual result
would be only a pattern state of the third
order: v 739 A E, 745 E if., cp. vn 805
]3. Here too the possibility of thus rea
lizing it, though only to a limited extent,
is made dependent on a condition, very
similar though not entirely the same as
the condition which is indispensable for
the realization of the state planned in the
Republic-, namely, that it should be un
dertaken by an absolute prince (rvpavvos)
with an inclination for philosophy, young,
of good disposition and as yet uncor-
rupted, in conjunction with a philosophic
lawgiver: IV 709 E fT. , v 735 D. Cp.
Zeller Plat. Stud. 16 ff., Plato (Eng. tr.)
p. 483, 522 f., 531, 538 f., 546; Suckow,
op. c. 133; Susemihl Plat. Phil. 1 1. 619,
German trans, of the Laws 976 ff. Aris
totle seems to have rightly apprehended
this relation between the two : at all
248
ITOAITIKflN B. 6.
[II 6. 4
5 Kpov Trepidyei, 7rd\iv 66? rrjv erepav 7ro\iTeiav. e^co yap (III)
5 T^? T&V yvvaLKCov KOivcovlas /cal r^5? Krrjcrea)?, ra a\\a
ravra
rat? TroXtre/ai? /cal
TT)V avrrjv, KOL TO rv ep<ywv TWV dvayfcaiwv
1265 a 4 els] Trpos II 2 Bk. )| 6 didwriv P 4 U b Aid.
yap
events he gives no expression here to the
opinion which is supported by many
moderns, most recently by Oncken op. c.
I. 201, that the state of the Laivs is only
meant to be a transitional form to mediate
and prepare the future introduction of the
true ideal state, an opinion which is seen
from the foregoing to be utterly untenable.
On the contrary his words plainly amount
to this; that Plato intended in the state
of the Laivs to frame something inter
mediate to that of the Republic and the
existing states, but in reality he has un
consciously followed the Republic so much
more closely than the existing states, that
all essential features of the former are still
retained." SUSEM. (191)
5 4 w "yap TT)S TWV yuvaiKwv KT\]
But supposing what is not indeed the
case (see next note) that this really were
the only difference between the two
schemes, is it not after all one so essen
tial that any further discussion of a really
essential identity between them is thereby
precluded? And so far as this might yet
be possible, does not Aristotle s ideal
state come pretty nearly as close to that
of the Republic as does that of the Laws?
At any rate, of the three points which
Aristotle lays stress upon as justifying his
criticism, he too expressly approves of the
two latter ones: c. 7 8 n. (238); 9 2
(279) 3i (340; io8f. (365); ii 10
(393) : iv(vn). 9 3, 4, 8; 10 9 (831),
10 (834), Introd. p. 22 n. (3). His own
ideal of public education also, so far as he
has developed it, coincides in very im
portant particulars with the directions in
the Laws: see on IY(VII). 17 i n. (950),
15 (970): v(vin). 4 79, nn.
True, Plato s divergence comes out in
that dialogue also when he insists on the
education of women in common with
men, on their taking part in military
service and in the common messes, thus
rendering true domestic life impossible ;
nor perhaps is Aristotle willing to follow
him in assigning by law a definite limit
to personal property: see 15 ;/. (213),
7 4 . (233). But he, too, demands,
exactly like Plato in the Laws, that the
land in the possession of private persons
should be divided into equal inalienable
indivisible lots twice as numerous as the
families of citizens (iv[vn]. 10 911,
see also nn. on 11. 5 i, 6 15): and
that for this purpose the number of
citizens be maintained perpetually the
same, 10 13, 7 5 iin. He is only
more decided and consistent than Plato in
not shrinking in the least from the hor
rible expedient of abortion, as a means of
securing this (Introd. 34, 56, IV(YII). 16
1 5 f. nn. ) ; while Plato, who had made
the same regulation under certain circum
stances in the Republic (see on n. 3 5,
6 n. 140), had in the Laws abandoned it,
and had left the number of children to
be produced unrestricted, in the hope of
adjusting the matter in a milder way : n.
(208) on 6 10. In this respect then
Aristotle s ideal state stands even nearer
than that of the Laws to the state de
picted in the Republic, and makes a more
severe and destructive attack upon mar
ried life. Lastly he too requires written
enactments fixing the age at which mar
riage is advisable and compulsory (iv[vii].
16 i 10, nn. 937, 940); in fine,
whereas his view of marriage is wholly
different from Plato s, and ethically re
garded a modern view (Exc. I. to B. II p.
327), it is actually realized in only a very
mutilated fashion. Thus in criticizing
Plato he has at the same time uninten
tionally passed judgment upon himself.
SUSEM. (192)
7 ircuStiav T^V avTrjv] This is only
relatively true. The all-essential feature
in the state of the Repiiblic is the rule of
the philosophers; see Zeller Phil. d. Gr.
II i 761 f. (Eng. tr. Plato 466, 467 ff.);
and in the Laws this is dropped. Aris
totle overlooks this fact. Further, in the
earlier scheme those engaged in trade
and agriculture are at any rate free mem
bers of the state : in the scheme of the
Laws, the former are aliens not settled
permanently in the country, while the
latter are slaves: Laws v 741 E ff. ; vii
806 D ff. ; VIII 842 C f., 846 D, 850 D ; XI
915 B ff., 919 D ff., 921 c; xii 952 D ff.
Thus the third class of citizens is done
away with. The second class is all that
is left and the training prescribed for it is
the same only so far as it extends; that
II. 6. 6]
1265 a 4 1265 a 13.
249
r)V, Ka ^ irepl (TVO-GITLWV cocrauro)? Tr\r)v eV ravry (III)
(fr rjo l $eii> eivai crfaWrta Kal ryvvaiKwv, KOI rrjv fj,ev yikiwv
10 TWV O7T\a KKT7]/jieVO)V, TaVTTjV Se 7reVTaKiO"VL\L(i)V.
6 TO jiiev ovv TrepiTTov e^owi TraWe? ol TOV ^,wKaTOV 3
\OJOl, Kal TO KO^OV Kal TO KaLVOTOfJLOV Kal [TO] ^TrjTi
&)? Se TravTa L&COS ^aXeTroV, eVet /cat TO ^uz^ elprjfAevov
9 /cat before ywantuv omitted by F (?) and by P 1 (ist hand, added by corr. 1 ) ||
12 TO before TJTTIT(.KOV omitted by M 8 P 1
is, not beyond the elementary principles
of mathematics: Laws vn. However a
certain survival of the philosophic rulers
of the Republic is still retained by the
formation of a higher council of state,
the so-called nocturnal assembly. It
is to consist of the most educated
and capable men in the community over
fifty years of age ; moreover certain of
the most distinguished magistrates be
long to it in virtue of their office ; while
younger qualified citizens, if at least
thirty years old, may be admitted as
extraordinary members by cooptation,
and are then instructed by the council in
its own sciences, philosophy, higher
mathematics, including astronomy and
theory of music. But this higher college
is destitute of political power and is re
stricted to its moral influence simply;
it endeavours thereby to guide public
opinion in such a manner that the elec
tions to public offices may fall, wherever
possible, upon its ordinary and extra
ordinary members. See Laws I 632 c,
xii 951 D ff., 961 A ff. Cp. n. (970) on
IV(VII). 17 15. SUSEM. (193)
Kai TO TWV iipyoiv KT\] Laws v 741 E,
VII 806 D 807 D, VIII 842 D, 846 D, XI
519 D f. SUSEM. (194)
dvcryKaCcov = necessary for support, cp.
in. 5. 3, iv(vn). 10. 7 where the antithesis
is to TO, et s eva x r l/^o(Tv^7]v Kal Trepiov<riav.
8 Kal irepl o-u(r<riTia>v w<ravT<os] Here
Aristotle is perfectly aware of the fact
which he appeared to have forgotten be
fore, 5 17 n. (168), 24 n. (179), that
even in the ideal state of the Republic Plato
had required there should be common
messes for the guardians. SUSEM. (195)
ir\r\v ev TavTT] KT\] As a matter of
fact messes common to the women are
assumed by Plato in the state of the Re
public^ as was stated in n. (153) on 5 i ;
but in the changed sphere of the state
in the Laws he finds himself obliged ex
pressly to lay down this requirement and
assign reasons for it, as he intends to
maintain it in the later scheme: VI 780 I)
ff., vii 806 E, cp. vni 842 i;, 847 E.
Further compare I. 13 9 n. (116), n. 7
i n. (231 b). SUSEM. (196)
9 x i k" v ] Rrfiib- iv 423 A, where
however this number is given as only the
minimum, (is aX^^ios neyiaTij /cat ecu/
IJ.OVOV rj X At wi TWf TTpOTroXe/uLOVVTUV. SU
SEM. (197) Yet Grote (Plato in. p. 206
n. b) observes that the understanding of
Aristotle himself on the point is one ma
terial evidence that this was intended by
Plato. Comp. Politicns 292 E for the
possible number of the rulers.
10 irevTaKKT^iXCcov] More precisely
5040; Laws v 737 E, 740 c f., 745 n ff.
etc. SUSEM. (198)
6 ii TO [lev ovv KT\] "Now all 1
the discourses of Socrates display genius
acuteness originality research." TT^PLTTOV, \
out of the common, extraordinary: cp.
Mctaph. I. 2. 13: Ko/j,\j/6v, ingenious,
subtle, as vi(iv). 4. n /COM / WS TOVTO ovx
i/ca^cDs <5e et pj/rat. Both better taken of
the thought than with some editors of the
style. (Thus Gottling Commentariolum de
Ar. Pol. II. 3 gives for KO^QV compta
pulchritude, grace or finish.)
TOV ZwKpciTOvs] Aristotle then erro
neously takes the Athenian stranger in
the Laws to be Socrates, although the
time of the conversation falls long after
his death. The eVos should rather be
considered as personifying enlightened
Athens. See Susemihl Plat. Phil. 11.667
ff., Trans. of the Laws p. 998 f. SUSEM.
(199) Yet all the same this stranger, 739
c E, apparently assumes responsibility
for the proposals of "Socrates" in the
Republic.
12 KaX<Ss 8^-rrcivTa] sc. ZX LV I for every
thing to be right: "but to be right on I
all points may well be a hard task." x a -
XeTra TO. /caXd. Bernays however renders
Xa\e7roj = too much to ask.
13 TO vvv tip. 7r\T]0os] The con
struction changes ; he begins as if Several
were to follow.
250
nOAITIKHN B. 6.
[II. 6. 6
$i fir) \av6aveiv on %Gdpas Secret rot? Tocrovrois B<z/3uXaWa9 (III)
B rj TLVOS XX?79 (iTrepavTOV TO TrXrjOos, e 779 dpyol TrevraKi-
<ryi\iQi OpetyovTai, KOI Trapd TOVTOVS yvvaiKtov KOI OepaTrov-
7 TWV ere/)09 0^X09 7ro\\a7r\do-io$. Sel fjbev ovv VTTOT Idea Oat, (p. 34)
j^ev [ikwroi a^vvarov. \eyerat S c9 Sei rov 4
jv 7T/309 3uo fB\e7Tovra TiOevai 701)9 VO^JLOVS, irpos re
20 TT^ wav /cal rovs avOpwjrovs. ert Se /caXw9 e^et Trpo&Oel-
TOI)?
eu%as etpyK&at, dXXd ^aXeTrd /cteV, dvvara
8e Try, Kal OVK aXXy 77 eipr/Tai, ; cp. VI
502 A C apto-ra /nev elv<u a \eyo/ijii>, el
yevoLTo, %aXe7rd Se yeveaOai. ov
fievTOi tidtivard ye. On his part
however Aristotle also appropriates the
expression : see the references in ;/. (128)
on i i, esp. 5io 5e? TroXXd Trpovwore-
6eladai. KaOdtrep evxop-tvovs, elvai ^evTOi
fj.y5ev TOVTWV ddvvarov iv(vil). 4 2 n.
(750). SUSEM. (202)
\e-ymu 8 cos Set KT\] This is
1 8
14 5e?7<rei rots TOLOVTOLS after 15 direpdvTOV T, perhaps rightly || 16 Trapd F p 1 ,
Trepi M lI-Bk. and P 1 (ist hand) || TOVTOIS Welldon || 18 ^kv\ w MT 1 , omit
ted by Q b I] 19 re omitted by P 1 , re rrjv by M s |] 21 irpwrov fj.ev added before
el by II 1 and in the margin of P 4 , adopted by Susem. 1 2 : a doubtful case, the words
would then bear the sense of /md\Lo-ra /xeV. Schmidt inserts them after
answered by 5e 28)
14 BapvXwvias] Cp. in. 3. 5 n. (462).
SUSEM. (200)
15 direp. r6 TrXrjOos] unlimited in
size.
e ifs KT\] But how does this cal
culation agree with that made about
Sparta in 9 16, 17? Compare nn.
(306), (311). Even granting that the
present is the more correct statement,
how much smaller must we imagine the
number of citizens to be in Aristotle s
own ideal state according to the data
given iv(vn). 4 5 -14? (Schlosser).
Suppose these data reduce the number
by one half, one half the same objection
would still apply to Aristotle. On the
other hand it is interesting to observe
how near his penetrating intellect comes
to a discovery of the fact, that the idle
ness which belonged as a right to a privi
leged minority of freeborn landholders
was really the fundamental evil of the
Hellenic state. Confined however to the
circle of opinions current in his own age
and nation, the philosopher turns back
when on the very threshold of the truth :
and follows Plato in adopting this funda
mental evil as an inalienable primary
good for his own model state. SUSEM.
(201)
7 17 8l [J.6V OUV...[A-q8V (J16VTOI
dSwarov] " We should frame our scheme
on the most favourable supposition, yet
not so as to be impracticable." Cp. Laws
V 742 E : rd de /my dvvard our av j3ou\oiro
[fj.araias [3ov\iri<reis], sc. 6 SiaKOcr^v.
tnroTi0<r0cu KCIT evxriv] A reference
to the expression used by Plato Laws iv
709 D ev^aaBai 5 w euro... /ecu vofj.o6err)s,
Repub. VII 540 D fj,r) TravrdTrao-iv
not expressly to be found anywhere in
the Laws, but Aristotle had a perfect
right to infer it from IV 704 709 and V
747 D. SUSEM. (203)
20 ri 8e KaXcos KT\] But this even
Plato himself has by no means over
looked ; see Laws V 737 C oyKos drj TrX??-
6ovs iKavbs OVK d XXws t>pB&s ylyvoiT dv
Xex^ets 7) ?rp6s TIJV yrjv /cat rds TUIV TrXTj-
(rioxupwv 7r6Xets (Schlosser). Aristotle
brings the same objection against Phaleas,
7 14 ff. (Eaton). Compare n. (210) on
6 13. SUSEM. (204)
Cp. iv(vil). 2. 1 8 r?}s vo/j,odeTiKijs effrtv
ldeiv, edv rives virdp-^wdL yeiTvwvTes^ Troia
Trpbs TTOLOVS dcr/c^reW.
21 el Set KT\] See Jahrb. f. Phil.
xcm. 1866. p. 329. The sense is clear
from the parenthesis : if the state is to
be independent and secure against ag
gression. Editors who retained the ms.
iroXiTLKov extorted much the same sense
out of it, explaining it to mean simply a
" national " life, the life of a TroXis ; or a
" social " life, a life of activity, Trpa.KTi.K6v.
Thus Victorius : a moribus aliarum civi-
tatum non penitus abhorrere quae fines
etiam imperii proferre conantur. Shilleto
II. 6. 9]
1265 a 14 1265 a 32.
251
(Biov TToXe/jiiKov (ov yap jjbbvov dvay/caiov eariv avrrjv rot- (III)
OVTOIS XprjcrQai, TT^O? rbv 7r6\e/noi> oTrXot? a ^prjaifjia Kara rrjv
8 oltcetav \wpav eo-riv, d\\d
25 T? yLt?) TOIOVTOV diTO^e^
KOIVOV T?79 TToXeft)?, OyLtO)?
7TO\fJiLOLS, jJLTj fJLOVOV
d7r[e\6]ov(riv. KOI TO
KOI Trpo? TOU? ef &&gt; TOTTOU?) el &e
, //^re TO> iSiov fjLijre rov
rJTTOV &6fc (f)0^pOV<^ elvai TOt?
t? T^ %WpOLV d\\d KOI
Be rrjs KTr]<rews opav Set, ^77 vrore 5
/3e\riov erepco? Siopicrai rco cra^w? fJiaXXov. rocravTrjv <ydp
30 elvai (frrjcri, Seiv wcrre %fjv o-cocfrpovws, uxrjrep av el rt? elTrev
9 wore ^z^ ei) (roOro ^yap e crrt /cado\ov yLtaXXo^, 7Ti$r) ecrrt crct)-
(frpovco? fiev Ta\ai7TGdpa)<$ $e ^v} d\\d ySeXr/a)^ opo? TO
22 Tro\eiJ.i.Kl)v Muret, Tro\iTu<:6i> Til Ar. Bk. OTrXtrt/cov Montecatino, <.riyejj.oviKov
KO.I ^7J fJLOVOV> TTO\LTLKOV TlllirOt || TTO\LTLKOV fJ.rj fJiOVWUTLKOV F, TTO\iTLKOV fJ.7) /J-OVUTL-
KOV P 1 , TroXiTiKov /j.rj [MOV (jor e pov M s , TTO\LTIKOV /j.rj [JLOVOTLKOV P 4 (in the margin) : all
glosses || 23 oTrXots] opiois Oncken, i/o^t/xotj ? Susem. || 25 </cat> /u?) Schmidt ||
28 aTroOcrti Bender || 30 el is omitted by II 1 . Were this right elTrei/ would have to
be altered, with Bas. 3 , to etwecey || 31 eireidrj Susem. TL 5 F II Ar. Bk. Susem. 1 2
wrote " perhaps explained by PI. Protag.
322 B Tro\iTiK7)v T^xvyv r)s /u.e pos 7To\e/x,t/c?7,
absolutely political and having therefore
as one ingredient TroXe^t/c??." The expres
sion recurs iv(vil). 2 3, 5, 6 (a pro
bably spurious chapter) and 6 7, where
see Critical notes.
23 a XP^FI KT\] Cp. vn (vi). c. 7
13 (Eaton). SUSEM. (205)
8 24 el 8e TIS \i.r\ TOIOVTOV KT\]
" But if any one refuse to approve of a
life such as this" i.e. warlike "for the
state at large any more than for the indi
vidual." Whether war is the end of the
state is a question debated iv(vn). 14
13 f., 15 i6. Plato in the Laws
I 628 C, vii 803, VIII 829 A, holds that it
*s not.
28 TO ir\TJ0os really belongs to the
dependent clause. Whether perhaps it
might not be better to define otherwise,
by a clearer definition, the amount of
property which one man may hold." It is
characteristic of the writer to require
analysis and precise definition, TO cra0es,
and distress.
9 o-co(}>p6vs here and iv(vn). 5 r,
and o-coej>poo-vvT] in. 4 16 can only
mean parsimoniously , parsimony . But
in II. 5 10 n. (162), 7 12 n. (242),
I. 13 2f., 6 (112), iv(vn). i 4 (691),
3 3> ! 5 2 4, 16 8 the meaning is
temperance or self-restraint in reference
to eating and drinking and the appetite of
sex : and it is from this side that the virtue
is depicted in Nic. Eth. III. cc. 10, 1 1 (1117
b 23 ff.). There however Aristotle himself
explains how extravagance leads to pro
fligacy and to excesses in this direction,
and that acrwroj, properly a spendthrift,
comes to mean a profligate ; ib. IV. i 3,
1119!) 30, 35, 112 1 b 17. In Nic. Eth. iv.
3 4, 1123!) 5, 4 4,
13
Too-axTTV
<j>T|o-i] Laws
29
V 737 D 7775 i*v 6-rr6a"rj TroVcus crcj^poi as
oWas LKavri T/3e"0eti> TrXeto^os 5 oi55ej> Trpocr-
5e?. With what follows compare 7 7 n.
(237 b). SUSEM. (206)
3 1 KaOoXov naXXov] " For this (term)
is too vague (cp. /u.la ^d\\ov, 2 2) since
men may live frugally and at the same
time wretchedly " : literally, in hardships
has yet another meaning : viz. modest.
Lastly, Van der Rest observes that the
next objection brought against Plato
affects only a certain inexactitude of ex
pression and not the thought, which is no
other than that followed by Aristotle, of
a right mean between excessive wealth
and excessive poverty : see esp. Laws v
741 E : xpTj/xaTtoy/.ds yap OVK Zveariv eV rrj
ToiavTrj KaracrKevrj : and next note. SUSEM.
(206 b)
32 opos] A better definition would be,
to live frugally and liberally. " Comp.
iv(vn). 5. i n. eXevOepiws d/ma KO! <rw-
(pp6v<j}$ ; II. 7. 7 n. TOU ^<rov (TTOXCKTT^OV ;
VI (IV). II. 4 TUIV eUTl XTJ/iClTWZ/ 17 KTrjfflS 7)
(j.t<rr) j3e\TiffT7) iravruv" SUSEM. (207)
252 TIOAITIKHN B. 6. [II. 6. 9
(ra)(f)p6v(D<; /cal eXeu#e/H6>9 (%&)/)l? yap ^ e/caTepa) TO) {lev TO (III)
Tpvcfrdv dtco\ov@r}(7ei ) T&3 Se TO eTrtTroVo)?), eirei [Aovai y
35 el<rlv [efet?] dpeTal Trepl Trjv T?J$ overlap %pfjcriv avTai, oiov
ovaia Trpdws \JAev~\ r) dvBpelo)? xpfjaOai, OVK e&rtv, o-oxfrpova)? Se
/cal eXevdeplco? eariv, wore /cal Ta? efets dvayrcalov eivai
10 7re/3t avTTjV TavTa?. CITOTTOV Be /cal Jig T? KTrjaeis Icrd^ovTa TO 6
40 VCLl TTjV TKV07TOliaV d6pL(TTOV W9 lKaVO)<S av OfJba
6i? TO aVTO TT\Tj6o^ Sid T(T? CUTKvi(l<$ OCTtoVOVV
1265 bf/rv^ x ^ /-/ V \^ -\ n ^ v
11 OTt oo/cei TOVTO Kai vvv (TV/Apaiveiv Trepi T? 7roA,et?. oet oe
TOUT 01)^ 6/1010)? dxpi/Boos %iv \rrepl ra? TroXet?] TOT6 /cot z^D^
^0^ ^ez^ 7p ouSet? drropel $ia TO fJbepi^eaOai T? ov&ia? el?
OTTOCTOVOVV TfX^^O?, TOT6 Se (l^>LCilpG.TCOV OVTWV ai>ay/C7) TOU? TTCt-
5 pd^vya? jjiriStv e^eiv, edv T6 e\drrov? alert TO irXrjBo? edv Te
33 Ko.Tepu> Koraes, fxarepov P II Ar. Bk. |j T45] TO II 2 Ar. Bk. || TO] TW II 2
Ar. I5k. and M s (ist hand) || 34 T$] TO H 2 Ar. Bk. || TO] Tc5 P 2 - 3 Q b Ar. Aid. Bk.
|| eTTtTroi ws] laboriose viverc William, no doubt an addition of his own : hence tr\v
Suscm. 1 2 erroneously || 35 [e ^ets] Susern. || aperal] alperal written by an un
known hand in the margin of the Munich copy of the Aldine, first found in Vettori
and wrongly defended by Bekker, Madvig, Bernays : omitted by Schneider as a gloss
upon e ets || XP^l ffu ] ^ LV n 1 . Apparently William translated from the following
order: avrac at e^ets et crt^ apeTat Trepl rr t v e^iv rrjs ovaias, Ar. from the following:
auTat at aperaL eldLV e ^ets irepi rrjv xprjcnv rr/s ovvLas \\ 36 /ut-ev is omitted by F II 2 Bk.
|| 37 eets Susem. 2 , x/o^crets F II Ar. Bk., alpeaeis Madvig: Bernays conjectures irepl
ras /CT?7<rets avayKalov avras dvai r auras, not happily || elvac after 38 avrrjv H 2 Bk.
|| 40 d vofj. aX t cr rj & o /A e v rj v Madvig for a^ ofMa\LO d r)0 ofjLei> r]v
1265 b 2 [wept ras TroXets] Bender who also conjectures TOVTO ok ovx ottv re for de?
de TOUT oi x || 4 Trepifvyas F M^ s and P 1 (ist hand), and the scribe restored this after
p 1 had emended it to
33 x^P^s] if the two be separated. One son and one daughter, then, is the
34 TO eirurovws (^")- normal family : only when there is child-
35 apTal...a UTai] These are the only lessness or death does it become neces-
virtues that have to do with the use of sary that there should be other children
property. 010^ = 1 mean. in order to marry heirs or heiresses, and
10 38 Icrd^ovTa] Laws v 740 B to be adopted by the childless (Schlosser).
74 r A. SUSEM. (207 b) As it stands at present, the polemic does
" Tis strange that while equalizing their not touch Plato. If Aristotle held the
properties he should not regulate the num- means proposed by Plato to avoid an
bers of his citizens." excess of the prescribed number to be
39 dXX dcf>ivcu KT\] This too is impracticable or impossible to realize he
very inexactly expressed. All that Plato should have proved his point, as he easily
in the Laws intends, indeed all that he is might have done. SUSEM. (208)
able to effect, is to keep the number of 11 1265 b 2 ov\ ojxoitos <XKpi,p(3s =
citizens unalterably the same : i.e. exactly aKpifBta-repov : "whereas that requires to
5040 elder men, as many younger men, be fixed with a great deal more nicety in
with twice that number of women. All the supposed case than at present." Cp.
beyond that number must, as he expressly 7 18 OVK law n.
prescribes, go abroad, to found colonies. 4 -irapa^Yas] the cadets ; like irap-f)-
II. 6. 14] 1265 a 331265 b 18. 253
(ill)
{12 7T\LOV 9. jJiaXkoV 06 CLV V7TO\apOL T9 CIV WpLdOai T>?9 OU<T/a9 7
Tr)v TeKvoTTOLiav, wcrTe dpiOuov TWOS /xr) 7r\elova yevvdv TOVTO
Se TiOevau TO 7r\fj0o<> d7ro/3\67rovTa 777309 ra9 ruva9, av (p. 35 )
crv^ftaivrj Te\evTav Tivas TWV yevvTjOevTwv, Kal 7r^09 TTJV
13 TWV aXkwv dreKvLav. TO & d(f>e2o-6ai, /caOaTrep ev rat9
ii aXXat9 TroXea-i, irevia^ dvay/caiov atriov ryve<r0ai rot9 TTO-
Xtrat9, ^_ 5e Trevia crTaaiv e^Troiel Kal tcafcovprylav. QelBcov
fj^ev ovv 6 Kopivdios, a)i> vofJioOeTr)^ TWV dp^aLOTaTcov, TOVS
OIKOVS 6O~Of9 MTjUT] O&LV Oia^GVCLV Kal TO TrX^uO? TWV TToXtTCOZ^,
15 Kal el TO TTpWTov dvl<rov$ efyov TOI)? K\r]povs irdvre^ KaTcl fj,e-
1476^09 ev Se rot9 vojjbois TOVTOLS TovvavTLOv GCTTIV. d\\d irepl
fjiev TOVTCOV 7Tc59 dv olo/jLeOa j3e\Tiov e^eiv, \KTeov vaTepov
e\\e\i7TTai oe rot9 VO/JLOIS TOVTOIS Kal TO, irepl TOV<$ dp^ov- s
ii dXXais F M s , TrXetVrats P 1 II- AY. Bk. (TT\ over an erasure P :i ) || 12 [$et 5wi ...
17 i/o-repo^J Schmidt || 14 /cat] /card Bernays || 15 TOL/J K\r]povs before avieovs II 2
Bk., before eTxoi/ M 8 P 1 || iravTas Bk. 2 || 17 dV after /SeXrtoj/ II 2 Bk.
opot iTTTrot, supernumeraries outside the
traces, the elder brother being the yoke-
horse, fvyios I TTTTOS.
12 6 Take /maXXov with T?}S curias.
7 W<TT dpiOfxoO TIVOS] Statistics A\ r ill
f have to be collected to determine on the
average how many children die before
reaching maturity and how many mar
riages are without issue. " Thus," says
Schlosser, " the idea of political arithme
tic is no novelty." Aristotle is a pre-
curigi^of Malthus (Eaton). CompTalso
Exc.~n~fb B.TT SUSEM. (209)
Grote ill. 228 231 : Plato and Aris
totle saw clearly the law of population,
but did not recognise the common ele
ment in the positive and prudential
checks sufficiently to coordinate them, as
Malthus did.
8 These "accidents of life " are before
Plato, Laws v 740 c E, cp. Grote in. p.
229 n. (g). Perhaps what Aristotle de
precates is the laisser faire , afaicrdai, to
leave it to the citizens at their own dis
cretion.
13 10 T& 8 a<f>eur0cu KT\] Aris
totle (?) repeats this 7 5. SUSEM. (209 b)
12 r\ 8 irevia KT\] See Laws v 744
D ; also the account of the transition from
oligarchy to democracy Rep. vin 555
D 557 A -
4>i8&)v 6 Kopv9ios] Nothing is known
of any such ancient lawgiver of Corinth.
He is supposed to be different from the
better known Pheidon of Argos, about
whom see vm(v). 10. 6. Yet he is called
a Corinthian by the scholiast on Pindar
Olyinp. Xlll. 20; TOVTO 5e 07/crtv, eireidri
<bdowi> TIS avrip KopivOios evpe fj.rpa Kal
aTadfjua. This is one of the serious diffi
culties in this chapter mentioned Introd.
p. 33 n, 4, 14 (4). There is always the
heroic remedy ; see Critical Notes and
M. Schmidt in Jalirb. /. PhiL cxxv.
1882. p. 822.
1 6 4v 8e TOIS vop.ois KT\] A decided
ly unfounded assertion, as was explained
in the note on 10. Aristotle (?) repeats
this objection against Phaleas, 7 5 :
comp. n. (204) on 7. SUSEM. (210)
14 17 TJcrrepovj IV (vil). 10 11 f.
and esp. 16 15 f. n. (946). From the
latter passage it is seen of what means
he is thinking. To prevent any increase
in the fixed number of the citizens Aris
totle sanctions the procuring of abortion.
Cp. Introd. p. 56 and n. (192) on 5.
SUSEM. (211)
18 eXXe XcurTcu KT\] Laws v 734 E:
the warp is necessarily stronger and firmer
than the woof, odev 8r] TOVS /j,eyd\as dpxas v
TCUS TroXecnv ap^ovTas dec 5ia.Kpive(r8ai TWO.
TpOTrov TavTrj /cat TOVS (Tytu/c/xxs TraiSetq.
fiaaaviadcvTas e/cdcrrore /card \oyov. As
a matter of fact this objection of Aris
totle s is altogether unfair. In the Laws
Plato has done exactly that which Aris
totle here requires : he has prescribed
for all the citizens of his model state
the same course of training, on the
ground of which he expects them to dis
cover for themselves which among them
254
HOAITIKON B. 6.
[II. 6. 14
ra?
ecrovTai Siacfrepovres ra>v
20 Sew, cocrTrep et; erepov TO crrrjiJLOViov eplov ^iverat, TT}?
i 15 ovrco /cal TOI)? ap^ovras e^euv Selv TT^O? roi>9
&e rrjv Trdcrav ovcriav e(j)i7j(7i, <yive<J0ai
TrXacr/a?, Sta ri TOVT ov/c av eiij eVl rrjs 7779
/cal TTJV rcov oiKojreSwv e Siaipeaiv Sel crKOTreiv,
25 (7VfjL(f>ep6i, 7rpo9 ol/covofJLiav Svo <ydp
<ydp (III)
fcrj^,
eirel
TTOT ov
19 OTTWS II- Bk. || 20 eip\ 5?7 Koraes ; Conring would omit Se??/ here or in 21.
Bergk, while defending de?i>, suggested <ov>dev <a\Xo r)> Fiinf. Abhand, p. 65
n. 2 (Leipz. 1883) || 21 5eZ II 1 || [e7ret...26 ot/ceri/] Schmidt, perhaps rightly, cp.
nn. (213) (214) (215) || 25 (rv/m<ptpet M s P 1 L s Aid. and P 2 3 (ist hand),
rP 4 Q b T b U b Bk. and P 2 (corr. 1 ) and a later hand in P 3
are better fitted for the warp and which
for the woof, and to vote accordingly at
the election of magistrates. What other
means has Aristotle at his command for
his own ideal state? Besides it must not
be forgotten that by the institution of the
Nocturnal Assembly (as explained in
n. 193 on 5) Plato aimed at making
especial provision for a staff (personnel)
more highly qualified to administer the
government and to hold offices of state.
The assertion then that this simile is all
that we learn from him as to the character
of those qualified for the government is a
mistake due to a too hasty perusal of the
dialogue in question. There might cer
tainly have been good reason for a doubt
whether the institution was practicable;
but here no such doubt is expressed.
SUSEM. (212)
It is the professed object of the Epi-
nomis to expound the course of study for
the Nocturnal Assembly which is to aim
at controlling the election of magistrates.
But nothing can be inferred from Aris
totle s silence respecting it : Zeller Plato
p. 616 n. (59) Eng. tr.
20 CTTT][l6viOV...KpOKT|s] Zeller Pld-
tonic Studies p. 107 took these terms in
the Laws to refer to the appointment of
magistracies and of the laws for them. But
in PI. Politictis 283 B, 309 B, the brave
and energetic natures are the warp and
the gentler and weaker natures the woof.
21 8eiv] Taking up the preceding
Setv of line 20.
15 It would certainly relieve the
chapter to reject this section, as M.
Schmidt proposes.
22 p-exP 1 TfVTcurXao-Cas] Here and
7 4 Aristotle (?) has mistaken Plato s
meaning, as if he had permitted the accumu
lation of moveable property to the amount
of four times the value of the real estate
belonging to the family. As a matter of
fact in Laws v 744 E (cf. vi 775 E ff.) he
only allows the increase of the total pro
perty to this fourfold value ; consequently
only the acquisition of three times as
much personal property. The recurrence
of the mistake at least favours the as
sumption that both passages are by the
same author. SUSEM. (213)
23 810, TI TOVT OVK civ ei t] eirl TTJS YTJS
KT\] This objection is simply incompre-
hensible. There is not the least provi
sion for an increase of landed property in
Aristotle s own ideal state: see iv (vn).
10 9 ff. SUSEM. (214)
25 Svo yO P olKOTTtSa] One home
stead near the city and the centre of the
territory and one placed on its borders,
the latter to be occupied and managed by
the married son and heir to the farm:
Laws v 745 E, vi 775 E ff., cp. vui 848.
Aristotle (?) here blames this arrangement,
but in his own pattern state he has adop
ted something very similar iv (vii). 10
ii. We might assume that when he
wrote Bk. iv (vii). he had changed his
mind and then forgotten to expunge from
his criticism of Plato the passage before
us as no longer in point. Here how
ever M. Schmidt s suggestion of interpo
lation is quite as obvious, although it may
be met by an inquiry whether a later
editor would not have carefully avoided
introducing this inconsistency. SUSEM.
(215)
But is the inconsistency proved ? " Plato
would assign to each man two ot /c??<ms
Laivs 745 E, or, as Aristotle puts it, oi/co-
TreSa, oi /ctas: Aristotle recommends two
K\rjpoi, not two oiK7)<ris or regular esta
blishments" (Jackson). To this I reply
that Plato too repeatedly uses the expres-
II. 6. 17]
16 Sie\(iov
1265 b 19 1265 b 33.
Zoo
o/cev.
Se
k, %a\67ro^ Se oliclas Svo
fji,ev elvai ^r]re
yu,ecr?7 Be TOVTWV, TJV rcaXovcri 7ro\iTeiav IK <ycip TWV OTT\L~
Tevovrwv eo-riv. el /uev ovv 0^9 K0t,vordr7)v ravrrjv Karaa/cevd-
30 et rat? TroiXecn rcov d\\wv TroKireiwv, /caXco? e tp^icev tVco?
el S to? apicrTrjV yaera Ti]V TrpWTrjv TroXireiav, ov KO\W^.
Tayj& yap rrjv TWV A^CLKMVWV Tt? av eTraiveaeie yu-aXXo^, 7} KCLV
17 a\~kriv Tivd dpiaTOKpaTLKcorepap. GVLOL fjiev ovv \e<yovcriv aJ? Set 10
27 /SouXercu after fj.kv M s P 1 || 29 [et ^^...1266 a 6 8-rjfj.oKpaTtKd] Schmidt, pro
bably rightly, cp. . (223) || 30 iroKirdav H :J Bk. and l )2 - y , (ist hand) yp. TTO\L-
retcov P- (corr. 1 in the margin), in P 3 TroAtretwj was written over it by a later hand,
but again erased [| 32 ris after av IP Bk.
(III)
9
sion K\-fjpoi. Even supposing that, in con
tradistinction to him, Aristotle really in
tended to provide only one of the two
estates with a dwelling-house, how c:m
he have believed that to farm two estates
in separate localities would thus be made
easier than if they had dwellings upon
them ? Is it not clear that the opposite
will hold good? Nay more, what idea
are we to form of two such detached pro
perties, one near the town and one in the
country, unless there are farm -buildings
and a house upon the latter? If this be
so, the above supposition is a priori im
possible. Even Plato does not arrange
that the country house shall be a regular
establishment in the sense of being always
inhabited, but the son who inherits suc
ceeds to it as soon as he is grown up and
married, and so sets up the second esta
blishment there (Laws vi 775 E f. ). In
Aristotle s best state such an appropria
tion of the second dwelling-house is cer
tainly excluded, because there, when the
heir marries, he succeeds his superan
nuated father as citizen and consequently
as proprietor of both the family proper
ties (see note and Excursus on iv[vn].
16 10, 1335 a 32 35): but that is the
sole point in which Aristotle diverges
from Plato in this matter. To what pur
pose he would destine this second house
can only be conjectured : it may be to
lodge the superannuated father, perhaps
with the lands belonging to it as a sort of
retiring pension. In any case the incon
sistency, as Aristotle s text has come
down to us, is unquestionable. SUSEM.
26 8iX(iv x w P^S = distinct, separate
homesteads.
16 O-V>VTO|I,S] The entire arrange
ment of the constitution tends neither to
oligarchy nor to democracy but to some
thing intermediate known as Polity. Plato s
citizens are the heavy-armed men : Laws
VI 753 15, TrdvTes [Aev KOLVUVQVVTUV rfjs T&V
d/r^ojTWf aipecreus, orroffocirep av oVXa iir-
TTIKO, TJ Tre^KO. TttfuJI TCU Kdl TTO\t/Jl,OV KKOi-
This is the criterion of a
Polity .
28 TToXireiav] Compare in. 7 4
with the notes and references there given.
SUSEM. (216)
29 ws KOIVOTCITT]V KrX] "as the most
universally adapted for cities at large"
vi (iv). c. ii with n. (1282) on i.
SUSEM. (217)
31 irpwTT]V = highest, normal. So 6
irp&ros a-vXXoyLcrfj.os. Comp. I. 2. 5.
32 Plato s arrangement Rep. B. viu
implies this.
33 cipurTOKpaTiKampav] i.e. a con
stitution which, like the Spartan, has the
character of an Aristocracy to a greater
extent than Polity. The term may be
thus explained : true Aristocracy coin
cides with Aristotle s best constitution ;
but in a transferred and secondary sense
this name is earned by such constitu
tions as combine aristocratical with oli
garchical and democratical elements, like
Carthage, or only with democratical ele
ments, like Sparta; this is stated vi(iv).
7 24, cp. vi(iv). 9 6 ff., 2 i n.
(1133), 4 n. (1141), 10 i, ii 2.
Further consult Excursus I. on Bk. in
and the notes to in. 5 10 (521), 13 9
(595), n (597), i3(6oi), 24 (614); 14
i5 (633), 17 3 (677), 5 (678): vi(iv).
2 2 (1136 7). Of course such mixed
constitutional forms are nearer to the true
Aristocracy than is Polity, which is a
blending of Oligarchy and Democracy :
vi(iv). cc. 8, 9. See on this the notes to
256
TIOAITIKftN B. 6.
[II. 6. 17
Trjv dpi<TTr)v TroXiTeiav e f aTrao-oov elvat, TCOV TroKijeiwv i^e^i- (HI)
35 ty/j,ev7jv, Sib KOI rrjv TCOV Aa/ceSaifjiovlcov iiraivovviv (elvai
jap avrrjv oi fj.ev ef 6\i>yapxias /cal {jiovap%las Kal 8?;//,o-
Kparias fyacriv, \e<yovTe$ rrjv jjiev $a(Ji\dav /^ovap-^lav, rrjv
Se TWV yep6i>TG)v dp%rjv o\i<yap%lav t ^jJiOKparelaOai Se
Kara TYJV TCOV e(f)6pa)v dp^rjv Sid TO e/c TOV STJ/AOV elvai TOI)?
40 e<p6povs o l Se TTfv fjiev e^opelav eivca TvpavviSa^ Srj/^o/cpa- (p- s6>
3e Kara re rd crvGGiTia /cal TOV aX\ov ftiov TOV
ev Se rot? vb^ois eipr^Tai TOVTOIS 00$ oeov awy- 11
34 7ro\LTeiuv] TroXtrojv r T b I! 35 rV omitted by F M s || TUV omitted by P 1
|| 39 TWV omitted by APP 1 , \TUV~] Susem. 1 2 || 40 etpopiav II 3 and P 3 (ist hand,
emended by a later hand)
ni. 7 4 (536, 538); vi(iv). 2 4 (1141),
7 4 (1237). SUSEM. (218)
17 33 vioi nv ovv KT\] Cp.
IV(VTI). 14 16 n. (911), vi(iv). i 6 n.
(1123). Thus we learn that two schools
of political theorists, to one of which
Ephoros perhaps belonged 1 , dissented
from the writer s opinion and agreed in
regarding monarchy, oligarchy, and de
mocracy as elements of the Spartan con
stitution; while the second school (40 oi
5e) added tyranny as a fourth element.
It is strange that in this passage Ari
stotle (?) takes up no definite position in
relation to the two views and does not
oppose to them his own. Presumably
he judged it sufficient, in order not to
enter on a longer digression, to have
denominated this constitution a mixed
aristocracy. From the explanations which
he has devoted specially to it we learn
that he looked upon the council of Elders
as the aristocratical, the Ephors as the
democratic element in it, 9 19 28,
but at the same time also as in a cer
tain sense related to rvpavvis : see on 9
20. He finds another democratic ele
ment, though such in intention only,
in the common messes, 9 32. He
regards the Spartan kingship as far too
limited to give the constitution any par
ticular colouring : in. 14 3, 4; 15 i,
2; 1 6 i. It is still more strange then
that Aristotle (?) only mentions here the
views of those other theorists on this sub
ject, passing over in total silence that ex
pressed by Plato himself in the Laws iv
712 c ff. (cp. in 692 A f., 693 E), a view
which stands much nearer to his own,
representing the Spartan constitution as
1 See on this Introd, p. 35 n. 3 and Susemihl s
critical edition p. LXII.
mainly a mixture of^ aristocracy and de
mocracy, but with the addition of the
royal office and an element akin in one
view to rvpavisis, in another to democracy,
viz. the Ephors. Plato himself tells us,
Laivs xn 962 E, that he was not the first
to pronounce a mixed constitution the
most excellent in practice : oi 5e cro0c6-
rarot, ws otovrai, irpos ravrd re (liberty
and dominion over others) /ecu ra roiavra
u fj-Travra [/SXeTro^res vo/AodeTovvTai], els
ev 5e ovdev t a (pepovrus rertyU 77/^.6-
v ov fyovTes <ppd ^Lv, eis 5 raXXa O.VTOLS 5ft
p\e-jrii>; presumably his predecessors
were to some extent the same who are
here noticed. Compare further Excur
sus i to Bk. in. SUSEM. (219)
Isocrates Lacedaemonios /m.d\i<rra dtj/^o-
KpaTov/uievovs Tvyx^avew dicit Arcopag. 61
(Spengel).
18 1266 a i ev 8c rots vojxous KT\]
Laii s III 693 D f. eiffl iro\t,TL(j}v olov jj.i]-
repes dvo Tiv4s..,KO,l TT]V ju.ei Trpocrayopeveiv
/uLovapxiav 6p96v, rr\v 5 av drj/j-OKpariav :
Persia is the extreme case of the one,
Athens of the other : 5e? 5rj odv Kal avay-
KOUOV //,eraXa/3e?j a^otV TOVTOLV : 701 E;
VI 756 E {ACffov fry ^x L (J*ovQ.pXf- K fy Ka -l
5r]iAOKpaTi.Kr)S TroXtre/as rjs del del /jLeo eveiv
rriv TroXtretW : cp. iv 7 1 2 u f. However
what Plato really says in these passages is
somewhat different, viz. that a good con
stitution must hold the mean between
democracy and monarchy. Moreover he
expressly guards against being supposed
to derive anything in his mixed form of
the state from TV paw is, IV 712 c: riva
dr) Trore TroXtret ai fyopiev ev i> rfj TroXei
TrpoaraTTeLV ^...olov drj/AOKpaTiav rivd r)
oXiyapxiav ^ dpiaTOKpariav T) (3aai\iKriv.
ov yap 5ri rvpavvlda ye TTOV \eyois dv : and
in the Republic he has already himself
II. 6. 18]
1265 b 34 1266 a 4.
257
rrjv apio-rrjv r jrd\ireiav K STJ^OK parlay KOI rvpavvl- (III)
So?, a? rj TO irapaTTdV OVK av T? delrj TroXireta? 77 ^etp/crra?
4 Tracrwv. /3e\ri>ov ovv \e<yovcriv ol TrXe/ou? fiiyvvvre^ 77 ^P ^
1266 a 3 x/ot <rrous P 2 and P 3 (ist hand, emended by a later hand) || Trdtriv F ||
4 [17... 5 /SeXrt wi ] Riese, see Comm.
pronounced democracy and rvpavvis to be
the two worst governments, the latter as
the extreme of despotic rule, the former
as the extreme of liberty. Aristotle how
ever everywhere else calls Oligarchy and
rvpavvis the two worst forms of govern
ment, see on vi(iv). n 21 n. (1305) : so
that here he contradicts himself. Accord
ing to the statement in the Laws it is no
doubt true that every unlimited, i.e. pure
and unmixed, monarchy coincides with
rvpavvis: III 691 D 701 E, IV 710 E,
712 C ff . : kingship or limited monarchy
and limited democracy are intermediate
or mixed forms. Hence it would cer
tainly be no incorrect expression of
Plato s thought in the Laws, that the
right constitution should hold a mean
between democracy and rvpavvL s. But
from this it does not in the least follow
that it must be compounded of the two:
for it would also be a mean between
them if it were compounded of forms
which approximate partly to the one
partly to the other, in order thus to blend
freedom with order or authority. In
the passages in question Plato is speak
ing of monarchy and democracy as prin
ciples of all government, not of certain
constitutions, since he finds the prin
ciple of authority more clearly stamped
on the one, that of liberty on the other
(Henkel). Consequently, to make the
state in the Laws a combination of
oligarchical with democratical elements
is not inconsistent with his require
ment. Besides, it is also incorrect to call
these the only constituents of the mixed
form and so to make the constitution
simply a Polity (iroXiTda) : for it de
serves to be called a mixed aristocracy
with far greater right than the Spartan
constitution: see on 5 (193), 14 (212),
21 (229); Susemihl Plat. Phil. n. 624
631, Translation of the Laws p. 980;
also Zeller Plato p. 535 f. Eng. tr. Nor
is this state of the Laws without a cer
tain monarchical head ; for in so far as it
too is preeminently an educating institu
tion, such a post is filled by the highest
official who presides over education.
However Henkel (Studien 65) is quite
right in inferring from all the foregoing
H.
that the monarchical element of the state
is rather to be looked for in the magis
trates collectively, in virtue of the ex
tended powers assigned to them. But
this by no means excludes the substantial
correctness of Oncken s remark (pp. c. I.
209): "taken literally monarchy and
democracy are incapable of reconcilia
tion : for where one rules, all cannot rule,
and conversely. But if a reconciliation
or blending of the two is thought of as
possible at all, it can only be understood
in this way, that the numbers are set
aside as unessential and the mode of
government emphasized as the essential
feature. In that case, however, the no
menclature is quite suitable to the case
before us." The highest magistracy,
apart from the council, in Plato s state of
the Laws, the 36, or (including the officer
who presides over education) the 37 VO/JLO-
(fivXaKes, have an approximately monarchi
cal authority in consequence of the large
powers entrusted to them * ; in the sense
in which Aristotle himself (?) admits that
the double kingship of the Spartans is
called monarchy, 17, and the board of
ephors a rvpavvis, though there were five
of them : and further, designates the
people in the most extreme democracy as
a many-headed monarch. Taken literally,
the union of oligarchy and democracy, as
Aristotle finds it in the TroAireta, is just
as impossible as that of monarchy and
democracy. SUSEM. (220)
4 P\TIOV ovv KT\] That is, in the
particular case here given (cp. n. 223)
they are more in the right : they either
leave out tyranny, the worst form of
government, altogether and combine other
elements with democracy ; or at any rate
add two other elements, oligarchy and
monarchy, one of which at least, viz.
monarchy, is distinctly better. The two
schools of political theorists and eulogists
of the Lacedaemonian constitution noticed
in 17, are doubtless intended. If it
were true (1266 a i, 2) that the best
polity according to Plato is one com-
* Only Oncken s assertion, that Plato intended
the council to be irresponsible, is a decided
mistake, and all the inferences which he has
attached to the assertion fall to the ground.
258
IIOAITIKHN B. 6.
[II. 6. 18
%ovo-a (III)
yap
5 irXeiovutv crvy/ceifjievr} irdXiTela /9eXrtW]. eirevra ov
fyaiveTai fiovap^LKov ovoev, d\}C oXiyap^iKa Kal
19 rj\ov Se eK r??9 TWV dp^ovTav /caracrrao-eei)?* TO
e aipeToov K\7]pwTOV<; K.OIVOV dfAcfroiv, TO Se rot?
10 repot? eirdvayKes eK/c^rjcrid^ew elvai Kal
rj TL Troielv d\\o TMV TTO\I,TI,K<V, roi)? 8 d^elaOaL, TOVTO 8
6v, Kal TO TreipdaOat, TrActou? etc TWV evTropwv elvai
to both " i.e. the lot to democracy, the
voting to oligarchy [or aristocracy]. This
took place in the election of the council,
of the magistrates charged with the police
of the city (dyopav6/j.oi and dcrru^o/xoi),
and of the superintendents of the games
(dywvias d#Ao$ercu): Laivs VI 756 B E,
763 D f., 765 B D. SUSEM. (223)
See R. Dareste Le systeme electoral dc s
Lois de Plat on in Anmiaire de V association
pour Tenc.des etudes grecques. xvn. 1883.
PP- 6574.
9 TO" 8e TOIS |iev KT\] Laws vi
764 A : trd) S et s eKKX^criav Kal TOV KOLVOV
u\\oyov 6 (3ov\6/ut,vos, eirdvayKes 5 ^<rro>
ry T&V devTepuv Kal irp&Tuv rt / u7? y udrwi ,
^Td^7]Tai TO IS %v\\oyoi.s, Tpirijj d TL/J.-/I-
fj.a.TL Kal rerapry /ULTJ CTrdvayKes, a\\a
d^TjyUios dfaiaOw. SUSEM. (224)
10 4>epiv is suffragiu//! t ferr$* to vote:
with ace., to vote for certain candidates
for office.
Kal <f>t piv apxovTas] As a matter
of fact this regulation only applies to the
election of the superintendents of the
games (dyuvias d#\o0<:Tcu) Laws vi 765 C,
and of the council vi 756 B E: but
Aristotle does not come to speak of this
latter election until 20. SUSEM. (225)
1 1 TOVS 8 cu|>ur0ai] Not however at
the election of qyopavo/uLoi and dcrTwofj-oi,
Laws 764 A : %etpoToz>eirco 5 Tras TrdWa*
6 5 ur) 6\wv, eoiv el<rayye\0rj Trpos roi)s
apxovTas, fr)fjuoi!>ff6<ji). SUSEM. (226)
TOVTO 8 ] This 5<r is resumptive of 5
in line 9. Cp. TOVTO d /xt/xemu, 2 6.
1 2 Kal T6 impdo-Bau irXefovs KT\]
Of these two statements the latter, viz.
that the highest officers of state are to be
elected from the highest classes of the
census, is quite incorrect. Even for the
Guardians of the Laws (vouofivXaKes) no
such regulation is found : Laws vi 753 B,
766 A f. : nor for the supreme board of
control (evOvvoi) xii 945 E ff.: nor again
for the military officers (crTpaTrjyol, iinrap-
XOL, fivXapxoi, Ta^iapxoL) 755 B ff. And as
pounded of democracy and tyranny, then
the general statement in a 4 might justly
be made : for any three, or more, forms
would make a better mixture than these
two. SUSEM. (221)
T[ -yap IK irXeiovcov KT\] This state
ment made thus universally is not in
keeping with the philosopher s thought.
He does not blame Plato for not com
bining elements enough, but because he
would construct a polity out of the two
corrupt elements 1 (Riese). On Aristotle s
own principles a mixture of aristocracy
and democracy, or even of oligarchy and
democracy, must be better than one of
oligarchy, democracy, and rvpavvis. As
was shown in the last note, the preceding
sentence, rightly understood, is a simple
deduction from what has been laid down
above, and needs no additional reason,
least of all one which erroneously ex
tends it beyond the limits of this right
interpretation and lays it down as uni
versally true. The chapter contains diffi
culties enough, but this is beyond the
limits of all that we dare attribute to
Aristotle himself: surely this illogical
generalization is interpolated. We shall
however be obliged to go some way fur
ther than this, I think. For even one
who, like myself, either rejects or mis
trusts Schmidt s other atheteses in this
chapter will nevertheless be unable to
deny that the entire passages 16 18,
12651^ 29 el [j.v . . . 1 266 a 6 Sy/moKpaTiKa,
and 22, 1266 a 22 ws...25 ovcei/ ts, do
most violently interrupt the connexion
and leave the impression that they are
non - Aristotelian. This suspicion is
strengthened by the strange statements
noticed in nn. (219, 220). SUSEM. (222)
5 ^(.ovcra sc> V & T0 ^ robots TroXtret a
HovapxiK^v ov8tv. See n. (220).
7 eYK\veiv = to betray a tendency
towards, as in vni(v). 7. 7-
19 8 r6 jxfcv -yAp cuperwv K\T|-
ptoToiis] "For selection by lot from a
body elected previously by vote belongs
II. 6. 20]
1266 a 5 1266 a 14.
259
13 rot)? ap^ovras, KOI ra? per/ fora? /c TWV
20 rwv. o^yapxiKrjv Be TTOLGL Kal rrjv TT$? (3ov\fj$ a ipea-w.
I- (III)
alpovv- 12
regards the former statement, instead of
arrangements to secure the election of a
majority of the officials from the richest
citizens, the truth is that only in the case
of a minority^ namely the aaTvv6[j.oi, is
it provided that they shall be of the
highest class on the register, while the
superintendents of the games (adXod^rai)
must be elected from the third or the
second class. SUSEM. (227)
13 rets p.-y<rras sc. dpxcis. T/OTMO. is_ a
property qualification, census. See Laws
744 u E.
20 14 -rqv TTJS POV\T]S al p<riv]
Thus described in Laws 756 B E : The
council shall consist of 360 members. If
we divide the whole number into four
parts of ninety each, we get ninety coun
cillors for each class. First all citizens
shall vote for members of the council
taken from the first class ; they shall be
compelled to vote, and, if they do not,
shall be duly fined (irp&Tov /mev e/c TWV
, 17 frifJ.iova da.i rbv fj.rj
rrj 5od<jT7 fr/mla). When the candidates
have been elected some one shall mark
them down ; this shall be the business of
the first day. And on the following day
the election shall be made from the second
class in the same manner as on the pre
vious day (777 8 va-repaLa <f)pei.v e/c r&v Sev-
rfywv Ti/JL-ri/j.aTwv Kara. ravTci Kadairep rrj
irpo&dev) ; and on the third day an election
shall be made from the third class, at
which every one may if he likes vote and
the three first classes shall be compelled
to vote (T/HTT? 5 IK TWV Tpirwv Tt/xTj/uarwv
(ptpeiv fj.v rov [3ov\6/ji.ei>ov, lirdva/yKes 8e
elvai TOIS TCOV rpiaiv TijjLT^fiaTwv) ; but
the fourth and lowest class shall be under
no compulsion, and any member of this
class who does not vote shall not be
punished. On the fourth day members
of the council shall be elected from the
fourth and lowest class (reraprri 5e 0^-
plV fJL^V K TOV TTdLpTOV Kal ff/J-lKpOTa-
TOV TifjL-f)/j,a.Tos airavras) ; they shall be
elected by all, but he who is of the fourth
class shall suffer no penalty, nor he who
is of the third, if he be not willing to
vote ; but he who is of the first or second
class, if he does not vote shall be pun
ished; he who is of the second class
shall pay a fine triple the fine which was
exacted at first, and he who is of the
first class quadruple. The number of
candidates thus nominated is reduced
first, by election, to 180 of each class
and next, by sortition, to 90 from each
class. The passage continues : On the
fifth day the rulers shall bring out the
names noted down, in the presence of all
the citizens, and every man shall choose
out of them under pain, if he do not, of
suffering the first penalty ; and when they
have chosen 180 out of each of the classes,
they shall choose one half of them by
lot, who shall undergo a scrutiny : these
are to form the council for the year (Dr
Jowett s translation).
Plato s object is to give the numerically
smaller and wealthier first and second
classes not only their half of the senators,
but also a preponderant influence in the
return of the other half, which they will
secure provided there are abstentions
enough among the poorer citizens. It is
obvious that Aristotle is referring to the
proceedings of the first four days. What
is the number returned from each class ?
(a) Grote thinks 360, Plato ill. 363 n. g.
(/3) Stallbaum, J. G. Schneider follow
older editors in assuming it to be ninety,
but omit to explain what takes place on
the fifth day. (7) Mr Cope supposed that
on each successive day each class voted for
90 candidates belonging to a given class,
so that the abstentions of classes ill and
IV might, in the extreme case, reduce
the roll of candidates published on the
fifth day from 1440 to u/o (360 + 360 +
270+ 1 80). Perhaps none of these sug
gestions is correct ; the proceedings of
the first four days are in reality a nomi
nation of candidates, not an election :
there is no limitation to the number of
candidates nominated, each citizen pre
sumably recording a vote, i. e. sending in
one name. The votes recorded are tal<en
down and published on the fifth day (eTret-
dav 5 evexd&ffi, TOIJTOVS ^v KaTaa"rj/j.riva(r-
#cu...7r^u,7TT?7 5 T]/m.tpa ra Ka.TO.a"r)[J.a.i>dvTa.
OTO/xara e^evey KCLV /mtv rovs apxovras ideiv
Traai rots TroAt rcus). The voting on the
fifth day is confined to these duly nomi
nated candidates, and as 180 must be
then selected from each class (e/cX^ayras)
Plato appears to assume that more than
that number will be nominated on each
of the first four days.
cupouvrai |iev KT\] For all are bound
to elect from the first class, and then
again equally [i.e. in like manner] from
the second : and next from the third, save
that it is not compulsory on all (to vote),
172
260 nOAITIKHN B. 6. [II. 6. 20
15 rai jJiev yap Trdvres ef dvdy/crjs [aXX J etc rov irpcorov TL^- (III)
/jiaros, elra 7rd\iv tcrct)? e/c rov Sevrepov, elr etc T&V rplrcov,
7r\rjv ov Trdaiv eTrdvay/ces, <XX > 77 TO? [e/c] TU>V rpiwv [97] Ti/jurj-
/jbdrcov, K Se rov rerdprov [raJvTGTdpT&v] JJ.OVOLS 7rdvayK<$ rot?
21 irpociTOiS teal rot? Sevrepois etr ere rovrayv. io~ov d(j) e/cdarov TIJIIJ-
10 /u-aro? aTroSel^al $it}<Ti $eiv dpiO^ov. ecrovTai Sr) TrXetW? ol
etc TWV fj-eyicrTwv TL/^TjfjLdrwv KCU /SeXr/ov? 8id TO eviovs pr)
22 alpelaOai TWV STJ/JLOTLKCOV 8ta TO /AT) enrdvayice^. w<$ pen ovv is
OUK e /c ^TI/JLOK parlay real jjiovap^ia^ Set o-vvea-rdvai rr)v roiav-
Tr)V TToXirelav, IK TOVTCOV cfravepov KOI TWV vcrrepov
25 z/o)^ ora^ 7ri/3d\\y Trepl rrj<f roiavr^ TroXtreta? 77
15 e dm7/c7?s, from Plat. Laws VI. 765 B ff. Schmidt (and probably Ar.), &rd-
vaynes F II Bk., [e7rdi>a7Kes] Schlosser Susem. 1 || [d\X ] Madvig, d\X trans
posed to 17 before TJ Susem. 1 ; dXXd <7rpc5rov> Lambin, irpwrov Bender, r as Muret
before him changed dXX into (J ( = 90) || 16 tVcos Nickes (Plato has Kara TO.VTO.),
foovs F II Ar. Bk. Susem. 1 || rov rpirov Oncken || 17 [TT\T]V] Madvig || OVK
[Tracni ] Bender || <dXX > 17 Susem., rjv TH. Ar. Bk. Bender, TrXV Gottling in his
edition and Madvig, 77 Gottling in Jenaer Lectionskat. 1855, elra <5 > e/c rwv rpi-
rwv ov iraviv e-rrdvayKes <7rX?jJ dXX > 97 TCHS [er] TUV rpiCov [y] Ti/u.-rj/maTUV, K re KT\
? Susem. Of course dXX rj or TrX^v would do just as well as irX^v dXX 77 || elr
K TUV rpLrwv. ir\rji> < dXX > ov iraXiv eTravayites rjv rCiv rerapruv ro?s e/c TOV rpLrwv
<(f>epeiv fj.r] /3ouXo/x,^ots> e/c 5 /crX Schmidt || elr e/c rcDv rpirwv ov ircicn.v eirdvayKes
TrXrjv ro?s e/c rwi Tpi&v elr e/c TWJ rerapruv /xovois Welldon |] [e/c] Susem.
(Plato omits it) || rpiuiv ri/jL-rj/Jidrwi Gottling Jcnacr Lcctionskat. tit sitp., from
Plato; rplrwv T) rerdpruv T H Ar. Bk., rpiwv \j] rerdprwv] Gottling in his edition,
Madvig; Engelhardt Spengel- Bender and Jowett omit rpiruv rj \\ 18 [ru>v re-
rdpruv] Engelhardt Bender Susem. ; but [roO reraprov\ with Sylburg is perhaps as
good : rwv rerrdpwv Camot Sepulveda s mss. Vettori 2 (and a marginal note from his
own hand in the copy of his ist edition in the Munich Library), rlav ri^/mdnov
Gottling in the Jenaer Lections kat. I.e. || eTrdvayxes <rii Schmidt || 20 5 II 1
(emended by p 1 ) || [22 ws...25 CTK^LS] Schmidt, probably rightly, cp. n. (223) ||
23 ou/c omitted by II 1 (supplied by p 1 ) || yu.oi apxfas] oXiyapxias Heinsius Schmidt
I! <oi e<r#cu> dec Schmidt || (rvveardvcu II 1 P 3 (ist hand) P 2 (corr. 1 ), ffvviardvai II 3
Bk. and P 2 (ist hand altered by corr. 1 ) and P 3 (corr. 1 ), perhaps rightly || 24
</ccu> e/c rovruv Schmidt
but only on those of the three (higher) belong to the highest classes and who are
classes, and (in electing candidates) from superior men will be a majority (of the
the fourth (class) it is compulsory only voters); because through the absence of
on the first and second. compulsion some citizens of the popular
21 19 etr K TOVTCOV KT\] More ac- party will abstain from the election.
curately stated, there is first an election of 21 P\TO\>S] I.e. men who take a
1 80 candidates belonging to each class out higher interest in political life. So far,
of the larger number first returned, and in then, even this oligarchical regulation
a similar manner : secondly, a selection of contains an aristocratic element. SUSEM.
one half of these, 90 from each class, by (229)
lot, to make up the whole number of 360. 22 24 TWV vcrTpov...<rKc x|/is] vi(iv).
Vide supra. SUSEM. (228) c. 7 and esp. cc. 8, 9, n. SUSEM. (230
20 ^o-ovrat 8r] KT\] Thus those who 25 tmpdXXTj devolves (upon us): see
II. 7. 2] 1266 a 15 1266 a 39. 261
\ e ^et Be teal Trepl TTJV aipeaiv TWV dp^ovTWV TO ef alperwv (III)
alpeTovs eTriKivSwov. el yap Tives o-vaTrjvai OeXovai, Kal fjue-
rpioi TO 7rX?7009, alel KCtTa TTJV TOVTWV alpedrjcrovTai /3ov\7)aiv.
7 Ta fjbev ovv Trepl Trjv Tro\iTelav Trjv ev rofc VQ^OIS TOV- IV
30 TOV e%ei TOV TpoTrov elal e Tives TroXtretat KOL a XXat,
at /Lie* <j)L\ocr6<pa)v Kal I^IWTWV ai $e TTO^LTLKWV, nraaai (p- 37)
Se Ta5z^ fcaOe&T rjKViwv Kal /ca@^ 09 TroXtreuozmu z^w
eyyi/Tepov elat, - TOVTWV d^oTepcov. ovSel? yap OVTG
Tr)v Trepl TO. T/cva KoivoTTjTa /cal
35 KeKaii OTOjAijKev, OVT Trepl TO, crvGcriTia, TWV
2 aXX CLTrb TGOV dvayKaiwv dpyovTai /j,d\\ov. SOKCL
Tien TO Trepl ra9 ovaias elvcu [dvajKalov] /AeyicrTov rera-
xQai KO\O}<? Trepl <ydp TOVTWV TroielcrOai ^aai ra9 o-racret9 irav-
39 Ta9. ^to OaXea9 o
30 Krohn pronounces the whole of c. 6 as far as rp6irov to be spurious and of late
origin, but see Int. p. 33 n. 4 and Comm. nn. (213, 215) |[ 3r ai 1 /ue^ 0tXo<To0coj/
/cat ISiwruiv at 5e TroXiriKtSv Spengel, al 1 yu^i/ iSiUT&v at 8k <pi.\off6<f)wv Kal TTO\LTLKO>V F
II Ar. Bk., ai ptv idtWTUv Kal (piXoaofiuv at 5^ TroXmKwi Piccart. See p. 80 ||
37 avayKalov erased by p 1 , omitted by II 2 Ar. Bk., possibly a variant of ^yiarov ||
39 <a\X<tas II 1 , and so throughout H irpurov Q b Ar. perhaps rightly, Trpwrws Piccart
on I. 13. 13 and reff. there given, A 33 TOIJTWV d|JL<}).] that of the Republic
further use of the participle is seen in and that of the Laws.
the Gortynian inscription lately found, 35 o-vcrcriTia TWV yvvaiKcav] Comp.
ol eTTi/SaXXoyres ols e7ri/3<xXXei, the next 6 5 with n. (196): also n. (153) on 5
of kin on whom certain obligations de- 2 and (116) on I. 13. g. SUSEM. (231 to)
volve. Cp. \eKTeov Kara rov eTrt/Sa XXorra 36 TWV avcryKcucov] the necessary con-
\oyov De gen. anim. I. 2. i, 716 a3: and siderations of every-day life as opposed
Pol. vi(iv). 13 7 r6 iroffov eTrt^dXXet. to its luxuries or ornaments : practical
26 TO If; aipercov alpTOvs] it is un- requirements )( fanciful theories.
safe to elect from a larger number previ- 2 37 ptyurrov Terd\Qa.i] The sen-
i ously elected. This would be done in tence is inverted; with rcraxdai Ka\ws
the election to the Council, and in the take TO ire pi rds ov<rias ; the infinitive
election of vo/j.o(f>v\aKes. First 300 were clause so formed, TO Trepl... Terdx^o-i., is
chosen, then out of these a hundred, subject of 5o/cet elf/at (MtyicrTov. Some
and out of the hundred thirty-seven. hold the right regulation of the relations
It was partially so in the election of of property to be of the utmost import-
the Supreme Board of Control. SUSEM. ance. There has been no lack of re- i
(231) presentatives of this view. Ap_art_ froox -
27 o-vo-TTJveu] This apparently por- physiocrats old and new, we may refer to
tends something like the wire-pullers and M. de Laveleye Primitive Property Pre-
caucus of our day. Comp. vm(v). 3. 9. face xxvii xxxii, also pp. 149, 158 ff., 223.
c. 7 Examination of the polity pro- 39 816 4>a\ as...TrpwTos] From c. 8
posed by Phaleas. See Analysis p. 105. i (comp. Exc. n to B. n) it is clear that
1 31 For the antithesis comp. i. 7. Phaleas was younger than Hippodamos:
5 TroXiTeiWTai 17 0tXo<ro<oD0-u>, II. 12. i but if Trpurros is the right reading, he
OVK CKOtv^vriaav Trpa^euv TTO\I.TI.K<JJV ou5 must have come forward with his poli-
UVTIVUVOVI , ctXXa 5ieTAe<raj idiuTetiovres tical scheme before Plato published either
rbv fiiov : PL Tim. 19 E TO 5^ r&v ao- of his. This conjecture finds support in
(picrTuv 7&&gt;os 0o/3o0^at ^ a&Toxov a^a the apparent meagreness of his proposal,
<pi\ocr6(f>(s}i> avdp&v y Kal TroXtTi/cw. its lack of all finished execution as com-
262
^crl rydp
ITOAITIKHN B. 7.
[II. 7. 2
1266 b
Sew iaa$ elvai, T9 KTrj(rei,s TWV f jro\LTWV. rovro 2
evOvs ov %dXe7rdv wero iroielv, ras
av
(IV)
ep<ya)$eo-Tepov /u,eV,
ofjia\io-6?ivai TCO ra? Trpoi/cas rou? /u-ez; TrXofcrtou?
Se
4
6 wero
Se.
TO 1)9 5e
Se roi)?
irXelov Be
/u-ez/
StSomt
ypdcfxov
rov 7rei>Ta7T\ao-lav elvai rfjs e\a-
Ka0a-
5
10
Trep eprfrai Kol irporepov.
Set Se fiijBe TOVTO \av6aveLV TOVS OVTW vofjbo6eTovvra^ r o \av-
Oavei vvv y OTL TO r^9 ova las rdrrovra^ 77X17^09 7rpocrr)Kei Kal rwv
TO 7r\rjdo^ TaTTeiv eav "7^/3 v7Tpaiprj T^9 overtax TO
o TCOI^ TZKVWV dpiO/jios, avd^Kfj rbv 76 vofjiov \veo-9ai, Kal
1166 b 2 5 ^817 T, 5r) P 1 !! 2 , 5e M 8 Ar. || 3 ras omitted by M 8 ? 1 , [ras] Susem. 1
perhaps rightly || 5 [nXarwj ...8 Trporepov] ? Susem. The brackets are necessary if
Schmidt is justified in rejecting 1265 b 21 26 (see Comm.) || 6 eci? omitted by II 1 ,
[<F<J>] Susem. 1 , but see Dittenberger op.c. p. 1359 f. || 9 ^ Bender || 12 TOJ/ re
M s U b
hindrances to this hypothesis. SUSEM.
(232)
3 1266 b I v0vis should be taken
with the participle.
2 Tctx.i(TTa] The expedient of modern
writers for bringing about this much de
sired equality is limitation of the right of
bequest.
4 6 lav = laisser faire.
8 Kal irpo repov] 6 15 ;/. (213).
Hence if that be bracketed the same
suspicion attaches to this one. SUSEM.
(233)
5 9 8ci 8e p.T)8e KT\] This remark
was made before, 6 10 13, cp. n. (2 ro).
It is strange that Aristotle does not refer
back to that passage. SUSEM. (234)
11 virepaipTj^ exceed, rise above. If
the number of children becomes too great
for the size of the property.
12 avd-yKTi...\v(r0ai] Schlosser thinks
this remark unfounded, because Phaleas
is only speaking of landed property, as
Aristotle says himself, 21. And he re
minds us of the custom in some parts of
Germany where only one child (the eldest,
or the youngest, or any one whom the
father chooses) succeeds to the real
estate and provides portions for the rest
at a fair valuation. But he should have
reflected that Phaleas Plato Aristotle all
alike exclude the sons of citizens from
engaging in any trade. SUSEM. (235)
pared with the Platonic schemes (comp.
nn. 255, 256 on 8 3, 4). According
to Aristotle s account, Phaleas thought
there was no more to be done when once
he had demanded an equal division of the
land into inalienable and indivisible lots,
and the preservation of this equality by a
uniform education which is not more
minutely described, and when he had
recommended the degradation of artizans
to the position of public slaves. He had
nothing to say about the size or number of
these lots, about moveable property, or in
fact hardly anything else. The spirit and
tendency of these proposals strongly sug
gest the idea expressed by Bockh Staats-
haushaltungder Ath. I. p. 65 and Roscher
Thukydides p. 247 that they concealed a
practical aim : that he wanted to restore,
in his Dorian native town especially, the
old aristocracy of well-born landholders.
Henkel Studien p. 165 further remarks in
support of this view that popular rule
found its way first into Byzantium, B.C.
390, and thence to Chalcedon, under the
influence of the reviving strength of the
Athenian Demos: Xen. Hellen. iv. 8. 27,
Theopompos Frag. 65 in Athenaeus xn
526 D. At the same time, he adds, it
must be remembered that the absence
from Phaleas scheme of the warlike spirit
of a chivalrous aristocracy, and his silence
as regards everything military, are great
II. 7. 7]
1266 a 401266 b 24.
263
pi? r?79 \vaews (f>av\ov TO TTO\\OVS e/c ifKovor iwv yivecrOai Trevrjras (IV)
6 egyoy yap ^ vecorepoTroiovs eivai TOI)? rotourof?. BIOTI ^ev 4
15 ovv e^ei Tivd ^vvafjuv et? rrjv TroXiTi/crjv Koivwv iav ri TJ9 ov-
<jm? o//,aXoT77?, KOI rwv iraXai rtz e? fyaivovrai SieryvwKOTes, olov
teal ^6\wv evofAoOervja-ev, teal Trap aK\oi<$ eari VOJJLOS o? KW\vei
KTaaQai yrjv oayv av j3ov\r]Tal Tt?, 6/zota)9 Be KOL rrjv
overlap 7r(ii)\LV ol vofAOL KwXvovcnv, cocrTrep eV Ao/cpois
20 ecrrl /Jirj TrwKelv, edv ^rj fyavepdv drv^lav Sel^rj
7 /cvlav, eri Se roi)? TraXatou? K\rjpovs Siao-w^eiv (TOVTO &e \v-
Qev fcal Trepi AevKciSa 8ij/jiOTLKTfjv eiroirjcre \iav TTJV iro\iT&iav
avrwv ov yap en crvveftcuvev djro rwv wpicr^evwv Ti/bi^fjid- (p. 38)
ecrrt TTJV Icror^ra jJL,ev 5
18 biroa"r]v Aid. Bk., oiroffriv or Sffijv AY., OTTOCTI^V P 2>3 - 4 Q b T b U b |] 19 of j/o/xot]
?woi Biicheler, probably right || 24 lart] ets r6 P 3 - 4 U b Ar. Aid. and P 2 (ist hand,
yp. fan corr. 3 in the margin), ets Q b T b
\wpls = quite apart from the violation
of the law, it is a defect that many citi
zens should decline from wealth to
poverty. Comp. 5 2, xw/ats 0,71-0.
13 <|>avXov KT\] Comp. 6 13 n. and
iv(vn). i6 15 ff. n. (946). SUSEM. (236)
14 Hpyov to be taken as b 2 t~pyu-
SfoTepov itjs_hard for such people not to
encourage sedition. In ill. 15. 8 also
Zpyov eVr = it is improbable, in the same
way as /xoXts with difficulty comes to
mean hardly ever.
6, 7 The influence which equality
of possessions must exercise upon civil
society was recognized (i) by Solon s legis
lation, (2) by laws which fix a limit to the
accumulation of landed property, (3) by
the laiv of Locri which forbids the sale of
land, (4) by a law of entail, as at Leucas,
where the disuse of the law altered the
constitution to an advanced democracy.
Yet the size of properties needs regulation,
if, when equalized, they are not to be over-
large or over-small.
Compare c. 12 10 (Philolaos at
Thebes), vn(vi). 4. 9 (the Aphytaeans
and Oxylos in Elis), vin(v). 7. 9 (Thurii).
See further Laveleye op. c. pp. i6r 165
Eng. trans., A. Lang Essay xin, esp. p.
89 ; all attempts to restrict the sale of
land and to keep it parcelled out in small
lots may be taken as survivals of early
custom. An early equal distribution
(Maine s Village Communities p. 81),
perhaps a periodic redistribution, was a
tradition to the early lawgivers of Greece.
Long after them Phaleas, and Plato in
the Laws, 744 E, desire a return to the
old usage.
SIOTI |xv...6|Jia\oTT]s] At this point
then Aristotle s own socialism begins
to come out more clearly than before.
See notes on 5 7 (158), 15 (166);
6 1014 (208211), and 7 5 (234).
Further comp. n. (192) and Introd.
p. 33. SUSEM. (236 b)
1 7 Like the law of Oxylos prohibiting
mortgage, vn(vi). 4. 9, Solon s o-eiadx-
deia, or relief measure, restored mort
gaged lands to their proprietors : yij
fj.\aiva TTJS eyu TTOTC | opous a<pei\ov TTO.V-
ra^ou TreTrr/yoras | TO TrpocrOe dov\euov(TCL
v\iv 5 tXevdepa. His graduated assess
ment must also have tended somewhat to
equality. But in addition to this Scho-
mann, Antiquities p. 330 Eng. tr., and
Curtius, Hist. \. 329 Eng. tr., represent
Solon as enacting a special law, that there
should be a maximum limit to the acqui
sition of landed property : Grote (in. 182)
thinks no such inference borne out by
the present passage.
Trap aXAois] It is not known where.
19 Iv AoKpois] Presumably the Epi-
zephrian Locri, where Zaleucus was legis
lator, c. 12 6.
7 22 Kdl irepl AevKaSa] Cp. vn(vi).
4. 9 r\v 5 TO ye ap-^ouov iv TroXXcuj TroXecrt
Trpwrovs K\rjpovs with note, and on the
custom at Sparta, c. 9 14 n. (300).
SUSEM. (237)
24 oXX &TTI filv KT\] But then
there may be equality of possessions and
264 nOAITIKIlN B. 7. [II. 7. 7
25 vTrdp xeiV T?79 overlap, ravrr]v Be T] \iav elvai Tro\\r}v, coo-re (IV)
rpvcfrdv, TI \iav o\lyrjv, ware %rjv y\io"xpa)s. $f}\ov ovv &$9
ov% Ifcavov TO T9 ovcrias IVa? rcoir^aal rov vofjLoderrjv, d\\d
s rov fJ^eaov aro^ao-reov. ere S et, rt? /cat T?}I> per p lav rd^eiev
overlay rrdcnv, ovSev o^eXo? /nd\\ov yap Set ra?
tao o^aki^eiv rj ra$ ov<7ias, rovro S ouV eVrt /AT) rr
\ l/cavci)? VTTO rwy vofJMV. a\)C laws av elrreiev o $aXea<? on 6
I ravra rvy^avei \e<ycov avro? olerai <yap Svolv rovroiv I<j6-
rrjra Selv vrrap^eiv ra?9 TroXecriz/, Krr]0 eo)s KOI iraib
9 d\\a rtfv re rrai^eiav r)ri<$ ecrrai, Set \e<yeiv, KOI TO
35 eivat, /cal rrjv avrrjv ovSev o<^>eXo9 ecrTt 7-/o rrjv avrr/v
elvai KOI jjuiav, d\\d ravrrjv eivai roiavr^v e f 779 ecrovrai
rrpoaiperiKoi rov rr\eovKrelv i] %pr)fjiara)i> r) rtp,f]s fj crvva,^-
10 (poreptov, eVet (rracrid^ovcriv ov JJLOVOV Sta rrjv dvicror rjra rfjs 7
Kr/jcrecos, d\\d KOI Sid rrjv rwv n/jicop, rovvavriov $e Trepl
40 efcdrepov (oj^ /ueis ydp 7ro\\ol old ro Trepl T9 Krr]creis dvi-
1267 a aov, ol ^ Se xapievres Trepl rwv ri^wv, eav Icrai o0ev fcal
ev 5e ifj ri/jirj T^/XCI/ KG/CO? rj8e KOI ecrdXos),
T apparently || 28 raet M s P 1 || 31 af e iiroiev M s , elVot af
P 2 - 4 -Q b T b U b Aid. Bk. and a later hand in P 3 , cfaoitv P 3 (ist hand) || 38 evel...
1267 a 17 TToXiretas 1267 a 37 ^TL...b 13 e ar^oj/. See the text arranged in parallel
columns hitrod. p. 80 f. || e?ret Spengel, ^rt FII Ar. Bk. Susem. 1 in the text, on
PSusem. || 39 5ta r-rjv omitted by M s , dia by P 1
1267 a 2 5 M s P 1 - 2 - 3 Aid. || Kal omitted by T and M s (ist hand)
yet the equal shares of citizens may be (c] for higher gratifications. Phaleas can
either immoderately large or excessively only cure the minor social evils due to (a),
small. but not the ambition which produces a
26 -yXCo-xptts] stingily, so as barely tyrant.
to make a living. Demosth. c. Arist. 30 TOVTO 8 OVK &TTI KT\] Compare
689, 25 ws fJLLKpa Kal yXlcrxpa (S^/wocn a with what follows 5 15 //. (165 b) ; see
OLKodofj-elre), c. Pant. *y\i<rxpws /cat /xoXts : further on 9 12 n. (296) and Exc. II on
Plato Rep. VII 553 c yXicrxpw Kal Kara Bk. II p. 333. SUSEM. (238)
cr^iKpov (peido [Mev os /ecu epya6/j.evos, thriftily 36 e ^ware K Ta^rys.
and gradually, by saving and working. 10 38 o-Tao-idtovo-i] Cp. vni(v).
28 TOV jxt crov (TTOxacTTtov] See this i. u Travraxov yap cud TO avicrov i]
more precisely defined in c. 6 8, 9 ; ordcris.
iv(vn). 5 i, with the notes: also 40 This opposition of ol x a P^" re ^j
vi(iv). ii 2 ff., as quoted in n. (207). the educated or enlightened classes, to
SUSEM. (237 b) the mass of ordinary men recurs in NIC.
8, 9 Men s desires need to be regu- Eth. I 5 3, 4. There joined with irpaK-
lated no less than the amount of their TLKOI, in Pol. Vli(vi). 5. io with vovv
property : this Phaleas must admit, as %x VT *-
he holds that there should be a public 1267 a i Idv l <rcu sc. at /cruets.
edtication, though he does not give a i Homer Iliad ix. 319. SUSEM. (239)
detailed scheme. Crime springs from The exclamation of Achilles, as one of
ill-regulated desires (a) for the necessaries the nobles, at the levelling policy which
of life, (b) for its superfluities, and for he attributes to Agamemnon.
the gratification of the. passions generally,
II. 7. 13]
126Gb 25 1267 a
11 ov fjibvov 8 ol dvdpwTTOU Sid TO, dvay/caia dSiKovcriv, wv a/co? (IV)
elvai vofjii^ei TTJV IcroTrjra r^? overlap, ftjcrre fjirj \a)7roSvT6 iv Sid TO
5 piyovv rj Treivfjv, d\\d /cal OTTCO? ^alpcoat, KOI /AT) eTridvfjLtoO lv
lav yap /JLel^co eywaiv iTTiQv^lav rcov dvay/caiow, Sid rrjv
12 TavTT]^ larpelav dSi/ctjaovo-iv, ov TOIVVV Sid Tavrrjv fiovov,
/cal dvev i^riOvfjawv, iva ^aipwai, rat? avev \VTTWV
rl ovv a/co? TWV rpicov TOVTCOV ; rot? JJLG.V ovcrla /3pa- 8
/cat epyacrla, rot? Se (rcotypoavvr) rptrov S\ et Ttz>e?
/ a (\>f / >,\><x >\ \
Q ot awrwv %aipeiv, OVK av eTTifyroLev eu firj irapa
a/co?. at 7<x/9 a\\ai dvOpcoTrwv* Seovrai. eirel
ye rd peytarra Sid ra? V7rp/3o\d$, d\\ ov Sid
rd dvaytcala, olov Tvpavvovcnv ov% Iva firj piywaiv (Bio KOLI
3 Susem. 2 , 5 FJIAr. Bk. Susem. 1 3 in the text [| 8 cij/eu eTn0viJ.tuv or
ai>eTri6vfj,r)TOi (cp. Clem. Al. Strom, vn. p. 742. A. B.) Bojesen, av CTridvfJLOiev FII
Ar. Bk., av /XT) eirLdv^waivl Schneider following Lambin s translation, Bernays omits
the words || u Stivaivro] POV\O<.VTO P 1 II 2 Ar. Bk. perhaps rightly . || avruv P 1 ,
atrtav T M 9 P 2 - 3 4 Aid. || 12 e?ret H Ar. Bk. : 2rt or eirei <5 > Rassow. Then
the apodosis begins with wore. William does not translate eTret : hence [eVei] and
adiKovcri 5^ Susem. 1 - erroneously for dSi/coOcrt ye
11 Shilleto pointed out that these
three causes of crime strongly resemble
those which are mentioned in Rhct. I. 12.
17 d8iKov<n 8e rot)s x VTa * ^v avrol ev-
5ee?s r els TavayKcua rj els vwepox^v 77 els
a,Tr6\av(Tiv, where see Cope s note.
6 <xv -ydp }i.tw] sc. TTJS rCov dvay-
Ko.lwi> eTridv/Jitas For if the desire goes
i beyond the necessaries of life. Compare
Nic. Eth. VII. 4. 2 1147 b 23 ff. effTLV ra
jj.ev ava.yK.cua. T&V TTOLQVVTUV -rjdovrjv, (viz.
TO, crw^tart/cd, e.g. TO, Trepl rrjv rpo(prjv,) ra
5 alpera fJiev /ca0 aura e-^ovra 5 inrep-
[3o\r)v ; these are OVK avaytcala ; VIKTJ,
Tijj,r), TrXoOros are examples : and VII. 14.
2 1154 a 15 ff. TUV 5e ffw/j.aTt.K&v ayad&v
eanv VTrepf3o\ri, /cat 6 0aOXos T diuKeiv
rrjv vwep^oXrjv (sc. </>aDXos) ecrrlv, d\X ov
ras avayKaias (Congreve). SUSEM. (240)
12 8 rats dveu \vrrw v ^Sovais]
Comp. Nic. Eth. vn. 12. 2 1152 b 36 ff.
^?ret /cat dvev \virrjs /cat eiridvfjLias elviv ij-
8ovai, olov at roO deupeTv evepyeiai : X. 3.
7 1173 b 1 6 ff. dXvTTOt yap elcnv at re /j.adt]-
/uan/cat /cat rwi /card rds alcr6r](reis al Sid
TTJs 6ff<t>pr)ffe<as, /cat d/cpodyuara 5e /cat c5/)d-
fjiara TroXXd /cat fj.vrnj.ai. /cat e\TrLSes. Taken
from Plato /%//. 51 B 52 B where occur
at Trepl rd /caXd \eyo/j.eva xpw/xara /cat Trepl
TO, (rx^iwara, /cat rcoi 6ff/j,uv at TrXetffrat,
/cat at rwv <j>doyyuv ; also ai Trepi rd /xa-
ijdoval. (Eaton.) SUSEM. (241)
One could hardly have supposed that
this la^t was a fruitfuLiiQurcc of crime.
(> <XKO9] Here is a digression into the
region of practical suggestions and expe
dients, in the same spirit as vn(vi). c. 5,
vni(v). cc. 8, g.
10 Ip-yourta] constant employment.
<r4>pocrijvr|] Cp. n. (206 b) on 6 9.
SUSEM. (242)
Here this word means self-restraint
generally, and not thrift, as before.
u Trapd <j>i\oo"o<j>ias] As in 5 15,
culture. The education of the citizens
and the elevation of the masses are the
leading ideas of B. v(viii).
12 al -yelp d XXai sc. r]8oval.
clvBpwirttV Stovrai] Compare Nic. Eth.
x. 7. 4 1177 a 2 7 ff- r ^ v ^ ev y&P ^pos
ro ffiv dvayKaiuv..,, rots 5 rotourots viz.
rots 7rp6s TO ffiv dvayxaLois, iKavus KexopfJ-
6 fj.ev diKaios 5e?rat Trpos ous 5t/cato-
i, /cat /ue0 cSv, ouolus 8e Kal o
<r<j)<f>pwv /cat 6 di Spetos /cat T&V d\\wv
e/cacrros, o 5^ cro(p6s /cat /ca0 avrbv w...
8/m.ios avTapKeffTaros: IX. 4. 5 n66a26f.
(Eaton). SUSEM. (243)
13 14 Tupavvovo-iv ov\ fra |x-q p.] It
- is not to keep out the cold that men be
come tyrants. Cp. Nic. Eth. v. 6. 7 1134
b 6 ff . jjucrOos dpa rts Sore os < eirel ovQev
avrf Tr\eov elvai 5o/cet, etVep 5t/catos>,
roOro de rt/x.7j Kal ye pas 6 ry 8e fj.T) LKavd rd
266
nOAITTKflN B. 7.
aTroKTeivrj Tt9 ov
ra? JUKds aSt/aa9
[II. 7. 13
N
K\7rrrjv aXXa (p. 39)
fjivov
ert ra 77oXXa j3ov\6TCU 9
KOI 7-019
ov
&ev
e^coOev
77/009 T^I
o/itota)9
77oXe-
776/o
15 at Tt/u-at /Lte^aXat, a
Tvpavvov} ware 77/009
14 6 r/007709 r>?9 <E>a\eou
/caraa/cevd^ecp e &v rd 77/009
Set Se /cat 77/009 7-01)9 yeiTvtwvras
20 ava^Kalov dpa rrjv nro\iTeiav
776/ot 779 eicelvos
KTrjcrea)?. Set yap ov /AOVOV 77/009 Ta9 77oXtrt/ca9
iKavrjv vTrdp^eiv, aXXa /cat 77/009 Toi)? e^wdev KLV-
SioTrep ovre Toaovrov Set 77X^09 virdp^ew wv ol
teal KpeiTTov?
ov SwijaovTat rovs
vaaOai 7r6\e/jLov VTreveyKelv
7^09 //-e^ oi)z^ ovSev SiGopi/cev, Set
(7V/JL(f)epi 77X77^09 ovcria^. tcr&)9
17 e n ra ...... 37 7roXio/>/a as transposed by Susem. to follow b 13
Susem. 1 wrongly from William, /u>Aet K
25
16
e^ovres
o S_e
ov9* OVTCOS 6\l yr)i> ware fjurj $i>-
/cat TW^ o/uioiwv. e /cet- 10
/it?) \av6dveiv, [o,J rt
a/ot<7T09 0/009 TO /ZT) \vcri-
eareov \\ del
dai ? Schmidt,
rovro
j ,^
/Soi^Xerai /caratr/ceuafea^at ? Susem. 1 , but see Dittenberger <?/.<:. p. 1365, j3ov\everai.
KaraaKevafait M s || 20 apa] 7ap ? Koraes, but see Dittenberger /. c, || 24 cSt ]
wcrre Spengel, but see Vahlen Aristot. Aufsatze II. p. 21 (Wiener Sitzungsber., phil.-
hist. Cl. LXXll. p. 23) || 25 7ri8vfj.ov<ni> P 1 , einQvfj.ov M s j| a^vveadai Ridgeway
|| 26 oi> r <ovaiav>? Schmidt, but Krrjffiv can be understood from what precedes ||
28 [5e?. ..b 13 ear^oi ] Bender, [Set. ..37 TroXtop/ci as] Susem. 2 , probably right : see
Comm. || TI Coming, 6 TL Stahr Susem. 1 in the text, on T II Ar. Bk., $ ri
Lindau. Bender retains 6Vt and suggests 7r\rj66s <rt>
rotaOra, ourot yiyvovrat.Tiupa.vvoL : IV. i. 42,
1 1 22 a 3 ff . : meanness is shown in petty
gains, those who take on a large scale,
despots who plunder cities and not tern-
pies, are called Trov-rjpoi, dcre^ecs, a5t/cot, but
not mean, dve\ev9epoi (Eaton). SUSEM.
^
816] The crime is greater because the
excuse is less : it is not did ra dvayKa ia.
Hence the higher reward given to those
who punish it.
14 19 8t 8e KT\] The same criti-
cism as was passed on the Laws, 6 7.
That the constitution must necessarily
have reference to the maintenance of the
military force follows directly from the
assumption of the military regime which
Plato and Aristotle make without reserve.
Cp. again vn(vi). 6. 15.
15 24 irXtjOos sc. TT?S KT-rjcreus. <av=
wcrre rotrwv ; as e TJS, g.
25 01 irXT]<rfov = ol trtXas, Rhet. I. 5.
17 where see Cope s note.
TOVS eiriovras may perhaps
be defended by Plato Phacdrus 260 B
7ro\/ut-tovs d/afoeiv. But see Critical Notes.
27 ir6\e[Aov...6|jiouov] to support a
war even with an equal or similar power,
tcroi /cat 6^10101 = a state of the same stand-
ing, an equal.
16 We should not fail to decide
what limit to property is advisable.
28 8ei 8e KT\] This limitation has been
sufficiently noticed in the preceding 15,
yet the repetition might be justified, if it
now appeared under a new form, much
sharper and better defined. This would
not be the case unless the second expla-
nation of 29 t <rws ovv KT\, as given in the
next note, were correct. But, as is there
shown, this can hardly be accepted. That
being so, there is certainly then fairly
good reason to suspect, with Bender, that
it is now appended solely for the purpose
of introducing the anecdote about Eubu-
los. SUSEM. (246)
29 i <rws o3v...3i ova-Lav] Perhaps i
the best limit of wealth is that its excess |
II. 7. 18]
1267 a 15 1267 a 37.
267
30 reXeiv
17 OUTW?
Jfr^^
TOIS
to? a
KpeiTroai,
Kol jur
Sid rrjv vTrep^dX.rjv TroXe/xetz/, aXV (IV)
pvrwv ToaavTriv ovalav. olov EvySou-
Xo? A.vrocj)pa8drov /-teXXoz TO? Arapvea nroKiopKeiv e/ceXev-
aev avrov, crKe^rdfJievov ei> TTOCTW Xpovp \r]^rerai TO ^wplov,
\oyto-acr0ai, rou %povov rovrov Trjv Sajrdvrjv e6e\eiv yap e\ar-
35 TOV TOVTOV \a(Stov e/c^eiTreiv rjSrj rov Arapvea ravTa & el-
irwv e7rot??cre TOV A^vro^paSdrrjv crvvyovv ryevbfJievov Traixra-
18 crOat, T?;? 7ro\topKia$. || ecrrt fjiev ovv TL TWV crv[Ji<$>ep6vTtoV TO n
34 e6e\eiv Mv T? (dcbere William) |] 35 e/cXtTreu II 2 Bk. || 37 fort ^j/...b8
dSt/cwj/rat, with which goes b 9 01) ...... 13 eartov, is believed by Susem. to be another
recension of the preceding 1266 b 38 e7ret...i267 a 17 TroXtrei as. See Iiitrod. p. Si
should not make it profitable for the
stronger to attack us, but should leave
them no motive for so doing which they
would not have had, even if our posses
sions had been less. The ellipse may
be filled up thus, dXX OL^TWS TroXe/xeu/ Xu-
ffiT\iv ws dv e TroX^uTjcrcw /cat fj.ri exovTWi>,
sc. T&V rjTTovojv, TOffavTTjv ovaiav. C.)iH
wealth should never tempt aggression :
we should then only be exposed to the
same attacks as a poorer state in our
place. That is, we should aim at being
the lean wiry dogs with whom their
neighbours are glad to make common
cause against fat and tender sheep :
Republic IV 422 D.
A less simple rendering has been pro
posed : that is the best limit of wealth
when a stronger power does not find it
profitable to make war upon us for the sake
of the excess of the booty to be gained over the
costs of victory, but when (even if it con
quers us) it is no better off than if it had
not made so great an acquisition. This
suits the sequel better, but somewhat
strains the meaning of vireppo\r)i> and
ovffiav, besides leaving a harsh genitive
absolute: a\X ourws ffv/jL(f>^peLV ws av avv-
(f>epe /XT; XOVT(J}V (T&V KpeiTrovwv) Toaavrrjv
ovaiav. It can hardly be right.
17 During the last years of Arta-
xerxes Mnemon and at the commence
ment of the reign of Artaxerxes Ochos,
the confusion in Asia Minor, more parti
cularly owing to the revolt of Artabazos,
the satrap of Phrygia Lydia and Paphla-
gonia, suggested the idea of wresting a
part of the Hellenic lands on the coast of
Asia from the Persians. The requisite
means for effecting this were secured, and
it was even possible to maintain the
severance. Eubulos was a Bithynian by
birth, a money-changer, i.e. banker, by
trade, and at the same time d
</>oj, i.e. probably one of Plato s scholars,
like his freedman and successor Hermeias.
Through the medium of his business he
found he could execute such a scheme as
this, and make himself absolute ruler
(rvpavvos) of Atarneus on the Aeolic coast
of Mysia, and of the stronghold of Assos
in the Troad with the adjacent districts :
Vita Aristotelis in Westermann s Bioypd-
0oi p. 402, Suidas s.vv. Apto-ror^XTys,
Ep/xct as, Strabo xm. 6:0. Bockh (Her-
jneias of Atarneus in his Gcs. Kl. Schriftcn
VI. 183 ff.) tries to show, as others have
clone, that this event happened before
359 B.C.; that in 359 Autophradates as
general of the Persian king marched
against Artabazos and took him pri
soner, and that in the course of this
same campaign he laid siege to Atarneus.
The suggestion by which Eubulos raised
the siege is, as Bockh remarks, one worthy
of a banker. We know that he main
tained his power down to his death : also
that it was not before 345/44 that his
successor, the eunuch Hermeias, Aris
totle s friend (see I. 6. 9. n. 56) was over
thrown by the Rhodian Mentor, the
Persian commander-in-chief, and that
solely by stratagem deceit and treachery.
SUSEM. (247)
Bergk s posthumous paper On the chro
nology of king Artaxerxes ///, Ochos, in
Rhein. Mus. xxxvu. 1882. pp. 355 362
fixes the fall of Hermeias and the escape
of Aristotle and Xenocrates to Mitylene
(and thence to Athens) in the year 345/44.
Comp. Susemihl in Bursian s Jahrcsber.
XXX. 1 882. pp. 4 7.
36 o-vvvow yev^ffBat, to become \
thoughtful, to reflect.
That 1820 are parallel to 10
13 has been explained Introd. p. 80 f.
18 37 fon ^...38 TroXirats] Comp.
line 3 wv a/cos... 4 over las.
268
nOAITIKHN B. 7.
[II 7. 18
ov<ria<s i<ra<$ elvai rot?
7rpo9 aXX^Xou?, 01) /x?)
40 ^apievTes dyava/CTOiev [av]
19 fyaivovTcu, 7roXXa/c/9 eTTiT
1267 b ?) Trovrjpla TWV dvOpwirwv
vov Stft)/3oX/a JJLOVOV, orav
737)09 TO /LM) vraGid^iv (IV)
ovSev 0)9 euTrelv. KOI yap av ol
OVK i<ra)v oVre? a^ioi,, Sto /cat
Kal crrao-tafo^re? erf S
v, /eal TO TTpwTOV uev i/ca-
TOUT 27 Trdrpiov, del Seov-
rai TOV 7rXetWo9, eft)? et? aTretpov e\0(0o~iv. direipo^ yap rj
Trjs eTTiOvalas (fivers, 779 777)09 TT)Z^ dvcnr^pwcriv ol TTO\\OL
ovv TOIOVTWV apxr), /j,d\\ov TOV T9 ovo~ias ojj,a- 12
i> ) TO TGI)? yu-ei eTriei/cels TTJ (frvcrei, TOIOVTOVS Trapao-fcevd- (P. 40)
UHTT6 A
20
21 Tat.
10 ydp
TOVTO eo~Tiv, av TJTTOVS Te CDCTL /ca /U-T
u /caX&)9 Se oi)Se T?}^ lo-oTijTa Trjs overlap eipijice
KTrjcriv to~aet uovov, GCTTL Se /cal
38 i cras after elvat II 2 Bk., perhaps T; possibly right || 40 av II 2 Bk., omitted
by n 1
1267 b 5 ap%?7 is corrupt: OL/CTJ Scaliger, a/cos Schneider, apuyri M. Vermehren,
aX/CT; ? Madvig probably right, < aTraXXcry^s > or <tar/oeias> dpx 7 ? Schmidt; dp/eel
Koraes, certainly not right
38 irpos TO p,i] <rTCuriaiv recalls
aTaaia^ovffi of 10.
39 ov (JLI^V lAc -ya KT\] a 16 wVre TT/)OS
rds /xt/cpas dSt/vi as /crX.
Kal -yap av KT\] "For even then (eav
I crai at /cTTjcrets, 10) the higher classes
would be discontented, as they lay claim
to something more than an equal share,
and hence are often found aggressive and
factious."
40 OUK urwv] dXXd ir\elovos . on the
ground that they deserve something more
than an equal share, something propor
tionately greater. Comp. ill. 13. 13 and
Thuc. VIII. 89. 4 Trcu res "yap avdri/mepov
a^iovcnv 00% OTTWS t uoi dXXd /cat TroXi) ?rpw-
TOS avrbs ^/cacrros etj>at. In Thuc. I. 132
2 /XTJ arcs = superior.
19 1267 b 2 8iw(3oXCa] This refers
to the so-called OeupLKov, a grant of pub
lic money to provide for shows or public
amusements introduced at Athens after
Pericles time. In the first instance at
those festivals only at which plays were
exhibited, the sum of two obols, the price
of an ordinary seat in the theatre, was
paid from the state-chest to the lessee of
the theatre for every citizen present.
(Every one who went to the theatre re
ceived a counter which he gave up on
going in; the lessee collected from the
state the two obols for every counter; but
he had to pay a rent out of his receipts
and to keep the theatre in repair. See
Benndorf Bcitrdge in Zeitschrift f. d, ost.
Gymn. xxvi. 1875. p. 23 ff.) Subse
quently the poorer citizens received the
like dole for all the other festivals, and
these outgoings swallowed up no small
part of the revenues. See Bockh Public
Econ. of Athens p. 217 Eng. tr., Scho-
mann Antiquities I p. 341, p. 438 ff. Eng.
tr. An Attic obol= 1*3^. of our money,
a little more than five farthings, or 1 1
German Pfennige: Hultsch Greek and
Roman Metrology p. 172. SUSEM. (245)
4 il^s irpos TTJV avairX-rfpoxriv KrX]
Comp. a 5 STTWS %atpwcrt /cat /HTJ eTTidv/J.w<nv.
20 6 TO TOVS |A^V...7 irXOVKTlv]
Substantially the same remedy as in 12
rpirov 5 et Ttfes...d :os.
21 The argument from inconsis
tency is pressed from opposite sides here
and in 6 15. Phaleas must have meant
to include personal property, 3.
10 O-TI 8c Kal SovXwv KT\] Comp.
Rhet. I. 5. 7 TT\OVTOV 5e /m^prj vo^la^a.-
TOS Tr\TJdos, yrjs ^wpiwv KTTJffis, TL de
7rL7T\(i}V KTTJfflS Kal (3 ff K 7) /J. d T W J> Kal
av8pair6duj>, where Cope explains ?TTI-
?rXa as "moveables" opposed to fixtures,
such as houses and land. Hence furni
ture, even if of bronze, Xen. Oecon. ix. 6,
Thuc. in. 68.
IT. 8. 1]
1267 a 38 1267 b 22.
269
15
23
KOL fiocr/crjfjidTayv TT\OVTOS /cal vofj,lcrjj,aTos, KOI KaraaKevrj (IV)
7ro\\rj TWV Ka\ov/Jieva)v eTriTrXwv rj nravTwv ovv TOVTWV i&o-
fyrrjreov r} rd^Lv TIVCL fjuerplav, rj Trdvra eareov. (jjal- is
verai S 6K TTJS vofjioOecrias Kara&fcevd^cov rrjv TTO\LV JJLL-
/cpdv, el y ol re^vlrai iravre^ 8rj[j,6<riot eaovrai KCU yu,?}
7T\fjpcofjid TL Trape^ovrai, rrjs TroXeco?. XA, elrrep Set Sij-
[jLocriovs elvcLi I TOU? ra KOIVCL epya^o/ji^vovs, Set Kaddrrep Iv
ETTiSd/jivw re, /cal Afoc/xx^To? Trore KaredKeva^ev AOrji ijo-i,,
TOVTOV e^eiv rov Tpoirov.
Trepl fiev ovv T?/? OaXeou TroXtre/a? a^eSop IK rovrwv av
Ti? Oewprjaetev, ei TL Tvy%dvL Kd\(a$ eipTj/ccas 77 fir) /ca-
09 /cat TTZ/ TCOZ^ V
16 5eZ] 5^ r 3 - 4 Q b T b U b L s Ar. Aid. and P 2 (rst hand, emended by corr. 1 ) ||
17 Set] /cat with a comma after 16 etVep Bernays ; if so, epya^o/j^vovs <jj.6vovs>
Susem.; probably right, but see Comm. The same sense can be obtained by Well-
don s punctuation e iirep Set 5??/xo<rt ous tivai, TOI)S ra KOLVOL epya fo^vovs Set, Kadcnrep
provided ws be inserted after 18 re /cat || 18 ws inserted by Morel Bk. before Ato-
0a^ros, omitted by II ; the translations of William and Ar. are no warrant that they
had ws in their mss. || 21 rt] rts II 2 || 22 [6s ..... 28 /SouXoyue^os] Congreve j the
passage had been suspected by Fiilleborn. See Comm.
22 15 8r|[Ji6crioi public servants.
Such were the executioners and physicians
always (see III. n. 1 1 dy/Movpyos = larpos) :
also vavir-rryol and others, Plato Gorg.
455 B with Dr Thompson s note, Politi-
cus 259 A.
16 irXi]pw}Jia rt Trapeoi>Tai. TTJS iroXecos]
Exactly Plato s expression Rep. 371 E
TT\rjp(>}fJia drj TroXews et crt /cat (Uffdurol
(Eaton). SUSEM. (248)
Comp. in. 13. 13, vi(iv). 4. 12.
23 17 4v EiriSdp-vo) KT\] "No
one but a political dreamer or dreamy
politician like Phaleas could hatch the
thought that the handicrafts throughout
the city should be carried on by public
slaves. The proposal made at Athens by
Diophantos, we do not know when, was
that only the artizans who worked for the
community were to be public slaves";
Bockh Staatsh. i. 65. [not in the Eng.
trans.] This was certainly the case at
Epidamnos. With the present text this
sense can only be obtained by interpreting
the words roi>s ra KOLVCL tpyafypfrovs to
mean those who do common work for
the whole community ; and we should be
forced to assume that even Phaleas pro
posal went no further than this, which is
very improbable. Hence the alteration
suggested by Bernays is tempting. The
archon of the year Ol. 96, 2 = 395/4 was
named Diophantos, but he can hardly
have been the man. " Aelian relates that
the people of Epidamnos allowed any one
who liked to settle amongst -them as a
resident, E7rt<5a /mot eTrtS^ea /cat /meroL-
/ce?f irapeixov rc3 /SoiAo/ieVoj : V. H. III.
16" (J. G. Schneider). But this fact
throws no light on the passage. On the
constitution of Epidamnos see further in.
16 i, vm(v). i 10, 4 7 nn. SU
SEM. (249)
Bernays renders: "But if (this propo
sal is to be tried), state-slaves ought only
to be employed upon works for state
objects, and the arrangement must be
made as it is found in Epidamnos and as
Diophantos wanted to introduce it at
Athens."
c. 8 Examination of the scheme of
Hippodamos of Miletus. This chapter
is analysed p. 105 f.
1 22 I7rird8a(ios] See Excursus
II to B. n p. 331 ff. : also K. F. Hermann
De Hippodamo Miles Jo (Marburg 1841).
SUSEM. (250)
This chapter is treated slightly by
Hildenbrand pp. 58 61, Oncken i.
213 218, Henkel 162 ---165. See also
270
nOAITIKHN B. 8.
[II. 8. 1
Bialpeo-Lv evpe Kal rov Tleipaia Karere^ev, ryevbpevos (V)
Kal 7Tpl TOV 0\\OV /3lOV TTeplTTOTepO? Bid fylkOTllJiiaV 0#Tft>9
25 ware Boxeiv evlois ^TJV rrepiepyorepov rpiywv re 7r\r)@6i,
real KOfJiT]^, eri Be ecrOfJTOS eureXou? l^ev aKeeivr/^ Be OVK
ev TCO ^eifJiwvi fiovov d\\d Kal Trepl TOJ)? depivovs
vovs, Xo yio? Be Kal Trepl rrjv o\r)V (frvcriv eivai yS
TTpwro? rwv fir) Tro\irevo^ev(ov ev6%eipr]<Te n Trepl
2 elrrelv T?;? dplcmjs. KareeKeva^e Be , rr)v rrb\iv TO> Tr\rj0ei 2
31 /jLev uvplavBpov, et? rpla Be fjieprj Birjprj/jievrjv eVo/et yap .
ev fJLev [Aepos re^Wra?, ev Be yewgyovs, rplrov Be TO irpo-
3 7ro\e/Aovv Kal rd o7r\a e-^ov. Biypei 8 et? rpla fiepr] <Kal> rrjv ,.
23 Tretpea (not iraipea as Susem. 1 gave) P 2 - 3f4 Q b T b (?) U b || 26
TroXureXet II 2 Ar. Bk. Bernays and yp. p 1 in the margin, /caAXwTricruy Bender,
/coa-^y Ridgeway, KOff^ffea-iv Welldon || ?TI 5e omitted by T h Sepulveda s codices
Bender Ridgeway Welldon, e^ Bernays || 28 Xo7os T 2 - 3 T b , cr7rou5a?os W b L s
Ar. Aid. || 32 nev omitted by M 9 Q b || 33 ra L s and U b (corr.), rb M 8 ? 1 - 2 - 3 4
Q b T b Aid. and U b (ist hand) || <Kal> rty Schmidt
M. Erdmann On Hippodamos and sym
metrical town architecture in Greece in
Philologus XLII. 1883. pp. 193 227.
22 6s Kal... 2 8 pov\6|ievosj Fiilleborn
remarked long since : "every reader must
be struck with one strange thing in this
introductory notice by Aristotle, viz. the
picture he draws of Hippodamos. With
what object has he preserved for posterity
these proofs of the man s vanity and
effeminacy? Do they serve to explain
the spirit of his work? I doubt it." And
Congreve, who rightly holds that this
description would be more consistent
with Theophrastos than with Aristotle,
suggests that here we may reasonably
suspect a later hand. SUSEM. (252)
23 KaTtT[j.v] cut out, i.e. laid out the
streets; Pindar Pyth. 5. 84 evdvro^ov
Kartdr] K... ffKvptaTav odov.
25 TJ V -rrfpiep-yoTepov] was held to
be somewhat affected in his way of life.
In the following words effdrjros must
be taken with TrX^ei according to the
reading of II 1 adopted in the text. It is
plausible to make it depend upon some
word like KOff/j.^, the reading of II 2 (so
Ridgeway, who quotes Aeschyl. Supp.
246 for /co<r/u,os, meaning fashion or style of
dress), or possibly /caXXojTrioyi^; or Koa-
fj.r)<reai, which are the conjectures of
Bender and Welldon respectively.
Tpixv re irX^Gei Kal KOH.T]S] In Sparta
it remained the custom, on account of
war and warlike exercises, to wear long
hair from the time of entering upon the
military age. But at Athens from early
times it became the practice to cut the
hair upon attaining the full age for civic
rights and to wear it short from that time
onwards. Not to do so passed for vanity,
foppishness, dandyism. The orator He-
gesippos, a contemporary and supporter
of Demosthenes, was on this account
nicknamed Kpw/WXos or Top-knot. The
knights alone are said to have kept the/
privilege of wearing longhair: /j-r) (pdoveW
-r^fuv KOfj-wai, Aristoph. Knights 580. See
Becker Char ikies in. 233 ft. ed. 2, Eng.
trans, pp. 453 55. SUSEM. (251)
26 evreXovs] of cheap material, though
warm.
28 Xo-yios] a man of learning, as in
iv(vii). 10. 3 and often in Herodotos (Con
greve). Suidas calls him fiereupoXoyos.
2 30 TTJV iroXiv] Oncken I. 214
n. (i) takes this to mean that in the
10,000 are included not the citizens only
but the entire free population. But ac
cording to the design of Hippodamos
7, not merely those who bear arms but
also the artizans and husbandmen are to
be citizens, although it must be conceded ,
to Aristotle s criticism 8 12, that hisi
end could hardly have been attained in
such a manner. SUSEM. (253)
3 33 8iiipi 8 ls rpCa |ApT] KrX]
So too Aristotle iv (vn). cc. 9, 10.
(Eaton.) Cp. n. (365) on II. 10 8.
SUSEM. (254)
12G7b 231268 a 3.
271
II. 8. 5]
%ct)pav, rrjv /JLCV lepdv rrjv Be BrjfjLoo lav rrjv 8 IBlav oOev (V)
35 fj,ev rd vofja^p^eva TTOL^O-OVCTL rrpos TOI)? Oeovs, lepdv, </> wv
S ol 7rpo7ro\ejjiovvT<; fticacrovrai,, KOIVTJV, rrjv Be TWV <yea)pya)v
4 IBiav. wero 8* eiBvj Kal TOJV vofjiwv elvat, rpla JJLOVOV Trepl J
cav yap al Blfcai, <ytvovrai,, rpla ravr elvai rov aptO/mov, ,( p- 4
vj3piv fi\d/3r)v Odvarov. evofJioOerei Be Kal iKaarr)piov ev
40 TO Kvpiov, et9 o Trdaa^ dvdyeo-Oai, Belv T? ftrj Ka\a>s KCKpl- 4
orOau BoKov&as Bl/ca^ rovro Be fcareaKevafcev etc nvwv ye-
=268 a / , vc^v/ * / ^v
5 povrcov atpercov. ra$ oe Kpiaeis ev Tot? bucaarripiois ov oia
qiero ryiveaOai Beiv, d\\d (frepeiv etcaarov m-
vaKiov, ev a>
e
[rrjv
e
35 lepa P 3 Q b T b L s and P 2 (ist hand, emended by corr. 2 ) || 37 5^ Kal
apparently, possibly right || 40 Set II 1
1268 a 2 $ero omitted by W b L s Aid., in P 4 inserted in the margin || 3
SiKafci P 1 and ist hand of P 2 - 3 (emended by corr. 1 ) || rrfv 8iKr)i> omitted by II 1
35 ci<j> 5 wv 8 KT\] Here there is just
a germ of Plato s ideal state, when we
consider that the soldiers answer to the
second order, and the artizans and far
mers together to the third order of citi
zens in the Republic, However even when
viewed in this light the differences be
tween the two schemes are as great as
the resemblances. But the state proposed
in the Laws may be described as hardly
I anything more than an improved working
out of Phaleas ideal. Comp. L. Stein
op, c, p. 162 f. SUSEM. (255)
4 37 wTo KT\] See Exc. II. to
B. ii p. 333 f. SUSEM. (255 b)
1//3/31S and /SXa/Sr? answer to crimes
against the person and against property.
Not precisely however; for i7/3pis implies
insult ; it is whatever wounds the feelings
or honour, whether accompanied by vio
lence or not. Whereas /SXci/S^ implies
loss or damage sustained, whether to per
son or property. See Rhet, I. 12. 26, n.
2. 5 with Cope s excellent comments.
39 lvofjLo0Ti 8*...] This idea of a
court of appeal is further evidence that
Hippodamos had a fine sense for juris
prudence. It is appropriated by Plato/
also Laws vi 767 c E, xn 956 c f.j
(Oncken). Cp. also Exc. n. SUSEM. l
(256)
40 TO Kvpiov = the supreme coui t.
5 1268 a i ov 8id \|/Ti<|>ocj>opas] In
the Athenian courts the voting was secret:
each juryman (SiKacrrrjs) received two
ballots, one for condemnation, the other
for acquittal; and there were two urns,
one of copper, into which the ballot con
taining the verdict was thrown, the other
of wood, into which the other, unused
ballots were thrown. The ballots for
voting were either differently coloured
stones or small metal balls, or even dif
ferently coloured beans or shells. At
what time the one or other of these were
used is not known. Stones were cer
tainly the most common; a black stone
served for condemnation, a white one for
acquittal: with balls of metal, one with a
hole in it served for the former purpose,
a whole one served for the latter purpose.
Equality of votes was counted as acquit
tal. (Meier and Schomann Attische Pro
cess 720 ff.) SUSEM. (257)
Aristotle himself is our authority for i
the voting at Athens: see Frag. i548b
541 of the Berlin ed.
2 dXXd (|>e peiv ^KCUTTOV KT\] Nearly
the same arrangement was actually intro
duced amongst the Rojnans : a fact which
shows how clearly this proposal testifies
to a legal mind of great originality. At
Rome the voting was by tablets in the
manner here proposed, leaving it to the
iudices to affirm not simply condemna
tion (C) or acquittal (A), but also a ver
dict of "not proven" (NL, non liquet).,
That Aristotle ( 13 f.) is as yet quite un-l
able to realize to himself the proper mean-i
ing of the proposal is a further proof on
its originality. (L. Stein.) Comp. n. \
(268) on 1315- SUSEM. (258)
272
nOAITIKHN B. 8.
[II. 8. 5
S CLTTOXVOI 7T\W?, KCVOV <eCLV>, i Se TO_Jl6eZ> TO Se fJbrf, TOVTO (V)
5 Stopl^ew, vvv yap OVK were vevo/JboOeTTJaOai, /caXo)? avay/cd-
6 eiv yap eTTiopfcelv [17] ravra TJ ravra Si/cd^ovTas. en Se 4
VO/jLOV 6TL0t 7T6pl TCOV VpL(7KOVTCOV Tl TTJ TToXet CTV/jL^epOV,
OTTO)? Tvy%dva}cri, ri/jbrj^, /cal rot? TTCLKJI TWV ev rep 7roXe/-t&&gt; re-
\evTwvTwv etc BrffAOfflov yLveaOai TTJV Tpo$>r]v y GO? ovjrco TOVTO
10 Trap 1 aXXot? vevo/^oOeTTj/juevov e&Ti &e KOI ev KO^vais ouro?
7o vbfjios z Oz /cat eV eTepcus TWV 7r6\ecov. TO*)? S ap^ovTas VTTO
TOV Bij/jiov alpeTovs eivcu Travra^ ^JJLOV 8 eTroiei Ta Tpia
fjieprj TT;? Tro/Veo)? TOI)? 8 alpeOevTas eTrifJueKelaOai KOIVWV
KOI %VIKU>V KOI 6p(f)aVlK(jOV.
15 ra yu-ei ouz^ Tr/Vetcrra /cal ra yu,aXto"ra d^Lo\oya Tr/s ^TTTTO- 5
4 diroXi^ei M 8 P 1 Q b , aTroXi^croi L 8 || <eai > Meier (Z?^ ^w damnatorum p. 58)
|| </ccu> TOVTO Meier /. r. perhaps rightly || 6 T) omitted by F M s , ^ raura omitted
by L K and P 1 (ist hand, both words added by p 1 ) [r/] Susem. 1 , but see Dittenberger
op.c. p. 1360 f. || ri 5e ert ^et vo^ov P 4 in the margin, in the text eritfei is omitted,
en 0ei 5^ voftov P 2 3 Q b T b L s Aid. Bk. || 9 TOVTO] TOTE and 10 "EXA^o-ip instead
of aXXois Spengel, but see Dittenberger op. c. p. 1369 ff. and Comm. || u erepots
P 3 - 4 Q b T b L s Aid. and P-(isthand, emended by corr. 2 ) || I^TTO TOV drj/j-ov after 12
aipeTOvs II 2 Bk. || 14 /cat &VI.KUV omitted by M s and P 1 (ist hand, supplied by p 1
in the margin)
5 ava-yKCt^eiv sc. TO
6 9 a>s ovirw KT\] "just as if this
law had not been made before elsewhere."
So K. F. Hermann De Hippodamo p. 44,
who is defended by Dittenberger (Gott.
gel. Anz. 1874 p. 1369) against Spengel.
It is true that d>s with the participle
might equally mean (i) because in fact,
as in PL Phacdr. 245 E ws TOLVT-^S ova-r^s
(pvaeojs, or (2) because as he thought (ws
OVK dv o.oi >va.Tov 5 6) : but vvv is not de
cisive in favour of (i), see n. (259).
oi irco, not /T^TTW; cp. Lysias 14 10
CToXfj-rjaev ava^ijvai, cl;s OVK ^<rofj,evov Ty
TroXet 5iK7]i> \a.jji^ia,veLV : 27 16 ojcnrfp TOV
dveidovs aXX 01) r-^s fa/m-las avTols fj.e\ov :
Xen. Cyr. v. i. 13 cos OVK avayKcuov r6
/cX^Trretj/, at rta Tdi> /cX^Trroz/ra. The clause
is virtually oblique, and the negative is
reproduced unchanged.
10 &TTI 8^. ..vvv] Here as often vvv
as things are, " under the existing system "
not simply = now, as Spengel explains it.
Unless one follows Spengel in an unten
able alteration of the text, the drift of the
passage can only be a censure upon Hip-
podamos, which is even in this form
quite intelligible, though it would cer
tainly have been more clearly expressed
as follows : "whereas a law like this was
already at the time in force at Athens."
We cannot however prove the date of
this Athenian regulation (on which Wila-
mowitz Ans Kydathen p. 26 may also
be consulted), but the present passage
would seem to make it earlier than the
treatise of Hippodamos. It is quite pos
sible that Aristotle s censure is unfair;
for who is to inform us that in its author s
intention the scheme of Hippodamos was
restricted to new proposals, never before
realized? Cp. Hermann op. c. 43 f.
SUSEM. (259) Cp. for vvv 5, c. i 3,
3 6, 5 ir, 17, 6 n ovx 6/iotws TOTC
(in Plato s supposed state) /cat vvv (as
things actually are), Rhet. I. i 4, 1354 a
19 KadaTrep ev eviais ye vvv ecrrl TUJV iro\ewv.
7 ii rods 8 d pxovTas KT\] All
officials (perhaps even the priests) were
consequently to be appointed by popular
election and not by lot; com p. Excursus
ii p. 332. SUSEM. (260)
12 Srjfiov. . .iroXews] It would seem
that Hippodamos did not state whether
all three classes were eligible (Oncken).
See however n. (262). SUSEM. (261)
13 TOVS 8 cupeQe vTcts] the magistrates
elected to have the charge of state mat
ters and of the affairs of foreigners and
minors in the city.
II. 8. 11] 1268 a 41268 a 36. 273
Sd/Aov Tafe&&gt;9 ravr eo-riv diropr^o-eLe $ civ rt? -jrpwTov ^ev TT)V (V)
8 SiaLpea-LV rov 7r\r/0ovs rwv 7ro\LTa>v. OL re jap re^ylrai, KOI ol ye-
copyol KOI ol ra ovrXa e^ovTes KOLVCOVOVQ-L r^? TroXtre/a? TrdvTes,
ol pev yecopyol ov/c e%oz/re? OTrXa, ol Se Te^yl-rai ovre yr)v ovre
20 OTrXa, ware yivovTai o-^eSov SOV\OL TWV ra ovrAa fceKT^/^evcov.
9 fiere^eiV pev ovv irao-wv TWV TL^WV dSvvaTov (avdy/cTj yap e/c
TWV ra O7r\a e^ovrwv KadlcrracrOaL KOI arparrjyov^ KOI TTO-
Xtro^>i/Xa/ca9 Kal ra? KVpicoTara? /3%*> w? eiTrelv} IJLTJ
^ere^o^ra? Se T^? TroXtre/a? TTW? otoz/ re ^tX^cS? e^e^z/
25i7T/?09 r?}^ 7ro\iTeiav, aXXa Set /cal Kpeirrovs elvai rou? ra oVXa 6
76 KetcT7]^evovs dpforepcov rwv pepcov TOVTO S 01)
10 /AT) TroXXoi)? oVra?" et Se TOUT CO-TCLI, TL Sel TOVS aXXou?
T?}? TroXtTe/a? /cat Kvpiovs elvai T^? TCOZ/ dp^ovrcov xa-
eVt ot yecopyol TL %p7](rifjLOl, rfj TroXe^; Te^/Ta?
rya/j dvay/caiov elvai (7rd<ra yap Selrat, TTO\^ re^virwv], ( P . 42 )
Aral Bvvavrai Siayivea-Qai, KaOaTrep ev Tat? aXXat? vroXe-
criv ^aTTo Tr/? re^vr]^ ol Se yecopyol Tropi^ovres yuez/ TO?? Ta
o?rXa KeKTyiJievois rrjv rpo(f>rjv i>\6ya)S av rjadv TL T^9 TTO-
Xea>9 yLte/309, z^w 8 t 3/az^ e%ov<TLV, Kal TavTTjv ISla yewp-
11 yrjO-OVO-LV. GTL Se T?)V KOLVTjV, d<p J ^9 Ofc 7rp07TO\/jLOVVTeS e^OVCTL 7
36 TT}^ Tplocfrr/v, el fjuev avTol yewpyija-ovcrLv, OVK dv ely TO fjid-
17 ol omitted by M s P 1 , [ol] Susem. 1 || 25 /cat omitted by H- Ar. Bk. || 26 76
omitted by IVPP 1 , [ 7 e] Susem. 1 - 2 || 34 t .5/a] idiav II 1 || 7eco/37oua-t// Ar. Morel Bk.
16 Ta^tws] scheme, polity: cp. 10 (1573), of a magistracy under this name
^4, n 8. The fuller phrase is rdis in Larisa. SUSEM. (263)
TTJS TToXin/c^s Koivuvias I. 2. 1 6, or r^s As ra7ot are attested by an inscription
TroXtret as II. 6. i, where the sense of for Larisa of 2 14 B.C. (Ridgeway Trans-
ordering, arrangement, is as apparent as actions n p. 138) it seems likely that Aris-
in n. 2 4, or^ii. 9, or in. i. i. totle there uses a different term in order
a-irppTJo-eie 8 av TIS irpwrov] Aristotle to express the functions of the office.
criticizes ( 815) (i)the entire division 24 ^ p,Te xovT<xs Si KT\] Aristotle
into classes, (2) the special position of himself altogether excludes the farmers,
the agricultural class, (3) the innovations tradesmen, and artizans in his ideal state
in the administration of justice. from the rights of citizenship; which is a
8 20 8ov\oi] This partly explains much stronger measure. But possibly he
the ^proposal of Phaleas to make them thinks it is not essential for those who
drjfMcrioi. are thus excluded to be attached to the
9 21 fJLTe xeiv n*v ovv TTCUTWV KT\] constitution, but that if they are to be
Yet Aristotle seems to assume this to citizens, it is. SUSEM. (264)
have been the intention of Hippodamos. 1^ 31 Sicr^veo-Oai^earn subsistence;
oUSEM^. (262) SO Kara^nv, Karayiyveffdai.
Obviously he is applying his own 33 v\6<yws civ KT\] They would
standard TroXmjs 6 ^r^v dpxrjs. then be in the position of the 8^/j.os of
22 iroXiTo^vXaKas] what sort of ma- the Republic.
gistracy Aristotle understands by this 34 vvv 8 = whereas what Hippoda- 1
word is not clear and is not sufficiently mos proposes is that they shall have land
explained by the notice, vin(v). 6 6 n. of their own.
H. 18
274 nOAITIKHN B. 8. [II. 8. 11
erepov real TO yewpyovv, jSoiikeTai 8 6 vofjLoOerrjs el (V)
erepoi rives ecrovTai TWV re TOL US La yecopjovvTcov KCLI T(i)v
[AaYL/cLcov, reraprov av jAopiov eorrai TOVTO TTJS 7roXeo)9, Ofoe-
12 z;o? /^ere^ov, aXXa aXKoTpiov TT}? TroTuret a? aXXa /jLrjv ei
41 Tt9 TO?)? avrovs 0rjcrei> TOVS re rrjv ISlav /cal TOL>? rrjv KOLVTJV
<yetop<yovvTa<; } TO re 7rX?5$o9 airopov carat, TCOV /capTrwv e% wv
1268 b eWcrro? yeco^ijo^i &vo ol/clasj /cal TWOS - eve/cev OVK evOvs
arro T^? 7^9 /cal rwv avrwv K\rjpwv aurot? re rrjv rpo<f)r)v
\r]-^rovTai /cal rot? /za^/yLtOi9 Trape^ovaiv J ravra S>) rravra
13 x^j, e^et rapaj^v. j ov /ca\&)9 3 ouS o Trepl r^
5 e^et vojjiQSj TO Kpiveiv afyovv SialpovvTas 7-179 S//C7
ryefypajjupevTjs, /cal ^iveaOai TOV SifcacrTrjv ^iaiT rjT ^v. TOVTO yap
ev fJ^ev TT] SiaiTrj /cal TrXetocrt^ eVSe^erat (/coivo\oyovvTar yop
d\\rj\oi<; irepl TTJS /cplcrea)s), ev Be rot9 Si/caaTripiQis OVK
, oXXa /cal TovvavTiov TOVTOV T&V vo^oOeTwv ol TroXkol
37 yewpyefv MT 1 || erepov ttvai after vofj.o6^Trjs F M s , a similar gloss TOJ/TOUS
elvat p 2 in the margin || 39 au] ovv II 3 || rouro after TTJS TroXews M s P 1 |]
42 Spengel thinks Kaptrwv corrupt, Schmidt suspects &Tropov, for which dvcnropiffTov
seems to him to be required by the sense
1268 b i yeupyricrei II Bk., ministrabit William, habeant ministrare Ar., doubtless
on mere conjecture; hence erroneously virovpyrjcrei Vettori Susem 1 2 and others ||
dvo oiKias can hardly be sound, dvalv ot /acus Ar. Camerarius, <els> duo oi /a as Ber-
nays, 5vo [ot/cias] Busse not happily || 2 rrjs < avrrjs > Bocker (not bad),
<6 \7?s> rfjs Madvig, [/cat] Bernays Susem. 2 ; there is some corruption || 5 TO Kpivew
a^Louv II Bk. , 6 Kpiveiv aiuv Susem. 1 2 wrongly from the translations of William and
Ar. || diaipovvra P 2 3 Q b T b Aid. Bk., dicupovvrai L s || diKtjs II 1 Ar., Kpiveus II 2
Bk. (which Bojesen saw to be wrong) || 6 70,^ Ar., 5 Til Bk. || 7 /cat </XT?>
TrXet oa-tv ? Koraes || g /cat omitted by TM S || TOVTU ruv p 1 P 2 3 4 Q b T b Bk.,
W b L s Aid. (omitting the following T&V)
11 37 |3ov\Tai KT\] Comp. n. /cd^et rb d /mr/, 5) when the charge in
101) on 6 6. the indictment is simple, whereby the
12 42 TO re TrXtjOos diropov KT\] juror is turned into an arbitrator." dtotiv
"the amount of produce will be in- is^ infinitive.
adequate for the maintenance of two 6 TOVTO yo.p KT\] This is practic-
establishments." This again is a mere able in arbitration even (/cat) where there
assertion which ought to have been are several arbitrators, for they confer
proved. SUSEM. (265) with one another about the decision.
1268 b i yecopYqcm oUCas] See 7 Kal irXeioo-iv] At Athens a single
Critical Notes. It is impossible to defend public arbitrator decided each case, but if
the text as meaning to maintain two house- private arbitrators were chosen by the
holds by agriciilture on the analogy of ol- parties to the dispute themselves, a body
/etas olKeiv. of 3 or 4 might well have been more
13 4 6 irepl TTJS Kpfrrews] the law common. SUSEM. (266)
about passing sentence. 8-^dv 8e TOIS SIKCUTT.] In this respect
5 TO Kpviv diovv KT\] " the require- then the practice in the Greek courts of
ment that a verdict shmll be returned justice w^s just the reverse of that in
upon separate counts (rb ptv sc. /caradt- ours. SUSEM. (267)
II. 8. 16]
1268 a 37 1268 b 23.
275
10 Trapacr Kevd^ovonv OTTO)? ol BifcacrTal /AT) KOivoKorywvrai 777509 (V)
14 aXX^Xou?. eTreiTa TrcS? OVK la-rat rapa^a)Br}<; rj Kpicns, orav a
fjiev 6 Bi/cacrTrjs oirjTai,, /JLTJ TOGOVTOV 8 ocrov o Bi-
o /J,GV yap eiKocri fjiva^, o Be Bocderr)? icpivel
Be/ca IAVCLS (i) o jjuev 7r\eov o _ e\ao-aov\ a XXo? Be Trevre, o
15 Be reTTapas (KOI TOVTOV Brj TOP rpoTrov Bfj\ov OTL fAepiov-
15 criv), o i Be Trdvra KaraBifcdo ova iv, ot 8 ovBev. rt? ovv o rpo-
TTO? earai T?/? Bia\,oyrj<; TWV ^rj^xov ; en [ ] ovBeis etriopKelv
dvayrcd^ei, TOV aTrXco? dji -oSi/cdo -avra 77 KaTaSi/cdaavTa, ei-
7Tp arrXft)? TO y/c\7j/j,a yeypaTTTdi, Bucal&V ov yap /Lt^-
20 Bev 6(f)L\iv 6 dTToBiKdcras Kpivei, d\\d r? eitcocn fjuva^ (p. 43)
aXX etcelvos rj^rj tiriopKei 6 /caraBLKacra^ /jirj VO/JLL^WV o<f)el-
16 \eiv ra? eiKoori //.m?./ 7re^>l Se roi) rot? evpiaicovcri n rrj K
(? 8et ylveaOal nva rifJi^v, OVK ecmv ducjya-
12 /xi> after 6 II 2 and perhaps F
13 Kpurei Bk. 2 , Kplvfi TIT Ar. Bk. 1 ||
(rst hand, corrected in the margin) || 178 omitted by II 1 |
Susem. 1 , perhaps rightly || 21 d\X ...22 /xi/Ss omitted
|| 5^ P 1 , omitted by M" and perhaps F |j
15 Sr,] dt H 3 || 16 ou5eV] otf T M s and P ]
19 yeypairrar 5t-
by M s || 21 ^5??
omitted by F M 8 and P 1 (ist hand, added by corr. 1 ), [175??] Susem. 1 wrongly || 23
M s pi
a smaller sum.
21 T) 8ii] when we turn to the judge
who condemns while not believing the
twenty minae to be owing, it is quite true
that he commits perjury. Comp. vm
(v). 8. 6 uxrirep drj/Aos TJd-rj ol 6p.oi.OL (Cope).
1315 L. Stein op. c. 162 ;/.
rightly calls this whole criticism a misap
prehension. If the judges, or jurors, are
forbidden to converse with one another,
it is certainly impossible for them to find
non liquct in concert : it is however pos
sible for all to reach the same result with
out consultation, and still more likely that
only in this way can some one of them
clear his conscience. And if, after the
fact of a pecuniary indebtedness has been
established, the jurors cannot agree upon
the amount, then a conditional verdict
is the only one possible, and in that case
certainly there can be no final decision
except by way of compromise. Thus this
objection makes for Hippodamos, rather
than against him (Oncken). And lastly
how is it made out that the majority of
legislators were right in excluding con
sultation amongst the jurors? At any
rate our modern regulation (see n. 267)
has pronounced them to be wrong. Cp.
also n. (258) on 5. SUSEM. (268)
16 23 OVK do-<t>a\s] "the proposed
I 8 2
14 12 6 8iKa^6|ivos may be either
litigant. If the participle is passive, it
denotes the defendant ; if middle, the
plaintiff. Here the latter is the case.
13 o [&v -ydp... 15 TTrapas] " For he
(the plaintiff) claims 20 minae, but the
juror will decide for ten or whatever
the larger sum may be which is claimed
by the former and the smaller sum which
is awarded by the latter while another
(juror) will award five, and yet another,
four " (Bernays). This seems slightly
better than to understand TrXelov, ^Xatr-
<7ov, Trtvre, r^rrapaj of sums awarded by
different jurymen (dicasts).
15 jitpiovwi] will estimate damages
according to a graduated scale. Comp.
Demosth. adv. Lcpt. 494, 4 5e? roivvv
fjLfj.epi(T6aL TO. r&v 8wpe&v.
15 1 6 ris ouv 6 rpoiros] In what
way then are the votes to be counted, i.e.
sorted? 810X0777 = collecting and arrang
ing: diribitio Cic. Pro Plancio 14.
19 el irep a, < irXws...8iKa<os] "if the in-
rdictment has been framed (not condition
ally but) absolutely with justice." (It
has also been proposed to put a colon be
fore SIKCU WS: "and justly too; for &c.").
If the suit be for 20 minae, acquittal
means that the defendant does not owe 20
minae, it says nothing about liability for
276
nOAITIKflN B. 8.
[II 8. 16
fjiovov eye i (V)
v
\e? TO vo/AoOerelv, d\J)C ev6(f>@d\iJ,ov
25 yap avKO(f)avTia<; Kal Kivrjcreis, av
iriTTTei S 6t? a\\o 7rp6/3\iifjia KOI aKe^iv erepav aTropovai
yap rives Trorepov {3\a/3pov i) av^epov rat? TroXeai T<J
17 Kivelv TOI)? Trarpiovs VO/AOVS, av rj rt? aXXo? /3e\riwv. SioTrep
ov paSiov TCO Xe%#ezm Ta^u (rvy^aypelv, elirep /JLVJ o-v/Jicfre-
30 pet, Kivelv. ev^e^erai yap elcrrjyelcrOai Tiva$ VO/ACOV -\vcriv r)
TroXtreta? a$9 KOIVOV dya66v. evrel Se TreTroiij/jieOa fjLveiav, 11
18 en jJbiKpov Trepl avrov SiaareiXacrdat^ fieXnov. e%ei yap,
wo-Trep eiTTOfjiev, airopiav, Kal $6j;ei6V av (BeKnov elvai TO\
Kivelv. ejrl yovv rwv ci\\a)V eTTiar^fjidov rovro avvevr^vo^ev]
35 olov larpiKrj KivrjOelcra Trapa ra jrarpia Kal yv^vaaTLKr^
Kal 0X0)9 at re^vat, Traaai KOI ai Svva/jieis, war eVet /jiiav*
rovrwv Oereov Kal^rrjv 7ro\iTiKr)v, $rj\ov ori Kal irepl rav-\
19 T7]v avayKalov o//-ota)9 e^eiv. aTj/jieiov 8 av yeyovevai (fraiiy )
rt? eV avrdov r&v epycov roi)9 yap dp%aiovs VOJJLOVS \iav {
-*-^ ^^ <~4%^H <#/
27 r6 <M> ( W b L 8 Ald.
Ar. Bk.
30 7ap Spengel, 6 T H Bk.
32
legislation is not safe, but only specious
to the ear," a curious confusion of me
taphors.
24 ?x ei V^P KT ^1 f r ^ leads to false
accusation and possibly to changes in the
constitution (see n. on line 30 below).
Informers would always claim to reveal
facts highly useful to the state, as did the
Roman delatores. av rvxy = should it so
happen ; and so el TI/XOI, rvy^ov, el ^ri ^e.
26 ciXXo irp6p\T]|xa] another question.
curopovo-i, ydp rives] Can this have
been in written works? SUSEM. (269)
1625 Is it expedient to alter the
laws of a country in order to introduce
improvements?
With this interesting discussion com
pare Rhet. i. 15 4 12 (Spengel); also
Plato Polit. 294 A 302.
28 TOVS irarptovs VOJJLOVS] The an
cestral laws would include much that is
unwritten : customs, institutions, those
traditional practices of the society which
serve as a basis (0^0^ e/setV/xara) to the
written code, Plato Laws in 680 A ovd
yap ypdfj.fj.ara effri TTW, dXX edeat. Kal rots
\eyo[j,evois Trarptots i>6[J.ois eirb^evoi 0>ai.
Comp. Laws VII 793 B D: see n. (48)
on i. 6. i, and n. 5 5, 15.
17 29 TW Xex.0<(vTi = t
of Hippodamos.
el irep JIT] <rvp.c|)ep6L Kiwiv] "in case it
turns out to be inexpedient": i.e. if on
the wider question we decide against
change.
30 evSe xcTcu "yelp KT\] "Some may
propose the repeal of the laws or the
constitution as a public benefit." When
thus distinguished from TroXtrei a, VO/J.OL =
the code of positive law. The revolution
of the Four Hundred, it will be remem
bered, was effected by the suspension, in
legal form, of the ypa^-rj wapavbfj.iM, the
great safeguard against the subversion of
the Athenian constitution.
32 8ia(TTLXa<r0ai = enter into detail.
It is used in 7^opics v. 3. 8, 131 b 15, 17,
as synonymous with SiopiffaaBai. Cp.
the proposal
PI. Rep. VII 535 B irola dy <5ia<rre X\ei ;
18 33 ptXriov rd Kiveiv] This
view is maintained 18 22.
34 eirl -yovv TWV a\\o>v KT\] Cp. III.
15. 4, n. (638) medicine in Egypt; 16
7, 8: iv(vn). 2 13 n. (726); 13 2
n. (870): in. 6 7 ;/-. (531). SUSEM.
(270)
36 fxCav ...... 37 iroXiriKiiv] It is A-
ristotle s invariable practice to rank Poli
tics with the "arts and faculties": e.g.
vi(iv). i 13, Nic. Eth. i.e. i.
19, 20 A most valuable line of
inquiry. We could wish he had noted
down a few more of these antiquated
usages.
II. 8. 20]
1268 b 24 1269 a 1.
277
(V)
yap P 2 , eo-idypofiopovvTo re yap
6re yap Bas. 3 , e<nd rjpo(p6pow re 7<xp
misled by William s version ; see Ditten-
40ja7rXoO? eivai KOI {3ap/3apifcovs. ecriS?) pcxfropovvTo re jap ol r/ EX- 12
20^7^6?, KOI T? jvvaiKas GtovovvTO Trap* d\\r)\a)v, oaa re
jXotTnz - TWV dp^aiwv ecrri TTOV vojJiifJLWv^ evrjOrf Trd/juirav eariv,
i26ga.\olov ev Kv/jir) Trepl rd (^ovi/cd vo^os ecrTiv, dv
40 eo~idf]po<popovvTO re yap P 1 3 ,
P 4 , e<n5rjpo(j>opovi>TO yap Q b T b ,
Koraes, eo~iSijpo<j>opovi> yap rore Susem. 1
berger op. c. p. 1371
1269 a i K6/J.7] TM S
40 (Tl8T]pO(j)OpOVVTo] ThllC. I. 5 3
TO re ffidripofpope iffdai TOVTOLS rots yTreipu-
rats aTro TT)S TraXatas Xr/oretas e^e^evf]K.e\
6 i Tracra 70,^ ^ EXXds ecridripocfropei, 8id
rets dcppaxTovs re ot /c7?creis /cat ou/c dcr0aXets
Trap dXXTjXous f<p6dovs, xal ^vvrjOij -Tr\v
oiaiTav fj,ed oir\uv eiroirjo-avTO (J. G.
Schneider). SUSEM. (270 b)
4 1 Tas "YvvaiKas ICOVOVVTO] The suitor
purchased the daughter of her father by
< means of presents (eova) : see Schomann
Greek Antiquities I. 52 [Eng. trans, by
Mann and Hardy p. 48 ff.]. Schneider
compares marriage by coeinptio among the
Romans. SUSEM. (271)
There is a valuable note on the eeova
or bride-price in the English translation
of the Odyssey by Butcher and Lang.
"The eeftva. in Homer are invariably gifts
made by the wooers to the father or kins
men of the bride, that is, the bride-price,
the kalym of the dwellers on the Volga...
The father of the bride was thus said
eedvovo-dai OvyaTpa (Od. II. 53), to accept
certain teftva as the price for his daugh
ter, what is called coming to terms
about the marriage in Iliad xiu. 381
(6(ppa...o~vvu>/meda...d/ji(f)l yd/j.^). As a rule
the woman would go to the highest bid
der, but in the case of a favoured wooer
it seems to have been not unusual either
to remit the price and give the bride
dvdeovov (cp. Agamemnon s offer to A-
chilles, //. IX. 141), or to return a portion
of the eeova after marriage (Od. I. 278,
II. 196), as is still the custom among the
Kanekas in New Caledonia." Homer
also mentions gifts from the wooers to
the bride, and [j,ei\ia, gifts from the bride s
father to his daughter: but <f>epvri, the
later word for dowry, does not occur.
Even in Pindar ^a is used in the sense
ares
or-
of <pepvf): Pyth. 3.94. (Eaton comp
Tac. Germ. 18 ; but that is the
gengabe, something quite different.)
20 1269 a i otov v KVJJ.TI] This
forcibly recalls computation, the estab
lished legal usage in ancient times in
England and amongst other Teutonic
peoples. That the oath might thus be
employed on behalf of the accuser is suffi
ciently attested, although cases where it
is taken on behalf of the accused are
usually mentioned. The Greek custom is
confirmed by the inscription of Gortyn,
column n, lines 36 44. The law has
prescribed certain fines, the price to be
paid for the ransom of an accused person
charged with adultery and in the power
of his captors. But he may plead that he
was (wrongfully) seized by force : cp.
[Demosth.] c. Neaeram 66 1367, 10
ddiKWs eipxOTJvat ws fj.oi.x6v. If so, the
captor must support his charge by com-
purgators, whose number depends on the
amount of the fine or ransom, (a) Four
are necessary if the fine is 50, 100, or 200
staters: i.e. if the aggrieved husband is
a full citizen. (/3) Two are necessary if
the aggrieved husband is an dforaipos,
i.e. free but not a full citizen: while
7) if the aggrieved husband is a serf
evs), the serf s lord (Trdcrras) and one
other compurgator must appear. The
fine for (7) is i\ staters, for (/3) 10 or 20
staters. The Cretan text of the law runs
thus: at 8e Ka irovet 8o\o<radOai [i.e. eav
8e 0UN/T7 dovXu&affdai], 0/j.ocrai TOV e\ovra TO
irevTeKovraffTarepo [TOV Tr
pov] /ecu TT\IOVOS TTCVTOV avTOv, piv
[eauroj] peKaaTov eirapi.op.evov [eirapw
TO 5 aireTaipo [TOV 5 d0erat /3ou]
avTov, TO 8e FOLKCOS TOV trao~Ta.v orepov
avTov, /ULOIKIOVT e\v [uoix&vd eXetV] 5oXo-
o-aOdai 8e fj.e [fj.r}]. And if he shall plead
that (the captor) overmastered him, the
captor shall swear in the case of the 50
staters or more, himself with four others,
each imprecating on himself: in the
case of a clanless man, himself with two
others: in the case of a house-thrall,
his lord with one other (an oath) that he
took him in adultery and overmastered
him not. See Zitelmann in Das Recht
von Gortyn, pp. 101 107 : and Mr H. J.
Roby The twelve Tables of Gortyn in the
278
nOAITIKflN B. 8.
[II. 8. 20
5 21
7rapd(T^7]TaL fjuapTVpwv 6 SIWKWV TOV $6vov TWV avTOV i(V)
evo^ov elvai rco (f)6vw TOV (frevyovTa. proven 8e
eicos re rou?
ov TO TraTpiov aXXa TayaOov
slVe yrjyeveis rjcrav etV e/c (f)0opd$
\ \ / \ \ >
VCLl Kai TOU9 TV^OVTCL^ Kdl TOf9
\ey6Tdl KCLTO, T<MV yTjjeVOlV, W(TT CLTOTTOV TO [JLeveiV ev T0fc9\
TOVTWV Boy/nacriv. 7T/)09 Be TOVTOLS ov$e TOVS <yejpa/jL/jievovs edv
dfcivrjTOVS (3e\TLOv. coaTrep ydp Kal irepl
Kal TT)V 7ro\iTiKr)V Ta^uv dSvvaTOV aKpipws irdvTa
Ka06\ov *ydp dvay/calov ypdcfreiv, ai oe Trpd^eis Trepi
Ka0 - efcacrTov elcrlv. e/c {lev ovv TOVTCOV <f>avepdv OTL KLVY]-
Teoi ical Tives Kal Trore TWV VOJJLWV elcriv d\\ov Be TpoTrov
eTTLCTKOTTovcriv ev\a3elas dv &6eiev eivai 7roXX7?9. oTav
j ? t
y TO fjiev /3e\Tiov fJiiKpov, TO o eui^eiv
(f>av\ov, (j)avepov w9 eareov evlas
(P- 4
? - \veiv TOI)?!
/cal TO)V\
6 6/j.oiws
n 2 Bk.
II 1 Ar. |! 7 TO omitted in
8 eav T Ar.
1 1 ypafirjvai
Laii< Quarterly Review II. 1886. p. 142,
who prefers the other rendering of do\oaaO-
9ai beguiled, as if from do\ovi>.
21 $ e lre yrcyevets rjerav] It is well
known that this was the popular view in
Greece about the oldest inhabitants of a
country, avroxdoves ; see Preller Griech.
Mythol. I. 62 f. Plato makes use of it
for his myth Pol it. 271 ff., cp. Symp. 191
r>f. In DC Gen. Aniin. ill. n. 25, 762 b
28 Aristotle expresses grave doubts on the
question whether such a so-called gener-
atio aequivoca should be assumed for
men and quadrupeds as well as for lower
forms : yet he goes on to inquire how it
must be supposed to take place. SUSEM.
(272) > ^
eilr IK <}>0opa.s TLVOS l<r.] This agrees
with the view explained in n. (167) on
5 1 6, and was much more Aristotle s
real opinion, as it was the opinion of
Plato Timaeus 22 c : TroXAcu /cai /card
TToXXd (f>6opal yeyovaaiv a.v9p&iruv /cat
ZVOVTOU, Trvpl fjikv Kal vdan /mtyiffrai,
/jLvpioLS Se d XXots erepat (3paxtiTepai : Laivs
III 677 A ff. TToXXds avQpunruv (f>6opas
yeyovfrai Kara/cXucr/^ois re /cat voffocs /cat
d XXots TroXXots, ev ots /3pa%u TL r&v avOpu-
irwv XetTrecr^at 7^0?. SUSEM. (273)
6 ojxotovs elvai Kal] were much the
same as the ordinary silly people " of to
day : cp. Vahlen Beitrdge in. 314. oi
recurs in c. 9 23, 10 10,
ii 3-
wo-rrep Kal Xe Yerai] Plato makes the
same remark Politicals 274 B f. : avrol 5
daOevels dvdpuiroi Kal d0L>Xa/croi yeyovores
dir/pTrdfovTO UTT avrCov (sc. T&V Otj picw) ,
/cat ?r d/^r)x av L Ka i are^ Kara roi)s
Trp&rovs TJaav XPOVOVS...CK TOVTWV iravrwv
ev /j.eyd\ais rjffav d-rropiais. SUSEM. (274)
Cp. Pro/lag. 321 c: man naked and
defenceless before the introduction of the
arts (Eaton).
8 ovSc TOVS y - ypa|jt[jLvovs] Positive
law as contrasted with the 5oy^ara and
dypa(f>a vo/juua discussed in 19 21. See
Vll(vi). 5. 2 TL0e/mevovs de TOLOVTOVS vo/movs
/cat roi)s dypd&ovs Kal rous yey pap/me vovs.
The distinction is best explained by Cope
Introd. to Rhetoric pp. 239 244.
22 9 wo-rrep -Ydp...i2 Ka0 ^Kao-rov
clo-iv] See in. 16 1 1 with n. (652) f. and
11. (637) on in. 15 4; also in. n 19 n.
(579): the ruler or rulers are supreme
where the laws cannot prescribe exactly
610, TO ^rf pddiov elvai Kad6\ov 8iopicrai
jrepl irdi>Tuv. SUSEM. (275)
10 Kal(7rept)Tiiv n-oXiTiK rivTa{;iv] "So
too in the political system it is impossible
that all things should be prescribed in
writing. "
23 A sound argument, quite in Ben-
tham s spirit.
II. 9. 1]
1269 a 21269 a 30.
279
/24
25
fcal TWV dp^ovTwv ov yap TOO~OVTOV w<^e\i -]crerai (V)
ocrov /BXaftij&ercu Tofr ap^ova-iv apreiOelv
Be /cal TO irapaSeiy/bia TO irepl TWV
ov 1-*
yap o/jiOiov TO Kivelv
fcal vofjiov o yap VO/JLOS lo~^yv /
ovBefiiav e^et 777)0? TO TreiOeaOai Trapa TO e0os,
8 ov yiveTai el /JUT) 8td xpovov _779u5#o?, coo-re TO
fj,eTafid\\eii> etc TWV VTrap^ovTcov VO/JLWV et? eTepovs
Kaivovs daOevrj iroielv ecrTi Trjv TOV VO/JLOV Bvva/juw.
TOUTol
GTL
Be
fca KivrjTeoi, TTOTepov
/cat TroTepov TcG
Siaffropdv. *
Bio vvv jjuev dfyw fjiev
tcaipwv) Trepl 8e T^?
Be Kal
Travres KOI ev Trday TroXtTeta, rj
rj THTIV \ TavTa yap e^et fjLeyd-
TavTtjv Trjv crKetyiv (a\\wv yap
AaKeSai/jLOvicov 7roXtT6/a? /cal T^? VI
Trepl TWV aXXwv 7ro\iTeLwv Bvo
17 &(f)e\ricreTal ns M s P 1 , w^eX-^crerat <6> Susem. 1 2 misled by the translations of
William and Ar. || 18 /SXa/STjcrercu 6 Schneider || VTrdpxov<nv Bernays, which I
should unconditionally accept were it not for the addition of /cat r&v apxovrwv after
17 vofjLoderCJv \\ 21 wapa II 1 , TrXrji/ corr. 1 of P 2 3 , TT\T]I> trapa II 3 Bk. || 23 vofj-ov
P 3 T b and P 2 (ist hand altered by corr. 2 ) |) 25 /cat before KIVIJT^OI omitted by FM 8 ,
[/cat] Susem. 1 2 || Ktvrirtov IP \\ /cat irdvres P 4 Q h T b L 8 Bk. || 28 8i6...1273 b 24
noticed t>y Michael of Ephesus
17 ov -ydp TOCTOVTOV KT\] Comp.
Rhct. I. 15. 12 ov XucrtreXet Trapacrcxfri-
^effOan TOV larpdv (to outdo your doctor):
ov yap TOffouro /SXaTrret 77 a/j.apria TOV t arpou
OGOV TO eOifccrdai aireLdetv T apxovTi ;
Thuc. ill. 37 xefyxxri v6/j,ois a/ctr^rots
Xpu/J-far) TroXts Kpfiffffwv fffTiv (Eaton).
Eur. Bacchae 971 f., ou 7<xp Kpelavov TTOTC
TWV v6[j.(i}v | yiyvwffKeiv xP~n Kai /".eXerai .
24 19 \J/tv8os 84 KT\] These re-
marks are very true. This is a difference
between the sciences or arts and the laws.
In the former only he who follows the
science has to act and his action on an im-
proved method proceeds from conviction:
whereas, if the laws are altered, all must
act according to the new law and though
unconvinced of the need for alteration
(Schlosser). SUSEM. (276)
21 irapct TO 0os] "has no force to
secure obedience apart from habit." The
Critical Notes show how the conflate
reading, Tr\rjv Trapa, arose.
25 24 ^TI 84... 27 8ia<j>opdv] Plato s
utterance Laws I 634 D exactly agrees
with this: v[w> ^kv yap (Cretans and
Lacedaemonians), etVep /cat /uerptas /care-
<r/cetfa<rrai ra r&v i>6fj.uv, efs r&v Ka\\i<jTUV
av e ir] vb[j,wv /u.rj ^
f.av, iroTa /caXws
...yepwv 5e ef rts
reiv r>v
vruv 77 fj.7] /caXcos
V Trap
TT/OOJ upxovTa re /cat TT/JOS ^Xt/ctwr-^v fj.r]devbs
evavTiov veov iroielffdai. TOVS TOLOVTOVS Xo-
701/5. Oncken, I. 252, strangely alleges
this passage of the Laivs as a proof of its
author s design to strangle the healthy
common sense of men in the name of
political Border. SUSEM. (277)
28 vt>v nev d4>w(JLv] See Introd. pp.
49, 53. SUSEM. (278)
This implies that the question has to be
decided elsewhere in the treatise.
c. 9 Examination of the Spartan
polity.
See Anal. p. 106. Since Gottling s
Exciirsiis, pp. 463 471 of his edition,
this chapter has been most fully treated
by Oncken I. 218 299,11.317 376, who
writes with especial reference to Crete s
memorable chapter on Lycurgus and, in
vol. II, to the later monographs by Trieber
Forschungen and Gilbert Studien. See
p. 35 note 3. The fragments of the Poli-
/zV.r 1557 b 38 - 1560 a 28 should be corn-
pared. See also Jannet Les institutions
sociales a Sfarte.
280
nOAITlKflN B. 9.
[II. 9. 1
elcrlv al crKe^ei^ pia jjuey ei TL Ka\co$ rj fjurj /caXo5? TT/OO? TTJV (VI)
dplaT7)i> vevo^o6eT7]Tai rdj;iv, erepa S el TL 777309 rrjv VTroOeaiv
KOI TOV TpoTrov VTTevavTicos T^? TTpoKei/Jiev^ avrols TroXtre/o.?. ^
2 OTL fJiev ovv Bel TTJ p,e\\ov orr) /ca\c3? TroTuretW&u rr)v 2
35 TWV dvayfcaiwv virap^eiv (T"%o\rjv, ofJbdXoyovp^evov GCTTIV
e rpCTTOv vTrdpxeiv, ov paBiov \a/3eiv. tf re yap er-
Trevea"reia 7roAA,a/a? eireOero rot? erraXot?,
Se /cat rot? KaKaxriv ol eDuore? (ooaTrep yap efaB
33 <r}> virevavrlws Scaliger, virevavrlw <$ w inrevavTiws> Susem. would
prefer: but no alteration is needed |] avrols] avTrjs M 8 Q b T b L 8 and P 4 (ist hand),
avru) P 1 , aury P 4 (corr.), aury Ar. || 34 <7r6Xet> TroXiTetfetrflai? Madvig H 37
ireveffrla M s P 4 and P 2 - 3 (ist hand, altered by corr. 2 P 2 and a later hand in P 3 ) I!
38 ot omitted by M 8 ? 1 !/, [ol] Susem. 1 - 2
1 31 jiia |XV KT\] The two points to
consider are (i) its absolute, (2) its rela
tive success : "whether its legislation is
good or bad in relation to the best sys
tem ; secondly, whether it is inconsistent
with the fundamental assumption and
scheme of the constitution proposed."
7rpos = when judged by a given standard.
32 et TI irpos TI^V {nr60<n,v...t*iTevav-
TIWS] sc. vevojj.oQ^rt]Ta.(.. So 1 8 virevav-
rios 5e...7rpos ravrriv TTJV Siopdwcnv.
The Helots or Serfs : 24.
2 34 OTL [i^v ovv... 35 op.oXo yovjj.evov
IO-TIV] Here we are allowed a very im
portant glimpse of the nature of Aristotle s
own ideal state. Cp. also n. (192) on 6
5 ; c. 1 1 10 n. (393); iv(vn). 9 3, 4,
7,8; 10 9 with n. (813), and Introd. p.
32*. (3); SUSEM. (279)
35 TWV dvo. YKaiwv o-^oXifv] leisure
free from imposed labour: I. 7. 3, II. 6. 5.
36 re followed by 38 5e.
TJ T -ydp 0TraX(5v irveo-Tia KrX]
Compare 5 22 n. (178). Wherever
in Greece bodies of serfs stood midway
between freedom and slavery, it is well
known that the relation invariably arose
in consequence of a subjugation of the
earlier inhabitants by victorious invaders.
Thus the earlier inhabitants of Laconia
obtained the freer lot of Provincials
(HepioiKOi) or else were forced into a de
pendent position of this kind as Helots
according as they submitted to the
Spartans earlier or later, more or less
easily, of their own free will or by com
pulsion. See Schomann Antiquities of
Greece I p. 191 194, Eng. tr., to whose
account of the Helots p. 194 200
it is sufficient to refer (comp. however
Gilbert Studien p. 76 ff.). The Penestae
were the descendants of that part of the
old population of the country occupied
by the invading Thessalians, which, in
stead of emigrating, made a friendly
agreement with the conquerors and con
cluded a treaty, by which for a fixed rent
they remained tenants of the land they
had formerly possessed and were under
obligation to furnish military service, but
were not to be sold or driven out of the
country or put to death. See Schomann,
p. 132, Eng. tr. The authorities quoted
by J. G. Schneider are Archemachos Fr.
i, from Athenaeus VI. 264 A : BotwrtDj
T&V Trjv Apvaiav KaTOLK^aavriov ol /JLTJ dir-
dpavres els ri]v BcHamW, ctXX e/.t</uXoxw-
prjcravTes irapedwKav eauroi)s rots GerraXots
dov\eveiv KO.& bfj,o\oyias, e0 $ o#re ea-
vrovs fK rrjs %c6/)as, cure diroKrevov-
aurol 5e TTJV -^wpav epya^6fj,evoi ras
tiTroScucroucrt^ ovroi f.iev ovv ol
Kara rds 6/uio\oylas Kara/meivavres /cat TTO.-
padovres eavrovs eK\rj07)aav rore /xe^eVrat,
vvv oe irev^ffrai : and Theopompos Fr.
134 in Ath. VI. 265 B, c: Aa/ceScu/xoVtoi
/cat GerraXot (pavria ovrai KaraaKevaad/mevoi
rrjv oov\elav eKr<jiv liKKrii>wv rQiv olKovvr&v
Trporepov rrjv %w/3af, TJV eKetvoi vvv e-%ovo~iv,
ol fj.fr Axaiwv, QerraXol 5e HeppaLfiuv /cat
^layvrjrw /cat Trpoarjyopevffai rovs Kara-
dov\wdevras ol /m-ev etXwras ot d irevecras.
On the similar relation between the Mari-
andynians and the people of Heracleia see
11. (777) on iv(vn). 6 8. SUSEM. (280)
Plato compares Helots, Penestae and
Mariandynians Laws vi 776 c, D.
38 e<^e8pvovTs] always in wait to
pounce upon their misfortunes : Thuc. IV.
80 det yap ra TroXXa Aa/ceSat/xoi tots irpbs
TOI)S et Xwras rrjs 0i;Xa/c^s irepi yudXtcrra
II. 9. 5] 1269 a 31 1269 b 13. 281
(VI)
3 Tot? aTvyj) /jiaa i BiaTeX^ovcriv) irepl Be TOU? Kp^ra? ovBev 3
40 7TO) TOIOVTOV (TV/jL/Beprj/cev. aiTiov B tVo)? TO T?
269 b 7r6Xet9, Kaiirep TroAe/Wcra? d\\ri\ai<$, fji^Be^iav elvai
Tot? d<j)iCTTafjievois Bid TO fjurj crv/jb^epeiv Kal avTjils (p. 45)
- TrepiOi/covs, TO?? Be KaKwcnv ol
e^jdpol TrdvTes rjcrav, Apyeloi Kal Mecr^i/tot Kal
fcal Tot? eTToA-ot? KaT dp%d$ dcfrlorTavTO Bid TO
en Tot? 7rpoo-%(iopoi$, A^cttot? Kal Tlepaifiois Kal
eoiKe Be Kal el fjirjBev eTepov, d\\d TO 76 T^? 4
epfyooBes elvai, Tiva Bel TT/^O? avTovs
dvie/jievoi re <ydp v/Spl^ovcri KOL TWV icroov
10 eavTOvs Tot? Kvplois, Kal KaK07ra0a)S ^"cG^re? e7riftov\evovcn
Kal fJucrovcrLV. Bf/\ov <S > oui^ co? oi) e^evpicrxovo i TOV /3e\TicrTov
5 TpoTTOv, ot? TOVTO <TVfji/3aivei Trepl TTJV elXwreiav. eVt Se ?; 5
vre/ot Ta9 yvvaiKas dveai$ Kal Trpo? T?/^ Trpoaipeonv T^? TTO-
1269 b 3 7repl off/covs M 8 and apparently F (pracdia circa domus William) || 5
e<pi<TTo.vTO Bas. 3 in the margin || 6 ireppaipois H 2 Bk. Susem. 1 || 9 CLVCL^VOI.
Trieber (perhaps rightly) |j 10 KaKoiradovvres P 1 (ist hand, perhaps rightly), yp.
KaKoirad&s ^wj^res corr. 1 of P 1 in the margin || n <5 > o$v or youi> Susem., o$v
FII Ar. Bk. I! 12 e rt...i27o a 8 ira\iv~\ Plut. Zj /C . 14 quotes similar statements
from Aristotle, but, as Heitz (Die verlorenen Schriften des Aristoteles p. 30) rightly
judges, from his AaKedaifAoviwi HoXtreta
3 40 al riov 8 iVcos] It might be cherish hatred."
thought that one very material reason n SirjXov KT\] The truth of this re-
was the much freer and less oppressed mark no one will wish to question. But
position which, according to Aristotle s does Aristotle really know of a remedy?
own evidences 5 19 n. (171), the He hopes to get over the difficulty in his \
Cretans granted to their dependants own best state by taking men of non-
(Oncken). Compare also c. 10 3 n. Hellenic race to till the soil, slaves or
(355) 5 (357) 8 (364), 16 (3/4). serfs, if possible; failing this, dependent
SUSEM. (281) freemen of different nations but only of
1269 b 3 irepiofcovs] See c. 10 3 the gentler races: iv(vn). 10 13, 14,
and Exc. in. n. (840): cp. iv(vn). 8 8 (815), and n.
5 rQlsQeTTaXolsldativusincomModi. (364) with Exc. in. Supposing all -this
d<|)C(rTavTO sc. ot Trei/ecrrat. could be so fortunately arraugedj__would
4 7 TO Y* T^S iri|xe\eas KT\] "the it have been any real remedy? SUSEM.
task of attending to this; how, namely, (282)
we ought to associate with them" the The women of Sparta : 5 12.
sentence rtva 8el...Tp()Trov being depen- 5 13 r\ irtpl rds Y^vaiKas aveons]
dent on the noun <:7rt/ie\eas, just as in So Plato speaks Laius I 637 c 5eiKt>vs
iv(vil). 16. I Tro re XP^I Troie io 6ai TT]V 6/j.i- Trjv TWV yvva.iKwv Trap v/uuv dvcffiv, and
\lav is dependent on firi/j.eXrjTtoi . We Euripides Androm. 595 o55 av el fiov-
may render : " It would seem too that Xoiro TLS \ <rw(ppwv ^CVOLTO 2irapTiaTi5ui>
apart from everything else there is the Kop-rj (Eaton). SUSEM. (283)
irksome task of seeing that we behave to irpis ri\v irpoap<riv TTJS iroXireCas]
them as we ought: for when allowed judged by the intention of the constitu-
their freedom, they grow insolent and tion, 5 the second point of view for criti-
claim equal rights with their lords: if cism as mentioned in i. The other, the
treated harshly, they plot revenge and standard of the best constitution, is here
282
nOAITIKftN B. 9.
[II. 9. 5
Xire/as" /3\a/3epd fcal TT/SO? ev^aifiovlav TroXeo)?. wo-jrep yap (VI)
15 olfcias jjilpos dvrjp KOI yvvr), 8f)\ov on, /cal TTO\I,V. eyyvs
TOV Si%a~ SirjprjcrOai Bel vo/mi%i,v et9 re TO rwv dvSp&v TT\TI-
6o<$ Kal TO TCOV yvvaiKcov, ware ev oaais TroXtretat?
eyei TO Trepl ra? yvvai/tas, TO THJUCTV Trjs TroXe&J? Bel
6 eiv elvai dvo{j,o6eT7]Tov. oirep e/cel av/j,/3e{3r)Kev oX^jv yap
10 TTJV Tr6\iv 6 vo/jioOeTTjs elvat, /3ov\6/jievos KapTepifcrjv, KCLTO,
TOI)<? dvBpas TotoOro? earlv, eVl Se TGOV yvvaircciov
o5crt yap a/coXacrroj? TT/OO? aTraaav aK,o\aGiav
7 /cat Tpvfiepws. ajcrre dvayfcaiov ev Trj ToiavTy TroXtre/a 6
Tij^aaOai TOV 7r\ovTOV, aXXa>? re /fa^ Tf^axrt yvvaifcotcpa-
25 Tovfjuevoi, /caOfiTrep Ta TroXXa TCOZ^ (TTpaTLWTiKwv teal vroXe-
yevwv, e^co KeXrw^ ^ /eaz> el rtz^e? GTepoi
14 ewo/uiiai> P 4 T b L s Ar. Aid., corr. 1 of P 2 3 and p 1 in the margin (wrongly) [|
15 [di^^p \ at] Oncken || 16 el s re] wore M 8 and, with ei s re written over it, F
apparently || 18 5ei vofj-i^etv after 19 e?fat P 1 II 2 Bk. || 11 TOLOUTOS evriv M s P 1 ,
(pavepos ecrTL rotouros ciV II 2 Ar. Bk. perhaps rightly, <f>avepbs etrrt TO&TOV T&XUV Bender
|j 24 rvyxo.vu<jL Aid. and corr. 1 of P 2 3 , rvx^ 1 - Ka -i- M s || 26 [f] Schneider ||
<pai>epus omitted by T M 8 and P 1 (ist hand, added by p 1 in the margin) ; [tpavepus]
Susem. 1
called the Wellbeing or Happiness
fj.ovia) of the state (Congreve). This
then, and not etivofjiia.v, is the right read
ing. For the best constitution is pre
cisely that which most contributes to the
best life or Happiness. See i i n.
(128): I. 2 8 ft. (21); and especially in.
18 i ;/. (683), IY(VII). i i (685), 2
(687), ii : 2 2, 5 (714), 9 3 f.
(806), 13 3. SUSKM. (284)
15 olKCas |Jipos] So I. 3 i, 4 i,
13 J5-,
Kal Tro\Lv...vop.i5i.v] "one must regard
the state as nearly divided into two."
But the construction is not plain : is it
eyyvs<ov(rai >Tov dix<z dirjprjo da.L ? This
would be supported by vi(iv). 6. n,
vm(v). i. 16, where 67711? is almost an
adjective. Or it might also be i>ojji.ie<.v
diypTjadai eyyvs TOV 5t^;a < diyp-fja-dai > .
1 6 From Euclid Eleni. I. 10, I. 9,
III. 30 it is seen that 5t%a diaipelv = to
divide into two equal parts. Cp. Nic.
Eth. v. 4. 8 with Jackson s note.
17 WCTT tv oorcus KT\] From this it
is seen, as indeed before from I. 13 16
nn. (126) (127), that Aristotle intended to
introduce into his ideal state a public edu
cation and training for women, although
this education was certainly not to be
common to boys and girls. Cp. Introd.
pp. 49, 52 (2). In the Laws vi 781 R
Plato had expressed himself still more
forcibly: ov yap rj/uuav fj.6vov eariv, tus
86%eiev dv, TO Trepl ras yvvcuKas dKoff/JirjTws
Trepiopu/JLevov, offy oe ij drj\La rnuv 0L/<ris
eaTl Trpos dpeTrjv xelpwv Trjs TWV appevuv,
TOffovTit) 5ta0epet Trpbs TO 7r\e?^ TJ dnrXdaiov
elvai. Aristotle however says quite the
same thing Rket. I. 5. 6 1361 a ro ff., 6 crois
yap TO, /card yvvaiKas (f>av\a wcnrep Aa/ce-
Sat^uovtots, O"xe56^ /card TO rnju-ffv OVK euSai-
IIOVOVVLV (quoted by Eaton). SUSEM.
(285)
6 20 Kaprepuofv] of hardy endu
rance.
22 !i;T][i. Xt]Kv] has disregarded his
aim. This picture of luxurious living is
indirectly confirmed by Plato Rep. vin.
548 A, B ; eTridv/ji,7]Tai 8 ye xp^yudroH oi
TOI.OVTOL are KeKTr)[j.evoi Ta/mte ia /cat oliceiovs
Kal ad TrepifioXovs ot/CTjcrewi
veoTTids i Stas, ev als &va\iffKOVTS
yvvat^l TroAXd dV SairavLpvTo: cp. 550 D.
7 23 cwo-re dvaYKatov] Wealth
must needs be in esteem, because the
unbridled luxury of women is a very
costly business. SUSEM. (286)
26 KeXroiv] See Note on the Celtae
at the end of B. n. SUSEM. (287)
II. 9. 9]
1269 b 141269 b 32.
283
8 T6Ti/Jii]Kacri rrjv Trpo? roi)? dppevas avvovcr iav . eot/ce yap (VI)
6 /av0o\oyrf(ra<i vrpwro? OVK d\6yw$ av^ev^ai TOV "Aprjv
7T/309 rrjv A(f)po$iTr]v rj yap 777309 TT}V rwv dppevcov 6fM\lav
30 77 Trpo? T/7i> Tft)^ yvvctlK&y fyaivowrai Karafcco^L/jLOt Trdvres
ol roiovroL. Sio Trapd rot? A.d/ccoa i rou$ V7rrjp%i>, Kal TroXXa 7
9 8lO)KlTQ V7TO TWV yVVdlKCOV eTTt Trj<> dp^fj^ CLVTWV.
28 Trpwrws M 8 ? 1 , perhaps rightly |
M 8 ? 1
8 28 6 p-vOoXo-y^o-as irpwros] Aris
totle imagines that myths, like laws and
customs, iin. (296) (300) on 12, 14, are
direct inventions of individuals, who
consciously intended by means of them
to represent to sense certain ideas and
thoughts. Cp. also v(vin). 6 13 n.
1078. SUSEM. (288)
29 fj -yap KT\] In his assertion, that
martial races are also the most amorous,
Aristotle is supported by the views of
modern anthropologists (Fiilleborn).
SUSEM. (289)
30 KaTaKw\i|jioi] easily captivated,
with inrb v(vill). 7. 4, with IK NIC. Eth.
x. 9. 3; with Trpos one might say "easily
allured to."
31 816 irapd KT\] Schomann Anti
quities of Greece p. 268 Eng. tr. is cer
tainly right in saying that the social
position and influence of women in
Sparta was not higher than it is amongst
the modern peoples of the west, and that
the prevailing condition of things with
us in this respect would have appeared to
an Athenian of the best time to be a
species of feminine rule (ywaiKOKpaTta),
although it does not at all alienate our
women from their natural and most
appropriate calling of housewives and
mothers. But this does not thoroughly
answer the question proposed by J. G.
Schneider (see n. 295 b) and by Oncken:
whether true womanliness can have thriven
under so rough a treatment of the marriage
relation as was customary at Sparta:
whether a family life and true domesticity
could be found when the Spartan full-
citizen was, as a matter of fact, banished
from the family, lived continually with
his comrades in arms, ate at the public
table, slept in a tent, and only paid
stolen visits to his wife ; where conse
quently the household was without a
head, the wife without a home of common
duty and mutual improvement, where pa
rental duty was removed and the natural
field for the wife s activity abolished. If
P 2 3 Q b Aid. Bk.
32
in the latter respect Aristotle mistook
the cause of the evil (as his retention of
common messes for the men and his
excessive public education prove), does
this justify us in assuming that his de
scription of the evil itself is wholly in
correct? In reference to the first question,
if it was nothing unusual at Sparta to
hand over one s wife to another, if, as
Schomann himself thinks, op, c, p. 267, a
Spartan woman, to whom proposals were
made by another man, hardly felt herself
insulted by them but referred the lover to
her husband, then, (as Fiilleborn and
Schomann after him have remarked) the
boast of the Spartans, that adultery was
never heard of amongst them, does not
amount to much : adultery here only
means an intrigue with another man with
out the husband s permission. The
further boast of the Spartan women, that
they were in an especial degree good
housewives (Schomann op. c. p. 268),
must accordingly be reduced to its proper
dimensions. Plato however concedes
(Laws vn 805 E f.) that though the
Spartan women did not weave and spin,
occupations which they left to their
female slaves, they yet led an active life :
since they had nearly half the responsi
bility for the management of the house
hold and the education of the children.
Certainly there is some exaggeration in
the charges of license and love of power
brought against them, and this must
be moderated from the above points of
view : but it is quite as certain that they
are not all pure inventions. Oncken
refers his readers to the proof given by
him Hellas and Athens II. 85. Cp.
Introd. p. 36 n. (i). SUSEM. (290)
32 errl TTJS apx^s] during their su
premacy. Cp. 10 n. (292) : vni(v). 6.
13 eiri TTJS T&V AXevaduv dpx^s, 7 14
^TT A.0fjvai(i}V Kal 2\.aKe8aifj.oviojv: and De
Caelo ill. 2 7, 300 b 30, tiri TTJS $1X0-
S, during the reign of Love.
284
nOAITIKHN B. 9.
[II. 9. 9
rl Sia(f)6pei, yvvaifcas ap^eiv rj TOV$ dp^ovras VTTO rwv (VI)
ap%eo-0ai ; ravro yap crv^flaivei. ro-l^ov 8 ov- (p.
oV
10
, flXa/SepcoTarai Kal Trpbs ravO al rcov
e&ij\(0crav S eVl 7-779 7]f3aiwv
ev yap ovBev rjcrav, wcrTrep eV eTepais
06pv/3ov Be
40 ovv eoiK
11 VdiKWV
i 270 a , ,
rot9 l\aKwaiv 6^X070)9 TI TGOV yv-
yap r^9 olieetas Sta ra9
TroXzV xpovov, f 7ro\e/jiovvT<; TOV Te 777309 .
7rd\LV TOV 7TD09 ApKaOCLS Kdi
Se avTOvs fjizv Trapel^ov TW vo/moOeTr)
35 eiirep II Bk.; rjirep Sylburg Susem. 1 misled by William s version nisi ad bellum
|| 36 roC# ] TOVTOV Spengel
1270 a i T??S OLKeias (ot /ctas ? P Ar.) omitted by M 8 and P 1 (ist hand), added by p 1
in the margin Ij 4 TrpoydoTre-rroL^/j.^ovs Bk. Susem. 1 by a misprint (corrected by
Bender)
ning of the era of the Olympiads, 776 B.C.
(J, G. Schneider). See this passage
among the Fragments 490, 1558 a 13,
Rose = 485 in Rose Aristot. psendep.=-^6
Miiller. Further compare especially Gil
bert Stiidicn 72 ff. 158 ff. SUSEM.. (294)
The passage is as follows : ot fj.ev yap
e/ceXetptW \tyov<nv O.VTOV, ui>
<TTI /cat Api(TTOTe\7)s TeK/mrjpiov Trpoafiepuv
TOV OXu^iTTtacrt dicn<oi> ev w TovvofJ.0. TOV
AvKovpyov Stacrwferat KaTayeypa/j-iAfrov,
E. Curtius, History Eng. tr. I. p. 191,
adopts this date. Even so, there would
be a grave chronological difficulty if
these Arcadian wars be supposed to pre
cede Lycurgus. The first Messenian war
is dated 743 723 B.C. But as to the
main fact Aristotle is correct. A long
period of camp-life, of war in which the
Spartans lived perpetually in the field,
must have preceded the complete estab
lishment of the system and the institu
tions which are referred to the Lycurgean
legislation*. Such a period we find in
the tedious and difficult conquest of La-
conia by its Dorian invaders.
4 Trpow8oir-iroLT]fjL vovs] Note the dou-J
ble formation of perfect.
* I entirely agree with Wilamowitz Homer-
ische Untersuchuugen, Berlin 1884, p. 267 ff., that
Lycurgus is only a mythical person, and that the
supposed Lycurgean legislation never had an
existence ; and I also regard the account which
he gives of the real state of things as altogether
correct. SUSEM.
9 35 TWV e-yKvKXiwv] See
and i. 7 2. SUSEM. (291)
10 37 iirl TT]S 0T](Bcua>v
at the time of the Theban nvason
under Epameinondas 369 B.C. SUSEM.
(292)
38 XP 7 ! "^ 01 KT M "For they were
of no use, any more than the women in
other cities, but they caused more con
fusion than the enemy." It is significant
that the encomiasts of Sparta, Xenophon
(Hellen. VI. 5 28 at ntv yvvcuK.es oude TOV
KO-TTVOV Op&TCLl Tlvd^OVTO, CLT OL 5TTOT
idovaac 7ro\efj.iovs) and Plutarch (Ages. 31
/cat TUV yvvanKuiv ov 5vvafj.evwv r/(ri xdfetj/,
dXXd TravTa.ira<nv eK(ppovo}i> ovauv irpos re
TT]v Kpavyrji /cat TO irvp T&V Tro\ep.lwv)
speak much more strongly on this point.
Oncken observes quite rightly, that this
was the first opportunity the Spartan
women had for putting into practice the
brave speeches they had been making for
centuries; they might at least have dis
played a quiet bearing, even if they were
not to be taken at their word. SUSEM. (293)
Bernays renders : although the women
in other cities are of use [on such occa
sions]. But is it so? The Septem of
Aeschylus scarcely bears this out.
Plato must allude to this, Laws 806 B.
11 1270 a i ^|o) -yap KrX] Accord
ing to Plutarch Lycurg. i , in his account
of the constitution of Sparta Aristotle
placed Lycurgus apparently no earlier
than the time of Iphitos, about the begin
II. 9. 13]
1269 b 331270 a 11.
285
5 7re7ro?7/iteVov? Bid rov arpaTiwriKov (Siov (Tro\\d yap e^et
7-37? dperf)?), ra? Be yvvai/cds <acrt jjiev ayeiv
vreicpovov,
pr)<rai TOP Av/covpyov eTrl roi)? yo/u-of?, &5?
12 a7ro(TTrjvai TraXiv. curiai {lev ovv elcrLV avrat, TWV yevo/Jie- 9
i/wi/, ware Bfj\ov on KCLI ravTTjs T^? d/jLaprias dX)C
10 ou TOVTO aKOTTovfjiev, TIVL Bet
13 d\\d 7Tpl rov opds Kal fjir
e^eiv rj fir/
TO, Be Trepl ra? 71;-
7 e-n-l] VTTO ? Koraes || 8 yivofj.i>uv M s P 1
hand), yp. rov P 4 in the margin
ii ToO] rd Q b T b and P 4 (ist
5 iroXXd YO-P ^x t H 16 ? 1 ! KT ^J Cp.
Plato Laws I. 630 E ou% cos ?r/)6s dper^s TI
/j.6piov Kal ravra TO (pavXararov eridet [6
Au/co0/37os] /SX^TTWi , d\\d Trpos iravav ape-
rrfV. Thuc. I. 84. 3 iro\e/miKoi re /cat
eu/3ouXot 5td r6 evKOffttov yiyvofJteda. : V.
66. 4 (Eaton). SUSEM. (294 b)
6 <j>ao-i] As to whether this is an
anonymous quotation from Ephoros, or
an appeal to oral tradition, see Introd.
P- 35 n - (3)- Cp. also below n. (310) on
7. SUSEM. (295)
7 ws 8 dvreKpovov KT\] Precisely so
Plato Laws VI. 781 A ro 5e Trept rds yvi>a?Kas
ovda/m&s opdus avofjioderriTov /ut,edelTai...d\\
o Kal d XXws 7^ros ^juwi/ r&v dvOpuiruv
\adpaioTfpov fj,a\\ov Kal eT
I0y, TO ^Xu, 5td TO dffdeves, OVK
TOVTO ei aVTOS TOV VO/A00 ^TOV SvCTTaK-
TOV ov afaid-r). This Plutarch must have for
gotten, when (Lycurg. 14) he attacks Aris
totle alone on account of this same remark
and tries to refute him. The facts which
he adduces with this object prove simply
nothing: but directly afterwards (c. 15)
he gives a detailed account of the Spartan
custom of lending wives, and this does
not make the assertion, which he appends
to it, very credible : viz. Tavra ok OI)TWS
irpa.TTOiJi.eva <pvfftKuis Kal TTO\ITIK&S TOTC TO-
cfovTov (xTretxe TTJS vvTepov \eyo-
/j,^vrjs yevtcrdai Trepl TCIS yvva^Kas
ev^epelas, wffTe 6 Xws O.TT(.<JTOV elvai TO
TTJS /Jiotxeias Trap 1 diVoTs. Even he does
not venture to deny the subsequent laxity
of the women at Sparta. (J. G.
Schneider.) SUSEM. (295 b)
12 8 " These then are the causes
of the events which happened and there
fore clearly of this mistake : but the ques
tion before us is not who is, or is not,
excusable; but whether as a matter of
fact (a legislator) is right or wrong."
9 d\\ iip.6i;s...ii op0o>s] Thus Aris
totle is not unaware that the author of
a code or a constitution is by no means
able to proceed simply at his own good
pleasure, but is tied down to the given
circumstances : cp. 22 ;/. (322), 12 5
(409); vi(iv). i 3 ff. n. (1116), c. 6, n
7, 8, 12 I ff. : VIl(vi). c. 4. It is
only in case these circumstances are
highly favourable that he considers his
own best constitution possible. But this
is still a long way off the knowledge that
a nation s constitution and code of laws
are in general the product primarily of
its individuality and history, and only
secondarily of the legislator s wisdom or
unwisdom. Nor does Aristotle omit
forthwith to mark precisely the spirit of
his own examination in that he never
purposes to account for the constitution
by the circumstances under which it
arose, or to fathom the necessities which
confronted the legislator. Instead of this,
Lycurgus, who left behind him an actual
state, is treated like Plato who con
structed an imaginary state. Aristotle s
criticism neither is nor claims to be his
torical criticism in our sense of the term,
which is more concerned to explain the
connexion of the facts than to award
praise or blame. He is as one-sided
in pointing out the defects of this poli
tical structure as the admirers of its ex
cellences had been in earlier times and
continued to be later on. Nor could it
have been otherwise : for neither he nor
they had the requisite historical data for
appreciating the personal responsibility of
Lycurgus. Nor have we even now : as
suming that we still retain our belief in
the existence of such a person as Lycur
gus. Moreover in spite of his recogni
tion of the force of circumstances Aristotle
shares with Plato and all the political
theorists of Greece the belief in the om
nipotence of positive legislation, as if
mighty historical developments which are
not of today or yesterday could be simply
swept out of the world by a command or
prohibition. Besides, he makes Lycurgus
responsible for things for which no legis-
286
nOAITIKON B. 9.
[II. 9. 13
^ovra py Ka\a><? eoiicev, wairep e Xe^#?7 teal TTporepov, (VI)
ov fjiovov cnrpeireiav TIVCL iroieiv r^? TroKiTeias avrvj^ icaO*
avrrjv, a\\a avfji^aXXecrOai TL 7T/30? rrjv (friXoxprj/jLariav*
15 * *. /jiera <yap ra vvv pTjOevra rot? Trepl TTJV avw[JLa\iav 10
/ > I >< V \ > "
14 T?;? /cT^creo)? eTTLTifirjo eiev av Ti?. rot9 yLtey 7&/? avrcov
{3e/3r]K6 fceKTTjcrOat, 7ro\\r)v \lav ovcriav y rot? Se
rovro Be KOI
,v jap rj
20 T?}I> vjrdpxpvaav eVo/T/crez/ 01) Ka\6v, opOoos Troirj&as,
12 ^oi/cez/ omitted by T M s || 13 aur?ji/ M 8 II 2 Bk., avra Ar. || 14 aura Ar. ||
dXXa </cat> Koraes || 15 * * /nera yap Susem., see Comm.; ^era 5t Zwinger \\
17 \iav omitted by M s P 1 || rots] TOV M 8 , rwi/ P 1 H 18 TJKI ? Congreve || 19
TOP ^6/x,oj/ M 3 and perhaps Ar. |j 20 ou/c before eiroL^ev inserted by II ] (erased
by corr. P 1 ), ovaiav ? Bender
lator can be responsible, and he partly
blames him for effects of certain laws,
when the effects could not be imputed to
him even if the laws in question had
really been his own work, and that in
the sense in which Aristotle attributes
them to him (Oncken). Cp. also n.
(82) on I. 9 8: n. (238) on n. 7 8 ;
Exc. II on Bk. II ; n. (339) on 30
below ; (466) on in. 3 9; (552) on in.
9 8 : n. 5 8 n. (160): iv(vn). 14 16
(916). Even that which rests on no
express command or prohibition, but
simply on the force of popular custom,
that is, the so-called unwritten law
(cp. n. 48 on i. 6. i and Exc. II to Bk.
n), is directly attributed by Aristotle, as
by Plato, to the authorship of a definite
individual lawgiver : this is especially
clear from 14 below, see ;/. (300). Ex
actly similar is his assumption of a first
founder of the state: I. 2 15, o Trpurros
o-ucmjcras, n. (28 b): or his judgment as
to the origin of the conceptions of popular
mythology, 8 above, 6 fj.v6o\oy^cras
Tjyjwros, n. (288).
In spite of these undeniable weak
nesses the whole chapter may lay claim to
a full measure of authority, as much as
any other of Aristotle s historical state
ments. It is its merit to have most
acutely corrected the aberration from
sound intelligence revealed in the adora
tion paid to the Spartan state, and here
also to have confronted romance with
criticism (Oncken). SUSEM. (296)
12 Kal irpoTepov] 5 ff., see nn. 284
286. SUSEM. (297)
The land question and the decline of
population: 1319.
13 15 fierd yap KT\] Possibly we
should alter yap into 5e, as Zwinger pro
posed, and not assume a lacuna ; since
as a matter of fact no proof is needed to
show why license amongst the women
tends to increase the love of wealth:
every one can easily imagine the reason
for himself. Nor was a reason stated
in 7 ; the passage where this was
touched upon above (/cat -rrpoTepov, see
last n.}, which is referred to in 13, see
n. (286). Vet it may equally have been
omitted there in order to be introduced
here, when the subject comes up for
further discussion: this may have been
followed by a transition to the relations
of property generally amongst the Spar
tans, in the form of a remark, to which
the passage /nera yap KT\ served as reason
or explanation. This much is certain
that these words are not at present re
lated to what precedes either as reason or
as explanation, and if no lacuna be as
sumed the yap of the text is an inconsis
tency. SUSEM. (298)
14 16 rots p-^v -yap KT\] Cp. vm(v).
7 10 ev AaKedai/AOVi et? 6X1701;$ ai ouo\cu
tpxovrai n. (1603). SUSEM. (298 b)
20 eTroh]o-v sc. Lycurgus. The name
is not mentioned, but this is the only
subject which can be understood (from
n). From this then it follows that
Aristotle was not as yet acquainted with
the famous story according to which a
certain Epitadeus carried the law which
allowed the family estate to be given
II. 9. 15]
1270 a 121270 a 24.
287
vat & KOI KaTa\,i7Tiv e^ovcriav eScotce rot?
Kdirot, ravro crvfJifBaiveLV dvayfcaiov e/ceivws re
15 ecm 8e real TWV tyvvaitcwv cr^eSoz/ T^? Tracr?;?
24 7T6VT6 jiewv ra Bvo TWV T
. (VI)
KOI OUTO>?.
7riK\tjpa)i> 7ro\\a)v
21 /caraAtTreti M 8 ? 1 Susem. 1 || 22 TOLVTO P 1 , TOVTO II- Bk. 1 || 23 &rrt] TI
Bender very temptingly, yet &rrt would then be required after T&V irtvre (Mep&v \\ Sii
Susem. 1 wrongly, see Comm. |j /cat omitted by II 1 , [/cat] Susem. 1 : if we read ri with
Bender, it is not needed [| 24 yevo/jievwv Koraes
away or freely disposed of by will : Plu
tarch Agis 4, cp. Schomann Antiquities
of Greece p. 216 Eng. tr. As far as he
knew, this had never been prohibited.
Should we expect later writers to be
really better informed? Or would it not
be as well to consign the said story to
the great lumber-room of historical fable
which Greek antiquity has bequeathed to
us so richly furnished? See further the
next note. SUSEM. (299)
iroCT|<rv ou KaXov] Aristotle implies
that Lyctirgus never expressly prohibited,
by a declaration of illegality and a penal
ty, the sale of the old plot of ground or the
purchase of a new one. When translated
into our mode of thought and expression
this means that the force of usage and
custom was against the practice ; it was
held dishonourable to sell. With this
agrees the omission of Sparta, 8 6, from
the list of states where alienation or en
largement of the inherited estate was
prohibited by law (Oncken), as one
means of restoring, in a certain sense,
equality of possessions; comp. n. (237).
(This decisive circumstance was quite
overlooked by Gilbert.) Is it not then a
fair inference that Aristotle was also un
aware of any equal division of property
amongst the Spartans, whether by Ly-
curgus or any one else, with the design
that this equality shoitld be perpetual 1
(This last is the only point here in ques
tion with Aristotle.) Otherwise, since
such a division amongst those who are
actual citizens was also his own ideal,
iv(vn). 10 9 12 n. (835); cp. nn.
on n. 6 5 (192), 15 (214) would he
not have expressly appealed to the autho
rity of Lycurgus in support of it, and
expressly commended him for this ex
cellent design? Would he not also have
expressly blamed him, no less than Plato
or Phaleas 6 10 ff. (208211), 7 5
(234) for having neglected, to a still
greater extent than these theorists, to
take the appropriate means for bringing
this about : nay more, for having taken
as good as no means whatever? The 7th
fragment of the Polity of the Lacedae
monians attributed to Ilerakleides
(Miiller Frag. hist. Gr. n. 211) un
doubtedly goes back to the Aristotelian
work On the Spartan constitution, see ;/.
(360) on 10 6. But this by no means
proves that these extracts must be wholly
free from foreign additions, or that TTJS
d dpxaias (j.oipas ov5e ^eanv is not one
here. Cp. n. (310 *) on 17. Gilbert,
op. c. 162 ff., attempts in vain to show
that it is quite natural that Aristotle
should omit this limitation in the present
passage. For, if he had known it, it is
obvious how much it must have both
weakened and again aggravated the blame
he has here expressed. For whatever we
may make of the ancient portion (dp-
Xaias fj.oipas), it would testify to a
stronger care on the part of the legislator
to preserve the family estates if the sale
of this portion was absolutely forbidden
by law and declared null and void, at
the same time that it would be so much
the stronger inconsistency if even this
property was to be freely disposed of by
will or given away. Besides Gilbert s
whole method of explaining this dpxaia
po ipa has already been briefly, but cor
rectly, refuted by Frick in Jahrb.f. Phil.
cv. 1872. 667. SUSEM. (300)
21 8i86v<u 8 Kdl KaraXetimv] Trans
lated into our language this means : in
all ages after Lycurgus usage and custom
were often evaded by apparent free gift
or by testamentary disposition of land.
SUSEM. (301)
22 KO.LTOI Taur6 cru|xpaviv KT\] Cp.
vm(v). 8 20 s. fin. n. (1628). SUSEM.
(301 to)
15 24 TWV TT6VT6 |XpJ)V Tti 8vo] tWO
fifths.
TWV T iriK\Tfpa>v KT\] why the num
ber of heiresses in Sparta was dispro
portionately large Aristotle considers it
superfluous to show, because it is readily
understood that in the many long wars
an unusually large number of sons fell
288
nOAITIKflN B. 9.
[II. 9. 15
5 Kal Bid TO Trpoifcas SiSovai fjbe<yd\a<?. KCLLTOL fte\Tiov TJV (VI)
fjLrjSe/jLlav 17 oXlyijv rj /cal fjLerpiav rerd^Oat,. * * vvv S e^ecm (P. 4;
Sovvai re TTJV 67TiK\7]pov OTCO av {3ov\,7]rai KCLV diroOdvr)
fir) Siafle/jievos, ov av KaraXiTrr) K\r)povo/jiov, ouro? co av
16 6e\r) oiococriv. TOiyapovv Svvafj,ev7]s TT?? %copas %i\iov$ ITT-
30 Trefc rpefaiv Kal TrevraKoo-iovs KOI oTrXrra? TpiG/jLvpLOVs, ov$e
%i\iOi TO 7r\fjOos j](jav. yeyove Se Bid T&V epywv avTwv 12
&fj\ov oTi (f>av\a)<; avTols el%e ra Trepl TTJV TCL^LV ravryv
/jiiav yap Tr X.Tjyrjv ov% - vTrrjveyKev r) 7roXt9, d\\ avrwXero
17 Sid TTJV o\i r yav9pwjriav. Xeyovcri S &5? eTrl yLtei^ TWV irpore-
25 ^^ omitted by II 1 , [rjv] Susem. 1 2 doubtfully || 26 * * ^w Biicheler, see
Comm. n. (304): vvv 5 e<m SoGrat <bir6<T^v av TLS 6e\r) KO.L ry Trarpt e^fcrri 5oD*/cu>
T^V /cr\ Welldon || 27 re omitted by M 8 P 1 , [re] Susem. 1 2 || 28 8v av /caraXtTT??,
<Tr]v> K\rjpovo/j.ov, euros or $ av /caraXtV^ <rr]v> K\^povo/Jiov, OVTOS Koraes || 30
rpia-fj-vpiovs] rptcrxtXtous P 1 in the margin || 33 ot}5e yottat- yap 7r\f)y^v VTrfyeyice
Susem. 1 * 2 misled by William s version millani enim plagam pertulit || 34 /utv omit
ted by II 1 : [fj.^v] Susem. 1 - 2
(Bender). Aristotle s statement concern
ing the great wealth of Spartan women
is confirmed by Plutarch s from a yet
later time Agis 4. 7 T,V 5e rore TUV Aa/cw-
vLK<3v TrXourwv ev rats yvvaL^l TO
(}. G. Schneider.) SUSEM. (302)
The Spartan name for them is
This privilege is assigned to the king
by Herod. VI. 57 : diKa^eiv d TOVS /3acrt-
\as...7rarpovxov re irapdevov Trepi, es rbv
25 KCUTOI P\TIOV] Here again later
authors are apparently better informed of
the facts than Aristotle. We are told that
dowries had actually been prohibited, and
that down to the time of Lysander none
were ever given; see Schomann Anti
quities of Greece p. 265 Eng. tr. SUSEM.
(303)
26 vvv 8 &JO-TI KT\] It is obvious
that this sentence forms no antithesis to
the preceding and thus vvv 5 gives no
sense. All however is right if one ima
gines something like the following to have
fallen out before vvv de : < And besides
it would have been necessary to prescribe
who had the right and obligation of
marrying heiresses, > whereas at present
every father can marry his daughter to
any one he pleases, and if he die without
a will his heir at law bestows her upon
whom he pleases. SUSEM. (304)
28 K\Tipovop.os usually means heir :
here it must mean the person entitled to
the rights of the deceased, the next male
relation of full age, or, if there were
more than one such, the eldest of them.
SUSEM. (305)
16 29 8vva[AevT]s] Of course Aristotle
makes this calculation, as Oncken re
marks, with regard to the total population
of Laconia, whether Spartan or of non-
Spartan descent. In any case it is rather
too high an estimate, as this total popula
tion amounted to only 400,000 at the
most : see Schomann Antiquities of
Greece p. 195 Eng. tr. But on the other
hand the reading, or rather conjecture,
TjOicrxtXt ous would not merely give a
number far too small, but also one out of
all proportion to that of the 1500 cavalry.
SUSEM. (306)
30 oi38e x^ 101 ] In the time of Agis
B.C. 241 (Pint. Agis c. 5) the Spartans
were but 700, and only 100 retained their
family allotments (Eaton). SUSEM. (307)
33 [iav "yap TrX/r^ilv] The battle of
Leuctra. Cp. further 34 n. (345),
iv(vn). 14 21 n. (916) : v(vm). 4 4,
7 n. (1008). SUSEM. (308)
ov\ viriivt YKe] The negative to be
taken closely with the verb : under one
blow the city sank. Cp. Aristoph.
Knights 1377 5ei ws OVK airedavev, Plato
Phil. 23 A efj-fipovMs OVK dvreTrotctro r&v
vLKrjTypiwv : and below Pol. Vl(iv). 4. 30
ov Tro\iTetav.
34 8td TT\V oXiYcivOpwTriav] Here
II. 9. 18]
1270 a 25 1270 a 40.
289
35 pa)v {BacTLXecov fj,Te$iSoo~av rfjs TroXtreta?,
(VI)
rore
dX)C
eir
ecrrv
Trore TOI;? 2<7rapTiaTas Kai i^vpiov^ ov
d\7]0rj ravra eire fjir), (Be\Tiov TO Sid r^9
7r\r)0veiv dvSpcov T^V 7r6\ii>. vTrevavTios
40 KOI o jrepl TTJP TGKVOTroiiav VO/AOS TT^O? TavTijv
37 TOVS STra/mdras Ar. Biicheler Susem. 2 , ro?s ZTra/mdrcus II Bk. Susem. 1 in the
text and probably F ; Thurot first suspected an error
Talthybiadae : see Schomann p. 193
Se 13
again of course only Spartans proper are
meant, not Provincials (lie/not /cot) and
Helots. According to Xenophon, Hcllen.
VI. 4. 15, rooo Lakedaemonians fell at
Leuctra, including 400 out of the 700
2iTrapTiaTa,i who took part in the battle.
Xenophon also, De Rep. Lac. i. i, calls
Sparta one of the least populous of states
(J. G. Schneider). SUSEM. (309)
17 34 \-you(ri 8 cos KT\] It would
appear as if Aristotle is__qiiir_QrjIy,;a-n-
thority for^thisTact. "Herodotus, IX. 35,
is"~very positive" in his assertion that
iTisamenos the Elean and his brother
illegias fj-ouvoi 5rj Tra,i>TWv avdp&wwv eye-
IOVTO ^TnT/TnrjrfjffT iroXiiJTai ((Jongreveji
also;/. (312)7 TI4\itarch/^jVzV. Lac. 22
speaks somewhat differently. It is there
stated that the strangers who submitted to
the Lycurgean discipline were by the or
dinance of Lycurgus also allowed a share
in the " ancient portion, TTJS dp^f/deis dia-
TeTayfj.e i> r)s [Moipas, which they were not
permitted to sell. Cp. 11. 300.) Ephoros
however, as Trieber shows, had the
following story, Frag. 18 found in Strabo
viii. 364. The first kings Eurysthenes
and Prokles had divided Laconia into
four states, besides Sparta and Amyclae,
and on account of the paucity of men
had authorized the dependent rulers of
these four provincial states to admit aliens
to the right of citizenship : at that time
the irepioiKoi were as yet completely on an
equality, political and civil, with the pure
Spartans. Now it is indeed true that
this account cannot have been the au
thority which Aristotle is here quoting,
as Trieber and Susemihl once supposed :
but this being the case the partial agree
ment of the two accounts is still striking
enough to suggest that Aristotle has here
cited some other passage of Ephoros.
For Herodotos may possibly refer only
to historical times, Aristotle to the earlier
period, e.g. perhaps only the reigns of
the oldest kings. No doubt he is also
thinking of such old Spartan families of
non- Dorian descent as the Aegidae and
H.
208, 225 f., 249 Eng. tr.; Gilbert p. 52 ff.,
57 ff, r 4 9 f; Frick in Jahrb. f. Philol.
cv. 1872. p. 655 ff. It might again be
said that Herodotos obviously has in
mind only foreigners proper; whereas
Aristotle might mean the /xotfa/ce?, as they
were called, children of Helots brought
up as Spartans, who were perhaps in
variably the illegitimate sons of Spartan
lords by Helot women. Uut then such
ij.66a.Kes were not confined to the times of
the earlier kings : even l.ysander, Gylip-
pos, Kleandriclas, for example, belonged
to their number, see Schumann p. 200
Eng. tr. Ridgeway, again, suggests that
the reference is to the veoSa/ut.d>dei.s, i.e.
Helots enfranchised for their services in
war, and to their descendants. But a
similar objection may be still more
strongly urged : the earliest mention of
veoda/jLuoeis is as late as the period of the
Peloponnesian war, Schomann p. 198
Eng. tr. Comp. 11 ;/. (295) and esp.
Introd. p. 35 //. (3). SUSEM. (310)
35 WOT ov -yive(r9cu] and that
therefore there was then no lack of men
although they were at war for a long
time. The indicative would have been
used in oratio recta : hence ov, not /j.r), in
obliqua. Thucyd. V. 40 clW oi)% yye icr-
6cu and Demosth. DC falsa leg. 166,
167, 351 with Shilleto s Appendix 15.
36 KCU (J>ao-iv etvcu KT\] Evidently
here again the pure Spartans are meant.
Demaratos in Herod. VII. 234 reckons
them at about 8,000 (Eaton). SUSEM.
(311)
37 tV <TT!V d\T|0TJ...iT (JIT}] Ari
stotle himself then doubts it. SUSEM,
(312)
38 p\Tiov...39 rr\v -rroXiv] "It is
better to fill the city with men by means
of an equal division of property" than by
the admission of aliens.
18 40 viTvavTios irpos TO,VTT]V
TT\V 8i6p0&xriv] is an obstacle to a cor
rection of these evils of Sparta, viz. by
equalization of property. See i for
19
290
nOAITIKHN B. 0.
[II. 9. 18
1270 \> & iv.
GO? 7rXe/o-TOU9 elvai TOI)? (VI]
on TrXeto-Tovs
rpes
/3ov\6/J,evos yap o
Trpodyerai rot 9
i yap avrols VO/JLO^ rov fiev yevvrjaavTa
19 vlovs dtjipovpov elvai, rov Se rerrapas arekrj TTCLVTWV.
5 (fravepov ori TTO\\O)V yLVO/^evcov, rtf? Be ^oopa? ovra)
dvay/calov TroXXoi)? ylvevOaL Trev^ra?.
fJLT)v /cal rd Trepl rrjv etyopeiav e%ei <auA.&&gt;?. rj yap dp- u
XTJ Kvpla fjiev aim) rwv fJieyicrTwi^ auroi? e^rlv, ylvovrai & IK
TOV SlJ/UiOV TTaVTOS, COCTT6 7TO\\dfClS e/mTTLTTTOVCriV dvOpO)7TOi (7(f)6-
1270 b 2 Trpodyet, Spengel || roi)s TroXtras omitted by M 8 ? 1 || 8 avrrj Ar.,
omitted by T M s Welldon || 9 Travrds Sauppe (Epist. crit. ad G. Ilcruiannwn
p. 94 f. ), irdvres TH Ar. Bk.
construction. Division of the larger pro
perties would ensure the maintenance of
an increased population : the existing law
encourages an increase without due re
gard to their subsistence.
1270 b 2 irpocryeTCU TOVS iroXiras KT\]
stimulates the citizens. Just the opposite
of what Aristotle himself requires. Plato
and Phaleas did not go anything like so
far, and yet are blamed severely enough
by him in this respect. See 6 10 ff.
nn. (208211), 7 5 nn. (234, 235).
SUSEM. (313)
4 d 4>povpov] not liable to military
service, )( e/m<ppovpov: <f>povpd is a Spartan
word for crrpartd, found frequently in
Xenophon Hellenics, II. 4. 29 e^dyei.
cppovpdv, so iv. 7. 2, v. 2. 3. Xenophon
uses the phrase (ppovpav 0a^e/ = to de
clare war in in. 2. 23 and some 15 other
places. Also in Thucydides II. 25, Bpa-
aLdas (ppovpav ^x wi>
TCTTapas] Aelian Var. Hist. VI. 6
says five (J. G. Schneider). Further
Manso Sparta i. r, p. 128 f., is un
doubtedly right in asserting that this law
was of a more modern origin, as the state
certainly never dreamed of taxing pure
Spartans in the olden times, and the re
mission of military duty as a reward ap
pears to agree but ill with the spirit of
ancient Sparta. The measure reveals
that the decadence of the national power
had already set in (Trieber). Aristotle
however does not say that this law came
down from Lycurgus: see n, (321) on
21. SUSEM. (314)
19 4 KO,TOI (j>avpov KT\] Since the
Spartans lived simply and solely on the
produce of their estates, this is plain
enough. But considering the numerous
wars, it is unfortunately not easy to see
how decrease in the numbers of fighting
men would be prevented by equality and
inalienability of the estates. From the
nature of the case the only effectual
means to prevent it would have been that
which according to tradition was adopted
by the early kings, to repair gaps in
the ranks of the old citizens by the ad
mission of new citizens. Compared with
this effective remedy no great importance
attaches to the encouragement given to
families of three or four sons by a re
ward which from its character excited the
dangerous surmise, that for distinguished
services to the state Sparta had no better
prize to offer than release from the
honourable duty of serving the state. We
know now that no stock which goes on
breeding in and in can be preserved from
extinction. Significant enough too is the
proportionately large number of distin
guished men in Sparta who came from
the ranks of the fj.66a.Kes (see ;/. 310 on
17): in whose case fresh blood was
imported into the ancient stock. The
peculiar feature in the social malady of
the Spartan state was this, that inequality
of property, which we know to be as old
as property itself, gained ground here,
not as usually, in the train of over-popu
lation, but as a consequence of the very
opposite condition, viz. depopulation
(Oncken). SUSEM. (315)
The Ephoralty 1924. Amongst
other monographs see A. Schafer >e
ephoris commentatio (Greifswald 1863), H.
Stein The development of the Ephoralty
(Jahresber. des Gymn. in Konitz, 1870),
Urlichs in Rhein. Mns. VI. 1847. p. 221,
G. Dum EntstehungundEntwicklungdes
sparta)iiscJien Ephorats (Innsbruck 1878).
8 avrr,] in itself, simply as such.
9 K TOV 8rj|j.ov] Thirlwall (iv. 377)
supposed the S^uos to include the VTTO-
II 9. 21]
1270 b 11270 b 20.
291
10 Spa -Trez^re? et? TO dp-^elov, o u Sid TTJV drropiav wvioi r^crav. (VI)
20 eSfacoaav Be TroXXa/a? fjilv Kal irpoTepov, /cal vvv S ev
rot? AvSploW Sia(f)dapevT6$ jap dpjvplw rtz/e?, ocrov e<
, o\7]v TTJV TTO\,IV aTrcoXecrav. Kal Sid TO rrjv dp-
elvai \iav /jieyd\rji> Kal laoTvpavvov / STj/jLaywyelv av-
15 roi)? rjva^Ka^ovTO Kal - ol /SacrtXet?, ware Kal ravrr) <jvv-
eTrifiXaTTTecrOai, TTJV Tco\iTeiav SrjfAOKpaTia <ydp ef apiaro- is
21 Kparias avveftaivev. avve^ei JJLCV ovv rrjv 7ro\irelav TO
TOVTO (rfcrvxd^ei jdp o SijfAos Bid TO ^ere^ew r/J? (P. 48)
dp^fjs, waT elVe Sid TOV vo/jLoOeTTjv elVe Sid TIJV
20 TVTV TOVTO
fj.eioves as well as the oT-totot, and so too
K. F. Hermann. The opposite view is
taken by Scho mann Antiquities p. 245
Eng. tr. See Busolt The Lacedaemonians
and their allies I. p. 21 f. (Leipzig, 1878).
For iravrbs, not Traces, see 22, 10 10.
10 ap\eiov = magistracy, board: so
21, io lord T&V e<t>6piov dpxdov.
W VLOI] See below 10 12 n. (370
b) and Thuc. I. 131. 2 6 5e
io &v e ltjcrav ? Schneider || 12 Avdpiois Ar., dvSpiois even Bk. ] , dvdpeiois P :! (ist
hand, emended by a later hand), dvrpeiois P M" and P 1 (ist hand), dvSpdois corr. of P 1
(r altered to 5), yp. dvdpiois p 1 in the margin || 14 [auroL/s] Oncken, aiVot Ridgeway
|| avrovs fjjsdyKafav Kal robs Susem. 2 , regcs ipsos popnlares fieri conipideratit Ar. ; regcre
populwn se ipsos cogebant reges William, whence avrovs r)vdyKaoi>[To] Kal [ol] Susem. 1
|| 1 6 dpiffTOKpareias p2-3-4Qb^b y jg T7 )j/ om. by II- Bk.
6 6, io 31. But, as Oncken remarks,
it hardly serves to convert the constitution
into a democracy that the kings pay court
to the Ephors. SUSEM. (319) If there
fore avTovs be retained, it will more con
veniently apply to the Spartans them
selves as in 1 6, 19, 24. The kings
themselves were compelled to court the
favour of the people in order thereby to
secure power to counterbalance that of
the ephors.
"This seems to me impossible in this
context. If then avrovs is right, Aristotle
has, I think, erroneously exaggerated.
For I cannot agree with Busse who thinks
that Oncken s objection is sufficiently
removed by c. 6 17, 1265 b 38, drj/j-o-
Kpareiadai. Kara ryv ruv k<p opuv dpxrjv did
TO e/croC d-rjfJLov elvaiTovs e<popovs." SUSEM.
1 6 apicrroKpaTias] See n. (536)
on in. 7 3. SUSEM. (320)
21 17 <ruv)^t = is the keystone of I
the constitution.
19 Sid. TOV vo[A00 TT]v] Not Lycurgus
in this case but, on Aristotle s view,
vin(v). ii 2, Theopompos. See n.
(314) on 18. SUSEM. (321)
efrre Sid TT^V Tt>xt]v] Aristotle is not
unaware, then, that many good or bad
consequences may arise out of legal regu
lations quite apart from, or even contrary
to, the legislator s intention : cp. 12 5 n.
(409). SUSEM. (321 b)
20 <rv|nrirTKv] Cp. ctTro crv/j.TTTU>-
/XdTOS C. 12 5.
192
(Eaton); alsofi/iet. in. 18. 6, 1419 a 31 ff. ;
the Lacedaemonian Ephor called to ac
count for his conduct says ol /mev yap (his
colleagues) xP ? 7/ aara Xa/Sopres raura
^Trpa^ai , 670; 5 ou, dXXd yv(bfj.ri (Gottling).
SUSEM. (316)
cray] were often. Why this tense?
Is it that in Aristotle s time it mattered
little whether they were so or not?
(Congreve). It is imperfect in 14 rJKev,
16 rjffav, 20 fyayKafavTO, crvvef3ai.i>e.
20 n iv rots AvSpfois] what cir
cumstance is mean I we do not know.
For the expression /cat vvv = recently,
compare vm(v). 10 31 Kal vvv i) T&V
irepl Aioj/ucrtoj/, n. (1699). SUSEM. (317)
14 K<xi l<roTupavvov] Cp. Plato Laius
IV. 712 D /cat yap rvpavvidi. 5o/cet /x.ot wpocr-
eot/cei at [r^ v AaKedaifj.ovi TroXtre/a] rb
yap TOV <f>6p(t)v ^au/xacrT(5s ws TvpavviKov
b avrrj ytyove. See c. 6 17 n. (219).
SUSEM. (318)
8T](j,aYwyeiv = to conciliate, flatter an
indlvidiial like a demagogue, in vm(v).
292
nOAITIKON B. 9.
[II. 9. 22
Trdvra (VI)
ravr
22 GIV Bel yap rrfv 7ro\ireiap rtjv fjue\\ovcrav
/3ov\(T0ai rd f^epy TTJS TroXew? "elvau /cal
OL /jiev ovv (3acrL\el$ Bid TT)V avrcov TI/JLTJI OVTCOS
OL Be KaKol tcdyaOol Sid rrjv yepovcriav d6\ov >ydp 77
25 ai TTj T?/9 dperfjs eaTiv , 6 Be Srj/jios Sid rrjp efopeiav KCL-
23 Ola-rarai yap e aTravrwiv ) a\\ alperrjv eBei TTJP dpfflv i$
elvai TavTrjv e diravTCOv fjuev, ^ TOP TpoTrov Be TOVTOV ov
vvv (TraiBapiwSrjs <ydp ecrri \lqv). eri Be /cal Kpi(rea)i>
22 ravrd P 1 , raOra F P 4 , TTJV avryv or [rai Tci] Schneider, </card> retard Ber-
nays; either this or rrjv avrr/v is right || 24 a^\ov...ecrrtV] Trieber considers these
words to be a gloss from Demosth. Lcpt. 107; even Giphanius remarks on the
agreement of the two passages " valde miror": see Comm. || 26 ^5et] 775?? M s I Jl
|j 28 Kplffeuv fieri /uLeyd\ut> II- 15 k.
22 21 8ei -yap... 2 2 Siap-eveiv ravrd]
Cj). vi(iv). 9 10 /<-.. (1267), 12 i
(1307); vn(vi). 5 4 (1434); vui(v).
95(i6 34 ). SU.SEM. (322)
The order (which Stahr, and apparently
Congreve, have mistaken) is del Travra ra
l^tpr] (subject) TTJS TroXews J3ov\eff9ai rr)v
TroXiTciav Tr]i> fj.. ff . (object of fiovXecrdai.)
tivai /cat Sia.fj.evei.i . If a constitution is
to be preserved, all classes in the state
must desire its existence and continu
ance. Hence we are led to Bernays or
Schneider s correction.
23 OVTCOS x. <n)0 " lV /Sot^XcWTCU TT]V 7TO-
\LTeia.v ota/xeVetv (Congreve). Comp. 10
10, of the ST^UOS.
24 KaXot Kci yaOol] This expression
in Aristotle see e.g. Yi(iv). 8 3 ff.
always denotes the more educated and
capable men : and this meaning in the
present passage is confirmed by the addi
tion a.6\ov yap 17 dpx n avrr/ TTJS dperTJs
iarlv, which Trieber hardly has sufficient
grounds for regarding as an interpolation.
Ilence U(nger) in Pliilol. Anzciger V.
I ^73- P- 37 nas rightly protested against
the completely mistaken assertion of Gil
bert op. c. 151 ff., and Frick De ephoris
Spartanis 28 f. 7, who prefer to understand
by it the nobles. P rom passages like 1 1
3, 4 and vi(iv). 7 4 (which Gilbert
p. 153 incredibly 
