The Online Library of Liberty

A project of Liberty Fund, Inc.

• Notes On Aristotle’s Politics.
• Book I.
• Book II.
• Book III.
• Book IV.
• Book V.
• Book VI.
• Book VII.
• Book VIII.

BOOK VI.

The greater part of Book vi. has been already anticipated in iv. There are also several repetitions of Book v. A few sentences may be paralleled out of ii. and iii. (See English Text.) The whole is only a different redaction of the same or nearly the same materials which have been already used; not much is added. The varieties of democracy and oligarchy and the causes of their preservation or destruction are treated over again, but in a shorter form. The management of the poor is worked out in greater detail: the comparison of the military and civil constitution of a state is also more precise and exact. The magistrates required in states are regarded from a different point of view: in iv. they are considered chiefly with reference to the mode of electing them and their effect on the constitution; in vi. they are enumerated and described, and the officers necessary to all states are distinguished from those which are only needed in certain states. There are several passages in which a previous treatment of the same subjects is recognized (1. § 1, § 5, § 8, § 10; 4. § 1, § 15; 5. § 2; 8. § 1). The references seem to have been inserted with a view of combining the two treatments in a single work.

ἅμα τε περὶ ἐκείνων εἴ τι λοιπόν

seems to indicate the supplementary character of this part of the work. 1) ‘As well as any omission of those matters (ἐκείνων) which have just been mentioned,’ i. e. the offices, law-courts, etc.; or 2*) ἐκείνων may refer to the forms of constitutions [πολιτειω̂ν].

Bekker in his 2nd edition inserts περὶ τὸ before βουλενόμενον in § 4, and ἐπεὶ before δεɩ̂ in § 6 without any authority, both apparently in order to make the language smoother and more regular. But this is not a good reason for altering the text of Aristotle.

αὕτη δ’ ἐστὶν ἣν καλον̂σί τινες ὀλιγαρχίαν,

‘which they call oligarchy,’ is perhaps only an example of unmeaning pleonasm like the expression ὁ καλούμενος ἀήρ, Meteor. i. 3, 339 b. 3; τὴν τον̂ καλουμένου γάλακτος ϕύσιν, Pol. i. 8. § 10. But it is also possible that Aristotle here uses the term in the wider sense in which he has previously spoken of oligarchy and democracy as the two principal forms of government under which the rest are included (iv. 3. § 6). Cp. note on iv. 8. § 1.

τῃ̑ δ’ ἅπαντα ταν̂τα.

‘All the democratic elements of which he has spoken generally and is going to speak more particularly,’ i. e. election by lot, elections of all out of all, no property qualification, payment of the citizens (etc., see infra c. 2. § 5), ‘may exist in the same state.’

ὡς ἐν μόνῃ τῃ̑ πολιτείᾳ ταύτῃ μετέχοντας ὲλευθερίας.

μετέχοντας, accusative absolute, or a second accusative after λέγειν εἰώθασιν, the subject and object being nearly the same.

τον̂τ’ εἰ̂ναι καὶ τέλος, καὶ τον̂τ’ εἰ̂ναι τὸ δίκαιον.

‘That is also the end, and that is the just principle.’

εἴπερ τον̂ δούλου ὄντος τὸ ζη̂ν.

The MSS. vary between δουλεύοντος and δούλου ὄντος. Supply ἔστι or some weaker word than ἔργον.

συμβάλλεται ταύτῃ πρὸς τὴν ἐλευθερίαν τὴν κατὰ τὸ ἴσον.

‘The impatience of control passes into the love of equality; mankind are unwilling to be ruled and therefore they rule and are ruled in turn. Thus the two characteristics of freedom meet or coincide.’

τὸ δικάζειν πάντας καὶ ἐκ πάντων.

The old translator takes this as if he read ἢ ἐκ. But we may retain καί, regarding ἐκ πάντων as explanatory of the manner in which the whole people exercised their judicial functions by the election of smaller bodies out of their own number.

τὸ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν κυρίαν εἰ̂ναι πάντων, ἀρχὴν δὲ μηδεμίαν μηθενὸς ἢ ὅτι ὀλιγίστων ἢ τω̂ν μεγίστων κυρίαν.

The passage as it stands in the MSS. [ἢ ὅτι ὀλιγίστων ἢ τω̂ν μεγίστων κυρίαν] gives no suitable meaning. It is possible to correct it 1*) by placing the words ἢ τω̂ν μεγίστων after πάντων, or 2) by inserting μὴ before τω̂ν μεγίστων [Lambinus].

ἀρχω̂ν

is used in the generic sense to include the ἀόριστος ἀρχὴ of iii. 1. § 7.

μεθόδῳ τῃ̑ πρὸ ταύτης.

Sc. iv. 6. § 5 and c. 15. § 13.

τω̂ν ἀρχω̂ν ἃς ἀνάγκη συσσιτεɩ̂ν μετ’ ἀλλήλων.

i. e. the chief magistrates whom the law required to take their meals together. This, which is a regulation prescribed by Aristotle in vii. 12. § 2, may be inferred to have been the general custom.

ἔτι ἐπειδὴ ὀλιγαρχία καὶ γένει καὶ πλούτῳ καὶ παιδείᾳ ὁρίζεται κ.τ.λ.

The term oligarchy is here used nearly in the sense of aristocracy. Education cannot be said to be characteristic of oligarchy in the strict sense of the word. Cp. iv. 8. § 3. ‘The term aristocracy is applied to those forms of government which incline towards oligarchy, because birth and education are commonly the accompaniments of wealth.’

ἐπὶ δὲ τω̂ν ἀρχω̂ν τὸ μηδεμίαν ἀΐδιον εἰ̂ναι.

Sc. δημοτικὸν δοκεɩ̂ εἰ̂ναι. For the general power of the ancient magistrates cp. iii. 16. § 1; v. 1. §§ 10, 11; c. 10. § 5.

ἐξ ἀρχα[Editor: illegible character]ας μεταβολη̂ς.

These words are translated in the text *‘has survived some ancient change’; they may also mean, though the expression is somewhat inaccurate, ‘have survived from the old state before the change.’ For an example of such a ‘survival’ compare the custom at Epidamnus of the magistrates going into the assembly at elections, v. 1. § 10.

τὰ μὲν ον̓̂ν κοινὰ ταɩ̂ς δημοκρατίαις ταν̂τ’ ἐστίν.

ταν̂τα, i. e. ‘election out of all, all over each, each over all, some payment for services, poverty, mean birth are in various degrees characteristic of all democracies.’

τὸ μηθὲν μα̂λλον ἄρχειν τοὺς ἀπόρους ἢ τοὺς εὐπόρους

is the reading of all the MSS. except one, and is supported by Moerbek. The phrase is peculiar: ‘that the poor should no more have power than the rich’ — we might expect rather ‘that the rich should no more have power than the poor.’ But Aristotle is speaking of democracy in the previous passage. It has been suggested that we should transpose the words; for the confusion of εὔποροι and ἄποροι (ii. 11. § 12, iii. 17. § 4, and v. 3. § 8) is common, and renders such a transposition not improbable. But a sufficiently good meaning is elicited from the text as it stands.

Τὸ δὲ μετὰ τον̂το ἀπορεɩ̂ται πω̂ς ἕξουσι τὸ ἴσον, πότερον δεɩ̂ τὰ τιμήματα διελεɩ̂ν χιλίοις τὰ τω̂ν πεντακοσίων καὶ τοὺς χιλίους ἴσον δύνασθαι τοɩ̂ς πεντακοσίοις, ἢ οὐχ οὕτω δεɩ̂ τιθέναι τὴν κατὰ τον̂το ἰσότητα, ἀλλὰ διελεɩ̂ν μὲν οὕτως, ἔπειτα ἐκ τω̂ν πεντακοσίων ἴσους λαβόντα καὶ ἐκ τω̂ν χιλίων, τούτους κυρίους εἰ̂ναι τω̂ν διαιρέσεων καὶ τω̂ν δικαστηρίων.

The meaning of the first case (πότερον δεɩ̂ τὰ τιμήματα κ.τ.λ.) is that the five hundred men of property should have as many votes as the thousand; of the second case that the proportion between the rich and the poor being maintained (500 = 1000), the electors instead of voting directly should choose representatives in equal numbers and transfer to them all the electoral and judicial power.

χιλίοις is the dative after διελεɩ̂ν: ‘to distribute to or among the thousand the qualification of the 500.’ The clause which follows (καὶ . . . πεντακοσίοις) is explanatory and illustrates the meaning. The qualification of the 500 is to be distributed among the 1000, and so the 1000 are equal to the 500. Others take the words with ἴσον δύνασθαι, placing a comma at διελεɩ̂ν, ‘and arrange the qualifications so that the votes of the 500 should be equal to those of the 1000, and the 1000 equal to the 500.’ According to this way of taking the passage, τὰ τιμήματα τω̂ν πεντακοσίων is not parallel with χιλίοις, sc. πολίταις, for which we should have expected τοɩ̂ς τω̂ν χιλίων. The irregularity is not continued in the next clause.

διελεɩ̂ν μὲν οὕτως. ‘We ought to distribute the qualification in this proportion, i. e. so that 1000 shall have together as much as 500 have together; and carry out the principle by electing an equal number of representatives from both.’ In the previous case Aristotle supposes a direct election, in this an election through representatives.

The word διαιρέσεων in this passage is doubtful. If genuine, it probably means the distribution of the citizens in classes or courts, like διελεɩ̂ν in the previous sentence (ἀλλὰ διελεɩ̂ν μὲν οὕτως κ.τ.λ.).

λέγουσι γὰρ ὡς ὅ τι ἂν δόξῃ τοɩ̂ς πλείοσι τω̂ν πολιτω̂ν, τον̂τ’ ε[Editor: illegible character]ναι δεɩ̂ κύριον κ.τ.λ.

‘It is commonly said that the majority must prevail, but in the majority the elements both of wealth and numbers have to be included. Suppose for example there are ten rich and twenty poor, six rich are of one opinion, fifteen poor of another. Five poor vote with the six rich, and four rich with the fifteen poor. When both are added up, then of whichever side the qualification exceeds, that is supreme.’

In the instance given, assuming the qualification of the poor to be half that of the rich then the votes of the side on which

The precise arithmetical expression which is given to an imaginary problem is rather curious. It is also remarkable that the formula which is used seems applicable to timocracy rather than to democracy, which is now being discussed. But here as elsewhere Aristotle is always trying to escape from democracy pure and simple.

ὁποτ[Editor: illegible character]ρων ον̓̂ν τὸ τίμημα ὑπερτείνει συναριθμουμένων ἀμϕοτέρων ἑκατέροις, τον̂το κύριον.

ἑκατέροις is the dative after ὑπερτείνει and a pleonastic explanation of ὁποτέρων.

λέγω δὲ πρώτην ὥσπερ ἄν τις διέλοι τοὺς δήμους· βέλτιστος γὰρ δη̂μος ὁ γεωργικός ἐστιν, ὥστε καὶ ποιεɩ̂ν ἐνδέχεται δημοκρατίαν, ὅπου ζῃ̑ τὸ πλη̂θος ἀπὸ γεωργίας ἢ νομη̂ς.

ὥσπερ ἄν τις κ.τ.λ. is the explanation of πρώτην, ‘I call it the first, meaning that which comes first in the classification of democracies,’ because it is the best and most natural, implied in βέλτιστος γὰρ δη̂μος.

ποιεɩ̂ν ἐνδέχεται δημοκρατίαν. The commentators require the addition of βελτίστην which may be supplied from βέλτιστος. Or Aristotle may mean, that you can have a democracy (though not commonly found to exist) among a rustic population, for that is the very best material of a democracy.

ἀπὸ γεωργίας ἢ νομη̂ς. Aristotle is here speaking not of nomadic tribes ‘cultivating their living farm’ (i. 8. § 6), who are far from being the most peaceable of mortals, not of an exclusively pastoral life at all (cp. § 11 infra), but of the tending of cattle as one of the ordinary pursuits of an agricultural population.

διὰ μὲν γὰρ τὸ μὴ πολλὴν οὐσίαν ἔχειν ἄσχολος, ὥστε μὴ πολλάκις ἐκκλησιάζειν· διὰ δὲ τὸ μὴ ἔχειν τἀναγκαɩ̂α πρὸς τοɩ̂ς ἔργοις διατρίβουσι καὶ τω̂ν ἀλλοτρίων οὐκ ἐπιθυμον̂σιν.

It may appear strange that their being poor should be a reason why people do not desire the property of others. But though a little paradoxical the meaning is clear. Aristotle is describing a population which having little or no independent means, is absorbed in labour, and can only obtain through their labour the necessaries of life; they are patient as well as industrious, and too busy to covet the property of others.

κἂν μὴ μετέχωσι τη̂ς αἱρέσεως τω̂ν ἀρχω̂ν ἀλλά τινες αἱρετοὶ κατὰ μέρος ἐκ πάντων, ὥσπερ ἐν Μαντινείᾳ.

These words probably mean that a body of representatives elected the magistrates, this body consisting of persons elected in turn, or by sections out of all the citizens. A similar principle was adopted in the constitution of Telecles the Milesian (iv. 14. § 4), in which the citizens were to deliberate by turns, as here they elect by turns.

καὶ δεɩ̂ νομίζειν καὶ τον̂τ’ εἰ̂ναι σχη̂μά τι δημοκρατίας, ὥσπερ ἐν Μαντινείᾳ ποτ’ ἠ̑ν.

So iv. 9. § 7, πολλοὶ γὰρ ἐγχειρον̂σι λέγειν ὡς δημοκρατίας οὔσης [τη̂ς Λακεδαιμονίων πολιτείας] διὰ τὸ δημοκρατικὰ πολλὰ τὴν τάξιν ἔχειν. Mantinea is to be counted as a democracy ‘after a fashion,’ at a certain period of her history, because the electors to offices, although themselves a small body only, were elected by all, and because the whole people had the right of deliberating. Schneider thinks that the names of the magistrates mentioned in the treaty made between Athens, Argos, Mantinea and Elis, b. c. 420 (Thuc. v. 47), likewise indicate a democratic form of government. But this is fanciful. That Mantinea was at that time a democracy may be more safely inferred from the alliance which she formed with Athens and Argos. Aristotle’s cautious language would lead us to suppose that the government of Mantinea, though not strictly speaking a democracy, wore the appearance of one, and was a form of government which he himself greatly admired, being in name a democracy but in reality administered by its chief citizens.

The chief magistrates are to be a select class possessing a high qualification, but they will be controlled by the whole people. Thus the democratical constitution is supposed to be happily balanced. But it may be questioned whether a democracy which has a supreme power in the assembly would be willing to elect its magistrates from a privileged class. It may equally be doubted, whether a great people like the Athenians would have submitted to the checks and artifices by which democracy is bridled. Such theories of government look well in books, but they are ‘paperconstitutions’ only. They may sometimes be realized in fact when events have prepared the way for them; but cannot be imposed as the behests of political philosophy on a reluctant people merely with a view to their good.

διὸ δὴ καὶ συμϕέρον ἐστὶ τῃ̑ πρότερον ῥηθείσῃ δημοκρατίᾳ.

διὸ refers to what has preceded. ‘And because of the general contentment which is thereby secured, it is advantageous to this rural form of democracy to be allowed to elect officers and review and judge’: a thought which is illustrated in what follows, § 6.

ἄρχειν τοὺς ἐπιεικεɩ̂ς ἀναμαρτήτους ὄντας.

Lit. ‘and they are blameless,’ ‘do no wrong,’ or taken in connexion with the preceding words, as in the translation, *‘are prevented from doing wrong.’ An example of a condensed sentence in which two thoughts are compressed into one.

πρὸς δὲ τὸ κατασκευάζειν γεωργὸν τὸν δη̂μον τω̂ν τε νόμων τινὲς τω̂ν παρὰ τοɩ̂ς πολλοɩ̂ς κειμένων τὸ ἀρχαɩ̂ον χρήσιμοι πάντες, ἢ τὸ ὅλως μὴ ἐξεɩ̂ναι κεκτη̂σθαι πλείω γη̂ν μέτρου τινὸς ἢ ἀπό τινος τόπου πρὸς τὸ ἄστυ καὶ τὴν πόλιν.

ἀπό τινος τόπου, ‘beginning from a certain place,’ reckoned in relation to the town. *If reckoning inwards, we must supply μὴ from μὴ ἐξεɩ̂ναι; if outwards, the force of μὴ is not continued.

‘The law provided that no one should possess more than a certain quantity of land; or, if he did, it was not to be within a certain distance of the city; or, regarded from another point of view, it was to be beyond a certain distance from the city.’ In other words he was not to monopolize the valuable portions of the land (cp. Plato’s Laws, v. 739 foll.), which were to be distributed among as many of the citizens as possible.

ἄστυ the city is more precisely defined by πόλις, the Acropolis, as at Athens, cp. Thuc. ii. 15.

ἔστι δὲ καὶ ὃν λέγουσιν Ὀξύλου νόμον εἰ̂ναι τοιον̂τόν τι δυνάμενος, τὸ μὴ δανείζειν εἴς τι μέρος τη̂ς ὑπαρχούσης ἑκάστῳ γη̂ς.

That is to say, a certain portion of the land could not be pledged, and was therefore always clear of incumbrances. In ancient as well as in modern times there were agricultural troubles; and many plans were devised for securing the peasant proprietor against the money-lender.

νν̂ν δὲ δεɩ̂ διορθον̂ν καὶ τῳ̑ Ἀϕυταίων νόμῳ· πρὸς γὰρ ὃ λέγομεν ἐστὶ χρήσιμος. ἐκεɩ̂νοι γάρ, καίπερ ὄντες πολλοὶ κεκτημένοι δὲ γη̂ν ὀλίγην, ὅμως πάντες γεωργον̂σιν· τιμω̂νται γὰρ οὐχ ὅλας τὰς κτήσεις, ἀλλὰ κατὰ τηλικαν̂τα μόρια διαιρον̂ντες ὥστ’ ἔχειν ὑπερβάλλειν ταɩ̂ς τιμήσεσι καὶ τοὺς πένητας.

διορθον̂ν. ‘Now, when through the want of an enactment such as that which is ascribed to Oxylus the evil has already sprung up, we should correct it by the law of the Aphytaeans.’

The object aimed at was to maintain or to preserve a large number of small proprietors who were freemen. This was effected at Aphytis by dividing the lots into small portions, each of which gave a qualification for citizenship, so that every one, however poor, was included: e.g. suppose a citizen of Aphytis to have possessed fifty acres, and that forty of these were seized by the usurer, still the remaining ten were sufficient to preserve his rights of citizenship. Or, more generally, ‘though the properties were often larger, the portion of land required for a qualification was small.’

The meaning of ὑπερβάλλειν is doubtful. It has been thought to mean that ‘even the small proprietors exceeded in number some other class, i.e. the rich or the inhabitants of the town,’ or* better ‘they exceeded the amount required.’

Aphytis was a city in Pallene, which, according to Heraclides Ponticus, fr. 39, Müller, vol. ii. p. 223, bore an excellent character for honesty among Hellenic cities. Δικαίως καὶ σωϕρόνως βιον̂σιν καὶ ἀλλοτρίων οὐ θιγγάνουσιν ἀνεῳγμένων τω̂ν θυρω̂ν. Then follows the story of the stranger who bought wine and entrusted it to no one, but on returning after a voyage found it in the same place.

τὰ πρὸς τὰς πολεμικὰς πράξεις.

Not to be taken after γεγυμνασμένοι; nor is it necessary with some editors to bracket τά. Translate, ‘and as regards military actions, their mode of life is an excellent training for them.’ Compare Alexander’s speech to his army, made a few months before his death, 323 b.c., recorded by Arrian, Exped. Alexandri, vii. 9, in which he contrasts the Oriental luxury of his Macedonian soldiers with their former life as mountain shepherds.

The pastoral democracies of the Swiss mountains have been among the most lasting democracies in the world, and they have also furnished some of the best soldiers.

ἑπομένως δεɩ̂ παρεκβαίνειν,

sc. τὰς ἄλλας. ‘The other sorts must deviate in a corresponding order.’

ἑπομένως, i.e. ‘in an order corresponding to their goodness or badness,’ gathered from βελτίστην καὶ πρώτην.

χεɩ̂ρον ἀεὶ πλη̂θος χωρίζειν.

‘At each stage we shall exclude a population worse in kind than at the preceding stage.’ Thus the first and best kind of democracy excludes the class of τεχνɩ̂ται (and a fortiori of course all below them). The second excludes the θη̂τες, and so on till at last nobody remains to be excluded. For the analogous process in oligarchy, cp. infra c. 6. §§ 2, 3.

ἃ δὲ ϕθείρειν συμβαίνει καὶ ταύτην καὶ τὰς ἄλλας πολιτείας, εἴρηται πρότερον τὰ πλεɩ̂στα σχεδόν.

Either the stress is to be laid upon καὶ ταύτην, to which the words καὶ τὰς ἄλλας are subordinated, for other states have not been spoken of, ‘Most of the causes which are wont to destroy this like other states, have been already mentioned.’ Or, if the emphasis on καὶ τὰς ἄλλας πολιτείας is retained, the reference is to the causes of the destruction of states in bk. v.

ἃ δὲ . . . εἴρηται. The connexion is, ‘But I need not speak of the causes which destroy states; for they have been already spoken of.’ For the absolute use of μα̂λλον cp. Plat. Phaedo 63 D, ϕησὶ γὰρ θερμαίνεσθαι μα̂λλον τοὺς διαλεγομένους.

ἅπαν γὰρ οἰκεɩ̂ον τον̂το τῳ̑ τοιούτῳ δήμῳ μα̂λλον.

The last word qualifies οἰκεɩ̂ον: ‘For all this admission of citizens is rather natural than alien to a democracy of this kind.’

ὅπερ συνέβη τη̂ς στάσεως αἴτιον γενέσθαι περὶ Κυρήνην.

ὅπερ = the violence of the democracy which was established after the overthrow of the royal power (Herod. iv. 161), about 460 or 450 b.c., and was extended at a somewhat later period in the history of Cyrene.

Κλεισθένης.

Cp. Hdt. v. 69, ὡς γὰρ δὴ τὸν Ἀθηναίων δη̂μον πρότερον ἀπωσμένον τότε πάντα (al. lect. πάντων) πρὸς τὴν ἑωυτον̂ μοɩ̂ραν προσεθήκατο, τὰς ϕυλὰς μετουνόμασε καὶ ἐποίησε πλεν̂νας ἐξ ἐλασσόνων. δέκα τε δὴ ϕυλάρχους ἀντὶ τεσσέρων ἐποίησε, δέκα δὲ καὶ τοὺς δήμους κατένεμε ἐς τὰς ϕυλάς.

Cp. Schömann’s Antiquities of Greece, Engl. Transl., p. 336.

The breaking up old divisions in an army and a state is not a mere change of names, but of traditions, customs, personal relations—to the ancients even of gods. The division of France into departments, the reorganisation of Italy and Germany, or, to take a minor instance, the recent redistribution of the English regiments, are modern examples of the manner in which such changes affect the habits of men or offend their prejudices.

ἔστι δ’ ἔργον . . . μέγιστον ἔργον.

The repetition of ἔργον is awkward; but the general style of the Politics is not sufficiently accurate to justify us in omitting the word in either place.

διὸ δεɩ̂, περὶ ὡ̑ν τεθεώρηται πρότερον, τίνες σωτηρίαι καὶ ϕθοραὶ τω̂ν πολιτειω̂ν, ἐκ τούτων πειρα̂σθαι κατασκευάζειν τὴν ἀσϕάλειαν.

διὸ because of the instability of states; the words περὶ ὡ̑ν τεθεώρηται πρότερον are either omitted or altered by those who change the order of the books.

The clause τίνες σωτηρίαι is the explanation of περὶ ὡ̑ν, and is resumed in ἐκ τούτων.

καὶ ϕερόντων πρὸς τὸ κοινόν.

These words are an explanation of τω̂ν καταδικαζομένων, ‘of those who are condemned, and so bring money into the public treasury,’ not voluntarily, but by the penalties which they incur.

Cp. Cleon in Aristoph. Knights (923):

• δώσεις ἐμοὶ καλὴν δίκην,
• ἰπούμενος ταɩ̂ς ἐσϕοραɩ̂ς.
• ἐγὼ γὰρ ἐς τοὺς πλουσίους
• σπεύσω σ’ ὅπως ἂν ἐγγραϕῃ̑ς.

δεɩ̂ ποιεɩ̂ν ὀλίγας ἐκκλησίας.

Cp. iv. 14. § 4.

ἀθρόα χρὴ διανέμειν τοɩ̂ς ἀπόροις, μάλιστα μέν, εἴ τις δύναται τοσον̂τον ἀθροίζων ὅσον εἰς γηδίου κτη̂σιν.

ὰθρόα, ‘in lump sums,’ opposed to the piecemeal method of doling out money which he had been describing above.

εἴ τις, indefinite ‘if we can only collect.’

δύναται, sc. ἀθρόα διανέμειν. The MSS. vary between ἀθροίζων and συναθροίζων. Bekker’s emendation ἀθροίζειν is unnecessary.

ἐν δὲ τούτῳ.

‘In the meantime,’ i.e. until the poor have all received their share they should be assisted by the rich, who should pay them for attending the assembly.

ἀϕιεμένους τω̂ν ματαίων λειτουργιω̂ν.

They being excused from those services which are useless. Cp. v. 8. § 20.

For Tarentum, see Müller’s Dorians (iii. 9. § 14), who suggests without any proof that the words κοινὰ ποιον̂ντες τὰ κτήματα refer only to the ager publicus. Compare ii. 5. § 8, where Aristotle describes the Lacedaemonians as using one another’s horses and dogs in common.

ἔστι δὲ τον̂το ποιη̂σαι καὶ τη̂ς αὐτη̂ς ἀρχη̂ς μερίζοντας, τοὺς μὲν κληρωτοὺς τοὺς δ’ αἱρετούς.

See note on text.

ἀρχη̂ς is a genitive of respect, assisted by μερίζειν. ‘Either there may be two sets of offices, filled up the one by lot and the other by vote, or the same office may be filled up sometimes by lot and sometimes by vote.’

τοὺς μὲν κληρωτούς, sc. ἄρχοντας. Either the accusative immediately follows ποιη̂σαι, or is in apposition with τον̂το; or some word like καθιστάντας is to be supplied from μερίζοντας.

The people of Tarentum elected to some of their offices by vote and to some by lot; the same result might have been attained if they had divided each office, and filled up the vacancies alternately by vote and by lot.

πω̂ς δεɩ̂ ϕανερὸν ἐκ τούτων.

With δεɩ̂, κατασκευάζειν from the previous sentence, or some similar word suitable to the construction, has to be supplied.

τὴν μὲν εὔκρατον μάλιστα τω̂ν ὀλιγαρχιω̂ν καὶ πρώτην.

With these words have to be supplied, though not therefore to be inserted in the text (Lambinus), πρὸς τὴν βελτίστην δημοκρατίαν καὶ πρώτην from the beginning of chap. 4.

ᾐ̑ δεɩ̂.

ᾐ̑ = ἐν ᾐ̑. ‘And in this.’

μετέχειν ἐξεɩ̂ναι,

sc. δεɩ̂.

τοσον̂τον εἰσαγομένου τον̂ δήμου πλη̂θος,

‘The people being introduced in such numbers.’ An accusative of measure. (Matth. G. G. 421. § 5.)

ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ μὲν σώματα εν̓̂ διακείμενα πρὸς ὑγίειαν καὶ πλοɩ̂α τὰ πρὸς ναυτιλίαν καλω̂ς ἔχοντα τοɩ̂ς πλωτη̂ρσιν ἐπιδέχεται πλείους ἁμαρτίας.

καλω̂ς ἔχοντα is taken in a double construction with τὰ πρὸς ναυτιλίαν and with πλωτη̂ρσι. Either (1)* ‘well furnished with sailors for navigation,’ or (2) ‘well furnished in respect of naval equipments for their sailors.’ τοɩ̂ς πλωτη̂ρσιν may also be construed with ἐπιδέχεται, ‘allow of more errors in their sailors.’ (1) is confirmed by the words which follow πλωτήρων τετυχηκότα ϕαύλων.

ἐπεὶ δὲ τέτταρα μέν ἐστι κ.τ.λ.

Interpreters correctly remark that the four kinds of military force have no connexion with the four classes of the people.

ἐνταν̂θα μὲν εὐϕυω̂ς ἔχει κ.τ.λ.

‘There nature favours the establishment of an oligarchy which will be strong,’ or ‘we may naturally expect to establish an oligarchy.’

ὅπου δ’ ὁπλίτην.

Sc. εἰ̂ναι συμβέβηκε understood from the previous words though with a slight change of meaning in the word εἰ̂ναι. It is not necessary to read 1) ὁπλɩ̂τιν with Bekker (in his second edition), or 2) ὁπλιτικὴν with Susemihl (on the authority of one MS. which reads ὁπλιτικὸν and the old translator who gives ‘armativam’).

The oligarchy find themselves outnumbered and overmatched by the light-armed troops. The remedy for this evil is to combine a light-armed force of their own with their cavalry and heavyarmed.

νν̂ν μὲν ον̓̂ν ὅπου τοιον̂τον πολὺ πλη̂θός ἐστιν, ὅταν διαστω̂σι, πολλάκις ἀγωνίζονται χείρω.

The change in the nominatives is observable, ‘When the two parties (πλη̂θος καὶ εὔποροι) fall out, the rich (εὔποροι) are often worsted in the struggle.’

ϕάρμακον . . . στρατηγω̂ν.

‘A remedy such as military commanders employ.’

ταύτῃ δ’ ἐπικρατον̂σιν.

The antecedent of ταύτῃ, ‘in this way,’ is not clear. It appears to mean (as we gather from the context) ‘by their superior flexibility’—sc. διὰ τὸ ψιλὴν τὴν δύναμιν εἰ̂ναι.

ἐκκεκριμένους δὲ ἐκ παίδων ἀθλητὰς εἰ̂ναι αὐτοὺς τω̂ν ἔργων.

Lit. ‘and that persons selected out of boys [thus trained] should themselves become actual light-armed warriors.’ The opposition of ἐκκεκριμένους δὲ to ἔτι μὲν ὄντας νέους implies that the persons selected had passed the stage of youth. For ἀθλητὰς τω̂ν ἔργων cp. Plat. Rep. viii. 543 B, ἀθλητὰς πολέμου.

ἐν Μασσαλίᾳ.

See note on v. 6. § 2.

κατασκευάζειν τι τω̂ν κοινω̂ν

should be taken generally of some permanent work, to erect some public building or monument.

τὰ λήμματα γὰρ ζητον̂σιν οὐχ ἡ̑ττον ἢ τὴν τιμήν.

Cp. Eth. viii. 16. § 3, οὐ γὰρ ἔστιν ἅμα χρηματίζεσθαι ἐκ τω̂ν κοινω̂ν καὶ τιμα̂σθαι.

The plan of this book, which is for the most part a repetition of Book iv., here abruptly breaks down. For though democracy and oligarchy are fully discussed, nothing is said of other forms of government, notwithstanding the intention expressed at the beginning of the book, c. 1. § 2, of considering ‘the modes of organisation proper to each form of government.’

πρω̂τον μὲν ον̓̂ν ἐπιμέλεια τω̂ν ἀναγκαίων ἡ περὶ τὴν ἀγοράν, ἐϕ’ ᾐ̑ δεɩ̂ τινὰ ἀρχὴν εἰ̂ναι τὴν ἐϕορω̂σαν περί τε τὰ συμβόλαια καὶ τὴν εὐκοσμίαν.

τω̂ν ἀναγκαίων, sc. 1) ἐπιμελειω̂ν; or *2) ἀρχω̂ν, cp. supra § 1, τω̂ν ἀναγκαίων ἀρχω̂ν.

μετὰ δὲ ταύτην ἐχομένη μὲν ἀναγκαιοτάτη δὲ σχεδὸν καὶ χαλεπωτάτη τω̂ν ἀρχω̂ν ἐστὶν ἡ περὶ τὰς πράξεις τω̂ν καταδικασθέντων καὶ τω̂ν προτιθεμένων κατὰ τὰς ἐγγραϕάς.

πράξεις is here used generally to include execution of sentences passed on criminals, and exaction of debts from public debtors.

τω̂ν προτιθεμένων appears to mean those whose names, having been first entered on the register as defaulters or criminals (κατὰ τὰς ἐγγραϕάς), are publicly posted up. Cp. infra § 10, περὶ τὰς προθέσεις τω̂ν ἀναγεγραμμένων: and Plato Laws 784 D where the incorrigible are to be written up (ἀναγεγραμμένοι) and deprived of citizenship.

καὶ πράξεων μὴ γιγνομένων,

sc. κοινωνεɩ̂ν ἀδύνατον ἀλλήλοις.

ἔτι δ’ ἔνια πράττεσθαι καὶ τὰς ἀρχὰς τάς τε ἄλλας καὶ τὰς τω̂ν νέων μα̂λλον τὰς νέας, καὶ τὰς τω̂ν ἐνεστώτων ἑτέρας καταδικασάσης ἑτέραν εἰ̂ναι τὴν πραττομένην, οἱ̑ον ἀστυνόμους τὰς παρὰ τω̂ν ἀγορανόμων, τὰς δὲ παρὰ τούτων ἑτέρους.

‘Moreover, in some cases, the magistrates too should execute the sentence; and there should be fresh magistrates to execute the sentences on fresh offences; but in the case of old or existing offences (τω̂ν ἐνεστώτων opposed to τω̂ν νέων) one magistrate should condemn, another should exact the penalty; for example, the wardens of the city should exact the fines imposed by the wardens of the agora.’

With τὰς τω̂ν νέων and τὰς τω̂ν ἐνεστώτων supply δίκας.

τὸ δὲ περὶ πάντων τοὺς αὐτοὺς πολεμίους πα̂σιν.

Sc. ποιεɩ̂ understood from ἀπέχθειαν ἔχει διπλη̂ν.

διὸ βέλτιον καὶ ταύτην χωρίζειν, καὶ τὸ σόϕισμα ζητεɩ̂ν καὶ περὶ ταύτην.

τὸ σόϕισμα, ‘the suitable or appropriate device.’ The correction τι σόϕισμα, which is supported by the expression ἐὰν μή τι σοϕίζωνται (ii. 5. § 19), is unnecessary and feeble. Such an idiomatic use of the article is not unknown in English: e. g. ‘to find out the way’ or ‘the proper way of making the office less unpopular.’

καὶ περὶ ταύτην, sc. τὴν ϕυλάττουσαν. ‘About this as well as the last case,’ i. e. the case of the jailor and the executioner, as well as of the judge and the executioner.

τοιαν̂ται δ’ εἰ̂εν αἵ τε περὶ τὴν ϕυλακὴν τη̂ς πόλεως, καὶ ὅσαι τάττονται πρὸς τὰς πολεμικὰς χρείας.

The optative here would seem to require ἄν, which is inserted by Bekker in his second edition, or εἰ̂εν may be altered into εἰ̂σι.

τὸ δὲ πα̂ν ἕν τι τούτων ἐστὶν εἰ̂δος ἐπιμελείας πολεμικω̂ν.

The order of the words is τὸ δὲ πα̂ν εἰ̂δος τούτων ἐστὶν ἕν τι εἰ̂δος ἐπιμελείας πολεμικω̂ν. Bekker, in his 2nd edition (after Lambinus), reads ἐπιμέλεια, a change which is unnecessary.

καὶ προσευθυνον̂σαν.

‘And which in addition audits them.’

ἡ γὰρ αὐτὴ πολλάκις ἔχει τὸ τέλος καὶ τὴν εἰσϕοράν.

The connexion proves that the latter words can only mean ‘the final ratification and the introduction of measures.’

ἐχομένη δὲ ταύτης ἡ πρὸς τὰς θυσίας ἀϕωρισμένη τὰς κοινὰς πάσας, ὅσας μὴ τοɩ̂ς ἱερεν̂σιν ἀποδίδωσιν ὁ νόμος, ἀλλ’ ἀπὸ τη̂ς κοινη̂ς ἑστίας ἔχουσι τὴν τιμήν.

Either 1)* the words ἐκείνοις ὅσοι, or 2) αἱ θυσίαι must be supplied before ἔχουσι.

Aristotle is opposing the priests, who perform the ordinary sacrifices assigned to them by law, to the great officers of state, who offer sacrifice at the public hearth of the city.

καλον̂σι δ’ οἱ μὲν ἄρχοντας κ.τ.λ.

Cp. iii. 14. § 13.

ἐπιλογισμούς.

Audits by the officers called λογισταί (cp. § 16). But it is hard to distinguish them from ἐξετάσεις since Aristotle (supra § 16) says that λογισταὶ and ἐξετασταὶ are only different names for the same officers.