Table Of Content

THE POLITICS OF ARISTOTLE THE POLITICS OF ARISTOTLE TRANSLATED WITH AN INTRODUCTION NOTES AND APPENDIXES BY ERNEST BARKER OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS London Oxford New York Library of Congress Catalogue Card Number: 58-11203 First published by the Clarendon Press, 1946 First issued as an Oxford University Press paperback, 1958 This reprint, 1977 Printed in the United States of America PREFACE The original intention of the translator, when he began work in 1940—on the suggestion, and with the encouragement, of Sir Richard Livingstone—was to produce a simple and possibly shortened version of the Politics for the benefit of English readers who were not versed in the classics but were interested in the general history of social and political theory. The original inten¬ tion has not been abandoned, but it has been partly modified and partly extended. It has been modified in the sense that any idea of shortening the Politics has been dropped. Aristotle is too pithy to be made still pithier. It is expansion, rather than contraction, which the text of the Politics demands. Little could profitably have been omitted: a shortened version would have been but little shorter, and yet would have been incomplete; and the translator respected the original too much to sacrifice even its minor details. (Minor details, after all, go to make the character, and to determine the influence, of any great book.) The Politics is therefore presented to the reader in extenso. The original intention has also been extended, and that in more than one way. In the first place it seemed desirable to illustrate the argument of the Politics by adding a translation of the various passages concerned with matters of politics which are to be found in the other writings of Aristotle—especially the Ethics, the Rhetoric, and the Constitution of Athens. This was the origin of the five appendixes at the end of the book, which attempt to complete and round off the review of political philosophy con¬ tained in the Politics itself, and thus to present the reader with a general conspectus of the whole body of Aristotle’s work in the field of political inquiry. In the second place the translator, who began his study of the Politics nearly half a century ago, and dealt with its argument in the first book which he published,1 was naturally moved, when the translation had been completed and revised, to add an introduction dealing with the life of Aris¬ totle, the place of the Politics in his system, the substance of its argument, and some problems of its vocabulary. The introduc¬ tion runs to some length; but its length may perhaps be excused by the plea that it is the last contribution which the writer can hope to make to the interpretation of the Politics. Was a new translation necessary ? The translator asked himself that question before he began his work; and he could only answer 1 The Political Thought of Plato and Aristotle, 1906. PREFACE IV (but his answer was inevitably partial) that it was. The Politics is a book which is needed—and needed in modern dress and a modern English idiom—by the ‘general reader’ of all the Anglo- Saxon world. It inspired the political thought of Aquinas: that in turn inspired Hooker: Hooker in turn helped to inspire Locke; and the thought of Locke, with all its ancestry, has largely inspired the general thought both of Britain and America in the realm of politics. More especially, the study of the Politics is a part of the curriculum in a hundred and more universities, not only in Britain and the United States, but also in the Dominions and India. Many—indeed, one may safely say, the great majority— of the students who attempt its study are students belonging to the faculties of modern history, or of modern philosophy, or of economics and politics, who have not been trained in the classics, and must therefore study the Politics in some sort of modern version. They need a version which is couched in a modern style (such as a writer would use to-day in treating of politics) and furnished with appropriate ‘helps to study’ which will bring its substance home to their minds. The translator, who was originally trained in the classics, but has spent most of his life in teaching students in the faculty of modern history, has accordingly drawn on his mixed experience in order to make a translation intended primarily to meet the needs of students of modern history, philosophy, and economics. This is not to say that he has not sought to translate the Greek text with as exact a scholarship as he could command, or that he has failed to re¬ member the needs of the student of classical languages or the student of ancient history. But he has designed the translation more par¬ ticularly for the service of the numerous students of social and political theory, in whatever faculty or department, who simply desire to study the Politics (along with Plato’s Republic) as the fountain-head of that theorv. Some technical details should also be added for the guidance of the reader, (i) The text from which the translation has been made is that of Newman’s edition,1 but the translator has also used the Teubner edition of Immisch.2 He would also add that he has checked his translation, again and again, with the revised version of Jowett’s translation in vol. x of the Oxford Translation of Aristotle. (2) The reader will find in the text of the translation a number of passages, marked by square brackets, which have been added by the translator in order to elucidate the course of the argument. They may seem numerous, and the frequent recur¬ rence of square brackets may confuse the eye of the reader. But 1 Oxford, 1887-1902. 2 Leipzig, 1909. PREFACE v no addition has been made to the text unless it seemed to be necessary for a full understanding of the argument; and scholarship demanded that any addition, however small, should be clearly marked. Every addition is simply, and only, designed to bring out clearly the ideas implied in the actual text; and there is no addition which is not based on the words of Aristotle himself or those of his commentators. (3) The titles given to each book (like the divisions and sub-titles within each book) are the work of the translator. But they are based on the authority of Aristotle;- and in many cases they are simply translations of the phrases which he uses in the text of the Politics, e.g., in referring back to the contents of a previous book. (The analysis which precedes each chapter is entirely the work of the translator, and has no other authority.) (4) The explanatory footnotes are, of course, the work of the translator. The longer notes have been placed at the end of the relevant chapter, with a heading to indicate their con¬ tents, in order not to disturb the page with an excess of annota¬ tion. (5) At the top of each left-hand page the reader will find a statement of the book, chapter, and sections translated on the two pages facing him; and at the top of each right-hand page he will find a similar statement of the column (or columns) and the lines of the original Greek text of the same two pages, as that text is printed in the large two-column Berlin edition of the works of Aristotle by Bekker (vol. II, 1831). The beginning of each column of the Greek text of the Berlin edition is marked in thick type at the relevant point in the body of the translation itself. It is the habit of classical scholars to cite passages in Aristotle’s works by the Berlin column and lines (as Plato’s dialogues are cited by the page and the lettered divisions of the page in the Stephanus edition of 1578); and the translator hopes that the indications given, on the top of each right-hand page and in the body of the text, will form a sufficient guide for the tracing of such citations. The translation has been a labour of love, and a permanent consolation of such leisure as was left to the writer, from the autumn of 1940 to the spring of 1945, among the anxieties and duties of war. It is a comfort, now that it is finished (perfectum in one sense, but in another imperfectum . . . nec absoluto simile), because it encourages a hope that something is here presented which may be of use to the students of the coming generation. For the wisdom of Aristotle grows on the mind as one ponders upon it; and the future will be all the better if it continues to digest his wisdom. Walter Burley, reputed a Fellow of Merton College, is said to VI PREFACE have dedicated a translation of the Politics (but was it, perhaps, a commentary ?) to Richard de Bury, the Bishop of Durham and the author of Philobiblon, about the year 1330, History repeats itself in an old country ; and six centuries later one who was some time a Fellow of Merton College presents again a work on the Politics, but presents it now to the Warden and Fellows of the College. It was Merton College which gave him the opportunity of a scholar’s life, when it elected him to a Prize Fellowship in Classics in 1898. (‘Surely that day’, as Ascham wrote in his Schoolmaster, referring to his own election to a fellowship at another college, in another university, over 350 years earlier, ‘was . . . Dies natalis to me for the whole foundation of the poor learning I have and of all the furtherance that hitherto elsewhere I have obtained.’) It was in the College that he learned to know F. H. Bradley, Harold Joachim, John Burnet, and A. E. Taylor: it was during the years which he spent in the College that he was introduced by Harold Joachim to the Aristotelian circle which met round Professor Bywater. Siquid haic libro insit boni, adscriptum sit CUSTODI ET SOCIIS COLLEGII MERTONENSIS E. B. 14 December ig45 NOTE The translator desires to record, with gratitude, the debt which he owes to Mr. A. E. Quene (sometime one of the principal regional medical officers of the Ministry of Health), who generously checked the references and cross-references in the original edition of 1946, and suggested a number of corrections and improvements which have been incorporated in the present printing. E. B. May K)4-8 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION I. THE HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF THE POLITICS . xi § i. The period down to 347 . . . . xii § 2. The period from 347 to 335 . . . . xiv § 3. The period after 335 ..... xix II. THE SCIENTIFIC BACKGROUND OF THE POLITICS . xxvii § 1. The personality of Aristotle and the characteristics of his approach to politics ..... xxvii § 2. The Aristotelian School in the Lyceum . . . xxxi § 3. The Aristotelian writings and their different styles . . xxxv § 4. The composition and structure of the Politics . . xxxvii (a) The different sections or ‘methods’ . . . xxxvii (b) The problem of the order of the books . . xxxix (c) The problem of the chronology of different sections of the Politics ...... xli III. THE SUBSTANCE AND ARGUMENT OF THE POLITICS xlvii § 1. The idea of the Polis ..... xlvii § 2. The natural character of the Polis .... xlviii § 3. The dominance of the Polis . . . . 1 § 4. The ideal Polis and the criticism of actual states . . lii § 5. Aristotle’s conception of law . . . . liv § 6. Aristotle’s theory of ‘economy’ and education . . lv § 7. The later history of Aristotle’s political theory . . lix IV. THE VOCABULARY OF THE POLITICS . . . lxiii § 1. The vocabulary of the conception of state . . . Ixiv § 2. The vocabulary of the conception of government . . lxvii § 3. The vocabulary of the conceptions of law and justice . Ixix § 4. Philosophical terms ..... lxxii § 5. Social and moral terms . lxxiii TRANSLATION OF ARISTOTLE’S POLITICS Note. The titles of the different books, the division of each book into parts, and the headings of these parts, are due solely to the translator. BOOK I. THE THEORY OF THE HOUSEHOLD . . 1 A. The political association, and its relation to other associations (cc. i-ii) ....... 1 B. The association of the household and its different factors (cc. iii-xiii) 8 1. The constituent elements of the household (c. iii) . . 8 2. Slavery (cc. iv-vii) . . . . .9 3. Property and the art of acquisition (cc. viii-xi) . .18 4. Marriage, parenthood, and the general management of the household (cc. xii-xiii) . . . . .32 vm CONTENTS BOOK II. REVIEW OF IDEAL STATES 39 A. Ideal states in theory (cc. i-viii) 3° 1. Plato’s Republic (cc. i-v) . 3 / 2. Plato’s Laws (c. vi) 5 ' 3. Phaleas of Chalcedon (c. vii) 62 4. Hippodamus of Miletus (c. viii) 68 B. Actual states which approach the ideal (cc. ix-xi 73 1. The Spartan constitution (c. ix) 73 2. The Cretan type of constitution (c. x) 80 3. The Carthaginian constitution (c. xi) 83 4. Postscript on other legislators (c. xii) 87 BOOK III. THE THEORY OF CITIZENSHIP AND CONSTITU¬ TIONS . . . . . . . .92 A. Citizenship (cc. i-v) . . . . . .92 B. Constitutions and their classification (cc. vi-viii) . . no C. The principles of oligarchy and democracy, and the nature of dis¬ tributive justice (cc. ix-xiii) . . . . .116 D. Kingship and its forms (cc. xiv-xviii) . . . .137 BOOK IV. ACTUAL CONSTITUTIONS AND THEIR VARIETIES 154 A. Introductory (cc. i-ii) . . . . .154 B. The varieties of the main types of constitution, especially de¬ mocracy, oligarchy, and ‘polity’ (cc. iii-x) . . .160 C. The type of constitution which is most generally practicable (c. xi) 179 D. What sort of constitution is desirable for what sort of civic body? (cc. xii-xiii) . . . . . .184 E. The methods of establishing constitutions, in relation to the three powers—deliberative, executive, and judicial (cc. xiv-xvi) . 188 BOOK V. CAUSES OF REVOLUTION AND CONSTITUTIONAL CHANGE ....... 203 A. The general causes of revolution and change in all types of constitu¬ tion (cc. i-iv) ...... 203 B. The particular causes of revolution and change in different types of constitution (cc. v-xii) . . . . .214 1. Democracies (c. v) . . . . .214 2. Oligarchies (c. vi) . . . . .217 3. Aristocracies (c. vii) . . . . .221 4. The methods of ensuring constitutional stability in the three previous types of constitution (cc. viii-ix) . . 224 5. Monarchies—including both kingships and tyrannies (cc. x- xii) ....... 235 BOOK VI. METPIODS OF CONSTRUCTING DEMOCRACIES AND OLIGARCHIES WITH A VIEW TO STABILITY . 255 A. The construction of democracies (cc. i-v) . . *255 B. The construction of oligarchies (cc. vi-viii) „ . , 270