BOOK V

Treatise on Government

by Aristotle

BOOK V, TREATISE ON GOVERNMENT by Aristotle




CHAPTER I


We have now gone through those particulars we proposed to speak of; it
remains that we next consider from what causes and how alterations in
government arise, and of what nature they are, and to what the
destruction of each state is owing; and also to what form any form of
polity is most likely to shift into, and what are the means to be used
for the general preservation of governments, as well as what are
applicable to any particular state; and also of the remedies which are
to be applied either to all in general, or to any one considered
separately, when they are in a state of corruption: and here we ought
first to lay down this principle, that there are many governments, all
of which approve of what is just and what is analogically equal; and
yet have failed from attaining thereunto, as we have already
mentioned; thus democracies have arisen from supposing that those who
are equal in one thing are so in every other circumstance; as, because
they are equal in liberty, they are equal in everything else; and
oligarchies, from supposing that those who are unequal in one thing
are unequal in all; that when men are so in point of fortune, that
inequality extends to everything else. Hence it follows, that those
who in some respects are equal with others think it right to endeavour
to partake of an equality with them in everything; and those who are
superior to others endeavour to get still more; and it is this more
which is the inequality: thus most states, though they have some
notion of what is just, yet are almost totally wrong; and, upon this
account, when either party has not that share in the administration
which answers to his expectations, he becomes seditious: but those who
of all others have the greatest right to be so are the last that are;
namely, those who excel in virtue; for they alone can be called
generally superior. There are, too, some persons of distinguished
families who, because they are so, disdain to be on an equality with
others, for those esteem themselves noble who boast of their
ancestors' merit and fortune: these, to speak truth, are the origin
and fountain from whence seditions arise. The alterations which men
may propose to make in governments are two; for either they may change
the state already established into some other, as when they propose to
erect an oligarchy where there is a democracy; or a democracy, or free
state, where there is an oligarchy, or an aristocracy from these, or
those from that; or else, when they have no objection to the
established government, which they like very well, but choose to have
the sole management in it themselves; either in the hands of a few or
one only. They will also raise commotions concerning the degree in
which they would have the established power; as if, for instance, the
government is an oligarchy, to have it more purely so, and in the same
manner if it is a democracy, or else to have it less so; and, in like
manner, whatever may be the nature of the government, either to extend
or contract its powers; or else to make some alterations in some parts
of it; as to establish or abolish a particular magistracy, as some
persons say Lysander endeavoured to abolish the kingly power in
Sparta; and Pausanias that of the ephori. Thus in Epidamnus there was
an alteration in one part of the constitution, for instead of the
philarchi they established a senate. It is also necessary for all the
magistrates at Athens; to attend in the court of the Helisea when any
new magistrate is created: the power of the archon also in that state
partakes of the nature of an oligarchy: inequality is always the
occasion of sedition, but not when those who are unequal are treated
in a different manner correspondent to that inequality. Thus kingly
power is unequal when exercised over equals. Upon the whole, those who
aim after an equality are the cause of seditions. Equality is twofold,
either in number or value. Equality in number is when two things
contain the same parts or the same quantity; equality in value is by
proportion as two exceeds one, and three two by the same number-thus
by proportion four exceeds two, and two one in the same degree, for
two is the same part of four that one is of two; that is to say, half.
Now, all agree in what is absolutely and simply just; but, as we have
already said they dispute concerning proportionate value; for some
persons, if they are equal in one respect, think themselves equal in
all; others, if they are superior in one thing, think they may claim
the superiority in all; from whence chiefly arise two sorts of
governments, a democracy and an oligarchy; for nobility and virtue are
to be found only [1302a] amongst a few; the contrary amongst the many;
there being in no place a hundred of the first to be met with, but
enough of the last everywhere. But to establish a government entirely
upon either of these equalities is wrong, and this the example of
those so established makes evident, for none of them have been stable;
and for this reason, that it is impossible that whatever is wrong at
the first and in its principles should not at last meet with a bad
end: for which reason in some things an equality of numbers ought to
take place, in others an equality in value. However, a democracy is
safer and less liable to sedition than an oligarchy; for in this
latter it may arise from two causes, for either the few in power may
conspire against each other or against the people; but in a democracy
only one; namely, against the few who aim at exclusive power; but
there is no instance worth speaking of, of a sedition of the people
against themselves. Moreover, a government composed of men of moderate
fortunes comes much nearer to a democracy than an oligarchy, and is
the safest of all such states.




CHAPTER II


Since we are inquiring into the causes of seditions and revolutions in
governments, we must begin entirely with the first principles from
whence they arise. Now these, so to speak, are nearly three in number;
which we must first distinguish in general from each other, and
endeavour to show in what situation people are who begin a sedition;
and for what causes; and thirdly, what are the beginnings of political
troubles and mutual quarrels with each other. Now that cause which of
all others most universally inclines men to desire to bring about a
change in government is that which I have already mentioned; for those
who aim at equality will be ever ready for sedition, if they see those
whom they esteem their equals possess more than they do, as well as
those also who are not content with equality but aim at superiority,
if they think that while they deserve more than, they have only equal
with, or less than, their inferiors. Now, what they aim at may be
either just or unjust; just, when those who are inferior are
seditious, that they may be equal; unjust, when those who are equal
are so, that they may be superior. These, then, are the situations in
which men will be seditious: the causes for which they will be so are
profit and honour; and their contrary: for, to avoid dishonour or loss
of fortune by mulcts, either on their own account or their friends,
they will raise a commotion in the state. The original causes which
dispose men to the things which I have mentioned are, taken in one
manner, seven in number, in another they are more; two of which are
the same with those that have been already mentioned: but influencing
in a different manner; for profit and honour sharpen men against each
other; not to get the possession of them for themselves (which was
what I just now supposed), but when they see others, some justly,
others [1302b] unjustly, engrossing them. The other causes are
haughtiness, fear, eminence, contempt, disproportionate increase in
some part of the state. There are also other things which in a
different manner will occasion revolutions in governments; as election
intrigues, neglect, want of numbers, a too great dissimilarity of
circumstances.




CHAPTER III


What influence ill-treatment and profit have for this purpose, and how
they may be the causes of sedition, is almost self-evident; for when
the magistrates are haughty and endeavour to make greater profits than
their office gives them, they not only occasion seditions amongst each
other, but against the state also who gave them their power; and this
their avarice has two objects, either private property or the property
of the state. What influence honours have, and how they may occasion
sedition, is evident enough; for those who are themselves unhonoured
while they see others honoured, will be ready for any disturbance: and
these things are done unjustly when any one is either honoured or
discarded contrary to their deserts, justly when they are according to
them. Excessive honours are also a cause of sedition when one person
or more are greater than the state and the power of the government can
permit; for then a monarchy or a dynasty is usually established: on
which account the ostracism was introduced in some places, as at Argos
and Athens: though it is better to guard against such excesses in the
founding of a state, than when they have been permitted to take place,
to correct them afterward. Those who have been guilty of crimes will
be the cause of sedition, through fear of punishment; as will those
also who expect an injury, that they may prevent it; as was the case
at Rhodes, when the nobles conspired against the people on account of
the decrees they expected would pass against them. Contempt also is a
cause of sedition and conspiracies; as in oligarchies, where there are
many who have no share in the administration. The rich also even in
democracies, despising the disorder and anarchy which will arise, hope
to better themselves by the same means which happened at Thebes after
the battle of Oenophyta, where, in consequence of bad administration,
the democracy was destroyed; as it was at Megara, where the power of
the people was lost through anarchy and disorder; the same thing
happened at Syracuse before the tyranny of Gelon; and at Rhodes there
was the same sedition before the popular government was overthrown.
Revolutions in state will also arise from a disproportionate increase;
for as the body consists of many parts, it ought to increase
proportion-ably to preserve its symmetry, which would otherwise be
destroyed; as if the foot was to be four cubits long, and the rest of
the body but two palms; it might otherwise [1303a] be changed into an
animal of a different form, if it increase beyond proportion not only
in quantity, but also in disposition of parts; so also a city consists
of parts, some of which may often increase without notice, as the
number of poor in democracies and free states. They will also
sometimes happen by accident, as at Tarentum, a little after the
Median war, where so many of the nobles were killed in a battle by the
lapygi, that from a free state the government was turned into a
democracy; and at Argos, where so many of the citizens were killed by
Cleomenes the Spartan, that they were obliged to admit several
husbandmen to the freedom of the state: and at Athens, through the
unfortunate event of the infantry battles, the number of the nobles
was reduced by the soldiers being chosen from the list of citizens in
the Lacedaemonian wars. Revolutions also sometimes take place in a
democracy, though seldomer; for where the rich grow numerous or
properties increase, they become oligarchies or dynasties. Governments
also sometimes alter without seditions by a combination of the meaner
people; as at Hersea: for which purpose they changed the mode of
election from votes to lots, and thus got themselves chosen: and by
negligence, as when the citizens admit those who are not friends to
the constitution into the chief offices of the state, which happened
at Orus, when the oligarchy of the archons was put an end to at the
election of Heracleodorus, who changed that form of government into a
democratic free state. By little and little, I mean by this, that very
often great alterations silently take place in the form of government
from people's overlooking small matters; as at Ambracia, where the
census was originally small, but at last became nothing at all, as if
a little and nothing at all were nearly or entirely alike. That state
also is liable to seditions which is composed of different nations,
till their differences are blended together and undistinguishable; for
as a city cannot be composed of every multitude, so neither can it in
every given time; for which reason all those republics which have
hitherto been originally composed of different people or afterwards
admitted their neighbours to the freedom of their city, have been most
liable to revolutions; as when the Achaeans joined with the
Traezenians in founding Sybaris; for soon after, growing more powerful
than the Traezenians, they expelled them from the city; from whence
came the proverb of Sybarite wickedness: and again, disputes from a
like cause happened at Thurium between the Sybarites and those who had
joined with them in building the city; for they assuming upon these,
on account of the country being their own, were driven out. And at
Byzantium the new citizens, being detected in plots against the state,
were driven out of the city by force of arms. The Antisseans also,
having taken in those who were banished from Chios, afterwards did the
same thing; and also the Zancleans, after having taken in the people
of Samos. The Appolloniats, in the Euxine Sea, having admitted their
sojourners to the freedom of their city, were troubled with seditions:
and the Syracusians, after the expulsion of their tyrants, having
enrolled [1303b] strangers and mercenaries amongst their citizens,
quarrelled with each other and came to an open rupture: and the people
of Amphipolis, having taken in a colony of Chalcidians, were the
greater part of them driven out of the city by them. Many persons
occasion seditions in oligarchies because they think themselves
ill-used in not sharing the honours of the state with their equals, as
I have already mentioned; but in democracies the principal people do
the same because they have not more than an equal share with others
who are not equal to them. The situation of the place will also
sometimes occasion disturbances in the state when the ground is not
well adapted for one city; as at Clazomene, where the people who lived
in that part of the town called Chytrum quarrelled with them who lived
in the island, and the Colophonians with the Notians. At Athens too
the disposition of the citizens is not the same, for those who live in
the Piraeus are more attached to a popular government than those who
live in the city properly so called; for as the interposition of a
rivulet, however small, will occasion the line of the phalanx to
fluctuate, so any trifling disagreement will be the cause of
seditions; but they will not so soon flow from anything else as from
the disagreement between virtue and vice, and next to that between
poverty and riches, and so on in order, one cause having more
influence than another; one of which that I last mentioned.




CHAPTER IV


But seditions in government do not arise for little things, but from
them; for their immediate cause is something of moment. Now, trifling
quarrels are attended with the greatest consequences when they arise
between persons of the first distinction in the state, as was the case
with the Syracusians in a remote period; for a revolution in the
government was brought about by a quarrel between two young men who
were in office, upon a love affair; for one of them being absent, the
other seduced his mistress; he in his turn, offended with this,
persuaded his friend's wife to come and live with him; and upon this
the whole city took part either with the one or the other, and the
government was overturned: therefore every one at the beginning of
such disputes ought to take care to avoid the consequences; and to
smother up all quarrels which may happen to arise amongst those in
power, for the mischief lies in the beginning; for the beginning is
said to be half of the business, so that what was then but a little
fault will be found afterwards to bear its full proportion to what
follows. Moreover, disputes between men of note involve the whole city
in their consequences; in Hestiaea, after the Median war: two brothers
having a dispute about their paternal estate; he who was the poorer,
from the other's having concealed part of the effects, and some money
which his father had found, engaged the popular party on his side,
while the other, who was rich, the men of fashion. And at Delphos,
[1304a] a quarrel about a wedding was the beginning of all the
seditions that afterwards arose amongst them; for the bridegroom,
being terrified by some unlucky omen upon waiting upon the bride, went
away without marrying her; which her relations resenting, contrived
secretly to convey some sacred money into his pocket while he was
sacrificing, and then killed him as an impious person. At Mitylene
also, a dispute, which arose concerning a right of heritage, was the
beginning of great evils, and a war with the Athenians, in which
Paches took their city, for Timophanes, a man of fortune, leaving two
daughters, Doxander, who was circumvented in procuring them in
marriage for his two sons, began a sedition, and excited the Athenians
to attack them, being the host of that state. There was also a dispute
at Phocea, concerning a right of inheritance, between Mnasis, the
father of Mnasis, and Euthucrates, the father of Onomarchus, which
brought on the Phoceans the sacred war. The government too of
Epidamnus was changed from a quarrel that arose from an intended
marriage; for a certain man having contracted his daughter in
marriage, the father of the young person to whom she was contracted,
being archon, punishes him, upon which account he, resenting the
affront, associated himself with those who were excluded from any
share in the government, and brought about a revolution. A government
may be changed either into an oligarchy, democracy, or a free state;
when the magistrates, or any part of the city acquire great credit, or
are increased in power, as the court of Areopagus at Athens, having
procured great credit during the Median war, added firmness to their
administration; and, on the other hand, the maritime force, composed
of the commonalty, having gained the victory at Salamis, by their
power at sea, got the lead in the state, and strengthened the popular
party: and at Argos, the nobles, having gained great credit by the
battle of Mantinea against the Lacedaemonians, endeavoured to dissolve
the democracy. And at Syracuse, the victory in their war with the
Athenians being owing to the common people, they changed their free
state into a democracy: and at Chalcis, the people having taken off
the tyrant Phocis, together with the nobles, immediately seized the
government: and at Ambracia also the people, having expelled the
tyrant Periander, with his party, placed the supreme power in
themselves. And this in general ought to be known, that whosoever has
been the occasion of a state being powerful, whether private persons,
or magistrates, a certain tribe, or any particular part of the
citizens, or the multitude, be they who they will, will be the cause
of disputes in the state. For either some persons, who envy them the
honours they have acquired, will begin to be seditious, or they, on
account of the dignity they have acquired, will not be content with
their former equality. A state is also liable to commotions when those
parts of it which seem to be opposite to each other approach to an
[1304b] equality, as the rich and the common people; so that the part
which is between them both is either nothing at all, or too little to
be noticed; for if one party is so much more powerful than the other,
as to be evidently stronger, that other will not be willing to hazard
the danger: for which reason those who are superior in excellence and
virtue will never be the cause of seditions; for they will be too few
for that purpose when compared to the many. In general, the beginning
and the causes of seditions in all states are such as I have now
described, and revolutions therein are brought about in two ways,
either by violence or fraud: if by violence, either at first by
compelling them to submit to the change when it is made. It may also
be brought about by fraud in two different ways, either when the
people, being at first deceived, willingly consent to an alteration in
their government, and are afterwards obliged by force to abide by it:
as, for instance, when the four hundred imposed upon the people by
telling them that the king of Persia would supply them with money for
the war against the Lacedaemonians; and after they had been guilty of
this falsity, they endeavoured to keep possession of the supreme
power; or when they are at first persuaded and afterwards consent to
be governed: and by one of these methods which I have mentioned are
all revolutions in governments brought about.




CHAPTER V


We ought now to inquire into those events which will arise from these
causes in every species of government. Democracies will be most
subject to revolutions from the dishonesty of their demagogues; for
partly, by informing against men of property, they induce them to join
together through self-defence, for a common fear will make the
greatest enemies unite; and partly by setting the common people
against them: and this is what any one may continually see practised
in many states. In the island of Cos, for instance, the democracy was
subverted by the wickedness of the demagogues, for the nobles entered
into a combination with each other. And at Rhodes the demagogues, by
distributing of bribes, prevented the people from paying the
trierarchs what was owing to them, who were obliged by the number of
actions they were harassed with to conspire together and destroy the
popular state. The same thing was brought about at Heraclea, soon
after the settlement of the city, by the same persons; for the
citizens of note, being ill treated by them, quitted the city, but
afterwards joining together they returned and overthrew the popular
state. Just in the same manner the democracy was destroyed in Megara;
for there the demagogues, to procure money by confiscations, drove out
the nobles, till the number of those who were banished was
considerable, who, [1305a] returning, got the better of the people in
a battle, and established an oligarchy. The like happened at Cume,
during the time of the democracy, which Thrasymachus destroyed; and
whoever considers what has happened in other states may perceive the
same revolutions to have arisen from the same causes. The demagogues,
to curry favour with the people, drive the nobles to conspire
together, either by dividing their estates, or obliging them to spend
them on public services, or by banishing them, that they may
confiscate the fortunes of the wealthy. In former times, when the same
person was both demagogue and general, the democracies were changed
into tyrannies; and indeed most of the ancient tyrannies arose from
those states: a reason for which then subsisted, but not now; for at
that time the demagogues were of the soldiery; for they were not then
powerful by their eloquence; but, now the art of oratory is
cultivated, the able speakers are at present the demagogues; but, as
they are unqualified to act in a military capacity, they cannot impose
themselves on the people as tyrants, if we except in one or two
trifling instances. Formerly, too, tyrannies were more common than
now, on account of the very extensive powers with which some
magistrates were entrusted: as the prytanes at Miletus; for they were
supreme in many things of the last consequence; and also because at
that time the cities were not of that very great extent, the people in
general living in the country, and being employed in husbandry, which
gave them, who took the lead in public affairs, an opportunity, if
they had a turn for war, to make themselves tyrants; which they all
did when they had gained the confidence of the people; and this
confidence was their hatred to the rich. This was the case of
Pisistratus at Athens, when he opposed the Pediaci: and of Theagenes
in Megara, who slaughtered the cattle belonging to the rich, after he
had seized those who kept them by the riverside. Dionysius also, for
accusing Daphnseus and the rich, was thought worthy of being raised to
a tyranny, from the confidence which the people had of his being a
popular man in consequence of these enmities. A government shall also
alter from its ancient and approved democratic form into one entirely
new, if there is no census to regulate the election of magistrates;
for, as the election is with the people, the demagogues who are
desirous of being in office, to flatter them, will endeavour with all
their power to make the people superior even to the laws. To prevent
this entirely, or at least in a great measure, the magistrates should
be elected by the tribes, and not by the people at large. These are
nearly the revolutions to which democracies are liable, and also the
causes from whence they arise.




CHAPTER VI


There are two things which of all others most evidently occasion a
revolution in an oligarchy; one is, when the people are ill used, for
then every individual is ripe for [1305b] sedition; more particularly
if one of the oligarchy should happen to be their leader; as Lygdamis,
at Naxus, who was afterwards tyrant of that island. Seditions also
which arise from different causes will differ from each other; for
sometimes a revolution is brought about by the rich who have no share
in the administration, which is in the hands of a very few indeed: and
this happened at Massilia, Ister, Heraclea, and other cities; for
those who had no share in the government ceased not to raise disputes
till they were admitted to it: first the elder brothers, and then the
younger also: for in some places the father and son are never in
office at the same time; in others the elder and younger brother: and
where this is observed the oligarchy partakes something of a free
state. At Ister it was changed into a democracy; in Heraclea, instead
of being in the hands of a few, it consisted of six hundred. At Cnidus
the oligarchy was destroyed by the nobles quarrelling with each other,
because the government was in the hands of so few: for there, as we
have just mentioned, if the father was in office, the son could not;
or, if there were many brothers, the eldest only; for the people,
taking advantage of their disputes, elected one of the nobles for
their general, and got the victory: for where there are seditions
government is weak. And formerly at Erithria, during the oligarchy of
the Basilides, although the state flourished greatly under their
excellent management, yet because the people were displeased that the
power should be in the hands of so few, they changed the government.
Oligarchies also are subject to revolutions, from those who are in
office therein, from the quarrels of the demagogues with each other.
The demagogues are of two sorts; one who flatter the few when they are
in power: for even these have their demagogues; such was Charicles at
Athens, who had great influence over the thirty; and, in the same
manner, Phrynichus over the four hundred. The others are those
demagogues who have a share in the oligarchy, and flatter the people:
such were the state-guardians at Larissa, who flattered the people
because they were elected by them. And this will always happen in
every oligarchy where the magistrates do not elect themselves, but are
chosen out of men either of great fortune or certain ranks, by the
soldiers or by the people; as was the custom at Abydos. And when the
judicial department is not in the hands of the supreme power, the
demagogues, favouring the people in their causes, overturn the
government; which happened at Heraclea in Pontus: and also when some
desire to contract the power of the oligarchy into fewer hands; for
those who endeavour to support an equality are obliged to apply to the
people for assistance. An oligarchy is also subject to revolutions
when the nobility spend their fortunes by luxury; for such persons are
desirous of innovations, and either endeavour to be tyrants themselves
or to support others in being so, as [1306a] Hypparinus supported
Dionysius of Syracuse. And at Amphipolis one Cleotimus collected a
colony of Chal-cidians, and when they came set them to quarrel with
the rich: and at AEgina a certain person who brought an action against
Chares attempted on that account to alter the government. Sometimes
they will try to raise commotions, sometimes they will rob the public,
and then quarrel with each other, or else fight with those who
endeavour to detect them; which was the case at Apollonia in Pontus.
But if the members of an oligarchy agree among themselves the state is
not very easily destroyed without some external force. Pharsalus is a
proof of this, where, though the place is small, yet the citizens have
great power, from the prudent use they make of it. An oligarchy also
will be destroyed when they create another oligarchy under it; that
is, when the management of public affairs is in the hands of a few,
and not equally, but when all of them do not partake of the supreme
power, as happened once at Elis, where the supreme power in general
was in the hands of a very few out of whom a senate was chosen,
consisting but of ninety' who held their places for life; and their
mode of election was calculated to preserve the power amongst each
other's families, like the senators at Lacedaemon. An oligarchy is
liable to a revolution both in time of war and peace; in war, because
through a distrust in the citizens the government is obliged to employ
mercenary troops, and he to whom they give the command of the army
will very often assume the tyranny, as Timophanes did at Corinth; and
if they appoint more than one general, they will very probably
establish a dynasty: and sometimes, through fear of this, they are
forced to let the people in general have some share in the government,
because they are obliged to employ them. In peace, from their want of
confidence in each other, they will entrust the guardianship of the
state to mercenaries and their general, who will be an arbiter between
them, and sometimes become master of both, which happened at Larissa,
when Simos and the Aleuadae had the chief power. The same thing
happened at Abydos, during the time of the political clubs, of which
Iphiades' was one. Commotions also will happen in an oligarchy from
one party's overbearing and insulting another, or from their
quarrelling about their law-suits or marriages. How their marriages,
for instance, will have that effect has been already shown: and in
Eretria, Diagoras destroyed the oligarchy of the knights upon the same
account. A sedition also arose at Heraclea, from a certain person
being condemned by the court; and at Thebes, in consequence of a man's
being guilty of adultery; [1306b] the punishment indeed which Eurytion
suffered at Heraclea was just, yet it was illegally executed: as was
that at Thebes upon Archias; for their enemies endeavoured to have
them publicly bound in the pillory. Many revolutions also have been
brought about in oligarchies by those who could not brook the
despotism which those persons assumed who were in power, as at Cnidus
and Chios. Changes also may happen by accident in what we call a free
state and in an oligarchy; wheresoever the senators, judges, and
magistrates are chosen according to a certain census; for it often
happens that the highest census is fixed at first; so that a few only
could have a share in the government, in an oligarchy, or in a free
state those of moderate fortunes only; when the city grows rich,
through peace or some other happy cause, it becomes so little that
every one's fortune is equal to the census, so that the whole
community may partake of all the honours of government; and this
change sometimes happens by little and little, and insensible
approaches, sometimes quicker. These are the revolutions and seditions
that arise in oligarchies, and the causes to which they are owing: and
indeed both democracies and oligarchies sometimes alter, not into
governments of a contrary form, but into those of the same government;
as, for instance, from having the supreme power in the law to vest it
in the ruling party, or the contrariwise.




CHAPTER VII


Commotions also arise in aristocracies, from there being so few
persons in power (as we have already observed they do in oligarchies,
for in this particular an aristocracy is most near an oligarchy, for
in both these states the administration of public affairs is in the
hands of a few; not that this arises from the same cause in both,
though herein they chiefly seem alike): and these will necessarily be
most likely to happen when the generality of the people are
high-spirited and think themselves equal to each other in merit; such
were those at Lacedasmon, called the Partheniae (for these were, as
well as others, descendants of citizens), who being detected in a
conspiracy against the state, were sent to found Tarentum. They will
happen also when some great men are disgraced by those who have
received higher honours than themselves, to whom they are no ways
inferior in abilities, as Lysander by the kings: or when an ambitious
man cannot get into power, as Cinadon, who, in the reign of Agesilaus,
was chief in a conspiracy against the Spartans: and also when some are
too poor and others too rich, which will most frequently happen in
time of war; as at Lacedaemon during the Messenian war, which is
proved by a poem of Tyrtaeus, [1307a] called "Eunomia;" for some
persons being reduced thereby, desired that the lands might be
divided: and also when some person of very high rank might still be
higher if he could rule alone, which seemed to be Pausanias's
intention at Lacedaemon, when he was their general in the Median war,
and Anno's at Carthage. But free states and aristocracies are mostly
destroyed from want of a fixed administration of public affairs; the
cause of which evil arises at first from want of a due mixture of the
democratic and the oligarchic parts in a free state; and in an
aristocracy from the same causes, and also from virtue not being
properly joined to power; but chiefly from the two first, I mean the
undue mixture of the democratic and oligarchic parts; for these two
are what all free states endeavour to blend together, and many of
those which we call aristocracies, in this particular these states
differ from each other, and on this account the one of them is less
stable than the other, for that state which inclines most to an
oligarchy is called an aristocracy, and that which inclines most to a
democracy is called a free state; on which account this latter is more
secure than the former, for the wider the foundation the securer the
building, and it is ever best to live where equality prevails. But the
rich, if the community gives them rank, very often endeavour to insult
and tyrannise over others. On the whole, whichever way a government
inclines, in that it will settle, each party supporting their own.
Thus a free state will become a democracy; an aristocracy an
oligarchy; or the contrary, an aristocracy may change into a democracy
(for the poor, if they think themselves injured, directly take part
with the contrary side) and a free state into an oligarchy. The only
firm state is that where every one enjoys that equality he has a right
to and fully possesses what is his own. And what I have been speaking
of happened to the Thurians; for the magistrates being elected
according to a very high census, it was altered to a lower, and they
were subdivided into more courts, but in consequence of the nobles
possessing all the land, contrary to law; the state was too much of an
oligarchy, which gave them an opportunity of encroaching greatly on
the rest of the people; but these, after they had been well inured to
war, so far got the better of their guards as to expel every one out
of the country who possessed more than he ought. Moreover, as all
aristocracies are free oligarchies, the nobles therein endeavour to
have rather too much power, as at Lace-daemon, where property is now
in the hands of a few, and the nobles have too much liberty to do as
they please and make such alliances as they please. Thus the city of
the Locrians was ruined from an alliance with Dionysius; which state
was neither a democracy nor well-tempered aristocracy. But an
aristocracy chiefly approaches to a secret change by its being
destroyed by degrees, as we [1307b] have already said of all
governments in general; and this happens from the cause of the
alteration being trifling; for whenever anything which in the least
regards the state is treated with contempt, after that something else,
and this of a little more consequence, will be more easily altered,
until the whole fabric of government is entirely subverted, which
happened in the government of Thurium; for the law being that they
should continue soldiers for five years, some young men of a martial
disposition, who were in great esteem amongst their officers,
despising those who had the management of public affairs, and
imagining they could easily accomplish their intention, first
endeavoured to abolish this law, with a view of having it lawful to
continue the same person perpetually in the military, perceiving that
the people would readily appoint them. Upon this, the magistrates who
are called counsellers first joined together with an intention to
oppose it but were afterwards induced to agree to it, from a belief
that if that law was not repealed they would permit the management of
all other public affairs to remain in their hands; but afterwards,
when they endeavoured to restrain some fresh alterations that were
making, they found that they could do nothing, for the whole form of
government was altered into a dynasty of those who first introduced
the innovations. In short, all governments are liable to be destroyed
either from within or from without; from without when they have for
their neighbour a state whose policy is contrary to theirs, and indeed
if it has great power the same thing will happen if it is not their
neighbour; of which both the Athenians and the Lacedaemonians are a
proof; for the one, when conquerors everywhere destroyed the
oligarchies; the other the democracies. These are the chief causes of
revolutions and dissensions in governments.




CHAPTER VIII


We are now to consider upon what the preservation of governments in
general and of each state in particular depends; and, in the first
place, it is evident that if we are right in the causes we have
assigned for their destruction, we know also the means of their
preservation; for things contrary produce contraries: but destruction
and preservation are contrary to each other. In well-tempered
governments it requires as much care as anything whatsoever, that
nothing be done contrary to law: and this ought chiefly to be attended
to in matters of small consequence; for an illegality that approaches
insensibly, approaches secretly, as in a family small expenses
continually repeated consume a man's income; for the understanding is
deceived thereby, as by this false argument; if every part is little,
then the whole is little: now, this in one sense is true, in another
is false, for the whole and all the parts together are large, though
made up of small parts. The first therefore of anything is what the
state ought to guard against. In the next place, no credit ought to be
given to those who endeavour to deceive the people with false
pretences; for they will be [1308a] confuted by facts. The different
ways in which they will attempt to do this have been already
mentioned. You may often perceive both aristocracies and oligarchies
continuing firm, not from the stability of their forms of government,
but from the wise conduct of the magistrates, both towards those who
have a part in the management of public affairs, and those also who
have not: towards those who have not, by never injuring them; and also
introducing those who are of most consequence amongst them into
office; nor disgracing those who are desirous of honour; or
encroaching on the property of individuals; towards those who have, by
behaving to each other upon an equality; for that equality which the
favourers of a democracy desire to have established in the state is
not only just, but convenient also, amongst those who are of the same
rank: for which reason, if the administration is in the hands of many,
those rules which are established in democracies will be very useful;
as to let no one continue in office longer than six months: that all
those who are of the same rank may have their turn; for between these
there is a sort of democracy: for which reason demagogues are most
likely to arise up amongst them, as we have already mentioned:
besides, by this means both aristocracies and democracies will be the
less liable to be corrupted into dynasties, because it will not be so
easy for those who are magistrates for a little to do as much mischief
as they could in a long time: for it is from hence that tyrannies
arise in democracies and oligarchies; for either those who are most
powerful in each state establish a tyranny, as the demagogues in the
one, the dynasties in the other, or the chief magistrates who have
been long in power. Governments are sometimes preserved not only by
having the means of their corruption at a great distance, but also by
its being very near them; for those who are alarmed at some impending
evil keep a stricter hand over the state; for which reason it is
necessary for those who have the guardianship of the constitution to
be able to awaken the fears of the people, that they may preserve it,
and not like a night-guard to be remiss in protecting the state, but
to make the distant danger appear at hand. Great care ought also to be
used to endeavour to restrain the quarrels and disputes of the nobles
by laws, as well as to prevent those who are not already engaged in
them from taking a part therein; for to perceive an evil at its very
first approach is not the lot of every one, but of the politician. To
prevent any alteration taking place in an oligarchy or free state on
account of the census, if that happens to continue the same while the
quantity of money is increased, it will be useful to take a general
account of the whole amount of it in former times, to compare it with
the present, and to do this every year in those cities where the
census is yearly, [1308b] in larger communities once in three or five
years; and if the whole should be found much larger or much less than
it was at the time when the census was first established in the state,
let there be a law either to extend or contract it, doing both these
according to its increase or decrease; if it increases making the
census larger, if it decreases smaller: and if this latter is not done
in oligarchies and free states, you will have a dynasty arise in the
one, an oligarchy in the other: if the former is not, free states will
be changed into democracies, and oligarchies into free states or
democracies. It is a general maxim in democracies, oligarchies,
monarchies, and indeed in all governments, not to let any one acquire
a rank far superior to the rest of the community, but rather to
endeavour to confer moderate honours for a continuance than great ones
for a short time; for these latter spoil men, for it is not every one
who can bear prosperity: but if this rule is not observed, let not
those honours which were conferred all at once be all at once taken
away, but rather by degrees. But, above all things, let this
regulation be made by the law, that no one shall have too much power,
either by means of his fortune or friends; but if he has, for his
excess therein, let it be contrived that he shall quit the country.
Now, as many persons promote innovations, that they may enjoy their
own particular manner of living, there ought to be a particular
officer to inspect the manners of every one, and see that these are
not contrary to the genius of the state in which he lives, whether it
may be an oligarchy, a democracy, or any other form of government;
and, for the same reason, those should be guarded against who are most
prosperous in the city: the means of doing which is by appointing
those who are otherwise to the business and the offices of the state.
I mean, to oppose men of account to the common people, the poor to the
rich, and to blend both these into one body, and to increase the
numbers of those who are in the middle rank; and this will prevent
those seditions which arise from an inequality of condition. But above
all, in every state it is necessary, both by the laws and every other
method possible, to prevent those who are employed by the public from
being venal, and this particularly in an oligarchy; for then the
people will not be so much displeased from seeing themselves excluded
from a share in the government (nay, they will rather be glad to have
leisure to attend their private affairs) as at suspecting that the
officers of the state steal the public money, then indeed they are
afflicted with double concern, both because they are deprived of the
honours of the state, and pillaged by those who enjoy them. There is
one method of blending together a democracy and an aristocracy,
[1309a] if office brought no profit; by which means both the rich and
the poor will enjoy what they desire; for to admit all to a share in
the government is democratical; that the rich should be in office is
aristocratical. This must be done by letting no public employment
whatsoever be attended with any emolument; for the poor will not
desire to be in office when they can get nothing by it, but had rather
attend to their own affairs: but the rich will choose it, as they want
nothing of the community. Thus the poor will increase their fortunes
by being wholly employed in their own concerns; and the principal part
of the people will not be governed by the lower sort. To prevent the
exchequer from being defrauded, let all public money be delivered out
openly in the face of the whole city, and let copies of the accounts
be deposited in the different wards tribes, and divisions. But, as the
magistrates are to execute their offices without any advantages, the
law ought to provide proper honours for those who execute them well.
In democracies also it is necessary that the rich should be protected,
by not permitting their lands to be divided, nor even the produce of
them, which in some states is done unperceivably. It would be also
better if the people would prevent them when they offer to exhibit a
number of unnecessary and yet expensive public entertainments of
plays, music, processions, and the like. In an oligarchy it is
necessary to take great care of the poor, and allot them public
employments which are gainful; and, if any of the rich insult them, to
let their punishment be severer than if they insulted one of their own
rank; and to let estates pass by affinity, and not gift: nor to permit
any person to have more than one; for by this means property will be
more equally divided, and the greater part of the poor get into better
circumstances. It is also serviceable in a democracy and an oligarchy
to allot those who take no part in public affairs an equality or a
preference in other things; the rich in a democracy, to the poor in an
oligarchy: but still all the principal offices in the state to be
filled only by those who are best qualified to discharge them.




CHAPTER IX


There are three qualifications necessary for those who fill the first
departments in government; first of all, an affection for the
established constitution; second place, abilities every way completely
equal to the business of their office; in the third, virtue and
justice correspondent to the nature of that particular state they are
placed in; for if justice is not the same in all states, it is evident
that there must be different species thereof. There may be some doubt,
when all these qualifications do not in the same persons, in what
manner the choice shall be made; as for instance, suppose that one
person is an accomplished general, but a bad man and no friend to the
[1309b] constitution; another is just and a friend to it, which shall
one prefer? we should then consider of two qualities, which of them
the generality possess in a greater degree, which in a less; for which
reason in the choice of a general we should regard his courage more
than his virtue as the more uncommon quality; as there are fewer
capable of conducting an army than there are good men: but, to protect
the state or manage the finances, the contrary rule should be
followed; for these require greater virtue than the generality are
possessed of, but only that knowledge which is common to all. It may
be asked, if a man has abilities equal to his appointment in the
state, and is affectionate to the constitution, what occasion is there
for being virtuous, since these two things alone are sufficient to
enable him to be useful to the public? it is, because those who
possess those qualities are often deficient in prudence; for, as they
often neglect their own affairs, though they know them and love
themselves, so nothing will prevent their serving the public in the
same manner. In short, whatsoever the laws contain which we allow to
be useful to the state contributes to its preservation: but its first
and principal support is (as has been often insisted upon) to have the
number of those who desire to preserve it greater than those who wish
to destroy it. Above all things that ought not to be forgotten which
many governments now corrupted neglect; namely, to preserve a mean.
For many things seemingly favourable to a democracy destroy a
democracy, and many things seemingly favourable to an oligarchy
destroy an oligarchy. Those who think this the only virtue extend it
to excess, not considering that as a nose which varies a little from
perfect straightness, either towards a hook nose or a flat one, may
yet be beautiful and agreeable to look at; but if this particularity
is extended beyond measure, first of all the properties of the part is
lost, but at last it can hardly be admitted to be a nose at all, on
account of the excess of the rise or sinking: thus it is with other
parts of the human body; so also the same thing is true with respect
to states; for both an oligarchy and a democracy may something vary
from their most perfect form and yet be well constituted; but if any
one endeavours to extend either of them too far, at first he will make
the government the worse for it, but at last there will be no
government at all remaining. The lawgiver and the politician therefore
should know well what preserves and what destroys a democracy or an
oligarchy, for neither the one nor the other can possibly continue
without rich and poor: but that whenever an entire equality of
circumstances [1310a] prevails, the state must necessarily become of
another form; so that those who destroy these laws, which authorise an
inequality in property, destroy the government. It is also an error in
democracies for the demagogues to endeavour to make the common people
superior to the laws; and thus by setting them at variance with the
rich, dividing one city into two; whereas they ought rather to speak
in favour of the rich. In oligarchies, on the contrary, it is wrong to
support those who are in administration against the people. The oaths
also which they take in an oligarchy ought to be contrary to what they
now are; for, at present, in some places they swear, "I will be
adverse to the common people, and contrive all I can against them;"
whereas they ought rather to suppose and pretend the contrary;
expressing in their oaths, that they will not injure the people. But
of all things which I have mentioned, that which contributes most to
preserve the state is, what is now most despised, to educate your
children for the state; for the most useful laws, and most approved by
every statesman, will be of no service if the citizens are not
accustomed to and brought up in the principles of the constitution; of
a democracy, if that is by law established; of an oligarchy, if that
is; for if there are bad morals in one man, there are in the city. But
to educate a child fit for the state, it must not be done in the
manner which would please either those who have the power in an
oligarchy or those who desire a democracy, but so as they may be able
to conduct either of these forms of governments. But now the children
of the magistrates in an oligarchy are brought up too delicately, and
the children of the poor hardy with exercise and labour; so that they
are both desirous of and able to promote innovations. In democracies
of the purest form they pursue a method which is contrary to their
welfare; the reason of which is, that they define liberty wrong: now,
there are two things which seem to be the objects of a democracy, that
the people in general should possess the supreme power, and all enjoy
freedom; for that which is just seems to be equal, and what the people
think equal, that is a law: now, their freedom and equality consists
in every one's doing what they please: that is in such a democracy
every one may live as he likes; "as his inclination guides," in the
words of Euripides: but this is wrong, for no one ought to think it
slavery to live in subjection to government, but protection. Thus I
have mentioned the causes of corruption in different states, and the
means of their preservation.




CHAPTER X


It now remains that we speak of monarchies, their causes of
corruption, and means of preservation; and indeed almost the same
things which have been said of other governments happen to kingdoms
and tyrannies; for a kingdom partakes of an aristocracy, a tyranny of
the worst species of an oligarchy and democracy; for which reason it
is the worst that man can submit to, as being composed of two, both of
which are bad, and collectively retains all the corruptions and all
the defects of both these states. These two species of monarchies
arise from principles contrary to each other: a kingdom is formed to
protect the better sort of people against the multitude, and kings are
appointed out of those, who are chosen either for their superior
virtue and actions flowing from virtuous principles, or else from
their noble descent; but a tyrant is chosen out of the meanest
populace; an enemy to the better sort, that the common people may not
be oppressed by them. That this is true experience convinces us; for
the generality of tyrants were indeed mere demagogues, who gained
credit with the people by oppressing the nobles. Some tyrannies were
established in this manner after the cities were considerably
enlarged--others before that time, by kings who exceeded the power
which their country allowed them, from a desire of governing
despotically: others were founded by those who were elected to the
superior offices in the state; for formerly the people appointed
officers for life, who came to be at the head of civil and religious
affairs, and these chose one out of their body in whom the supreme
power over all the magistrates was placed. By all these means it was
easy to establish a tyranny, if they chose it; for their power was
ready at hand, either by their being kings, or else by enjoying the
honours of the state; thus Phidon at Argos and other tyrants enjoyed
originally the kingly power; Phalaris and others in Ionia, the honours
of the state. Pansetius at Leontium, Cypselus at Corinth, Pisistratus
at Athens, Dionysius at Syracuse, and others, acquired theirs by
having been demagogues. A kingdom, as we have said, partakes much of
the nature of an aristocracy, and is bestowed according to worth, as
either virtue, family, beneficent actions, or these joined with power;
for those who have been benefactors to cities and states, or have it
in their powers to be so, have acquired this honour, and those who
have prevented a people from falling into slavery by war, as Codrus,
or those who have freed them from it, as Cyrus, or the founders of
cities, or settlers of colonies, as the kings of Sparta, Macedon, and
Molossus. A king desires to be the guardian of his people, that those
who have property may be secure in the possession of it, and that the
people in general meet with no injury; but a tyrant, as has been often
said, has no regard to the common good, except for his own advantage;
his only object is pleasure, but a king's is virtue: what a tyrant
therefore is ambitious of engrossing is wealth, but a king rather
honour. The guards too of a king are citizens, a tyrant's foreigners.

That a tyranny contains all that is bad both in a democracy and an
oligarchy is evident; with an oligarchy it has for its end gain, as
the only means of providing the tyrant with guards and the luxuries of
life; like that it places no confidence in the people; and therefore
deprives them of the use of arms: it is also common to them both to
persecute the populace, to drive them out of the city and their own
habitations. With a democracy it quarrels with the nobles, and
destroys them both publicly and privately, or drives them into
banishment, as rivals and an impediment to the government; hence
naturally arise conspiracies both amongst those who desire to govern
and those who desire not to be slaves; hence arose Periander's advice
to Thrasybulus to take off the tallest stalks, hinting thereby, that
it was necessary to make away with the eminent citizens. We ought then
in reason, as has been already said, to account for the changes which
arise in a monarchy from the same causes which produce them in other
states: for, through injustice received, fear, and contempt, many of
those who are under a monarchical government conspire against it; but
of all species of injustice, injurious contempt has most influence on
them for that purpose: sometimes it is owing to their being deprived
of their private fortunes. The dissolution too of a kingdom and a
tyranny are generally the same; for monarchs abound in wealth and
honour, which all are desirous to obtain. Of plots: some aim at the
life of those who govern, others at their government; the first arises
from hatred to their persons; which hatred may be owing to many
causes, either of which will be sufficient to excite their anger, and
the generality of those who are under the influence of that passion
will join in a conspiracy, not for the sake of their own advancement,
but for revenge. Thus the plot against the children of Pisistratus
arose from their injurious treatment of Harmodius's sister, and
insulting him also; for Harmodius resenting the injury done to his
sister, and Aristogiton the injury done to Harmodius. Periander the
tyrant of Ambracia also lost his life by a conspiracy, for some
improper liberties he took with a boy in his cups: and Philip was
slain by Pausanias for neglecting to revenge him of the affront he had
received from Attains; as was Amintas the Little by Darda, for
insulting him on account of his age; and the eunuch by Evagoras the
Cyprian in revenge for having taken his son's wife away from him ....

Many also who have had their bodies scourged with stripes have,
through resentment, either killed those who caused them to be
inflicted or conspired against them, even when they had kingly power,
as at Mitylene Megacles, joining with his friends, killed the
Penthelidee, who used to go about striking those they met with clubs.
Thus, in later times, Smendes killed Penthilus for whipping him and
dragging him away from his wife. Decamnichus also was the chief cause
of the conspiracy against Archelaus, for he urged others on: the
occasion of his resentment was his having delivered him to Euripides
the poet to be scourged; for Euripides was greatly offended with him
for having said something of the foulness of his breath. And many
others have been killed or conspired against on the same account. Fear
too is a cause which produces the same effects, as well in monarchies
as in other states: thus Artabanes conspired against Xerxes through
fear of punishment for having hanged Darius according to his orders,
whom he supposed he intended to pardon, as the order was given at
supper-time. Some kings also have been [1312a] dethroned and killed in
consequence of the contempt they were held in by the people; as some
one conspired against Sardanapalus, having seen him spinning with his
wife, if what is related of him is true, or if not of him, it may very
probably be true of some one else. Dion also conspired against
Dionysius the Younger, seeing his subjects desirous of a conspiracy,
and that he himself was always drunk: and even a man's friends will do
this if they despise him; for from the confidence he places in them,
they think that they shall not be found out. Those also who think they
shall gain his throne will conspire against a king through contempt;
for as they are powerful themselves, and despise the danger, on
account of their own strength, they will readily attempt it. Thus a
general at the head of his army will endeavour to dethrone the
monarch, as Cyrus did Astyages, despising both his manner of life and
his forces; his forces for want of action, his life for its
effeminacy: thus Suthes, the Thracian, who was general to Amadocus,
conspired against him. Sometimes more than one of these causes will
excite men to enter into conspiracies, as contempt and desire of gain;
as in the instance of Mithridates against Ariobarzanes. Those also who
are of a bold disposition, and have gained military honours amongst
kings, will of all others be most like to engage in sedition; for
strength and courage united inspire great bravery: whenever,
therefore, these join in one person, he will be very ready for
conspiracies, as he will easily conquer. Those who conspire against a
tyrant through love of glory and honour have a different motive in
view from what I have already mentioned; for, like all others who
embrace danger, they have only glory and honour in view, and think,
not as some do, of the wealth and pomp they may acquire, but engage in
this as they would in any other noble action, that they may be
illustrious and distinguished, and destroy a tyrant, not to succeed in
his tyranny, but to acquire renown. No doubt but the number of those
who act upon this principle is small, for we must suppose they regard
their own safety as nothing in case they should not succeed, and must
embrace the opinion of Dion (which few can do) when he made war upon
Dionysius with a very few troops; for he said, that let the advantage
he made be ever so little it would satisfy him to have gained it; and
that, should it be his lot to die the moment he had gained footing in
his country, he should think his death sufficiently glorious. A
tyranny also is exposed to the same destruction as all other states
are, from too powerful neighbours: for it is evident, that an
opposition of principles will make them desirous of subverting it; and
what they desire, all who can, do: and there is a principle of
opposition in one state to another, as a democracy against a tyranny,
as says Hesiod, "a potter against a potter;" for the extreme of a
democracy is a tyranny; a kingly power against an aristocracy, from
their different forms of government--for which reason the
Lacedaemonians destroyed many tyrannies; as did the Syracusians during
the prosperity of their state. Nor are they only destroyed from
without, but also from within, when those who have no share in the
power bring about a revolution, as happened to Gelon, and lately to
Dionysius; to the first, by means of Thrasybulus, the brother of
Hiero, who nattered Gelon's son, and induced him to lead a life of
pleasure, that he himself might govern; but the family joined together
and endeavoured to support the tyranny and expel Thrasybulus; but
those whom they made of their party seized the opportunity and
expelled the whole family. Dion made war against his relation
Dionysius, and being assisted by the people, first expelled and then
killed him. As there are two causes which chiefly induce men to
conspire against tyrants, hatred and contempt, one of these, namely
hatred, seems inseparable from them. Contempt also is often the cause
of their destruction: for though, for instance, those who raised
themselves to the supreme power generally preserved it; but those who
received it from them have, to speak truth, almost immediately all of
them lost it; for, falling into an effeminate way of life, they soon
grew despicable, and generally fell victims to conspiracies. Part of
their hatred may be very fitly ascribed to anger; for in some cases
this is their motive to action: for it is often a cause which impels
them to act more powerfully than hatred, and they proceed with greater
obstinacy against those whom they attack, as this passion is not under
the direction of reason. Many persons also indulge this passion
through contempt; which occasioned the fall of the Pisistratidae and
many others. But hatred is more powerful than anger; for anger is
accompanied with grief, which prevents the entrance of reason; but
hatred is free from it. In short, whatever causes may be assigned as
the destruction of a pure oligarchy unmixed with any other government
and an extreme democracy, the same may be applied to a tyranny; for
these are divided tyrannies.

Kingdoms are seldom destroyed by any outward attack; for which reason
they are generally very stable; but they have many causes of
subversion within; of which two are the principal; one is when those
who are in power [1313a] excite a sedition, the other when they
endeavour to establish a tyranny by assuming greater power than the
law gives them. A kingdom, indeed, is not what we ever see erected in
our times, but rather monarchies and tyrannies; for a kingly
government is one that is voluntarily submitted to, and its supreme
power admitted upon great occasions: but where many are equal, and
there are none in any respect so much better than another as to be
qualified for the greatness and dignity of government over them, then
these equals will not willingly submit to be commanded; but if any one
assumes the government, either by force or fraud, this is a tyranny.
To what we have already said we shall add, the causes of revolutions
in an hereditary kingdom. One of these is, that many of those who
enjoy it are naturally proper objects of contempt only: another is,
that they are insolent while their power is not despotic; but they
possess kingly honours only. Such a state is soon destroyed; for a
king exists but while the people are willing to obey, as their
submission to him is voluntary, but to a tyrant involuntary. These and
such-like are the causes of the destruction of monarchies.




CHAPTER XI


Monarchies, in a word, are preserved by means contrary to what I have
already mentioned as the cause of their destruction; but to speak to
each separately: the stability of a kingdom will depend upon the power
of the king's being kept within moderate bounds; for by how much the
less extensive his power is, by so much the longer will his government
continue; for he will be less despotic and more upon an equality of
condition with those he governs; who, on that account, will envy him
the less.

It was on this account that the kingdom of the Molossi continued so
long; and the Lacedaemonians from their government's being from the
beginning divided into two parts, and also by the moderation
introduced into the other parts of it by Theopompus, and his
establishment of the ephori; for by taking something from the power he
increased the duration of the kingdom, so that in some measure he made
it not less, but bigger; as they say he replied to his wife, who asked
him if he was not ashamed to deliver down his kingdom to his children
reduced from what he received it from his ancestors? No, says he, I
give it him more lasting. Tyrannies are preserved two ways most
opposite to each other, one of which is when the power is delegated
from one to the other, and in this manner many tyrants govern in their
states. Report says that Periander founded many of these. There are
also many of them to be met with amongst the Persians. What has been
already mentioned is as conducive as anything can be to preserve a
tyranny; namely, to keep down those who are of an aspiring
disposition, to take off those who will not submit, to allow no public
meals, no clubs, no education, nothing at all, but to guard against
everything that gives rise to high spirits or mutual confidence; nor
to suffer the learned meetings of those who are at leisure to hold
conversation with each other; and to endeavour by every means possible
to keep all the people strangers to each other; for knowledge
increases mutual confidence; and to oblige all strangers to appear in
public, and to live near the city-gate, that all their actions may be
sufficiently seen; for those who are kept like slaves seldom entertain
any noble thoughts: in short, to imitate everything which the Persians
and barbarians do, for they all contribute to support slavery; and to
endeavour to know what every one who is under their power does and
says; and for this purpose to employ spies: such were those women whom
the Syracusians called potagogides Hiero also used to send out
listeners wherever there was any meeting or conversation; for the
people dare not speak with freedom for fear of such persons; and if
any one does, there is the less chance of its being concealed; and to
endeavour that the whole community should mutually accuse and come to
blows with each other, friend with friend, the commons with the
nobles, and the rich with each other. It is also advantageous for a
tyranny that all those who are under it should be oppressed with
poverty, that they may not be able to compose a guard; and that, being
employed in procuring their daily bread, they may have no leisure to
conspire against their tyrants. The Pyramids of Egypt are a proof of
this, and the votive edifices of the Cyposelidse, and the temple of
Jupiter Olympus, built by the Pisistratidae, and the works of
Polycrates at Samos; for all these produced one end, the keeping the
people poor. It is necessary also to multiply taxes, as at Syracuse;
where Dionysius in the space of five years collected all the private
property of his subjects into his own coffers. A tyrant also should
endeavour to engage his subjects in a war, that they may have
employment and continually depend upon their general. A king is
preserved by his friends, but a tyrant is of all persons the man who
can place no confidence in friends, as every one has it in his desire
and these chiefly in their power to destroy him. All these things also
which are done in an extreme democracy should be done in a tyranny, as
permitting great licentiousness to the women in the house, that they
may reveal their husbands' secrets; and showing great indulgence to
slaves also for the same reason; for slaves and women conspire not
against tyrants: but when they are treated with kindness, both of them
are abettors of tyrants, and extreme democracies also; and the people
too in such a state desire to be despotic. For which reason flatterers
are in repute in both these: the demagogue in the democracy, for he is
the proper flatterer of the people; among tyrants, he who will
servilely adapt himself to their humours; for this is the business of
[1314a] flatterers. And for this reason tyrants always love the worst
of wretches, for they rejoice in being flattered, which no man of a
liberal spirit will submit to; for they love the virtuous, but flatter
none. Bad men too are fit for bad purposes; "like to like," as the
proverb says. A tyrant also should show no favour to a man of worth or
a freeman; for he should think, that no one deserved to be thought
these but himself; for he who supports his dignity, and is a friend to
freedom, encroaches upon the superiority and the despotism of the
tyrant: such men, therefore, they naturally hate, as destructive to
their government. A tyrant also should rather admit strangers to his
table and familiarity than citizens, as these are his enemies, but the
others have no design against him. These and such-like are the
supports of a tyranny, for it comprehends whatsoever is wicked. But
all these things may be comprehended in three divisions, for there are
three objects which a tyranny has in view; one of which is, that the
citizens should be of poor abject dispositions; for such men never
propose to conspire against any one. The second is, that they should
have no confidence in each other; for while they have not this, the
tyrant is safe enough from destruction. For which reason they are
always at enmity with those of merit, as hurtful to their government;
not only as they scorn to be governed despotically, but also because
they can rely upon each other's fidelity, and others can rely upon
theirs, and because they will not inform against their associates, nor
any one else. The third is, that they shall be totally without the
means of doing anything; for no one undertakes what is impossible for
him to perform: so that without power a tyranny can never be
destroyed. These, then, are the three objects which the inclinations
of tyrants desire to see accomplished; for all their tyrannical plans
tend to promote one of these three ends, that their people may neither
have mutual confidence, power, nor spirit. This, then, is one of the
two methods of preserving tyrannies: the other proceeds in a way quite
contrary to what has been already described, and which may be
discerned from considering to what the destruction of a kingdom is
owing; for as one cause of that is, making the government approach
near to a tyranny, so the safety of a tyranny consists in making the
government nearly kingly; preserving only one thing, namely power,
that not only the willing, but the unwilling also, must be obliged to
submit; for if this is once lost, the tyranny is at an end. This,
then, as the foundation, must be preserved: in other particulars
carefully do and affect to seem like a king; first, appear to pay a
great attention [1314b] to what belongs to the public; nor make such
profuse presents as will offend the people; while they are to supply
the money out of the hard labour of their own hands, and see it given
in profusion to mistresses, foreigners, and fiddlers; keeping an exact
account both of what you receive and pay; which is a practice some
tyrants do actually follow, by which means they seem rather fathers of
families than tyrants: nor need you ever fear the want of money while
you have the supreme power of the state in your own hands. It is also
much better for those tyrants who quit their kingdom to do this than
to leave behind them money they have hoarded up; for their regents
will be much less desirous of making innovations, and they are more to
be dreaded by absent tyrants than the citizens; for such of them as he
suspects he takes with him, but these regents must be left behind. He
should also endeavour to appear to collect such taxes and require such
services as the exigencies of the state demand, that whenever they are
wanted they may be ready in time of war; and particularly to take care
that he appear to collect and keep them not as his own property, but
the public's. His appearance also should not be severe, but
respectable, so that he should inspire those who approach him with
veneration and not fear; but this will not be easily accomplished if
he is despised. If, therefore, he will not take the pains to acquire
any other, he ought to endeavour to be a man of political abilities,
and to fix that opinion of himself in the judgment of his subjects. He
should also take care not to appear to be guilty of the least offence
against modesty, nor to suffer it in those under him: nor to permit
the women of his family to treat others haughtily; for the haughtiness
of women has been the ruin of many tyrants. With respect to the
pleasures of sense, he ought to do directly contrary to the practice
of some tyrants at present; for they do not only continually indulge
themselves in them for many days together, but they seem also to
desire to have other witnesses of it, that they may wonder at their
happiness; whereas he ought really to be moderate in these, and, if
not, to appear to others to avoid them-for it is not the sober man who
is exposed either to plots or contempt, but the drunkard; not the
early riser, but the sluggard. His conduct in general should also be
contrary to what is reported of former tyrants; for he ought to
improve and adorn his city, so as to seem a guardian and not a tyrant;
and, moreover., always to [1315a] seem particularly attentive to the
worship of the gods; for from persons of such a character men
entertain less fears of suffering anything illegal while they suppose
that he who governs them is religious and reverences the gods; and
they will be less inclined to raise insinuations against such a one,
as being peculiarly under their protection: but this must be so done
as to give no occasion for any suspicion of hypocrisy. He should also
take care to show such respect to men of merit in every particular,
that they should not think they could be treated with greater
distinction by their fellow-citizens in a free state. He should also
let all honours flow immediately from himself, but every censure from
his subordinate officers and judges. It is also a common protection
of all monarchies not to make one person too great, or, certainly, not
many; for they will support each other: but, if it is necessary to
entrust any large powers to one person, to take care that it is not
one of an ardent spirit; for this disposition is upon every
opportunity most ready for a revolution: and, if it should seem
necessary to deprive any one of his power, to do it by degrees, and
not reduce him all at once. It is also necessary to abstain from all
kinds of insolence; more particularly from corporal punishment; which
you must be most cautious never to exercise over those who have a
delicate sense of honour; for, as those who love money are touched to
the quick when anything affects their property, so are men of honour
and principle when they receive any disgrace: therefore, either never
employ personal punishment, or, if you do, let it be only in the
manner in which a father would correct his son, and not with contempt;
and, upon the whole, make amends for any seeming disgrace by bestowing
greater honours. But of all persons who are most likely to entertain
designs against the person of a tyrant, those are chiefly to be feared
and guarded against who regard as nothing the loss of their own lives,
so that they can but accomplish their purpose: be very careful
therefore of those who either think themselves affronted, or those who
are dear to them; for those who are excited by anger to revenge regard
as nothing their own persons: for, as Heraclitus says, it is dangerous
to fight with an angry man who will purchase with his life the thing
he aims at. As all cities are composed of two sorts of persons, the
rich and the poor, it is necessary that both these should find equal
protection from him who governs them, and that the one party should
not have it in their power to injure the other; but that the tyrant
should attach to himself that party which is the most powerful; which,
if he does, he will have no occasion either to make his slaves free,
or to deprive citizens of their arms; for the strength of either of
the parties added to his own forces will render him superior to any
conspiracy. It would be superfluous to go through all particulars; for
the rule of conduct which the tyrant ought to pursue is evident
enough, and that is, to affect to appear not the tyrant, but the king;
the guardian of those he governs, not their plunderer, [1315b] but
their protector, and to affect the middle rank in life, not one
superior to all others: he should, therefore, associate his nobles
with him and soothe his people; for his government will not only be
necessarily more honourable and worthy of imitation, as it will be
over men of worth, and not abject wretches who perpetually both hate
and fear him; but it will be also more durable. Let him also frame his
life so that his manners may be consentaneous to virtue, or at least
let half of them be so, that he may not be altogether wicked, but only
so in part.




CHAPTER XII


Indeed an oligarchy and a tyranny are of all governments of the
shortest duration. The tyranny of Orthagoras and his family at Sicyon,
it is true, continued longer than any other: the reason for which was,
that they used their power with moderation, and were in many
particulars obedient to the laws; and, as Clisthenes was an able
general, he never fell into contempt, and by the care he took that in
many particulars his government should be popular. He is reported also
to have presented a person with a crown who adjudged the victory to
another; and some say that it is the statue of that judge which is
placed in the forum.

They say also, that Pisistratus submitted to be summoned into the
court of the Areopagites. The second that we shall mention is the
tyranny of the Cypselidse, at Corinth, which continued seventy-seven
years and six months; for Cypselus was tyrant there thirty years,
Periander forty-four, and Psammetichus, the son of Georgias, three
years; the reason for which was, that Cypselus was a popular man, and
governed without guards. Periander indeed ruled like a tyrant, but
then he was an able general. The third was that of the Pisistradidae
at Athens; but it was not continual: for Pisistratus himself was twice
expelled; so that out of thirty-three years he was only fifteen in
power, and his son eighteen; so that the whole time was thirty-three
years. Of the rest we shall mention that of Hiero, and Gelo at
Syracuse; and this did not continue long, for both their reigns were
only eighteen years; for Gelo died in the eighth year of his tyranny,
and Hiero in his tenth. Thrasybulus fell in his eleventh month, and
many other tyrannies have continued a very short time. We have now
gone through the general cases of corruption and [1316a] means of
preservation both in free states and monarchies. In Plato's Republic,
Socrates is introduced treating upon the changes which different
governments are liable to: but his discourse is faulty; for he does
not particularly mention what changes the best and first governments
are liable to; for he only assigns the general cause, of nothing being
immutable, but that in time everything will alter [***tr.: text is
unintelligible here***] he conceives that nature will then
produce bad men, who will not submit to education, and in this,
probably, he is not wrong; for it is certain that there are some
persons whom it is impossible by any education to make good men; but
why should this change be more peculiar to what he calls the
best-formed government, than to all other forms, and indeed to all
other things that exist? and in respect to his assigned time, as the
cause of the alteration of all things, we find that those which did
not begin to exist at the same time cease to be at the same time; so
that, if anything came into beginning the day before the solstice, it
must alter at the same time. Besides, why should such a form of
government be changed into the Lacedaemonian? for, in general, when
governments alter, they alter into the contrary species to what they
before were, and not into one like their former. And this reasoning
holds true of other changes; for he says, that from the Lacedaemonian
form it changes into an oligarchy, and from thence into a democracy,
and from a democracy into a tyranny: and sometimes a contrary change
takes place, as from a democracy into an oligarchy, rather than into a
monarchy. With respect to a tyranny he neither says whether there will
be any change in it; or if not, to what cause it will be owing; or if
there is, into what other state it will alter: but the reason of this
is, that a tyranny is an indeterminate government; and, according to
him, every state ought to alter into the first, and most perfect, thus
the continuity and circle would be preserved. But one tyranny often
changed into another; as at Syria, from Myron's to Clisthenes'; or
into an oligarchy, as was Antileo's at Chalcas; or into a democracy,
as was Gelo's at Syracuse; or into an aristocracy, as was Charilaus's
at Lacedsemon, and at Carthage. An oligarchy is also changed into a
tyranny; such was the rise of most of the ancient tyrannies in Sicily;
at Leontini, into the tyranny of Panaetius; at Gela, into that of
Cleander; at Rhegium into that of Anaxilaus; and the like in many
other cities. It is absurd also to suppose, that a state is changed
into an oligarchy because those who are in power are avaricious and
greedy of money, and not because those who are by far richer than
their fellow citizens think it unfair that those who have nothing
should have an equal share in the rule of the state with themselves,
who possess so much-for in many oligarchies it is not allowable to be
employed in money-getting, and there are many laws to prevent it. But
in Carthage, which is a democracy, money-getting is creditable, and
yet their form of government remains unaltered. It is also absurd to
say, that in an oligarchy there are two cities, one of the poor and
another of the rich; for why should this happen to them more than to
the Lacedaemonians, or any other state where all possess not equal
property, or where all are not equally good? for though no one member
of the community should be poorer than he was before, yet a democracy
might nevertheless change into an oligarchy; if the rich should be
more powerful than the poor, and the one too negligent, and the other
attentive: and though these changes are owing to many causes, yet he
mentions but one only, that the citizens become poor by luxury, and
paying interest-money; as if at first they were all rich, or the
greater part of them: but this is not so, but when some of those who
have the principal management of public affairs lose their fortunes,
they will endeavour to bring about a revolution; but when others do,
nothing of consequence will follow, nor when such states do alter is
there any more reason for their altering into a democracy than any
other. Besides, though some of the members of the community may not
have spent their fortunes, yet if they share not in the honours of the
state, or if they are ill-used and insulted, they will endeavour to
raise seditions, and bring about a revolution, that they may be
allowed to do as they like; which, Plato says, arises from too much
liberty. Although there are many oligarchies and democracies, yet
Socrates, when he is treating of the changes they may undergo, speaks
of them as if there was but one of each sort.