Politics

Is it the case that if one is not justly a citizen, he is not a citizen? As though ‘unjust’ and ‘false’ had the same meaning. But since we see also some ruling unjustly, of whom we shall say that they do rule but not justly, and the citizen is defined by a certain office (for he who shares in such an office is a citizen, as we said), it is clear that we must say that these also are indeed citizens. But concerning ‘justly or not justly’ it connects with the dispute mentioned before. For some raise the difficulty as to when the city performed an action and when not the city, for example, when a democracy arises out of an oligarchy or a tyranny (for at that time some do not wish to discharge contracts, on the ground that it was not the city but the tyrant who received them, nor to do many other such things, on the ground that some of the constitutions exist by virtue of being dominant, and not for the common advantage). If therefore indeed some also live under a democracy in this manner, we must say that the actions of this constitution are in like manner those of this city, just as are those from the oligarchy and the tyranny. But the discussion appropriate to this difficulty seems to be how on earth one ought to say that the city is the same, or not the same but different. The most superficial inquiry, then, into this difficulty is about the place and the people; for it is possible for the place and the people to be separated, and for some to inhabit one place and others another. We must, then, set this down as a milder difficulty; for since ‘city’ is spoken of in many ways, there is a certain ease in such an inquiry. But in like manner, when the people inhabit the same place, when must we consider the city to be one? For surely not by the walls; for it would be possible to throw a single wall around the Peloponnese. Of this sort perhaps is Babylon too, and every enclosure that has the outline of a nation rather than of a city; of which they say indeed that when it was captured, a certain part of the city did not perceive it for three days. But concerning this difficulty, the investigation will be useful on another occasion (for concerning the size of the city, both how large it should be and whether one nation or several is advantageous, must not escape the attention of the statesman); but when the same people inhabit the same place, is it to be said that the city is the same as long as the race of the inhabitants remains the same, although some are always perishing and others being born, just as we are accustomed to call rivers the same and springs the same, although some stream is always flowing in and another flowing out, or are we to say that the humans are indeed the same for this sort of reason, but the city is different?