Politics

​Or is it manifest that the more are better? “But they will factionalize, whereas the one is free from faction.” But to this it should perhaps be countered that they are excellent in soul, just as that one person. If indeed the rule of the more, but all of them good men, must be set down as aristocracy, and that of the one as kingship, aristocracy would be more desirable for cities than kingship, whether the rule is with power or without power, if it is possible to find several who are similar. And for this reason perhaps they were ruled by kings formerly, because it was rare to find men greatly outstanding in virtue, especially since they then inhabited small cities. Moreover, they established their kings on the basis of benefit, which is the work of good men. But when it happened that many became similar in virtue, they no longer submitted but sought something common and established a constitution. But when, becoming worse, they made money from the public funds, from some such source it is reasonable that oligarchies arose; for they made wealth honorable. And from these they first changed into tyrannies, and from tyrannies into democracy; for by always bringing the power into fewer hands because of shameful greed, they made the multitude stronger, so that they attacked and democracies arose. And since it has also happened that cities are larger, perhaps it is no longer even easy for any other constitution to arise besides democracy. But if indeed someone should set down that to be ruled by a king is best for cities, how will the matter of children stand? Should the family also rule? But if they turn out to be whatever kind they happen to be, it is harmful. “But being sovereign, he will not hand it over to his children.” But this is no longer easy to believe; for it is difficult, and requires a greater virtue than belongs to human nature. And there is also a difficulty about power, whether the one who is going to rule as king should have some force about him, by which he will be able to compel those who are unwilling to obey, or how is it possible to administer the rule? For even if he were sovereign according to law, doing nothing according to his own will contrary to the law, nevertheless it is necessary that a power belong to him by which he will guard the laws. Perhaps, therefore, the matters concerning such a king are not difficult to define; for he must have force, but the force must be of such a size as to be stronger than each individual, both one and several together, but weaker than the multitude, just as the ancients used to give guards when they established someone as what they called an aisymnetes or tyrant of the city, and someone, when Dionysius asked for guards, advised the Syracusans to give guards of such a size.