Humanitext Reader

Aristotle · Politics §1.1253b

Three Household Relations and the Slave as an Instrument

Passage 3 of 155 · Greek

Summary

Aristotle outlines the three basic relations of household management (master-slave, marital, and paternal) and discusses the nature of mastership, defining the slave as an animate instrument of action.

§1.1253bἐπεὶ δὲ φανερὸν ἐξ ὧν μορίων ἡ πόλις συνέστηκεν, ἀναγκαῖον πρῶτον περὶ οἰκονομίας εἰπεῖν· πᾶσα γὰρ σύγκειται πόλις ἐξ οἰκιῶν.
Since it is clear from what parts the city-state is constituted, it is necessary first to speak of household management; for every city-state is composed of households.
οἰκονομίας δὲ μέρη ἐξ ὧν πάλιν οἰκία συνέστηκεν· οἰκία δὲ τέλειος ἐκ δούλων καὶ ἐλευθέρων.
And the parts of household management are those from which in turn the household is constituted; and a complete household consists of slaves and free persons.
ἐπεὶ δʼ ἐν τοῖς ἐλαχίστοις πρῶτον ἕκαστον ζητητέον, πρῶτα δὲ καὶ ἐλάχιστα μέρη οἰκίας δεσπότης καὶ δοῦλος, καὶ πόσις καὶ ἄλοχος, καὶ πατὴρ καὶ τέκνα, περὶ τριῶν ἂν τούτων σκεπτέον εἴη τί ἕκαστον καὶ ποῖον δεῖ εἶναι.
And since we must first examine each thing in its smallest elements, and the first and smallest parts of a household are master and slave, husband and wife, and father and children, we should have to consider concerning these three relations what each is and of what sort it ought to be.
ταῦτα δʼ ἐστὶ δεσποτικὴ καὶ γαμική (ἀνώνυμον γὰρ ἡ γυναικὸς καὶ ἀνδρὸς σύζευξις) καὶ τρίτον τεκνοποιητική (καὶ γὰρ αὕτη οὐκ ὠνόμασται ἰδίῳ ὀνόματι).
These are the master-slave relation, the marital relation (for the union of wife and husband is nameless), and thirdly, the procreative relation (for this too has not been named with a proper name).
ἔστωσαν δὴ αὗται τρεῖς ἃς εἴπομεν.
Let these, then, be the three relations we have mentioned.
ἔστι δέ τι μέρος ὃ δοκεῖ τοῖς μὲν εἶναι οἰκονομία, τοῖς δὲ μέγιστον μέρος αὐτῆς· ὅπως δʼ ἔχει, θεωρητέον· λέγω δὲ περὶ τῆς καλουμένης χρηματιστικῆς.
But there is a certain part which seems to some to be household management itself, and to others to be its greatest part; how this stands must be considered; I mean what is called the art of acquisition.
πρῶτον δὲ περὶ δεσπότου καὶ δούλου εἴπωμεν, ἵνα τά τε πρὸς τὴν ἀναγκαίαν χρείαν ἴδωμεν, κἂν εἴ τι πρὸς τὸ εἰδέναι περὶ αὐτῶν δυναίμεθα λαβεῖν βέλτιον τῶν νῦν ὑπολαμβανομένων.
First, then, let us speak of master and slave, so that we may see both the things that relate to necessary use, and also whether we can acquire, for the purpose of understanding them, something better than current conceptions.
τοῖς μὲν γὰρ δοκεῖ ἐπιστήμη τέ τις εἶναι ἡ δεσποτεία, καὶ ἡ αὐτὴ οἰκονομία καὶ δεσποτεία καὶ πολιτικὴ καὶ βασιλική, καθάπερ εἴπομεν ἀρχόμενοι· τοῖς δὲ παρὰ φύσιν τὸ δεσπόζειν (νόμῳ γὰρ τὸν μὲν δοῦλον εἶναι τὸν δʼ ἐλεύθερον, φύσει δʼ οὐθὲν διαφέρειν)· διόπερ οὐδὲ δίκαιον· βίαιον γάρ.
For to some indeed, mastership seems to be a kind of science, and household management, mastership, statesmanship, and kingship to be the same, just as we said at the beginning; but to others, to exercise mastership is against nature (for it is by law that one is slave and another free, but by nature there is no difference); therefore, it is not just either; for it is violent.
ἐπεὶ οὖν ἡ κτῆσις μέρος τῆς οἰκίας ἐστὶ καὶ ἡ κτητικὴ μέρος τῆς οἰκονομίας (ἄνευ γὰρ τῶν ἀναγκαίων ἀδύνατον καὶ ζῆν καὶ εὖ ζῆν), ὥσπερ δὲ ταῖς ὡρισμέναις τέχναις ἀναγκαῖον ἂν εἴη ὑπάρχειν τὰ οἰκεῖα ὄργανα, εἰ μέλλει ἀποτελεσθήσεσθαι τὸ ἔργον, οὕτω καὶ τῷ οἰκονομικῷ.
Since, then, property is a part of the household, and the art of acquisition is a part of household management (for without necessaries it is impossible both to live and to live well), and just as for the definite arts it would be necessary for their proper instruments to be present if their work is to be accomplished, so it is also for the household manager.
τῶν δʼ ὀργάνων τὰ μὲν ἄψυχα τὰ δὲ ἔμψυχα (οἷον τῷ κυβερνήτῃ ὁ μὲν οἴαξ ἄψυχον ὁ δὲ πρῳρεὺς ἔμψυχον· ὁ γὰρ ὑπηρέτης ἐν ὀργάνου εἴδει ταῖς τέχναις ἐστίν)· οὕτω καὶ τὸ κτῆμα ὄργανον πρὸς ζωήν ἐστι, καὶ ἡ κτῆσις πλῆθος ὀργάνων ἐστί, καὶ ὁ δοῦλος κτῆμά τι ἔμψυχον, καὶ ὥσπερ ὄργανον πρὸ ὀργάνων πᾶς ὑπηρέτης.
Now of instruments, some are soulless and others have a soul (for example, for the helmsman the rudder is soulless, but the lookout is animate; for the assistant is in the class of instruments for the arts); so also a possession is an instrument for life, and property is a multitude of instruments, and the slave is an animate possession, and every assistant is like an instrument prior to other instruments.
εἰ γὰρ ἠδύνατο ἕκαστον τῶν ὀργάνων κελευσθὲν ἢ προαισθανόμενον ἀποτελεῖν τὸ αὑτοῦ ἔργον, καὶ ὥσπερ τὰ Δαιδάλου φασὶν ἢ τοὺς τοῦ Ἡφαίστου τρίποδας, οὕς φησιν ὁ ποιητὴς αὐτομάτους θεῖον δύεσθαι ἀγῶνα, οὕτως αἱ κερκίδες ἐκέρκιζον αὐταὶ καὶ τὰ πλῆκτρα ἐκιθάριζεν, οὐδὲν ἂν ἔδει οὔτε τοῖς ἀρχιτέκτοσιν ὑπηρετῶν οὔτε τοῖς δεσπόταις δούλων.
For if each of the instruments were able, when commanded or anticipating, to accomplish its own work, and just as they say of the statues of Daedalus or the tripods of Hephaestus, which the poet says enter the divine assembly of their own accord, so if shuttles wove of themselves and plectrums played the lyre, there would be no need either for master-builders of assistants, or for masters of slaves.

Notes

  1. 1253b9ἀνώνυμος γὰρ ἡ γυναικὸς καὶ ἀνδρὸς σύζευξις — This statement, "the union of wife and husband is nameless," points out a linguistic fact in Greek: there was no single, technical noun that uniquely designated the relationship between a husband and a wife. While the adjective γαμική ("marital") is used as a substitute, the relation itself lacks a proper name (ἴδιον ὄνομα).
  2. 1253b32ὥσπερ ὄργανον πρὸ ὀργάνων — Regarding the preposition πρὸ. Rather than indicating temporal or spatial precedence, it here means priority or superiority in terms of control and hierarchy: "an instrument that takes precedence over other instruments" to direct and make them function. It metaphorically describes how a slave or assistant is a primary, active instrument that operates inanimate tools.
  3. 1253b33εἰ γὰρ ἠδύνατο ... οὐδὲν ἂν ἔδει — A counterfactual conditional construction (present unreal) consisting of a protasis with εἰ + imperfect indicative (ἠδύνατο) and an apodosis with ἂν + imperfect indicative (ἔδει). The logic runs: "if each of the instruments were able (to act automatically), there would be no need..."; since such automatic devices do not exist in reality, this paradoxly establishes the indispensable necessity of assistants and slaves.

Cite this passage

Aristotle, Politics §1.1253b. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0086.tlg035.humanitext-grc2:1.1253b

Please note the AI-draft status of the translation and the date accessed.

Translation, notes and summary are AI-generated drafts, revised through reader feedback.