Politics: Book 4

Politics 'Book IV'

Politics, like other practical arts, has to '[C]onsider the different methods appropriate to the different categories of its subject.'¹ Thus, one must consider the following.

1. What is the best i.e ideal constitution when there are no factors to hamper its formation.
2. Which sort of constitution suits which sort of civic body.
3. The study of constitutions that are not the ideal and are not the best possible under the given circumstances.
4. What constitution is best for cities generally.

The constitution being proposed should be such that it is acceptable to the majority of the people, given the system they currently have. The statesman (politikos) should thus know how many different kinds of constitution there are. Aristotle opines that there is not, as is believed, only one sort of democracy and one sort of oligarchy. This understanding is also essential for the framing of laws. Laws must be framed according to each constitution if they are to be appropriate for that constitution. A constitution is an organization of offices in a city which fixes the method of their distribution, the sovereign authority and the nature of the end to be pursued. Laws set the rules by which magistrates can check transgressors and exercise their authority. A law appropriate for one constitution need not be appropriate for another.

Having discussed aristocracy and kingship in 'Book III', Aristotle now proposes to discuss 'constitutional government', oligarchy, democracy and tyranny. Oligarchy, democracy and tyranny are perversions of ideal constitutions, according to Aristotle, with tyranny being the worst, followed by oligarchy and then democracy.

A city is composed of different parts and the different ways in which these parts share in the control of the constitution gives rise to different constitutions. Aristotle argues that democracy cannot be defined merely as a constitution where the greater number are sovereign. In all forms the decision of the majority of those who share in the constitution is sovereign. Similarly, oligarchy cannot be defined as a constitution where a few people have sovereignty over the constitution.

“There is a democracy when the free-born and poor control the government, being at the same time a majority; and similarly there is an oligarchy when the rich and better-born control the government, being at the same time a minority.”

-- Politics,1290^b20

Having established that a city is composed of different parts, Aristotle says that the same set of people may possess the capacity to act in different roles ( as soldiers and as part of the judicial court, for instance) but since the same people cannot be both rich and poor, these two are regarded as parts of the city in a special sense. They appear to be opposed elements since once is usually larger than the other. This is why constitutions are established based on the predominance of one or the other and the different ways in which offices are organised gives rise to different types of democracy and oligarchy.

The various types of democracies that Aristotle defines are

1. The poor and the rich share, as far as possible, on the same terms in the constitution and the decision of the majority is sovereign
2. There is a low property qualification, with everyone who achieves it eligible for a share in office.
3. Every citizen of unimpeachable descent is eligible for office but the law is the final sovereign.
4. Everyone, provided only that he is a citizen, is eligible but the law is the final sovereign.
5. The fifth is the same in other respects [by which I understand that every citizen is eligible], but the people and not the law are the final sovereign i.e. popular decrees are sovereign and not the law.

Where the people and not the law are the final sovereign, demagogues arise and the people then becomes a monarchy. Aristotle likens them to tyrannical forms of monarchy, despotic and likens their decrees to the edicts of the monarch. He argues that they are not democracies in the proper sense since decrees can never be general.

Having classified democracies, Aristotle proceeds to classify oligarchies under the following categories.

1. Where there is a high enough property qualification to exclude the poor but where anyone who attains that qualification is eligible.
2. Where the property qualifications are high and those eligible themselves choose the replacements for vacancies.
3. Where sons succeed their fathers but the law is sovereign.
4. Where sons succeed their fathers but the officials, not the law, are sovereign and this is equivalent to tyrannies and the fifth form of democracy mentioned earlier.

Aristotle then provides another system of classifying democracies and oligarchies, this time on the basis of the amount of leisure available. Where those eligible to participate do not enjoy the leisure required, the rule of law is sovereign. In democracies, when there is state payment for attending assemblies, the mass of poor become the sovereign power while in oligarchies when those eligible acquire considerable property and are able to wield considerable influence, a 'dynasty' akin to personal rule appears.

Other forms of constitution are aristocracy and 'constitutional government'[or polity]. Aristotle opines that a constitution can with strict justice be called an aristocracy when the members are not merely 'good' relative to some standard but absolutely the best[aristoi] in excellence.

“[M]erit is the criterion of aristocracy, as wealth is the criterion of oligarchy, and free-birth of democracy.”

-- Politics, 1294^a9

In a mixed form of constitution, we must ideally consider free birth, wealth and merit. However only the first two are usually considered with the wealthy being considered gentlemen. A 'constitutional government' contains elements of both democracy and oligarchy. This can be achieved by either combining elements or taking the mean between them.

After a brief discussion on tyrannies, Aristotle goes on to consider the best constitution and way of life for the majority of people and cities. The best form of political association, if the best kind of life is in a mean attained by every individual, is one where power is vested in the middle class (which is the mean between the rich and the poor) and where the middle class is large enough so that they are at least stronger than each singly. This form is free from factions and its members are most ready to listen to reason.

Having established that the best constitution will follow the mean, Aristotle considers what type of constitution is suited for which people, based on quantity (superiority in numbers) and quality( free birth, wealth, culture and nobility of descent). However, he urges the legislator to always make the middle class partners in the constitution. Similarly, various devices are adopted to “fob off the masses” and Aristotle recommends honest compromise instead of deception.

Finally, Aristotle deliberates on the methods of establishing constitutions. He identifies three elements or powers in a city : the deliberative, concerned with common affairs, the legislative, concerned with public offices, and the judiciary. The deliberative deals with issues like war, alliances, capital punishment and auditing of offices. He enumerates various methods of achieving this like assigning responsibility to all citizens on all decisions, to all on some decisions and not on others and so on. However he advices that those assigned these responsibilities be drawn from all sections.

The legislative is concerned with public offices (defined as directing either the whole body of citizens or some part of them in a particular sphere of activity.) Aristotle again enumerates different arrangements based on the number of offices, the subjects with which they deal, their tenure and their method of appointment. The last point raises further questions regarding who should be eligible, who can appoint them and how they will be appointed.

Those eligible for office and to appoint to office can be all the citizens or some of the citizens and the method of appointment can be by election or by lot. Various combinations of these factors are democratic or oligarchic depending on whether all are appointing from all, whether by lot or election or whether some are appointing from some. Other combinations are aristocratic when appointment is done by a section from all or by all from a section by election.

Aristotle ends by discussing the judicial element. He categorises courts into eight parts discusses courts that deal with a political nature further. Again the courts will be democratic or oligarchic depending on whether the entire citizen body is eligible to give decision or whether only a section is eligible, and whether they are chosen by lot or election or a combination of these two.

'Book IV' thus gives an empirical view of constitutions with Aristotle defining various types of constitutions and the different arrangements possible that give rise to them.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1Politics, 1288^b10

All quotations are from the Oxford edition of Aristotle's Politics translated by Sir Ernest Barker, revised by R.F. Stallley.