Chapter 9

We shall next proceed to show how that government which is peculiarly called a state arises alongside of democracy and oligarchy, and how it ought to be established; and this will at the same time show what are the proper boundaries of both these governments, for we must mark out wherein they differ from one another, and then from both these compose a state of such parts of each of them as will show from whence they were taken.

Next, we will show how the form of government specifically called a state arises alongside democracy and oligarchy. We will also explain how it should be established. This explanation will also show the proper limits of democracy and oligarchy. For we must identify how these two forms of government differ, then combine elements of both into a state. The elements must remain recognizable as coming from democracy or oligarchy.

There are three different ways in which two states may be blended and joined together; for, in the first place, all those rules may be adopted which the laws of each of them have ordered; as for instance in the judicial department, for in an oligarchy the rich are fined if they do not come to the court as jurymen, but the poor are not paid for their attendance; but in democracies they are, while the rich are not fined for their neglect. Now these things, as being common to both, are fit to be observed in a free [1294b] state which is composed of both. This, then, is one way in which they may be joined together. In the second place, a medium may be taken between the different methods which each state observes; for instance, in a democracy the right to vote in the public assembly is either confined by no census at all, or limited by a very small one; in an oligarchy none enjoy it but those whose census is high: therefore, as these two practices are contrary to each other, a census between each may be established in such a state. In the third place, different laws of each community may be adopted; as, for instance, as it seems correspondent to the nature of a democracy, that the magistrates should be chosen by lot, but an aristocracy by vote, and in the one state according to a census, but not in the other: let, then, an aristocracy and a free state copy something from each of them; let them follow an oligarchy in choosing their magistrates by vote, but a democracy in not admitting of any census, and thus blend together the different customs of the two governments. But the best proof of a happy mixture of a democracy and an oligarchy is this, when a person may properly call the same state a democracy and an oligarchy. It is evident that those who speak of it in this manner are induced to it because both these governments are there well blended together: and indeed this is common to all mediums, that the extremes of each side should be discerned therein, as at Lacedaemon; for many affirm that it is a democracy from the many particulars in which it follows that form of government; as for instance, in the first place, in the bringing up of their children, for the rich and poor are brought up in the same manner; and their education is such that the children of the poor may partake of it; and the same rules are observed when they are youths and men, there is no distinction between a rich person and a poor one; and in their public tables the same provision is served to all. The rich also wear only such clothes as the poorest man is able to purchase. Moreover, with respect to two magistracies of the highest rank, one they have a right to elect to, the other to fill; namely, the senate and the ephori. Others consider it as an oligarchy, the principles of which it follows in many things, as in choosing all their officers by vote, and not by lot; in there being but a few who have a right to sit in judgment on capital causes and the like. Indeed, a state which is well composed of two others ought to resemble them both, and neither, Such a state ought to have its means of preservation in itself, and not without; and when I say in itself, I do not mean that it should owe this to the forbearance of their neighbours, for this may happen to a bad government, but to every member of the community's not being willing that there should be the least alteration in their constitution. Such is the method in which a free state or aristocracy ought to be established.

There are three ways to blend and unite two forms of government. First, a state may adopt all the rules laid down by the laws of both forms. Take the courts, for example. In an oligarchy, the rich are fined if they fail to serve as jurors. But the poor receive no payment for serving. In democracies, the poor are paid, while the rich are not fined for failing to serve. Both rules are therefore suitable for a free [1294b] state that combines the two forms of government. This is one way to unite them. Second, a state may take a middle course between the different practices of the two forms. In a democracy, voting in the public assembly requires either no property qualification or a very low one. In an oligarchy, only those who meet a high property qualification may vote. Since these practices are opposites, a mixed state may set a property qualification between the two. Third, a state may adopt different laws from each form of government. For example, choosing officials by lot seems characteristic of democracy, while choosing them by vote seems characteristic of aristocracy. One form requires a property qualification, while the other does not. Let an aristocracy or a free state therefore borrow something from each. Let it follow oligarchy by choosing officials through voting, but democracy by requiring no property qualification. In this way, it can blend the different practices of the two governments. The best proof of a successful mixture of democracy and oligarchy is this: the same state can rightly be called both. Clearly, people describe a state this way because the two forms of government are well blended there. Indeed, every middle course has this feature: the extremes on either side can be recognized within it. Lacedaemon is an example. Many call it a democracy because so many of its practices follow that form of government. First, rich and poor children are brought up in the same way. Their education is such that poor children can share in it. The same rules apply when they become youths and grown men, with no distinction between rich and poor. At their public meals, everyone receives the same food. The rich also wear only clothes that the poorest man can afford. Moreover, the people have rights concerning two of the highest offices. They may elect members of the senate, and they may themselves serve as ephori. Others consider Lacedaemon an oligarchy because many of its practices follow oligarchic principles. All its officials are chosen by vote, not by lot. Only a few people have the right to judge cases involving the death penalty and similar matters. Indeed, a state that successfully combines two forms of government should resemble both, and neither. Such a state should have the means to preserve itself within itself, not outside it. By this, I do not mean that its survival should depend on its neighbors leaving it alone. Even a bad government may survive that way. Rather, its survival should rest on every member of the community opposing even the slightest change to its constitution. This is how a free state or an aristocracy should be established.