<TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xmlns:py="http://codespeak.net/lxml/objectify/pytype" py:pytype="TREE"><text><body><div type="translation" n="urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0010.tlg021.perseus-eng2" xml:lang="eng"><div n="131" subtype="section" type="textpart"><p>For they established government by the people, not the kind which operates at haphazard,
          mistaking licence for liberty and freedom to do what one likes for happiness,<note resp="editor">See <bibl n="Isoc. 7.20">Isoc. 7.20</bibl> and note.</note>
          but the kind which frowns upon such excesses and makes use of the rule of the best. Now
          the majority count the rule of the best,<note resp="editor">Aristocracy.</note> which is the most advantageous of governments (just as they do
          government based upon a property qualification<note resp="editor">Timocracy.</note>), among the distinct kinds of polity, being mistaken, not because of
          ignorance, but because they have never taken any interest in the things which should claim
          their attention. </p></div><div n="132" subtype="section" type="textpart"><p>But I, for my part, hold that there are three types of polity and three only: oligarchy,
          democracy, and monarchy,<note resp="editor"><bibl n="Plat. Rep. 544c">Plat.
              Rep. 544c ff.</bibl>, distinguishes these three types: monarchy, which may be either a
            constitutional or an absolute rule; government by the few, which may be either an
            aristocracy or an oligarchy; and democracy. <bibl n="Aristot. Pol. 3.1281a">Aristot.
              Pol. 3.6 ff.</bibl>, recognizes three types: monarchy, aristocracy, and a republic,
            and, corresponding to them (aberrations from them), three debased forms, tyranny,
            oligarchy, and democracy. Isocrates’ point is that any one of these forms may be an
            aristocracy; it is the spirit of the constitution which matters (<bibl n="Isoc. 12.138">Isoc. 12.138</bibl>); that government is best (i.e. an aristocracy) where the best
            men rule.</note> and that of the people who live under these all who are wont to place
          in charge of their offices and of their affairs in general those of their fellow-citizens
          who are most competent and who will most ably and justly direct the affairs of state—all
          these, I hold, will govern well, under any type of polity, both in their domestic
          relations and in their relations to the rest of the world. </p></div><div n="133" subtype="section" type="textpart"><p>On the other hand, when men employ in these positions of leadership those of their
          citizens who are the most brazen and the most depraved and who take no thought for the
          things which are advantageous to the commonwealth but are ready to go to any extreme to
          further their personal advantage, the character of their government will correspond to the
          depravity of the men at the head of their affairs. Again, all who are not of the latter
          class nor of that which I mentioned previously, but who, when they feel secure, honor
          before others those who speak for the gratification of the public and, when they are
          afraid, seek refuge in the best and wisest of their citizens—such men will fare now worse
          now better as the case may be. </p></div><div n="134" subtype="section" type="textpart"><p> This, then, is the truth regarding the natures and powers of the several polities—a
          theme which will, I think, furnish to others material for much more extended discussion,
          although I must not speak further on the general subject but must confine myself to the
          polity of our ancestors. For I undertook to prove that this has been of greater worth and
          the source of greater benefits than the polity which obtains in <placeName key="perseus,Sparta">Sparta</placeName>. </p></div><div n="135" subtype="section" type="textpart"><p>And what I say on this head will prove, for those who would gladly hear me discuss an
          excellent polity, neither burdensome nor untimely but of due measure and in keeping with
          what I have said before; those, however, who take pleasure, not in the things which have
          been spoken in deep seriousness, but rather in the orators who rail at each other most of
          all at the public assemblies, or, if the speakers refrain from this madness, in those who
          deliver encomiums on the most trivial things<note resp="editor">It appears to
            have been a common practice for speakers to show off their oratorical powers by
            extolling such themes. See <bibl n="Isoc. 4.">Isoc. 4.</bibl>close and note; <bibl n="Isoc. 10.12">Isoc. 10.12</bibl>.</note> or on the most lawless men who have ever
          lived—to these, I think, what I say will seem much longer than it should be. </p></div></div></body></text></TEI>