Abstract

According to Aristotle, there are three qualitatively different forms of rule: royal, political, and despotic. Royal and political rule are free, while despotic rule is unfree. In unfree rule the ruler rules in his own interest. But free men deserve to be ruled in their own interests, which occurs in royal and political rule. In political rule some of the ruled have a right to participate in public life. Being a citizen does not necessarily mean, however, having the right to higher office. In actual constitutions, the distribution of political power beyond that accompanying mere citizenship usually depends on an additional criterion. Political virtue is the best criterion because officials possessing it are most likely to produce a happy citizenry. If a political community has a man with political virtue that outweighs that of all others combined, no other man is qualified to participate in public deliberation and judgment, to be a citizen. Under this royal rule, there is neither shared rule nor rule of law. Despite this Aristotle says that royal rule is better than political rule. A king is more effectively able to produce a happy population than would any multitude of citizens ruling jointly. This means that one need not be a citizen, let alone hold high office, to be happy. In fact happiness primarily consists in philosophical contemplation, for which there is more time in a monarchy. Corresponding to the three kinds of rule there were three dimensions to Aristotle's practical policies