The Complete Aristotle (eng.)

a
wealthy class, and priests, and judges to decide what is necessary
and expedient.
IX
    Having determined these points, we have in the next place to
consider whether all ought to share in every sort of occupation.
Shall every man be at once husbandman, artisan, councillor, judge,
or shall we suppose the several occupations just mentioned assigned
to different persons? or, thirdly, shall some employments be
assigned to individuals and others common to all? The same
arrangement, however, does not occur in every constitution; as we
were saying, all may be shared by all, or not all by all, but only
by some; and hence arise the differences of constitutions, for in
democracies all share in all, in oligarchies the opposite practice
prevails. Now, since we are here speaking of the best form of
government, i.e., that under which the state will be most happy
(and happiness, as has been already said, cannot exist without
virtue), it clearly follows that in the state which is best
governed and possesses men who are just absolutely, and not merely
relatively to the principle of the constitution, the citizens must
not lead the life of mechanics or tradesmen, for such a life is
ignoble, and inimical to virtue. Neither must they be husbandmen,
since leisure is necessary both for the development of virtue and
the performance of political duties.
    Again, there is in a state a class of warriors, and another of
councillors, who advise about the expedient and determine matters
of law, and these seem in an especial manner parts of a state. Now,
should these two classes be distinguished, or are both functions to
be assigned to the same persons? Here again there is no difficulty
in seeing that both functions will in one way belong to the same,
in another, to different persons. To different persons in so far as
these i.e., the physical and the employments are suited to
different primes of life, for the one requires mental wisdom and
the other strength. But on the other hand, since it is an
impossible thing that those who are able to use or to resist force
should be willing to remain always in subjection, from this point
of view the persons are the same; for those who carry arms can
always determine the fate of the constitution. It remains therefore
that both functions should be entrusted by the ideal constitution
to the same persons, not, however, at the same time, but in the
order prescribed by nature, who has given to young men strength and
to older men wisdom. Such a distribution of duties will be
expedient and also just, and is founded upon a principle of
conformity to merit. Besides, the ruling class should be the owners
of property, for they are citizens, and the citizens of a state
should be in good circumstances; whereas mechanics or any other
class which is not a producer of virtue have no share in the state.
This follows from our first principle, for happiness cannot exist
without virtue, and a city is not to be termed happy in regard to a
portion of the citizens, but in regard to them all. And clearly
property should be in their hands, since the husbandmen will of
necessity be slaves or barbarian Perioeci.
    Of the classes enumerated there remain only the priests, and the
manner in which their office is to be regulated is obvious. No
husbandman or mechanic should be appointed to it; for the Gods
should receive honor from the citizens only. Now since the body of
the citizen is divided into two classes, the warriors and the
councillors and it is beseeming that the worship of the Gods should
be duly performed, and also a rest provided in their service for
those who from age have given up active life, to the old men of
these two classes should be assigned the duties of the
priesthood.
    We have shown what are the necessary conditions, and what the
parts of a state: husbandmen, craftsmen, and laborers of an kinds
are necessary to the existence of states, but the parts of the
state are the warriors and councillors. And these are distinguished
severally from one another, the distinction being in some cases
permanent, in others not.
X
    It is not a new or recent discovery of political philosophers
that the state ought to be divided into classes, and that the
warriors should be separated from the husbandmen. The system has
continued in Egypt and in Crete to this day, and was established,
as tradition says, by a law of Sesostris in Egypt and of Minos in
Crete. The institution of common tables also appears to be of
ancient date, being in Crete