,VOTES, BOOA- 212. .i. 1’9
,j sld ye TO~OV ~bv Adyou oi~6;u pjuopcv uupp’aiuctu &O;~OV ; 0684 y+ 6. 2.
“i ~~a~ol T&U c;pqpdvwv odSCv, 066’ oi cflrcXtLBFpol.
(But if the artisan is not included in the number of citizens
n-llere is he to be placed? He is not a metic, nor a stranger.
yet no real difficulty is involved in his exclusion any more than in
thJt of slaves or freedmen.’
8th ye TO~TOV T~V XO’you=so far as this objection goes, viz. the
implied objection that he has no place in the state.
Tiv +&UW refers to 0662 ~~TO~KOS 06%; &‘VOS.
;[ i7;o&uror.
, On the supposition that they grox up to be men.’T&U 8’ duaymiou. 6. 4.
‘ But in respect to servile occupations ’ ; either an anacoluthon
rcsumetl in ih TOKI~T~, or governed by the idea of Tpyou contained in
Xf ‘rov,,yoijvrro.
The point is hoJv to determine the position of the artisan or mean
pcraon. There is no difficulty in seeing that some Liho live in
\tales are not citizens, but how is the meclianic to be distinguished
’ froin the slave? The answer is that the slave ministers to a
j hgle master, artisans and serfs belong to the state.
$JOVfp6U 6’ fbf~dCU p1KpbU fhUKf$Clp;UOlS Vi)E zxfl TCP; a6T& ahb yhp 5. 4.
Oaviv TA Xfx& noifi 0“ijXov. irrr‘r yip K.T.X.
‘What has been said at once (+a&) makes the matter clear.’
It has been said that the best form of state will not admit the
artisan class to citizenship ($ 3), and that the citizen will vary with
the state (supra c. 1.8 9), a remark which he repeats in what follows.
‘ For there are many forms of states; virtue is the characteristic of
aristocracy, wealth of oligarchy. Now although the mechanic
or skilled artisan cannot have virtue, he may have wealth, and
therefore he may be a citizen of some states, but not of others.’
Tcd a;rGu, sc. about the lower class.
& ejf+ais 6; V+O~ 4. T;v 8;Ka i7~v pi cflrfwXqpivov 6s ciyiyopir pi 5. 7.CP. infra vi. 7.0 4, where the fact respecting Thebes is repeated.
It is clearly for the common interest and Tor the security of the@niyrl” (ipXlj*.