Liber III, Pars I — Quod non sic ordinanda est civitas, sicut Socrates statuebat. Cap. XIV.

Liber III, Pars I — Quod non sic ordinanda est civitas, sicut Socrates statuebat. Cap. XIV.

Since we believe that philosophers have spoken about politics and the order of citizens with reason, it is appropriate to discuss their opinions, not for the sake of ostentation, but because the present method we intend to present requires it regarding the governance of the city and the kingdom. For when we see what the philosophers have felt about this matter and examine their opinions, it will become clearer what should be considered regarding this kind of governance. Therefore, since it has been established in the preceding discussions that it is not expedient for the city to have possessions, wives, and children in common, as Socrates proposed; nor is it proper for women to be assigned to military duties; nor is it useful to always place the same individuals in the same offices, as Socrates seemed to suggest. It remains, therefore, to execute the commands and order of the city that Socrates established. For Socrates said, as I mentioned above, that a city should have five elements within itself. These are, namely, the ruler, the advisors, the warriors, the craftsmen, and the farmers. For he wanted the warriors to be a distinct part of the city, separate from the other citizens. Moreover, he stated that the number of warriors should be such that in any city there ought to be at least five thousand, and at most one thousand. This kind of arrangement regarding warriors can be challenged in three ways, based on what Socrates proposed about those who fight. First, he said they should be distinct and separate from other citizens. Second, he proposed a large number of warriors. Third, he placed them in a certain determined number. The first point is clear. For it is always better to prioritize the common good over private benefit: it is natural for one to expose oneself to danger for the whole, just as an arm immediately exposes itself to danger for the defense of the body; therefore, any citizen acts against the natural order if he does not expose himself to danger for the defense of his country. Thus, warriors should not be separated from craftsmen and other citizens in such a way that other citizens do not have to fight for the defense of their country. It is better, therefore, to say that in a city there should be as many warriors and defenders of the country as there are citizens capable of bearing arms, rather than to separate warriors from other citizens. The second way is clear, for establishing such a large number of warriors in any city, like five thousand or even a thousand, would be very difficult and burdensome for the citizens. For it would be burdensome and difficult for the citizens of a single city to support a thousand men in common expenses, none of whom would have any other duty than to fight, when the opportunity arose; and it would be even more burdensome and almost entirely impossible to support five thousand in this way. For this reason, the Philosopher says in the second book of Politics. Criticizing Socrates for such an order of the city, he says that the city must be established in the Babylonian region, where, due to the vastness of the deserts, there is a great expanse of land from which a large population could be sustained. For, as the Philosopher suggests, it is difficult to have such a large number of warriors. Thirdly, Socrates erred in organizing the city by establishing a fixed number of warriors. For according to the Philosopher in the second book of Politics, anyone wishing to establish laws or make any kind of ordinance in a city must consider three things. Namely, concerning the people, the region, and the neighboring places. If someone wants to establish some warriors living off the common resources of the city besides the citizens, they should consider three things. First, they should look at the citizens: for if the citizens themselves are cowardly and useless in war, they would need a greater number of warriors to support them. Second, they should consider the region: for the larger the city is in terms of territory and land, the more warriors it could sustain. Third, they should look at the neighboring areas, to see whether that city has friends or enemies nearby, whether they are cowardly or brave. For, given the varying conditions of the neighbors, it is necessary to determine differently about the conditions of the warriors. Therefore, since the art and science cannot deal with specific particulars, one wishing to teach the art of governing cities cannot set a fixed number of warriors: rather, such matters must be left to the judgment of a prudent ruler who considers the condition of the citizens, the nature of the region, and the circumstances of the neighbors.