Book 3 — The Citizen and the Constitution

Book 3 opens with the question that any political science must answer: what is a state, and who is a citizen? Aristotle's answer is precise. The citizen is not merely a resident or a party to legal proceedings — resident aliens and slaves share the place but are not citizens. The citizen in the strict sense is one who shares in deliberative or judicial office — who participates in the governance of the community. This definition, Aristotle notes, applies most naturally to democracy and must be modified for other constitutions.

From the definition of the citizen, Aristotle moves to the definition of the constitution. A constitution is the arrangement of offices in a city, especially the arrangement of the sovereign office. Two questions classify any constitution: how many rule, and in whose interest? The answer gives six types: monarchy (one, for the common good), tyranny (one, for the ruler's benefit), aristocracy (few, for the common good), oligarchy (few, for the wealthy), polity (many, for the common good), and democracy (many, for the poor). The three deviations are not merely different forms but corruptions — they have turned the aim of rule from the common good to a private interest.

The second half of Book 3 addresses the question of distributive justice in politics: if the good things of the city are to be distributed, on what basis? The democrats say numerical equality — each person counts as one. The oligarchs say proportional inequality — those with more property have more claim. Aristotle says both are partially right: justice is proportional, but the relevant proportion is not wealth or birth alone. The end of the city is the good life, and those who contribute most to that end — whether through virtue, wealth, or numbers — have the strongest claim to a share in rule. The book ends with the argument that the rule of law is superior to the rule of any individual, however excellent: law is reason without appetite.