The Ancient Greeks did not have a dedicated theory
about the idea of sovereignty but they developed the conceptualisation of State
and its implications so we in fact are able to at least have hints about their
thoughts in regards also to sovereignty.
Plato sets up the basis from where the Greek
philosophers and thinkers (even the modern ones) depart. Plato understands that
we are in presence of a State “when we have got hold of enough people to
satisfy our many varied needs, we have assembled quite a large number of
partners and helpers together to live in one place […]”.
He summarised with his conceptualisation all the elements we consider nowadays
essential for the existence of a State: population, territory, government. Note
that law is not mentioned but will be present throughout his work.
With The Republic “[…] there seems reason to
believe it was monarchy which claimed [Plato’s] allegiance. A famous sentence
of the Republic tells us, that there will be no rest from their troubles for
the cities of Greece or for all mankind, until the days of philosopher kings;
and from the Politicus we also learn the necessity of ideal and absolute
monarchy. […] Reason, being one and indivisible, rules the spirit and the
multitude of desires in the individual mind: reason, incarnate in one
sovereign, must rule all other classes in the State. In such a sovereign the
theories of the Republic culminate. […]The Platonic theory of monarchy is
expounded in the Politicus”. However interesting, this point is not
relevant here. Plato revaluates several forms of governments from different
angles. It is true he considers monarchy as the best option in theory but he
knows—being a pragmatic—that democracy results more feasible. The key detail for
here: the sovereignty of a State remains a “human” attribute.
Let us turn the attention to what Plato says in the
Politicus in relation to the
Guardians, representatives, statesman or government:
“[…] we started by taking theoretical
knowledge and distinguishing an instructional part of if, and we then drew on
an analogy to make up the term ‘producer-instructional’ for a further subdivision.
Next, within this ‘producer-instructional’ branch we isolated the not
unimportant art of maintaining creatures. We found that a category of
creature-maintenance was herd-maintenance, and that a category of
herd-maintenance in its turn was the herding of creatures with feet. Within the
herding of creatures with feet, the crucial segment we distinguished was the
art of maintaining those which lack horns. And if you want to encapsulate in a
single term the relevant subdivision of this art of maintaining creatures which
lack horns, you have to combine at least three components and call it the
branch of knowledge which is concerned with ‘the herding of species which
cannot interbreed’. As for subdividing this class, since the art of herding
human beings is the only section left which deals with two-footed gregarious
creatures, then it is exactly what we are after – the art we’ve been calling
both kingship and statesmanship”.
Indeed, it seems Plato introduces a simple
classification. But after more careful consideration we may see that he presents
the elements that integrated—and still do —the theory of a ruler and the State:
gregarious two-footed creatures (we would add, with consciousness) that are
used to being in groups. He assumes they will have needs and in order to better
cover their needs they will need direction; hence, the reciprocal relation
represented-representative—i.e. sovereignty and its reflection. For the ones
into political sciences and political theory, a very early reference to Nozick
and his “aggregations.”
Another key development evident in Plato’s work: having
different options in terms of forms of government, it is only one that truly
reflects the idea of public sovereignty: “[…] ‘dictatorship’ is the term for
the management by constraint of unwilling subjects, whereas ‘statesmanship’ is
the term for the management by consent of willing, two-footed, gregarious
creatures. So [the one] […] with this particular kind of managerial expertise
is a true statesman-king […]”.
As it has previously been mentioned in this post, it
is clear Plato’s preference for monarchy but being a practical thinker and
having experienced many realities throughout his life he concedes that “[…] in
other cities there had been a development which had almost everywhere followed
the same order, from monarchy to aristocracy, from aristocracy to tyranny, from
tyranny to democracy”.
For that reason it is at least hard to agree with Barker
when he concludes that “[t]he statesman has an infinite complexity of
circumstances, an infinite variety of characters, to handle; and like a
physician, he must be left untrammelled by any book of laws, if he is to handle
them as he should. The variability of his matter demands a corresponding
flexibility in his power. States which bind their rulers to act according to
law lose that flexibility. [...] The ideal of Plato would thus appear to be the
absolute monarch of a subject people, unfettered by public opinion and
unhampered by law”. From The Republic to the Politicus and the Laws a
common thread may be identified: sovereignty as an attribute of the people that
are the polis.
The idea of the
representative evolves as his works and mostly his experience do so. Although
he is inclined at first for a monarch ruling with absolute power he later on
understands the idea of democracy as a better and more practical solution. It
is important to highlight once again: sovereignty remains in all his works
within the society. That society because of its needs requires representation.
The representatives (or Guardians) are a reflection of the people’s will.
Having one person representing them or a group does not change the essence of
his idea.
Next time Plato’s Statesman.
Plato, The Republic, translated by D. Lee, Penguin Books, 1987, p. 58.
Barker, Ernest, The
political thought of Plato and Aristotle, Dover Publications Inc., 1959, pp.
164/165.
Plato,
Statesman, translated by R. Waterfield, Cambridge texts in the History of
political thought, 1995, pp. 18/19.
Plato,
Statesman, translated by R. Waterfield, Cambridge texts in the History of
political thought, 1995, p. 32.
Barker, Ernest, Greek
political theory: Plato and his predecessors, Methuen & Co., Ltd., 1951, p.
3.
Barker, Ernest, The
political thought of Plato and Aristotle, Dover Publications Inc., 1959, p.
167/168.
