Kings and Poets

solus aut rex aut poeta non quotannis nascitur
[It is only king and poet who is not born every year.  From Annius Florus (circa 130 A.D.)] 

I think I got that right.   For Plato, the two rivals for philosophy, rivals for the minds of men, were kings and poets.  Plato's philosopher kings had absolute authority--and those damned poets are going to wish they'd never been born.

For Plato, those who grasp the Forms were always going to be a small group who must control, enslave, direct, think for those who do not grasp the Forms, vast numbers of them, the masses, artists, etc.  The ratio between the two groups was never going to change.  For Aristotle, those who are nurtured in a functioning polis (civilized) are an ever-growing group and percentage of the whole.  The uncivilized groups of men--"barbarians" of today did not have to remain so tomorrow.  They could join villages into a polis and in a few generations could be every bit as civilized as any Greek polis--regardless of race.  Aristotle's often accused of having an elitist us and them, Greek and non-Greek, attitude toward civilization.  But this is false.  He was familiar with most of the Greek poleis, Macedon, the satraps and cities along what is now the western Turkish coast, many of the isles in the Aegean, Persia and its holdings, Egypt, and many other Mediterranean cities.  He did not simply regard the Greeks as civilized and everyone else uncivilized.  For example, he held the Carthaginians in high regard, and Carthage was a North African city state with a population of mostly Phoenician decent.  They were non-Greek, but they were civilized, they had a polis, they had laws.  Aristotle also thought there were uncivilized Greeks, and then there's his constant harping on Athenians and others, but that's another post.