2a Herodotus and Plato

The seven foremost Persian aristocrats took on the two Magi, who usurped the power. When they killed them, they cut off their heads and ran out of the palace, calling on Persians and showing them the heads. Then every Persian found it right to kill any Magi they could put their hands on. Had not the night fall on, all Magi would have been wiped out on that day.

Five days later, when the situation calmed down, the seven discussed the future government. Otanes, who was the first to speak, rejected the monarchy as neither pleasant (oute gar hȇdu) nor good (oute agathon): ‘How could a monarchy ever be the right system of government, in which a monarch may do whatever he likes without any responsibility or control? Becoming a monarch, even the best of man is bound to change for the worse; the typical vices of monarch are envy (phthonos) and insolence (hubris).’ Having rejected monarchy, Otanes pleaded for democracy: ‘First, it has the finest name of all names to describe it, equality under law (isonomiȇn); and, secondly, the people in power (plȇthos de archon) do none of the things that monarchs do; a magistrate is appointed by lot (palȏi men archas archei) and is held responsible for his conduct in office (hupeuthunon de archȇn echei), and all resolutions (bouleumata de panta) he puts up for open debate (es to koinon anapherei).  I therefore propose (tithemai ȏn gnȏmȇn) that we do away with the monarchy (metentas hȇmeas mounarchiȇn) and raise the people to power (to plȇthos aexein). (III. 81)

Then Megabyzos, enlarging on the weaknesses of democracy, pleaded for oligarchy: ‘What Otanes said against monarchy, I agree with him (lelechthȏ k’amoi tauta); but in asking us to transfer power to people (ta d’ es to plȇthos anȏge pherein to kratos) he missed the best proposal (gnȏmȇs tȇs aristȇs hȇmartȇke); for there is nothing more witless and wantonly violent than useless mob (homilou gar achrȇiou ouden esti asunetȏteron oude hubristoteron). Let us choose a certain number of the best men (hȇmeis de andrȏn tȏn aristȏn epilexantes homiliȇn) and give the power to them (toutoisi peritheȏmen to kratos); and the best men (aristȏn de andrȏn) will presumably (oikos), produce the best policy (arista bouleumata gignesthai).

 Darius was the third (III. 82):

‘I support all Megabyzus’ remarks about the masses (ta men Megabuzos eipe eis to plȇthos) but I do not agree with what he said about oligarchy. Take the three forms of government we are considering – democracy, oligarchy, and monarchy – and suppose each of them to be the best of its kind; I maintain that the third is greatly preferable to the other two. One ruler: it is impossible to improve upon that – provided he is the best. His judgment will be in keeping with his character; his control of the people will be beyond reproach; his measures against enemies and traitors will be kept secret more easily than under other forms of government. In an oligarchy, the fact that a number of men are competing for distinction in the public service (en oligarchiai polloisi aretȇn epaskeousi es to koinon) cannot but lead to violent personal feuds; each of them wants to get to the top, and to see his own proposals carried; so they quarrel. Personal quarrels (echthea) lead to open dissension (ex hȏn stasies engignontai), and then to bloodshed (ek de tȏn stasiȏn phonos); and from that state of affairs the only way out is monarchy (ek de tou phonou apebȇ eis mounarchiȇn) – a clear proof that (kai en toutȏi diedexe) monarchy is the best (hosȏi esti touto ariston). Again, in a democracy, malpractices are bound to occur; in this case, however, corrupt dealings in government services lead not to private feuds, but to close personal associations, the men responsible for them putting their heads together and mutually supporting one another. And so it goes on (touto de toiouto ginetai), until somebody or other comes forward as the people’s champion (es ho an prostas tis tou dȇmou) and breaks up the cliques (tous toioutous pausȇi). This (ek de autȏn) wins him the admiration (thaumazetai houtos dȇ) of the people (hupo tou dȇmou), and being admired (thȏmazomenos de an ȏn) he became a monarch (ephanȇ mounarchos eȏn) – all of which is another proof that the best form of government is monarchy. To sum up: where did we get our freedom from, and who gave it to us? Is it the result of democracy, or of oligarchy, or of monarchy? We were set free by one man [Darius was pressing on; Otanes was procrastinating] and therefore I propose that we should preserve that form of government, and, further, that we should refrain from changing ancient laws, which have served us well in the past. To do so would lead only to disaster.’

These were the three views set out (Gnȏmai men dȇ treis hautai proekeato), and the four of the seven men (hoi de tesseres tȏn hepta andrȏn) sided with this proposal (prosethento tautȇi).