There are three major themes in the dialogue thought to be Plato’s Statesman: the nature of statesmanship, the difference between perfect and less than perfect regimes and the method of division. In this paper I focus on the first two themes. I argue, first, that the dialogue makes a plausible case for what it takes to be a wise statesman. In doing so, I play down the importance of the second theme: the difference between regimes. In fact, I consider this discussion to be deeply flawed and even irrelevant to the argument of the first. My main purpose is to provide a critical analysis of the political theory articulated in the dialogue. My analysis is made plausible by abandoning the traditional view that the Statesman was written Plato in its entirety as a unified whole. In my view, a close reading of the text supports the hypothesis that it is, at best, semi-authentic; namely, that it is most likely a collage of fragments written at different times by Plato and other members of the Academy.
References
[1]
Annas, J., & Waterfield, R. (1995). Plato: Statesman. Cambridge University Press.
[2]
Aristotle (1984). The Politics. Translated by Lord, C. University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226026701.001.0001
[3]
Aristotle (1912). On the Parts of Animals. Translated by William Ogle. University of California Libraries. http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/parts_animals.html
[4]
Berges, S. (2010). Understanding the Role of the Laws in Plato’s Statesman. Prolegomena, 9, 5-23.
[5]
Brisson, L. (1995). Interpretation du myth du Politique. In C. Rowe (Ed.), Reading the Statesman. Academia Verlag.
[6]
Canevaro, M. (2015). Making and Changing Laws in Ancient Athens. In E. M. Harris, & M. Canevaro (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Ancient Greek Law. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199599257.013.4
[7]
De Long, J. (2011). A Challenge to Samaras: Non-Ideal Constitutions in Plato’s Statesman and the Problem of Developmentalism (291-303).
[8]
Gill, C. (1995). Rethinking Constitutionalism in the Statesman291-303. In C. J. Rowe (Ed.), Reading the Statesman: Proceedings of the Iii Symposium Platonicum. Academia Verlag.
[9]
Larivée, A. (2019). Taking Frustration Seriously. Reading Plato’s Statesman as a Protreptic to Political Science. In B. B. López, & T. M. Robinson (Eds.), Plato’s Statesman Revisited. De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110605549-002
[10]
Masters, R. D. (1977). The Case of Aristotle’s Missing Dialogues: Who Wrote the Sophist, the Statesman and the Politics. Political Theory, 5, 31-60. https://doi.org/10.1177/009059177700500103
[11]
Masters, R. D. (1979). On Chroust: A Reply. Political Theory, 7, 545-547. https://doi.org/10.1177/009059177900700410
[12]
Miller, M. (2005). The Philosopher in Plato’s Statesman. Parmenides Publishing.
[13]
Plato (1956). Protagoras. Translated by Jowett, B. and Ostwald, M., Bobbs-Merrill.
[14]
Plato (1992a). The Statesman. Translated by Skemp, J.B. and Ostwald, M., Hackett Publishing Co.
[15]
Plato (1992b). The Republic. Translated by Grube, G.M.A. and Reeve, C.D.C., Hackett Publishing Co.
[16]
Plato (1993). The Sophist. Translated by White, N. P., Hackett Publishing Co.
[17]
Rosen, S. (1995). Plato’s Statesman: The Web of Politics. St. Augustine Press.
[18]
Rowe, C. J. (2001). Killing Socrates: Plato’s Later Thoughts on Democracy. The Journal of Hellenic Studies, 121, 63-76. https://doi.org/10.2307/631828
[19]
Rowe, C. J. (2006). Treatment of Non-Ideal Constitutions in Plato’s Politicus: Further Considerations. Philosophical Inquiry, 28, 105-121. https://doi.org/10.5840/philinquiry2006281/217
[20]
Ryle, G. (1995). Plato’s Progress. Cambridge University Press.
[21]
Sabine, G. H. (1937). A History of Political Theory. George G. Harrap, Ltd.
[22]
Schmitt, C. (2005). Political Theology. University of Chicago Press.
[23]
Schwartzberg M. (2004). Athenian Democracy and Legal Change. The American Political Science Review, 98, 311-325. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055404001169
[24]
Thesleff, H. (2009). Platonic Patterns. Parmenides Publishing.
