First of all, the characteristics of city-state system: 1. The formation of Greek city-state system is a complex problem involving many aspects, and it is also one of the most concerned issues in the study of Greek history. Over the years, scholars have conducted in-depth and systematic research on it from different angles and put forward many new opinions. Professor Snodgrass, a famous Greek archaeologist at Cambridge University in England, pioneered a new way to study the formation of city-states by using rich archaeological data. He believes that the appearance of temples, town halls and other public buildings in the city is an important symbol of the formation of the city-state, and the rapid growth of the early ancient population reflected by archaeological materials promoted the formation of the city-state; French scholar Porini discussed the formation of the city-state system from the evolution of religious worship, pointing out that the establishment of the national patron saint in early ancient Greece and its religious worship marked the formation of the classical city-state; British scholars Goody and Watt discussed the use and popularization of characters, and pointed out that the appearance of Greek characters based on Phoenician letters and their wide application in society were the crucial factors to promote the formation of Greek city-states after the disappearance of Mycenae Greek characters for about four centuries. They believe that, unlike other traditional societies, in ancient Greece, once characters appeared, they were widely promoted and used, thus to a great extent, the appearance of polis was attributed to the appearance of characters and the consequences of their application. Generally speaking, the above-mentioned series of studies make us have a newer and deeper understanding of the historical problems of the formation of the Greek city-state system: the formation of the Greek city-state system is the result of a series of factors interacting. Regardless of the respective shortcomings of the above studies, their common shortcoming is that one-sided emphasis is placed on the role of one factor and the importance of other factors is ignored. Therefore, if viewed separately, none of them can convincingly explain the formation of the Greek city-state system. What is more serious is that although western scholars have made in-depth discussions on many aspects of the formation of the city-state system, they have neglected a very important factor, that is, the formation of private ownership of land. Of course, this may be intentional to a large extent. In western academic circles, the issue of private ownership of land has always been regarded as a part of Marxist ideology, so most scholars try to avoid touching this issue. But in fact, in this way, they just became the victims of western non-Marxist or anti-Marxist ideology. Aside from ideological factors, it is still very beneficial to make a historical investigation on the formation of private ownership of land.

Before the discussion, it must also be pointed out that the concept of ownership in ancient Greece is very different from that in ancient Rome or modern law. In ancient Greek thought, there was no abstract concept of ownership, and correspondingly, there were no words to express this abstract concept in ancient Greece. Greek words expressing ownership, such as ousia, exein, kratein, kektesthai, ktema, etc., all indicate the specific possession of specific property in practical sense. In the modern legal sense, they refer to "possession" rather than "ownership". The ancient Greeks understood ownership in the sense of actual possession, so when Aristotle tried to define solid possession, he was actually defining ownership:

The definition of firm possession is the possession of property, that is, the use of property depends entirely on oneself-the test standard for one's property is whether one has the right to transfer it; Here I use transfer to mean giving and buying. Aristotle's definition is generally accepted by today's ancient economic and legal historians. In ancient Greece, the primary symbol of land ownership was the owner's right to transfer land, that is, the right to give and buy.

2. The struggle between the lower class and the aristocratic ruling class for political and economic rights in ancient times is the key to understand the formation of Greek polis and the establishment of private ownership of land. To be sure, private ownership of land had not been established before ancient times. In Mycenae's time, the materials provided by the clay tablets in line B showed that the economic structure at that time was centered on the palace, which was what scholars called "palace economy". A large number of records on land possession show that Mycenae's land can be roughly divided into "Ke-Ke-Mi-Na" and "Ji-Ti-Mi-Na". Members of society-whether bureaucrats or ordinary farmers in the kingdom-have certain obligations to occupy land, which is what scholars call "conditional tenure". This is quite different from the land system in various historical periods in Greece. In Homer's time, with the collapse of Mycenae's centralization, local nobles shared the rights of the court and controlled most of the land. Although some scholars think that the land system in Homer's society is a typical private ownership, the materials provided by Homer's epic show that the private ownership of land has not yet been established. In Homer's society, there is still public ownership of land, which is proved by the epic records about Bacceli's uz or Timnos. The word temenos appears in the letter B, which means the territory of Wang (wanax) and General (lawagetas). In Homer's epic, the word 13 times. Except four of them represent the territory of God, the other nine places represent the territory of Brazilian Julius and noble soldiers. According to epic records, these territories were collectively awarded heroes and leaders who made military achievements. This shows that at least part of the land is owned by the collective rather than the individual, and the collective has the right to give it to the individual. In addition, the records of land in the epic also reflect the existence of public land. In ancient Greek, the original meaning of the word "kleros" is "drawing lots", and when referring to land, its extended meaning is "land obtained by drawing lots". There are two references to the distribution of land in the epic, and a metaphor used by Homer in the Iliad clearly shows that the land cultivated by individuals is distributed by the collective. When Homer described the fierce battle between the Greek allies and the Trojans, he compared the two armies to two people fighting for the boundary of the territory on a public land. They took measuring poles and quarreled about the uneven division of a small piece of land, but a fence separated them. Although some scholars have questioned this material, the existence of public land mentioned in it is undeniable.

However, public land is not the only form of land possession in Homer society. At the same time, the hero described by the poet is also the possessor of a large piece of land. They generally own a large number of orchards, pastures and cultivated land, and use slaves to work for them. Sometimes, nobles also give some land to loyal servants. Odysseus' pig, Yumaios, expects his master to give him a piece of land and a small house. He said, "A kind master should repay his servants who work hard and are blessed by the gods". On the other hand, the epic also mentions people who have no land. When Odysseus saw Achilles' soul in the underworld, he praised him for being respected by people before his death and becoming the leader of all souls after his death. The latter replied, "Noble Odysseus, don't praise death in front of me. I would rather live on the earth and be a servant of Akerlos than be the king of all the ghosts here. "

Generally speaking, in Homer society, Oykos controls most of the land, but this is not the whole picture of its land system, and there are also factors of land public ownership. The most reasonable explanation is that the land system in Homer's era was in the transitional stage from public ownership to private ownership, and private ownership of land was gradually established only in ancient times.

3. The monopoly control of the aristocratic ruling class on political power and economic resources led to the struggle for political and economic rights by the lower classes, which in turn triggered great changes in ancient society. It was this great social change that led to the formation of the classical city-state system, and it was also in this change that the private ownership of land was gradually established. In Sparta, the obvious sign of this change is the reform of Lekugu. Although Lekugu himself is a legend, the reform traditionally attributed to him has a historical basis, and its main content is the distribution of Claroi and the reform of social and political system. In recent years, some western scholars, such as Hudson, have tried to deny the historical truth of the land equalization system and put forward that Sparta's land system and its property inheritance system are no different from other city-states, but their research has neglected many important aspects of Sparta's social and political life. We have every reason to believe that Sparta's military system, citizen dining system and its education system are closely related to its land system. Unlike other city-states, Sparta has its own unique military and social system. All its adult male citizens are professional soldiers, and the noblest duty of citizens is to defend the city-state. Therefore, Spartan citizens took war and military training as their only occupation. As early as the Lekugu Reform, the polis "prohibited all free people from pursuing wealth and stipulated that their only duty was to defend the freedom of the polis". The polis also stipulates that all adult male citizens under the age of 60

Compulsory military service at all times. This system of militarization of citizens is inseparable from the system of sharing land equally. Since citizens can't engage in any pursuit of wealth, it is obvious that the city-state must provide a certain guarantee for their livelihood, so that all citizens can have the economic foundation of relatively equal. On the other hand, the combat mode of heavy infantry will inevitably affect the social and political consciousness of citizens. All citizens, whether civilians or nobles, become members of the heavy infantry, fighting or training side by side in the same phalanx. This group life between nobles and civilians undoubtedly gave birth to a concept of equality. Although some scholars have questioned this, the combat mode of heavy infantry has undoubtedly enhanced the self-confidence of civilians in their struggle with nobles. Although this self-confidence may not be enough to form a strong political consciousness and make them demand equal political rights, their demand for equality in economy, especially in land, is confirmed by historical data. At the beginning of the 7th century BC, the poetry of Tyrrhesus, a Spartan poet, recorded the call of the lower class for land redistribution. Perhaps this call coincides with the reform of heavy infantry, which is not only coincidence, but also cause and effect.

Another unique feature of social life in Sparta is the system of sharing meals with citizens. According to this system, all male citizens, including the king, have a collective meal. In order to maintain this system of collective dining, every citizen must pay a certain amount of food to the polis every year. If he can't pay the prescribed amount of food, he will lose his citizenship. Obviously, the basic premise of this system is that from the beginning, all citizens must have a corresponding economic foundation, that is, the land they occupy is enough to produce the food they want to pay, and this foundation can only be realized through the equal distribution of land. Without such a foundation, the system of collective dining could not be implemented at all, because the purpose of Spartan dining system was not to exclude some citizens from the beginning, but to cultivate citizens' collective concept and city-state concept.

The land system of Sparta is closely related to its unique social and political system. Therefore, when discussing the land system of Sparta, we should not treat it in isolation, but should take it as a part of the whole social, political and economic system of the polis and conduct a comprehensive study. The purpose of equal land system is to maintain the unique social and political system of the city-state. Its significance lies in that it actually defines the scope of citizen groups, thus defining citizenship. Members of the society who share land become members of the sharing system of the polis and professional soldiers, that is, citizens of the polis. It is in this sense that Polybius called the land of Sparta "the political part", and it was here that the private ownership of land of Sparta was established.

In Athens, the struggle between the lower peasants and nobles led to the establishment of private ownership of land more directly. The direct cause of Solon's reform is the monopoly of the aristocratic ruling class on land and the dissatisfaction of the lower peasants caused by it. Before the reform, lower-class farmers did not have direct land ownership. Aristotle said that before Solon's reform, Athens' debts could only be mortgaged by individuals, that is, individuals had no right to mortgage their cultivated land. All the land is controlled by the ruling group called Eupatridai, and the lower peasants become their dependents. Aristotle said when talking about the social situation in Athens before the reform:

..... After that, the nobles clashed with the people. From all aspects, their political system is in the hands of a few people, especially the poor, and their wives and children are enslaved by the rich. They are called princes and June 1 Han. Because they cultivate the land of the rich according to this misunderstanding. All land is controlled by a few people; If they can't pay the rent, they and their children will lose their freedom.

Aristotle mentioned the issue of "61 Han" here, and there has been a lot of controversy about this issue. Traditionally, Liu Yihan was regarded as a poor man who paid rent to aristocrats, so the misunderstood word in Aristotle's article was translated as "rent". However, there were different opinions on the specific share of rent, that is, one sixth or one fifth. In any case, one-sixth or one-fifth of the land rent seems incredible, so this conclusion is not generally accepted by scholars. In this regard, British scholar Garrent put forward a new view that "6 1 Han" means that farmers cultivate land for wealthy nobles in the busy farming season, and as a reward, they get one-sixth of the harvest. But this theory is difficult to explain the dissatisfaction and social crisis of the lower peasants in Attica in the seventh century BC. In order to justify himself, Garrent had to introduce the concept of "shame culture" here, and further assumed that it was a shame for the Greeks to be forced to sell their labor. But in any case, this concept of "shame culture" cannot convincingly explain the root of the social crisis in Athens at the end of the seventh century BC and the beginning of the sixth century BC. "Shame" is not the only reason for social change in Athens, or even a major reason.

Politics is the most important political work of ancient Greek thinkers. This book was written in 326 BC. The Chinese version was translated by Wu and Wu Xuchu according to the English version of British B. Jowett (revised version 192 1) and published by the Commercial Press in 1934. 1In August, 965, the Commercial Press published Wu Shoupeng's translation. On the basis of analyzing and comparing the political systems of more than 100 city-states, this book systematically discusses what is the best country for citizens on the premise that people are natural political animals. The book consists of 8 volumes, 103 chapter, which can be divided into 4 parts according to the content. (1) Volume 1 and Volume 3 discuss the basic theories of polis and polity. It is believed that the polis is a supreme and extensive social group, pursuing the highest and widest good cause. Human beings are natural political animals, and form city-states through families and villages. According to its purpose and the number of supreme sovereign executors, political power can be divided into two categories: authentic and abnormal. The former are monarchs, nobles and republics, while the latter are tyrants, oligarchs and civilians. (2) The second volume refutes the viewpoint of abolishing private property and family, and comments on various political systems at that time. (3) The fourth, fifth and sixth volumes discuss the concrete forms of expression, causes of change and preventive measures of the common people, oligarchs and republics in reality, and point out that the republic with the middle class as the main body is the most stable regime. (4) Volumes 7 and 8 discuss the morality, population, territory, nationality and education of the ideal city-state. Politics is recognized as the pioneering work of western traditional politics. The system it established and a series of political views had a far-reaching impact on the development of western political thought.

Aristotle's works express the view that every aspect of human life and society is the object of thinking and analysis; Everything in the universe is not controlled by gods, opportunities and fantasies, but operates according to certain laws; It is worthy of systematic and in-depth study of nature; We should draw our own conclusions through experiments and logical analysis. Aristotle's anti-tradition, anti-superstition and anti-mysticism had a far-reaching impact on western culture.

Aristotle's important works include Metaphysics, Ethics, Politics and Analysis. These works had a great influence on the later development of philosophy and science.

In Metaphysics, Aristotle believes that there is a relationship of "cause" in nature. This concept of "cause" is different from the modern concept of "cause and effect". "Cause" corresponds to "Why" but not to "Result". That is, objective reasons, material reasons, dynamic reasons and formal reasons. The so-called "material cause" is to show the existence form of a thing from a pile of parts, components, foundations or raw materials, and trace the composition of the matter back to the parts (elements, components), and then form a complete (system, architecture, mixing, synthesis, compound or combination). "Formal cause" can tell us what kind of definition, form, shape, essence, synthesis or prototype a thing is made of, and explain the basic principles or laws that make up a thing, which is only a part of the whole thing (a set of causality) (macro structure). "Causation" refers to the motive force and reason of changing things, and studies "what changed what and what caused this change", which includes all the media between things, including living or inanimate, motive force or the origin of changed things. "Final cause" refers to the reason why a thing exists or changes, including purposeful actions and activities. The purpose of a thing is the reason why it exists, or why it changes. This also explains that modern so-called psychological motives, including will, demand, motivation, rationality, irrationality and ethics, are the source of creative behavior.

Another work of Aristotle, Physics, discusses natural philosophy, principle of existence, matter and form, movement, time and space. He believes that in order to make an object move endlessly, there needs to be a reason to keep working.

Aristotle began to discuss matter and destructible things in his book "On Heaven", and then discussed occurrence and destruction. In this process of occurrence and destruction, the opposing principles of cold and heat and dry and wet interact to produce four elements: fire, fire, soil and water. In addition to these elements on the ground, he added ether. The ether moves in a circle, forming a perfect and immortal celestial body.

Meteorology discusses the area between heaven and earth, that is, the zone of planets, comets and meteors; There are also some primitive theories about vision, color vision and rainbow. In the fourth book, some primitive chemical concepts are described. At present, Aristotle's meteorology is far less satisfactory than his biological work, but this work had a great influence in the late Middle Ages.

The methodology of poetics has two characteristics: one is strict logical reasoning; The second is the combination of natural science method and social science method. Poetics is the first monograph on aesthetics and literature in the west, which is relatively complete in both theoretical content and theoretical form and deeply embodies Aristotle's methodology. The general artistic principles in Poetics reveal the essential characteristics of "the art of beauty", which is not only the requirement of the development of ancient Greece for theoretical brewing, but also provides a foothold for Aristotle to answer Plato's attack on poetry. Based on this, this paper expounds the fundamental rationality of "poetry" around its essence and function.

Aristotle's logic works were later compiled into a book by his annotators, called "On Tools". They inherited Aristotle's view that logic is neither theoretical knowledge nor practical knowledge, but a tool of knowledge. Instrumentalism mainly discusses deduction, which lays the foundation for formal logic and has a far-reaching influence on the development of this science.

Although it is later than Plato's Republic, Aristotle's Politics is still the earliest preserved work. In the book, politics is regarded as a special branch of applied science. Through the information obtained, Aristotle inspected the constitutions of more than 100 Greek countries. For him, for all Greeks, the name polis means a highly organized country. His works include some research fields today; If some of his theories mainly explain the difference between ancient times and modern times, then others are not only applicable to ancient Greece, but also to Europe today. Aristotle put forward in this book that "man is a political animal", arguing that man must be combined into a community according to his nature to survive, and that a country or city-state comes from something. According to Aristotle, the territory of an ideal country should not be too big, and all citizens should know each other. Like Plato's Republic, Aristotle also formulated a whole set of education system in Politics, proposing that education should conform to human nature, and cultivate children from three aspects: morality, intelligence and physique, so as to cultivate children into citizens with moderate moral character and perfection. The ruling form of a country can be divided into monarchy, aristocracy and constitutionalism. The opposing forms of the three regimes are tyrant, oligarchy and democracy, and the aristocratic regime is the most ideal regime.

reading comprehension

[Germany] Marx: "Aristotle was the greatest thinker in ancient times."

If you can learn to think with Aristotle, then you will become a real wise man.

It is best to have a certain understanding of the class goodness of ancient Greek society, such as reading and revising Ju Lushi's works; Mainly grasp the author's exposition of the regime, read through the book, and experience Aristotle's method of observing the world.

Famous saying: "Life is a political animal."

Try to establish a more reasonable system.

During Aristotle's period, the country was in serious turmoil, and there were constant free poor and slave uprisings. Witnessed the disintegration of Greece at that time, especially Athens as the cultural center of Greece, Aristotle advocated balancing the contradictions and struggles between the rich and the poor by strengthening the power of the middle class, which led to the collapse of the slave-owning country.

This book expounds the basic problems of political science, provides the theory of political virtue and political skills for political science, and lays the foundation for western political science. Aristotle advocated that the middle slave owners should master the political power and establish the "middle" political power, which should follow a "golden mean".