commercial and monetary system, whereas they centralized all judicial functions in the ruler. Thus, the State gains a twofold power, manifested, in the first place, in the very establishment of a judicial order, and, secondly, in the differentiation of the spheres of justice in which the authority of the State over the individual is exercised. This finally prepares the way for the last stage of development. The state itself becomes subject to an established legal order which determines its various functions and the duties of its members. There thus originates an officialdom, organized on fixed principles and possessing carefully defined public privileges. The people of the State, on the other hand, are divided into definite classes on the basis of the duties demanded of them as well as of the rights connected with these duties. These articulations of political society, which determine the organization of the army, the mode of taxation, and the right of participation in the government of the State, develop, as we have already seen, out of totemic tribal organization, as a result of the external conditions attendant upon the migrations and wars connected with the rise of States. But they also exhibit throughout the traces of statutes expressing the will and recording the decisions of individual rulers, though even here, of course, universal human motives are decisive. After the political powers of the State have been divided and have been delegated to particular officials and official colleges, and after political rights have been apportioned to the various classes of society, the next step consists in rendering the organization of the State secure by means of a _Constitution_ regulating the entire political system. In the shaping of the Constitution, it cannot be denied that individual legislators or legislative assemblies played a significant rôle. Nevertheless, it must be remembered that it is solely as respects the _form_ of State organization that the final and most comprehensive legal creation appears to be predominantly the result of the will acts of individuals. The _content_ of the Constitution is in every respect a product of history; it is determined by conditions which, in the last analysis, depend upon the general culture of a nation and upon its relations with other peoples. These conditions, however, are so complex that, though every form of Constitution and all its modifications may be regarded as absolutely involved in the causal nexus of historical life, the endless diversity of particular conditions precludes Constitutions from being classifiable according to any universal principle. Constitutions can at most be classified on the basis of certain analogies. The most influential attempt at a genetic classification of the various historical forms of government was that of Aristotle. But his classification, based on the number of rulers (one, a few, many, all) and on the moral predicates of good and evil (monarchy and tyranny,