Plato and Aristotle are the two political writers, as they are the two outstanding philosophers, of ancient Greece. We have already seen something of the political ideas of Plato, and know how thoroughly he resisted the theory of woman's inferiority. Beyond this sturdy defence of woman's capacity, however, Plato helps us little in the search for the moral base of political power. In his _Gorgias_ he expresses great disdain of the actual Athenian democracy, and insists on the superiority of the aristocratic ideal. The wiser are to rule the community, and such rulers were by no means always chosen by the democracy of Athens. In the _Republic_, from which I have previously quoted, Plato goes on to sketch his ideal political system. The rulers and administrators are to be a special and hereditary caste, with distinct education, beside the classes of workers and of soldiers. Within their limits there will be election for the higher offices, and women are to be put on a level of absolute equality with men in the political body. Thus Plato is emphatic in his protest against any sex limitation of political power, but it must be admitted that he misses or ignores the most difficult point in the problem--how the workers are to be reconciled to a permanent exclusion from politics--and his Utopian commonwealth has never been taken seriously. Aristotle, a realist and a critic of Plato, brings us at once to the practical problem. He, too, disdains the boisterous democracy of Athens, with its shallow mob and their frothy orators, and believes democracy would always have the same weaknesses. Oligarchy and despotism are equally unsound. Kingship is an admirable political form, but the uncertainties of kings make it impracticable. Aristocracy is the ideal constitution. A few leisured and cultivated landowners, supported by the work of slaves, would be the best body to entrust with the choice of rulers. But Aristotle sees that democratic Greece will never admit that system, and he proposes a compromise. Excluding the poorest, on the ground of incompetency, he would have the magistrates elected by the vote of the majority of the men in the free cities; and he would grant an increased power to property-holders, for the defence of their possessions. We have seen that Aristotle would exclude women from political life, apparently on the ground of incompetency. In this the contrast to Plato is merely superficial. Plato did not proclaim the actual competency of women for public life, but shrewdly attributed their present weakness to the complete lack of education and experience--a point that Aristotle quite fails to meet. However, it is enough that he definitively assigns competency as the moral basis of enfranchisement.