That's the way I see it, anyway.
The funny thing is that it occurs to me that Aristotle must have secretly viewed oligarchy (rule by the few) as the mean between king (rule by one) and democracy (rule by the many) and, therefore, the preferred form of state. But there never has been rule by one, just as there has never been rule by the many. Both monarchy and democracy obscure reality and distract people from seeing who truly makes the decisions. A monarchy just concentrates the ire of the masses and has the problem that the king may let the illusion of power go to his head and start wielding it against the oligarchy in reality (which led to the Magna Carta). A democracy diffuses the ire of the masses and has the problem that each individual among the masses believes he/she has a right to be heard, which can be really annoying.
Aristotle was a pathological liar and one of the more despicable men in history. Everything he wrote must be read carefully and with an eye towards the unspoken truth that makes what he wrote its diametric opposite. The man was a master of propaganda through misdirection.