Is the "State" a "persona ficta"?

J.J. Rousseau said that "the State is a 'Persona Ficta', but, is that really the case? Well, the State is certainly not a "Persona", but it certainly is a fiction. Why is it a fiction, simply because it is a linguistic fiction or a high level abstraction that encompasses and includes all the real individuals under its jurisdiction. But that does not make it a Persona. Of course, the term "Persona' is also being used as a high level abstraction implying that its a Person. That's what happens when we reason from the Top to the Bottom. That's probably also the source of the so-called Linguistic Turn. But, the real people are at the Bottom of government and certainly not at the Top. In government, or the "State", the real people are at the Bottom and were there before the Top even came into existence. In formulating concepts of government, we usually address the structure of the Top first. That's what the 'generality' of abstractions do to us. But all that was before Triadic government or Three Branch Government. In todays concept, the Many at the Bottom ( the essence )are essential to the formation of government and to the function of government. The people at the Bottom are the individuals that 'confer' power to the functional Top. We would not have a Top if it were not for the People at the Bottom. Truly the concept of the State is a general, high level abstraction and in that sense is an abstraction, and hence, a Fiction, but it cannot be a "Persona". Persona implies 'person' and 'person' 'implies' real individuals. That's probably also why the 'corporation' is considered a 'person' or "legal fiction". Twisted reasoning. To be sure, Rousseau's concept of the State is a fiction, not a "persona"; that's also the way the status of the corporation was conceived. Neither, of these two 'misplaced fictions' can be more important than the real People at the Bottom of Democratic Government.