Chapter 25

5Plat. Legg. p. 966 D, xii. pp. 968 C-E, 969 A. Compare vii. p. 818 E. In p. 966 D, the study of astronomy is enforced on the ground that it is one of the strongest evidence of natural theology: in p. 818 C, arithmetic, geometry, and astronomy are advocated as studies, because, without having gone through them, a man cannot become a God, a Dæmon, or a Hero, competent to exercise effective care over mankind. This is altogether different from the Republic.

6Plat. Legg. vii. pp. 811 B, 819 A.

In the Timæus, Plato recommended the study of astronomy, in order that the rotations of man’s soul in his cranium, which were from the beginning disturbed and irregular, might become regularised, and assimilated by continued contemplation to the perfect uniformity of the celestial and cosmical movements.7In the Leges, he recommends astronomy to be studied, because without it we fall into blasphemous errors respecting the cosmical movements, and because such cosmical errors are among the three varieties of heresy, to one or other of which the commission of all crimes against society may be traced.8Hence we find Plato, in the city here described, consecrating his astronomical views as a part of the state-religion, and prohibiting dissent from them under the most stringent penalties. In the general spirit of the Treatise de Legibus, Plato approximates to Xenophon and the Spartan model. He keeps his eye fixed on the perpetual coercive discipline of the average citizen. This discipline, prescribed in all its details by the lawgiver, includes a modicum of literary teaching equal to all; small in quantity, and rigorously sifted as to quality, through the censorial sieve. The intellectual and speculative genius of the community, which other Platonic dialogues bring into the foreground, has disappeared from the Treatise de Legibus. We find here no youths pregnant with undisclosed original thought, which Sokrates assists them in bringing forth: such as Theætêtus, Charmidês, Kleinias, and others — pictures among the most interesting which the ancient world presents, and lending peculiar charm to the earlier dialogues. Not only no provision is made for them, but severe precautions are taken against them. Even in the Republic, Plato had banished poets, or had at least forbidden them to follow thefree inspirations of the Muse, and had subjected them to censorial controul. But such controul was presumed to be exercised by highly trained speculative and philosophical minds, for the perpetual succession of whom express provision was made. In the Treatise De Legibus, such speculative minds are no longer admitted. Philosophy is interdicted or put in chains as well as poetry. An orthodox religious creed is exalted into exclusive ascendancy. All crime or immorality is ascribed to a departure from this creed.9The early communities (Plato tells us10), who were simple and ignorant, destitute of arts and letters, but who at the same time believed implicitly all that they heard from their seniors respecting Gods and men, and adopted the dicta of their seniors respecting good and evil, without enquiry or suspicion — were decidedly superior to his contemporaries in all the departments of virtue — justice, temperance, and courage. This antithesis, between virtue and religious faith on the one side, and arts and letters with an inquisitive spirit on the other, presenting the latter as a depraving influence, antagonistic to the former — is analogous to the Bacchæ of Euripides — the work of that poet’s old age11— and analogous also to the Nubes of Aristophanes, wherein the literary and philosophical teaching of Sokrates is represented as withdrawing youth from the received religious creed, and as leading them by consequence to the commission of fraud and crime.12

7Plato, Timæus, p. 47 B-C.

8Plato, Legg. vii. pp. 821 D, 822 C; x. pp. 885 B, 886 E.

9Plato, Legg. x. p. 885 B.

10Plato, Legg. iii. p. 679. Compare p. 689 D.

11Lobeck, Aglaophamus, p. 623. “Superest fabula (Euripidis), Bacchæ, dithyrambi quam tragœdiæ similior, totaque ita comparata, ut contra illius temporis Rationalistas scripta videatur; qua et Bacchicarum religionum sanctimonia commendatur … et rerum divinarum disceptatio ab eruditorum judiciis ad populi transfertur suffragia:—σοφὰν δ’ ἄπεχε πραπίδα φρένα τεπερισσῶν παρὰ φωτῶν·τὸ πλῆθος ὅ, τι τὸ φαυλότερονἐνόμισε χρῆταί τε, τόδε τοι λεγοίμαν.[λέγοιμ’ ἄν, Matthiæ] (427).Compare vv. 200-203 of the same drama.

σοφὰν δ’ ἄπεχε πραπίδα φρένα τεπερισσῶν παρὰ φωτῶν·τὸ πλῆθος ὅ, τι τὸ φαυλότερονἐνόμισε χρῆταί τε, τόδε τοι λεγοίμαν.[λέγοιμ’ ἄν, Matthiæ] (427).

Compare vv. 200-203 of the same drama.

12Aristophan. Nubes, 116-875, &c.

Scene of the Leges, not in Athens, but in Krete. Persons Kretan and Spartan, comparatively illiterate.

The submergence and discredit of letters and philosophy, which pervades the Dialogue De Legibus, is farther indicated by the personages introduced as conversing. In all the other Platonic dialogues, the scene is laid at Athens, and the speakers are educated citizens of Athens; sometimes visitors, equally or better educated, from other Grecian cities. Generally, they areeither adults who have already acquired some intellectual eminence, or youths anxious to acquire it. Nikias and Laches, Melesias and Lysimachus (in the Lachês), are among the leaders (past or present) of the Athenian public assembly. Anytus (in the Menon) is a man not so much ignorant of letters as despising letters.13Moreover Sokrates himself formally disclaims positive knowledge, professing to be only a searcher for truth along with the rest.14But the scene of the Laws is laid in Krete, not at Athens: the three speakers are not merely all old men, but frequently allude to their old age. One of them only is an Athenian, to whom the positive and expository duty is assigned: the other two are Megillus, a Spartan, and Kleinias, a Kretan of Knossus. Now both Sparta, and the communities of Krete, were among the most unlettered portions of the Hellenic name. They were not only strangers to that impulse of rhetoric, dialectic, and philosophical speculation which, having its chief domicile at Athens, had become diffused more or less over a large portion of Greece since the Persian war — but they were sparingly conversant even with that old poetical culture, epic and lyric, which belonged to the age of Solon and the Seven Wise Men. The public training of youth at Sparta, equal for all the citizens, included nothing of letters and music, which in other cities were considered to be the characteristics of an educated Greek:15though probably individual Spartans, more or fewer, acquired these accomplishments for themselves. Gymnastics, with a slight admixture of simple chronic music and a still slighter admixture of poetry and letters, formed the characteristic culture of Sparta and Krete.16In the Leges, Plato not only notes the fact, but treats it as indicating abetter social condition, compared with Athens and other Greeks — that both Spartans and Kretans were alike unacquainted with the old epic or theological poems (Hesiod, Orpheus, &c.), and with the modern philosophical speculations.17

13Tacitus, Dialog. de Orator. c. 2. “Aper, communi eruditione imbutus, contemnebat potius literas quam nesciebat.”Nikias is said to have made his son Nikêratus learn by heart the entire Iliad and Odyssey of Homer; at least this is the statement of Nikêratus himself in the Symposion of Xenophon (iii. 5).

13Tacitus, Dialog. de Orator. c. 2. “Aper, communi eruditione imbutus, contemnebat potius literas quam nesciebat.”

Nikias is said to have made his son Nikêratus learn by heart the entire Iliad and Odyssey of Homer; at least this is the statement of Nikêratus himself in the Symposion of Xenophon (iii. 5).

14This profession appears even in the Gorgias (p. 506 A) and in the Republic (v. p. 450 D).

15See Xenophon, Republ. Laced. c. 2.Compare the description given by Xenophon in the Cyropædia (i. 2, 6), of the public training of Persian youth, which passage bears striking analogy to his description of the Spartan training. The public διδάσκαλοι are not mentioned as teaching γράμματα, which belong to Athens and other cities, but as teaching justice, temperance, self-command, obedience, bodily endurance, the use of the bow and the javelin, &c.

15See Xenophon, Republ. Laced. c. 2.

Compare the description given by Xenophon in the Cyropædia (i. 2, 6), of the public training of Persian youth, which passage bears striking analogy to his description of the Spartan training. The public διδάσκαλοι are not mentioned as teaching γράμματα, which belong to Athens and other cities, but as teaching justice, temperance, self-command, obedience, bodily endurance, the use of the bow and the javelin, &c.

16Plato, Legg. ii. p. 673 B.

17Plato, Legg. x. p. 886 B-C. εἰσὶν ἡμῖν ἐν γράμμασι λόγοι κείμενοι,οἵ παρ’ ὑμῖν οὐκ εἰσὶ δι’ ἀρετὴν πολιτείας, ὡς ἐγὼ μανθάνω, οἱ μὲν ἔν τισι μέτροις, οἱ δὲ καὶ ἄνευ μέτρων λέγοντες περὶ θεῶν, οἱ μὲν παλαιόταταοι, ὡς γέγονεν ἡ πρώτη φύσις οὐράνου τῶν τε ἄλλων, προϊόντες δὲ τῆς ἀρχῆς οὐ πολὺ θεογονίαν διεξέρχονται, γενόμενοί τε ὡς πρὸς ἀλλήλους ὡμίλησαν. Ἃ τοῖς ἀκούουσιν εἰ μὲν εἰς ἄλλο τι καλῶς ἢ μὴ καλῶς ἔχει, οὐ ῥᾴδιον ἐπιτιμᾷν παλαιοῖς οὖσι, &c.

Gymnastic training, military drill, and public mess, in Krete and Sparta.

Not simply on this negative ground, but on another positive ground also, Sparta and Krête were well suited to furnish listeners for the Laws.18Their gymnastic discipline and military drill, especially the Spartan, were stricter and more continuous than anywhere else in Greece: including toilsome fatigue, endurance of pain, heat, and cold, and frequent conflicts with and without arms between different factions of citizens. The individual and the family were more thoroughly merged in the community: the citizens were trained for war, interdicted from industry, and forbidden to go abroad without permission: attendance on the public mess-table was compulsory on all citizens: the training of youth was uniform, under official authority: the two systems were instituted, both of them, by divine authority — the Spartan by Apollo, the Kretan by Zeus — Lykurgus and Minos, semi-divine persons, being the respective instruments and mediators. In neither of them was any public criticism tolerated upon the laws and institutions (this is a point capital in Plato’s view19). No voice was allowed among the young men except that of constant eulogy, extolling the system as not merely excellent but of divine origin, and resenting all contradiction: none but an old man was permitted to suggest doubts, and he only in private whisper to the Archon, when no youngman was near. Both in Sparta and Krete the public authorities stood forward as the conspicuous, positive, constant, agents; enforcing upon each individual a known type of character and habits. There was thus an intelligible purpose, political and social, as contrasted with other neighbouring societies, in which no special purpose revealed itself.20Both Sparta and Krete, moreover, had continued in the main unchanged from a time immemorial. In this, as in numerous other points, the two systems were cognate and similar.21

18Ephorus, ap. Strabo, x. 480; Xenophon, Repub. Lac. c. 4-6; Isokrates, Busiris, Orat. xi. s. 19; Aristot. Politic. ii. capp. 9 and 10, pp. 1270-1271, and viii. 9, p. 1338, b. 15; also chap. vi. of the second part of my ‘History of Greece,’ with the references there given.

19Plato, Legg. i. p. 634 D-E. ὑμῖν μὲν γάρ, εἴπερ καὶ μετρίως κατεσκεύασται τὰ τῶν νόμων, εἷς τῶν καλλίστων ἂν εἴη νόμων μὴ ζητεῖν τῶν νέων μηδένα ἐᾷν ποῖα καλῶς αὐτῶν ἢ μὴ καλῶς ἔχει, μιᾷ δὲ φωνῇ καὶ ἐξ ἑνὸς στόματος πάντας συμφωνεῖν ὡς πάντα καλῶς κείται θέντων θεῶν, καὶ ἐάν ἄλλως λέγῃ, μὴ ἀνέχεσθαι τὸ παράπαν ἀκούοντας, &c.Compare Demosthen. adv. Leptin. p. 489, where a similar affirmation is made respecting Sparta.

Compare Demosthen. adv. Leptin. p. 489, where a similar affirmation is made respecting Sparta.

20These other cities are what Plato calls αἱ τῶν εἰκῇ πολιτευομένων πολιτεῖαι (Legg. i. p. 635 E), and what Aristotle calls νόμιμα χύδην κείμενα, Polit. vii. 1324, b. 5.

21Plato, Legg. i. p. 624, iii. pp. 691 E, 696 A, iii. p. 683. Krete and Sparta, ἀδελφοὶ νόμοι.K. F. Hermann (in his instructive Dissertation, De Vestigiis Institutorum veterum imprimis Atticorum, per Platonis de Legibus libros indagandis) represents Sparta and Krete as types of customs and institutions which had once been general in Greece, but had been discontinued in the other Grecian cities. “Hoc imprimis in Lacedæmoniorum et Cretensium res publicas cadit, quæ quum et antiquissimam Græciæ indolem fidelissimé servasse viderentur, et moribus ac disciplinâ publicâ optimé fundatæ essent, non mirum est eas Græco philosopho adeò placuisse ut earum formam et libris de Civitate et Legibus quasi pro fundamento subjiceret” (p. 19, compare pp. 13-15-23) … “unde (sc. a legitimis Græcarum civitatum principiis) licet plurimi temporum decursu descivissent atque in aliâ omnia abiissent, nihil tamen Plato proposuit, nisi quod optimus quisque in Græciâ semper expetierat ac persecutus erat” (p. 15). I think this view is not correct, though it is adopted more or less by various critics. Sparta and Krete are not specimens (in my judgment) of what all or most Grecian cities once had been — nor of pure Dorism, as K. O. Müller affirms. On the contrary I believe them to have been very peculiar, Sparta especially. So far they resembled all early Greeks, that neither literature nor luxury had grown up among them. But neither the Syssitia nor thedisciplina publicahad ever subsisted among other Greeks: and these were the two characteristic features of Krete and Sparta, more especially of the latter. They were the two features which arrested Plato’s attention, and upon which he brought his constructive imagination to bear; constructing upon one principle in his Republic, and upon a different principle in his Dialogue de Legibus. While he copies these two main features from Sparta, he borrows many or most of his special laws from Athens; but the ends, with reference to which he puts these elements together, are his own. K. F. Hermann, in his anxiety to rescue Plato from the charge of rashness (“temerario ingenii lusu,” p. 18), understates Plato’s originality.

21Plato, Legg. i. p. 624, iii. pp. 691 E, 696 A, iii. p. 683. Krete and Sparta, ἀδελφοὶ νόμοι.

K. F. Hermann (in his instructive Dissertation, De Vestigiis Institutorum veterum imprimis Atticorum, per Platonis de Legibus libros indagandis) represents Sparta and Krete as types of customs and institutions which had once been general in Greece, but had been discontinued in the other Grecian cities. “Hoc imprimis in Lacedæmoniorum et Cretensium res publicas cadit, quæ quum et antiquissimam Græciæ indolem fidelissimé servasse viderentur, et moribus ac disciplinâ publicâ optimé fundatæ essent, non mirum est eas Græco philosopho adeò placuisse ut earum formam et libris de Civitate et Legibus quasi pro fundamento subjiceret” (p. 19, compare pp. 13-15-23) … “unde (sc. a legitimis Græcarum civitatum principiis) licet plurimi temporum decursu descivissent atque in aliâ omnia abiissent, nihil tamen Plato proposuit, nisi quod optimus quisque in Græciâ semper expetierat ac persecutus erat” (p. 15). I think this view is not correct, though it is adopted more or less by various critics. Sparta and Krete are not specimens (in my judgment) of what all or most Grecian cities once had been — nor of pure Dorism, as K. O. Müller affirms. On the contrary I believe them to have been very peculiar, Sparta especially. So far they resembled all early Greeks, that neither literature nor luxury had grown up among them. But neither the Syssitia nor thedisciplina publicahad ever subsisted among other Greeks: and these were the two characteristic features of Krete and Sparta, more especially of the latter. They were the two features which arrested Plato’s attention, and upon which he brought his constructive imagination to bear; constructing upon one principle in his Republic, and upon a different principle in his Dialogue de Legibus. While he copies these two main features from Sparta, he borrows many or most of his special laws from Athens; but the ends, with reference to which he puts these elements together, are his own. K. F. Hermann, in his anxiety to rescue Plato from the charge of rashness (“temerario ingenii lusu,” p. 18), understates Plato’s originality.

Difference between Leges and Republic, illustrated by reference to the Politikus.

Comparing the Platonic Leges with the Platonic Republic the difference between them will be illustrated by the theory laid down in the Politikus. We read therein,22that the process of governing mankind well is an art, depending upon scientific principles; like the art of the physician, the general, the steersman: that it aims at the attainment of a given End, the well-being of the governed — and that none except the scientific or artisticRuler know either the end or the means of attaining it: that such rulers are the rarest of all artists, never more than one or a very few, combining philosophical aptitude with philosophical training: but that when they are found, society ought to trust and obey their directions without any fixed law: that no peremptory law can be made to fit all contingencies, and that their art is the only law which they ought to follow in each particular conjuncture. If no such persons can be found, good government is an impossibility: but the next best thing to be done is, to establish fixed laws, as good as you can, and to ensure that they shall be obeyed by every one. Now the Platonic Republic aims at realising the first of these two ideal projects: everything in it turns upon the discretionary orders of the philosophical King or Oligarchy, and even the elaborate training of the Guardians serves only to make them perfect instruments for the execution of those orders. But the Platonic Leges or Treatise on Laws corresponds only to the second or less ambitious project — a tolerable imitation of the first and best.23Instead of philosophical rulers, one or a few invested with discretionary power, we have a scheme of political constitution — an alternation of powers temporary and responsible, an apportionment of functions and duties — a variety of laws enacted, with magistrates and dikasteries provided to apply them. Plato, or his Athenian spokesman, appears as adviser and as persuader; but the laws must be such as the body of citizens can be persuaded to adopt. There is moreover a scheme of education embodied in the laws: the individual citizen is placed under dominion at once spiritual and temporal: but the infallibility resides in the laws, and authority is exercised over him only by periodical magistrates who enforce them and determine in their name. It is the Laws which govern — not philosophical Artists of King-Craft.

22See above,vol. iii. ch. xxx. p. 273, seq.

23Plato, Politikus, pp. 293 C-297 C.

Large proportion of preliminary discussions and didactic exhortation in the Leges.

The three first books of the Leges are occupied with general preliminary discussions on the ends at which laws and political institutions ought to aim — on the means which they ought to employ — and on the ethical effects of various institutions in moulding the character of the citizens. “For private citizens” (the Athenian says), “it is enough to say, in reply to thecriticism of strangers, This is the law or custom with us. But what I propose to examine is, the wisdom of the lawgiver from whom the law proceeds.”24At the end of book three, Kleinias announces that the Kretans are about to found a new colony on a deserted site at one end of the island, and that they have confided to a committee of ten Knossians (himself among the number), the task of establishing a constitution and laws for the colony. He invites the Athenian to advise and co-operate with this committee. In the fourth book, we enter upon the special conditions of this colonial project, to which the constitution and laws must conform. It is not until the fifth book that the Athenian speaker begins to declare what constitutional provisions, and what legal enactments, he recommends. His recommendations are continued throughout all the remaining Treatise — from the fifth book, to the twelfth or last. They are however largely interspersed with persuasive addresses, expositions, homilies, and comminations, sometimes of extreme prolixity and vehemence,25on various topics of ethics and religion: which indeed occupy a much larger space than the laws themselves.

24Plato, Legg. i. p. 637 C-D. πᾶς γὰρ ἀποκρινόμενος ἐρεῖ θαυμάζοντι ξένῳ, τὴν παρ’ αὐτοῖς ἀήθειαν ὁρῶντι, Μὴ θαύμαζε, ὦ ξένε· νόμος ἔσθ’ ἡμῖν οὗτος, ἴσως δ’ ὑμῖν περὶ αὐτῶν τούτων ἕτερος· ἡμῖν δ’ ἐστὶ νῦν οὐ περὶ τῶν ἀνθρώπων τῶν ἄλλων ὁ λόγος, ἀλλὰ περὶ τῶν νομοθετῶν αὐτῶν κακίας τε καὶ ἀρετῆς.

25This is what Plato alludes to in the Politikus (p. 304 A) as “rhetoric enlisted in the service of the Ruler,” — ὅση βασιλικῇ κοινωνοῦσα ῥητορεία ξυγδιακυβερνᾷ τὰς ἐν ταῖς πόλεσι πράξεις.

Scope of the discussion laid down by the Athenian speaker — The Spartan institutions are framed only for war — This is narrow and erroneous.

The Athenian speaker avails himself of the privilege of old age to criticise the Spartan and Kretan institutions more freely than is approved by his two companions; who feel bound to uphold against all dissentients the divine origin of their respective polities.26On enquiring from them what is the purpose of their peculiar institutions — the Syssitia or public mess-table — the gymnastic discipline — the military drill — he is informed by both, that the purpose is to ensure habits of courage, strength, and skill, with a view to superiority in war over foreign enemies: war being, in their judgment, the usual and natural condition of the different communities into which mankind are distributed.27Such is the test according towhich they determine the good constitution of a city. But the Athenian — proclaiming as the scope of his enquiry,28What is it which isright or wrong by nature, in laws? — will not admit the test as thus laid down. War against foreign enemies (i.e.enemies foreign to the city-community) is only one among many varieties of war. There exist other varieties besides:— war among the citizens of the same town — among the constituent villages of the same city-community — among the brethren of the same family — among the constituent elements of the same individual man.29Though these varieties of war or discord are of frequent occurrence, they are not the less evils, inconsistent with thatidéalof the Best which a wise lawgiver will seek to approach.30Whenever any of them occur, he ought to ensure to the good and wise elements victory over the evil and stupid. But hisidéalshould be, to obviate the occurrence of war altogether — to adjust harmoniously the relation between the better and worse elements, disposing the latter towards a willing subordination and co-operation with the former.31Though courage in war is one indispensable virtue, it stands only fourth on the list — wisdom, justice, and temperance, being before it.Youraim is to inculcate not virtue, but only one part of virtue.32Many mercenary soldiers, possessing courage in perfection, are unjust, foolish, and worthless in all other respects.33

26Plato, Legg. i. p. 630 D, ii. p. 667 A.

27Plato, Legg. i. pp. 625-626. ὅρον τῆς εὖ πολιτευομένης πόλεως, &c. (p. 626 B).

28Plato, Legg. i. p. 627 C. ὀρθότητός τε καὶ ἁμαρτίας πέρι νόμων, ἥτις ποτ’ ἐστὶ φύσει. Also 630 E.Compare the inquiry in the Kratylus respecting naming, wherein consists the ὀρθότης φύσει τῶν ὀνομάτων. See above,vol. iii. ch. xxxi.p. 285, seq.

28Plato, Legg. i. p. 627 C. ὀρθότητός τε καὶ ἁμαρτίας πέρι νόμων, ἥτις ποτ’ ἐστὶ φύσει. Also 630 E.

Compare the inquiry in the Kratylus respecting naming, wherein consists the ὀρθότης φύσει τῶν ὀνομάτων. See above,vol. iii. ch. xxxi.p. 285, seq.

29Plato, Legg. i. p. 626.

30Plato, Legg. i. p. 628 D.

31Plato, Legg. i. p. 627 E. ὃς ἂν τοὺς μὲν χρηστοὺς ἄρχειν, τοὺς χείρους δ’ ἐάσας ζῇν ἄρχεσθαι ἕκοντας ποιήσειε.Theidéalwhich Plato here sets forth coincides mainly with that which Xenophon adopts as his theme both in the Cyropædia and in the Œconomicus (see the beginning of the former and the close of the latter) τὸ ἐθελόντων ἄρχειν.

31Plato, Legg. i. p. 627 E. ὃς ἂν τοὺς μὲν χρηστοὺς ἄρχειν, τοὺς χείρους δ’ ἐάσας ζῇν ἄρχεσθαι ἕκοντας ποιήσειε.

Theidéalwhich Plato here sets forth coincides mainly with that which Xenophon adopts as his theme both in the Cyropædia and in the Œconomicus (see the beginning of the former and the close of the latter) τὸ ἐθελόντων ἄρχειν.

32Aristotle cites and approves this criticism of Plato, ἐν τοῖς Νόμοις, Politic. ii. 9, p. 1271, b. 1. Compare vii. 14, 1333, b. 15.

33Plato, Legg. i. p. 630 A. The doctrine — that courage is possessed by many persons who have no other virtue — which is here assigned by Plato to his leading speaker the Athenian, appears in the Protagoras as advocated by Protagoras and impugned by Sokrates (p. 349 D-E). But the arguments whereby Sokrates impugns it are (according to Stallbaum) known by Plato himself to be mere captious tricks (laquei dialetici — captiosé et arguté conclusa, ad sophistam ludendum et perturbandum comparata) employed only for the purpose of puzzling and turning into ridicule an eminent Sophist. (See Stallbaum, not. ad Protag. p. 349 E. and Præf. ad Protag. p. 28.) I have already remarked elsewhere, that I think this supposition alike gratuitous and improbable.

Principles on which the institutions of a state ought to be defended — You must show that its ethical purpose and working is good.

If you wish (says the Athenian to Kleinias) to make out aplenary defence and advocacy of the Kretan system, you ought to do it in the following way:

Our laws deserve the celebrity which they have acquired in Greece, because they make us happy, and provide us with all kinds of good things: both with such as are divine and with such as are human. The divine are, Wisdom or Prudence, Justice, Temperance, Courage: the human are, Health, Beauty, Strength, Activity, Wealth. The human depend upon the divine, are certain to follow them, and are not to be obtained without them. All the regulations and precepts of the lawgiver are directed to the attainment and protection of these ends — to establish among the citizens a moral tone of praise and blame favourable to that purpose. He seeks to inculcate on the citizens a body of sentiment, as to what is honourable and not honourable — such as may guide their pleasures and pains, their desires and aversions — and such as may keep their minds right amidst all the disaster (disease, war, poverty, &c.) as well as the prosperity of life. He next regulates the properties, the acquisitions, and the expenditure of the citizens, together with their relations to each other on these heads, upon principles of justice enforced by suitable penalties. Lastly, he appoints magistrates of approved wisdom and right judgment to enforce the regulations. The cementing authority is thus wisdom, following out purposes of temperance and justice, not of ambition or love of money.

Such is the course of exposition (says the Athenian) which ought to be adopted. Now tell me — In what manner are the objects here defined ensured by the institutions of Apollo and Zeus at Sparta and Krete? You two ought to show me: for I myself cannot discern it.34

34Plato, Legg. i. p. 632.

Religious and ethical character postulated by Plato for a community.

This passage is of some value, because it gives us, thus early in the Treatise, a brief summary of that which Plato desiderates in the two systems here noted — and of that which he intends to supply in his own. We see that he looks upon a political constitution and laws as merely secondary and instrumental: that he postulatesas the primary and fundamental fabric, a given religious and ethical character implanted in the citizens: that the lawgiver, in his view, combines the spiritual and temporal authority, making the latter subordinate to the former, and determining not merely what laws the citizens shall obey, but how they shall distribute their approval and aversion — religious, ethical, and æsthetical. It is the lawgiver alone who is responsible and who is open to praise or censure: for to the people, of each different community and different system, established custom is always a valid authority.35

35Plato, Legg. i. p. 637 D.

Endurance of pain enforced as a part of the public discipline at Sparta.

We Spartans (says Megillus) implant courage in our citizens not merely by our public mess-table and gymnastic, but also by inuring them to support pain and hardship. We cause them to suffer severe pain in the gymnopædia, in pugilistic contests, and other ways: we put them to hardships and privations in the Kryptia and in hunting. We thus accustom them to endurance. Moreover, we strictly forbid all indulgences such as drunkenness. Nothing of the kind is seen at Sparta, not even at the festival of Dionysus; nothing like the drinking which I have seen at Athens, and still more at Tarentum.36

36Plato, Legg. i. pp. 633-B 637 A.Plato puts into the mouth of the Athenian a remark that in some other cities (not Sparta or Kretan) these συσσίτια or public mess-tables had been found to lead to intestine sedition and disturbance (p. 636 B). He instances the cases of the Bœotians, the Milesians, and the Thurians. It is much to be lamented that we cannot assign the particular events and conjunctures here adverted to. The Spartan and Kretan Syssitia were daily, compulsory, and universal among the citizens, besides the strictness of the regulations: under such conditions they were peculiar to these two places, as far as our knowledge goes: the Syssitia in Southern Italy (noticed by Aristotle, Polit. vii. 10, p. 1329 b.) are not known and seemingly unimportant. The Syssitia in Bœotia, &c., may probably have been occasional or periodical banquets among members of the same tribe, deme, club, or θίασος — and voluntary besides, neither prescribed nor regulated by law. Such meetings might very probably give occasion to disturbances under particular circumstances.

36Plato, Legg. i. pp. 633-B 637 A.

Plato puts into the mouth of the Athenian a remark that in some other cities (not Sparta or Kretan) these συσσίτια or public mess-tables had been found to lead to intestine sedition and disturbance (p. 636 B). He instances the cases of the Bœotians, the Milesians, and the Thurians. It is much to be lamented that we cannot assign the particular events and conjunctures here adverted to. The Spartan and Kretan Syssitia were daily, compulsory, and universal among the citizens, besides the strictness of the regulations: under such conditions they were peculiar to these two places, as far as our knowledge goes: the Syssitia in Southern Italy (noticed by Aristotle, Polit. vii. 10, p. 1329 b.) are not known and seemingly unimportant. The Syssitia in Bœotia, &c., may probably have been occasional or periodical banquets among members of the same tribe, deme, club, or θίασος — and voluntary besides, neither prescribed nor regulated by law. Such meetings might very probably give occasion to disturbances under particular circumstances.

Why are not the citizens tested in like manner, in regard to resistance against the seductions of pleasure?

How is it (says the Athenian) that you deal so differently with pains and pleasures? To make your citizens firm against pain, you expose them designedly to severe pains: if they were kept free from pains, you would have no confidence in their firmness against painful actualities, when any such shall occur. But in regard to pleasures, you are content with simple prohibition. You provide no means for strengtheningyour citizens against the temptations of pleasure. Are you satisfied that their courage (or self-command) shall be lame or one-sided — good against pains, but not good against pleasures?37In determining about laws, the whole enquiry turns upon pleasures and pains, both in the city and in individual dispositions. These are the two natural fountains, from which he who draws such draughts as is proper, obtains happiness: while every one who draws unwisely and out of season, will fail of obtaining happiness.38

37Plato, Legg. i. pp. 633-634 A. χωλὴν τὴν ἀνδρείαν.

38Plato, Legg. i. p. 636 D-E.

Drunkenness forbidden at Sparta, and blamed by the Spartan converser. The Athenian proceeds to inquire how far such unqualified prohibition is justifiable.

Besides, as to drunkenness, we must not be too hasty in condemnation of it. We must not pronounce generally respecting any institution without examining the circumstances, persons, regulations, &c., attending it. Such hasty praise and censure is very misleading. Many other nations act upon the opposite practice. But I (says Plato) shall not pretend to decide the point by witnesses and authority. I shall adopt another course of investigation, and shall show you, in this particular case, a specimen of the way in which all such institutions ought to be criticised and appreciated.39

39Plato, Legg. i. p. 638 D-E. Τρόπον δὲ ἄλλον, ὃν ἐμοὶ φαίνεται δεῖν, ἐθέλω λέγειν περὶ αὐτοῦ τούτου, τῆς μέθης,πειρώμενος ἂν ἄρα δύνωμαι τὴν περὶ ἁπάντων τούτων ὀρθὴν μέθοδον ὑμῖν δηλοῦν, ἐπειδὴ καὶ μυρία ἐπὶ μυρίοις ἔθνη περὶ αὐτῶν ἀμφισβητοῦντα ὑμῖν πόλεσι δυεῖν τῷ λόγῳ διαμάχοιτ’ ἄν.Here Plato (as in the Sophistês, Politikus, and elsewhere) announces that the special inquiry is intended to illustrate a general method.

Here Plato (as in the Sophistês, Politikus, and elsewhere) announces that the special inquiry is intended to illustrate a general method.

Plato here digresses40from his main purpose to examine the question of drunkenness. He will not allow it to be set aside absolutely and offhand, by a self-justifying ethical sentiment, without reason assigned, defence tendered, accompanying precautions discussed. Upon this, as upon the social functions proper for the female sex, he is a dissenter from the common view. He selects the subject as a case for exhibiting the proper method of criticism respecting social institutions; not without some consciousness that the discussion, if looked at in itself (like the examples of scientific classification or diæresis in the Sophistês and Politikus), would appear unduly prolonged.41

40He himself notes it as a digression, iii. p. 682 E.

Back to Index Next