The works of Plato · Plato
ARGUMENT.
It necessarily follows, said I, from what has been acknowledged, that the best men should as often as possible form alliances with the best women, and the most depraved men, on the contrary, with the most depraved women; and the offspring of the former is to be educated, but not of the latter, if the flock is to be of the most perfect kind:—and this must be so done, as to escape the notice of all but the governors themselves, if at any rate the whole band of the guardians is to be as free as possible from sedition. Quite right, said he. Are there not to be festivals legally established, in which we shall draw together the brides and bridegrooms;—and must not there be sacrifices, and hymns composed by our poets suitable to the marriages in course of celebration?—But as to the number of the marriages, this we will leave to the rulers, that they may as much as possible keep up the same number of men, having a regard both to wars and diseases, and all other such matters, so that as far as possible our state may be neither great nor small. Right, said he. And chances too, I conceive, should be so well managed, that the depraved man may, on every turn of them, accuse his fortune, and not the governors. Of course, said he.
CHAP. IX.—As for those youths, who distinguish themselves, either in war or other pursuits, they ought to have rewards and prizes given them, and the most ample liberty of lying with women, that so, under this pretext, the greatest number of children may spring from such parentage. Right. And as for the offspring born from time to time, are the authorities presiding over these matters to receive them, whether they be men or women, or both?—for somehow these offices belong in common both to men and women. Yes, they do. As respects, then, the children of worthy persons, I think, they should carry them to some retirement, to certain nurses dwelling apart in a certain quarter of the city; but as for the children of the more depraved, and such of the rest as may be maimed or lame, they will hide them, as is right, in some secret and obscure place. Yes, indeed, said he, if the race of guardians is to be pure. Will they not then take care also of their children’s nurture, bringing to the nursery mothers with full breasts, taking every precaution that no woman should recognise her own child, and, where the mothers cannot suckle them, providing others who would be able to do so?
And they will be careful also of this most particularly, that the nurses suckle only during a proper time, and they will enjoin, both on the nurses and keepers, their watching duties, and every other necessary toil. You speak, said he, of a time of great ease to the wives of our guardians, in the breeding of children. Yes, for it should be so, replied I. But let us next discuss what we were so anxious to do, when we said that the procreation of children should take place among persons in the prime of life. True. Do you agree with me then, that this prime season is at twenty in a woman, and at thirty in a man? How do you reckon this time for each sex? said he.[167] The woman, replied I, is to bear children to the state from the age of twenty to that of forty; and the man, after having passed the most excitable period of his course, is from that period to beget children to the state up to the age of fifty-five. This indeed, is the prime, replied he, in both sexes, both as respects body and mind.
If then any one, either older or younger than these, should employ himself in begetting children for the commonwealth, we should say that the trespass is neither right nor just, since he is begetting to the state a child, which (if concealed) is born and grows up, ushered in neither by sacrifices nor prayers—(which, on every marriage, the priestesses and priests, and the whole state offer, that the descendants of the good may be still better, and that from useful descendants others still more useful may arise),—but is born in darkness, and the result of dreadful incontinence. Right, said he. And the law, said I, must be the same, if any of those men, who are yet of the age for procreation, have intercourse with women of a proper age, without the magistrate’s leave; for we may consider him as having raised to the state a bastard, born in adultery and unhonoured by religious auspices. Most right, said he. And I presume, whenever either the women or the men are past the age of procreation, we are to let the men cohabit with any woman they like, except their daughter and mother, and the children of their daughters, or those upwards from their mother; and so likewise the women are to embrace any, except a son, a father, and the children of these, in either direction: all this liberty we are to grant them, after we have enjoined them to be careful, first, if a child be conceived, not to bring it to the light, but if, by accident, it should be brought forth, so to expose it as if there were no provision for it. All these things, said he, are reasonably said:—but how are the fathers and daughters, and the other relations you just mentioned, to be known to one another?
CHAP. X.—This, and such as this, Glaucon, is the community of women and children, among the guardians of the state: and that this is consistent both with the rest of our polity, and is by far the best, we must next establish from reason;—or how shall we do? By Zeus, just so, said he. Is not this, then, the beginning of our agreement, to ask ourselves what we can allege to be the greatest good for the establishment of a state, with a view to which the lawgiver is to enact the laws, and what the greatest evil,—and next to examine, whether what we have hitherto described tends to or conforms with the track of the good, and is opposed to that of the evil? Most certainly, said he. Is there, then, any greater evil for a state than that which tears it in pieces, and makes it many instead of one;—or, any greater good than that which binds it together, and makes it one? There is not. Does not then the communion both of pleasure and pain bind men together, when the whole of the citizens as much as possible rejoice and mourn in fellowship, for the same matters, whether gainful or the contrary?[168] Assuredly, he replied.
And again, any mere private perception of such things dissolves [that union,] when some grieve exceedingly, and others rejoice exceedingly at the same events, either in the state or those composing it? Of course. Does not this then arise from the following circumstance,—when such words as these are not pronounced at the same time in a state, as _mine_, and _not mine_; and with regard to what concerns another, in the same way? Aye, surely. And the state, in which the greatest number unite in saying of the same things, that _this concerns me_, and _that does not concern me_,—that is best regulated? By far. And it is that also, which most closely resembles the individual man;—just as, when a person’s finger is wounded, the entire fellowship of feeling, extending through the body towards the soul, and producing that harmony which is the work of the governing principle within it, [viz. the soul,][169] experiences a sensation, and at the same time wholly sympathizes with the ailing part; and thus we say that the man has a finger-ache:—and so also, with respect to any part whatever of the human frame, the same reasoning applies either with respect to grief, when a part is in pain, or with respect to pleasure, when it is at ease. Aye, the very same, said he: and as to what you are asking, the state that nearest approaches this is the best governed. When, therefore, any individual citizen receives good or ill, such a state, methinks, will most especially maintain that she herself is the party affected, and will unite as a whole in joy or mourning. That must be the case, said he, in a state, governed, at least, by good laws.
Just so. But how is it with your guardians? Is there any one of them, who can esteem or address any of his fellow-guardians as a stranger? By no means, he replied;—for with whomever a person falls in, he will conceive that he falls in with a brother or sister, or a father or mother, or a son or daughter, or their descendants or ancestry. You speak exceedingly well, replied I:—and further, tell me this also, whether you will give them only a legal right to these familiar names,—or rather bid them perform all their actions in accordance with these names, especially as respects parents, whatever the law enjoins as the parents’ due,—such as reverence, and care, and obedience,—it being otherwise not for his advantage, either in the sight of God or of men, inasmuch as he would do what is neither holy nor just, if he acted otherwise than thus?—Will these, or other maxims coming from the whole body of our citizens, echo close round the ears of our children, both about their parents, when pointed out to them, and about other relations likewise? These [maxims must so,] replied he; for it were ridiculous, if, without actions, their proper names were uttered by the mouth alone.
Of all states then, in this especially, when any one individual fares either well or ill, the citizens will mostly agree in exclaiming, according to our late expression,—namely, “Mine fares well, or mine ill?” Quite true, said he. Did we not say too, that agreeably to this opinion and expression, their common pleasures and pains should agree? Aye,—and we said rightly. Will not then our citizens most especially hold in common that same thing, which they call “_my own_,”—and, holding this in common, thus have a special fellowship in pleasure and pain? Very much so. And the cause of all this, independently of other regulations of the state,—is it not the community of women and children among the guardians? Most especially so, he replied. CHAP. XII.—We had agreed, moreover, as to the greatest good of a state, by comparing a well-managed state to a body, which feels pleasure or pain affecting any part of it. Aye, we were right, said he, in agreeing about this. The cause then of all this high degree of good to our state was found to be the community of women and children among our defenders? Surely, replied he. And in that case, we agree at least with what was before alleged; for we said, I believe, that they ought to have neither houses of their own, nor land, nor any possession, but to receive their subsistence from others, as a reward for their guardianship, and all to consume it in common, if they mean really to be guardians? Right, said he.
Do not then, as I say, the circumstances formerly mentioned, and still more those now mentioned, cause them to be true guardians, and prevent those divisions in the state [which arise] from not calling one and the same thing their own,—but one one thing, and another another;—one drawing to his own dwelling whatever he can acquire separately from the rest, and another, to his likewise that which is separate; and also different wives and children, occasioning both pleasures and pains, individually private, though holding one and the same opinion concerning what is domestic,—all, as far as possible, pointing towards the same thing,—namely, a community of feeling respecting pleasure and pain? Of course, we grant that, replied he. But what?—will not lawsuits and criminal charges in the courts be banished from among them (so to speak), from the fact of their possessing nothing in private but their body, but all the rest in common,—owing to which, they will be kept free from all the dissensions which men raise about money, or children and relatives? It is quite clear, they will be thus relieved.
And, moreover, in these there could not fairly be any suits, as regards personal violence or improper treatment:—for conceiving personal preservation to be an absolute necessity, we will own it to be handsome and just for compeers in age to help their compeers. Right, said he. And this privilege, said I, at any rate this law possesses:—if a man be in a passion with any one, he will in such a case be less apt to venture on still greater seditions. Certainly. The elder, moreover, will be ordered both to govern and chastise all the younger. Clearly so. And moreover, as to the younger, with regard to the elder, unless the magistrates order it, he will never attempt to beat the elder, or otherwise offer him violence,—nor, methinks, will he by any other means dishonour him:—for there are two sufficient guardians to hinder it, fear and respect,—respect on the one hand restraining him from laying hands on a parent, and fear on the other, that others might come to the defence of the sufferer;—some as sons, others as brothers, and others as fathers. Yes,—such is the case, said he. In every respect then, in consequence of the laws, these men, [_i. e._ the warriors,] will enjoy peace with one another? Yes, much.
And so long as these do not quarrel among themselves, there is no danger of the rest of the state rising or mutually splitting into factions. No, of course not. As for the least important evils, I am unwilling for propriety’s sake even to mention from how many they will have been relieved,—the poor, [for instance,] as regards the work of flattering the rich,—and the difficulties and anxieties, which people have in bringing up their children and procuring money for the support of servants,—sometimes borrowing, sometimes denying debts, and at other times using all manner of shifts in procuring [money,] and then giving it to the management of their wives and domestics;—about these matters, friend, how many slavish and ignoble troubles they suffer are not even worthy to be mentioned. Yes, they are manifest, said he, even to one blind.
CHAP. XIII.—From all these troubles, therefore, they will be relieved, and will live more blessedly than that most blessed life which those live who gain the Olympic prizes. How? On one small account only are those esteemed happy, compared with what these enjoy;—for the victory of these is more noble, and their maintenance at the public expense more complete: inasmuch as the victory that they gain brings safety to the entire state,—and by way of crown and reward, both they and their children receive their maintenance and all other necessaries of life, thus winning honours from their own state while living, and at their death an honourable funeral. Noble rewards! indeed, said he. Do you remember, then, said I, that in a former part of our discussion, some one,—I know not who,—objected to us, that we were not making our guardians happy, by decreeing that those who had the whole wealth of the citizens at their command should nevertheless have nothing at all?—and we said, I believe, that we would consider this afterwards, if it fell in our way; but that at present we were making our guardians real guardians, and the state itself as happy as possible, without exclusively regarding any single class in it, with a view to make it happy? I remember, said he.
What think you now of the life of our auxiliaries, which appears far more noble and happy than that of those of the Olympic prizemen;—do you think it can be compared to the life of the leather-cutter, or any other kind of craftsman, or even the farmer? I do not think so, said he. Still even, what I said before, it is proper that I mention here also,—if the guardian should try to become happy in such a way as to lose his character as a guardian, and not be content with a life thus moderate and steady, and as we say, of the best quality, but on the other hand be impelled by a silly boyish notion about happiness, to appropriate to himself all the property in the state, because he has the power, he will know that Hesiod was really wise, in saying that “the half is considerably more than the whole.”[170] If he take me for his counsellor, said he, he will remain in such a life. You agree then, said I, as to the fellowship of the women with the men, which we have explained, in matters referring to education and children, and the guardianship of the other citizens;—that whether they remain in the state, or go forth to war, they ought to keep guard with them, and hunt with them like hounds, and in every case take a share in all things, as far as they can; and that doing these things they will do what is best, and not contrary to the nature of the female, as regards the male,—by which nature, indeed, they act jointly with one another? I agree, said he.
Yet every creature whatever will fight more valiantly in the presence of its offspring? It is so: but there is no small danger, Socrates, should they be defeated, as is often the case in war, that when their children, as well as themselves, are cut off, it will be impossible to restore the rest of the state. Yon speak truly, replied I: but think you, that our first duty should Be never to expose them to risk? No, by no means. What then: if they are to hazard themselves in any case, is it not—where they will become better men, if they succeed? Clearly so. But do you think it a small matter, and unworthy of the risk, that children destined for military life should or should not be observers of the transactions of war? No;—for it is highly important with reference to what you now mention. This then, we must first contrive,—to make our children spectators of war, yet providing for their safety:—and then all will go well, will it not? Yes. And surely their fathers, said I, in the first place, as far as men can, will not be ignorant, but well informed as to the kinds of expeditions which are dangerous or not so. Probably so, said he.
Into the one then, they will take them; but will be cautious of exposing them to the other. Right. And they will probably, said I, set governors over them, not such as are the most depraved, but such as by experience and years are able leaders and trainers of the young. Yes, quite proper. Yet many things, we may say, happen to many contrary to expectation. Quite so. With reference, therefore, to such events as these, it is fit that we should provide the children with things while quite young, in order, if need be, that they may escape by flight. How do you mean? said he. We must mount them on horseback, said I, when extremely young; and when they have learnt to ride, they must be taken to see battles, not on high-mettled war-horses, but on the fleetest and most obedient to the rein; for thus they will best observe their proper work, and in case of need, escape with the greatest safety, following the aged leaders. I think, said he, your remark is correct. What then, said I, as to the affairs of war; how are you to manage our soldiers, both as respects each other and their enemies? Is my opinion correct or not? Tell me what it is, replied he.
As for that man among them, said I, who has left his rank, thrown away his arms, or done any such like act from mere cowardice, ought we not to make him a craftsman, or field labourer? Certainly. And the man who is taken alive by the enemy, should he not be given away as a present to those inclined to use their booty just as they please? Yes, surely. And as to him who has signalized himself and attained to high renown, think you not, that he ought, first of all in the field itself, to be crowned successively by each of the youths and boys who are his fellow-soldiers?—is it not so? Yes, I think so. And will they give him the right hand likewise? And that too. But what I am going to tell you, said I, will not, methinks, be quite so pleasing. What? That they should kiss and be kissed by each individually? This is by far the best of all, said he: and for myself, I would add this regulation,—that, so long as they are on this expedition, no one shall be allowed to refuse the man, whoever it be that he pleases to kiss,—so that if a warrior happen to be in love with any one, male or female, he may be the more animated to win the noblest prize of valour.[171] Very well, said I:—for it has been already said, that more opportunities for marriage should be provided for the brave citizen than for others, and more frequent choice in such matters should be allowed to them than to all others, in order that such a man’s descendants may be as numerous as possible. Yes, we did say so, replied he.
Yes, we will believe him. We will ask the oracle then, how we ought to bury noble and divine men, and with what marks of distinction; and then we will bury them in the very manner that [the God] directs. Of course. And in all after-time we will reverence and worship their tombs as those of demigods, and enact that the same ceremonies shall be observed with regard to persons dying of old age, or from any other cause, after having been deemed remarkably good during their lifetime? Aye, it is only just, said he. But what?—how are our soldiers to behave towards enemies? In what respect? First, as respects enslavement, think you it just, that Greeks should enslave Greek cities?—-nay, ought they not, as far as they can, to prevent others from doing it, and act on the principle of sparing the Grecian tribe, cautiously looking to the possibility of being themselves enslaved by barbarians? Aye, said he; both generally, and in every particular case, it is the best plan to be sparing. Are they then not to keep any Greek slave themselves, and to counsel the rest of the Greeks to agree to the same plan?
CHAP. XVI.—Moreover, we shall not at any time bring arms into the temples, for the purpose of dedicating them, at least not the arms of Greeks,—if we at all care for the kind feeling of the rest of the Greeks; but we shall rather fear its being a kind of profanation to bring into the temple such things as these from our close connexions, unless the oracle direct us otherwise. Quite right, replied he. And as regards the laying waste of Grecian lands and the burning of houses, how would your soldiers treat their enemies? Aye,—I should be glad, said he, to hear you state your opinion on that point. Truly then, said I, my opinion is, that we should do neither of these things, but only carry off the year’s crop:—and would you have me tell you the reason, why this should be done? By all means. It appears to me, that as these two words, war and discord, are different, so two different things are signified by them; and I call them different—the latter between members of the same community, and the former between foreigners and strangers.—When hatred is among one’s own people, it is called discord; when it respects foreigners, war. What you say, replied he, is not at all unreasonable.
Text from Project Gutenberg, public domain in the United States.