Ath. Many persons say that legislators ought to impose such lawsas the mass of the people will be ready to receive; but this is justas if one were to command gymnastic masters or physicians to treator cure their pupils or patients in an agreeable manner.
Meg. Exactly.
Ath. Whereas the physician may often be too happy if he canrestore health, and make the body whole, without any very greatinfliction of pain.
Meg. Certainly.
Ath. There was also another advantage possessed by the men of thatday, which greatly lightened the task of passing laws.
Meg. What advantage?
Ath. The legislators of that day, when they equalized property,escaped the great accusation which generally arises in legislation, ifa person attempts to disturb the possession of land, or to abolishdebts, because he sees that without this reform there can never be anyreal equality. Now, in general, when the legislator attempts to make anew settlement of such matters, every one meets him with the cry, that"he is not to disturb vested interests"-declaring with imprecationsthat he is introducing agrarian laws and cancelling of debts, untila man is at his wits end; whereas no one could quarrel with theDorians for distributing the land-there was nothing to hinder them;and as for debts, they had none which were considerable or of oldstanding.
Meg. Very true.
Ath. But then, my good friends, why did the settlement andlegislation of their country turn out so badly?
Meg. How do you mean; and why do you blame them?
Ath. There were three kingdoms, and of these, two quicklycorrupted their original constitution and laws, and the only one whichremained was the Spartan.
Meg. The question which you ask is not easily answered.
Ath. And yet must be answered when we are enquiring about laws, thisbeing our old man"s sober game of play, whereby we beguile the way, asI was saying when we first set out on our journey.
Meg. Certainly; and we must find out why this was.
Ath. What laws are more worthy of our attention than those whichhave regulated such cities? or what settlements of states aregreater or more famous?
Meg. I know of none.
Ath. Can we doubt that your ancestors intended these institutionsnot only for the protection of Peloponnesus, but of all theHellenes. in case they were attacked by the barbarian? For theinhabitants of the region about Ilium, when they provoked by theirinsolence the Trojan war, relied upon the power of the Assyrians andthe Empire of Ninus, which still existed and had a great prestige; thepeople of those days fearing the united Assyrian Empire just as we nowfear the Great King. And the second capture of Troy was a seriousoffence against them, because Troy was a portion of the AssyrianEmpire. To meet the danger the single army was distributed betweenthree cities by the royal brothers, sons of Heracles-a fair device, asit seemed, and a far better arrangement than the expedition againstTroy. For, firstly, the people of that day had, as they thought, inthe Heraclidae better leaders than the Pelopidae; in the next place,they considered that their army was superior in valour to that whichwent against Troy; for, although the latter conquered the Trojans,they were themselves conquered by the Heraclidae-Achaeans byDorians. May we not suppose that this was the intention with which themen of those days framed the constitutions of their states?
Meg. Quite true.
Ath. And would not men who had shared with one another many dangers,and were governed by a single race of royal brothers, and had takenthe advice of oracles, and in particular of the Delphian Apollo, belikely to think that such states would be firmly and lastinglyestablished?
Meg. Of course they would.
Ath. Yet these institutions, of which such great expectations wereentertained, seem to have all rapidly vanished away; with theexception, as I was saying, of that small part of them which existedin yourland.And this third part has never to this day ceased warringagainst the two others; whereas, if the original idea had been carriedout, and they had agreed to be one, their power would have beeninvincible in war.
Meg. No doubt.
Ath. But what was the ruin of this glorious confederacy? Here is asubject well worthy of consideration.
Meg. Certainly, no one will ever find more striking instances oflaws or governments being the salvation or destruction of great andnoble interests, than are here presented to his view.
Ath. Then now we seem to have happily arrived at a real andimportant question.
Meg. Very true.
Ath. Did you never remark, sage friend, that all men, and weourselves at this moment, often fancy that they see some beautifulthing which might have effected wonders if any one had only knownhow to make a right use of it in some way; and yet this mode oflooking at things may turn out after all to be a mistake, and notaccording to nature, either in our own case or in any other?
Meg. To what are you referring, and what do you mean?
Ath. I was thinking of my own admiration of the aforesaidHeracleid expedition, which was so noble, and might have had suchwonderful results for the Hellenes, if only rightly used; and I wasjust laughing at myself.
Meg. But were you not right and wise in speaking as you did, andwe in assenting to you?
Ath. Perhaps; and yet I cannot help observing that any one whosees anything great or powerful, immediately has the feelingthat-"If the owner only knew how to use his great and noblepossession, how happy would he be, and what great results would heachieve!"Meg. And would he not be justified?
Ath. Reflect; in what point of view does this sort of praiseappear just: First, in reference to the question in hand:-If thethen commanders had known how to arrange their army properly, howwould they have attained success? Would not this have been the way?
They would have bound them all firmly together and preserved themfor ever, giving them freedom and dominion at pleasure, combinedwith the power of doing in the whole world, Hellenic and barbarian,whatever they and their descendants desired. What other aim would theyhave had?
Meg. Very good.
