INTRODUCTION by casual utterances of such critics as Renan, Pater, Emerson,and Emile Faguet. The captious attitud of mind is illustrated by the set criticism of Aristotle, the Christian Fathers, Zeller, De Quincey, Landor, Spencer, and too large a proportion of professional philologists and commentators." As the poet toe says Emerson, "he(Plato) is only contemplative. He did not, like Pythagoras, break himself with an insti tution. All his painting in the Republic must be esteemed mythical with the intent to bring out sometimes in violent colours, his thought. This disposes at once of all criticism, hostile or friendly, aesthetic or philological, that scrutinizes the Republic as if it were a bill at its second reading in Parliament, or a draft of a constitution presented to an American state convention. The greater the in genuity and industry applied to such interpretations the further we are led astray. Even in the Lars Plato that are n ot vet, but are only becoming, legislators. In the Republic it suits Plato's design to build up the state from individual units and their economic needs But his critics, from Aristotle to Sir Henry Maine derive their conception of the patriarchal theory of society from his exposition of it in the Lans He embodies his criticism of existing Greek institu tions in a scheme for the training of his soldiers, supple. mented by the higher education of the guardians But we cannot infer, as hasty critics have done, from 421 A that he would not educate the masses at all The banishment of Homer is a vivid expression of Plato's demand that theology be purified and art moralized. But Milton wisely declined to treat it as a serious argument against the liberty of unlicensed
INTRODUCTION by casual utterances of such critics as Renan, Pater, Emerson, and Emile Faguet. The captious attitude of mind is illustrated by the set criticism of Aristotle, the Christian Fathers, Zeller, De Quincey, Landor, Spencer, and too large a proportion of professional philologists and commentators. " As the poet too," says Emerson, " he (Plato) is only contemplative. He did not, like Pythagoras, break himself with an insti- tution. All his painting in the Republic must be esteemed mythical with the intent to bring out, sometimes in violent colours, his thought." This disposes at once of all criticism, hostile or friendly, aesthetic or philological, that scrutinizes the Republic as if it were a bill at its second reading in Parliament, or a draft of a constitution presented to an American state convention. The greater the in- genuity and industry applied to such interpretations the further we are led astray. Even in the Lans Plato warns us that we are not yet, but are only becoming, legislators. In the Republic it suits Plato's design to build up the state from indi\idual units and their economic needs. But his critics, from Aristotle to Sir Henry Maine, derive their conception of the patriarchal theory of society from his exposition of it in the Lans. He embodies his criticism of existing Greek institu- tions in a scheme for the training of his soldiers, supplemented by the higher education of the guardians. But we cannot infer, as hasty critics have done, from 421 A that he would not educate the masses at all. The banishment of Homer is a vivid expression of Plato's demand that theology be purified and art moralized. But Milton wisely declined to treat it as a serious argument against the liberty of unlicensed
INTRODUCTION printing in England. And nothin n be more posterous than the statement still current in books of supposed authority that the severity of dialectics had appreciation of beauty. The abolition of private property among the ruling classes is partly th e ex Christian, ideal, which Plato reluctantly renounces in the Lans. a But it is mainly a desperate attempt to square the circle of polities and justify the rule of the intelligent few by an enforced disinterestedness and the annihilation of all possible"sinister interests. " b All criticism that ignores this vital point is worthless.c The same may be said of the community of wives which is further, as Schopenhauer remarks, merel drastic expression of the thought that the breeding of men ought to be as carefully managed as that o animals. It is abandoned in the Lans. The detailes efutations of Aristotle are beside the mark, and th denunciations of the Christian Fathers and De Quincey and Landor are sufficiently met by Lucians remark that those who find in the c an apology for licentiousness little apprehend in wha t sense the divine philosopher meant his doctrine of communistic marriage It is the height of naivete to demonstrate by the statistics of a Parisian creche that the children of the uardians would die in infancy, or to inquire too curiously into the risks they would run in accompany ing their parents on horseback to war(466 F, 467 F) a Rep. 416, 462-463, 465 1, Timaeus 18 B, Lacs 739 B-D and infra, Ps eems to accept the Aristo- telian object See Newman
INTRODUCTION printing in England. And nothing can be more pre- posterous than the statement still current in books of supposed authority that the severity of dialectics had suppressed in Plato the capacity for emotion and the appreciation of beauty. The abolition of private property among the ruling classes is partly the ex- pression of a religious, a Pythagorean, not to say a Christian, ideal, which Plato reluctantly renounces in the Laws.'^ But it is mainly a desperate attempt to square the circle of politics and justify the rule of the intelligent few by an enforced disinterestedness and the annihilation of all possible " sinister interests." ^ All criticism that ignores this vital point is worthless." The same may be said of the community of wives, which is further, as Schopenhauer remarks, merely a drastic expression of the thought that the breeding of men ought to be as carefully managed as that of animals. It is abandoned in the Laws. The detailed refutations of Aristotle are beside the mark, and the denunciations of the Christian Fathers and De Quincey and Landor are sufficiently met by Lucian's remark that those who find in the Republic an apology for licentiousness little apprehend in what sense the divine philosopher meant his doctrine of communistic marriage. It is the height of naivete to demonstrate by the statistics of a Parisian creche that the children of the guardians would die in infancy, or to inquire too curiously into the risks they would run in accompanying their parents on horseback to war (A'&Q f, 467 f). « Rep. 416, 462-463, 465 b, Timaeus 18 b, Laws 739 b-d. * Cf. supra, p. XV and infra, p. xlii. ' Even Newman, for example, seems to accept the Aristotelian objection that such a military caste will tyrannize. See Newman's Politics of Aristotle, vol. i. pp. 326 f
INTRODUCTION The comparison of the individual to the state is a suggestive ana for sociology and at the sa ame writer's tact and skill can make a precisely what the literary motif that is worth it. Plato,s use of the idea is most effective. By subtle artifices of style the cumulative effect of which can be felt only in the original, the reader is brought to conceive of the social organism as one monster man or leviathan, whose sensuous appetites are C mo whose disciplined emotions are the trained force that checks rebellion within and guards against invasion rom without, and whose reason is the philosophi statesmanship that directs each and all for the good of the whole. And conversely the individual man is pictured as a biological colony of passions and appetite which" swarm like worms within our living clay -a curious compound of beast and man which can attain nity and personality only by the conscious domination of the monarchical reason. The origina- can hardly be held responsible for the abuse of it by derous demonstration that with the aid of Huxley and Carpenter he can discover analogies between the body politic and the physiological body in comparison with which those of Plato are mere child's-play It is unnecessary to multiply illustrations of such matter-of-fact and misconceived criticism. Enou has been said perhaps to prepare the way for the broad literary common-sense appreciation of the Republic, which an intelligent reader, even of a trans- for lf if he reads without prejudice and without checking at every little
INTRODUCTION The comparison of the individual to the state is a suggestive analogy for sociology and at the same time a literary motif that is vi'orth precisely what the writer's tact and skill can make of it. Plato's use of the idea is most effective. By subtle artifices of style the cumulative effect of which can be felt only in the original, the reader is brought to conceive of the social organism as one monster man or leviathan, whose sensuous appetites are the unruly mechanic mob, whose disciplined emotions are the trained force that checks rebelhon within and guards against invasion from without, and whose reason is the philosophic statesmanship that directs each and all for the good of the whole. And conversely the individual man is pictured as a biological colony of passions and appetites which " swarm like worms ^nthin our living clay "— a curious compound of beast and man which can attain real unity and personality only by the conscious domination of the monarchical reason. The origination of this idea apparently belongs to Plato. But he can hardly be held responsible for the abuse of it by modern sociologists, or for Herbert Spencer's ponderous demonstration that with the aid of Huxley and Carpenter he can discover analogies between the body politic and the physiological body in comparison with which those of Plato are mere child's-play. It is unnecessary to multiply illustrations of such matter-of-fact and misconceived criticism. Enough has been said perhaps to prepare the way for the broad literary common-sense appreciation of the Republic, which an intelligent reader, even of a translation, will arrive at for himself if he reads without prejudice and without checking at every Uttle apparent oddity in the reasoning or the expression
INTRODUCTION The proper historical background for such a broad nderstanding of Platos is Thucydides' account of the thirty years' Pelc ponnesian war, which Hobbes translated in order to the evils of bridled democra Thucydides’ histe ultimate source of all the hard-headed cynical politi- Machiavelli. Guicciardini, and Hobbes to Nietzsche and Bernardi. And in recent years the speeches which he attributes to the Athenian ambassadors proposing to violate the neutrality of Melos have been repeatedly rediscovered and quoted. They are merely the most drastic expression of a philosophy of life and politics which pervades the entire history nd which I studied many years ago in a paper or the"Implicit Ethics and Psychology some of the ideas of which apparently by accident in Mr. Cornford's Thucydides longed world war is the predestined medium for the culture of this poisonous germ. And the Pelo- ponnesian war was a world war for the smaller international svstem of the Greek states. It was for Greece that suicide which our civil war may have been for the old American N England and Virginia, and which we pray the World War may not prove to have been for Europe. The analogy, which we need not verify in detail, is start ing, though the scale in Greece was infinitely aller. In both cases we see an inner ring or focus of intense higher civilization encompassed by a vast Dian. chicago, so e x P Lo gg, e. vol. xiv. Pp. 66 f
INTRODUCTION The proper historical background for such a broad understanding of Plato's political and social philosophy is Thucydides' account of the thirty years' Pelo- ponnesian war, which Hobbes translated in order to exhibit to England and Europe the evils of unbridled democracy. Thucydides' history is the ultimate source of all the hard-headed cynical politi- cal philosophy of Realpolitik and the Superman, from Machiavelli, Guicciardini, and Hobbes to Nietzsche and Bernardi. And in recent years the speeches which he attributes to the Athenian ambassadors proposing to violate the neutrality of Melos have been repeatedly rediscovered and quoted. They are merely the most drastic expression of a philosophy of life and politics which pervades the entire history and which I studied many years ago in a paper on the " Implicit Ethics and Psychology of Thucydides," " some of the ideas of which are reproduced apparently by accident in Mr. Cornford's Thucydides Mythistoricus. The moral disintegration of a pro- longed world war is the predestined medium for the culture of this poisonous germ. And the Pelo- ponnesian war was a world war for the smaller international system of the Greek states. It was for Greece that suicide which our civil war may prove to have been for the old American New England and Virginia, and which we pray the World War may not prove to have been for Europe. The analogy, which we need not verify in detail, is startling, though the scale in Greece was infinitely smaller. In both cases we see an inner ring or focus of intense higher civilization encompassed by a vast " Transactions of Amer. Philol. Assoc, vol. xxiv. pp. 66 fF. The Dial, Chicago, 1907, xliii. p. 202
NTRODUCTION outer semi-civilized or barbarian world of coloniza- tion, places in the sun, trade monopolies, and spheres of infuence. In both the inner ring is subdivided into jealous states whose unstable equilibrium depends on the maintenance of the balance of power between two great systems, one commercial, de cratic, and naval, the other authoritative, dis- ciplined, military. The speeches of Pericles and King Archidamus in Thucydides analyse, contrast and develop the conflicting ideals and weigh sea wer against land power, as the speeches of rival prime ministers have done in our day. I merel suggest the parallel. What concerns us here is that to understand Plato we must compare, I do not say identify, him with Renan writing about la reforme intellectuelle et morale of France after the 1950 speculating on the decline fall of the British Empire, or an American philosopher of 19s0 meditating on the failure of American democracy. The background of the comparatively optimistic Socrates was the triumphant progressive in alistic democracy of the age of Pericles, and the choric rophets of the imaginative reason, Aeschylus and of Plato, the experience that ground to devilish colours all his dreams and permanently darkened his of the Periclean ideal and lowered the level of Hellenic civilization in preparation for its final ove sophy which he strove to overcome in himself and others was the philosophy of the political speeches in Thucydides and of those bitter disillusionized later plays of Euripides. His xxXvI
INTRODUCTION outer semi-civib'zed or barbarian world of colonization, places in the sun, trade monopolies, and spheres of influence. In both the inner ring is subdivided into jealous states whose unstable equihbrium depends on the maintenance of the balance of power between two great systems, one commercial, democratic, and naval, the other authoritative, dis- ciplined, militar}-. The speeches of Pericles and King Archidamus in Thucydides analyse, contrast, and develop the conflicting ideals and weigh sea power against land power, as the speeches of rival prime ministers have done in our day. I merely suggest the parallel. What coacerns us here is that to understand Plato we must compare, I do not say identify, him with Renan vTiting about la reforme intellectuelk et morale of France after the annee terrible, or, absit omen, an EngUsh philosopher of 1950 speculating on the decline and fall of the British Empire, or an American philosopher of 1980 meditating on the failure of American democracy. The background of the comparatively optimistic Socrates was the triumphant progressive imperialistic democracy of the age of Pericles, and the choric odes of the poets and prophets of the imaginative reason, Aeschylus and Sophocles. The background of Plato, the experience that ground to devihsh colours all his dreams and permanently darkened his vision of life, was the world war that made ship^^Teck of the Periclean ideal and lowered the level of Hellenic civilization in preparation for its final overthrow. The philosophy which he strove to overcome in himself and others was the philosophy of the political speeches in Thucydides and of those bitter disillusionized later plays of Euripides, His