Ath. I should wish the citizens to be as readily persuaded to virtue as possible ; this will surely be the aim of the legislator in all his laws.
Cle. Certainly.
Ath. The proposal appears to me to be of some value ; and I think that a person will listen with more gentleness and good-will to the precepts addressed to him by the legislator, when his soul is not altogether unprepared to receive them. Even a little done in the way of conciliation gains his ear, and is always worth having. For there is no great inclination or readiness on the part of mankind to be made as good, or as quickly good, as possible. The case of the many proves the wisdom of Hesiod, who says that the road to wickedness is smooth and can be travelled without perspiring, because it is so very short :
But before virtue the immortal Gods have placed the sweat of labour, and long and steep is the way thither, and rugged at first ; but when you have reached the top, although difficult before, it is then easy.
Cle. Yes ; and he certainly speaks well.
Ath. Very true : and now let me tell you the effect which the preceding discourse has had upon me.
Cle. Proceed.
Ath. Suppose that we have a little conversation with the legislator, and say to him — “O, legislator, speak ; if you know what we ought to say and do, you can surely tell.”
Cle. Of course he can.
Ath. “Did we not hear you just now saying, that the legislator ought not to allow the poets to do what they liked ? For that they would not know in which of their words they went against the laws, to the hurt of the state.”
Cle. That is true.
Ath. May we not fairly make answer to him on behalf of the poets ?
Cle. What answer shall we make to him ?
Ath. That the poet, according to the tradition which has ever prevailed among us, and is accepted of all men, when he sits down on the tripod of the muse, is not in his right mind ; like a fountain, he allows to flow out freely whatever comes in, and his art being imitative, he is often compelled to represent men of opposite dispositions, and thus to contradict himself ; neither can he tell whether there is more truth in one thing that he has said than in another. this is not the case in a law ; the legislator must give not two rules about the same thing, but one only. Take an example from what you have just been saying. Of three kinds of funerals, there is one which is too extravagant, another is too niggardly, the third is a mean ; and you choose and approve and order the last without qualification. But if I had an extremely rich wife, and she bade me bury her and describe her burial in a poem, I should praise the extravagant sort ; and a poor miserly man, who had not much money to spend, would approve of the niggardly ; and the man of moderate means, who was himself moderate, would praise a moderate funeral. Now you in the capacity of legislator must not barely say “a moderate funeral,” but you must define what moderation is, and how much ; unless you are definite, you must not suppose that you are speaking a language that can become law.
Cle. Certainly not.
Ath. And is our legislator to have no preface to his laws, but to say at once Do this, avoid that — and then holding the penalty in terrorem to go on to another law ; offering never a word of advice or exhortation to those for whom he is legislating, after the manner of some doctors ? For of doctors, as I may remind you, some have a gentler, others a ruder method of cure ; and as children ask the doctor to be gentle with them, so we will ask the legislator to cure our disorders with the gentlest remedies. What I mean to say is, that besides doctors there are doctors’ servants, who are also styled doctors.
Cle. Very true.
Ath. And whether they are slaves or freemen makes no difference ; they acquire their knowledge of medicine by obeying and observing their masters ; empirically and not according to the natural way of learning, as the manner of freemen is, who have learned scientifically themselves the art which they impart scientifically to their pupils. You are aware that there are these two classes of doctors ?
Cle. To be sure.
Ath. And did you ever observe that there are two classes of patients in states, slaves and freemen ; and the slave doctors run about and cure the slaves, or wait for them in the dispensaries — practitioners of this sort never talk to their patients individually, or let them talk about their own individual complaints ? The slave doctor prescribes what mere experience suggests, as if he had exact knowledge ; and when he has given his orders, like a tyrant, he rushes off with equal assurance to some other servant who is ill ; and so he relieves the master of the house of the care of his invalid slaves. But the other doctor, who is a freeman, attends and practises upon freemen ; and he carries his enquiries far back, and goes into the nature of the disorder ; he enters into discourse with the patient and with his friends, and is at once getting information from the sick man, and also instructing him as far as he is able, and he will not prescribe for him until he has first convinced him ; at last, when he has brought the patient more and more under his persuasive influences and set him on the road to health, he attempts to effect a cure. Now which is the better way of proceeding in a physician and in a trainer ? Is he the better who accomplishes his ends in a double way, or he who works in one way, and that the ruder and inferior ?
Cle. I should say, Stranger, that the double way is far better.
Ath. Should you like to see an example of the double and single method in legislation ?
Cle. Certainly I should.
Ath. What will be our first law ? Will not the the order of nature, begin by making regulations for states about births ?
Cle. He will.
Ath. In all states the birth of children goes back to the connection of marriage ?
Cle. Very true.
Ath. And, according to the true order, the laws relating to marriage should be those which are first determined in every state ?
Cle. Quite so.
Ath. Then let me first give the law of marriage in a simple form ; it may run as follows : — A man shall marry between the ages of thirty and thirty-five, or, if he does not, he shall pay such and such a fine, or shall suffer the loss of such and such privileges. This would be the simple law about marriage. The double law would run thus : — A man shall marry between the ages of thirty and thirty-five, considering that in a manner the human race naturally partakes of immortality, which every man is by nature inclined to desire to the utmost ; for the desire of every man that he may become famous, and not lie in the grave without a name, is only the love of continuance. Now mankind are coeval with all time, and are ever following, and will ever follow, the course of time ; and so they are immortal, because they leave children’s children behind them, and partake of immortality in the unity of generation. And for a man voluntarily to deprive himself of this gift, as he deliberately does who will not have a wife or children, is impiety. He who obeys the law shall be free, and shall pay no fine ; but he who is disobedient, and does not marry, when he has arrived at the age of thirty-five, shall pay a yearly fine of a certain amount, in order that he may not imagine his celibacy to bring ease and profit to him ; and he shall not share in the honours which the young men in the state give to the aged. Comparing now the two forms of the law, you will be able to arrive at a judgment about any other laws — whether they should be double in length even when shortest, because they have to persuade as well as threaten, or whether they shall only threaten and be of half the length.
Meg. The shorter form, Stranger, would be more in accordance with Lacedaemonian custom ; although, for my own part, if any one were to ask me which I myself prefer in the state, I should certainly determine in favour of the longer ; and I would have every law made after the same pattern, if I had to choose. But I think that Cleinias is the person to be consulted, for his is the state which is going to use these laws.
Cle. Thank you, Megillus.
Ath. Whether, in the abstract, words are to be many or few, is a very foolish question ; the best form, and not the shortest, is to be approved ; nor is length at all to be regarded. Of the two forms of law which have been recited, the one is not only twice as good in practical usefulness as the other, but the case is like that of the two kinds of doctors, which I was just now mentioning. And yet legislators never appear to have considered that they have two instruments which they might use in legislation — persuasion and force ; for in dealing with the rude and uneducated multitude, they use the one only as far as they can ; they do not mingle persuasion with coercion, but employ force pure and simple. Moreover, there is a third point, sweet friends, which ought to be, and never is, regarded in our existing laws.
Cle. What is it ?
Ath. A point arising out of our previous discussion, which comes into my mind in some mysterious way. All this time, from early dawn until noon, have we been talking about laws in this charming retreat : now we are going to promulgate our laws, and what has preceded was only the prelude of them. Why do I mention this ? For this reason : — Because all discourses and vocal exercises have preludes and overtures, which are a sort of artistic beginnings intended to help the strain which is to be performed ; lyric measures and music of every other kind have preludes framed with wonderful care. But of the truer and higher strain of law and politics, no one has ever yet uttered any prelude, or composed or published any, as though there was no such thing in nature. Whereas our present discussion seems to me to imply that there is ; — these double laws, of which we were speaking, are not exactly double, but they are in two parts, the law and the prelude of the law. The arbitrary command, which was compared to the commands of doctors, whom we described as of the meaner sort, was the law pure and simple ; and that which preceded, and was described by our friend here as being hortatory only, was, although in fact, an exhortation, likewise analogous to the preamble of a discourse. For I imagine that all this language of conciliation, which the legislator has been uttering in the preface of the law, was intended to create goodwill in the person whom he addressed, in order that, by reason of this good-will, he might more intelligently receive his command, that is to say, the law. And therefore, in my way of speaking, this is more rightly described as the preamble than as the matter of the law. And I must further proceed to observe, that to all his laws, and to each separately, the legislator should prefix a preamble ; he should remember how great will be the difference between them, according as they have, or have not, such preambles, as in the case already given.
Cle. The lawgiver, if he asks my opinion, will certainly legislate in the form which you advise.
Ath. I think that you are right, Cleinias, in affirming that all laws have preambles, and that throughout the whole of this work of legislation every single law should have a suitable preamble at the beginning ; for that which is to follow is most important, and it makes all the difference whether we clearly remember the preambles or not. Yet we should be wrong in requiring that all laws, small and great alike, should have preambles of the same kind, any more than all songs or speeches ; although they may be natural to all, they are not always necessary, and whether they are to be employed or not has in each case to be left to the judgment of the speaker or the musician, or, in the present instance, of the lawgiver.
Cle. That I think is most true. And now, Stranger, without delay let us return to the argument, and, as people say in play, make a second and better beginning, if you please, with the principles which we have been laying down, which we never thought of regarding as a preamble before, but of which we may now make a preamble, and not merely consider them to be chance topics of discourse. Let us acknowledge, then, that we have a preamble. About the honour of the Gods and the respect of parents, enough has been already said ; and we may proceed to the topics which follow next in order, until the preamble is deemed by you to be complete ; and after that you shall go through the laws themselves.
Ath. I understand you to mean that we have made a sufficient preamble about Gods and demi-gods, and about parents living or dead ; and now you would have us bring the rest of the subject into the light of day ?
Cle. Exactly.
Ath. After this, as is meet and for the interest of us all, I the speaker, and you the listeners, will try to estimate all that relates to the souls and bodies and properties of the citizens, as regards both their occupations and arrive, as far as in us lies, at the nature of education. These then are the topics which follow next in order.
Cle. Very good.