Ath. In the first place, let us speak of the laws about music-thatis to say, such music as then existed-in order that we may trace thegrowth of the excess of freedom from the beginning. Now music wasearly divided among us into certain kinds and manners. One sortconsisted of prayers to the Gods, which were called hymns; and therewas another and opposite sort called lamentations, and anothertermed paeans, and another, celebrating the birth of Dionysus, called,I believe, "dithyrambs." And they used the actual word "laws," ornomoi, for another kind of song; and to this they added the term"citharoedic." All these and others were duly distinguished, norwere the performers allowed to confuse one style of music withanother. And the authority which determined and gave judgment, andpunished the disobedient, was not expressed in a hiss, nor in the mostunmusical shouts of the multitude, as in our days, nor in applause andclapping of hands. But the directors of public instruction insistedthat the spectators should listen in silence to the end; and boysand their tutors, and the multitude in general, were kept quiet by ahint from a stick. Such was the good order which the multitude werewilling to observe; they would never have dared to give judgment bynoisy cries. And then, as time went on, the poets themselvesintroduced the reign of vulgar and lawless innovation. They were menof genius, but they had no perception of what is just and lawful inmusic; raging like Bacchanals and possessed with inordinatedelights-mingling lamentations with hymns, and paeans with dithyrambs;imitating the sounds of the flute on the lyre, and making onegeneral confusion; ignorantly affirming that music has no truth,and, whether good or bad, can only be judged of rightly by thepleasure of the hearer. And by composing such licentious works, andadding to them words as licentious, they have inspired the multitudewith lawlessness and boldness, and made them fancy that they can judgefor themselves about melody and song. And in this way the theatresfrom being mute have become vocal, as though they had understanding ofgood and bad in music and poetry; and instead of an aristocracy, anevil sort of theatrocracy has grown up. For if the democracy whichjudged had only consisted of educated persons, no fatal harm wouldhave been done; but in music there first arose the universal conceitof omniscience and general lawlessness;-freedom came followingafterwards, and men, fancying that they knew what they did not know,had no longer any fear, and the absence of fear begetsshamelessness. For what is this shamelessness, which is so evil athing, but the insolent refusal to regard the opinion of the better byreason of an over-daring sort of liberty?
Meg. Very true.
Ath. Consequent upon this freedom comes the other freedom, ofdisobedience to rulers; and then the attempt to escape the control andexhortation of father, mother, elders, and when near the end, thecontrol of the laws also; and at the very end there is the contempt ofoaths and pledges, and no regard at all for the Gods-herein theyexhibit and imitate the old so called Titanic nature, and come tothe same point as the Titans when they rebelled against God, leading alife of endless evils. But why have I said all this? I ask, becausethe argument ought to be pulled up from time to time, and not beallowed to run away, but held with bit and bridle, and then we shallnot, as the proverb says, fall off our ass. Let us then once moreask the question, To what end has all this been said?
Meg. Very good.
Ath. This, then, has been said for the sake-Meg. Of what?
Ath. We were maintaining that the lawgiver ought to have threethings in view: first, that the city for which he legislates should befree; and secondly, be at unity with herself; and thirdly, should haveunderstanding;-these were our principles, were they not?
Meg. Certainly.
Ath. With a view to this we selected two kinds of government, thedespotic, and the other the most free; and now we are consideringwhich of them is the right form: we took a mean in both cases, ofdespotism in the one, and of liberty in the other, and we saw thatin a mean they attained their perfection; but that when they werecarried to the extreme of either, slavery or licence, neither partywere the gainers.
Meg. Very true.
Ath. And that was our reason for considering the settlement of theDorian army, and of the city built by Dardanus at the foot of themountains, and the removal of cities to the seashore, and of ourmention of the first men, who were the survivors of the deluge. Andall that was previously said about music and drinking, and whatpreceded, was said with the view of seeing how a state might be bestadministered, and how an individual might best order his own life. Andnow, Megillus and Cleinias, how can we put to the proof the value ofour words?
Cle. Stranger, I think that I see how a proof of their value maybe obtained. This discussion of ours appears to me to have beensingularly fortunate, and just what I at this moment want; mostauspiciously have you and my friend Megillus come in my way. For Iwill tell you what has happened to me; and I regard the coincidence asa sort of omen. The greater part of Crete is going to send out acolony, and they have entrusted the management of the affair to theCnosians; and the Cnosian government to me and nine others. And theydesire us to give them any laws which we please, whether taken fromthe Cretan model or from any other; and they do not mind about theirbeing foreign if they are better. Grant me then this favour, whichwill also be a gain to yourselves:-Let us make a selection from whathas been said, and then let us imagine a State of which we willsuppose ourselves to be the original founders. Thus we shall proceedwith our enquiry, and, at the same time, I may have the use of theframework which you are constructing, for the city which is incontemplation.
Ath. Good news, Cleinias; if Megillus has no objection, you maybe sure that I will do all in my power to please you.
Cle. Thank you.
Meg. And so will I.
Cle. Excellent; and now let us begin to frame the State.
