Book 5 - Platonic Foundation

Laws

––––– BOOK V –––––

ATHENIAN: Give ear, then, all you who have heard just now about gods and the beloved ancestors.

The most divine thing that anyone possesses, after gods, is soul, his closest kindred. All things

that ever belong to anyone are of two kinds: the superior and better acting as masters, and the infe-

rior and worse acting as servants, and those that act as master should always be held in higher

esteem than those that serve. Accordingly, I say that a person’s own soul should be accorded a

place of honour second only to the gods and those who follow in their train, and I am right to

encourage this. Yet none of us really bestows honour in the correct way, although we think we do.

For honour is presumably a divine good, and nothing bad is worthy of honour, and anyone who

believes he is exalting his soul with some words or gifts or indulgences, while making it no better

than it was before, thinks he is bestowing honour when he is doing no such thing.

Every child, for instance, no sooner comes to manhood than he believes he is capable of

understanding everything, so he imagines he is honouring his own soul once he is praising it, and

he eagerly grants it licence to do as it pleases. But we are now saying that by acting in this way he

is harming his soul rather than honouring it, when, according to us, soul should be second in honour

only to the gods. Again, whenever a person presumes that other people, and not himself, are con-

sistently responsible for his own transgressions and his many significant vices, while he always

holds himself blameless thinking he is honouring his own soul, he is really doing no such thing.

He is, in fact, harming his soul. Similarly, when he indulges in pleasures contrary to the direction

and encouragement of the lawgiver, he is not honouring his soul at all but dishonouring it by filling

it with woes and regret. And again, in the opposite case, when someone won’t make an effort to

endure the approved hardships and fears, travails and sufferings, but gives in, his capitulation does

not honour his soul. Indeed, all behaviour of this sort brings dishonour.

Nor indeed does he honour his soul when he imagines that being alive is good under any

circumstances. Rather, he dishonours it, for his soul then forms the view that everything that hap-

pens in the other world is evil. And he goes along with this notion instead of resisting it by instruc-

tion and refutation because the soul does not really know if, on the contrary, the greatest goods of

all for us are to be found in the realm of the gods of that place. And, indeed, whenever someone

honours some earthly beauty above excellence, this is the same as dishonouring the soul completely

and utterly, as it is tantamount to declaring falsely that the body is more honourable than the soul.

Indeed, nothing earth born is more honourable than the heavenly, and whoever forms any other

opinion about the soul has no idea how wondrous a possession he is despising.

Again, when someone loves acquiring wealth by base means, or has no qualms about doing

so, he is not honouring his soul with such gifts. Far from it; he sells his soul’s treasure and nobility

for a little bit of gold. But all the gold on earth, or beneath the earth, is not as valuable as excel-

lence. So, to sum it all up, once the lawgiver has set out in detail what is disgraceful and evil on

the one hand, and what is good and noble on the other, whoever is not prepared to refrain from

726 a

727 a

727 b

727 c

727 d

727 e

728 a

1,122 | LAWS V – 726a–728a

the one by every means at his disposal, and practice the other to the utmost of his ability, does

not realise that in doing all this he is heaping vile dishonour and deformity on his most divine

possession, his soul.

For no one really takes account of the greatest judgement, so called, passed upon evil-doing:

to become like unto men who are already evil, and having become like this, to flee from and avoid

good men and good words, and pursue the other sort of people, cleave to them and keep their com-

pany. But in consorting with such people, he inevitably does what they naturally do, and experi-

ences what such people naturally experience and say among themselves. Now this state of affairs

does not constitute justice, since justice and what’s just are noble. It is, rather, a punishment, a

consequence of wrong-doing, and the person who meets with it and the person who does not, are

both wretched; in one case because he is not cured, in the other because he is undone so that many

others may be saved. But for us, honour consists, generally speaking, in following the better and

doing our utmost to improve the worse when it can be improved.

Now, when it comes to fleeing from evil and following the trail of the utmost excellence,

choosing that and then living the rest of one’s life in communion with that, a human being has no

possession more naturally suited to the purpose than soul. That is why we assigned it second place

in terms of honour, while third place, as anyone would recognise, goes to the honour that naturally

belongs to the body. Furthermore, it is necessary to consider the various honours, which of them

are true and which are spurious. This is the role of the lawgiver.

Now, as I see it, he will declare these honours to be as follows and of the following kinds.

The body that is worthy of honour is not the one that is beautiful or strong, nor the one possessed

of speed or stature, nor indeed the one that is healthy, even though this is what most people think.

Nor are bodies of the opposite sort to be honoured either, but those that occupy a middle position

are the most sound-minded and safest by far, while the other two make people’s souls conceited

and arrogant in one case, and submissive and slavish in the other. The same holds for the acqui-

sition of wealth and possessions, and the same ranking in terms of honour applies too. For

excess of each of these brings about enmity and faction, in public and in private, while their defi-

ciency, for the most part, leads to slavery. Let no one then covet wealth for his children’s sake so

that he may leave them as wealthy as he possibly can, since this is good neither for them nor for

the city. Indeed, unflattering wealth that still provides for our needs is what’s best of all, and most

musical, for the young. For it is harmonious and it suits us and ensures a life that is free from

pain in every respect.

We should bequeath to our children a great sense of reverence, rather than gold. We imagine

that we shall bequeath this legacy to the young if we chastise them when they are disrespectful,

but the exhortation used nowadays, which declares that the young must be respectful to everyone,

won’t bring this about. The thoughtful lawgiver would, rather, exhort the older generation to show

respect for the young, and to be careful above all else lest any of the young folk ever see an elder,

or even hear tell of him, doing or saying anything shameful, because where the old have no shame,

the young in that place are also inevitably devoid of reverence. Indeed, the best education of the

young, and of ourselves, consists not in admonishment, but in being seen to exemplify in practice

throughout one’s life, the very directions we use when admonishing others.

Someone who honours and respects all his kindred who share the family gods and naturally

have the same blood, would, within reason, retain the favour of the birth gods in the procreation

of his own children. And, indeed, we would secure the goodwill of friends and companions in

daily affairs by regarding their services to us as more significant and important than they them-

selves regard them, and, conversely, by reckoning our own kindnesses to friends as less significant

than our friends and companions themselves regard them. Again, in the case of the city and its cit-

izens, the best person by far is the one who, in preference to a triumph at the Olympic games, or

728 b

728 c

728 d

728 e

729 a

729 b

729 c

729 d

LAWS V – 728b–729d | 1,123

in any other military or more peaceful contests, would prefer to be famous for service to the laws

of his own land as someone who, throughout his entire life, rendered them more outstanding service

than any other man.

Furthermore, when dealing with foreign people, he should bear in mind the special sanctity

of contracts. For almost all offences against strangers, in contrast to those against fellow citizens,

rely more upon a god’s vengeance, since the stranger, bereft of companions and kindred, is more

at the mercy of gods and humans. So, whoever is able to exact vengeance comes to his aid much

more eagerly, and the one who is especially able to do so is the daimon or god of strangers, the

attendants of Zeus Xenios. Anyone, then, with even a little foresight will go through life to the

very end, taking the utmost care to avoid committing any offence against strangers. What’s more,

the greatest offence against foreigners or fellow countrymen is, in each case, the one that affects

supplicants of a god. For the god whom the supplicant called as witness when he entered the agree-

ment becomes the special guardian of this victim, so he would never suffer an offence without

vengeance being exacted for the wrongs done to him.

We have now reviewed, quite comprehensively, all dealings with one’s parents, with oneself,

the city, friends and kindred, strangers and fellow countrymen. After this, we need to describe

what kind of person one should be to live the most noble of lives. So, we should proceed to speak

not of what the law brings about, but of what education achieves through praise and blame in mak-

ing each person more receptive and well disposed towards the laws we intend to enact. These are

our next topics. Now, of all goods, among gods and among humans, truth is the leader, and if any-

one is to become blessed and happy, let him share in this from the very beginning so that he may

spend as much of his lifetime as possible living as a man of truth. For such a man is faithful, but

he who loves intentional falsehood is untrustworthy, and he who loves unintentional falsehood is

a fool, and neither of these are enviable. For every untrustworthy or ignorant person is friendless,

and as time passes and he is recognised for what he is, in the challenges of old age he isolates him-

self completely as life’s end draws nigh. And so, it makes no difference whether his companions

or children are still alive or not, for he lives almost as if he has none.

Someone who does no injustice is worthy of honour, but someone who does not allow the

unjust to act unjustly deserves twice as much honour, nay more. For the former is worth as much

as one person, while the latter, who discloses the injustice of others to the rulers, is worth as much

as many others. But he who also does his best to assist the rulers in chastising the unjust is a great

and perfect man in the city, who should be awarded the prize for excellence by popular acclaim.

And the very same praise also applies to sound-mindedness and wisdom, and indeed to any other

goods which, once acquired, can be held by the person himself and passed on to others too.

Whoever passes them on should be honoured to the utmost, while second place should go to some-

one who wishes to do so but lacks the ability. But anyone who holds back and does not willingly

share any of the goods with anyone else in a spirit of friendship is someone who should himself

be censured, while showing no less honour for the good he acquired, just because this fellow

acquired it.

Every one of us should be ambitious for excellence without a hint of jealousy, since a per-

son like this makes a city great by exerting himself personally, while at the same time not imped-

ing others by slandering them. But the jealous type, thinking that he has to get the better of others

by slandering them, exerts himself less in pursuit of true excellence, and creates despondency

among his rivals by criticising them unjustly. By doing so he makes a weakling of the whole city

when it comes to competing for excellence, and, for his part, diminishes its good reputation.

Indeed, every man should be spirited, and gentle too, as far as in him lies. For there is no escaping

the dangerous, intractable and, indeed, entirely irremediable injustices of others in any other way

than by being triumphant in doing battle and defending oneself against them, and by relentless

729 e

730 a

730 b

730 c

730 d

730 e

731 a

731 b

1,124 | LAWS V – 729e–731b

chastisement. And this is an impossible task for any soul devoid of noble wrath.

As for the injustices of those who act unjustly but whose injustices can be remedied, we

need to recognise, firstly, that no one who is unjust is deliberately unjust. For no one anywhere

would ever deliberately end up possessed of the greatest evils, least of all in his own most honoured

possession. And soul, as we have said, is, in truth, everyone’s most honoured possession, so no

one should ever deliberately take the greatest evil into this most honoured place and live his life

possessed of that. Now, the unjust person who is possessed of evils deserves unreserved pity, and

in the case of someone possessed of remediable evils, there is scope for pity, gentleness and

restraining one’s anger, rather than raging bitterly like a shrew. But in the case of an evil and corrupt

person who does not respond to any entreaties at all, it is necessary to let the anger loose. And

that’s why we say that it is appropriate and necessary for the good person to be both spirited and

gentle, as the occasion demands.

The greatest of all evils, innate in the souls of most human beings, is one that everyone

makes an excuse for, in his own case, and makes no effort to avoid. It consists in the assertion

that every person is by nature a friend to himself, and that this is the way things should be. But

the truth of the matter is that the source of all faults in each person, in every case, lies in this

intense self-love. For the lover is blind to the faults of the beloved, so he is a poor judge of what’s

just and good because he believes he should always honour his own above the truth. But a man

who is to be a great man must cherish, not himself or what belongs to himself, but what’s just,

either in his own actions, or indeed in the actions of others. From this same fault is born the uni-

versal conviction that our own ignorance is wisdom, and so we, who in a sense know nothing,

imagine that we know everything. And since we don’t rely on others to do whatever we ourselves

don’t know, we inevitably make mistakes in doing this ourselves. That’s why everyone must flee

from this intense self-love, and always keep with someone better than himself, without feeling

any shame in doing so.

But there are lesser precepts than these that are just as useful. They are frequently quoted

and should be recited as a reminder to oneself. For there must always be some influx corresponding

to any outflow, and memory is an influx of wisdom that had previously left the soul. That is why

excessive laughter and tears must be avoided, and everyone should encourage everyone else in

this. One should try to show composure by completely concealing all excessive joy and sorrow,

whether our own daimon is set fair, or it turns out that we face an uphill struggle in certain situations

and the daimons face opposition. So we must have constant hope that the goods bestowed by God

will lessen the pains that befall us, and change our present predicament for the better. And in rela-

tion to the goods themselves, we must hope that these, and good fortune too, will always be ours,

rather than all these pains. Everyone needs to live with these hopes and constant reminders of all

such precepts unstintingly, clearly reminding both himself and his fellows, in work and in play.

At this stage, as far as divine considerations are concerned, we have dealt quite well with

the activities that should be engaged in, and the sort of person each individual should be. We have

not dealt with the human considerations so far, but we should do so since we are discussing human

beings rather than gods. Pleasures, pains and desires are most natural to humanity, and every mortal

creature really is, in a sense, inevitably dependent and reliant upon such powerful influences. So

we should praise the very best life, not only because of its superior outward reputation, but also

because, if anyone is prepared to taste it and not take flight from it in his younger years, it also

proves itself superior in providing what everyone is seeking, more delight and less pain, all the

days of our life. It is easy to show without doubt that this will be the obvious outcome, provided

such a life is tasted in the correct manner. But in what does the correctness consist? This is what

we must now consider, guided by our argument.

We need to decide, by comparing the more pleasant life with the more painful, whether the

731 c

731 d

731 e

732 a

732 b

732 c

732 d

732 e

733 a

LAWS V – 731c–733a | 1,125

life conforms to our nature in one case, and goes against our nature in another. We should proceed

as follows. We want pleasure, and we do not choose pain, nor do we want it, nor do we want neither

in preference to pleasure, but we do want this neutral state, instead of pain. We want less pain

along with more pleasure, and we do not want more pain along with less pleasure, and when both

are present in equal measure we find it hard to make a decision. And when it comes to desire, all

these factors, and their quantity, magnitude, intensity and equality, and all the opposites of these,

make a difference, or do not make a difference, to our choice in each case. Now, with all these

arranged as they must inevitably be arranged, the life in which there are lots of pleasures and pains,

great and intense, and in which the pleasures predominate, is the one that we want, not the one in

which the pains predominate. Then again, when there is not much of either, and they are mild and

minor but the pains predominate, we do not want that life, but when pleasures predominate, we

do. Furthermore, we should think of the life in which pleasures and pains are in balance, just as

we did earlier. We want it insofar as it involves a predominance of what we like, and we do not

want it insofar as it involves a predominance of the opposite. We should, then, think of all our

lives as bound by nature within these confines, and should think about the kinds of lives we natu-

rally want. And if we assert that we want anything that lies outside of these confines, we are saying

so out of ignorance and inexperience of the realities of our lives.

So how many lives are there and what are they like? From among these, a man must make

his choice between the desirable and undesirable, by reviewing them and turning his decision into

a law for himself. And by selecting what he likes, and what is pleasant, what is noblest, what is

best at the same time, he should live the most blessed life available to humanity. Now, we should

say that the sound-minded life is one, the wise life is another, as is the courageous life and the

healthy one. And, as opposites of these four, there are the lives of folly, cowardice, licence and

disease. Whoever understands the sound-minded life will count it as gentle in every respect, mild

in its pains and pleasures, calm rather than frenzied in its desires and passions. The life of licence,

however, he will count as harsh in every respect, intense in its pains and pleasures, impetuous and

frantic in its desires, with passions that are mad in the extreme. And he will recognise that in the

sound-minded life, the pleasures exceed the pains, whereas in the life of licence, the pains exceed

the pleasures in their magnitude, quantity and frequency. And so it follows, naturally and of neces-

sity, that one life proves to be more pleasant, the other more painful, and anyone who wishes to

live pleasantly no longer has the option of living a licentious life. Rather, as is obvious by now, if

what we are saying is right, any licentious person is necessarily licentious unintentionally. Indeed,

it is either through ignorance or lack of self-control, or both, that the broad mass of humanity live

lives devoid of sound-mindedness.

And we should think of healthy and diseased lives in the same way; they both involve pleas-

ures and pains, but in health the pleasures exceed the pains, and in disease the pains exceed the

pleasures. Now, our intention in choosing between lives is not that pain should be prevalent, the

life we have adjudged most pleasant is the one where the very opposite is the case. So we would

maintain that both the desires and the pleasures are fewer, smaller and less frequent in the sound-

minded life than in the licentious life, in the wise life than the foolish one, in the courageous one

than the cowardly. But in each case the former exceed the latter in pleasure, while the opposite

applies to pain. So the courageous life wins out over the cowardly, and the wise over the ignorant,

and comparing the lives with one another, the sound-minded, the courageous, the wise, and the

healthy are more pleasant than the cowardly, the ignorant, the licentious and the diseased. To sum

up then, the life of excellence in body or soul is more pleasant than the life of degeneracy, and it

is superior, in general, in its extraordinary beauty, rectitude, excellence and reputation, and it makes

anyone who possesses this happier in life than his opposite in every respect.

Thus far, having presented the prelude to our laws, let us end that discussion here. After the

733 b

733 c

733 d

733 e

734 a

734 b

734 c

734 d

734 e

1,126 | LAWS V – 733b–734e

prelude, the ‘melody’

should, I presume, inevitably follow, or, in truth, a sketch of the legal and

civic arrangements. Now, to use an analogy, in the case of a web or any woven fabric, the woof

and the warp cannot be made from the same thread since the kind of thread used for the warp

needs to be superior in terms of excellence. For the warp is tougher and has a certain firmness of

character, while the woof is softer and, to an appropriate extent, yielding. On this basis, then, we

should make a reasonable distinction along similar lines, between those who hold positions of

authority in our cities and those whose education has been less testing. For there are, you see, two

components of a political system – the appointment of individuals to positions of authority, and

providing those in authority with laws.

But there is something we need to think about before any of these matters. A shepherd, a

cowherd, a horse-breeder or the like, taking charge of any herd, will never set about caring for

them until he has performed the appropriate purification on each community of animals. Having

separated those that are healthy from those that are not, and the noble from the ignoble, he will

send the second group off to various other herds and care for the remainder. This is because he

realises that such care would be a futile and never-ending exercise in the case of bodies and souls

that have been corrupted by nature or poor nurture. He would recognise that the corrupt types will

also corrupt those who are healthy and unblemished in body and in behaviour in every herd unless

the existing stock is properly purified. Now, in the case of the other animals, this is less important

and only merits mention in our argument for the purposes of illustration. But in the case of human

beings, it is of the utmost importance for the lawgiver to seek out and proclaim, in each case,

what’s appropriate in relation to purification and all of his other dealings with them. For instance,

in the case of purifications of a city, many means of purification are available, some milder, some

more severe, and the lawgiver who is also a tyrant would be able to use the severe purifications,

which are also the best. But a lawgiver without tyrannical power, when establishing a new political

system or laws, would be content if he could effect even the mildest of purifications. Yet, the best

method, like the best medicines, is painful, and it effects punishment by justice combined with

vengeance, which is taken to the ultimate point of exile or death, and usually rids the city of the

most serious transgressors who are incurable and do her the greatest harm. The more gentle of the

purifications might be described as follows. There are people who, from want of basic sustenance,

show themselves ready and willing to follow their leaders in an assault by those who have not on

those who have. These are regarded by the lawgiver as a disease sprung up in the city, and he ban-

ishes them in as kindly a spirit as possible to a colony in what he euphemistically calls “a removal”.

Now, every lawgiver must, somehow or other, do this at the very outset, but for us the present cir-

cumstances are even more straightforward, since at the moment we do not have to devise a colony

or make a selection for the purposes of purification. In our case, it’s as if waters from various

springs and winter torrents are flowing together into a single pool, and we need to concentrate on

ensuring that the converging water will be as pure as it can possibly be by drawing it off in some

cases, or channelling and diverting it in others.

There is, it seems, hard work and risk involved in any civic arrangement, but since our pres-

ent endeavours are theoretical rather than practical, let’s assume that the selection has been com-

pleted and that the purity has been satisfactorily secured. For once we have tested the bad people

who are attempting to enter the city and live there as citizens by means of extensive persuasion

and sufficient delay, we may then refuse them admission. But we should welcome the good people

in the best possible spirit of goodwill and graciousness.

Let us not overlook the fact that we ourselves have met with the same good fortune we

735 a

735 b

735 c

735 d

735 e

736 a

736 b

736 c

LAWS V – 735a–736c | 1,127

–––––

There is an untranslatable play here upon the word nomos, which refers both to a musical melody, tune or strain, and

to a law.

referred to earlier in the case of the Heraclid colony

– escape from terrible and dangerous strife

over land, the cancellation of debts and the distribution of property. When a city, established of

old, is compelled to legislate for such strife, it can neither leave things as they are, nor is it able to

effect any change, so the only thing left is something like ‘aspiration’ and gradual cautious change

over many years, advancing little by little, as follows. Among the agents of change, there should

always be people who have acquired a lot of land, who have many debtors and are willing to be

reasonable and share wealth with those debtors who are in distress. So they forgive debts and redis-

tribute land, adhering somehow or other to measure, convinced that poverty consists, not in reduced

wealth, but in increased greed. For this conviction is the greatest source of security for a city, and

on such a firm foundation it is possible to build whatever political order may be constructed there-

after, appropriate to such an arrangement as this. But when this transition falters, any subsequent

political progress, in any city, will be fraught with difficulty.

Now, although we say we have escaped this strife, it is only right to explain how we might

have extricated ourselves if we had not escaped it. So let us now declare that combining justice

with freedom from avarice is the only means of deliverance. There is no other way out, broad or

narrow, besides this, and we should let this principle be like a mainstay of our city. Indeed, we

should somehow or other ensure that property does not provide grounds for dispute among various

parties, otherwise anyone with even a little intelligence will refuse to proceed, unless he has to,

with a civic arrangement for citizens among whom there are disputes of ancient date. But God has

given us a new city to found, one in which there are, as yet, no mutual enmities. So it would be the

height of depravity and human folly if founders in such a situation were, themselves, to cause

enmities through their distribution of land and houses.

Well then, what would be the correct way to make the distribution? First we must determine

what the total size of the population should be. After this, we should come to an agreement on the

distribution of the citizens, and the number and size of the subdivisions into which they are to be

divided. Land and houses should then be distributed as equally as possible to these subdivisions.

An adequate population size could not be correctly decided without referring to the land and to the

neighbouring cities. There should be enough land to sustain a particular number of sound-minded

people; no more is needed. Their number should be sufficient to be able to defend themselves

when they are being wronged by neighbouring peoples, and capable of giving some assistance at

least to their own neighbours when they too are being wronged. When we have surveyed their

land and its neighbours, we shall define all this in practical terms with supporting arguments, but

for now our argument should proceed to complete our legislation as a sketch and an outline.

Let us assume, as an appropriate number, that there are 5,040 landholders and defenders

of the territory, and let the land with its houses be divided, likewise, into the same number of

parts so that the citizen and his allotment are counted together. Let the first division of the entire

number be into two parts, then into three. In fact, it is naturally divisible also by four, five, and

all successive numbers up to and including ten. This much then must be understood by every

man involved in law-making – what number and what kind of number would be most beneficial

to all cities. Let’s choose the number that possesses the greatest amount of immediately consec-

utive subdivisions. Now, although number as a whole contains all possible divisions for all pur-

poses, 5,040 can be divided, for military or for peaceful purposes related to any contracts and

joint endeavours involving taxation and grants, into fifty-nine divisions and no more, the first

ten being consecutive.

Now, all of these numerical relations should be thoroughly understood at leisure by those

whom the law directs to do so. They are, indeed, as I have said they are and not otherwise, and a

founder of a city should be told these for the following reasons: when constructing a new city from

scratch, or reforming an old and thoroughly corrupted one, in relation to its gods and those sacred

736 d

736 e

737 a

737 b

737 c

737 d

737 e

738 a

738 b

1,128 | LAWS V – 736d–738b

places which should be founded in the city, and when deciding which of the gods or divinities

each should be named after, no one in his right mind shall attempt to alter anything that is based

upon guidance from Delphi or Dodona or Ammon,

or certain ancient accounts that convinced

some people of apparitions that had taken place, or divine revelations that had been reported.

Having been convinced, people established sacrificial practices combined with rites, either from

that very locality or imported from Etruria or Cyprus, or somewhere else, and on the basis of such

reports they consecrated oracles, statues, altars and shrines, marking off sacred precincts for each

of these, none of which should be changed in the slightest by the lawgiver. To each of the places

a god or daimon, or even a hero, should be assigned, and in the division of the land, special

precincts and everything appropriate should be assigned to them first. As a result, gatherings of

the various parts, taking place at regular intervals, would provide an opportunity for people to sat-

isfy all kinds of needs and develop a friendly spirit towards one another, thanks to the sacrifices,

and become familiar and get to know one another, and there is no greater good for a city than

people knowing one another. For where people are in the dark about one another’s characters, and

they have no light, no one will ever get the honour he rightly deserves, or the positions of authority,

or the justice he is entitled to. So every citizen in every city should strive above all else to ensure

that he himself never proves false to any man, is always simple and true, and never falls foul of

deception by anyone else.

Now, our next move in the settling of the laws is an unfamiliar one, somewhat akin to a

draughts player departing from the sacred line, and it will probably cause surprise at first hearing.

Nevertheless, through reflection and experience, it will be evident that a city is likely to be founded

in the second best way. Yet someone might, perhaps, refuse to accept this because he is not familiar

with a lawgiver who does not have tyrannical power. But the most correct course of action is to

describe the best political system, then the second best, and then the third best, and having done

so, leave the choice to the person in charge of the settlement. So let’s follow this procedure now,

and describe the political system that is first in excellence, then second, then third. The choice, for

now, should be given to Clinias, and if anyone else ever, at any stage, when faced with a selection

between such alternatives, wishes to adopt what he likes from his own native land, he too should

be allowed to do so in his own way.

The foremost city with the most excellent political system and laws is one where the ancient

maxim prevails as widely as possible throughout the entire city, that friends really do have all

things in common. So this principle, whether it applies somewhere now or will ever apply in the

future, means that women are in common, children are in common, and all possessions are in com-

mon too, and what we call ‘private’ is entirely eradicated by all possible means from every aspect

of life. And it has been contrived, as far as possible, that even what is naturally private such as

eyes, ears, and hands, seem to see, hear, and act in common. And what’s more, everyone expresses

their praise and criticism as one, insofar as this is possible, being delighted or pained by the same

things. Those laws which unify the city as much as possible set the standard, and no one will ever

suggest an improvement on these by proposing any other standard better or more conducive to

excellence. And whether a number of gods, or the sons of gods, manage such a city, they dwell

there in this way, living lives of good cheer. Hence, we should not look anywhere else for an ideal

political system but should hold to this and do our best to seek out the one that is most like this

one. The political system we have just attempted would, if it were ever to come into existence, be

738 c

738 d

738 e

739 a

739 b

739 c

739 d

739 e

LAWS V – 738c–739e | 1,129

–––––

The Heraclids were the Dorians who controlled Argos, Messene and Sparta.

5,040 is divisible by all numbers from one to ten, but not by eleven. It is divisible by a total of fifty-nine numbers.

These three sites all housed influential oracles. Delphi was dedicated to Apollo, Dodona to Zeus, both situated on main-

land Greece; the third was dedicated to the Egyptian god Ammon, and located at the oasis of Siwa in the Libyan desert.

closest to immortality, and second in terms of unity. After these two, we shall, God willing, consider

the third best. At the moment, the question for us is what is this second best and how would it

come to be like this?

First then, let them portion out the land and houses, and not work the land in common,

since an undertaking of this sort is beyond their present birth, upbringing and education. But let

the division be made based on the principle that the person who is allotted a portion should regard

this as the common property of the entire city, and since the region is his fatherland, he should

care for it more than a mother for her children, as the earth, being a goddess, is the mistress of all

mortal creatures. And he should hold the same idea too in relation to the gods and daimons of the

locality. And so that this state of affairs may persist for all time, the following precepts should be

added. The number of hearths, as we apportioned them at the outset, should always remain at

this number and neither increase nor decrease at all. The way to ensure that such an arrangement

is fixed, in the case of any city, is as follows: whoever has been allocated the portion is always

to leave after him, from among his own children whichever one he most prefers, a single inheritor

of this holding, his successor too in attending to the gods of the family and city, be they alive or

already deceased by then. As for the other children, when someone has more than one child,

the female children should be given in marriage under a law, yet to be instituted, while the males

are to be allocated, as sons, to fellow citizens who have no offspring, preferably on terms of

friendship.

But there may be cases where friendly arrangements are not available or there are too

many children, male or female, or where, on the contrary, there are too few due to infertility. In

all these cases, the most important and revered official we have appointed, having considered

what should be done about the excesses and deficiencies, shall contrive as best he can some means

whereby the 5,040 holdings will always be constant. There are many means of doing so, for there

are various ways of curtailing procreation in cases where it is excessive, and on the other hand

there are deliberate encouragements to having lots of children through the respect or disrespect

shown to young people, and through admonitions and words of warning from their elders. All of

these means are capable of producing the outcome we refer to. And, indeed, if in the end we fail

completely to maintain the number of holdings at 5,040, because the affectionate disposition of

couples towards one another results in excessive growth in the city’s population, and we are com-

pletely at a loss, an age old device is at our disposal, one we have often mentioned – sending out

colonies, suitably constituted, in a spirit of friendship on both sides. But if, on the contrary, some

wave of disease ever deluges us, or we are struck by the ravages of war and fall below our

appointed number because of the loss of life, we should never, unless forced to do so, take in

citizens who have been poorly educated. And yet, as the saying goes, even God cannot stand

against necessity.

Let us imagine, then, that our present argument is advising us in the following terms. O

most excellent of all men, never relent in your respect, according to nature, for likeness, equality,

sameness, and agreement, based upon number and any power belonging to things noble and good.

In particular, now guard first and foremost, the number, as declared, throughout your entire life.

Then respect the level and extent of your wealth as allocated to you initially in due measure, and

don’t dishonour it by its purchase and sale among yourselves, or else you won’t have the lot, which

is a god, as your ally, nor the lawgiver either. For firstly, in the case of someone who is disobedient,

the law now gives a direction by saying, initially, that whoever wants to is to take the lot on the

following conditions or not take it all. First, that the land is sacred to all the gods; secondly, that

the priests and priestesses shall offer prayers at the first, second and third sacrificial offerings.

Whoever buys or sells allotted buildings and land is to suffer the appropriate penalties, which the

officials shall inscribe on cypress wood memorials and place in the sacred places as a record for

740 a

740 b

740 c

740 d

740 e

741 a

741 b

741 c

1,130 | LAWS V – 740a–741c

the future. What’s more, they will give oversight of these matters to ensure their observance to

whichever authority seems most keen-sighted so that any departures from these directions that

occur from time to time may not escape their notice, and they may punish whoever disobeys the

law and God. Just how good the present injunction actually is for all the cities that obey it, provided

the appropriate arrangement has been adopted, “no one bad will ever know”, as the proverb says,

but only someone who has become experienced and reasonable in his behaviour. In fact, under

such an arrangement as this, money-making is largely absent, and consequently no one is either

required or allowed to make money from any vulgar commercial activities insofar as any so-called

base and reprehensible occupation subverts free character, nor would anyone sink so low as to

amass a fortune from such occupations as these.

Furthermore, an additional law follows from these directions, stating that no private citizen

is allowed to hold any gold or silver, but only coinage for the purposes of the day-to-day exchange,

which is more or less unavoidable in the case of craftsmen and anyone at all who needs to pay

wages of this sort to wage earners, be they slaves or foreigners. For these purposes, we maintain,

they need to have a currency that is valuable among themselves, but which has no value to other

peoples. And there is to be a common Greek currency for use on foreign campaigns and expedi-

tions, such as embassies, or any other necessary missions on behalf of the city where there is a

need to send someone abroad. For these purposes, it is necessary that the city always holds a com-

mon Greek currency. And if it ever proves necessary for someone to go abroad for private reasons,

he should travel, having secured the permission of the officials, and if he comes back home with

surplus foreign money from that place, let him deposit this in the city coffers and receive the equiv-

alent in local currency in return. And if someone is found to be keeping the funds for himself, they

should be confiscated by the state, and anyone who is aware of this and says nothing is to be cursed

and reproached, along with the person who brought in the money, and, in addition, incur a fine not

less than the amount of foreign currency involved. When marrying or giving in marriage, let no

dowry whatsoever be given or received, let there be no depositing of money with someone who is

not trusted, and no lending at interest either, as this permits the borrower to repay neither interest

nor principal to the lender.

Whoever considers these practices in the right way, by referring to their principle and inten-

tion, would come to the conclusion that these are the best practices for the city to adopt. We main-

tain that the intention of the reasonable statesman is not what most people say it is. They would

claim that the intention of the good lawgiver should be that the city he legislates for so benevolently,

be as great as it can possibly be, and as wealthy as possible too, possessing silver mines and gold

mines, and ruling over as many peoples as possible by land and by sea. And they would add that

someone who legislates in the correct manner should intend that the city be as excellent and as

happy as possible. Now, some of these objectives are possible, while others are not possible, and

whoever is organising things will intend what’s possible and will not entertain vain intentions, nor

attempt what is impossible. Now, it is well-nigh inevitable that happiness and goodness go together,

so he would want this combination. But the combination of extreme wealth with goodness is impos-

sible, based, at any rate, on the popular definition of wealth. And most people say that the wealthy

are the rare few who acquire possessions that are worth a lot of money, which are just what a bad

person would acquire.

But if this is the situation, I would never agree with them that the wealthy person is, in truth,

happy unless he is also good, but being exceptionally good and being exceptionally wealthy too

is impossible. “Why so?”, someone might perhaps ask. Because, we would reply, what’s acquired

from a combination of just and unjust actions is more than double what’s acquired from just actions

alone, while the expenditure of someone who is unwilling to spend, either in a good way or in an

ignoble way, is less by half than that of good people who are willing to spend on what’s good.

741 d

741 e

742 a

742 b

742 c

742 d

742 e

743 a

743 b

LAWS V – 741d–743b | 1,131

Therefore, those who acquire twice as much and spend half as much would always be wealthier

than those who do the exact opposite. And although the second of these fellows is good, the other

is not evil as long as he is frugal, but on occasion he is utterly evil, although as I have just said, he

is never good. For whoever acquires in a just way and in an unjust way, and spends neither in a

just way nor in an unjust way, is wealthy as long as he is also frugal, but the utterly evil person,

being for the most part beyond redemption, is extremely poor. But someone who spends on what

is good, and acquires only from just actions, would never easily become exceptionally wealthy or

extremely poor either. And so our argument is correct to say that the very rich are not good, and

since they are not good, they are not happy either.

Now, the intention of our laws is that the citizens be as happy as possible, and as friendly

to one another as possible. But the citizens could never be friends where they take lots of legal

actions against one another and injustices proliferate, but only where these are minor and very

infrequent. We maintain, then, that there should be neither gold nor silver in the city, nor should

there be a lot of money-making from base activities, nor from interest, nor from fattening deformed

livestock, but only as much as land cultivation yields or provides, and only so much that people

do not get absorbed in money-making and neglect the natural objects of the wealth which are soul

and body, and these are of no account, ever, in the absence of physical training and education in

general. That is why we have said, not just once, that the pursuit of wealth should occupy last

place in the scale of honour. For although every human being has three general concerns, concern

with wealth pursued in the right way is third and last in the scale, concern with the body is second,

but first in the scale is concern for the soul. And, indeed, if the political system we are now describ-

ing were to assign honours according to this scale, it would have enacted its laws in the right way.

But if any of the laws enacted afterwards turns out to be granting more honour to health than to

sound-mindedness, or more honour to wealth than to health and sound-mindedness, the enactment

is patently flawed. So the lawgiver should ask himself on a regular basis, “What is my intention,

and am I achieving this or missing the mark?” And in this way, he would perhaps complete the

task of legislation himself and relieve others of that responsibility. There is no other way whatso-

ever to do so.

Let the person who has been assigned a lot hold it then, as we say, under the conditions we

have outlined, and it would be good if each person who arrived in our colony also had all their

other possessions equal. But since this is impossible, and one person will arrive with more wealth,

another with less, it is necessary for various reasons and for the sake of equality of opportunity in

our city, that there be unequal property valuations. And so, positions of authority, taxes and grants

would reflect the honour that each person deserves not merely on account of his own excellence

or that of his ancestors, or his physical prowess and good looks, but also because of how much

wealth a person does or does not have. And they obtain honours and positions of authority on as

equal a basis as possible by measured inequality, and there would be no quarrelling. For these rea-

sons, we must create four property qualifications on the basis of size, called the first, second, third

and fourth, or by some other names, to be used when people remain in the same valuation, or

change from being poor to being wealthy, or from being wealthy to being poor, and end up in the

valuation appropriate to themselves.

The kind of law I would enact as a consequence of these considerations would be this. We

say that it is necessary in a city that is to avoid the virulent disease which might more correctly be

called division rather than faction, that there be neither grievous poverty nor extreme wealth, both

of which give rise to both outcomes. So the lawgiver now needs to declare some limit for each of

them. Let the limit of poverty then be the value of the lot. This must remain, and no one in authority

or any other citizen who aspires to excellence should ever ignore any reduction of this, in any

case, nor should any other citizen who aspires to excellence. Having put this measure in place, the

743 c

743 d

743 e

744 a

744 b

744 c

744 d

744 e

1,132 | LAWS V – 743c–744e

lawgiver will allow some to acquire twice, three times, or even as much as four times this measure.

But if anyone acquires more than this by discovery, as a gift or from commerce, or has come into

possession of wealth in excess of the measure by some other good fortune of this sort, he shall

keep his good reputation and his innocence if he hands the surplus over to the city and the gods of

the city. But if someone disobeys this law, anyone who wishes may disclose the fact in return for

half the surplus, while the offender shall pay out of his own resources a fine equal to the surplus,

and half shall go to the gods. Everyone’s resources, in their entirety apart from the lot, shall be

recorded in writing in a register, guarded by officials appointed by law, so that legal disputes relat-

ing to any property issues may be straightforward and transparent.

After this, the lawgiver must first situate the city, insofar as this is possible, in the middle

of the territory, choosing a location possessing all the other advantages that are relevant to the city,

which are not difficult to recognise or describe. Next, he should make a division into twelve parts,

having first assigned a sacred precinct to Hestia, Zeus and Athena, called the Acropolis, enclosed

in a circle, from which he will make the twelve divisions of the city itself and the entire territory.

The twelve parts are to be equal, in the sense that the parts consisting of good land are to be small,

while those consisting of poor land are to be large. He is to mark off 5,040 lots, each of which is

to be divided in two, forming a single lot with two sections, a near one and a far one, the part near

the city being paired with one nearest the boundaries, the second closest to the city with the second

closest to the boundaries, and so on. And in the twofold divisions, we should arrange the proportion

of poor and good soil that we just referred to by balancing the relative sizes of the distributions.

The lawgiver should divide the people too into twelve subdivisions, arranging the distributions so

that the rest of the wealth of the twelve parts is as equal as possible, and ensuring that everything

is duly recorded. And, indeed, he will then assign twelve divisions to the twelve gods, naming and

consecrating each allotted part to the particular god, and calling it a tribe. What’s more, the twelve

divisions of the city are to be divided in the same way that the rest of the territory was divided,

and each citizen is to be allocated two dwellings, one near the centre and one close to the borders.

And so the settlement will be completed.

But there is something we need to recognise fully. All the arrangements we have outlined

are unlikely ever to encounter such favourable conditions that everything falls into place just as

described. This would require people who are not resistant to a community of this sort, who will

put up with lifelong regulation and control of wealth, the restrictions we have described on pro-

ducing children, and being deprived of gold and anything else which the lawgiver, on the basis of

what has just been said, is obviously going to prohibit. And it would require a central position for

the city, with dwellings distributed all over the surrounding countryside, as we said, speaking as

though in a dream, shaping some city and its citizens as if they were made of wax. Such reserva-

tions are, in a way, not wide of the mark, so the lawgiver should take up the argument again as fol-

lows. He will say “My friends, in these discussions do not presume that I am unaware that there

is some truth expressed in what is now being said. Actually, in dealing with any future course of

action, I think it best that the person pointing out the ideal approach, the one to be adopted, should

never forsake perfect beauty and truth. Anyone who finds it impossible to fulfil some aspect of

these ideals should avoid that and abstain from that, and arrange instead to proceed with whatever

aspect is closest and most akin by nature, to that one, and is the most appropriate one to undertake.

He should allow the lawgiver to finish outlining the ideal, and when this is done, only then are

they to consider together which of his proposals are beneficial and what aspect of his legislation

involves difficulties. For even someone who makes a most commonplace object must ensure that

it is somehow entirely consistent with itself if he is to deserve any credit.”

Now that we have decided upon the twelve-part distribution, we should focus intently upon

one particular issue – the obvious way to arrange the twelve parts, each with numerous internal

745 a

745 b

745 c

745 d

745 e

746 a

746 b

746 c

746 d

LAWS V – 745a–746d | 1,133

divisions, and those that depend upon them and arise from them, right down to the 5,040 holdings.

From this come the tribes, demes,

villages, and also the battle arrays and marching columns, and

even the units of currency, dry measures, wet measures and weights. So the law needs to arrange

that all these are duly measured and consistent with one another. There is an additional fear that

should also be dismissed. He is not to be afraid of a reputation for petty-mindedness if the law

ordains that all the utensils that the citizens possess are to have a standard measure. The lawgiver

is to regard it as a general principle that the numerical divisions and variations are useful in all

cases, whether they vary among themselves or there are numerical variations in lengths and depths,

or indeed, in sounds and movements, whether they are up and down in a straight line or revolutions

in a circle. Indeed, the lawgiver, in the light of all this, must direct all the citizens, as best he can,

never to depart from this systematic arrangement. For in the realm of economics, or in affairs of

state, or in practical matters, no single subject in our education has such great power as the study

of numbers. But its greatest benefit is that it awakens the person who is sleepy and stupid by nature,

and makes him easy to teach, retentive and intelligent, and because of this divine science, he makes

progress far beyond his natural endowments.

All these branches of education then would turn out to be worthwhile and appropriate pro-

vided you use further laws and activities to banish slavishness and greed from the souls of those

who study them comprehensively and profitably. Otherwise you would unwittingly produce an

out-and-out villain rather than a sage. Examples of this are to be seen nowadays in the Egyptians

and the Phoenicians and numerous other peoples, due to the enslaving effect of their general activ-

ities and their wealth, whether some corrupt lawgiver of theirs may have brought about this state

of affairs or some bad luck, or, indeed, some other natural factor like that came their way.

In fact, Megillus and Clinias, there is something about location that we should not overlook.

When it comes to producing people who are better and people who are worse, some places are

superior to others, and we should not enact laws that go against these facts. Some locations bode

well or ill due to variations in winds or sunshine, others because of their waters, others because

the nutriment that springs from the soil not only provides better or worse food for their bodies, but

also has a similar effect on their souls. But most advantageous of all will be the localities where a

heavenly breeze blows and there are haunts of daimons who receive anyone who ever settles there

in a gracious or ungracious spirit. A lawgiver, possessed of reason, would consider locations like

these insofar as this is possible for a human, and would attempt to enact laws applicable to these

places. So that’s what you should do too, Clinias, since you intend to settle a region. You must

first turn your mind to issues of this sort.

CLINIAS: Yes, Athenian stranger, what you are saying is excellent in every way. I must do as you say.

–––––

746 e

747 a

747 b

747 c

747 d

747 e

1,134 | LAWS V – 746e–747e

–––––

The division of the 5,040 citizens into twelve yields tribes of 420 people. These smaller tribes can then be further

subdivided.

A deme was a collection of villages and their inhabitants.