Ath.O Lacedaemonian Stranger,these festivities are praiseworthy where there is a spirit of endurance,but are very senseless when they are under no regulations.In order to retaliate,an Athenian has only to point out the licence which exists among your women.To all such accusations,whether they are brought against the Tarentines,or us,or you,there is one answer which exonerates the practice in question from impropriety.When a stranger expresses wonder at the singularity of what he sees,any inhabitant will naturally answer him:-Wonder not,O stranger;this is our custom,and you may very likely have some other custom about the same things.Now we are speaking,my friends,not about men in general,but about the merits and defects of the lawgivers themselves.Let us then discourse a little more at length about intoxication,which is a very important subject,and will seriously task the discrimination of the legislator.
I am not speaking of drinking,or not drinking,wine at all,but of intoxication.Are we to follow the custom of the Scythians,and Persians,and Carthaginians,and Celts,and Iberians,and Thracians,who are all warlike nations,or that of your countrymen,for they,as you say,altogether abstain?But the Scythians and Thracians,both men and women,drink unmixed wine,which they pour on their garments,and this they think a happy and glorious institution.The Persians,again,are much given to other practices of luxury which you reject,but they have more moderation in them than the Thracians and Scythians.
Meg.O best of men,we have only to take arms into our hands,and we send all these nations flying before us.
Ath.Nay,my good friend,do not say that;there have been,as there always will be,flights and pursuits of which no account can be given,and therefore we cannot say that victory or defeat in battle affords more than a doubtful proof of the goodness or badness of institutions.
For when the greater states conquer and enslave the lesser,as the Syracusans have done the Locrians,who appear to be the best-governed people in their part of the world,or as the Athenians have done the Ceans (and there are ten thousand other instances of the same sort of thing),all this is not to the point;let us endeavour rather to form a conclusion about each institution in itself and say nothing,at present,of victories and defeats.Let us only say that such and such a custom is honourable,and another not.And first permit me to tell you how good and bad are to be estimated in reference to these very matters.
Meg.How do you mean?
Ath.All those who are ready at a moment's notice to praise or censure any practice which is matter of discussion,seem to me to proceed in a wrong way.Let me give you an illustration of what Imean:-You may suppose a person to be praising wheat as a good kind of food,whereupon another person instantly blames wheat,without ever enquiring into its effect or use,or in what way,or to whom,or with what,or in what state and how,wheat is to be given.And that is just what we are doing in this discussion.At the very mention of the word intoxication,one side is ready with their praises and the other with their censures;which is absurd.For either side adduce their witnesses and approvers,and some of us think that we speak with authority because we have many witnesses;and others because they see those who abstain conquering in battle,and this again is disputed by us.Now I cannot say that I shall be satisfied,if we go on discussing each of the remaining laws in the same way.And about this very point of intoxication I should like to speak in another way,which I hold to be the right one;for if number is to be the criterion,are there not myriads upon myriads of nations ready to dispute the point with you,who are only two cities?
Meg.I shall gladly welcome any method of enquiry which is right.
Ath.Let me put the matter thus:-Suppose a person to praise the keeping of goats,and the creatures themselves as capital things to have,and then some one who had seen goats feeding without a goatherd in cultivated spots,and doing mischief,were to censure a goat or any other animal who has no keeper,or a bad keeper,would there be any sense or justice in such censure?
Meg.Certainly not.
Ath.Does a captain require only to have nautical knowledge in order to be a good captain,whether he is sea-sick or not?What do you say?
Meg.I say that he is not a good captain if,although he have nautical skill,he is liable to sea-sickness.
Ath.And what would you say of the commander of an army?Will he be able to command merely because he has military skill if he be a coward,who,when danger comes,is sick and drunk with fear?
Meg.Impossible.
Ath.And what if besides being a coward he has no skill?
Meg.He is a miserable fellow,not fit to be a commander of men,but only of old women.
Ath.And what would you say of some one who blames or praises any sort of meeting which is intended by nature to have a ruler,and is well enough when under his presidency?The critic,however,has never seen the society meeting together at an orderly feast under the control of a president,but always without a ruler or with a bad one:-when observers of this class praise or blame such meetings,are we to suppose that what they say is of any value?
Meg.Certainly not,if they have never seen or been present at such a meeting when rightly ordered.
Ath.Reflect;may not banqueters and banquets be said to constitute a kind of meeting?
Meg.Of course.
Ath.And did any one ever see this sort of convivial meeting rightly ordered?Of course you two will answer that you have never seen them at all,because they are not customary or lawful in your country;but I have come across many of them in many different places,and moreover I have made enquiries about them wherever I went,as I may say,and never did I see or hear of anything of the kind which was carried on altogether rightly;in some few particulars they might be right,but in general they were utterly wrong.