Cleinias the Cretan
Table of Contents
PERSONS OF THE DIALOGUE: An Athenian Foreigner, Cleinias (a Cretan), Megillus (a Spartan).
Is the author of your laws a God or some man?
A God. Among us Cretans, he was Zeus. But in Sparta, where our friend here comes, they say Apollo is their lawgiver*
Superphysics Note
Homer says that every 9th year, Minos went to converse with his Olympian sire, and was inspired by him to make laws for your cities.
Yes, that is our tradition. There was Rhadamanthus, a brother of his, with whose name you are familiar.
He was the justest of men. We Cretans believe that he earned this reputation from his righteous administration of justice when he was alive.
Yes, it was a noble reputation worthy of a son of Zeus.
You and Megillus have been trained in these institutions.
The distance from Knosus to the cave and temple of Zeus is considerable.
Why did the law ordain that you shall have common meals and gymnastic exercises, and wear arms?
The aim of our institutions is easily intelligible.
Thessaly is a large plain. This is why they have horsemen in Thessaly.
Crete is not a plain. This is why we have runners.
The inequality of the ground in our country is more adapted to locomotion on foot.
Runners require light arms like bows and arrows.
All these regulations have been made with a view to war.
The legislator instituted common meals because he saw that while they are in the field the citizens are by the nature of the case compelled to take their meals together for the sake of mutual protection.
He seems to me to have thought the world foolish in not understanding that all men are always at war with one another.
If in war there should be common meals. Certain persons should be regularly appointed to protect an army, they should be continued in peace.
For what men in general term peace would be said by him to be only a name; in reality every city is in a natural state of war with every other, not indeed proclaimed by heralds, but everlasting.
This was the intention of the Cretan legislator. All institutions, private and public, were arranged by him with a view to war.
In giving them he was under the impression that no possessions or institutions are of any value to him who is defeated in battle.
For all the good things of the conquered pass into the hands of the conquerors.
You were thoroughly trained in the Cretan institutions
What is the principle of your government? It seems to be war.
Yes. Our Spartan friend will agree with me.
In the village will there be the same war of family against family, and of individual against individual.
Should each man conceive himself to be his own enemy?
All men are publicly one another’s enemies, and each man privately his own.
There is a victory and defeat. The first and best of victories, the lowest and worst of defeats—which each man gains or sustains at the hands, not of another, but of himself; this shows that there is a war against ourselves going on within every one of us.
Every individual is either his own superior or his own inferior. There is the same principle in the house, the village, and the state.
In each of them there is a principle of superiority or inferiority to self.
This is most obvious in states where the better citizens win a victory over the mob and the inferior classes is the better than itself.
You say that citizens who are of the same race and live in the same cities may unjustly conspire. Having the superiority in numbers they may overcome and enslave the few just.
When they prevail, the state may be truly called its own inferior and therefore bad; and when they are defeated, its own superior and therefore good.
A family might gave several brothers who are the offspring of a single pair; very possibly the majority of them may be unjust, and the just may be in a minority.
This family and household superior when they conquer, and inferior when they are conquered.
We are not now considering what may or may not be the proper or customary way of speaking, but we are considering the natural principles of right and wrong in laws.
Might there not be a judge over these brethren, of whom we were speaking.
Which would be the better judge—one who destroyed the bad and appointed the good to govern themselves; or one who, while allowing the good to govern, let the bad live, and made them voluntarily submit?
Or third, I suppose, in the scale of excellence might be placed a judge, who, finding the family distracted, not only did not destroy any one, but reconciled them to one another for ever after, and gave them laws which they mutually observed, and was able to keep them friends.
CLEINIAS: The last would be by far the best sort of judge and legislator.