composed of lovers and beloved would be invincible.[67] These, in his
opinion, would, from awe of one another, have the greatest horror of
destruction. A truly marvellous argument, if he means that men
accustomed to turn deaf ears to censure and to behave to one another
shamelessly, are more likely to feel ashamed of doing a shameful deed.
He adduced as evidence the fact that the Thebans and the Eleians[68]
recognise the very principle, and added: Though they sleep inarmed,
they do not scruple to range the lover side by side with the beloved
one in the field of battle. An instance which I take to be no
instance, or at any rate one-sided,[69] seeing that what they look
upon as lawful with us is scandalous.[70] Indeed, it strikes me that
this vaunted battle-order would seem to argue some mistrust on their
part who adopt it--a suspicion that their bosom friends, once
separated from them, may forget to behave as brave men should. But the
men of Lacedaemon, holding that "if a man but lay his hand upon the
body and for lustful purpose, he shall thereby forfeit claim to what
is beautiful and noble"--do, in the spirit of their creed, contrive to
mould and fashion their "beloved ones" to such height of virtue,[71]
that should these find themselves drawn up with foreigners, albeit no
longer side by side with their own lovers,[72] conscience will make
desertion of their present friends impossible. Self-respect constrains
them: since the goddess whom the men of Lacedaemon worship is not
"Shamelessness," but "Reverence."[73]

[64] See Cobet, "Pros. Xen." p. 15; Plat. "Protag." 315 D; Ael. "V.
H." ii. 21.

[65] Ib.; Aristot. "Poet." ix.

[66] Or, "in his 'Apology' for."