in the Laws, he is making history by analogy. In the former, he appears to
be like some modern philosophers, absolutely devoid of historical sense;
in the latter, he is on a level, not with Thucydides, or the critical
historians of Greece, but with Herodotus, or even with Ctesias.

The chief object of Plato in tracing the origin of society is to show the
point at which regular government superseded the patriarchical authority,
and the separate customs of different families were systematized by
legislators, and took the form of laws consented to by them all. According
to Plato, the only sound principle on which any government could be based
was a mixture or balance of power. The balance of power saved Sparta, when
the two other Heraclid states fell into disorder. Here is probably the
first trace of a political idea, which has exercised a vast influence both
in ancient and modern times. And yet we might fairly ask, a little
parodying the language of Plato--O legislator, is unanimity only 'the
struggle for existence'; or is the balance of powers in a state better
than the harmony of them?

In the fourth book we approach the realities of politics, and Plato begins
to ascend to the height of his great argument. The reign of Cronos has
passed away, and various forms of government have succeeded, which are all
based on self-interest and self-preservation. Right and wrong, instead of
being measured by the will of God, are created by the law of the state.
The strongest assertions are made of the purely spiritual nature of
religion--'Without holiness no man is accepted of God'; and of the duty of
filial obedience,--'Honour thy parents.' The legislator must teach these
precepts as well as command them. He is to be the educator as well as the
lawgiver of future ages, and his laws are themselves to form a part of the
education of the state. Unlike the poet, he must be definite and rational;
he cannot be allowed to say one thing at one time, and another thing at