74 Specialists versus Amateurs 



physical and moral inferiority of persons occupied in sedentary trades. 

 That such men were unfitted for the rough work of war, and therefore 

 unfitted to take part in ruling an independent Greek state, was an 

 opinion not peculiar to Plato. But this objection could not well be 

 raised against the working farmer. Why then does Plato exclude the 

 farmer-class from a share in the government of his ideal state? I think 

 we may detect three reasons. First, the husbandman, though necessary 

 to the state's existence, has not the special training required for govern- 

 ment, nor the leisure to acquire it. Second, it is his intense occupation 

 that alone secures to the ruling class the leisure needful for their re- 

 sponsible duties. Third, the belief 1 that a man cannot be at the same 

 time a good husbandman and a good soldier. These three may be, 

 regarded as one : the philosopher would get rid of haphazard amateurism 

 by making the expert specialist dominant in all departments of civil 

 and military life. The influence of the Spartan system (much idealized), 

 and the growth of professional soldiering, on his theories is too obvious 

 to need further comment. 



Reading the Republic from the labour-question point of view, one 



is struck by the lack of detail as to the condition of the classes whose 



labour feeds and clothes the whole community. We must remember 



that the dialogue starts with an attempt to define Justice, in the course 



of which a wider field of inquiry is opened up by assuming an analogy 2 



between the individual and the state. As the dominance of his nobler 



element over his baser elements is the one sure means of ensuring the 



individual's lasting happiness, so the dominance of the nobler element 



in the state alone offers a like guarantee. On these lines the argument 



proceeds, using an arbitrary psychology, and a fanciful political criticism 



to correspond. The construction of a model state is rather incidental 



than essential to the discussion. No wonder that, while we have much 



detail as to the bodily and mental equipment of the 'Guardians' (both 



the governing elders and the warrior youths) we get no information as 



to the training of husbandmen and craftsmen. Like slaves, they are 



assumed to exist: how they become and remain what they are assumed 



to be, we are not told. We are driven to guess that at this stage of 



his speculations Plato was content to take over these classes just as 



he found them in the civilization of his day. But he can hardly have 



imagined that they would acquiesce in any system by which they would 



be excluded from all political power. The hopeless inferiority of the 



husbandman is most clearly marked when contrasted with the young 



warriors of the 'Guardian' class. Duties are so highly specialized that 



men are differentiated for life. The yewpyos cannot be a good soldier. 



But if a soldier shews cowardice he is to be punished 3 by being made 



1 Republ 374 c, d. * Republ 433-4. 3 Republ 468 a. 



