The question of Property 75 



a 760)^709 or SrjjjLiovpyo*; a degradation in itself, and accompanied by 

 no suggestion of a special training being required to fit him for his 

 new function. It is unnecessary to enlarge on such points : constructors 

 of Utopias cannot avoid some inconsistencies and omissions. The 

 simple fact is that the arrangements for differentiation of classes in the 

 model state are not fully worked out in detail. 



Plato's Guardians are to have no private property ; for it is private 

 property 1 that seems to him the cause of sectional and personal in- 

 terests which divide and weaken the state and lead to unhappiness. 

 But the other classes are not so restricted. They can own land and 

 houses etc; on exactly what tenure, is less clear. Meanwhile, what is 

 it that the Guardians have in common? It is the sustenance (rpoc/)/}) 

 provided as pay (fjucrOo?) for their services by the mass of workers 

 over whom they rule. It is expressly stated 2 that in the model state 

 the Demos will call the Rulers their Preservers and Protectors, and 

 the Rulers call the Demos their Paymasters and Sustainers. In exist- 

 ing states other than democracies their mutual relation is too often 

 expressed as that of Masters and Slaves. I cannot refrain from noting 

 that, if the pay of the Guardians consists in their sustenance, this is 

 so far exactly the case of slaves. That power and honour should be 

 reserved for men maintained thus, without private emoluments, is re- 

 markable. The Spartiates, however much an idealizing of their system 

 may have suggested the arrangement, were maintained by the sulky 

 labour of Helot serfs. Are the husbandmen in Plato's scheme really 

 any better than Helots? In describing the origin of states in general, 

 Plato finds the cause 3 of that development in the insufficiency of in- 

 dividuals to meet their own needs. But in tracing the process of the 

 division of labour, and increasing complexity of civilization, he ignores 

 slavery, though slavery is often referred to in various parts of the book. 

 Now, if the husbandman has under him no slaves, and is charged with 

 the food-supply of his rulers, he comes very near to the economic 

 status of a serf. He works with his own hands, but not entirely at 

 his own will or for his own profit. And in one respect he would, to 

 Greek critics, seem inferior to a Spartan 4 Helot: he is, by the extreme 

 specializing system, denied all share in military service, and so can 

 hardly be reckoned a citizen at all. How came Plato to imagine for a 

 single moment that a free Greek would acquiesce in such a position? 

 I can only guess that the present position of working farmers and 

 craftsmen in trades seemed to him an intolerable one. If, as I believe 



1 That the speculations of Greek political writers were influenced by the traditions of a 

 primitive communism is the view of Emil de Laveleye Primitive property ch 10. 



2 Republ 463 b. 3 Republ 369 b 373 c. 

 4 Cf Isocrates Panath 1 80 p 271. 



