Timaeus — Plato

property is a fixed idea with him, though he is aware of the arguments which may be urged on the other side^. We wonder how in the reign of Henry VIII., though veiled in another language and published in a foreign country, such speculations could have been endured. He is gifted with far greater dramatic invention than any one who succeeded him, with the exception of Swift. In the art of feigning he is a worthy disciple of Plato.

Like him, starting from a small portion of fact, he founds his tale with admirable skill on a few lines in the Latin narrative of the voyages of Amerigo Vespucci. He is very precise about dates and facts, and has the power of making us believe that the narrator of the tale must have been an eyewitness.

We are fairly puzzled by his manner of mixing up real and imaginary persons ; his boy John Clement and Peter Giles, the citizen of Antwerp, with whom he disputes about the precise words which are supposed to have been used by the (imaginary) Portuguese traveller, Raphael Hythloday. * I have the njore cause,' says Hythloday, ^ to fear that my words shall not be believed, for that I know how difficultly and hardly I myself would have believed another man telling the same, if I had not myself seen it with mine own eyes.

Or again : ' If you had been with me in Utopia, and had presently seen their fashions and laws as I did which lived there five years or more, and would never have come thence, but only to make the new land known here,' etc. More greatly regrets that he forgot to ask Hythloday in what part of the world Utopia is situated; he Svould have spent no small sum of money rather than it should have escaped him,' and he begs Peter Giles to see Hythloday or write to him and obtain an answer to the question.

After this we are not surprised to hear that a Professor of Divinity (perhaps ' a late famous vicar of Croydon in Surrey,' as the translator thinks) is desirous of being sent thither as a missionary by the High Bishop, ' yea, and that he may himself be made Bishop of Utopia, nothing doubting that he must obtain this Bishopric with suit ; and he counteth that a godly 1 'These things (I say), when I consider with myself, I hold well with Plato, and do nothing marvel that he would make no laws for them that refused those laws, whereby all men should have and enjoy equal portions of riches and commodities.

For the wise man did easily foresee this to be the one and only way to the wealth of a community, if equality of all things should be brought in and established' (Utopia, English Reprints, pp. 67, 68).

Sir Thomas Move's Utopia. ccxxiii suit which proceedeth not of the desire of honour or lucre, but Republic. only of a godly zeal. The design may have failed through the introducdisappearance of Hythloday, concerning whom we have * very ^'"'*' uncertain news ' after his departure.

There is no doubt, however, that he had told More and Giles the exact situation of the island, but unfortunately at the same moment More's attention, as he is reminded in a letter from Giles, was drawn off by a servant, and one of the company from a cold caught on shipboard coughed so loud as to prevent Giles from hearing. And ' the secret has perished' with him; to this day the place of Utopia remains unknown.

The uords of Phaedrus (275 B), * O Socrates, you can easily invent Egyptians or anything,' are recalled to our mind as we read this lifelike fiction. Yet the greater merit of the work is not the admirable art, but the originality of thought. More is as free as Plato from the prejudices of his age, and far more tolerant. The Utopians do not allow him who believes not in the immortality of the soul to share in the administration of the state (cp.

Laws x. 908 foil.), ' howbeit they put him to no punishment, because they be persuaded that it is in no man's power to believe what he list ' ; and * no man is to be blamed for reasoning in support of his own religion^. In the public services ' no prayers be used, but such as every man may boldly pronounce without giving offence to any sect.

He says significantly (p. 143), ' There be that give worship to a man that was once of excellent virtue or of famous glory, not only as God, but also the chiefest and highest God. But the most and the wisest part, rejecting all these, believe that there is a certain godly power unknown, far above the capacity and reach of man's wit, dispersed throughout all the world, not in bigness, but in virtue and power. Him they call the Father of all.

To Him alone they attribute the beginnings, the increasings, the proceed- 1 ' One of our company in my presence was sharply punished.

He, as soon as he was baptised, began, against our wills, with more earnest affection than wisdom, to reason of Christ's religion, and began to wax so hot in his matter, that he did not only prefer our religion before all other, but also did despise and condemn all other, calling them profane, and the followers of them wicked and devilish, and the children of everlasting damnation.

When he had thus long reasoned the matter, they laid hold on him, accused him, and condemned him into exile, not as a despiser of religion, but as a seditious person and a raiser up of dissension among the people ' (p. 145).

Republic. ings, the changes, and the ends of all things. Neither give they Introuuc- any divine honours to any other than him. So far was More from TioN. sharing the popular beliefs of his time. Yet at the end he reminds us that he does not in all respects agree with the customs and opinions of the Utopians which he describes.

And we should let him have the benefit of this saving clause, and not rudely withdraw the veil behind which he has been pleased to conceal himself. Nor is he less in advance of popular opinion in his poHtical and moral speculations.

He would like to bring military glory into contempt; he would set all sorts of idle people to profitable occupation, including in the same class, priests, women, noblemen, gentlemen, and ' sturdy and valiant beggars,' that the labour of all may be reduced to six hours a day.

His dislike of capital punishment, and plans for the reformation of offenders ; his detestation of priests and lawyers^ ; his remark that ' although every one may hear of ravenous dogs and wolves and cruel man-eaters, it is not easy to find states that are well and wisely governed,' are curiously at variance with the notions of his age and indeed with his own life.

There are many points in which he shows a modern feeling and a prophetic insight like Plato. He is a sanitary reformer ; he maintains that civilized states have a right to the soil of waste countries ; he is inclined to the opinion which places happiness in virtuous pleasures, but herein, as he thinks, not disagreeing from those other philosophers who define virtue to be a life according to nature.

He extends the idea of happiness so as to include the happiness of others ; and he argues ingeniously, *A11 men agree that we ought to make others happy ; but if others, how much more ourselves ! ' And still he thinks that there may be a more excellent way, but to this no man's reason can attain unless, heaven should inspire him with a higher truth.

His ceremonies before marriage ; his huinmie proposal that war should be carried on by assassinating the leaders of the enemy, may be compared to some of the paradoxes of Plato. He has a charming fancy, like the affinities of Greeks and barbarians in the Timaeus, that the Utopians learnt the language of the Greeks with the more readiness because they were originally of the same race with them.

He is penetrated with the spirit of Plato, and quotes or adapts many 1 Compare his satirical observation : ' They (the Utopians) have priests of exceeding holiness, and therefore very few ' (p. 150).