Plato Republic 5.461

ἂν λάθῃ . “Si non latuerit foetus praeter legem susceptus, ne in lucem quidem edetur, sed antea opprimetur” (Schneider). Cf. C below.

γεννήσεται = ‘will be produced’ must, if right, refer to birth (“hervorkommen wird” Schneider), otherwise φύς is superfluous. Bekker and others are possibly right in reading γενήσεται with Ξ^{1} q, and some other MSS: cf. Hdt. VI 69, where Stein prints γεγενημένος in place of γεγεννημένος. See Introd. § 5.

φὺς ἅς . See cr. n. and Introd. § 5.

ἐξ ὠφελίμων κτλ. Cf. IV 424 A note

ὑπὸ σκότου . Cf. (with J. and C.) σκότιος=‘an unlawful child.’

γεγονώς =‘produced,’ ‘a product of,’ is cancelled by Hartman; but φύς is too far away, and γίγνεσθαι (‘to be produced’) is sufficiently accurate: cf. γένηται in 461 C.

ἀνέγγυον : ‘unauthorised,’ because the child of an irregular union. An ἀνέγγυος γάμος is a marriage without an ἐγγύη or contract between the parents of the betrothing parties (Blümner Privatalt. p. 262 note 2).

ᾧ. ᾗ is read by Ξ, Vind. E and Eusebius ( Praep. Ev. XIII 19. 18); but αὐτούς includes both sexes, and in such cases the masculine is preferred to the feminine. Hartman strangely thinks

ᾧ neuter.

θυγατρὶ κτλ. The cases enumerated are all in the direct line, and nothing is said forbidding unions between ‘brothers’ and ‘sisters.’ See however 461 E note Greek law permitted the marriage of uncles with nieces, aunts with nephews, and even half-brothers and halfsisters, provided they were not ὁμομήτριοι (Becker's Charicles E. T. p. 478, with the passages there cited). Some of Plato's contemporaries, notably the Cynics, entertained peculiarly revolting views on this subject, and the question was frequently agitated in his time: see Dümmler Proleg. zu Pl. St. pp. 52 ff. The Stoics agreed with the Cynics: see the authorities cited in Henkel Stud. zur Geschichte d. Gr. Lehre vom Staat p. 30.

καὶ ταῦτά γ’ ἤδη κτλ. : ‘and all this only after we have exhorted them’ etc. ἤδη goes with ἀφήσομεν (or the like) understood after πάντα. J. and C. wrongly connect πάντα with προθυμεῖσθαι (‘to use all diligence’). The voice should pause a little before διακελευσάμενοι.

μηδ’ εἰς φῶς κτλ. : ne in lucem quidem efferre. Much less shall we permit it to live if born: see App. IV. μηδέ prepares the way for ἐὰν δέ τι βιάσηται κτλ. Hartman strangely prefers μή, “cum post μάλιστα coniunctio μηδέ prorsus frigeat.” But μάλιστα μέν is, of course, ‘if possible.’

μηδὲ ἕν . See cr. n. μηδέ γ’ ἕν occurs in a few inferior MSS besides A, and is read by Baiter and others, but we do not find γε thus interposed between οὐδέ ( μηδέ) and εἷς.

γένηται κτλ. γένηται sc. κύημα. βιάσηται means ‘force its way’ sc. εἰς τὸ φῶς (J. and C.). The extreme emphasis shews what importance Plato attached to this provision. The procuring of abortion, though perhaps in certain cases punishable by law (Meier and Schömann Att. Process p. 381), was in practice common enough: see Blümner Privatalt. p. 76. Plato permits it also in the Laws (740 D). The general Greek sentiment on this matter is fairly represented by Aristotle when he says ( Pol. H 16. 1335^{b} 22 ff.) ὡρίσθαι γὰρ δεῖ τῆς τεκνοποιίας τὸ πλῆθος. ἐὰν δέ τισι γίνηται παρὰ ταῦτα συνδυασθέντων, πρὶν αἴσθησιν ἐγγενέσθαι καὶ ζωήν, ἐμποιεῖσθαι δεῖ τὴν ἄμβλωσιν· τὸ γὰρ ὅσιον καὶ τὸ μὴ διωρισμένον τῇ αἰσθήσει καὶ τῷ ζῆν ἔσται .

τιθέναι κτλ. : ‘so deal with them.’ τιθέναι is more delicate than ἐκτιθέναι, which was read before Bekker, although it has no MS authority. Herwerden suggests that τιθέναι means θάπτειν (as in 469 A), but Plato expresses himself with more refinement. τροφῆς does not mean, as some are fain to believe, merely the educational system reserved for the guardians: see on 459 E and App. IV.

πατέρας κτλ. : ‘how will they distinguish one another's fathers’ etc.? The Aristophanic parallel is here very close: Πῶς οὖν οὕτω ζώντων ἡμῶν τοὺς αὑτοῦ παῖδας ἕκαστος | ἔσται δυνατὸς διαγιγνώσκειν; Τί δὲ δεῖ; πατέρας γὰρ ἅπαντας | τοὺς πρεσβυτέρους αὑτῶν εἶναι τοῖσι χρόνοισιν νομιοῦσιν ( Eccl. 635—637). The question touches an obvious difficulty in any system of the community of children; but, as a link in the chain of evidence connecting the Ecclesiazusae and the Republic, the parallel deserves to carry weight, although it has sometimes been pressed too far. See on the one hand Teichmüller Lit. Fehd. 1 pp. 18—19 and Chiappelli Riv. di Filolog. XI p. 213, and on the other Zeller^{4} II 1. p. 551 note 2. Cf. also App. I.

δεκάτῳ κτλ. : ‘in the tenth month and also in the seventh month.’ δή (as J. and C. remark) draws attention to the more exceptional case: cf. II 367 C note The Greek cannot, I think, be taken as an inexact way of saying “from seven to ten months after” (J. and C.). In point of fact the majority of ancient writers on the subject denied that children were ever born in the eighth month of pregnancy: see Gellius Noct. Att. III 16 and Censorinus de die natali 7. 2.

ἐγέννων : ‘were engaged in begetting children’: cf. 460 E, and 461 B ( τῶν ἔτι γεννώντων). Richards has pointed out ( Cl. Rev. IV p. 7) that the imperfect refers “to the whole time of life during which father and mother were allowed, if the lot fell upon them, to take part in the regular unions.” Cf. Tim. 18 D νομιοῦσι δὲ πάντες πάντας αὐτοὺς ὁμογενεῖς, ἀδελφὰς μὲν καὶ ἀδελφοὺς ὅσοιπερ ἂν τῆς πρεπούσης ἐντὸς ἡλικίας γίγνωνται. Jowett's version—“all who were begotten at the time when their fathers and mothers came together”—mistakes both ἐν and ἐγέννων. Schneider translates the passage correctly.

ὥστε ‐‐ ἅπτεσθαι . I agree with Richards in understanding this of the “irregular unions which were last mentioned” (461 C). But in spite of the explicit reference in ὃ νῦν δὴ ἐλέγομεν, Plato has not as yet forbidden such unions between ‘brothers’ and ‘sisters’: see 461 C note The discrepancy is hard to explain, especially as the list in 461 C seems intended to be exhaustive. The effect of the prohibition (owing to the meaning now given to ‘brother’ and ‘sister’) would be greatly to restrict, but not to abolish, unauthorised liaisons.

ἀδελφοὺς κτλ. refers only to State-marriages, as ὁ κλῆρος shews. Without this exemption Plato's proposals would (according to Richards l.c.) “have rendered all unions whatever practically impossible.” Surely not; although they would have unduly favoured the τηλύγετος παῖς. A son, for example, who is born when his mother is 21 and his father 26, cannot marry till he is 49, because he is 29 before his bride can possibly be born, and she cannot marry under 20; whereas a son, whose father is 54 and mother 39 when he is born, can marry a girl only one year younger than himself, because his father and mother retire at 55 and 40 respectively. Did Plato intend the sons of elderly couples to marry young, and those of young couples to marry late? Such an inference is unlikely, although it is the logical outcome of his theories. In any case Plato did well to introduce a saving clause. The κομψὸς κλῆρος, obedient to the archons, would couple ‘brothers’ and ‘sisters,’ whenever it seemed desirable in the interests of the State, so long as they were not really blood-relations. (This the archons of course would know.) Apollo's priestess would platonize. We must suppose that her assent is given in advance, and once for all (although προσαναιρῇ is present and follows ξυμπίπτῃ), unless she had an accredited representative on the spot, which there is nothing to indicate. On Plato's attitude to Apollo see IV 427 C note

ἑπομένη ‐‐ πολιτείᾳ . This topic was not specified in the original distribution of the subject (458 B), but it is closely connected with ὡς μακρῷ βελτίστη. Plato does not deal with it till 464 B.

βεβαιώσασθαι κτλ. Hirschig cancelled παρὰ τοῦ λόγου: but cf. (with Stallbaum) Gorg. 489 A ἵνα—βεβαιώσωμαι ἤδη παρὰ σοῦ. ‘The argument’ is personified, as often.