Designer History_ Plato's Atlantis Story and Fourth-century Ideology

8/2/2019 Designer History_ Plato's Atlantis Story and Fourth-century Ideology

1/18

Journal of Hellenic Studies 118 (1998) pp 101-118DESIGNER HISTORY:PLATO'SATLANTISSTORY AND FOURTH-CENTURYDEOLOGY*

I. INTRODUCTIONThe myth of Athens and Atlantis in Plato's Timaeusand Critias can be, and has been,

interpretedon a numberof different evels. On the most fundamental,philosophical evel themyth sets into narrativemotion the paradigmof the ideal stateelaboratedn the Republic.Gill,in a series of publications,has done much to throw light on the natureof this invention:itsrelationshipwithmoder categoriesof fiction and withantecedenthistoriography.1et theextentto whichthemythof Atlantis s embedded n larger ourth-centuryoliticalandhistoriographicalconcerns has been insufficiently appreciated.2n what follows, I shall attemptto reconstructsome of these concerns. I shall argue, first, that the narrative set-up of the Atlantis mythcorresponds to the conditions specified in the Republic for the successful creation of a chartermyth (the 'Noble Lie') for the ideal city, and that this is a valuable indication of the truthstatusof the myth and of the function it is expected to perform. This function is not merely a matterof abstract philosophical interest, since there are close parallels between the Atlantis myth andcontemporary panegyric versions of Athenian history; in Section III, therefore, I shall explorethese parallels through an examination of some Isocratean orations. Sections IV and V willinvestigate how such panegyric history illuminates areas of ideological concern for Athenians inthe first half of the fourth century, most notably worries about legitimating the constitution(politeia) under which they lived, and about the attitude that should be taken towards Athenianmaritime interests in the Aegean. The Atlantis myth creates a vision of Athens that is true toPlato's political ideals, but which is animated by contemporary istor ical topoi. The result is anarrative oranaudienceof philosophicalcognoscenti hatbothrejectsandtransforms uchtopoi,and sparks a second-order consideration of the forces at work in the construction of history.The contents of the myth are well known. At the beginningfhe myth are well known. At the beginning of the Timaeus, Socrates declareshis dissatisfaction with a Republic-like discussion held on the previous day (19b-c). He wantsan account of the just city in action, rather than a bare description. The other interlocutors inthe dialogue are the astronomerTimaeus (probablya fictional character),and two historicalpoliticians, Critias of Athens and Hermocratesof Syracuse.3The philosophicalentertainment

* Thispaper s an expansionof materialwhichappears n a chapterof my book, forthcoming romCambridgeUniversityPress.I would like to thankaudiencesat Duke University,JohnsHopkins University,andthe CenterforHellenic Studies for helpful comments on earlierversions. Special thanks are due to A. Nightingale,R. Stroud,S.Todd, and the anonymousrefereesof thisjournal.C. Gill, 'Platoon falsehood-not fiction', in C. Gill and T.P. Wiseman(eds.), Lies and Fiction in theAncientWorld(Exeter 1993) 38-87; 'Plato's Atlantisstory and the birthof fiction', Ph&Lit 3 (1979) 64-78; 'The genre ofthe Atlantis story', CPh 72 (1977) 287-304.2 The fourth-centuryontext is adumbrated t Gill, 1977(n.1)295 n.36, and in P. Vidal-Naquet, Athenesetl'Atlantide. tructuret signification 'unmytheplatonicien',REG77 (1964)433 withn.66.L. Brisson, De laphilosophiepolitiquea l'epopee.Le "Critias"de Platon',RMM75 (1970) 436 is the most expansive: 'il ne faut chercher 'ilemysterieusenullepartailleursquedans l'AthenesduVe t duIVesieclesdontune des faces est tourmeeers la puissancemaritime'.Brissondoes not, however,examine the largercontext of fourth-centuryanegyricandhistoriography.3The latter is plausibly identifiedwith the Hermocrateswho appearsin the narrativeof Thucydidesas an

architectof resistanceagainstAthenianimperialistdesigns. The identityof Critias is more problematic.Gill, 1977(n.l ) 294 n.33, assumesthat he is the notoriousmemberof the oligarchic unta of 404-3 BC.This interpretationsaccepted also by J.K. Davies, AthenianPropertiedFamilies (Oxford 1971) 325. This would make him Plato'smother'scousin. Such aninterpretation as notgone unchallenged,however. J.V. Luce has argued,based on Davies'stemma,thatour Critias is Plato's great-grandfather'The sources and literaryform of Plato's Atlantisnarrative',in E.S. Ramage [ed.],Atlantis.Fact or Fiction? [Bloomington1978] 76-8, with discussion of previousscholarship).Critias'referenceto his old age at Tim.26b inclines me to believe thatCritiasis not the oligarch,and I note that


2/18

KATHRYNA. MORGANenvisaged by the interlocutors s that Timaeus will give an account of the creation of theuniverse,followed by Critias,who will tell the storyof ancientAthens and Atlantis.By a happycoincidence, the excellence of ancientAthens is well-suited to set the pictureof the ideal stateinto narrativemotion. The narrativeof the Timaeus ells how

il v&v 'AOlvatcov otooa i6Xit; 6cptoTTr7p6;T? t6v 7t6?tov Kat KaT nwivtzabvotxorT6CT8&ta0p6vto0 fit KcXkOtoa Ipya cKatl oktTEilat yvEc0at 7yovtat K6cXtuirait aoiTv 67n6aovt)7c6 6v o6pavov ~ig?i; Kcofv nap?pe6c?9E?0a.(23c4-dl)the city that is now Athens was the best in war and had in all respects the best laws by far. It is said tohave performedthe finest deeds and to have had the finest constitution of all of those we have heardreportof under heface of heaven.

Amongthesedeeds, thegreatestwas thedefenceof Europeand Asia againstthehybristic slandempire of Atlantis. When Atlantis attacked Athens showed its excellence. She was the leaderof the Greeks,but when they all deserted her she stood alone, defeatedthe enemy, preventedthe free from being enslaved, and freed those who had been. This victory was, however,followed by earthquakes n which Atlantis sank into the sea and the Athenian army wasswallowed up by the earth(24d-25d).The narrativeof the Critiasrecounts n greaterdetailthedisposition of ancient Athens and Atlantis, anda begins to tell how Atlantis declined from itsancient virtue before the dialogue breaks off. Here then indeed is a chartermyth for Plato'sAthens.4 The Egyptian priests who are the ultimate source for the tale narrate that the laws ofancientAthensenjoineda stricthierarchical ystem,withpriests,warriors,artisansandpeasants(Tim.24a-b). Critiasexplicitly identifies this system with that of the ideal statein the Republic.The citizens whom Socrates spoke of on the previous day are in fact Athenian ancestors (Tim.25e-26d). Every character in the dialoguel, including Socrates, claims to believe in the truth ofthis extraordinary oincidence. This is the more impressivebecause, as Socrates tells us, hisinterlocutorsTimaeus,Critias,and Hermocratesaremembersof the only class of people fittedboth by nature and by nurtureto have a share both of politics and philosophy (T6 TiT';bt?jtPpCS; 4?Co; y?vo;, gOa&6lqtOTp(ov [viz. politics and philosophy] tf(1y Kact Tpporfi,U?T%Xov9e8-20al). The situation s almost impossibly ideal.

II. CHARTERMYTHSANDTRUTHSTATUSWe must first examine the truthstatus of the account,a status linkedby the interlocutors oits historicalutility.Critiasintroduceshis tale of the origin of the Atlantismyth thus: 'Listen

then,Socrates,to a very strangebutabsolutelytruetale, as Solon, the wisest of the Seven WiseMen, once told it' (20d7-el). Critiasand Socratesstressthe fact thatthe tale is historically rue.The deed of the ancient Athenians is not merely spoken of, but was actually performed(o)X?y6Levovgtv, is 5 7tpaXOCtv bVTO;, 21a4-5). The ideal state that was described 'as if inmyth' in the Republic (6o; tv Lt)90wt)will now be transferred o the realm of truth (bitt&Xc0t;) (26c8-dl). The tale has the greatadvantageof not being an inventedmythosbut atrue logos (|ti TicxkaxOtvcafOov 6A' 6Xr0Ivtv X6yov, 26e4-5). This stress on truth hascaused problems for scholars of Atlantis and of Platonic myth alike. The most promisingapproach s, I think,to read Critias' exclamation over the marvellouscoincidence of Solon'sancient Athens and Socrates' ideal city as an example of 'Platonic irony', which Rowe has

C. Osborne, 'Creative discourse in the Timaeus'in C. Gill and M.M. McCabe (eds.), Form and Argument n latePlato (Oxford 1996) 179-211, agrees, although,on herreading,maximizingthe distanceof the tale from the originalnarration ndicatesits inadequacy(182 n.8).4 Gill, 1993 (n.1) 65.

102


3/18

PLATO'S ATLANTISSTORYdescribed as 'a form of expression which, when taken with its context, tends to undermineitself... We are taken momentarilybackstage, as it were, and shown the puppet-masteratwork'.5 When Critias says 'I was amazed ... when I realized how, marvellously, by somechance and not on purpose, you agreed in most respects with what Solon said' (68aCLovtfo; Kicnvo5; rtfirg OK 5CtO cK07ono0,5e4-5),6 the very emphasis of the formulation nvites thereaderto distance herself from the narrativeperformanceof the dialogue.The mechanism through which the myth of Atlantis reaches the present of the Timaeus bearson the process of historical construction.7Critias heard the story from his grandfather,Critias theson of Dropides,a relative of Solon. Like his literary orbears,HecataeusandHerodotus,Solonhas visited Egypt and talkedto prieststhere.8 n Herodotus'narrativewe hearhow Hecataeustried to tracehis descent backto a god but was refutedby the priests(Hdt. 2.143). Solon is notas self-centredas Hecataeus.He tries to tell these prieststhe storiesof DeucalionandPyrrha norder to count generations and date the event. The priests greet this attemptwith amusement: theGreeksare all childrenand have no accurateknowledgeof the past.We have here the familiarassociationof myth with childhood,but the metaphorhas been extended. The membersof anentirecivilization are calledchildren,regardlessof physical age: 'you are all young withrespectto your souls' (22b6-7). None of them have the historicalsophisticationhatwould allow themto be called old (22b5); the entire Greek mythologicaltradition s childish stories, as are thegenealogical complexities of the Greek aristocracy: the genealogies you have told are littledifferent romchildren'sstories',say the priests(23b3-5).Since the countingof generationswasan important tool for the location of events in a remote historical past, this dismissal has the effectof cutting off the Greeks both from accurate history and from their cultural past.The mechanism that achieves Greek ignorance is cosmological. There are periodicdestructions of mankind, from which Egypt is saved by the beneficent protection of the Nile(22c-e). Civilization, and any accurate memory of the past, is destroyed everywhere else.Moreover, because of the cyclic nature of the destructions, the prospect for preservingknowledge in the future is slim. After each destruction, we infer, the rising civilization will haveto provide itself with what we might call 'charter myths'; in the case ofhe current Greeks, aswe know from the critique of poetic mythologizing in the Republic, these myths are childishand harmful.9Because the Greeks are young in their souls (and, by implication, philosophicallyimmature),they cannot e trusted to constructheyannot be trusted history. Clearly, the success of such aprojectdepends on one's priorknowledge of the truth,and since this truth s not a matterofrecord,the success will vary greatly.Yet even if the speakers n the dialoguetakeCritias'protestations f truthat face value, thereadermay be excused for feeling some misgivings.Certainparallelswith the Republicsuggestthat more has been set in motion than the ideal of the perfectcity, and highlightissues of the

5 C.J. Rowe, 'Platonicirony', Nova Tellus 5 (1987) 95.6IfCritias is the oligarch,this passagebecomes extremelyresonant.It definesboth the closeness anddistanceof any Critianpolitics from Socraticones. One could say that the extremeironyherepointsup the appropriation yCritiasof certainSocratic deas,butalso thatany applicationof them is not a Socratic one. If membersof the Thirtymadepious noises aboutsearchingout the ancestralconstitution,Critias'remarksare even morepointed.It may bethat Plato has purposely constructedthe character of Critias ambiguously, in order to spur reflection on thesequestions(cf. L. Brisson, Platon, les mots et les mythes[Paris 1982] 37).

For a moreextensive treatmentof the 'prehistory'of the Atlantisstory,and one which makes it paradigmaticfor mythologicaltransmission n general, see Brisson (n.6) 32-49.8For the relationshipbetween Plato and the historiographyof Herodotus and Thucydides, see R. Weil,L'archeologie" de Platon (Paris 1959) 18-26.CompareRep.382dl-3 'In the mythologicalnarrativeswe've just been talkingabout,because we don't knowthe truth about the past, we liken the false to the true as much as possible and so make it useful'.

103


4/18

KATHRYN A. MORGANmodality and purpose of believing the myth. As a charter-mythfor Athens, the tale of Atlantishas close connections with the Noble Lie (or the 'Myth of the Metals') at the end of Republic3.10This lie tells the prospective citizens of Socrates' ideal state that, while they experiencedbeing educated and trained for the new polity, they were really being formed within the earth,their mother and their nurse. The second part of the myth tells how each citizen has a genetic(metallic) inheritance that predisposes him or her to be a ruler, an auxiliary, a farmer or acraftsman. The object of the Noble Lie is to persuade the rulers of the city especially, but failingthat, the rest of the city (L6ctiToax lv Kat aoTots; totS; &cpXovtO(;, t 8f nf tv &kUXrlvn76Xtv,414c1-2), thatthey should care for thecity and each other.Socrates hinks t unlikelythatthey could induce the first generation o believe the myth of the metals,but it is possible thatsubsequent generations could be persuaded (415d2). Is this not the situation at the beginning ofthe Timaeus? Solon has been given a charter myth for Athens from the Egyptians, convenientlyfetishized as preservers of accuracy about the past.11He tells this story to Critias' grandfather,and the tale is passed down with the stamp of Solon's authoritative truthon it. This tale has notyet been made available to the citizens of Athens at the dramatic date of the dialogue (421perhaps?), but it has already persuaded Critias, and it shows every sign of having persuadedSocrates, Timaeus, and Hermocrates in advance. Of these four, three have been described asbeing suited to share in politics and philosophy and are in fact of some political importance intheir respective cities. If the aim of a chartermyth is particularlyto persuade the rulers, the mythof Atlantis has made an excellent start. The truth of the tale must be acknowledged by theinterlocutorsbecause a successful noble lie does not make its fictional statustransparent.Thisdoes not, however,mean that its status cannot be transparento the reader.Theseparallelswith theRepublicmay indicate that one aspectof the Atlantismythis Plato'sinvitation to observe a Noble Lie in action and to speculateupon the possibilities of didacticmythologizing.If the tale of Athens and Atlantiswere to be acceptedbothby a politicalelite,and by ordinarycitizens, it would be a powerful paradigmfor reform,especially given theAthenian predilection for elaboratingthe splendours of their past, both mythological andotherwise,and setting them up as a paradigm.Indeed,in a universe where accurate ong-termhistorical knowledge is impossible, the use of a paradigmatichistorical model is almostmandatory.But it is only the psychicallymaturewho can be allowed to create it. The openingof the Timaeus hus creates a demand or thephilosophicalcreationof historyanddemonstrateshow the resultsmightbe implemented.The specific formtakenby the myth (as a noble lie) isinfluenced by the topoi that animate contemporaryAthenian versions of history,which arethemselves chartermyths.

III. THEATLANTIS TORYAS PANEGYRIC ISTORYCritias' tale is afestival speech, which is told on the day of the Panathenaea n honour ofAthena (Tim. 21a2-3) and is coloured by the epideictic rhetoric that characterizedmanyAthenian festival occasions. The most famous genreglorifyingthe Athenianpast and settingitup as a model for thepresent s, of course,the funeraloration,butthroughouthefourthcenturyIsocrates and others had been employing similar material.12socrateanorations such as the

10Gill, 1993 (n.) 64-5.1 Although one might note that Egyptian authorityin this sphere is itself a literarydevice, presumablyborrowedfrom the historiographicraditionof HerodotusandHecataeus(Gill, 1979 [n.1] 75).12 On festival orations,see G. Kennedy,The Art of Persuasion in Greece (Princeton1963) 166-67. The mostcomplete survey of the genre of the funeral oration is N. Loraux, The Inventionof Athens, trans. A. Sheridan(Cambridge,Mass. 1986). As Lorauxpoints out (302-3), Plato borrows most of the Atlantis myth from Athenian

104


5/18

PLATO'S ATLANTIS STORYPanegyricus and Panathenaicus were never performed by him, but this need not imply that hisspeeches were merely displays of eloquence.13Isocrates stresses at the beginning of thePanathenaicus (1-2) that the aim of his career has been to give good advice.14Part of thisstrategy is to argue from past glories and failures in order to establish the best course of actionin the present; the paradigmatic role of the past is thus explicitly an issue. The charter-mythonechooses for Athens is a reflectionof the programmeone desires the city to follow.Critias' ancient Athens participates in the commonplaces of fourth-century audatoryepideictic speeches, but creates them afresh and on a philosophic footing. Let us use thePanegyricus and Panathenaicus as examples of a more generaldiscourse.15The Panegyricuseulogizes Athens for makingherself a model for the rest of Greece (n7ap68et7W(Xa)nd beingthe first to lay down laws and establish a constitution (v6,ou; tEctro Kal toXurEtavKaCT?6T1fyaTO,39-40). In the military sphere, Athens has endured many great struggles, bothon her own behalf and on behalf of the freedom of others (6cycivaS ... 7oXXob;SKOct8Evoi;KcXt |?Y76CXou;, Tot; gL?V T7?p Tf; a)Tbwv X)pa(;, otS; 6' )7Tctp TfS; TC6v&XXOve?u09ept(S;, 52). To enumerate all the dangers Athens faced when fighting the barbarianswould be to speak at undue length; he will therefore narrateonly the greatest. Thus, theThracians and the Amazons tried to extend their power over Europe, but were utterly destroyedby the Atheniansin an unparalleleddefeat (68-70). Their most renownedvictory was in thePersian War (66-68). The citizens of Athens at that time took care that the laws should be good,but realized that good men had little need of written laws; they strove to emulate each other inachieving the common good (78-79). The eulogy in the Panathenaicus is similar. Isocratessummarizes Athens' services to civilization, among themer expulsion of barbarians from theGreek islands and sea coasts (42-43),ndea coasts (42-43), and her instruction of the other Greek cities in how tomake Greece great (44). He then passes on to the excellence of her constitution-not the presentone, but the constitution of the ancestors, who managed the city most nobly (tiv tspoy6vowvTCOV iv 76XtV KUXXTac 8lotiKq67VToV, 120): a democracy mixed with aristocracy.Both speechesconstructa eulogisticmodel of Athenianhistoryfor contemporary mulation.This historical encomium encompasses both an Athenian constitution that surpasses all othersand deeds of valour that make Athens preeminent in war. Note too that constitutional excellenceis nostalgicallyretrojectednto a mythologicalpast.Points of comparisonwiththe Atlantisstoryare numerous.Critias'Athens, like Isocrates',was by far the best in war andthe best-governed(6ptT,r 7p6O;T? T6v 76?4o0V Kct KicTa 7tlvT eiOvogwT6aT 8IocE?p6VTw;, Tim. 23c5-6).Both Plato and Isocratesemploy the topos of singling out one deed or groupof deeds amongmany (Tim.24d; Panegyr. 66). Both traditionsrecord that Athens defended the Greeks andEurope againstthe incursionsof hybristicbarbarians. n the Timaeus,Athens is the leader ofGreece, undergoes extremes of danger (Totb; t7X6toi; ... KIV?6VOu;),preserves some citiesfrom slaveryand liberatesothers(otb; 8& nIRtO8E8oXco(u0ov);8IEKE)?U7?V oiXw9f|vai,Tot); 6' &X Dou; .. 6096v; ftavTac; ??v6pcopwmv, 25c), just as, in the Panegyricus,Athens undergoesdangerandpreservesthe freedom of all. When Critiasexpandsthe tale, we

tradition.For the Atlantismythas a panathenaic ration,see F.M. Cornford,Plato's Cosmology(London1937) 4-5;Luce (n.3) 59 with n. 28.13 Of the speeches to be considered in this paper,Panegyricus,On the Peace, and Areopagiticushave beencalled variously symbouleutic, deliberative, or political. The Busiris and Panathenaicus have been labelledencomiastic andepideictic.For a surveyof these genericclassifications,see Yun Lee Too, TheRhetoricof Identityin Isocrates (Cambridge1995) 13-17.4 Too (n.13)23-32. There s argument bout he seriousnessof Isocrates'advice. I return o thisquestionbelow.15 The Panegyricusis to be dated to 380 BC,and thuswould have been availableto Plato.The Panathenaicus,Isocrates'last work, dates to 342-339 BC, and thus postdatesPlato.

105


6/18

KATHRYN A. MORGANlearn that the Athenians administered justly both themselves and the rest of Greece, and werethe most renowned people of that time (tXk6yL1ot ... Kal 6volaoT6TaTotl, Crit. 112e5-6).They were the hegemones of the Greeks, but their hegemony was willingly granted to them(' EkX vcov i'XLg6v?; tvK6vTov, 112d5). The Panegyricus tells us that, from the earliest time,the city was the leader of Greece (lY7?LovIK(o; et%?, 57), and in the aftermath of the PersianWars,because it had excelled in every danger, t was given the prize of valour andrule overthe sea (roto; Ktv6?Volu; 5tEv?yKy6vT?C;,e6ti; pLV T6V puiartfov t\60Qracv ... Tniv&cpXjvTS; Oa6cTTTlS;cxapov, 72). Most notably,and as was the case in the Critias, thispower is freely given. Those who now (thatis, in the fourthcentury)seek to depriveAthensof her power did not then disputeit with them (oOtKl(lto(iprTOVTO)V,2). Isocratesmakesthe same point in the Areopagiticus,this time explicitly tying it to constitutionalexcellence:those who used the constitution of the forefathers did many noble deeds, enjoyed a greatreputation, and were willingly granted the hegemony by the Greeks (noxkxc Kact KXoc8a7ucpae6L?VOI Kaot 7iapdi nixtv &vep6rnot; eI)oJKtILaVvT?;, nap' tK6VTOV TCOV'EXXfvcwv rTv 'y?Jtovvtv tXcapov, 17). The description of Athenian governmental practiceand class structure (which refers us back to the discussion of the Republic) at Crit. 1lOc-d findsits counterparts in the Isocratean comments on Athenian constitutional excellence cited above.One way of evaluating these extensive parallelisms is, like Loraux, to attribute them to acommon reliance on the genre of the funeral oration. This model stresses how Isocrates takes boththemes and modes of expositionfrom the oration, n what amountsto a form of plagiarism.'6Similarly,Plato wouldhave constructed is Atlantismythas a 'countereulogy' whichbringsthefuneral orationinto question from the polemical standpointof Platonic philosophy.17 Lorauxdismisses the connectionof the Atlantismythwithpanathenaic rationsbecausesuchorationshadno institutionalstatus in the fourthcentury.18Yet the occasion for the Timaeus-Critias s notinstitutional;estivaloccasionsgave many professionals heopportunityo displaytheireulogisticprowess. It is the sophists that Socratesrejects (afterthe poets) as potentialspeakersof hisencomium of the city (Tim.19e) in favourof the philosophicalpolitician,and this shouldimplythat Plato is not thinking only of the official funeral oration. I suggest that the links withIsocrateanpanegyrichistoryare betterreadas a reflectionof common concernswith the role ofhistoryin the first half of the fourthcentury.To be sure, such panegyricnarratives ind theirliteraryancestry n the funeraloration,but take on an addedresonance n contemporary oliticaldebates.Isocrates s interestedn usingthepastas a basis forpresentaction,andPlato'sconcernsarenotmerely genericandtheoretical;f they were,there would havebeen no needto stressthatthe purposeof the Atlantismyth is to bringthe ideal city down to earth.

It is instructive o contrastPlato's treatment f similarthemes in theMenexenus.The funeraloration delivered by Socrates in that dialogue is rightly considered parodic,and shows theextremities to which Plato could take the topoi of panegyric.19We note the dual stress onexcellence of government and nobility of deeds. The Athenianpoliteia is an aristocracy,although t is sometimes called a democracy. t is ruledby those who seem to be good andwise(6 86Oo; GoooC;1|67a9(0; ?IVoal KpCtE ot pX?1, 238d8-a particularly savage twist).It has performed many noble deeds (iokk6c ... Kact KKoc6cpyc), and has fought on behalf offreedom against both Greeks and barbarians,battles exemplified in the mythical past but

16 Loraux(n.12) 91-7, 142.17Loraux(n.12) 298.18 Loraux(n.12) 455 n.168.19On the Menexenus as parody,see G. Vlastos,IONOMIA HOAITIKH',n G. Vlastos, Platonic Studies2(Princeton 1981) 188-201; Loraux(n.12) 311-27.

106


7/18

PLATO'S ATLANTIS STORYespecially in the Persian Wars (239a-d). The Peloponnesian Wars and the events at thebeginningof the fourthcenturycause greatembarrassmentor the speaker.Atheniandefeatsareglossed over, and events are explainedby the jealousy of the Greeks at Athenianprosperity.20The wounding ingratitudeof the Greeksalmost causes Athens to cease herbenefactions(244b-c), but her compassionwins the day (244e-245a). No defeat that is not a moralvictory.Thedifficultyin dealingwith events after the PersianWarspoints up the problems nherent n usingrecenthistoryas a paradigm cf. Menex.236e5-6). Historyhas been appropriatedo praise;asSocratesremarks, t is easy to speak well when one is speaking among the objects of praise(235d5-6). The funeral oration claims to be a spur to present action, but is so tainted byencomiumthat it loses its effectiveness, as Plato's reductio shows. It too is 'designer history',but is designed to respond to a narcissistic Athenian desire for self-congratulation: the natureof the design corresponds to the model to which its author looks.21 The oration in theMenexenus is true to its genre, but is backed only by its own generic authority,not by theknowledgeof a philosophicalexpert;the lie is not noble, andit has no hope of being believed.It is surelyrelevant n this context that the audience of the Atlantismythis madeup of experts.Critias' account of Athens and Atlantis stands recognizably, then, in the tradition ofeulogistic Athenianfestival speeches along Isocratean ines. Just as these speeches treat themythological past as partof a verifiable historicalcontinuum,so Critias assimilatesmythto asimilar historical tradition. Yet Plato makes him do this in such a way that the tale is aphilosophicaladvance over its crudelypatriotic counterparts. f it is, from our point of view,to be a 'lie,' it must at least be a noble one. We have alreadyseen thatthe willingness of theinterlocutors o take the tale at face value is an indicationof its philosophicalnobilityfromtheperspective of the Republic; this is a tale that convinces the philosophicallyand politicallysophisticated.WhenCritiastells his story,he is not merelyengagingin rhetoricalmanipulationof the same old patrioticcommonplacesthat fill the festival speeches. HntiAtlantisnarrative srepresentedas a sincere attemptat reproductionof an authoritative ource. The difference isencapsulated in his worries about narrative style. At the beginning of the Critias he frets thatthe theme he has to handle is even more difficult than thatjust treated by Timaeus (cosmology).Since his audience has some familiarity with the world of historical contingency and its humanactors, they will be more exacting critics (Crit. 107b-108a). On the one hand, this is atransformation of a common topos of panegyric exordia, the fear that the speaker will not beable to live upoive up to his subject matter.22On the other, it reflects the set of philosophic concernsabout imitability and the nature and permanence of language that was one focus of theintroduction o Timaeus'cosmology in the previousdialogue(Tim. 29b-c). Critias s speakingto experts and must watch his words.Plato's constructionof a philosophically-based hartermythshows that he has observedthenecessity for a city to construct ts own 'noblelie', a version of the pastthat will encourage hecitizens to care for the land and for each other and to seek excellence in the present. Forimperial Athens, such a lie was entrenched in the funeral orations and other panegyricdiscourses that Platowould frequentlyhave heardandread.Such discourses,farmorethan the

20 Contrastthe hegemony freely given Athens in the Timaeus-Critiasand in some of Isocrates' versions ofAthenianhistory(see above p. 106, below p. 117). Whereas Plato rejectshistory entirely,and Isocratespartly,thefuneral oration has difficulty rejecting any. Phthonos, rather than Athenian error, is the cause of disaster. Ananonymousreferee of thisjournal points out thatthe Hipparchus akes a similarlycavalier attitude o historical factin order to set up a positive paradigm.There, Socrates asserts that Hipparchuswas a beneficent and quasi-philosophical ruler, who was murderedbecause Harmodius and Aristogeiton (his competitorsin wisdom) wereenragedwhen a young man thoughtHipparchuswiser thanthey.21 Cf. Loraux(n.12) 315.22 For this topos in the funeraloration,see Loraux(n.12) 231-4.

107


8/18

KATHRYNA. MORGANformal works of Herodotusand Thucydides,were history for the averageAthenian. It madesmall difference that this history was largely a myth. Yet Plato did not approveof Athens'imperialpast.Weknow fromtheRepublic hathe was equallydissatisfiedwiththemythologicalpast as it had been constructedby the poets. Both the actual and the mythological past areequally flawed; he must, therefore, make a fresh mythological start.23Since the topoi ofAthenianeulogistic rhetoric are both hackneyedand unsuitable in content, he will transformthem, althoughthey remainrecognizable.The Atlantismyth in Timaeusand Critias is offeredas a conceptualreplacementfor speeches such as Isocrates'Panegyricusand Panathenaicus.The contrastbetween Isocrateanand Platonicpractice n theTimaeus-Critiass especiallytellingwhen we consider that each author considered himself the true 'philosopher' and ran aneducational nstitution.24socrates considered Platonicphilosophyabstractand useless mentaljuggling, andpridedhimself on being andproducing he kind of man who used his judgmentin orderto arrive at the best decision (Antid.271). Despite the sharedtopoi, Isocrates wouldhave considered Plato's panathenaic ale useless, precisely because it cuts off the object ofpanegyricfrom the present,because the panegyricis presentedas a philosophicexercise, andbecause it thereforemakes no concreteproposalfor the best course of action. His own rhetoricis superior o conventionalpanegyricbecause it not only praises past deeds, but gives counselfor the future (Antid.62). Isocrates constructsfor himself a territory hat mediates betweenPlatonic quibbling on the one hand and mere epideixis on thehe er. Plato, by contrast,associates the praise of ancient Athens with an extremely demandingcosmology, restricts itsimmediate audienceto experts, anduses cosmic catastrophe o ensure thatpraise is distancedfrom the Athenianpresent.25Nor does he offer explicit advice; the panegyricseems to havelost exhortatory orce. The absence of this featuress notable, and is evidence that Plato isavoiding cheap(Isocratean?) ffects andeasyIsocratean?)ean?)ffects answers. Thevery abstraction f thepraise-narrativeproves that it is concerned with second-orderquestions of how history isconstructed to be true to ideals and ideologies that arise from and may react against thecontemporary cene. For Plato, Isocratesand those like him are singing the same old facilesong, whatever theirpretensions.

IV. THE ROLE OF SOLON AND CONSTITUTIONALHISTORYThe problematic ruthstatus of the Atlantismyth is, I have proposed,intimatelyconnectedwith its relationship o panegyrichistory.This becomes especially evident when we considerthe connection of the Atlantismythto fourth-centuryrends n theconstructionof constitutional

history. Solon's role as authoritative ource of the Atlantis myth parallelshis function as a

23 For Plato's Athens 'rebelle a 1'histoire'see Brisson (n.2) 418.24On the competingclaims of IsocrateanandPlatonicphilosophy,see now A. Wilson Nightingale,Genres inDialogue. Plato and the Constructof Philosophy(Cambridge1995) 13-59.25 Osbome (n.3) has a differentperspectiveon the narrative emotenessof the myth.She arguesthatPlato usesthe Timaeus-Critias o presenttwo different kinds of authoritativediscourse: a correcthistorical accountand onewhich brings a living model into being. Timaeus' creative cosmology correspondsto the creative act of theDemiurge, while Critias' history lacks philosophic authority(184-5). Osborne proves eloquently the superiorcorrespondenceof the cosmology to its model. Nevertheless,one wonders what creativeaccount of thejust city in

actioncould satisfythis criterion or authoritative hilosophicaldiscourse.Osbornecites Rep.592b4, whereSocratesremarksthatthe significance of the perfect city does not dependon its actualexistence, but this is the view thatSocratesfinds unsatisfactoryat the beginningof the Timaeus,precisely becausethatparadigmwas not sufficientlyanimated.It is true thatmererepetitiondoes not create an authoritative ccount,but this censuremightmorejustlybe levelled at Isocratean and other)panegyric;at least Critias'ancient Athens corresponds o the perfectionof theparadigm.The remoteness of the source of the Atlantismyth and the contexts of its multiple reperformance reatea distancenot so muchfrom living narrativeas from currentencomiasticpractice.

108


9/18

PLATO'S ATLANTIS STORYsignifier of constitutional egitimationin contemporary hetoric.Plato presents Solon as thewisest of the Seven Sages (Tim. 20d8-el) He is a poet, althoughhe does not concentrateall hisenergies on poetry,but also a politician compelled to deal with civic strife (21c). As poet andpolitician,perhapseven as philosopher-statesman,olon is ideally suitedto be the purveyorofan encomiastichistory of Athens with political implications.Had Solon not found the city ofAthens in a stateof faction when he returned romEgypt,he mighthave successfully put intopoetry the tale of Atlantis (Tim.21c). This is confirmedi the Critias:Solon had intended touse the story of Atlantis as materialfor his own poetry andhestatal is refore translated he Egyptianterminologyinto Greek(Crit. 113a). Had Solon completedhis work, he would, in the opinionof the grandfather, have outstripped Homer and Hesiod (Tim. 21dl-3).There is much to digest here. Solon is prevented from fulfilling his poetic potential bypolitical pressures. As a result poetry is only a sideline (21c4). We conclude that, as might beexpected, the construction of poetic tales, however useful, must take second place to the runningof the city. In theth Republic, the founders of the city need not compose useful mythoi themselves,but need only give the poets the models according to which they should construct their tales(379a). The only situation where this will not be the case is the noble lie, which must becomposed by Socrates, as founder,and then imposed successfully on the body of the city. Ireferredabove to the similarityof the Atlantismythto the noble lie, qua chartermyth.We cannow see that the myth and its transmissioncombineaspects of both of these situations. Solonabandonshis grandEgyptianpoetic project n order o takeup the moreimportantask of beinga lawgiver. Yet he also blocks out enough of a narrativeto be a model for subsequentgenerationsof Critias'family.AlthoughSolon's charter-myth as lain dormant, t is effectivelyreactivatedat the Panathenaea.Plato's Solon wished to turnthe mythof Atlantis into poetrythat wouldrivalthe heroicanddidacticepic of Homer andHesiod. The content of the mythcombinesbothheroicanddidacticelements: it tells its audiencehow they should live their lives (on the model of the Republic),and celebrates heparadigmatic chievementsof theAthenianpast.Solon's intendedepic wouldthus have replacedHomer and Hesiod as the foundational ext of the society. It would havebecome, to use Havelock's term, the cultural 'encyclopedia'.26Solon himself would havebecome, not only the preeminent sage and lawgiver, but the preeminentpoet. The fields ofpoetry,politics, andwisdom/philosophymighthavebeenunited n oneperson.Theimperfectionof Athenspreventsthis happycollocation;poetrymustcede to politics. We should note in thisconnectionthatPlatopresentsSolon's travelsin a ratherpeculiarorder.Both Herodotus 1. 29-30) and Aristotle (Ath. Pol. 11.1) place Solon's visit to Egypt after his legislation.27 n theTimaeus,he is compelled to neglect poetry by the troubles he finds in the city afterreturningfrom his travels: '... if he had finished the storywhich he broughthere fromEgyptandhadnotbeen compelledto neglect it by the factions and the otherevils whichhe found when he arrivedback ...' (21c4-dl). While this formulationdoes not rule out the possibility that the factions(aTS6c7?;) in question are different from the ones that led to Solon's legislation (Plato mightbe referring,for instance, to the rise of Peisistratus), he most naturalreadingis that Solon'slegislationfollowed the tripto Egypt.28Why has Platoconstructedevents in this way? In order

26 E. Havelock, Preface to Plato (Cambridge,Mass. 1963) 61-84.27 On the causal relationshipbetween Solon's legislation and his travels in the ancient sources, see S.S.Markianos,'The chronologyof the HerodoteanSolon', Historia 23 (1974) 16.28 Plutarch(Sol. 31.3) has perceived the difficulty. Since he accepts the tradition hat the travels follow thelegislation, he must put Solon's abandonment f the Atlantis narrativeafter the rise of Peisistratus, n Solon's oldage. But he must then disagree with Plato (which he does explicitly) that Solon abandoned t because of lack ofleisure, since he had indeedmuch leisurein his old age. Plutarch s probablyentirely dependenton Plato's narrative

109


10/18

KATHRYN A. MORGANto reinforce the relative importance of poetry and statesmanship, but also so that Solon'slegislation may be tinged with Egyptian authority. And let us not forget that part of what theEgyptians tell Solon is the constitution of ancient Athens that reifies the theorizing of Plato'sown Republic. Even more striking: the family whose oral and written traditions have passeddown the story is Plato's own.29The genealogy of thedeay constitutionof thone Republicis bewilderingly complex and wasthoughtso even in antiquity.The Timaeuspresentsa stemma n which this constitutionoriginateswith the Athenians n the historicalpast.It is recordedby theEgyptians,who pass it on to Solon,who transmits t to the familyof Critias.Its similarity o the Republic s said to be coincidental.At the level of the author, hef ornarrative is subsequent o and dependenton the Republic:Platois the ultimate father of the logos, although he is at pains to efface himself and invert therelationships involved. These relationships arefurthercomplicated by an ancient debate on Plato'ssources for his ideal constitution. In the Busiris, Isocrates describes an Egyptian constitution withsimilarities to the state of the Republic and Timaeus. Busiris is said to have instituted a classsystem in which no one was allowed to change their occupation (15-16). So successful was thissystem that the most renowned philosophers who speak about such matters prefer it (17). Sincethe Busiris is to be dated to fairly early in Isocrates' career, it must predate the Timaeus. The bestcandidate for the reference is the Republic, although Socrates makes no mention of Egypt as amodel for the constitution there.30We learn from Proclus that Crantor, an early exegete of theTimaeus active in the late-fourth and early-third centuries, reported that Plato's contemporariesmocked him on the grounds that he was not the author of the institutions of his Republic, but hadplagiarized hemfromEgypt.Platois supposedto have taken this criticismso seriouslythat,inthe Timaeus,he wentoutof his way to stress thattheEgyptianshadcopiedtheir nstitutions romthe ancientAthenians In Tim.2. 76, on Tim.20d).Weneednot take Crantor's ccountof Plato'smotivation too seriously, but it is intriguingin this context to recall Critias' protestationsconcerningthe unforeseen coincidence of Solon's Egyptianstoryand Socrates' accountof hisstate. This may be a tongue-in-cheekdeclaration hat,appearanceso the contrary,he Egyptianparadigm s not foundational.31n any case, Plato's games of authorshipand fictionalitywiththe Atlantis myth and the constitution of the Republic reflect a more basic problem:doeslegitimacyderive from a stemma(whethergenealogical,literary,or political)or does it inherein content?For a philosopher, he authorityof a constitution s not based upon authorshiporhistory,but for most others,pedigreeis essential.It enables the audienceof a constitutionalorhistoricaldiscourseto feel confidence,while the authorof such a discoursewill manipulatet tobolster he statusof his production.WhenPlato'sSocratesrequests hattheidealcity be animatedand has his requestfulfilled by Critias,he sponsorsa compromisebetween the world of thephilosopherand the world of historicalcontingency.The questionof the authority or a given law or constitutionwas very much a live one at the

in his accountof Solon and Atlantis. The only tradition hatconnectsSolon's travels with PeisistratusputsthemafterPeisistratus'rise to the tyranny(Diog. Laert. 1. 50).29 This is not, however,to suggestthat Solon's legislationeitherdoes, or is supposedto, reflectthe constitutionof theRepublic.Onthe (spurious) raditionof a tripartite ivision of theAtheniancivic body in earlytimesandalongthe lines of the Republicand Timaeus,see S.D. Lambert,The Phratriesof Attica (Ann Arbor1993) 371-80.30 On the relationshipof the Busiris to the Republic, see K. Ries, Isokrates und Platon im Ringen um diePhilosophia (Munich 1959) 52-3. M. Pohlenz, Aus Platos Werdezeit(Berlin 1913) 216-22 uses the similaritiesbetween the Busiris and the Timaeusto arguethat both works are dependenton an early version of the Republicwhere Plato was explicit about his dependenceon Egyptianmodels. The wording of the Busiris passage quotedabove does not, however, compel us to believe that the preferencewas explicit.31Pohlenz(n.30) 219 n.3 aptly comparesPhaedr. 275b. WhenPhaedrusreproachesSocrates that his Egyptianmythof Thamusand Theuth s madeup, Socratesreplies somewhattartlythat it is the truthof the tale thatmatters,not its provenance.

110


11/18

PLATO'S ATLANTIS STORYtime Plato was writing. Following the restoration of the democracy in 403 BC, the Atheniansdecidedto completethe codification of theirlaws, and decreedthatthey shouldbe governed nthe ancestralway, using the laws of Solon.32Finley has arguedthat by the 'laws of Solon'(and Dracon), the Athenians meant 'the law of Athens as it stood in 403, some of it indeedgoing back to the ancient lawgivers but much of it ... promulgated n the two centuries sinceSolon ... [A]dvocateswent on cheerfully citing in the courts whatthey called "a law of Solon",even when it was blatantly impossible for the enactment to have been very ancient'. Therenewed democracy appropriatesSolon as its 'trumpcard' and principleof validationin theconstitutional struggles of the time.33 It is even possible, although conjectural, that theoligarchs of 411 may have used the figure of Solon for the same purpose.34 Aristotle (Pol.1273b35-1274a21)cites two traditionsabout the contributionof Solon to the democracy,onewhich praises him as having founded a mixed constitution, and one which criticizes him forhaving made the popular courts authoritative and destroying the power of the other elements ofthe city. As Hansen has suggested, this shows that there was probably a tradition which praisedhim as the founder of radical democracy.35 There was, then, an extent to which the figure ofSolon was 'up for grabs' in the fourth century, although everyone 'agreed that it was Solon whofounded the modern Athenian state'.36

Solon's importance as constitutional icon seems to have increased as the century progressed.In the first half of the century he tends to be mentioned in connection with specific laws, butthis has changed by the mid-350s, at which point he is deployed more explicitly as a generalparadigm.37 y the latterpartof the century,Thomasmaintains,oratorsare fond of appealingto the lawgiver's intentions,especially his moral ones. Thomas links this appeal to a moregeneralconservatismand to a pessimisticattitude owards he law,which entails a nostalgiafora simpler legal past and a reliable legal authority.38lato's Timaeusand Critias are, in part,a reflection of these developing fourth-century rends.They are most plausibly dated to the

32 The majorpiece of evidence for such a revisionis Andocides(1. 83), who cites the 'decreeof Teisamenus'and claims that t called for an examinationandpublicationof the laws. Therehas been muchrecentcontroversyoverthe accuracyof Andocides'claimand thenatureof thedecreeof Teisamenus.N. Robertson, The laws of Athens,410-399 BC:theevidence for reviewandpublication',JHS 110 (1990) 43-75 hasargued hatAndocides s anuntrustworthywitness and thatthe decree does not indicate that the Athenianseithercontemplatedor engagedin a revision of thelaws. This interpretation as not been universally accepted.P.J. Rhodes, 'The Atheniancode of laws, 410-399 BC',JHS 11(1991) 87-100, gives a measured urveyof theproblem,andwhile granting heforceof some of Robertson'sarguments99), concludesnevertheless hat'anagrapheiswere to find andrepublishn or near he Stoa of theBasileusall currentlyvalid written aws whichapplied o the whole communityof Atheniancitizens', and that 'additionalawsshould be enactedto give appropriate ffect to the revised code in the circumstancesof the amnesty' (100). Mostrecently,S.C. Todd, 'Lysias againstNikomachos: he fate of the expertin Athenian aw' in L. Foxhall and A.D.E.Lewis (eds.), GreekLaw in its Political Setting(Oxford 1996) 101-31, concedes the unreliabilityof Andocides(cf.Rhodes 97) but concludes thattherewas 'a substantialprocessof legal revision duringthe final decadeof the fifthcentury'(107, 127-8). It seems reasonable o believe, therefore, hat whateverthe preciseform of publication, herewas publicly-expressednterest n compilationand revision of the city's laws.33M.I. Finley, 'The ancestralconstitution'in The Use and Abuse of History(London1975) 39-40.34M.H. Hansen, 'Solonian democracyin fourth-centuryAthens' in W.R. Connoret al., Aspects of AthenianDemocracy (= C&MDissertationesxi, Copenhagen1990) 88.35 Hansen(n.34) 90.36Finley (n.33) 50.37 E. Ruschenbusch, 'PATRIOS POLITEIA.Theseus, Drakon, Solon und Kleisthenes in Publizistik undGeschichtsschreibung es 5. und 4. Jahrhunderts. Chr.,Historia 7 (1958) 400-5.38R. Thomas, 'Law and the lawgiverin Atheniandemocracy' n R. Osborneand S. Hornblower eds.), Ritual,Finance, Politics. Athenian Democratic AccountsPresentedto David Lewis (Oxford 1994) 122-4, 128-9.

1l1


12/18

KATHRYN A. MORGAN350s, precisely the periodin which the reconceptionof Solon picks up speed.39To cite Solonas an authority, as Plato has Critias do, is to appeal to a recognizable political commonplace inan attempt to confer authority on one's version of history.40 When Finley discusses theintellectual opposition to democracy in the fourth century,he notes that the appeal to the'ancestral constitution' retained vitality, but excepts Plato and his disciples from this trend.Plato,he thinks,dismisses the 'historical'discussion with contempt; he referencesto Solon inthe Platonic corpus are casual and no Platonic constitution ever depended on ancestralarguments. For Plato, the rot in Athenian democracy affected Solon's constitution as well.41These arguments are undoubtedly valid as far as Plato's explicit statements are concerned,but the mention of Solon in the Timaeus is anything but casual. The legends of the Greeklawgivers, as Szegedy-Maszak points out, 'deserve careful study ... because they illustrate soclearly the transformation of history by and into myth'.42 With the Atlantis myth, Plato addsa new element to this body of legend, with enough finesse that the legend has been taken to betrue (and not just by Critias). He attempts to turn myth back into (paradigmatic) history. Theappeal to the authority of Solon is a crucial part of this project. In order to effect a change inattitude in a society, its charter myth would have to be reworked and imposed on a peoplewilling to accept it. By associating the myth of Athens and Atlantis with Solon, Plato has Critiasengage in a characteristically fourth-century practice of tapping into an historical source forpolitical validation. This is how a fourth-century noble lie would have to be presented. Both inits contentand in its presentation the appealto Solon), the mythof Atlantis resumes andplaysupon contemporary ommonplaces.Finley is correctto say that Plato does not, in the Republicor the Statesman,make anyattempt o appeal o anancestral onstitutionorengagein historicaldiscussion.Yet thetreatmentof the myth of Atlantis in the Timaeusand Critias is precisely an attemptto claim that theconstitutionof the Republic s the ancestralconstitutionof Athens and that the reportof it wasbroughtback to Athensby the fourthcentury'smost famous awgiverand framerof constitutions,framedandnarratedn termsthat would have a particular ourth-century ppeal.43How seriouslyshould we take this claim? As readers,we must find this rhetoric airlytransparentperhapsassoon as we hear that this is Solon's story).Plato does not reallythink thathis ideal constitutionwas everpractisedor thatSolon or the Egyptianspasseddownanynarrativereatment f it. Norshould we concludethatPlato's 'appeal'to Solon impliesthat,like Isocrates,he yearned or thedays of oligarchic aristocracy.His use of the figure of Solon is closer to a parody ofcontemporarypracticethan an appropriation f it. Whereasthe interlocutorsmust accept thenoble lie at face value, we must not do so, but must recognize that Atlantis is a speculativeexercise in politicalrhetoric,albeitphilosophicallybased. Ourfocus mustbe on theconstruction.One concern with this readingis that it 'platonizes' Solon. AlthoughSolon behaves in an

39The datingof these two dialoguesis, of course,a matterof considerablecontroversy.For an overview of thestylometricandphilosophicalproblems nvolved in G.E.L.Owen'splacementof the Timaeusat the end of the middleperiod, soon after the Republic, see G. Fine, 'Owen's progress', PhR 97 (1988) 373-83, and more generally, L.Brandwood, Stylometryandchronology'in R. Kraut ed.), The CambridgeCompanion o Plato (Cambridge1992)90-120. In this paperI follow the conventionaldating,which puts the dialogues in the last stages of Plato's career.40 Note that the terms in which Critias refers to the similarity between the Solonian and the Socraticconstitutions,'You [Socrates]agreedwith Solon' (25e), are nicely calculatedto invert the real state of affairs inwhich Plato has made Solon agree with Socrates.41 Finley (n.33) 50-51.42 A. Szegedy-Maszak,'Legendsof the Greeklawgivers', GRBS19 (1978) 200.43Hansen(n.34) 72-3, when notingthe fourth-centuryrend to place the 'golden age' not in the remote but inthe recentpast, remarks hat it is only Plato who has to look back millennia in order to find a society he approvesof. This is a reflectionof the vigour with which Plato wishes to cut himself off from all knownhistory.

112


13/18

PLATO'S ATLANTISSTORYapproved Platonic fashion when he abandons poetry for politics, and although the epic ofAtlantis would have filled Plato's desire for a substitute o HomerandHesiod, he is, afterall,the founder of Atheniandemocracy.Yet at the end of Laws 3, the AthenianStrangerevincessome nostalgia for the Athenianconstitutionbefore it allowed excessive licence (693e), andmentions with approval the government of Athens at the time of the Persian invasions:magistracieswere based on four ranks (tiK tLIrtjL,6uTovpcpXatwV?;T?ETTpCov),Reverencewas mistress, and people were willing to live as slaves to the laws (698b). This is at leastreminiscent of the four-tiered Solonian system, and suggests that Plato found something to workwith in it, althoughwe should remember hat the Laws aims atdescribing he second-bestpolityrather hanthe ideal city of the Republicand, by extension, the Timaeus-Critias. n any case,there is no reason why Plato should have felt compelled to make his constitution in theTimaeus-Critias conform to any Solonian reality, since he does not intend his narrative as a realhistory.A Solonian constitution n this context is the constitutionof the Republic,and Solonis a floating signifier of constitutionalexcellence withoutany independentcontent.The example of Isocratesshows that one could play fairly fast and loose with the conceptof 'Solonian' democracy. He uses the constitution of Solon to stand for his own ratheraristocraticversion of democracy.At Areopagiticus16, Isocratesurges the Atheniansto returnto the 'democracyof our ancestors'. The only way for them to escape theirpresentevils is toreinstitute the democracy 'which Solon, the greatest friend of the people, laid down in law' (1vX6XCovgL?v6 ?rlOTnK6taTOo;7V6gLu?Vo; voLoO TF7?). This democracy gave rewards andpunishmentsaccording o individualdeserts.They did not fill the offices by lot, but selected theworthiest and most reputablecitizens (22-24). It was under this constitution that they werewillingly grantedhegemony by the otherGreeks(17). Clearly,Isocratesbelongs to the traditionof those who made Solon the authorof a mixed democracy.At the end of his life, Isocratesretrojected heoriginsof his idealizeddemocracyback to the time of Theseus,whose immediatesuccessors establisheda democracy,but notot a haphazardone; rather hey combinedit with therule of the best (6pia?oKpatat) (Panath. 129-31). Nevertheless,Solon still appearsat the endof the greatdemocratic radition hat ends with Peisistratus Panath. 148).ThatIsocrates was quite conscious of the significanceof employinga figure like Solon asoriginatorof constitutionalexcellence can be gatheredfrom his treatmentof Busiris in theencomiumdedicated o him. The natureof theconstitution hatIsocratesattributes o the ancientEgyptians has alreadybeen examined above: they were endowed with a rigid class systemreminiscent of the one in the Republic, and it was Busiris who gave it to them. Isocrates,however, feels the need to answer a potentialobjection:

Perhapsyou will reply to what I have said, thatI praisethe land and the laws and the piety of theEgyptians, ndeven theirphilosophy, utI amnot able toprovethathe [Busiris]wasresponsibleorthesethings,as I have assumed .. [but]I holdhimresponsibleornothingwhich s impossible,but forlaws anda constitutionv6gowV CatTOXIT?ta;],whichare thedeeds of noble men ... I use the argumentswhichthose who praiseoughtto employ. Bus. 30-33)

From this passage we can discern that in an encomiastic framework, authorship of laws andconstitutionsis a deed of excellence that could be attributed o anyone. Busiris is a nobleperson.Noble people compose laws andconstitutions.ThereforeBusiris composedlaws and aconstitution. In this instance the topos is employed to praise an individual, but we can easilysee how this kind of floating motif can be appliedto a fixed person (Solon) who has positiveconnotationsfor most of the audience (ratherthan being used to rehabilitatea cannibalisticEgyptian pharaoh). What is important is that it takes a certain kind of person to be afoundational igure, and thatIsocratesrecognizes thatthe deploymentof the motif is a matterof rhetoricrather han history.If we apply this conclusion to the constructionof the Atlantismyth and its narrativehistory, we can cease to worry overmuch whether the Solon of theTimaeusand Critias is too platonizeda figure. Fromthe point of view of political rhetoric tis Solon's aurathat is significant,rather hanany constitutionaldetail.

113


14/18

KATHRYNA. MORGANPlatois not, however,unaware hathis narrative bouttherealancientAthenianswill undergoa kind of scrutiny hat Lorauxneatlycalls a 'philosophicaldokimasia'.44When Critiaspresentstheplanof thetwo dialogues,he foreseesa geneticaccount n whichthe humanbeingswho havebeen created n the course of Timaeus'cosmologywill be deemed to havereceived an educationalongthe lines indicatedby Socrates n theRepublic.This is how he characterizes is own task:'I will receive the men who have come into being in Timaeus' account.I will receive fromyou[Socrates]some of them who have been superblyeducated.In accordancewith the accountandthe law of Solon (Kado65f6v Z6Xcovo;X6yov t? Kat v6gLov) will introduce heminto ourpresenceas if we weredikastaiand make them citizensof thiscity, on the grounds hatthey arethe Athenians of thattime, whom the reportof the sacredwritingsdisclosed when they wereunknown(tgn|vuoxev&o4avel; 6vTa;)' (Tim. 27a7-b4). This passage has considerable egalresonance.45 he interlocutors re conceived as jurors sittingin judgementon a citizenshipcase.Information has been laid about the candidates for citizenship. The verb used, menuo, is atechnical legal term, usually used of negative evidence given in denunciation.46 What are weto make of the account and thelaw of Solon? The account is obviously the narrativeSolon heardin Egypt, but Solon is not known to have legislated on citizenship.47The answer is that Solonis once again being invoked in his aspect as founder of the Athenian state. In a resaense, it ishe who is making these fictional Athenians real citizens. Even more significant is that the

judgement that the interlocutors and the readers make about the legitimacy of their claim tocitizenship is a judgement about the proper nature of the Athenian constitution. If they are not'real'citizens, then thepoliticalagendaof theRepublic,Timaeus,and Critias s to be dismissed.If we accept the literary genealogy as a true representation of the way things should be, weaccept that other accounts of Athenian history-and the lessons they are thought to teach-areflawed andmisleading.It is Solon who presidesover this complex interplayof utopianismandrhetoricalpragmatism, ust as he does in the otherfourth-centuryources examinedabove.

V. IMPLICATIONS OR FOREIGNRELATIONSThe effort to contextualize the myth need not stop with an examination of its genericaffinities and their philosophical implications. History, constitutional and otherwise, affectspresent policy. In this section I shall explorehow the Atlantismythplays uponconcerns aboutthe natureof Athens' maritimealliances at the time of the second Athenian eague:the idea thatmaritimeexpansioncauses constitutionaldecay is common to the mythandIsocrateanorationsof thatperiod. Vidal-Naquethas already pointed out that in juxtaposingAthens and Atlantis,Plato was setting an idealized Athens of the past againstthe Athens of the present.48 reviousscholars had remarked hat Atlantisresembledan idealized PersianEast;the conflict between

Athensand Atlantis would then be a mythical transposition f the Persianwars.49 Vidal-Naquet

44 Loraux(n.12) 297.45For an interpretationf this passagethatfocuses on the tension between narrativeandreality,see Gill, 1977(n.1) 303-4; also Weil (n.8) 30-31.46 LSJs.v. njiv(I. cf. S.C.Todd,TheShapeofAthenianLaw(Oxford1993)187. The verbused of introducinghe'fictional'Atheniansnto thepresenceof theinterlocutors,ta6qc, alsohas technicalmplicationsLSJs.v. ?to6(o 11.3).47 But see also P. Manville, The Originsof Citizenship n Ancient Athens(Princeton 1990) 124-44, for whomthe implicationof much of Solon's legislation is the formalizationof citizenship categories.48 Vidal-Naquet n.2) 429: 'Rencontrant t vainquant 'Atlantide,qui donc vainc en realite l'Athenesde Platon,sinonelle-meme?'. So too Brisson(n.2) 436: 'il est necessairede considerer e combat de 1'Athenesprimitivecontrel'Atlantidecomme l'expressionde l'oppositioninterieurea l'Athenescontemporainea Platon entre sa face tournmeevers la puissancemaritimeet celle tournmeeers la puissanceterrestre,gage de sobriete,qu'incarnedans sa puretel'Athenesprimitive'. Cf. Gill, 1977 (n.l) 295-8.49 Vidal-Naquet n.2) 427. This parallel s reinforced,as he pointsout (428), by echoes of Herodotus.The 'greatand wonderful deeds' (pEy6XaTeicat 9oaoTaa6c) f Greeksand barbarians t Hdt. 1. 1 are matchedby the 'greatand wonderful deeds' (WjteyoXaat Oaugoxaac)of the ancient Athenians at Tim.20e4-5, and both sets of deeds

114


15/18

PLATO'S ATLANTIS STORYemphasized hat Plato's ancientAthensis a uniquelystablelandpowerwith no ports,commerceor maritimetrade. In this it contrasts with Atlantis, which is a colonialist and expansionistmaritimepowerwith a huge navy and substantialports.50He notes briefly possible contempor-ary resonanceof the myth for the mid fourth-centuryAthens,51 ut fundamentally his readingmakes the myth a late fifth-century allegory in which Atlantis maps onto the aggressivemaritime pride of Athens that led to defeat at the end of the Peloponnesian War. Thishistoricizing interpretation of the Atlantis myth is suggestive, but does not go far enough. Thesame kind of readingcan set the myth in a fourth-century ontext.The selection of a paradigm from the past determines the rhetoric employed in discussionsof presentneeds. Such an explicit discussion does not takeplace in the Timaeusor Critias,butwe will hear its echoes; the 'moral' is present but never drawn. For a more explicit treatment,we must return o Isocrates.The connection between constitutionalhistoryand the historyofforeignpolicy and warfarewas muchin the mind of Isocrateswhenen wrote theAreopagiticus(probablyaround 355 BC). I have already quoted the passage where he connects Athens'historicalhegemony with the Solonian constitution(17); it is important o note that he alsodeclares there that those who desired the present constitution were hated by all and barelyescaped the uttermostdisaster,a reference to Athens' nearescape from total destructionat theend of the PeloponnesianWar.He expandson the dangerousprecedentof the fifth-centurypastin his orationOnthePeace. This work was probablywritten n 355, in the closing stages of theSocial War,the conflict between Athens and some of her leading allies thatbrought o an endthe resurgence of Athenian influence in the aftermath of the formation of the second Athenianleague. Isocrates nveighs againstthose who 'say that we should imitateourforefathersand notsee ourselves made fools of andmerely watch while people sail the sea withoutbeing willingto pay us a contribution (mvt4&c;)'. But which ancestors do they mean, Isocrates asks? Thoseat the time of the Persian Wars or those at the time of the Peloponnesian War? If the latter, theyare merely advising the city to run the risk of complete destruction once again (36-7).In order to appreciateIsocrates'point here, we must look briefly at Athens' relationshipswith other Greek states in the first half of the fourthcentury.Athensspentthe beginningof thecentury attempting o recover its position after the Spartanvictory in the PeloponnesianWar.Its efforts came to a head with the foundingof the second Athenianconfederacy n 377 BC.Inthe charter of the new league the Decree of Aristoteles (IGtheecree of Aristoteles (IG 43), there are several specificguarantees concerning the treatment of Athens' new allies. Theli es are to be autonomous andhave freedom of constitution lines 20-21). They will not be garrisonedor pay tribute(06po;),andthere is a ban on Athenianownershipof allied land (lines 21-23, 35-46). How far Athenslived up to these guarantees s disputed.The cleruchies sent to Samos (365 BC) and Potideia(361 BC) are said by some to infringe the spirit, if not the letter, of the league charter,andAthenian interference with the autonomy of member states has been reconstructed.52 heleague finally fell apartwith the Social War of 357-55 BC. Now, some recent opinion hasconcluded thatreconstructionsof an Atheniandecline into imperialismare projectionsof thehistory of the first Athenian league onto the second,53and it may well be that Athenianimperialisticambitions andactions have been exaggerated.Yet if modern scholarscan projectthe fifth-centuryempire nto the fourth(rightlyor wrongly),so couldfourth-centuryAthenians,theirenemies, and theirallies. Whatis important or present purposesis thatAthenian actions

are threatenedwith obscuritybecause of the passage of time.50Vidal-Naquet(n.2) 429-33.51See above (n.2).52 Thus,e.g., F.H.Marshall,TheSecondAthenianConfederacy Cambridge 905)50-53. Samos and Potideiawerenot leaguemembers,and Potideia'scleruchywas probably nstalledby request cf. IG ii2 114). J. Cargill,The SecondAthenianLeague(Berkeley1981) 146-60 objectsto the interpretationhat sees thecleruchiesas infringing he spiritofthe charter.For those with theireye on the past,however,the cleruchiesmay have seemed an ominousdevelopment.53 Cargill (n.52) 161; P. Harding,'Athenianforeign policy in the fourthcentury',Klio 77 (1995) 113-15.

115


16/18

KATHRYN A. MORGANin the fifth centuryexisted as a paradigm hatpeople could, if they desired,choose to employ;the specific guarantees in the Decree of Aristoteles seem intended to reassure members thatAthens has no imperialistic designs; the fifth-century model is recalled and rejected.54The passage from Isocrates' On the Peace cited above is good evidence that questionsofparadigm were explicitly raised in Athenian discussions of their relationship with their allies.The proponents of the fifth-century model criticized by him draw no distinctions between fifth-century 'tribute' (06po;) and fourth-century 'contributions' ((OVT(c;?I). The paying ofcontributions is equated with the imitation of the fifth-century empire. Even if, therefore,Athenian policy was not the reassertion of empire, actions such as the sending of cleruchiescould easily be misinterpreted by those, like Mausolus, who had an interest in arguing that theAthenians were a threat. The league may well have foundered upon the fear, rather than theactuality, of Athenian imperialism.The supposition that we should attach importance to perception as well as to action may helpus to resolve recent difficulties over the intent of On the Peace. Harding has asserted that thespeech should be read as a rhetorical exercise rather than political advice; it is one member ofan epideictic antilogy arguing for peace, just as the other member of the pair, the Archidamus,argues for war. One consequence (for Harding, desirable) of dismissing On the Peace aspolitical advice is that the oration has been used to argue for imperialistic intent on the part ofthe Athenians during the period of the second league; once it is disposed of, we are free toacquit the Athenians of reversion to bad habits.55A disadvantage of this approach is that wemust then dismiss Isocrates' own statements in the Antidosis about the seriousness of his intent:he wants to give the city good advice.56 Moreover, I am uncomfortable with the idea that anyspeech could be merely epideictic. Even in an epideixis, an orator must use arguments that willseem plausible to his audience. In fact, Harding also thinks that On the Peace is a partisan tract'insinuating that Chares' brutal behaviour was responsible for the Social War'. Partisanship isat some remove fromrhetoricalgame-playing;arewe reallyto thinkthat Isocrateswas the onlyperson who deployed argumentsbased on the past? It is reasonable, then, to assume thatcommentssuch as Isocrates' could be andwere used in deliberationsat the time of the SocialWar,whatever the natureof any 'official' policy.Let us return o the ideology of On the Peace. Isocrates thinksthatthe Athenians aremad,because although they eulogize the deeds of theirancestors,they do the opposite.At the timeof the Persian Wars-familiar territoryhere-they liberated the cities of Hellas and wereconsideredworthyof hegemony;now they seek to enslave them.Moreover, hey complainthatthey do not enjoy the same honouras theirancestors(41-42). How may the Atheniansregainpossession of piety,moderation,ustice, and the othervirtues?The answer s simple. 'Wemust',he says, 'stop desiring a sea empire. This is what has thrown us into confusion and hasdestroyedthe democracyunder which we were the happiestof the Greeks' (64). A little later,he contrasts he condition of Athens before and after the acquisitionof a maritimeempire.Theearlier politeia gained Athens military supremacy and freely-conceded hegemony. Thesubsequentstate of license andgreedearneduniversalodium. Themultitudeof the peopleweremesmerizedby the wealth that flowed into the city, but it was greed for such wealth that led

54 C.D. Hamilton,'Isokrates, G ii243, Greekpropaganda ndimperialism',Traditio36 (1980) 83-107 arguesthat references to autonomy,etc., are a response to recent Spartanexcesses ratherthan to Athens' fifth-centurymalpractice,and thatthe purposeof the league was the restorationof Athens' empire.It seems unlikely,however,thatallied memorieswere shortenough for membersto jump into the Athenian fire (howevervicious the Spartanfrying pan) withoutguarantees hey at least felt were sincere.55Cargill (n.52) 176-8 admitsthe seriousness of the speech,but thinks thatIsocrates' criticismsapply only tothe periodof the Social War,andnot to a processof degeneration.But Isocratescertainly hinks that the constitutionhas been degenerating consistently, and it is difficult to find evidence for a period of political and militaryrecuperationn the speech.56 Cf. the remarksof R.A. Moysey, 'Isokrates'On the Peace: rhetoricalexercise or political advice?', AJAH7 (1982) 118-27.

116


17/18

PLATO'S ATLANTIS STORYto recklessness anddestruction(74-89). Lest we thinkhk at a sea empirecaused harmonly inthe specific instance of Athens,he hastens to declare thatthis is a generalrule. Speakingof theSpartans,he concludes that the arche (rule)of the sea was thearche (beginning)of misfortunes(101). Rule on land gave them good order and steadfastness;rule of the sea led to arroganceand lack of discipline.They no longer kept the laws of their forefathersbut were plungedintoconfusion(101-2). The pointcould not be moreclearlymade thatsea air rotsyourconstitution.The most comprehensivetreatmentof this theme comes in the Panathenaicus (115-16).Isocrates anticipates that critics will want to inject a discussion of constitutions into hisdiscussion of Athens, and undertakes o prove that the city excels in this area. His praises,however, will go not to the presentconstitutionbut to the constitutionof the ancestors.Thissuperiorconstitution was abandonedbecause it was inappropriateor the exercise of the seapowerneeded to frustratehe machinationsof the Spartans.Hegemonyon land is practisedwithgood-order, moderation, and obedience, while hegemony on sea is increased by technicalnautical skill. Although the foundersof the empire knew that the good order of the formerconstitutionwould be destroyedby a sea empire,and thatthe goodwill of the allies would turnto hatred,neverthelessthey thought t betterto commitinjusticethansuffer it (certainlya swipeat the Socratic maxim that it is better to suffer injusticethan commit it).All thesethemesrecur nthe narrative f Atlantis.Becauseof the excellenceof theirconstitution,the ancient Athenians were beautiful in body and soul and ruled both themselves and the rest ofGreece njustice.The inhabitants f Atlantis,on the otherhand,undergo he samedegeneration stheirmodernAthenian ounterparts.he end of the Critias ells us how at firsttheAtlanteanswereobedient o their aws. Onlyvirtuewas importanto them andtheydisdained heirprosperity. hismadethemwise andgentle;their wealth did not make themdrunk.But as the divineelement inthem became weakened,they became greedy and power-hungryCrit. 120e-121b).It was thishungerwhich led them to attackGreece,and causedtheir totaldefeat.Enoughhas by now beensaid to indicate hat,for some audiencesat least, it will havebeen Atlantis'sea powerthatwas amajor actor n their nstability,eadingas it did to greedanddisobedience o their aws. As Vidal-Naquetpointedout, the maritimecharacter f Atlantis s crucial,but it is crucialnot just withrespect o thefifth-century ast.Platowas playingon themesthatwere themosttopicalof his day.It is probable hatthe TimaeusandCsnd Critiaswere being composedduring he SocialWar, he timewhen Isocrateswas writingOn thePeace. If, as I have suggested, he questionof whetherAthensshouldembrace(or was embracing) he late fifth-centurymaritimeparadigmwas in the air,thestoryof Atlantisresonatesclosely with contemporaryebate.This would be trueeven if we wereto datethedialoguesearlier han he350s (althoughheyaremostat homethere), incetheproblemof historicalparadigmwas presentwhentheleaguewas foundedandmusthavecontinued o loombetween 377 and357.

Do the parallelsbetween Plato and Isocratesmean thatthe former s merely constructingacryptic version of the latter's oration?By no means. Isocratessituates himself as counsellor,while Plato is absent from his narrativeand constructs t as a more distancedexercise in theconstructionof history.The paraineticelement is differentfrom that in Isocrates. If one wantsto drawthe presentmoral,one can easily do so, but this is not necessarilythe point. To giveadvice as Isocratesdoes is to admitone's implication n the currentpolitical system with all itsrhetoricalposing, but while Isocrates is proudof his implication(Antid.263-9), Plato rejectscontemporarypolitics. It would be as pointless for him to offer specific advice as to constructa history of the ideal state that was based on real Athenianhistory.The well-governed,non-maritime Athens is a non-startergiven the city's actual past; Isocrates' rhetoric is anunsuccessfulcompromisebetween the desire for civic stabilityand the necessity of panderingto Athens' self-image. Plato, on the otherhand, wants a paradigmshift, one which involvesembracinga different(Platonic)form of constitution,and one which will, by its very nature,entail the abandonment f maritimeambitionandits concomitantmoralrot. The Atlantismythcriticizes such ambition,but its presentationn the context of the cosmology of the Timaeusandthe politics of the Republictraces the root of the problemfar deeperthanIsocratescan. This

117


18/18

KATHRYN A. MORGANis why the myth is set in the remote past.This interpretation f the myth of Atlantishas said little aboutpossible connectionsto thecosmology of the Timaeus, and one might wonder whether the readers who were interested in thefoundationalpropertiesof triangles ound muchto theirpurpose n such an extendedmeditationon historicizingrhetoric.Yet it is the propertyof a Platonic dialoguethat it containsmanyintersecting levels of interpretation;n the end, one level resonates with all the others.The Timaeusand Critias aim to give an historical account of the universe encompassing both cosmology andpolitical history.57The purpose of the cosmology is not to achieve scientific certitude, but toproduce a narrative second to none in likelihood, one which is internally consistent and doesjustice to the beneficent intentions of the Demiurge. Some of the human beings createdby the endof Timaeus' account are to receive the ideal education described in the Republic. So far, all isparadigmatically for the best, but the sensible world is one of change and decay (cf. Rep. 546a);conflict must enter, therefore, with the kingdoms of Athens and Atlantis. An idealized Athens livesout a transformed version of her own history and is cut off at the peak before degeneration canbegin. Socrates' request for a representationof the ideal state in action is thus fulfilled. To theextent that this state is recognizably Athenian in its name and its historical tropes, its function isparainetic in a way that the city of the Republic could not be, but only for a philosophic audiencethat accepts the presuppositions of the Timaeus andRepublic. Plato takes his narrative as far downinto the realm of historical contingency as it can go without bringing in actual historical fact. Itis a mediating element between the historical narrativeof Athens (which cannot be told for ethicalreasons) and the paradigms of the Republic and Timaean cosmology. Because it is motionless, theparadigm of the Republic cannot move us; the triangles of the Timaeus are esoteric indeed, butthe Atlantismythconfrontsus with how and why we constructour own histories,and how wetransform ourselves by telling them. Its close relationship with the themes of contemporaryhistoricizing panegyric functions as a deconstructionof them, and shows that the design of historycannot be takenfor grantedor remainunexaminedby the philosopher.The power of nationalmythson the popularmind dramatizes he need for philosophicalcontrol,and the Atlantismythis an exampleof such manipulation, s the genresof philosophy,history,andoratory ntersect.58Boththemythandthecosmologyare constructedo make apointabout heway the world shouldbe, the principlesupon which we should construct t, and the meansby which such models arerenderedbelievable.

KATHRYNA. MORGANUniversityof California,Los Angeles

57 For a full-scale studyof links betweencosmology andpoliticalhistory n Timaeus-Critias, ee J.-F.Pradeau,Le mondede la politique (SanktAugustin,forthcoming).58Gill has speculated hatthe mythis aboutplayingthe 'game of fiction', althoughhe subsequentlyrepudiatedthis notion (1979 [n.l] 76, 1993 [n.l] 62-6). Certainly,to call it a game is to underestimate he didactic stakesinvolved; cf. G. Naddaf, 'The Atlantis myth: an introduction o Plato's later philosophyof history', Phoenix 48(1994) 200. Naddaf sees the myth as the 'preamble'(191) to the foundationof a new constitutionalong the linesof the Laws. I find the idea of the myth as a preambleattractive,but am doubtful whether t is appropriateo havea Republic-likeparadigmof thebest city as thepersuasive ntroductiono the 'second-best' constitutionof the Laws.On the relationshipof the Critias to the Laws, see furtherC. Gill, 'Plato andpolitics: the Critiasand the Politicus',Phronesis 24 (1979) 148-67. The Atlantismyth has another nterestingparallelin Xenophon'screationof didacticpseudo-historyn the Cyropaedia,on which see P.A. Stadter, Fictionalnarrativen the Cyropaedia',AJP 112(1991)461-91. Stadterremarkson the overt and utopiandidacticismof the narrative 464). Although Xenophonincludestheobligatorypreface,he, unlikeCritias/Plato,makes no claim to factualaccuracy.ForStadter, XenophonandPlato,in their different ways, reassert for prose the right to present the truthwithout focusing on the validity of thehistorical referent'(465).

118

Date post:	05-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	atlantispapers
View:	225 times
Download:	0 times

Designer History_ Plato's Atlantis Story and Fourth-century Ideology

Documents