Critias | Page 6

degenerate, though to the outward eye they appeared
glorious as ever at the very time when they were filled with all iniquity. The all-seeing
Zeus, wanting to punish them, held a council of the gods, and when he had called them
together, he spoke as follows:--
No one knew better than Plato how to invent 'a noble lie.' Observe (1) the innocent
declaration of Socrates, that the truth of the story is a great advantage: (2) the manner in
which traditional names and indications of geography are intermingled ('Why, here be
truths!'): (3) the extreme minuteness with which the numbers are given, as in the Old
Epic poetry: (4) the ingenious reason assigned for the Greek names occurring in the
Egyptian tale: (5) the remark that the armed statue of Athena indicated the common
warrior life of men and women: (6) the particularity with which the third deluge before
that of Deucalion is affirmed to have been the great destruction: (7) the happy guess that
great geological changes have been effected by water: (8) the indulgence of the prejudice
against sailing beyond the Columns, and the popular belief of the shallowness of the
ocean in that part: (9) the confession that the depth of the ditch in the Island of Atlantis
was not to be believed, and 'yet he could only repeat what he had heard', compared with
the statement made in an earlier passage that Poseidon, being a God, found no difficulty
in contriving the water-supply of the centre island: (10) the mention of the old rivalry of
Poseidon and Athene, and the creation of the first inhabitants out of the soil. Plato here,
as elsewhere, ingeniously gives the impression that he is telling the truth which
mythology had corrupted.
The world, like a child, has readily, and for the most part unhesitatingly, accepted the tale
of the Island of Atlantis. In modern times we hardly seek for traces of the submerged
continent; but even Mr. Grote is inclined to believe in the Egyptian poem of Solon of
which there is no evidence in antiquity; while others, like Martin, discuss the Egyptian
origin of the legend, or like M. de Humboldt, whom he quotes, are disposed to find in it a
vestige of a widely-spread tradition. Others, adopting a different vein of reflection, regard
the Island of Atlantis as the anticipation of a still greater island--the Continent of America.
'The tale,' says M. Martin, 'rests upon the authority of the Egyptian priests; and the
Egyptian priests took a pleasure in deceiving the Greeks.' He never appears to suspect
that there is a greater deceiver or magician than the Egyptian priests, that is to say, Plato
himself, from the dominion of whose genius the critic and natural philosopher of modern
times are not wholly emancipated. Although worthless in respect of any result which can
be attained by them, discussions like those of M. Martin (Timee) have an interest of their
own, and may be compared to the similar discussions regarding the Lost Tribes (2
Esdras), as showing how the chance word of some poet or philosopher has given birth to
endless religious or historical enquiries. (See Introduction to the Timaeus.)
In contrasting the small Greek city numbering about twenty thousand inhabitants with the
barbaric greatness of the island of Atlantis, Plato probably intended to show that a state,
such as the ideal Athens, was invincible, though matched against any number of

opponents (cp. Rep.). Even in a great empire there might be a degree of virtue and justice,
such as the Greeks believed to have existed under the sway of the first Persian kings. But
all such empires were liable to degenerate, and soon incurred the anger of the gods. Their
Oriental wealth, and splendour of gold and silver, and variety of colours, seemed also to
be at variance with the simplicity of Greek notions. In the island of Atlantis, Plato is
describing a sort of Babylonian or Egyptian city, to which he opposes the frugal life of
the true Hellenic citizen. It is remarkable that in his brief sketch of them, he idealizes the
husbandmen 'who are lovers of honour and true husbandmen,' as well as the warriors who
are his sole concern in the Republic; and that though he speaks of the common pursuits of
men and women, he says nothing of the community of wives and children.
It is singular that Plato should have prefixed the most detested of Athenian names to this
dialogue, and even more singular that he should have put into the mouth of Socrates a
panegyric on him (Tim.). Yet we know that his character was accounted infamous by
Xenophon, and that the mere acquaintance with him was made a subject of accusation
against Socrates. We can only infer that in this, and perhaps