But the allegations of Myron, as the reader will perceive, remain not only untouched, but more confirmed and established than ever by such a defence. It happens, in fact, that they are true to the letter, and what is more, are by no means the gravest imputation which can be substantiated against the Dorian model-state. We shall proceed, however, step by step examining fairly, and in order, the charges and the defence. Plutarch,[189] whose testimony, when favourable, is unhesitatingly accepted, “relates that the Helots were compelled to intoxicate themselves, and perform indecent dances as a warning to the Spartan youth.”[190] Shall we credit Plutarch? No we must not; because “common sense is opposed to so absurd a method of education.” But if everything in history which we may determine to be opposed to common sense were on that account to be rejected, we should make sad inroads upon the domains of antiquity. That which increases the ridicule of the practice is, that from among those same Helots they selected tutors for their younger children,[191] as well as companions, so that in the very article wherein Xenophon[192] discovered the superiority of Lycurgus’s educational system, it was completely on a level with that of the other Greeks, habituating the youth to the intimacy and government of slaves.[193] ----- Footnote 189: Lycurg. § 28. To this may be added the testimony of Demetrius Cydonius: φασὶ καὶ, Λακεδαιμονίους τῇ τῶν Εἱλώτων μέθῃ τοῖς πασὶν ὑποδεικνύναι τὸ τῆς νήψεως ἀγαθον. ap. Meurs. Miscell. Lacon. 11. 6. p. 128. Footnote 190: Dorians, ii. 39. Footnote 191: Mr. Müller’s argument is put in the form of a question: “Is it possible that the Spartans should have so degraded the men whom they appointed as tutors over their young children?” Dorians, ii. 39. Footnote 192: De Rep. Laced. ii. 1. Footnote 193: