[229] _Econ_ 20 §§ 22 foll.
[230] _Econ_ 12 § 3.
[231] _Econ_ 3 §§ 1-5, 5 §§ 15, 16, 12 § 19.
[232] _Econ_ 7-9, 12-14, 21.
[233] _Econ_ 13 § 9, cf 9 § 5.
[234] _Econ_ 12-15.
[235] _Econ_ 14 § 8.
[236] _Econ_ 14 § 9.
[237] _Econ_ 5 § 4, 14 § 2, 20 _passim_.
[238] _Econ_ 5 § 6.
[239] _Econ_ 1 § 4, 4 § 6.
[240] cf _Memor_ II 7 §§ 7-10.
[241] _Econ_ 11 §§ 9, 10.
[242] _Econ_ 20 _passim_.
[243] _Econ_ 21 § 10.
[244] _Econ_ 21 § 12.
[245] _Econ_ 21 § 9.
[246] _Memor_ II 8 especially § 3. For this suggestion that a free man
should be steward of a rich man’s estate I can find no parallel. See the
chapters on the Roman agricultural writers. The case of the shepherd in
Juvenal I 107-8 is not parallel.
[247] _Memor_ II 5 § 2. See _Vect_ 4 § 22 for suggested employment of
free citizens or aliens.
[248] _Vectigalia_ ch 4 _passim_.
[249] _Cyrop_ VII 5 § 67, VIII 3 §§ 36-41.
[250] _Cyrop_ IV 4 §§ 5-12, VII 5 §§ 36, 73.
[251] _Cyrop_ VIII 1 §§ 43-4.
[252] Cited from Kock’s edition 1880-8.
[253] _Menandrea_, ed Körte 1910, Teubner.
[254] Fragments 100-24. From other plays, 294, 387.
[255] Cratinus 81, Pherecrates 212.
[256] e.g. Antiphanes 265, Philemon 227, Menander 581, etc.
[257] Philemon 95.
[258] Philemon 213, Menander 68, 716, Hipparchus 2.
[259] Menander 14, Posidippus 23 with Kock’s note.
[260] Pherecrates 10, Crates 14.
[261] Nicophon 13, 14.
[262] Athenaeus VI pp 263, 267 _e_-270 _a_.
[263] Menandrea pp 159-61 (fragments of Γεωργός).
[264] Menandrea pp 157, 159.
[265] _opus cit_ and Menander 97 Kock. For ἄγροικος connoting simplicity
cf 794 ἄγροικος εἶναι προσποιεῖ πονηρὸς ὤν.
[266] Menandrea p 155, 96 Kock.
[267] Menandrea p 15 (lines 26, 40).
[268] Menandrea p 13 (line 12, cf 111).
[269] Menandrea p 5.
[270] Menandrea p 25.
[271] Kock III p 473 (adespota 347).
[272] Lucian, Timon 7, 8. Kock adesp 1434, note.
[273] Menander 795.
[274] Menander 642.
[275] Menander 408.
[276] Menander 63, τὰ κακῶς τρέφοντα χωρί’ ἀνδρείους ποιεῖ.
[277] Stobaeus _flor_ LVI 16 preserves an utterance of Socrates on
labour, especially agricultural labour, as the basis of wellbeing, in
which he remarks that ἐν τῇ γεωργίᾳ πάντα ἔνεστιν ὦν χρείαν ἔχομεν.
[278] ἰδιωτῶν Aristotle _Pol_ II 7 § 1.
[279] Arist _Pol_ II 6 § 13, 12 § 10.
[280] Arist _Pol_ II 7 § 6 and Newman’s note.
[281] Arist _Pol_ II 7, 8.
[282] In _Thucydides and the history of his age_ chapters III-VII.
[283] _Politics_ III 13 § 2.
[284] See Newman on Ar _Pol_ II 7 § 7.
[285] Ar _Pol_ II 6 § 13.
[286] Ar _Pol_ II 12 § 10.
[287] Ar _Pol_ II 7 §§ 3-7.
[288] _Pol_ II 7 _passim_.
[289] _Pol_ II 7 §§ 14, 15.
[290] μυρίανδρον _Pol_ II 8 §§ 2, 3, with notes in Newman.
[291] ‘Artisan’ is not quite = τεχνίτης. All professional work is
included.
[292] _Pol_ II 7 §§ 8, 9. The probable influence of Spartan precedents is
pointed out in Mr Newman’s note.
[293] See the valuable discussion in Grundy _op cit_ chapter VIII.
[294] Cf Isocr _de pace_ § 69 p 173, §§ 129-131 p 185.
[295] Plato was evidently uneasy at the growing influence of metics, to
judge from the jealous rule of _Laws_ p 850. This is in striking contrast
with the view of Xenophon.
[296] _Laws_ 630 _b_, cf 697 _e_.
[297] See _Republic_ 565 _a_ on the indifference of the handworking
δῆμος. Cf Isocr _de pace_ § 52 p 170.
[298] Cf Xenophon _hell_ VII 5 § 27 on the ἀκρισία καὶ ταραχὴ intensified
after Mantinea, 362 BC.
[299] Even Isocrates, who hated Sparta, says of it τὴν μάλιστα τὰ παλαιὰ
διασώζουσαν, _Helen_ § 63 ρ 218, and attributes the merits of the Spartan
government to imitation of Egypt, _Busiris_ § 17 p 225. He notes the
moral change in Sparta, _de pace_ §§ 95 foll pp 178-180.
[300] _Republic_ p 421 _e_, _Laws_ 936 _c_, 744 _e_.
[301] _Laws_ 736 _c_, cf _Rep_ 565 _a_, _b_.
[302] _Republic_ 421 _d_.
[303] _Republ_ 416 _d_, _e_, 417, 464 _c_, 543 _b_.
[304] _Republ_ 540 _e_-541 _a_.
[305] _Republ_ 469-471.
[306] _Republ_ 495 _d_, 590 _c_, 522 _b_. _Laws_ 741.
[307] _Republ_ 374 _c_, _d_.
[308] _Republ_ 433-4.
[309] _Republ_ 468 _a_.
[310] That the speculations of Greek political writers were influenced by
the traditions of a primitive communism is the view of Emil de Laveleye
_Primitive property_ ch 10.
[311] _Republ_ 463 _b_.
[312] _Republ_ 369 _b_-373 _c_.
[313] Cf Isocrates _Panath_ § 180 p 271.
[314] _Republ_ 547 _b_ foll.
[315] _Republ_ 550-2.
[316] _Laws_ 756. See _Rep_ 565 _a_ with Adam’s note.
[317] _Laws_ 754.
[318] See _Politicus_ 293-7, Grote’s _Plato_ III pp 309-10.
[319] _Laws_ 737 foll, 922 _a_-924 _a_, called γεωμόροι 919 _d_.
[320] _Laws_ 744 _d_, _e_.
[321] _Laws_ 745 _c_-_e_.
[322] _Laws_ 842 _c_-_e_.
[323] _Laws_ 742.
[324] _Laws_ 705.
[325] Rustic slaves, _Laws_ 760 _e_, 763 _a_.
[326] _Laws_ 832 _d_. The artisans are not citizens, 846 _d_-847 _b_.
[327] _Laws_ 806 _d_.
[328] _Laws_ 777 _c_.
[329] _Laws_ 777 _d_-778 _a_, cf 793 _e_.
[330] _Laws_ 838 _d_.
[331] _Laws_ 865 _c_, _d_, cf 936 _c_-_e_.
[332] _Laws_ 720. See _Rep_ 406 on medical treatment of δημιουργοί.
[333] Case of domestics, _Republ_ 578-9.
[334] _Laws_ 776-7.
[335] _Laws_ 690 _b_.
[336] _Politicus_ 262 _d_.
[337] _Politicus_ 289-90, _Republ_ 371, _Laws_ 742 _a_.
[338] _Republ_ 467 _a_, _Laws_ 720 _a_, _b_.
[339] _Laws_ 762 _e_.
[340] _Laws_ 823.
[341] _Republ_ 344 _b_.
[342] _Republ_ 435 _e_-436 _a_, _Laws_ 747 _c_.
[343] _Rep_ 423 _b_, 452 _c_, 544 _d_, _Laws_ 840 _e_.
[344] _Laws_ 886 _a_, 887 _e_.
[345] It is not easy to reach a firm opinion on this matter. The
inscribed records are nearly all of a much later age. But even a more
informal method of manumission would surely, if common, have left more
clearly marked traces in literature. See Index, _Manumission_.
[346] The problem of the worn-out plantation slave was much discussed
in the United States in slavery days. An interesting account of the
difficulties arising from emancipation in British Guiana is given in J
Rodway’s _Guiana_ (1912) pp 114 foll.
[347] _Laws_ 914-5, and an allusion in _Republ_ 495 _e_.
[348] _Laws_ 914 _a_, 932 _d_.
[349] See Lysias XXII, speech against the corn-dealers.
[350] See for instance Andocides _de reditu_ §§ 20-1 p 22 (Cyprus),
Isocrates _Trapeziticus_ § 57 p 370 (Bosporus).
[351] Isocr _de bigis_ § 13 p 349.
[352] Isocr _Panegyricus_ § 28 p 46, cf Plato _Menex_ 237 _e_.
[353] Andoc _de myster_ §§ 92-3 p 12, Böckh-Fränkel _Staatsh_ I 372-7.
For private letting of farm-lands see Lysias VII § 4-10 pp 108-9 (one
tenant was a freedman), Isaeus XI § 42.
[354] Isaeus VI §§ 19-22, VIII § 35, XI §§ 41-4.
[355] Isocr _Areopagiticus_ § 52 p 150.
[356] Lysias I §§ 11, 13, p 92.
[357] Antiphon fragm 50 Blass.
[358] Isocr _Panath_ § 179 p 270.
[359] Isocr _Philippus_ §§ 48-9 pp 91-2.
[360] Isocr _de pace_ §§ 117-8 p 183.
[361] Isocr _Paneg_ §§ 34-7 pp 47-8, _de pace_ § 24 p 164, _Panathen_ §§
13, 14, p 235, §§ 43-4 p 241, etc.
[362] Isocr _Paneg_ § 132 pp 67-8.
[363] Isocr _Areopag_ § 44 p 148.
[364] Isocr _de pace_ § 90 p 177, _Areopag_ §§ 54-5 pp 150-1, § 83 p 156.
[365] Isaeus VIII § 42 p 73, cf Aristophanes _Nub_ 71-2.
[366] Andocides _de pace_ § 15 p 25, § 36 p 28.
[367] Isocr _de pace_ § 92 p 177.
[368] Lysias VII especially §§ 4-11 pp 108-9.
[369] Lysias VII § 16 p 109.
[370] See especially the _Archidamus_ §§ 8, 28, 87, 88, 96, 97.
[371] Isaeus fragm 3 Scheibe.
[372] Isaeus VI § 33 σὺν τῷ αἰπόλῳ.
[373] See Isocrates _Plataicus_ § 48 p 306 (of Plataeans), and Isaeus V §
39 with Wyse’s note.
[374] I should mention that for simplicity sake I refer to the _Politics_
by the books in the old order. Also that I do not raise the question of
the authorship of the first book of the so-called _Economics_, as the
point does not affect the argument. In common with all students of the
_Politics_ I am greatly indebted to the edition of Mr W L Newman.
[375] This χορηγία includes a population limited in number and of
appropriate qualities. _Politics_ VII 4, and 8 §§ 7-9.
[376] _Pol_ VII 4 § 6.
[377] See the story of Peisistratus and the peasant in Ἀθην πολ c 16.
[378] _Economics_ I 5 § 1, 6 § 5, _Pol_ I 7 § 5, and see the chapter on
Xenophon.
[379] _Pol_ VI 4 §§ 8-10.
[380] We have a modern analogue in the recent legislative measures in New
Zealand and Australia, not to speak of movements nearer home.
[381] See note on Plato, p 75.
[382] Ἀθην πολ cc 11, 12.
[383] A most interesting treatment of this topic is to be found in
Bryce’s _South America_ (1912) pp 330-1, 533, where we get it from the
modern point of view, under representative systems.
[384] See the general remarks _Pol_ IV 6 § 2, VI 4 §§ 1, 2, 13, 14. For
historical points Ἀθην πολ cc 16, 24.
[385] _Pol_ III 15 § 13.
[386] _Pol_ IV 4 §§ 15, 18, cf VII 9.
[387] _Pol_ VI 4 §§ 1, 2, 13.
[388] _Pol_ VI 4 § 11.
[389] Whether the πεπονημένη ἕξις (favourable to eugenic paternity) of
_Pol_ VII 16 §§ 12, 13, may include this class, is not clear. In Roman
opinion it certainly would.
[390] _Pol_ VII 6 § 8. Xenophon (see p 53) records cases of seamen ashore
and in straits working for hire on farms.
[391] See Sandys on Ἀθην πολ c 4.
[392] _Pol_ II 7 § 12.
[393] _Pol_ II 7 § 7.
[394] Severely criticized in _Pol_ II 6 § 15, though adopted by himself.
See below.
[395] See _Pol_ VI 5 §§ 8-10, on the measures that may be taken to secure
lasting εὐπορία.
[396] Cf IV 15 § 6, etc.
[397] E Barker _The political thought of Plato and Aristotle_.
[398] _Ethics_ II 1 § 4.
[399] _Pol_ VII 16.
[400] _Pol_ VII 8, 9, etc.
[401] _Pol_ VII 10.
[402] This adoption of the split land-lots (see above p 91) is perhaps
explained by the fact that the landowners are not αὐτουργοί, so the
difficulty of dual residence does not arise.
[403] _Pol_ IV 8 § 5, 9 § 4, etc.
[404] _Pol_ II 6 § 17, 9 §§ 21-2, IV 9 §§ 7-9. The same view is found in
Isocrates.
[405] _Pol_ VII 9 § 5.
[406] _Pol_ V 6 §§ 12, 13.
[407] _Pol_ VII 14, 15, VIII 4, cf II 9 § 34.
[408] _Economics_ I 5 § 3 δούλῳ δὲ μισθὸς τροφή. Cf the saying about the
ass, _Ethics_ X 5 § 8.
[409] Deinarchus refers (_in Dem_ § 69 p 99) to Demosthenes’ ownership of
a house in Peiraeus, and goes on to denounce him as heaping up money and
not holding real property, thus escaping taxation. Yet the laws enjoin
that a man who is a political leader ought γῆν ἐντὸς ορων κεκτῆσθαι. This
wild abuse at least is a sign of existent feelings.
[410] We may at least add slaves.
[411] _Pol_ VII 4 § 6.
[412] Aristotle, like most of the philosophers at Athens, was a metic.
See Bernays’ _Phokion_ note 8, in which the notable passage _Pol_ VII 2
§§ 3-7 is discussed.
[413] The author of _Revenues_ (πόροι).
[414] _Pol_ II 3 § 4, 5 § 8.
[415] _Pol_ I 7.
[416] Pol VII 10 § 14, _Econ_ I 5 § 5.
[417] But perhaps to some extent by the author of _Econ_ I 6 § 9.
[418] See _Econ_ I 5 §§ 1, 2, 6 § 5.
[419] _Pol_ II 3 § 4, 5 § 4.
[420] He only once (III 5 § 2) in the _Politics_ mentions ἀπελεύθεροι and
once in the _Rhetoric_ (III 8 § 1).
[421] Too often asserted to need references. But _Pol_ III 5 §§ 4-6 is
notable as pointing out that τεχνῖται were generally well-to-do, but
θῆτες poor.
[422] _Pol_ VII 6 §§ 3-8.
[423] _Pol_ I 8 §§ 3 foll.
[424] _Pol_ I 9.
[425] _Pol_ I 10, 11.
[426] _Pol_ I 11 § 1, and Mr Newman’s note.
[427] _Pol_ I 11 §§ 3-5.
[428] _Rhetoric_ I 9 § 27 πρὸς ἄλλον ζῆν, and Cope’s note.
[429] _Pol_ VI 8 § 3, VII 6 §§ 1-5.
[430] _Pol_ I 2 § 5, 5 §§ 8, 9, cf _Ethics_ VIII 11 § 6.
[431] _Pol_ I 13 § 13, cf II 5 § 28.
[432] _Pol_ I 5, 6.
[433] _Pol_ VII 6 §§ 7, 8.
[434] _Pol_ VII 15 §§ 1-6, VIII 4 §§ 1-5, and a number of passages in the
_Ethics_.
[435] Indeed in _Pol_ VII 15 §§ 2-3 he practically says so.
[436] _Pol_ VIII 3 § 7.
[437] _Pol_ VIII 4.
[438] _Pol_ II 5 § 19.
[439] _Pol_ II 10 § 16.
[440] _Pol_ VI 2 § 3, cf 4 § 20, and _Ethics_ X 10 § 13.
[441] _Pol_ VII 12 §§ 3-6.
[442] _Pol_ VII 8 § 7.
[443] II 6 § 6 ἀργοί (in his criticism of Plato’s _Laws_).
[444] _Rhet_ I 12 § 25, cf Plato _Rep_ 565 α αὐτουργοί τε καὶ ἀπράγμονες.
[445] _Rhet_ II 4 § 9, cf Euripides _Orestes_ 918-20.
[446] _de mundo_ 6 §§ 4, 7, 13.
[447] Even after the ruin of Phocis and the peace of 346 BC the old man
wrote in the same strain. But it was to Philip, in whom he recognised the
real master of Greece, that he now appealed.
[448] References are too numerous to be given here. A _locus classicus_
is Dem _Lept_ §§ 30-3 pp 466-7, on the case of Leucon the ruler of
Bosporus. We hear also of corn imported from Sicily and Egypt, and even
(Lycurg § 26 p 151) from Epirus to Corinth.
[449] Demosthenes _Olynth_ I § 27 p 17.
[450] (Dem) _c Polycl_ §§ 5, 6 pp 1207-8.
[451] A good case of such investment by guardians is Dem _Nausim_ § 7 p
986.
[452] Dem _F Leg_ § 314 p 442, εἶτα γεωργεῖς ἐκ τούτων καὶ σεμνὸς γέγονας.
[453] See cases in Aeschines _Timarch_ § 97 p 13, Dem _pro Phorm_ §§
4, 5 p 945. The inheritance of Demosthenes himself included no landed
property, _c Aphob_ I §§ 9-11 p 816.
[454] Dem _F Leg_ § 146 p 386, cf § 114 p 376, § 265 p 426, _de cor_ § 41
p 239.
[455] [Dem] _c Phaenipp_ §§ 5-7 pp 1040-1.
[456] Aeschines mentions two ἐσχατιαὶ in the estate of Timarchus.
[457] The lack of ξύλα in Attica made timber, like wheat, a leading
article of commerce, and dealing in it was a sign of a wealthy
capitalist. Cf Dem _F Leg_ § 114 p 376, _Mid_ § 167 p 568.
[458] I suspect this is an exaggeration.
[459] [Dem] _Lacrit_ §§ 31-3 p 933.
[460] Dem _Androt_ § 65 p 613, repeated in _Timocr_ § 172 p 753.
[461] Dem _Aristocr_ § 146 p 668.
[462] Dem _c Callicl_ _passim_.
[463] ἀστικοῦ, Dem _Callicl_ § 11 p 1274.
[464] [Dem] _Nicostr_ _passim_.
[465] [Dem] _Nicostr_ § 21 p 1253.
[466] Dem _Pantaen_ § 45 p 979.
[467] Dem _Eubulid_ § 65 p 1319.
[468] Aeschin _Timarch_ § 99 p 14.
[469] [Dem] _Euerg Mnes_ §§ 52-3 p 1155.
[470] Twice, §§ 53, 76.
[471] Hyperid _in Demosth_ fragm col 26.
[472] [Dem] _c Timoth_ § 11 p 1187.
[473] Dem _de Cor_ §§ 51-2 p 242.
[474] [Dem] _c Timoth_ § 51 p 1199.
[475] Ibid § 52.
[476] Of course οἰκέτης is often loosely used as merely ‘slave.’ But here
the antithesis seems to gain point from strict use.
[477] I have not found this question distinctly stated anywhere.
Beauchet _Droit privé_ IV 222 treats the μισθωτοὶ of this passage as
freemen. But in II 443 he says that slaves hired from their owners
were generally designated μισθωτοί. Nor do I find the point touched in
Meier-Schömann-Lipsius (edition 1883-7, pp 889 foll), or any evidence
that the πρόκλησις could be addressed to others than parties in a case.
Wallon I 322 foll also gives no help.
[478] Dem _Eubulid_ § 63 p 1318.
[479] Hyperides _pro Euxen_, fragm §§ 16, 17, col 12, 13.
[480] Dem _Olynth_ I § 27 p 17.
[481] [Dem] C PHAENIPP §§ 5-7 pp 1040-1, §§ 19-21 pp 1044-5.
[482] ὀπωρώνης, Dem DE COR § 262 p 314.
[483] Dem _Eubulid_ § 45 p 1313, speaking of an old woman.
[484] Aeschin _Timarch_ § 27 p 4.
[485] We have already seen the case of olive-pickers in Aristoph _Vesp_
712.
[486] See Dem _Mid_ § 48 p 530, etc.
[487] Aeschin _F Leg_ § 156 p 59. The passage of Dem _F L_ to which he
refers is not in our text, for §§ 194-5 pp 401-2 is different.
[488] See Plut _Aratus_ 14, 25, 27, 36, 39, 40, _Philopoemen_ 7, 15.
[489] Isocr _paneg_ § 50 p 50.
[490] V 64-5, cf XVII 9, 10.
[491] XVI.
[492] XVII.
[493] XXII, XXV.
[494] XXV.
[495] XXV 1, 51.
[496] XXV 27, cf XXIV 137.
[497] XXV 86-152.
[498] XXV 47-8.
[499] VII 15-6.
[500] III 35, cf XV 80.
[501] X 9, cf 1, XXI 3.
[502] XXIV 136-7.
[503] XX 3, 4.
[504] XVI 34-5.
[505] XXV 56-9.
[506] XIV 58-9, cf 13, 56, where στρατιώτας is a professional soldier.
[507] _Char_ IV (XIV Jebb).
[508] See Plutarch _de garrulitate_ 18.
[509] Plut _Aratus_ 24, _Philopoemen_ 8.
[510] Polyb IV 63.
[511] IV 66.
[512] IV 75, V 1, 3, 19.
[513] X 42, etc.
[514] XVIII 20.
[515] XVI 24, XXI 6, etc.
[516] XXI 34, 36, 43, 45.
[517] V 89.
[518] XXVIII 2.
[519] V 89, cf XXV 4, XXI 6.
[520] This topic is well treated by Mahaffy _Greek Life and Thought_
chapter I.
[521] The best treatment of this matter known to me is in Bernays’
_Phokion_ pp 78-85. See Diodorus XVIII 18, Plutarch _Phoc_ 28.
[522] According to Plut _Cleomenes_ 18, Sparta was very helpless before
that king’s reforms. The Aetolians in a raid carried off 50000 slaves,
and an old Spartan declared that this was a relief.
[523] Freeman’s _Federal Government_ chapter V.
[524] II 62.
[525] See Strabo VIII 8 § 1 p 388, and cf Plut _Philopoemen_ 13.
[526] Polyb IV 73. Theocritus had spoken of ἱππήλατος Ἆλις (XXII 156).
Keeping horses was a mark of wealth.
[527] Theocritus XXII 157 Ἀρκαδία τ’ εὔμαλος Ἀχαιῶν τε πτολίεθρα. Polyb
IX 17, and IV 3 (Messenia).
[528] Eubulus fragm 12, 34, 39, 53, 66, Kock. Also other references in
Athenaeus X pp 417 foll.
[529] Polyb XX 6. Otherwise Mahaffy in _Gk Life and Thought_ chapter XIII.
[530] _FHG_ II pp 254-64, formerly attributed to Dicaearchus. Cited by E
Meyer _Kleine Schriften_ p 137.
[531] II 62.
[532] IV 38.
[533] IV 73, 75.
[534] XXIII 1 § 11.
[535] In the famous case of the siege of Rhodes in 305-4 BC (Diodorus XX
84, 100) freedom seems to have been a _reward_, as has been pointed out
by A Croiset.
[536] IV 20, 21. Compare Vergil _Buc_ X 32-3 _soli cantare periti
Arcades_, VII 4-5.
[537] In a fragment cited by Athenaeus p 272 _a_, cf 264 _c_. In
Hultsch’s text Polyb XII 6.
[538] Cited by Diodorus II 39, and by Arrian _Indica_ 10 §§ 8, 9.
[539] Calderini _la manomissione_ etc chapter V.
[540] See table in Collitz _Dialectinschriften_ II pp 635-42.
[541] παραμονά, παραμένειν.
[542] In 432 acts of manumission given in Wescher and Foucart
_Inscriptions de Delphes_ 1863, I could not find one case of a rustic
slave.
[543] Ar _Pol_ II 3 § 4, cf saying of Diogenes in Stob _flor_ LXII 47.
Menander fragm 760 K εἷς ἐστι δοῦλος οἰκίας ὁ δεσπότης.
[544] See above, chapter XIII p 64.
[545] So Jove _Poenulus_ 944-5.
[546] _Casina_ 97 foll, _Poenulus_ 170-1, _Mostellaria_ 1-83.
[547] _Mercator_ 65 foll.
[548] _Mercator_ _passim_.
[549] _Trinummus_ 508-61.
[550] _Vidularia_ 31-2.
[551] _Vidularia_ 21-55, text is fragmentary.
[552] But not excluding it, since slaves were hired.
[553] _Hautontimorumenos_ 62-74.
[554] _Hautont_ 93-117.
[555] _Hautont_ 142-4.
[556] _Phormio_ 362-5, cf _Adelphoe_ 949.
[557] _Hecyra_ 224-6.
[558] _Adelphoe_ 45-6, cf 95, 401, 517-20, 845-9.
[559] _Adelphoe_ 541-2.
[560] Collitz I No. 345, Dittenberger 238-9. Mommsen’s notes in Hermes
XVII.
[561] καὶ τὴν χώραν μᾶλλον ἐξεργασθήσεσθαι.
[562] That this neglect was not a new thing seems shewn by the saying of
Alexander that the Thessalians deserved no consideration, ὅτι τὴν ἀρίστην
κεκτημένοι οὐ γεωργοῦσι. Plut _apophth Alex_ 22.
[563] Livy XXXIV 51 §§ 4-6.
[564] Plutarch _Aratus_ 5-8.
[565] Plut _Dion_ 27, 37, 48.
[566] Plut _Timoleon_ 23, 36.
[567] Plut _Aratus_ 9, 12, 14.
[568] Plut _Philopoemen_ 3, 4.
[569] In fact became an αὐτουργός.
[570] _Bevölkerung der Griechisch-Römischen Welt_ pp 156-8.
[571] Diodorus XVIII 70 § 1.
[572] Livy XXXIV 50, Plut _Flamininus_ 13.
[573] Polyb XXXIX 8 §§ 1-5.
[574] Only in Appian _civ_ I 8 § 2. The provision is ascribed by Suet
_Jul_ 42 to Julius Caesar. The two writers were contemporary. Whence did
Appian get his story?
[575] Case of Persia.
[576] Cases of Messana, Syracuse, etc.
[577] Case of Carthage.
[578] Livy II 23 etc.
[579] Referred to in Iwan Müller’s _Handbuch_ IV ii 2, ed 3 pp 533 foll,
article by H Blümner.
[580] That the household as a vigorous unit outlived the _gens_ is I
think clear. I guess that this was because production for the supply of
life-needs was more closely correlated with the former. Labour was more
easily divorced from the clan-system than property was.
[581] Cic _Cato mai_ § 56, Liv III 26, Dionys X 8, 17, Plin _NH_ XVIII
20, Valer Max IV 7. The discrepancies in the versions do not concern us
here.
[582] Liv III 13 §§ 8-10, Dionys X 8.
[583] Liv III 27 § 1.
[584] Liv X 36 § 17, Dionys VI 3, etc.
[585] Liv II 22 §§ 5-7.
[586] Varro _sat Men_ fr 59 and title of his satire _Marcipor_.
Quintilian I 4 § 26, Festus p 306 L = 257 M _Marcipor Oppii_ in title of
Plaut _Stichus_. Sallust _hist_ fr III 99 Maurenbrecher. Inscriptions CIL
I 1076, 1034, 1386, Dessau 7822-3. For Pliny see below.
[587] Argument as in Luke’s gospel 17 §§ 7-9.
[588] Cic _Cato mai_ §§ 55-6, etc.
[589] Dionys XIX 15.
[590] Preserved in a fragment of Dion Cassius, fr 40 § 27.
[591] Columella I 4 § 2, Pliny _NH_ XVIII §§ 27-8, cf Valer Max IV 4 § 4.
[592] Livy _epit_ XVIII.
[593] Valer Max IV 4 § 6. The version given in Seneca _ad Helv_ 12 § 5
is much the same, but ends characteristically _fuitne tanti servum non
habere, ut colonus eius populus Romanus esset?_ Here _colonus_ = tenant
farmer.
[594] _colendum locari._
[595] Plin _NH_ XVIII § 39.
[596] Polyb I 31 § 4.
[597] Cato 5 § 4 (of duties of _vilicus_) _operarium mercennarium
politorem diutius eundem ne habeat die_.
[598] How far we can infer this from references to slaves such as Livy
XXIII 32 § 15 (215 BC), XXV 1 § 4 (213 BC), XXVI 35 § 5 (210 BC), is not
quite certain. The Licinian law to check the grabbing of state domain
land certainly does not prove it, for that land was probably for the most
part pasture.
[599] Liv XXVIII 11 § 9.
[600] Weissenborn’s note on the passage.
[601] Liv XXII 57 § 11, and index to Livy under _volones_.
[602] Liv XXIII 49 §§ 1-4, XXIV 18 § 11, XXV 1 § 4, 3 § 8-4 § 11.
[603] Liv XXI 63 §§ 3, 4, Cic II _in Verr_ V § 45.
[604] Liv XXVI 36.
[605] Liv XXIX 16 §§ 1-3.
[606] Liv XXXI 13.
[607] See Rudorff _gromatische Institutionen_ pp 287-8.
[608] Liv XXXIII 42 § 3.
[609] _lex agraria_, line 31, in Bruns’ _fontes_ or Wordsworth’s
_Specimens_.
[610] Appian _civ_ I 7 § 5. But the account given in this passage of the
spread of _latifundia_ and slave-gangs is too loose to be of much value.
In particular, the assertion that slave-breeding was already common and
lucrative is not to be believed. Appian was misled by the experience of
his own day. See Sallust _Iug_ 41 § 8 _interea parentes aut parvi liberi
militum, uti quisque potentiori confinis erat, sedibus pellebantur_.
[611] The urban artisans engaged in the sedentary trades do not concern
us here. See Weissenborn on Liv VIII 20 § 4 _opificum vulgus et
sellularii_.
[612] Dionys III 31, IV 9, 13, etc.
[613] Dionys VI 79, a passage much coloured by later notions.
[614] Liv VII 4, 5. A slightly different and shorter version in Cic _de
off_ III § 112.
[615] Cic _pro Sex Roscio_ § 46 recognizes this familiarity.
[616] Sallust _Catil_ 4 § 1.
[617] Cic _pro Sex Roscio_ §§ 39-51.
[618] Cic _pro Sex Roscio_ §§ 50-1.
[619] Livy VI 12 § 5, cf VII 25 § 8.
[620] Dionys XVII [XVIII] 4. L Postumius Megellus was consul 305, 294,
291 BC. The story relates to his third consulship. His earlier career may
be followed in Liv IX 44, X 26 § 15, 32 § 1, 37, 46 § 16.
[621] Liv _epit_ XI.
[622] See the precept of Mago cited by Pliny _NH_ XVIII § 35.
[623] That is, on those possessed of a certain minimum of property,
which was lowered in course of time. Originally reckoned on land only,
thus reckoning only those settled on farms (_adsidui_). See Mommsen
_Staatsrecht_ index. The rise in the census numbers between 131 and 125
BC is explained by Greenidge _History_ p 150 as due to the increase of
_adsidui_ through effect of Gracchan legislation.
[624] See Greenidge _History_ pp 60-1, 424-5.
[625] See Cato’s opinion cited by Cic _de off_ II § 89, Columella VI
_praef_ §§ 3-5, Plin _NH_ XVIII §§ 29, 30.
[626] Cic _in Catil_ II § 18.
[627] Cic _in Catil_ II § 20, cf _de lege agr_ II § 78 _fundos quorum
subsidio familiarum magnitudines sustentare possint_.
[628] _familiis magnis._
[629] Livy VI 12 § 5, cf VII 25 § 8.
[630] Cairnes _The Slave Power_ ch III. [1862, second edn. 1863.]
[631] Cic _de republ_ III § 16.
[632] But see the oratorical picture of the bad steward, Cic II _in
Verrem_ III § 119. That remarkable passage still leaves my questions
unanswered, for the comparison with Verres is superficial and only serves
a temporary purpose.
[633] Varro I 2 § 17, 17 §§ 5, 7.
[634] Cato 2 § 7, cf Martial XI 70.
[635] As Cato 5 § 2 says, _dominus inpune ne Sinat esse_.
[636] Foreshadowed in Xenophon _memor_ II 8.
[637] Compare the case of the _mercennarius_ and Regulus referred to
above.
[638] Columella I _praef_ §§ 3, 12, 13, 20, XII _praef_ §§ 8-10.
[639] Pliny _NH_ XVIII §§ 41-3 (of earlier times), XIV §§ 48-50
(speculations), XVIII §§ 273-4.
[640] M Weber _Römische Agrargeschichte_ pp 242 foll.
[641] Sueton _Aug_ 32, _Tib_ 8, cf Seneca the elder _contr_ X 4 § 18.
Later, Spart _Hadr_ 18. In law, Digest XXXIX 4 § 12².
[642] Even a _valetudinarium_ is provided. See Columella XI 1 § 18, XII 1
§ 6, 3 §§ 7, 8.
[643] Columella I 7.
[644] Weber _op cit_ pp 244-5. See the chapter on Columella for this
interpretation. It can hardly be considered certain, but it is not vital
to the argument.
[645] Varro I 17 § 2, cf Colum I 3 § 12.