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.

192. De Rep. Laced. ii. 1.

193. Plut. Vit. Ages. § 3. The evils of this intercourse are constantly dwelt upon by the ancients: ὅπου οἰκέτης ἐστιν, εὐθὺς διαφθείρονται οἱ γεγνόμενοι παῖδες. Dion Chrysost. Orat. t. i. p. 299. Cf. Orat. 41. t. ii. p. 261. Though it be most true that domestic slaves are generally corrupt in manners and ignoble in sentiments, yet we may be sure from an attentive observation, of human nature, that, even were it not so, their masters would inevitably seek to justify their own cruelty and injustice by depreciating the moral character of their dependents. Thus the ablest of Spanish writers, actuated less perhaps by theory than by instinct, strives to extenuate the conduct of their countrymen towards the natives of America by attributing to them the most odious and repulsive qualities: “Les Indiens,” observes Ulloa, “sont moins à craindre par leur valeur que par leur perfidie, et par la ruse avec laquelle ils commettent leur attentats. Victorieux par surprise, ils sont cruels à l’excès, ne connaissent aucun sentiment de compassion. Leur cruauté est toujours accompagnée de sang froid, leur plaisir est le carnage; mais vaincus ce sont les gens le plus lâches les plus pusillanimes qu’on puisse voir. Dans le premier cas ils ont un souverain plaisir à répandre le sang des malheureux qu’ils surprennent au dépourvu, dans le second ils cherchent à se disculper s’humilient jusqu’à la dernière bassesse, condamnent euxmêmes leur furie, prient, supplient, et se montrent dans toute leur conduite les plus lâches des hommes. Ce contraste est celui qui doit résulter de la lâcheté et de la perfidie qui font le charactère de ces barbares.” Mémoires Philosophiques. Discours. xvii. t. ii. p. 21, et seq.

194. Theopomp. ap. Athen. xiv. 74.

195. Plut. Vit. Lycurg. § 28. On their cruelty and perfidy towards the same unhappy men see Ælian. Var. Hist. vi. 1. Polyæn. i. 41. 3.

196. Critias, in fact, observes, that, as the freemen of Sparta were of all men the most free, so were the serfs of Sparta of all slaves the most slavish. Liban. Declam. xxiv. t. ii. p. 83, seq. Reiske.

197. Theopomp. ap. Athen. vi. 102 Ὅτε οἱ Λακεδαιμόνιοι τοὺς ἐκ Ταινάρου ἱκέτας παρασπονδήσαντες ἀνέστησαν καὶ ἀπέκτειναν, (ἦσαν δὲ οἰκέται τῶν Εἱλώτων) κατὰ μῆνιν τοῦ Ποσειδῶνος σεισμὸς ἐπιπεσὼν τῇ Σπάρτη, τὴν πόλιν ἀνδρειότατα κατέσεισεν, ὡς πέντε μόνας ἀπολειφθῆναι οἰκίας ἐξ ἁπάσης τῆς πόλεως. Æl. Var. Hist. vi. 7. Thucyd. i. 128. Suid. v. Ταινάριον. t. ii. p. 874, F. Pausanias, however, relates, that the suppliants in question were not Helots but Lacedæmonians. iv. 24. 5. vii. 25. 3. Cf. Capperonier, Recherches sur les Hilotes, Mem. de l’Acad. des Inscrip. t. xxiii. p. 275.

198. Capperonier, in the last century, entertained something like scepticism on the point, though he could not deny that the moral temperament of the Spartans rendered the existence of the institution probable. “Le défaut de preuves m’empêche, malgré la ferocité connue des Lacédémoniens, de rien décider sur l’usage de la Cryptie.” Mem. &c. p. 284.

199. Dorians, ii. 40, seq.

200. Οἱ τἀκείνων ἀκριβοῦντες. Panathen. § 73.

201. Ap. Plut. Lycurg. § 28.

202. See the conversation with Megillos in the First Book of the Laws throughout. Opp. t. vii. p. 201, sqq. And, again, in Book vi. p. 460. Σχεδὸν γὰρ πάντων τῶν Ἑλλήνων ἡ Λακεδαιμονίων εἱλωτεία πλείστην ἀπορίαν παράσχοιτ᾽ ἂν καὶ ἔριν τοῖς μὲν ὡς εὖ, τοῖς δ᾽ ὡς οὐκ εὖ γεγονυῖα ἐστιν. ἐλάττω δὲ ἥ τε Ἡρακλεωτῶν δουλεία τῆς τῶν Μαριανδυνῶν καταδουλώσεως ἔριν ἂν ἔχοι, τὸ Θετταλῶν τ᾽ αὖ πενεστικὸν ἔθνος.

203. Plut. Vit. Lycur. § 28. Vid. Ubb. Emmium, iii. 127, seq. et Crag. de Rep. Laced. b. i. c. xi. p. 68.

204. Among other nations where servitude was rendered less offensive, both by law and manners, men were enabled to place a more generous confidence in their slaves. Sarmatæ Limigantes Gotthorum vicinorum suorum armis oppressi, cum justas ad resistendum liberorum hominum copias non haberent, tanquam in extremo periculo servos suos armarunt, atque eos contra Gotthos duxerunt. Mox autem, cum à servis deficientibus appetiti, ac sedibus ejecti patriis essent auxilii ac consilii inopes ad Constantinum subsidium imploratum, et sedes tutas petitum se contulerunt. Carol. Sigon. De Occident. Imper. l. iv. p. 67.

205. Thucyd. iv. 80.

206. Plut. Lycurg. § 28.

207. Πολέμοις οἰκείοις ἐξειργόμενοι. Thucyd. i. 118.

208. Plut. Cim. § 16. Diod. Sic. xi. 63.

209. Athen. vi. 87.

210. Strab. viii. t. c. 6. t. ii. p. 190.

211. Ælian. vi. i.

212. In justification of this harsh view of the Spartan character, numerous ancient authorities of the greatest weight may be cited. On their extreme licentiousness see the testimony of Agnon. Athen. xiii. 79. Plato de Legg. viii. t. viii. p. 90. On their tolerance of adultery, Plut. Paral. Num. § 3. On their inhospitality and sordid avarice, Aristoph. Pac. 623. Οἱ δ᾽ ἅτ᾽ αἰσχροκερδεῖς καὶ διειρωνόξενοι, κ. τ. λ. On the avarice of Gylippos, see Max. Tyr. Dissert. p. 133. In the Acharnes (v. 306, seq.) Aristophanes, again, briefly but energetically describes the character which the Spartans enjoyed in Greece:

On which the scholiast remarks: ἐπὶ ἀπιστίᾳ γὰρ διεβάλλοντο οἱ Λακεδαιμόνιοι· καὶ Εὐριπίδης ἐν Ἀνδρομάχῃ·

Σπάρτης ἔνοικοι, δόλια βουλευτήρια.

Τρία δὲ ἐγκλήματα παραβασίας προσέθηκεν αὐτοῖς· αἱ γὰρ συνθῆκαι διὰ τριῶν τελοῦνται, λόγων, ἔργων, χειρῶν, λόγων μὲν, οἱον δι’ ὅρκων, ἔργων δὲ, διὰ τῶν ἐν βωμοῖς θυσιῶν, χειρῶν δὲ, ἐπειδὴ αἱ πίστεις διὰ τῶν δεξιῶν γίνονται. καὶ Ὅμηρος·

Δεξιαὶ, ᾖς ἐπέπιθμεν.

The passage in the Andromachè referred to by the scholiast occurs at v. 445, sqq. Cf. Thucyd. i. 101. v. 35. See above, Book i. chapter ii. Book ii. chapter viii.

213. M. Ant. Muret. Orat. xvii. p. 153. The achievement of the king is thus related by honest Mezeray: Numbers of Huguenots having collected together on the banks of the Seine his most Christian Majesty, from an apartment of the Louvre “taschoit de les canarder avec sa grande arquebuse à giboyer.” Abrégé Chronologique, iii. 1083.

214. Plat, de Legg. i. t. vii. p. 196. Bekk. Cf. Müller, Hist. of the Dorians, ii. 41.

215. Dorians, ii. 43. Thucyd. i. 118. v. 14. 23.

216. Müll. Dorians, ii. 43.

217. In fact Dion Chrysostom states most distinctly, that there was no such way: Οὐδὲ ὑπάρχει τοῖς Εἵλωσιν γενέσθαι Σπαρτιάταις, ὅθεν δὴ καὶ διατελοῦσιν ἐπιβουλεύοντες τῇ Σπάρτη. Orat. xxxvi. t. ii. p. 92. Reisk.

218. Dorians. ii. 43. Hesych. in v. Ἀργεῖο ... ἐκ τῶν Εἱλώτων οἱ πιστευόμενοι οὕτως ἐλέγοντο. t. i. p. 514, seq. Albert. This has previously been remarked by Capperonier: “On lit dans Hesychius, qu’on donnoit le nom d’Argiens à ceux qui se distinguoient par leur fidelité.” Recherches sur les Hilotes, Mem. de l’Acad. des Inscript. t. xxiii. p. 285. Cf. Crag. de Rep. Laced. l. i. c. xi. p. 70.

219. Cf. Anim. ad Athen. t. viii. p. 603.

220. Cf. Athen. vi. 102.

221. Ad Iliad, ο. p. 1031. 10. Cf. ν. p. 933. 51.

222. Cf. Eustath. ad Il. λ. 784. 15.

223. See Bœckh. Pub. Econ. of Ath. i. 349.

224. l. v. § 34.

225. Dr. Arnold, in Thucyd. v. 34. Hudson, in Var. Lect. on the same passage observes, that “Neodamodes fuisse Helotas, contra quam censet Cragius (de Rep. Lac. i. 12,) clare ostendit Meursius in Miscell. Lacon. ii. 7.” Thucyd. t. iii. p. 492. Bip. Cf. Diod. Sic. xii.

226. Athen. vi. 102. Cf. Herm. Polit. Antiq. §§ 24. 48. et Valckenaar ad Herod. ix. 11, where the condition of the Periœci is sought to be explained. Suid. v. νεοδαμ. ii. 215. Animad. in Athen. t. viii. p. 603. Ubbo Emmius, iii. 138.

227. Thucyd. v. 34. 67. vii. 58. Xenoph. Helen. i. 3. 17. iii. 1. 4. iii. 36. 6. v. 2. 24. vi. 1. 4. I cannot discern the force of Schneider’s argument in his remark on Thucyd. vii. 58: “Sed locus Thucydidis clarissimus est: δύναται δὲ τὸ νεοδαμῶδες ἐλεύθερον ἤδη εἶναι. i. e. significat vocabulum νεοδαμῶδεις homines nuper libertate donatos.” Not to insist on the opinion of Æmilius Portus, that the above words have crept from the margin into the text, the recently enfranchised Helots were as much “homines nuper libertate donatos,” as the Neodamodes. And yet, when sent together to Lepreon they are carefully distinguished. See Hudson. Var. Lect. Thucyd. iv. 460. Bip.

228. Morus. ap. Schneid. Ind. Græc. ad Xen. Hellen. p. 468. Cf. Perizon. ad Ælian. xii. 43.

229. Plut. Agesil. § 6. Cf. Xenoph. Hellen. i. 3. 15. iii. 1. 3. v. 2. 24. Diod. Sicul. xv. 20.

230. See Book ii. chapter vii.

231. Cf. Schol. Aristoph. Eq. 632. Ubbo. Emm. iii. 132, seq. Mention is made in Plutarch of two Syntrophoi of Cleomenes, who were called Mothaces, and these we find at the head of a party of soldiers. Vit. Cleom. § 8. Cf. Valck. Diatrib. p. 231.

232. Athen. vi. 102. Müller, alluding to this passage, says, “In Athenæus they are called free in reference to their future, not their past, condition.” Dor. ii. 44. n. b. By the same rule, the vicious man who is one day to be virtuous, might, in the midst of his crimes, be pronounced a pattern of morality.

233. Ælian. Var. Hist. xii. 43. Perizon.

234. Cf. Diod. Sicul. xiii. 106, who calls the father Clearchos.

235. Plut. Vit. Lysand. § 2.

236. Cf. Xenoph. Cyrop. i. 2. 15, where the regulations of the Persian system are evidently mere copies of those which prevailed, at least in earlier ages, at Sparta. Plut. Institut. Lac. § 21, seq. Müller, Dor. ii. 314, seq.

237. Teles, ap. Stob. Florileg. Tit. 40. 8. Λακεδαιμόνιοι δὲ οὐδὲν τῶν τοιούτων ὄνειδος ἡγοῦνται· ἀλλὰ τὸν μὲν μετασχόντα τῆς ἀγωγῆς καὶ ἐμμείναντα, κἂν ξένος, κἂν ἐξ εἵλωτας, ὁμοίως τοῖς ἀριστοῖς τιμῶσι· τὸν δὲ μὴ ἐμμείναντα, κἂν ἐξ αὐτοῦ τοῦ βασιλέως εἰς τοὺς εἵλωτας ἀποστέλλουσι, καὶ τῆς πολιτείας ὁ τοιοῦτος οὐ μετέχει. The testimony of Dion Chrysostom (Orat. xxxvi. t. ii. p. 92), as we have seen above, is in direct contradiction with this of Teles; but if we suppose them to speak of different periods of Spartan history, they may both be right.

238. Athen. vi. 101.

239. Ποσειδώνιος δέ φησιν ὁ ἀπὸ τῆς Στοᾶς, πολλούς τινας, ἑαυτῶν οὐ δυναμένους προΐστασθαι διὰ τὸ τῆς διανοίας ἀσθενὲς, ἐπιδουναι ἑαυτους εἰς τὴν τῶν συνετωτέρων ὑπηρεσίαν, ὅπως, παρ’ ἐκείνων τυγχάνοντες τῆς εἰς τὰ ἀναγκαῖα ἐπιμελείας, αὐτοὶ πάλιν ἀποδιδῶσιν ἐκείνοις δι’ αὐτῶν ἅπερ ἂν ὦσιν ὑπηρετεῖν δυνατοί. Athen vi. 84. Cf. Grot. de Jur. Bell. et Pac. ii. v. 27.

240. Eustath. ad Il. β. t. i. p. 223. 38.

241. Δωροφόροι καλεοίαθ᾽ ὑποφρίσσοντες ἄνακτας. Athen. vi. 84.

242. Athen. vi. 84.

243. Aristot. Polit. vii. 5. 7. Müller, ii. 62.

244. Valcken. Diatrib. in Perd. Dram. Eurip. p. 216. b. Ruhnk. ad Tim. Lex. v. πενεστικόν. Eustath. ad Il. β. p. 223. ν. p. 933. π. p. 1120. Ammonius. v. πελάτης. Valcken. Animad. iii. 8. p. 192. Schol, Aristoph. Vesp. 1264. Suid. v. πενέσται. t. ii. p. 479. Strab. l. xii. t. ii. p. 817. Casaub.—Hesych. v. πενέσται. t. ii. p. 910. Albert.

245. See Poppo. Proleg. in Thucyd. ii. 306. 308. Cf. Aristot. Pol. ii. 9. 28.

246. Athen. vi. 85.

247. “But,” says Hermann, “was the name derived from μένειν, Athen. vi. 88 (Cf. Welcker ad Theogn. p. xx.) or from πένεσθαι, Dionys. Hal. ii. 9. p. 255, or were they a distinct race? On this resemblance to the Italian clients, see Niebuhr. vol. i. p. 318.” (1. 277. Engl. Trans.) Niebuhr, however, remarks, that “the same relation which, in Thessaly, was rude and revolting, might, at Rome, be refined by different manners and a better spirit.”

248. Valcken. Diatrib. p. 216. b. Athen. vi. 85.

249. Thucyd. i. 12. Steph. Byzant. v. Ἄρνη.

250. See on the subject Classes of Crete, Gœttling. Excurs. ad Aristot. Pol. p. 473, sqq. Müller. Dor. ii. The undertaker’s business in this country was entrusted to slaves, who obtained the name of Ergatones. Hesych. ap. Meurs. Cret. ii. 13. p. 190.

251. Hesych. in voce. t. ii. p. 635. Albert.—Strab. l. xv. t. ii. p. 1027. l. xii. t. ii. p. 817. Casaub.

252. Suid. in v. i. 1461.

253. Cf. Müll. Dor. ii. 51.

254. Cf. Eustath. ad Iliad, ο. p. 1031.

255. Polyb. iv. 53. The Periœci of Crete bore the same relation to their lords as the agricultural caste did in Egypt to the nobility. Arist. Pol. vii. 9.

256. Vid. Ilgen. De Scol. Poës. p. 108.

257. Athen. iv. 22. Cf. Gœttling. ad Arist. Pol. Excurs. ii. p. 473.

258. Athen. vi. 84.

259. Gœttling. Excurs. ii. De Rep. Cretens. p. 474.

260. Athen. vi. 84.

261. Athen. xiv. 44.

262. Λῷος among the Macedonians. Suid. ii. 60. Anim. ad Athen. xiv. 44.

263. Müll. Dor. ii. 53.

264. Athen. xv. 50. Cf. Ilgen. de Scol. Poës. xxvi. p. 102, sqq.

265. Aristot. Pol. ii. 9. 28.

266. Cf. Arist. Pol. ii. 5. 20.

267. Cf. Müll. Dorians, ii. 54.

268. Herod. vii. 155. Plat. De Legg. t. vii. p. 205. Suid. in v. καλλικυρίοι, i. 1359. Eustathius, however, places the Killicyrii in Crete, and the Ἀρότται (μνῷται?) in Syracuse, ad Il. β. t. i. p. 223. 37.

269. Plin. Nat. Hist. xxxv. 36. Meurs. Rhod. p. 35.

270. Eustath. ad Il. π. p. 1120. Athen. vi. 101. The institution of slavery among the Argives was denominated ἄβουτον, (Hesych. in v.) because their serfs originally, I suppose, were too poor to possess oxen.

271. Sch. Aristoph. Concion. 719. Poll. vii. 68. Cf. Steph. Byzant. v. Χῖος. p. 758. b.

272. The Peisistratidæ pursued the same policy in Attica. Aristoph. Lysist. 18, sqq. Suid. v. κατωνάκαι, i. 1421.

273. Eustath. ad Il. π. p. 1120. Philost. Vit. Apoll. Tyan. viii. 7. 12, who observes that, in later times, the Arcadians though more attached to liberty than any other Greeks, yet maintained a great number of slaves, standing in need of husbandmen, goatherds, swineherds, herdsmen, and drove-keepers, and expert woodsmen. The Corinthians had forty-six myriads of slaves, for which reason the Pythian oracle called them Chœnix-measurers, probably because they allowed their slaves a chœnix of corn per day. Athen. vi. 103. Under the tyranny of Athenion the citizens of Athens were at one time reduced to the fourth part of a chœnix of barley per diem, which, observes the sophist, was rather a cock’s food than a man’s. Athen. v. 53.

274. Theopomp. ap. Athen. iv. 31. This historian speaks in another passage of people who in the present text of Athenæus are denominated Ariæi, who possessing three hundred thousand slaves, (a favourite number with Theopompos,) were enabled to spend their whole lives in mirth and jollity: Ἀριαῖοι δὲ φησὶ, κέκτηνται προσπελατῶν, ὥσπερ εἱλώτων, τριάκοντα μυριάδασ· καθ᾽ ἑκάστην δὲ ἡμέραν μεθύουσι, καὶ ποιοῦνται συνουσίας, καὶ διάκεινται πρὸς ἐδωδὴν καὶ πόσιν ἀκρατέστερον. Athen. x. 60. Cf. vi. 101.