[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.
[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.