[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.

BOOK VI.
COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY.

CHAPTER I.
CONDITION OF THE POOR.

Respecting the condition of the poor, in ancient nations, very little is commonly known, the great historians, the tragic poets, and the other classic writers who enjoy what may be termed popularity, not having bestowed their attention on the subject; and to mine, for this species of knowledge, amid the speculations of philosophers, or the dusky rubbish of scholiasts and lexicographers, being a task for which few have patience. Even those writers who might have been expected to enter fully into this matter, supply but slight and unsatisfactory information, either because they attached little importance to the question, or because it did not enter into their design to examine in all their details the poor-laws of Athens, or the numerous sources of private and public charity which circumscribed the operation of those laws. To the best of my ability I shall endeavour to supply the deficiency.

In the earlier ages of the commonwealth there existed no class of citizens so necessitous as to require the aid of charity.[[275]] The democracy was not disgraced by the beggary of one of its members; for, though many, compared with their neighbours, might be poor, none were reduced to sordid indigence, or so lacked credit as to be unable to command the means of engaging in some profitable branch of industry. Afterwards, however, through the calamitous events of war, and that deterioration seemingly inherent in all forms of government, the number of the indigent exceeded that of the wealthy,[[276]] (as in every modern country it does,) and distress and destitution occupying entirely the thoughts of the sufferers, corroded to the core that spirit of patriotism which had distinguished their ancestors. But the institutions of Athens, having been truly designed to promote the happiness and provide for the wants of the people, the attention of the legislature was immediately directed to the evil.

As this was the first developement of the spirit of charity, it naturally appeared feeble at the outset, and only acquired strength and volume by degrees. A beginning was made in the case of those who had been disabled in war,[[277]] and of the children left behind by citizens who fell in defence of their country.

To the former a pension, in early times of one obolos a-day, was allowed: the latter[[278]] may be said to have been adopted by the state which maintained and educated them till the age of eighteen, when, having been taught some trade or business, they were considered able to provide for themselves.[[279]]