With respect to those associations which bore a legal character, they were by the laws of Solon permitted to enact whatever rules and regulations they judged proper for their own government and advantage, provided no public ordinance prevented.[[300]] Sometimes the citizens of a whole Demos, or borough, formed themselves into a club, or a ship’s crew,[[301]] or an eating society, or persons having a right to the same burial-ground, or the partners in a mercantile expedition. Thus we find three several motives,—religion, gain, and pleasure,—impelling men into unions of this kind, all recognised by law. The curious and intricate internal structure of Athenian society lent itself readily to the formation of such clubs; the whole population having originally been divided into four tribes, each tribe into three phratriæ,[[302]] each phratria into thirty clans (γενη), each clan containing thirty houses, among whom the honours of the priesthood were distributed by lot.[[303]]
In these Attic associations we discover the germs of those companies of merchants, guilds, &c.,[[304]] so familiar to the modern world; or rather similar wants in both cases gave rise to similar institutions. But with the trading companies we have, in this place, nothing to do; and if incidentally the other associations are noticed, it is simply for the purpose of more fully developing a system of which the Benefit Clubs formed a part. These evidently rose out of the Eranæ established originally for purposes of pleasure: that is, a number of individuals desirous of enjoying a more splendid entertainment than they could generally afford at home,[[305]] together with the society of their intimate friends, entered into a subscription[[306]] for the purpose of getting up a public dinner during the celebration of the great national festivals. In some cases the associations thus formed, pro tempore, did not outlast the occasion, while in others the taste for social pleasures, or the accidental meeting of congenial tempers, led to the establishment of a permanent club, the members of which grew naturally among a warm-hearted people to take an interest in each other’s welfare. The expenses of the sacrifices during these festivals were in part defrayed from the revenues of the sacred lands, but these not sufficing, it was generally necessary to raise a common fund by subscription.[[307]]
Of all these clubs, whether temporary or permanent, whose object was the providing of funds for sacrifice, or to enjoy the pleasures of society, the generic name was Erani, though such as partook of a religious character received besides the appellation of Thiasi.[[308]] Their members were called Eranistæ and Thiasotæ. It was common among the Greeks to indulge in feasting immediately at the close of harvest, both on account of the plenty which then prevailed, and, because the great business of the year being finished, they had more leisure to devote to enjoyment.[[309]] That these associations tended to generate and promote friendship and affection among their members was well understood; wherefore in the ancient tyrannies they were rigidly prohibited, together with all common tables, educational establishments, and whatever else, to adopt the expression of Aristotle, promotes reflection and mutual confidence.[[310]] It was supposed to be their interest to keep men as far as possible in ignorance and distrust of each other. Hence all religions with a tendency to beget mutual love were proscribed (as among the Romans Christianity) as of an antimonarchical character. Thus Mæcenas, as ardent a patron of tyranny as of literature, urged Augustus to persecute and proscribe all attempts at introducing new creeds, as favourable to innovation or, at least, to change; to sworn brotherhoods, associations, clubs, things in their nature hostile to monarchy.[[311]]
The conjecture is probable, that the conversion of the Erani into charitable institutions was matter of accident. At first it seems clear, as I have observed already, that their object was sacrifice, feasting, and pleasure. But it sometimes happened that, of the funds subscribed, some portion would, after their objects had been fulfilled, remain; and if, when this was the case, any member of the club happened to fall into distress, it was perfectly natural to think of applying this surplus to his benefit.[[312]] From this the step was easy to subscribing expressly for the purpose of relieving indigent members, which, at length, was the practice, though the gradations by which they arrived at it have not been accurately marked.[[313]] Arrian has left a curious account of a Celtic eranos established by a Hunting Club in honour of Artemis,[[314]] to whom solemn sacrifice was annually offered up. A fund was created by the members of the club in the following manner: every one who caught a hare paid into the treasury two oboli: the capturer or destroyer of a fox a drachma, the fox being a mischievous animal and fatal to the hare; they therefore considered his destruction in the light of a triumph over an enemy. The sportsman who took a roebuck (δορκὰς), which among them was the noblest game, and the largest animal hunted, paid four drachmæ. On the birth-day of the goddess the treasury was opened, and a victim, whether a sheep, a she-goat, or a calf, according to their means, was purchased. Sacrifice was then offered, after which both men and dogs regaled themselves with a banquet. Bitches were on this day crowned with flowers, to show that the feast was celebrated in their behalf.[[315]]
In all these clubs the chest was the soul of everything; for this being removed the whole society fell to pieces.[[316]] Accordingly, to become a member it was necessary to subscribe a certain amount to the fund, and all payments were made monthly.[[317]] As these clubs, moreover, were legal, the person who neglected such payments could be prosecuted at law, as for any other debt; and what shows the importance of these institutions at Athens, the ordinances referring to them formed a separate branch of jurisprudence,[[318]] to enter into which, however, does not belong to my present inquiry. The president or chairman of the club was likewise treasurer, whether chosen by lot or elected by the members of the club, whose expenses and behaviour, while assembled, he appears to have regulated.[[319]] It has been seen that the meetings of these societies took place during religious festivals; but whenever they were called together, whether by business or piety, it was customary, as in all similar cases among ourselves, for the members to dine together. They do not appear, however, to have possessed club-houses; but, like our literary men of the last century, to have dined at taverns or alternately at each others’ dwellings.[[320]] On these occasions it was customary to restrain their expenses within moderate limits, the object being rather the enjoyment of each others’ society than the indulgence of a passion for luxury.[[321]]
On those occasions, when a member received the club at his house, he himself, it has been conjectured, took the chair,[[322]] not, however, necessarily and by rule; for it has been seen that the president was sometimes chosen by lot, sometimes by vote. But this supposition is, probably, ill-founded; for, as the same individual was at once eranarch and treasurer, it appears exceedingly improbable that he should be changed every time the club dined together. It seems to me more likely,—and we are left to conjecture,—that an annual chairman was chosen to transact the general business of the society, while another individual might be selected to fill the office of chairman for any particular evening. Towards the close of the republic, when the worship of Serapis had been introduced, women would seem to have been received as members of Erani established in honour of that foreign divinity.[[323]]
But as these clubs were only accidentally connected with charity and the condition of the poor, I proceed to consider another species of Eranæ, conceived almost in the spirit of Christianity. Van Holst,[[324]] whose researches on the subject of the Hellenic clubs, though pedantic and confused, are not without value, denies that any permanent charitable associations existed among the Greeks, though among the Romans, he conceives, they did. At the same time, he confesses what it were difficult to deny, that the friendly subscription called Eranos derived its name and being from the clubs above-described. He contends that no club existed with permanent funds for the relief of distressed friends, and that the relief actually afforded was the spontaneous effort of beneficence and humanity. On this point he is at issue with Casaubon,[[325]] whom he appears, in some respects, to misunderstand. Salmasius, he conceives, comes nearer the mark where he says, that when any person was overwhelmed with debt or poverty, he found a ready refuge in his friends, who subscribed what they could, both to satisfy his creditors and provide for his future subsistence. It was in the discharge of debts, however, that men found most aid from their friends;[[326]] though such subscriptions were set on foot on many other occasions, to redeem a man from captivity, for example, or to portion a friendless girl, as was the practice also at Thebes.[[327]]
The mode in which this subscription was collected, and the principle on which the transaction was based, had something characteristic about them. In the first place, the money resembled a loan (which, strictly speaking, it was not), because, if the receiver afterwards became fortunate, he was bound to make repayment,[[328]] though while in unfavourable circumstances his mind was not oppressed by the consciousness of being in debt, since no one regarded himself as a creditor, or could ask him for an obolos. Salmasius observes very justly, that the greatest proof of generosity is to give without any desire of a return, which the Greeks called eleëmosynè, or eranos of strict charity. The second grade is, where money is lent to be repaid without interest, which our Saviour calls τὰ ἶσα ἀπολαβεῖν.[[329]] The lowest, where you lend, but on condition of receiving interest.[[330]]
For the repayment of money collected by eranistic subscription, no exact time, it has been observed, was fixed. It appears to have depended entirely on the recipient’s sense of honour or feelings of gratitude. But Petit,[[331]] whose researches on this part of his subject were not sufficiently exact, confounds the monthly subscription paid by members of a trading company or ordinary club, with the money which a man, aided by his friends, might be supposed to owe them, and says, that such-a-one was required to pay it back by monthly instalments, or all at once within a month. The former would be the case were we to understand Harpocration to speak of this kind of eranos at all; the latter, if we accept his interpretation. But Van Holst[[332]] is right in remarking that Petit here apprehends the sense of the grammarian “minus recte”; that is, he mistakes it altogether. However, that the money was at some time to be repaid appears from a variety of passages. Theophrastus, for example, in his Chapter on Grumbling, observes, that the querulous man, to whom a collection made for him by his friends is brought, will reply to the person who bids him to be of good cheer,—“Wherefore? when I must return as much to each of them, and be grateful, moreover, for the favour?”[[333]]
Among the other peculiarities in the construction of Athenian society which tended to better the condition of the poor, were the entertainments given by rich citizens to their tribes, on certain festivals or days of public rejoicing.[[334]] And this was a matter by no means left to the caprice of individuals, for if some one came not forward voluntarily to undergo the expense, the members of the tribe proceeded to cast lots,[[335]] and the citizen to whose chance it fell could not escape the performance of this duty, unless he pleaded, as his excuse, some cause deemed satisfactory by the public. Of course, the character of the entertainment depended on the wealth or munificence of the Hestiator.[[336]] Necessary, it was not, that he should regale his fellow-tribesmen sumptuously, as frugality was one of the characteristics of the nation; but, at the same time, it is quite evident that on many occasions[[337]] the Feast of the Tribe was a magnificent banquet.[[338]]