diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'old/62364-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/62364-0.txt | 25357 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 25357 deletions
diff --git a/old/62364-0.txt b/old/62364-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 5916e48..0000000 --- a/old/62364-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,25357 +0,0 @@ -The Project Gutenberg eBook, The Origin of Tyranny, by P. N. (Percy -Neville) Ure - - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most -other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of -the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at -www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you'll have -to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook. - - - - -Title: The Origin of Tyranny - - -Author: P. N. (Percy Neville) Ure - - - -Release Date: June 10, 2020 [eBook #62364] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - - -***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE ORIGIN OF TYRANNY*** - - -E-text prepared by Richard Tonsing, Turgut Dincer, and the Online -Distributed Proofreading Team (http://www.pgdp.net) from page images -generously made available by Internet Archive (https://archive.org) - - - -Note: Project Gutenberg also has an HTML version of this - file which includes the original illustrations. - See 62364-h.htm or 62364-h.zip: - (http://www.gutenberg.org/files/62364/62364-h/62364-h.htm) - or - (http://www.gutenberg.org/files/62364/62364-h.zip) - - - Images of the original pages are available through - Internet Archive. See - https://archive.org/details/originoftyranny00urepuoft - - -Transcriber’s note: - - Text enclosed by underscores is in italics (_italics_). - - Superscripts are denoted by a caret before a single - superscripted character or a series of superscripted - characters enclosed in curly braces, e.g. M^r. or M^{ister}. - - Footnotes have been re-indexed using numbers and collected - together at the end of the last chapter. - - - - - -THE ORIGIN OF TYRANNY - - -Cambridge University Press -C. F. Clay, Manager -London: Fetter Lane, E.C. 4 - - -[Illustration] - - -New York: The Macmillan Co. - -Bombay } -Calcutta } Macmillan and Co., Ltd. -Madras } - -Toronto: The Macmillan Co. of Canada, Ltd. - -Tokyo: Maruzen-Kabushiki-Kaisha - -All Rights Reserved - - - - - -THE ORIGIN OF TYRANNY - -by - -P. N. URE, M.A. -Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge -Professor of Classics, University College, Reading - - - - - - -Cambridge -At the University Press -1922 - -Printed in Great Britain. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - PREFACE - - -The views expressed in the following chapters were first published in -the _Journal of Hellenic Studies_ for 1906 in a short paper which gave a -few pages each to Samos and Athens and a few sentences each to Lydia, -Miletus, Ephesus, Argos, Corinth, and Megara. The chapters on Argos, -Corinth, and Rome are based on papers read to the Oxford Philological -Society in 1913 and to the Bristol branch of the Classical Association -in 1914. - -As regards the presentation of my material here, it has been my -endeavour to make the argument intelligible to readers who are not -classical scholars and archaeologists. The classics have ceased to be a -water-tight compartment in the general scheme of study and research, and -my subject forms a chapter in general economic history which might -interest students of that subject who are not classical scholars. On the -other hand classical studies have become so specialised and the -literature in each department has multiplied so enormously that unless -monographs can be made more or less complete in themselves and capable -of being read without referring to a large number of large and -inaccessible books, it will become impossible for classical scholars to -follow the work that is being done even in their own subject beyond the -limits of their own particular branch. For these reasons ancient -authorities have been mainly given in literal English translations, and -when, as happens in almost every chapter, information has to be sought -from vases, coins, or inscriptions, I have tried to elucidate my point -by means of explanatory descriptions and illustrations. - -The work has involved me in numerous obligations which I gladly take -this opportunity of acknowledging. In 1907 I received grants from the -Worts travelling bachelors’ fund of Cambridge University and from -Gonville and Caius College to visit Greece for the purpose of collecting -archaeological evidence upon the history of the early tyranny. This -purpose was partially diverted because shortly after reaching Greece I -became associated with the late Dr R. M. Burrows in the excavation of -the Greek cemetery at Rhitsona in Boeotia and in the study and -publication of the pottery found there. This pottery dates mainly from -the age of the tyrants, and the results of my work at it appear in -several of the succeeding chapters. To Dr Burrows I owe also the -encouragement that led me to start working on the early tyranny: my main -idea on the subject first occurred to me when I was lecturing on Greek -history as his assistant at University College, Cardiff. - -I have also received much assistance at various times and in various -ways from Professor G. A. T. Davies, another former colleague of mine at -Cardiff, and from several of my Reading colleagues, particularly -Professor W. G. de Burgh, Mr D. Atkinson, and my wife. Many other debts -are recorded in the body of the book: but considering how many and -various they have been, I can scarcely hope that none has been passed -over without acknowledgement. - -But of all my obligations the earliest and chiefest is to Sir William -Ridgeway. It is to the unique quality of his teaching at Cambridge that -I owe the stimulus that suggested to me the explanation here offered of -the origin of tyranny. - - P. N. URE. - - UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, - READING. - _October 1920._ - - - - - CONTENTS - - - CHAP. PAGE - I INTRODUCTION 1 - - II ATHENS 33 - - III SAMOS 68 - - IV EGYPT 86 - - V LYDIA 127 - - VI ARGOS 154 - - VII CORINTH 184 - - VIII ROME 215 - - IX SICYON, MEGARA, MILETUS, EPHESUS, LEONTINI, AGRIGENTUM, - CUMAE 257 - - X CAPITALIST DESPOTS OF THE AGE OF ARISTOTLE, THE MONEY POWER - OF THE RULERS OF PERGAMUM, PROTOGENES OF OLBIA 280 - - XI CONCLUSION 290 - - APPENDICES 307 - - INDEX 339 - - - - - ILLUSTRATIONS - - - FIG. PAGE - 1 Lophos Loutrou from Daskalio station 42 - - 2 On the road from Daskalio station to Plaka 42 - - 3 Kamaresa 43 - - 4 Kitsovouno from Kamaresa 43 - (Figs. 1–4 from photographs by the author) - - 5 Corinthian terra cotta tablet depicting a miner at work 46 - (_Antike Denkmäler_, I) - - 6 Coin of Athens with Athena and owl 53 - (Macdonald, _Evolution of Coinage_) - - 7 Athenian coins: the wreath on the head of Athena 56 - (_Bulletin de Correspondance hellénique_, XXX) - - 8 Persian “archer” 57 - - 9 Samian coin with Samaina and Messanian coin with hare 75 - (Hill, _Historical Greek Coins_) - - 10 Aiakes, father of Polycrates 82 - (_Athenische Mitteilungen_, 1906) - - 11 Psamtek I 86 - (Petrie, _Hist. Egypt_, III) - - 12 Vase with cartouche of Bocchoris found at Tarquinii 94 - (_Monumenti Antichi della R. Acc. dei Lincei_, VIII) - - 13 Rhodian or (?) Milesian vase found at Naukratis 111 - (Gardner, _Naukratis II_. By permission of the Egypt - Exploration Fund) - - 14 Fikellura or (?) Samian vase found at Daphnae 113 - (Petrie, _Tanis II_. By permission of the Egypt Exploration - Fund) - - 15 Naukratite vase found at Rhitsona in Boeotia 115 - (_Journ. Hellenic Studies_, 1909) - - 16 Perfume vase found at Naukratis 119 - (Gardner, _Naukratis II_. By permission of the Egypt - Exploration Fund) - - 17 Greek wine jar found at Naukratis 120 - (Petrie, _Naukratis I_. By permission of the Egypt - Exploration Fund) - - 18 Corinthian vase with cartouche of Apries 124 - (_Gazette Archéologique_, 1880) - - 19 Coins of (_a_) Gyges (?), (_b_) Croesus 127 - (Macdonald, _Evolution of Coinage_) - - 20 Early Aeginetan “tortoises” 154 - (Babelon, _Traité des Monnaies Gr. et Rom._) - - 21 Bundle of spits found in the Argive Heraeum 163 - - 22 Corinthian vase found at Corinth 185 - (From a photograph supplied by Miss Walker of the American - School of Archaeology at Athens) - - 23 Corinthian terra cotta tablet depicting a potter at his wheel 186 - (_Gazette Archéologique_, 1880) - - 24 Corinthian terra cotta tablet depicting the interior of a - kiln 186 - (_Antike Denkmäler_, I) - - 25 Coins of Corinth 188 - (_Brit. Mus. Cat. Coins Corinth_) - - 26 Coins of Cypsela 200 - (_Abhandl. Bayerische Akad. Phil. Class._ 1890) - - 27, Attic vase paintings, perhaps depicting cypselae - 28 202 - (Saglio, _Dict. d. Antiq._ figs. 2964, 2965) - - 29 Attic vase painting, perhaps depicting a cypsele 203 - (Saglio, _Dict. d. Antiq._ fig. 937) - - 30 Vase on stove found at Iasos 205 - (_Jahrb. d. arch. Inst._ 1897) - - 31 Relief, perhaps depicting a small cypsele 206 - (_Revue Archéologique_, 1869) - - 32 _Aes signatum_ 220 - (Haeberlin, _Aes Grave_) - - 33 _Aes grave_ with wheel 232 - (Hill, _Historical Roman Coins_) - - 34 Corinthian vase found at Tarquinii 241 - - 35 Corinthian terra cotta tablet depicting the export of vases 242 - (_Antike Denkmäler_, I) - - 36 Proto-Corinthian vase found in the Roman Forum 249 - (_Notiz. d. Scavi della R. Acc. dei Lincei_, 1903) - - 37 Ionic terra cotta antefix found in Rome 250 - (_Monumenti Antichi della R. Acc. dei Lincei_, XV) - - 38 Similar antefix found in Samos 251 - (Boehlau, _Aus ion. u. ital. Nekropolen_) - - 39 Terra cotta head found on the Roman Capitol 252 - (_Monumenti Antichi della R. Acc. dei Lincei_, XV) - - 40 Stone head found on the Acropolis at Athens 253 - (_Athenische Mitteilungen_, 1879) - - 41 Vase in Attic black figure style found on the Quirinal 254 - (_Monumenti Antichi della R. Acc. dei Lincei_, XV) - - 42 The Capitoline wolf 254 - (How and Leigh, _Hist. of Rome_. By arrangement with Messrs - Longmans Green & Co.) - - 43 Dipylon vase 314 - (_Companion to Greek Studies_, Cambridge) - - 44 Proto-Corinthian vase 315 - (_Journ. of Hellenic Studies._ By permission of the Council - of the Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies) - - 45 Dipylon Ships 322 - (_Rev. Arch._ XXV, 1894; _Athenische Mitt._ 1876; _Arch. - Zeitung_, 1885; Perrot and Chipiez, _Hist. de l’Art dans - l’Antiquité_) - - 46 Vase painting signed by Aristonothos 323 - (Walters and Birch, _Hist. of Ancient Pottery_) - - - - - τοῖσι ἐμφανέσι τὰ μὴ γιγνωσκόμενα τεκμαιρόμενος. - - HDT. II. 33. - - - - - Chapter I. _Introduction_ - - - Δόξαιεν γὰρ ‹ἂν› οὐδὲν λέγειν δίκαιον οἱ διὰ τὸν πλοῦτον ἀξιοῦντες - ἄρχειν. - - ARISTOT. _Pol._ III. - 1283_b_. - - Φαῦλον τὸ τὰς μεγίστας ὠνητὰς εἶναι τῶν ἀρχῶν. - - ARISTOT. _Pol._ II. 1273_a_. - -[Sidenote: The seventh century B.C. is the age] - -The seventh and sixth centuries B.C. constitute from many points of view -one of the most momentous periods in the whole of the world’s history. -No doubt the greatest final achievements of the Greek race belong to the -two centuries that followed. But practically all that is meant by the -Greek spirit and the Greek genius had its birth in the earlier period. -Literature and art, philosophy and science are at this present day -largely following the lines that were then laid down for them, and this -is equally the case with commerce. [Sidenote: (_a_) of the first known -metal coins,] It was at the opening of this epoch that the Greeks or -their half hellenized neighbours the Lydians brought about perhaps the -most epoch-making revolution in the whole history of commerce by the -invention of a metal coinage like those that are still in circulation -throughout the civilized world. - -It was no accident that the invention was made precisely at this time. -Industry and commerce were simultaneously making enormous strides. About -the beginning of the seventh century the new Lydian Dynasty of the -Mermnadae made Sardis one of the most important trading centres that -have arisen in the world’s history. The Lydian merchants became -middlemen between Greece and the Far East. Egypt recovered its -prosperity and began rapidly to develop commercial and other relations -with its neighbours, including the Greeks. Greek traders were pushing -their goods by sea in all directions from Spain to the Crimea. Concrete -evidence of this activity is still to be seen in the Corinthian and -Milesian pottery of the period that has been so abundantly unearthed as -far afield as Northern Italy and Southern Russia. It was a time of -extraordinary intellectual alertness. Thales and the numerous other -philosophers of the Ionian School were in close touch with the merchants -and manufacturers of their age. They were in fact men of science rather -than philosophers in the narrow modern sense of the latter word, and -most of them were ready to apply their science to practical and -commercial ends, as for example Thales, who is said to have made a -fortune by buying up all the oil presses in advance when his -agricultural observations had led him to expect a particularly plentiful -harvest[1]. A corner in oil sounds very modern, and in fact the whole of -the evidence shows that in many ways this ancient epoch curiously -anticipated the present age. - -[Sidenote: and (_b_) of the first rulers to be called tyrants.] - -Politically these two centuries are generally known as the age of -tyrants. The view that the prevalence of tyranny was in some way -connected with the invention of coinage has been occasionally -expressed[2]. Radet has even gone so far as to suggest that the first -tyrant was also the first coiner[3]. He does not however go further than -to suggest that the tyrant started a mint and coinage when already on -the throne. - -[Sidenote: The new form of government was, I believe, based on the new - form of capital.] - -The evidence appears to me to point to conclusions of a more -wide-reaching character. Briefly stated they are these: that the seventh -and sixth century Greek tyrants were the first men in their various -cities to realize the political possibilities of the new conditions -created by the introduction of the new coinage, and that to a large -extent they owed their position as tyrants to a financial or commercial -supremacy which they had already established before they attained to -supreme political power in their several states. - -In other words their position as I understand it has considerable -resemblances to that built up in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries -A.D. by the rich bankers and merchants who made themselves despots in so -many of the city states of Italy. The most famous of these are the -Medici, the family who gave a new power to the currency by their -development of the banking business, and mainly as a result of this -became tyrants of Florence. Santo Bentivoglio of Bologna passed from a -wool factory to the throne. Another despot of Bologna was the rich -usurer Roméo Pepoli. At Pisa the supreme power was grasped by the -Gambacorti with an old merchant named Pietro at their head. At Lodi it -was seized by the millionaire Giovanni Vignate. The above instances are -taken from Symonds’ sixth class of despots of whom he says that “in most -cases great wealth was the original source of despotic ascendancy[4].” - -[Sidenote: This view deserves examination in the light of the modern - financial revolution,] - -Still closer analogies lie at our very door. It is a commonplace that we -are in the midst of an industrial revolution. This modern movement was -already beginning a century ago, when Byron pleaded the cause of the -frameworkers before the House of Lords. There are of course obvious -differences between the two revolutions. That of the seventh and sixth -centuries B.C. was mainly financial, that of the present time is mainly -industrial. But the difference is not so great as it at first sight -appears[5]. The invention of a metal coinage was accompanied by great -industrial changes[6], and we can no more divide sharply the financial -and industrial activities of the great houses of archaic Greece than we -can separate the banking and the mercantile enterprises of the great -families of the cities of Italy at the time of the renaissance, such as -the wealthy Panciatighi of Florence, who lent money to the emperor -Sigismund and exported cloths to London, Avignon and North Africa[7]. On -the other hand the modern industrial movement, with its development of -machinery and its organization of masters and men into trusts and trade -unions, has been accompanied by a revolution in the nature of the -currency. The modern financial revolution began at the same time as the -industrial. [Sidenote: which has replaced metal coins by paper,] Its -earliest phases are described and discussed in William Cobbett’s _Paper -against Gold_[8]. Since Cobbett’s days the paper currency which so -distressed him has developed enormously. Even before 1914 we were told -that “Gold already acts in England only as change for notes[9].” - -It is not necessary here to examine in detail the various forms taken by -this new paper currency. It is enough to point out that it enables -property to be transferred and manipulated far more rapidly and on far -larger a scale than was previously possible[10]. Only one other point in -the history of the new currency needs to be here mentioned. It cannot be -better expressed than in the words used by the Chancellor of the -Exchequer in the House of Commons on November 28th, 1914: - - I have been much struck since I have been dealing with these - transactions (bills of exchange) with how little even traders who - form a part of this great machinery know about the mechanism of - which they form an essential part.... I do not think that the - general public—and I am putting myself among them—ever realized the - extent to which the business not merely of this country, but of the - whole world, depended upon this very delicate and complicated paper - machinery. - -Apparently it needed a European war to bring home to the modern world of -commerce the nature of its currency. This fact should warn us against -expecting to find in early Greece any very clear recognition of the -revolution in the currency that then took place. When gold and silver -coins were first circulated they had a corresponding effect to the -modern issues of paper. They enabled property to be transferred with -greater ease and rapidity. We may be sure however that the character and -possibilities of the new currency did not at once receive universal -recognition[11]. The merchants in the bazaars of Lydia and Ionia who -best understood how to make use of it must have profited enormously. - -[Sidenote: and led many people to fear a new tyranny of wealth.] - -The experts in the new finance of the last two generations have been -exercising a profound influence upon politics and government. There are -many people, particularly in America, who believe that there is a -possibility of this influence becoming supreme. It is worth while -quoting a few of these opinions: - - This era is but a passing phase in the evolution of industrial - Caesars, and these Caesars will be of a new type—corporate - Caesars[12]. - - The flames of a new economic evolution run around us, and we turn to - find that competition has killed competition, that corporations are - grown greater than the state and have bred individuals greater than - themselves, and that the naked issue of our time is with property - becoming master instead of servant[13]. - - For some months past the sugar trust has been the Government of the - United States[14]. - -In 1884 there seems even to have been an idea of running a Standard Oil -senator for the United States presidency. “Henry B. Payne is looming up -grandly in the character of a possible and not altogether improbable -successor to Mr Tilden as the Democratic candidate for the -presidency[15].” - -The danger of supreme power in America passing into the hands of a few -capitalists has even been publicly acknowledged by a President of the -United States during his period of office. “Mr Wilson also discussed the -division between capital and labour. He dwelt for the greater part of -the speech on the effort of ‘small bodies of privileged men to resume -control of the Government,’ and added: ‘We must again convince these -gentlemen that the government of this country belongs to us, not to -them[16].’” - -Similar views are expressed by French, German and Italian writers. -According to the most brilliant of modern Frenchmen the government of -France has in some recent periods been in the hands of three or four -groups of financiers[17]. Salvioli in his _Capitalism in the Ancient -World_ speaks of the “kings of finance who exercise in our states a -secret but pervading sway[18].” Even the warlike von Bernhardi fears an -impending “tyranny of capital[19].” - -These quotations might be multiplied[20], but enough have been given to -show that the opinion which they express is widely held. There is no -need to discuss the honesty of particular expressions of it. If any of -them could be shown to have been insincere, it would be only additional -evidence of the plausibility of the opinion. Nor is this the place to -discuss from a more general point of view the extent to which that -opinion has been or seems likely to be verified. To have indicated how -widely prevalent is the fear of an impending “new tyranny of wealth[21]” -or “tyranny of capital[22]” is by itself enough to show that the -relation between the tyranny and the new form of wealth that arose in -the seventh and sixth centuries before our era is a subject that -deserves investigation, and to show also that the particular view as to -those relations that is maintained in these pages has _a priori_ -plausibility[23]. - -[Sidenote: The evidence:] - -It should however be said at once that my view appears to have been held -by no one who has published opinions on the subject from the fourth -century B.C. onwards. This however is not fatal. Later in this chapter -reasons will be suggested for holding that the true character of the -early tyranny was lost sight of in the days of Plato and Aristotle. Why -truer views on this particular subject should be recovered precisely at -the present period may be sufficiently explained by the modern financial -revolution, which makes it possible to approach the question from a -point which has scarcely been accessible during the last two thousand -years. With this warning we may proceed to state the nature of the -evidence in favour of this view that the earliest tyrannies were founded -and based on wealth. - -(1) The greater part of it is drawn from anecdotes and incidental -statements of fact about particular seventh or sixth century tyrants -preserved in Herodotus and later Greek and Latin writers. The various -tyrants are dealt with individually in the remaining chapters of the -book. - -(2) Glimpses into the economic and political life of the seventh and -sixth centuries are occasionally to be got from the scanty remains of -the poets of the period, supplemented by cautious references to later -writers. It will be convenient to examine at once this more general -evidence. - -[Sidenote: (_a_) statements from the extant writings of the sixth - century (Solon and Theognis),] - -The only two writers of the age of the tyrants of whom more than the -merest scraps have come down to us are Solon[24] and Theognis[25]. Both -deal professedly with the social and political problems of their day. -But both address audiences who are familiar with those problems. Even if -their whole works had been preserved instead of a few hundred lines in -either case, we should not expect to have the fundamental problems -explicitly stated. It would be possible to read a large selection of -articles and speeches by quite the best journalists and politicians on -many recent political measures and at the end of it to be left in -uncertainty as to the content and purport of the measure in question. We -must expect the same difficulty in reading Solon and Theognis. And it -must be confessed that we find it. But there is nothing in the extant -fragments of either writer which discredits the theory. More than that -there are passages in both of them that become of the utmost -significance if the early tyrants owed their power to their previous -wealth but are rather pointless on any other hypothesis. - -Solon’s position in relation to the tyranny is explained in the chapter -dealing with Athens. But a few lines may be quoted here: - - But of themselves in their folly the men of the city are willing - Our great city to wreck, being won over by wealth. - False are the hearts of the people’s leaders[26]. - -By the wreck of the city the poet means the establishment of a tyranny, -as is indicated by another couplet: - - Great men ruin a city: for lack of understanding - Under a despot’s[27] yoke lieth the people enslaved[28]. - -These last two lines were presumably written after Peisistratus had made -himself tyrant of Athens. Solon’s fears had been realized. The citizens -had been “won over by wealth” to “wreck their great city.” Is not the -best sense made out of these lines by assuming that what Solon feared -and what actually happened was that the popular leader had made use of -his wealth to establish himself as tyrant? Neither the “people’s -leaders” of the first quotation nor the “great men” of the second are -specifically stated to have been extremely rich, but to quote again the -words of Solon, both may be plausibly identified with the foremost of - - Those who had power and made men to marvel because of their riches[29]. - -The political aim of Theognis was to prevent a recurrence of tyranny in -Megara[30]. What does the poet bid his townsmen beware of? Not of -eloquence, not of violence, not of rashly appointing a lawgiver or -αἰσυμνήτης. All his warnings are directed against wealth. The whole town -of Megara had become commercial[31]. Birth had lost its prestige, and -wealth acquired unprecedented power. He complains how - - Tradesmen reign supreme: the bad lord it over their betters[32]. - - This is the lesson that each and all must thoroughly master: - How that in all the world wealth has the might and the power[33]. - - Many a bad man is rich, and many a good man needy[34]. - - Not without cause, O wealth, do men honour thee above all things[35]. - - Most men reckon the only virtue the making of money[36]. - - Everyone honours those that are rich, and despises the needy[37]. - -When he explicitly alludes to the dangers of the establishment of a -tyranny, his references to wealth are no less prominent: - - Neither exalt thou in hope, _by yielding to gain_, any tyrant[38]. - - Cyrnus, this city is pregnant. I fear lest a man it may bear us - Swollen with insolent pride[39], leader in stern civil strife[40]. - -The couplet last quoted almost certainly refers to a possible tyrant. -Insolent pride (ὕβρις) is one of the tyrant’s stock characteristics[41]. -There is no reference to wealth in this particular context. But there -can be little doubt that this same character is also referred to earlier -in the poem. Who, the poet asks, can preserve his reverence for the -Gods: - - When that a man unjust and presumptuous, one that regardeth - Neither the wrath of a man, no, nor the wrath of a God, - _Glutted with wealth_ waxes proud and insolent[42]? - -In this last passage the pride and insolence are directly attributed to -enormous wealth. - -Or again: - - Be thou sure that not long will that city remain unshaken, - Even though now it may lie wrapped in the deepest repose, - Soon as soever to those that are bad these things become pleasing— - Gains that, whenever they come, bring with them ill for the state. - For from these arise factions, murders of men by their kindred, - Despots withal[43]. - -What are the gains that lead up to tyranny? Is it not most probable that -they are some form of payment received by the commons (“those that are -bad”) from the would-be tyrant[44]? - -Solon and Theognis wrote with the examples of Gyges, Pheidon, -Orthagoras, Cypselus, Theagenes and the rest of the seventh century -tyrants before them[45]. If they constantly feared that some wealthy -tradesman[46] would make himself tyrant, it must surely have been -because the tyrants had sprung from or been allied with this new class -of wealthy traders and financiers. - -[Sidenote: (_b_) the fifth century writers (Thucydides, Herodotus, - Pindar),] - -The view here set forth as to the basis of the tyrant’s power finds -nothing to contradict it in the fifth century references to the early -tyranny. On the contrary such few references as are explicitly made to -the origin of the tyranny by writers of the fifth century bear it out. -“Is it not folly,” says Oedipus to Kreon in the _Oedipus Tyrannus_ of -Sophocles, “this attempt of yours, without a host of followers and -friends to seek a tyranny, a thing that’s gained only with hosts of -followers and money[47]?” “When Greece,” says Thucydides, in his -introductory sketch of early Greek history, “had grown more powerful, -and was still more than before engaged in the acquisition of wealth, -tyrannies were established in the cities[48].” Herodotus gives no -account of the rise of tyranny, but a large proportion of the evidence -as to the careers of individual tyrants is derived from his work. -Perhaps the fifth century writer who might be expected to throw most -light on the question is Pindar, who visited the courts of the Sicilian -tyrants and wrote odes in their honour. His poems contain many -references to the supreme importance of wealth: - - Wealth adorned with virtues - Brings opportunity for this and that[49]. - - Ever in the quest of noble achievements - Toil and outlay strive after the issue[50]. - -So elsewhere[51] in a similar spirit he describes Hiero’s great victory -over the Etruscans as “the crown of his lordly wealth.” The Syracusan -monarchs of the early fifth century seem to have had fewer affinities -with the commercial tyrants of the two preceding centuries than with the -military despots of a later age. It is therefore all the more -significant that wealth is so frequently regarded by Pindar, who more -than any other writer represents the transition from the sixth century -to the fifth, rather as a means to power than as one of its rewards. -Later documents, as has been said already, give a different account of -the early tyrants’ antecedents. But here and there statements are to be -found in them that, though perhaps reconcilable with other views, only -become fully significant on the commercial theory. - -Isocrates for instance speaks of the “huge wage bills and expenditures -of money by which all modern dynasts maintain their power[52].” He wrote -these words between 342 and 339 B.C.[53], but as his modern times are -contrasted with those of Agamemnon and he himself was nearly thirty -years old at the close of the fifth century, his modern dynasts may well -include sixth century tyrants like Peisistratus and Polycrates, the more -so as “dynasts” arose so seldom in fifth century Greece. - -[Sidenote: (_c_) some statements of fourth century writers,] - -Aristotle preserves the tradition that the early tyrants were good -business men. He speaks of “rendering account of their receipts and -expenditure, as has been done already by certain of the tyrants. For by -this kind of administration he would give the impression of being a -manager (οἰκονόμος) and not a tyrant[54].” - -That the early tyrants had previously been men of wealth is also perhaps -to be inferred from certain remarks of Aristotle about the “lawgivers” -of the same period. The general character of these “lawgivers” is a -matter of some dispute; but they appear to have differed from the -tyrants in at least two points. They governed by general consent and -they marked an earlier stage in the economic evolution of the city -state[55]. They are perhaps to be compared with the “arbitrators” -between employers and employed who in recent times have sometimes -enjoyed considerable influence[56]. When Aristotle[57] emphasizes the -fact that the best “lawgivers” were all drawn from the citizens of -moderate means (ἐκ τῶν μέσων πολιτῶν) he is making a fairly pointless -remark unless the same could not be said of the tyrants of the period. -That Aristotle did actually recognize the connexion between tyranny and -extremes of wealth and poverty is shown by another passage of the -_Politics_[58]: - - For this reason it is very fortunate when those engaged in politics - have moderate but sufficient means, for where some have very great - possessions and others none, the result is either extreme democracy - or unmitigated oligarchy or tyranny, which is caused by both - extremes. For unbridled democracy and oligarchy lead to tyranny, the - intermediate and more closely allied forms of government do so far - less. - -The philosopher himself may have pictured some of the early tyrants as -having risen from being penniless demagogues. The difficulties in the -way of accepting the view that a poor man ever became a tyrant before -the democratic development of the fifth century will be set forth later -in this chapter. If there is any basis of fact for Aristotle’s -statement, the early tyrants must have come from among the wealthiest of -the citizens. - -[Sidenote: (_d_) evidence as to industrial conditions during and after - the age of the tyrants,] - -There is nothing surprising in this conclusion. In the age that saw -merchants like Solon made practical dictators in their native -cities[59], and philosophers like Thales anticipating the Rockefellers -by making a corner in oil[60], there must have been individuals with -something of the abilities of these great men, but little of their -disinterestedness, who would be quick to grasp the possibility of -reaching through the corner to the crown. - -At a later date cornering became less easy. In fifth century Athens -there were statutes and magistrates (σιτοφύλακες) to prevent corners in -corn, and we still have a speech of Lysias directed against some -speculators who had bought beyond the legal limit. The context of a -passage in this speech suggests that the general controllers of the -market (ἀγορανόμοι) were expected to be on their guard against corners -in other articles[61]. - -The detailed evidence in favour of this view is given in the chapters -that follow. It will be found however that these men who made themselves -tyrants through their riches were not all of them mere speculators. Some -at least had acquired their wealth from trade or industry. This means -that they were large employers of labour. There are reasons for thinking -that from this point of view they would be politically far more -influential than their successors in business in the days of the -Athenian democracy. - -The big merchants and manufacturers of the fifth and fourth centuries -relied largely, and more and more as time went on, on servile labour. -The thousand miners whose services Nikias commanded were all slaves. Six -hundred slave miners were owned by his contemporary Hipponikos and three -hundred by Philemonides[62]. The hundred and twenty hands in the shield -factory of the orator Lysias were all slaves[63]. So too were the -fifty-two in the knife and bedstead factories inherited by -Demosthenes[64], and the nine or ten in the boot-making establishment of -Timarchus[65], as also those in the flute-making establishment from -which the father of Isocrates made his living[66], and the sail-makers -and drug-pounders who appear in Demosthenes _contra Olympiodorum_[67]. -These instances might be multiplied[68]. Slaves were of course only a -form of wealth[69]. As human beings they were entirely without influence -on politics. It would have been another matter if Nikias had had a big -constituency of miner citizens at his entire disposal. That I believe -was one of the great differences between Nikias and Peisistratus and -generally speaking between the captains of industry in the fifth and -fourth centuries and their predecessors in the seventh and sixth. The -evidence is not decisive, but as far as it goes it all points in this -direction. - -At Athens in the generation that preceded the tyranny it is reported of -Solon that “he encouraged the citizens to take up manual trades[70],” a -policy perhaps to be connected with his release from debt and -semi-slavery of the “pelatai” and the “hektemoroi[71],” since fresh -employment had possibly to be found for many of these liberated serfs. -It is further reported of Solon that he offered the citizenship to any -who “transplanted themselves to Athens with their whole family for the -sake of exercising some manual trade[72].” Aeschines quotes Solon, laws -attributed to whom were still in force when the orator flourished, to -the effect that “he does not drive a man from the platform” (_i.e._ he -allows him to speak in the assembly of citizens) “even if he is -practising some handicraft, but welcomes that class most of all[73].” -Solon himself, describing the various paths by which men pursue riches, -declares that - - Another learns the works of Athena and Hephaestus of the many - crafts, and with his hands gathers a livelihood[74]. - -The tyrants themselves are repeatedly found making it part of their -policy to keep their subjects employed on big industrial concerns. In -more than one case we shall see their power collapsing just when this -policy becomes financially impossible[75]. This part of the tyrants’ -policy is noticed by Aristotle, who quotes the dedications (buildings -and works of art) of the Cypselids at Corinth, the building of the -temple of Olympian Zeus at Athens by the Peisistratids, and the works of -Polycrates round Samos[76]. To these names we may add Theagenes of -Megara, Phalaris of Agrigentum, Aristodemus of Cumae, and the Tarquins -of Rome, all of whom are associated with works of this kind[77]. -Aristotle says that the object of these works was to keep the people -busy and poor. This explanation is more than doubtful, as has been -already recognized[78]. It is not employment that leads to poverty. More -probably the tyrants pursued this industrial policy because, to quote an -expression used in another context by Plutarch, “stimulating every craft -and busying every hand it made practically the whole city wage earners -(ἔμμισθον),” employed, as in the case Plutarch is describing, by the -government of the state. In other words may not the tyrants have been -building up an industrial state of employee subjects who in their turn -involved an army of “customer subjects[79]”? The words just quoted come -from the life of Pericles[80] and refer to the way that he employed the -poorer citizens (τὸν θητικὸν ὄχλον) in the rebuilding and adornment of -Athens. Among the people so employed he mentions carpenters, sculptors, -coppersmiths, stone masons, dyers, moulders of gold and ivory, painters, -embroiderers, engravers, merchants, sailors, wheelwrights, waggoners, -drivers, rope-makers, flax workers, leather cutters, road-makers, -miners. We still possess fragments of the accounts of payments made to -these workmen or their successors some years after Pericles’ death[81]. -The Alcmaeonids, the family to which Pericles belonged, had been -opponents of the house of Peisistratus for ages, and had consistently -fought it with its own weapons. Pericles himself was commonly called the -new Peisistratus[82]. His public works were a continuation of those of -Peisistratus[83]. The whole situation as well as our scanty information -about industrial conditions in the age of the tyrants alike suggest that -in this use of public works to convert the industrial classes into an -army of his own employees, which is what they very nearly were[84], -Pericles was in a very particular sense a new Peisistratus. - -To judge too from the purely industrial evidence Pericles seems to have -been continuing the traditions of an earlier age. It is true that free -labour was largely employed on the restoration of the great sanctuary at -Eleusis some eighty years after the operations just referred to. An -inscription relating to the wages paid during this later undertaking -shows that the employees included 36 citizens, 39 resident aliens, 12 -strangers, 2 slaves, besides 57 persons of uncertain status[85]. But -this evidence only tends to show that building was always a free man’s -trade[86]. We must beware of arguing from one trade to another or from -one particular trade to trade in general. There were doubtless many -subtle shades of status depending on the nature of either the work or -the profits[87]. As servile industry develops, it drives free labour -from work thought to be particularly damaging to body or mind such as -employment underground in mines. Speaking generally, however, there are -signs that in Athens at least between the days of the tyranny and those -of the Periclean democracy the conditions of free labour had been -radically changed. This is most obvious as regards the status of the -citizen artizan[88]. Solon refers to him without a trace of contempt and -is careful to maintain his political dignity. In so doing he appears to -have been conservative and simply following the tradition of the Homeric -age, when a prince was proud to make his own bedstead or build his own -house and a princess took pleasure in acting as palace laundress[89]. In -Attica at any rate manual labour appears to have enjoyed an equally -honourable reputation from the heroic age onwards till the end of the -age of the tyrants[90]. In the good old days, so Plato declares in the -_Critias_[91], “the other classes of citizens were engaged in -handicrafts (δημιουργίαι) and agriculture.” The earliest division of the -free population, ascribed to the half historical Theseus, comprised -three classes—nobles, farmers, and artizans (δημιουργοί)[92]. When -Solon, who was himself a merchant[93], reorganized the population he -divided it (or perhaps simply preserved an existent division) into four -classes, of which the lowest were θῆτες or day labourers[94]. The names -of the others (pentekosiomedimnoi, hippeis, zeugitai) show that this -class must have included all the artizans, the men who, in the -lawgiver’s own words, “learn the works of Athena and Hephaestus of the -many crafts.” This description of the ancient Athenian craftsmen as sons -of Pallas and Hephaestus recurs in Plato[95]. A class that is described -in this way plainly rests under no stigma. As Wallon puts it, “le -travail, loin d’être un titre d’exclusion, était un moyen d’arriver au -pouvoir[96].” Some five years after Solon’s legislation the old -classification of the free population as nobles, farmers and artizans -(δημιουργοί) reappears and the artizans secure two out of ten seats on -the board of chief magistrates[97]. - -But in the fifth century this has changed. Contrast the tone of Solon -with that of Xenophon[98], who states that some citizens “actually” live -by handicrafts, and that mechanical occupations are rightly held in -contempt by civilized communities. When Socrates has demonstrated to -Alcibiades that the Athenian ecclesia is made up of working men -(cobblers, criers, tent-makers and the like), he proceeds to this -inference: “if you have a contempt for them individually, then you must -have a contempt for them as a body[99].” This contempt for manual work -appears in Aristophanes, as for instance in his constant contemptuous -references to Euripides’ mother, who had been a greengrocer[100]. It is -recognized and discussed by Herodotus, who regards it as of -comparatively recent growth: as he puts it, “most of the Greeks have -learned to despise artizans[101].” His view is supported by Isocrates, -who when describing the state of things that prevailed in the Athens of -Solon and Cleisthenes, declares that “the propertied classes, so far -from despising those who were not so well off, ... relieved their -necessities, giving some of them farms at moderate rents, sending out -others to travel as merchants, supplying others with capital for their -various employments (ἐργασίας)[102].” The passage just quoted is no -doubt tendencious. But, as maintained by Mauri[103], it does indicate -that labour was not despised in archaic Athens. More than that it -suggests that in the days of Solon and Cleisthenes there was a good deal -of free labour under the patronage, if not in the actual employment, of -rich individuals. The transformation that began in the fifth century -seems to have occurred gradually. It had not been completed when -Herodotus wrote. Among the Athenian citizens who just at that time were -being employed by Pericles on the Athenian acropolis we have seen from -Plutarch that there were included carpenters, smiths, and leather -workers. In the next generation we find Xenophon declaring that most of -those who understand these crafts are servile. The words are put into -the mouth of Socrates, who was the younger contemporary of Herodotus by -some fifteen years[104]. Socrates and Xenophon however sometimes voice -the earlier view. In the _Apology_ for instance artizans are compared -favourably with politicians, poets, and the like[105]. Similarly in the -_de Vectigalibus_ of Xenophon, in which the writer expresses some of his -own personal views, artizans are placed with no suggestion of -inferiority in the company of sophists, philosophers, poets, and -sight-seers[106]. In Plato, except for the passage just quoted from the -_Apology_, manual labour is consistently condemned as unworthy of a free -man in a free city[107]. He would have no member of a state or even the -slave of a citizen among those engaged in manual trades[108]. He admits -that there is nothing inherently ignoble in trade, but explains at -length how all trading has in fact become so[109]. Trade has come to -imply money-making and to mean that the city where it flourishes is -“infected with money of silver and gold, than which, speaking generally, -no greater evil could arise for a city that aimed at producing just and -noble characters[110].” When Plato is building up his ideal state wage -earning is left to those citizens who are mentally deficient[111]. Plato -is above all things an independent thinker with no great respect for the -masses and less still for popular opinion. But in this particular point -his views do not seem to be unusual. He is echoed again and again by -Aristotle: “Citizens ought not to live the life of an artizan or -tradesman[112].” “Farmers and artizans and all the working-class element -must exist in cities: but the real constituents of the city are the -military class and the parliamentarians[113].” “The best city will not -make the artizan a citizen[114].” “The city where the artizans are -numerous and men at arms are few cannot attain to greatness[115].” The -speech of Demosthenes against Euboulides makes it plain that in the -fourth century a doubtful claim to Athenian citizenship might be damaged -by pointing out that the claimant was a small tradesman. “It is your -duty,” the orator makes his client say to the jury, “to uphold the laws -and not to regard as outlanders people who work for their living (τοὺς -ἐργαζομένους)[116].” Aristotle and Euboulides would have agreed with -Pollux[117], our earliest lexicographer (second century A.D.), that -thetes is a name for free men who out of poverty do slave’s work for -money (ἐπ’ ἀργυρίῳ δουλευόντων). - -The Greeks despised the artizan largely because of his lack of leisure -and impaired physique which to their minds necessarily implied a lack of -culture and a weakened intelligence[118]. This being the ground of their -contempt, the feeling must plainly have grown up when the claims of -culture and of industry had become exacting. This means that it was -probably subsequent to and a result of the industrial developments of -the age of the tyrants; and this dating is confirmed by other -considerations. - -The growth of contempt for labour has been explained by Drumann[119] as -due in part at least to the Persian wars and the resultant plunder, -which must have made a good many citizens financially independent. The -payment of the huge panels of jurymen, which at Athens did so much to -release the poorer citizens from the necessity to work, was an ultimate -outcome of the Persian wars. The Peloponnesian war may have completed -the process. It lasted through nearly thirty campaigns (431–404 B.C.) -and must have deeply disorganized the labour market. Slaves must in all -directions have supplanted the free men who were wanted for military -service, just as women took men’s places in the modern counterpart of -the Greek disaster[120]. The continued campaigning is sure to have left -many of the fighting men with a distaste for the dull routine of -industry[121]. In the _Plutus_ of Aristophanes, brought out in 388 B.C., -Poverty argues against an even distribution of wealth on the ground that -it would destroy the slave trade and drive free men to manual labour as -smiths, shipbuilders, tailors, wheelwrights, shoemakers, brickmakers, -laundrymen, tanners and ploughmen[122]. Rather than return to their -trades they preferred active service in distant lands. When early in the -fourth century Agesilaus of Sparta was campaigning in Asia Minor against -the King of Persia we are told that most of his troops except his own -Spartans were potters, smiths, carpenters and the like[123]. Mechanical -occupations are said by Aristotle to have been in his own days in some -Greek cities mainly in the hands of slaves and outlanders: “in ancient -times in some cities the artizan element (τὸ βάναυσον) was servile or -alien, for which reason most of them are such now[124].” This growing -contempt and dislike for manual labour as such, combined with the -passion for freedom and independence, would make free citizens -particularly unwilling to become factory hands or miners or anything -that meant working under a master for a daily wage, the receipt of which -tended to be regarded as a degradation[125]. Ciccotti[126] observes that -piece work becomes much commoner at this period. He explains the -tendency in abstract Marxian principles. The change may be due to much -more human causes, such as the workman’s growing desire to work his own -hours at his own pace. The work that the free man refused to do was -undertaken by the growing population of slaves. There was at this time a -glut in the slave market, as is sufficiently proved by the single fact -that while the prices of all other commodities went up in the fifth and -fourth centuries, that of slaves went down[127]. Among the unpleasant -occupations that fell more and more completely into servile hands were -mining and quarrying[128], two of the occupations with which we shall -find that the early tyrants were most frequently concerned. - -If therefore in the fifth and fourth centuries citizen craftsmen appear -to have worked mainly in small individual concerns[129], it by no means -follows that the same was the case in the seventh and sixth centuries. -The conditions during the later period were due to causes that only -began to operate during that period. On the other hand industry must -have begun to organize itself into considerable concerns somewhere about -the beginning of the earlier period, at the time of the developments -that are admittedly associated with the beginnings of tyranny. What was -the status of the employees in these earlier enterprises such as the -potteries of Corinth, the sixth century mines at Laurium, or the metal -and woollen works at Samos? Almost our only piece of direct evidence on -this subject is a statement of Alexis[130] that Polycrates the tyrant of -Samos, whose connexion with Samian industry is established in Chapter -III, “used to send for skilled artizans at very high wages (μετεστέλλετο -τεχνίτας ἐπὶ μισθοῖς μεγίστοις).” These highly paid artizans may have -been foreigners—Athenians, Milesians, or the like[131]—but they can -scarcely have been slaves. Indirect evidence in the same direction is -more abundant. Periander for example, the second tyrant of Corinth -(about 620–580 B.C.), is said to have forbidden the purchase of -slaves[132]. This regulation looks like an attempt towards the end of -the period of tyranny at Corinth to stem an influx of servile labour. - -It is doubtful whether slave owning on a large scale existed at this -period[133]. The Greeks of the fifth and fourth centuries regarded -slavery as they knew it as a modern development[134]. Timaeus says[135] -that till recently the Locrians had a law and likewise the Phocians -against possessing either maid servants or slaves (οὔτε θεραπαίνας οὔτε -οἰκέτας) and that Mnason the friend of Aristotle having acquired a -thousand slaves was ill-spoken of (διαβληθῆναι) among the Phocians as -having deprived that number of the citizens of their daily bread. There -is much therefore to be said for the view expressed by Clerc[136] that -free labour flourished afresh in the seventh and sixth centuries B.C. -with the overthrow of aristocracies, or in other words in the age of the -early tyrants. Ciccotti has recently well observed that in all the -literature from the hymn of Demeter to the writings of Plutarch slaves -occupy no place in the picture of social conditions at this period[137]. - -It was long ago recognized by Buechsenschuetz[138] that in preclassical -Greece the manual trades were in the hands of free men, but each man was -his own master, there being no factories or division of labour. In -classical times there was considerable division of labour and there were -businesses employing a large number of hands, but citizens seldom worked -in them. The age of the tyrants falls between the two epochs just -formulated. It is the one short epoch in Greek history when there were -probably considerable industrial enterprises employing citizen labour. -Thus it is the age in Greek history when apart from all details of -evidence there would be the greatest _a priori_ possibility of an -individual having secured the political power which may fall to the -employer of organized free labour on a large scale[139]. - -It is difficult in these days to realize how unique a situation is here -implied. We are apt to forget how completely slaves were excluded from -any part whatsoever in the life of the state. Politically they were -non-existent, and the whole free population was vitally concerned in -keeping them so. The slave was an essential form of property. To -question the institution of slavery in ancient Greece was like -questioning the fundamental claims of property in modern Europe. It was -a proclamation of war to the knife against the whole established order -of things. Individual slaves might win freedom and political rights, but -any organized effort at emancipation on the part of the slaves -themselves was put down with merciless severity. When in 71 B.C. Pompey -and Crassus had crushed the slave rebellion of Spartacus, the moderate -and statesmanlike revolutionary whose name has come again to such -prominence in recent days, six thousand of his followers were crucified -along the road from Rome to Naples. The distance is about 150 miles. At -the time therefore of this exemplary punishment if anyone had occasion -to pass along the road in question, one of the most frequented in the -whole Roman state, he would see some forty of these victims writhing in -agony or hanging dead upon the cross for every mile of his journey. No -piece of frightfulness quite so thorough and methodical is to be found -in all the frightful history of the present century. The punishment of -71 B.C. is typical of the whole attitude of the ancient republics of -Greece and Rome towards rebellious slaves. No wonder then if in their -history servile labour played no active part[140]. - -[Sidenote: (_e_) the history of the states where there was never a - tyrant,] - -Some parts of Greece never passed under a tyrant. The most conspicuous -of these is Sparta[141]. The Spartans never struck real coins. The iron -pieces “heavy and hard to carry[142]” that formed the classical Spartan -currency seem to be a survival of a premonetary medium of exchange[143]. -Sparta was also practically without any urban population[144]. It may be -more than an accidental coincidence that the most anti-tyrannical state -in Greece was without a real coinage, and backward in trade and -industry. - -Another region where nothing is heard of early tyrants is Thessaly. -Thessaly had a large serf population called πενέσται, whose position -much resembled that of the Spartan helots[145]. Both were mainly -agricultural labourers, _asscripti glebae_. Such a population might -serve the purpose of a would-be military despot. Pausanias, the Spartan -generalissimo against the Persians, had dealings with the helots when he -was trying to make himself tyrant of all Greece[146]. But for a -commercial tyrant they would not be very useful material. The other -important district that seems to have been immune from tyrants is -Boeotia. It is natural to associate this immunity with the dominantly -agricultural character of the district where Hesiod wrote his _Works and -Days_[147]. - -[Sidenote: (_f_) steps taken to prevent a recurrence of tyranny.] - -When the tyrants had been suppressed or expelled, or their families -became extinct, the government in most cases either reverted to an -oligarchy or developed into a democracy. Oligarchs and democrats (or at -least democratic governments) seem to have been equally inspired with a -hatred of the tyranny. The steps that they took and the fears that they -displayed under that influence may be expected to throw light on the -source of the tyrant’s power. Once more however it is necessary to limit -ourselves to the fifth century, when the conception of the tyrant had -not yet undergone the great change that came over it in the days of -Dionysius of Syracuse[148]. - -Of the oligarchic Greek states our knowledge is comparatively slight. -History has preserved for us no oligarchic counterpart to the picture -that we still possess of democratic Athens. But thanks to the _Politics_ -of Aristotle, that precious storehouse of incidental statements and -remarks, the fact has come down to us that[149] “in many oligarchies it -is not allowed to engage in business (χρηματίζεσθαι, perhaps better -construed ‘money-making’), but there are laws forbidding it.” - -Of the anti-tyrannical measures of democratic Athens during the century -that followed the expulsion of the Peisistratids we are better informed. -So are we also as to the measures taken in the early days of republican -Rome to prevent a re-establishment of the kingship. The evidence -supports the view that in both cases what the established government -mainly feared was the rich man becoming politically powerful by means of -his riches. - -Only, if that view is right, why is it nowhere specifically formulated -in extant records? - -[Sidenote: The evidence is not conclusive; but contemporary documents - are meagre and no Greek writers say much about economic - causes.] - -One set of causes has already been incidentally indicated. The state of -things that could lead to a tyranny of the early type was passing away -at the time of the Persian wars. The payment of jurymen rendered a -recurrence of it in Athens finally impossible. Sparta had always been -equally averse from making either coins or tyrants. What Athens and -Sparta both disapproved of had little chance of finding a home in fifth -century Greece. It was during this period that Herodotus and Thucydides, -our earliest Greek historians, composed their works. Each wrote the -history of a great war. But even if their themes had been more peaceful, -it would be a mistake to imagine that their enquiries into economic -causes would have been any more searching. Cornford in his illuminating -study of Thucydides[150] complains of the general blindness of the -Greeks in this direction. This is hardly fair on the Greeks. Thucydides -and his successors are not unusually blind. It is the moderns who are -unusual in the way they fix their eyes upon this particular aspect of -history. Only in times of financial and industrial revolution does the -world at large become distinctly conscious of the financial and -industrial basis of its social and political organization. The -revolution now proceeding has produced this effect. It has led modern -historians to concentrate, perhaps unduly, upon the investigation of -economic causes and conditions. From this modern point of view the Bank -of England or the Standard Oil Company is as fruitful and important a -subject of historical research as the policy of a prime minister or the -strategy of a general. But this attitude is unusual. The financial -revolution associated with the realms of Gyges and Pheidon had been -accepted by the whole Greek world before the outbreak of the Persian -wars. For writers of the new epoch that began with Salamis and Plataea -economic conditions must have appeared a changeless and somewhat boring -factor. If the early tyrants had previously been kings of finance or -industry, we must not expect many statements or illustrations of the -fact in the _Persian Wars_ of Herodotus, or the _Peloponnesian War_ of -Thucydides. It should satisfy us if, as is the case, their allusions to -the tyranny are all in complete harmony with that hypothesis. - -[Sidenote: The view is at variance with statements of Plato, Aristotle, - and subsequent writers:] - -The writers of the fourth century offer a more serious difficulty. Both -Plato and Aristotle deal at some length with the origin of tyranny, and -both give explanations quite different from the one that is here -offered. As their accounts have been the basis of all subsequent views, -it is necessary to state briefly what they are. - -According to Plato[151] “it is fairly plain that tyranny develops out of -democracy.” - - When a tyrant comes into being, the root he springs from is the - people’s champion, and no other.... What then is the beginning of - the change from protector to tyrant?... The people’s champion - finding a multitude very ready to follow him ... enslaves and - slaughters, and hints at the abolition of debts and the partition of - land. When such a man so behaves, is he not subsequently bound and - doomed either to be destroyed by his enemies or to become tyrant and - be changed from a man into a wolf? This is what becomes of the - leader of the rebellion against the owners of property[152]. - -Plato goes on to describe how the tyrant either gets banished and -effects his return by force or avoids exile only by the famous expedient -of demanding a bodyguard. - -Aristotle’s account is similar, but less rigid, and emphasizes the -military element. “In ancient times, whenever the same individual became -both demagogue and general, the result was a tyranny. It is fairly true -to say that the majority of the early tyrants have developed out of -demagogues[153].” Other tyrants he describes as establishing themselves -as such after having previously either reigned as kings or held for a -long period some important office[154]. In ancient times Aristotle -includes the fifth century (and perhaps the beginning of the fourth), as -is shown by his quoting Dionysius of Syracuse[155]. Plato’s treatment is -less historical, but as he specifically excludes the possibility of any -other sort of tyrant pedigree than that he gives, his account is plainly -meant to hold good for all periods[156]. - -[Sidenote: but their picture of the rise of tyranny clashes with known - facts about the period,] - -In short both Plato and Aristotle regard their accounts of the -tyrant’s origin as being of general application. As such they have -always been accepted, and not at first sight without reason. The -Platonic-Aristotelian pedigree (with an alternative) is already -ascribed to the tyrant by Herodotus: “under a democracy it is -impossible for corruption not to prevail ..., until some individual, -championing the people (προστὰς τοῦ δήμου) blossoms out into a monarch -(ρεϡτε μούναρχος = tyrant)[157].” But what are the facts? The process -just described makes the early tyrant develop out of a demagogue who -is usually also a general. Demagogues may have existed in Greece -before tyrannies began to be established; but the evidence for their -having done so is extraordinarily meagre[158], and it is highly -doubtful whether Aristotle adds to it. He does not attempt a picture -of a seventh or sixth century demagogue. Those of his own day secured -their influence by confiscations effected through the popular -courts[159]. They are essentially the product of a full-blown -democracy, and pretyrannical democracies are extremely doubtful. -Athens is a special and only partial case, and even there, in spite of -Solon, Herodotus[160] can speak of Cleisthenes, who overthrew the -tyranny, as “the man who established the democracy.” The demagogues -from whom Aristotle derives his early tyrants are mainly military -demagogues: “the tyrant,” he says, “is also prone to make war[161].” - -This statement is hardly borne out by the facts. As a body, in spite of -the times they lived in, the early tyrants were remarkable for their -works not of war but of peace[162]. Some of them indeed, as for instance -Orthagoras and Peisistratus, are reported to have distinguished -themselves as soldiers before they became tyrants. The warlike exploits -of the youthful Orthagoras are discussed below[163]. He cannot have been -really prone to militarism, since Aristotle declares that a successor of -his altered the character of the Sicyonian tyranny by becoming -warlike[164]. Peisistratus’ early feats of war are well attested. -Naturally enough he made political capital out of them. “He asked of the -people that he should receive from them a bodyguard, having previously -distinguished himself in the expedition against Megara, when he captured -Nisaea and performed other great deeds[165].” But earlier in the same -chapter Herodotus has made it perfectly plain that Peisistratus was not -a military despot. “Having formed designs on the tyranny he raised a -third faction, and having collected partizans, and posing as a champion -of the Hillmen, he devised as follows.” It was the faction of the -Hillmen and not[166] the Megarean expedition, that was the -stepping-stone to the tyranny. Who the Hillmen were is discussed in the -chapter on Athens. It has never been suggested that they were -military[167]. - -A military demagogue who makes himself tyrant is essentially the product -of an advanced democracy threatened by invasion from without. When the -tyrants of the seventh and sixth centuries secured their positions there -was no foreign invader without the gates and no democracy within. -Aristotle[168] calls democracy “the last word in tyranny” (ἡ τελευταία -τυραννίς). From the point of view of historical development the converse -comes much nearer to the truth, and tyranny is the first word in -democracy. [Sidenote: and is due to false generalizations from the -conditions of their own days,] The evolution of the tyrant as described -in Aristotle and Plato cannot have taken place until after the reforms -of Cleisthenes or precisely the period when the last of the early -tyrants was finally banished from Greece. The two philosophers, and -likewise Herodotus in the passage just quoted[169], must be reading into -more ancient times a state of things that only became prevalent shortly -before their own[170]. The words of Herodotus are put into the mouth of -Darius. This means that they really hang loose and may be influenced by -the careers of contemporary demagogues like Cleon. - -[Sidenote: and particularly from the career of Dionysius of Syracuse.] - -But the main source of error lies in Plato and Aristotle, and is still -more obvious. The most distinguished figure in the political history of -the early part of the fourth century was Dionysius of Syracuse. -Dionysius is, like Plato’s tyrant in the _Republic_, the product of -democracy: like Aristotle’s in the _Politics_ he begins his career as a -military demagogue. The resemblances are not accidental. Dionysius made -himself tyrant when Plato was just reaching manhood. Plato visited his -court and few political experiments have become more famous than Plato’s -attempt to turn the tyrant’s son into the ideal philosopher king[171]. -Aristotle naturally shared his master’s interest in the famous -Syracusan. His _Politics_ bears frequent witness to the fact. It -contains only eight references each to the tyrant houses of Corinth and -Athens as against twenty to those of Syracuse (eleven to the Dionysii -and Dion, nine to the Deinomenidae). Of the three individuals, -Theagenes, Peisistratus, Dionysius, chosen to illustrate the way a -tyrant may be produced out of a military demagogue, Dionysius is the -only one whose career the process fits. - -Other philosophers of the period wrote under the same dominant -influence, notably Aeschines the Socratic, and Aristippus, both of whom -had stayed with the tyrant[172]. Similarly with the fourth century -historians: their notion of a tyrant was Dionysius as described by that -potentate’s own historian, his fellow-citizen Philistus. - -Everything tended to confirm this view. The greatness of Dionysius -naturally drew attention to that of Gelo and Hiero, his predecessors at -Syracuse. Gelo and Hiero were, like Dionysius, military despots. To -later generations they were the great soldiers who had saved Sicily from -the Carthaginians and Etruscans. Their contemporary Pausanias had tried -to raise himself from generalissimo of the Greek army to tyrant of all -Greece[173]. These events were still in men’s minds. Of the earlier -tyrants they had only hazy notions[174]. The best remembered were -probably the Peisistratids, both from their late date and from the fact -that they were Athenians. Peisistratus, as has been already noticed, -chanced early in his career to have distinguished himself as a soldier. -It so happened that Polycrates, the other great tyrant of the latter -half of the sixth century, also engaged in war. It was forced upon him -by the Persians. The evidence is all against the view that it was the -basis of his power. But the warlike achievements of these two rulers, -the last and perhaps the greatest of the earlier tyrants, lent colour to -Aristotle’s hasty generalizations[175]. - -Aristotle himself, speaking of the ways of maintaining a tyranny, says -that “the traditional method, in accordance with which most tyrants -conduct their government, is said to have been mainly instituted by -Periander of Corinth[176]?” Only a few pages later in the same work[177] -we are told that Periander abandoned the policy of his father Cypselus -and that he did so by becoming warlike or in other words by -approximating more to Dionysius of Syracuse. Once more then the typical -tyrant of Aristotle is a ruler who departs from the policy of a typical -founder of an early tyranny. - -For an example of the victory of the Aristotelian view over the truth we -may compare Herodotus, I. 59, which states that Peisistratus, who had -fought against Megara, made himself tyrant by means of the faction of -the Hillmen, with Justin, II. 8, according to whom “Peisistratus, as -though he had conquered (the Megareans) for himself, not for his -country, seized by craft the tyranny.” Justin is a perversion of a -passage in Chapter 14 of the Aristotelian _Constitution of Athens_, -which states that Peisistratus, “having the reputation of being a great -friend of the people, and having greatly distinguished himself in the -war against Megara,” secured his bodyguard and the tyranny. Aristotle -misinterprets the Hillmen and exaggerates the importance of the Megarean -expedition. Justin omits the former altogether and makes the latter the -sole cause of Peisistratus obtaining the tyranny. - -Aristotle’s conception of the tyrant class as drawn mainly from that of -the military demagogue was taken over by the Romans. In the chapter on -Rome it will be shown how little this conception fits in with the -Romans’ own early history. But the times before the great wars at Rome -(Samnite, Pyrrhic, Punic) are like those before the Persian wars in -Greece. They belong to a different epoch from those that follow. The -later history of the Roman republic harmonizes with Aristotle’s view. -The Gracchi may be represented as demagogues who failed to make -themselves supreme for lack of military power[178]. Marius, Pompey, and -Caesar succeeded in proportion as they realized the Aristotelian -combination. The fourth century conception was therefore unchallenged by -Roman writers, the more so since Dionysius appears for a while to have -dominated the Roman conception of a Greek tyrant[179]. Fortunately -however, owing to the careless way the Roman historians worked over -their material, they have left us glimpses of the different conditions -that had once existed. - -The view that was thus disseminated in classical Greece and Rome was -naturally accepted by the scholars of the renaissance and has prevailed -ever since. - - - - - Chapter II. _Athens_ - - -[Sidenote: Exceptional position of Athens.] - -Of all the tyrants of the seventh and sixth centuries none are so well -known to us as those who reigned at Athens. No other city has left us so -clear a picture of the state of things not only during the tyranny but -also immediately before and after it. Solon lived to see Peisistratus -make himself supreme. Herodotus, born a Persian subject about 484 B.C., -must have had opportunities of questioning first-hand authorities on the -later years of the Athenian tyranny, while his younger contemporary -Thucydides was in a particularly favoured position for getting -information on this subject through his relationship with the Philaidae, -of whose rivalry with the Peisistratidae there will be occasion to speak -later in this chapter[180]. - -This comparative abundance of information is the reason why Athens has -been made the starting-point of this enquiry. But even so our knowledge -is meagre enough. And there is a special reason for using it with -caution. So far in the history of the world there has been only one -Athens. The developments that took place in the city during the first -two centuries of the democracy are without parallel. Can we be certain -that Athens was not already unique in the period immediately preceding? -One point in which the Athenian tyranny was exceptional meets us at the -first glance. [Sidenote: Athens before the establishment of the -tyranny.] With the single exception of Samos, all the other famous -tyrannies of the earlier type, at least in the Aegean area, arose in the -seventh century. But apart from this fact it will be found that the -tyranny at Athens in the sixth century followed the same course as it -appears to have done at places like Corinth and Argos, Sardis and -Miletus in the seventh. The more highly developed an organism is, the -longer it takes to reach maturity. This is perhaps the reason why Athens -in the sixth century appears in some respects to be a hundred years -behind some of the cities whom she was destined so completely to -eclipse. - -Athens was not exclusively commercial. Her large territory made her -partly agricultural. To this fact may be due her failure to compete -commercially in the seventh century with cities like Aegina and -Corinth[181]. Hence too the late rise of the tyranny. It appears only -when the commercial and industrial element had got the upper hand. There -was indeed the attempt of Cylon, who conspired to make himself tyrant -within a generation of the first appearance of tyranny on the mainland -of Greece[182]. But Cylon failed because, though wealthy (ὀλυμπιονίκης) -and influential (δυνατός), he could not possibly, in the Athens of his -day, be the leader of any dominant organized commercial activity. He was -merely an ambitious member of the aristocracy (τῶν πάλαι εὐγενής), -connected with the great band of merchant princes only by marriage[183]. -The attempt and its result are both what might have been expected from -the position of Athens at the time. - -Soon after Cylon’s attempt Athens began to rival Corinth in the pottery -trade, and the influence of the rich city merchants and exporters -doubtless increased. But even in pottery the great vogue of Attic ware -was still to come, and Solon’s measures for encouraging the growth of -olives and the export of olive oil also belong to this period[184]: the -importance of the landed aristocracy who owned the olive yards must have -increased almost equally. No merchant therefore attempted by means of -the wealth that he had amassed or the labour that he employed to seize -the tyranny. The landed aristocracy were also wealthy and they too -employed much labour, and it so happened that the best part of the Attic -plain, where lay their estates, was situated round the city, as Cylon -discovered to his cost when he seized the Acropolis. Tyranny was almost -impossible. - -The leading man at Athens was not a mere millionaire, as in the more -exclusively trading states. Solon had indeed some experience of -trade[185], but he was essentially a politician with a gift for finance, -not a financier or merchant with political ambitions. He became not a -tyrant but a lawgiver. - -[Sidenote: Peisistratus makes himself tyrant by organizing a new party.] - -Solon tried to provide for the difficulties that he saw resulting from -the existence of two evenly matched parties, the landowners of the plain -and the traders of the coast. The tyranny arose from the political -organization of a new interest by Peisistratus, who, to quote the exact -words of Herodotus: - - While the coast men of Athens and those of the plain were at - strife ... having formed designs on (καταφρονήσας) the tyranny, - proceeded to raise (ἤγειρε) a third faction[186]. - -Some ancient writers represent Peisistratus as owing his tyranny to his -gifts as an orator or demagogue[187]. Reasons are given in Chapter I for -not accepting this view, and also for not believing that it was mainly -as a successful soldier that Peisistratus secured the throne[188]. It -was as founder and leader of the “third faction” of Herodotus that -Peisistratus made himself tyrant, and he seems largely to have built up -his influence with them by rendering them aid, doubtless financial[189]. - -To understand the position of Peisistratus and to ascertain the basis of -his power it is obviously of the first importance that we should know -who precisely were the men who made up this third faction. Unfortunately -this question cannot be answered directly from the information that has -come down to us. So before sifting the evidence that bears on it, it -will be well to examine some later and better known phases of the -tyrant’s career. - -[Sidenote: How Peisistratus “rooted” his power.] - -After the tyrant had first established himself he is reported to have -been twice banished and twice restored. After his second restoration “he -proceeded to root his tyranny with many mercenaries, and with revenues -of money, of which part was gathered from the home country, part from -the river Strymon[190].” - -The Strymon (Struma) flows through the famous mining district which was -afterwards annexed by Philip of Macedon, and brought him his enormous -wealth. It is scarcely conceivable that Peisistratus’ revenues from this -region came from any other source than the mines[191]. Hence Guiraud, in -his interesting but sober account of ancient Greek industry, has already -been led to suggest that Peisistratus’ Attic revenues were derived from -a similar source, and that he worked the mines of Laurium[192]. - -[Sidenote: How he secured his second restoration.] - -Peisistratus was not using revenues from mines for the first time in his -career, when he proceeded to “root his tyranny” in the manner just -described. He had already used the same means to compass his second -restoration. When driven from Athens for the second time he had -“proceeded to the parts round Pangaion, where he made money, and having -hired soldiers he went back to Eretria, and in the eleventh year made -his first attempt to recover his position by force[193].” Herodotus -appears to think that all the period of exile was spent at Eretria; but -he too states it to have been spent in collecting money (ἕως ... τὰ -χρήματα ἤγειρε). The result was that “he now held the tyranny -securely[194].” Mt Pangaion is the name of the great mining district to -the East of the lower Strymon. The mention of it confirms the view that -Peisistratus had a personal connexion with the Thracian mines. Eretria, -on the West coast of Euboea, is an obvious place from which to swoop -down on East Attica, but on the other hand in Euboea too there were -mining districts[195], and Eretria had a settlement just to the East of -Mount Pangaion, if Svoronos is right in his very plausible -identification of the modern Kavalla with the “Skabala: a place of the -Eretrians” of Stephanus Byzantinus[196]. - -About the tyrant’s first restoration there is only a story in Herodotus -which the historian himself describes as a “very silly business.” Its -consideration is best left over till we have dealt with his original -seizure of the throne. If for this earlier stage of his career the -evidence is less specific, we must not be surprised. Like Augustus, -Peisistratus was careful, especially at first, to observe the outward -forms of the constitution which he overthrew, so that the realities of -the situation would not be patent to everybody[197]. - -[Sidenote: The “Hillmen” through whom Peisistratus made himself tyrant] - -The party through which Peisistratus made himself tyrant is called by -Herodotus the Ὑπεράκριοι[198]. The Aristotelian _Constitution of Athens_ -calls them the Διάκριοι[199], Plutarch sometimes Διακριεῖς sometimes -Ἔπακροι[200]. The English terminology is equally fluctuating. Hill, -Mountain, and Upland have all been used. - -Modern historians have mostly explained the party as made up of small -farmers, agricultural labourers, herdsmen and the like, and have -generally assigned them to one special district, the mountainous region -of North and North-east Attica[201]. But this view, as shown below in -detail in an appendix[202], is based on a misunderstanding of the texts -that are quoted in its support, and is at variance with all the ancient -evidence, whether as regards the political propensities of agricultural -labourers or the state of cultivation of the Attic mountains. It takes -no account of the facts just brought forward as to how the tyrant -regained and maintained his power. - -[Sidenote: were probably the miners of the Laurium district] - -In a paper that I published in 1906[203] these facts were made the basis -of a new explanation of the Hillmen of Peisistratus. According to the -view there put forward the most important section of Peisistratus’ -followers were the miners who worked the famous silver mines of South -Attica, and it was as leader of this mining population that Peisistratus -raised himself to the tyranny. At the time this view was little more -than a conjecture, topographically dubious. Of the only two places, -Plotheia and Semachidai, known to have been situated in the Hill -Country, Plotheia had been shown by tombstones to lie somewhere between -Marathon and Kephisia[204], and as this fact seemed to confirm the -theory of an exclusively Northern Hill Country, Semachidai, for the site -of which as within the limits of the three trittyes of its tribe no -evidence was available, was placed up in the North in the inland -trittys. But that this location was wrong is made practically certain by -the discovery of an inscription, published in 1910 by the Greek scholar -Oikonomos, that bears directly on the point. [Sidenote: which was -certainly part of the Hill Country] It dates from 349–8 B.C. and defines -the position of various mining concessions. One of them is described as -near Laurium and bordered on the South by the road leading past Rhagon -to Laurium and the Semacheion[205]. - -The Semacheion is convincingly explained by Oikonomos as the shrine of -Semachos, who gave his name to the deme Semachidai[206]. From this fact -he proceeds quite logically to argue that we must decide on a more -Southerly position for that deme than those proposed by Milchhoefer and -Loeper[207], “since the mine to the South of which Semachidai lay, was -situated in the neighbourhood of Laurium[208].” Semachidai belonged to -the tribe Antiochis[209]. In the electoral organization of Cleisthenes -the coast trittys of the tribe Antiochis occupied the Western part of -the mining district, including the villages of Amphitrope (Metropisi), -Besa, and Anaphlystus. Thus Oikonomos’ conclusions are confirmed by the -fact that his Semacheion falls within the borders of Antiochis. But -whereas technically this mining district formed the coast trittys of the -tribe, we have the evidence of Philochorus, writing early in the third -century B.C., that it was spoken of as part of the Epakria or hill -country[210]. - -How suitable this name was may be illustrated from the Semacheion -inscription itself, in which the sites of mining claims are three times -defined by reference to a ridge or hill crest (λόφος)[211]. - -As seen from _C.I.A._ II. 570, the Epakria of 400 B.C. was a religious -organization[212], apparently with only a local political significance. -[Sidenote: and probably the Hill Country _par excellence_.] This fact -makes it probable that the name was already ancient, and that Plutarch -and the _Lexicon Seguerianum_ were right in equating it with Diakria and -Hyperakria[213]. There is indeed the possibility of a confusion of -names. But on the other hand the names suggest a common origin. They are -all compounds of ἄκρον. It is curious that nobody in recent times seems -to have asked what was the ordinary connotation of ἄκρον to the Athenian -of antiquity[214]. There seems little doubt as to what it was. - -In Attica the ἄκρον _par excellence_ was Sunium. Already in the -_Odyssey_ Sunium is the ἄκρον Ἀθηνῶν[215]. The same phrase reappears in -Aristophanes[216]. Strabo refers to Sunium as τὸ τῆς Ἀττικῆς ἄκρον[217]. -Some early scholars recognized this fact. Palmerius explained the -Diakrioi as the people living between the two capes, Sunium and -Cynosura, and the Hyperakrioi as those who dwelt beyond Sunium, “beyond” -being used presumably from the point of view of those coming by sea from -Athens[218]. Albertus held that the Diakrioi were so called because they -lived “in promontoriis Atticae[219].” - -Plato indeed in the _Critias_[220] speaks of Πάρνηθος τῶν ἄκρων; but for -the Athenians the peaks of Parnes are ἄκρα with a local qualification, -not simply τὸ ἄκρον or τὰ ἄκρα; just as we in England speak of the peaks -of Snowdon or Skiddaw, but apply the word unqualified to the heights of -Derbyshire. The unqualified expression applied to the Northern heights -of Attica was “the land of the mountain (ἡ ὀρεινή)[221],” not “the land -of the ἄκρον.” The name Diakria appears therefore to be derived -geographically not from Mount Parnes but from Cape Sunium[222]. - -Herodotus, as already noticed, gives the Sunium district another name. -He calls the country between Sunium, Thoricus, and Anaphlystus, _i.e._ -the Laurium mining district, by the name of the γουνὸς Σουνιακός[223]. -But as in the same sentence he speaks of the ἄκρη of this district, his -allusion is less of a difficulty to regarding this district as the -original Diakria than it is to the orthodox view, which identifies it -with the Paralia (Coast). Especially is this so if we assume that by his -days the name Diakria had spread Northward beyond the mining region, so -that a new name was wanted for the Southern apex of the peninsula. This -assumption is of course only a reversal of the current view, that -extends the name indefinitely Southwards from Parnes. - -It has sometimes been forgotten in the discussion of these names that we -are dealing with common nouns that were used by the Greeks with -different connotations at different places and periods like the English -downs or forest[224]. Epakria appears to have been used in more than one -sense even within the limits of Attica[225]. Possibly the name was -applied at large to any region of ἄκρα. If we prefer to assume that it -spread from a single district the balance of probabilities points to the -name having spread Northwards from the district round Sunium. - -From yet another point of view the words Diakria, Hyperakria, Epakria -favour the mining interpretation. The inhabitants of El Dorado of Greek -legend, the land of the Golden Fleece, are said to have occupied the -ἄκρα of the Caucasus[226]. - -[Illustration: Fig. 1. Lophos Loutrou from Daskalio station.] - -[Illustration: Fig. 2. On the road from Daskalio station to Plaka.] - -[Illustration: Fig. 3. Kamaresa.] - -[Illustration: Fig. 4. Kitsovouno from Kamaresa.] - - Views in the Laurium mining district. - -The ἄκρα of the Caucasus are of course not capes but peaks. Trinakria on -the other hand is the land of the three capes. It is important to -remember that the word ἄκρον has no equivalent in English. It means peak -or height as well as cape or headland. To attempt to keep these two -meanings separate is to commit a mental mistranslation. Though Sunium is -the ἄκρον _par excellence_, the whole Σουνιακὸς γουνός abounds in ἄκρα, -or as the inscriptions call them, λόφοι (crests, ridges)[227]. Bursian -describes the hills of Laurium (Lauriongebirge) as a continuous mountain -chain, and includes it with Parnes, Brilessos, and Hymettos among the -main ridges (grössere Gebirgszüge) of Attica[228]. The writer has spent -some days walking in the mining district. The sea is always near, and -glimpses of it may be had frequently. But it is the hills that dominate -the landscape, not the sea. More particularly is this the case in the -district that was most mined in the sixth century, where the ground -varies in height from 170 m. to 370 m. (550–1200 feet), and lies well -inland[229]. - -In the light of this probability that the Diakrioi occupied the mining -district of Attica, and of the fact that their name means hill men, it -is interesting to note that the Idaean Dactyls, who “are said to have -been the first miners,” are stated also to have been men of the -mountains[230], and that in German and Welsh the words for miners -(Bergleuten, gwyr y mynyddau) mean literally “hill men.” - -The Greek word Diakrioi would have a peculiar appropriateness for -miners. The ἄκρον is precisely the part of a hill that the farmer has -least use for. Miners on the other hand preferred to carry on their -smelting operations on the hill tops, because a better draught is thus -secured[231]. - -It has been pointed out by Milchhoefer[232] that the mining district is -considerably broken up by the Cleisthenic division of Attica into -trittyes. Milchhoefer’s arrangement of the trittyes in the mining -district has been convincingly simplified by Loeper[233], but Loeper -himself leaves the mines divided between three trittyes of three -different tribes. We may therefore still follow Milchhoefer in thinking -that Cleisthenes took special precautions to break up this district. The -same fact is noticed by Milchhoefer about the district round Plotheia, -the Northern deme already noticed as belonging to the Epakria. Here too -the Russian scholar has simplified, but here too only to a limited -extent. “In a breaking up like this of the old hill country of the -Peisistratids” Milchhoefer sees unmistakable signs of “measures directed -against the Peisistratids.” Now that we have as good reason for seeing -Peisistratan hill country round Laurium as round Plotheia, we must -either reject Milchhoefer altogether, or, more probably, see in both -districts centres of Peisistratan influence, of which the Southernmost -was the more important. Mining operations in antiquity were conducted on -a large scale. Forty thousand workers were employed in mines near -Carthagena[234]. - -Athenaeus[235] speaks of tens of thousands of chained slaves as working -in the Laurium mines and losing their lives in an unsuccessful revolt at -the time of the second slave war in Sicily (103–99 B.C.). Of the 20,000 -who deserted to Decelea when it was occupied by the Spartans in 413 B.C. -it is not unlikely that large numbers were miners from Laurium[236]. - -But what was the state of the Laurium district in the days of -Peisistratus? - -[Sidenote: The mines were almost certainly in full work at this period,] - -The mines of Laurium do not appear in history till 484 B.C.[237], when -Themistocles persuaded the Athenians to devote the profits from them to -the building of a navy. The _Constitution of Athens_ speaks of a -discovery of mines in that year. This however is probably rather loose -language. The writer’s words are “on the discovery of the mines at -Maronea.” The “discovery” of 484 B.C. was of the mines in this -particular part of the Laurium district, or rather, in all probability, -of an extraordinarily rich vein in this particular part. “The -disposition of the strata” (at Maronea) “is such that the richest are -not those that could be first reached.... Some centuries of search and -effort were therefore necessary in order to suspect their existence and -to reach their level” (_i.e._ of the rich veins “discovered” in -484)[238]. - -[Illustration: Fig. 5. Corinthian terra cotta tablet depicting a miner -at work.] - -Plutarch says that before this time the Athenians were in the habit of -distributing the Laurium revenues among themselves, and that -Themistocles had the courage to persuade them to give the habit up[239]. -This agrees with Xenophon where he declares that “no one even attempts -to say from what period people have tried to work them[240].” The mines -of Lydia, Cyprus, and Spain all appear to have been developed in the -seventh century B.C.[241]. The Siphnian mines were at full work about -525 B.C.[242]. Mining operations are depicted on several Corinthian clay -tablets, that cannot be later than the early part of the sixth -century[243]. One of them is here reproduced (fig. 5). - -Herodotus says nothing about the date of discovery of the Attic mines in -his account of the proceedings of 484 B.C.[244]. It would not be like -him to keep silence about an epoch-making discovery, or even a -phenomenal “rush,” if any had occurred just at this time. Elsewhere he -tells us that the Siphnians were already distributing among themselves -the money from their mines about the year 525 B.C.[245]. - -Modern writers have been inclined to talk of the great “rush” of -484[246]. But against the silence of Herodotus they can set only the -reference in the _Constitution of Athens_ to the “discovery” at Maronea, -which has been discussed already. What made the great impression at this -time was probably not so much the output as the employment of the output -on the building of a fleet. That surely is the point of the contemporary -allusion in the _Persae_ of Aeschylus. The chorus of Persian elders -tells the Persian queen about the Athenians’ - - Fount of silver, treasure of the land[247] - -just after mentioning the prowess of the Athenian troops, and just -before explaining the weapons that they use. - -The idea proposed in 484 by Themistocles was not original. Seven years -earlier the Thasians had used the revenues from their mines to build a -fleet against the Persians[248]. It was doubtless the success of the -Athenian fleet in a supreme crisis that caused the Athenians to remember -with such pride this triumph of the voluntary system. - -There can therefore be no question that the mines were worked in the -sixth century[249]. But if we are to understand the position of the -leader of the mining interests at that period, we must learn something -about the conditions and position of the miners. - -[Sidenote: and the miners free men, good material for a political - faction.] - -The leaders of the Plain and Coast had a powerful body of citizens -behind their backs. The mines on the other hand, at least from the time -of Xenophon, were worked almost exclusively by slaves[250]. - -In the fourth century very occasionally poor citizens worked their own -allotments[251]. Skilled work like smelting seems always to have been -done by free men. The tombstone of “Atotes the miner,” carved in letters -of the second half of the fourth century, declares that he was a -Paphlagonian “of the root of Pylaimenes, who fell slain by the hand of -Achilles,” and boasts of his unrivalled skill[252]. But there is no -recorded instance of a citizen working in a mine for wages[253]. This -however does not prove that they did not do so in the days of -Peisistratus, when, as pointed out in the introductory chapter, the -conditions of labour must have been very different from what they became -in the fifth and fourth centuries, and industrial slavery had scarcely -yet begun. A fragment of Solon suggests that it was quite usual in his -days for citizens to work with their own hands, though whether for pay -or on their own account is not stated and no particular occupations are -specified[254]. - -About ten years after Solon’s legislation the Athenians are found -resolving “on account of their factions to elect ten archons, five from -the nobility (Eupatridai), three from the farmers (agroikoi), two from -the craftsmen (demiourgoi)[255].” The equation of these three groups of -archons with the three factions of the Plain, Coast, and Hill is more -than doubtful[256]. The farmers _par excellence_ are naturally located -in the plain: also it is doubtful whether Peisistratus had already -“raised the third faction” twenty years before he became tyrant, and -over fifty before his death. The two different sets of names point in -themselves to two different groupings of the population. Solon’s -quadruple division into pentekosiomedimnoi, hippeis, zeugitai, and -thetes proves a certain fluidity and tendency to cross grouping. But in -any case the two craftsman magistrates prove that craftsmen or artizans -were already an important element in the free population. - -In this matter of free labour in an industry such as mining, fifth -century Phrygia is perhaps a better guide than the Attica of Nikias or -Demosthenes as to the state of things in Attica during the sixth -century. In Phrygia a generation after the Samian tyrant Polycrates, who -died about 522 B.C., Pythes was working mines with citizen labour[257]. -Even in Athens in the early days of Pericles the earlier conditions seem -still to have prevailed. “Each trade τέχνη had its body of (free) -labourers organized (τὸν θητικὸν ὄχλον συντεταγμένον)” to carry out the -great public works that were financed from the Delian treasury. A long -list of the trades thus organized ends with miners[258]. - -Considering the evidence already adduced for equating the sixth century -miners at Laurium with the presumably free Diakrioi, may we not use the -notices already quoted about the latter as being of impure race and a -mob of hirelings[259], and infer that in the sixth century the mines of -Laurium were worked by free men, partly of foreign extraction and mainly -working for hire? - -This is of course conjecture. But it produces for the first time a -picture of the Diakrioi that harmonizes with the notices in question. -Alien shepherds and alien small farmers are most unlikely in -autochthonous Attica. - -Outlander miners on the other hand have always been familiar, wherever -there have been mines to work. When mining operations were resumed at -Laurium some thirty years ago, the immediate result was a very mixed -population, the local supply of labour being supplemented from France, -Italy, and Turkey. One of the ancient gold mines near Philippi bore the -significant name of the asylum[260]. In the Laurium district itself in -ancient times the people of at least one deme, Potamioi, were famous for -their readiness to admit foreigners to citizenship[261]. Potamioi is -placed by Loeper right in the centre of the mining district, well away -from the sea[262], and very near the probable site of Maronea[263]. A -member of the deme Semachidai is found sharing a tombstone with two -strangers from Sinope[264]. We have just had occasion to notice a -Paphlagonian miner, though of a later date, and we shall see in a moment -that in the sixth century the mines of Laurium were worked in close -connexion with those of Thrace. There are no records of specific -Thracians employed in the Attic mines during the sixth century. We only -know that just after the Persians conquered Thrace, at the close of the -reign of Hippias, there was a large Greek element in the mining -population near the Strymon[265]. But in the fifth century we have a -famous case of a Thracian mine-owner settling in Athens in the person of -Thucydides, whose father was a Thracian, and whose Thracian mines -probably lost him his command in the Athenian navy, and turned a -second-rate admiral into the greatest of historians[266]. Nikias hired -out a thousand hands whom he owned in the mines to Sosias the -Thracian[267]. - -This ends our examination of the various steps by which Peisistratus -made himself tyrant, effected his second restoration, and finally rooted -his power. In all three cases the evidence points to the conclusion that -the secret of the tyrant’s power was his control of mines either in -Attica or Thrace. To complete the enquiry it is necessary now to examine -the accounts of his first restoration. As observed already, this event -is recorded only in anecdotal form. As independent evidence it would -hardly be worth considering. All that is here claimed for it is that it -can be so interpreted as to corroborate the conclusions already reached. - -[Sidenote: The strange story of Peisistratus’ first restoration] - -According to the story Peisistratus persuaded the Athenians to take him -back by dressing up a stately woman named Phye to personate Athena and -order his recall[268]. It is generally agreed that this story will not -do as it stands. Various attempts have been made to explain it -away[269], but all of them are equally unconvincing. Perhaps the reason -is that all alike are based on some single unessential detail of the -story. None of them interprets it in the light of the better known parts -of the tyrant’s career, and more particularly of the matter of fact -accounts of his second restoration. Beloch indeed, like the Russian -Hirschensohn, believes that there was only one restoration, with which -the Phye story and the account of Peisistratus’ return from the Thracian -mining district are both to be connected[270]. He notes that the cause -of banishment is the same in both cases; that the chronology is -suspiciously symmetrical; that Polyaenus combines incidents from the two -restorations; and that Eusebius[271] and Jerome[272] both make -Peisistratus begin his second reign about the time that Herodotus begins -his third, while neither of them mentions a third reign at all. Note too -that corresponding to Phye in the first restoration we have in the -second a “sacred procession” from the temple of Athena Pallenis -conducted by an Acarnanian soothsayer[273]. - -These points are not convincing. Similar improbabilities, and -repetitions and chronological symmetries can often be discovered in -narratives of the most unquestionable authenticity[274]. The fact that -Polyaenus combines the two accounts proves nothing, unless we assume him -to be incapable of confusing two similar events. Further, Beloch is -forced to make the marriage of Peisistratus with Megacles’ daughter -precede his first exile, since he sees that the childlessness of the -marriage led to the breach with the Coast[275]. In this he goes dead -against the tradition on a point where there is no reason to suspect it. - -What Beloch’s arguments do emphasize is the fact that the situations -during Peisistratus’ two periods of exile were in some ways very -similar. The sameness of the two situations may in fact be the reason -why so little has been remembered about the earlier. It raises the -question whether the tyrant mined and coined during his first exile. -There is no certainty that he did either, but the probability is that he -did both. As regards Thrace we know that Miltiades, probably with -Peisistratus’ permission and approval[276], had settled in the Gallipoli -peninsula soon after the tyranny was first established at Athens[277]. -Thrace is the one region that we can be sure that the tyrant must have -considered as a possible place of exile. [Sidenote: is connected by -Babelon with the Athena-head coins of Athens] As regards the coinage it -has been suggested on the high authority of Babelon[278], that the -famous series with the owl on one side, and the head of Athena on the -other (fig. 6), which remained for centuries the coin types of the city, -was actually started to commemorate the help that the tyrant claimed to -have received from his patron goddess at the time of his first -restoration. - -[Illustration: Fig. 6. Coin of Athens with Athena and owl.] - -The evidence is not conclusive. The arguments for and against this date -are based on a few literary references that are too vague to be of much -use, on points of style and technique from which it is notoriously -dangerous to draw conclusions, on a comparison of the coin and pottery -statistics from Naukratis which it is no less dangerous to use as -evidence, on a hoard found in 1886 among the pre-Persian remains on the -Athenian Acropolis which, as far as the circumstances of the find are -concerned, may have been lost or deposited there long before the -catastrophe, and only establish a _terminus ante quem_ that nobody would -think of disputing, and on certain alliance coins (Athens-Lampsacus, -Athens-Sparta?, Athens and the Thracian Chersonese)[279]. These last -look more promising at first sight, but only the Athens-Lampsacus coins -can be dated with any certainty, and they, unfortunately, are very -small, and may have been struck under difficulties, so that it is not -easy to be sure of their chronological position in the Athenian series. - -We are driven back therefore on to the impressions of experts, most of -whom agree with Babelon that the owl-Athena series cannot begin either -much before or much after 550 B.C.[280]. That is to say that this double -type was certainly in vogue when the tyrant secured his second -restoration by means of his Thracian silver[281], and “rooted his -tyranny” in revenues derived “partly from the river Strymon, partly from -home.” - -[Sidenote: nicknamed (probably just about this time) girl, virgin, - Pallas.] - -Pieces with the double type were sometimes colloquially called girls -(κόραι), sometimes virgins (παρθένοι), sometimes by the virgin goddess’ -own name of Pallas (Παλλάδες)[282]. Sometimes they got their nickname -from the reverse type, and were called owls[283]. “Virgin” is used by -Euripides, “girl” by Hyperides, “Pallas” by Eubulus, “owl” by -Aristophanes. “Owl” is said by the Aristophanes Scholiast to have been -applied to the tetradrachms; the “girl” of Hyperides is some smaller -coin[284]. In the fifth and fourth centuries therefore the bird name, -and the virgin goddess names seem to have been used side by side, like -our sovereign and crown, to indicate two different denominations. When -the names were first used is nowhere stated. The most likely time for a -type to give rise to a nickname is when the type itself is still a -novelty. If this holds good for the coins of Athens, the nicknames -Pallas, virgin, and girl go back to the time of Peisistratus. The owl -had already appeared on earlier issues, stamped on the reverse with a -simple incuse[285], and would therefore at this time attract less -attention than the Athena head. - -Is it possible that we have here the clue to the Phye story? The details -about her being dressed up in full armour and placed in a chariot are -not the essence of the story: they all appear in Herodotus in quite a -different setting, as part of the ritual of the worship of Athena in -North Africa by Lake Tritonis[286]. It can hardly be doubted that one of -these passages is plagiarized from the other, and it is scarcely less -certain that Phye is indebted to the ritual of Lake Tritonis and not -_vice versa_. - -[Sidenote: Was the Athena who restored Peisistratus the lady of the - coins?] - -The kernel of the Phye story lies in the tradition that Peisistratus was -restored by a woman, “as Herodotus says, from the deme of the Paianians, -but as some say, a Thracian flower girl from the deme of Kollytos[287].” -In fact Phye, the human goddess four cubits high, said by some to come -from Attica, and by others from Thrace, who brought Peisistratus back to -Athens for the first time, bears a suspicious likeness to the coins -called sometimes girls and sometimes goddesses, derived some from -Attica, and some from Thrace, with which Peisistratus secured his second -return, and finally established his power. - -Assume for the moment that they were indeed identical, and it is easy to -see how the Phye story may have arisen. Peisistratus certainly claimed -to rule by the grace of Athena. Everyone is agreed in inferring from the -Phye story that he attributed his restoration to the intervention of the -goddess. After the citizens had fulfilled Solon’s prophecy, and -“consented to ruin their great city, induced by money[288],” what more -natural than that one of the tyrant’s opponents should sarcastically -agree that it was indeed Athena who had restored Peisistratus: on which -another might comment that it was not the virgin goddess of Athens who -had restored the tyrant, but an alien being of quite a different order, -a Thracian flower girl. [Sidenote: cp. (i) details in the story that -suggest a derivation from the coins,] The name of flower girl -(στεφανόπωλις) is never applied to Athenian drachmae. If we accepted -Head’s early dating for the Athena type, and assumed a Peisistratan date -for certain Athenian coins[289] where the goddess has had her hair done -by a κεροπλάστης[290] in corkscrew curls (fig. 7_a_) that suggest an -early date[291], and wears the garland (στέφανος) of olive leaves (fig. -7_a_, _b_) that appears regularly on coins of the fifth century, we -might find in flower girl (lit. garland seller, στεφανόπωλις) an -allusion to this detail. The garland seller may often have advertised -her garlands by wearing one herself[292]. - -[Illustration: Fig. 7. Athenian coins: the wreath on the head of -Athena.] - -Numismatists however are now unanimous in making the earliest στέφανοι -on Athenian coins later than Peisistratus[293]. To describe the coins as -flower girls would however be natural enough on the simple supposition -that Athenian flower girls had no high moral reputation[294], and -further perhaps that the business was in the hands of Thracians, just as -that of organ-grinding in England is in the hands of Italians. Or -conceivably στεφανόπωλις on our present hypothesis is to be explained by -reference to the phrase δραχμαὶ (τοῦ) Στεφανηφόρου (drachmae of the -garland bearer)[295], applied at Athens to coins fresh from the mint, -such as must have been put into circulation in large quantities when -Peisistratus returned after his money-making in the districts round Mt -Pangaion. - -How readily to the Greek the garland suggested the flower girl is seen -from an explanation in the _Lexicon Seguerianum_ of a certain -“garland-bearing hero (στεφανηφόρος ἥρως).” It runs: “Either because the -hero is so called, or by way of nickname, because he had many garlands -round him, _or because garlands were sold near him_[296].” The coins -themselves, especially when the garland was the new feature, may -possibly have been sometimes called garland bearers (στεφανηφόροι), as -is shown to be possible by the analogy of such descriptive coin names as -“chest bearer (κιστοφόρος)[297]” and “harp bearer (κιθαρηφόρος)[298].” - -[Sidenote: (ii) attested instances of _Jeu de mot_ on coin types,] - -Such bitter jesting is quite in keeping with the Greek language; the -Greeks were particularly fond of attributing appropriate life and action -to types of living things that figured on their coins[299]. - -[Illustration: Fig. 8. Persian “archer.”] - -The best known instance of a play on such a nickname is that of -Agesilaus of Sparta, who complained that he had been driven out of Asia -by thirty thousand of the Great King’s archers, a colloquial name for -the Persian gold stater or Daric (fig. 8), derived from its type[300]. - -In Athens itself we find Euripides, in a fragment of the _Sciron_, -playing on the double meaning of “virgin,” as also on that of “pony” -(πῶλος), the colloquial name of the Corinthian drachma, that bore on one -side the image of the winged steed Pegasus: - - Some you will secure if you offer a pony, - others with a pair of horses, while others are brought - on four horses, all of silver; and they love - the maidens from Athens when you bring plenty of them. - -The reverse type of the Athenian drachma is punned upon by Aristophanes, -who speaks of the owls of Laurium nesting in the purses of the Athenians -and hatching small change[301]. In 404 B.C., during the final operations -against Athens, Gylippus, the hero of the siege of Syracuse, -misappropriated a large amount of Athenian coin, and hid it under the -tiles of his roof. The theft was revealed by a servant, who informed the -ephors that “there were many owls nesting under the tiles[302].” - -These examples are enough to show that there is nothing improbable in -the suggestion that the Phye story grew out of a remark made by the -tyrant’s enemies about his silver drachmae. Our explanation is of course -pure conjecture, and even at that it has one weak point. The statement -that Phye was a Thracian, so essential to our interpretation, does not -appear in Herodotus, according to whom she came from the Paianian deme -in Attica[303]. - -Can this omission be accounted for? - -There is an anecdote told by Herodotus in quite another connexion[304] -which suggests that it can. - -[Sidenote: (iii) the story of the dressed-up woman] - -In the days just after King Darius had made his conquests in Thrace -(about 512 B.C.), there lived on the banks of the Strymon two brothers -named Pigres and Mantyes, who wished to become tyrants of the land in -which they lived. To carry out this aim “they went to Sardis, taking -with them their sister, who was tall and handsome.” Then waiting till -Darius was sitting in state before the city, having dressed up their -sister as well as they possibly could, they sent her for water with a -pitcher on her head and leading a horse with her hand and spinning flax. -She was noticed by the king, but the result was that he sent an -expedition to her country, and deported her people to Asia. - -The Strymon and Pangaion mines are at this period, before the expansion -of Macedonia, naturally described as Thracian[305]. But in the days of -King Darius, who began his reign about five years after the death of -Peisistratus, part of the country round Mt Pangaion[306], and part of -the banks of the Strymon[307] were occupied by another race called -Paionians. It was to this latter race that Pigres and Mantyes belonged. -[Sidenote: who caused Hippias to lose his throne] They failed to secure -the tyranny that they sought; but the expedition sent by Darius to -deport the Paionians to Asia probably caused Hippias to lose his. - -[Sidenote: as a result of losing his Paionian (Thracian) possessions.] - -It can scarcely be an accident that the tyranny at Athens ended almost -immediately after the removal of one of its two roots, the mines of the -country of the Thracians and Paionians[308]. - -Thus we find the restoration of the tyranny at Athens and its abolition -both ascribed to the dressing up of a tall handsome woman[309]. It is -hardly conceivable that both these events were brought about by the same -“primitive and excessively simple” means. The Paionian dressing up has -every appearance of being the original[310]. - -It is possible that the whole Phye story arose at the time of the -Paionian incident, just as the good stories about some of the bad Roman -emperors must have first had a circulation only after the emperor had -ceased to reign. When Hippias had lost his Thracian and Paionian mines, -and consequently his throne, it might be said with additional point that -the Athena who had restored the father had now deserted the son[311]. - -If the Paionian story is contemporary, as it well may be without being -either true or original, it accounts for the appearance in the -Peisistratus story of a dressed-up woman. Further we have brought the -story down to a period in the history of Athenian coinage when the -garland may already have made its first appearance on the head of -Athena[312], in which case “Thracian garland seller” becomes an -effective description of the type. - -Thus the whole story, as it appears in the Aristotelian _Constitution of -Athens_, has been accounted for. In this, as in the account of -Peisistratus’ second exile, the author of the treatise seems to be -following a better authority than Herodotus. Herodotus’ deviations -appear to be attempts at rationalistic explanation in the best -Herodotean style. From Herodotus’ account of Peisistratus’ second exile -it is plain that he knew nothing of the tyrant’s connexions with Thrace, -of which we are informed in the Aristotelian treatise. According to -Herodotus the whole period of the second exile was spent in Euboea. -Hence the Thracian reference had to be rationalized away. But a fact -mentioned by Herodotus in another connexion[313] points to Hippias -having maintained some sort of position in the North Aegean till the end -of his reign. When in 510 B.C. he was banished, a home was offered him -by the king of Macedon. - -Thrace and Paionia might be used indifferently in the original account, -the latter being the more accurate name, the former the more popular. -Herodotus takes Paionian as a corruption of Paianian, and Thracian as a -popular version of Paionian. That Herodotus himself was personally -responsible for the emendation Paianian is made probable by the words of -the _Constitution of Athens_, “as Herodotus says, a Paianian, as some -say, a Thracian.” The Paionians are made by Herodotus[314] to recognize -their own name in the paian or war-cry of their enemies. Only the verb -appears in the anecdote, and that in the form παιωνίζω, but Herodotus -must have been equally familiar with the forms in -α-, παιανίζω, παιάν, -and the anecdote shows how ready he would be to equate Paionian with -Paianian. I am dealing here with pure speculation, but so too has been -every one else who has tried to explain away this “extraordinarily silly -business[315].” The explanation just offered is at least in harmony with -the rest of our knowledge about both Peisistratus and Thrace. - -Greeks were certainly capable of misunderstanding a _jeu de mot_ based -on a coin type. Mention has been made already of Aristophanes’ -invocation of the “owls of Laurium” to nest in his purse[316]. A -Scholiast on the _Knights_ has turned these owls of silver into real -birds. “The owl,” he says, “is the sacred bird of Athena, that haunts -Laurium in Attica[317].” - -[Sidenote: The tyrant Histiaeus and the Thracian mines.] - -Whatever the truth of these speculations there is no doubt that the -Greeks of the end of the sixth century were fully alive to the political -possibilities of the Thracian mines. Just after the Persian conquest of -Thrace and Paionia Histiaeus of Miletus, one of the Persian king’s Greek -vassals, almost succeeded in securing from the Great King possession of -Myrcinus, a mining centre in the very district from which Peisistratus -had got so much of his wealth[318]. He was in fact granted the gift by -Darius, who however was persuaded by the far-sighted Megabazus to recall -it. What alarms the Persian statesman is the prospect of an able Greek -like Histiaeus establishing himself in a place where there are silver -mines and forests suitable for ship-timber and a large mixed population. -He prophecies that this population will quickly become the employees of -the new owner and do his bidding day and night[319]. - -The Myrcinus incident is bound up in the narrative of Herodotus with the -story of Pigres and Mantyes and their efforts to become tyrants of the -Paionians[320]. Herodotus says definitely that Histiaeus did not aim at -establishing a tyranny at Myrcinus[321]. But this statement seems to be -simply an inference from the fact that Histiaeus was already tyrant of -his own city of Miletus. Even if it is correct, the protests of -Megabazus and their effect on Darius, who at once removed Histiaeus to a -sort of honourable captivity in Persia, sufficiently show that according -to Herodotus himself Myrcinus would have made Histiaeus in the eyes of -Darius and Megabazus a different and altogether more dangerous sort of -ruler[322]. - -It was still comparatively recently that Peisistratus had “rooted” his -power at Athens partly on revenues from the river Strymon. When -Histiaeus’ activities near that river so greatly alarmed the Persians, -it is hard to believe that they were not thinking largely of the -Peisistratids. Thus we have a confirmation of the view that the -Peisistratids’ Thracian revenues had been derived from the silver mines, -and the large mixed population that worked them. - -[Sidenote: Labour and commerce under the tyranny.] - -When once established Peisistratus certainly set himself to secure -control of a large amount of labour by the public works that he -promoted. Kallirrhoe (the Fair Spring), the best source of the Athenian -water supply, was improved by him into Enneakrounos (the Nine -Fountains)[323]. The building that shelters the actual jets is depicted -on a black figure vase[324]. Like Polycrates and the seventh century -tyrants, he was a great builder; the group of Athena slaying a giant, -excavated on the Acropolis in the eighties of the last century[325], -probably belongs to the temple that he built to Athena[326]; his temple -of the Olympian Zeus was not completed till the time of Hadrian. Like -Periander of Corinth, he severely repressed idleness[327]. To -Aristophanes, writing just a century after the fall of the tyranny, the -Athens of Hippias appeared as a city of labourers[328]. - -Beloch well insists on the acute commercial instinct of Peisistratus in -getting a footing on the coast of the Hellespont by the seizure of -Sigeium[329]. Hippias not only kept his hold on the town to the last, -and eventually retired there, but actively developed his father’s line -of policy by forming a close personal connexion with the tyrants of -Lampsacus[330], and effecting a reconciliation with the Philaids, his -rivals on the European side of the strait[331]. - -[Sidenote: Financial troubles of the tyranny before its overthrow.] - -According to the pseudo-Aristotelian _Oeconomica_, Hippias on one -occasion called in the Attic coinage at a fixed valuation, and then -reissued the same money[332]. Some scholars have tried to explain away -this last statement, and assume a change in the type[333]. But if, as is -natural to suppose, χαρακτήρ in this passage means type, then the Greek -implies that no such change was made. The other actions of Hippias -recorded in the same passage are confiscations of property (front doors, -projecting top stories of houses, etc.), sold again, with no alteration -whatever, to the original owners. Six and Babelon[334] maintain that -χαρακτήρ means denomination, and that Hippias proceeded to give the name -of didrachm to a piece that had been previously a drachm. They quote -with some effect the statement of the Aristotelian _Constitution of -Athens_[335], ἦν ὁ ἀρχαῖος χαρακτὴρ δίδραχμον. Their arguments, though -plausible, are not decisive: but whatever the explanation of these -particular words, the whole passage makes it fairly certain that the -step was an attempt to avert a financial crisis by some desperate -manipulation of the coinage. It points to a serious threat of -approaching insolvency, such as must have been the inevitable result of -the loss of the Thracian mines[336]. - -[Sidenote: The Alcmaeonid opposition to the house of Peisistratus.] - -No aspect of the tyranny at Athens can be adequately examined without -some reference to the remarkable family that from first to last with -only one brief lapse led the opposition to the tyranny[337], and after -its overthrow played the principal part in moulding the destinies of the -democracy. In the earlier part of the sixth century the Alcmaeonidae had -become extremely rich. That is the fact that emerges from the story of -Alcmaeon and the king of Lydia told in Herodotus[338]. They were at the -head of the faction of the shore, and Meyer is probably right when he -says that their “enormous” wealth was due to trade with Lydia[339]. The -fall of Lydia must have meant heavy losses to the family[340]. It is -probably no accident that Peisistratus appears to have “rooted” his -tyranny only after his rivals had suffered this great financial blow. - -Nor is it probably a pure coincidence that as the Peisistratids secured -their power by a mixture of commercial enterprise and political -intrigue, so it was by a mixture of political intrigue and commercial -enterprise that they were finally driven out, through the Alcmaeonidae -undertaking the contract for rebuilding the temple at Delphi[341]. - -This building operation was regarded by the Athenian informant of -Herodotus as an expensive but effective way of purchasing divine -favour[342]. But the Aristotelian _Constitution of Athens_ says -otherwise: “the Alcmaeonidae secured the contract for building the -temple at Delphi, and made a fortune as the result[343].” The two -versions may not be so contradictory as they at first sight appear. A -way of reconciling them is suggested by Philochorus (early third century -B.C.), who makes the Alcmaeonids accept the contract, make their money, -successfully attack the Peisistratids, and then give rich -thank-offerings to the Delphic god[344]. Isocrates and Demosthenes -confirm the statement that Cleisthenes organized the expulsion of the -Peisistratids with money secured from Delphi, but both regard the money -as a loan[345]. - -But Delphi recalls yet another field of Alcmaeonid activities. According -to the official Delphic records not Solon[346], but Alcmaeon, the -paternal grandfather of the Athenian Cleisthenes, was the Athenian -general in the “sacred” war which early in the sixth century was waged -by the Amphictyons, and particularly Athens and Sicyon, against the -people of the Delphic port of Krisa. The significance of this war is -discussed below in the chapter where Sicyon is dealt with in detail. -Here it is enough to notice that Cleisthenes of Athens was, through his -mother, the grandson of his namesake the tyrant of Sicyon who took so -prominent a part in this “sacred” war. He was probably also his -heir[347]. In the days of Hippias Sicyon seems to have been still under -a tyrant, but not of the house to which Cleisthenes belonged. His name -was Aeschines. Evidence has been adduced by De Gubernatis[348] for -believing that this Aeschines was an ally of Hippias of Athens. As we -shall see below when dealing with Sicyon, his attitude towards Delphi -was a pivotal point in the policy of the Sicyonian Cleisthenes, and in -his later years Sicyon and Delphi became deadly rivals. Athens can -hardly have kept out of the feud. We know little of the course of -events, and the history of recent years shows how idle it would be to -assume that internal revolutions are always reflected in foreign -politics. But we may be sure that both in Athens and Sicyon an -anti-Delphic policy would have its opponents as well as its -supporters[349]. It is quite conceivable that the Athenian Cleisthenes -had once aimed at a union of central Greece with Athens, Sicyon, and -Delphi as the three chief states of the union and Cleisthenes himself as -the chief statesman, controlling the immense treasure of the oracle and -basing on it a tyranny over the two other cities, with Sicyon -controlling the trade of the Peloponnesus and the far West while Athens -did the like for the Northern trade and developed with the Persian -empire those friendly relations which the Alcmaeonidae were still -suspected of favouring at the time of the battle of Marathon. If this is -all speculation it at least recalls the fact that the received accounts -of Cleisthenes are all centred on what he did in Athens in the few years -following the fall of Hippias. That indeed is practically all that is -known about the second founder of the Athenian democracy; but -considering his varied antecedents and his remarkable ancestry it is -well to consider how small a chapter this must have been in what was -probably a long[350] as well as an eventful life. But to return to the -short chapter about which something is known we find that the way -Cleisthenes secured his position against the banished tyrant was by -outbidding him. “He enfranchised many foreigners and slaves and -metics[351].” The Peisistratids had ruled Athens as masters. -Cleisthenes, by the stroke of genius so excellently epitomized by -Herodotus, “took the people into partnership[352].” - -It was this memorable partnership that dealt the cause of tyranny at -Athens its final blow. Cimon indeed appears to have tried to make -himself all-powerful in the state by the lavish outlay of his enormous -wealth. But the result was only to cement the partnership between his -Alcmaeonid rival and the people. The army, the navy, and the civil -service became paid professions, or at least paid occupations, and the -state, with Pericles at its head, perhaps the largest and most popular -employer of the free population. Individuals of outstanding wealth were -more and more kept in their political place by having to perform -expensive liturgies. To make a public display of wealth became a -perilous thing; anyone who did so was suspected of aiming at the tyranny -and dealt with by ostracism or other effective means. - - - - - Chapter III. _Samos_ - - -[Sidenote: Samian trade and industry in the seventh and sixth centuries - B.C.] - -The Samians had from early times been great shipbuilders and sailors. -They were among the first of the Greeks to adopt the Corinthian -invention of the trireme, somewhere about the year 700 B.C.[353], and in -most of the naval warfare of the next two hundred years they are found -playing a prominent part[354]. Still more important were the -achievements of their merchantmen. It was a Samian ship, commanded by -Kolaios, that “sailing towards Egypt, put out for Platea (in Libya) ... -and hugging the Egyptian coast, continued their voyage, carried along by -an east wind: and since the breeze did not drop, they passed the pillars -of Herakles and arrived at Tartessus, enjoying divine guidance. That -market was at that time unopened (ἀκήρατον)[355].” The opening up of the -Spanish silver mines through the port of Tartessus, the biblical -Tarshish, was an event of first-class importance. “On their return home -these Samians made the greatest profits from the carrying trade -(φορτίων) of all the Hellenes of whom we have exact information, -excepting only Sostratos the Aeginetan[355].” The date of the Samian -voyage to Tarshish appears to have been about 620 B.C.[356]. - -It was a Samian, Xanthias by name, who about the same time as this -brought to Egypt “on business” the famous Greek hetaera Rhodopis[357]. -When Amasis, king of Egypt from 569 to 526 B.C., “showing himself a -friend of the Greeks ... and to those that came to Egypt, gave the city -of Naukratis to dwell in[358],” Samos was one of the three Greek states -to set up an establishment of its own there[359]. These establishments -were of course commercial. “In the old days Naukratis was the only -market in Egypt. There was no other[360].” - -Samian trade developed side by side with Samian industry. From early -times the islanders had enjoyed a great reputation as workers in metal, -especially the fine metals[361]. The beginning of the connexion with -Tartessus at the end of the seventh century gives the latest probable -date for the beginning of this industry. Samian woollen goods were no -less famous[362]. - -[Sidenote: Why no tyranny was established till the middle of the sixth - century.] - -The island was not however exclusively commercial. There was a powerful -landed aristocracy called γεωμόροι[363], who doubtless owned the rich -Samian olive-yards[364]. The late date of the tyranny in Samos is -probably to be explained by the power of the γεωμόροι. The result was -something very similar to what occurred under similar circumstances at -Athens. There may have been attempts like that made at Athens by -Cylon[365], but no tyrant appears to have established himself firmly -before the rise of Polycrates early in the second half of the sixth -century. Till then the geomoroi were sufficiently powerful to make a -tyranny impossible. Then, about 545 B.C., the Samian landowners received -a fatal blow to their power, when the Greek cities on the coast of Asia -Minor were conquered by the Persians. These cities, whether friendly or -hostile to Samos, were all equally its commercial rivals, and the -disturbances connected with the Persian conquest, which affected them -all while leaving Samos untouched, must have greatly increased the -importance of the commercial element on the island[366]. - -[Sidenote: Polycrates becomes tyrant: his tyranny and Samian trade.] - -It was within a few years of these events that Polycrates made himself -tyrant of Samos. The exact date is not known, but it was probably -after[367] the Persian conquest of the mainland, and may well have been -due in part to the increased commercial importance of Samos which -resulted from that conquest. - -However this may be, Polycrates, when established as tyrant, is found -controlling the commercial and industrial activities of his state. All -through his reign he was a great sailor and shipowner[368]. He built the -famous breakwater in the Samian harbour[369], and was credited with the -invention of a new type of boat, called the Samaina[370] (see fig. 9). - -[Sidenote: The wars and “piracies” of Polycrates and their possible - commercial character.] - -The general conception of the Samian tyrant is indeed that he used his -ships in naval and piratical operations rather than for peaceful -purposes of trade. Thucydides says of him that “having a powerful fleet -he made divers of the islands subject to him, and in particular captured -Rheneia and dedicated it to the Delian Apollo[371].” But even the -capture of Rheneia, which Thucydides seems to regard as the principal -warlike achievement of Polycrates’ fleet, was one that may have had -important commercial consequences. By capturing Rheneia Polycrates -became practically master of Delos. He celebrated the Delian games[372]. -Considering the unrivalled situation of Delos it is not unlikely that -the festival was even in the sixth century the “commercial affair[373]” -that it was in later ages, and such as others also of the great Greek -games appear to have been from the days of the tyrants[374]. In that -case it is not inconceivable that the repeated purifications of Delos in -the sixth and fifth centuries may have had not only a religious -signification, but also the purpose of restricting a commercial element -that was constantly reasserting itself. - -We need not be surprised to find a commercial potentate exerting his -power by means of an army or navy. War has so far in the world’s history -always stood in the immediate background of even the most peaceful -political power. There is nothing in the nature of a capitalist -government to make it anti-militarist. If, as seems to have been the -case, the early tyrants realized how seldom war does anything for -commercial prosperity except to ruin it, it only shows them to have been -men of unusual insight, as indeed there are many reasons for thinking -that they were. If Polycrates was an exception to the generally peaceful -character of the early tyranny, the fact may be explained by his -antagonism to Persia, with which he appears to have been openly at war -during part of his reign[375]. - -Our records of this war contain obvious mis-statements about the death -of Cyrus, and their whole truth has been questioned[376]. But the -hostility of Polycrates to Persia is sufficiently shown by his -friendship with Egypt. His break with Amasis king of Egypt can scarcely -be anything but a desertion to the common enemy Persia. The catholic -character of his piracy, which stopped all shipping though it -confiscated only hostile craft, is not really explained by his jest when -he claimed that by this method he not only injured his enemies whose -ships he kept, but also secured the gratitude of his friends, whose -ships he released. His proceedings become really comprehensible only if -we understand them as one of the earliest instances of a strict -blockade, plainly directed against the great land power to the east. The -Peloponnesian expedition against Polycrates shows simply that the -neutrals to the west did not yet realize who was their real enemy[377]. -The danger from Persia only became apparent to European Greece when -Darius invaded Scythia and Thrace[378]. - -There is every reason to believe that Polycrates supported Cambyses -half-heartedly and under compulsion. He went over to the Persian side -only when Cambyses was collecting a force against Egypt[379], or in -other words when the Great King was advancing on the Mediterranean with -an overwhelming force. He sent to his support only a disaffected -contingent that was a source of trouble and weakness to him at home in -Samos[379]. He met his death not so very long after, in an attempt to -break away from Persia at what must have been the very first -opportunity, just about the time when Cambyses fell ill[380]. - -On the whole therefore it seems best to accept as historical the account -of the war between Cyrus and the Samians, since though only mentioned in -late authors, it accords so well with all that is known of the period -from early sources. It is ascribed to the period when Samos ruled the -waves[381], which we have seen already to mean the reign of Polycrates, -and this indication as to date agrees with the statement[381] that the -war occurred at the end of Cyrus’ reign. It brings Polycrates into a -situation which alike in its patriotic and in its selfish side -anticipates the attitude of Dionysius of Syracuse towards Carthage. But -even this war may have been in part an attempt to maintain Samos in her -commercial and industrial position. From the Samian point of view war -with Persia meant first and foremost a struggle against Miletus. The -island city and its neighbour on the mainland had long been rivals, and -the supremacy of the one had meant the depression of the other. Miletus -was now under the Persians and had made favourable terms with her -conquerors. What Cyrus was aiming at in Anatolia is made sufficiently -plain to us by the description in Herodotus of the way that he treated -the conquered Lydians. They were to bring up their children simply to -play music and to become retail traders[382]. A similar account is given -by Zenobius: “they say that Cyrus, having overcome the Lydians, charged -them to become retail traders (καπηλεύειν) and not to acquire -arms[383].” Zenobius says nothing about the music. There can be little -doubt that the trading was the main thing. Both writers say that Cyrus’ -object was to prevent the Lydians breaking out into armed rebellion, and -this may be true as far as it goes. But Cyrus did not treat all his -rebellious provinces in this way. It looks as though he intended to make -conquered Sardis, devoted entirely to trade and with the Persian army -behind it, into the commercial capital of his kingdom, with Miletus as -its chief seaport. This policy, if successful, would have been -disastrous to the trade of Samos. May it not have been to prevent it -that Polycrates organized the fleet and pursued the naval policy that -won him such fame and unpopularity? We have an instance of rivalry -between Polycrates and Sardis in the “laura” which he constructed at -Samos, the significance of which is discussed below[384]. - -In any case Polycrates employed his fleet for commercial purposes as -well as warlike. He traded with Egypt[385], which was the one Eastern -country that was during most of his reign independent of Persia and open -to Samian trade. The statement of Clytus the Aristotelian that -“Polycrates the tyrant of the Samians from motives of luxury gathered -the products of every country[386]” shows that Polycrates had a personal -interest in the transport trade. There is unfortunately nothing to show -that he employed his own vessels. - -[Sidenote: The tyranny of Polycrates and Samian industry.] - -It is difficult again with the available evidence completely to identify -the tyrant with Samian industry. He was the patron of Theodorus, who was -famous not only as a jeweller, but also as a maker of metal vases[387]. -The possible significance of this fact will be seen in a moment, when we -proceed to examine the statements about Polycrates’ activities before he -became tyrant. There is however no evidence that Polycrates was himself -engaged in the Samian metal industries during his reign. For the woollen -industries the evidence is stronger. Among the things which -Athenaeus[388] declares that Polycrates, when tyrant, introduced into -Samos are sheep from Miletus. Athenaeus is here quoting Clytus. Later in -the same passage he quotes another writer, Alexis, as stating that the -tyrant imported sheep from Miletus and Attica. The sheep were of course -imported not for their mutton but for their wool: the wools of Miletus -were particularly famous. During his reign Polycrates lent support to -Arcesilaus III, king of Cyrene in “sheep-rearing Libya[389]” and himself -probably a merchant prince[390], who when banished from his own -dominions sought refuge with the Samian tyrant[391]. - -[Sidenote: The tyranny of Polycrates and Samian coinage.] - -One reported act of Polycrates seems out of keeping with the view that -he was a great merchant. “It is said that Polycrates struck a large -quantity of local coins in lead and then gilded them and gave them to -them in payment[392].” Herodotus, our authority for this statement, -dismisses it as idle (ματαιότερος). But it is supported by numismatic -evidence[393], and the reason alleged for the issue in Herodotus is -perfectly plausible. Polycrates was resorting to a desperate expedient -for getting rid of an invader. Apart from the question of its truth, the -report is valuable as indicating that Polycrates, like his contemporary -Hippias, was credited with a tendency to make practical experiments with -the coinage. This is borne out by another report, quoted by Suidas[394], -according to which the Samaina reputed to have been invented by -Polycrates was not a ship but a coin. - -The two reports are not necessarily contradictory. The tyrant may have -introduced both the ship and the coin, like Anaxilas, tyrant of Rhegium, -who introduced the hare into his dominions and commemorated his action -by putting a hare on his coins (fig. 9). The Samaina is found on extant -Samian coins (fig. 9), some of which appear to have circulated in Samos -itself about the middle of the fifth century, while others have been -associated with the Samian refugees who migrated to the far West in 494 -B.C. and occupied Messana in Sicily with the aid of Anaxilas of Rhegium, -whose subjects they became. The type cannot be traced back to the days -of Polycrates himself, but the numismatic evidence is not abundant -enough to make that fact decisive. As far as it goes it even inclines -slightly in favour of Suidas. If the coin type used by the refugees of -494 B.C. appears later on the coins of Samos itself, the fact is best -explained by assuming that it was already in use in Samos before the -earlier date. Moreover one of the coins generally associated with the -refugees is inscribed with the letters Α Ι, which have no obvious -connexion with Messana or the Samians who went there, but which do on -the other hand form the first syllable of the name Aiakes, the name of -the Samian tyrant from whom the refugees fled to Messana. Aiakes was a -nephew of Polycrates, so that if the Α Ι coin is rightly ascribed to him -the Samaina type is traced back to the family of Polycrates, if not to -Polycrates himself. Aiakes had been restored to Samos by the Persians -after their defeat of the Greek fleet at the battle of Lade. In that -battle the Samian fleet, with the exception of the ships manned by the -men who fled later to Sicily, had disgraced itself by deserting to the -Persians. Aiakes profited by their proceedings but he can hardly have -been proud of them. If he struck coins with the Samaina type it is more -likely to have been because his uncle had done so before him than from -any desire to commemorate either his own exploits, whether as a -shipbuilder or a sailor, or those of his uncle, who so successfully -defied the Persian power to which the nephew owed his throne[395]. - -[Illustration: Fig. 9. Samian coin with Samaina and Messanian coin with -hare.] - -[Sidenote: The public works of Polycrates during his tyranny, including - an aqueduct and a harbour breakwater.] - -In his domestic policy Polycrates won great fame as the promoter of -great public works. “I have dwelt the longer on the Samians,” says -Herodotus[396], “because they have erected three works that surpass -those of all the Greeks.” The works in question are the harbour -breakwater already mentioned, the huge temple of Hera, and the -underground aqueduct constructed by Eupalinus of Megara[397]. Herodotus -himself does not say who was responsible for these works being -undertaken; but the context shows that the historian is thinking of the -Samos of Polycrates. The first architect of the temple is given by him -as Rhoecus, the partner of Theodorus, who worked for Polycrates. Great -engineering activities in Samos about this time are indicated by the -fact that the engineer who shortly afterwards bridged the Bosporus for -Darius was a Samian[398]. The breakwater round the harbour is naturally -ascribed to the time of the Samian thalassocracy under Polycrates. There -is therefore little doubt that modern scholars and archaeologists have -been right in identifying these great constructions with the -“Polycratean works” referred to by Aristotle[399] as typical -undertakings of a typical tyrant, the more so as there are numerous -instances of early tyrants undertaking these particular kinds of -work[400]. - -One work of a similar kind that Samos owed to Polycrates deserves at -least a passing notice, namely the “laura” that he erected as a rival to -what is called in Sardis the Ἀγκὼν γλυκύς[401]. Etymologically “laura” -is probably to be connected with “labyrinth[402].” The word has various -meanings[403]. The laura at Samos appears to have been a place for -buying and selling[404], possibly an early predecessor of the -labyrinthine bazaars still in use in the great cities of the near East -such as Smyrna, Cairo, and Constantinople[405]. - -If Polycrates’ laura was in fact a great bazaar, it is easy to imagine -how it became a byword for luxury[406] and worse things than that. The -description of it by Clearchus as a place of ill-repute is plainly from -a source unfriendly to the tyrant[407]. - -[Sidenote: The labour employed on these works appears to have been - mainly free.] - -Whatever the facts about the laura, the sums that Polycrates spent on -his public works in general and the number of hands that he employed on -them must have been very large. Of the life led by these employees we -know little. Aristotle states that the object of the tyrant’s works was -“the employment and poverty of his subjects[408].” This implies that the -work was ill-paid and unpopular. It is doubtful however whether -Aristotle quite understood the social and economic conditions of sixth -century Samos[409]. On the other hand no inferences as to the normal -wages in the days of the tyrant are to be drawn from occasional -instances of high payments made by him for exceptional work[410]. One -fact however becomes plain from the statement in the _Politics_. The -hands employed by Polycrates must have been mainly free men. - -Like some tyrannical employers of labour in more recent times, -Polycrates appears to have recognized the value of having his employees -provided with amusements of not too elevated a type. Holidays and -drunkenness appear to have been frequent under his regime[411]. The -encouragement or permission of unprofitable amusements for the multitude -is of course quite consistent with great severity in other -directions[412], and more particularly with the suppression of the -liberal forms of recreation popular among citizens of the better -class[413]. - -[Sidenote: The tyrant’s mercenaries.] - -He maintained his power by means of mercenaries, native it should be -noticed, as well as foreign[414]. These mercenaries were in all -probability a development of the fifteen men at arms[415] with which he -had seized supreme power, and, like the original fifteen, they were -presumably free men[416]. - -[Sidenote: His pension scheme for the mothers of fallen soldiers.] - -While on the subject of Polycrates’ warlike achievements it is -interesting to note that he did something to put military service on a -sound financial basis by providing for the mothers of soldiers who fell -in his service. The way he did so is described by Duris, a historian of -Polycrates’ own island, who was born about 340 B.C.[417]. “He gathered -together the mothers of those who had fallen in war, and gave them to -the wealthy among the citizens to support, saying to each, ‘I give you -this woman to be your mother.’” No provision was made for the widows; -but from the Greek point of view this was hardly required. They would -naturally be provided for by their second husbands[418]. The method of -financing this popular measure recalls the Athenian liturgies. The -measure itself points to the tyrant’s troops having been free men. - -One fact recorded of the times just after Polycrates’ fall appears at -first sight to offer a reason for assuming that Polycrates had relied on -highly trained servile labour, which the city had found it a problem to -deal with after his fall. A large number of slaves purchased the -citizenship[419]. There is however a simpler explanation of this fact. -Syloson, the brother of Polycrates, when restored by Persia, had almost -annihilated the free population[420]. - -Polycrates the tyrant has therefore been shown to have taken some part -in the commercial, the industrial and probably the financial activities -of the city that he ruled. - -[Sidenote: Before he became tyrant Polycrates already had a concern in - the chief Samian industries.] - -Let us now see what is known about his career before he had made himself -supreme in the state. - - Before he had become tyrant he used to get expensive coverlets and - drinking vessels made, and lend them out to those who were holding - weddings or entertainments on a particularly large scale. - -These words are from Athenaeus[421]. It could scarcely be more -definitely stated that Polycrates owed his throne to his wealth in -coverlets and drinking vessels. - -The coverlets (στρωμναί) are surely the manufactured article for which -Polycrates subsequently introduced Milesian and Attic sheep. The word -seems to denote a Samian speciality. A form of the corresponding verb -(ἔστρωται) is used by Theocritus in the passage where he refers to the -famous wools of Samos and Miletus[422]. - -It seems probable that Polycrates’ brother and partner at first in the -tyranny was also a merchant or manufacturer of woollen goods. At any -rate after his banishment we find Darius wanting to buy a cloak (χλανίς) -from him. According to Herodotus[423] it was the one that Syloson was at -the moment wearing. The incident took place in Egypt. Syloson was one of -the Greeks who followed Cambyses there after the Persian conquest. Some -of these had come as traders (κατ’ ἐμπορίην), some as soldiers, some as -mere sight-seers. Syloson, who was in the market place at Memphis at the -moment of Darius’ request, replied: “I am not selling this at any price; -but I offer it you for nothing.” What precisely Syloson was doing in the -market place is unfortunately not certain. According to Grote[424] he -was just walking there. The Greek is ἠγόραζε, which may mean -“frequenting the market place,” or “buying,” or “selling in the market -place.” The incident suggests rather the last meaning, and that Syloson -was in Memphis as a trader (κατ’ ἐμπορίην) in cloaks (χλανίδες). The -unromantic commercial aspect of the transaction between Syloson and -Darius, which is already obscured in Herodotus’ account, has quite -disappeared in that of Strabo[425], who says simply that Syloson “made a -present to Darius of a garment which he had seen him wearing and taken a -fancy for ..., and received the tyranny as a present in return.” - -The drinking vessels (ποτήρια) were almost certainly of metal. Ποτήρια -of earthenware are only once[426] mentioned in the passages quoted in -Liddell and Scott’s _Lexicon_, whereas there are numerous passages in -which ποτήρια are specifically stated to have been of metal[427]. In the -case before us the fact that they were lent and for entertainments of -special importance points strongly to metal[428]. We have just seen that -Theodorus, who worked for Polycrates later in his career, was a maker of -metal ποτήρια. It may well be the case therefore that Theodorus was -something more to Polycrates than merely his crown jeweller and -silversmith[429]. - -The Samian silversmiths got their material from Tartessus[430]. -Polycrates must therefore have had at least a second-hand interest in -Samian shipping before his accession. In the outline of my views on the -origin of the tyranny published in the _Journal of Hellenic Studies_ for -1906 I observed that there was no evidence that Polycrates procured his -silver in his own ships. [Sidenote: Aiakes father of Polycrates is -probably the Aiakes whom a Samian inscription appears to connect with -sea-borne trade.] That is still the case; but curiously enough only a -few weeks after this observation was made, a find from Samos itself was -published[431], which, with the learned and illuminating comments of the -scholar who published it, has thrown fresh and interesting light on the -close concern which the family of Polycrates already had in Samian -shipping in the days when the future tyrant was still a child. The find -consists of a headless seated statue[432] (fig. 10) that at once recalls -the figures from Branchidae now in the British Museum[433]. The style -both of the figure and of the lettering of the inscription attached to -it point to a date about 550 B.C. The statue was dedicated by Aiakes the -son of Bryson. Aiakes is not a common name. It was borne by the father -of Polycrates. It is not improbable that, as L. Curtius maintains, the -Aiakes who dedicated the statue was none other than the tyrant’s father. -The date suits exactly: so too does the inscription as ingeniously -interpreted by Curtius. The actual words are: - - Ἀεάκης ἀνέθηκεν ὀ Βρύσωνος ὂς τῇ Ἤρῃ - τὴν σύλην ἔπρησεν κατὰ τὴν ἐπίστασιν. - -The context makes it difficult to derive ἔπρησεν from πίμπρημι. Nor can -ἐπίστασις well signify “dream” (visit by night), since the analogy of -κατ’ ὄναρ, κατ’ ἐνύπνιον shows that in that case κατὰ would not be -followed by the article. Curtius therefore takes ἔπρησεν as Ionic for -ἔπρασσεν in the common sense of “exacted,” “collected”: for the single ς -he compares Τειχιούσης for Τειχιούσσης, which actually occurs on one of -the figures from Branchidae. The word σύλη he explains by reference to -Herodotus IV. 152, which describes how the Samians, on their return from -the voyage to Tarshish, “set apart the tithe of their gains, six -talents, and let make a copper cauldron after the manner of an Argive -mixing bowl, and dedicated it in the Heraeum[434].” - -[Illustration: Fig. 10. Aiakes, father of Polycrates.] - -The gains from Tarshish, so Curtius suggests, may actually have been -called σύλη, the idea of which word he thinks had grown to include all -gains made by ventures on the sea. The name of Polycrates’ brother -Syloson is almost certainly to be derived from σῦλον (= σύλη, see above) -and σῶν = σαῶν from σαῶ = σῴζω (save)[435]. Curtius rightly observes -that this name takes the connexion of Polycrates’ family with σύλαι, -sea-spoils, sea-gains, back to the time when Syloson received his name, -that is, presumably, a generation or so before he and his two brothers, -Pantagnotos and Polycrates, seized the tyranny of their native city. - -[Sidenote: Polycrates is said by Herodotus to have owed his fall to an - attempt to get money enough to rule all Greece.] - -The great wave of the Persian invasions of Europe, that began only a few -years after Polycrates’ death, and the rise of the Athenian empire after -the Persians’ final repulse, have somewhat eclipsed the glory of the -Samian thalassocracy, which practically synchronized with the tyranny of -Polycrates. During his reign he was unquestionably the most famous Greek -in the whole Greek world, and his extraordinary series of unbroken -successes was reported and discussed everywhere[436]. From the Greek -point of view, according to which all excesses are to be avoided, -whether of good things or of bad, he was too successful. The end could -only be Nemesis or retribution. This feeling is expressed by Herodotus -in the letter in which he makes the king of Egypt advise Polycrates to -break the series by voluntarily giving up the thing that most he cared -for[437]. - -The story goes on to tell how Polycrates was moved by the letter to cast -away in the sea the most precious thing he possessed, a ring made by -Theodorus, how the ring came back to him in the body of a fish served up -at the royal table, and how Amasis “learnt that it is impossible for one -human being to rescue another from the event that is to befall -him[438],” and how accordingly he broke off his friendship with him, -“that when some great and terrible accident overtook Polycrates, he -might not himself be grieved at heart with the thought that it had -befallen a friend[439].” - -In all probability it was not Amasis who broke with Polycrates, but -Polycrates who deserted Amasis when the Persian peril began to look -irresistible[440]. But the dubious historicity of the incident only -heightens its historical value: it shows that so far as the story of the -end of Polycrates is false or inaccurate in point of fact, it has been -altered to suit the requirements of Greek poetic justice and to make the -way that Polycrates lost the throne a fitting requital for the way he -had won and held it. - -This is the story as given by Herodotus[441]. A new Persian satrap had -been appointed at Sardis, who, learning that Polycrates aspired to rule -“Ionia and all the islands,” set a trap for him by pretending to need -his help and promising in return much money. “As far as money goes,” the -promise ran, “thou shalt be ruler of all Hellas.” “When Polycrates heard -this he was glad and willing. And since he greatly desired money, he -first sent Maeandrius the son of Maeandrius to inspect.... But Oroetes, -learning that the inspector was expected, did as follows. He filled -eight chests with stones, except to a very slight depth just round the -top, where on top of the stones he set gold.” For the events that -followed the precise words of Herodotus need not be quoted. Maeandrius -was deceived. Polycrates crossed over to see Oroetes, was seized by him, -and crucified. - -[Sidenote: Value of Herodotus on Polycrates.] - -It is important to remember how good are the sources for the history of -the Samian tyranny. The famous Anacreon lived at Polycrates’ court[442], -and “all his poetry” was “full of references to him[443].” Practically -all of it has perished, but it was accessible to the writers from whom -we draw. Herodotus had conversed with Archias the Spartan, whose -grandfather, also named Archias, had distinguished himself in the -Spartan expedition against Polycrates, and whose exploits on that -occasion had led to a permanent connexion between the Spartan family and -the Samians[444]. - -As mentioned already in discussing the coins stamped with the Samaina, a -son of Polycrates’ brother Syloson was reinstated by the Persians as -tyrant of Samos after the battle of Lade in 494 B.C. He is not heard of -again, and in 480 B.C. a certain Theomestor “became tyrant of Samos, -being set up by the Persians[445].” But even if the son of Syloson died -immediately after his restoration, his reign still brings us down to -times well within the memory of Herodotus’ father. With sources like -these it is highly likely that the main outlines of the facts have been -preserved, and that where they have been improved on or added to, the -changes or additions, whether conscious or unconscious, have been made -to suit the general history of the period. Thus for example we should -expect the facts about Polycrates’ downfall to be in the main correctly -reported: but the story of the letter from Amasis shows that we may -expect touches to be added to emphasize the view that it was a -visitation of Nemesis, an act of retribution on the part of the divine -power. - -The account in Herodotus states that Polycrates fell because he hoped by -means of boundless money to make himself tyrant of all Greece. The -stress laid on money all through the narrative is remarkable[446]. -According to all the laws of Greek psychology, the inference is surely -this: that it was by means of his wealth that he had won and maintained -his power. - - - - - Chapter IV. _Egypt_ - - -[Illustration: Fig. 11. Psamtek I.] - -The sixth century tyrants of Athens and Samos may be regarded with some -probability as rulers who had come to their power by means of their -wealth. Before proceeding to deal with the earlier Greek tyrants, as to -whose antecedents the evidence is necessarily much more meagre and -indecisive, it will be found convenient to turn our attention for a -while to Egypt and Lydia. In both these states we shall find evidence, -some of it very positive, that from the end of the eighth century -onwards the kings were gaining and maintaining their power by means of -their wealth. With both these states the Greeks of the seventh century -were in close touch; from both they learned and borrowed much, since -Egypt and the East had still much to teach them. The history therefore -both of Egypt and Lydia is closely relevant at this period to that of -the Greek world that they adjoined. It gives a context to the -disconnected fragments of evidence that will have to be dealt with in -some of the succeeding chapters, and makes it possible to fit them -together into something resembling a significant whole. - -[Sidenote: Commercial and industrial developments in seventh century - Egypt.] - -Like Greece, Egypt had been through a dark period during the first three -centuries of the first millennium B.C. After about two centuries of -Libyan rulers (XXIInd and XXIIIrd dynasties) whose energies were often -devoted to dealing with rival kings while subject princes spent the -resources of the country in feuds among themselves, Egypt had fallen -during the eighth century under an Ethiopian dynasty which she changed -occasionally for Assyrian rule. But early in the seventh century, Egypt -recovered its material prosperity. By the middle of the next century it -is said to have been more prosperous than ever it was before[447], and -this prosperity is reflected in the law of Amasis (570–526 B.C.) against -unemployment[448] as also in the organization of industry into “more or -less sharply defined classes or guilds[449],” in improved business -methods and mechanical processes. The forms of legal and business -documents became more precise[450]; the mechanical arts of casting in -bronze on a core and of moulding figures and pottery were brought to the -highest pitch of excellence[451]. Inscriptions of this epoch found in -the gold-mining regions prove that the work of the ancient kings was -taken up with renewed ardour[452]. The ports of Egypt were thrown open -to the commerce of all the nations[453]. Strong fleets were maintained -both in the Mediterranean and in the Red Sea[454]. An attempt was made -by Pharaoh Necho (610–594 B.C.) to anticipate the Suez Canal by one -connecting the Nile with the Red Sea[455]; and the exploits of Vasco da -Gama were anticipated by a Phoenician ship that was sent out by this -same Pharaoh Necho and circumnavigated Africa[456]. In these activities -of Necho Sayce[457] sees an attempt to make Egypt the chief trading -country of the world. - -These great developments took place under a single dynasty, the XXVIth, -which came from Sais on one of the western arms of the Delta[458]. -[Sidenote: Psammetichus I (664–610) rose to power] The history of this -dynasty can be traced back at Sais to the eighth century B.C., but the -first of the family to rule all Egypt was Psammetichus (Psamtek), who -reigned from about 664 to 610. Necho the father of this Psammetichus and -grandfather of the Necho mentioned just above had been king or governor -of Sais and Memphis under the Assyrian king Assurbanipal[459]. -Psammetichus was driven into war and foreign politics to free his -country from foreign invaders. The details of his warlike achievements -do not here concern us. What does here concern us is to observe how he -secured the power that enabled him to set about them. - -Early in his career, Psammetichus, so Herodotus informs us[460], had -been one of twelve kings who had each received a twelfth of the country -to reign over[461]. [Sidenote: according to Herodotus by means of Greek -and Carian mercenaries,] One day some bronze-clad Ionian and Carian -freebooters were driven to Egypt by stress of weather. Psammetichus -“made friends with the Ionians and Carians, and by great promises -persuaded them to join him: and having persuaded them he thereupon, in -conjunction with his supporters in Egypt and the mercenaries, put down -the (other eleven) kings, and became master of all Egypt[462].” - -The man who among twelve or more rivals[463] secured the monopoly of -Greek and Carian mercenaries must have been a man of outstanding wealth. -But this is not all our information about him. A fuller account is -preserved in Diodorus[464]: - -[Sidenote: according to Diodorus by trading with Phoenicians and - Greeks.] - - When the twelve had ruled Egypt for fifteen years it befel that the - kingdom passed into the hands of one of them through the following - causes. Psammetichus of Sais, who was one of the twelve kings, and - ruler of the parts beside the sea, used to provide cargoes (φορτία) - for the merchants, and particularly for Phoenicians and Greeks; by - such means he disposed profitably of the products of his own land - and secured a share of the products of the other nations, and - enjoyed not only great wealth (εὐπορίαν) but also friendship with - nations and princes. - -Could it be more plainly stated that Psammetichus owed his throne to his -wealth and his wealth to trade? - -[Sidenote: Value of these statements of Herodotus and Diodorus.] - -The commercial origin of Psamtek’s power can only be questioned by -questioning the value of our authorities. The rest of this chapter will -be devoted to showing that there is no reason for doing this, while -there is much to confirm the passages just quoted. - -Herodotus and Diodorus[465] had both visited Egypt and are among our -best authorities. At first sight indeed they do not seem quite in -agreement. But the story they tell is essentially the same. The -difference is one of emphasis. Herodotus seizes on a single incident and -makes much of the description of the Ionians and Carians as men of -bronze. The point was worth emphasizing; for from the military point of -view the first appearance of the heavy-armed hoplite in Egyptian history -marked an epoch[466]. Diodorus contradicts Herodotus only in stating -that it was not an accident that led Psammetichus to employ these -foreign hoplites[467]. The rest of his narrative only supplements -Herodotus, and the silence of Herodotus is no reason for thinking that -the later historian was not drawing on good and early sources[468]. Even -Herodotus could not incorporate in his history every scrap of knowledge -that he possessed, and for Egypt in the seventh century there may well -have been contemporary documents which were not consulted by Herodotus -but were by Diodorus. Diodorus’ account has in fact been accepted by a -considerable number of modern scholars[469]. [Sidenote: Cp. Strabo on -the Fort of the Milesians] They point out that it agrees with the -statement of Strabo about the Fort of the Milesians[470] that “in the -days of Psammetichus the Milesians sailed with 30 ships and put in at -the Bolbitine mouth, and disembarking built the foundation just -mentioned.” - -There is one difficulty in this passage of Strabo. Psammetichus is -described in it as the contemporary of Cyaxares king of the Medes, who -reigned from 624 to 584 B.C., so that the Psammetichus referred to might -be Psammetichus II (594–589). But Psammetichus in Strabo appears -elsewhere always to mean the first and most important king of that name. -Cyaxares too both from his date and his nationality is an odd person for -a Greek writer to quote in order to indicate the date of an Egyptian -king[471]. Hirschfeld is therefore probably right in rejecting this -parenthesis as a learned but unintelligent gloss[472]. - -The Bolbitine mouth of the Nile is near the great lake and marshes of -Bourlos[473]. Psammetichus I, before he overcame his rivals in Lower -Egypt, is said by Herodotus[474] to have spent a period of exile in the -marshes, and the marshes are shown by the context to have lain near the -sea[475]. Thus quite apart from Diodorus, by simply comparing Herodotus -and Strabo, a case may be made for thinking that the arrival of the -bronze men from Ionia was not the accidental occurrence that Herodotus, -after his way, makes it out to have been, but that it had some close -connexion with the Milesians’ Fort. - -[Sidenote: and Assurbanipal on help sent to Psammetichus by Gyges of - Lydia.] - -That Psammetichus made it his policy to cultivate “friendship with -nations and princes[476]” in Asia Minor is sufficiently shown by the -famous clay cylinder of Assurbanipal, king of Assyria (about 668–626 -B.C.), which states[477] that - - Gyges King of Lydia, a district which is across the sea[478], a - remote place, of which the kings my fathers had not heard speak of - its name ... his forces to the aid of Psammetichus[479] of Egypt, - who had thrown off the yoke of my dominion, he sent. - -The troops sent by Gyges may well have been none other than the Ionian -mercenaries that made Psammetichus master of all Egypt[480]. The -alliance of Psammetichus with Gyges adds to the probability that the -Egyptian was responsible for the foundation and development of the -Milesian settlement in his country, since we know that Gyges had allowed -the Milesians to establish the Hellespontine Abydos in what was then -Lydian territory[481]. - -[Sidenote: History of Psammetichus’ predecessors:] - -If trade and riches raised Psammetichus to supreme power about the year -664 B.C. their influence was probably making itself felt in Egyptian -politics at least some little while before that date. It will greatly -strengthen the credibility of Diodorus on the early history of -Psammetichus if this can be shown to have been in fact the case. - -[Sidenote: (i) Sethon in 701 B.C. based his power on “hucksters and - artizans and trades people.”] - -In 701 B.C. Sennacherib made his famous expedition against Palestine and -Egypt, which were saved only by the plague sent upon the Assyrian host -by the Angel of the Lord[482]. According to the Egyptian version -recorded in Herodotus the king of Egypt at this time was Sethon or -Sethos, priest of Hephaestus. When the priest-king prepared to defend -his country against the Assyrian “he was followed by none of the warrior -class, but by hucksters and artizans and trades people[483].” No king of -the name of Sethon is known either to the Egyptian monuments or to the -Greek and Latin lists of the kings of Egypt: his individuality has been -the subject of much controversy. Later in this chapter reasons will be -given for thinking that he was a prince of the same city and probably of -the same house as Psamtek. The point to be emphasized here is the -appearance just at this period of a Pharaoh who rests his power on the -support of the mercantile and industrial classes. - -[Sidenote: (ii) King Bocchoris (d. 715 B.C.) and his commercial - legislation.] - -Shortly before the days of Sethon another Egyptian king had won great -fame by his recognition of the commercial tendencies of his age. This -was Bocchoris the lawgiver, the solitary representative of the XXIVth -dynasty, who appears for a time to have been recognized as king of Egypt -until in 715 B.C. he was taken and burnt or flayed alive by his -successor Sabacon, the first king of the Ethiopian (XXVth) dynasty[484]. -Diodorus says that the laws concerning contracts were attributed to -Bocchoris and that he brought more precision into the matter of -contracts. These statements are illustrated in a remarkable way by -actual business documents that have come down to us from that time[485]. - -A faience vase (fig. 12) with Egyptian scenes and the name of Bocchoris -has been found in the Etruscan city of Tarquinii (Corneto)[486]. It is -held by Maspero and v. Bissing to be of pure Egyptian workmanship[487]. -Before its discovery the only evidence that Bocchoris had dealings with -Europe was a reference in Plutarch[488] which makes Bocchoris the judge -in a case involving a Greek hetaera named Thonis. The Plutarch passage -is doubtful evidence, but the Corneto vase suggests that already in the -reign of Bocchoris the Egyptians and perhaps the king himself already -had dealings with the trading nations of the North. This would fit well -with the fact that Bocchoris was probably the predecessor of a king -whose following consisted of hucksters and artizans and trades people. -Bocchoris himself is said by Diodorus to have been reputed the most -money-loving of men[489]. - -[Illustration: Fig. 12. Vase with cartouche of Bocchoris found at -Tarquinii.] - -[Sidenote: (iii) Tafnekht, father of Bocchoris, resisted the Ethiopians - thanks apparently to his command of the sea.] - -Bocchoris’ father Tafnekht[490], the first of the Saite princes (749–721 -B.C.), is not known to have had any commercial interests or connexions. -He is best remembered for his struggle against Pianchi, the first -Ethiopian ruler to claim the throne of the Pharaohs. Of this struggle we -have Pianchi’s own version, preserved in the famous Pianchi stele. While -Tafnekht’s partizans were holding Memphis against the Ethiopians we hear -of the employment of artizans and master masons as soldiers[491]. The -force however is stated to have been small, and it is not quite certain -which side it was fighting on. Tafnekht, when the struggle went against -him, retired to “the islands of the sea,” from whence he was able to -negotiate with Pianchi in complete safety. Tafnekht himself described -the situation not without tact in a letter to Pianchi: “To whatsoever -city thou hast turned thy face, thou hast not found thy servant there, -until I reached the islands of the sea, trembling before thy might, and -saying ‘his flame is hostile to me.’” Eventually he submitted to the -Ethiopians, but the submission seems to have been little more than -nominal. Pianchi after receiving it is no more heard of in the Delta, -and Tafnekht, to judge from the position held after him by his son -Bocchoris, must have regained considerable power. - -This may have had its base in naval supremacy. In the ancient list of -thalassocrats, or states that successively ruled the waves, preserved to -us by Syncellus, Eusebius and Jerome, the thalassocracy of Egypt falls -at about this period. The only list that gives a precise date is that of -Jerome, who puts it between 783 and 748 B.C. But the lists give the -duration of each thalassocracy as well as absolute dates, and, as -pointed out by J. L. Myres, if, instead of following the dates in years -from Abraham, we calculate from the duration of the various -thalassocracies, working backward from the period of the Persian wars, -then the end of the Egyptian supremacy falls not in 748 but in 725[492]. -This dating makes Tafnekht a thalassocrat[493], and explains how he was -able to stand up against Ethiopia and the comparatively little damage -that he sustained in spite of his military failures. In 715 we find -another Ethiopian invading the Delta. The new prince of Sais, Bocchoris, -presumably had no impregnable naval base. He was caught by the Ethiopian -Sabacon and burnt or flayed alive[494]. It is only when Psamtek formed -alliances with the naval power that had replaced Egypt that the Saite -princes fully regained the throne of the Pharaohs. This time their power -had a sounder financial basis. It lasted for nearly a century and a -half, and was then suddenly destroyed at its zenith by irresistible -forces from without. On the reckoning which ends Egyptian naval -supremacy in 725 B.C. the command of the sea when Psamtek was building -up his power was in the hands of the Carians. It is precisely the -Carians, along with the Milesians (who on the same reckoning were -thalassocrats from 725 to 707 B.C.), who are said by all our ancient -authorities to have been the basis of Psamtek’s power[495]. - -If the king who ruled Egypt in 700 B.C. based his power on the trading -and industrial classes, and a king who reigned twenty years earlier drew -up the first commercial code in Egypt, while under the predecessor of -this latter king Egypt had been supreme at sea, then by 670 B.C. -conditions may well have been favourable for the commercial activities -of Prince Psammetichus as described by Diodorus. [Sidenote: Tafnekht and -probably Bocchoris and Sethon were (not kings of all Egypt but) princes -of Sais, the city of Psammetichus, and belonged possibly to the same -family as Psammetichus.] But still more will this have been so if, as -seems likely, both Sethon and Bocchoris were Saite princes of the same -house as Psammetichus himself. The evidence is weak and inconclusive and -for that reason difficult to summarize shortly. But the conclusions that -it seems to point to are sufficiently important to make the attempt -worth while. - -One point seems fairly certain. Sethon was not the name of the conqueror -of the Assyrians. Far more probably it was his title, a graecized form -of the priestly title stm, stne, setmi, or satni[496]. If his actual -name is still doubtful, it is not for lack of suggestions. Sethon has -been identified with (_a_) Khamois son of Ramses II[497], (_b_) Shabaka, -first king of the Ethiopian dynasty[498], (_c_) Shabataka, successor of -Shabaka[499], (_d_) Taharqa, the Biblical Tirhaka[500]. - -These identifications are all untenable, the first two on account of -their dates, the rest because they make Sethon an Ethiopian. The warrior -class that refused to support Sethon was Ethiopian in sympathy and not -likely to desert an Ethiopian[501]. The Sethon story glorifies the god -Ptah (Hephaestus) of Memphis whereas the Ethiopian dynasty was devoted -to Amon of Thebes[502]. Griffith indeed suggests that Taharqa, who -became king of Ethiopia and Egypt after 700 B.C., may at the time of -Sennacherib’s defeat have represented the reigning king Shabataka in -Lower Egypt, possibly with the title of priest of Ptah at Memphis[503]. -But there is no evidence for this having been so, and the picture of -Taharqa as a king with no real soldiers at his back is not easily -explained. On the contrary, as pointed out long ago by Lepsius[504], the -Biblical account[505] appears to differentiate Pharaoh king of Egypt, -whom it calls a broken reed, and Tirhaka king of Ethiopia. Similarly the -Assyrian cylinders distinguish the kings of Egypt from the king of -Miluhhi = Meroe = Ethiopia[506]. The kings of Egypt who are thus -referred to in the plural[507] are plainly the rulers who at the period -divided among themselves the lands of the Delta. The evidence all points -to the conclusion that Sethon was one of these Delta chiefs, and -presumably one of the most important of them, who acknowledged when -forced to the suzerainty of Ethiopia or Assyria as the case might be, -but did his best to keep clear of both great powers. - -It is not improbable that Sethon belonged to the same family as -Psammetichus, or at any rate that he was one of his predecessors on the -throne of Sais. As starting-point for identifying him we have two facts. -He was high priest of Ptah and he was alive in 701 B.C. A generation -earlier the title Sem of Ptah was borne by Tafnekht, the chief of Sais -from about 749 to 721 B.C.[508] who led the Delta in its struggle -against the Ethiopian Pianchi[509]. A generation after Sethon the -Assyrian cylinders[510] describe Necho I (672–664 B.C.) the father of -Psammetichus I as king not only of Sais but also of Memphis, the home of -the Sethon tradition. A whole line of Saite rulers may be traced from -Tafnekht onwards to Psammetichus I[511]. All of these kings seem to have -been something more than mere local rulers. The Pianchi stele makes it -plain that Tafnekht aimed at becoming king at least of the whole of -Lower Egypt. Bocchoris, the solitary king of the XXIVth dynasty, has -been discussed already. Stephinates, Nechepsus, and Necho I appear in -Africanus[512] as the first three kings of dynasty XXVI, Psammetichus I -coming fourth on the list. This statement is not discredited by the fact -that other writers[513] begin the dynasty with Psammetichus, while -Eusebius[514] puts Stephinates second, after Ammeris the Ethiopian. The -three versions need not be mutually exclusive. Psammetichus was -unquestionably the first of the Saites to win for his house the -undisputed kingship of all Egypt. Hence the position generally assigned -to him. In another way too he represented a new departure dynastically. -He appears to have had family connexions with Ethiopia, and to have -consistently aimed at an entente with the Ethiopian royal house[515], -who may have originally left him a free hand in the Delta from the -desire to put a buffer state between Ethiopia and Assyria. Ammeris -appears to be a Greek form of (Ta) Nut-Amen, Rud-Amen, or Amen-Rud, as -the last of the Ethiopian kings is variously called[516]. His appearance -at the head of the XXVIth dynasty is a record of its Ethiopian -connexions at this time[517]. Africanus on the other hand, following -Manetho, who was himself an Egyptian, records Psamtek’s ancestry in the -direct line, and regards them, rather than any Ethiopian or Assyrian -conquerors, as the lawful kings of the whole country[518]. - -We are now in a better position for trying to identify the Sethon of -Herodotus. This Saite dynasty was probably represented at the time of -Sennacherib’s invasion by Stephinates. In Africanus his reign as first -king of the XXVIth dynasty begins later, about 685 B.C. But this leaves -a gap of 30 years with no recorded rulers of Sais and Memphis. Petrie’s -explanation of this hiatus may be right. He thinks that Stephinates was -probably son and successor of Bocchoris, but that after Bocchoris had -been crushed and burnt by the Ethiopians in 715 B.C. the Saite power -remained for some time a very broken reed. It is therefore not unlikely -that the Stephinates of Manetho is the Sethon of Herodotus. No prince of -the name appears on Egyptian monuments, but it has been plausibly -suggested by Petrie[519] that Stephinates is another Tafnekht with -perhaps a sigma carried over by a Greek copyist from some word before -his name. May we not guess what this word was? The first Tafnekht styled -himself Sem of Ptah. The story of Satni Khamois[520] shows that the -title might be prefixed to the personal name. May not the strange form -Stephinates be simply a Greek corruption of Satni Tafnekht or, as the -name is sometimes transcribed, Tefnakhte[521]? - -A family connexion between Bocchoris and the later Saites is harder to -establish. In support of it there are these facts: a Samtavi Tafnekht -appears among the officials of Psamtek I; and, as the name Tafnekht was -borne by the father and predecessor of Bocchoris[522], this Samtavi -Tafnekht has been recognized by Petrie[523] as “doubtless a brother or -cousin of the king.” The name Bakenranf itself is borne by another of -Psamtek’s officials[524], who may well be the Bocchoris son of Neochabis -(Nekauba) mentioned by Athenaeus[525], in which case he would have been -an uncle of the reigning king[526]. A direct connexion between the -XXIVth and XXVIth dynasties has indeed been often suspected[527]. They -may stand to one another much as the English Lancastrians to the Tudors, -separated by a period of eclipse and by the alliance with their rivals -that was made in each case at the period of the restoration[528]. - -[Sidenote: Popular stories of Satni Khamois, which probably reflect the - atmosphere of Sais under Sethon,] - -It was probably during this period of eclipse that two popular stories -of an earlier date were revised and received the shape in which they -have come down to us[529], and in which also they very possibly have a -bearing on the history of the Herodotean Sethon. Their hero is Satni -Khamois, son of Ramses II, who protects the king his father not by force -of arms but by learning and magic. - -Satni and Sethon both save their country where the military had failed. -“The military chieftains of the chief ones of Egypt were standing before -him (Pharaoh Usimares) each one according to his rank at court” when the -Ethiopian came and threatened to “report the inferiority of Egypt in his -country, the land of the Negroes.” And just as the captains and the -courtiers proved helpless against the Assyrians in the days of Sethon, -so did they against the Ethiopians in the days of Satni. This is the -connecting link. The value of the Satni story for the history of Sethon -is that it probably gives the atmosphere of the Sethon period, and that -being so it helps to show that Sethon was already pursuing in many ways -the Saite policy. Griffith for instance has observed that Satni is not -presented in a very heroic light. But neither did any of the later -Saites adopt the heroic pose. Nothing could be less like the grand -monarque than Psamtek as pictured on a relief in the British Museum -(above fig. 11)[530] or Amasis as pictured in the pages of -Herodotus[531]. [Sidenote: recall in tone those told of Amasis, the last -great Saite pharaoh.] The same picture of Amasis is presented to us by -the popular Egyptian stories. “Is it possible,” his courtiers ask, “that -if it happens to the king to be drunk more than any man in the world, no -man in the world can approach the king for business[532]?” - -Amasis, who was virtually the last of the Saites, is said to have been a -man of the people[533]. In the days of Sethon (Satni Tafnekhte), who -perhaps heads the dynasty, a story of the Satni Khamois cycle told how -that royal prince had personally visited the kingdom of the dead to -learn the lesson of Dives and Lazarus[534]. - -[Sidenote: Conclusions as to the early history of the Saite dynasty.] - -This concludes our examination of the history of the early Saites. It -points to a consistent policy carried out with a remarkable combination -of perseverance and versatility by a succession of rulers who may have -been all of a single family and who certainly inherited in unbroken -succession the same aims and the same essential method of attaining -them, which was marked out for them by the place and the age they lived -in. The Saite power grew to be supreme in Egypt while Ethiopians and -Assyrians were contending for the land. From force of circumstances Sais -had to be a military power. But the city owed its victory over its -rivals between 721 and 670 B.C. first and foremost to the fact that it -lay off the main track of war. As always when Egypt is involved in a -great war it is the Eastern frontier that faces the main enemy. Sais was -not always able to remain neutral, but lying right away in the West it -was able at least to preserve and even to develop its commerce. It -seized its opportunity and did so. The commercial code of Bocchoris, the -hucksters and artizans and tradespeople of Sethon, and the cargoes of -Psammetichus mark three great stages in the development, at the end of -which, to quote the words of Maspero, “the valley of the Nile becomes a -vast workshop, where work was carried on with unparalleled -activity[535].” - -All these considerations lend a general probability to the narrative of -Diodorus. They do not however specially confirm his statements about -Psamtek’s trading with the Greeks. [Sidenote: Sais and Greece: -foundation of Naukratis:] Greek commerce in Egypt in the days of the -Saites is bound up with the name of Naukratis. “In the days of old,” -says Herodotus[536], “Naukratis was the only emporium in Egypt. There -was none other.” This is an overstatement the origin of which will be -seen when we come to deal with Amasis, the last but one of the Saite -Pharaohs. But it implies that Naukratis eclipsed in importance all the -other Greek trading stations in the country. It concerns us therefore to -enquire what was the position of Naukratis in the days of Psammetichus. -The question has been much disputed, especially since the eighties of -the last century, when the site was excavated by Petrie and Ernest -Gardner, and an account of the city was published by Petrie[537] based -on the literary sources and the results of the dig. As however some of -the excavators’ archaeological conclusions have been challenged in many -quarters, and as too some important archaeological evidence has only -recently come to light, it may be worth while to summarise briefly the -whole body of available material. - -[Sidenote: (_a_) literary evidence;] - -S. Jerome under the date Olymp. VII 4 (= 749 B.C.) says “the Milesians -held the sea for eighteen years and built in Egypt the city of -Naukratis[538].” This statement agrees with Stephanus Byzantinus[539] -who calls Naukratis “a city of Egypt from the Milesians who were at that -time supreme at sea.” Jerome and Stephanus are in harmony with -Polycharmus[540] who mentions a certain Herostratos as living at -Naukratis and trading there and making long voyages in the XXIIIrd -Olymp. (688 B.C.). But there are other writers who put the foundation -later. Strabo, in the passage already referred to[541], after describing -the foundation of the Milesians’ Fort in the days of Psammetichus, -continues: “and eventually they sailed up to the Saite nome and after -defeating Inaros in a naval engagement they founded the city of -Naukratis.” Lastly we have Herodotus[542] stating that King Amasis -(570–526 B.C.) “gave the city of Naukratis for Greeks who came to Egypt -to dwell in,” an assertion that taken by itself might mean that -Naukratis was founded in or after 570 B.C.[543]. - -One further witness remains to be cited. Sappho wrote a poem reproaching -her brother Charaxos for his devotion to a Naukratite hetaera named -Doriche, with whom he had fallen in love when bringing Lesbian wine to -Naukratis by way of trade[544]. Among the papyri discovered by Grenfell -and Hunt at Oxyrhynchus is a fragment containing sixteen mutilated -Sapphic lines that almost certainly form part of this very poem[545]. -This means that Naukratis had already grown to be a pleasure city in the -days of Sappho. Unfortunately her dates are not absolutely certain. A -recent heresy brought her down to the reign of Amasis, but her floruit -is generally given as the end of the seventh century, and there seem to -be no sufficient reasons for not accepting that date. - -Such is the literary evidence. No single item of it is decisive for an -early occupation. Those which are definite can be questioned on point of -fact. Sappho, whose evidence alone cannot be so questioned, may -conceivably have written after 570. Combined however they make it -probable that Naukratis rose to importance before the days of Amasis, -and that Herodotus either confused the foundation of the city with that -of the Hellenium[546] or else did not intend his words “gave the city -for Greeks who came to Egypt to dwell in” to imply that the Milesians -were not there in force before the granting of this concession[547]. -Nevertheless, if we were limited to these literary sources, we could not -be certain that where Diodorus seems to supplement his predecessors he -was not merely adding details that they appear to imply. That is in fact -the view of his narrative that some modern scholars apparently -hold[548]. Even if this were so, his additions would still have a -certain value. If Diodorus, writing in the first century B.C., read -between the lines of Herodotus the same unstated implications that have -been read there in recent times, the coincidence points to the -probability that this reading is not altogether wrong[549]. - -[Sidenote: (_b_) archaeological evidence:] - -That is as far as the texts take us. For further light we must look to -archaeology. The new light began by increasing the perplexity. Petrie -and Gardner both claimed that their excavations at Naukratis proved that -it had been an important Greek city from the middle of the seventh -century. But their main arguments were before long shown to be mistaken, -and somewhat naturally it began to be assumed that they must be wrong in -their conclusions. - -[Sidenote: (i) excavations of Petrie, who dated Naukratis from the time - of Psammetichus I;] - -Petrie[550] based his arguments on the following observations. In the -South part of the town he came across what he described as a scarab -factory. There were numerous scarabs of Psamtek I, some of Psamtek II, -and some that are probably of Apries; but none of Amasis. This seems to -date the factory from well before 610 till after 589. Two feet beneath -the factory was a burnt stratum of plain potsherds which must take us -back a good way further, to at least 650 B.C. and probably earlier. The -scarabs are imitation Egyptian and are taken by Petrie to be Greek. -Further South, but also within the area of the burnt stratum, there is a -large enclosure which he describes as surrounded by a strong brick wall. -This he identified with the Hellenium, where Herodotus states that nine -Greek cities had quarters assigned to them by Amasis. The dimensions of -the bricks point to the early Saite period. - -[Sidenote: (ii) further excavations by Hogarth invalidated Petrie’s - arguments;] - -But in 1899 and 1903 further work was done at Naukratis by Hogarth which -led him to the following conclusions. Petrie’s Hellenium is wrongly -identified: it is not a walled enclosure: what Petrie took for walls is -simply débris of houses[551]. The real Hellenium is to be found in what -Petrie called the North Temenos[552]. All Petrie’s evidence for a -seventh century Naukratis comes from his scarab factory and his “Great -Temenos,” both in the South part of the town, which is marked off by the -occurrence there of the burnt stratum already referred to, and is shown -by the finds to have been the Egyptian quarter of the town[553]. The -Greeks would naturally have separate quarters and occupy the Northern -seaward end of the town[554]. The scarabs, it is maintained, may well be -of Phoenician make[555]. - -[Sidenote: (iii) arguments from the vase inscriptions shown to be - indecisive.] - -The early arrival of the Greeks in Naukratis has been thought by Ernest -Gardner to be confirmed by the numerous inscriptions, some painted but -most (about 700) incised, on the pottery from the site[556]. His -arguments were criticized by Hirschfeld and Kirchhoff[557] and have -received little support[558]. In some of them the lettering appears very -crude and primitive; but this may be due simply to the fact that they -are scratched by hasty and unskilled hands. They are not more archaic in -appearance than some of the graffiti on vases from Rhitsona (Mykalessos) -in Boeotia, of which the earliest must be dated in the middle of the -sixth century, while others are contemporary with the finely written -signatures of Teisias, who flourished at the end of the sixth -century[559]. Gardner is certainly wrong in thinking that the lettering -of any of his inscriptions proves a seventh century date. But on the -other hand, as well remarked by Edgar[560], all that his critics have -proved is that none of the inscriptions are _necessarily_ so early. It -by no means follows that they are necessarily not. But even supposing -that the Naukratite graffiti are all sixth century, it does not follow -that Greek Naukratis was of no importance till then. Both Gardner and -his critics and likewise Mallet[561] discuss the inscriptions with too -little reference to the particular sherds on which they are inscribed. -Thirty years ago, when the study of archaic Greek pottery was still in -its infancy, this was perhaps inevitable. But in the present state of -our knowledge the style of the potsherds would be a natural -starting-point for dating the graffiti. Unfortunately the information on -this point given by Gardner is inadequate, and the Naukratite finds have -been so dispersed, that the task of collating sherds and graffiti must -now wait for someone who can devote to it his undivided time and -attention[562]. - -Under these circumstances the best that can be done is to turn to some -more recently excavated site. At Rhitsona the graffiti are nothing like -so numerous as at Naukratis. Still they are numerous enough to justify -certain observations. Some 50 examples have been found[563]. All of them -are on vases of the sixth century. Not one occurs on the numerous vases -of the seventh century also found on the site[564]. Plainly in Boeotia -the fashion of scratching inscriptions on pottery only became -prevalent[565] in the sixth century. By itself therefore the absence of -seventh century Greek graffiti from Naukratis would no more prove the -absence of seventh century Greek worshippers[566] than the corresponding -absence from Rhitsona proves the absence of seventh century graves. At -the other end of the period Edgar has already noticed that “the practice -of dedicating vases in the temples appears to have almost died out at -Naukratis before the middle of the fifth century[567].” Edgar makes this -remark at the end of his discussion of the inscriptions found in 1899. -He is apparently thinking of inscribed dedications. Elsewhere, -discussing the pottery discovered during the same dig, he mentions late -red figure (_i.e._ about 450 B.C. onwards) as plentiful and black glazed -pottery with stamped ornaments inside as particularly common. This -latter ware dates from about the middle of the fifth century, but its -main vogue is later still[568]. Unfortunately not a sherd of this latter -ware from Naukratis has been published, and not a word is said as to its -distribution over the site. It was customarily offered to the dead at -Rhitsona. It may well have been offered to the gods at Naukratis[569]. -There is of course no need to assume that the fashion of inscribing -vases came in and went out simultaneously in Naukratis and Mykalessos. -Boeotia was often behind the times, the Ionians of the seventh and sixth -centuries generally ahead of them. But the Boeotian evidence shows how -cautiously the Naukratite graffiti must be used for determining the date -of the first Greek settlement. - -[Sidenote: (iv) The absence of proto-Corinthian pottery proves little.] - -Nor is there anything against a seventh century date in the absence of -proto-Corinthian pottery[570], which is so prevalent on the mainland in -seventh century Greece. Edgar indeed[571] infers from this absence that -the fabric must have been obsolete by the time the Greeks came to -Naukratis. This argument cannot be maintained. Kinch notices that there -is none of this ware in a chapel that he excavated at Vroulia in Rhodes -and in which he found a good deal of seventh century Greek pottery[572]. -Within the proto-Corinthian sphere of influence the style lasted on side -by side with its successors all through the sixth century[573]. This -late proto-Corinthian ware is equally conspicuous by its absence from -Naukratis. To push Edgar’s argument to its logical conclusion we should -have to doubt the existence of Naukratis in the days of Amasis -himself[574]. Of the twelve Greek cities that had quarters in Naukratis -in the days of Amasis only one, Aegina, belonged to European Greece. For -the little known history of this Aeginetan settlement the absence of -proto-Corinthian may be of significance. Beyond that it is not. - -So far then all that has been proved is that both Petrie and Gardner -fixed partly on the wrong material for deciding whether Naukratis was a -Greek city of importance in the days of Psammetichus I. And even here on -one important point the criticism of them has been shown to be ill -founded. Edgar doubted the Greek character of the scarab factory: but -not only are the types on some of the scarabs of Greek origin, but a -faience fragment from the site shows fragments of a Greek inscription -placed on it before the glazing of the vase[575], a fact that can hardly -be explained except by assuming a Greek maker. - -A great advance was made by Prinz, whose monograph _Funde aus Naukratis_ -marked the first adequate treatment of the pottery. The earlier -controversies about the date of Naukratis had made little appeal to the -potsherds that from their mere numbers offer the most valuable evidence -that has been yielded by the site. [Sidenote: (v) Positive evidence for -an early foundation comes from the pottery actually found, viz.:] Edgar -indeed observed in 1905[576] that - - it seems very doubtful whether all the fragments from the Naukratite - temples can be as late as 570. There is at least a probability that - some of the temples, especially that of the Milesian Apollo, date - from the earlier [_i.e._ Hogarth’s Egyptian] days of the town. - -But apparently the question was still regarded as “primarily a question -of historical criticism[577].” Since Prinz’s monograph appeared the -pottery has taken the first place in the discussion, and it has now -finally confirmed the earlier dating. - -[Sidenote: Milesian (?) (fig. 13),] - -Much of the pottery belongs to the well-marked style known generally as -Rhodian or Milesian[578] (fig. 13) which had its chief vogue in the -seventh century and the first part of the sixth[579]. The crucial point -however for our immediate enquiry is to know how long the style may have -survived. When Prinz states[580] that it is hard to imagine the style -surviving as a competitor of the developed black figure (_i.e._ sixth -century) style he is treading on dangerous ground. The earlier ware has -a charm of its own. The excavations at Rhitsona show that, in Greece -Proper at any rate, old styles of pottery often lasted long after a new -style had been introduced, and that a white ground ware with no human -figures[581] maintained itself all through the sixth century. Against -any such survival of the fabrics under discussion there is however the -fact that at Berezan in South Russia it does not occur with Attic black -figure of the style that spread all over the Greek world by the middle -of the sixth century[582]. At Naukratis itself it is said not to have -been found in the Hellenium erected very soon after 570 B.C., a fact -which points to its vogue having ended by about that date[583]. On the -other hand fragments, mainly of a later phase, have been found in Samos -in a cemetery that can hardly go back beyond the middle of the sixth -century[584]. The Samian material is however scanty[585] and hardly -demands any modification of the conclusions suggested by the rest of the -evidence. - -[Illustration: Fig. 13. Rhodian or (?) Milesian vase found at -Naukratis.] - -Though generally known as Rhodian this ware was probably made at -Miletus[586]. It is the dominant ware in archaic Miletus[587] and has -been found all over the Milesian sphere of influence, including the East -coast of the Aegean, Rhodes, Rheneia, the Black Sea, and to some extent -Sicily and Italy (_via_ Sybaris?). It has seldom been found outside it, -scarcely any being recorded from Greece Proper. The occurrence at -Naukratis in large quantities of what is probably seventh century -Milesian pottery is distinctly in favour of a Milesian occupation in the -reign of Psammetichus[588]. - -[Sidenote: Fikellura (Samian?) (fig. 14),] - -Another fabric of the end of the seventh century and beginning of the -sixth that is well represented at Naukratis is the so-called -Fikellura[589]. This ware is similar to the later phases of the -“Milesian” that show full silhouettes, incisions, and a comparative -absence of fill ornament. Its distinguishing mark is the zone of -crescent-shaped ornament that never appears in the “Milesian” style. Its -date is sufficiently established by its occurrence at Daphnae[590], -which had its Greek garrison removed by Amasis almost certainly in -connexion with his concentration of Greeks in Naukratis[591]. This ware -is assigned by Boehlau to Samos[592], but Perrot[593] well observes how -rash it is to draw wide general conclusions from the meagre finds -published in Boehlau’s _Aus ionischen und italischen Nekropolen_. - -[Sidenote: Corinthian (figs. 22, 34),] - -Corinthian sherds are also fairly frequent at Naukratis[594]. This ware -prevailed in the seventh century and early sixth and survived till the -end of the sixth century in certain stereotyped forms. Some of the -examples from Naukratis appear to be fairly early; _e.g._ the aryballi -with four warriors[595] belong to a type that was very prevalent about -600 B.C. but had died out before Black Figure came in[596]. - -[Illustration: Fig. 14. Fikellura or (?) Samian vase found at Daphnae -(Defenneh).] - -[Sidenote: Attic (fig. 41)] - -The earliest examples of Attic pottery from Naukratis[597] likewise go -back to the very beginning of the sixth century. They belong to a series -of amphorae called Netos amphorae from the name of a centaur painted on -one of them in Attic lettering. Their general archaic appearance and the -survival of the fill ornament show that they must be considerably -earlier than the François vase or the earliest Panathenaic amphorae, -which date from about 565 B.C. Prinz puts them back to about 600. - -[Sidenote: and Naukratite (fig. 15),] - -For dating the Greek settlement at Naukratis this probably imported ware -is of less importance than a very distinctive style of painted -pottery[598] that was found there in far larger quantities than any of -the fabrics just mentioned, and was almost certainly made by Greeks in -Naukratis itself[599]. - -For the dating of this pottery Naukratis offered no certain data. The -decisive evidence is derived from Naukratite vases recently found in -three other sites, Vroulia in Rhodes, Rhitsona (Mykalessos) in Boeotia, -and Berezan in South Russia. Vroulia was excavated by Kinch in 1907 and -1908. The finds were fully and sumptuously published in 1914. They led -him to believe that the site was occupied only from the first third of -the seventh century B.C. to about 570–560[600]. Among them were -fragments of nine Naukratite cups, none of them particularly early -examples of the style, and of one vase in what seems to be a late -development from it. The decoration of the Vroulia Naukratite seems -moreover to correspond to one of the earlier phases of the Milesian (?) -pottery from the same site. - -The Vroulia evidence is confirmed by that of the Naukratite chalice -(fig. 15) unearthed at Rhitsona just at the time when Vroulia was being -excavated by Kinch. The vase, which is almost complete, belongs to a -late phase of the style[601]. Fill ornaments have almost disappeared. -Red and incisions are abundantly used for details. The vase was found -with some hundreds of others in a single interment grave that cannot be -dated much after 550 and maybe a little before that date[602]. A -Naukratite vase cannot have been made to order for a Boeotian funeral. -The Rhitsona chalice by itself renders it practically certain that the -making of Naukratite ware at Naukratis began long before the accession -of Amasis. - -Finally at Berezan on the Black Sea the Russian excavators report that -in 1909 Naukratite pottery was found along with Rhodian (= Milesian), -Fikellura and Clazomenae wares in the lowest stratum of the excavations, -which they date seventh to sixth century, whereas Attic pottery of the -middle of the sixth century (especially Kleinmeister kylikes) first -appears in a higher stratum (sixth to fifth century B.C.)[603]. - -[Illustration: Fig. 15. Naukratite vase found at Rhitsona in Boeotia.] - -[Sidenote: all pointing to a foundation in the seventh century.] - -In the face of all this evidence it becomes highly probable that -Naukratite pottery began to be made before the end of the seventh -century[604]. It is against all likelihood to suppose that the first -thing the Greek settlement at Naukratis did was to start a large -pottery, which proceeded at once to turn out a highly original kind of -ware. And in point of fact we have seen that the finds include a good -quantity of an earlier style of pottery, that takes us back well into -the reign of Psamtek. We have seen too that this pottery, which is one -of the starting-points of the Naukratite style, is probably Milesian. - -[Sidenote: Evidence as to Naukratis based on differences observed in - different parts of the site, viz. (α) the temenos of the - Milesians,] - -A further proof of early Milesian influence at Naukratis remains to be -mentioned. At one spot in the excavations literally hundreds of vases -were found with incised dedications to Apollo[605]. Some ten of these -speak of the Milesian Apollo, the god to whom Necho the son of -Psammetichus made an offering after the victory over Josiah at -Megiddo[606]. The Milesian sherds that it is natural to put into the -seventh century come largely from this spot. Herodotus tells us that the -Milesians did not have quarters in the Hellenium but occupied a separate -temenos. The spot where these sherds and inscriptions were found is -unquestionably the site of this temenos. As to why the Milesians thus -kept apart there can be little doubt that Petrie gives the right -explanation. It means that they were there before the cities that shared -the Hellenium[607]. The finds show that their occupation was already on -a considerable scale before the end of the seventh century. - -[Sidenote: (β) the temenos of the Samians,] - -Two other cities had separate temene, namely Samos and Aegina[608]. The -Samian has been identified by a find of sherds dedicated to the Samian -goddess Hera. But there is from this temenos no mass of pottery that -takes us back into the first half of the sixth century or the second of -the seventh, as there is from the Milesian. “Fikellura” ware that is -very possibly Samian[609] and that may date from about 600 B.C. was -indeed found, but not in quantities like the Milesian[610]. The scanty -finds may be due to Arab farmers who had removed much earth from the -Samian temenos before the excavations began[611]. But the finds as we -have them, with inadequate accounts of the exact spots they come from, -hardly make it likely that the Samian temenos was an early -establishment[612]. True Herodotus[613] tells the tale of a Samian ship -that set sail for Egypt between 643 and 640 B.C. But it got to Spain by -mistake, a fact which suggests an imperfect knowledge of the route it -wished to take. A Samian nymph appears in a fragment of the “Foundation -of Naukratis” of Apollonius Rhodius[614]. But we only know that she once -went to a festival at Miletus and was there carried off by Apollo. - -[Sidenote: (γ) the temenos of the Aeginetans,] - -Of the Aeginetan temenos no trace has been found. It might be suggested -that the Aeginetans had not the habit of inscribing their dedications. -But the absence of proto-Corinthian finds favours the view that this -temenos was not unearthed. It is idle therefore to speculate on its date -and importance[615]. - -In any case we have good reason for interpreting the written texts in -the sense that the Milesians’ Fort made way for the Greek Naukratis -during the reign of Psammetichus. This is historically important. The -Milesians’ Fort may have been a fortified trading station[616]: but it -never had the commercial importance of Naukratis. If, as we have just -seen good evidence for believing, Greek Naukratis was already a -considerable place before Psamtek’s death and owed the fact to Psamtek -himself, then there is an increased probability that Diodorus is right -when he says that Psamtek owed his throne to commercial dealings with -traders from across the sea. - -[Sidenote: (δ) the Egyptian quarter, with its early temple of Aphrodite] - -There are two further points in which the Naukratis excavations bear out -the texts that support this view. Hogarth has shown that South Naukratis -was the Egyptian quarter, and that it goes back probably to before King -Psamtek’s reign. We have seen too that as early as 688 B.C. the Greek -merchant Herostratos is said to have made offerings at Naukratis in the -temple of Aphrodite. There is only one spot at Naukratis that compares -with the Milesian temenos for early Greek finds, and that spot is marked -by a long series of dedications to Aphrodite[617] incised or sometimes -painted on the pottery, which includes Milesian, Naukratite, Ionian buff -and black, and other seventh and sixth century wares. The site of this -temenos has a significance that seems to have been overlooked. It lies -just on the borders[618] of the black stratum area that appears to mark -the limits of the original Egyptian town. When excavations were resumed -in 1899 there was discovered in the North part of the town a second -Aphrodite shrine forming a sort of side chapel to the real -Hellenium[619]. The earliest finds from this Northern Aphrodite shrine -date from the earlier part of the fifth century[620]. May not the -position of the earlier and more southerly shrine be due to the fact -that it was founded before the occupants of the Milesians’ Fort had -moved to Naukratis and established a Greek quarter there? In other -words, may we not see in it a confirmation of Polycharmus[621] when he -speaks of a Greek as offering an image of Aphrodite in a temple of that -goddess at Naukratis in 688 B.C.? The fact that the Aphrodite site was -not burnt is no proof that it did not form part of the earliest -settlement. The men from the Milesians’ Fort who defeated Inaros may -well have spared the Greek sanctuary when they burnt the rest. - -[Sidenote: and the statuettes of the goddess found on the temple site.] - -The voyage of Herostratos was held in remembrance at Naukratis because -of a statuette of Aphrodite that he dedicated in her temple as a -thank-offering for having saved him during a storm. The statuette was a -span long and of archaic workmanship, and had been bought by him at -Paphos during the voyage. When the storm arose the people on board had -betaken themselves to this eikon and prayed it to save them. The goddess -heard their prayers and gave them a sign by suddenly filling the ship -with a most fragrant perfume. The story is discussed by Gardner[622] in -his chapter on the statuettes from the temenos of Aphrodite, which -include a number that may represent the Paphian goddess. But he makes no -reference to the statuette that probably has the closest bearing on the -tale. The upper half is of the normal draped female type, but the lower -shows simply the form of an alabastron. The whole is a perfume -vase[623]. This particular example (fig. 16) cannot be earlier than the -end of the sixth century. The type however is shown both by the style -and the context of other examples to go back to the seventh century, and -probably to the earlier part of it. The home of the type is thought by -Poulsen[624] to be Cyprus. An object that combined the functions of an -eikon and a smelling-bottle might indeed work miracles in a storm. It is -tempting to believe that such was in fact the image that saved -Herostratos. The miracle takes place just at the period when this type -of figurine was started. If we are right in associating the two, then we -are further justified in thinking that Polycharmus may have had some -solid grounds for his dating as well as for the rest of his account. - -[Illustration: Fig. 16. Perfume vase found at Naukratis.] - -[Sidenote: Evidence of large jars used for merchandise.] - -The other point concerns the large plain jars that were found on the -site[625]. Many of these are of Egyptian forms. But others, of which one -is shown in fig. 17, are unmistakably Greek. This jar was found in the -burnt deposit in the South end of the city, which represents the earlier -Egyptian settlement on the site[626]. These large jars were used by the -Greeks for the transport of wine, oil and the like[627]. In jars such as -these Sappho’s brother must have brought to Naukratis the wines of -Lesbos, and they must have figured largely in the cargoes brought by -Greeks and Phoenicians[628] to Psamtek in exchange for the cargoes that -they received from Psamtek in the days when he was building up his -power[629]. - -[Illustration: Fig. 17. Greek wine jar found at Naukratis.] - -[Sidenote: Conclusions about early Naukratis.] - -To sum up our conclusions about Naukratis: texts and excavations confirm -and supplement one another to the effect that there was an Egyptian -settlement from the beginning of the seventh century, that Greek traders -found their way there almost from the first, and that about the middle -of the seventh century the Greek trading settlement became of -considerable importance[630] through the removal to it of the occupants -of the Milesians’ Fort[631]. Finally about 569 B.C. we have the -concentration in the city of all the Greek traders in Egypt. - -[Sidenote: The position of Naukratis under Amasis] - -The Greek traders were concentrated by Amasis in Naukratis as a -concession to the Egyptians with whom they had grown more and more -unpopular owing to their influence and success. Amasis had risen to -power as the leader of an anti-Greek agitation[632], and, as Petrie -pointed out[633], the concentration was an anti-Greek move[634]. But -Amasis cleverly contrived that it should be not unpopular, but even the -reverse, with the Greeks. Naukratis as a monopoly city enjoyed an -immense reputation during Amasis’ long and prosperous reign. [Sidenote: -contrasted with its position under Psammetichus.] But the Amasis -tradition cannot conceal the fact that the time when Greek traders got -the freest welcome in Egypt was that of Psammetichus, when Greek -hoplites were being employed to establish the Saite dynasty as rulers of -all Egypt. - -[Sidenote: Daphnae and the Greek mercenaries] - -In the early days of Psammetichus, when he was overthrowing the -dodecarchy, his Greek merchants and his Greek soldiers probably had -their headquarters together, in the Milesians’ Fort. At Naukratis the -military element does not appear. From about 650 B.C. till shortly after -the accession of Amasis in 570 the Greek mercenaries are found quartered -in a place called The Camps at Daphnae on the most Easterly (Pelusian) -arm of the Nile[635]. The history of the transition from the Milesians’ -Fort to Daphnae is obscure[636]; but in a broad sense there can be -little doubt that the Fort was as much the parent of the camp at Daphnae -as of the emporium at Naukratis. Naukratis and Daphnae, the Greek -emporium and the Greek camp, were alike essential to the Saite Pharaohs, -and both had plainly gone far in their development and organization -early in Psamtek’s reign. - -[Sidenote: and the Egyptian warrior caste.] - -How closely the two were associated may be realized from the consistent -attitude of the Saite Pharaohs towards another element of the -population. The Ionian and Carian bronze men were not the first -mercenaries to form the basis of a Pharaoh’s power. The XXIInd and -XXIIIrd dynasties (_c._ 943–735 B.C.) had rested their power on their -mercenaries from Libya. These Libyan mercenaries had developed into a -caste of professional soldiers and were still in the land[637]. It is -noteworthy that no Saite, with one possible exception nearly 100 years -after Psamtek’s accession, ever attempted to use them either for -securing or for maintaining his power. Mallet notes that for the time -before Psammetichus the monuments often show commanders of Libyan -mercenaries bearing high titles, but that from his reign onwards there -is no similar instance[638]. - -Meyer[639] is probably right in suspecting that this warrior class -(μάχιμοι) formed Psamtek’s bitterest opponents. Eventually a large body -of them deserted and took service with the king of Ethiopia, and Psamtek -seems to have made no determined effort to prevent them[640]. The one -exceptional case in which the Libyan warrior class may possibly have -placed a Saite on the throne is that of Amasis (570–526 B.C.)[641], who -overthrew his predecessor Apries (589–570) by leading the native -population against the Greek mercenaries[642]. But, as Herodotus tells -us, he was soon driven to “become a philhellene[643].” Petrie thinks -that Amasis was converted under pressure of the Persian peril, and in -support of this view quotes the alliance of Amasis with Croesus[644], -Polycrates[645], and the Greek Battus of Cyrene[646], as also his -friendship with Delphi[647]. - -This point of foreign policy no doubt had its weight in the years that -saw the rise of Cyrus and his overthrow of Media in 549 B.C., Lydia in -546, Babylon in 538 (?). But it was not the cause of his conversion. -Amasis became Pharaoh in 570. In the sixth year of his reign he made an -edict that contained the following words: “Let the Ouinin (= Ionians) be -given place of habitation in the lands of the nome of Sais. Let them -take to their use ships and firewood. Let them bring their gods[648].” -Long therefore before the rise of Persia Amasis had realized how -impossible it was to maintain his position otherwise than by coming to -an understanding both with the Greek merchants and the Greek -mercenaries. Philhellenism was in fact an essential part of Saite -policy. Necho (610–594 B.C.), the son and successor of Psammetichus I, -sent offerings to Apollo at Branchidae (Miletus) after his victory over -Josiah of Judah and the Syrian fleet[649]. Psammetichus II (594–589) -died probably as a child: to his reign are probably to be assigned the -Abu Symbel inscriptions[650] scratched by Greek soldiers on monuments -far up the river by Elephantine. The people of Elis are said to have -appealed to him or his government on a point respecting the Olympian -games[651]. Apries (589–570), who fell foul of his Greek troops, had -30,000 Ionians and Carians under arms[652]. A small Greek vase found at -Corinth[653] has the cartouche of Apries. It is in the form of a -helmeted head (fig. 18). The vase is of faience (so-called). It was -probably made at Naukratis, perhaps in Petrie’s scarab factory, and -gives us a contemporary picture of one of Apries’ Greek mercenaries, or -at least of the top part of his equipment. - -[Illustration: Fig. 18. Corinthian vase with cartouche of Apries.] - -Amasis accordingly became a friend of the Greeks and remained so till he -died. The Greeks reciprocated his friendship. The feelings of the -Naukratite traders towards him are reflected plainly enough in the pages -of Herodotus[654]. The Greek mercenaries supported him loyally to the -end of his long reign, and in spite of the treachery of their commander -Phanes they fought gallantly at Pelusium in 525 B.C. when Psammetichus -III, the last of the Saites, was overthrown by the Persians. Under the -military rule of Persia the Libyan warrior class recovered its old -position[655]. - -[Sidenote: Personal relations between Saite sovereigns and Greek - tyrants.] - -Thus we have seen the Saite dynasty rising to power by means of Greek -merchandise and Greek mercenaries and maintaining its power by the same -means. Its general policy follows the same lines as that of the -tyrannies that sprang up at this time all over the Greek world. -Herodotus with his usual insight recognized this fact when he put into -his history the story of the friendship between Amasis and the Samian -tyrant Polycrates. Amasis was probably not the first of the Saites to -have a Greek tyrant for his friend. Cordial relations with Thrasybulus, -the tyrant of Miletus, are suggested by Necho’s offerings to the -Milesian Apollo, and the friend of Thrasybulus must have been also the -friend of the Corinthian tyrant Periander. It has often been assumed, -and not without reason, that Periander’s successor was called -Psammetichus from some personal connexion with the lord of Sais. - -[Sidenote: The name Psammetichus.] - -Psammetichus I is the first individual known to have borne that name. It -is possible therefore that it may have had some special appropriateness -to his own or his father’s career[656]. One of the most probable -interpretations of the name is “man (vendor) of mixing bowls.” The -choice seems to lie between this interpretation and “man (vendor) of -mixed wine” (_i.e._ wine mixed with spices, etc.). Which of these is to -be preferred depends on the interpretation of the root mtk[657]. In -hieratic writing the phonetic symbols are sometimes followed by a -“determinative” symbol or pictograph, placed at the end to prevent -misunderstanding. The determinative for mtk is the picture of a vase, as -seen for instance in _Rylands Library Demotic Papyri_, p. 201. The vase -has a barrel or pear-shaped body, narrow neck, and broad flat mouth, ⚱. -The particular shape must not be pressed, and the picture may be meant -to denote not the vase but its contents. But it must mean one or the -other[658]. Griffith thinks it denotes the contents, his reasons being -these[659]: mtk is a Coptic root meaning “mix” and has a Hebrew -equivalent meaning “mixture” (wine mixed). This meaning “seems to fit -all requirements[660],” _i.e._ it suits the story of the libation which -led Psammetichus to become king[661], and also the tales of the low and -bibulous (φιλοπότης) origin of Amasis[662]. Griffith’s interpretation -rests ultimately on the philological point, and on the assumption that -the root in Egyptian must have precisely the same meaning as in Coptic -and Hebrew. I am indebted to the writer himself for the information that -this is not always the case. Apart from philology “mixed wine” may suit -all requirements[663]: but does it do so quite as well as “mixing bowl”? -The whole point of the story of Psammetichus’ libation depends not on -the wine but its receptacle. On either interpretation however it is -sufficiently remarkable that the ruler who is said to have risen to -power by trade should have had so mercantile a name. Griffith does not -forget the possibility that the name may have been the source of the -stories[664]. The two possibilities are not mutually exclusive. A -merchant prince may be proud of his origin: but that fact will not -always prevent other people from telling good unofficial stories about -his early days. - - - - - Chapter V. _Lydia_ - - - “Yes, ready money is Aladdin’s lamp.”—BYRON. - -[Sidenote: Tyranny and coinage both said to be of Lydian origin.] - -In an enquiry into the connexions between the new form of government and -the new form of wealth that both arose at the opening of the classical -epoch Lydia has a special interest and importance for the reason that -both coinage and tyranny are said on good authority to have been of -Lydian origin. Considering how much Lydia was then in the background of -the Greek world this fact by itself is suggestive. It becomes important -to determine the dates, and connexions if any, of the first Lydian -tyrant and the first Lydian coins. It should be said at once that no -Lydian ruler has been credited with the invention of coinage, and that -no very definite conclusions can be drawn from the available material. -The evidence is however sufficiently suggestive to repay a careful -examination. - -[Illustration: Fig. 19. Coins of (_a_) Gyges (?), (_b_) Croesus.] - -[Sidenote: Date of the earliest coins.] - -Both the date and the place of the final evolution of a metal coinage -are the subject of much dispute. Among writers of a generation or more -ago the question of date was mainly a matter of speculation as to how -long an interval was required between the earliest silver coins with a -type in relief on both sides, which on grounds of style, epigraphy, and -circumstances of find can be dated with fair accuracy to about the -middle of the sixth century, and the primitive electrum pieces punched -on one side and striated on the other (fig. 19. _a_) that probably -belong to the earliest issues of Lydia. Most of the leading numismatists -allowed some three or four generations and assigned the earliest coins -to the earlier part of the seventh century[665]. But more recently facts -have come to light which point to the possibility of an earlier and -perhaps a considerably earlier date. A round dump of silver weighing -3·654 grammes was found by Sir Arthur Evans at Knossos in a stratum that -cannot, he says, be dated later than the twelfth century B.C., and two -similar dumps of gold weighing 4·723 and 4·678 grammes along with a -third of elongated shape weighing 8·601 were found during the British -Museum excavations at Enkomi in Cyprus, a site which according to Evans -must be dated equally early[666]. These few Cretan and Cyprian dumps are -no argument against the mass of material which points to a great -numismatic development at a date not so very far removed from 700 B.C. -But they do shift the balance of probability backward and make a date in -the eighth century as likely as one in the seventh. The same conclusion -is suggested by the recent British excavations of the famous temple of -Artemis at Ephesus[667]. There, below the temple erected in the days of -Croesus and to which he contributed the sculptured column now in the -British Museum, the excavators found remains of three earlier -structures. While clearing out these early buildings they found 87 -electrum coins. Twenty of these were extracted from between the slabs of -the earliest of the three buildings, five (including four of the lion -type) were extracted from underneath the foundations of the second -building, and all low down within the area of these three early -structures. The total evidence points to all the 87 coins being not -later than the time of the first of the three buildings, _i.e._ well -before the time of Croesus. The series begins with the striated type -(above fig. 19. _a_) that is generally regarded as the most primitive of -all, while far the commonest type (42 coins) is the lion’s head of the -style usually attributed to Alyattes[668]. - -From the latest building to the earliest coin means a considerable -period, and may well take us back into the eighth century. General -historical considerations are however against going back too far into -the eighth century. It was only in the course of that century that -brigandage and piracy gave place to trade and commerce and the first -traces can be discovered of the great renaissance that led to Classical -Greece. If the earliest coins were struck by Lydia they are more likely -to have been issued in the second half of the century than the first, -since the establishment of the second Assyrian empire in 745 B.C. -probably gave a great impetus to Lydian trade. This, however, is -assuming the claims of Lydia to the “invention.” They have been -frequently challenged and before proceeding it is necessary briefly to -examine them. - -[Sidenote: The evidence for attributing them to Lydia.] - -The Lydians are only one of several peoples and cities that were -credited by the ancients with the invention of coinage. This uncertainty -was inevitable. Coinage was not invented but evolved[669]. But it is -probable that in the final stage of the evolution some one state was a -little ahead of the rest, and put in this form the Lydians have a good -claim to the invention. They have in their favour our two best and -oldest witnesses, Xenophanes and Herodotus[670], the latter of whom -recognized their outstanding position as traders and plainly sees in it -the explanation of their leading position in the evolution of coined -money[671]. The facts as far as we know them bear these authorities out. -Lydia contains Mt Tmolus and Mt Sipylus and the river Pactolus, the main -sources of the supply of the metal in which the most primitive coins -were struck. It was probably just about this period that the Lydian -electrum mines began to be worked[672] and the electrum of Sardis gained -the fame it still enjoyed in the days of Sophocles[673]. The kings of -Lydia from the beginning of the seventh century onward were famous for -their wealth[674]. The touch-stone used by the ancients for testing the -precious metals came likewise from Mt Tmolus, and was called “Lydian -stone[675].” Furthermore, the Lydians occupied a unique position for -purposes of trade. Sardis, their capital, was the place where the great -trade-route from the further East, the “royal road,” as Herodotus calls -it[676], branched out to reach the various Greek cities on the -coast[677]. - -In the face of this evidence it is hardly necessary to examine in detail -the arguments of the modern sceptics who have disputed Lydia’s claim. In -many cases they start from the baseless assumption that so remarkable an -invention cannot but be due to the quick-witted Greeks[678]. True, the -earliest electrum coins are said to have been found mostly along the -Eastern shore of the Aegean, but it does not follow that that is where -they were all struck. Gold pieces were common enough in Greece in the -first half of the fourth century B.C., but they had nearly all been -struck in Persia. 30,000 Darics (fig. 8) were distributed among the -Greeks by the Great King’s agents in one single year[679]. The two -staters of gold that each of the Delphians received from King -Croesus[680] were undoubtedly Crœseids[681]. - -Again, the modern market for ancient coins has been largely restricted -to the coast. Because a coin was bought in Smyrna it does not follow -that it was found there. Of Sardis itself we still know too little to -speak with any assurance[682]. But the absence of finds, even at Sardis, -would not be decisive, since on Radet’s theory the Lydian coinage was -intended mainly for export, just as appears later to have been the case -with the silver tetradrachms of Smyrna, Myrina, Cyme, Lebedos, Magnesia -ad Maeandrum and Heraclea Ioniae, which are rarely found near their -place of origin, but with few exceptions are brought from different -parts of Syria[683]. - -More serious are the criticisms which do not altogether reject -Xenophanes, but explain him away by means of an interpretation of -Herodotus I. 94 first put forward by J. P. Six and later developed by -Babelon[684]. Six maintained that when Herodotus there states that the -Lydians were the first to strike and use coins of gold and silver, the -reference is to the concurrent issue of coins in the two separate -metals, or, in other words, to the coinage of Croesus (fig. 19. _b_), -who is generally admitted to have been the first to give up electrum in -favour of separate issues of gold and silver. But though it is true that -“coins of gold and silver” cannot mean “coins of electrum,” it by no -means follows that Herodotus is referring to the beginnings not of -coinage but of bimetallism. Babelon is right in insisting on the exact -words used by Herodotus, but in his interpretation of them he takes -perhaps too little account of the type of fact usually recorded by the -historian. Which is Herodotus more likely to give us? An inaccurate -version of a fundamental fact like the invention of coined money? Or a -pedantically accurate statement about an experiment in bimetallism that -was after all of quite secondary importance? Other things being equal we -should surely always prefer the interpretation which gives us the -former, and there is nothing to prevent us from doing so in the present -case. Assume that Xenophanes means what he says and that his statement -represents the prevalent tradition, and it is easy to see how Herodotus -came to use the precise words that he did. - -“The Lydians,” he begins, “were the first to strike and use coins.” We -must remember who it was that he was writing for. His readers would be -found mainly in the free cities of European Greece. Down to the days -when he ended his history these European Greeks had coined almost -exclusively in silver. On the other hand the coinage of Lydia and the -other Persian satrapies of Asia Minor consisted of Darics of gold and -shekels of silver, and people in those parts doubtless remembered that -this coinage in the two metals went back to the days of the Lydian -kings. It is a fundamental principle with our historian never to omit -any fact that he can possibly insert. In this case an extra fact can be -inserted in three words, χρυσοῦ καὶ ἀργύρου, and almost inevitably the -words go in. Possibly he had forgotten for the moment the primitive -pieces of electrum: it is equally possible that accuracy was sacrificed -to fulness of information. Another way of meeting Babelon’s difficulty -is suggested by Babelon’s own article. It is generally assumed that the -first coins struck in Asia Minor were all of electrum, and that electrum -later gave way to gold and silver. But Babelon[685] quotes an example of -what is generally regarded as the earliest Lydian electrum type (_ob._ -striated, _rev._ three small stamps as on silver spoons) that appears -from its specific gravity to contain 98 per cent. silver and weighs -10·81 grammes. This latter is the unit of the so-called Babylonian -standard, which is employed almost exclusively for silver, the only -exception being a gold issue of Croesus. It is true that the coin has a -yellow tint, and that it may contain more than 2 per cent. gold, if the -light specific gravity is due partly to the presence of copper[686]. -There are cases too of what seem to be unquestionable electrum coins -with a very low percentage of gold, _e.g._ _Brit. Mus. Cat. Coins of -Ionia_, p. 47, nos. 2, 3, Ephesian thirds of the normal Phoenician -standard, one with only 14 per cent. gold to judge by the specific -gravity, the other actually with only 5 per cent. But the combined -evidence of weight and specific gravity gives strong support to -Babelon’s view that the coin must have been intended to pass as -silver[687]. Babelon assigns this piece to Miletus, but on no sufficient -grounds. As he himself points out[688], the weight is exactly that of -the silver coins of Croesus, a weight which in Ionia prevailed only at -Colophon and Erythrae in the fifth century and at Miletus in the -third[689], and in these three cases was borrowed from the Persian -siglos (shekel), which latter was the direct successor of the silver -coins of Croesus. The earliest silver coins assigned by Head to Miletus -are struck on the Aeginetan standard (185 grains)[690]. In short, if it -seems probable that this piece is silver, _a fortiori_ is it probable -that it is Lydian, and if, as the evidence all tends to show, this is -the case, the importance of the piece at once becomes obvious. It means -that from the earliest period of their coinage the Lydians struck not -only in electrum but also in silver. Now for Herodotus electrum was only -a variety of gold. His name for it is “white gold” (λευκὸς χρυσός), and -he appears to regard it as gold of a particular quality, just as -Bonacossi does the gold of China when he describes it as “pâle, mou et -ductile[691].” - -When therefore Herodotus speaks of the Lydians as the first to coin in -gold and silver he may well mean white gold and silver and be referring, -like Xenophanes, to the original “invention” of coined money. But even -if Babelon is right, there is still no decisive reason why we should not -ascribe to the Lydians the original “invention” as well as the first -bimetallic development. Thus Xenophanes and Herodotus may be regarded as -pointing to Lydia as the first country to strike coins, and after all -they were in a fairly good position for ascertaining the facts[692]. -Certainty is perhaps hardly attainable. But that does not justify a -completely sceptical attitude. It is the reverse of scientific to treat -an epoch illuminated by many half lights as though it was one of total -darkness. The safest course in such a case is to operate with -probabilities. - -[Sidenote: The origin of the title tyrant.] - -The claim of Lydia to have been the original home of tyranny is based on -similar evidence that needs to be similarly used. The earliest authority -for it is Euphorion (third century B.C.), who says that the first ruler -to be called tyrant was Gyges, who began to reign in the XVIIIth -Olympiad (708–704 B.C.)[693]. The statement has been doubted as being -perhaps only an inference from Homer and Archilochus drawn by later -writers[694]. Homer does not use the word τύραννος. It first appears in -Archilochus, and apparently the tyrant that Archilochus had in mind was -his contemporary[695] Gyges: - - I care not for golden Gyges.... - I long not for a great tyranny[696]. - -But even if only an inference from this source the statement may still -be of some value. The word tyrant is not Greek and may be Lydian[697]. A -new title does not necessarily imply a new form of government; but if -there is independent evidence for thinking that a new form of government -arose just at this time, then that evidence will be corroborated by the -appearance of a new title; and if that title has a particular local -origin, it becomes of particular interest to examine the history of the -rulers of the region where the change arose. - -As our evidence leaves it uncertain whether Gyges was the first ruler of -his kind to arise in Lydia or merely the first to find a prominent place -in Greek literature and as further we find unusual steps for securing -the throne attributed to Lydian rulers of about the middle of the eighth -century it will be well to begin at this earlier date. - -[Sidenote: How Spermos and Ardys became kings of Lydia.] - -According to the story told by Nicolaus Damascenus[698], Damonno, the -wife of Cadys, whose reign is ascribed to the middle of the eighth -century[699], after her royal husband’s death won over by her wealth a -large number of Lydians, expelled her brother-in-law Ardys, and then -married her lover Spermos and proclaimed him king. When banished by -Spermos and Damonno, Ardys goes into business at Cyme as a -waggon-builder (ἁμαξοπηγῶν) and is keeping a hotel (πανδοκεύων) there -when called back to the throne of Sardis. He is brought back by a -tavern-keeper or retail trader (κάπηλος) named Thyessos[700], who as his -reward asked and received that this inn or shop (καπηλεῖον) should be -exempt from paying dues (ἀτελές) and after a time became rich from his -shop-keeping (καπηλεύειν) and as a result established near it a market -and a shrine of Hermes[701]. The part played in this story by innkeepers -may, at first sight, seem odd. But as pointed out by Radet[702] in -discussing the word κάπηλος, innkeeper was probably synonymous with -merchant in the days of Ardys (766–730 B.C.)[703], when Lydia was -already becoming a great highway of commerce between Further Asia and -the Aegean[704]. The Lydian merchants of the period must have seen the -advantage of providing food and shelter for the members of the caravans -with whom they traded. Waggon-building, which was one of the occupations -of the banished Ardys[705], is part of the same activity, connected with -the famous road that did as much to make the fortunes of ancient Lydia -as railways will some day do to revive them in the future. - -If the narrative of Nicolaus is to be believed, then, as recognized some -time ago by Gelzer[706], the Lydian leaders of the period appear as -great merchants and men of business, and more than that, it is as such -that the rulers secure the throne, and a not unnatural inference is that -it was the spread of this new type of merchant prince from Lydia -Westward over the Greek world that caused the spread at the same time of -the Lydian title. There is nothing improbable in the assumption that -Lydian history of this period was preserved in a fairly authentic form. -True our extant authorities are late and their sources uncertain, and -the story of Spermos has perhaps an excessive resemblance to that of -Gyges and the wife of his predecessor Candaules[707]. In both cases the -usurper marries the wife of his predecessor and owes to her his throne. -The close relations between Ardys and the Greek Cyme recall those -between the house of Gyges and the tyrant house of Melas at Ephesus, -which latter is very plausibly explained by Radet[708] as based on their -common business interests. But these resemblances do not prove that the -two narratives are not both true. The two queens may have responded in -the same way to similar semi-matriarchal surroundings, and the two -princes have found similar solutions for the same commercial problem. If -the Damonno Ardys story is not history we have no Lydian history of that -age. But even so it is of value as reflecting conditions that prevailed -at the beginning of the seventh century and possibly went back to the -period to which the story is ascribed. - -Chronologically we ought next to deal with Gyges himself. Unfortunately -his history, and more particularly the part that tells how he won the -throne, has been much obscured by legend. We shall examine it with a -better prospect of disinterring the facts if first we review certain -later incidents of Lydian history. - -[Sidenote: Later rulers of Lydia.] - -The century that followed Gyges is for this purpose not very -illuminating. A great part of it is taken up with the national struggle -against the Cimmerian invaders. The kings of the house of Gyges appear -to have led this struggle well, and as a natural result their power was -seldom called into question. It is only before the accession of Croesus, -the last king of the line, that active steps appear to have been -necessary to secure the throne. The reason was not any anti-monarchic -movement, but rivalry between two sons or possibly grandsons of the old -and perhaps senile King Alyattes. None the less, the steps taken by the -rivals are not without significance. [Sidenote: Financial dealings of -Croesus before he became king.] The story is told[709] that shortly -before Alyattes’ death Croesus, the subsequently successful rival, had -borrowed largely from a very rich man[710] in Ephesus in order to appear -before the old king with a levy. Before resorting to the rich Ephesian, -Croesus had appealed to a certain “Sadyattes the merchant, the richest -man in Lydia,” who had refused to lend to him for the reason, as it -subsequently turned out, that he was backing the other candidate for the -throne, Croesus’ half-brother, the half-Greek Pantaleon[711]. Croesus’ -poverty, we are informed, was due to spendthrift habits. But it is -doubtful whether his lavishness at this period was simply youthful -dissipation, and not rather part of a systematic policy. - -Only a few years later Peisistratus of Athens “rooted his tyranny” on -revenues from mines. Reasons have been given above[712] for thinking -that he was already endeavouring to do so. May not Croesus have been -pursuing a similar course? Later in his career, when he wanted to win -the special favour of Delphi, “he sent to Pytho, ascertained the number -of Delphians, and presented each one of them with two staters of -gold[713].” The staters of Croesus (above fig. 19. _b_) were among the -most famous coins of antiquity[714]. Reference is made in the _Mirabiles -Auscultationes_ to gold mines that he worked[715]. His wealth was -proverbial[716]. Most of it he inherited from his predecessor[717]: but -the wise old Alyattes knew that it was the root of his power and clung -to it till his death. For the rivals it is a question who can secure it -first and in the meanwhile carry on best without it. Both try to borrow -on a princely scale, and to judge by the issue Croesus was the more -successful. “As a result of that proceeding he got the upper hand of his -calumniators[718].” He became king, and his government is described by -Radet[719] as “une puissante monarchie régnant par la force de l’or.” - -This is all conjecture, but it is borne out alike by Croesus’ own -behaviour and by the advice to Cyrus that is put into his mouth after he -has become the captive and the counsellor of the Persian king. - -The first thing that Croesus did after securing the throne was to put -Sadyattes to death and to confiscate his possessions[720]. By itself -this might be taken simply as part of something corresponding to a -normal process of attainder. But the Sadyattes incident must be read in -the light of the advice that Croesus is represented as having -subsequently given to Cyrus, the gist of which is that Cyrus is to -beware above all things of the richest of his subjects[721]. [Sidenote: -Croesus bids Cyrus to suspect a rival in the richest of his subjects.] -The speech is of course pure fiction: so too is very possibly the whole -story of the intimacy between Croesus and his conqueror[722]. But all -the same Croesus is Herodotus’ embodiment of the wise and experienced -ruler of the sixth century, the century during which the historian’s -father was born only a little way from the borders of Croesus’ kingdom. -If in the pages of Herodotus he is made to regard wealth as the basis of -political power, it must be because the historian believed such to have -been in fact the case. Of the evidence that may have led him, and with -good reason, to this belief, one item may have been derived from the -colossal tomb of Croesus’ predecessor Alyattes, which according to the -account given by Herodotus was constructed by the tradesmen and artizans -and prostitutes (οἱ ἀγοραῖοι ἄνθρωποι καὶ οἱ χειρώνακτες καὶ αἱ -ἐνεργαζόμεναι παιδίσκαι)[723]. [Sidenote: The tomb of Croesus’ father -had been erected by tradesmen, artizans, and “working girls.”] -Presumably these were the classes who had most benefited or at least -been most affected by Alyattes’ rule, and on whose support he had mainly -depended[724]. The largest part of the tomb is said by Herodotus to have -been built by the “working girls” (= prostitutes) but too much attention -need not be paid to this typical instance of Herodotean “malignity.” -Strabo’s report that the tomb was said by some to be that of a harlot -(πόρνης) is equally suspicious. It may possibly have arisen from the -obscene symbols that appeared on various parts of the monument, -including its summit. Possibly the builders of the tomb got mistaken for -its occupant. The reverse process is less likely, as it leaves the -tradesmen and artizans unaccounted for[725]. - -[Sidenote: Revolt from Cyrus of Pactyes who had all the gold from - Sardis.] - -In conformity with the policy that Herodotus puts into the mouth of -Croesus, Cyrus was careful before he returned from Lydia to Persia to -separate the political and financial power in his new conquest: - - Sardis he entrusted to Tabalos, a Persian gentleman, but the gold - both of Croesus and the other Lydians he gave to Pactyes, a man of - Lydia, to look after (κομίζειν).... But when Cyrus had marched away - from Sardis, Pactyes caused the Lydians to revolt from Tabalos and - Cyrus, and going down to the sea, as was but natural since he had - all the gold from Sardis, he proceeded to hire mercenaries and - persuaded the population by the sea to join his expedition[726]. - -[Sidenote: Xerxes and the rich Lydian Pythes.] - -In the days of Xerxes the richest of all the Lydians was Pythes the son -of Atys. After Xerxes himself, Pythes was the richest man known to the -Persians of that day. His wealth amounted to 2000 talents of silver and -3,993,000 golden Darics[727]. He held some sort of rule under the Great -King at Kelainai in Phrygia and owed his enormous wealth to his mines, -in which the citizens of his dominions were forced to labour. When -Xerxes reached Kelainai on his way to invade Greece, Pythes offered to -present the whole of this immense sum to the king[728]. So stupendous a -present requires a special explanation. It is not like “the gold plane -tree and the vine” that Pythes had given earlier to King Darius. It -looks as if he had suddenly discovered with intense alarm that Xerxes, -like Cyrus before him, feared nothing so much as a man of extraordinary -wealth, and as if this present was a desperate attempt to disarm the -Great King’s suspicions. The father of Pythes bore the same name as one -of the sons of Croesus, and Pythes himself has been thought by some -modern scholars to have been the grandson of Croesus[729]. The name -Pytheus (Pythes) might be due to Croesus’ relations with Delphi[730]. - -The evidence so far adduced has pointed to the following conclusions: -metal coinage reached its final evolution in Lydia, probably in the -second half of the eighth century B.C.; the title tyrant reached Greece -from Lydia probably early in the seventh century; from the middle of the -eighth century down to the end of the age of the tyrants all the rulers -or would-be rulers of Lydia of whom we have any relevant information -regarded money as the basis of political power. [Sidenote: Radet -suggests that the first coins were struck by the first tyrants,] In the -face of these facts it is not surprising that Radet, the scholar who has -devoted most attention in recent years to this period of Lydian history, -should have expressed the opinion that the earliest tyrants were also -the first coiners[731]. - -The rest of this chapter will be devoted to examining and very -tentatively developing this suggestion. - -Radet attributed the earliest coins to Gyges and imagined them as having -been struck when Gyges was already on the throne[732]. He wrote however -before Enkomi, Knossos, and Ephesus had suggested the possibility of an -earlier date for the earliest coins, and he does not consider the -possibility that it may have been quite as much a case of the coins -making the tyrant as the tyrant making the coins. No certainty is to be -looked for on this point, but for arriving at the greatest available -probability it will be well for a moment to turn to the brilliant and -convincing account of the last stages in the evolution of metal coinage -published by Lenormant and developed by Babelon. Lenormant’s account of -the circumstances in which stamped pieces of precious metal of definite -weight first came into circulation cannot be given better than in his -own words: - -[Sidenote: Lenormant that they were private issues.] - - Pour la commodité du commerce, auquel ils servent d’instrument - habituel d’échange, on donne à ces lingots des poids exacts ... de ½ - à 10 taels en or, de ½ à 100 taels en argent. Mais leur circulation - et leur acceptation n’ont aucun caractère légal et obligatoire. - L’autorité publique n’a point à y intervenir et ne leur donne aucune - garantie. Ces lingots ne portent aucune empreinte si ce n’est en - certains cas un poinçonnement individuel, simple marque d’origine et - de fabrique, qui quelquefois inspire assez de confiance pour - dispenser de la vérification du titre du métal, lorsque c’est celle - d’un négociant assez honorablement connu. La facilité avec laquelle - on accepte le lingot à tel ou tel poinçon tient donc entièrement au - crédit personnel de celui qui l’a marqué[733]. - -The passage just quoted describes not a theory of Lenormant’s but the -actual practice of the Chinese empire[734]. A similar currency of ingots -stamped by merchants or bankers has been used in many other parts of the -world, _e.g._ Japan[735], Java[736], India[737] and Russia[738]. -Reversions to the practice of private coinage have been frequent in -America[739]; “for a long time the copper currency of England consisted -mainly of tradesmen’s tokens,” used largely by manufacturers to pay the -wages of their workpeople[740]. The earliest coins of Asia Minor are -regarded by the French savants as private issues of a similar kind to -those just quoted. The small stamps of which several often appear on an -early electrum coin (_e.g._ above fig. 19. _a_ right) are regarded by -them as marks or countermarks of bankers or merchants. Babelon[741] -points out that these stamps cannot be identified as the types of towns -or kings; that in one case no less than six of them are found on a -single coin[742]; and that they continue to be put on to the state -coinage of Darius. The case for Lydia therefore rests largely on -analogies, and analogies can never be quite conclusive. Some even of -these must be used with caution, _e.g._ those from Russia and -Merovingian France, where it is difficult to be sure that they do not -represent a stage of decadence rather than development. But decadence is -often another name for reversion to type, and some of the instances -already quoted, _e.g._ those from China and India, are sufficiently -remote to be safely trusted. The total effect of the evidence marshalled -by Lenormant and Babelon is impressive, and certainly no other view -offers so satisfactory an explanation of the distinguishing features of -the earliest Greek coins. Their view has already won partial -acceptance[743]. There are of course gaps in the evidence, notably as to -the circumstances of the nationalization of the coinage. But this is not -very surprising if, as the stories of Damonno and Ardys suggest, it was -in a succession of financial struggles for the throne that the control -of the mint came gradually to be synonymous with the kingship. When the -two were finally equated is a matter of conjecture. The chief part in -the process may perhaps have been played by the tradesman king Ardys, -but on the whole it seems likely that it was Gyges who completed the -evolution of metal coinage by making it the prerogative of the state -after he had first used it to obtain the supreme power. [Sidenote: -Gyges.] His career falls early enough to make this possible[744], and -the gold of Gyges attained proverbial fame[745]. - -Herodotus indeed seems to discountenance the view that Gyges was ever a -merchant or banker, since he describes him as serving as a guardsman -αἰχμοφόρος, δορυφόρος under his predecessor Candaules[746]. But -Schubert[747] is probably right in putting only a limited confidence in -this part of our account of his career, which he shows to have been -derived from Delphi. He even suggests[748] that Gyges had bought up -Delphi before, with a view to his accession, just as Croesus endeavoured -to purchase the favour of Apollo before his attempted conquest of -Persia[749]. If there is any truth in this plausible suggestion, then -the guardsman part of the story may well have been a half-truth -emphasized to hide Gyges’ commercial antecedents, and Gyges may have -secured the throne mainly through his wealth. - -It is true that Gyges as tyrant fought against the Cimmerians who at -this time were sweeping over Asia Minor, and that later in his reign he -rebelled against Assyria[750]. From time to time he invaded the Greek -cities on the coast. He may even have taken military measures to secure -the throne, if, as Radet argues[751], his accession meant the overthrow -of a Maeonian domination and the substitution for it of a Lydian. All -this however is no proof of particular militarism. The wars against the -Cimmerians were defensive. The revolt from Assyria was an indirect -result of the Cimmerian wars. If Gyges took the aggressive against the -Greeks[752], his motive was probably commercial. He wanted “to secure -for the Lydian caravans a free and sure outlet for their goods[753].” -These Greek wars were seldom carried to extremes[754]. As regards the -fighting by which he is said to have seized the throne, note that his -troops, in part at least, were Carian mercenaries[755]. - -Immediately after establishing himself by these violent means Gyges -“sent for his various friends and enemies. Those whom he thought would -oppose him he did away with; but to the rest he gave presents and made -them mercenaries[756].” - -[Sidenote: The ring of Gyges] - -A confirmation of this same view as to the origin of Gyges’ power is -possibly to be found in the story of Gyges and his ring. In this famous -story, as told by Plato[757], Gyges was a shepherd who discovered in the -earth a magic gold ring, which gave him the power of invisibility and -enabled him to enter the palace, slay the king, and procure his own -accession. As happens so often when a story of the order of the _Arabian -Nights_ is applied to a historical personage, the immediate problem is -to discover not the origin of the story, but the points about the -historical character that caused the story in question to get attached -to him. We may begin by dismissing the shepherding, since Gyges belonged -to an ancient and princely family[758]. - -The fact or facts that caused Gyges to be associated with the story -probably had some connexion with the magic ring and its discovery in the -earth. It has for instance been suggested that the real magic of the -ring of Gyges lay in the signet that serves as a passport and reveals or -conceals a man’s identity according to the way he wears it. Radet[759] -pictures Gyges as a sort of major domo to Candaules, and the ring as the -emblem of his power. Explanations of this kind are not without -plausibility; they are right in taking notice of the signet[760]; but -they ignore one essential detail of the story namely the marvellous -discovery of the ring, nor do they go to the root of the matter, if, as -the story plainly implies, the ring of Gyges is to be equated with the -real source of his power. From this last point of view it becomes -probable that Radet has come very much nearer the truth in another -passage, where he says: “Gygès et ses successeurs ont possédé un -merveilleux talisman: la science économique[761].” [Sidenote: explained -by Radet as “la science économique.”] There is a point about the ring -story that tells strongly in favour of some explanation on the lines of -this second suggestion of Radet’s. The hero of the story is not always -Gyges: in Pliny[762] it is Midas the king of Phrygia who was overthrown -by the Cimmerians a generation before they overthrew Gyges[763]. It is -of course possible that Pliny is merely making a mistake about the name. -But it is equally possible that a genuine tradition attributed the ring -to Midas. Midas has much else in common with Gyges and the points of -resemblance deserve to be noticed. His kingdom, like that of Gyges, was -famous for its precious metals[764]. Like Lydia it occupied an important -part of the great caravan route[765]. Midas was the golden king still -more than Gyges. His touch turned all things into gold until he was -freed from this disastrous power by bathing in the Pactolus, the river -from which the Lydians got so much of their electrum[766]. According to -one account coins were first struck by “Demodike of Cyme, daughter of -Agamemnon king of the Cymaeans, after her marriage with Midas the -Phrygian[767].” Midas, like Gyges, sent rich presents (bribes?) to -Delphi[768]. In short the great point of resemblance which Midas bears -to Gyges lies in his enormous wealth and the ways in which he appears to -have acquired and used it[769]. It may be that this implied the -possession of the magic ring[770]. - -[Sidenote: With the story of the finding of the ring cp. stories of - finds in mining districts.] - -The circumstances of the find recall two anecdotes in the _Mirabiles -Auscultationes_[771], located the one in Paionia the other in Pieria, in -which, as in the Gyges story, we have the rains, the chasms, the find of -gold and the taking of it to the palace. In at least one of the two -cases the find is treasure trove, like the ring of Gyges. But the point -to be noticed is that both Paionia and Pieria are in the famous mining -district that played so great a part in the history of Athens and -Macedonia. Considering the fame of the mines of Lydia it is natural to -ask whether they did not play their part in the evolution of the story -of the ring. Stories of men buried in the mines of Lydia did actually -exist. One of them, told in the _Mirabiles Auscultationes_, shows that -in Lydia, as in the region of Mt Pangaion and the river Strymon, chasms -containing skeletons and gold were not unlikely to be mine shafts, and -the power secured by their discoverer to be simply the power of suddenly -and perhaps secretly acquired wealth. - -As to the date at which Tmolus was first mined nothing is known except -that the workings were disused in the days of Strabo[772]. It may well -have been worked from the earliest days of Gyges if, as is probable, he -mined at Pergamus and further afield[773]. Lydians mining in those -regions would hardly be neglecting mines so near their own capital, the -more so as they would be directed to them by following the golden stream -of the Pactolus[774]. - -In the face of these facts it is tempting to go one step further than -Radet when he explains Gyges’ talisman as economic science. [Sidenote: -Rings as money.] We are reminded of Byron’s description of the most -potent of talismans: - - Yes, ready money is Aladdin’s lamp[775]. - -Gyges, it is true, discovered a ring, not a lamp, but the particular -form of his talisman only adds point to the Byronic interpretation. Till -somewhere about the time of the story rings were probably ready money in -the literal sense of the phrase[776]. In many parts of the world before -the introduction of a regular stamped coinage trade had been conducted -largely by means of rings of specific weight[777]. - -Much of the evidence for this use takes us back well into the second -millennium. Some of the localities where it is known to have prevailed -earliest were connected with Lydia at this time. Egypt was the ally of -Gyges, the Hittites were the predecessors of the Lydians in the land of -Lydia. Troy probably formed part of Gyges’ dominions[778]. The book of -Genesis specifically associates ring money with caravans[779]. It is -therefore probable that rings circulated in Lydia itself until they were -supplanted by the new stamped coins, which may have owed their shape to -its convenience for stamping. [Sidenote: With Gyges’ ring cp. perhaps -Pheidon’s spits, the Attic obol and drachma, and the Roman as.] In -Argos, according to a tradition which is defended in the next chapter, -the stamped coinage was preceded by a currency of metal spits (below, -fig. 21): if the tradition is to be trusted, these spits remained -permanently associated with the name of the tyrant who displaced them by -coined money. Have we a parallel in the case of the Gyges story? Is its -hero the inventor of the new stamped coinage and has his name become -associated with the rings that he displaced? It is perfectly possible -that the new coins were at first regarded as so many rings’ worth of -precious metal. The name νόμισμα implies that the stamped coin had won -general acceptance; it would of course be quite appropriate to a -currency in rings or kettles or cows; but there is no evidence of its -use previous to the introduction of a stamped metal coinage, and it was -probably the general acceptance of this latter that gave rise to the -word. To call the earliest Lydian coins rings (δακτύλιοι) would be -precisely like calling the earliest coins of Athens spits (ὀβελοί) or -bundles of spits (δραχμαί) or the earliest coins of Rome bars (asses). -If obol and drachma and as survived while δακτύλιος did not, the fact is -sufficiently accounted for by the histories of Athens, Rome, and Lydia. - -[Sidenote: But if so, why is the ring a seal ring?] - -The explanation just offered of the ring of Gyges omits one detail that -is essential to the story as told by Plato. Plato’s ring is a signet -ring, and it is the seal (σφραγίς) that does the magic. Babelon holds -that the seal makers (δακτυλιογλύφοι) of the period were probably also -the coin strikers. But if we are to follow one of our own leading -numismatists, G. Macdonald, the connexion between seal and coin was -closer than this. Originally, according to him[780], coins were simply -pieces of sealed metal. - -[Sidenote: “Coins are pieces of sealed metal.”] - - The minting of money in its most primitive form was simply the - placing of a seal on lumps of electrum that had previously been - weighed and adjusted to a fixed standard: the excessive rarity of - coins that have only a striated surface on the obverse proves that - this primitive stage was of short duration[781]. - -Greek seals were normally attached to rings[782]. The definition of a -coin as a piece of sealed metal was started by Burgon, who used it as an -argument for the religious character of coin types and described the -seal as “the impress of the symbol of the tutelar divinity of the -city[783].” Macdonald very rightly rejects the theory, so widely current -before the appearance of Ridgeway’s _Metallic Currency_, that all coin -types had a religious origin. But he himself proceeds to hang on to the -seal theory views of his own that are equally untenable, at least in the -sweeping form in which he states them. He assumes that the seal must be -always that of a state or king or magistrate, and that the device is -usually heraldic. The latter point does not concern us here[784]: the -former does, since it is incompatible with the views of Babelon and -Lenormant that the earliest coins were not state issues. But the seal -theory does not depend on the nature either of the seals or of the -sealers. There is no reason why we should not accept Babelon and -Lenormant on the private character of the earliest coins simultaneously -with Burgon and Macdonald on the character of the first coin types as -being simply seals. Indeed some of the evidence collected by Macdonald -positively suggests that we should. In the fifth and fourth centuries -B.C. at Athens public property was stamped with the public seal, τῷ -δημοσίῳ σημάντρῳ[785]. The same practice was followed in the fifth -century at Samos[786], and perhaps at Syracuse[787]. This use of public -seals to stamp public property suggests corresponding private seals -similarly used. At this point the literary evidence fails us, but -archaeological documents come to our aid. - -Metal was not the only material that the ancients stamped in this way. -Wine jars, bricks, and tiles were similarly stamped. Thousands of these -stamps have come down to us, and many of them bear city symbols and a -magistrate’s name. But they often bear also the name of the maker, and -the Danish scholar Nilsson[788], who has made a thorough study of them, -is inclined to regard them as essentially the seals of private -manufacturers. The magistrate’s name may merely indicate the date: the -state symbol may mean that the state was the consignee, or that the -manufacturer enjoyed some sort of state protection, or was subjected to -state taxation and control. - -If then such was the history of the stamp as applied to bricks and wine -jars, we have a further reason for thinking that stamps as applied to -the precious metals may have originally been put on them by private -owners. May we not here have the true explanation of the marvellous seal -of Gyges’ ring? May not the owner of this ring have been the first -person to use his signet for stamping coins of metal, and may not this -fact be the origin of the stories about its marvellous powers? - -Whether this person was Gyges is another question. His claim to the ring -is not beyond dispute. We have seen already that it is sometimes -attributed to Midas. Even in the story as told by Plato the MSS. make -the hero “the ancestor of Gyges,” not Gyges himself, and the fact that -in other writers and elsewhere in the _Republic_[789] the ring is called -the ring of Gyges is not in itself decisive. Both the ring and its magic -powers may have passed from hand to hand. But if the evidence and -opinions that have been adduced in this chapter have any value, our -interpretation of the ring story does not depend on establishing Gyges -as the original owner. - -Let us now revert for a moment to the illuminating theory of Babelon -that the striking of coins was at first a private undertaking of -merchants or miners or bankers, and that the final step in the evolution -of a gold and silver coinage was reached only when this business of -stamping and issuing the pieces was taken over by the state. We are -entirely without record of the actual transference that the theory -implies. Babelon assumes that the government created the monopoly. This -chapter suggests a modification of Babelon’s view in one important -point, namely that it was not the government that made the monopoly, but -the monopoly that made the government. As in the case of Babelon’s own -main thesis, we are forced to trust largely to analogies. But the -analogies are striking, and they strike in two directions. We have first -the commercial or financial antecedents of the rulers of this period -both in Lydia and in various Greek states: and secondly we have the -history of later Lydian rulers and aspirants to the throne, notably -Croesus and Sadyattes, Cyrus and Pactyes, Xerxes and Pythes. The moral -of their stories is that no ruler could feel safe at Sardis until he had -secured some sort of financial supremacy. When we further consider that -Gyges was famous for his gold[790], and that his gold and his tyranny -are spoken of by Archilochus, probably in the same breath, then apart -from speculative interpretations of the story of the ring, there is at -least a clear possibility that the monopolist policy of Croesus and his -successors goes back at least to Gyges and perhaps even a generation or -so earlier, to some such ruler as Ardys or Spermos, and that it was the -monopoly in stamped pieces of electrum that brought the first tyrant to -the king’s palace and placed him on the throne[791]. - - - - - Chapter VI. _Argos_ - - - τὰν ἀρετὰν καὶ τὰν σοφίαν νικῶντι χελῶναι. - -[Illustration: Fig. 20. Early Aeginetan “tortoises.”] - -[Sidenote: “Tyranny” of Pheidon the legitimate sovereign “who created - for the Peloponnesians their measures” (Herodotus),] - -Our earliest account of the one tyrant of Argos is found in Herodotus -and runs as follows: “and from the Peloponnesus came Leokedes the son of -Pheidon the tyrant of the Argives, that Pheidon who created for the -Peloponnesians their measures and behaved quite the most outrageously of -all the Greeks, who having removed the Eleian directors of the games -himself directed the games at Olympia[792].” Pheidon belonged to the -royal house of Temenos[793], and appears to have succeeded to a -hereditary throne in the ordinary way. Nevertheless he is deliberately -classed by Aristotle as a typical tyrant[794]. - -Some years ago I suggested that it was Pheidon’s “invention” of measures -rather than his outrageous behaviour or his warlike achievements that -caused him to be regarded as a different kind of ruler from his -forefathers—as a tyrant instead of a king[795]. - -[Sidenote: and also, according to Ephorus, struck in Aegina the first - silver coins.] - -Herodotus speaks of him simply as the man who made their measures for -the Peloponnesians. But Ephorus and later writers declare that Pheidon -invented a system of weights as well as measures, and, most important of -all, that silver was first coined by him in Aegina[796]. The reign of -Pheidon probably covered the first third of the seventh century. Thus in -Greece Proper as in Asia Minor there is evidence for ascribing the -earliest coins to the earliest tyrant. [Sidenote: Pheidon the European -counterpart of Gyges.] If there is any weight in the Argive evidence, -then the accounts mutually confirm one another, and it becomes -distinctly improbable that the association of coinage and tyranny was a -mere accident. - -[Sidenote: The evidence for Pheidon is disputed. This chapter is devoted - to maintaining its credibility.] - -Unfortunately the evidence as regards Pheidon is all very much disputed. -The greater part of this chapter will therefore be devoted to examining -its credibility and endeavouring to show that the doubts that have been -cast upon it are not well founded, that on the most probable showing the -reign of Pheidon opened the epoch known as the age of the tyrants, that -Pheidon lived just about the time when the first coins were struck in -Aegina, and that the institution of the Aeginetan weight system was the -direct result of an Argive occupation of the island. - -[Sidenote: Date of earliest Aeginetan coins.] - -One or two points may be assumed to start with as generally admitted. -The Aeginetan “tortoises” (fig. 20) were the first coins struck in -European Greece[797], and they were first struck fairly early in the -seventh century[798]. The points that have been most disputed are the -date of Pheidon and his connexion with Aegina and the Aeginetan coinage. -[Sidenote: Evidence for the date of Pheidon:] It is the date that is the -real centre of the controversy, and it will be best to deal with it -first and to begin by briefly recalling the evidence and arguments. - -[Sidenote: (1) from genealogies:] - -(i) The later genealogies[799] which make Pheidon seventh from Temenos -and eleventh from Heracles and thus put him early in the ninth century -have been shown by Busolt[800] to be due to fourth century tamperings -with the pedigree of the royal house of Macedon. In ascribing the -foundation of the Macedonian dynasty to a certain Karanos, who according -to Theopompus was a son of Pheidon, according to Satyrus a son of -Pheidon’s father[801], they were influenced by the incurable Greek -belief in symmetry which required the Macedonian royal family to be as -old as that of its great rivals the Medes which latter, following -Ktesias, they dated from 884 B.C.[802]. - -(ii) The genealogy that makes Pheidon tenth from Temenos and thus puts -him about the middle of the eighth century can be traced back only to -Ephorus[803]. In other words, as already pointed out by Bury[804], its -credibility depends in great measure on that of the writer who is also -our earliest authority for the statement that Pheidon coined in -Aegina[805]. - -(iii) Yet a third statement as to Pheidon’s family is that of -Herodotus[806]. According to Herodotus Leokedes son of Pheidon was one -of the suitors of Agariste at Sicyon early in the sixth century. The -statement occurs in a plainly romantic setting, and must not be pressed -too far. It may however be fairly claimed as an argument against a date -as early as 750. Even admitting the possibility that παίς (son) in the -singular may be loosely used for ἀπόγονος (descendant)[807], yet it -remains highly unlikely that Herodotus would have mentioned Pheidon at -all in connexion with Leokedes if he regarded them as separated by over -150 years[808]. - -Lehmann-Haupt[809], who, in spite of all the difficulties just -summarized, dates Pheidon eighth Olympiad (748 B.C.)[810], imagines an -obscure Pheidon, father of Leokedes, and formulates as a characteristic -of Herodotus the practice of assigning the deeds of famous men to -obscure namesakes. Besides Pheidon he quotes only Philokypros, tyrant of -Soli and friend of Solon, whom he proceeds, in direct contradiction of -Herodotus[811], to differentiate from the father of the Aristokypros who -fell during the Ionic revolt. His view is discredited by the one -illustration that he quotes in its support. Solon’s young friend need -not have been born before 608 B.C., and the son of a man born in that -year might well be alive in 498 B.C. Even if Herodotus is mistaken on -this point, his mistake would only illustrate the comparatively narrow -margin of error to which his anachronisms on matters of this kind are -limited. - -There is yet another group of statements bearing on Pheidon’s pedigree. -Pausanias says that the last king of Argos was Meltas son of -Lakedes[812]. The latter is equated by Beloch[813] with the Leokedes of -Herodotus[814]. Meltas is said by Pausanias to have been tenth in -descent from Medon, grandson of Temenos. Pheidon, as has been noted -already, is described by Strabo as tenth in descent from Temenos -himself. Thus Strabo, Pausanias, and Herodotus might be taken as -mutually confirming one another, if we accept Herodotus literally, and -make Pheidon father of Leokedes and consequently grandfather of Meltas. -As there was still a king of Argos in 484 B.C.[815], and there is -nothing to show that the office did not continue well after that date, -Beloch’s argument brings Pheidon well down into the sixth century. But -as it allows only twelve generations from the Dorian invasion under -Temenos to the indeterminate date after 480 B.C. when kingship was -completely abolished, it only helps to emphasize the fact that Argive -royal pedigrees are not a safe guide for determining Pheidon’s -date[816]. - -[Sidenote: (2) from his interference at the Olympian games.] - -The assertion of Pausanias[817], that Pheidon interfered with the eighth -celebration of the Olympian games, is not to be reconciled with a -seventh century date. But serious doubts have been thrown on Pausanias’ -dating, which may very possibly have been influenced by the Macedonian -genealogies, in which case it is no confirmation of the date arrived at -by reckoning Pheidon tenth from Temenos. The arguments for emending -eighth to twenty-eighth are weighty[818]. Pausanias’ exact statement is -that “at the eighth Olympian festival the Pisatans called in Pheidon ... -and celebrated the games along with Pheidon[819].” But Strabo declares -it to be “more probable (ἐγγυτέρω τῆς πίστεως) that from the first -Olympiad till the twenty-sixth the presidency both of the temple and the -games was held by the Eleians[820].” Julius Africanus likewise knows -nothing of any disturbance at the eighth Olympiad, but records one at -the twenty-eighth. - -The difficulties in accepting the twenty-eighth Olympiad, as set forth -by Unger[821], are not very impressive. He argues that at the -twenty-eighth Olympiad the Eleians had arms[822], whereas Pheidon made -his attack “when the Eleians were without arms[823],” and that, as the -Pisatans celebrated the twenty-seventh Olympiad, Pheidon in the -twenty-eighth would have displaced not the Eleians, but the Pisatans. -But when Strabo says that the Eleians were without arms, he or his -source may mean that their Dymaean war left them unequipped for home -defence. Assume that this was so and that they were preoccupied with -their Dymaean war both in 672 B.C. and in 668 B.C., and the whole -situation is explained easily. At the twenty-seventh celebration the -Pisatans unaided might secure the presidency by a surprise attack. It -would be at the next festival, when the Eleians were forewarned, that -the Pisatans would need Pheidon’s help to displace them at Olympia. -Weaker still is Unger’s argument that a notice about Pheidon may have -fallen out in Eusebius under Olymp. VIII, as one has in the same -chronicle about the emperor Caligula. - -We may indeed with Mahaffy[824] and Busolt[825] doubt whether these -early parts of the Olympian victor lists are contemporary records. But -it is easy to be unduly sceptical. Mahaffy, for instance, is inclined to -argue that the Olympian lists cannot have existed in the fifth century -because they are not then used for purposes of dating. He assumes that -Hippias who made his edition of the list in 370 B.C. can have had little -more evidence at his disposal than Pausanias, who lived over five -hundred years later. Plutarch[826], whom he quotes as discrediting the -list, merely expresses an opinion which is no more final than that of -Mahaffy himself. If our chronological data are untrustworthy, we are -thrown back on Pheidon’s achievements for determining his date, a -position long ago maintained by C. Mueller[827]. Regarded as a fact of -indeterminate date Pheidon’s interference at Olympia is more likely to -have been remembered if it was not made so early as the close of the -eighth century, when the festival had not yet attained its subsequent -reputation[828]. - -[Sidenote: Pheidon probably contemporary with the earliest Aeginetan - coins.] - -The evidence as to Pheidon’s date is therefore quite compatible with the -statement that makes him the first to strike coins in Aegina. For if it -be allowed that he may have lived in the first half of the seventh -century, there would be nothing unique in his having his mint away from -his capital in an outlying but commercially important part of his -dominion. Ridgeway and Svoronos have already compared the Romans, who -struck their first coins in Campania[829], and the Ptolemies who coined -very largely in Cyprus[830]. - -[Sidenote: Did he strike them?] - -But had Pheidon anything to do with Aegina and its coinage? Against the -statements of Ephorus and later writers must be set the silence of -Herodotus, who makes no reference either to coins or to Aegina in his -account of Pheidon. This omission, combined with the diversity of views -as to Pheidon’s date, has led to a general distrust of Ephorus, so much -so that the majority of the most competent authorities are either -agnostics[831] or utter unbelievers[832]. - -Herodotus’ silence is not by itself a serious argument for rejecting the -additions of the later historians. It should be remembered that his -whole account of Pheidon in VI. 127 extends to barely four lines. He can -hardly be expected to state at all completely even the main facts about -so important a personality in so short a space. To assert, as has been -done recently[833], that Herodotus _knew_ nothing about a coinage issued -by Pheidon is to beg the question. - -To the fifth century Greek, for whom Herodotus wrote, the origin of the -system of weights on which the Aeginetan coins were struck may have been -of greater interest than the remoter question of an invention which they -doubtless all took for granted. Peloponnesian weights and measures stood -for the lack of standardization in all matters metrical from which -Herodotus and his hearers must have suffered daily. - -There is no need to pursue these criticisms in further detail. They -start with various assumptions as to Pheidon’s date. Some of them would -be found to be mutually destructive. Nearly all of them overestimate the -difficulties raised by the apparent lack of confirmation of Ephorus in -earlier writers. It is by no means certain that his statements about -Pheidon’s connexion with the Aeginetan coinage must be a fanciful -expansion of Herodotus VI. 127. There are in fact two lines of evidence -that point in quite the opposite direction. One of them rests on notices -about the Argive Heraeum supplemented by recent finds on the site; the -other is based on a new interpretation of a passage in the fifth book of -Herodotus. It will be necessary to examine in some detail the evidence -from these two sources. - -[Sidenote: A. Evidence from the Argive Heraeum.] - -In the famous temple of Hera, the Argive Heraeum, that lies between -Argos and Mycenae, there was preserved a dedication that was said to -have been made by Pheidon in commemoration of his coinage. The notice is -preserved only in the mediaeval _Etymologicum Magnum_. It runs: “Pheidon -the Argive was the first of all men to strike a coinage in Aegina, and -on account of this coinage he called in the spits (ὀβελίσκοι) and -dedicated them to the Hera of Argos.” There is nothing suspicious in -this notice. The word drachma means a handful, and according to Plutarch -a drachma is a handful of obols (spits or nails), which in early times -were used as money[834]. In modern times nails are said to have served -as a coinage in both Scotland and France[835]. Plenty of evidence is to -be found in antiquity for offerings of disused objects to the gods[836]. -The ultimate source for the statement of the _Etymologicum Magnum_ may -well be the official guide at the Heraeum itself. Temple traditions are -not always above suspicion. All the same the indications of a Pheidon -tradition preserved in the Argive Heraeum are valuable, because they -show a source from which Ephorus might very well have supplemented -Herodotus far older and more valuable than his own imagination. - -[Illustration: Fig. 21. Bundle of spits found in the Argive Heraeum.] - -This however does not end the evidence of the Argive Heraeum. Some -thirty years ago the site was excavated by the American School of -Archaeology at Athens. Among the finds was a bundle of iron spits or -rods about four feet long (fig. 21) which Svoronos[837] has plausibly -associated with the ὀβελίσκοι of the _Etymologicum Magnum_. - -The Americans ascribed the foundation of the Heraeum to the Mycenaean -period, so that the dedication of the spits could be put anywhere in the -three centuries that form the limit of controversy as to Pheidon’s date. -But more recently this dating has been shown to be mistaken by the -Germans who excavated Tiryns. Whole series of miniature vessels which -the Argive Heraeum excavators had regarded as Mycenaean were shown by -the Tiryns excavators to be seventh century or later, and when one of -them, Frickenhaus, visited the Argive Heraeum, he found fragments of -Geometric and proto-Corinthian pottery in positions which proved the -sherds to be older than the temple foundations. From this fact he argues -conclusively that the abundant series of dedications at the Heraeum -begin in the seventh century. Pheidon’s ὀβελίσκοι cannot therefore go -further back than that[838]. The Mycenaean objects from the Argive -Heraeum site must all come from a small secular settlement that preceded -the temple. The latter becomes possibly contemporary with Pheidon -himself. - -This is a fact of possible significance. It suggests that the Heraeum -may have been the religious centre of Pheidon’s imperial policy, a sort -of religious federal capital carefully placed away from the chief cities -of the Argolid much as the federal capital of Australia has been placed -away from the capitals of the various Australian states. It looks indeed -as though the analogy may have been closer still, and that Pheidon was -the builder of his federal capital. If so his date was some time, -probably early, in the seventh century. - -[Sidenote: B. Fresh evidence from Herodotus.] - -This ends the evidence of the Heraeum and brings me to the most -important section of my argument. We have just seen how little need -there is to mistrust Ephorus simply because he does not exactly -reproduce Herodotus. All the same the earlier writer is of course by far -the more reliable. The account of Pheidon’s coinage in Aegina would gain -enormously in credibility if any evidence for it could be found in the -pages of Herodotus. Modern writers without exception have taken it for -granted that no such evidence is to be found. In this I believe them to -have been mistaken. There is a passage in the fifth book which, though -it does not mention Pheidon’s name, I believe to describe the conquest -by him of Aegina and the institution as a result of that conquest of the -weight standard on which the earliest Aeginetan coins were struck. If my -explanation has not been anticipated, there is no reason for surprise. -The passage contains references to pottery, ships, dress, and jewellery, -and my interpretation of it is based on archaeological evidence much of -which has only quite recently become available. - -[Sidenote: Herodotus, V. 82 f. describes an Argive intervention in - Aegina,] - -In the passage of the fifth book which we are now to examine -Herodotus[839] is explaining the origin of the hatred that existed -between Athens and Aegina in 500 B.C. Aegina had once been subject to -Epidaurus[840]. Then the Aeginetans, having built triremes and made -themselves masters of the sea[841], revolted. Through their revolt they -got embroiled with the Athenians, who had at that time very close -relations with Epidaurus. At the suggestion of the Epidaurians, the -Athenians sailed against Aegina. The Aeginetans appealed to Argos, and -with the help of an Argive force that crossed undetected from Epidaurus, -utterly defeated the Athenians in a land battle on the island. The -various measures[842] taken in common by the Aeginetans and the Argives -immediately after the war suggest that Aegina, when she had revolted -from Epidaurus, became in some sort a confederate, or possibly a -subject, of Argos[843]. We may assume too that Argos secured some sort -of control over Epidaurus in the course of the war. Otherwise it is -inconceivable that an Argive force should have set out from Epidaurus -with the double purpose of aiding Epidaurus’ revolted subjects and -attacking those very Athenians, whose expedition against the island had -been suggested by the Epidaurians themselves[844]. The crushing defeat -that the Athenians sustained may have been due to the collapse of her -Epidaurian allies. - -One further point about Herodotus’ narrative should be noticed. There is -nothing in it to suggest that at the time when the Aeginetans revolted -from the Epidaurians, either of them was dependent on Argos. The -narrative points rather to a previous confederation or dominion in which -the chief cities were Epidaurus, Aegina, and not Argos but Athens. Are -there any indications as to when all this occurred? - -The reference is to a time considerably[845] previous to 500 B.C. Macan -thinks that the most probable date for the expedition to Aegina is -somewhere in the lifetime of Solon or Peisistratus[846]. [Sidenote: -generally ascribed to the first half of the sixth century,] He points to -various circumstances that certainly might well have led to a collision -between Athens and Aegina during that period[847]. All the same it is -difficult to accept a date within those limits. The Aeginetans are not -likely[848] to have been dependent on Epidaurus after it was conquered -by Periander, about 600 B.C.[849] If therefore the revolt from Epidaurus -and the Athenian invasion are incidents in one and the same struggle, -both must go into the seventh century. Macan prefers to assume a long -interval between these two events. But Herodotus gives no hint of one. -On the contrary, his narrative hangs excellently together as a -description of successive and correlated incidents in a single struggle. -Not only so, but even if the invasion be separated from the revolt, it -is difficult to believe that it occurred after 590. So crushing a defeat -for the Athenians, who themselves admitted that only one of their number -got back to Attica[850], could hardly have taken place in the time of -Solon or Peisistratus without being associated with their names. After -all, a fair amount is known about sixth century Athens. There are no -traces of any such overwhelming disaster, or of the inevitable set back -that would have followed it. The relations of Athens to Argos during the -period seem to have been friendly rather than the reverse. Peisistratus -had Argive mercenaries, not to speak of an Argive wife[851]. Argive -support of Peisistratus is of course quite consistent with hostility to -the government that Peisistratus overthrew. It has indeed been -suggested[852] that the Aeginetan expedition took place while -Peisistratus was in exile. But, apart from the entire absence of -evidence, and all the other difficulties involved by a sixth century -date, this suggestion means that Peisistratus sought a bodyguard and -wife in the most unpopular quarter imaginable, hardly a probable -proceeding on the part of a ruler so tactful and popular as Peisistratus -must have been. - -A date late in the seventh century is rendered unlikely by what is known -of Procles of Epidaurus[853], the father-in-law of Periander, who ruled -Epidaurus during the last part of the seventh century[854], apparently -as a dependent of the Corinthian tyrant, by whom he was eventually -deposed. C. Mueller indeed[855] claims Aegina for Procles, but only on -the more than dubious evidence of a more than dubious story of -Plutarch’s, which tells how Procles once used an “Aeginetan stranger” to -get rid of the corpse of a man whom he had murdered for his money[856]. - -[Sidenote: but more probably to be dated early in the seventh, as shown - by archaeological evidence on allusions in the narrative to:] - -On the whole the narrative seems to fall best into the first half of the -seventh century. That is the time that best suits the naval situation -during the war, and the effect that it is said to have had upon costume, -ornament, and pottery. As the archaeological evidence for all these -points is based largely on the evidence of the pottery, it will be best -to take the pottery first. - -[Sidenote: (i) pottery,] - -In the temple of Damia and Auxesia on Aegina it became the practice -(νόμος) after the war “to introduce into the temple neither anything -else Attic nor pottery, but to drink there henceforth only out of native -jars[857].” Herodotus mentions this embargo on Attic pottery only as -applied to the one temple on Aegina[858]. But he states that it was -observed by Argives as well as by Aeginetans, which points to the -possibility that the practice prevailed in Argos as well as Aegina. -Macan goes as far as to suggest that it is an “understatement and -pseudo-explanation of a measure or custom for the protection of native -ware from Attic competition[859].” The other measures recorded in this -connexion, the changes in Attic dress and in Peloponnesian brooches, -support Macan’s suggestion. But in the matter of dating he follows -earlier writers who, using very inadequate material, came to conclusions -which can now be shown to be improbable. They date this embargo in the -middle of the sixth century. But in Aegina at any rate Attic pottery -continued to be imported throughout the second half of the sixth -century, while in Argos, where the evidence is less decisive and -abundant, there is no sign of a cessation of Attic imports about 550 -B.C. On the other hand both in Argos and Aegina there does appear to be -an abrupt cessation of Attic imports early in the seventh century. As, -further, the general history of Greek pottery shows that an -Argive-Aeginetan embargo on Attic pottery would have had a strong -commercial motive early in the seventh century and none in the middle of -the sixth, there is a strong presumption that the date of the embargo -was not the middle of the sixth century but somewhere about the -beginning of the seventh. To examine the archaeological evidence here in -detail would take us too far from our main enquiry. It will be found -presented in full in an appendix[860]. - -[Sidenote: (ii) sea-power and ships,] - -The war was a great disaster for Athenian naval power. Now the period of -greatest eclipse for Athens from this point of view was the seventh -century. Throughout it there is no indication whatever of naval activity -at Athens, except a possible war against Mitylene. Even that must be put -at the earliest close on the year 600 B.C., and is to be regarded as -announcing the beginning of the new epoch of activity in the sixth -century[861]; and against it must be set the failure in the struggle -with Megara for Salamis[862]. This had not been the naval position of -Athens earlier. During the dark ages she appears to have been a -considerable naval power. A tradition preserved by Plutarch makes Athens -succeed Crete in the command of the sea[863]: naval power is implied in -Theseus’ expedition to Crete; a poem of Bacchylides[864], which is -illustrated by a vase painting of Euphronios[865], tells how Theseus -went to the depths of the sea to fetch up the ring of Minos, and the -story has been brought by S. Reinach into connexion with rings such as -those of Polycrates and the doges of Venice, and explained as -symbolizing the winning by Theseus of the sea which had been previously -the bride of Minos[866]. - -The date of these events must not be pressed. The period of this -sea-power is plainly the dark age that followed the breaking up of the -Cretan and Mycenaean civilization. It is the period of the pottery known -as Geometric, and the Athenian Geometric, the Dipylon ware, again and -again shows pictures of ships. Thirty-nine examples are quoted by -Torr[867], enough, as pointed out by Helbig[868], to prove the important -rôle played by the Athenian navy in the life of Athens of that age. The -Dipylon ships, as remarked twenty years ago by Helbig[869], show that -already in the eighth century Athens was preparing to found her power on -her navy. It requires some such catastrophic explanation as has just -been offered to account for her complete set back in the seventh. - -[Sidenote: (iii) dress.] - -One result in Athens of the reverse in Aegina, so Herodotus declares, -was a revolution in the dress of the Athenian women, who gave up the -Doric costume, which was made of wool and fastened with pins, and -adopted in its place the Ionic, which consisted of sewn garments made of -linen. The passage is a _locus classicus_ among writers on Greek dress, -and it must be at once admitted that nearly all of them accept a date -late in the first half of the sixth century[870]. So late a date seems -to me to be untenable. It can be reconciled neither with the statements -of Thucydides on the subject of Athenian dress[871], nor with the -evidence of extant monuments[872]. The sumptuary laws on women’s dress -passed by Solon in 594 B.C.[873] were plainly directed against the -Ionian costume. They show that it must have reached Athens by about 600 -B.C. and offer no evidence that it had not done so considerably earlier. -Bury dates the introduction of Ionian dress into Athens “c. 650 -(?)[874].” - -[Sidenote: After the war the Argives and Aeginetans make their brooches - “half as big again.”] - -Among the Aeginetans and Argives as a result of their victory over -Athens a change was introduced in what Herodotus calls the “measure” -(μέτρον) of Aeginetan and Argive brooches (περόναι). Herodotus states -that this change affected both the dedications at the temple of Damia -and Auxesia[875], and also the general manufacture and use. The way he -tells the story explains why he goes beyond the temple when speaking of -the pins, but does not do so in the case of the pottery. The exclusion -of Attic pottery from the Aeginetan temple, or rather the exclusive use -for temple purposes of local ware, was in Herodotus’ days a ritualistic -survival. The large brooches on the other hand had continued in general -use. “Now the women of Argos and Aegina even to my own days wore -brooches of increased size.” Very possibly Herodotus had himself noticed -them. It is the account of this change in the “measure” of the Aeginetan -and Argive brooches that confirms the connexion of Pheidon with the -origin of the Aeginetan coinage. - -The new practice was in Herodotus’ own words: “to make the brooches half -as big again as the then established measure.” It is probably -significant that, both before and after the change, the brooches have a -standard “measure.” The tendency of articles of jewellery in early -periods to be of a fixed weight is a familiar one. Numerous instances -are quoted in Ridgeway’s _Origin of Metallic Currency_[876]. Not only -so, but these fixed weights are repeatedly found corresponding with or -anticipating the coin standards of the places they belong to. - -It may be objected that the word μέτρον does not mean weight. This is so -when it is contrasted with σταθμός[877]; but it appears to have been -used also in a more comprehensive sense[878]. The Athenian -μετρονόμοι[879] must have inspected weights as well as measures. μέτρον -is presumably applied to both, and to a fifth century Greek there would -be no question of its referring to anything but weight when applied to -jewellery[880]. - -[Sidenote: The Aeginetan drachma was half as big again as the Attic.] - -The change introduced by the Argives and Aeginetans after driving the -Athenians from Aegina was to make the “measure” of their brooches half -as big again as what it had previously been. Now this is approximately -the relationship in weight of the earliest Aeginetan drachmae to the -earliest drachmae struck on the Euboeic standard. Later, in Herodotus’ -own times, the relative weights were four to three. But the earliest -Aeginetan drachmae weighed a little more than those of later -issues[881]. On the other hand, as stated by Percy Gardner[882] in -discussing Solon’s “augmentation” of the Athenian coins, the earliest -Attic or rather Euboeic drachma[883] weighed less than those of -post-Solonian times. The weight of the Aeginetan drachma as determined -from the early didrachms quoted above (p. 171, n. 6) is just over six -grammes, as compared with the 5·85 grammes of later issues, while that -of the earliest Attic Euboeic drachma as determined from the coins of p. -171, n. 8 is just over four grammes, as compared with the 4·26 grammes -of later issues[884]. - -Thus the original Aeginetan drachma seems to have been just half as -heavy again as the earliest Attic[885]. This ratio is accepted by -Ridgeway[886], who regards it as invented to make ten silver pieces -worth one gold when gold was fifteen times as precious as silver, while -later, when silver rose to be worth 3/40 of its weight in gold, the -silver pieces were slightly diminished in weight, in order that ten of -them might still be the equivalent of one of gold[887]. - -[Sidenote: Summary of the evidence of Herodotus.] - -Let us now return to the one passage of Herodotus, in which he refers by -name to the Argive tyrant. - -In that passage he speaks of Pheidon as “the man who made their measures -for the Peloponnesians[888].” The force of the definite article that -precedes the Greek μέτρα has not always been sufficiently stressed. More -than one recent writer begins his discussion of the passage by -translating τὰ μέτρα “_a_ system of measures.” The subsequent argument -has naturally suffered. τὰ μέτρα can be no other measures than those -associated with the Peloponnesus in Herodotus’ own days, namely those of -the famous Aeginetan standard, employed in particular for the coinage of -the island[889]. Other scholars have regarded the statement that Pheidon -struck the first coins in Aegina as merely an amplification by later -writers of these very words. They argue that “the measures” plainly -meant the Aeginetan standard, and so suggested the famous Aeginetan -coinage. This latter view assumes of course that the amplifications of -Ephorus are not to be found in Herodotus himself. But what are the -facts? The establishment of Aeginetan measures in the Peloponnesus are -alluded to by Herodotus not only in the passage about the Argive tyrant -in Book VI but also very possibly in the passage in Book V that -describes the early Argive expedition to Aegina. In this latter passage -the measures are said to have been the result of the expedition. Both -expedition and tyrant are probably to be dated early in the seventh -century. That is also the date to which numismatists generally assign -the first drachmae struck in Aegina, struck too on a standard that, like -that of our brooches, was half again as great as that previously in use. - -It is hard to avoid the inference that when the fourth century writers -say that Pheidon coined in Aegina, they are faithfully reporting a -genuine tradition. - -[Sidenote: Sceptical views on these chapters of Herodotus stated and - answered.] - -It has indeed been maintained that the whole Herodotean account of the -early relations of Argos, Aegina, and Athens is unhistorical[890]. The -arguments brought forward to support this destructive view are: (i) that -the episode is timeless and its timelessness must be due to its -unhistorical character, (ii) that it must be unhistorical because it -cannot, as alleged by Herodotus, have been the cause of the war of 487 -B.C., which must have been due to the natural rivalry of the two -neighbouring states. As regards the first of these two arguments, the -preceding pages have, it is hoped, shown that the episode is not -timeless: as regards the second, it is enough to point out that it -assumes that war cannot breed war, that no war can be due to two causes, -and that an incident cannot be historical if it is alleged as leading to -results that it cannot have in fact produced. The fact that arguments -such as these were accepted for publication in a periodical of high -repute less than a generation back shows how much the whole world of -scholarship was infected by the spirit of uncritical scepticism that has -left its mark in some quarters on that of the present age. - -Others again like Wilamowitz[891] regard the narrative of Herodotus V. -82–88 as simply a reflexion backwards of the state of affairs existing -in 487 B.C.[892], when Athens attacked Aegina, and the Aeginetans -“called to their aid the same people as before, the Argives[893].” They -argue that (i) the story is our only evidence for hatred between Athens -and Aegina much before 506 B.C., (ii) the Argive-Aeginetan brooches as -compared with the broochless Athenian costume[894], the embargo on Attic -pottery at the Aeginetan temple, and the posture of the kneeling statues -(pleading before the Athenian invaders) may all have been referred in -Herodotus’ days to the existing hatred and recent wars between Athens -and Aegina, (iii) Herodotus puts back the Athenian disaster into the -timeless period because the miracle and the change of costume required -an early date, and the story does not fit the war of 487 B.C., since the -famous Sophanes[895], who fought in it, lived till 464. Herodotus, they -say, gives no account of a disaster to the Athenian fleet in 487 because -he had used it up for this early reflexion. - -Of these points (i) is answered by the whole of this chapter, (ii) and -(iii) fall with (i), besides which (ii) contains many improbabilities, -_e.g._ that the pottery in an Aeginetan temple should without historic -reason have suggested to any fifth century Greek an early war with -Athens, while (iii) assumes an Athenian disaster in 487 B.C., whereas -Thucydides declares that Athens was successful in that war[896]. - -There is nothing suspicious in the Aeginetans having twice in two -hundred years attained some sort of thalassocracy, and having on both -occasions come as a result into collision with Athens. It is perfectly -natural for the Aeginetans on a second occasion to appeal to allies who -had previously helped them so effectively and with such profit to -themselves. Macan[897] observes that the Herodotean account of the feud -between Athens and Aegina is remarkably uninfluenced by contemporary -politics and interests. He suggests[898] dating the subjection of Aegina -to Epidaurus to the reign of Pheidon, and the revolt of the island from -Epidaurus to the time of Pheidon’s fall. But why in that case does the -account speak of a revolt from Epidaurus, if it was really a revolt from -the famous Argive tyranny? The whole narrative finds a more appropriate -setting if regarded as one chapter in the history of Pheidon himself. - -[Sidenote: Why Pheidon is not mentioned in them.] - -Only, why in this case is the name of Pheidon nowhere mentioned? It is -one thing to omit details in a biography four lines in length. It is -quite another to omit so prominent a name in a narrative that runs to -seven whole chapters. But the omission, though at first sight -surprising, is capable of explanation. The Herodotean story appears to -have been derived from the temple of Damia and Auxesia[899]. It was told -Herodotus not in connexion with any royal monument, but to explain -certain offerings of pottery and jewellery that he saw in the temple. -Not a single personal name occurs in the whole narrative, and there is -no particular reason why there should. There may actually have been -motives for not introducing them. The account of the events given to -Herodotus in the Aeginetan temple of Damia and Auxesia would naturally -not emphasize the part played by the Argive tyrant. The Athenian -version, to which also Herodotus alludes, would have still better reason -for trying to forget the name of Pheidon. If my whole interpretation of -these events is not entirely wrong, Pheidon dealt the Athenians what was -probably the most crushing blow they had ever received down to the days -when Herodotus wrote his history. The personal name may be omitted from -the same motive that made the Athenians speak of the Aeginetan drachma -as the “fat” drachma, which they are said to have done, “refusing to -call it Aeginetan out of hatred of the Aeginetans[900].” Sparta again -had taken sides against Pheidon at Olympia[901], and would have had no -interest in perpetuating the name of the man who had almost barred their -way to the hegemony of the Peloponnese. - -Ephorus’ account of Pheidon’s conquests and inventions is derived -neither from Attic nor from Aeginetan sources. As seen already[902] the -source of his statement about Pheidon coining in Aegina was most -probably the Argive Heraeum. Herodotus claims to use Argive sources, but -for him the war is primarily a matter between the Athenians and the -Aeginetans, whose subsequent hatred of one another it is intended to -explain. Thus we appear to have three rival or even hostile traditions -confirming one another, so that the variety of sources adds in a real -way to the credibility of the resultant narrative. - -[Sidenote: Pheidon and Aegina, further evidence from Ephorus: Pheidon - recovered the lot of Temenos, which included Aegina.] - -The notices about the coinage are not the only evidence for associating -Pheidon with Aegina. According to Ephorus “he completely recovered the -lot of Temenos, which had previously been split into several -parts[903].” Temenos appears in the genealogies as great great grandson -of Heracles, and founder of the Dorian dynasty at Argos[904]. He and his -sons and his son-in-law between them are represented as securing the -greater part of the North-east Peloponnese. Aegina fell to his -son-in-law Deiophontes, who went to the island from Epidaurus[905]. - -The operations described in Herodotus V. 82–88, by which the Argives -crossed from Epidaurus and drove the Athenians out of Aegina and put an -end to the Epidaurians being tributary to Athens[906], are almost beyond -doubt to be identified with the recovery by Argos of the portion of the -lot of Temenos that had been secured by Deiophontes. - -[Sidenote: Traces of this recovery in other passages of Herodotus.] - -It is true that this account of the recovery of the lot of Temenos is -first certainly met with in Strabo, whose authority is only the fourth -century Ephorus. But there are hints that Ephorus is here to be trusted. -There is the evidence of Herodotus that from an unspecified earlier date -down to about 550 B.C. the Argives had possessed the whole east coast of -the Peloponnesus and “the island of Cythera and the rest of the -islands[907].” The most likely period for Argos to have acquired this -territory is the reign of Pheidon. Pheidon according to Strabo[908] “had -deprived the Spartans of the hegemony of the Peloponnese,” and it is the -Spartans who shortly before Croesus asked for their help, had wrested -from the Argives “Cythera and the rest of the islands.” About 668 B.C., -_i.e._ probably in Pheidon’s reign, the Argives had beaten the Spartans -in the battle of Hysiae, which decided the possession of the strip of -coast land south of the Argolid[909]. - -Aegina is not mentioned in these proceedings, but C. Mueller may be -right in including it among “the rest of the islands[910].” The Hysiae -campaign is roughly contemporary with the second Messenian war, in which -Argos took part against the Spartans[911], and of which indeed it may -have been an incident. Now in that war the Samians took part by sea -against the Argives[912], and it is natural to connect this action of -theirs with their repeated attacks on Aegina in the days of the Samian -King Amphikrates, at some period indefinitely before the reign of -Polycrates. The Samians were certainly a naval power in the first half -of the seventh century. The four triremes built for them in 704 B.C. -marked for Thucydides an epoch in naval history[913]. About 668 B.C. -Kolaios the Samian made his famous voyage beyond the Straits of -Gibraltar to the Spanish seaport of Tartessus, a voyage that implies -much previous naval enterprise on the Samians’ part. The rivalry with -Aegina was probably commercial. Kolaios and his crew returned from the -“silver rooted streams” of the Tartessus river[914], having “made the -greatest profits from cargoes of all Greeks of whom we have accurate -information, excepting Sostratos the Aeginetan: for it is impossible for -anyone else to rival him[915].” Samian attacks on Aegina are thus -particularly likely to have happened about the time of the second -Messenian war. - -A century ago C. Mueller[916] argued that some event or other connecting -Samos with Aegina must have been closely connected with the revolt of -Aegina from Epidaurus, since the revolt was described in the _History of -Samos_ of the Samian historian Duris (born about 340 B.C.)[917]. From -this he proceeds to advocate a date for the revolt not very long before -the war between Samos and Aegina of 520 B.C. Arguments based on the laws -of digression observed by a writer whose works are known to us only in a -few fragments need to be used with caution. If Duris is any indication -whatever for the date of the revolt, he leaves an open choice between -the time of the war of 520 B.C. and that of the days of King -Amphikrates; and as between these two the evidence shows that the -earlier is probable while the latter is almost impossible. - -As independent evidence these hints would be of scarcely any value. As -confirmation of a definite but disputable statement their value is -considerable. - -[Sidenote: Summary of Pheidon’s activities according to Strabo (= - Ephorus).] - -The recovery of ancestral domains is a favourite euphemism among -military conquerors for their policy of annexation. The chronology, both -relative and absolute, of Strabo’s summary of Pheidon’s career has every -appearance of authenticity. Pheidon first recovers the lot of Temenos, -then “invents” his measures and coinage, and after that attempts to -expand eastwards and southwards to secure the whole inheritance of -Heracles, or in other words aims at the suzerainty of the whole -Peloponnese, and to that end celebrates the Olympian games. This last -event is probably to be dated 668 B.C. The coinage must be put -indefinitely earlier in his reign, a perfectly reasonable date on -numismatic and historical grounds, and the recovery of the lot of -Temenos a few years earlier still. - -The date thus reached is confirmed by the histories of the two other -leading cities of this part of the Peloponnese, Sicyon and Corinth. - -[Sidenote: Pheidon and other parts of the lot of Temenos: (i) Sicyon.] - -Sicyon formed part of the lot of Temenos, and was held by his son -Phalkes[918]. About 670 B.C. the city fell under the tyranny of the able -and powerful family of Orthagoras, whose policy was marked by extreme -hostility to Argos[919]. Pheidon plainly can have had no footing in -Sicyon during the rule of the Orthagorids. But the unusual stability and -popularity of the tyranny at Sicyon have often been explained, not -without reason, as due to its popular anti-Dorian policy. During the -second Messenian war, which Pausanias dates 686–668 B.C.[920], so that -the rise of Orthagoras coincides with its conclusion, the Sicyonians -appear to have acted in close co-operation with the Argives[921]. The -position and policy of the Sicyonian tyrants becomes particularly -comprehensible if they had risen to power as leaders of a racial -uprising that put an end in the city to a Dorian ascendancy that dated -originally from the days of Temenos[922] and had been revived by -Pheidon[923]. - -[Sidenote: (ii) Corinth.] - -Whether Corinth formed part of the lot of Temenos is uncertain. Probably -it did. Strabo and Ptolemy exclude the city from the Argolid[924]. But -on the other hand Homer speaks of it as being “in a corner of horse -rearing Argos[925],” and Pausanias states that “the district of Corinth -is part of Argolis[926],” and that he believes it to have been so in -Homeric times[927]. The conflicting statements of these excellent -authorities are best reconciled by supposing them to be referring to -different periods. If this is so, and if, as well might be, all the -domains of Homeric Argos passed to its first Dorian lord, then Corinth -formed part of the lot of Temenos. A Temenid Corinth is perhaps implied -in Apollodorus[928], where Temenos, the two sons of Aristodemus, and -Kresphontes “when they had conquered the Peloponnese, set up three -altars of Zeus Patroos and sacrificed on them and drew lots for the -cities. The first lot was Argos, the second Sparta, the third Messene.” - -For connexions between Pheidon and Corinth we have only a story told by -Plutarch and a Scholiast on Apollonius Rhodius[929] of which the salient -points are that (_a_) Pheidon tries to annex Corinth; (_b_) the -Bacchiads and Archias are the pro-Argive party; (_c_) the fall of the -Bacchiads (which led to the rise of the tyrant Cypselus) meant the -overthrow of Argive influence. - -So far the story is all of a piece, and supports the view that the -simultaneous establishment of Cypselus in Corinth and Orthagoras in -Sicyon may have been part cause and part result of the fall of Pheidon -and the breaking up again of the lot of Temenos. Such a suggestion -harmonizes well with the friendship that existed between the Corinthian -and Sicyon tyrants[930]. - -There are however chronological difficulties in this interpretation of -the Pheidon Archias story. In the story (i) the fall of the Bacchiads is -made contemporary with the foundation of Syracuse, _i.e._ it must -presumably be dated about 734 B.C.[931]; (ii) Pheidon is put some time -before this event, his contemporary Habron being grandfather of Archias’ -favourite Actaeon: the Marmor Parium enters Pheidon before Archias. - -In a highly romantic narrative like that of Archias and Actaeon the last -thing to be looked for is a reliable and exact chronology. Impossible -dates may mean impossible statements; but on the other hand they may -mean merely a confusion of facts of different dates, or again, the facts -may be coherent, and the dates just simply wrong. - -In the present case, except for the relative dating of Archias and -Pheidon, the historic background is perfectly coherent, if the events -are put early in the seventh century. To accept the 750 date for Pheidon -sets him right in relation to Archias, but leaves the rest of the story -in the air. There is indeed always the refuge of assuming a double -banishment of the Bacchiads. But the idea of a double banishment, traces -of which might easily be discovered by the reduplicating school of -historians, is deservedly suspect, and may have arisen from a double -dating due to double dating of Pheidon. If there really were two -banishments, the story better suits the second. - -Neither Plutarch nor the Scholiast on Apollonius gives any absolute -dates; and those of the Parian Marble, which does, are impossible. The -Marble dates Pheidon 895 B.C. and Archias 758. Pheidon is also indeed -made contemporary with an Athenian who according to Castor held the -office of king from 864 to 846 B.C.[932] From 846 to 758 is a possible, -though improbably long interval between Pheidon and Archias, if as the -story tells us, the latter had as favourite the grandson of one of -Pheidon’s contemporaries; but even so the dating is so unsatisfactory, -that the latest editor of the Parian Marble[933] has suggested -transposing Archias and Pheidon. But, apart from other difficulties, the -resultant early date for Archias is altogether against the evidence. -There is no need to put him back into the ninth century merely because -it is not unlikely that Greeks at that period were already making their -way to Sicily. The antedating of Pheidon has already been accounted for, -and he appears to have taken back Archias with him part of the way. - -The date of Archias is a problem any way. But it is not difficult to -suggest a possible chronology. Pheidon’s fall[934] was probably rapid (a -proof of his hubris). His rise was probably slow. Being a hereditary -monarch, he may well have ruled for fifty years, from about 715 to 665 -B.C. It was early in his career that he began to carry out his designs -on Corinth. Archias, who had founded Syracuse in 734, gave him support. -We are told no details, but the alliances of the period of the second -Messenian war and the naval struggle in the Saronic Gulf must have -supplied abundant motives and inducements. Bacchiad government under -Argive protection continued till Pheidon fell, which meant also the fall -of the Bacchiads themselves. They withdrew to the far west. Demaratus -penetrated as far as Tarquinii. Large numbers doubtless settled at -Syracuse. The order of events just outlined coincides entirely with the -extant narratives, except in the one matter of Syracuse, and there the -divergence is very comprehensible. The founder of Syracuse had supported -Pheidon. Pheidon’s fall had led to a great influx of pro-Argive -Corinthians into Syracuse, and threw Archias back entirely onto his -Sicilian colony. If this is what really happened, it would not be -surprising if the fall of Pheidon came to be regarded as having led to -the original foundation of Syracuse. - -[Sidenote: Pheidon of Corinth: is he identical with the Argive?] - -The chief doubt however as to the historical truth of the Argive -tyrant’s interference in Corinth is caused by certain references to a -Corinthian Pheidon, described by Aristotle as “one of the earliest -lawgivers[935].” When an Argive Pheidon is reported as making his -appearance in Corinthian history, is it a mistake due to the confusing -of two separate personalities? If two existed, they were unquestionably -confused. A Pindar Scholiast says that “a certain Pheidon, a man of -Corinth, invented measures and weights[936].” - -But there is an alternative possibility. The Corinthian Pheidon may be -only one aspect of the Argive: this is suggested by the Pindar Scholiast -later in the same ode, where he says that “the Pheidon who first struck -their measures (κόψας τὸ μέτρον) for the Corinthians was an -Argive[937].” Too much stress must not be laid on such very confused -statements[938]. At best they can only corroborate other and better -evidence. This however is not altogether lacking. When Karanos, the -kinsman of Pheidon, went to Macedonia and occupied Edessa and the lands -of the Argeadae[939], Bacchiads from Corinth settled near by among the -Lynkestai[940]. - -A lawgiver who was “one of the earliest” can have arisen in Corinth only -before the establishment of the tyranny in 657 B.C. On the other hand -lawgivers seem to have been mainly a seventh century phenomenon in -Greece, and the most natural time for one to have been appointed in -Corinth is when the Bacchiad nobility was losing its ascendancy, a -process which may be imagined as beginning early in the seventh century -or at the end of the eighth. Plutarch describes Pheidon’s designs on -Corinth as formed at the beginning of his career. Everything points to -the Argive tyrant having had a long reign. There is nothing improbable -in the supposition that the rival factions in Corinth invited to act as -their lawgiver a young sovereign of unusual ability who ruled a city of -great traditions but not at the time particularly powerful[941]. I have -already suggested the course taken by events in Corinth after Pheidon -had once secured a position in the city. One passage remains to be -quoted that makes it still more probable both that the Corinthian -lawgiver was the Argive tyrant, and that events in Corinth took -something like the course that I have suggested. According to Nicholas -of Damascus[942] Pheidon out of friendship went to the help of the -Corinthians during a civil war: an attack was made by his supporters, -and he was killed[943]. An intimate connexion from the beginning of his -career with the great trading and manufacturing city of the Isthmus -would go far to explain the commercial and financial inventiveness that -was the distinguishing feature of this royal tyrant[944]. - - - - - Chapter VII. _Corinth_ - - - ἡ μὲν δὴ πόλις ἡ τῶν Κορινθίων μεγάλη τε καὶ πλουσία διὰ παντὸς - ὑπῆρξεν, ἀνδρῶν τε ηὐπόρησεν ἀγαθῶν εἴς τε τὰ πολιτικὰ καὶ εἰς - τὰς τέχνας τὰς δημιουργικάς. STRABO VIII. 382. - -[Sidenote: Mercantile and marine developments at Corinth quoted by - Thucydides to illustrate the conditions that led to the rise - of tyrannies.] - -In the passage of Thucydides[945] in which he associates the origin of -tyranny with the acquisition of wealth, one other development is -mentioned as characteristic of the age. “Greece began to fit out fleets -and took more to the sea.” - -If the views expressed in the last chapter are not entirely mistaken, -then in Greece Proper the earliest phases of all these developments, in -politics, in industry, and in commerce by land and sea, are all to be -associated with Pheidon of Argos. But on the same showing Pheidon was a -man born rather before his time and not quite in the right place. - -The town marked out by its situation[946] to develop the new tendencies -to the fullest was Corinth, and it is in fact from Corinth that -Thucydides draws his illustration, mentioning in this connexion the -shipbuilding of the Corinthian Ameinokles about 704 B.C. and the naval -battle between Corinth and Corcyra of about 664 B.C.[947] He says -nothing about Corinthian tyrants, but the description of the situation -at Corinth is simply a paraphrase of that of the general situation that -led to tyrannies[948]. Corinth is chosen to exemplify the normal course -of things in a seventh century Greek town, and it may be taken as -certain that Thucydides regards the tyranny at Corinth as the outcome of -the mercantile and maritime developments described in the passage just -quoted. - -Only, what was the personal relationship of the tyrants to the new -developments? - -[Illustration: Fig. 22. Corinthian vase found at Corinth.] - -[Illustration: Fig. 23. Corinthian terra cotta tablet depicting a potter -at his wheel.] - -[Illustration: Fig. 24. Corinthian terra cotta tablet depicting the -interior of a kiln.] - -[Sidenote: Seventh century Corinth was also a great industrial centre, - especially for pottery.] - -Before attempting to answer this question, one important addition may be -made to Thucydides’ picture of the state of things in the city when the -tyranny arose. Corinth was not engaged only in commerce and shipping. -She was also a great industrial centre. In the chapter on Argos reasons -have been given for thinking that the tyrant Pheidon flourished just at -the time when pottery of the style called for want of a better name -proto-Corinthian was enjoying a great vogue in a great part of the Greek -world, that much at least of this ware was made in Pheidon’s dominions, -and that Pheidon took political measures to crush or cripple rival -centres. Towards the middle of the seventh century proto-Corinthian ware -was eclipsed by a new style, which with good reason has been named -Corinthian[949]. This new style became so popular that the invention of -the potter’s wheel was ascribed to a Corinthian[950]. Corinthian vases -of this period show one of the most decorative and distinctive styles of -pottery that has ever been invented. The style of decoration somewhat -recalls oriental carpets, and it was long ago plausibly suggested that -oriental carpets or tapestries furnished the models for the Corinthian -vase painters[951]. Two jugs in this style, one from Corinth -itself[952], the other from Corneto (Tarquinii), are shown in figs. 22 -and 34. Votive tablets of the sixth century B.C. have been found at -Corinth that depict various stages of the manufacture. Two are here -reproduced (figs. 23, 24). This very distinctive pottery made its way -over a great part of the Greek world[953]. It has been found in large -quantities all over Sicily, South Italy and Etruria, in many parts of -Greece Proper, and in many places further east[954]. - -[Sidenote: Cypselus becomes tyrant at the height of these developments.] - -Cypselus established himself as tyrant in 657 B.C. at the height of -these great developments of Corinthian industry, trade, and shipping. It -has been noticed by Busolt[955] that 657 is also the year of the -conquest of Sardis by the Cimmerians. The disturbances in Asia Minor may -have enhanced the importance of the western trade, in which Corinth was -particularly concerned[956]. They may incidentally have removed, at -least for the time being, a very powerful commercial rival, since -Corinth and Lydia appear to have been engaged in much the same -industries, namely weaving, dyeing, metallurgy, horse rearing and the -making of ointments, in addition to pottery, a fact that can hardly have -been accidental[957], and points to Corinth having been influenced by -Lydia. Both before and after the Cimmerian invasion Lydia and Corinth -appear to have been on excellent terms[958]: but this would not prevent -Corinthian merchants from growing more prosperous through Lydia’s -troubles[959]. - -[Sidenote: Cypselus and the beginnings of Corinthian coinage.] - -Whether the rise of Cypselus had any connexion with the beginnings of -Corinthian coinage is a matter of dispute. Busolt[960] dates the -earliest issues some half century later than the establishment of the -tyranny. Head[961] on the other hand makes the coinage and the tyranny -begin approximately together and he is supported by Percy Gardner[962], -who dates the earliest coins of Corinth in the early part of the seventh -century but after 665 B.C. - -[Illustration: Fig. 25. Coins of Corinth.] - -If, then, as seems probable, the English numismatists are nearer the -truth than the German, the first issues of “colts,” as the coins were -colloquially called from the winged horse that they bore, may have -played their part in helping Cypselus to the tyranny. The traces of -Lydian influence support this view. But on the other hand Corinth, whose -trade was so preponderatingly with the west, may, like its colony -Corcyra, have felt the need of a coinage only comparatively late. Where -the main facts are so obscure and particulars are completely wanting it -is idle to carry speculation further. - -For evidence as to Cypselus’ personal relationship to the commercial -developments of his age we must look elsewhere. Some modern writers have -indeed despaired of recovering any picture of the personal history of a -ruler who is variously described by our best authorities as having ruled -mildly[963] and with bloodthirsty severity[964]. [Sidenote: His personal -relationship when tyrant to the commercial developments of his age.] -This attitude is quite unnecessary. Both statements are in themselves -quite credible as contemporary accounts of the same regime from -different points of view. Still, by themselves they do not take us very -far. Fortunately we are better informed in other directions. - -Of the Corinthian colonies in Western Greece, that lined the trade route -to Sicily and Italy and the Furthest West, Leukas, Ambracia and -Anaktorion were founded by Cypselus[965]. Leukas was converted by him -from a peninsula into an island for the greater convenience of -navigation[966]. - -Cypselus is said to have taxed his subjects heavily. This statement is -taken from the pseudo-Aristotelian _Oeconomica_[967], a work of no great -authority for our early period. The tax is associated by Suidas[968] -with the dedication of a colossus of beaten gold which “Didymus says was -made by Periander” (not Cypselus) “with the object of checking the -Corinthians in their luxury and arrogance.” Theophrastus, so Suidas also -states, called the statue the colossus not of Cypselus but of the sons -of Cypselus (Κυψελιδῶν). The statement of the _Oeconomica_ must -therefore be taken with reserve. But the story of Cypselus’ heavy -taxation states also that the tyrant made his subjects work and prosper -and able to pay the taxes[969]. - -[Sidenote: Personal relationships of his son Periander to these same - developments.] - -Whatever the truth about the colossus the fact remains that the fame of -Cypselus was largely eclipsed by that of his son and successor -Periander, who was actually claimed by some writers as one of the seven -sages of early Greece[970]. This is unfortunate when we are searching -for origins, since Periander is said to have changed the character of -the sovereignty[971]. Even if the authorities who made this statement -are not particularly good, still it must be taken as in some part true. -The son born in the purple can never succeed exactly to the position of -the father who founded the house. Luckily however we are told the nature -of Periander’s change. He regarded himself as a soldier and sought to -make Corinth a great military power, whereas Cypselus had been a man of -peace with a peaceful policy[972]. So far therefore as Periander’s -policy was not directly or indirectly military, there is no need to -assume a break with that of his father. - -He maintained and enlarged the colonial empire of the city[973]. As -regards Corinthian trade under Periander we are told that his public -revenues were all derived from its taxation[974]: but everything shows -that he did not follow the Bacchiads and tax it ruthlessly. Rather he -seems to have aimed at increasing his revenues by fostering commerce. -Corinthian shipping, with which the trade of the city was inseparably -bound up, certainly owed much to him. “He built triremes and plied both -seas[975].” This last statement seems intended to contrast Periander -with his father, whose activities had been mainly in the west. Periander -on the other hand is found acting in close concert with Thrasybulus the -tyrant of Miletus[976]. He has been suspected of slave-dealing with -Lydia[977], and acted as arbitrator between that state and Miletus[978]. -He had a nephew who bore the name of a king of Egypt[979]. In order the -better to “ply both seas” he is said to have wanted to cut a canal -through the Corinthian Isthmus[980]. Here too he was following in the -footsteps of his father who had “velificated” Leukas. - -It is interesting therefore to notice the emphasis laid on Periander’s -wealth[981], and to recall the social legislation attributed to him by -Nicolaus Damascenus, according to whom the tyrant “forbad the citizens -to acquire slaves and live in idleness, and continually found them some -employment[982].” Heraclides[983] and Diogenes Laertius (quoting Ephorus -and Aristotle)[984] state that he did not allow anybody and everybody to -live in the city. Their statement is capable of many interpretations. It -may mean that Periander sought to control labour in the city or to -prevent the rural population from quitting the land for the superior -attractions of life in the great industrial centre. - -In short from first to last the tyranny at Corinth is seen taking an -active part in guiding the industrial, commercial and maritime -activities of the city[985]. This however is what might be expected from -any able government at the period, and nobody has ever questioned the -Cypselids’ ability. The previous government, that of the aristocracy of -the Bacchiads, had “exploited the market with impunity[986],” and very -possibly this short-sighted policy had hastened and helped their -fall[987]. - -[Sidenote: Before he became tyrant Cypselus was probably polemarch,] - -But how precisely were they overthrown? What was the career of Cypselus -previous to his obtaining the tyranny? - -According to Nicolaus Damascenus, who based himself largely on the -fourth century Ephorus[988], Labda, the mother of Cypselus, belonged to -the Bacchiad aristocracy, but owing to a personal deformity[989] she had -married beneath her. Her husband, Eetion, is variously said to have been -descended from the pre-Hellenic Lapithae of Thessaly[990] and from a -non-Dorian stock of Gonussa above Sicyon[991]. In any case, as observed -by How and Wells[992], Eetion belonged to the pre-Dorian “Aeolic” -population of Corinth[993]. The Bacchiad aristocracy was extremely -exclusive. Its members married only among themselves. Consequently the -official oracles prophesied evil from this union, and when a son was -born of it, the government sent agents to destroy the child. But the -infant melted the hearts of its would-be murderers, and instead of -killing it they went back and reported that they had done so. The infant -was sent away by its parents to Olympia, and was brought up first there -and then at Cleonae. Encouraged by a Delphic oracle Cypselus returned to -Corinth, became very popular, was elected polemarch, and made himself -still more popular by refusing to imprison citizens and remitting in all -cases his part of their fines. Finally he headed a rising against the -unpopular Bacchiads, killed Patrokleides, who was king at the time, and -was made king in his stead. He ruled mildly, neither maintaining a -bodyguard nor losing the people’s favour[994]. - -Such is the account given by Nicholas of Damascus. For the greater part -of it we have no earlier authority. But once more we must be on our -guard against too hasty scepticism. Ephorus, who is generally admitted -to have been the source of this account, was not further removed from -Cypselus than this age is from Cromwell. Cypselus was the foremost man -of his age in all Greece. We need to be very sceptical of such -scepticism as that of Busolt[995], who argues that Cypselus cannot have -been polemarch before he became tyrant because if his parentage was not -known he would not have been eligible, while if it was he would not have -been elected[996]. As pointed out many years ago by Wilisch[997], such -arguments are dangerous when applied to times of which so little is -known. The aristocracy which fell in 657 B.C. may have begun to totter -some time earlier. Given the requisite gaps in our knowledge, Busolt’s -line of argument might be equally well used to discredit the received -tradition about the Victorian age in England on the ground that it -contains the highly improbable statement that the leader of the -aristocratic party was an Italian Jew. - -Ephorus seems to have been used by Aristotle[998]. It would be rash -indeed to follow Busolt[999] and agree that such a source may yet be -valueless. Aristotle is not to be treated in this way. The whole -character of his work forces us to start with the assumption that he had -some idea of the difference between myth and historical tradition. We -always know the reasons why modern scholars are sometimes inclined to -discredit him. We do not always know the reasons that led Aristotle to -accept as facts what he so accepts. What we do know is that the material -on which he based his statements was far more ample than that which is -now at our disposal. Even for a period so comparatively remote from him -as the seventh century B.C. Aristotle must have been able to collect -much evidence of one sort or another to confirm him alike in his doubts -and his beliefs[1000]. - -For eighth century Corinth Aristotle and his contemporaries -probably[1001] had the poems of the Corinthian Eumelos, a ποιητὴς -ἱστορικός[1002] who flourished about 750 B.C. and wrote among other -works an epic called Κορινθιακά. A prose history of Corinth (Κορινθία -συγγραφή) was also ascribed to him. The ascription is doubted by -Pausanias[1003], not without reason, but it may still have been a -document of some value and antiquity. The same is true of the “didactic -poem in two thousand lines” ascribed by Diogenes Laertius to Periander -himself[1004]. We are learning to take our ancient records more on their -face value than was done by our grandfathers in the nineteenth century. -The classical historians, using the word in its widest sense, are still -suffering from the reaction against the doctrine of verbal inspiration. - -The story of the infant Cypselus is put by Plutarch[1005] into the mouth -of a certain “Chersias the poet,” who is represented as having during a -banquet given by Periander “mentioned others whose lives had been saved -when despaired of and in particular Cypselus the father of Periander.” -One of the sceptics[1006] has recently accepted this Chersias as -historical and imagined Plutarch as here making use of a poem of his -which he proceeds to explain as a fiction invented to give an appearance -of legitimacy to the Cypselids. The explanation is quite gratuitous. It -is true that Diogenes Laertius[1007] speaks of Periander as “of the race -of the Heraclids.” But Chersias in Plutarch does not mention even the -parents of Cypselus, much less his remote ancestors, and there is no -evidence that he had them in mind[1008]. The poem itself is a doubtful -item. The only inference to be drawn from Plutarch is that to his -readers the poem (assuming its existence) probably seemed in keeping -with the scene. It is however well to be reminded that even Plutarch had -much more literary material to draw from for this early period than have -the moderns. - -On the whole therefore the safest attitude towards the narrative of -Nicolaus will be one of benevolent agnosticism. No doubt he had a -tendency to rationalize half or wholly mythical stories. It is not -improbable that he did this to some extent in his account of the infant -Cypselus with which we can compare the version of Herodotus. But when he -makes a simple statement of commonplace fact, as, for instance, that -Cypselus was polemarch before he became tyrant, the most prudent and the -most critical course is to accept it as probably true[1009]. The reason -why the record of this fact was preserved is not far to seek. The fourth -century historians seized on the name as evidence that Cypselus was in -fact as well as in name a ruler of the same order as Dionysius, who -started his career as a military demagogue. [Sidenote: but that is no -evidence of military power. Cypselus cannot have been a military -despot.] But the context shows that the polemarch was not in this case a -military officer[1010], and we know by implication that Cypselus was not -a warlike person, for the record of how Periander changed the character -of the government goes on to say that he _became_[1011] warlike. And, as -remarked long ago by Schubring[1012], if the tenure of the polemarchy is -historical, still it was not the means by which Cypselus reached the -tyranny, but rather like the murder of the Bacchiad Patrokleides, a sign -and token that he was already in a position to seize it. [Sidenote: What -then was the basis of his power? The only possible evidence is to be -found in the story] Nicolaus therefore brings us little nearer to -understanding the basis of the future tyrant’s power. Our only hope of -doing this lies in Herodotus, who tells the story of the infant Cypselus -with certain details omitted by Nicolaus but which probably contain the -essence of the story. According to Herodotus[1013] Cypselus was the -child from the cypsele in which as an infant his mother had concealed -him from his would-be murderers. [Sidenote: which makes Cypselus the -child from the cypsele.] If we are to believe Plutarch, the story of the -cypsele could still in his days be traced back to the days of -Periander[1014]. It is easy to point out[1015] that we are here up -against a widespread story of which different versions have been -attached to such different names as Sargon of Akkad (_c._ 3800 -B.C.[1016]), Moses, Romulus and Cyrus[1017]. But even if we accept a -common origin for all these stories, we are not very much further on. We -should still have to determine why and how Cypselus found a place in the -series. [Sidenote: What is a cypsele? Not, in spite of some ancient and -modern authorities, either an ark or a wooden chest.] But it must not be -too hastily assumed that the cypsele of Cypselus has anything at all to -do with the ark that Pharaoh’s daughter found on the banks of the -Nile[1018] or the “alueus” discovered by the shepherd Faustulus on the -banks of the Tiber. In both these cases[1019] the vessel could float and -was discovered by a river side. Cypselus was not discovered. That is the -whole point of the story. He was not exposed in a river or sea like -Romulus or Perseus. And it is more than doubtful whether a cypsele has -any connexion whatever with an alueus or ark. It is true that they are -more or less identified by our ancient authorities. Pausanias[1020], who -wrote his guide to Greece in the second century A.D., professed to have -seen at Olympia the very cypsele in which Cypselus had been hidden and -from which he was said to have got his name. It was a coffer (λάρναξ) of -wood and ivory elaborately carved. The description leaves no doubt that -it was of archaic Corinthian workmanship of the time of the tyrants or -not much later[1021]. But it is extremely doubtful whether this carved -box was a cypsele or had any original connexion with the cypsele story. -Plato[1022], Aristotle[1023], and Plutarch[1024] all refer to the -dedications of the house of Cypselus without alluding to this object. -Herodotus says nothing about the cypsele having been dedicated. For -Strabo[1025] the chief dedication of Cypselus was a “golden hammered -Zeus.” Dio Chrysostom[1026] (about 100 A.D.) refers to what Pausanias -calls the cypsele of Cypselus, but describes it simply as the “wooden -box (ξυλινὴ κιβωτός) dedicated by Cypselus.” From Pausanias himself it -is plain that the object was not by any means what the Greeks of his -time understood by a cypsele. His statement[1027] that the ancient -Corinthians called a coffer a cypsele raises a suspicion that nobody -else ever did. It is probably only an inference drawn by the traveller -from the fact of this particular coffer being so called by the guides at -Olympia[1028]. - -[Sidenote: Meanings of the word “cypsele” given by the ancients.] - -The Olympian larnax does not at all correspond to the picture of a -cypsele suggested by the ancient notices on the subject, which, quite -apart from the light they may possibly throw on Cypselus, deserve a more -detailed examination than they have hitherto received[1029]. - -The meanings of the word given by the ancients are as follows: - -(1) A wine vessel[1030], - -(2) A vessel to receive wheat or barley[1031], - -(3) Part of a furnace[1032], - -(4) A beehive[1033], - -(5) Vessels for sweet condiments[1034], or receptacles for such -vessels[1035], - -(6) The hole of the ear[1036], - -(7) Wax in the ears[1037]. - -[Sidenote: Cp. coins of Cypsela.] - -This literary evidence may be supplemented from a numismatic source. -Some fourth century B.C. coins of the Thracian Cypsela[1038] show a more -or less cylindrical vessel with two small vertical handles[1039]. A -similar vessel, resting on what is probably a grain of corn, is shown on -other coins of the same century and from the same district[1040]. The -vessel has very plausibly been identified as a cypsele. - -[Illustration: Fig. 26. Coins of Cypsela.] - -[Sidenote: Inferences as to size, shape, and material.] - -At first sight the various uses of the word appear rather miscellaneous, -especially if we include (6) and (7). But (6) and (7) need not be -brought in. They are late uses derived from (4)[1041]. Meaning (5) is -probably to be eliminated on the same grounds. This leaves us with (1) -to (4), all of them vessels of large size, a feature implicit in the -Cypselus legend and confirmed by the ancient lexicographers[1042]. - -For the material of cypselae under meanings (1) to (5) the only written -evidence is found in (i) schol. Aristoph. _Pax_ 631, which says that -“cypselae were not only woven (πλεκταί) but also of pottery (κεραμεαῖ),” -(ii) a scholiast to Lucian, _Lexiphanes_, 1, which explains the cypsele -as (_a_) “the narrow-mouthed unpitched vessel of pottery,” (_b_) an -earthenware vessel, (_c_) [addit. C] “the name is also given to a sort -of woven vessel,” (iii) Hesychius, who explains a cypsele as a -wickerwork beehive. - -These statements quite suit the list of uses. As between the two -materials mentioned the Aristophanes scholiast gives the impression that -the commoner was wicker or basket work. But in the Lucian scholiast -wickerwork is only an afterthought added by a later hand. The Lucian -scholiast is probably more correct. Pottery is a natural material for -every kind of cypsele. Cypselae (1) and (3) can never have been of -basketwork, and for (5) it looks a most unlikely material, though we -know too little about ancient spice vessels to speak with certainty. For -(2) it is suitable enough, but the cypselae of the Thracian coins, which -the emblem of the grain of corn shows to have been probably corn jars, -point in the other direction. Their shape suits either terra cotta or -metal but not wickerwork. The probable use practically excludes -metal[1043]. (4) is according to Hesychius a “plaited beehive,” _i.e._ a -hive of basketwork, and this statement is accepted by M. Pottier[1044]. -No doubt it was true at the time when it was made. But is it so certain -that the earliest cypsele beehives were of basketwork? The first -reference to beehives is in the _Odyssey_, which describes hives of -stone in the shape of vases (κρητῆρες and ἀμφιφορῆες)[1045]. These -Homeric beehives must have been either prototypes or glorifications of -hives of earthenware[1046], and it is tempting to classify these latter -with the cypsele form of hive, especially in the light of the cypsele on -the Thracian coins, which has much the shape of a mixing bowl except -that the handles are of a type more frequent on the amphora. These coins -are of the first half of the fourth century. Our literary authorities -are all much later. Most of them mention earthenware beehives only to -condemn them[1047]. Presumably they were out of fashion. Basketwork -hives[1048] on the other hand are spoken of without condemnation. When -therefore they define the cypsele beehive as a basketwork beehive, they -practically mean a round or vase-shaped hive like the “little pail where -the bee distils his sweet flow” of Antiphilus[1049], as distinguished -from the rectangular form that was also much in use[1050]. - -This is assuming that cypselae were never rectangular, but the -assumption seems fairly safe. Neither plaiting nor pottery adapts itself -to rectangular shapes. Wine vessels are not usually square. The cypsele -of the coins is not rectangular. - -[Illustration: Fig. 27. Attic vase painting, perhaps depicting a -cypsele.] - -[Illustration: Fig. 28. Attic vase painting, perhaps depicting a -cypsele.] - -There remains the “certain part of a furnace” referred to by Hesychius. -Whatever this may have been, it is most unlikely that it was rectangular -for the simple reason that ancient Greek furnaces appear from extant -pictures to have no rectangular parts that could possibly be so -identified. Pictures of ancient Greek furnaces are numerous, and it is -surprising that no attempt seems to have been made to discover a cypsele -in any of them, for it is not unlikely that some of these pictures do in -fact depict it, and in that case they show us the earliest form of the -object of which we have any precise record. - -[Illustration: Fig. 29. Attic vase painting, perhaps depicting a -cypsele.] - -[Sidenote: Probable pictures of a cypsele on sixth-century Attic vases, - depicting it as a large terra cotta vase.] - -In Saglio’s _Dictionnaire des Antiquités_, s.v. Fer, figs. 2964, 2965, -(here figs. 27, 28), pictures are reproduced from two black figure vases -that depict furnaces being used, in all probability for treating -iron[1051]. On the top of either furnace is depicted what de Launay -describes as a “sorte de vase, sans doute de terre cuite[1052].” A -similar vase is shown _ibid._ s.v. Caelatura, fig. 937[1053] (here fig. -29) on top of what the context shows to be the furnace of a bronze -foundry[1054]. This latter picture is on an early red figure vase[1055]. -In all three cases the “sort of vase” is very large, as is shown by -comparing it in size with the human figures in the picture. In short -both in size, shape, use and probably material it answers to the written -descriptions of one variety of cypsele. What it does not so well answer -to is the vase represented on the coins of Cypsela, which is tall and -cylindrical and shows two vertical handles. Fortunately there is a -connecting link between the two forms. In the Berlin Museum there is an -actual stove of terra cotta, said to have been found in the sea off -Iasos (coast of Asia Minor)[1056]. It is about ·50 m. high and of a -common enough type[1057], though it is rare to find one so well -preserved[1058]. What however gives the Iasos example its importance is -a vase ·13 m. high and ·192 diameter, of the same dark brown micaceous -clay as the stove itself, that was found along with it and fits so well -on top of it that it must unquestionably have formed part of the -complete article[1059]. Here we have a vase of considerable size that in -shape has resemblances to the vases on the coins of Cypsela, but in its -bulging sides deviates from them in the direction of our conjectured -cypselae of the vase paintings. In position and in use as the receptacle -for material to be heated, it corresponds with these latter. Though -comparatively large, it must remain doubtful whether it is large enough -to be a cypsele. But in any case it helps to connect the vases of the -Cypsela coins with the “part of a furnace” of the vase paintings, and to -make it probable that the latter was made of pottery and that both are -rightly identified as cypselae. The objects on the vase paintings differ -from all our other hypothetical cypselae in having no handles; even the -beehive cypsele has been connected with craters and amphorae, both of -which normally have two handles. But it is use as often as shape that -determines the name of a vase, and from the point of view of use the -Iasos vase is probably to be classed with a vase figured on a Greek -funeral relief (fig. 31)[1060]. Here we have an object very similar in -shape to our conjectured cypselae of the vase paintings, resting on what -Dumont[1061] called a réchaud. Its size may be judged by comparing it -with a human head from the same relief. There is no _a priori_ reason -why the ancient cypsele, like the modern glass or bottle or cup or mug, -should not show much diversity in the matter of handles and of shape -generally. The evidence just collected suggests that such was in fact -the case, and it becomes the more likely when we remember that we are -dealing with a period of some centuries. The Cypsela coins date only -from the fourth century. The portable stoves of the Iasos type are later -still[1062]. The funeral relief with the vase and réchaud is dated by -Dumont in the first century A.D.[1063]. - -[Illustration: Fig. 30. Vase on stove found at Iasos.] - -[Illustration: Fig. 31. Relief, perhaps depicting a small cypsele.] - -On the other hand the vases depicting the cypsele that forms part of a -furnace[1064] belong to the fifth or sixth century B.C., and thus bring -us to within measurable distance of Cypselus himself[1065]. A cypsele of -this description would be an admirable hiding-place for a baby, provided -it was technically speaking a good baby, not given to crying[1066]. -Eventually, as has been seen, the box version of the story won the day: -but from the Greek point of view there would be nothing impossible in a -version which hid the child in an earthen jar. Eurystheus[1067] sought -safety from Heracles in a πίθος or jar. In the seventh and sixth -centuries infants were usually buried in large terra cotta vases not -unlike those we are here considering. In the fifth century Aristophanes -represents a supposititious child as introduced into the house in an -earthenware pot[1068]. - -In short everything points to the cypsele of Cypselus having been a -large vessel of pottery. May not Herodotus after all be right when he -says that the tyrant got his name from the cypsele? The story of the -attempted murder and the ten bad men may be older than Cypselus. But if -so we have to explain how it came to be attached to the Corinthian -tyrant. [Sidenote: Was Cypselus (the child from the cypsele) a potter -who got his name from his occupation?] Is it not possible that it was -given to him as being ἐκ τῶν κυψελῶν (just as later the demagogue -Hyperbolus, who had spent his early days in a lamp factory, was spoken -of as the man from the lamps, οὑκ τῶν λύχνων[1069]) or in other words to -denote his connexion with the Corinthian potteries which at this period -were supplying a great part of the civilized world? - -[Sidenote: Evidence for the plausibility of this suggestion. (i) Such - names do occur, notably among potters.] - -Hyperbolus does not offer the only analogy for this suggestion or even -the closest. In the chapter on Rome[1070], when tracing the source of -the power of the Tarquins, we shall have occasion to examine the story -of the Corinthian potters Eucheir and Eugrammus, who lived just at this -period and whose names meaning “skilful with the hand” and “skilful at -painting” are palpably derived from their occupation[1071]. - -Cypselus may possibly have adopted, or inherited from the founder of the -firm, a cypsele as his badge or emblem, and this may have been the -immediate origin of his name. These personal or family badges or arms -were widely used in ancient Greece. Among the many found on the -Heraclean tables[1072] a κιβώτιον (box) occurs three times. A κιβώτιον -is not a cypsele; but it is a similar object and shows that a cypsele -might have been similarly used. The emblems as a rule seem to be -entirely arbitrary and unconnected with the bearer’s name or occupation. -But the word κιβωτὸς (in the original non-diminutive form) became the -nickname of Apamea in Phrygia from the fact that so much packing was -done in that great centre of trade[1073]. - -[Sidenote: (ii) Agathocles, tyrant of Syracuse, is said to have been a - potter,] - -If Cypselus was originally a potter he may be compared with Agathocles, -tyrant at the end of the fourth century of Syracuse, the great daughter -city of Corinth. Agathocles is said to have been the son of a -potter[1074]. According to Diodorus Siculus, the Delphic oracle -prophesied over the infant Agathocles (as it had over Cypselus) that “he -would be the cause of great misfortunes” to his country: and as a result -of the prophecy it was resolved to do away with the child, who however -was saved by its mother. Eventually the father was told that the child -had been saved, and took it back, and “being poor he taught Agathocles -the potter’s trade (τὴν κεραμευτικὴν τέχνην) while he was still a boy.” -This story is probably to be traced back to Timaeus, who is quoted by -Polybius[1075] for the statement that Agathocles was a potter, and is -the only source of Diodorus actively hostile to the tyrant, by whom he -had been banished from Sicily[1076]. - -[Sidenote: in what is probably a fiction intended to suggest a - comparison with Cypselus.] - -Plainly in great part at least the story of the young Agathocles is a -piece of malicious fiction. What is its prototype? I cannot help -suspecting that it is Cypselus himself. It is true that there is no -cypsele or larnax in the story, and Bauer[1077] connects it with the -legends of the youthful Cyrus and infant Romulus. But neither is there -an animal to suckle the infant, which the experts state to be the -essential feature of the Cyrus Romulus cycle[1078]. The oracle and the -rescue by the mother are both salient incidents of the Cypselus story. -In the Cyrus story we have dreams and their interpretation by Magians, -not nearly so close an analogy. The dreams too indicate only the -greatness of the child that is to be born. The Cypselus story indicates, -like that of Agathocles, the harm the child will do[1079]. Agathocles -grew up in the days when the great name in Sicily was that of the -Corinthian Timoleon. The thoughts of Sicily were all turned towards -Corinth, and we find this rapprochement reflected in the Syracusan coins -of the period, which show the Corinthian types of the helmeted goddess -head and Pegasus[1080]. What more natural therefore, especially for the -banished Timaeus, than to compare Agathocles with Cypselus[1081]? It is -not impossible that from this seditious analogy there grew up the story -that Agathocles was the son of a potter[1082]. The alternative is to -accept Agathocles’ early connexion with “the wheel, the clay, and the -smoke[1083]” of the pottery as a historical fact: but this is less -likely. Polybius himself warns us against accepting Timaeus on -Agathocles as truthful history, and seems himself to suspect his own -quotation about the tyrant having been a potter in his early days. The -elder brother of Agathocles was a prominent statesman and soldier in -Syracuse early in his career, before the younger brother had risen to -the tyranny: Agathocles himself appears early in his career to have -reached high rank in the army and to have lived in intimate relations -with some of the Syracusan nobility[1084]. The tyrant’s father was -banished from Rhegium in the days when that city was under Dionysius of -Syracuse, from which fact Beloch[1085] reasonably infers that he was a -distinguished personality. Beloch supposes that Agathocles inherited a -big pottery business. If this view is right, then the pottery does not -seem to have greatly helped the future tyrant in his public career, -which from first to last was essentially military. Still, though the -capitalist tyrant was already a thing of the past in Greece Proper, -Sicily was in some ways younger than the mother country, and it is not -impossible that Agathocles possessed a pottery, and that it played a -part, though not the leading one, in helping him on to the throne. -Agathocles was the contemporary of the Roman Appius whose suspected -attempt at a financial despotism is discussed in the chapter on Rome. -Before his accession he is described as having become very rich: but his -riches are attributed to his marriage[1086]. The evidence about -Agathocles’ early career is not decisive. But on any interpretation it -lends plausibility to the view that Cypselus started life as a potter. - -[Sidenote: Cypselus as a common noun.] - -In the whole of this long discussion as to how Cypselus acquired his -name it has been assumed that Herodotus was right in declaring that he -derived it direct from cypsele. The fact that there is a common noun -cypselus hardly affects this assumption. It is true that the cypselus is -a bird, but the bird in question is shown by Aristotle’s account of -it[1087] to be either the house-martin[1088] or some similar -species[1089] that derives its name from its clay-built nest. The -cypselus is in fact the potter-bird. - -[Sidenote: King Cypselus of Arcadia.] - -But are we right in our main assumption? There is of course an -alternative possibility. The story of the infant Cypselus may have been -attached to him solely to explain his unusual name. Schubring’s -instances of stories that he thinks to have arisen in this way are -neither convincing in themselves nor altogether analogous[1090]. But -there is one fact that offers more solid grounds for not accepting -Cypselus as a name that the tyrant derived from his occupation. An early -king Cypselus of Arcadia is mentioned by Pausanias[1091]. - -This is a genuine difficulty. But there are several ways of meeting it. -It is for instance quite conceivable that two different individuals -should have independently earned the same nickname. The name need not -have been used in the same sense on both occasions. The cypselus is not -only the potter-bird. It is also one of the most conspicuous of -migrants[1092]. It may have been from this latter point of view that the -name was thought appropriate for a king of the period of the great -migrations. - -If this be thought unlikely we might borrow a page from the sceptics and -throw doubts upon the Arcadian’s historical existence. We might explain -him away as the eponymous hero of the Arcadian Cypsela[1093]. Or again, -it might be pointed out that he is said to have been an ancestor of his -Corinthian namesake’s daughter-in-law, Melissa the wife of -Periander[1094]. The Arcadian Cypselus might then be disposed of as a -creation of the pedigree-mongers of the period when the marriage between -Melissa and Periander took place[1095]. - -[Sidenote: The third tyrant of Corinth, whom Aristotle calls - Psammetichus,] - -There is another name in the pedigree of the Corinthian tyrants from -which historical conclusions have frequently been drawn. According to -Aristotle the third and last of the tyrants (587–584 B.C.) was called -Psammetichus, a name which, as we have seen already, was borne by the -first Pharaoh of the Saite (twenty-sixth) dynasty, which appears to have -based its power largely on foreign mercenaries and foreign trade, both -mainly Greek[1096]. The Egyptian name of the Corinthian tyrant has -rightly been held to establish some sort of connexion between the two -states during the age of the tyrants. It has often been assumed[1097] -that Psammetichus of Corinth got his name directly from the Egyptian -royal family. No certainty is to be had on this point. The name, though -unknown before the time of Psammetichus I, appears to have become common -during the twenty-sixth dynasty[1098]. A Greek mercenary named -Psammetichus son of Theocles commanded the expedition which has left us -the graffiti of Abu Symbel[1099]. The name and position of the son of -Theocles show that the Corinthian tyrant might have got his Egyptian -name through a Greek intermediary. But on the other hand there is a fair -probability that the governments of Corinth and Egypt at this period -were in touch with one another either directly or through their common -friend Miletus[1100]. - -[Sidenote: an Egyptian name meaning probably “vendor of bowls,”] - -But the really curious point about a Cypselid being called Psammetichus -lies in the meaning of the name, which, as seen above[1101], is most -probably to be interpreted “man (vendor) of mixing bowls.” If this -interpretation is correct Psammetichus and Cypselus are synonyms. Now -the modern historians generally follow Aristotle[1102], and give the -name of the last tyrant of Corinth as Psammetichus. [Sidenote: is given -by Nicolaus the name of Cypselus,] But our other ancient authority, -Nicolaus of Damascus[1103], states that Periander was succeeded by a -second Cypselus, “who came from Corcyra and became tyrant of Corinth -until certain of the Corinthians combined and slew him ... and freed the -city.” Psammetichus is called by Aristotle the son of Gorgos, Cypselus -II is described by Nicolaus as son of Periander’s brother Gorgos[1104]. -A Psammetichus son of Gorgos is mentioned by Nicolaus as having been -sent to Corcyra by Periander. The same author makes Cypselus II come -from Corcyra to succeed Periander on the throne of Corinth. It is hard -to avoid the conclusion reached by Busolt[1105] that Cypselus II and -Psammetichus are one and the same person. But need we follow Busolt -further[1106] and assume that Psammetichus changed his name to Cypselus -on his accession? Psammetichus I of Egypt in his early days when he was -a vassal of Assyria, appears to have received from his overlord the -Assyrian name of Neboshazban[1107]. Possibly therefore the Egyptian king -might take it as a compliment if a Greek adopted an Egyptian name. But -even this is doubtful. The Saites would not be extremely anxious to -follow the practices of Assyria and Babylon: the Greeks did not readily -change their names. On the other hand the Greeks loved to find -equivalents between Greek names and Egyptian, as we see most markedly in -their treatment of Greek and Egyptian gods[1108], and heroes[1109], and -likewise of Egyptian place-names[1110]. [Sidenote: which suggests that -the two names were regarded by their bearer as synonyms meaning vendor -of pots.] Is it not therefore rather more probable that from beginning -to end the last of the Corinthian tyrants bore the name of his -grandfather, according to the familiar Greek custom, and that Cypselus -and Psammetichus were employed consciously as the Greek and Egyptian -forms of one and the same name[1111], both alike meaning “man of pots.” - -It may of course have been an accident that of the three names borne by -the three tyrants of the Greek potteries two should be derived from -words denoting some species of pot: but if so it is a very curious one. - - - - - Chapter VIII. _Rome_ - - - “All the historical labours bestowed on the early centuries of Rome - will, in general, be wasted.”—Sir George Cornewall Lewis, _On the - Credibility of Early Roman History_ (1855), vol. II. p. 556. - -[Sidenote: I. The narrative as to how the Tarquins are said to have - gained, held, and lost the throne.] - -At the time of the birth of Herodotus, which took place about the year -484 B.C., Polycrates, Peisistratus, and Croesus had been dead less than -fifty years: in Corinth and Sicyon it was not more than a century since -the tyranny had been suppressed. The historian had probably met people -who remembered the tyrants of Samos and Athens: he may possibly have -talked with old men from the cities of the Isthmus whose fathers had -told them of personal experiences under Cleisthenes, or Periander. - -The case with the Tarquins, the tyrant kings of Rome, is very different. -There is nothing even approximating to contemporary literary evidence -for their history, or even for their existence. In recent times their -whole claim to be regarded as historical has been disputed. It may -therefore seem something like begging the question to proceed at once to -collect evidence for the narrative before clearing the ground by -discussing its authenticity. There are however two reasons for following -that course. The first is that the question of authenticity can be more -easily discussed after the narrative has been called to mind. The other -is that the value of the story for this enquiry does not altogether -depend on the Tarquins’ historicity[1112]. - -According to the extant narratives[1113] king Tarquinius Priscus was the -son of a Corinthian named Demaratus who had settled in the Etruscan city -of Tarquinii, the modern Corneto, some fifty miles north of Rome. -[Sidenote: Tarquinius Priscus, son of a rich Corinthian trader named -Demaratus, settles at Rome and by means of his wealth secures the -throne.] The fullest of these narratives, that of Dionysius, makes -Demaratus sail to Italy “intending to trade, in a private merchant -vessel, and with a cargo of his own: having disposed of his cargo in the -cities of the Etruscans ... and acquired great gains, ... he continued -to ply the same sea, conveying Greek cargoes to the Etruscans and -bringing Etruscan goods to Greece, and became the possessor of very -great wealth ... and when the tyranny of Cypselus was being -established ... he quitted Corinth and set up a house in Tarquinii, -which was then a great and prosperous city.” All this property was left -by Demaratus to his son Lucumo, the future Lucius Tarquinius, “who, -receiving his father’s great wealth, resolved to engage in politics and -take a part in public life and to be one of the foremost men of his -city[1114].” He is described as migrating to Rome for the specific -reason that there seemed more prospect there of his wealth leading to -high political power, and as finding there the opportunity he was -looking for. “At Rome,” says Livy[1115], “his wealth brought him into -prominence.” So Dionysius[1116]: “He very soon became friends with the -king (Ancus Martius), making him presents and supplying him with funds -for his military requirements ... he also secured many of the patricians -by his benevolences, and won the favour of the common people by his -courteous greetings and the charm of his discourse and by contributions -of money.” Similarly Aurelius Victor[1117]: “by his money and his -industry he secured high position.” So too Diodorus[1118], speaking of -Tarquin’s rise to prominence in Rome: “being very wealthy he helped many -of the poor by giving them money.” Still more specifically our oldest -authority, Polybius[1119], says “Lucius, the son of Demaratus the -Corinthian, set out for Rome trusting in himself and his money.” - -These passages are enough to show that according to all our best extant -authorities, and therefore presumably according to some earlier common -source, Tarquinius Priscus owed his throne to his previous wealth. The -writers just quoted apparently pictured Tarquin as a royal favourite who -used his great wealth and ability to pave the way in the palace for his -own succession[1120], or possibly as merely a wealthy demagogue[1121], -but there are indications in the accounts that have come down to us that -Tarquin’s power may have had a somewhat different basis. - -[Sidenote: Demaratus and Priscus were great employers.] - -When Demaratus was making[1122] his fortune in Etruria, he was probably, -if the story has any historical foundation, a great employer of labour. -Strabo speaks of the “large number of skilled workmen” who accompanied -him from Corinth[1123]. Pliny speaks of the Corinthian as accompanied by -the potters (fictores) Eucheir and Eugrammus[1124]. As Tarquin is made -by both Livy[1125] and Dionysius[1126] to succeed to all his father’s -possessions, the received accounts may be taken as implying that he too -was master of “a large number of skilled workmen.” That this is the -intention of our narrative is borne out by Dionysius’ account of the -migration of Lucumo, as the subsequent Tarquinius was then called, from -Tarquinii to Rome. “He resolved to migrate thither collecting up all his -money ... and taking all who were willing of his friends and relations: -and there were many eager to go with him[1127].” On his arrival at Rome -the king “assigned him and the Etruscans who had come with him to a -tribe and curia (φυλήν τε καὶ φρατρίαν).” - -[Sidenote: Their employees were probably free men.] - -This whole description implies that Lucumo’s fellow-emigrants were free -men: nothing is said as to their occupations. On the other hand the -narratives of his father’s migration to Tarquinii make no statement as -to whether the “skilled workmen” who accompanied him were free men or -slaves. But the temptation to equate the two bodies is considerable. -Later on, when on the throne, the Tarquins are represented as employing -free skilled labour on a large scale. The object alleged by Livy for the -first Tarquin’s numerous public works was “that the people might be as -much employed at home as they had been in the army[1128].” The Roman -army did not include slaves. - -About the Tarquins as large employers of free labour we shall find more -precise and significant statements when the story of Superbus comes to -be discussed. But in the accounts of Priscus there is one further -statement that associates him closely with the trade of Rome. “The same -king,” says Livy[1129], speaking of Priscus, “apportioned sites round -the forum for private individuals to build on, and erected arcades and -shops.” So Dionysius[1130]: “he adorned the forum by surrounding it with -workshops and arcades (ἐργαστηρίοις καὶ παστάσι).” It is surely somewhat -remarkable that King Tarquin should be thus associated with the building -of shops. - -[Sidenote: Priscus is succeeded by Servius Tullius, who is said to have - been the first at Rome to strike coins.] - -Between the first and the last of the Tarquins our accounts are -unanimous in inserting Servius Tullius. Livy and Dionysius[1131] make -him the son-in-law of Priscus. Servius, who is thus assigned to both the -period and the family of the Tarquins, is stated by several authors to -have been the first to issue coins at Rome. Varro[1132] for instance -informs us that “they say that silver coinage was first struck (flatum) -by Servius Tullius.” So Pliny[1133]: “King Servius was the first to -stamp (signauit) bronze”; and again Cassiodorus[1134]: “King Servius is -said to have been the first to strike a coinage (impressisse monetam) in -bronze.” - -[Sidenote: Possible historical basis for this statement.] - -These statements cannot be accepted just as they stand. Silver coins -were first struck in Rome in 268 B.C., and the first round copper coins, -the large _aes graue_ with a Janus head on one side and a ship’s prow on -the other, are now unanimously assigned to the middle of the fourth -century[1135]. There is however nothing to preclude the possibility of -important monetary innovations or reforms by a sixth century king of -Rome. Copper has been found in Central Italy in various forms that point -to a copper currency prior to the introduction of the round _aes graue_. -There are the rough pieces known as _aes rude_, the objects of various -simple shapes but entirely devoid of decoration known as _aes formatum_, -and the pieces rectangular in shape and marked with a type known as _aes -signatum_[1136]. Though the extant examples of _aes signatum_ are -plainly on stylistic grounds to be assigned to long after the regal -period, and though the objects discovered along with finds of _aes rude_ -do not point to a very early date[1137], it would be rash to say that -either _aes rude_ or _aes signatum_ or for that matter _aes formatum_ -was not as early in origin as the sixth century[1138]. Willers[1139] -dates the use of _aes rude_ from 1000 B.C. to the fourth century, and -supposes some developments during the period, one of which, _e.g._ the -kuchenförmig (bun-shaped) variety of _aes formatum_ or the “bars with -various patterns,” may possibly be due to Servius. If Servius is to be -associated with _aes formatum_ the “bun-shaped” pieces have perhaps not -quite so good a claim as those to which Haeberlin[1140] gives the name -tortenförmig (something like the flat round weights with a flange that -are made to fit into one another), since these latter appear from the -full data that Haeberlin has collected to be characteristic of S. -Etruria: they have been found mainly at Caere, Tarquinii, and -Castelnuovo di Porto (between Rome and Falerii), _i.e._ in great part at -places with which Rome had particularly close connexions. - -But neither the “kuchenförmig” nor the “tortenförmig” _aes formatum_ -suits the literary evidence so well as Willers’ “bars with various -patterns.” These appear to constitute the most primitive form of _aes -signatum_. Pliny’s precise account[1141] of Servius’ innovation is that -he introduced _aes signatum_ in place of the earlier _aes rude_. Pliny -indeed goes on to say that Servius’ money “signatum est nota -pecudum[1142].” Among extant pieces this description is applicable only -to certain fully developed examples of the quadrilateral _aes -signatum_[1143], that, as remarked already, have to be assigned to a -later date: but whereas Pliny’s statement about Servius and _aes -signatum_ is based on Timaeus (Sicily, third century B.C.), it is quite -uncertain whether the remark about “nota pecudum” is to be referred to -the same respectable authority. Pliny’s own words are: “Seruius rex -primus signauit aes. antea rudi usos Romae Timaeus tradit. signatum est -nota pecudum.” - -[Illustration: Fig. 32. _Aes signatum._] - -Assume a historical basis for the accounts of Servius’ connexion with -the Roman currency[1144], and the motive for his activity in this -direction is not far to seek. Just about the period to which his reign -is dated Greek coins began to penetrate Etruria. They belong mainly to -Phocaea and the Phocaean colonies[1145]. Now “in the days of King -Tarquinius,” so Justin[1146] tells us, “Phocaeans from Asia put in at -the mouth of the Tiber and formed a friendship with the Romans.” The -Phocaean coinage may well have led to some reform or regulation of the -home currency, though the statement of Aurelius Victor[1147] that “he -(_i.e._ Servius) established weights and measures” may perhaps come -nearer to the truth than the more detailed assertions about striking a -coinage that have been already quoted. Even if this was all that Servius -did it is enough to make him stand out as a commercially minded -statesman since he is represented as the first ruler in Rome to regulate -units of exchange[1148]. - -The chief positive objection to a sixth century date for even the most -primitive form of metallic currency is the fact that down to the time of -the XII tables (450 B.C.) all fines were paid in cows and sheep[1149]. -But evidence of this sort may be given too much weight. As pointed out -by Ridgeway[1150], “even in a great commercial Greek city like Syracuse, -the cow formed the basis of assessment in the reign of Dionysius -(405–367 B.C.).” Syracuse had minted masterpieces of silver coinage some -time before Dionysius was born. - -Enough has been said to indicate the possible significance of the -accounts of king Servius and his copper coins. Too little is known about -either the king himself or the sixth century currency to build much upon -their reputed connexion. The matter is not one of first importance for -our enquiry. There can be no question of a revolution in the currency, -such as there are reasons for attributing to Gyges, Pheidon, -Peisistratus, and probably others of the early Greek tyrants[1151]. - -[Sidenote: The census of Servius.] - -Reforms or innovations in the currency are quite in keeping with the -other activities ascribed to Servius. The step most commonly associated -with his name is the institution of a census, “ex quo belli pacisque -munia non uiritim, ut antea, sed pro habitu pecuniarum fierent[1152].” - -[Sidenote: Servius and the collegia opificum.] - -Another institution that has been attributed to Servius is that of the -collegia opificum or unions of workmen[1153]. The early history of these -collegia is obscure: Plutarch attributes the eight earliest of them -(carpenters, potters, tanners, leather-workers, dyers, coppersmiths, -goldsmiths, flute-players) to Numa[1154]. The two versions may both have -a historic basis if we suppose that the collegia as private corporations -go back into the early regal period and that later they passed under -state control[1155]. This view is of course incapable of proof. The -evidence limits us to conjecture[1156]. But one point seems fairly -certain. The collegia must have lost importance when slave labour came -to be much used[1157]. - -Servius is constantly accused of having secured the support of the poor -by gifts and benevolences[1158], and special mention is made of his -distributions of corn and land to the plebs[1159]. [Sidenote: His -methods of purchasing the support of the lower classes:] In short, king -Servius, if he be regarded as a historical personage, appears to have -inherited the policy as well as the position of his predecessor, and his -violent accession and no less violent end to have been due mainly to -feuds within the palace. [Sidenote: his relations with the Tarquins.] -The same conclusion is the most natural one to draw from his Etruscan -name of Mastarna[1160], quite apart from the etymological value of -Gardthausen’s suggestion[1161] that the name Mastarna is a prefixed form -of Tarquin. - -[Sidenote: Tarquinius Superbus secures the throne by buying up the poor. - When king he employs Etruscans and Roman citizens on a large - scale as artizans and quarrymen.] - -Servius was eventually overthrown by Tarquinius Superbus, who is said to -have secured the throne “by buying up the poorest of the common -people[1162].” It is in the account of his reign that we find the -fullest statements as to the Tarquins’ relations to labour while they -were kings of Rome. Nothing could be more explicit than Livy’s statement -on that point: - - He summoned smiths from every part of Etruria and employed upon it - (_i.e._ on the building of the temple of Jove on the Tarpeian Mount) - not only public funds, but also _workmen from among the - plebeians_[1163]. - -The statement that Tarquin’s employees were largely plebeians (and not -slaves) is repeated by Livy later in the same book. In this second -passage Brutus, declaiming against the state of things that had existed -under the Tarquins, is made to declare that “men of Rome had been -changed from soldiers into artizans and quarrymen[1164].” - -Dionysius is as explicit and more detailed[1165]: - - He was not content to offend against the plebeians merely in this - way. He enrolled all the plebeians who were loyal to him and - suitable for military requirements, and the rest he compelled to - find employment on the public works in the city, thinking it a very - great danger for monarchs when the worst and poorest of the citizens - are unemployed: at the same time he was anxious during his reign to - complete the works left half-finished by his grandfather—the - channels to drain away the water ... and ... the hippodrome - amphitheatre.... On these works all the poor were employed, - receiving from him a moderate provision, some quarrying[1166], some - hewing wood, some leading the waggons that conveyed this material, - others bearing the burdens on their own shoulders; others again - digging out the underground cellars and moulding the vaults in them - and erecting the corridors: subordinated to the artizans thus - engaged there were coppersmiths and carpenters and stonemasons, who - were removed from their private shops and kept employed on the - public requirements. - -So in the same book[1167]: - - Tarquin after this achievement (Gabii) gave the people a rest from - expeditions and wars, and occupied himself with the building of the - temples.... He set all the artizans to work on the undertakings. - -And a little later[1168] Brutus is made to tell the Romans that Tarquin -“compels them like bought slaves to toil at quarrying and woodcutting -and carrying burdens[1169].” - -It is nowhere explicitly stated that it was to this control of the free -labour of the city that the Tarquins owed their power. On the contrary, -according to Livy the populares helped to turn Superbus out for the very -reason that he had forced them into this banausic life. “They were -indignant that they had been kept by the king so long employed as smiths -and doing the work of slaves[1170].” This by itself would certainly -suggest that the Tarquins had used their kingly power to turn the free -men of Rome into artizans and quarrymen, and not their army of employees -to turn a capitalist into a king. But the smiths summoned from Etruria, -who are associated with the Roman plebeians, recall the “large number of -skilled workmen” mentioned by Strabo as working for Demaratus at -Tarquinii, and suggest that we have here a continuation of the -activities that had made the fortune of the Tarquin family while still -in Etruria[1171]. - -[Sidenote: He loses the throne when he can no longer pay these - employees.] - -There is a further statement in the same chapter of Livy that certainly -harmonizes better with this latter alternative. At the time when the -plebeians suddenly discovered the degrading nature of their occupations, -not apparently without the help of the abler members of the nobility, -Livy informs us that the king had run out of money, “exhausted by the -magnificence of his public works.” Similarly Dionysius makes Brutus urge -on his fellow-conspirators that now is the time to carry out their plot, -when the armed citizens are “no longer controlled by (Tarquin’s) -presents as formerly[1172].” That Tarquin’s regime was one of sweat and -wages but never of blood and iron is borne out by Cicero, who observes -that “we never hear of Tarquin’s putting Roman citizens to death[1173].” - -Later writers speak of Superbus as employing penal labour and various -forms of torture and intimidation on a large scale[1174]. But these -statements, which have plainly a common origin, are no less plainly -embroideries upon the aristocratic misrepresentations of the Tarquins’ -labour policy. The truth is expressed by Florus: “in senatum caedibus, -in omnes superbia, quae crudelitate grauior est bonis, grassatus[1175].” -In other words Superbus was a harsh and unpopular employer[1176]. This -personal unpopularity must have contributed along with the exhaustion of -the royal treasury to reconcile the common people to the republican -regime, which for them was certainly the beginning of an era of -oppression and misery, since they had lost in the king their natural -protector[1177]. - -[Sidenote: Suspected attempts at restoring the kingship:] - -If the Tarquins’ power was really commercial in origin, and if the -account of it in writers of the age of Livy is in the main outline -historical, then the facts ought to be found influencing the history of -the early republic and in particular the measures taken by the -aristocrats to prevent the restoration of the monarchy. What is in fact -the sort of situation represented as most alarming them from this point -of view? - -[Sidenote: Collatinus and his wealth and “benevolences”;] - -The first indication of the direction of their fears is to be found in -the account of Collatinus’ banishment, recorded by Livy as having taken -place in the first year of the republic. According to Livy[1178] it was -simply the hated name of Tarquin that led to his banishment. Collatinus -was reluctant to withdraw: he only did so from fear that later, when no -longer consul, the same fate might overtake him with the loss of his -property into the bargain—cum bonorum amissione. Livy does not always -work over his material sufficiently to make it quite harmonize with his -own interpretation of it. It looks as though it was the bona, the wealth -of Collatinus, that led to his expulsion. Though plainly not the -strongest influence in Rome at the time, it may have been sufficiently -strong to be a perpetual menace to the aristocratic government. It is -the “primores ciuitatis” who insist on his withdrawal. If in -Dionysius[1179] on another occasion Collatinus is made to argue “that it -was not the tyrants’ money that had been harming the city, but their -persons,” the protestation only shows that there were others who did not -share this view, but thought rather, with Dionysius’ Marcus Valerius, -that there was a danger lest the people, “beguiled by the tyrant’s -benevolences, ... should help to restore Tarquin to the throne[1180].” -The same view is implied in a speech put by Dionysius[1181] into the -mouth of one of the popular leaders at the time of the first secession. -He reminds his hearers that “the people were never put to any -disadvantage by the kings, and least of all by the last ones”: he -recalls an occasion on which the king had “distributed five minae of -silver to every man,” and reminds the patricians how the plebeians had -rejected the great gifts that the banished Tarquins had offered them as -an inducement to break faith with the patrician government. - -It may well have been from similar fears that in the following year the -remainder of the Tarquins’ property was distributed among the people: -“(bona regia) deripienda plebi sunt data[1182].” A few chapters later -Livy states that so long as the banished Tarquin was still alive, the -people received from the senate “multa blandimenta[1183].” The nobles -are described by Dionysius as “taking many measures friendly to the -poor, that they might not go over to the tyrants and be won over by -considerations of personal gain and betray the commonwealth[1184].” The -senate seems to have been fighting the Tarquins with their own weapons. -The blandimenta that kept Superbus off the throne may well have been -synonymous with the benignitas that got Priscus on to it. - -After the death of Tarquin at the court of the Greek tyrant at Cumae -there were three prominent Romans who rightly or wrongly were suspected -of aiming at the kingly power. It may be worth while examining in each -of the three cases the circumstances that are said to have given rise to -these suspicions. - -[Sidenote: Cassius and his exceptional financial position;] - -Spurius Cassius[1185] is not described as having been personally very -rich, and our authors introduce into their accounts of him nothing to -support the charge that he was aiming at overthrowing the existing -government. They leave it possible to conceive of him as a -constitutional reformer who when consul sought to relieve a widespread -distress by distributions of land[1186] and perhaps corn[1187] and by -taking the state finances into his own hands[1188]. The outcry against -him is made to come mainly from the landed classes who fear that his -proposals may touch their own pockets. As far as they are thinking about -the constitution it is the financial position that the consul has -created for himself that is the chief ground of their alarms. “By his -distributions of money the consul was erecting a power perilous to -liberty: ... the way was being paved to monarchy.” Later on we find -Cassius having money dealings with the people. He proposes that the sums -that they have paid the government for corn brought from Sicily in time -of famine should be refunded to them: “but this was looked on by the -plebeians as a cash payment for the throne, and refused.” Though there -is nothing to show that the Cassius of Livy and Dionysius had either the -desire or the real equipment to repeat the career of Tarquinius Priscus, -yet the narrative about him is none the less relevant. It depicts the -early republican as deeply alarmed at any individual who secures any -kind of financial predominance in the state. Very possibly this feeling -may account for the ostentatious exhibition of poverty in which early -republican nobles are so often depicted as indulging[1189]. - -[Sidenote: Maelius and his exceptional wealth and organized body of - clients.] - -In the case of Spurius Maelius there are no such complications. If we -accept Livy and Dionysius, Maelius’ policy did not threaten the property -of any of the nobles. The fears that he would restore the kingship may -have been mistaken, but they were almost certainly genuine. Is there any -resemblance between extant accounts of Maelius’ career and the -speculations that we have been engaged in as to the early history of the -first Tarquin? There is not only a resemblance but a striking one. -Maelius was extremely rich: not dives merely but praedives[1190]. When -he set about relieving Rome from famine, he was able to do so not only -at his own expense but through his own clients and connexions: “buying -up corn at his own expense through the agency of his friends (hospitum) -and clients[1191].” - -[Sidenote: Manlius.] - -Marcus Manlius, the third to be condemned to death for aiming at the -throne, need not detain us. He is essentially a military character, like -his contemporary Dionysius of Syracuse[1192]. - -[Sidenote: The republican government changes Tarquin’s artizans into - soldiers and makes war a paying (and ultimately a paid) - profession:] - -But the real bulwark of the republic of the fifth century as it appears -in the pages of our authors is not the right arm of Servilius Ahala. It -is a fundamental change that came over the lower classes of the free -population. In a passage of Livy that has already been quoted, Brutus is -made to charge the Tarquins with having converted the men of Rome from -soldiers into artizans and quarrymen (opifices ac lapicidas). Brutus had -just effected a revolution at Rome. To represent a revolution as a -return to antiquity was as natural with the Roman as it is with -us[1193]. It is possible, though improbable, that the Tarquins had -turned the plebeians from soldiers into artizans. The situation clearly -indicated by Brutus is that he and his fellow-nobles are turning them -from artizans into soldiers. It is not merely in the speeches put by -Livy and Dionysius into the mouths of Brutus and his colleagues that we -find the establishment of the republic associated with a reorganization -of the state upon a military basis. The development of the comitia -centuriata as the main organization of the citizens of Rome for -political purposes is associated with the beginnings of the republic: -the centuries were originally and fundamentally a military -organization[1194]. - -The agrarian measures that appear so early in the narratives of the -historians need not deceive us. As far as they are authentic they must -have been either insincere or idealist[1195]. The republican nobility is -painted from the first as teaching the distressed plebeians to look not -for farms and allotments but for wars and prize money. The picture of -the transfiguration of the plebeians into soldiers is completed in the -narrative of the siege of Veii (406–396 B.C.), when pay for military -service is introduced[1196] and war becomes a leading means of earning a -livelihood[1197]. - -In short it would appear that the nobles ceased to dread a restoration -of the monarchy otherwise than by armed force when and only when their -government became the principal and most popular employer in the state. - -[Sidenote: cp. fifth century Athens.] - -The Alcmaeonidae at Athens put an end to the possibility of a revival of -the tyranny (and incidentally to all respect for constructive manual -labour) by instituting state payments for services as jurymen, sailors -on warships, and the like. Conditions at Rome were in some ways very -different from those at Athens. But the Roman nobles appear to have -aimed at securing the same result as the Athenian by very similar means. -How far this parallel holds, at least as between the extant narratives, -may be illustrated from the history of the family that took the leading -place in the early Roman republic. - -[Sidenote: The earlier Claudii and their anti-tyrannical policy.] - -The part played by Brutus in the narrative is politically as -insignificant as that of Harmodius in the overthrow of the tyranny at -Athens. The political geniuses of the early Roman republic are all to be -found in the great house of the Claudii[1198]. Our accounts make the -family first come to Rome in the sixth year of the republic. The head of -the family at that time is described by Dionysius as “of noble birth and -influential through his wealth[1199].” He arrives, “bringing with him a -great establishment and numerous friends and retainers.” Mommsen[1200] -gives strong reasons for thinking that the family cannot have first come -to Rome at so late a date. But the arrival may well have been a return -from exile like that of the Alcmaeonidae to Athens after the fall of -Hippias. The analogies between the Claudii and the Alcmaeonidae deserve -consideration, the more so as they seem to be uninfluenced by any -ancient recognition of their existence. It looks as though the wealthy -Claudii, like the wealthy Alcmaeonidae, “took the commons into -partnership[1201].” Mommsen has pointed out[1202] how many “well known -traits of the ancient tyrannus” occur in the picture of the decemvir -Appius. His contemporary Pericles was called the new Peisistratus. If -there are such strong reasons for equating the early Claudii, whose -historical existence can scarcely be seriously questioned, with the -contemporary Alcmaeonidae, it becomes increasingly probable that the -history of Rome and Athens in the sixth century ran on parallel lines. - -One great difference between fifth century Rome and fifth century Athens -was that Athens had had her own coinage from well back into the sixth -century, whereas Rome, as already mentioned, struck her first pieces -about 338 B.C. No famous name is associated with these earliest pieces. -[Sidenote: Appius Claudius Caecus (censor 312 B.C.):] The most prominent -man in Rome during the first generation after 338 was another Claudius, -the censor Appius Claudius Caecus. His greatest achievement was the -epoch-making Via Appia, the first of the great series of roads that knit -together the Roman Empire. [Sidenote: his public works,] The city owed -to him also its first aqueduct. On these great public works he spent, -without the previous sanction of the senate, the money accumulated in -the treasury[1203]. The sums thus spent must have represented the first -large accumulation of the new Roman currency. - -[Illustration: Fig. 33. _Aes graue_ with wheel.] - -[Sidenote: his probable connexion with Roman coinage,] - -Appius’ connexion with the early coinage of Rome was probably not -confined to spending it. The second series of Roman _aes graue_ was -coined in Campania and bears on the reverse a wheel (fig. 33). -Numismatists have long associated the appearance of this wheel with the -construction of the Appian way that led from Rome to the Campanian -capital[1204]. - -[Sidenote: his numerous clients,] - -One detail only is wanted to complete the picture of a potential tyrant -of the early Greek type, such as has been depicted in every section of -this volume, and that feature appears in Valerius Maximus. According to -that writer[1205], who flourished early in the first century A.D., -Appius possessed “plurimas clientelas.” - -[Sidenote: and Mommsen’s conjecture that he aimed at a tyranny.] - -All this gives added significance, in the light of our enquiries, to a -brilliant conjecture of Mommsen[1206] that Appius actually attempted to -make himself tyrant. Mommsen relies mainly on a sentence in -Suetonius[1207] which runs: “Claudius Drusus, after a crowned statue had -been set up to him at Appi Forum, endeavoured by means of his clients -(clientelas) to seize Italy.” The context dates the event between the -decemvirate and the first Punic War. The possible period is further -limited by the fact that Appi Forum was only founded by Appius Claudius -Caecus. The name of the would-be tyrant as given by Suetonius is -Claudius Drusus, but this, Mommsen shows, must be corrupt. The mention -of Appi Forum points definitely to Appius Claudius Caecus, the only -person whose name is associated with the place. In another passage of -his history[1208], Mommsen himself observes how Appius shows the spirit -of the Tarquins. - -[Sidenote: “Secessions.”] - -If we look at the history of the early republic from the plebeian point -of view, there is at least one important feature in the extant -narratives that supports our main conclusions. The most notable weapon -that the fifth century plebeians are represented as employing against -the nobles is the “secession.” The first is recorded under the year of -Spurius Cassius’ consulship, when the men whom Tarquin is accused of -having made into “artizans and quarrymen” proceeded in a body to the -“mons sacer” outside the city, and refused to come back and resume work -until their grievances had been dealt with. The resemblance of the -secession to the modern strike has already been recognized[1209]. It may -be an accident, but if so it is a remarkable one, that the chief weapon -of the class on which Tarquin’s power appears to have rested should have -been one that reappears in history with the organization of the -industrial classes in modern times. - -Before we proceed to discuss the value of the narratives that we have -been quoting, there are a few further notices in them that have a place -in this discussion, though they deal not with Rome but with other cities -of Central Italy. - -[Sidenote: The part played at Ardea in 440 B.C. by the working-classes.] - -In 440 B.C. the plebeians of Ardea, a city about 20 miles S. of Rome, -are described by Livy[1210] as engaged in a struggle with the optimates, -and as getting the worst of it. Thereupon the losing party “quite unlike -the Roman plebs, ... prepared to besiege the city (_i.e._ Ardea) with a -crowd of workmen (opificum), attracted by the prospect of plunder.” The -Latin leaves it possible that the crowd of workmen (opificum) with which -the plebs of Ardea prepared to besiege their city should be understood -as a separate body, conceivably metics or slaves. At Veii in 400 B.C. -the artifices are said to have been slaves[1211]. But though in Etruria -in 400 B.C. this may have been normally the case, in Latin Ardea forty -years earlier we may well have conditions not unlike those that have -been inferred above for sixth century Rome. Even if the opifices of -Ardea are to be understood as slaves, the united body of plebeians and -opifices acting in opposition to the optimates comes nearer to Brutus’ -description of the situation at Rome under the Tarquins than does -anything that can be found in our historians’ pictures of Rome in the -fifth century. Livy is thinking of the Roman plebeians of the early -republican period, not of the opifices and lapicidae of the age of the -Tarquins, when he says that the plebs of Ardea was quite unlike the -Roman plebs[1212]. - -[Sidenote: The rich Veientine employer who became king of his city in - 400 B.C.] - -In the year 400 B.C. according to Livy the people of Veii, “taedio -annuae ambitionis, regem creauere[1213].” Nothing is said by Livy about -feelings and parties in Veii itself, except this statement that they -were bored with annual elections. All that Livy mentions is the way in -which the appointment was received elsewhere in Etruria. The event, he -says, gave offence to the peoples of Etruria. Their hatred of kingly -power was not greater than that which they felt against the king -personally. He had previously made himself generally unpopular by his -wealth and arrogance (opibus superbiaque). He had once brought a solemn -celebration of the games to a violent conclusion: indignant at having -been rejected by the votes of the twelve peoples in favour of another -candidate for the priesthood, he had suddenly, in the middle of the -performance, withdrawn the workmen (artifices), a great part of whom -were his own slaves[1214]. - -The result of the Veientine’s wealth had been, according to Livy, to -make him unpopular. But it is a reasonable inference from Livy’s -narrative that he was unpopular only with the aristocrats who continued -to control the government in the other cities of Etruria. His accession -can hardly have been disagreeable to the Veientines who made him king. - -As noticed just above before he became king he had also been the -employer and actually the owner of a great proportion of the “artifices” -of the city. It is nowhere stated that the artifices helped to make him -king in Veii as they had helped to make him unpopular in the rest of -Etruria: but the important part played by the opifices at Ardea a -generation previously suggests that this may well have been the case. If -the events took place as recorded it is hard to believe that there was -not some connexion between the Veientine’s royal power and his previous -riches and control of the skilled labour of the city[1215]. - -[Sidenote: II. The credibility of the narrative.] - -So far we have been assuming that the extant accounts of the Tarquins -have a historical basis. That assumption, as remarked already, is by no -means beyond dispute. Not a statement has been quoted so far in this -chapter that has not within the last century been pronounced to be -historically worthless. Recently however there has been a movement to -treat the narrative with much more respect than it generally received a -generation ago. The new attitude is not merely a reaction against the -excessive scepticism of the nineteenth century. Largely it is based on -fresh evidence, mainly archaeological. Inscriptions show that writing -was no extraordinary accomplishment at Rome in those early days. -Excavations of cities that have been sacked make it most unlikely that -the sack of Rome in 390 B.C. meant the complete destruction of the city -records. In the face of facts like these more weight is now given to -passages where our authorities for the history of sixth and fifth -century Rome allude to more or less contemporary records, whether Roman -or Greek. The evidence for falsification and invention is indeed -considerable, but it is now for the most part realized that the critics -of the nineteenth century greatly overestimated its application. The -credibility of early Roman history is too big a subject to deal with at -all adequately in a work like this. It is necessary however to examine -more in detail those parts of the narrative with which this enquiry is -more particularly concerned. - -[Sidenote: The historical existence of the Tarquins has been denied, - _e.g._ by Pais.] - -Some scholars are still to be found who dispute _in toto_ the -Tarquins’ historical existence. Of this ultra-sceptical school the -most recent and voluminous exponent is Professor Pais of Naples[1216]. -Pais accepts nearly all the views of nearly all the sceptics in so far -as they are purely destructive. But the main inspiration of his -unbelief is not this destructive criticism but the ease with which he -finds that he can explain the growth of our narratives on the -assumption that they are false[1217]. In the case of the Tarquins Pais -first points out in the usual way the inconsistencies and -impossibilities and reduplications[1218] in the narrative, and the -uncertainties that hang over it as a whole. Then, after rejecting it -as history, he accounts for it as myth. He equates Tarquinius -philologically with Tarpeius[1219]. The Tarpeian rock was the slope of -the Roman Capitol over which condemned criminals were hurled to meet -their doom. There are passages in Varro and elsewhere that make it -possible that the whole Capitol was once called the Tarpeian -Mount[1220]. On the strength of them Tarquinius is explained as -Tarpeius, the original guardian deity of the Roman citadel. All the -stories told about Tarquin are, according to Pais, attempts to explain -customs and buildings and natural features connected with the Tarpeian -Mount. Hence his association with the temple on the top of the Capitol -and with the quarries on its sides. Hence the stories of his cruelty -and of his own violent death. Hence too we hear of Tarquinian laws: -they are merely laws passed on the Mons Tarpeius or sanctioned by the -god Tarpeius[1221]. - -I do not propose to deal in detail with these criticisms. They do not -seem to me to need it. So many unquestionably historical characters -would succumb to Pais’ treatment. - -[Sidenote: Pais’ arguments tested by applying them to Alfred the Great.] - -Imagine for a moment that the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle had never -circulated, and that the original had perished in a Danish raid. Imagine -further that Asser’s life of Alfred had met with a similar fate. Both -calamities might easily have happened, and if they had, king Alfred -would be as easily disposed of as king Tarquin himself. - -Alfred did none of the things that tradition ascribes to him. He did not -institute trial by jury or the division of England into shires. He was -not the founder either of University College, Oxford, or of the British -navy. The stories of his victories over the Danes are extremely doubtful -on the face of them[1222]. Alfred does not conquer his enemies: he -merely converts them. The legend admits that he had his headquarters in -an impassable swamp, and that the conquered Danes ruled the country. -Twice in two centuries the Danish invaders sweep over England after the -death of a king Aethelred. Both times there is a campaign on the -Berkshire Downs. The decisive battle is fought in the first case at -Ashdown, in the second at Essendune, which is palpably a mere variation -of the same name. In each case the conquest is succeeded by the reign of -a Saxon Edward. The second Edward is admitted by tradition to have been -less concerned with royalty than with religion[1223]. The first will be -shown in a moment to have been the son of a god. Elder as applied to the -first Edward is neither more nor less suspicious than Priscus as applied -to Tarquin. This simple device of duplication probably explains the -story of Alfred in Athelney. It is a reflexion backwards of the story, -possibly historical, of Hereward’s exploits in the similar swampy -fastness of Ely. - -The one legend that remains inextricably associated with Alfred is that -of the cakes. Alfred the fugitive in his Arician grove[1224] at Athelney -is made known to his followers only after the burning of the cakes. The -inference is obvious. Alfred is a vegetation deity of the same order as -Demeter, the wandering goddess who was found by the mistress of the -house where she sought refuge burning not cakes but Triptolemus the corn -god himself[1225]. The mistress of the house appears also in the Alfred -myth. But in other ways, and especially in the recognition scene, the -story has been obviously contaminated by Christian influence[1226]. - -So far therefore from dismissing the cake story from Alfred’s history, -we find that it is the very essence of the legend. In fact, when we -recall such divinities as Dionysus Botrys, Dionysus the Grape, we must -be tempted to wonder whether king Alfred and his cakes are not one and -the same divinity. - -[Sidenote: The Greek Demaratus has been regarded as a Greek fiction:] - -The introduction of the Greek Demaratus into the Tarquin story has -sometimes been regarded with extreme suspicion. For the late -Professor Pelham it seems to have been a proof that Tarquin was -merely Herodotus translated into Latin. He uses it as such in a -handbook on Roman history[1227]. Even if only the literary records -are considered Pelham’s inference if not unreasonable is certainly -rash. The story of the voyage of Demaratus stands on quite a -different footing from the long speech put by Dionysius into the -mouth of Brutus, in which the founder of the Roman republic is made -to quote the double kingship at Sparta as a precedent for the double -consulship[1228]. [Sidenote: but there is nothing improbable about -the narrative,] Brutus’ speech is palpable fiction. The Demaratus -story on the other hand may indeed have been borrowed from that of -Philip the son of Butacides, who in the last quarter of the sixth -century fled from Croton “with his own trireme and a crew of his own -employees[1229]” and sailed first to Cyrene and then with Dorieus -the Spartan to Sicily, where they tried to establish a settlement -but were killed by the Phoenicians and Egestaeans. But if on other -and independent grounds we find reason for thinking that the story -of Demaratus’ voyage in the seventh century[1230] is in the main -outline historical, then we may reasonably find a confirmation of it -in the well attested facts of Philip’s adventures in the century -following, in the statement[1231] that Caere, the Southern neighbour -of Tarquinii, contained a Greek element at the time of the -Tarquins[1232], and further in the fact that Demaratus is made to -quit Corinth at a time when we have the authority of Herodotus[1233] -for believing that many prominent Corinthians were being driven to -quit their city. The migration of the Tarquins from Tarquinii to -Rome corresponds with the Etrusco-Carthaginian alliance against the -Greeks of which the best remembered fact is the subsequent disaster -that overtook the Phocaeans in Corsica in 536 B.C. When the Tarquins -are banished from Rome they flee to the Greek city of Cumae, while -the Romans who have banished them proceed to make an alliance with -Carthage[1234]. All through the Tarquin narrative we may discern a -strictly historical background that fully explains their comings and -goings. The same may of course be said of countless heroes of modern -historical romances. But in these historical romances the fictitious -characters seldom play the leading political part that is played by -the tyrant kings of the Tarquin dynasty. - -The evidence of institutions also tends rather against the sceptics. -Cicero notes that the organization which Tarquinius Priscus was said to -have introduced for maintaining the Roman cavalry was the same in -principle as that which had once prevailed in Corinth[1235]. The -sceptics may indeed argue that the Corinthian character of the Roman -practice was the reason why it was attributed to the son of Demaratus. -But this line of argument rests on pure assumption, and leaves with its -advocate the onus of explaining this similarity between the institutions -of Corinth and Rome. - -There is in fact another source of evidence now available which greatly -alters the balance of probabilities. Cicero may after all be right when -he says [Sidenote: which is confirmed] “influxit non tenuis quidam e -Graecia riuulus in hanc urbem, sed abundantissimus amnis illarum -disciplinarum et artium[1236],” and proceeds at once to illustrate his -statement from the career of Demaratus. - -[Illustration: Fig. 34. Corinthian vase found at Tarquinii.] - -[Illustration: Fig. 35. Corinthian terra cotta tablet depicting the -export of vases.] - -[Sidenote: by the finding at Tarquinii of VII-VI century Corinthian - pottery,] - -At the time when the story makes Demaratus leave Corinth for Etruria -Corinth was probably the chief industrial state in Greece. Her chief -industry was pottery. Corinthian pottery of this period has been found -in many parts of the Greek world, including the chief cities of -Etruria[1237]. At Corneto (Tarquinii), the town from which Tarquinius -Priscus is said to have migrated to Rome, many specimens from the -necropolis of the ancient city are to be seen in the museum. An example -is shown in fig. 34[1238]. Unless the Corinthian pottery found in such -distant regions as Etruria has distinct local peculiarities, it is -generally assumed to have been imported from Greece. Corinth did -unquestionably export pottery. A Corinthian terra cotta tablet has come -down to us (see fig. 35)[1239] that depicts a ship surmounted by a row -of vases that can only represent the cargo. The wide area of its -distribution and the very numerous sites on which it has been found -point to export from a single centre. On the other hand a large export -trade from one main centre is quite consistent with branch -establishments. If Corinthian potters went to Etruria, it is hard to see -how we are to distinguish the vases they made before leaving home from -those that they produced afterwards. The question whether the -characteristic pale clay of the Corinthian pottery is to be found in -Central Italy does not arise. The raw material would be imported quite -as easily as the finished product. But there is other archaeological -evidence that takes us further, and makes it not only possible but -probable that Greek potters as well as Greek pottery found their way to -Etruria at the period to which the Demaratus story, if historical, must -be assigned, _i.e._ about the middle of the seventh century[1240]. I -refrain purposely at this point from drawing my own conclusions, and -shall confine myself to the views and statements of archaeologists who -have devoted special attention to the material in question. - -[Sidenote: and by the many finds in Central Italy of VII and VI century - objects of Greek style but local workmanship.] - -In the seventh century graves that have been found in so many cities of -Etruria there occur, besides objects that may well be imported from -Greece, many others that are essentially Greek in character, but show -local peculiarities. For instance at Caere, which was so closely -connected with Tarquinii and Rome, in the famous tomb excavated in 1836 -by General Galassi and the arch-priest Regulini, a quantity of metal -work of this description was found. The tomb has been recently reopened -and the contents discussed at length by G. Pinza[1241]. On some of the -vases of a very familiar Greek type found in the same grave Pinza -remarks that “the coarse clay allows us to imagine that they are of -local fabric[1242].” - -When we come to Central Italian finds that date from the sixth century -Greek objects that there is good reason for regarding as locally -produced become positively plentiful. They include vases and bronzes, -architectural terra cottas and sepulchral frescoes[1243]. Such a mass of -material points again to a large number of Greek or Greektrained workmen -in Central Italy at the time of its production, and though that time is -rather later than Demaratus and the objects are Ionic, not Corinthian, -yet it increases the plausibility of the Demaratus story, the more so as -the change from Corinthian to Ionic reflects the policy ascribed in our -ancient literary authorities to Servius Tullius[1244]. - -[Sidenote: The names of Demaratus’ Greek workmen are not (_pace_ Rizzo) - “obviously fictitious.”] - -Those who deny the historical existence of Demaratus naturally deny also -that of his Greek workmen Eucheir and Eugrammus. Even Rizzo, who admits -a historical basis for the Demaratus story, declares that these names -are “obviously fictitious[1245].” - -The taint of the ultra-sceptical school still lingers. Else why should a -countryman of Tintoretto say that Eucheir and Eugrammus are “obviously -fictitious” names? In spite of its obvious fictitiousness the name -Eucheiros was actually borne by a Greek potter, several of whose vases -have come down to us signed “Eucheiros made me the son of -Ergotimos[1246].” This Eucheiros the son of Ergotimos (itself a good -industrial name) lived not in the seventh century but in the sixth: -also, he was not a Corinthian but an Athenian. But even if we refrain -from emphasizing the pride of family which his signature shows as -compared with that of most potters, who sign with only their own names, -and refrain too from recalling the facts that Greeks so very frequently -bore the names of their grandfathers and that potters like Amasis almost -certainly migrated to Athens about the middle of the sixth century, when -Athens was supplanting the rest of Greece and more particularly Corinth -in the pottery industry, still the sixth century Athenian Eucheiros -completely disposes of the “obvious fictitiousness” of one detail of the -Demaratus story. So far from being obviously fictitious the Corinthian -Eucheir has every appearance of historical reality. So too has his -alleged relationship to the founder of the Tarquin dynasty at Rome. If -the first tyrant of Corinth got his name from a pot and very possibly -owed his tyranny to the Corinthian potteries, it is not surprising if a -Corinthian emigrant to Italy took potters with him and used them to -build up the position which enabled him to make himself tyrant in the -city of his adoption[1247]. In both cases we are dealing with -conjectures, but it may be fairly claimed that the two conjectures lend -one another mutual support. - -[Sidenote: Servius and Greece: the narrative connects him not with - Corinth but with Ionia.] - -There are no traditions connecting Servius with Corinth: such notices as -we have of his relations with the Greeks connect him with Ionia. Both -Livy[1248] and Dionysius[1249] and also Aurelius Victor[1250] state that -Servius built a temple of Artemis and made it the centre of a Latin -league, in imitation of the temple of Artemis at Ephesus, which was the -meeting-place of the Ionian league. It has already been suggested that -Servius’ monetary reforms may have a historical basis, and be due to -intercourse with the Phocaeans, who had founded Marseilles in 600 B.C. -The city of Phocaea, though in Aeolian territory, was reckoned -Ionian[1251]. - -[Sidenote: Ionian influence in Central Italy at the reputed period of - Servius is confirmed by archaeological finds.] - -The Ionizing Servius is said to have reigned from 578 to 534 B.C. In the -middle of the sixth century, or in other words at just the same period, -a corresponding change occurs in the archaeological finds, in which -experts are agreed in recognizing Ionian influence if not Ionian -workmanship. Among the objects which display the new style are the vases -known as Caeretan hydriae[1252] and Pontic amphorae[1253] and a group -that has been classified as among the latest products of -Clazomenae[1254], and a group of bronzes from Perugia[1255]. Of the -sixth century examples of the famous frescoes that adorn or disfigure -the chamber tombs of Etruria some have been attributed to Ionian -artists[1256], as have also architectural terra cottas of the same -period found in Latium at Conca (the ancient Satricum)[1257] and -Velletri[1258]. - -[Sidenote: Rome and Cumae.] - -In dealing with the architectural terra cottas from Conca Rizzo -suggests[1259] that the potters who worked there came from Cumae or some -other Greek city in Campania. In this connexion he remarks[1260] that so -far the traces of intercourse between Rome and Campania during the first -two centuries of the city (_i.e._ 750–550 B.C.) seem rather scanty. He -attributes this to gaps in excavation. Once more he seems not to notice -that the negative archaeological evidence harmonizes with the literary -tradition. Cumae must have been powerfully influencing Rome in the very -early days when the Romans borrowed the Cumaean alphabet. But then comes -a period when Cumae is eclipsed by Corinth[1261]. Cumae only begins to -recover her influence Romewards when Corinthian influence is on the -wane. The Tarquins’ story begins at Corinth: it ends at Cumae, where -Superbus, when banished from Rome, is said to have sought refuge[1262] -with Aristodemus who was perhaps the last Greek tyrant of the old -commercial type[1263]. - -[Sidenote: The earliest Forum shops (from the graves on the site) and - the great drain (from its brickwork) have been dated after - the regal period: but] - -It has been argued that nobody could have built shops in the Forum in -the time of the Tarquins because recent excavations have shown that till -a comparatively late date the Forum was used as a cemetery: that, apart -from this, arcades and shops must have been impossible in the Forum -until it had been drained: and that the building of the main drain, the -cloaca maxima, ascribed to Tarquin by Livy, has been shown by excavation -to belong to a very much later age. - -[Sidenote: the drain cannot be dated from its brick facing,] - -As regards the main drain, archaeology has indeed shown that it was -bricked and vaulted at a late date; but there is no reason for thinking -that it began its existence with the masonry that now encloses it. The -London Fleet and Tyburn suggest the opposite. The most recent volume on -the subject is emphatic on this point. “The earliest Roman sewer -consisted undoubtedly of a natural watercourse, the channel of which was -widened and deepened[1264].” “There is no doubt that the first attempts -at artificial drainage date from the regal period. The first part of the -city to be drained was the Forum valley[1265].” - -[Sidenote: and the Forum graves show only (_pace_ Pais) that the - cemetery was secularized not later than late in the regal - period.] - -Those who maintain a post-regal date for the building of the Forum base -their arguments on the finds of pottery in the Forum graves. The finds -have been numerous and their evidence is valuable, and it is necessary -briefly to review it. The latest style of pottery found in these graves -is the Proto-Corinthian. This very distinctive and widely distributed -pottery[1266] has been the subject of much controversy as regards its -place of origin, but its chronology is well established. It flourished -in the seventh century: during the sixth it persisted in a few -stereotyped forms, of which at least two[1267] lived on in a degraded -form into the fifth. Vases of this style quoted by Boni[1268] as coming -from two of the latest graves in the Forum are illustrated in the -_Notizie degli Scavi_[1269] (fig. 36). Both the vases illustrated might -well be seventh century. At Rhitsona in Boeotia the types were -completely obsolete by the middle of the sixth century, not one example -occurring among some 2500 vases excavated from graves of the latter half -of the century. This mass of pottery included about 150 Proto-Corinthian -vases, but the number is divided about equally between kothons like -_J.H.S._ XXXI. p. 75, fig. 4, and small skyphoi such as _J.H.S._ XXIX. -p. 319, fig. 7, no. 9, with just two or three pyxides like _J.H.S._ -XXIX. p. 312, fig. 2, no. 8. - -In the Forum graves there are a certain number of vases of other styles -that cannot be dated so accurately as the Proto-Corinthian but suggest -on stylistic grounds a somewhat later date. None of them however would -naturally be put later than towards the end of the sixth century, and -very few so late as that[1270]. Occasional burials of a later date would -be evidence for a later conversion from cemetery to Forum only if -intramural burials were unknown in Rome. As a matter of fact there is -explicit evidence that they took place[1271]. - -[Illustration: Fig. 36. Proto-Corinthian vase found in the Roman Forum.] - -[Sidenote: Views on the historicity of Servius Tullius.] - -After what has been said about the Tarquins and sixth century Rome -generally it is scarcely necessary to discuss in detail the historicity -of Servius Tullius. For representative modern views on him see -Mueller-Deecke[1272] (Servius symbolizes the supremacy of Volsinii, the -Tarquins that of Tarquinii); De Sanctis[1273] (Servius is the Etruscan -invader who drove out the Tarquins); Gardthausen[1274] (Servius is the -Roman counterpart of the Greek tyrant, the Tarquins the legitimate -kings, leaders of the rich and noble). This whole chapter is a -refutation of Gardthausen’s view about the Tarquins: the other -suggestions are compatible with my own. Etruria may well have exercised -as strong an influence on a sixth century tyranny at Rome as did Persia -on those of sixth century Ionia. - -Pais[1275] fancifully explains Servius as the priest god, the seruus -rex, of Aricia, who was imported to Rome in 338 B.C., well known to -English readers as - - The priest who slew the slayer - And shall himself be slain. - -Mastarna is differentiated from Servius[1276] and said to have a -historical prototype in Mezentius, the enemy of Aeneas. My criticisms of -Pais in reference to the Tarquins are equally applicable here. - -[Illustration: Fig. 37. Ionic terra cotta antefix found in Rome.] - -[Sidenote: Rome and Athens.] - -In the early period of the Roman republic the chief Greek influence to -judge from the narratives was that of Athens and the Alcmaeonidae[1277]. -Once more we find the written documents and the archaeological evidence -in agreement. During the second half of the sixth century Attic imports -had been gaining a great preponderance in Central Italy[1278]. - -[Illustration: Fig. 38. Similar antefix found in Samos.] - -Thus from the time when the Greek Demaratus is said to have settled in -Tarquinii to that at which the last Roman Tarquin is said to have sought -shelter in the Greek Cumae the series of Greek connexions implied in our -narrative is found reflected in the results of excavations. We have -based our conclusions on a mass of material from various sites scattered -all over Central Italy. [Sidenote: The finds from Rome itself confirm -the narratives by showing first Corinthian influence, then Ionian, and -then Attic.] The evidence from Rome itself could not have been made the -basis of the discussion. It is not sufficiently abundant. Its scantiness -however need cause no misgivings. It is sufficiently accounted for by -the unbroken ages of crowded occupation that differentiate Rome from the -surrounding cities. The finds from Rome, as far as they go, confirm the -other evidence by showing that first Corinth, then Ionia and finally -Athens did actually influence Rome during the period of the last royal -dynasty. Corinthian vases have been found in the city from time to -time[1279], though not, it should be noticed, in the Forum -cemetery[1280]. The influence of Ionia in the sixth century is seen in -such objects as a series of cups[1281] closely resembling the “later -Ionic vases” of the Munich catalogue[1282], or again in a bearded -antefix (fig. 37) found near the church of S. Antonia and compared by -Pinza[1283] with examples published by Boehlau in his _Aus ionischen -Nekropolen_[1284] (fig. 38), or yet again in the archaic terra cotta -head (fig. 39) found in 1876 near the church of the Aracoeli on the -Capitol[1285], which much resembles the stone head (fig. 40) from the -Athenian Acropolis described by Dickens as “an undoubtedly early example -of imported Chiot art[1286].” An amphora in the Attic black figure style -(fig. 41) has been found on the Quirinal[1287]. “The most exquisite -early Attic” is reported by Boni from the Palatine[1288]. Attic Ionic -influence has been seen in the Capitoline she-wolf (fig. 42), which is -held by Petersen to commemorate the expulsion of the kings, and may be -compared with the statue of a lioness put up at Athens to commemorate -Leaina, the mistress of the tyrannicide Aristogeiton[1289]. - -[Illustration: Fig. 39. Terra cotta head found on the Roman Capitol.] - -[Illustration: Fig. 40. Stone head found on the Acropolis at Athens.] - -[Illustration: Fig. 41. Vase in Attic black figure style found on the -Quirinal.] - -[Illustration: Fig. 42. The Capitoline wolf.] - -[Sidenote: Conclusions on the question of credibility.] - -This completes the evidence for the credibility of our narrative[1290]. -It is not conclusive. The archaeological material on which we have had -so largely to rely, though it reflects the various Greek influences that -are said to have affected their history, does not for instance establish -Demaratus as a historical character. But it does fully establish him as -a historical possibility. It disposes us to give much more weight than -was customary a generation ago to statements and allusions that tend to -confirm the historical basis of our narratives. We no longer pass over -the possibility that Demaratus may have been a living prototype of -Philip the son of Butacides[1291], and not a mere study in fiction based -on the career of the adventurous Crotonian. In the light of the -extremely rich collection of Greek pottery from Caere[1292], the -childish story told by Strabo[1293] of how Caere got its name from the -Greek χαῖρε no longer discounts his other statement in the same passage -that in early times the city had a treasury at Delphi, a statement that -is confirmed by Herodotus[1294], who tells us that the people of Caere -consulted the Delphic oracle about the year 540 B.C. In short there is -every possibility that Tarquin at Rome may have had consciously before -his eyes the career of Cypselus at Corinth. The accounts here offered -both of the Tarquins and of the Corinthian tyrants are admittedly -conjectural: but when two such conjectures based on independent evidence -are found to harmonize so well both with one another and with a broad -general explanation of the narratives they deal with, it may be fairly -claimed that they render one another mutual support. - -[Sidenote: If Tarquin is a Greek fiction, it preserves an early Greek - conception of the typical early tyrant as a great - capitalist.] - -But let us for the moment adopt the attitude of the sceptics, and assume -the whole story of the Tarquins to be false. In that case the numerous -Greek elements can be explained only as plagiarisms from the -corresponding figures in Greek history, the seventh and sixth century -tyrants. But the Greek element includes the story of Demaratus and his -Corinthian workmen and his wealth, and the part that these played in the -events that led up to his son Tarquinius Priscus becoming king of Rome. -In other words, for the hypothetical authors of this hypothetical -fiction the typical early Greek tyrant was a great capitalist and a -great employer[1295]. - - - - - Chapter IX. _Sicyon, Megara, Miletus, Ephesus, Leontini, Agrigentum, - Cumae_ - - - “Ne perdons rien du passé. Ce n’est qu’avec le passé qu’on fait - l’avenir.” - - ANATOLE FRANCE. - -[Sidenote: Sicyon.] - -The tyranny at Sicyon lasted longer than in any other Greek state[1296]. -It started about the same time as that of Cypselus at Corinth and -continued in the same family for about a century. The tyrants rested -their power on the support of the pre-Dorian population of their city, -and the establishment of the tyranny was probably to a large extent a -racial movement representing a rising of the pre-Dorian stratum of the -population against their Dorian conquerors. - -How the tyrant family secured its power is another question. Until the -other day our only information on the subject was to the effect that the -founder of the dynasty was a cook or butcher (μάγειρος)[1297], who was -helped to power by the Delphic oracle[1298]. Thanks however to a papyrus -recently unearthed by the Oxford scholars Grenfell and Hunt and -published by them in 1915 we have now considerable fragments of a -detailed account of the founder of the dynasty[1299]. - -The fragment confirms the statement that the tyrants of Sicyon were -sprung from a butcher and settles the vexed question of the relationship -of Andreas and Orthagoras (the two earliest known members of the family) -by showing that Orthagoras was the first tyrant and Andreas was father -of Orthagoras. It also shows that Orthagoras himself was bred as a -butcher. But it is devoted mainly to the military exploits of the -youthful Orthagoras, and though it does not take us down to the day when -he made himself tyrant it plainly brings us very near it, and as it -leaves him in the position of polemarch on active service it seems to -illustrate and support the statement of Aristotle that the early tyrants -often owed their power to some high magistracy or military position that -they had previously secured in the state. But there are several reasons -why this military aspect should not be overrated. The account of how -Orthagoras actually seized the tyranny is after all wanting. The extant -fragment says that he secured the position of polemarch “partly also by -reason of the goodwill of the mass of the citizens towards him,” and -gives this as a separate reason[1300] from that of his military -successes. Moreover the author of the fragment was possibly Aristotle -himself, who is known to have written a lost _Constitution of the -Sicyonians_; and although Grenfell and Hunt regard Ephorus as more -probably the author, Ephorus lived at the same time and wrote under the -same historical influences as Aristotle and was probably misled in the -same way concerning the character of the early tyranny[1301]. The -outstanding fact in the early career of Orthagoras is still his -tradesman origin. - -Little is known of the later career of Orthagoras except that he -governed mildly, and of his successor Myron (Olympian victor in 648 -B.C.[1302]) nothing is recorded that throws any direct light on the -origin of the tyranny: but the case is different when we come to -Cleisthenes, the last and most famous of this family of tyrants, whose -reign covered roughly the first third of the sixth century[1303]. With -Cleisthenes the Sicyonian tyranny entered on a new phase. - -Aristotle quotes Sicyon as an instance of a city where the government -changed “from tyranny to tyranny ... from that of Myron to that of -Cleisthenes[1304].” The story of how Cleisthenes got his two brothers -out of the way is told by Nicolaus Damascenus[1305]. But what Nicolaus -gives is purely a tale of domestic crime, a change from tyrant to tyrant -not from tyranny to tyranny. Perhaps the change referred to by Aristotle -is to be connected with the fact that Cleisthenes followed an aggressive -foreign policy[1306]. He was violently hostile to Argos[1307], and took -a leading part in the “sacred” war that was fought about Delphi at the -beginning of the sixth century B.C.[1308]. He was a contemporary of -Periander who appears to have changed the character of the tyranny at -Corinth by making the government warlike. It is not unlikely that the -change effected by Cleisthenes at Sicyon was in the same direction. In -turning to war it does not follow that he forsook trade. He may have -held the view that trade follows the flag. The “sacred” war had its -secular side. It arose about the refusal of the people of Krisa, who -possessed the port of Delphi, to remove their harbour dues. - -Krisa was a place of importance in early times[1309], so much so that -what was later known as the Gulf of Corinth was called the Gulf of -Krisa. The territory of the Krisaians lay just opposite Sicyon, and it -seems not improbable that the Sicyonians, with their allies the -Corinthians[1310], aimed at wresting from their rivals across the water -their position in the gulf which was the starting-point of trade with -the far West[1311]. According to a Pindar scholiast the Krisaians had -control of the sea at the beginning of the war and owed their ultimate -defeat to the fact that Cleisthenes built a fleet and destroyed their -naval supremacy[1312]. It looks very much as though Cleisthenes was -trying to win for Sicyon the sea-borne trade that had been flowing into -Krisa. With the aid of a fleet that must for the time have made Sicyon a -really important naval power[1313] he crushes the trade rival across the -water and wins its place for his own city and himself[1314]. - -Bury assigns to Cleisthenes the leading part in the reorganizing of the -Pythian games at Delphi after the Sacred War[1315], and pictures the -Sicyonian tyrant as doing for the Delphic Pythia much what Periander and -Peisistratus are depicted as doing for the Corinthian Isthmia and the -Athenian Panathenaia and Pheidon very possibly did for the great games -at Olympia. Bury’s general picture of the early tyrants as founders or -reorganizers of these great Greek games is quite in harmony with the -chronological evidence and with all that is known about the various -tyrants’ activities and characters[1316]. Developing these games might -well be part of a broad commercial policy, the more so as the games were -under divine patronage and ensured periodic opportunities for peaceful -intercourse in an age of chronic warfare[1317]. Under such circumstances -gatherings of this kind naturally tend to become the “commercial affair -(ἐμπορικὸν πρᾶγμα)” that the Delian festival admittedly grew to -be[1318]. Everything known about the early Greek tyrants shows how -capable they were of turning such a tendency to good account. That -Delphi in particular had from early times a commercial character has -already been conjectured by Cornford[1319]. In the early years of the -Sicyonian tyranny the greatness of the Euboean cities Chalcis and -Eretria had begun to be steadily on the decline. The time had come to -change the course of the Eastern part of this great trade route and -instead of Krisa, Delphi, Thebes, Euboea to substitute another line, in -which Sicyon and probably Athens should be dominating points. This is -probably what Cleisthenes had in view when he so strongly supported -Solon in the Sacred War. - -It follows that to make him the founder of the Delphic Pythia is a view -that cannot be accepted without reservations. The available evidence -represents Cleisthenes as rather the rival than the champion of Delphi. -A Pindar scholiast already quoted states that he instituted Pythian -games in his own Sicyon. There is no other evidence for Pythian games at -Sicyon, but Herodotus gives a long account of the way in which -Cleisthenes radically reformed the chief existing festival in the city. -This festival, like the Delphic Pythia of the days before the Sacred -War, was devoted largely to musical and poetical competitions. Its -patron was the ancient hero Adrastus, whose connexions were all with -Argos, the Dorian city whose influence in Sicyon Cleisthenes was bent on -overthrowing. Cleisthenes ejected Adrastus from Sicyon by the curious -process of burying beside him the body of his bitterest enemy, the -Theban Melanippus (which he borrowed for the purpose from Thebes), and -then removing the body of Adrastus which was assumed to depart -voluntarily from so unpleasant a neighbourhood. - -The reformed festival was held in honour of this Theban hero and the -Theban wine god Dionysus. The ejected Adrastus had been one of the -leaders in the famous expedition of the Seven against Thebes[1320]. -There can be little doubt that when the festival was instituted -Cleisthenes was aiming at an entente with the great inland city that -formed the first main stage on the route from Delphi to Euboea and the -North. But the attempt was a failure. Thebes was conspicuously -unrepresented at the wooing of Cleisthenes’ daughter Agariste[1321], and -the tyrant is furious when one of the suitors performs what has -plausibly been suggested to have been a Theban dance[1322]. Relations -with Delphi may have run a similar course. In the first celebration of -the reformed Delphian Pythia Cleisthenes competed; and the way that he -approached the Delphic oracle before reorganizing his own Sicyonian -festival shows that he wanted an understanding with the authorities -there, to whom his family was perhaps largely indebted for its -throne[1323]. But the oracle would have nothing to do with Cleisthenes’ -proposals and used abusive language to the tyrant for making them. -Relations between the god and the tyrant can hardly have remained -cordial after this incident and the Thebans presumably sided with the -god. - -Whatever the precise outcome of Cleisthenes’ policy with Delphi and -Thebes the likelihood remains that one main object of that policy had -been to give a new direction to the city’s trade. We have been assuming -that the Sicyon of the tyrants was an important centre of commerce and -industry. This has been denied by Eduard Meyer[1324]. The evidence is -meagre: but as far as it goes it is entirely against Meyer’s hypothesis, -which makes it hard to explain how the city became so great and -prosperous at this time. We have seen already that Cleisthenes possessed -a powerful fleet and that his proceedings suggest far-reaching -commercial designs. The evidence as to industry points in the same -direction. Some distinguished archaeologists have actually assigned to -the Sicyon of Andreas and Orthagoras one of the leading industries of -the period, the making of the remarkably fine pottery now usually known -as Proto-Corinthian. Their arguments are by no means decisive[1325], and -in any case there is nothing to associate the Sicyonian tyrants -personally with Sicyonian potteries; but there are literary notices -which point to the Orthagorids as having been, like the other early -tyrants, builders and, presumably, employers of local labour. The -Olympian “treasury” which Pausanias thought to have been put up by the -tyrant Myron[1326] has been shown by excavation to have been fifth -century work[1327]. But in this treasury Pausanias saw two “bronze -chambers” (models of buildings?) one of which bore an inscription saying -that it was a dedication of Myron and the people of Sicyon. This -inscription may have misled Pausanias into ascribing to Myron the -building that contained it[1328]. The bronze chamber on which the -dedication was inscribed was on a large scale. It weighed 500 Aeginetan -talents or about 19 tons. From towards the end of the period of the -tyranny Sicyon was famous for its school of sculptors, who worked -largely in bronze, and though no statement has been preserved as to the -workmanship of Myron’s dedication, it may not unreasonably be used as -evidence that the Sicyonians of his reign were already experts in the -working of bronze[1329]. As regards buildings, Cleisthenes with the -spoils that he gained in the Sacred War is known to have erected at -Sicyon a magnificent portico[1330]. - -Pollux, the lexicographer of the second century A.D., says that the -Sicyonians in the time of the tyrants (as also the Athenians under the -Peisistratids) wore a particular kind of rough woollen dress “that they -might be ashamed to go down into the city[1331].” The statement may be -true and the explanation false. If both are accepted, it by no means -follows that the policy of the Sicyonian tyrants was dominantly -agricultural[1332]. We may possibly have here a record of a measure -intended to prevent the commercialized city from attracting to itself -the agricultural population that was of such vital importance to the -normal self-sufficing Greek city-state. There is little doubt that the -government of the Sicyonian tyrants was popular with the lower classes. -Aristotle declares that it lasted so long because they treated their -subjects so well[1333]. If Herodotus and Ephorus give a less favourable -account of them, the reason is probably that their sources were -aristocratic and anti-tyrannical[1334]. - -[Sidenote: Megara.] - -The tyranny at Megara is associated with the single name of -Theagenes[1335], whose reign is dated by the support that he gave to his -son-in-law Cylon, winner of an Olympian victory in 640 B.C.[1336] and -would-be tyrant of Athens. - -According to Aristotle in the _Rhetoric_ Theagenes, like Peisistratus -and Dionysius, scheming to make himself tyrant asked for the (usual) -bodyguard, and having secured it became tyrant. But as pointed out in -the first chapter this only shows that winning the tyranny meant -possessing an armed force. It says nothing as to how the armed force was -acquired. Armed forces are not to be had for the asking. For the way in -which Theagenes got his our only evidence is another passage of -Aristotle, this time from the _Politics_, which says that Theagenes -secured his power “after slaughtering the flocks and herds of the -wealthy[1337].” - -In the latter part of the fifth century “most of the Megareans got their -living by making exomides” (the normal dress of the poorer -classes)[1338]. Meyer assumes this to have been a fourth (_sic_) century -development, but altogether against the evidence[1339]. Not only is the -woollen industry known to have been one of the main occupations of -Megara in the fifth century, but the prosperity of the city in the -seventh century is only comprehensible if we assume that it was already -engaged in the woollen trade. As observed by Busolt[1340], Megaris has -on the whole a barren stony soil that was mostly suited only for the -pasture of its numerous flocks of sheep. The Megareans must have -manufactured goods to take to their distant colonies, from which they -imported corn and other raw material. - -The colonial activities of Megara went back well into the seventh -century. Some of her colonies such as Chalcedon and Byzantium and -Heraclea Pontica[1341] lay on the route of the Argonauts that led to the -land of the golden fleece. Other seventh century colonies of Megara lay -in the far West in Sicily, where she founded Megara Hyblaea in the -latter part of the eighth century and Selinus in the second half of the -seventh. - -Thus Megara’s colonial activities in the seventh century correspond -closely with those of Miletus, the city that colonized most of the ports -of the Black Sea and owed so much of her wealth to her trade in wool -with the Italian Sybaris[1342]. - -That Megara herself was engaged in the woollen industry at this early -date is made not unlikely by several fragments of evidence. Demeter at -Megara bore the title Malophoros. “Various statements,” says Pausanias, -“are made about this title, and in particular that Demeter was named -Malophoros by those who first reared sheep in the land[1343].” The word -Malophoros may mean either “Sheep-bearing” or “Apple-bearing,” but the -account of the title in Pausanias shows that the Megareans understood it -as meaning “Sheep-bearing,” and regarded it as of high antiquity and -certainly as older than the days when the flocks of the well-to-do were -slaughtered by Theagenes. - -According to Pliny[1344] fulling was invented by a Megarean named -Nikias. Buechsenschuetz[1345] infers from this passage that fulling or -milling was of great importance in the ancient wool industry. -Bluemner[1346] quotes it to prove the importance of the industry at -Megara. The most important inference to be drawn from it both of them -seem to have overlooked, namely that the industry at Megara must have -been of high antiquity. - -The care bestowed by the Megareans on sheep-breeding is alluded to by -the sixth century Theognis - - κριοὺς μὲν καὶ ὄνους διζήμεθα, Κύρνε, καὶ ἵππους - εὐγενέας[1347]. - -Megarean woollen goods at the end of the fifth century were much worn by -Athenian slaves who, as Cauer observes[1348], came largely from the -region of the early Megarean colonies. - -It seems therefore not unlikely that when Theagenes slaughtered the -flocks of the wealthy at Megara his blow was aimed at a class of -capitalists whose wealth was already based on the woollen trade, as was -that of the direct ancestors in Tudor times of our own modern -capitalists[1349]. - -This possibility has been recognized by Poehlmann[1350] who quotes -Xenophon on the Megarean wool industry in reference to Theagenes. -Poehlmann imagines the blow as dealt by the discontented masses and -inspired by simple hatred. But our one authority attributes it not to -the rebellious masses but to Theagenes himself. On a point of definite -fact like this Aristotle deserves to be taken precisely as he expresses -himself. Can it be that Theagenes’ coup was a simple but effective means -of securing for himself the monopoly of the Megarean woollen industry? - -If this was in fact the aim of Theagenes he was merely anticipating the -methods of certain modern monopolists. In December 1888 the Whiskey -Combination in the United States is said to have blown up a troublesome -independent still in Chicago[1351]. There are records of a similar -attempt to blow up rival works at Buffalo[1352]. For these cases I quote -again from a work on the danger of a new tyranny of wealth that the -writer, whose book appeared in 1894, thought at the time to be -threatening the United States. - -The most lasting memorial that Theagenes left behind him was the water -conduit that he constructed for the city[1353]. The extant remains seem -to belong to a later date, but this is no reason for either post-dating -the tyrant or not accepting him as its constructor. The remains now to -be seen may well be due to a reconstruction, perhaps by the famous -Megarean Eupalinus, who constructed the Samian waterworks for -Polycrates. Underground conduits like the Megarean were being made half -a century before the reign of Theagenes, as is shown by the underground -canal constructed by Hezekiah to bring to Jerusalem the waters of Miriam -(Gihon)[1354]. Tyranny at Megara was short lived. The only tyrant ended -his life in exile. - - When they had banished Theagenes the Megareans for a short while - behaved with moderation ... but after that they began behaving - outrageously to the rich: in particular the poor entered their - houses and demanded to be entertained and feasted sumptuously, and - treated them all with violence and insult if they did not get what - they desired. Finally they passed a decree and recovered from the - money-lenders the interest that they happened to have paid. - -This passage of Plutarch[1355] throws no direct light on either the -character or the basis of Theagenes’ power. The outbreak that it -describes may have been due to the comparative weakness of the new -government. It is equally possible that it occurred because the fall of -the tyranny had made things much worse for the working classes, on whose -support and favour Theagenes had probably based his power[1356]. - -This period of Megarean history is better known than the corresponding -phase of any other Greek city, thanks to the verses of Theognis. Their -evidence for the character of the early tyrannies has been discussed in -Chapter I. If, as there maintained, his exhortations not to be won over -by gains to exalt any tyrant and his complaints about tradesmen -controlling the state all point to fears of a tyranny of wealth, then it -is particularly likely that his alarm may have had a historical basis in -the career of Theagenes. - -[Sidenote: Miletus.] - -At Miletus during the seventh and sixth centuries[1357] there appear to -have been several periods of tyranny with intervals of anarchy in -between. The most famous and powerful of the Milesian tyrants was -Thrasybulus, whose reign must have begun towards the end of the seventh -century. While he was tyrant the city enjoyed great material prosperity. -Then in the middle of the sixth she was afflicted with two generations -of civil war, after which there came a great revival of prosperity under -the tyrant Histiaeus. Plutarch records the names of two other tyrants, -Thoas and Damasenor, but only to introduce an account of the state of -things that followed their overthrow. They may have been joint -successors of Thrasybulus[1358], much as the Athenians tended to regard -Peisistratus as having been succeeded by Hippias and Hipparchus ruling -conjointly. Or possibly Plutarch is mentioning two successive rulers of -a distinct period of tyranny, the latter of whom only was deposed, in -which case they are probably to be put before Thrasybulus[1359], -somewhere about the middle of the seventh century. - -The fall of Thoas and Damasenor was followed by a struggle between two -parties called Ploutis (?) and Cheiromache, names which sound remarkably -like Capital and Labour. - -There is no certainty as to either the etymological or the historical -meaning of these names. Plutarch seems to identify the Ploutis (?) -faction with a body called Aeinautai (always on shipboard)[1360] and the -reading Plontis, connected with πλοῖον (ship), has been proposed by -Plass[1361]. Cheiromache again means not hand-workers but hand-fighters, -a name that need not have any industrial implication. Hand-fighters -might be just people who did not wear swords, the lower classes -generally. But Cheiromache is said by Eustathius to have been a synonym -for χειρώναξ, a common word for artizan[1362], and Suidas speaks of -rival parties in Miletus composed of the wealthy (πλούσιοι) and the -manual labourers (Γέργηθες, s.v., explained as χειρώνακτες), and though -the period to which he is referring is quite uncertain, he still lends -some support to the Capital and Labour interpretation of Plutarch’s -Ploutis (?) and Cheiromache[1363]. The latter name would have been given -to the party by its opponents, much as though enemies of a modern labour -party should call them the Strikers or Down-Toolers. The other name for -labour (Γέργιθες or Γέργηθες) is said by Heraclides Ponticus[1364] to -have been given to it by the faction of the wealthy, a statement quite -compatible with the explanation of the name as derived from a place and -denoting the poor subject Carians, the descendants of the pre-Hellenic -population of the Milesian territory[1365]. Perhaps we may see a hint -that Gergethes and Cheiromache were alternative names both given to -labour by its rich opponents in the reply given by the oracle to the -party of the rich after they had been brutally massacring the party of -the poor. “I too” says the god “take heed of the murder of the unwarlike -Gergithes[1366].” The rebuke gains in point if the Gergithes had been -also called Cheiromachoi, the manual _fighters_[1367]. - -Of the early careers of the Milesian tyrants we know practically -nothing. Aristotle indeed[1368] refers to Miletus as a place where -tyranny arose from the great power possessed by the magistrate called -prytanis. But as argued already in discussing the office of polemarch -held before his tyranny by Cypselus, a position of this kind does not -by itself explain a tyrant’s rise to supreme power. Moreover in the -case of Miletus there is nothing to show which tyrant Aristotle is -referring to. When on the throne Thrasybulus pursued the policy of -“cutting off the heads of those ears of corn which he saw higher than -the rest” or in other words of “putting to death those who were -eminent among his subjects[1369].” It is fairly certain that a ruler -who pursued this policy did not rest his power on the support of the -upper classes. One of the few anecdotes about the tyrant tells how he -outwitted the king of Lydia by a misleading display of corn in the -Milesian market-place[1370]. - -The accession of Histiaeus seems to have synchronized with a revival of -the commercial prosperity of Miletus. Histiaeus was the friend and -vassal of Darius of Persia, and the basis of his power must therefore -not be sought exclusively in the internal conditions of Miletus. But on -the other hand the Persians seem to have been remarkably free from any -tendency to Persianize the nations they subdued. Their sins were those -rather of Abdul Hamid than of the Young Turks. Purely internal -conditions continued to operate much as before[1371]. - -In the absence therefore of all evidence as to how Histiaeus came by his -power[1372] it becomes interesting to see how he sought to expand it. -The chance came to him when he had won Darius’ confidence and gratitude -in his Scythian campaign and the Great King invited him to choose his -reward. “He asked for Myrcinus in Edonia, wishing to found in it a -city[1373].” Darius granted his request and the foundation was begun. -But when the news of this gift reached Megabazus, the able Persian -officer who had reduced Edonia and other parts of Thrace and Macedonia, -he was much alarmed, and remonstrated with his master: - - O King, what manner of thing hast thou done, granting to a clever - and cunning Greek to acquire a city in Thrace? Where there is an - inexhaustible supply of timber for building ships and oars, and - mines of silver, and a large population of Greeks living in the - neighbourhood and a large population of barbarians: if they get a - patron (προστάτης) they will do what he directs day and night. Now - therefore do thou stop him from doing this, that thou be not - involved in a war against thine own[1374]. - -As pointed out by Grundy[1375] Myrcinus occupied a most important site -on great strategic and commercial highways. But there is no reason to -suspect Herodotus when he tells us that the town owed its importance -first and foremost not to its geographical situation but to its minerals -and forests. It is as a great mine-owner and shipbuilder and the -employer of hosts of miners and shipbuilders and seamen that Histiaeus -threatens to make himself a ruler sufficiently powerful to be a danger -to the Great King himself[1376]. - -[Sidenote: Ephesus.] - -The earliest tyrant of Ephesus appears to have been Pythagoras, who -overthrew the government of the Basilidae. Baton of Sinope[1377], who -wrote a history of the tyrants of Ephesus[1378], states that Pythagoras -lived “before Cyrus the Persian.” This seems to be rather an -understatement of the tyrant’s antiquity, since we hear of two other -tyrants, Melas and Pindaros, of whom the latter was son and successor of -the former and was deprived of his throne by Croesus[1379], and of yet -another pair, by name Athenagoras and Komas, who lived at the same time -as the poet Hipponax and must therefore be assigned to about the middle -of the sixth century[1380], while during part of the reign of Croesus, -after the fall of Pindaros, Ephesus appears to have enjoyed a moderate -democracy guided by the aesymnetes Aristarchus[1381]. All this leaves -little room for Pythagoras in the period just preceding Cyrus, and since -too the Basilidae were almost certainly one of the hereditary -aristocracies, like the Bacchiadae of Corinth, that overthrew the -hereditary monarchy in most Greek cities before the end of the dark -ages, it becomes probable that Pythagoras flourished at the beginning of -the sixth century or possibly even in the seventh[1382]. - -According to our only authority Suidas, who quotes Baton on the date of -Pythagoras and very possibly used him for the rest of his notice, -Pythagoras displayed an insatiable passion for money (ἔρως χρημάτων -ἄμετρος) and showed himself a cruel tyrant (τύραννος πικρότατος) but -“with the people and the multitude he both was and appeared to be well -liked, sometimes making them hopeful by his promises, sometimes secretly -distributing small gratuities[1383].” “Those however who enjoyed -reputation or power he plundered and subjected to confiscations[1384].” -Suidas deals only with the tyrant on the throne and draws plainly from a -most unfriendly source[1385]: but as far as he goes he suggests that the -power of Pythagoras was based on wealth. - -The tyrant Pindarus, who was overthrown by Croesus, was a grandson of -Alyattes, Croesus’ father and predecessor[1386]. Ephesus was one of the -chief termini of the great caravan route from the Far East that ran to -Sardis and then branched to several places on the coast. In the chapter -on Lydia we have had occasion to notice the story of the eighth century -Lydian Ardys, who when banished from his native land went into business -at Cyme (another of these branch termini) and from there returned as -ruler to Sardis. Radet may therefore be right in thinking that the -Ephesian tyrants shared with the Lydian the monopoly of the trade that -traversed this great road[1387]. The overthrow of Pindarus is perhaps to -be associated with the story of the financial dealings of Croesus while -his father Alyattes was still on the throne[1388]. To pave the way to -his own succession as against his half brother, the half Greek -Pantaleon, Croesus has to borrow large sums of money. He first tries in -Sardis, and failing there proceeds to Ephesus, where he succeeds in -raising money, not however from the house of Melas, but from a certain -Pamphaes the son of Theocharides. It is hardly rash to assume that the -tyrant family at Ephesus were putting their money on the half Greek -candidate, and that Pindarus fell because his family had taken the wrong -side in this great battle of high finance. - -[Sidenote: Leontini.] - -Panaitios of Leontini was the first in Sicily to seize the tyranny -(Panaitios primus in Sicilia arripuit tyrannidem), which he is stated to -have done a few years before the end of the seventh century[1389]. The -stratagem by which he made himself tyrant is described by -Polyaenus[1390]. The people of Leontini were at war with Megara, and -Panaitios was polemarch. The actual coup was a matter of disarming the -rich citizens who served on horseback (τοῖς εὐπόροις καὶ ἱππεῦσι), which -he did with the help of their grooms. But before carrying out this _coup -d’état_ Panaitios had started a conflict between these rich knights and -the poor who served on foot (τοὺς πένητας καὶ πεζούς). Aristotle[1391] -adds little. He classes Panaitios with “Cypselus in Corinth, -Peisistratus in Athens, and Dionysius in Syracuse, and others who in the -same way (became tyrants) from demagogy,” a view that has already been -dealt with[1392]. His other statement, that the government of Panaitios -succeeded an oligarchy, is credible but unilluminating[1393]. - -[Sidenote: Agrigentum.] - - Phalaris of Agrigentum, a tax collector, when the citizens wished to - erect a temple of Zeus Polieus for two hundred talents on the - citadel as being rocky and strong and for the further reason that it - would be pious to give the god the highest place, undertook, if he - was given charge of the work, to have the best craftsmen and provide - the material cheaply and offer sound securities for the money. The - people trusted him, thinking that thanks to his life as a - tax-collector he had experience of such proceedings. So taking the - public money he hired many foreigners and bought many prisoners and - carried up to the citadel much material of stone, timber, iron. And - when the foundations were already being dug, he sent down his herald - to proclaim “whoever gives information against those who stole the - stone and iron on the citadel shall receive such and such a reward.” - The people were annoyed at the report of the material being stolen. - “Well then,” said he, “allow me to enclose the acropolis.” The city - allowed him to enclose it and to raise a wall round it. He released - the prisoners, armed them with the stones and hatchets and axes, - made an attack during the Thesmophoria, killed most of the men, and - having established himself as master of women and children, became - the tyrant of the city of Agrigentum[1394]. - -For over two centuries the name of Phalaris has been chiefly associated -with the famous controversy between the Cambridge Bentley and the Oxford -Boyle as to the authenticity of the letters ascribed to him. The -spuriousness of these letters was so convincingly established by the -Cambridge scholar, that everyone since then seems to have shrunk from -attributing historical value to anything whatsoever that Phalaris is -reported to have done. It so happens that the best known tradition about -Phalaris tells of his extreme cruelty[1395], and more particularly how -he did his victims to death by roasting them alive in a brazen -bull[1396]. This bull story has no doubt helped further to discredit -Phalaris as a strictly historical character. - -Yet there can be no dispute that Phalaris did make himself tyrant of -Agrigentum and that his cruelty made a lasting impression on the people -whom he ruled. His existence and importance is shown by a whole series -of references to him that begins with Pindar[1397] and includes -allusions in Aristotle[1398]. Considering that the tyrant probably died -only one generation before Pindar was born[1399], there is no reason why -a trustworthy tradition about him should not have been preserved and -more particularly why the account of his early days in Polyaenus should -not have a historical basis. - -If it has, its significance is important. It means that Phalaris owed -his tyranny in the ultimate instance to his skill in finance and more -immediately to the control of large sums of money that gave him great -influence over the lower classes who earned their living by manual -labour[1400]. - -Polyaenus cannot be decisively confirmed. But still less can he be -decisively discredited. The story itself suggests that its source was -the temple of Zeus Polieus, and a temple founded in the sixth century -may well have kept some record, oral or written, of the days of its -foundation. There is of course the possibility of forgery, but forgeries -generally have some motive, such as gain or glory or love of the -sensational. No such motive can easily be imputed to this narrative of -Polyaenus, whose picture of Phalaris is borne out by notices in various -other writers. - -Lucian for instance makes the tyrant a great builder and great financier -and a great patron of the common people[1401]. Lucian’s Phalaris is -represented as defending himself at Delphi against the charge of -cruelty: he certainly utters many paradoxes in so doing; but the point -of the picture is that it is based on the received tradition, and it may -fairly be used as evidence on a question such as that which is being -here considered. - -Aristotle classes Phalaris among the tyrants who owed their position to -some high office that they had previously held[1402], a statement which -is good evidence for Phalaris as a historical personage and as far as it -goes accords with Polyaenus. - -“When the Agrigentines were rid of Phalaris they decreed that nobody -should wear a blue-grey cloak: for the servants of the tyrant wore -aprons (περιζώματα) of blue-grey[1403].” The prohibition of these -blue-grey aprons makes it look as if the men who overthrew the tyranny -of Phalaris thought it necessary to disband his army of uniformed -employees. - -Further the part of the narrative of Polyaenus that most concerns us -here can claim a certain probability from what is known of an early -namesake and fellow-townsman of the Syracusan tyrant Agathocles. -According to Diodorus[1404] this earlier Agathocles, who lived while -Syracuse was still under a landed aristocracy called γεωμόροι, probably -about 700 B.C.[1405], - - Being chosen to have charge of the building of the temple of Athena, - picked out the finest of the stones that were being quarried and met - the expense out of his own pocket (τὴν μὲν δαπάνην ἐκ τῆς ἰδίας - οὐσίας ἐποιεῖτο), but misused the stones and built a costly house. - At this they say the divine power gave forth a sign: Agathocles was - struck by lightning and consumed by fire along with all his house. - The Geomoroi confiscated his property to the state, although the - kleronomoi (the financial officials) showed that he had taken - nothing of the monies of the temple or of the state. They devoted - his house to the gods and forbade those who came there to set foot - in it, and to this day it is called the embrontaion (_i.e._ the - place struck by lightning). - -The positions of Phalaris and Agathocles as described by Polyaenus and -Diodorus are very similar. Both are in charge of the building of a great -temple, the Greek word in each case being ἐπιστάτης, which means -literally superintendent, but is rather a vague term and appears to -include the idea of contractor[1406]. Both again misuse their position, -and in neither case is the offender charged with misappropriation. -Phalaris secures himself a tyranny, Agathocles builds himself a house. -But the house is a very special sort of house, and though the builder is -specifically acquitted of any dishonest dealings about it, it brings -down on him the wrath both of the gods and of the government. The gods -burn him and his house: the government confiscate his property. What -sort of a house was it that had such disastrous consequences for its -builder? A close parallel is offered by the history of the Roman -Maelius, who is said in the fifth century B.C. to have had his house -pulled down and his property confiscated. In the case of Agathocles the -gods, when they destroyed his house, are said to send a sign -(ἐπισημαίνειν): in that of Maelius the offence that caused his house to -be demolished is pronounced to be not a scelus but a monstrum. The -charge that brought down on Maelius these extreme penalties was that of -aiming at the throne. Maelius was extremely rich, and had a large army -of clients, and we may reasonably infer that his house was so severely -dealt with because it looked too much like a royal palace. Considering -the analogies in the story of Agathocles with that of Maelius on the one -hand and that of Phalaris on the other, it looks not unlikely that the -exception taken to the house of Agathocles was due to its palatial -character. Private dwellings in early Greek cities were notoriously -simple and unpretentious[1407]. A house in which it was possible to -employ stones intended for a great temple was obviously quite the -reverse. It would challenge comparison with the government buildings and -might be used as the rallying-place for an armed attack[1408] upon the -government, and it was this in all probability that brought on it so -terrible a fate. - -The stories of Agathocles and Maelius lend support to the view that -Polyaenus in his account of the rise of Phalaris is describing the -normal way in which tyrannies were established at this early period in -Sicily and Italy. If so, the normal tyrant in early Sicily and Italy was -some very rich man who used his riches to secure financial control of -some large section of the labouring classes and this control was -sometimes secured by undertaking big building operations which provided -not only continuous work for numerous employees but often too a strong -and imposing headquarters that could soon be converted into the castle -or palace from which he ruled the whole state[1409]. - -[Sidenote: Cumae.] - -Aristodemus of Cumae is dated by the fact that he gave shelter to -Tarquinius Superbus when banished from Rome[1410]. “In those days Cumae -was renowned throughout Italy for its wealth and power[1411].” Before he -became tyrant he is said to have distinguished himself as a -soldier[1412]. But it was not as a soldier that he is represented as -securing the tyranny. “He won over the people by turning demagogue ... -relieving many of the poor out of his own purse ... distributing money -to them man by man, and depositing for the common good the presents he -had received from the people of Aricia[1413].” At the end of his reign -he is represented as employing citizens on a large scale on manual -labour: “he chanced about that time to be making a trench round the -place, a work neither necessary nor useful, but merely because he wished -to weary and exhaust the citizens with toils and labours. For each was -ordered to remove a certain extent of earth[1414].” The chronology of -the tyrant’s career is not altogether easy and the narrative not -entirely credible[1415], but we appear to have a tyrant of the early -type, taking a prominent part in war and politics but relying largely at -any rate on the control of labour and the power of wealth. - - - - - Chapter X. (a) _Capitalist Despots of the Age of Aristotle_, (b) _the - Money Power of the Rulers of Pergamum_, (c) _Protogenes of Olbia_ - - -[Sidenote: (_a_) Capitalist despots of the days of Aristotle.] - -Stress has been laid on the influence that has been exercised by -Dionysius of Syracuse upon all who have written about the early tyranny -since he came to power. This of course does not mean that the -military-demagogue type of tyrant, of which Dionysius is the supreme -example, was never at all anticipated in any of its features by any of -the rulers of the seventh and sixth centuries. Nor does it mean that the -new order of things that culminated in Dionysius completely swamped the -old. Aristotle himself was personally connected with a tyrant who -appears to illustrate the survival into the fourth century of the -seventh and sixth century type. The ruler in question, Hermias tyrant of -Assos and Atarneus - - was a eunuch, the slave of a certain banker: he went to Athens and - attended the lectures of Plato and Aristotle, and returning he - shared the tyranny of his master who had previously secured - (ἐπιθεμένῳ) the places round Atarneus and Assos. Subsequently he - succeeded him and sent for Aristotle and married his niece to - him[1416]. - -In this “slave, banker, philosopher and despot” Leaf sees a tyrant who -owed his position to his wealth[1417]. He quotes Euaion, the pupil of -Plato[1418], who not far off to the north at Lampsacus “lent money to -the city on the security of the Acropolis, and, when the city defaulted, -wanted to become tyrant, until the Lampsacenes gathered against him and -after paying him the money cast him out[1419].” On the other side of -Assos, at Cyme, the public porticoes once passed into the hands of some -bankers who had lent money to the city on that security[1420]. Leaf -might have gone on to quote the case of Timaeus the Cyzicene, who, like -Euaion and perhaps Hermias, had been a pupil of Plato: - - Timaeus the Cyzicene having granted bonuses (ἐπιδοὺς) of money and - corn to the citizens and having on that account won credit among the - Cyzicenes as being a worthy man, after a short while made an attempt - on the city (ἐπέθετο; cp. ἐπιθεμένῳ above of the predecessor of - Hermias) by means of Aridaios[1421]. - -The attempt failed but there can be no doubt that Timaeus like Euaion -“wanted to become tyrant” by means of his wealth. - -It is curious to notice that the method of securing power practised by -the pupils of Plato and Aristotle is precisely that which was prescribed -by our own Doctor Johnson: “No, Sir, the way to make sure of power and -influence is by lending money confidentially to your neighbours at a -small interest or perhaps at no interest at all, and having their bonds -in your possession[1422].” In Aristotle’s own day it appears to have -been followed, though without success, in the greatest commercial city -of the age: - - After this Anno, a man of Carthage, who in personal wealth was more - than a match for the state, was absorbed with a desire to seize - supreme power.... He stirred up the slaves that with their aid he - might suddenly crush the unsuspecting state.... This happened in the - days of Philip[1423]. - -Thus there is a basis for Leaf’s suggestion that Euboulos of Assos, the -master and predecessor of Hermias, had made himself tyrant by similar -means[1424]. But if Aristotle had before him the career of Hanno the -Carthaginian, and if a whole group of his own fellow-students made the -attempt, and in one case at least successfully, to become financier -despots in a corner of the world particularly familiar to the -philosopher[1425], how are we to explain the fact that his writings take -no account of the commercial tyrant? Once more, if I am not mistaken, -the cause is largely Dionysius. If, as seems probable, there was this -late outcrop of attempts at a commercial tyranny, none the less the type -had long ceased to play any great part in history[1426]. Hanno was a -failure: moreover he tampered with the slaves of Carthage and this -enabled Aristotle to classify him with Pausanias the Spartan. For -Aristotle the tyrant is a soldier or a demagogue or both. Plutocracy -with him means oligarchy[1427]. As he himself says, “if one individual -possesses more than the rest of the wealthy, on the oligarchic principle -it is right that he should rule alone[1428].” If forced to catalogue the -government of a commercial despot he would probably have described it as -an oligarchy of one. But it is doubtful whether the government of -Hermias was strictly speaking the rule of a single individual. - -An inscription now in the British Museum speaks repeatedly of Ἑρμίας καὶ -οἱ ἑταῖροι[1429] which Leaf translates and explains into “Hermias and -company, Bankers and Despots.” The precise nature of these companions is -uncertain: but their repeated mention in a treaty suggests that Hermias -tried to avoid the appearances of single rule[1430]. Lastly the personal -element may have had its influence even with the great philosopher. Not -only was he in close personal connexion with Hermias; but his one -deviation into poetry, his remarkable ode to Virtue[1431], was written -in honour of Hermias after his fall. According to one version of the -story the philosopher’s devotion to the memory of his friend cost him -his life[1432]. Plainly for Aristotle the ruler of Atarneus was no -tyrant[1433], and it follows that Euaion and Timaeus, even if their -efforts had been successful, would not have been so either. Plato on the -other hand would have particular cause to regard as a tyrant the -Syracusan ruler by whom he is said to have been sold into slavery for -twenty minae[1434]. In short this group of would-be philosopher kings -probably did as much as Dionysius himself to blind Aristotle and later -writers to the true nature of seventh and sixth century tyranny[1435]. - -[Sidenote: (_b_) The money power of the rulers of Pergamum (283–133 - B.C.).] - -If Aristotle had lived another forty years he might have witnessed quite -near Atarneus the rise of another and much more notable monarchy, that -of the Attalids of Pergamum, which was also based almost exclusively on -wealth. Pergamum had become the fortified treasury of Lysimachus when he -succeeded to the Thracian dominions of Alexander the Great. The keeping -of the fort and the 9000 talents of treasure that it contained was -entrusted to a certain Philetairos. He was a eunuch, but well brought -up, and he showed himself worthy of the trust. In spite of, or rather -perhaps as the result of, the quarrels of the Diadochoi, he continued -for twenty years master of the fort and of the money[1436]. There seems -little doubt that Philetairos was of humble birth[1437], and that he -owed his rise to this gift of finance which secured him first the -management and then the possession of these 9000 talents. He began his -independent career by going over from Lysimachus, whose realm lay mainly -in Europe, to Seleucus, the most able of the Diadochoi in Asia[1438]. -Shortly afterwards Seleucus was murdered by Ptolemy Keraunos, the Greek -king of Egypt; but Philetairos, who believed firmly in the fortunes of -the Seleucids, secured the friendship of Antiochus, the son and -successor of Seleucus, by buying the body of the murdered king at a -heavy price from Keraunos and sending it to Antiochus[1439]. Philetairos -was always ready to draw upon his 9000 talents if by doing so he could -purchase power. When the people of the neighbouring town of Pitane were -in debt to the extent of 380 talents, Philetairos advanced a portion of -that sum, and thereby secured influence over that city[1440]. Gifts were -made to Cyzicus with similar intentions and results[1441]. The island of -Aegina became a Pergamene possession for the price of 30 talents[1442]. -These proceedings are typical of the way in which the rulers of Pergamum -established and maintained their position. As Holm observes[1443] their -power was a money power. Like every other political power that has -hitherto arisen, that of the Attalids was partly military. Soon after -the death of Philetairos and the accession of Attalus, the second ruler -of the dynasty, Asia Minor was overrun by the Celtic hordes which -finally settled down to a peaceful life in what was known thenceforth as -Galatia. The promiscuous maraudings of these barbarians were checked and -eventually crushed by Attalus and his successors. But the Attalids were -still more notable for their works of peace. Under their government -Pergamum became one of the most active centres of art and industry in -the whole world. The city, elaborately constructed in terraces on a -lofty hillside, offered a remarkably successful example of scientific -town-planning, and must have involved a large and highly organized army -of architects, builders, masons, and the like. The Pergamene school of -sculpture flourished exceedingly. We owe to it Lord Byron’s dying -gladiator, who has long since been recognized as a copy of a dying -Galatian carved at Pergamum to commemorate a victory of Attalus I over -the Celtic invader. Much of Pergamene art is exaggerated and ugly, but -that does not diminish its economic significance, and Mommsen is -justified in describing Attalus I as the Lorenzo de’ Medici of -antiquity[1444]. We have already compared the Medici with the early -Greek tyrants. But it is not merely that the Pergamene rulers and early -tyrants like Gyges have a common resemblance to the Italian merchant -princes of the early renaissance. A distinct resemblance between the -Attalids and the house of Gyges has been already recognized and -developed by Adolph Holm. The two powers are much the same -geographically; both are the great connecting link between the Greek -Aegean and the Asiatic lands that lie to the east of it; both organize -the forces of material prosperity against barbaric invasions from the -north; both have money as the basis of their power[1445]. - -The history of Philetairos and his successors at Pergamum increases the -probability that Leaf is right in his picture of the banker despots of -the days of Plato and Aristotle. [Sidenote: (_c_) The rich Protogenes, -financial director of Olbia about 200 B.C.] The picture is scarcely -complete enough to be quite convincing, but it may be supplemented and -confirmed from the history of a financial magnate named Protogenes, who -flourished at Olbia probably towards the end of the third century B.C. - -Protogenes is known only from a single inscription put up during his -lifetime to record his benefactions to his native city[1446]. The date -of the inscription is not quite certain. The lettering points to the -second century B.C. but does not exclude a rather earlier date, and a -reference in the inscription to danger threatening Olbia from certain -Galatians rather favours a date before 213 B.C. - -Within the space of three years Protogenes made gifts to his city -amounting to 12,700 gold pieces and made up of the following items: four -times he contributes to help buy off the barbarians who at this period -were constantly threatening the city; twice he pays for repairs to the -city walls; he built or repaired the public granary, the bazaar gateway, -and the barges that brought the stone for these building operations; he -redeemed for 100 pieces of gold the city plate, which was about to be -put in the melting-pot by one of the city’s creditors; he pays down -three hundred pieces of gold for wine which the city fathers had -purchased and then found that they could not pay for; he contributes -directly or indirectly to the purchase of large quantities of corn for -the city; he remits to the amount of 6000 gold pieces (_i.e._ nearly -half his total benefaction) private debts owed to himself or his father. - -During the three years covered by these gifts Protogenes was financial -director of the city’s affairs, a position which he had reached after a -wide experience of public business (πλεῖστα δὲ χειρίσας τῶν κοινῶν, τρία -δὲ ἔτη συνεχῶς πάντα διῴκησεν ὀρθῶς καὶ δικαίως). - -To see in this financial direction of the city’s affairs an instance of -a commercial tyranny would be a pure hypothesis. It is not even certain -that Protogenes made all his gifts quite voluntarily. One of his -contributions for the purchase of corn was made after the demos had -passed a resolution that the wealthy ought to advance money for this -purpose[1447]. On one of the occasions when he paid for repairs to the -town walls he did so at the invitation of the people[1448]. “Advance” -and “invitation” may be euphemisms for “tax paying” and “compulsion,” -and the payments made by Protogenes may have had affinity to the -liturgies paid to the state by rich Athenians in the fifth century -rather than to the benevolences that Lucius Tarquinius is said to have -paid voluntarily for his own ends to the people of Rome. But this latter -hypothesis is not better founded than the other. “Advance” and “request” -may after all mean what they say. We do not know what became of -Protogenes after his three years as financial director. The financial -directorship may correspond to the magistracy that is said to have -frequently led directly to the tyranny, _e.g._ at Corinth and Miletus. -Protogenes is of course much later in date, but the Greek cities of -South Russia were the home of many curious survivals. At Olbia itself -for instance we find a style of pottery that in Greece proper was -typical of the fifth and fourth centuries persisting apparently into the -first[1449]. There are even hints that Olbia had once at least and -perhaps comparatively recently gone through a social and economic -revolution something like those that so often convulsed the cities of -the seventh and sixth centuries just before they fell under tyrants, -_e.g._ Athens before the tyranny of Peisistratus, or Miletus before that -of Histiaeus. While the city was being besieged by a certain Zopyrion -the Olbiopolitans had “set slaves free, given foreigners citizenship, -and cancelled all debts[1450].” If this Zopyrion is the governor left by -Alexander in Thrace[1451] this revolution must be dated at least a -century earlier than Protogenes. If, with Grote, we refuse to accept -this identification, the revolution is left dateless. In any case it -shows that such upheavals did happen in Olbia, and serves to remind us -how very incomplete is the material with which we are dealing. But the -value for our enquiry of the Protogenes enscription does not depend on -any speculations of this kind. What it does is to give us a detailed -picture of an exceptionally wealthy man in an ancient Greek city state -who for a considerable period largely financed his city. If Protogenes -could do this in Olbia there can be nothing inherently improbable in the -hypothesis that other great capitalists had done something similar in -other cities. If Protogenes did not turn his position into a political -tyranny, that would be no proof that others did not do so: and the fact -remains that the assumption that Protogenes was not on the way to become -a tyrant, or indeed that he did not actually become one, if not -precisely wild[1452] is purely hypothetical. - -The records of Protogenes illustrate the sort of way in which the -financial magnate might win the supreme place in his city. The whole -group of facts associated with his name and with those of Euboulos, -Hermias, Euaion, Timaeus, Philetairos, and Attalus shows once again that -at least there is nothing improbable in the theory that the power of the -seventh and sixth century tyrants was built up on a similar financial or -industrial basis, the more so considering the evidence adduced already -for believing that conditions in the earlier period were uniquely -favourable for the establishment of a money power. We have seen why the -financial despots of the age of Plato and Aristotle should not have -helped to preserve the memory of earlier money powers. It is no less -easy to see why the same should have been the case with the rulers of -Pergamum. An exceptional circumstance saved the house of Philetairos -from being reproached with its mercenary basis, and curiously enough -that circumstance was one which illustrates how very mercenary that -basis was. When Attalus III, the last of his house, died in 133 B.C., he -made the Roman people his heirs[1453]. His fortune was used by the -Gracchan revolutionaries to equip the impoverished Romans whom they were -restoring to the land by their agrarian laws. The dynasty too, with its -clear eye for the main chance, had always consistently sought the -friendship of Rome[1454]. Though most of our authorities for the history -of the Attalids are Greek, the Greeks in question were all pro-Roman, -with the result that we see the Attalids essentially from the Roman -point of view. They stood in much the same relationship to the Romans as -the house of Gyges did to the Greeks; and the Romans to whom Attalus III -had left all his treasure and possessions were as little inclined to -think harshly of their benefactor as were the Greeks whom Croesus had so -largely benefited inclined to be critical of his “hospitable -virtue[1455].” In both cases the man of business was known only as the -patron of deserving charities. We have to go to rulers like the Tarquins -and Peisistratids, whose history we owe ultimately to their own subjects -and employees, to hear the money-power described as it really was and -given its true name of tyranny. - - - - - Chapter XI. _Conclusion_ - - - ἀγαθὸν δὲ ὄντα διαφερόντως καὶ πλούσιον εἶναι διαφερόντως ἀδύνατον. - - PLATO, _Laws_, V. 743_a_. - - “We adopted a law that if you bought an office you didn’t get it. I - admit that that is contrary to all commercial principles, but I - think it is pretty good political doctrine.”—WOODROW WILSON. - -This final chapter will contain (_a_) a _résumé_ of the evidence already -adduced; (_b_) a short general discussion of the credibility of the -whole mass of extant evidence; and (_c_) an attempt to view in their -proper perspective the conclusions that the evidence seems to warrant. - - - (a) _Résumé of previous chapters_ - -[Sidenote: Introductory chapter.] - -The age of the first known metal coins is also the age of the first -rulers to be called tyrants. Ancient evidence and modern analogy both -suggest that the new form of government was based on the new form of -capital. The modern analogy is to be found in the financial revolution -which has largely replaced metal coins by paper (thereby rendering -capital very much more mobile, just as was done by the financial -revolution of the age of the tyrants) and has led many people to fear a -new tyranny of wealth. The ancient evidence is to be found in the scanty -extant writings of the sixth century B.C. (Solon and Theognis), in -scattered notices about early tyrants or tyranny in fifth century -writers (Thucydides, Herodotus, Pindar), in certain statements of -Aristotle, in references to industrial conditions both during and after -the age of the tyrants, in the history of the states where there was -never a tyranny, and in the steps taken to prevent a recurrence of -tyranny. - -If the commercial origin of the early tyranny is not explicitly -formulated by any ancient writer it should be remembered how meagre are -contemporary documents and how little Greek writers say about economic -causes. It is true also that my view is at variance with statements of -Plato, Aristotle, and subsequent writers: but their picture of the rise -of tyranny clashes with known facts about the seventh and sixth -centuries and is due to false generalizations from the conditions of -their own days and particularly from the career of Dionysius of -Syracuse. - -[Sidenote: Athens.] - -Peisistratus made himself tyrant by organizing the Attic “hill men” -(Diakrioi, Epakrioi) against the two previously existing rival factions -of the “plain” and the “coast.” The accepted explanations of these “hill -men” are improbable. They cannot have been farmers or shepherds, who -were always very conservative, are not recorded as having subsequently -supported Peisistratus, and must have lived principally in the plain and -very little in the forest-clad mountains where modern theories generally -locate them. Nor were the “hill men” confined to the mountainous -district of North Attica, the mistaken identification of which with the -“hill country” is due to mistaken views as to the triple division of -Attica into “hill,” “coast,” and “plain,” which wrongly assigns all -South Attica to the “coast” and limits the “coast” to South Attica. -These views on the triple division of Attica in the days of Peisistratus -are based on the weakest of evidence and are made improbable by the -subsequent topographical arrangements of Cleisthenes (502 B.C.), and by -the later uses of the terms Diakria and Epakria. The Epakria contained a -village named Semachidai which, as shown by a recently found -inscription, lay in the hilly mining district of South Attica. -Furthermore the Attic “akron” _par excellence_ was Cape Sunium, the -Southern apex of the Attic mining district and of the whole Attic -peninsula. In view of these facts it becomes probable that the Sunium -and Laurium mining district was the “hill country” _par excellence_. The -mines were almost certainly in full work at this period, and the miners, -unlike those of later ages, free men, good material for a political -faction. - -That Peisistratus based his power on silver mines is made very likely by -what is known of his subsequent career. He finally “rooted his power” on -money derived partly from home, partly from the Thracian mining -district; he went to the Thracian mining district to prepare for his -second restoration; his first restoration is attributed to the dressing -up as Athena of a Thracian woman named Phye, who is very possibly to be -explained away as the Athena who begins about this time to appear on -Attic coins: for this interpretation of the Phye story compare the names -“girl,” “virgin,” “Pallas” colloquially given to the Attic coins, and -the jest about Agesilaus being driven out of Asia by the Great King’s -archers, a colloquial name for Persian gold coins. - -The tyranny fell at Athens when the tyrants lost control of the Thracian -mining district. Shortly afterwards the ambitious Histiaeus, the Greek -friend of the Persian king into whose power the mines had passed, -incurred the suspicions of the Persian sovereign through attempting to -build up a political power on these very mines and miners. - -The history of the Alcmaeonid opposition to the house of Peisistratus -likewise suggests that the government of Athens at this period depended -first and foremost on the power of the purse. - -[Sidenote: Samos.] - -Polycrates is perhaps best known for his piracies, but it seems not -unlikely that these piracies were in fact an elaborate commercial -blockade of Persia that proved almost as unpopular among Greek neutrals -as among the subjects of the Great King against whom it was mainly -directed. As tyrant Polycrates is found controlling the commercial and -industrial activities of his state, building ships, harbour works, and -waterworks, and very possibly a great bazaar, and probably employing -much free labour on these works. Before he became tyrant he already had -an interest in the chief Samian industries, the working of metal and the -manufacture of woollen goods. Aiakes the father of Polycrates is -probably the Aiakes whom a recently discovered Samian inscription -appears to connect with the sea-borne trade of the island. The tyrant is -said to have owed his fall to an attempt to get money enough to rule all -Greece, a statement of particular value considering the tendency to -administer poetic justice that is so frequently displayed by Herodotus, -who is our authority for this statement. - -[Sidenote: Egypt.] - -The great developments of trade and industry that just preceded the age -of tyranny in Greece had their parallel if not their origin in Egypt. At -the height of this development in Egypt a new and powerful dynasty -arises which bases its power on commerce and on the commercial and -industrial classes. Already towards the end of the eighth century we -find King Bocchoris (somewhat after the manner of the Argive Pheidon) -devoting special attention to commercial legislation. His successor -Sethon is said by Herodotus to have based his power on “hucksters and -artizans and tradespeople.” During these reigns the country was always -being occupied or threatened by foreign invaders from Ethiopia or -Assyria. The first Egyptian king of this period to rule all Egypt in -normal conditions of peace and quietness was Psammetichus I, who rose to -power about the same time as Cypselus in Corinth and Orthagoras in -Sicyon. Psammetichus according to Diodorus converted his position from -that of a petty Delta chieftain (one of twelve who shared the rule of -the part of the country not in foreign occupation) into that of supreme -ruler of the whole country as a result of the wealth and influence that -he won by trading with Phoenicians and Greeks. - -This last statement if true establishes Psammetichus as a commercial -tyrant. It occurs only in Diodorus, and receives no direct confirmation -in earlier writers, but it is in entire harmony with all that is known -about events and conditions in Egypt at this period, and more -particularly with the notices just quoted as to Bocchoris and Sethon, -with the history of Amasis and the other later Saites as recorded in -Herodotus, and with the conclusions to be drawn from the excavation of -Naukratis and the other Greek settlements that played so important a -part in Saite Egypt. - -[Sidenote: Lydia.] - -From the middle of the eighth century B.C. till the early part of the -fifth Lydia appears to have been a power in which the ruler based his -position on wealth and struggles for the throne were fought with the -weapons of trade and finance. This according to the accounts is the case -with Spermos and Ardys in the eighth century and with Croesus in the -sixth: the story of Gyges and his magic ring may also be explained in -the same sense. A similar state of things is indicated in the advice -which Croesus is made by Herodotus to give to Cyrus, in the story of the -revolt of Pactyes, and in that of Xerxes and the rich Pythes. - -At about the time to which we can trace back this state of things in -Lydia, two events were taking place that are both attributed to Lydia, -namely the striking of the first metal coins and the appearance of the -first tyrant. In neither case are the dates very precise. The first -coins are more probably to be placed late in the eighth century than -early in the seventh, and though Gyges is stated to have been the first -tyrant, there are reasons for suspecting that he may have been merely -the first ruler of his kind to attract the attention of the Greeks. The -magic ring too by which he secured his tyranny is sometimes attributed -not to Gyges but to some (not very remote) ancestor of his or to the -eighth century plutocrat Midas king of the neighbouring Phrygia. But on -any showing the ring falls within the limits of time and place to which -may be ascribed the earliest coins and the earliest tyrant. Rings are -one common form of early currency and it is not impossible that it was -to the ring in this sense that the first tyrant owed his tyranny. This -view, which implies that the earliest coins were private issues and that -the coinage was only nationalized when the principal coiner became chief -of the state, is supported alike by evidence and analogies. - -[Sidenote: Argos.] - -Pheidon, who was probably the first ruler to be called tyrant in -European Greece, is described by Herodotus as “the man who created for -the Peloponnesians their measures,” a description that at once suggests -that it was this commercial step that differentiated Pheidon the tyrant -from the kings who preceded him. Later writers, of whom the earliest is -Ephorus, go further and state that silver was first coined by Pheidon in -Aegina. The statement has been called in question, but it is confirmed -by the chapters of Herodotus (V. 82 f.) which describe the early -relations between Argos, Aegina, and Athens. In the light of recent -archaeological enquiries it becomes highly probable that Argos became -predominant in Aegina as described in these chapters of Herodotus (which -are unfortunately most vague in their chronology) just about the time -when Pheidon most probably reigned; and this probability is increased by -the tradition that Pheidon recovered the lot of Temenos, the domain of -the kings of Argos in early Dorian times, which included the island of -Aegina. The occupation of Aegina by Argos which we have seen reason to -associate with Pheidon gave rise according to Herodotus to a change in -the “measures” (which probably included the weights system) in use on -the island, the new measures being half as great again as those -previously in use. The Aeginetan standard on which the Aeginetan coins -were struck is roughly half as great again as the other and probably -earlier standard used in ancient Greece. The statement of Ephorus that -silver was first coined by Pheidon in Aegina is thus strikingly -confirmed, which means that the first ruler to strike coins in European -Greece was also the first to be called tyrant. - -[Sidenote: Corinth.] - -The tyranny at Corinth coincides with the great industrial and -commercial developments of the city described by Thucydides (I. 13) in -words that are a paraphrase of his description of the state of things -that led to the rise of tyrannies in Greece generally. Scholars agree -that the tyrants had a direct interest in some of these developments, -notably shipping, colonizing and coinage. The main industry of Corinth -at this period seems to have been pottery, with which she supplied much -of the Greek world. Of the early career of the first tyrant, Cypselus, -very little is known beyond the story in Herodotus which professes to -explain how the infant Cypselus got his curious name. We have examined -in some detail the meaning of the words cypselus and cypsele, and found -that they probably mean potter and pot, so that the man who established -the tyranny at Corinth seems to have borne a name that associates him -with the main industry of his city. - -[Sidenote: Rome.] - -Both in date and in character the corresponding period at Rome to the -age of the tyrants in Greece is that which is occupied by the reigns of -the Tarquins. The first king of this dynasty, Tarquinius Priscus, is -said to have been the son of a rich Corinthian named Demaratus. Early in -life the first of the Tarquins had settled in Rome. It was by means of -his wealth that he secured the throne. Both he and his father are said -to have been great employers of labour, and the accounts imply that -their employees were free men. Servius Tullius, who succeeded Tarquinius -Priscus, is said to have been the first at Rome to strike coins, and to -have secured the support of the poor by gifts and benevolences. When the -last of the Tarquins, Tarquinius Superbus, overthrew Servius Tullius and -secured the throne, he did so by buying up the poorest of the common -people. After his succession he is described as employing Etruscans and -Roman citizens on a large scale as artizans and quarrymen. He loses the -throne when he can no longer pay these employees. - -During the first century of the republic the established government -several times thought itself threatened with attempts to restore the -kingship. In each case it is the wealth or the exceptional financial -position of the suspected person that causes the alarm. Early republican -statesmen are repeatedly reported as charging the Tarquins with having -degraded Roman citizens (from their natural position as soldiers and -gentlemen) into tradesmen and artizans, a charge which implies the -reverse change as having accompanied the change from kingly government -to republican. The final blow to the monarchist movement at Rome seems -to have been dealt when army pay was instituted, and the government as -paymaster of the army became the greatest employer of paid free labour -in the state. - -One later attempt to establish a tyranny at Rome has been suspected by -Mommsen. The man he suspects of it is Appius Claudius Caecus, the censor -of 312 B.C. Appius was noted for the number of his clients and the great -public works that he conducted, and he probably had a close connexion -with the first real coinage struck by Rome. Attention has also been -drawn to the accounts of the secessions, with their curious resemblances -to modern strikes and their implication of organization on the part of -labour. At Ardea in North Latium about the year 440 B.C. the -working-classes are described as playing a decisive part in the struggle -for supreme power. At Veii in the year 400 B.C. we are told of a rich -employer who became king of his city. - -The statements just quoted have all been often regarded with extreme -scepticism. The reasons for this scepticism have been examined in the -chapter on Rome. It is impossible to resume them here. If my conclusions -are not entirely wrong, the scepticism of the last century represented -an excessive reaction against the undue credulity of earlier ages. -Recent archaeological discoveries enormously increase the probability of -the narrative in its main outlines. But if after all the sceptics are -right on this particular question, and the Tarquin narrative is a -fiction, it is none the less of historical value, and confirms the view -that the early tyrannis was commercial, since, if fiction, it must be an -early Greek fiction, preserving an early Greek conception of the typical -early tyrant as a great capitalist. - -[Sidenote: Other early tyrannies.] - -In Chapter IX we surveyed the evidence for the origin of the early -tyrannies at Sicyon, Megara, Miletus, Ephesus, Leontini, Agrigentum, and -Cumae. The material is scanty and it is enough here to recall that as -far as it goes it supports the theory of a commercial origin. At Sicyon -the tyranny is founded by a tradesman the son of a tradesman. At Megara -Theagenes rises to power as the result of what looks very like the -creation of a corner in the staple product of his city. At Miletus and -Leontini we find tyrants arising as the result of something like class -war between rich and poor, while a later tyrant of Miletus tries to -establish a great political position by getting control of the mines and -miners of Thrace. At Ephesus and Cumae the tyrants’ power is said to be -based on the money that they distributed among the poorer classes, while -at Agrigentum the tyrant is definitely stated to have secured the -tyranny through his position as a great employer. - -[Sidenote: Capitalist despots of later ages.] - -In the times of Aristotle there are several cases in the Pergamene -district of rich bankers and the like making attempts, of which one at -least was successful, to secure supreme political power in their cities -by means of their wealth. The close personal relationship in which -Aristotle stood to some of them partly explains why they are not classed -by him as tyrants. - -Not long afterwards the far more important power of the rulers of -Pergamum owed its origin entirely to the enormous wealth of the founder -of the dynasty. - -Later still at Olbia chance has preserved an inscription which records -how a very rich Olbiopolitan named Protogenes became “financial -director” of his city. Though there is no evidence that Protogenes ever -became a tyrant the inscription shows that the sort of position which we -have imagined to have been normally built up by the would-be tyrant of -the seventh or sixth century was actually secured some three or four -centuries later by a wealthy individual in this remote and backward -Greek city on the Black Sea. - - - (b) _The credibility of the evidence as a whole_ - -The value of the various items of evidence collected and reviewed in the -preceding chapters varies very greatly. In some cases we have precise -statements bearing closely on the point in question and made by almost -contemporary writers. At the other end of the list we have anecdotes of -doubtful relevance and doubtful authenticity found in writers who lived -centuries after the period to which they refer. It is difficult to sum -up the value of so miscellaneous a collection. The estimate is bound to -vary greatly according to the temperament and training of the person who -makes it. There are however two points which seem in the present state -of scholarship to need especial emphasis. - -The first of these refers to the generally prevalent attitude towards -the question of historical truth as it affects generally the period -under consideration. No one who has read at all widely in modern -writings on ancient history can have failed to observe that the -scepticism or credulity of any given scholar has always depended largely -on that of his generation. Up to a point this is inevitable: but we are -reaching a stage when it is no longer necessary to follow quite so -blindly as has hitherto been done the natural reaction from excessive -credulity to excessive scepticism and _vice versa_. The pendulum has now -been swinging long enough for its motion to be observed and allowed for. -There is no doubt that scholars of a few generations ago were often and -perhaps in general unduly credulous. But it is no less certain that the -main tendency of the past century has been to react from excessive -credulity to no less excessive scepticism. The beginnings of the -sceptical reaction were observed by Byron: - - I’ve stood upon Achilles’ tomb - And heard Troy doubted: Time will doubt of Rome. - -The doubts about Troy have been triumphantly dispelled by the spade. So -likewise, as we have seen already, have many doubts as to the reality of -the Tarquins’ Rome. But the wonderful discoveries of the last forty -years at Troy, Mycenae, Knossos, Phaistos, and other sites of early -Cretan civilization have diverted the attention of scholars from later -periods. It need therefore cause no surprise if in the preceding pages -there has repeatedly been occasion to criticize prevailing views as -excessively and uncritically sceptical. - -The second point on the question of historical truth that I wish here to -emphasize is concerned more directly with the evidence collected in this -book. As already admitted, the collection contains many items of -doubtful value: it could not be otherwise if it was to be at all -complete. The cumulative effect of so much dubious evidence upon some -mental temperaments is to discredit the mass of evidence as a whole. It -is important therefore to bear in mind the character of our material. It -is a heap, not a chain. Its strength is to be measured by its strongest -items rather than by its weakest. Weak or irrelevant items do not -invalidate any that are relevant and cogent. On the contrary, points of -evidence that are individually unconvincing may have a powerful -cumulative effect if they are found all pointing, however dimly, in one -definite direction, and all suggesting a single explanation arrived at -on independent grounds. When dealing with the dawn of history it is -uncritical to reject a whole body of evidence merely because it is made -up of details scarcely any of which are capable of proof. The evidence -of history, or at any rate of Greek history, in its childhood is like -that of many an individual child. The child’s idea of truth is often -more fluid than that of the adult. It may be harder in any given case to -be sure of the exact facts. But it may all the same be certain that -facts more or less accurately recorded form a large element of the -information. - -That, it may be fairly claimed, is how the evidence that has been -presented in this volume ought to be regarded. Its cumulative value is -really considerable. It should be remembered how independent our -witnesses are. Livy on the Tarquins of Rome is corroborated by Diodorus -on Psammetichus of Egypt: Herodotus on early tyrants generally is borne -out by his critic Thucydides: the later writers who have been quoted so -frequently and in such numbers drew upon a great variety of sources: -literary evidence is confirmed by archaeological, as for instance when a -conjecture as to the “hill men” of Peisistratus that I put forward in -1906 is corroborated by an inscription that was first published just -after the publication of my conjecture. When witnesses are so many and -they speak on such a variety of topics and under such a variety of -circumstances and to all appearances without the possibility of any -common cue, the chances of collusion become remote in the extreme. - - - (c) _Conclusions_ - -But granted that the various items of evidence that we have so far -collected have all a real historical value, and granted too that they -lend one another a considerable amount of mutual support, there is a -further line of criticism that deserves a careful consideration. The -evidence may all be true and yet the inferences that have been drawn -from it be false, or at least ill-balanced and misleading. Kings and -tyrants have in all ages tended to be extremely rich. In most ages great -riches have been indispensable for anyone aiming at great political -power, and the greater the power aimed at naturally enough the greater -the riches required to secure it. Admittedly the tyrants lived in a -commercial age, and the influence of wealth was particularly strong. -Does the evidence that has just been presented prove in reality very -much more than that? Some of the statements about the men who became -tyrants are indeed sufficiently explicit, as for example that about the -trading of the young Psammetichus, or the wealth and workmen of the -young Lucius Tarquinius, but apart from the question of their -trustworthiness they are all so brief and meagre that it is impossible -to be sure that we see them in the right perspective. They are not very -adequate for forming any picture of the men they refer to or even of -their financial position. - -In short the early tyrants may have all been rich and all men of -business and yet their riches and business activities may have been -neither the basis nor the distinguishing feature of their rule. They -arose in a many-sided age, and there were many other developments that -might have conceivably brought them to the top. The doctrine of the -divine right of kings had lost its hold. The struggles between the kings -and the nobles had doubtless led both parties to appeal to the people, -and from that it might well be no far step to the people’s appointing -its own rulers. Then again there had been a revolution in the art of -war. The Homeric days were over when the heavy-armed chieftain was -everything and his followers a more or less useless rabble. In the new -kind of warfare large bodies of trained men-at-arms counted for -everything[1456]. Such a change might easily encourage a whole series of -military officers to seize the supreme power. Furthermore in the case at -any rate of the outlying Greek cities, and particularly those of Asia -Minor[1457], the constant danger from barbarian neighbours might readily -suggest the appointment of a military dictator. And we do in fact find -the early tyrants described as having been previously demagogues or -soldiers. - -But we find also that these descriptions go back only to Aristotle and -have their source in fifth and fourth century conditions. Even if they -went further back, the objection just raised against the commercial -explanation applies still more strongly here. Kings and rulers who -govern in fact as well as in name are generally something of public -speakers or soldiers. It is almost an impossibility to find a -self-raised ruler who cannot be described as either a demagogue or a -polemarch[1458]. - -Similarly with the notices about important offices of state alleged to -have been held by various tyrants before they attained to supreme power. -They are indeed among the most reliable items of information that we -possess about the early tyrants. But their significance can be easily -overrated. If ever a merchant who was aiming at the tyranny sought to -strengthen his political influence by obtaining office, the record of -his magistracy would be much more likely to be preserved than that of -his commercial successes. When we come to the detailed evidence as -presented in the previous pages the balance in favour of the commercial -theory may be claimed as decisive. - -If once the commercial origin of the tyrants’ power is admitted, the -various facts recorded about individual tyrants certainly gain in -meaning and coherence. The mercenaries, the monetary reforms and -innovations, the public works, the labour legislation, the colonial -policy and the commercial alliances with foreign states, which have been -repeatedly found associated with the early tyrants and which give the -preserved accounts of them such a distinct stamp, become far more -significant if it is granted that the tyrant’s power was based on his -control of the labour and trade of his city. As has been already -observed, the fact that a theory explains the connexions between an -obviously connected group of phenomena is no proof of its truth: but on -the other hand a theory which fails to explain satisfactorily such a -connexion is at an obvious disadvantage as compared with one which does. -That is one further reason why the typical tyrant is not to be explained -as a successful soldier or demagogue whose riches came to him suddenly -at the same moment as his throne. The adventurer of either of these -types might indeed further the commercial developments of the city that -he had seized. It would be of course to his interest to do so. But as a -general rule the man who has secured a fortune at a single stroke does -not care to improve it by years of patient and organized effort. If all -or any considerable number of the tyrants reviewed above had owed their -positions to their sword or their tongue, there would inevitably have -been some cases of commercial retrogression under the tyrannis, whereas -in fact there are none. - -This is a fundamental fact. The tyrants were one and all first-class -business men. If they did not deliberately use their wealth to secure -their position, there is only one other possible explanation of their -history: their financial abilities must have led their fellow-countrymen -to put them in the way of seizing the throne, and that is roughly the -account of them that is to be found in some modern histories, where they -are vaguely pictured as the more or less passive products of blind -economic forces. This view seems to me untenable. It cannot be -reconciled with the impression made by the early tyrants on writers like -Aristotle. More fatal still, we have a series of “lawgivers” like Solon, -who was a business man who gained his position precisely in the way just -indicated. Some of Solon’s friends reproached him with his folly in not -making himself tyrant. But the fact remains that no “lawgiver” of the -period did so[1459], and that the titles of νομοθέτης and αἰσυμνήτης -that were given these legally appointed dictators were never applied -either by friends or enemies to any of the tyrants at any period of -their careers[1460]. - -One fact has still to be explained. Different as are the views about -tyrants and tyranny expressed by different ancient writers at different -times they have this feature in common. All alike express their hatred -of tyrannical government. For Plato the man who becomes a tyrant “is -changed from a man into a wolf[1461].” When Herodotus digresses into a -debate on the merits of the chief forms of government, he makes the -critic of tyranny declare that there is nothing more unjust than it or -more bloodthirsty in the whole world[1462]. There is no judgment from -heaven on the man who lays low a tyrant. This doctrine of Theognis[1463] -is perpetually preached all through Greek history. Harmodius and -Aristogeiton the Athenian tyrannicides were celebrated in -sculpture[1464] and in song[1465] and their names were constantly on the -lips of orators[1466]. - -There are apparent exceptions to this attitude. The Aristotelian -_Constitution of Athens_, chapter XVI., records that “the tyranny of -Peisistratus was often praised as the life of the days of Kronos,” -_i.e._ as the Golden Age, and the pseudo-Platonic _Hipparchus_, 229_b_, -speaks of it in similar terms: (under the tyrants) “the Athenians lived -much as in the days when Kronos was king.” But the Aristotelian version -states also what it was that evoked this praise. “Peisistratus always -secured peace and maintained quiet. Therefore his tyranny was often -praised.” The phraseology of the two quotations shows that the praise -was given not to the form of government, but to the peaceful life that -it procured, a life that might be, and sometimes has been, associated -with the most oppressive of governments. - -The word tyrant appears to be Lydian, and to have been first applied -among the Greeks to the rulers who followed in the steps of the Lydian -Gyges, whom some ancient writers describe as the first tyrant[1467]. -Originally it was used in a colourless sense as a synonym for king or -monarch[1468]. It is still so used in the tragedians and frequently in -Herodotus[1469]. But wherever the tyrant is spoken of in -contradistinction to the king it is always in terms of detestation. - -It must have been something in the character of the early tyrants that -first gave the word the evil connotation, which it has preserved until -this day[1470]. What that something was is not easy to determine with -certainty. Much of it may be mere misrepresentation. Aristotle[1471] -makes a statement about the tyrants with whom he was acquainted that is -generally true of all monarchies. The tyrant, he says, “supports the -people and the masses against the nobles (γνωρίμους).” We must not -forget that the extant narratives represent almost exclusively the point -of view of the aristocracy. It has often been suggested that this fact -may account for the almost unanimous condemnation of the tyranny. But is -this explanation altogether adequate? The Greek tyrant and the Roman rex -are not the only monarchs who have had a bad press. The Emperors of Rome -and the kings of Israel and Judah suffered likewise. Yet Jewish priests -and Roman senators were not able to turn the titles of King and Emperor -and Caesar into a byword and reproach. There must have been some very -special circumstances to account for the universal execration of the -name of tyrant. Is it not perhaps to be found in the commercial -character of its origin? From the days of the Zeus-born king of Homer -and long before, back to the very beginnings of leadership among men, -legitimate kingship has always been held to rest upon the personal -capacity of the ruler. This is the basis of belief in hereditary -monarchy, or any other system that attaches great importance to birth -and upbringing. It is no less the basis of much republicanism which from -one point of view is merely a denial of the value of heredity and -specialized political education. Men have often been ready, and with -reason, to endure much from a ruler whose power is based on his -personality. But there is one basis of political power that mankind has -never tolerated, and that basis is mere riches. They have felt with -Plato that the plutocrat as such has no right at all to rule. “He seemed -to be one of the city rulers,” says Plato[1472], of the oligarch whose -power is based on his wealth, “but in reality he was neither its ruler -nor its servant, but merely a consumer of its stores.” Plato was here at -one with his countrymen[1473]. In the fifth century, as we know from the -history of the wealthy Nikias, riches did not exclude an Athenian from -the highest position in the state. But neither did they constitute a -claim to political power. In his famous funeral oration Pericles twice -claims that at Athens poverty is no bar to a political career. Pericles -is speaking of course for his own age. If the evidence collected in this -book has any value, the state of things during the first four -generations or so after the invention of a metal coinage was very -different. Money for a while became the measure of a man, and wealth by -itself brought political power. - -We must beware of expecting simplicity anywhere in history[1474]. Even -from the purely commercial point of view there were doubtless powerful -side-currents that have left no trace in our extant records. The power -of the Medici in Florence was based on their commercial supremacy. But -it did not rest entirely on their actual trading. In part it was based -on their position in the Papal treasury among the mercatores Romanam -curiam sequentes, and in part again on the struggle between Emperor and -Pope[1475]. Similar factors must have influenced the careers of Pheidon -and other early tyrants of Greece. In part again these early tyrants -seem to have stood for a racial movement. This was certainly the case at -Sicyon, where the tyranny marked the ascendancy of the pre-Dorian -population; probably also at Corinth, where the first tyrant’s father -belonged to the Aeolic pre-Dorian element of the population[1476]. This -racial factor is easily reconciled with the commercial, quite apart from -the possibility that the pre-Dorian element that comes to the top at -this period may have been closely related to the Levantine race that -plays so prominent a part in Aegean commerce of the present day. - -Nor must the personal element be left out of account, though so -lamentably little is known about it. Cypselus and Pheidon, Peisistratus -and Polycrates were certainly great personalities in their way. The -leaders in any movement are generally that. On the whole they seem to -have ruled well. Their government, except towards opponents and rivals, -was by no means oppressive. All the more surprising therefore is their -general condemnation. It is indeed scarcely possible to explain it -except on the view that they ruled by right not of their personalities -but of their riches. The prosperity that they brought to their cities -was altogether material. The famous works of Polycrates were altogether -the works of men’s hands. It is characteristic of the rule of a typical -early tyrant like Periander that he encouraged the worship of Dionysus -and Aphrodite at the expense of the cults of Poseidon and Apollo[1477]. -No doubt his object was partly to break down the monopoly of priestly -office and religious privilege that had hitherto been enjoyed by the -aristocracy[1478]: but it is significant that while the tyrants’ policy -meant a material advance in all directions, it meant also a -materialization even of religion. That is why with a clearness of -judgment that can be matched outside Greece only in Dante, the united -verdict of all the Greeks utterly condemned them. - -Two centuries after the expulsion of the tyrants from Athens, the city -again fell under a ruler who is said to have made its material welfare -his chief care, and “to have prided himself that there was much -profitable trade in the city and that all enjoyed in abundance the -necessaries of life.” Such according to Demochares, a nephew of -Demosthenes, was the boast of Demetrius of Phaleron, and for it he is -utterly condemned by Demochares as “taking pride in things that might be -a source of pride to a tax-collector or an artizan.” The condemnation is -quoted by Polybius as “no common charge[1479].” Polybius plainly regards -it as particularly damning, for he quotes it _à propos_ of certain -monstrous charges that were current about Demochares to prove that -Demetrius must have refrained from supporting them for lack of evidence -and not from lack of ill-will. Demochares and Polybius are a long step -from the early tyrants: but both in a sense belong to the period that -followed the tyrants’ fall. Their views about Demetrius and his -materialistic policy may well be an inheritance from an earlier age. - -The age of the tyrants lasted for little more than five generations, and -never so long as that in any one city[1480]. This fact may have some -consolation for those who fear a modern tyranny of wealth, and offers -perhaps an analogy for the observations of H. G. Wells on the transitory -character of the modern financial boss[1481]. The determination not to -be permanently governed by mere wealth is as strong to-day as it was -twenty-five centuries ago. “The loathing of capital with which our -labouring classes to-day are growing more and more infected” is -explained by William James[1482] as “largely composed of this sound -sentiment of antipathy for lives based on mere having.” He -contrasts[1483] the “military and aristocratic” ideal of the “well-born -man without possessions.” - -It is of course particularly hard to test the scorn of possessions of a -class that can always help itself to them at a crisis, and, as William -James himself admits, the ideal has always been “hideously -corrupted[1484].” Certainly at the present day the antipathies between -aristocracy and militarism and capitalism are, to say the least of it, -not particularly marked. It is the democracy that loathes capitalism. -But this may be merely a phase. The anti-capitalist movement may end by -labour becoming fatally materialised or fatally impoverished, and in any -country where that happens the way will be open for a new Peisistratus. - - - - -Appendix A (to p. 37). _The supposed Agricultural and Northern Diakria._ - - -[Sidenote: (A) The farming population took little part in politics,] - -The agricultural or pastoral explanation of the party that supported -Peisistratus has no inherent probability[1485]. Of course if it was -specifically stated on good authority that in his days people of either -of these two classes played the decisive part in politics, objections -would be silenced. But the ancient evidence points all the other way. -Aristotle repeatedly states that of all people farmers and herdsmen are -least prone to support revolutions[1486], and definitely pictures these -two classes as having played an entirely passive part both under the -regime of the early tyrants and during its establishment[1487]. When on -the throne Peisistratus gave financial help to impoverished -farmers[1488], a fact that is brought by Grundy[1489] into connexion -with his supposed agricultural Diakrioi. But in doing so Grundy -disregards some of the words that he himself quotes, which show that the -tyrant is dealing not with his supporters but with a body of men who -were not interested in politics but threatened to become so if driven -off the land. Geographically there is nothing to connect with the -Diakria the men whom Peisistratus thus relieved. In his earlier days the -most distressed and discontented part of the agricultural population -were the pelatai and hektemoroi[1490] who worked the lands of the -rich[1491] and therefore presumably lived in the Plain. - -According to the _Constitution of Athens_ the hill men were made up -largely of people not of pure race, whose claim to citizenship was more -than doubtful[1492]. Such a description is singularly inapplicable to -the people on the land in Attica, where in the fifth century they still -prided themselves on having an undisturbed autochthonous population. -Plutarch speaks of the hill men as a “mob of hirelings[1493].” In the -days just after Solon shepherds and small farmers of the hektemor class -may have been hirelings, but they can hardly have ever been a mob. - -There is therefore little to be said for the attempt to identify the -hill men with the shepherds and hypothetical farmers of Mount Parnes. We -cannot even be certain that the latter ever existed. - -The soil of Attica was notoriously poor, abounding in stony districts -(φελλεῖς) useful only for pasture[1494]. Attica claimed to be the land -not of corn but of the olive. Demeter had her seat not in the great -plain of Attica, but in the small and much more fertile plain of -Eleusis. - -[Sidenote: and lived but little on the mountains,] - -None of the champions of an agricultural hill party dwelling on Mount -Parnes seems to have seriously enquired into the upper limit of -cultivation with wheat on the mountains of Attica. The only ancient -writers who talk of agriculture being carried on there are the writer of -the Aristotelian _Constitution of Athens_ and Statius. - -The former[1495] tells the story of the man with the farm on Hymettus -(τὸν ἐν τῷ Ὑμηττῷ γεωργοῦντα). The story says nothing about the -frequency of farms on Hymettus or of the height up the hillside of this -particular farm. But it does say something about the soil and the crops. -The soil consisted of stones, the crops, so the farmer told -Peisistratus, were “troubles and sorrows.” This hardly suggests that in -the days of the tyranny Hymettus was of any great importance -agriculturally. The same conclusion is suggested by the story of the -clever Pelasgians who succeeded in cultivating the land at the foot of -Hymettus, much to the surprise of the Athenians[1496]. - -Statius[1497] speaks of the ploughmen of fragrant Hymettus (olentis -arator Hymetti), and the vineyards of Parnes (Parnesque benignus -uitibus). The former is almost a contradiction in terms. Fragrant is an -allusion to the famous honey of Hymettus, or to the thyme that produced -it[1498]. Thyme and honey do not go with cornfields. A “Parnes kindly to -vines” is not easily reconciled with Pausanias, who makes the mountain a -good hunting-place for bears and wild boars[1499]. Plato declares that -in his days some of the Attic mountains were barren except for their -yield of honey[1500], whereas once they had been covered with -forests[1501], some of which had only recently been cut down. The fame -of the honey of Hymettus went so far back, that the mountain was claimed -as the place where bees were first created[1502]. Aristotle divides bees -according to whether their haunts are cultivated (ἥμερα) or mountainous -(ὀρεινά). The latter are described in the next sentence as haunting the -forests (ὑλονόμοι)[1503]. - -[Sidenote: which were occupied by forests and wild beasts.] - -At the present day the Attic mountains are scarcely cultivated at -all[1504], and though in ancient Attica cultivation may have been more -intense, yet apart from the difficulties of carrying it up the mountain -side, the whole scheme of life presupposes vast supplies of timber for -shipbuilding, fuel, and countless other purposes. Bursian is probably -right when he says that in antiquity Parnes was “thickly covered with -forest in which numerous beasts found shelter, including wild boars and -bears[1505].” During the period of Athens’ greatness, between 550 and -350 B.C., the supply of timber must have been constantly diminishing. -Yet towards the end of the fifth century the charcoal-burners had their -centre at Acharnae, below the southern slopes of Parnes, only about -seven or eight miles from Athens. Thucydides excludes Acharnae from the -plain[1506], and we must infer that it was not then the land of corn and -vines that it is now. If not forest it was waste. If the land round -Acharnae had not been claimed for farming, it is hardly likely that -farmers abounded higher up[1507]. - -The same inference is suggested by a passage of Xenophon which implies -that corn could not be grown in the mining district, which is distinctly -hilly but does not reach anything like the height of Pentelicon, -Hymettus, or Parnes, “and there is also land which when sown does not -bear fruit, but being mined supports a population many times larger than -it would if it was producing corn: and its argentiferous character is -plainly due to Providence,” etc.[1508]. - -Then again frequent mention is made in ancient Attic documents of -“boundary estates” and these are explained by the scholiast to Aeschines -as “lands on the border of the country, extending either to the -mountains or the sea[1509].” Such a definition implies that the -mountains were almost as unused to cultivation as the sea itself. In -Italy too the limit of cultivation of wheat seems to have been low. -Latin writers repeatedly contrast the forest-clad mountains with the -arable lowlands, and in some cases the mountains that these writers have -in mind are considerably lower than the heights of Parnes[1510]. - -[Sidenote: (B) The case for a North-east “Hill Country” rests on - misreadings or misinterpretations of ancient authorities.] - -Enough has been said to show how little reason there is for picturing -the mountains of North and East Attica in the days of Peisistratus as -the home of a large and active agricultural population. It remains for -us to examine the evidence for thinking that this district was known as -the “Hill Country.” We shall find that if possible it is flimsier still. -The supporters of the prevailing view base their case mainly on the -definition of the Diakria found in the printed editions of Hesychius. -This definition is the main source of all existing misconceptions. It is -necessary therefore to examine it. The words of Hesychius as generally -quoted are these. “Diakrieis: not only certain of the Euboeans but also -of the Athenians: also a place (τόπος) in Attica: the Diakria is the -land from Parnes to Brauron.” The modern name for the hills at Brauron -is Περάτι (End), which seems at first sight to harmonize well with the -definition of the Diakria just quoted. But if we examine any good map of -Attica, we see that Περάτι does not end the Southern extension of -Parnes; it forms the North-east extremity of the hills of South Attica. -That is a first difficulty. It is at least unusual to define the limits -of a district by places beyond those limits. We do not say that Germany -extends from Tilsit to Verviers. - -The second objection is far more serious. It is that the MSS. say -nothing of Brauron. The word they give is Balylon (εἰς Βαλυλωνος, -_sic_). This was emended by Aldus to Babylon. Brauron is a conjecture of -Palmerius, and by no means a certain one. In Byzantine times the -familiar Babylon (pronounced Vavylon) would indeed be a very natural -corruption for the then obscure Brauron (pronounced Vrafron). The MS. -Balylon is not nearly so likely to be a phonetic corruption of Brauron. -It might conceivably be an orthographic corruption of Aulon, a place or -region in the mining district in the extreme South of Attica[1511]. The -εἰς with the genitive of the MS. suggests however some more complete -corruption[1512]. - -But even if the reading “to Brauron (εἰς Βραυρῶνα)” were certain, -Hesychius would still be a doubtful authority on this point. His -definition of the “Coast” runs thus: “the Coast: Attica, whence also the -ship Paralos (ἡ παραλία· ἡ Ἀττική, ἔνθεν καὶ ἡ ναῦς πάραλος).” This -presumably means that the Coast was a synonym for Attica, the coastland -_par excellence_. Such a definition might be supported by philological -connexions between Ἀττική and ἀκτή[1513]. Conceivably with ἡ Ἀττική we -should understand not γῆ but παραλία: the Coast means _par excellence_ -the Attic coast (compare the modern “Riviera”). This interpretation is -supported by our author’s definition of the men of the coast (οἱ -παράλιοι), which runs “those who occupy the coast of Attica.” Neither -interpretation vindicates Hesychius as an authority on the triple -division of Attica. He makes no mention of the Plain. - -Modern writers, it is true, give the word “coast” (παραλία) a -conventional meaning and confine it to the Southern apex of the Attic -triangle, the district of Attica that has the largest proportion of -coast to interior[1514]. Their view has one fact in its favour. After -the expulsion of the tyrants, when Cleisthenes set himself to break up -the old local political parties, the whole of this Southern apex was -included among the “coast” trittyes or (th)ridings of his new triple -division of the whole country. But there are indications that the -inclusion of this whole district in the coast was never anything but an -artificial arrangement[1515] to prevent either of the other two -divisions from overbalancing the coast[1516]. The Cleisthenic coast was -of course not confined to this Southern apex. The moderns who imagine -this restricted use base their assumption on a misunderstanding of their -authorities. They quote Thucydides II. 55, where in reference to a -Peloponnesian raid on Southern Attica he speaks of “the so-called coast -land.” But the precise words of Thucydides show that the ravages were -confined to the coast[1517], while inscriptions and passages in other -writers prove that the name “coast” was not confined to the Southern -apex of Attica but was normally applied to the whole Attic -seaboard[1518]. When Thucydides uses the expression “what is called the -coast land” he need not be taken as meaning that the name “coast” in -Attica was used as a synonym for what Herodotus calls the Sunium -Heights[1519]. Very possibly he is commenting rather on the fact that -the Attic coast was called by the poetical name πάραλος γῆ, παραλία (the -land of the brine) instead of the good fifth century prose word -παραθαλάσσιος, ἐπιθαλάσσιος (the land by the sea). He himself uses -ἐπιθαλάσσιος in the very next chapter for the coast land of the -Peloponnese[1520]. - -Another text which has been thought[1521] to establish a Northern or -North-Eastern Diakria and a Southern Paralia is a fragment of -Sophocles[1522] in which the mythical king Pandion divides Attica -between his three sons. Two scholia of Aristophanes[1523] and a notice -in Suidas[1524] equate the North-Eastern of these divisions with the -Diakria. But against this equation must be set that of Stephanus -Byzantinus[1525], who says that the Diakria fell to the son who received -according to Sophocles the Southern division. - - - - - Appendix B (to p. 168). _The Date of the Argive-Aeginetan Embargo on - Attic Pottery_ - - -[Illustration: Fig. 43. Dipylon vase.] - -The outstanding facts in the history of Attic pottery are these. During -the dark ages Attic pottery takes perhaps the foremost place in the -whole of Greece Proper. The dominant ware of this period is of a well -defined style generally known as Geometric, of which the Attic “Dipylon” -ware (fig. 43) is a superior and well represented variety[1526], that -appears to have been in considerable request beyond the borders of -Attica[1527]. The period of eclipse for Attic pottery is the seventh -century and the beginning of the sixth. During this period oriental -influences made themselves felt in all Greek arts and crafts. In Greece -Proper the dominant pottery of the period is the Corinthian (figs. 22, -34), and another ware that began somewhat earlier but largely overlapped -it, generally known as Proto-Corinthian (fig. 44). These two fabrics -flooded most of Greece as well as Sicily and Italy, and are found in -abundance in many Greek cities of the East. But in Attica Dipylon ware -seems to have held the market well into the seventh century[1528], and -to have been followed by the vases known as Proto-Attic and -Phaleron[1529], which occupy only a humble place in the ceramic history -of the period[1530]. Then in the first half of the sixth century Attica -developed its famous Black Figure style (fig. 41), that quickly drove -all competitors out of the market. - -[Illustration: Fig. 44. Proto-Corinthian vase.] - -From the commercial point of view an embargo on Attic pottery between -about 670 and 570 B.C. would have been practically pointless. It is only -before the earlier date and after the later that Attic pottery was a -menace to its rivals. As between these dates all that is known of the -history of pottery in the Argolid and Aegina inclines strongly in favour -of the earlier period. The most ardent protectionist will admit that -protection is useless without something to protect, and from 570 B.C. -onwards neither Argos nor Aegina appears to have had any interest in any -possible rival to Attic ware. But in the early part of the seventh -century Argos and Aegina alike were flooded with both Corinthian[1531] -and Proto-Corinthian[1532] pottery, and, as may be gathered from the -traditions about the lot of Temenos[1533], it is highly probable that -they were much interested in pushing these wares, which are found in -large quantities not only in Greece Proper, but also in Italy, Asia -Minor, and even further afield[1534]. Corinthian pottery is -unquestionably a Corinthian product[1535]. The place of origin of -Proto-Corinthian is, as has been already noticed, much disputed. It has -been claimed for Aegina itself[1536], and for Argos[1537]. Corinth is a -possibility[1538], as also is Chalcis, for which latter the abundant -finds at Cumae are interesting but by no means decisive evidence[1539]. -Most archaeologists prefer Sicyon[1540]. - -The balance of expert opinion at present is certainly in favour of the -North-east Peloponnesus[1541]. In Chapter VI evidence is cited to show -that the whole of this region was probably under Argive domination -previous to the establishment of tyrannies at Corinth and Sicyon about -the year 660 B.C. But after that the situation changes. Corinth and -Sicyon become strong cities, friendly to one another and hostile to -Argos[1542]. Corinthian pottery eclipses all its rivals, with -Proto-Corinthian as an easy but lagging second. If Argos had wanted -protection for her native pottery in the second half of the seventh -century, she would have excluded not Attic pottery, but the wares of -Corinth, and perhaps Sicyon[1543]. Attic pottery revived and began to -dominate the Greek market about 570 B.C., and that is the date to which -the embargo is assigned by Hoppin, who published the pottery from the -Argive Heraeum. But if that was the date, then, as he himself declares, -its motive cart have been “nothing but simple spite, since no increased -activity on the part of the Argive potters is the result[1544].” The -motive that Hoppin so rightly desiderated can best have been at work -when Proto-Corinthian and Corinthian pottery was already on the market, -but Corinth and Sicyon were not yet under tyrants. - -Thus on _à priori_ grounds the early years of the seventh century form -far the most likely period for an Aeginetan or Argive embargo on the -pottery of Attica[1545]. The power that destroyed the Dipylon -ships[1546] might well have struck a blow at Dipylon pottery, if only to -improve its own position in the carrying trade. - -It remains to test this general probability by the evidence of the sites -more immediately concerned. - -In Aegina Attica Black Figure pottery has been found in some -abundance[1547]. In fact Attic pottery found a ready entrance from the -latter half of the seventh century onwards[1548]. If there is any stage -of Attic pottery that is poorly represented on the island, it is the -Proto-Attic and Phaleron. Such at any rate is the evidence of the -excavations at the temple of Aphaia; and the scarcity of early -orientalizing Attic harmonizes with what is known of the Geometric -pottery from the site. This latter style, so Thiersch reports[1549], is -richly represented, and in two groups, which are plainly imports from -the neighbouring regions of Attica and the Argolid. The Attic ware -predominates at first, the finds at Eleusis and the Athenian Kerameikos -offering the closest analogies. Towards the end of the Geometric style, -when it begins to connect up with Proto-Corinthian, the second great -group of imports begins, with types that are also found in great numbers -in the Argolid, at Tiryns and the Argive Heraeum. - -Again, in the Aeginetan temple of Aphrodite, where the pottery found by -Stais has been published by Pallat[1550], Geometric sherds, in clay and -technique not to be distinguished from Attic, were fairly numerous, but -coming down from the eighth century to the seventh, we are told that the -Attic pottery of the period, the so-called Proto-Attic, is represented -only by a few types, some of which are perhaps only imitations of the -genuine Attic. - -Similarly, the excavators of the Argive Heraeum report that “in the -Argolid we find the Geometric style ceasing almost abruptly, while the -Argive style becomes as it were emancipated[1551].” Argive is the -Americans’ name for Proto-Corinthian[1552]. - -The vast majority of the fragments of this period from the Aphrodite -temple are Proto-Corinthian or early Corinthian[1553]. Attic pottery -reappears among the finds of about the middle of the sixth century, with -a few sherds of Kleinmeister kylikes. Pallat indeed[1554] speaks further -on of the Proto-Attic (_i.e._ early seventh century Attic) that is -richly represented at Aegina, and Loeschcke too speaks of all stages of -Attic ware from Dipylon onwards occurring in the island[1555]. -Unfortunately, such terms as rare and abundant are still used by -archaeologists in the loosest and most misleading way. The only vases -Loeschcke quotes are a “Tyrrhenian” amphora, and an Ergotimos cup, -_i.e._ two early sixth century vases, both from the Fontana collection, -and attributed to Aegina only on the authority of dealers or collectors -of the early part of the nineteenth century[1556]. The fact remains that -in the properly recorded excavations on the island, it is early in the -seventh century that Attic pottery occupies its least prominent -position, and that in the museum at Aegina[1557], which includes the -Aphaia finds and specimen pieces from the 1904 excavations at the -Aphrodite temple, there is plenty of Mycenaean, Geometric, -Proto-Corinthian, and Corinthian pottery, some early Black Figure (about -550 B.C.), and a fair number of late Black Figure vases, but no -Proto-Attic at all. - -For Argos the evidence is limited mainly to the finds from the Heraeum, -the temple some miles from the city, that was excavated by the -Americans. As mentioned already, the evidence from this site has been -used for dating the embargo in the second half of the sixth -century[1558]. Unfortunately, the American report is mistaken in the -dating of some of its finds. It ascribes to the first half of the sixth -century the archaizing Attic potter Nikosthenes, who flourished in the -second half[1559]. The only two types of Attic fragments that the report -states to have been found in considerable numbers[1560] both belong to -the latter part of the century, and not, as the report states, to the -first half of it. The finds therefore can hardly be quoted as indicating -an exclusion of Attic pottery that started in the middle of the sixth -century. They include only a very few fragments of early seventh century -Attic[1561]. - -The indignant Argives and Aeginetans who, at the date that we are trying -to determine, had crushed the Athenians in Aegina, did not merely -exclude Attic pottery from the temple or temples of their outraged -deities. They insisted further on the exclusive use of local pottery. It -is highly probable that a whole mass of this local pottery, used for -this very purpose, has actually come down to us. In the recent -excavations of the Heraeum at Tiryns, the vast majority of the dedicated -vases are miniature vessels of local fabric. The number reaches nearly a -thousand, forming a series that begins in the seventh century and runs -right through the sixth century into the fifth[1562]. Miniature vases -similar in style, and presumably of about the same date, were found in -like abundance in the Argive Heraeum[1563], where they were dated by the -Americans many centuries too early. They form the most characteristic -series of vase dedications in the temple. It has been suggested with -much plausibility by Frickenhaus in the Tiryns publication[1564], that -it was just such a mass of similar votive vases that was seen by -Herodotus in the temple of Damia and Auxesia in Aegina. If Frickenhaus -is right, the exclusion of Attic pottery from certain temples in Aegina -and the Argolid is naturally put back at least into the seventh century. -Frickenhaus refuses to believe that the use of these “native pots” was -due to the reason given by Herodotus. But does the association of these -harmless little local vases with an anti-Attic policy really look like -an aetiological invention? - -In the Aphaia temple on Aegina a quantity of local hand-made ware was -found in the form of pots, jugs, plates, hydriae, amphorae, etc., large -enough for use. Furtwaengler refers to them as χύτραι[1565], another -form of the word used by Herodotus of the native pots dedicated to Damia -and Auxesia. Similar plain ware for practical use is found on many -sites[1566], and is not likely to have attracted the notice of -Herodotus, though on the other hand the word that he uses (pots, -χυτρίδες) points to plain coarse ware[1567]. If this is the ware he -noticed, our dating is not however affected, since the principal shapes -find their nearest parallels in Geometric graves. - - - - - Appendix C (to p. 169). _Early Athenian Sea Power_ - - -The earliest naval battle known to Thucydides was fought between the -Corinthians and the Corcyraeans in 664 B.C.[1568]. The Dipylon ships are -built with rams (fig. 45. _a_), which by itself sufficiently shows their -warlike character[1569]. Some of them are depicted fighting, or with -fallen sailors lying all around (fig. 45. _c_)[1570], a fact which led -Kroker[1571] to date them after 664 B.C. If Kroker’s argument was sound, -they would have to be dated later still, for it is highly unlikely that -Athenian vases would depict for the local market a battle in which -Athenians were not concerned[1572]. But even 664 B.C. seems too late a -date for the vases. Seventh century Greek pottery everywhere shows -Oriental influence. This is the case with typical seventh century Attic, -which is known as Proto-Attic and Phaleron ware. Dipylon pottery may -have lasted on into this century, but it belongs mainly to the eighth -and ninth[1573]. A Geometric cup with a naval fight found at -Eleusis[1574] occurred in the lowest stratum of the Geometric graves and -is dated by Poulsen fairly early in the style[1575]. - -[Illustration: Fig. 45. Dipylon ships.] - -[Illustration: Fig. 46. Vase painting signed by Aristonothos.] - -There is however no necessary discrepancy with Thucydides. Helbig[1576] -points out that all Dipylon fights seem to be duels between single pairs -of ships. Most of these Dipylon warships are depicted on huge vases that -took the place of tombstones, so that the single ship, or ship-duel, -might be explained by the single sea-captain who lay beneath[1577]. But -against this explanation must be set the single ships and single ship -fights on smaller Dipylon vases and the naval duel on the vase signed by -Aristonothos, probably an Argive potter of the first half of the seventh -century (fig. 46)[1578]. One late Dipylon fragment (fig. 45. _d_)[1579] -shows a ship’s crew fighting warriors on land, and the vessel’s prow, in -which Helbig sees the form of a horse’s head, is thought by him to -indicate that it came from Caria or Phoenicia, where this kind of prow -ornament is known to have been used[1580]. The horse’s head is not very -distinct. Its identification is regarded as uncertain by -Furtwaengler[1581]. At the best it is not decisive for Helbig’s -inference. But he is probably right, when he sees in the Athenian ships -of the Dipylon period a naval force intended to protect Attica against -pirates[1582], which may never have fought a pitched battle at -all[1583]. - -Some such state of things as Helbig outlined is required to explain the -behaviour of the naval forces of the combatants in the early Aeginetan -war. The war is described as occurring just after the Aeginetans had -built ships and become masters of the sea[1584]. The fleet may have been -the outcome of the shipbuilding recorded in the Hesiodic Eoiai, where it -is said of the Aeginetans that they “were the first to fashion ships -with oars on either side, and first to set up sails, the wings of the -ship that crosses the sea[1585].” The thalassocracy must have been -local[1586], and may well mean simply that Aegina had outstripped -Athens, and become the leading member of the Kalaurian league, though -possibly it is to be associated with the early Aeginetan settlement at -Naukratis[1587]. The Athenians claimed to have sent only a single ship -to Aegina. But this appears to have been the version of the official -bulletin, with the incapacity apparently inherent in such documents for -describing a serious reverse as such. “The Aeginetans said that the -Athenians had come not with one ship but with many[1588].” - -That Athens too possessed a fleet is implied when Herodotus says that -the Argives crossed to Aegina undetected[1589]. Yet there is no hint of -a sea battle. Both sides have their explanation[1590], but neither is -very satisfactory. The state of things implied by Herodotus’ narrative -of the Aeginetan war is remarkably like that pictured by Helbig for the -time of the naval activities of the Dipylon ships. - -One further point on this naval question may be noted, though it must -not be pressed. Triremes are mentioned in connexion with the crossing of -the Athenians to Aegina. This may be a mere anachronism[1591]. But there -is nothing to prove that it is so. A state of things which includes -fleets of triremes, but no naval actions on a large scale, suits -admirably the early part of the seventh century, before the naval battle -of 664 B.C. and after the invention of the trireme. The first triremes -in Greece are said to have been built at Corinth, some time before 704 -B.C., when Ameinokles constructed four for the Samians[1592]. Some of -the Dipylon ships appear already to possess two banks of oars (fig. -45_b_)[1593]. Ships with two banks of oars appear on monuments of -Sennacherib (700 B.C.)[1594]. - -Triremes were used by the Pharaoh Necho (610–594 B.C.)[1595]. Both -Sennacherib and Necho probably relied largely on Phoenician sailors and -shipwrights. “We are told that the Sidonians were the first to construct -a trireme[1596].” All these statements fall in excellently with the -notice of Thucydides. It is true that in the next chapter he says that -Aegina and Athens possessed few triremes a little before the death of -Darius (486 B.C.), and uses this fact to argue that Greek naval power -only developed on a large scale from about that time. His facts are -hardly to be questioned; but in his conclusions he appears to be misled -by the fallacy (which he shares with so many moderns) that no -development of first class importance could possibly be dated much -earlier than his own age[1597]. - -The troubles that overtook Aegina about the time of her break with -Epidaurus probably included a war with Samos[1598], in which the Samians -“sent an expedition against Aegina, and did much harm to the Aeginetans, -and received much from them[1599].” In such a state of affairs Aegina -would be doing her utmost to turn out ships on the up-to-date pattern -with which Ameinokles was supplying the enemy. - -The Dipylon ships are rightly associated by many modern scholars with -the naukraric organization that is found existing at Athens at the end -of the dark ages[1600]. The presidents of the naukraroi (or perhaps of -the naukraries) are said by Herodotus to have been administering -(ἔνεμον) Athens at the time of Cylon’s attempted tyranny, _i.e._ about -632 B.C.[1601]. The statement is challenged by Thucydides, who says -that “at that time the nine archons conducted most of the business of -the state[1602].” Herodotus however is at the worst only being -inaccurate. The naukraroi were very possibly “the authorities in -charge of the siege (οἱ ἐπιτετραμμένοι τὴν φυλακήν)” of Thucydides and -were probably responsible for the levy _en masse_, recorded by -Thucydides himself (ἐβοήθησαν πανδήμει ἐκ τῶν ἀγρῶν), that led to -Cylon’s discomfiture[1603]. Herodotus may have exaggerated the -authority of the naukraroi to palliate the guilt of the Alcmaeonid -archon who put Cylon’s followers to death[1604]. - -Attica in the days of Cylon was divided into forty-eight of these -naukraries, each of which had to provide a ship[1605]. The business of -the naukraroi was however largely financial[1606], so much so that later -writers, who may have known them best from references to them in the -laws of Solon, seem to have regarded them as exchequer officials[1607], -the more so as Cleisthenes replaced the naukraric organization by -demes[1608], which had no naval associations. - -Even the etymological connexion of naukrary with ναῦς (navis, ship) has -been called in question. Doubt is first cast on it by Pollux, who wrote -his _Onomasticon_ in the second century A.D.[1609]. Modern writers have -proposed alternative derivations. Grote derives it from ναίω (I dwell), -and explains the naukraroi as the principal householders[1610], a reflex -of the suffrage basis of the nineteenth century. Others[1611] connect it -with an obscure word ναύω, said by Hesychius and Photius to mean “I -beseech,” and connected by Photius with ναός (temple). ναός and ναύω -they connect with a dubious gloss of Pollux[1612], which explains -ναύκληρος (ship’s captain) by the rare word ἑστιοπάμων (householder, -lit. hearthholder), and which they emend by reading ναύκραρος for -ναύκληρος. As further Hesychius defines ναύκληρος (_sic_) as the -president of a community (συνοικία) they connect the origin of the -naukraries with the unification (συνοικισμός) of Attica by Theseus, -symbolized by a common hearth[1613]. - -These philological doubts have been met by G. Meyer[1614], who argues -that even assuming that ναός means “hearth,” compounds would require not -ναυ- but ναο- or ναυο-. Phonetic analogies all point to a derivation -from ναῦς (ship)[1615]. -κραρος is to be connected with κραίνω (make, -complete) or perhaps with κραίνω meaning “I rule[1616].” - -Pollux’s uncertainty about the derivation simply reflects the -uncertainty about the history of the naukraries that was prevalent in -his days. No naval activities of the naukraroi are recorded by any -ancient writer[1617]. But this proves nothing. Naukraries probably had a -long history at Athens, like ship-money in England, and in the course of -time lost their dominatingly naval character. - -Gilbert indeed[1618] doubted the existence of naukraries before the time -of Solon, who is suggested as a possible founder by a Scholiast of -Aristophanes[1619]. He suspects the evidence of the pro-Alcmaeonid -Herodotus, and notes that he describes the attempt of Cylon and its -suppression by the naukraroi as having happened “before the time” not of -Solon but “of Peisistratus.” He argues also against the possibility of a -pre-Solonian Attic fleet of forty-eight ships, since Solon, when he -attacked Salamis, sailed against the island with nothing but a large -number of fishing-boats and one thirty-oared vessel[1620]. He quotes -Photius, who s.v. ναυκραρία says, “Solon having thus called them, as -Aristotle states.” His views are not tenable. Even if Herodotus is -trying to whitewash the Alcmaeonidae, it by no means follows that he is -very far from the truth in his account of the naukraries. If he mentions -Peisistratus and not Solon, it is simply because Cylon aimed at becoming -not a lawgiver but a tyrant. A weak Athenian fleet in Solon’s time is no -proof that the Athenian fleet had never been stronger. When Photius says -“thus called” (ὀνομάσαντος), he may quite as well mean “used this name -for” as “gave this name to”: if he intended it for the latter, all that -follows is that he misunderstood Aristotle, as did also the Scholiast to -Aristophanes, _Clouds_, 37. - -De Sanctis has gone even further than Gilbert, and brings down the -establishment of the naukraries, along with the attempt of Cylon, to the -time of Peisistratus[1621]. He argues mainly from the naval developments -under the tyrant, which, as seen already, are no evidence whatever -against a much earlier date. - -There is no reason to doubt the existence of the naukraries in 632 B.C. -The question to be settled is how much further they go back, and what -was the naval need that they were organized to meet. - -A date not much before Cylon is argued for by Schoemann[1622], who can -find no earlier occasion for their institution than the seventh century -struggle with Megara, by Duncker[1623], who similarly explains them as -instituted out of rivalry to the seventh century navies of Athens’ -neighbours, by Philippi[1624] who dates them 683 B.C. (institution of -annual archons), and by Busolt[1625], on account of their connexion with -the financial classification and organization of the seventh century. As -regards Schoemann and Duncker it has been shown above in Chapter VI how -very unlikely it is that Athens started an elaborate naval organization -in the seventh century. Busolt’s connexion of the naukraries with -seventh century financial organization shows only that they then -existed: it does not follow that they were then created. Whether or no -Glotz is right in tracing them back to Homeric times[1626], the balance -of probabilities indicates that they go back to the period of the -Dipylon pottery[1627], and were organized for protection or reprisals -against the raiders that then infested the Attic coasts, much as in -England the Danegeld was instituted to deal with the pirates of a -corresponding period in our own history. There may be something in the -view that equates the naukraric organization with the council of -Theseus[1628], if by Theseus is meant the head of the Athenian state who -established some sort of order on the waters and coasts of the Saronic -Gulf after the overthrow of the Cretan civilization[1629]. To quote the -words of two particularly sober writers[1630]: - - After the breakdown of the Minoan thalassocracy Athens certainly - took her part in policing the Saronic Gulf.... Her men of war are - frequently depicted on Dipylon vases of the ninth and eighth - centuries. In later times need of this protecting squadron may have - grown less, when the navies of Megara, Aegina, Chalcis, and Eretria - cleared the Aegean of corsairs. We may suppose that the naukraroi of - the seventh century seldom saw active naval service[1631]. - -The writers just quoted, following Helbig, imagine the ancient -naukraries pursuing their naval activities as members of the Kalaurian -league, and the latter, which lasted on as a religious body through -classical times, as gradually taking a back place with the development -of the other naval states they mention. Their picture however leaves out -of account the chief fact known about the history of the league. Its -original members were Hermione, Epidaurus, Aegina, Athens, Prasiae, -Nauplia, and the Minyan Orchomenos. Then at the end of the list Strabo -adds, “Nauplia used to be represented by Argos, and Prasiae by -Sparta[1632].” Strabo is here referring to a later period. It looks as -though Argos and Sparta were intruders into the league, who sought -membership to secure influence or a recognized position in the Saronic -Gulf, just as in later times Philip of Macedon, for political reasons, -set such store on recognition by the Delphic Amphictyony[1633]. Is it -unreasonable to suppose that the two intruders secured their places in -the league each at the time of his aspirations to Peloponnesian -hegemony, Sparta in the sixth century, and Argos under Pheidon? All the -known circumstances bear out this supposition, at least for Argos which -alone at present concerns us. It fits alike the naval power of Athens in -the dark ages, the eclipse of that power in the seventh century, and the -expansion of Argos just at this period. Nauplia is said by -Pausanias[1634] to have fallen to Argos only at the end of the seventh -century. But Asine, which lies further from Argos, is said to have been -conquered by her a hundred years earlier[1635]. Beloch argues with some -reason that the nearer city must have been conquered first. But there is -no need to follow him in his passion for lowering dates, and bring down -the time of the conquest of Asine. There is more reason for putting back -the date of the fall of Nauplia, and thus bringing it into the period of -Argive expansion under Pheidon[1636]. - -Make this not unlikely modification in the picture just quoted from -Mitchell and Caspari, and the early war between Athens and Aegina finds -a satisfactory historical setting. Before the war Athens, Epidaurus, and -Aegina are the leading states in the Saronic Gulf. As a result of it -Athens is crippled at sea, and her place, and even more than her place, -is taken by Argos. The evidence is admittedly scanty, but as far as it -goes it points to the first Aeginetan war as marking the downfall of the -naval power that Athens had enjoyed during the dark ages, or, as the -legend puts it, after the fall of Minos, when the Kalaurian league and -the navy of the naukraries were potent realities. The power that brings -about this downfall is that of the Argive tyrant Pheidon. - - - - - Appendix D (to p. 170). _Early Athenian Dress_ - - -Thucydides[1637] quotes Athenian dress in the introductory chapters of -his first book to illustrate his thesis that civilization and comfort -are extremely modern things. He divides Athenian history from this -standpoint into three periods, the first that when men went about armed, -the second that of luxurious Ionic fashions, and the third that in which -they reverted to simple or rational dress (μετρία ἐσθής). It is -difficult to date the beginning of Thucydides’ second period later than -the first half of the seventh century. At the time indeed when -Thucydides wrote his remarks it was not very long since elderly men of -the wealthy class in Athens had given up the Ionic dress. It has -sometimes been maintained that the dress was always confined to old men, -and that Thucydides implies that Ionic at Athens had been recently in -full fashion. But the tone of the passage suggests rather the old -gentleman who clings to the fashions of an earlier age. Already in the -seventies of the fifth century B.C. the woman who typifies Greece in -Xerxes’ dream is dressed by Aeschylus in Doric robes[1638] and the -monuments confirm the view which regards the Persian Wars as marking the -change. - -But that does not end Thucydides’ evidence. He speaks of fashions in -Sparta as well as in Athens. The return to simple dress was started by -the Spartans (μετρίᾳ δ’ αὖ ἐσθῆτι πρῶτοι Λακεδαιμόνιοι ἐχρήσαντο). This -statement has two implications[1639]. The Spartans must have reverted to -Doric costume before the Persian Wars, and previous to this reversion -they must, like the Athenians, have worn some sort of Ionic costume. The -importance of these allusions to Sparta seems scarcely to have been -realized, no doubt because the controversy took shape before the -excavations of the British School at Sparta had challenged many of the -received views on the history of archaic Sparta. The very large finds of -ivory and lead figurines of the seventh and sixth centuries[1640] show -that artistically at least the Spartans of that period were by no means -the austere devotees of simplicity that they became in the classical -age. Spartan simplicity in fact probably dates in large measure from the -days of Chilon, the reformer of the middle of the sixth century[1641]. -It is not improbable that the simple dress at Sparta came in with the -simple life at just about this period. It is already implied for Spartan -young women by the epithet φαινομηρίδες (showing the thigh) of the poet -Ibycus, a contemporary of Chilon. There is nothing in Thucydides to -discountenance the assumption of an interval of about fifty years -between the beginning of simple dress at Sparta, and its adoption at -Athens[1642]. The tyranny at Athens roughly covers this period, and -standing as it did for material luxury, sufficiently accounts for the -interval. Athenian luxury, at least in the matter of dress, is said by -Thucydides to have started earlier than Spartan, and Spartan, if it went -out in the middle of the sixth century, must plainly have come in -considerably before that date. - -The Ionic costume is said by Herodotus to be strictly speaking not -Ionian but Carian[1643]. Eastern influence began to pass over from the -Greek cities of Asia Minor and pervade the more progressive parts of -Greece Proper early in the seventh century[1644]: so that once again -this seems to be the most probable period for the assumption of Ionic -dress at Athens. - -The same date is arrived at by working forward from Thucydides’ first -period, the age when men habitually went about armed. Thucydides is -notoriously sceptical about the existence of the culture so familiar to -us now under the names of Mycenaean and Minoan and it does not come into -his three periods of Greek dress. The first of these is plainly the dark -age that followed the downfall of Crete and Mycenae, the age of the -Geometric pottery which about the year 700 B.C. began to make way for -orientalizing styles. This is the period _par excellence_ of dress-pins -and fibulae as shown by archaeological finds[1645], and the end of it, -_i.e._ the beginning of the seventh century, would be the natural time -for regulations curtailing or prohibiting their use. - -Much has been made of the fact that Thucydides deals exclusively with -male attire and Herodotus with female, and scholars who maintain that -the Aeginetan disaster occurred towards the middle of the sixth century -argue that in early Athens men would take the lead even in matters of -dress[1646] and that the early date implied by Thucydides for the male -Ionic costume in Attica need not hold for the female as well. If the -distinct dates were established beyond dispute the difference of sex -might serve as an explanation. We have seen however that there is -nothing in the words of Herodotus to justify a sixth century date for -the adoption of Ionic costume by Athenian women. - - - - - Appendix E (to p. 249). _The Dating of the latest Vases from the Forum - Cemetery_ - - -Among the Forum vases that look late are some skyphoi like the “Later -Ionic” of Sieveking and Hackl’s Munich Catalogue, _e.g._ _Notiz._ 1903, -p. 137, fig. 17, pp. 407 f., figs. 36, 42, 55, 57 (the last two from the -same grave as fig. 53, see _ibid._ fig. 52). These skyphoi are closely -related to a series of small, flat, handleless bowls similarly -decorated, _Notiz._ 1903, p. 137, fig. 17, p. 388, figs. 14, 15 (grave -G), p. 409, fig. 39 (grave I), p. 425, fig. 56 (grave K): for the -stylistic connexion cp. _Notiz._ 1903, p. 425, fig. 56 (handleless bowl) -with _ibid._ fig. 57 (skyphos). The context in which they were found at -Rome points to a date not later than fairly early in the sixth century: -_Notiz._ 1903, p. 137, fig. 17, was found acting as a lid (see _ibid._ -fig. 16) to the skyphos _ibid._ fig. 17 of the later Ionic style; -_Notiz._ 1903, p. 388, figs. 14, 15, were found in a single skeleton -grave (_ibid._ p. 385 and fig. 11) along with the Proto-Corinthian -lekythos, p. 388, fig. 17, that is probably of the seventh century, and -other vases that are probably of the sixth: fig. 39 is from a single -skeleton grave that contained also the “later Ionic” skyphoi, figs. 36, -42 (_ibid._ p. 400 and figs. 28, 31); fig. 56 is from a single skeleton -grave and had a similar context (_ibid._ p. 418 and fig. 52). All these -handleless cups (figs. 14, 15, 39, 56) are pierced near the brim with -pairs of small holes. This is a practice known in Greek pottery of the -Geometric and Proto-Corinthian period (_J.H.S._ XXX. p. 241, n. 42: add -_Notiz._ 1895, p. 238, found in the same grave with two sixth century -black figure vases. Two vases apparently somewhat similar in shape, -style, and decoration to this flat, handleless series, but without the -bored holes, were found at Rhitsona in graves of the end of the sixth -century, _Arch. Eph._ 1912, p. 115, fig. 15) but not to black and red -figure Attic pottery: it occurs on the probably seventh century cup from -grave M, _Notiz._ 1905, pp. 151, 155, figs. 9, 12. - -Other late-looking vases are the two figured _Notiz._ 1905, p. 150, fig. -7. Pais, _Ricerche_, I. (1915), p. 382, quoting Helbig dates them later -than the sixth century. But Piganiol, _Journ. des Sav._ 1915, p. 552, n. -4, supported by Dugas, argues for the possibility of an earlier date on -the ground that, though the shape might belong to the end of the fifth -century, the decoration, for which cp. Louvre C 44, figured by Pottier, -_Album_, I. pl. 23, points to the seventh. This argument will hardly do -as it stands. The vase cannot be older than its shape, which rather -recalls the fifth and fourth century festooned cups from Gnathia. But -though it so much recalls that period, it does not seem to find an exact -parallel in it, and the divergence may be more significant than the -similarity. No other vases were found in the same grave with these two, -so there is no context to suggest an earlier date: but if I am not -mistaken, fifth and fourth century Gnathia ware is similarly recalled -with a similar slight difference by another Forum vase, _Notiz._ 1903, -p. 408, fig. 37, found in a grave with nine others (including figs. 36, -38, 39, 42, quoted above) which all point to a sixth century date. It -must not be assumed that features common to early Greek and Italic wares -always began earlier in Greece: a whole series of Etruscan bucchero -vases has broad ribbon-shaped vertical handles that in Greek ware are -distinctive of the late sixth century potter Nikosthenes: yet one of -these bucchero vases comes from the early (seventh century) Regulini -Galassi tomb at Caere, see _Roem. Mitt._ XXII. p. 126, fig. 18, p. 207. -For Forum examples see _Notiz._ 1903, pp. 408, 422, figs. 38, 53. - - - - - Appendix F (to p. 249). _Evidence for Intramural Burials in Rome_ - - -Servius declares that the people of Rome and other cities originally -buried all their dead within the city and actually within the -house[1647]. The latter statement appears to be an inference from the -worship of the lares, “people used all to be buried in their own houses, -whence has arisen the practice of worshipping the lares within the -house,” but may be none the less true for that reason[1648]. Intramural -burials are prohibited in the Twelve Tables, “hominem mortuum in urbe ne -sepelito neve urito[1649],” a prohibition which implies a practice still -to some extent prevalent at the time[1650]. In the consulship of Duilius -the prohibition was re-enacted[1651], showing that even then the -practice was not altogether obsolete. Quite a number of exceptions were -allowed by law. Vestal virgins (both good and bad) and imperatores were -as such exempted[1652]. To come to concrete instances, the grandfather -of King Tullus Hostilius is said to have been buried “at the best spot -in the Forum[1653].” Tullus is a dubious figure in Roman history, and -still more so is his grandfather. There is some uncertainty too about -the case of the novem combusti, contemporaries of Spurius Cassius in the -early years of the republic[1654]. They may have been not cremated but -burnt alive[1655]. But there are plenty of later instances. Cicero -implies that the exceptions were well known when after quoting the -prohibition in his _de Legibus_ he makes another character in it at once -exclaim: “But what of the famous men who have been buried in the city -since?,” and immediately proceeds to quote the families of Valerius -Publicola and Postumius Tubertus, and the individual case of C. -Fabricius, buried in the Forum itself in 275 B.C. The exceptions in -favour of the Valerii and the Postumii apparently go back to the -beginning of the republic, when the consuls P. Valerius Publicola and P. -Postumius Q. f. Tubertus were buried within the walls[1656]. To the same -period went back the concession to the Claudii of a burial-place under -the Capitol[1657]. The intramural (?) tomb of the Cincii, and that of -“quidam Argiuorum illustres uiri” said to have been buried within the -city, rest on more doubtful evidence[1658]. That of the seven military -tribunes buried near the Circus in 267 B.C. may have been still without -the city. - -The archaeological evidence for intramural burials at Rome has been -discussed by Graffunder. At least two cases are well attested for the -early republican period[1659]. - - - - - INDEX - - - _A.J.A._ see _American Journal of Archaeology_ - - Aahmes, see Amasis, Pharaoh of Egypt - - Abdul Hamid, 270 - - Abel (E.), _Scholia Vetera in Pindari Nemea et Isthmia_, cited 258 n. 2 - - Abertawe (Swansea), 106 n. 3 - - _Abhandlungen d. bayerisch. Akademie d. Wissenschaften zu Muenchen_, - cited 199 n. 11, 200 n. 1 - - _Abhandlungen d. hist. phil. Gesellschaft Breslau_, see Haase - - _Abhandlungen d. preussisch. Akademie d. Wissenschaften zu Berlin_, - cited 39 n. 1; - see also Diels, Erman, Lepsius, Milchhoefer, Schweinfurth, Wiegand - - _Abhandlungen d. saechsischen Gesellschaft d. Wissenschaften_, see - Overbeck - - Abraham, 96 - - Abrahams (E. B.), _Greek Dress_, cited 166 n. 1 - - Abu Symbel, 123, 212 - - Abydos, 92 - - _Academy_, see Dennis - - Acarnania, 52 - - Acharnae, 310 - - Achilles, 48, 298 - - Acragas, see Agrigentum - - Acropolis of Agrigentum, 274; - of Athens, 17, 40 n. 6, 53, 63, 252, 253, 315 n. 5; - of Lampsacus, 281 - - Actaeon, favourite of Archias, 181 - - Adrastus, 179 n. 2, 261, 262, 264 n. 5 - - Adrianople, 200 n. 1 - - Aeacus, 176 n. 3 - - Aegean Sea, 33, 112, 130, 135, 286, 305, 330 - - Aegeis, 41 n. 3 - - Aegina, Aeginetans, 34, 57 n. 5, 64 n. 3, 68, 109, 116, 117, 154–157, - 160–162, 164–171, 173–178, 212 n. 8, 285, 294, 314–320, 324–326, - 330, 331, 333 - - Aeginetan weight system, 24 n. 1, 133, 156, 161, 164, 171–173, 175, - 263, 294 - - Aegon, 158 n. 6 - - Aeinautai, 269 - - Aelian, _Historia Animalium_, cited 95 n. 1; - _Varia Historia_, cited 10 n. 6, 17, 126 n. 4, 136 n. 3, 137 n. 1, - 145 n. 3, 150 n. 6, 155 n. 2, 193 n. 1, 272 n. 1, 273 n. 1, 275 n. - 1, 302 n. 6, 307 n. 4 - - Aeneas, 237 n. 1, 249 - - Aenus, 200 n. 1 - - Aeolic (pre-Dorian) stock, 193, 304; - see also pre-Dorian - - Aeolis, Aeolians, 69 n. 5, 246 - - _aes formatum_, 219 - - _aes graue_, 219, 232 - - _aes rude_, 219, 220 - - _aes signatum_, 219, 220 - - Aeschines, _contra Timarchum_, cited 12 n. 7, 13, 312 n. 1; - Schol. _contra Timarchum_, cited 310 - - Aeschines, Socratic philosopher, 30 - - Aeschines, tyrant of Sicyon, 66, 263 n. 5. - - Aeschines of Semachidai, 39 n. 1 - - Aeschylus, _Agamemnon_, cited 57 n. 5; - _Persae_, cited 47, 69 n. 4, 332; - Schol. _Persae_, cited 40 n. 9; - Schol. _Prometheus Bound_, cited 134 n. 2 - - Aesop, 56 n. 3 - - aesymnetes, αἰσυμνήτης, 8, 272, 301 - - Aethelred, 238 - - Aetolia, 196 n. 5, 263 n. 5 - - Africa, 3, 54, 87 - - Africanus, cited 93 n. 1, 98–100, 143 n. 2, 159 - - Agamemnon, 10 - - Agamemnon, king of Cyme, 147 - - Agariste, 157, 259 n. 1, 262 - - Agatharchides of Cnidus, 90 n. 3, 203 n. 4 - - Agathocles, 208–211, 276–278, 303 n. 2 - - Agesilaus, 20, 57, 291 - - ἀγορανόμοι, 12 - - ἀγοράζω, 80 - - agrarian laws, 230, 289 - - agriculture, 16, 24, 34, 264, 307–311; - see also farmers - - agricultural labourers, 24, 37, 38 - - Agrigentum, Acragas, 10 n. 1, 14, 274–278 _passim_, 296 - - agroikoi, 48; - see also farmers - - Ahala, see Servilius Ahala - - Aiakes, father of Polycrates, 81, 292 - - Aiakes, nephew of Polycrates, 75 - - αἰχμοφόρος, 143 - - Aipeia, 169 n. 1 - - Aithalia, 203 n. 4 - - ἀκήρατος, 68 - - Akkad, 197 - - akron, ἄκρον, ἄκρα, ἄκρη, 40, 41, 44, 291 - - ἀκτή, 312 - - Ala Shehr, 130 n. 7 - - alabastron, 119 - - Aladdin, 127, 148 - - Albertus (J.), ed. Hesychius, cited 40 - - Alcibiades, 17 - - Alciphron, cited 155 n. 1 - - Alcmaeon, 64, 65 - - Alcmaeonidae, Alcmaeonids, 14, 64–67, 231, 250, 292, 326, 328 - - Aldus, 311 - - Alexander Aetolus, cited 180 n. 2 - - Alexander Aphrodisiensis, _Problems_, cited 199 n. 9 - - Alexander the Great, 54 n. 1, 282 n. 4, 284, 288 - - Alexandria, 160 n. 7 - - Alexis, cited 21, 74 - - Alfred the Great, 91 n. 4, 237–239 - - Alopeke (modern Ampelokipi), 39 n. 1 - - Alyattes, 59 n. 6, 128, 137–139, 143 n. 1, 145 n. 3, 152 n. 2, 187 n. - 8, 273 - - Amasis, Aahmes, Pharaoh of Egypt, 68, 71, 83, 84, 87, 96 n. 4, 101–105, - 107 n. 4, 109, 112, 114, 115 n. 2, 116 n. 3, 117 n. 4, 121–124, 126, - 293 - - Amasis, potter, 245 - - Ambracia, 189, 213 n. 4, 263 n. 5 - - Ameinokles, 184, 325, 326 - - Amelung (W.), _apud_ Pauly-Wissowa, cited 166 n. 1 - - Amen Rud, see Ammeris - - America, see United States of America - - _American Journal of Archaeology_, cited 38 n. 2, 81 n. 3 - - _American Journal of Philology_, see Smith (K. F.) - - American School of Classical Studies, Athens, 163, 187 n. 2, 319 - - Ammeris, Amen Rud, Rud Amen, Nut Amen, 88 n. 1, 99 - - Ammianus Marcellinus, cited 208 n. 4 - - Ammonius, _Vita Aristotelis_, cited 282 n. 3 - - Amon, god of Thebes, 97 - - Ampelokipi, see Alopeke - - Amphictyons, Amphictyony, 65, 259 n. 2, 330 - - Amphikrates, king of Samos, 69 n. 5, 177, 178 - - ἀμφιφορῆες, 201 - - Amphipolis, 36 n. 1 - - Amphitrope (modern Metropisi), 39 - - amphorae, 113, 201, 205, 243 n. 1, 246, 253, 320 - - Anacreon, 84 - - Anaktorion, 189 - - Anaphlystus, 39, 41 - - Anatolia, 72 - - Anaxilas of Rhegium, 74, 75 - - Ancus Martius, 216, 217 n. 1 - - Andocides, cited 47 n. 7 - - Andreas, father of Orthagoras, 257, 263 - - Andros, 313 n. 1 - - Angel of the Lord, 92 - - Anglo-Saxons, 89 n. 1, 238 - - Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, 237 - - Ἀγκὼν γλυκύς, 76, 77 n. 3 - - _Annali dell’ Instituto_, see Bachofen - - Anno, see Hanno - - _Annual of the British School at Athens_, cited 317 n. 7; - see also Burrows, Edgar, Hogarth, Petrie, Ure - - antefix, terra cotta, 250–252 - - _Anthologia Lyrica_, cited 14; - see also Bergk - - _Anthologia Palatina_, cited 201 - - _Antike Denkmäler_, cited 242 n. 3 - - Antiochis, 39, 41 n. 3 - - Antiochus I, 147 n. 1, 285 - - Antiochus of Syracuse, 274 n. 1 - - Antiphilus (_Anth. Pal._), cited 201 - - S. Antonia, church of, 252 - - Anysis, 88 n. 1 - - Apamea, 147 n. 1, 208 - - Aphaia, temple of, 318–320 - - Aphrodite, 107 n. 4, 118, 119, 191 n. 3, 305, 318, 319 - - Apis stelai, 99 n. 1 - - ἀπόγονος, 157 - - Apollo, 65, 70, 107 n. 4, 110, 116, 117, 123, 138 n. 9, 144, 263 n. 5, - 305 - - Apollodorus, cited 180 - - Apollonius Rhodius, _Argonautica_, 195 n. 2; - _Foundation of Naukratis_, cited 117; - Schol. _Argonautica_, cited 44 n. 4, 146 n. 7, 180, 181 - - Appi Forum, 233 - - Appian, _Bellum Civile_, cited 39 n. 4, 50 n. 1; - _Bellum Mithridaticum_, cited 189 n. 8; - _Bellum Syriacum_, cited 285 n. 1 - - Appian Way, see Via Appia - - Appius Claudius Caecus, 211, 232, 233, 295 - - Appius Claudius the decemvir, 231 - - Apries, Haa ab ra, Hophra, 88 n. 1, 105, 122, 123 - - Apuleius, _Florida_, cited 69 n. 4 - - aqueducts, 62 n. 6, 76, 232, 267 - - Arabia, Arabians, Arabs, 100 n. 8, 116, 261 n. 2 - - _Arabian Nights_, 145 - - Aracoeli, church of, 252 - - Aratus, 257 n. 1 - - arbitrators, 11 - - Arcadia, 211, 212 - - Arcesilaus II of Cyrene, 74 n. 3 - - Arcesilaus III of Cyrene, 74, 82 n. 1 - - _Archäologische-epigraphische Mitteilungen aus Oesterreich_, cited 319 - n. 2 - - _Archäologische Zeitung_, see Furtwaengler, Preller - - _Archäologischer Anzeiger_, cited 110 n. 4, n. 7, 115 n. 1; - see also Assmann, Fabricius - - _Archaiologike Ephemeris_, cited 15 n. 4, 169 n. 5; - see also Doerpfeld, Skias - - “archers,” Persian coins, 57, 291 - - Archias of Corinth, 180–182 - - Archias of Sparta, 84 - - Archilochus, cited 36 n. 3, 55 n. 4, 129 n. 6, 134, 143 n. 3, 145 n. 4, - 152 - - archons, 326, 329 - - Ardaillon (E.), _Les Mines de Laurium_, cited 40 n. 9, 46, 48 n. 3; - _apud_ Saglio, _Dictionnaire des Antiquités_, cited 44 n. 5 - - Ardea, 234, 235, 296 - - Ardys, 135, 136, 143, 152, 273, 293 - - Argeadae, 183 - - Argolis, the Argolid, 164, 177, 179, 315–318, 320, 333 n. 4 - - Argonauts, 148 n. 3, 265 - - Argos, Argive, 24 n. 1, 33, 69 n. 5, 79 n. 2, 82, 149, 152 n. 2, chap. - VI _passim_, 184, 185, 259, 261, 264 n. 5, 292, 294, 314, 316–319, - 323, 325, 330, 331, 337 - - Argive pottery, 318; - see also Proto-Corinthian - - Aricia, 238, 249, 279 - - Aridaios, 281 - - Axion, 191 n. 2 - - Aristagoras, historian, 90 n. 1, 96 n. 4 - - Aristagoras, tyrant, 59 n. 1, 62 n. 4 - - Aristarchus of Ephesus, 272 - - Aristides, Publius Aelius, cited 184 n. 2 - - Aristippus, 30 - - Aristodemus of Cumae, 14, 247, 278 - - Aristodemus, ancestor of Spartan kings, 180 - - Aristogeiton, 253, 302 - - Aristokypros, 158 - - Aristonothos, 323 - - Aristophanes, _Acharnians_, cited 17, 59 n. 1, 265 n. 3; - _Birds_, cited 58, 61; - _Clouds_, cited 40, 51 n. 2, 207 n. 6; - _Frogs_, cited 17, 187 n. 1; - _Lysistrata_, cited 63; - _Peace_, cited 265 n. 3; - _Plutus_, cited 13 n. 1, 20; - _Thesmophoriazusae_, cited 17, 207, 302 n. 6; - _Wasps_, cited 51 n. 2, 201 n. 8; - Schol. _Birds_, cited 54, 58 n. 1; - Schol. _Clouds_, cited 327 n. 2, 328; - Schol. _Knights_, cited 51 n. 2, 61; - Schol. _Lysistrata_, cited 313; - Schol. _Peace_, cited, 199 n. 3, n. 9, 200; - Schol. _Thesmophoriazusae_, cited 207 n. 5; - Schol. _Wasps_, cited 201 n. 8, 313 - - Aristotle, 6, 22, 32, 192, 195, 200 n. 2, 212, 258, 267, 280–282, 284, - 286, 288, 290, 296, 297, 300, 301, 328 - - Aristotle, _Constitution of the Athenians_, 19 n. 1; - cited 13 n. 6, 16 n. 6, n. 9, 29 n. 1, 31, 35 n. 1, n. 4, 36, 37, - 46–48, 49 n. 3, 51 n. 2, 55 n. 1, 59 n. 5, 60, 61, 64, 65, 166 n. - 6, 171 n. 2, 302, 307, 308, 326 n. 8, n. 9, 327 n. 1, n. 2; - _Constitution of the Sicyonians_, 258; - _Historia Animalium_, cited 199, 211, 309; - _Meteorologica_, cited 87 n. 9; - _Mirabiles Auscultationes_, cited 138, 147, 148; - _Ode to Virtue_, 283; - _Oeconomica_, cited 63, 189, 283 n. 6; - _Politics_, cited 1, 2, 10–12, 14, 18–20, 22 n. 1, 24 n. 3, 25, 27, - 28, 31, 35 n. 3, n. 5, 67, 76 n. 4, 77, 154, 182, 189 n. 1, 190 n. - 2, 191 n. 2, 194, 196 n. 6, 198, 213, 257 n. 1, 258, 264, 265, 268 - n. 3, 270, 274–276, 282–284, 303, 307; - _Rhetoric_, cited 18, 134 n. 4, 264 n. 6, 265, 275 - - Arnobius, _adversus Gentes_, cited 238 n. 3 - - Arrian, _Periplous_, cited 265 n. 6 - - Artemidorus of Ephesus, 90 n. 3 - - Artemis, 128, 130 n. 6, 245, 246 n. 1 - - _artifices_, 235 - - artizans, 15–21, 49, 92, 95, 103, 139, 217, 218, 222–225, 230, 233, - 269, 292, 295, 305; - see also manual labour - - aryballi, 112 - - _as_, 149 - - Ashdown, 238 - - Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, 112 n. 8 - - Asia, 57, 58, 135, 191 n. 3, 221, 284, 286, 291 - - Asia Minor, 20, 91, 132, 142, 144, 155, 187, 205, 246 n. 8, 285, 300, - 316, 333 - - Asine, 331 - - Asser, _Life of Alfred_, 237 - - Assmann, _Archäologischer Anzeiger_, cited 321 n. 5; - _Berliner Philologische Wochenschrift_, cited 324 n. 3, 326 n. 3, 327 - n. 5 - - Assos, 280–282 - - Assurbanipal, 88, 91, 99 n. 3 - - Assyria, 86, 88, 89 n. 1, n. 3, 91, 92, 97–99, 101, 102, 121 n. 4, 129, - 144, 214, 292 - - Asylum, Asyla, 39 n. 4, 50 - - Atarneus, 280–284 - - ἀτελές, 135 - - Athelney, 238 - - Athena, 14, 16, 51–55, 60, 61, 63, 214 n. 4, 276, 291 - - Athena Ergane, 16 n. 7 - - Athenaeus, cited 21 n. 4, 22 n. 3, 23 n. 1, 45, 50 n. 2, 51 n. 2, 55 n. - 1, 70 n. 5, 73 n. 5, n. 6, 74, 76–80, 100, 101 n. 5, 103 n. 6, 104 - n. 4, 117 n. 3, 118 n. 5, 126 n. 4, 139 n. 3, 144 n. 3, 167 n. 1, n. - 4, n. 5, 187 n. 1, 191 n. 3, 208 n. 1, n. 4, 211 n. 6, 259 n. 1, 268 - n. 3, 269 n. 6, 270 n. 1, 271 n. 6, 275 n. 1, 281 n. 3, n. 5, 283 n. - 4, n. 5, 284 n. 4, 309 n. 3, 336 n. 1 - - Athenagoras, 272 - - _Athenische Mitteilungen_, see _Mitteilungen des deutschen - archäologischen Instituts in Athen_ - - Athens, Athenians, 7, 12, 13–17, 19, 21, 25, 28, 30, 31, chap. II - _passim_, 69, 72 n. 2, 76 n. 5, 78, 80 n. 5, 83, 86, 92 n. 2, 137, - 147, 149, 151 n. 2, 162 n. 3, 163, 165, 166, 168–176, 178 n. 1, 181, - 183 n. 6, 196 n. 5, 215, 229 n. 1, 231, 239 n. 4, 245, 250–253, 258 - n. 4, 260, 261, 264–266, 268, 274, 280, 287, 291, 292, 294, 302–305, - 309–311, 321–334 - - Athribis, 214 n. 3 - - Atotes the miner, 48 - - Attalids, 284–286, 289 - - Attalus, (?) father of Philetairos, 284 n. 4 - - Attalus I, 285, 288 - - Attalus III, 288, 289 - - _Atti d. Reale Accademia d. Torino_, see De Gubernatis - - Attica, Attic, 16, 21 n. 1, chap. II _passim_, 74, 79, 166, 168–170, - 174, 251, 291, 307–313, 315, 327, 329, 334 - - Attic pottery, 34, 113, 115, 167, 168, 170, 202, 203, 245, 25 n. 1, - 253, 254, 314–320, 321, 335; - see also Proto-Attic, Black Figure, Red Figure - - Atys, 140 - - Aubert (H.) and Wimmer (F.), ed. Aristotle _Historia Animalium_, cited - 211 n. 3 - - Augustus, 37 - - Aulon, 312 - - Aurelius Victor, _de Viris Illustribus_, cited 215–217, 221, 223 n. 1, - n. 5, 224 n. 5, 229 n. 4, 238 n. 3, 245 - - Australia, 164 - - Auxesia, 167, 170, 175, 320 - - Avignon, 3 - - - _B.C.H._ see _Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique_ - - _B.S.A._ see _Annual of the British School at Athens_ - - Babelon (E.), in _Corolla Numismatica_, cited 56 n. 2, 60 n. 2; - _Journal International d’Archéologie Numismatique_, cited 51 n. 3, - 52, 53, 56 n. 2, 64; - _Les Origines de la Monnaie_, cited 129 n. 1, 130 n. 2, 131 n. 2, 137 - n. 2, 141, 142, 148 n. 6, 149, 150, 152 n. 2, 161 n. 1, 162 n. 3, - 220 n. 4; - _Revue Numismatique_, cited 69 n. 5, 75 n. 1, 128 n. 1, 130 n. 2, 131 - n. 2, 132, 133, 143 n. 1 - - Babylon, 123, 214, 311 - - Babylonian weight standard, 132 - - Bacchiads, 26 n. 2, 180–183, 187 n. 9, 190, 192–194, 196 n. 3, 197, 272 - - Bacchis, 193 n. 3 - - Bacchylides, cited 129 n. 7, 138 n. 9, 144 n. 4, 169 - - Bachofen, _Tanaquil_, cited 236 n. 2; - _Annali dell’ Instituto_, cited 253 n. 4 - - Baedeker, _Greece_, cited 39 n. 6 - - Baetis (modern Guadalquivir), 177 n. 6 - - Bakenranf, see Bocchoris - - Balylon, 311 - - Βάναυσον, τὸ, 20 - - Bank of England, 26 - - bankers, 2, 3, 137 n. 2, 141–143, 152, 280–283, 286, 296 - - Barnabei and Cozza, _Notizie degli Scavi_, cited 244 n. 1, 246 n. 7 - - Barth (H.), _Corinthiorum Commercii et Mercaturae Historiae particula_, - cited 187 n. 1, 192 n. 5, 261 n. 2 - - Basilidae, 271, 272 - - Baton of Sinope, cited 271, 272 - - Battus of Cyrene, 123 - - Bauer, _Sitzungsberichte d. Akademie d. Wissenschaften in Wien_, cited - 197 n. 6, n. 8, 209 - - bazaar, 4, 77, 286, 292 - - Becker (W. A.), _Charicles_, cited 336 n. 1 - - beehives, 199–201 - - beehive tombs, 224 n. 5 - - Bekker (I.), _Lexicon Seguerianum_ (in _Anecdota Graeca_), cited 39, 41 - n. 3, 57, 310 n. 4, 326 n. 9, 327 n. 9 - - Beloch (J.), 177 n. 3, 265 n. 1, 331; - _Griechische Geschichte_^2, cited 33 n. 1, 51, 52, 63, 67 n. 1, 158, - 161 n. 3, 192 n. 1, 210, 259 n. 5, 269 n. 1, 300 n. 1, n. 2, 325 - n. 9; - _Rheinisches Museum f. Philologie_, cited 21 n. 1, 34 n. 2, 51 n. 4, - 315 n. 3; - _Zeitschrift f. Socialwissenschaft_, cited 22 n. 7 - - _benignitas_, 227 - - Bent (J. T.), _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, cited 44 n. 5, 243 n. 1 - - Bentivoglio, Santo, 2 - - Bentley (Richard), 274 - - Bérard (V.), _Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique_, cited 48 n. 2 - - Berezan, 110, 114 - - Bergk (T.), _Anthologia Lyrica_, cited 48 n. 4, 180 n. 2 - - von Bergmann, _Numismatische Zeitschrift_, cited 148 n. 6 - - Berkshire Downs, 238 - - Berlin Museum, 204, 253 n. 4 - - _Berliner Philologische Wochenschrift_, see Assmann, Buechsenschuetz, - Furtwaengler - - Bermion, Mount, 146 n. 7 - - Bernardini tomb, 93 n. 3 - - von Bernhardi (F. A. J.), _Germany and the Next War_, cited 5, 6 - - Bertha, sister of Charlemagne, 193 n. 7 - - Besa, 39 - - Bevan (E. R.), _House of Seleucus_, cited 285 n. 2 - - Binder (J. J.), _Laurion_, cited 44 n. 5 - - Birch (S.), _History of Ancient Pottery_, cited 187 n. 1 - - von Bissing (W.), 93 - - Black Figure pottery, 107 n. 4, 110, 113, 115, 202, 203, 253, 254, 315, - 317, 319, 326 n. 3, 335 - - Black Glaze pottery, 107 n. 4, 108 - - Black Sea, 112, 114, 265 n. 2, 266, 297 - - _blandimenta_, 227 - - Bloch, _La République Romaine_, cited 226 n. 6, 233 n. 6 - - Bluemner (H.), _apud_ Hermann, _Lehrbuch d. griechischen Antiquitäten_, - cited 201 n. 4; - _Gewerbliche Tätigkeit_, cited 187 n. 7, 266; - _Technologie u. Terminologie der Gewerbe u. Künste_, cited 203 n. 2, - n. 4; - _Wochenschrift f. klassische Philologie_, cited 199 n. 1; - see also Hitzig and Bluemner - - Bocchoris, Bakenranf, 88 n. 1, 93–98, 100, 103, 292, 293 - - Bode (W.), 253 n. 4 - - Boeckh (A.), _Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum_, cited 80 n. 4; - _Kleine Schriften_, cited 280 n. 1, 282 n. 2, n. 4, 283 n. 3; - _Public Economy of Athens_, cited 23 n. 1, 44 n. 2, 56 n. 4, 308 n. - 2, 310 n. 4, 328 n. 2, 330 n. 3 - - Boehlau (J.), _Aus ionischen u. italischen Nekropolen_, cited 110 n. 9, - 111 n. 1, n. 2, 112, 252; - _Jahrbuch des deutschen archäologischen Instituts_, cited 315 n. 4 - - Boeotia, 24, 106, 108, 114, 196 n. 5, 198 n. 5, 248 - - Boeotian Kylix style of pottery, 110 - - Bolbitine mouth of the Nile, 90, 91 - - _Bollettino di Filologia Classica_, see Costanzi - - Bologna, 2 - - _bona_, 227 - - Bonacossi, _La Chine et les Chinois_, cited 133, 141 n. 3 - - Boni (G.), _Journal of Roman Studies_, cited 224 n. 5, 253; - _Notizie degli Scavi_, cited 248 - - Bonnet (A.), see Salvioli - - Borrell (H. P.), _Numismatic Chronicle_, cited 131 n. 1 - - Bosporus, 76 - - _Boston Museum of Fine Arts Report_, cited 60 n. 1 - - Boswell, _Life of Johnson_, cited 281 - - “boundary estates,” 310 - - Bourlos, 91 - - Boyle (Charles), 274 - - Brahami, 39 n. 1 - - Branchidae, 81, 123 - - Brandis (J.), _Münz-, Mass-, u. Gewichtswesen_, cited 74 n. 6, 130 n. - 3; - _Zeitschrift f. Numismatik_, cited 150 n. 1 - - Brants, _Revue de l’Instruction Publique en Belgique_, cited 21 n. 3 - - Brasidas, 50 n. 7 - - Brauron, 310 n. 2, 311, 312 - - breakwater, 70, 76 - - Breasted (J. H.), _Ancient Records of Egypt_, cited 44 n. 5, 95 n. 3, - 98 n. 6, 99 n. 3, 100 n. 4, 122 n. 5, 123 n. 1, 212 n. 6; - _History of Egypt_, cited 87 n. 3, 92 n. 1, 97 n. 3, 100 n. 4, 101 n. - 1 - - Bremer (W.), _Die Haartracht des Mannes in archaisch-griechischer - Zeit_, cited 55 n. 5, 56 n. 1 - - brickmakers, 20 - - Brilessos, 44 - - Britain, 89 n. 1, 306 n. 5 - - British Museum, 81, 101, 109 n. 6, 128, 171 n. 6, 283 - - _British Museum Catalogue of Chinese Coins_, cited 141 n. 3 - - _British Museum Catalogue of Greek Coins_, Corinth, cited 188 n. 2; - Ionia, cited 132, 133; - Lydia, cited 130 n. 7, 138 n. 1; - Troas, cited 131 n. 1 - - _British Museum Catalogue of Coins of Central Greece_, cited 54 n. 5 - - _British Museum Coins of the Roman Republic_, cited 220 n. 3, 221 n. 7 - - _British Museum Catalogue of Greek Vases_, cited 62 n. 6, 246 n. 2; - _of Terracottas_, cited 246 n. 7; - _of Jewellery_, cited 171 n. 1; - _of Finger Rings_, cited 70 n. 3 - - _British Museum Excavations at Ephesus_, cited 128 n. 3, 130 n. 6 - - British School at Athens, 332 - - bronze, 80 n. 4, 89–91, 122, 203, 228 n. 3, n. 4, 263; - casting, 87; - and copper coinage, 142, 218, 219, 221; - sculpture, 243, 246, 263 - - brooches, 168, 170, 171, 173, 174; - see also _fibulae_, jewellery - - Brueckner and Pernice, _Athenische Mitteilungen_, cited 169 n. 7, 321 - n. 6, 323 n. 1, 326 n. 3 - - Brugsch (H.), cited 96 n. 2, 97 n. 4; - _Geschichte Aegyptens_, cited 125 n. 3 - - Brutus, 223–225, 230, 231, 234, 239 - - Brygos, potter, 204 n. 1 - - Bryson, 81 - - Bubastis, 121 n. 3 - - bucchero vases, 335 - - Buda-Pesth, 106 n. 3 - - Buechsenschuetz (A. B.), _Berliner Philologische Wochenschrift_, cited - 327 n. 5, 329 n. 6; - _Besitz u. Erwerb im griechischen Altertume_, cited 22; - _Die Hauptstätten des Gewerbfleisses im klassischen Altertume_, cited - 266 - - Buerchner (L.), cited 272 n. 4 - - Buffalo, 267 - - bull, brazen, 275, 278 n. 2 - - _Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique_, cited 55 n. 3, 108 n. 2; - see also Bérard, Gerster, Kampanes - - _Bullettino della Commissione Archeologica Municipale di Roma_, see - Pinza, Rizzo - - _Bullettino dell’ Instituto_, cited 242 n. 1 - - Bunbury sale, 55 n. 3 - - de Burgh (W. G.), 27 n. 4 - - Burgon (T.), cited 150 - - burials, intramural, 249, 336–338 - - Burnet (J.), _Thales to Plato_, cited 30 n. 1, 284 n. 1 - - Burrows (R. M.), _Recent Discoveries in Crete_, cited 76 n. 7; - and Ure (P. N.), _Annual of the British School at Athens_, cited 107 - n. 1, 108 n. 1, 110 n. 6, 113 n. 1; - _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, cited 108 n. 1, 113 n. 1, 114 n. 5, - 248 - - Bursian (C.), _Geographie von Griechenland_, cited 44, 260 n. 2, 309; - _Jahresbericht ü. d. Fortschritte d. klassischen - Altertumswissenschaft_, see Lenschau - - Bury (J. B.), _History of Greece_, cited 45 n. 5, 159 n. 2, 170, 212 n. - 5, 264 n. 3, 278 n. 2, 303 n. 2; - _The Nemean Odes of Pindar_, cited 157, 160 n. 5, 259 n. 1, 260 - - Buschor (E.), _Griechische Vasenmalerei_, cited 114 n. 6, 169 n. 3, 246 - n. 2, n. 3, 315 n. 1, 318 n. 7, 323 n. 2 - - Busolt (G.), cited 159 n. 2; - _Griechische Geschichte_^2, cited 2, 35 n. 2, 48 n. 6, 70 n. 2, 128 - n. 1, 156, 157 n. 4, 159 n. 2, 160, 187, 188, 189 n. 3, n. 4, 191 - n. 4, 192 n. 1, 193 n. 2, 194, 214, 264 n. 5, 265, 317 n. 5, 325 - n. 9, 326 n. 6, 329; - _Die Lakedaimonier_, cited 187 n. 9, 192 n. 1, n. 4, n. 5, 305 n. 2, - n. 3 - - Butacides, 239, 255 - - Butades, sculptor, 186 n. 1, 244 n. 1 - - butcher, 257 - - _Butler County Democrat_, cited 5 n. 8 - - Byrd (William), 245 n. 1 - - Byron, Lord, 3, 127, 285, 298; - _Don Juan_, cited 148 - - Byzantium, 265, 311 - - - _C.I.A._ see _Corpus Inscriptionum Atticarum_ - - _C.I.G._ see _Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum_ - - _C.I.L._ see _Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum_ - - _C.R._ see _Classical Review_ - - Cadys, 135, 136 n. 3 - - Caeculus, 238 n. 3 - - Caere, 219, 240, 242 n. 1, 243, 246, 255, 335 - - Caeretan hydriae, 246, 255 - - Caesar (title), 4, 303 - - Caesar, Julius, 32, 311 n. 1; - _de Bello Gallico_, cited 162 n. 1 - - Cairo, 77 - - cakes, 238, 239 - - California, 142 n. 5 - - Caligula, 160 - - Camarina, 10 n. 2 - - Cambyses, 72, 80, 102 n. 1 - - Camirian pottery, 112 n. 1; - see also Milesian pottery - - Campania, 160, 232, 233, 246, 247 - - Camps at Daphnae, 112 n. 4, 121 - - canals, 87, 189, 191, 267 - - Candaules, 136, 144, 146 - - Canopus, 96 n. 2 - - Capitol, Rome, 224 n. 5, 237, 252–254, 337 - - Capitoline wolf, 253, 254 - - Capua, 233 - - caravans, 135, 145, 147, 149, 273 - - Caria, Carians, 89, 90, 96, 122, 123, 145, 269, 324 - - Caromemphites, 96 n. 4 - - carpenters, 14, 17, 20, 134 n. 4, 222, 224 - - Cartault (A. G. C.), _Monuments Grecs_, cited 321 n. 3 - - Carter (J. B.), trans. Huelsen, _Forum Romanum_, cited 247 n. 5 - - Carthage, 30, 72, 240, 278 n. 2, 282; - see also Phoenicians - - Carthagena, 45 - - Carystius, 284 n. 4 - - Casagrandi (V.), _Nouem Combusti_ (appendix to _Minores Gentes_), cited - 337 n. 3 - - Casaubon, _apud_ Schweighaeuser, ed. Athenaeus, cited 270 n. 2; - ed. Athenaeus, cited 77 n. 1; - ed. Diogenes Laertius, _Solon_, cited 40 n. 6 - - Caspari (M. O. B.), see Mitchell - - Cassiodorus, _Variae_, cited 218 - - Cassius Hemina, 224 n. 5 - - Cassius Iatrosophistes, _Problemata_, cited 199 n. 9 - - Cassius, Spurius, 32 n. 2, 228, 233, 255 n. 1, 337 - - caste, 87 n. 3, 122 n. 1 - - Castelnuovo di Porto, 219 - - Castor, cited 181 - - Cato, _apud_ Schol. Veron. _ad_ Virgil, _Aen._, cited 238 n. 3 - - Caucasus, 41, 44 - - Cauer (F.), _apud_ Pauly-Wissowa, cited 161 n. 2, 331 n. 3; - _Parteien u. Politiker in Megara u. Athen_, cited 46 n. 5, 265 n. 2, - 266, 268 n. 2 - - Cavaignac (E.), _Études sur l’histoire financière d’Athènes au V^e - siècle_, cited 21 n. 1, n. 2, 41 n. 2, 309 n. 10; - _Vierteljahrschrift f. Social- u. Wirtschafts-Geschichte_, cited 47 - n. 6 - - cavalry organization, 240 - - Cecrops, 41 n. 3 - - Cedrenus, _Synopsis Historiarum_, cited 71 n. 4 - - Celts, 285 - - centuries, 230 - - Ceres, 228 n. 3, n. 4, 240 n. 2, 250 n. 1 - - χαῖρε, 255 - - Chalcedon, 265 - - Chalcis, 261, 316, 330 - - Chalmers’ shillings, 142 n. 5 - - chamber tombs, 246 - - chambers of bronze, 263 - - Chancellor of the Exchequer, 4 - - χαρακτήρ, 64 - - Charaxos, 104 - - Charisius, _Ars Grammatica_ (ed. Keil), cited 218 n. 5 - - Charlemagne, 193 n. 7 - - Charon, 134 n. 4 - - Cheiromache, Cheiromachoi, 269, 270 - - χειρώναξ, 269 - - Chem Peh’-resu, 214 n. 5 - - Chersias, 195, 196, 197 n. 3 - - Chersonese, Thracian, 53, 63 n. 7, 199 n. 10, 245 n. 2 - - Chicago, 267 - - Chigi vase, 316 n. 10 - - Chilon, 332 - - China, 133, 141, 142 - - Chios, 23 n. 1, 191 n. 3, 253 - - χλανίς, 79, 80 - - χρήματα, χρηματίζεσθαι, 25, 36 - - _Chronicles, 2nd Book of_, cited 92 n. 3 - - Chronographer of 354 A.D., cited 224 n. 5, 226 n. 3 - - χρυσοῦ καὶ ἀργύρου, 132 - - church music, 245 n. 1 - - χύτραι, χυτρίδες, 320 - - Ciccotti (E.), _Il Tramonto d. Schiavitù nel Mondo antico_, cited 3 n. - 2, 20, 22, 29 n. 3 - - Cicero, _de Amicitia_, cited 228 n. 1, 229 n. 2; - _ad Atticum_, cited 57 n. 2, 275 n. 1; - _Brutus_, cited 35 n. 3; - _in Catilinam_, cited 229 n. 2; - _de Divinatione_, cited 238 n. 3, 275 n. 1; - _de Finibus_, cited 70 n. 3; - _de Legibus_, cited 336 n. 3, 337; - _de Officiis_, cited 15 n. 6, 20 n. 6, 145 n. 6, 151 n. 4, 225 n. 2, - 302 n. 6; - _de Oratore_, cited 35 n. 3; - _Philippics_, cited 226, 228 n. 1, 229 n. 2; - _pro Rabirio_, cited 226 n. 5; - _de Republica_, cited 215 n. 2, 221 n. 5, 222 n. 7, 223 n. 5, 225 n. - 2, 228 n. 1, 229 n. 2, 240, 241; - _de Senectute_, cited 229 n. 2; - _Tusculanae Quaestiones_, cited 247 n. 3; - _in Verrem_, cited 275 n. 2; - Schol. Bobiens. _pro Sulla_, cited 215 n. 2 - - Cimmerians, 137, 141 n. 1, 144, 146, 187 - - Cimon, 67 - - Cincii, 337 - - Cincinnati _Commercial Gazette_, cited 5 n. 8 - - Circus, Circus Maximus, 240 n. 2, 338 - - _Classical Philology_, see Frank - - _Classical Review_, cited 112 n. 8, 319 n. 5; - see also Cook, Headlam - - Claudii, 231, 337; - see also Appius - - Claudius Drusus, 233 - - Claudius (Emperor), 215 n. 2 - - Clazomenae, pottery of, 114, 115 n. 2, 121 n. 5, 246 - - Clearchus, cited 76 n. 6, 77, 78 n. 1, 139 n. 3 - - Cleisthenes of Athens, 17, 28, 29, 39, 45, 65, 66, 67, 258 n. 4, 291, - 310 n. 2, 312, 327, 330 n. 3 - - Cleisthenes of Sicyon, 66, 179 n. 2, 180 n. 3, 215, 258–264 - - Clement of Alexandria, _Stromata_, cited 93 n. 2, 146 n. 7, 325 n. 8 - - Cleomenes of Sparta, 79 n. 2 - - Cleomenes (Cleomis) of Methymna, 191 n. 3 - - Cleon, 30 - - Cleonae, 194 - - Clerc (M.), _Les Métèques Athéniens_, cited 22 - - _clientela_, clients, 233, 277, 296 - - _cloaca maxima_, 247 - - Clytus, cited 73, 74 - - Cnidus, 90 n. 3 - - coast, party of the coast, 35, 41, 47, 48, 52, 64 (shore), 291, 312, - 313 - - Cobbett (William), _Paper against Gold_, cited 3 - - cobblers, boot-makers, 17, 139 n. 2 - - coinage, debasement of, 64 n. 3, 74, 183 n. 6; - invention of, 1, 2, 3, 127, 129, 131, 133, 140, 147, 155, 161, 178, - 290, 293, 304 - - coins, 52–58, 60, 61, 63, 64, 74, 75, 84, 127–133, 137, 138, 140–143, - 147, 149, 150, 155–157, 160–162, 164, 166 n. 2, 170–173, 175, 176, - 178, 188, 199–201, 204, 205, 209, 213 n. 4, 218–221, 231, 232, 246, - 290, 293–296, 304 - - Collatinus, 226, 227 - - _collegia opificum_, 222 - - colonies, colonization, 189, 190, 265, 266, 294, 300 - - Colophon, 133 - - colossus, 189, 192 n. 5 - - “colts” (coins), 188 - - Columbus, Ohio, 235 n. 3 - - Columella, cited 201 n. 5, n. 8, 309 n. 7 - - _Comitia centuriata_, 230 - - Commons, House of, 4 - - _Companion to Greek Studies_, cited 179 n. 3 - - _Companion to Latin Studies_, cited 221 n. 6 - - Conca (Satricum), 219 n. 4, 243 n. 4, 244 n. 1, 246 - - Constantinople, 77 - - _Constitution of the Athenians_, see Aristotle - - contracts, 93 - - Conway (R. S.), quoted 76 n. 7, 134 n. 5, 223 n. 3 - - Conze (A.), _Jahrbuch_, cited 205 n. 2, n. 3, n. 4, 206 n. 3 - - cook, 257 - - Cook (A. B.), _Classical Review_, cited 262 n. 3 - - copper, 82, 203 n. 1, n. 4 - - copper coinage, see bronze coinage - - copper mines, 37 n. 1 - - coppersmiths, 14, 222, 224 - - Coptic, 126 - - Corcyra (Corfu), 63 n. 5, 184, 187 n. 9, 188, 213, 214, 244 n. 1, 321 - - Corinth, 14, 21, 22, 28 n. 7, 30, 31, 33, 34, 62 n. 6, 63, 68, 76 n. 5, - 123, 124, 167, 178–180, 182, 183, chap. VII _passim_, 215–217, - 240–242, 244, 245, 247, 248 n. 2, 251, 255–257, 259, 260, 263 n. 5, - 266 n. 1, 272, 274, 287, 293–295, 304, 306 n. 1, 316, 317, 321, 325 - - Corinthian drachma, 57; - helmet, 54 n. 6; - pottery, 1, 21, 34, 46, 109 n. 5, 112, 117 n. 4, 186, 187, 208 n. 1, - 212 n. 8, 241–245, 251, 295, 315–319 - - corner (in oil), 2, 12 - - Corneto, 93, 187, 215; - see also Tarquinii - - Cornford (F. M.), _Thucydides Mythistoricus_, cited 25, 261 - - _Corolla Numismatica: Numismatic Essays in Honour of Barclay V. Head_; - see Babelon, Evans, Fox - - _Corpus Inscriptionum Atticarum_, cited 14, 15, 39, 40 n. 9, 41 n. 3, - 50 n. 3, n. 5, 56 n. 4, 312 n. 1, 313 n. 2 - - _Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum_, 80 n. 4, 208 n. 2 - - _Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum_, cited 215 n. 2, 223 n. 2 - - Corsica, 221 n. 2, 240 - - Costanzi (V.), _Bollettino di Filologia Classica_, cited 51 n. 4; - _Rivista di Storia Antica_, cited 34 n. 2, 51 n. 4, 177 n. 3, 329 n. - 1 - - Cozza, see Barnabei - - Crassus, 23 - - Cratinus, 13 n. 3 - - Crete, Cretan, 128, 156 n. 2, 169, 263 n. 5, 298, 330, 333; - Cretan bull cult, 278 n. 2 - - criers, 17 - - Crimea, 1 - - Croeseids, 130, 137 - - Croesus, 104 n. 3, 123, 127, 128, 130–133, 136 n. 3, 137–140, 143 n. 1, - n. 3, 144, 145 n. 2, n. 3, n. 4, 148 n. 3, 152, 176, 215, 272, 273, - 289, 293 - - Cromwell, 194 - - Croton, Crotonian, 239, 255 - - Cruchon (G.), _Banques dans l’Antiquité_, cited 141 n. 1, 143 n. 1, 221 - n. 4 - - crucifixion of followers of Spartacus, 23 - - Cumae, 14, 228, 240, 246, 247, 251, 278–279, 296, 316 - - Curtius (E.), _Ephesus_, cited 272 n. 3; - _Griechische Geschichte_, cited 36 n. 3, 159 n. 2, 198 n. 9; - _Peloponnesos_, cited 191 n. 6; - _Stadtgeschichte v. Athen_, cited 63 n. 2 - - Curtius (G.), _Studien z. griech. u. latein. Grammatik_, cited 327 n. 8 - - Curtius (L.), _Athenische Mitteilungen_, cited 81, 82 - - Curtius, Marcus, 248 n. 1 - - Cyaxares, 90, 91 - - Cyclades, 169 n. 1 - - cylinders, inscribed Assyrian, 91, 98, 99 n. 3 - - Cylon, 34, 69, 264, 326, 328, 329 - - Cyme, 130 n. 6, 131, 135, 136, 147, 155 n. 2, 273, 281 - - Cynosura, 40 - - Cyprus, Cypriote, 46, 108 n. 7, 119, 128, 156 n. 2, 160, 169 n. 1, 303 - n. 1, 315 n. 2 - - Cypsela in Thrace, 199, 200, 204–206 - - cypsele, 197–209, 211, 295 - - Cypselids, 14, 76 n. 5, 189, 192, 196, 213, 263 n. 5 - - Cypselus of Arcadia, 211, 212 - - Cypselus I of Corinth, 9, 26 n. 2, 28 n. 7, 31, 95 n. 1, 180, 187–190, - 192 n. 5, 193–200, 207–211, 216, 245 n. 2, 255, 257, 270, 274, 292, - 295, 303 n. 2, 305, 306 n. 1 - - Cypselus II of Corinth, 213, 214 - - Cypselus, father of Miltiades, 199 n. 10 - - cypselus bird, 211 - - Cyrene, 74, 82 n. 1, 123, 239 - - Cyrnus, 8 - - Cyrus, 8 n. 3, 71–73, 123, 138, 139, 145 n. 2, 152, 197, 209, 271, 272, - 293 - - Cythera, 176, 177 - - Cyzicus, 281, 285 - - - Dactyls of Ida, 44 - - Dagobert I diploma, cited 261 n. 2 - - δακτύλιοι, δακτυλιογλύφοι, 149 - - Dale, Sir D., 11 n. 2 - - Damasenor, tyrant of Miletus, 268, 269 - - Damia and Auxesia, 167, 170, 175, 320 - - Damocratidas, 158 n. 6 - - Damonno, 135, 136, 143, 236 n. 2 - - Damophilus, 240 n. 2 - - Danegeld, 329 - - Danes, 237, 238 - - Dante, 305; - _Paradiso_, cited 57 n. 4 - - Daphnae (Defenneh), 109 n. 5, 112, 113, 115 n. 2, 121, 122 - - Daphnae pottery, 115 n. 2, 121 n. 5 - - daric, 57, 130, 132, 140, 172 n. 4, 291 - - Darius, 29, 58, 59, 61, 62, 72, 76, 79, 80, 87 n. 9, 140, 142, 152 n. - 2, 270, 271, 325 - - Daskalio, 42 - - Daskylion, 273 n. 2 - - Decelea, 45 - - decemvirate, 233 - - De Cou (H. F.), _Argive Heraeum_, cited 164 n. 1 - - dedications, votive offerings, 14, 82, 107 n. 4, 108, 116–118, 124, 144 - n. 3, 162, 163, 170, 175, 189, 192 n. 5, 198, 244 n. 1, 263 - - Deecke, see Mueller - - Defenneh, see Daphnae - - Deinomenidae, 30 - - Deiokes, 146 n. 4 - - Deiophontes, 176 - - Delos, 49, 70, 71, 162 n. 3, 166 n. 2, 171 n. 5, 260 n. 5, 261 - - Delphi, 65, 66, 123, 130, 137, 140, 144, 147, 162 n. 3, 194, 198 n. 5, - 207 n. 3, 208, 255, 257, 259–262, 276, 283 n. 4, 330 - - Delta, 88, 95, 96, 98, 99, 121 n. 3, 293 - - demagogues, 11, 26–32, 35, 190 n. 2, 217, 274, 279, 280, 282, 300, 301 - - Demaratus, 182, 187 n. 6, 215–218, 225, 236 n. 2, 239–245, 251, 255, - 256, 295 - - Demeter, 238, 266, 308; - Malophoros, 266; - hymn to, 22 - - Demetrius, _de Elocutione_, cited 280 n. 1, 283 n. 6 - - Demetrius Magnes, cited 280 n. 1 - - Demetrius of Phaleron, 305, 306 - - demiourgoi, δημιουργοί, δημιουργίαι, 16, 48 - - Demochares, 305, 306 - - Demodike of Cyme, 147, 155 n. 2 - - Demosthenes, 49, 305 - - Demosthenes, _c. Aphobum_, cited 12; - _c. Aristocratem_, cited 277 n. 2; - _c. Eubulidem_, cited 19, 20 n. 1; - _c. Midiam_, cited 65; - _c. Olympiodorum_, cited 13; - _Olynthiac Orations_, cited 277 n. 2; - _c. Phaenippum_, cited 48 n. 1; - περὶ Συντάξεως, cited 277 n. 2; - Schol. _c. Aristocratem_, cited 51 n. 2 - - Demoteles, 69 n. 5 - - Dennis (G.), _Academy_, cited 76 n. 2 - - Derbyshire, 40 - - Diadochoi, 258 n. 2, 284 - - Diakria, Diakrieis, διακριεῖς, Diakrioi, διάκριοι, 37, 39–41, 44, 48 n. - 6, 49, 291, 307–313 - - Diakrioi, Euboean, 41 n. 2; - Rhodian, 41 n. 2 - - Diamantaras, _Athenische Mitteilungen_, cited 57 n. 3 - - Diana, 224 n. 5 - - Dickens (G.), _Catalogue of the Acropolis Museum, Athens_, cited 252, - 253; - _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, cited 332 n. 4 - - didrachm, 64, 171 n. 6, n. 8, 172 - - Didymus, cited 33 n. 1 - - Diels (H.), _Abhandlungen d. preussisch. Akademie d. Wissenschaften zu - Berlin_, cited 35 n. 2 - - _Digest_, cited 336 n. 5 - - Dindorf (L.), ed. Diodorus, cited 48 n. 6 - - Dio Cassius, cited 226 n. 3, 337 n. 4 - - Dio Chrysostom, _Orations_, cited 35 n. 3, 148 n. 3, 189 n. 8, 198 - - Diodorus Siculus, cited 10 n. 6, 23 n. 1, 48 n. 6, 59 n. 1, 78 n. 2, 87 - n. 7, n. 9, 89–93, 95, 97, 99 n. 1, 100 n. 4, n. 8, 103, 105, 117, - 121 n. 4, 122 n. 1, n. 4, 123 n. 1, n. 10, n. 11, 138 n. 8, 146 n. - 7, 156 n. 3, 176 n. 2, 180 n. 2, 203 n. 4, 208, 209, 210 n. 4, 211 - n. 1, 215 n. 2, 216, 217 n. 1, 228 n. 1, 229 n. 2, 232 n. 1, 257 n. - 2, 262 n. 4, 275 n. 2, 276, 277, 280 n. 1, 283 n. 6, 284 n. 1, 293, - 298 - - Diogenes Laertius, cited 30 n. 2, 69 n. 1, 150 n. 3, 167 n. 1, n. 2, - 190 n. 1, n. 2, 191 n. 3, n. 6, n. 7, 192, 195, 196, 212 n. 2, n. 8, - 280 n. 1, 281 n. 2, 282 n. 2, 283 n. 3, n. 4, n. 5, n. 6, 284 n. 1 - - Diogenianus, cited 71 n. 1 - - Dion of Syracuse, 30 - - Dionysius of Halicarnassus, _Antiquitates Romanae_, cited 32 n. 2, 37 - n. 4, 48 n. 6, 191 n. 2, 215 n. 2, 216–218, 221 n. 2, 222 n. 7, 223 - n. 1, n. 4, n. 5, 224–231, 234 n. 3, 237 n. 3, 238 n. 3, 239, 245, - 247 n. 3, 278 n. 3, n. 4, n. 5, 279 n. 1, 283 n. 6, 337 n. 2, n. 5; - _Epistola ad Ammaeum_, cited 280 n. 1; - _Isocrates_, cited 13 n. 1 - - Dionysius of Syracuse, 24, 27, 30–32, 72, 196, 210, 221, 229, 256 n. 1, - 265, 274, 278 n. 2, 280, 282, 284, 291, 303 n. 2 - - Dionysus, 262, 264 n. 5, 305; - Botrys, 239 - - Diphilus, cited 208 n. 1 - - Dipoenus, 263 n. 5 - - Dipylon pottery, 169, 314, 315, 317, 319, 321–326, 329, 330 - - Dives, 102 - - _dives_, 229 - - Doerpfeld (W.), _Archaiologike Ephemeris_, cited 62 n. 6; - _Athenische Mitteilungen_, cited 63 n. 2 - - Dorians, 157 n. 7, 158, 176, 179, 180, 257, 259 n. 1, 261, 262 n. 1, - 294,305 n. 1, 333 n. 1; - pre-Dorian stock, 257, 304, 305; - see also Aeolic stock - - Doric dress, 169, 332 - - Doriche, 104 - - Dorieus, 239 - - δορυφόρος, 143 - - drachma, δραχμαί, 57, 58, 64, 149, 162, 171–173, 175 - - δραχμαὶ τοῦ Στεφανηφόρου, 56 - - Draco, 53 n. 2 - - Dragendorff (H.), _Thera_, cited 316 n. 7, 320 n. 5 - - drains, 224, 247 - - dress, 164, 167–170, 174, 331–334 - - drivers, 14 - - Drumann (W.), _Arbeiter u. Communisten in Griechenland u. Rom_, cited - 19 - - Duemmler (F.), _Jahrbuch des deutschen archäologischen Instituts_, - cited 112 n. 4 - - Dugas (Ch.), _apud_ Piganiol, _Journal d. Savants_, 335 - - Duilius, 336 - - Dumont (A.), _Revue Archéologique_, cited 205 n. 4, 206 - - dumps, 128, 156 n. 2; - see also ingots - - Duncker (M. W.), _Geschichte des Alterthums_, cited 145 n. 4, 159 n. 5, - 166 n. 1, n. 3, 192 n. 1, 198 n. 9, 214 n. 7, 328 n. 3, 329 - - Dunham (A. G.), _History of Miletus_, cited 117 n. 1, 268 n. 4 - - Durazzo, 190 n. 3 - - Duris of Samos, cited 78, 178, 324 n. 6 - - dyeing, dyers, 14, 139 n. 2, 187, 222 - - Dying Gladiator, 285 - - Dymaean War, 159 - - - ecclesia, 17 - - Edessa, 183 - - Edgar (C. C.), _Catalogue of the Greek Vases in Cairo Museum_, cited - 112 n. 5; - _Annual of the British School at Athens_ and _Journal of Hellenic - Studies_; see Hogarth and others - - Edonia, 271 - - Edward the Confessor, 238 - - Edward the Elder, 238 - - Edward VII, 102 n. 1 - - Eetion, 193 - - ἐγείρω, 35 - - Egestaeans, 239; - see also Segesta - - Egypt, 1, 44 n. 5, 48 n. 6, 68, 71–73, 80, 83, chap. IV _passim_, 145 - n. 4, 148 n. 3, 149, 191, 203 n. 4, 212–214, 285, 292, 293, 298, 303 - n. 1, 315 n. 3 - - Eion, 59 n. 1 - - Eldorado, 41, 177 n. 7 - - electrum, electrum currency, 44 n. 5, 74 n. 6, 127–133, 142, 147, 150, - 152 - - Elephantine, 123 - - Eleusis, Eleusinians, 15, 41 n. 3, 169 n. 5, 250 n. 1, 308, 318, 321, - 324 n. 1, 333 n. 4 - - Elis, 123, 134 n. 2, 154, 159, 160 - - Ely, 238 - - embroiderers, 14 - - embrontaion, 277 - - Emperor, Holy Roman Empire, 304 - - employees, 14, 15, 21, 62, 77, 223, 225, 239, 278, 289, 295 - - ἐμπορίη, 80 - - ἐμπορικὸν πρᾶγμα, 261 - - _Encyclopaedia Britannica_, cited 77 n. 3; - see also Griffith - - Endt (J.), _Beiträge zur ionischen Vasenmalerei_, cited 120 n. 4; - _Wiener Studien_, cited 10 n. 6, 14 n. 6, 31 n. 2, 274 n. 1, 283 n. 6 - - ἐνεργαζόμεναι παιδίσκαι, 139 - - England, English, 15 n. 6, 126 n. 5, 233 n. 6, 237, 238, 249, 306 n. 2, - 328, 329 - - engravers, 14 - - Enkomi, 128, 141 - - Ennea Hodoi, 59 n. 1 - - Enneakrounos, 62 - - ἐνύπνιον, 81 - - Epakria, Epakrioi, ἔπακροι, 37, 39, 41, 45, 291 - - Epaminondas, 179 n. 3 - - Ephesus, 90 n. 3, 128, 130 n. 6, 132, 136, 137, 141, 143 n. 1, 144 n. - 3, 145 n. 3, 147 n. 3, 156 n. 2, 191 n. 3, 221 n. 2, 245, 246 n. 1, - 271–273 _passim_, 296 - - Ephorus, cited 26 n. 2, 155, 157, 161, 163, 164, 173, 175, 176, - 192–194, 196 n. 4, 258, 264, 294, 330 n. 5 - - Epidamnus, 190 n. 3 - - Epidaurus, 165–167, 174–176, 178, 326, 330, 331 - - ἐπιδιδόναι, 281 - - Epiphanius, _de Mensuris et Ponderibus_, cited 120 n. 3 - - ἐπισημαίνειν, 277 - - ἐπίστασις, ἐπιστάτης, 81, 277 - - ἐπιτετραμμένοι τὴν φυλακήν, 326 - - ἐπιθαλάσσιος, 313 - - ἐπιτίθεσθαι, 280, 281 - - ἔπρησεν, 81 - - Erastos, 283 n. 3 - - Erechtheum, 14 n. 9, 20 n. 7 - - Eretria, 36, 37, 72 n. 2, 261, 330 - - ἐργασία, ἐργαζόμενοι, 17, 19 - - ἐργαστήρια, 218 - - Ergotimos, 245, 319 - - Erichthonios, 155 n. 2 - - Erman (J. P. A.) und Schweinfurth (G.), _Abhandlungen d. preussischen - Akademie d. Wissenschaften zu Berlin_, cited 87 n. 6 - - ἔρως χρημάτων ἄμετρος, 272 - - Erotici Scriptores (ed. Didot), cited 93 n. 2 - - Erythrae, 133 - - Esquiline, 338 n. 2 - - Essendune, 238 - - ἔστρωται, 79 - - Ethiopia, Ethiopian, 95–102, 122, 125 n. 3, 292 - - Ethiopian dynasty in Egypt, 86, 88 n. 1, 93, 95, 97 - - Etruria, Etruscans, 10, 30, 93, 187, 203 n. 4, 215–217, 219, 220, 223, - 225, 234, 235, 241–243, 246, 249, 295, 335 - - Etruscan language, 134 n. 5 - - Etrusco-Carthaginian alliance, 240 - - _Etymologicum Gudianum_, cited 134 n. 1, n. 5 - - _Etymologicum Magnum_, 41 n. 3, 76 n. 7, 134 n. 1, n. 5, 155 n. 2, 156 - n. 1, 162, 163, 193 n. 3; - 201 n. 2, 280 n. 1 - - Euaion, 281, 283, 288 - - Euboea, 37, 60, 156 n. 1, 261, 262, 311, 313 n. 1 - - Euboeic standard, 171, 172 - - Euboulos, 282, 283 n. 6, 288 - - Eubulus Comicus, cited 54 n. 2 - - Eucheir, workman of Demaratus, 207, 217, 244, 245 - - Eucheiros, potter, 244, 245 - - Eugrammus, 208, 217, 244 - - Eumelos, 195 - - eunuch, 280, 284 - - Eupalinus, 76, 267 - - Eupatridai, 48 - - Euphorion, cited 133, 143 n. 2 - - Euphronios, 169 - - εὐπορία, εὔποροι, 89, 273 - - Euripides, 17, 54 n. 2; - _Bacchae_, cited 148 n. 1; - _Cyclops_, cited 40 n. 9; - _Hecuba_, cited 174 n. 3; - _Iphigenia in Tauris_, cited 182 n. 4; - _Sciron_, cited 57; - Schol. _Hecuba_, cited 178 n. 1, 324 n. 6 - - Europe, 23, 236 n. 2, 284 - - Eurystheus, 207 - - Eusebius, _Chronicon_, cited 52, 70 n. 3, 93 n. 1, 95, 96 n. 1, n. 3, - 99, 143 n. 2, 146 n. 6, 159 n. 6, 160, 172 n. 5, 190 n. 3, 265 n. 1, - 273 n. 4, 275 n. 5 - - Eusebius, _Praeparatio Evangelica_, cited 280 n. 1 - - Eustathius, _Commentary on the Iliad_, cited 155 n. 2; - _Commentary on the Odyssey_, cited 77 n. 2, 269; - _Commentary on Dionysius Periegetes_, cited 37 n. 1, 70 n. 3, 79 n. - 2, 90 n. 5; - _Opusculum de emendenda vita monachica_, cited 269 n. 4 - - Eutropius, cited 224 n. 5 - - Evans (Sir Arthur), _Corolla Numismatica_, cited 128 - - Evans, Lady, _Greek Dress_, cited 170 n. 1 - - Exchequer, Chancellor of, 4 - - exomides, 265 - - - Fabricii, 337 n. 5 - - Fabricius, Gaius, 337 - - Fabricius (E.), _Athenische Mitteilungen_, cited 76 n. 2; - _Archäologischer Anzeiger_ cited 76 n. 2 - - factories, 12, 20, 22 - - faience, 93, 94, 109, 124 - - fairs, 261 n. 2 - - Falconer (T.), ed. Strabo, cited 159 n. 2 - - Falerii, 219 - - farmers, 18, 37, 44, 48, 49, 307, 308, 310; - see also agriculture - - Faustulus, 197 - - _favissae_, 224 n. 5 - - Feronia, 261 n. 2 - - Ferrari, _Agathokles_, cited 209 n. 3 - - Festus, cited 134 n. 5, 221 n. 5, 338 n. 1 - - _fibulae_, 333 - - figurines, 118, 119, 332 - - Fikellura ware, 112–114, 116, 121 n. 5 - - _flatum_, 218 - - flax workers, 14 - - Fleet (London), 247 - - Florence, 2, 3, 56 n. 3, 304 - - Florentinus, _Geoponica_, cited 201 n. 8 - - Florus, _Epitome Liui_, cited 215 n. 2, 222 n. 2, 223 n. 5, 226, 228 n. - 1, n. 2, 229 n. 2, 238 n. 3 - - flower girls, 55–57 - - flute players, 222 - - Foerster (R.), _Philologus_, cited 257 n. 2 - - Fontana Collection of Greek Vases, 319 - - Forchhammer (P.), _Philologus_, cited 326 n. 6, 329 n. 8 - - Forum at Rome, 218, 247–249, 251, 334, 335, 337, 338 n. 2 - - Fotheringham (J. K.), _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, cited 96 n. 3 - - fountains, 62, 76 n. 5 - - Fowler, W. Warde, 211 n. 4 - - Fox (Earle), _Corolla Numismatica_, cited 53 n. 2, 56 n. 2, 156 n. 2, - 161 n. 1 - - Fraenkel (M.), _Inschriften von Pergamon_, cited 285 n. 2 - - _Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum_, cited 26 n. 2, 36 n. 3, 39 n. 2, n. - 3, 59 n. 6, 65 n. 4, 66 n. 3, 79 n. 2, 93 n. 1, 95 n. 2, 98 n. 9, 99 - n. 2, 102 n. 2, 130 n. 2, 134 n. 1, n. 2, 135 n. 1, n. 3, n. 4, n. - 8, 136 n. 2, n. 3, 137 n. 1, 138 n. 5, 144 n. 1, 145 n. 1, n. 4, n. - 5, 146 n. 1, 147 n. 3, 151 n. 1, 156 n. 3, 166 n. 1, 178 n. 1, 180 - n. 3, 183 n. 4, 189 n. 1, 190 n. 1, n. 3, n. 4, 191 n. 3, 192 n. 1, - n. 2, 194 n. 1, 211 n. 6, 213 n. 3, n. 4, 214 n. 7, 224 n. 5, 226 n. - 3, 259 n. 4, 273 n. 2, n. 3, 275 n. 2, 280 n. 1, 283 n. 5 - - France, 5, 50, 142, 162 - - France, Anatole, cited 5, 257 - - François vase, 113 - - Francotte (H.), _Mélanges_ (Liège, 1910, _Bib. Fac. Phil._), cited 303 - n. 2 - - Frank (T.), _Classical Philology_, cited 219 n. 1 - - Frazer (J.), _Magic Art_, cited 238 n. 3, 336 n. 2; - ed. Pausanias, cited 80 n. 6, 179 n. 10, 263 n. 3, n. 4 - - Frederic, father of George III, 157 n. 4 - - Freeman (E. A.), _History of Sicily_, cited 274 n. 3 - - frescoes, 243, 244 n. 1, 246 - - Frickenhaus (A.), _Tiryns_, cited 114 n. 5, 163, 164, 317 n. 1, 318 n. - 4, 320 - - von Fritze (H.), _Zeitschrift f. Numismatik_, cited 36 n. 3, 53 n. 2, - 56 n. 2 - - Frohberger, _de opificum apud veteres Graecos conditione_, cited 15 n. - 7 - - Frontinus, _Stratagems_, cited 259 n. 2, 278 n. 1 - - Frye, Senator, quoted 5 n. 8 - - Fulgentius, _Sermones Antiqui_, cited 336 n. 2 - - fulling, 266 - - furnace, 199, 202, 203, 205, 207, 208 n. 1 - - Furtwaengler (A.), _Antike Gemmen_, cited 243 n. 3; - _Archäologische Zeitung_, cited 324; - _Berliner Philologische Wochenschrift_, cited 170 n. 6; - _Beschreibung der Vasensammlung im Antiquarium, Berlin_, cited 46 n. - 7, 203 n. 3, n. 4, 204 n. 1, 207 n. 2, 242 n. 3; - _Olympia_, cited 243 n. 3; - _Winckelmannsfeste Program_, cited 171 n. 1; - Thiersch and others, _Aegina_, cited 316 n. 1, n. 2, n. 6, n. 7, n. - 10, 317 n. 7, 318, 320 n. 4, 333 n. 4 - - - Gabii, 224 - - Gabrici (E.), _Monumenti Antichi_, cited 316 n. 9 - - Galassi, General, 93 n. 3, 243, 335 - - Galatia, Galatians, 285, 286 - - Galen, _Protrepticus_, cited 13 n. 5, 70 n. 3 - - Gallipoli, 52 - - Gambacorti, 2 - - games, 71, 123, 154, 159, 160, 178, 235, 258–262, 265 - - Gardner (Ernest), _Naukratis_, see Petrie and Gardner; - _Handbook of Greek Sculpture_, cited 63 n. 1, 81 n. 4, 263 n. 5, 302 - n. 4 - - Gardner (Percy), _History of Ancient Coinage_, cited 130 n. 3, 171; - _Earliest Coins of Greece Proper_, cited 53 n. 2, 159 n. 5, 161 n. 2, - 188; - _Gold Coinage of Asia before Alexander the Great_, cited 130 n. 3, - 143 n. 1; - _Samos and Samian Coins_, cited 75 n. 1; - _Numismatic Chronicle_, cited 57 n. 5 - - Gardthausen (V.), _Mastarna oder Servius_, cited 223, 249 - - garlands, 55–57, 60 - - Garrucci (R.), _Le monete dell’ Italia antica_, cited 220 n. 4 - - Gellius, Aulus, cited 17 n. 3, 221 n. 5 - - Gelo of Syracuse, 10 n. 6, 30 - - Gelzer, _Rheinisches Museum_, cited 136 n. 1, n. 3, 137 n. 3, 138 n. 7, - 140 n. 4, 141 n. 1, 145 n. 4, 146 n. 1, n. 6, 273 n. 2 - - genealogies, 156–159, 176, 212 - - _Genesis_, cited 149 - - _Geographi Graeci Minores_, cited 90 n. 5, 91 n. 1 - - Geometric pottery, 163, 169, 314, 315, 318–321, 333, 334; - see also Dipylon pottery - - Geomoroi, γεωμόροι, 69, 276, 277 - - George II, 157 n. 4 - - George III, 157 n. 4 - - George, King of Greece, 143 n. 1 - - Gercke und Norden, _Einleitung i. d. Altertumswissenschaft_, cited 157 - n. 8 - - Gergethes (Γέργηθες), Gergithes (Γέργιθες), 269, 270 - - Gerhard (E.), _Trinkschalen u. Gefässe_, cited 203 n. 3, n. 4 - - Germany, Germans, 163, 197 n. 6, 253 n. 4, 311 - - Gerster, _Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique_, cited 191 n. 6 - - Gibraltar, 177 - - Gihon (Miriam), 267 - - Gilbert, _Jahrbücher f. Classische Philologie_ (_Neue Jahrbücher f. - Philologie und Paedagogik_), cited 53 n. 2, 63 n. 9, 326 n. 7, 328 - - Gilliard (C.), _Quelques Réformes de Solon_, cited 48 n. 6, 307 n. 6, - 329 n. 7 - - Glotz (G.), _Études sociales et juridiques sur l’Antiquité grecque_, - cited 328 n. 1, 329 - - γλυκὺς ἄγκων, 76, 77 n. 3 - - Gnathia ware, 335 - - γνώριμοι, 303 - - _Goettingsche Gelehrte Anzeigen_, see Wilisch - - gold, 44 n. 5, 54 n. 1, 80 n. 4, 84, 139, 143, 144 n. 3, n. 4, 145, - 147, 148, 152, 171 n. 1, 189, 192 n. 5, 198 - - gold currency, 3, 4, 18, 57, 128, 130–133, 140, 142 n. 5, 152, 156 n. - 1, 172, 286, 287, 291; - see also daric - - gold mines, 39 n. 4, 44 n. 5, 50, 54 n. 1, 58 n. 1, 59 n. 1, 87, 138, - 148, 203 n. 4 - - Golden age, 302 - - Golden Fleece, 41, 265 - - goldsmiths, 222 - - Gonussa, 193 - - Gorgasus, 240 n. 2 - - Gorgos, Gorgias, Gordios, 213 - - γουνὸς Σουνιακός, 41, 44 - - Government-owned industry, 22 n. 7 - - Gracchi, 32 - - Gracchan revolutionaries, 288, 289 - - Graef (B.), _Die antiken Vasen v. d. Akropolis zu Athen_, cited 315 n. - 5; - _Wochenschrift f. klassische Philologie_, cited 316 n. 6 - - Graffunder (P.), _Klio_, cited 338 - - Graillot, _Mélanges d’Archéologie et d’Histoire_, cited 246 n. 7 - - Great King (= King of Persia), 20, 57, 61, 69 n. 5, 72, 130, 140, 270 - n. 7, 271, 291, 292 - - greengrocer, 17 - - Gregorius Cyprius, cited 190 n. 1 - - Grenfell (B. P.) and Hunt (A. S.), _Oxyrhynchus Papyri_, cited 104, - 257, 258, 262 n. 4, 264 n. 4 - - Griffith (F. Ll.), _Encyclopaedia Britannica_, cited 87 n. 5; - _Catalogue of the Demotic Papyri in the Rylands Library at - Manchester_, cited 87 n. 4, 93 n. 2, 98 n. 5, 100 n. 4, 125, 126; - _High Priests of Memphis_, cited 97, 98 n. 6, 101 - - Groddech, 195 n. 4 - - Grote (G.), _History of Greece_, cited 36 n. 1, 66 n. 1, 70 n. 1, 80, - 180 n. 3, 262 n. 1, 278 n. 2, 288, 327 - - Grueber (H. A.), _Coins of the Roman Republic in the British Museum_, - cited 221 n. 7 - - Grundy (G. B.), _Great Persian War_, cited 271; - _Thucydides and the History of his Age_, cited 37 n. 7, 307, 310 n. 3 - - Guadalquivir (Baetis), 177 n. 6 - - De Gubernatis, _Atti d. Reale Accademia d. Torino_, cited 66, 258 n. 1, - n. 2 - - Guérin (V.), _Patmos et Samos_, cited 76 n. 2 - - guilds, 87 - - Guiraud (P.), _La Main-d’Œuvre dans l’Ancienne Grèce_, cited 36; - _La Propriété Foncière en Grèce_, cited 309 n. 10 - - Gutschmid, cited 104 n. 6; - _Neue Beiträge z. Geschichte d. alten Orients_, cited 92 n. 1; - _Philologus_, cited 90 n. 1, 99 n. 6, 214 n. 6 - - Gyges, 9, 26, 91, 92, 99 n. 3, 127, 130 n. 2, 134, 136, 137, 139 n. 3, - 141, 143–149, 151, 152, 187 n. 8, 221, 236 n. 2, 273 n. 2, 286, 289, - 293, 302 - - Gylippus, 58 - - - Haa ab ra, see Apries - - Haase, _Abhandlungen d. historisch. philologisch. Gesellschaft - Breslau_, cited 37 n. 7, 38 n. 2 - - Habron, 181 - - Hackl (R.), see Sieveking (J.) - - Hadrian, 63, 336 n. 5 - - Haeberlin (E. J.), _Aes Grave_, cited 219, 221 n. 7; - _Die Systematik des ältesten roemischen Münzwesens_, cited 233 n. 1 - - ἁμαξοπηγῶν, 135 - - Hammer, _Zeitschrift f. Numismatik_, cited 146 n. 7, 148 n. 3 - - Hanno, 30 n. 3, 282 - - Hanover, House of, 157 n. 4 - - hare, 74, 75 - - Harmodius, 231, 302 - - Harold, King of England, 238 n. 1 - - Harpocration, cited 16 n. 7, 56 n. 4, 171 n. 4, 280 n. 1, 310 n. 4, 327 - n. 2 - - Head (B. V.), _Historia Numorum_^2, cited 56 n. 2, 63 n. 7, 75 n. 1, - 128 n. 1, 132 n. 3, 143 n. 1, 147 n. 1, 156 n. 2, 159 n. 5, 161 n. - 1, 171 n. 6, 172 n. 3, 188, 208 n. 3, 209 n. 6; - _Numismatic Chronicle_, cited 53 n. 2, 55, 63 n. 9; - see also _British Museum Excavations at Ephesus_; - _Catalogue of Greek Coins, Corinth, Ionia_ - - Headlam (J. W.), _Classical Review_, cited 326 n. 6 - - Hebrew, 126 - - Hebrus, 200 n. 1 - - hektemoroi, 13, 307, 308 - - Helbig (W.), cited 335; - _Das homerische Epos_^2, cited 166 n. 1, 170 n. 1, 332 n. 2; - _Mémoires de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres_, cited - 169, 321, 324, 325, 326 n. 3, 329 n. 7, 330 - - Helladius, cited 257 n. 2 - - Hellanicus, cited 102 n. 2 - - pre-Hellenic population, 269 - - Hellenium at Naukratis, 104–106, 107 n. 4, 110, 116, 118 - - Hellenomemphites, 96 n. 4 - - Hellespont, 63, 92 - - helots, 24 - - ἥμερα, 309 - - Hephaestus, 14, 16, 92, 97 - - Hera of Argos, 162 - - Hera of Samos, 69 n. 5, 76, 116 - - Hera, temple of, see Heraeum - - Heraclea Ioniae, 131 - - Heraclea Pontica, 265 - - Heraclean tables, 208 - - Heracles, 156, 176, 178, 207, 236 n. 2 - - Heraclid royal family, 158 n. 6, 196, 211 n. 6 - - Heraclides, cited 79 n. 2, 135 n. 8, 147 n. 3, 167 n. 1, 190 n. 1, n. - 2, n. 4, 191 n. 3, 192 n. 1, n. 2, 193 n. 3, 269 - - Heraeum at Argos, 161–164, 175, 316 n. 7, 318–320, 333 n. 4; - at Samos, 76, 82; - at Tiryns, 320 - - Hereward, 91 n. 4, 238 - - Hermann (C. F.), _Lehrbuch der griechischen Antiquitäten_, vol. I - (_Staatsaltertümer_), cited 28 n. 5, vol. IV (_Privataltertümer_), - cited 201 n. 4 - - Hermes, shrine of, 135 - - _Hermes_, cited 171 n. 6; - see also Lehmann-Haupt, Niese - - Hermias, 280–283, 288 - - Hermione, 330 - - Hermocapelia, 135 n. 4 - - Hermogenes (ed. Spengel), cited 51 n. 2 - - Hermotybies, 90 n. 1 - - Herodotus, 6, 9, 18, 25, 26, 33, 194 n. 6, 196, 212 n. 3, 215, 290, - 292, 293, 295, 298, 320, 328; - cited 8 n. 3, n. 13, 17, 22 n. 2, 26 n. 2, 27–29, 31, 35–37, 40 n. 8, - 41, 46 n. 1, n. 6, 47, 50 n. 6, 51 n. 2, n. 3, 52, 54, 55, 58, 59 - n. 1, n. 2, n. 3, n. 4, n. 5, 60–62, 63 n. 5, n. 7, 64, 65, 67, 68 - n. 2, n. 3, n. 4, n. 5, n. 6, n. 7, n. 8, 69 n. 5, 70 n. 3, n. 4, - 72, 73 n. 1, n. 4, n. 6, 74, 75 n. 1, 76, 77 n. 8, 78 n. 4, n. 5, - n. 6, n. 8, 79–81, 82 n. 1, 83–85, 87 n. 1, n. 2, n. 8, n. 9, n. - 10, n. 11, 88–92, 96 n. 4, 97 n. 1, n. 6, 99–101, 102 n. 1, n. 2, - 103–105, 112 n. 4, 116, 117, 121 n. 4, 122 n. 1, n. 4, 123, 124, - 126 n. 3, n. 4, 129–131, 133, 136 n. 2, 137 n. 1, n. 3, n. 5, 138, - 139, 140 n. 1, n. 2, n. 3, 143, 144 n. 1, n. 3, n. 4, n. 6, 145 n. - 1, n. 2, n. 3, n. 4, 146 n. 1, n. 4, 147 n. 4, 154, 155, 156 n. 3, - 157, 158, 161–167, 169–176, 177 n. 4, n. 7, 178 n. 1, 179 n. 2, - 180 n. 3, 187 n. 8, 189 n. 2, 190 n. 1, 191 n. 2, n. 3, 193 n. 4, - n. 6, 197, 198, 207, 209 n. 5, 210 n. 1, 211, 214 n. 7, 231 n. 4, - 239, 240, 255, 259 n. 1, n. 4, 260 n. 2, 261, 264, 268 n. 3, 270 - n. 4, n. 5, n. 7, 271, 272 n. 1, 294, 302, 303, 305 n. 2, 306 n. - 1, 309 n. 1, 313, 324 n. 6, n. 10, 325, 326, 330 n. 3, 333, 334, - 336 n. 1 - - Herostratos, 103, 118, 119 - - Hesiod, 24 - - Hesiod, _Eoiai_, cited 324 - - Hesychius, cited 39 n. 5, 41 n. 2, 51 n. 2, 54 n. 2, 70 n. 5, 122 n. 4, - 129 n. 7, 199 n. 3, n. 4, n. 5, n. 8, n. 9, 200–202, 280 n. 1, 311, - 312, 313 n. 4, 327 - - Hesychius Milesius, cited 280 n. 1, 283 n. 5 - - hetaerae, 68, 93, 104, 139 n. 3 - - Heuzey (L.), _Catalogue des Figurines antiques de terre cuite du Musée - du Louvre_, cited 123 n. 12 - - Hezekiah, 267 - - Hicks (E. L.), _Manual of Greek Historical Inscriptions_, cited 283 n. - 2 - - Hicks (R. D.), _Companion to Greek Studies_, cited 179 n. 3 - - Hiero, 10, 30, 138 n. 9 - - Hierocles, cited 135 n. 4 - - Hieronymus, see Jerome - - Hill (G. F.), _Handbook of Greek and Roman Coins_, cited 24 n. 1; - _Historical Greek Coins_, cited 53 n. 2, 54 n. 5, 156 n. 2, 161 n. 1; - _Historical Roman Coins_, cited 233 n. 1; - _Sources for Greek History between the Persian and Peloponnesian - Wars_, cited 59 n. 1 - - hill, party of the, hillmen, hill country, 29, 31, 37, 38, 39, 44, 45, - 48, 291, 299, 307–313 - - Himera, 275 n. 4 - - Himerius, cited 280 n. 1, 282 n. 4 - - Hipparchus, 51 n. 2, 268 - - hippeis, 16, 49 - - Hippias, tyrant of Athens, 33 n. 1, 50, 51 n. 2, 56 n. 2, 59–61, 63 n. - 4, 64, 66, 74, 231, 268 - - Hippias of Elis, cited 134 n. 2, 160 - - Hipponax, cited 139 n. 1, 272 - - Hipponikos, 12 - - Hirschensohn, _Philolog. Obozrenie_, cited 51 n. 4 - - Hirschfeld (O.), _Rheinisches Museum_, cited 91, 106, 117 n. 3, n. 5, - 120 n. 4, 123 n. 8; - _apud_ Pauly Wissowa, cited 166 n. 1 - - Histiaeus, 61, 62, 268, 270, 271, 287, 292 - - Hittites, 149 - - Hitzig and Bluemner, _Pausanias_, cited 158 n. 3, 198 n. 9 - - Hoar, Senator, quoted 5 n. 8 - - Hogarth (D. G.), _Excavations at Ephesus_, see _British Museum - Excavations at Ephesus_ - - Hogarth (D. G.) and others, _Annual of the British School at Athens_, - cited 106–110, 115 n. 2, 116 n. 3, n. 6, 118 n. 1, n. 2, n. 3, 119 - n. 5, 120 n. 2; - _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, cited 106, 110, 118 n. 2, n. 4 - - Holm (A.), _History of Greece_, cited 23 n. 1, 159 n. 5, 198 n. 9, 275 - n. 6, 285, 286, 288 n. 3, 303 n. 2; - _Geschichte Siciliens im Alterthum_, cited 275 n. 6 - - Holwerda (A. E. J.), _Album Herwerden_, cited 53 n. 2, 56 n. 2; - _Rheinisches Museum_, cited 332 n. 2, 333 n. 2 - - Homer, 27 n. 4, 40 n. 2, 134, 180, 262 n. 1, 264 n. 5, 303; - _Iliad_, cited 16 n. 1, 179, 259 n. 3, 324 n. 5, 333 n. 2; - _Odyssey_, cited 16 n. 1, 36 n. 3, 40, 201, 309 n. 6, 328 n. 1; - _Hymns_, cited 259 n. 3 - - Homeric age, 16, 300, 329; - talent, 172 n. 4 - - Homolle (Th.), _apud_ Saglio, _Dictionnaire des Antiquités_, cited 162 - n. 3 - - honey, 309, 310 n. 3 - - Hophra, see Apries - - hoplite, 90, 121 - - Hoppin (J. C.), _Argive Heraeum_, cited 167 n. 6, 316 n. 7, 317 - - Horace, _Epist._, cited 201 n. 1; - _Odes_, cited 248 n. 1 - - horse rearing, 187 - - Horus, 91 n. 4 - - house martin, 211 - - How and Wells, _Herodotus_, cited 87 n. 9, n. 10, 90 n. 1, 125 n. 3, - 140 n. 5, 144 n. 4, 156 n. 5, 161 n. 2, 165 n. 5, 166 n. 1, n. 4, - 168 n. 1, 190 n. 3, 193, 269 n. 7, 305 n. 1, 319 n. 4, 326 n. 7 - - Howorth (H. H.), _Numismatic Chronicle_, cited 53 n. 2, 56 n. 2 - - hubris, ὕβρις, 8, 181 - - Huelsen (Ch.) (trans. Carter), _Forum Romanum_, cited 247 n. 5 - - ὑλονόμοι, 309 - - Humbert (G.), _apud_ Saglio, _Dictionnaire des Antiquités_, cited 222 - n. 6 - - Hunt (A. S.), see Grenfell - - hydriae, 246, 255, 320 - - Hyginus, cited 147 n. 2 - - Hymettus, 39 n. 6, 44, 308–310 - - Hyperakria, Hyperakrioi, Ὑπεράκριοι (Athenian), 37, 39–41; - (Milesian), 40 n. 8, 41 n. 2 - - Hyperbolus, 207 - - Hyperboreans, 138 n. 9 - - Hyperides, cited 47 n. 7, 54 n. 2 - - Hysiae, 177 - - - Iamblichus, cited 69 n. 1, 93 n. 2 - - Iasos, vase from, 204–206 - - Ibycus, 332 - - Ida, 44 - - Imbros, 134 n. 5 - - Imhoof-Blumer (F.), _Monnaies Grecques_, cited 200 n. 1 - - _imperatores_, 337 - - _impressisse monetam_, 218 - - Inaros, 104, 118 - - India, Indian, 142, 197 n. 6 - - ingots of metal, 141, 142 n. 4, 150, 152 n. 2; - see also dumps - - inscriptions, 14, 15, 20 n. 7, 38–41, 44, 48, 50, 56 n. 4, 75, 81, 87, - 106–109, 113, 116–118, 123, 128 n. 4, 174 n. 5, 198 n. 2, 208, 212, - 221 n. 2, 236, 240 n. 2, 263, 283, 284 n. 4, 286, 288, 291, 292, - 297, 299, 313, 316 n. 10; - see also cylinders - - Ionia, 4, 27 n. 2, 83, 89, 90–92, 108, 123, 133, 245, 246, 249, 251–253 - - Ionian art, 244, 246; - dress, 169, 170, 331–334; - league, 245; - mercenaries, 122, 123; - philosophers, 1; - pottery, 118, 120 n. 1, 334; - revolt, 72 n. 2, 158, 270 n. 7; - terra cottas, 252; - tyrants, 270 n. 7 - - iron, 203, 274; - currency, 23, 163 n. 1, 164 n. 1, 221 n. 7; - mines, 37 n. 1 - - Isaiah, cited 92 n. 3, 98 n. 2 - - Isidore of Seville, _Etymologiae_, cited 224 n. 5, 226 n. 3 - - Isis, tomb of, 119 n. 3 - - Ismenias, 24 n. 5 - - Isocrates, 12; - _Antidosis_, cited 65; - _Areopagiticus_, cited 17; - _de Biga_, cited 64 n. 4, n. 5; - _Busiris_, cited 122 n. 1; - _de Pace_, cited 265 n. 4; - _Panathenaicus_, cited 10, 35 n. 3; - _Panegyricus_, cited 261 n. 1, 304 n. 2 - - Israel, 303 - - Isthmus, 215 - - Isthmian games, 260 - - Italy, Italian, 1, 2, 3, 50, 56, 112, 187, 189, 194, 216, 233, 234, - 243–245, 251, 266, 278, 286, 311, 315, 316 - - Italian pottery, 335 - - - _J.H.S._ see _Journal of Hellenic Studies_ - - _J. I. d’A. N._ see _Journal International d’Archéologie Numismatique_ - - Jacoby (F.), _Marmor Parium_, cited 155 n. 2, 160 n. 4, 181 - - _Jahrb._ = _Jahrbuch des deutschen archäologischen Instituts_, cited - 187 n. 4; - see also Boehlau, Conze, Duemmler, Kalkmann, Kroker, Winter - - _Jahrbücher f. Nationalökonomie u. Statistik_, see E. Meyer - - _Jahrbücher f. Classische Philologie_, see Gilbert, Schoemann, Wilisch - - _Jahresbericht des Gymnas. Zittau_, see Wilisch - - James of Hereford, Lord, 11 n. 2 - - James (W.), _Varieties of Religious Experience_, cited 306 - - Janus, 219 - - Japan, 142 - - Java, 142 - - Jebb, _Attic Orators_, cited 10 n. 5; - ed. Sophocles, cited 16 n. 7, 134 n. 5 - - Jerome, cited 52, 95, 96 n. 1, 103, 172 n. 5, 273 n. 4 - - Jerusalem, 267 - - Jevons (W. S.), _Money_, cited 3 n. 6, 142 n. 6, 162 n. 2 - - Jew, 194 - - jewellery, 164, 167, 170, 171, 175 - - _Job, Book of_, cited 149 n. 2 - - Johansen (K. F.), _Sikyoniske Vaser_, cited 316 n. 10 - - John of Antioch, cited 93 n. 1, 224 n. 5, 226 n. 3 - - Johnson, Dr, 281 - - Jones (Stuart), _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, cited 198 n. 2 - - Jordan, _Topographie der Stadt Rom_, cited 338 n. 1 - - Josephus, cited 97 n. 5 - - Josiah, 116, 123 - - _Journal des Savants_, see Piganiol, Reinach (A. J.), De Sanctis - - _Journal International d’Archéologie Numismatique_, cited 171 n. 6, n. - 8; - see also Babelon, Svoronos - - _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, cited 112 n. 8, 114 n. 1, 155 n. 1, 284 - n. 4, 285 n. 3; - see also Bent, Burrows, Dickens, Edgar, Fotheringham, Hogarth, Stuart - Jones, Leaf, Macan, Mahaffy, Munro, Myres, Ramsay, Ridgeway, Ure - - _Journal of Roman Studies_, cited, see Boni - - Jove, temple of, 223 - - Juba, king of Libya, 201 n. 8 - - Judah, 123, 303 - - jurymen, payment of, 19, 25, 231 - - Justin, cited 29 n. 2, 31, 54 n. 1, 73 n. 1, 129 n. 6, 136 n. 2, 138 n. - 3, 156 n. 5, 183 n. 1, 208 n. 4, 211 n. 1, 221, 278 n. 2 - - - Kabeirion, 108 n. 2 - - Kahrstedt, _apud_ Pauly Wissowa, cited 120 n. 4 - - kalasiries, 90 n. 1 - - Kalaurian league, 324, 330, 331 - - Kalkmann (A.), _Jahrbuch_, cited 333 n. 1 - - Kallikrates, 13 n. 3 - - Kallirrhoe, 62 - - Kallisthenes, _Apophthegms_, cited 282 n. 2 - - Kamaresa, 43, 44 n. 3 - - Kaminia, 44 n. 5 - - Kampanes, _Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique_, cited 56 n. 2 - - κάπηλος, καπηλεῖον, καπηλεύειν, 73, 135 - - Kapsala, 44 n. 5 - - Karanos, 156, 183 - - Kavalla, 37 - - Keil (B.), _Die Solonische Verfassung_, cited 168 n. 3, 327 n. 5 - - Kelainai, 140, 147 n. 1 - - Kent, 311 n. 1 - - Kephisia, 38 - - κεραμεαί, κεραμευτικὴ τέχνη, 200, 209 - - Kerameikos (Athens), 318 - - Keraunos, see Ptolemy Keraunos - - κεροπλάστης, 55 - - Khamois, Satni, 97, 100–102 - - κιβωτός, κιβώτιον, 198, 208 - - Kibotos, 147 n. 1 - - Kieff, 142 n. 4 - - Kinch (K. F.), _Vroulia_, cited 93 n. 4, 109, 110 n. 4, 112 n. 1, 114 - - _Kings, Second Book of_, cited 92 n. 3, 98 n. 2 - - Kinkel (G.), _Epicorum Graecorum Fragmenta_, cited 324 n. 7 - - Kirchhoff (A.), _Studien z. Geschichte d. griechischen Alphabets_^4, - cited 104 n. 7, 106 - - Kirrha, Kirrhaians, 259 n. 2, n. 5 - - κιστοφόρος, 57 - - κιθαρηφόρος, 57 - - Kitsovouno, 43 - - Kleidemos, Atthidograph, 328 n. 2 - - Klein (W.), _Die griechischen Vasen mit Meistersignaturen_, cited 245 - n. 1; - _Sitzungsberichte d. Akademie d. Wissenschaften in Wien_, cited 198 - n. 9 - - kleinmeister kylikes, 115, 318 - - kleronomos, 277 - - _Klio_, see Graffunder, Nordin, Perdrizet, Petersen, Seeck - - Knapp (P.), _Korrespondenz-Blatt f. die Gelehrten- u. Real-Schulen - Wuerttembergs_, cited 189 n. 7, 192 n. 1, 193 n. 3, n. 7, 194 n. 5, - 196 n. 4, n. 5, 197 n. 7, 214 n. 2 - - Knossos, 128, 141, 298 - - Knut, 238 n. 1 - - Kodros, 169 n. 1 - - Koehler (U.), _Athenische Mitteilungen_, cited 50 n. 3, 163 n. 1; - _Rheinisches Museum f. Philologie_, cited 173 n. 1, 174 n. 5; - _Sitzungsberichte d. preuss. Akademie d. Wissenschaften zu Berlin_, - cited 31 n. 2 - - Kolaios, 68, 177 - - Kollytos, 55 - - Komas, 272 - - κομίζειν, 139 - - κόψας (μέτρον), 182 - - κόραι, 54 - - Κορινθία συγγραφή, Κορινθιακά, 195 - - Koriskos, 283 n. 3 - - Kornemann (E.), _apud_ Pauly Wissowa, 222 n. 3, n. 5 - - _Korrespondenz-Blatt f. die Gelehrten- u. Real-Schulen Wuerttembergs_, - see Knapp - - kothons, 248 - - κραίνω, 328 - - Kreon, 9 - - Kresphontes, 180 - - κρητῆρες, 201 - - Krisa, Krisaians, 66, 247 n. 2, 259–261 - - Kroker (E.), _Jahrbuch_, cited 315 n. 1, n. 3, 321, 325 n. 9 - - Kronos, 302 - - Ktesias, 157 - - kylikes, 74 n. 3, 115, 318 - - - Labda, 193 - - labyrinth, 76, 89 n. 3 - - Lacedaemon, Lacedaemonia, 144 n. 4; - see also Sparta - - Lade, battle of, 75, 84 - - Lakedes, 158 - - Lakydes, 158 n. 4 - - Lamb (D.), _Year’s Work in Classical Studies_, cited 244 n. 1 - - Lampsacus, 53, 63, 281 - - Lancastrians, 101 - - Landwehr, _Philologus_, cited 35 n. 2, 48 n. 6 - - Lanuvium, 246 n. 7 - - _lapicidae_, 230, 234 - - Lapithae, 193 - - Larcher (P. H.), _Mémoires de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles - Lettres_, cited 280 n. 1, 283 n. 6 - - _lares_, 336 - - _lares grundules_, 336 n. 2 - - Larissa, near Phocaea, 246 n. 8 - - larnax, λάρναξ, 198, 199, 209 - - Latium, 219 n. 4, 224 n. 5, 234, 246, 296, 336 n. 1 - - de Launay (L.), _apud_ Saglio, _Dictionnaire des Antiquités_, cited 44 - n. 5, 203 - - laundrymen, 20 - - laura, 76, 77 - - Laurentius Lydus (Johannes), _de Magistratibus_, cited 48 n. 6; - _de Mensuris et Ponderibus_, cited 224 n. 5, 226 n. 3; - _de Ostentatione_, cited 238 n. 3 - - Laurium, 21, 23 n. 1, 36, 38, 39, 41–46, 49, 50, 58, 61 - - Lauth (F. J.), _Aus Aegyptens Vorzeit_, cited 97 n. 4 - - _lautumiae_, 224 n. 5 - - lawgivers, 8, 11, 16, 35, 93 n. 2, 182, 183, 301 - - Lawson (Thos. W.), _Frenzied Finance_, cited 4 n. 1, 5 n. 8 - - Layard (A. H.), _Monuments of Nineveh_, cited 325 n. 6 - - Layton (W. T.), _Capital and Labour_, cited 11 n. 2 - - Lazarus, 102 - - leaden coins, 74 - - Leaf, _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, cited 281–283, 286 - - Leaina, 253 - - leather currency, 221 n. 7 - - leather workers, 14, 17, 222 - - Lebadea, 162 n. 3 - - Lebedos, 131 - - Ledl (A.), _Studien zur älteren athen. Verfassungsgeschichte_, 34 n. 2 - - Lehmann-Haupt (C. F.), cited 157; - _Hermes_, cited 161 n. 3 - - Lelantine war, 68 n. 2, 117 n. 1 - - Lemnos, 134 n. 5 - - Lenormant, 24 n. 1, 89 n. 3, 150; - _La Monnaie dans L’Antiquité_, cited 74 n. 6, 141; - _Monnaies Royales de la Lydie_, cited 130 n. 7; - _Monnaies et Médailles_, cited 56 n. 4 - - Lenschau (T.), _apud_ Bursian, _Jahresbericht_, 34 n. 2, 328 n. 3 - - Leokedes, 154, 157, 158, 259 n. 1 - - Leontini, 273–4 _passim_, 296 - - Leontis, 50 n. 3 - - Lepsius (K. R.), _Abhandlungen d. preussisch. Akademie d. - Wissenschaften zu Berlin_, cited 148 n. 3; - _Denkmäler_, cited 123 n. 9; - _Königsbuch_, cited 98 - - Lermann (W.), _Athenatypen_, cited 53 n. 2, 56 n. 2, 63 n. 7 - - Lesbians, Lesbos, 96 n. 1, 104, 120 - - Letters of Phalaris, 274 - - Leukas, 189, 191 - - λευκὸς χρυσός, 133 - - Leutsch und Schneidewin, _Paroemiographi Graeci_, cited 71 n. 1, 73 n. - 2, 76 n. 6, 77 n. 4, 78 n. 7, 79 n. 2, 190 n. 1, 308 n. 3 - - Levantine race, 305 - - Lewis (Geo. Cornewall), _On the Credibility of Early Roman History_, - cited 215, 236 n. 2, 237 n. 5 - - _Lexicon Seguerianum_, ed. Bekker, cited 39, 41 n. 3, 57, 310 n. 4, 326 - n. 9, 327 n. 9 - - Libanius, _Oratio c. Severum_, cited 257 n. 2 - - Liber and Libera, 250 n. 1 - - Libya, 68, 74, 86, 89 n. 1, 92 n. 2, 122, 124, 125 n. 3, 201 n. 8 - - Liddell and Scott, _Lexicon_, cited 80, 313 n. 3 - - Limir-Patesi-Assur, 214 n. 3 - - Liopesi, 58 n. 3 - - liturgies, 67, 79, 287 - - Livy, cited 54 n. 1, 57 n. 2, 184 n. 2, 215 n. 2, 216–218, 221 n. 2, - 222 n. 1, n. 7, 223, 224 n. 5, 225–230, 232 n. 1, 234, 235, 238 n. - 3, 245, 247, 248 n. 1, 253 n. 4, 261 n. 2, 278 n. 3, 289 n. 1, 298 - - Lloyd (Hy. D.), _Wealth against Commonwealth_, cited 4, 5, 6, 14, 235, - 267 - - Locrians, 22 - - Lodi, 2 - - Loeper (R.), _Athenische Mitteilungen_, cited 38 n. 5, 41 n. 3, 44 n. - 3, 45, 50, 310 n. 1, 312 n. 4, 313 n. 5 - - Loeschcke (G.), _Athenische Mitteilungen_, cited 316 n. 4, 319 - - London, 3, 247 - - Long Walls, 13 n. 3 - - λόφος, 39, 44 - - Lophos Loutrou, 42 - - Lords, House of, 3 - - Louvre, 74 n. 3, 245 n. 1 - - λύχνων, οὑκ τῶν, 207 - - Lucian, _Bis Accusatus_, cited 151 n. 4, 275 n. 1; - _Charon_, cited 144 n. 4; - _Eunuchus_, cited 280 n. 1, 283 n. 6; - _Lexiphanes_, cited 199 n. 9; - _Navigium_, cited 151 n. 4; - _Phalaris_, cited 275 n. 1, n. 2, 276, 301 n. 2; - _Prometheus_, cited 203 n. 4; - _Vera Historia_, cited 275 n. 1; - Schol. _Cataplus_, cited 134 n. 5; - Schol. _Lexiphanes_, cited 199 n. 3, n. 9, 200 - - Lucius Tarquinius, 216; - see also Tarquinius Priscus - - Lucretius, cited 311 n. 1 - - _lucumo_, 239 n. 5 - - Lucumo, 216; - see also Tarquinius Priscus - - Luke, cited 239 n. 1 - - Lycian language, 134 n. 5 - - Lycophron, son of Periander, 214 n. 7 - - Lycophron, _Cassandra_, cited 59 n. 1 - - Lydia and Lydians, 1, 4, 46, 59 n. 6, 64, 72, 73, 86, 90 n. 4, 91, 92, - 104 n. 3, 123, chap. V _passim_, 155 n. 2, 187, 188, 191, 236 n. 2, - 270, 273, 293, 302 - - Lydian stone, 129 - - Lygdamis, 70 n. 2 - - Lykos, 155 n. 2 - - Lynkestai, 183, 190 n. 3 - - Lyons, 215 n. 2 - - Lysias, _c. Eratosthenem_, cited 12; - _c. Frumentarios_, cited 12 - - Lysimachus, 284 - - - Macan (R.), _Herodotus_, cited 54 n. 6, 59 n. 4, n. 6, 68 n. 4, 156 n. - 2, 157 n. 7, 159 n. 2, 161 n. 2, 165, 166, 168, 174, 175 n. 1, 259 - n. 1, 262 n. 2, 325 n. 3, 326 n. 7; - _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, cited 31 n. 2 - - Macarius, cited 77 n. 4 - - Macaulay (G. C.), translation of Herodotus, cited 313 n. 3 - - Macdonald (G.), _Coin Types_, cited 128 n. 1, 133 n. 4, 143 n. 1, 150 - - MacDonald (J. Ramsay), _Unemployment and the Wage Fund_, cited 5 n. 8 - - Macedonia, 59, 61, 147, 156, 157, 158 n. 6, 159, 183, 271, 330 - - Macfie (J. W. Scott), _Revue d’Ethnologie et de Sociologie_, cited 171 - n. 1 - - μάχιμοι, 122 - - Macrobius, _Saturnalia_, cited 287 n. 4 - - Maeander, 131, 147 n. 1 - - Maeandrius, 84 - - Maelius, Spurius, 229, 255 n. 1, 277, 278 - - Maeonian dynasty, 144 - - μάγειρος, 257 - - Magians, 209 - - magic, 101 - - Magnesia, 131 - - Mahaffy (J. P.), _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, cited 160 - - Malalas, cited 71 n. 4, 72 n. 5 - - Malchus, 278 n. 2 - - Malcolm (J.), _Memoir of Central India_, cited 142 n. 3 - - Mallet (D.), _Les Premiers Établissements des Grecs en Égypte_, cited - 56 n. 3, 87 n. 6, n. 8, 89 n. 3, 90 n. 1, n. 4, 91 n. 3, n. 4, n. 9, - 92 n. 2, 103 n. 1, 105 n. 1, 107, 120 n. 4, 121 n. 2, 122, 123 n. - 12, 124 n. 2 - - Mamertine prison, 224 n. 5 - - Manetho, cited 95 n. 2, 99, 100 - - Manlius, Marcus, 229 - - Mantineans, 212 n. 1 - - Mantissa, cited 308 n. 3 - - Mantyes, 58, 59, 62 - - Manu, laws of, 221 n. 4 - - manual labour, 13–22, 231, 269, 275, 279 - - Marathon, 38, 66 - - Marcellinus, _Vita Thucydidis_, cited 33 n. 1, 50 n. 7 - - Marchant (E. C.), _Thucydides Book II_, cited 313 n. 1 - - Marcopoulo, 39 n. 6 - - Margoliouth (D. S.), _Mohammed_, cited 261 n. 2 - - Mariéjol (J. H.), _de Orthagoridis_, 259 n. 5, 264 n. 2 - - Mariette (A.), cited 100 n. 4 - - Marius, 32 - - _Marmor Parium_, cited 155 n. 2, 156 n. 3, 157 n. 1, 160 n. 4, 181, 210 - n. 1 - - Maronea, 36 n. 3, 44 n. 3, 46, 47, 50 - - Marquardt (J.), _Privatleben d. Roemer_, cited 336 n. 4 - - Marseilles, 246 - - Marshall (F. H.), see _British Museum Catalogue of Rings_ - - Martha (J.), _L’Art Étrusque_, cited 240 n. 4, 251 n. 1, 255 n. 3 - - Marx (Karl), 6 n. 3, 21 - - masons, 95, 285; - see also stonemasons - - Maspero (G.), cited 93, 100 n. 4; - _Bibliothèque Égyptologique_, cited 96 n. 2, 99 n. 3, n. 4; - _Histoire Ancienne_^5, cited 87 n. 9, 99 n. 4, 103, 197 n. 5; - _Passing of the Empires_, cited 123 n. 5; - _Popular Stories of Ancient Egypt_, cited 101 n. 3, 102 n. 1, n. 3 - - Mastarna, 223, 249 - - Matthew, cited 261 n. 2 - - Mau (A.), _apud_ Pauly Wissowa, cited 203 n. 4 - - Mauri (A.), _I Cittadini Lavoratori dell’ Attica_, cited 15 n. 2, 17, - 37 n. 7, 307 n. 1 - - Maximus Tyrius, cited 70 n. 3, 180 n. 2, 307 n. 4 - - Medes, Media, 90, 91 n. 1, 123, 146 n. 4, 157 - - Medici, the, 2, 285, 286, 304 - - Mediterranean, 72, 87 - - Medon, 158 - - Megabazus, 62, 271 - - Megacles’ daughter, 52 - - Megara, 8, 14, 16 n. 2, 29, 31, 76, 166 n. 2, 168, 187 n. 9, 264–268, - 296, 329, 330, 336 n. 1 - - Megara Hyblaea, 265, 273 - - Megaris, 265 - - Megiddo, 116 - - Mela, cited 87 n. 1 - - _Mélanges d’Archéologie et d’Histoire_, see Graillot - - Melanippus, 262 - - Melas, 136, 272, 273 - - Melissa, 212 - - Meltas, K. of Argos, 158 - - _Mémoires de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres_, see - Helbig, Larcher - - Memphis, 80, 88, 95, 96 n. 4, 97, 98, 100 - - Menaechmus of Sicyon, 258 n. 2, 260 n. 1 - - Menander, _Twins_, cited 50 n. 2 - - Mendes, 121 n. 3 - - _mercatores Romanam curiam sequentes_, 304 - - mercenaries, 36, 78, 89, 90, 92, 102 n. 1, 121–124, 140, 145, 165 n. 5, - 166, 212, 300 - - Mermnadae, Mermnads, 1, 139 n. 1, 144 n. 3, 147 n. 3 - - Meroe, 98 - - Merovingians, 142 - - Mesogeia, Mesogeioi, 39 n. 6, 310 n. 2 - - Messana, 75 - - Messene, 179 n. 3, 180 - - Messenian War, 68 n. 2, 158 n. 6, 167 n. 2, 177, 179, 182, 331 n. 3 - - metal industry, 21, 69, 73, 74, 80, 81, 146 n. 7, 187, 203 n. 4, 243, - 292 - - Methymna, 191 n. 3 - - metics, 67, 234 - - μετρία ἐσθής, 331, 332 - - μέτρον, μέτρα, 170–172, 182 - - μετρονόμοι, 171 - - Metropisi, see Amphitrope - - Meyer (E.), _Geschichte d. alten Aegyptens_, cited 102 n. 1, 117 n. 5, - 125 n. 3; - _Geschichte d. Altertums_, cited 6 n. 3, 29 n. 2, 37 n. 7, 47 n. 2, - 54 n. 1, 59 n. 4, 64, 69 n. 5, 70 n. 1, 83 n. 5, 90 n. 4, 105 n. - 1, 122, 145 n. 4, 148 n. 5, 168 n. 3, n. 4, 173 n. 2, 180 n. 4, - 192 n. 1, 262, 266 n. 1, 267 n. 6, 270 n. 6, 278 n. 2; - _Jahrbücher f. Nationalökonomie u. Statistik_, cited 3 n. 3; - _Kleinschriften_, cited 21 n. 2, 265; - _Rheinisches Museum_, cited 193 n. 2 - - Meyer (G.), _apud_ G. Curtius, _Studien zur griech. u. latein. - Grammatik_, cited 327 - - Mezentius, 249 - - Michaelis (A.), _Century of Archaeological Discoveries_, cited 63 n. 2, - 74 n. 3, 253 n. 4 - - Midas, 146, 147, 151, 152 n. 2, 155 n. 2, 213 n. 4, 293 - - middlemen, 1, 129 n. 3 - - Migne, _Bibliotheca Patrum Graecorum_, cited 71 n. 4 - - Milchhoefer, _Abhandlungen d. preussisch. Akademie d. Wissenschaften zu - Berlin_, cited 38, 45, 58 n. 3, 312 n. 4; - _Athenische Mitteilungen_, cited 50 n. 4; - _apud_ Pauly Wissowa, cited 41 n. 3 - - Miletus, Milesians, 21, 33, 59 n. 1, 61, 62, 63 n. 7, 72–74, 79, 90, - 92, 96, 103, 104, 110–112, 116, 117, 121 n. 5, 123, 124, 132, 133, - 135 n. 7, 145 n. 3, 191, 212, 266, 268–271 _passim_, 287, 296; - Milesian hyperakria, 40 n. 8; - Milesian pottery, 1, 107 n. 4, 110–112, 114, 116, 118, 212 n. 8; - Milesians’ Fort, 90, 91, 104, 117, 118, 120, 121, 123 n. 8 - - military despotism, 24, 27–32, 35, 144, 190 n. 2, 196, 258, 280, 282, - 300, 301 - - millionaires, 13 n. 4, 35 - - Milo, 193 n. 7 - - Miltiades, 52, 199 n. 10, 245 n. 2 - - Miluhha, Miluhhi, 98, 99 n. 3 - - miners, 12–14, 20, 38, 44, 45, 47–49, 152, 271, 291, 292, 296 - - mines, mining districts, 15, 21, 36–39, 41, 44–47, 49–51, 58 n. 1, - 59–62, 64, 68, 87, 137, 140, 146 n. 7, 147, 148, 183 n. 6, 224 n. 5, - 271, 291, 292, 296, 310, 312 n. 5 - - Minns (E. H.), _Greeks and Scythians_, cited 286, 287, 288 - - Minoan culture, 333; - thalassocracy, 330 - - Minos, 169, 331 - - Miriam (Gihon), 267 - - μισθός, 21 - - Mitchell (J. M.) and Caspari (M. O. B.), ed. Grote, cited 327 n. 1, - 330, 331 - - _Mitteilungen des deutschen archäologischen Instituts in Athen_, cited - 108 n. 2, 210 n. 1, 312 n. 5, 316 n. 2; - see also Brueckner, L. Curtius, Diamantaras, Doerpfeld, Fabricius, - Koehler, Loeper, Loeschcke, Milchhoefer, Oikonomos, Pallat, - Pernice, Studniczka - - _Mitteilungen des deutschen archäologischen Instituts in Rom_, cited - 215 n. 2, 242 n. 1, 255 n. 3, 335; - see also Petersen, Pinza - - Mitylene, 168, 282 n. 2 - - mixing bowls (craters), 82, 125, 126, 201, 205, 213 - - Mnason, 22 - - Mnesarchus, 69 n. 1 - - Mohammed, 261 n. 2 - - Moloch, 278 n. 2 - - Mommsen (A.), _Heortologie_, cited 16 n. 7 - - Mommsen (Th.), _de Collegiis_, cited 222 n. 5; - _History of Rome_, cited 32 n. 1, 222 n. 6, 230 n. 2, 231, 233, 285, - 295; - _Roemische Forschung_, cited 228 n. 1, 229 n. 2, n. 4, 255 n. 1, 337 - n. 3; - _Roemisches Staatsrecht_, cited 222 n. 4 - - _mons sacer_, 233 - - _monstrum_, 277 - - Montelius (O.), _Civilisation Primitive en Italie_, cited 119 n. 3, 242 - n. 2, 246 n. 6 - - _Monumenti Antichi_, cited 248 n. 2, 251 n. 2, 253 n. 2; - see also Gabrici, Pinza, Schiaparelli - - _Monumenti Inediti pubblicati dall’ Instituto di Corrispondenza - archeologica_, cited 213 n. 4 - - _Monuments Grecs_, cited 325 n. 5 - - Moret (A.), _de Bocchori rege_, cited 93 n. 2, n. 4, 100 n. 4 - - Moses, 197 - - moulders of gold and ivory, 14 - - μούναρχος, 27 - - Movers (F. C.), _Die Phoenizier_, cited 191 n. 3 - - mtk, 125, 126 - - Mueller (C.), _Aeginetica_, cited 160, 166 n. 1, 167, 176 n. 3, 177, - 330 n. 4 - - Mueller (K.) and Oelmann (F.), _Tiryns_, cited 315 n. 1, 317 n. 1 - - Mueller and Deecke, _Die Etrusker_, cited 221 n. 1, 249 - - Muenzer und Strack, _Die antiken Münzen Nord-Griechenlands_, cited 37 - n. 3, 60 n. 2 - - Mullach (F. W. A.), _Fragmenta Philosophorum Graecorum_, cited 19 n. 4 - - Mundella, Mr, 11 n. 2 - - Munich, 251 n. 3, 252 - - Munro (J. A. R.), _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, cited 40 n. 1 - - Muretus, _Variae Lectiones_, cited 31 n. 2 - - Muses, 27 n. 4 - - music, 73, 260 n. 4, 261 - - Mycenae, 162, 298, 333 - - Mycenaean culture, 169, 333; - period, 163, 164; - pottery, 319 - - Mykalessos, 106, 108; - see also Rhitsona - - Mylonpolis, 214 n. 6 - - Myrcinus, 59 n. 1, 61, 62, 271 - - Myres (J. L.), _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, cited 96, 191 n. 2, 268 - n. 3, 324 n. 8; - _apud_ Zimmern, 309 n. 9 - - Myrina, 131 - - Myron, tyrant of Sicyon, 258, 263 - - Myrrina, 51 n. 2 - - ἐν μύρτου κλαδί, 302 n. 5 - - - nails as money, 162 - - ναίω, 327 - - Nakauba, see Nechepsus - - ναός, 327 - - Naples, 23 - - _National Baptist_ of Philadelphia, cited 5 - - ναύκληρος, 327 - - naukraries, naukraroi, ναυκραρία, ναύκραρος, 326–331 - - Naukratis, 53, 56 n. 3, 68, 92 n. 2, 103–118, 120–122, 124, 172 n. 1, - 212 n. 8, 293, 315 n. 5, 324 - - Naukratite pottery, 107 n. 4, 114–116, 117 n. 4, 118 - - ναύω, 327 - - Nauplia, 330, 331 - - ναῦς, 327 - - _nauis_, 327 - - Naxos, 70 n. 2, 155 n. 2 - - Neboshazban, 214; - see also Psammetichus I - - Nechepsus (Nakauba), 88 n. 1, 98 - - Necho I (Nekau), 88, 98, 101 n. 1, n. 2 - - Necho II (Nekau), 87, 88, 116, 123, 124, 325 - - negroes, 101 - - Neilos, 169 n. 1 - - Neith, 102 n. 1, 214 n. 4 - - Nemean games, 259 n. 1 - - Nemesis, 83, 84 - - Neochabis (Nekauba), 100 - - neolithic age, 336 n. 1 - - Netos amphora, 113, 315 n. 5 - - _Neue Jahrbücher_, see _Jahrbücher f. Classische Philologie_ - - _New York Daily Commercial Bulletin_, cited 5; - _State Investigation Report_, cited 5 n. 8; - _Sun_, cited 5 - - Nicolaus Damascenus, cited 59 n. 6, 130 n. 2, 135, 136, 137 n. 1, n. 2, - n. 3, 138 n. 5, n. 7, 144 n. 1, 145 n. 1, n. 4, n. 5, 146 n. 1, 180 - n. 3, 183, 189 n. 1, n. 8, 190 n. 1, n. 2, n. 3, 191 n. 1, n. 3, - 192–194, 196, 197, 211 n. 6, 213, 214 n. 7, 258, 259 n. 4, 273 n. 2, - n. 3 - - Niebuhr (G. B.), _History of Rome_, tr. Walter, cited 239 n. 2 - - Niese (B.), _Hermes_, cited 212 n. 3; - _apud_ Pauly Wissowa, cited 279 n. 3 - - Nigeria, 171 n. 1 - - Nikias, 12, 13, 49, 51, 229 n. 1, 304 - - Nikias, a Megarian, 266 - - Nikolaos, son of Periander, 214 n. 7 - - Nikosthenes, potter, 319, 335 - - Nile, 87, 91, 103, 121, 197 - - Niloxenos, 104 n. 3 - - Nilsson (M. P.), _Timbres Amphoriques de Lindos_, cited 151 - - Nisaea, 29 - - Nitokris, 99 n. 3 - - νόμισμα, 149 - - νόμος, 167 - - νομοθέτης, 301 - - Nonius Marcellus, cited 223 n. 1 - - Norden, see Gercke - - Nordin (R.), _Klio_, cited 302 n. 8 - - _Notizie degli Scavi_, cited 219 n. 4, 251 n. 3, 252 n. 1, 334, 335, - 336 n. 1; - see also Barnabei, Boni, Cozza, Pasqui - - _nouem combusti_, 337 - - Novgorod, 142 n. 4 - - Numa, 221 n. 7, 222 - - _Numismatic Chronicle_, cited 60 n. 2; - see also Borrell, Gardner (P.), Head, Howorth, Ridgeway, Six - - _Numismatische Zeitschrift_, see v. Bergmann - - Nut Amen, see Ammeris - - nymph, 117 - - Nymphi, 130 n. 7 - - - ὀβελοί, ὀβελίσκοι, 149, 162–164 - - obols, 172 n. 2, 221 n. 7 - - Oedipus, 9 - - Oelmann (F.), see Mueller (K.) - - Ohio, 235 n. 3 - - οἰκέται, 22 - - Oikonomos, _Athenische Mitteilungen_, cited 38, 39, 40 n. 9, 44 n. 1 - - οἰκονόμος, 10 - - oil presses, 2 - - Oil, Standard, 5 - - ointments, manufacture of, 187 - - Olbia, 286–288, 297 - - olentis arator Hymetti, 309 - - olive oil and yards, 34, 69, 308 - - Olympia, 192 n. 5, 194, 198, 199, 263 - - Olympian games, 123, 154, 159, 160, 175, 178, 258, 260, 265 - - ὀλυμπιονίκης, 34 - - Omphale, 236 n. 2 - - κατ’ ὄναρ, 81 - - ὀνομάσαντος, 328 - - _opibus superbiaque_, 235 - - _opifices_, 222, 230, 234, 235 - - Oppert (J.), _Mémoire sur les Rapports de l’Égypte et de l’Assyrie_, - cited 97 n. 4, 98 n. 4 - - _optimates_, 234 - - oracle, 158 n. 6, 209, 269, 270; - see also Delphi - - Orchomenos, Minyan, 330 - - ὀρεινά, ὀρεινή, 40, 309 - - Oriental influence, 321 - - _Orientalische Litteraturzeitung_, see Spiegelberg - - Oroetes, 84 - - Orosius, cited 30 n. 3, 45 n. 4, 54 n. 1, 187 n. 1, 282 n. 1 - - Orthagoras, 9, 28, 179, 180, 257, 258, 262 n. 4, 263, 293 - - Orthagorids, 179, 263 - - ostracism, 67 - - Ouinin (= Ionians), 123 - - Overbeck, _Abhandlungen d. saechsischen Gesellschaft d. - Wissenschaften_, cited 198 n. 9 - - Ovid, _Ars Amatoria_, cited 275 n. 2; - _Fasti_, cited 238 n. 3; - _Ibis_, cited 275 n. 2; - _Metamorphoses_, cited 147 n. 2; - _Tristia_, cited 275 n. 2 - - “owls” (coin), 53, 54, 58, 61 - - “ox” (? coin), 57 n. 5 - - Oxford, 3 n. 2, 112 n. 8, 237, 257 - - Oxyrhynchus papyri, 104, 257, 258,262 n. 4, 264 n. 4 - - - Pactolus, 129, 147, 148 - - Pactyes, 139, 152, 293 - - Paestum, 221 n. 2 - - παιάν, παιανίζω, παιωνίζω, 61 - - Paianians, 55, 58, 59 n. 5, 61 - - painters, 14 - - Paionia, Paionians, 59–62, 147, 183 n. 6 - - παίς, 157 - - Pais (Ettore), 194 n. 6, 224 n. 5, 236; - _Ancient Italy_, cited 255 n. 1; - _Ancient Legends of Roman History_, cited 236 n. 1, 237, 238 n. 2, - 239 n. 5, 248 n. 1, 249, 255 n. 1; - _Ricerche sulla Storia e sul Diritto pubblico di Roma_, 236 n. 1, - cited 335; - _Storia Critica di Roma_, 236 n. 1 - - Palatine, 224 n. 5, 253, 338 n. 2 - - Palazzo di Giustizia (Rome), 65 n. 3 - - Palestine, 92 - - Palladius, cited 201 n. 5, n. 6 - - “Pallas,” παλλάδες (coins), 54, 291 - - Pallas (goddess), 16, 54; - see also Athena - - Pallat, _Athenische Mitteilungen_, cited 317 n. 7, 318 - - Palmerius (Le Paulmier), _Exerc._, cited 40 - - Pamphaes, 273 - - Pamphilus, 39 n. 1 - - Panaitios, 273, 274 - - Panathenaic amphorae, 113; - games, 260 - - Panciatighi, 3 - - Pandion, 313 - - πανδοκεύων, 135 - - Pangaion, Mt, 36, 54 n. 1, 56, 59, 148 - - Panionios, 191 n. 3 - - Panofka (T.), _Res Samiorum_, cited 68 n. 1 - - Pantagnotos, 82 - - Pantaleon, 137, 273 - - Papal treasury, 304 - - Pape (W.), _Griechische Eigennamen_, cited 199 n. 10 - - paper currency, 3, 4 - - Paphlagonia, 48, 50, 284 n. 4 - - Paphos, 118, 119 - - papyri, 48 n. 6, 104, 257 - - Paralia, παραλία, πάραλος γῆ, παράλιοι, 41, 312, 313 - - Paralos (ship), 312 - - παραθαλάσσιος, 313 - - Parian Marble, see Marmor Parium - - Parnes, Mt, 40, 41, 44, 308–311 - - παρθένοι (coins), 54 - - Pasqui, _Notizie d. Scavi_, cited 219 n. 3 - - παστάδες, 218 - - patricians, 216, 227 - - Patrokleides, 194, 197 - - Pauly Wissowa, cited 41 n. 3, 56 n. 1, 120 n. 4, 148 n. 5, 156 n. 2, - 161 n. 2, 162 n. 3, 166 n. 1, 201 n. 8, 203 n. 4, 207 n. 4, 222 n. - 3, n. 5, 268 n. 4, 272 n. 3, n. 4, 276 n. 5, 279 n. 3, 331 n. 3 - - Pausanias, _Description of Greece_, 160, cited 46 n. 6, 62 n. 5, n. 6, - 65 n. 5, 70 n. 3, 145 n. 1, 157 n. 2, 158, 159, 162 n. 3, 165 n. 2, - 167 n. 1, n. 2, 169 n. 2, n. 4, 176 n. 3, 177 n. 1, n. 3, 179, 183 - n. 3, 193 n. 5, 195, 198, 211, 212 n. 2, 258 n. 3, 259 n. 2, n. 3, - 260 n. 4, 263, 264 n. 1, n. 6, 266, 267 n. 5, 284 n. 4, n. 5, 309, - 331, 336 n. 1 - - Pausanias the Spartan, 24, 30, 282 - - Payne (Henry B.), 5 - - Peak of Derbyshire, 40 - - Pearson, ed. Sophocles, cited 16 n. 7 - - Pegasus, 57, 188, 209 - - Peile, cited 134 n. 5 - - Peiraeans, trittys of, 41 n. 3 - - Peirene, 62 n. 6 - - Peisistratids, 14, 15, 25, 31, 264, 289, 292 - - Peisistratus, 7, 10, 13, 15, 16 n. 7, 28–32, chap. II. _passim_, 76 n. - 5, 137, 166, 167, 215, 221, 231, 245 n. 2, 260, 265, 268, 271 n. 4, - 274, 287, 291, 299, 302, 303 n. 2, 305–307, 308 n. 3, 309, 310 n. 2, - 311, 328 - - Pelasgians, 309 - - pelatai, 13, 307 - - Pelham (H.), _Outlines of Roman History_, cited 239 - - Peloponnese, Peloponnesians, 66, 72, 154, 155, 156 n. 1, 173, 175, 176, - 178, 180, 294, 305 n. 1, 313, 317, 330 - - Peloponnesian brooches, 168; - war, 19, 23 n. 1, 26, 33 n. 1, 45, 260 n. 2; - weights and measures, 161, 172 - - Pelusium, 124 - - Pelusian mouth of Nile, 121 - - πενέσται, 24 - - πένητες καὶ πεζοί, 274 - - pentekosiomedimnoi, 16, 49 - - Pentelicon, 39 n. 6, 310 - - Penteskuphia, 207 n. 2, 208 n. 1 - - Pepoli, Roméo, 2 - - Περάτι, 311 - - Perdiccas, 24 n. 5 - - Perdrizet (P.), _Klio_, cited 36 n. 2, 46 n. 6, 47 n. 3, 50 n. 1, 59 n. - 4 - - perfume vase, 119 - - Pergamum, Pergamus, Pergamene, 135 n. 4, 148, 284–286, 296, 297 - - Periander, 21, 24 n. 5, 31, 63, 104 n. 3, 124, 166, 167, 187 n. 8, - 189–192, 195–197, 212–215, 259, 260, 305 - - Pericles, 13 n. 3, 14, 15, 17, 49, 67, 231, 304 - - Periklytos of Tenedos, 162 n. 3 - - περιζώματα, 276 - - Pernice, _Athenische Mitteilungen_, 321 n. 4, 325 n. 5; - see also Brueckner - - περόναι, 170, 333 - - Perrot (G.), _Histoire de l’Art dans l’Antiquité_, cited 112, 116 n. 5, - 169 n. 3 - - Perseus, 198, 214 n. 5 - - Persia, Persians, 20, 24, 31, 33, 47, 50, 53, 57, 61, 62, 66, 69–73, - 75, 77 n. 3, 79, 80, 83, 84, 92 n. 2, 102 n. 1, 123, 124, 130, 132, - 133, 138–140, 144, 145 n. 2, 172 n. 4, 249, 270, 271, 280 n. 1, 282 - n. 2, 291, 292, 312 n. 5 - - Persian wars, 19, 25, 26, 32, 96, 260 n. 2, 332 - - Persinos, 282 n. 2 - - Peru, 44 n. 5 - - Perugia, 246 - - Petersen (E.), _Klio_, cited 253; - _Roemische Mitteilungen_, cited 246 n. 5 - - Petra, 193 n. 7 - - Petrie (Flinders), _apud_ Hogarth, _Annual of the British School at - Athens_, 119 n. 5; - _History of Egypt_, cited 87 n. 9, 88 n. 1, n. 2, 97 n. 5, 98 n. 5, - 100, 101 n. 4, 121, 123 n. 1, 125 n. 3; - _Tanis_, cited 109 n. 5, 112 n. 3, n. 4, 121 - - Petrie and Gardner, _Naukratis_, cited 103, 104 n. 7, 105–107, 109, 110 - n. 3, 113 n. 2, 114 n. 1, n. 2, 116, 118 n. 1, n. 2, 119, 172 n. 1 - - Phacussa, 214 n. 6 - - φαινομηρίδες, 332 - - Phaistos, 298 - - Phalaris, 14, 27 n. 2, 274–278, 289 n. 2, 303 n. 2 - - Phaleas, 22 n. 1 - - Phaleron, 305 - - Phaleron ware, 315, 318, 321 - - Phalkes, 179 - - Phanes, 102 n. 1, 124 - - Phanias of Ephesus, cited 144 n. 3 - - Pharaoh, 88 n. 1 and chap. IV _passim_, 212 - - Pharaoh’s daughter, 197 - - Phasis, 148 n. 3 - - Pheidias (= Pheidon), 155 n. 2 - - Pheidon of Argos, 9, 26, 27 n. 2, 64 n. 3, 69 n. 5, 149, 152 n. 2, - 154–162, 164, 170, 171 n. 3, 172–186, 221, 235 n. 3, 259 n. 1, 260, - 292, 294, 301 n. 1, 304, 305, 330, 331 - - Pheidon of Corinth, 182 - - φελλεῖς, 308 - - Pherecrates, _Metalleis_, cited 51 n. 2 - - Pheron, 97 n. 1 - - Philadelphia, 130 n. 7 - - Philaidae, Philaids, 33, 63 - - Philemonides, 12 - - Philetairos, 284–286, 288 - - Philip of Macedon, 36, 54 n. 1, 282, 330 - - Philip, son of Butacides, 239, 255 - - Philippi (Macedonia), 39 n. 4, 50 - - Philippi (A.), _Beiträge zu einer Geschichte d. Attischen - Bürgerrechtes_, cited 329 - - Philistus, 30 - - Philochorus, cited 36 n. 3, 39, 65, 66 n. 3, 134 n. 5 - - Philokypros, tyrant of Soli, 158, 303 n. 1 - - _Philolog. Obozrenie_, see Hirschensohn - - _Philologus_, see Foerster, Forchhammer, Gutschmid, Landwehr, Unger - - φιλοπότης, 126 - - Philostratus, _Vita Apollonii_, cited 151 n. 4 - - Phocaea, 130 n. 6, 221, 240, 246, 282 n. 2 - - Phocians, 22 - - Phoenicia, Phoenicians, 87, 89, 90 n. 4, 93 n. 4, 106, 120, 239, 278 n. - 2, 293, 321 n. 5, 324, 325, 326 n. 3 - - Phoenician standard, 132 - - _Phoronid_, 44 n. 4 - - φορτία, 68, 89 - - Photius, cited 19 n. 3, 54 n. 2, n. 4, 56 n. 4, 70 n. 5, 71 n. 1, 79 n. - 2, 151 n. 1, 257 n. 2, 326 n. 9, 327, 328, 330 n. 3 - - Phrygia, 49, 62 n. 4, 140, 146, 147, 155 n. 2, 208, 213 n. 4, 293 - - Phye, 51, 52, 54, 55, 58–60, 291 - - φυλή τε καὶ φρατρία, 217 - - Pianchi, 88 n. 1, 95, 98, 99 n. 3, 100 n. 4 - - piece work, 20 - - Pi-emro, 106 n. 3 - - Pieria, 147 - - S. Pietro in Carcere, church of, 224 n. 5 - - Piganiol (A.), _Journal d. Savants_, cited 335 - - Pigres, 58, 59, 62 - - Pillars of Herakles, 68 - - πίμπρημι, 81 - - Pindar, 9–10, 290; - _Isthmians_, cited 156 n. 1; - _Nemeans_, cited 177 n. 7; - _Olympians_, cited 10 n. 1, n. 2; - _Pythians_, cited 10 n. 3, 275, 289 n. 2, 336 n. 1; - Schol. _Nemeans_, cited 258 n. 2, 259–261; - Schol. _Olympians_, cited 157 n. 6, 176 n. 3, 182, 186 n. 2, 195 n. - 3, 275 n. 5; - Schol. _Pythians_, cited 275 n. 2 - - Pindaros, tyrant of Ephesus, 272, 273 - - Pinza (G.), _Bullettino della Commissione Archeologica Municipale di - Roma_, cited 221 n. 2, 224 n. 5, 243, 336 n. 1, n. 2, 338 n. 1; - _Monumenti Antichi_, cited 244 n. 1, 252, 338 n. 2; - _Roemische Mitteilungen_, cited 243 - - Pipin, diploma, cited 261 n. 2 - - piracy, 70, 71, 129, 292, 321 n. 5, 324, 329, 330 - - Pisa (Italian), 2; - (Peloponnesian), 159, 160 - - Pisamiilki, see Psammetichus (Assyrian form) - - Pitane, 285 - - πίθος, 207 - - plague, 92 - - plain, party of the, 35, 47, 48, 291, 307, 312 - - Plaka, 42 - - Plass (H. G.), _Die Tyrannis_, cited 70 n. 2, 71 n. 5, 198 n. 9, 269, - 272 n. 4 - - Plataea, 26; in Libya, 68 - - Platner (S. B.), _Topography of Rome_^2, cited 247 n. 5, 248 n. 1 - - Plato, 6, 28 n. 1, 29, 280, 281, 283, 286, 288, 290; - _Alcibiades_, cited 18; - _Amator_, cited 18; - _Apology_, cited 18; - _Critias_, cited 16, 40, 308 n. 2, 309; - _Gorgias_, cited 18, 208 n. 1; - _Hipparchus_, cited 302; - _Laws_, cited 16, 18, 176 n. 2, 181 n. 3, 290; - _Letters_, cited 30 n. 1, 189 n. 8, 280 n. 1, 283 n. 3; - _Meno_, cited 24 n. 5, 85 n. 1; - _Minos_, cited 336 n. 1; - _Phaedo_, cited 26 n. 2; - _Phaedrus_, cited 198; - _Protagoras_, cited 16 n. 7, 189 n. 8; - _Republic_, cited 18, 20 n. 6, 24 n. 5, 26, 27, 28 n. 4, n. 5, 29 n. - 6, 30, 129 n. 3, 145, 149, 151, 189 n. 8, 302, 304; - _Timaeus_, cited 122 n. 1, 214 n. 4; - Schol. _Hippias Major_, cited 190 n. 1; - Schol. _Phaedrus_, cited 198 n. 3 - - Plautus, _Captivi_, cited 12 n. 3 - - plebeians, 216, 217 n. 2, 223–225, 227, 228, 230, 233, 234 - - πλεκταί, 200 - - Pliny, _Natural History_, cited 17 n. 3, 40 n. 9, 44 n. 1, 68 n. 1, 70 - n. 3, 71 n. 2, 80 n. 6, 87 n. 1, 122 n. 4, 129 n. 7, 135 n. 4, 146, - 171 n. 3, 172 n. 5, 186 n. 1, n. 2, 211 n. 7, 215 n. 2, 217, 218, - 220, 222 n. 3, 224 n. 5, 226 n. 3, 228 n. 1, n. 2, n. 4, 238 n. 3, - 240 n. 2, 244 n. 1, 263 n. 5, 266, 275 n. 2, n. 5, 311 n. 1 - - πλοῖον, 269 - - Plotheia, 38, 41 n. 3, 45 - - ploughmen, 20 - - πλούσιοι, 269 - - Ploutis, Plontis (?), 269 - - Plutarch, 22, 39, 181, 183, 196, 269; - Lives: _Agesilaus_, cited 20; - _Aratus_, cited 336 n. 1; - _Brutus_, cited 229 n. 2; - _Cato Major_, cited 166 n. 6; - _Cimon_, cited 50 n. 7, 59 n. 1; - _Demetrius_, cited 93; - _Demosthenes_, cited 12 n. 6; - _Dio_, cited 284 n. 1; - _Fabius Maximus_, cited 162 n. 1, 164 n. 1; - _Lycurgus_, cited 336 n. 1; - _Lysander_, cited 23, 58, 162 n. 1, 164 n. 1; - _Nikias_, cited 12 n. 4, 151 n. 2; - _Numa_, cited 160, 222; - _Pericles_, cited 13 n. 3, 14, 15, 17, 49 n. 2, 70 n. 5; - _Phocion_, cited 336 n. 1; - _Poplicola_, cited 223 n. 5, 337 n. 5; - _Romulus_, cited 238 n. 3; - _Solon_, cited 12 n. 1, 13, 16 n. 5, 34 n. 4, 35 n. 1, n. 2, n. 5, - 37 n. 6, 49 n. 3, 63 n. 3, 65 n. 6, 169 n. 1, 170 n. 4, 308, 309 - n. 4, 328 n. 5; - _Themistocles_, cited 46; - _Theseus_, cited 16 n. 4, 329 n. 8; - _Timoleon_, cited 302 n. 6, 336 n. 1; - Moralia: _de Alexandri Magni Fortuna aut Virtute_, cited 158 n. 6; - _Amatoriae Narrationes_, cited 180; - _Amatorius_, cited 35 n. 2, 37 n. 6, 275 n. 1; - _Apophthegmata Laconica_, cited 57 n. 5, 130 n. 4; - _de Ei apud Delphos_, cited 189 n. 8; - _de Exilio_, cited 168, 199 n. 5; - _de Fortuna Romanorum_, cited 238 n. 3; - _Instituta Laconica_, cited 336 n. 1; - _de Iside et Osiride_, cited 100 n. 4, n. 8; - _de Malignitate Herodoti_, cited 191 n. 3, 195 n. 1, 263 n. 5; - _de Mulierum Virtutibus_, cited 49 n. 1, 123 n. 5, 140 n. 3, 278 n. - 5, 279 n. 2; - _Parallela_, cited 275 n. 2; - _Paroemia_, cited 76 n. 6, 77 n. 2, n. 4; - _Praecepta Gerendae Reipublicae_, cited 35 n. 2, 37 n. 6, 276 n. 3; - _cum Principibus Philosophandum_, cited 276 n. 3; - _de Pythio Oraculo_, cited 136 n. 3, 137 n. 1, 167; - _Quaestiones Graecae_, cited 69 n. 3, n. 5, 144 n. 6, 145 n. 4, 264 - n. 6, 268; - _Quaestiones Romanae_, cited 337 n. 1, n. 5; - _Regum et Imperatorum Apophthegmata_, cited 179 n. 3, 208 n. 4; - _Septem Sapientum Conuiuium_, cited 104 n. 3, 124 n. 1, 191 n. 2, - 195, 197, 198, 207 n. 3, 213 n. 4; - _de Sera Numinis Vindicta_, cited 257 n. 3, 262 n. 4, 275 n. 1; - _de Tranquillitate Animi_, cited 134 n. 4; - _de Vita et Poesi Homeri_, cited 134 n. 2; - _de Vitioso Pudore_, cited 95 n. 1 - - Poehlmann (R.), _Geschichte d. socialen Fragen u. des Socialismus i. d. - antik. Welt_, cited 4 n. 2, 267, 269 n. 5; - _Grundriss der griechischen Geschichte_, cited 37 n. 7, 192 n. 1, 304 - n. 3 - - polemarch, 194, 196, 197, 258, 270, 273, 300, 327 n. 9 - - Polledrara, 119 n. 3 - - Pollux, cited 13 n. 5, 19, 54 n. 2, 57 n. 5, 129 n. 2, n. 7, 138 n. 1, - 143 n. 3, 147 n. 3, 152 n. 1, 155 n. 2, 156 n. 1, 162 n. 1, 172 n. - 2, n. 6, 175 n. 2, 199 n. 6, n. 7, n. 8, n. 9, 200 n. 2, 264, 282 n. - 2, 320 n. 4, 326 n. 8, n. 9, 327, 328 - - πῶλος (coin), 57 - - Polyaenus, cited 10 n. 6, 20 n. 4, 51 n. 2, 52, 69 n. 5, 70 n. 2, 90 n. - 1, 96 n. 4, 140 n. 3, 145 n. 3, 147 n. 5, 211 n. 6, 259 n. 2, 272 n. - 1, 273, 274 n. 4, 275–278, 283 n. 3 - - Polybius, cited 45 n. 3, 189 n. 4, 196 n. 5, 209, 210, 215 n. 2, 216, - 275 n. 2, 285 n. 4, 302 n. 6, 305, 306, 336 n. 1 - - Polycharmus, cited 103, 118, 119 - - Polycrates, 10, 14, 21, 24 n. 5, 31, 49, 62, chap. III _passim_, 123, - 124, 169, 177, 215, 260 n. 5, 267, 270 n. 7, 292, 303 n. 2, 305 - - Pompey, 23, 32 - - Pontic amphorae, 246 - - “pony” (coin), 57 - - Pope, 304; - see also papal - - populares, 225 - - πόρυη, 139 - - Porphyrius, _de Antro Nympharum_, cited 201 n. 3 - - Porzio (G.), _I Cipselidi_, cited 27 n. 5, 31 n. 2, 192 n. 1, 194 n. 6, - 196, 197 n. 4 - - Poseidon, 169 n. 2, 305 - - Postumius Tubertus, Postumii, 337 - - Potamos, Potamioi, 44 n. 3, 50 - - ποτήρια, 80 - - Potidaea, 190 n. 3 - - potteries, 21, 115, 207, 210, 214, 263 - - potters, 20, 139 n. 2, 186, 207–211, 217, 222, 243–246, 295, 323 - - potter’s wheel, 186, 210 - - pottery, 34, 53, 87, 105–119, 121 n. 5, 139 n. 1, 163, 164, 167–170, - 174, 175, 185–187, 200–203, 205–208, 210, 212 n. 8, 214, 241–245, - 248, 251, 252, 255, 263, 287, 295, 314–325, 333–335 - - Pottier (E.), 245 n. 1; - _Musée du Louvre, Catalogue des Vases Antiques_, cited 321 n. 4, n. - 6; - _Vases Antiques du Louvre_ (Album), 242 n. 1, 255 n. 3, 335; - _apud_ Saglio, _Dict. d. Antiq._, cited 201, 315 n. 2, 317 n. 1 - - Poulsen (F.), _Dipylongräber_, cited 315 n. 1, n. 3, 316 n. 7, 321; - _Der Orient u. die frühgriechische Kunst_, cited 93 n. 3, n. 4, 112 - n. 1, 119 - - _praedives_, 229 - - Praeneste, 219 n. 3, 238 n. 3 - - Prasiae, 330 - - Preller, _Archäologische Zeitung_, cited 198 n. 9 - - priest, 92, 272 n. 3, 303, 305 - - _primores ciuitatis_, 227 - - Prinz (H.), _Funde aus Naukratis_, cited 92 n. 2, 109, 110, 111 n. 2, - 112 n. 2, n. 7, 113, 114 n. 2, 116 n. 4, n. 6, 117 n. 4, n. 5, 120 - n. 1, n. 2, 123 n. 12, 212 n. 8, 315 n. 2, n. 5, 316 n. 4, n. 8, n. - 10, 320 n. 6 - - private coinage, 141, 142, 143, 150, 152, 294 - - Procles of Epidaurus, 167 - - Proclus, _Comment. in Platonis Rempublicam_, cited 151 n. 4; - _in Timaeum_, cited 16 n. 7 - - Prodicus, cited 19 n. 4 - - προστὰς τοῦ δήμου, προστάτης, 27, 271 - - Proto-Attic pottery, 92 n. 2, 113, 315, 318, 319, 321 - - Proto-Corinthian pottery, 109, 117, 163, 185, 186, 244 n. 1, 248, 249, - 263, 315–319, 334 - - Protogenes, 286–288, 297 - - prytanis, 270 - - Psammetichus of Corinth, 212–214 - - Psammetichus (Psamtek) I of Egypt, chap. IV _passim_, 212, 214, 292, - 293, 298, 299 - - Psammetichus II of Egypt, 88 n. 1, 90 - - Psammetichus III of Egypt, 88 n. 1 - - Psammetichus the Libyan, 92 n. 2 - - Psammetichus, priest, 212 n. 6 - - Psammetichus son of Theocles, 212 - - Psammouthis, see Psammetichus II - - Psaumis, 10 n. 2 - - Psellus (M.), cited 313 n. 4 - - Ptah, 97, 98 - - Ptolemaic story, 102 n. 1 - - Ptolemies, 160, 203 n. 4 - - Ptolemy Keraunos, 284, 285 - - Ptolemy, _Geographike Syntaxis_, cited 122 n. 4, 179 - - Ptoon, Mt, 108 n. 2 - - Publicola (Valerius), 229 n. 1, 337 - - Punic Wars, 32, 233 - - Pylaimenes, 48 - - Pyrrhic War, 32 - - Pythaenetus, cited 167 n. 4 - - Pythagoras of Ephesus, 271, 272 - - Pythagoras of Samos, 69 n. 1 - - Pythes, 49, 140, 147 n. 1, 152, 293 - - Pytheus, 140; - see also Pythes - - Pythia, 144 n. 3 - - Pythian games, 260–262 - - Pytho, 137; - see also Delphi - - pyxides, 248 - - - quarries, quarrying, 21, 224, 225, 230, 233, 237, 276, 295 - - Quirinal, 253, 254 - - Radet (G.), _La Lydie et le Monde grec_, cited 2, 77 n. 3, 130 n. 1, n. - 2, n. 3, 131, 132 n. 3, 133 n. 4, 134 n. 5, 35, 136, 138, 139 n. 2, - 141, 143 n. 3, 144, 145 n. 2, n. 3, n. 4, 146, 147 n. 3, 148, 273; - _Revue des Universités du Midi_, cited 128 n. 1, 135, 143 n. 3, 159 - n. 5 - - Ramsay (W. M.), _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, cited 147 n. 3 - - Ramses II, 87 n. 9, 101 - - Ramses III, 44 n. 5 - - Rayet (O.), _Monuments de l’Art Antique_, cited 240 n. 2, 253 n. 4 - - Red Figure pottery, 107 n. 4, 108, 204, 326 n. 3, 335 - - Red Sea, 87 - - Regling (K.), _apud_ Pauly Wissowa, 148 n. 5, 156 n. 2, 162 n. 3 - - Regulini-Galassi tomb, 93 n. 3, 243, 335 - - Reinach (A. J.), _Journal des Savants_, cited 110 n. 8 - - Reinach (S.), _Chroniques d’Orient_, cited 147 n. 3; - _Cultes, Mythes, et Religions_, cited 169; - _Revue Archéologique_, cited 70 n. 3 - - Reinach (Th.), _L’Histoire par les Monnaies_, cited 128 n. 1, 129 n. 3, - 130 n. 2, 159 n. 5, 172 n. 4; - _Revue Numismatique_, cited 161 n. 2, 162 n. 3 - - Renaissance, 3, 32, 286 - - Revillout (E.), _Précis du droit égyptien_, cited 93 n. 2; - _Les Rapports historiques et légaux des Quirites et des Égyptiens_, - cited 93 n. 4; - _Revue Égyptologique_, cited 102 n. 1, n. 2,123 n. 7; - _Society of Biblical Archaeology Proceedings_, cited 123 n. 7 - - _Revue Archéologique_, see Dumont, Reinach (S.), Torr - - _Revue de l’Instruction Publique en Belgique_, see Brants - - _Revue des Universités du Midi_, see Radet - - _Revue Égyptologique_, see Revillout - - _Revue d’Ethnologie et de Sociologie_, see Macfie - - _Revue Historique_, see Waltz - - _Revue Numismatique_, see Babelon, Reinach (Th.) - - _rex_, 303 - - Rhagon, 38 - - Rhegium, 74, 75, 210 - - _Rheinisches Museum f. Philologie_, see - Beloch, Gelzer, Hirschfeld, Holwerda, Koehler, Meyer (E.), Ruehl - - Rheneia, 70, 71, 112 - - Rhitsona (Mykalessos), 106–108, 109 n. 4, 110, 113 n. 1, 114, 248, 335 - - Rhodes, 109, 112, 114, 119 n. 3, 171 n. 1, 187 n. 4 - - Rhodian pottery, see Milesian pottery - - Rhodopis, 56 n. 3, 68 - - Rhoecus, 69 n. 1, 76, 80 n. 6 - - de Ridder (E.), _de Ectypis quibusdam aeneis quae falso uocantur - Argiuo-Corinthiaca_, cited 316 n. 9 - - Ridgeway (W.), _Origin of Metallic Currency and Weight Standards_, - cited 132 n. 3, 148 n. 6, 150, 160, 170–172; - _Companion to Greek Studies_, cited 128 n. 2, 150 n. 5; - _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, cited 172; - _Numismatic Chronicle_, cited 129 n. 7 - - ring of Gyges, 145–152, 293; - of Midas, 146, 151; - of Minos, 169; - of Polycrates, 70 n. 3, 83, 169; - of Venetian doge, 169; - rings as money, 148, 149, 171 n. 1, 293; - rings (seal), 150 - - Riviera, 312 - - _Rivista di Storia Antica_, see Costanzi - - Rizzo (G. E.), 245 n. 1; - _Bullettino della Commissione Archeologica Municipale di Roma_, cited - 243 n. 4, 244, 246, 247 - - road makers, 14 - - roads, 130, 136, 190 n. 3, 232, 233, 273 - - Roberts (E. S.), _Introduction to Greek Epigraphy_, cited 106 n. 7, 123 - n. 9 - - Rockefellers, 12 - - _Roemische Mitteilungen_, see _Mitteilungen des deutschen - archäologischen Instituts in Rom_ - - Rohde (E.), _Psyche_, cited 336 n. 1 - - Roland, 193 n. 7 - - Rome, Romans, 12 n. 3, 14, 15 n. 6, 20 n. 2, 22 n. 3, 23, 25, 32, 63 n. - 4, 65 n. 3, 149, 160, 162 n. 3, 183 n. 6, 207, 211, chap. VIII - _passim_, 261 n. 2, 277, 278, 287–289, 295, 296, 298, 303, 336–338 - - Roman Empire, 139 n. 2, 232; - Emperors, 60, 303 - - Romulus, 197, 198, 209, 221 n. 7, 239 n. 5 - - rope makers, 14 - - Roscher (W. H.), _Lexikon_, cited 336 n. 2 - - de Rougé (E.), _Inscription Historique du roi Pianchi Mériamoun_, cited - 96 n. 2; - _Notice de quelques textes hiéroglyphiques récemment publiés par M. - Greene_, cited 99 n. 3, n. 4; - (ed. J. de Rougé) _Chrestomathie Égyptienne_, cited 95 n. 3 - - de Rougé (J.), _Étude sur les textes géographiques du temple d’Edfou_, - cited 99 n. 3 - - royal road, great road, 130, 136, 273 - - Rud Amen, see Ammeris - - Ruehl, _Rheinisches Museum_, cited 56 n. 2 - - Rufous (or Eastern) Swallow, 211 n. 4 - - Russia, 1, 110, 112 n. 1, 114, 142, 287 - - _Rylands Library, Manchester, Catalogue of Greek Papyri_, cited 66 n. - 2; - _Catalogue of the Demotic Papyri_, see Griffith - - - Sabacon (Shabaka), 88 n. 1, 93, 96, 97 - - Sacred War, 65, 66, 247 n. 2, 258 n. 4, 259–261, 264 - - Sadyattes, King, 145 n. 3 - - Sadyattes, merchant, 137, 138, 152 - - Saglio (E.), _Dictionnaire des Antiquités grecques et romaines_, cited - 44 n. 5, 46 n. 7, 56 n. 4, 142 n. 4, 162 n. 3, 201 n. 2, 203, 222 n. - 6, 315 n. 2, 317 n. 1 - - sailors, 14 - - Sais, 87–89, 96, 98, 100, 102 n. 1, 104, 120 n. 3, 123, 124 - - Saite dynasty, 88, 95, 97, 99–103, 105, 121–124, 125 n. 3, 212, 214, - 293 - - Salamis, 26, 29 n. 1, 166 n. 2, 168, 326 n. 3, 328 - - von Sallet (A.), _Zeitschrift f. Numismatik_, cited 75 n. 1 - - Sallust, cited 324 n. 5 - - Salonika, 190 n. 3 - - Salvioli (G.) (French translation by Bonnet (A.)), _Le Capitalisme dans - le Monde Antique_, cited 5, 230 n. 3, n. 5 - - Samaina, 70, 74, 75, 84 - - Samnite War, 32 - - Samos, Samians, 14, 21, 33, 49, chap. III _passim_, 86, 110, 112, 116, - 117, 124, 150 n. 6, 151, 177, 178, 215, 251, 266 n. 1, 267, 292, 324 - n. 6, 325, 326 - - Samian pottery, see Fikellura - - Samtavi Tafnekht, 100 - - Samwer (C.), _Geschichte des älteren römischen Münzwesens_, cited 219 - n. 1 - - De Sanctis (G.), _Atthis_^2, cited 34 n. 2, 51 n. 4, 328, 329; - _Journal des Savants_, cited 249 - - Sandys (J.), ed. Ἀθηναίων Πολιτεία^2, cited 35 n. 2, 37 n. 7 - - Sappho, 56 n. 3, 104, 120 - - sarcophagus, 246 n. 7 - - Sardis, 1, 33, 58, 76, 83, 129–131, 135, 138 n. 9, 139, 140, 152, 187, - 191 n. 3, 273 - - Sargon of Akkad, 197 - - Saronic Gulf, 169 n. 4, 182, 329–331 - - satni (title), 97 - - Satni Khamois, 97, 100–102 - - Satni Tafnekhte, 102 - - Satrai, 59 n. 1 - - satrap, satrapy, 83, 132, 270 n. 7 - - Satricum (Conca), 219 n. 4, 246 - - Satyrus, cited 156 - - Saulmugina, 99 n. 3 - - Saxon, see Anglo-Saxon - - Sayce (A. H.), ed. Herodotus, cited 87 n. 11, 89 n. 3, 90 n. 1, 91 n. - 4; - _Encyclopaedia Britannica_, cited 197 n. 5 - - Scandinavian, 238 n. 1 - - scarabs, 105, 106, 109, 118 n. 2, 119 n. 3, 124 - - Schiaparelli, _Monumenti Antichi_, cited 93 n. 3, n. 4 - - Schoemann (G. F.), _de Comitiis Atheniensium_, cited 40 n. 5; - _Jahrbücher f. Classische Philologie_, cited 326 n. 6, 328 n. 3, 329 - - Scholia, see under authors concerned - - Schow (N.), ed. Hesychius, cited 312 n. 2 - - Schrader (E.), _Cuneiform Inscriptions and the Old Testament_, cited 98 - n. 3 - - Schubert (R.), _Geschichte der Könige von Lydien_, cited 135 n. 4, 138 - n. 7, 144, 145 n. 4; - _Geschichte des Agathokles_, cited 209 n. 3, n. 4, 210 n. 2, n. 4 - - Schubring (J.), _de Cypselo Corinthiorum tyranno_, cited 194 n. 3, 196 - n. 5, 197, 198 n. 9, 199 n. 10, 211 - - Schweighaeuser (J.), ed. Athenaeus, cited 270 n. 2 - - Schweinfurth (G.), see Erman - - Scotland, 162 - - sculptors, sculpture, 14, 53 n. 2, 81, 101, 128, 206, 228 n. 3, n. 4, - 252, 253, 263, 285, 302 - - Scyllis, 263 n. 5 - - (Pseudo-) Scymnus, cited 91 n. 1 - - Scythia, 72, 271 - - sea power, 68, 70–73, 81–83, 87, 95–97, 103, 165, 168, 169, 177, 184, - 321–331; - see also thalassocracy - - seals, 149–151 - - secessions, 227, 233, 235 n. 2, 296 - - Seeck (O.), _Klio_, cited 34 n. 2, 53 n. 2, 56 n. 2 - - Seeley (J.), ed. Livy I, cited 246 n. 1 - - Segesta, 80 n. 5; - see also Egestaeans - - Seleucus, Seleucids, 284, 285 - - Selinus, 265 - - Sem of Ptah, 98, 100 - - Semachos, Semacheion, Semachidai, 38, 39, 41 n. 3, 50, 291 - - σήμαντρον, 150 - - Semites, 278 n. 2 - - Semitic origin of χιτών, 333 n. 2 - - Sennacherib, 92, 97, 100, 325 - - serfs, 13, 24 - - Servilius Ahala, 230 - - Servius, _ad Vergil. Aeneid._, cited 224 n. 5, 238 n. 3, 311 n. 1, 336, - 337 n. 1 - - Servius Tullius, 218–223, 224 n. 5, 238 n. 2, n. 3, 245, 246, 249, 295 - - seruus rex, 249 - - Sethon, Sethos, 88 n. 1, 92, 93, 97–103, 105 n. 2, 292, 293, 303 n. 1 - - Seti I, 87 n. 9 - - setmi, 97 - - Seven against Thebes, 262 - - seven sages, 189 - - Sevenoaks, 125 n. 3 - - Shabaka, see Sabacon - - Shabataka, 88 n. 1, 97, 98 n. 3, n. 4, 125 n. 3 - - Sharpe (S.), _History of Egypt_^6, cited 121 n. 3 - - sheep breeding, 266 - - shekel, 132, 133 - - Shelley (P. B.), trans. Euripides, _Cyclops_, cited 40 n. 9 - - Shepnepet, 99 n. 3 - - shipbuilders, shipbuilding, 20, 62, 68, 70, 75, 184, 271, 292, 309, - 324, 325, 326 - - ships, 164, 169, 242, 315 n. 3, 317 - - shires, 237 - - shoemakers, 20, 233 n. 6 - - shops, 135, 218, 224, 247 - - Sicily, Sicilian, 10, 30, 45, 75, 80 n. 5, 112, 180 n. 4, 181, 182, - 187, 189, 209, 220, 228, 239, 265, 273–278, 284 n. 2, 315 - - Siceliot Greek, 224 n. 5 - - Sicyon, 28, 66, 157, 178–180, 186 n. 1, 193, 215, 257–264 _passim_, - 293, 296, 304, 306 n. 1, 316, 317, 336 n. 1 - - Sidonians, 325 - - Sieveking (H.), _Vierteljahrschrift f. Social- u. - Wirtschafts-Geschichte_, cited 3, 26 n. 2, 267 n. 1, 304 n. 4 - - Sieveking (J.) and Hackl (R.), _Die königliche Vasensammlung zu - Muenchen_, cited 251 n. 3, 252 n. 2, 334 - - Sigeium, 63 - - Sigismund, Emperor, 3 - - _signauit_, 218 - - silphium, 74 n. 3 - - silver, 80 n. 4, 81, 144 n. 3, 177, 227; - currency, 4, 18, 57, 58, 61, 127, 128, 131–133, 140, 152, 155, 164 n. - 1, 172, 218, 219, 220 n. 4, 221, 294; - mines, 38–40, 47, 54 n. 1, 59 n. 1, 62, 68, 271, 291; - see also Laurium - - Sinope, 50, 135 n. 7, 271 - - Siphnos, 243 n. 1 - - Siphnian mines, 44 n. 5, 46, 47 - - Sipylus, Mt, 129 - - σιτοφύλακες, 12 - - _Sitzungsberichte d. preussischen Akademie d. Wissenschaften zu - Berlin_, see Koehler, Wiegand - - _Sitzungsberichte d. bayerischen Akademie d. Wissenschaften zu - Muenchen_, see Wecklein - - _Sitzungsberichte d. Akademie d. Wissenschaften in Wien_, see Bauer, - Klein - - Six (J.), _Numismatic Chronicle_, cited 53 n. 1, 56 n. 2, 64, 128 n. 4, - 131 - - Skabala (? Kavalla), 37 - - Skapte Hyle, 50 n. 7 - - Skias (A.), _Archaiologike Ephemeris_, cited 324 n. 1, 333 n. 4 - - Skiddaw, 40 - - skyphoi, 248, 334 - - slaves, slavery, slave labour, 12, 13, 15, 18–23, 30 n. 3, 45, 47 n. 7, - 48, 51, 67, 79, 150 n. 6, 151 n. 2, 187 n. 8, 191, 192, 218, - 222–225, 234, 235, 266, 280–282, 284, 287; - see also helots, πενέσται, serfs, thetes - - slave revolts, 23, 45, 234 n. 3 - - smelting, 44, 48 - - Smith (G.), _Assurbanipal_, cited 88 n. 2, 91 n. 7, 99 n. 3, 101 n. 2, - 143 n. 2, 144 n. 5, 214 n. 3 - - Smith (K. F.), _American Journal of Philology_, cited 147 n. 6, 148 n. - 4 - - Smith (W.), _Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology_, - cited 336 n. 5 - - smiths, 14, 17, 20, 223, 225 - - Smyrna, 77, 130, 131 - - Snooks, Mrs, 125 n. 3 - - Snowdon, 40 - - _Society of Biblical Archaeology Proceedings_, see Revillout - - _Sociological Review_, see Zimmern - - Socrates, 17, 18, 19 n. 4 - - Soli, 158 - - Solon, 7, 8, 9, 12, 13, 16, 17, 28, 33–35, 49, 53 n. 2, 63 n. 3, 65, 95 - n. 1, 150 n. 3, 158, 166, 170–172, 258 n. 4, 261, 290, 301, 303 n. - 1, 308, 309 n. 4, 327, 328; - cited 7, 8, 9 n. 3, 14, 28 n. 1, 48, 55 - - Solonium, 239 n. 5 - - Sophanes, 174 - - Sophocles, _Antigone_, cited 129; - _Oedipus Tyrannus_, cited 9, 174 n. 3; - fragments cited 16 n. 7, 313 - - Sosias, 51 - - Sostratos, 68, 177 - - Σουνιακὸς γουνός, 41, 44 - - Sourdille (C.), _Hérodote et la Religion d’Égypte_, cited 98 n. 3 - - σῴζω, 82 - - Spain, 1, 46, 68, 117, 177 - - Sparta, Spartans, 20, 23–25, 45, 53, 57, 63 n. 4, 74 n. 5, 84, 144 n. - 4, 164 n. 1, 175–177, 178 n. 1, 180, 196 n. 5, 239, 263 n. 5, 282, - 330, 332, 333, 336 n. 1 - - Spartacus, 23 - - Spermos, 135, 136, 152, 293 - - σφραγίς, 149 - - Spiegelberg, _Orientalische Litteraturzeitung_, cited 125 n. 3 - - spits as coins, 149, 162–164 - - Spurius Cassius, see Cassius - - Spurius Maelius, see Maelius - - Staffordshire, 80 n. 6 - - Stais (V.), 318 - - Stallbaum (G.), _Platonis Meno_, cited 85 n. 1 - - Standard Oil Company, 5, 26 - - stater, 57, 130, 132 n. 3, 137; - see also daric, Croeseids - - σταθμός, 171 - - Statius, _Thebais_, cited 308, 309 - - statuettes (figurines), 118, 119 - - Stein (H.), ed. Herodotus, cited 51 n. 3 - - στέφανος, στεφανόπωλις, στεφανηφόρος ἥρως, 55–57 - - Stephanus Byzantinus, cited 37, 38 n. 4, 40 n. 2, 41 n. 3, 68 n. 7, 96 - n. 4, 103, 104, 135 n. 3, 212 n. 1, 313 - - Stephinates, 88 n. 1, 98, 99, 100 - - von Stern (E.), _Zeitschrift f. aegyptische Sprache_, cited 125 n. 3 - - Stesichorus, 275 n. 4; - cited 177 n. 6 - - stm, stne, 97 - - stone masons, 14, 224 - - stove, 204, 205 - - Strabo, cited 40, 41 n. 3, n. 4, 54 n. 1, 59 n. 2, 63 n. 7, 65 n. 5, 70 - n. 3, 71 n. 2, 79 n. 2, 80, 84 n. 2, 87 n. 9, 90, 91, 92 n. 2, 103, - 104 n. 4, 122 n. 1, n. 4, 129 n. 6, 138 n. 3, n. 4, 139, 146 n. 7, - 148, 149 n. 1, 155 n. 2, 157 n. 2, 158, 159, 167 n. 2, 175 n. 3, - 176, 177 n. 3, 178, 179, 180 n. 4, 183 n. 2, 184, 187 n. 1, 189 n. - 4, 190 n. 3, 191 n. 3, 192 n. 5, 195 n. 1, 198, 215 n. 2, 217, 224 - n. 5, 225, 240 n. 1, 246 n. 1, 255, 257 n. 1, 259 n. 5, 260 n. 4, - 261 n. 2, 280 n. 1, 282 n. 2, 283 n. 6, 284 n. 3, n. 5, 288, 289 n. - 1, 305 n. 2, 310 n. 3, 312 n. 3, n. 6, 313 n. 2, n. 6, 324 n. 2, - 330, 336 n. 1 - - Strack (M. L.), see Muenzer - - Strattis, 50 n. 2 - - στρωμναί, 79 - - Strymodorus, 59 n. 1 - - Strymon (Struma), 36, 37, 50, 54, 58, 59, 62, 148 - - Studniczka (F.), _Athenische Mitteilungen_, cited 318 n. 6; - _Beiträge zur Geschichte der altgriech. Tracht_, cited 166 n. 1, n. - 7, 170 n. 1, 332 n. 2, 333 n. 2 - - Suetonius, cited 221 n. 7; - _Caligula_, cited 76 n. 4; - _Tiberius_, cited 233, 337 n. 6 - - Suez Canal, 87 - - Suidas, cited 16 n. 7, 41 n. 3, 50 n. 2, 58 n. 1, 59 n. 1, 70 n. 5, 71 - n. 1, 74, 75, 79 n. 1, n. 2, 95 n. 1, 104 n. 4, 137 n. 3, 145 n. 1, - n. 6, 171 n. 4, 189, 195 n. 5, 199 n. 2, n. 3, n. 5, n. 8, 200 n. 3, - 201 n. 2, 221 n. 7, 224 n. 5, 226 n. 3, 268 n. 3, 269, 271 n. 5, - 272, 275 n. 5, 280 n. 1, 281 n. 1, 283 n. 5, n. 6, 305 n. 2, 313, - 326 n. 9, 327 n. 2 - - σύλη, συλον, 81, 82 - - Sunium, 40, 41, 44, 291, 313 - - Superbus, see Tarquinius Superbus - - Susemihl (F.), 213 n. 4 - - Svoronos, _Journal International d’Archéologie Numismatique_, cited 37, - 53 n. 2, 60 n. 1, 62 n. 2, 64 n. 3, 156 n. 2, 160, 163, 171 n. 1, - 183 n. 6 - - swallow, 211 n. 4, n. 7 - - Swansea, 106 n. 3 - - Swoboda (H.), _apud_ Pauly Wissowa, 268 n. 4 - - Sybaris, 112, 266 - - Syloson, 69 n. 5, 79, 80, 82, 84 - - symmories, 328 n. 2 - - Symonds (J. A.), _Renaissance in Italy, Age of the Despots_, cited 3 - - Syncellus, cited 95, 156 n. 3 - - Syracuse, 10, 24, 27, 30, 58, 72, 138 n. 9, 151, 180, 182, 208–210, - 221, 274 n. 1, 276, 278 n. 2, 280, 284, 291, 316 n. 8 - - Syria, 99 n. 3, 123, 131 - - - Tabalos, 139 - - Tacitus, _Annals_, cited 311 n. 1; - _Histories_, cited 223 n. 5 - - Tafnekht, see Tnefachthus - - Taharqa (Tirhakah), 88 n. 1, 97, 98, 99 n. 3, n. 5 - - tailors, 20 - - Tanaquil, 236 n. 2 - - Tanis, 121 n. 3 - - tanners, 20, 222 - - Tarbell (I. M.), _History of the Standard Oil Company_, cited 5 n. 8 - - Tarchon, 237 n. 1 - - Tarentum, 336 n. 1 - - Tarpeian Mount, Tarpeius, 223, 237 - - Tarquinii (Corneto), 93, 94, 182, 187, 215–219, 225, 240–243, 244 n. 1, - 249, 251 - - Tarquinius (name), 237 - - Tarquinius Priscus, Lucius, 215–218, 221, 222 n. 7, 224 n. 5, 227–229, - 238, 239 n. 5, 240, 242, 256, 287, 295, 299 - - Tarquinius Superbus, 183 n. 6, 218, 223–227, 233, 234 n. 3, 247, 251, - 278, 295 - - Tarquins, 14, 207, 215, 218, 223, 224 n. 5, 225–227, 230, 233, 234, - 236, 237, 239, 240, 245, 247, 249, 255, 256, 289, 295, 296, 298 - - Tartessus (Tarshish), 68, 69, 81, 82, 177 - - taxation, taxes, 189, 190, 192 n. 1, 259, 287 - - tax-collector, 274, 305, 326 n. 9, 327 n. 1 - - τέχνη, 49 - - τεχνῖται, 21 - - Tefnakhte, see Tnefachthus - - Tegea, 24 n. 1 - - Τειχιούσης, 81 - - Teisias, 106 - - Tellus, 228 n. 2 - - Temenos, 154, 156–159, 176, 178–180, 183 n. 3, 294, 316 - - temple, 162, 224, 277; - in Aegina (Aphaia), 318–320; - (Aphrodite), 318, 319; - (Damia and Auxesia), 167, 170, 174, 175, 320; - Agrigentum (Zeus Polieus), 274, 276; - Argos (Hera), 161–164, 175, 316 n. 7, 318–320, 333 n. 4; - Athens (Athena), 63; - (Olympian Zeus), 14, 63, 76 n. 5; - Corcyra, 244 n. 1; - Corinth (Aphrodite), 191 n. 3; - (Apollo), 76 n. 5; - Delphi (Apollo), 65; - Eleusis, 15; - Ephesus (Artemis), 128, 130 n. 6, 245, 272 n. 3; - Naukratis, 108; - (Aphrodite), 118, 119; - (Apollo), 110; - Olympia, 159; - Pallene in Attica (Athena), 52; - Rome (Artemis, Diana), 224 n. 5, 245, 246 n. 1; - (Ceres), 240 n. 2; - (Jupiter Tarpeius), 223, 237; - (Tellus), 228 n. 2; - Sabine (Feronia), 261 n. 2; - in Samos (Hera), 76, 82; - Syracuse (Athena), 276; - Tiryns (Hera), 320 - - Tenedos, 162 n. 3 - - tent-makers, 17 - - terra cottas, architectural, 243, 244 n. 1, 246, 250–252; - see also antefix - - terra cotta tablets, 46, 186, 187, 207 n. 2, 242 - - Terrien de la Couperie (A.), see _British Museum Catalogue of Chinese - Coins_ - - Tertullian, _Apologia adversus Gentes_, cited 280 n. 1 - - tetradrachm, 131 - - Tetrapolis, 41 n. 3 - - Thackeray (W. M.), _Virginians_, cited 157 n. 4 - - thalassocracy, 76, 83, 95, 96, 165 n. 3, 174, 191 n. 2, 268 n. 3, 324, - 330; - see also sea power - - Thales, 1, 2, 12 - - Thasos, Thasians, 36 n. 3, 47, 271 n. 4 - - Theagenes, 9, 14, 30, 62 n. 6, 76 n. 5, 264–268, 296 - - _Thebais_ (Homeric), 262 n. 1 - - Thebes, Boeotian, 24 n. 5, 108 n. 2, 164 n. 1, 261, 262 - - Thebes, Egyptian, 90 n. 1, 97, 99 n. 3 - - Themistius, _Orations_, cited 65 n. 5 - - Themistocles, 46, 47, 239 n. 4, 312 n. 5 - - Theocharides, 273 - - Theocles, 212 - - Theocritus, cited 69 n. 2, 79, 201 n. 8, 280 n. 1 - - Theodorus, 69 n. 1, 73, 76, 80, 83 - - Theognis, 7–9, 16 n. 2, 195 n. 5, 268, 290; - cited 8, 9, 47 n. 2, 57 n. 5, 266, 302 - - Theomestor, 84 - - Theophrastus, 189; - _Historia Plantarum_, cited 56 n. 2, 308 n. 2; - _de Lapidibus_, cited 129 n. 7 - - Theopompus, cited 144 n. 3, 156, 158 n. 6, 195 n. 2 - - Thera, Theraeans, 82 n. 1, 315 n. 2, 320 n. 5 - - θεράπαιναι, 22 - - Thero, 10 n. 1 - - Thersites, 28 n. 1 - - Theseus, 16, 169, 327, 329 - - Thesmophoria, 274 - - Thessalos, 56 n. 2 - - Thessaly, 24, 193 - - thetes, θῆτες, θητικὸς ὄχλος 14, 16, 19, 49 - - Thiersch (H.), see Furtwaengler - - Thirlwall (C.), _History of Greece_, cited 51 n. 3 - - Thoas of Miletus, 268, 269 - - Thomas (E.), _Ancient Indian Weights_, cited 142 n. 3; - _Chronicles of the Pathan Kings of Delhi_, cited 142 n. 3 - - Thonis, 93 - - Thoricus, 40 n. 9, 41, 44 n. 1 - - Thrace, 36 n. 1, n. 3, 37, 50–52, 54–56, 58–62, 64, 72, 199–201, 271, - 284, 288, 291, 292, 296 - - Thracian Chersonese, 53, 63 n. 7, 199 n. 10, 245 n. 2 - - Thrasybulus, 124, 191, 268–270 - - Thucydides, 25, 26, 33, 290, 299; - cited 9, 15 n. 2, 23 n. 1, n. 2, 24 n. 2, n. 4, 28 n. 5, 30 n. 3, 31 - n. 1, 34 n. 3, 36 n. 1, 45 n. 5, 50, 51 n. 2, 62 n. 5, 63 n. 6, 68 - n. 1, 70, 80 n. 5, 170, 174, 177, 178 n. 1, 180 n. 4, 184, 185, - 190 n. 3, 193 n. 7, 212 n. 1, 260 n. 2, 264 n. 6, 294, 308 n. 2, - 310, 313, 321, 325, 326, 329 n. 8, 331–334, 336 n. 1 - - Thyessos, 135 - - Tiber, 197, 221 - - Tilden (Mr), 5 - - Tillyard (H. J. W.), _Agathocles_, cited 209 n. 2, n. 3, 210 n. 1, n. 4 - - Tilsit, 311 - - Timaeus of Cyzicus, 281, 283, 288 - - Timaeus of Sicily, 210; - cited 22, 209, 220, 275 n. 2 - - Timarchus, 12 - - timber, 62, 271 - - _Times_, cited 5 - - Timoleon, 209 - - Tintoretto, 244 - - Tirhakah, see Taharqa - - Tiryns, 163, 318 - - Tmolus, Mount, 129, 148 - - Tnefachthus I (Tafnekht), 88 n. 1, 95, 96, 98, 100, 101 n. 1 - - Tnefachthus II, 88 n. 1 - - Torr, _Revue Archéologique_, cited 169, 321 n. 2, n. 3, n. 4, 324 n. 5 - - “tortoises” (coins), 57 n. 5, 64 n. 3, 143 n. 1, 154, 156, 183 n. 6 - - touch-stone, 129 - - trade unions, 3 - - treasuries at Delphi (Corinthian, Caeretan), 187 n. 8, 255 - - treasury at Olympia (Sicyonian), 263 - - Triakon, 176 n. 3 - - trial by jury, 237 - - tribunes, military, 338 - - Trinakria, 44 - - Triptolemus, 238 - - triremes, 68, 165, 177, 191, 239, 325 - - Tritonis (Lake), 54, 55 - - Troezen, 169 n. 4 - - Trojan wars, 180 n. 4, 259 n. 1 - - Troy, 149, 298 - - trusts, 3, 5 - - Truth’s Investigator, _The Great Oil Octopus_, cited 5 n. 8 - - Tudors, 101, 267 - - Tullianum, see Mamertine prison - - Tullus Hostilius, 261 n. 2, 337 - - τυραννὶς τελευταία, 29 - - τύραννος, 134, 302 n. 8 - - Turkey, 50, 270 - - Twelve Tables, 221, 336 - - Tyburn, 247 - - Tyrrhenians, 134 n. 5 - - Tyrrhenian amphora, 319 - - Tzetzes, _Chiliades_, cited 70 n. 3, 79 n. 4, 87 n. 9, 134 n. 5, 176 n. - 3; - _ad Lycophronem_, cited 59 n. 1, 195 n. 2, n. 3 - - - unemployment, 13 n. 5 - - Unger, _Philologus_, cited 159, 160, 183 n. 5 - - United States of America, 4, 5, 142, 267 - - University College, Oxford, 237 - - Ure (P. N.), _Black Glaze Pottery from Rhitsona in Boeotia_, cited 108 - n. 1, n. 6, 248 n. 3, 287 n. 3; - _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, cited 38, 81, 155; - see also Burrows (R. M.) - - Usimares, pharaoh of Egypt, 101 - - usurers, 2 - - - Valerii, 337; - see also Publicola - - Valerius (Marcus), 227 - - Valerius Maximus, cited 17 n. 3, 35 n. 3, 51 n. 2, 70 n. 3, 184 n. 2, - 217 n. 5, 228 n. 1, n. 2, n. 4, 229 n. 2, 233, 275 n. 1, 337 n. 4 - - Varro, _de Lingua Latina_, cited 218 n. 3, 224 n. 5, 229 n. 2, 237, 248 - n. 1; - _de Re Rustica_, cited 201 n. 5, n. 6, n. 8; - _apud_ Charisium, cited 218; - _apud_ Nonium Marcellum, cited 223 n. 1; - (?) _apud_ Plutarchum, cited 222 n. 3 - - Vasco da Gama, 87 - - Vedic, 134 n. 5 - - Veii, 230, 234, 235, 296 - - Velabrum, 12 n. 3 - - Velia, near Paestum, 221 n. 2; - in Rome, 221 n. 2, 337 n. 5 - - Velletri, 246 - - Venice, 56 n. 3, 70 n. 3 - - Verrius Flaccus, cited 134 n. 5 - - Verviers, 311 - - Vestal virgins, 336 n. 1, 337 - - Vetterfeld, 171 n. 1 - - Via Appia, 232, 233 - - Victoria, Queen, 157 n. 4 - - Victorian age, 194 - - Vicus Tuscus, 221 n. 2 - - _Vierteljahrschrift f. Social- u. Wirtschafts-Geschichte_, see - Cavaignac, Sieveking (H.) - - Vignate, Giovanni, 3 - - Virgil, _Aeneid_, cited 238 n. 3, 311 n. 1; - Schol. Veron. 238 n. 3 - - “Virgin” (coin), 54–57, 291 - - Vitruvius, cited 13 n. 5 - - Vittorio Emanuele monument, 65 n. 3 - - Volsinii, 249 - - Vourva pottery, 315 n. 5, 318 n. 1 - - Vroulia, 109, 114 - - Vulci, 119 n. 3, 251 n. 1 - - - Wachsmuth (C.), _Die Stadt Athen_, cited 269 n. 2, 327 n. 5, 329 n. 4 - - wages, 14, 15, 18, 20, 21, 48, 49, 77, 226, 230, 295 - - waggoners, 14 - - Waldstein (C.), _Argive Heraeum_, cited 317 n. 3, 318, 319 n. 5, n. 6, - n. 7, 320 n. 2 - - Walker (A.), 187 n. 2 - - Wallon (H.), _Histoire de l’Esclavage dans l’Antiquité_, cited 16 n. 8, - 23 n. 1, 47 n. 7 - - Walter (F. A.), trans. Niebuhr, _History of Rome_, cited 239 n. 2 - - Walters (H. B.), see _British Museum Catalogue of Terracottas_ - - Walters (H. B.) and Birch (S.), _History of Ancient Pottery_, cited 323 - n. 2 - - Waltz (P.), _Revue Historique_, cited 22 n. 6 - - Walzius, _Rhetores Graeci_, cited 51 n. 2 - - Watson (Mr), 11 n. 2 - - weaving, 187 - - Webb (S.), _History of Trade Unionism_, cited 233 n. 6 - - Wecklein, _Sitzungsberichte d. bayerisch. Akad. d. Wissenschaften zu - Muenchen_, cited 269 n. 2, 326 n. 7, 327 n. 5, 329 n. 8 - - Wedgwood, 80 n. 6 - - Weissenborn (H.), _Hellen_, cited 159 n. 2 - - Welldon (J. E. C.), trans. Aristotle, _Politics_, quoted 35 n. 5 - - Wells (H. G.), 125 n. 3; - _Anticipations_, cited 306; - _Tono Bungay_, cited 306 n. 5 - - Westminster, 306 n. 5 - - wheelwrights, 14, 20 - - Whiskey Combination, 267 - - Wiedemann (A.), _Aegyptische Geschichte_, cited 91 n. 4, 95 n. 1, 97 n. - 4, 99 n. 5, 125 n. 3, 212 n. 6; - _Geschichte Aegyptens_, 122 n. 4; - _Herodotus II_, cited 87 n. 9, 89 n. 3, 90 n. 4, 91 n. 9, 102 n. 1, - 104 n. 6, 106 n. 8, 122 n. 1, n. 4, n. 5, 214 n. 5 - - Wiegand (Th.), _Abhandlungen_ and _Sitzungsberichte d. preussisch. - Akademie d. Wissenschaften zu Berlin_, cited 76 n. 2, 110 n. 4, 111 - n. 3 - - _Wiener Studien_, see Endt - - _Wiener Vorlegeblätter_, cited 323 n. 2 - - von Wilamowitz-Moellendorf (U.), _Aristotel u. Athen_, cited 173 n. 2, - 329 n. 7 - - Wilisch (E.), _Eumelus_, cited 195 n. 2, n. 4; - _Goettingsche Gelehrte Anzeigen_, cited 180 n. 3, 191 n. 3, 194, 195 - n. 1, 196 n. 4; - _Jahresbericht d. Gymnas. Zittau_, cited 46 n. 7, 187 n. 7, 188 n. 1, - 191 n. 3, 192 n. 1, n. 4, 242 n. 3; - _Jahrbücher f. Classische Philologie_, cited 180 n. 2, 183 n. 5 - - Willers (H.), _Geschichte der roemischen Kupferprägung_, cited 156 n. - 2, 171 n. 6, 219 - - Wilson, President Woodrow, cited 5, 290 - - Wimmer (F.), see Aubert - - _Winckelmannsfeste Program_, see Furtwaengler - - Winckler (H.), _Altorientalische Forschungen_, cited 143 n. 2 - - wine trade, 104, 120, 125, 126, 143 n. 1, 286 - - Winter (F.), _Jahrbuch d. deutsch. archäologischen Instituts_, cited - 205 n. 1 - - Wisbech, 233 n. 6 - - _Wochenschrift f. klassische Philologie_, see Bluemner, Graef - - wolf, Capitoline, 253, 254 - - women in industry, 20 n. 1; - political status of, 236 n. 2 - - woollen industry, 2, 3, 21, 69, 74, 79, 265–267, 292 - - “working girls,” 139 - - Wyttenbach, 158 n. 3 - - - Xanthias, 68 - - Xanthus, cited 130 n. 2, 144 n. 1 - - Xenophanes, cited 129, 131, 133 - - Xenophon, _Anabasis_, cited 265 n. 6; - _Cyropaedia_, cited 123 n. 3, 144 n. 4; - _Hellenica_, cited 20 n. 4, 27 n. 5, 148 n. 2; - _Hiero_, cited 302 n. 6; - _Memorabilia_, cited 13 n. 3, 17, 18 n. 1, 20 n. 1, 265 n. 3, 267; - _Oeconomicus_, cited 17, 19 n. 4; - _de Republica Lacedaemoniorum_, cited 17; - _de Vectigalibus_, cited 12 n. 4, 18, 44 n. 1, 46, 47, 51 n. 1, 150 - n. 6, 308 n. 2, 310 - - Xerxes, 24 n. 5, 140, 152, 293, 332 - - ξυλινὴ κιβωτός, 198 - - - _Year’s Work in Classical Studies_, see Lamb (D.) - - Young Turks, 270 - - - _Zeitschrift f. aegyptische Sprache_, see v. Stern - - _Zeitschrift f. Numismatik_, see Brandis, v. Fritze, Hammer, v. Sallet - - _Zeitschrift. f. Socialwissenschaft_, see Beloch - - Zenobius, cited 71 n. 1, 73, 78 n. 7, 79 n. 2, 95 n. 1, 308 n. 3 - - zeugitai, 16, 49 - - Zeus, 138 n. 9, 198, 303; - Olympios, temple of, 14, 63, 76 n. 5; - Patroos, altars of, 180; - Polieus, temple of, 274, 276 - - Zimmern (A. E.), _Greek Commonwealth_, cited 309 n. 9; - _Sociological Review_, cited 15 n. 5, 20 n. 6 - - Zonaras, cited 215 n. 2, 223 n. 5, 337 n. 4. - - Zopyrion, 287 - ------ - -Footnote 1: - - Aristot. _Pol._ I. 1259_a_. The authenticity of the story may be - questioned, but the fact of its being attached to Thales is in itself - significant. - -Footnote 2: - - _E.g._ Busolt, _Gr. G._ I.^2 pp. 626–7. - -Footnote 3: - - _La Lydie_, p. 163; cp. _ibid._ p. 274, “wealth acquires an importance - it had never had.” - -Footnote 4: - - J. A. Symonds, _Renaissance in Italy, Age of the Despots_^2, pp. - 103–4; cp. _ibid._ pp. 65 n. 1, 66, 73, 76, 77–78. - -Footnote 5: - - Some lecturers at Oxford are inclined to minimize the analogies - offered by the seventh and sixth centuries B.C. to modern industrial - conditions. In so doing they appear to me to be falling into the - commonest of modern fallacies, that of overestimating the importance - of size and numbers. For a better appreciation of the analogies see - _e.g._ Ciccotti, _Tramonto d. Schiavitù n. Mondo ant._ p. 45. - -Footnote 6: - - E. Meyer, _Jahrb. f. Nationalök._ IX. (1895), p. 713 and below - _passim_. - -Footnote 7: - - Sieveking, _Viert. f. Soc. u. Wirts._ VII. p. 87. - -Footnote 8: - - Cobbett, _Paper against Gold_, pp. 5, 6 (Aug. 30th, 1810). - -Footnote 9: - - Jevons, _Money_^{23}, p. 203; cp. _ibid._ p. 285: “It is surprising to - find to what an extent paper documents have replaced coin as a medium - of exchange in some of the principal centres of business.” - -Footnote 10: - - Cp. Thos. W. Lawson, _Frenzied Finance_ (published 1906), pp. 33, 35. - -Footnote 11: - - Cp. Poehlmann, _Sozialismus i. d. ant. Welt_^2, I. p. 170. - -Footnote 12: - - Hy. D. Lloyd, _Wealth against Commonwealth_ (1894), p. 2. - -Footnote 13: - - Hy. D. Lloyd, _op. cit._ p. 494; see also pp. 297–8, 311; ch. XXVIII: - (on a Standard Oil secretary of U.S.A. treasury), 434, 511. - -Footnote 14: - - _New York Daily Commercial Bull._ June 4th, 1894, _ap._ Hy. D. Lloyd, - _op. cit._ p. 450. - -Footnote 15: - - New York _Sun_, May 27th, 1884, _ap._ Hy. D. Lloyd, p. 387. - -Footnote 16: - - _Times_, Nov. 4th, 1916. - -Footnote 17: - - Anatole France, _L’Île des Pingouins_, pp. 242 f., 309. - -Footnote 18: - - Salvioli, _Capitalisme dans le Monde Antique_ (traduit A. Bonnet), p. - 267. - -Footnote 19: - - von Bernhardi, _Germany and the Next War_, p. 65. - -Footnote 20: - - See _e.g._ Thos. W. Lawson, _Frenzied Finance_, pp. 6, 35; Hy. D. - Lloyd, _Wealth against Commonwealth_, pp. 341, 353, 386 (quoting the - _National Baptist of Philadelphia_, the Cincinnati _Commercial - Gazette_, and Senator Hoar); J. Ramsay MacDonald, _Unemployment and - the Wage Fund_; I. M. Tarbell, _Hist. Standard Oil Co._ II. pp. 114, - 116, 137 (quoting the _Butler County Democrat_, Senator Frye, N.Y. - State Investigation Report, 1888), 124, 126–7, 290, 291; Truth’s - Investigator, _The Great Oil Octopus_, p. 227. - -Footnote 21: - - Hy. D. Lloyd, _op. cit._ p. 493. - -Footnote 22: - - von Bernhardi, _loc. cit._ - -Footnote 23: - - Karl Marx objected to applying the words Capital and Capitalism to the - condition of things in antiquity. But see E. Meyer, _Gesch. d. Alt._ - III. p. 550. - -Footnote 24: - - Extant some 300 lines in 35 fragments. - -Footnote 25: - - Extant 1389 lines of continuous verse. - -Footnote 26: - - Fr. 2 (13), 5–7. - -Footnote 27: - - μονάρχου. - -Footnote 28: - - Fr. 7 (17), 3–4. - -Footnote 29: - - Fr. 3 (14), 3. - -Footnote 30: - - For his hatred of tyranny see _e.g._ 1181–2, 1203–4. - -Footnote 31: - - Cp. of the Greeks in general, Theognis’ contemporary Cyrus (_ap._ Hdt. - I. 153), “these taunts Cyrus flung at the Greeks, because they secure - marketplaces and engage in buying and selling.” - -Footnote 32: - - 679, φορτηγοὶ δ’ ἄρχουσι κ.τ.λ., the “bad” is the regular term in - aristocratic writers for their political opponents. - -Footnote 33: - - 717–8. - -Footnote 34: - - 315. - -Footnote 35: - - 523. - -Footnote 36: - - 699. - -Footnote 37: - - 621. - -Footnote 38: - - 823; cp. Solon quoted above. - -Footnote 39: - - ὑβριστήν. - -Footnote 40: - - 1081–2. - -Footnote 41: - - Cp. _e.g._ Hdt. III. 80, ὕβρι κεκορημένος. - -Footnote 42: - - ὑβρίζῃ, 749–751. - -Footnote 43: - - 47–52. - -Footnote 44: - - Other interpretations would be possible if in line 51 we read “from - this” (ἐκ τοῦ) instead of “from these” (ἐκ τῶν), but the MSS. all - support ἐκ τῶν. - -Footnote 45: - - Is it possible to see in Solon, 12 (4). 29–32, a reference to the - fates of the various tyrant families of the seventh century? - -Footnote 46: - - φορτηγός, Theognis, 679. - -Footnote 47: - - Soph. _O.T._ 540–542. - -Footnote 48: - - I. 13. - -Footnote 49: - - _Olymp._ II. 58–9 (to Thero, tyrant of Acragas). - -Footnote 50: - - _Olymp._ V. 15–16 (to Psaumis of Camarina). The poem ends with a - warning to Psaumis not to emulate the tyrants (μὴ ματεύσῃ θεὸς - γενέσθαι). - -Footnote 51: - - _Pyth._ I. 48. - -Footnote 52: - - ἀλλ’ ὅμως τὸ τοιοῦτον ἔτη δέκα κατέσχεν (Ἀγαμέμνων), οὐ μισθοφοραῖς - μεγάλαις οὐδὲ χρημάτων δαπάναις, οἷς νῦν ἅπαντες δυναστεύουσιν, Isocr. - _Panath._ 82 (249). - -Footnote 53: - - Jebb, _Attic Orators_^2, II. p. 110. - -Footnote 54: - - _Pol._ VII. (V.), 1314_b_. Endt, _Wien. Stud._ XXIV. (1901), p. 47, - sees here a reference to Gelo of Syracuse and quotes Diod. XI. 26; - Ael. _V.H._ VI. 11; Polyaen. I. 27, which tell how Gelo appeared naked - before the Syracusans and gave an account of his government and - offered to resign. But the only reference to the Exchequer is in - Polyaenus; and there it is only incidental (εὐθύνας δοὺς τῆς - αὐτοκράτορος ἀρχῆς, τῆς δαπάνης, τῶν καιρῶν, τῶν ὅπλων, τῶν ἵππων, τῶν - τριήρων). - -Footnote 55: - - See below on Solon, pp. 34–5, and chapter XI. p. 301, and cp. Aristot. - _Pol._ II. 1267; III. 1285_a-b_. - -Footnote 56: - - _E.g._ Lord James of Hereford, Sir D. Dale, Mr Watson and Mr Mundella, - quoted by W. T. Layton, _Capital and Labour_, p. 198. In a simpler and - smaller state than the modern kingdom or republic, during an epoch of - industrial war between evenly matched parties, it is easy to imagine - individuals in a similar position acquiring or even having thrust upon - them almost autocratic powers. - -Footnote 57: - - _Pol._ VI. (IV.), 1296_a_. - -Footnote 58: - - VI. (IV.), 1295–6. - -Footnote 59: - - Plut. _Sol._ 2, 14. - -Footnote 60: - - Aristot. _Pol._ I. 1259_a_. - -Footnote 61: - - Lysias, _c. Frument._ 16 (165). For an oil ring in the Rome of Plautus - see _Captivi_, 489, “omnes conpecto rem agunt quasi in Velabro - olearii.” - -Footnote 62: - - Xen. _de Vect._ 4. 14–15; cp. Plut. _Nikias_, 4. - -Footnote 63: - - Lysias, _c. Eratosth._ 19 (121). - -Footnote 64: - - Dem. _c. Aphob._ A. 9–11 (816, 817); cp. Plut. _Demosth._ 4. - -Footnote 65: - - Aeschines, _c. Timarch._ 97 (13–14). - -Footnote 66: - - Dion. Hal. _Isocr._ 1, θεράποντας αὐλοποιούς. For θεράπων = slave, cp. - Aristoph. _Plut._ 518–521. - -Footnote 67: - - _c. Olymp._ 12 (1170). - -Footnote 68: - - _E.g._ Xen. _Mem._ II. 7. 3, 6. The contract for building the long - walls of Athens in the days of Pericles is said to have been given to - a single individual, by name Kallikrates (Plut. _Per._ 13): of his - employees we know nothing except that according to the contemporary - comic poet Cratinus they were very slow about their work. - -Footnote 69: - - Athen. VI. 272_e_ actually speaks of Nikias as a millionaire - (ζάπλουτος) owning slaves as capital (ἐπὶ προσόδοις). - -Footnote 70: - - Plut. _Sol._ XXII. πρὸς τὰς τέχνας (cp. χειροτέχνης = artizan) ἔτρεψε - τοὺς πολίτας. Note too, _ibid._ (cp. Galen, _Protrept._ 8 init.; - Vitruv. VI. praef.) the law that a son was not obliged to support his - father if the father had not taught him a trade, and further Poll. - VIII. 42 (in the days of Solon a person thrice convicted of - unemployment lost his vote). - -Footnote 71: - - Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 2. In ch. 12 the _Ath. Pol._ alludes to the - difficulties (ἀπορία) of the poor and of those previously slaves who - were liberated as a result of the σεισαχθεία (Solon’s measure for - dealing with slavery and debt), and proceeds to quote Solon himself. - -Footnote 72: - - Plut. _Sol._ XXIV. - -Footnote 73: - - Aesch. _c. Timarch._ 27 (4). - -Footnote 74: - - _Anth. Lyr._ Solon, 12 (4), 49–50. - -Footnote 75: - - Notably at Athens and Rome. - -Footnote 76: - - Aristot. _Pol._ VII. (V.), 1313_b_. - -Footnote 77: - - Below, pp. 267, 274 f., 279, 223 f. - -Footnote 78: - - _E.g._ by Endt, _Wien. Stud._ XXIV. (1901), p. 55. - -Footnote 79: - - Hy. D. Lloyd, _Wealth against Commonwealth_, p. 364. - -Footnote 80: - - Plut. _Per._ 12. - -Footnote 81: - - Building of the Erechtheum, 408 B.C. _C.I.A._ I. 321, 324. - -Footnote 82: - - Plut. _Per._ 16, τὴν δύναμιν αὐτοῦ ... κακοήθως παρεμφαίνουσιν οἱ - κωμικοί, Πεισιστρατίδας μὲν νέους τοὺς ἀμφὶ αὐτὸν ἑταίρους καλοῦντες, - αὐτὸν δ’ ἀπομόσαι μὴ τυραννήσειν κελεύοντες. - -Footnote 83: - - Cp. Mauri, _Cittadini Lavoratori dell’ Attica_, p. 56. - -Footnote 84: - - Cp. Thuc. II. 65, of Athens under Pericles, “nominally it was a - democracy, but in fact it was government by the foremost man.” - -Footnote 85: - - _Arch. Eph._ 1883, pp. 109 f. = _C.I.A._ II. ii. 834_b_ (329–8 B.C.). - -Footnote 86: - - Zimmern, _Sociological Review_, 1909, p. 166. - -Footnote 87: - - Cp. Cic. _de Off._ I. 42. 151, mercatura, si tenuis est, sordida - putanda est, sin magna et copiosa ... non est admodum uituperanda; - atque etiam si ... ex portu in agros se possessionesque contulerit, - uidetur iure optimo posse laudari: a view that was doubtless as firmly - held in Greece as it has been since in Rome and England. - -Footnote 88: - - A fairly complete collection of the authorities for ancient Greek - views on manual labour is to be found in Frohberger, _De Opificum apud - vet. Graec. condit._ chap. II. - -Footnote 89: - - Hom. _Od._ XXIII. 189; _Il._ VI. 313–5; _Od._ VI. 52 f.; cp. also - _Il._ V. 59 f.; XXI. 37; _Od._ V. 241 f. - -Footnote 90: - - In Megara the aristocratic Theognis has contempt enough for the - working classes, but he wrote after the overthrow of tyranny in his - city. - -Footnote 91: - - Plato, _Critias_, 110_c_. - -Footnote 92: - - Plut. _Thes._ 25. - -Footnote 93: - - Plut. _Sol._ 2. - -Footnote 94: - - Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 7. - -Footnote 95: - - _Laws_, XI. 920_d_. For the character of Athens’ patron deities cp. - Proclus ad Plat. _Timae._ 52_b_, Athena Ergane (so called) as - patroness of the works of craftsmen (δημιουργικῶν ἔργων); cp. Soph. - fr. 844 (Jebb and Pearson); Plato, _Protag._ 321_e_, the common abode - in which they (Athena and Hephaestus) practised their crafts - (ἐφιλοτεχνείτην); Harpocrat. and Suid. s.v. χαλκεῖα, “A feast common - to artizans (χειρώναξι) and especially to smiths”: Suid. adds that it - was originally a public feast, not till later observed only by - artizans (τεχνιτῶν): A. Mommsen, _Heortologie_, p. 313, thinks that - the change may be due to Peisistratus. - -Footnote 96: - - Wallon, _Histoire de l’Esclavage_, I. 142. - -Footnote 97: - - Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 13. - -Footnote 98: - - Xen. _de Rep. Lac._ 7; _Mem._ IV. 2. 22; _Oecon._ IV. 2. - -Footnote 99: - - Ael. _V.H._ II. 1; so Xen. _Mem._ III. 7. 6. - -Footnote 100: - - Aristoph. _Ach._ 478; _Thes._ 387; _Frogs_, 840; cp. Plin. _N.H._ - XXII. 38; Aul. Gell. XV. 20; Val. Max. III. 4, ext. 2. - -Footnote 101: - - Hdt. II. 167. Mauri therefore, _Cittadini Lavoratori dell’ Attica_, p. - 65, rather postdates when he says that our authorities for Athenian - contempt of manual work are fourth century and later. - -Footnote 102: - - Isocrat. _Areop._ 32 (146). - -Footnote 103: - - Mauri, _Cittadini Lavoratori dell’ Attica_, p. 69. - -Footnote 104: - - Xen. _Mem._ IV. 2. 22. - -Footnote 105: - - Plato, _Apol._ 22_c-e_; cp. Xen. _Mem._ II. 7, where Socrates strongly - deprecates the prejudice against manual labour. - -Footnote 106: - - Xen. _de Vect._ V. 4. - -Footnote 107: - - Plato, _Rep._ VII. 522_b_, IX. 590_c_; _Laws_, V. 741_e_; _Gorg._ - 517_d_–518_a_; _Alcib._ I. 131_b_; _Amator_, 136_b_, 137_b_. - -Footnote 108: - - Plato, _Laws_, VIII. 846_d_. - -Footnote 109: - - _Ibid._ XI. 918. - -Footnote 110: - - _Ibid._ IV. 705_b_. - -Footnote 111: - - _Rep._ II. 371_e_. - -Footnote 112: - - οὔτε βάναυσον βίον οὔτ’ ἀγοραῖον, Aristot. _Pol._ IV. (VII.), 1328_b_; - cp. _Rhet._ I. 9. 27. - -Footnote 113: - - γεωργοὶ μὲν γὰρ καὶ τεχνῖται καὶ πᾶν τὸ θητικὸν ἀναγκαῖον ὑπάρχειν - ταῖς πόλεσιν, μέρη δὲ τῆς πόλεως τό τε ὁπλιτικὸν καὶ βουλευτικόν, - Aristot. _Pol._ IV. (VII.), 1329_a_; cp. VII. (V.), 1317_a_. - -Footnote 114: - - _Pol._ III. 1278_a_. - -Footnote 115: - - _Pol._ IV. (VII.), 1326_a_. The _Politics_ was based on a series of - studies of particular constitutions one of which, the _Constitution of - Athens_, was recovered from an Egyptian rubbish heap some thirty years - ago. When Aristotle says that a city of artizans cannot attain to - greatness we may feel fairly sure that artizans had played no - prominent part in any of the Greek cities since the Persian wars. For - the period before that his information must have been less reliable. - -Footnote 116: - - _c. Eubulidem_, 32 (1308). - -Footnote 117: - - Pollux, III. 82; cp. Photius s.v. “θητεία· δουλεία.” - -Footnote 118: - - See _e.g._ Xen. _Oecon._ IV. 2–3, and cp. the unusually sympathetic - account of the working classes in the sophist Prodicus, a contemporary - of Socrates: “let us proceed to the artizans and mechanics - (χειρωνακτικοὺς καὶ βαναύσους), toiling from night to night and with - difficulty providing themselves with the necessities of life and - bewailing themselves and filling all their sleepless hours with - lamentation and tears.” Mullach, _Frag. Phil. Gr._ II. 139. - -Footnote 119: - - _Arbeit. u. Comm._ p. 46. - -Footnote 120: - - Women were of course involved in the consequences of the Peloponnesian - war. “I am told that many women citizens (ἀσταὶ γυναῖκες) became wet - nurses and day labourers and grape pickers (τιτθαὶ καὶ ἔριθοι καὶ - τρυγήτριαι) as a result of the misfortunes of the city in those - times.” Dem. _c. Eubul._ 45 (1313); cp. Xen. _Mem._ II. 7 f. - -Footnote 121: - - Cp. the trouble that the Romans were always having with their - disbanded troops. - -Footnote 122: - - Aristoph. _Plut._ 510–525. - -Footnote 123: - - Plut. _Ages._ 26; Polyaen. II. 1. 7; cp. Xen. _Hell._ VI. 1. 5. - -Footnote 124: - - Aristot. _Pol._ III. 1278_a_. Aristotle is of course a more valuable - authority for his own days than for his “ancient times.” - -Footnote 125: - - Plato, _Rep._ II. 371_e_. So Cic. _de Off._ I. 42, “est ipsa merces - auctoramentum seruitutis.” Cp. Zimmern, _Sociological Review_, 1909, - p. 174, who however, when he says that “the Greeks never took kindly - to wage earning” is thinking mainly of the fifth and fourth centuries - B.C. and rather disregarding the evidence for conditions at that - period being of comparatively recent growth. - -Footnote 126: - - Ciccotti, _Tramonto d. Schiavitù_, pp. 124 f. In the extant fragments - of the Erechtheum accounts for 409 B.C. the payments are partly by the - piece, partly by the day. - -Footnote 127: - - Cavaignac, _Études Financ._ p. 173. For the large growth of the - servile population in fourth century Attica see Beloch, _Rhein. Mus._ - 1890, pp. 555 f. - -Footnote 128: - - Cavaignac, _Études Financ._ p. 172; E. Meyer, _Kleinschrift._ p. 198. - -Footnote 129: - - See Brants, _Rev. de l’Instruct. Publ. Belg._ XXVI. p. 106. - -Footnote 130: - - Athen. XII. 540_d_. - -Footnote 131: - - Cp. on fifth century Athens Xen. (?) _Ath. Pol._ I. 12, “the city - needs resident aliens owing to the number of its handicrafts (δεῖται - μετοίκων διὰ τὸ πλῆθος τῶν τεχνῶν).” - -Footnote 132: - - Below, p. 192. - -Footnote 133: - - Cp. Phaleas, Aristot. _Pol._ II. 1267. - -Footnote 134: - - Hdt. VI. 137, οὐ γὰρ εἶναι τοῦτον τὸν χρόνον σφίσι κω οἰκέτας. - -Footnote 135: - - Timaeus, _ap._ Athen. VI. 264_c_. - -Footnote 136: - - Clerc, _Métèques Athén._ pp. 324 f. - -Footnote 137: - - Ciccotti, _Tramonto d. Schiavitù_, p. 47. - -Footnote 138: - - Buechsenschuetz, _Besitz u. Erwerb._ pp. 321, 341, 193; cp. Waltz, - _Rev. Hist._ 117 (1914), pp. 5–41. - -Footnote 139: - - In the oriental Greek states of the Hellenistic period, as also in the - Roman East, the government seems sometimes to have run big industrial - concerns whose employees have been held to have been free men. Beloch, - _Zeits. f. Socialwiss._ II. pp. 24–25. But these establishments belong - to a quite different political order from that with which we are now - concerned. - -Footnote 140: - - For slave revolts in Greece see Diod. XXXIV. 2. 19 and Athen. VI. 272 - f. (Laurium, probably latter part of second century B.C.); Athen. VI. - 265_c_ (Chios, apparently later still, _pace_ Boeckh, _Public Econ. of - Athens_, II. pp. 470–471); cp. Wallon, _l’Esclavage_^2, I. pp. 318 f., - 483–484. The movements at Laurium and Chios in the Peloponnesian war, - Thuc. VII. 27, VIII. 40, seem to have been not so much revolts against - slavery as desertions from one set of masters to another. When Holm, - _Hist. Greece_ (English trans.), I. p. 263, says that the essence of - tyranny was that it rested on force he makes a statement which, so far - as it is true, differentiates tyranny from no other ancient form of - government. - -Footnote 141: - - ἀεὶ ἀτυράννευτος ἦν, Thuc. I. 18. - -Footnote 142: - - Plut. _Lysander_, 17. - -Footnote 143: - - Hill, _Handbook of Greek and Roman Coins_, p. 17, quoting Lenormant. - Hill himself inclines to think that the Spartan coinage may have - resembled the iron pieces of Aeginetan weight attributed to Tegea and - Argos. But these latter are not “heavy and hard to carry.” - -Footnote 144: - - οὐ ξυνοικισθείσης πόλεως ... κατὰ κώμας δὲ ... οἰκισθείσης, Thuc. I. - 10. - -Footnote 145: - - Aristot. _Pol._ II. 1269_a_. - -Footnote 146: - - Thuc. I. 132. - -Footnote 147: - - In the days of Plato Thebes contained one citizen of extraordinary - wealth in Ismenias, “the man who had just recently received the wealth - of Polycrates.” Ismenias is classed with Periander, Perdiccas, and - Xerxes as a wealthy man who thought he possessed great power; but he - is not called a tyrant. He had become rich not through his own wisdom - and care, but suddenly as the result of a bequest, so that his wealth - would apparently fall under a different category from that of the - seventh and sixth century tyrants, and he is in fact placed by Plato - in a very miscellaneous company. Plato, _Meno_, 90_a_; _Rep._ I. - 336_a_. - -Footnote 148: - - See below, pp. 30 f. - -Footnote 149: - - Aristot. _Pol._ VIII. (VI.), 1316_b_. - -Footnote 150: - - _Thucydides Mythistoricus_, p. 32. - -Footnote 151: - - Rep. VIII. 562_a_; cp. 564_a_, 565_d_. - -Footnote 152: - - On tyrants as plunderers cp. Hdt. V. 92: “(Cypselus) deprived many - people of their property.” So Ephorus, _F.H.G._ III. p. 392, “He - banished the Bacchiads and confiscated their possessions.” Cp. Plato, - _Phaedo_, 82_a_; _Rep._ VIII. end. The spoils of victory however are - quite a different thing from the litigious confiscations of fifth and - fourth century demagogues. The way the early tyrants used their wealth - is sufficient proof that it was not mainly plunder. There is nothing - of the condottiere about the typical early tyrant. Cp. H. Sieveking, - _Kapitalist. Entwick. i. d. ital. Städt. d. Mittelalt._ in _Viertelj. - f. Soc. u. Wirts._ VII. pp. 64 f. - -Footnote 153: - - Pol. VII. (V.), 1305_a_; cp. VII. (V.), 1310_b_, ὁ δὲ τύραννος - (καθίσταται) ἐκ τοῦ δήμου καὶ τοῦ πλήθους. - -Footnote 154: - - “Pheidon and others became tyrants with a kingship to start from ... - those in the parts about Ionia, and Phalaris, from their offices,” - _Pol._ VII. (V.), 1310_b_; cp. _ibid._, “through starting with power, - some that of kingly office,” and _ibid._, “other (tyrannies) from - kings overstepping their inherited positions”; VII. (V.), 1308_a_, - “attempts at tyranny are made in some places by demagogues, in other - places by dynasts, or those who hold the highest offices when they - hold them for a long time.” - -Footnote 155: - - Cp. also _Pol._ VII. (V.), 1305_a_, where “modern times” means since - rhetoric developed and demagogues ceased to be soldiers. - -Footnote 156: - - Or else for no historical period at all. As pointed out to me by my - colleague Professor W. G. de Burgh, Plato’s order is confessedly an - order of ascending injustice (_Rep._ VIII. 545_a_; cp. 344_a_), in - introducing which he invokes the muses of Homer and asks them not to - be too serious (545_e_). Plato’s evidence on this point need not be - taken so literally as that of the historically minded Aristotle. - -Footnote 157: - - Hdt. III. 82. See also Xen. _Hell._ VII. 1. 44–46; and cp. Porzio, - _Cipselidi_, p. 207, n. 1. - -Footnote 158: - - Neither the Homeric Thersites nor the “leaders of the people” of Solon - show any of the essential features of the demagogue as known to - Herodotus, Plato, and Aristotle. Individual early tyrants are often - said to have been demagogues, but only by the writers of the fourth - century or later, whose evidence on this point is valueless; cp. - below, pp. 30 f. - -Footnote 159: - - “The demagogues of the present day win favour with the democracies by - securing many confiscations through the law courts.” Aristotle, _Pol._ - VIII. (VI.), 1320_a_. - -Footnote 160: - - Hdt. VI. 131. - -Footnote 161: - - πολεμοποιός, Aristot. _Pol._ VII. (V.), 1313_b_; cp. 1305_a_ (οἱ - προστάται τοῦ δήμου, ὅτε πολεμικοὶ γένοιντο, τυραννίδι ἐπετίθεντο) and - Plato, _Rep._ VIII. 566_e_ (πολέμους ἀεὶ κινεῖ). - -Footnote 162: - - Cp. Thuc. I. 17, δι’ ἀσφαλείας ὅσον ἐδύναντο μάλιστα τὰς πόλεις ὤκουν. - Hermann, _Staatsaltertümer_^5 p. 253, n. 5, notices that this passage - contradicts Plato, _Rep._ VIII. 566_e_ and Aristot. _Pol._ VII. (V.), - 1313_b_, 1305_a_, which make the typical tyrant warlike. He does not - realize that Thucydides is describing the tyrants of an earlier age. - -Footnote 163: - - Below, pp. 257 f. - -Footnote 164: - - Aristot. _Pol._ VII. (V.), 1315_b_. The same change is recorded in the - tyranny at Corinth: there Cypselus the first tyrant is said to have - been a demagogue, possibly because he became tyrant and was not stated - in Aristotle’s sources to have previously waged any war. - -Footnote 165: - - Hdt. I. 59; according to the _Ath. Pol._ 17, “it is obvious nonsense - to say that Peisistratus was general in the war for Salamis against - the Megareans.” But this statement based on chronological arguments - can only call in question the date and character of Peisistratus’ - warlike achievements, not their whole historicity. - -Footnote 166: - - _Pace_ E. Meyer, _G. d. A._ II. p. 666, following Justin II. 8 (quasi - sibi non patriae uicisset, tyrannidem per dolum occupat). - -Footnote 167: - - On the essentially peaceful character of the Athenian tyranny, see - Ciccotti, _Tramonto d. Schiavitù_, p. 49. - -Footnote 168: - - _Pol._ VII. (V.), 1312_b_. - -Footnote 169: - - III. 82. - -Footnote 170: - - Mixed of course with earlier features. _E.g._ in Plato (_Rep._ VIII. - 566_a-b_) the banishment and forcible return and the bodyguard are all - genuine Peisistratus. - -Footnote 171: - - Plato, _Letters_ 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 13. On the genuineness of the - Platonic letters see Burnet, _Thales to Plato_, pp. 206, 207 and note. - -Footnote 172: - - Diog. Laert. II. 7. 63; 8. 67 f. - -Footnote 173: - - Aristotle, _Pol._ VII. (V.), 1307_a_, where Hanno of Carthage, - Aristotle’s contemporary, is also quoted. Both these would-be tyrants - tampered with the slave population (see Thucydides, I. 132 - (Pausanias), Orosius, IV. 6 (Hanno)), and may thus have further helped - to obliterate the picture of the peace-loving early tyrant and his - relationship to free labour. - -Footnote 174: - - Cp. Thuc. I. 20; VI. 54 on the inaccurate accounts of the - Peisistratids prevalent in Athens in the historian’s own days. - -Footnote 175: - - On the way that Aristotle’s ideas often colour the facts he quotes see - Muretus, _Var. Lect._ I. 14; Koehler, _Sitzungsb. Preuss. Akad._ 1892, - p. 505; Endt, _Wien. Stud._ XXIV. (1901), pp. 50–51, quoted Porzio, - _Cipselidi_, p. 244. - - On the general dubiousness of fifth and fourth century explanations of - seventh and sixth century motives, see Macan on the _Athenaion - Politeia_ in _J.H.S._ XII. pp. 34 f. - -Footnote 176: - - Aristot. _Pol._ VII. (V.) 1313_a_. - -Footnote 177: - - Aristot. _Pol._ VII. (V.) 1315_b_. - -Footnote 178: - - Mommsen, _Hist. Rome_ (Eng. trans.), III. p. 333. - -Footnote 179: - - Cp. Dion. Hal. VII. 1, on the statement in his oldest authorities that - Dionysius sent corn to Rome in the time of Spurius Cassius (492 B.C.). - The name Dionysius appears here a good half century before his birth, - doubtless as the Sicilian tyrant _par excellence_. - -Footnote 180: - - Beloch, _Gr. G._^2 I. ii. p. 295, is surely underestimating the value - of Thucydides’ express statements about the Peisistratids when he - calls them “merely oral traditions about the relations of a family - that had been expelled from Athens 100 years before.” This way of - putting it hardly suggests that less than 20 years may have separated - the death of Hippias from the birth of Thucydides, and that the - tyrant’s family was still sufficiently flourishing at the end of the - Peloponnesian war to be excluded from the amnesty that restored - Thucydides to Athens (Didymus _ap._ Marcellin. _Vit. Thuc._ 32). - -Footnote 181: - - See also chapter III, p. 69. - -Footnote 182: - - Beloch, _Rhein. Mus._ L. (1895), p. 252, n. 1, puts Cylon’s attempt - into the time between Solon and Peisistratus, De Sanctis, _Atthis_^2, - pp. 280 f., into the time of Peisistratus’ exile; O. Seeck, _Klio_, - IV. pp. 318 f., puts it at earliest early in the career of - Peisistratus; Costanzi, _Riv. d. Stor. Ant._ V. pp. 518–19, about 570 - B.C.; so also Lenschau _ap._ Bursian, _Jahresbericht_ 176 (1918), p. - 190. But see _e.g._ Ledl, _Stud. z. d. ält. ath. Verfassungsges._ pp. - 77 f. - -Footnote 183: - - Thuc. I. 126. - -Footnote 184: - - Plut. _Solon_, 24. - -Footnote 185: - - Plut. _Solon_, 2; cp. Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 6, where Solon’s enemies - accuse him of (dishonest) financial speculations. Aristotle dismisses - the charge. - -Footnote 186: - - Hdt. I. 59; Plut., _Solon_, 13, _Amat._ 18, _Praecept._ 10 (_Moral._ - 763, 805), imagines this third party as existing at the time of - Solon’s reforms: but his account is inconsistent in itself and - contradicts Hdt. See Sandys, _Ath. Pol._^2 p. 55, Busolt, _Gr. G._^2 - (1895), II. p. 302, n. 2, following Diels, _Abh. Berl. Akad._ 1885, p. - 20, and Landwehr, _Philol._ Suppl. V. (1889), p. 155. - -Footnote 187: - - So Isocr. _Panath._ 148 (263); Aristot. _Pol._ VII. (V.), 1310_b_; cp. - Cic. _de Orat._ III. 34; _Brutus_, 27, 41; Val. Max. VIII. 9; Dio - Chrys. XXII. - -Footnote 188: - - _Pace_ Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 22 (ὅτι Πεισίστρατος δημαγωγὸς καὶ - στρατηγὸς ὢν τύραννος κατέστη). - -Footnote 189: - - Cp. Plut. _Solon_, 29, “helping the needy” of Peisistratus when first - suspected by Solon of aiming at tyranny: cp. also Aristot. _Pol._ VII. - (V.), 1305_a_ (tr. Welldon), “the ground of this confidence being - their detestation of the wealthy classes. This was the case at Athens - with Peisistratus in consequence of his feud with the (wealthy landed) - proprietors of the plain.” - -Footnote 190: - - Hdt. I. 64. Grote’s translation, III. (ed. 1888), p. 329, n. 4, which - makes the money come from Athens and the mercenaries from Thrace, is - highly improbable. Amphipolis, the chief fifth century city on the - lower Strymon, is described by Thucydides, IV. 108, as useful to - Athens “from its revenues of money.” Grote’s objections to making - Peisistratus a Thracian mining magnate are met below. - -Footnote 191: - - So Perdrizet, _Klio_, X. (1910), p. 5. - -Footnote 192: - - Guiraud, _La Main-d’Œuvre dans l’Ancienne Grèce_, pp. 30, 31; cp. von - Fritze, _Zeits. f. Num._ XX. (1897), p. 154, who notes that Maronea, - the name of the place in the Laurium district mined in the time of - Peisistratus, is also the name of a town in Thrace opposite Thasos - (said by Philochorus, _F.H.G._, I. p. 404, to have been alluded to by - Archilochus; cp. Hom. _Od._ IX. 197). E. Curtius (quoted _ibid._) - regards the Attic Maronea as having been named after the Thracian. - -Footnote 193: - - Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 15. - -Footnote 194: - - Hdt. I. 62, 64. - -Footnote 195: - - Of iron and copper, Steph. Byz. s.v. Αἴδηψος, Χαλκίς, Eustath. _ad - Dion. Perieget._ 764. - -Footnote 196: - - Svoronos, _Journ. Int. d’Arch. Num._ XV. (1913), pp. 233–4. - -Footnote 197: - - Cp. Muenzer u. Strack, _Münz. Nord-Griech._ II. i. p. 8, n. 1. - -Footnote 198: - - Hdt. I. 9; so Dion. Hal. I. 13. - -Footnote 199: - - Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 13. - -Footnote 200: - - Plut. _Solon_, 13; _Praecept._ 10 (_Moral._ 805); _Amat._ 18 (_Moral._ - 763). - -Footnote 201: - - See _e.g._ Poehlmann, _Grundriss_^4 p. 85; E. Meyer, _G. d. A._ II. p. - 663; Sandys, _Ath. Pol._^2 p. 55; Mauri, _Cittadini Lavoratori dell’ - Attica_, p. 29; Grundy, _Thucydides and Hist. of his Age_, p. 116; - Haase, _Abhand. Hist. Phil. Gesell. Breslau_, I. p. 105. - -Footnote 202: - - Below, Appendix A. - -Footnote 203: - - _J.H.S._ XXVI. pp. 136–8. - -Footnote 204: - - _A.J.A._ 1889, p. 426; cp. Haase, _Abhand. Hist. Phil. Gesell. - Breslau_, I. p. 69, n. 16. - -Footnote 205: - - _Ath. Mitt._ XXXV. (1910), p. 286, ll. 18–21, μέταλλον ἀνασάξιμον ἐπὶ - Λαυρέωι ... ὧι γε(ιτνιᾷ ... πρὸς) νότο(ν) ἡ ὁδὸς ἡ ἔξω τοῦ Ῥαγῶνος ἐπὶ - Λαύρεον φέρουσα καὶ τὸ Σημάχειον. - -Footnote 206: - - Steph. Byz. s.v. - -Footnote 207: - - _Abh. Berl. Akad._ 1892, p. 37; cp. _ibid._ 47; _Ath. Mitt._ XVII. pp. - 422, 424. - -Footnote 208: - - _Ath. Mitt._ 1910, p. 309. The single tombstone of “Aeschines of - Semachidai, the son of Pamphilus” (_C.I.A._ II. 2534), found at - Brahami, three and a half kilometres South of the Acropolis, is - probably to be classed with _ibid._ 2535–9 as belonging to a Semachid - who died at Athens. So too with the fragment ΙΑΧΙΔΟΥ _C.I.A._ III. - 3897, found at Alopeke, the modern Ampelokipi, one of the Eastern - terminuses of the Athenian tramways. Demesmen seem to have been - generally buried either in Athens or in the deme to which they - belonged. The ordinary Attic word for travel, ἀποδημεῖν (lit. “to quit - one’s deme”), seems to have been still appropriate even in the fourth - century. - -Footnote 209: - - _F.H.G._ I. p. 396. - -Footnote 210: - - _F.H.G._ I. p. 396. - -Footnote 211: - - _Ath. Mitt._ XXXV. (1910), p. 277, l. 25; 278, l. 42; 281, l. 46; the - word may have been semi-technical. Appian, _Bell. Civ._ IV. 106, - speaks of a λόφος not far from Philippi, “in which are the gold mines - called the Asyla.” - -Footnote 212: - - Cp. Hesych. Ἐπάκριος· Ζεὺς ὁ ἐπὶ τῶν ἄκρων τῶν ὀρῶν ἱδρύμενος. ἐπὶ γὰρ - τῶν ὀρῶν τοὺς βωμοὺς αὐτῷ ἵδρυον ὡς ἐπιπολύ. - -Footnote 213: - - _I.e._ with the hill country of the Cleisthenic Interior. Inscriptions - (_C.I.A._ II. 602, 603), of the fourth century or later, mention men - of the Interior (Mesogeioi) who formed a similar organization to the - Epakrioi of _C.I.A._ II. 570, and were possibly composed of lowlanders - of the Cleisthenic Interior (Mesogeia). The name Mesogeia is now - applied to the “undulating district of hill and plain stretching to - the spurs of Pentelicon on the North, to Hymettus on the West, to the - vicinity of Marcopoulo on the South, and to the coast hills on the - East,” Baedeker, _Greece_, 1905, p. 117. - -Footnote 214: - - See _e.g._ J. A. R. Munro’s note _J.H.S._ XIX. (1899), p. 187. - -Footnote 215: - - _Odyss._ III. 278; cp. Steph. Byz. Σούνιον· δῆμος Λεοντίδος φυλῆς. - Ὅμηρος δὲ ἄκρον καλεῖ. - -Footnote 216: - - Aristoph. _Clouds_, 401. - -Footnote 217: - - Strabo, IX. 390. - -Footnote 218: - - Palmerius (Le Paulmier), _Exerc._ p. 4, quoted Schoemann, _de Comit. - Ath._ p. 343, n. 4. - -Footnote 219: - - Albertus, _Hesych._ s.v. Alii aliter; _e.g._ Casaubon _ad_ _Diog. - Laert._, _Solon_, 58 appears to locate the Diakrioi on the Acropolis. - -Footnote 220: - - Plato, _Critias_, 110_d_. - -Footnote 221: - - Strabo, IX. 391; cp. XIV. 632 f. on the Milesian district where Hdt., - VI. 20, mentions the existence of a Hyperakria: Strabo distinguishes - clearly the ἄκραι on the coast from the ὄρη of the interior. - -Footnote 222: - - No mines are marked actually at Sunium in the map attached to - Ardaillon’s careful study of the mines of Laurium, but a mine at - Sunium (μέταλλον ἐπὶ Σουνίῳ) is mentioned in the inscription published - by Oikonomos, _Ath. Mitt._ XXXV. (1910), p. 277, l. 9; so also - _C.I.A._ II. 781: cp. also Eurip. _Cycl._ 293–4, “aery Sunium’s - silver-veined crag (ὑπάργυρος πέτρα),” tr. Shelley. Sunium and - Thoricus, also in the mining district (“at Thoricus and Laurium are - mines of silver,” schol. Aesch. _Pers._ 238), are coupled together by - Pliny, _N.H._ IV. 11 (7), as “promontoria.” - -Footnote 223: - - Hdt. IV. 99. - -Footnote 224: - - There were Diakrioi in Rhodes (Cavaignac, _Étud. Financ._ pp. xl, xli) - and Euboea (Hesych. s.v.) as well as Attica. Miletus had its - Hyperakrioi (Hdt. VI. 20). - -Footnote 225: - - Besides its connexion with (_a_) Semachidai and (_b_) the party of - Peisistratus, we find it as (_c_) one of twelve cities founded by - Cecrops (Strabo, IX. 397, Steph. Byz. s.v.), (_d_) one of three groups - of cities founded by Cecrops (Suid. and _Et. Mag._ s.v.), (_e_) a - country near Tetrapolis (Bekker, _Lex. Seguer._ p. 259), (_f_) a - trittys (trittys of the Epakrians: _C.I.A._ II. 1053 and (?) I. - 517_b_; cp. Loeper, _Ath. Mitt._ XVII. p. 355, n. 3), and (_g_) the - recipient of payments from Plotheia (_C.I.A._ II. 570, about 420 - B.C.). It is recognized by Milchhoefer that the word is used in a - broader and a more restricted sense (_ap._ Pauly Wissowa s.v. - Epakria). Though note _à propos_ of the Epakrian trittys of the - inscriptions that trittyes are generally named after not the district - but the chief place in the district, _e.g._ trittys of the - Eleusinians, of the Peiraeans, _C.I.A._ I. 517. Semachidai and - Plotheia belong to different tribes (Antiochis and Aegeis), and - consequently to different trittyes. - -Footnote 226: - - Strabo, XI. 499. - -Footnote 227: - - _E.g._ Oikonomos, _Ath. Mitt._ XXXV. (1910), pp. 277, l. 25; 278, l. - 42; 281, l. 46; cp. Xen. _de Vect._ IV. 2, τῶν ὑπαργύρων λόφων; Pliny, - _N.H._ IV. 11 (7), Thoricus promontorium. - -Footnote 228: - - Bursian, _Gr. Geog._ I. pp. 254–5. Boeckh, _Pub. Econ._ II. p. 416, n. - 6, quotes Λαύριον ὄρος, but gives no reference. - -Footnote 229: - - A site between Kamaresa (Maronea?) and Sunium, which Loeper identifies - with Potamos, is described by him as “im Inneren liegend,” _Ath. - Mitt._ XVII. pp. 333–4. - -Footnote 230: - - Schol. Ap. Rhod. _Argon._ I. 1129, quoting the _Phoronid_, - - ἄνδρες ὀρέστεροι, - οἱ πρῶτοι τέχνην πολυμήτιος Ἡφαίστοιο - εὗρον ἐν οὐρείῃσι νάπαις, ἰόεντα σίδηρον, - ἐς πῦρ τ’ ἤνεγκον καὶ ἀρίπρεπες ἔργον ἔδειξαν. - -Footnote 231: - - Binder, _Laurion_, p. 25 (cp. de Launay in Saglio, _Dict. d. Ant._ - s.v. ferrum, p. 1087), who says this is still the practice in Peru. - Smelting was carried on close by the mines, see Ardaillon in Saglio, - _Dict. d. Ant._ s.v. metalla. The sites of the ancient Siphnian mines - are to this day called Kaminia (furnaces) and Kapsala (slag?), Bent, - _J.H.S._ VI. pp. 196–7. - - Note too that at a still earlier epoch gold from mines, as - distinguished from alluvial gold, was known in Egypt as “gold of the - mountain,” Breasted, _Records Anc. Egypt_, IV. 30: so _ibid._ 28, - “electrum of the mountains,” temp. Ramses III. - -Footnote 232: - - _Abh. Berl. Acad._ _d._ 1892, p. 47. - -Footnote 233: - - _Ath. Mitt._ XVII. - -Footnote 234: - - Polyb. XXXIV. 9. - -Footnote 235: - - Athen. VI. 272_e_; cp. Oros. V. 9, who dates what is apparently the - same revolt in the time of the first Sicilian slave war (139–132 - B.C.). - -Footnote 236: - - Thuc. VII. 27; cp. Bury, _Hist. Greece_, p. 485. - -Footnote 237: - - Hdt. VII. 144; Plut. _Themist._ 4; Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 22. - -Footnote 238: - - Ardaillon, _Les Mines de Laurium_ (the best book on the subject), pp. - 132, 133; where see also a technical explanation of the veins. - -Footnote 239: - - Plut. _Themist._ 4. - -Footnote 240: - - Xen. _de Vect._ IV. 2. - -Footnote 241: - - F. Cauer, _Parteien in Megara und Athen_, p. 17. - -Footnote 242: - - Hdt. III. 57; they appear to have been exhausted before 490 B.C. - (Perdrizet, _Klio_, X. (1910), p. 7, quoting Hdt. III. 57 and Paus. X. - 11. 2), a fact that suggests an early discovery. - -Footnote 243: - - Furtwaengler, _Berl. Vas._ 871 B, 639, 831 A: Wilisch, _Jahresb. Gym._ - _Zittau_, 1901, figs. 19 (Saglio, _Dict. d. Ant._ fig. 4987), 20 and - p. 20. - -Footnote 244: - - Hdt. VII. 144. - -Footnote 245: - - Hdt. III. 57; cp. E. Meyer, _Ges. d. Alt._ II. p. 610, on Theognis, - 667 f. - -Footnote 246: - - _E.g._ Perdrizet, _Klio_, X. (1910), p. 2. - -Footnote 247: - - Aeschyl. _Persae_, 240 (238). - -Footnote 248: - - Hdt. VI. 46. - -Footnote 249: - - _Pace_ Cavaignac, _Viertelj. f. Soc. u. Wirts. Ges._ IX. p. 7. - -Footnote 250: - - Xen., _de Vect._ IV. 17, advised the Athenian state to buy slaves to - the number of three for each citizen and let them out to work the - mines. The number of Athenian citizens at the time was about 20,000 - (cp. Wallon, _l’Esclavage_^2, I. pp. 222 f.), which makes the proposed - number of slave miners about 60,000. This was admittedly many more - than the number actually employed at the time of the proposal, and - Xenophon suggests starting with 10,000, which Wallon, _ibid._ p. 230, - thinks to have been probably the existing number of privately owned - mining slaves. But even so these numbers show how influential a free - mining population might well have been. See also _de Vect._ IV. 14, 15 - and _passim_; Andoc. _de Myst._ 38 (6); Hyp. frag. 33 (Blass); and - above, p. 45. - -Footnote 251: - - Dem. _c. Phaenipp._ 20 (1044–5). - -Footnote 252: - - Bérard, _B.C.H._ XII. (1888), p. 246, τέχνη δ’ οὔτις ἔριζε. - -Footnote 253: - - Ardaillon, _Les Mines de Laurium_, p. 91. - -Footnote 254: - - Solon, Bergk, frag. 12 (4), 49–50, - - ἄλλος Ἀθηναίης τε καὶ Ἡφαίστου πολυτέχνεω - ἔργα δαεὶς χειροῖν ξυλλέγεται βίοτον. - -Footnote 255: - - Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 13. - -Footnote 256: - - A means of equation would be to accept the reading of the Berlin - papyrus ἀποίκων for ἀγροίκων and then, _pace_ Busolt, _Gr. G._ II.^2 - p. 96, n. 1, identify the ἄποικοι (men away from home; cp. the - Milesian ἀειναῦται, men always at sea) with the πάραλοι (men of the - coast). The demiourgoi would then be identified with the Diakrioi, and - it would have to be assumed that the youthful Peisistratus was already - leading his faction. Laurentius Lydus, _de Magistr._ I. 47, makes - Solon import from Egypt a triple division into philosopher nobles, - warrior farmers, and mechanics (τὴν βάναυσον καὶ τεχνουργόν). The - statement appears among the fragments of Diodorus IX. in Dindorf’s - text; but the attribution is disputed, _e.g._ by Landwehr, _Philol._ - Suppl. V. (1889), p. 141. The reading ἄγροικοι rather than ἄποικοι is - supported by Dion. Hal. II. 9; see further Gilliard, _Réformes de - Solon_, p. 105, n. 2. - -Footnote 257: - - Plut. _de Mul. Virt._ 27 (_Moral._ 262). - -Footnote 258: - - Plut. _Pericl._ 12. - -Footnote 259: - - Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 13; Plut. _Sol._ 29. - -Footnote 260: - - Perdrizet, _Klio_, X. (1910), p. 22, quoting Appian, _Bell. Civ._ IV. - 106. Cp. above, p. 39, n. 4. - -Footnote 261: - - Harpocrat. s.v. Ποταμός· “they were lampooned as readily admitting - illegal claims to citizenship (ὡς ῥᾳδίως δεχόμενοι τοὺς - παρεγγράπτους), as others proclaim and particularly Menander in _The - Twins_”; _Potamioi_ was the name of a comedy by Strattis; Athen. VII. - 299_b_; Suid. s.v. Ποταμοί. - -Footnote 262: - - _Ath. Mitt._ XVII. (1892), pl. xii. Inscriptions mention three - Potamioi, see _Ath. Mitt._ XVII. pp. 390–1, Π. καθύπερθεν, Π. - ὑπένερθεν, Π. Δειραδιῶται. The first two are grouped together apart - from the third, and Loeper is probably right, as against Koehler, - _Ath. Mitt._ X. (1885), pp. 105 f.; cp. IV. (1879), p. 102, in - assigning them to the city trittys of Leontis and making P. - Deiradiotai the mining village. καθύπερθεν is therefore no evidence - for an inland mining Potamioi. But “Deiradiotai” means “on the ridge,” - and supports Loeper’s location of Potamioi Deiradiotai, no matter - whether the adjective means “P. on the ridge,” or “P. near - Deiradiotai” (a separate deme, see _C.I.A._ II. 864). - -Footnote 263: - - Milchhoefer, _Ath. Mitt._ XVIII. (1893), p. 284. - -Footnote 264: - - _C.I.A._ II. 3343. - -Footnote 265: - - Hdt. V. 23, “by the river Strymon ... a city ... where are mines of - silver; and a large Greek population dwells around, and a large - barbarian.” - -Footnote 266: - - Thuc. IV. 105, “Brasidas, ... learning that Thucydides owned workings - in the gold mines in that part of Thrace, and as a result was one of - the most influential men on the mainland”; Marcellinus, _Vit. Thuc._ - 19, “(Thucydides) married a wife from Skapte Hyle in Thrace, who was - very wealthy and owned mines in Thrace”; Plut. _Cimon_, 4. - -Footnote 267: - - Xen. _de Vect._ IV. 14. - -Footnote 268: - - Hdt. I. 60; Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 14; Athen. 609_c_; Polyaen. I. 21. 1; - Val. Max. I. 2. 2 (ext.); Hermog. περὶ εὑρεσ. I. 3. 21 (ed. Spengel); - cp. schol. _ibid. ap._ Walzium, _Rhet. Gr._ V. p. 378. In schol. - Aristoph. _Eq._ 447 Phye appears to be confused with Myrrina who - appears to have been either wife (_ibid._) or daughter (schol. Dem. - _Aristoc._) of Peisistratus or more probably wife of Hippias (Thuc., - and Hesych. s.v. Βυρσίνης). Athenaeus marries Phye to Hipparchus. The - confusion may possibly be due to the fact that myrrina, as a common - noun, sometimes means garland (_e.g._ Pherecr. _Metall._ I. 25; - Aristoph. _Vesp._ 861; _Nub._ 1364, etc.), while Phye is described as - a garland seller (_Ath. Pol._ and Athen.). - -Footnote 269: - - See _e.g._ Thirlwall, _Hist._^2 II. pp. 67–8; Babelon, _Journ. Int. - d’Arch. Num._ VIII. (1905), pp. 17, 18; Stein, Hdt. I. 60; Beloch, - _Gr. G._^2 I. i. p. 370; cp. also Beloch, _Gr. G._^2 I. ii. p. 299. - -Footnote 270: - - Hirschensohn, _Philolog. Obozrenie_, X. (1896), Moscow, pp. 119 f.; - Beloch, _Gr. G._^2 I. ii. pp. 290 f., _Rhein. Mus._ XLV. (1890), p. - 469; so De Sanctis, _Atthis_^2, p. 278, n. 5; Costanzi, _Riv. d. Stor. - Ant._ V. pp. 516 f., _Boll. Fil. Class._ IX. pp. 84 f., 107 f. - -Footnote 271: - - Euseb. _Chron._ Armenian vers. 544/3 B.C., Pisistratus Atheniensibus - iterum imperauit. - -Footnote 272: - - Jerome, _Chron._ 539 B.C., Pisistratus secunda uice Athenis regnat. - -Footnote 273: - - Hdt. I. 62. - -Footnote 274: - - Cp. below, chap. VIII. pp. 237–9. - -Footnote 275: - - Beloch, _Gr. G._^2 I. ii. pp. 292–3, 297. - -Footnote 276: - - Hdt. VI. 35, “Peisistratus held supreme power, but Miltiades also had - influence (ἐδυνάστευε)” suggests some sort of co-operation (cp. Hdt. - VI. 39, below, p. 63), though Hdt. VI. 35, “annoyed with the - government of Peisistratus,” shows that it was not cordial. - -Footnote 277: - - Busolt, _Gr. G._^2 II. p. 316, n. 3. - -Footnote 278: - - _Journ. Int. d’Arch. Num._ VIII. (1905), p. 19. - -Footnote 279: - - Six, _Num. Chron._ 1895, pl. VII. 8, 7, 1. - -Footnote 280: - - _E.g._ P. Gardner, _Earliest Coins of Greece Proper_, p. 28; Hill, - _Hist. Gk. Coins_, p. 17; v. Fritze, _Zeits. f. Num._ XX. (1897), pp. - 153–5, emphasizing the connexion of Peisistratus with silver as well - as with Athena; Lermann, _Athenatypen_, pp. 3 f. - - For a somewhat earlier date see Head, _Num. Chron._ 1893, pp. 249, - 251; Earle Fox, _Corolla Numismat. B. V. Head_, p. 43; Svoronos, - _Journ. Int. d’Arch. Num._ XIV. (1912), p. 3, nos. 1109–1120; Seeck, - _Klio_, IV. (1904), p. 176 (Solon or even Draco). - - For a date after Peisistratus see Imhoof-Blumer, Howorth, Six, and - (_Neue Jahrb._ 1896, pp. 537 f.) Gilbert, all completely answered by - Head, _Num. Chron._ 1893, pp. 247 f.; Babelon, _J. I. d’A. N._ 1905, - pp. 12–16. Holwerda, _Album Herwerden_, p. 117, who follows Six, only - adds some inconclusive comparisons with Greek sculpture. - -Footnote 281: - - There is no need to assume with E. Meyer, _Ges. d. Alt._^1 IV. p. 28, - and others, that Peisistratus’ Pangaion mines were gold. In the days - of Philip and Alexander the Great they were best known for their gold; - but silver was also mined abundantly, see Hdt. V. 17; VII. 112; - Strabo, 331, 34; Livy, XLV. 29; Justin, VIII. 3; Orosius, III. 12. - -Footnote 282: - - Pollux, IX. 74, 75, quoting Euripides (_d._ 406 B.C.), Hyperides - (_fl._ 350 B.C.), Eubulus Comicus (_fl._ 350 B.C.); cp. Hesych. s.v. - Παλλάδος πρόσωπον, Photius s.v. Παλλάδος πρόσωπον. - -Footnote 283: - - Schol. Aristoph. _Birds_, 1106, “the tetradrachm was at that time - called an owl.” - -Footnote 284: - - Cp. Photius s.v. Παλλάδος πρόσωπον, “the staters, from the stamp: for - on one side there was a head of Athena.” The stater is the didrachm. - -Footnote 285: - - Hill, _Hist. Gk. Coins_, p. 16; _Brit. Mus. Coins Central Greece_, pl. - XXIV. 18, 19. - -Footnote 286: - - Hdt. IV. 180, “They dress up together on each occasion their fairest - maiden in a Corinthian helmet and full Greek armour, and, mounting her - on a chariot, drive her all round the lake.” See further Macan, _Hdt._ - IV.-VI. _ad loc._, who quotes Phye. - -Footnote 287: - - Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 14; cp. Athen. XIII. 609_c_. - -Footnote 288: - - Solon, frag. 2 (13), ll. 5–6 - - αὐτοὶ δὲ φθείρειν μεγάλην πόλιν ἀφραδίῃσιν - ἀστοὶ βούλονται, χρήμασι πειθόμενοι. - -Footnote 289: - - _E.g._ _B.C.H._ XXX. (1906), p. 69, fig. 2; Brit. Mus. from Bunbury - sale. - -Footnote 290: - - Archil. frag. 54 (53), τὸν κεροπλάστην ἄειδε Γλαῦκον. - -Footnote 291: - - Bremer, _Haartracht_, p. 64. - -Footnote 292: - - Garlands of flowers worn on the head appear in Attica during the - second half of the sixth century; see Pauly Wissowa s.v. Haartracht, - p. 2132; cp. Bremer, _Haartracht_, p. 15, vogue begins with red figure - vase style. - -Footnote 293: - - Time of Hippias, Head, _Hist. Num._^2 p. 368 (but cp. _ibid._ n. 3); - Seeck, _Klio_, IV. (1904), pp. 173–5; 508 B.C., Holwerda, _Album - Herwerden_, p. 119; 500 B.C. or after, V. Fritze, _Zeits. f. Num._ XX. - (1897), p. 142: Kampanes, _B.C.H._ XXX. p. 75; 490 B.C., Six, _Num. - Chron._ 1895, p. 176: Earle Fox, _Coroll. Num. B. V. Head_, p. 43: - Babelon, _Coroll. Num. B. V. Head_, p. 8: _J. I. d’A. N._ VIII. - (1905), pp. 44 f.; 480 B.C., Howorth, _Num. Chron._ 1893, p. 245: - Lermann, _Athenatyp._ pp. 28 f. As regards a post-Hippias dating, the - ungarlanded head of a coin with Hippias’ name is not decisive. The - coin, which is abnormal, was probably struck by the tyrant in exile, - and the absence of garland may indicate either the exile’s grief or - the local coiner’s incompetence. Or was the embarrassed despot casting - away the ornaments of sovereignty in the hope of retaining or - regaining the reality? “The olive again has been known to lose its - leaves and yet produce its fruit; this is said to have happened to - Thessalos the son of Peisistratos,” Theophrast. _Hist. Plant._ II. 3. - 3; cp. Ruehl, _Rhein. Mus._ 1892, p. 460. - -Footnote 294: - - Just as was probably the case with the flower girls at Naukratis, the - most famous centre of the garland trade, where the Thracian hetaera - Rhodopis won such great fame in the days of Sappho and Aesop. See - Mallet, _Prem. Étab. Gr. en Égypte_, p. 238, who compares the fioraie - of Venice and Florence. - -Footnote 295: - - Phot., Harpocrat. s.v. στεφανηφόρος; cp. Boeckh, _Pub. Econ._ I. pp. - 193 f. Lenormant, _Monnaies et Médailles_, p. 60; Saglio, _Dict. d. - Ant._ s.v. drachmae Stephanephori, p. 403. The inscriptions, however, - in which the expression occurs date only from the end of the second - century B.C., _C.I.A._ II. i. 466–8, 476. - -Footnote 296: - - Bekker, _Anecd. Gr._ I. 301, 19. - -Footnote 297: - - Livy, XXXVII. 46, 58, 59; XXXIX. 7; Cic. _ad Att._ II. 6, 16; XI. 1. - -Footnote 298: - - Diamantaras, _Ath. Mitt._ XIV. (1889), p. 413. - -Footnote 299: - - The practice of course is not exclusively Greek; cp., _e.g._, - - il maledetto fiore - ch’ ha disviate le pecore e gli agni. - - Dante, _Paradiso_, IX. 130. - -Footnote 300: - - Plut. _Apophth. Lac._, _Agesilaus_, 40 (_Moral._ 211); cp. the proverb - τὰν ἀρετὰν καὶ τὰν σοφίαν νικᾶντι χελῶναι (virtue and wisdom are - vanquished by tortoises), alluding to the famous coins of Aegina; cp. - too βοῦς ἐπὶ γλώσσῃ (there’s an ox on my tongue), Theognis 815, Aesch. - _Agam._ 35, Pollux IX. 61, which, whether the ox meant is a gold - stater, on which the ox was one of the commonest types, or, as P. - Gardner suggests, a leather gag, _Num. Chron._ 1881, p. 289, is an - instance of a similar _jeu de mot_ dating from the actual epoch of - Peisistratus. - -Footnote 301: - - Aristoph. _Birds_, 1106; cp. Schol. _ad loc._ “the tetradrachm was at - that time (_i.e._ of Aristophanes) called an owl”; Suid. s.v. γλαῦκες - Λαυρεωτικαί· “of those who have much money,” is a misunderstanding of - the phrase; cp. his statement that the Laurium mines were gold. - -Footnote 302: - - Plut. _Lysander_, 16. - -Footnote 303: - - The modern Liopesi, Milchhoefer, _Abh. Berl. Akad._ 1892, p. 17. - -Footnote 304: - - Hdt. V. 12. - -Footnote 305: - - Cp. _e.g._ Hdt. V. 23, 126 (Myrcinus on Strymon called Thracian), VII. - 75, 115; Aristoph. _Ach._ 273 (“the Thracian daughter of - Strymodorus”); Diod. XII. 68. 1, “this city (Ennea Hodoi on the - Strymon) Aristagoras the Milesian had tried previously to settle; ... - but he had met his death, and the occupants had been driven out by the - Thracians” (about 500 B.C.); cp. _ibid._ XI. 70. 5; Plut. _Cimon_, 7, - “Eion ... a city in Thrace on the Strymon.” Cp. Suid. s.v. χρυσὸς - Κολοφώνιος; Tzetzes _ad_ Lycoph. _Cass._ V. 417 (Hill, _Sources Gk. - Hist._ p. 87). For Pangaion see Hdt. VII. 112, “Mt Pangaion, in which - are gold and silver mines, which are worked by ... most of all the - Satrai,” with which cp. _ibid._ 110, where the Satrai occur in a list - of Thracian tribes. - -Footnote 306: - - Hdt. V. 15, 16; Strabo VII. 331. - -Footnote 307: - - Hdt. V. 1, 13, 98. - -Footnote 308: - - Meyer, _Ges. d. Alt._ III. p. 297; Macan, _Hdt._ IV.-VI. app. III., - IV. particularly IV. sect. 8; neither of whom sufficiently emphasizes - the political importance for Hippias of these Northern mines. - Perdrizet, _Klio_, X. (1910), p. 12, denies this removal when he says - that the Peisistratid’s Thracian possessions had perhaps remained in - Athenian hands between 512 and 475. - -Footnote 309: - - (_a_) The Paianian (Phye): γυνὴ ... μέγαθος ἀπὸ τεσσάρων πηχέων - ἀπολείπουσα τρεῖς δακτύλους καὶ ἄλλως εὐειδής. ταύτην τὴν γυναῖκα - σκευάσαντες, Hdt. I. 60; γυναῖκα μεγάλην καὶ καλὴν ἐξευρών ... τὴν - θεὸν ἀπομιμούμενος τῷ κόσμῳ, Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 14. - - (_b_) The Paionian: ἀδελφεὴν μεγάλην τε καὶ εὐειδέα ... σκευάσαντες ὡς - εἶχον ἄριστα, Hdt. V. 12. - -Footnote 310: - - Nic. Dam. frag. 71, _F.H.G._ III. p. 413, gives the same story, but - calls the woman a Thracian and the king Alyattes. Macan, _ad_ _Hdt._ - V. 12 (cp. _ibid._ (_Hdt._ IV.-VI.), app. IV. sect. 7) thinks we - probably have a local story transferred to Darius; but the transport - of Thracians to Asia, recorded also by Nic. Dam., suggests rather that - Hdt. is right in attaching the story to Darius. The Lydian king of the - Nic. Dam. version is perhaps due to Sardis being the scene of the - story. - -Footnote 311: - - Paionian coins, like Athenian, bore the helmeted head of Athena, - _e.g._ _Boston Mus. Rep._ XXII. (1897), p. 40; Svoronos, _J. I. d’A. - N._ 1913, p. 197 (fourth century). - -Footnote 312: - - The corkscrew hair of the most archaic looking garland coins, above, - pp. 55–56, is found on an obol, Babelon, _Corolla Num. B. V. Head_, - pp. 1 f., inscribed ΗΙ𐅃, presumably short for Hippias. Probably - it was struck by him in exile, _ibid._ p. 7, but in any case it - associates the corkscrew curls with the tyranny. _Num. Chron._ 1908, - pp. 278 f. shows the same corkscrew curls, and the inscription ΙΠ. - This has been expanded both as Hippias and as Peisistratus, but cp. - Muenzer and Strack, _Münz. Nord-Griech._ II. i. p. 8, n. 1. - -Footnote 313: - - Hdt. V. 94. - -Footnote 314: - - Hdt. V. 1. - -Footnote 315: - - πρῆγμα εὐηθέστατον μακρῷ, Hdt. I. 60; cp. Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 14, - ἀρχαϊκῶς καὶ λίαν ἁπλῶς. - -Footnote 316: - - Aristoph. _Birds_, 1106. - -Footnote 317: - - Schol. Aristoph. _Knights_, 1092. - -Footnote 318: - - Hdt. V. 11. - -Footnote 319: - - Hdt. V. 23. Cp. below, p. 271. - -Footnote 320: - - Above, p. 58; cp. Svoronos, _Journ. Int. d’Arch. Num._ XV. (1913), p. - 277. - -Footnote 321: - - V. 11. - -Footnote 322: - - Cp. also with the Histiaeus incident the intrigues of Aristagoras with - the deported Paionians whom Darius had settled in Phrygia (a famous - mining country), Hdt. V. 98. - -Footnote 323: - - Thuc. II. 15; Paus. I. 14. 1. - -Footnote 324: - - _Brit. Mus. Cat. Vas._ II. B 331, where, however, it is called - Kallirrhoe (more precisely καλιρεκρενε, perhaps a confusion of - Καλλιρρόη and Ἐννεάκρουνος). The aqueduct by which Peisistratus - improved and enlarged the supply of water has been discovered by - Doerpfeld, _Arch. Eph._ 1894, pp. 3 f.; cp. Theagenes (Paus. I. 40), - Polycrates (Hdt. III. 60), and the Corinthian Peirene. - -Footnote 325: - - E. Gardner, _Gk. Sculp._ fig. 34. - -Footnote 326: - - Doerpfeld, _Ath. Mitt._ XXVII. (1902), pp. 379 f.; E. Curtius, - _Stadtg. v. Athen_, pp. 73 f.; Michaelis, _Cent. Arch. Discov._ pp. - 240–2. - -Footnote 327: - - Plut. _Solon_, 31, “the law against idleness was passed, not by Solon - but by Peisistratus.” - -Footnote 328: - - Aristoph. _Lysistr._ 1150 f. “Do you not know that it was the Spartans - again, who when you were wearing the labourer’s dress (κατωνάκας - φοροῦντες), came under arms and slew ... many friends and allies of - Hippias, ... and set you free, and clothed your people like gentlemen - instead of labourers once again (ἀντὶ τῆς κατωνάκης τὸν δῆμον ὑμῶν - χλαῖναν ἤμπισχον πάλιν).” Cp. the charges made by fifth century Roman - republicans against the kings: below, pp. 223–4. - -Footnote 329: - - Beloch, _Gr. G._^2 I. i. 387–8; Hdt. V. 94, “(Peisistratus) having - secured it (Sigeium), established as tyrant his illegitimate son”; cp. - Periander and Corcyra. - -Footnote 330: - - Thuc. VI. 59. - -Footnote 331: - - Hdt. VI. 39; cp. above, p. 52. For numismatic evidence of Hippias’ - ties with both Lampsacus and the Thracian Chersonese see Head, _Hist. - Num._^2 p. 377, Lermann, _Athenatypen_, pp. 17–21, coins of (_a_) - Chersonese, _obv._ Athena head, _rev._ Milesian lion (for Milesian - colonies in Chersonese see Strabo, XIV. 635; VII. 331, frag. 52); - (_b_) Lampsacus, _obv._ Athena head, _rev._ type of Lampsacus. This - alliance currency points to a broad and far-reaching commercial - policy. - -Footnote 332: - - Ps.-Aristot. _Oec._ II. 1347_a_, τό τε νόμισμα τὸ ὂν Ἀθηναίοις - ἀδόκιμον ἐποίησε, τάξας δὲ τιμὴν ἐκέλευσε πρὸς αὑτὸν ἀνακομίζειν. - συνελθόντων δὲ ἐπὶ τῷ κόψαι ἕτερον χαρακτῆρα, ἐξέδωκε τὸ αὐτὸ - ἀργύριον. - -Footnote 333: - - Head, _Num. Chron._ 1893, p. 248 (change very slight); Gilbert, _Neue - Jahrb._ 1896, pp. 537 f. (Hippias issued fresh coins from the same - silver). - -Footnote 334: - - _Num. Chron._ 1895, p. 178; _J. I. d’A. N._ VIII. (1905), pp. 23 f. - -Footnote 335: - - _Ath. Pol._ 10. - -Footnote 336: - - Cp. Svoronos, _J. I. d’A. N._ V. (1902), p. 32 f. (cp. below, p. 183, - n. 6), on a hint that Pheidon may have debased the Aeginetan - “tortoises” shortly before his fall. - -Footnote 337: - - Cp. Isocr. _de Big._ 25, 26 (351). - -Footnote 338: - - Hdt. VI. 125; cp. Isoc. _de Big._ 25 (351). - -Footnote 339: - - E. Meyer, _Ges. d. Alt._ II. p. 637. - -Footnote 340: - - Note, however, Hdt. V. 62 (see next note), χρημάτων εὖ ἥκοντες. - -Footnote 341: - - δεῖ δὲ πρὸς τούτοισι ἔτι ἀναλαβεῖν τὸν κατ’ ἀρχὰς ἤϊα λέξων λόγον, ὡς - τυράννων ἐλευθερώθησαν οἱ Ἀθηναῖοι. Ἱππίεω τυραννεύοντος ... - Ἀλκμαίωνιδαι, ... φεύγοντες Πεισιστρατίδας, ... ἐνθαῦτα ... πᾶν ἐπὶ - τοῖσι Πεισιστρατίδῃσι μηχανώμενοι, παρ’ Ἀμφικτυόνων τὸν νηὸν - μισθοῦνται τὸν ἐν Δελφοῖσι, τὸν νῦν ἔοντα, τότε δὲ οὔκω, τοῦτον - ἐξοικοδομῆσαι, οἷα δὲ χρημάτων εὖ ἥκοντες, καὶ ἔοντες ἄνδρες δόκιμοι - ἀνέκαθεν ἔτι, τόν τε νηὸν ἐξεργάσαντο τοῦ παραδείγματος κάλλιον, τά τε - ἄλλα καὶ, συγκειμένου σφι πωρίνου λίθου ποιέειν τὸν νηὸν, Παρίο τὰ - ἔμπροσθεν αὐτοῦ ἐξεποίησαν. Hdt. V. 62. - -Footnote 342: - - Hdt. V. 63, ἀνέπειθον τὴν Πυθίην χρήμασι. - -Footnote 343: - - Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 19. For huge sums made in this way in recent - times on classic ground see the _causes célèbres_ of the Vittorio - Emanuele monument and the Palazzo di Giustizia at Rome. - -Footnote 344: - - _F.H.G._ I. p. 395, frag. 70. - -Footnote 345: - - Isoc. _Antid._ 232, “Cleisthenes, having been banished from the city - by the tyrants, persuaded the Amphictyons to lend him some of the - money of the god, and restored the democracy, and banished the - tyrants”; Dem. _Meid._ 144 (561), “(the Alcmaeonids), they say ... - having borrowed money from Delphi, freed the city and expelled the - sons of Peisistratus.” Themistius, _Orat._ IV. 53_a_, gives the - Alcmaeonidae as the contractors without any mention of means or - motives. Hdt. II. 180, Strabo IX. 421, and Paus. X. 5. 13 mention the - rebuilding of the temple without referring to the Alcmaeonidae. - -Footnote 346: - - Plut. _Sol._ II. - -Footnote 347: - - Grote, _Hist. Greece_, ed. 1888, II. pp. 412–413. - -Footnote 348: - - _Atti R. Accad. Torino_, 1916, pp. 303–4, quoting _Cat. Greek Pap. - Rylands_, vol. I. p. 31. - -Footnote 349: - - That the Peisistratids were unfriendly to Delphi is perhaps to be - inferred from the report highly dubious in itself, but prevalent in - various quarters, that they had actually caused the fire which - destroyed the temple, Philoc. frag. 70, _F.H.G._ I. p. 395. - -Footnote 350: - - Cleisthenes’ parents appear to have married before 570 B.C. Beloch, - _Gr. G._^2 I. ii. p. 286. - -Footnote 351: - - Aristot. _Pol._ III. 1275_b_. - -Footnote 352: - - Hdt. V. 66, τὸν δῆμον προσεταιρίζεται. Cp. _ibid._ 69, ἦν τε τὸν δῆμον - προσθέμενος πολλῷ καθύπερθε τῶν ἀντιστασιωτέων. - -Footnote 353: - - Thuc. I. 13; cp. Pliny, _N.H._ VII. 57 (56). Panofka, _Res Samiorum_, - p. 15, quotes Pliny, _ibid._, for attributing to the Samians the - invention of horse-transports, but the reading is doubtful: edd. - hippagum Samii (inuenerunt), but for Samii MSS. give Damiam. - -Footnote 354: - - Hdt. III. 47 (Messenian war), III. 59 (against Aegina), V. 99 - (Lelantine war). - -Footnote 355: - - Hdt. IV. 152. - -Footnote 356: - - Macan, _Hdt._ IV.-VI. i. p. 106. - -Footnote 357: - - Hdt. II. 135. - -Footnote 358: - - Hdt. II. 178. - -Footnote 359: - - Hdt. II. 178; cp. Steph. Byz. s.v. Ἔφεσος. On the Greek τεμένη at - Naukratis see below, Chapter IV. pp. 116–7. - -Footnote 360: - - Hdt. II. 179. - -Footnote 361: - - The most famous names connected with this industry are Rhoecus and - Theodorus (below, pp. 73, 76, 80, 83) and Mnesarchus, father of the - philosopher Pythagoras (see Diog. Laert. VIII. 1. 1; cp. Iambl. - _Pyth._ 5, 9). - -Footnote 362: - - Theocr. XV. 125–6. - -Footnote 363: - - Plut. _Qu. Gr._ 57 (_Moral._ 304–5). - -Footnote 364: - - Apul. _Florid._ II. 15; Aesch. _Pers._ 883. - -Footnote 365: - - For possible early tyrants in Samos see Meyer, _Ges. d. Alt._ II. pp. - 614, 616, who names Amphikrates (Hdt. III. 59), Demoteles (Plut. _Qu. - Gr._ 57), and Syloson (Polyaen. VI. 45). All three are extremely - doubtful. Amphikrates was probably a legitimate king of the period - before the abolition of monarchy: very possibly he was a contemporary - of the Argive Pheidon (below, pp. 177–8). Demoteles was, according to - our only authority, the monarch whose murder led to the ascendancy of - the geomoroi: he is naturally assumed to have been the last sovereign - of the legitimate royal house. The Syloson of Polyaenus, VI. 45, is - probably a confused recollection of the brother of Polycrates. He - helps the Samians during a war with the Aeolians to observe a festival - of Hera held outside the city and makes himself tyrant during the - celebration. The connexion with Hera points to the family of - Polycrates (see below, pp. 76, 81): the Aeolian war may be a disguised - version of the struggle waged by Polycrates against the Great King who - was in possession of the Aeolian mainland. This struggle went back to - the beginning of the reign of Polycrates, when he was associated in - his tyranny with his brother Syloson: see also Babelon, _Rev. Num._ - 1894, p. 268. - -Footnote 366: - - Meyer, _Ges. d. Alt._ II. p. 777, following Grote III. (ed. 1888), p. - 453. - -Footnote 367: - - Busolt, _Gr. G._^2 II. pp. 508–9, n. 3, who notes that Lygdamis was - already tyrant of Naxos (Polyaen. I. 23, _pace_ Plass, _Tyrannis_, p. - 236). - -Footnote 368: - - Thuc. I. 13; Hdt. III. 39, 122; Strabo, XIV. 637. Max. Tyr. (Teubner), - XXIX. 2; Euseb. _Chron._ Armenian vers. “mare obtinuerunt Samii,” Lat. - vers. “Dicearchiam Samii condiderunt,” both just after notice of - Polycrates’ accession. Cp. S. Reinach’s interpretation of the ring - which Polycrates cast into the sea (Hdt. III. 41; Strabo, XIV. 638; - Paus. VIII. 14. 8; Pliny, _N.H._ XXXVII. 1; Cic. _de Fin._ V. 30. 92; - Val. Max. VI. 9. 5 (ext.); Tzetz. _Chil._ VII. 121; Galen, _Protrept._ - 4; Eustath. _ad_ Dionys. V. 534), with which the French scholar - compares the ring with which the doge of Venice annually wedded his - mistress the sea (S. Reinach, _Rev. Arch._ ser. IV. vol. VI. (1905), - pp. 9 f.), but cp. Marshall, _Brit. Mus. Cat. Rings_, p. xxi, n. 7, - who points out that wedding rings seem unknown among the Greeks. - -Footnote 369: - - Hdt. III. 60. - -Footnote 370: - - Suid. and Phot. Σαμίων ὁ δῆμος; Plut. _Pericles_, 26; Athen. XII. - 540_e_; cp. Hesych. Σαμιακὸς τρόπος; Phot. Σάμαιναι. - -Footnote 371: - - Thuc. I. 13, III. 104. - -Footnote 372: - - Phot. and Suid. Πύθια καὶ Δήλια. So Zenob. _ap._ Leutsch u. - Schneidewin, _Paroem. Graec._ I. p. 165; cp. Diogenian. _ibid._ p. - 311. - -Footnote 373: - - ἐμπορικὸν πρᾶγμα, Strabo, X. 486; cp. Pliny, _N.H._ XXXIV. 4. - -Footnote 374: - - See below, p. 260. - -Footnote 375: - - Malalas _ap._ Migne, _Bibl. Patr. Gr._ vol. 97, p. 260. So Cedren. - _Synops._ 243; _ibid._ vol. 121, p. 277. - -Footnote 376: - - Plass, _Tyrannis_, p. 240. - -Footnote 377: - - Hdt. III. 47, where observe the causes to which the war is attributed. - -Footnote 378: - - Hence the relevance of the long account of the Thraco-Scythian - expedition in the fourth book of Herodotus, immediately preceding the - first attack upon Persia by European Greeks, that namely of Athens and - Eretria during the Ionian revolt described in Book V. - -Footnote 379: - - Hdt. III. 44. - -Footnote 380: - - Hdt. III. 120. - -Footnote 381: - - Malalas, _loc. cit._ - -Footnote 382: - - κιθαρίζειν τε καὶ ψάλλειν καὶ καπηλεύειν, Hdt. I. 155. So Justin, I. - 7, iussi cauponias et ludicras artes et lenocinia exercere. - -Footnote 383: - - Zenob. V. 1, Λυδὸς καπηλεύει, _ap._ Leutsch u. Schneidewin, _Paroem. - Graec._ I. p. 115. - -Footnote 384: - - pp. 76–7. - -Footnote 385: - - Cp. Hdt. III. 39 with Diod. I. 95, 98. - -Footnote 386: - - ὑπὸ τρυφῆς τὰ πανταχόθεν συνάγειν, Athen. XII. 540_c_. - -Footnote 387: - - Hdt. I. 51; Athen. XII. 514 f. - -Footnote 388: - - Athen. XII. 540_c-d_. - -Footnote 389: - - Hdt. IV. 155; cp. _ibid._ 159. - -Footnote 390: - - Arcesilaus II is represented on a famous kylix in the Louvre as - presiding over the weighing and shipment of a cargo of silphium, and - has in that connexion been called by Michaelis a silphium merchant, - _Cent. Arch. Discov._ p. 235. - -Footnote 391: - - Hdt. IV. 162–4. - -Footnote 392: - - Hdt. III. 56. The recipients are Spartan invaders of Samos. - -Footnote 393: - - Archaic Milesian hects of lead plated with electrum, Brandis, - _Münzwesen_, pp. 327–8; F. Lenormant, _La Monnaie dans l’Antiq._ I. p. - 225. - -Footnote 394: - - Suid. s.v. Σαμίων ὁ δῆμος. - -Footnote 395: - - On Aiakes see Hdt. VI. 13, 22, 25; on the Samaina coins see Head, - _Hist. Num._^2 pp. 153, 603–4; P. Gardner, _Samos_, p. 17, Pl. I. 17, - 18; Babelon, _Rev. Num._ 1894, pp. 281–2, Pl. X.; V. Sallet, _Zeit. f. - Num._ III. p. 135, V. p. 103. - -Footnote 396: - - Hdt. III. 60. - -Footnote 397: - - Fabricius, _Ath. Mitt._ IX. (1884), pp. 165 f.; _Jahrb._ IV. _Arch. - Anz._ pp. 39–40; Wiegand, _Abhand. preuss. Akad._ Phil. Hist. Class. - 1911; Dennis, _Academy_, 1882, Nov. 4, pp. 335–6; Guérin, _Patmos et - Samos_, pp. 196–7. The great tunneled aqueduct that took the water - through the mountain which separates the city from the source of the - supply is still in existence. - -Footnote 398: - - Hdt. IV. 87, 88. - -Footnote 399: - - ἔργα Πολυκράτεια, Aristot. _Pol._ VIII. 1313_b_; cp. Athen. XII. - 540_d_; Suet. _Calig._ 21 (regia). - -Footnote 400: - - Water supplies: Cypselids at Corinth (Πειρήνη), Theagenes at Megara - (the home of Eupalinus), Peisistratus at Athens (Καλλιρρόη). Temples: - Corinth, Athens (the huge Olympiaeum completed by Hadrian 700 years - later). - -Footnote 401: - - Clearchus _ap._ Athen. 540 f.; cp. Ps.-Plut. I. 61, s.v. Σαμίων ἄνθη, - καὶ Σαμιακὴ λαύρα _ap._ Leutsch u. Schneidewin, _Paroem. Graec._ I. p. - 330. - -Footnote 402: - - Burrows, _Discoveries in Crete_, pp. 117 f.; cp. Conway, _ibid._ pp. - 227 f. The ancient derivations are interesting but not helpful: see - _Et. Mag._ s.v. παρὰ τὸ λίαν ἔχειν αὖραν· ἢ δι’ ἧς ὁ λαὸς ῥεῖ εἰς τὴν - ὁδόν. - -Footnote 403: - - Casaubon _ad_ Athen. XII. cap. 10. - -Footnote 404: - - Ps.-Plut. I. 61; cp. Athen. 541_a_, Eustath. _ad Odyss._ XXII. 128. - -Footnote 405: - - See _Encyc. Brit._^{11} s.v. Bazaar: “Persian (bazar, market), a - permanent market or street of shops or a group of short narrow streets - of stalls under one roof.” A similar picture is given by Radet, - _Lydie_, pp. 298–9, of the Lydian γλυκὺς ἄγκων. - -Footnote 406: - - See Macarius VII. 55_ap._ Leutsch u. Schneidewin, _Paroem. Graec._ II. - p. 207, “Samian laura: of those indulging in luxury” (ἐπὶ τῶν εἰς - τρυφὴν ἐκκεχυμένων); Ps.-Plut. I. 61_ap._ eosd. I. p. 330, “of those - indulging in extreme pleasures (ἐπὶ τῶν ὑστάταις ἡδοναῖς χρωμένων).” - -Footnote 407: - - It goes on to state that “Polycrates, the tyrant of luxurious Samos, - perished through his intemperate mode of life.” - -Footnote 408: - - ἀσχολίαν καὶ πενίαν τῶν ἀρχομένων, Aristot. _Pol._ 1313_b_. - -Footnote 409: - - See above, pp. 26–32. - -Footnote 410: - - Athen. 540_d_, μετεστέλλετο δέ, φησί, καὶ τεχνίτας ἐπὶ μισθοῖς - μεγίστοις: Hdt. III. 131. - -Footnote 411: - - Athen. 541_a_, ἔτι δὲ τῆς συμπάσης πόλεως ἐν ἑορταῖς τε καὶ μέθαις. - The sentence is corrupt, but probably ἔτι = furthermore, and the - subject is still Polycrates. It occurs in an extract from Clearchus - that appears to deal exclusively with the Samian tyrant. If Polycrates - is not the subject ἔτι is probably temporal, and the sentence - described a state of affairs that had persisted from the time of the - tyranny. - -Footnote 412: - - Diod. I. 95, “behaving with violence both to the citizens and to - strangers who sailed in to Samos.” - -Footnote 413: - - Athen. 602_d_, “there are some who regarded παλαῖστραι (wrestling - schools) as counter-fortifications to their own citadels and set them - on fire and demolished them, as was done by Polycrates the tyrant of - Samos.” - -Footnote 414: - - Hdt. III. 39 and 45. - -Footnote 415: - - Hdt. III. 120. - -Footnote 416: - - They consisted of “hired mercenaries” and “native bowmen,” Hdt. III. - 45. - -Footnote 417: - - _Ap._ Zenob. V. 64, s.v. Πολυκράτης μητέρα νέμει in Leutsch u. - Schneidewin, _Paroem. Graec._ I. p. 146. - -Footnote 418: - - Cp. the story in Hdt. III. 119 of the woman who preferred to save her - brother rather than her husband, because the latter was replaceable, - but the former not. - -Footnote 419: - - Suid. Σαμίων ὁ δῆμος. - -Footnote 420: - - Strabo, XIV. 638; Heraclides, _F.H.G._ II. p. 216; Zenobius, III. 90 - (_ap._ Leutsch u. Schneidewin, _Paroem. Graec._ I. p. 79), and - Eustath. _ad_ _Dion. Perieg._ 534, ἕκητι Συλοσῶντος εὐρυχωρίν; Suid. - and Phot. s.v. Σαμίων ὁ δῆμος. Cp. Argos after the massacre of - Cleomenes (about 494 B.C.): “Argos was so denuded of men that the - slaves had the whole situation in their hands, ruling and - administrating until the sons of the victims grew to manhood,” Hdt. - VI. 83. - -Footnote 421: - - πρὸ δὲ τοῦ τυραννῆσαι κατασκευασάμενος στρωμνὰς πολυτελεῖς καὶ ποτήρια - ἐπέτρεπε χρῆσθαι τοῖς ἢ γάμον ἢ μείζονας ὑποδοχὰς ποιουμένοις, Athen. - 540_d_. - -Footnote 422: - - Cp. Tzetz. _Chil._ X. 347, τὸ παλαιὸν περὶ στρωμνὰς ἦν τῇ Μιλήτῳ φήμη. - -Footnote 423: - - Hdt. III. 139. - -Footnote 424: - - Grote, III. p. 461. - -Footnote 425: - - Strabo, XIV. 638. - -Footnote 426: - - Athen. XI. 464_a_. - -Footnote 427: - - Bronze, Hdt. II. 37; silver, gold, Hdt. III. 148; Boeckh, _C.I.G._ - 138. 7, 19, 27. - -Footnote 428: - - Cp. the borrowed metal vessels used for the entertainment of the - Athenian envoys to Segesta just before the Athenian expedition to - Sicily, Thuc. VI. 46. - -Footnote 429: - - Some ancient authorities held that Theodorus flourished more than a - century before Polycrates (Plin. _N.H._ XXXV. 43 (152); cp. Frazer, - _Paus._ IV. p. 237). Theodorus is always associated with Rhoecus and - the two names may have been borne in alternate generations by one - family of artists. This would not require the Rhoeci to have - flourished longer in Samos than the Wedgwoods have in Staffordshire. - Whether or no this explanation holds, the divergence in dates points - to the industry having flourished for a long time in the island. If - one date for Theodorus is insisted on, that of Hdt. (I. 51), which - makes him the elder contemporary of Polycrates, must be chosen. - -Footnote 430: - - Hdt. IV. 152. - -Footnote 431: - - L. Curtius, _Ath. Mitt._ XXXI. (1906), pp. 151 f. - -Footnote 432: - - Illustrated, _ibid._ pp. 151, 152, Pl. XIV.; _Amer. Journ. Arch._ XI. - (1907), p. 84. - -Footnote 433: - - _E.g._ Gardner, _Gk. Sculp._, Fig. 8. - -Footnote 434: - - Hence perhaps the friendship of Polycrates with Arcesilaus of Cyrene; - cp. Hdt. IV. 152, “It was from this action that the Cyreneans and - Theraeans first struck up great friendships with the Samians.” - -Footnote 435: - - _Ath. Mitt._ XXXI. (1906), pp. 160, 161. - -Footnote 436: - - Hdt. III. 39, 125. - -Footnote 437: - - Hdt. III. 40. - -Footnote 438: - - Hdt. III. 43. - -Footnote 439: - - Hdt. III. 43. - -Footnote 440: - - So E. Meyer, _Ges. d. Alt._ II. p. 792; cp. above, p. 72. - -Footnote 441: - - Hdt. III. 120 f. - -Footnote 442: - - Hdt. III. 121. - -Footnote 443: - - πᾶσα ἡ ποίησις πλήρης ἐστι τῆς περὶ αὐτοῦ μνήμης, Strabo, XIV. 638. - -Footnote 444: - - Hdt. III. 55. - -Footnote 445: - - Hdt. VIII. 85, IX. 90. - -Footnote 446: - - The wealth of Polycrates was still proverbial in the days of Plato, - see _Meno_, 90_a_, and Stallbaum, _Platonis Meno_, _ad loc._ - -Footnote 447: - - Hdt. II. 177; Plin. _N.H._ V. 11; Mela, I. 9 (60). - -Footnote 448: - - Hdt. II. 177. - -Footnote 449: - - Breasted, _Hist._^2 p. 574, apparently an inference from Herodotus’ - inaccurate statement that a strict caste system prevailed among the - Egyptians: only the priests became an exclusive caste, _ibid._ p. 575. - -Footnote 450: - - Griffith, _Dem. Pap. Rylands_, III. p. 10. - -Footnote 451: - - Griffith, _Encyc. Brit._^{11}, Egypt, p. 87. - -Footnote 452: - - Mallet, _Prem. Étab. des Grecs en Ég._ p. 292, quoting Erman u. - Schweinfurth, _Abh. Ak. Berl._ 1885. - -Footnote 453: - - Diod. Sic. I. 66. - -Footnote 454: - - Hdt. II. 159; on technical progress in shipbuilding in seventh century - Egypt see Mallet, _Prem. Étab._ pp. 99 f. - -Footnote 455: - - Hdt. II. 158, IV. 42; cp. Aristot. Meteor. I. 14 (352 b); Strabo, - XVII. 804; Diod. I. 33; Tzetz. _Chil._ VII. 446. A canal connecting - the two seas appears (_pace_ Wiedemann, _Hdt._ II. 158) to have been - in use 700 years earlier under Seti I and Ramses II; see Petrie, - _Hist._ III. p. 13; Maspero, _Hist. Anc._^5 p. 228. Necho’s work was - apparently completed by Darius (How and Wells, _ad_ _Hdt._ II. 158). - -Footnote 456: - - Hdt. IV. 42 and How and Wells, _ad loc._; cp. Hdt. II. 159 on Necho’s - fleets of triremes on both the Mediterranean and the Red Sea. - -Footnote 457: - - _Hdt._ I.-III. p. 338. - -Footnote 458: - - For convenience of reference I give here a list of the rulers with - whom in this chapter we shall be concerned. The bracketed forms of the - names are Egyptian. The dates are taken from Petrie’s _History of - Egypt_. In the case of acknowledged kings of all Egypt the number of - their Dynasty is added after the date. - - A. _Saite rulers._ - - Tnefachthus (Tafnekht) 749–721 - Bocchoris or (?) Anysis (Bakenranf) 721–715 (XXIV) - Stephinates or (?) Sethon (Tafnekht II) 715–678 - Nechepsus (Nakauba) 678–672 - Necho I (Nekau) 672–664 - Psammetichus I (Psamtek) 664–610 (XXVI) - Necho II (Nekau) 610–594 (XXVI) - Psammouthis or Psammetichus II (Psamtek) 594–589 (XXVI) - Apries (Haa ab ra, Biblical Hophra) 589–570 (XXVI) - Amasis (Aahmes) 570–526 (XXVI) - Psammetichus III (Psamtek) 526–525 (XXVI) - - B. _Ethiopian rulers._ - - (Pianchi) 748–725 or later - Sabacon (Shabaka) 715–707 (XXV) - (Shabataka) 707–693 (XXV) - Taharqa (Biblical Tirhakah) (701–) 693–667 (XXV) - Ammeris (Amen Rud, Rud Amen, Nut Amen) 667–664 (XXV) - - C. _Dates of the dynasties._ - - XXIV (early Saite) 721–715 - XXV (Ethiopian) 715–664 - XXVI (Saite) 664–525 - -Footnote 459: - - G. Smith, _Assurbanipal_, pp. 20, 27, 28; cp. Petrie, _Hist._ III. p. - 299, “Niku of Mempi and Sa’a.” - -Footnote 460: - - II. 151. - -Footnote 461: - - Herodotus (II. 147) says that these kings had been set up by the - Egyptians themselves. It is generally recognized that his “dodecarchy” - is an Egyptian description of the Assyrian administration, but the - Assyrians may well have taken over a previously existing state of - things, and the dodecarchy have developed out of the Libyan - penetration of Egypt much as the heptarchy resulted from the - Anglo-Saxon invasion of Britain. - -Footnote 462: - - Hdt. II. 152. - -Footnote 463: - - The Assyrian record gives twenty. Twelve may have been the number of - kings in Lower Egypt (Mallet, _Prem. Étab._ p. 36, quoting Lenormant), - or the total number at times (Wiedemann, _Hdt._ II. 147), or Herodotus - may have got the number twelve from the twelve courts of the labyrinth - that he erroneously ascribes to this period (Sayce, _Hdt._ _ad loc._). - -Footnote 464: - - Diod. I. 66. - -Footnote 465: - - Diod. III. 11. - -Footnote 466: - - Mallet, _Prem. Étab._ p. 39. Polyaen. VII. 3 (= Aristagoras and Theban - tradition, Gutschmid, _Philol._ 1855, p. 692) makes Psammetichus - employ Carians because an oracle had warned his rival to beware of - cocks and “the Carians were the first to put crests on their helmets.” - Here too the armour is the main thing. The Egyptian warriors (μάχιμοι) - were called Kalasiries and Hermotybies (Hdt. II. 164). According to - Sayce, _ad loc._, Kalasiries = armed with leather; but cp. How and - Wells, _ad loc._ - -Footnote 467: - - He says Psammetichus “sent for” mercenaries from Caria and Ionia. - -Footnote 468: - - Diod. III. 11 quotes and praises two lost writers on Egypt, - Agatharchides of Cnidus (second century B.C.) and Artemidorus of - Ephesus (about 100 B.C.). - -Footnote 469: - - _E.g._ Wiedemann, _Hdt._ II. 152; Meyer, _Ges. Alt._ II. p. 461 (but - cp. I. p. 562); Mallet, _Prem. Étab._ pp. 37–8 (but cp. p. 41). Only - Mallet, however, sees features typical of the rulers of the period and - he quotes only Lydian and Phoenician parallels. - -Footnote 470: - - Strabo XVII. 801; cp. Eustath. _Comment. ad Dion. Perieg._ 823_ap._ - _Geog. Gr. Min._ (Didot), II. p. 362; Strabo knew Egypt personally, - cp. II. 118. - -Footnote 471: - - Cp. however Pseudoscymn. 748–750 _ap. Geog. Gr. Min._ (Didot), I. p. - 226, Ὀδησσός, ἣν Μιλήσιοι κτίζουσιν Ἀστυάγης ὅτ’ ἦρχε Μηδίας. This - method of dating might have its origin in some work that described the - expansion of Greece and Media previous to the great clash of 490–479. - -Footnote 472: - - _Rhein. Mus._ 1887, pp. 211 f. - -Footnote 473: - - Mallet, _Prem. Étab._ p. 29. - -Footnote 474: - - II. 151–2. Mallet, _Prem. Étab._ p. 38, cautiously quotes the Horus - myth as a parallel for this flight. Nobody now would agree with Sayce - (cp. Wiedemann, _Aeg. Ges._ p. 608) that “the story of Psammetichus’ - retreat in the marshes is clearly (_sic_) borrowed from the myth of - Horus.” It is far more likely that the story of Horus borrowed from - the life of some early Egyptian ruler. Psamtek’s flight to the marshes - is as natural and well attested as that of Alfred or of Hereward, the - latter of whom is suspiciously like Horus in name as well as in - behaviour. - -Footnote 475: - - In Diodorus’ version of the same affair they are specifically stated - to have done so. - -Footnote 476: - - Diod. _loc. cit._ - -Footnote 477: - - G. Smith, _Assurbanipal_, pp. 64, 66, 67. - -Footnote 478: - - Radet, _Lydie_, p. 177, translates “où l’on franchit la mer.” - -Footnote 479: - - Assyrian Pisamiilki: see Mallet, _Prem. Étab._ p. 49, n. 1; but cp. - Wiedemann, _Hdt._ II. 152. - -Footnote 480: - - Breasted, _Hist._ p. 566. This view is now commonly accepted. Against - it, see Gutschmid, _Neue Beiträge Ges. Or._ pp. x.-xi. - -Footnote 481: - - Strabo XIII. 590: see Mallet, _Prem. Étab._ p. 48, n. 1. Later in his - reign Psamtek is said by Diodorus (I. 67) to have “made an alliance - with the Athenians and some of the other Greeks”; but here we may - follow Mallet (_ib._ p. 97; cp. pp. 212, 284) and suspect a reflexion - backwards of events of the time of Psammetichus the Libyan (_circ._ - 445 B.C.), who took part in the uprising against Persia in which Egypt - received much help from Athens (Mallet, _ib._ p. 149, n. 3). On the - very few examples from Naukratis of late Proto-Attic vases (Attic of - about 600 B.C.) see Prinz, _Funde aus Naukratis_, pp. 75 f. - -Footnote 482: - - Isaiah XXXVII. 36; II Kings XIX. 35; II Chron. XXXII. 21. - -Footnote 483: - - Hdt. II. 141, ἕπεσθαι δὲ οἱ τῶν μαχίμων μὲν οὐδένα ἀνδρῶν, καπήλους δὲ - καὶ χειρώνακτας καὶ ἀγοραίους ἀνθρώπους. - -Footnote 484: - - Africanus and Euseb. _F.H.G._ II. p. 593; John of Antioch, _F.H.G._ - IV. p. 540. - -Footnote 485: - - Their significance is well put by Griffith, _Dem. Pap. Rylands_, III. - pp. 9–10; cp. Moret, _de Bocchori_, pp. 76 f. quoting Revillout, - _Précis droit égy._ pp. 190 f. The Diodorus passages are from I. 94 - and I. 79; cp. also Plut. _Demetr._ 27 and Clem. Alex. _Strom._ IV. - 18, Bocchoris as clever judge in a claim for payment; Iambl. (Didot, - _Erot. Scrip._ p. 517) on Bocchoris’ skill in assessment of values - (cup, nosegay, kiss). Moret is scarcely right in saying (_de Bocch._ - p. 55) that every kind of story is told to illustrate the wisdom of - Bocchoris: cp. Revillout _ap._ Moret, p. 78, “Bocchoris avait voulu - surtout faire un code commercial.” Diod. I. 94 places Bocchoris fourth - among the reputed lawgivers of Egypt. No similar measures are - attributed to any of the earlier three. - -Footnote 486: - - Schiaparelli, _Mon. Ant._ VIII. pp. 90–100 and Tav. II. The context in - which the vase was found (Poulsen, _Orient u. frühgriech. Kunst_, pp. - 125–6) recalls the Regulini-Galassi and Bernardini graves. - -Footnote 487: - - See Poulsen, _Orient u. frühgr. Kunst_, p. 64; cp. Kinch, _Vroulia_, - p. 249. Schiaparelli, Revillout (_Quirites et Ég._ p. 4), and Moret - (_de Bocch._ pp. 27–8) think it of Phoenician make and provenance. - -Footnote 488: - - Plut. _Demetr._ 27. - -Footnote 489: - - πάντων φιλοχρηματώτατον (Diod. I. 94), a trait quite reconcilable with - the statement of Zenobius (II. 60), that he was remembered for his - justice (cp. Suid. s.v. Βάκχυρις) and ingenuity (ἐπίνοια) as a judge. - The statement of Aelian that Bocchoris was hated by his countrymen - (_H.A._ XI. 11; cp. Plut. _Vit. Pud._ 3, φύσει χαλεπός) proves only - that he, like Solon and Cypselus, excited different feelings in - different quarters: nobody would now follow Wiedemann (_Aeg. Ges._ p. - 579) and quote it against reports favourable to him, as a proof that - neither are of any use for serious history. - -Footnote 490: - - Manetho, _F.H.G._ II. pp. 592–3; see further below, p. 100, n. 4. - -Footnote 491: - - Breasted, _Records_, IV. 858; J. de Rougé, _Chrestom. Egypt_, IV. - -Footnote 492: - - _J.H.S._ XXVI. p. 103; cp. pp. 91–2, 94 f. The main divergence is in - the Lesbian thalassocracy, where the Armenian version of the canon of - Eusebius gives the dates ann. Abr. 1345–1441 (= 96 years), whereas - Jerome gives the duration as 68 years. - -Footnote 493: - - Note that he probably began his career at a small town near Canopus, - E. de Rougé (quoting Brugsch), _Inscr. Hist. Pianchi_ _ap._ Maspero, - _Bibl. Égypt._ XXIV. p. 290. De Rougé notes that Tafnekht’s name has - no cartouche and no qualification announcing royal birth and from - these facts argues that he was of comparatively humble origin. - -Footnote 494: - - Note that the unrevised dating of the Egyptian thalassocracy makes it - fall into the reign of Bocchoris as dated by Eusebius, Fotheringham, - _J.H.S._ XXVII. p. 87. - -Footnote 495: - - Cp. perhaps Steph. Byz. Ἑλληνικὸν καὶ Καρικόν, τόποι ἐν Μέμφιδι ἀφ’ ὧν - Ἑλληνομεμφῖται, ὡς Ἀρισταγόρας. ibid. Καρικόν· τόπος ἰδιάζων ἐν - Μέμφιδι, ἔνθα Κᾶρες οἰκήσαντες ἐπιγαμίας πρὸς Μεμφίτας ποιησάμενοι - Καρομεμφῖται ἐκλήθησαν. Cp. Polyaen. VII. 3, ἀπὸ τῶν Καρῶν ἐκείνων - μέρος τι τῆς Μέμφεως κέκληται Καρομεμφῖται. These Caromemphites and - Hellenomemphites are generally recognized as descendants of Psamtek’s - mercenaries who were transplanted by Amasis to Memphis (Hdt. II. 154). - -Footnote 496: - - Griffith, _High Priests of Memphis_, p. 8, who compares the Herodotean - king Pheron of Egypt (Hdt. II. 111) who plainly is simply a nameless - Pharaoh. - -Footnote 497: - - See below, p. 101. - -Footnote 498: - - So apparently Breasted, _Hist. Eg._^2 pp. 552–3. - -Footnote 499: - - Wiedemann, _Aeg. Ges._ p. 587; Lauth, _Aeg. Vorzeit_, p. 439 f; - Oppert, _Rapp. Eg. et Assyr._ pp. 14 n. 1, 29 n. 1, quoting Brugsch. - -Footnote 500: - - Joseph., _Antiq. Iud._ X. 1. 4 (17); cp. Petrie, _Hist. Eg._ III. p. - 296. - -Footnote 501: - - Cp. Hdt. II. 30. - -Footnote 502: - - Griffith, _High Priests of Memphis_, p. 10. - -Footnote 503: - - _Ibid._ - -Footnote 504: - - _Königsbuch_, p. 47. - -Footnote 505: - - II Kings XVIII. 21; XIX. 9; Isaiah XXXVI. 6; XXXVII. 9. - -Footnote 506: - - Schrader, _Cun. Inscr. and O.T._, (marginal) pp. 292, 303; cp. 357. - This fact by itself is fatal to Sourdille (_Hdt. et la relig. de - l’Ég._ p. 141) when he places Sethon on his index mythologique on the - ground that Shabataka was king of Egypt at this time. - -Footnote 507: - - Hence the equation with Shabataka, while Tirhaka is equated (Oppert, - _Rapp. Égy. et Assyr._ p. 29) with the king of Meroe, is impossible, - quite apart from its making nonsense of the reference to the bruised - reed. - -Footnote 508: - - Petrie, _Hist. Eg._ III. p. 312; Griffith, _Dem. Pap. Rylands_, III. - p. 6. - -Footnote 509: - - Griffith, _High Priests of Memphis_, p. 10; Breasted, _Records_, IV. - 830 (Pianchi stele). - -Footnote 510: - - G. Smith, _Assurbanipal_, p. 20. - -Footnote 511: - - See above, p. 88, n. 1. - -Footnote 512: - - _F.H.G._ II. p. 593. - -Footnote 513: - - Hdt. II. 151; Diod. I. 66; the Apis stelai. - -Footnote 514: - - _F.H.G._ II. p. 594. - -Footnote 515: - - Psamtek’s daughter Nitokris was adopted by Shepnepet, daughter of - Taharqa (or, according to J. de Rougé, _Ét. sur les textes géogr. du - temple d’Edfou_, p. 62, of Pianchi), sacerdotal princess of Thebes, - Breasted, _Records_, IV. 935 f.; cp. E. de Rougé, _Notice de quelques - textes hiérogl. publ. par M. Greene_, _ap._ Maspero, _Bibl. Égypt._ - XXIII. pp. 70 f.; J. de Rougé, _Ét. sur les textes géogr. du temple - d’Edfou_, pp. 59–63; neither of whom understood that N. was daughter - of S. only by adoption. From the omission of the revolt of Gyges and - Psamtek from the earlier Assurbanipal cylinders and the statement that - Miluhha (Ethiopia) revolted with Saulmugina (brother of Assurbanipal), - G. Smith, _Assurbanipal_, p. 78, cp. pp. 154–5, infers that the revolt - of Gyges and Psammetichus took place at the time of the general rising - against Assyria, which means that Psammetichus was allied with - Ethiopia at that time. His early flight into Syria, Hdt. II. 152, is - to be connected with his father’s policy rather than with his own. - -Footnote 516: - - Against this identification see Maspero, _Hist. Anc._^5 p. 459, n. 3; - E. de Rougé, _Textes pub. par M. Greene_, _ap._ Maspero, _Bibl. - Égypt._ XXIII. pp. 74–75. - -Footnote 517: - - Psamtek himself acknowledged the Ethiopian Taharqa as his predecessor: - Wiedemann, _Aeg. Ges._ p. 600. - -Footnote 518: - - There can be no doubt that the reigns of rival rulers of the period - largely overlap. Otherwise, as pointed out long ago by Gutschmid - (_Philol._ 1855, p. 659), we have Psamtek I surviving his father for - over 100 years. - -Footnote 519: - - _Hist. Eg._ III. p. 318. - -Footnote 520: - - Below, p. 101. - -Footnote 521: - - _E.g._ by Breasted. - -Footnote 522: - - Diod. I. 45; Plut. _de Is. et Os._ 8 (_Moral._ 354); cp. Moret, _de - Bocch._ pp. 6–8, quoting Mariette and Maspero; Breasted, _Records_, - IV. 811, 884, _Hist._^2 p. 546; Griffith, _Dem. Pap. Rylands_, p. 6. - The Pianchi stele mentions one son of Tafnekht as killed in Pianchi’s - campaign against Tafnekht, and another as spared by him (Breasted, - _Records_, IV. 838, 854; cp. Moret, _de Bocch._ p. 6, n. 2). - -Footnote 523: - - _Hist. Eg._ III. p. 334. - -Footnote 524: - - _Hist. Eg._ III. p. 327. - -Footnote 525: - - Athen. X. 418_e_. - -Footnote 526: - - In Diod. (I. 45) and Plut. (_de Is. et Os._ 8) Tnefachthos, the father - of Bocchoris, is said to have accidentally discovered while - campaigning against the Arabians the joys of the simple life. In - Athen. (418_e_) Neochabis and his son Bocchoris are said both to have - been moderate in their diet (μετρίᾳ τροφῇ κεχρῆσθαι). But even if we - have here variants of a single story, it would be no proof that we are - up against the same individuals. - -Footnote 527: - - It is implied by Breasted, _Hist._^2 p. 556, when he calls Necho I - “doubtless a descendant of Tefnakhte.” - -Footnote 528: - - Necho I enjoyed the favours of the Assyrian conqueror (G. Smith, - _Assurbanipal_, pp. 20, 23, 27–28), but his revolt shows that he was - making a virtue of necessity. - -Footnote 529: - - Translated Griffith, _High Priests of Memphis_, chaps. II., III.: - Maspero, _Pop. Stories_, pp. 115 f. - -Footnote 530: - - Petrie, _Hist._ III. fig. 139. - -Footnote 531: - - Hdt. II. 173; cp. Athen. VI. 261_c_, X. 438_b_. - -Footnote 532: - - Maspero, _Pop. Stories_, pp. 281–2; the story, however, is Ptolemaic - and may be influenced by Hdt.; cp. Wiedemann, _Hdt._ II. 173. E. - Meyer, _Ges. Aeg._ p. 366, n. 1, uses the demotic stories about - Amasis’ drunkenness as proof that the Saite Pharaohs were not popular - with their Egyptian subjects. It might as well be argued that Edward - VII must have been unpopular in England because the masses like to - associate him with horse-racing and cigars. When the Egyptians - represented Amasis as drunken they paid him the compliment of making - him like themselves. The catastrophe of 525 B.C. was helped on by the - drunkenness of the servants sent by Amasis to capture Phanes the - captain of the Greek mercenaries when he was on his way to desert to - Persia (Hdt. III. 4). The Egyptian who “complained before his majesty - King Cambyses on the subject of all the strangers who dwelt in the - sanctuary of Neith (at Sais) to the end that they might be expelled” - (so-called demotic chronicle, _ap._ _Rev. Égy._ 1880, p. 75) is a - better witness as to the policy of Cambyses than as to the - unpopularity of Amasis; cp. the sequel: “His Majesty ordained: expel - all the strangers who dwell in the sanctuary of Neith: destroy their - houses.” - -Footnote 533: - - Hdt. II. 172; Hellanicus, _F.H.G._ I. p. 66; but cp. Revillout, _Rev. - Égypt._ 1881, pp. 96–98. - -Footnote 534: - - _Pop. Stories_, pp. 151 f. - -Footnote 535: - - _Hist. Anc._^5 p. 531. Maspero refers to the evidence of excavations; - Mallet, _Prem. Étab._ pp. 52–53. - -Footnote 536: - - Hdt. II. 179. - -Footnote 537: - - _Naukratis_, I. pp. 1 f. - -Footnote 538: - - Hieron. VIII. (Migne), pp. 365–6. - -Footnote 539: - - s.v. Naukratis. - -Footnote 540: - - _Ap._ Athen. XV. 675. - -Footnote 541: - - Strabo, XVII. 801. - -Footnote 542: - - Hdt. II. 178. - -Footnote 543: - - Plutarch, _Sept. Sap. Conviv._ 2 (_Moral._ 146), speaks of a certain - Niloxenos the Naukratite as entertained by Periander. If the setting - of the dialogue was strictly historical, this would be evidence for - the existence of Naukratis before 590 B.C. But Amasis is introduced as - reigning in Egypt and Croesus apparently as already King of Lydia, so - that chronological inferences from this fictitious dialogue would be - rash. - -Footnote 544: - - Strabo, XVII. 808; cp. Hdt. II. 135; Athen. XIII. 596_b_; Suid. s.v. - Ῥοδώπιδος ἀνάθημα. - -Footnote 545: - - _Oxyr. Pap._ I. pp. 10–13. - -Footnote 546: - - So Gutschmid, _ap._ Wiedemann, _Hdt._ II. 178. - -Footnote 547: - - It is forcing the sense of Herodotus’ words to regard them, as does - Petrie, _Nauk._ I. p. 4, as proof positive of a pre-Amasis occupation. - Still less is Kirchhoff justified (_Stud. Gr. Alph._^4 p. 47) in - regarding them as proving that there were no Greeks in Naukratis - before the reign of Amasis. - -Footnote 548: - - _E.g._ Mallet and E. Meyer. - -Footnote 549: - - I was first led to apply to Egypt my views about the Greek tyranny, - before I had read Diodorus on Psammetichus, from Herodotus’ account of - Sethon and his following of tradesmen and artizans; above, p. 92. - -Footnote 550: - - _Nauk._ I. pp. 5, 6, 21. - -Footnote 551: - - _J.H.S._ XXV. pp. 110 f. - -Footnote 552: - - _B.S.A._ V. p. 39 f.; _J.H.S._ XXV. p. 109; cp. especially the finds - there of vases dedicated “to the gods of the Greeks” and also to - various different individual Greek deities. The size of the bricks - dates this enclosure as earlier half of sixth century, _B.S.A._ V. p. - 35. - -Footnote 553: - - _B.S.A._ V. pp. 41 n. 2, 48; _J.H.S._ XXV. p. 107. In 1899 there was - found in Petrie’s “Great Temenos” a fourth century Egyptian - inscription that speaks of “Pi-emro which is called Naukratis.” This - is, however, _pace_ Hogarth, _J.H.S._ XXV. p. 106, evidence not for - but against thinking of Piemro Naukratis as a double town like - Buda-Pesth rather than as a bilingual like Swansea Abertawe. - -Footnote 554: - - _J.H.S._ XXV. p. 107; _B.S.A._ V. p. 43. - -Footnote 555: - - _B.S.A._ V. p. 49. - -Footnote 556: - - _Nauk._ I. pp. 54 f. - -Footnote 557: - - Hirschfeld, _Rhein. Mus._ 1887, pp. 215–219; Kirchhoff, _Stud._^4 p. - 44 f.; cp. Edgar, _B.S.A._ V. pp. 50 f. For Gardner’s reply see - _Nauk._ II. pp. 70 f. For a _résumé_ of the epigraphical evidence see - E. S. Roberts, _Gk. Epig._ I. pp. 159 f., 323 f. - -Footnote 558: - - Wiedemann accepts them, _Hdt._ II. 178. - -Footnote 559: - - _B.S.A._ XIV. p. 263. - -Footnote 560: - - _B.S.A._ V. p. 52. - -Footnote 561: - - _Prem. Étab._ pp. 167 f. - -Footnote 562: - - Hogarth’s publication of the additional inscriptions found in 1903 is - still more deficient. Edgar’s account of those found in 1899 is - better, though by no means adequate. Of 108 probable dedications (some - are too fragmentary to be certain), 48 are on vases (black glaze, - black figure, red figure) that cannot have been made before the reign - of Amasis, 33 are on cups of types that certainly lasted into his - reign, 6 on Naukratite fragments (phase not stated), 2 on (late) - Milesian. The rest are on fabrics difficult to date from the meagre - descriptions. Unfortunately this collection is not typical. It is to - be regretted that Edgar thought it “unnecessary to state the - provenance of each separate inscription” (_B.S.A._ V. p. 53). Sixteen - have dedications to the gods of the Greeks, and only two to Apollo. We - may conclude that a large percentage come from the Hellenium and are - therefore after 570. But this does not prove a late date for graffiti - generally. Of the sixteen dedications to the gods of the Greeks - fifteen are on black figure or black glaze vases: the other is on one - of the 33 cups mentioned above. This fact suggests that the - dedications generally could have been dated from the vases they are - inscribed on if the data had been made available, and that Gardner was - fairly right in his main conclusion although wrong in his method of - reaching it. Of the Milesian fragments one has a dedication to Apollo, - of the Naukratite two (both from the old Southern “Temenos”) are to - Aphrodite. It is significant that among the finds of the reign of - Amasis “the early local pottery was disappointingly scarce” (_B.S.A._ - V. p. 57). It is surprising that the excavators did not draw the - obvious conclusion. - -Footnote 563: - - _B.S.A._ XIV. p. 263; _J.H.S._ XXIX. p. 320; Ure, _Black Glaze - Pottery_, pp. 59–61. Others still unpublished from Burrows’ - excavations of 1909. - -Footnote 564: - - For later Boeotian examples see _Ath. Mitt._ XV. pp. 412–413 (Theban - Kabeirion) and probably those from Mt Ptoon alluded to in _B.C.H._ IX. - 479, 523. - -Footnote 565: - - Occasional earlier inscriptions are no evidence against this later - dating for the beginning of the real vogue. - -Footnote 566: - - The inscriptions are largely dedications to deities. - -Footnote 567: - - _B.S.A._ V. p. 57. - -Footnote 568: - - Ure, _Black Glaze Pottery_, pp. 32 f. - -Footnote 569: - - Three of the stamped black sherds from Naukratis (_B.S.A._ V. p. 56, - nos. 113–15) are inscribed, one with a very secular inscription, one - with a Cypriote abbreviation, and one with what may be the beginning - of a dedication. The secular inscription on one example of a very - common fabric is no argument against the use of other examples for - religious purposes. - -Footnote 570: - - The vases so classed by Prinz, _Funde aus Naukratis_, p. 69, do not - belong to the style (cp. Kinch, _Vroulia_, pp. 134 f.). His - conclusions _ib._ p. 72 therefore do not hold. - -Footnote 571: - - _B.S.A._ V. p. 57. - -Footnote 572: - - Kinch, _Vroulia_, p. 26. - -Footnote 573: - - Cp. Rhitsona, _passim_. - -Footnote 574: - - Cp. also Daphnae, which flourished contemporaneously with Corinthian - and some phases of proto-Corinthian pottery, but yielded no remains of - Corinthian nor, apparently, of proto-Corinthian: Petrie, _Tanis_, II. - p. 62. - -Footnote 575: - - Brit. Mus. 1886, 6–I. 40; Prinz, _Funde aus Nauk._ p. 102. - -Footnote 576: - - _J.H.S._ XXV. p. 136. - -Footnote 577: - - Edgar, _B.S.A._ V. p. 52. - -Footnote 578: - - See _e.g._ _Nauk._ I. Pl. IV. 3. - -Footnote 579: - - Wiegand, _Sitz. Preuss. Akad._ 1905, pp. 545–6; _Arch. Anz._ 1914, p. - 222, p. 219, figs. 29–31; Kinch, _Vroulia_, pp. 194–231. - -Footnote 580: - - _Funde aus Nauk._ p. 37. - -Footnote 581: - - The Boeotian Kylix style of _B.S.A._ XIV. pp. 308 f., Pls. VIII. and - XV. - -Footnote 582: - - _Arch. Anz._ 1904, p. 105; 1905, p. 62; 1910, p. 224. - -Footnote 583: - - A. J. Reinach, _Journ. d. Sav._ 1909, p. 357. - -Footnote 584: - - Boehlau, _Nekrop._ Taf. XII. 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11; cp. pp. 30, 31. - -Footnote 585: - - An important fact, not sufficiently taken into account by Boehlau and - his followers. - -Footnote 586: - - Boehlau, _Nekrop._ p. 75; Prinz, _Funde aus Nauk._ p. 33. - -Footnote 587: - - _Sitz. Preuss. Akad._ 1905, p. 545. - -Footnote 588: - - The ware has often been called Rhodian and more recently (Kinch, - _Vroulia_, _passim_) Camirian. Rhodes has produced far the most - specimens, but probably only because tomb-robbing has been - particularly prevalent in the island. Rhodian provenance is maintained - by Poulsen (_Orient u. frühgr. Kunst_, p. 91), but on dangerous - stylistic grounds. His treatment of the Russian finds is particularly - unconvincing. All the same Perrot does well (_Hist. de l’Art_, IX. pp. - 390, n. 2, 403 f.) to remind us that the Milesian attribution is not a - certainty. - -Footnote 589: - - Prinz, _Funde aus Nauk._ pp. 39 f. - -Footnote 590: - - Petrie, _Tanis_, II. Pls. XXVII., XXVIII. - -Footnote 591: - - Petrie, _Tanis_, II. pp. 51, 52 (quoting Hdt. II. 30, 154). Duemmler’s - doubts as to the identity of Daphnae and the Greek “Camps” (_Jahrb._ - X. p. 36) seem somewhat superfluous. - -Footnote 592: - - Boehlau, _Ion. Nekrop._ pp. 52 f.; cp. Edgar, _Cat. Vases, Cairo_, pp. - 10, 13, 14. - -Footnote 593: - - _Hist. de l’Art_, IX. p. 404. - -Footnote 594: - - Prinz, _Funde aus Nauk._ pp. 73–74. - -Footnote 595: - - _C.R._ II. 233_e_, Oxford Ashmolean Museum, G. 127. 2, 3 (the latter - two excavated 1903). For an illustration of this type see _J.H.S._ - XXX. p. 354, fig. 18. - -Footnote 596: - - See the evidence of the Rhitsona grave catalogues, _B.S.A._ XIV.; - _J.H.S._ XXIX., XXX. - -Footnote 597: - - _Nauk._ I. Pl. VI. 1, 2; II. Pl. IX. 5; cp. Prinz, pp. 75 f. - -Footnote 598: - - _E.g._ Petrie and Gardner, _Nauk._ I. Pl. V. and (coloured) _J.H.S._ - VIII. pl. 79. - -Footnote 599: - - _Nauk._ I. p. 51; II. p. 39: cp. Prinz, pp. 87 f. - -Footnote 600: - - _Vroulia_, pp. 7, 34, 89. - -Footnote 601: - - _J.H.S._ XXIX. pl. 25 and pp. 332 f. - -Footnote 602: - - Cp. Buschor, _Gr. Vasenmal._^1 p. 81; Frickenhaus, _Tiryns_, I. p. 53. - -Footnote 603: - - _Arch. Anz._ 1910, pp. 224–5; 1914, p. 227. - -Footnote 604: - - Its absence from Daphnae, the military station from which the Greeks - were removed by Amasis soon after 570 B.C., was formerly thought to - indicate that at that date it had not yet been invented or at least - not yet become popular. But the chief wares found at Daphnae, - including the typical (Clazomenian?) Daphnae ware, and excepting only - a peculiar local type of situla, are not uncommon at Naukratis - (_B.S.A._ V. pp. 60–61). This could hardly be the case, at least not - to the same extent, if Naukratis started only when Daphnae ceased. We - must seek some other explanation of the lack of Naukratite at Daphnae. - May it not have been simply that such delicate ware was ill-suited for - a camp? The Naukratite cups show a fabric as fragile as the modern - teacup. - -Footnote 605: - - Over 350; _Nauk._ I. pp. 60 f. - -Footnote 606: - - _Nauk._ I. p. 11. - -Footnote 607: - - Its central and crowded position is (_pace_ Edgar, _B.S.A._ V. p. 53) - no argument against this view, but rather the reverse, especially if - it is remembered that Miletus and presumably as a consequence the - Milesian part of Naukratis was in a bad way in the days of Amasis. - -Footnote 608: - - On the evidence of excavation as to these temene see Prinz, _Funde aus - Nauk._ pp. 12–13. - -Footnote 609: - - Note, however, Perrot’s comments, _Hist. de l’Art_, IX. p. 415. - -Footnote 610: - - Prinz, pp. 39–42; _B.S.A._ V. pp. 41, 60. - -Footnote 611: - - _Nauk._ II. p. 60. - -Footnote 612: - - There is little evidence for the attractive suggestion (A. G. Dunham, - _Hist. Miletus_, p. 68) that the establishment should be connected - with the victory of the Samian side and the defeat of the Milesian in - the (seventh century) Lelantine war. - -Footnote 613: - - IV. 152. - -Footnote 614: - - Athen. VII. 283_e_. Hirschfeld may be right in inferring that - Apollonius took the foundation of Naukratis back to mythical times - (_Rhein. Mus._ 1887, p. 220). - -Footnote 615: - - Prinz, _Funde aus Nauk._ p. 75, connects with it the Corinthian - sherds, some of which are much earlier than Amasis. Better evidence - for early Aeginetan dealings with Naukratis are the Naukratite sherds, - some of them of the earliest phase, found in Aegina, Prinz, p. 88. - -Footnote 616: - - Hirschfeld, _Rhein. Mus._ 1887, p. 212; E. Meyer, _Ges. Aeg._ p. 368; - Prinz, _Funde aus Nauk._ p. 1. - -Footnote 617: - - Over 100 are recorded, _Nauk._ II. p. 62 f.; others, _B.S.A._ V. p. - 41. - -Footnote 618: - - Not apparently on it: cp. _Nauk._ II. pl. 3 (section of the site down - to the basal mud with no black stratum marked); _B.S.A._ V. p. 44 - (spoken of as at South end of Greek quarter); _J.H.S._ XXV. p. 107. - Considering that the temple lies so very near the scarab factory and - due West of it and that the line of cleavage between Greek and - Egyptian runs East and West it is strange that no explicit statement - is made on this point. - -Footnote 619: - - _B.S.A._ V. pp. 38, 44. - -Footnote 620: - - _J.H.S._ XXV. p. 114. - -Footnote 621: - - Athen. XV. 675 f. - -Footnote 622: - - _Nauk._ II. - -Footnote 623: - - _Nauk._ II. Pl. XIV. 11. - -Footnote 624: - - _Orient u. frühgr. Kunst_, pp. 93–99 (Cyprus for examples with an - Oriental character, Rhodes for those that are purely Greek). An - example found at Polledrara (Vulci) comes from a grave (“tomb of - Isis,” Montelius, _Civ. Prim. en Ital._ Sér. B, pl. 266. 3) that - contained also a scarab of Psammetichus I and is probably to be dated - in the second half of the seventh century. - -Footnote 625: - - _Nauk._ I. Pls. XVI., XVII. For Pl. XVI. 4 see below, fig. 17. - -Footnote 626: - - _Nauk._ I. p. 21; cp. p. 42; but cp. Petrie, _B.S.A._ V. p. 41, “I - found nothing but Egyptian South of Aphrodite.” - -Footnote 627: - - Prinz, _Funde aus Nauk._ p. 84. Prinz, _ibid._ pp. 86–87, regards some - of the early jars from Naukratis as Ionian, comparing the shapes of - painted Ionian jars. Whether, as Prinz thinks (_ibid._ p. 13), they - prove an early Greek settlement in the South quarter is another - question. - -Footnote 628: - - For Phoenician remains at Naukratis see _B.S.A._ V. p. 49, where they - are probably overestimated; cp. Prinz, _Funde aus Nauk._ p. 102. - -Footnote 629: - - For connecting jars of this sort with Greco-Saite trade cp. perhaps - Epiphan. _de Mens. et Pond._ 182_d_ ὁ ἀληθινὸς Σαΐτης ξεστῶν ἐστι κβ - (= 44 kotylai). - -Footnote 630: - - For a more modest estimate of early Naukratis see Mallet, _Prem. - Étab._ p. 178. The view of Kahrstedt (Pauly Wissowa, S.V. Herostratos) - and Hirschfeld (_Rhein. Mus._ 1887, p. 219) (cp. Endt, _Ion. - Vasenmal._ p. 68), that Greek Naukratis dates only from 570, is - untenable. - -Footnote 631: - - One great gap in the evidence would be filled if ever the site of the - Milesians’ Fort was found and excavated. - -Footnote 632: - - See below, pp. 122–3. - -Footnote 633: - - Petrie, _Hist. Eg._ III. pp. 351–2; _Tanis_, II. pp. 51 f.; cp. - Mallet, _Prem. Étab._ pp. 129–130. - -Footnote 634: - - Sharpe, _Hist. Eg._^6 I. p. 167, thought it directed against Tanis, - Mendes and Bubastis; but there is nothing to show that Amasis had - anything to fear from these seats of earlier dynasties in the Eastern - part of the Delta. - -Footnote 635: - - Hdt. II. 154; cp. II. 30; Diodorus (I. 67) dates the foundation of The - Camps after Psamtek’s victory. The site confirms the date. Daphnae - could become the military base of the Saite prince only after he had - disposed of the dodecarchy and was mainly concerned with the Assyrian - peril; see Petrie, _Tanis_, II. p. 48. - -Footnote 636: - - Whether troops were actually transferred from the “Fort” to the “Camp” - is doubtful. There is little trace of Miletus at Daphnae, where the - Greek pottery appears to have been mainly from Samos (Fikellura ware, - Petrie, _Tanis_, II. pls. 27, 28) and Clazomenae (Daphnae ware, - _ibid._ pls. 29–31). The marked differences between the pottery finds - at Naukratis and Daphnae are now generally recognized as being local, - not temporal, except in so far as the Daphnae series ends earlier. But - the fact of these local differences still awaits a satisfactory - explanation. Cp. above, p. 115, n. 2. - -Footnote 637: - - Meyer, _Ges. d. Alt._^1 I. 384; cp. Mallet, _Prem. Étab._ pp. 43, 80. - Mallet, _ibid._ pp. 79–80, makes Herodotus’ μάχιμοι a sort of militia, - but this hardly suits their description as a caste. Egyptian documents - do indeed show that, in spite of Herodotus II. 164, VI. 60; Plato, - _Tim._ 23–24; Isocr. _Bus._ 15–17 (224); Diod. I. 28, 73–74; Strabo - XVII. 787; there was no hard caste system in ancient Egypt; cp. - Wiedemann, _Hdt._ II. 164; Mallet, _Prem. Étab._ p. 411. But the - μάχιμοι, though not a caste, were plainly a sharply defined class. - -Footnote 638: - - _Prem. Étab._ p. 80. - -Footnote 639: - - _Ges. d. Alt._^1 I. 561. - -Footnote 640: - - Hdt. II. 30; Diod. I. 67; Strabo XVI. 770 and XVII. 786 (where they - are said to have been still in Ethiopia in the days of the historian); - Pliny, _N.H._ VI. 35 (30); Ptol. _Geog._ IV. 7 (Didot, i. p. 783); - Hesych. s.v. Μαχλαίονας. On the authenticity of this story see - Wiedemann, _Hdt._ II. 30, pp. 128 f., _Ges. Aeg._ pp. 137–8 - (sceptical); Mallet, _Prem. Étab._ pp. 77 f. Herodotus says there were - 240,000, Diodorus over 200,000. These numbers will not now be regarded - as sceptically as they were in the last century. - -Footnote 641: - - Wiedemann, _Hdt._ II. 161; Breasted, _Records_, IV. 1000, 1001. - -Footnote 642: - - Hdt. II. 169; Diod. I. 68; Petrie, _Hist. Eg._ III. 351–2; Breasted, - _Records_, IV. 1003. - -Footnote 643: - - Hdt. II. 178. - -Footnote 644: - - Hdt. I. 77; cp. Xen. _Cyrop._ VI. 2. 10. - -Footnote 645: - - Hdt. III. 39. - -Footnote 646: - - Maspero, _Passing of the Empires_, p. 645; cp. Plut. _Mor._ 261 (_Mul. - Virt._ 25). - -Footnote 647: - - Hdt. II. 180. - -Footnote 648: - - From a demotic chronicle published by E. Revillout, _Proc. Soc. Bib. - Arch._ XIV. (Mar. 1892), pp. 251–4; cp. _Rev. Égyptol._ 1880, p. 60. - -Footnote 649: - - Hdt. II. 159; Hirschfeld, _Rhein. Mus._ 1887, p. 219, suggests that - the fleet with which Necho defeated the Syrians may have owed much to - the Milesians’ Fort. - -Footnote 650: - - Cp. Hdt. II. 161; Lepsius, _Denkm._ III. 274_d_, _e_; Roberts, _Gk. - Epig._ I. 151 f. - -Footnote 651: - - Hdt. II. 160; according to Diod. I. 95, the appeal was made to Amasis. - -Footnote 652: - - Hdt. II. 163; Diod. I. 68. - -Footnote 653: - - Heuzey, _Fig. Ant._ pl. 7. 2; Mallet, _Prem. Étab._ fig. 27; Prinz, - _Funde aus Nauk._ p. 107. - -Footnote 654: - - For Amasis and trade cp. Plut. _Sept. Sap. Conv._ 6 (_Moral._ 151), - ἐκείνῳ γὰρ (sc. Ἀμάσιδι) ἂν γένοιτο πλέονος ἀξία τῆς ἐμπορίας ἡ - παρενθήκη. - -Footnote 655: - - Mallet, _Prem. Étab._ p. 414. - -Footnote 656: - - Cp. Griffith, _Dem. Pap. Rylands_, III. p. 44, n. 5. - -Footnote 657: - - _Ibid._ p. 201. The word analyses p (article)—san (man, vendor)—mtk. - -Footnote 658: - - Earlier Egyptologists derived the word quite differently, explaining - it as Libyan (_e.g._ V. Stern, _Z. f. Aeg. Spr._ 1883, pp. 24 f. and - references, _ad loc._) or Ethiopian (= son of the Sun), (Brugsch, - _Ges. Aeg._ pp. 731 f., but cp. Wiedemann, _Aeg. Ges._ p. 623). Meyer, - _Ges. Aeg._ p. 363, describes it simply as “not Egyptian,” presumably - as not occurring before the Saite period. But this is no argument if - the name was till then extremely plebeian. Petrie rejects “man (vendor - of) mixing bowls,” as manifestly absurd and analyses P-sam-te-k = the - (Egyptian) lion’s (Upper Egyptian) son (Ethiopian) the (Ethiopian - suffix) (_Hist. Eg._ III. p. 320, accepted as probable by How and - Wells, _ad Hdt._ II. 151). He compares Shaba-ta-ka (Ethiopian dynasty, - 707–693) = wild cat’s son the; but this is no parallel for the real - difficulty, which is the extraordinary hybrid composition. Linguistic - hybrids are legion. Our own forefathers enriched Latin with the word - quicksethedgavit. But so complicated a hybrid as Petrie implies cannot - be considered seriously without some very solid evidence for really - parallel monstrosities. Spiegelberg (_Orient. Litt. Zeit._ 1905, p. - 560), after arguing convincingly against Petrie, accepts “bowl vendor” - as a popular etymology, but rejects it as the real meaning, “denn kein - König wird Mischkrughändler heissen wollen.” He explains the word as - really meaning “man of the god Mtk”; only no such god is known. Even - if there were, Spiegelberg’s explanation cuts both ways. If, as the - evidence has shown, there is a probability that Psammetichus I had - really been a vendor of something like mixing bowls, and got his name - from his occupation, some such aristocratic explaining away of the - plebeian name may perhaps have induced him and his successors to keep - it, just as Mrs Snooks in one of Wells’ stories became more than - reconciled to her name after it had been explained as an abbreviation - of Sevenoaks and spelt accordingly. - -Footnote 659: - - _Dem. Pap. Rylands_, III. pp. 44, n. 5: 201, n. 3. - -Footnote 660: - - _Ibid._ p. 201, n. 3. - -Footnote 661: - - Hdt. II. 151. - -Footnote 662: - - Griffith, _ibid._ p. 44, n. 5, quoting Hdt. II. 174; cp. Ael. _V.H._ - II. 41; Athen. VI. 261, X. 438. - -Footnote 663: - - There is little evidence for a trade in mixed wine. The ancient Greeks - habitually drank mixed wine, but the mixing was done at home. In - England there is no wholesale trade in claret cup. But note Mod. Gk. - κρασί, = mixture, the normal word for wine. - -Footnote 664: - - _Ibid._ p. 44, n. 5. - -Footnote 665: - - Babelon, _Rev. Num._ 1894, pp. 267 f.; Th. Reinach, _L’Hist. par les - Monnaies_, pp. 32–3; Head, _Hist. Num._^2 p. 643; Macdonald, _Coin - Types_, pp. 6–8; Radet, _Rev. des Univ. du Midi_, 1895, p. 120; - Busolt, _Gr. G._^2 I. p. 493. - -Footnote 666: - - Evans in _Corolla Numismatica B. V. Head_, pp. 363–7; Ridgeway, - _Compan. Gk. Stud._^3 p. 537. - -Footnote 667: - - _Brit. Mus. Excavations at Ephesus_ (1908), chaps. IV., V. - -Footnote 668: - - Three have the 𐤥𐤠𐤩𐤥𐤤𐤦 inscription that Six explained as an - abbreviation of Alyattes’ name, _Num. Chron._ 1890, pp. 203 f. - -Footnote 669: - - Babelon, _Origines_, pp. 181 f. - -Footnote 670: - - Xen. _ap._ Poll. IX. 83; Hdt. I. 94. - -Footnote 671: - - Cp. Th. Reinach, _Hist. par les Monn._ p. 32. Cp. also the account of - the invention of money in _Rep._ II. 371, where Plato connects it with - the rise of middlemen. - -Footnote 672: - - See below, p. 148. - -Footnote 673: - - Soph. _Antig._ 1037. - -Footnote 674: - - Strabo XIII. 626 (cp. XIV. 680); Archilochus, quoted below, p. 134; - cp. Justin I. 7. - -Footnote 675: - - Bacchyl. ed. Jebb, fr. 10 (Λυδία λίθος μανύει χρυσόν); Theophr. _de - Lap._ 4; Pliny, _N.H._ XXXIII. 43; Pollux VII. 102; Hesych. s.v. - βασανίτης and χρυσῖτις λίθος; cp. Ridgeway, _Num. Chron._ 1895, pp. - 104 f. - -Footnote 676: - - Hdt. V. 52 f.; cp. Radet, _Lydie_, pp. 23 f. and references p. 23, n. - 1. - -Footnote 677: - - Radet, pp. 31 f. On the political importance of the great highways of - trade in Lydia see Radet, _Lydie_, pp. 108 (tolls along caravan routes - in eighth century B.C., Nic. Dam. _F.H.G._ III. p. 381, fr. 49), 227–8 - (ferry tolls levied by the state under the dynasty founded by Gyges, - and state compensation for damage done by the flooding of the - waterways, Xanthus, _F.H.G._ I. p. 37, fr. 4). - - For Sardis as geographically more likely than any coast city to have - evolved a metal coinage see Radet, _Lydie_, p. 156; Th. Reinach, - _Hist. par les Monn._ p. 22. For the contrary view see Babelon, _Rev. - Num._ 1895, pp. 352 f., _Origines_, p. 218. - -Footnote 678: - - _E.g._ P. Gardner, _Gold Coinage of Asia_, p. 4, _Hist. Anc. Coin._ p. - 69; Brandis, _Münzwesen_, p. 201; cp. also Radet, _Lydie_, p. 293. - -Footnote 679: - - Plut. _Apophth. Lac._, _Agesil._ 40 (_Mor._ 211_b_). - -Footnote 680: - - Hdt. I. 54. - -Footnote 681: - - The fact that 73 out of 87 early electrum coins found recently in the - Artemision at Ephesus are of types usually assigned to Lydia is thus - no argument against the usual attribution. Of the rest two are - Phocaean, two possibly Phocaean, four possibly belong to Cyme, one - perhaps to Ephesus, while five are quite uncertain. Head, _Brit. Mus. - Excav. Ephesus_, pp. 79 f. - -Footnote 682: - - F. Lenormant, _Monn. royal. de la Lydie_, p. 28, quotes two early - electrum coins, one _obv._ striated, _rev._ three incuses, as found in - the Plain of Sardis, the other, _obv._ four petals, _rev._ one incuse, - as found at Nymphi, about 12 miles inland from Smyrna. An electrum - third (67·6 grains) _obv._ lion’s head, _rev._ one incuse, _Brit. Mus. - Coins, Lydia_, p. 2, no. 4, is said to have been found at Ala Shehr - (Philadelphia), 30 miles S.E. of Sardis. - -Footnote 683: - - Borrell, _Num. Chron._ VI. (1843), p. 156; cp. _Brit. Mus. Coins, - Troas_, etc. p. lvii. - -Footnote 684: - - _Num. Chron._ 1890, p. 210, n. 69; cp. Babelon, _Rev. Num._ 1895, pp. - 354 f., _Origines_, pp. 215 f. - -Footnote 685: - - _Rev. Num._ 1895, p. 303; _ib._ Pl. VI. 3. - -Footnote 686: - - Head, _Brit. Mus. Coins, Ionia_, p. xviii. - -Footnote 687: - - Head, _Hist. Num._^2 p. 643, Ridgeway, _Metal. Curr._ p. 293, and - others have stated that the 168 gr. standard was in regular use for - early electrum, but their only evidence appears to be this one coin; - cp. Head, _ib._ p. xl., who notes that no divisions of this standard - are known in electrum. They are fully represented in Lydian gold and - silver. Others, _e.g._ Radet, _Lydie_, p. 233, explain it as a - three-quarter stater of the Phoenician standard normally employed for - Lydian electrum, but a three-quarter stater is most unlikely. Nobody - has suggested that the coin was meant to pass as gold. - -Footnote 688: - - _Rev. Num._ 1895, p. 303. - -Footnote 689: - - Head, _Brit. Mus. Coins of Ionia_, p. xxxviii. - -Footnote 690: - - _Ibid._ p. 184, nos. 6–11. Babelon himself ascribes three small early - silver pieces to Miletus (his nos. 18, 23, 39 = Pl. VI. 7, 10, 17). - They weigh 1·26 grammes, 1·75 grammes, 1·10 grammes and are hardly - helpful from the metrological point of view. - -Footnote 691: - - _La Chine et les Chinois_ (1847), p. 173; this, though he refers - _ibid._ to ingots of silver mingled with gold dust, called “syce,” of - which the literal translation is “fine silk.” - -Footnote 692: - - See further, Radet, _Lydie_, pp. 155 f.; Macdonald, _Coin Types_, pp. - 6–8. - -Footnote 693: - - _F.H.G._ III. p. 72, fr. 1; so _Et. Mag._ and _Et. Gud._ s.v. - τύραννος. - -Footnote 694: - - Cp. Hippias of Elis, _F.H.G._ II. p. 62; Schol. Aesch. _P.V._ 224; - Plut. _Vit. Hom._, Didot V. p. 153. - -Footnote 695: - - Hdt. I. 12. - -Footnote 696: - - _Ap._ Aristot. _Rhet._ III. 17 and Plut. _De Tranqu. An._ 10 (_Mor._ - 470_c_). The two lines quoted above were not consecutive. Plutarch - quotes them thus: - - οὔ μοι τὰ Γύγεω τοῦ πολυχρύσου μέλει - καὶ οὐδ’ εἷλέ πω με ζῆλος, οὐδ’ ἀγαίομαι - θεῶν ἔργα, μεγάλης δ’ οὐκ ἐρέω τυραννίδος. - - But the καὶ appears to connect two extracts from a single passage. - Aristotle, who quotes only οὔ μοι τὰ Γύγεω, states that the passage - was put by Archilochus into the mouth of Charon the carpenter - (τέκτων). - -Footnote 697: - - Cp. _Et. Gud._ quoted above, defended by Radet, pp. 146–8. -αννος, so - R. S. Conway writes to me, is neither Greek nor Latin, but occurs - often in Etruscan (= Lydian?) and several times in Lycian: “tyrant” is - derived from “Tyrrhenian” (= Etruscan) by Philochorus (_ap._ Schol. - Lucian, _Catapl._ I: τύραννος εἴρηται ἀπὸ τῶν Τυρρηνῶν ... ὥς φησι - Φιλόχορος. οἱ οὖν Ἀθήνησι ῥήτορες ἔθος ἔχουσι τοὺς βασιλέας τυράννους - καλεῖν ἀντὶ τῆς παρ’ αὐτοῖς βίας τῶν Τυρρηνῶν: the reference is to the - Tyrrhenians of Lemnos and Imbros), Tzetzes, _Chil._ VIII. 890–1 (ἐκ - τούτων καὶ τὸ τύραννος ὁμοίως ἐπεκλήθη· βίαιοι γὰρ οἱ Τυρρηννοὶ καὶ - θηριώδεις ἄγαν), Verrius Flaccus (_ap._ Festum s.v. turannos, ed. - Teubner, p. 484, a cuius gentis (sc. Tyrrhenicae) praecipua - crudelitate etiam tyrannos dictos ait Verrius), and the _Et. Mag._ - (ἤτοι ἀπὸ τῶν Τυρσηνῶν· ὠμοὶ γὰρ οὗτοι). On Vedic affinities of the - word τύραννος see Peile, _ap._ Jebb, _Soph. O. T._ p. 5. - -Footnote 698: - - _F.H.G._ III. p. 380. - -Footnote 699: - - Radet, _Lydie_, p. 79. - -Footnote 700: - - _F.H.G._ III. pp. 380–1; cp. Steph. Byz. s.v. Θυεσσός, “πόλις - Λυδίας ... ἀπὸ Θυεσσοῦ καπήλου.” - -Footnote 701: - - _F.H.G._ III. pp. 381–2. The scene of the story is doubtless - Hermocapelia, put by Pliny, _N.H._ V. 33, in Pergamene territory, by - Hierocles 670, Teub. p. 21, in the eparchy of Lydia. Schubert, _Könige - v. Lydien_, p. 20, identifies Thyessos with Hermes himself. - -Footnote 702: - - _Lydie_, p. 98. - -Footnote 703: - - Radet, _Lydie_, p. 79; _Rev. des Univ. du Midi_, 1895, p. 117. - -Footnote 704: - - Radet, pp. 95 f. and _Rev. des Univ. du Midi_, 1895, pp. 118–9 - (foundation of Sinope by Milesians, 756 B.C., implies knowledge on - part of Miletus of great eastern caravan routes). - -Footnote 705: - - Heraclides, _F.H.G._ II. p. 216, fr. 11. - -Footnote 706: - - _Rhein. Mus._ XXXV. (1880), p. 520. - -Footnote 707: - - Hdt. I. 7 f.; Plut. _Mor._ 622_f_; Justin I. 7. In Nic. Dam. _F.H.G._ - III. pp. 384–5 she does not aid Gyges. - -Footnote 708: - - _Lydie_, p. 134; cp. Nic. Dam. _F.H.G._ III. pp. 396, 397, fr. 63, 65; - Ael. _V.H._ III. 26. The Ephesian connexion is (_pace_ Radet) only - attested for the later rulers of Gyges’ house. Cp. Gelzer, _Rhein. - Mus._ XXXV. p. 521. Cp. too with the attempt to poison Cadys the - attempt to poison Croesus, Plut. _de Pyth. Orac._ 16 (_Mor._ 401). - -Footnote 709: - - Nic. Dam. _F.H.G._ III. p. 397, fr. 65; cp. Ael. _V.H._ IV. 27; Hdt. - I. 92. For a different version or phase of the struggle see Plut. _de - Pyth. Orac._ 16 (_Mor._ 401). - -Footnote 710: - - Babelon, _Origines_, p. 105, calls him a banker, on what authority I - cannot discover: Nic. Dam. calls him simply εὖ μάλα εὐπόρου. - -Footnote 711: - - Note that Sadyattes (_ap._ Suid. (s.v. Κροῖσος), Alyattes) bears a - royal name, and that he is almost certainly the rival ἀντιστασιώτης of - Croesus of Hdt. I. 92. A _var. lect._ in Nic. Dam. has ἔπαρχος - (governor) instead of ἔμπορος (merchant). Sadyattes may therefore well - have been a great noble: but that is no reason, _pace_ Gelzer, _Rhein. - Mus._ XXXV. 520, for not assigning the chief rôle to his wealth. - -Footnote 712: - - Pp. 37 f. - -Footnote 713: - - Hdt. I. 54. - -Footnote 714: - - Poll. III. 87, _Brit. Mus. Coins, Lydia_, p. XX. - -Footnote 715: - - Aristot. (?) _Mirab. Ausc._ 52 (834_a_). - -Footnote 716: - - Strabo XIII. 626; Justin I. 7. - -Footnote 717: - - Strabo, _ibid._; Hdt. I. 92. - -Footnote 718: - - Nic. Dam. _F.H.G._ III. fr. 65 end. - -Footnote 719: - - _Lydie_, p. 242. - -Footnote 720: - - The ἀνὴρ ἐχθρός of Hdt. I. 92 is almost certainly the Sadyattes of - Nic. Dam. See Gelzer, _Rhein. Mus._ XXXV. 520; Schubert, _Könige v. - Lydien_, p. 61. - -Footnote 721: - - Hdt. I. 88–89; the story is repeated but with the point omitted, Diod. - IX. 33. - -Footnote 722: - - Cp. Bacchyl. III., the earliest reference to the fall of Lydia, - written for Hiero of Syracuse in 468 B.C., where Croesus is made - during the sack of Sardis to immolate himself and his family and to be - saved by Zeus and carried off by Apollo to the land of the - Hyperboreans. - -Footnote 723: - - Hdt. I. 93; cp. Hipponax, fr. 5 παρὰ τὸν Ἀττάλεω τύμβον κ.τ.λ. (an - almost contemporary reference); Strabo XIII. 627. For excavations of - this monument see _Abh. Preuss. Akad._ 1858, pp. 539 f. and Pls. IV. - (tomb) and V. (pottery from the tomb). The pottery suits very well the - period of the Mermnad dynasty. - -Footnote 724: - - Radet, _Lydie_, p. 226, infers for the time of Croesus corporations of - artizans (potters, boot-makers, dyers, etc.) such as existed in Lydia - in the time of the Roman empire, but his suggestion is too speculative - to build on. - -Footnote 725: - - Strabo XIII. 627; cp. Athen. XIII. 573_a_, “Clearchus in Book I. of - his Erotica says Gyges, king of Lydia, ... when (his mistress) died, - gathered all the Lydians of the land and raised what is called the - tomb of the hetaera.” This looks like the version preserved by Strabo - with details borrowed from Herodotus: note that the work is here - ascribed to Gyges. - -Footnote 726: - - Hdt. I. 153–4. - -Footnote 727: - - Hdt. VII. 27, 28. - -Footnote 728: - - Hdt. VII. 27, 28; Plut. _de Mul. Virt._ 27 (_Mor._ 262); Polyaen. - VIII. 42. - -Footnote 729: - - Gelzer, _Rhein. Mus._ XXXV. p. 521. - -Footnote 730: - - How and Wells, _Hdt._ VII. 27. - -Footnote 731: - - _Lydie_, pp. 155 f., and particularly pp. 162–3. - -Footnote 732: - - Early in his reign before the Cimmerian invasions (on which see - Gelzer, _Rhein. Mus._ XXX. pp. 256 f.), _Lydie_, p. 166. So Cruchon, - _Banques dans l’Antiq._ pp. 15–16. - -Footnote 733: - - _Monn. dans l’Antiq._ I. p. 110; cp. Babelon, _Origines_, pp. 39–40. - -Footnote 734: - - Cp. Babelon, _Origines_, p. 94, quoting Terrien de la Couperie, _Brit. - Mus. Cat. Chinese Coins_, p. 4, on period before fourth century A.D. - So also _ibid._ (_Cat. Chinese Coins_), p. xlviii. 5. Bonacossi, _La - Chine et les Chinois_ (1847), pp. 172–3, says there is no government - mint: the precious metals are formed into ingots by private bankers: - these ingots bear the name of districts, bankers, etc. To the present - day Chinese bankers stamp foreign coins with their own countermarks, - Babelon, _Origines_, pp. 121–2. - -Footnote 735: - - Babelon, _Origines_, pp. 41, 42. - -Footnote 736: - - Babelon, _Origines_, p. 98. - -Footnote 737: - - E. Thomas, _Chron. Pathan Kings Delhi_, p. 344 (cp. E. Thomas, _Anc. - Indian Weights_, p. 57, n. 4), goldsmiths and merchants struck coins - in fourteenth century A.D.; J. Malcolm, _Mem. Central India_, II. 80, - similar issues still in 1832 but with permit from central government; - cp. Babelon, _Origines_, p. 95. - -Footnote 738: - - Babelon, _Origines_, p. 83, at Kieff and Novgorod in the Middle Ages - ingots weighing rouble or multiple stamped, sometimes with name, by - merchants, bankers or goldsmiths. This practice arose before the - Russian government first struck coins. On Greek and Roman stamped - ingots see Saglio, _Dict. d. Antiq._ s.v. Metalla, p. 1865; all appear - to be centuries later than the invention of money, on which - accordingly they throw no light. - -Footnote 739: - - Babelon, _Origines_, p. 100; _e.g._ Chalmers’ shillings struck by a - goldsmith named Chalmers in 1783, numerous private issues in - California, 1831–1851, with the legend “native gold” or “pure gold” - and the name and sometimes address of the striker. - -Footnote 740: - - Jevons, _Money_^{23}, p. 65. - -Footnote 741: - - _Origines_, pp. 110 f. - -Footnote 742: - - _Ibid._ p. 123. - -Footnote 743: - - Head, _Hist. Num._^2 pp. lvii. and 644–5, dates private issues - 687–610; P. Gardner, _Gold Coinage of Asia_, p. 9, attributes the - first state coinage anywhere to Croesus, against which view see the - whole of the present chapter. Gardner’s own objection to his own - theory, based on the ϝαλϝει coins, is not cogent. Alyattes might, of - course, have struck coins as a private venture. The late King George - of Greece traded largely in wine grown on the royal estates, but the - wine was in no sense a state beverage; cp. also Cruchon, _Banques dans - l’Antiq._ pp. 11 f. For Babelon himself see further _Rev. Num._ 1895, - pp. 332–3, on the early electrum coin, _obv._ stag, φανος ἐμι σεμα; - _rev._ one oblong incuse between two square, which Babelon ascribes to - Ephesus and suggests was issued by “one of those rich bankers who lent - to kings and whose safes were filled with precious metals”; see Hdt. - VII. 27–29; but cp. Macdonald, _Coin Types_, p. 51. Against Babelon’s - view has been urged the fact that his supposed collections of private - marks on such coins as our fig. 19. _a_ (p. 127) form in each case a - single group all stamped together. But such a stereotyped grouping on - the earliest extant specimens is no argument against his explanation - of the origin of these curious marks, which on other very early coins - occur in positions which show them to be counter-stamps: see _e.g._ - that on the back of the tortoise of our fig. 20. _b_. - -Footnote 744: - - His accession is variously dated 716 B.C. (Hdt.), 708 (Euphorion), 698 - (African.), 687 (Euseb. Arm. vers.); he was still alive after 660 B.C. - and perhaps after 650 (Geo. Smith, _Assurbanipal_, pp. 64–68; cp. - _ibid._ pp. 341–2, Winckler, _Altorient. Forsch._ VI. pp. 474 f., 494 - f.). - -Footnote 745: - - The Γυγάδας χρυσός of Poll. III. 87 and VII. 98 was not, _pace_ Radet, - _Lydie_, p. 162; _Rev. d. Univ. du Midi_, 1895, p. 119, necessarily or - even probably coined, but the history of Croesus shows that a king who - unquestionably coined might yet be famous for his uncoined gold. - Archilochus calls Gyges “the golden.” - -Footnote 746: - - Hdt. I. 8, 91; cp. Xanthus, _ap._ Nic. Dam. _F.H.G._ III. fr. 49, p. - 383 ἐκέλευσε (τὸν Γύγην) μετὰ τῶν δορυφόρων εἶναι. - -Footnote 747: - - _Könige von Lydien_, p. 30. - -Footnote 748: - - _Ibid._ p. 34; cp. Athen. VI. 231_e_, “The Delphian dedications of - silver and gold were started by Gyges the king of the Lydians (ὑπὸ - πρώτου Γύγου ... ἀνετέθη): before his reign the Pythia had neither - silver nor gold, as is stated by Phanias the Ephesian and Theopompus,” - and Hdt. I. 13, 14, “he won the throne and was confirmed on it by the - Delphic oracle”.... “In this way the Mermnadae won the tyranny ... and - Gyges, having become tyrant, sent offerings to Delphi not a few, but - most of the silver offerings at Delphi are his, and besides the silver - he offered vast sums of gold.” - -Footnote 749: - - “He is dedicating golden bricks to the Pythian as payment for his - oracles,” Lucian, _Charon_, II; Hdt. I. 50 f.; “we may suppose that - the liberality of Croesus was intended to secure the Lacedaemonian - alliance through Delphic influence,” How and Wells, _Hdt._ I. 53 - (doubtless in view of Xen. _Cyr._ VI. 2. 11 (news is brought to Cyrus) - “that Croesus had sent to Sparta about an alliance”); μέγιστα θνατῶν - ἐς ἀγαθέαν ἀνέπεμψε Πυθώ (Κροῖσος), Bacchyl. III. 61–62. - -Footnote 750: - - Smith, _Assurbanipal_, pp. 64–68. - -Footnote 751: - - _Lydie_, pp. 57 f.; cp. Plut. _Qu. Gr._ 45 (_Moral._ 302), “when Gyges - revolted and made war on him (Candaules)”: cp. also Hdt. I. 13, “when - the Lydians much resented the way Candaules was treated and took up - arms.” But Herodotus goes on to say that the two factions came to an - understanding to refer the dispute to Delphi. - -Footnote 752: - - Hdt. I. 14; _F.H.G._ III. Nic. Dam. fr. 62; IV. p. 401, fr. 6; Paus. - IV. 21, 5; IX. 29, 4; Suid. s.v. Γύγης and Μάγνης. - -Footnote 753: - - Radet, _Lydie_, p. 214; cp. _ib._ 243 on the commercial necessities - that drove Croesus to make war on Cyrus when the Persians, “who are - accustomed to make no use of markets and have no market at all” (Hdt. - I. 153), threatened the great trade routes of the East. - -Footnote 754: - - Radet, _Lydie_, p. 171; cp. Hdt. I. 17, on the way Sadyattes and - Alyattes warred against Miletus, and also Ael. _V.H._ III. 26; - Polyaen. VI. 50 on Croesus’ war with Ephesus. - -Footnote 755: - - Plut. _Qu. Gr._ 45 (_Moral._ 302_a_): ἦλθεν Ἄρσηλις ἐκ Μυλέων - ἐπίκουρος τῷ Γύγῃ μετὰ δυνάμεως, καὶ τὸν Κανδαύλην ... διαφθείρει. - This notice is “historisch wertlos,” Meyer, _G. d. A._ I. p. 547, - following Duncker, _G. d. A._^5 I. p. 488, but cp. Gelzer, _Rhein. - Mus._ XXXV. p. 528; Schubert, _Könige v. Lydien_, p. 33; Radet, - _Lydie_, pp. 124 f., 133 f., 136, n. 2. It is more than a coincidence - that Carian mercenaries become famous just at this time: cp. - Archilochus. In Lydia, as in Egypt (pp. 89, 123), mercenaries, in - great part Greek, play an important part throughout the period of the - tyrant dynasty. Croesus raised a force of mercenaries before he became - king, Nic. Dam. fr. 65, _F.H.G._ III. p. 397; mercenaries fought for - Croesus against Cyrus, Hdt. I. 77; cp. Radet, _Lydie_, p. 261. - -Footnote 756: - - Nic. Dam. fr. 49; _F.H.G._ III. p. 385. - -Footnote 757: - - _Rep._ II. 359_d_; cp. Cic. _de Off._ III. 9 (38); Suid. s.v. Γύγου - δακτύλιος. - -Footnote 758: - - Nic. Dam. _F.H.G._ III. p. 382; cp. Gelzer, _Rhein. Mus._ XXXV. pp. - 515 f.; Radet, pp. 80 f.; cp. also Hdt. I. 8. - -Footnote 759: - - _Lydie_, pp. 89, 120. - -Footnote 760: - - Cp. below, pp. 149 f. - -Footnote 761: - - _Lydie_, p. 224. For Gyges’ invisibility Radet, p. 153, compared that - of Deiokes the Mede who, when he became king, withdrew himself from - the sight of his subjects, ὁρᾶσθαι βασιλέα ὑπὸ μηδενός, Hdt. I. 99. - -Footnote 762: - - _N.H._ XXXIII. 4. - -Footnote 763: - - Gelzer, _Rhein. Mus._ XXX. pp. 256 f. According to Eusebius Midas - became king in B.C. 738. - -Footnote 764: - - Hammer, _Zeits. f. Num._ XXVI. 4; Midas himself worked the mines of Mt - Bermion, Strabo XIV. 680. The fame of the Phrygians as metal workers - went back to mythical times, see Schol. Ap. Rhod. I. 1129, with which - cp. Diod. V. 64; Clem. Alex. _Strom._ I. p. 360 (132 edit. Sylburg.). - -Footnote 765: - - Note that Kelainai (the home of the rich Pythes, above, p. 140), which - lies in East Phrygia near the source of the Maeander, occupied “a - central point from which trade routes radiated in every direction. It - became a commercial junction where goods arriving by caravan routes - from the East were packed in chests to be forwarded to various sea - ports.” These words (Head, _Hist. Num._^2 p. 666) refer to Apamea, - which, from its occupation, was nicknamed Kibotos (Box), but Apamea - was only a revised version of Kelainai, which lay on the heights above - it and was supplanted by the lower city in the time of Antiochus I. - -Footnote 766: - - Ovid, _Met._ XI. 100 f.; Hyginus, fab. 191. - -Footnote 767: - - Poll. IX. 83; so Heraclides, _F.H.G._ II. p. 216; Radet, p. 160, - acutely argues from the association here of Cyme and Phrygia that this - account associates the invention of money with the great caravan - route, of which Cyme was the main terminus before the rise of the - Lydian Mermnadae, about which time it was replaced by Ephesus, the - Greek city with which the Lydians maintained the most friendly terms; - cp. Ramsay, _J.H.S._ IX. (1888), pp. 350 f., followed by S. Reinach, - _Chroniques d’Orient_, I. p. 574, Radet, _Lydie_, p. 172. - -Footnote 768: - - Hdt. I. 14. - -Footnote 769: - - Polyaen. VII. 5 makes Midas secure his throne (Μίδαν τύραννον - ἀνηγόρευσαν) “by pretending to celebrate by night rites in honour of - the great gods.” - -Footnote 770: - - On Midas and the ring see also K. F. Smith, _Amer. Journ. Phil._ - XXIII. p. 273. - -Footnote 771: - - Aristot. (?) _Mirab. Ausc._ 45, 47 (833_b_). - -Footnote 772: - - Strabo XIII. 591, XIV. 680. See also Radet, _Lydie_, p. 44, on Eurip. - _Bacch._ 13. - -Footnote 773: - - Strabo XIII. 590–1, XIV. 680; cp. Xen. _Hell._ IV. viii. 37. - -Footnote 774: - - It is not known when the river was first exploited, but an early date - may be safely assumed. The gold washings of the Phasis are said to - have been the objective of the Argonauts (Strabo XI. 499; cp. Hammer, - _Zeits. f. Num._ XXVI. p. 4). In Egypt “gold of the water,” _i.e._ - river gold, is recorded about 1200 B.C. (Lepsius, _Abh. Berl. Akad._ - 1871, p. 35). The Pactolus washings went back at least some - generations beyond Croesus (Strabo XIII. 626; cp. Dio Chrys. _Orat._ - 78, Teubner, p. 280). - -Footnote 775: - - _Don Juan_, XII. xii. For Gyges and Aladdin see K. F. Smith, _Amer. - Journ. Phil._ XXIII. p. 271. - -Footnote 776: - - E. Meyer, _Ges. d. Alt._ I. p 580; cp. Regling _ap._ Pauly Wissowa - s.v. Geld, p. 972. - -Footnote 777: - - Ridgeway, _Orig. Metallic Currency_, pp. 35 f., 44, 82, 128, 242, 399 - f.; Babelon, _Origines_, chap. II. The rings appear not to have always - a fixed weight, but the ring, especially if not closed, is a very - convenient form for weighing, v. Bergmann, _Num. Zeits._ 1872, pp. - 172–4. - -Footnote 778: - - Strabo XIII. 590, see above, p. 148. - -Footnote 779: - - Genesis XXIV. 22; cp. Job XLII. 11. - -Footnote 780: - - Macdonald, _Coin Types_, p. 52; cp. Brandis, _Zeits. f. Num._ I. p. - 55. - -Footnote 781: - - Macdonald, _Coin Types_, p. 46. - -Footnote 782: - - Cp. Diog. Laert. I. 2. 9 (from a law of Solon’s), δακτυλιογλύφῳ μὴ - ἐξεῖναι σφραγῖδα φυλάττειν τοῦ πραθέντος δακτυλίου. - -Footnote 783: - - See Macdonald, _Coin Types_, p. 45. - -Footnote 784: - - I incline to the view that the types are in part heraldic (_e.g._ the - lion), but I see nothing in Macdonald’s arguments to invalidate - Ridgeway’s illuminating explanation of many early coin types as - indicating the previous unit of exchange (_e.g._ tunny fish or - tortoise shell; cp. Ridgeway, _Cambridge Companion to Greek Studies_, - § 503). - -Footnote 785: - - Xen. _de Vect._ IV. 21, referring to public slaves; Ael. _V.H._ II. 9 - (Samian prisoners branded with an owl). - -Footnote 786: - - Photius, _F.H.G._ II. p. 483. - -Footnote 787: - - Plut. _Nikias_, 29, the captive Athenians in 413 were branded on the - forehead with a horse, but after being branded they were sold as - domestic slaves (οἰκέται), which makes it possible that the branding - was an act of simple revenge. - -Footnote 788: - - _Timbres Amphoriques de Lindos_, Copenhagen, 1909. - -Footnote 789: - - _Cic. de Off._ III. 38; Lucian, _Nav._ 42, _Bis Acc._ 21; - Philostratus, _Vit. Apoll._ III. 8; Plato, _Rep._ 612_b_. The version - which makes the hero an ancestor of Gyges is found in Proclus, _Comm. - in Remp._ 614_b_ (Teubner, II. p. 111). - -Footnote 790: - - Pollux III. 87, VII. 98. - -Footnote 791: - - Babelon, in his account of the origin of money, rightly points out - (_Origines_, p. 167) that “in general the prince has at his disposal a - greater quantity of precious metal than any banker or merchant.” This - fact does not however affect our argument. As Babelon himself goes on - to observe, the princes of this period, like modern monarchs in the - East, “had in reserve in their treasuries enormous quantities of gold - and silver ingots.” He cites Midas, Alyattes, Croesus and Darius as - coining according to their various requirements from this reserve. But - there is a point that Babelon does not touch. What started these - monarchs coining? If, as Babelon assumes, it was simply the fact that - the previous private coiners supplied bad coins, the position of coins - is on a par with that of any other commodity. We might expect to hear - of kings who became butchers and bakers to ensure their subjects good - bread and good meat. It is therefore more than doubtful whether the - initiative is likely to have come generally from the ruling sovereign. - To imagine again a popular clamour for state control, as is done by - Babelon, _ibid._ pp. 168–9, is probably an anachronism. The platform - would be too constructive and original for a popular agitation. As a - general rule constructive movements begin or at least take shape with - outstanding individuals. Parallels from later periods, such as quoted - by Babelon, p. 171, are dangerous. A populace can of course clamour - for the restoration of lost rights and advantages, that of a state - coinage among the rest. In the days that we are considering no - precedents could be quoted for a state currency. On the other hand, - the situation as conceived either by Babelon or myself implies - outstanding individuals in the mercantile class. It is surely among - these that it is most natural to look for the beginnings alike of a - state coinage and of the new statesmanship that sprang up with it. - This need not, of course, imply that occasionally a monarch of the old - regime did not grasp the situation and himself institute a state - coinage. Pheidon of Argos is a case in point. - -Footnote 792: - - Hdt. VI. 127. - -Footnote 793: - - See below, pp. 156–158. - -Footnote 794: - - Aristot. _Pol._ VII. (V.), 1310_b_. - -Footnote 795: - - _J.H.S._ XXVI. p. 140. Note that in later times Pheidon was regarded - as a typical miser, οἱ λοιποὶ τῶν Ἀθήνησι νεοπλούτων Φείδωνός τε εἰσι - καὶ Γνίφωνος μικροπρεπέστεροι, Alciphron, III. 34, where, however, the - statement may be an inference from the name. - -Footnote 796: - - Strabo VIII. 376, “Ephorus says that in Aegina money was first coined - by Pheidon”; _Marm. Par._ (Jacoby) under 895 B.C. “Pheidon the - Argive ... made a silver coinage in Aegina (ἀφ’ οὗ Φείδων ὁ Ἀργεῖος - ἐδήμευσε τὰ μέτρα καὶ σταθμὰ κατεσκεύασε καὶ νόμισμα ἀργυροῦν ἐν - Αἰγίνῃ ἐποίησεν)”: _Et. Mag._ s.v. ὀβελίσκος, “the first of all men to - strike a coinage was Pheidon the Argive in Aegina”; Eustath. _Comm. - Iliad._ II. 562, “silver was first coined by Pheidias (_sic_) there - (sc. in Aegina).” So, but with no mention of Aegina, and an - implication of other metals besides silver, Strabo VIII. 358, “and he - (sc. Pheidon) invented the measures called Pheidonian, and weights, - and a stamped coinage, particularly that in silver,” and Pollux IX. - 83, “whether Pheidon the Argive was first to strike money or Demodike - of Cyme when married to Midas of Phrygia or Erichthonios and Lykos or - the Lydians or the Naxians.” Aelian, _V.H._ XII. 10, in a list of - Aeginetan achievements mentions their invention of money: he has no - occasion to mention Pheidon but rather the reverse, so that no - conclusion can be drawn from the omission of the name. - -Footnote 797: - - For Aegina as the first place in Greece to coin see Pindar, _Isthm._ - IV. (V.), 1–3: - - Μᾶτερ Ἀελίου πολυώνυμε Θεία - σέο γ’ ἕκατι καὶ μεγασθενῆ νόμισαν - χρυσὸν ἄνθρωποι περιώσιον ἄλλων. - - The statement of the _Et. Mag._ s.v. Εὐβοικὸν νόμισμα that “Pheidon - king of Argos struck a gold coinage in Euboea, a place in Argos,” is - manifestly a hopeless confusion. For the Aeginetan tortoise as the - coin of the Peloponnesus see Pollux IX. 74. - -Footnote 798: - - _Pace_ Macan, Hdt. IV.-VI., vol. I. p. 382. See _e.g._ Hill, _Hist. - Greek Coins_, p. 4; Regling _ap._ Pauly Wissowa s.v. Geld, p. 975; - about the middle of the seventh century, Head, _Hist. Num._^2 p. 394; - rather after than before 650, Willers, _Roem. Kupferpräg._ pp. 8–9, - Svoronos, _J. I. d’A. N._ V. p. 44; about 620 Earle Fox, _Corolla Num. - B. V. Head_, pp. 40, 46; there is no specific evidence either way, but - the earlier date seems much more probable, particularly since the - discovery of the Cretan and Cyprian dumps and the coins from Ephesus - discussed in the preceding chapter. - -Footnote 799: - - Satyrus, fr. 21, _F.H.G._ III. p. 165; Marm. Par. _F.H.G._ I. pp. - 546–7. Theopompus (_ap._ Diod. VII. fr. 17 and Syncellus, _F.H.G._ I. - p. 283) makes Pheidon sixth from Temenos, but this may be due to the - accidental omission of a name. For fifth century pedigrees of the - royal house of Macedon see Hdt. VIII. 137–9. - -Footnote 800: - - Busolt, _Gr. G._^2 I. p. 616. - -Footnote 801: - - On Karanos see also Justin VII. 1. How and Wells, _ad_ Hdt. VI. 127, - refer wrongly to Theopompus as making Karanos a brother of Pheidon. - -Footnote 802: - - Hence the date 894 B.C. assigned to Pheidon by the Parian Marble. - -Footnote 803: - - Strabo VIII. 358; cp. Paus. II. 19. 2. - -Footnote 804: - - _Pindar, Nem._ p. 255. - -Footnote 805: - - See further Busolt, _Gr. G._ I.^2 p. 619, n. 2, and text. Long - pedigrees are not in any case infallible material for arriving at a - precise date. There is always _e.g._ the possibility that here and - there a son who died before his father may have been left out of the - list. A pedigree of the house of Hanover might easily omit Frederic - the father of George III, as is in fact done by Thackeray, who, in - chapter XXX. of the _Virginians_, speaks of Queen Victoria’s great - grandfather, meaning George II. - -Footnote 806: - - Hdt. VI. 127. - -Footnote 807: - - Cp. Schol. Pindar, _Ol._ XIII. 17, παῖδας εἶπεν ... ὡς ἀπογόνους. The - usage is poetical, and if accepted here might point to a poetical - source for the Agariste story. - -Footnote 808: - - Bury, _Pindar, Nem._ pp. 255–6. Bury’s arguments are scarcely affected - by the question (Macan, _Hdt._ IV.-VI., vol. I. _ad_ VI. 127. 11; cp. - _ibid._ _ad_ VI. 127. 2) whether an Argive and Dorian suitor for - Agariste is conceivable. - -Footnote 809: - - _Ap._ Gercke u. Norden, _Einleit. i. d. Altertumsw._ III. pp. 80–105. - -Footnote 810: - - See below, p. 159. - -Footnote 811: - - Hdt. V. 113. - -Footnote 812: - - Paus. II. 19. 2. - -Footnote 813: - - Beloch, _Gr. G._^2 I. ii. pp. 193 f., following Wyttenbach: see Hitzig - and Bluemner, _Paus._ II. 19. 2. - -Footnote 814: - - He is perhaps to be equated also with the luxurious Lakydes, king of - Argos, of Plut. _Mor._ 89_e_. - -Footnote 815: - - Hdt. VII. 149. - -Footnote 816: - - Cp. Paus. IV. 35. 2, Damocratidas, king during the second Messenian - war who does not appear in Theopompus’ list. Plut., _de Fort. Alex._ 8 - (_Mor._ 340_c_), actually declares that the Heraclid royal family - became extinct, and that a certain Aegon was indicated by the oracle - to succeed them. Of this dynastic change there is no hint in - Theopompus. Modern sceptics again, distrusting every statement about - Pheidon not contained in Hdt. VI. 127, have doubted Pheidon’s royal - descent, regarding it as an invention of Theopompus, beyond whom it - cannot be traced. But if we assume that Theopompus glorified Pheidon - to please the Macedonian royal family, we must suppose that the latter - were anxious from the beginning to have their connexion with Pheidon - brought into prominence, which would hardly have been the case if - Pheidon had been regarded as an upstart; cp. Hdt. VIII. 137. - -Footnote 817: - - Paus. VI. 22. 2. - -Footnote 818: - - First suggested by Falconer, _ad_ Strab. VIII. 355, and first fully - discussed by Weissenborn, _Hellen_, pp. 18 f.; accepted by Busolt, - Bury, and Macan, and by many earlier scholars, see E. Curtius, _Gr. - G._ I.^6 p. 660, n. 72. - -Footnote 819: - - Paus. VI. 22. 2. - -Footnote 820: - - Strabo VIII. 355. - -Footnote 821: - - Unger, _Philol._ XXVIII. (1869), pp. 399 f., followed by Duncker, - _Ges. d. Alt._ V.^5 p. 546; Holm, _Hist. Greece_ (Eng. trans.), I. p. - 213; Reinach, _L’Hist. par les Monnaies_, p. 35; Radet, _Rev. Univ. du - Midi_, 1895, pp. 120–1; P. Gardner, _Earliest Coins of Greece Proper_, - p. 7; and very tentatively by Head, _Hist. Num._^2 p. xliv. - -Footnote 822: - - _Philol._ XXVIII. pp. 401 f.; Euseb. _Chron._ I. 33, Olymp. 28, “the - Eleians being occupied through their war against the Dymaeans.” - -Footnote 823: - - Strabo VIII. 358. - -Footnote 824: - - _J.H.S._ II. pp. 164–178. - -Footnote 825: - - Busolt, _Gr. G._^2 I. p. 586. - -Footnote 826: - - Plut. _Numa_, 1. - -Footnote 827: - - C. Mueller, _Aeginetica_, p. 58, ignored by Jacoby, _Marm. Par._ - (1904), pp. 158–162. - -Footnote 828: - - See further, Bury, _Pindar, Nemeans_, pp. 253–4, and _ibid._ Bury’s - discussion of the tyrants’ connexions with the great games. - -Footnote 829: - - Ridgeway, _Orig. Met. Curr._ p. 216. - -Footnote 830: - - Svoronos, _J. I. d’A. N._ V. (1902), p. 44: their other main mint was - at Alexandria. - -Footnote 831: - - _E.g._ Head, _Hist. Num._^2 pp. xliv, 394–5; G. F. Hill, _Hist. Greek - Coins_, p. 4; cp. Babelon, _Origines_, pp. 211–3; Earle Fox, _Corolla - Numis. B. V. Head_, p. 34. - -Footnote 832: - - _E.g._ Th. Reinach, _Rev. Num._ 1894, pp. 2–3; P. Gardner, _Earliest - Coins Greece Proper_, p. 8; F. Cauer _ap._ Pauly Wissowa s.v. Argolis, - p. 733; Macan, _Hdt._ IV.-VI. vol. I. p. 382; How and Wells, _Hdt._ - vol. II. pp. 117–8. - -Footnote 833: - - Lehmann-Haupt, _Hermes_, XXVII. (1892), p. 557; Beloch, _Gr. G._^2 I. - ii. p. 196. - -Footnote 834: - - Plut. _Lys._ 17; Pollux VII. 105; IX. 77–8; cp. Plut. _Fab. Max._ 27; - Hdt. II. 135; and perhaps Caes. _B.G._ V. 12 (reading “taleis” as - against “anulis”). - -Footnote 835: - - Jevons, _Money_^{23}, p. 28. - -Footnote 836: - - See Homolle _ap._ Saglio, _Dict. Ant._ s.v. donarium, pp. 374, n. 155 - and 378. It is hardly surprising (_pace_ Th. Reinach, _Rev. Num._ - 1894, p. 5) that no instance there quoted is contemporary with the - first recorded event in Greek history. Nor is Reinach’s psychology - sound when he maintains (_ibid._) that giving away what one no longer - needs is an action that by its sentimental or archaeological character - betrays a rather recent epoch. Reinach, _Rev. Num._ 1894, pp. 1–8, - notes that the ancients often kept in their temples samples of weights - and measures and quotes examples from Athens, Delos, Lebadea, Rome - (see also Homolle _ap._ Saglio, _Dict. Ant._ s.v. donarium, n. 176), - whereas there is no other certain instance of the dedication of a - disused currency (Paus. X. 14. 1, dedication at Delphi of double axes - by Periklytos of Tenedos, is so interpreted by Babelon, _Origines_, - pp. 75 f., 208, but see Regling _ap._ Pauly Wissowa s.v. Geld, p. 974 - and references _ibid._ Coins have been found in temples superscribed - ἀνάθεμα (dedication) and ἱαρόν (sacred), Babelon, _Origines_, p. 208, - but these may be nearer in intention to the modern offertory than to - Pheidon’s reputed dedication). He therefore maintains that the - ὀβελίσκοι were not called in by Pheidon, but first issued by him: - Pheidon’s invention thus becomes something that happened in Argos not - in Aegina, and must be put back at least into the eighth century. - Reinach accordingly dates the tyrant eighth Olympiad (748 B.C.). His - conjecture only carries weight if that is regarded as the most - probable date for Pheidon, against which see above, pp. 159–160. - -Footnote 837: - - Svoronos, _J. I. d’A. N._ IX. (1906), pls. X.-XII. For connecting iron - spits with the coinage at Argos cp. perhaps the Argive iron coins of - usual shape and type, Koehler, _Ath. Mitt._ VII. pp. 1–7, dating, - however, only from the fourth century B.C. - -Footnote 838: - - _Tiryns_, I. p. 114. It does not follow simply from this that they - were demonetized offerings, and not standard samples. Spits on the new - standard may have circulated concurrently with the new silver coinage. - In Thebes and Sparta very heavy iron spits were used as currency as - late as the fourth century, Plut. _Fab. Max._ 27; _Lysand._ 17. On the - other hand the spits published by de Cou in the _Argive Heraeum_ (vol. - II. pp. 300–323, pls. CXXVII.-CXXXII.; cp. vol. I. p. 63), appear to - be mainly of the Geometric period, and discountenance the view that a - spit currency was instituted by Pheidon and went on after him. - -Footnote 839: - - V. 82–89. - -Footnote 840: - - Hdt. V. 83; cp. VIII. 46 and Paus. II. 29. 5. - -Footnote 841: - - Hdt. V. 83. “The thalassocracy might be local and relative to - Epidaurus,” Macan, _ad loc._ - -Footnote 842: - - Hdt. V. 88. - -Footnote 843: - - Hence too, _pace_ How and Wells, it is improbable that the Argives who - helped Aegina were merely mercenaries. - -Footnote 844: - - Hdt. V. 84. - -Footnote 845: - - Cp. ἐκ τόσου, Hdt. V. 88 (89), and Macan, _ad loc._ - -Footnote 846: - - Macan, _Hdt. IV-VI._ vol. II. p. 106; cp. How and Wells, _Hdt._ V. 86. - 4; so C. Mueller, _Aeginetica_, p. 73 (“coniectura satis uaga”), - _F.H.G._ II. p. 481; Duncker, _Ges. d. Alt._ IV.^1 p. 312, n. 1; - Helbig, _Homer. Epos._^2 p. 162; Hirschfeld _ap._ Pauly Wissowa s.v. - Aigina, p. 966; Amelung, _ibid._ s.v. χιτών, p. 2327; Studniczka, - _Altgr. Tracht_, p. 4; Abrahams, _Gk. Dress_, p. 39. - -Footnote 847: - - Macan, _Hdt. IV-VI._ vol. II. p. 106, successful war with Megara, - conquest of Salamis, new coinage, development of trade and commerce, - patronage of Delos. - -Footnote 848: - - _Pace_ Duncker, _Ges. d. Alt._ VI.^5 p. 52. - -Footnote 849: - - How and Wells, _Hdt._ V. 84. 1. - -Footnote 850: - - Hdt. V. 87. - -Footnote 851: - - Hdt. I. 61; Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 17; cp. Hdt. V. 94; Plut. _Cato Mai._ - 24. - -Footnote 852: - - Studniczka, _Altgr. Tracht_, p. 4. - -Footnote 853: - - Hdt. III. 50–52; Her. Pont. _ap._ Diog. Laert. I. 7. 1; Paus. II. 28. - 8; Athen. XIII. 589 f. - -Footnote 854: - - His father-in-law is said to have perished in the second Messenian - war; cp. Diog. Laert. I. 7. 1 with Strabo VIII. 362; Paus. IV. 17. 2, - 22. 7. - -Footnote 855: - - _Aeginetica_, pp. 63–73. - -Footnote 856: - - Plut. _de Pyth. Or._ 19 (_Moral._ 403). Neither Plutarch’s story nor - Mueller’s inference is confirmed by the fact that the story of the - wooing of Procles’ daughter is quoted by Athenaeus XIII. 589 f. from - “Pythaenetus in his third book about Aegina.” - -Footnote 857: - - Hdt. V. 88; cp. Athen. XI. 502_c_. - -Footnote 858: - - This fact is obscured by Hoppin’s translation of the passage, _Argive - Heraeum_ II. p. 175, who renders τῶν θεῶν τούτων “_their_ gods,” ἱρόν - “temples,” and omits αὐτόθι. - -Footnote 859: - - Macan, _Hdt. IV.-VI._ _ad loc._; cp. How and Wells, _ad loc._ - -Footnote 860: - - Below, Appendix B. - -Footnote 861: - - Cp. its continuation, if continuation it was, under the tyrants. For - Athens with no fleet about 650 B.C. see B. Keil, _Solon. Verfass._ p. - 94. For Athens and Mitylene, E. Meyer, _Ges. d. Alt._ II. sect. 402, - n. - -Footnote 862: - - E. Meyer, _ibid._ sect. 403 n. - -Footnote 863: - - Plut. _de Exil._ 10 (_Moral._ 603) (Cyclades settled first by the sons - of Minos, later by those of Kodros and Neilos); Plut. _Solon_, 26 - (Aipeia in Cyprus founded by a son of Theseus). - -Footnote 864: - - Bacchyl. XVI.; cp. Paus. I. 17. 3. Theseus fetches the ring to prove - himself a true son of Poseidon, and brings with it a crown. - -Footnote 865: - - Perrot et Chipiez, X. pl. ix.; Buschor, _Gr. Vasenmal._^1 fig. 113. - -Footnote 866: - - S. Reinach, _Cultes, Mythes, et Relig._ II. p. 218. Theseus’ connexion - with Troezen, Paus. I. 27. 7, points to the Athens of the period as - powerful in the Saronic Gulf. - -Footnote 867: - - _Rev. Arch._^3 XXV. (1894), pp. 14–15. Add _Arch. Eph._ 1898, pl. V. 1 - (Eleusis). - -Footnote 868: - - _Mém. Acad. Inscr. et B.-L._ XXXVI. (1898), p. 390. - -Footnote 869: - - _Ibid._ p. 421, based on Brueckner and Pernice, _Ath. Mitt._ XVIII. - (1893), p. 153. For further discussion of this naval question see - below, Appendix C. - -Footnote 870: - - _E.g._ Lady Evans, _Greek Dress_, pp. 24 and 29; cp. p. 28: - Studniczka, _Ges. Altgr. Tracht_, pp. 13, 29; Helbig, _Epos._^2 pp. - 162–163. - -Footnote 871: - - See below, Appendix D. - -Footnote 872: - - A paper on this subject is being prepared by my wife. - -Footnote 873: - - Plut. _Sol._ 21. - -Footnote 874: - - Bury, _Hist. Greece_^2, p. 174. - -Footnote 875: - - Cp. the 346 iron brooches (peronai) in the extant (fifth century) - inventory of this temple, Furtwaengler, _Berl. Phil. Woch._ 1901, pp. - 1004–5, 1597–9. - -Footnote 876: - - Rings, pp. 35, 394; ear-rings, p. 35; fibulae (but not with pins), p. - 42. Add _Brit. Mus. Cat. Jewellery_, early Greek fibula no. 1089 - (Rhodes); Furtwaengler, _Winckelmannspr._ 1883, pp. 5–10, archaic - Greek gold ornaments found at Vetterfeld, all apparently weighing some - multiple of the Attic drachma. On the whole question of ring money, - see above, chapter V, p. 148. Ridgeway is criticized by Svoronos, _J. - I. d’A. N._ IX. p. 184, who, however, admits the main fact that - “goldsmiths habitually make their ornaments from a specific weight of - metal in agreement with the prevalent standard of weight.” We must of - course beware of arguing from the practice of places like modern - Nigeria, where the native jewellers are in the habit of making up - rings and other objects out of coins supplied for the purpose by their - customers, see _e.g._ J. W. Scott Macfie, _Rev. d’Ethn. et de Sociol._ - 1912, p. 282. - -Footnote 877: - - As in Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 10, “the increase of the μέτρα and of the - σταθμοί.” - -Footnote 878: - - Pheidon’s invention is described by Pliny, _N.H._ VII. 57 as - concerning “mensuras et pondera.” - -Footnote 879: - - Suid. s.v.; Harpocrat. s.v. - -Footnote 880: - - Cp. the Delos inventory. - -Footnote 881: - - _E.g._ (didrachms), _J. I. d’A. N._ 1912, pp. 17, 18, nos. 1727, 1728, - 1732 (12·06, 12·14, 12·26); _Hermes_, XXVII. p. 558 (13·44); cp. Head, - _Hist. Num._^2 p. xlv. Note, however, Willers, _Roem. Kupf._ p. 9, in - Brit. Mus. 38, very archaic weigh 11·713; 20 more advanced weigh - 12·266. - -Footnote 882: - - P. Gardner, _Hist. of Anc. Coinage_, p. 152. - -Footnote 883: - - _E.g._ _J. I. d’A. N._ 1912, pp. 1, 3, drachmae nos. 1038, 1044, 1083, - 1093 (3·60, 4·12, 4·10, 3·95), didrachms nos. 1042, 1043 (8·48, 8·20). - -Footnote 884: - - Of the weights found at Naukratis, Petrie, _Naukratis_, I. pp. 83–4, - 87, notes that the earliest Aeginetan are the heaviest, the earliest - Attic the lightest. - -Footnote 885: - - According to Pollux IX. 76, the Aeginetan drachma contained ten Attic - obols, and was thus a little _more_ than half as heavy again as the - Attic drachma, which contained six Attic obols. This statement is not - easily explained. It is doubtful what period it refers to. - -Footnote 886: - - Ridgeway, _Metallic Currency_, pp. 219–228; cp. _ibid._ 307, 311, and - _J.H.S._ VIII. (1887), pp. 140 f.; cp. also, Head, _Hist. Num._^2 p. - 395. - -Footnote 887: - - For the gradual rise in value of silver, see Reinach, _Hist. par les - Monnaies_, pp. 72–3; in 438 B.C. gold was to silver as 14 : 1, in 408 - as 12 : 1, in 356 as 10 : 1. For the fall in weight of the Attic - silver pieces struck on the gold standard, cp. the fall from the - Homeric gold talent of 135 grains to the Persian gold Daric of 130 - grains, Ridgeway, _Met. Curr._ p. 126. - -Footnote 888: - - Hdt. VI. 127; cp. Pliny, _N.H._ VII. 57. 7; Euseb. _Chron._ anno - Abrahami 1201; Jerome, anno Abrahami 1198. - -Footnote 889: - - Pollux IX. 74. - -Footnote 890: - - Koehler, _Rhein. Mus._ XLVI. (1891), p. 3. - -Footnote 891: - - Wilamowitz, _Aristot. u. Athen._ II. pp. 280–288; so E. Meyer, _Ges. - d. Alt._ II. sect. 341 n. (p. 538). - -Footnote 892: - - Hdt. VI. 87–93. - -Footnote 893: - - _Ibid._ VI. 92. - -Footnote 894: - - Cp. Soph. _O.T._ 1269; Eurip. _Hec._ 1170. - -Footnote 895: - - Hdt. VI. 92, IX. 73–5. - -Footnote 896: - - Thuc. I. 41; cp. the inscription _ap._ Koehler, _Rhein. Mus._ XLVI. - (1891), p. 5, n. 1. - -Footnote 897: - - Macan, _Hdt. IV-VI._ vol. II. p. 103. - -Footnote 898: - - _Ibid._ p. 106. - -Footnote 899: - - Cp. Macan, _Hdt. IV-VI._ vol. II. p. 107. - -Footnote 900: - - Pollux IX. 76. - -Footnote 901: - - Strabo VIII. 358. - -Footnote 902: - - Above, pp. 162–4. - -Footnote 903: - - _Ap._ Strabo VIII. 358. - -Footnote 904: - - Plato, _Laws_, III. 683_c-d_; Diod. VII. 13. - -Footnote 905: - - Strabo VIII. 389; Paus. II. 29. 5, VII. 4. 2; cp. Hdt. VIII. 46, but - contrast Schol. Pind. _Ol._ VIII. 39, “a certain Triakon of Argos - settled Aegina.” Mueller, _Aeginetica_, p. 67 reconciles the two - versions by stating that Deiophontes, “per Triaconem Aeginam - occupaverat.” Triakon appears in Tzetzes, _Chil._ VII. 133 (ll. 317, - 319) as developing Aeginetan shipping after Aeacus: - - ὁ Αἰακὸς κατάρξας δὲ ποιεῖν αὐτοῖς ὁλκάδας - ὥσπερ καὶ μετὰ θάνατον τοῦ Αἰακοῦ Τριάκων. - -Footnote 906: - - The troubles that led up to the war had begun with a refusal of the - Epidaurians to make their annual payment to Athens, Hdt. V. 82, 84. - -Footnote 907: - - Hdt. I. 82. - -Footnote 908: - - Strabo VIII. 358. - -Footnote 909: - - Paus. II. 24. 7. - -Footnote 910: - - C. Mueller, _Aeginetica_, p. 53. - -Footnote 911: - - Strabo VIII. 362; Paus. IV. 14. 8, 15. 1, 7, 17. 7. Beloch and his - followers, _e.g._ Costanzi, _Riv. Stor. Ant._ V. p. 522, follow their - general practice and post-date the war. - -Footnote 912: - - Hdt. III. 47. - -Footnote 913: - - Thuc. I. 13. - -Footnote 914: - - παγὰς ἀργυρορίζους, Stesich. fr. 4 (5). The river is the Baetis - (Guadalquivir). - -Footnote 915: - - Hdt. IV. 152. For Aeginetan aspirations towards the Spanish Eldorado, - see perhaps Pindar, _Nem._ III. 21, IV. 69. - -Footnote 916: - - C. Mueller, _Aeginetica_, p. 73. - -Footnote 917: - - _F.H.G._ II. p. 481. Duris makes the Spartans take the place of the - Argives, and the hapless Athenian is blinded before being put to - death. Duris, however, is plainly based on Herodotus: Spartans are - substituted for Argives as the enemies of Athens under fifth century - influence, and a little archaeology is thrown in, borrowed perhaps - from Thucydides, I. 6. The position of the story in the narrative of - Duris might indicate his view (not necessarily correct) as to its - date, but we know only that it occurred in the second book of his - Horae (Schol. Eurip. _Hec._ 915, where the fragment is preserved, “ἐν - τῷ ιβ τῶν Ὡρῶν”; “recte procul dubio Hullemanus ἐν τῷ β,” _F.H.G._ _ad - loc._), which mentioned events of the sixth century, and may have - dealt with the seventh also. - -Footnote 918: - - Paus. II. 6. 7, 7. 1, 13. 1; cp. Strabo VIII. 389. - -Footnote 919: - - Hdt. V. 67, war of Cleisthenes, the third tyrant of the family, with - Argos, and his device for inducing the Argive hero Adrastus, who was - buried in Sicyon, to quit the city. - -Footnote 920: - - Paus. IV. 15. 1, 23. 4. This is firmer evidence, _pace_ Hicks, - _Cambridge Comp. Greek Stud._^1 p. 58, n. 3, than Plut. _Moral._ 194 - (_Reg. et Imp. Apoph._), where Epaminondas, speaking in 369 B.C., - declares “that he had refounded Messene after an interval of 230 - years.” Plutarch may equally well be used as evidence that the - extinction of archaic Messene did not synchronize with the end of the - second Messenian war. - -Footnote 921: - - Paus. IV. 15. 7, 17. 7. - -Footnote 922: - - Cp. Paus. II. 6. 7, 7. 1: “Phalkes, son of Temenos with his Dorians - seized Sicyon,” ... “from that time the Sicyonians became Dorians and - formed part of Argolis.” - -Footnote 923: - - For its lapse in the interval see references below, p. 183, n. 3. On - the tyranny at Sicyon, see below, chapter IX. - -Footnote 924: - - Strabo VIII. 389, cp. 369, 335; Ptol. III. 14. 33, 34. - -Footnote 925: - - _Il._ VI. 152, ἔστι πόλις Ἐφύρη μυχῷ Ἄργεος ἱπποβότοιο. - -Footnote 926: - - Paus. II. 1. 1. - -Footnote 927: - - Paus. II. 4. 2 (trans. Frazer). “Like every attentive reader of Homer, - I am persuaded that Bellerophon was not an independent monarch, but a - vassal of Proetus, king of Argos. Even after Bellerophon had migrated - to Lycia, the Corinthians are known to have been still subject to the - lords of Argos or Mycenae. Again, in the army which attacked Troy, the - Corinthian contingent was not commanded by a general of its own, but - was brigaded with the Mycenaean and other troops commanded by - Agamemnon.” - -Footnote 928: - - Apollodorus II. 8. 4. - -Footnote 929: - - Plut. _Amat. Narr._ B (_Moral._ 772); Schol. _ap._ Rhod. _Arg._ IV. - 1212; see also Diod. VIII. 10; Alex. Aetol. _Anth. Lyr._ I. 208; Max. - Tyr. (ed. Teubner), XVIII.: cp. Wilisch, _Jahrb. Class. Phil._ 1876, - pp. 586 f. - -Footnote 930: - - Cleisthenes, the tyrant of Sicyon, regarded with particular favour one - of his daughter’s suitors, “because he was related by descent to the - Cypselids of Corinth,” Hdt. VI. 128 (quoted by Grote in this - connexion). For friendship between Corinth and Sicyon at this time, - see perhaps also Nic. Dam. _F.H.G._ III. p. 395; cp. Wilisch, _Goett. - Gel. Anz._ 1880, II. p. 1195. - -Footnote 931: - - Thuc. VI. 3, 4; Thucydides must be preferred to Strabo VI. 269, 267, - who says the first Greek cities in Sicily included Syracuse, and were - founded in the tenth generation after the Trojan wars (_i.e._ about - 800 B.C., E. Meyer, _Ges. d. Alt._ II. sect. 302 n.). - -Footnote 932: - - Jacoby, _Marm. Par._ p. 158. - -Footnote 933: - - _Ibid._ _ad loc._ - -Footnote 934: - - See perhaps Plato, _Laws_, 690_d-e_. - -Footnote 935: - - Aristot. _Pol._ II. 1265_b_. - -Footnote 936: - - Schol. Pind. _Ol._ XIII. 20. - -Footnote 937: - - _Ad_ _Ol._ XIII. 27. - -Footnote 938: - - A quotation at length is needed to illustrate our authority’s - mentality. He explains τίς γὰρ ἱππείοις ἐν ἔντεσσιν μέτρα ἐπέθηκε, - _Ol._ XIII. 27, thus: “by gear he is meaning quarts and bushels owing - to their hollowness ... now of this gear for measures he says that the - Corinthians were the inventors. But why did he call them equestrian? - Because Pheidon, who first struck their measures for the Corinthians, - was an Argive, and the poets call Argos equestrian: Eurip. (_I.T._ - 700), ‘when to Hellas and to equestrian Argos thou dost come’.” - -Footnote 939: - - Justin VII. 1; cp. above, p. 156. - -Footnote 940: - - Strabo VII. 326. - -Footnote 941: - - For the lot of Temenos having been really dissipated, see Paus. II. - 26. 2, 28. 3; VIII. 27. 1; II. 36. 5; III. 7. 4; IV. 8. 3, 14. 3, 34. - 9. - -Footnote 942: - - _F.H.G._ III. p. 378, fr. 41. - -Footnote 943: - - The Argive tyrant’s overlordship in Corinth is accepted, but put into - the eighth century by Unger, _Philol._ XXVIII. pp. 399 f., XXIX. pp. - 245 f., and Wilisch, _Neue Jahrb._ 1876, pp. 585 f. - -Footnote 944: - - Svoronos, _J. I. d’A. N._ V. p. 42 states that some of the earliest - “tortoises” are bad money (κίβδηλα), and suggests that Pheidon debased - the coinage when his prosperity began to diminish towards the end of - his reign. This suggestion has no direct confirmation, but it - harmonizes with what is known of the fall of the tyranny in other - places, notably Athens, where it coincides with the loss of the - Paionian mines, and Rome, where Tarquin fell, “exhaustus munificentia - publicorum operum.” - -Footnote 945: - - I. 13. - -Footnote 946: - - Cp. Livy XXXIII. 32; Val. Max. IV. 8. 5; Aristid. _Isthmic._ p. 102. - -Footnote 947: - - Thuc. I. 13; cp. Strabo VIII. 378. - -Footnote 948: - - cp. δυνατωτέρας γενομένης τῆς Ἑλλάδος καὶ τῶν χρημάτων τὴν κτῆσιν ἔτι - μᾶλλον ποιουμένης τυραννίδες ἐν ταῖς πόλεσι καθίσταντο, τῶν προσόδων - μειζόνων γιγνομένων with οἱ Κορίνθιοι ... χρήμασί τε δυνατοὶ ἦσαν ... - καὶ ἐμπόριον ...; παρέχοντες δυνατὴν ἔσχον χρημάτων προσόδῳ τὴν πόλιν. - -Footnote 949: - - Cp. perhaps the tradition which makes the artist Butades migrate from - (proto-Corinthian?) Sicyon to Corinth. Pliny, _N.H._ XXXV. 43 (12). - -Footnote 950: - - Pliny, _N.H._ VII. 57 (56), figlinas (inuenit) Coroebus Atheniensis, - in iis orbem Anarcharsis Scythes, ut alii Hyperbius Corinthius. Schol. - Pind. _Ol._ XIII. 27 (on achievements of Corinthians), Δίδυμος δέ φησι - δηλοῦσθαι τὸν κεραμεικὸν τρόχον ἐκ μεταφορᾶς. - -Footnote 951: - - Birch, _Hist. Pott._ p. 185. For Corinthian textiles see Barth, - _Corinth. Comm._ pp. 22 f. quoting Athen. I. 27_d_, XII. 525_d_., - XIII. 582d, Aristoph. _Ranae_ 440. For general industrial activities - see Strabo 382, γραφική τε καὶ πλαστικὴ καὶ πᾶσα ἡ τοιαύτη δημιουργία; - Oros. V. 3, officina omnium artificum atque artificiorum. - -Footnote 952: - - From recent excavations of the American School. I am indebted for the - photograph to Miss A. Walker. - -Footnote 953: - - Cp. below, p. 242. - -Footnote 954: - - _E.g._ 79 vases in one grave in Rhodes, _Jahrb._ I. 144. - -Footnote 955: - - _Gr. G._^2 I. 459, n. 6. - -Footnote 956: - - See for instance the story of Demaratus and Tarquinii, discussed in - the chapter on Rome. - -Footnote 957: - - Bluemner, _Gewerb. Tätig._ 35–37; Wilisch, _Jahrb. Gym. Zittau_, 1901, - p. 7. - -Footnote 958: - - Gyges used the Corinthian treasury at Delphi (Hdt. I. 14). Periander - sent slaves to Alyattes (Hdt. III. 49). - -Footnote 959: - - The revolts from Corinth of Corcyra and Megara are also associated by - Busolt (_Lakedaim._ I. 200) with the rise of Cypselus. If they helped - it, it was probably by discrediting the ruling Bacchiads. - -Footnote 960: - - _Gr. G._^2 I. 627 (where “seventh” century is a misprint for “sixth”; - cp. p. 651); cp. p. 499 and Wilisch, _Jahrb. Gym. Zittau_, 1901, p. - 25. - -Footnote 961: - - _Brit. Mus. Cat. Coins Corinth_, p. xviii; _Hist. Num._^2 _ad loc._ - -Footnote 962: - - _Earliest Coins Greece Proper_, pp. 22 f. - -Footnote 963: - - Aristot. _Pol._ VII. (V.), 1315_b_; Nic. Dam. _F.H.G._ III. p. 392. - -Footnote 964: - - Hdt. V. 92. 21. - -Footnote 965: - - For full references see Busolt, _Gr. G._^2 I. pp. 642–3. - -Footnote 966: - - Strabo X. 452; cp. Busolt, _Gr. G._^2 I. 642, who quotes also Strabo - I. 59, Polyb. V. 5. 12. - -Footnote 967: - - Aristot. _Oecon._ II. 1346_a-b_. - -Footnote 968: - - Suid. s.v. Κυψελιδῶν ἀναθήματα. - -Footnote 969: - - Cp. Knapp, _Korrespondenz-Bl. Gelehrt-Schulen Wuerttembergs_, 1888, p. - 120, n. 1, who compares fourteenth century Italian tyrants. - -Footnote 970: - - Plut. _de Ei ap. Delph._ 3 (_Moral._ 385); Dio Chrys. XXXVII. 456M - (103 R); Plato, _Ep._ 2. The unfriendly Nic. Dam. _F.H.G._ III. p. - 393, quotes this view, but adds τὸ δὲ οὐκ ἦν; cp. Plato, _Rep._ I. - 336; _Protag._ 343_a_. Appian (_bell. Mithr._ 28) does not mention - Periander, but accepts his claim: “of the seven sages so called all - who engaged in active life ruled and tyrannized more savagely than the - normal tyrant (ὠμότερον τῶν ἰδιωτικῶν τυράννων).” - -Footnote 971: - - “Periander first changed the government (πρῶτος μετέστησε τὴν ἀρχήν),” - Heraclides, _F.H.G._ II. p. 213; “Periander, the son of Cypselus king - of Corinth, received the kingdom by inheritance from his father and - out of savagery and violence turned it into a tyranny,” Nic. Dam. - _F.H.G._ III. p. 393; “they say that Periander the Corinthian was - originally popular (δημοτικόν), but afterwards changed his policy and - became tyrannical,” Greg. Cypr. III. 30 = Leutsch, _Paroem. Gr._ II. - p. 89; cp. (almost the same words) Schol. _Hipp. Maj._ 304 E; cp. also - Diog. Laert. I. 7. 5. Hdt. V. 92. 23 regards Periander’s early - mildness as a change from Cypselus, but his account is frankly - anti-Cypselid. - -Footnote 972: - - “Cypselus was a demagogue and throughout his reign remained without a - bodyguard: but Periander proved tyrannical but warlike,” Aristot. - _Pol._ VII. (V.), 1315_b_, where Cypselus’ alleged demagogism is - probably only a late inference from a genuine tradition that he was - not a soldier: see chap I. p. 31. The passages quoted in the last note - from Heraclides and Nicolaus go on at once to mention that Periander - instituted an armed bodyguard, and Nicolaus adds that “he made - repeated campaigns and was warlike.” This statement may be accepted - though the context of the last passage shows that the picture of the - tyrannical Periander is influenced by the conception of the tyrant as - a military despot prevalent since Aristotle (see chap. I. pp. 28 f.). - The maxim καλὸν ἡσυχία (peace is a good thing) is attributed to - Periander by Diog. Laert. I. 7. 4, but such utterances are notoriously - quite consistent with the most aggressive military policy. - -Footnote 973: - - Nic. Dam. _F.H.G._ III. p. 393 (a son of Periander founded Potidaea); - cp. How and Wells, _Hdt._ vol. II. p. 341 on Potidaea and Epidamnus - (founded 626 B.C. Euseb.; cp. Thuc. I. 24) as controlling the great - road from Durazzo to Salonika. The road traversed the land of the - Lynkestai, whose kings claimed Corinthian descent, Strabo VII. 326. - -Footnote 974: - - Heraclides, _F.H.G._ II. p. 213. - -Footnote 975: - - Nic. Dam. _ibid._ - -Footnote 976: - - Hdt. V. 92; Aristot. _Pol._ III. 1284_a_, VII. (V.), 1311_a_; Dion. - Hal. IV. 56. Myres, _J.H.S._ XXVI. pp. 110 f. makes Periander an - active partner in the Milesian thalassocracy, which he dates at this - period. Reasons for not accepting Myres on the Milesian thalassocracy - are suggested in the chapter on Egypt, but his account of Periander’s - naval support of Thrasybulus is valuable and convincing. Myres quotes - the story of Arion and his wonderful adventure with the pirates and - the dolphins on the Corinthian merchant ship that was bearing him to - Periander’s court, Hdt. I. 23–4; Plut. _Sept. Sap. Conv._ 18 f. - (_Moral._ 161). - -Footnote 977: - - Hdt. III. 48, 49; Nic. Dam. _F.H.G._ III. pp. 393–4; Plut. _de Mal. - Hdt._ 22, 23 (_Moral._ 859–861); Diog. Laert. I. 7. 2. Hence Movers, - _Phoen._ II. iii. 109, calls Periander a slave dealer; so also - Wilisch, _Gœtt. Gel. Anz._ 1880, p. 1202, _Jahrb. Gym. Zittau_, 1901, - p. 22, n. 9, who refers also to Hdt. VIII. 105 (on Panionios the Chian - who in the early part of the fifth century “made his living” by - mutilating boys whom “he took and sold at Sardis and Ephesus for great - sums”). Wilisch infers also, _ibid._ p. 22, from the ἱερόδουλοι or - consecrated prostitutes of the Corinthian temple of Aphrodite, an - import from Asia to Corinth of female slaves: see Athen. XIII. 573; - Strabo VIII. 378 and perhaps 347. This view is not necessarily - contradicted by Heraclides, who declares (_F.H.G._ II. p. 213) that - Periander drowned all the procuresses in the city (Steinmetz however - reads ἀπέδυσε, stripped). Heraclides is not indeed discredited by the - fact that Athenaeus X. 443_a_, makes not only Periander but also - Cleomenes or Cleomis tyrant of Methymna dispose of loose women in this - Napoleonic way. The double assignation decides neither whether the - story is true or false nor which way went the borrowing. But Wilisch - and Heraclides may both be right. A tyrant who traded in prostitutes - might yet be most severe on unlicensed prostitution. - -Footnote 978: - - Busolt, _Gr. G._^2 II. 466. - -Footnote 979: - - See below, pp. 212–4. - -Footnote 980: - - Diog. Laert. I. 7. 6; cp. E. Curtius, _Pelop._ I. 13; Gerster, _Isthme - de Corinthe_, _B.C.H._ VIII. (1884), pp. 225 f. - -Footnote 981: - - Cp. the epitaph, Diog. Laert. I. 7. 3, - - πλούτου καὶ σοφίης πρύτανιν πατρὶς ἥδε Κόρινθος - κόλποις ἀγχίαλος γῆ Περίανδρον ἔχει. - -Footnote 982: - - _F.H.G._ III. p. 393; cp. Heraclides, _F.H.G._ II. p. 213, “putting a - complete stop to the acquisition of slaves and to luxury.” These - statements are treated sceptically by Busolt, _Gr. G._^2 I. p. 646 - (mainly on the dangerous ground that Periander’s behaviour is too - typical to be true), and by Poehlmann, _Grundr. Gr. G._^1 62, ^479, - but accepted or defended by Knapp, _op. cit._ p. 119; Duncker, _G. d. - A._ VI.^5 63; Wilisch, _Jahrb. Gym. Zittau_, 1901, p. 17; cp. p. 12; - Meyer, _G. d. A._ II. 621; Beloch, _Gr. G._^2 I. i. p. 270. These - writers mainly explain the measures as intended to protect small home - industries against large slave factories (so Busolt, _Lakedaim._ p. - 201). Porzio, _Cipselidi_, p. 235, n., rightly points out that the - authors who preserve this notice did not so understand it, but wrongly - maintains that this fact is fatal to the explanation. Porzio’s own - explanation (that the Cypselids’ taxation led to discontent which - endangered the tyrants whose “main care was therefore to empty the - city by forcing their subjects to live solitary and scattered in the - country,” _ibid._ p. 236) runs counter to the facts, which show that - cities increased under the tyranny. - -Footnote 983: - - _F.H.G._ II. 213. - -Footnote 984: - - Diog. Laert. I. 7. 5. - -Footnote 985: - - Cp. Wilisch, _Jahrb. Gym. Zittau_, 1901, p. 13, “promotion of home - industries, attitude towards slave labour, introduction of the - coinage, these were the main questions for the government of the - Cypselids, especially Periander”; so Busolt, _Lakedaim._ I. 202, 211. - -Footnote 986: - - Strabo VIII. 378; cp. Barth, _Corinth. Comm._ p. 14. Strabo calls the - Bacchiads tyrants, probably in the later sense of bad despotic rulers. - Note, however, that he associates their “tyranny” with great wealth - and commercial connexions. “The Bacchiads too became tyrants, and - being wealthy and many and of distinguished family for some two - hundred years they held rule and exploited the market with impunity. - These Cypselus put down and himself became tyrant.... Of the wealth - associated with this house there is evidence in the dedication of - Cypselus at Olympia, a hammered gold statue of large size.” Busolt, - _Lakedaim._ I. 201–3, thinks that the Bacchiads had the industry of - Corinth in their own hands, and that they employed in it numerous - slaves who proved irresistible competitors to the crowd of _petit - bourgeois_, and that Cypselus made himself tyrant by putting himself - at the head of the latter. Servile competition was put out of the way - when Cypselus had made himself tyrant, and the working classes of the - citizen population were occupied in numerous public works. Busolt - rightly recognizes the commercial element in Cypselus’ power, but the - evidence is all against a highly organized servile industry at this - early date; in Corinth itself the legislation against servile labour - is attributed to Periander, and the date of the legislation is a good - indication of the date at which servile labour first seriously - threatened free; the exploiting of the market by the Bacchiads is not - evidence for commercial undertakings on the part of the Bacchiads, but - rather of their having held aloof from commerce. - -Footnote 987: - - This suggestion is quite consistent with the vague statement of - Aelian, _V.H._ I. 19, that they fell “through immoderate luxury” (διὰ - τρυφὴν τὴν ἔξω τοῦ μέτρου). - -Footnote 988: - - Busolt, _Gr. G._^2 I. p. 637; E. Meyer, _Rhein. Mus._ 1887, p. 91. - -Footnote 989: - - _Et. Mag._ βλαισός· ὁ τοὺς πόδας ἐπὶ τὰ ἔξω διεστραμμένος καὶ τῷ Λ - στοιχείῳ ἐοικώς· διὰ τοῦτο καὶ Λάμβδα ἐκαλεῖτο ἡ γυνὴ μὲν Ἠετίωνος - μήτηρ δὲ Κυψέλου τοῦ Κορίνθου τυράννου. Knapp, _op. cit._ p. 33, notes - that Bacchis, ancestor of the Bacchiads, was also lame, Heraclid. - _F.H.G._ II. p. 212. - -Footnote 990: - - Hdt. V. 92. 7. - -Footnote 991: - - Paus. II. 4. 4; cp. V. 18. 7. - -Footnote 992: - - _Hdt._ _ad loc._ - -Footnote 993: - - Thuc. IV. 42. His family lived at Petra, Hdt. V. 92. 7, which has led - Knapp, _op. cit._ pp. 33–34, n. 5, to compare Cypselus with the - Paladin Roland who was son of Charlemagne’s sister Bertha and a poor - knight named Milo. Roland was born among the rocks and was called - Roland because he rolled across the cave in which he was born. - -Footnote 994: - - _F.H.G._ III. pp. 391–2. - -Footnote 995: - - _Gr. G._^2 I. p. 636, n. 2. - -Footnote 996: - - Cp. Schubring, _de Cypselo_ (Goettingen, 1862), pp. 62 f.; Wilisch, - _Goett. Gel. Anz._ 1880, p. 1198. - -Footnote 997: - - _Goett. Gel. Anz._ 1880, pp. 1196–1197. - -Footnote 998: - - Wilisch, _Goett. Gel. Anz._ 1880, p. 1197; Knapp, _op. cit._ p. 115; - Busolt, _Gr. G._^2 I. p. 637, quoting Ar. _Pol._ VII. (V.), 1310_b_, - Κύψελος ἐκ δημαγωγίας. - -Footnote 999: - - _Gr. G._^2 I. p. 637. So more recently Porzio, _Cipselidi_, p. 180, - who thinks the Ephorean version a mere amplification of Herodotus. In - uncritical incredulity Porzio rivals Pais (see _e.g._ _op. cit._ pp. - 164–5 and cp. below, pp. 236 f.). - -Footnote 1000: - - Cp. Wilisch, _Goett. Gel. Anz._ 1880, pp. 1198–9, quoting Plut. _de - Mal. Hdt._ 22 (_Moral._ 860), Strabo XIII. 600. - -Footnote 1001: - - Wilisch, _Eumelus_ (Zittau, 1875). The Κορινθιακὰ were known to - Theopompus (_b._ 380 B.C., quoted eight lines, Tzetz. _ad Lyc._ 174) - and Apollonius Rhodius (_b._ 265 B.C., used them for his - _Argonautica_). To judge from slight extant fragments they dealt with - the mythical period. But even so they may well, when complete, have - contained material for eighth century Corinthian history. They were - not known to Pausanias in the original; Paus. II. 1. 1. - -Footnote 1002: - - Tzetzes, _ad Lyc._ 174; Schol. Pind. _Ol._ XIII. 74. - -Footnote 1003: - - Paus. II. 1. 1. Groddech and Wilisch think the συγγραφὴ a prose précis - of the ἔπη. - -Footnote 1004: - - ὑποθήκας εἰς ἔπη δισχίλια, Diog. Laert. I. 7. 4; cp. Suid. s.v. - Περίανδρος· ὑποθήκας εἰς τὸν ἀνθρώπειον βίον, ἔπη δισχίλια. The maxims - quoted by Diogenes as from this work are utterly commonplace, but they - might none the less be derived from a poem or collection as valuable - as that of Theognis. - -Footnote 1005: - - Plut. _Sept. Sap. Conviv._ 21 (_Moral._ 163). - -Footnote 1006: - - Porzio, _Cipselidi_, p. 195. - -Footnote 1007: - - Diog. Laert. I. 7. 1. - -Footnote 1008: - - On the family of Cypselus see above, p. 193. The accounts make it on - the father’s side older than that of the ruling Bacchiads. - -Footnote 1009: - - Cp. Wilisch, _Goett. Gel. Anz._ 1880, p. 1198, Knapp, _op. cit._ p. 41 - (who realizes that ancient lists of Corinthian magistrates may have - survived till the days of Ephorus and been used by him). - -Footnote 1010: - - Polemarch was a common title (Knapp, _op. cit._ p. 39). The duties of - the office varied and were by no means always military: see Schubring, - _de Cyps._ pp. 62–63, quoting Sparta, Athens, Boeotia, Aetolia (Polyb. - IV. 18. 2). - -Footnote 1011: - - Aristot. _Pol._ VII. (V.), 1315_b_. - -Footnote 1012: - - _de Cypselo_, p. 64. - -Footnote 1013: - - Hdt. V. 92. - -Footnote 1014: - - _Sept. Sap. Conv._ 21 (_Moral._ 163–4). Periander’s court poet - Chersias (above, p. 195) tells of Cypselus “whom those who were sent - to destroy him when a new born child refrained from slaying because he - smiled on them. And afterwards they repented and sought for him, but - did not find him, since he had been put away by his mother in a - cypsele.” - -Footnote 1015: - - As is done by Porzio, _Cipselidi_, p. 198. - -Footnote 1016: - - Sayce, _Encyc. Brit._^{11} s.v. Babylonia and Assyria, p. 103; - Maspero, _Hist. Anc._^5 pp. 157–8. - -Footnote 1017: - - For other parallels cp. Bauer, _Sitz. Ak. Wiss. Wien_, vol. 100 - (1882), pp. 553 (German), 557 (Indian). - -Footnote 1018: - - The fact that Cypselus smiled before being put in his cypsele while - Moses cried when left in his ark hardly proves the identity of the - legends, _pace_ Knapp, _op. cit._ 1888, p. 32, n. 1. - -Footnote 1019: - - As also in those quoted by Bauer, _Sitz. Ak. Wiss. Wien_, vol. 100, - pp. 553, 557. - -Footnote 1020: - - Paus. V. 17. 5. - -Footnote 1021: - - Note _e.g._ the human-legged centaurs, the winged Artemis, and the - misreadings by Pausanias of inscriptions plainly in the archaic - Corinthian alphabet (with its σὰν κίβδηλον ἀνθρώποις), Paus. V. 19. 7, - 19. 5; Stuart Jones, _J.H.S._ XIV. p. 40. - -Footnote 1022: - - _Phaedrus_, 236_b_ and schol. _ad loc._ - -Footnote 1023: - - _Pol._ VII. (V.) 1313_b_. - -Footnote 1024: - - _Sept. Sap. Conv._ 21 (_Moral._ 164), “and found him not, since he had - been put into a cypsele by his mother. Wherefore Cypselus built his - house at Delphi.” The omission here is particularly striking. - Plutarch, living in Boeotia, has a reason for referring to offerings - at Delphi rather than at Olympia: but the counter-motive for quoting - Olympia would surely have been stronger still if Plutarch had believed - that the actual cypsele was there. - -Footnote 1025: - - VIII. 353, 378. No other dedications by Cypselus are mentioned. - -Footnote 1026: - - _Or._ XI. 163 M. (325 R.). - -Footnote 1027: - - V. 17. 5. - -Footnote 1028: - - So Hitzig, _Pausan._ _loc. cit._ (vol. II. p. 396); Schubring, _de - Cyps._ p. 26 f.; Overbeck, _Abh. Saechs. Ges. Wiss._ 1865, p. 611. The - equation of cypsele with coffer was accepted without question by many - scholars of the last century, _e.g._ Preller, _Arch. Zeit._ 1854, p. - 297; Klein, _Sitz. Ak. Wiss. Wien_, CVIII. pp. 56, 69 f.; Plass, - _Tyrannis_, p. 151; Duncker, _G. d. A._ VI.^5 pp. 39, 40; Curtius, - _Gr. G._^6 I. pp. 262–3; Holm, _Gk. Hist._ I. 307 (cp. _ibid._ Pref. - p. v. where Holm claims to have endeavoured to bring into clear relief - what may be regarded as proved and what as hypothesis). - -Footnote 1029: - - See _e.g._ Bluemner’s despairing agnosticism, _Woch. Kl. Phil._ 1885, - p. 609. - -Footnote 1030: - - Suid. s.v. - -Footnote 1031: - - Suid. s.v.; Schol. Aristoph. _Pax_, 631; Hesych. s.v.; Schol. Lucian, - _Lexiphanes_, 1. - -Footnote 1032: - - Hesych. s.v. - -Footnote 1033: - - Aristot. _H.A._ IX. 627_b_ (in form κυψέλιον); Plut. _de Exil._ 6 - (_Moral._ 601); Suid. s.v.; Hesych. s.v. - -Footnote 1034: - - Pollux X. 92. - -Footnote 1035: - - Pollux VI. 13. - -Footnote 1036: - - Suid. s.v.; Hesych. s.v.; Pollux II. 85. - -Footnote 1037: - - Pollux II. 82, so _ibid._ II. 82, 85, κυψελίς; Hesych. s.v. κυψέλαι, - κυψελίς; Schol. Aristoph. _Pax_, 631; Lucian, _Lexiphanes_, 1, and - Schol. _ibid._; cp. Alex. Aphrod. _Prob._ II. 63; Cassius Iatrosoph. - _Prob._ 32. - -Footnote 1038: - - Steph. Byz. s.v. For other references see Pape, _Gr. Eigennamen_, s.v. - Schubring, _de Cypselo_, p. 14, thinks the Thracian Cypsela founded by - Miltiades of the Chersonese and named after his father Cypselus, a - relation of the Corinthian. - -Footnote 1039: - - _Abh. Bay. Ak._, _Phil. Class._, 1890, pl. I. 7, 8. - -Footnote 1040: - - _Abh. Bay. Ak._, _Phil. Class._, 1890, pl. I. 6; Imhoof, _Monn. Gr._ - pls. C 5, C 6, C 7 and pp. 51, 52. These coins have been found mainly - in the Hebrus valley, some of them during the construction of the - railway from Adrianople to Aenus. - -Footnote 1041: - - Pollux II. 86 says that “physicians invented these names. Aristotle - thought the parts of the ear to be nameless except the lobe.” - -Footnote 1042: - - Suid. s.v. and Schol. Aristoph. _Pax_, 631 speak of a “six bushel - kypsele” (ἑξμέδιμνος κυψέλη). - -Footnote 1043: - - For terra cotta corn jars cp. probably Hor. _Ep._ I. vii. 29 f. - Earthenware offers the best protection against damp as well as - rodents. - -Footnote 1044: - - Saglio, _Dict. d. Ant._ s.v. citing also Suid., _Et. Mag._, Plut. - _Mor._ 601_c_. - -Footnote 1045: - - _Od._ XIII. 105; cp. Porphyr. _de Antro Nymph._ 17. - -Footnote 1046: - - Bluemner’s view that the poet meant simply natural holes in the rock - may be right, but his inference that the passage is no evidence for - artificial hives is absurd, especially in the light of the stone looms - (ἱστοὶ λίθεοι) described in the same passage and actually quoted by - Bluemner (_ap._ Hermann, _Lehrb. Gr. Antiq._^3 IV. p. 120, n. 1). - -Footnote 1047: - - Varro, _de Re Rust._ III. 16. 15, (alui) deterrimae fictiles; - Columella IX. 6, deterrima conditio fictilium; Pallad. I. 38, - (aluearia) fictilia deterrima sunt. - -Footnote 1048: - - Varro, _de Re Rust._ III. 16. 15, ex uiminibus rotundos; Pallad. I. - 38, salignis uiminibus. - -Footnote 1049: - - γαυλοῦ δὲ σμικροῖο, τόθι γλυκὺ νᾶμα μέλισσα | πηγάζει, _Anth. Pal._ - IX. 404. - -Footnote 1050: - - “Ex ferulis quadratas,” Varro, _de Re Rust._ III. 16. 15; “the best - are those made of boards,” Florentinus, _Geopon._ XV. 2. 7; cp. - _ibid._ 2. 21, “Juba king of the Libyans says bees should be kept in a - wooden box (ἐν λάρνακι ξυλίνῃ)”; “figura cerarum talis est qualis et - habitus domicilii; namque et quadrata et rotunda spatia nec minus - longa suam speciem uelut formae quaedam fauis praebent,” Columella IX. - 15. 8. For possible earlier evidence for square hives see Aristoph. - _Vesp._ 241 with Schol. _ad loc._ In Theocr. VII. 78 f. bees occupy a - large rectangular box (λάρναξ) of sweet cedar wood, but they are - taking part in a miracle and it would be rash to generalize from their - behaviour. See further Pauly Wissowa s.v. Bienenzucht. - -Footnote 1051: - - Iron rather than copper is suggested by the heavy hammers in the - picture, but cp. below, n. 4. - -Footnote 1052: - - Saglio s.v. Fer, p. 1090. Bluemner, _Gewerbe u. Künste_, IV. p. 363, - with unnecessary vagueness calls it an Aufsatz. But _ibid._ p. 331 he - calls the vase on Saglio, fig. 937 a “gefäss- oder kesselartiger - Aufsatz.” - -Footnote 1053: - - = _Berl. Cat. Vases_, 2294; the whole vase in colours Gerhard, - _Trinkschalen_, Pls. XII., XIII. - -Footnote 1054: - - Mau, _ap._ Pauly Wissowa s.v. fornax, calls all three furnaces (_i.e._ - Saglio, figs. 937, 2964–5) Schmiedeöfen and says they served a double - purpose, partly to raise iron to a glowing heat for the smithy, partly - to smelt metals more easily molten (_e.g._ copper, bronze). On these - vases as melting pots cp. Gerhard, _Trinkschalen_, p. 22 - (Schmelzkessel); Furtwaengler, _Berl. Cat._ 2294 [“above, a round - cauldron with lid (inside it metal?)”]. So Saglio and de Launay _ap._ - Saglio _Dict. d. Ant._ s.v. Caelatura, p. 790, ferrum, p. 1090, n. 6. - For the way metals may have been smelted in these vases cp. Diod. III. - 14 (from Agatharcides, describing the mining and working of gold in - “Furthest Egypt” (περὶ τὰς ἐσχατιὰς τῆς Αἰγύπτου) under the - Ptolemies). When the metal has been pounded and washed and the gold - dust (ψῆγμα) is left behind “finally other skilled workmen (τεχνῖται) - take what has been collected and cast it into earthenware pots (εἰς - κεραμεοὺς χύτρους); and mixing in the right proportions lumps of lead - and grains of salt and further a little tin and some barley bran, they - put that in too, and having made a well fitting lid and carefully - sealed it (περιχρίσαντες) with clay, they heat it on a furnace for - five days and nights without a break. Then letting it cool they find - nothing left in the vases (ἀγγείοις) but the gold.” If the process - thus described is open to criticism it should be remembered (Bluemner, - _Gewerbe u. Künste_, IV. 132) that Diodorus was not a metallurgist, - and that ancient methods were probably far from perfect, even of their - kind. Bluemner, _ibid._ IV. p. 363, regards Saglio 2964 (above, fig. - 27) as a smithy. For κάμινος = smithy cp. _e.g._ Lucian, _Prometh._ 5. - But the furnace here is too big and elaborate for a smithy. None of - our three vase pictures shows an anvil. What Bluemner _ibid._ calls a - small anvil is too small to be an anvil at all; cp. the lump of iron - in the same picture and also Bluemner’s own fig. 53, which shows an - anvil of a natural size; cp. too the similar projections to Bluemner’s - supposed anvil in the corresponding position on the furnaces of our - other two vase pictures, both of which projections are obviously not - anvils. The picture of an unquestionable smithy, Bluemner, fig. 53, - shows a quite different type of furnace, not half a man’s height, - called in Bluemner “ein niedriger konisch geformter Schmelzherd.” The - heavy hammers in Saglio, _Dict. d. Ant._ fig. 2964, do not prove a - smithy; they may have been used for various other purposes, _e.g._ - breaking up the ore; cp. Diod. V. 13 (Aithalia in Etruria), τοὺς - λίθους καίουσιν ἔν τισι φιλοτέχνοις καμίνοις ... (καὶ) ... - καταμερίζουσιν εἰς μεγέθη σύμμετρα ... ταῦτα ἔμποροι κομίζουσιν εἰς τὰ - ἐμπόρια. Or smelting and forging may have gone on simultaneously in - the same works. - -Footnote 1055: - - Style of Brygos, Furtwaengler, _Berl. Cat. Vases_, p. 596. - -Footnote 1056: - - Winter, _Jahrb._ XII. pp. 160 f. and fig. 1. - -Footnote 1057: - - Conze, _Jahrb._ V. pp. 118 f. - -Footnote 1058: - - For well preserved examples see those figured by Conze, _Jahrb._ V. - pp. 134, 137. - -Footnote 1059: - - Dumont had already inferred that these stoves were regularly intended - “à soutenir les plats ou les autres ustensiles qu’on plaçait sur ces - sortes de réchauds.” See _Jahrb._ V. p. 135, and Conze, _ibid._ - Neither writer suggests cypselae. - -Footnote 1060: - - _Rev. Arch._ 1869, II. Pl. XVII. - -Footnote 1061: - - _Ibid._ II. p. 423. - -Footnote 1062: - - Third to second century B.C., Conze, _Jahrb._ V. pp. 138–9. - -Footnote 1063: - - _Rev. Arch._ 1869, II. p. 432. - -Footnote 1064: - - Above, figs. 27, 28, 29. - -Footnote 1065: - - Similar cypselae are perhaps depicted on the Corinthian terra cotta - tablets from Penteskuphia, _Berl. Cat. Vas._ nos. 616, 631, 802; but - see Furtwaengler, _ad loc._ - -Footnote 1066: - - Cp. Plut. _Sept. Sap. Conv._ 21 (_Moral._ 164). Cypselus erected the - house in Delphi believing that it was a god who on that occasion - prevented his crying. - -Footnote 1067: - - Pauly Wissowa s.v. - -Footnote 1068: - - _Thesm._ 505 f. The Scholiast explains that the pot was used “because - they used to expose children in pots.” - -Footnote 1069: - - Aristoph. _Clouds_, 1065. - -Footnote 1070: - - See below, pp. 217, 244–5. - -Footnote 1071: - - Cypselus may have been chosen rather than a more general name or a - name derived from some other shape, owing to the huge size of the - cypsele. Modern potters have a great respect for a man who can throw a - particularly large vase. So, too, had the ancients, as is shown by the - proverb ἐν τῷ πίθῳ τὴν κεραμείαν ἐπιχειρεῖν μανθάνειν, Plato, _Gorg._ - 514_e_. What is probably the earliest allusion to actual Corinthian - vases in all Greek literature speaks of a parasite hurrying to dinner - and not stopping to admire his host’s κάδοι. “οὐδὲ δοκιμάζω τοὺς - Κορινθίους κάδους,” Diphilus _ap._ Athen. VI. 236_b_. The κάδος was a - vessel of large size and might be of pottery; cp. Athen. XI. 472_e_, - 473_b_ and especially Κλείταρχος ἐν ταῖς Γλώσσαις τὸ κεράμιόν φησιν - Ἴωνας κάδον καλεῖν. For the archaic period the large number of - furnaces depicted on the Penteskuphia tablets suggests that the - furnace cypsele may have been an article of much importance, assuming - that all the furnaces were provided with cypselae for use as occasion - required. Their comparatively rare appearance in the pictures is - sufficiently explained on artistic grounds if the flames blazed up - better when they were removed. - -Footnote 1072: - - _C.I.G_. III. pp. 709–10, where the word, _e.g._ τρίπους, precedes the - name. - -Footnote 1073: - - Head, _Hist. Num._^2 p. 666. - -Footnote 1074: - - Diod. XIX. 2; Justin XXII. 1; Plut. _Reg. et Imp. Apophth._ s.v. - (_Moral._ 176); Athen. XI. 466_a_; Amm. Marc. XIV. fin. - -Footnote 1075: - - XII. 15, XV. 35. - -Footnote 1076: - - Bauer, _Sitz. Ak. Wiss. Wien_, vol. 100, pp. 564–5; cp. Tillyard, - _Agathocles_, p. 13, n. 2. - -Footnote 1077: - - _Ibid._, so Schubert, _Agathokles_, p. 29 (quoting Ferrari, - _Agathokles_, p. 10 (1872)), Tillyard, _Agathocles_, p. 26. - -Footnote 1078: - - The bees that are said to have settled on the hips of a stone statue - of him set up by his mother when he was well over seven years old are, - _pace_ Schubert, _Agathokles_, p. 30, hardly a substitute. - -Footnote 1079: - - Cp. _e.g._ Hdt. V. 92. 10, πολλῶν δ’ ὑπὸ γούνατα λύσει (oracle about - Cypselus) and _ibid._ 92. 16, ἔδει ἐκ τοῦ Ἠετίωνος γόνου Κορίνθῳ κακὰ - ἀναβλαστεῖν with Diod. XIX. 2, ἐξέπεσε χρησμὸς ὅτι μεγάλων ἀτυχημάτων - ὁ γεννηθεὶς αἴτιος ἔσται Καρχηδονίοις καὶ πάσῃ Σικελίᾳ. In this point - the Romulus story is still more remote from the Agathocles than is - that of Cyrus. - -Footnote 1080: - - Head, _Hist. Num._^2 p. 179. - -Footnote 1081: - - Cp. Hdt. V. 92. 21: “when Cypselus became tyrant this is the sort of - man he proved: many of the Corinthians he banished, etc.” Agathocles - and Cypselus both reigned about the same length of time, a fact that - would attract Timaeus, who was excessively interested in such - coincidences or parallels of time (Tillyard, p. 14). [Cypselus reigned - 657–627; Agathocles’ reign is usually dated 317–289; but cp. _Ath. - Mitt._ XXII. p. 188 (new fragment of Marmor Parium), 319/8, Ἀγαθοκλῆν - Συρακόσιοι εἵλοντο αὐτοκράτορα στρατηγόν, which may indicate what - Agathocles himself regarded as the date of his accession.] - -Footnote 1082: - - But cp. Schubert, _Agath._ p. 31, “wie man darauf kam, den Karkinos - (father of Agathocles) gerade zum Töpfer zu machen, lässt sich - natürlich nicht mehr erkennen.” Schubert, _ibid._ pp. 26 f., discovers - two sources for the story of the tyrant’s early days, and ascribes the - pottery making to one (Timaeus), and to the other the rescue of the - infant from attempted murder. His division appears to be very - arbitrary. - -Footnote 1083: - - Polyb. XV. 35. - -Footnote 1084: - - Diod. XIX. 3; cp. Tillyard, _Agath._ p. 28; Schubert, _Agath._ p. 31. - -Footnote 1085: - - _Gr. G._ III. i. 186, n. 3. - -Footnote 1086: - - Diod. XIX. 3; Justin XXII. 1. - -Footnote 1087: - - _Hist. Animal._ IX. 618_a_. - -Footnote 1088: - - So Aubert and Wimmer ad _Hist. Animal._ IX. 108. - -Footnote 1089: - - Mr W. Warde Fowler has suggested to me that the cypselus is the Rufous - or Eastern Swallow, which builds a more elaborate nest than the House - Martin and has not the white rump that so distinguishes the House - Martin but is absent from Aristotle’s description of the cypselus. - -Footnote 1090: - - Πάγασαι, Κορυθεῖς, _de Cypselo_, pp. 29 f. - -Footnote 1091: - - Paus. IV. 3. 6; VIII. 5. 6, 29. 5; cp. Polyaen. I. 7 (Cypselus’ - stratagem against the Heraclids); Nic. Dam. _ap. F.H.G._ III. p. 377; - Athen. XIII. 609_e_. - -Footnote 1092: - - As a traveller according to Pliny, _N.H._ X. 55 (39), it excelled even - the other birds of the swallow tribe. - -Footnote 1093: - - Steph. Byz. s.v., an outpost fortified by the Mantineans, Thuc. V. 33. - -Footnote 1094: - - Paus. VIII. 5. 4 f.; Diog. Laert. I. 7. 1. - -Footnote 1095: - - Niese, _Hermes_, XXVI. p. 30, thinks the Arcadian pedigree of Melissa - a late invention, but his argument from the silence of Herodotus is of - very little weight. - -Footnote 1096: - - See above, Chapter IV. - -Footnote 1097: - - _E.g._ by Bury, _Hist. Greece_^2, p. 152. - -Footnote 1098: - - _E.g._ the priest Psammetichus, Breasted, _Records_, IV. 1026–9 - (_circ._ 610–544 B.C.). For a list of its bearers see Wiedemann, _Aeg. - Ges._ p. 623. - -Footnote 1099: - - See above, p. 123: written probably between 594 and 589 B.C. - -Footnote 1100: - - In Naukratis, which became under Psammetichus of Egypt the chief Greek - trading-centre in the country, Corinthian potsherds take the second - place among the vase finds of the earlier period of the Greek - settlement, Milesian coming first (Prinz, _Funde aus Nauk._ p. 75), - though note that Corinth was not among the Greek cities that had an - establishment at Naukratis, the Aeginetans being the only European - Greeks to possess one. On Egypt and Miletus see above, Chapter IV. To - the evidence usually quoted for Egyptian influence on Periander we - should perhaps add a story told by Diog. Laert. I. 7. 3. When - Periander was an old man he is said to have provided for his own death - and burial in the following way. He directed two men to kill and bury - a man they would meet on a certain night at a certain lonely spot. He - arranged with four others that they should kill these two on their way - back. The four in their turn were to be disposed of in like manner by - a larger band. At the appointed hour Periander himself went to the - spot to which the two had been directed and was there killed and - buried by them. The essence of this story is that Periander took - extraordinary precautions to prevent anyone knowing the place of his - burial. Such precautions at once recall Egypt. Can the story have - originated as a skit on Periander’s Egyptianizing tendencies? - -Footnote 1101: - - Above, p. 125. - -Footnote 1102: - - _Pol._ VII. (V.), 1315_b_. - -Footnote 1103: - - _F.H.G._ III. p. 394. - -Footnote 1104: - - In Aristotle Gorgos is Susemihl’s emendation for Gordios. In - Plutarch’s _Sept. Sap. Conv._ 17 (_Moral._ 160) Gorgos (Didot, - Gorgias) brother of Periander takes part, and the name occurs too - often to be a mistake for some quite different name. Nic. Dam. - _F.H.G._ III. p. 393 mentions a Gorgos son of Periander who broke his - neck when chariot racing. There can be little doubt that in all these - passages the same name should be read, and that that name should be - Gorgos, which appears on Ambracian coins as that of a local hero. See - _Mon. Ined. Inst._ I. pl. XIV. nos. 1, 2. The name Gordios was much - used in the Phrygian royal family. But as in Aristot. _Pol._ 1315_b_ - it is probably only an intrusion for the less familiar Gorgos it is no - evidence for connexion between the Cypselids and the house of Midas. - -Footnote 1105: - - _Gr. G._^2 I. p. 657, n. 4. - -Footnote 1106: - - _Ibid._ So Knapp, _op. cit._ pp. 123–4. - -Footnote 1107: - - Geo. Smith, _Assurbanipal_, p. 28. The identification is not certain, - but we find Neboshazban where we should look for Psammetichus: the - Assyrian practice is illustrated, in a repetition of this very - sentence in question, by the double name of Neboshazban’s fief: “and - Neboshazban his (_i.e._ Necho’s) son in Athribis, which - Limir-patesi-Assur is its name, to the kingdom I appointed” (_ibid._ - pp. 46–47). - -Footnote 1108: - - _E.g._ Plato, _Tim._ 21_e_, Neith = Athena. - -Footnote 1109: - - _E.g._ Chem Peh’-resu (?) = Perseus, Wiedemann, _Hdt._ II. pp. 368–9. - -Footnote 1110: - - Phacussa atque Mylonpolis sunt Graeca nomina ex Aegyptiacis translata, - Gutschmid, _Philol._ X. p. 528. - -Footnote 1111: - - There is of course the alternative possibility (assumed by Duncker, - _G. d. A._ VI.^5 p. 72, n. 1), that one of the names is merely a - mistake. The Lycophron son of Periander of Herodotus is plainly the - Nikolaos of Nic. Dam. _F.H.G._ III. p. 393. - -Footnote 1112: - - See below, p. 256. - -Footnote 1113: - - Polyb. VI. fr. ii.; Strabo V. 219–20, VIII. 378; Dion. Hal. III. 46; - Diod. VIII. 31; Cic. _de Rep._ II. 19–20 (34–36); Schol. Bob. ad Cic. - _pro Sulla_, 22; Livy I. 34, IV. 3; Florus, _Epitome Liui_, I. 5. 1; - Pliny, _N.H._ XXXV. 5, 43; cp. XXXIII. 4; Aurel. Vict. _de Vir. Ill._ - 6; cp. _C.I.L._ I. i. p. 43 and _Roem. Mitt._ XIX. p. 117 (acta - triumphorum Capitolina), L.TARQUINIUS.DEMARATI.F.PRISCUS; _C.I.L._ - XIII. 1668 (Claudius at Lyons); Zonaras VII. 8. - -Footnote 1114: - - Dion. Hal. III. 47; cp. Livy I. 34, Lucumoni contra ... cum divitiae - iam animos facerent. - -Footnote 1115: - - Livy I. 34. - -Footnote 1116: - - Dion. Hal. III. 48. - -Footnote 1117: - - _de Vir. Ill._ 6. - -Footnote 1118: - - Diod. VIII. fr. 31. - -Footnote 1119: - - Polyb. VI. fr. ii. 10. Polybius insists on this point: πιστεύων ἁυτῷ - τε καὶ τοῖς χρήμασι ... διὰ τὴν χορηγίαν ... μεγάλης ἀποδοχῆς - ἔτυχε ... τῇ τοῦ βίου χορηγίᾳ μεγαλοψύχως εἰς τὸ δέον ἑκάστοτε καὶ σὺν - καιρῷ χρώμενος. - -Footnote 1120: - - Cp. Diod. VIII. fr. 31, “he was introduced to the king, Ancus Martius, - and became his greatest friend, and helped him much in the - administration of the kingdom”; Dion. Hal. III. 48, “he very soon - became friends with the king” ... “being held in high honour by the - king”; also the passage from the same chapter quoted above; Livy I. - 34, Tarquinius gets himself made guardian of Ancus’ young sons; Aur. - Vict. _de Vir. Ill._ 6, “he even secured the friendship of King - Ancus.” - -Footnote 1121: - - Cp. Diod. VIII. fr. 31, “making himself agreeable to everyone (πᾶσι - προσφιλῶς ὁμιλῶν)”; Dion. Hal. III. 48, “by courteous greetings and - ingratiating discourses” (cp. VI. 60, “every tyrant develops out of a - mob flatterer”); Livy I. 34, “benigno alloquio, comitate inuitandi,” - I. 35, “he is said to have been the first to canvass for the throne - and to have made a speech designed to win over the plebeians.” - -Footnote 1122: - - Or perhaps rather increasing; cp. Strabo VIII. 378, “Demaratus ... - brought such great wealth from home to Etruria that he became ruler of - the city that received him, and his son was actually made king of - Rome.” - -Footnote 1123: - - Strabo V. 220. - -Footnote 1124: - - Pliny, _N.H._ XXXV. 43 (12); so (multo uero elegantius) Val. Max. III. - 4. 2. - -Footnote 1125: - - Livy I. 34. 2, “bonorum omnium heres,” so also 34. 4. - -Footnote 1126: - - Dion. Hal. III. 47, κληρονόμον ἁπάσης τῆς οὐσίας. - -Footnote 1127: - - Dion. Hal. III. 47. - -Footnote 1128: - - Livy I. 38, “ut non quietior populus domi esset quam militiae - fuisset.” - -Footnote 1129: - - Livy I. 35. - -Footnote 1130: - - Dion. Hal. III. 67. On the forum shops see also Livy XXVI. 27; Varro, - _L.L._ VI. 59. - -Footnote 1131: - - Livy I. 39; Dion. Hal. IV. 1 (but cp. IV. 2; Pliny, _N.H._ XXXVI. 70 - (204)). - -Footnote 1132: - - _Ap._ Charisii, _Art. Gramm._ I. p. 105, ed. Keil. - -Footnote 1133: - - _N.H._ XVIII. 3, XXXIII. 13. - -Footnote 1134: - - Variae, VII. 32. - -Footnote 1135: - - See Samwer, _ält. roem. Münzwesen_, p. 43; T. Frank, _Class. Phil._ - XIV. (1919), pp. 314 f. - -Footnote 1136: - - For copious illustrations see Haeberlin’s sumptuous _Aes Grave_. - -Footnote 1137: - - See _e.g._ Pasqui, _Notiz._ 1897, pp. 265_p_, 267_a_ (Praeneste). - -Footnote 1138: - - _Aes rude_ is recorded among the finds of the earlier stips at Conca - (Satricum in South Latium) which appears to belong exclusively to the - seventh and sixth centuries B.C., _Notiz._ 1896, pp. 29–31, 101. - -Footnote 1139: - - _Roem. Kupferpräg._ pp. 21–22. - -Footnote 1140: - - _Aes Grave_, p. 5. - -Footnote 1141: - - _N.H._ XXXIII. 13. - -Footnote 1142: - - XXXIII. 13, so XVIII. 3, ouium boumque effigie. - -Footnote 1143: - - _E.g._ _Brit. Mus. Rep. Coins_, I. p. 3. - -Footnote 1144: - - As is done by Babelon, _Origines_, pp. 186 f., who quotes as a - possible example of regal “aes signatum,” Garrucci, pl. XVII. figs. - 1_a_, 1_b_; but cp. _ibid._ p. 195, where he much antedates the - earliest silver coins of Rome. - -Footnote 1145: - - Mueller-Deecke, _Etrusker_, I. p. 382. - -Footnote 1146: - - Justin XLIII. 3. The traditional date is 600 B.C. Cp. the statements - as to Servius’ intercourse with Ephesus, Livy I. 45: Dion. Hal. IV. - 25–26 (quoting an ancient inscription); Aur. Vict. _de Vir. Ill._ 7. - The Phocaeans expelled from Corsica about 537 B.C. ultimately settled - at Velia near Paestum, a fact that has led Pinza, _Bull. Comm._ 1898, - p. 269, to see a Phocaean quarter in the Velia at Rome: he compares - the Vicus Tuscus, but even so the evidence hardly justifies the - inference. - -Footnote 1147: - - _de Vir. Ill._ 7. - -Footnote 1148: - - Cruchon, _Banques dans l’Antiq._ pp. 13, 14, 16, so regards him, and - compares the laws of Manu (fourteenth century B.C.). - -Footnote 1149: - - Cic. _de Rep._ II. 60 (35); Gellius XI. 1, 2; Festus s.v. peculatus. - -Footnote 1150: - - _Compan. Lat. Stud._ sect. 685. - -Footnote 1151: - - On the whole question of the origin of Roman coinage see most recently - Haeberlin’s _Aes Grave_, especially pp. 1–6, and Grueber, _Brit. Mus. - Coins Rom. Rep._ vol. I., especially p. 1, n. 1, p. 3, n. 1. The - introduction of money of bronze and iron was attributed by Suetonius - to Numa, Suid. s.v. Ἀσσάρια: “Assaria: obols. Numa the first king of - Rome appointed after Romulus was the first to present the Romans with - (money) of iron and bronze, all his predecessors having paid with - (money of) leather and earthenware: these from his own name he named - nummia, as stated by Tragkylios” (_i.e._ Suetonius Tranquillus). - Conflicting versions where both are doubtful tend to discredit one - another. But the whole notice about Numa hardly affects those about - Servius. The temptation to equate Numa with nummus must have been - great. Yet nobody before Suetonius appears to have succumbed to it, - and the claim he makes for Numa is concerned only with a very - primitive stage in the history of the currency. - -Footnote 1152: - - Livy I. 42. - -Footnote 1153: - - Florus I. 6. 3. - -Footnote 1154: - - Plut. _Num._ 17 (from Varro (?), see Pauly Wissowa s.v. collegium, p. - 391); cp. Pliny, _N.H._ XXXIV. 1, XXXV. 46. - -Footnote 1155: - - Mommsen, _Roem. Staatsr._ III. 287, who connects the Servian - organization of the collegia with the Servian centuries of artizans. - -Footnote 1156: - - For other views see Kornemann _ap._ Pauly Wissowa s.v. collegium; cp. - also Mommsen, _de Colleg._ 31. - -Footnote 1157: - - Mommsen, _Hist. Rome_^2, I. p. 249; Humbert _ap._ Saglio, _Dict. d. - Antiq._ s.v. collegium, p. 1292. - -Footnote 1158: - - _E.g._ Dion. Hal. IV. 4, “seducing the poor citizens by benevolences - and gifts.” So, _ibid._ 3, 9, 10, 40, and Livy I. 47; Cic. _de Rep._ - II. 21 (38), “Servius began to reign ... because, when Tarquin was - falsely said to be seriously wounded but alive, he assumed the royal - insignia, and gave judgments and freed debtors at his own expense.” - -Footnote 1159: - - Dion. Hal. _IV._ 13, “immediately upon securing the throne he - (Servius) distributed the public land to the poorer class of Romans - (τοῖς θητεύουσι Ῥωμαίων)”: Livy I. 46, “Servius, ... having first - conciliated the goodwill of the plebeians by dividing among them - individually land taken from the enemy, dared to put to the people the - question whether they wished and bade him to be king”; cp. Varro _ap._ - Non. p. 43, “uiritim: et extra urbem in regiones XXVI. agros uiritim - liberis attribuit”; Aur. Vict. _de Vir. Ill._ VII. 7, “he distributed - corn to the plebs.” - -Footnote 1160: - - _C.I.L._ XIII. 1668. - -Footnote 1161: - - Gardthausen, _Mastarna_, p. 27. Professor R. S. Conway tells me that - tarna = Tarcna strikes him as _a priori_ possible. - -Footnote 1162: - - Dion. Hal. IV. 30. - -Footnote 1163: - - Livy I. 56. On the building of this temple see also Livy I. 38; Cic. - _de Repub._ II. 36 (20); Dion. Hal. III. 69; IV. 59; Tac. _Hist._ III. - 72; Plut. _Popl._ 13; Florus I. 1. 7; Aur. Vict. _de Vir. Ill._ 8; - Zonaras VII. 11. - -Footnote 1164: - - Livy I. 59. - -Footnote 1165: - - Dion. Hal. IV. 44. - -Footnote 1166: - - Reading doubtful. - -Footnote 1167: - - Dion. Hal. IV. 59. - -Footnote 1168: - - Dion. Hal. IV. 81. - -Footnote 1169: - - For other public works ascribed to the Tarquin dynasty see Livy I. 45; - Dion. Hal. IV. 26 (Servius, temple of Diana on the Aventine). - - Livy I. 44 (agger, fosse, and wall of Servius; cp. Strabo V. 234); - Livy I. 36–8 (well begun by Priscus); Dion. Hal. III. 67; Aur. Vict. - _de Vir. Ill._ 6 (wall of Tarquinius Priscus); Eutrop. I. 6 (walls and - cloacae of Tarquinius Priscus). - - Pliny, _N.H._ III. 9 (agger of Tarquinius Superbus on the East side of - the city). - - It was in the reputed period of the Tarquins that the people of Latium - seem to have first learned to make walls of squared stones, Pinza, - _Bull. Comm._ 1897, pp. 228 f. - - Serv. ad _Aen._ XII. 603 f. (Cass. Hem., second century B.C.), - (Superbus, cloaca), Pliny, _N.H._ XXXVI. 24 (Priscus, cloaca), the - Chronographer of 354 A.D., Joh. Laur. Lyd. (sixth century), _de Mens._ - IV. 24, Joh. Antioch. (seventh century), _F.H.G._ IV. p. 553, Isidore - of Seville (seventh century), _Etym._ V. 27. 23, Suid. (tenth - century), s.v. Σούπερβος, all say that Tarquinius Superbus introduced - into Rome penal labour (see below, p. 226) in mines and quarries. - There appear to have been quarries on the slopes of the Capitol which - may have been worked in the regal period. Pais argues that they could - not have been worked before the fifth century because they were called - lautumiae, a name borrowed from Siceliot Greek: his view is based on - the groundless assumptions (i) that a Siceliot word could not reach - Rome before the fifth century, and (ii) that the quarries cannot be - older than their name. In point of fact the quarries have been - inferred from the name being frequently applied by Livy in his third - decade to a prison known also as the Tullianum, Varro, _L.L._ V. 151, - or Mamertine prison, or more recently as the church of San Pietro in - Carcere. The prison is one of the most ancient structures in Rome, and - has been compared with the beehive tombs of Greece. - - The whole Capitol and Palatine are completely catacombed to a great - depth by shafts and passages of most uncertain dates, discussed by - Boni, _J.R.S._ III. pp. 247–250, and called by him favissae. Can - Boni’s favissae, or any part of them, be the lautumiae of the - Tarquins? See Dion. Hal. IV. 44. - -Footnote 1170: - - Livy I. 57. - -Footnote 1171: - - Cicero probably regarded the wealth of Superbus as military spoil; cp. - _de Rep._ II. 46 (25), “deinde uictoriis diuitiisque subnixus - exsultabat insolenter,” but on a point like this his words are of - little weight. Equally valueless as evidence for the state of things - in regal Rome are his contemptuous references to artizans, _de Off._ - I. 150 (42), “opifices omnes in sordida arte uersantur: neque enim - quidquam ingenuum habere potest officina.” - -Footnote 1172: - - Dion. Hal. IV. 71, οὔτε δωρεαῖς ἔτι κατεχόμενοι ὡς πρότερον. - -Footnote 1173: - - Cic. _Phil._ III. 10 (4). - -Footnote 1174: - - Pliny, _N.H._ XXXVI. 24; Dio Cass. II. fr. xi. 6; the Chronographer of - 354 A.D.; Joh. Laur. Lyd. _de Mens._ IV. 24; Joh. Ant. _F.H.G._ IV. p. - 553; Isid. _Etym._ V. 27. 23; Suid. s.v. Σούπερβος. - -Footnote 1175: - - Florus I. 7. - -Footnote 1176: - - Cic. _pro Rab._ 13 (4) is, however, no evidence for Superbus - personally, but only for the severity of ancient law. - -Footnote 1177: - - Bloch, _Répub. Rom._ p. 57. - -Footnote 1178: - - Livy II. 2. - -Footnote 1179: - - Dion. Hal. V. 5. Note, _ibid._ V. 12, C.’s banishment was ultimately - arranged on a financial understanding. He took with him 25 talents - into exile. - -Footnote 1180: - - Dion. Hal. V. 64. - -Footnote 1181: - - Dion. Hal. VI. 74. - -Footnote 1182: - - Livy II. 5; so Dion. Hal. V. 13. - -Footnote 1183: - - Livy II. 9. - -Footnote 1184: - - Dion. Hal. V. 22. - -Footnote 1185: - - Diod. XI. 37; Livy II. 41; Dion. Hal. VIII. 69, 77; Cic. _de Rep._ II. - 35 (60), 27 (49), _de Amicit._ 8 (28), 11 (36), Phil. II. 44 (114); - Pliny, _N.H._ XXXIV. 9 (4), 14; Val. Max. V. 8. 2 (the above all - quoted Mommsen, _Roem. Forsch._ II. p. 173, n. 37); Florus I. 17. 26. - The Greek writers say he aimed at a tyranny. - -Footnote 1186: - - So specifically Livy, Dion. Hal., Val. Max., Florus, in the passages - cited above; cp. Pliny, _N.H._ XXXIV. 14, “eam (statuam) quam apud - aedem Telluris statuisset sibi Sp. Cassius qui regnum affectauerat.” - -Footnote 1187: - - Livy. Note the bronze statue of Ceres erected from the proceeds of his - property after his fall. See next note. - -Footnote 1188: - - Cp. Dion. Hal. VIII. 78. At his death his peculium (personal fortune) - was confiscated and dedicated to Ceres, Val. Max. V. 8. 2, but there - is no hint that it was very large. It appears to have only sufficed to - make a single bronze statue, Livy II. 41, Pliny, _N.H._ XXXIV. 9 (4). - Dionysius speaks of the great wealth of Cassius’ opponents. - -Footnote 1189: - - _E.g._ Livy II. 16, Publicola (perhaps, however, merely a wrong - inference from the statement that the government paid for his funeral - (so also Dion. Hal. V. 38); but cp. the way that in fifth century - Athens enormously rich men like Nikias avoided anything that might - draw attention to their wealth). - -Footnote 1190: - - Livy IV. 13–16; so Dion. Hal. XII. 1. 1, “most potent in wealth, - having recently inherited his father’s estate” (whence Mommsen, _Roem. - Forsch._ II. p. 211, describes him as “according to Dionysius a rich - merchant’s son”); Florus, _Epit._ I. 17. 26, “Spurium largitione - suspectum regiae dominationis praesenti morte (populus) multauit.” - Maelius is repeatedly said to have aimed at the kingship, so Cic. _de - Rep._ II. 27 (50), _de Senect._ 16 (56), _de Amic._ 11 (36), _Phil._ - II. 11, 34, 44 (26 and 27, 87, 114) (cp. also _in Cat._ I. 1. 3); - Varro, _L.L._ V. 157; Val. Max. VI. 3. 1 (Rom.); Diod. XII. 37 - (ἐπιθέμενος τυραννίδι); Dion. Hal. XII. 1 (ἐπιθέσει τυραννίδος); Plut. - _Brut._ I. - -Footnote 1191: - - Livy IV. 13; cp. Dion. Hal. XII. 1. 2, “having many associates and - employees (ἑταίρους καὶ πελάτας) he sent them in various directions - supplied with money from his own pocket to collect food.” - -Footnote 1192: - - See especially Mommsen, _Roem. Forsch._ II. p. 189, who follows Dion. - Hal. and believes the seditio Manliana to have been an armed revolt. - Note, however, that Livy says that at Manlius’ trial he brought to - court 400 individuals whom, at his own expense, he had saved from - financial ruin (VI. 20; cp. VI. 14: so also Aur. Vict. _de Vir. Ill._ - 24), and that the site of his house became the mint (Livy VI. 20). - Aurelius Victor, _loc. cit._, states further that he was accused by - the senate of having secreted Gallic treasures. - -Footnote 1193: - - It does not for the moment matter whether the misrepresentation goes - back to Brutus or only to Livy or somewhere in between. - -Footnote 1194: - - Mommsen, _Rom. Hist._^2 (English translation), I. p. 328. - -Footnote 1195: - - Cp. Salvioli (French translation), _Capitalisme dans le Monde - Antique_, p. 77. - -Footnote 1196: - - Livy IV. 59–60; cp. Dion. Hal. IV. 19. - -Footnote 1197: - - Salvioli, _Capitalisme_, p. 227. - -Footnote 1198: - - Mommsen, _Hist. Rome_ (English translation^2), I. p. 495 f. - -Footnote 1199: - - Dion. Hal. V. 40. - -Footnote 1200: - - _Ibid._ p. 498. - -Footnote 1201: - - Hdt. V. 66. - -Footnote 1202: - - _Ibid._ pp. 500–1. - -Footnote 1203: - - Diod. XX. 36; cp. Livy, IX. 29, uiam muniuit et aquam in urbem duxit - _eaque unus perfecit_. - -Footnote 1204: - - Hill, _Historical Roman Coins_, p. 18; see also _ibid._ pp. 10–18, - based on Haeberlin’s _Systematik_. - -Footnote 1205: - - Val. Max. VIII. 13. 5 (Rom.). - -Footnote 1206: - - Mommsen, _Hist. Rome_ (English translation^2), I. p. 504. - -Footnote 1207: - - Suet. _Tiberius_, 2. - -Footnote 1208: - - Mommsen, _op. cit._ II. p. 94. - -Footnote 1209: - - _E.g._ Bloch, _Répub. Rom._ p. 58. One of the earliest recorded - strikes in England is that of the Wisbech shoemakers who in 1538 left - the town and established themselves on a neighbouring hill from which - they summoned their masters to come out and meet them and hear their - demands for higher wages. Webb, _Hist. of Trade Unionism_, p. 3. - -Footnote 1210: - - Livy IV. 9. - -Footnote 1211: - - Below, p. 235. - -Footnote 1212: - - The reported attempts at servile insurrections in fifth century Rome - (Livy III. 15–16; Dion. Hal. V. 51) seem never to have had plebeian - support, and are perhaps to be partly explained as a result of a more - complete severance between the free and servile population. The - alleged participation of ambitious slaves “seduced by hopes of - freedom” (Dion. Hal. V. 53) in a conspiracy to restore Tarquinius - Superbus is not the same thing. - -Footnote 1213: - - Livy V. 1. - -Footnote 1214: - - _Ibid._ This sudden withdrawal of the supply of labour by the - subsequent king of Veii should be noted in connexion with the - discussion (above, p. 233) of the significance of the Roman - “secessions.” - -Footnote 1215: - - The story of his interference in the national games might perhaps be - regarded with suspicion. It recalls Pheidon. But the essence of the - story, the sudden withdrawal of the supply of labour, is not in the - Pheidon story. It rather recalls what happened at Columbus, Ohio, in - midwinter, 1891, when the gas kings suddenly cut off the gas. Hy. D. - Lloyd, _Wealth against Commonwealth_, p. 365. - -Footnote 1216: - - Pais’ most recent works are his _Storia Critica_ and _Ricerche_; but - for English readers I have thought it better to refer mainly to his - earlier but equally characteristic _Ancient Legends of Roman History_ - (1906). - -Footnote 1217: - - The method is of course much older than Pais; cp. G. C. Lewis, - _Credib. Early Rom. Hist._ I. p. 228, “we have no difficulty in - explaining the fictitious character of the events of that early period - provided we consider them fictitious.” For an early instance see - Bachofen, _Tanaquil_ (1870), where the Etruscan Tarquin-Tanaquil are - equated with the Lydian Heracles (ancestor of Demaratus)-Omphale; cp. - Damonno, the wife of Gyges, etc. (above, p. 135). Bachofen’s - comparison may be not altogether groundless, but it is sufficiently - explained by assuming, as these stories perhaps imply, that the - political status of women among the Lydo-Etruscans was not quite so - backward as it has hitherto been in Europe generally. The traces of - impropriety which Bachofen detected in these ladies’ behaviour may be - merely a reflexion of the European attitude towards the claims of - women for any sort of political equality with men. - -Footnote 1218: - - Tarquin = Tarchon the friend of Aeneas. - -Footnote 1219: - - Pais, _Legends_, pp. 105, 122. - -Footnote 1220: - - Varro, _L.L._ V. 41; Dion. Hal. III. 69; Pais, _Legends_, pp. 109–116. - -Footnote 1221: - - Pais, _Legends_, pp. 116–127. - -Footnote 1222: - - Cp. G. C. Lewis, _Credib. Early Rom. Hist._ I. p. 472. - -Footnote 1223: - - Note, too, the curious history of his successor, who, though claimed - as a Saxon king, is said to have been of Danish extraction. He bears - the name of a son of Knut, and spends his brief reign in disposing of - another king Harold, who is admittedly a Scandinavian. All this must - surely be a clumsy attempt to anglicize the last of the Danish kings. - -Footnote 1224: - - Cp. Pais’ explanation of Servius Tullius as the fugitive slave god of - Aricia, _Legends_, pp. 142 f. - -Footnote 1225: - - Ovid, _Fasti_, IV. 549 f. Caeculus, the mythical founder of Praeneste, - was found as a babe in a hearth, Virg. _Aen._ VII. 681 (cp. X. 544), - and Cato _ap._ Schol. Veron. _ad loc._ He was conceived by a spark and - manifested by a fire, Serv. ad _Aen._ VII. 681. Servius Tullius - himself offers a still closer analogy. He was the issue of the union - between a disguised princess (cp. Livy I. 39) and a burning hearth - (according to Frazer, _Magic Art_, II. 267–8, the normal form of - parentage among the early kings of Rome; cp. Plut. _Romulus_, 2), - which made known its passion for her when she was bringing it cakes - (πελάνους). Subsequently Servius announced his coming kingship by - himself catching fire, Dion. Hal. IV. 2; Pliny, _N.H._ XXXVI. 70; - Plut. _Fort. Rom._ 10 (_Moral._ 323); Ovid, _Fasti_, VI. 627–36. These - four references have both birth and burning. For birth see also Arnob. - _adv. Gent._ V. 18 (quoting Flaccus); for burning Florus I. 1. 6; - Serv. ad _Aen._ II. 683; Aur. Vict. _de Vir. Ill._ 7; Laur. Lyd. _de - Ostent._ 279 (18 B, C); Cic. _Divin._ I. 53 (121). - -Footnote 1226: - - Cp. S. Luke XXIV. 30, 31. - -Footnote 1227: - - Pelham, _Outlines_^2, p. 7; cp. Niebuhr, _History of Rome_ (trans. - Walter), I. p. 231. - -Footnote 1228: - - Dion. Hal. IV. 73. - -Footnote 1229: - - οἰκηίῃ τε τριήρει καὶ οἰκηίῃ ἀνδρῶν δαπάνῃ, Hdt. V. 46–7; cp. VIII. - 62, where Themistocles threatens to sail to the far West with the - whole population of Athens. - -Footnote 1230: - - Pais, _Legends_, p. 312, n. 7, asserts that “that tradition which - makes him (Tarquinius Priscus) a contemporary of Romulus was received - among the official versions.” But Dion. Hal. II. 37, which alone he - quotes in support, speaks only of a nameless lucumo from Solonium. - -Footnote 1231: - - Strabo V. 220, 226. - -Footnote 1232: - - There are the same two _a priori_ possibilities about the Greek - artists Gorgasus and Damophilus, said by Pliny (_N.H._ XXXV. 45) to - have adorned the temple of Ceres in the Circus Maximus, which is said - to have been dedicated in 494 B.C. In this case there is the further - complication that the adornment may have been indefinitely later than - the dedication. But there is no evidence that it was. Greek - inscriptions on the temple recorded that the right side was the work - of Demophilus, the left of Gorgasus. It is begging the question to say - that these artists must be later than 390 B.C. because the - inscriptions are mentioned by Pliny. Rayet (_Mon. de l’Art Ant._ I. p. - 7 of chapter entitled “Louve en Bronze”) regards Pliny’s statement as - confirming the extant archaeological evidence for Greek artistic - influence on early republican Rome. This is going too far in the - opposite direction: but Rayet’s view has no inherent impossibility. - Nothing is said about restoration or reconstruction in the account of - the work of these Greek artists on the Roman temple. - -Footnote 1233: - - Hdt. V. 92. - -Footnote 1234: - - Martha, _l’Art Étrusque_, p. 120, n. 1. - -Footnote 1235: - - Cic. _de Rep._ II. 20 (36). - -Footnote 1236: - - Cic. _de Rep._ II. 19 (34). - -Footnote 1237: - - _E.g._ from Caere, Pottier, _Album_, I. nos. E 629–40; _Roem. Mitt._ - II. p. 155, XXII. pp. 133–4, 150–1; _Bullettino dell’ Inst._ 1884, pp. - 122–3, 1885, p. 211. - -Footnote 1238: - - Cp. above, fig. 22 from Corinth. The Corinthian pottery from Tarquinii - is well illustrated Montelius, _Civ. Prim. Ital._ Sér. B, plates 297, - 298. - -Footnote 1239: - - _Cat. Berl. Vas._ 831 = _Ant. Denk._ I. pl. 8, fig. 3_a_. In - discussing this tablet Wilisch, _Jahresb. Gymn. Zittau_, 1901, p. 20 - and fig. 22, associates it with the Demaratus tradition. - -Footnote 1240: - - For travelling potters cp. Bent, _J.H.S._ VI. (1885), p. 198, on the - modern potters of Siphnos: “In springtime they start on their travels - far and wide and settle in towns and villages for days and weeks until - the place is supplied with large and well made earthenware, amphorae, - and cooking utensils.” - -Footnote 1241: - - _Roem. Mitt._ XXII. p. 122; so _Bull. Comm._ 1898, p. 273, n. 3. - -Footnote 1242: - - _Roem. Mitt._ XXII. p. 162; cp. Furtwaengler, _Ant. Gemm._ III. pp. - 174–5; see also _Roem. Mitt._ XXII. p. 156, quoting Furtwaengler, - _Olymp._ IV. 114 f. - -Footnote 1243: - - Vases and bronzes have been attributed to local workshops on stylistic - grounds. The frescoes must obviously have been executed _in situ_. As - regards the architectural terra cottas, their size and the number - required for each building raise the question of local fabric quite - apart from their style and technique. Unfortunately hitherto remains - of this sort have been inadequately excavated and no less inadequately - published. Rizzo, whose valuable article on the Conca finds is - referred to more fully below, regards the earliest Conca series as “di - manufattura non di arte locale.” - -Footnote 1244: - - See further pp. 245–6, 251–4. The absence in some cases of seventh - century Corinthian counterparts to the sixth century Ionic finds is - due mainly to the accidents of discovery. The earliest architectural - terra cottas from the regions round Rome are for instance all sixth - century and Ionic: but the literary tradition ascribes the invention - of terra cotta antefixes to Butades, who worked at Corinth (Pliny, - _N.H._ XXXV. 43 (12); cp. _ibid._ 45; cp. also _Year’s Work Class. - Stud._ 1914, p. 2 (D. Lamb on recent finds at Corfu)). We may expect - therefore that when more attention has been paid to excavation and - publication we shall find that seventh century Italy possessed (which - probably means produced) architectural terra cottas, and that these - terra cottas were in style Corinthian. A fresco at Tarquinii, _Bull. - Comm._ 1911, p. 26, fig. 9, depicts a gable which recalls that of the - actual temple recently unearthed in the Corinthian colony of Corcyra. - At Conca the votive offerings, which go back further than the - architectural terra cottas, include both Proto-Corinthian and - Corinthian pottery (Pinza, _Mon. Ant._ XV. p. 494; Barnabei and Cozza, - _Notiz._ 1896, pp. 29 f.). That the Conca finds lend plausibility to - the Demaratus story is recognized by Rizzo, _Bull. Comm._ 1911, p. 44, - who, however, does not appear to recognize the historical significance - of the material being Ionian. - -Footnote 1245: - - Rizzo, _Bull. Comm._ 1911, pp. 43–6. - -Footnote 1246: - - Klein, _Meistersig._^2 p. 72, nos. 1–3. For the absurdity of saying - that the name Eucheir is obviously fictitious, cp. the fact that one - of the greatest composers of early English church music (dominantly - vocal) bears the name of Byrd. What too does Rizzo think about the - historicity of M. Pottier, the distinguished French archaeologist to - whom we owe the catalogue of the Greek vases in the Louvre? - -Footnote 1247: - - Demaratus is said to have fled from the tyranny of Cypselus (above, p. - 216). He may have been an unsuccessful rival of Cypselus for the - Corinthian tyranny. Cp. the facts quoted, p. 52, as to Miltiades the - rival of Peisistratus tyrant of Athens, and the tyranny that Miltiades - secured for himself in the Thracian Chersonese. - -Footnote 1248: - - Livy I. 45. - -Footnote 1249: - - Dion. Hal. IV. 25–6. - -Footnote 1250: - - Aur. Vict. _de Vir. Ill._ 7. - -Footnote 1251: - - Strabo, IV. 179, 180, remarks on the similarity of the images of - Artemis at Ephesus, at Marseilles, and in the Servian temple at Rome; - see Seeley, _Livy I._ chap. 45. - -Footnote 1252: - - _E.g._ _Brit. Mus. Cat. Vases_, II. fig. 41 and pl. II., Buschor, _Gr. - Vasenmal._^1 p. 94. - -Footnote 1253: - - Buschor, _Gr. Vasenmal._^1 pp. 97–9 and figs. 62, 63. - -Footnote 1254: - - _Ibid._ pp. 87–90 and fig. 56. Clazomenae lay only 20 miles from - Phocaea, the city with which we have just seen reasons for associating - Servius. - -Footnote 1255: - - _Roem. Mitt._ IX. (1894), pp. 253 f. and especially 254–5, 269 (where - Petersen compares with Ephesian work) and 287–296 (particularly close - parallels from Clazomenae). - -Footnote 1256: - - _E.g._ Montelius, _Civ. Prim. Ital._ Sér. B, pl. 342; Rizzo, _Bull. - Comm._ 1910, p. 320, 1911, p. 43, discussing representations of temple - gables in some of the frescoes. - -Footnote 1257: - - Graillot, _Mélanges d’Arch. et d’Hist._ 1896, pp. 148 f.; Barnabei and - Cozza, _Notiz. d. Scav._ 1896, pp. 28 f.; Rizzo, _Bull. Comm._ 1910, - pp. 307 f.; cp. Walters, _Brit. Mus. Cat. Terracottas_, pp. xvii. and - 171–9 (Ionic Greek architectural terra cottas from Lanuvium and - Caere), 183 (Etruscan terra cotta sarcophagus under Ionic influence - from Caere). - -Footnote 1258: - - Rizzo, _Bull. Comm._ 1910, p. 318. The Velletri examples show a - striking resemblance to finds made in Asia Minor at Larissa near - Phocaea. - -Footnote 1259: - - _Bull. Comm._ 1911, pp. 46–7; cp. 1910, p. 313. - -Footnote 1260: - - _Bull. Comm._ 1911, p. 47. - -Footnote 1261: - - Perhaps after the “Sacred” war of the beginning of the sixth century - when the fall of Krisa cut off Cumae from her mother city, see below, - pp. 259–260. - -Footnote 1262: - - Cic. _Tusc. Quaest._ III. 12 (27); Livy II. 21; Dion. Hal. VI. 21; cp. - VII. 2, 12. - -Footnote 1263: - - See below, pp. 278–9. - -Footnote 1264: - - Platner, _Topography of Rome_^2 (1911), p. 106. Cp. Huelsen, _Forum - Romanum_, trans. Carter, 1906, p. 3. - -Footnote 1265: - - Platner, _ibid._ p. 105. Pais claims the story of Curtius (445 or 362 - B.C.; Varro, _L.L._ V. 148; Livy VII. 6) as an alternative version of - the draining of the Forum. The existence of two conflicting versions - would not, _pace_ Pais, _Legends_, pp. 35–6, prove that neither was - true; in this particular case we have not two rival stories, since the - Curtius legend refers not to the original draining of the site, but to - a sudden flood, such as that which so alarmed the Romans in the days - of Horace (_Odes_, I. ii. 12–20). The Forum continues to be seriously - flooded from time to time. - -Footnote 1266: - - On this pottery and its provenance see below, Appendix B, pp. 315–319. - Considering the claims of Corinth to have produced ware of this style - it is interesting to note that some quantity of it has been found in - Rome, _e.g._ _Mon. Ant._ XV. figs. 88_a_, _b_, and 89, pp. 109 f., pl. - IX. 9, 10, 14, 15, 18, pl. X. 1, 4, 5, pl. XVII. 9. See also below, - nn. 4, 5. - -Footnote 1267: - - Ure, _Black Glaze Pottery_, pls. X. 3, XI. 1, 2. - -Footnote 1268: - - _Notiz._ 1903, p. 380; 1911, p. 161. - -Footnote 1269: - - 1903, p. 388, fig. 17; 1911, p. 160, fig. 3_d_. - -Footnote 1270: - - See Appendix E. - -Footnote 1271: - - See Appendix F. - -Footnote 1272: - - _Etrusker_, I. p. 114. - -Footnote 1273: - - _Journal des Savants_, 1909, p. 213. - -Footnote 1274: - - _Mastarna_, p. 43. - -Footnote 1275: - - _Legends_, pp. 142 f. - -Footnote 1276: - - _Ibid._ p. 134. - -Footnote 1277: - - Above, p. 231. Ceres, Liber, and Libera, whose worship is said to have - been introduced into Rome in the seventh year of the republic, are - plainly the Attic-Eleusinian triad. - -Footnote 1278: - - Martha, _L’Art Étrusque_, p. 125, mentions several thousand Attic - vases from the single city of Vulci. - -Footnote 1279: - - _E.g._ _Mon. Ant._ XV. p. 242_a_, _b_, _c_, pl. IX. 16, pl. X. 3, pl. - XVII. 11. - -Footnote 1280: - - Except perhaps _Notiz._ 1903, p. 137, fig. 17; cp. Sieveking and - Hackl, _Cat. vases Munich_, 613, pl. 30, classified as Italian - Corinthian. - -Footnote 1281: - - _Notiz._ 1903, pp. 407, 412, 424, 425, figs. 36, 42, 55, 57. - -Footnote 1282: - - Sieveking and Hackl, pl. 18, 481. - -Footnote 1283: - - _Mon. Ant._ XV. fig. 157 and p. 508. - -Footnote 1284: - - Pl. XIII. 6. - -Footnote 1285: - - _Mon. Ant._ XV. fig. 153_b_. - -Footnote 1286: - - Dickens, _Cat. Acrop. Mus._ p. 193 on Athens Nat. Mus. no. 654. - -Footnote 1287: - - _Mon. Ant._ XV. p. 263, fig. 105. - -Footnote 1288: - - _J.R.S._ III. p. 249. Such vague language is unworthy of its - distinguished author, particularly in a paper in which he repeatedly - pleads for scientific precision. - -Footnote 1289: - - Petersen, _Klio_, 1908, pp. 440 f.; 1909, pp. 29 f.; cp. Michaelis, - _Cent. Arch. Discov._ p. 250. Experts have differed to the extent of - eighteen centuries in the dating of this fine animal. Early scholars - attributed it to a dedication of 296 B.C. recorded by Livy X. 23, when - the consuls “simulacria infantium conditorum urbis sub uberibus lupae - posuerunt.” But 296 B.C. is no time for so archaic a work. This led - certain German scholars, including Bode, to regard it as a work of the - twelfth or thirteenth century A.D., and the cast of it at Berlin was - expelled from the Classical collections. Already, however, in 1867 - Bachofen in the _Annali dell’ Inst._ pp. 184–8 had incidentally - suggested (as possible though not likely) a date at the end of the - sixth century B.C. A reasoned argument for this dating was first put - forward by Rayet, _Mon. de l’Art Ant._ I. vii. Rayet shows that the - wolf was in existence in the ninth century A.D., that the animals of - the twelfth and thirteenth centuries A.D. are stylistically different, - and that the Capitoline wolf has close affinities with other - representations of animals that are unquestionably archaic Greek. The - children are of course much later. - -Footnote 1290: - - It has not been thought necessary to combat the ultra-sceptical views - of Mommsen (_Roem. Forsch._ II. pp. 156 f., 199 f.) and Pais (_Ancient - Italy_, pp. 276 f.; _Ancient Legends_, chap. XI.), as to the - historical existence of Cassius and Maelius. - -Footnote 1291: - - Above, p. 239. - -Footnote 1292: - - Martha, _L’Art Étrusque_, p. 123; _Roem. Mitt._ XXII. pp. 131, 133–4, - 150–1, 162; Pottier, _Album_, I. E 629–40. - -Footnote 1293: - - Strabo V. 220. - -Footnote 1294: - - Hdt. I. 167. - -Footnote 1295: - - In Chapter I of this book I have tried to show that this conception of - the tyrant disappears from Greek literature with the advent of - Dionysius of Syracuse. If, therefore, the Tarquin story is only - pseudo-history, it must have been concocted in the fifth century. - -Footnote 1296: - - Aristot. _Pol._ VII. (V.), 1315_b_; Strabo (where, however, the - reference includes the third century Aratus) VIII. 382. - -Footnote 1297: - - Diod. VIII. 24; Liban. _Orat. c. Severum_, III. p. 251 Reiske; Hellad. - _ap._ Phot. 530_a_ Bekker. Cp. Foerster, _Phil._ XXXV. p. 710. - -Footnote 1298: - - Plut. _Ser. Num. Vind._ 7 (_Moral._ 553). - -Footnote 1299: - - _Oxyrhync. Pap._ XI. no. 1365. - -Footnote 1300: - - _Pace_ De Gubernatis, _Atti R. Accad. Torino_, 1916, p. 293. - -Footnote 1301: - - See above, pp. 26f. De Gubernatis, _ibid._ pp. 294–7, suggests as - author Menaechmus of Sicyon, who probably flourished about the time of - the Diadochoi, see Abel, _Schol. Pind. Nem._ IX. p. 254. - -Footnote 1302: - - Paus. VI. 19. 2. - -Footnote 1303: - - He took part with Solon in the Sacred War (about 590 B.C.) and was the - grandfather of the Athenian Cleisthenes who reformed the Athenian - constitution in 508 B.C. - -Footnote 1304: - - Aristot. _Pol._ VII. (V.), 1316_a_. - -Footnote 1305: - - Nic. Dam. _F.H.G._ III. p. 394. - -Footnote 1306: - - Aristot. _Pol._ 1315_b_ (διὰ τὸ πολεμικὸς γενέσθαι Κλεισθένης). - -Footnote 1307: - - Hdt. V. 67 (Κλεισθένης γὰρ Ἀργείοισι πολεμήσας...). Athen. XIII. - 560_c_ implies that Argos and Sicyon were on the same side in the - Krisaian war, but no conclusions can be based on this romantic passage - which ascribes the war (like the Trojan war) to the rape of some - Argive women. An Argive (Leokedes, son of the tyrant Pheidon) appears - among the suitors of Agariste, Cleisthenes’ daughter. He has been - suspected by the moderns as being chronologically impossible, as being - the only Dorian, and as raising the number from twelve to thirteen - (Macan ad Hdt. VI. 127); but his _a priori_ improbability is not - decisive against his historical reality. Cleisthenes may have changed - his policy towards the end of his career, though against this must be - set the evidence for rivalry between Sicyon and Argos over the - foundation (?) of the Nemean games right at the end of Cleisthenes’ - reign, Bury, _Nemean Odes_, pp. 250–1. - -Footnote 1308: - - Paus. II. 9. 6; X. 37. 6 (“so the Amphictyons resolved to make war on - the Kirrhaians, and they appointed Cleisthenes, tyrant of Sicyon, to - the command”); Polyaen. III. 5 (cp. VI. 13); Frontin. _Strat._ III. 7. - 6; Schol. Pind. pref. to _Nem._ IX. (quoted below). - -Footnote 1309: - - Cp. Hom. _Il._ II. 520; _Hymn. Apoll._ 438; Paus. VII. 19. 7. - -Footnote 1310: - - Hdt. VI. 129; cp. Nic. Dam. _F.H.G._ III. p. 395. - -Footnote 1311: - - Strabo IX. 418 εὐτυχήσαντες γὰρ οἱ Κρισαῖοι διὰ τὰ ἐκ τῆς Σικελίας καὶ - τῆς Ἰταλίας τέλη πικρῶς ἐτελώνουν τοὺς ἐπὶ τὸ ἱερὸν ἀφικνουμένους. - _ibid. supra_, πόλις ἀρχαία Κίρρα ἐπὶ τῇ θαλάττῃ ἱδρυμένη ... ἵδρυται - δ’ ἀπαντικρὺ Σικυῶνος, πρόκειται δὲ τῆς Κίρρας τὸ Κρισαῖον πεδίον - εὔδαιμον. πάλιν γὰρ ἐφεξῆς ἐστιν ἄλλη πόλις Κρῖσα, ἀφ’ ἧς ὁ κόλπος - Κρισαῖος, cp. Mariéjol, _de Orthagoridis_, pp. 29 f.; Beloch, _Gr. - G._^2 I. i. p. 337, n. 3. Whether Kirrha is either geographically or - etymologically distinct from Krisa is immaterial for our enquiry. - -Footnote 1312: - - Schol. Pind. preface to _Nem._ IX. φησὶ δὲ ἐν τῷ πολέμῶ τῶν Κρισαίων - κατὰ θάλασσαν ῥᾳδίως τὰ ἐπιτήδεια ποριζομένων καὶ διὰ τοῦτο μακρᾶς - γενομένης τῆς πολιορκίας Κλεισθένην τὸν Σικυώνιον ναυτικὸν ἰδίᾳ - παρασκευάσαντα κωλῦσαι τὴν σιτοπομπίαν αὐτῶν, καὶ διὰ ταύτην τὴν - εὐεργεσίαν τὸ τρίτον τῶν λαφύρων ἔδοσαν τῷ Κλεισθένει καὶ Σικυωνίαν - (alii Σικυωνίοις), αφ’ οὗ καὶ Σικυώνιοι τὰ Πύθια πρῶτον παρ’ ἑαυτοῖς - ἔθεσαν. The authority here used by the scholiast is uncertain. - Possibly it is Menaechmus of Sicyon, on whom see above, p. 258, n. 2. - -Footnote 1313: - - Sicyon has not much of a harbour (Bursian, _Geog. Gr._ II. i. p. 30), - but it managed to raise a respectable squadron of ships for the - Persian and Peloponnesian wars (Hdt. VIII. 43; Thuc. II. 9), when its - importance was far less than in the age of the tyrants. - -Footnote 1314: - - According to one reading of the scholium to Pindar, _Nem._ IX. it was - to these proceedings that Cleisthenes owed his throne: καὶ διὰ ταύτην - τὴν εὐεργασίαν τὸ τρίτον τῶν λαφύρων ἔδοσαν τῷ Κλεισθένει καὶ - Σικυωνίαν. (See above, n. 1.) But the name of a country in the - objective accusative without the article is unusual, and MS. evidence - appears to support the reading Σικυωνίοις. - -Footnote 1315: - - Bury, _Nemean Odes_, Appendix D. The year 586 B.C. is generally given - as the date of the first Pythian games; but our authorities state that - the festival was older. What happened after the Sacred War was a - change in the character of the festival, which from being purely - musical became largely athletic (Strabo IX. 421; Paus. X. 7. 2–5). - -Footnote 1316: - - To the instances quoted by Bury add perhaps the interferences of - Polycrates in the great Delian festival, above, pp. 70, 71. - -Footnote 1317: - - See especially Isocr. _Panegyr._ 43 (49). - -Footnote 1318: - - Strabo X. 486; cp. Livy I. 30, “Tullus (_i.e._ Tullus Hostilius, king - of Rome) ad Feroniae fanum mercatu frequenti negotiatores Romanos - comprehensos querebatur”; S. Matt. XXI. 12, “and Jesus entered into - the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the - temple, and overthrew the tables of the money-changers.” From this - point of view the Greek games may be compared, too, with some of the - great fairs of mediaeval Europe; see, _e.g._, Dagobert I, diplom. ann. - 629; Pipin, diplom. ann. 753, de festo S. Dionysii, cited Barth, - _Corinth. Comm._ p. 9, n. 1. Cp. also the fairs held in the - neighbourhood of sanctuaries in pre-Mohammedan Arabia, Margoliouth, - _Mohammed_, p. 6. - -Footnote 1319: - - Cornford, _Thucydides Mythistoricus_, p. 35. - -Footnote 1320: - - Cp. Grote (ed. 1888), II. pp. 65–66, who acutely argues that - Cleisthenes aimed mainly at suppressing not our Homer but the lost - _Thebais_ when he prohibited the recitation of Homer in Sicyon. The - _Thebais_ glorified the Dorian heroes who overthrew prehistoric - Thebes. - -Footnote 1321: - - Macan ad Hdt. VI. 127. - -Footnote 1322: - - A. B. Cook, _C.R._ XXI. p. 169, but cp. _ibid._ p. 233. - -Footnote 1323: - - The oracle had prophesied, and therefore presumably favoured, the - establishment of the tyranny by Orthagoras, _Oxyrhync. Pap._ XI. 1365; - Diod. VIII. 24; Plut. _Ser. Num. Vind._ 7 (_Moral._ 553) (where the - tyranny of Orthagoras is made to result from an outrage committed at - the Pythian games). - -Footnote 1324: - - “Sikyon ist keine Handelstadt,” _Ges. d. Alt._ II.^1 p. 628. - -Footnote 1325: - - Below, pp. 316–7 and references, _ibid._ - -Footnote 1326: - - Paus. VI. 19. 2. - -Footnote 1327: - - Frazer, Paus. _ad loc._ - -Footnote 1328: - - Frazer, _ibid._ - -Footnote 1329: - - The Cretan sculptors Dipoenus and Scyllis came about 580 B.C. to - Sicyon, “which was long the home of all such crafts. The Sicyonians - contracted with them for statues of the gods, but before they were - completed the artists complained that they were ill used and departed - to Aetolia” (Pliny, _N.H._ XXXVI. 4). Gardner suggests that the - artists left Sicyon on the death of Cleisthenes (_Gk. Sculp._^2 p. - 103). The wild and half civilized Aetolia seems an odd refuge for such - highly skilled craftsmen. Beyond Aetolia from Sicyon lay the city of - Ambracia, which Pliny declares to have been crammed with works of - Dipoenus (_N.H._ XXXVI. 4). On the strength presumably of this - statement, Gardner (_ibid._) makes the artists retire to Ambracia from - Sicyon. Ambracia was a Corinthian colony and appears to have continued - under a tyrant of the house of Cypselus after the fall of the great - tyrant houses in the isthmus states. The Sicyonians were ordered by - Apollo to recall the artists and let them finish their work, and this - was done though it cost the Sicyonians dear (magnis mercedibus - impetratum est, Pliny, _N.H._ XXXVI. 4). It may be noted that tyranny - too was revived at Sicyon. A tyrant Aeschines was expelled by the - Spartans, presumably towards the end of the sixth century, Plut. _de - Hdt. Malig._ 21 (_Moral._ 859). The wanderings of Dipoenus and Scyllis - thus point to a possible connexion between the tyrannical form of - government and good conditions for skilled labour. - -Footnote 1330: - - Paus. II. 9. 6. - -Footnote 1331: - - Poll. VII. 685; Mariéjol, _de Orthagoridis_, pp. 11–12, compares the - Megareans who - - πρόσθ’ οὔτε δίκας ᾔδεσαν οὔτε νόμους, - ἀλλ’ ἀμφὶ πλευρῇσι δορὰς αἰγῶν κατέτριβον, - ἔξω δ’ ὥστ’ ἔλαφοι τῆσδε νέμοντο πόλεος - καὶ νῦν εἴσ’ ἀγαθοί. THEOGNIS 54–7. - -Footnote 1332: - - _Pace_ Bury, _Hist. Greece_^2, p. 155. - -Footnote 1333: - - Aristot. _Pol._ VII. (V.), 1315_b_; cp. _Oxyrhync. Pap._ XI. 1365, ll. - 58 f. - -Footnote 1334: - - Busolt, _Gr. G._^2 I. p. 663. Cleisthenes, the last and best - remembered of the dynasty, seems to have made himself particularly - obnoxious to the upper classes. His marked antipathy to Homer, the - poet of aristocracy and divine right, may have had a social as well as - a racial basis, as may have been the case also with his treatment of - the Argive-Sicyonian hero, king Adrastus, whose festival, which - doubtless savoured of aristocratic ancestor worship, he replaced by - the cult of the parvenu and plebeian wine-god Dionysus. - -Footnote 1335: - - Thuc. I. 126; Aristot. _Rhet._ I. 2; Aristot. _Pol._ VII. (V.), - 1305_a_; Paus. I. 28. 1, 40. 1, 41. 2; Plut. _Qu. Gr._ 18 (_Moral._ - 295). - -Footnote 1336: - - Euseb. _Chron._ I. ch. 33. Theagenes is brought down by Beloch into - the sixth century, but on the weakest possible evidence. - -Footnote 1337: - - Aristot. _Pol._ VII. (V.), 1305_a_. Cauer’s idea, _Part. u. Polit. in - Megara u. Athen_, p. 16, that the rise of Theagenes coincided with a - severe blow to the colonial power of Megara in the Black Sea has no - evidence to support it. - -Footnote 1338: - - Xen. _Mem._ II. 7. 6; cp. Aristoph. _Ach._ 519, _Pax_ 1002. - -Footnote 1339: - - _Kleinschr._ pp. 116–17; cp. 119, n. 1. Meyer quotes Isoc. _de Pace_, - 117 (183), on the humble beginnings of Megara, but the passage - suggests no particular dates. - -Footnote 1340: - - _Gr. G._^2 I. p. 470. - -Footnote 1341: - - Xen. _Anab._ VI. 2. 1; Arrian, _Perip._ 18. - -Footnote 1342: - - On the relationships between Megara and Miletus at this period - practically nothing is known. They appear to have been friendly, - Meyer, _G. d. A._ II. p. 676 (but cp. Cauer, _Part. u. Polit. in - Megara u. Athen_, pp. 14 f.). Corinth on the other hand appears to - have been friendly to Samos the rival of Miletus, and we hear of an - early collision between Corinth and Megara (Meyer, _G. d. A._ II. p. - 449). It is therefore not unlikely that the great wool trade of - Miletus with the far West passed through Megara rather than through - the rival isthmus state of Corinth. - -Footnote 1343: - - Paus. I. 44. 4. - -Footnote 1344: - - _N.H._ VII. 57. - -Footnote 1345: - - _Hauptstätten d. Gewerbfleisses_, p. 89. - -Footnote 1346: - - _Gewerbliche Tätigkeit_, p. 71. - -Footnote 1347: - - Theog. 183–4. - -Footnote 1348: - - _Part. u. Polit. in Megara u. Athen_, p. 24. - -Footnote 1349: - - H. Sieveking, _Viertelj. f. Soc. u. Wirt._ VII. p. 64. - -Footnote 1350: - - _Sozialismus_^2, I. p. 195, n. 2. - -Footnote 1351: - - Hy. D. Lloyd, _Wealth against Commonwealth_, chap. III. - -Footnote 1352: - - _Ibid._ chap. XVIII. - -Footnote 1353: - - Paus. I. 40. 1, 41. 2. - -Footnote 1354: - - Meyer, _Ges. d. Alt._ I.^1 p. 567. Hezekiah came to the throne 714 - B.C. - -Footnote 1355: - - Plut. _Qu. Gr._ 18 (_Moral._ 295). - -Footnote 1356: - - So Cauer, _Part. u. Polit. in Megara u. Athen_, p. 31. - -Footnote 1357: - - Hdt. I. 20–22, V. 28, VI. 46; Aristot. _Pol._ III. 1284_a_, VII. (V.), - 1305_a_; Plut. _Qu. Gr._ 32 (_Moral._ 298); Suid. s.v. Γέργηθες, - Περιβολή, Τύρβη; Athen. XII. 523_f_–524_b_; Myres, _J.H.S._ XXVI. - 110–115 (on Milesian thalassocracy). - -Footnote 1358: - - Swoboda _ap._ Pauly Wissowa s.v. Damasenor. This possibility is stated - as a fact by A. G. Dunham, _Hist. Miletus_, p. 127. - -Footnote 1359: - - So Beloch _Gr. G._^2 I. i. p. 359. - -Footnote 1360: - - For a quite different interpretation see Wecklein, _Sitzb. Bay. Akad. - Muenchen: philos.-philol. Kl._ 1873, p. 45; Wachsmuth, _Stadt Athen_, - I. 481. - -Footnote 1361: - - _Tyrannis_, p. 226. - -Footnote 1362: - - Eustath. ad _Odyss._ I. 399. He himself so uses it ad _Odyss._ XII. - 103 and _Opusc. de emen. vita monach._ 126. - -Footnote 1363: - - Poehlmann, _Sozialismus_^2, I. 183, regards Cheiromache as consisting - mainly of “the compact masses of journeymen, labourers and - tradespeople, whom the great developments of industry, trade, and - shipping were concentrating in ever growing numbers in the cities.” - -Footnote 1364: - - _Apud_ Athen. XII. 524_a_. - -Footnote 1365: - - How and Wells, ad _Hdt._ V. 28. - -Footnote 1366: - - Athen. XII. 524_b_. - -Footnote 1367: - - Casaubon _ap._ Schweighaeuser, _Athen._, _ad loc._ explains - “unwarlike” as referring to the children who were tarred and burnt - along with their elders; but there is no indication that the oracle is - thinking particularly of the children, nor would unwarlike be a very - appropriate adjective for them. - -Footnote 1368: - - _Pol._ VII. (V.), 1305_a_. - -Footnote 1369: - - Hdt. V. 92; so Aristot. _Pol._ III. 1284_a_. - -Footnote 1370: - - Hdt. I. 21–22. - -Footnote 1371: - - E. Meyer, _G. d. A._ III. 1, p. 57. - -Footnote 1372: - - Miletus must have profited enormously by the fall of Polycrates (about - 523 B.C.) and the raising of the blockade that he had maintained - against all the subjects or allies of the Great King. - - Hdt. IV. 137 makes Histiaeus assert that it was thanks to Darius that - the Ionian tyrants were on their thrones, and that if the power of - Darius was destroyed neither would he (Histiaeus) be able to rule the - Milesians nor any other tyrant any other people. But the Greek does - not say that Darius had put the tyrants on their thrones, and the - words of Histiaeus are described as an opinion, not as an assertion of - fact. Herodotus therefore neither states nor suggests that the Ionian - tyrannies were due to the active interference of Darius. After the - Ionian revolt the Persian satrap “established democracies in the Greek - cities,” or in other words openly proclaimed that they might govern - themselves. - -Footnote 1373: - - Hdt. V. 11. - -Footnote 1374: - - Hdt. V. 23. Cp. above, p. 62. - -Footnote 1375: - - Grundy, _Great Persian War_, p. 66. - -Footnote 1376: - - For this view cp. my remarks in Chapter II on the part played by the - Thracian mines in “rooting” and maintaining the tyranny of - Peisistratus. Cp. also the later attempt of Histiaeus to secure the - Thracian island of Thasos with its great fleet and extremely - productive mines, Hdt. VI. 46. - -Footnote 1377: - - _Ap._ Suid. s.v. Pythagoras. - -Footnote 1378: - - Athen. VII. 289_c_. - -Footnote 1379: - - Ael. _V.H._ III. 26; Polyaen. VI. 50; cp. Hdt. I. 26. - -Footnote 1380: - - Suid. s.v. Hipponax. - -Footnote 1381: - - Pauly Wissowa s.v. Ephesus, pp. 2788–9, quoting Suid. s.v. - Aristarchos. The rope with which the Ephesians bound their city to the - temple during the siege by Croesus and the liberal contribution by - Croesus to the rebuilding of the temple are no evidence, _pace_ E. - Curtius, _Ephesus_, pp. 14–15, that the government of the city at this - period passed for a time into the hands of the priesthood. - -Footnote 1382: - - So Buerchner _ap._ Pauly Wissowa s.v. Ephesus, p. 2788. Plass, - however, _Tyrannis_, pp. 229–30, regards Melas and Pindaros as - Basilids and Pythagoras as later than them. - -Footnote 1383: - - τῷ δήμῳ καὶ τῇ πλήθυι ἦν τε καὶ ἐδόκει κεχαρισμένος, ἅμα τὰ μὲν αὐτοὺς - ἐπελπίζων ὑποσχέσεσιν, τὰ δὲ ὑποσπείρων αὐτοῖς ὀλίγα κέρδη. - -Footnote 1384: - - τούς γε μὴν ἐν ἀξιώσει τε καὶ δυνάμει περισυλῶν καὶ δημεύων. - -Footnote 1385: - - Cp. _e.g._ ἀπέχρησε μὲν οὖν καὶ ταῦτα (his behaviour to his subjects) - ἂν κάκιστα ἀνθρώπων ἀπολέσαι αὐτόν· ἤδη δὲ καὶ τοῦ θείου κατεφρόνει, - κ.τ.λ. - -Footnote 1386: - - Ael. _V.H._ III. 26. - -Footnote 1387: - - Radet, _Lydie_, p. 172. There is, however, _pace_ Radet (pp. 82, 134), - no evidence that the Melas, son-in-law of Gyges, described by Nic. - Dam. _F.H.G._ III. p. 396 as prince of Daskylion was an ancestor of - Melas the father of Pindarus (so also Gelzer, _Rhein. Mus._ XXXV. pp. - 520–1) and a predecessor of this later Melas as tyrant of Ephesus. - Radet assumes the Daskylion of Nic. Dam. to be a mistake for Ephesus. - -Footnote 1388: - - Nic. Dam. _F.H.G._ III. p. 397; see above, p. 137. - -Footnote 1389: - - Euseb. and Hieron. _Chron._ - -Footnote 1390: - - Polyaen. V. 47. - -Footnote 1391: - - Pol. VII. (V.), 1310_b_ 29, 1316_a_ 37 (based perhaps on Antiochus of - Syracuse, Endt, _Wien. Stud._ XXIV. p. 53). - -Footnote 1392: - - Above, Chap. I, pp. 26 f. - -Footnote 1393: - - Freeman, _History of Sicily_, II. 56, used it to rebut the view that - the struggle that ended with the tyranny of Panaitios was “only a - strife between the rich and the poor” and to infer that it was - probably racial. The significant “only” sufficiently explains the - inference. - -Footnote 1394: - - Polyaen. V. 1. 1. - -Footnote 1395: - - Cic. _ad Att._ VII. 12. 2, 20. 2; _de Div._ I. 23; Val. Max. III. iii. - extern. 2; Plut. _Ser. Num. Vind._ 7 (_Moral._ 553); Lucian, _Ver. - Hist._ II. 23; _bis Acc._ 8; _Phalaris_, A and B _passim_ (_ibid._ A - 6, Phalaris declares that he punished conspirators savagely, cp. Plut. - _Amat._ 16 (_Moral._ 760), simply because they thwarted his intention - of governing mildly; _ibid._ A 8, 9, men naturally kindly like himself - are more pained by inflicting punishments than by receiving them); - Athen. XIII. 602_a-b_; Ael. _V.H._ II. 4. The last two give an - anecdote where Phalaris shows that he can be merciful as well as - cruel. - -Footnote 1396: - - Pind. _Pyth._ I. 95 f., cp. Schol. _ad loc._; Timaeus _F.H.G._ I. pp. - 221–2 (Polyb. XII. 25; Diod. XIII. 90; Schol. Pind. _Pyth._ I. Timaeus - appears to have denied the historical existence of the bull); Diod. - XIX. 108; Cic. _Verr._ IV. 33; Ovid, _A.A._ I. 653; _Trist._ III. xi. - 41 f.; _Ib._ 441; Pliny, _N.H._ XXXIV. 19; Plut. _Parall._ 39 - (_Moral._ 315); Lucian, _Phalaris_, A 1, 11; B 11. - -Footnote 1397: - - Pind. _Pyth._ I. 95 f. - -Footnote 1398: - - Aristot. _Pol._ VII. (V.), 1310_b_; and (?) _Rhet._ II. 20 (possibly - referring to another Phalaris). The fable of the horse and stag is - attributed to Stesichorus when Phalaris was στρατηγὸς αὐτοκράτωρ of - Himera and asking for the bodyguard with which he intended to make - himself tyrant. - -Footnote 1399: - - Euseb. Ol. 52. 3–56. 3; Suid. s.v.; cp. Schol. Pind. _Ol._ III. 68 - (38). For an earlier date see Euseb. Ol. 32. 3–39. 2 and Pliny, _N.H._ - VII. 57 (tyrannus primus fuit Phalaris Agrigenti), but these two - passages make the tyrant flourish before the foundation of the city - that he ruled. - -Footnote 1400: - - Holm, _Gesch. Sic._ I. 149 (cp. _Hist. of Greece_, I. p. 363), who, - however, fails to see the full application of his own words. - -Footnote 1401: - - Lucian, _Phalaris_, A 3. - -Footnote 1402: - - Aristot. _Pol._ VII. (V.), 1310_b_, τύραννοι κατέστησαν ... ὁι περὶ - τὴν Ἰωνίαν καὶ Φάλαρις ἐκ τῶν τιμῶν. - -Footnote 1403: - - Plut. _Praec. Ger. Rep._ 28 (_Moral._ 821); on the overthrow of - Phalaris see also Plut. _cum Princ. Philosoph._ 3 (_Moral._ 778). - -Footnote 1404: - - Diod. VIII. 11. - -Footnote 1405: - - Pauly Wissowa s.v. Agathokles, 14_b_ (in Supplement Heft I). - -Footnote 1406: - - Cp. perhaps the use of ἐπίστασις above, p. 81. - -Footnote 1407: - - Dem. _Olynth._ III. 25–6; _Aristocr._ 207; περὶ Συντάξ. 29 (= III. 35; - XXIII. 689; XIII. 174). - -Footnote 1408: - - The military stratagems attributed to Phalaris by Polyaenus, V. 1. 3, - 4, and Frontinus, III. 4. 6, are not very illuminating, but note that - in one of them Phalaris is made to achieve his aim by a fraudulent - deal in corn. - -Footnote 1409: - - Somewhere about the time of Phalaris Sicily was invaded by a - Carthaginian army under a commander named Malchus, Justin XVIII. 7. It - has been suggested that Phalaris was pre-eminently the leader of the - Agrigentines against the Punic peril (Bury, _Hist. Greece_^2, p. 297), - and that he played a similar part to that played during a later - invasion by the Syracusan Dionysius. For this suggestion there is no - evidence whatsoever. There is no certainty either that the invasion of - Malchus occurred in the age of Phalaris or that Agrigentum was - endangered by it or even alarmed. On the other hand there are hints - that Phalaris was the reverse of anti-Carthaginian. The Semites of - Carthage were devoted to the cult of Moloch, in whose worship no small - part was played by the molten image of a calf and the offering to it - of human sacrifices. Perhaps the most likely origin of the story of - the bull of Phalaris is to be sought in this Moloch worship. The - tyrant may have had a large Phoenician contingent among his foreign - employees and have very much shocked his Greek subjects by allowing - these Semites to practise Semitic rites in Agrigentum. Meyer, however, - _Ges. d. Alt._ II. p. 682 n., suggests a connexion between the bull of - Phalaris and the Cretan bull cult. Note that the story of the bull of - Phalaris impressed Grote as having a historical basis: “The reality of - the hollow bull appears to be better authenticated than the nature of - the story would lead us to presume,” _Hist. Greece_, ed. 1888, IV. p. - 65; cp. _ibid._ p. 296, n. 1. - -Footnote 1410: - - Livy II. 21, 34; Dion. Hal. VI. 21. - -Footnote 1411: - - Dion. Hal. VII. 3. - -Footnote 1412: - - Dion. Hal. VII. 4, 5; Plut. _Mul. Virt._ 26 (_Moral._ 261). - -Footnote 1413: - - Dion. Hal. VII. 4. 5, 6. 4. - -Footnote 1414: - - Plut. _Mul. Virt._ 26. - -Footnote 1415: - - See Niese _ap._ Pauly Wissowa s.v. Aristodemus (8). - -Footnote 1416: - - Strabo XIII. 610; cp. 614. See further Diod. XVI. 52; Diog. Laert. V. - 1. 3–11 (quoting Demetrius Magnes and Theocritus); Dion. Hal. _Ep. ad - Amm._ 5; Demetrius, _de Eloc._ 293; Hesych. Miles. _F.H.G._ IV. p. - 156; Harpocrat. s.v. Ἑρμίας; Hesych. s.v. Τάρνη; Suid. s.v. - Ἀριστοτέλης; _Et. Mag._ s.v. Ἑρμῆς; Lucian, _Eunuch._ 9; Himerius, VI. - 6; Tertull. _Apol. adv. Gent._ 46; Euseb. _Prep. Ev._ XV. 2. Suid. - s.v. Ἀριστοτέλης and Hesych. Miles. make Aristotle marry a daughter of - Hermias; Diog. Laert. “a daughter or niece”; Euseb., Harpocrat., Suid. - s.v. Ἑρμίας and _Et. Mag._ an adopted daughter who was by birth the - tyrant’s sister (Euseb.). - - Plato (?), _Ep._ VI., implies that two of Hermias’ companions had - attended the Academy, but not Hermias himself. But even so the letter, - if genuine, is evidence of intercourse between Hermias and Plato. - - The sources for Hermias are collected and discussed by Boeckh, _Klein. - Schrift._ VI. 188 f. and Larcher, _Mém. Acad. Insc. et B.-Lettr._ - XLVIII. pp. 208 f. Larcher, writing in 1792, is less complete, but - extremely interesting from his attitude towards Hermias’ rebellion - from the king of Persia. “Moi-même, j’ai longtemps été persuadé qu’un - rebelle qui avoit été justement puni du dernier supplice, n’étoit pas - un personnage assez important pour mériter qu’on s’en occupât. Mais en - le voyant célébré par Aristote j’ai pensé qu’un homme qui s’étoit - attiré les louanges d’un grand philosophe devoit sortir de l’espèce - d’obscurité à laquelle il étoit en quelque sort condamné”; p. 208; cp. - p. 225, where Larcher explains the Greek conception of the rights of - nationality and their refusal to submit to a foreign conqueror. This - perverted attitude of the Greeks he attributes to their benighted - religion. - -Footnote 1417: - - _J.H.S._ XXXV. p. 167. Note that Hermias was famed for fair dealing. - “If ever he made any purchase and this happened frequently in the case - of books, the vendor, being his subject (ἰδιώτης), would demand a - price less than their value. But Hermias used to correct the mistake - and declare that the book was worth more and pay accordingly” (Suid.). - -Footnote 1418: - - Diog. Laert. III. 1. 31 (46). - -Footnote 1419: - - Athen. XI. 508 f. - -Footnote 1420: - - _J.H.S._ XXXV. p. 167. - -Footnote 1421: - - Athen. XI. 509_a_. - -Footnote 1422: - - Boswell, ed. Fitzgerald, I. p. 422. - -Footnote 1423: - - Orosius IV. 6; cp. Aristot. _Pol._ VII. (V.), 1307_a_ above. - -Footnote 1424: - - Euboulos (the unnamed banker of Strabo XIII. 610; cp. Diog. Laert. V. - I. 5 (3)) is quoted by Aristotle (_Pol._ II. 1267_a_) as demonstrating - to a Persian satrap that it would not pay for him to besiege Atarneus, - on which Boeckh observes that “the idea is worthy of a banker,” _Kl. - Schr._ VI. p. 188. He seems to have been notoriously accessible to - economic arguments. “Anyhow Kallisthenes in his Apophthegms says that - the poet Persinos, being neglected by Euboulos of Atarneus went to - Mitylene, and when Euboulos expressed surprise wrote to him that it - was because he found it more pleasing exchanging in Mitylene than in - Atarneus the Phocaean staters he had brought with him,” Poll. IX. 93. - -Footnote 1425: - - Besides his connexions with Hermias Aristotle had been brought up παρά - τινι Προξένῳ Ἀταρνεῖ, Ammon. _Vita Arist._ - -Footnote 1426: - - Boeckh, _Kleine Schriften_, VI. p. 191, says of Hermias, “seine Macht - darf man nicht gering anschlagen”; but Atarneus τὸ τοῦ Ἑρμείου - τυραννεῖον (Strabo XIII. 614) is described by Himerius (_Or._ VI. 6) - as πόλις μέγεθος οὐ μεγάλη. Even on the most liberal estimate it sinks - into utter insignificance in the light of the conquests of Alexander, - which so shortly followed it. - -Footnote 1427: - - _Pol._ II. 1273_a_; III. 1280_a_. - -Footnote 1428: - - _Pol._ VIII. (VI.), 1318_a_. - -Footnote 1429: - - Hicks, _Manual Gk. Hist. Inscr._ no. 100. The expression occurs four - times in the thirty-two extant lines of the inscription. Hermias is - mentioned without his partners only once, right at the end. - -Footnote 1430: - - Perhaps also the reality. Plato’s sixth letter, which is addressed to - Hermias and Erastos and Koriskos (cp. Diog. Laert. III. 1. 31 (46)), - urges the three to form a “single bond of friendship” (μίαν φιλίας - συμπλοκήν). Boeckh, _Kl. Schr._ VI. p. 191, describes Hermias’ tyranny - as “eine Hetairie mehrerer, an deren Spitze ein anerkanntes Haupt - stand.” Hermias was at least primus inter pares; cp. the use made of - his seal, Polyaen. VI. 48. - -Footnote 1431: - - Diog. Laert. V. 1. 7 (6); Athen. XV. 696; cp. also the epigram - ascribed to Aristotle on Hermias’ statue at Delphi, Diog. Laert. - _ibid._ - -Footnote 1432: - - Suid. s.v. Ἀριστοτέλης; cp. Athen. XV. 696_a-b_; Diog. Laert. V. 1. 7; - Hesych. Miles. _F.H.G._ IV. 156–7. - -Footnote 1433: - - _Pace_ Endt, _Wien. Stud._ XXIV. pp. 67–68. He is not called tyrant by - Aristotle either in the Paean (where he is called Ἀταρνέος ἔντροφος, - v.l. ἔντροπος (= ἐπίτροπος, viceroy, steward?), see Larcher, _op. - cit._ p. 244), or in the epitaph Diog. Laert. V. 1. 7. The - _Oeconomica_, included among the works of Aristotle and probably - written by one of his pupils, refers to him without calling him tyrant - (II. 28: on authorship see ed. Teubner, introd. p. viii). Nor is - Euboulos so called where mentioned in the _Politics_ (II. 1267_a_). - Demetrius may be following the Aristotelian tradition when he calls - Hermias simply ὁ τοῦ Ἀταρνέως ἄρξας (but cp. _ibid._ παρὰ τοῖς - τυράννοις). So Suid. ὅστις ἦν ἄρχων Ἀταρνέως. In other writers Hermias - is generally styled tyrant (so Strabo, Diod., Diog. Laert., Dion. - Hal., Lucian). - -Footnote 1434: - - Diod. XV. 7; Plut. _Dio_, 5; Diog. Laert. III. 1. 14 (19). The story - may be a fiction (Burnet, _Thales to Plato_, p. 211), but if so it is - probably based on the fact of a quarrel between the tyrant and the - philosopher. - -Footnote 1435: - - Dionysius himself had a clearer conception of the danger of a - monopolist becoming a political potentate, as appears from a passage - of Aristotle himself. “In Sicily a certain person who had had money - deposited with him bought up all the iron from the iron works - (σιδηρείων), and after that, when the merchants came from the emporia, - he was the sole salesman. He did not greatly overcharge; but none the - less on fifty talents he made a hundred. When Dionysius perceived this - he told him to take off the money, but not to remain any longer in - Syracuse, since he had discovered a source of income that was - prejudicial to his interests.” (Arist. _Pol._ II. 1259_a_.) The - incident as described hardly, however, suggests that the monopolist - was Dionysius’ greatest danger. - -Footnote 1436: - - Strabo XIII. 623. - -Footnote 1437: - - An inscription published _J.H.S._ XXII. p. 195 gives his father the - Greek name of Attalus, but he is described by Athenaeus, XIII. 577_b_, - quoting Carystius, as the son of a courtesan flute girl from - Paphlagonia, and by Pausanias, I. 8. 1, as a Paphlagonian eunuch. - -Footnote 1438: - - Strabo XIII. 623; Paus. I. 10. 4. - -Footnote 1439: - - Appian XI. 10 (_Syr._ 63). - -Footnote 1440: - - Fraenkel, _Inschr. v. Perg._ no. 245, fr. C, l. 44; Bevan, _House of - Seleucus_, I. p. 156. - -Footnote 1441: - - _J.H.S._ XXII. p. 193 f. - -Footnote 1442: - - Polyb. XXIII. 8. - -Footnote 1443: - - Holm, _Hist. Greece_, IV. p. 280. - -Footnote 1444: - - Mommsen, _Hist. Rome_ (English trans.), II. p. 403. - -Footnote 1445: - - Holm, _Hist. Greece_ (English trans.), IV. pp. 280, 296. - -Footnote 1446: - - Published in full by Minns, _Greeks and Scythians_, pp. 641–2, and - discussed, _ibid._ pp. 460–3 and _passim_. - -Footnote 1447: - - Minns, p. 641, l. 65. - -Footnote 1448: - - Minns, p. 642, l. 59. - -Footnote 1449: - - Ure, _Black Glaze Pottery_, p. 35, n. 6. - -Footnote 1450: - - Macrob. _Sat._ I. xi. 33. - -Footnote 1451: - - Minns, p. 459. - -Footnote 1452: - - Cp. Minns, p. 462, n. 2. - -Footnote 1453: - - Strabo XIII. 624. The significance of this proceeding cannot be put - better than in the words of Holm, _Hist. Greece_, IV. p. 527: “It is - characteristic of the Pergamene dynasty that it concluded its career - in the spirit in which it began it. Its rule was of private origin: - Philetairos had appropriated treasure and treasury. After that the - Pergamene rulers had raised themselves to the rank of kings by their - money and their clever policy, and as such had achieved much good. The - last sovereign of the line, however, reverted to the view that his - position was of a private nature and he disposed of everything that he - claimed as if it were private property.” - -Footnote 1454: - - Strabo XIII. 624. The friendship dated from at least 211 B.C., Livy - XXVI. 24. - -Footnote 1455: - - οὐ ψθίνει Κροίσου φιλόφρων ἀρετά, Pind. _Pyth._ I. 93–94; but cp. what - the poet says _ibid._ 95–98, about what was probably a similar - government (see above, pp. 274–8), that the Greeks knew from the - inside: “Phalaris men tell of everywhere with hate” (ἐχθρὰ Φάλαριν - κατέχει παντᾷ φάτις). - -Footnote 1456: - - Beloch, _Gr. G._^2 I. i. 348. - -Footnote 1457: - - Beloch, _Gr. G._^2 I. i. 359. - -Footnote 1458: - - Cp. recent days, when a relapse into some of the conditions of the - dark ages turned “business men” into polemarchs or publicists and in - some notorious cases into both combined. - -Footnote 1459: - - Except perhaps Pheidon, who is exceptional in other ways as well. - -Footnote 1460: - - The lawgiver and the tyrant are often sharply contrasted, _e.g._ - Lucian, _Phalaris_ A, 8. - -Footnote 1461: - - _Rep._ 566_a_. - -Footnote 1462: - - V. 92. - -Footnote 1463: - - 1181–2; cp. 1203–4. - -Footnote 1464: - - E. Gardner, _Greek Sculpture_^2 figs. 44, 45. - -Footnote 1465: - - _E.g._ the famous drinking song beginning ἐν μύρτου κλαδί. - -Footnote 1466: - - For hatred and condemnation of tyranny or praise of tyrannicides see - further Aristoph. _Thesm._ 335 f.; Polyb. V. 11; Cic. _de Off._ III. - 6; Xenoph. _Hiero_, II. 8; Plut. _Timol._ 5, 37; Ael. _V.H._ XIV. 22. - -Footnote 1467: - - See above, pp. 133–4. - -Footnote 1468: - - Nordin, _Klio_, V. pp. 402 f., explains the title τύραννος as adopted - in the seventh century because kingship was then revived as a reality - while king meant a functionary who was essentially powerless. This - explanation may well be true, but it throws no light on the character - of the revived reality. - -Footnote 1469: - - _E.g._ I. 7, 73, 100, 109; II. 147 (the dominions of the twelve rulers - who divided Egypt after Sethon are called tyrannies, the rulers - themselves are called kings); V. 113 (“Philokypros, whom Solon of - Athens, when he came to Cyprus, praised in his poems most of all - tyrants” (τυράννων μάλιστα)); VII. 52, 99, 164; VIII. 67, 137, 142. - -Footnote 1470: - - The term has of course at different periods been applied to - governments that differed widely from one another both in the - character and in the basis of their power. There is no reason for - classing Cypselus and Dionysius together as the same kind of ruler, as - Holm (_Gk. Hist._ I. p. 266, n. 15), followed by Bury (_Gk. Hist._^2 - p. 147; cp. Francotte, _Mélanges_, pp. 62 f.), has gone out of his way - to do. Holm’s points have already been met: they are (1) For Phalaris, - Peisistratus and Polycrates brute force was as indispensable as for - later tyrants like Dionysius and Agathocles. (2) These latter owed - their rise as much as earlier tyrants to the hatred that the lower - classes bore the nobles. (3) Herodotus does not distinguish king from - tyrant. Bury’s dogmatism on this point and his denial of the existence - of an “age of tyrants” is responsible for the inception of this book. - -Footnote 1471: - - _Pol._ VII. (V.), 1310_b_. - -Footnote 1472: - - _Rep._ 552_b_. - -Footnote 1473: - - Cp. Isocr. _Paneg._ 62 (105), “thinking it monstrous that the few - should be masters of the many and that those who are below them in - point of property but in other respects not a whit their inferiors - should be excluded from office.” - -Footnote 1474: - - Poehlmann, _Grundriss_^4, p. 73, n. 1 (my theory a “falsche - Verallgemeinerung”). - -Footnote 1475: - - Sieveking, _Viertelj. Soc. Wirt._ VII. p. 81. - -Footnote 1476: - - How and Wells, _Hdt._ V. 92 β 1, regard an anti-Dorian reaction as a - usual feature of early Peloponnesian tyrannies. - -Footnote 1477: - - Busolt, _Lakedaim._ I. p. 209; cp. Hdt. I. 23; Suid. s.v. Ἀρίων; - Strabo VIII. 378. - -Footnote 1478: - - Busolt, _Lakedaim._ I. p. 210. - -Footnote 1479: - - Polyb. XII. 13. - -Footnote 1480: - - Except at Sicyon it seldom lasted more than two generations; cp. Hdt. - V. 92, where the oracle prophesies that Cypselus and his sons shall be - kings of famed Corinth, but not his sons’ sons, αὐτὸς καὶ παῖδες, - παῖδων γε μὲν οὐκέτι παῖδες. - -Footnote 1481: - - _Anticipations_, pp. 156–7; cp. the North of England saying that it is - three generations from clogs to clogs. - -Footnote 1482: - - _Varieties of Religious Experience_, p. 319. - -Footnote 1483: - - _Ibid._ p. 318. - -Footnote 1484: - - Cp. H. G. Wells, _Tono Bungay_^1, p. 486, on the governing classes of - Great Britain as seen at Westminster, “the realities are greedy trade, - base profit-seeking, bold advertisement—and kingship and chivalry ... - are dead.” - -Footnote 1485: - - See _e.g._ Mauri, _Citt. Lav. dell’ Attica_, p. 30. - -Footnote 1486: - - Aristot. _Pol._ VIII. (VI.), 1319_a_. - -Footnote 1487: - - _Ibid._ 1318_b_. - -Footnote 1488: - - Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 16; cp. Ael. _V.H._ IX. 25 and Max. Tyr. XXIII. - (Teubner, = Duebner, p. 117). - -Footnote 1489: - - Grundy, _Thuc. and his Age_, p. 117. - -Footnote 1490: - - For a full discussion of these people see Gilliard, _Réformes de - Solon_, chap. VI. - -Footnote 1491: - - Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 2. - -Footnote 1492: - - οἱ τῷ γένει μὴ καθαροί ... ὡς πολλῶν κοινωνούντων τῆς πολιτείας οὐ - προσῆκον. Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 13. - -Footnote 1493: - - θητικὸς ὄχλος, Plut. _Sol._ 29. - -Footnote 1494: - - Thuc. I. 2. Xenophon indeed, _de Vect._ I. 3, calls Attica all - productive (παμφορωτάτη), and declares that things that could not even - grow in many places bear fruit in Attica. But the context shows that - this only applies to the most favoured districts, cp. _ibid._ 5, - quoted below; the reference, too, is strictly to the variety of Attic - crops (doubtless a result of Athenian luxury and enterprise); cp. - Plato, _Critias_, 110_e_–111_a_: “(fifth century) Attica can vie with - any land in the variety and excellence of its products (τῷ πάμφορον - εὔκαρπον τε εἶναι); but in those days” (_i.e._ in the mythical past) - “in addition to their quality it produced them in great abundance.” - Theophrastus, _Hist. Plant._ VIII. 8, says that “at Athens the barley - produces more meal than anywhere else, since it is an excellent land - for that crop”; but this says nothing as to the amount of land in - Attica under barley. Boeckh, _Public Economy_, I. p. 109, calculates - that in ancient Attica 955,500 plethra out of a total area of - 2,304,000 were under corn; but his calculation is based on a series of - conjectures as to the yearly consumption and import which hardly weigh - against the considerations adduced below. - -Footnote 1495: - - Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 16. So (_ap._ Leutsch, _Paroemiograph. Gr._ II. - p. 756) Mantissa, I. 76 (where Peisistratus expresses surprise at - anyone farming such land, τίνας καρποὺς ἀναιρούμενος τοιαῦτα γεωργοίη - χωρία), and, with no reference to Hymettus, Zenob. IV. 76 (_ap._ eosd. - I. p. 105). - -Footnote 1496: - - Hdt. VI. 137. - -Footnote 1497: - - Stat. _Theb._ XII. 622, 620. - -Footnote 1498: - - Athen. I. 28_d_, θύμον Ὑμήττιον. - -Footnote 1499: - - Paus. I. 32; cp. Plut. _Sol._ 23 (Solon offered rewards for killing - wolves). - -Footnote 1500: - - Plato, _Critias_, 111_c_; cp. references, Bursian, _Geog. Gr._ I. p. - 254. - -Footnote 1501: - - Cp. the “forest clad mountain (ὄρος καταειμενον ὕλῃ)” of _Odyss._ - XIII. 351. - -Footnote 1502: - - Columella IX. 2. - -Footnote 1503: - - Aristot. _Hist. Anim._ IX. 624_b_. - -Footnote 1504: - - Zimmern, _Greek Commonwealth_, p. 44, quoting J. L. Myres. - -Footnote 1505: - - Bursian, _Gr. Geog._ I. p. 252; cp. Cavaignac, _Études Financ._ p. 13; - Guiraud, _Prop. Fonc._ p. 505, n. 5. Bursian is based on Paus. I. 32 - (quoted above). - -Footnote 1506: - - Thuc. II. 20, 23; cp. Loeper, _Ath. Mitt._ XVII. (1892), p. 394, n. 1. - -Footnote 1507: - - Another possibility is to equate the Plain of Thucydides with the - Parts round the City of Cleisthenes. This is only probable on the - assumption that the Cleisthenic triple division followed the lines of - the old local parties, and that the old names persisted in unofficial - usage. It implies that the Peisistratan Diakria corresponded roughly - to the Cleisthenic Mesogeia and extended far south of Brauron (see p. - 311). But more probably Thucydides is using “plain” in its natural - sense of low-lying level open country. - -Footnote 1508: - - Xen. _de Vect._ I. 5; cp. Strabo IX. 400, “far the best honey comes - from the mining district.” The passage from the _de Vect._ is - misunderstood by Grundy, _Thuc. and his Age_, p. 151, n. 2, who says, - “the reference is certainly to a widespread system of market-gardening - and perhaps also to the purchasing power of the product of vine - cultivation.” Grundy gives no evidence that cabbages or other - vegetables or even wine were many times as valuable as corn; he - plainly takes ὀρυττομένη as though it were σκαπτομένη, and appears to - think that the sentence refers to Attica at large, a view that is - rendered most unlikely both by the language (ἔστι δὲ καὶ γῆ ἡ - σπειρομένη οὐ φέρει καρπόν, not καὶ σπειρομένη μὲν ἡ γῆ οὐ φέρει - καρπόν), and the context (the crops of Attica are finished with in I. - 4, and the sentence just quoted follows a statement about the Attic - quarries and precedes the declaration that the mines are the gift of - God). - -Footnote 1509: - - Schol. Aesch. _c. Timarch._ 97 (13); cp. Harpocrat. s.v. ἐσχατιά, and - _Lex. Seguer._ _ap._ Bekker, _Anec. Gr._ p. 256. See further Boeckh, - _Pub. Econ._ I. p. 86. - -Footnote 1510: - - Lucret. V. 1370–5; Virg. _Aen._ XI. 316–20 and Servius, _ad loc._; cp. - _Aen._ XI. 569; Tac. _Ann._ I. 17. The Latin evidence all shows that - when Pliny, _N.H._ XVIII. 12, says that foreign wheat can only be - compared with the mountain crops of Italy (montanis Italiae agris), he - is using “mons” of anything that is not valley. Caesar, it should be - remembered, speaks of the mountains of Kent. - -Footnote 1511: - - _C.I.A._ II. 782; Aeschin. _c. Timarch._ 121 (17). - -Footnote 1512: - - The MS. is much abbreviated and very corrupt, Schow, _Hesych._ p. x. - -Footnote 1513: - - Cp. Strabo IX. 391. - -Footnote 1514: - - Cp. the maps of Milchhoefer, _Abh. Berl. Acad._ 1892 after p. 48, and - Loeper, _Ath. Mitt._ XVII. pl. XII. Milchhoefer’s “coast” goes - considerably further North than Loeper’s. - -Footnote 1515: - - Perhaps not altogether so, at least after the Persian peril and - Themistocles had given the mining district something of a naval - character. See _Ath. Mitt._ X. p. 111. - -Footnote 1516: - - “It would be tedious to enumerate the demes of the interior owing to - their number,” Strabo IX. 399, just after a (presumably full) - enumeration of the Attic coast demes. The city was probably growing - rapidly at the time of Cleisthenes’ reforms. - -Footnote 1517: - - “First they ravaged the land that looks towards the Peloponnesus, then - (ἔπειτα δέ) that which faces Euboea and Andros.” “The addition of δέ - emphasizes the antithesis,” Marchant, _Thuc._ II. _ad loc._ - -Footnote 1518: - - Hdt. V. 81; Strabo IX. 395, 400; _C.I.A._ II. 1059 (cp. Strabo IX. - 398), 1194, 1206_b_, 1195. - -Footnote 1519: - - γουνὸς Σουνιακός, Hdt. IV. 99. The meaning of γουνός is not certain, - but see Liddell and Scott s.v.: Macaulay translates “hill region.” - -Footnote 1520: - - Hesych. and Suid. explain παραλία and πάραλος by παραθαλάσσιος,. M. - Psellus by ἐπιθαλαττίδιον. - -Footnote 1521: - - See Loeper, _Ath. Mitt._ XVII. p. 429. - -Footnote 1522: - - Strabo IX. 392. - -Footnote 1523: - - _Vesp._ 1223, _Lysis_, 58. - -Footnote 1524: - - Suid. s.v. - -Footnote 1525: - - Steph. Byz. s.v. - -Footnote 1526: - - See _e.g._ Kroker, _Jahrb._ I. pp. 112–13; Buschor, _Gr. Vasenmal._^1 - p. 39; Mueller and Oelmann, _Tiryns_, I. p. 161. - - The Geometric of the Argolid is described by Poulsen, _Dipylongräber_, - p. 66, as a “featureless variety” (unpersönliche Gattung). - -Footnote 1527: - - On export of Dipylon ware see Pottier _ap._ Saglio, _Dict. d. Ant._ - s.v. vases, p. 634; Prinz, _Funde aus Naukratis_, p. 77 (Cyprus and - Thera). - -Footnote 1528: - - Beloch, _Rhein. Mus._ 1890, p. 590, following Kroker, _Jahrb._ I. pp. - 95 f., who however is mistaken (_ibid._ p. 113) in dating Dipylon - vases with war ships depicted in action as necessarily later than 664 - B.C. See below, pp. 321 f. So also F. Poulsen, _Dipylongräber_, pp. 13 - (seventh? century Egyptian objects in Dipylon graves), 27–28 - (Proto-Corinthian vases in Attic Geometric graves). - -Footnote 1529: - - Boehlau, _Jahrb._ II. (1887), pp. 33–66. For the name Phaleron see - _Jahrb._ II. p. 44. - -Footnote 1530: - - Late seventh century Attic ware, style of Netos amphora, has been - found at Naukratis, where Prinz, _Funde_, p. 77, argues that it must - have been taken by Aeginetans, since Aegina was the only European - Greek city with a concession at Naukratis. But for the general poverty - of Athens at that period cp. the Acropolis finds, which show some - thousand Dipylon sherds, as against only about forty Proto-Attic, 160 - Vourva (Attic with zones of animals and rosette fill-ornament, date - probably about 600 B.C.), fifteen Proto-Corinthian, and 125 - Corinthian; Graef, _Vasen Acrop. Athen_, pp. 23, 34, 41, 44, 51. At - least two of the Proto-Corinthian sherds, and a very considerable - number of the Corinthian may be sixth century. - -Footnote 1531: - - Thiersch _ap._ Furtwaengler, _Aegina_, p. 451. - -Footnote 1532: - - _Ath. Mitt._ 1897, p. 262 (Aegina); Furtwaengler, _Aegina_, p. 448. - -Footnote 1533: - - Above, pp. 176 f. - -Footnote 1534: - - Prinz, _Funde aus Naukratis_, p. 69, following Loeschcke, _Ath. Mitt._ - XXII. p. 264. - -Footnote 1535: - - Above, pp. 185–7, 241–3. - -Footnote 1536: - - Thiersch, _Aegina_, p. 448; Graef, _Woch. Klass. Phil._ 1893, p. 139. - -Footnote 1537: - - Hoppin, _Argive Heraeum_, I. p. 59, II. pp. 119 f. (arguing from the - unbroken development of the style that can be traced in the Heraeum - finds); Dragendorff, _Thera_, II. p. 193; but cp. Furtwaengler, - _Aegina_, p. 477; _Berl. Phil. Woch._ 1895, p. 202; Poulsen, - _Dipylongräber_, p. 75. - -Footnote 1538: - - Cp. finds at Corinth itself and at the Corinthian Syracuse. Corinthian - is admittedly not a development of Proto-Corinthian; but from this to - argue with Prinz, _Funde aus Nauk._ p. 70, that Proto-Corinthian - cannot be a Corinthian product is to assume that an industry once in - existence makes it impossible for a rival concern, producing a - different style of article, to be started in the same city, even in - the case of so cosmopolitan a centre as Corinth. - -Footnote 1539: - - Gabrici, _Mon. Ant._ XXII. p. 362; de Ridder, _de Ectypis_, p. 56, n. - 4. - -Footnote 1540: - - Furtwaengler, _Aegina_, p. 477; Thiersch, _Aegina_, p. 448; Prinz, - _Funde aus Nauk._ p. 70; K. F. Johansen, _Sikyoniske Vaser_. The Chigi - vase, a Proto-Corinthian masterpiece, has an inscription in an - alphabet that is neither Argive, Aeginetan, nor Chalcidian (see - especially the lambda), but may well be Sicyonian. - -Footnote 1541: - - Pottier in Saglio, _Dict. d. Ant._ s.v. Vases, p. 637, sums up for - North Peloponnesus not far from Corinth; Frickenhaus, _Tiryns_, I. p. - 103, Argolis but not Argos (cp. _ibid._ pp. 145–6, Mueller and Oelmann - on a type of geometric Kraterskyphos common in the Argolid that leads - up directly to Proto-Corinthian). - -Footnote 1542: - - Above, pp. 179–180. - -Footnote 1543: - - For Sicyonian potteries being important at this time see Waldstein, - _Arg. Heraeum_, II. p. 166, n. 1, and cp. above, p. 316, n. 10. - -Footnote 1544: - - _Argive Heraeum_, II. p. 175. - -Footnote 1545: - - Busolt, _Gr. G._^2 II. p. 200, thinks it dates “probably as early as - the seventh century.” - -Footnote 1546: - - Below, pp. 321 f. - -Footnote 1547: - - _B.S.A._ XI. pp. 226–7; Furtwaengler, _Aegina_, p. 478; Thiersch, - _ibid._ p. 458; Pallat, _Ath. Mitt._ 1897, p. 324. - -Footnote 1548: - - Thiersch _ap._ Furtwaengler, _Aegina_, p. 458 (Vourva). - -Footnote 1549: - - _Aegina_, p. 436; cp. Furtwaengler, _ibid._ p. 474. - -Footnote 1550: - - _Ath. Mitt._ 1897, pp. 265 f. - -Footnote 1551: - - _Argive Heraeum_, II. pp. 121–2. Hoppin, _ibid._ p. 102, thinks the - Heraeum Geometric probably Argive rather than Attic. As regards the - abrupt termination of Geometric on the Heraeum site, it should be - remembered that the temple only dates from the eighth to the seventh - century, Frickenhaus, _Tiryns_, p. 118, and that a previous secular - settlement appears to have come to a violent end. - -Footnote 1552: - - And for much else as well, including some Argive. - -Footnote 1553: - - Pallat, _Ath. Mitt._ 1897, pp. 273 f., 315; cp. Studniczka, _Ath. - Mitt._ 1899, pp. 361 f. - -Footnote 1554: - - _Ath. Mitt._ 1897, p. 332; cp. Buschor, _Gr. Vasenmal._^1 pp. 64, 66. - -Footnote 1555: - - _Ath. Mitt._ 1897, p. 263. - -Footnote 1556: - - See _Arch.-epig. Mitt. aus Oesterreich_, II. pp. 17 f. - -Footnote 1557: - - Visited by the writer in the spring of 1914. - -Footnote 1558: - - How and Wells, _Hdt._ V. 88. 2. - -Footnote 1559: - - _Argive Heraeum_, II. p. 175; _C.R._ XII. pp. 86–87. - -Footnote 1560: - - _Argive Heraeum_, II. p. 177, nos. 14, 16. - -Footnote 1561: - - _Argive Heraeum_, II. p. 173. - -Footnote 1562: - - Frickenhaus, _Tiryns_, I. pp. 97–98. - -Footnote 1563: - - _Argive Heraeum_, II. pp. 96–97; cp. _Tiryns_, I. pp. 97–98, 117. - -Footnote 1564: - - _Tiryns_, I. p. 95. - -Footnote 1565: - - Furtwaengler, _Aegina_, p. 441, quoting “pot dealer” (χυτρόπωλις), - applied to Aegina by Pollux VII. 197. - -Footnote 1566: - - _E.g._ Thera, see Dragendorff, _Thera_, II. p. 231. - -Footnote 1567: - - Cp. Prinz, _Funde aus Naukratis_, p. 69. - -Footnote 1568: - - Thuc. I. 13. - -Footnote 1569: - - Torr, _Rev. Arch._^3 XXV. p. 25. - -Footnote 1570: - - Torr, _ibid._ figs. 3, 6 (probably), 10, 11, 12; Cartault, _Mon. Gr._ - 1882–4, p. 53, figs. 2, 3. - -Footnote 1571: - - _Jahrb._ I. pp. 111–13; cp. Torr, _Rev. Arch._^3 XXV. p. 25. Kroker - and Torr are answered by Pernice, _Ath. Mitt._ XVII. (1892), pp. - 304–6; Pottier, _Cat. Vases Louvre_, I. pp. 222–3. - -Footnote 1572: - - On the same psychological grounds, quite apart from the historical - evidence for Athenian naval power during the dark ages, we must reject - Assmann’s suggestion, _Arch. Anz._ 1895, pp. 118–19, that the Dipylon - ships are the vessels of “the dreaded Phoenician pirates.” - -Footnote 1573: - - Brueckner and Pernice, _Ath. Mitt._ XVIII. pp. 135–7; Pottier, _Cat. - Vases Louvre_, I. pp. 231–3; Helbig, _Mém. Acad. Inscr. et B.-L._ - XXXVI. (1898), p. 390. - -Footnote 1574: - - _Arch. Eph._ 1898, pl. V. 1. - -Footnote 1575: - - Poulsen, _Dipylongräber_, p. 100. - -Footnote 1576: - - _Mém. Acad. Inscr. et B.-L._ XXXVI. (1898), p. 400; _pace_ Kroker, - _Jahrb._ I. p. 111. - -Footnote 1577: - - Suggested and rejected by Brueckner and Pernice, _Ath. Mitt._ XVIII. - p. 153. - -Footnote 1578: - - _Wiener Vorlegeblätter_, 1888, pl. I. 8; Walters-Birch, _Hist. Anc. - Pott._ I. pl. XVI.; Buschor, _Gr. Vasenmal._^1 pp. 60–61. - -Footnote 1579: - - _Mém. Acad. Inscr. et B.-L._ XXXVI. (1898), p. 394, fig. _e_ = _Arch. - Zeit._ XLIII. (1885), pl. VIII. 1. Just after Helbig’s publication - another Attic Geometric vase was published by Skias from his - excavations at Eleusis, which shows a ship’s crew attacking men on - land, _Arch. Eph._ 1898, p. 110, and pl. V. 1. - -Footnote 1580: - - Strabo II. 99. - -Footnote 1581: - - _Arch. Zeit._ 1885, p. 133; so Assmann, _Berl. Phil. Woch._ 1899, p. - 18. - -Footnote 1582: - - _Op. cit._ pp. 397–400. - -Footnote 1583: - - As noticed by Torr, _Rev. Arch._^3 XXV. p. 25, the only naval - engagement mentioned in Homer occurs between a fleet and a land force, - _Il._ XV. 367 f.; cp. Sallust, “nauigationem inuadendarum terrarum - causa ortam.” - -Footnote 1584: - - Hdt. V. 83. Duris of Samos, Schol. Eurip. _Hec._ 934, attributes the - Athenian attack on Aegina to previous Aeginetan raids on Attica. - -Footnote 1585: - - Kinkel, _Epic. Frag._ p. 118, fr. 96. - -Footnote 1586: - - Cp. Myres, _J.H.S._ XXVI. p. 85. - -Footnote 1587: - - See above, p. 109. - -Footnote 1588: - - Hdt. V. 86. - -Footnote 1589: - - Hdt. V. 86. - -Footnote 1590: - - Athens, Hdt. V. 85; Aegina, Hdt. V. 86. 2. - -Footnote 1591: - - So Macan, _Hdt._ IV.-VI. ad VI. 82. 2 and vol. II. pp. 105–6. - -Footnote 1592: - - Thuc. I. 13. - -Footnote 1593: - - _Ath. Mitt._ XVII. p. 298, figs. 5, 6; p. 303, figs. 9, 10; Pernice, - _ibid._ pp. 294, 306; cp. _Mon. Grecs_, 1882–4, pl. IV. 2, 3 and pp. - 51–2. - -Footnote 1594: - - Layard, _Mon. of Nineveh_, series I. pl. 71. - -Footnote 1595: - - Hdt. II. 159. - -Footnote 1596: - - Clem. Alex. _Strom._ I. 16. - -Footnote 1597: - - Against this view see Kroker, _Jahrb._ I. p. 110, n. 39; cp. Beloch, - _Gr. G._^2 I. i. p. 275, n. 1; Busolt, _Gr. G._^2 I. p. 449. - -Footnote 1598: - - Above, pp. 177–8. - -Footnote 1599: - - Hdt. III. 59. - -Footnote 1600: - - Brueckner and Pernice, _Ath. Mitt._ XVIII. p. 153, followed by _e.g._ - Helbig, _Mém. Acad. Inscr. et B.-L._ XXXVI. (1898), pp. 387 f. Against - this view see Assmann, _Berl. Phil. Woch._ 1899, pp. 16 f., who argues - merely (1) that the dead on the ships proves them Phoenician, (2) that - if the Athenians depicted their own ships, there would be more ships - on Black and Red Figure Attic vases. But against this note (1) that - the Dipylon vases are funeral vases, (2) that, in spite of Salamis, - fifth century Attic vases do not abound with pictures of enemy ships. - -Footnote 1601: - - Hdt. V. 71. - -Footnote 1602: - - Thuc. I. 126. - -Footnote 1603: - - Forchhammer, _Philol._ 1874, p. 472; Schoemann, _Jahrb. Class. Phil._ - CXI. (1875), p. 451; J. W. Headlam, _C.R._ VI. p. 253; Busolt, _Gr. - G._^2 II. p. 190, n. 2. - -Footnote 1604: - - Wecklein, _Sitz. bayr. Akad., philos.-philol. Kl._ 1873, pp. 33–34; G. - Gilbert, _Jahrb. Class. Phil._ CXI. p. 10; Macan, _Hdt._ IV.-VI., and - How and Wells, _Comment. Hdt._ ad Hdt. V. 71. - -Footnote 1605: - - Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 8; Pollux VIII. 108. - -Footnote 1606: - - Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 8, “organized for the collection of taxes and - their disbursement (τὰς εἰσφορὰς καὶ τὰς δαπάνας τὰς γιγνομένας)”: cp. - Pollux VIII. 108; Photius s.v. ναύκραροι; perhaps also s.v. ναύκληρος; - Suidas; and _Lex. Seguer._ _ap._ Bekker, _Anec. Gr._ p. 282. - -Footnote 1607: - - Mitchell and Caspari’s edit, of Grote, p. 8, quoting Aristot. _Ath. - Pol._ 8. 3; cp. Hesych. s.v. ναύκλαροι (_sic_, but in error for - ναύκραροι; cp. _ibid._ “afterwards they were called demarchs”), who - describes naukraroi simply as “the men who collected the taxes from - each district.” - -Footnote 1608: - - Aristot. _Ath. Pol._ 21 (quoted Harpocrat. s.v. ναυκραρικά); Schol. - Aristoph. _Clouds_, 37; Pollux VIII. 108; Photius s.v. ναυκραρία, - Suidas s.v. δήμαρχοι. - -Footnote 1609: - - Pollux VIII. 108, “ship, from which perhaps naukrary has got its - name.” - -Footnote 1610: - - Grote, _Hist._, edit. 1888, II. p. 426. Cp. Pollux I. 74–5, X. 20, the - master of the (whole) house is called ναύκληρος (_sic_). - -Footnote 1611: - - Wecklein, _Sitz. bayr. Akad._ 1873, p. 43; Wachsmuth, _Stadt Athen_, - I. 481, n. 4; the derivation from ναῦς is denied also by Assmann, - _Berl. Phil. Woch._ 1899, p. 19, and Keil, _Solon. Verfass._ p. 94, - and doubted by Buechsenschuetz, _Berl. Phil. Woch._ 1907, p. 815. - -Footnote 1612: - - Pollux I. 74. So X. 20. - -Footnote 1613: - - Hesych. s.v. ναύειν, “to supplicate, from the fact that suppliants - flee for refuge to the hearth”; _ib._ s.v. ναύκληρος (_sic_)· ὁ - συνοικίας προεστώς. - -Footnote 1614: - - G. Meyer in G. Curtius, _Stud._ VII. pp. 176–9. - -Footnote 1615: - - To the evidence for nau- in naukrary meaning ship add _Lex. Seguer._ - in Bekker, _Anecd. Gr._ 283. 20 s.v. naukraroi, “Those who equip the - ships, and act as trierarchs, and are subordinate to the polemarch.” - -Footnote 1616: - - Glotz, _Et. Soc. et Jurid._ p. 246; cp. _Odyss._ VIII. 391, ἄρχοι - κραίνουσι. - -Footnote 1617: - - Unless, as maintained by Boeckh, _Public Econ._ II. p. 327, n. 285, - one is to be inferred from the comparison made by the Atthidograph - Kleidemos between naukraries and the symmories of his own day; Phot. - s.v. ναυκραρία; cp. Pollux VIII. 108. - -Footnote 1618: - - _Jahrb. Cl. Phil._ CXI. (1875), pp. 12 f. (answered by Schoemann, - _Jahrb. Cl. Phil._ CXI. (1875), pp. 452 f., and Duncker, _Ges. d. - Alt._ VI.^5 p. 120, n. 2); so also Lenschau ap. Bursian, _Jahresb._ - 176 (1918), pp. 194–5. - -Footnote 1619: - - _Clouds_ 37, “whether established by Solon or even earlier.” - -Footnote 1620: - - Plut. _Solon_, 9. - -Footnote 1621: - - De Sanctis, _Atthis_^2, pp. 305 f.: so Costanzi, _Riv. Stor. Ant._ V. - pp. 514–15. - -Footnote 1622: - - _Jahrb. Cl. Phil._ CXI. (1875), p. 454. - -Footnote 1623: - - _Ges. d. Alt._ V.^5 p. 474. - -Footnote 1624: - - _Attisch. Bürgerrecbt_, p. 152; cp. Wachsmuth, _Stadt Athen_, I. pp. - 473–4. - -Footnote 1625: - - _Gr. G._^2 II. p. 189, n. 1; cp. p. 191. - -Footnote 1626: - - Glotz, _Et. Soc. et Jurid._ pp. 231–43; but cp. Buechsenschuetz, - _Berl. Phil. Woch._ 1907, pp. 815–16. - -Footnote 1627: - - Helbig, _Mém. Acad. Inscr. et B.-L._ XXXVI. p. 405; cp. Wilamowitz, - _Aristot. u. Athen_, II. 54; Gilliard, _Réformes de Solon_, p. 108, n. - 2. - -Footnote 1628: - - Wecklein, _Sitz. bayr. Akad., philos.-philol. Kl._ 1873, p. 30–48; - Forchhammer, _Philol._ XXXIV. p. 472, on the meagre evidence of Thuc. - II. 15; Plut. _Theseus_, 24. - -Footnote 1629: - - Above, p. 169. - -Footnote 1630: - - Mitchell and Caspari, p. 8 of their edition of Grote. - -Footnote 1631: - - With this last remark contrast my whole account of the first Aeginetan - war. Boeckh, _Public Econ._ I. p. 341, notes that in the time of - Cleisthenes the number of ships in the fleet is fifty (Hdt. VI. 89), - corresponding to that of the naukraries, which had been raised from - the earlier forty-eight, Photius, s.v. ναυκραρία. - -Footnote 1632: - - Strabo VIII. 374, ὑπὲρ τῶν Ναυπλιέων Ἀργεῖοι συνετέλουν, ὑπὲρ Πρασιέων - δὲ Λακεδαιμόνιοι; cp. C. Mueller, _Aeginetica_, I. § 7. - -Footnote 1633: - - “There was a sort of Amphictyonic council” at Kalauria, Strabo VIII. - 374 (Ephorus), who quotes - - ἴσον τοι Δῆλόν τε Καλαυρείαν τε νέμεσθαι - Πυθώ τ’ ἠγαθέην. - -Footnote 1634: - - Paus. IV. 24. 4, 35. 2. - -Footnote 1635: - - Paus. III. 7. 4, IV. 14. 3. - -Footnote 1636: - - So F. Cauer in Pauly Wissowa s.v. Argolis, p. 730, “about the time of - the second Messenian war.” - -Footnote 1637: - - Thuc. I. 6. - -Footnote 1638: - - πέπλοισι Δωρικοῖσιν, _Persae_, 182–3. - -Footnote 1639: - - As already noted by Studniczka, _Ges. Altgr. Tracht_, p. 18, although - (like Helbig, _Hom. Epos_^2, 163, 164, and Holwerda, _Rhein. Mus._ - 1903, p. 520) he overlooks the important word αὖ. Partly perhaps - because he wrote before the excavations of Sparta, partly because of - his preconceived views on other points, Studniczka has failed to see - the full force of his own observations. - -Footnote 1640: - - _B.S.A._ XIII. pp. 77 f. - -Footnote 1641: - - G. Dickens, _J.H.S._ XXXII. pp. 17–19. - -Footnote 1642: - - Dorian states followed Sparta in this revival earlier than did Athens; - see Kalkmann, _Jahrb._ XI. pp. 41–42. - -Footnote 1643: - - Hdt. V. 88; cp. Studniczka, _Ges. Altgr. Tracht_, pp. 14 f. on the - Semitic origin of χιτών, the distinguishing garment of the Ἰάονες - ἑλκεχίτωνες (Hom. _Il._ XIII. 685). The discrepancy with Hdt. that - some scholars have found in Thuc. I. 6 is only apparent, see Holwerda, - _Rhein. Mus._ 1903, p. 520. - -Footnote 1644: - - See especially the pottery of the period. - -Footnote 1645: - - Skias, _Arch. Eph._ 1898, p. 103, n. 3 (Eleusis); Furtwaengler, - _Aegina_, p. 474. As compared with the Geometric pin the archaic - (post-geometric) type is shorter, but thicker, stronger, and the - ornamental knobs thicker and closer. This type is particularly well - represented at the Argive Heraeum (Thiersch _ap._ Furtwaengler, - _ibid._ p. 414): that is to say, the period when dress-pins became - heavier in the Argolid is once again the end of the Geometric period. - -Footnote 1646: - - So Studniczka, _Ges. Altgr. Tracht_, p. 19. The distinction is rightly - disregarded in Abrahams, _Gk. Dress_, pp. 42, 58. - -Footnote 1647: - - Serv. ad _Aen._ XI. 206, V. 64, VI. 152. Burial within the village, - near, or more often in the house itself, was usual in Latium in the - neolithic period from which the Romans inherited much ritual (_e.g._ - the use of stone knives in sacrifice and stone arrow-heads in - declaring war), Pinza, _Bull. Comm._ 1898, pp. 77, 84–85, 116 f. Hence - possibly the practice of burying vestal virgins within the city. - - Intramural burial was practised at Megara (Paus. I. 43, 44; Plut. - _Phoc._ 37), Sicyon (Plut. _Arat._ 53; Hdt. V. 67; cp. Becker, - _Charicles_, Eng. trans.^8 p. 393), Sparta (Plut. _Lycurg._ 27, _Inst. - Lac._ 18 (_Moral._ 238)), and Tarentum (Polyb. VIII. 30; cp. Athen. - XII. 522 f. and _Notiz. d. Scav._ 1895, p. 238). For graves of - particularly distinguished individuals the market-place was the usual - spot (Pindar, _Pyth._ V. 93; Thuc. V. 11, which, however, implies that - the market-place was subsequent to the tomb; Paus. II. 13. 6; Plut. - _Timol._ 39; Strabo VIII. 371). Cp. also (Plato), _Minos_, 315_d_, and - Rohde, _Psyche_, I. p. 228, n. 3, II. p. 340, n. 2. - -Footnote 1648: - - Cp. Frazer, _Magic Art_, II. p. 232, cases (differently explained by - Frazer) of new-born children being brought to the hearth as a mode of - introducing them to the ancestral spirits. Pinza, _Bull. Comm._ 1898, - pp. 116–17 _à propos_ of early burials within the house quotes the - lares grundules, explained in the light of the statement of - Fulgentius, _Serm. Ant._ 7, that till late times children were buried - sub grundo. Unfortunately Fulgentius is a doubtful authority on a - point of this sort: see Roscher, _Lex._ s.v. Lares, p. 1886. - -Footnote 1649: - - _Ap._ Cic. _de Leg._ II. 23 (58). - -Footnote 1650: - - Marquardt, _Privatleben_^2, p. 360. - -Footnote 1651: - - Serv. _Aen._ XI. 206. Smith, _Dict. Biog. and Myth._, states that the - Duilius in question is the consul of 260 B.C. The first Duilius to - attain the office was K. Duilius in 336 B.C., a sufficiently late - date. The prohibition was again re-enacted in the reign of Hadrian, - _Dig._ 47, 12, 3, sect. 5. - -Footnote 1652: - - Serv. ad _Aen._ XI. 206; Plut. _Qu. Rom._ 79 (_Moral._ 283). - -Footnote 1653: - - Dion. Hal. III. 1. - -Footnote 1654: - - Casagrandi, _Nouem Combusti_ (appendix to _Minores Gentes_), gives all - the restorations of the gloss; his own runs “_nouem combusti_ fuerunt - legati] T. Sicinii. Volsci [eos interfecerunt cum proelium] inissent - aduersus [Romanos. sumptu publi]co combusti feruntur [et sepulti in - crepidi]ne quae est proxime Cir[cum, ubi locus est la]pide albo - constratus.” If the locus lapide albo constratus was proxime Circum, - it may have been, technically at least, outside the city at the time - of the obsequies. - - Mommsen, _Roem. Forsch._ II. p. 168 (Sp. Cassius), speaks of the - cremation as having taken place “auf dem roemischen Markt”: he gives - no evidence for the locality. The nouem combusti were in any case - exceptional personages. But even so they are a warning against hasty - conclusions from the archaeological evidence. - -Footnote 1655: - - Val. Max. VI. 3. 2 (Rom.); cp. Dio Cass. V. fr. 22; Zonaras VII. 17. - -Footnote 1656: - - The Valerii were buried “close to the Forum (σύνεγγυς τῆς ἀγορᾶς) - under the Velia,” Dion. Hal. V. 48; cp. Plut. _Poplic._ 23. Plutarch - _Qu. Rom._ 79 says that the Fabricii as well as the Valerii had the - right of burial in the Forum, but made only formal use of it. Cicero - and Plutarch are easily reconciled by supposing that some formality in - the Forum took place always and the actual burial occasionally. - -Footnote 1657: - - Suet. _Tib._ I. - -Footnote 1658: - - Festus s.v. Romanam portam and Argea; cp. Jordan, _Topog. Rom_ I. i. - p. 176, n. 40; p. 190, n. 64; II. p. 283; but cp. Pinza, _Bull. Comm._ - 1898, p. 116. - -Footnote 1659: - - Graffunder, _Klio_, XI. pp. 116–20, one on the Palatine, the other on - the Esquiline. Being nowhere near the Forum they are probably cases of - inherited rather than strictly individual merit: cp. Pinza, _Mon. - Ant._ XV. p. 778. - - - PRINTED IN ENGLAND AT THE CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS - - - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -Transcriber’s note: - - 1. Silently corrected typographical errors and variations in spelling. - - 2. Anachronistic, non-standard, and uncertain spellings retained as - printed. - - - -***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE ORIGIN OF TYRANNY*** - - -******* This file should be named 62364-0.txt or 62364-0.zip ******* - - -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: -http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/6/2/3/6/62364 - - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United -States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive -specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this -eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook -for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, -performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given -away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks -not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the -trademark license, especially commercial redistribution. - -START: FULL LICENSE - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country outside the United States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: - - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and - most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no - restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it - under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this - eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the - United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you - are located before using this ebook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation." - -* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works. - -* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - -* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The -Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the -mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its -volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous -locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt -Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to -date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and -official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -For additional contact information: - - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. - |