Slave Power at Athens: Juridical Theory and Economic Reality
p. 155-169
Texte intégral
« Le pouvoir vient d'en bas »
Michel Foucault, La Volonté de savoir, p. 124.
I. CONCEPTUALIZATIONS OF POWER AT ATHENS
1Ancient historians (often without self-awareness) generally think and write within the context of a neo-classical understanding of “power” as something derived from governmental authority, an approach that focuses on identification of the sovereign, analysis of the basis for the sovereign's authority, exploration of the diffusion and division of the sovereign's power. Traditional analyses of “power” assume laws and constitutions to be the ultimate source for the possession of control command or influence over others.1 Because all formai authority at Athens was derived from membership in the dêmos, the male political organization that held all legal and juridical prerogatives, modern scholarship has attributed all power to the male citizens (the politai)2 Although a central tenet of contemporary political sociology holds that “political institutions are (but) one of many clusters of social institutions,”3 historians of Athens generally insist that ”the polis did not comprise all who lived within its borders, but only the politai, i.e. the (male) citizens.”4 Slaves, women, and free male non-citizens - the vast majority of the résident population of Attika5 - are accordingly perceived as powerless “others.”6
2I propose a different model - and one that I believe accords far better with surviving evidence. I will seek to show that at Athens power was a complex strategical situation, not an institution or a structure delineated by juridical déterminants. To do so, l'Il analyze the economie significance and political nullity of wealthy slaves in order to demonstrate that at Athens, as Foucauld puts it in La Volonté de savoir, “les relations de pouvoir ne sont pas en position d'extériorité à l'égard d'autres types de rapports (processus économiques, rapports de connaissance, relations sexuelles), mais elles leur sont immanentes.”7
3As we shall see, at Athens some male slaves enjoyed considerable command. control and influence over a variety of Athenians - manifestations of “power” at variance with the sovereign-based ideal-form that governs virtually all modern treatment of ancient Athens. In fact, the potential exercise of power by slaves is anticipated by various emerging social-scientific approaches. Sociologists today tend to focus not on juridical prerogatives and political rights, but on actual capacity to accomplish one's desires. Blau, for example, defines “power” as the “ability of persons or groups to impose their will on others despite resistance.”8 This accords with Max Weber's classic sociological description of power as “that opportunity existing within a social relationship which permits one to carry out one's will even against resistance and regardless of the basis on which this opportunity rests.”9 In defining power, anthropologists emphasize a variety of social, cultural and psychological factors.10 Psychologists in turn look to the internal linkage between behavior and ego development: power is tautologically construed as “feeling powerful and acting powerfully.” Foucault, with his emphasis on “relations de pouvoir” - rather than on power tout court - seems entirely to deny the sovereign as a “source” of authority. For Foucauld - who in recent years has attained quasi-iconic stature among many historians concerned with theory - “(le pouvoir) c'est le socle mouvant des rapports de force... Le pouvoir est partout: ce n'est pas qu'il englobe tout, c'est qu'il vient de partout... le pouvoir, ce n'est pas une institution, et ce n'est pas une structure, ce n'est pas une certaine puissance, dont certains seraient dotés: c'est le nom qu'on prête à une situation stratégique complexe dans une société donnée.” En bref, “les relations de pouvoir ne sont pas en position d'extériorité à l'égard d'autres types de rapports (processus économiques, rapports de connaissance, relations sexuelles), mais elles leur sont immanentes” (La Volonté de savoir. p. 122-24). As a result, “Le pouvoir vient d'en bas” (Ibid.. p. 124). If, as Foucault conjectures, power can emanate from below (as well as from above and from everywhere else), and if pouvoir is immanent not only in governmental actions but also in economic processes and sexual relations, there is nothing anomalous in the manifestation and exercise of power in classical Athens by wealthy slaves. In areas other than ancient studies historians of slavery have been busily chronicling across many civilizations slaves' attainment of wealth and control over others - accomplishments achieved sometimes even in the face of determined societal opposition.
II. WEALTHY SLAVES
4“At Athens some slaves live magnifïcently, and properly so.”11
5- Constitution of the Athenians attributed to Xenophôn
6In fourth-century Athens. certain enslaved businessmen and unfree civil-servants amassed considérable wealth and authority - but they often remained juridically unfree.
7Of course, the concept of a “wealthy slave” or a “powerful slave” is oxymoronic in the context of the racially-based servitude of recent North American history which insisted on the permanent exploitation of the slave as a member of an inferior group12; which outlawed business activity13 and sought to deny professional skills, and even literacy, to black inhabitants.14 Yet, analysed both within Athenian context and within the experience of other societies, slaves' occasional attainment of high position and considerable wealth presents no cause for desperate disbelief on a priori grounds. In Babylonia and in Rome in antiquity, and in sub-Saharan Africa and the Islamic world in the medieval period, some slaves functioned as high military officers, as powerful administrators, and as important (and sometimes wealthy) businessmen.15
8In Attika, servitude was not racially-based or inherently perpetual16 could befall anyone and might well be temporary.17 No physical or other markers differentiated enslaved from free inhabitants.18 The state, far from buttressing the institution, largely ignored it - providing, for example, no mechanism for effectuating or registering manumissions.19 Affirmatively. however, the legal System facilitated slaves' independent business operations by limiting a master's liability for a slave's business debts, by allowing liberal use of agents to effectuate transactions otherwise impossible for non-citizens, and by accepting slaves as parties and witnesses in business litigation.20
9Yet while Athenian society offered conditions receptive to slave enterprise. free men were discouraged from business activity by traditional Athenian concepts of manliness (andreia21) which condemned all commerce as inherently servile and insisted that farming alone provided a proper economic arena for the “free man” (anêr eleutheros).22 Although desire and/or necessity brought numerous free Athenian men into self-employment in craft or trade,23 a pervasive moral tenet was “the obligation to maintain an independence of occupation. and at all costs to avoid seeming to work in a ‘slavish’ way for another.”24 In Aristotle's words, “the nature of the free man prevents his living under the control of another.”25 Isokratês equates hired employment (thêteia) with slavery.26 Isaios laments the free men. and Demosthenes the free women, compelled by a “lack of necessities” to labor for pay: free people “should be pitied” if economic necessity forces them into “slavish” (doulika) employment.27 Receipt of a salary (misthophoria) was the hallmark of a slave.28
10Athenian morality thus focused on the structure of work relationships. not on the actual nature of the labor undertaken. Confounding modem expectations, the same labor functions might be performed indiscriminately by slave workers or by free “foreign residents” (metics) or by “citizens” (politai).29 (In fact, the shoes for the public slaves working at Eleusis were made by a cobbler who was a politês!30) In the Athenian navy, politai, metics and slaves served as crew members without differentiation of status or work assignment: a master and his slave even appear often to have been rowers on the same trireme.31 Within Athenian households, free women worked alongside domestic slaves at many tasks.32 Yet the willingness of Athenian “citizens” to do the same work as foreigners or slaves was accompanied by a scrupulous effort to avoid even the appearance of being “employed.” Service outside the Athenian household by free persons was usually for a single specific task or for a limited period of time and seldom exclusive to a single employer: we typically encounter Athenian businessmen working on their own for a variety of customers, or agents undertaking a limited task for an individual client.33 Even slaves attempted to avoid the appearance of “slavish employment”: the Athenian institution of “servants living independently” (douloi khôris oikoimtes) permitted unfree persons to conduct their own businesses, establish their own households, and sometimes even to own their own slaves34 - with little contact, and most importantly, virtually without supervision from their owners.35
11Servile business success was thus a natural consequence of an Athenian conception of masculinity which - by relegating household operation and “slavish” business pursuits to foreigners, women and slaves - tended to deprive Athenian men of economic opportunity and business experience. The numerous opportunities for self-employment of free persons in craft or trade, which I mentioned earlier, and the wide availability of paid political positions,36 left only slaves (and family members) as potential employees for the many Athenian businesses that needed the labor of individuals over a continuing period of time.37 “Nowhere in the sources do we hear of private establishments employing a staff of hired workers as their normal operation.”38 Athenians assumed, correctly, that persons performing repetitive functions in a commercial context - whether bank staff39 or sexual workers -were likely to be slaves.40 At Kolonôs Agoraios, the site of Athens' incipient version of a labor market.41 douloi constituted virtually all of those standing for hire.42
12Because of the diverse specialization of the Athenian economy, which encompassed hundreds of distinct occupations (most unrelated to agriculture),43 substantial vocational training was required - but because of the unavailability of free employees, this education tended to be provided only to slaves (and family members). In the many fields requiring knowledge and skill (tekhnai)44 - handicraft, catering and medicine, for example - douloi and doulai normally received substantial training,45 technical education that free persons often lacked.46 Slaves working in trapezai were taught the intricacies of finance and accounting,47 and slaves working as prostitutes are known to have received specialized training, sometimes starting in childhood.48
13As a result, many douloi (albeit in all probability a small minority of the unfree inhabitants of Attika) were able to acquire skills, to obtain business knowledge, to develop valuable contacts - and to prosper. But the slaves' very importance entailed for their owners financial danger and/or financial accommodation. Overseers and managers often had detailed knowledge of household finance and sometimes controlled substantial assets: the slave Moskhiôn, for example, enriched himself through his complete knowledge of Komôn's household affairs (Demosthenes 48); another doulos, Kittos, supposedly appropriated for himself and his confederales some 36,000 dr.49 To avoid the possibility of such losses (and for other reasons50), masters sometimes chose to enter into arrangements under which slaves maintained their own households and operated their own businesses, while paying their owners fixed sums periodically (apophora).
14These douloi khôris oikountes (“slaves living independently”) are attested -even in the limited sources surviving to us - as playing an important rôle in many businesses. The slave Lampis was the owner/operator (nauklêros) of a substantial commercial vessel, entered into contracts with free persons (Dem. 34.5-10), and was wealthy enough to lend a customer 1,000 dr. (§6).51 integral enough to Athenian food supply to have received the special exemption from taxes (ateleia) provided by Pairisadês of Bosporos on the export of grain to Athens,52 credible enough to be the authorized recipient of a repayment of 2,000 dr. on behalf of another lender (§§ 23, 31) and to have provided a déposition in the arbitration proceedings relating to an Athenian legal action (§§18-19). Likewise. Zênothemis, identified as a slave in Demosthenes 32, was actively engaged in maritime commerce and lending: allegedly the owner of a substantial commercial cargo, he litigated in his own name as a principal in the Athenian courts.53 Again, a slave businessman was the leader (hêgemôn tou ergastêriou) of a group of 9 or 10 unfree leather-workers, who paid their owner three obols for himself per day, two for each of the other slaves, and kept any remaining revenues (Aiskhinês 1.97). We know of a doulos who operated his master's business for a fixed payment and was free to retain any additional income after expenses (Milyas in Demosthenes 27); a slave who ran a substantial perfume business.54 providing his owner with reports only monthly and again subject only to a fixed payment (Meidas in Hypereidês, Ath. 9); slaves operating their own businesses in the agora and personally liable for legal transgressions without reference to their masters (Stroud 1974: 181-82, lines 30-32).
15This phenomenon of servile prosperity at Athens did not go unnoted in antiquity: the author of the satiric Constitution of the Athenians observed, and complained, that at Athens, where the mass of foreigners and slaves could not easily be differentiated in appearance from the citizens, there could be found “rich slaves” (plousioi douloi), even “some who lived magnifîcently.”55 (We know from inscriptional evidence that some slaves at Athens themselves owned slaves.56 Xenophon. in the Oikonomikos, even urges owners of large estâtes to make special efforts to enrich their slave estate-managers (epitropoi) lest the slaves' “love of lucre” lead them to misappropriate the owners' assets; honest house-keepers (tamiai) should live with greater honor, freedom and wealth than the dishonest.57 In fact. virtually all large estates at Athens were managed by slaves - who were expected to become wealthy if they performed well.58
16In short, slaves played a leading role in Athenian business, especially in finance, crafts. and skilled trades.59 But the wealthiest slaves appear to have been operators of banks (trapezai). The douloi Xenôn, Euphrôn, Euphraios and Kallistratos - while still enslaved60 - as principals operated the largest bank in Athens, that of Pasion.61 The scale of this bank's operation - and the financial capacity of the slaves operating it - are suggested by the rental paid annually by the four slaves; one talent a year, perhaps three-quarters of a million U.S. Dollars (calculated on the basis of purchasing power parity). Over the ten-year term of the lease, they would have paid to the bank's owners, Pasiôn's grown children, some 10 talents (between Five and Ten Million Dollars).62 Pasiôn himself - while still unfree - had played a major role in his owners1 bank.63 and thereafter in his own trapeza.64 Phormiôn (who ultimately succeeded Pasiôn as Athens' most important financier)65 - while still a slave - had been a partner in a maritime trading business.66 A few years thereafter, he had emerged as one of the most powerful benefactors of the Athenian state, a titan of wealth and prestige. Indeed, when Demosthenes. already a prominent political leader, and scion of a prominent Athenian family, prepared his important speech Against Meidias, he sought to equate his own financial contributions to the city with those of the “wealthiest” Athenians, naming Phormiôn, the former slave, first among a trinity of the polis's “movers and shakers” (hêgemones).67 When Phormiôn was a defendant in a major litigation, Demosthenes emphasized to the jurors Athens' dependence on this tycoon: Phormiôn's wealth, and access to funds had reached such unprecedented heights that a verdict against him could endanger the city's welfare by depriving the citizens of Athens of future benefactions similar to those that Phormiôn had showered upon them in the past.68
17And despite their frequently servile status or origins, Athenian trapezitai joined extensive networks of friends to their considerable financial strength and the enormous prestige of their profession.69 This combination of resources and relationships made them daunting adversaries: one powerful foreigner, the son of the prime minister of the important Black Sea state of Bosporos - a vital supplier of food to Athens - claims that of all possible antagonists, it is most difficult to be in conflict with Athenian bankers.70
18Persons owned by the Athenian state, so-called “public slaves” (dêmosioi)71 also are known to have prospered: as civil servants exercising considerable independent discretion, they were in a position to aid the persons whom they regulated, and to enrich themselves. For example, the dokimastês, a public servant empowered to pass on the purity of silver coinage, had considerable discretionary power: he had the right to confiscate coins if he determined them to be counterfeit.72 One dêmosios, a certain Pittalakos, even battles with a powerful citizen, Hêgêsandros. for the sexual favors of Timarkhos, a young male citizen and alleged prostitute: the slave not only makes use of his wealth to maintain Timarkhos in the slave's own home for a prolonged period of sexual exploitation - he ultimately brings a legal action against his citizen rival, seeking through the Athenian courts redress for the citizen's jealous assault against his house and person, an action which even awakened the slave's neighbors, offensive behavior defended by Hêgêsandros not as the exercise of a free man's right to violate a slave's person and his quiet enjoyment of home, but as culpability diminished by wine's nocturnal influence (Aiskhinês 1.54-64).
19There were also, of course, innumerable exploited and impoverished douloi. Slave opportunity was not a right. Even after Phormiôn had performed enormous public and private benefactions for the Athenians (Dem. 36.55-7), had attained prosperity almost unparalleled (Dem. 45.54 and 72), both as an independent banker73 and as a maritime businessman (Dem. 45.64), Apollodôros tells him in open court that all his success and accomplishment were entirely dependent on a single vagary of chance: his purchase by a banker, in whose employ a slave might rise to blessed heights at Athens, but “you (jurors) all know that if a caterer, or an artisan of some other skilled-calling (technê), had purchased Phormiôn, then -having learned the technê of this master - he would have been far from his present benefits.74 But since... a banker acquired him and taught him lettered accounts and instructed him in this technê and made him responsible for large sums of money, he has become prosperous, taking as the foundation of all of his present prosperity the good fortune which brought him (to a banking family).”75
20There were, of course, worse fates, at Athens, than being the doulos of a food-provider or a craftsman. Far more typical of unfree labor at Athens were such areas as mining,76 where thousands of douloi undoubtedly endured short lives of anguish. Yet it is not the slaves of suffering, but the slaves of power and wealth who have endured scholarly oblivion.
Notes de bas de page
1 This model is derived ultimately from judicial-philosophical tracts of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries C.E., but was the focus of monarchist/anti-monarchist literature from the thirteenth through the nineteenth centuries.
2 For the continuing identification of the male citizen as the exclusive avatar of Athens - despite the articulation in recent years of new sociological, anthropological and ideological approaches to Athenian civilization- see Manville (P.), The Origins of Citizenship in Ancient Athens. Princeton, 1990 and the various articles in Boegehold (A.) and Scafuro (A), eds., Athenian Identity and Civic Ideology, Baltimore, 1994
3 Lipset (S.), “Political Sociology,“ in merton (R.) et al., Sociology Today, New York, 1959. Cf. Washburn (P.), Political Sociology: Approaches, Concepts, Hypotheses, Englewood Cliffs, N. J., 1982.
4 Hansen (M.), Was Athens a Democracy? Popular Rule, Liberty and Equality in Ancient and Modern Political Thought, Historisk-Filosofiske Meddelelser 59, Copenhagen, 1989, p. 19.
5 A census reportedly conducted at Athens between 317 and 307 counted resident “foreigners”as about half the number of politai (Athên 272c), and a higher proportion (perhaps far higher) if unregistered alien residents and transients are added. Since the metic population appears to have been more variable in number than that of the politai (Xen. Poroi 2.1-7; Isok. 8.21), the percentage of free non-politai in the prior, and more prosperous, decades of the fourth century may have been even greater: Thur (G.), “Wo wohnen die Metöken?,“ in Schuller (W.), hoepfner (W.) and schwandner (E.), eds., Demokratie und Architektur: Die hippodamische Städtebau und die Entstehung der Demokratie, Munich, 1989, p. 118 has estimated the metic population during this earlier period at about 100,000. The number of slaves was also very large: the Athenians believed that the servile population of Attika exceeded that of the free (Hyper, fr 33; Athên. 272c-d; Xen. Poroi 4.4, 25, 28). From a male “citizen” body which he places at 30,000, Hansen extrapolates for all of Attika a total population of 300,000 or more (Was Athens a Democracy? Popular Rule, Liberty and Equality in Ancient and Modern Political Thought, Historisk-Filosofiske Meddelelser 59, Copenhagen, 1959, p. 93-94).
6 On this interpretation, men without political rights were not truly men. See Todd (S.), “Status and Gender in Athenian Public Records,” in Thür (G.) and Vélissaropoulos-KarakostaS (J.), eds., Symposion 1995, Köln, 1997, p. 114: at Athens “the gap between male and female is specific to citizens.... Among metics, the division between male and female is less clear-cut, and among slaves, it is very blurred indeed“. Cf. Cartledge (P.), The Greeks: A Portrait of Self and Others, Oxford, 1993, p. 12: for the Athenians, male non-citizens were “construed as naturally effeminate. In the Greeks' construction of the male-female dichotomy, culture overrode nature”.
7 La Volonté de savoir. (Histoire de la sexualité 1), Paris, 1976, p. 92. Cf. Foucault (M.), Surveiller et punir: Naissance de la prison, Paris, 1975, p. 31-32; Rancière (J.), “Pouvoirs et stratégies: Entretien avec Michel Foucault.” Révoltes logiques, 4 (1977), p. 89-97; fornet-betancourt (R.), Becker (H.), and Gomez-Müller (Α.), “An Interview with M. Foucault,” Philosophy and Social Criticism, 12 (1987), p. 112-31
8 Blau (P. ), Exchange and Power in Social Life. New York, 1964.
9 weber (M.), Basic Concepts in Sociology, Secaucus, N. J., 1972, p. 117
10 For example, see Patterson (O.), Slavery and Social Dealh: A Comparative Study. Cambridge, Mass., 1982, p. 1-2: “The power relation has three facets. The first is social and involves the use or threat of violence in the control of one person by another. The second is the psychological facet of influence, the capacity to persuade another person to change the way he perceives his interests and his circumstances. And third is the cultural facet of authority, the means of transforming force into right, and obedience into duty which, according to Jean Jacques Rousseau, the powerful find necessary ‘to insure them continual mastership.’ Rousseau felt that the source of 'legitimate powers' lay in those 'conventions' which today we would call culture. “
11 Xen. Ath. Pol. 1.11: ἐῶσι τοὺς δούλους τpυφᾶν αὐτόθι καὶ μεγαλοπpεπῶς διαιτᾶσθαι ἐνίους. καὶ τοῦτο γνώμῃ φανεῖεν ἄν ποιοῦντες.
12 In America, in a landmark case the U.S. Supreme Court held, for example, that freed blacks could not ever be United States crtizens and that even after obtaining their freedom blacks “had no rights which the white man was bound to respect.” Dred Scott v. Sanford. 60 U.S. 393, 407 (1857).
13 In the American South, slaves were severely restricted by statutory law from engaging in the professions or in business transactions. See generally Higginbotham (A.), In the Matter of Color: Race and the American Legal Process, New York, 1978. Yet slaves' independent practice of trades and business transactions nonetheless persisted: many slaves lived and worked in cities on their own account, paying their masters monetary compensation from fees and wages earned as craftsmen, generally receiving from employers and customers compensation equivalent to that paid to free black or white practitioners See Golden (G.), Urban Slavery in the American South 1820-1860, Chicago, 1976. For slaves' market-related activities in South Carolina, Virginia and Louisiana, see Campbell (J.), “As ‘A Kind of Freeman’? Slaves' Market-Related Activities in the South Carolina Upcountry, 1800-1860,” in Berlin (I.) and Morgan (P.), eds., The Slaves' Economy; London, 1991, p. 131-169; Schlotterbeck (J.), “The Internal Economy of Slavery in Rural Piedmont Virginia,” The Slaves' Economy, p. 170-181; McDonald (R.), “Independent Economic Production by Slaves on Antebellum Louisiana Sugar Plantations,” The Slaves' Economy; p. 182-208.
14 A number of southern states provided criminal sanctions for teaching a slave to read or write See, for example, the Va. Code (1848), p. 747-48. At Athens, in contrast, special efforts were made to provide young slaves with a skill: see Forbes (C.), “The Education and Training of Slaves in Antiquity.” Transactions of the American Philological Association, 86 (1955), 321-60; Burford (A. ), Craftsmen in Greek and Roman Society; London, 1972.
15 Ancient Mesopotamia: Gelb (I.), “Prisoners of War in Early Mesopotamia,” Journal of Near Eastern Studies, 32 (1973), p. 72, 90-93 For the importance of enslaved military and civilian officials in Islamic empires, see Lewis (B.), Race and Slavery in the Middle East. Oxford. 1990, p. 62-77; Crone (P.). Slaves on Horses: The Evolution of the Islamic Polity, Cambridge. 1980; Kunt (I.), The Sultan's Servants: The Transformation of Ottoman Provincial Government, 1550-1650. New York. 1983, esp. chaps. 3, 4. For “rich and powerful” slaves in African traditional societies, see Miers (S.) and kopytoff (I.), eds., Slavety in Africa, Madison, Wisc, 1977, p. 5 and passim. Roman slaves, as early as the second century B.C.E., act as principals in buying (through borrowed funds) other slaves for training and resale (Plut. Cato Maior 21.7-8). This may reflect the difficult and relatively late development in Roman law of a mechanism for conducting business through agents or dependents (Wenger (L.), Stellvertretung im Rechte der Papyri, Leipzig. 1906, p 125; Nicholas (B.), An Introduction to Roman Law, Oxford. 1962, p. 201-204). When agency was ultimately recognized. “the overwhelming majority of business managers were slaves” (Aubert (J.-J.), Business Managers in Ancient Rome: A Social and Economic Study of Institores, 200 B.C.-A.D. 250, Leiden, 1994, p 417)
16 At Athens many slaves, although apparently not the majority, were of Greek origin (see Finley(M.), Economy and Society in Ancient Greece, edited by Shaw (B.) and Saller (R.), London, 1981, p. 104): no legal barrier prevented the enslavement of a citizen of another Greek state (Harrison (Α.), The Law of Athens, 2 Vols, Oxford, 1968, 1971, I, p. 165). Where slavery is not racially-based, “to be a slave is a misfortune for the individual, assuredly a grave one, but it is not inevitable, natural or necessarily permanent” (Watson (A.), Roman Slave Law, Baltimore, 1987, p. 3, with reference to Roman slavery).
17 Fisher (N.), Slavety in Classical Greece, London, 1993, p. 36. The philosopher Plato. an aristocratie Athenian by birth (a member of the family of Kritias, with descent from Solon), is reported to have personally experienced enslavement, being captured on board ship and offered for sale at Aigina (but purchased into freedom through his friends' efforts: Diogenês Laertios 3. 18-21 ). In a similar case, the slave-owner Nikostratos, while pursuing three runaway douloi, was himself captured by a hostile warship and taken to the island of Aigina, and there sold into slavery but ultimately returned to Athens and freedom (Dem. 53.4-9). Cf. Dem 58.18-19 So pervasive was the need to free Athenian citizens fallen into the control of others that Lysias lists - among a litany of routine civic undertakings (paying regular and special taxes, not causing difficulties, obeying the law, creating no enmity) - his family's “ransoming of many Athenians from the enemy” (Lysias 12.20).
18 The residents of Attika were remarkably homogeneous. The satiric Constitution of the Athenians 1.10 (attributed to Xenophon) emphasizes the impossibility at Athens of distinguishing, by dress or physical appearance, free men from slaves, citizens from aliens: εἱ νόμος ἧν τòν δοῦλον ὑπò τoῦ ἐλευθέpου τύπτεσθαι… πολλάκις ἄν οίηθεὶς εἶναι τòν Ἀθηναῖον δοῦλον ἐπάταξεν ἄν ἐσθῆτά τε γὰp οὐδὲν βελτίων ὁ δῆμος αὐτόθι ἢ οἱ δοῦλοι καὶ οἱ μέτοικοι, καὶ τὰ εἴδη οὐδὲν βελτίους εἰσίν. Cf. Plato, Rep. 563b; Winxler (J.), “Laying Down the Law: The Oversight of Men's Sexual Behavior in Classical Athens,” in Halperin (D.), Winkler (J.), and Zeitlin (F.), eds., Before Sexuality: The Construction of Erotic Experience in the Ancient Greek World, Princeton, 1990, p. 180. Court accounts routinely assume congruence of appearance among the inhabitants of Attika. During a raid on a citizen's farm, for example, by persons seeking to enforce a judgment, the debtor's son was carried off - he was assumed to be a slave (Dem. 47.61) The maltreatment of a free woman, described at Demosthenes 47 58-59, demonstrates the difficulty of differentiating female slaves from free women. We even hear of a young citizen (astos) who was sent into a neighbor's garden to pluck flowers in the hope that, mistaking the intruder for a slave, the neighbor might strike or bind him and thus become subject to damages for hybris (Dem. 53.16).
19 Although in many jurisdictions liberation of slaves has been carefully controlled by official regulation and formal legal provisions (cf. the Roman process of manumission vindictâ yielding citizenship but validated only by the presence of a Roman officiai [D.40 2]), at Athens the state provided no direction or even officiai registration. See Todd (S.), “Status and Contract in Fourth-Century Athens,” in Thür (G.), éd., Symposion 1993, Köln, 1994, p. 26-27. Indeed, private efforts to publicize manumissions in the theatre were ultimately proscribed by the state as disruptive (Aiskhin. 3.41-44; cf. Zelnick-Abramovitz (R.), Not Wholly Free, Leiden, 2005). (The shadowy phialai exeleutherikai inscriptions, all of which seem to date from the 320s [Lewis (D.), “Attic Manumissions,” Hesperia, 28 (1959), p. 237] may represent a late effort to provide some public record of manumission, but even this is highly uncertain. See IG II2 1553-78; Lewis, “Dedications of Phialai at Athens,” Hesperia, 37 (1968), p. 368-80.
20 See Cohen (E.), “Banking as a 'Family Business': Legal Adaptations Affecting Wives and Slaves,” in Gagarin (M.), ed, Symposion 1990, Köln, 1991, p. 239-63; idem. “Τpάπεζες και τpαπεζικές εpγασίες στην κλασικὴ Αθήνα - Η νομική θέση τῶν γυναικών και τῶν δούλων,” in Συμβολές στην ἐpευνα του αpχαίου ελληνικού και ελληνιστικού δικαίου 2 (1994), p. 149-75.
21 The prime and literal meaning of andreia (see LSJ) is ‘manliness,’ i.e. ‘the quality or state of having characteristics suitable for a man’ (the American Webster's dictionary definition of ‘masculinity’). However, extended and figurative uses of andreia are frequently encountered in ancient Greek. See Cohen (E.), “The High Cost of Andreia at Athens,” in Rosen (R.) and Sluiter (I.), eds., Andreia: Studies in Manliness and Courage in Classical Antiquity, Leiden, 2003, p. 145.
22 Xen. Oikonomikos 5.1; Eur. Orestes 917-22, Hiket. 881-7; Plato Laws 889d; Men. Fr. 338 (Körte/Thierfelder 1953); Aristoph. Peace. passim, Akhar. 32-36. See Hanson (V.), The Other Greeks: The Family Farm and the Agrarian Roots of Western Civilization, Berkeley, 1995, p. 214-219.
23 About half of all politai (perhaps 10,000 citizens) pursued non-agricultural work in hundreds of individual métiers (Harris (E.), “Workshop, Marketplace and Household: The Nature of Technical Specialization in Classical Athens and Its Influence on Economy and Society,” in Cartledge (P.), Cohen (E.) and Foxhall (L.), eds., Money, Labour and Land: Approaches to the Economies of Ancient Greece, London, 2002, p. 70). The Athenian Assembly was full of clothes-cleaners, leather-workers, construction workers, blacksmiths, traders, sailors and men involved in retail pursuits: τοὺς γναφέας αὐτῶν ἢ τοὺς σκυτέας ἢ τοὺς τέκτονας ἢ τοὺς χαλκέας ἢ τοὺς γεωpγοὺς ἢ τοὺς ἐμπópους ἢ τοὺς ἐν τῇ ἀγοpᾷ μεταβαλλoμένους… ἐκ γὰp τούτων απάντων ἡ ἐκκλησία συνίσταται (Xen. Apom 3.7.6). ’Oμοίως μὲν τέκτων, ὁμοίως δὲ χαλκεὺς. σκυτοτόμος. ἔμποpος, ναύκληpος… (Plato, Protag. 319d).
24 Fisher (N.), “Violence, Masculinity and the Law in Athens,” in Foxhall (L.) and salmon (J.), eds., When Men Were Men: Masculinity, Power and Identity in Classical Antiquity, London, 1998, p.70. Similarly: Id., Slavery in Classical Greece, London, 1993; cartledge, The Greeks, p. 148-9.
25 Aristot. Rhet. 1367a33: ελευθέpου γὰp τò μὴ πpòς ἄλλον ζην. Jameson notes free persons' “reluctance to admit to the need of working for someone else” (“Women and Democracy in Fourth-Century Athens,” in Brulé (P.) and Oulhen (J.), eds., Esclavage, guerre, économie en Grèce ancienne: Hommages à Yvon Garlan, Rennes, 1997, p. 100). Cf. Humphreys (S.), The Family, Women and Death. Second Edition. Ann Arbor, 1993, p. 10; Finley, Economy, p. 122.
26 14.48: τίνα γὰp ἡμᾶς οἴεσθε γνώμην ἔχειν ὁpῶντας… πολλοὺς μὲν μικpῶν ἔνεκα συμβολαίων δουλεύοντας, ἄλλους δ’ ἐπὶ θητείαν ίόντας... Cf. Aristot Rhet. 1367a30-32: ἐλευθέpου γὰp σημεῖον οὐδὲν ποιεῖν ἔpγον θητικόν.
27 Isaios 5.39: δι’ ἔνδειαν τῶν ἐπιτηδείων. Dem. 57.45: πολλὰ δουλικὰ καὶ ταπεινὰ πpάγματα τοὺς ἐλευθέpους ἡ πενία βιάζεται ποιεῖν, ἐφ’ οἱς ἐλεοϊντ’ ἂν... πολλαὶ καὶ τιτθαὶ καὶ ἔpιθοι καὶ τpυγήτpιαι γεγόνασιν ὑπò τῶν τῆς πόλεως κατ’ ἐκείνους τοὺς χpόνους συμφοpῶν ἀσταί γυναῖκες. On misthôtoi, see Martini (R.), “Sul contrario d'opera nell'Atene classica,” in Thür (G.) and Vélissaropoulos-Karakostas (J.), eds., Symposion 1995, Köln, 1997, p. 49.
28 SEG 26.72, lines49-55. Cf. IG II2 1492.137; 1388.61-2.
29 Osborne (R.), “The Economics and Politics of Slavery at Athens,” in Powell (A.), ed., The Greek World, London, 1995, p. 30; hopper (R.), Trade and Industry in Classical Greece. London, 1979, p. 140; Finley, Economy, p. 99; Ehrenberg (V.), The People of Aristophanes: A Sociology of Old Attic Comedy, New York, 1962, p. 162, 183, 185; Loomis (W.), Wages, Welfare Costs and Inflation in Classical Athens, Ann Arbor, 1998, p 236-39. This concurrence is especially well-attested in the construction trades: Randall (R.), “The Erechtheum Workmen,” American Journal of Archaeology 57 (1953), p. 199-210; Burford, Craftsmen, Cohen (E.), The Athenian Nation, Princeton, 2000, p. 134-35, 187.
30 IG II2 1672.190. Cf. IG II2 1672.70-71.
31 See IG. I3 1032; Thouk. 7.13.2 which together confirm that “slaves regularly formed a substantial proportion of the rowers on Athenian triremes, and their masters included fellow oarsmen” (Graham (A.), “Thucydides 7.13 2 and the Crews of Athenian Triremes: An Addendum,” Transactions of the American Philological Association. 128 (1998), p. 110). Cf. Id., “Thucydides 7.13.2 and the Crews of Athenian Triremes,” Transactions of the American Philological Association, 122 (1992), p. 257-270; Welwei (K.-W.), Unfreie im Antiken Kriegsdienst, Vol. I, Stuttgart, 1974. See the discussion of Isokratês 8.48 at Burke (E.), “The Economy of Athens in the Classical Era,” Transactions of the American Philological Association, 122 (1992), p. 218.
32 See, for example, Iskhomakhos' wife at Xen. Oik. 7.6. The wife's role, however, was often essentially managerial: see Cohen (E.), The Athenian Nation, Princeton, 2000, p. 37-38.
33 Cf. the maritime entrepreneur who introduces a client to the bank of Herakleides in Dem. 33.7; Agyrrhios who serves Pasion as a representative in litigational matters (Isok 17.31-32; cf. Strauss (B.), Athens after the Peloponnesian War: Class, Faction, and Policy, 403-386 B.C., Ithaca. Ν.Y., 1987, p. 142; Stroud (R.), The Athenian Grain-Tax Law of 374/3 B.C., Hesperia Suppl., 29 (1998), p.22); Arkhestratos who provided the bond for Pasion (Isok. 17.43); Stephanos' relationship with the banker Aristolokhos at Dem. 45.64.
34 See Cohen, Athenian Nation, 145-154; Hervagault (M.-P.) and Mactoux (M.-M.), “Esclaves et société d'après Démosthène,” in Actes du colloque 1972 sur l'esclavage, Annales Littéraires de l'Université de Besançon, Paris, 1974; Perotti (E.), “Esclaves ΧΩΡΙΣ ΟΙΚΟΥΝΤΕΣ,” in Actes du colloque 1972 sur l'esclavage, Annales Littéraires de l'Université de Besançon, Paris, 1974. For the banking oikoi of slaves and former slaves, see Cohen (E.), Athenian Economy and Society, Princeton, 1992, Chapter 4.
35 The douloi Xenon, Euphron, Euphraios and Kallistratos - while still enslaved - as principals operated the largest bank in Athens, that of Pasion Their only involvement with their owners appears to have been annual payment of lease obligations. Dem. 36.14, 43, 46, 48. Cf. Meidas, a slave who ran a substantial perfume business but provided his owner with reports only monthly and again subject only to a fixed payment (Hyper Ath. 9).
36 The Athenian state offered paid service in the armed forces, and compensation for frequent jury duty and assembly meetings; for “incapacitated” politai of limited means, there were outright public grants (Aristot. Ath. Pol. 49.4). Cf. Lysias 24, 6, in which an Athenian unable to work easily at his own business but too poor to buy a slave doesn't even consider the possibility of hiring a free man to work for him: instead he seeks public assistance.
37 For the complex commercialization of the fourth-century Athenian economy. see Shtpton (K.), Leasing and Lending: The Cash Economy in Fourth-Century B.C. Athens. London, 2000, p. 14; Id., “The Private Banks in Fourth-Century B.C. Athens: A Reappraisal,” Classical Quarterly, 47 (1997), p. 396-422; Schaps (D.), The Invention of Coinage and the Monetization of Ancient Greece, Ann Arbor, 2004, p. 175-193; Gofas (D.), Μελέτες ιστοpίας τοῦ ἐλληνικού δικαίου τῶν συναλλαγῶν, Athens, 1994.
38 Finley, Economy, p. 262-263, n. 6.
39 Bank workers were assumed to be enslaved: see, for example, Dem. 49.51 ( τίς ὁ παpαλαβών τῶν οίκετῶν τῶν ἡμετέpων;).
40 A few free persons - motivated by abject circumstance or financial incentives - might occasionally have accepted paid employment (see above n 27 and accompanying text).
41 Marx believed that the formation of a labor market necessarily meant the introduction of “wage slavery,” a precursor to classical capitalism (Capital. 3 Vols, London, 1970-72, I, p. 170; cf. Lane (R.), The Market Experience, Cambridge, 1991, p. 310-11). But this proposition is not confirmed by the continued dominance of the Athenian economy by household-based businesses primarily utilizing household members.
42 Pherekratês Fr. 142 (K-A). See Fuks (A.), “Kolonos misthios. Labour Exchange in Classical Athens,” Eranos, 49 ( 1951 ), p. 171-173; Garlan (Y.), “Le Travail libre en Grèce ancienne,” in Garnsey (P.). ed., Non-Slave Labour in the Greco-Roman World, Cambridge, 1980, p. 8-9. The prime ancient Greek term for “slave” was doulos (masc. plur. douloi, fem sing doulê, fem. plur doulai). On the multiplicity of unfree statuses in ancient Greece, and the corresponding multitude of descriptive terms, see Gschnitzer (F.), Studien zur griechischen Terminologie der Sklaverei. 1. Grundzüge des vorhellenistischen Sprachgehrauchs, Abhandlung der Akademie d. Wiss. u. d. Lit. Mainz - Geistes- und sozialwiss. Klasse, Wiesbaden. 1964, p. 1283-1310; Carrière-Hervagault (M.-P.), “Esclaves et affranchis chez les orateurs attiques: documents et étude,” in Actes du colloque 1971 sur l'esclavage, Annales Littéraires de l'Université de Besançon, Paris, 1973; Mactoux (M.-M.), “Douleia.” Esclavage et pratiques discursives dans l'Athènes classique, Paris, 1980, p. 21-124. Cf. Faraguna (M.), “Aspetti della schiavitù domestica femminile in Attica tra oratoria ed epigrafia,” in Merola (F.) and Storchi (A.) Marino, eds., Femmes-esclaves: modèles d'interprétation anthropologique, économique, juridique, Atti del XXI Colloquio internazionale del G.I.R.E.A, Naples, 1999, p. 58-59; Cohen (E.), Athenian Economy and Society, Princeton, 1992, p. 74, n. 63
43 For a survey of “the extensive horizontal specialization in the Athenian economy,” and the resultant profusion of discrete labor functions, see Harris, «Workshop...».
44 Cf. Xen. Oik. 1.1. ἆpα γε ἡ οικονομία ἐπιστήμης τινòς ὄνομα ἐστιν. ὥσπεp ἡ ἱατpικὴ καὶ ἡ χαλκευτικὴ καὶ ἡ τεκτονική;... 12: Ή καὶ ὥσπεp τούτων τῶν τεχνῶν etc. Cf. Pollux 4.7,22. On prostitution as a tekhnê, see Dem. 59.18.
45 Cf. Xen. Oik. 7.41, 12.4; Aristot. Oik. 1344a27-29 and passim. Training of artisans and caterers: see, for example, Dem. 45.71 (τοῦτον εἰ συνέβη μάγειpον ἤ τινος ἄλλης τέχνης δημιουpγòν πpίασθαι, τὴν τοῦ δεσπότου τέχνην ἂν μαθὼν etc.). Medicine: Klees (Η.). Sklavenleben im klassischen Griechenland, Stuttgart, 1998, p. 96-100.
46 Aristarkhos contrasts the vocationally useless “liberal education” of free persons with slaves' training in tekhnai (crafts or trades requiring knowledge and skill: Xen. Oik. 1.1; Pollux 4.7.22): his female relatives lack the knowledge and skills of slaves (ὁ μὲν γὰp τεχνίτας τpέφει, ὲγώ δ’ ἐλευθεpίως πεπαιδευμένους. Αpom. 2.7.4).
47 Dem. 45.72 (with regard to the great trapezitês Phormiôn who entered banking as a slave): ἐπειδὴ δ’ ὁ πατὴp ὁ ήμέτεpος τpαπεζίτης ὢν ἐκτήσατ’ αὐτòν καὶ γpάμματ’ ἐπαίδευσεν καὶ τὴν τέχνην ἐδίδαξεν….
48 See, for example. Dem. 59.18: Νικαpέτη… δεινὴ δὲ καὶ δυναμένη φὐσιν μικpῶν παιδίων συνιδεῖν εὐπpεπῆ, καὶ ταῦτα ἐπισταμένη θpέψαι καὶ παιδεῦσαι ἐμπείpως, τέχνην ταύτην κατεσκευασμένη. Kapparis comments: “she knew how to educate them to become commercially successful courtesans” (Apollodoros “Against Neaira” [D.59], Berlin, 1999, p. 207). See Alkiphrôn 4 passim; Louk. Έταιp. Διαλ. 4 3, 10 4. Cf. Vanoyeke (V.), La prostitution en Grèce et à Rome. Paris, 1990, p. 33-35.
49 Dem. 48.14-15: οὖτος ὁ οίκέτης σχεδόν τι ᾔδει τά τε ἄλλα τὰ τοῦ Κόμωνος ἅπαντα, καὶ δὴ τò ἀpγύpιον οὖ ἦν… καὶ πpῶτον μὲν ὑφαιpεῖται αὐτοῦ χιλίας δpαχμὰς χωpίς που κειμένας τοῦ ἄλλου ἀpγυpίου, ἔπειτα ἐτέpας ἐβδομήκοντα μνᾶς. Isok 17.11-12: Κίττον, τòν παῖδα ὄς συνῄδει πεpὶ τῶν χpημάτων… αὐτòν ἐπὶ τῇ τpαπέζῃ καθήμενον ἔξ τάλαντ’ ἀpγυpίου λάβοιμεν παp’ αὐτοῦ.
50 See Cohen (Ε.). “The Wealthy Slaves of Athens: Legal Rights, Economic Obligations,” in Jones (H.), Le monde antique et les droits de l'homme, Brussels, 1998, p.105-129.
51 See Thompson (W.), “An Athenian Commercial Case: Demosthenes 34.” Tidjschrift voor Rechtsgeschiedenis, 48 (1980), p. 144-45.
52 Cf. Hervagault and Mactoux, «Esclaves...», p. 90-91; Perotti. «Esclaves...», p. 52-54.
53 Dem. 32.4: ὑπηpέτης ‘Hγεστpάτου. A Massilian, he borrowed money at Syracuse (χpήματ’ ἐν ταῖς Συpακούσαις ἐδανείζεθ’ οὖτος), claimed to have lent the funds against the security of maritime cargo, and litigated with other claimants to the collateral upon its arrival at Athens (Dem. 32,9) τοῦ σίτου τοῦ ήμετέpου ἀμφισβητήσας ήμῖν δίκην πpοσείληχεν).
54 The considérable scale of the business is suggested by the colossal amount of debts incurred in its opération: five talents composed of both conventional (khrea) and eranos loans (Dem 32, 7, 14,19).
55 Xen. Ath. Pot. 1.11: εἰ δέ τις καὶ τοῦτο θαυμάζει, ὅτι ἐῶσι τοὺς δούλους τpυφᾶν αὐτόθι καὶ μεγαλοπpεπῶς διαιτᾶσθαι ἐνίους. καὶ τοῦτο γνώμῃ φανεῖεν ἂν ποιοῦντες. ὅπου γὰp ναυτικὴ δύναμίς ἐστιν. ἀπò χpημάτων ἀνάγκη τοῖς ἀνδpαπόδοις δουλεύειν.
56 See the slave-owning slave [...]leides (whose name has been incompletely preserved) at IG II2 1570.78-9. Under Roman practice, dependent persons frequently owned slaves - sometimes in large numbers. See Watson (A.), Roman Slave Laws, p. 95.
57 Xen. Oik. 14.7: ὁpῶντες πλουσιωτέpους γιγνομένους τοὺς δικαίους τῶν ἀδικων πολλοί καὶ φιλοκεpδεῖς ὄντες εὖ μάλα ἐπιμένουσι τῷ μὴ ἀδικεῖν. Ibid., 9.13: καὶ δικαιοσύνην δ’ αὐτῇ ἐνεποιοῦμεν τιμιωτέpους τιθέντες τοὺς δικαίους τῶν ἀδικων καὶ ἐπιδεικνύοντες πλουσιώτεpον καὶ ἐλευθεpιώτεpον βιοτεύοντας τῶν ἀδικων.
58 Such epitropoi, Sokrates notes, were well compensated (Xen. Oik 14.6) even if they merely preserved existing wealth (Xen. Oik 14.3: ἔpγων τε ἐπιστατούντα καὶ συγκομίζοντα τοὺς καpποὺς καὶ συμφυλάττοντα τὴν οὐσίαν, ὠφελοῦντα ἀντωφελεῖσθαι ).
59 For slaves' preeminence in banking operations, and the social and economic factors underlying their predominance, see Cohen, Athenian Economy, (1992), Chapter 4. For their significance in skilled trades, see, e g., Webster (T.), Potter and Patron in Classical Athens. London, 1973.; Hemelrijk (J.), “A Closer Look at the Potter,” in Rasmussen (T.) and Spivey (N.), eds., Looking at Greek Vases, Cambridge, 1991, p. 255 (“the outlandish names of many artisans [Skythes, Bryygos, etc.]” reveals their slave status”); for construction, Randall, “The Erechtheum Workinen”;Burford (A.), “The Builders of the Parthenon,” Parthenos and Parthenon, Greece & Rome Suppl., 10(1963). p. 23-35.
60 They functioned pursuant to a leasing arrangement (misthôsis) with their masters. Only on expiration of the lease did their owners καὶ ἐλευθέpους ἀφεῖσαν (Dem 36.14) (“enfranchised them,” see Harrison, The Laws of Athens, I., p. 175, n.2).
61 Even Thompson, who sees banks as “insignificant” in the Athenian economy, recognizes the significance of “the lendable deposits (and) private resources of a tycoon like Pasion” (“An Athenian Commercial Case: Demosthenes 34,” Tidjschrift voor Rechtsgeschiedenis. 48 (1980), p. 240).
62 Dem. 36.37: ἐκ δὲ τῶν μισθώσεων... ἐτῶν... δέκα δὲ τῶν μετὰ ταῦτα, ὦν ἐμίσθωσαν ὔστεpον Ξένωνι καὶ Εὐφpαίῳ καὶ Εὔφpονι καὶ Καλλιστpάτῳ. τάλαντον τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ ἐκαστου.
63 Dem. 36.43: παpὰ τοῖς αὑτοῦ κυpίοις’ Αντισθένει καὶ Ἀpχεστpάτῳ τpαπεζιτεύουσι πεῖpαν δοὺς ὄτι χpηστός ἐστι καì δίκαιος, ἐπιστεύθη. Cf. Dem 36.46, 48.
64 Although he was an important trapezitês by the 390's (Isok. 17), Pasion was not then a citizen (see Isok. 17.33 [use of Pythodoros the citizen as his agent], § 41 [his inclusion among the ξένοι είσφέpοντες]). Although it is generally assumed that he was manumitted prior to the events described in Isok. 17 (cf. Davies (J.), Athenian Propertied Families, 600-300 B.C., Oxford, 1971, p. 429-30), in fact we do not know when he obtained his freedom. His inclusion among the ξένοι είσφέpοντες is of no evidentiary significance: nothing is known of Athens' taxation of prosperous unfree inhabitants of Attika or of the possible inclusion of slave entrepreneurs among the priamenoi mentioned in the grain-tax law discovered in the Athenian agora (cf. Stroud, The Athenian Grain-Tax Law, Chapter 3).
65 Dem. 36.4, 11, 37; 45. 31-2. Phormion's lease of Pasion's bank was entered into with Phormiôn ἥδη καθ' ἐαυτòν ὄντι (§4) In thus noting explicitly that Phormiôn had already obtained his freedom when he entered into operating leases giving him complete control of the bank and of a shield-workshop, the speaker necessarily implies that slave status would not have been a bar to entering into these substantial obligations: otherwise the mere fact of his being lessee of the businesses would have established his status as free.
66 See Dem. 49.31, where Timosthenes, active in overseas commerce (ὰφικνεῖται κατ’ ἐμποpίαν ἰδίαν ὰποδημων), is characterized as Phormiôn's κοινωνός at a time when Phormiôn was still a doulos.
67 Dem. 21.157: ἡγεμὼν συμμοpίας ὑμῖν ἐγενόμην ἐγὼ ἔτη δέκα. ἴσον Φοpμίωνι καὶ Λυσιθείδῃ καὶ Καλλαίσχpῳ καὶ τοῖς πλουσιωτάτοις.
68 Dem. 36.57: τoσαῦτα γάp. ὦ ἄνδpες Ἀθηναῖοι, χpήμαθ’ ὑμῖν ἀνεγνώσθη πpοσηυποpηκώς, ὄσ’ οὔθ’ οὗτος οὔτ’ ἄλλος οὐδεὶς κέκτηται, πίστις μέντοι Φοpμίωνι παpὰ τοῖς είδόσι καὶ τοσούτων καὶ πολλῷ πλειόνων χpημάτων, δι’ ἧς καὶ αὐτòς αὑτῷ καὶ ὑμῖν χpήσιμóς ἐστίν, ἂ μὴ πpοσῆσθε.
69 Cf. Isok. 17 2: φίλους πολλοὺς κέκτηνται καὶ χpήματα πολλὰ διαχειpίζουσι καὶ πιστοὶ διὰ τὴν τέχνην δοκοῦσιν εἶναι.
70 Ibid.: Ἔστι πάντων χαλεπώτατον τοιούτων ἀντιδίκων τυχεῖν.
71 On dêmosioi (enslaved individuals owned by the state), see Jacob (O.), “Les esclaves publics à Athènes,” Musée Belge, 30 (1926), p. 57-106; Id., Les esclaves publics à Athènes, Fasc. 35: Bibliothèque de la Faculté du philosophie et lettres de l'Université de Liège, Paris, 1928. The number of dêmosioi at Athens is unknown: cf. Garlan (Y.), Slavery in Ancient Greece, Ithaca, N.Y., 1988, p. 41, 68.
72 stroud (R.), “An Athenian Law on Silver Coinage,” Hesperia, 43 (1974), lines 10-13.
73 Phormion was still engaged in banking (Dem. 45.64, 66) many years after the end of his lease of the bank of Pasiôn. See Cohen, Athenian Economy and Society, p. 176, n. 268.
74 An Athenian citizen working in a field other than banking was, as a general matter, equally unable to achieve the financial success possible as a trapezitês. But, theoretically at least, he would have been able to change his profession -the slave, theoretically at least, had no such choice.
75 Dem 45.71-2: οἶμαι γὰp ἅπαντας ὑμᾶς εἰδέναι. ὅτι τοῦτον, ἡνίκ’ ὤνιος ἧν. εἰ συνέβη μάγειpον ἤ τίνος ἅλλης τέχνης δημιουpγòν πpίασθαι. τὴν τοῦ δεσπότου τέχνην ἄν μαθὼν πόppω τῶν νῦν παpόντων ἧν ἀγαθῶν, ἐπειδὴ δ’ ό πατὴp ὁ ήμέτεpος τpαπεζίτης ὢν ἐκτήσατ’ αὐτòν καὶ γpάμματ’ ἐπαίδευσεν καὶ τὴν τέχνην ἐδίδαξεν καὶ χpημάτων ἐποίησε κύpιον πολλών, εὐδαίμων γέγονεν, τὴν τέχην, ᾖ πpòς ήμᾶς ἀφίκετο, ἀpχὴν λαβὼν πάσης τῆς νῦν παpούσης εὐδαιμονίας.
76 See esp. Lauffer (S.). Die Bergwerkssklaven von Laureion, Mainz, 1979.
Auteur
University of Pennsylvanie
Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence Licence OpenEdition Books. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.
Divertissements et loisirs dans les sociétés urbaines à l’époque moderne et contemporaine
Robert Beck et Anna Madœuf (dir.)
2005
Les Cités grecques et la guerre en Asie mineure à l’époque hellénistique
Jean-Christophe Couvenhes et Henri-Louis Fernoux (dir.)
2004
Les entreprises de biens de consommation sous l’Occupation
Sabine Effosse, Marc de Ferrière le Vayer et Hervé Joly (dir.)
2010
La Galicie au temps des Habsbourg (1772-1918)
Histoire, société, cultures en contact
Jacques Le Rider et Heinz Raschel (dir.)
2010
Saint François de Paule et les Minimes en France de la fin du XVe au XVIIIe siècle
André Vauchez et Pierre Benoist (dir.)
2010
Un espace rural à la loupe
Paysage, peuplement et territoires en Berry de la préhistoire à nos jours
Nicolas Poirier
2010
Individus, groupes et politique à Athènes de Solon à Mithridate
Jean-Christophe Couvenhes et Silvia Milanezi (dir.)
2007
Une administration royale d'Ancien Régime : le bureau des finances de Tours
2 volumes
François Caillou (dir.)
2005
Le statut de l'acteur dans l'Antiquité grecque et romaine
Christophe Hugoniot, Frédéric Hurlet et Silvia Milanezi (dir.)
2004
Divertissements et loisirs dans les sociétés urbaines à l’époque moderne et contemporaine
Robert Beck et Anna Madœuf (dir.)
2005
Les Cités grecques et la guerre en Asie mineure à l’époque hellénistique
Jean-Christophe Couvenhes et Henri-Louis Fernoux (dir.)
2004
Les entreprises de biens de consommation sous l’Occupation
Sabine Effosse, Marc de Ferrière le Vayer et Hervé Joly (dir.)
2010
La Galicie au temps des Habsbourg (1772-1918)
Histoire, société, cultures en contact
Jacques Le Rider et Heinz Raschel (dir.)
2010
Saint François de Paule et les Minimes en France de la fin du XVe au XVIIIe siècle
André Vauchez et Pierre Benoist (dir.)
2010
Un espace rural à la loupe
Paysage, peuplement et territoires en Berry de la préhistoire à nos jours
Nicolas Poirier
2010
Individus, groupes et politique à Athènes de Solon à Mithridate
Jean-Christophe Couvenhes et Silvia Milanezi (dir.)
2007
Une administration royale d'Ancien Régime : le bureau des finances de Tours
2 volumes
François Caillou (dir.)
2005
Le statut de l'acteur dans l'Antiquité grecque et romaine
Christophe Hugoniot, Frédéric Hurlet et Silvia Milanezi (dir.)
2004
