The History and Antiquities of the Doric Race Volume II Part 1

The History and Antiquities of the Doric Race.

Vol. 2.

by Karl Otfried Muller.

BOOK III. POLITICAL INSt.i.tUTIONS OF THE DORIANS.

Chapter I.

-- 1. End of a state according to the Doric notions. -- 2.

Difference between the political inst.i.tutions of the Dorians and Ionians. -- 3. Successive changes in the const.i.tutions of the Greek states; 1st, royal aristocracy of the heroic ages. -- 4. 2nd, Timocracy, or aristocracy of wealth. -- 5. 3rd, Tyranny. -- 6. 4th, Democracy. -- 7. Form of government characteristic of the Doric race. -- 8. Supposed legislation of Lycurgus. -- 9. Derivation of Spartan laws from the Delphic oracle. -- 10. Characteristics of the Doric form of government.

1. Before we speak of the form of government which prevailed in the Doric states, it will be necessary to set aside all modern ideas respecting the origin, essence, and object of a state; namely, that it is an inst.i.tution for protecting the persons and property of the individuals contained in it. We shall approach nearer to the ancient notion, if we consider the essence of a state to be, that by a recognition of the same opinions and principles, and the direction of actions to the same ends, the whole body become, as it were, one moral agent. Such an unity of opinions and actions can only be produced by the ties of some natural affinity, such as of a nation, a tribe, or a part of one: although in process of time the meaning of the terms _state_ and _nation_ became more distinct. The more complete the unity of feelings and principles is, the more vigorous will be the common exertions, and the more comprehensive the notion of the state. As this was in general carried to a wider extent among the Greeks than by modern nations, so it was perhaps nowhere so strongly marked as in the Dorian states, whose national views with regard to political inst.i.tutions were most strongly manifested in the government of Sparta. Here the plurality of the persons composing the state was most completely reduced to unity; and hence the life of a Spartan citizen was chiefly concerned in public affairs. The greatest freedom of the Spartan, as well as of the Greeks in general, was only to be a living member of the body of the state; whereas that which in modern times commonly receives the name of liberty, consists in having the fewest possible claims from the community; or in other words, in dissolving the social union to the greatest degree possible, as far as the individual is concerned. What the Dorians endeavoured to obtain in a state was good order, or ??s??, the regular combination of different elements. The expression of king Archidamus in Thucydides,(1) that "it is most honourable, and at the same time most secure, for many persons to show themselves obedient to the same order (??s??)," was a fundamental principle of this race. And hence the Spartans honoured Lycurgus so greatly, as having inst.i.tuted the existing order of things (??s??):(2) and called his son by the laudatory t.i.tle of Eucosmus.(3) For the same reason the supreme magistrate among the Cretans was called Cosmus; among the Epizephyrian Locrians, Cosmopolis. Thus this significant word expresses the spirit of the Dorian government, as well as of the Dorian music and philosophy.(4) With this desire to obtain a complete uniformity, an attempt after stability is necessarily connected.

For an unity of this kind having been once established, the next object is to remove whatever has a tendency to destroy it, and to repress all causes which may lead to a change: yet an attempt to exclude all alteration is never completely successful: partly on account of the internal changes which take place in the national character, and partly because causes operating from without necessarily produce some modifications. These states, however, endeavour to retain unchanged a state of things once established and approved; while others, in which from the beginning the opinions of individuals have out-weighed the authority of the whole, admit, in the progress of time, of greater variety, and more innovations, readily take up whatever is offered to them by accident of time and place, or even eagerly seek for opportunities of change. States of this description must soon lose all firmness and character, and fall to pieces from their own weakness; while those which never admit of innovation will at last, after having long stood as ruins in a foreign neighbourhood, yield to the general tide of human affairs, and their destruction is commonly preceded by the most complete anarchy.

2. This description expresses, though perhaps too forcibly, the difference between the Doric and Ionic races. The former had, of all the Grecians, the greatest veneration for antiquity; and not to degenerate from his ancestors was the strongest exhortation which a Spartan could hear:(5) the latter, on the other hand, were in everything fond of novelty, and delighted in foreign communication; whence their cities were always built on the sea, whereas the Dorians generally preferred an inland situation.

The anxiety of the Dorians, and the Spartans in particular, to keep up the pure Doric character and the customs of their ancestors, is strongly shown by the prohibition to travel,(6) and the exclusion of foreigners, an inst.i.tution common both to the Spartans and Cretans, and which has been much misrepresented by ancient authors.(7) It is very possible, as Plutarch thinks, that the severity of these measures was increased by the decline of all morals and discipline, which had arisen among the Ionians from the contrary practice; that race having in the earliest times fallen into a state of the greatest effeminacy and inactivity, from their connexion with their Asiatic neighbours. For how early was the period when the ancient const.i.tution of the Grecian family degenerated among the Ionians into the slavery of the wife! how weak, effeminate, and luxurious do their ancient poets Callinus(8) and Asius(9) represent them! and if the legend describes even the daughters of Neleus, the founder of the colony, as completely dest.i.tute of morality,(10) what must have been the condition of this people, when the wives of the Ionians had mixed with Lydian women!

The warning voice of such examples might well stimulate the ancient lawgivers to draw in with greater closeness the iron bond of custom.

3. But with all this difference in the races of which the Grecian nation consisted, there was, in the development of the const.i.tutions of the Greek states, a common progress, which extended a certain influence even to such as retained their earlier impressions with a firm adherence to antiquity.

As it is our present object to give a general view of this advance, we will begin with the const.i.tution of the heroic age, so clearly described in Homer. This can scarcely be called by any other name than that of _aristocracy_, as its most important feature is the accurate division between the n.o.bles(11) and the people. The former composed the deliberative councils, and the courts of justice;(12) and although both were commonly combined with a public a.s.sembly (?????), the n.o.bles were the only persons who proposed measures, deliberated and voted; the people was only present in order to hear the debate, and to express its feelings as a body; which expressions might then be noticed by princes of a mild disposition.(13) The chief ruler himself was properly of equal rank with the other n.o.bles, and was only raised above them by the authority intrusted to him as president in the council, and commander in the field.

This form of government continued to exist for a considerable time in the Ionian, Achaean, and aeolian states; but the power of the chief ruler gradually declined, and was at last wholly abolished. With the Dorians, however, the case was very different; they were peculiar in possessing a very limited n.o.bility, for the Heraclidae had nearly an exclusive right to that appellation: while, on the other hand, a whole nation occupied by means of conquest, a station a.n.a.logous to that of an aristocracy, uniting military pursuits with independence obtained by the possession of the land.

4. About the 30th Olympiad (660 B.C.), however, on account of the increased trade and intercourse with foreign nations, and consequently of the greater demand for luxuries, the value of wealth rose in comparison with the honour of n.o.ble descent. The land, indeed, still remained for the most part in the hands of the aristocracy; but as it had at this time become more easy to dissipate an inherited estate, and to obtain consideration by the profits of trade, property was more exposed to sudden changes. It is probable that the Geomori of the Ionic Samos, as well as the Hippobotae of Chalcis (which, as well as Samos, had once belonged to Ionians), whose distinction was derived from the possession of land, also carried on the extensive commerce of these two states; otherwise the wealth of the merchant would soon have exceeded that of the landowner. In the Doric states also, which were much engaged in trade, such as Corinth, aegina, &c., it was attempted to unite the government of hereditary aristocracy and of wealth.(14) The new importance attached to wealth, even at the time of the Seven Sages, gave rise to the saying of Aristodemus the Argive, "Money makes the man;"(15) and at a later period Theognis the Megarean complains that the pursuit of riches confounds all distinction of rank, and that estimation was derived from it.(16) The ancient legislators of Greece considered the power of money, or moveable property (which is as changeable as property in land is durable), most prejudicial to the safety of states; and they endeavoured by oppressing the commercial cla.s.ses, as well as by rendering the land inalienable, to palliate a danger which they were unable wholly to remove. Sparta alone, from the unchangeableness of her inst.i.tutions, remained free from these revolutions. Solon, on the other hand, endeavoured to arrest and perpetuate a state of things which was merely fleeting and transitory. He left some remnants of the aristocracy, particularly the political union of the ???ea, or houses, untouched; while he made his government in principle a timocracy, the amount of property determining the share in the governing power; and at the same time showed a democratic tendency in the low rate at which he fixed the valuation. In his poetry also Solon considers the middle ranks as most valuable to the state; and therefore he endeavoured to give them political importance.(17) But the temperature which he chose was too artificial to be lasting; and the const.i.tution of Solon, in its chief points, only remained in force for a few years. In other Ionic states also similar reconciliations were attempted, but without obtaining any stability.(18) The spirit of the age was manifestly turned towards democracy; and though at Athens Solon, as being the friend of the people, succeeded perhaps in effecting a more gradual transition; in other places the parties were more directly opposed, as is clearly shown by the contest between the parties ????t?? and ?e?????a at Miletus.(19)

5. At Athens however, and generally throughout Greece, the first result of these democratic movements was the establishment of tyranny or despotism; which may be considered as a violent revulsion, destined to precede a complete subversion of all the existing inst.i.tutions. It has been already shown that the tyrants of Corinth, Sicyon, Megara, and Epidaurus, were originally leaders of the popular party against the Doric n.o.bility, or _demagogues_, according to the expression of Aristotle; and for this reason Sparta, as being the protector of aristocracy, overthrew them, wherever her power extended.(20) In Ionia and Sicily the tyrants found an oligarchical timocracy, which was commonly opposed by a democratical party;(21) and in some instances, as in that of Gelon, the tyrant acted against the popular faction. At the time of the Persian war democracy had struck deep root among the Ionians; and Mardonius the Persian, after the expulsion of the tyrants, restored it in their cities as the desired form of government.(22) In Athens Cleisthenes had deprived the union of the houses (the last support of the aristocracy) of its political importance; and Aristides was at length compelled by circ.u.mstances to change the timocracy into a democracy. For in the Persian invasion the lower orders had discovered, while serving as rowers and sailors in the fleet, how much the safety of the state depended upon their exertions, and would no longer submit to be excluded from a share in the highest offices.(23) The democracy flourished so long as great men understood how to guide it by the imposing superiority of their individual characters, and educated persons (?? e?t???e?) dared to take a share in public affairs; it fell when the greedy and indolent people, allured by the prospect of rewards pernicious to the state, filled the public a.s.semblies and courts of justice. We will not carry on any further our picture of the ochlocracy, in which all social union was entirely dissolved, and the state was surrendered to the arbitrary will of a turbulent populace.

6. The last of these changes, produced by what is called the spirit of the times, we have ill.u.s.trated by the history of Athens, although the same course may be shown to have taken place in other, even originally Doric states. Thus in Ambracia, about the same time as at Athens, the timocracy gradually pa.s.sed into a democracy,(24) and at Argos also the democracy rose at the same period. At the time of Polybius, the people had in the Doric states of Crete so unlimited an authority, that this writer himself wonders that his description of them should be so entirely opposed to all former accounts.(25) But since, in general, these alterations threw down the Doric families from their high station, and put an end to the Doric customs, they have not so strong a claim upon our attention, as the peculiar system of the Doric form of government, which was most strongly expressed in the ancient Cretan and Lacedaemonian const.i.tutions: the latter of which, although in many points it yielded and adapted itself to the progress of civilization, existed in its essential parts for five centuries;(26) and by its durability preserved Sparta alone among all the states of Greece from revolutions and revolutionary excesses.(27)

7. But, it may be asked, what right have we to speak of a Doric const.i.tution in general; and why should we select Sparta in preference to any other state of the Doric race, as a model of that system? May not Lycurgus have formed his legislation from reflection upon the condition and wants of his own nation, or have conceived it from arbitrary principles of his own, and have thus impressed upon Sparta the character which it ever after retained, as an essential element of its system?(28) Against this opinion, not unfrequently advanced, instead of bringing forward any general arguments, we prefer adducing the words of Pindar,(29) who, beyond a doubt, was far better acquainted with the basis and origin of ancient const.i.tutions, than either Ephorus or Plutarch. Pindar mentions that Hieron, the Syracusan, wished to establish the new city of aetna (which was inhabited by 5000 Syracusans, and the same number of Peloponnesians) upon the genuine Doric principles; as in later times Dion wished to establish in Syracuse itself a Lacedaemonian or Cretan const.i.tution.(30) He founded it "with heaven-built freedom, according to the laws of the Hylean model;" _i.e._, after the example of the Spartan const.i.tution. "For the descendants of Pamphylus, and of the Heraclidae, who dwell under the brow of Taygetus, wish always to retain the Doric inst.i.tutions of aegimius." Now in the first place, this pa.s.sage proves that the laws of Sparta were considered the true Doric inst.i.tutions; and, secondly, that their origin was held to be identical with that of the people. It proves that the Spartan _laws_ (????) were the true Doric _inst.i.tutions_ (???a), and indeed, in no other nation was the distinction between usage and positive law less marked; from which circ.u.mstance alone it is evident how little opportunity the legislator had for fresh enactments, since custom can never be the work of one person.

From this view of the subject we can also explain why h.e.l.lanicus, the most ancient writer on the const.i.tution of Sparta,(31) made no mention of Lycurgus (for which he is ignorantly censured by Ephorus),(32) and attributed what are called the inst.i.tutions of Lycurgus to the first kings, Procles and Eurysthenes. It also follows, that when Herodotus describes the Spartans before the time of Lycurgus, as being in a state of the greatest anarchy,(33) he can only mean that the original const.i.tution (the te??? ???????) had been overthrown and perverted by external circ.u.mstances, until it was restored and renewed by Lycurgus. Lycurgus, of whose real or imaginary existence we have already spoken,(34) must at the time of Herodotus have been considered a mythical personage, as he had a temple, annual sacrifices, and, in fact, a regular wors.h.i.+p.(35) Now it is the tendency of mythological narration to represent accordant actions of many minds at different times under the name of one person: consequently, the mere name of an inst.i.tution of Lycurgus says very little respecting its real origin and author.

8. The legislation of Lycurgus was, however, according to ancient traditions, aided by the support of Crete and Delphi, and the connexion between the religious usages of these states thus influenced their political condition. The form of government which was prevalent throughout the whole of Crete, originated, according to the concurrent testimony of the ancients, in the time of Minos; and it has been already shown that the Dorians at that time extended their dominion to this island, which thus received their language and customs.(36) In Crete therefore, the const.i.tution founded on the principles of the Doric race, was first moulded into a firm and consistent shape, but even in a more simple and antiquated manner than in Sparta at a subsequent period.(37) Thus Lycurgus was enabled, without forcing any foreign usages upon Sparta, to take for a model the Cretan inst.i.tutions which had been more fully developed at an earlier period; so that the const.i.tutions of Crete and Sparta had from that time, as it were, a family resemblance.(38) When therefore we are told that a paean singer and expiatory priest of Crete, by name Thaletas of Elyrus,(39) sent by the command of the Pythian oracle, composed the troubles and dissensions of Sparta by the power of his music, and that he was the instructor of Lycurgus;(40) it is easy to perceive that the latter part of this account is an addition, made without any attention to chronology; but the operation of Cretan music upon the regulation of political affairs, is strictly in the spirit of an age, and of a race, in which religion, arts, and laws conduced far more than among any other people to attain the same end, and had their basis in the same notions.

9. On the other hand, it was the pride of the Spartans, that their laws had proceeded from the oracle of the Pythian G.o.d:(41) and Tyrtaeus says, in some verses of his Eunomia, that the fundamental principles of the Spartan const.i.tution had been laid down by Apollo.(42) It is probable that these laws were really composed in the form of injunctions to Lycurgus, or to the people.(43) The oracle, however, continued to possess a superintending power over the const.i.tution, chiefly through the intervention of the Pythians,(44) four persons appointed by the kings as messengers to the temple of Pytho, who delivered the oracles truly and honestly to the kings,(45) and were equally acquainted with their purport. On account of the importance of these oracles, the Pythians were the a.s.sessors of the kings and the gerusia,(46) and were always the messmates, both at home and in the field, of the kings. It is probable that the three "Pythian interpreters" at Athens, who, besides explaining the oracles, performed public and domestic expiatory sacrifices,(47) once possessed a similar dignity, although they lost these powers at a very early period. The theori of aegina, Mantinea, Messenia, Trzen, and Thasos, who composed separate colleges, ate together, and who were regular magistrates, not being like the theori of Athens, chosen for a single theoria, may be compared with the Pythians.(48)

10. This comparison again leads us back to our former position, that in the genuine Doric form of government there were certain predominant ideas, which were peculiar to that race, and were also expressed in the wors.h.i.+p of Apollo, viz., those of _harmony_ and _order_ (t? e???s??); of _self-control and moderation_ (s?f??s???), and of _manly virtue_ (??et?).(49) Accordingly, the const.i.tution was formed for the education as well of the old as of the young, and in a Doric state education was upon the whole a subject of greater importance than government. And for this reason all attempts to explain the legislation of Lycurgus, from partial views and considerations, have necessarily failed. That external happiness and enjoyment were not the aim of these inst.i.tutions was soon perceived.

But it was thought, with Aristotle,(50) that every thing could be traced to a desire of making the Spartans courageous warriors, and Sparta a dominant and conquering state; whereas the fact is, that Sparta was hardly ever known to seek occasion for a war, or to follow up a victory; and during the whole of her flouris.h.i.+ng period (that is, from about the 50th Olympiad to the battle of Leuctra) did not make a single conquest by which her territory was enlarged. In conclusion we may say, that the Doric state was a body of men, acknowledging one strict principle of order, and one unalterable rule of manners; and so subjecting themselves to this system, that scarcely anything was unfettered by it, but every action was influenced and regulated by the recognised principles. Before however we come to the consideration of this system, it will be necessary to explain the condition of an order of persons, upon which it was in a certain measure founded, namely, the _subject cla.s.ses_ in the several Doric states.

Chapter II.

-- 1. Origin and distribution of the Perici of Laconia. -- 2. Their political condition and civil rights. -- 3. Their service in war, and their occupation in manufactures, trade, and art. -- 4. n.o.ble families in Sparta not of Doric origin. Trades and crafts hereditary in Sparta.

1. The clearest notion of the subjection enforced by the dominant race of Dorians may be collected from the speech of Brasidas to the Peloponnesians, in Thucydides.(51) "You are not come," he says, "from states in which the many rule over the few, but the few over the many, having obtained their sovereignty in no other manner than by victory in the field." The only right indeed which they possessed was the right of conquerors; the Dorians had by the sword driven out the Achaeans, and these again could not rest their claim to Peloponnesus on any better t.i.tle. It seemed also like a continuation of the heroic age, the existence of which was founded on the rule exercised by the military over the agricultural cla.s.ses. The relative rights of the Dorians and Achaeans appear, however, to have been determined by mutual compact, since the Dorians, obtaining the superiority only by slow degrees, were doubtless glad to purchase the accession of each town on moderate conditions; and this was perhaps especially the case in Messenia.(52) The native inhabitants of the towns, thus reduced to a state of dependence, were called ?e???????.(53) The difference of races was strictly preserved; and was not (as elsewhere) obliterated by an union in the same city and political community. The Perici were always considered as Achaeans, that people having in early times composed the larger ma.s.s of the people thus subdued. So, for example, the inhabitants of the maritime town of Asopus were called by the t.i.tle of ??a??? ?? pa?a??pa??ss???.(54) At a later date, when the power of Sparta had been long broken, and her freedom annihilated by the tyrant Nabis, t.i.tus Quinctius detached the hamlets (once called p??e??, then ??a?, _vici_) from all connexion with Sparta, and placed them under the protection of the Achaean league.(55) Augustus confirmed the independence of twenty-four Laconian towns under the name of Eleutherolacones; these, like the former, being entirely released from the power of Sparta, were governed by their own laws,(56) and formed a small distinct confederation.

Hence it is evident that these Perici had previously maintained a certain degree of independence, and composed separate communities. Of these twenty-four towns eighteen are mentioned-viz., Gerenia, Alagonia, Thalamae, Leuctra, tylus, Caenepolis, Pyrrhichus, Las, Teuthrone, Gythium, Asopus, Acriae, Bae, Zarax, Epidaurus, Limera, Prasiae, Geronthrae, and Marius;(57) a small part only of the coast near Cardamyle remained at that time under the power of Sparta.(58) The towns, however, belonging to the Perici did not lie merely on the coast, but also more inland; for example, Thuria and aethaea, which were in what had formerly been Messenia.(59) This aethaea is reckoned among the hundred cities of Laconia,(60) which Androtion had enumerated at full length in his Atthis, and perhaps also Stepha.n.u.s of Byzantium, on the authority of Androtion;(61) the epitome of whose work which we now possess only mentions aethaea, Amyclae, Croceae, Epidaurus, Limera, Dyrrachium, Tenos, Aulon, and Anthana. Now since two of these towns are known from other authorities to have belonged to Perici, we may perhaps infer the same of the whole hundred. The round number of a hundred cannot however have been fixed before the time when the whole of Messenia, as far as the river Neda (on which Aulon was situated), as well as Cynuria (to which Anthana, or Athene, belonged), came finally under the dominion of Sparta, that is to say, after Olymp. 58. 548 B.C.(62) It must therefore have been subsequent to this epoch that Sparta fixed the exact number of the towns inhabited by her Perici, and somewhat arbitrarily set them at a hundred; as Cleisthenes at Athens, though by what means is indeed unknown, contrived likewise to raise the number of demi in Attica to a hundred.

We have already(63) taken notice of another division of Laconia besides that into towns, and shown that the Perici of this country had formerly dwelt in five districts, of which the chief towns were Amyclae, Las, Epidaurus Limera (or else Gytheium), aegys, and Pharis; as also Messenia, in addition to the territory round the city inhabited by Dorians, contained four provinces-viz., Pylos, Rhium, Mesola, and Hyamia. For what length of time these districts were retained, and what relation they bore to the division into a hundred towns or hamlets, cannot now be determined.

2. It will next be necessary to ascertain what were the political rights and condition of the Perici. The main circ.u.mstances are without doubt correctly given by Ephorus. "They were," he says, "tributary to Sparta, and had not equal rights of citizens.h.i.+p." If these words are taken in their literal sense, it is plain that the Perici had not a share in the great legislative a.s.sembly of the citizens. And in truth the pa.s.sages adduced by modern writers to show that they had a vote in this a.s.sembly are not by any means satisfactory.(64) Perhaps the following considerations are sufficient to convince us of the impossibility of such general a.s.semblies. Had the Spartan const.i.tution permitted the whole people to hold large a.s.semblies with the right of deciding on all public questions, it would have been in principle completely democratic, and would have had a perpetual tendency to become more so, in the necessary course of events. But, in addition to this objection, let us only picture to ourselves the absurdity of the Perici, in the neighbourhood of Sparta, all flocking together between the brook Babyca and the bridge Cnacion!

Where again were those, who took several days to arrive at Sparta from Cyphanta, Pylos, or Taenarus, to find houseroom and food? How could any of them be ready to leave their homes and trades at such a summons? It was esteemed a difficult matter even to collect an armed force of Perici at a short notice. A _city-community_ was doubtless everywhere requisite for a popular a.s.sembly; and hence in the Athenian, and every similar democracy, each citizen was in some way settled in the town, and had the right of there possessing an house (???t?s?? ????a?), which a Pericus most a.s.suredly had not.(65)

3. Now, if it is acknowledged that the distant situation and state of the Perici presented almost insuperable objections to their possessing a share in the general government, their political inferiority to the Spartans will not appear very oppressive. They were admitted equally with the Spartans to the honourable occupation of war, and indeed sometimes served as heavy-armed soldiers, or as troops of the line.(66) There were at Plataea 5000 Dorian hoplitae, and the same number of Perici; at Sphacteria 292 prisoners were taken, of whom only 120 were Spartans.(67) How, if the Perici had been an oppressed people, could Sparta have ventured to collect so large a number into her armies; and for what reason should the Perici have taken part in the heroic devotion of that small band, if they had not the victory and honour of Sparta as much at heart as their own? "Sparta," said the Spartan king Demaratus, to Xerxes,(68) "contains 8000 Spartans, all of equal bravery; the other Lacedaemonians, in many surrounding cities, are indeed inferior to them, but yet not deficient in courage." Nor do we hear of any insurrection of Perici (if we except the revolt of two Messenian towns in Olymp. 78. 468 B.C.) until the downfall of the const.i.tution.(69) Again, would it be possible, on the a.s.sumption of an oppressive subjection, to explain how the Asinaeans and Nauplians, when deprived of their independence by Argos, fled to Laconia, that they might occupy the maritime towns of Mothone and Asine, manifestly as Perici? Nor is it consistent with a general contempt of the Perici that ?a??? ?a?a???-"gentlemen"-are mentioned in their number.(70) All trade and commerce, of indispensable need to Laconia, were in the hands of the maritime towns. Merchants from Libya and Egypt brought their cargoes to the Perici of Cythera,(71) who, among other branches of trade, followed the lucrative employment of the purple fishery.(72) All manual labour in Sparta, not performed by slaves, was in the hands of this cla.s.s, since no Spartan, before the introduction of the Achaean const.i.tution, was allowed to follow any trade.(73) The low estimation in which trade was held was founded on the ancient Grecian customs and opinions, in departing from which the Corinthians were nearly singular among the Doric states, the productiveness of trade having taught them to set a higher value upon it.(74) And yet in their colony of Epid.a.m.nus public slaves were the only manual labourers;(75) Diophantus wished to introduce the converse of this system at Athens, and to make all the manual labourers slaves. The Spartans, moreover, appear to have admitted those alone of the Perici who were engaged in agriculture to serve among the heavy-armed, while artisans were admitted only to the light-armed infantry.(76) This had been once the case at Athens, where the Thetes (to which cla.s.s the artificers belonged) served only in that inferior rank. According to this, then, the 5000 Perici, who at the battle of Plataea were allotted as light-armed to the same number of heavy-armed soldiers, were in part perhaps artificers. The industrious pursuit of trade did not, however, suffer so much as might be supposed, from the low estimation in which it was held; for not only were many raw commodities obtained in a high degree of perfection in Laconia, but many Lacedaemonian manufactures were also used and sought after in the rest of Greece. The Laconian _cothon_, a drinking vessel used in camps and marches,(77) the bowl,(78) the goblet,(79) tables, seats, elbow chairs,(80) doors,(81) and cars,(82) the Laconian steel,(83) keys,(84) swords, helmets, axes, and other iron fabrics,(85) the shoes of Amyclae,(86) the Laconian mantles,(87) and woollen garments dyed with native purple, which adorned alike the warriors setting out to battle and the b.l.o.o.d.y corpses of the slain; all these bespeak an active pursuit of trade, and at the same time a peculiar sense of propriety and comfort, which brought several of these goods and implements into general use. Many men were probably employed in the iron mines and forges;(88) stone quarries of Taenarus had also been worked from early times;(89) and that their industry was not confined to the mere drudgery of manufactures is shown by the schools of Lacedaemonian embossers and bra.s.s-founders (probably a branch of that in Crete), to which Chartas, Syadras, Dontas, Dorycleidas and Medon, Theocles, Gitiadas, and Cratinus belonged,(90) all of whom were probably Perici, although Pausanias, neglecting the distinction, calls them Spartans. Upon the whole we may venture to affirm that the Doric dominion did not discourage or stifle the intellectual growth of her dependent subjects, but allowed it full room for a vigorous development. Myson, by many reckoned one of the seven sages, was, according to some, and perhaps the most credible accounts, a husbandman of the Laconian town of Etia, and resided at a place called Chen in the same country.(91) Even the highest honour among the Greeks, the victory at the Olympic games, was not denied to the Lacedaemonians; an inhabitant of Acriae was found in the list of the conquerors at Olympia:(92) from which circ.u.mstance it is evident that the Perici of Sparta were in all other parts of Greece considered as free citizens. They must also without doubt have possessed civil rights, but only in those communities to which they immediately belonged, and which would never have been called _cities_ (p??e??) unless they had to a certain point been independent bodies.

Isocrates,(93) indeed, states that they possessed less freedom and power than the demi of Attica; but no general comparison can be drawn between the d??? of Attica and p??e?? of Laconia. Perhaps they had the power of electing their own munic.i.p.al magistrates, though we find that a Spartan was sent as governor to the island of Cythera.(94) The same was the case in war. We find the command at sea intrusted to one of the cla.s.s of Perici,(95) doubtless because the Spartans did not hold the naval service in much estimation, and because the inhabitants of the maritime towns were more practised in naval affairs than the Dorians of the interior.

Concerning the tribute of the towns belonging to the Perici no accurate account has been preserved.

4. Though for the most part the early inhabitants were driven into the country by the Doric conquerors, there still remained some families which inhabited the city conjointly with the Spartans, and were held in equal consideration with them; as at Athens, for example, many families of the original inhabitants appear to have had the rank of Eupatridae. Of this the Talthybiadae are an instance. The office of herald was at Sparta (as in the fabulous times) hereditary, and not, as in other parts of Greece, obtained by compet.i.tion.(96) The privilege of performing all foreign emba.s.sies,(97) and a share in the sacred missions,(98) were a.s.signed to the pretended descendants of the Mycenean herald Talthybius, who also enjoyed especial honours amongst the Achaeans at aegium;(99) and there is doubtless reason to suppose that this family belonged to the Achaean race, without entering into the question of the correctness of their pedigree. The dignity attached to their office was very great, especially if, as was the case in the heroic ages, it was the custom for the heralds to address the princes as "beloved sons." As to property and effects, they ranked with the first Spartans,(100) if, as it appears, Sperthias and Bulis, who offered themselves to the Persian king as an atonement for the murder of his amba.s.sadors,(101) were of the family of the Talthybiadae.

Indeed almost all the other trades and occupations, besides that of herald, were hereditary at Sparta, as, for example, those of cooking, baking, mixing wine, flute-playing, &c.(102) The trade of cooks had its particular heroes, viz., Daeton, Matton, and Ceraon, whose statue stood in the Hyacinthian street.(103) It is easy to see how this hereditary transmission of employments favoured the maintenance of ancient customs.

In fact, Sparta would not have so long remained contented with her black broth, either if her cooks had not learnt the art of dressing it from their youth upwards, and continued to exercise their craft after the manner of their fathers, or if this office could have been a.s.signed at will to those who were able by their art to gratify the palate. It is not probable that any of these families of artisans were of Doric origin, and they doubtless belonged to the cla.s.s of Perici; nor is it to be supposed that, like the Talthybiadae, they possessed the Spartan rights of citizens.h.i.+p.(104)

Chapter III.

-- 1. Helots of Sparta. Their political condition. -- 2. Their service in war. -- 3. Treatment of the helots. -- 4. The crypteia. -- 5. Various degrees of helotism. -- 6. Number of the helots. -- 7.

The phylae of Pitana, Limnae, Mesoa, and Cynosura.

1. The condition of the Perici and that of the Helots must be carefully distinguished from each other; the latter state may be termed "villenage,"

or "bondage," to which that of the Perici had not the slightest resemblance.(105) The common account of the origin of this cla.s.s is, that the inhabitants of the maritime town Helos were reduced by Sparta to this state of degradation, after an insurrection against the Dorians already established in power.(106) This explanation, however, rests merely on an etymology, and that by no means a probable one; since such a Gentile name as ????? (which seems to be the more ancient form) cannot by any method of formation have been derived from ????. The word ????? is probably a derivative from ???; in a pa.s.sive sense, and consequently means _the prisoners_.(107) Perhaps it signifies those who were taken after having resisted to the uttermost, whereas the Perici had surrendered upon conditions; at least Theopompus(108) calls them Achaeans as well as the others. It appears, however, more probable that they were an aboriginal race, which was subdued at a very early period, and which immediately pa.s.sed over as slaves to the Doric conquerors.(109)

In speaking of the condition of the Helots, we will consider their political rights and their personal treatment under separate heads, though in fact the two subjects are very nearly connected. The first were doubtless exactly defined by law and custom, though the expressions made use of by ancient authors are frequently vague and ambiguous. "They were,"

says Ephorus,(110) "in a certain point of view public slaves. Their possessor could neither liberate them, nor sell them beyond the borders."

From this it is evident that they were considered as belonging properly to the state, which to a certain degree permitted them to be possessed, and apportioned them out to individuals, reserving to itself the power of enfranchising them. But to sell them out of the country was not in the power even of the state; and, to the best of our knowledge, such an event never occurred. It is, upon the whole, most probable that individuals had no power to sell them at all; since they were, for the most part, attached to the land, which was inalienable. On these lands they had certain fixed dwellings of their own, and particular services and payments were prescribed to them.(111) They paid as rent a fixed measure of corn; not, however, like the Perici, to the state, but to their masters. As this quant.i.ty had been definitively settled at a very early period (to raise the amount being forbidden under heavy imprecations),(112) the Helots were the persons who profited by a good, and lost by a bad harvest; which must have been to them an encouragement to industry and good husbandry; a motive which would have been wanting, if the profit and loss had merely affected the landlords. And thus (as is proved by the accounts respecting the Spartan agriculture),(113) a careful management of the cultivation of the soil was kept up. By means of the rich produce of the land, and in part by plunder obtained in war,(114) they collected a considerable property,(115) to the attainment of which almost every access was closed to the Spartans. Now the annual rent paid for each lot was eighty-two medimni of barley, and a proportionate quant.i.ty of oil and wine.(116) It may therefore be asked how much remained to the Helots themselves, after paying this amount of corn from each lot. Tyrtaeus appears to give some information, where he describes the Messenian bondmen(117) "as groaning like a.s.ses under heavy burdens, and compelled by force to pay to their masters a half of the entire produce of the land."(118)

According to this account, the families of the Helots (of which many resided on one lot) would have retained only eighty-two medimni on an average, and the whole amount would have been one hundred and sixty-four.

But this cannot be the inst.i.tution of which Plutarch speaks; and Tyrtaeus doubtless describes some oppression much aggravated by particular circ.u.mstances. For, a.s.suming that the property of the Spartans amounted to two-thirds of the whole Laconian territory, which may be rated at three thousand eight hundred and forty square miles English, and three-fourths being deducted for hill, wood, pasture-land, vineyards, and plantations, we have two thousand eight hundred and eighty square miles for the nine thousand lots of the Spartans; each of which accordingly amounted to 72/225 of a square mile, or one hundred and ninety-two plethra; a s.p.a.ce amply sufficient to have produced four hundred medimni,(119) which, after the deduction of the eighty-two medimni, would have supplied twenty-one men with double the common daily allowance, viz., one chnix of bread. It is at least manifest that each lot would have been quite sufficient to maintain six or seven families of Helots. It must not, however, be supposed that the rent was precisely the same for all the lots of the Spartan territory. The different quality of the land made such a strict equalization impossible; not to mention that it would have entirely destroyed all interest in the possession. We even know that many Spartans were possessed of herds and flocks, from which they provided young animals for the public meals.(120) The proprietors, besides their share of the harvest, received from their lands, at particular periods, the fruits of the season.(121)

There could not, on the whole, have been much intercourse and connexion between the Spartans, as possessors of the land, and the bondsmen upon their estates. For how little interest would the Spartan, who seldom left the town, and then only for a few days,(122) have felt for Helots, who dwelt perhaps at Mothone! Nevertheless, the cultivation of the land was not the only duty of the Helots; they also attended upon their masters at the public meal,(123) who, according to the Lacedaemonian principle of a community of goods, mutually lent them to one another.(124) A large number of them was also doubtless employed by the state in public works.

2. In the field the Helots never served as Hoplitae, except in extraordinary cases; and then it was the general practice afterwards to give them their liberty.(125) On other occasions they attended the regular army as light-armed troops; and that their numbers were very considerable may be seen from the battle of Plataea, in which 5000 Spartans were attended by 35,000 Helots.(126) Although they did not share the honour of the heavy-armed soldiers, they were in return exposed to a less degree of danger. For while the former in close rank received the onset of the enemy with spear and s.h.i.+eld, the Helots, armed only with the sling and light javelin, were in a moment either before or behind the ranks, as Tyrtaeus accurately describes the relative duties of the light-armed soldier (?????), and the Hoplite. Sparta, in her better time, is never recorded to have unnecessarily sacrificed the lives of her Helots. A certain number of them was allotted to each Spartan;(127) at the battle of Plataea this number was seven. Those who were a.s.signed to a single master were probably called ?p?tta?e?.(128) Of these, however, one in particular was the _servant_ (?e??p??) of his master, as in the story of the blind Spartan, who was conducted by his Helot into the thickest of the battle of Thermopylae, and, while the latter fled, fell with the other heroes.(129) Te??p??, or servant, is the appropriate, and indeed honourable, appellation which the Dorians, particularly in Crete, gave to the armed slaves;(130) these in Sparta were probably called ????t??e?, in allusion to their duty of drawing (????e??) the wounded from the ranks.(131) It appears that the Helots were in the field placed more immediately under the command of the king than the rest of the army.(132) In the fleet, they composed the large ma.s.s of the sailors,(133) in which service at Athens the inferior citizens and slaves were employed; when serving in this manner they were, it appears, called by the name of desp?s???a?ta?.

These accounts are sufficient to give a tolerably correct notion of the relation of the Helots to the Doric citizens of Sparta. Although it does not fall within the scope of the present work to enter upon a moral or political examination of the condition of Helotism, I may be allowed to subjoin a few observations. The Grecian states then either contained a cla.s.s of bondsmen, which can be traced in nearly all the Doric states, or they had slaves, who had been brought either by plunder or commerce from barbarous countries; or a cla.s.s of slaves was altogether wanting. The last was the case among the Phoceans, Locrians, and other Greeks.(134) But these nations, through the scantiness of their resources, never attained to such power as Sparta and Athens. Slavery was the basis of the prosperity of all commercial states, and was intimately connected with foreign trade; but (besides being a continued violation of justice) it was upon the whole of little advantage to the public, especially in time of war; and, according to the doctrine of the ancient politicians, it was both fraught with danger, and prejudicial to morality and good order. It must also be remembered, that nearly all the ties of family were broken among the slaves of Athens, with which the inst.i.tution of bondage did not at all interfere;(135) and that in the latter the condition of the bondmen was rather determined by general custom; in the former, by the arbitrary will of individuals. Sparta had, indeed, some foreign slaves, but their number was very inconsiderable. Thus Alcman, the slave of Agesidas,(136) was the son of a slave from Sardis,(137) who had perhaps been brought by Cretan traders to the coast of Laconia.

3. It is a matter of much greater difficulty to form a clear notion of the treatment of the Helots, and of their manner of life; for the rhetorical spirit with which later historians have embellished their philanthropic views, joined to our own ignorance, has been productive of much confusion and misconception. Myron of Priene, in his romance on the Messenian war, drew a very dark picture of Sparta, and endeavoured at the end to rouse the feelings of his readers by a description of the fate which the conquered underwent. "The Helots," says he,(138) "perform for the Spartans every ignominious service. They are compelled to wear a cap of dog's skin and a covering of sheep's skin, and they are severely beaten every year without having committed any fault, in order that they may never forget that they are slaves. In addition to this, those amongst them who, either by their stature or their beauty, raise themselves above the condition of a slave, are condemned to death; and the masters who do not destroy the most manly of them are liable to punishment." The partiality and ignorance of this writer is evident from his very first statement. The Helots wore the leathern cap with a broad band, and the covering of sheep's skin, simply because it was the original dress of the natives; which moreover the Arcadians had retained from ancient usage;(139) Laertes the father of Ulysses, when he a.s.sumed the character of a peasant, is also represented as wearing a cap of goat's skin.(140) The truth is, that the ancients made a distinction between town and country costume. Hence, when the tyrants of Sicyon wished to accustom the unemployed people, whose numbers they dreaded, to a country life, they forced them to wear the ?at?????, which had underneath a lining of fur.(141) The Pisistratidae made use of the very same measure.(142) Thus also Theognis describes the countrymen of Megara (whose admission to the rights of citizens.h.i.+p he deplores) as clothed with dressed skins, and dwelling around the town like frightened deer.(143) The _dipthera_ of the Helots therefore signified nothing more humiliating and degrading than their employment in agricultural labour. Myron is doubtless right in stating that the Helots could not lay aside this dress at pleasure; indeed, a young Spartan could not a.s.sume the dress of an older man. Whilst in Athens the influence of democracy had produced an uniformity of dress, and even (according to Xenophon)(144) of bodily form, in citizens, resident aliens, and slaves; in Sparta the several orders were characterised by external differences. Now since Myron thus manifestly misinterpreted this circ.u.mstance, it is very probable that his other objections are founded in error; nor can misrepresentations of this political state, which was unknown to the later Greeks, and particularly to the cla.s.s of writers, have been uncommon. Plutarch,(145) for example, relates that the Helots were compelled to intoxicate themselves, and perform indecent dances, as a warning to the Spartan youth; but common sense is opposed to so absurd a method of education. Is it possible that the Spartans should have so degraded the men whom they appointed as tutors over their young children? Female Helots also discharged the office of nurse in the royal palaces,(146) and doubtless obtained all the affection with which the attendants of early youth were honoured in ancient times.

It is, however, certain that the Doric laws did not bind servants to strict temperance;(147) and hence examples of drunkenness among them might have served as a means of recommending sobriety. It was also an established regulation, that the national songs and dances of Sparta were forbidden to the Helots,(148) who, on the other hand, had some extravagant and lascivious dances peculiar to themselves, which may have given rise to the above report.(149) We must, moreover, bear in mind, that most of the strangers who visited Sparta, and gave an account of its inst.i.tutions, seized upon particular cases which they had imperfectly observed, and, without knowing their real nature, described them in the light suggested by their own false prepossessions.

4. But are we not labouring in vain to soften the bad impression of Myron's account, since the fearful word _crypteia_ is of itself sufficient to show the unhappy fate of the Helots, and the cruelty of their masters?

By this word is generally understood, a chase of the Helots, annually undertaken at a fixed time by the youth of Sparta, who either a.s.sa.s.sinated them by night, or ma.s.sacred them formally in open day, in order to lessen their numbers, and weaken their power.(150) Isocrates speaks of this inst.i.tution in a very confused manner, and from mere report.(151) Aristotle however, as well as Heraclides of Pontus,(152) attribute it to Lycurgus, and represent it as a war which the Ephors themselves, on entering upon their yearly office, proclaimed against the Helots. Thus it was a regularly legalised ma.s.sacre, and the more barbarous, as its periodical arrival could be foreseen by the unhappy victims. And yet were not these Helots, who in many districts lived entirely alone, united by despair for the sake of common protection, and did they not every year kindle a most b.l.o.o.d.y and determined war throughout the whole of Laconia?