Chapter VI: Letter 81: , 16 (Vol. XXIX, 212), where he refers to Plato and

Aristotle; _Mun. Pul._, IV, 98, note (Vol. XVII, 220), where he
absolutely condemns it; On the Old Road, Vol. XXXIV, 425, on usury,
ends with a citation from the Laws 913C; ἃ μὴ κατέθου, μὴ ἀνέλη.

Footnote 199:

E.g. J. Scott Nearing’s recent book on _Income_.

Footnote 200:

_Laws_ 679B, 831C; _Rep._ 545B ff., 548B. Cf. Ruskin on the evils
arising from money, Vol. XX, 295 f.

Footnote 201:

_Laws_ 743D, 742A-B, 801B.

Footnote 202:

742A.

Footnote 203:

Ruskin, _Mun. Pul._, I, 25. He thinks it is a relic of a barbarism
that will disappear as civilization develops.

Footnote 204:

_Laws_ 742A-B.

Footnote 205:

_Sophist._ 223C-D; cf. _Pol._, 289E for the triple division of
commercials, κάπηλοι, ἔμποροι, and ἀργυραμοίβοι; cf. _Phaedo_, 69A for
a figurative use of ἀλλαγή.

Footnote 206:

_Rep._ 370A-E, home; 370E-371E, foreign; cf. Adam Smith’s idea above.

Footnote 207:

370E-371A; Cornford (_op. cit._, p. 66) wrongly asserts that Plato did
not know the law that exports must balance imports. Cf. _op. cit._, p.
37.

Footnote 208:

Boeckh, _Die Staataushaltung der Athener_, I, pp. 382 ff.; Zimmern,
_op. cit._, 1st ed., p. 317. But cf. Brants, _Xenophon Economiste_, p.
18, n. 2 and references, on the protectionist tendency of the
commercial policy of Athens.

Footnote 209:

_Laws_ 847C; Souchon (_op. cit._, p. 102) sees in this a mercantile
trend, but the purposes are entirely different.

Footnote 210:

847B.

Footnote 211:

_Rep._ 371C-D.

Footnote 212:

_Laws_ 918B-C.

Footnote 213:

_Rep._ 369C.

Footnote 214:

On the relation of exchange to production, cf. above, p. 28.

Footnote 215:

Pp. 19 ff.

Footnote 216:

P. 41 and notes.

Footnote 217:

_Laws_ 918B.

Footnote 218:

918D.

Footnote 219:

918E.

Footnote 220:

P. 41 and notes.

Footnote 221:

_Laws_ 918A, 920C. He seems to feel that trade as regularly pursued is
a form of cheatery, in which one gains what the other loses. Cf.
Ruskin, _Unto This Last_, I, 22 (Vol. XVII, 40 f.); IV, 66 ff. (Vol.
XVII, 90 ff.); _Mun. Pul._, IV 95 ff. (Vol. XVII, 217 ff.), where he
refers to _Rep._ 426E, on the difficulty of curing this disease of
traders; cf. Vol. XVII, _Intro._, p. xlvi, citing Xen. _Mem._, iii. 7.
5, 6, on those who are “always thinking how they may buy cheapest and
sell dearest.”

Footnote 222:

_Rep._ 371C.

Footnote 223:

416A-417A.

Footnote 224:

Cf. 415E, χρηματιστικάς in contrast to στρατιωτικάς.

Footnote 225:

741E, 743D, 919D.

Footnote 226:

920A.

Footnote 227:

919D.

Footnote 228:

915A-B, though it applies especially to freedmen.

Footnote 229:

850B-C, and n. 1, above.

Footnote 230:

919C.

Footnote 231:

849D-E, 850A, 915D; cf. _infra_ on this and the other regulations in
their application to modern economics.

Footnote 232:

916D-E; cf. 917.

Footnote 233:

917B-D.

Footnote 234:

920B-C. Plato’s market regulations would exclude all selfish
competition and all gain, beyond mere return for labor expended, from
exchange, and would base it upon a mutual spirit of reciprocity. Thus
here, as often, he is the model for Aristotle, who usually fails to
recognize his debt. Espinas (_Revue des Etudes Grecques_, XXVII
[1914], 246) is hardly in accord with the modern spirit in declaring
that competition is the social bond, and that Plato misconceives the
nature of this bond.

Footnote 235:

920A-B, 919D.

Footnote 236:

_Laws_ 920C.

Footnote 237:

Zimmern (_op. cit._, p. 280, n. 1) calls it “grandfatherly.”

Footnote 238:

But cf. Robin, _op. cit._, p. 212, n. 1, who argues that many of his
suggestions are based on actual legislation in Athens or elsewhere in
Greece. Cf. also Hermann, _Ges. Abh._ (1849), pp. 141, 153, 159, whom
he cites; J. Schulte, _Quomodo Plato in legibus publica Atheniensium
instituta respexerit_ (1907, dissertation), and the bibliography cited
there. But he deals very little with Plato’s economic and social laws.

Footnote 239:

Plato saw that it might add a time and place value (p. 41, and notes).

Footnote 240:

Cf. above, p. 42, n. 7; also _Fors Clav._, Letters 45, 82; _Crown of
Wild Olive_, II, 75 f. (Vol. XVIII, 450 f.). He argues that there
should be no profit in exchange, beyond merely the payment for the
labor involved in it. He insists that “for every plus in exchange
there is a precisely equal minus.” Cf. _infra_ on Aristotle for a
similar idea, pp. 107 ff.

Footnote 241:

_Op. cit._, p. 278, n. 2; cf. above, pp. 42 f.

Footnote 242:

Cf. p. 43.

Footnote 243:

_Ibid._

Footnote 244:

_Ibid._ Cf. Ruskin’s more socialistic idea that all retailers be made
salaried officers (_Time and Tide_, XXI, 134 [Vol. XVII, 427]).

Footnote 245:

Cf. e.g., Dem. _De corona_ 87; _Cont. Lept._ xx. 31; _Cont. Andr._
xxii. 15; _Cont. Lacrit._ xxxv. 50; Lysias xxii; Hdt. vii. 102; Thuc.
iii. 86, and many other passages. For modern discussions, cf. Droysen,
_Athen und der Westen_ (1882), pp. 41 ff.; Grundy, _Thucydides and the
History of His Age_ (1911), pp. 58-95; Zimmern, _op. cit._, 1st ed.,
pp. 349 ff.; Gernet, “L’Approvisionment d’Athènes en blé,” _Mélanges
d’histoire, ancienne_, 1909; Beloch, _G. G._, I, 406 f.; _Bevölkerung
im Alterthum_ (1898), p. 30, etc.

Footnote 246:

_Rep._ 372C: οὐχ ὑπὲρ τὴν οὐσίαν ποιούμενοι τοὺς παῖδας.

Footnote 247:

_Laws_ 740D; but his specific methods for carrying out his difficult
suggestion, if he had any to offer, were probably impracticable,
judging by his discussion of women and children in the _Republic_.
Ruskin’s suggestions for meeting the problem are colonization,
reclamation of waste lands, and discouragement of marriage (_Unto This
Last_, IV, 80 [Vol. XVII, 108]).

Footnote 248:

_Laws_ 740E; Ar. (_Pol._ 1265_b_6-12) unfairly criticizes him for
limiting the amount of property, and making it indivisible, while
failing to provide against a too high birth-rate.

Footnote 249:

741A.

Footnote 250:

Cf. Ruskin, cited above, p. 27.

Footnote 251:

For the Greek term, cf. _infra_ on Aristotle.

Footnote 252:

Cf., however, Xen. _Mem._ ii. 7. 12-14, discussed _infra_, which may
be a suggestion of a theory of profits.

Footnote 253:

_Laws_ 921A-D, discussed on p. 39, n. 8; cf. also 847B.

Footnote 254:

The passages above cited, n. 1 above, need not imply labor for
capitalists. It does not appear that there was ever a considerable
body of free citizen laborers at Athens, who worked for capitalists,
though the number of free workers, aside from labor on the farms, was
fairly large. Cf. _C.I.A._ for records of such labor on the buildings
of the acropolis; Boeckh, _op. cit._, I, 58: “Der geringere war durch
seine Umstände so gut als der arme Schutzverwandte oder Sklave zur
Handarbeit genöthigt.” On the favorable attitude toward free labor at
Athens, cf. above, p. 29, n. 4. Poehlmann (_op. cit._, _in loc._)
takes the opposite view as to the number of free laborers for
capitalists.

Footnote 255:

_Rep._ 552B-D, a characteristic passage; _Gorg._ 507E; _Laws_ 757B.

Footnote 256:

920C.

Footnote 257:

740B ff., 923; but his purpose is to keep the allotments intact.

Footnote 258:

847B: μισθῶν δὲ αὐτοῖς περὶ καὶ τῶν ἀναιρέσεων τῶν ἔργων, καὶ ἐάν τις
αὐτοὺς ἕτερος ἢ κεῖνοί τινα ἄλλον ἀδικῶσι, μέχρι δραχμῶν πεντήκοντα
ἀστυνόμοι διαδικαζόντων, etc.; perhaps a strained interpretation.

Footnote 259:

On his attitude to industry, cf. pp. 32 ff.

Footnote 260:

Bonar, _op. cit._, p. 29.

Footnote 261:

Bussy, _Histoire et Réfutation du Socialisme_ (1859), p. 119.

Footnote 262:

Oncken, _op. cit._, p. 34.

Footnote 263:

Haney, _op. cit._, p. 16.

Footnote 264:

Zeller, _Phil. Gr._, II, 1 (1889), 907; cf. also above, pp. 32 f.
Historians of economic thought generally state the case extremely;
e.g., Kautz, _op. cit._, p. 59; Blanqui, _op. cit._, p. 45; Souchon
also, to some extent. Poehlmann (_op. cit._, II, 36-108) errs in the
opposite way.

Footnote 265:

Pol. ii. 5. 1264_a_11-17, 36-38; 1264_b_11-13.

Footnote 266:

423D: ὡς δόξειεν ἄντις; also 425D, both cited by Poehlmann.

Footnote 267:

415E-417B, 420A-421C admit of no other interpretation. Cf. 421C, how
he turns to the next related point (τοῦ τούτου ἀδελφόν) the question
of the effect of wealth or poverty on the artisans (τοὺς ἄλλους
δημιουργούς). Cf. also _infra_ for other citations.

Footnote 268:

_Pol._ 1264_a_36-38, repeated by many moderns.

Footnote 269:

_Rep._ 415B-C.

Footnote 270:

Cf. the undiscriminating statement of Souchon, _op. cit._, p. 41: “Et
il n’y a guère eu, au cours de l’histoire de la science politique, de
conception plus aristocratique que le mythe fameux des trois races
d’or, d’argent et d’airain.”

Footnote 271:

_Pol._ 1264_b_15-25, repeated by Grote and others.

Footnote 272:

_Rep._ iv. beg.-421C.

Footnote 273:

I Cor. 12:14 ff.; for other evidence of Plato’s interest in all
classes, cf. 519E ff., and the entire argument against Thrasymachus,