Chapter I: Condition of the Poor

Respecting the condition of the poor, in ancient nations, very little is commonly known, the great historians, the tragic poets, and the other classic writers who enjoy what may be termed popularity, not having bestowed their attention on the subject; and to mine, for this species of knowledge, amid the speculations of philosophers, or the dusky rubbish of scholiasts and lexicographers, being a task for which few have patience. Even those writers who might have been expected to enter fully into this matter, supply but slight and unsatisfactory information, either because they attached little importance to the question, or because it did not enter into their design to examine in all their details the poor-laws of Athens, or the numerous sources of private and public charity which circumscribed the operation of those laws. To the best of my ability I shall endeavour to supply the deficiency.

In the earlier ages of the commonwealth there existed no class of citizens so necessitous as to require the aid of charity.[275] The democracy was not disgraced by the beggary of one of its members; for, though many, compared with their neighbours, might be poor, none were reduced to sordid indigence, or so lacked credit as to be unable to command the means of engaging in some profitable branch of industry. Afterwards, however, through the calamitous events of war, and that deterioration seemingly inherent in all forms of government, the number of the indigent exceeded that of the wealthy,[276] (as in every modern country it does,) and distress and destitution occupying entirely the thoughts of the sufferers, corroded to the core that spirit of patriotism which had distinguished their ancestors. But the institutions of Athens, having been truly designed to promote the happiness and provide for the wants of the people, the attention of the legislature was immediately directed to the evil.

-----

Footnote 275:

Before the establishment, however, of the Athenian commonwealth, when
Greece had not yet emerged from the period of barbarism, piratical
expeditions were, by many of the smaller states, undertaken for the
sake of providing for the poor. Thucyd. i. 5.

Footnote 276:

Τότε μὲν οὐδεὶς ἦν τῶν πολιτῶν ἐνδεὴς τῶν ἀναγκαίων οὐδὲ προσαιτῶν
τοὺς ἐντυγχάνοντας τὴν πόλιν κατῄσχυνε, νῦν δὲ πλείους εἰσὶν οἱ
σπανίζοντες τῶν ἐχόντων. Isocrat. Areop. § 38.

-----

As this was the first developement of the spirit of charity, it naturally appeared feeble at the outset, and only acquired strength and volume by degrees. A beginning was made in the case of those who had been disabled in war,[277] and of the children left behind by citizens who fell in defence of their country.

-----

Footnote 277:

Καὶ νόμους αὐτὸς ἑτέρους ἔγραψεν, ᾧν ἐστι καὶ ὁ τοὺς πηρωθέντας ἐν
πολέμῳ δημοσίᾳ τρέφεσθαι κελεύων. Plut. Solon. § 31. See the other
authorities collected by Meursius. Them. Att. i. 10. p. 27. Cf. Petit,
Legg. Att. viii. 3. p. 559. Aristotle, in a passage of his Politics,
(ii. 5. 4,) has been supposed to attribute the honour of this idea to
Hippodamos, who, he says, proposed public rewards for useful
inventions, and maintenance and education for the children of slain
warriors. But St. Hilaire, who translates him in this sense, seems to
be mistaken. Aristotle says, that Hippodamos proposed such a law, as
if it were new:—“Now such a law,” he says, “existed at Athens, and in
other states.” Cf. Gœttling. ad loc. p. 327, sqq. St. Hil. i. 147.

-----

To the former a pension, in early times of one obolos a-day, was allowed: the latter[278] may be said to have been adopted by the state which maintained and educated them till the age of eighteen, when, having been taught some trade or business, they were considered able to provide for themselves.[279]

-----

Footnote 278:

Poll. viii. 91. Gœttlieb. ad Plat. Menex. p. 62, seq.

Footnote 279:

Aristid. Panath. i. 190. Jebb. Μόνοι δὲ ἁπάντων ἀνθρώπων τρία ταῦτα
ἐνομίσατε· τῶν μὲν ὑπὲρ τῆς πόλεως τελευτησάντων αὐτῶν μὲν ἐπαίνους
ἐπὶ ταῖς ταφαῖς καθ᾽ ἕκαστον ἔτος λέγειν· τούς δέ παῖδας δημοσίᾳ
τρέφειν ἄχρις ἥβης, καὶ τηνικαῦτα ἀποπέμπειν ἐπὶ τοὺς πατρῴους οἴκους
μετὰ τῶν πανοπλιῶν· τοὺς δὲ ἀδυνάτους τῶν πολιτῶν δημοσίᾳ τρέφειν.

-----

With whom this humane institution originated is not agreed. In the case of disabled soldiers the honour has, by some, been attributed to Peisistratos, by others to Solon. Bœckh, though he acknowledges that the latter “certainly gave the example to Peisistratos,” considers it not improbable that, for the benefit of this important lesson, humanity is indebted to the tyrant, who, he observes, “was of a mild disposition; and usurpers are generally glad to seize every opportunity of conferring a benefit, with a view to make themselves popular; nor would the Athenians, with their hatred to tyranny, have attributed this honour to him if he had not deserved it.”[280]

-----

Footnote 280:

Publ. Econ. of Athen. i. 324.

-----

Of this I am not sure. Peisistratos, a consummate politician, having unjustly rendered himself master of the state, was, no doubt, careful to appropriate to himself as many as possible of the honours due to Solon, the mildest of all legislators; and, if he abstained from abrogating such a law, might contrive to pass for its author. Certain, at all events, it is, that a tradition long existed among the ancients which attributed the institution to Solon;[281] and however mild and popular in manners the tyrant may have been, it will still, perhaps, be acknowledged that in those qualities he was excelled by the great legislator.

-----

Footnote 281:

Schol. ined. ad Æschin. cont. Timarch. p. 14. 40. ap. Taylor, ad Lys.
Orat. Att. t. ii. p. 537. Dobs.—Diog. Laert. i. 2. 8.

-----

By what steps the law, originally instituted with reference solely to citizens disabled in war, came afterwards to embrace the aged, the sick, the blind, and infirm of every description, is not known. It did not, however, require them to be absolutely destitute before they could receive relief. Any citizen whose property did not exceed three minæ, or twelve pounds sterling,[282] was entitled to the allowance; to eke out which he might keep a small shop, or apply himself to any other branch of industry within his competence. The laws, in fact, were on this point exceedingly liberal, justly considering it to be the duty of society to make up as far as possible for the injuries of fortune. There was little danger of the state’s humanity being abused. The people themselves examined into every case, which in a community so limited they could easily do, and afterwards it was still in the power of any citizen, who suspected imposition, to bring an action against the offender before the Senate of Five Hundred.

-----

Footnote 282:

Harpocrat, v. ἀδύνατοι. Cf. not. Vales. et Suid. v. t. i. p. 89, b.

-----

The speech of a defendant in a cause of this kind has come down to us. It was written for the unfortunate citizen by Lysias; and I own I can discover in it nothing of that “jesting tone,” which, in the opinion of some writers, proves it to be a mere rhetorical exercise.[283] On the contrary, it breathes of that manly confidence, which it became the citizen, however poor, of a republican state, to feel. We must not conceive of him as a miserable pauper whining to a board of guardians. He understood the intent and meaning of the law, and certain that his case entitled him to the relief it was designed to afford, he spoke before the Senate like a man claiming no more than was equitably due to him; and too well assured of the humanity and justice of his countrymen to be under much apprehension. He kept a small shop, it appears, in the vicinity of the agora, and one of the principal points dwelt on by the prosecutor was, that he there drew together a number of saunterers and newsmongers, such as usually at Athens frequented the shops of barbers, perfumers, &c., in that fashionable part of the town.[284] Another point was, that he sometimes rode on horseback, which, in the opinion of the accusers, a man receiving aid from the state should not have done. But, to this part of the accusation, he replies, that, being so lame as to be compelled to make use of crutches, he was wholly unable to answer the more distant calls of business without hiring a horse, the expense of which only augmented his difficulties.

-----

Footnote 283:

Bœckh. Pub. Econ. of Athens, vol. i. p. 325. It should here, perhaps,
be remarked, that they who failed to be present on the day of
examination, lost their allowance for a whole Prytaneia. Schol. ad
Æschin. cont. Tim. § 21. At times it would appear a man required some
skill and eloquence to plead his own cause; or a friend to speak in
his behalf, perhaps, when the number of applicants was very great. We
may gather thus much from the accusation of Æschines against
Timarchos, who, though a rich man, suffered, we are told, his old
blind uncle to inscribe his name on the list of the destitute. On one
occasion, moreover, when the uncle had omitted to attend on the proper
day, and had addressed a petition to the Senate to be allowed his pay
notwithstanding, Timarchos, who happened to be then in court, refused
to support his application, by which means he lost his allowance for
that Prytaneia. Æschin. cont. Tim. § 21. The Scholiast on this passage
adds, that they who petitioned the Senate appeared in person, bearing
in their hand an olive branch wreathed with wool.

-----

-----

Footnote 284:

Andocid. de Myst. § 9. Plut. Timol. § 14.

-----

From these circumstances we may learn, that the Athenian government was by no means penurious in its appropriation of those funds which the contributions of the wealthier citizens placed at its disposal.

On the amount of the daily allowance writers are not agreed, some pretending it was three oboli, others two, and others an obolos. The truth, probably, is, that, originally, it exceeded not a single obolos, but that, as prices augmented, or, rather, as the coin deteriorated in value, it was found necessary to double the amount.[285] Whether it was ever raised to three oboli seems doubtful; the affirmation of the Scholiast on Æschines[286] may be a mistake; but the mere fact that this was the pay of the dicasts is no reason at all for calling the testimony of the grammarian in question.[287] Be this, however, as it may, in the time of Lysias,[288] one obolos only was bestowed, and Bœckh has attempted, with much ingenuity, to determine the date of the increased allowance. It had not taken place, according to Harpocration, in the time of Aristotle; but Philochoros, the next writer who touches on the subject, observes, that it was nine drachmæ a month, or fifty-four oboli,[289] which, omitting the fractions, is equal to two oboli a day. The year in which Aristotle composed his treatise on the Athenian government is not exactly known; it was probably, however, after his return from Macedon, 334 B.C. Philochoros was Hieroscopos at Athens in the year of Corœbos, 306 B.C. He did not, however, publish his Atthis till about the year 260 B.C., at which time the poor allowance had been raised to two oboli. The date of the increase, therefore, falls somewhere within the preceding seventy years.[290]

-----

Footnote 285:

That this allowance was not very scanty may be inferred from the fact,
that when the people of Trœzen publicly received the wives and parents
of the Athenians on their retreat from the city during the Persian
invasion, they allowed each individual only two oboli a day. Plut.
Themist. § 10.

Footnote 286:

Ap. Taylor ad Lys. Orat. Att. t. ii. p. 537. Dobs.

Footnote 287:

Bœckh’s over-acuteness has, probably, misled him on this point. i.
325.

Footnote 288:

Pro Impot. §§ 4. 8.

Footnote 289:

Philoch. Fragm. p. 44, seq. with the notes of Lenz and Siebelis. Conf.
Harpocrat. v. ἀδύνατ. cum not. Gronov. et Vales. Petit, Legg. Att.
558, seq.

Footnote 290:

Cf. Clinton Fast. Hellen. ii. p. 175. Siebel. ad Philoch. Fragm. p. 3.
Bœckh. Publ. Econ. of of Ath. i. 327, falls into an extraordinary
error respecting the age of Philochoros, “who was a youth,” he says,
“when Eratosthenes was an old man.” This he states on the authority of
Suidas. But, as Siebelis has already remarked, in exposing the
erroneous imputations of Vossius and Corsini, Suidas was himself
mistaken, or his text is corrupt; for Philochoros, to have obtained
the important office of Hieroscopos in 306, B.C., must have been then
at least twenty years old. Now Eratosthenes was born B.C. 275, Clint.
Fast. Hellen. iii. 5, so that it seems he was a youth when Philochoros
was an old man.

-----

With respect to the number of persons blind, old, sick, maimed, or otherwise disabled, who received maintenance from the state, no exact computation can be made. Bœckh,[291] imagining that Meursius had reckoned them at five hundred, after remarking that the assumption is founded on a false reading in Suidas, accepts the number as the least that can be adopted. But Meursius,[292] in the passage referred to, assumes nothing; he does not even allude to the number at all. And, in fact, it will be evident, at the first glance, that no conjecture can hope to approach the truth where circumstances were constantly varying, adding to, or taking from, the number of those who required relief. This was chiefly affected by the general poverty of the state, which augmented rapidly towards its decline, when the number of the aged and infirm, not possessing three minæ, or twelve pounds sterling, per annum, must, no doubt, have been considerable. On the other hand, having no longer to defend its freedom, which was gone for ever, the children of citizens falling in battle were comparatively few, and, accordingly, the gain on this item went to balance the loss on the other.

-----

Footnote 291:

Pub. Econ. of Athens, i. 327.

Footnote 292:

Lect. Att. vi. 5.

-----

The offspring of citizens thus bequeathed to the care of the state were at one time exceedingly numerous, and highly exemplary and honourable was the attention they received.[293] To the females a maintenance, education, and a portion, were given; and the males having also been supported and educated until manhood, received in the public theatre a complete suit of armour, as a memento of their fathers’ valour, to incite them to follow their example. The whole audience being assembled, the herald introduced the orphan youths clothed in panoply of “complete steel,” and then, with a loud voice, proclaimed what Æschines rightly regarded as a most glorious and valour-inspiring proclamation, viz., that the fathers of those youths, like brave and good men, had fallen in their country’s battles, on which account the state had undertaken the charge of their bringing up, and now, on the verge of manhood, having adorned them with an entire suit of armour, dismissed them under happy auspices to watch over their own affairs, granting them, likewise, for the day, the most honourable seats in the theatre.[294]

-----

Footnote 293:

Isocrat. de Pac. § 29. To complete the humanity of the laws, the
parents, also, of such as fell in war were placed under the special
protection of the Archons. Petit, Legg. Att. p. 559.

Footnote 294:

Æschin. cont. Ctesiph. § 48, with the notes of the Scholiast, p. 395.
Conf. Plat. Menex. § 21. p. 61. ed. Gœttlieb. The προεδρία which the
Scholiast to Æschines supposes them to have enjoyed during the day on
which they received the panoply, Lesbonax seems to have regarded as
perpetual. They were honoured, moreover, with particular marks of
public favour in the sacred choruses and in the gymnasia. Protrept. i.
§ 5. Conf. Menag. in D. Laert. t. ii. p. 20. c. d.

-----

Petit[295] supposes this to have taken place on their attaining the age of twenty, before which they could not legally assume the management of their inheritance, or encounter the fatigue and peril of regular warfare; but, others, perhaps, with more probability, fix upon the age of eighteen.

-----

Footnote 295:

Legg. Att. p. 560.

-----

The above legal provision, however, does not appear to have sufficed, and there sometimes occurred cases of distress which it could not reach. Many, too, would submit to great privation rather than have recourse to public aid. Such persons, where numbers were in similar circumstances, usually united and formed, what may very properly be denominated a Benefit Club (ἔρανος[296]), to which they contributed when in their power, that, should misfortune overtake them, they might still be sure of support. This description, however, of Eranos constituted only one branch of the numerous Clubs, Companies, Associations, Trades-unions, &c., which, like the Clubs of the Civil Wars[297] and Associations of a still later date, occasionally assumed a political character and impeded the movements of the machinery of the state.[298] These societies were instituted with various objects. In the first place they were established to defray by subscription the expense of certain sacrifices, offered up in behalf of their members who were called Eranistæ and Thiasotæ. But under cover of this pretext combinations of an evil tendency were sometimes formed,—among the aristocracy, for example, who established the tyranny of the Four Hundred,—and these obnoxious clubs, varying in character with the period, espoused the cause of freedom in Roman times, and were of course watched jealously by the conquerors.[299]

-----

Footnote 296:

Sch. Aristoph. Acharn. 1171. Poll. iii. 129. vi. 7. viii. 144. 157.

Footnote 297:

See Locke, Memoirs of Anthony, Earl of Shaftesbury, Works, folio. vol.
iii.

Footnote 298:

Van Holst, de Eranis. c. ii. p. 35.

Footnote 299:

Casaub. ad Theoph. Charact. p. 284.

-----

With respect to those associations which bore a legal character, they were by the laws of Solon permitted to enact whatever rules and regulations they judged proper for their own government and advantage, provided no public ordinance prevented.[300] Sometimes the citizens of a whole Demos, or borough, formed themselves into a club, or a ship’s crew,[301] or an eating society, or persons having a right to the same burial-ground, or the partners in a mercantile expedition. Thus we find three several motives,—religion, gain, and pleasure,—impelling men into unions of this kind, all recognised by law. The curious and intricate internal structure of Athenian society lent itself readily to the formation of such clubs; the whole population having originally been divided into four tribes, each tribe into three phratriæ,[302] each phratria into thirty clans (γενη), each clan containing thirty houses, among whom the honours of the priesthood were distributed by lot.[303]

-----

Footnote 300:

Gaius. lib. iv. ad leg. xii. Tabul. in f. 4. d. Petit, Legg. Att. v.
7. 427. Potter, i. 200.

Footnote 301:

The words ἤ ναῦται omitted by some, converted into something else by
others, are judiciously retained by Van Holst, de Eranis, c. ii. p 36,
since they are in exact conformity with what Aristotle remarks. Ethic.
Nicom. viii. 11. p. 470, seq. Victor.

Footnote 302:

Vandale having cited a passage from Pollux, iii. 52, stating that the
temple in which the phratriæ assembled was denominated φράτριον,
adds:—“quas φρατρίας Athenis duodecim numero existentes, ibi tum
ulterius describit atque inter alia notat, illorum ad illos introitu
virum (procul dubio ab ipsorum parentibus) distributum cæteris
φράτορσιν fuisse. Huic οἰνηστήρια sicut et Themistius, Orat. xiii.
notat, illos ante introitum, convocata concione probatos et publico
annulo signatos fuisse.” Dissert. 9. p. 729.

Footnote 303:

Harpocrat. v. v. γεννῆται et τριττὺς. Herm. Polit. Antiq. § 98, seq.
Schöm. Comit. p. 360.

-----

In these Attic associations we discover the germs of those companies of merchants, guilds, &c.,[304] so familiar to the modern world; or rather similar wants in both cases gave rise to similar institutions. But with the trading companies we have, in this place, nothing to do; and if incidentally the other associations are noticed, it is simply for the purpose of more fully developing a system of which the Benefit Clubs formed a part. These evidently rose out of the Eranæ established originally for purposes of pleasure: that is, a number of individuals desirous of enjoying a more splendid entertainment than they could generally afford at home,[305] together with the society of their intimate friends, entered into a subscription[306] for the purpose of getting up a public dinner during the celebration of the great national festivals. In some cases the associations thus formed, pro tempore, did not outlast the occasion, while in others the taste for social pleasures, or the accidental meeting of congenial tempers, led to the establishment of a permanent club, the members of which grew naturally among a warm-hearted people to take an interest in each other’s welfare. The expenses of the sacrifices during these festivals were in part defrayed from the revenues of the sacred lands, but these not sufficing, it was generally necessary to raise a common fund by subscription.[307]

-----

Footnote 304:

A corresponding distribution of the humbler classes was effected at
Rome by Numa: Ἠν δὲ ἡ διανομὴ κατὰ τὰς τέχνας, αὐλητῶν, χρυσοχόων,
τεκτόνων, βαφέων, σκυτοτόμων, σκυτοδεψῶν, χαλκέων, κεραμέων. Τὰς δὲ
λοιπὰς τέχνας εἰς ταὐτὸ συναγαγῶν, ἓν αὐτῶν ἐκ πασῶν ἀπέδειξε σύστημα
Plut. Num. § 17. Cf. Schol. Nub. Aristoph. 179.

Footnote 305:

The Thebans of Bœotia, intoxicated by the military glory they gained
at the battle of Leuctra, shortly afterwards gave themselves up almost
entirely to the pleasures of the table, which they appear chiefly to
have enjoyed at their clubs. To support these establishments,
therefore, numerous individuals were found who, notwithstanding that
they had children, bestowed the greater portion of their fortunes upon
them, thus manifesting, perhaps, the greatest enthusiasm ever
exhibited in the cause of good-eating. Athen. x. 11.

Footnote 306:

Sch. Æsch. Tim. p. 380. a.

Footnote 307:

Cf. Bergmann and Coray ad Isocrat. Areop. § 11. Van Holst, de Eranis.
c. ii. p. 37.

-----

Of all these clubs, whether temporary or permanent, whose object was the providing of funds for sacrifice, or to enjoy the pleasures of society, the generic name was _Erani_, though such as partook of a religious character received besides the appellation of _Thiasi_.[308] Their members were called Eranistæ and Thiasotæ. It was common among the Greeks to indulge in feasting immediately at the close of harvest, both on account of the plenty which then prevailed, and, because the great business of the year being finished, they had more leisure to devote to enjoyment.[309] That these associations tended to generate and promote friendship and affection among their members was well understood; wherefore in the ancient tyrannies they were rigidly prohibited, together with all common tables, educational establishments, and whatever else, to adopt the expression of Aristotle, promotes reflection and mutual confidence.[310] It was supposed to be their interest to keep men as far as possible in ignorance and distrust of each other. Hence all religions with a tendency to beget mutual love were proscribed (as among the Romans Christianity) as of an antimonarchical character. Thus Mæcenas, as ardent a patron of tyranny as of literature, urged Augustus to persecute and proscribe all attempts at introducing new creeds, as favourable to innovation or, at least, to change; to sworn brotherhoods, associations, clubs, things in their nature hostile to monarchy.[311]

-----

Footnote 308:

Etym. Mag. 449. 53. Lucian introduces Pan calling himself the θιασώτης
of Bacchos. Deor. Dial. xxii. Another name bestowed on these societies
was Ὀργεῶνες which appellation however, according to Pollux, was
synonymous with φράτορες· ἐκαλοῦντο δ᾽ οὗτοι καὶ ὀμογάλακτες καὶ
ὀργεῶνες. iii. 52. Cf. viii. 107. Vandale, Dissert. ix. p. 734.

Footnote 309:

Aristot. Ethic. viii. 11.

Footnote 310:

Arist. Polit. v. 11.

Footnote 311:

Dion Cass. l. ii. p. 490. e.

-----

The conjecture is probable, that the conversion of the Erani into charitable institutions was matter of accident. At first it seems clear, as I have observed already, that their object was sacrifice, feasting, and pleasure. But it sometimes happened that, of the funds subscribed, some portion would, after their objects had been fulfilled, remain; and if, when this was the case, any member of the club happened to fall into distress, it was perfectly natural to think of applying this surplus to his benefit.[312] From this the step was easy to subscribing expressly for the purpose of relieving indigent members, which, at length, was the practice, though the gradations by which they arrived at it have not been accurately marked.[313] Arrian has left a curious account of a Celtic eranos established by a Hunting Club in honour of Artemis,[314] to whom solemn sacrifice was annually offered up. A fund was created by the members of the club in the following manner: every one who caught a hare paid into the treasury two oboli: the capturer or destroyer of a fox a drachma, the fox being a mischievous animal and fatal to the hare; they therefore considered his destruction in the light of a triumph over an enemy. The sportsman who took a roebuck (δορκὰς), which among them was the noblest game, and the largest animal hunted, paid four drachmæ. On the birth-day of the goddess the treasury was opened, and a victim, whether a sheep, a she-goat, or a calf, according to their means, was purchased. Sacrifice was then offered, after which both men and dogs regaled themselves with a banquet. Bitches were on this day crowned with flowers, to show that the feast was celebrated in their behalf.[315]

-----

Footnote 312:

Salmas. de Usur. c. iii. p. 50.

Footnote 313:

Cf. Plin. Epist. x. 93, seq. Van Holst, de Eran. p. 43.

Footnote 314:

The Thiasi, &c., among the Greeks, appear all to have had their patron
divinities, of whom the most common were Heracles, Phœbos-Apollo, and
Dionysos. This circumstance has been noticed by Vandale: Plerumque,
(sicut ὀργεώνων collegia) cœtus ac fraternitates Baccho, Herculi,
Apollini, aliisve Diis consecratæ: quibus Diis ab harum fratriarum
membris, ut peculiaribus patronis sacrificabatur: atque hinc convivia
inter φράτορας celebrabantur: ad quæ communes illi sumptus sive
impensas pariter conferebant. Dissert. ix. p. 730.

Footnote 315:

Arrian de Venat. c. xxxiii. p. 383. Schneid.

-----

In all these clubs the chest was the soul of everything; for this being removed the whole society fell to pieces.[316] Accordingly, to become a member it was necessary to subscribe a certain amount to the fund, and all payments were made monthly.[317] As these clubs, moreover, were legal, the person who neglected such payments could be prosecuted at law, as for any other debt; and what shows the importance of these institutions at Athens, the ordinances referring to them formed a separate branch of jurisprudence,[318] to enter into which, however, does not belong to my present inquiry. The president or chairman of the club was likewise treasurer, whether chosen by lot or elected by the members of the club, whose expenses and behaviour, while assembled, he appears to have regulated.[319] It has been seen that the meetings of these societies took place during religious festivals; but whenever they were called together, whether by business or piety, it was customary, as in all similar cases among ourselves, for the members to dine together. They do not appear, however, to have possessed club-houses; but, like our literary men of the last century, to have dined at taverns or alternately at each others’ dwellings.[320] On these occasions it was customary to restrain their expenses within moderate limits, the object being rather the enjoyment of each others’ society than the indulgence of a passion for luxury.[321]

-----

Footnote 316:

Van Holst, c. ii. p. 46.

Footnote 317:

Harpocrat. p. 85. Bekk. It would, however, appear that payment might
be avoided by pleading poverty: speaking of the hypocrite, πρὸς τοὺς
δανειζομένους, says Theophrastus, καὶ ἐρανίζοντας, ὡς οὐ πωλείφήσεν.
Charact. c. i. p. 5.

Footnote 318:

Poll. viii. 37, 101, 144.

Footnote 319:

Harpocrat. v. πληρωτὴς; where doubtless we must read with Salmasius
(Miscell. Defens. C. ii. p. 27) ᾑρημένοις, for ἐωνημένοις, though
Bekker retains the old lection, p. 155. Cf. Van Holst, p. 56.—Athenæus
describes a festival called Phagesiposia in which every one who passed
by was compelled to repeat a rhapsody in honour of Bacchos. (vii. 1.)
There was also at Alexandria a curious festival called Lagenephoria,
in which every person brought his own portion, and his own bottle, and
reclined on a couch of grass or reeds. (2.)

Footnote 320:

Athen. vi. 35. Van Holst, de Eranis, pp. 30, 59.

Footnote 321:

Arist. Ethic. viii. 11.

-----

On those occasions, when a member received the club at his house, he himself, it has been conjectured, took the chair,[322] not, however, necessarily and by rule; for it has been seen that the president was sometimes chosen by lot, sometimes by vote. But this supposition is, probably, ill-founded; for, as the same individual was at once eranarch and treasurer, it appears exceedingly improbable that he should be changed every time the club dined together. It seems to me more likely,—and we are left to conjecture,—that an annual chairman was chosen to transact the general business of the society, while another individual might be selected to fill the office of chairman for any particular evening. Towards the close of the republic, when the worship of Serapis had been introduced, women would seem to have been received as members of Erani established in honour of that foreign divinity.[323]

-----

Footnote 322:

Van Holst, de Eranis, p. 60.

Footnote 323:

Bœckh, Corp. Inscrip. pt. ii. p. 162.

-----

But as these clubs were only accidentally connected with charity and the condition of the poor, I proceed to consider another species of Eranæ, conceived almost in the spirit of Christianity. Van Holst,[324] whose researches on the subject of the Hellenic clubs, though pedantic and confused, are not without value, denies that any permanent charitable associations existed among the Greeks, though among the Romans, he conceives, they did. At the same time, he confesses what it were difficult to deny, that the friendly subscription called Eranos derived its name and being from the clubs above-described. He contends that no club existed with permanent funds for the relief of distressed friends, and that the relief actually afforded was the spontaneous effort of beneficence and humanity. On this point he is at issue with Casaubon,[325] whom he appears, in some respects, to misunderstand. Salmasius, he conceives, comes nearer the mark where he says, that when any person was overwhelmed with debt or poverty, he found a ready refuge in his friends, who subscribed what they could, both to satisfy his creditors and provide for his future subsistence. It was in the discharge of debts, however, that men found most aid from their friends;[326] though such subscriptions were set on foot on many other occasions, to redeem a man from captivity, for example, or to portion a friendless girl, as was the practice also at Thebes.[327]

-----

Footnote 324:

De Eranis, c. iii. p. 73, sqq.

Footnote 325:

Ad Theoph. Char. p. 280, sqq.

Footnote 326:

Salmas. de Usur. c. iii. p. 38.

Footnote 327:

Corn. Nep. Vit. Epaminond. § 3.

-----

The mode in which this subscription was collected, and the principle on which the transaction was based, had something characteristic about them. In the first place, the money resembled a loan (which, strictly speaking, it was not), because, if the receiver afterwards became fortunate, he was bound to make repayment,[328] though while in unfavourable circumstances his mind was not oppressed by the consciousness of being in debt, since no one regarded himself as a creditor, or could ask him for an obolos. Salmasius observes very justly, that the greatest proof of generosity is to give without any desire of a return, which the Greeks called eleëmosynè, or eranos of strict charity. The second grade is, where money is lent to be repaid without interest, which our Saviour calls τὰ ἶσα ἀπολαβεῖν.[329] The lowest, where you lend, but on condition of receiving interest.[330]

-----

Footnote 328:

It ought, moreover, to be remarked, that these eranistic loans were
sometimes returned even to the children of those who advanced them.
Isæus, De Hagn. Hered. § 10.

Footnote 329:

Cf. Cicer. pro Rosc. Amer. § 7.

Footnote 330:

Salmas. de Usur. p. 672.

-----

For the repayment of money collected by eranistic subscription, no exact time, it has been observed, was fixed. It appears to have depended entirely on the recipient’s sense of honour or feelings of gratitude. But Petit,[331] whose researches on this part of his subject were not sufficiently exact, confounds the monthly subscription paid by members of a trading company or ordinary club, with the money which a man, aided by his friends, might be supposed to owe them, and says, that such-a-one was required to pay it back by monthly instalments, or all at once within a month. The former would be the case were we to understand Harpocration to speak of this kind of eranos at all; the latter, if we accept his interpretation. But Van Holst[332] is right in remarking that Petit here apprehends the sense of the grammarian “minus recte”; that is, he mistakes it altogether. However, that the money was at some time to be repaid appears from a variety of passages. Theophrastus, for example, in his Chapter on Grumbling, observes, that the querulous man, to whom a collection made for him by his friends is brought, will reply to the person who bids him to be of good cheer,—“Wherefore? when I must return as much to each of them, and be grateful, moreover, for the favour?”[333]

-----

Footnote 331:

Legg. Att. v. 7. 429.

Footnote 332:

De Eranis, t. iii. p. 75.

Footnote 333:

Theoph. Charact. xvii. Casaub. p. 308. Cf. Ter. Phorm. iv. 4. 22.
Plaut. Asinar. i. 3. 92, sqq. Van Holst, p. 77.

-----

Among the other peculiarities in the construction of Athenian society which tended to better the condition of the poor, were the entertainments given by rich citizens to their tribes, on certain festivals or days of public rejoicing.[334] And this was a matter by no means left to the caprice of individuals, for if some one came not forward voluntarily to undergo the expense, the members of the tribe proceeded to cast lots,[335] and the citizen to whose chance it fell could not escape the performance of this duty, unless he pleaded, as his excuse, some cause deemed satisfactory by the public. Of course, the character of the entertainment depended on the wealth or munificence of the Hestiator.[336] Necessary, it was not, that he should regale his fellow-tribesmen sumptuously, as frugality was one of the characteristics of the nation; but, at the same time, it is quite evident that on many occasions[337] the Feast of the Tribe was a magnificent banquet.[338]

-----

Footnote 334:

Athen. v. 2.

Footnote 335:

Harpocrat. in v. ἑστιάτωρ. Dem. cont. Mid. § 44. adv. Lept. § 7. adv.
Bœot. § 3. Cf. Herald. Anim. in Salm. Obs. ad Jus. Athen. et Rom. l.
ii. c. i. § 12.

Footnote 336:

Ἑστιάτωρ, ὁ εἰς εὐφροσυνην καὶ εὐωχίαν καλων· δαιτυμόνες δὲ οἱ
ἀριστηταὶ, οἱ εὐωχούμενοι. Suid. v. t. i. p. 1052. d.

Footnote 337:

There occurred, however, but few holydays on which artisans abstained
altogether from labour. Lucian. Parasit. § 15.

Footnote 338:

Poll. vi. 27. iii. 67. Bœckh, therefore, appears to be wrong in
supposing that delicacies were never used on these occasions. Pub.
Econ. of Athens, vol. ii. p. 222. Cf. Wolf. Proleg. ad Lept. in Orat.
Att. t. vi. p. 372.

-----

Of the state of the poor at Sparta,[339] our information is exceedingly scanty. We only know that, when they were unable to contribute their share to the maintenance of the public tables, they lost the privilege of being present, and had to provide for themselves at home in the best manner they were able.[340] It would thus appear that their Phiditia differred very little, except in being more general, from the Erani of the Athenians. As Laconia abounded with game, it may be conjectured that the more indigent citizens frequently relied greatly for support on the chase,[341] to which may be added the charity of their wealthier neighbours, in whatever way bestowed. In Crete, the citizens being placed more upon an equality, there was little room for extreme poverty.[342] The population, moreover, by artificial restraints, was kept within due bounds; consequently, most persons lived plentifully, and possessed wherewith to exercise the most generous hospitality. But even here they multiplied in later times more rapidly than the means of subsistence, so that numbers of Cretans were fain to serve as mercenary archers in the intestine wars of Greece. The same remark will apply to the Arcadians, and several other people whose poorer members earned a subsistence by their hereditary valour.[343]

-----

Footnote 339:

Vid. Plat. De Leg. t. vii. p. 181. 201. seq. t. viii. p. 101. seq. De
Rep. t. vi. p. 233. The institution of the Phiditia commenced in
Italy. Arist. Pol. vii. 9. The members of these messes were balloted
for. Plut. Lycurg. § 12. Even the relations of Agesilaos, by the
mother’s side, were poor. Agesil. § 4.

Footnote 340:

Aristot. Polit. ii. 9.

Footnote 341:

Cf. Athen. iv. 9.

Footnote 342:

Aristot. Polit. ii. 9.

Footnote 343:

Id. Polit. ii. 10.

-----

At Athens, when persons in easy circumstances made a feast, as on all occasions of sacrificing they did, the custom was to send some small presents, as parts of the victim, to their friends, more especially when poor.[344] But most joyful for the indigent was the period of the Athenian jubilee, the Panathenaia,[345] on which occasion the state received presents of oxen from all the colonies founded by Athenians, so that the whole city overflowed with meat and soup, of which every person might take his share. Sometimes, however, if not generally, the meat fell into the hands of those who least needed it, while the poor got nothing but a little soup with a scanty slice of bread.[346] In times of great scarcity corn was distributed to the indigent in the Odeion, where, on ordinary occasions, it was sold.[347] A similar distribution took place at the Peiræeus in the arsenal, where loaves were given out at an obolos each. On extraordinary occasions, as when a famine raged in the country, the state applied for corn to its foreign allies, and, on receiving any, distributed it equally among the citizens. This was the case when Psammitichos made the Athenians a present of a vast quantity of wheat, of which every citizen received five medimni.[348] A peculiar kind of windfall is commemorated by Athenæus, who relates, that when Ion, the dramatic poet of Chios, won the prize of tragedy, he was so overjoyed at his success, that he presented every Athenian with a jar of the best Chian. No doubt, foreign tragedians were not every day winning prizes, or, when they won, so rich and generous as Ion; but advantages of various kinds were enjoyed by the Athenian people not anywhere else known.[349]

-----

Footnote 344:

Theoph. Char. c. 17. Casaub. p. 259.

Footnote 345:

Meursius (in Panath. c. xv. p. 22) is very unsatisfactory.

Footnote 346:

Schol. Aristoph. Nub. 385.

Footnote 347:

Demosth. cont. Phorm. § 13. Cf. Meurs. Rhod. p. 127.

Footnote 348:

Schol. Aristoph. Vesp. 718.

Footnote 349:

Athen. i. 5.

-----

Sometimes, when generals obtained any remarkable quantity of plunder, instead of laying it up to meet the serious exigencies of the state they lavished it in feasting the people. Thus, Chares is said to have expended more than sixty talents, or near 15,000_l._ sterling in entertaining his fellow-citizens,[350] when the public tables were laid out in the agora; and Conon,[351] having obtained a great naval victory over the Lacedæmonians at Cnidos, and surrounded the Peiræeus with fortifications, offered a real hecatomb in sacrifice, and feasted the whole body of people. Of these thoughtless donations the poor, of course, obtained their share. Cimon acted more judiciously and more nobly towards the unfortunate among his countrymen. Looking upon wealth only as a means of recommending himself and obtaining friends, he set no guard upon his lands or gardens, from which every Athenian who chose might freely take what he needed. His house, likewise, in the city was open to all; a plain table being constantly laid for a number of men, so that whosoever was at a loss for a dinner might dine there. He willingly obliged those who came daily to demand some favour of him; and is said always to have gone abroad accompanied by two or three domestics bearing money, who were instructed to give to any citizen who approached him with a request. He contributed also to the interment of many; and, often, if he observed a poor Athenian meanly clad, ordered one of his attendants to change raiment with him. By these means, as may be supposed, he acquired marvellous popularity, and stood first among his rivals in public estimation.[352]

-----

Footnote 350:

Athen. xii. 43. Money itself was sometimes distributed. Dem. adv.
Leochar. § 12.

Footnote 351:

Athen. i. 5.

Footnote 352:

Theopomp. ap. Athen. xii. 44.

-----

But persons thus subsisting on the bounty of the opulent soon lost of necessity the dignity of sentiment which should belong to the citizens of a free state. Many, therefore, when reduced by misfortune, to a choice of evils, preferred the bread obtained by honest labour,[353] however mean or ill paid, to so humiliating a dependance on charity; and, unable to obtain more favourable conditions, actually worked for their food.[354] To labour for hire they scarcely accounted a hardship. A large class of citizens, including women,[355] appear by this means to have gained their livelihood, some as cooks, others as reapers, mowers, or any other description of labour which happened to offer itself.[356] Poverty sometimes drove the unprincipled poor to keep houses of ill fame. Others became itinerant flower-sellers, and cried “roses so many bunches the obolos;” or hawked radishes, lupines, or olive-dregs about the streets.[357] And, after their death, the daughters of poor men sometimes joined the Hetairæ, not having been able to earn their livelihood by needlework, weaving, and spinning.[358]

-----

Footnote 353:

Alluding to the necessity of labour to the poor, Plato says:—If an
artisan happen to fall sick, he demands a rapid cure of his physician
by emetics or aperients, or cautery, or surgical operation. But if he
be recommended a long and careful attention to regimen, to tie up his
head and such things, he speedily replies, that he has no leisure to
play the valetudinarian, and that it is of no advantage to him to
preserve his life by such continual nursings, while his affairs are
going to ruin. Thus dismissing his physician, and returning to his
ordinary diet, if he recover he pursues his calling, if not he is
delivered from all his troubles at once. De Repub. t. vi. l. iii. p.
145.

Footnote 354:

Ἐπισίτιοι. Plat. Rep. iv. § 1. t. i. p. 263. Stallb. Athen. vi. 50.
Cf. Bœckh. Pub. Econ. i. 156, on the lowness of wages. On the Pelatæ
see the note of Rünkh. ad Tim. Lex. in v. Meris, p. 208. Bekk.—Plat.
Euthyph. t.i. p. 356. Poll. iii. 82. Dionysius of Halicarnassus
entertained a strange notion of the θῆτες and πελάται of the
Athenians, whose condition he supposes to have been inferior to that
of the Roman clients. He pretends, indeed, that clientship arose in
Greece, and was only established by imitation at Rome: ἔθος Ἑλληνικὸν
καὶ Ἀρχαῖον, he says, ὧ Θετταλοί τε μέχρι πολλοῦ χρώμενοι διετέλεσαν
καὶ Ἀθηναῖοι καταρχὰς. ἐκεῖνοι μὲν γὰρ ἐπιτάττοντες οὐ προσήκοντα
ἐλευθέροις, καὶ ὁπότε μὴ πράξειάν τι τῶν κελευρομένων, πληγὰς
ἐντείνοντες, καὶ τἄλλα ὥσπερ ἀργυρωνήτοις χρώμενοι. ἐκάλουν δὲ
Ἀθηναῖοι μὲν Θῆτας τοὺς Πελάτας, ἐπὶ τῆς λατρείας Θετταλοὶ δὲ,
Πενέστας, ὀνειδίζοντες αὐτοῖς εὐθὺς ἐν τῇ κλήσει τὴν τύχην. Antiq.
Rom. ii. 9. Reiske very justly remarks on this passage, that he does
not see with what propriety the Thetes of Attica are classed with the
Thessalian Penestæ, in comparing them with the Roman Clients. For it
is most certain (as H. Stephens shows in his Schediasm. v. 15, seq.),
that the condition of the Penestæ bore little resemblance to that of
the Roman Clients. And as to the Attic Thetes and Pelatæ they were
completely free, though inferior in rank to the artisans (οἱ βαναυσοὶ,
Steph. Thes. v. θῆς); nor did they serve as slaves serve their masters
(ut δοῦλοι δεσπόταις); but, as appears from the Scholiast on Odyss. δ.
644, as poor and debt-oppressed persons hire their services to the
rich or to their creditors, who were denominated χρήστας, not
προστάτας, or δεσπότας. The condition of the Thessalian Penestæ was
different: for they were nearly slaves, μεταξὺ δούλων καὶ ἐλευθέρων,
as the ancients called them. (Pollux, iii. 83.) Those among them who
served in families were named θετταλοικέται. (Reiske, ad Dion. Hal. t.
i. p. 255.)

Footnote 355:

Demosth. adv. Eubul.

Footnote 356:

Demosth. de Coron. § 16. Cf. Plat. Rep. ii. 12. Stallb.

Footnote 357:

Diphilos ap. Athen. ii. 45.

Footnote 358:

Luc. Dial. Meret. vi. § 1. Plut. Arat. § 54.

-----

In many respects the poor of southern climates have the advantage of those of the north.[359] The atmosphere itself forms their clothing, and during a great part of the year it is immaterial to them where they sleep. But at Athens, however temperate the climate, a shelter from the cold in winter is desirable, and here, therefore, as in every other part of Greece, the practice was to erect houses where, as in the Caravanserais of the East, any man, native or stranger, might enter and obtain shelter for the night. These buildings were called Leschæ, erected without doors, to intimate that all were welcome; and in them, accordingly, beggars and wanderers of every description congregated round great fires in winter and bad weather, both to sleep and converse.[360] Even the citizens, particularly at Sparta, met in the Leschæ, to enjoy the delights of gossiping; whence any idle assemblage was called a Leschè.[361] In a fragment of the lost oration of Antiphon against Nicoles, mention is made of these edifices, which served as a refuge for the destitute. They were erected by the state; and, to cast over them an air of sanctity, dedicated to Apollo, who thence obtained the surname of Leschenorios.[362] Nowhere were these humane institutions so numerous as at Athens, where, according to Proclus,[363] there existed no fewer than three hundred and sixty, in which the indigent, who had no home, might congregate together and keep themselves warm at the nation’s expense.

-----

Footnote 359:

Beggars sometimes sat down on the ground to eat what was given them at
the doors of the charitable. Thus in Antiphanes one says,—“What dost
thou say? Bring me hither to the door something to eat; and then, like
the beggars, I will despatch it, seated on the ground, and who will
see?” Athen. ii. 87.

Footnote 360:

Etym. Mag. 18. 1, seq. 561. 11. Odyss. σ. 328, et Eustath. ad loc. Cf.
Hesiod. Opp. et Dies, 493, et 500, seq. with Bœckh. Inscript. i. p.
133. Horat. Serm. i. vii. 3.

Footnote 361:

Pausan. iii. 14. 2. 15. 8. x. 25. 1. Siebel. ad loc.

Footnote 362:

Harpocrat. in v. λέσχαι. Suid. in v. ii. 27, seq. Etymol. Mag. p. 18,
v. ἀδολεσχία.

Footnote 363:

Ap. Meurs. Athen. Att. iii. vi. 158.

-----

In addition to these the public baths served as an asylum to such of the poor as had no home, or were unable to provide themselves with fuel in their own dwellings. Here they would seem to have pressed so eagerly about the furnaces as to be sometimes scorched and blistered;[364] and the crowd of poor wretches in this necessitous condition would appear to have been occasionally so great as to deteriorate the state of the atmosphere by their breath,[365] on which account they were exposed to be driven forth by the bath-keepers.

-----

Footnote 364:

Πλὴν φώδων ἐκ βαλανέιου. Aristoph. Plut. 535: φλυκταινῶν· ἐκ βαλανείου
δὲ διὰ τὸ τοὺς πένητας ἀποροῦντας ἐνδυμάτων διὰ τὸ ψύχος ἐν βαλανείοις
καθεύδειν, καὶ ἐκ θέρμης ἢ ἀέρος αὐτοὺς ἐξιόντας παραχρῆμα
προσβάλλοντος φλυκτόινας ποιεῖν· Απολλαδωρος τὰ ἐκ τοῦ πυρὸς
ἐρυθήματα, ἢ ἐκ ψύχους, ἢ τοὺς τύλους, καὶ τὰ ἐπικαύματα τὰ ἐκ τοῦ
πυρὸς, ὡς τῶν πενήτων διὰ τὸ αὐτουργεῖν τοῦτο πασχόντων. Schol. in
loc.

Footnote 365:

Schol. Aristoph. Plut. 956.

-----

In Homeric times, beggars and all other sorts of vagrants took refuge from the nightly cold in smiths’ forges,[366] just as in former ages they did in the glass-houses of London. These fathers of sacrilege, as Plato[367] calls them, when properly equipped for the road, presented a tolerably picturesque aspect with their close Mysian bonnet,[368] ragged cloak, and bottle strapped to the thigh,[369] and supporting themselves as they walked on a huge staff. To this worshipful society Dionysios, once tyrant of Syracuse, belonged in his old age.[370]

-----

Footnote 366:

Οὐδ᾽ ἐθέλεις εὕδειν, χαλκήϊον ἐς δόμον ἐλθὼν,
Ἠὲ που ἐς λέσχην.
Odyss. σ. 327, seq.

Χαλκήϊος δὲ δόμος τὸ τῶν χαλκέων ἐργαστήριον, ἔνθα εἰσιόντες ἀκωλύτως
οἱ πτωχοὶ, ἐκοιμῶντο παρὰ τῷ πυρί. Eustath. in loc. p. 672. 28. Basil.

Πὰρ δ᾽ ἴθι χάλκειον θῶκον καὶ ἔπ’ ἀλέα λέσχην
Ὥρῃ χειμερίῃ, ὁπότε κρύος ἀνέρας ἔργων
Ἰσχάνει, κ. τ. λ.
Hesiod. Opp. et Dies, 493, sqq.

Footnote 367:

De Repub. t. vi. p. 393. Among the nations of antiquity I remember
none who looked upon poverty in so venerable a light as the
inhabitants of Gadeira, now Cadiz. For these worthy people erected, we
are told, an altar in its honour, probably supposing it to be near
akin to death, whose praises they also sang in pæans. Philost. Vit.
Apoll. Tyan. v. 4, p. 190. Phot. Biblioth. Cod. 241, p. 328, b.

Footnote 368:

Aristoph. Acharn. 440.

Footnote 369:

Lucian. Dial. Mort. i. § 2. Vict. Var. Lect. i. 24. Schol. Aristoph.
Acharn. 410.

Footnote 370:

Ἀυτὸς δὲ Διονύσιος τέλος μητραγυρτῶν καὶ τύμπανο φορούμενος, οἰκτρῶς
τὸν βίον κατέστρεψεν. Clearch. ap. Athen xii. 58. Every just and
upright man would probably rejoice to behold all tyrants in the same
condition. Cf. Tim. Lex. Platon. v. ἀγείρουσαν, with the note of
Rühnken. p. 16, who has collected several passages illustrating the
life and manners of the begging priests of Cybelè.

-----

There was at Athens, in later times, a class of men who resembled the bone-grubbers and dung-hill scrapers of London and Paris. These were the grain-pickers of the Deigma and Agora, who hovering about where the farmers and corn-chandlers meted their grain, and collecting what dropped from the sacks,[371] or was spilled in measuring, thus earned a miserable subsistence. Persons of this description might eke out their livelihood by appropriating to themselves the coarse brown bread which pious and charitable persons placed in the propylæa of temples for their use.[372] Here Diogenes, the Cynic, who, carrying about provisions in his wallet, was independent of these offerings, sometimes dined; and, for the sake of uttering a _bon mot_, threw out the loaves that might have been useful to others; observing, that nothing coarse[373] should be allowed to enter the temples of the gods.

-----

Footnote 371:

Eustath. ap. Casaub. Char. p. 197. In the Acts of the Apostles the
Epicureans and Stoics contemptuously denominate St. Paul a
σπερμολόγος, xvii. 18.

Footnote 372:

The Alexandrians placed loaves in the temple of Chronos for the poor.
Athen. iii. 74. Among the Ethiopians there was an institution called
the Table of the Sun, which we may suppose to have been designed to
supply the poor with food. In a meadow close to the suburbs of the
capital a plentiful entertainment was laid out during the night, which
as soon as day broke every person had permission to partake of. This
feast the natives affected to regard as a gift bestowed upon them
incessantly by the earth. Herod. iii. 18. Cf. Pausan. i. 33. 4. vi.
26. 2.

Footnote 373:

Diog. Laert. vi. 2. § 64. Ῥυπαρὸς, alone, signifies as the French
translator has rendered it, “mal-propres,” t. i. p. 358. But ῥυπαρὸς
ἁρτὸς, means _du pain bis_, as Menage long ago observed, ad loc. ii.
146. b. c. Diogenes, as the reader will perceive, meant to pun upon
the word ῥυπαρὸς.

-----

Religion has everywhere been favourable to the poor. On the festival of the new moon, when the great and opulent offered up costly sacrifices to the gods, as to Hecatè, for example, on cross-roads,[374] their more indigent brethren seized the occasion when their hearts were thus softened, to ask them for something. Thus Homer, according to the legend attributed to Herodotus, went in Samos to the houses of the wealthy, chanting his Eiresione, for which he received a consideration.[375]

-----

Footnote 374:

These suppers were eaten by the poor, together with the eggs and other
small offerings used in purifying places. Luc. Dial. Mort. i. § 1.
Catapl. § 7. Lomeier, de Lustrat. c. xxi. p. 258, seq. Cakes called
Amphiphontes were offered to Artemis within a circle of burning
torches. These offerings were made in the temples, and on cross-roads,
at the full moon, when the sun, rising ere the moon sets, there is
constant light throughout the twenty-four hours, which was signified
by the ring of torches; the whole round of the day being filled with
light. In the island of Hecatè, on the coast of Delos, the Delians
used to dedicate offerings to Iris, of cakes called Basynias, made
with wheaten flour and honey, the offering called cokkora, a dried
fig, and three walnuts. Athen. xiv. 53. The Athenians, when
sacrificing to the Seasons, offered up boiled meat, and not roasted,
as on other occasions; praying to be protected from the heats which
dry up and destroy everything, and to be blessed with moderate warmth,
to ripen and bring everything to perfection. Id. xiv. 72.

Footnote 375:

Herod. Vit. Hom. § 33. t. ii. p. 362. Schweigh.—Meurs. Gr. Fer. p.
213, seq.

-----

There was a class of beggars who went about the country begging for the crow,[376] holding, apparently, a tame bird of that species like a falcon on their wrist, and chanting the following ditty:—

SONG OF THE CROW.

Good people, a handful of barley bestow
On the bearers about of the sable crow—
Apollo’s daughter she—
But if the barley heap wax low,
Still kindly let your bounty flow,
And of the yellow grains that grow
On the wheaten stalk be free.
Or a well-kneaded loaf or an obolos give,
Or what you will, for the crow must live.
If the gods have been bountiful to you to-day,
Oh say not to her for whom we sing,
Say not, we implore you, nay,
To the bird of the cloudy wing.
A grain of salt will please her well,
And whoso this day that bestows,
May next day give (for who can tell?)
A comb from which the honey flows.
But come, come, what need we say more?
Open the door, boy, open the door,
For Plutos has heard our prayers.
And see, through the porch a damsel, as sweet
As the winds that play round the flowery feet
Of Ida, comes the crow to meet,
And a basket of figs she bears.
Oh may this maiden happy be,
And from care and sorrow free;
Let her all good fortune find,
And a husband rich and kind.
And when her parents have grown old,
Let her in her father’s arms
Place a boy as fair as she,
With the ringlets all of gold,
And, upon her mother’s knee,
A maiden decked with all her charms.
But I from house to house must go,
And wherever my eyes by my feet are borne,
To the muse at night and morn
For those who do or don’t bestow,
The mellow words of song shall flow.
Come then, good folks, your plenty share,
O give, my prince! and maiden fair,
Be bountiful to-day.
Sooth, custom bids ye all to throw
Whole handfulls to the begging crow;
At least give something; say not, no,
And we will go our way.

-----

Footnote 376:

Athen. viii. 59.

-----

In Rhodes another kind of begging, which usually took place in the month of March, was denominated Chelidonizein;[377] or, to sing the

SONG OF THE SWALLOW.

The swallow is come, and with her brings
A year with plenty overflowing;
Freely its rich gifts bestowing,
The loveliest of lovely springs.
She is come, she is come,
To her sunny home.
And white is her breast as a beam of light,
But her back and her wings are as black as night;
Then bring forth your store,
Bring it out to the door,
A mass of figs, or a stoop of wine,
Cheese, or meal, or what you will,
Whate’er it be we’ll not take it ill:
Even an egg will not come amiss,
For the swallow’s not nice
When she wishes to dine.
Come, what shall we have? Say, what shall it be?
For we will not go,
Though time doth flee,
Till thou answerest Yes, or answerest No.
But if thou art churlish we’ll break down the gate,
And thy pretty wife we’ll bear away;
She is small, and of no great weight.
Open, open, then we say.
Not old men but boys are we,
And the swallow says,—“Open to me.”

-----

Footnote 377:

Athen. viii. 60. In the warmer atmosphere of the volcanic islands of
Lipari, the swallow has, by modern naturalists, been found stationary.
Spallanzani, Travels in the Two Sicilies, i. Introd. p. 32.

-----

It was seldom, however, that the indigent in Greece could enjoy the luxuries here enumerated. Antiphanes[378] describes a poor man’s meal as consisting of a cake (μαζα),[379] bristling with bran for the sake of economy, with an onion, and, for a relish, a dish of sow-thistle, or of mushrooms, or some such wretched produce of the soil, a diet producing neither fever nor phlegm. However, where meat is to be got, no man, he thought, would be contented with thyme, though he might pretend to rival the Pythagoreans.[380] Mention, nevertheless, is made of two philosophers who voluntarily subsisted all their lives on water and figs, and grew very healthy and robust upon this fare, though their perspiration had so ill an odour, that every one avoided them when they entered the public baths. Pythagoras forbade his abstemious followers the use of the mallows, upon which the humbler classes in Greece were accustomed to feed, together with the roots of the day-lily, the nymphea nelumbo, the nettle,[381] and various other wild plants. The Kapparis,[382] plentiful in Athens, was very commonly eaten by the indigent, and hence “to gather kapparis” was at length considered synonymous with “to be in want.”[383] Alexis furnishes us with a curious account of a poor Athenian family’s provisions.[384]

Mean my husband is, and poor,
And my blooming days are o’er.
Children have we two,—a boy,
Papa’s pet and mamma’s joy;
And a girl, so tight and small,
With her nurse;—that’s five in all:
Yet, alas! alas! have we
Belly timber but for three!
Two must, therefore, often make
Scanty meal on barley-cake;
And sometimes, when nought appears
On the board, we sup on tears.
My good man, once so strong and hale,
On this fare grows very pale;
For our best and daintiest cheer,
Through the bright half of the year,
Is but acorns, onions, peas,[385]
Ochros, lupines,[386] radishes,
Vetches, wild pears nine or ten,[387]
With a locust[388] now and then.
As to figs, the Phrygian treat,
Fit for Jove’s own guests to eat,
They, when happier moments shine,—
They, the Attic figs, are mine.

-----

Footnote 378:

Athen. ii. 56.

Footnote 379:

Cf. Foës. Œconom. Hippoc. v. μαζα. This bread, we find, was sometimes
leavened. Schol. Aristoph. Pac. 557. Athen. xiv. 83.

Footnote 380:

Mention is made of some poor philosophers of this sect, who used to
chew the plant called ἄλιμα to allay hunger, and might be seen
wandering about torrent beds, collecting this and similar herbs in
their wallets. Athen. iv. 52. According to the comic poets, the
Pythagorean sect allowed its disciples a loaf of pure bread and a cup
of water per diem, which constituted the ordinary prison allowance.
Id. ibid.

Footnote 381:

Aristoph. Equit. 420.

Footnote 382:

Schol. Aristoph. Acharn. 445.

Footnote 383:

Athen. xiii. 22.

Footnote 384:

Id. ii. 44.

Footnote 385:

Lucian. Amor. § 33.

Footnote 386:

Athen. x. 17.

Footnote 387:

Aristophanes, Vesp. 1260, enumerates apples and pomegranates among the
ordinary articles of food used by the poor.

Footnote 388:

Cf. Schol. Aristoph. Ach. 1081. Athen. iv. 7. 10. Phot. Bib. 453. a.
32. Herod. iv. 172.

-----