Chapter 18

175.Oncken observes (Geschichte der Nationalökonomie, pp. 34-36) that while Smith drew from the law the idea of freedom of trade and industry, Plato inferred the strictest subordination of these to the will of the state, and that he also based the caste system on the principle. For the alleged caste system, cf. Souchon,op. cit., p. 82, and infra, under distribution. Aristotle’s state implies even a more rigid separation of the capable few. On Plato’s insight into economic principles, cf. Robin,op. cit., pp. 229 ff. He criticizes Guiraud for belittling the value of Plato’s social ideas, and urges that he should be judged, not by the worth of his proposed remedies, but by his scientific insight (p. 252).

176.Rep.395A-B; 374E, 395B; εἰς σμικρότερα κατακερματίσθαι.

177.Apol.21C-22E; cf.Rep.495D-E, though it applies rather to the evil effects of the banausic life. Cf. Bonar,op. cit., p. 16. Ruskin (Stones of Venice, VI, 16 [Vol. X, 196]), says: It is “not the labor that is divided but the men—divided into segments of men.” It stunts their faculties.

178.Rep.552A.

179.396C-373E; cf. Bonar,op. cit., p. 27.

180.579D.

181.Cf. Zimmern,op. cit., p. 389, note;Laws777B: δῆλον ὡς ἐπειδὴ δύσκολόν ἐστι τὸ θρέμμα ἄνθρωπος καὶ πρὸς τὴν ἀναγκαίαν διόρισιν, τὸ δοῦλόν τε ἔργῳ διορίζεσθαι καὶ ἐλεύθερον καὶ δεσπότην οὐδαμῶς εὕχρηστον ἐθέλει εἶναι τε καὶ γίγνεσθαι. On his alleged caste system, cf. above, n. 2, andinfra.

182.Rep. 469C; cf.Pol.309A.

183.Laws806D. For Ruskin on slavery, cf.infraon Aristotle.

184.Laws776D-777E. Espinas (Revue des Etudes Grecques, XXVII [1914], 256) observes that Plato adopts the mean between the two extremes in his attitude to slaves.

185.Cf. Xen.Ath. Pol.i. 10-12 on the easy life of slaves in Athens, and Zimmern,op. cit., pp. 382 f., who points out that this resulted from economic necessity. Cf. 777C-D;cf.Rep.578D-579A on the dangers and troubles arising from extensive slave-holding.

186.Laws 915A ff., another striking evidence of the actual status of freedmen and slaves in Athens.

187.Rep. 371B. The word is νόμισμα, something established by usage, hence “current coin,” not necessarily suggestive of intrinsic worth, as are χρήματα and the metals. Cf. Ar.Clouds248 for a play on the word, θεοὶ ἡμῖν νόμισμ᾽ οὐκ ἔστι. Cf. the simile,Frogs720, andPhaedo69A, for an analogy between it and wisdom.

188.Rep. 371B: ξύμβολον τῆς ἀλλαγῆς.

189.Fors Clav., IV, 11, note (Vol. XXVIII, 134 f.); cf. also Vol. XVII, 50, 194 f.

190.742A-B: νόμισμα δ᾽ ἕνεκα ἀλλαγῆς; 918B: ἐξευπορεῖν καὶ ὁμαλότητα ταῖς οὐσίαις, referring directly to traders.

191.Laws918B.

192.Rep.553E; for Aristotle, cf.infra.

193.Laws743D.

194.849E.

195.742C, 915D-E;Rep.556A-B;Laws850A.

196.921C, an obol per month.

197.Rep.555E.

198.Fors. Clav., notes to Letter 43, 14 (Vol. XXVIII, 121 f.), notes to 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.

199.E.g. J. Scott Nearing’s recent book onIncome.

200.Laws679B, 831C;Rep.545B ff., 548B. Cf. Ruskin on the evils arising from money, Vol. XX, 295 f.

201.Laws743D, 742A-B, 801B.

202.742A.

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

204.Laws742A-B.

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.

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

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.

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.

209.Laws847C; Souchon (op. cit., p. 102) sees in this a mercantile trend, but the purposes are entirely different.

210.847B.

211.Rep.371C-D.

212.Laws918B-C.

213.Rep.369C.

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

215.Pp. 19 ff.

216.P. 41 and notes.

217.Laws918B.

218.918D.

219.918E.

220.P. 41 and notes.

221.Laws918A, 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 toRep.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.”

222.Rep.371C.

223.416A-417A.

224.Cf. 415E, χρηματιστικάς in contrast to στρατιωτικάς.

225.741E, 743D, 919D.

226.920A.

227.919D.

228.915A-B, though it applies especially to freedmen.

229.850B-C, and n. 1, above.

230.919C.

231.849D-E, 850A, 915D; cf.infraon this and the other regulations in their application to modern economics.

232.916D-E; cf. 917.

233.917B-D.

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.

235.920A-B, 919D.

236.Laws920C.

237.Zimmern (op. cit., p. 280, n. 1) calls it “grandfatherly.”

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.

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

240.Cf. above, p.42, n. 7; alsoFors 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.infraon Aristotle for a similar idea, pp. 107 ff.

241.Op. cit., p. 278, n. 2; cf. above, pp.42f.

242.Cf. p. 43.

243.Ibid.

244.Ibid.Cf. Ruskin’s more socialistic idea that all retailers be made salaried officers (Time and Tide, XXI, 134 [Vol. XVII, 427]).

245.Cf. e.g., Dem.De corona87;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.

246.Rep.372C: οὐχ ὑπὲρ τὴν οὐσίαν ποιούμενοι τοὺς παῖδας.

247.Laws740D; 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 theRepublic. 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]).

248.Laws740E; Ar. (Pol.1265b6-12) unfairly criticizes him for limiting the amount of property, and making it indivisible, while failing to provide against a too high birth-rate.

249.741A.

250.Cf. Ruskin, cited above, p.27.

251.For the Greek term, cf.infraon Aristotle.

252.Cf., however, Xen.Mem.ii. 7. 12-14, discussedinfra, which may be a suggestion of a theory of profits.

253.Laws921A-D, discussed on p.39, n. 8; cf. also 847B.

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.

255.Rep.552B-D, a characteristic passage;Gorg.507E;Laws757B.

256.920C.

257.740B ff., 923; but his purpose is to keep the allotments intact.

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.

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

260.Bonar,op. cit., p. 29.

261.Bussy,Histoire et Réfutation du Socialisme(1859), p. 119.

262.Oncken,op. cit., p. 34.

263.Haney,op. cit., p. 16.

264.Zeller,Phil. Gr., II, 1 (1889), 907; cf. also above, pp.32f. 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.

265.Pol. ii. 5. 1264a11-17, 36-38; 1264b11-13.

266.423D: ὡς δόξειεν ἄντις; also 425D, both cited by Poehlmann.

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. alsoinfrafor other citations.

268.Pol.1264a36-38, repeated by many moderns.

269.Rep.415B-C.

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.”

271.Pol.1264b15-25, repeated by Grote and others.

272.Rep.iv. beg.-421C.

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, Book I.

274.Rep.421A, cited by Zeller,op. cit., II, 1, 907, as evidence of this, states merely that it is more important that there be efficient rulers than efficient cobblers. Cf. Poehlmann,op. cit., II, 36-108, a masterly defense of theRepublicon this point, criticizing both Zeller and Gomperz. He errs on the other side, however, as e.g., p. 96, where he infers fromRep.462C that Plato intended his communism to apply to the whole people.

275.416A-B, 417B.

276.415A, introducing the alleged aristocratic myth.

277.463B, 417B, 416A, 547C.

278.431E-432A, 443E, 423D.

279.421C-E, cited on p. 48, n. 8. Cf. Poehlmann,op. cit., II, 91.

280.590C.

281.431D-E, 434C.

282.378B, E, 377B, insisting upon proper stories for all children; 915E-520A, implying that the artisans shall share in all benefits of the state up to their capacity.

283.643B-C.

284.847B, 921C-D.

285.936B-C.

286.Mill is an exception, but despite his thoroughgoing definitions of economics.

287.Cf. Ar.Pol.ii. 1266b17-24.

288.On the Spartan system, cf. Guiraud,La Prop. fonc., pp. 41 f.; Poehlmann,op. cit., I, 75-98, both of whom oppose the more extreme theory of communism in Sparta.

289.On this general subject, cf. Guiraud,La Prop. fonc., 573 f.; cf. S. Cognetti de Martiis,Socialismo Antico(1889), pp. 515-17, on socialistic tendencies in Greek constitutions and politics.

290.E.g., Esmein,Nouvelle Revue historique, 1890, pp. 821 ff. For a refutation, cf. Poehlmann,op. cit., 1st ed., pp. 20 ff.; Guiraud,op. cit., p. 37; Souchon,op. cit., pp. 135 f.

291.For a refutation of the common error, cf. Zeller,op. cit., I, 1, 317, n. 1, and 318, n. 2; Guiraud,op. cit., pp. 574 f. and 7-11; Souchon,op. cit., pp. 136-39 and notes. The earliest witnesses for Pythagorean communism, Epicurus, in Diog. L. x. 2, and Timaeus of Tauromenium,ibid., viii. 10 are remote from his time and untrustworthy. The later writers (Diog. L. viii. 10; Aul. Gell. i. 9. 12; HippolytusRefut.i. 2. 12; PorphyryVit. Pyth.20; JamblichusDe Pyth. vit.30, 72, 168, 257, etc.; Photius, under κοινά) quoted, and made the tradition general. The older writers know nothing of the tradition. Moreover, some passages give evidence of private property among the Pythagoreans (Diog. L. viii. 1. 15, 39). The origin of the tradition has been plausibly assigned to a misunderstanding of the proverb κοινὰ τὰ τῶν φίλων and to the doctrine of moral helpfulness among the Pythagoreans. S. Cognetti de Martiis (op. cit., pp. 459ff.) calls itsocialismo cenobito.

292.Pol.ii. 8. Hippodamas the Pythagorean, cited byStob. Flor.xliii (xli). 92 f., should not be confused with him. The former wrote in the Dorian dialect, and differs materially in his ideas. His three classes are rulers, soldiers, and all laborers, including merchants and farmers. He says nothing of the division of the land or who shall own it, but provides that the third class furnish a living to the rest. But cf. Robin,op. cit., p. 228, n. 1, who identifies them.

293.Pol.1267b31-33. Cf. Cornford’s visionary article (Class. Quart., VI [1912], 246 ff.), in which he seeks to prove that the tripartite psychology of Plato’sRepublicis an inference from this triple division of society. Cf. a similar idea of Pohlenz,Aus Platos Werdezeit(1913), pp. 229 ff.

294.ii. 8. 1267b33-36.

295.1268a34 ff.

296.So Souchon,op. cit., p. 141, who makes him an individualist.

297.Pol.ii. 7.

298.1266a37 f.

299.1266a40: φησὶ γὰρ δεῖν ἴσας εἶναι τὰς κτήσεις τῶν πολιτῶν; 1266b31-33, to be realized in an old state, partly by allowing only the rich to give dowries and only the poor to receive them; 1266b2-4.

300.Ar. (1267b10) criticizes him for this.

301.1267b15; cf. Poehlmann,op. cit., II, 7 f.

302.1266a37 f.; 1267a1 f. Aristotle’s account of these writers, as of Plato, is incomplete and unsatisfactory.

303.Rep.415A; cf. above, pp.48ff. on this and the following note.

304.420B-C.

305.416D-E, 458C; cf. alsoCritias112B-C, where common houses, common meals, and the prohibition of gold and silver are presented as an ideal.

306.457D.

307.462B-C.

308.451D-455D. Poehlmann points to this doctrine of theEbenbürtigkeitof women as an advanced ground even for Christianity.

309.451E.

310.Guiraud (La Prop. fonc., p. 578) distinguishes these elements in Plato’s system,RepublicandLaws: exclusive right of property vested in the state; use of land granted to a part of the citizens; distribution of the product among all the citizens; obligation to work, tempered by equality of service; inequality of classes, and equality of men in each class; heredity of profession, corrected by selection of talents.

311.Cf. pp.48f. and notes. Even Aristotle admits (1264a33) that Plato makes his husbandmen absolute owners of their lots, on condition of paying rental. The rulers alone (μόνοις) are to keep themselves from silver or gold (417A). Cf. Book IV, beg.: οἶον ἄλλοι ἄγρούς τε κεκτημένοι καὶ οἰκίας οἰκοδομούμενοι, etc.; 420A, 416D-E, 458C, 464B-D, where the community is applied to the guards only, and 464A-D, where the same is true of family communism. Doubtless he would have extended it farther, had he thought it feasible (462B-C), but Poehlmann (op. cit., I, 569 f.; II, 96 f.) overemphasizes this demand of Plato. Adler (Geschichte des Socialismus und Kommunismus von Plato bis zur Gegenwart, p. 44), DuBois (op. cit., p. 40), Oncken (op. cit., p. 34), Souchon (op. cit., 148); Malon (op. cit., pp. 90 f.), Shorey (Class. Phil., October, 1914, art. on “Plato’s Laws”) all agree with the foregoing conclusion. Francotte (L’Industrie, II, 258 ff.) leaves the question open, but (261 f.) observes that the third class is at least restrained from extremes of wealth and poverty.

Back to Index Next