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 , 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. 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.

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. 1264a11-17, 36-38; 1264b11-13.

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. 1264a36-38, 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. 1264b15-25, 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,