De Agricultura: In Memoriam Pieter Willem de Neeve 9789004528734, 9789004525566, 9789050630702, 9050630707

Table of contents :
DE AGRICULTURA: IN MEMORIAM PIETER WILLEM DE NEEVE(1945-1990)
Copyright
Preface
CONTENTS
Pieter Willem de Neeve (1945-1990) on ancient agrarian history
Hesiod's farmer as a sailor
Solon's hektēmoroi and Pisistratid dekatēmoroi
Spartan land lots and Helot rents
New evidence on Seleucid land policy
Greeks, natives and farmsteads in south-eastern Italy
Saturn and the Saturnalia. The question of origin
The census qualifications of the assidui and the prima classis
Cicero and the costs of the republican grain laws
The emergence of tenancy and the precarium
Tibullus' colonus and his 'Ambarvalia'
Sklaven und Freigelassene als Pächter und ihre ökonomischeFunktion in der römischen Landwirtschaft (Colonus-Studien III)
The vilica and Roman estate management
Free-born estate managers in the Graeco-Roman world
Investment in estates by upper-class landowners in early imperial Italy: The case of Pliny the Younger
The nundinae of L. Bellicius Sollers
Partners in agriculture. The pooling of resources in rural societates in Roman Italy
Considerazioni sulla struttura e sulla dinamicadell'affitto agrario in eta imperiale
Agriculture in the Roman empire in comparative perspective
Bibliography of Pieter Wim de Neeve
Bibliography
Index
Addresses of contributors

Citation preview

DE AGRICULTURA IN MEMORIAM PIETER WILLEM DE NEEVE (1945-1990)

J.C. GIEBEN, PUBLISHER AMSTERDAM 1993

EDIDERUNT ET CURAVERUNT:

HELEEN SANCISI-WEERDENBURG R.J. VAN DER SPEK H.C TEITLER H.T. WALLINGA

DUTCH MONOGRAPHS ON ANCIENT HISTORY AND ARCHAEOLOGY EDITORS

F.J.A.M. MEIJER - H.W. PLEKET

VOLUME X

This paperback was originally published as volume X in the series Dutch Monographs in Ancient History by J.C. Gieben, Amsterdam, 1993 ISBN 978-90-04-52873-4 (paperback reprint, 2022) ISBN 978-90-04-52556-6 (e-book, 2022) ISBN 978-90-50-63070-2 (hardback, 1993) CIP-DATA KONINKLIJKE BIBLIOTHEEK, DEN HAAG De agricultura De agricultura : in memoriam Pieter Willem de Neeve / ed. by H. Sancisi-Weerdenburg, R.J. van der Spek, H.C. Teitler, H.T. Wallinga. Amsterdam : Gieben. - (Dutch monographs on ancient history and archaeology, ISSN 0924-3550; vol. 10) ISBN 90 5063 070 7 bound. Subject headings: agriculture ; history ; Classical Antiquity.

PREFACE

Pieter Willem de Neeve's death of cancer on June 9, 1990 left a void with his colleagues and friends of the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam and the Rijksuniversiteit Utrecht. For many years we had enjoyed working and talking with him. After his illness had been diagnosed, it soon became clear that time was running out fast. Even so his death came too soon. While Pieter Wim had built up a reputation among his Dutch colleagues as an excellent student of ancient agrarian history, a subject to which he applied a new and refreshing methodology, at the time of his death, his work had only just started to receive international recognition. Since as his close colleagues and friends we had so often shared in his enthusiasm for the subject, we thought it appropriate to commemorate him by collecting the material for a memorial volume on ancient agriculture. This choice had the disadvantage that some colleagues and friends, both in the Netherlands and abroad, who would have gladly contributed to a volume on a more general theme, were unable to participate. They agreed, however, that the focus of the volume is in line with Pieter Wim's views on our discipline. We gratefully acknowledge the help of Lidy van Roosmalen of the Utrecht Department of History in preparing the text for publication. We thank Harry Pleket and Fik Meijer, editors of the series Dutch Monographs in Ancient History, for accepting De Agricultura in this series, of which Pieter Wim de Neeve was one of the editors. Han Gieben decided at a very early stage of the project to publish the volume, which made all following steps considerably easier. Jaap-Jan Flinterman and Dorothee Tutuarima assisted in preparing the index. Finally, Rietje de Neeve-Groot has been most helpful in retrieving names and addresses and providing us with a photo­ graph of Pieter Wim. We hope this book conveys to her and the children the scholarly regards of the contributors for our late colleague. The editors

CONTENTS

Preface

v

R.J. van der Spek Pieter Willem de Neeve (1945-1990) on ancient agrarian history

ix

H.T. Wallinga Hesiod's farmer as a sailor

1

Heleen Sancisi-Weerdenburg Solon's hektemoroi and Pisistratid dekatemoroi

13

H.W. Singor Spartan land lots and Helot rents

31

R.J. van der Spek New evidence on Seleucid land policy

61

Douwe Yntema Greeks, natives and farmsteads in south-eastern Italy

78

H.S. Versnel Saturn and the Saturnalia. Tue question of origin

98

Dominic Rathbone Tue census qualifications of the assidui and the prima classis

121

Fik Meijer Cicero and the costs of the republican grain laws

153

Pasquale Rosafio Tue emergence of tenancy and the precarium

164

Jan N. Bremmer Tibullus' colonus and his 'Ambarvalia'

177

viii

Walter Scheide! Sklaven und Freigelassene als Pächter und ihre ökonomische Funktion in der römischen Landwirtschaft (Colonus-Studien III)

182

Jesper Carlsen Tue vilica and Roman estate management

197

H.C. Teitler Free-born estate managers in the Graeco-Roman world

206

Dennis P. Kehoe Investment in estates by upper-class landowners in early imperial Italy: Tue case of Pliny the Younger

214

Luuk de Ligt Tue nundinae of L. Bellicius Sollers

238

Huib Lirb Partners in agriculture. Tue pooling of resources in rural societates in Roman Italy

263

Elio Lo Cascio Considerazioni sulla struttura e sulla dinamica dell'affitto agrario in eta imperiale

296

H.W. Pleket Agriculture in the Roman empire in comparative perspective

317

Bibliography of Pieter Wim de Neeve

343

Bibliography

345

Index

383

Addresses of contributors

403

PIETER WILLEM DE NEEVE (1945-1990): ON ANCIENT AGRARIAN HISTORY

RJ. VAN DER SPEK

Pieter Willem de Neeve was an historian, specializing in ancient agrarian economy. He started, however, as a classicist. He studied classics at the Utrecht State University from 1963 until 1971 taking ancient history as his main subject. Only weeks after his graduation he became lecturer in Ancient History at this same University, and held this position until 1982 when he was appointed professor of Ancient History at the Vrije Universi­ teit in Amsterdam. He held this chair until his untimely death in 1990. Tue chair in question had always been in the Classical Department, but soon after his inauguration it was transferred to the Department of History. Though this was occasioned by a reorganization in the Faculty of Arts, the move corresponded neatly with his own development as an historian. Tue study of Greek and Latin to him was primarily a means to an end. In his inaugural lecture of 1982, he defined the historian's aim as "the study of societies of the past in all their different aspects" (De Neeve 1983a: 28). Although his interests in the ancient world were wide-ranging, he chose to concentrate on ancient agriculture, since ancient societies he considered agrarian societies. "In every textbook one may read that the major part of the population, 90% or more, depended directly or indirectly on agri­ culture. The poor tilled the soil, permanently or as seasonal workers; for the rich landed property was the main source of wcalth and status" (De Neeve 1989a: 131). Ancient agriculture had long been a neglected field. De Neeve thought this Jack of attention due to the traditional emphasis on political and cultural history. Economic history of the ancient world focused on city-life. Tue countryside only received attention in relation with the city or with political questions, such as the agrarian bills of Tiberius Gracchus in 133 B.C. Typical of his stance is the following observation: "Scholars mainly had an urban background. Tue possibilities for country children to receive an academic education were minimal. As a result ancient agriculture was too

X

RJ. VAN DER SPEK

often studied by townsmen who had little affinity with it; their analyses are now often regarded as unsatisfactory" (De Neeve 1989a: 132). He explained the growing interest of recent times in ancient agriculture with the same argument: "Furthermore, agrarian history received a marked impetus at the end of the sixties, when among West-European intellectuals concem for the environment was growing and townsmen moved to the country in order to enjoy country-life. A connection between these two phenomena is of course hard to prove, but not implausible. lt is after all quite usual that historical research is stimulated by current interest in a question" (De Neeve 1989a: 132). lt would appear that De Neeve here described himself. Although he was bom in Rotterdam and lived and studied in Utrecht, he moved to the the village of Geldermalsen where he enjoyed country-life to his heart's content. He kept his vegetable garden and his fruit-trees lovingly. Conversa­ tions with farmers of his neighbourhood he found inspiring and illumi­ nating. He repeatedly stated that he could not have studied agrarian history, had he not lived in the country. De Neeve was a firm be!iever in the comparative method and averse to the idea that the sources speak for themselves. He realized for ancient history the danger of what Snodgrass (1983:142) called 'the positivist fallacy of archaeology,' namely that 'archaeological prominence and historica! importance are much the same thing; that the observable phenomena are by definition the significant phenomena.'1 In other words, the sources, written as well as archaeological, are often unreliable, and certainly not sufficient, nor representative. In order to overcome this fallacy the use of the com­ parative method and the conscious and explicit use of theories and explana­ tory models is required (cf. Finley 1985: 18). Most clearly De Neeve defined his position in his last article: "My premise is that ancient agrarian history is first and foremost agrarian history, that is, economic history, and only secondly ancient" (De Neeve 1990a: 364). De Neeve's first major publication was the PhD thesis Colonus (Utrecht 1981), 2 which shows his interest in general agrarian history and in the use

Defined by De Neeve as the unconscious assumption 'that the extant sources are not only a reliable, but also a sufficient rendering of the past, in other words, that only those sources that matter are extant and that a reconstruction of the past with these sources is possible' (quoted from an unpublished paper on Ancient Historiography and De Neeve 1990b: 18; cf 1990a:367). I prefer to speak of 'empiricist fallacy,' since although positivism only recognizes positive facts and observable phenomena as scientifically relevant, it also implies the contention that history is subject to laws, a view usually rejected by 'positivistic' ancient historians (suggestion C.F.G. Lorenz). 2 Translated into English as De Neeve 1984a; Appendix IV appeared as De Neeve 1984b. In the following I shall refer to these English editions. 1

PIETER WILLEM DE NEEVE (1945-1990)

xi

of models. Chapter I provides the theoretical basis •Of the book and gives an analysis of various forms of tenancy, viz. tenancy proper ('fermage') arid share-cropping ('metayage'). Tenancy proper only exists if remuneration, the merces, consists of a fixed amount, either in money or in kind. In share­ cropping, on the contrary, the remuneration consists of a percentage of the yields, likewise in money or in kind (De Neeve 1984a, 15). Between these two systems important economic and social differences exist. In 'fermage' the tenant is a completely independent entrepreneur. He manages bis own operation and bears full risk for it, possessing bis own capital and means of production. All profits are bis. In share-cropping, on the other band, it is the rule that the lessor provides the capital assets and bears part of the costs of exploitation. The advantage of share-cropping is that even people of limited means are able to lease a piece of land. The share-cropper does not bear the full risk, since the rent is a percentage of the yield. On the other band, he has little incentive to raise the yield, because a big part of the profit will go to the lessor. In short, in this system the lessor bears the greater responsibility and the share-cropper has a subordinate position. The economic and social standing of the share-cropper is much lower than that of a tenant farmer's.3 An important economic concept De Neeve makes use of is the 'plantation' (eh. 111.6). In bis view the agrarian enterprises as described by Cato in bis De Agri Cultura display the most important characteristics of plantation agriculture, which are well-known in the tropical and sub-tropical regions of modern times. Typical features are a high degree of specialization and centralization and accordingly high capital investment. In plantation agriculture the labour force consists of wage labourers or slaves; tenants, being independent entrepreneurs, are unsuitable. Tue only option for tenants is leasing an entire plantation. This is indeed attested in the Roman tradition, although it rarely occurred. Such a tenant bad to be well-provided with capital and must have been hard to find; moreover, plantation owners mostly preferred to keep the plantation under their own administration: it conveyed wealth and standing. In bis study of tenancy De Neeve combined the use of models with a very careful interpretation of the ancient texts. That is especially clear in bis second chapter on the term colonus. During the Principate colonus normal­ ly meant 'tenant.' This is a derivative meaning of the word. The literal meaning is 'cultivator', 'farmer.' In this case most scholars have too readily given preference to the derivative meaning. De Neeve, however, demon-

3

Cf. George 1963: 121; cf. De Neeve 1984d: 128-131.

xii

R.J. VAN DER SPEK

strated that the original meaning 'farmer' remained current far into the Principate. Unfortunately, on the other hand, this observation reduced the number of data conceming tenancy in the Principate. If tenancy on plantations was not common, where did it exist? Tue answer is: in extensive agriculture, such as the cultivation of grain. Tenancy must have been standard practice until the Second Punic War (218-201 BC), although the possibility that slaves were also used cannot be mied out. Ancient tradition is unanimous that slavery increased enormously in the second century BC. This was caused, according to De Neeve, by economic factors. One of these is the falling slave prices, owing to the growing availability of slaves as a consequence of Rome's expansionist wars. He perceived another even more important factor. According to current theories, tenancy is unattractive in times of low grain prices. lt is a sound assumption that grain prices indeed feil in the second century BC. Tue tendency towards !arge landownership resulted in grain production be­ coming more efficient; moreover, after the occupation of Sicily more grain became available as taxes in kind. Falling grain prices cause falling land prices and diminishing rents. Comparative evidence from later periods before the Industrial Revolution suggests that under such conditions farmers tend to give up their farms and to seek a new existence in trade and crafts. A shift from the cultivation of grain to that of cash-crops (e.g. wine) and stock-raising often occurs (De Neeve 1984a: 107). Such a model neatly fits the situation of second century central Italy, and this suggests that grain prices may have been low. This is a good example of how models may be used to bridge a gap in the evidence. Our sources give no information on the tluctuations of grain prices, but the model allows us to set up the aforementioned theory. Under the circumstances grain farming must have been more profitable in !arge enterprises with slaves. Since slaves did not have to support a family, the surplus produced was !arger. De Neeve concluded therefore that tenancy was hardly of any importance in the second century BC (De Neeve 1984a: 108). Several factors that cannot be discussed here in detail, caused the situ­ ation to change in the first century BC. On plantations slavery remained Standard practice, but rising grain prices caused by increasing urbanization again made tenancy in grain farming possible. Tue political situation also contributed to the change. After the agrarian laws of the late second century, ager publicus was no langer available in Italy. Tue civil wars caused many confiscations in favour of veterans, often at the expense of small landowners (De Neeve 1984a: 133). Not all these farmers were driven from their lands. Same must have stayed as tenant farmers.

PIE'IER WILLEM DE NEEVE (1945-1990)

Xlll

The distinction between different types of tenancy tums out to be very helpful in the article 'Colon et colon partiaire,' finished in 1980, although it appeared only in 1984. lt is a contribution to the discussion on the price of labour and the difference in profitability of slave labour and tenancy. De Neeve shows how the discussion has been obscured by the neglect of this difference, whereas they are, in fact, of the greatest importance for the level of investment by the lessor and the degree of risk he has to bear. Risks were greatest in share-cropping ('metayage'), but they were clearly also present in fixed rent tenancy ('fermage'). Consider for example the right of remission of debts (remissio mercedis) in case of an act of God. The latter phenomenon received separate treatment by De Neeve in bis article entitled Remissio Mercedis (De Neeve 1983b), in which he demonstrated the value of the Roman legal evidence to the historian, if correctly interpreted. In September 1982, exactly one year after obtaining bis doctorate, he was appointed professor of Ancient History at the Vrije Universiteit in Amster­ dam. His eager interest in universal historical questions must have contri­ buted to this appointment. These characteristics were brought out clearly, even more so than in bis PhD thesis, in bis inaugural lecture, delivered on May 27th, 1983, Peasants in Peril Location and Economy in Italy in the Second Century B.C. 4 In it he further developed the concept of plantation agriculture, and further defined it as distinct from peasant agriculture. The main objective of this lecture, however, was the application of the so­ called 'location theory' of the 19th century German landowner Johann Heinrich von Thünen (Von Thünen 1826) to ancient Italy. The basic idea of this theory is that the nature of agrarian production is determined by the costs of transport of the products to the markets and of the means of production, like manure and labour, to the farm. Tue costs of transport, being a substantial part of the costs of production, determine to a great extent whether production for a market is profitable. Tue costs are not only determined by distance, but also by the volume, the weight and the perish­ ability of the products to be transported. If the other costs of production are high (in intensive agriculture), it is important to keep the costs of transport as low as possible, i.e. to produce as closely to the market as possible. This implies that one may expect to find market-gardening and intensive dairy farming in a narrow circle around a market; in the next ring forestry; then arable farming decreasing in intensity with distance; in the outermost ring extensive stockbreeding and industry (De Neeve 1984c: 13). lt will be clear that Von Thünen's model can only be applied to 'capitalist' This is actually the title of the English version, which appeared in 1984 (De Neeve 1984c); I shall quote from this version. lt appeared in Dutch in 1983 (De Neeve 1983a).

4

xiv

RJ. VAN DER SPEK

agriculture. Peasants produce almost exclusively for subsistence, not for a market. Cost of transport is not a vital factor in tbeir work. In tbe light of tbis model fresb scrutiny of tbe sources was made, wbicb at once yielded mucb more inforrnation. lt became clear tbat the location tbeory could very well be applied to second century BC ltaly. lt is evident for example tbat large landowners preferred to own land situated near a city, in particular land in tbe immediate surroundings of Rome. A telling exarnple is provided by Livy XXXI 13.5-9. During tbe Second Punic War tbe state bad borrowed money from rieb individuals. Not being able entirely to repay tbese loans in money, tbe state offered by way of payrnent pareels of ager publicus witbin a radius of 50 Roman miles (70 km) around Rome. The ereditors aceepted tbis proposal witb eagemess. Apparently tbey reeognized tbe offer's potential for profit. lt even looks as if tbe agricultural experts, Cato, Varro and Columella, bad read Von Thünen. Cato (Agr. I 3) stresses tbe importanee of tbe location of a plantation in tbe neigbbourbood of a sizeable city, tbe sea or a navigable river, or a good and well-travelled road. Columella (RR I 2.3; I 3.3-4) even explicitly mentions tbe importanee of location for transport costs. The production of milk is only profitable in tbe immediate vicinity of tbe city (RR VII 3.13; VII 9.4); furtber afield production of cbeese would be preferable (RR VII 8.1). Arcbaeological evidence corroborates tbese findings. Investigations of tbe Britisb Sebool at Rome around Veii bave demonstrated tbat villae were actually situated along main roads, while small farrns were often (though not always) located farther away. These data eonfirrn the relevance of the location theory to ancient ltaly. Furtherrnore, since the theory concems capitalist agriculture, tbey also confirrn De Neeve's contention tbat capitalist agriculture existed in Roman ltaly. Of course he admitted that it existed side by side with subsistence farrning and that this remained so, whether the peasants were in peril or not. The ancient writers fairly unanimously describe tbe decline of tbe independent peasantry, but tbe cause of tbis proeess is botly debated in modern scholarsbip. The obligation of prolonged service in the arrny, which forced peasants to neglect their farrns, is usually seen as tbe primary factor in tbis process. De Neeve, bowever, also stressed purely economic causes, such as peasants suffering from competition with their rieb neighbours. Although their non-market oriented behaviour makes peasants less likely to suffer under competition, (so Bringrnann 1985: 17-18), they cannot entirely do without the market. Only small margins may be at stake, but these margins often deterrnine the survival of the small peasant.

PIE1ER WILLEM DE NEEVE (1945-1990)

XV

Work with the Von Thünen model naturally led to a discussion of the character of the ancient economy, a debate reopened by Moses Finley in his famous The Ancient Economy (Finley 1 985a). De Neeve thoroughly went into it it in his article in Opus on 'The price of agricultural land in Roman ltaly and the problem of economic rationalism' (De Neeve 1 985a). Finley had criticized historians like Rostovtzeff, who looked at the ancient econ­ omy from a twentieth century perspective and therefore misunderstood the character of the ancient economy. Finley regarded the ancient economy as "primitive" and lacking in economic rationalism (i.e. the maximization of income from rationally invested money on the basis of a rational cost­ benefit analysis). He argued that social considerations played an important part in determining Roman economic behaviour. The Romans were entirely unaware of economic laws and concepts such as supply and demand and had not learnt how to calculate accurately. However, Finley's criticism of overmodernizing the ancient economy is no longer completely convincing. This is already true for his views of the modern economy. Even in our times an entrepreneur does not always act as an 'economic man.' He too, at times, is guided by social or other non-economic considerations, such as the desire to build the highest skyscraper in the world. Nor do modern farmers always act on the basis of rational calculations. In other words: Finley's opposition of 'modern versus primitive economy' is too crude. This, in any case, was De Neeve's opinion, who preferred the approach advocated two years earlier by Carandini ( 1 983). According to Carandini the economically most advanced estates of the Roman upper dass were characterized by a 'bi-sectoral economy': a 'monetary sector,' specializing in products for the major markets, and a 'natural sector,' concerned with polyculture. As the title of the Opus article indicates, it focuses on the price of agri­ cultural land. De Neeve's main purpose was to reject the widely accepted idea that in Roman Italy the average price of land was c. 1000 HS per iugerum, a notion based on a passage in Columella (RR III 3 .8) but devoid of any verisimilitude. According to De Neeve several factors determined the price, such as location and quality of the soil, relation to the market and transport costs, state of cultivation, etc. He shows that these factors, advocated in modern times by Ricardo and Von Thünen, also played their part in antiquity, which again is an indication that the Romans were not as primitive in their economic thinking as is often thought. De Neeve also discussed the importance of the market. This point has been further elaborated in an article written in collaboration with his pupil L. de Ligt. lt was the result of a tutorial, a fine example of the cross­ fertilization between teaching and research. The article entitled 'Ancient periodic markets: festivals and fairs' (De Neeve/De Ligt 1 988), again

XVI

RJ. VAN DER SPEK

demonstrates impressively the advantages of using theory. The authors applied the so-called 'central place theory' to periodic markets with a long cycle. This theory explains which kinds of products will be traded in which place under which circumstances. In this paper the function of markets for peasants and the possible role of periodic markets as intermediaries between town and country is analysed. This question will be more amply discussed by De Ligt in his forthcoming PhD thesis (originally supervised by De Neeve). De Neeve's last article appeared posthumously in Athenaeum (De Neeve 1990a). lt draws a close-up picture of Pliny the Younger, one of the large landowners whose position is so often described in general terms. Pliny's extant correspondence makes more detailed analysis of the management of his !arge estates possible. A good example is the letter (III 19) in which he asks a friend for advice on the purchase of a piece of land. Clearly, social and economic factors appear to be involved (De Neeve 1990a, 371; cf. De Neeve 1989a, 138-9). The article pays much attention to the letter (IX 37) in which Pliny complains about bad harvests and the problems his tenants faced as a result. Pliny decides to turn his tenants into sharecroppers. De Neeve (1990a: 389ff) showed that such a measure accords with the econ­ omic theory contending that sharecropping is a rational choice when great risks in harvesting are expected and when tenants do not possess capital, the reason being that in sharecropping the lessor bears the risk and provides the capital equipment. In this and other ways a particular instance is shown to contributc to a general picture. In this article De Neeve's discussed all of his favourite themes: the use of theory, the character of the ancient economy, the contribution of archaeol­ ogy, and the importance of environment and landscape. His personal interest shows up particularly in the description of the surroundings of one of Pliny's estates based on observations of the locality of Tifemum Tiber­ inum where recently one of Pliny's villas has been discovered (see also his own photo of it in De Neeve 1989a: 138). Although Pieter Willem de Neeve was an all-round historian, he rarely wrote about subjects outside agrarian history (exceptions are his papers on the political aspects of Roman imperialism: De Neeve 1988a and 1988b). But in his chosen field he demonstrated full mastery of the ancient his­ torian's complex skills. He was at harne in law, philology, archaeology, economy and anthropology, to mention only a few disciplines. This enabled him to cooperate fruitfully with the Archaeological Institute of the Vrije Universiteit, both in the research project 'Integration Processes in An-

PIETER WILLEM DE NEEVE

(1945-1990)

xvii

tiquity,' and in teaching. He brought into practice Finley's dictum on the relationship between archaeology and history: "At issue are not two qualitative distinct disciplines but two kinds of evidence about the past, two kinds of historical evidence" (Finley 1985a: 20). lt was De Neeve's merit to deal methodically with the whole of this historical evidence. lt is sad that this work has been broken off so abruptly, especially for the young researchers, who began their work in his footsteps. His work, how­ ever, not only has produced publications but also inspiration for further research. In the last words of his last article he, in a sense, summarized his vision of agrarian history. Nevertheless, it (ancient agrarian history - vdS) is agrarian history in the sense that it must link up with the methods and models of better documented agrarian history in order to overcome the anecdotical character or our evidence. ( ... ) Tue important gain, in other words, is in method - even if it does not make the study of ancient economic history any easier. (De Neeve 1990a: 398-9)

HESIOD'S FARMER AS A SAILOR1

HERMAN T. WALLINGA

In recent studies Hesiod's pronouncements on the trading and seafaring ofhis contemporaries have been chiefly exploited in determining the social and economic structure of archaic society. 2 Tue more down-to-earth problems of Hesiodic seafaring, in particular the part therein of farmers, are hardly ever discussed at all (only one small article on the navigating season has appeared in recent years), but the same is alas true for the problems of navigation and seabome trade of the archaic age in general. As a consequence problems of economic and social structure of a more general kind involving seafaring are treated on the basis of a number of rather speculative assumptions conceming e.g. the types of ship and their owners/users, their size and their range of action, and the trading opportunities. These assumptions have far-reaching implications for the social and economic embedding of maritime trade and seafaring, but are far less plausible than is generally supposed. I shall try to correct the perspective and amend the assumptions, thus supplementing my full-dress study of archaic shipping to which I shall occasionally refer (Wallinga 1993). SAILING SEASONS AND RANGE OF ACTION

Conceming the sailing season Hesiod gives very precise instruction: For fifty days after the solstice, when the summer has entered its last stage, the season of fatigue, then is the time for mortals to sail (663-65)3

and 1 All references by line numbers alone are to Works. Tue passages quoted are taken from West's translation (Oxford 1988). 2 B. Bravo 1977; id. 1984; S.C. Humphreys 1978, esp. eh. 7; A. Mele 1979. 3 I doubt the correctness of this translation. Tue 50 days after the solstice, in our terms ending about the 10th of August, are not the 'last stage,' but the 'peak' of the summer (see Waanders 1983: 65).

2

HERMAN T. WALJJNGA

There is another time for rnen to sail in the spring. As soon as the size of the crow's footprint is rnatched by the aspect of the leaves on the end of the fig-branch, then the sea is suitable for ernbarcation. This is the spring sailing. I do not recornrnend it (678-83).

The briefness of Hesiod's seasons hardly needs explanation. Time investment may be restricted in subsistence agriculture as compared with other industries (cf. Finley 1973: 106). Prolonged absence from his farm must nevertheless have been thoroughly undesirable for Hesiod's freeholder. The sailing seasons of fifty days in high summer and the precarious span in spring precisely fit the slack periods - immediately before and after the grain harvest - of the calender of agricultural activities (conveniently set out by Osbome 1987: 13ff.) and in that perspective are ample.4 As to the sailing farmer's radius of action, however, matters are less clear, if only because of the uncertainty ofHesiod's geographical horizon when writing the Works, in particular the passages conceming maritime trade. Still one may assume that he will not have written exclusively for his brother and their home ground of Askra and Thespiae. On the other hand I consider it very improbable that in articulating his precepts he deliberately reckoned with an audience in Athens and Argos, Jet alone Cyme and Rhodes. In view of the Jack of any geographical specification in these precepts it is natural to take them as applying to the seas near Boeotia, i.e. the sheltered waters of the Corinthian Gulf and also, especially because of Hesiod's personal experience of it, the Gulf of Euboea. The precepts themselves have the same tenor. To say that the weather is stable for fifty days after the summer solstice and that only acts of gods can then lead to disaster, amounts to leaving the Aegean and the strong winds of its summer season out of account. West's comment on lines 663ff.:"670 makes it plain that he is thinking of the time of the Etesians, those steady, predictable daily winds, excellent for navigation provided one is not heading northwards" misses the point entirely. The Medite"anean Pilot describes the matter as follows: "In July and August winds blow from between north-west and north-east over the open sea with remarkable persistence ... Their strength is normally between Beaufort 4 and 6, but sometimes reaches force 7. On the northem coasts of the larger islands and on parts of the mainland which are fully exposed to them, however, the etesian winds are often stronger than they are over the open sea" (IV 21)and "[modern!] vessels bound through Sten6n Mik6nou ... and having to take shelter [ ! ] from strong 'meltems' [ = etesians]" (ib. 204). 4 Snider's recent proposal ( 1978: 132) to date Hesiod's surnrner sailing season to "the late surnrner and early fall, during approximately the period frorn 10 August to 1 October or 26 October" at the outside - i.e. for a )arge part within one of the busy periods of the farrner's year - is to be rejected for this reason alone (for another objection see West 1978 at line 633).

HESIOD 'S FARMER AS A SAILOR

3

Göran Schildt's well-known I Odysseus kölvatten ('In Odysseus' Wake') graphically pictures the struggle of a modern yacht with these boisterous winds (eh. IV Mote med meltemian) and the same difficulties are implied in Cicero's account of bis sixteen-day island-hopping voyage from Athens to Ephesus in mid-July 51 (Att. V 12: vento molesto ... saevo vento). Under the lash of these etesians the sea is far from apemön and however well-defined these winds cannot be considered favourable from Hesiod's point of view.5 And this to my mind is also implied in the term aurai of 1. 670, for aura means 'light air' and never as far as I can see anything like the stiff breeze of the etesians. English 'breeze' clearly covers another part of Beaufort's scale than aura. Hesiod's instructions, moreover, nicely fit the Corinthian Gulf. As Wilamowitz aptly comments at 1.643 "In welchem Hafen mögen diese Schiffe liegen? Am ehesten denken wir wohl an die thespischen Häfen Kreusis und Tiphai, zur Fahrt im korinthischen Golfe," to which, as I said, one may add the channel between Boeotia and Euboea. The winds in the latter in particular are reliable for most of the year, the only exceptions mentioned by the Pilot being that 'violent gusts of wind descend from the mountains during north-easterly and northerly winds' and that "Violent squalls may also be expected from the high land on the south-western side of the gulf [north of the Euripus]" (IV 239). These gusts and squalls correspond well with the acts of gods of 11. 66768. In the Corinthian Gulf circumstances are no more dangerous: the Pilot only mentions "a considerable sea in the eastern part of the gulf," i.e. Hesiod's own region, "when during summer the wind from north-westward blows strongly" (III 82). Predictable risk in other words. That Hesiod's precepts primarily apply to bis own surroundings and those of bis Boeotian public is also made clear by bis mentioning of the second sailing season of, in our terminology, the end of April and the beginning of May, i.e. exactly the first slack period of the farmer's year (ll.678ff.: for the time see West's comment): this presupposes calmer waters than those of the Aegean of that season. TRADING OPPORTIJNITIES

If the trade routes Hesiod's farmer followed have been correctly located in the waters north and south of Boeotia, the question is whether these restricted areas offered a sufficient exchange potential to justify a farmer's trading ventures. Could he trust to come upon partners who would supply bis deficiencies at short notice and accept what he could offer? lt seems to me that this is incontestable. In a study on the grain trade in the archaic period (1983) Bravo has collected presentable evidence for occasional trade in grain 5

Tue difficulty of the etesians is weil brought out by Snider 1978: 132.

4

HERMAN T. WALLINGA

and has concluded that there was a fairly regular but variably located market (i.e. supply and demand) for the commodity in Greece (cf. Jameson 1 983: 8, 12-13). Finley has even conceded that "peasants, especially those nearer the upper limit of family holdings" (among which I would reckon Hesiod and his brother), might have been encouraged to turn to cash crops in favourable circumstances. He was "thinking of the presence nearby of !arger towns, of international shrines attracting visitors who needed catering (such as Olympia or Delphi)" (1973: 107). This of course was the case in the Corinthian Gulf from the later eighth century on and in a spectacular way. The Delphic oracle is considered an important factor in early Greek colonization (see Forrest 1982: 308; Graham 1982: 145) and that presupposes more than local prominence even earlier than that. Apart from Delphi other shrines such as that of Hera Acraea at Perachora will have attracted worshippers from a wider region than only the polis they belonged to. And then there was Corinth itself. Thucydides has preserved a tradition, no doubt local tradition which he picked up in Corinth itself, that this polis started its career as a maritime power in the last quarter of the eighth century on the basis of the income from its emporion, which after the polis had built a navy and eliminated piracy attracted much seaborne trade (1 13.5, cf. Wallinga 1993: 14ff.). Trade and colonizing activity over the length of its Gulf and farther are documented in finds of Corinthian pottery from Boeotia, Delphi, lthaca, Sicily and the northwest of Greece (cf. Salmon 1984: 84ff.). Finds of imports into Corinthia from Gulf communities are, it is true, negligible (ib. : 128f.), but farm products leave few traces and are nevertheless likely to have paid for the pottery found in the lands of Corinth's trade partners. Corinth would indeed seem to have offered ideal trading conditions for a farmer from the south of Boeotia; nearby Sicyon will have added to the attractions of this whole region by offering a choice of products of thc land (cf. Skalet 1 928: eh. II). At the other side of Boeotia, in the Euboean channel, Chalcis was a trading and colonizing centre no less active than Corinth; and here too there were other markets, Lefkandi/Eretria and Amarynthus, where farmers had a chance to seil their products and supply their deficiencies. The choice of markets in both areas allowed them to look out for an adequate bargain instead of having to trade with the first man met. The presence of the two colonial powers, each expanding in its own region and stimulating exchanges within that region precisely at the time of Hesiod's activity, seems sufficient to explain why he could take farmers' participation in seaborne trade as a matter of course, indeed as something to be dissuaded rather than stimulated for all that it might contribute to warding off hunger. Perhaps it is for the same reason that he suppressed the names of these markets.

HESIOD 'S FARMER AS A SAJLOR

5

THE SHIPS

If the region where Hesiod's sailing farmer traded was so restricted and the chances offered still adequate, traders must have had great freedom in the choice of ships. There is in particular no reason to think that the ships had to come up to very stringent requirements of seaworthiness. This is indeed what Hesiod suggests: his farmer had the choice of a small and a big ship, a bigger profit being the only criterion (II. 643-45). Here difference in sea-going capacity hardly is taken into consideration, the danger of storms threatening the big ship just as much as the small one. Such indifference in itself points to relatively unexposed waters. But this still leaves the question of what Hesiod means by big and small unanswered. The commentaries are very unsatisfactory on this point. No commentator seems to have asked himself what this choice involved. Gray's appears to be the first (and only) straightforward interpretation of line 643: "Trotz des Rates 'Preise ein kleines Schiff, aber verstaue deine Güter in einem Grossen' lassen die Verhaltensmaßregeln eher an ein kleines, offenes Ruderboot denken als an ein stattliches Handelsschiff' (1974: G 136). In this assessment theterm 'Verhaltensmaßregeln' evidently refers to lines 624-29and Hesiod's recommendations there ("Pull the ship on land ... Lay away all the tackle ... hang the well-crafted steering-oar up ... "). These recommendations, addressed as they are to one man, are taken to be performable by one man and the ship concemed to be his big ship. Both assumptions are utterly arbitrary; and too much method is ascribed to the poet by making his counsellings one connected whole. There is no good reason to think that Hesiod's advice on the winter storage of a ship or boat regards a mere skiff, nor that this vessel is specifically meant in either the small or the big ship. Bravo makes Gray's minimalism even worse by suggesting that it is corroborated by Hesiod's failure to mention the possibility of taking on board passengers with their merchandise, and that this means that his big ship is only just big enough to transport its proprietor, his merchandise and his crew (1977: 25ff.). In this perspective the small ship clearly is one with insufficient cargo capacity, i.e. that 'small' means 'too small' and 'big' no more than 'adequate'. This seems very unsatisfactory. Moreover, the Jack of any specification makes such a suggestion more mystifying than enlightening: if the small boat was inadequate, why then did Hesiod deign to mention it as if it were a viable alternative at all? Gray's and Bravo's comments seem to be made without any clear idea about maximum and minimum for big and small. This is also demonstrated in Bravo's otherwise most valuable and instructive discussion of the institutional context of the still bigger ships he distinguishes. This discussion will serve me as a starting point for my own.

6

HERMAN T. WALLINGA

"Navires marchands qui etaient bien plus grands [than Hesiod's big ship] et a bord desquels voyageaient plusieurs marchands" may according to Bravo be recognized in several passages: in the Phaeacian Euryalos' well-known misrepresentation of Odysseus' persona as one "who is en route with his many-tholed ship, a foreman of sailors and merchants, who minds his cargo and looks after his freight and snatched profit" (Od. VIII 161-64); in the story about the Cnossian traders who were chosen by Apollo to be his priests in Delphi (Hymn.HomAp. 393ff.); in Theognis' ship of state in the storm with many men on board (667-82); and in the same poet's advice to someone planning a trading voyage to choose his company with care (1165-66). Such ships in his view were the property of the rich, i.e. big landowners. That this dass of people was concerned in maritime activities he demonstrates in an examination of the Athenian naukraroi and the corporations of aeinautai in Miletus and Eretria (for all these see the fundamental discussion in Velissaropoulos 1980: 14-26). According to Bravo (1977: 27-28) the naukraroi "avaient a la fois la possibilite economique et l'obligation envers Ja cite de con­ struire et d'entretenir des navires de guerre, de !es armer, d'en fournir et d'entrainer des equipages et de les commander pendant !es expeditions." The designation naukraroi he takes to be exclusively derived from this naval function, reasoning that they would never have been called that name as the owners of merchant ships, because they did not travel in these ships themselves. However, since the term naukraros in its later form naukleros is always used for precisely the master/proprietor of merchant ships, Bravo's view seems hardly defensible. Moreover, it is based on a widely shared, and nevertheless untenable presupposition, viz. that ships employed by and for the state have to be warships, i.e. ships specially built and equipped for warfare and used for nothing eise. This was no more the case in the archaic period of ancient history than in early modern times. In this recent period armed merchantmen were an essential element in all naval power and the 'warships' of states and, what comes to the same thing, kings were hardly different from merchantmen and indeed were regularly hired out as such: a well-known instance is the ships belonging to the Tudor kings of England (see Lewis 1951: 58). When Thucy­ dides distinguishes pentekontors and long vessels (ploia makra) in the naval armaments of archaic times, the first must be the true naval units, property of the polis, the second armed merchantmen, identical with the naukraric ships in the case of Athens. These two categories were not sharply differentiated, the state-owned ships being more standardized in size and somewhat more specialized in equipment, but still remaining very similar to the merchantmen (see Wallinga 1993: 22f., 53). There are indeed indications that archaic states, in any case Corinth, sold their ships after a number of years to merchant

HESIOD'S FARMER AS A SAJLOR

7

mariners/naukraroi (see ib. : 26ff.). All these ships, in other words, were a double usage, both for naval duties and for the peaceful work of maritime trade, and any work in between, such as the conveying of passengers, by state­ owned ships in the case of ambassadors or theöroi and by naukraric ploia makra in that of emporoi and mere passengers, contiguous categories no doubt (for theöroi see Demeas FGH 502 Fl/Archil. 192W; for emporoi Hymn.HomAp. 397). As to the naukraroi, it is pace Bravo much more probable that they used one ship in both spheres, than that they had several ships for both, as Bravo has to assume. lt is to be understood that these ships were all galleys, no other type being employable in the service of the state. And this is doubly certain for the time up to the sixth century, because the use of pure sailing ships is very improbable earlier than that (see Wallinga 1993: 2f., 35f.). Before the end of the sixth century the type is not at all documented, neither in the literary nor in the iconographic tradition: 6 the first certain testimony is an Attic black-figure cup of c. 510 BC (Morrison & Williams 1968: 85). lt is true that of the passages illustrating Bravo's big ships only the first explicitly refers to oars, but the other ships will be galleys too. In the greater poleis of Greece the naukraric ships lost their function as auxiliary naval vessels a short time before Xerxes' expedition when polis navies adopted the trireme as ship of the line and great numbers of this type were put in commission; the Sicilian tyrants and Corcyra had done this somewhat earlier, all following the lead of the eastem kingdoms (see Thuc. I 14 and Wallinga 1993: 31f., 103ff., 140ff.). In the smaller Peloponnesian poleis on the other hand the old situation appears to have persisted. This is demonstrated in a peculiar clause of the armistice concluded in 422 between Athenians and Peloponnesians to end the Archidamian war. According to this clause the Spartans and their allies undertook not to travel in long ships, nor in other oared vessels, with a capacity of 500 measures or more (Thuc. IV 118.5), i.e. either 500 medimnoi = 25m3 or 500 metretai (the concrete containers!) = 2550m3 (see Wallinga 1964: 36ff. esp. 39, and Wallinga 1993: 25 and n.33). The ships concemed in this agreement are obviously not nearly comparable to the triremes of the time: as the latter type is now reconstructed by Morrison and Coates (1986) it has more than three times their maximum capacity.7 They

6 Ships represented without oars must not naively be taken as 'sailing ships' even in case they are pictured with sails. Galleys must often have sailed with the oarsmen resting (see Morrison & Williams 1968: Geom. 8, Arch. 5, 52, 57, 88) without thereby becoming anything other than galleys. 7 Tue part of Coates' trireme's thalamos or hold where the thalamian oarsmen were accommodated measures c. 30 x 4,25 x 1,5m, i.e. (far) more than 150m3 (the width of 4,25m seems excessive to me ).

8

HERMAN T. WAUJNGA

must therefore still have been of the dass of Thucydides' pentekontors and

ploia makra . That is to say that we have here a pretty precise measure for the

'naukraric' ships of the last quarter of the fifth century. At the time the naval use of such vessels was a dim memory for the Corinthians as well as for the Athenians, whose navies had by then consisted of triremes es plethos (Thuc. I 14.3) for two generations. For the Peloponnesian league as a whole the smaller ships still counted all the same: the dause in question was proposed by the Spartans! This of course means that, as lang as the pentekontor was the ship of the line, ships of that size must have been a perfectly serious proposition in the naval context. We are fully entitled therefore to draw the condusion that we have here the measure of Hesiod's big ship. A capacity of 500 medimnoi/25m3 is not indeed to be considered negligible: this quantity was the total produce of the lesser Athenian pentekosiomedimnoi, and far more than that of Athens' top hippeis. lt seems very improbable that Hesiod's farmer could ever offer for sale more than a fraction of that amount. Tue big ships of his times which could carry such loads must therefore have had room for several passengers/emporoi of the dass of this farmer with their own cargo. As we shall see, these men were needed as rowers anyway and are therefore to be taken for granted. Hesiod's silence about such 'passengers' cannot be used, as it is by Bravo, to deny that they occurred at all. Hesiod's small ship on the other hand is more difficult to specify and not only where its size is concemed. For the early archaic period there are hardly any data, literary or iconographical, unless the Homeric schedie stands for boats too small and not sea-worthy enough to be used for serious work. Of the specific terms which are considered to denote such smaller vessels (akatos, keles, kerkouros, kybaia, lembos and phaselos) akatos occurs for the first time in Theognis (458), kerkouros in Herodotus (VII 97), phaselos only in the first century, the others in the fourth BC. Testimonies have been conveniently assembled by Casson (1971 : eh. VIII Merchant galleys). Casson's data make dear at once that his merchant galleys as a group and Thucydides' pentekontors andploia makra/naukraric ships overlap: some akatoi and lemboi had 50 oars (Lucian Ver. Hist. I 5 and Casson 1971: 126 respectively), kerkouroi probably even more (see Casson 1971: 64 and n.40 and Wallinga 1993: 1 10). However, akatos and lembos were also used as ship's boats, which ought to have been considerably smaller (akatos: Nie. Ther. 268-70; lembos: Dem. XXXII 6, XXXIV 10). Keletes there were with only ten oars (pentaskalmos: Ephippos F5.l 7 K/A), but papyri mention ships of this type as cargo-carriers on a raute between Asia Minor and Egypt (PCair.Zeno 59002, 59015), and these I would presume to have been somewhat bigger than is suggested by Ephippos' ten oars, though in the Corinthian and Euboian Gulfs the ten-oar

HESIOD'S FARMER AS A SAILOR

9

version may well have been a handy freighter. The whole group clearly was very mixed in size. As to what precisely defined the types we are poorly informed: presumably it had to do with shape.8 The question is of course whether the lack of early evidence for these smaller ships (I leave aside Casson's still smaller 'Small craft': see his eh. XIV) must be taken to mean that these types only made their appearance later. This seems very improbable a priori. Small ships were certainly used for long­ distance trade in the archaic age, witness a number of mid-sixth century mer­ chantmen carrying Greek and Etruscan wares and wrecked at points on the Mediterranean coast of France (Antibes, Bon Porte to the south of St. Trapez and Dattier 10 km west of Bon Porte (see Gras 1985: 152, 155). These vessels were of modest dimensions, the Bon Porte wreck, which is the best preserved, measuring no more than 10 metres (see Joncheray 1976: 23). If such small ships operated under a relatively exposed coast like the French Riviera (see Pilot II 21), even smaller ones will have been usable in the sheltered waters off Boeotia. Therefore we may assume that Hesiod's small ship was a viable proposition as a merchant ship, not Gray's absurd one-man boat. ÜWNERS AND USERS

According to Bravo (1977: 1) the ships that are referred to by Hesiod are to be considered the property of the elite, to which he (improbably9) takes the poet and his brother to belang themselves as dfon genas (1. 299). This is an extreme view. No doubt the naukraric ships of the time were owned by large landowners, who became the aristocracy of the polis, but there is no good reason for the notion that smaller ships could not have been owned by freeholders outside the elite. Such smaller ships not only were cheaper to build, but also easier to man and therefore more economical, or at any rate

Casson suggests that 'the akatos and lembos bad a concave prow with pointed cutwater, the keles a straight prow' (Casson 1971: 163). Aristotle does indeed remark that ships of the dass of the lembos (ploion lembödes) had shatp prows (IncAn. 710a32); for the prows of akatos and keles we have only the pictures of the Althiburus mosaic (Casson 1971: fig. 137), very l ate and 8

not in my view reliable data. 9 See Verdenius' persuasive comment: "Hes. never assumes the air of a nobleman. On the other hand, it may be assumed that Perses was not free of genteel manners ... Accordingly, the phrase tlion genas seems to be a mock-heroic allusion to tliogenes. The irony is reinforced by an ambiguity: on the one hand we may think of dios used in the epic of all kinds of men, on the other hand, the Homeric model of the phrase dion genos ... refers to a destructive boar sent by Artemis" ( 1985: 154).

10

HERMAN T. WALLINGA

easier, to operate. Tue naukraric ships - requiring at least 20 oarsmen10 and occasionally, perhaps even regularly, required to be on stand-by under the orders of the magistrates - must have been less remunerative, more of a luxury. Of course we have no direct evidence for the running costs of bigger and smaller ships, but it is not impossible to make estimates for the two factors that influenced the retums most strongly. Building costs to begin with, though they, however substantial, certainly were not the most important item in the annual account. When carefully maintained and put away for winter, as Hesiod counsels (II. 624ff.), a well-built ship would last for years, the twenty years assumed as the average life of a trireme (SSA W 90 and 119f.) to be considered as no more than a modest average. In private hands ships surely were used longer than in the management of the state: precisely this enabled the state to seil its scrapped ships to private citizens. Now in 483 the triremes built as the consequence of the passing of Themistocles' navy bill cost about half a talent apiece (100 triremes for the 300,000 drachmas earmarked for distribution among c. 30,000 citizens (Hdt. VII 144.1 compared with V 97.2, VIII 65.1; see Wallinga 1993: 153f.). Tue much smaller pentekontor no doubt cost far less, say half, i.e. ¼ talent; the average naukraric galley considerably less than that, and a ship of the dass of Hesiod's small one less again, say 500 to 800 drachmas (in the 480's). Apportioned over twenty years the latter category could have been paid with 25-40 drachmai for each year. In Hesiod's times costs could not of course be expressed in such terms, but the differences will have been as clearly marked. Like in 483, they will have been almost negligible when compared with the outlay needed to put such ships into service. Tue twenty oarsmen I have assumed for the average naukraric ship would have cost twenty days' wages each day and that, regardless of the wage level, 11 would far surpass the annual 'instalments' of the building costs in no time. At that rate the participation of such a ship in an official theoria like the one to Delos could become very costly indeed, and unforeseeably so if the weather was unfavourable. lt must have been to share out such heavy burdens that, when the naukrariai became an organ of the polis, a tax (i.e. a generalised apportionment = eisphora ) 12 was instituted and

Homer's repeated reference to such ships in real-life situations (II. I 309; Od I 280, IV 669), as contrasted with Märchen (Od VIII 35) or the literature of prestige (ll. II 510), suggests that these were the usual ships of his own experience. But there will have been naukraric ships with !arger crews. 11 For the mid-fifth century Finley assumes a 'half drachma rate' ( 1978: 112), which we may reduce to a third drachma for the later sixth and the early fifth century. 1 2 The Athenian naukraroi had the task to collect the eisphorai and to disburse the yield for certain purposes (Arist. Ath.Pol. VIII 3, cf. Kahrstedt 1934: 248). 10

HESIOD 'S FARMER AS A SAJLOR

11

the collecting of it assigned to the naukraroi themselves. 13 lt is to be noted that this was not something entirely new, but simply the adaptation of the very governing principle of the original institution to new circumstances. Tue principle is also relevant to the situation described by Hesiod and had to do with (finding means for) manning the ships. Owners of galleys like those presented by Homer as the normal working vessels of his world (see n.10), i.e. my naukraric ships, must have depended on a fairly !arge circle of people to be assured of a sufficient supply of oarsmen. Members of the elites may have had enough slaves and other dependants at their direct command to be able to use their ships for occasional trips of a private nature, e.g. to their overseas possessions, like Noemön's (Od. IV 63437). In cases when the motivation for a voyage was not purely private, or when it took a long time, as in the case of Telemachus' journey to Pylos and Sparta, this domestic crew must have been supplemented, perhaps even entirely replaced, by oarsmen recruited from outside the oikos: the existence of an organization for such occasions is presupposed in Homer's account of the recruitement of Telemachus' crew by simple command (Od. II 384). Tue naukrariai may be considered the Athenian version of that organization, which generally speaking served the purpose of making the ships present in a region available to the community living there for collective action (like defence, worship at great and distant shrines and peaceful contacts with other communities). They must have been ubiquitous. Tue use of ships for trade ventures like those meant by Hesiod will have been organized in a way somewhere between the extremes just described. If the owner of a ship had a personal interest in such an undertaking, he may have employed members of his domestic 'staff (the original hyperesia?) as his crew, but this I would presume to have been rarely sufficient to man the ship adequately: only the very rich can have bad so many men fit for rowing at their beck and call and then thanks to their ability to pay or to demand services of 'clients.' All the others will in such cases have depended on the voluntary co­ operation of a second echelon, the wider circle just mentioned, primarily the neighbours, and the naukraroi on the members of their naukrariai (originally no doubt neighbours too). lt is in such situations that Hesiod's farmer bent on trade has bis place. Since the inhabitants of a given region probably were all more or less in the same boat as regards the success or failure of their harvests (see Jameson 1983: 8), a farmer will rarely have been the only man there who wanted to better his situation by trade. So if he did not own a ship himself, he

13

Hignett's idea that the tax was the original institution and the narne of the collecting body

(naukraria) then chosen "to disguise the real nature of the new fiscal organization" (1952: 70)

topsy-turvies matters.

12

HERMAN T. WALLINGA

could travel as an emporos in a neighbour's vessel; if he did, he must have been able to find emporoi among his neighbours to accompany him and to man the oars; and if he only had a small boat, he could always prefer his neighbour's bigger ship, if that did sail. This seems to be the purport of Hesiod's counsel. 14 lt is in such a constellation that I should expect the developments leading to the organization of merchant shipping that existed at the end of the sixth century. Just as some specialization became possible in agriculture when markets like Delphi and Corinth sprung up, ship-owners could widen their galleys to adapt them to bigger cargoes, thus creating the eikosoros (Horn. Od. IX 322, cf. Wallinga 1993: 41ff.). The extended trade contacts with colonies, resulting in bulk cargoes of grain, and the acquaintance with tbe wbole of tbe Mediterranean and its meteorology tben made it possible to dispense with oars altogetber and cbange over to tbe pure sailing sbip. By tben the full-time naukleros surely bad made bis entry. As in the case of the exploitation for public purposes of naukraric sbips this cbange-over will have involved more people tban just tbe naukleros and bis family. Members of the elite may bave belped substantially, botb witb loans and witb tbe guarantee of cargoes. But tbe initiative of smaller owners of mercbant galleys seems a more probable step in tbe direction of tbe later situation witb its specialized naukleroi tban tbe emancipation of tbe naukraros' slave or dient.

14 For the 'support network' - kinsmen, neighbours, "friends," associations etc. - called on by individuals in crises, see now Gallant 1991: eh. 6 "'With a little help from my friends": Interpersonal risk-buffering behavior' (pp. 143-169).

SOLON'S HEKTEMOROI AND PISISTRATID DEKATEMOROP

HELEEN SANCISI-WEERDENBURG

Although the term hektemoroi in itself seems a relatively straightforward one, meaning 'sixth-sharers,' the discussion of which type of agricultural workers this category precisely comprised and under which conditions they worked, has been long and intensive. 2 Most will agree that the hektemoroi formed a particular social category or indeed "a real dass" (Gemet [1981]: 280, 305).3 That much can be inferred from the way Aristotle4 (AthPol 2.2: hoi penetes ... kai ekalounto pelatai5 kai hektemoroi) and Plutarch (Sol 13.4: hektemorioi prosagoreuomenoi) use the term. Tue only secure evidence we have is that the hektemoroi had to pay a sixth (or five-sixths; see below) and thereby got into trouble and debts. There is no evidence as to whom they owed that amount to or for what reason, except for Aristotle's vague statement that the land was di'oligön. We are rather poorly informed on the existence of rents in tenancy-systems and shares in share-cropping systems in the archaic Greek world. But it is clear that whoever paid a sixth share and was called a hektemoros was, in Aristotle's view, by definition or by implication very poor. 6 So poor, that he incurred the risk of not being able 1 In memoiy of discussions with Pieter Wim de Neeve on agriculture, ancient and modern, as pleasant interludes in between editing and proof reading. 2 Since the subject has received extensive discussion in recent years, it seems superfluous to repeat here the main lines of the discussion. For bibliographical overviews see Cassola 1964: 26 n.1., 28, n.2; Martina (ed.) 1968: 442-445; Rihll 1991. 3 That the heklemoroi did form a particular social dass was recently denied by Gallant (1982: 123) who argued that it is difficult to see how Solon could dissolve a whole well­ defined social group by a single measure. 4 For convenience, I will refer to the author of the Athenaiön Politeia here as Aristotle. 5 For an explanation of pelatai as "dependent labourers working on their masters' demesne" cf. Andrewes ap. Rhodes 1981: 91. 6 lt seems that Rhodes in his veiy sensible summing up of the status quaestionis fails to recognize this: "Almost certainly it would be wrong to assume that all heklemoroi were poor, ... more probably some hektemoroi were prospering and some independent farmers

14

HELEEN SANCJSJ-WEERDENBURG

to pay even that sixth part as a result of which he could be sold into slavery, had to seil his children (Plut. Sol 13.5: Polloi de kai paidas idious enangkazonto pölein) or had to flee the polis: (ibid. : ten polin pheugein dia ten chalepotata tön daneistön ). Images of Olmi's movie L 'albero degli zoccoli, in which a family of mezzadri is driven from the land they are cultivating, may weil give an idea of the state of misery in which farmers unable to pay their dues might find themselves. Tue main problem with the hektemoroi, however, seems to be that it is difficult to imagine how the payment of a sixth of the crop could be a burden. "One sixth is an impossibly low rent in a share-cropping system" (Murray 1980: 182) or: "the rate of payment is an obstacle to regarding the system as oppressive" (Andrewes 1982: 379) to which he adds: [it is an] "improbably low rate for share-cropping, though parallels of a kind have been found" (ibidem) - these are examples of the general view in the literature. If the owner, or the person or institution who held title to the soil in question was entitled to only one-sixth (as compared to a half, for instance in the mezzadria-system or the rate paid by the helots in Sparta) it is hard to understand how such a small share could result in such misery for the farmer. 7 Hence attempts have been made to argue that the hektemoroi category did not owe one sixth, but rather five-sixths, the term implying that they were allowed to keep only a sixth share of the yield of their fields. On the basis of linguistic arguments, Woodhouse (1938: 47) reasoned that a hektemoros had to pay five-sixths: "just as the ward isomoros, used by Poseidon in the Iliad to describe his own relation to Zeus means 'having or taking equal share "' (IL XV 209).8 Von Fritz (1940: 55), however, forcefully argued that the text of Aristotle is not ambiguous at all and that a hektemoros could not be anything but a man who had to pay a sixth. This still seems to be the general feeling in the relevant literature (cf. Andrewes 1982: 379), although recently Gallant (1982: 123) once more proposed that

bad fallen into debt ... " ( 1981: 96). Aristotle does not say that some of the poor were among the hektemoroi. He says that these poor were called hektemoroi: Hektemoroi is therefore a labe), possibly it even indicates a category. So does Plutarch: they were called hektemoroi or thetes. Both ancient authors were apparently convinced that all those paying a sixth qualified as poor or being in debt. That did not exhaust the category of those in appalling economic conditions or in debt. But to assume that there were hektenwroi in rather well-to-do circumstances is going beyond what Aristotle and Plutarch do say. 7 There is a strong element of appeal to common sense underlying these statements. Tue common sense in this case is formed by crude notions of share-cropping systems as they are known from European history. But, "What has a comparison between Attic Hektemors and modern metayer tenants to do with the case anyway?" (Woodhouse 1938: 45 n.4). 8 Although Thomson [1978]: 591 confidently states that "all the other compositions with 'moros' and 'moiros' refer to the recipient or possessor," he quotes no further examples.

SOLON'S HEKIEMOROJ

15

the hektemoroi kept (or rather received) a sixth only. This sixth was not so much a share the workers were entitled to, but rather a gift that would keep them under obligation to reciprocate with their labour in the next season.9 In Gallant's understanding the hektemoroi in addition to their own land, worked fields newly cultivated by the rich. Tue sixth eamed (or given) in this way rounded up the normal harvest of their own fields. 10 Although the core of the problem seems to lie in the fact that it was a mere sixth share which caused the social disturbances, curiously enough, there have been few attempts to explain this precise division. Once it is accepted that the hektemoroi had to part with a sixth, and could keep five­ sixth of their crop, the problem remains why this seemingly small amount caused them problems, or for what other reason they formed a category of poor people. There is, as far as I am aware, only a short note by Kirk, who offers a parallel for this sixth share (1977: 369f.). He quotes an Iranian example of the division of the crop according to which party provided the relevant necessities: soil, water, beasts, seed, and labour-force. Translated in these terms, a hektemoros then would be a peasant who owned nothing but his own labour and had to hand over, except for his one-sixth, all the remaining crop. Tue other five-sixths covered the expenses of the owner of the land, his outlay in beasts, water-provision and seed. That, at least, would explain why sixth-sharers formed a special category: they were indeed real 'have-nots.' Tue main problem with Kirk's proposal is that it does not explain how Solon put an end to the situation by removing the horoi and why the category virtually disappeared after Solon's reforms: even if the hektemoroi had acquired title to the land they were tilling, they would still have remained in ,' Athenaeum 76, 273-302. Lo Cascio, E. 1991a, 'Forme dell'economia imperiale,' in: Storia di Roma II 2, a cura di A. Schiavone, Torino, 3 13-365. Lo Cascio, E. 1 991b, 'Fra equilibrio e crisi,' in: Storia di Roma II 2, a cura di A. Schiavone, Torino, 701-31. Lo Cascio, E. in c.d.s., 'La dinamica della popolazione in ltalia da Augusto al III secolo,' in: L 'Italie d'Auguste a Diocletien, (Atti del Colloquio Intemazionale, Ecole franc;aise de Rome, 25-28 marzo 1992). Lo Porto, F.G. 1964, 'Ceramica dalla necro poli di Tor Pisana a Brindisi,' ASMG 5, 1 1 1-127. Lombardo, M. 1986, 'Siris-Polieion: fonti letterarie, documentazione archeologica e problemi storici,' in: Siris-Polieion, 55-86. Los, A. (in press), 'Les interets des affranchis dans l'agriculture italienne,' MEFRA forthcoming.

'367

Lotze, D., 1959, Mera (v ilE v0E'p "' v m i & tll "' v. Studien zur Rechtsstel­

lung unfreier Landbevölkerungen in Griechenland bis zum 4. Jahrhundert v. Chr. , Berlin [repr. New York 1979].

Love, J. 1986, 'The Character of the Roman Agricultural Estate in the Light of Max Weber's Economic Sociology,' Chiron 16, 99-146. Love, J.R. 1991, Antiquity and Capitalism. Max Weber and the Sociological Foundations of Roman Civilization, London/New York. MacDowell, D.M. 1986, Spartan Law, Edinburgh. McEwan, GJ.P. 1 981, Priest and Temple in Hellenistic Babylonia, Wies­ baden. McEwan, GJ.P. 1982, 'An official Seleucid Seal reconsidered,' JNES 41, 5153. Macfarlane, A. 1978, The origins of English individualism, Oxford. MacMullen, R. 1970, 'Market days in the Roman empire,' Phoenix 24, 333341. Macve, R.H. 1985, 'Some glosses on "Greek and Roman accounting,"' in: De Ste Croix Fs, 233-264. Maetzke, G. 1986, 'Area nord-occidentale del Foro Romano,' BCAR 91, 372-80. Marcone, A. 1988, R colonato tardoantico nella storiografia modema (da Pustel de Coulanges ai nostri giomi) (Biblioteca di Athenaeum 7), Corno. Marcone, A. in c.d.s.: 'Introduzione' a M. Rostovtzeff, Studi sulla storia del colonato romano, [ed. it. a c. di A. Marcone ], in c.d.s. Marcos Casquero, M.A. 1980, 'Lua Satumi', Helmantica 31, 207-31. Margairaz, D. 1988, Foires et marches dans la France preindustrielle, Paris. Mar6ti, E. 1976, 'Tue Vilicus and the Villa-System in Ancient ltaly,' Oikumene l , 109-124. Marshall, B.A. 1985, A Historical Commentary on Asconius, Columbia, Missouri. Martin, R. 1967, 'Pline le Jeune et les problemes economiques de son temps,' REA 69, 62-97. Martin, R. 1974, "'Familia Rustica": Les esclaves chez les agronomes latins,' Actes du Colloque 1972 sur l 'esclavage, Paris, 267-297. Martin, R. 1976, Palladius. Traite d 'Agriculture, Paris. Martin, S. 1989, The Roman Jurists and the Organization of Private Building in the Late Republic and Early Empire, (Collections Latomus 204), Bruxel­ les. Martin, S. 1 990, 'Servum meum mulionem conduxisti: Mules, Muleteers and Transportation in Classical Roman Law,' TAPA 120, 301-314. Martina, A. (ed.) 1963, Solone. Testimonianze sulla vita et l 'opera, Roma.

368

Martino, F. De 1 974, 'Intomo all'origine della schiavitu a Roma,' Labeo 20, 1 63-193 (= id., Diritto e societa nell'antica Roma, Roma 1 979, 130-161). Matthews, J.F. 1 984, 'The tax law of Palmyra: evidence for economic history in a city of the Roman east,' JRS 74, 157-180. Mattingly, DJ. 1 988, 'Oil for export? A comparison of Libyan, Spanish and Tunisian olive oil production in the Roman Empire,' Journal of Roman Archaeology 1 , 33-56. Mayer, A.J. 1981, The persistence of the 0/d Regime, London. Mazzarino, S. 1 962, Trattato di storia romana II: L 'Impero romano, Roma. 2 Mazzarino, S. 1 974, fl pensiero storico classico II,2, Bari.4 Mehl, A. 1 980/81, 'Doriktetos chöra. Kritische Bemerkungen zum 'Speer­ erwerb' in Politik und Völkerrecht der hellenistischen Epoche,' AncSoc 1 1/12, 173-212. Mertens, D. 1 973, 'L'architettura,' in: Metaponto. Atti XIII Convegno di Studi sulla Magna Grecia, Taranto 1973, 1 87-235. Meijer, F. 1 990, 'The financial aspects of the leges frumentariae of 123-58 BC,' MBAH 9.2, 14-23. Mele, A. 1979, fl commercio greco arcaico. Prexis ed emporie (Cahiers du Centre Jean Berard, IV), Naples. Meslin, M. 1 970, La fete des kalendes de janvier dans l 'empire romain. Etude d'un rituel de Nouvel An, Bruxelles. Mette-Dittmann, A. 1991, Die Ehegesetze des Augustus, Stuttgart. Michels, A.K. 1 944, 'The Consualia of December,' CP 39, 50. Millar, F. 1977, The emperor in the Roman world, London. Miliar, F. 1981, 'The world of the Golden Ass,' JRS 7 1 , 63-75. Miliar, F. 1 986, 'Italy and the Roman empire: Augustus to Constantine,' Phoenix 40, 295-3 1 8. Millet, P. 1 989, 'Patronage and its avoidance in classical Athens' in: Wal­ lace-Hadrill (ed.) 1 989, London/New York, 15-47. Mircovic, M. 1 986, 'Colonus iuris alieni and the Taxation,' Opus 5, 53-73. Molenat, J.-P. 1 985, 'L'approvisionnement de Tolede au :xv siede, d'apres les ordonnances municipales,' in: L 'Approvisionnement, 215-219. Momigliano Fs. 1 983, Tria Corda. Scritti in onore di A. Momigliano, a cura di E. Gabba, Corno. Mommsen, Th. 1 884/1 908, 'Die italische Bodentheilung und die Alimen­ tartafeln' (1 884), in: id., Gesammelte Schriften V, Berlin, 123-145. Montanari, E. 1986, 'Problemi della demittizzazione romano,' SMSR NS 10, 73-100. Monticelli, T. 1 792, Catechismo di agricoltura pratica, e di pastorizia Per la publica istruzione de' Contadini del regno di Napoli Parte prima. Napoli. e

369

Monticelli, T. 1841, 'Su la pastorizia del regno di Napoli,' Memoria del cavaliere Teodoro Monticelli, p. professore di filosofia morale nell'univer­ sita di Napoli, letta nell'adunanza del r. istit. d'incoraggiamento, del di 26 settembre 1810,' in: Opere dell'abate Teodoro Monticelli, segretario perpetuo della reale accademia delle scienze di Napoli I, Napoli, 137-186. Morineau, M. 1981, 'History and Tithes,' Journal of European Economic Histo,y 10, 437-480. Morris, I. 1987, Burial and ancient society. The rise of the Greek city-state (New Studies in Archaeology), Cambridge. Morris, I. 1991, 'The early polis as city and state,' in: Rich, Wallace-Hadrill (eds.) 1991, London, 25-57. Morrison J.S., Coates J. 1986, The Athenian trireme, Cambridge. Morrison, J.S., Williams, R.T. 1986, Greek oared ships 900-322 B.C. , Cambridge. Murray, 0. 1980, Earo/ Greece, Glasgow. Musurillo, H.A. 1972, The Acts of the Christian martyrs, Oxford. Neeve, P.W. de: see separate bibliography. Nenci, G. 1989 [1990], 'L'etnico Eo/moi e il ruolo del panico nell'alimenta­ zione antica,' ASNP 19, 1255-1265. Nicholas, D.M. 1971, Stad en plaueland in de Middeleeuwen, Bussum. Nicolet, C. 1977, 'Armee et Fiscalite: pour un bilan de la conquete Ro­ maine' in: Annees et fiscalite dans le monde antique (Colloques nationaux du centre national de la recherche scientifique ), Paris, 435-454. Nicolet, C. 1978, 'Mutations monetaires et organisation censitaire,' in: Les a Rome. Epoque republicaine et imperiale, Roma, 249-72. Nörr, D. 1966, Imperium und Polis in der hohen Prinzipatszeit, München. Nolle, J. 1 982, Nundinas instituere et habere. Epigraphische Zeugnisse zur Einrichtung und Gestaltung von ländlichen Märkten in Afrika und in der Provinz Asia, Hildesheim.

O'Brien, P. 1985, 'Agriculture and the home market for English industry, 1660-1820,' EHR 397, 773-799. O'Brien, P., Keyder, C., 1979, 'Les voies de passages vers la societe in­ dustrielle en Grande-Bretagne et en France (1780-1914 ),' AnnalesESC 34, 1284-1303. Oehme, M. 1988, Die römische Villenwirtschaft, Bonn. Oelsner, J. 1986, Materialien zur babylonischen Gesellschaft und Kultur in hellenistischer Zeit, Budapest. Oliva, P. 1971, Sparta and her social problems, Amsterdam/Prague. Opelt, I., 1970, 'Die Volcanalia in der Spätantike,' VChr 24, 59-65. Orlandini, P. 1982, 'Scavi e scoperte di VIII e VII sec. a.C. in localita Incoronata tra Siris e Metaponto,' ASAA 60, 315-327.

370

Osbome, R. 1985, Demos. The Discovery of Classical Attika, Cambridge. Osbome, R. 1987, Classical Landscape with Figures: The Ancient Greek City and its Countryside, London. Ottokar, N. 1962, fl Commune di Firenze alla fine de! Dugento, Torino.2 Pace, S. 1952, / contratti agrari (saggio di una teoria generale) , Milano. Pachtere, F.G. de 1920, La table hypothecaire de Veleia. Etude sur la propriete fonciere dans l 'Apennin de Plaisance, Paris. Pagliara, C. 1981, 'Vaste, fondo Lucemara: nota preliminare,' Studi di Antichita 2, 169-171. Pailler, J.-M. 1988, Bacchanalia. La repression de 186 av. l C. a Rome et en /talie, Paris/Roma. Palmer, R.E.A. 1970, The Archaic Community of the Romans, Cambridge Ma. Panitschek, P. 1990, 'Der spätantike Kolonat: Ein Substitut für die "Halb­ freiheit" peregriner Rechtssetzungen?,' ZRG 107, 137-154. Panizza, M. 1890, Risultati dell'inchiesta istituita da Agostino Berlani sulle condizioni sanitarie dei lavoratori della terra in /talia, Roma. Pascal, C.B. 1988, 'Tibullus and the Ambaivalia,' AJPh 109, 523-36. Pasquinucci, M. 1979, 'La transumanza nell'ltalia romana,' in: Strutture agrarie e allevamento transumante nell'/talia romana (///-/ sec. A.C.), a cura di E. Gabba, M. Pasquinucci, Pisa, 79-182.

Patterson, J.R. 1991, 'Settlement, city and elite in Samnium and Lycia,' in: Rich, Wallace-Hadrill (eds.) 1991, 147-168. Pavis d'Escurac, H. 1 987, 'A propos de l'approvisionnement en ble des cites de !'Orient romain,' in: Societes urbaines, societes rurales dans l 'Asie Mineure et la Sy,ie hellenistiques et romaines, ( ed.) E. Frezouls, Strasbourg, 1 17-130. Pecirka, J. 1973, 'Homestead farms in classical and hellenistic Hellas,' in: Finley (ed.) 1973, 1 13-147. Peppe, L. 1981, Studi sull'esecuzione personale. l Debiti e debitori nei primi secoli della Repubblica romana, Milano. Pereira Menaut, G. 1975, 'Probleme der globalen Betrachtung der römi­ schen Inschriften,' BJ 175, 141-164. Peruzzi, E. 1981, 'Romulus' Furrow,' PP 36, 106-28. Peyer, H.C. 1950, Zur Getreidepolitik oberitalienischer Städte im 13. Jahr­ hundert, Wien. Pflaum, H.-G. 1960, Les carrieres procuratoriennes equestres sous le HautEmpire I, Paris. Pflug, H. 1989, Römische Porlrätstelen in Oberitalien, Mainz. Piccaluga, G. 1974, Terminus, Roma. Piganiol, A. 1923, Recherches sur les jeu.x romains, Strasbourg/Paris.

371

Piganiol, A. 1 962, Les documents cadastraux de la colonie romaine d 'Orange (Gallia suppl. 16), Paris. Pilot = Medite"anean pilot Vol.II9, London 1965; ill8, IV8, ib. 1955. Piper, LJ. 1984-86, 'Spartan helots in the Hellenistic age,' AncSoc. 15/17, 75-88. Pleket, H.W. 1 964, Epigraphica I: Texts on the economic and social histo,y of the Creek world, Leiden. Pleket, H.W. 1 969, 'The Archaic tyrannis,' Talanta l, 19-61. Pleket, H.W. 1973, 'Economic History of the Ancient world and Epigraphy: Some Introductory Remarks,' Akten des VI. Internationalen Kongresses für Griechische und Lateinische Epigraphik, München 1972, München, 243-257. Pleket, H.W. 1 990, 'Wirtschaft,' in: Handbuch der Europäischen Wzrtschafts­ und Sozialgeschichte l, Europäische Wirtschafts- und Sozialgeschichte in der römischen Kaiserzeit, (hsg.) F. Vittinghoff, Stuttgart, 25-160. Pleket, H.W. (forthcoming), 'Rome: a preindustrial megalopolis,' in: Megalopolis: the Grand City in Histo,y, (eds.) T.Barker, A.Sutcliffe. Pöstgens, P. 1 940, Tibulls Amba,valgedicht (/11), Kiel. Polay, E. 1970, 'Matrimonio degli schiavi in Roman repubblicana,' Studi in onore di Giuseppe Grosso III, Milano, 79-89. Potter, T.W. 1979, The Changing Landscape of South Etruria, London. Pouthier, P. 1981, Ops et la conception divine de l 'abondance dans la religion romaine jusqu 'a la mort d '.Auguste, Rome. Powell, A. 1989, 'Mendacity and Sparta's use of the visual,' in: id. (ed.), Classical Sparta. Techniques behind her success, London, 173-192. Premerstein, A. von 1901, 'Clientes,' RE IV, 6-47. Pringsheim, F. 1952, 'Rez. von J.V.A. Fine, Horoi. Studies in mortgage, real security and land tenure in ancient Athens,' Gnomon 24, 348-353. Purcell, N. 1984, 'Puteoli' (= chapter 4 in M.Frederiksen (ed.), Campania, Roma 3 19-358). Purcell, N. 1985, 'Wine and wealth in ancient Italy,' JRS 75, 1-19. Radke, G. 1 965, Die Götter Altitaliens, Münster 19792• Radke, G. 1987, Zur Entwicklung der Gottesvorstellung und der Gottes­ verehrung in Rom, Darmstadt. Ramsay, W.M. 1895, The Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia, Oxford. Rathbone, D.W. 1981, 'The Development of Agriculture in the "Ager Co­ sanus" during the Roman Republic', JRS 71, 10-23. Rathbone, D. 1989, 'The ancient economy and Graeco-Roman Egypt' in: Egitto e storia antica dall'ellenismo all'eta araba. Bilancio di un confronto. Atti de/ colloquio intemazionale, Bologna 31 agosto - 2 settembre 1987, a

cura di L. Criscuolo, G. Gerad, Bologna, 159-176.

372

Rathbone, D. 1991, Economic rationalism and rural society in third-centu,y AD. Egypt. The Heroninos archive and the Appianus estate, Cambridge. Rawson, B. 1974, 'Roman concubinage and other de facto marriages,' TAPA 104, 279-305. Rawson, B. (ed.) 1986, The Family in Ancient Rome, London. Rawson, E. 1971, 'The literary sources for the pre-Marian army,' PBSR 39, 13-31 (repr. in: ead., Roman Culture and Society. Collected Papers, Oxford 1991). Rea, J.R. 1982, 'P.Lond. inv. 1562 verso: Market taxes in Oxyrhynchus,' ZPE 46, 191-209. Reynolds, J.M. 1 982, Aphrodisias and Rome, London. Rhodes, P.J. 1981, A Commenta,y on the Aristotelian Athenaion Politeia, Oxford. Rieb, J.W. 1983, 'The supposed Roman manpower shortage of the later second century B.C.,' Historia 32, 287-331. Rieb, J.W., Wallace-Hadrill, A. (eds.) 1991, City and count,y in the ancient world, London/New York. Richard, J.-C. 1978, Les origines de la plebe romaine, Roma. Richardson, J.S. 1980, 'The ownership of Roman land: Tiberius Gracchus and the ltalians,' JRS 70, 1-11. Rickman, G. 1980, The Com Supply ofAncient Rome, Oxford. Ridgway, D. 1984, L 'alba della Magna Grecia, Milan. Riemann, H. 1983/1984, 'Iuppiter Imperator,' RhM 90, 233-338; 91, 396. Riemann, H. 1 988, 'Praenestinae Sorores. Praeneste,' MDAI(R) 95, 41-73. Rihll, T.E. 1991, 'EKTHMOPOI: Partners in Crime?,' JHS 111, 101-127. Rix, H. 1989, 'LAT. patronus, matrona, colonus, pecunia,' in: Indogermanica Europaea. Festschrift für Wolfgang Meid zum 60. Geburtstag am 12. 11.1989, (hsg.) K. Heller et al., Graz, 225-40. Robert, J. & L. 1955, 1965, Hellenica. Recueil d'Epigraphie du Numismatique et d'Antiquites Grecques X, XIII, Paris. Rodbertus, J.C. 1864, 'Zur Geschichte der agrarischen Entwickelung Roms unter den Kaisern oder die Adscriptitier, Inquilinen und Colonen,' Jahr­ buch für Nationalökonomie und Statistik 2, 206-268. Röhle, R. 1987, 'Zur Bedeutung der lex locationis in CIL 6, 33840, l.2-4,' ZRG 104, 437-464. Ronciere, Ch. de la 1976, Florence, centre economique regional au XIV siecle, Aix-en-Provence. Ronciere, Ch. de la 1985, 'L'Approvisionnement des villes italiennes au Moyen Age (XIV0-:XV0 siecles),' in: L 'Approvisionnement, 33-51. Roobaert, A. 1977, 'Le danger hilote?,' Ktema 2, 141-155.

373

Roquero de Laburu, C. 1964, 'L'utilisation du sol dans la region semi-aride de l'Espagne' in: Land Use in Semi-Arid Mediterranean Climates. Unesco/­

Intemational Geographical Union Symposium Jraklion (Greece), 19-26 September 1962, (ed.) D.H.K. Amiran, Paris, 75-80. Rosafio, P. 1991a, Studies in the Roman Colonate (Diss. Cambridge).

Rosafio, P. 1991b, 'Dalla locazione al colonato: per un tentativo di rico­ struzione,' AION (archeol.) 13, 237-81. Rostovzev, M. 1901, 'Der Ursprung des Kolonats,' K/,io l, 295-99. Rostovzev, M. 1910a, 'Kolonat,' in: Handwörterbuch der Staatswissenschaften V, 913-21. Rostovzev, M. 1910b, Studien zur Geschichte des römischen Kolonates, Leipzig/Berlin. Rostovtzeff, M. 1941, Social and Economic Histo,y of the Hellenistic World, Oxford. Rostovtzeff, M. 1957, The Social and Economic History of the Roman Empire, Oxford2 (repr. 1971). Rouge, J. 1966, Recherches sur l 'organisation du commerce maritime en Mediterranee sous /'Empire Romain, Paris. Rowland, R.J. Jr. 1965, 'The number of grain recipients in the late Repub­ lic', MntHung 13, 81-83. Rundell, W.M.F. 1979, 'Cicero and Clodius: the question of credibility,' Historia 28, 310-328. Sabbatucci, D. 1988, La religione di Roma antica. Da/ calendario festivo all'ordine cosmico, Milano. Sachers, R. 1948, 'Tutela,' RE VII A 2, 1497-1608. Sachs, A.J., Hunger, H. 1988/1989, Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia . I. Diaries from 652 B. C. to 262 B. C. ; II. Diaries from 261 B. C. to 1 65 B. C. , Wien. Sahlins, M. 1974, Stone Age Economics, London. Ste. Croix, G.E.M.de 1981, The Class Struggle in the Ancient Creek World from the Archaic Age to the Arab Conquests, London (repr. 1983). Ste. Croix Fs. 1985, Crnx. Essays presented to G.E.M de Ste. Croix on his 75th birthday, (eds.) P. Cartledge, F.D. Harvey, Ex:eter. Sakellariou, M. 1979, 'Les hectemores,' in: Terre et paysans, 99-113. Sallares, J.R. 1991, The ecology of the ancient Creek world, London. Salmon, E.T. 1969, Roman Colonization under the Republic, London. Salmon, J.B. 1984, Wealthy Corinth. A Histo,y of the City, Oxford. Salvemini, G. 1899, Magnati e popolani in Firenze da! 1280 al 1295, repr. in: Opere di Gaetano Salvemini I, (2nd edn Milano 1974). Sandys, J.E. 1 912, Aristotle's Constitution ofAthens, (repr. New York 1973).

374

Sarkisian, G.Ch. 1969, 'City and land in Seleucid Babylonia,' in: Ancient Mesopotamia: Socio-Economic History, (ed.) I.M. Diakonoff, Moscow, 312331. Sarkisian, G.Ch. 1974, 'New Cuneiforrn Texts from Uruk of the Seleucid Period in the Staatliche Museen zu Berlin,' Forschungen und Berichte 16, 15-76. Sartre, M. 1991, L 'Orient romain. Provinces et societes provinciales en Mediterranee orientale d 'Auguste aux Severes (31 avant 1-C.- 235 apres 1 C. ) , Paris. Scalais, R. 1930, 'La politique agraire de Rome depuis les guerres Puniques jusqu'au:x Gracques,' Le Musee Beige 34, 195-241. Schacherrneyr, F. 1937 [1979], 'Peisistratos', RE 19, 156-191 (gekürzt in: Die ältere Tyrannis bis zu den Perserkriegen. Beiträge zur griechischen Tyrannis,

(hsg.) Konrad H. Kinzl, (WdF 510), 94-129, Darmstadt). Scheid, J. 1990, Romulus et ses freres, Paris. Scheidel, W. 1989, Der 'colonus' bei Columella: Image, sozialer Status und ökonomische Funktion, Diplomarbeit Univ. Wien 1989. Scheide!, W. 1990a, 'Feldarbeit von Frauen in der antiken Landwirtschaft,' Gymnasium 97, 405-431. Scheide!, W. 1990b, 'Free-born and manumitted bailiffs in the Graeco­ Roman World,' CQ 40, 591-593. Scheide!, W. 1990c, 'Ein Fall von Großpacht? Zu einer neuen Auflösung von CIL IX 3674,7,' ZRG 107, 373-375. Scheide!, W. 1 990d, 'Agricola, colonus, cultor, rusticus: Beobachtungen zur rechtlichen und sozialen Stellung der "Landwirte" in Columellas Schrift de re rustica,' Maia 42, 257-265. Scheide!, W. 1990e, 'Quasikolonen bei Vergil?,' Klio 72, 1 66-172. Scheide!, W. 1992, 'Coloni und Pächter in den römischen literarischen Quellen vom 2Jh.v.Chr. bis zur Severerzeit: Eine kritische Betrachtung (Colonus-Studien I),' Athenaeum 80, 331-70. Scheide!, W. 1993, 'Pächter und Grundpacht bei Columella (Colonus­ Studien II),' Athenaeum 81, forthcoming. Schilling, R. 1988, Dans le sillage de Rome, Paris. Schleich, T. 1983, 'Senatorische Wirtschaftsmentalität in moderner und antiker Deutung,' MBAH 2, 65-90. Schleich, T. 1984, Überlegungen zum Problem senatorischer Handels­ aktivitäten,' MBAH 3, 37-76. Schmiedt, G., Chevallier, R. 1959, Caulonia e Metaponto, Milano. Schneider, J., Schneider, P. 1976, Culture and Political Economy in Western Sicily, New York/London.

375

Schneider, H. 1988, 'Schottische Aufklärung und antike Gesellschaft,' in:

Alte Geschichte und Wissenschaftsgeschichte. Festschrift für Karl Christ zum 65. Geburlstag, (hsg.) P. Kneissl, V.Losemann, Darmstadt, 431-464. Schneider, K. 1958, 'Vilicus,' RE VIII.A.2, 2136-2141. Schwegler, A. 1867, Römische Geschichte I, Tübingen. 2 Scobie, A. 1986, 'Slums, sanitation and mortality,' Klio 68, 399-433.

Sergeenko, M.E. 1959, 'Der Vilicus,' BCO 4, 154-164. Seyfarth, W. 1974, Römische Geschichte. Kaiserzeit l, Darmstadt. Shaw, B.D. 1981, 'Rural markets in North Africa and the political economy of the Roman empire,' Ant. Afr. 17, 37-83. Sherwin-White, AN. 1966, The Letters of Pliny. An Historical and Social Commentary, Oxford (reissued with corrections 1985). Sherwin-White, S.M. 1983, 'Ritual for a Seleucid King at Babylon,' JHS 103, 156-159. Sherwin-White, S.M. 1987, 'Seleucid Babylonia: a case study for the instal­ lation and development of Greek rule,' in: Kuhrt, Sherwin-White 1987, 131. Sherwin-White, S., Kuhrt, A. 1993, From Samarhand to Sardis. A new approach to the Seleucid empire, London. Sirago, V.A. 1958, L 'Italia agraria sotto Traiano, (Universite de Louvain, Receuil de travaux d'histoire et de philologie, 4e serie, XVI), Louvain.

Siris-Polieion: Siris-Polieion. Fonti letterarie e nuova documentazione archeo­ logica, Incontro di Studi, Policoro 1984, Galatina 1986.

Sirks, B. 1991, 'The size of the grain distributions in imperial Rome and Constantinople,' Athenaeum 79, 215-237. Skalet, C.H. 1928, Ancient Sicyon, Baltimore. Skaskin, S.D. 1 955, Le condizioni storiche della rivolta di Dolcino, Moskva. Skydsgaard, J.E. 1969, Nuove ricerche sulla villa rustica romana fino all'epoca di Traiano, ARID 5, 25-40. Skydsgaard, J.E. 1980, 'Non-Slave Labour in Rural ltaly during the Late Republic,' in: Gamsey (ed.) 1980, 65-72. Skydsgaard, J.E. 1988, 'Transhumance in Ancient Greece,' in: Whittaker (ed.) 1988, 75-86. Slicher van Bath, B.H. 1960, De agrarische geschiedenis van West-Europa (500-1850), Utrecht. Smith, J.Z. 1978, Map is not Territory: Studies in the History of Religions, Leiden. Snider, G.L. 1978, 'Hesiod's sailing season,' AJAH 3, 129-135. Snodgrass, A. 1983, 'Archaeology', in: Sources for Ancient History, (ed.) M. Crawford, Cambridge, 137-184. Spek, R.J. van der 1981, 'Review of Kreissig 1978,' BO 38, 212-219.

376

Spek, RJ. van der 1985, 'Tue Babylonian Temple during the Macedonian and Parthian Domination,' BO 42, 541-562. Spek, RJ. van der 1986, Grondbezit in het Seleucidische Rijk, Amsterdam. Spek, RJ. van der 1987, 'Tue Babylonian City,' in Kuhrt, Sherwin-White 1987, 57-74. Spek, RJ. van der 1990a, 'Review of Briant 1982,' BO 47, 300-303. Spek, RJ. van der 1990b, 'Review of Oelsner 1986,' BSOAS 53, 326-327. Spek, R.J. van der 1992, 'Nippur, Sippar and Larsa in the Hellenistic Period,' in: Nippur at the Centennial Papers read at the 35e Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, Philadelphia 1988, (ed.) Maria deJong-Ellis (Occasional publications of the S.N. Kramer Fund 14), Philadelphia, 235-

260.

Spek, RJ. van der 1993a, 'Landownership in Babylonian Cuneiform Docu­ ments,' in: Legal Documents of the Hellenistic Period, (eds.) MJ. Geiler, H. Maehler, A.D.E. Lewis, Lcmdon, forthcoming. Spek, RJ. van der (1993b),'The Astronomical Diaries as a source for Achaemenid and Seleucid History,' BO, 50 (1993), forthcoming. Spranger, P.P. 1981, Historische Untersuchungen zu den Sklavenfiguren des Plautus und Terenz, Stuttgart. Spurr, M.S. 1983, 'Tue cultivation of millet in Roman Italy,' PBSR 51, 1-16. Spurr, M.S. 1986, Arable Cultivation in Roman ltaly (c. 200 B. C. -A.D. 100), London. Spurr, M.S. 1990, 'Agriculture and the Georgics,' in: Virgi� (eds.) I. McAuslan, P. Walcot, Oxford, 69-93. S taerman, E.M. 1964, Die Krise der Sklavenhalterordnung im Westen des römischen Reiches, Berlin. Staerman, E.M. 1969, 'Die Sklaverei in der römischen Landwirtschaft und die Politik der Kaiser,' JWG 2, 289-308. S taerman,E.M., Trofimova, M.K. 1975, La schiavitu nell'Italia imperiale /-III secolo, Roma (repr. 1982). S taerman, E.M. et al. 1987, Die Sklaverei in den westlichen Provinzen des römischen Reiches im 1. -3. Jhs., Stuttgart. Stahl, M. 1978, Imperiale Herrschaft und provinziale Stadt, Göttingen. Stefanelli, L. 1974, Arretratezza e patti agrari nel Mezzogiomo. La colonia migliorataria, Bari. Stehouwer, P.H.N.G. 1956, Etude sur Ops et Consus (Diss. Utrecht). Steinwenter A. 1942, 'Fundus cum instrumento. Eine agrar- und rechts­ geschichtliche Studie,' SA WW (Phil.-hist. Kl.) 221. Bd. 1. Abhandlung, Wien-Leipzig. Strubbe, J.H.M. 1989, 'Tue sitonia in the cities of Asia Minor under the Principate,' EA 13, 99- 122.

377

Syme, R. 1991,'Verona's earliest senators: some comparisons,' in: id. Roman papers VII, (ed.) A.R. Birley, Oxford, 473-491. Szab6, A. 1 956, 'Roma Quadrata,' Maia 8, 243-74. Tagliente, M. 1 986, 'Policoro: nuovi scavi nell'area di Siris,' in: Siris­ Polieion, 129-133. Talbert, RJ.A. 1984, The Senate of Imperial Rome, Princeton. Talbert, RJ.A. 1989, 'The role of the helots in the dass struggle at Sparta,' Historia 38, 22-40. Tarn, W.W. 1 951, The Greeks in Bactria and India, Cambridge (1938 1 ; 1951 2). Tate, G. 1989, 'Les campagnes de la Syrie du Nord a l'epoque protobyzan­ tine,' in: Hommes et richesses dans l'empire Byzantin. I: We- J/lle siecle, Paris, 63-77. Tate, G. 1990, 'Les relations economiques entre ville et campagne autour d'Antioche et en Syrie du Nord (debut du Ile siede-debut du VIIe siede ap. J.C.),' in: Models of regional economies in antiquity and the Middle Ages to the 11th century (Proceedings Tenth Intern. Economic History Con­ gress), (eds.) E. Aerts, J. Andreau, P. Oersted, Leuven, 84-92. Tchernia, A. 1 986, Le vin de l'Italie romaine, Roma. Tellegen, J.W. 1982, The Roman Law of Succession in the Letters of Pliny the Younger I, (Studia Amstelodamensia ad Epigraphicam, Ius Antiquum et Papyrologicam Pertinentia 21 ), Zutphen. Te"e et paysans 1979, Te"e et paysans dependants dans les societes antiques. Colloque international tenu a Besan