It seems, however, neither now nor recently to have been known to those who have philosophized concerning a polity, that a city ought to be divided separately according to genera, and that the genus of the soldiers should be different from that of the husbandmen. For this method is adopted in Egypt even now, and also in Crete; Sesostris, as it is said, having established this custom in Egypt, but Minos in Crete. The regulation, likewise, of common tables appears to be ancient; having been, indeed, established in Crete, during the reign of Minos; but in Italy in a much more remote period. For the learned men of that country say, that one Italus was the king of Oenotria, from whom the people changing their names, were called Italians instead of Oenotrians; and that coast of Europe which is between the Scylletic and Lametic bay, received the name of Italy. For these gulfs are distant from each other about half a day’s journey. This Italus, therefore, it is said, made the Oenotrians, who were formerly shepherds, husbandmen, and gave them laws different from what they had before, and was the first that established common tables. Hence, even now, some of his descendants use them, and adopt some of his laws. But the Opici inhabit that part of Italy which is situated towards the Tyrrhenian sea, and who both formerly were and now are called Ausonians. That part, however, which is towards Iapygia and the Ionian sea, which is called Syrtis, is inhabited by the Chaonians. But the Chaonians are the descendants of the Oenotrians. The regulation, therefore, of the common tables, first originated from hence; but the separation of the citizens according to genera, was derived from Egypt. For the reign of Sesostris is of much higher antiquity than that of Minos. It is requisite, therefore, to think that nearly other things have been discovered repeatedly, or rather infinitely, in a great length of time¹. For it is reasonable to suppose that want would lead men to the discovery of what is necessary, and that when this was obtained, and increased, they would invent what pertains to the elegancies and conveniences of life; so that it is requisite to form the same conclusion with respect to polities. But that all these things are ancient is indicated by what pertains to the Egyptians. For they appear to be the most ancient of all people, and they have laws, and political arrangement. Hence, it is necessary to make a sufficient use of what has been said, and to endeavor to discover what has been omitted. We have already said, therefore, that the landed property ought to belong to the military, and to those who partake of the government of the state. We have likewise shown why the husbandmen ought to be a separate order of people, and of what extent and quality the country should be. In the first place, therefore, we will speak of the division of the land, and show who and what kind of persons the husbandmen ought to be; since we do not admit that property should be common, as some persons have said, except that it should become common by the friendly use of it; nor should any one of the citizens want food. And with respect to common tables, it appears to all [politicians], that they are useful in well-regulated cities. But we shall hereafter show through what cause it also appears to be so to us. It is necessary, however, that all the citizens should partake of these. But it will not be easy for the poor out of their own property, to furnish as much as they are ordered to do, and supply their own family besides. Further still, the expense pertaining to the worship of the gods, should be common to the whole city. It is necessary, therefore, that the land should be divided into two parts, and that one part should be common, but the other, the property of individuals. And again, it is requisite that each of these should receive a twofold division. For of that which is common, indeed, one part should be appropriated to the worship of the gods, but the other to the expense of the common tables. Of the portion, also, which belongs to individuals, one part should be at the extremity of the country, but the other near the city; in order that two portions being allotted to each person, all may partake of both places. For thus they will have what is equal and just, and will act with greater concord and unanimity in their wars with the neighbouring states. For where this mode of division is not adopted, one party will neglect and despise the enmity of the neighbouring states, and the other will pay great attention to it, and more than is becoming. Hence, in some places there is a law, which forbids those that dwell near the borders of the country to have a vote in the council respecting what pertains to war; as being incapable through private interest of voting impartially. It is necessary, therefore, that the land should be divided after this manner, through the beforementioned causes. It would be very gratifying, indeed, if the husbandmen were slaves, but neither all of them of the same nation, nor of an ardent mind. For thus they will be useful in their business, and safe from attempting any novelties. But in the second place, barbarian servants are to be preferred, similar in natural disposition to those above-mentioned. Of these, however, those who are to cultivate the private property of an individual, should belong to that individual; but those who are to cultivate the common land, should belong to the public. And we shall hereafter show in what manner slaves ought to be used, and why it is better that liberty should be proposed to all slaves, as the reward of their services.
The lessons published on this site are freely available to read. If you wish to move from reading to formal study — with graded assessments, academic records, and the support of the Academy — you may enroll at any time. Enrollment is open year round, to students of all ages.
