No More Learning

c. ; Wachsmuth. Hellen. Alterthums- impossible to estimate with any certainty the
kunde, $ 56, vol
. i. p. 472) seem to admit, with magnitude of the change which Solon effected.
out any question, the statement that Solon lowered Till it can be settled whether the division into four
the rate of interest. This, however, rests only on tribes was restricted to the Eupatridae, or included
the authority (or conjecture) of Androtion, and as the Geomori and Demiurgi, it is impossible to as-
his account is based upon an erroneous view of certain in what position the ruling class stood to
the whole matter, it may fairly be questioned the unenfranchised demus, and consequently how
whether any portion of his statement is to be far the latter was affected by the legislation of


## p. 860 (#876) ############################################

860
SOLON.
SOLON.
Solon. The opinion of Niebuhr (Hist. of Rome, direct taxes, but of course they, as well as the rest,
vol. i. note 1017, vol. ii. p. 304), which is sup- were liable to indirect taxes.
ported by Mr. Malden (Library of Useful Know- To Solon was ascribed the institution of the
ledye, History of Rome, p. 144), was, that the Bould, or deliberative assembly of Four Hundred.
division into phylae, phratriae, and genea, was Probably he did no more than modify the consti-
restricted to the Eupatridae. All analogy confirms tution of an earlier assembly of the same kind
this view, which certainly is not opposed by more (Dict. of Antiq. art. Boule. ) Plutarch (Sol. 19)
numerous or authentic testimonies on the part of says that the four hundred members of the Boule
ancient writers than are the universally acknow- were elected (επιλεξάμενος perhaps simplies an
ledged views of Niebuhr with respect to the election by the popular assembly), one hundred
Roman curine and tribes. If it be the correct one, from each of the four tribes. It is worth noting
the demus in Attica must have been destitute of that this is the only direct statement that we have
any recognized political organization, and must about the Boule of Solon's time. It must be
have profited by the legislation of Solon in very settled whether the the Boule is an åpxń, and if
much the same way as the plebs at Rome did by it is, whether it is one of the doxal spoken of by
that of Servius Tullius.
Plutarch (c. 18), and Aristotle (Pol. ii. 9. § 2),
The distinguishing feature of the constitution before it can be affirmed that a member of
any
of
of Solon was the introduction of the timocratic the first three classes might belong to it, but not
principle. The title of citizens to the honours one of the fourth, or that it was elected by the
and offices of the state was regulated (at least popular assembly. Plutarch does not say that the
in part) not by their nobility of birth, but by members of the Boule were appointed only for a
their wealth. All the citizens were distributed year, or that they must be above thirty years of
into four classes. (If the tribes included only the age. In fact we know nothing about the Boule,
Eupatridae, it will be a mistake to speak of these but that its members were taken in equal propor-
classes as divisions of the citizens of the tribes ; tions from the four genealogical tribes, and that
they must have been divisions in which the Eupa- the popular assembly could only entertain propo-
trid tribes and the demus were blended, just as sitions submitted to it by the Boule. Here again
the patricians and plebeians were in the classes we feel greatly the want of more certain knowledge
and centuries of Servius Tullius. ) The first class regarding those genealogical tribes, with the in-
consisted of those who had an annual income of at ternal organisation of which Solon does not seem
least 500 medimni of dry or liquid produce (equi- to have interfered. We are strongly inclined to
valent to 500 drachmae, a medimnus being reckoned the opinion that even Mr. Grote represents the
at a drachma, Plut. Sol. 23), and were called Boule of Solon's constitution as a far less aristo-
Pentacosiomedimni. The second class consisted cratical assembly than it really was, and that in
of those whose incomes ranged between 300 and point of fact it was an exclusively Eupatrid body,
500 medimni or drachmae, and were called Hippeis closely analogous to the Roman senate under the
('laneis or 'Intñs), from their being able to keep constitution of Servius Tullius. The most au-
a horse, and bound to perform military service as thentic and valuable statement that we have re-
cavalry. The third class consisted of those whose specting the general nature of Solon's constitu-
incomes varied between 200 and 300 medimni ortional changes is that of Solon himself (ap. Plut.
drachmae (see Grote, l. c. vol. iii. p. 157, note, for Sol. 18, Fragm. 4. ap. Bergk, l. c. p. 322), from
reasons for rejecting Böckh's estimate of the lowest which it is clear that nothing can be more erro-
pecuniary qualification of the third class at 150 neous than to speak of Solon's institutions as being
drachmae), and were termed Zeugitae (Zevgitai). of a democratical character. To the demus he
The fourth class included all whose property fell gave nothing more than a defensive power, suffi-
short of 200 medimni or drachmae. Plutarch (Sol. cient to protect them from any tyrannous abuse on
18) says that this class bore the name of Thetes. the part of the noble and wealthy classes, with
Grote (l. c. p. 158) questions whether that state whose prerogatives, in other respects, he did not
ment is strictly accurate. There is no doubt, interfere (Δήμω μεν γαρ έδωκα τόσον κράτος όσον
however, that the census of the fourth class was επαρκείς, τιμής ούτ' αφελών ούτ' επορεξάμενος:
called the Thetic census (Θητικόν τέλος). The | οι δ' είχον δύναμιν και χρήμασιν ήσαν άγητοι,
first three classes were liable to direct taxation, in Kal Tois éopao áunu under deines éxeur). Accord
the form of a graduated income tax. The taxable ing to the view commonly taken of the four tribes,
capital of a member of the first class was estimated there seems no reason why a large proportion of
at twelve times his yearly income, whatever that the Boule might not have been members of the
The taxable capital of a member of the demus, for it is not credible that the Attic demus
second class was estimated at ten times his yearly was entirely included in the lowest class, and if
income ; and that of one of the third class at five (according to the common view) the Boule was
times his yearly income. Thus upon any occasion elected by the ecclesia, where the fourth class
on which it became necessary to levy a direct tax, would be the most numerous, it seems that the
it was assessed at a certain per centage on the result must almost necessarily have been, that the
taxable capital of each. It is not correct, however, Boule should be little more than the exponent of
to say that the taxable property of one of the the feelings and will of the demus. In the most
pentacosiomedimni was estimated at 6000 drachmae. moderate view of the case the constitution and
It was at least that, but it might be more. In working of such an assembly must have been a
like manner, the taxable capital of one of the large infraction of the previous power and prero-
Hippeis might range from 3000 to 5000 drachmae, gatives of the Eupatrids, and seems equally incon-
and so on. (Bockh, Public Economy of Athens, sistent with the passage of Solon quoted above,
b. iv. ch. v. ; Grote, l. c. p. 156). A direct tax, and with the statement of Plutarch (Sol. 19) that
however, was an extraordinary, and not an annual the Boule was designed as a check upon the demus.
payinent. The fourth class were exempt from Both these statements, and all that we learn of the
was.


## p. 861 (#877) ############################################

V
SOLON.
SOLON,
861
innovations of Cleisthenes, become far more intelli- , and that of Demosthenes ; many of the institutions
gible on the hypothesis that the four Ionian thus referred to the great legislator, being among
tribes were Eupatrid tribes, and the Boule of the last refinements and elaborations of the demo-
Solon an Eupatrid body, whose action, however, cratical mind of Athene. We entirely coincido
was so far controlled by the demus, that its measures in his opinion that the whole arrangement of the
required the ratification of the popular assembly to Heliastic courts and the transference to them of
make them valid. Mr. Grote (vol
. iii. p. 97) expresses the old judicial powers of the archons bespeaks a
an opinion that before the time of Solon there was state of things utterly inconsistent with the knows
but one aristocratical council, the same which was relations of the age of Solon. " It would be a
afterwards distinguished from the Council of Four marvel, such as nothing short of strong direct evi-
Hundred as the Upper Council, or the Council of dence would justify us in believing, that in an age
Areiopagus. But his remark that the distinctive when even partial democracy was yet untried,
title of the latter, “Senate of Areiopagus," would Solon should conceive the idea of such institutions:
not be bestowed until the formation by Solon of it would be a niarvel still grenter, that the half-
the second senate or council, scems at varinncc emancipated Thetes and small proprietors for
with the quotation from one of the laws of Solon whom he legislated — yet trembling under the rod
himself, by which Plutarch shows that the council of the Eupatrid archons, and utterly inexperienced
of Arciopigus was not instituted by Solon. We in collective business should have been found
incline more to the opinion of Dr. Thirlwall (Ilist. suddenly competent to fulfil these ascendent func-
of Greece, vol. ii. p. 40), that the Boule of Solon tions, such as the citizens of conquering Athens in
was only a modification of a previously existing the days of Pericles — full of the sentiment of
institution.
force, and actively identifying themselves with the
There was no doubt a public assembly of some dignity of their community became gradually
kind before the time of Solon, though probably competent, and not more than competent, to exer-
possessed of but little more power than those which cise with effect. ” (p. 165. ) The term Heliaea he
we find described in the Homeric poems. Solon thinks was in the time of Solon no more than the
undoubtedly greatly enlarged its functions. He name of the popular assembly, which is in fact the
gave it the right of electing the archons and other original meaning of the word. The number of
magistrates, and, what was even more important, 6000, which was that of the whole body of dicasts
made the archons and magistrates accountable in after times, had reference to the Cleisthenean
directly to it when their year of office was expired. division into 10 tribes. It is to be observed, that
He also gave it what was equivalent to a veto Plutarch, who after all is our best authority, says
upon any proposed measure of the Boule, though nothing of any such dicastic organisation as that
it could not itself originate any measure. Nor of the later Heliaea. Mr. Grote even questions
does it seem at all likely that, as constituted by the statement of Plutarch (Sol. 18), that Solon
Solon, it even had the power of modifying any allowed an appeal to the ecclesia from the sentence
measure submitted to it. Every member of all of an archon, considering that Plutarch has been
the four classes might vote in the popular assembly misled by the recollection of the Roman provocatio
(Dict. of Antiq. art. Ecclesia), and all votes seem to (l. c. p. 172).
have had the same weight, which forms an im- The idea of the periodical revision of his laws
portant point of difference between the Ecclesia of by the Nomothetae being a part of Solon's
Athens and the Comitia Centuriata of Servius plan is even in contradiction to the statements
Tullius,
of our authorities (Herod, i. 29; Plut. Sol. 25).
Plutarch (Sol. 19) remarks that it was an error The institution of the Nomothetae was one of
to attribute to Solon the establishment of the the most ultra-democratical that can well be ima-
council of the Areiopagus (Dict. of Antiq. art. gined. It was a jury appointed by lot out of a body
Areiopagus). He does not seem even to have of dicasts who were appointed by lot, with power
made any change in its constitution, though he to rescind any law with which any one could
enlarged its powers, and entrusted it with the ge- find sufficient fault to induce an assembly of the
Deral supervision of the institutions and laws of people to entertain the idea of subjecting it to
the state, and the religion and morals of the revision. It is to be observed too that Dercos-
citizens.
thenes (cont. Timarch. p. 706) and Aeschines
Athenians in the age of unmitigated democracy (cont. Ctes. p. 429) mention, in connection with
were extremely fond of speaking of all their in- this procedure, as one of the regulations appointed
stitutions either as originated by Solon, or as the by Solon to be observed by the proposer of a new
natural expansion and application of his principles. or amended law, that he should post up his pro-
Some even carried them back to Theseus. The posed law before the Eponymi, that is, the statues
orators of course were not slow to fall in with this of the ten heroes from whom the ten tribes of
popular prejudice, and various palpable anachronisms Cleisthenes derived their names (comp. Grote, l. c.
in their statements show how little reliance can be p. 163).
placed on any accoun of the institutions of Solon Besides the arrangement of the general political
that come from such a source. For instance, the relations of the people Solon was the author of a
oath of the Heliastic dicasts, which is quoted by great variety of special laws, which do not seem
Demosthenes and ascribed to Solon (cont. Timocr. to have been arranged in any systematic manner.
p. 746), mentions the Cleisthenean senate of Five Those relating to debtors and creditors have been
hundred. Several other curious examples of simi- already referred to. Several had for their object
lar anachronisms are collected by Mr. Grote (vol. the encouragement of trade and manufactures.
iii. p. 163, note 1) who has some excellent re- Foreign settlers were not to be naturalized as
marks on the practice of connecting the name of citizens unless they carried on some industrious
Solon with the whole political and judicial state of pursuit. If a father did not teach his son some
Athens, as it existed between the age of Pericles | trade or profession, the son was not liable to main-


## p. 862 (#878) ############################################

862
SOLON.
SOLON.
c
tain his father in his old age. The council of the Greeks months of 29 and 30 days alternately.
Areiopagus had a general power to punish idleness. He also thinks that this was accompanied by the
Solon forbade the exportation of all produce of the introduction of the Trieteris or two-year cycle.
Attic soil except olive oil. The impulse which he We have more than one statement to the effect
gave to the various branches of industry carried on that Solon exacted from the government and people
in towns had eventually an important bearing upon of Athens a solemn oath, that they would observe
the development of the democratic spirit in Athens. his laws without alteration for a certain space -
(Plut. Sol. 22, 24. ) Solon was the first who gave 10 years according to Herodotus (i. 29), - 100
to those who died childless the power of disposing years according to other accounts (Plut. Sol. 25).
of their property by will. He enacted several According to a story told by Plutarch (Sol. 15),
laws relating to marriage, especially with regard to Solon was himself aware that he had been com-
heiresses (Plut. Sol. 20). Other regulations were pelled to leave many imperfections in his system
intended to place restraints upon the female sex and code. He is said to have spoken of his laws
with regard to their appearance in public, and as being not the best, but the best which the
especially to repress frantic and excessive mani. Athenians would have received. After he had
festations of grief at funerals (l. c. 21). An adulo completed his task, heing, we are told, greatly an-
terer taken in the act might be killed on the spot, noyed and troubled by those who came to him
but the violation of a free woman was only punish with all kinds of complaints, suggestions or criti-
able by a fine of one hundred drachmae, the seduc- cisms about his laws, in order that he might not
tion of a free woman by a fine of twenty drachmae bimself have to propose any change, he absented
(l. c. 23). Other laws will be found in Plutarch himself from Athens for ten years, after he had
respecting the speaking evil either of the dead or obtained the oath above referred to.
He first
of the living, respecting the use of wells, the plant visited Egypt, and conversed with two learned
ing of trees in conterminous properties, the des- Egyptian priests — Psenophis of Heliopolis, and
truction of noxious animals, &c. (l. c. 21, 23, 24. Sonchis of Sais. The stories which they told him
Comp. Diog. Laërt i. 55, &c. ). The rewards which about the submerged island of Atlantis, and the
he appointed to be given to victors at the Olympic war carried on against it by Athens 9000 years
and Isthmian games are for that age unusually before his time, induced him to make it the sub-
large (500 drachmae to the former and 100 to the ject of an epic poem, which, however, he did
latter). The law relating to theft, that the thief not complete, and of which nothing now remains.
should restore twice the value of the thing stolen, From Egypt he proceeded to Cyprus, and was
seems to have been due to Solon. (Dict. of Ant. received with great distinction by Philocyprus,
art. Konñs dikn). He also either established or king of the little town of Aepeia. Solon persuaded
regulated the public dinners at the Prytaneium. the king to remove from the old site, which was
(Plut. Sol. 24. ) One of the most curious of his on an inconvenient and precipitous elevation, and
regulations was that which denounced atimia build a new town on the plain. He himself as-
against any citizen, who, on the outbreak of a sisted in laying out the plan. The new settle-
sedition, remained neutral. On the design of this ment was called Soli, in honour of the illustrious
enactment to shorten as much as possible any sus- visitor. A fragment of an elegiac poem addressed
pension of legal authority, and its connection with by Solon to Philocyprus is preserved by Plutarch
the ostracism, the reader will find some ingenious (Sol. 26 ; Bergk, 1. c. p. 3:25). We learn from
and able remarks in Grote (l. c. iii. p. 190, &c. ). Herodotus (v. 113) that in this poem Solon be-
The laws of Solon were inscribed on wooden rollers stowed the greatest praise upon Philocyprus. The
(a toves) and triangular tablets (Kúpbeus), in the statement of the blundering Diogenes Laërtius
Bovotpoondóv fashion, and were set up at first in (i. 51, 62) that Solon founded Soli in Cilicia, and
the Acropolis, afterwards in the Prytaneium. (Plut. died in Cyprus, may be rejected without hesi-
Sol. 25; Harpocr. s. vv. Kúpbels - Kátwdev tation.
vóuos ; Pollux, viii. & 128 ; Suidas, s. vv. )
It is impossible not to regret that the stern laws
The Athenians were also indebted to Solon for of chronology compel us to set down as a fiction
some rectification of the calendar. Diogenes Laër- the beautiful story so beautifully told by Hero-
tius (i. 59) says that “he made the Athenians dotus (i. 29–45, 86 ; comp. Plut. Sul. 27, 28) of
regulate their days according to the moon,” that is the interview between Solon and Croesus, and the
to say, he introduced some division of time agreeing illustration furnished in the history of the latter of
more accurately with the course of the moon. the truth of the maxim of the Athenian sage, that
Plutarch (Sol. 25) gives the following very confused worldly prosperity is precarious, and that no man's
account of the matter: “Since Solon observed the life can be pronounced happy till he has reached
irregularity of the moon, and saw that its motion its close without a reverse of fortune (CROESUS).
does not coincide completely either with the setting For though it may be made out that it is just
or with the rising of the sun, but that it often on within the limits of possibility that Solon and
the same day both overtakes and passes the sun, Croesus may have met a few years before B. C. 560,
he ordained that this day should be called evn kal that could not have been an interview consistent
véa, considering that the portion of it which pre- with any of the circumstances mentioned by Hero-
ceded the conjunction belonged to the month that dotus, and without which the story of the inter-
was ending, the rest to that which was beginning. view would be entirely devoid of any interest that
The succeeding day he called vouunvía. ” Accord-could make it worth while attempting to establish
ing to the scholiast on Aristophanes (Nub. 1129) its possibility. The whole pith and force of the
Solon introduced the practice of reckoning the days story would vanish if any interview of an earlier
from the twentieth onwards in the reverse order. date be substituted for that which the episode in
Ideler (Handbuch der Chronologie, vol. i. p. 266, &c. ) Herodotus requires, namely one taking place when
gathers from the notices that we have on the sub- Croesus was king (Mr. Grote, l. c. p. 199 shows
ject, that Solon was the first who introduced among that it is a mere gratuitous hypothesis to make


## p. 863 (#879) ############################################

SOLON.
863
SOPATER,
SISTRATUS,
Croesus joint king with his father), at the height arrangement of the Homeric poems, sec the article
of his power, when he had a son old cnough to be HOMERUS (p. 507).
married and command armies, and immediately The story told by Plutarch (Sol. 29, comp.
preceding the turn of his fortunes, not more than Diog. Laërt
. i. 59) respecting Solun and Thespis
seven or eight years before the capture of Sardis. cannot be true, since dramatic entertainments were
“In my judgment,” observes Mr. Grote, “this is not introduced into Athens till 20 years (B. C. 535)
an illustrative tale, in which certain real characters after Solon's death. It is related that Solon
--Solon and Croesus, ----and certain real facts — asked Thespis, after witnessing one of his pieces,
the great power and slicceeding ruin of the former if he was not ashamed of telling such untruths
by the victorious arm of Cyrus, together with before so large an audience. Thespis replied, that
certain facts altogether fictitious, such as the two as it was done for amusement only, there was no
Bons of Croesus, the Phrygian Adrastus and his harm in saying and doing such things. Which
history, the hunting of the mischievous wild boar answer incensed Solon so much that he struck the
on Mount Olympus, the ultimate preservation of ground vehemently with his staff, and said that if
Croesus, &c. are put together so as to convey an such amusement as that were to be praised and
impressive moral lesson. "
honoured, men would soon begin to regard cove-
During the absence of Solon the old oligarchical nants as nothing more than a joke.
disscnsions were renewed, the Pedieis being headed An inscription on a statue set up in honour of
by Lycurgus, the Parali by Megncles, the Diacrii Solon spoke of him as born in Salamis (Diog.
by Peisistratus. These dissensions were approach. Laërt. i. 62, ib. Menage). This can hardly have
ing a crisis when Solon returned to Athens, and been the case, as Salamis was not incorporated
had proceeded to such a length that he found him with Attica when he was born. The statue was set
self unable to repress them. For an account of up a long time after Solon's death, and probably
the successful machinations of Peisistratus, and the by the Salaminians themselves. (Piut. Solon. ;
unsuccessful endeavours of Solon to counteract Diog. Laërt. i. 45, &c. ; K. F. Hermann, Lehrbuch
them, the reader is referred to the article Pei- der griech. Staatsalterth. SS 106—109; Grote, Hist.
The tyrant, after his usurpation, is of Greece, vol. iii. c. xi. ; Thirlwall, Hist. of Greece,
said to have paid considerable court to Solon, and vol. ii. pp. ?
. 27—56. )
(C. P. M. ]
on various occasions to have solicited his advice, SOLON, a gem engraver, who probably lived
which Solon did not withhold. We do not know under Augustus, at the same time as Dioscorides,
certainly how long Solon survived the overthrow with whom he may perhaps be considered to divide
of the constitution. According to Phanias of Les- the honour of being the founder of the succession
bos (Plut. Sol. 32), he died in less than two years of gem engravers, who lived under the early Roman
after. There seems nothing to hinder us from ac- emperors, and whose numerous and beautiful works
cepting the statement that he had reached the age now fill the cabinets of Europe. There is no mention
of eighty (Diog. Laërt. i. 62). There was a story made of Solon in any ancient writer, but his name
current in antiquity that, by his own directions, occurs on several gems. A complete account of his
his ashes were collected and scattered round the works, with references to the other writers by whom
island of Salamis. Plutarch discards this story as they have been described, is given in Nagler's
absurd. He himself remarks, however, that Aris- Neues Allgemeines Künstler-Lexicon, vol xvii. s. v.
totle, as well as other authors of credit, repeated (See, also, Thiersch, Epocken, p. 304 ; Müller,
it. Diogenes Laërtius (i. 62) quotes some lines Archäol. d. Kunst, $ 200, n. 1. ) [P. S. )
of Cratinus in which it is alluded to. The sin- SOLON, JUʻLIUS, a man of the lowest origin,
gularity of it is rather an argument in its favour. purchased the rank of senator from Cleander, the
Of the
poems of Solon several fragments remain. favourite of Commodus, by the surrender of all his
They do not indicate any great degree of imagina- property. He was afterwards put to death by
tive power, but the style of them seems to have Septimius Severus at the commencement of his reign,
been vigorous and simple. Those that were called although he had himself drawn up a decree of the
forth by special emergencies appear to have been senate at the request of the emperor, enacting that
marked by no small degree of energy. Solon is no senator should be put to death (Dion Cass.
said to have attempted a metrical version of his lxxii. 12, lxxiv. 2, and Excerp. Vatic. ed. Maii,
laws, and a couple of lines are quoted as the com- p. 225).
mencement of this composition ; but nothing more SOMIS (Pwuis), the artist who made the bronze
of it remains. (Plut. Sol. 3). Here and there, even statue of Procles the son of Lycastidas, of An-
in the fragments that remain, sentiments are ex- dros, an Olympic victor in the boys' wrestling.
pressed of a somewhat more jovial kind than the (Paus. vi. 14. § 5. s. 13. ) From the connection
rest. These are probably relics of youthful effu- in which the passage stands in Pausanias, it may be
sions. Some traced them, as well as Solon's some inferred with probability, though not with certainty,
what luxurious style of living, to the bad habits that Somis was contemporary with Stomius about
which he had contracted while following the pro- the beginning of the fifth century B. C. (Thiersch,
fession of a trader. (Plut. Sol. 3. ) The fragments Epochen, p. 202 ; comp. Stomius. ) [P. S. )
of Solon are usually incorporated in the collections SOMNUS, the personification and god of sleep,
of the Greek gnomic poets, as, for example, in the Greek Hypnos, is described by the ancients as
those of Sylburg, Brunck, and Boissonade. They a brother of Death (Jávatos), and as a son of
are also inserted in Bergk's Poetae Lyrici Graeci. Night (Hes. Theog. 211, &c. ; Virg. Aen. vi. 277).
There is also a separate edition by Bach (Lugd.