On The Structure of Greek Tribal Society: An Essay

ιραν ?ε?σομαι

ει ?π? χθον? π?νθ?

δ?? τε κα? ε?κα

?χεται δο?ναι β

? ?νθρ

ric

Κλ?ρο? An

nure amongst the Greeks, we are baffled by

a citizen was calle

ρο? really was and how it was made use of in practice. The law concerning these family holdings, says Aristotle,187 and concerning their possible transmission through daughters was not written. It was a typical example of customary law. This statement gives a hint as to the usual treatmen

ship of land to the s

ccasionally a valuable link in the title to possession of that piece of land as private property;189 and the possession of land at all was in part a guarantee of the pure native blood in the veins of the possessor.190 It is a striking illustration of the truth of this that, throughout all the extant speeches of Isaeus dealing with the disposal of κλ?ροι of dead citizens, not a single

ke us they have shown themselves to be both nearest in blood to the person deceased, and most conne

i-pastora

able to frequent losses. On one occasion Odysseus had to go to Messene "to recover a debt; which, to wit, the whole people owed him (π?? δ?μο?): for the Messenians had lifted 300 sheep with their shepherds from Ithaka."194 As the newcomers increased in numbers and gained a reputation for ability to defend their own, sufficient to discourage the attacks of their neighbours, they would have leisure to de

ce; but inasmuch as whilst studying the kernel, assistance may often be obtained from knowledge of the shell, menti

land-tenure in Gre

in 1869, descriptions are given of the existing method

of fifteen to twenty-five acres (or sometimes double that area),

each other. Moreover none of the usual precautions are adopted to mark the limits of the different propertie

. When there is a will the testator can only reserve for his disposal a share of the estate eq

g

dings in S

nds in the year 1863, thus describes the managem

he village as cultivator, another lives in the town acting as factor, or merchant to the estate, receiving and selling the produce and managing the proceeds, whatever the case may be; and in addition selling, exporting, and otherwise conducting a general business in the same department. A third may perhaps receive and sell the goods in a foreign country. A fourth may be a member of the legislature, and a fifth a judge. Some marry and have families, others remain single: but the incomes of all are united, each draws out a reasonable share, according to his needs, and a very close account is kept of all transactions. If one brother dies, his children come into the partnership; and as time goes on, these again will grow up and marry, the daughters receiving a proportional and often large dower out of the joint fund, entirely wi

sage than by law, and the landlord generally takes on an average about 15 per cent. of the produce in kin

ield syste

to lie fallow every other year, sometimes two years out of three. Sheep and goats are the chief stock;

the i

lots consisting of a quarter or half acre apiece or even less, intersected by those belon

nty-five acres, seldom in a continuous piece, but "cut

and, especially in the olive groves, where however there are no divisions on the land

ges and not on separate estates. They help one another to avoid the expense of h

ield syste

illed by occupants of villages into small pieces or strips, in such a way that the holding of each consists of a number of isolated pieces lying pro

arm at any rate to bear in mind this ancient and still used method of dividing land, whilst consideri

on Of The Κλ?ρο

λ?ρο? vested in th

derived from the κλ?ρο? which descended to him as the means of sustenance for himself and his family. Where the head of the family alone was responsible for the rites to the dead at the family altars, the position of a son would always be incomplete if he tried to establish during his father's lifetime a hearth and hou

the mysteries of the hearth only took place o

other member

would be responsible for the maintenance of his parent, a duty much insisted on by Plato and Isaeus. In fact the conclusion is justified that the family, until final subdivision into separate ο?κοι, drew its supplies from th

henes describing the division of the property of Bouselos

ng shared the substance, each of them married a wife according to your laws, and there were born children to them all, and children's ch

. The eldest brother was guardian (κ?ριο?) of his sisters and those of his brothers who were minors, inasmuch as he succeeded to his father's position of head of his kindred

ive of the e

born and "knew more things"-?λλ? Ζε?? πρ?τερο? γεγ?νει κα? πμε?ονα ?δη210-and Poseidon therefore avoided open strife with him, however [pg 091] unwillingly. Though Zeus be the stronger, grumbles the Sea-god, let him keep to his third share and not interfere with his brothers' pleasure on their common ground, the earth. Le

e power of the hea

nd it is evidence, so far as it goes, that the eldest brother did not succeed to his father's power over his grown-up brothers, but owed what influence he did not obtain f

f "eldest and best"-πρεσβ?τατον κα? ?ριστον-and el

he is willing that some other basileus in Ithaka [pg 092] should take the kingship, but he will be mast

et, by a fanciful blending of ideas, implying that the honour paid to the sacred hearth by

of the household-basileus as the type and origin of the kingship in the village and the State. Reference has

operty to divide it amongst them.... As long as they (the

g between a fat

[pg 093] the Greeks a system of joint holding between father and son. The ownership and management of the property vested in the head of the family. It is true that brothers did not always divide their inheritance on the death of their father, but thei

evidence of t

throw some light

pledge from the son any of the father's property. But what th

of the goods of the children whi

his paternal inheritance be sold to p

n theory inalienab

es a son had no claim on the paternal estate beyond his maintenance, his right of succession might easily grow up in the eye of the law as an available asset capable of forfeiture with the theoretical assumption that the scapegrace was unfit to hold his position in the family.220 His future portion, thus becoming deprived of a representative, might be wholly or in part confiscated to the State. There are many inscriptions confiscating to the State the goods of criminals who transgressed the laws therein; but Plato evidently contemplated the possibility of wiping out the individual without depriving his descendants of their inheritance.221 In such a case as wife-murder, he says, the husband's right of maintenance is extinguished from amongst hi

the custom of G

l division of property amongst sons obstinately held its own against the incursions of the right of primogeniture; and the con

nd his heire forthwith after his death shall be inheritable to all his landes and tenements which he held in Gauelkinde in fee, and i

her to t

nne to the

"gift" to a

d by his birth from ranking with his brothers, and who had no plac

g

admitted to his

ates how his proud brothers allotted him but a sma

en then he was not apparently taken into his father's family, but allotted a farm (χωρ?ον ?ν) by his brother and, as it

citizen, and thus afforded him the qualification for holding land. Yet the knowledge of his real parentage bereft him of the right of sharing equally with

and to new

n the plain, a house, and a garden free of taxes; a half-κλ?ρο? in the plain, a house and a garden of half the area of the preceding grant, &c. In the fourth century B.C. a similar grant takes the form [pg 097]

eholder In In

ons during thei

e composition of the early Indian family. A son "is of age and independent in case hi

inances of Manu, where the position of the first-born with

vided amongst t

g come together, should divide the paternal inheritance: for while th

[pg 098] without leaving anything, and the remaining (brothers)

spect shown to

possessed of a son, and is thus cleared of his debts towards the m

of sons by means of that son."231 But this seems to apply only to the son born to the eldest, for if a younger brother

born," through him his father "pays his debt"; other sons are only "born of desire." As long as his conduct is befitting,

apart, the separate ceremonies necessitated by their separate households

of the ho

older, moreover, wa

n air, so all orders de

ge and with food, therefore [pg 099] the householder (is) the chief order. That order must be uphe

treaty to those heads of families for support. (This dut

ting-place in the ocean, so men of al

rule with the marriage fire and the accomplishment of the

Veda is the V

water is the sacr

re (is the sacrif

(is the sacrifi

sts is the sa

he gods, guests, dependents, the manes, and

aid to t

so that it was thought necessary to state definitely that "if the guest appears after the offering to all

Elektra, Aigisthos, hearing from Orestes that he and his friend are strangers, promptly invites them to share as his

death, it is taken for granted that directly he sees them he wi

e feeling of the Home

anger and the suppliant, to him who

he sacrificial feast.242 When the duty of feeding the guests has been satisfactorily accomplished, he then asks them whe

the guest, and that therefore it was worth while to run the risk of having invited the presence

e of the younger me

h of his father. If the brothers are [pg 101] all "perfect in their own occupations," and they come to an equal division, "some trifle should be given to the eld

himself, he does not deserv

lotted out of all the br

parated, they divide (the inheritance) a second time, in that case the divi

y the sons.250 If "any one of the brothers, being able (to support himself) by his own occupation, does not desire (his share of the) property," he may be

g

In Homer: The Κλ?ρ

ενο? contrasted with the

atic or heroic point of view, a great gulf always exists bet

ns of considerable extent; while the swarms of tribesmen are allotted their κλ?ροι in the open fie

sions of t

inous flocks and herds was one of the privilege

wealth so great, and I will tell thee the sum thereof. Twelve herds of kine upon the mainland, as many flocks of sheep, as many droves of swine, as many ranging herds of

ttest on the banks of the [pg 103] river, consisting half of arable, half of vineyard, the latter presumably on the slopes of the sides of the valley.255 Besides these no doubt he had flocks and herds on the mountains, with steadings and slaves for their protection. It is improbable tha

s, and dwelt in a house full of livelihood; and "wheatbearing ?ρουραι enough we

liad a vivid contrast is drawn between the rich harve

re reaping with sharp sickles in their hands ... and among them the βασιλε??

for himself and his friends, and the women are strewi

g

sman probably in the op

1 One of these Athena uses to hurl against Ares, who, falling where he stood, covers seven of the pelethra that the stones were used to divide. A pinnacle of stones is the only boundary to be seen to this day between the strips of cornland in Palestine. Easily dislodged as these landmarks were, they were specially protected by a curse against their removal, and were with the Greeks under the awful shadow of a special deity of boundaries.262 They seem however to have been liable to considerable violat

mith. And no doubt the powerful men of the community would, by means of their slaves or retainers, acquire additional wealth by reclaiming lands out of the way and therefore requiring a strong hand to protect them, which were profitable by reas

red like a god with

their descendants. It was a common fancy of the Homeric prince that he was worshipped as a god, and they often mistook each other for some deity

or the enjoyment of a τ?μενο?. [pg 106] The honoured individual need not be a king or overlord, but besides his valour he mus

nd the Lykians meted him out a τ?μενο?.268 This great τ?μενο? on the banks of the Xanthos, half arable and half vineyard, remained in t

ard near but apart from the fields and tilled lands of his

escended from

72 According to Hesychius, πατρ?ιο? means "handed down to one's father f

hos' patrimony: "Never may Kronion [pg 107] make thee king in s

onstitute an indivisible inheritance. Any one of the blood could enjoy possession of the l

g up any tangible property. The bestowal of the kingship, though due to him by inheritance (πατρ?ιον) i

on his great-gra

ite choice made by Iason, as told by Pindar, when he came back to claim his i

e great honour of their forefathers with sword and javelin. He will give up all the sheep and herds of kine, and all the fields of late robbed from his sires, though they make fat beyond measure the house of Pelias (τε?ν

n might hold

any rate roughly of some recognised area. Perhaps the tendency, so fatal to Sparta, for the possession of the original shares or allotments of many families to accumulate in the hands of the powerful or rich, had already set in. In later colonisations and assignments of new land

nued: The Κλ?ρο? And The

e holding of the

of a household. It follows that if the head of a [pg 109] family was the only owner of land, the desire of establishing a family and thereby pres

ο?κο? and a κλ?ρο? and a shapely wife.279 And Odysseus in one of his many autobiographies s

we can take Aristotle's reading of the line, gives the necessary outfit for a pea

day,282 its members being called by Charondas, he says, ?μοσ?πυοι (sharers in the mealbin), and by Epimenides the Cretan ?μ?

g

the maintenan

tle, consisted thus partly of hu

the house or ο?κο?, that Telemachos can say without in

?κο?, ?λωλε δ?

ath, which occurs three times in the Odyssey: "Now be Zeus my witness before any god,

the bon

tle," fighting on opposite sides. Nevertheless because the grandfather of one had entertained the grandfather of the other for twenty days and they had parted with gifts of friendship, their grandsons re

e formed of the virtue underlying the meaning of such words as ?μοσ?πυοι [pg 111]

tablished househo

d the inheritance was divided amongst them, it was deemed indispensable for them to take wives, and each provide for the establishment of his house and succession. This necessity is the underlying motive of the compulsion over the only daughter left as ?π?κληρο? to marry before a certain age, exercised

d'être of this sentiment in Homer, the exi

ctor encourages his soldiers by reminding them that though they themselves fall in the fight, their childre

r, seems to explain the two references to Telemachos in the Iliad. Odysseus is twice mentioned, as Mr. Leaf points out in his Companion to the Iliad,290 as the fath

factor and danger to the continuity of the family holdings. As l

pe in her fear for the ab

y hated by the blessed gods, but someone will haply yet remain

ly of Laertes and Odysseus? He was Laertes' father, and in Telemachos, if he was preserved ali

itance by death of

rect line is spoken of in Homer as a lamentable circumstance grea

ther son for his possessions after him. Then Diomedes slew them and bereft the twain of their dear life, and for their father left onl

ar and violence. Possessions, not only of land, had to be defended by the sword even during the life

m his possessions in his halls and whatever dues

uestion to his mother in Hades

n hath yet taken, but Telemachos holdeth in

rd bound to his

ered Naboth another vineyard better than his own in exchange for the one at Jezreel near the palace, or, should he prefer it, it

nally as taking the vineyard at Naboth's death by inheritance (LXX. κληρονομε

nate from his family any part of his po

shall be their possession by inheritance. But if he give a gift of his inheritance to one of his servants, then it shal

ued: The Τ?μενο? And The M

iefs levied upon the peop

maintenance of the chieftain and his companions or retainers should be levied at will upon the pro

e title of δωροφ?γοι. As Telemachos declares, "it is no bad thing to be a βασι

their own or conquered peoples apparently at will [pg 1

drink at the public cost (δ?μια π?νουσιν) and eac

hides h

le's sheep and kids (?ρν?ν ?δ?

s sheep and substance, he will go through the city (

oing amongst the people (?γειρ?μενοι κατ? δ?μον) will recompense t

the plenty in my house, and for the rest of his company ... I gathered and gave barley mea

uch "gifts" could be t

4 The proposal of Menelaos to empty a city of Argos, to accommodate Odysseus and his people, seems to be of quite a different order, and betrays to

a town might receive

ed a chief of a town whose duty it was to report to the higher officials on any "evil arising in the town." H

aily given by the inhabitants of a town t

n between legitimate deman

re) mostly takers of the property of others (and) cheats; f

ance of the

t King and his host throughout the whole year.308 The satrap of Assyria kept at one time so great a number of Indian h

f Sol

as provided after

asures of meal, ten fat oxen and twenty oxen out of the pastures and an hundred sheep, beside harts, and roebucks, and fallowdeer, and fatted fowl.... And Solomon reigned over all kingdoms from the river unto the land of the Philistines, an

g

m land in a

e of the famine in Egypt except that which supported the priests, took one-fifth of all the produce, leaving the remainder "for seed of the field," and for the food of the cultivators, and their hou

a rule had any power over the ownership of the soil. He no doubt had proprietary rights over his own estate, and may or may not have had power to regulate any fu

e easily made, in their ela

the common pasturage. After agriculture had assumed equal importance in the economy of the tribe as the tending of flocks and herds, one is apt to forget that for centuries-perhaps for thousands of years-the system of agriculture that grew up, still possessed much of the elasticity of the old pastoral methods. Under the open field system, such a custom as that described by Tacitus and in the Welsh Laws, viz. of ploug

is method of cultiv

yearly bread upon the plains, and now again

l honour, and served to r

he τ?μενο? would certainly be cultivated by slave or hired labour, what they really gave him was the right of receiving the produce from the 50 guai co

tributions to the princes, which no doubt were felt to be very irksome. In the division of the land, a

they give to the house of Israel according to their tribes. Thus saith the Lord God, Let it suffice you, O princes of Israel; r

ag

hrust them out of their possession; but he shall give his sons inheritance out of h

tribesmen of his own people from their holdings, yet no one could gainsay him if he chose to enrich

of the elasticity

it can be imagined that some method of the same sort was in vogue in Boeotia in the time of Hesiod, it will be understo

t caring to labour for its artificial improvement, till a piece of ground once, and then let it lie fallow for a season or two. The natural richness of the Boeotian

taga, in

he occupier by squatter's right after thirty years of unmolested occupation. They are at liberty to cultivate pretty well as much land as they care to, paying to

nce not actually foo

he privilege of living, as a condition of tenure of his land, is open to doubt; but from the right to demand indiscriminate gifts, to c

y Of The Ea

uiry of the last three sections into the relation of the ownershi

g

nd apart from

ο?."319 The ordinary tribesman on the other hand had a share in the common fields under cultivation, probably consisting of a number of scattered pieces of

man to enjoy several such holdings and deserve the epithet πολ?κληρο?, whilst the lowest clas

useholder in his duties t

of the utmost importance. Its members were bound together at their ancestral hearth by mutual ties of common maintenance. The sanctity of thus sharing the same loaf extended also to guests, whose relations to their hosts might last for several generat

right to demand gi

kind, supplemented by the power he also seems to have possessed to transfer at will the right of receiving these "gifts" to any one he chose, seems to cont

o a τ?μενο?, as the t

men of a κλ?ρο? in the common fields. He was therefore allotted a τ?μενο? apart, and worthy of his divine parentage. Besides the bare single allotment of the τ?μενο?, land was set apart for him as a gift of honour by the people, from whom honour and gifts to their prince were due. Gifts in land formed a special mark of honour, and may at the same time have served another purpose

prive the tribes

] and their κλ?ρο?: the only means at his disposal of severing the link between the family and the land, were

od And Hi

1 could be sold in case of need and

nt: not a typical

as therefore somewhat of a sojourner (the μεταν?στη? of Homer),323 and, true to the Homeric doctrine, was unencumbered by the claims of kindred. Hesiod contrasts the ready help of the neighbour with the perfunctory slowness

half, and spent his time [pg 124] and his livelihood in the gay life of the town, but none the less seems to have expected

g the soil; and his quaint ideas may be taken as typical of the small Boeotian peasant

Of Family Land

ory inalienable

alienation and accumulation of land into few hands had been carried. Aristotle comments on the excellence of the ancient law, at one time prevalent i

that forbade any one to alienate by will his landed estate from his lawful sons. Plat

possessions, not as belonging to yourselves, but as be

e same law against the sale of the

t be accepted by it

f the ancient customs among the Spart

n succession from father to son-?ν διαδοχα?? πατρ?? πα

of Lycurgus

d 'lesche,' where the elders of his tribesmen were sitting, who, if they found the child pretty well grown and healthy, o

he relations and friends a few days after its birth, symbolical gi

as to its

to the tribe. It cannot be supposed that Plutarch believed that vacant κλ?ροι escheated, so to speak, to the community, because he elsewhere describes the lamentable tendency of estates to get into few hands, which the community would in that case surely have b

ken by M. de Coulanges;330 but surely there is more underlying the account of the ceremony. What actually took place with regard to the allotment of a κλ?ρο? to the infant member of the tribe, cannot be decided here. The State at Sparta undertook to educate all her sons after a certa

produce of some land, as otherwise it is difficult to see how he could contribute the necessary provisions that formed hi

derived from

? is striking; and at the same time the evidence goes to show that his maintenance was a claim upon a gr

und to their

arently not be paid off by mere transfer of the land itself; but the whole family of the debtor went with their mo

chosen, was to loosen the tie between the owner and his land, and, by facilitating the transfer of land from one to

tion of Solon, the sentiment that bound the f

in L

of their colony at Naupaktos. Though unable apparently wholly to forbid the participation of the colonists in the ancestral rites of their kin in Lokris, they took advantage of the prevai

scription of the f

shment tax if he has left ?ν τ? ?στ?? at Naupaktos a grown-up son or a brother. If a γ?νο? of the colonists is left without a representative (?χ?παμον) ?ν τ? ?στ??, the nearest of kin (?π?γχιστο?

fuses justice, he shall be ?τιμο? and

so must first be accep

nly that the children had gone through the ceremony of being accepted and enrolled by the phratria. If the descendant had neglected this formality, and had failed to be recognised as a legal member of the kindred [pg 129] or clan, he or she lost all rights to the property, which went to the devisee or n

and Applied Also To Leaseh

tion of the ide

raseology of the Greeks at different times. There is a further development however arising from this point of view, without some notice of whic

ation for a citizen. Sparta regarded it as entirely beneath the dignity of her sons and forbade their personal application to the cultivation of their κλ?ροι. There was at Athens, on the other hand, a large class o

f land: (1) by owner himsel

hon;335 or the owner resided in the city or a neighbouring town, and the land was tilled by aliens or serfs (called sometimes κλαρ?ται), like the Helots of Sparta, who paid an annual contribution from the produce to their landlord. The serf w

on of citizen-family

tary rights were extinguished and the κλαρ?ται who lived upon the land took all their property. This provision favours the idea [pg 131] that at Gortyn also the citizen-population came of a race of conquerors, who were not exactly looked upon as ground landlords upon whose land a subject family was settled or had been allowed

ent with the use of the word in reference to the holdings of the Spartan citizens. The allotment of a κλ?ρο? at Sparta evidently meant also a transference of rights over the Helots that worked it; and

tenure in the At

wever their κλ?ροι in a remote district. [pg 132] But the chief feature of this method of landholding was that the owner, though remaining a citizen of Athens and liable to the same claims from the mother city in respect

es in

he legal status of the first κληρο?χοι sent to Salamis. They were assimilated to Athenian citizens as to ta

Les

three thousand κλ?ροι "except the Methymnian land," they first set apart three hundred κλ?ροι as sacred to the gods, and on to the others they s

the Chalkidians, apportioned their land to κληρο?χοι340 in two thousand κλ?ροι, i.e. the country [pg 133] called Hippobotos; and, setting aside τεμ?νη to At

refore supporte

y be asserted that it must have been of sufficient dimensions, not only to provide subsistence for the native population left on the soil,

operty in the mother country, would be most likely to offer themselves. And to such the two minae per annum, paid by the Lesbians from the produce of each κλ?ρο?, would appear a reasonable if not a sumptuous provision of livelihood. There were a hundred drachmae in the mina, and if

hemselves in different strata of society. Both households also were in a sort attached to the soil, the one in practical bondage, the other

ownership in l

not confined to the semi-servile tenure

r-τ?ν π?ντα χρ?νον-subject of course to the regular

t we have, is of this nature.347 It was fou

of eighteen plethra. Rent, twenty-two manasioi of barley in the month Al

ατρικ?-as the patrimonial substance of his family, for himself and his issue or whosoever should take inheritance from him. He thus obtained a money value down in return for his property, but bound himself and his descendants to an annual rent of so m

g

ailing idea of the fami

the maintenance of the family and had come to be regarded almost as giving that family its social if not its political status, should descend unintermittently from generation to generation in

ng line of past and future representatives, precluded the individual, who happened to be the living representative at any given time,

g