In his proto-encyclopedia/dialogue, Athenaeus has his character Democritus take up the theme of slaves. Democritus’ motivation is talk now so that Ulpian doesn’t have a chance to talk about bottle, and he decides to talk about slaves since a troop of them just entered the room (262b).
Democritus’ discussion of slavery can be divided into the following:
1) Slaves’ temperance amidst the luxuries of their masters
2) A religious ritual on the islands of Araeae that prohibits slaves’ attendance
3) The origins of entire Greek ethnicities being enslaved (e.g. the helots by the Spartans)
4) The Chians as the first Greeks to buy non-Greek slaves
5) The Chian slave-bandit Drimacus
6) The definition of a slave
7) The proper treatment of slaves
8) Utopias in Greek comedies that are so overflowing with food that slavery isn’t necessary
While I’ll be writing about section 3) today, it’s important to keep in mind the context of Athenaeus’ discussion: first, this is a dialogue, and it’s technically the words of the speaker Democritus, rather than Athenaeus himself. Second, while Athenaeus is interested in anything that occurs in Greek literature, his project has a focus on food and dining.
Alright, so what is Democritus talking about in this section? Democritus initially attempts to the answer the unstated question of how people become slaves, a question that connects to his initially surprise at how slaves can restrain themselves while working amidst the luxuries of their owners. Democrtius turns to Posidonius, a Stoic philosopher who also was the author of a 52 volume history that covered the years 146-88 BCE. Democritus says that in the 8th volume of this history Posidonius, explaining why the Mariandynians were enslaved by the Heracleots, offers this reason:
“Many persons being unable to manage themselves on account of the weakness of their intellect, give themselves voluntarily to the service of more intelligent men, in order that they may secure from them provision for their daily needs, and in turn may themselves render to their patrons, through their own labours, whatever they are capable of in the way of service.” (Athenaeus 263c. trans. Gulick)
I’m sure that you are quite unsatisfied with this reasoning. The surprising thing is that Democritus appears to be as well, as least with part of Posidonius’ acout. Noting that Posidonius suggests that the Heracleots called the Maraidnynians “tribute-barriers” so that they wouldn’t suffer the indignity of being called slaves, Democritus then quotes a certain Callistratus, disciple of Aristophanes, as saying that “as the Spartiates did in the case of the Helots, the Thessalians in the case of the Penestae, the Cretans in the case of the Clarotae.” (ibid.) However, then Democritus provides a series of quotations making the case that most of these terms, especially penestae, clarotae are not ethnic markers but are instead words that originated from how the slaves were enslaved.
Democritus’ discussion of slavery can be divided into the following:
1) Slaves’ temperance amidst the luxuries of their masters
2) A religious ritual on the islands of Araeae that prohibits slaves’ attendance
3) The origins of entire Greek ethnicities being enslaved (e.g. the helots by the Spartans)
4) The Chians as the first Greeks to buy non-Greek slaves
5) The Chian slave-bandit Drimacus
6) The definition of a slave
7) The proper treatment of slaves
8) Utopias in Greek comedies that are so overflowing with food that slavery isn’t necessary
While I’ll be writing about section 3) today, it’s important to keep in mind the context of Athenaeus’ discussion: first, this is a dialogue, and it’s technically the words of the speaker Democritus, rather than Athenaeus himself. Second, while Athenaeus is interested in anything that occurs in Greek literature, his project has a focus on food and dining.
Alright, so what is Democritus talking about in this section? Democritus initially attempts to the answer the unstated question of how people become slaves, a question that connects to his initially surprise at how slaves can restrain themselves while working amidst the luxuries of their owners. Democrtius turns to Posidonius, a Stoic philosopher who also was the author of a 52 volume history that covered the years 146-88 BCE. Democritus says that in the 8th volume of this history Posidonius, explaining why the Mariandynians were enslaved by the Heracleots, offers this reason:
“Many persons being unable to manage themselves on account of the weakness of their intellect, give themselves voluntarily to the service of more intelligent men, in order that they may secure from them provision for their daily needs, and in turn may themselves render to their patrons, through their own labours, whatever they are capable of in the way of service.” (Athenaeus 263c. trans. Gulick)
I’m sure that you are quite unsatisfied with this reasoning. The surprising thing is that Democritus appears to be as well, as least with part of Posidonius’ acout. Noting that Posidonius suggests that the Heracleots called the Maraidnynians “tribute-barriers” so that they wouldn’t suffer the indignity of being called slaves, Democritus then quotes a certain Callistratus, disciple of Aristophanes, as saying that “as the Spartiates did in the case of the Helots, the Thessalians in the case of the Penestae, the Cretans in the case of the Clarotae.” (ibid.) However, then Democritus provides a series of quotations making the case that most of these terms, especially penestae, clarotae are not ethnic markers but are instead words that originated from how the slaves were enslaved.