Archaic Period: Social and Agricultural Crisis

Sources

Solon . Despite the rise in economic well-being and the growth of nonagricultural jobs during the Archaic Period (700-480 b.c.e.), there is no indication of the advent of a new social class based on the newer occupations provided by manufacture and commerce. Agriculture remained the foundation of the economy, a fact confirmed by the work of the Athenian legislator and reformer Solon, who, in dividing the population of Attica into four classes, used as his criterion the amount that a citizen’s land could produce.

Land Problems. The appearances of Solon and of his legislation on the historical stage were due to a crisis that occurred in some places during the last century of the Archaic Period. The origin and development of the crisis and the solution to the problems it created cannot be followed with much accuracy and detail, except in the better-documented states, such as Athens, and even there not everything is clear. Apparently the problems were connected with the land. Despite the considerable exodus to the colonies, Greece in the sixth century continued to be faced with overpopulation. As living conditions improved, the mortality rate declined; archaeological discoveries show an increase in the number of settlements and the presence of a denser population. The insufficiency of the land to feed a growing population, a phenomenon observable also in some parts of Ionia, induced some city-states to import grains.

Sixth-Sharers. Nevertheless, food shortages did not cause farm income to rise. As the soil was being overused, while, despite countermeasures, the practice of dividing farms between several heirs continued, the farmers found it difficult to make ends meet and began to fall into debt to a relatively small number of wealthy owners of large estates. To pay off their debts small farmers became something resembling sharecroppers: they turned over one-sixth of their produce to their creditors and became known as hektemoroi (“sixth-sharers”). If a debtor defaulted on his loans, the creditor could sell him as a slave, an outcome made possible by the practice of making loans on the security of a person’s body. Some Attic farmers apparently deliberately chose to become dependent on the large landowners, becoming in effect their slaves, in order to find protection from their creditors. This development was favorable to the landlords, who thereby substantially increased their labor force.

Slavery. The gradual enslavement of the population was intolerable. Solon received the task of finding a remedy. He was not opposed to the institution of slavery, and his reforms did not affect the chattel slaves. Instead, he took steps to stop the enslavement of free citizens. He abolished the status of sixth-sharers, canceled all debts, and prohibited the enslavement of citizens in the future. The Athenians who had been sold into slavery abroad were brought back. Solon also promulgated some other reforms, including a prohibition to export grain and all other agricultural products except olive oil.

Census Classes. Modern historians are in general agreement that Solon did not redistribute the land among the farmers who had been dispossessed by the large landowners. Solon himself clearly says in his poems that he did not do so. He is supported by Aristotle, who says that the commoners were disappointed in their hope of land distribution. However, Aristotle also says that before Solon’s reforms all the land of Attica was in the hands of the few. There is a fundamental contradiction in the sources on this point, for if all or most of the land was owned by a few landlords, it is hard to see how Solon could have defined his census classes on the basis of land yields “in wet and dry measure,” that is, in grain, oil, and wine. Thus, the highest class obtained a yield of 500 bushels and hence were called “500 Bushels Men.” The next class, the “Knights,” owned sufficient land to yield 300 bushels, an income allowing them to keep horses. The land of the third class produced 200 bushels. These men could only afford a pair of oxen with which they plowed and were called “Men of the Yoke.” Even the lowest class, whose members were called “Laborers,” and who may or may not have owned land, was defined in terms of a farm income of less than 200 bushels. According to the best estimates, 30 acres were needed for a yield of 500 bushels; some 18 acres for 300; and something above 12 acres for 200 bushels. Yet, with the land in the hands of a few landlords, Solon’s criteria for his census classes became meaningless. One resolution of the difficulty in the evidence is to assume that Solon carried out

at least some land distribution. It is also possible that the liberation of the sharecroppers from debt-bondage automatically brought about their transformation into small farmers, but evidence for this is lacking.

Other Opportunities. A third possibility is that under Solon’s new order landless farmers could turn to work in the metropolis, as craftsmen, small businessmen, and shopkeepers. That Solon’s reforms opened up avenues to non-agricultural employment is supported by the fact that laborers and craftsmen of various kinds obviously found employment in the great building and improvement programs initiated by the tyrants.

Sources

Antony Andrewes, The Greeks (New York: Knopf, 1967).

M. M. Austin and P. Vidal-Naquet, Economic and Social History of Ancient Greece: An Introduction, translated by Austin (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1977).

Nicholas F. Jones, Ancient Greece: State and Society (Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1997).

Anthony M. Snodgrass, Archaic Greece: The Age of Experiment (London: Dent, 1980).