A Dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology. By various writers. Ed. by William Smith. Illustrated by numerous engravings on wood.

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
ledge, History of Rome, p. 144), was, that the BovXAo, or deliberative assembly of Four Hundred.
division into phylae, plhratriae, and genea, was Probably he did no more than modify the constirestricted to the Eupatridae. All analogy confirmis 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 (4irtAEnh,uevos perhzaps implies an
ledged views of Niebuhr with respect to the election by the popular asselmbly), one hundred
Roman curiae 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 dapX,, and if
much the same way as the plebs at Rome did by it is, whether it is one of the dpXal 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 proporclasses 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 propotrid 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;ind centuries of Servius Tullius.) The first class regarding those genealogical tribes, with the inconsisted 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, amedimnus 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 aristoPentacosiomedimni. 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
('Ir'reZ7 or'I'rvis), from their being able to keep constitution of Servius Tullius. The most aua horse, and bound to perform military service as thentic and valuable statement that we have recavalry. The third class consisted of those whose specting the general nature of Solon's constituincomes varied between 200 and 300 medimni or tional changes is that of Solon himself (ap. Plut.
drachmae (see Grote, l.c. vol. iii. p. 157, 2ote, for Sol. 18, Fragm. 4. ap. Bergk, I. c. p. 322), from
reasons for rejecting B6ckh's estimate of the lowest which it is clear that nothing can be more erropecuniary qualification of the third class at 150 neous than to speak of Solon's institutions as being
drachmae), and were termed Zeugitae (Ze)yI-Tat). of a demzocratical character. To the demous he
The fourth class included all whose property fell gave nothing more than a defensive power, suffishort 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 (1. c. p. 158) questions whether that state- whose prerogatives, in other respects, he did not
ment is strictly accurate. There is no doubt, interfere (A&j4qu IYv.yap ewica T'OOVc KcpaCros on'ov
however, that the census of the fourth class was e7rapicev, yres o"r' VTeAce, ogT' e7rope/aevos
called the Thetic census (1TqTLKoV Ts'.os). The of 8' E'XOv 8tvaJtlV Kcal Xpr/'aarv -irav ay7rrol,
first three classes were liable to direct taxation, in ical To eppaor-/AInv tn!8es jciucs fxtst). Accordthe 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
was. 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 preroHippeis might range from 3000 to 5000 drachmnae, gatives of the Eupatrids, and seems equally inconand so on. (Bdckh, Public Ecomzomy of Athens, sistent with the passage of Solon quoted above,
b. iv. ch. v.; Grote, 1. 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.
payment. The fourth class were exempt from Both these statements, and all that we learn of the