Abstract

It seems to be widely agreed by modern scholars that when Solon created his four census-classes (τ⋯λη) in early sixth-century Athens (Plut.Sol.18. 1–2) he gave to at least three of them – theἱππεῖς, theζευγῖταιand theθ⋯τες– names which were in pre-existing use there. But what, if so, did the names signify, before being assigned their new, official, quantitative (and semantically colourless) Solonic sense? The archaic Athenianθ⋯τεςwere presumably recognizably akin to their Homeric and Hesiodic namesakes; and despite the etymological obscurity of the word in any event, in practical terms it will have denoted men who byallrelevant social, economic or military tests scored a negligible rating. In the case of higher scorers, however, it becomes important for us to discover preciselywhichcriteria are being applied, and so it is theἱππεῖςand theζευγῖταιwho have always posed the main interpretative puzzle. For theζευγῖταιEhrenberg put it succinctly enough: ‘thezeugitaican be explained either as those who owned a pair of oxen under the yoke(zeugos)or those who are joined to their neighbours in the ranks of the phalanx’. Both these explanations – for convenience I shall (for the moment) call them the agricultural and the military – have indeed long had, and continue to have, their adherents. Most of the great nineteenth-century students ofStaatsaltertümertook the agricultural line, usually without argument; and the standard lexica still do. In 1894, however, Conrad Cichorius made out a strong case for the military explanation, and he has had many followers, both witting and (I should guess) unwitting.