[2] For the Athenians had divided their population into two parts, the eupatridai or “well-born,” as they called those who were of the noble families and powerful by reason of their wealth, to whom the government of the city was committed, and the agroikoi or “husbandmen,” consisting of the rest of the citizens, who had no voice in public affairs, though in the course of time these, also, were admitted to the offices.
[3] δὲ καὶ οὗτοι προσελήφθησαν ἐπὶ τὰς ἀρχάς. οἱ μὲν δὴ τὰ πιθανώτατα περὶ τῆς Ῥωμαίων πολιτείας ἱστοροῦντες διὰ ταύτας τὰς αἰτίας κληθῆναί φασι τοὺς ἄνδρας ἐκείνους πατέρας καὶ τοὺς ἐκγόνους αὐτῶν πατρικίους, οἱ δὲ πρὸς τὸν ἴδιον φθόνον ἀναφέροντες τὸ πρᾶγμα καὶ διαβάλλοντες εἰς δυσγένειαν τὴν πόλιν οὐ διὰ ταῦτα πατρικίους ἐκείνους κληθῆναί φασιν, ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι πατέρας εἶχον ἀποδεῖξαι μόνοι, ὡς τῶν γε ἄλλων δραπετῶν ὄντων καὶ οὐκ ἐχόντων ὀνομάσαι πατέρας ἐλευθέρους.
[3] Those who give the most probable account of the Roman government say it was for the reasons I have given that those men were called “fathers” and their posterity “patricians”; but others, considering the matter in the light of their own envy and desirous of casting reproach on the city for the ignoble birth of its founders, say they were not called patricians for the reasons just cited, but because these men only could point out their fathers, — as if all the rest were fugitives and unable to name free men as their fathers.
[4] τεκμήριον δὲ τούτου παρέχουσιν, ὅτι τοὺς μὲν πατρικίους, ὁπότε δόξειε τοῖς βασιλεῦσι συγκαλεῖν, οἱ κήρυκες ἐξ ὀνόματός τε καὶ πατρόθεν ἀνηγόρευον, τοὺς δὲ δημοτικοὺς ὑπηρέται τινὲς ἀθρόους κέρασι βοείοις ἐμβυκανῶντες ἐπὶ τὰς [p. 166] ἐκκλησίας συνῆγον. ἔστι δὲ οὔτε ἡ τῶν κηρύκων ἀνάκλησις τῆς εὐγενείας τῶν πατρικίων τεκμήριον, οὔτε ἡ τῆς βυκάνης φωνὴ τῆς ἀγνωσίας τῶν δημοτικῶν σύμβολον, ἀλλ᾽ ἐκείνη μὲν τιμῆς, αὕτη δὲ τάχους. οὐ γὰρ οἷόντε ἦν ἐν ὀλίγῳ χρόνῳ τὴν πληθὺν καλεῖν ἐξ ὀνόματος.
[4] As proof of this they cite the fact that, whenever the kings thought proper to assemble the patricians, the heralds called them both by their own names and by the names of their fathers, whereas public servants summoned the plebeians en masse to the assemblies by the sound of ox horns. But in reality neither the calling of the patricians by the heralds is any proof of their nobility nor is the sound of the horn any mark of the obscurity of the plebeians; but the former was an indication of honour and the latter of expedition, since it was not possible in a short time to call every one of the multitude by name.
[1] ὁ δὲ Ῥωμύλος ἐπειδὴ διέκρινε τοὺς κρείττους ἀπὸ τῶν ἡττόνων, ἐνομοθέτει μετὰ τοῦτο καὶ διέταττεν, ἃ χρὴ πράττειν ἑκατέρους: τοὺς μὲν εὐπατρίδας ἱερᾶσθαί τε καὶ ἄρχειν καὶ δικάζειν καὶ μεθ᾽ ἑαυτοῦ τὰ κοινὰ πράττειν ἐπὶ τῶν κατὰ τὴν πόλιν ἔργων μένοντας, τοὺς δὲ δημοτικοὺς τούτων μὲν ἀπολελύσθαι τῶν πραγματειῶν ἀπείρους τε αὐτῶν ὄντας καὶ δι᾽ ἀπορίαν χρημάτων ἀσχόλους, γεωργεῖν δὲ καὶ κτηνοτροφεῖν καὶ τὰς χρηματοποιοὺς ἐργάζεσθαι τέχνας, ἵνα μὴ στασιάζωσιν, ὥσπερ ἐν ταῖς ἄλλαις πόλεσιν, ἢ τῶν ἐν τέλει προπηλακιζόντων τοὺς ταπεινοὺς ἢ τῶν φαύλων καὶ ἀπόρων τοῖς ἐν ταῖς ὑπεροχαῖς φθονούντων.
[9.1] After Romulus had distinguished those of superior rank from their inferiors, he next established laws by which the duties of each were prescribed. The patricians were to be priests, magistrates and judges, and were to assist him in the management of public affairs, devoting themselves to the business of the city. The plebeians were excused from these duties, as being unacquainted with them and because of their small means wanting leisure to attend to them, but were to apply themselves to agriculture, the breeding of cattle and the exercise of gainful trades. This was to prevent them from engaging in seditions, as happens in other cities when either the magistrates mistreat the lowly, or the common people and the needy envy those in authority.
[2] παρακαταθήκας δὲ ἔδωκε τοῖς πατρικίοις τοὺς δημοτικοὺς ἐπιτρέψας ἑκάστῳ τῶν ἐκ τοῦ πλήθους, ὃν αὐτὸς ἐβούλετο, νέμειν προστάτην ἔθος Ἑλληνικὸν καὶ ἀρχαῖον, ᾧ Θετταλοί τε μέχρι πολλοῦ χρώμενοι διετέλεσαν καὶ Ἀθηναῖοι κατ᾽ ἀρχάς, ἐπὶ τὰ κρείττω λαβών. ἐκεῖνοι μὲν γὰρ ὑπεροπτικῶς ἐχρῶντο τοῖς πελάταις ἔργα τε ἐπιτάττοντες οὐ προσήκοντα ἐλευθέροις, καὶ ὁπότε μὴ πράξειάν τι τῶν κελευομένων, πληγὰς ἐντείνοντες καὶ [p. 167] τἆλλα ὥσπερ ἀργυρωνήτοις παραχρώμενοι. ἐκάλουν δὲ Ἀθηναῖοι μὲν θῆτας τοὺς πελάτας ἐπὶ τῆς λατρείας, Θετταλοὶ δὲ πενέστας ὀνειδίζοντες αὐτοῖς εὐθὺς ἐν τῇ κλήσει τὴν τύχην.
[2] He placed the plebeians as a trust in the hands of the patricians, by allowing every plebeian to choose for his patron any patrician whom he himself wished. In this he improved upon an ancient Greek custom that was in use among the Thessalians for a long time and among the Athenians in the beginning. For the former treated their clients with haughtiness, imposing on them duties unbecoming to free men; and whenever they disobeyed any of their commands, they beat them and misused them in all other respects as if had been slaves they had purchased. The Athenians called their clients thêtes or “hirelings,” because they served for hire, and the Thessalians called theirs penestai or “toilers,” by the very name reproaching them with their condition.
[3] ὁ δὲ Ῥωμύλος ἐπικλήσει τε εὐπρεπεῖ τὸ πρᾶγμα ἐκόσμησε πατρωνείαν ὀνομάσας τὴν τῶν πενήτων καὶ ταπεινῶν προστασίαν, καὶ τὰ ἔργα χρηστὰ προσέθηκεν ἑκατέροις, καὶ φιλανθρώπους καὶ πολιτικὰς κατασκευαζόμενος αὐτῶν τὰς συζυγίας.
[3] But Romulus not only recommended the relationship by a handsome designation, calling this protection of the poor and lowly a “patronage,” but he also assigned friendly offices to both parties, thus making the connexion between them a bond of kindness befitting fellow citizens.
[1] ἦν δὲ τὰ ὑπ᾽ ἐκείνου τότε ὁρισθέντα καὶ μέχρι πολλοῦ παραμείναντα χρόνου Ῥωμαίοις ἔθη περὶ τὰς πατρωνείας τοιάδε: τοὺς μὲν πατρικίους ἔδει τοῖς ἑαυτῶν πελάταις ἐξηγεῖσθαι τὰ δίκαια, ὧν οὐκ εἶχον ἐκεῖνοι τὴν ἐπιστήμην, παρόντων τε αὐτῶν καὶ μὴ παρόντων τὸν αὐτὸν ἐπιμελεῖσθαι τρόπον ἅπαντα πράττοντας, ὅσα περὶ παίδων πράττουσι πατέρες, εἰς χρημάτων τε καὶ τῶν περὶ χ�
�ήματα συμβολαίων λόγον: δίκας τε ὑπὲρ τῶν πελατῶν ἀδικουμένων λαγχάνειν, εἴ τις βλάπτοιτο περὶ τὰ συμβόλαια, καὶ τοῖς ἐγκαλουσιν ὑπέχειν: ὡς δὲ ὀλίγα περὶ πολλῶν ἄν τις εἴποι πᾶσαν αὐτοῖς εἰρήνην τῶν τε ἰδίων καὶ τῶν κοινῶν πραγμάτων, ἧς μάλιστα ἐδέοντο, παρέχειν.
[10] The regulations which he then instituted concerning patronage and which long continued in use among the Romans were as follows: It was the duty of the patricians to explain to their clients the laws, of which they were ignorant; to take the same care of them when absent as present, doing everything for them that fathers do for their sons with regard both to money and to the contracts that related to money; to bring suit on behalf of their clients when they were wronged in connexion with contracts, and to defend them against any who brought charges against them; and, to put the matter briefly, to secure for them both in private and in public affairs all that tranquillity of which they particularly stood in need.
[2] τοὺς δὲ πελάτας ἔδει τοῖς ἑαυτῶν προστάταις θυγατέρας τε συνεκδίδοσθαι γαμουμένας, εἰ σπανίζοιεν οἱ πατέρες χρημάτων, καὶ λύτρα καταβάλλειν πολεμίοις, εἴ τις αὐτῶν ἢ παίδων αἰχμάλωτος γένοιτο: δίκας τε [p. 168] ἁλόντων ἰδίας ἢ ζημίας ὀφλόντων δημοσίας ἀργυρικὸν ἐχούσας τίμημα ἐκ τῶν ἰδίων λύεσθαι χρημάτων, οὐ δανείσματα ποιοῦντας, ἀλλὰ χάριτας: ἔν τε ἀρχαῖς καὶ γερηφορίαις καὶ ταῖς ἄλλαις ταῖς εἰς τὰ κοινὰ δαπάναις τῶν ἀναλωμάτων ὡς τοὺς γένει προσήκοντας μετέχειν.
[2] It was the duty of the clients to assist their patrons in providing dowries for their daughters upon their marriage if the fathers had not sufficient means; to pay their ransom to the enemy if any of them or of their children were taken prisoner; to discharge out of their own purses their patrons’ losses in private suits and the pecuniary fines which they were condemned to pay to the State, making these contributions to them not as loans but as thank-offerings; and to share with their patrons the costs incurred in their magistracies and dignities and other public expenditures, in the same manner as if they were their relations.
[3] κοινῇ δ᾽ ἀμφοτέροις οὔτε ὅσιον οὔτε θέμις ἦν κατηγορεῖν ἀλλήλων ἐπὶ δίκαις ἢ καταμαρτυρεῖν ἢ ψῆφον ἐναντίαν ἐπιφέρειν ἢ μετὰ τῶν ἐχθρῶν ἐξετάζεσθαι. εἰ δέ τις ἐξελεγχθείη τούτων τι διαπραττόμενος ἔνοχος ἦν τῷ νόμῳ τῆς προδοσίας, ὃν ἐκύρωσεν ὁ Ῥωμύλος, τὸν δὲ ἁλόντα τῷ βουλομένῳ κτείνειν ὅσιον ἦν ὡς θῦμα τοῦ καταχθονίου Διός. ἐν ἔθει γὰρ Ῥωμαίοις, ὅσους ἐβούλοντο νηποινὶ τεθνάναι, τὰ τούτων σώματα θεῶν ὁτῳδήτινι, μάλιστα δὲ τοῖς καταχθονίοις κατονομάζειν: ὃ καὶ τότε ὁ Ῥωμύλος ἐποίησε.
[3] For both patrons and clients alike it was impious and unlawful to accuse each other in law-suits or to bear witness or to give their votes against each other or to be found in the number of each other’s enemies; and whoever was convicted of doing any of these things was guilty of treason by virtue of the law sanctioned by Romulus, and might lawfully be put to death by any man who so wished as a victim devoted to the Jupiter of the infernal regions. For it was customary among the Romans, whenever they wished to put people to death without incurring any penalty, to devote their persons to some god or other, and particularly to the gods of the lower world; and this was the course what Romulus then adopted.
[4] τοιγάρτοι διέμειναν ἐν πολλαῖς γενεαῖς οὐδὲν διαφέρουσαι συγγενικῶν ἀναγκαιοτήτων αἱ τῶν πελατῶν τε καὶ προστατῶν συζυγίαι παισὶ παίδων συνιστάμεναι, καὶ μέγας ἔπαινος ἦν τοῖς ἐκ τῶν ἐπιφανῶν οἴκων ὡς πλείστους πελάτας ἔχειν τάς τε προγονικὰς φυλάττουσι διαδοχὰς τῶν πατρωνειῶν καὶ διὰ τῆς ἑαυτῶν ἀρετῆς ἄλλας ἐπικτωμένοις, ὅ τε ἀγὼν ὑπὲρ τῆς εὐνοίας ὑπὲρ τοῦ μὴ λειφθῆναι τῆς ἀλλήλων χάριτος ἔκτοπος ἡλίκος ἀμφοτέροις ἦν τῶν μὲν πελατῶν ἅπαντα τοῖς προστάταις ἀξιούντων ὡς δυνάμεως [p. 169] εἶχον ὑπηρετεῖν, τῶν δὲ πατρικίων ἥκιστα βουλομένων τοῖς πελάταις ἐνοχλεῖν χρηματικήν τε οὐδεμίαν δωρεὰν προσιεμένων: οὕτως ἐγκρατὴς ὁ βίος ἦν αὐτοῖς ἁπάσης ἡδονῆς καὶ τὸ μακαρίον ἀρετῇ μετρῶν, οὐ τύχῃ.
[4] Accordingly, the connexions between the clients and patrons continued for many generations, differing in no wise from the ties of blood-relationship and being handed down to their children’s children. And it was a matter of great praise to men of illustrious families to have as many clients as possible and not only to preserve the succession of hereditary patronages but also by their own merit to acquire others. And it is incredible how great the contest of goodwill was between the patrons and clients, as each side strove not to be outdone by the other in kindness, the clients feeling that they should render all possible services to their patrons and the patrons wishing by all means not to occasion any trouble to their clients and accepting no gifts of money. So superior was their manner of life to all pleasure; for they measured their happiness by virtue, not by fortune.
[1] οὐ μόνον δ᾽ ἐν αὐτῇ τῇ πόλει τὸ δημοτικὸν ὑπὸ τὴν προστασίαν τῶν πατρικίων ἦν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τῶν ἀποίκων αὐτῆς πόλεων καὶ τῶν ἐπὶ συμμαχίᾳ καὶ φιλίᾳ προσελθουσῶν καὶ τῶν ἐκ πολέμου κεκρατημένων ἑκάστη φύλακας εἶχε καὶ προστάτας οὓς ἐβούλετο Ῥωμαίων. καὶ πολλάκις ἡ βουλὴ τὰ ἐκ τούτων ἀμφισβητήματα τῶν πόλεων καὶ ἐθνῶν ἐπὶ τοὺς προϊσταμένους αὐτῶν ἀποστέλλουσα, τὰ ὑπ᾽ ἐκείνων δικασθέντα κύρια ἡγεῖτο.
[11] It was not only in the city itself that the plebeians were under the protection of the patricians, but every colony of Rome and every city that had joined in alliance and friendship with her and also every city conquered in war had such protectors and patrons among the Romans as they wished. And the senate has often referred the controversies of these cities and nations to their Roman patrons and regarded their decisions binding.
[2] οὕτω δὲ ἄρα βέβαιος ἦν ἡ Ῥωμαίων ὁμόνοια τὴν ἀρχὴν ἐκ τῶν ὑπὸ Ῥωμύλου κατασκευασθέντων λαβοῦσα ἐθῶν, ὥστε οὐδέποτε δι᾽ αἵματος καὶ φόνου τοῦ κατ᾽ ἀλλήλων ἐχώρησαν ἐντὸς ἑξακοσίων καὶ τριάκοντα ἐτῶν, πολλῶν καὶ μεγάλων ἀμφισβητημάτων γενομένων τῷ δήμῳ πρὸς τοὺς ἐν τέλει περὶ τῶν κοινῶν, ὡς ἐν ἁπάσαις φιλεῖ γίγνεσθαι μικραῖς τε καὶ μεγάλαις πόλεσιν:
[2] And indeed, so secure was the Romans’ harmony, which owed its birth to the regulations of Romulus, that they never in the course of six hundred an
d thirty years proceeded to bloodshed and mutual slaughter, though many great controversies arose between the populace and their magistrates concerning public policy, as is apt to happen in all cities, whether large or small;
[3] ἀλλὰ πείθοντες καὶ διδάσκοντες ἀλλήλους καὶ τὰ μὲν εἴκοντες, τὰ δὲ παρ᾽ εἰκόντων λαμβάνοντες, πολιτικὰς ἐποιοῦντο τὰς τῶν ἐγκλημάτων διαλύσεις. ἐξ οὗ δὲ Γάιος Γράκχος ἐπὶ τῆς δημαρχικῆς ἐξουσίας γενόμενος διέφθειρε τὴν τοῦ πολιτεύματος ἁρμονίαν, οὐκέτι πέπαυνται σφάττοντες [p. 170] ἀλλήλους καὶ φυγάδας ἐλαύνοντες ἐκ τῆς πόλεως καὶ οὐδενὸς τῶν ἀνηκέστων ἀπεχόμενοι παρὰ τὸ νικᾶν. ἀλλὰ περὶ μὲν τούτων ἕτερος ἔσται τοῖς λόγοις καιρὸς ἐπιτηδειότερος.
[3] but by persuading and informing one another, by yielding in some things and gaining other things from their opponents, who yielded in turn, they settled their disputes in a manner befitting fellow citizens. But from the time that Gaius Gracchus, while holding the tribunician power, destroyed the harmony of the government they have been perpetually slaying and banishing one another from the city and refraining from no irreparable acts in order to gain the upper hand. However, for the narration of these events another occasion will be more suitable.
Delphi Complete Works of Dionysius of Halicarnassus (Illustrated) (Delphi Ancient Classics Book 79) Page 450