Page:Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography Volume I Part 1.djvu/342

324

ATTICA.

from the bees which sucked the wild flowers of Mt. Hymettns.

Attica is not adapted for the breeding of horses to any extent; the country is too hilly, and the soil too poor to afford much nourishment for them. Hence they were very scarce in early times, and even at later times could be kept only by the wealthy. For the same reason homed cattle were also scarce, and Philochorus mentions an ancient law which prohibited the killing of these animals. (Athen. ix. p. 375.) The slopes of the mountains, however, afforded excellent pasture for sheep and goats, which were very numerous in ancient times. Goats in particular formed a large portion of the wealth of the ancient inhabitants; and, from this animal, one of the four ancient tribes was called Aegicoreis. Of sheep there were several different breeds, particularly of the finest kinds. (Dem. c. Euerg. et Mnesib. p. 1153; Athen. xii. p. 540.) To encourage the breeding of sheep, there was an ancient law, which forbade the sacrifice of a sheep until it had lambed or had been shorn. (Athen. ix. p. 375.) The seas around the coast abounded in fish, which were a favourite article of diet among the Athenians. Leake enumerates several varieties caught in the Phaleric bay, of which the άφύη, probably a sort of anchovy or sardine, is often mentioned. Off Cape Zoster was caught the red mullet (τρίγλη).

On the mountains wild animals were found. Even in the time of Pausanias the bear and the wild boar were hunted on Mt. Parnes. (Paus. i. 32. § 1.)

V. Political Divisions. — The oldest political division of Attica is said to have been made by Cecrops, who divided the country into twelve independent communities, which were afterwards united into one state by Theseus. The names of these communities were: Cecropia, Tetrapolis, Epacria, Deceleia, Eleusis, Aphidna, Thoricus, Brauron, Gytherus, Sphettus, Cephisia, and Phalerus. (Philochor. ap. Strab. ix. p. 397; Etymol. M. s. v. Έπακρία; Plut. Thes. 24.) Their position has been ably discussed by Finlay, in the Transactions of the Royal Society of Literature (vol. iii. p. 396), but as we shall have occasion to speak of each presently, it is only necessary to state now that these names continued to exist down to the latest times of Athenian history; that Cecropia became the Acropolis of Athens ; that Tetrapolis contained the four demi of Oenoë, Marathon, Tricorythus, and Probalinthus (Strab. viii. p. 383); and that the remaining cities sunk into demi.

Another ancient division of Attica into four parts, among the sons of Pandion, has a distinct reference to the physical divisions of the country. Nisus received Megaris; Aegeus the Coastland (άκτί), with the capital and the adjoining plain (πεδιάς); and the two other brothers Diacria (διακρία), or the Highlands in the NE. of the country, and Paralia (παραλία), or the southern coast. (Strab. ix. p. 392; Schol. ad Aristoph. Vesp. 1223, and ad Vesp. 58.) That this division has a reference to some historical fact, is clear from the circumstance that, after Megaris had been torn away from Athens by the Dorians, the inhabitants of the remaining parts formed three political parties in the time of Solon and Peisistratus, known by the name of the Men of the Plain, the Parali, and the Diacrii or Hyperacrii. (Herod. i. 59; Plut. Sol 13.)

Another division of the people of Attica into four φυλαί or tribes, existed from the earliest times. These tribes were called by different names at different periods. In the time of Cecrops they were called

ATTICA.

Ceeropis, Autochthon, Actaea, and Paralia, the two former names being derived from mythical persons, and the two latter from the physical divisions of the country. In the reign of Cranais, these names were changed into Cranius, Atthis, Mesogaea, and Diacris, where again the two former are mythical, and the two latter local denominations. Afterwards we find a new set of names, Dias, Athenais, Poseidonias, and Hephaestias, evidently derived from the deities who were worshipped in the country. But these names all disappeared before the four Ionic tribes of Geleontes, Hopletes, Argades, and Aegioores, which continued to exist down to the time of Cleisthenes (B.C. 510). One of the most important measures in the democratical revolution, brought about by Cleisthenes after the expulsion of the Peisistratidae, was the abolition of the four ancient Ionic tribes, and the formation of ten new tribes. The names of these ten tribes, derived from Attic heroes, were, in order of precedence, Erechtheis, Aegeis, Pandionis, Leontis, Acamantis, Oeneis, Ceeropis, Hippothoontis, Aeantis, Antiochis. This number remained unaltered down to B.C. 307, when it was increased to twelve by the addition of two new tribes, Antigonias and Demetrias, in honour of Antigonus and his son Demetrius, because the latter had delivered Athens from the rule of Cassander. The name of Antigonias was subsequently changed into that of Ptolemais, in honour of Ptolemy Philadelphus; and the Demetrias into Attalis, when Attains was the ally of Athens against Philip and the Rhodians. Finally, the number of tribes was increased to thirteen, in the reign of Hadrian, by the addition of Hadrianis, in honour of this emperor.

Each tribe was subdivided into a certain number of δήμοι, townships, cantons, or parishes. The whole territory of Attica was parcelled out into these demi, in one or other of which every Athenian citizen was enrolled. The number of these demi is not ascertained: we only know that they were 174 in the time of Polemo, who lived in the third century B.C. (Strab. ix. p. 396; Eustath. in Il. 546.) It has been supposed, from the words of Herodotus (δέκα δέ καί τούς δήμους κατένεμε ές τάς φυλάς v. 69), that there were originally one hundred demi, ten to each tribe; but it is improbable that the number of demi was increased so largely as from 100 to 174, and hence some modern critics construe δέκα with φυλάς, and not with δήμους, as the least difficulty in the case.

It is important to bear in mind that the demi assigned by Cleisthenes to each tribe were in no case all adjacent to each other. The reason for this arrangement cannot be better stated than in the words of Mr. Grote (vol. iv. p. 177): "The tribe, as a whole, did not correspond with any continuous portion of the territory, nor could it have any peculiar local interest, separate from the entire community. Such systematic avoidance of the factions arising out of neighbourhood will appear to have been more especially necessary, when we recollect that the quarrels of the Parali, the Diacrii; the Pediaci, during the preceding century, had all been generated from local feud, though doubtless artfully fomented by individual ambition. Moreover, it was only by this same precaution that the local predominance of the city, and the formation of a city-interest distinct from that of the country, was obviated; which could hardly have failed to arise, had the city itself constituted either one deme or one tribe." We know that five of the city demi belonged to five different tribes