It is not surprising that, in our day and age, we have a new interest in the ancient Greek economy, and celebrate or criticize their own techno-economic theories about it. In a modern version of the debate between ‘Ancients’ and ‘Moderns’, many today seek to establish that certain economic theories either did or did not exist as such in Greek antiquity. There are, indeed, some very suggestive extant literary texts (aside from the available epigraphic, papyrological, numismatic, and archaeological sources) which relate to economic thought, (trans)actions, and actors. Notably, Greek philosophers devoted particular attention to the comprehension of economic issues which were obviously ubiquitous in their time. Therefore, a representative collection of these texts is very much welcome.[1] The present volume is a compilation of texts made by a scholar well-versed in ancient Greek economic thought, which is concisely introduced and perfectly arranged in a way that helps us to understand the commonalities and differences between a variety of authors, whose works cover not just the long fourth century BC but also (with passages from Philodemus of Gadara) later Hellenistic times.
In his introduction, Étienne Helmer first reviews scholarly evaluations of ancient Greek writings on the economy which range from mere empirical observation (J. A. Schumpeter) and ethical / moral assessment (M. I. Finley), to pre-scientific, rational reflection (S. T. Lowry, cf. J. Ober). Helmer follows a middle way (based on A. Orain) which emphasizes the differences between the ways ancient and modern thinkers divide up the world and distinguish the theoretical and the practical (pp. 9-14). Helmer shows that ancient economic theory was developed by philosophers, rather than as a specialised intellectual discipline.[2] As such, one ought to speak of philosophical economics rather than economic philosophy (pp. 14-18). Helmer rightly stresses that oikonomia is not equal to its modern derivative, economy, as the former was primarily concerned with and related to household management (pp. 18-21). However, his claim that the Greeks and Romans had no concept of the market as anything other than something in physical space,[3] and that the rules of oikonomia rarely stretched beyond the household,[4] is highly contentious. Similarly disputable are his claims, which follow K. Polanyi, that oikonomia was always “embedded” in the social sphere and therefore related to moral reflection: this goes beyond our extant source material. Also, in the last part of the introduction (pp. 22-25), one might question whether the extant logoi oikonomikoi, which are fragmentary, or known by mere title alone, should always be kept distinct from thought about the economy in contexts where the polis is under discussion. Xenophon’s Vectigalia has been proven by St. Schorn to follow the same philosophical model found elsewhere in Xenophon:[5] his Oeconomicus and Vectigalia seem to share a lot of similarities in their argument, both being constructed during times of (perceived) crisis. The Anonymus Iamblichi is also closely related to Xenophon’s thought.[6]
The main selection of texts is arranged around the following seven topics: (1) oikonomia as knowledge; (2) oikos and polis economy; (3) differentiation, structure and unity in the social organization of the household and city; (4) the handling of different forms of goods; (5) acquisition from agriculture; (6) acquisition from trade and silver; and (7) wealth and poverty. Each topic is prefaced by a very short introduction, and some topics are subdivided into smaller subsections: for instance, the similarities and differences between the economy of the oikos and polis are distinguished, as they are in our sources. The texts are presented in French translation (mainly adapted from existing translations) – Greek keywords are intermittently inserted into the transcript where necessary – with explanatory remarks in the texts, and occasionally in footnotes. The index of sources is useful, as is the index of proper names and topics, while the bibliography has a firm foundation in mainly French and English scholarship, with notably fewer German scholarly works.
In summary, this is a very useful and thought-provoking anthology, whether or not one agrees with Helmer’s interpretation of specific aspects of ancient Greek economic thought. No doubt, the philosophical framing of ancient Greek economic thought has a significant impact on it. But it is exactly this relationship between the philosophical framing and the non-theoretical discourse and practice of economics that makes these texts highly worthwhile studying.
Notes
[1] For German readers, cf. G. Audring / K. Brodersen, OIKONOMIKA. Quellen zur Wirtschaftstheorie der griechischen Antike, Darmstadt 2008, with introduction, Greek texts and translations.
[2] On how Plato’s framework could be altered when realities required, see S. Günther, (K)einer neuen Theorie wert? Neues zur Antiken Wirtschaftsgeschichte anhand Dig. 50,11,2 (Callist. 3 cognit.), Gymnasium 124/2, 2017, 131-144.
[3] Cf. e.g. the contributions in K. Droß-Krüpe / K. Ruffing (eds.), Markt, Märkte und Marktgebäude in der antiken Welt, Wiesbaden 2022.
[4] Cf. M. Hinsch, Ökonomik und Hauswirtschaft im klassischen Griechenland, Stuttgart 2021, and the review by S. Günther in Klio 104/1, 2022, 366-371.
[5] St. Schorn, Xenophons Poroi als philosophische Schrift, Historia 60/1, 2011, 65-93; republished in English translation: The Philosophical Background of Xenophon’s Poroi, in: Chr. Tuplin / F. Hobden (eds.), Xenophon: Ethical Principles and Historical Enquiry, Leiden 2012, 689-723.
[6] S. Günther, Let Money circulate, for the sake of the Commonwealth! A Note on the Echo of Anonymus Iamblichi Fragment 7 in Xenophon’s Works, in: P. Reinard / Chr. Rollinger (eds.), Cum magna fide? Vertrauen und die antike Wirtschaft / Trust and the Ancient Economy, Gutenberg 2023, 167-175.