The principle of the division of labor is clearly stated by him, but here again he differs from Plato in that his prime interest is practical and economic rather than moral. He presents it as the reason why royal dishes are superior in flavor to others, and makes the acute observation that the division of labor is not so fully applied in the small city, because there are not enough consumers to support a man in one trade. In the large city, on the other hand, the consumers are so numerous that even the trades themselves are divided and subdivided. Thus much greater skill is developed, and better results realized, for he who spends his time in work of the narrowest compass (βραχυτάτῳ) must accomplish this in the best manner.[436] He does not specify the advantages of the division of labor to industry, except that it results in greater skill, but he reveals especial insight in stating so clearly the relation of the market to the development of the principle.[437] In this, he is the forerunner of Adam Smith, who observes that a minute division of trades cannot exist except in the larger cities, especially in coast and river towns.[438] The assertion of Haney,[439] that the Greeks referred only to a “simple separation of employments,” is certainly unwarranted in the light of this passage, for Xenophon expressly distinguishes here the simple from the more complex subdivision. He says that some are employed on men’s shoes, others on women’s; some do the sewing (νευρορραφῶν), others do the cutting (σχίζων), and that the same also is true in the manufacture of clothing.[440] This passage is also an evidence that the development of industry in fourth-century Athens must have been extensive. Xenophon also, like Plato, observed the fact that the diversity in the natures of men is the basis for the division of labor,[441] though he did not follow him in his doctrine that men and women should have the same work.[442] Unlike Plato, the idealist, Xenophon, the practical man of affairs, takes the institution of slavery for granted, seemingly unconscious of any ethical or economic problems involved.[443] However, as a matter of common-sense, he advises that slaves be treated with consideration. He would give them a proper degree of liberty,[444] and arouse them to do their best[445] by a fair system of rewards and punishments. In the case of those slaves who hold positions of trust, he advises that their affections should be won by kindly treatment, and even by making them sharers in the prosperity of the household.[446] Slavery is, of course, a condition most irksome to the free-born. The unfortunate Eutheros would almost prefer starvation.[447] MONEY