CHAPTER II ECONOMIC IDEAS BEFORE PLATO, AND REASONS FOR THE UNDEVELOPED CHARACTER OF GREEK ECONOMICS As stated above, the economic ideas of the Greeks were unsystematized and inextensive.[18] The extant literature previous to Plato presents only incidental hints on matters economic. Hesiod, in interesting antithesis to classical thinkers, emphasizes the dignity and importance of manual labor.[19] The contrast, however, is not so great as it appears, for the labor which he dignifies is agricultural. He constantly urges its importance as the chief source of wealth.[20] On the other hand, he opposes the commercial spirit that was beginning to be rife in his age, and decries the evil of unjust gains.[21] His mention of the fact of competition between artisans of the same trade is of interest for the development of industry in Greece.[22] His _Erga_ was, in a sense, the forerunner of the later _Economica_ in Greek literature. Solon proved by his reforms that he had some sane economic ideas as to the importance of labor, industry, commerce, and money in the development of the state. He also showed some insight into the solution of the problem of poverty. His ideas, however, are not definitely formulated in his extant fragments, and belong rather to economic history.[23] The _Elegies_ of Theognis are full of moral utterances on wealth, emphasizing its temporary nature as compared with virtue.[24] Pythagoras and his followers have often been given a prominent place in the history of communism, but this is probably due to a false interpretation.[25] It is likely, however, that he opposed the evils of luxury, and moralized on the relation between wealth and virtue.[26] Democritus wrote a work on agriculture.[27] Like the other philosophers, he taught that happiness was to be sought in the gold of character, rather than in material wealth.[28] To his mind, poverty and wealth alike were but names for need and satiety (κόρου).[29] Wealth without understanding was not a safe possession, depending for its value on right use.[30] The amassing of wealth by just means, however, was good,[31] though unjust gains were always a source of evil.[32] Excessive desire for wealth was worse than the most extreme poverty.[33] It is possible also that Democritus held to a mild form of the social contract theory of the origin of society.[34] Heraclitus complained bitterly of the unwisdom of the masses and their merely material view of life.[35] He made the common antithesis between material and spiritual wealth,[36] and observed the fact that gold is a universal medium of exchange.[37] Hippodamas of Miletus and Phaleas of Chalcedon proposed new plans for the distribution of wealth, but we have the barest outline of their theories from Aristotle.[38] Their systems will be discussed in a following chapter.