Book 1

Between Housecraft (the art of governing a Household or Home) and Statecraft (the art of governing a Nation) there are differences corresponding to those between the two kinds of community over which they severally preside. There is, however, this further difference: that whereas the government of a nation is in many hands, a household has but a single ruler.

Now some arts are divided into two separate branches, one concerned with the making of an object—for example a lyre or a flute—and the other with its use when made. Statecraft on the other hand shows us how to build up a nation from its beginning, as well as how to order rightly a nation that already exists; from which we infer that Housecraft also tells us first how to acquire a household and then how to conduct its affairs.

By a Nation we mean an assemblage of houses, lands, and property sufficient to enable the inhabitants to lead a civilized life. This is proved by the fact that when such a life is no longer possible for them, the tie itself which unites them is dissolved. Moreover, it is with such a life in view that the association is originally formed; and the object for which a thing exists and has come into being is in fact the very essence of that particular thing.

From this definition of a Nation, it is evident that the art of Housecraft is older than that of Statecraft, since the Household, which it creates, is older; being a component part of the Nation created by Statecraft.

Accordingly we must consider the nature of Housecraft, and what the Household, which it creates, actually is.

The component parts of a household are (l) human beings, and (2) goods and chattels. And as households are no exception to the rule that the nature of a thing is first studied in its barest and simplest form, we will follow Hesiod and begin by postulating Homestead first, and a woman; a plough-ox hardy to furrow. For the steading takes precedence among our physical necessities, and the woman among our free associates. It is, therefore, one of the tasks of Homecraft to set in order the relation between man and woman; in other words, to see that it is what it ought to be.

Of occupations attendant on our goods and chattels, those come first which are natural. Among these precedence is given to the one which cultivates the land; those like mining, which extract wealth from it, take the second place. Agriculture is the most honest of all such occupations; seeing that the wealth it brings is not derived from other men. Herein it is distinguished from trade and the wage-earning employments, which acquire wealth from others by their consent; and from war, which wrings it from them perforce. It is also a natural occupation; since by Nature’s appointment all creatures receive sustenance from their mother, and mankind like the rest from their common mother the earth.

And besides all this, agriculture contributes notably to the making of a manly character; because, unlike the mechanical arts, it does not cripple and weaken the bodies of those engaged in it, but inures them to exposure and toil and invigorates them to face the perils of war. For the farmer’s possessions, unlike those of other men, lie outside the city’s defences.

When we turn our attention to the human part of the household, it is the woman who makes the first claim upon it; 〈for the natural comes first, as we have said,〉 and nothing is more natural than the tie between female and male. For we have elsewhere laid down the premiss that Nature is intent on multiplying severally her types; and this is true of every animal in particular. Neither the female, however, can effect this without the male, nor the male without the female; whence the union of the sexes has of necessity arisen.

Now among the lower animals, this union is irrational in character; it exists merely for the purpose of procreation, and lasts only so long as the parents are occupied in producing their brood. In tame animals, on the other hand, and those which possess a greater share of intelligence, it has assumed a more complex form; for in their case we see more examples of mutual help, goodwill, and co-operation.

It is, however, in the human species that this complexity is most marked; since the co-operation between woman and man aims not merely at existence, but at a happy existence. Nor do mankind beget children merely to pay the service they owe to Nature, but also that they may themselves receive a benefit; for the toil they undergo while they are strong and their offspring is still weak is repaid by that offspring when it in turn is grown strong and the parents by reason of age are weak.

At the same time Nature, by this cycle of changes, fulfills her purpose of perpetuating existence; preserving the type when she is unable to preserve the individual. And so with this purpose in view Divine Providence has fashioned the nature of man and of woman for their partnership. For they are distinguished from each other by the possession of faculties not adapted in every case to the same tasks, but in some cases for opposite ones, though contributing to the same end. For Providence made man stronger and woman weaker, so that he in virtue of his manly prowess may be more ready to defend the home, and she, by reason of her timid nature, more ready to keep watch over it; and while he brings in fresh supplies from without, she may keep safe what lies within. In handicrafts again, woman was given a sedentary patience, though denied stamina for endurance of exposure; while man, though inferior to her in quiet employments, is endowed with vigor for every active occupation. In the production of children both share alike; but each makes a different contribution to their upbringing. It is the mother who nurtures, and the father who educates.

We begin then with the rules that should govern a man’s treatment of his wife. And the first of these forbids him to do her wrong; for if he observes this, he is not likely himself to suffer wrong at her hands. As the Pythagoreans declare, even the common rule or custom of mankind thus ordains, forbidding all wrong to a wife as stringently as though she were a suppliant whom one has raised from the hearthstone. And a man does wrong to his wife when he associates with other women.

As regards the intercourse of marriage, wives should neither importune their husbands, nor be restless in their absence; but a man should accustom his wife to be content whether he is at home or away. Good also is the advice of Hesiod: Take thee a maiden to wife, and teach her ways of discretion. For differences of ways and habits are little conducive to affection.

As regards adornment: it is not well that souls should approach one another in borrowed plumes, nor is it well in the case of bodies. Intercourse which depends 〈for its charm〉 upon outward adornment differs in no respect from that of figures on the stage in their conventional attire.

Of property, the first and most indispensable kind is that which is also best and most amenable to Housecraft; and this is the human chattel. Our first step therefore must be to procure good slaves. Of slaves there are two kinds; those in positions of trust, and the laborers. And since it is matter of experience that the character of the young can be moulded by training, when we require to charge slaves with tasks befitting the free, we have not only to procure the slaves, but to bring them up 〈for the trust〉.

In our intercourse with slaves we must neither suffer them to be insolent nor treat them with cruelty. A share of honor should be given to those who are doing more of a freeman’s work, and abundance of food to those who are laboring with their hands. And whereas the use of wine renders even free men insolent, so that in many countries they too refrain from it—as, for instance, the Carthaginians do when they are on campaign—it follows that we must either deny wine to slaves altogether, or reserve it for rare occasions.

We may apportion to our slaves (1) work, (2) chastisement, and (3) food. If men are given food, but no chastisement nor any work, they become insolent. If they are made to work, and are chastised, but stinted of their food, such treatment is oppressive, and saps their strength. The remaining alternative, therefore, is to give them work, and a sufficiency of food. Unless we pay men, we cannot control them; and food is a slave’s pay.

Slaves, again, are no exception to the rule that men become worse when better conduct is not followed by better treatment, but virtue and vice remain alike unrewarded.

Accordingly we must keep watch over our workers, suiting our dispensations and indulgences to their desert; whether it be food or clothing, leisure or chastisement that we are apportioning. Both in theory and in practice we must take for our model a physician’s freedom in prescribing his medicines; observing at the same time that food differs from medicine in that it requires to be constantly administered.

The best laborers will be furnished by those races of mankind which are neither wholly spiritless nor yet overbold. Each extreme has its vice; the spiritless cannot endure hard labor, and the high-spirited will not readily brook control.

Every slave should have before his eyes a definite goal or term of his labor. To set the prize of freedom before him is both just and expedient; since having a prize to work for, and a time defined for its attainment, he will put his heart into his labors. We should, moreover, take hostages 〈for our slaves’ fidelity〉 by allowing them to beget children; and avoid the practice of purchasing many slaves of the same nationality, as men avoid doing in towns. We should also keep festivals and give treats, more on the slaves account than on that of the freemen; since the free have a fuller share in those enjoyments for the sake of which these institutions exist.

There are four qualities which the head of a household must possess in dealing with his property. Firstly, he must have the faculty of acquiring, and secondly that of preserving what he has acquired; otherwise there is no more benefit in acquiring than in baling with a colander, or in the proverbial wine-jar with a hole in the bottom. Thirdly and fourthly, he must know how to improve his property, and how to make use of it; since these are the ends for which the powers of acquisition and of preservation are sought.

Everything we possess should be duly classified; and the amount of our productive property exceed that of the unproductive. Produce should be so employed that we do not risk all our possessions at once. For the safe keeping of our property, we shall do well to adopt the Persian and Laconian systems. Athenian housecraft has, however, some advantages. The Athenian buys immediately with the produce of his sales, and the smaller households keep no idle deposits in store.

Under the Persian system, the master himself undertook the entire disposition and supervision of the household, following the practice which Dion used to remark in Dionysius. No one, indeed, takes the same care of another’s property as of his own; so that, as far as is possible, each man ought to attend to his affairs in person. We may commend also a pair of sayings, one attributed to a Persian and the other to a Libyan. The former on being asked what best conditions a horse, replied His master’s eye. The Libyan, when asked what kind of manure is best, answered The master’s footprints.

The master and mistress should, therefore, give personal supervision, each to his or her special department of the household work. In small households, an occasional inspection will suffice; in estates managed through stewards, inspections must be frequent. For in stewardship as in other matters there can be no good copy without a good example; and if the master and mistress do not attend diligently to their estate, their deputies will certainly not do so.

Moreover, as such habits are both commendable for moral reasons and also conducive to good management, the master and mistress will do well to rise earlier than their servants and to retire later; to treat their home as a city, and never leave it unguarded; nor ever, by night or by day, to postpone a task which ought to be done. Rising before daylight is also to be commended; it is a healthy habit, and gives more time for the management of the household as well as for liberal studies.

We have remarked that on small holdings the Athenian method of disposing of the produce is advantageous. On large estates, after the amount for the year’s or the month’s outlay has been set apart, it should be handed to the overseers; and so also with implements, whether for daily or for occasional use. In addition, an inspection of implements and stores should be made periodically, so that remainders and deficiencies may alike be noted.

In constructing a homestead, we have to provide for the stock which it is to shelter, and for its health and well-being. Providing for the stock involves questions such as these: What type of building is best for the storage of crops and of clothing? How are we to store the dry crops, and how the moist ones? Of the other stock, how is the living to be housed, and how the dead? and what accommodation are we to make for slaves and free, for women and men, for foreigners and fellow-citizens? For well-being and health, again, the homestead should be airy in summer, and sunny in winter.

A homestead possessing these qualities would be longer than it is deep; and its main front would face the south. On large estates, moreover, it seems worth while to instal as porter a man incapable of other work, to keep his eye on what passes in and out. That implements may be ready for use, the Laconian practice should be followed. Each should be kept in its own place; thus it will always be to hand, and not require seeking.