Hostname: page-component-5d59c44645-n6p7q Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-01T09:09:03.417Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Laurion Mines: A Reconsideration

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 September 2013


The present article follows on one published some years ago in the Annual, which dealt with the administrative problems connected with the so-called silver mines of south-east Attica and with their relation to other economic activity particularly in the fourth century B.C. This second discussion, based on a number of visits to the mining area, is an attempt to relate what can be seen on the ground to the literary and epigraphical sources, and to previous writing on the subject; to draw some historical and economic conclusions if this seems possible; at the least to point out problems.

The mining region has been almost completely neglected by the excavator. A recent exception to this, a very carefully carried out Greco-Belgian excavation at Thorikos, which still continues, is an encouragement to look again at this ancient industrial activity.

The excavations at Thorikos, a site already well known for its theatre and Mycenaean tombs, are proceeding at several points on or near the Velatouri Hill. The following are the important discoveries from the standpoint of mining activity.

Research Article
Copyright © The Council, British School at Athens 1968

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)


1 BSA xlviii (1953) 200–54, largely based on Miss Margaret Crosby's study of the mine leases, including extensive material not in IG 2, published in Hesperia xix (1950) 189–312, to which was later added further material in Hesperia xxvi (1957) 1–23.

2 Including some brief observations by the present writer in Greece and Rome viii2. 138–51, by G. Macdonald, Ibid. 19–21, plates ii–iv, and the earlier literature listed by Lauffer, S., Die Bergwerkssklaven von Laureion, 1: Arbeits- und Betriebsverhältnisse, Rechtsstellung, pp. 3 ff.Google Scholar, in considerable detail. This work (hereafter ‘Lauffer’), including Part 11: Gesellschaftliche Verhältnisse, Aufstände (Akad. Wiss., Mainz; published Wiesbaden, 1955, 1956), ranges far beyond the questions relating to the slaves employed in the mines. On slaves' origins and employment, 11. 123 ff.; note the prominence of Phrygians; general comment on all problems connected with slaves, 1. 46 ff. Largely derivative is Wilsdorf, H., Bergleute und Hüttenmänner im Altertum bis zum Ausgang der röm. Republik (Berlin, 1952: hereafter ‘Wilsdorf’)Google Scholar, drawing heavily (as all work on the mines does) on Ardaillon, E., Les mines du Laurion dans l'antiquité (Paris, 1897; hereafter ‘Ardaillon’)Google Scholar, the account which is mainly under examination in this article. Between Cordella, , Le Laurion (Marseilles, 1869)Google Scholar and Ardaillon (1897) comes Cambrésy, A., ‘Le Laurium’, in Revue universelle des mines (Paris–Liège), series 3, vol. 67 (1889) 109–28 and 230–71.Google Scholar Hereafter ‘Cambrésy’.

3 The author wishes to thank the University of Sheffield for financial assistance in this project, and Mr. G. Macdonald for permission to reproduce photographs taken by him. It should be noted that the arrangement of what follows, i.e. a general text followed by five appendices, is intended to provide an outline account for the broadly interested reader supplemented by discussions of detail for those more specifically concerned with this aspect of ancient technology.

4 The most convenient summary of the bibliography of this excavation to date, as well as a useful account of the discoveries so far, is to be found in BCH xci (1967) 627–31. A definitive publication has also begun to appear: Thorikos 1964 (Brussels, 1967), and other volumes are promised. One of them is also to contain an account of what is clearly a technical device (for washing or crushing ore?) commented on below, note 161. An account of the Thorikos excavation is given also in AD 19 (1964), pt. 2. 1, 80–6 with plans and AD 20 (1964), pt. 2. 1, 128–30. The excavations are located on the northern and western slopes of the Velatouri Hill, and in the vicinity of the theatre. The play of Antiphanes οἱ Θορίκιοι ἢ ὁ Διορύττων need have no connection with mining, except in so far as the inhabitants of Thorikos, in their calling as miners, might also be expert sappers or burglars (τοιχώρυχοι).

5 BCH xci (1967) 628.

6 Thorikos 1964, 29. See ibid. 30, n. 1 for an analysis, and reference to discussion of the cupellation process. See PPA N.S. xxxi (1965) 214 for refs. to a possible Sub-Mycenaean silver cupellation furnace in Argos. See also n. 46a below.

7 South of Velatouri? See Thorikos 1964, 47, and for the excavation of 1963, very briefly, AntClass. xxxiv (1965) 5–8.

8 BCH xci (1967) 628.

9 Cf. Thorikos 1964, 60–1. On a possible identification of slaves' barracks, see Lauffer, 1. 61 and n. 3.

10 Again a conjecture, not necessarily convincing, referring to the work of Young, J. H., ‘Studies in South Attica. Country Estates at Sounion’, in Hesperia xxv (1956) 122–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

11 Thorikos 1964, 62. On the flight of mining slaves to Dekeleia, and the numbers employed, see Lauffer, 11. 140 ff. It is difficult to decide on numbers from the evidence we possess. In the proposal of Hyperides made in the crisis of 338 B.C. to free slaves and enlist the under-privileged for the defence of Athens (= Hyperides fr. 29), the number of slaves is given as ‘more than 150,000’ τοὺς 〈δούλους τοὺς〉 ἐκ τῶν ἔργων τῶν ἀργυρείων καὶ τοὺς κατὰ τὴν ἄλλην χώραν where the same problem arises as with Thucydides' τεχνῐται of deciding on the proportion of mining slaves involved.

12 Commented on by Mussche, ibid. 71.

13 Ibid. 77–8.

14 i.e. clay nozzles for the injection of a forced draught into a heated mass in a furnace.

15 Ibid. 77–8.

16 Ibid. 79.

17 Ibid. 66.

18 Ibid. 58.

19 BCH xci (1967) 629.

20 Cf. what the fourth-century writer of the de Vectigalibus has to say of the Athens of his time ([Xen.] ii. 6): εῑτα ἐπειδὴ καὶ πολλὰ οἰκιῶν ἔπημά ἐοτιν ἐντὸς τῶν τειχῶν καὶ οἰκόπεδα, εἰ ἡ πόλις διδοίη οἰκοδομησομένοις ἐγκεκτῆσθαι οἲ ἂν αἰτούμενοι ἂξιοι δοκῶσιν εῑναι, πολὺ ἂν οἲομαι καὶ διὰ ταῦτα πλείους τε καὶ βελτίους ὀρέγεσθαι τῆς Ἀθήνησι οἰκήσεως.

20a See below, n. 38.

21 Le Laurion (Marseilles, 1869) 13.

22 See Eliot, C. W. J., Coastal Demes of Attica (Toronto, 1962) 75 ff.Google Scholar, and also (passim) Lewis, D. M., ‘Cleisthenes and Attica’, Historia xii (1963) 22 ff.Google Scholar; a map of the coastal and inland trittyes, Eliot 139. On the question of names as those of villages (but not necessarily deme-centres), cf. Eliot 75 and 83. Note that he suggests (75) ‘many of the sites were studied in the late nineteenth century by those engaged in mining operations, but, because the results of the studies were not published the evidence has not come down to us’. He deals with the demes of Anaphlystos, Amphitrope, Besa, and Atene at some length (op. cit. 75–109, 110–16, 117–24, 125–35 respectively), and considers the problem of the deme of Phrearrhos (91, n. 58), which he does not locate; he observes ‘… Phrearrhos is used as the general location of only one mine in the preserved leases…. The deme therefore seems to have had comparatively few mining interests.’ But one must surely place it in an area with a considerable concentration of cisterns, perhaps near the coast behind Ergasteri where actual mines are less frequent. For the trittys to which it gave its name, see D. M. Lewis, op. cit. 28.

22a Cordella suggests numerous villages of citizen inhabitants to exploit the mines, op. cit. 13 (contrast 29).

23 The term used is ‘scories’, which must mean slag (now relatively scarce) not rejected material (which is abundant). But there was also mining, since one of the chief reasons for the nineteenth-century exploitation of the mines was the production of zinc, rarely used in ancient times: cf. Farnsworth, M., Smith, C. S., Rodda, J. L., ‘Metallographic Examination of Zinc from Athens’, Hesperia Suppl. viii. 126 ff.Google Scholar

24 Ardaillon, 21 ff.; Wilsdorf, 212 ff.; Lauffer, 1. 1152–6 for slaves' fetters. The inscriptions, IG 2 II–III. 2, 2747, 2748, 2749 (moved to Markopoulo), 2750 (ὅρος κ[α]μίνου καὶ ἐδάφων πε[πραμένων ἐπὶ λύσει])

25 A popular account of the resumed (post Second World War) mining in The Sphere, 13 Jan. 1952. See also the Atlas économique et social de Grèce (Athens, 1964), map 401, which stresses the difficulty of obtaining statistics or precise information, and describes the Laurion mineral deposits as ‘almost exhausted’ except for a minor production of zinc. Cf. Lauffer, 1. 1106, end of n. 1.

25a It is not clear if the finding of an Attic 4 dr. piece (to judge from the description possibly of fifth-century date) in a spoil dump is an indication of early re-working ( Cordella, and Wolters, , AM xix. 238 Google Scholar).

26 But see Appendix III, p. 311 for the effects of weather. Ardaillon also comments on the disappearance of structures through the silting-up of valley bottoms. Cf. Philippson, , Die griechische Landschaften 1. iii (1952) 836.Google Scholar

27 See Appendix III, p. 313–14, Ardaillon 73–4; Lauffer, 1. 37–8.

28 As at Thorikos and elsewhere; see Appendix III, p. 314.

29 BSA xlviii (1953), 203–5. References on mortgage stones IG 2 II–III. 2, 2747, 2748, 2749. See also nn. 38, 40, 51 below.

30 Thorikos 1964, 67, fig. 62.

31 Ardaillon, 68.

32 Cf. Demosthenes, , Or. lv. 5 Google Scholar, Plato, Leg. 761 a–c, 844 a; Plutarch, , Solon 23 Google Scholar; IG2 II–III. 2657 and 2494.

33 BSA xlviii (1953) 242 ff.; Lauffer, S., ‘ Prosopographische Bemerkungen zu den attischen Grubenpachtlisten ’, Historia vi (1957) 287 ff.Google Scholar, passim. Note that Ardaillon (74) suggests many small ergasterion owners or operators, but a few big ‘industrialists’. It would be interesting to know how far such men served as Boule members and were indicative by their numbers of the wealth of their deme, as, e.g. in SEG xix 149 (?336/335 B.C.), in which Phrearrhos has 8 members (and one vacancy), while Thorikos has 5 and Sounion 4. In IG 2 11. 1700 (of 334/5 B.C.) Anaphlystos has 10, and continues to be well represented into the third century B.C.; as a large deme it must have incorporated some mining activity (see Eliot, , Coastal Demes of Attika, 84 Google Scholar and the leases), but Besa which is generally agreed to have been of great mining importance, had only two, though later, at the beginning of the second century A.D., it had twelve, which is difficult to understand if mining was the local source of wealth, SEG xxi. 603.

34 BSA xlviii (1953) 247; Ardaillon, 105; [Xen.] de Vect. iv. 14–15.

35 Appendix III, p. 320. For such periods, see BSA xlviii (1953) 247 ff., and [Xen.] de Vect. iv. 28.

36 Ardaillon, 80–1.

37 Ardaillon, 113.

38 Above, p. 294, and n. 14. But a κάμινος could be mortgaged, cf. IG2 II–III. 2, 2750: ὅρος κ[α]μίνου καὶ ἐδάφων πε[πραμένων ἐπὶ λύσει] On mortgage inscriptions, see Lauffer, 1. 87 ff. On furnaces, cf. Davies, O., Roman Mines in Europe (Oxford, 1935) 45 ff.Google Scholar: ‘shaft furnaces’in a rock cut, with ore and fuel covered with clay (the traces on the ridge mentioned in the text may have been thus produced) or free-standing, built of stones and clay as Plate 59a; and ‘bowl furnaces’ (42–3) with forced draught through tuyères like those from Thorikos (others, according to Davies (op. cit. 42), were found in Siphnos at H. Sostis). On the location of smelting furnaces, cf. Strabo, iii. 11. 8: τὰς δὲ τοῦ ἀργύρου καμίνους ποιοῦσιν ὑψηλάς, ὥστε τὴν ἐκ τῶν βώλων λιγνὺν μετέωρον ἐξαιρέσθαι. Βαρεῐα γάρ ἐστι καὶ ὀλέθριος (cf. Pliny, HN. xxxiv. 18. 167Google Scholar).

39 See Appendix I, p. 305 for the Derbyshire practice.

40 Strabo, iii. 2, 10; Pliny, HN xxxiii. 6, 98 Google Scholar; Ardaillon. 83. O. Davies, op. cit. 54, mentions cupellation remains at H. Sostis in Siphnos. In Demosthenes xxxvii (involving an ἐργαστήριον with 30 slaves as a security for a loan) the refining of silver appears to be referred to, and the term κεγχρέων (see n. 41 below) seems to be used (28) for this establishment in which ἀργύριον is extracted from ἀργυρἵτις which in that case would be argentiferous lead (but see n. 41). The Attic refiners may have used other processes than cupellation, cf. Archaeology in Greece 1961–62, 5 (from the newspaper Kathimerini of 15 April 1962): ‘It seems that a highly efficient method of separating the silver from lead was adopted in the 4th century B.C. Light was thrown on this method, lost since antiquity, by finds in an ancient working area on the Bay of Poundazeza about 4 km. south of modern Lavrion. The method depended upon the use of iron bars, and may be that to which Pliny refers in NH xxxiii. 35, 107.’ As far as the present writer knows, nothing more has been heard of this discovery.

41 Demosthenes, , Or. xxxvii. 26 Google Scholar; cf. BSA xlviii (1953) 204; Lauffer, 1. 37–8. Other terms: ὅλμοι λίθινοι, τριπτήρ. κεγχρέων probably includes the washing-table equipment, cf. Harpocration, s.v. κεγχρέων. τὸ καθαριστήριον ὅπου τὴν ἐκ τῶν μετάλλων κέγχρον διέψυχον ( = clean and dry?) ὡς ὑποσημαίνει Θεόφραστος ἐν τῷ περὶ μετάλλων. διεψυχον would seem to exclude the refining of argentiferous lead. κέγχρος (cf. Bekker, , Anec. Gr. i. 271 Google Scholar (from Demosthenes xxxvii?), ἡ ἀργυρῖτις κέγχρος must be related to κέρχνος on which cf. Pollux vii. 99: καὶ τὸν ἀργυρίων κονιορτὸν κέρχνον which sounds like finely divided ore, and the lexicographer's ἐκαθαίρετο like the washing process. See Hesperia xxxii (1963) 174–5.

42 Oddly enough [Xen.] de Vect. iv. 2 (mentioning only the ἐκβεβλημένοι σώροι) does not comment on these, nor yet when suggesting (iv. 25) the great number of slaves employed before the occupation of Dekeleia by the Spartans.

43 Cf. the term ἄντρον used in a mining lease, Crosby, (Hesperia xix) 19. 19.Google Scholar

44 See Appendix III, pp. 317 f.

45 See Appendix III, pp. 317 f.

46 See Appendix III, pp. 314 ff.; Ardaillon, 34 f.; Wilsdorf, 109 ff.

46a See Hesperia viii (1939) 415–16 for lead, including a large quantity of lead sheathing from the Mycenaean fountain on the Acropolis of Athens, and a portion of a lead pig 4·10 kg in the ruins of a Slope, North house (Hesperia ii (1933) 352.Google Scholar More lead comes from Athens than from other Mycenaean areas. Comment by Stubbings, F., BSA xlii (1947) 69.Google Scholar

47 See Appendix II, pp. 308 ff.; Appendix III, pp. 319 ff., Ardaillon, 13 ff.

48 See Appendix II, p. 308; cf. AJA lxxi (1967), R. H. Brill and J. M. Wampler, ‘Isotope Studies of Ancient Lead’, 69, and 63–77 Passim on Laurion lead.

49 Aeschylus, , Persae 238.Google Scholar

50 Herodotus vii. 144; other references in Sandys, Aristotle's Constitution of Athens, commentary on 22. 7. See below, nn. 73–7.

51 Appendix III, p. 316; Ardaillon, 37 ff.; on the possible site of Maroneia, Ardaillon, 138–40. In commenting on this discovery Eliot, (Coastal Demes of Attica, 77–8)Google Scholar dees not fully understand the difficulties which arise in accepting Ardaillon's dating and view of the sequence of discoveries, even if we take into account the long tradition demonstrated by the discoveries at Thorikos.

52 See BSA xlviii (1953) 234 ff. Even if it is assumed that payment took place only when ore had been found, the problem remains of the risk of a great volume of profitless digging.

53 iv. 28.

54 See BSA xlviii (1953) 250 ff., for a discussion of the factors involved. In addition to καινοτομίαι we hear of κατατομαί and ἐπικατατομαί in the lease inscriptions. There is no indication what they might be (see BSA xlviii (1953) 201 and reference, and Appendix IV, p. 324).

55 The terms are discussed in BSA xlviii (1953) 203 and n. 27; see also Hesperia xxvi (1957) 14. Cf. also Xenophon, Oec. xix. 11 Google Scholar: for σάττειν as a gardening term, meaning to ‘press’ or ‘pack’ earth around a plant. For another form, clearly indicating the same idea of ‘filling’ or ‘packing’, cf. Harpocration, ἀποσάξαντα. Δείναρχος ἀντὶ τοῦ φράξαντα τὸ τρῆμα καὶ ἀποπληρώσαντα (from Dinarchus, see Baiter, and Sauppe, Or. Att. 340 Google Scholar, fr. incert. loc. 10; in manuscripts falsely ascribed also to Herodotus and Isaeus). It now seems to the present writer that ἀνασάξιμον could very well mean ‘blocked up’, a meaning suggested by Plates 61 a, 62a, where the ‘packing’ of stones, so neatly done, suggests a prepared and more readily closed entrance, in contrast to the roof-supporting construction of Plate 60b, but it is not easy to suggest a difference between ἀνασάξιμον and πάλαιον ἀνασάξιμον.

56 de Vect. iv. 28, on καινοτομίαι, but true in some measure of all categories, even ἐργάσιμα But in mines taken over from other prospectors there was the fact of some digging already done, and probably an indication of some success in finding ore, pace de Vect. iv. 27.

57 BSA xlviii (1955) 234 ff.

58 Appendix I, p. 307; cf. Ardaillon, 36–7.

59 Appendix III, pp. 319 ff.; Ardaillon, 13 ff.

60 Appendix II, pp. 308 ff.

61 Appendices II. pp. 308 ff. and I, pp. 306 f.

62 Appendix III, p. 317. Ardaillon himself admits the construction of shafts for ventilation and evacuation of material in the case of the First Contact posterior to the driving of the galleries (38): ‘Nous retrouvons ces premiers puits sur toute la ligne du premier contact, à peu de distance et au-dessus de l'entrée des galeries: ils sont régulièrement espacés et taillés avec soin dans l'axe des galeries principales qu'ils recoupent à divers intervalles. Ils facilitent l'aérage et simplifient l'extraction des minerais. Mais ils sont toujours postérieurs aux galeries qu'ils desservent et ne sont donc qu'un perfectionnement apporté après coup à un ensemble de travaux de mines.’ There is urgent need for investigation to establish the accuracy of statements such as this by Ardaillon, which are normally accepted without question. It is difficult to see mine-lease holders embarking on such works, which might well benefit their successors rather than themselves.

63 Ardaillon, plate II opposite p. 42; Appendix III, p. 319.

64 See Stokes, A. A., Lead and Lead Mining in Derbyshire (1964), 21 ff.Google Scholar

65 Such an inference might be extracted from the cases of Epikrates, and Diphilos, (see BSA xlviii (1953) 225 Google Scholar but the leases give few indications of the involvement of very large sums (except in Hesperia xxvi (1957) 14, where (in S 5) a sum of 2 talents 5,550 drachmas appears (l. 15), but there are considerable obscurities: whether this is a mine ἐργάσιμον or παλ. ἀνασάξιμον, and whether TT represents 2 talents or is part of a demotic. The same collection of inscriptions shows other large sums of 6,100, 3,500, and 2,000 drachmas), but nothing of elaborate partnership organizations, but these may be obscured by the official and laconic form of the leases, in which only one ‘purchaser’ need be named.

66 Note that very small shafts, more suitable for ventilation, occur in all areas.

67 Appendices I, p. 307 and III, p. &21.

67a Note that Cambrésy (n. 2 above) seems to mention (126–7, 268–9) the water-table being reached and passed (?) in ancient times, which is surely an error.

68 BSA xlviii (1953) 247 ff.

69 BSA xlviii (1953) 245–6, but of possibly ambiguous interpretation.

70 See Appendix III, p. 310 ff. (the most reasonable conclusion), and Appendix IV, p. 322.

71 See above, p. 294 and n. 10, and Appendix IV, p. 322.

72 See BSA xlviii (1953) 227 ff.

73 The sources are Herodotus vii. 144, AthPol 22. 7, Plutarch, , Them. 4 Google Scholar, and Polyaenus i. 30. 6. Plutarch appears to follow Herodotus and Polyaenus AthPol. See Labarbe, J., La loi navale de Thémistocls (Paris, 1957)CrossRefGoogle Scholar for a long discussion.

74 Sandys, J. E., Aristotle's Constitution of Athens 94 on 22. 7.Google Scholar

75 Ibid. 23. 1–2.

76 From Plutarch, , Them. 4 Google Scholar (καὶ πρῶτον μὲν τὴν Λαυρεωτικὴν πρόσοδον ἀπὸ τῶν ἀργυρείων μετάλλων ἔθος ἐχόντων Ἀθηναίων διανέμεσθαι μὀνος εἰπεῐν ἐτόλμηοε … ὡς χρὴ τὴν διανομὴν ἐάσαντας…) perhaps derived from the ambiguity of Herodotus? See Sandys, ad loc., on Herodotus' παυσαμένους and its implications (op. cit. 94–5). Polyaenus does not suggest a previous practice, nor does AthPol.

77 In some way subsequently garbled and misunderstood. The problem of the trierarchy is bound up with the history of the Athenian navy and not least the Troizen inscription. On Themistocles' action and the earlier trierarchy see Morrison, J. S. and Williams, R. T., Greek Oared Ships 900–322 B.C. (Cambridge, 1968) 260 Google Scholar, who accept AthPol at its face value.

78 BSA xlviii (1953) 205 ff.

79 As Kahrstedt, U., Staatsgebiet und Staatsangehörige in Athen (1934), 26 Google Scholar; Berve, H., Die Tyrannis bei den Griechen ii. 548.Google Scholar

80 Appendix I, p. 305.

81 As the writer of the de Vectigalibus does, iv. 50. On the term ἔδαφος see BSA xlviii (1953) 218, and cf. IG 2 11–111. 2750 quoted in n. 38 above.

82 Appendix I, p. 305.

83 The phrase ἐκ τῆς στήλης is applied to 5 out of 17 mines in the poletai list for the year 367/366 B.C. (Hesperia x (1941) 14, no. 1; Hesperia xix (1950) 206, no. 1). Some kind of new start could be deduced from de Vect. iv. 28: νεωστὶ γὰρ πάλιν κατασκευάӡονται. but the date of this pamphlet would not fit.

84 BSA xlviii (1953) 218, 221. The inscription Hesperia xiv. 119 = SEG x. 87, as well as referring to coinage makes some reference (restored) to mines at Laurion, but its meaning is quite unclear.

85 See Gray, D., ‘Metal-working in Homer’, JHS lxxiv (1954) 1 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar; for a much earlier period, Renfrew, C., ‘Cycladic Metallurgy and the Aegean Early Bronze Age’, AJA lxxi (1967) 1 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Branigan, K., ‘Silver and Lead in Prepalatial Crete’, AJA lxxii (1968) 219 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar And see note 46a above.

86 AJA lxxi (1967) 63 ff., especially 69 ff., which gives also a very useful bibliography and discussion of ancient lead.

87 Kraay, C., in JHS lxxxiv (1964) 8891.Google Scholar

88 This seems to be the reasonable conclusion from Raven's, E. J. P. observations in ‘Problems of the earliest Owls of Athens’, in Essays in Greek Coinage presented to Stanley Robinson (Oxford, 1968), 47.Google Scholar

89 Aeschylus, , Persae 238.Google Scholar

90 [Xen.] AthPol ii. 11, though all the comment here relates to Athens' control of the sea; even so it is surprising that this great resource, if such it was, is not mentioned. This contrasts with the stress on the importance of the mines in certain 4th-century references, Demosthenes viii. 45, xxiii. 146; Isocrates, , de Pace 117.Google Scholar

91 Thuc. ii. 13, 3–5. Or did Thucydides regard the mines only as potential income and likely to be put in jeopardy by invasion? On the fifth-century mines (and references to them) see BSA xlviii (1953) 248.

92 See JHS lxxxii (1962) 67 ff., in answer to Historia x (1961) 148–69.

93 Thucydides vi. 91. 7 and vii. 27. 5. It is reasonable to suppose that Thucydides is the source of the reference in de Vectigalibus iv. 25. See also Lauffer, 1. 46 ff., 11. 140 ff.

94 BSA xlviii (1953) 247 ff.

95 Cf. BCH xcii (1968) 180, on the sacrificial calendars and festival sacrifices, c. 360–350 B.C.

96 de Vect. iii. 2, indicating a potential rather than an actual production.

97 Stokes, op. cit. 7.

98 Ibid. 65.

99 English Dialect Society, Series B, Reprinted Glossaries VIII: Derbyshire Leadmining Terms, with a reprint of Manlove's ‘Rhymed Chronicle’ (London, 1874).

100 Especially Raistrick and Jennings, op. cit. 112, passim, and Law 11 in particular; Stokes, op. cit. 9 (Art. x), 10 (Arts, xxxviii and xxix).

101 Raistrick and Jennings, op. cit. 100.

102 As in the Mendip Mining Laws of Edward IV; cf. Raistrick and Jennings, op. cit. 104–5 and references there.

103 See BSA xlviii (1953) 219–24.

103a For eviction from a concession, cf. the speech of Dinarchus (falsely attributed) πρὸς Μὴκυθον μεταλλικός in the Index of Dionysius of genuine or false speeches attributed to the orator ( Baiter, and Sauppe, , Or. Att. 325.Google Scholar) Here the plaintiff having worked a mine for three years (τρία δὲ ἔτη ἐργασάμενος: is there here some connection with the period of ἐργάσιμα?) is dispossessed by a neighbour, ἐκβαλλόμενος ὑπὸ τοῦ πλησίον ἔχοντος μέταλλα… On the other hand it may be pointed out that the words preserved from the speech of Antiphon (which otherwise would be interesting for its early date) πρὸς Νικοκλέα περὶ ὄρων frs. 36–45 (ed. Blass, Teubner, 1908) give no indication of a mine boundary issue. The ἀργυροκοπεῐον (= the Mint) (36) was in the vicinity of the Agora.

104 Ibid., 223. Correctly explained by Lauffer, 1. 32. For τύφειν = ‘smoke out’, cf. Aristophanes, , Vesp. 457.Google Scholar

105 Ardaillon, 48–9. For ancient use of fire in rock-breaking, cf. Diod. Sic. iii. 12.4, Pliny, , HN xxxiii. 4. 71.Google Scholar

106 For ἐπικατατομή, cf. Appendix IV, p. 324 and n. 266. Cf. Hyperides, , Euxen. 35 Google Scholar, and Lipsius, , Att. Recht 311, n. 8.Google Scholar

107 BSA xlviii (1953) 220–1 suggests otherwise, and the idea of underground boundaries cannot wholly be discarded.

108 Stokes, op. cit. 9, Art. v: ‘Every miner shall, so long as his mine shall be worked, be entitled, without making any payment for the same, to the exclusive use of so much surface land as shall be thought necessary by the Barmaster and two of the grand jury for the purpose of spoil heaps, etc.’ To be distinguished from the length of vein to be exploited (the ‘meer’, ibid., Art. x).

109 See reference in n. 107 above; even if there were underground boundaries as a delimitation of the ground to be worked (as in Derbyshire), these could not be the same as the surface boundaries given in the leases: see below, Appendix IV, p. 325.

110 Op. cit. xiv.

111 See n. 65 above and references there.

112 Cf. Raistrick and Jennings, op. cit. 71 ff., 131 ff.

113 Ibid. 132.

114 Op. cit. 1–2.

115 Ibid. 43.

116 Ibid. 11.

117 Discussed by the present writer in BSA xlviii (1953) 227–8.

118 Op. cit. 94 ff.

119 Marinos and Petrascheck, 235.

120 AJA lxxi (1967) 69.

121 Op. cit. 235.

122 Op. cit. 231; a good diagram, fig. 61, p. 161, of the contacts and of the granite-porphyry dykes which sometimes served as channels for the hydrothermal mineralizing solutions.

123 Op. cit. Note the comment of Philippson, , Die griechische Landschaften i. iii (1952) 847 Google Scholar that Ardaillon's geological account is defective ‘(sehr unvollkommen’) since he ignored Lepsius, 's work, Geologie von Attika (Berlin, 1893).Google Scholar Philippson's own work contains (841–2) important points on the surfacing of the contacts and on the general lie of the land in the mining area.

124 See above p. 299 and Appendix III, pp. 314 ff. The same assumption by Eliot, , Coastal Denies of Attica, 77.Google Scholar

125 Op. cit. 15.

126 Op. cit. 19.

127 Op. cit. 14.

128 Op. cit. 13.

129 Op. cit. 18.

130 See Raistrick and Jennings, op. cit.

131 Op. cit. 5–12. Usefully summarized by Lauffer, 1. 21 ff.; combined with practice elsewhere, including drainage problems. Lauffer is a little too inclined to accept Ardaillon uncritically.

132 Greece and Rome viii2 (1961) 138–51.

133 Especially Marinos and Petrascheck, , Laurium (Λαυρίον) (Athens, 1956).Google Scholar See above Appendix II, p. 308.

134 As, for example, Spain; for mines cf. Strabo iii. 10–11, cf. Wilsdorf, op. cit. 141, n. 31. Strabo, loc. cit. comments on the tall (?) smelting ovens and poisonous fumes (see n. 38 above), and there are indications of something similar in Attica, cf. Xenophon, Mem. iii, 6 Google Scholar, 11–12 on Τἀργύρεῑα: λέγεται βαρὺ τὸ χωρίον εῑναι… (cf. Strabo's βαρεῐα λιγνύς).

135 On this problem, see above, p. 295, n. 22, and p. 297, n. 33.

136 Young, J. H., ‘Studies in South Attica. Country Estates at Sounion’, Hesperia xxv (1956) 122–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

137 Ibid. 129, 141; for a tower, thought to be of the same sort, at Thorikos, see above, p. 294.

138 Except, perhaps, for temene: cf. Sophocles, , Ajax 1218 Google Scholar: γενοίμαν|ἵν ὑλᾶεν ἒπεστι πόν|του πρόβλημ᾿ ἀλίκωστον, ἄ|κραν ὑπὸ πλάκα Σουνίου… Ardaillon, 11.

139 One naturally thinks of Acharnai and Aithalidai (the name a reference to the smoke of charcoal burning?), or of such regions as the area in which lay the ἐσχατιά of Phainippos in the deme of Kytherros (?), (or Kithairon?) whence he drew more than 12 drachmas a day value in wood fuel (Dem. xlii. 7). See also Lauffer, 1. 41, n. 1.

140 Witness the imports of Demosthenes' enemy Meidias (Dem. xxi. 167), ‘timber for the silver workings’.

141 See Appendix IV, p. 323 for χαράδραι.

141a Note the suggestion (cf. Philippson, , Die griech. Landschaften 1. iii (1952) 849 Google Scholar) that just as in antiquity the competition of Macedonia and Thrace in part at any rate led to a decline of the Laurion mines, so in modern times the Greek annexation of Macedonia has had the same effect.

142 See above, pp. 296 ff.

142a Cambrésy, however, (op. cit. n. 2 above), comments on the scant vegetation, and the effect on the retention of water (126–7).

143 In Aperçu général sur la question des scories du Laurium avec documents à l'appui (Athens, 1871).

144 Ibid. 9.

145 Ibid. 22 and 34.

146 Ibid. 47.

147 Ibid. 16.

148 Ibid. 18, 27, 104 (for the amount of lead produced).

149 Op. cit. 80–1.

150 Dr. C. Renfrew informs the present writer that it has on occasions been taken for obsidian.

151 Le Laurion (Marseilles, 1869), 81.

152 Cf. Ardaillon, 11–12.

153 Young, J. H., Hesperia xxv (1956), 122–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar and ‘Greek Roads in South Attica’, Antiquity xxx (1956), 94–7 and plate 5, where Young describes the ancient road construction, and claims the detection of ‘a great and perplexing network of them’. But some of these must surely belong to the nineteenth century.

154 Op. cit. 31.

155 Appendix IV, p. 324 and n. 272.

156 Op. cit. 20–3.

157 Op. cit. 211 ff., fig. 42; 215, fig. 46.

158 Ibid. 139, plate 4 and n. 18.

159 Ibid. 112: ‘Es ist eben versäumt worden — und das ist nun nicht wieder gut zu machen — einen sorgfältigen Grubenriß aufzumachen, was vor 70 Jahren sehr wohl möglich gewesen wäre, ehe die neuen Bergwerksanlagen die antiken Baue verschlangen. Die schematischen Diagramme, die Cordella gibt, genügen ebensowenig, wie die Aufnahmen von Ardaillon, die ja schon zu spät kamen….’ Most regrettable is the recent loss of important records: ‘Die Unterlagen, die der sächsische Mineraloge Baldauf sen. in den Jahren 1869–1871 für Grubenrisse, bergmännische Skizzen, Vermessungen angefertigt hatte, sind nie publiziert worden und 1945 beim Angriff auf Dresden untergegangen.’

160 To judge from the observations of the writer of the de Vectigalibus (iv. 43–4) on the subject of defensive fortifications for the mining area, Besa should be located somewhere here on a line between Anavyssos (ancient Anaphlystos) and Thorikos, as Ardaillon is disposed to agree (though the Staff Map places it to the south-west of Camareza in the valley west of Verseko) op. cit. 140, coupling with it the location of Maroneia (cf. Demosthenes xxxvii. 4 and 25 (Thrasyllos); Aeschines i. 101) famed for the rich strike discussed above pp. 303 ff. The area is very usefully discussed by Eliot, , Coastal Demes of Attica 117–24.Google Scholar Cf. for Maroneia, the appearance of this place name in the lease lists, sometimes coupled, in what must be a significant association, with that of Pangaios: Crosby 2. 17 (ἐμ Μαρ [- - -], cf. 18: ἐμ Πα]γγαί; 5. 54; 14. 4 (restored): 18.6 and 7 (Βήσ] η̣σ̣ι ἐμ Παγγαί; 19. 18 Μαρωνεί[α] 〈ι〉 19. 23–4 (ἐδάφη of Nikeratos of Kydathenaion, see BSA xlviii (1953) 243 Google Scholar).

On the duplication of names between Thrace and the Attic mining region (cf. Antisara, Maroneia, Pangaios), see Hesperia x (1941) 182. For the normal interpretation of βῆσσα see Frisk, Griech. Etym. Wörterbuch and Schwyzer, RhM lxxxi, 193 ff.Google Scholar, but note the βησσα of the Pangaian region, Casson, , Macedonia, Thrace and Illyria 77.Google Scholar It must be admitted that Thracian Maroneia has no particular connection with mining, Casson, op. cit. 91.

161 Op. cit. 42, plate ii. In this area is also located the curious structure of stone to be discussed by Mussche, and Konophagos, in Thorikos vi.Google Scholar

162 Op. cit. 19.

163 See the Greek Army Staff Map (1927), Sheets Laurion and Sounion; in fact, part of the fault stretching down to Legraina, Philippson, , Die griechische Landschaften 1. iii (1952) 837–8.Google Scholar

164 But see n. 160 above.

165 Cf. Young, J. H., Hesperia xxv (1956) 122 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar For ancient roads and their relation in this area to the Agrileza marble quarries and temple construction at Sounion, see Philippson, , Die griechische Landschaften 1. iii (1952) 844.Google Scholar

166 See Plates 61a; 62a.

167 It is to be wondered if these are not the ἀνασάξιμα and πάλαια ἀνασάξιμα of the leases. See n. 55 above.

168 Hesperia xix, 189 ff., Crosby 19. 19, n. 43 above.

169 Op. cit. 109. So too Cambrésy (op. cit., n. 2) 248–9 propounds the same idea as Ardaillon concerning ‘primitive’ and later mining works, and regards the shafts (253) as a means of direct access ‘destinés à couper les gisements en profondeur’.

170 Ibid. 109, ‘Mitte des IV. Jahrhunderts’.

171 Ibid. 116.

172 Ibid. 109. It is difficult to accept Wilsdorf's period of later reworking ‘mit verbesserter Hüttentechnik’, and the construction then of what he calls ‘die großen Wasserkraftanlagen’. He gives as the date c. 250 B.C., which it is natural to regard as an error for 350 B.C., or just possibly for 150 B.C. in view of the following slave rising.

173 Op. cit. 113, n. 9, which seems to relate to the Rio Tinto copper-mine area in Spain rather than to Laurion.

174 Ibid. 113–16.

175 Op. cit. 19.

176 Ibid. 40–1. Ardaillon's account (39–40) of the Kitso shaft seems to confirm the present writer's view.

177 Ibid. 33 ff.

178 Cf. Pliny, , NH xxxiv. 142 Google Scholar; just as likely it was the silvery appearance and heavy weight of the nuggets of galena (cf. Ardaillon, 33–4).

179 Op. cit. 34: ‘Tels sont manifestement les débuts de l'art des mines au Laurion.’

180 Ibid. 36–7: note the statement: ‘la galerie … cheminera toujours sans souci d'une direction préméditée au gré des mille plissements du terrain’.

181 Ibid. 37.

182 Ibid. 37. Note the description: ‘à l'extrémité de la plaine de Megala Pefka’, which is somewhat ambiguous.

183 See p. 313 above; Ardaillon seems to believe not.

184 Cf. op. cit. 38–9: ‘une connaissance exacte des lois des gisements’. For this and for his apparent suggestion of a deduction of a geological principle from a single instance, the modern lack of ancient writings on geology, as, for instance, that of Theophrastus, On Mines, makes it difficult to judge how much the Greeks knew, while Pliny Senior must incorporate a great deal of purely Roman knowledge. The observation ‘plus simple d'y arriver directement avec un puits’ (38) seems nonsense unless the Third Contact was first discovered some other way.

185 Contrast Ardaillon's view (39): ‘C'est donc uniquement la croyance à la permanence du contact minéralisé, qui les a déterminés à creuser, sans se décourager, de grands puits à travers des couches de 100 mètres d'épaisseur, et leur persévérance a été presque partout couronnée de succès. Du moins savaient-ils observer l’épaisseur probable des strates, pour ne pas travailler trop longtemps en pure perte’ with de Vectigalibus iv. 27–8.

186 Op. cit. 115.

187 Op. cit. 39–40. Note the comment, which seems to admit to lack of expertise in geology.

188 See the description, ibid. 38, quoted in n. 62 above; cf. also, ibid. 32, which is surely a demonstration of the erroneous view of Ardaillon: ‘Ces puits de mines étaient l'œuvre, non de l'État, mais de simples particuliers: chaque entrepreneur en payait le forage de ses propres deniers, et enfin on savait qu'un jour le puits deviendrait inutile, lorsque l'amas métallifère serait épuisé. Cependant, les Athéniens n'ont pas cessé, pendant toute leur exploitation, de les tailler avec la même application et sur le même modèle.’

189 Ibid. 28.

190 Ibid. 50–1, and note the emergence of some of the shafts at a high elevation.

191 Ibid. 57, n. 3.

192 Ibid. 48–9.

193 Ibid. 31. Quite different from examples found in Asia Minor, AA 1967 (1968), 504 ff.Google ScholarPubMed: v. Gall, H., ‘Zu den Kleinasiatischen Treppentunneln’ (with excellent photographs).

194 Op. cit. 28–9.

195 Ibid. 30–1.

196 Ibid. 28.

197 Ibid. 26.

198 Ibid. 25.

199 Despite all Wilsdorf's (op. cit. 113–17) account of different methods.

200 Op. cit. 31. Davies, O., Roman Mines in Europe (Oxford, 1935) 31 Google Scholar claims it would take two men nearly a month to sink a shaft 30 metres deep: a quite absurd speed!

201 Ibid. 25.

202 Rather than from the quoted analogy of the Corinth Canal, ibid. 31–2.

203 Ibid. 31.

204 Ibid. 31.

205 Ibid. 32–3.

206 Plate ii opposite p. 42; described 41–2. Note that ancient graves have been found there, and it has been suggested as the site of the deme Ergadeis by Milchhoefer (iii. 25).

207 Ibid. 45.

208 The idea of transition from one contact to another seems to be implied already by Cambrésy (op. cit., n. 2 above) 250: in his reference to ‘gisements inclinés … poussés jusqu'au niveau des eaux’.

209 As suggested in Greece and Rome viii2 (1961) 141–2.

210 As suggested in BSA xlviii (1953), 247 ff.

211 As Plate 56b.

212 See Appendix IV, p. 325 on the lease boundaries.

213 See Ardaillon, 68, and plates i (photograph) and iii (plan), the central water channel being marked in plate iii.

213a On questions of ventilation, cf. Pliny, , HN xxxi. 28. 49Google Scholar; Bekker, i. 317; Etym. Alagn. s.v. ψυχαγώγια; Vitruvius, , de arch. viii. 7 Google Scholar (noxious gas?), mainly concerned with wells.

214 See above p. 316.

215 n. 207 above.

216 References, above, n. 1.

217 As Hesperia v (1936) 397 ff., no. 10, where a list is given of confiscated properties, with boundaries: ὁδὸς δημοσία (16), πάγος (37), χωρίον καὶ ὄρο[ς] (44), ἐ]σχατιά (61), χάρακΕς (63) following on a list of leases.

218 Thus ἐργαστήρια and the like are used as boundaries: ἐργαστέριον (104), three οἰκίαι (120–3), four χωρία (155–8), road to κλευσμός|κλυσμός = ‘beach’; two ὄρη (187–8).

219 Hesperia v (1936) 400, no. 10, ll. 101–4 (restored), but generally in this document four boundaries are given.

220 Ibid., 1. 121: ἡ ὁδὸς ἡ ἀστἰα.

221 Ibid., ll. 121 f. for οἰκίαι.

222 Cf. [Xen.] de Vect. ii. 6: quoted above, n. 20.

223 Crosby, 5. 3–6 (and north and south boundaries only); 5. 17–19.

224 Hesperia xix (1950) 193, 206. For a staccato description, cf. IG 2 11–111. 1587. 9 ff. Apparently a case of names only in Crosby, 5. 17–19.

225 Crosby, 5. 73–80; IG 2 11–111. 1582. 45–51, 70 ff., 118 ff., 123 ff., 129 ff.; Crosby, 14. 3–9 (if ἒδαφος owner represents the fourth boundary. Restored: Crosby, 5. 85, 92–8. 5. 15–20, 47–53, 55; 14. 15 ff.; 19. 23–4; 29. 2–9; 18. 57–63 (see Crosby, op. cit. 259).

226 Crosby, 18. 24–5.

227 IG 2 11–111. 1582. 152 ff.

228 Crosby, 7. 22–7; 14. 30 ff.

229 Crosby, 5. 73–80.

230 Crosby, 18. 57–63. See ibid., p. 259.

231 Crosby, 28. 5–6, 10: καινοτομία ἥν ἐργάӡεται…; later, Crosby, 33. 2; 35. 3.

232 [Xen.] de Vect. iv. 28; cf. BSA xlviii (1953) 235 ff., 247 ff.

233 IG 2 11–111. 1583. 2; 1587. 16; 1588. 11.

234 IG 2 11–111. 1582. 111; Crosby, 6. 24. On this, see Young, J. H., Antiquity xxx (1956) 97.Google Scholar

235 ‘To the sea’, IG 2 11–111. 1582. 5–6; Besa: 1583. 26, 1582. 91, 1585. 10; Aulon (cf. Aeschines i. 101): 1584. 7, 1585. 3; Thrasymos: 1582. 111, 116, 175; Leukonoion: 1582. 134.

236 Thrasymos, Anaphlystos, : IG 2 11–111. 1584. 4Google Scholar; Thorikos–Thrasymos: 1582. 48; Crosby, 6. 10; Thorikos–Laurion: 1582. 67; Crosby, 6. 5–6; 29. 5–6; Thorikos–Besa, 29. 6–7; Laurion–Thrasymos: 1582. 68, 104(?), 128; Crosby, 16. 53; Thrasymos–Marathon: Crosby, 10. 33. The place-names and routes in question, are discussed at length by Eliot, , Coastal Denies of Attica 82 ff.Google Scholar, and by La Barbe, , La Loi navale de Thémistocle (Paris, 1957), 23 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

237 Sounding like a minor road, IG 2 I–II. 1582. 53. If Ῥαγῶν means ‘gulley’, ἔξω here might signify ‘to the east of’.

238 IG 1–11. 1582. 5–6 (uncertain), 66. Directions seem very odd at times, cf. Crosby, 29. 2–9, if the restoration is correct: road from Thorikos to Besa on south; on north from Thorikos to Laurion.

239 IG 2 11–111. 1582. 11; Crosby, 16. 59. Cf. the use of the term τέλμα of Athena at the Dipylon Gate, JdI 1964, 414.Google ScholarPubMed

240 IG 2 11–111. 1582. 53.

241 Crosby, 9. 14 ff.

242 S. 2 ( Crosby, , Hesperia xxvi (1957) 29 Google Scholar) 20.

243 IG 2 11–111. 1582. 65.

244 IG 2 11–111. 1582. 50; Crosby, 5. 8–9, 71; 13. 44; 4. 14; 9. 8; 14. 5; 14. 19; 20. 5, 11. For the possible distinction of χωρίον and ἔδαφος, see Crosby, , Hesperia xix (1950) 194 Google Scholar). In Crosby, 1 ἐδἀφεσι does not yet appear, but in some cases ἐν τοῑς with a name, and once ἐν τοῐς χωρίοις with a name.

245 A road, a mine, and a λόφος in IG 2 11–111. 1585. 11 f.

246 Crosby, 5. 27–8 (with a ὁδός), 85 (with a κάμινος); as simple boundaries: IG 2 11–111, 1582. 45–51: boundaries almost complete with clear marking out of a surface area, and with an ἐργαστέριον on one side; Crosby, 5. 68–72; 13. 41–6; 1582. 133, 148–9, all at angles; 1582. 156, three ἐργαστήριον boundaries?; 5. 73–80 (opposite boundaries; owner of ἔδαφος and one ἐργαστήριον the same); 7. 22–7 (two owned by the same man?); 13. 52–3; 14. 3–9 (at angles south and east, mine in ἔδαφος of owner of ἐργαστήριον on the south side; 14. 2 ff., and 26 ff., 1582. 129 ff. Note 20. 6–13: boundaries: mine (north); watercourse and ἐργαστήριον (south); χωρία and οἰκία (east); ἐργαστήριον (west). For an οἰκία as a boundary, cf. 18. 24–5.

247 Crosby, 3. 7; 5. 55; 13. 26; 14. 5–6 (with χωρίον); 16. 37; 54–5: ‘from Laureion to Thalinos’(?); the same in S. 5. 7; ‘flowing from Nape’, 20. 10; IG 2 11–111 1583. 3, 20; 1584. 16; 1582. 39, 40, 122. They may have names, cf. 1587. 9 ff.: ἡ χαράδρα καλουμέ[νη…

248 IG 2 11–111. 1582. 39–40.

249 To Anaphlystos (?), 7. 20; Laureion to Thalinos(?), 16. 54–5.

250 IG 2 11–111. 1586. 11–12, followed by the uncertain ΔΙΟΦΕΙωΝ = διαρΕῶν? ὑπόνομοι may appear in a possible mining speech falsely attributed to Dinarchus (Harpocration, s.v. ὑπονομεύοντες).

251 Crosby, 28. 4.

252 Crosby, 20. 6–13.

253 Crosby, S. 2 (Hesperia xxvi (1957) 1–23), 31, cf. 18. 35; to be restored S. 2. 40 and S. 6. 7?

254 Crosby, 5. 42–3.

255 Named λόφος, IG 2 11–111. 1582. 57, 74, 131 (as boundary, seemingly owned by some one); (μέταλλον) καὶ ὁ λόφος ὅν ἠργάӡετο… 1585. 11; Crosby, 3. 15; 13. 19; 22. 14; 24. 6; S. 3. 13; Βαβίδειος (λόφος), Crosby 2. 14 (mine in); Βαμβίδειος λόφος (mine in): 5. 89; S. 2 (Hesperia xxvi (1957) 1–23), 22, cf. 42.

256 IG 2 11–111. 1582. 74.

257 Crosby, 18. 24–5.

258 ἱΕρόν Crosby, 2. 7; Dionysion, 20. 15; Ή]ρῶιον, S. 6. 5.

259 Crosby, 18. 12, 21–2, 35–6.

260 IG 2 1582. 54. See BSA lvi (1961) 218.

261 Two boundary mines, Crosby, 5. 3–6; 5. 6–11 (similarly two χωρία); IG 2 1582. 118 ff.; 1588. 6 ff.; Crosby, 7. 17–21. Crosby, 14. 30 ff. is a case of a mine in the land of one who also seems to own an ἐργαστήριον and property on two boundaries. On Crosby 20. 6–13, see above n. 246. Where a μέταλλον appears as a boundary it is reasonable to believe it signifies a working space, even when it is combined with ἐν τοῐς ἐδάφεσι It should be pointed out that μέταλλα need not always mean mines in any context. In IG 2 11–111. 1035. 49 it clearly means a quarry; in Plato, Laws 761 e, μετάλλειαι seem to be underground water channels; and in BSA lxi (1966) 307, A. Burford, ‘Notes on the Epidaurian Building Inscriptions’, xx (Record of Apartment Block construction) 128–9 υέταλλον = a water channel to a cistern, and in the Index it is taken as ‘cistern’. For this reason it is not necessary to interpret the Μεταλλεῐς of Pherekrates (perhaps to be dated to 431 B.C.) (Harpocration, s.v.) as ‘The Miners’. If a character of the name of Kallias appears in the play, and he is to be identified with the λακκοπλοῦτος his ‘pits’ might be cisterns rather than mines. And cf. Hesychius, s.v. ταρρός. λίθος ὁ κἁτω τιθέμενος ἐν τῷ ἰπνῷ ἐν τοῐς Μεταλλεῦσιν. Here ἰπνός should mean κάμινος and the reference be to surface activity. Μεταλλεῑς is normally interpreted ‘Miners’ because of the humorous association with the Underworld which seems to be present in the play.

262 Vacat.

263 See n. 261. For the use of the phrase, see IG 2 11–111. 1582. 42, 95, 102, 125, 147; 1585. 8, 17; 1586. 9; 1587. 6, 18, etc.

264 IG 2 11–111. 1582. 70 (with a μέταλλον); Crosby, 5. 73–80 (boundary, with Artemision and two ἐργαστήρια); 2. 18–19.

265 IG 2 11–111. 1587. 15, an addition to a mine.

266 In addition to a mine, Crosby, 6. 5 (boundaries given), and again 6. 14, and 16. 50. See BSA xlviii (1953) 201. In Crosby 5. 76 part of named mine.

267 See n. 246 above.

268 Cf. Crosby, 5. 3–6, and see n. 246 above.

269 See BSA xlviii (1953) 203 ff., though it is to be wondered can it be at times just a working space: see above p. 322, but what in that case would be the difference from μέταλλον?

270 κεγχρέων: see Dem., Or. xxxvii 26 and LS2 s.v. κέγχρος etc.; discussion in BSA xlviii (1953) 204. See nn. 40, 41 above.

271 As a boundary (and therefore relatively permanent): IG 2 1588. 6; Crosby, 5. 85 (on another boundary an ἐργαστήριον); 13. 11 (restored) and 57; 19. 25. Cf. IG 2 11–111. 2750: ὅρος κ[α]υίνου καὶ ἐδάφων πε[πραμένων ἐπὶ λύσει].

272 IG 2 11–111. 2747, 2748, 2750 and BSA xlviii (1953) 205, n. 39.

273 BSA xlviii (1953) 206, 208–9.

274 Ps. Plut., Vit. X Orat. 843d. See Hesperia xix (1950) 258, on Crosby, 18. 18–22.

275 Crosby, 6. 6 (cf. 10 with ὁδός); 9. 7; 18. 57–9 (two boundaries, ἐδάφη of same man?); S. 2. 6, 27; IG 2 11–111. 1588. 13ff.

276 BSA xlviii (1953) 239.

277 Ibid. 218.

278 Hesperia x (1941) 14, no. 1; ibid. xix (1950) 196.

279 Ibid.

280 Cf. Crosby, 19. 9 ff.: mine in ἐδάφη of παῐδες Εὐθυκράτους (restored): ὧι γεί: παντα]χόθεν παῐδες Εὐθυ[κ|ράτους] S3. 38: ὧι γεί: π|α]νταχόθεν Διοπείθους Φρ[ε]α χωρίον.

281 See above, n. 246.

282 Ibid.

283 See above, p. 298.

284 The author would wish to thank Professor L. R. Moore, Professor of Geology in the University of Sheffield, for his great assistance in this connection.