previous next


γένεα. H. states his belief in the Egyptian caste system still more clearly in vi. 60, and it was generally believed among the Greeks, though the actual divisions vary, e. g. Plato (Tim. 24) gives three, ἱερεῖς, δημιουργοί, and μάχιμοι, of whom the δημιουργοί are divided into νομεῖς, θηρευταί, and γεωργοί; Diodorus (i. 73-4) gives the same division, putting τεχνῖται for the θηρευταί (cf. also Isoc. Bus. 15-16; Strabo 787; all, however, make the priests and the military the two first). The Greek belief was too systematized; as a matter of fact there was no strict division of hereditary castes; members of the same family could belong to different classes. But it is true that certain functions were hereditary (e. g. Brugsch enumerates fourteen royal architects in succession from one family at this period), and that the ‘soldiers’ and the ‘priests’ were separated from the mass of the people; so too were certain degraded callings, e. g. that of swineherd (47. 1). Possibly the hereditary tendency grew stronger in the last days of Egyptian independence, under the Saite reaction (Meyer, i.1 470-1).

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.

An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.

hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: