THE LEGAL FOUNDATIONS OF ECONOMIC GROwTH 145
25 Arist. Ath. Pol. 60.2–3; Rhodes 1981 : 672–5.
26 P. Halle 1, lines 80–105 with Bechtel et al. 1913: 64–76.
27 For the text of the stele see Duchêne 1992: 18–20. For these regulations see 46–8 and 54–5.
28 OGIS 483 (= SEG 13:521), lines 104–67 (party-walls), 202–30 (cisterns) with Hennig
1995 : 255–6, 259–60.
29 The following pages (120ff) show that there is no reason to follow Frier and Kehoe 2007 : 135
when they assert ‘the Greeks and Romans generally lacked the systematic public registries
that are necessary for conclusive resolution of disputes over ownership, boundaries, land use,
servitudes, liens; adequate resources and bureaucracies were simply unavailable.’
30 Piérart 1974 : 177 believes that Plato is innovating here and that Greek city-states did not
keep property records (‘il ne semble pas que des cadastres aient existé en Grèce et Platon a
sans doute innové’).
31 Theophr. fr. 21 (Szegedy-Maszak) [= Stob. 4.2.20].
32 See Frier and Kehoe 2007 : 120 note 22, who cite Akerlof 1970 and Furubotn and Richter
- I believe that Bang 2006 exaggerates the amount of asymmetry of information in
ancient economic transactions. I hope to deal with this topic in detail in a future publication.
33 For the texts of these inscriptions see Lambert 1997 : 5–74.
34 Lambert 1997 : 225.
35 de Soto 2000 : 45.
36 See Lambert 1997 : 114–48.
37 For the records of the poletai see Langdon in Lalonde, Langdon and Walbank 1991 : 58–60.
38 See IG i^3 421–30 with Pritchett 1953 and Pritchett and Pippin 1956.
39 On these records see Walbank 1982.
40 For the examination of accounts presented by officials after their term of office see Arist.
Ath. Pol. 54.2 with Rhodes 1981 : 597–9.
41 For the text see Lalonde, Langdon and Walbank 1991 : P5, lines 8–39.
42 On property records kept in the demes see Faraguna 1997 : 23–8.
43 IG i^3 425 (414/13), lines 23, 26, 30, 41, 44.
44 For records of court decisions kept in the archives of Greek city-states see Arist. Pol.
1321b34-40 with Lambrinudakis and Wörrle 1983.
45 The speaker also states that he found no horoi on Phaenippus’ property (Dem. 42.5), but this
evidence is not compelling because the law did not require for horoi to be placed on land
used as collateral.
46 The speaker says that the boundaries were forty stades. Scholars have tried to estimate the
size of his property from this figure, but without knowing its contours it is impossible to
determine the acreage. He may have exaggerated its extent because the figure he gives is
larger than that for other known estates. The speaker may well have exaggerated because he
knew that his opponent had no official document to prove him wrong. See de Ste. Croix - Note by contrast that in the records of purchases by Zopyrus son of Gorgias at Mieza,
the size of the properties is recorded. See Hatzopoulos 2011.
47 The earliest mention of boundary-markers in Greek literature is in Homer where two
neighbors are disputing about their placement.
48 For the text see Haussoullier 1879. For discussion see Faraguna 2005 , who argues persua-
sively that the inscription contains two separate measures.
49 SIG^3 633, line 89 with SEG 34:1173 and 37:984.
50 For the duty of warranty of title in the law of sale see Pringsheim 1950 : 429–72.
51 Poll. Onom. 8.34–35; Harp. s. v. βεβαιώσεως. Cf. Isae. 10.24. In some cases a guarantor might
be named who was not the seller. See Pringsheim 1950 : 437–9.
52 See Pringsheim 1950 : 429–72.
53 For a description of the physical characteristics of the horoi see Fine 1951 : 4–6.
54 Finley 1985a: 29–37 assumed that they referred to two different kinds of legal transactions,
but see Harris 1988 and 1993a (= Harris 2006 : 163–240), which show that there was no
difference between the two kinds of expressions.