the cup, and the thick part stopping at the shelving brim, it came
clearer to the lips. Of these improvements the lawgiver was the cause;
for the workmen having no more employment in matters of mere curiosity,
showed the excellence of their art in necessary things.

Desirous to complete the conquest of luxury, and exterminate the love of
riches, he introduced a third institution, which was wisely enough and
ingeniously contrived. This was the use of public tables, where all were
to eat in common of the same meat, and such kinds of it as were
appointed by law. At the same time they were forbidden to eat at home,
upon expensive couches and tables, to call in the assistance of butchers
and cooks, or to fatten like voracious animals in private. For so not
only their manners would be corrupted, but their bodies disordered;
abandoned to all manner of sensuality and dissoluteness, they would
require long sleep, warm baths, and the same indulgence as in perpetual
sickness. To effect this was certainly very great; but it was greater
still, to secure riches from rapine and from envy, as Theophrastus
expresses it, or rather by their eating in common, and by the frugality
of their table, to take from riches their very being. For what use or
enjoyment of them, what peculiar display of magnificence could there be,
where the poor man went to the same refreshment with the rich? Hence the
observation, that it was only at Sparta where Plutus (according to the
proverb) was kept blind, and like an image, destitute of life or motion.
It must further be observed, that they had not the privilege to eat at
home, and so to come without appetite to the public repast: they made a
point of it to observe any one that did not eat and drink with them, and
to reproach him as an intemperate and effeminate person that was sick of
the common diet.

The rich, therefore (we are told), were more offended with this