many responsibilities. He was expected to provide education for boys under his care, represent his wards in legal proceedings, provide for their everyday needs, as well as arrange marriages of women in his care. In addition to family members by kinship or marriage, slaves or metics might have lived and worked within the household. Wealthy households would have had many slaves and metics working for them. The oikonomos of the household would have played a role in directing the labour of the slaves and metics. While the oikonomos did not have absolute power over members of his oikos owing to his role as kyrios, this was not the case for slaves. The Greeks did not consider him to be a kyrios to the slaves, he was instead their despotes, a word meaning master. In some extreme cases, slaves were seen as factors of production without any agency rather than autonomous human beings. A small oikos would have had only a few household slaves known as oiketai. Of the oiketai, the men might have had the responsibility to work in the field. In a larger oikos, many slaves would be entirely dedicated to agricultural work. This is generally considered to be less favourable than work in the house itself. The oikos was the primary unit of economic organization within the ancient Greek world. Genuine urban commercial centers were relatively uncommon and sparse. Additionally, lack of trust between members of an oikos and nonmembers usually prevented larger businesses not associated with an oikos from forming. For these reasons, the oikos remained the pillar of ancient Greek economy. An oikos was expected to be self-sufficient in what it produced for itself. Thinkers such as Aristotle considered the self-sufficient oikos to be the fundamental, indivisible constituent of the polis. In order to be a true oikos, it had to be entirely self-sustaining it what it produced and consumed, as well as maintain its population over time. Most of the processing and storage facilities needed to run a farm, such as grain stores and oil presses, were found on the land owned by the oikos. The continued existence of the oikos was dependent on its ability to store goods for the future and the prudence of the oikonomos in anticipating future needs. Chance weather events, warfare, sick animals, pests, and even ageing members of the oikos could seriously threaten its existence. Households which practised a