Pericles Citizenship Law of 451-50 BC 0881430226, 9780881430226

Citation preview

PERICLES’ CITIZENSHIP LAW OF 451-50 B.C.

This is a volume in the Arno Press collection

MONOGRAPHS IN CLASSICAL STUDIES Advisory Editor W.R. Connor

Editorial Board E. Badian P.E. Easterling David Furley Michael H. Jameson W.R. Johnson Bernard M.W.

Knox

Jacqueline de Romilly

See last pages of this volume for a complete list of tities.

PERICLES’ CITIZENSHIP LAW OF 451-50 B.C.

Cynthia Patterson

THE AYER COMPANY Salem, New Hampshire

Editorial Supervision: Steve Bedney

First publication In book form 1981 by Arno Press Inc. Copyright © 1961 by Cynthia Patterson Reproduced by permission of Cynthia Patterson MONOGRAPHS IN CLASSICAL STUDIES ISBN for complete set: 0-405-14025-8 See last pages of this volume for titles. Manufactured

in the United States of America

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Patterson,

Cynthia.

Pericles'

Citizenship

Law of 451-50

B.C.

(Monographs in classical studies) Revision of thesis (Ph. D.)--University

Pennsylvania,

Bibliography: Includes

1. I.

p.

indexes.

Citizenship

Title.

of

1976.

II.

(Greek

law)

2.

Pericles,

499-29

Series.

Law ISBN 0-88143-022-6

312 38083 343.80283

80-2661 AACR2

B.C.

PERICLES’

CITIZENSHIP

OF 451/0

B.C.

LAW

For R.

and

N.

Table

Preface

,

LJ

e

e.

e

*

.

Chapter I. Introduction.

II. III. IV.

V.

Athenian The

Contents

.

.

.

.

Φ

.

e.

.

.

.

e.

.

.

.

.

.

.

2

2

2

«

2

«©

«

ew

02.

Citizenship

Population

of

Before

Athens;

451/0

480

.

B.C...

- 450

B.C..

Pericles, Politics in the Mid-Fifth Century and Citizenship Law . . . 2 2 2 2 . «© © 2 © 202% Conclusion.

Epilogue:

The

.

.

.

.

.

Citizenship

Appendix

1.

Citizenship

Appendix

2.

Some

2

Law

2

2

Athenian .

2

2

.

.

©

«©

©

General

.

.

.

.

.

2

2

2

2

2

Ancient

Sources

«©

450

Discussed

©

to

©

on

403

n

B.C..

in Athens.

Classes.

.

of

©

Terminology

.

Index

©

From

Bibliography.

Index

of

.

...... © © or

«©

©

©

©

©

© we we

Cited

111

©

n

ee .

.

.

.

Preface

This 1976

for

vania.

monograph

the

of

In revising

organization not

degree

and

attempted

is a revised

I have

take

to

Ph.D.

in Ancient tried

account

reform

or

holes.

The

many

but

which

of Athens that tions

will

whether are

one

find

very

the

much

Lateiner,

Sally

Jameson.

The

for

the

In

from

the

mistakes,

work

published as

therefore

still

those

re-reading answers

in August

of

Pennsyl-

arguments,

since

1976.

or

to

improve

I have

fill

all

a dissertation

(with

in

and

revising

proposed

University

a whole

interested and

submitted

clarify

manuscript

is

I hope

a dissertation

History

relevant

specific

worth

I am grateful

of

of

correct

result

useful.

or not

to

recast

bibliographical footnotes)

version

here

the

history

I have prove

become

too

society

convinced

correct,

the

ques-

raising. the

Humphreys,

criticism

Seth

responsibility

Schein,

for

the

and

suggestions

Brook

views

of Martin

Manville

expressed

and and

Ostwald,

especially

arguments

Donald

Michael

used

is

of

course my own. Finally, transliteration forms

for

tions

from

I have

not

attempted

of

Greek

proper

familiar

names

(Pericles,

Greek

for

less

to achieve

names,

familiar

but

have

Thucydides, ones

complete generally Piraeus)

(Kratinos,

New York, N.Y. October 1980

consistency used and

familiar

dircct

B.

the Latinized

translitera-

Boiotos).

C.

iv

in

P.

I.

The few.

ancient

Aristotle,

in

the

testimonia

Ath.

Pol.

archonship

number of citizens the proposal of that anyone not

for

Pericles'

26.4,

of

Introduction

says

citizenship

lawl

of

451/0

B.C.

that

Antidotos,

on

account

of

the

large

(dia to pl@thos tdn politÓn) and on

Pericles, born from

they both

[the Athenians] citizen parents

decided would

not have a share in the city (mà metechein tés t@s poleds hos an mf ex amphoin astoin ἃ gegonßs). and

Plutarch,

When and the

Pericles

the d@mos Pericles city and

37.2-5,

that

apologized

for

its

harshness

towards

straightway took up again the affairs was chosen general, he asked that the

on (bastards) (ton peri ton nothön

nomon),

him of law

the law he him-

self had introduced earlier, be relaxed so that his name and family would not be left completely bereft of a successor. This is how the law came about. When Pericles was at his height in power in the government many years before and when he had, as has been said, legitimate sons, he wrote a law that only those born from two Athenians vere

Athenians

(monous

Athénaious

einai

Y

tous ek duein Ath@naion

gegonotas). And when the king of „Egypt sent a gift of 40,000 medimnoi of grain to the d@mos, it was necessary to distribute it among the citizens (tous politas). Many law suits arose from this law against nothoi who had up to then escaped its notice and were overlooked, and many fell victin to the sycophants. In fact, those who were sold into slavery after being convicted vere only a little less than 5,000, and those vho remained in the politeia and vere judged Athenians were found to be 14,040. While it is strange that a law which prevailed against so many should be relaxed by the one who wrote it, the present personal (peri ton oikon) misfortune of Pericles (who seemed to be paying the price for

his arrogance

and disdain)

thinking that he had human sympathy, they

among These

are

the

the phraters two

most

moved

the Athenians

suffered retribution agreed to enroll his

giving

important

him Pericles’ sources

and

to pity.

And

and was in need of illegitimate son

name. perhaps

represent

independent

are

traditions. an

archon

connects

not

Apart date

the

from

and

in

law with

mentioned

differences

an

annalistic

events

in the Ath.

Then,

Aelian,

in

terminology

context

(the

‘return’

Historia

6.10

3,

while of

Aristotle

Plutarch

Pericles

and

cites

gives the

the

law

no date

and

Egyptian

with

graiü

gift)

Pol.

Varia

Pericles, when general of the said) if someone were not born

says

that

Athenians, wrote a law [that from both citizen parents he

should not have a share in the city (ean m$ tuchéitisex amphoin huparchón astön, toutGimé meteinai t@s politeias).

Retribution

and

the Suda,

came

s.v.

to

him

from

démopoiétos;

this

law.

that

Pericles son of Xanthippos, although he wrote a law that [said that]he who was not born from both [citizen parents?J should

not be a citizen

(ton m@ ex amphoin astupolitÉn mé einai),

when many years later he lost his legitimate sons, unwillingly and grieving, having relaxed his own law and having behaved in unseemly way, and being at the same time pitiable and hateful, he obtained the things he desired. Still only at length and with difficulty, by entreaty and bribery, did he make his

illegitimate

These

sources

phrasing

of

follow, the

law,

son by Aspasia of Miletus for

the

most

however,

part,

a d@mopoiétos.

the Plutarchian

is Aristotelian

an

(close

tradition.

to

Politics

Aelian's

1278a34-35

or

1275b31-32 as well as to Ath. Pol. 26.4) and the Suda's is unique." Despite for

the

the

character

relation

of

for

sceptics

some

"impossible" and with

the ite

Suda)

the

and

Greek

that as

paucity

to

of

career polis

corroborating

to

its

But

testimony

importance

democracy

membership.

Pericles

proposed

unreliable.”

the

of Athenian

separate

he ever

references

from

his

In

and

discovery

its

this

law

and

for

the

larger

the

19th

citizenship

such a law and the

of

definite

to dismiss in

1890

dating

of left

is

clear, issue

of

century

it

law,

consider

to

Plutarch the

was

the

possible it

(with Aelian

Ath@naiG6n

that

both

Politeia

position

untenable--and

and

effects

ileges

is

either

is

influencing

and

non-developmental;

Athenian

88

an

city

amendment

changed law

to

torical

society

ing

the

history

law

in

generally to

have

remedy

Chapter

the no

for

most

of

fifth

the

law

defining

Pericles

set

forth

as

their

self-image

sound,

has

rules

or

the

cause

on

the fifth

stereotyped,

described

are law

less

Athens,

been

place

an

assumed is

now

century

less tend

above.19

This

had

law

usual

in

is

static

still

fail of

to

view

monograph

is

approach considering

the

development viewed investigated.

piece to

for the

an

of

his-

mention,

Athenian

models

attempt-

in

than

a standard

studies

(marriage)

simply

rather

Athens

priv-

aristocrat

The

it

its

foreign

interest

the

Recent

? but

or

little

Usually,

new,

century

policies’

cast.

wants

aristocratic

what

which

since

which

population.

there

neglected.

argument

the

evidence

or

of

in

of

Peisistratus,

as

way

rules

Athenian the

membership for

"having

and

in which

Athenians,

for

study,

controlling

requirement

the

the

the

his

affected

or

Athenian

statutes

membership

revisionist

Cleisthenes

interpreting

démos

prevent

been

considers

tyranny

of

politics

understand-

citizenship attempt

to

situation.

determining

the

to

has

terms

that

a selfish

organization.

few writers

law

offered

II

civic

may

to

the

citizenship

which

polis

Solon,

it

citizenship

and

451/0

as

information

Pericles’

and

of

pre-existing

Paradoxical

task

ideological-political

decisions

static

of

begin

public

"debasement"

law

the

a strong

concerned

the

Pericles'

with

catering

or ἃ democrat

from

had

prevent

also

how

have

a demagogue

protectedÓ

to

historians

law.

interpretations

connections ing

Athenian

of Pericles'

Most Pericles

left

but

the

and

procedures

citizen chapter of

the

a share

civic

and

body. concludes

demes in

the

participated

until

mid-fifth

in

century

before

In what

is

that

there

phratries

city."

political

Athenians the

and

used

was

before laws

of

reorganization

of

their

The

perhaps

city

as

traditional

vell rules

and

identity

(both

was

an Athenian

dismissed

as

growing

to

(or

the

nature

least

growth

law

and

in Athens.

on

Peloponnesian citizen

time

of

on

general

in

births

demands

and

war

IV

the

up

the

the

finally,

institutions "most

her

self-sufficient

(Pericles, desire

tial

suit

as

new

criterion

distinctly

for

terms

determine

who

there

twenty

is

of

this

an

us

at

most

chapter

be

will

on

the

such

of

of

information from

increase

1.e.,

the

citizens

start

increase an

of

population

precise

a significant

"natural,"

Due

a pl$thos

later

that

in Athens."

views

indeed

our

‘the population

understanding

customary

years

and

entirely

such as

to

was

gives

this

an issue often

were now living

some

earlier

be

immediate and

‘having

political

democracy, between

Consideration to

an

part

analysis

of

position

as

an

of and

a larger

(autarkestat@)

in Thucydides,

to mark

years

relationship

451/0

is viewed

that

that

in 451/0,

relevant

with

Thucydides

empire

up

law

to

due

to

the

could an

not,

increase

deaths.

entailed.

The

sufficient

arguments

highly

first

principles,

of

the

odds

second,

developments

law.

at

which

changing

leads,

still

thirty

in

people

as their were

and

wars

in vague

evidence,

again,

these to

or

argued

takes

growth and

of

for

decrease

citizenship,

‘more

is

demographic

Chapter

rapidly’

as many

Persian

or

or put

also,

population;

the

were

the pl€thos of citizens

although

It

in 451/0—probably the

membership)

irrelevant,

lack)

conclusive,

citizenship

phratry

III considers

of Attica was the

and

citizen.

Chapter ignored,

deme

the

changing

attitudes

and

private

the

career

and

politics

interpretation

(Periclean)

‘imperial’ things

2.36.3).

In

particular,

the

boundaries

in the city’

Pericles’

public

all

a share

of

the

in

city's

context

and

effort

city, both the

of

to

make

in war law

clearly

make her

and

Pericles

Athens in

in

forth

of the Athenians.

of

which

citizenship

reflects set

towards realm

the

to

law--the

fact

peace"

the one

need

and

essen-

A Conclusion

takes

of

law,

tation

Pericles’

Pericles’

law

of

some

fifth

I will

Athenian be

one

to

Athenian

use

both

usage

Athenian

male as

obedience

of

or many

and

and

not

an

to he

and

class

female. Athenian

is

English

briefly)

of

considers

vote

Athenian

the

this the

members

An

Athenian

in

the

or

to

hold

ancient

usage.

life

the

citizenship

important

former

to

entitled

(contemporary)

modern

implications

terminology In

refer

can

(also

first,

society.

and

further

interprestatus

of

to 403 B.C.

discuss

to

and

some

Epilogue

451/0

‘citizens’

part

city—whether the

an

classes

politics

takes

owes

and

appendices

community,

who

Athenian the

two

century

whole,

briefly

in the period

Finally, second,

up

of

and

in

the

Athenian

citizen of

for

the

will

city,

This

historians!

an

monograph

be and

is

but

and

who

in

an

laws

of

accord

a

the

as

admittedly is

as

considered

of the

and

understanding

families

protection

office.

terminology

to

contrary with

Introduction:

1. For the Appendix 1.

2. as

Athenian

Throughout

Aristotle.

ship,

and

3. Again accounts.

see

Appendix

the

--LSJ)

rare

is not

astupoled

this

a

full

in LSJ. ("go

up

by

discussion

down

‘citizenship

to

Pol.

I do

of

not

the

a rare noun city,

Politeia

the Politics

think

author-

seem

a resolution

meaning in

see

Aristotle's

terminology

in

live

deny

and

than a

law’

of the Ath€nai6n

attempts

the Ath.

monograph

Rather and

standard

to the author

between

of

for

the

convinced

in view

1

by

I refer

I am not

But for purposes is necessary.

Astupolités

from

translated

monograph

general

the similarities

me striking. the question

4.

this In

terms

Footnotes

it,

used

in

‘citizen’ frequent

to

of

these

formed

the

streets"

it may be a corruption from mé ex amphoin astÓn politén mé einai of Politics

1278a34-35.

5.

See

the comments

of 0.

Muller,

Untersuchungen

Bürger-und Eherechts (Leipzig, 1899), pp. 813-814. that Plutarch's story was simply the result of the law-giver ‘hoist by his own petard'. 6. and

This of

is

Beloch,

the

view,

e.g.,

Griechische

Tod,

Walker

and

Geschichte

of

11.12,

Ὁ.

zur Geschichte

des

Attischen

Muller cites Duncher's argument favorite rhetorical theme of a

Adcock

in

CAHV,

pp.

5,

102,

167;

191.

7. E.g., Fritz Schachermeyr, Perikles (Stuttgart, 1969), pp. 50-51. 1. Gernet, "Les nobles dans la Grece antique," Anthropologie de la Gréce antique, p. 342, and S.C. Humphreys, "The Nothoi of Kynosarges," JHS 94 (1974) 93-94, also consider the law as aimed at noble, extra-city relationships, but do not claim that it is per se democratic. Gernet suggests that it reveals the homogeneity of the polis against the

internationalism

of

the

nobility.

For

Humphreys’

view

see

Chapter

IV,

p.

99.

8. The quotation is from Hignett, HAC, p. 346. The view is endorsed, for example, by Harrison, The Law of Athens I, p. 25 note 2; McGregor, "Athenian Policy at Home and Abroad," (Semple Lecture, 1966), p. 10; Burn, Pericles and Athens (New York, 1949), p. 92; Kagan, The Outbreak of the Peloponnesian War (Cornell, 1969), P. 104. See Chapter IV for a full consideration of these traditional views. New

Politicians

of

or such papers of S.C. Humphreys as "Economy Anthropology and the Greeks, pp. 136-158, or Classical Athens," CJ 73 (1977-78) 97-104.

9.

As,

for

example,

W.R.

Connor,

The

and Society "Public and

in Classical Athens," Private Interests in

Fifth

Century

Athens

10. For example, S.C. Humphreys ín her interesting and perceptive "Public and Private Interests in Classical Athens," (referred to in

artícle, note 9)

speaks

led

of "the dogmatic

Perikles'

citizenship

separation law"

and

adds

of public in

and

private

parentheses,

"to

life

which

prevent

families

to based

on international dynastic marriages from using their private relationships to manipulate foreign policy" (p. 99). She claims that "a decisive hardening of the public/private boundary" is confirmed by "Perikles' repudiation of his citizen wife in order to set up what was evidently a widely known and stable relationship with a foreign woman, just in the years when his own law had made marriage with foreign women impossible" (ibid.). It is not clear to me that Pericles’ law did make "impossible" a marriage to a foreign woman or that it had anything to do with his relationship with Aspasia. The public/private analysis has not been profitably applied to the citizenship law. And while J.K. Davies,"Athenian Citizenship, the Descent Group and its Alternatives," CJ 73 (1977-78) 105-121, offers an impressive formal analysis of alternative ways of defining a citizen body (although I doubt that what he terms alternatives were in Athens really so, see the Conclusion), he assumes the existence of a legal and procedural system in which Pericles' law simply 'closed the last remaining loophole' (p. 118). ll.

p.

See,

105.

for

example,

the

article

of

Davies

referred

to

in

the

previous

note,

II.

It

is

the

male

law

replaced

tion the

generally

parent

is

be

an

that

Athenian

this

examination gene,

and

Solon

through

will be

suggest

argued,

phratries

simply

the and

(2)

who

of

of

the

citizenship

the

on

507) law

This

conclusion

down

a standard

city)4

as The

but

nor

Athenian

specifically polis

itself deny

was

for

a local

will that

that

the

Athenian

that

were

necessarily

not the

and

the

of

Athens

from

these

groups,

451/0,

it will

Athenian

citizens.

the

citizenship? to

be

problem

restrictive

importance

citizenship

city's

the

define

lies

(having

met of

but

by the

or,

all cause

in

as much

a share

some

of

smaller

or sense,

in laying

in

the

communities

or

was. up

An

phratries,

of

the

was

a city

business

solve law

451/0

the

needed

law's

built

their

Before

‘why

451/0?

demes,

which

qualification

a community

before

of

in

of

there

the

"no. *

concern,

up

before

Was

development

is

members

condition

them.

assump-

accompanying

taken

exist

that

Pericles'

a discussion

responsibilities’

question

not

step

membership

regulated

political

whose

did

suggest

qualification

in what

last

demes,

it

they

that

be

did

society,

only

Jk further

will

rules

city

required 1.6.»

on

enforced

Attic

‘citizenship

necessary

does

it will

the

to the

in

of

point

what

who

law

democratic

embarking

regulating

of

itself

Athenians.

law,

or

and

same

second

before

in which

the

the

The

Athenian

final

consider

essentially

a minimum

‘democratic’;

a

them

effect

was

Pericles’

the

is

segments

way

the answer

(after

made

various

forth

of

ranks

the

defining

set

purpose

subject."

to

that

Furthermore,

the

first

we

Cleisthenes

and

on

need

of

and

law

that

tribes,

membership;

also,

clear

thesmos,

(1)

Athenian

be

important,

or

be

should

changed'

a nomos

to

it

was

B.C.

son

exclusive, of

451/0

451/0

democracy.?

the

law,

less

his

Before

before

'radical'

but

more

that

of

IV,

even

Citizenship

for

‘narrowing’

Chapter

and,

assumed

older,

development

law

Athenian

social

groups,

phratries

most

(hereditary

phratries).

Although

kinship

(phratries

and

Cleisthenic

the

tricts

into

as

voting

are,

in

the

and

more in

the

'old'

the

one

in

to and

tribe

polis

itself one

prytaneion,

other

simply

the

aggregate

tion istic

was

and

officials

8 but

between is

the

the

use

whole

possible

to

view

the

the démos,

against

increasing

than

between How

she)

was

that

an

should

parts

Athenian

and

Athenian properly?

was

been

the

one

who

recognized

Athenian

organs

smaller

not

and

its

lead or

in

always the

authority

parts

boundaries

tribe

and

Athenían

while

an

the

the

the

organizafederalrelation Rather

centuries

of

it

as

Athenians,

along with

and

rights

on

called

that

whole

member-

(one

be

fifth

second,

government

defined.

(d@moi or others), between

and

on

had

assume

the

purposes

character"’;

etc.)

which

clearly

of

dis-

citizen

of

perhaps

sixth

(demes

of his

his

a “double

to

for

by virtue

bodies

one

local

divisions; ® and

courts

could

or.

imagined

phratry

procedures

generals,

a society

Athens

and

or

divided

exercized of

of demes

real

deme,

and

districts),

administrative

be

the

something

static

influence

with

Athenian

the

of

any or all of

concern one

was

history

increasing

was

has

term

the

identified

which--as

that its

an

on

to

might

through

city

originally

geographical

not

other

Such

some

men

archons,

own.

and

based

First,

had

their

of

and

reflecting

ly

of

and

507,

up either

army.?

with

of

(made

country)

that

a whole,

after

comparable

extent

thus

agora,

is

(or

a large

"polis,' ' one it

sort

of

or,

tribes

tribes)

the

groups

The

was

Attic

population

phratry

responsibilities.

were

neither

it was

and

it

the

instance,

deme,

hand

hereditary

groups

registration

important,

(villages

some

tribes),

first

demes

and

a modern

or

the

'brotherhoods'),

and

which

such

ship

important,

a similar-

non-Athenian

rather

another.

identified The

answer

belonged from

before

to

to an

Aristotle

451/0 the

and

first

who

saw

to

it

question

is

quite

Athenian

(or

Attic)

on--was

the

primary

that

family, unit

he simply

an of

(and

oikos,

the

10

polis. 9 or

a

The

family

members (and

with

were

view

"local

nature

of

the

phratry

that

it

was

Andrewes of

the

in

evidence or

local

and

perhaps

by

classical

Greeks).

one

dominant

family,

ual

families,

13 the

bration the

line

and

the

phratry

the same

by the

the

to pardon ET

a closed

question,

formed

"at

the

close

the

family"

12 and

seems

(cf.

of

of

the murderer

dark

likely

that

originally

took

on

group

but

the

on

perhaps,

as

into

common

how

that

delegated

the

transitions--birth,

the

times

and

was

understood

all

its

archon

with (and

secured

cousin)

members

were who

exist.l?

its

not

entrance the

into

proper

In

Dracon's

homicide

law,

at

of

fifth

century,

phratry

members

their

duty

the

the

end

family "URS

n Eo

the

through

Pa" to ha

,

of a fellow

This

a phratry

cele-

4

fe

law

co-extensive--even

was

individeponymous

TRIER

phrater ue,n

ID

wur Rasagpee

to RT

prosecute

for whom no relatives pur

ATof "ve^

PEEL

LHEP

S

and

also

probably

member

was

shows in

clearly the

late

effectively

that fifth

RN capa-

nn

V.

RU A V

(up

oe

to the “παν

a

second

of

oikoi.

-

it

its

protected

the

adulthood and

phratry

festivals

of

to

early

cults

Apatouria

legitimized

the

through

and

protector

Through

to

a

character

word

protector

the

as

Whatever

a hereditary (e.g.,

age"

in classical

family.

I follow

individual

TEPER IUE

CALCOT” "Pp PF v9 wet Cre

of

its

question.

but

contributed

phratry

phratry

the

such

involving

large.

to

and

phratries

as

Iliad 2.362)

responsibility

Athenians

protectors

not

sort

on

it

is

matters

at

that

second

developed

city

was

Alcmeonidae)

answer

origin,

of

thing

the

the

provide

It

marriage--the

passing

social

phratry

EEUU

n

an

important

proper),

important

itself--depending

From

example,

the

a kinship

the

republished

anyone

name

of

noting

and

uns nat

attributes

the

and

as

the

for

succession

— city

domestic

for

organization,

polis.

organization in

Attic

then

great

56.6-7)

phratry

appear

the

origins,

male

larger who

local

of

in military

the

10 (as,

all; 11 the

and

development

Pol.

at

origin

the

(Ath.

a house

house’

tribes)

A.

artificial

"great

the

following

more

a

them

had a part is

barely

be

into

of

political

could

accepted

through The

the

oikos

Athenians

and

phratry

century,

!® or

that

atimos.!/

It

18

noteworthy

11

that

for

Homer,

Athens, tive

at

and

being have

least

were

demes)

and

was

legitimate

male

rule

was

oikos

that

than

that

woman

the

only

the

when

the

phrater's

and

only

marriage husband

her

the

same

of

to

18

citizen

body?

but

it

The

continuation

was

prime

importance

son

was

a member

through

9.63).

new

the

being

fifth

insured of

century,

the

after

There

may

have

been

clear

that

the

to of

the

the

right

to

a phratry. (and

of the

In

administra-

phratries

seems

for all. of

the

a member

the

(Iliad

deme

and

being

into

procedure!9

the

likely

a xenos, on

athemistos

made

very

acceptance

Athenian

as

and

depended

a legitimate

of

by

the

son's

father.

last

mother

There

may one

from

was

probably

the

least

which

Cleisthenes,

the

Athenian

(Herodotus

an

Athenian

father

wife

either

needed

celebration

to

could

be

but

only

her

side"

marriage.

have

phratry,

by

sons

would

the

ceremony,

father's the

his

Athenians

applied

his

polis

for

and

Cleisthenes

instead

succession

within

to Megacles

of

the

identity

of

from

although

her

into

anestios

phratry

into

variations essential

individual phratry

507

oikos through

and

the

basic

to which

his

belonged. 29 The

of

when

the

rules

phratries

requirement

also

prosecuted,

the

so

various

of

an astos

murderer

What

is

507/6

unit

an Athenian,

among

aphrétor

until

political

one's

the

the

The (or

daughter

marriage

sacrifice)

of

the

of

of

the

followed

be

The

announced

καπ8114.22

been

and

to

A

the

at

his

same

as

phratry. of

father some

or

point

daughter

those

have

only

no

to

to

the

husband's

If

the

marriage

offical

on

consummation

phratry were

one,

her

grandfather the

which

Still,

was

a woman

by

polis,

practices)

man, 4!

There

a

another

gave

could

interest

between

from

Athenian man

less

(customary

the

(enguésis) same

one

tyrant,

an

of

drawn

nomoi

probably

such.

entrusting

46.18), would

as

members

brother

phratry

Sicyonian

his

a simple

(Demosthenes

the

have

distinction

common.

were

and

or

no

another

recognized

heirs

"father

been

6.130)

gave

be

usually

ever

with

12

disputed

there

apparently ἃ wife

of

been

some

sort

as

of

only

sons

Pericles’

as a sort The

phratry

I.G.

main

phratry

first

.1237

of

two

official

for

(3)

is

(1)

within

is

at

Attic

also

for

the

at

least of

the decree,

and

the

fínes

supporters

are

set

members (debate,

against

an

phratry.?7 but

on

The

decrees

of

the

into

None

oc

fourth

the

of

these

unsuccessful

diadikasia

as

.1237)

into

a married

oath,

and

can

a whole.

a phratry century The

(2)

the

the

be

The

and

a good

are

is,

probably and

setting

procedure vote

of

forth has

the

Demotionidai, 18

itself

made

candidates

itself

from

2

II

members

son

steps

innovations

but

phratry.

discussion), to

a case,

(I.G.

new

phratry.

vote

a

owner

traditional

particular

adverse

procedural

imposed

forth.

three

part

as

Even

such

Decree"

phratries

does

heir.25

a traditional

most

one

beginning

new

(male)

of

of

presentation

property

a legitimate

of

this

In

not

there

identify

heir.

introduction

practice

diadikasia

appeal

the

origin

enacted. to

"Demotionidai

is

a set

of

the

were

daughters

that

a true

a true

this

actually

the

produce

that

in

from

as

the

of

able

a male

not

introducing

practice

the

possible

particular

steps

a part

introduction

& genos

this

is

could

I suggest

dating

steps:

and

apparently tion

2

'Dekeleis'^9

procedure

three

it

customary

II

is

birth

be

women

century

thought

to

without

called

father

and

fourth

at

be

necessary

witnesses

men,

the

not

although

she

reflecting the

of which of

the

gametes).

accurately

indication

called

eg

that

in

although

the law of 451/0 was

die

heiress,

as

23

should

father

commonly

acting

It

been

until

as were

presentation

after

have

her

an

decree

swear

registers

official

it would

Furthermore,

consequence,

in effect)

become

those

(gnésion as

of

should

phratry

phratry

little

'place-holder'

that

procedure

the

would

of

requires

law

witnesses.

3.71££.).24

(and

daughter,

daughter

taken

(Isaeus

necessary

legitimate

wife

the

been

well

the

in

have

have

the

to be

might

to

before

need

"enrolled"

seem

was

would

as

and

an

within

innovathe

their

Andrewes

notes

13

(JHS 81 1237

(1961)

3), taken “for granted" kata ton nomon

14-15).

not

the

Similarly

fact

assumption

of

the

vote

of

doing The

the

their

P

eyes.

is

in

these

phratry

play

nomos

their

membership

129),

the manner In

this

of

situation

iscussion,

-

voting

which

I think

the

important

the

keeping, 14,

people were

and

an

that

(lines

ority a vestige of still

————

their

final

21,

the

role

diadikasia

and

they

act

30-31).

"experts";

arbiters

‘aristocratic

of

rule'

in

the

admission

is

held,

as

a court

the

Clearly,

as

they

the

phratry

are

main

of

their

("Demotionidai,"

p.

131).

to which

the

practice'

have

that

meant

witnesses

to

do

an objection. how

have

diadikasia

is

father

introduced

the

same.

Then

carried

28

It

is

the

register

resort

for

those

of

("Demotionidai,"

the books'

Considering

for

this

auth-

"The Law of the Phratry

not,

m

it

resides

written

in

officials,

managed and

of

For

the

admission

relation

to

the

the

any

could

hardly

held

his

the

translation son,

phrater

the nomos Decree"

swore

who

fourth

have

of the

wished

in

than with what

then

procedure,

things

in

century

been

nomos

and

proper

could

an

the

arcane

that

oath

matter.

seems

and

probably

"Lay"

to

produced

have

voiced

influence of the genn@tai would then have had more to do

out

quirements

Their

|1f

However,

a better

the

"Demotionidai

own

was

probably

The special

they

The

may

unlikely

of

notes

'keepers

comments,

breasts;

copy

last

N

in

keeping"

its

an

procedure.

Wade-Gery

decisions.

Wade-Gery

resides (unwritten

'Customary

with

is,not

discussion,

EEE

according

with

it

under

112

vote and appeal--were the traditional

-—-—7

perhaps

is

(1.G.

things.

to

of members

p.

only

itself.

Demotionidai

according

denied

is

that Nee

way

it

ton Demotionidon

records

a slightly

procedure

18

procedure

phratries

reveals

the

and

different

likely

to

of

demes

will

the be

the nomos itself phratry

"board way,

have

but

been

there

considered

of

as

an

autonomous

experts." the

much

entailed.

Other

substance the

of

body phratries the

re-

same.

is

less

detailed

along

with

the

information. 29

reforms

of

14

Cleisthenes. political on

the

now

it

of

the

state

unit

pre-existing

such

‘official’

(the

‘big men’

there

two

For

was

said

in

507

it

when

probably

ranks.

be the same

essential

that

the nomosof

in its ow

might any

be

phratry--on

elite

ever

can

for

the

deme

modeled

a genos

its

difference

and

rules

perhaps,

Many demesmen

both),

was.instituted

were

in fact

and

also

the

criterion

constituted

the

four

for

a

procedures

although

it

fellow

it cannot

in

as

had

no

phraters

be shown

membership

that

of

the

groups. 2° From

Hopletes,

the

phratries

Argadeis

Cleisthenes

the

were

and Aigikoreis--Herodotus

ten

new

'Cleisthenic'

‘Attic’

5.66.2)

tribes.

and

And

the

tribes

from

(Geleontes,

the demes

tribes,

either

after

old

or

new,

constituted the Athenian demos. >! What control or influence did the dÉmosas a whole have on who was admitted to

the

phratries

the polis--as a

Single

"age

,

or

(after

distinct

from

phratry--dealing

there

would

probably

argued recently ———

that

507)

the

that

with be

eligibility

first

/

constitution and

of

————

persuasive.

Before

j

πὶ

i.e.,

——

mn

—

a new

ec.

any

or other

the

answers.

both

in

a law

of

relevant

to

pre-Solonian _It

has

Pe

the

sense

been

-..-.-

of

[nn

identity as Athenians.32 "This-ise

A

the distinctions

for

genos

For

negative

ἃ politeia M

evidence

admission? on

Athens

.

Solon

there

and

agreement

gave eae)

citizenship, --

Is

of the Demotionidai

general

Solon

demes?

__

“αν.

within

Attic

society,

between rich and

DE

poor, esthloi un

Dana νῶν,

e

T

T

.

Athenians, Yo

and

kakoi

“m

and ET

so n

tm

or mehbers "of Attic

Lo

eres

anm

forth,..may_ have overshadowed

any

"p eo

----

phratries

and

9ikoi, and

-.

distinction

foreigners.

Te

There "may

— “νοις

are

the

hekt@moroi

property. issue

in

"legally

and

While the

or

between

ya

others

there

is

pre-Solonían

illegally’

who

were

no

clear

troubles,

(Solon,

frag.

no

u

longer

masters

of

that

phratry

indication 99 certainly

36,

West)

wee

when

he was

Uwe

and

membership could

longer

ennt

mE"

themselves

a man

no

~

gee

be

their was

sold

a member

an abroad

of

his

"--

15

hereditary

phratry.

otherwise

'freeing'

Athenian.

And

It

18

in

He

the his

not

by

of

provided

bringing

'enslaved',

poems

evident,

responsibilities ship.

Le

he

shows

himself

that

phratries

a politeia

to

Attica

recognized

however,

the

back

for

which

those

a real

their

embraced

proud

legislation

and

through

and

abroad

and meaningful

distinctly

Solon's

sold

to

be

status

the

distinguished

the

city's

all

of

one.24

affected

them

and

basic member-

Athenians,

>>

but did he modify the rules which determined who was an Athenian? | The and

their

essential relation

in the Digest fragment

on

a

and

was

once

mistaken

and

are

first

ae

in Plutarch's

claimed

in

needless

any to

in this

had

no

but

the

say

life

to the effect

Zeus,

but

this

law

some

Solon's

supposed

of Solon

inheritance

Solonian

(24)

and

ten

Heracles nothing

(a mortal

laws

laws

found

in Philochoros

of

him when

(5651)

assumed

foreign

not To

said

relation

to

no

turn

concerned

out

not

with

to

the

be

at

all.

integrity

of

the

based 1,

been

a

which

a law of

the estate

sure,

it

is

law

of

because

that

to the

particular

facts

was

Peisthetairos

to cite

in relation

in Muller's tour de force analysis

law(s)

mother)

inherit be

was

to have

alive.

claim

law

Themistocles

in the realm of the gods)

is not

in

be

he was

spouses.

however,

Plutarch,

a

p.16 ) does

this

citizenship

idea,

cannot

to

is a xenos

lines

was

of

born

foreign

but

Solon

and

as a nothos will of

earlier

The

(i.e.,

below,

him a nothos,

citizenship Still,

(see

Pericles'

Solon.

Themistocles

applied

says

that

1660-66

not

have

36

of

Birds

sense

Thus the two key "facts" Athenian

of

law

post-451

that

is ek xenes

considers

Müller)

earlier

of the Birds

Solon

but

an

O.

foundation.

would

section

Heracles

of

(by

interpretation

otherwise

tairos

consideration

citizenship,

(42.22.4),

a reenactment

nothos

law

to

for

35a. It

simply

points

PeistheSolonian

at

all. 5}

of nothoi and the

individual

oikos

and

16

with

the

briefly

proper

to Solon's

quotes

two

father's the

laws

an

heiress

ed

to

Solonian

phanes'

to

(Solon,

20).

procedure

of

and

her

prevent

which

the

estate

insure As

we

Herakles:

insure

that

has

may

have of

an

been

true

find

the

following

(Ath.

suggested,

heirs

oikoi

could

essential

Solon.

through be

for

legitimate

true

of

claimed

a system

of

her

feature

relative

Such

lack

refers

and Plutarch

children

(paternal)

by

only

9.2),

bear

the

a male

Aristotle

Pol.

would 39

instituted

individual

seems,

integrity. 38

epikléros

by which

been

it

that

and heiresses

epidikasia

dissolution

view,

Birds,

would

law on inheritance

intended

oikos

classical

the

succession

attenpt-

heirs.

sons.

In

On

Aristo-

exchange:

Well, but suppose my father as bastard's heritage?

leaves

me

all

Peisthetairos: The law won't let him. Poseidon here, who now excites you on, will be the first to claim the money then, as lawful brother, and your father's heir. Why here, I'll read you Solon's law about ít. "A bastard

18

to

inheritance anchisteian)

children And

if

have

no

right

(nothöi de m8 if

there

(paidon there

be

be

lawful

ontön gnesion). no

lawful

children

(ean de paides me 881 gnésioi) goods kin."

are

to

fall

to

the

next

1660-1666

There to

is

the

lawful

no

same

certain effect

children"

combined,

the

any

part

in

the

are

combined,

omitted

first

gn@sioi, nothoi

interpretation

(the

might family

from

the

Solonian

in fact

of

this

with

one?)

whatsoever. 41

and

phrase

Possibly

two

that

the second

Whatever

trans.)

quotation.'

the

implying

the of

(Rogers

‘comic

possibly

first.40

inherit

of

einai

the

"or

Possibly if

there

different

in

case

(a later correct

are

rules

there

one)

two

not

are

were

no

denying

resolution,

laws

the

nothoi law

17

does

show

the

maintaining private

then in

or

its oikoi

On in

lawgiver

denied other

body

of

concerning

with what

prerogative.

the

the

its

population,

in effect

city.

membership

through

familial

Solon

the

‘state’

If

before

there

is

a genuine

the

law

Athenians.

puts

Overall,

un.

system

of

Attica;

MEM ee

forth. 42 slaves

Again,

by

or had fled

bringing from

re

-

no

interest

archonship

was

law

both

citizenship

or

the

to

Attica

(Solon,

nd

them

to

again

ship

(or

the

be

the

(paternal)

phratry.

by denying

the nothos

son,

the

be

aper ipt

e

concern

with

was

frag.

A son

whom

a share of

the

t?s

poleös

those

who

had

Athenians

36 = Ath.

phratry

in

other

responsibilities

traditional drawing

a distinct

of Athenian

of

Pol.

demes,

(42.22.4)

12.4)

Solon eo.

"db

set

sold

as

restored aD

in

we

te

phratries,

stand

this

belong

the. historical

dip

He enabled

phratry

will

is

father's

estate,

and

giving

by

were

the

been

were

position

in

a father to

even

an

wore

the Solon,

from

illegitimate

Certainly nothoi if

irregular;

family

reinforced of

And

Essentially,

children.

of

citizen-

membership

ta chr@mata

adoption,

for

issue.43

prohibited

not part

phratry

an

gnesios.

(gn@sioi)

(perhaps

the

seems)

have

admits

from

qualifications

(it

a law is attributed

grammata" to

are

been

to these men.

the

not

legitimacy

between

"dGmosia law

But

were

as nothoi they

line

the

or state.

by

legitimate

specific and

legis-

illegitimate

families.

In the Digest others)

but

ways

The

(among

of

se

of his

40.11)

members

per

the

see Demosthenes

lation

oikos.

if there were other legitimate

accommodated

for

© btet

an Athenian

evidence

and

o ——À

on to metechein

of being Athénaioi EN

Athénaios)

clearest

decision

at least

might

of

of

important,

ignoring

πη τὸ θα» Pe

part

status

status

family

criterion

—

a

involved,

in the

ae

effect

perhaps

independent

-

of

bu

back

debt

rules

no

Solon's

in the

Solonian

a place

forth

—— —

property holding

Solon's

the nothos (as nothos) hand,

itself

thiasoi,

in the way.

The

Solon?

and

to Solon which

first

sussitoi

their

problem which

Andrewes

comments,

own

guarantees rules

arises "This

unless

is, is

not

does an

to

18

antiquarian's as here one

of

presented

step

later

than

century

may

further

lew.44

the

In

restriction

at

mentioned

on

if there were

the

νόμος

Solon which

definitely not

or who

craft

(epi

techn81).

exclusive'

Athenians

Plutarch's

was

on to explain Athens

trustworthy

But

what

foreigners

permit

such

pretation law

in

will

is

in

law,

this

given

be

the of

on this

Although

Solon

have caused

really

former,

does

membership.

matter--which

(παρέχει

whole

modern approved the

not

puzzlement such

may

be

wholesale

negative

to drive

order

in

household

over

others

of

away,

but

an

imply only

issue.

a law of

law provided home-

their

a

practice

to how

a

ὁ τῶν

from

the

as

at

about

admission

phrasing

a fifth

result

καὶ

exile

in

were

were

authenticity

This

24).

(Solon

founder

the point

sources,

passed

known

would

ἀπορίαν

go

the

necessarily

is just

in his

as

not

the

That

6°

a law

argues

about

law

We could

him

Andrewes

decided

who

to

sussitoi are

itself

those

40).

the

the

'jealously

aliens, 46

of law.

He

rather

goes

to call

to

citizens.

was

this

exile

or

not

and

incentive

law

so that

accretion,

attributed

the

is

12 n. an

which

9-12),

its

to

their

by

simply

citizenship

díd not mean

permanent

be

may

puzzlement

except

with

could

law

whatever

control

foreigners--and the

pp.

to do with

has

(1961)

thiasoi,

to being puzzled

permanent

provide

economy.97

But

apparently

that

the

cit.

all.^?

to Athens

came

to

reference,

(JHS 18

whole

), or to finding

δημοποιήτων

land

the

a lawyer's

later--and

(art.

grammata

Plutarch admits

citizenship

much

phratry's

d@mosia

that

that

addition

creation

but

accretions”

suggest

institution

groups

the axones

contain

and

Athenian

Athenian

from

Solon--possibly

Athenian

of

quotation

to

the

law

proposing?

settled

any

in

Athens

others--to

motivation

foreign

trade

Is

is and

it

an

epi

become often needed

enfranchisement

technéi?

citizens? found

in

stimulus

Or

does

The "epi to

of

all

it

simply

usual

inter-

technéi'; Athenian

the

19

The as

second

Plutarch

aliens

in

would

noticed,

general

then

with

that

be

a

the

someone.48

interpretation

likely

that

the

Athenians

citizenship

any

and

so

A a

one-time

but

one

‘laws

used’

the

(cf.

that

among

the

exiles

problem

of

Pol.

might the

(1)

the

a reference

later

time,

Greek

world. Finally

and

often

we

admit

of

possibly

by

the

as

a

archaic to

to

an

axon,

to

the

Solon:

law

that

exiled

the (2)

be

by

with

well

have

anti-Athenian

law

does

not

did I

relative the

would

offer

unusual perhaps

exiles

were

(fragment

the

no

stop

openness

provide

seem

times]

only

or

Philochoros

before

they

of

not

this

more.

when

is

excluded.

unauthentic years

class

been

classical

given

by

to This

have

When

no

not

present

may

It

also

not

It

but

quoted

there

policy.

say

or

It

would

general

[of

but

other

craftsmen.

But

of

aliens.

met,

the

voted

laws).

war

to

Athenians

suggest,

restricted.

perhaps

reflects

post-Persian

the

of

whether

was

and

may

given

would

Athenians

Athens

on

would

acceptance

be

somewhat

is

of

fact

to

decision

exile.

city

such

aporia

sorts

pro-Athenians

the

the

Solonian

the

come

attributed

which

certain

to

groups

permanent

establishes

if

control

of

caused

of

simply

restricted

to

the

precondition

was

and

against

actual

(e.g.,

reasonable

was

attention

8.3 on the naucrary

simply

law

if

admission,

Solon

centralized lack

is

law

or

choice

in

addition

also

acceptance

particular were

their

the

the

not

who

apparently

Ath.

One here

or

extraordinary

Arginusai, of

exiles--and

all

that

further

of

credibility

involved--the

decisions)

the

making

freedom

in

of

is

requirement

phratries'

gains

"desirables'

for

'state'

Their

however,

thrust

than

aliens

been

the

rather

indéed

compatible admit

interpretation,

battle

to

the

be

ir?49

suggestion

lack

phrasing >

of and

belongs

to

a

abundant

in

the

35a,

of

longer

using

and

for

Jacoby)

20

τοὺς

δὲ

φράτορας

ἐπάναγκες

δέχεσϑαι

καὶ

The phraters must admit both the orgeönes homogalaktes, whom we call genn@tai. This to

is

most

commonly

'nobles')

that

all

idea

is

to membership

Athenians that

were

before

‘commoners’

from

a guarantee

in

the

members

Solon,

the

Athénaioi.

Andrewes,

however,

His

main

are:

the

points

from

the

kai

as well

epigraphic

orgeones

(4)

Philochoros

of

462

quoted

and by

the

will

be discussed

menos)

this

law

in

(Ath.

next

Pol.

redress on

(see

in

his

be

on

to

considered

This

view in

considered

establishing

behalf of the

by

and

it--and

take admit is

the most itself

book

suggest

(and of me

relation

to

the

the right

wronged we ee

and

prevent

citizens

this

power

view.

of

automatically; "the

reading;

(3)

(p. the

argue)

to 1)

and

finally

probable

citizenship

limits

the

but and

"th

anyone

that

most

"2

decision

construed

correct?

the

being

suggested

Solon's

);

ignoring

everyone

has

10

or

a digression

to

two of

all

phratry"

which

p.

to

natural

seems

that

from

opposed

shows

unjustly

then

have

the

part

above,

bending

so

(as

homicide

objections

to

in

on

did

either

homogalaktas

fourth

goes

time

would

by

‘commoners’

his

serious

is not

of

could

commoners

chapter

9)

were

right

forced

never

of

then

century.

the

tous

would

not

be

which

mentions

Andrewes

raised

understood

kai

body

should

in

the

law

imposing

would

main

innovations

to seek

so

they

orgeones

mid-fifth

Aristotle

law

orgeönas

by

καλοῦμεν.

Dracon's

genne@tai

has

the

Philochoros

into

"populist")

on

B.C.

well

not

as the gennétai"

formed

405

i.e.,

tous

evidence

that

genos,

(1)

phratry,

phrase

orgeönes

or

the

phratry--presumably

and

the

phratry

phratries

aristocratic

entering

of

and

phratries.?!

of

law

(2)

the

as

the

away

of

taken

τοὺς

γεννήτας

οὖς

ὁμογάλακτας,

touc

και

ὀργεῶνας

law

fits

the

very

fragment

law.

"popular"

(or

of any Athenian (ho boulothe

right

το.) ues Ὁ n mum PT E

πεν

of

appeal

ygei

to d

the

i BAR OO OO

law a

21

court the

(for

case

all

of

someone

ho boulomenos phratry

Athenians).

and

into

self-contained suggest

denied

prosecute so

that

and it

One

the

would

admission

to

to

know

who

(he

polis:

did

the graphe

not;

thought)

procedure

certainly

if

a phratry.

someone

self-determined

did

like

there

is

these

Or, was

the

no

on

the

other

improperly

xenias

of

principles

of

the

second

half

of

the

fifth

exist

at

this

time?

phratry

of

I.G.

11?

indication

century

hand

there

that

recorded

by

to

could

accepted

that phratry will be appealed to anyone but the Demotionidai.?^ psephisma

applied

into

a

The 1237

might

decisions

of

Further, a Krateros

provides

that

if someone born from two acts as a phratry member for

whoever

is

willing

foreigners (ex amphoin xenoin) (phratrizei), | it is possible (ho boulomenos)

(who have the right--hois dikai the case will be alloted on the to the nautodikai.

There law,

but

are

the

most

ho boulomenos pp.

108-111).

two

foreign

menos

to

a number natural

of

in such

Theoretically,

prosecute

is if

ways

interpretation

to prosecute

parents”

possible

new,

someone

to

of

to

one

to

prosecute

if

someone

were

born

the

right

to

prosecute

if

he were

born

of

that for been

does not the

law

hearing tried

find

sets cases

in

the

up

a suitable a special

against same

way

context

as

those

one

(with

aliens against

creates

be

it was

entered

someone

parent

parents.

- 430's

that

cases

one

this of

see Chapter

the

clause for

ho boulo-

logically

foreign

But includes

such

One might

had

IV,

"from

a phratry.

Further,

B.C.

of

right

as magistrates

such

with

the

possible

nautodikai

and

that

foreign

foreign

implications

discussion

parent

in the 450's

procedure

'pure-bred'

two

it

would

this

of

the

further

foreign

right

Athenians

that

possibility

the

shift

be

(For

previous

born

the

prosecute; and of the month

understand

would

a case.

another that

of

eisi) to last day

in

a

argue charge)

previously parent

who

22

entered

a phratry.

view.

Therefore,

secute

an

assumed

alien

ing

I would

the

may

have

is not

genuine,

then

citizen.2©

woman's)

mined

few

sum

and

kinsmen,

his

words

as

quoted

specific

be

ways

right

a citizen

of

tyrant

likely

some

citizens

for

far,

into

does

of

not

support

ho boulomenos

(phratry

bringing

to

If the

it

of

that

is

likely and

proceeded

according

to

to

or

fictious,

member)

that to

should

pro-

not

be

public

attention

‘law of Solon'

and

quoted

prosecut-

by Demosth-

or

carry

on

business

effect are

This and

on

supported

the next was

in

at

citizen their

to

expose

least body

the

through

was

individual

neighbors—not

order.

is

based

the

fraudulent

the

time

business

rules.

the

by those

that

the

both

of

Politics

"not

the

their

on

as

of

of

A man's

polis

on

pure

Athenian of

Solon's

individ(and

a whole--deter-

statement

"a sign of

membership?

of

says

the

that

of

(Ath.

many

is

Pol.

ia..."

tyrants

a 13.5)

Aristotle's Athenians being

prosékon--ibid.). Cleisthenes

often

me katharoi).

the

were

rules,

what

(tOigenei

this

"since

tes politeiasou

Aristotle

notion

in family"

explusion

citizenship

enfranchisement

a general

explicit

beginning

after

had

A policy

Aristotle's

(hös koinénountGn in

that

Cleisthenes

sentence

investigation

that

and

opportunity

him an astosor xenos. the

do?’

claim

improperly" 16

take

phratries

was

this

to work

the

from

sort

complication

so

Peisistratus.

Peisistratus

evidence

up

Peisistratus

to

is apparent

a xenos

might

considering

about

was

for

and judged

attributed

made

to

law

in the agora

real

status

Before

As

the

like an astos.

possible

entry

phratries

that

the

century.

other

acting

Athenians

To

legislation,

a

that

claiming

been

(ergazesthai)

ual

argue

of

57.31:

it

is

emphasis

mid-fifth

a xenos who was

enes

the

unjustly

before There

But

A further

enrolled

in

23

the

tribes

"foreigners

A common that

under

Then,

resident

slaves"

which

attempts

to

Peisistratus

after

Athenian

view

and

the

(and

expulsion

aristocrats”

Solon)

of

but

the

soon

tie

(1275b37). together

foreigners

Aristotelian

entered

Peisistratids, reinstated

the

they

although

the

ranks

were not

evidence

of

expelled

is

Athenians. by

completely

the

resurgent

‘cleared’

by

Cleisthenes. This of

real

the

is

evidence

Athenians that

this

have

been

an

is

after

the

tyrants’

Athens

by

such

in

Rather

than

through

value.

pressure

was

of

the

new

put

by

upon

If

a

the

wake

of

had

a

(if

It

Peisistratus

The the

suppose

Isagoras.

one

Aristotle

may

simply

brought

foreign

foreign-

wife.

It

as

Athenians,

that

were

it

is

so,

piece

tyranny

enrolled

then

likely

have

rid

be the

same

"xenoi and douloi"

of

Cleisthenes

no

sure

herself

as

would

diaps@phismos

is

so.

some

Athens

there

much

(see

which

in

below).

the

indication

of

fourth

that

the

510/9. any

‘open

Panathenaea,

brought

to have

too

to

himself

organization this

by

that

he

in

need

up

necessarily

assembly,

Greater a good

not

members.

not

civic

citizenship

is

and

tyrants,

terming

the

do

clear

managed

phratry

Athenian

The

Athenian

and

that

headed

is

artisans

Peisistratus

Aristotle's

be voted

affected

or

It

a little

is

We

action

action.

the

perhaps

membership.

These would in

but

in Herodotus)

aristocratic

was

participate, an

rid

included

would

procedure

that

friends.

despite

century

their

mercenaries

Sparta

supposedly Further,

an

contained

house-holders

that

of

as

possible

landowners,

sons

was

theory,

'antí-tyranny'

to Athens also

(not

examined

did)

ers

a economical

example the

of

admissions’

by

making

or

more

gene,

But

Peisistratus

distinctive,

in which

increased

Peisistratids.60

phratries

it

a festival the

policy,

all

awareness despite

Herodotus

more

Athenians

and

and

his

a thing could

importance

whatever

(1.59.1)

and

of

being

‘extra-legal'

Thucydides

(6.54.6)

24

agree

that

ditional

Peisistratus

rules

With of

Athens

tribes

for

the

did not

admission

a new

turn.

Athens with

ten new

phylarchs

accordingly

from

ten

tribes

(5.69)

and

the democracy more

to

and

the nomoi

citizen

undertaken

tribes

four

finally

for

the

Herodotus

of

somewhat

to

reorganization

takes

disturb

to

that

by

Cleisthenes

(5.66),

that

that

that

he

Cleisthenes

the Athenians"

the

tra-

body.

reports

ten,

of Athens--including

consititutional

Cleisthenes

he increased

distributed

was

(6.131).

the

the

one

the

the number

of

the "who

Aristotle

replaced

demes

among

established

in the Ath.

Pol.

history four

the the

has

say:

...he distributed the whole population into ten tribes instead of the previous four, with the aim of mixing up the population so that a greater number would be

citizens

This

is

(hopSs metaschdsi pleious

the

origin

of

investigation:

It was

wanted

on

to

check

the

t@s politeias).

proverbial

directed

family

saying:

against

backgrounds

No

tribe-

those who (ta

gen®).

Then

he established a Council of Five Hundred instead of the existing one of Four Hundred, taking fifty from each tribe,

whereas

previously

there

had

been

one

hundred

from each of the previous four tribes.... At the same time, he divided the whole country into thirty parts composed of demes, ten from the district around the

city

(t@s

(peri

to

_paralias),

astu),

ten

ten

from

from

the

the

shore

shore

district

district

(tés

mesogeiou ). These parts he called Trittyes and assigned three of them by lot to each tribe, in such away that each tribe would have one portion from all the main regions of the country. He made those who lived in each of the demes fellow-demesmen, so that they would not, by addressing one another by their father's names (patrothen), expose the newly enrolled citizens, but would call them by the name of their demes. This is the reason the Athenians speak of one another by the names of their demes.

Ath. A similar we

read

tradition that

(already

Cleisthenes

referred

"enrolled

in

Pol.

21

(after

to

earlier)

is

found

the

tribes

many

von in

Fritz-Kapp)

the

foreigners

Politics and

where

resident

tribes

25

slaves

(πολλοὺς

γὰρ

ἐφυλέτευσε

On Aristotle's the

number

and

although

of

system

If

but

citizens. an

organization

included

had

imputes

and

conclude structure, tribes.

The

ten

nev

the

generals

this

sense Did

rules?

everyone

result vas

of

were

can

have

could

the

ten

be

been

that

in

increasing

unbiased

of people

assume

that

on

this

the

result

left

out

of

was

his

main

of

foreigners,"

that

enrolled

the Athenian

citizens

be

be

from

each

the

that

in

system

directly

said

to

swear may

into

entail

issue

his

1

re-

the old

does

purpose.

not

mean

as the

Although

this

phratries

and

appears

same

have

says

five

year

of

to

result

of

the

Council

22 in

of

the

500

implementation years

told,

classical

so

that

Cleisthenes democracy.

democracy."

towards

explicitly

priesthoods

10

later

A11 of

into

years

several

him.9?

the

then

ten',

The

least

administrative

chapter

the

he

at

in

(22.1).62 required

can

a natural

says

features

attitude

and

'board

tríbes

today"

"established

he

trittyes

motives

we

Athenian

Aristotle

ten

the

account,

Athenian

attributed

a new

30

tribe,

organizational have

from

classical

fact,

from

still

provides

Herodotus'

the

In

and

essential

gené and

of

generals.

"they

so.

with

divided

elected

system

Aristotle

characteristic

(501/0)

also

thought

their

demes

fifty

first

the

Cleisthenes

Aristotle

to

- 1275b37).

and

author

administrative

with

he

μετοίκους

interested

have

number

together

170

does

the

which

the

500,

the oath which

Athens

likely may

"slaves

The demes

some

as

new

not

cannot

some

'facts'

Hermokreon

innovations

provided In

of

swore

of

being

Cleisthenes'

these

up

tribes,

that

first

the the

council

important

archonship

out

Cleisthenes

built

most

of

included

definitely

population

we

δούλους

then.

bringing

that

new),

them.

before

is

a significant

the

system

Separating

the

in

καὶ

was

Aristotle

citizen

(if there were

he 'enfranchised'

phratries

Cleisthenes

But

increased

Cleisthenes'

that

view,

ξένους

citizenship, that

or

new

Cleisthenes

let

kata ta patria,

he emphasizes

26

the

importance

name

plus

tion’

in

mission

Put

his of

own

new

Cleisthenes simply

phratries system They

deme

be

That

demesmen

ara

belonging

Pol.

this

demes

the

to

to

in

role.

Cleisthenic

new

citizens

in

old

phratries

this

was

the

neopolitai?95

why

Cleisthenes'

should

continued

the

use

Further,

tc

*hroughout

the

(with

restoration

(and for

the

be

classical

century testimony

membership

it

ar

Aristotle

in

was

join

but

the

not

in

in

bound

to

deny

since

the

ad-

Appeal

thought were

of

and

sons).

they

ranks

'constitu-

scrutiny

Aristotle

reorganization, to

motive of

is

but

the

not

is

from

in

the

‘new’

the

of

word

in

of the

Krateros'

having

phratry city

to

members

his the

his

old

day--

mind

the

unobtrusively.

demes,

so

Aristotle

(see,

for

[Demosthenes]

collection

(see

necessarily

other

of

sources

from

mention have

that

membership

citizenship

to

and

only

revealed

membership

in 409

the

in

polis

B.C.

says

enrolled 66

citizenship, birth

example,

and

membership

parentage)

Demosthenes

59, Against Neaira). above

To

phratry):

do with as

dubious ‚0%

name

criterion

A grant of

highly

father's

evident

important

period.

speeches

57, Against Euboulides; eluded

initial

18-year-old

that

personal

of the Athenian

the

(i.e.,

...that Thrasyboulos should be an Athenian in a tribe and phratry of his choice.

fourth

for

nomenclature,

thought.

problem,

In

the

citizenship--as

But

enable the

deme

of

of

account

suggests

curators

the

in his

their

account

phratries'

noticed

^ne

some

origin

responsible

the

devised

the

the

importance

have

a phratry

che

attributes

And

Ath.

made

and

to Cleisthenes.

citizens

with

any

was

to

day

ignored

would

seems

the

deme name,

together

and

of

vage

2]

reflects

39,

40,

in

a phratry

is vital

evidence

Against

Boiotos ;

And the ps€phisma the

fifth

century

in-

27

importance

of

belongs

the

to It

tion,

the

course

affected

by

head of

by

longer

itself.

fifth

growth

to

and

67

then,

the find

that appeal

Rathei, based

λι

of citizenship;

to

of

that

simply

to

has

in

fact

scrutiny,

on

emerged

have

phratry

popular

1t

testimony

procedure and

acquiesce

in

its the

ruli-pluwe during

but of

also

the

power

the phratry was

belonged of

registra-

developed

courcs

responsibility

itself

commentator

if

the fourth century,

the

One

deme

probably

the

though

Demosthenes

ot

ἃ dikastérior

would

phratry--even

(see

Philochorus,

systew

initially

jurisdiction

having

by

che

fifth and through

arbitrator recent

quoted

period.

possible

the

By the later

law

assume

century, of

the

century

Cleisthenes.

the

important--could public

Boule

the arbiter By

does

mid-fifth

the

the

as

juscifiable

of

of the Boule. no

phratry

same

not

review

from the

is

the

to

the démos

members decision

was

still

of a

40.11). wricten:

In the form of the new administrative δἥμοι- Structure the Attic State, now for the first time in its history, was Put on a firm, unshakable basis, ín contrast to the previous state of a loose conglomerace of overlapping blocks determined by such diverse factors as region, clan allegiance, communion of cult, kinship; a clearly defined procedure, regulated by the principle of due process of law and placing the responsibility with theónuórau was finally created fox the purpose of controlling and administering citizenship.

Certainly prised were

the

a new

legal

responsible

hereditary

kings’

for

held whose

their

the old Attic defined"

and

‘keepers

difference. 9?

as did

"clearly

now

entity

officials,

significant

ent

d@motai

Nor

a responsibiiity members the

of did

tribes.

procedure.

made

tribes

up

the

or of

I do not

(Procedures

not

new

berore.

tribes, The

the

Cleisthenic

But

nad

membership.

the bcoks' the

tney

deme

‘iaw,‘

tribes

have

They

and

as

did

not

and

this

there

aust

have

such

been

and

they

have

ie a

hereditary

tnink we know of a

cum

'new,

‘trive

difte:-

it would

28

be

helpful

Reform

to

know

Bill,”

more

CQ 27

about

(1977),

them.

pp.

See

the

241-245).

comments

of

Andrewes,

"Cleisthenes'

There were new attitudes

toward

(and

methode of dealing with) regional differences and loyalties ’° and towards the organization

of

the

cance

is

likely

and

from

the

it time

regulated

of

rules of

Athens

was

p.

Smith's 319)

anyone other ance

one's

by than

in

their

the

influence

thinking

mid-fifth

membership.

of

a deme

using

now

the

to

cities

kin

it of

was

began the

Through

ξενίας that

it

in

on

the

of

three

4; at

to

take

context

could

by

tell, the to

the

role

the

citizenship basis.

in

other in

setting law

hand, some

I, by

by

nothing

the

appear-

way

with

and Pericles’ perhaps

citizen-

under

the

criteria

for

of

should

451/0

was

Bonner

court

justified

35a;

citizenship

experience

to Aristotle,

"state,"

in

was

citizenship

tested

do

fragment

a direct

in which

Homer be

having

that

that

familial

always

On

time

and

from

so.

a deme

still kata ta patria.

century

be

common

introduction,

fifth

I can

decrees

an

signifi-

more

to

historical

as

to

was

the

far

Philochoros this

day,

Justice

name

28ff.)

a traditional

186,48 ought

1278

early

political

admission

a phratry,

his

had

deme

I submit,

(Politics

citizenship

fragment

Pericles, is

of

and

century

that

This

implies

to

a γραφὴ

law--suggests

of

admission

Administration

right

citizenship--Krateros, ship

as

concern

(The

of

way

in

initially,

different.

"a man's

means

But

neighbors

comment

that

practice

Aristotle

somewhat

by

the

membership

not kata ton nomon of any genos but

a persistent

determined and

same

although

were

that

the

and vote,

Thus,

body;

Cleisthenes.

in much

discussion

citizen

its be

considered. In Periclean prompt

the

demographic

both

Ath.

Pol.

citizenship entry

of

question

(26.4)

law with the

state

deserves

and

Politics

a large into

the

a chapter

(1278a28ff.)

population. business of

its

of own.

Did

Aristotle a pléthos

determining

of

connects

the

citizens

citizenship?

The

29

Chapter

1. for

For

example,

entitlement

both be citizens Greece,

p.

"In 451 Pericles

to

citizenship

by

II:

Footnotes

persuaded

a law which

for him to be a citizen"

100).

Hignett

implies

the assembly

to modify

decreed

a man's

(W.K.

something

that

Lacey,

similar

closing

the remaining

loophole"

(Athenian

must

The Familyin Classical

when he says,

Athenians could intermarry freely with members of other of such unions were legitimate and were citizens of the parent belonged" (HAC, p. 343) as does J.K. Davies with

law,

the rules

parents

"Until

451/0

states; the children born state to which the male "Pericles' citizenship

Citizenship:

the Descent

Group

and its Alternatives," The Classical Journal 73 (1977-78), p. 118). An exception is R. Sealey who says, "The law of 451/0 may mark growing pride in Athenian citizenship, but it is not easy to say how great a change it made, since the immediately preceding conditions are not known.... Conceivably even before 451/0 assemblies of demesmen may have insisted, commonly or increasingly, that both parents of a candidate must be citizens before they would accept him" (A History of the Greek City States, p. 299). A further exception is Brook Manville who in his recent dissertation (The Evolution of Athenían Citizenship, Yale University 1979) offers an historical analysis of the development of Athenian citizenships to the end of the 6th century B.C.

2.

Pierre

Leveque

'The

Final

ship

to men born

3.

It

(The Greek Adventure,

Consolidation

of

is often

English

of

Democracy',

"Finally,

fathers

and mothers

who were

assumed

that

Pericles'

law

trans.) a law

says

of

citizens"

included

under

451/0

(p.

the heading

limited

citizen-

255).

regulations

on marriage.

E.g., MacDowell refers to the "other provision of Perikles' law, invalidating marriage between a citizen and an alien" (The Law of Classical Athens, p. 67). Although the law as we know it it would ceratinly is not necessary to assume that marríage was here point see Chapter IV.

discourage at issue.

such marriages, it For more on this

4. For discussion of this phrase see Appendix I, pp. 153-160. In using metechein tés poleos Pericles emphasized that membership in the city as a whole-not in a particular deme or phratry--was his concern. This seems a sufficient

answer from

I,

p.

to Harrison's query, then

on

the

children

Paoli,

"Why did it [sc., Pericles' of mixed

marriages

were

to be

law] not simply say that nothoi"

(The

Law

of

Athens

65).

5.

Cf.

U.

Studi

di

Diritto

6.

For

this view of the demes

Attico,

see W.E.

pp.

Thompsen,

Reforms,"SO 46 (1971) 72-79; and D.M. Lewis, of Attica, in Gnomon 35 (1963), 723-725. 7.

Paoli,

Studi

8.

"Carattere

di

Diritto

Attico,

quasi-federale,"

p.

Paoli,

207-208.

222. ibid.

review

"The

Deme

of

Eliot,

in Kleisthenes' The

Coastal

Demes

30

9. See the recent account οὗ W.K. Lacey, The Family in Classical Greece, chapter I. After Aristotle (Politics I, 125la-b) the fundamental analysis is course that of Fustel de Coulagnes, La Cite Antique. 10.

See

Andrewes,

The

Greeks,

p.

of

81.

ll. I do not subscribe to the view that owning land (or a certain amount of land) was ever a requirement for being an Athenian. For holding office, yes, but metechein t@s archés is not equivalent to metechein tes poleos (see Appendix I, pp. 164-166. 12.

Andrewes,

Andrewes

argues

(1961) 129-240; portant studies

The

Greeks,

more

fully

pp.

80

and

81.

in two articles:

This

is

a summary

'"Phratries

and "Philochorus on Phratries," JHS 81 on the phratry to which reference will

M. Guarducci, "L'istituzione della Fratria nella antica e nelle Colonie Greche d'Italia," Memorie Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Ser. VI, vol. VI hereafter referred to as "Guarducci." Wilamowitz, Wade-Gery, pp. 116ff. Nilsson,

Greece, 13.

Aristotles

und

Athen,

vol.

"Demotionidai,"

Essays

in

Cults,

Myths,

Appendix

II.

Guarducci,

p.

Oracles

and

II,

views

which

Hermes

(1961) 1-15. be made are:

89

Other

im-

Grecia della (1937),

chapter

Greek

of

in Homer,"

1.

History,

Politics

in

Ancient

19ff.

14. W.K. Lacey emphasizes the military role of the phratry and leaves affairs of the family to the genf. But in the fourth century at least the phratry was involved in disputes over inheritance, legitimacy (and names). One role need not exclude the other, and the genos should be understood as a group functioning within a phratry, not beside it. On the role of the genos within the phratry see below. 15. I.G. I? 115.11-29. See the text and commentary of F. Stroud, Drakon's on Homicide, University of California Publications: Classical Studies, Vol. (1968). 16. Membership in Thrasyboulos in 409

a phratry B.C. (M-L

that

Osborne,

time

(see M.J.

is also part of the citizenship grant 85.16) and 19 a usual feature of such

"Attic

Citizenship

For the effect of Cleisthenes' reorganization of tionship between phratry and city membership see

17.

Atimos

literally

is

‘without

honor

Decrees,"

BSA

69

(1972)

the Athenian state below pages 25-28.

or value.'

made to decrees on

On the development

Law 3

after

129-158). the

rela-

of this

important term and its meaning from 'outlaw' to 'disenfranchised' see most ly M.H. Hansen, Apagoge, Endeixis, and Ephegesis Against Kakourgoi, Atimoi

recentand

31

Pheugontes,A Study in the Athenian Administration of Justice in the Fourth Century B.C. (Odense, 1976), pp. 55-90, and B. Manville, The Evolutionof Athen-

ian Citizenship (dissertation, Yale University note 42 and Chapter V (Conclusion) pp. 135-136. 18.

For

this

contrast

(astos/xenos)

see

1979),

Appendix

Appendix.

See

also

below

I pp. 156-158.

19. For some variations evident in the fourth century see Paoli, Studi di Diritto Attico, p. 222 and also the comment of B. Manville, The Evolution of Athenian Citizenship, p. 23 note 26: "The inconsistent testimony of the sources may suggest that different phratries enrolled their members differently, at slight-

ly different stages of the child's life." notion of legitimacy may not have existed very

unlikely.

For

the

status

of

the

But Manville's further claim that "the much before Solon" (ibid.) seems to me

nothos

see

note

20.

20. I say this categorically (with the clear implication that illegitimate sons and daughters were not part of the Athenian 'citizen-body', despite the current debate on the issue. The evidence is quite one-sided, especially in that those who argue against 'nothoi as citizens‘ use the evidence of basic practice and principle while those who argue the opposite use particular problem cases. For example, see the particular objections of Mac Dowell ("Bastards as Athenian Citizens,"

CQ 26 CQ 28 into

no

(1976) (1978) the

longer

88-91) and the answers of P.J. Rhodes ("Bastards as Athenian Citizens," 89-92). And while it is true that we do hear of nothoi being accepted

phratries,

a nothos

they

when

are

not

in 429

accepted

as nothoi.

by the vote

Pericles

of the d@mos

son

he was

of

Pericles

accepted

was

as his

father's heir and registered in his father's phratry (Plutarch, Pericles 37.5); and when Callias introduced to the genos of the Kerukes a son whom he had previously considered illegitimate, he simply reversed his former stand and svore that the son was in fact legitimate (Andocides I.127. Cf. Demosthenes 40.11 and the comments of Wolff, "Marriage Law and Family, Organization in Ancient Athens," Traditio 2 (1944) 79-82) and Harrison, The Law of Athens I, 68-70).

forth

The status of by Wolff (op.

nothoi (illegitimate, cit. pp. 75-82). The

(1)

Illegitimate sons were were they eligible for

(2) (3)

Illegitimate sons were not Illegitimate sons were not Ath@naioi. For daughters,

not admitted adoption.

of anchisteia Wolff

55,

that

the

also

and politeia

suggested

situation

mate woman. (This case apparently illegitimate

may

(pp.

82-3), been

to

the

(WS 29-30

"untrennbar"

have

from unwed parents) points are: phratries

is

clearly

put

nor

their father's heirs. citizens of Athens, true see below.

The same position is held by Ledl rights

born main

(1907-8)) who considers

(vol.

30,

on a ‘straight’ somewhat

different

p.

230 and

reading in

of

the

is one emphasized by MacDowell, art. and unable to be an epikl@ros of her

Isaeus

case

the

passim). of

an

3.45-52, illegiti-

cit.) Phile was father's estate, but

was given in marriage to an Athenian and so supposedly could bear legitimate Athenian children. But the evidence of this speech should perhaps not be taken at face falue. There seems to have been something suspicious about the citizen-

32 ship

of

Phile's

escaped

maternal

by a margin

of

As long as Phile (or well enough was left

out

to be a xen$).

uncle,

Nicodemus--he

four votes

(37)--and

was

prosecuted

so also

about

for xenia

and

Phile's mother

only

and Phile.

her kurios) did not press the issue and claim the estate, alone (others besides Phile might suffer if her mother turned

But when

she claimed

the estate

of her

father

Pyrrhus

after

the death of his adopted son Endius, the truth (or at least partial truth) of her status was brought into the open. We can assume that if the prosecution in this case was successful, Phile's children were no longer consídered legitimate.

ably like deme

See also the comments of Rhodes (art. cít., above) who suggests quite reasonthat it might have been easier for a noth® born of two Athenian parents to act an asté than for a nothos since the latter had to go through the process of registration (p. 91).

If

A final argument, Pericles' law, which

also noticed by Rhodes denied to any not born

to

'share

could

in'

the city,

be popularly

Pericles 37), then the normal the city--or citizenship.

21.

Cf.

the comments

22.

Guarducci,

23.

Cf.

p.

of A.

assumption

Ledl,

WS 20

(p. 91, note 12), from tvo Athenian

termed

is

that

(1908)

can be mentioned. parents the right

a "law on bastards" bastards

did

not

(Plutarch,

have

a

share

in

203-4.

39.

Ledl,WS 20

(1908)

214-227.

24. Guarducci, p. 37. Hignett thinks (apparently) that women and children were registered with the phratry and not only introduced (HAC, pp. 56, 60 note 2), but he has failed to distinguish presentation and registration. 25.

For

further

discussion

of

the

position

of

women

in Athens

see

Appendix

I,

26. I follow here the interpretation of Wade-Gery ("Demotionidai"), contra Wilamowitz,on the name of the phratry of I.G. 112 1237, 1.e., that the Demotionidai are a smaller group within a phratry called Dekeleis or the Dekeleia "House." S.C. Humphreys has pointed out that it is not impossible for a whole phratry called Demotionidai to first vote on the admission of a new member as part of the ritual of the Apatouria and then if there were an appeal vote again as Derotionidai in a more legal setting with witnesses present and testimonies given ("Anthropology and the Classics," Anthropology and the Greeks, p. 26). But this possibility affects only one of Wade-Gery's arguments. I am aware that F. Bourriot in his

recent

dissertation

the genos

(Recherches

sur

la nature

du genos,

Lille,

1976)

also argues that the name of the phratry is Demotionidai. However, I know his view only in the summary given in the review of N. R. E. Fischer in JHS 99 (1979) 193-95. In what follows I continue to assume that the phratry is called the "Dekeleis" phratry and that the Demotionidai are a smaller group, probably a genos, within that phratry. However, if this is not correct I do not think it would affect substantially the larger argument of thís chapter.

27.

Again,

"Philochorus

see Wade-Gery,

"Demotioniídai"

on

JHS

Phratries,"

81

and

(1961)1ff.

also

the

comments

of Andrewes,

33

28.

It

admitted

is

possible

candidate

have been to uphold

not the

that

the

as well

an arbitrary law, as with

Demotionidai

as to admit

the

authority

one who had been

once

had

rejected.

to

reject

But

authority to reject candidates, but rather those whom the phratry had rejected.

29. Aristotle, Ath. Pol. 42.1-2 is the most accurately the practices of earlier periods. century the procedure was as follows:

complete account, but In the second half of

an

this would an

may the

authority

not reflect fourth

-. the right of citizenship belongs to those whose parents have been citizens. They are enregistered on the rolls of demes at the age of eighteen. When they come up for enrollment, their fellow demesmen decide by vote under oath the following: first, whether they appear to have reached the legal age--and if they do not appear of the right age, they return to the state of boys; secondly, whether the candidate is freeborn and of such parents as the law requires (ei...gegone kata tous nomous). If they decide that he is not free (eleutheros) he appeals to the law court and the demesmen choose five men from among themselves as his accusers; and if it appears that he has no right to be enrolled, the

city

sells

him

into

compelled to enroll have been enrolled, eighteen years, the

MacDowell

(art.

cit.

above

slavery,

but

if

he

wins,

the

demesmen

are

him. After this the Council examines those who and if someone appears to be younger than the Council fines the demesmen who enrolled hin. (von Fritz--Kapp trans.)

note

23) cites

Aristotle's

failure

to mention

legitimacy,

the need for married parents, as evidence for believing that nothoi were citizens. While it is true that gegone kata tous nomous does not necessarily refer to legitimate birth, it is also true that Aristotle is here concerned with the official and legal machinery of citizenship, not traditional practices. I consider legitimacy part of the latter and as much a requirement for belonging to the citizen body in the fourth century as in the fifth or sixth.

Also, as Rhodes (art. cit., above note 23), notes, the Ath. Pol. is an "insecure basis for argument" (p. 89) since it is a "text which abounds in omissions (p. 91)". And a further problem in this account is Aristotle's implication that if a deme rejects a candidate as "not free" (apparently "not entitled to citizenship" here, see von Fritz-Kapp, note 147) he necessarily appeals to the law court, and is sold into acquiesce in the

fourth by 422

30.

slavery if he looses deme's decision.

his

case.

But

surely

a man

could

simply

Finally, although Aristotle describes the system in the second half of the century, it can be noted that Wasps 577 indicates a role for the dikastéria in scrutinizing new candidates for membership into the demes.

The

main

difference

appears

at eighteen,

became

ἃ dememan

"L'üge

correspondant

au

to have

a phrater

sacrifice

at

been

age

(most

du xovUpaov

et

sixieme discours a'Isée," BAB 39 (1953) 358-394.

of

enrollment.

likely) les

sixteen,

données

An

Athenian

(see J.

historiques

Labarbe, du

Phratry membership was thus probably an important piece of evidence for gaining deme membership. There is no indication in the sources that while legitimacy was required for the first it was not for the second. (See note 29 for the omission of legitimacy as a requirement in Ath. Pol. 42.1.) 31. In both the old and the new tribes there vere smaller groups, three to each tribe, called trittues. These were intermediate between the deme and tribe and phratry and tribe. Although little is heard of trittues, they do have ἃ recognized place in both the pre-Cleisthenic and Cleisthenic systen. 32. B. Manville, 1979), p. 91.

The

33. For see below

objection

possible pp.

Evolution

34. See the comments Salamis, "Literature,"

on

of

Athenian

Citizenship

(dissertation,

the

basisof

Philochoros

fragment

35a

Yale,

(Jacoby)

of B.M.W. Knox in Athens Comes of Age, From Solon to (AIA Symposium, Princeton University, 1978), pp. 44-45.

35. Manville implies that Solon opened up the category ‘Athenian' to those who had before not belonged to it, that after Solon's reforms "men who had settled in Attika, recently or long before, could take part in political life, share any privilege of court, assembly, or law..." and that under the tyranny of Peisistratus, the démos included "freed hekt@moroi, foreign craftsmen, men of slave descent, landless immigrants, foreign mercenaries loyal to Peisistratos, itinerant traders, alien workers...." (The Evolution of Athenian Citizenship, p. 149). This seems

a little family)

extreme. would

organization

In order

stíll and

have

into

a

to

to be part be

accepted

of the into

demos the

ton Ath@naion

Athenian

social

a man and

(and his

political

phratry.

J.K. Davies argued that under Solon "the boundary between 'free residents' and 'citizens' became, or remained, permeable'"("Athenian Citizenship," The Classical Journal 73 (1977-78), p. 115). This seems quite true, but no so much because of Solon's law, as because of the traditional, local way in which the boundary was drawn. (See below for discussion of the law on 'becoming a citizen' attributed to Solon by Plutarch.)

36. 1899),

37.

zur Geschichte

Untersuchungen pp.

825-826

See A.

Ledl

and

(WS 29-30

critique of Muller's Birds passage). The (1)

Attischen

Bürger und

(1907-1908)

173-227;

1-46,

theory (WS 30 (1908) 199-200 on main points of the theory are:

Before Solon, nothoi (here as alvays in to be those born of an Athenian man and

citizens. 857) when (2)

des

Eherechts,

173-230) the

for a complete

misinterpretation

this argument thought a foreign woman) were

These were the days of the "Geschlechterstaat" (p. the 'nobility' did not intermarry with the ‘commons’

but when both Solon forbade citizenship.

(Leipzig,

passim.

groups could marry outside Attica. foreign marriage and deprived nothoi

of

their

of

the

35

(3)

Damasias, in the interest of his the civic rights of nothoi, but equal to that of gn@sioi. They but rather to the newly created nasium. Their position was not

enjoyed

(attempted) tyranny, restored did not give them a position were not admitted to the phratries synteleia at the Kynosarges gymaltered by Peisistratus who also

the support of these m? genei katharoi.

then, enrolled at Kynosarges as a youth. With the fall of the Peísistratids, Isagoras

(4)

of nothoi

and

abolished

the

«ynteleia

completely equal with the gn@ésioi. was (6)

Pericles,

the

For

place

the

was them

The synteleia at Kynosarges

interest

of

limiting

privileges

of

the

Athenian

number

of

those

citizenship,

enjoy-

reenacted

law.

to read

857-865).

on the the

rights

Cleisthenes

In 411 the special status of citizen nothoi and the Kynosarges svnteleia were reinstituted (due mainly to oliganthrÓpia). In 403 the "democratic"--Solonian and Periclean--rule was restored and the Kynosarges synteleia abolished once again.

(8)

logue

in

nev-found

Solon's (7)

best

the

abolished.

ing

(pp.

revoked

at Kynosarges.

was deprived of his citizenship. Cleisthenes restored the citizenship of nothoi (just how he able to do anything when not a citizen is unclear) and made

(5)

The

Themistocles was,

a general

Reference

fate

will

of Pericles’

Kynosarges

synteleia

outline

again

of

law after see

this

be made

theory

to

these

451/0.

Chapter

IV,

is in Miller's

Untersuchungen

They will

note ll5 page

"Uberblick" in

the

fare no better

Epi-

there.

128.

38. This integrity can be thought to have been under pressure from the claims of the wider kinship group or the genos of which it was a part (cf. Lacey, The Family in Ancient Greece, pp. 88-90) or simply from the possibility of dissolution if there were no heirs. The need for “enough hoplites to fill the ranks of the Athenian army may also have been a factor influencing Solon. 39.

See

Manville,

The

Evolution

of

Athenian

Citizenship,

pp.

97-99,

note

17.

40. This was suggested by A. Ledl (WS20 (1908) 176) who considers the law to be pre-Solonian. Humphreys also proposed that two laws were combined, one on nothoi and one on inheritance (JHS 94 (1974) 89 note 5). 4l.

2

Wolff,

(1944) 42.

that

"Marriage

pp.

Solon's

law

who

anyone

Law

and

Family

Organization

in Ancient

Athens,”

Traditio

88-89. on

stasis

did not take

(as

reported

by

in civic

part

Aristotle,

strife

Ath.

should

Pol.

8.5)

stipulated

and

be atimos

‘have

no

share' in the city( ὃς ἂν στασιαζούσης τῆς πόλεως μὴ ϑῆται τὰ ὅπλα μηδὲ wed’ ἐτέρων, ἄτιμον εἶναι γαὶ τῆς πόλεως uh μετέχειν). Even if this law is authentic

and

Ruschenbusch, that

Solon

properly

ZQAQNOE

understood

understood

NOMOJ atimia

by Aristotle

frag. as

not

38

and

having

(see

the

doubts

note), it should a

'share

'being an outlaw' (as suggested by B. Manville, ship, p. 90, and Appendix, p. 184). Ts poleds

in

the

expressed

not

city'

by

be taken as

opposed

E.

to mean to

The Evolution of Athenian Cítizenmé metechein may be a later para-

36

phrase should

or be

explanation. atimos.

See

the

Conclusion

43. This point is Stanford University 44.

For

Notice

this

for

that

some

Plutarch

further

made by Martin in 1974.

phenomenon

see,

20.1

comments

Ostwald

e.g.,

Solon

the

in

an

on

says

only

atimos

and

unpublished

comments

of

that

a man

atimia.

paper

Hignett,

such

HAC

read

p.

at

17ff.

45. On syssitoi see Busolt-Swoboda, 698ff., 746, 754ff. and G. Morrow, Plato's Cretan City, pp. 389-398. Sysstoi were a well-known Cretan and Spartan institution; Morrow considers the Athenian common meals for magistrates a survival of

this

practice

(op.

cit.,

p.

391 note

333).

46. See, for example, McGregor, "Athenian Policy at Home and Abroad," (Semple Lecture, 1966, Vol. 2), p. 14, who accuses Solon of "un-Athenian

activity." 47. E.g., Busolt-Swoboda, II, p. 835; Bury-Meiggs^ p. 123. However, see the more cautious and careful comments of D. Whitehead, The Ideology of the Athenian Metic (Cambridge Philological Society, Supplementary Volume number 4, 1977) pp.

48. For a phratry to admit a foreigner probably involved some form of adoption or perhaps the recognition of a new óikos (through marriage?). The obstacles were not insurmountable. 49. Busolt-Swoboda think very soon ("Das Gesetz verlor fruhzeitig seine Geltung" --p. 945). In support of this claim it is noted that in later times more was required of a recipient of Athenian cítizenship than residence. But on the second interpretation suggested above, residence does not automatically bring citizenship but simply permits it. More could have been required. More recent opinion favors a validity until the time of “Athenian concepts of citizenship were drastically realigned"

Citizenship,"

CJ

(1977-78)

p.

117).

According

momentarily 'equated' the inhabitants of segmental descent groups that mattered," For

50.

further

The

consideration

phrase

didonai

of

Davies'

genesthai

to Davies,

Attica with (p. 115 and

analysis,

politas

see

is not

Cleisthenes when (Davies, "Athenian

Cleisthenes

reforms'

"those who were in the 114) in this case the demes.

Chapter

V

a usual

(Conclusion).

formula

for

citizenship. The normal and earliest known formula is that found in the honoring the Samians (I.G. II^ 1.12--M-L 94.12), Samios Athenaios enai. Osborne, "Attic Citizenship Decrees," BSA 69 (1972) 129-158.

bestowing decree See M.

51. E.g., Guarducci, pp. 14-15; Nilsson, Cults, Myths, Oracles, and Politics, pp. 159-161; Hignett, HAC, pp. 61-2, 390-1. On Nilsson's account, the orgeones actually seem to be equated with the thetes to whom Solon gave "certain political rights" (p. 161). Are the genn@tai then equal to the three upper tele? That seems unlikely.

52. the

JHS 81 possible

(1961) new

1-2 on the difficulties

interpretation.

of the

usual

interpretation,

2-15

on

J.

37

53.

It might

be noted

that

Nilsson's

argument,

"that

this

reform

of

the phratries

was effectuated before the democratic reforms of Kleisthenes is confirmed by a passage in Aristotle in which he says that Kleisthenes let everyone keep the gene and phratries and the priesthoods in accordance with the custom of their fathers"

(op.

cit.,

p.

took

place

after

161),

carries

no weight

against

Andrewes'

claim

that

the

"reform"

Cleisthenes.

54. In the fourth century, of course, when this decree of the phratry was passed, the decision of the phratry could be overruled by the demos. I am simply suggesting that the traditional nomoi of the phratry imply that this had not always been the case. 55. Fragment 4 (Jacoby). See Jacoby's commentary (FGrH IIIb) for a discussion of the date and below, Chapter IV, pp. 109-111. The fragment comes. from book 4 of Krateros' collection of Athenian decrees, roughly the 450's to 430's. The phrase "hois dikai eisi" would appear to be an earlier version of hois exesti common in

fourth

century

Harrison, phrase. 56.

The

This

ship

laws, Law

See,

for

"those

Athens

suggestion

(dissertation

57.

meaning

of

II,

is made

Yale

example,

who have

pp.

by

82-85,

B.

Manville,

University, the

the right

who,

1979),

comments

of

to bring

however,

The

only

Evolution

cases."

See

mentions

of

the

Athenian

later

Citizen-

p. 89.

Hignett,

HAC,

p.

112.

58. Aristotle uses the term diaps€phismos, the term used for a scrutiny of the citizen registers in his day, but this is probably an anachronism. Later on, Aristotle asys that the saying "No tribe investigation (m8 phulokrinein)" originated

during tion

Cleisthenes'

of

the

reorganization

Athenian

state

and

to check on family backgrounds

of

that

the Athenian

this

was

state

directed

and

against

(ta gen8 )" (Ath. Pol.

21.2).

that

this

"those

was

who

reorganiza-

wanted

This may refer to

the investigations of 510 and may suggest that Cleisthenes and his followers adopted a looser attitude toward deme and phratry registration than did his opponents. But it should not be taken to mean that 'aristocrats' were trying to limit the citizen population

possible

On 59.

the

to

view

gennétai

by

term and This

gennétai

is

or

Lacey,

the

on

view

of

Family

institution

a common

insisting

members

The

gene

in

in

the

see Appendix

whether

it

genos membership

sense

Classical

is

of

Greece,

II. pp.

thought

(see note

85

(as

and

offered

note

5,

p.

as

a

273.)

186-193.

that

58)

'clan'

p.

these

or

aristocrats

less well

were

defined

'nobles'

who wished to deny civic membership to 'more humble' Athenians (see, e.g., Manville, Evolution of Athenian Citizenship pp. 147, 150, 179). The latter view founders on the problem of noble 'class' identification, for which see Appendix II, 60.

On

the

his sons) fountains

Greater

Panathenaia

(fostered

if

not instituted

see J.A. Davison, JHS 78 (1958) 23-42. (Thucydides 2.15.2), temples (for the

by

Peisistratus

and

Other ‘improved benefits' were ‘building program’ of the Pisistra-

tids see Joh S. Boersma, Athenian Building Policy from 561/0-4-5/7 B.C., Scripta Archaeologica Groningana 4, 1970), road markers (with inscribed moral messages--

[Plato],

Hipparchus),

note 53,

p.

121.

and perhaps

local judges

(Ath.

Pol.

16.5--see Chapter

IV

38

61.

In general

citizenship Chapter

see

II.

for Aristotle's Day

On

end

view of the relation

Chambers,

Arístotle's

view,

between

population

Aristotle's

History

of

Athenian

Cleisthenes

was

of

those

one

and

Democracy,

politicians

who

wanted to increase the citizen body, who would go to the length of admitting aliens (cf. 1278a27ff. where illegitimate children, children of a slave or of a citizen mother only are all considered xenoi) to achieve his end. The charge that Cleisthenes "made tribesmen of foreigners and resident slaves" (1275b37) could reflect conservative opposition to Cleisthenes new system from those who considered the demes to be acting or have acted without proper control, and as such is important for understanding later or contemporary perception of Cleisthenes' reorganization. But the motives and particular role of Cleisthenes in the events of 507 can not be understood snlelv along such lines. Population, either too much or too little, was and which he assumed an active statesman would Chapter III, note 68, pp. 77-78.

about below 62. oath

This as it

date.

ian

For

the

most

Boule,

pp.

190-100.

63.

Κ.

Ancient

Kinzl,

in

Historians

together

to

actually is somewhat in was sworn in the fourth

under

a

paper

díscussion

delivered

in May,

whatever

501/500

recert

error since century can

1975

of

the

at

the

at Ohio

innovative

legislation

"Kleisthenic

was

several clauses of the bouleutic only have been added after this

bouleutic

annual

State

the heading

a problem Aristotle worried worry about also. See also

oath,

meeting

University, enacted

Reforms"

of

Rhodes,

the

the

"that

return

delineate

The

Association

suggests

from

and

see

the

of

we

Athen-

of

lump

Kleisthenes

general

thrust

and spirit of reform in its immediate significance and in its far-reaching meaning. This will certainly do a greater service to the historical Kleisthenes than will a personality cult." (page 3). Kinzl further suggests (pages 5-7) that Herodotus' demokratia in 6.131 means (or meant originally in the source which he used) d$moikratia and refers to Cleisthenes' establishment of the deme as the basic political unit.

However,

as

kratia (and the able to suppose "reforms." 64.

See

Day

Kinzl

himself

notes,

Herodotus

in

all

related verb) in its ‘classical’ sense. that Herodotus himself applied the word

and

Chambers,

111-120;

Hignett,

other

And it in that

cases

uses

démo-

is entirely reasonsense to Cleisthenes'

138-142.

65. Wilamowitz' solution (Aristoteles und Athen II, 169ff.) that the had no recognized fathers, but only patrons, is a good attempt to make Aristotle but 18 not the most natural interpretation of the passage.

new citizens sense of

66. It is true that the decree giving citizenship to the Plataeans (inserted into [Demosthenes] 59.104) says only that the Plataeans are to be distributed among the demes and the tribes. In another case of wholesale enfranchisement (1.6. 112 1 = M-L 94) only the distribution into tribes is mentioned for sure (34). There is room for restoration and Meiggs-Lewis restore mention of the demes. Probably such enfranchisement of whole poleis, whose members would not be expected to move to Athens (?), would have called for somewhat different procedures than for individuals. J.K. Davies, in fact, argues that the Samians are given not citizenship but isopoliteia since they keep their own institutions and are not

expected

to move

to Athens

(CJ73

(1977-78) p. 107).

39

67.

Since

head,

The

naieve,

writing

this

I have

noticed

Ideologyof the Athenian

surely,

to

imagine

the

that

Metic

metoikia

this

image

(Cambridge springing

is

1977)

also

p.

used

145:

fully-formed

by

D.

white-

"It would

from

be

Cleisthenes'

head." 68. K. Kinzl, "The Origin of Anuonpathand the Early Development ot Athenian Democracy," (unpublished paper delivered at the Association of Ancient Historians, Ohio State University, May 1975) p. 2.

69.

W.K.

Lacey's

claim

that

"Cleistheaes

effectiveiy

eudeu

Cue

power

ot

tue

cau

aristocratic families to control admission to citizenship" (The Family in Classical Greece, p. 84) may be true,although ít implies that we know more about the early procedure and organization of the demes than we in fact do and that there would be no place in the 'democratic' demes for upper class influence. 70. See D.M. Lewis, "Cleisthenes and Attica," Historia 12 (1963) 22-40, for an account of how Cleisthenes may have distributed demes into tríttues so as to weaken the influence of local cult centers. Perhaps the most striking example is

that

Oinoe

of

and

the

Marathonian

Tricorynthos

and

tetrapoleis;

put

in

Probalinthos

a different

trittys.

was

severed

from

Marathon,

40

III.

A.W. Centuries and

Gomme's p.c.!

convenient

fifth

The

century

Population

Table

has

I in

become,

source

for

citizen

at

is

at

of

best,

the

discussions

of

Athenian

of

480

serve

as

the

fifth

century

an

(Gomme,

the

and

1,000

them 16,000

walls.

The

regular

question

to

insist

that

any

case,

the

for

examines

the

example

are of

which

Total

Athenian Population (2.13.6-9) that

their

hoplites, In

marks

and

possible,

when

all

eight

figures

should

no

questionable

sum

can

addition,

be

the

perhaps

9.28),

25,000

is more

but

in

fact

problematic

if

not

the

difficulties

population, p.

even

less

hoplites

reliable is

the

one be

of

than

as,

its

of 431 proceeds than

that

product

of

questionable.

involved

in any

when

ancient

the

thought

underlying

at

This

from

least

two

calculation

attempt

to

'quantify'

figures

are

"our

most

encouraged

the

Athenians

4).

reports city

the

total

which produces

2.13)

which

Thucydides

ing

figures

are:

18-59 thetes

(Herodotus

assumptions

and

His

population.

172,000

(In

Fourth

standard

43,000

the

and

the

18,000?

to note

Fifth

world,

25,000

can

forts

English-speaking

the

431

(Thucydides

telling

in

140,000

a figure

by

Athens

35,000?

guesses.

precise"

of

B.C.

20,000?

The calculation

major

- 450

15,000?

calculation,

15,000

Population in

population

parts.)

the

The

480

480

important

method

Athens;

least

Males hoplites

It

his

of

had

composed there

that

in

431

Pericles

13,000

hoplites

of

"youngest,"

the

were

1,200

not

cavalry

including "oldest" (including

those

and

in

metics,

the guard-

mounted

archers)

16,000

"reserve"

archers.

difficulty

lies

in determining

what

proportion

of

the

41

was Athenian,

Gomme's

20-49

year-olds

18-19

and

since

"3,000

431),

with

organized

unfit

two assumptions for

regular

50-59 year-olds; of

the as

them

took

citizen

the

and

army,

citizens

duty

(2)

part

that

they

(1)

sector in

assume

It 18

neither

of

161ff.)

who on his part

Democracy,

40 -60

Appendix

p.

that

implies tional 4,000

a force

of

some

14,000

men

of

the

ages

18-19

factor

and

argues

that

the

cleruchs.) Gomme's

acteristic

However,

25,000,

the

of

modern

graphic

experience

to

ancient

ture

Athens

on

the

(and

basis

modern)

societies,

shown,

the ancient

Empire

gives

not

averages.

as

were

census:

assumes

an

demographically

Rome) of

at

say

that

those

oldest,

the

in all,

that

operations not

so

least

5,500 by

(Megara,

thoroughly 2,000

or

in all"

Jones

(p.

evidence

in

Athens.

included

same

to

mortality

we as

that

of

levels

picture cannot

India

should more

likely

India

in 1900,

cavalry)

of an

addi-

very

apt

to

different be

overlooked.

to another

uneasiness. modern

that

the

demo-

age

struc-

can

be

in pre-industrialized

(or

pre-

(As Keith Hopkins

and age-structure when

considered that

because

of

Athens this

char-

This

thís

assume

just

not

important,

18 very

con-

approximately

points

cause

evidence.

expectancy

demographic

way

it

are

structure

and,

of ancient

for life

in method

which

data

is

and

account

included

23,000,

age

While

similar

Furthermore, the

result,

analyses

takes

hoplites

differences

on the basis

impossible ^ )

total

demographic

was

active

also

hoplites

5).

(Athenian

the "oldest"

(including

(He

India-based

Gomme's

general

not

his

year-olds 40-60.

13,000

of Burn's

application

of

both

and

fundamental

and

the

of

since

his

duced

active

assumptions is accepted

20-40

9,000

The use by Jones

is

there

and

5,500

probability,

hoplite

these

the

included

year-olds and, on the basis of the 1900-1 census figures for India,^

cludes

from

that

and old--of

youngest

were about

of

that

unfit

the "reserve"

the

all

2,500 more--organized, interesting

as

the metics

were

we may

that

as well

in a small

and

...

are

de-

has

in the Roman

individually would

and

have

reacted

similarity.

Jones

42

notes

(p.

those

of

ity."

177) Egypt

But

improved 20th

that and

in

modern

structure

in Athens

birth

about

The

the

(often

experiencing) century

beneath)

overall

has

Athenian

population

"natural

increase"

the

number

either Jones

of

and

of

others

within

negative. given

increase"

is "naturally"

ambiguity

of

meaning

to

was

came

as

rapidly

not

the

along

references

the

to

Athenian--

economic

only

with

abandon

instead model

today

factor

prosper-

involved;

prosperity

assume

in

for

in

the

classical

as

India in

fifth an

rate

gets

certain

is perhaps

over the

rapid. most

mortality

for

a

experi-

rate for

life

at

rates

3.3%

centuries

population

at

rates

and

age

a pre-in-

expectancy

in Mexico of

the

to

the

a given

6.12

at

impression, (such

as

term in

number

of

per

.17 in

every

the

births

however,

when

reading

following

in-

minus

and

the

38

term

time

takes

ca.

possible

of

then

year

in West

"natural

"prosperity")

some

Kuwait,

of

on

in

Before

population

comment

period

18

.32

from

Demographically

simply

blatant

beneath

discussions

A brief

The

(and

growth.

ranging

on modern

century.

conditions

and

of

grew

effect

is

35

two

a doubling

it

particular

appropriate

Table

illustration,

a population One

and

most

last

growing

is neutral;

positive

which

is

of

the

Athens. ©

the

high

a clear

the

for

population

resulting

in

take

in

to

estimates

table

can

model

it

2.9%

for

life

We

world's

serve

growth"

that

very

necessarily

abnormally

I think

will

or

pattern

cannot

experienced

1.8Z

growth

deaths

positive

to

had,

"natural

U.N.

an

the

Switzerland

This

we

a likely

while

rate

probably

as Athens. 5

has

with

or

the

world

and

crease"

turn

modern

Germany

years,’

such

and

as

well

an

to

simply

years

eighteenth

care

is

25

still

same

below p. 43).

countries

society

the

prosperity

something

approach

dustrial of

is

further

A better of

that

of

instance--respond

economic

or medical

and

(See

populations

for

cases

nutrition

Athens.

areas

India,

these

century,

ence

"modern

can

be Gomme,

"natural

on a certain comment

of

43

Rignett:

Apart from the exclusion of fraudulent claimants on the one hand and the natural growth of population on the other, the citizen-body had remained constant. (History of the Athenian Constitution,

It the

is

hard

word

theless

her

to

be

sure

'natural.' imply

Democracy,

we

to

ought

wealth

and

be as

locking possible E.A.

an

increase

age

at

result

in

of

leading

in greater

decreased

fifth

it

is,

is

in "real for

in

their

less

in varying

ways

only

growth

was

a complex

on

effect

in

result

(on

the

Or,

industrial

cities,"

leading,

then,

two main

faults

given)

which

and

however,

ancient

figure

an increase

goods"

and

1969,

an

of

during

fact,

increase And many

inter-

world, ὃ are 4.1).

however

will

The

well

indicated

For

in real

then

example, in

lead

income might

"proportion

increased

in

modern,

in a decrease

a greater to

none-

in

involved.

result

by

(Jones,

But, to

population

model

population,

income."

the

a pre-modern New York,

factor

but

increase"

startling.

the

in

usage

of Thucydides

be

not

specifically

"naturally

figures

react

seldom

History,

increased

to

somewhat

can

wealth

will

Athens

and

346)

mortality

of

the

and

a

population.

There of

were

and

to

"demand

towns

then

statement

careful

“startling”

vill

which

this

more

for

population

income"

to a decrease

in

it

increasing

"real

are

Populations

(Population

marriage,

population

modern

of

The become

earlier

most

Wrigley

further

161)

revolution,

effects

bv

p.

by

natural

century.

noted

factors,

Jones

only

startled.

post-industrial

is meant

and

it was

fifth

Athenian

what

Gomme

that

prosperous

just

p.

are,

century

Athenian

obscured

notions

of

with the

population,

problematic

"natural"

in Gomme's First,

the

assumptions

behavior

of

(and Jones') basic

and

ancient

calculations;

a population

are

calculations evidence, and

imported

Buch

as

second, into

discus-

44

sions

of ancient Perhaps

some,

already despairing

of any reliable

world,

would

now

up

ancient

insistence evidence remedy

that

these

faults

First,

the

of

figures.

figures.

adult

are

less

was

changing

background

cluding

during

evidence

those

of

unavoidable Second,

ancient for

evidence,

a life

structure

or

behavior

in

must

of

to water

large

can

needed, be

be ?

populations

stems

we

to

fifth

as

for

of

will the

law

know

we can of the I think,

possible, of

to

"total"

mostly

a

ancient or

be of

absolute,

with

the

purpose

concerned ascertaining

total

figures

how,

the

population

B.C.

Even

with

many

ancient

if,

century not

Gomme's

and

comparable,

and

some

this

limi-

figures,

in-

assumptions

figures.

made

to

interpret

should used

be

for

more in

and

any

the

light

The

of

p.

dramatic

of

U.N.

of

what

is

62). losses,

model

of

known

compares

limited

suggested

not

is,

the of

the

table

ageAthenian the

dem-

a pre-industrial

capacity

That

by

life

mortality,

the growth

Wrigley

a tap

History

changes

estimates

importantly

has

from

the

avoided,

populations.

which

(Population

calculation

the

convincingly.

credibility

accommodating;

considered

in a bathtub

the

But

really

more

directly

evidence,

need

the

are

but

pre-industrial

diameter

pre-industrial

is

speak

as

the

make what

for

But

it is possible,

citizenship

of

experience 25

the

these

attempt

of

sex-ratio

graphic

of

the

up

We

strength,

used

service.

be very

interpreting

expectancy

population

hole

not

modern

citizen

population

will

be

Pericles'

half

And

figures

altogether.

"we must

weakening

of

comparisons. first

that

evidence

giving

military

the

when

the

‘census’

enterprise

stands.

should

nature

of

military in

make

involve

for

than

still

and

the

fit

12)

calculations

Given

important

the

or

the

be ignored,

figures

often

citizens

demographic

(p.

ancient

giving

not

somewhat

will

the

are

subject

assumptions This

absolute

tation

the

suggest

at our disposal"

minimum

with

data.

and

dramatic

gains.

a plugchange

45

Such the

populations long

run

typically

remaining

In

some

Western

of

short-term

a period

the

and

provoke

result

periodicity Such

of

of

resources.

It

fluctuations

are

of

sharp

The over

an

Table will

die

average

will

age

have

relevant

necessary

in

surge

a society the

short-term,

that

rapid

population

which

will 10

adapts

p.

context

inter-

with

properly

Athenian is

usually

population

to

grow

a

69).)

to

its

that

increase

be

replace (One

History,

pattern

will

in numbers

Population and

if

a cyclical

generation.

a "wave-like

for

of

of

a pre-industrial

time

ca.

is

evident

25 years). This

bear

factors

one

note

thirty.

to

is

about

in

imperceptibly. been

year)

while

sharp

preceded

by

!?

expectancy

before

within

have drop

12% per

to

ability

period

(perhaps

fluctuations

almost

to

a severe

(Wrigley,

important

decrease.

limited

(life

only

normally

extended

35

Other

is

not

growing

appears

causing

crises

a generation"

short-term

or

there

crisis

cyclical

is

same

growth

another

such

sharp

the

a crisis

rapid

pattern

!!

a time

of

about

a cyclical

about

commmities

fluctuation;

by

esting

just

European

followed loss

experienced

five

Some

means,

just

the

mortality

levels

60% of the children

very

children

affecting

from

significantly

roughly, to

pre-industrial

that

replace

each

the

of Model

born each year

woman

existing

populations,

such

Life

on

the

population.

as

the

negative

effect of urban life, will be mentioned later, 19 We thinking propose from

the

cantly, of part

can

return

now

to

that

it vas

the

large

his era

of

The the

first

Persian

pre-Cleisthenic

indirect in

law?

the

evidence general

the

population number

specific Wars.

population

which Greek

can

of

of

citizens?

figures The is

for

beyond

of

the

Was

which

the

pre-Persian

be mentioned.

colonization

Athens 1^

Aristotle

prompted

Athenian or,

perhaps

recovery,

but

there

8th

and

Athens 7th

Pericles

population

war

First,

right

more

are

as a city

centuries.

a

in to

come signififew

bits

took

no

Some

Athen-

46

ians

may

individually

taken

part,

but

it

is

likely

that

Attica

was

not

over-

16 The

colonization’

'internal

for

room

had

actually

and

time

this

at

crowded

have

polis of Athens comprised about 1,000 square miles of territory!’ or 256,000 hectares.

Assuming

might

get

land

alone,

sistence 30,000

If

Megara

over

Megera

provided

wonder

how

fifth

mate is

of

only

century 6th

the

to

city

6th

the

less

perhaps

the

first

Herodotus

the years

this

in

the

with

however,

as

before

she

might

tempt

equal

the

was

been

her

less

less

to

this.

we

note

that

so

relative

small

of

might

any

of Megara.

esti-

It the

Athen-

and centralized

phratry

able

the

we

unified of

in

neighbor

to venture

that

some

Salamis,

reorganization

relationship

have

one

the sub-

that

When

at

at

than

with

was

to

Cleisthenes'

war but

figures also

are

come

not

from

Although

Gomme

on military

strength

(Population

access

and

that

to

"official

his

figures

only

the

possible.

480-479

which

not

about

ships

on

support

likely

years

we

to

take

tribe advantage

of

evidence

for

20

Persian

had

20

four

families

Attic

a city

If Athens if

of

could

seems

many

and

should

5th,

land

it

fewer for

subsisting

a family

income,

Plataea

trouble

was

cultivatable!®

population

cultivatable of

was

Plutarch, Solon 8ff.).

population

defined,

population

authorities" that

than

well

manpower,

Athenian

at

land

support

struggled

so military--system.

century

Thus,

had

Athenian

Attic

significantly

Athens

This,

that

of

sources

hoplites

have

this

will

in particular

3,000

to note

was

available

century

Athens.

century

tribal--and

in

were

of

potential

hectares

there

could

half

(10 acres)

other

(See

than

the

with

Salamis.

important

fan

6th

Athens

of

128,000

Even

the

more

hectares

centuries

During

to

four

families, 7th

not

estimate

level, !? tben

and

8th

a rough

that

first

period

classes

muster

our

p.

in which

Herodotus 3)

it

rolls"

in Books

specific

8 and

among

is

of

also

the

9 have

such the

figures

"incompetent

possible

Greek

are

to

forces

"a prima

think

during

facie

claim

47

to

acceptance," 21

about

Herodotus'

consistency would

some in

sort

part

ence

Persian

and

expect

show

them,

in

any

if

greater

with

hoplites

armed

the

at

specific is

probable

be

calculated

that

Greek

total

hoplite

does

(pace

not

Of reasonable involved

to

wae

would

have

land

battle

There would

excluding

the

mean

or

that

engagements

only

virtually the

reserved

at

that

been

8,000

ships

during

22)

does,

He

helots

was

all

Athenians

was

represents

some heavy-armed

as

one

consulted

little

evid-

and

at

other

9.90,

no

even

effort

of

another

age.

to

the

the

is reliable

(it

is

Artemision of

Plataea

force

Athentans

hoplites

as

possible

for

on board

could

Hellenic that

soldiers

It

Plataea

battle

probable

entire

at

Athenian

the light-

give

war.

that

this

involving

the

8,000 for

numbers

equal

peiloi

is

the

figures

note

if

it

almost

and

Thucydides

such

about

of military

100)

(8.43),

however,

just

time

at Artemision,

Peloponnesian

Athenian

the

ships

gives

which

But

a total

However,

experienced

internal

and

Salamis

the

from

Salamis

to Herodotus,

an

have

(Nor does

rosters

8,000

were

at

cities.

there

fleet

think

indirectly),

127

Herodotus

(9.29).

Mykale. ^

as many

the

fit

could

is very

supplied

Spartiates

Athenian

according

180

losses

elsewhere,

the

he

have

generally

information there

battle

or

excluding

15).

of

or

armies

we

rely,

individual

katalogoi

p.

fighting

have

of

last

whatever

cities

that

official

(8.1),

this

Greek

accepted

the

because

Greek

possible

Athenians

no

force

the

that

For

in Athens

the

to

Plataeans

were

for

on which

there

part

not

in part

of

seems

are

strengths

suppose)

and

it

for psiloi

Population,

only

ships

figures

the

figures

(or obtained

psiloi)

necessarily

(on the same day, 110

(the

force

these

because

(9.28).

light-armed

Gomme,

strengths

reports

of

either

total

it

help

opinion,

relative

credibility

Plataea

figures

latter his

sources

then,

contingents

the

figures,

part

these

Herodotus, manned

the

of official

because

of

I follow

the the

expected

hoplite

the Athenian

of

force,

ships

at

48

Mykale;

if

provided for

the

at

the

Sth

hoplites

century

the

get

of

Salamis.

of

the

that

ships

century

for

to move

at

at

serving

top

crew

own may

A tríreme

Athenians

would

9,000

all

to

Athenians

(rowers

200.28

(7.184) ship

and

with

two

not

have

known

could

move

with

no

doubt

have

is

for

were

180

normal

Herodotus

applies

notes

how

men,

many

every

but

together

with

in

have

force the

many

would

have

else whom to

non-Athenians been

the

resident

aliens

serving

foreigners

the Athenians

the Chalcidians,

were

could

employment

clearly

with

resident

recruit. of

suggests

the

figure at

Since

at it

with

in

full

the

son

for

it

is

they

and, were

in not

the

to of

at

their the

himself" in the it

>! and

of

Themistocles to man

is

Further,

Probably

slaves,

"was (8.17).

covered,

Salamis?

sufficient

able

Persian

Although

lending

fifth

and

triremes

oar

20

Alcibiades

all

the

Athenian

later

the

time

a safe

lent

strength

200 men. every

the

the

the

principle

in Athens, 30 perhaps

Plataeans that

Athenians

In any case,

of

battle

possible that they fought at Salamis with as few as 150 men per shíp.^? how

the

during

for

addition

manned

than

to

sources

that

beginning

Persians.

and

paying

actually

effort

the

figures

Cleinias

less

at

serving

this

and

men

considerably

made

were

a trireme

that

Late in

the

theoretical of

they

hoplites

thought.

ships

fighters)

as

9,000

military

the

by

able

whole

battle, ^^

Athenian

ravaged

the

boplites. ^.

that

sometimes

and

hundred

600

had

interpret

reported,

also

some

of

convincing,

fit

to

who

The

and

be

total

than

evacuated

to

supposition

the

try

proportion

Athenians

the

of

Herodotus

was

the

hoplites

size

been

same

necessarily

Chalcidians.

speed

his

Herodotus

480.

nearly

Artemision in

that

difficult

had

(the

amounted

supports

the

is more

the

the

it

of

provided,

to

have

is necessary

Athens

Athens

other

it

not

about

idea

ships

report

would

had

60

might

Plataea

This

assumption fleet.

at

any

battle

these

alone

wars

sent

Marathon

Athens

Persian

ships

of

This

To

But

Salamis)

battle

battle. ^) 8,000

Athenians

there

anyone

20 ships decree, the

ships

49

themselves.

In at racy,

p.

dans.

8)

But

produce

least

partial

subtracts his

6,000

the desired Some

recognition

6,000

metics

metics

seem

result

from to

have

32

of 30,000.

alternative

calculations

1.

On a moderate

assumption

per

ship

at

Salamis,

of

are

situation

Jones

36,000

(200

x 180)

been

chosen

for

For at

least

by

to

no

(Athenian

as

Democ-

get

30,000

Athen-

other

reason

than

the problem of this credible

of 150 Athenians

supplemented

there would have been per ship, there would

this

figure

as

to

see below.

Jones’,

on the average

as many

others

27,000 Athenians in 480; have been 22,500.

as

possible,

if there were

125

or

2. The Decree of Themistocles (Meiggs-Lewis 23.18ff.) calls for the mobilization of a total of 23,000 including metícs. Each of 200 ships is guaranteed 1 trierarch, 10 marines, 4 archers and 100 rowers--or 115 men, No doubt any extras would have been welcomed in the final "filling" (line 37) of the ships, but this was the number which the decree implies was known to be available.

If we

could

the correctness provisions"

would at

both

points,

possible the

hoplites This

is

the

become time

war

and the

of

the

of

>> the

alternative

Persian

sure

the

authenticity

of

this

part

of

the

of the crucial reading afvja Eexatovin line 32,

population these

be

to

evidence

the

the it

important

Persian

evidence

eivdence

a total

most

of

wars. the

figures

can

said

population which

is

some

other

of

that

insufficient

secure

However,

decree

higher be

evidence

enough

can

Gomme in

480

to man to

serve

for

the

since only and

be

180 as

size doubt

of

the

of

as

In any about for

the

basis

on

a

case,

9,000

triremes main

Athenian

is possible

considered

had

and

these "mobilization

Jones.

Athens

decree

from fit

battle. for

later

comparison. I turn

now

to

calculations

for

the

Athenian

population

at

the

50

beginning but

the

considered

berg, not

of

fifth

25,000

following

discuss

Labarbe, through 30,000

book

a number

on many

them

in detail

of

to

the

By

here.

not

devote

required

for

the

the

Navale

different

I will

only

manning

elaborate

calculation

that

the

will

mention

at

Since

serve

briefly

no

the

this

problem

ships. >”

25-30,000, is

1957)

population

199ff.). it

(Liege,

to

180

most

Themistocle

480

of

in

(p.

assumptions,

time

Athenians

de

in 480

much

of

arguments

38,000

problematic

did

number

far

La Loi

about

Beloch

a minimum set

issue,??

In his

based

as

Beloch,

the

in 499

century.

of

that

these

but of

Labarbe

Athens

Ehren-

Jules

proposed

grew

arguments

purpose

to

go

arguments

he

uses.

from

are

through

1. Herodotus’ report that Aristogoras misled 30,000 Athenians in 499 (5.97) is to be believed since it ought to have come from Hecataeus who as a Milesian ought to have known how many Athenians Aristogoras won to his (Milesian) side (p. 159).

2. Herodotus' account of the battles of suggest (to Labarbe) 35-36,000 Athenians

Plataea and Salamis (pp. 187-192).

3. The various stories involving the surplus from the silver mines can be reconciled (and explained) by supposing that in 483 there was a new surplus of 100 talents in addition to previously existing yearly surpluses of 100 talents. Although Themistocles prevented its occurring, the payment of this sum of 200 talents (1,200,000 drachmae) over a three year period at a rate of 10 dracmmae per head (Herodotus 7.144) to all males over 16 (Labarbe's explanation of Herodotus’ term orchidon) implies 40,000 such citizens (pp. 21-79).

4,

The arguments

that the the time

Pol. per

23.1)

head;

130ff.; The

30,000

adds

very

of

(3)

(plus

some

Athenian "treasury" would of the evacuation in 480.

to the conclusion

again

produces

some

36,000-38,000

eight drachmae

Athenfans

(p.

200).

Athenians little

lead

have contained 48-50 talents at It is reported (Aristotle Ath.

that at that time the Areopagus distributed

this

p.

others)

to

of our

499

will

knowledge

be of

considered the

size

further, of

the

but

the

Athenian

rest

citizen

of

did

this

body.

51

From what figures

cannot

Athens

at

genious) comes

has been

time;

arguments, with

of Hungary

this

awareness

"30,000 The

number

3.

206, is

4.

shown

(over

appears

in

1%

year)

the

Jones.

whose

Herodotus

which

passage

It seems to be easier to mislead many was not able to mislead Cleomenes but

is

(and

than

20 years.

military

extremely

cited

by

in-

Labarbe

citing

less

of

often

the

and as in fact

and

than one, succeeded

population

Labarbe,

considerable

value

Persian war

itself.

in less

political

Gomme

total

complex

not unusual

show

a figure

from

8,000

comments or

the

to the book

by

per

for

up

the reader

of Athenian

either is

built

considers

Such

by

are

that Herodotus’

number

increasing

"audacity" 211).

be clear

secure

I refer

growth

Athenians"

first

and

population

of

the

(pp. than

points

any

in the 1920-30's,

for

period

reveal

for which

rate

it should

to

a total

Thisis a rapid

"explanation"

earlier

be made

that

out

ample

said

ex-

a good

behavior

in

demographic

hard

to

judge.

Labarbe:

if he [Aristogaras] with 3 myriade of

Athenians.

(5.97)

Then

later

dust

coming

(8.65). and

the

speaks

he

repeats

from

Eleusis,

And

30,000

author

of

of

"citizens Socrates

Agathon's

victorious

mass

such

says

apparent

of Athenians--or

when

as

he

would

more

that

play at

that

than

an

be

of

"30,000"

Athenians

three

and

trial

and

that

raised

the the

was

by

Dikaios about

of the Athenians

Axiochos,

audience

(175e);

the

reports

to be used

pseudo-Platonic

being

in assembly"

immediately

number

continues

the

Symposium

myriads

the

In

myriads of

"more

author

a stock

foreigners.

three

than

of

the

The

cloud

of

myriadsof

Ecclesiazousae

30,000

figure

in

Hellenes"

for

ton Hellénon

an of

Plato

the

saw

mentions (369).

men"

a servant

(1131-2);

Axiochos

Arginusai

literary

"a

by Ariatophanes,

in number"

of

generals

the

saw

It

"three is

assembled the

Symposium

52

passage

would

suggests

be present. ?9

involved

is

theater

of

shown

large'

number

Empedocles, the

Agathon's

That

by

Dionysos

Further,

in

that

the did

this

not

frag.

Kníghts

at

when

hold

the

presented

passage.

"more

the

time

As

than

of

again

later

when

Demos

also

says

uses

to

the

again

in

the

you

as

for

and

Sausage

the

(Population,

number

p.

3)

the

n 37

figure

30,000

foreigners

to the actual

notes

(Works

when

an

Days in

'indeterminately

252;

this

see

sense;

also it

appears

Seller:

thief

complains:

And I despise you both, waiting (trismuriopalai) and ages, ages palai; palai) (1156-7).

Then

Dionysia

people.

a common

You will repent this, but I will seize of 3 myriads [of drachmas] (828-9);

and

the

Gomme

13,000

Hesiod

Aristophanes

Paphlagonian

at

could bear no relation

3 myriads--was

least

115). 38

was

figure

Symposium

30,000--or from

play

now and

for 30,000 ages ages (propalai,

Birds:

From

Libya

down

foundation

came

about

30,000

stones

cranes

who

had

swallowed

(1136-7)

and

But we sent (1178-9).

And

both

goras the

them

Herodotus'

could

number

be of

Gomme

as

comment

understood Athenian

(p.

3)

mounted

about in

thís

archers,

the

dust

sense

30,000

falcons

rising

from

rather

than

as

Eleusis

and

a specific

about

Arista-

reference

to

citizens.

considered

30,000

so

"completely

conventional"

(a

figure

for

53

the Athenian been

based

population)

originally

estimate

have

been

possible

that

30,000

erally

thought

polis

(cf.

common where

finally

total

could

we

accept

was the 6,000

These up

object is

6,000,

into

accurate

lot'?

It

seems

at

least

when

and

laws

of 30,000, on

cities)

was

the beginning

ostracism in

because

Athens

vas

gen-

a poluanthropotate

2.54).

provided

enrolled

quite

6,000

was

cannot

be

Meiggs'

ever

was

various

has

analogous thought

sure

that

of that

and

certain

"originally"?

of the

The

most

the fifth

century

just

only

argument

directed court

real

against

cases

the

an

he concluded the

deme

"Was

registers

failure

of

the

and

30,000

the real

at

time

the

for

individual

votes brought a fine and atimia,

"accurate

quarter the

a quorum,

smaller

of total

fifth

number

they

are

different

a minimum

as

a representative

quorum

was

30,000

estimate," the

two

to

it

could as

jurors

called

hoi

cast

^?

of

do

they

rather have

the

of

end

the

citizen

in one

way.

of

the

all

necessarily

'three

been

estimate

the

an

sixth. dikasteria,

body--even by

even

that if

classical

Athenaioi

a quorum

However,

as vell

for

the whole

things;

quorum

one-fifth.

I suggest

century of

of votes

citizens,

reforms"?

represented

courts

combined

grant

of Cleisthenes'

also

like

Meiggs

inference

an

second

that

not

to the "time

in

males

an

has

that

have

would

Greek

estimate,

at

may

why

to Athens

other

"it

But

Meiggs

votes,

is one-fifth adult

although

Athenians,

myriads'

6,000

'a

though

reforas?" ^!

voters

is,

that

for

Thucydides

accurate

Russell

Noting of

2.3.24;

to

even

estimate.”

attributed

relative

an

discussing,

figure

It belongs

1c, 7?

6,000

Athenian

One

made

put

accurate

were

was,

was

be worth

a stock

Hellenica

30,000

to

to get one-fifth of the jurors'

Cleisthenes'

belong

(and

there, ^

that

of

we

as

a minimum

as

citizens

is Labarbe's:

prosecutor

if

same

answer

it

not

a fairly

if

required

That

the

Xenophon,

Herodotus

total

on

Still,

putting

of

of

as

when

litigantes.

divided There

54

is,

I think,

classical actual

general

form

took

creation

& person

or

created

at

this

quorum

of

the

of

time

(late

and

including

devised

this

been

adopted

that

the

new

the

their of

that

numbers,

6,000

one-fifth

the

of

the

against

man.

It

one The

declaration demos

of war)

the

assembly

that

these

to

act

clauses

Boule

on

an

important

of

the

cannot

number 12

quorum

of

6,000

matter,

^?

P.J.

oath

at

a tíme

total

goes

the

the

when

have

the

have

be

claimed

460's.

applied

back

to

to

reforms,

that

boule's

(or

487).

actions

presence

argues

the

directed

507

to Athenaion

whose

of

been

a measure

Rhodes

the

rules

could

several

demo

the

(e.g.

plethuontos enables

convincingly "restrictive

powers

were

not

increased," "©

to me

likely

insuring

6,000

been

been

as

still

have

to

in

of

can to

aneu

incorporated

a quorum

might

a that

have

Also,

rules

it

either

effected

chosen

belong

take

Ephialtea’

for

classical

specifies

of

450's

was

votes,

6,000

114)

time

seems

the

to

extensive

determined.

logically

the

it

6,000

30,000

to

but considerably

so

ἔμελε

The

assigned

reforms

on ostracism--certainly

(I.G.

again

be

into

^?

It would

procedure,

belong

reduced

the

that

oath

probably

were

460's-early

the

law

of

these

would

cannot

Heliaia

figure

Heliaia

6,000

show

is

clauses

Thus,

not

bouletic

which

plethuon

of

Cleisthenic)

need

fragmentary

quorum

the

selection

specific rule

century,

217). ^^

one-fifth

objected

as

to

the

and

it vas

of

is

that

of

fifth

"Ephialtes'

(HAC p.

assembly

(1f

fifth

it

that

courte"

manner

the

Helfaia

old

Areopagos

450's)

dikasteria

the

existing

Cleisthenic

of

the

these

of

suggests

from

of

quarter

from

requirement

If

development

second

Hignett

early

the

from

Further,

idea

the

courts

the

time.

that

popular

460's,

procedure,

This

jury but

for

Athenians

at

in

jurisdiction

a need

of

place

to a date,

transference it

agreement

arose

population,

that

there

was

a representative at it

this can

time.

only

a concern

ekklésia If

suggest

6,000 that

in Athens

and is

to

there

coucts, be

in and

the that

considered

were

some

late the

one-

30,000

55

Athenians tus so

may

in

the

have

he may

projected

have

Gomme ment.

This

make

defends is

that

pages

total

Athenian

point

of

of

empire

and

how

of

at

only

two

needed

the

the

many

9,000

year.

of

the

hoplites were

life

fication

table),

and

Athen

Athens at

(and

this

year.

62.3)

It

since

the

meant

Cleistheníc

in

at 480

of

the

however,

limitation

to

this

is

equal

shows two

time

1s

surely

rule

(1f

at

the

terms

the

then

cites

odd

to

new

Athenian

It

bouleutai p.

help

very

much

structure

least

zeugités

at

the

same

500

would 2)

the tele, >

in estimating about

the

later

in

men

be

upper

and

(by means

that both

system

vere

statue

of Athens

it is unlikely effect

there

lead

allowing

not

of

a

the

needed

three

at

for

of

Cleisthenic

the

that

support

and his

but

from

probable

for

follow Gomme's

Boule,

that

Wilamo-

century,

came do

to

above. of

the census time.

fifth

the

quali-

A popula-

tion of 30,000 (adult males 20 and over)?!

would have slightly under 1,000 men

reaching

25,000

age

30

every

year,

*’

argu-

large

arguing

Cleisthenic)

250

οὗ

refer

there

Boule.

know

in

He

the

already

were

been

we may

it was

(The

cítizens

age

that

Herodo-

Cleisthenes,

sort

conatitution

to make

least

I suppose)

seems

probable

of

as

have

fifth

Still,

480

assumes

to

time

is

of the

24.3).

We

2).

Wilamowitz

constitution

ít

Just

a different

a little

in

time.

and

the

500 must

Cleisthenic

that

originally,

in

need

The

as Rhodes

roughly

Consideration

model

did

to

25 note

of

if,

population

these

(p.

207-8.

needs

earlier.

with

population

the

each

But

ὃ

in the middle

body

Pol.

officially

(fit)

century

crucial

(Ath.

Athenian

not

in 480

workable"

und

back

of 60,000

citizens

terms

needs

citizen

pp.

460's

years

in 499.

citizens

II,

fifty

the

Aristotle, Ath. Pol.

years

bouleutai then

is

30

each

total

(cf.

The

least

"the

Aristoteles

departure

"workable"?

35,000

Athen

of

Athenians

his

population

Athenian ask,

30,000

und

necessarily

is@goria

constitution

Aristoteles

these

not

the

assumed

Cleisthenes'

witz, to

460's--but

a population

of

about

750,

of

15,000

under

500,

and

of

10,000

to have

served

10,000 two

only

( or

all

On

could

the

other

realistic

not decisive

for

necessity

35,000

of

The population

which

undercut

the these

such (or

as

roughly

1.33/1 such in

later

sitting

to divide

total

the

on

Athenian

useful

are

accustomed the

middle then

of

are

the

the many

'have-not's'.

middle

to

can

The

matter

does

of

only

year

be is

not prove

the

classes

A prominent

of

(the

and

of

further

Figures

and

poor

and

some

the

and

and

of

the

of

the

with

the

few

this

thinking

due

1291b7-14)

in the

"proletariat" Greek

poor,

modern

the

tendency good

and

commentators

who

a basic

conflict

proletariat). 'have's' is

from

that

be

common

characteristic

rich

range

to

(Politics

and

non-hoplite

belief

seems

antithesis

in between

classed

I hope, 480.

society

a large

bourgeoisie

example

period

dictum

misled

class

in

generalized

The apparent

The the

will,

and

a preponderant

Athentan

society.

non-hoplite

non-hoplite/hoplite

classical

suggest

has

but

imply

the poor'--an

etc.,

a middle

class

of

the

theoretical

Athenians

body

classes,

the worthless,

hoplites

35,000

the

necessarily

opposing

lower

year.

estimating

Aristotle's

the many

two

in

(Labarbe),

nature

the

into

and

3/1

of

pyramid

of

assumed

a population

«ach

and certainly

figures

ratios

for

the

thinking

or

normal

of

and to

not

of

society.

and

that

be

a limitation

each

a somewhat

specific

or even

or

to

citizen

estimates

their

the rich

base

society

bad,

between

reasonable

century--does

the

now

for

(Jones)

with

councilors

difficulty

30,000

'few are

at

the

of

to 2/1

unlikely

can

480, ??

acceptance

class;

Athenians

30-year-oldas

of Athens,

common

the

new

new

any

comments

fifth

250

resort

a misunderstanding

Athenians'

the

in

remains

not

1,000

in

are

to

a council

population

I will

eligible

supported 750 or

citizens

all

it appears

result

(Gomme)

part

that

will

not

terms,

providing

problem

thetic)

ratios

hand,

total

of Athens.

argument

Since

have

for

the

basic

300.

their allowed

15,000)

terms.

considered

about

found

The

against in

the

often

57

repeated part But

comment

because at

the

that

of

the

time

not

eligible

they

be

considered

non-hoplite

absence

of

were

Ephialtes from

Ephíaltes' for

the

the

was

successful

Athens

reforms

archonship

supporters

of

4,000

or

therefor

Areopagite

"radical"

hoplites

non-hippeis nor

of

in his

reforms

(and

their

in

large

leader

Cimon.) 2»

non-pentakosiomedisnoi

for

the

Areopagus.

privileges

any

more

Why

hoplites should

than

the

thetes?

The

distinction

between

few

and

many,

rich

and

poor,

in Athenian

society

is not between hoplite and thete but rather between the really rich

(in Athenian

terms),

perhaps

the

even

these),

and

rest

have

been

the

small

landowners.

Knights

731),

point

ian

the

landowners,

20,000 of

out

the

both

population

innocent

of

and pentakosiomedimnoi

to

4

”

hippeis

some

Many and

1,000

preceding

argument

difficulties

also

in various

has

(but

of

the

perhaps thetes

not

and

pentakosiomedimnoi

knights

or so other Athenians

the

and

Athenians. the

In comparison

Much to

hippeis

wouldbe polloi been

involved

negative

in

in estimating

presuppositions

zeugitai

somewhat

(Thucydides,

all

2.13;

of

would

larger

Aristophanes,

enough. import the

underlying

and

size

of

Jones'

ís

intended

the

Athen-

apparently

calculation:

At

which

Salamis

required

(480)

the

36,000 men.

Athenians

manned

As Attica

had been

180

triremes,

evacuated

and no army was mustered this figure probably represents the whole able-bodied population including resident aliens,

so that

30,000. ?

We must

be

hoplites (fit) much

[ay emphasis]

satisfied

saying

(as

on

in 480 and not enough citizens

non-hoplites more

with

the citizens may be reckoned at about

numerous

is

not

than

ascertainable,

the

hoplites.

page

49)

that

Athens

had

to man 180 ships herself. but 12,000

we

need

not

non-hoplites

think fit

of for

about

9,000

fit

The number of them

as

being

military

58

service

may

for

Athenian

the

be

a reasonable

It would citizen

body

(e.g.,

the

to make

in

few

of

be

helpful

480.

for

small.

worked

there

was

involved not

society. was

correctly and

ao

5,000

ditions

these to

alter

Gonme

(p.

37ff.)

town"

noted

that

the male

living or

of

not

his

all

urban

of

assumption cítizens

within

of

walls.

life-style,

in

480

gradations

in

size

the

high

the

importance

More

method

to

living

the

is

demes

in

480

the

valls. ^

important

criteria

by

high

density

But are

main were

of

small of

true

and

Athenian

urban

situation

the

relative

satisfactory.

perí to astu) the

there

the

number

ascertaining

within

possible

were being

character

of

would

urban

based

were

He urban

Themístoclean

than one-seventh

Athenians

is

holding

the

entirely

(those

or "not more

characterized

of

not

of

in a

regard

was

comparatively

homogeneous

"town-demes"

within

been

population

this

land

but

Athenian

it

The mines

quality),

have

in

non-hoplites)

pp.177 -178), (of

the

evidence

that

the

living

of

likely

his

35,000

composition of

a maximum

480.

is

but

65-70

in

of

basically

population

number

the

would

the

unfit

considered

number

2,

recognized

populations,

bouleutai

On

the

and

be

the

that

activities

fit

can

deficiency

it

industry

proportion

adult

simply

a pottery

in

restricted

37).

and

the

walls whose (p.

First,

30,000

about

serious

(See Appendix

suffícient

and

more

determining

Second,

small.

"country

the

Athenians,

eyes)

probably

know

comments.

(to modern and

to

of

Perhaps

population,

Despite

brief

wealth

Athenians

male)

impossibility

a

source

(adult,

figure.

on

settlement

the whole" then

be

about

living

ís

not

living

and

con-

non-landed

income, That but

it

is

sort

of

possible

information on

the

square

kilometer

within

and

the

to note

on

other

one

the what

is

hand

city the

not

easily

to

calculate

walls

implied

extracted the by

archaeological

from

(citizen)

various record

the

ancient

population

population suggests

evidence, per

estimates

about

settle-

59

ment of the astu in 480. One-seventh women

and

2.15

sq.

of

children)?’ km? uhich

foreigners

realistic,

figure

Athenians

per

4,620 ers

per

and

about

sq.

slaves)

17,000

relatively an

area

we

assume

480,

the

people

14,000 with

and

within

of

of

that

some

raise km.

per

sq.

there

the

was

as

seems

private

Areopagus

"an industrial

aliens

is

less

belonging

of

the

tries

much

latter

at The

the

that

to

the

of ancient

and

results

later

deme

the of

Athens."

valley

Melite

62

too

one

reasonable

the

and

called

the

some

is

living even

18

walls

in

in

11,000

for

less

or

km.

century

seventh

of

urban-

480. 100,000)

dense

8,000

figure.

end

excavated

between

sq.

high

suggesting at

had

foreign-

And

fifth

London

36,000

about

in a somewhat

systematically is

walls.

or

than

1960

people

25,000, 9!

evidence

6,650

century

as

wichin

about

about

per

20,000

ia

still

(including

6,000

about

people

but

in

period

or

35,000

beginning

most

12th

Athene

only

9,300

in

slaves

for

is the more

the

astu

to

room

children

slaves

that

population

9,000

population

and

note

2,000

was

about

results

Themistoclean

and

including

A smaller,

to visualize

the

(now

walls

in

classical

either

indication

"urban"

in

in

)

Greater

total

archaeological

reasonable.

district

walls

leave

and

the

some

settlement

probably

not

women

I think

Further, wall

does

(including

km.

the

city

walls

can

while

aliens

urban

the

we

km.

within

a further

of

within

one

resident

Gomme'a

is

number

when

enclosed

That

kilometer.

A density

clear

1,000

perhaps

same

century, area

6126

square

sq.

the

the

population

estimated

ka, 99 is

Athenians

the

people

84.

within

comparison

per

population

Gomme's

per

of

citizen

area

14,300

within

as

sq.

or

Travlos

high,

would

per

ization

per

(for

people

possible

only

this

59

total

The

slaves)

By way

10,800

km.

then

100,000

km.

of

140,000

20,000.

and

of

sq.

a density

is

results

(excluding

had

Gomme's

that of

settlement the

5th

(and

published)

the

Pnyx

and

by

the

The name derives

the

excavator

from the many

60

workshops/houses one

of

these

found

workshops

Thus

to

spesk

tury

1e somewhat

quarter

of

of

the

the

fifth

the archaic

tery

occurred

in use

suggests

at

lifestyle it would

the

main

has

to be

only

sex

been were

and

the

of

the roads

fourth area

is made

the

Persian

the

the

Piraeus,

part

of

Attica,

transformed

of

classical

has

been

generally

vas

on

fewer

due

in

the

women

large

basis in

part

to

of

of

kind

represent

office-holders

females

and are

even often

a cross-section

one

when not of

families known.

all

of

the

names

of

of

of

a ceme-

fifth

century

in

conditions

four

is

later. 65

it

vithout

coastal

possible

was

vas

go

seems

comments, living

cf.

are built

the

unfortified

Athens

the second

existence

in the

cen-

so to speak

century

of

as Gomme

names

from

fourth

one

fourth

than 100 years

those

480

century.»

and

less

in

than

probably (and

to

the

'unplan-

tetrakÓmoi

into

Athens.

significantly

compete,"

the

from

since,

not

and

still

line of argument,

did

contrast

the

only

to Themistocles,

the

time

that

fifth

the houses

beginning

preceding

in

dangerous are

the

the

as

development’

walls 66

vas

as well

Further,

the

in

belonged

at that

the

which

such

along which

until

wars

within

these

century.

of

as

however,

are attested

"industrial

up

to note,

fifth

houses

type of settlement

of

ratio

this

in

one

vut

general

recently

argued,

that

and

early

Athenians

of

(perhape

important operating

Residential

whatever

urban

is

industrial

period, 64

And

harbor

as

22.2),

this

time

become.

and

there men

the

between

The It

shown

the

case,

thoroughly

ned')

can be

a more "rural"

that

most

in

within

In any say

It

century

back

have

area.

misleading.

Themistocles

to

the

area

Plutarch, into

in

or

subject

of

prosopographícal

citizen female

population

(p.

another, known

Further, but

the

81), from

to

some

that

of

than

Athens This

a field

have

are

is

a

"the vast majority

had

in which

daughters

prosopographical

rather

debate.

evidence,

infanticide.”

notes

are

Athenians

the

skewed

data

towards

of

women the do the

not

6]

wealthier,

socially

the “demographic average, 99

afford

In

less

especially

frequent

is

follows

and

p.

42).

sexes

but

the

such This

"in

age

of

slightly

an Athenian

30, 9?

an

different

family

could

born

reaching

average

keep alive.

It is poseible

Athenian

that

from the

probably

ill

the age of

family

Who knew what might

might

happen

in

not

not

have

that

social

assume from

ratio

can

as war

will

assess

thirty

years

after

changes

as

seem

to

The

next

fixed

wanted,

some and

But

to

the

by

clear

have

any

the

of

sex

the

in

women

may

such

cases

infanticide

of

is

have

been

children

not

an uneven

classical

likely

in

be ussumed

In

classical

life-table

to be

no.

time

(in

favor

antiquity." ^)

evidence, ^!

ratio

model

is

at any particular

to

the

This

discussion

Athens 35

of

was

not

population

is different

(see

for

close

to

1:1--unless

population

of

Athens

sig-

the two

other

2

discussion amount

of

establish

evidence

Salamis,

"perception" throughout

that

in,

small

important

chapter

men;

poor,

strata

that

a long

the

than

especially

her

generally

enter

been

often

been

The risk of dying

has

is

families

substantiated

I will

more

common,

all

considering it

was

572 of all children

it could

states

different

above

change

Atheniane.

Atheniana

average,

some

victims

some may

Pomeroy

ratio

nificantly

ially

the

the

child

the

or

females)

perception

factors

on

reaching

been

fertile

Sarah

which

and

every

have

(especially

sex

of wealthier

active)

This is not to deny that infanticide was at times practiced or that

may

been

(or legally

With only

half

have wanted

females

men)

general

than

the future?

have

behavior"

infanticide.

5 and

well

prominent

and

of

the

evidence,

a clear

for then

the

But

starting

Athenian

finally

in

any

point.

population

attempt

to

in

attempt The in

analyze

480,

espec-

to detect

rest

of

this

(particularly) such

occurred,

point

after

the

Persian

wars

in a consideration

of

the

the

62

Athenian

population

is usually

discussions

of Gomme

pléthos

politon

ton

way between throughout

these these

and Jones). we

need

to

years, ??

the

other

claims

would hand,

that

and

their

evidence

between

such

numbers

74

that

population of

generally

next are the

cluster

of

were

a way--to the

hoplites

the

draw

of

be

the

within figures

from

size

seen

the

first

useful

450's.

In what

follows

I have

otherwise

(δα

in the

dia to

population

a steady

half-

(even)

we would

just

rise take

that a pre-industrial

reat

by

of

in

the

the

contrary growth

Gomme.

to

may

Jones,

Athenians

second

half

both

these

have

in

on

and of

the

views,

fact

occurred

20-30 years.

for

and

and

that,

the

a graph

rapidly

population

of

proposed

the

war

Aristotle's

there was

extent

figures

75

to

increased

it will most

the

military

dates

of

that

again

accepted

to evaluate

idea

implies

if we

especially

However,

suggests

the Peloponnesian

But a priori it is doubtful

480 and 430 occurred The

events

in

so

of

in order

some

Gomme

distinguishes

Pentakontaetia. the

grow

But have

two points.

the mid-point on the curve. population

the outbreak

the

come

study

from

given

followed

of

fifth

Thucydides' a few

report

crucial

Thucydides'

In 460 or 459 two hundred ships of the Athenians their allies were diverted from operations in Cyprus in to come to the aid of the Libyans who had revolted from

century

Athenian

of

events

the

their

ordering. and order Persia. (1.104)

At to

apparently about che same time the Athenians sent a fleet Halieis where they were defeated by the Corinthians. (1,105.1)

After this war broke out between Aegina and Athens, There was a large sea battle involving allies on both sides, The Athenians captured 70 ships and began a siege, (1,105.2)

63 iad

Then, allies

aroused in

by the presence

the

Megarid,

from the oldest fought

owe

and

a successful

the

of the Corinthians

Athenians

the youngest battle

at

put

and

together

(hoplites

and

their

a force

psiloi)

and

Megara. (1.105. 3-6)

(At about the same time (kata tous chronous toutous) the Athenians began building the long walls to Phaleron and the Peiraeus,

(1.107.1)] a

In 457 (probably) the Athenians marched pandemei against the Peloponnesians at Tanagra. The force totaled 14,000 including 1,000 Argives and an indeterminate number of other allies. 6 The Peloponnesians were victorious in a battle involving great

loss

(phonos

polus)

on both

sides.

Sixty-two days later the Athenians marched back into Boeotia and

defeated

the

Boetians

at

Oenophyta. (1,108, 2-3)

(Meanwhile,

they

finished

the

long

walls .] (1.108.3)]

After this, (meta tauta) Aegina surrendered and agreed to tear down its walls, turn over its ships and pay tribute.

(1,108.4) Meanwhile, the Athenians and their allies still in Egypt met disaster, 77 Fifty additional Athenian and allied ships arrived too late to be of help and most of these (tas pollas) were also lost, (1.109)

Then

(1)78

the Athenians: sent

and Phocians to king, Orestes,

Pharsalus

to

a force

restore

including

the

exiled

Boeotians Thessalian (1,111.1)

And a little later (meta de tauta ou polldi) sailed with then sailed

1,000 Athenians

Pericles to Sicyon, defeated the Sicyonians, to Oeniadae, besieged the town but failed to

and take

it.

(1.111, 2-3)

Three by

years

the

later

Athenians

(451) and

a five years

the

truce was

agreed

upon

Peloponnesians.

(1,112.1) To 454 of

use

Labarbe's

definitely

show

citizens,

fronts

disaster

there

at

It ations the

is

and

and

what

course

Athenian

make

it

for

the

size

of

Athenian

follows

is

not

probability

of

fight

of

by

(Thucydides

after

the

of

coming

quantify

an

impression

of

an

reluctant

to

operate

at

least

and

Megara)

So

the Athenians

had

for

and to

how

between

on

79

and

many

the

and

459

and

abundance three

until

Athenian

the

citizens

of

and

the

that

the

there

in

all

were

in

these of

throughout

the

can

oper-

to

precise

still

of

each but

any

the

usual

rather

from

480 to

were

began

Egypt

to

following

surrender

of

six

the

450.

pay

rather and

Athenians. °!

before

left

What

for

accountof metics years

see

trireme,

preferring

Aegina

expedition

way:

on

population

end after the this

one

citizens,

(taking

siege

these

rowing alongside

assumptions

of men

allies

forces the

of

citizen

over

that

disastrous

evidence

in

that

However,

number

numbers

been

in

Thucydides record

conservative the

support

uncertainties—see notes

from

Athenian

clearly

have

population,

actual

of

allied

could other

extract

increase

remained

its

some

certain

one-third

Tanagra

xenoi)

Athenian

and

implies

might

the

1.99)

Thucydides

apparently

give

defeat.

to

450's

Then,

we

least

Aegina

by

(and

the

xenoi)

with

factors

argument

that

battle

Athenians

and

of

Aegina

other

impossible

other

battle

that (and

a significant

at

back

participation

an

not

Egypt,

implies—given

I assume than

true

These

record

set

the

energy

were in

metics

90

that

level

not

activities

time?

83)

evidence

and

(e.g.,

were

of

the

apperently

this

Athenains,

82

audacity

simultaneously

Egyptian were

They

terms,

and

before

ended

the

years,

Aegina.

Therefore,

65

1)

2)

If the 200 ships there would have

in Egypt each had a complement of 175 men 82 been 35,000 men involved and 11,700 Athenians.

If the Athenians

and

their

allies

captured

70 Aeginetan

ships,

they may have numbered about 100 themselves. Again giving each ship 175 men, this would result in c, 5,800 Athenians. There may have been a considerable number of Athenians of hoplite as well as non-hoplite status engaged in the siege, since Thucydides says that the Corinthians thought that Athens would be very weak without them and in fact Athens had to call out the youngest and oldest to resist the Corinthians in the Megarid. I assume

here

that

during

all

the

the Athenians

engaged

in the sea battle

remained

siege.

3) The pand@mei

army at Tanagra

is somewhat

difficult

to understand.

It cannot (it would seem) mean ‘with all their military since troops were still engaged elsewhere, It probably

‘with all available

forces'--or

perhaps

including the youngest and oldest. some 1,000 along with the Argives,

Athenians 4) Adding

(plus

In

addition

Tanagra

to

or

trates

at

figure

for

all

those home the

of 1,

involved

these

c.

2,

and

3, we have

in military

29,500

there

working

on

abroad.

In all,

some

Athenian

(adult,

male,

at least

operations

were

Athenians

or

the age

groups'

If we give the other allies this would result in 12,000

some psiloi?).

the results

Athenians

‘from all

force' means

the

the

at

possible

long

40,000

walls

or

same

time,

light-armed

or

Athenians

militarily

29,500

the

those is

troops

serving

perhaps

politically

at

as magis-

a minimum

active)

population

in the 4508. This

figure,

ascertainable. Athenian

years. would zation,

However,

military

Certainly have

29,500

had

force

the

it in

little

intended

is the

it should

only

important 450's

manning

a suggestion;

realize

implicit

be at least

difficulty

to

as

the

order

in Thucydides’

clear

that

200

ships

the

real

of

magnitude

account

the Athenians at

a time

of

total

of

16 of

440's

supports

of

the

the

various

idea

that

cleruchies the

city

and

was

colonies

overflowing

unthe

these

in the 450's complete

mobili-

9^

Consideration in

16

sent with

out

by Athens

citizens

in

66

the mid-fifth servative at

century.

With

estinate, 85

Tanagre),

the

and

substantial

additional

Athenians

still

losses

losses

were

in Egypt

elsewhere

able

(or

felt

on even

(e.g., the

the most

the phonos

need)

to

send

polus

out

haps 6-8,000 Athenians to colonies and cleruchies in the next decade. has

collected

the evidence

"several

thousands”

1,000

2,000

or

to Jones

were

of 3,000)

were

argument,

cleruchies.

Drawing

independent

Jones

then

registers been

a fantastic

permanent

cleruchs

waste of

Athens

of

this had

such

twenty

years

earlier.

uchs

did

out

of

and

live

the

Athenian

allies.

arose,

as were,

we

that

in

the

of

the

as

8,000

Sinope)

450's,

440's,

If we

to

sometimes now

move

would

to

a "term

on

of

their

assigned

lots,

probably

imagine,

the

could live

were

colonists

loss

of

perhaps

afford

to

send

in

foreign

lands,

(e.g.

Euboea).

from

450's

to

431,

if by

suppose

some at

for

it

427 in

10,000 least

the

the

would

quite

that

not

here

while

cler-

control need

is

simply wars

as many

(e.g.

the

sent

if

the

perhaps

distant

of

the for

in

a

necessarily

service

point

as

"they

garrisons

and

have

context

440's

Athenians 3,000

appears

military

citizens

the

military

new

citizens, °’

“It

it was

to

on

entirely

Thucydides’

as

But

sometimes

all,

In

that

serving

according

Athenian

176).

175)

also,

out

close by the

p.

liable

an

regular

at

to Brea,

theory

able-bodied

But

(p. to

the

2,700

true.

possible

on

as

of

that

it is crucial

on Jones!

kl@roi

Democracy,

art"

think

outpost

their

is

They

the

an

1,000 minimum

a colony

remained

surely

(a

I do not

sterilise

is

others

per-

Jones?Ó

calculated

to Sinope,

between

livedon

and has

necessary

simply

have

(Athenian

It

after

Athens

citizens

and

can

Although

as

manpower

become

(600

thousand

distinction

statement

(apepempsan)

colonies

are probably

have

Lesbos"

out"

go

several

a cleruchy

necessarily

garrison

post-plague

common

and

that

not

while

given kleroi.

the

and

off as coloniats

a few words

polis

argues and

sent

to Histiaia)

the present

and

on cleruchies

con-

Thrace,

losses

were

67

probably

replaced

population

as

and

a whole

Turning

once

again

431,

find

that

we

forts

and

there

replacing

the

his

claim

that

But

his

1,000 is

see

pp.

wealth of the

century

half,

and

above)

in more

(e.g.

so

with

still

lites

the

ian

hoplites

other Athenian youngest

and

The an

increase

lation

may

and

the

oldest

hoplite of have

decades.

at

any

increased

332

of

more

had

the

450's

Further,

hoplites

Plataea

afford

more

these

ana

12,000

83).

from

all

well

been

on

over

dramatically.

20 years. If we

(or

second

the

at

These

the

assume

the

hoplite

increasing

half in

some of

the first

were

ranks

of

hop-

18,000)

Tanagra,

Athenwhen

be the

groups.

order the c.

with

12,000 may

age

And

"oldest"

explains

than

perhaps

the

some

the

into

proof.

the

there

in

including

so

that

metics

of

and

hoplites

available

a little

in

In

although

177),

cleruchs)

up

23,000

(see note

have

hopla

p.

the

method

Athenian

Dem.

effect

moved

(plus the

probability

who

with

of

on

in

of

others

claim

in

walls.

susceptible

his

(Ath.

colonists

inherent

could in

to

the

in

not

suggests

the

Jones'

14,000

a doubling

able

have

out

others

population least

being

and

at

others

to Gomme ' a, 99

is not

but

450's.

of Athens

proportion

figures.

the

the

some

guarding The

ephebes

hoplites

as Jones

plus

preferable

method

of

strength

oldest)

year-olds

(see below) level

hoplites

archers,

is

least

comparable

contained

plus

at

would

with

not directly

forces

show

sending us

his

the

hoplite

in these

2,000

8,000

that,

Athenians

following are

with

factor

leaves

non-hoplite

if

Athenians

This

40-60

oldest,

hoplites

comparable

abundant in

(7,000

mounted

figure

include

the

and

‘unknown’

a specific

18,000

increase,

and

hoplites

beyond

13,000

youngest

cavalry

It is possible

resulted

this

by

for

time

metics,

is the main

hoplites

47-48

that

became

grown

figures

at

"oldest"

are

population.

were

1,200

the

or

8?

not

Thucydides’

unknown

cavalry)

fleet,

necessarily

reserve

23,000

followed

had

(including

were

in the hoplite

more Athenians

there

16,000

addition

to

perhaps

of

15,000

non-hoplite

40,000

in

457—popu-

Athenians

68

in the 450's, 25,000. not

the number

Finally,

possible?

20,000,

so

of

although

neither

resulting

in

would

not

then

non-hoplites.

more

nor

just

of

Jones

about

have

actual

the

same

been

Athenians

in

were

total

that

of

they

total

(c.

15,000

non-hoplites

numbered

40,000)

in

much

as was

in

but

431

in proportion

than

the

of

450's,

to 431

more

than

not

as

to

hoplites

but

is

suggested

in the population from the 450's

numbers

wealthier

from perhaps

number

suggests

The main change

have

increased

to

necessarily

numerous. The

may

have

480

to

may

even

ancient

grown

some

that

as

evidence, much

as

in

the

40,000

be

possible.

population

in

this

then,

50Z

in

early

period

are

few years

after

Attica?)

would

have

lean

and

fewer

this

might

have

ravaged) losses

and were

suffered

urbanization

during

have

replace

the

to come

and

hard

together

empire

the fifth

into (Ath.

to

Mykale, 31

century.

growing

even

more

proportion Aristotle

the astu "from 24.1).

Even

if

this

Athenian

might

expect

post-

how of

pervasive Attica

have

losses been

its to

that

and is

an

was

following

Athenians

the fields"

the

marriages

difficult

reports

50,000

scarce,

beyond

of

to

in

(and

military

would

25-30,000

25,000

we

Athens

of Athens

much

whatever

of

ravaging

immediately

these

before

increasing

Pol.

years

from

First,

judge

how

from

affecting

been

to

judge

with

(perhaps

1002

factors

have

is

and

Athens,

may

population

years,

of

the Persian

is difficult

"fat"

20

figures.

It

been

factor

increase

and

citizen

about

these

Food

Plataea to

of

the

negative

by

Salamis

it

have

Still,

negative

of

the Athenians state

would

vould

A second

as

An

two

ones.

that

course

450's.

born.

(just

Salamis,

population

their

had

replaced.

at

conditions

been

children

there

the

masked

first

poned

suggests

Furthermore,

the

the

would

calculation

Gomme

a minimum for the 450's. 431

thetes

effect

actually

in which Athens

losses

pre-var

which

level.

estimate) living

in

Aristeides

is

urban encouraged

take up the business regarded

as

the

of 92

unhistorical,

69

one

can

or,

in the second

would

hardly

have

either

led

than

in

tive

effect

areas

the

1800)

rapidly

but

make

Population

and

smaller

effect

cially,

which

doubt

suggest even

ians

crisis'

assume

unhealthy negative

that

the

gross

(see

the

then,

that

with

such

prosperity above,

in

an

means

p.

43)

the

years

very much a return

level requires

(or

have

of perhaps city

to

would

been

surplus

have

the

from

to

had

to

fifth

acute

nega-

rural was

900,000

8,000-10,000

continue

more

instance,

1700

in

a year...

grow”

(Wrigley,

a proportionately

significant.

during

unsanitary

a uniformly

for

in

astu,

The

Piraeus

century,

would

espe-

have

been

are

completely

the

citizen

unquantifiable,

population

18

but

they

likely

do

to have

been

suggests. increase

to be

increasing

in

the

460's,

decade)

normal something

As noted

We

450's,

and

earlier

The

but

The

standard

response

is unsatisfactory

grounds.

immediately

conditions, more.

explained?

population'

historical

richer. to

to

on

the

shortages

have

London,

550,000

in

trade

live.??

in

and

prosperity

(from

factor

rapidly

factors

increase

increase, ^4

This

to

cities

(walls

or private

crowding,

food

depend

works

residence

to

possible

They

the

up

Due

pre-modern)

allow

ought

place

and

in public

business

take

without.

immigration

and

grew

evidence

is

in Athenian

became

pected

can

to

century

150). but

Athenians

growth.

"a net

p.

public

disease,

to

employment

temples),

(or

or

surplus

on Atheng,

than

of

18th

required

two

‘increasing

believe

early

These

How,

crease

the

size

for

distance

population

burial

we

of

pre-industrial

History,

a very

larger

graphic

in

the

a short

constant

actually

good

or

number

spreading

natural

to maintain

growing

no

walls

country,

opportunities

of the century,

a rapid

on

new

increasing

the

and

that

half

an

within

conditions

to

doubt

can

imagine

440's,

following

but

growth

Athenian

of

502

evidence

it

is very

"boom" or

even

does

on

significant

Salamis

a recuperative

both

not

of demoin-

difficult many

to

Athen-

is to be ex25%

above

seem

to

'prefit

the

70

model

of

a population

crisis, would

then be

recovering

"ripe

Not

only

year

in

over

a period

for

does the

the

and

the

at

and

Arginusae

tribes

vere

In more

rejected

special

tion

in

of

the

the Then

seems to

skills of

or

grown

at

it

I think

that

one

population

that

should

of

demographic

a generation

Population

and

the

when

History,

rapid

rate

its

higher

retained

the

or

But

entry

creation

grounds we

of

that

should

necessarily

explanation

of

is

not

those

of

perhaps

give

the

restoration

battle

possible

those it

ranks special

vho is of

that

fought also

children 100

or

provide for

the

be

12 per

of

the

Salamis

the

later

fifth

dÉmos made

. 99

as

major

demes,

reasons

in defence

of

the

noticeably

Such

explanation abundant

rowed The

as

and of

Athens.

newcomers

common

marriage.

best

who

phratries

suppose

that

economic

prosperity

enabled

the

7°

the Plataeans

(403)

crises

or

century.

democracy

were

may

fifth

those

to

simply

into

un-Athenian

early

Athenians

for

is

to

Athenian with

the

This

that

citizenship

possible

Athenians,

wealth,

and

of

Athenians.

the

and

of

considered

suppose

the Athenian

ín

be

it would

century

population

possible

70).

level

or

military new for

Athenians-the

citizen

rapid

popula-

450's. it

it

p. of

non-Athenians

new

fifth

479

the

their

Athenían

vere

entirely

after

sort

in

but

the

subsequent

admit

have

admission

it.

citizens

and

to

25%

Salamis,

in

on

of

later

entered

some

the

some

helped

times

service,

growth

or

villing

aliens

perhaps

(405)

it

resident

and

Athenian

nothing

in the

Attica

settled

by

attitudes

(406)

and

the

perhaps

some

generation.

resulting

Samians

Arginusae,

one

during

(Wrigley,

seem

considerations,

in

say

check"

following

phratries,

even

of

by

increase

population

than

century

evacuation

to

1.e.,

sources

Furthermore,

losses

severe

decades

these

significant

increase, "?7

be

fourth

(429)

of

and

immediately that

two

increase

“non-natural demes

a further

longer

“startling”

rapidly

Athenian

first

In view

the

suffering

population

to

7]

remain

at

children

born

expanding the

this

have

was

been

in

economy

increase

century

high

will able

a "boom"

that

be to

the these

to

find

they

come

of

not

support

years

by

Athenian,

Aristotle

prosperity

there

And

a larger

number

is

more

Athens

of

If

in

and

an

chance the

citizens

the

that

mid-fifth

than

would

some

is

perhaps

depend

upon

but were

foreigners

acceptance

as

an

less

and

crucial

were

not

if

the

the responsibility would

alien

have but

entered

by

it

is

result

of the the

individ-

demes

fraudulently

of

and

pretending

102 seems

Athenians

Pericles’

age,

of

war.

earlier.

t6n AthénaiOn,

'official'

a wave

109]

not

And

Peloponnesian

cyclical,

did

not

and

enough

admissions

phratries

situation

the

sources

phratries.

of

οὗ

when and

and

time

the

and

a plethos

the

of

demes

was

them

silence

ual

Thus,

lucky

fifty

the démos

a native

are

employ

of

be

to

permanent

decisions

to

down

awaiting

conceivable

Finally, accepted

level

to in

have

451/0

citizenship

been B.C. law

correct The

will

at

least

possible be

taken

in

believing

relation up

ín

between

Chapter

IV.

that this

there

72

Chapter

1. P. "Gomme,

Footnotes

26. Hereafter, in this section, Population.” Gomme's discussion

in his A Historical

this book will be of the population

Commentaryon Thucydides

nificantly from his earlier will be discussed below. 2. under

III.

comments.

(II pp.

Other

33-39)

estimates

Jones here follows A.R. Burn's analysis of the Principate (Past and Present 4 (1953),

of

referred to as of Athens in 431

does the

not differ

Athenian

the population 2-31).

of

B.C.

sig-

population

Roman

Africa

3. D. Whitehead (The Ideology of the Athenian Metic, Cambridge, 1977) briefly considers Thucydides 2.13 for the purpose of estimating the metic population and comes to no conclusion other than "something has gone seriously wrong" (p. 98). I think, however, that he dismisses too quickly the usefulness of Thucydides’ data.

4, "The Probable (1966) 245-264. 5. See "Age and countries," United

6.

See Keith

Age

7.

The

Hopkins,

specific

Section

E,

art. For

2.

cit.,

what

figures p.

of

the Roman

Population,"

Population

Studies

20

Sex Patterns of Mortality, model life-tables for under-developed Nations Population Studies, no. 22, New York, 1955.

range as 20-30 years. growth see below,

1980,

Structure

are

For

p.

this

cited

the

264

and

suggests

in The

average

p.

250,

about

New

figure

York see

n.14,

possible

Times,

who

sets

Athenian

Sunday,

Population

the Roman population

August

Facts

at

31,

Hand,

(UNFPA, New York 1980). 8. For a concise account of the complex problem of the relationship between the industrial revolution and modern population growth see E.A. Wrigley, Population and History (New York, 1969), p. 146ff. D.E.C. Eversley, "Population, Économy

and

Society,"in Population

in

History,

is also

helpful

for

the non-specialist.

9. The model life tables are of course not infallible. They are built on the basis of actual census data which can contain errors, but overall they "tabulate high probabilities" (Hopkins, art. cit., p. 251). The life table represents a stable population, i.e. one with a constant age and sex pattern, This may not always have been the case in Athens, but distortions of the structure caused by such things as war or plague would have been temporary, barring significant permanent change in fertility. 10.

Wrigley,

Population

and

History,

p.

70,

1l. Such proper adaptation of population to natural, population growth 16, I suggest, the

tion 12.

policy.' Such

See also below note

rapid

increase

(or

more

and

in

general

Chapter

3,

p.

62ff.

resources, not the danger of rapid, basic concern of ancient 'popula-

68. properly,

replacement)

is

"one

of

the

most

73

widely and

documented

is most

scarcity

and want.

bers may p. 68).

also

13.

See

also

15.

due

of demographic

to

the

Decreased

play

the

the Greco-Roman 14. will take

phenomena

clearly

a role

of

CP 75

due to the

Eversley,

D.

history"

of marriages

mortality

(see

comments

World,"

"boom"

loc.

Engels,

(1980),

cit.;

“The

pp.

(Eversley, and

"weeding

of

after

out"

Wrigley,

Problem

art.

births

cit.,

of weaker

Population

Female

p.

a period

44) of

men-

and

History,

Infanticide

in

112-120.

In the following discussion "population of Athens," unless otherwise noted, refer to the adult, male citizen population of military age and ability. I age 60 to be the upper limit, age 18 the lover limit of military service.

It should be noted

the "rapid to think.

that διὰ τὸ πλῆϑος τῶν πολιτῶν

does not mean

'due to

growth of the population"' as Gomme (p. 12) and Hignett (p. 245) seem To translate the phrase that way would be to prejudge the issue at hand.

16. Cf. the comment of B. Manville, (The Evolution of Athenian Citizenship, dissertation, Yale University, 1979, p. 46): "We might suspect that at least some of the restless Megarians, Korinthians, Euboians were not so restless as to travel

to Manga Graecia 17.

Ehrenberg,

or Ionia The

but

Greek

resettled

State,

18. For what it 16 worth, we (excluding Greater Athens) was

Table 19.

p.

closer

to home,

in Attica."

27.

can note that in 1960 only cultivated. (Economic and

about one-third Social Atlas of

of Attica Greece,

301). See

Appendix

II,

p.

202,

note

19.

20. In this context it seems possible that one of the reasons Solon was concerned with the enslavement and sale abroad of Athenians was the effect that such Practices had on the Athenian military strength. 21. XIX,

Both quotations p. 363.

are

from

How

and

Wells,

A Commentary

on Herodotus,

Appendix

22. This should not be taken to imply, however, that lists of non-hoplite thetes were not kept in Athens. For some comments on the katalogoi and the lexiarchikon grammateion see M.H. Jameson, "Apollo Lykeios in Athens, Archaiognosis 2 (1981) note 25. 23.

I accept

tion of Munro

Herodotus'

have

had

than

in 480 when

24, By triremeg lites in

110

(JHS 24 (1903)

a significantly

smaller

they were

the time of the (epibatai) were 479.

ships

despite

146-7). fleet

fighting

the

objections

and

It is most reasonable in

479

when

they

were

clever

reconstruc-

that the Greeks would fighting

on

two

fronts

on one.

Peloponnesian War, the heavy armed usually thetes. But they may have

soldiers on Athenían been self-armed hop-

74

25. Nepos, Miltiades 5.1; the Suda διν. Ἵππιας. Justin (2.9) gives 10,000 Athenians plus 1,000 Plataeans instead of the 9,000 Atheniane plus 1,000 Plataeans of Nepos and the Suda. He appears to have added in the Plataeans twice. 26. I am following Gomme in drawing a distinction between fit Lowever, I think it possible that only those who were fit would logoi in the first place. 27.

It

1s not

clear,

however,

to what

extent

Attica

as

and unfit be put on

a whole

was

hoplites. the kata-

ravaged.

28, See, for example, Thucydides 6.8.1 and 31.1 on the preparations for the Sicilian expedition and also Plato, Critias 119a-b. In general on the crew of the trireme see Casson, Ships and Seamanship in the Ancient World (Princeton, 1971), p. 300ff. and Morrison and Williams, Greek Oared Ships 900-323 B.C. (Cambridge, 1968), pp. 254-279. 29. See Decree of

the comments of M.H. Jameson, "The Provisions for Mobilization Themistokles," Historia 12 (1963) 394 and notes 18 and 19.

30. Cf. M-L 23).

lines

30-31

of

the Themistocles'

Decree

(Hesperia

31

(1962)

in

the

310-315;

31. If there were empty places it 18 hard to imagine that slaves would not have been employed. fm Athenian use of slaves in warfare see R. Sargent, CP (1927) 209-11, 264ff. Cf. also Isocrates 8.48. 32. Jones elsewhere (Athenian Democracy, Appendix, p. 165) calculates were 7,000 metícs in 431. I think one would expect more of an increase figures imply.

that than

22

there his

33. In general I think the decree contains an authentic tradition of a decree Proposed by Themistocles. However, since 20,000 was a stock figure for the population of Athens in the fourth century (e.g., Plato, Critias 112b; Dem. 25.51) thís may be a part of the decree which was affected by fourth century transmission.

See also

the objections

of Meiggs

in Bury-Meiggs^,

p.

530.

The

reading

álvj]a ἑκατόν

was not in the first edition of the inscription (Hesperia 29 (1960) 198-223) thus has sometimes been missed (e.g. by Podlecki in his Life of Themistokles (Montreal, 1975), p. 148). It is accepted by Meiggs and Lewis. 34. Die Bevolkerung der Griechisch-Romischen Welt, p. the idea that the ships in 480 were smaller than in the 35.

The

36.

Despite

37. vote

Greek

State

(New

Athenaios'

York,

statement

1964),

pp.

(5.217a)

33

and

that

prefix tpı@-has (1952) 172-190,

a similar effect in the esp. 178 and note 28.

60; 99. This is based on latter part of the century.

248.

it

was

Also we might wonder if the total citizen body of 499 or the condemnation of the generals.

38. The Eranos 52

and

word

performed

took

part

τριπάτωρ

at

in

the

the

;

see

Lenaia.

assembly

B.

Hemberg,

75

39,

See

also

Jones,

Athenian

40.

CR 78 (1964), 2-3.

41,

Ibid., p. 3.

Democracy,

p.

161,

42. The question of the use of the quorum in Athens is an interesting one which has not been much studied. Bonner and Smith, for example, discuss extensively (The Administration of Justice from Homer to Aristotle II, chapter 7, passim) the role of the 6,000 without ever considering what fraction this was of the total. E.S. Stavely (Greek and Roman Voting and Elections) mentions a "quorum" of 6,000 for certain meetings of the Athenian assembly (p. 78) and notes that "the total citizen population at the time of Pericles has been estimated at between 50,000

and 60,000" (ibid.). He does not give.his source or clarify what is meant "the time of Pericles" or discuss when this 'quorum' was instituted. 43.

See

44.

Hignett,

Bonner

date

in the

for

example,

and

Smith

470's, A.

HAC,

pp. (The

216-221. Administration

but Hignett's

Andrewes,

The

opinion

Greeks,

p.

of

Justice

I,

pp.

now the generally

222-223)

accepted

Op.

cit.,

p.

206.

But

see

previous

The number is close at Salamis. 15,000

possible

increase

a

See,

223-225. Rhodes τὸ 'ABevatov

note.

47. G.T. Griffith, "Isegoria in the Assembly at Institutions: Studies Presented to V. Ehrenberg, 48. ships

prefer

one.

179.

45. See Bonner, "The Minimum Vote in Ostracism," CP 8 (1913) (The Athenian Boule, pp. 194-207), however, considers τὸ δέμο πλεϑύοντος as meaning simply ‘Athenians in assembly." 46.

by

Athens," 115-38.

Ancient

Society

and

to 36,000 (180 x 200) but is not based directly on 180 hoplites come from 8,000 at Plataea (7) and from “the

of citizen population between 480 and 430"

(p. 25 note 1);

20,000 is then added on the basis of the 180 ships and the Cleisthenic constitution. Needless to say, “the possible increase in citizen population” is just what I am trying to determine. 49. The one piece of direct Memorabilia 1.2.35, but it is Erythrai (M-L, 40.11).

evidence for this age also specified in the

50. See also Chapter IV, p. 92. census qualification he goes on to whole citizen population (Athenian

qualification is Xenophon, regulations drawn up for

Although Rhodes states a belief in this cite population figures (Gomme's) for the Boule, pp. 2-3).

51, The 18- and 19-year-olds are left out here simply in order to use the numbers 30,000 and 10,000. In the first population they would number about and proportionally less in the others.

52.

But,

it is a decisive

argument

against

there

being

a limitation

to two

round 2,400

terms

76

and an exclusion of thetes at the same time. Thus when we tion to two terms we should probably aseume that there was

know there was ἃ limitano exclusion of thetes.

The council set up for Erythrai had 120 members and no one could serve twice within a period of four years (Meiggs-Lewis 40.12). Assuming that each man served as often as possible and taking 20 years as the length of the average career (to account for mortality after age 30), then each Erythraian would serve four terms. This would require then 30 new men each year. A population of 3,000 would have 100 men reach 30 every year and does not seem too large for Erythrai which paid a maximum of seven talents tribute. 53.

See,

54.

Andrewes

speaking

for

of

example, (The

Hignett,

Greeks

the revolution

HAC,

(New

p.

York,

of 411:

196.

1971),

"But

p.

210)

says

the ordinary

something

hoplite

similar

remained

when

suspicious

of the intentions of the extremists and in the end sided with the people instead. The noticeable socíal gulf here was rather between the middle class and the really rich, roughly the division between hoplite and cavalry." I would only object that the hoplites ("middle class") and the "people" or demos are not really so distinct. As Jones (Athenian Democracy, p. 90) remarks, "I have depicted a society in which, except for a small group of relatively very rich men at the top and a larger group

of

casual

labourers

at

the

bottom,

wealth

was

evenly

graduation from the affluent to the needy very gentle." (1972) 123 and below Appendix II, pp. 177 - 178, In 480 social scale may have been even less pronounced.

55.

Athenian

Democracy,

p.

of course,

that

the number

original

Cleisthenic

distribution.

Hesperia Supplement and quotas.

15

a deme

chose was based

with a house in Melite who does not, I think,

The bouleutai quotas are known from fourth the usual (probably justified) assumption is

of Attica, utai lists

the

JHS the

92

Gomme in assuming that enough Athenians to justify considering the bouleutai quotas of various parts of Attica. (I am also

of bouleutai

population.) Themistocles Phearrios, stocles 22.2) is a prominent exception of this assumption.

but

and

8.

56. Here and in what follows I follow were still living in their demes in 480 as accurately reflecting the population

assuming,

distributed,

See also Rhodes, both extremes of

See John (1975)

for

(Plutarch, affect the

on its Themivalidity

century and later inscriptions, that the quotas go back to the

Traill,

The

a general

Political

discussion

Organization of

the

Finally, it might also be noted that although there were apparently sort of pre-Themistoclean walls in Athens (see Eugene Vanderpool in QOPOZ p. 156ff.), the walls serving as the boundaries of urban living for Gomme Themistoclean--and post-480.

boule-

some , are

57. This is calculated by multiplying 35,000 by 4. This is satisfactory for present purposes, but probably the factor should be closer to 4.5 for a population likely to have had a life expectancy at birth of 25 years. (Gomme argues on p. 7Sff. for an average Athenian family of 4--against those who thought the number

77

should

58. this 59. Atlas 60. 61. since

be

lower.)

J. Travlos, Poleodomik$ Exelixis tön Athenön, p. 71. area

was

taken

up

by private

Only about half of

settlement.

W. Petersen, Population (New York, 1975), p. 378 and Social of Greece, Table 202, for London and Athens respectively. Travlos, op. cit. I follow a larger

(above

Gomme (p. 25, proportion of

62. Rodney Young, (1951), 135ff.

note

44),

p.

Economic

72.

note 4) in multiplying the residents these were apt to be bachelors.

"An Industrial

and

District

of Ancient

Athens,"

aliens

by

Hesperia

20

3,

63. See Hesperia 20 (1951), 187-252. The exception is House F in which "a central floored area was surrounded, probably on all sides and certainly on three, by tanks or vats set beneath floor level" (p. 229). The earliest phase of this

building

was

64.

See

65.

Rodney

"around

the

the middle

discussion Young,

of

of

these

"Selputurae

the fifth century" roads

Intra

in Hesperia

Urbem,"

(p. 20

Hesperia

232).

(1951), 20

(1951),

66. Quite a few Athenians may have lived within the walls without. Probably one such was Themistocles Phrearrios and been more ag the fifth century progressed. But see note 56 67.

See

Gomme,

Note

C,

p.

75ff.,

for

references

to

this

Sarah Pomeroy has reopened the discussion in her Goddesses, Slaves, pp. Infanticide

68-70, in the

145-168. 69ff.

and have owned land there would have above.

discussion.

Whores,

227-230, and was answered by D. Engels, "The Greco-Roman World," CP 75 (1980) 112-120.

Recently

Wives and

Problem

of

Female

68. Wealthier Athenians may have tended to marry younger wives than the average Athenian, and a young wife would have more child-bearing years ahead of her than an older one, Also, a richer woman might have been better nourished and so less prone to miscarriage, stillbirth, and perhaps infertility. One other factor which could conceivably have led to a wealthy woman bearing more children is the practice of employing wet-nurses. A woman who did not nurse her child would become pregnant again sooner than one who did. (For this and the other factors

see Wrigley,

Population

If, then, richer more of a chance to be should also not assume control,

and History,

Arethusa

8 (1975)

100ff.).

families tended to have more children, they would have had selective and more of a motive for infanticide. But we that there was no knowledge in Athens of methods of birth

For methods of birth "Biomedical Techniques for

B.C.,"

p.

control known in the fourth century see A. Preuss, Influencing Human Reproduction in the Fourth Century

237-263.

Preuss,

however,

apparently

aseumes

(contrary

78

to the implications of the medical writers he cites) that restricting the natural growth of the population (1.e., the number of births) was a major concern in classical Greece. But concern with numbers of citizens--clearly a concern of both Aristotle and Plato--is not necessarily concern with numbers of citizen births. (On the "population policy" of Plato's Republic, see J.J. Mulhern, "Population and Plato's Republic," Arethusa 8 (1975) 265-281.) Preuss’ claim that "In classical Greece we see an agricultural economy becoming progressively more urban, and consequently the desirability of having many children giving way to the desirability of having few" (p. 240) is not obviously true.

69. ments 70.

Calculated from United Nations Model Life Table of Engels (above note 67) to the same end. Goddesses,

Whores,

Wives

and

Slaves,

p.

no.

35.

See

also

the

argu-

227.

71. The pelvic studies of Lawrence Angel, purporting to show 4.3 births per woman with 1.6 juvenile deaths resulting in 2.7 survivors per female which Pomeroy cites on this point, are not very helpful. It is surprising that she goes on to comment, "According to these calculations the Athenian population would have increased each generation, and indeed Aristotle stated that Pericles’ citizenship law was enacted because of the large number of citizens" (p. 68). Angel's "classical" skeletons are few and range over the 6th, 5th and 4th centuries. See E. Badian's review of Pomeroy in New York Review, Oct. 30, 1975 for further criticism. 72. after 73.

On the probability of an the Sicilian expedition, E.g.,

page

unequal see the

sex ratio Epilogue,

(in favor p. 142.

of

women)

in

Athens

48.

74. Athenian Democracy, p. 179. Jones thinks that both prosperity and inflation played a part in increasing the number of hoplites (p. 180). It does seem possible that--in the second half of the pentakontaetia--prosperity might have increased the proportion of Athenians able to supply their own hopla. For the effect of inflation, see Appendix II, note 24, p. 202. 75.

See

Russell

Meiggs,

The

Athenian

Empire,

(Oxford,

1972),

p.

92ff.

76. It is usually assumed that these 14,000 are hoplites (e.g., by Jones, Athenfan Democracy, p. 161) although Thucydides does not specifically say so; but since he does not seem to have known specific figures for psiloi in the rest of his History, this is probably a fair assumption. 77.

The

size

of

the

loss

involved

here

is

a matter

78. Thucydides gives no chronological indication. suggests that this and the following expedition may news of the Egyptian disaster reached Athens. 79, The Erechtheid casualty list (I.G. 1? 9295 Egypt, Phoenicia, Halieis, Aegina and Megara.

M-L

of

dispute.

See

Meiggs (Athenian have been decided

33)

lists

below

note

82.

Empire, p. 111) upon before

tribesmen

dying

in

79

80.

See

the discussion

(Cambridge Philological

οὗ Ὁ.

Society,

Whitehead,

The

Ideologyof the Athenian Metic

Supplementary Volume,

number 4, 1977),

pp.

86. His comment, "...we lack a typical, representative document to show ative proportions of citizens and metics (and others) in a trireme under circumstances" (p. 85) indicates the problem at hand.

84-

the relnormal

It is noteworthy that Thucydides does not mention metics in his account of any of these events, as he does for the Megara campaign thirty years later (2.31.2). The implication is that serving as a hoplite was not yet an official duty of the metic who could afford it in the 450's (as it was in the 430's) and further that metic service in the fleet was voluntary, unorganized and "not a service but a job of work" (Whitehead, p. 86). The calling up of "xenoi registered with the polemarch" to serve in the fleet in 480 ("Decree of Themistocles"--M-L, 23.30-31) was perhaps the result of extraordinary circumstances. 81. It Pericles

18 notable, sent out 60

politón"

(Pericles

82,

There

but hardly decisive for any argument that Plutarch ships every year for eight months, on which sailed

says that "polloi

11.4).

is admittedly

a tendency

to think

that

not

all of

the

200 ships

stayed

in Egypt. (See the account of this position and counter-arguments given by Meiggs, Athenian Empire, p. 104ff.). But nothing in Thucydides’ text suggests that he did not think that they all stayed. To assume that they would have been needed at home would be to assume something about the size of the population--and that is just what I am trying to ascertain, 83.

Jones

engaged 84. Cf. on p. 55.

(Athenian

in Egypt the

Democracy,

and Aegina,

estimate

of

p.

161)

thinks

but Thucydides'

Wilamowitz,

based

that

there

were

account

seems

to suggest

on Aristotle

24.3,

"not

many"

hoplites

otherwise.

referred

to

above

85. If 1t is assumed that there were only 40 ships involved at the end of the campaign and (for purposes of calculation) that.the whole crev of 175 on each Ship, 40 plus the relieving 50, was lost, then the losses would have been on the order of 5,750 men. 86. 87, clear

Athenian

Democracy,

p.

168ff.

As Jones notes (Athenian Democracy, p. 168) the distinction is in literary sources. Possibly it is not appropriate for fifth

88, See above,page 41. are very similar to those at birth of 25 years.

As of

not always century usage.

noted there, the age-group proportions used by Jones the model-life-table population with life expectancy

89. This would result in some 10,000 metics vis-a-vis the citizen hoplite population.

which

90. The calculations of Gomme (p. 12ff.) and Jones guesses.

might

be

considered

too

many

(Ath. Dem., p. 9) remain

80

91.

These

losses

are

probably

of

less

significance

for

overall

population

growth

than the effects of changed rates of marriages and births. As Bversley noted (art. cit. p. 52, see note 7 above) in relation to the plagues of medieval Eurpoe, in-

creased mortality already 92. istic

low

life

in the adult population has less effect expectancy

Day and Chambers (pp. democratic move vhich

93.

See

Wrigley,

94.

Since

societies,

rural

95. E.A. Wrigley's p. 99) is suggestive port" has a negative

and

population surplus

decrease

in

in a population with an

fertility.

35, 124-125) regard this ae eimply another Aristotle attributes to Aristeides.

Population

the urban the

than

need

History,

p.

is usually not

be

97ff.

a small

huge

character-

fraction

in order

to

"demographic contour map" (Population of what might have been the situation population growth of 20 per 1,000 per

of the whole

keep

a city

in such

alive.

and History, figure 3.7, in Attica. His "reayear.

96. It should be clear from what vas said earlier (pp. 42-43) that Jones' claim, "increase in wealth meant...that larger families survived" (Athenian Democracy, p. 180) is demographically simplistic and not necessarily true of Athenian population. 97. Again, other explanations such as a significant drop in infant mortality or a significant increase in the number of live births per less reasonable. (See also D. Engels, CP 75 (1980) 112-120). 98. For origin in

a few comments on Athenian the mid-fifth century, see

xenophobia or exclusivity the Conclusion.

and

the

and child woman seem

its

probable

See also A. Billheimer, Naturalization in Athenian Law and Practice (Princeton 1917), pp. 24-27 for a collection of testimonia suggesting that the Athenians and other Greeks were not entirely unavare that less exclusive practices had existed in Athens. The scholiast to Thucydides 1.2, for example, says, " οἱ Adevaloı τὸ

πάλαιον εὐϑὺς μεταδίδουσαν πολιτεῖας,

ὕστερον δὲ οὐετι.

Naturalization, however, should be distinguished from honorary bestowal of citizenship, which after 451/0 was the only legal way a foreigner could become an Athenian, The historicity of reported grants of citizenship before the latter fifth century is doubtful. See, for example, J.W. Cole, "Not Alexander but Perdikkas," GRBS 18 (1977) 25-29. 99. Although Thucydides implies that the Plataeans were Athenian politai (3.63) and had a share of the politeia (3.55) already at the end of the sixth century, | Demosthenes] 59.104 and Isocrates 12.94 imply.that 'Plataeans became Athenians’ only after their city was destroyed by the Spartans. See Gomme, HCT II, pp. 339340.

For the Samians, see I.C. I^ 1 (M-L, 94). Diodorus

However

this

(13.97)

is not

says

supported

that

those who fought

by Xenophon,

at

Hellenica

Arginusae

1.6.24

were

made

citizens.

or Aristophanes'

Frogs

81

190

and

693

slaves

and

for

some

service

modern

Citizenship," CJ 73

I.G.

historians

in the fleet (1977-78)

consider

as historical

p.

120 with

only

the

(e.g.,

note

freeing

J.K.

of

Davies,

“Athenian

91).

The bestowal of citizenship on democratic allies seems to be II^ 10, but there is much difficulty in restoration. See Tod

100.

A new

after

480 would

because

101.

of

group

of

citizens,

by the 450's

their

own

See Eversley,

if

settled,

have almost

married

a double

and

producing

effect

recorded 11.100.

children

in

soon

on the population

size

'baby-boom."'

art.

cit.

(note

8 ), p.

50ff.

This Athenian

prosperity

and

expansion, however, was in a sense artificial since it was based not on any permanent improvement in production or opportunity such as occurred in the Industrial Revolution, but on the opportunities and funds provided by the Empire. And the population seems to have dropped back to a lower level with the loss of the

Empire. 102.

(See Gomme, For

vironment

further

Population.)

comment

on

this

of the astu and Piraeus,

phenomenon

and

see Chapter

its

likelihood

IV, pp.

83-84.

in

the

urban

en-

82

IV.

Pericles,

Politics

and

It for

is

difficult

subsequent

in

Greek

their any

Athenian

history.

aftermath certainty

general will

As was

or

morale,

here

to

only

over-emphasize

has

been

certainly

This seen,

It

was

the

is

comments

Century

Law

importance

as

demographic is

easier

to

offer

and

social

relevant

of

decisive

but

well-being

a few

Mid-Fifth

the

significant

precision.

make

the

the Citizenship

history.

economic

in

to

Persian

a turning impact

hard

and

the

now

of to

wars

point the

as

wars

evaluate

and

with

judgments

on

political

institutions.

Pericles

the

and

the

and

then

any

effects

on I

citizenship

law. To 480

begin,

(and

fans

to

the

victories

a lesser

those

in

Plataea

Mykale

confidence

Themistocles

had

proposed

daring,

novel

them

won.

A new

generation

of

and

had

Themistocles,

ambitious

the

for

Xanthippus

themselves

'international'

It

was

it

seems

decline

as

in

archonship 22.5).

to

the

The

and

that

importance

new

in 487 brand

further

sharpening

opposed

to

a member

of

the of

their or

and

in

and

the

these

an office

and

Athenians

awareness

one

or

regional

to

of

deme

or

Athens

the

and

in

that

political

himself or

as

another.

as

well highly

concerned

with

rivalries.” and

office

to

elite

led of

(Ath.

image an

followed

Athenians,

by lot not vote ‘imperial’

Athen-

and

had

audacious,

local

in

the

Miltiades

more

prestige

a new

Athenían's

gave

looking,

led

chosen

created

one

with

men

Salamis

leaders--Aristeides

outward

than

479)

leaders.

as Miltiades--arose,!

attractiveness

region

their

Athenian

success

leaders

and

490

strategies;

Athens that

became of

well

Athens,

(generals)

say

which

themselves

as

position

strat@goi fair

in

of

at Marathon

in

as

a boost

extent

first

of

the

Pol. Athene,

Athenian

Indeed,

a

it

as is

not

83

going

too

heroic

far

to

heritage

a share

in

being

or

the

From

say

that

the

ideal

and

the

470's

on

Although

for

employment

cleruchy

for

the

were

most

"continuous" for

military

conclusion

that

on

Athenian

‘foreign

As the

state

Pol.

27;

while

shipboard

or

Plutarch

Pericles

indicates

a major

step

popular

(1.e.,

court the

in

city,

after

480;

executive

the

the

city

of

Athens

a common

"being an Athenian’

Cimon the

city's

in

mines the

assumed and body.

but

or

‘having

the

greater the

and

paid

paid

be

more

that

enabled

them.

used read

later

importance

for

his

imperial

the

to

finance.)

popular

of

the

fact

story

but the

450's.

i.e.,

the

a fleet,

Similarly,

d@mos of both

of

all

Athenians,

became

older--institutionally

and

probably

also

(Ath.

certainly

distribute

assembly,

of

to win support

in

representative

new

by

purposes,

the

and

was

ways,°

not

and

business,

so.’

treasury

representing

of

a justifiable

profits

own resources

and

still

plenty

in Athenian

well-known

in various

state

seems

an Athenian The

a

developing

increased

to do

Athenians

them

through

for

to and

developments,

It

time

the

them to

service,

responsibility

Boul$,

The

spent

the

dikasteria

jury

also

rowers.Ü

convincing

of

for

enrichment

and

public

to all Athenians

of

naval

Cimon

use

and

advantages

479 gave Athenians

the

to

size

after

revards,?

wages

can

concrete

or

of

direction

open form

in

and

which

that

and

projects

Athenians

actual

10)

office

campaigns

have

obvious

'second-generation'

assembly,

treasury

success the

later,

would

importance

(Themistocles' of

as

used

the

surpluses

the

to

more

public

skill--as

the

policy'

‘league’

for

part

more

in

also

in building

of

480

or

important

pay

employment

a consciousness after

were

military

skill--and

either

gave

a new meaning

there

opportunities

opportunity

wars

city.'

an Athenian.

the almost

Persian

the

is

the

Athens) meeting

in

decades the

city's

demographically--

council

of

seened

the

a vestige The

ilial

were

Areopagus,

local

distinct

from

former

distinction

and

public

of

between

realm

were

or

οὗ

ex-archons

with

life

tenure,

might

have

and

private,

times.” the

becomes

from private

leaders

local

composed

political

increasingly

(cf.

elites

about

politicians, who

realm

apperent

the story

increasingly

traditional

public,

might

and

Cimon

relevant.10

and Pericles

professionals

seem

the

to be

or

Public

noted

‘experts’

‘amateurs’

fan-

in

monies

above); distinct

comparison.

The state, hoi Athénaioi or ho démos ho Athénai@n,!? was more often the focus of attention ades

of

also,

and

the

for

state

When

fifth

funeral

for

those

can

assuming

powerful

demos,

they

and

The

latter

Athenian

who

say/

that

Thee,

outsider

the

new than in

group

a Tyrant

sharpens, however, attempted

by

the

the

Athenian

public

record

and

ἃ state

calls

upon

citizenship.

héliastoi,

to defend

familial

or

local

Salamis

in

importance

‘Delian some to

quote

and

League’

the

(see,

allies

e.g.,

the

420's

an

replacing

increasingly

Knights:

In

into

the

several

to Athens. regulations

the

one.l^

distinction

turned

the

phratores

"Proud,

and obey"--1111-1114,

qualification.

unite

the

became the

or

him against

traditional,

fear

but

for

by

All men

pay,

qualification

was

and King/

state

dec-

public

identity

to

courts

with

middle

the

3-obol"--255)

following

the

keeping,

"gerontes

(Again,

tended

By

Athenian

years

the

century.

dikastéria

people.

requires or

popular

of

3

of the

public,

mid-fifth

only

Knights

fade

as

the

system

in var, |

the

of

by not

phraters

differences

point,

(or misserved)

died

jurors,

privileged

empire

were

developed

Athenians’

Internal

ian

there

importance

‘the

and

trans.).

see

more

Thus,

distinct

in Aristophanes’

("veteran we

more

& more

'Paphlagon'

Knights,

as

century

example,

trlobolou”

or

emerged

Rogers

between

Athen-

‘Athenian respects They

for

0

Eapire. the

were

Chalcis,

served 1.6.

12 39 = ML 52 752; cf. Thucydides, 1.77.1), given Athenian institutions (e.g., the

council

set

up

in

the

decree

for

Erythrae,

1.6.

I”

2 10,

line

8ff.),

ordered

to

85

use

Athenian

festivals

(ML,

significant lan

coinage 69,

is the

as

course "set

The

or

from of

are

major

for

the

reports

Cholargos,

and

(Pericles

3.1).

Indeed,

the

Athenian

Xanthippos,

to

element

same

time

that

in

their

that

own

of

his

mother's

uncle

at

ancestors

were

distinguished

Appendix

also

about

2,

Xanthippos'

elsewhere

pp.189-91

ancestors

).

but

in

too,

could

an Alcmeonid,

a descendant

gave

Athens

her

first

yictory.

among

the

weaith This,

to

a very

together

families

lucrative

with

the

the mid-6th century family's But

wealth while

it

story

is

from

to

that

King

13.4),

but

more

is

on

and

has

politics. tribe

on

and

doubt

means

led

sore

simply

families

were

that

"party

was

were

his

more

Pericles" 37.2.

much

is

known

and

Alcmeon

who

wealthy--probably

attributed Lydia

deme

sides

these

prominent,

century

to

father

that

Not

been

6th

the

to

the

both his

e.g.,

true.

have

of

Athen-

16

33.1,

Croesus

more

of

only

Acamantis,

genos

no

some

been

biography,

Tradition

used

excluded

for

the

even

closely

were

the use of genos

Both

Megacles

here

Cleisthenes

well

18

Athens.

visit

(Ath. Pol.

came

of

the

seems

of

they

later

aim

to

Athenian

the allies

bound

Athenian

was

the

was

wealthiest

again

The

(cf.

Cleisthenes

Olympic

up

in

Athenians.

apparently

This,

they

the

there

Plutarch

were

nikos) and

Mykale;

remote

sense

of

into

(pr@tog

that

paradeigma,

15

family

general

allies

belonged

genos

See

important,

come

Pericles

Pericles

a prominent

larger

is

right.

By prÖton

the

compulsion

or

will

oikoi.!7

in

colonists

city

prßtoi

'family'

as

the

the

points

entry

also

participate

of

metropolis

a share’

in

to

it was never as Athenians

general

topics

Plutarch

and

tyrannos,

these

stage’

that

the

"having

Many

the

57-8).

At

hégemon

distinctly

45 )

fact

institutions.

Athens

(M-L,

the

Alcmeonid

(Herodotus of

the

3.128.5).

coast”

in

has been interpreted as evidence that the

commerce. 19

possible

that

the

family

grew

wealthy

with

the

new

trade

oppor-

86

tunities need

and

to

And

economic

suppose

Pericles

Pericles likely

that

in the family

of

to

comments

Athenian

of

which

to

change

the

locally

‘rule

of

more

for

that

was

his

father

prosecuted

the

matter

of

was

ostracized.

22.8;

cf.

served was

as

"The

the

born

and

Decree of

of the

considered

for

with

in

or

its

than

did

their

ca.

494

B.C. 24 on

the

expedition

not

were recalled

young

to

in

23 479

fight

in

on

to

might

also

were

more

one.

We

position

more nor

Pericles

been

about the

11

or

the battle 45-47)

(Herodotus the

than

amenable

Alcibiades.

and

of

units

but

have

any

goes

administration

lines,

home-

power

"deceiving

for

the

own

22 and

a similar

3.136)

a

"alternative

relative

of

(Herodotus

fleet

was

would

charge

prevented

old-established

Cleisthenes

younger He

the

and

of

cult. 21

family's]

seek

in

Plutarch,

a member

Attic

have

necessarily

Themistocles"--M-L.

too

to

families

Neither

been

Praxiergidai",

organization

masses.‘

Athenian

to

(cf.

such as the Eumolpidai

[the

hetairos'

families--but

have

might

open

merchants.

estate, ^U most

particular

its

no

still peri to asty.

to

connection

is

fact

farmer’

groups

any

Alcmeonids

other

Miltiades

Paros

used

power

as

political

the

known

the way

the

but

there

in

a sizable

is

Bouzygai

demos

The ostracized

general

apparently

the

entrenched

or

Pericles

the

the

in

led

Alcmeonids in

cult

vere

a ‘gentleman

Pericles

sense

effective

as

centuries,

the city walle

of

phratries

"taking

amenable

any

left

6th

Cleisthenes

Cleisthenes

lack

such

or

associated

situation

the

cared

and

this

that

democracy’

this

politics

suppose

more

been

exercising

cults

that

bases"

that

“from

through

suggest

nor

and

be called

deme north of

have

7th

Megacles

probably

Xanthippos

or

Alcmeonids land

the

genos in the restricted

Boutadai,

Davies

of

confidence

Xanthippos

Neither

or

Alcmeon,

can with

16).

particular

expansion

of

9.114), battles

‘pure have

^? six when

when

in Xanthippos

Salamis

and

to

may

people" 12

were

(Ath.

Pol.

Xanthippos but of

Pericles 480-479

2?

87

It is sometimes his

mother--1.e.,

politician hand, was

it no

that

pursuing

is

implied

said

he was

the

that

Alcemeonid.

of

attempt

classify

to

previous

the

The

in Athenian

his

ideological

family

sufficiently attacked >! lingers

on

basically after

in two

things

Salamis

crats.

as

First,

wrong

it

suggests

a recognizable

interest

and

son

Thucydides

maternal

great

as

hetairos.

their

existed it

did

tion. those

in or

aight

century

notion

viewwe might

is

themselves

political lay

a

claim

the

life

‘nobility’

to

consider

that Cimon,

find

‘party

that

(see

Cimon

this

term. along

Athenian

the

to

other Pericles

the

the

this

admitted

sort

of

membership’

or

the

citizenship politics

democrats

‘renegade’

time

was

But from

Furthermore, with

his

the

‘best

probably the from

father

upper

are

decades aristo-

‘aristocracy’ others

by

was Cimon

who

the démos

pp.187-193)

represented

There

or

2,

a very

influence

Pericles

a single

probably

the

among

nobles

its

conservative or

like

has been

law.

in

that

Appendix is

and

upper-class

clear

politics

Introduction,

‘democrats’

were

is not

of

represented

kaloikagathoi.

at

not

assumed

the

Athenian

spokesman

that

I do

Athenian

radical

and

it

its

the

and

the

Athens

was

‚3

from

family

democrats,

Despite

Pericles

Cleisthenes,

Cimon

A common

in Athenian and

that

that

However,

no

on

democratic29

in

between

group,

certainly

Or,

belonging

model

viewing

Melesias,

uncle,

fifth

calling

of

to

family 2/

father

politics

an Alcemeonid

in

indicated

of

with

a struggle

got his

convincing.

as

interpretations

his

politics

politics’

but

his

were

was

according

‘party

of

followed which

Pericles

democradó or

Alcemonids

he

Pericles

of

that

interests

faction,

family

behavior

the

Rather,

Themistocles-Aristeides

stated)

an Alcemonid

personal

while

28

importance

(or

took

monolithic and

to

'nobility' assume

misleading people,’ any

a different Miltiades,

perhaps

of

point as

that

simplifica-

Athenian

reaches

his

one

prominent society of of

the

more

radical

Athenian

of a maritime

(naval)

Second,

cratic

in

in

the

'game.'

in one

another

or

tyranny,

them

do

assume

that

is

limit every

of

may

issue

have

all

the

challenge

politicians

democrats.

"9 the

anonymous

a previous at

In

Athenian

and

as

that

dissidents

time

opportunity

so

this

far

time

played

particular

over

the

of

457

was

demo-

rules

and

function

return

of

far

the

1,107.4), >"

Athens

not

(in

so

as we

radicals

va.

conservatives

a

the

(Thucydides

would

were

as Athens

over

who

were

δὲ

politicians

generation

this

empire)

and

there

that

politics were

return

a struggle

were

no

was

simply

certainly to

earlier

and

with

wealth and inclination for

high

Pericles’

we

if

of

perhaps

to play an active and

stakes--in

Athenian

relationship

with

arouse

same

of

we

Athenian

families

the

to

know

do

strong

came

from

a family

(or

for

feeling

with

of

terms Some the in

to

suppose

i.e., power. and

Davies'

action.

comment

accustomed

'radical')

by

part--

politics. Themistocles

is

important

for

the

or

century

need

politics,

content

the

long

Areopagus

not

be

as

lines.

mid-fifth

struggling

innovating

for

desirability

that

oligarchy

could

the

role

view

behind

Pericles

the

the

the

meanings

down

(e.g.,

and

various

then that

Athenians

reject

which

‘class’

(e.g.,

families

issues

saying

we

or

issue

democracy

only

should

one

another

a matter

other

Pericles,

on

between but

divided

on

Thus,

ideas

of

ideological

radical

36

speak

have

conservative

was

that

to to

will

been

politics

often

the

ourselves

governments).

quoted

Athenian

disagreement,

legitimate

Athenian

To

up

there were disagreements

politicians

it

not

Athenians

There

take

) revolutionaries.>

we

naval

all

century,

for

Hippias

Athenian

to

were

bitter

except

like

Still, as

they

To be sure,

But

someone

sense

mid-fifth

institutions--sometimes Areopagos.

ready

empire.32

while

‘aristocrats’, democracy

leaders,

nature

of

89

the

part

known

he

came

public

to

action

Aeschylus'

Persians,

not

Athens

all

of

Pericles his

admired

strategy

Athenian ing of

the

long

in

may

not

have

Pericles

seems

fifth

century

young

man

"lofty

Ionian

on

to

have

Anaxagoras

thought"

of

philosophy.

of

of was

telling

Pericles

Thurii2?

Hippodamus century

49

may

of

for

in

it

Miletus

Certainly,

even

more.

His

day

spent

is

to

plan

both

philosophy

that whom

Thurii in

he

the

choice

(and

perhaps

of

the

century

an

was

not.

1.138)

thinking

much

time

"proud

as that

and

town

the

not

an

of as

mind"

of or

to "slander" on

(Plutarch,

in

idea

or

Protagoras

probable)

Piraeus

the

theoreticians

Protagoras

theoretician

expense

and

knowledge

tried

homicide

the

fifth

with

advis-

(Thucydides

his

some

in

of

'imperial'

spent

acquired

that

for

vision

the

theoretical

son reportedly

and

and

policy

genius

suppose,

only

fleet,

practical-minded

political

not

aristocrats

Pericles

when

believe

Piraeus

a large

more

a time

and

invincible

Athenians,

the

the

first

for

valls--at

in

and

involuntary

behind

the

both)

their

in discussion

possible

in

by

we may more

of

them

"natural"

from

the

been

bringing

all

reports

and,

a case

have

Similarly,

responsible

5.1)

a full

responsibility

walls

influenced

Perhaps

by

to

Clazomenae

(Pericles

further

foresight

a militarily were

at

go

interest

untrained

Plutarch

and

The

473/2

a Themistoclean

ships

earlier

strongly

been

to

intelligence,

of

to Themistocles'

Pericles

and

an

in

to Themistocles

admired

followed

features so

Pericles

36.5),

in

be documented. chorégos

possible

their

a vision

appealed

interested

of

his

to

had

is

Thucydides for

rely

as

favorable

Perícles

sophists

problem

(as

extent

service

It

also

philosophers.

natural

his

clearly

essential

also

with

was

perhaps

men

a certain

least

431

the

to

disposed.

but

ἀξ

Both

which

play

so

Salamis

In addition

and

3/5

greatness.

of

can

Pericles

countryside--and

Athens

and

Themistocles

at

walls38

which

of

was

Athenians

the

play

the

Pericles nomothetés Pericles

planner

mid-fifth armchair

a

90

profession

nor was

association ment,

at

least

ideal. 41 needed same

to

some

was

not

of

the

scenes

friends in

and

B.C.,

years

clearly

implies

credit.

No

that

to

451/0

it

is simply

which

By at property")

judicial

to

their

(or

in

offer

his

the

on

the

attribution

the

public

on Athenian

departed

space may

of

from

have

governthe

time,

no

doubt

thought

advice

and

proposals

Pericles

ideas

significant On

behind for

limelight;

and

as "uncrowned

42

the more

the

the

other than

suggestions

king"

the

the This

for

tendency

from

he

as

took

political

influences

likely

democrat

within

just

which

direct

activity

already

than

of

through

causes

The

Plutarch

more

city

development

Pericles’

of an ideological

preferred

of Athens

or

hand,

about

somewhat

to

activity.

that

of

he

7.7).

decision

account

perhaps

guise

way

affairs ^^

innovate

25.1)

Pericles

(Plutarch,

every

for

a short

and

political

was

Athens

Pericles'

made);

those

in

demogague

or

politician.

private

organization

(Ath. Pol.

enjoyed

his

views

that

Athens.

the age of 22 Pericles

43 and

his

who

story'"--but

family

least

of

in

to imagine

his

where

rapidly

planning,

claimed

follows

appears

'aristocratic'

willingness

is

a "likely

Pericles

of

Pericles

affected

recognizing

Pericles,

for

it is hard

have

unjustified.

certainty

up

not

associates

to make

responsible is

and

evaluating

and modern)

clearly

and

rational

a man

and

grown

Pericles

460-430

man,"

having

institutions

behind

manager

of

the

(ancient

own

extent

'radical',

difficulty

which

the

would

of

agency

these

men

Piraeus,

some

work

some

‘conservative’

such

to

The

of

the

with

it

are

during

to

was kurios

proving This

desire

characteristic

his

30's.

himself

of

Pericles

(Ath.

27.1)

and

the judicial probably

if

in

of

his

unorthodox

combined

activity

a "just

is

("master

efficient

efficiency

Pericles’

Ephialtes,

Pol.

a very

for

was the main force behind to

ton heautou

with

the

area

a of

incorruptible

reforms an

of 462/461,

example

of

just

9)

that

tendency

friend

and

story

noted

supporter

that

although

almost

certainly

most

to Aristotle

a

While

it

as

is

a

Pol.

what

that

it

was

(perhaps and

Plutarch

25.2;

of

natural

at

same

the

position Subject

The

Areopagus

had

or

to

the

10.8).

Might

to be

do, to

divide

and

leaving

the

the

Athenían

controversy

in

the

in

458,

before

its law.

The

idea

the

by

for

and

Ephialtes

was

the

taken

came

rich

by

but

it

of

all

away

of

was

the

their both

an

uncertainty seems

as

to

possible

Athenians

suits

corruption been

role

the

cases

true?

Pol. Perhaps

by more

cases

among

other

proposed--while

and

'hallowed'

continued least

against

(Ath.

played

hearing

duties

from

46

Aristotle

Ephialtes

at

according

aristocracy

Areopagus

have

Areopagus 462,

Ephialtes.

were

numerous

active

following

of

which,

time

Both

charges

years

Pol.

Pericles--

against

obscured

perhaps

what

(Ath.

chat

supporter

thie

it.

religious The

a

blow

462 48

and

apparently

10.7).

a

boul@ and dikastfria,

satisfaction

the

was

effort

through

at

is

responsibility

council

of

Eumenides

issue

increasingly

is

foundation

of

a

that

preceded

the

this

true

were

some

the

as depriving

before

not

given

and

came

mismanagement

Pericles

responsibilities

which

for

tíme

Aeschylus’

also

Areopagus

magistrates,

of

is

reforms

thing

as

it

number)

also

Areopagos

can be seen

the

would

or

the

that

Pericles

groups

in

support

democracy

of

fairly

in this

reforms,

judicial

overworked. the

of Ephialtes might

that

(Pericles

among the assembly,

members

managing

report the

Athenians,

of

not

increasing

members

the

jurisdiction

claims

Ephialtes'

certain

the reforms

probably

impossible

Themistocles--was

‘radical’

the

not

Plutarch

an ally

of

jurisdiction,

‘anomaly’ 47 and just

that

is

unlikely,

of

toward

telé and of

as

also

25),

it

and distributed

step

true

right

was

interpretation

(Ath.

two highest unique

Ephialtes

supporter

from the Areopagos them

But

chronologically

common

sees

of

Themistocles

25.3),

The

earlier. 45

to

be

a

up

to

the

production

assassinated

by

Aristodikos

92

of

Tanagra

(Ath.

understand

the

ation.49

details

Judicial

clearly

in

aroused

bitter

the

the

merits

of

and

cal'

democracy

thetes

were

assumes

are

p.

crats.

ment,

While of

the

city's

itself, and

were

and

fifth

interests

Pol.

new

24.3;

to

the

to

insure

a necessary

aroused or

and

most

simply

system

of

that

there enough

still

Athenians

Chapter

did

have

to

depended

have would

latter,

change on

If the been

need

upper

26.2)

but

P.J.

in

some

figure of

participate,

Rhodes

(The

and

55).

We

in

in

could as

with

than

traditional

6,000

does

a large Pericles

jurors

not

himself

govern-

scope

of

democracy

in

authority institutions. daily

in fact

number.).

the

Increasing

and

local

then

demo-

during

their

size

rather

Athenian

there

or development.

‘conservatives’

opposition

'radi-

two

democratic

growth

author-

the

Pol.

part

which

between

necessarily

taking

the the

not

one

most

considerable

Boule

p.

more

issue

of

been

from

661-2.

but

Athenians

consequence

the

III,

become

a subsidiary

dikasteria

would

from

seen

had

of

(Ath.

can

assassin-

judicial

is inconclusive

reformers

more

protest

Wasps

(See

still

(Although

excluded

as

between

members

eligible.

Athens

it may

a firm

Aristophanes

450's,

been

were

a restriction it.

with

and

and

issue

than

Areopagites

we

system

delegating

rather

that

Ephialtes'

process

the

to the achronship

radical

that

century,

government,

which

The

was

such

for

out

and

assume

classical

to view

judging

462,

officially

as

true

have

of

the

a drawn

and

to

reason

in

dikasteria,

officially

against

the

sense

of

Archons

for

Ephialtes seems

way

admitted

also

arguments

more

public

never

over-confident

apparently

reforms

were

this per se may

participation the

the

be

resulting

makes

and

evidence

it

it

aristocracy.

after

the

was

traditional

'modern'

thetes

Pericles

course

old,

and

demographic

view

eventually

But

apparently

2)

controversy--or

this

debate.

zeugitai

that

of

century,

responsibilities

In 457

It would

fourth

the new

tele.

25.4).

reform,

the

ity,

Boule,

Pol.

(Ach.

go back In

order

proposed

93

that

the jurors

The

principle

remain

of

Cimon

e.g.,

responsible

φιλαργύρους" It

is

for

that

obols

was

and

insufficient

the

were

provided

there

into

able

in

a few

rich

of

enough

into

and

(and

trap

"masses"

of

of

and

away

from

considered

καὶ

λάλους

greater

which

something

conclusion

thinking

that

if

willing

of may

5156).

amount

for

a fair and

καὶ

of

Pericles

day-wage

Athenians

this

a

average

courts

poor,

attributed

Plato

δειλοὺς

give

the

popular

would

"masses"

required)

I believe

qualified

the

the

dangerous--but

than

and

5156).

and money-loving-Gorgias

however,

less

a family. >!

be

fall

not,

new.

tradition

9.3),

και

Gorgias

nothing;

for is

a laborer simply

remuneration and

able

to

Athenian

society

as

not

such

unreason-

seem

an

belief. It

which

would

not

did

cf.

Later

to woo

" ἀργοὺς

considered

a system

>

Pericles

possible

significantly

in

democracy.

loquacious

made

27.3;

startlingly

and a desire

and

It

Pol.

was

Plutarch,

Plato

support

believed

divided

system

(Ath.

service

Athenians

essential.

to

do

the

which

probably

we

Athenian

27.3;

new

Pericles

If

the

and worthless

that

serve.

public

making

thought

two

service

for

Pol.

participation,

apparently

their

to demagoguery

Ath.

(lazy

clear

public

of

innovation

(see

for

payment

characteristic

Pericles'

it

be paid

may

seems

453/2

possible

both

of

traveled

be

the

among

to

credit

centralizing dikastai

the

demes

and

kata

Pericles

standardizing

d@mous,

giving

a group

preliminary

before the dikast@ria or final judgéments Pol.

26.5;

(one

from

demes

of

uniform

53.1). each his

The

tritttis?),

native

system

judges

of

trittus

settling

were

and

most

whether

the

with

result

disputes.

in

of

judicial

effect.

thirty

judgments

This

judges

in

cases

innovation is

who

the

creation>

apparently

which

might

in cases involving small claims likely

or

another

chosen

three

not

each

judge

would

have

been

Aristotle

does

was to

not

from

each

name

Athens an

(Ath.

tribe

responsible

give

come

for a more

author

for

the

94

this

institution

someone name

like

(in 453,2).

Archestratos

dropped

out

of

Aristotle its

former

important

just

what

Aristeides

But

Pericles its

the

had

its

We

if

a special

the

the

Piraeus

By 451/0, himself

an

adapting

with

needs.

In

his

tion had inherited (autarkeatate in

peace"

ability

of

)--or

the

who

be

Oration

their arché,

average

to

take

2.36.3).

Athenian

for

when

have

another

judicial

to judge

able

need

century

might

He

35.2)

whose

been

in

the

in

the Areopagos

would

the

above,

not

seem in

Themistocles

direction. in

as

the

specify

that

170)

of

as

that

Piraeus, p.

455d).

(27.1)

does

decisively

(see

Gorgias

jurisdiction

institutions

(Thucydides

spokesmen,

Pol.

power"

career.

interest

sectors

the

sea

dynamis--it

agoranomoi,

the

well

as

By

the

time

metronomoi

and

sitophulakes

some the

of

these

physical

instituted fifth

indication

of

was

about as

Periclean

in

the

Aristotle (Ath.

magistrates

plan

century

of

planning

was

laid

out.

this

time,

had

they

did

in

interest

in

systen.

from

politician--a

Funeral

Ath.

in shearing

Athenians

(cf.

that

could

the

then,

city's

private

mid-fifth

they

and

at

toward

‘popular’

the

yards

port

city

a special

assume

innovative

the

take

role

nautike

astınomoi,

the

the

early

turned

nautodikai,

concern

Ephialtes

supposed

promote

ship

own

by

fourth, 53 then

both

his

and

might

apparent

Finally,

to

religious

50-51).

already

of

already

and

with

“turning

probably

ships

Piraeus

Pol.

the

did

of

his

did

had

civic,

building

Pericles’

features

Pericles

and

of

with

(connected

have been one of Pericles’

tradition.

linked

powers

most

the

It could

the available radical

(and (of

if

physical

431/0)

one

evidence,Pericles likes

plan)

Pericles

to

that its

claimed

added to it and "rendered care

of

Pericles

to

rule

itself--in in

450

himself

all

probably

(cf.

had

shown

term--concerned

changing that

he

with

situation

and

his

and

genera-

it most self-sufficient things, had

both

more

Thucydides

in war

faith

2.41)

in

and the

95

than

did

Plato

in

the

to

demagoguery

city's

plexity as

an

(of

in

of

399, 54 and

institutions, or

the

Athenian

With

as this

‘democratic’

or as

sort

to

the

(Ath.

purpose) not

of

say.

Pol. this

It

simply

citizenship.

marriages

In

behind

fourth

but

450

marriage

since

Athenian

parent

law as being

about

as

(see

may

the

law

the

effect

in the

"about

failure

and

that

Finally,

of

not

legitimacy there

same

have the

the

or

(in

so

the absence simply

a gap

a definition was

probably the

i.e.,

it is argued

real

but

a man

or

in

fi

it

does

does

and

does

parents--for

not

declare

to that

below,

p.

with

58 Plutarch

could

preserved)

to

effect

133),

of private woman

(or

contract. only

one

refer

to the

37.2).

far

as

of

some

to

be

only

problem

emergence

Pericles

be laws

52 and

it

is

form of

gamos

filled. 39 a necessary

But

of

whether

it applied

if the scrutiny

or

to those

say

in the when

not

anything

law,

ve

condition

required kata ta patría,

whether that

put

com

proposals

citizen

it

a matter

the nothos

(Pericles

her

the

of the motive

what

There would

to

to

the

supposing)

just

and

everything

situation.

sources,

entirely

law vas

am

on

59.16

been

class with

law

(I

of

condition--two

in

[Demosthenes]

of

the

remains

to be "retroactive," the one hand

quoted

the nothoi"

a problem

provides

is

still

legitimacy per se,

considered

it

that

necessary

a necessary

(e.g.,

durability

Athenians

reduce

justice

century

a discussion

between xenoi and astoi.?7

century

However,

The

far

do

not

to

of

óc ἄν μὴ ἐξ ἀμφοῖν

beginning

are

does

with

τῆς πόλεως

a few words

But

and

him >

participation

courts.

mid-fifth

dealing

Before

establishes

so

illegal

in the in

law,

the

for

a career

26.4). 56

the

originality

451/0 proposed that μὴ μετέχειν γεγονώς

in

ideology

in

others)

of

large-scale

clearly

situation

city) well

promoted

most

radical

"imperial"

Pericles

he

has been

realize

of

that

citizenship

the

problem

disappears.

the

law

intended

born before

was

451/0.

of 445/4 was an enforcement

On of

the law,

as Plutarch

clearly

have

chised

are

been

simply

called

of

Cimon

and

last

(pace

that

died

afterwards.)

a scrutiny capacity supply

of

of

all

necessary to

his

father's

more,

there

of 445/4

is

his

no

see below

But phratry

an

(or

possibly

language

of

have

Athenian

two

the

by the grain xenoi

Athenian during

bred’

xenoi

suffered

parents.

would

parent,who the

last

six

have had

the

law.

of

that

deprived

be unfair the

individual 149),

the

probably also

need

was

scrutiny

in

entailing

beyond be

parentage?

the

able

to

In addition

witnesses

to

a citizen.

451/0.

the

Cimon

law

instance,

case

given

(Also,

perhaps

for

of

and ex post

p.

of

was

Athenian

she

not

the case.

50,

he would

of

is

is On

to

included

managed

to But

have become Finally,

law

entirely be

this

the

at

the

possible

a shareholder

both be

Further-

(For

the

events

citizens

to

one the

others

before

understanding

the

law

the

fits

best

the

who

does

not

city

of

him

this

rule;

rolls

the

fraudulently

(including

would as

occasioned

those with no

citizen

450/1)

into

scrutiny

and

like

entry

also

the

the

those with

and

and

of

an enforcement

admitted

Cimon

time

in

interpretation,

can be considered

years. 9?

who might

under

one

in 445/4

was

64.)

dene)?

No

would

grammateia

a wholesale

enforcement

the

law:

gift

involved

double

and note

Cimon

enforcement

prove

such

that

disenfran-

xenoi

Metic,

a man

of

the

Athenian

immediate

prove

that

the

Would

to

noted

Jacoby)

to prosecute

enrollment

the law would

can

system. to

then

decisive,nor

lexiarchike

enrollment

immediate

be

37.4), is

119,

enforcement

"willing" an

it

(frag.

the

father's

mention

other,

enrolled)

hardly

However, on

(Pericles

Ideologyof

witnesses

to witnesses mother's

can

someone

the Athenian

the

falsely

The

those

the

retroactive

Whitehead,

of finding

On

Philochoros

objection

necessity soon

by

thought

60

(foreigners

his citizenship, 61 The

to have

retroactive.

pareggegrammenoi

facto.

seems

not

'pure-

have justly

providing

an immedi-

97

ately

effective

law was

criterion

provoked

not

by

for

entry

foreign

into

marriages -

and

phraters What

The

general

and

so Athenians.

caused

Pericles

character

making

that

answer

I will

begin

with

that

the

law

most

clearly

was

of

what

provoked

stated

some

seems

by

to

by

but

by

again

suggests

foreigners

becoming

that

the

demesmen

wm

propose

answer

explicit,

τ

phratries

64

to

my

the

a

Hignett

this

should old

me

be

concern

who

new

the be

demos

to

accept

evident.

But

before

need

to

a complete

"red

herring, " the

"racial

that

the

be

it?

views

for

notes

or

already

and

to

law

purity."

considered.

65

"aliens"

The

in

the

notion

position

18

Piraeus

included

not merely of Greece,

Greeks from the Athenian Empire but non-Greek elements and even

and the rest Orientals.

To allow citizens to intermarry with such might entail a debasement of their racial purity that would be viewed with alarm by progressive statesmen who could take a long view.

66

(HAC

This

view

writes, itally

is

"He

endorsed

[Pericles]

superior

measures" Is

to

there

any

presume must

to

Hignett

be willing

Greeks

and

the

numerous

may

other

(Periclean

that the word genos, resemblance

by

even

Greeks

Athens,

have and

p.

foundation

other

that

it).

to

of

speak

Persians. 67

C.M.

that

thís

Bowra,

the

should

be

for

Athenians

example,

were

recognized

congen-

by

practícal

93). for.such

"race"

is using

346)

authors.

believed

often translated English

p.

in

views?

"race" its

of

birds,

There does not

it

is

important

(see LSJ s.v. genos)

biological

If we want races

First,

sense

to translate old

men

and

(the

genos women

seem to be a Greek

to

bears little

sense

as

note

in which

"race"

as well

equivalent

then we as

of

of

"race"

I

98

used

to refer

noticed and

physical

culture

instance, the

biological

differences

appear

to

have

considered

greatest

actually He was

to any

obstacle

may

have

concerned

distinction

the

sub-species

(cf. been

Xenophanes, the

more

foreigner's

had

with

other

"purity"

Dorian/Ionian

is

important

analogous.

Although

"races"

by modern writers,

the only real

Dorian

from

Ionian

and

and

Sparta

Dorian been

are

much

In

less

any

considered

minority

have

usually

of

suggests.)

case,

"orientals"

free

foreign

off

as)

Athenians.

that

would

be

Most

of

the

non-Athenians,

Athenians

is

have

if there was it

speaking

for

would

who

70

“racial

purity”

will

do.

another

matter,

and

not

will

be

groups

and

little

Thus,

to

in

in

explain

discussed

below.

stands.

the often

all

who

Ionian

or

(or

may than

might

the

conceivably

law courts,

but

themselves

"debase"

pass

the

a small would

pass

to

have

Athenians

barbarians

of

and

probability the

a

(Athens

There

language,

dislike

are

of

law would

Simple

(Plato

of

Corinth

xenoi

these

the

"race"

still

culture.68

overreaction by

for

for distinguishing

become

lest

an

differed

Athenian.

nature

assemblies

affected

average

The

in their

of

the

point

Certainly

to

his

the

Attica.

a concern

people

only were

attempted

something

probably

terms)

of

xenoi

(the

language

Plato,

not

atypical.

Miletus

but

(Laws 7414).

two

extent

very

say,

modern

population

not

proposed?

from

such

And

Pericles

a concern

on

and

representatives

probably

barbarians

to non-Greek-speaking

unlikely

culture

are

but

these

a certain

between,

or

"race"

to

differentia.

criterion

archetypal

both

dichotomy

seems

even

fact

the

difference

the

stock,

as

cultural

it

citizen

in

a non-Greek

objected

dialect

taken

cultures, 69 but

Ionian/Dorian

be

was

group

purity.")

termed

an

Diels-Kranz),

here,

“racial

the Greeks

16,

of Magnesia

in mind

not

Certainly

(or culture)

a citizen

Greeks

but

frag.

education

to his becoming

only

of mankind.

the

have

law

been

which Greek-

appearance law

by means

foreigners

the

or of

becoming

99

The argument practice

of

a practice rational

concern

of

already

Athenian assumed

perhaps

tice would

toward

was

necessarily

The

idea

that

but

perhaps

foreign

can

we

subjects

is

marriage

was

from

how

the

a widespread

more

to

it

century? do

we

is

again

What

really

marriages

know

central

(Lakedaimonios, xenoi an

that

of? to

The

the

Pericles

Arcadian) mother

of

Eleios)

29.2).

(ibid.).

In

his

Cimon,

know

the

the

own

gnésioi

that

in Athens

large--or

the

Pericles'

reviled

the

sons

however,

Plutarch

mid-fifth generation

his

these

the

at in

but

of

Megacles

not

that

policy."

and

marriage

explains

& prac-

practices

sort"

in name

extra(again

such

Neocles

of

main

is widespread?

the

"better

Athenians

his

Few

father's-of

othneioi

were

the

reveals

Cimon

and sons

of

that,

“eee”

according (16.1). be

to

Stesimbrotos,

Since

understood

both

it

of

been

probably

geographically

biographies

evidence

has

Lakedaimonios

a

probably

foreign

wife

but

stem for

correctly

sensu

from Cimon.

and

the

Eleios

were

ek

noted

that

this

obscoeno, n 74 and same Davies

source, accepts

we

gunaikos

since are

a good

phrase the

left

kleitorias not

to

statements

of

with

Athenian

"is

no

\

practices.

to "rational

about

reportedly

as not

Plutarch

we

and

Pericles

that

un-

the

aristocracy

an obstruction of

that

assumes

second,

widespread

Cimon--now

argument.

and

Athenian

two

admission

it

of Miltiades,

foreigners

case

of

states--

obstruct

on

implies

then,

among

particularly

between

Thettalos

(Plutarch,

was

it

to

rests

phratry

and

other

liable

First,

little

habit

and

the

"aristocratic in

rivals"!

a habit

examples

the

were

addition

group)

generally

considering

her

δὲ

families

which

deme

to Pericles

it was necessarily point,

not

defined

that

the

(In

characteristic

seemed

assume

and

mistaken.)

clearly

have

unjustified

And

this

leading

loyalties

arrtage-jond

and

with

assumptions.

a unique

a unified

and

Athens’

vith

was

law was directed

alliances

sympathies

I think

marriage be

marriage

unlikely)

law

noted,

to

Many. 73

both

the

the citizenship

created

policy (and

As

contracting which

proven

that

sure

wife,

100

Isodike,

as

the

ascribed

to

Pericles

@velouc)

disgraceful

would

not

have

an

might

a new

to

of

the

well

it

would

himself also

had

not

ship

did

prevented

not

was

prevent

others

from

Aristotle's "che

large

substance.

number For

not

at

most

one

of

the

the

only

Pericles’

of

least

it

way

to

can

was be

Pericles

wife'—he

they

should

Rather

lands

be

were

essential

proxenoi

were

officially

Athenians,

Sparta

the

of

(If

helped

much--

but

they

2.13.1).

friendships.

Aspasia;

did

Pericles

Miletus

(Thucydides

foreign

Cimon

Athens

either.) of

proxenos

individual

also.

Aspasia

with

than

private

policy

was

form

if

with

have

Athenian

of

Or,

it

he

those

useful not

relationship

would

The it

citizen-

have

similar?

(followed

citizens"

might

thought have)

‘wedded

friendship

been

citizenship

false.

foreign often

the

notorious kings

76

καὶ

or not.

individual

have

something

suggestion

were

of

hindered

the

doing

in

( ζένους

vell

that

demonstrably

through

could

have

friends;

Archidamos,

not

relationship

necessarily

marriage

and

position

the

citizenship.

power, 77 and while

friendships

Arcadia

Finally, law

or

his

foreign

included

city

he may

insinuation

friends

Ambassadors

to

from

but

relations.

come

have

more

policy,

(as

mother

Tendenz

If Pericles

born of his

the

"the

of Pericles’

cryptic.

not

a foreign

perhaps

foreign

a whole

Informal

a wife

is

as

Athenians.

and

that

resemblance

children

justify

had

démos

have

to

they

foreign

is somewhat

to Athenian

law

states

intention

illegitimate--not

assumption

a

then

a curious

the

name-giving

needed

foreign

connections

on

of being

to

^? but

bears

This

names

a lav

obstacle

Athenian

friends

305).

sons

second

sons,

and presumably

xenoi--whether

The

Cimon's

Stesimbrotos

such

proposed

considered

to

p.

give

Cimon's

forming

by

(APF,

to

have

accused

οὗ

to the effect,

law of 451/0"

would

mother

by

some

responsible said

with

modern for

some

the

commentators) 78 that

law

certainty

of

451/0

that

has

there

more were

a

101

large

number

however,

of

encounter First,

many?

For

been

the

the

Athenians

if

some

common

purposes

5,040

families

Plato

(Politics

of

century

opinion.

fear

lest

the

constitution 35,000 must

have

machinery the

been of

480

large

"too

many"

of

these

are

pléthos

may (cf.

His

have

too

ought

is

arguments

would

make

the

to

involved,

"the

Cleisthenes' not

Athens

her

empire

than

did

the

quite in

"the

and

chief

his

administration

of

was

make

in

can

alone

a

the

of 500

Surely

the

imagine

that

substantially

Athens

by

fifth

estimate

We

the

fourth

workable."80

required

for

envisaged

population

delicate.

have

thought

motive

eventually

citizen

450

he

reflecting

supported

so

many

state

too

would

too

but

of

as

constitution

was

and

saying,

total

they

anti-democratic

taken

also

were

sort

an

increasing

however,

claim,

of

were

better’

26-28)

the

be

lines,

continue

Gomme,

for

what

the

there

1326a,

that

not

for

more

thought

many

view

450,

‘the

Politics

government

citizens

were

or

the

The

in

more

480

(cf.

24.3).

Or

been

to

of

480.

in

expect,

Aristotelian

with

Athenian

participating

Pol.

along

in

with

citizens

would

were

probably

unworkable."79

administration

Ath.

Laws

population

citizens

one

14-19).

and

argued

many’

government’

1265a

comparison

Aristotle

Plato's

phílosopher

in

‘too

purposes,

‘good

century

Gomme

were

opinion.

of

450

difficulties.

there

military

in

there who

"too

wanted

probably

appropriate

ἔθη politÓn

to

valid remedy?

own

Athenians land

citizen

population?

the

law

not

applied

It

living

outside

considerations, This

theory--viz.,

the

was

many"

can

bringsme

how would at

least

retroactively

to

be

of but to

in the

the

city

city

and

would the

the

main

those

that (such

the

Piraeus,

Piraeus?

citizenship

affected

if, as

the

difficulty

the law have said

or

as

Cimon)

Both

law

of

the

the size

have dia

to

of

seems

most

likely,

who

were

already

102

enrolled effect

in

on

citizen for

the

and

the

also

the

grew

is

and

effect

on

of

is

chain

the

size

of

probably

When

it

was

most

and

phratries,

is

likely

eliminating

it

the

population

would

not

assume

that

cleruchies),

the

regard.

would

Nor

Foreigners Is

might the

it

been

of

population--unless

the

Athenian

which

led

the

large be

still

has

the

of

any

of course

law

the démos

immediately

live

recourse

any there

now

to

the

we

not

to

or

of

decided

have

an

ail.

of

by

is

second

is

480

effect

(or

in

the

continue motive)

non-

Now

on

the to

Colonies

efficient

(or

in

that

astu

or

Piraeus.

to

move

there.

which

450

of

its rule).

reasonable

true. 84

demes

excluding

law

of

and

the

is

more

(This

premise

and

been

de-

fathers

the

population.

had

if

of

it

of

Athen-

81

into

the

time

have

effect

still

explanation

had

growth

overcrowding

Athenians

the

to

type

that

between

to amend

the

at

foreigners have

the

law will

first not

this

between

a lobby

the

figures

population

suppose

population

would

large’

if

in

suppose

to

and

marry

that

since

up

the

the

further

drop

we

If

that

concluded,

negative

would

further and

was

further

Still,

on what

century

negative

military

population

451

admission

aim to reduce a ‘too

prevent

the

fifth

the

significant

solution,

or

suggest

of

the

"naturally." been

440's

stand--whether

the

that

immediate

in

However,

growth

to

evident

to

immediate

no

depends

choose

Gomme

cannot

part

the

would

law.) 82

that

traditional

only

men

of

an

Athenians.

then,

have

it

century

woman,

grow

it did not

fifth

before

(unless only

increase

common

possibility

would

the

had

that

effect

least

in

population

the

at

or

conclusion

will

increase

of

of

law's

have

added

half

realized

due

events

the

of

be

first

behind

false, 83 the

can

not

the

wives

was

of

habits

reasoning

women

the

cause)

in

it would

It

by

view

(and

legal

foreign

unmarried

natural

our

a foreign

prived

the

this

"naturally"

ian no

suggested

matrimonial

marriage

then

population.

nature

foreign man

registers,

citizen

Beyond

been

only

deme

numbers

431.

have

the

some

have

the

103

thought

obvious

of the démos

from

the

outset,

in its new-found

draw a distinction

between

Pericles

simply

people

is in

either

order

motives

of

notions

are

to

well

in

the motives

his

as

own

his own

accord

"Athens

privilege?

acting

enhance

the demos for

i.e.,

of

position

taking

"refined"

character

to

the

selfishness

like

to

of Pericles8°

the

will

advantage

86 purposes. of

the

view often

those

catering

or

or

this

the demos and

a demagogue

the

Athenians”

Proponents of

more

with

for

of

of

the

Although

Plutarchian

the baser

such

Pericles,

the

m

Olympian was

his

fit

so

was

just

intellectual task

well

the

historical

the average The

and

18

a serious

of

this

member

also

military

campaigns)

Athenian

and

I have the

suggested

of

of

urban

entirely

so

far

during

where

and

most

the in

in of

the

the

multitude

possible

for

whom

it

they may not

that

Pericles

the Athenian

increasing

citizenship context

jury

increase demes

in and

as

such

the

460's

and

the

xenoi

and

of

off

intercourse

demos

the

the

as

(legally,

law

opening may

of

comments

have

citizens.

(in

court,

451/0

led This,

festivals,

to be saure of who was an

problems, to

value

citizenship

themselves

it difficult

the

of

the

Athenian

social

in regard

of

between

pass

serious

foreigners

continued demes,

also

most

In

to

have made

created

that

is

Athenian

value

contact

but

Salamis.

patroxenoi) the

of

be viewed

increased

would

times

distribution,

enrollment

battle

in

at

of

in what was best

a connection

should

increased

It

interested

a few xenoito attempt with

superstitions

Pericles.

emotionally)

The

combined

grain

the

of that démos.

of

one | and

chapter.

than

and

possibility

financially

“from

" 87 or the demagogic Aristotelian Pericles,

guide

as parochial

as was

more

to

free

especially duty the

or

enrollment 450's would

other

citizen

phratries (of

when

there

public

the

xenoi,

it may

have

have

lived,

years

was

due

after

metroxenoi, occurred and

a

offices.

population in

was

have

to

the

or primarily been

104

least

conspicuous

and where

the

is

that

likely

where

citizen the

rosters

urban

tinctly

cosmopolitan

imagine

the

to

a suspiciously

for

find

either

"Athens

for

number

(HAC, of

citizen are

And

for

the rulers

its

politai

cities

or xenoi. for

crucial

to

may

citizenship

law

response

an

ment

of

a

shoring

mid-fifth

Athenian,

or

While

“racial

been

a slogan

prevented

a way

of

in

the

had

which

after

further

a

the

We

walk

in

line

of

place,

number it

in

of

of is

reduced

interests

might

long

as

increase

it

a dis-

out

large

have

rapid

on

ahead

certainly

not

found,

case,

a

be dismissed,

law would

protecting

any

taken

asteios

rallied

be

flavor.

agora

is

cannot

the

In

foreign)

purity”

explanation

have

also

century

perhaps

would

up 99

foreign-sounding

that

seem there was for

just

an of

be

astoi

had

allies. remained

who

was

possible

to

451/0

B.C.

can

problem

Athenian

state

in 451/0

by

the the

those

considered

an

for a standard Athenian.

to be identifiable, was

who

from

city

in its

territory

(1.6.

considered

which best

an

the

does

seem'of

be

threads

understood

and

at

the

same

and

of

Athenian

the

of

the

could be 12 10-11)

allied

fined

five

it was

Athenian.

together not

from

as

a territorial

inhabitants

an allied

quali-

Athenians,

distinct

a polis not

when

to weave

interpretation

be

distinct

level,

be

a need

Athens

of an Athenian

immediate

unified

could

(or arche),

'foreign' or

who

On a practical

now

into

to

is

it would

the murder know

arguments

the

most

grounds

would

which

still

state;

It

It

the

agroikos who arrived

have

on the

citizenship,

but

talents

by

“self-interest”

of an empire

‘related’

need

employment

citizens.

In general fication

would

duty. 89

could

Athenians.

already

non-agricultural

foreign-looking

346),

population

the

a rural

the

jury

the

p.

to

of

Athenians"

Athenians.

Hignett

or

of

population

(and

irritation

grain

most

time

as as

of

whole

the

preceding

cloth’.

a remedy one

step

citizenship,

the

The

proposed in

the

public,

in developlegal

105

status

of

“being

successful;

the

Peloponnesian the

code

of

polit6n

Athenian."

problem

war the

The

an

in

it

the

increase

probably and

a larger

young of

men

these

were

dramatic

to

for,

but

Athens

in

perhaps

the

the

expansion, owners

of

56,

century

68) can

a greater

the only

be

proportion

short-lived

land

the

also

clue,

the

guessed

citizen The

for

a period

to

became

to

have

been

during

a permanent

the

part

of

thetic but

might

the

fed on

(or it

the

citizen

body

empire

(c.

457-446)

may

in

have

the the

than

served

non-Athenians

in

daring

young

men

who

been the

that

either

a double

and

force

are

likely

of

445/4

and

room landless

preceding

the

sudden

fighting seems

population

in

the

Boeotia

have

been

of

rather

episode

in

have

Peloponnesian

been

"frontier"--or

possible

of

some

It

(The

interest

450

of

housed.

non-hoplite)

of

on

abundant

emphasized

seems

2.8

of

may

some

the bulk of

would

attribute

an

ton

in the 470's,

have

had no more

As

that

would

food.

perhaps

450's

opening

and

Athenians

were

pl@thos

there would

the

in

the

phratries

pl@thos

Athenian

plots.

and

born

we

to)

suggested

Further,

numbers

be

of

equal there

demes

at

short

but

not

that

advantages

was

number

at,

except

Thucydides

war

time Attica

supportive of

the

in,

needed

century

seems

generation

confidence--cf.

increasing

size

to

(Perhaps

age. 9]

years. 92

law

law

in 480 and

of

important

marginally

than

III

of

By this an

(but

Chapter

(post-crisis)

(adult)

mid-fifth

and

by

proportion

in

a force

revealing.)

the

the

90

in

inexperienced

these

most

ignored,

admission

youthful

ways

and,

the battle of Salamis.

come

jump

such

the

the

usual

and

in just

clear,

(pp.

than

years

Thus

to

a 'boom'

recently

eager

war.)

also

been

was

in the 450's

due

these

solved

revealed

I argued

following

have

is

of

was

democracy.

problem

450's.

was

in the years

perhaps

Athenian

15,000 more Athenians the

apparently

when

immediate

In both

in

the

that is

Egypt

is

for internal or

the

chapter fifth

thetes

comprised

480

430.

or

purpose:

not

The only

106

could also

the

'bread-basket'

supplement The

possibly I have

or

the

could

Urban

planning

might

have the

in

in

resembled

immediate

problem

might

uncontrolled.

means

of

controlling

up of individual any

who

wished

altered. who

an

Thus

in

suggests

both, an

the

that

Gomme

attempt

would two

city some

and

of

restore

San

of

what

was

right

was

could

citizen

body--and

by

to

some in

order

enforceable

the

was

disorder. the

citizen

body--

qualification,

state--

had no

democracy

made

the gates

and

of

teru

substantially

that the

the

it

of

origin

allow

just

relatively

necessary

the

"the

clarify

kept

language

ignoring

were

city

be

standard,

normal;

which

to open

that

that

funds

town

standard

Athenians

While

what

lav.

and

the

participatory

demanded of

a

451

ín

a

colonization.

lawlessness in

of

allied

to

as & whole--the

number

as

of

remedy,

increase

a

symptoms

citizenship

Pericles

meaning

to insist

regarded

exploitation

possible

were

the

by

was

the

the

Pericles’

bring

no

became

phratries

also

hoplites

class--are

further

an Athenian.

and

Boeotian

by

concern

identity the

in

Francisco

ít was not

parents

being

demes

least

Athens

that

but

traditional

the demos

size.

self

citizen

is probably to

own

and be

the

at

Athenians--unless

interest

Athenian

constant.

be

of

there

admission,

its

solved

admissions--and Since

poorer

addressed

were)

was

Attica

increase

the

century

shareholders; to

Self

sharing

over

in

could

which

further

control

a rapid

Greece

míd-19th

that

no central

(and

Piraeus

possibility occur

be

feed

force.

problem

maínland

the

by

increase

immediate

difficulties

help

hoplite

caused

disproportionate

aggrandizement

But

Athenian

difficulties

termed

These

the

of Boeotia

condition

Pericles of

one

for

proposal

parent

or

law of 451 was was

in accord

with

average

. —

sentiment."

93 Although

usually

a matter

married

other

of

the origin

inquiry

Athenians.

before

And

since

of a potential 451,

it

it was

seems

citizen's likely

approved

by

mother was _

that the

Athenians

Athenian

not usually

assembly,

the

107

law

could

or

very

average

‘urban’ know who

was

sentiment

who.

been

is

marry

a daughter

if

he

fought

of

individuals

or

his

a deme or

as

in

sentiment."

persuasion.

permanent

to

a daughter

admit

In

have

residence or

in

battle.

his

(M-L

but

Of

85.15-16)

henceforth

popular

increasingly

a man did not necessarily

may

him

But

the

been

son

or

course, or

an it

be

may

could

such

made

to

know

have

been

Athenian be

exceptions

groups

would

difficult

in Athens

in marriage--especially,

Athenians

possible,

of

parents--it

Thrasyboulos

still

average

the Piraeus--where

phratry

the

with

admits

neighbors’

or

give

such

were

it

craftsman

alongside

94.12)

accord

movable,

Α foreign

persuade

"in

of the astu and

neighbors

to

(M-L

have

atmosphere

his

able

well

on

as

to

added,

in behalf the

the

man

Samians

vote

of

the

démos. Once and

there

logical--that

that

the

law

Pericles

on

might

appeal

from

the

(or

duty) be

time)

of

were

suppose

deme's

is

no

direct

also

city

While

451/0

it

either

decision

to

may

to or

criterion

for

citizenship,

procedures

and

regulations

is

included

that

ho boulomenos (this

‘state’

not any

at

the

not

judicial

to

know

measures

right

dikasteria)

been

called

not

the

(the

have

or

after

démos

was

whether

seeing

proposed

or

who

for

likely--

his

time

someone

soon

is

in

that

prosecute may

possible

it

and

the

fraudulently

the graphe

of

right claiming

xenias

at

this

established. was

that

it

in

suppose

a citizen

As

stead,

day

or

were

enforced.

that

we

a city

there

was

decree,

to

was

both

argued

the

démos

logical ancient

as

legislation

is

often which

in

and,

Chapter

exercised by

the

testimony the

II,

case

suggest

there

these

this

in

ancient

changes

of

no

evidence

responsibilities

mid-440's,

for

is

confirmed

important history, a more

by

to

before some

constitutional we

general

have

suggest

two

nature.

or

451,

reason

but

evidence.

after

^

fragments

These

are

451

There

development. odd

to

the

is

Inof frag-

108

mentary

decrees 35 contained

ἐᾶν δὲ τις

διώκειν

in

Krateros

ἐξ ἀμφοῖν

ξένοιν

εἶναι

εἰσί.

frag.

4

(Jacoby):

γεγονὼς

φρατρέζη,

τῷ βουλομένῳ Ἀϑηναίων,

λαγχάνειν

δὲ τῇ Evn

καὶ

οἷς δίκαι

νέα πρὸς

τοὺς

ναυτοδίκας.

and if someone born from two foreigners acts as ἃ phratry member, it is possible for whoever is willing of the

Athenians

(who have

case will be nautodikai.

and

in

Philochoros \

\

τους

δε

ὀργεῶνες

the right)

alloted

frag.

on

35a

φράτορας

καὶ

the

to presecute;

last

of

and

the

the

month

to

the

(Jacoby):

ἐπάναγκες

τοὺς

day

δέχεσϑαι

ὁμογάλακτας,

καὶ

τοὺς

and

the

οὐς γεννήτας

καλοῦμεν.

The

phraters

must

homogalaktai, (It

should

chosen

be

by

the

accept

emphasized Byzantine

that

(orgeOnes,

ment

law

Athenian

making

complete

fragments books

from

roughly

the

fragment

c.

which late 462

Andrewes

The they 450's to

the

argued

creation

of

thiasoi

he

to

the

dated

or

legal

a date.

the

are

orgeones

sense

of

basic are

odd for

nautodikai)

justice.

We

for

For

the

the

latest,

end

of

the

Peloponnesian

the

which The

two

fragments

nothing

date

the

depends

in

importance

will

some lies

be

Krateros

430's,

which

97

were

illustrating

expect

the

usage

in the develop-

difficulty in

giving

limits

fragment and

the

for

the

these

of

thís

in

the will

be

Philochoros

war.) 9 (along

remains)

in

problem

limits

at

that

their

first

chronological

information,

value

therefore

The

extracted. ^?

of

their

not

can

them.)

bits

to,

from

430's.

these

lexicographers

of certain words of

both

whom we call gennetai.

with

belonged

large

part

on

a provision to

the

same

for law,

interpreting

the

the which

109

citizenship

law

as

affecting

...Complications

only

were

those

likely

born

to

after

arise

in

metroxenoi born before the passage of yet enrolled in the demes by 451/450, be specially came to deal 451/450.

the

the and

acute in the middle 430's with candidates allegedly

451:

case

of

law but not these would

when born

the demes just before

("Philochorus on Phratries," JHS 81 (1961), p. 13.)

But

this

situation

and

demes

to

Further, the

would

begin

of

grounds

451

that

rejection

was

not

the

conclusions

law,

also

with

the

is

phratries

may

even

While Krateros

frag.

fragment

and

the most

early

not

natural

a main have

clause

been so

the

optimistic

also the

but

interpretation

‘rider’ other

as

the

of rhe of

of

I think

law. 4 is

As that

un-

while

from

or

of

can to

it

the

to

do

these

whose

main

citizenship. attributing be

argued

decrees

suggested this

also

having

a law

belong

the

come

both

of

on

finally,

about

it

part

decrees

or

ATL

parents.

are

is

fragments

to

phratries

9-12)

451 ??

one

on

the

Athenian

pp.

And

phratries

fragment

frag.

III

more)

that

tacked

authors

citizenship

Krateros

or

than

law,

Philochoros

(or

two

in

both

to

fragments

accepted.

two

450-430,

citizenship

the

wake

a

these

by ATL

to have

were

order

of

business

are

14)

there

years

something

Pericles’

possibly in

in

that

II

an

born

fragment

Chapter

p.

was

that

phratries'

cit.

possible

I am not

440's,

art.

passed

4 to

of

law

those

possibility

citizenship

same

concern

the

Krateros

(Andrewes,

was

of

the

only

the

the

if

admitting

for

is "economical"

fragments

arisen

(proposed

necessary--if

it

have

immediately

Andrewes'

law

not

that passed

earlier,

fragmentary

law

that in the

110

established acting

as

the

a citizen

magistrates

of

and

presided

understood

in

Archidamian

two

καὶ

in Aristophanes"

ἐϑέλω

βάψας

alien

in

Andrewes' such

jurisdiction

that

a law

well

as

But

the

at

about

(or

thís

time

citizenship. as

required

two

countered. graph? Cases

any

πρὸς

It

xenias, of

is

old

comedy

from

to

the

the

xenos

for

nautodika1 10°

That

these

fraudulently roughly

there

passed

the

appeared

I

lead

three

as

citizens

beginning

the

of

is

the

lines:

shameless

to

the

still

the

most

too,the

possible

where

the

beasts.

illegal

might

"from

not

just

one.

103 Thís

have

come

that

of

only

idea

the

deme

p.

13).

as

membership

essential

law

giving

the

of

phratry

objection

before

on

[parents]"

4 deals

accused

a law

Phratries",

citizenship

fragment was

and

foreign

the

from

depends

perhaps

with

that

defendant could

both

and

be

an

membership

suggest

characteristic

.͵92

you]

cannot

nautodikai

to

.

prove

("Philochoros

alone

possible

Athenians

to

"refer

relationship

the

[to

cases

phrase

parents,

entirely

nautodikai,

phratry"

phratry

ἐξαίφνης.

fragment

would

the

ξένον

Krateros

citizenship

than)

'half-bred'

who

the

'pure-bred'

ναυτοδικῶν

sailing

in

that

aliens

ναυτοδέκας

that

citizen

of

nautodikai

belief

Then,

excluding

the

citizenship

was

to

ἃ

ἀναιδῆ. 101

instant.

reference

cases

Cheirones

παρὰ

an

rather

to prosecute

Daitaleis:

I am willing, an

of

κνώδαλ

before

such

cases

Kratinos’

μὲν

tola

first

assigned

over

In

πρῶτον

And

ho boulomenos

fragments

war.

ánáyo

and

right

has

sign

of

been

taken

of

451/0

also

can

be

with

one

type

being

wholly

another

set

which

of

foreign.!0^

of magistrates.

lil

Busolt-Swoboda

suggested

the thesmothetai who xenias

the

polemarch

in Aristotle's

dÖroxenias--or

retaining

came before

the dikastéria

(Ath.

to

explain

boulomenos

could

nautodiksi

prosecute

who

entered

the

thesmothetai. 10° The

boards

of

a phratry

little

xenoi

The

earliest

the

regulations

belongs were

dikai

with

the

created

were

existence

in

reference set

just

does

cases

it

time

not

been

is

1.6.

I2

involving

446

been

any

voted in

and

one

of

the

put

in

the and

that

perhaps

that

polemarch

or

that

cases

their X

their to

containing seem

to

be

institution

suppose a

also And

of

jurisdiction.

37),

would

nautodikai

year).

parentage

idea

they

probably

ho

obscure

evidence,

other

by Harpo-

more

under

that

graphai

the

(SEG

where

rather

that

quoted

the

was

of bribery)

stating

before

reasonable

first

case,

belong

allies

(7),

more

seeing

half-foreign)

41.4

suggested

are

4 was

itself

in

it

by means

one

supports

have

they

fragment

come

nautodikai,

seems

In

by (or

would

in

has

1074,

would

Athens,

Hestiaia

increasing.

Krateros

fragment

judicial

the

preceded

century

While

about

been

the

for

the clause

half-Athenian

about

nautodikai for

Thus

cases

as citizens

century,

probably

when

known

to

106

such

fifth

down

sixth

that

is

acting

officials. in

Krateros

that

magistrates

'pure-bred'

imperial

and

of

12).perhaps

citizenship

59.3).

have

someone

note

responsible

fraudulent

Pol.

may

1095,

time were

(and

cration

(page

time

that when

they nautikai

were

already

in

451/0—(if

they

foreigners.

were

in the

concerned

Thus

it

would

have been natural to turn over to these magistrates the newly established graphé xeníasin cases

of allies

A few words and

343.89,

the

or

foreigners

are probably

Parthenon

[odikai]

contributed

Athenian

Maritime

"at

Courts,

necessary

accounts least p.

who

for

9,148 172)

to

attempted

to act as Athenians.! 08

on thexoev

the

years

and

at

most

the

building

pó(xau

444/3

and

32,148 of

the

of 1.6. I?

443/2.

drachmai" Parthenon;

In

342.38

444/3

(Cohen, the

xen

Ancient sum

for

112

443/2

does

not

epigraphic

or

Cavaignac of

funds

came

xenia

Pericles

431;

see

may

104

in

(and

445/4

magistrates

and

the also

have the

of

442 on

and

were

replaced

production

coincidence for

who

the

of

of

these

best

to

a certain

class

of

graphe

soon

after

book

IV could

cases

property

evidence

That

striking),

the

It

4 belongs

such

seems for

the

In

there

in the 440's

have

begun

to

suspend as

to

xenodikai

than

451/450

by

437.

between

reason

numerous

that

their

Plutarch had

charge

111

(The

436

and

elaborate--especially

"xen"...in

two

fifth

to the Parthenon of

fraudulent

need

not

(E.g.,

Cohen, on

logic for

citizens

have they

been may

aliens

the

of

slaves--

Athenian

xenodikai. responsible having

supposing

the

have

as

Ancient

magistrates the

the

(cf.

convicted cf.

the

this

slavery

judgment

another

rather

before

of

of

and

tríal.

aliens;

addition is

they

selling

nautodikai

xenias. 451,

conviction

view

445/4,

somewhat

is

either

trying

Cheriones

contributed

the

18

is

in

for

that

theories

of

solid

fragment

this

again

In

nautodikai

Kratinos'

charge

more

Krateros

172).

the

in

into

claimed

by

with

years

bringing

the

and

of both

do

gift

of

109

century.

grain

of

heard

responsible

the xen...who

ín

took

of

All

to

not

defendants

but

something

magistrates

established

Psammetichos'

Although

responsible

then

were

further

There

graphe

magistrates

went

Courts,

for

fourth

the

then

Maritime is

until

the sole basis

had

p.

are

reference).

that

selling

officials

unsuccessful

the

inscriptions.

expenses

been

in

depends

when we remember century

sale

Korte

xenias

note

these

attended

the

35.119

date

sources

that

which

from

of graphai

These

literary

proposed

suits

latter

survive.

this that

the 430's: 18 no positive

argument for assigning F4 to that year, but it cannot be so very much later; the fact that book IX included a document from Sept. 411 prevents us from alloving a long span to book IV. (Andrewes, "Philochoros on Phratries," note 44, p. 13) 112

113

It

seems

not

an

unreasonable

hypothesis

that

Krateros

fragment

4 is

part

of

a

law establishing the graph@ xenias--or a law concerned with one class of this graphe, other

that

it is one judicial

important

correlate,

correlate

that

of Pericles’

rejected

candidates

teria, may also have been instituted about apparently

note

possible

64),

for

those

and by 422 and

enrollment

of new citizens

is a well

at

line

58).

It

is

more

difficult

‘citizenship’

interpretation that

phratry

sub-groups, grant

of

normal

members the

this

to

still

apply

ed

anyone

who

thought

thought

that

procedures

of

451/0

gene

some

their

as

are

after

groups--and

he was

a

not

Andrewes (at

accepted,

451/0.

81

(1961)

membership The

law to

that

most

1-2),

two is

own.

insisted

Further, on

it

Athenian

natural

smaller

apparently

undergo

the

fourth

or

it

would

it would

also

make

be simply

gennetes

phratry

could

member

had adequate

seems

just

parentage

on

a

the century

sense

still

possible both

that

sides

be

unlawfully.

admission

and

that

law

prosecutBut

for

Presumably enrollment

already

and

to

a procedural

The basic criterion of Pericles'

a supposed

orgeones

the

a chronological

the original phratry enrollment was automatic. the gene and

(see

gennétai./ 13

then

Then

dikas-

445/4

The

required

the

in

into

(JHS

shows

least)

the

overseeing

a guess.

their

are

The

of the dikasteria

35a

gennetai).

they

citizen

Wasps,

noted

into (=

and for

best

Andrewes

accept

groups;

at

to

distribution

fragment

is

law.

Appeal was already

responsibility

(and orge6nes).

those

gennftai and orgeßnes

to

arguments

as passed

to

is,

procedure,

to the gennétai

known

homogalaktes two

grain

appeal

of Aristophanes’

follows

a privilege

preceding

would

it was

and

these

such

35a

the

Philochoros

what

required

enrollment

regulation

concession

by

are

orgeones

supports the

and

put

Philochoros

privilege

If

view

of

phratry

evidence

context,

to

might

this time.

at

the production

(parodied

or

rejected

citizenship

before the

law

114

quoted

by

Plataíeon

a share

Philochoros

is

recorded

[Demosthenes]

in all

in which

archonship(s) their

in

and

children

Chapter

genos

189-191

in

any

will

106,

here

in

they the

) the

be

was

the

priests

and If

requiring

ward?)

eligible

are

have

born

than

were

made by

clear

the

of

so,

Athenian

recognition

59.104

for

these

cult)

once

the

office

they

the

(astes) sense

body

must

gene

as

a whole in

made

the

citizenship,

was

to have

and

that

the

state.

a concession

own

on

2,

pp.

more

this The

amphoterous.

might

its

the

aking

been

standard

they

for

explains

115

have

kat’

have

But

Appendix

may

fulfilled

had

author

(see

to

genous.

wife.”

be Athenians

of the genos this

are

peri

except

is ek

also--if,

Athenian

Athenians

again

psephisma

Plataeans

which

citizen

citizen

Athenian

The

kai hieron kai hosion,

the

cults

for

But

the

functions

privilege

phratry.

that

offices

that

Athenian

the

states

Eteoboutaidai

Athenian

parents

fact.

a wedded

suggests

then

this

religious

Kerykes,

the

of

share,

or

"from

(or

priestesses

two

recognized

priesthood

religious

this

a

the Athenians

qualification

exclusive

to

part

Eumolpidai,

rigorously due

in

rule (soon

after-

scrutiny

procedure

not

on

qualifications. Pericles’ city’

thus

Krateros the

have

frag.

(or

latter be

further

along taken

In century physical

of

were and

a standard

up

the

other in

for

the

Philochoros

the

this

of

of

the

implications

and

35a.

nothoi

and

‘having

procedural Further

at

status

for

xenos

consequences

related

in

_ >

and

perhaps

or

by

may the

‘metic.’

Perícles'

the

recorded

developments

metoikos of

share

innovations

Kynosarges!

of

a

be delinea-

The

citizenship

law

Conclusion.

chapter, intense

we

a time

of

in

institutional

the

qualification

judicial frag.

synteleia

delineation)

with

sum,

of

prompted

4 and

institution

tion

will

may

proposal

can

say

development sense.

that of

These

the

the

middle

Athenian

years

saw

decades polis, the

of

both

creation

the in and

fifth the

115

development

of

an

of

of

participation

the

base

and

with

part

to

the the Wars,

leaders

who

institution

but

seized

generation,

city.

Pericles

led

was

leaders,

The

public

status

law of

even the

being it

the to

perhaps

less

institutions, of

the

which

and were

law

important

of

and

for

and

being

the

archonship

was

of

and

his

needs

in

after

then,

these other

in

the

the

imperial second known

Athens

by

large

extraordinary

the emergence

controlled so.

in

the

of

broadening

due

a cohesive,

with

development,

determined

the

themselves

there

well

situation

of a larger

This

influential--of

fits

and

to

ability

formation

most

general

found

energy

the

zeugitai

service.

Athenians

the

citizenship the

civic

public

in

Athenian--now

is no

of

admittance

for

more

one piece an

the

Athenians

his

and

opportunities

and with

is only

procedures--but

with

position

the

and

center

payment

one--and

innovations

451/0.

and

of

perhaps

first

second

political

civic

extraordinary

Persian

generation

urban

city

in

of a rules

116

Chapter

IV.

Footnotes

l. Cf. the suggestion of Davies (in a review of W.R. Politicians of Fifth Century Athens) that the 480's saw cians’

moving

into

the

vacuum

left

by

the

Alkmeonidai"

P. 378), and also the comments of W.G. Forrest racy) who, however, sees the change as from an ' Eos -dog' to the démos taking "charge of its

certainly

that

Just politics

to

have

démos

why

the

a

topic

is

been

an

still

had

Alcmeonids for

(Hermes

47

New politi-

(1975)

(The Emergence of Greek Democ"Alkmeonid tail" wagging the tail for good" (p. 203). But

leaders. lost

another

important

Connor's The “young, ‘new

their

position

occasion;

their

ín

or

control

attitude

toward

of

Athenian

Persia

seems

factor.

2. I find R. Sealey's claim (A History of the Greek City States, p. 257; cf. 184-185) that Themistocles "was resented not because of any distinctive policy but because he came from the deme Phrearrioi, far outside the city" highly

3.

makes

improbable.

The

more

point

is

sense

not

new;

(pace

cf.

Hignett,

to the lot as following the archonship.

rather

Wilamowitz,

Aristotle

HAC p.

to view

than

175)

producing

and

the

Athens

II.88.

It

change

from election

in

prestige

a decline

the

of

4. Aeschylus’ Persians can be viewed in this light. But by the later fifth century the idea of the heroic 'Marathon-fighters' was perhaps somewhat hackneyed and could be mocked on the comic stage (see, Gomme, "Aristophanes and Politics," More Essays in Greek History and Literature, p. 85). 5. See S.C. Humphreys, "Homo politicus and and the Greeks, pp. 169-171. On page 171 she military activity" which followed the Persian

6. special

See Appendix point

of

2 for

Athenian

comment

homo economicus," Anthropology speaks of “continuous Athenian wars.

on the extent

to which

‘naval

skill'

was

a

pride.

7. M.H. Jameson has emphasized the importance of agricultural slavery for Athenian participatory democracy ("Agriculture and Slavery in Classical Athens," CJ 73 (1977-78), esp. pp. 122 and 140, and suggested (p. 141) that "the Persian Wars, with the expansion of mining and ship-building before them and the influx of unprecedented booty after, may have provided the initial impetus in all three areas of slavery (mines, professions and household)." 8.

S.C.

Humphreys

notes

that

quality but of range" ("Public CJ 73 (1977-78) p. 102). W.G. an

"open-handed

(Emergence

local

of Greek

dynast

Democracy,

the

story

implies

"a

difference

not

only

of

and Private Interests in Classical Athens," Forrest sees in it evidence that Cimon was at

heart"

p.

219).

while

Pericles

was

a "class

politician"

117

9.

See

10. Greek

below,

pp.

172-173

This distinction history (as, for

for

a discussion

of

the

‘reform’

of

the

Areopagus.

is currently popular in discussions of Athenian and example, in the papers, and comments and discussion,

at

the Princeton conference entitled "Kinship, Politica and Economy in Classical Greece," the papers for which were published in CJ 73 (1977-1978)). It is potentially a very clearly applied. 1l. ('The

appropriate

and

fruitful

Cf. Connor, The New Politicians Indispensible Expert').

12. See Appendix 1 for describe their community 13.

Cf.

Forrest,

The

of

distinction,

Fifth

a discussion of the terms or civic membership.

Emergence

of

Greek

funeral

the comments

to

14, The Wasps fusion--between

the

chorus

law

suits

the

(contra

Thucydides

of A.W.

is another the public

of Wasps in

460's.

Jacoby)

claim

their

own

not

pp.

Athenians

p.

it

HCT

219:

a patrios

II p.

108-127,

used

"The

general for 455-460.

E.g.

to have

houses"

matters

Schachermeyr,

20.

Evidence

2318.9-11), in

the

to pay

21.

430's

for

for

his

nomos

(2.34.1).

of

heard

that

Pericles'

(1.6.12

Davies, APF,

wealth

to contribute 54

= Hill,

the Parthenon

p. 369

See

"The Athenians

one day would

judge

(800-801).

Perikles,

Pericles'

offer

should

94.

empire

see

especially

family,

see

J.K.

Davies,

Sealey's

APF,

18. See Davies, APF, p. 371. 1 follow Wade-Gery and Davies (APF, considering the Alcmeonids to be a (very remarkable) family and not the restricted sense used of the Boutadai or Eumolpidai. 19.

to

state

The account which follows will be somewhat different from R. Entry of Pericles into History," in Essays in Greek Politics.

17. In 368-384;

always

play in which the relationship--and at times conand private realms is a major theme. For example,

15. On the development and character of the Athenian R. Meiggs, The Athenian Empire (Oxford, 1972). 16. "The

is

those who have died in its service." ín dating the introduction of the

terms

Gomme,

it

Athens,

the

Democracy,

take over from the family responsibility for Forrest follows Jacoby (JHS 64 (1944) 36-66) state

Century

but

p.

Cf.

includes

to

Sources

(Plutarch,

17.

Bury-Meiggs^, his

a project 69)

Pericles

and

chorégia

p.

the

story

that

p. 370) a genos

in in

126.

in 473/2

of uncertain

pp.

(1.6.11?

character Pericles

offered

24.1-2).

(on family of Cleisthenes);

p. 459

(a less explicit

statement on the family of Xanthippos, simply a denial of its belonging to the genos Bouzygai). Davies believes that the family of Alcmeon was of Eupatrid status on the grounds that its members held the archonship before 580. I do not think that this is conclusive; it depends completely on Wade-Gery's theory

118

of the pre-Solonian "caste" of Eupatridai. Pericles is not called a Eupatris; Alcibiades may have been a member of the group--but on his non-Alcmeonid side (see Appendix 2, p. 188 ).

22.

Ibid.,

23. that

Cf.

25.

for

370.

the comment

Cleisthenes

toward 24.

p.

the results See Davies, Ex silentio

a birth

date

of Forrest,

descendents

"are

of

their

APF,

p.

457

but,

as

Davies

c.

The

Emergence

not

distinguished

ancestor's for

of Greek for

Democracy, any

love

p.

they

work."

the evidence. notes

(see

preceding

note),

some

confirmation

494.

26. E.g., Kagan, The Outbreak of the Peloponnesian War, p. 59: "The Cleisthenes founded the Athenian democracy and the Alcmaeonid Pericles its development." 27. PP:

28.

Sealey,

"The

200, show

Entry

of

Pericles

into

History,"

Essays

in

Greek

Alcmaeonid fostered

Politics,

64-65.

W.G.

Forrest,

"Themistocles

and

Argos,"

Classical

Quarterly

54/10

(1960)

233.

29.

Ibid.,

p.

235.

30. The assembly's election of Pericles as a prosecutor of siege of Thasos (Plutarch, Pericles 10.6; Cimon 14.5) may in due to the memory of Xanthíppos' prosecution of Miltiades. 31.

See

W.R.

Connor,

The

Nev

Políticians,

pp.

Cimon after the part have been

3-9.

32. On all accounts Cimon was also committed to a friendly relationship with Sparta (see Plutarch, Cimon 16.8; also Thucydides 1.102); another good indication is that he named his son Lacedaimonius). This combination of imperial and proSpartan policy provides a good example of the deficiency of a simple democrat/ aristocrat model for early fifth century politics. 33. The official ineligibility of the thetes to the archonship and perhaps the Boule in 450 (but see Chapter III, pp. 55-56 and above p. 92) is an "oligarchic element" counterbalancing the "democratic" lack of property qualifications for voting in the assembly (cf. de Ste. Croix, "The Character of the Athenian Empire," Historia 3 (1954/5), pp. 40-41). 34. they the

These dissidents are ever really existed. course

of

events

in

mysterious characters and we might even wonder if They cannot be seen to have had any real effect on

Athens

or

in

Greece

in

general.

that is was in "suspicion" of these activities that to Tanagra (108.1). Perhaps they were an invention the Spartan delay in Boeotia or of some Spartans to

Again,

Thucydides

says

the Athenians marched out of some Athenians to explain promote discord in Athens.

119

If they did exist they probably were oligarchs in the sense that they are said to have wanted to katapausein [ton] démon (107.4) and so probably wanted to put political power in the hands of a few (including themselves). They also wanted (according to rumor, it seems) to put an end to the building of the long walls (ibid.); this was an oligarchic idea at the end of the fifth century--was it already such when the walls were still being built?

35.

On this

into

History,"

36.

Not

point

see

Essays

everyone

also

the comments

in Greek

would

have

Politics, seen

the

of R. pp.

Sealey,

60-61,

logical

“The Entry

of Pericles

66-67.

connection

between

empire

and

‘radical’ democracy noticed by the ‘Old Oligarch' ([Xenophon), Constitution the Athenians) or considered the career of Cimon to have entailed a "fatal contradiction" 37.

See

Pericles

(Hignett,

note

20

by the

above.

lot

HAC,

p.

of

193).

I think

or any other

it

unlikely

"objective"

that

this

play

simply

fell

to

method.

38. The North and South walls need not have been due to Pericles, but the Middle wall was, according to Plato (Gorgias 4556), built on the urging of Pericles (cf. Plutarch, Pericles 13.7). It might be added that Cimon helped supply the funds for the foundations of the North and South walls (Plutarch, Cimon 13.6). On the Piraeus see page 94. Other possible "Themistoclean" aspects of Pericles' leadership are (1) an interest in the West (see V. Enrenberg, "The Foundation of Thurii," AJP 69 (1948) 155). I am, however, not so confident as Ehrenberg in the legitimacy of attributing to Pericles the responsibility for all Athenian policy in the 440's. And (2 ) an interest in a well stocked central treasury (Herodotus 7.144 on

Themistocles support

of

and the

the profits

appropriation

from of

the mines;

League

funds

Plutarch, for

Pericles

Athenian

12 on Pericles'

purposes).

The possible influence of Themistocles on Pericles has of course been recognized (e.g., by Jacoby, FGrH IIIb (Supplement), 123 and 387), but not always to great profit. Forrest, for example, uses this relationship to prove

that pp.

39.

Pericles

was

a Democrat

not

an Alcmeonid

(art.

cit.--above

note

28--

233-235).

Protagoras'

association

with

the

founding

of Thurii

is reported

by

Heracleides Ponticus (frag. 150 “ Diogenes Laertius 9.50). Diodorus does not mention Protagoras in hís account of the colony, but the story 18 generally accepted (see Ehrenberg, "The Foundation of Thurii," p. 168). Since Pericles is likely to have known Protagoras (if the sophist had visited Athens already by the mid-440's) it is a reasonable guess that Pericles was responsible for the choice of Protagoras as lawgiver for Thurii. But we cannot really be sure. The anecdote about the two men reported by Plutarch (above p. 9) is not dated and could as easily have taken place in the 430's as the 440᾽8. Pericles might have come to know Protagoras after the foundation of Thurii rather than before. 40. Aristotle, on the Piraeus;

Politics Diodorus

1267b37ff.; Harpocration, 12.10.7 on Thurii.

Photios

s.v. Innoódytc.a,

120

tion

For the date of of the substance

Miletus,"

in Studies

Hippodamos' laying of the Hippodamian

Presented

out of the Piraeus and for ἃ consideraplan see J.R. McCredie, "“Hippodamos of

to George

M.A.

Hanfmann

(Mainz,

1971),

pp.

95-100.

41. Again, the notion that Pericles was influenced by philosophers is not new (it goes back at least as far as Plutarch). What I am suggesting is that the influence may have been more practical--and less ideological--than is usually assumed; that, for example, Pericles may have absorbed from Protagoras (when he came to know him) less of a ‘theory of democracy' (cf. Ehrenberg, "The Foundation of Thurii," p. 16, n. 40) than an interest in the possibilities of legislation or rational planning.

42.

See de Ste.

76-7 root

(n. 31), 79. in Thucydides

43.

Davies,

Croix,

APF,

The Origins of the Peloponnesian War,

The term 2.65.

p.

"uncrowned

king"

is

his,

pp.

27-8,

but

of

course

harvest

in

mass

has

73, its

456.

44. Plutarch, Pericles 16. He sold supplies as needed from the market. 45. Aristotle's attribution of be due to his following a source

all

of

his

the reforms to Pericles with this anachronistic

and

then

alone in Chapter tendency.

bought

27

may

46. E.g., Hignett, HAC, pp. 193-213. Hignett claims (p. 195) that "It was not the unworthiness of the Areopagites to exercise their powers which was denounced by the radicals but the retention of such wide powers in a progressive state by a council whose members were appointed for life." I do not see how he can be sure that the issue was so limited. 47. Forrest considers the Areopagus an "anomaly" because it represented 'personal' as opposed to ‘constitutional’ authority. (Emergence of Greek Democracy, pp. 215-216). We might more easily suppose that it was an anomaly because a council of ex-archons (whether or not they vere members for life) would no larger represent the character and interests of Athenian leadership, which

now

rejects

tended

this

to

use

the

possibility

as

generalship

as

48. See P.J. Rhodes, The Athenian Boule, discussion of the Areopagus before 462. 49. It

On is

this

possible

point that,

cf. as

a

insuffícient--p.

Forrest, Forrest

The

of

power

(Forrest,

however,

216). pp.

Emergence

claims,

basis

179-207

of

Aeschylus

and

201-207,

for

a

Greek

Democracy,

pp.

212-215.

was

radical

the

issue

a

on

of

the Areopagus and in the Eumenides (indirectly) supported the limitation of its responsibility. Just what other advice he was giving the Athenians is not entirely clear. When he warns against '"muddying" the laws "with foul infusions" (lines 693-4, Lattimore trans.) it is possible that he is referring to something that we know nothing about or that never came to pass. On the political aspect of this play, see especially Podlecki, The Political Background of Aeschylus" Plays; Dover, JHS 77 (1957); Dodds, The Ancient Idea of Progress (Oxford,

1973),

PP.

45-63.

121

50. Although M.I. Finley (The Ancient Economy, p. 173) claimed that Athens was unique in this regard, G.E.M. de Ste. Croix (CQ25 (1975) 48-52) has shown that at least Rhodes in the 4th century and Iasus in the 3rd provided pay for some public service. The conclusion, however, that "quite a number of Greek democracies made use of political pay, in the fifth and fourth centuries and later" (p. 52) is somewhat overconfident; its main basis is the belief that Aristotle made use of a wide range of historical examples in his comments on state pay in the Politics.

Pay for public service at Rhodes may have been instituted in conscíous imitation of Athens at the time of the synoikiamos of the Rhodian cities (408/7). The Rhodians also adopted the deme system (see Ehrenberg, The Greek State, p. 30) and called in Hippodamos (who had already planned the Piraeus and Thurii) to lay out their new city (Strabo, 14.2.9). The degree to which Athens served as a model for other Greek cities ís an interesting topic for investigation, especially in the light of Thucydides 2.37.1. As noted earlier in this chapter, there was a certain amount of forced imitation of Athens by the allies. 51.

See

A.H.M.

Jones,

52. Aristotle actually (26.5) since he believes (16.5). On this see Day

Athenian

Democracy,

p.

135,

says that the deme judges that they were originally and Chambers, pp. 95-96.

note

1 and

pp.

17-18.

vere reinstated at this time established by Peisistratus

53. For the problem of the nautodikai and their function see E. Cohen, Ancient Athenian Maritime Courts (Princeton, 1973), pp. 162-183 and also pp. 110-111. 54. Pericles also an autarkestate and

had more faith than Plato in his own well governed city (see Gorgias 5156

ability ff.).

to

make

below

Athens

55. Notice the 'domestic' character of Pericles' early political activity. 'Foreign affairs' ceratinly affected Pericles' early political activity, but were not apparently his main concern. 56. I am assuming here that Aristotle's is the "documentary" version of the law and that Plutarch (Pericles 37.3) gives a paraphrase. This assumption rests primarily on the annalistic context of the reference and the use of astoin. The dual seems especially appropriate to the fifth century (cf. Jacoby, FGrH IIIb (Supplement) Notes, p. 379, n. 27, who uses the term "documentary" and Chapot ('"AZTOZ" Revue des Etudes Anciennes 31 (1929) 7). Astos, even in the singular or plural, was not a word Aristotle tended to use in his own discussion. For what it is worth, we can also note that in the funeral oration (Thucydides 2.35.46) Pericles twice uses metechein to describe the nature of Athenian civic participation (37.1, 40.2). However, it may be possible that Aristotle's formulation derives from the reenactment of the law in 403 (see the Epilogue, p. 145 ) and has no more real claim to be ‘documentary’ than Plutarch's version, which uses the epigraphic

phrasing "einai Athénaious".

122

57.

Hignett's

statement

(HAC,

p.

343),

"Presumably

it also

enacted

that

hence-

forth no Athenian man could contract a valid marriage with a woman who was not an Athenian citizen," is unjustified and unnecessary. But MacDowell (The Law in Classical Athens, p. 67) simply speaks of the "other provision” of Pericles’ law "invalidating marriage between citizen and an alien." 58.

See

Chapter

II

note

20,

pp.

31-2

(on

nothoi).

59. Hignett (HAC, p. 343) says simply, "There is nothing in this clause as we have it to exclude from the citizenship those whose parents were both Athenian citizens but had never married, and it is usually assumed that, as being of pure Athenian descent, they were not excluded from the citizenship either before or after 451/0." Bury-Meiggs', however, follow Busolt-Swoboda I, p. 222, and solve the problem by simply incorporating legitimacy into their "paraphrase" of the law: ...a

decree

name

of

not

no

was

introduced

child

Athenian

should

citizens

is

the

position

61.

Hignett,

HAC,

p.

62.

This

also

been

Humphreys, the ion then ship

has

'"The Nothoi

Pericles...that

admitted

whose

legitimately

"In the future" it can be noted question. See below, pp. 95-97. 60. This 167-8.

by

be

of

is

Tod,

also

wedded an

Walker,

in

the

future

the

father

and

mother

were

'

(page

addition

and

and

Adcock

217). begs

an

important

CAH

V,

pp.

5,

102-3,

reasons)

by

S.C.

in

345. suggested

(for

of Kynosarges,"

somewhat

JHS 94

different

(1974)

phratry 18 generally considered to have taken to the deme (see Humphreys, art. cit. n. 12), have to have been decisive. which was considered the key

92).

Since

admission

to

place two years before admissone of the admissions would

I suggest that it to citizenship.

was

still

phratry

member-

63. It is probably unnecessary to insist that the relation between the cítizenship law of 451 and the grain gift of 445/4 with its attendant scrutiny 18 an either/or question--that either the gift provoked an enforcement of the law (the

first enforcement 445/4 had nothing p. 345).

according to the CAH V authors--above note 61) or the events to do with the law of 451/0 (the position of Hignett, HAC,

of

There 18 actually no reason to think that the grain distribution occasioned a complete scrutiny of the deme registers (see Jacoby, FGrH IIIb (Supplement) p. 476). Neither Plutarch nor Philochoros speak of a diapsephismos, the fourth century term for a full-scale scrutiny by the demes of their membership, as having been carried out at his time. Plutarch's comment ...Ol δὲ μεέναντες έν

tfj πόλιτεία

καὶ

κριϑέντες

᾿Αϑηναῖοι

μόριοι

τεσσαράκοντα τὸ πλῆϑος ἐξητάσθϑησαν (Pericles mean (e.g., by Jacoby, op. cit. p. 463) that he not scale

scrutiny

had

been

carried

out

but

also

καὶ

τετρακισχίλιοι

καὶ

37.4) is usually takento only thought that a full-

believed

that

Athens

had

a total

of

123

14,040 citizens when it was all over. However, he need way. He could have meant that of those who applied and anined 14,040 were found to be Athenians.

Perhaps

the

course

of events

in 445/4 was

not be read in that whose status was ex-

something

like

this:

The grain arrived in the Piraeus and an announcement was made that all Athenians might come and collect a share. [Whether the amount that each man would receive was set beforehand or calculated after it was clear how many qualified claimante there would be is a problem. But the idea that the amount was set beforehand might find some support if we suppose that Psammetichos sent what he thought would be one medimnos per

Athenian;

on this see the comments of Jacoby

on Philochoros

frag.

119)

who

thinks

that

(op. cit.

n. 4

Philochoros’

30,000 medimnoi--Plutarch says 40,000--are evidence for 30,000 citizens. Jacoby is probably right in insisting that shares would not have been limited to thetes or city dwellers (op. cit. p. 467), although these may have been the majority of those in need.] At the distribution point the claimants were divided into tribes, and appropriate magístrates, demearchs and tribe officials were present to verify that each claimant was actually an Athenian. If a man were rejected by the deme or tribe offícial, he míght then appeal to a

dikasterion.

But

According to this fate.

if he lost,

Plutarch

he would

(Pericles

37)

be sold

nearly

into

5,000

slavery.

men

suffered

If this were the system, then the fraudulent claimants could have included (very brazen or hungry) xenoi with no connection to a deme at all as well as those

whose enrollment in the deme was questioned, and almost 5,000 rejected applicants is perhaps not so unlikely. In so far as the claim of someone demonstrably enrolled in a deme could be question it would have been on the basis of the law of 451/0 and the complaint would have been that the man was not born of two

Athenian parents yet had been admitted to a deme after 451/0. Thus the state distribution of 445/4 can be seen as the first major test of the state citizenship law of 451/0. 64. The of whether

Eumelos

ἀκξτάτοις

(FGrH

recognized 65.

The

reenactment of or not the law

in

77,

frag.

ἴσϑαι. fourth

concept

(or

the law in 403 is actually of 451/0 was retroactive.

2)

only

adds

of no help in the The law ag quoted

the qualification

τοὺς

6€

npo

question by

Εὐκλείδου

The possible ambiguity of this clause may have been

century "myth")

Athens of

Man's Most Dangerous Myth: The Montagu, writing in the 1940's,

as well

race

is

as

today,

a modern

Fallacyof Race, calls the modern

cf.

Demosthenes

invention.

See

57.30.

Ashley

Montagu,

esp. chapter I, pp. 1-26. conception of race “the tragic

myth of our tragic era" (p. 8). It is unfortunate that so widely in regard to Greek history. The issue is not

it has simply

been employed a semantic one,

124

a simple

matter

Dorians can the lonians

ancient ent

of

be as

how

one

chooses

to

translate

genos

or

ethnos

When

the

thought of as somehow innately slow, dull, conservative and innately quick, lively and innovative, we should realize that

historians

sub-species

have

of

66.

For

other

67.

See Appendix

adopted

more

than

just

the

modern

term

for

Introduction,

note

8.

the

differ-

man.

proponents

2,

pp.

of

this

view

189-191,

for

see

comment

on

the word

genos.

68. Kagan, for example, refers to Dorians and Ionians as "races" (The Outbreak of the Peloponnesian War, p. 347) but rejects the idea that such "differences of race" determined the policy of any Greek city. Bury-Meiggs^, on the other hand, are duly cautious about terming Dorians and Ionians "races" (p. 212) but consider the Peloponnesian war as "the culmination of that antagonisu between Dorian and Ionian of which the Greeks of this period never lost sight" (p. 245). It

seems

likely,

however,

that

this

antagonism

Athenian tensions of the fifth century (see (and dangers) of using the term "races" for Doriens et Ioniens (Paris, 1956). 69.

This

may

have

its

roots

in

the

was

post-Persian

prise of

at the

(to tolmeron) the

same

ídea

and

time

that

revolutionary

considering

the

Spartans

character

them

and

product

war

Athenians and Spartans over the leadership of the comment that the Spartans sent the Athenians home and

a

next note). Dorians and

the

conflicts

on E.

the error Will,

between

(to neoteropoion)

are

Spartan-

the

Greek world. Cf. Thucydides' from Ithome "fearing the enter-

allophulous

Athenians

of

In general Ionians see

(1.102). tvo

And

dífferent

of

the Athenians

a developed

sorts

of

version

people

is

found again

in the first speech of the Corinthians in Sparta (Thucydides I.70--note the characterization of the Athenians neoteropoioi 70.2). Allophulos, how-

ever,

as

used

by

Aeschylus

(Eumenides

851)

and

Plato

(Laws

629d)

plication of 'racial'--biological or genetic--differences. simply foreign--xenikos as opposed to astikos. 70.

liked

Many

to

of

the

Greek

think were

xenoi

originally

in Attica

Athenian

would

have

They considered themselves closely related,and Apatouria (Herodotus 1.147) suggest that there 71.

S.C.

Humphreys,

"The

Nothoi

of

been

colonists

(cf.

carries

Rather

lonians,

it

who

Furipider. Ion

no

im-

means

the

Athenians

1570ff.).

similar institutions such as the was a certain truth in the claim.

Kynosarges,"

JHS

94

(1974)

93.

72. E.g. Humphreys, ibid., Gomme, Essays in Greek History and Literature, p. 87; McGregor, "Athenian Policy at Home and Abroad," p. 10; Connor, The New Politicians, p. 171. 73. Also the idea that foreign marriages were foreign women may be likely but has no basis in See below note 83. 74.

Davies,

APF,

75.

Lakedaimonios,

p.

304, in

any

A.E. case,

Raubitschek, RE was

considered

confined to Athenian men the evidence (such as it

18, an

2

(1942),

Athenian

marrying is).

2000. citizen

since

he

125

served other

76.

as stratégos evidence

It

can

children. and

on

be

in 433

noted

that

Peisistratus

Themistocles

Themistocles

(Thucydides

Lakedaimonios

32).

Cimon

also

called

and

was

had

three

1.42.2).

the

other

not

alone

a son named

of

his

In a casualty

from

in

giving

Thettalos

daughters

list

See Davies APF,

p.

306,

for

sons.

Asia,

(7)

such

(Ath. Italis

the 440's

names

Pol.

to

his

17.3,

and

18.2)

Sybaris

(M-L 48.79)

(Plutarch,

there

appears

a Naxiades and in one from 412/22 (1.G. 12 950.14) an Eretrieus. (The last could possibly be an ethnic, but if so it would be the only ethnic of the list.) [Chal]kideus is a secretary of the Hellenotamiai in 442/1 (1.6. 12 203.2); Helliespon]tios is a treasurer of Athena in 438 (1.6. 12 359.12; and Salaminokles (a different sort of foreign-root name which could be connected with the battle of Salamis) is epistat@s of the Parthenon accounts in 446,5 (1.G. I2 340.37). 77.

and

On

this,

Private

see

the

comments

Interests

78.

E.g.,

A.

79.

Essays

W.

of

in Classical

Gomme.

in Greek

See

note

History

S.C.

Humphreys

Athens,"

(in

CJ 73

another

(1977-78)

The Population

and Literature,

81.

HAC,

82.

Essays

83.

See

84.

Actually

p.

of Athens,

p.

"Public

79.

p.

87.

This

really compatible with his other remark on this issue, same essay, note 1. Also, although Comme may not have cation, it suggests that the main growth in population had occurred by 450.

80.

article),

100-101.

26,

n.

statement

is not

on the same page of the been aware of the impli in the pentakontaetia

3.

346. in

above

Greek

History

Chapter

III,

one might

and Literature,

p.

87,

n.

1.

pp.

normally

assume

that

in 450

(before most

of

the

cleruchies were sent out) that Athenian women married did Athenian men. There were probably more unmarried women.

foreigners more often foreign men in Athens

85. E.g., A.R. Burn, Pericles and Athens, (1974) 93, also makes this distinction.

S.C.

86.

The word

body

(Pericles

is Burn's, and

87. This phrase (Bury-Meiggs^) of

88. urban

89.

See above

and

Athens,

the purpose

p.

pp.

92-3;

is again

II,

"purity"

of

JHS

94

the citizen

92).

belongs to J.B. Bury and appears his Historyof Greece, p. 215.

Chapter

the

Humphreys,

than than

pp.

68-69 for

in

the negative

the

recent

demographic

fourth

edition

effects

of

living.

Plutarch

(Pericles

37)

says

that

some were

accused

unjustly

in the spurt

126

of citizenship

suits

in 445/4.

Perhaps

there were

some

as those who had spent considerable time abroad or who (to some) were indistinguishable from xenoi.

in

genuine

the

Athenians

company

of

such

foreigners

90. It is commonly thought (and said) that Pericles’ law was repealed during the Peloponnesian War, but there is no actual evidence for this other than its ‘reenactment’ in 403. For further discussion see the Epilogue.

91.

This would

ence

to

92. young 93.

have been

Wrigley,

a "bulge"

Population

and

generation.

History

cited

If we suppose some 30,000 Athenians Athenians came of age in the 450's. Essays

in Greek

History

and

94. For the grain distribution See also the discussion below p.

See p.

45

above

and

the refer-

there.

in

c.

462,

Literature

p.

86.

then

perhaps

and scrutiny of 445/4 see above 108ff. of Krateros, fragment 4.

about

note

10,000

64,

pp.

122-3.

95. Andrewes noted ("Philochoros on Phratries," p. 2) that the δέ of Philochoros frag. 35a, "shows that it was not the sole or the main clause." The same might be said of the δε in Krateros frag. 4. (Actually, since Andrewes thinks the fragments are from the same law (p. 14) he necessarily thinks both are fragmentary laws.)

96. For Krateros of psephismata was Philochoros, digressions,

97. p.

who the

this is sufficient since it seems clear that arranged in chronological order (see ATL III

was writing an historical narrative situation is more complicated. See

For the upper 10.

Their

limit

with the possibility of the argument below p. 113

see Jacoby FGrH IIIb on Krateros

disagreement

over

the

exact

terminus

his collection p. 10); for

post

frag.

quem

18

4 and ATL III not

crucial

at

this point. It involves in part the citizenship lav, and the relation of that law to this fragment will be discussed below. The lower limit is very uncertain, but since Book IX contained material from 410/9, Book IV ought to have ended by at least the 430's. (In fact, I think it likely that it did not go further than

the 440's,

see below

p.

198.)

On the Book

IX fragments

see Jacoby

and ATL loc.

cit.

98.

Jacoby,

99.

"Philochoros

100.

FGrH

IIIb on

(Supplement),

Phratries,"

I accept Harpocration's

pp.

p.

251-2.

13.

(s.v.vauto6(xaui)

classification of the nautodikai

as magistrates, similar to the thesmothetai. They might have judicial authority than the thesmothetai at this time because foreign or allied cases.

101. The

Edmonds, date

is

in

fragment the

later

233,

cited

430's;

see

by

the

scholiast

Edmonds,

had more real they dealt with

to Aristophanes'

Fragments

of

Attic

Birds

Comedy

I,

766. p.

105.

127

102.

Fragment

the ancient

225,

cited

testimonia,

by

Harpocration,

Edmonds,

op.

cit.

s.v.

p.

nautodikai;

the

date

is

427,

see

629.

103. E.g., Harrison, The Law of Athens II p. 24. Harrison thinks that Krateros frag. 4 "is the less strict rule that prevailed before 451/0." It is, however, not clear whether he thinks the law from which the fragment came was actually passed before 451. If he follows Jacoby in thinking that Krateros' fourth book has an upper limit of 446 (see note 98 above for reference), then one wonders what he thought the purpose of the law was. But, as will be seen, the

Krateros 104.

fragment

This

not

possibility

ATL (III p. Phratries", dealing covered

does

is

necessarily also

recognized

10), Busolt-Swoboda (p. p. 13). Since Andrewes

with phratries but by the fragment of

in an earlier

clause)

not the

were

imply by,

"the

less

for

strict

instance,

rule." the

authors

of

1095 note 1) and Andrewes ("Philochoros and believed that the fragment came from a law

cítizenship, he suggested that the cases not ps@phisma quoted by Harpocration (but dealt with

under

the jurisdiction

of the phratry

alone.

105. Harrison (The Law of Athens II, p. 24 n. 2) finds a dividing up of jurisdiction in citizenship cases "hard to believe." But a difference in status of the defendant I think) have

106.

See E.

(1.e., whether he had one or no Athenian parent) could led to a difference in procedure and jurisdiction.

Cohen,

Ancient

Athenian

Maritime

Courts,

pp.

162-184,

(reasonably,

for

the most

recent and complete discussion of the nautodikai. Cohen suggests (pp. 163, 176) that the nautodikai of the fifth century may be a wholly different board from the commercial magistrates of that name in the fourth century. I will be concerned only with the fifth century nautodikai, who on the most natural interpretation would originally have had something to do with things nautika but who may very early on have been concerned also with imperial matters.

107. G.F. Greece, p.

Schoman, Die Verfassungsgeschichte 42ff.; Schwahn RE s.v. nautodikai.

Athens These

(op.

pp.

brief

108.

cit.,

162-3,

note

12).

If we could be sure that

See

also

his

the nautodikai

nach Grote's History of references are from Cohen comments

in

the

same

note.

in the fifth century also had

charge of commercial cases involving foreigners in the emporion as they did in the fourth century, then we might assume that many of these fraudulent citizens were sailors and merchants in the Piraeus. However, there is no clear evidence for nautodikai as commercial magistrates in the fifth century even though it seems likely (see note 110). Jacoby's claim that graphai xenias were assigned

to the nautodikai not because the "seasonal on

Kraterus

all

graphai

nautodikai

109. seem

frag. were

They appear to

Athenian

be

4,

xenias in

p.

191)

sounds

came

before

fact

commercial

strange--and

the nautodikai magistrates

in the very fragmentary

concerned

Maritime

because of their connection with commerce per se, but character" of commerce gave them free time (FGrH IIIb

with

Courts,

symbolaia

p.

173

for

among

I.C.

is

at in

based

this the

fifth

discussion.

See

on

the

idea

and a belief

that

that

century.

112 46 and 144,

foreigners.

further

both

time

both of which

Cohen,

Ancient

128

,

110. E. Cavaignac, "Etudes (Paris, 1908), p. 1xvii.

111.

A.

Korte,

sur

l'histoire

"Die Attischen

᾿

financiere

Xenodikai,"

Hermes

d'Athenes

68

(1933)

au

noted frag.

113.

were

"Philochoros

114.

I assume

were

and

a similar

astoi

that

not

Phratries,"

privilege when

xenoi,

pp.

could

Plataeans

and

so

a

3-9.

I assume

be shown became

Plataean

for

earlier the 4 is part of

there

enough

the orgeOnes,

Athenians,

would

that

siecle

240ff.

112. Reference is to the argument of ATL III p. 9-12. As authors think ít "virtually certain" (p. 10) that Krateros the citizenship law. But that is hardly necessary.

evidence

V*

not

they--both

have

to

have

male

and

married

female--

an

Athen-

ian woman in order to pass on his citizenship to his children or for his children to be able to serve as archon. However, as the restrictions cited by [Demosthenes] indicate, these new Athenians were not yet full members of the community. For a discussion of the term astos see Appendix I. 115. The argument for a post-451 date for the synteleia at Kynosarges depends on the suggestion ín Plutarch (Themistocles 1) and in Demosthenes (23.213) that its members were nothoi by virtue of having a foreign parent. This is why Themistocles,

with

the

existed

who

group in

his

and

in

his

why

day

was

probably

Demosthenes

day--ibid.)

with

considered

compares

one

in

Oreus

this

gnésios,

synteleia

which

was

(which

enrolled

associated

no

longer

Charidemos,

the

son of a foreign mother. It is reasonable that such an institution would have been thought desirable in the 440's (7) and also that it would have disappeared by the mid-fourth century. For a full discussion of this institution see A. Ledl, WS 30 (1908) 43-46, 188-193, and S.C. Humphreys, JHS

94

(1974)

88-95.

mother (or seemed an sons of a have been the upper

Both

especially

so.

Thus

probable

a

it

special

is

authors

argue

for

a post-451

date.

The

sons

of a foreign

father) who had not been admitted to a phratry by 451/0 would have obvious anomaly. Théy were to be considered nothoi and xenoi yet were married Athenian and possibly siblings of Athenians. They may not numerous, nor (pace Humphreys, p. 93) were they all necessarily from class, but they would have been conspicuous and the upper class ones These

young

that

synteleia was

men

either set

up

were

perhaps

formally in

or

connection

not

content

informally with

the

with

(so cult

a

metoikos

Humphreys, of

Heracles

status.

p.

92)

(who

was

thought of as being in a similar situation, cf. Birds, 1661). In the 420's perhaps there was still a public interest in the synteleia (see Humphreys discussion on pp. 85-89 of the decree proposed by Alcibiades--Poleman frag. 78, Preller), but by the time of Demosthenes the synteleia had ceased to exist.

129

V.

“Classical terms

of

'defined' of

a

Athens

defined

the

(J.K.

Davies,

"Athenian

descent"

Alternatives,"

CJ 73

since

law

at

(1977-78)

no

of Athens the

thought

as members

important

A non-Athenian descent

(the

could

group--into

(Chapter

II,

the

At

character.

was and

those

the

public

was

realm,

essentially

Solon

subject

example, cial

the

that

marriage

groups

oikos)

the

children realm

public

a matter

of

private

in

certain

a heiress called

instances find

of

the

atimia--a

form

of

punishment

imposed

heiress

upon

of

and

and

reserved a citizen

were

first

had no were

As

thought

as odds

also,

as

at

produce

or

and

(Plutarch, for off

emphasized

group')

was

a public

least

unit

different

unit

although

of

the

time

The

need

to

insure,

laws

Solon

in

woman

of for judithe

Similarly,

crimes’--was

foreign

the

regulating 20).

from

marriage

from

resulted

of

that

least

in

that

in familial

and

basic

public a

been

into

relationship

of

at

children

46.22)

group. '

a self-contained

Thus

it was

married

foremost

has

‘descent

the

rules.

correctly

entering

'familial'

both a private

especially

and

and

tribe.”

its

evidence

statement

accepted

regulations.

husband

who

this

there

being

at

and

is

and

in

the word

‘descent

life,

and

(Demosthenes her

periods

with

Athenian

and

often

state

quarrel

the Athenian

private

contract, to

Group

Descent

the

thus

concern

a husband

epidikasia

deme,

had

state,

of

life

century

the

of

by

(and

interests

object

'private'

fourth

or

or

in reality

which

The

is..., "1

or the genos)

epitome with

and

society

body...rigorously

classical

citizens

an Athenian

which

citizen

one might

citizen

families

the phratry

(the

or

Athenian

phratry

its

Citizenship:

archaic

that

oikos,

both

wife

public

point

of

Although

Athenian

of Athenian

husband, of

"an

become

family

It

the

only

tribe,

the base

individual

in

Athenians

even

membership

105).

of

the

p. 10)

Cleisthenic

terms.

point

stating

emphasizes of

Conclusion

as

in

the

though

130

she were Athenian 87),

and

and

a

"similar

Aeschines

tially still

(|Demosthenes}

1.183).

course

producing

to

have

the

Suda:

would not

clear

are

only

taken

simply

as

admitted

to

It

is

profitable

group;

of

the

suggested,

does

not

say

that

property,

public,

‘state,’

or

are

only

but

that

the born

only

to view

this

criterion

two

between

its

on

law

the

two

a public

was

parents.

as

decision

the

parents

a share

are

lav

itself

the

while

foreigners, The

now

no

two

shift

law it

is

one

Athenians. to

a closed as

or

law makes

buttress

group

a significant

Athenian

‘have

of

were

the

451/0

And

from

a legal

Athenians

[Demosthenes]

after

context:

born

rules.?

Aelian

time.

century

of

Plutarch,

and

this

from

that

were

marriage

changed

Arístotle,

substan-

matter

strict

about

assume

is not

law

indicates

they will

public

who

The

to

to

known

probably

at

mid-fifth

Pericles’

those

was

‘public’

a law

Athenians

happening

group.

of

by

Athenian

phratries

only

that

for

‘state’

in

reason

quoted

fact

to view

criterion we

in

descent

those

one

with

and

possible

however,

inherit

How

was

evident

as

(Ibid.

relationships

subject as

(Ibid.,

adultery

solidarity

clearly

were

such

ín

Private

now

procedures

marriages

demes

Athenian

‘adoption’

have

the

marriage

the

law.

and

an adulteress

taken

group

considered

is

was

by

Athenians

and

quoted,

be

106)

rules

those

discouraged

descent

usually

no

to divorce

a woman

important

on

than

that

still

18

there

extent

solidarity

a public

related

other

p.

citizens,

law

to what

sense,

should

provision

severely

the

restrictions

107-115),

Athenians

have

good

IV

any

and

on

century,

cit.,

in

citizenship

But although

included

art.

or refused

imposed

fourth

but

heirs

included

Chapter

the

(Davies,

legitimate

59.16-17. (see

By

possible,

Pericles' and

punishment" ^ was

"buttressed" of

59.52)

the 'familial'

a whole. in

focus.

legitimate®

in the city.’

I

or

It

It can

is a

status. insistence

necessary

in

on 451/0,

a descent was

the

group

criterion?

Periclean

rule

If the

131

only

possibility?

Descent

Group

bilities

for

(1)

and

all

behalf

those

be

citizen:

who

this

But

Athenian

Athenian

of

treasurer

of

though

Cleisthenes

did

not

contrary.

tribes)

may some

thereby order

is

any

terms"

"The

three

possi-

who

be

that

roles

says

an

and

1). office

is

to

definition

office’

(see

accordingly

holding

reason that

Aristotelian

judicial

He

level.

class

his

Athens

use

"cares

away

towards

defining

it in terms

of criterion

alternative

to being

for

choosing

be entitled

before

were

not

the

not

poorer

to attend

Athenian

alternative

citizens

would

a somewhat

broadened

any

office-holders

non-Athenian than

defining

be

able

(see

xenoi

for and

(3)

to

run

II,

of an body

office wealth

al-

(in

the

p.

25)

citizenship.

On

metoikoi

a

"wealth

for

And

word

of

the

(with

even

about

terms

within

include

Chapter

the

a member

the assembly.

criterion

(presumed)

from

to

above But

of

in

non-Athenian

citizenship

included

it

the

discus-

mainly

strongly

a real

from

the

in Athens.

question

Solonian

of

concerned

moves

would

have

groups

essential

with

serious

Davies

more

introduce to

the

wealth was not

of the thes)

In

defining

A wealthy

Athena

citizenship

"in Athenian

resources above a certain (art. cit., p. 114)

deliberative

there

and

other

operating

a criterion

families.

level

he

of

and

in Appendix

example,

(1)

but

at the

and

of

office-holders,

family,

of

demes

ways

certainly

on Athenian

and

is

a share

of criterion

(ibid.).

Davies

definition

For

defining...the

State:

economic

restriction,

‘alternatives.’

version

have

has

alternative

granting

article

citizenship:

the

that

Aristotle's

with

of

who

noted

‘he

of

his

and postulated

those who perform military

(3)

sion

subtitled

its Alternatives”

determining

on

should

Davies

those who were in the segmental descent mattered (gene, phratries, and demes):

(2)

It

J.K.

douloi

the

132

(Aristotle, that

Politics

mattered,”

the

last

the

years

criterion

program

of

for

the

and

these

foreigners

proposal

was

tal ed

again

within

the

Thus,

it

group

membership

manned"

was

of

noticed

istic

or

side

the

not)

of

of

body.

What

by

and

descent

idea

that

group

Such

a law

discussed

in

speaking

this

Chapter had

was

to

more

most

clear

"segmental Finally,

that

based

on

than

5,000

able

to

in

anyone

the

was

descent.

turmoil

the

take

with

groups

proposing

If

should

contribute

descent

of a

oligarchic

part

in public

their

moneys

and

there is no reason to think that this The

natural

participation

family

in

membership

uncontroversial" controversial members,

cit.,

were

no

under

or

And p.

interpretation

public

affairs

membership p.

105)

is

that

this

to

a certain

the

Athenian

basis

the

degree

just

how

to

insure

that

"sense

of

seige,

of

derives

from

Athenians--a

were

in

was

110)

It but

for

to which

the

fear

a special

barbarians.? pressure,

or

(Davies,

the

longer

Athenians

with

and

the

civic 'segmen-

descent

barricades

Athenian which

fear

developed

distinct

was

not

the

rather

the

solidarity

group

of

descent-group or

remainbeing (realalongpeople, criter-

identity

itself.

buttress is

that

that

citizenship

a substantial

on

the

of Athenians.?

(art.

'unmixed'

one

Athenians.

was

Athenians

not

to

citizenship.

Davies

'obsessive'

is

‘not

into

phratries.’

p. 118),

‘adopt’

Athenian

Pericles'

vided

body

to

it

those

"largely

free

citizenship

that

be

as

to me

the

that

autochthonous ion

seems

were

basis

to

that

a restriction

larger

the

alternative

well

in Athens.

groups' the

as

brought

and

century

alia

were

be

(Davies, art. cit.,

included

descent

fifth

inter

must

tribes

citizenship

their bodies"

group

demes,

"specified

affairs,'

1275b37)

only IV

law

to the

passed

the

do with

was

when

reasons the

a response

to

‘familial’ it for

is

development

pressure!9

solidarity

needed

which

this

this of

or law

Athens

and

indeed

of the Athenian

thought seemed after

to

the

citizen

be needed.

necessary. Persian

pro-

I Generally

wars

into

133

an

urban

number

and

of

imperial

related

drew a tight

center.

issues.

line

ans,

59.104

II,

pp.

339-340).

natural

and

probably

law

was.

ing

consciousness

the

belief

With

It

the

"inflow

those

on marriage

art. The

on

p.

111;

suggestion

parent

vas

in

community

the

the

on

the

'family'

groups,

ἃ cosmopolitan 451/0 ignored

ignore

itself by

it,

by

of

the

but

that

most

rather

of

center starkly

Athenians

or

drew

producing

commentary

of

A.W.

Gomme,

from

art.

result

to be

century

(except

121).

It

supported

for

was

(e.g.,

by

"obsession"

the

further

(Davies,

entrenched.

or

worst

all,

a foreign

or,

to

impugn

someone's

again,

I

way

But,

should the

of

be

or

sacrificed

in

(although

and

of

right

this

no

with

doubt

the

to membership not

families

and

their

of

traditional

growth

of

Athens

second,

of

the

could

not

continued

for

a foreign

result

that

and

which

insecurity'!?

the

Athenian

empire,

a way

many

of

perception

ἃ maritime

boundary

'anxiety'

consider

members

Athenian

lost

ruler the

accent

of

status.

regulations

the

increas-

development

outsiders p.

of a city the

valuable

further

59.16-17)!?

of

further

cit.,

require

the making

the of

it was

was well

common

foreigners

Platae-

both

themselves

group"

it a "neurosis"--ibid.)

being

and

‘descent

revolutionary--rather

was

fifth

Athenians

the

distinctly

first,

was

their

the

a

of

and

of the

451/0

on

as

a distinct

Athenians

which

thereby

name

the

not

briefly

(e.g.,

cause

Athenians.

Athenians

urban

terms

and

law

eventually

end

with

in

closed

the

isolated

would

They

and

[Demosthenes]

foreign

idea

as

which

By the

easiest

pressure

self-identity

a

was

proposal

sentiment"! !—pbue

a trickle"—Davies,

he also

of

was

this

identity

commenting

‘adoption’

3.55

itself

that

Athenians

quoted

public

with common

probable

remained

or ideology.

cit.,

criterion

Athenian

a course

of

by

Pericles’

Thucydides

an Athenian

the

that

step

rationale

of

law

first

and

to me

being

Pericles'

occasion

The

to

here

civic membership.

"in accord

seems

that

the

conclude

agreeing

their

on

Demosthenes}

ECT

By

around

to outsiderg--except

I will

easily

law

be

to

try

to

themselves

and

their

into of

134

families). Pericles’

(between

the astos

tant

further

some

were

Athens

that

division.

Some xenoi

were

The well

citizen metic

for

but

it

not

Cleisthenes' of

the

14

with

rights

and

became was

of

Athenian

the track

of

necessary

to

the

the

concept. '!'

contribution)

alien the

most

"Decree

important of

a τῶι

[πολε] u [oex] e (.] --M-L 23. 30-31) to man

lans

before

this

aliens

decree

18

permanent

yet

been

I.c.

12

not

188.52-3)

may

share

in

indicate such

significant foreigner,

uses an

such

as

the

common the

result

seems

then

in

calls

the

ships

official

in

city It

the

requirement

status

seems

main

( reat} of

of

that

460's

which

of

possible, that

development the

foreigners

the

evidence

the the

one

that the

registration

480

deme

τὸς μετοίκίος

plausible

features

that

admittedly

term

metoikos

at

Athen-

also

term

is

the

and

the

now

with

registered

the

the

along

suggests--although

By

the

ἔμ τῶν ἀπογεγραμμένων

in

them.

as

defined--nor

upon

a recognition

to

the

Cleisthenic

entirely

was

assigned

the made

fully

watershead

held

of

was

there

be

in

for

emerged

view

secure--that

distributions.

development

have

This

to

‘metic’

responsibilities

and

Salamis.

enough

'officially'

which

of

(τοὺς) 6€ εἰέν] oc

or

and

law)

only

Themistocles"

and Attica

status

the

was

an impor-

distinct

arrangement

status

foreigner

there was

metoikos

residents

rr

battle

or

the

of Athens

a

most

some

with

the

of

The

That

of

could

registered

of

the polemarch

xenos

innovation

that

the

The

the

and

(out)side

formulation

registering

Athenian

residents

protection

state. 16

was

of

distinct.!?

suppose

reorganization

'polités

but

the

latter,

permanent

a Cleisthenic

and

the

status

(to

likewise

on

between

the

financial

status

keeping

is

of

documented,

service

reorganization time

evolution

foreigner,

the

boundary

but

not

of

a clear

the xenos),

military

status

drew

and

not.

is

resident (for

law

was

mid-fifth

a deme,

had

of not

Scambonidai

λαχ],) Ev

classical with

a class

metoikoi of

feature

the

of

status the

-51-3)

having

a

century of

saw

resident

guarantee

of

135

legal

rights

Periclean in

any

or

institution

legislation,

case

it makes

citizenship

main

century

tés

Pericles

did

parents

could

of

later

not

own

be

of

a

the

Athenians

law

stands

u

the

Samians

re-enacted This atimos of

in

the

by

atimos

centuries)

may

perhaps

have

an

in which

been

part

anticipation

we

have

atimia changed

to

and

the

—

-1—

Athenian

if

or

of

of

viewed

the

it,

but

Pericles'

might

"deprived

(or

could

(and

duties)

it

stood

for.

the

right

to

beginning

it

from or not

land

seems

of

the

development

Further,

the

older

and

two

‘to

Athenian a public

be

part

a

in

but

was

belonging,

not

decades make

that

him

a

Pericles’

a abstract

simpler

of

451/0

three

possible of

and

hold

simple

Although own

37),

city’

citizenship as

two

citizenship.

born

she)

rights

1? 83),

the

a juror

that

is I.c.

in

be

then

alien

community

was

not

lost;

" σΣαμίος ᾿Αϑηναίος the

has

in Athenian from

or

not

the

mid-

and

attitude

toward

τ΄

in

valid,

he

was

in

the

Pericles

toward

suppose of

an

office

that

everything

that

law

hold

a share

about

used

Plutarch

attitude who

suggests

phrases

26.4;

have

someone

simply

citizenship. —

Pericles'

vote

We

('to

law

The

Pol.

'wholistic'

that

example

at

Ath.

say

but

Pericles'

citizen.'1?

Athénaious

offer

decreeing

conclusion, and

or

city

known

of

the

a collection

could

first

notion

membership

or

on what

to me a

Athenians.

in

(the

einai

polites,

a share

divisible

it,

This

context

(Aristotle,

land

much

citizenship

same

of

(apparently)

so

citizen

of

comment

suggest

not

the

law

and

both

not

community

having

the

‘concept

the

poleos

priesthood--or

considered

metoikton. 18

result

in

brief

Athenian

be Athenians’),

the

the

sense

a very

quotations

metechein

the

law.

Finally, fifth

or

of

same

terms

"outlaw"

in

of rights"

It the

for

is

in the

our

late

it

Athenians

94.12)20

was

originally of

recognized

that

(7th

and

and

fourth

at

honored

and

understanding

period

fifth

the

(M-L

generally

archaic

405

ἕναι

in which

implications usage.

in

in

403

they

proposed.2! the

terms

the

least

meaning

early

centuries.22

sixth

And

136

by

the

later

certain

period

it

was

such

as

holding

to

view

this

rights

tendency

now

is

it

probably

should

The

crucial

years

the

related

development

According was

passed

about

that,

attribute Cimon" as

"with and the

were

as

may

indeed

have

one

late

an

absolute might

lack

of

But over

actually

very

little

trusted?

Was

there

no

question,

but

would

suggest

and to

those

on

to

traditional his

rules

Olympian

of Athenians polis have

society been

of

of

this

that

on

or

chat

the

and

in the

of

not mid

and

trouble."2?

It

of

the

hear

Parthenon al 1.26

or

perhaps

fifth

of

only the

Cleisthenes,

complete

change.

century

citizenship is

which

saw

confident

there

had

been to

of

necessary

their

own

best

interest.

for

sure

goes

on

of

the

have

attention

able

to

it

their seems

come poets

who

wanted the

speaking

convince

be

either

changing

Pericles,

maintaining that,

to

and

of

members)

opposed

such

sources

it may

ordinary

and

12)

opposition the

to

objections,

to

was

greater."

be

Pericles

however,

And

to

answer

conservatives

proposal,

451/0

an

(or

Perhaps,

of

Pericles

or

silence

receive

officials

both

between

debate

the

not

likely

who

(Plutarch,

Can

law

difficult

source,

no

I am

the

Although

late

the

was

argument

assembly.*3

necessarily

of

own

loss

Solon

report

we

from

atimia'--the

citizenship.

rule

lesser

with

that

state.

his

the

bargain

deme or

in

a “political

at

if

Athenian

behalf

of

least

phratry

and

again

the

law

Athenians

the

occurring

reliability

to

prerogatives,

voice

‘making

the

‘partial

speaking

of

opposition?

namely, their

minimum

building

of

century!)

striking

about

‘anonymous’

historians, hang

the

as

been

(20th

doubt

is

or

concept

opposition it

speak

a gradual

the

to

raised

from

change

viewed

in

to

office

be

we

(ibid.).

possible

the

in

majority

traditional to me,

would

not

137

Chapter

1.

As was noted

tion’ 2. tial

of

in Chapter

citizenship

but

I argued that after part of citizenship,

3.

See

IV

only

Hansen,

Apagoge,

(Odense

University

4.

Ibid.,

by men

p.

on

this

56.

(p.

95)

Pericles’

law did not

necessary

provide

a

'defini-

condition.

Cleisthenes membership in a phratry was still an but that is not crucial to the point made here.

M.H.

comment

Footnotes

a minimum

and Pheugontes further

V.

term,

Hansen

Endeixis see

and

Classical pp.

believes

Ephegesis

Studies

against

Kakourgoi,

8,

pp.

Vol.

1976)

essen-

Atimoi

72-74.

For

135-136.

that

"atimia

was,

of course,

a penalty

incurred

only."

5. It is clear, however, that the rules were not always followed, and the proliferation of rules about who can marry whom perhaps reflect a certain laxness in

obeying

and

enforcing

Pericles'

law of 451/0.

6. I would argue that Plutarch's referring to Pericles' law as the "law about nothoi" (Pericles 37) is due to the popular perception that this law put children of a foreign parent in the same position as nothoi. For the nothoi of Kynosarges see Chapter IV, note 115, p. 128, 7.

See

note

2,

above.

8. See the Epilogue for a brief discussion of the various proposals about who should manage the affairs of Athens which were put forth in the last years of the fifth century. 9. See the comments of D. Whitehead, The Ideology of the Athenian Metic (Cambridge Philological Society, supplementary volume no. 4, 1977) pp. 113-114 and especially Plato's Menexenus 245c-d. However, it should be noted that a hatred of

t@s allotrias as

Whitehead

10. 19th

war

phuse@s (245d) translates

does not necessarily mean a hatred

"of other races"

it.

Compare the development of American ideas on citizenship in the 18th and centuries under the pressure of first the conflict with England and then the

between

1608-1870,

the

states.

University

ll. A.W. Gomme, "The Literature, p. 86.

(See J. of

Nortb

Law

of

Kettner,

Carolina Citizenship

The Press,

Development

of Athenian

Citizenship,

1978).

in Athens,"

Essays

in

Greek

History

and

12. If foreigners could live with Athenians as though they were married it may have been difficult to keep the boundaries clear and to enforce Pericles' law. I do not know of any argument dating the marriage laws quoted by [Demosthenes] 59. 451/0 is a terminus post quem, but the rules may not have been thought necessary until the fourth century.

138

13. According to Davies, obsessions, anxieties, and 14. "A ‘history’ of the sparse that vast expanses

classical 15.

period"

"For

it

is one--but amounts

is

(D. the

Athenian of metic

Whitehead, the

and

same

argument.

16. E.g., Davies, Metic, p. 145, with

art. note

cit. 24.

the

17. This seems 140 and 147). 18.

pp.

Whitehead, however, does participation of the metic

On

these

to

and

be

rigid

maintenance

foundations

116-117;

of

of

Whitehead,

view

features

of

the

(The

Ideology

metic

status

ology of the Athenian Metic, pp. 75-97, who also ments. It seems possible that the metoikion was 19. See Appendix 1 for it implies about the way

descent

rules...generated

Metic,

the

p.

polites

The

Ideology

of

the

see

140). which

" (ibid.)

of

the

Athenian

now

so the

concept

the metoikia

not believe thatthe entire set of rules were instituted by Cleisthenes (ibid.).

Whitehead's

other

"rigid

Ideologyof the Athenian

ideological

the

the

metic can never be written: the data are history are totally undocumented, even in

The

appearance

only one--of

to much

art. cit., p. 111, insecurities.”

Athenian

regulating

Metic,

Whitehead,

pp.

The

Ide-

views them as post-451/0 developa product of Peloponnesian War.

a discussion of Athenian citizenship terminology Athenians viewed their civic membership.

20. See M.J. Osborne, "Attic Citizenship Decrees,” a discussion of the terminology of such decrees.

BSA

69

(1972)

and

129-158,

what

for

J.K. Davies regards this decree as actually bestowing isopoliteia on the Samians (art. cit., p. 107), but although that may have been de facto the result of the decree it is not what the words say. 21. See Chapter IV, Aristotle's quotation 22.

See

M.H.

23.

Ibid., p. 6lff.

24.

For

note 57 for of Pericles’

Hansen,

Apagoge...,

this

view

see

(dissertation,

Yale

University,

were

expanded

Association 25.

A.R.

ín

in Burn,

a

B.

paper

Boston,

a discussion of the ‘documentary character law and the Epilogue for its reenactment.

26. It is possible that already in the air in 458

reference

in note

The

Evolution

of

Manville,

1979)

read

at

December

Pericles

(full

and

the

Appendix. annual

The

meetings

4),

Athenian

arguments of

the

p.

of

/5ff.

Citizenship

presented

American

there

Philological

1979.

Athens

(New

York,

1949),

p.

93.

the issue of ‘who can be (or become) an Athenian?’ was when Aeschylus' Eumenides was produced. It might be

139

argued that Aeschylus was taking argue that the son bears no real

more

likely

that

he

δὴ anti-Periclean position when he relation to his mother (657-660).

is simply--for

purposes

of Orestes'

has But

defence--making

Apollo it seems

use of the

common idea that the woman provides the receptacle, the man the seed (cf. Sophocles, Antigone 569). Plato (e.g., Timaeus 50d) and Aristotle (e.g., On the Generation of Animals 729b1-20) adapted the idea to philosophical purposes. Furthermore, attention should as well as to the biological theory court but win a position of honor in nal as well as the paternal side of

the

Eumenides

as the protectors

the Eumenides become Apollo has spoken so

of

be paid to the values defended by the Eumenides of Apollo. The Eumenides lose their case in Athens; and they very clearly value the materthe family (e.g., 545-549). Athena establishes

fertility

the guardians of the fervently (213-220).

and marriage

'bond

between

in Athens

husband

and

(834-836). vife'

of

Thus which

140

Epilogue The

Citizenship 450

The evidence half In

of

account

for the

the

given

the

own

and

short

are

and

of

shrift.

the

scope

citizenship

law,

by

the

assembly;

it

to

the

demes

phratries.

and

seen

to

have

pp.

66

- 68)

population total

home and boon

we

only and

years.

as

as

revenue

for

The ment

of

more

specifically

his

two

first

of

out

from

occasion parents

after the

went

was

of

war

deserve

the

of

during

the

and of

the second

reenacted. plague

411

full

of

and

on

the

404

treatment

will

of

their

Pericles’

loss

of

his

it was

admissions

population (see

is

for

voted

cannot

be

Chapter The

likely

III,

citizen

that

the

increased

during

these

those

stayed

at

who

Athenian

also

were

public an

works

economic

dwellers.

annulment

after

future

body

Athens

city

429,

and

It

used

in

in

all

benefitted

funds

an

day

effective.

citizen

the

the

450-430

years.

business

law

to

citizen

years

the

for

effect

generally

these

perhaps

citizenship

sketch

essentially

applied

the

Allied

suggested

law

revolutions

cleruchies

allied

is

as

in

law

of

was

into

but

far

in

left.!

espectally

citizen

discussion

the

a brief

monograph.

retroactive so

as

effect

however,

this

well-being

who

gained

Athenians,

the

topics,

In

sending

those

of

it

constitutional

‘naturally’

general

The

well

the

grew

when

both

of

assume

only

citizenship

403

significantly

can

B.C.

Pericles’

I argued,

not

increased

wealth

twenty

was

403

From

intended

until

These

the

is by

complexities

beyond

The

enjoyed

century--or

population

be

follows

status

fifth

particular,

citizen

which

TO

Law

the

of

losses

legitimate

Egyptian

grain

the from

citizenship the

sons. ^ gift

Plague

requireor

Plutarch

with

the

ends

comment,

141

While

it

is

strange

that

a law

which

had

prevailed

against so many should be relaxed (luth@nai) again by the same man who proposed it, Pericles’ personal misfortune...moved the Athenians to pity and... they allowed hie bastard son (nothos) to be enrolled in the phratry, taking his (Pericles') name. (Pericles 37.5)

The

usual

revoked

interpretation

but

only

of

"relaxed"

this

passage

is

best;

in the

sense

that

the

law was

its provisions

not

were

officially

not

to be

applied to its author.

The demos, with its jurisdiction over citizenship,

voted

should

that

should

be

an

exception

considered

father.

The

Athenian

parents,

legitimate,

passage

was no longer

does

would

that

tries

Heracles

to

share"

cites

Birds

as

be

that

such

that

Heracles lose

a xenes

that

but

1646-1670

thereby

is "of

suggests (1656)

prove

henceforth

dissuade

vould

since Heracles Heracles

not

and

and

Pericles'

enrolled

nothoi,

in

either

citizens.

illegitimate the of

phratry

one

Pericles

son

or of

son >

of

of

his

two

Pericles

a nothos.

Aristophanes' Poseidon

be made

Zeus

supports from

his

Peisthetairos

ceding

give

(1651) him

replies

conclusion.*

to

the

Peisthetairos

estate

the

law

"as

not

the

allow

When

arguing out

and not

anyway does

birds, poínts

he 18 ἃ nothos

the

that

preceding

Olympos

patrimony,

gynaikos"

might

the

that

heir. bastard's

that

and

a "law of Solon': A nothos will not be heir when there are legitimate children; if there are no legitimate ehildren the goods shall go to the nearest in kin. (1660-1666)

Heracles

is

stunned,

to the phratry wondering

about

and

(1669). that

Peisthetairos

"No, for

some

asks

he did not!" time"

(1670).

him

answers

if

Zeus

has

ever

introduced

Heracles,

"and

I have

been

comic

intent

this

Even with

its

him

142

passage shows clearly

that in 414 when the play was produced

1) nothoi could

neither be heirs nor phratry members and 2) the child of a xen@ was in the popular

mind

second

a nothos.

Pericles’ The

found

by

Diogenes

that

some

modern

on

the

of the shortage

children

(paidopoiesthai)

The

decree

is

the

Sicilian

not

and

kai

Athenian been

nothoi

concern Pomeroy, bigamy

not

the

in all

in

the

below

for

the

"situation

wives

an

Sicily

productive

discussing

see

eign

conversely

the

this

were

Athens

women..."(ibid.).

law

from

The

really

When

(cf.

the

of 451

evidence

seems

and

of

of

of

notes

ín

(Goddesses, the was

word

belongs

the

as

"three

but

not

support

the

were

mian...

women

there

of

must

591-3),

known

Wives

men

latter

on

have

the Sarah

cases

and

goes

restored....Athenian

does

asten

be vasted."

Whores,

'bigamy'),

rules

shortage

Lysistrata women

civic

foreign wives

foreign

women,

after

7

wording

a severe

who

2.26).

now given

that

have one

soon

plausible.

The

Athenian

that

it

told

says,

was

Philosophers

the oikos and

was

he

Socrates

pre-Cleisthenic

suggests

Athenian

a story

one aste and

were

say?

there

is

disaster

Athenians,

that

that

Aristophanes;

years

The

Famous

and

another)

Athenian,"

before

of

part

abundance

point,

inappropriateness of

this

argument

that nothoi

were

the Sicilian

further

pre-Periclean

consideration.

defeat

lest

does

aste...and

under

and

was

what

kata ta patria and

(gamein)

suggestion

law as evidence

that

(one

and

accepted

on his view But

"to marry

(Lives

Muller's

generally

this

the

of

of Aristotle.

law

the

men

after

the

but

basis

another,"

that

ex heteras are

from

after

voted

argues

allowed. ὃ

(xenai)

authority

obeyed)

is

rule

annulled

The

of men,"

dated,

takes

Wolff

reinstated, were

(or

disaster

Muller rights

of

law was

proponents.°

Laertius

advantage

is the Athenian

law.

Pericles’

"because

took

first

citizenship

ides

has

The

of

Slaves, τό

could

p.

67,

conclude marry

conclusion.

that for-

1

0

143

The

law

does

not

make

bigamy

legal

nor

man can marry one asté and paidopoieisthai considered

paragraph

a key

122);

feature

the

of

idea

that

clear.

Thus

the

effect

status,

which

was

neither

Athenian they a

women

could

of

not

married.!

special

law

in

order

by

the

law

nor

to

is

the

author

be

able

by

of

to

of

concubinage,

citizens.

legitimate was

future

to

an

59

create

which

is

a special

more

even

Athenian

(illegitimate)

is

(see

children

citizens,

that

A

Paidopoieisthai

through

conceivable father

nothoi

[Demosthenes]

Diogenes

children,

hardly

make

from another.

quoted

legitimate It

it

it is the producing

marriage

bear

were

marriage

does

though

ever

children

of

needed a

prostitute. It tions

is more

of

common

411

idea

is

citizenship those

(in be

set

the

and

disturbed

rights,

that,

one

sense

by

in which vas

were

it was

an

issue

to rule,

Thucydides

was

to

8.92.11);

The

is

‘turn

33.1-2). this

qualifications

not

It

in

of

over The

perhaps

for being

1s

the oligarchic

Pericles’

deprive

many

additional

not

not

clear,

law

conditions

to Pericles

the

oligarchic

ta

pragmata

5,000 the

are

to

there

5,000'

of

as

thing

as

prassontes

same

have

of that assembly and also of the dikasteria.

been

or

‘who

issue

tes

to

This

which

seems

most

represented

poleos

by

8.97.1-2; Thucydides,

holding

office?

(kai hosion

it seems,

substantially

is to was

(archein, or

in the assembly were not, would

added

8.65.3,

"ruling"

for metechein

were

as

(e.g.,

spoken

an Athenaios,

can

the

program

The

their

the

when

way.

citizenship

in 451/0) Rather,

revolu-

of

that

controlta pragmata.

411

any

Athenians

however,

revolution.

in

and

However,

that

say,

of

or

power

and for participating imagine

did

either

kai hieron) we

whether

status

of concern

to hold

revolution

Pol.

could

Pericles.!?

the

Ath.

the

revolutions

in

cf.

determine

these

an Athenian'

evident

404/3

to

that

forth

Athenians

difficult

fewer

changed. 13 meetings

144

The take

an

reign

of

the

interest

in

the Athenian

the laws 35.2)

of Ephialtes

and

intended A.

tried

down"

and

participation

account

for

of

the

as

fall

of

(36.1)

and

the

penalty

"outside that was

not

still

then

36.1,

was tés

katalogos

of

death

at

was

not

who

and

is

was of

the

was

put

to

3,000

1ξ

were

the other

citizenship by

the

a member that

citizenship

the

but

use

supposed

of

the

Athenians

rather

to

become

Thirty.

the

It

as be

could

Phyle

value

of

to

the

that

who

this

the

the

would

Mounychia

(as

regard.

the

411,

ton

for

existing being

decreed

politon the

who

politeia

(supposedly) which

Athenaioi

in

the

fought

citizenship.

land

ta pragmate

when

be

in

government

considered

that

also

to the

had

outside

possession

who

in

in

any

controlling

argued

and

of

of

Theramenes,

Thirty

to

of

Aristotle's

400

a share

refer

still

but

the

death

have

Thirty

ownership

Then

Pol.

even

the

unclear.

those

form

those

be

to

down"

the qualification

confusing

the

Are

a paltry

the

is

have

put

were

community at

for

may

not

did

(Ath.

over ta pragmata

by

politeia

Athenians

had

to

“took

discussion

changing

37.1).

death

they

or

opposing

"to

(ibid.).

(as well

who

of

politeias

3,000

of

"given

autokratores) the

(thus

cults)

right

the

whether

also

convicted

oligarchs

They

(see

terminologically

had not

that

(ibid.).

But

but

these

the Areopagítes"

code

city's

circle

will was

the

to

But

to

in

seems

force)

their

assembly

Aristotle

inner

laws

Athenian

but

notes

"concerning

parouses

(ibid.)

the

politai,

community,

loss

(as

in

Aristotle

law of 451/0

the

after

empowered

38.2).

their

soon

terror,

333-335).

the Thirty

(koinonein

politai?

governing was

that

were

in

the

Pericles’

the politeia”

they

of

in

of

testamentary

Theramenes

beltistoi"

constitution"

laws.

an Athenian

objected

crime

a reign

(1971)

participation

Theramenes

which

40

(or altered)

only

the

revamping

Hesperia

not

was

and Archestratos

clarify

ἃ complete

Fingarette,

"took

to

Thirty

they

(cf.

and

could

be

411)

the

issue

rulers

of

to

put

that

restore

not

145

In

403,

under

μηδένα

τῶν

restored

democracy,

μετ "Εὐκλείδην

dv μὴ ἄμφω πρὸ

the

τοὺς

Βὐκλείδου

γονέας

it

ἄρχοντα

dotrods

aveEetdotouc

was

voted

μετέχειν

that

τῆς «πόλεως,

ἐπιδείξηται, τοὺς

δὲ

ἀφείσϑαι.

no one of those [coming of age!“ ] after the archonship of Eukleides, who can not show that both his parents are astoi should have a share in the city; but those before Eukleides should be left unexamined. (Eumelos frag. 2, from Scholiast to Aeschines 1.39)

What

was

this

question

as

to

the reason

those

of

democracy

the

law

be

would

begun

in

we

up

which

The

the

should

look

not

to

first

months were

The

law

agreed

for

it was not

does

not

mean

that

that

it was

been

ignored

policy were

of

(cf.

to

by

of

and

in

of

to

‘those

the

turmoil and

been

to

of

by

the

Thirty

restoring

just

of

of

what

Dracon

their

Athenian

and

Solon'

. . law'

law. the

This

of in

the

before

the

403.

accordance admitted

It

to

the

(43.51),

of

451/0.

before

403'

suggests

decade

with

situation

law

enro11ed!*

preceding

Demosthenes

is

citizenship

of age and

illegally

law quoted

After

‘laws

unwritten

prevailed

that

reign

clarify

the

To answer

(1.85,87),

Athenian

had

had

The

of

an

law

those

who

use

the

democracy.

need

reinscribing

8.88),

of

μὴ χρῆσϑαι.

principle

to apply

that

the

law of 451/0?

events

restored

Andocides

not

Isocrates

remain.

the

the

codification

should

a different

recognized

amnesty

allowed

the

a restating

that

much

τὰς ἀρχὰς

upon

fact

of

quoted

δὲ νόμῳ

so

convinced

continue

magistrates

now

called

of Pericles’

to

᾿Αγράφῳ

sums

reenactment

Athenians

15

‘chat

this

the

and

410.

for

the

the

rather

law

general

citizen

body

had

146

νόϑῳ δὲ μηδὲ νόϑῃ μὴ εἶναι ἀγχιστείαν ἱερῶν

und’

that

the

ὁσίων,

nothoi

inheritance

ἀπ’

and

the

Εὐκλείδου nothe

(or no place

should

among

who are entitled to inherit), cult" nor "material goods.

is

of

the

same

character.

Further, the to

air

in

have

‘to

that

the

been

months

after

those who

a "share

of

the

was

passed

and

the

court

Orators

835).

previous that

first

Soon

whom?' 19

all

question

the

upheld The

approval

after

the

(1.G. was

A more

first

the

again

set

out

as

reiterate requirement;

citizenship phratries

was,

which

ignored

and

but all

of

of

“family

for

once it

was

exceptions

the

the and

Pericles'

were

such

Ten

lack

of

the

to

think

of

is

two

not

their

unreason-

agreed citizen

idea

upon parents,

phratries.

as

were but

of

the

again

eventually

necessity

it

lav

a definition

qualification

made,

of

(the

a precedent

was

decree

but

began

cítizenship

not

phratríes

cit.)

be given

(paranomos)

Lives

point

Athenians

setting

demes

intended

and

a procedural

so

proposed

The

the laws"

loc.

if

should

3.195).

in

seems

and

Thrasyboulos

together"

was

issue

tended?'

[Plutarch]

enfranchisement

a minimum

demes

of

be

"against

[Plutarch],

principle,

again,

to

The

Aeschines

plus

on

an Athenian

Thirty.

Piraeus’

cf.

(ibid.

see

the

become)

the

the

it vas

fell

of

(or

of

40.1,

that

dangers

general

as

right

relatives

from the Piraeus

enthusiasm

decree

lav

from

Pol.

Boule,

the

moderate and

back

reportedly

of

no

citizenship

‘return

(Ath.

rush

10)

negative

been

and

in

be

fall

of

objection

the

could

the

objected

law

II?

To

the

the

by

after

"come

but Archinos

neither

of who

privilege

politeís"

self-interest able.

had

have

the closest

ἢ

the

‘ought

μήϑ᾽

ἄρχοντος,

for

to

of

admission

observe.

cannot

essentially

be

what to

As

such,

shown

to

set

a

Athenian the it have

demes may

and have

been

147

revoked

or

reenactment

modified in

403

during B.C.

the

period

between

its

enactment

in

451/0

B.C.

and

148

Epilogue.

1.

Cf.

Jones,

2.

See

Beloch,

Athenian

Footnotes

Democracy,

Griechische

p.

169.

Geschichte

III.1,

p.

14,

note

l.

3. This son is usually assumed to be the child of Aspasia, and usually thought to be a nothos in the traditional sense of the word as well as the new. But it seems just possible that Pericles married Aspasia. 4.

Again,

5. See passage.

Contra

above

Beloch,

Chapter

II.

Gr.

G.III.1,

pp.

16

p.

-17

14,

and

note

notes

for

l. a discussion

of

this

.6. In addition to 0. Müller, Untersuchungen zur Geschichte des Attischen Burgerund Eherechts (Leipzig, 1899) pp. 786-811, these include H.J. Wolff, Traditio II (1944) 85-86, and S. Pomeroy, Goddesses, Whores, Wives and Slaves, pp. 66-67; Jacoby, F. Gr. H. IIIb (Supplement), n. 35 on Philochoros frag. 119, thinks it "more likely" than an annulment in 429. 7. Untersuchungen p. 797. Wolff tially oligarchic (op. cit. p. 86).

likes 411 because he sees A 413-412 date is simply

by,

p.

for

example,

Greece,

p.

8.

Müller,

op.

cit.,

66

and

Lacey,

The

Family

in

Classical

113.

Untersuchungen,

9. Perhaps epigamia with

was

Pomeroy,

the lav as essentaken for granted

this is (or to)

done when Athens

pp.

797-798;

Wolff,

op. cit.,

p. 86).

also the correct context in which to put the the Euboeans (Lysias 34.3). Lysias however,

had her

"walls,

ships,

money

and allies"

grant of says this

(ibid.).

Muller

(Untersuchungen p. 812) thought the grant must have been made before the Sicilian expedition. The difficulty in giving this measure a date and placing it in relation to the Euboean revolt, in ascertaining just what it implied and in deciding who these Euboeans are (can they possibly be former Athenians now living in Euboea as colonists?) makes me wary of any definite conclusions.

10.

A.

Muller's Greece, ll.

Ledl,WS 30 viev. p.

Lacey

See

(1908) also

38-46

the

followed

comments

of

By Hignett,

W.K.

Lacey,

HAC, The

p.

345,

Family

also

rejects

in Classical

113. (The

Family

in

Classical

Greece,

ment "accords fully with the Athenian view maintaining the oikoi, and (in the case of supply of citizen soldiers." 12. E.G. Hignett, pp. 273, question in too Aristotelian

p.

113)

remarks

that

this

arrange-

of marriage--as an arrangement the city) for replenishing the

274. I think that we a manner, considering

for

often tend to approach this only the political rights of

149

the citizen. But were rights of inheritance, or of participation in public cult to be taken away from all but the 5,000 in 411, or all but the 3,000 in 403? See the Conclusion, p. 132 for J.K. Davies discussion of ‘alternative' criteria for citizenship in the oligarchic program of the lgst years of the fifth century.

13. See de. Ste. Croix, Historia 5 (1956) 1-23, for an analysis of the revolution of 411 along these lines, and contra Rhodes, JHS 92 (1972) 115-127. 14.

See

note

16.

15. On the codification of the laws see especially the articles of S. Dow, Hesperia 30 (1961) 60-68; Historia 9 (1960), 270-293; and Massachusetts Historical Society, Proceedings 71 (1953-7), 1-36. Also, Andocides 1 and Lysias 30. 16. As with the law of 451/0, I think the law would have been effective for all future admissions to the demes and phratries. I agree with Humphreys, JHS 94 (1974), 91-92, that Demosthenes 57.30 is not decisive evidence against this idea.

17.

So

18.

Harrison

Similarly

fathers

who

had

Law

of

Athens

Theozotides

in

his

died

(The

in

battle

I.,

decree

(Lysias,

p.

130)

on

the

frag.

vi,

translates public Bude;

"hieron

support cf.

R.

for

kai

hosion”

orphans

Stroud,

of

Hesperia

40 (1971) 280-301, for what seems to be a fragment of the decree proposed by Theozotides and opposed by Lysias' client) was careful to exclude nothoi. We need not assume (as does Stroud, p. 299) that before 403 such orphan nothoi had legally received state support. Theozotides also excluded (according to a move which has caused some puzzlement (e.g., Perhaps the adopted son was thought to have a turn for support. Or perhaps the poíétoi are had fallen in battle but the natural sons (of adopted. 19. However, if Lysias has (Lysias 34) there were also narrower the qualifications Dionysios of Halicarnassos, proposed that the exiles be

over

not

to all

but

Lysias) poi&toi (adopted sons), Humphreys, JHS 94 (1974), n. 14). natural father to whom he could not the adopted sons of men who those men) who had since been

not distorted the nature of Phormisios' proposal some Athenians (or one Athenian) willing to make for citizenship. According to the hypothesis of after the 'return' from the Piraeus Phormisios accepted back and "that the politeia be turned

to those who

owned

land."

Dionysios

adds,

"The

Laceduemonians

also were in favor of this being done." The number of Athenians excluded from ta koina by this measure--again according to Dionygios, but the figure may come from part of Lysias' speech which has not survived--was 5,000. (It might be noted that this is the same number--5,000--which was said by Plutarch to be

disenfranchised

in 446.

See above

p.123,

n.

63.

here.

150

Lysias

certainly

makes

the landless 5,000 Athenians include hoplitas pollous kai

it

sound

as if Phormisios'

into xenoi; hippeas kai

he also toxotas

proposal

would

turn

claims that these would (34.3). The whole thing

seems

somewhat odd. The proposal does not really fit into what is known of late fifth century oligarchic ideology; it sounds suspiciously Spartan. Was Phormisios acting as the spokesman of the Spartans, who perhaps did not understand the nature of Athenian society? It should be noted that Lysias himself was personally involved in the debates about citizenship in these months. He is said to have been one who enjoyed a brief moment of citizenship under the decree of Thrasyboulos ([Plutarch] Lives of the Ten Orators, 835). As a metic he probably owned no land.

151

Appendix1,

"Pericles' designation

quotes full in

and

citizenship the

rule

Plutarch

texts.)

this

ing

for

There

are

‘citizenship’

the

language

reveal

about

their

with

Athenian,

but

political

theory

the

and

is he

most

and

old

that

and

later

office

Aristotle

actively

a

the

are

Does of

the

common

Aristotle

simply

Introduction

and

for

terminology

not.

What

this

implicit

are

we

call-

of

its

law

in

any

citizenship

or

citizen

membership

the

nature

discussion

extremely

a state is

(1275a33)

and

of

such

what

does

this

membership

modified (exousia

"he

relieved

has

"simply" in

of

meaning

the

state

of

citizens of

for

the

archés or

made

the are

or

their

business dutiesl),

to

and and

Aristotle (1274b34)

up

of

term?’

by

quick(politai) The

what is

they

he

part

in

of

do

who

of assemblyman

qualification"

likewise

and

(1275al-2).

or

deliberative

@ kritikés)"

decisions

of

opens

citizens

(polites)

take

a non-(native)-

development

identified

bouleutikes

"without

the

a state?’

a citizen

power

of

Athens.

(ἀῤριστος ἀρχή -1275432)

koinonein

a citizen

is

by

a composite

definition

who

terminology

influential

"what

is

one;

office

of

influenced

the

functional

participating

(those

is

what

‘indeterminate’

as

men

is

suitable"

in the

is

notion

a citizen offers

who

and

question

the

‘who

terminology

the

via

who

of

with

on

for

understanding

himself

ly moves

Thus,

often

community

was

Politics

judicial

to

but

is

which

language

terminology

also

the

or

technical

B.C.

(See

citizens?

who

of

or

raised,

refer

a non-Athenian

III

juryman

about

Athens

citizenship?

I begin

shares

questions

in

monograph,

bastards."

or

Athenian

"the

"law about

calling

the

and

451/0

we

did

definition

in

are

How

ask

Pericles

whom

status?

to

this

be

legal

Book

of

to

reflect

Terminology

title

need

formulations

of

the

by

important

which

and

law,"

proposed

terms

designation

‘concept’

Citizenship

(1275b18-19).

(ἁπλῶς

his

resident

city.

)

is

one

Children

foreigners,

152

are

only

mention

"qualified"

the

parents

does How

of

not do

tion

a clear,

-1275b21-22),

number

are

citizens

really

wins

-1275al6).

he

(by

holds

some

whether

A related

problem

do we

regard

There

is

no

need

or

kind

not

arises

new

we when

is

defined

someone or

any

city??

For

of

ot

rule

doubt

"in practice"

even

to

as

(πρὸς τὴν

one

of

€E ἀμκροτάχυν τολιτῶν). This

definition a

But

citizen

τὸν

this of

a

πολίτην

how

members

who

a citizen,

...

First,

the

definition.

Aristotle,

(

qualify

regard out;

concise

continues

problems.

we

called

(οὐχ ἁπλῶς

women.

So we have χρῆσιν

citizens

his

rules

acts

other

like

office

to

a city

the

18

a

that

both

raises

a

a citizen

concerned

Aristotle,

claim

of

who

whom

with

parentage)?

functional

cítizen

name

but

and

defini-

must

be

(1276a5).

change:

There are many constitutions (politeiai) where the law goes to the length of admitting aliens to citizenship. There are, for example, some democracies where ἃ man who has only a citizenmother (politis) 18 admitted; and there are many states where the same privilege is given to persons of illegitimate birth. But the policy of extending citizenship so widely is due to a dearth of genuine citizens (gn@ésioi politai); and it is only a decrease of numbers which produces such legislation. When the population increases again first sons of a slave-father or slavemother

are

disqualified;

mother

but

an alien

citizenship

on both

is

sides

then

father

confined

those

who

are

| born

(tousaapo gunaikon);

to

those who

(tous ex amphoin

are

of

Aristotle

states, have

but better

argues the

by

the

politically

there

citizen

citizens

A problem part

that

which

terminology

is

are

still

than

Aristotle of

participating

different

the male

kinds

functionally

others

a

citizen

citizen-

finally parentage

aston). -1278a27ff.

So

of

and (Barker

of

trans.)

citizen

defined.

Some

in

different

states

will

simply

(1278a40-bl). seems

rules but

he

what

not

to

appreciate,

quotes. about

however,

A polites the

astoi

may

(male

be or

is

raised

the

active

female)?

in

153

Metechein tes

archés

poleös??

is

In

chein

t@s poleös

quoted

in

the

experience

of

political,

was

it

is

not

an

as

Aristotelian

although

Aristotle

does

are

the terms

appearing

in Pericles’

Pol.,

while

Aristotle's

democratic

polites

does

definition

Athens

a noticeable

of

where

privilege

of

definition

understanding

the way

in which

Athenians

membership.“

For

last

is

when

we must

to metechein

indicated

“Athenians that

this

are

both

only

turn

not

in

to Athenian

the

those

‘citizenship’

fact

born

was

that

from

terms

given

by

Athens,

of

mete-

that

reflect

judicial

of

the

law. the

and

community,

authoritative for

and defined

their

(civic)

term astoias well

The importance of the Pericles’

parents"

the

clearly

to the

quoted

Athenian

to

and

law as

version

necessarily

usage,

Plutarch

both

any

member

tes poleés” and hoi Athénaioi.

by

astoi

decisions,

male

group

metechein

‘citizenship’

to make

it

about

them,

appears

is

used

what

discuss

adult

nor

but

appear

right the

adequate

not

polités

the

entirely

as politai,

citizenship,

fact,

Ath.

Although

clear

law

simply

(Pericles

recipient

was

37.4),

simply

"to

as and

be

an

Athenian" (e.g., I.G. II? 1.12 * M-L 94.12). Aristotle or

indirectly

just

as

they

quoting were

and polis

for

community

along

difference to

those

of

Attica

eminent

has

and

the

two?

the

town

astoi and

polis

been

claimed,

astoi

author up

onto

What or

Attica

he

use

of

term astoí

astu

for

century imply?

Attica.

as

a

and

is

either

its

The

Athenians,

of

politai.! term

in

directly

settlement

the members

Neither

throughout Athens

he

for

term

itself;

was)

does

institutions.

Athens

it

however,

old

each of

when

Athenian

fourth

does

living

or

the

citadel

are

and

the

standard

whatever of

term

give

held

more

the

and

(whenever

astu

It

in

to

also

with

the

Athenian

reluctant

between

politai

uses

an

citadel,

living

Athenian

rarely

acropolis

there

referred

the

town

their

Is

historical

After

or

only

times

synoikismos

were

the

pre-

refer

to

whole.

that

in Athens

astoi

and

politai

a

154

distinct

groups

of

people.

Bekker,

Anecdota,

257

s.v.

Eupatridai

ἐκαλοῦντο οἱ αὐτὸ τὸ ἄστυ οἰκοῦντες καὶ μετέχοντες βασιλικοῦ γένους καὶ

they

are

have

a share

called

religious

has

been

taken

that

in

earliest

astu.

This

gene

did have

that

"in

is not

born

warns

that

Athens

mind

and

that

the

will

of

putting

the

city

danger.

Solon

the

fragments

démos and

and the

-frag.

uses

her of

the

and

men--frag. other

the

perish

town

itself

and,

with

such

to of

with

of

in

does

contrast

not

with

specifically

poems

the

division

(frag.

6),

the démos

9)

the

nobles

may

also

and

the

own city

kakoi

oppositions.

and

that

When

is

mean

that

theoi;

it

it

is

within

the

it

solon

immortal

gods,

persuaded

and

the the

Solon

says

own

city

(the (at

is

that

andres vile the

and time

by

unjust who

equal

h@gemones.

the megaloi

esthloi

("the

h@gemones

Athens'

a

3).

49

the astoi is

be

poems

35 note

"being

the

the

Athenian

his

In fragment

Zeus

in

claimed

in

p.

mean

simply

many

who

" (HAC,

to

lived

and

Hignett

1)

of δήμου 6° ἡγεμόνων ἄδικος νόος

this

and

C.

the

their

who

families

poetry. of

people")--suggesting But

note

anecdotum

the πενιχροῦ

will

38

Eupatridai

But

of Solon's the

p.

this

town."

residence

by

Athens,

Athenian

risk destroying

troubles

Solon's

the

fragments

astoi

its hégemones

great 34)

in

is

of

part

prominent

on to speak

leaders

causing

the

a concern

referred

first

contrasted

themselves

goes

astoi

many

never

the

are

in

Population

"around

by the

of

who

live

and have

The

ἄστυ

as such

the astoi

hégemones.

Gomme,

centers

out

then

A.

in Athens

fact

time

This

He

by

their

the Ócto(

money."

who

family'

unjustified.

the

Solon's

that

'royal

times

are

but

[Eupatridai)

of

(e.g.,

of

ἱερῶν ἐπιμέλειαν ποιούμενοι.

cults.

seems

recognition

τὴν τῶν

are

the

citizens

Throughout between

the

(the people the

worthy-

of

Peisis-

155

tratus’

designs

on a tyranny),

δείξει δὴ μανίην μὲν ἐμὴν βαιὸς χρόνος ἀστοῖς, δείξει,

ἀληϑείης ἐς μέσον ἐρχομένης . .

A little time will comes out into the

show my open.

madness

to

.

the

(frag. there

is

no

Diogenes this

reason

Laertius

does

not

passages

(in

it

astoi

be

usage

will

to

essentially haps

from

Troy

be

Troy

taken

as

to

help

friends

will

a clear we

and

the

of

Solon's

is

any

local

more

common

of

claim

Solon that

sum

total

of

it

not

is than

population.

also

Athenians.

to

meaning

Greek

and

the

astoi

adduced,

the

early

all

accused

the

evidence

stratum

to

that

) comprise

truth

10)

talking

Boule

terms

astoi

the

members

for points

the

the

astoi,

Odyssey

‘communal’

of

politai But

recognize

might

10

this

the

warriors.

in

perhaps,

far

the

when

usage.

of

being

mad,

Boule.

These

Solon's

use

did

Further,

two

to

politai

asto1.

that

a distinction

consideration

a background

is

the

the

community

killed

(Iliad

15.557-8);

Iphidamos Trojan

astoi

left

with

mist Put

are

politai

battle

for

of

that

interpreting

as

so

"one's coming

own" to

they

seem

to be

citizens,

but

seen

per-

with

and

is

neither with in

draw

the

Achaians

politai

his

a whole

that

together

Homer !?

there

Thrace

community

in or

urges

(13.192).

sense;

consider

of

appear

Hector

covered

him"

politai

view.

when the

and

young in

wife

and

the

civic

water

from

are wife

view.

"wife

nor

13

realm.

lest the to

come

So

astoi

philoi,

King

Ὁ

suppose

Nor

such

to

but

of

necessary

A brief

provide

According

usage.

different

Odysseus

has

support

not

meaning

4 and

from

synonyms

as

the

in Athens

Athenian

is

it was

a particular

both

so

he

convincing

retained

In

to

more

a deviation

classical

citizens

(1.49)

fragments

referred

would

think

restrict

Unless that

to

astoi

nor

astoi So,

Alcinous'

156

well as

(Odyssey

viewed

ruled.

an

a more

or

usage

Grant

one

him

is

of

the

the

another

frequently

one's

own

pleasure

and strangers,

fountain

perspective:

reveals

astos

insider,

from

public

Post-Homeric

Athenian is

in

7.131)

water

paired

was

and

the

aspect

is

in

asty

provided

contrasted

a xenos

veneration

his friends

of

'connotative'

while

of

outside

an

the

of

by of

Ithaca

the

ruler

astos

with

(17.206) to

the

significant

xenos.

!?

An

13

for

astos

outsider.

sight

of

citizens

(ποτ΄ ἀστῶν καὶ ποτὶ ξείνων).

or Thrice Olympionician the house citizens (ἀστοῖς ), ministrant

A xenos

can

enemy,

the

but

be

never

meaning

legal.

a guest-friend

of

part

both

Sophocles’

usage

a xeinos

xenas

as

xenoi

(e.g.,

206)

Athenian

chorus

Oedipus

can

see

their

the

terms

is

also

epi

of

as

is vell

the

they and

position

his in

do

at

him

(e.g.,

way.

At

... μανϑάνειν γὰρ ἤνιομεν ξένοι πρὸς ἀστῶν, ἂν 6° ἀκούσωαιεν

...forwe we hear.

a sentiment

which

must

learn/xenoi

Antigone

echoes

from

at

another The

a good

184);

he

xenoi the

From

among

opening

situation

usage,

is

214).

13.1-3

contrast

in Athenian

Colonus

are

in

astos. 18

strangers,

daughter this

an

or

evidenced

before

also

lines

or

Oedipus

(stranger as

these

community

and in

in

I praise, gentle to fellow to foreigners (ξένοισι ). Pindar, Olym. 7.89-90 and (Lattimore trans.)

is

fundamental

literary

example.

addresses the

and

of

play

and

Oedipus the

chorus

viewpoint

astoi, the

a hostile

the

of two

Oedipus

the Thebans says

τελεῖν.

astoi,

171.

and

Theseus

do

what

too,

when

berating

Creon

for

to

157

his

conduct,

says

ξένον

πορ΄ ἀστοῖς ὡς διαιτάσθαι,

...but

He would xenos

I

would

never

convey

[ Demosthenes

act

the

know

in

a

same

how

foreign

contrast

pen.

a xenos

must conduct (927-928);

land

Creon

in

as

the

fourth

has

century

yore

In Thucydides

the

always

together

astoi

people

xenoi

astoi

6.16.3;

summed would

appear

and

in the city, 1.24.4;

up

expect;

marriage

and

The

in Attica!”

marriage

term

is

relationship

referred

to

above

set

prominent

or

to

in

one

or

the

means

law

Astos

quoted

and

by

procession

to

be

the

laws

dealing

Plato's Laws 849a-d,

form. !?

(2.34.1)

community

against

See,

Astos

for

everyone

the

example

(See

large,

As one

categories the

866c,

laws

872a,

also

easily

xenoi.

various

845d-e,

example,

(6.30). at

outsiders, with

For

and xenos

or almost

expedition

the

another.

whatever...

explicit.

plural

the Sicilian

appear

and

way

always

in

funeral

saw off

astoi

form,

is almost usually

in the

and xenoi,

plural

the

their

opposition

joined

27.4).

in the

and

astoi.

τὲτέχνῃ ἢ umen ἡτινιοῦν ....

If a xenos cohabits with an ast@ by any and if a xené cohabits with as as astos. T

both

acted

among

| 59.16: 18

"Bay δὲ ξένος d

nearly

himself

of

on

882a,

938c. Accordingly, the first

the

lav of Pericles

would

be

implication

'born

of

the

from astoi,

phrase

not

"born

xenoi.’

from

Under

both

astoi

astoi"

in the

in

158

lexicon

of

LSJ

we

find,

however,

townsman,

citizen,

πολίτης,

ἀστός being

πολίτης,

a

stronger

Il.11.242,

conclusion:

0d.13.192

etc:

one who has civil

one who has political

we

have

seen,

restrictive

Periclean there

at

laws

rule)

on who

politai,

LSJ

is

which

rights „20

makes

and

those

from

(p.

Politis,

not

to me

of

their

between women

only

as

rule

with

the

did

but

quoting

who

as

possible

"civil

the

is born

feminine

from a politis"

by Aristotle

distinction

Is

rights?

have

uses

(1275b22)

the

two astoi."

not

even

Aristotle

The

progressively

political

astoi

elsewhere

politai."

from

a woman

earlier

of

(apparently

and

he is a citizen

are

speaking

(born)

civil in

But

is phrased

politai

those

included

lines

is

concludes

only

sense.

seven

Aristotle and

those

democracies

198). he

just

but

Diritto

from

language.)

politis(ides)

in Athens,

two

di

astoi

politai.

meaning.

of

And

(Studi

office

graphic’

a citizen

1278a34;

of

LSJ

as

appears

?!

distinguished

clear

here

the Periclean

Paoli

hold

be

Politics

they make politai

"In some

born

the

(Aristotelian)

in Athens?

{11-founded.

or

made

in to

thinking

form of polités: (1278a28)

is

"finally

a distinction

Apparently

"only

1278a34

Pol.

from

only,

rights also. Arist.

As

dist.

rights

politai Thus

claims, what

not

as

have

and

is

undeniable

nowhere

is

it

ever

as

astai.

The

said

due

underaged

“official

that (or

woman's

argued

along

to

or

age

males

language are

‘official,’ women

did

implied) exclusion

as

not

that from

carry

arms

astai

and

astoi,

not

opposed

this

was

these

However below

common

carry

and

not

(See

more

lines

do

(ibid.),

is.

much

similar

sex

are

language”

polites(at)

obvious

it

3)

who

‘official’

Although

status

and

is not

an

chapter

those

women

Paoli's

Astos(oi) do

Attico,

to

for

it

is

'epi-

than common

arms

or

hold

due

to

or

activities

usage, office

a sign was

due

to

159

the

simple

insider,

fact

an aste.

traditional

her

she

no

referred

for

the

asté"--Demosthenes

was

enrollment return

palin

a deme

eis as

8.31,

And

offers

to

was

the so

no

describe

example

introduced

she

was

accepted

it--other

usually

of

his

outsider,

commonly

a woman was

than

an

and that

of

a gune.2?

their

specifically

son to the phratry

being

he might

as

I can

the contrast with xenos and xene is

see,

until

to within

his

community

Athenian

did

not

(Ath.

paides epi

the

needed

but certainly far

an

paidas

teen-year-olds

10.12).

as

referred

into

place

in Greece

Paoli

against

("knowing him to be an astos born to him from a wedded

57.54),

Otherwise,

her

was

When a father

to him as an astos

an Athenian

term

underaged,

Viewed

society

as elsewhere

to as astoi.

implicit.

a woman.

her

specific

In Athens

As

was

Within

that

sex.

refer

that

Pol.

42.1).

by

reached

to

be

Similarly,

the

Isaeus

(children

Isaeus

the

as a pais.

appear

dietes t@besan

law quoted

he

two

age

If at proper

of

the

time

of

age,

he

would

of

the

eigh-

speaks

years

eighteen

past

puberty--

10.10:

ὃ γὰρ νόμος διαρρήδην γκυλόει παιδὶ μὴ ἐξεῖναι συμβάλλειν μηδὲ γυναικὰ πέρα μεδίμνου κριϑῶν.

The

law

expressly

or a woman of

shows

but

the

hardly

that

stages

main

‘child’

of

legal

an

unusual

On

the

political

it

being

possible

to make a contract

worth

for

a child

(pais)

over one medimnos

barley.

clearly

Different

prevents

(guné)

childhood and

social

'woman' might

be

were

sufficient

recognized

distinction

was

(as

between

indication of

the

child

of

legal

meirakion and

status.

or

adult.

ephebos)

It

is

situation.

other

rights

and

hand,

astos

and military

is

frequently

service.

used

in Attic

In Aristophanes’

in

reference

to

Birds

Euelpides

claims

160

that

he

and

Peisthetairos

Gouy....(honored ing

of

a second

in

are

tribe

class

φυλῇ

and

τιμᾶάμενοι

astoi

Again,

among

when

in

4

ἄστοὶ

μετ᾽

astoi--33-34);

the

he

Ecclesiazousae

is

not

boast-

Blepyros

asks,

ἐστι προστεταγμένα

ἃ τοῖσιν ἀστοῖς. ἔμελεν has everything concern of the

γένει

family,

position.

Grexvtadτ’ αὐταῖς

μαὶ

;

been assigned astoi?

to

them

(the

women)

which

was

the

assembly

and

jury

(459) he

specifically

Thucydides fifth

means

speaks

century

such

of the

things

as

lightarmed

inscription

seems

when

most

no

law

unlikely

makes

If astoi terms

in

of

the

that Athenian

usage

suggests

communal

one,

26

in

were

usage

was

democracy.

then

politai

women;

in

fifth

we

be

came

carry

cross

the

century usage

usage

the

cult

of

be

in

legal

used

by

the the

legal view

while

that

in

polites, Homer's

bridge

built when

politai

flaunts

‘official’

and a

Apollo

Lykaios

does

the

their politai

not

political

(as opposed

in

it

broad

Athens

excluded took

queen vote

an

water

is

the

active

judge

include

Greek

term The

part

in his

Herodotus'

(1.186), they or

still

a domestic,

women.

or

to

development

century

draw

usually

terms

polites

existed

25

suggests

who

politai

it.

astos

which one

by the

that

In sum,

describes

enactments),

and

fifth

connotations

When

Athens

directly

Paoli

or

context

clear

which

‘legal’

accept

Aristotle's

Judging.?’

in Athenian

also

it will

became

and

not

public

to

to

distinction

affected

If

a political,

Babylonian

Thus

common

their

in Athens

men.

and

might

polites

but

it

legal

which

increasingly

by voting

of

relation

(4.94.1)

duty.??

... (archers both astoi and xenoi) .24

the

use

polites

city

that

and politai

common

apparent

use

troops aston kai xenon

mentions,

τοχσότος τός τε dot [oc wa. χσένος it

office-holding,

will

they

women.

28

were

be men and only

161

There (as

far

it was term

as

remains I know)

coined

is

1227),

Aristotle rights.

The

either

that

all

basic to

education

of

the

(Plato)??

called

astai

notable 459,

1335),

half

increasingly Whether

it carries term

female

it

fifth

is

(e.g.,

used

is not

at

all

(Sophocles

politai

and

woman

of

an

Perhaps

polites.

Plato

insider

8144)

or

or political

Euripides) will

The

(Electra

(Laws

common)--seems

and

appears

Sophocles

of legal

politides, 18

by

57.43),

first

century.

connotation

no implication

chorus

community,

the

male

Demosthenes

the

of

It

to

or

be

to

that

an Athenian

from

any

women,

when

not

referred

to as gunaikes,

were

politides

and

could

included

collective

rhetori-

emphasize

undergo

or

than

cases

quoted

asté,

when

fact

not,

see Thucydides

Again,

this

is due not

‘official’

that

the

key

community

was

her

status

she

would

not

normally

for

the

use

opposed

political the

to or

as

be

was

(wife

for

the the

class

insider

Athenian

to

not

city most

to Athenian

and daughter)

and part

an

we

military point

owing passive

‘official’

it

of

of

say,

to

yet

the

and

produce

Athenian more

"invisible"

which

and

called

citizens not

state,

solely

entitled

30 put their fathers

Athenian

link.

from

the

a xene,

broader,

service,

Eccles.,

in

certainly

or

(For

it stems

not

be

of astos,

contexts

community

indirect.

in order

the vital

were in

allegiance or

Rather

an aste

to

astoi.

meaning

‘political’

the

likely

or membership

outsider,

‘citizens’

more

or Aristophanes,

of women.

might

of members

husbands

was

to any

in active,

women,

the

citizenship

understanding sense

ín

2.34.4

position

a woman's

referred

Aristotelian, of

of

an

non-citizens,

daughters

The woman

second

feature

politai.

protection

citizenship their

of

be

they are

above.)

or to the

the

to

status.

he politis.

(Demosthenes). Athenian

as

second

to

use--(and a

the

the

1278a28)

address

members

in

('unofficial')

of

as

(Electra

(Politics

cal,

view

because

ambiguous

Euripides

feminine

in Athens

just

never

the

After

married sons.

451/0

162

an Athenian

would

prove

his

citizenship

father and of his mother's 1237, ing

lines her

119-120.)

A woman

citizenship,

father,

father.

but

would

have

indirectly

it

or sons. 31

There

aste as between

a xenos and

an astos.

not

as

and

in modern

In addition

to his

rigorous

terminology”

to adult

male

aion or ial"

for

themselves

children)

did

making

the

forty-odd

to

Aristophanes

("The

not

of

refer of

40-1

only

these

1229,

where

always

are

Archarnians

630

and

764

the

phrase

language

Bdelykleon

632,

among

ton

swears,

the

but

It

is

(in

various

for

Athenians

ox

that

cases)

listed

ἄδουσι their

tachybouloi

and

is

used,

τὸν ᾿Αϑηναίων

had

πάντα

"to

94)

(and

no

to

498,

or

part all

in of

index

formal, 645,

Knights

the Athenians,”

τὸν βίον

whole

life

metabouloi. and

]eM-L

in Todd's

typically

"among"

records)

virtually

Acharnians

law cases

Athenaion

TOE

is

to

that women

striking

"in

to an "offic-

referred

they

terms.

ho Athen-

(1.G. 112

true

an

restricted

administrative

Samians

example,

that

came

they

Clearly

is to speaking

about

ton

in which

reference

exclusive

argued was

her

and wives were

(or ho demos

16 also

also

Further, See

Paoli

prov-

a xen® and

mutually

Athenaioi

to the

1.6. 112

between

are

his

involving

as the Athenians way

of

directly

daughters

treaties,

ἀεὶ "ἐπὶ τῶν bud

demon

hoi

Athenaioi.

it

Athenaioi

singing the

the

is given

reference

6°

is

(12).

to men.

alien

for

cases

hoi Athenaioi

(decrees,

Ath@naioi.

᾿Αϑηναῖοι

Athenians

832

of

and

deme

Decree,"

in

mothers,

as close

ἕναι

decrees,

appearances

Lysistrata

and

or

and

occasion

issue

198)

that

citizenship

fall

name

and polités,

p.

This

documents

normally

treaties

activity

or Birds

When

astos

is about

that σαμέίος Admaloc

the

811,

official

on stone.

is said

public

the

an

citizen

seem

body.

little

Athenian

Diritto,

It does

citizen

the

as much of a contrast

about

di

ho demcs)

their

in

inscribed it

Athenians.

abbreviated

term

(Studi

had

became

was

English

claim

citing

(See the "Demotionidai

husband

aliens,

by

in

long

"), or

At

Knights

parody

κολοσιυρτόν

of

"official"

32

163

("To

the

The

women

in

‘rabble’ of

their

of Athens

the

I'll

ever

Thesmophoriazousae

opening

prayer

to

be true" --Wasps seem

Demeter

and

to

666,

separate

Rogers’

themselves

trans.).

from

hoi

Athenaioi

Kore:

Θοιλησίαν τήνδε καὶ EdvoSov τὴν vOv μάλλιστα

eee

κἄριστα ποιῆσαι,

δὲ ἡμῖν

wee

6° ἡμῖν αὐταῖς

se

Epiicay καὶ τὴν ἀγορεύουσαν δὴν δρῶσαν καὶ τὴν ἀγορεύοιχκαν

alie

μαὶ τὸν τῶν γυναικῶν τούτην

νικᾶν.

that this assembly and gathering now achieve the best and noblest things, most beneficial to the city of the Athenians, and favorable to us, too. and that she, who does and counsels the best things for the demos of the Athenians, and also for that of the women, be victorious. (302-309)

Thus,

it

could

Athenian the

restriction

women

that

i.e.,

of

the

not

appear often

made

city's

cults

and

Athenaiai)°>:

the

the

Athénaioi

adult

to

courts

male

males

or

is

in

this of

Athena

states

that

This

may

not

an

be said

to be

be

an Athenian

exact

‘incorrect’

must

quotation

or

of

too

was

be born Chapter

‘unrigorous.'

be

or

IV

usage

Athenaioi

and

as

all

traditional

the

participate

"from

fifth

actively

Athenaioi

the

of Pericles’

p.

usage

the

(or

citizen-

(Pericles

but

in

Athenians"

two Athenians" 56)

Again,

definition; in

recorded

active

community.

official

version

"from

collective,

Athenian

did

chosen

Plutarch's

(see

hoi

women

the

common

legal

might

to

the of

where But

Nike

of

result

not

they

(" ἐχς ‘Adevalov hona [οὖν "| M-L 44.4). law

the

heard.

realm

usually

members

assemblies

themselves

priestess

ship

refers

responsibilities,

in

most

hoi

term

of male/female

did

century

said

citizenry,

division

their

be

37.4).

cannot

164

An

to

Athenian,

express

his

however,

belonging

have

a share

in

the

city’

says

to Oedipus

"I,

too,

(Oedipus century

Tyrannos, orators

did

in

the

the

phrase

appears

ín

the

Ath.

use

either

or

with

Pol. 's

polités

could

moi

is

καὶ μετὸν

or

simply

tes

Athénaios

say

poleOs).

It is not yours

variation,

δεῖξαι,

or 39.31,

He

metesti

in the city.

57.1,

astos,

citizenship.

poleos

phrase,

57.2,τὸ προσήκειν μοι τῆς πόλεις The

tes

Demosthenes

to

his

a share

and

(e.g.,

need

city,

(metecho

have

630),

not

common

‘I Creon

alone" ín

τῆς πόλεως

the

fourth

ἡμῖν

or

εἰ τῆς μὲν πάλεχως ... μετέστι σοι). „34

"documentary

version

of

Pericles'

law

(n€ metechein tés poleós) and is perhaps more helpful than astos or polités alone in

understanding

in which

women

The

citizen in

verb

a piece

of

these

phor.

polis

of

did

its

land.

most

important (Laws

There was

as

ways

768b)

or

the

citizenship

illustrates

in a cult is

meant

close

of

a god

of

its

picked

a citizen

and

in Athens

(or in

and

also

the

the

shared

or

idea and

exousia

in his

involvement

a "share

hero)

citizens

out

immediate

He had

a concreteness

community

in which

the

its pragmata.

Aristotle

also

or

the

in"

in his which

its to

city

the

family

is more

wealth judge

city or than

belonged and

(Politics

of

rule

the

just

ín

to as

Certainly Plato's

someone that is

these

day,

but

were they

οὐ μέτοχος εἶναι.

is without completely

important do

not

a share without

aspects exhaust

of the

in the capacity to judge, a share in the city.

(male) meaning

citizenship of metechein

he

in Aristotle tes

the

1275a22-23)

ὃ yap ἀκοινώνητος Gv ἐξουσίας τοῦ συνδινέζειν ἡγεῖται τὸ

For if thinks

all

meta-

comments:

παράπαν τῆς πόλεις

way

citizenship.

and with

land

polis

them

this

metechein

together.

The

'belonging'

possessed

with his

as

Plato

what

poleos

and (as

and

165

Plato's

‘he thinks'

material,

judicial

participation proper

and

in

and

his

relationships

“sharing

in" Athens.

from

civic

all

and

formed

theus

the

the context political

city's with

of his

"shares,"

cults--and

the

gods--as

Conversely,

cults

as

well

as

basis

of

community

comment

loss from

also

an Athenian

in

the

benefits

an

essential

assembly

membership.

In

have

which

resulted

considered

his

from

citizenship

meant

or

exclusion

membership

speech

to

was

against

analogous

Boíotos

Manti-

says,

Having

τῶν

ἔχεις τὸ μέρος μετὰ τὴν τοῦ πατρὸς τελευτήν.

ἱερῶν,

μετέχεις.

a share

in

hiera

part of Boiotos'

city

his

atimia,

You have some share of the paternal estate after our father, you have a share in the cults of the of the city. (Dem. 39.35).

is

of

Family

his

In addition

would

part

of citizenship,

the

suggest).

membership

had

kai

hosia,

patrimony. been

the

The

father]

you then,

cults

of

the

closeness

in

conception

emphasized

is it not strange if while a share of the city and of

the death of gods and business

somewhat

gods

and

business

between

of

the

family

city,

and

earlier:

on account of this name you have the property left by him (our

casting off this

name, expect

to take on

another?

(39.31) How did an Athenian not

legally

did

an

her

husband's

take

own

heiress

it back

her own

house.

to her

dowry her

women (i.e.,

‘share she

inheritance. If

he

father's

died

or

house.

in'

could On

her not

her

divorced

family

or her

dispose

marriage, her

of the

without

If she had children,

it

city? as

wife

she

A wife

did

wished)

nor

brought

children

she

they would

a dowry would

inherit

to

then

the

166

dowry and

apart

may

helped

It

belonged

a passive

would

with

analogy

restricted

but

actively

her

most

ensure

as

carrier

equally

were

paternal

to

luck--and

The

not

their

have

wished. was

from

she

of

with and

her

did

her

some

inheritance. welfare,

to

city

conspicuous

it

the

dowry

was

estate

was

contribution

(or

her on

to

something

to

or

to

the

as

the

heiress

(epikleros)

welfare

of

which

ἃ true

These the

active

on

to

she

she heir.

citizenship

passed

jury-courts.

woman

do with

woman's be

the

dowry)

a son,

The

with

to

mother's

clear.

assembly

hers

Similarly,

pass is

traveled

never

tanily./

membership

in

but

support--

potential;

exercized

her

father's

legal

The

vas

children

(male)

children

city:

τοὐράνου γάρ μοι μέτεστι war γὰρ ἄνδρας εἰσρέρυω.

I have a share in public for I contribute men.

service; (Lysistrata

But

certainly

woman the

herself

gods

women

(see

were

disgrace

the

value

was

most

the

preceding

‘active’

and

of

which

had married

of

will

women"

αὐταῖς

be

angry

and

also

attending

in

the

Neaira

realized.

and

her

to

Again,the

conducting

Lysistrata

referred

and

the archon if

was

in

were

Neaira

ταύτην wmamEvotte

μαὶ τῶν ἱερῶν.

you the

chorus

citizens

sacrilege

daughters

conspicious

(the daughter the

the

63)

as

daughter

civic

640ff.). such. have

In

is

μετέχειν

acquitted

upon

that

because,

τῶν τῆς mew

deemed her worthy, equally with them affairs of the city and the cults of

to have a share the gods.

| Demosthenes]

59.111

of

context

detailing

brought

basileus), [Demosthenes] says

cults

that

After

Athenian

in

the

the

the city

"wisest

167

In ology less

conclusion,

for

belonging

inclusive

political

a share

in

the

ship

or

an

inferior

able

of

including

women.

does,

able

a "qualified" not

service

on

can

the

say

cíty,'

none

way

the

to

of

of

which

(otx &mXX)

service

financial

may

reflect

ship,

but

a not

so much,

loosening

a loosening

citizenship.

An astos

from

the

late

fifth

ship,

to

give

one

piece

(e.g.,

considerable

of some

"belonging' comments

the

piece right

of to

development

for which on

this

most

boys

and

old

Athenian

tightly

boundary

but

men

each

or

resident

was

imply

‘having citizen-

which

function,

and

to

class'

of

is capthe

of

Athen-

what

one

foreigners

drew a sharp

origin.

a metic

seem

prominently

of

and

group

does

termin-

more

Athénaios

terminology

on

pay an

to

Despite

in

line

his

a xenos and despite

taxes

like

abstract

see

to

own

Athenian)

idea

the experience

inherent

possible

right an

Aristotle's and

in Athenian

of

of the

Chapter

to

land) to

III.

century

of

citizen-

ideas

of

Beginning

divide

up

to

xenos,

one

another.

citizenship

fifth

definition

duties

an xenosan outsider.

increasingly the

that

privileges

distinction

(e.g.,

development

add

connected

an insider,

it was it

of

citizen,

varied

both

‘second

but

criterion

is necessary

is still

century

a

his

is

which

astos,

denotes

contributions

once of

use

and

an Athenian woman was as aste.

it

of

which

polites

with

rendered

a rich

community

non-active

citizenship.

or

to

way

the

had

a citizen

could

any

to

young

her lack of such contribution, said

in

Aristotle both

being

Athenians

belonging

while

or

or

Athenians

In addition

politically

include

in the army

the

community

participation,

function

Having

that

Aristotle's.

However,

was

based

to

than

active,

ian

we

citizen-

This

another reflects

from

a simple

notion

was

crucial.

For

168

Appendix

1.

"Tous

"relieved

gerontas

of

a man of the not entirely

2.

tous

military

See Chapter

duty

II,

Footnotes

apheimenous'"--1275a15.

service’

right and clear.

1:

pp.

to

25-6

since

attend

in

Presumably

Athens,

the

at

assembly

for a discussion

Aristotle

least,

old

or

court.

law

age

of Cleisthenes'

means

did

not

The

argument

relieve

is

neopolitai.

3. Similar questions can be asked of J.K. Davies very Aristotelian discussion of citizenship, "Athenian Citizenship: the Descent Group and the Alternatives," The Classical Journal 77 (1977-78) 105-121. Like Aristotle, Davies rigorously defines citizenship in terms which exclude women (p. 105) but occasionally slips, as when he says that Neaira's daughter was given to Stephanos ‘as if she were a citizen’ (p. 112) or that the case against Neaira was first that "she was not a

citizen"

(p.

112).

Similarly

refers to a law saying that are trivial objections, but

4.

It

O.E.D.

is also

gives

l.

An

as

Aristotle,

a narrow and a first

restricted

definition

inhabitant

possessing freeman of

in the passage

quoted

a citizen is one who is born from the questioning of the functional

of a city

civic rights a city.

of

or and

meaning

of

the

on page

2 (1275b20)

two citizens. definition is

English

'citizen'.

These not.

The

citizen:

(often) of a town; privileges,

esp.

one

a burgess

or

and

The

lb.

used also as have thee go French hood.

second

definition

2.

A member

of

feminine. Lond. Prodigal III.1.243, I'11 like a citizen, in a guarded gown and a

is

the

more

a state,

an

‘political’ enfranchised

country,as opposed to an alien

one: inhabitant

[my emphasis};

of

a

in U.S.,

a person, native or naturalized, who has the privilege of voting for public office and is entitled to full protection in the exercize of political rights. The

American

usage

referred

to

is more

broadly

indicated

in

the

American

Heritage

Dictionary:

1.

A person owing naturalization

loyalty to and entitled by birth or to the protection of a given state.

This last seems to me the best general, over-all, definition of a citizen. (See note 3 for the situation in which it was developed by the American courts.) The English

169

word of course has a history of its but, as will be seen, the different above are reflected in the Athenian

5.

own, not related to the Greek polites or astos; aspects or meanings in the definitions quoted terms astos, polites or metechein tes poleos.

The degree to which metechein

the equivalent of--metechein entirely clear. Thucydides,

government’

or

'the

tas for

government’

tes politeias was equivalent

poleés in Athens in the example, generally uses

(1.18.1,

2.37.1

on the

Spartan

'constitutions' or 8.73.2, 76.5, 97.2 on ‘the government’ or Athens in 411.) But at 3.55.3, in relation to the Plataeans politeias metalambanein. By

ably.

the

end

Lysias

metechein

of

the

(34.3)

fifth

seems

t@s poleds

century

the

two

phrases

seem

to use metechein t@s politeias

(see Epilogue, p. 149).

to--or used as

fifth century is not politeai for ‘form of

to

and Athenian

‘those in power’ in he uses the phrase

be

used

interchange-

as the equivalent

And that usage

of

(with the variant

koinönein tes politeias) is standard in fourth century and later writers. It occurs in Plato (e.g., Laws 753a), Aristotle (e.g., Ath. Pol. 21.2, Politics 126818, 1275b32,34), as well as jn Aelian's version of the citizenship law. Politeia is also find

restored in I.G. II^ 10.7 (the enfranchisement the restoration dubious; see the discussion of

of democratic Tod (11.100).

allies),

but

I

The history of the many senses of politeia deserves further study but cannot be undertaken here. In general, we might suppose that Athenian usage in 450 was simpler and more concrete than in 403 and that Athenian epigraphic usage was sinpler and more concrete than literary usage. The Samians are simply "to be Athen-

fans" (M-L 94.12). "Attic Citizenship

For further comment on epigraphic usage see M.J. Osborne, Decrees: Α Note," BSA 69 (1972) esp. pp. 150-155.

6. In addition to Politics 1278a34 (quoted above p. 2), Aristotle uses astos at Politics 1300b32, when speaking of the court system and in particular of a court which hears cases xenois pros astous, and at Rhetoric 1394a34, when quoting Euripides' Medea 297. I think it is fair to say that in the first two instances he has in mind respectively the Athenian citizenship law and the Athenian court system. (1300b29-30 in the Politics contains a reference to the Athenian court at Phreatto.) Actually the manuscripts have auton for aston at 1278a34, the latter being the emendation of Bekker. It is interesting that Stahr (failing to see the 'quotation' of Athenian law) rejected this on the ground that astos is a very rare word in Aristotle (see the edition of Congreve, 1874, p. 121). 7. On this point see V. Chapot, ἌΣΙΤΟΣ," Revue des Etudes Anciennes 31 (1929) 7-12; and, more fully developed, D. Cole, 'Asty' and 'polis': "City" in Early Greek, (dissertation, Stanford University, 1976) pp. 255ff. Thucydides and Plato reveal ἃ tendency to limit the use of astos; see the examples cited below in the text.

8. (for

G. an

Alfoldy article

(Revue about

Belgede Philologie

the

Athenian

in which the

'-idai families’

See

II

Appendix

for

d'Histoire

synoikismos)

an

47

(1969)

interesting

and other recognized gene clustered

a discussion

of

the

Eupatridai

and

gene.

37)

map

has

produced

showing

the

peri to astu.

way

170

9. All fragment (Oxford, 1971). 10.

It

taken

is

numbers

interesting

to refer

to the

refer

that

in

to the edition another

‘commoners’.

of M.L.

context

So L.

and

Jeffery

West,

another

reads

Iambi poet

Pindar,

et

Elegi,

astoi

has

Pythian

been

3.70-71

ὃς Συροακόσσαισι, νέμει, βασιλεύς πατήρ.

νοις 6€ διαμαστὸς There last.

are

11.

three

D.

Whitehead

an

archaic,

Thucydides be

in

terms

6.54

never

(The

and

the

Ideology

real

of

contrast

locative

sense."

has

such

('Asty' home."

a

sense

in

is

between

the

Athenian

But

Aristogeiton's

but the deme of Aphidna

12. Astos appears polites three times (7.131, 17.206). 13. Cole family and

here,

("Aristogeiton anér ton aston,

astu of Athens, astoi)

ξεί-

ἀγαϑοῖς,

οὐ φϑονέωυν

ἀστοῖς,

προῦς

the

Metic,

of

family

Thucydides"

15.

See

247.

Athenian 16. astoi 9.35) did

D.

D.

Cole, p.

and

'Polis',

p.

'Asty'

and

terms

138)

'Polis',

the

become

an

the

that

in

"astos might was

not

from

Moreover,

History.

See

indeed the

astos p.

(or

157.

comments

that

astos

(dissertation,

contrast

"a mere

has

politai.

Stanford

cliche,"

"connotations

(The

Neither

University,

Ideology

of

men

1976)

of the

60).

It is noteworthy that we (e.g., Thucydides 1.2.6, which fits well with the

not

and

once in the Iliad (11.242) and once in the Odyssey (13.192), in the Iliad (2.806, 15.558, 22.429) and twice in the Odyssey

Whitehead

Metic,

first

suggests

Mor. 628e).

14. Note that in these instances women will be among the or women of Phaeacia will be politai in Aristotle's sense.

p.

60)

mesos polites")

(Plutarch,

rest

p.

the

astos

by a

hear of foreigners being made politai but never 3.63.2, 5.4.2; or Herodotus 5.57, 7. 156, 8.75, political, public connotation of polités. One

legal

or

official

act;

but

did

one become

an

astos

at all? Apollodorus claims that Neaera was neither left an aste by her ancestors nor been made a politis by the demos (|Demosthenes] 59.107). If we think in terms of the contrast astos/xenos then certainly the new citizen ought to have been included with the astoi, insiders as they now were; but there are indications that their position was in certain respects peculiar. Just as the adopted son could not dispose of his adopted father's property by will but had to produce a direct heir to carry on the family (see W.K. Lacey, The Family in Classical Greece, p. 146), so the new (adopted) citizen was subject to various restrictions which did not apply to his ‘native born' children (e.g., he could not hold the office of archon or an hereditary priesthood-- Demosthenes 59.104; cf. Herodotus 5.57). Even though the law quoted in „this speech refers formulaically to children born “ex astes gunaikos kai egguetes" (106) we might still conclude that while the parent(s) had been made a polites (ai) only the children were haplÓs astoi or citizens. See

next

note

for

Oedipus'

"astos

eis

astous

tel@"

(0.T

222).

171

17. The position deserves a further

"ἀστός εἰς ἀστοὺς

of Oedipus--and Sophocles ' usage--in the Oedipus Tyrannos comment. Wilamowitz argued that since Jedipus himself says

t€10-222"

the metic in Athens was Whitehead, The Ideology unnecessary

and Teiresias

calls

him a , Ἑένος, ..ETOUXÓc -452,"

considered as astos(Hermes 22 (1887) 334-5; see of the Athenian Metic, p. 60). But surely that

conclusion--and

not

supported

by

any

other

examples

D. is

an

(Thucydides

90.0

and

94.1 do not provide such support). The riddle of Oedipus' identity is a major theme of the play and Sophocles seems to be playing on this in these passages. In fact, Oedipus is an astos 'by birth’ in Thebes, not a xenos at all. (See also the comments of Whitehead, ibid.) 18. See Chapter V (Conclusion) for discussion of their importance.

19.

"The

phrase

aston kai xenon

has

(Cole, 'Asty' and 'Polis,' p. 356). e.g., Aristophanes, Acharnians 508, Suppliants 355, 843. 20.

"Civil"

belonged

to

Classical

21. p.

rights

ought

to

include

women

in

a

Greece,

22.

"This Note

for

being

138-139,

the comment eccentric example,

aston kai xendn" hai pros@kousai. their

pp.

become

of

almost

rights

of

ownership

way

if

151-153,

and

170-171).

of D.

these

laws

a formula

limited

statement that

substance

and

a brief

in Thucydides,"

It is also common in his contemporaries, Birds 32; Euripides, Heracleidai 411,

Athenian

See also 60:

the

Whitehead, is

not

Thucydides

The

borne (2.34.4)

at

all

and

(see

Ideology out

by

The

which Family

of the Athenian

any

first

contract

Lacey,

of

says

the that

in

Metic,

instances "whoever

only

cited." wishes

joins in the state procession and then adds, kai gunaikes pareisin Their position as female relatives here is more important than

'insiders'.

23. Although Aeschylus' usage is a special other Athenian writers by current usage (see 279 and 365-366), still if astoi implied any would probably have managed not to have used

the Areopagus

"astón tön emÓn ta beltata"

case in that he is less affected than Cole, 'Asty' and 'Polis', pp. 275doubt of full political rights he it when Athena chose the members of

(Eumenides

437).

24. I.G. 12 79. (For the identification of the cult see the forthcoming 1.G. 1? 138 and M.H. Jameson, "Apollo Lykeios in Athens," Archaiognosis (198 ).) This is the only epigraphical occurrence of astos listed in the index to I.G. 12. 25. Although A.H.W. between the two words

Harrison (The Law

D.M. MacDowell speaks possible distinction. 7-12) objected to the Glenn Morrow (Plato's debated.

of the "citizen (polites or astos)" and does not discuss any V. Chapot (AZIOB , Revue des Etudes Anciennes 31 (1929) distinction drawn by LSJ and other lexicographers as did Cretan City, 112 note 51). The issue has not been extensively

refers

26.

to "...the

See

above

simply refers his reader of Athens I, p. 188 note

fully qualified

p.

6.

Cf.

Cole,

citizen,

'Asty'

and

the πολίτης

'Polis',

pp.

to Paoli for the 2), on that same

or ἀστός ."

137-138,

difference page he

Likewise

238-239,

245-247,

172

358-359.

I do

polités

not

(e.g.,

follow

that

astos

Cole

in

all

usually

his

suggested

suggests

connotations

good-will

and

οὗ

harmony,

will and rivalry--pp. 238-239), but the basic distinction between ‘familial’ astoi and public, political politai seems sound.

27. For a good example, of the politícal the phrase agathos polites (e.g., 3.42.5;

sense of polites 5.9.2, 14).

see

astos

polites the

and

ill-

communal,

Thucydides

use

of

28. Apart from Athena in the Eumenides being prophronos toward the politai, I know of no use of polítai which can be definitely understood to include women. Aristophanes’ Ecclesiazousae would be a natural place to expect to find such usage, but the women in that play do not refer to themselves as politai or politides. The closest they come is to ask Praxogora to disclose the "myriad benefits" she will bring to the "politen dÉmon" (574-75). Here the adjective polités is equivalent to "of the polis" (see LSJ s.v. polites II.) and does not exclude the female ‚half of the polis. But in the phrase "Ootic πολιτῶν πλεῖον f τρισμυρίων ὄντων τὸ πλῆϑος"-1131 ("who out of more than 30,000 politai") it is clear that only adult males are included (On '3 myriads' of Athenians, see Chapter III pp. 51-55. Two

occurrences

of

politai

in

the

Lysistrata,

both

plicitly exclude--or contrast with--women, will further 3241. the female chorus pray to Athena that instead of they will see Hellas and the politai saved from war and the

business

and

responsibility

of

the

men,

the

of

which

seem

to

im-

illustrate the point. At seeing the women burned madness. War is clearly

politai.

Then, at 1041-43, the chorus addresses the male audience (ὥνδρες ) and says that they have not come to ‘scold’ any "of the politai," but rather to say and do "good things." In both cases, I think politai is best understood as including only adult males. 29. Something should Republic V (45le ff.).

ness

of the city

guardians,

are

Plato of

this

be saíd here about the female guardians of that these select women do pursue the same

(epitedeuma...pros does

simply gunaikes

argument

probably Granted not

and

dioikesin

poleds--455b,

establish

this

by

so distinct

from

the politai.

section

are

worth

calling

--And

politides.

The

concluding

busi-

as the male Rather

lines

they

of

the

not

the

best

of

indeed. what

women --Yes,

455d)

noting:

--What then? Are these (the guardians) the other citizens (politon)? --Yes,

them

cf.

then?

Will

these

women

not

be

the

best

of

the

(gunaikön)? this

too,

he

said.

(456e)

the

Plato uses politis only once, text. Certainly nothing can be

in the passage on military education noted in deduced from this occurrence about the position

173

of women

in Plato's

Laws.

Their

position

there

is ambiguous--largely,

it would

seem because of the way Plato has mixed Athenian traditions, philosophical innovation and philosophical modification of Spartan traditions. Much is left up in the air. "Plato's provision that women also should serve in the duties of the state, even in military service against the enemy (785b, 805a,c), would mean that they attend the assembly as well; but there is not a hint that Plato has this

point

in mind

Plato's

in any of the references

Cretan

City,

pp.

that

follow

in this

section"

(Morrow,

157-8).

30. See above note 4. In 1822 Judge offered this definition of citizenship:

Mills

of

the

Kentucky

Court

of

A citizen...is one who oves to the government allegiance, service, and money by way of taxation, and to whom the government in turn, grants and guarantees liberty of person and of conscience, the right of acquiring and possessing property, or marriage and the social relations, of suit and defence, and security in person, estate and reputation. (quoted in J.H. Kettner, The

of American This

opinion

was

in dissent

from

place of a man's birth, but the make a man a citizen (ibid., p. The constitutional and are of course very different good examples of alternative culties raised by each. The by reasoning that these

the majority rights 321).

and

which

Citizenship, held

privileges

be

Development

p.

the view

he may

Appeals

322.)

that

"not

entitled

to

the enjoy"

political issues of pre-Civil War America from fifth century Athens, but these opinions are ways of looking at citizenship, and of the diffimajority had tried to account for women and children

are generally dependent upon adult males, through whom they enjoy the benefits of those rights and privileges; and it is a rule of common law, as well as of common sense, that

females

and

infants

should,

in

thís

respect,

partake

of the quality of those adult males who belong to the same class and condition in society, and of course they will be or will not be citizens, as the adult males of the same

class

are or are not

so

(ibid.,

p.

321).

Mills pointed out that this excluded “widows "the unprotected orphan" (ibid., p. 322). It the

is noteworthy

majority

"that

and

citizenship

enjoyed"

(Kettner,

the citizenship 31. VIII,

the

In 9)

of

that

the

minority

could

in

'functional' the

be determined

op. cit.,

p.

332).

Dred

and maids definition

Scott

case

by examining

free black Americans

of mature

age"

eventually

(1857)

rejected

the rights

and

lost

out;

the

a person

p.

both

idea

actually

Justice Taney found other reasons (ibid.,

also

to deny

326-328).

their commentary on Varro's story (quoted by Augustine, The City of how the Athenían women in 'pre-historic' times lost the vote,

of God matri-

174

linear

filiation,

and

the

name

Atlíénaiai,

Austin

and

Vidal-Naquet

claim

that

the

story "can hardly have originated before the citizenship law of Pericles in 451 or 450" and that the loss of the name means that "they are not citizen women, but only daughters of citizens" (Economic and Social Historyof Ancient Greece, pp.

186-187).

women

I do

changed

not

after

follow

451/0

their

it ought

reasoning.

to have

If

been

the

position

in the direction

of

Athenian

of more

recog-

nition as citizens; their status was now essential to that'of their chíldren. The best way of proving a woman's citizenship was demonstrating that her father (and maternal grandfather, if we want to keep the seríes going) was a recognized citizen. But this is simply due to the fact that citizenship was public and

active of

while

Athena

a woman's

Nike

of husbands Athénaioi.

was

and

was,

chosen

fathers.

for "from

the most all

See below

the

part,

private.

Athenians"

pages 162-163

Presumably

(M-L

44.4)

for more

the priestess

by means

comments

of

lists

on the

tern

32. The metic, it should be remembered, was a xenos metoikos. See the Conclusion for a few comments on the origin of this classification. And see above note 17 for the (mistaken) view that an metic could be considered an astos. 33. I do not regard the story of XVIII, 9) as authoritative on this 34. above

Jacoby, Chapter

FGrH IIIb IV p. 121

Varro (quoted by Augustine, point. See note 31.

(Supplement) note 56.

35. Notice that thís usage tragedy, oratory and law.

16 not

Notes

exclusively

36. On atimia see Harrison, The Law of in Classícal Athens, pp. 73-75; and most and

Ephegesis

tion

of

against

Athenian

Kakougoi,

Citizenship,

Atimoi

discussion of 45-60, Wolff,

in

109-110.

Greece,

379,

times

each month.

If he was Family

in

term.

27

uses

legal

or

official

Pheugontes

but

of

God

See

is

found

in

169ff.; MacDowell, The Law Hansen Apagoge, Endeixis and

B.

Manville,

The

Evolu-

the Athenian dowry system see Harrison, The Traditio 2 (1944) 53-65 and Lacey, The Family

38. Not only did the city require that an heiress’ next Side either marry her or find her a husband, but a lav of husband of an heiress to have sexual intercourse with her kin (Lacey, The Solon 20.4).

this

n.

Athens II, p. recently M.H.

and

City

Appendix.

37. For a detailed Law of Athens I, pp. Classical

p.

The

unable

Classical

to do so then Greece,

pp.

of kin on her father's Solon also required the not less than three

she should

139-145

and

turn p.

89,

to his next citing

of

Plutarch,

175

Appendix

The

family

was

the

he*

participated

and

through

which

But

outside

his

which

participants

how

or

of

consider

fifth

or

be

primarily

of

an

the

portant

status,

and

order

of

Athenian

but

of

or

is

and

a variety his

of

In

terminology

important

or

classes!

toward

this

to

fellow legally

an

under-

appendix

what

it

distinctions.

implies

This

appropriate,

I will

will

comments

emphasize

here

the

divisions

remember

that

the

most

to

society

city.

whether

and

where

I will

the

groups

classes,

politics.

belonged

of

importance

political

Athenian

life

attitudes

Such

incorporating,

it

an Athenian

obvious

class

although

of

to

affected

are

economic

body,

to which

community.

usage

Classes

institutions

and

the

Finally,

citizen

group

belonged

and

essay

Athenian

the

statuses?,

social,

nature. 9

Athenian

in

Athenian

of

in

participated,

a descriptive

class,

important

citizenship

views

Some

Athenian

unofficial

century

analytical

within

the

he

Athenian

Athenian

most

"shareholders"

orders

standing

about

family

determined

defined

2.

was

the

Athenians

in-

them-

selves.” For vided

into

purposes

of

distributing

what

be

called

zeugitai

and

based

a type

to

on

and

the

of

(Ath.

by

500 medimnoi 200

thétes.

Aristotle

determined

can

These property Pol.

quantity

(dry) thés

* I am using the mostly on active,

orders rating,

7.3) of

four

than

were

(liquid) This

archai)

the

called

whose

agricultural

200.

(or

orders:?

membership

or metr@tai less

offices

in

the

per year, leaves

(or

nature

a telos

yield;

Athenians

pentakosiomedimnoi,

telé

exact

the

many

(in

timémata) is the

of

questions

300,

were

According Solon)

pentakosiomedimnos

the hippeus

di-

hippeis,

and

unclear. time

were

was

produced

the

unanswered,

generic 'he' here, although in fact what I will say political and military, functions of citizenship.

zeugités most

will

bear

176

prominently:

barley,

What

is

the

metretai

of wine

non-agricultural

income?

Aristotle

thought.

Plutarch

attributed

with

"palaia

the

Aristotle

and

tions

added

the

and

horse

might

land

or

because

that

income.

In

they

were

basis

of

of

what

of

the

This

property seems

tel@

to

Solon

supposing

did

not

account of

early

fifth

It

century

is

value

definitely

although

annual

(Laws 698b),

does mean

estate

(see

Demosthenes’

there

Croix,

"Demosthenes' T{wpa

Classica et Mediaevalia

14

and

[1953]

set

wine

wealth

system

(as

been

century

But

and

so

we

qualificaorders,

neither

did

might

both

of

formed

that

changed

evidence

reconcile

‘common

reported

not

the

at

currency’;

the

natural

least

by

by Aristotle)

to

one

based

on

property). for

it.?

The

of the citizen

the

value

total

guardians

again,

(27-29)

in

owm

suppose

divisions

Athenian E(Opopá

30ff.).

were

non-landed

direct

his

by

them

non-agricultural

however,

‘ancestral’

against the

and

of

families).

and

of

to

they

account

and

links

owned

their

take

wine,

assumed,

fourth

who

and

7.3),

traditional

because

support

could

had

those

Pol.

minimal

three

a summary,

oil

their

no

before

either

to

possible

definite

oxen 8 and

including is

in the

speeches

it

and

yield

word timéma, which Plato uses for the body

Perhaps

land

Solonian

by

possible

simply

grain,

membership (now

Plato

laborers

usually

the

while is

of wheat

And what

18.1),

system

counted

in value?

(Ath.

of

oil

medimoi

Solon

certainly

the

century

Athenians

system.

most

barley,

sixth

equal

6 to what were

as

Are

before

Solon

enough

Solon

and

that

out

is

existed

ἃ team

own

names?

considered

689b).

of

the

(Solon

(Laws

themselves

time

most

the

owners

of wheat

Solon's

determining

total

the

the

that

by

the

they

value

all

500-bushel-men

hire

from

different

middle

the

Aristotle's

even

and oil,

politeia"

owmers,’

who

Further,

them

Plutarch

(and

significanceof

the

of an

and

Fourth

de

Ste.

Century,"

it is possible

that

the

177

agricultural sorts

of

yield

property

example,

might

his

were

pots

When new

was

scale

or

income.

as

10

the

common

denominator

The telosof

have been determined

the

owner

by calculating

for

of

comparing

a pottery

how many

different

workshop,

bushels

for

(or measures)

worth. (and

of

retained

if)

the

values?

tele

A.H.M.

were

determined

by

has

that

Jones

argued

total

property,

what

200 medimnoi

were

was

the

valued

at

200 drachmae and then multiplied by 10 to get a value for the total zeugit®s

cen-

sus

of

it

was

produced)

2,000

drachmae is

the evidence

from

Diod.

If

And that

brought

rent

we

that

Whether

of

are

below

or not

figures

possible, for

observations it

can

we

need

be

on

noted

not

bushel

Second,

price

200

the

for

Jones’

due of

the

equation

argument

lack

of

evidence

in

classical

the

scale

of

land-holding

that

the

range

that

range. 16 medimnoi

The of

the

between

majority

system grain

is

on

200

property

and

up

a hoplite

fran-

on a somewhat 20 minae. 13

might

need

support

to ask:

of land?" yield

I will

offer

by

Solonian

the

bushels at

of

Jones"

the

is

No precise and

here

not

lower

"How rich ans-

reliable only

a few

system. 1? extreme,

of

thetes

were

was--to

modern

eyes--one

of

small

amount.

At

a maximum

a considerable

noted

hoplites.)

agricultural

500

be

"is an inference

value

this

and

in terms

implied

should

rent which

we still

Athens. 14

by which

says that each kl@ros on

zeugitai

a th@s

land

assume

of

it

set

zeugit®s,

is valid,

how poor was

to

annual

be

method

of 20 minae

Antipater

a total

to

the but

(3.50.2)

two minae

expected

not

correct,

that

indicate

(if

figure

Thucydides

would was

be

The

assumption

cleruch

10%

ἃ pentakosiomedimnos,

wers

000

on

value

may

it is minimal.

a cleruch

(See

This and

is about all.

percentage

assume

accepted

the Athenian

calculation.

was

behind

XVIII.18.4-5,

chise."12

high

20 minae, 11

generally

that

Lesbos

or

end

of

First, and

the

199-

gradations. yield

of

178

20-25

medimnoi

a minimum On

this

same

hectares

or

counted two

plot

(those

had

stands

as

other

that

ín

These they even

great

of

at

planted

at

by

of

classical

many

and

by j.18

of

wholly

are

30

each

their

three

system

minimum-yield

We

ought,

penet@s

at

between

did

not

to be

value

all

vary

30

of prob-

but

still

the

all

fact very

large 1?

comprehensive,

is

nor

not

poorest

address

about

Aristophanes

(This

the

since

and

destitute

21

20 is

or

I.123c

at

necessarily

requirements

therefore, face

not

fallow

considered

or

fallow.

about

plethra

and

mean

of magnitude

300

was

for

need no

land,

hectares

existed--as

The

vould

Alcibiades to

would

allowance

order

satisfactory

was

this

Plato.Alcibiades

addition

a farm

fact

but

plousioi

in

of

a pentakosiomedimnos.

wealth,

of

know

than in

no

to be the right

19.19

not

plethron,

year--again

poorer

pentakoisiomedimnos.)

holding.

we

(each

a thes

richest

property

grain

that

in wealth

set

with

suggest

tímes

extremes

Lysias

are

80 plethra

reported

income

calculations

per

seems

as

Athens

2 medimnoi

pentakosiomedimnos

with

estates

Alcibiades

sources

of the

least

Athenian

reported

least

about

reckoning

This

of

or

8 hectares

plethra

largest

Aristophanes

or

about

method 200

the

hectares

but

of

hectare!

in here).

of

ably

per

itself

landless,

to

thes to

^)

deny

and

that

the

extremes

of

suggesting

moderate

sized

accepting

Athenian

talk

of

and

especially

of

equating

firm

conclusions

about

large

part

context

at

the

penetés

with any one or two of the tel®. The of

the

which

members the

graphic

or

who

of

tele

sources

obsolete e.g.,

difficulty the

four

tele

to

any

is

in

mentioned

(in

of

classical

Athens. ??

in determining be

coming

are

throughout

would

in

this who

called

up

period was for

any

for

eligible service

This

they for on

do

the the

‘real’

due

to

the

infrequency

all)

in

the

literary

does seem

the

not to

have

colony fleet

mean

at in

that

been Brea

427

the

wealth with

and orders

epiwere

used

officially,

(1.6.

1245.40-42)

(Thucydides

3.16).

179

Although

in Aristotle's

day

requirements

that

certain

of certain tel& were "on the books" but ignored assume

that

above

this

show,

was

membership

totle also notes death")

shows

that

the

tion,

Ath.

Pol. is

Athenian

during

the

higher

tele

the

course 7^

up

of If

Probably set

one

of

the

four

26.2)

this

of

the

a statue

on

were

tele

Avrı

at

that

to

time

by Glotz, that

century

true

would

be It

political

(telé),

18

at

possible

discussion

based

participated 'cut

interesting

the

on in

to

the

the

his

ἱππόδ᾽

(social

or

also

Ancient

examples record;

given and

which

Aris-

certainly

the Anthemion

dedica-

Greece

would

and

a mass

at

Work,

general

have

169;

prosperity

movement

perhaps

p.

upwards

been

to

into

lessen

this

Anthemion

jumped

two

exchanged

his

orders

inscription:

25

ἀμειψώμιενος.

- Ath. Pol. 7.4

if

there

the

lack

of

a

in

century

with

know

reveals

city's

of

zeugitai,

inflation

effect

fifth

acropolis

that

property,

a matter

(cf.

resulted

Anthemion son of Diphilos dedicated 'thetic' telos for the 'hippic'.

It

two

systen.

during

τέλους

was

the

we cannot

the

opened

Διφίλου Avdeulunv τήνδ΄ ἀνέϑηκε ϑεοῖς, ϑητικοῦ

As

7.4, 47.1),

members

was

166-167)

Solonian

the

century.

by

("in the sixth year after

(e.g.

pp. fifth

sometime

Pol.

held

below).

assumed

the

(Ath.

be

that in 458/7

important

Democracy,

significance

and

fifth

quoted

sometimes

Jones,

the

archonship

were

7.4,

in

Pol.

the

telé

case

in

(Ath.

Ephialtes'

It

the

offices

this,

were

volitical)

may

joints"

he

others of

the

situation:

determined

government

many

prominence

paradoxical

which

after

the not, in

manner in

the

the

like telé

the

hin. in

official

in which fifth

Athenian

social

an

orders

Athenian

century,

citizen

and

have

bodv.

180

Political

issues

not

directly

saw

other

battle,

and

the

This

Athenian

(s.v.

10

these

as

more

based

on

type

objection

to

the

orders),

military

lines;

social

The Athenians

classifications)

(or

the

hippeis

could

of

then,

equation

16

classes

were

not

epibatai Dracon (5.1)

of

was of

the given

the

those

who

that could

However, invention

ments

go

Further,

back all

fact

and

their been

vere

own

of to

161ff.

status

in the

is

ships...." over

as

1,500

not

and

of

classical

suggestion with

according supply

when the the

to

we

who

references

the

their

fifth

same

from

could

the

to

A reference

a Solonian

(e.g.,

by Jones,

Hoplite

Assessment,

support.

effect

that

on

the

Harpocration

thetes

manning

all

5,100

katalogos,

700

thetes

4.2)

arms.

says Since

zeugitai

Aristotle

that he

speaks of

thetes

followed

vere of

hoplites, (as)

of

later the

(7.3,

the

those

the

the politeia

as members

to the

pre-

Solonian

"...in

by Solon

tradition own

this:

Pol.

and

to

ancient

6.43,

the

the zeugitai as

granted

the

the

bear

given

council

9),

rhates

we

were

hopla.

that

century,

period--the

have

(Ath.

hippeis

recognize

late

for

Athenians

those

to

of

cavalry.

"Solon's

some

Thucydides

support

the new privileges

not

Antiphon

the

for

periods

participation.in

a reference

taken

without

Aristotle

to

in

was

significant.

equated

and French,

armor.

taken

be

generally

p.

pentakosiomedimnoi,

of 400 and notes assume

in

essentially

Aristophanes

has

there

would

S12ff.)

supply

fleet,

pentakosiomedimnoi)

Appendix,

(1961)

these

(and

class,

Θῆτες ) quotes

Sicilian

an

(or

A possible

that

on

membership.

classes

is

Democracy,

Historia

can

classes

drawn

the thétes serving as light-armed soldiers or as rowers,

telos.

and

directly

significant.

a military

who

of

paragraph

hoplites to

not

to telos

military

were

ceding

tele,

linked

sorts

The

were

the

"constitution

7° it last

do with

is

striking

decades

thetes

as

of

the

of

Dracon"

that

all

fifth

non-hoplites;

is

these

probably state-

century. the

other

telé

181

are not mentioned. the

time

of

the

Thucydides

Mytilenean

pentakosiomedimnoi were

still

tel@

were

the

fifth

and

so

above.

revolt)

and

hippeis.

'operative'

official

officially century

the

3.16

the

cavalry

Nothing

equated

and

more

As

noted

the

and

this

their

orders;

the

hoplites

than

that

with

with

thétes

says

manned

a fleet

own

except

for

citizens,

earlier it

does

cavalry.

this

usually

show

It

appears were

those

legitimately

shows

not

non-hoplites

were can

the Athenians

be

the

telt

the

two

upper

that that

the

at the

zeugités

concluded

the

that

usually

of

(at

the

end

same

people--

census

from

the

of

and

evidence

available. If

we

more

unlikely

type

of

would

to

that

military

this

wealth

try

imagine

membership

service.

always of

course,

experienced

as

a hoplite

property

rich yet

and

pentakosiomedimnos come

into

would

acquire

have

objected?

his

seems

possible

was were had

in

the

failed

drafting.

to

instance

enroll

In

this

as

Or

context

of

and

of

it

But

if

register,

in view

of

the

the

as

zeal

Would

the

to

(Ath.

with

who

katalogeis

evidence

he

lost

son

of

had

not

philotimia,

the Athenians called

Pol.

not was would

presented

was

he

and

upon

to

49.2) 28

liturgies

were

a man

be

who

the

full

rolls

that

though that

but Although

zeugités

even

of

a certain

property?

a

even

hopla,

because

eligible

that

having

likely

or cavalry

proof)

appears

soldier

thés,

men

a katalogeus

proper

was

it

implied

total

imagine

light-armed

8.24.2) no

of

a hoplite

Or,

a

on

in the katalogos.

lists

is

as

perhaps

voluntary.

the

a

depended

could

serve

himself

6.43,

attention in

2

were

there

we

practice,

necessarily

or value

a thes.

serve

(Thucydides

to

to

in

telos

a hoplite

factor,

officially

enroll

worked

produce

continuing

katalogoi

the

as

annual

would

system

a Solonian

limiting

(although

first

brought

and

The

as hoplites

in

inheritance?

hopla

serve

on

a

became

the

Service

depend

was,

his

how

It

enrollment

filled able

or to

if

it

serve

have

done

above,

it

some

is

182

likely from

that the

level

thetic

duty

would

higher there the

cavalry

the

rowers

have

been

They

varied in

also

and

Aristophanes'

the

221a;

also

see

who

were

as

Athens

as

Athenian

virtues

the

growth one

speak

of

cavalry.

power."

proudly

108). of

a man higher

Perhaps not.

century, above,

But

that

Thus, between

and

even

between

this

may

not

and

and

horsemen

the

came

public

empire

and

navy

In the themselves

same as

were

chorus

chorus

their

have

of

and

Athenians

showier,

their

also

could

vas

may

have

increased

the

on

a recognition

rowers.

proud

Athenian

of

in which

'Marathonomachoi'

their

the

not

ancestral

But,

Symposium

it was

them

service. 3l

knights

a particularly

paid

brought

were

not

represent

orders--the

Athenians

of

may

at Potidaea--Plato,

they

to

and

and

was

respect

courage

military

proud

(in-

on vealth.?)

prestige

The

wealthiest

Rather,

they

and

light-armed

based

state.

cavalry the

the

their

Alcibiades

the

sea

1.142)

and

orders

Athenian

and

While

toward

lower

perhaps

hoplites,

although

the

(e.g.,

city

the

(Birds

army,

the

Athenian

some

cavalry.

status.

the

long-haired

of

grew,

beneath

fifth

status

considered

the

But

as hoplites

steadfastness,

in

rich,

Athenian

power

the

be

fortunes

backbone

of

can

the

16.3).

later

thetic

cavalry,

groups,

Lysias

the

excused

29 the

are

the

zeugitai of

in

equivalent),

in

prestige

the

ranks"

of

legally

falling

service

the

or

the

(Thucydides

triremes" Wasps

of

sea

group

skilled

in

‘turned

of

least

rowers,

Knights

service

serve "in

of

status

time

part

at

rule.

the

from

those

war)

Similarly,

(or

those

classes,

and

Peloponnesian

farm

and

fast

military

prominent

the

and

archers)

fathers'

and

light-armed

a hard

with

Athenian

300-bushel

hoplites

the

a hoplite.

correspondence,

and

were

as

a richer

a

and

The cluding

was

some

(during

serving

excuse

level was

of

status

the

of

the

hoplites

diminished in

stature

'heroic' other

the

rowers

hand,

virtues vere

"beautiful

‘Wasps’

of Aristophanes

(1075-90—the

word

Marathon

183

fighters

is

emphasize

not

used

their

but

the

ability

to

reference

to

the

Persian

in

by

spear

and oar

it

still

may

given

the

to

similar

final

lines

that

a hoplite to

that

of

that

(...xdnnv

be

of

chorus

in

a trireme

knight.

the

they

μήτε λόγχην

rowing

or

is

clear),

they

also

row:

‘Twas not then our manhood's test, Who can make a fine oration? Who 1s shrewd in litigation? It was, who can row the best? -(1094-1098,

And

Wars

The

equate

the

trans.)

value

of blisters

μήτε φλόκταιναν did

rower's

Rogers

not

command

position

in

-1119).

the

social

this

produced

However, respect

respect

was

perhaps

artist:

No youth of proper character longs to be Phidias or Polyclitus. For it does not of necessity follow that if the work delights you with its grace, the one who wrought it is worthy of your egteem.

It orders

18

important

should

be

taken

relationship

to

the

can not

hoplites

interests

the

distinct

and

hippeis

the

fifth

But

when

Greece,

economic of

from

the

century

be

landless

that

the

middle it

production.

owners

"party

is

ΑΒ

the

of

all

three

p.

126)

lower-middle-classes"

all

coo

transfer

or that the

(Lacey, modern

III

(pp.

by

the

end

social

or

of

of trade?»

the

middle

democracy

customs

The

56-57)

hoplítes

bulk

"the

by

and political

industry

...the

military

determined

Thetes,

through

with

the

economic

might

included

conformity

to

Chapter

with

living

nor

sense

aristocracy.

and

easy

in

class"

Coast

of Greece

Solonían

Marxist

noted

or

their

the

the

likewise

earn of

measure

in

a "middle

and

and

A History

a considerable

156),

classes

"proletariat"

land

hear

that'neither

be considered

be

dominant p.

as

means

classes" (Bury-Meiggs,

ically

emphasize

could

we

...imposed

to

of

the

numer-

Familyin Classical and

economic

class

184

relationships Greek

term

indicate

the

are

either

have

likely

divided

but

then

without

the

trans.)

with

In of

to be

into

all the

such

trace

as

modern

existence

squeezed

out

by

the commons, is clear

economic indeed

the

the

"with

rich,

the

rich

of

the

heavy-armed

of

the

mesoi.

the

to

citizens

the

class which

forms

the mean

principle,

that

help

extremes

on

or the rich and

says

the city

that

and

the

possessing and

(mesoitout6n).

will

terminology;

(Politica has

more

Now

middle

the

poor

to

"is

class being

1289532,

states there may be distinguished three parts, citizen-body--the very rich; the very poor and

a general

the

the many,

poor,

he

of

categories.

in Greek

few and

on,

meaning

(terminological)

soldier"

Later

of

applied

in Aristotle who

classes--the

continues,

equipment no

of

consideration

moderate)

a precarious

The situation

be

A brief

middling,

the protoi and

the poor. 29

(mesoi)"

(middle,

mesoi

very

to

Athens.

inappropriateness

side,

bound

ancient

μέσος

The they

to

Barker

say:

or classes, the middle

it is admitted,

moderation and the mean are always -1295b1-4, Barker trans.

as best.

and

..a state which is based on the middle class is bound to be the best constituted in respect of the elements of which on our view, a state is naturally composed. -1295b25-27, Barker trans.

For mesoi the

very rich;

Aristotle

the

pressure

often

the

victim

whichever

(1296a16). their

The

moderate

record neither

are

one

very

poor

nor

the

the

upper

mesoi

is

political

not

only

struggle

terminological; between

establishes

are

the

non-extremists

who

wealth

but

who

unfortunately

have

a government

and

very

in Aristotle

position

in maintaining

of

the

hand

mesoi

gets

on

and

very

rich,

but

easily

otherwise

have

drop no

its

out

own

of

special

the

the

poor

and

constitution

are

content

a very

with

poor

sight. economic

track

They

are

or

class

185

characteristics. “middle

class" Two

They or

very

mesoi

to the Ath.

will

Pol.,

one of the mesoi"

of

legislators

view,

few Solon

linked);

by

is

not

is

also

he

the

seeing

an

(Plutarch,

problems.

best

a mesos

he way

"a

would to

says

that

seem

certainly

comfortable

dé@mos. 29

He

Athenian

and

clear

or

in

or

to

2,25).

the

Marxist

notion

belong the

of

should

the

political merchant

this This

will the

the

and

is

he

was

was

a

of

the

again

friend

mesos

is

distinctly

come

as

no

distance

can

trading-sight-

and

view,

translated

in a middle

and

presents

(5.53)

elíte.

the from

but

was

not

tyrant meaning

still

an

but

modern

ancient

and

Perhaps

a moderate the

con-

some.

Gephyraioi

that

are

suggested

variously

neither

to most,

two

on Thucydides

with

see

modern

(the

Aristogeiton

different

surprise

between

of

is one

Aristotelian

on his

Athenian

that

Solon

easily

"a citizen

satisfied

we

is

been

of genos

tern.

and business

the

as

time

has

leisured

Thus,

the

terms

class"-Jowett)

a member

phrase

bourgeoíg.

Aristotelian

example

or

On

and an emphasis

middle

of

(ousia)

(1296818).

54.2).

to

nature

in the Politics,

Again,

he was

property

This

mesos

middle-class

'politics';

hardly

"in his wealth

economic

(6,

the

rank of life"-Crawley; of

in wealth

very

modern

Similarly

been

polites

citizen

extremist

'middle-class.'

have

Solon

understand

was

the

illustrate

'middle-class'

in the middle

Herodotus

otherwise

(5.3).

not a rising

travels

dition'"-Hobbes;

further

extremist

translation

("a citizen

the

who

common

Aristogeitonwas

from

Solon was

(pragmata) the

far

bourgeousie.

Athenian

According

are

nor of

the the

English

provides

'class'

a

term-

inology. Nor They

but

determined

not

the

necessarily

official

nature

his

of

vote.

orders a man's

The

be

considered

political

Periclean

and

political military

building

program,

interest

groups.

participation

for

example,

186

might

have

order

or

been

deme

political

not

A common

this

furthermore

apt

there

never was

Athens

(Staat

and

spheres and

by

of

office Apart

from

Athens—or

ever

no

better

those

seems

or

to

the

any of

with

pin

down.

will

Who

were

description.

despite

vague

the

came.

Hyperbolus

a sufficient But

than

begins

generally

Cleon

is hard

from

A discussion

necessarily

‘nobility’.

of

did exist that

its

attractive-

'upper-class',

nobility in

accepting

Still,

there

Stand

and

would

special

rights

and

took

up

the

challenge

of

fragments

of

the

Ath.

(plus

attempted privilege

in the

is not some to

(and

a class

to

an

in

the

until

areas

of

appropriate in

operated

Aristotle's) people

that

seeing

inferences called

about

Eupatridai

claim

or

the

creation

religion

and

of Eupatridai.

for

in historical

a hered-

Plutarch,

law,

how

be

no

Wilamowitz'

580

term

that

in

in various

form of the "caste"

difficulty

Solon)

of

show

duties

Pol.

that

der Adligen"

nobility

"caste"

was

Jeclared

A true

in Athens

his

Essentially

in Athens.

with

(Theseus

abgesonderter

sense,

saying

2.14)

is

in a loose

he was

with

the

there

Adel

74).

Wade-Gery

a nobility,

fact

p.

group

life.

using

irgendwie

existed

defined

describes, >’

pre-historic

cavalry

term

fact

rechtlich

Thucydides

such

the

in

nor

by

initiative

‘upper-class’

commonly

reading

and

holding,

Wade-Gery

events.

had

Athenian

the tel&

is

Athens

or

ideal.

‘lower-class’?

the

Gesellschaft,

legally

25

to

orders

Periclean

political

the

Athenian

while

und

a careful

Theseus

whence

from

is

the

all

to be misleading.

"ein

nobles

of

the

term

Wilamowitz,

itary

know

οὗ

fifth-century

itself

recourse

to many,

of

in

voters to

Pentakosiomedimnoi

modern

order

urban

responsive

we

But

Neither

by

groups

do

qualify. ?9)

ness

were

‘upper-class’

Athenians

they?

18

who

interest

Athenian (What

supported

a class

his

such

essentially (post-Solon)

pre-historic in historical

as

187

Athens,

and

one

must

try

to

determine

what

sort

of

a class

they

may

have

been

then. The

most

from Eretria,

on

the

ἐξ Εὐπατριδὺῦν

seems

to be

Acropolis

c.

Alchimachos c.

525.

is

of

are of

help

four

involving

was

in

for

the

us

have

the

late

fifth

man

(DAA,

p.

the

was

in

have

the for

Theseus

regard.

No

the

been

special

can

The be

have

held

these

the

tribe-kings

of

wealthy their

Pol. laid

are

Alcmeonidae

them:

to

them

calling

archonship were

of

the on

before

chosen

an

so

580

a dedication

be

down

in

the

phvlobasileis the

is

that

until

have

Eupatridai.

Laws,

part 40,

no

record. the

There

is

little

validity

in

of

this

Eupatridai,

called

of

of

45-46,

B.C.

problem

members

873e)

580

historical

that

cases

10.38-39, we

not

'kings'

surviving

which

are

entry

Plato,

of

the

acropolis

homicide

cf.

13.2.

himself

on the

The

judged

57.4,

is

made

Pollux'

would

interesting

they

Pol.

calling

28

Supplement,

view

depends

it

they They

(LSCG,

modern

son,

prominence.

responsibilities and

inscription

Ath.

a statue

family.

but

regulations

Athena,

whose

erected

(Ath.

responsibility

for

6)

tribes.

calendar

century

Aristotle of

and

figures,

attributed

to

If

and

animals

cult

330)

no.

Attic

(essentially

25.).

genos

and

Aristotelian

this

10,

nature

other

argument

known

the

Athenian

real

are

p.

sixth

extent)

treasurer

no.

well-known

only

the

364,

the

(1.6. XIII 9.296), Pollux 8.111

as

prominent,

objects

century

Plutarch

and

are

a lesser

who,

(pre-Cleisthenic)

standard

evidence

(DAA,

least,

a part

may

archonship sure

550

inanimate

There

evidence

(to

same

a proud,

at

old

also

Again,

the

understanding

and

53).

of

and

600A5 πατρός

This

not,

pieces

Χαιρίον Adevaloc Εὐπατριδδν

φυλουασιλεῖς Chairion

important

the

39

family

B.C.

exclusively

from

the

group

of

families

188

known in

as

the

Eupatridai,

historical

matter. it

An

should

13.2)

Athens as

that

from

the

Eupatridai,

might

be

sufficient

a

legal

Finley

a recognized

reports

order

of

can

^O Calling

order,

be

we

from

Athenian

farmers

and

artisans

Hippeis

(or

Pentakosiomedimnoi)

Ath.

or

But

Pol.

13.2

is

and

Another

Davies "tend

(APF,

200,"

but

p.

11)

and

is

when

that

it

an

similar

help

by and

the

is

a

that

B.C.

late

Andocides

sixth

to Ath.

puzzle.

of

are

their

ῥάδιον γνῶναι,

Demiouroi) was

but

not

welathy

non-noble

really

archon

list

fragment

such

orders

to

This

course

they

were

not?

tradition

3742

of

farmers

“3 to

the

sources" ...through

development.

Eupatridai

as

in Hellenistic

and

that

the

they

Roman

Eupatridón"

are

a genos.

times "described

period...till

Plutarch

(Lives

is

speaking

A.D. anach-

of the Ten Orators,

Alcibiades

πρὸς μὲν ἀνδρῶν ἦν Εὐπατριδῶν ὧν τὴν εὐγένειαν ἐξ αὐτῆς ἐπυλυμίας

of

Pol.

Eupatridai

"genous

and

(Ath.

five

Demiousgoi.

century!)

if

piece

chosen,

Wade-Gery

despite

reference

in the Delphic

this

the

Further,

Aristotle

Agroikoi

"These

elite

another

orders.

were the

trusted.

references

the Athenian

180

from

agroikoi

authentic

solve

c.

be

however,

a whole.

(and

Solon

in nature

from

two

religious

other

ten archons

and

of

18,

to

as

qualification,

historical

says

relation

can

quarter

official

a nobility

population

it

démiourgoi

that

he terms

Isocrates

the

an

Eupatridai

understanding

as a genos

believes

when

to

or

Agroikoi

admitted

is

no

notes

consistently

ronistically 834),

Athens

problem

to behave

a genos

are

group

in

the

the

first

them

of theory

in

the

with

the

call

there

craftsmen

story

puzzling;

is it a piece

Unfortunately,

as

why

of

state--if

to believe

(in

order

stands

considering

the

that

'Damasias stasis'

willing

estate.

an

notes,

the

three

the

them

division

after

for

consider

πρὸς γυναιμῶν

6° ᾿Αλκμεχυυνιδῶν.

(Isocrates

16.29

Pol.

189

was on his

father's

side

‘of

the Eupatridai'

whose

nobility ['good birth'] is easily recognized by the name, and on his mother's side ‘of the Alkmeonidai,'

he

is

referring

we

need

as

'family'

though what

limit

to

the

sort

sense

particularly

in

that

they

(see were

privileges that

class

made

an

before

Solon

It

also

of

up

is

Athenian

the

that

by

Davies)

cult,

in

the as

257,

four

well

urban, But

frequently

said

(or

genos

could

108 note

genos

"means

1)

refer

both

in

for

assumed)

of

with

to

a

'Caste'

of

the most

(e.g.,

Hdt.

just the

as

in the

Further,

rites p.

and

154

)

retaining that

we

their

respon-

suggests those

need

old

assume

office.

the

gene

This

‘Body

is hardly

think

political

individual

45

elite

al-

responsibilities,

'kingly'

that

problem,

that

tribes.

I,

that simply

understanding

possible

Appendix

not

taken

(now understood

Attic

Athenian

nobility.

that

as

in

seems

18

little

traditional

old

I do

eligible

Athenian

it

convinced

genos

presents

with

quoted

era, ^^

members

If

a genosof gené

were

gennetai,

I am not

helpful

However,

used

Athens

12).

Eupatridon

alone

while

p.

was.

particularly

pre-Solonian

"Eupatridai," saying

of

p.

particularly

considered

classical

they

not

(APF,

possibilities.

genous

Anecdota

early,

the

two

this

to

town

Bekker,

into

First,

of

the

is

'clans'

relation

with

sibilities

it

been

of

a genos

these

group

have

specialized

not

below),

hand

'family'

could

association

to

further

other

of

Eupatridai

"caste"

ourselves (see

on

a

Eupatridai or

view

were

'clans,'

too

Gennetai'

and

presents

the as

such

difficulties.

(Wade-Gery,

common meaning.

Instead

2.164)

of

and

‘Body

Gennetai'

190

(ibia.)", ^6 we should (as

opposed

genos.)

to

The

artificial)

most

basic

(e.g., Aristophanes’ notion

of

of

phanes, or

natural

"blood"

were

a genos

Medes

or

these

there

the

(Birds

5,473c,

Birds

were

700,

birds

to show

the

parables

in

Eupatridai

or

origin,

as could

Dorians be

Herodotus

1.6,

Birds

gene

10,

620a;

699,

960).

Aristophanes,

flexibility

of the word genos and

the

can

implied.

comment

be

and

on

‘family’

is

even

a genos

The of

the

1239)

as

were

All

other

137)

if

men

of

Alcmeonidai

is

ene

(Wasps

is simply

"natural" incom-

and

an

(e.g.,

possible

comparing

neither

(Plato,

citation

notion

within

within

gods

old

this

necessarily the

the

Lydians,

And

are ἃ genos

some

4.61)

Persians,

divisions

on

(Aristo-

barbarians

125

a whole

both

ideas

(Thucydides

gene

of the Greek

(16.25);

groups

be called

Lysistrata

not

strict

7.27).

(Frogs 240).

Isocrates

Andocides

considered

the

frogs

offspring

But the Greek

by

1.24).

Finally,

1227)

it

as

or

under

Thucydides

1.101,

Birds

312,

limited

into

833,

LSJ

family

the Chalcidians

(anthröpoi)

Aristophanes,

(See

2.80.1).

could

divided

(Herodotus

men

not

(Thucydides

also

for a natural

sort.

descent,

was

could

Then,

Rep.

of gennetai."

families

but

further

189d;

which

any

as a whole

1696)

Thesmophoriazousai

Certainly of

of

almost

(Birds 699,

relationship

"body

1700)

be

(Plato,

of

relationship

1.56)

Persians).

702,

that

The Athenians

(e.g.,

Symp.

women

223),

‘familial’

(Herodotus

and

kind

is

Birds 1867,

Thracians

Medes

Rep.

and

could

or

meaning

or heredity.

Ionians

group

Greek word

Frogs 946, Birds 1451 or Thucydides

Wasps 1077,

the

say that genos is the natural

the

official

47 word

claiming

genos

a common

intendence

of

a common

Eumolpidai

who

claimed

cult.

could

refer

(mythical) 48

descent

One from

of

to

such

ancestor the

Eumolpus

more and

a

"body

and

sharing

famous who

of

gennetai,"

a group

in

the

super-

examples

was

the

provided

the

Eleusinian

191

cult

with

its

Eumolpidai noble

and

others

with

or

order?

The

class

mistaken

interpretation

ChaptersII within

hierophantes.

but

recognized

cults,

and

while

many

(e.g.,

the

cults

of

evidence

to

The

in

is,

nobility. serve

I

Nor

any

in

think, does

purpose and

force

Wade-Gery's

the

gene)

is

offices

for

obsolete.

The

who

back

looked

they of

can

the

modern

no more ‘original’

American

Using kaloikagathoi

despite

the

and

said

members

as

of

be

of

which be

of

Massachusetts

in

proud,

Bay

local

as

with

a whole

there

but

the

is

ít

city

genn@tai

Eupatridai)

after

Athenian

groups

a unified

451/0

was

order. did

the

Athenian

‘nobility’

B.C.)

Athenian

The

whole

those

was

nobility Company

elitists

unquestioned,

than can

about

politically

family-conscious

rule

not

a whole.

extent

580

no

as

a

a genos.

a lesser

their

see

a

city

especially

when

a classical

the

the

privilege,

to

which

a

constituted

goddesses)

(or

(and

might

time

local

for

on thembership

a nobility

they

considered

gennétai

Eupatridai

imagined

that

considering

(and

for

I consider

a

seem to be an elite group

institutions for

then

Euptaridai

or to

the

historical

depend

were

the

constituted

on what

(Jacoby)

mean

particular

Athenian

on

35a

that

themselves

hereditary

a whole

in

suppose

extent

Eleusinian

condition

the

in

important

the

or

existence

a real

be

and

genos

not

were

were

brought

argument

gennetai

to

gene

cults

discussing did

the

The

a minimum

to

The gennftai

genos

calling

in

fragment

necessarily

gennétai

there

a large

not

Polias

another

politics of

these

that

to

113-114.

elite.

is

responsibilities

depends

does

ἃ particular

privilege last

this

of

reason

Philochorus

Athena

suggest

Membership bring

idea

of

city

what

similar

p. 20 and IV pps.

a phratry,

legally

But

be

the

but

descendants

called

a

one.

‘nobility’ (and

"false

to denote

chrestoi,

and

modern

a status ^? (not

plousioi,

flavor

etc.)

in

that

the

an order), "nobles"

antithesis"

as

Ehrenberg against

(The

People

termed the

of

the

"commons'

Aristo-

192

phanes,

p.

75).

It

is

class

self-description,

speak

of

the

nobles

recognizable

of

But

part

On

the

kaloikagathoi Use

of

the

not

to

affect

not

possible.

out'

pp.

term

Despite

opinion

was

not

Thucydides

by

different never

not

whether

nobility

and

did

not

from

speak

rich

that

of

the

bad

A

spend were

and

a good

his

a

or

the

noble

Cleon

perizösamenos

in

conspicuous.

kaloskagathos

A kaloskagathos

time

the

a bad

life-style

People

wealthy.

kaloskagathos;

the

a

be

(Ehrenberg, to

to

to

articulation.

kaloikagathoi

is

itself;

Thucydides.

loud,

least

also

desire)

to

one

If we are

at

clear

only

and

the

of

his

important

Athenian

But

but

(and

‘flavor’

worthy,

ought

a

The

Aristophanes

right

nobility

Alcibiades

by

Alcibiades’

title

to

the

it

is

of

the

the

and

In

sum,

were

as

economic

Athenian

probably

called

(or

that

(Ath.

ought

however

was

in

is

‘voted

their Pol.

kaloskagathos

the

those

Ehrenberg goals

to

29.3;

Athenian

MOAOL

of

them

attempts

upper-class

the to was

at

νάγαϑοὶ

and

the

not

probably

a status

habits,

and

would

himself

claims

and

call

behind

Athenian

same

Alcibiades

while

misleading

the

by

upper-class

misconception idea

be

Athenians

name.

8.48.6)?

basic is

all

to

career)--although

political

segment

class, the

of

granted

social,

Perhaps

‘politics’. moral

strong.

upper-

3. 36.6.) ^?

stages

upper

means

presumably

self-conscious

active

the

characteristic

of "life-style"

and

(Thucydides

an

having

view

such

wealth

ὀνομαζόμενοι

were

a matter

the

the

nobles

of

was

was

is quite

the

provide

in

and

then

not

a strong

in

his

unanimously

doubted

or

flavor”

point

approval.

violent,

Similarly,

been

of

good

kaloikagathoi

their

does

is

membership

class

have

the

implied

the

commons

from

107),

there

were

of

cf.

the

horses

term

the "false

only

99,

hand,

the

kaloskagathos

training

other

but

kalokagathia

Aristophanes in

that

versus

of being

gymnasia,

50

class--not

non-noble.

large

true

group

with

certainly

politically

Athenian speak

of

nobility. an

a monolithic

193

class, the

order

very

O.

and

use

of

Reverdin

turn

out

and

Greek

the

said

in

thus

status word

effect

falsify

to

powerful

as

just

where we should

in

active.

Rather,

politics the

an

class of

active

Athenian

upper

class

the

Athenian

upper With

the

basic

class, the

talents,

that

presítge

Davies Although

won

class"

Davies'

life

Athenian

the

his

the

political

(xxiv),

would

class

as

catalogue

of

than

liturgical

by

i.e.,

politically aspects

of

Athenian

or

when

an

depend

upper

on the

sort

base." ?9

Davies

of

legal

argues

(p.

covers

that

xx).

privilege

An estate

an Athenian

class."

the Athenian

liturgies” any

families

that

the “liturgical

leverage. put

elites

kaloskagathos

J.K.

clear

"liturgical

of

"power

or

even

or member

would

of his

definitely

not

which

state, >> but

of public

special

is

= the

of

for defining membership

rather

wealthier

different

stuff

then,

standard

Athenian

or

Families

services,

enjoyed

it

and

‘politics’

upper

the

equivalent,

of

Athenian

is the performance

such

the

values)

Propertied

exist

all

as

employ

(For Davies’

classes)

or on the nature

does

this by

of

and

from

inappropriate,

the

or pentakosiomedimnos (or

power;

use

simply

= cavalry,

(or

result

who

To

the various

represent

style

running

are

those

is

two.

that

segments

of

powerful

tht

may

a strange

reality." 34

necessarily

on the Athenian

his

suggests

are

probably

he was

criterion

and

"liturgical

to

suppose

idea

which

mind

less

between

a ‘politician’

a comment

introduction

a "usable

the

did become

Finally, In

in

or

every gennétés the

has

upper-class

poorer

pages

most

adopt

part

Athenian

different

Not

would

the

= pentakosiomedimnoi

upper-class

were made.

cavalry

take

these

in

historical

not

this

"These words,

thing

the line

preceding

= kaloikagathoi

of

extent

Terminology

'party,'

the

We should

the

Athenian

to

draw

gennétai

the

the

opposed

see below.)

a certain

that

vision

analysis,

more

considered

to

create

their

To

'nobility.'

in regard

dualistic

class"

group.

in three

of four this

class.?/

centuries

194

(600-300

B.C.)

the

(see

table

on

the

clase

is best especially

much

to

fifth

was

as

in

as

Davies

a product

Oligarch,"

xxvii),

the

admitted

century

system

p.

documented.

ury,

the

overwhelming

of

3.4)

and

The

first

scarcity

is

class

of

with

describes

it

and

this

of

them

where

as such

three-quarters

compared

the

majority

fourth,

through

Peloponnesian Paphlagon

much

war,

can

of

the

as

to

of

the

and

period

400-300

leverage

in the This

prominent

Athenians

absence

is

the

century.

clearly

Sausage

of

of

his

fifth

century?

fifth

is

the

the

evident

the

it

in

wealth

about

when

threaten

the

is less

information

the

belong

due

centnot

in

so

the

liturgical

The

a liturgy

eisphora ("Old

Seller:

ἐγὼ σε ποιήσυ tpunp apxeiv, ἀναλίοκοντα τῶν σαυτοῦ, παλαιὰν ναῦν ἔχοντ΄. (Knights

I will make you serve as trierarch, spending your money, and having an old

But

the

not

seem

decree,

mention to

refer

this century.

war.

The

not

trierarchs to

should

fifth

does

of

Perhaps

chorégia,

justify

the

of

Athenians

such

13.8)

13.7)

or

(in

produce--to and

his

sons

an

his

in

it,

like

course,

apparently

in

not

the

(Ath. to

through

gift)

Pol.

help

the back

a product

the

Many

liturgies

of the

on

liturgy was

class."

longer-term

views

the

eisphora,

formal

Themistocles"

one's

back

financing

offered

of

pushing

goes

fellow demesmen

apparently

"decree

"liturgical

were

or his

the

Whatever

caution

term

fifth-century

as Cimon

own ship.

a liturgy. urge

912-14)

fifth

but

27.3;

finance

too

the

far

of

the

century,

of the up

Plutarch, a public

does

of

voluntary,

opening

23.18,27)

authenticity

of the public

foundations his

(M-L

of

into

Peloponnesian but

gifts,

long walls

of

itself

of rich

one-time,

(ibid.

estate--and

Cimon 10.2).

project

by

services

his

the

its

Pericles

unknown

character

195

in Athens

offered

in

the

to pay Davies

equation the

in

people

again

in

for

would

have

Therefore,

despite

importance

of

defining

crossing were of

country

Athenians

in

guishable

social

the

has

the and

general

dressed

a zeugites

sound) from

quite

fourth

class

and

a 20-year-old.

to be a rough

performed

which that

will

of

liturgies

and

examples

is

of the

fifth

his

their

they

of

wealth

formed

official

Athens

solve

to have

classes been

spent

a class

liturgies.

and

the

admitted

politics,

the

in

I do

problem

passing

but

was

of

it was

not

purple

wore

hair

long

but

1.6;

assembly

might

a shepherd a potter

"Old

the

the

there Two

town

and

all-pervasive

robes (Knights

the

have

580,

Ceramicus,

1121),

1.10).

been

would

most

(Plutarch,

Oligarch,"

not

"criss-

a whole

always

from Phyle

from

of

groups.

an

wore

their

as

are

Alcibiades

the

from

composed

interest

Wealth

(Thucydides, in

been

population and

made

old.

life,

knights

different

came

in Athenian

citizen

the

Although

speaking

Pericles

upper-class.

already

simply

that

rich Athenians

century

involuntary,

political

young

many

performance

Athenian

young

factor. the

to

told

earliest

clear

can be considered

from a pentakosiomedimnos,

(and

60-year-old

and

less

distinguished

reference

and

is

who

popularity

a liturgical

in

vertically

16.1)

it

or

Athenian

visible

situation

appear

voluntary

century

in Athenian

the

"there

The

that

was

24.1-2).

people

xx).

regular

fifth

dwellers

or

the

of

applicability

as the upper-class

Alcibiades

this

them;

of

to which

prominent

advantage

38 so

the

(p.

story

century

is clear

concept

significant

factor

It

the

categories,"

these

the

its

between

the

Pericles

fifth

εὔποροι

by

and

(Plutarch, later

1.13.

bring

liturgies,

the

Just

or

characterized

that

54.13-16),

language

taken

could

or

think

by the

Oligarch"

causes

2

I^

πλούσιοι

recognized

not

that

contemporary

"Old

public

(I.G.

the Parthenon

shows

called

the

century

430's

distin-

very as

In

likely

would

a

196

The the

rest

opposition--potential

of

sometimes

Attica

no

Government

doubt

in

have

"carried

over

the

emphasized

had

a close

its

and

Greek

military

and

had

as,

(Humphreys,

when

to

Greek

other

contrast

poleis

was

little

sign

to the

division

course

no

The

how true

of

true much

or

to

seems

between

rich

distinguished of

why

solidarity

solidarity

"urban/rustic

p.

part

rights

134).

Thus,

groups

contrast"

and

at

Larsen,

that

the

the

he

on

the

in

in comparison

Attica and

later

beginning

is

sued that

other

remarkably viewed

of

the

fifth

boundary

did

not

hand,

assembly,

ín Ancient

or medieval

were

must

countryman

its

with

and

other

festivals,

Country

Alexandria

war

and

of the war

obligations--including and

Athens

tovnsmen

outbreak

voted

religious

of

Representative

"The Athenian

("Town

the

in of

Greece,"

city/town

Europe homogeneous. in

relation

century,

the

significant. urban/rural

poor" the

and

in Athens

of

while

of at

is

‘urbane’

solidarity

(ibid.

a vertical

all--apart

coincide

town

(agroikos),

a conscious

a solidarity

in Aristophanes

the

'bumpkin'

and manners"

division

demands

that

country

interests,

this

ite

and

itself

activity

one

in

century

and

Peloponnesian

at

(astu)

Humphreys,

city;

mid-fifth

"the

the

says

state:

population"

from

of economic is

took

more

that

a grouping

who

the

in Hellenistic

the

states

and

with

133-134), Athens

of

cíty/country

(asteios)

urban

example,

Athens

3,

town

by J.A.O

people) 29 S.C.

political

the

p.

of the Athenian

the Greeks,

Humphreys

just

same

example,

of

the

the countryside”

country

markets,

pp.

for

History,

in

for

the opposition

(as,

relationship

the

discussions

to abandon

the

its

actual--between

in

direct

ibid.,

However,

Roman

of

service--as

relations,

noted

the cohesion

Anthropology and

of

and

the decree

sold

courts,

often

exaggerated

reluctance

has

bought

is

or

p.

one;

the

group.

from

is certainly

133).

the

dweller

"there

is

corresponding

The

second

Perhaps Athenians

largely

with

first is depends

there

on

were

themselves.

"cultural"

197

rather

than

picture

of

last

"political" the

moment

farmers

in

"Ic The the

(Humphreys,

the

smelling

ibid.

of

245

note

garlic,

arriving

290ff.).

But

Ecclesiazousae,

is necessary to poor agree; but farmers do not.

p.

12),

for

for

the

example

assembly

Praxagora's

the

at

the

comment

launch the ships' the rich and

(197-198) although

again

town/country

fourth

is

only

relevant

must

have

become

It

when

Athens

grew

(cf.

Humphreys'

other zation which

of

besides

town

and

economic

the

town

‘political’

nothing 106).

of

change:

keeping) at

the

environment

p.

the

to

tíme

the

the men

might

during

the

Piraeus)

more

and

paper,

141-14

such

as of

differ. course than

of the

the

the

during

Piraeus

).

and

opposition war

the

into

a major

Society

of

a centralized The

changes

the

fifth

in Classical

temples

and

or

organi-

system,

intellectual,

century

would

resulted

port

there were

judicial

in

and

Pentakontaetia

Furthermore,

building

country

The

Peloponnesian

"Economy

pp.

development

the

noticeable

center

ships,

revealing.

of

increasingly

the Greeks, and

still

on

social

have

also

in

to

cope

affected different

attitudes. 9?

"When

and

or

country

the

18

in another

war

climate

(and

comic,

a cosmopolitan

comments

sacrifices

and

an

into

Anthropology and

issues

and

not

afterward.

Athens,"

century

rate

of which

the

Fifth

old

all

beginning.

man

century

art, were

of

drama, very In

change

is

very

his

grandfather

can

say

Athens,

seems as

education, different the

420's

great and

already

warfare,

(and

no

relevant"

has

at

the

the

end

perhaps

grandson

experience (Dover, been

has at

Greek

said,

a comparable Popular

underwent

public

decision-making

of

century

the

earlier)

from

Marathon

with

and

Morality,

such (and

what

age,

a period record-

they

Salamis

were were

198

already

events

uation

in which

opposition the

Alcibiades,

in °!

strongly by

into

the

(from

the

the It

If

it

of

the

became

terms

Individual wealthy

had

a potentially

But

the

the

city

economic, in

social

a distinctly

which

was

to

may

and

part

that

that

similar of

pressures and

responsible

of

political

untypical for

The

not

was and

a

Aristotle,

vacuum moving

discussion

society

was

of

also

Syracuse

participation

"popular"

of

inland

the

astu

status,

urban

and

opened

by

had

its

its

class

(and

a large for

one

port/harbor(s).

and

service

harbor)

and

a maritiue

of

gamoroi

Megara

separate

(and

and

‘typical’.

and

privilege

center

classes

council

demos,

polis.

uniqueness

not

6.100),

had a

Greek the

5.77,

classical

for

different

typical

Hdt.

possibilities

the

politicians’

Chalcis

a expanding

of

is suggests

into

cities;

for

importance

there

other

criteria

generation

essentially

not

preceding

of

is

century]. "9?

Plato

Chios

Euripides,

opposition

its

moving ‘new

and

the

in

‘unfossilized' the

evidence

sit-

Clouds 6.13.1;

to

of

the

the

The

relation

were

Athenian

arrangement

various

in

young

Athens for

1.155). the

the

of the

paralleled

reflecting

1229-1235.)

is

Indeed, the

1.80.1,

possibility

Ephialtes,

remains. °°

Hdt.

the

this

in

Thucydides

politicians’

("horse-feeders,

land,"

(e.g.,

Colonus

with

(ibid.) important.

'new

democracy

be

be

"What

remember of

to

discussed

450's

later

I think,

combination the

the

notes

father.

young

Kimon

still

population)

and

or

by

suggests,

in the

or his

with

‘model’

hippobotai

(“sharers

discount

in the

elements

at

not

important the

Oedipus

118;

should

left

achievement

class

slave

is

frag.

most

480's

situation

likely

and

Allmeonidai

vacuum

is

sources

we

the

As Dover

in Aristophanes

Eupolis,

of Pericles

that

left

the

gap"

prominent

Sophocles,

but

generation

is

also,

232-7;

evident

past.

a "generation

(See

Suppliants

the

“heroic”

old/young

Wasps).

most

in the

empire

social

structure

and

society,

Athenian

cultural

and

political

within

the resulted the

society

achievement.

199

Appendix

1.

2:

Footnotes

I use

‘class’

having

common

2. order

I follow as

here

in the neutral

characteristics the

usage

ἃ juridically

or

of M.I.

defined

sense

status’

of

‘a group

(adapted

Finley

(The

group within

from

Ancient

ranked

Economy)

a population,

together

Webster,

fifth who

as

edition).

defíncs

an

possessing

formalized privileges and disabilities in one or more fields of activity, governmental, military, legal, economic, religious, marital and standing in a hierarchical relation to other orders (p.

45),

and a status

|

(less

succinctly)

group

sharing

common

These

meanings

will

as an unofficial

economic, be

social

assumed

or

through

(non-juridically

political

the

rest

position

of

this

defined)

pp.

46-50).

appendix.

3. In both narrative accounts and structural analyses of the Athenian state there seems to be a tendency to take the accumulated traditional view of Athenian society as a starting point for analysis. Eupatridai are a nobility; zeugitai are hoplites; thetes are poor, etc. In this appendix I am suggesting that we need to examine carefully the evidence for the social and 'class' structure of Athens before we go to more sophisicated analysis. An argument is only as good as its underlying premises. 4. Cf. Finley, The Ancient Economy, pp. 47-48. It can be noted here that in Plato's Laws the groups or orders receiving different treatment under the law are the astoi (citizens), Xenoi (foreigners) and douloi (slaves). See, e.g., the laws on homicide, 865-873. Athenian law recognized a similar division (cf. D.M. MacDowell, The Law in Classical Athens p. 67ff.; Austin and VidalNaquet, Economic and Social History of Ancient Greece p. 95ff.).

It can still ians

did

op.cit.

not

p.

be quite

constitute

103).

Lysias

of an urban upper-class were excluded. 5.

See

the

6.

Bushel

definition is

not

an

true

a single

that

"from

social

a social

class"

and his brothers,

Athenían

social

circle

from

which

given

above,

note

2.

exact

translation

422 larger than a bushel, c. 50 of oil or vine was c.40 liters.

of

point

(Austin

metics,

poorer

medimnos;

as opposed to c. 35 See M. Lang, Agora

and

of view might

Athenians

be a part citizens

a medimnos

liters. 10, pp.

the Athen-

Vidal-Naquet,

was

c.

A metrétes 46 and 58.

(measure)

The apparent artificiality of the name '"500-bushel-men"” other tel@ led me to the idea that this telos was added

as compared with the by Solon (cf. L.H.

Jeffery,

a "rich

Archaic

Greece,

p.

93).

However,

the

grave

of

Athenian

lady"

200 from

the

9th century

(published

116) produced a chest Smithson suggests, p.

by E.

L.

Smithson

with five model grannaries 96) that the woman was the

in Hesperia

37

(1968)

pp.

77-

on top, perhaps indicating (as wife (or daughter) of a penta-

kosiomedimnos.

7. Horses were a luxury pleasure. A man who owned

and were used for racing, hunting, a horse probably also owned oxen.

warfare

or

just

8. It is possible that the zeugitai were so called because of the figurative "yoke" binding together the hoplite phalanx (as argued by Adcock, The Greek and Macedonian Art of War (Berkeley, 1957), p. 5) and that the hippeis were simply the cavalry. But it is not probable.

The

tele

Ath. Pol. generally class,

had

their

main purpose

in determining

7.4, Plato, Laws 698b, Isaeus thought of in the latter part

and

híppeis

is

the

word

used

7.39). of the

for

eligibility

for offices

(cf.

As will be seen, the theten were fifth century as the non-hoplite

'cavalry.'

But

no

complete

equation

of

tele with military classes seems to have been made. Zeugites and thes are not military terms, and it is not clear whether or not all those who qualified for the telos of hippeus also were eligible for service in the cavalry. Unfortunately, Aristotle (Ath. Pol. 49) does not say specifically what size ousia qualified a man for the cavalry. The Knights of Aristophanes’ Knights are clearly members of the cavalry (see, e.g., 595ff) but are they also members of the telos of hippeis? The

and

the

communis

opinio

references

given

is

also

against

Adcock's

view.

9. Different dates have been proposed for a change yield to one of total property value. Busolt-Swoboda time of Cleisthenes, Beloch (Gr.G. 112 p. 89) for the

Hignett

(HAC p.

143)

for

See

Hignett,

HAC

p.

101

there.

the mid-fifth

century--and

from a criterion of annual (II, p. 837) voted for the era of the Persian wars and

Pericles.

B. Manville

(The

Evolution of Athenian Citizenship, diseertation, Yale University, 1979, pp. 111112, note 39) has suggested that there was a monetary equivalent from the start: "I believe the change came with Solon himself; the new system required the machinery for assessing any Athenian, and thus the development of equivalents." If it is necessary to assume that there was ever an official monetary equivalent, Manville's view seems to me very plausible, remembering, as he does, that for sacrificial equivalents, "a sheep and a drachma were reckoned as a medimnos" (Plutarch, Solon 23.3). 10.

Cf.

Jeffery,

Archaic

Greece,

p.

92.

11. Athenian Democracy, p. 142, note 50. Presumably the value of the property of hippeis and pentakosiomedimnoi would be calculated in the same manner. Since Jones believes in fifth century inflation (e.g., p. 166) it is a little odd that he thínks the "Solonian scale of values" (p. 142 n. 50) was used in figuring the total property values. 12. Athenian Democracy, of hoplites and zeugitai.

13.

For

the possibility

p.

142,

that

note

this was

50.

about

See

below,

the value

pp.

of

180-183,

on

the average

the

equation

'family

farn'

201

see

below

14.

note

19.

I follow

Jones,

Jarde

tutions,

(his

de

Ste.

and

P.

114).

'timema'

Croix

others

in

(see

Using

his

"The

one

scepticism

Estate

fourth

for a zeugités)

century

would

buy

on

the

value

of Phanenippus," price,

"perhaps

Jones

of

land

Ancient

prices

calculates

a holding

used

Society that

of 5 acres

and 20

by

Insti-

minae

with

house

and stock" (Athenian Democracy, p. 79). But that seems too small (see note 19). Is it not likely that the price given by Lysias (19.29, 42) is 'rhetorically' inflated?y. N. Andreyev (Eirene 13 (1974) 5-46) suggested, on the basis of fourth

century Athenian sales of public drachmas

per plethron.

100 drachmas.) and

general

This

price

(One

seems

land,

hectare

a basic price half that of Jones’ = c.

2.5

acres

= c.

10 plethra.

more reasonable but cannot. be decisiye

levels.

See

note

19

below

for

Andreyey's

for

60 plethra

or 50

1 mina

=

earlier 'zeugités

farm.'

15. Any attempt to calculate exact equivalencies in land for the Solonian tele is riddled with problems. Apart from ignorance about such crucial matters as fallowing customs or ratio of seed to yield, or whether the seed was included in the Solonian assessment, the apparent equating in value of dry and liquid measures

(Ath.

Pol.

7.3)

suggests

that

not

size

but what

was

planted

could

have determined

the status of an estate. Olive trees need more land to produce ἃ measure of oil than wheat needs to produce a bushed of grain, while vines need less. The most usual sítuation may have been a mixture of agricultural products. 16. In 403 there were apparently some 5,000 landless hypothesis to Lysias 34). As has been noted (e.g., by p.

80),

Lysias

these

says

5,000

they

are

not

included

necessarily

"many"

co-terminous

hoplites

and

Athenians (Dionysius, Jones, Athenian Democracy

with

knights

the

thetes.

In

fact,

(34.4).

17. This figure is given by French (Historia 10 (1961) 511). De Sanctis (Atthis, p. 299) gave a figure of c. 23 medimnoi per hectare or just under 10 medimnoi per acre. Similarly, Beloch (Griechische Geschichte I? p. 303 n. 2) put the Attic

yield,

"in einem

12-14

hecto-liters

18.

value

Despite

unfruchtbaren

the

per

hectare

specific

of Phaenippus'

estate

Lande...beí or

statements

remains

Phaenippus," Ancient Society and [Demosthenes] 42 claims that the metretai of wine, but Phaenippus

meros"

of

those

figures

(29,

again

5).

on

primitiven

about

Wirtschaftsmethoden,"

23 medimnoi

circumference

obscure

(see

de Ste.

per

and

at

hectare.

yield,

Croix,

the

"The

size

and

Estate

of

Institutions, p. 109ff.). The speaker of estate produces 1,000 medimnoi of wheat and 800 has sworn that the yield was not "to dekaton

And while

the

speaker

says

that

the estate

measures forty stades in circumference, the actual area would depend on the contour (as de Ste. Croix points out, the speaker 18 trying to make the estate seem as large as possible). De. Ste. Croix sets 100 acres as the minimum size of a piece of land enclosed by 40 stades; this is still "the largest single Athenian estate of which we have any details" (art. cit. p. 112), but it all need not have been suitable for agriculture. No doubt Phaenippus was one of the wealthier

Athenians—he

served

in the

cavalry

(24)

and might

of income such as his wood-carrying donkeys his estate by [Demosthenes] 42 is of little yield per acre.

have

had additional

sources

(30)--but the information given about help in estimating average Attíc

202

19. Other discussions of the scale conclusions. See most recently A.B. (1977-78)

168-172

and

M.H.

Jameson,

of land Cooper,

holding in Athens have come to similar "The Family Farm in Greece," CJ 73

"Agriculture

and

Slavery

in

Classical

Athens,"

ibid., p. 120 and note 13. V.N. Andreyev ("Some Aspects of Agrarian Conditions in Athens in the Fifth to Third Centuries B.C.," Eirene 12 (1974) 5-46) argued that the average farm was approximately 60 plethra in size and worth 2,000-3,000 dr. This may be true, but it is not necessary to assume that the average farm was the 'zeugite farm." The calculation in the text suggested a larger figure. 60 plethra (or about 6 hectares) strikes me as perhaps low, since it has been estimated by K. Hopkins that 4 hectares would support a family of four at subsistence level,

with no allowance is

a

correction

for from

fallowing the

(see

printed

Further, as Cooper notes tares) as a minimum plot

Jameson,

five

known

art.

cit.,

me

through

to

p.

131;

a family

personal

of

four

communication.)

(ibid.) Hamish Forbes considers 80-90 plethra (c. B hecnecessary for a modern Greek to make an adequate living.

20. It is clear, of course, that a family did not live on grain alone and that these rudimentary calculations have not taken account of necessitíes such as oil for cooking, lighting and soap or fodder for animals. (My thanks to S. Humphreys for this point.) More exact calculations would be desirable but are not necessary, I think, for the point being made here. 21.

It

thetes,

seems a

term

odd,

then,

carrying

the lowest ranking remains a puzzle. 22. See plousios. come less

that the

members

all

those

implication

of

a

class

the comments of M.I. Finley (“A plousios was a man who

(as we should phrase or even, in the full

it), a sense,

penes poor:

beneath of

the

hired

giving

200

labor.

a name

medimnoi Perhaps

to

the

whole.

23.

For all

in

example,

pentakosiomedimnos

Herodotus,

the

I.G.

I“ index,

in the I.G. I2 index (45.41-2) but phanes. Thes is also rarely used,

were is

But

called

a

case

the

term

of

(The Ancient Economy, p. 41) on penes and was rich enough to live properly on his inwas he

not. could

The own

latter a farm

need not be propertyor slaves, and he

could have a few hundred drachmas accumulated in a strong-box, to devote himself to gaining a livelihood" (ibid.).)

at

level this

appears or

once

in

Thucydides

Aristophanes.

not at all in while hippeus

but

he

vas

(3.16)

Zeugites

compelled

but

appears

not once

Herodotus, Thucydides or Aristoappears frequently--as a cavalry

member.

24. The idea that inflation caused this "upward mobility" involves some confused thinking. First, the Solonian value of one drachma per medimnos is assumed to be the standard on which the figures in produce were translated into drachmae. Then, since the prices at the end of the fifth century appear higher, inflation is assumed. And many more Athenians would have been able to qualify as zeugitai. But when did the supposed change-over to monetary values occur? If it was sometime in the fifth century it would have been odd to use a Solonian price as standard--if there had been inflation.

Further,

as

suggested

earlier,

there

is

perhaps

no

reason

to

think

that

the agricultural basis for the assessment was ever eliminated. Adjustment could have been made for non-agricultural income while keeping the agricultural yield as the standard.

203

Second, Jones and Glotz claim that inflation will help explain the increase in the number of hoplites from 480 to 431. Granted that there was such an increase, can this have been due to inflation? An equation is made between hoplites and zeugitai, and since membership in the telos of zeugités was 'cheaper' in 431 than in 480 there were more hoplites in 431 than 480. But service as a hoplite

was

a thés'

50 medimnoi

him

to

own

based

his

on

own

wealth,

armor

inflated

on

the

ability

200 drachmae,

any

in

480?

more

than

Chapter

For the question of the increase in III and for the equation hoplites

Raubitschek

(DAA,

for

the way

“attractive

set

(Presumably

the

of

hopla.

that cost

If

enable

of

armor

p.

206)

noted

hoplites between 480 and 431 see = zeugitai, see below pp. 180-183.

that

if Aristotle

saw

this

dedication

it

suggested that this was Anthemion, father of Anytos politician. Plato (Meno 90a) praises that Anthemion

he made

his

certain."

Hignett,

a

how would

also.)

but

not

provide

at

have

should be post-480 and the late fifth century

to

in 430 valued

would

25.

been

real

were

fortune

HAC,

p.

through

5 with

sophia.

26.

See

27.

The problem of the son who was not yet

Davies

(APF,

p.

40)

says

references.

'kurios ton heautou' is a problem

in any case. To what telos did he belong? French (Historia 10 (1961) 512) also imagines this situation. His explanation is, "Solon's assessment was minimal, 1.e., each Zeugites farm was expected to supply at least one hoplite. W.K. Lacey suggests that "when a man underwent his dokimasia and was approved, he was enrolled in his deme as a citizen in the oikos of so-and-so, and this gave him his status as a citizen, and the financial standing enjoyed by his oíkos at the same time" (The Family in Classical Greece, pp. 128-129). 28.

of

These

all

lists

Athenians

are

for

distinct

general

from

the

purposes

lexiarchika

of

civic

grammateia

which

were

lists

participation.

29. It also can be noted that the property requirement for a scrategos cited by Deinarchos (in Demosthenem 71) is not that of any Solonian telos but simply Yin &vvoc ὅρων xExrfio9avs cf. the 'Decree of Themístocles' (M-L, 23) 20-22. 30.

See

the

definition

given

above,

note

2.

31. When the Athenians try to restore the ‘ancestral constitution’ they think in terms of turning things over to the hoplites. On the ideal of the "Marathonfighter" in Aristophanes see Ehrenberg, The People of Aristophanes (London, 1943), p. 299£f, but like many features of Athenian society this glorification of the past

could More

be mocked. Essays

in

32.

Plutarch,

33.

See

above,

See Greek

the comments History

Pericles note

16.

and

2.1-2

of A.W.

Gomme,

Literature,

p.

(Finley's

"Aristophanes

and

Politics,”

85.

translation,

The

Ancient

Economy,

p.

54).

204

34. See Chapter III, pp. 56 - 57 divide the citizen into two parts.

35.

Or,

say that as to go

36.

if we regard Aristogeiton into exile.

Cf.

37. ments

W.R.

the was

Connor,

tyrant

for

further

comment

as a ‘friend

neither

a supporter

The New Politicians

of of

of

on

the

the demos’ the

Fifth

then

populist

Century

Greek

tendency

perhaps

regime

Athens,

nor

pp.

to

we could so opposed

158-159.

See M.I. Finley, The Ancient Economy, chapter 2, note 20 (p. 185), who comthat castes (on the most accepted definition according to which the essential

features would be "separation in matters of marriage and contact...division of labour...and finally hierarchy") "did not exist in the ancient world...when ancient historians write caste, they 'order.'" Wade-Gery's Eupatridai are correctly called an order, or an estate, as he sometimes terms them (e.g., "Eupatridai," p. 92). I do not know what he intends by the "Eupatrid race" (p. 104).

38.

See

eligible

39.

Davies, for

the

APF,

pp.

office

12-15

of

The Leipsydrion scholion

kai eupatridas.

Since

as

on this

treasurer

(Ath.

the Ath.

of

family. Athena

Pol. Pol.

19.3) says

Only pentakosiomedimnoi (Ath.

Pol.

refers

were

47.1).

to the andras...agathous te

a few lines

earlier

the Alcmeonida

were the leaders of the exiles, there were probably some Leipsydrion. But, as is commonly recognized, eupatridai

members is used

of the family of here in a poetic,

non-technical sense. These were men ‘of good family' who "then showed what of parentage they were from" (tor’ ἔδειξαν οἵων πατέρυν ἔσαν -ibid.) Cf.

Sophocles,

40.

It

γένους

1s

as

(Bekker,

Antigone

162,

'tribe-kings

Anecdota

257,

4l.

"Eupatridai,"

p.

42.

This

describes

fragment

859, ,

then,

c.v.

Pol.

13.2

only

the

1081. that

Eupatridai

are

said

to

be

βασιλικοῦ

Eupatridai).

102.

the Athenian

phratries and 4 tribes. Only the based on the model of the days of

Ath.

sort

Eupatridaí

state as being composed of 30 gent,

four tribes are historical; the month and months of the

are known

the other numbers year. Similarly,

12 are in

to be historical.

Although Ath. Pol. frag. 3 has been taken as historical (most recently by F. Bourriot in his dissertation Recherches sur la nature du genos, Lille, 1976, known to me only through the review of N.R.E. Fischer in JHS 99 (1979) 193-195), I find that

view

unlikely.

43. Aristotle's agroikoi, Plutarch's geomoroi (Theseus 25.2) and various mentions of georgoi (e.g., Schol. Plat. Axioch., p. 465 Bk., see Wade-Gery, "Eupatridai,” p. 88) are all usually taken to refer to the same group of people. It is not clear, however, that this assumption is justified (see R. Sealey, A History of the Greek City States, p. 118). The later references are of no help in resolving the puzzle of this "order."

205

F.R.

Wüst

historical

political The

(Historia 8 (1959)

Athens

by

rights,

déniourgoi

suggesting

1-11)

that

the Eupatridai

(or

craftsmen)

attempts

before

(the Adel)

were

and

without

to give

Solon

there

the

these orders

a place

only

two

geomoroi

(the

freie

rights

as were

political

were

Stande

Bauern).

the

hekt@moro1.

When the hektemoroi were 'freed,' they, along with the craftsmen, were admitted the tribes, given certain political rights and became the third "Stand." But orders.

in the accounts of Solon's reforms there Were craftsmen so numerous in 6th century

is no mention of these Athens as to give their

name to the third order? The fact that the tele probably as traditional classes (orders?) also makes Wust's theory have

a much

greater

Manville

dubious

ground

claim

also

accepts

that

"the

that early Athenians pP.

31 note

for

60).

the

knew more,

There

existed before Solon unlikely; the telé

historicity.

classes

lower

two

existed

not less,

is too much

classes

on what

for Arístotle,

about

theoretical

seems

to me,

and we should

them than he did" discussion

the

assume

(op. cit.

of political

forms

and development in the time of Aristotle to assume that he necessarily reflects an accurate and popular tradition. Nor am I convinced that the problem is solved by assuming that “Eupatrids, agroikoi, dÉmiourgoi were social classes" (ibid.) not orders. 44. This is approximately the City States, pp. 116-119), also p. 4l.

suggestion of R. Sealey (A History of found in "Eupatridai; Essays in Greek

the Greek History,"

45. M. Nilsson, Cults, Myths, Oracles and Politics (Lund, 1951), Appendix II, considers the genetai as 'nobles' as does Hignett, HAC, esp. pp. 61-67. Hignett follows E. Meyer (G.A. 1112 p. 278.) in identifying (contra Wade-Gery) gennétai and Eupatridat. Gernet, also, identified the two groups(''Les nobles dans la Grece antique," Anthropologie de la Gréce Antique, p. 334). 46.

as

Herodotus

"caste")

2.164

speaks

(the

passage

of the seven

Wade-Gery

relies

on

gené of Egypt--which

for

the

turn out

meaning

of

genos

to be seven

occu-

pational groups such as priests, warriors or interpreters. The fact that these Egyptian groups might be similar to true castes does not mean that genos had Such a meaning for Greeks in general or for Herodotus (as his use of the word

in other

contexts

shows).

47. See Davies, Athenian Propertied Families p. the family of Cleisthenes was not associated with

cult.

Davies

grounds

that

believes they

that

held

the

the Alcmeonidai archonship

of Wade-Gery's pre-Solonian nobility use of the names (above p. 17) might Alcmeonidai

48.

were

also

See Wade-Gery,

not

before

were 580.

369 any

for the suggestion that particular genos or Attic

among

the Eupatridai

However,

if

the

on the

existence

is admitted to be unproved, then more naturally be taken to imply

Isocrates' that the

Eupatridai.

"Eupatridai,"

49. The "original" Roman nobility Ancient Economy pp. 46-47).

pp.

86-87.

was a status

not

an order

(cf.

in

with

Finley,

The

to

206

50. For a good, brief Ste. Croix, The Origins Greek Popular Morality,

discussion of this term, with of the Peloponnesian War, pp. pp. 41-45.

51. While there were consular senators of not have questioned their status as nobles. 52.

Connor

136).

More

considers

Cleon's

values of the kalotkagathoi important,

improper

whom

style

Cicero

only

to

Connor,

were

did

part

and of “old politics"

according

references, see G.E. Μ. de 371-376. Also K.J. Dover,

not

of

approve,

his

rejection

(The Néw Politicians

his

he would

rejection

of

pp.

of

the

87-

traditional

philia relationships and espousal of démo-philia. However, J.K: Davies (Hermes 47 (1975) pp. 374-378) has pointed out that the ‘old versus new politics’ model can be something of a simplification. The changes in fifth century Athenian politics were not so simple, not so complete, and Cleon's politics were not entirely

new.

53. It ie not entirely clear how successful these men were in getting other Athentans to recognize their special title to this name. In the fourth century Cleon's relatives would probably not have thought of him as anything but kaloskagathos. Mantitheos (Demosthenes 40.25) says that Cleon Ev τῇ πάχει oo. By the end of the fifth century many of these same men had voluntarily retired from politics. The most famous case is that of Plato but there were certainly others. See the comments of W.R. Connor, The New Politicians of Fifth Century Athens, p. 175ff.

2

54. "Remarques sur la vie politique d'Athenes au V (1945) 201-202, quoted (in the Englísh given above)

Politicians,

p.

'race'.

above

55. and

See Cf.

note

Connor, 70

(with

7.

Something

Chapter The

New

similar,

IV

pp.

Politicians

references)

on

the

I

think,

has

siecle," Museum Helveticum by Connor, The Nev happened

with

the

word

97 - 98. of

Fifth-Century

apragmónes

in

Athens,

Athens

in

pp. the

179-180 later

fifth

century. 56. Davies, in his review of Connor's New Politicians (Hermes 47 (1975) 374378), speaks of late fifth century politics as "an uneasy competitive symbiosis of various power-bases, some (cult-linked ἰϑαγένεια: athletic prowess) antique and crumbling, some (wealth: overseas clientela: military competence) vellestablished and taken for granted, others (display oratory) strident and ostentatious precisely because novel, tentative, and unincorporated" (p. 378). I think that similar competition of "power-bases" probably existed earlier in the century. Davies also notes (p. 376) the possibility that the role of the gené was essentially passive. It should be recognized that some gennetai may have been more concerned with local than state business. 57.

This

century xxiv).

is

for

may well

the

have

fourth

been

century.

rather

"The

higher,

corresponding

but

one

cannot

figures

say

for

the

by how much"

fifth

(p.

207

58.

ΜΟΙ.

Finley,

The

Ancient

Economy,

p.

51.

59. I doubt that the actual town-dwellers were numerous enough not all the citizens outside Athens came in to vote. Thucydides

"tous pollous" (2.14.2). 60.

Perhaps

(most) the

key

of the Athenians

were

to

the

understanding

at that charges

time of

still

foreign

to do that even does say that

living birth

if

in the country

made

against

many of the "new politicians" in the later fifth century lies not in their being "non-nobles" or "nouveaux riches" (which some at least were not), but in their living and doing business in the city where tions to paternal estates perhaps weakened. of the town/country contrast see Chapter IV 61.

See,

Studies

62.

for

example,

W.G.

24

(1975),

37-52.

J.K.

Davies,

Hermes

47

Forrest,

(1975),

"An

foreigners were plentiful and connecFor further comments on the importance , pp. 103 - 104.

Athenian

Generation

Gap,"

Yale

Classical

378.

63. Resemblances between other democracies and Athens of the 'model' (see Chapter IV, note 50, p. 121).

may

very

often

be

imitations

208

Bibliography

Abbreviations

used

AJA

American

Journal

of

American

Journal

of Philology.

J.K.

Davies,

600-300

Athenian

B.C.,

Aristotle,

Busolt-Swoboda

Bury-Meiggs^

Busolt

I,

II,

Politeia.

H.T. Wade-Gery Tribute Lists,

and

Munich,

Bury

and

Death

of

York,

1975.

ἢ.

R.

The Cambridge 1927.

the

Ancient

Journal.

Classical

Philology.

Classical

Quarterly.

Classical

Review.

de Belgique

Griechische

Staatskunde

1926.

Meiggs,

Classical

and M.G. McGregor, vol. III, Princeton,

Royal

Swoboda,

1920,

Alexander

Families,

1971.

de l'Académie

G.

J.B.

Propertied

Oxford,

Athenaion

B.D. Meritt, The Athenian 1950.

Bulletin

Archaeology.

A History of Great,

fourth

History,

vol.

A.E. Raubitschek, Dedications from Akropolis, Cambridge, Mass., 1949.

Greece

to

edition,

V,

the

the

New

Cambridge,

Athenian

J. Day and M. Chambers, Aristotle's History of Athenian Democracy, University of California Publications in History, vol. 73, 1962.

F.

FGrH

Jacoby,

Berlin Gomme,

Population

and

Die

Fragmente

Leiden,

der griechischen

Historiker,

192%.

A.W. Gomme, The Population and Fourth Centuries B.C.,

of Athens in the Oxford, 1933.

Fifth

209

"L'istituzione della Fratria nella Grecia e nelle Colonie Greche d'Italia," Memorie

Guarducct

Accademia

Nazionale

dei

Lincei,

Ser.

VI,

antica della

vol.

VI

(1937).

ξ

C. Hignett, A Historyof the Athenian Oxford, 1952.

I.G.

Inscriptiones

JUS

Journal

LSCG,

F.

Supplement

of

Graecae,

Hellenic

Sokolowski,

Supplement,

H.G. Liddell, R. English Lexicon, R.

Meiggs

and

Historícal

Century Symbolae

sacrées

des

Cités

grecques,

1962. Scott ninth

D.M.

and H.S. edition,

Lewis,

Inscriptions

B.C.,

1873-

Studies.

Lois

Paris,

Berlin,

Constitution,

Oxford,

A to

Jones, A GreekOxford, 1940.

Selection the

end

of

of

Greek

the

Fifth

1969.

Osloensia.

Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft, Stuttgart, 1893M.N.

Tod,

tions,

A

Selection

vol.

II,

from

of

Greek

403

to

Wade-Gery,

"Demotionidai"

H.T. Wade-Gery, "Demotionidaí," History, Oxford, 1958.

Wade-Gery,

"Eupatridai"

H.T.

WS

Works

cited:

Adcock,

The Greek F.E. California Press,

Alfoldy,

Geza.

Adels."

Andrewes,

"Eupatridai,

in Greek

Wiener

Studien.

and Macedonian 1957.

"Der Attische

Art

Synoikismos

of

History,

War.

und die

B.C.,

Archons

Oxford,

The

"Cleisthenes Greeks.

New

Reform Bill." York:

Alfred

A.

Greek

and Arcopagus,"

University

Entstehung

Knopf,

in

1948.

1958.

Berkeley:

CQ27 (1977)

Inscrip-

Oxford,

Essays

of

des Athenischen

Revue Belge de Philologie et d'Histoire 47 (1968)

Antony. «

Wade-Gery,

Essays

Historical

323

5-38.

241-145.

1971.

210

.

"Philochoros

on

"Phratries Austin,

in Homer."

JHS

Hermes

81

89

(1961)

(1961)

1-15.

129-140.

M.M. and Vídal-Naquet, P. Economic and Social History of Ancient An Introduction, (translated and revised by M.M. Austin). Berkeley Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1977.

Badian,

E.

Review

22.17

Karl Julius. Die Bevolkerung der Griechisch-Romischen Duncker & Humbolt, 1886.

Welt.

30,

Beloch,

Phratries."

“The 1975)

Lives

of

Ancient

Women."

The

New

(October

28-33.

. Griechische Geschichte?. Vol. I.1 Karl J. Trubner, 1912 and 1914. Vol. 1.2. Gruyter, 1926. Billheimer,

York

Greece: and

A.

Naturalization

in

Athenian

Law

Leipzig:

and Vol. II.1. Strassburg: Berlin and Leipzig: Walter

and

Practice.

Princeton,

de

1977.

Boersma, Joh. S. Athenian Building Policy from 561/0 - 405/4 B.C. (Scripta Archaeologica Groningana 4) Walters-Noardhoff, Grongingen, 1970.

Bonner,

R.J.

Bonner,

ἢ...

I, Burn,

"The Minimum and

II.

in Ostracism."

G.

The

Administration

The

University

of

CP 8 (1913) of

Chicago

223-225.

Justice

Press,

from

1930

A.R. “Hic breve vivitur, a Study of the Expectation Empire." Past and Present 4 (1953) 2-31. .

Bury,

Pericles

and

Athens.

New

York:

Busolt,

G. G.

Griechische and

1926.

Swoboda,

Casson,

Ancient

and

F.E.

Lionel.

Ships

Press,

V.

Études

"AZTOE."

I.

continuous

History,

and

Vol.

the

C.H.

V.

volume

Athens

the

Life

in

Aristotle,

the

Roman

Alexander

the

Great ^.

1920.

Munich:

C.H.

Beck,

I.)

478-401,

Cambridge in

to

1938.

of

Beck, II.

Homer

and

1949.

Death

Staatskunde,

with

Cambridge: Seamanship

to

Munich:

Griechische

is

Adcock.

University Cavaignac, E. 1908. Chapot,

H.

(Pagination

Cambridge

Cook

Staatskunde,

of

Macmillan,

J.B. and Meiggs, R. A Historyof Greece New York: St. Martin's Press, 1975.

Busolt,

The

Smith,

Chicago:

Vote

ed.

by

University

Ancient

World.

J.B.

Press,

Bury,

S.A.

1927.

Princeton:

Princeton

V

Paris,

1971. sur

Revue

l'histoire

des

Études

financiere

Anciennes

d'Athenes

31

(1929)

au

7-12.

siécle.

211 Cohen,

Edward E. University

Cole,

David

Ancient Athenian Press, 1973.

Russell.

'Asty' and

dissertation, Connor,

Alison

Davies,

J.K.

"Athenian

.

Davison, J.

and

Dodds,

"City"in Early of

Fifth-Century

in Greece."

the

Propertied

"Notes

on

Chambers,

M.

E.R.

The

the

Descent

Families,

Panathenaea."

Aristotle's

Publications

Ancient

Belief.

Concept

Oxford:

Sterling. "The Second Term."

.

JHS

D.

Athens.

and

Princeton:

(1977-78)

its

B.C.

162-175.

Alternatives."

Oxford:

(1958)

Clarendon

73,

of

and

Other

Progress

Press,

Inscribed

Democracy.

University

1962. Essays

on

Greek

Literature

1973. of

Plato

of Sacrifices: 270-293.

with

23-42.

Athenian

Vol.

Calendar 9 (1960)

Fragments

The

"The Greek

of

Attic

Foundation State2.

Nikomakhos'

and

the

Proceedings

of

Comedy,

Vol.

Thurii."

London:

The People of Aristophanes. of 1943 edition).

"The Problem of Female

(1980)

78

History of

Clarendon

Athenian Historia

Walls

Victor.

. (reprint

Eversley, ed.

"The

The

.

Engels,

Unpublished

of

Law

Aristotle.

Chronology

the

Berkeley:

of

Nikomakhos'

Massachusetts

Code."

Hesperia

Histor-

30

58-73.

J.M.

Ehrenberg,

Group

in History,

"The Law Codes of Athens." Society 71 (1953-7) 1-36.

(1961)

Edmonds,

Greek.

CJ 73

600-300

K.J. Greek Popular Morality in the Time University of California Press, 1974.

ical

Princeton

1976.

Farm

Citizenship:

Athenian

California

and

Family

Princeton:

1971.

J.A.

of

Dow,

"The

CJ 73 (1977-78). Press,

Dover,

Burford.

Courts.

'Polis':

University,

W. Robert. The New Politicians Princeton University Press, 1971.

Cooper,

Day,

Stanford

Maritime

I. AJP

Methuen London:

Infanticide

Leiden: 69

& Co.,

E.J.

(1948)

1957.

149-170.

Ltd.,

Methuen

Brill,

1969.

ἃ Co.,

Ltd.,

in the Greco-Roman World."

1974

CP 75

112-120.

D.E.C. by D.V.

"Population, Economy and Society,” in Population in History, Glass and D.E.C. Eversley. London: E. Arnold, 1965.

212

Fingarette,

Ann.

"A

New

Look

at

the

Wall

of

Níkomakhos."

Hesperia

40

(1971)

330-335.

Finley,

M.I. 1973.

Forrest,

The

W.G.

37-52

Ancient

Economy.

“An

Athenian

The

Emergence

Generation

.

(Weidenfeld

of

and

"Themistocles

von

A.

""Solon's

Fritz, New

University

Gap."

Yale

of

K.

and

Hoplite

Kapp,

York:

Press,

Studies

(1975)

Classical

E.

Hafner,

Greek

Democracy.

Nicolson),

1966.

and Argos."

CQ

Assessment." Aristotle's

London:

54

(1960)

24

Historia

10

Constitution

(1961)

of

Gernet,

Louis. "Les Nobles dans Antique Francois Maspero.

Glotz,

Gustave. New York:

Thucydides son of Melesians 13 (1964) 385-399.

510-512.

Athens

Gomme,

A.W. "Aristophanes Literature. Oxford:

and Politics” in More Essays Basil Blackwell (1962).

. "The Law of Literature. Oxford:

Citizenship at Athens" in Basil Blackwell (1937).

The Population of Athens Basil Blackwell (1933).

and

Athenian

English

in

the

translation

Fifth

in

Greek

Essays

and

by

in

Related

Texts.

Politics

de

la

M.R.

before

Grece

Dobie.

History

Greek

Fourth

Griffith, G.T. "Isegoria in the Assembly at Athens." Ancient Institutions, Studies presented to Victor Ehrenberg, pp. Blackwell

and

la Grece antique." Anthropologie Paris (1968) 333-343.

Ancient Greece at Work. Alfred A. Knopf, 1926.

.

University

1950.

Frank. "Pericles, the War." Historia

Oxford:

World

221-241.

Frost,

Basil

California

Φ

Library

French,

Berkeley:

and

History

Centuries

and

B.C.

Society and 115-138. Oxford:

(1966).

Guarducci, M. "L'istituzione della Fratria nella Grecia antica e nelle Colonie Greche d'Italia." Memorie della Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Ser. VI, vol. VI (1937). Hansen,

M.H. Apagoge, Endeixis, and Ephegesis Against Kakourgoi, Atimoi, and Pheugontes,A Study in the Athenian Administration of Justice in the Fourth

Century Harrison,

B.C.

A.H.W.

Procedure.

Odense: The

Law

Oxford:

Odense of

Athens.

Clarendon

University Vol.

Press,

I:

Press The

1968

(1976).

Family

and

1971.

and

Property.

Vol.

IT:

213 Hemberg,

F.

"ΤΡΙΠΑΤῺΡ

und

TPIZHPOQE

."

Hignett, C. A History of the Athenian Century B.C. Oxford: Clarendon

Eranos

(1954)

Constitution Press, 1952.

Hopkins, Keith, "The Probable Age Structure tion Studies 20 (1966) 245-264. How,

52

W.W. and Wells, J. A Commentary 1937 (reprint of 1912 edition).

on

of

the

to

the

Roman

Herodotus.

172-190. End

of

the

Population."

Oxford:

and

78) Jacoby,

economicus"

.

"The

Nothoi

.

"Public

and

"Town

and

of Kynosarges."

and

Private

Country JHS 94

Interests

in Ancient (1974)

in Classical

Press,

Pail, "Homo

London politi-

Greece.")

88-95. Athens."

CJ

73

(1977-

97-104. F.

Jameson,

homo

Popula-

Clarendon

Humphreys, S.C. Anthropology and the Greeks. Routledge and Kegan 1978. (Including "Economy and Society in Classical Athens,"

cus

Fifth

Die

M.H.

Fragmente

der

"Agriculture "Apollo "A

griechischen

and

Lykeios

Decree

of

Slavery

Historiker.

in Classical

in Athens."

Themistokles

Berlin

Athens."

Archaiognosis from

and

Troizen."

Leiden,

CJ 73

2

1923-

(1977-78).

(1980).

Hesperia

29

(1960)

198-223. .

"The

Historia .

Hesperia

Jeffery, Jones, Kagan,

L.H.

(1963)

"A

Revised

31

(1962)

Archaic

A.H.M.

The

Press,

for

Mobolization

in

the

Decree

of

Themistokles."

385-403. Text

of

the

Decree

of

Themistokles

from

Troizen."

310-315.

Greece.

Athenian

Donald.

versity

Provisions

12

New York:

Democracy.

Outbreak

of

the

1969.

St.

Oxford:

Martin's Basil

Peloponnesian

Press

(1976).

Blackwell, War.

1969.

Ithaca:

Cornell

Uni-

M

Kettner, James H. The Development of American Citizenship, Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1978.

1608-1870.

Chapel

Kinzl,

Konrad. "The Origin of δημοκρατία and the Early Development of Athenian Democracy." Unpublished paper delivered at the Association of Ancient Historians meeting, May 1975, at Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.

Knox,

B.M.W. Papers

"Literature" of

a Symposium

in Athens sponsored

Comes by

of Age: the

From

Solon

Archaeological

to Salamis.

Institute

of

America,

214

Princeton Society and The Department University, Princeton, 1978. Korte,

A.

Labarbe,

"Die

Attischen

Jules.

"L’äge

historiques

Xenodikai."

Lacey,

W.K.

Lang,

Mabel and

The

Hermes

correspondant

Family

and

in

Crosby,

Classical

Leveque, Pierre. Weidenfeld D.M.

Margaret.

The

"Cleisthenes

H.G.,

Scott,

James

and

1968

"Hippodamos 95-100.

Malcolm Louise

Jones,

du κούρϑον

et

les

données

358-394.

Thames

Agora

M.

The

F.

Law

Vol.

Semple,

and

10

Hudson,

(Weights,

Athenian

The

"A Note

Russell

the

End

and

of

on the

Lewis,

the

of

by

12

1968. Measures

Population A

Century

B.C.

1940

of

London:

Oxford:

edition).

to George Cornell

(1976)

M.A.

University

88-91.

Abroad."

(Lecture

in memory

Cincinnati

Classical

Studies,

Unpublished

Clarendon

Oxford:

Kocharr,

Ithaca:

of Attica."

Selection

173-227,

(1907)

1971.

Citizenship.

Oxford:

29

Presented

CQ 26 and

Berkeley:

Lexicon”.

Zabern,

Athens.

History.

22-40.

of

Studies von

at Home

Empire.

(1963)

Greek-English

Universityof Athenian

WS

Miriam

supplement,

Citizens."

Policy

David.

Fifth

A

with

Roman

Frauen."

Historia

Classical

1966),

Meiggs,

die

and

Translated

Philipp

as Athenian

Evolution 1979.

Russell.

in

"Athenian

Taft

Greek

of Miletus."

Mainz:

Manville, Brook. The Yale University,

to

und

H.S.

(reprint,

pp.

"Bastards

.

Government in Press, 1966.

Attica."

R.

MacDowell, Douglas Press, 1978.

.

and

R.

Press,

Hanfmann,

Meiggs,

240ff.

London:

Athenian

The Greek Adventure. and Nicolson, 1968.

Clarendon

of

Princeton

Tokens).

Artur. "Das Attische Burgerrecht 30 (1908) 1-46, 173-230.

McGregor,

(1933)

BAB 39 (1953)

Greece.

Ledl,

McCredie,

68

Archaeology,

Themistocle. Paris: Bibliotheque de la Faculte de l'Universite de Liege, Fascicule 143 (1957).

J.A.O. Representative University of California

Liddell,

and

au sacrifice

Larsen,

Lewis,

Art

au sixieme discours a'Isée."

. La Loi Navale de Philosophie et Lettres

de

of

CR 78

Greek

Press,

(1964)

Historical

Clarendon

dissertation,

1972.

2-3. Inscriptions

Press,

Vcl.2.

1969.

215

Meritt,

B.D., Vol.

Wade-Gery,

III.

H.T.

and

Princeton:

The

McGregor,

M.F.

American

The

School

of

Athenian

Tribute

Classical

Studies

Lists, at

Athens,

1950. Meyer,

E.

Geschichte

des

Altertuns^,

Vol.

III.

Montagu, M.F. Ashley. Man's Most Dangerous Columbia University Press, 1945. Morrison, J.S. and Williams, R.T. Cambridge University Press, Morrow,

Glenn R. Princeton:

Mulhern, Muller,

J.J.

Plato's Cretan City, Princeton University "Population

and

J.A.R.

JHS

"Some

24

Oared

the

Ships,

Republic,"

1937.

Fallacy

900-323

Arethusa

on

the

Persian

Wars,

the

"Attic

U.E.

Petersen,

Studi

W.

Myths,

Oracles

and

di

Beginning

Citizenship Diritto

Population».

Decrees:

Attico.

.

The

Pomeroy,

New Preuss.

Sarah.

York:

of

New

Political Michigan

Goddesses,

Schocken

"Biomedical Century B.C."

Politics

Yotk:

the

(1975)

Atlas

Ancient

Athenian

a Note."

BSA

R.

Macmillan,

1975.

the

Laws.

265-281.

of

Plataea."

of

Greece.

Greece.

Lund:

Background

Democracy.

69

(1972)

Bemporad

and

Oxford:

129-158. Son,

1930.

A Critical Survey of the Literary and McGill-Queens University Press, 1975.

of Aeschulean

Press,

1966.

Whores,

Wives

Books,

of

Florence:

Podlecki, A.J. The Life of Themistokles, Archaeological Evidence. Montreal:

University

of

1951.

Ostwald, Martin. Nomos and the Clarendon Press, 1964.

Paoli,

York:

Cambridge:

Campaign

in

Cults,

Gleerup,

M.H.

New

144-165.

Nilsson,

Osborne,

B.C.

8

Social

Martin.

Race^.2

Interpretation

National Statistical Service of Greece, Economic and Athens, 1964 (In Greek, English and French.)

C.W.K.

of

Geschichte des Attischen Burge - und Eherechts. Philologie, Supplementband 25.) Leipzig: Teubner,

Observations

(1904)

Myth:

a Historical Press, 1960.

Plato's

O. Untersuchungen zur (Jahrbuch fur Classische 1899.

Munro,

Greek 1968.

Stuttgart,

and

Slaves,

Tragedy. Women

in

Ann Arbor: Classical

Antiquity.

1975.

Techniques for Influencing Arethusa 8 (1975) 237-263.

Human

Reproduction

in

the

Fourth

216

Raubitschek, A.E. Dedications Archaeological Institute

"Oulios."

from the Athenian of America, 1949.

P.J.

The

. 92

de

Ste. 5)

Athenian

"Bastards

. "The Five (1972) 115-127.

Ruschenbusch,

E.

Croix, 1-41.

"The .

.

The

Rachel

CQ 28

Athenian

Character

of

of

the

Τύμημα

the

and

14

89-92. of

the

Peloponnesian

B.C."

Historia

Historia

JHS

Elapook

5 in

3

(1956) the

(1954/

1-23.

Fourth

30ff.

of Phaenippus." Ancient Society and Victor Ehrenberg, p. 109ff. Oxford:

of

411

(1966).

Empire."

Athenian

(1953)

9

Museum

1972.

(1978)

Thousand."

the

et Mediaevalia

siecle."

Revolutions

Athenian

Five

V

Press,

Historia, Einzelschriften

Constitution

L.

"The

Schachermeyr,

Fritz.

G.F.

Kritisch

Sealey,

"The

"Political

164ξξ.

Schwahn,

ΝΌΜΟΙ,

Origins

201ff.,

Schoman,

the

in

au

War.

Ithaca:

CQ 25

(1975)

Institutions, Basil Blackwell,

Cornell

University

1972.

. Sargent,

Thousand

Classica

. Press,

Clarendon

Citizens."

"The Estate Presented to

Studies 1966.

Oxford:

d'Athenes

as Athenian

"Demosthenes'

Century."

politique

Boule.

ZOQAQNOL

G.E.M.

Cambridge:

RE 18.2 (1942) 2000.

Reverdin, O. "Remarques sur la vie Helveticum 2 (1945) 201-212. Rhodes,

Akropolis.

Die

Use

Athens,"

of Slaves

Perikles.

by the Athenians

Stuttgart:

Verfassungsgeschichte

gepruft.

Walther. Raphael.

Pay Outside

Leipzig:

"Nautodikai." Essays

in Greek

Athens,"

"Eupatridai"

and

Manyland

Books,

1967.

Inc.,

in Warfare."

Kohlhammer,

Athens

nach

48-52. CP 22

(1927)

1969.

Grote's

History

of

Greece.

1854.

RE 16.2 Politics.

"The

. A History of the Greek University of California Press,

Entry

(1935)

2053-2063.

(Including

of Pericles

City States 1976.

"Regionalism

in Archaic

into History.")

700-338

B.C.

Berkeley:

New York:

217

Sokolowski,

F.

Lois Sacrées des Cités Greques,

Stavely, E.S. Greek Press, 1972. Stroud,

Szanto,

Das

W.S.

M.N.

Oxford:

0.J.

Index

John.

Political

Age

and

Elections.

for

Eugene. to

Date

of

Dean

Meritt,

Essays

in

and

Blackwell,

Areopagus"

Freiburg:

J.C.B.

Greek

and

of ton

of

the

New

"Die

M.L. Iambi et Press, 1971.

Hesperia

Athenon.

From

403-323

Press,

1932.

ed.

York:

model

no.

by

City

D.W.

New

J.J.

Wall

Augustin,

York,

Facts

Bradeen

15,

1975.

1960.

life-tables

22.

Population

Pre-Persian

Supplement

Athens,

Mortality,

Studies,

of and

for

under-

1955. at

Hand.

Athens." M.F.

New

QOPOZL

,

McGregor,

1974.

History.

(Including

"The Laws

of Cleisthenes.")

Polizeiwache, auf der

Elegi

Wilamowitz-Mollendorff, 1893. .

1892.

72-79.

II,

University

Attica.

"Demotionidai,"

Oxford:

Graeci

ante

Burg von Athen."

Alexandrum

Whitehead, David. The Ideologyof the Athenian Society, Supplement 4) Cambridge, 1977.

1910.

280-301.

"Eupatridai,

Basil

1958.

Wernicke, Konrad. 51-75.

von

(1971)

Mohr,

Vol.

University

California

40

SO 46 (1971)

Harvard

Activities.

"The

J.T.

Archons

Exelixis

Benjamin

Valley,

Hesperia

of

1962.

1948.

Patterns

Locust

University

Inscriptions,

Boccard,

Cornell

Orphans."

Cambridge:

Population

Paris:

Ithaca:

Reforms."

Historical Press,

Population

156ff.

Wade-Gery,

Athenian

Organization

Sex

countries.

Nations Fund York: 1980.

Pp.

West,

and

Bürgerrecht.

Greek

Poleodomike

Nations.

Tribute

the

Aristophaneus.

The

developed

of

Clarendon

Ioannes.

Vanderpool,

and

Griechische

A Selection

Travlos,

United

Voting

"The Deme in Kleisthenes'

B.C.

Traill,

United

"Theozotides

Emil.

Thompsen,

Todd,

Roman

Ronald. Drakon's Law on Homicide. Berkeley: Publications: Classical Studies, Vol. 3, 1968. .

Tod,

and

Supplement.

Staat

und

Ulrich.

Gesellschaft

Aristoteles

der

Cantati.

Metic. und

Griechen

Hermes

Oxford:

(Cambridge Athen.

und

Romer.

26

(1891)

Clarendon

Philological

Berlin:

Berlin:

Weidmann,

Teubner,

218

Will,

Wolff,

Edouard. Doriens et Ioniens. Essai sur la valeur du critiere ethnique applique a l'étude de l'histoire et de la civilisation grecques. Paris: Universite de Paris, Faculte des lettres, 1956. H.J.

"Marriage

2 (1944)

Law

and

Wrigley, E.A. Population and (McGraw-Hill), 1969. Wüst,

Young,

F.R.

"Gedanken

Rodney.

Family

Organization

History.

New York:

in

Ancient

Athens."

Traditio

43-95.

“An

über

die

Industrial

attischen

District

World

University

Stande."

Historia

of Ancient

8

(1959)

1-11.

Athens."

Hesperia

20

20

135ff.

67ff. "Sepulturae

Intra

Urbem."

Hesperia

Library

(1951)

(1951)

219

General

agroikoi and asteioi 84, 196 order of 188, 204-5 note Alcmeon 85 Alcmeonidae 86-87, 190, 204

to

democrats in 403 70, 80 note 99 to Thrasyboulos 26, 107 concept of 135-36, Appendix 1

43 n.

47

and Pericles Apatouria 10 Archestratos 94 Archidamos and Pericles

86 of

91-92,

hoi Athenaioi represented

120

note

47

53

Boule

οὗ

500 in Athens 25 implications for size of population 55-56 of Erythiai 46 note 52 of Chios 198 | Cimon 57, 83, 96, 119 note 36 marriage of 99-100 and Sparta 118 note 32 citizens

astoi 153-160 politai 158-160 politis 161 female 161-162,

of i^

classes

in Cleisthenes' 163,

165-166,

29

under

Athenian society 56-57, Appendix 2, passim "middle class" 76 note 54; 184-85 Cleisthenes and citizenship 24-28 and xenoi kai metoikoi 23, 25 and organization of population "renegade noble" 87 and metoikia 134 Cleon 192, 206 notes 52 and 53 cleruchies see colonization colonization in 8th and 7th centuries 45 of Athens in mid-fifth century 65-66 deme 9 . admission procedure 14, 26-28

"reforms"

46

27-28

demiourgoi

‘definition’ 5 ‘alternative’ definitions in Athens 131-132 Aristotle's definition 152-53 granting of aliens

1 151-74

chapter

of

citizens

162-163 in dikast@ria

28,

Appendix

testimonia 1-2 traditional interpretations 3, 97-104 re-enactment in 403 145-47

atimos and atimia 10, 30 note 17, 35 note 42, 129, 135-36, 165 birth control in antiquity 77-78, note 68

172 note citizenship

of

citizenship law of 451/0 IV, passin

89

100

Aristeodes 82 astos, astoi see

to

passim

terminology

Anaxagoras

Areopagus reform

Index

law

of

Solom

18-19, 34 note 35 to Plataeans 38 note 66, 70, 80 note 99 to Samians 38 note 66, 70, 80 note 99, 107, 138 note 20 to rowers at Arginusoi 70, 80 note 99

order in Athens 188, demos plethuön 54 Demotionidai 12-13, 14, 33 note 28 diadikasia 12-13, 53

204-5 32

note

note

63

26,

diaps€phismos of

510:

of

445/4:

23,

37

95-96,

note

58

122-23

note

63

dikastai kata demous 37 note 60, 93 dikasteria 83, 91-92 and citizenship 26, 27, 33 note 29 Dorians/Ionians 98, 124 notes 68 and 69 Dracon

law on enguésis

homicide 10 11 (see also marriage)

220

"nobility '

Ephialtes 54, 57, 91 and Pericles 90 and Areopagus 91-92 epidikasia 129 epigamia 148 note 9 Eupatridai 186-88, 204 note 39 and archonship 117 note 21

‘family

oikos

farm'

price of size of

few/many

56-57

as a 'nobility' katalogoi

and Athenian society 9-10, 129 Solon's concern with 15-17, 35 note 37 oligarchic revolution and citizenship 143-44 orgeönes 20, 108, 113

201 note 14 202 note 19

gamelia 11 generation gap, 197-98 genos and gennetai 20, 113-14, 189-91 and phratry 30 note of Demotionidai 12, graph& xenias 21, 28, Hippodamos of Miletus homogalaktes 20, 108, infanticide 60-61, 77 inheritance Solon's laws of 15 kaloi kagathoi 57 47,

73

25,

‘party

168,

for public note 50 paidopoiesthai

14 32 note 26 107, 110-113 89, 120 note 40 113 note 68

class'

96

19 182-83,

nomoi of 11 and citizenship law 29 note 3, 95, 99-100 to foreigners 11, 99-100 metechein tes poleös 17, 29 note 4, 30 note 11, 35 note 42, 164-66 mesoi 184-85

creation

of

72 note 3 military forces status

79

note

134-135

military classes 180-83 Miltiades 82, 86 “naturalization” 98 note 80 nautodikai 21, 108-111, 127

note

108

21

plousios/penés 178, 202 note polit@s (see also citizens) Aristotle's as citizen population

metoikoi

431 41, Athenian

35

of Dekeleis 12, 32 note 26 Phulobasileis 187 Piraeus 60 effect on population 69, 80 note 95 Pericles interest in 84 pléthos ton politÓn (see also population) 1, 4, 28, 100, 105

marriage

in in

121

143

"phraterize"

193-95

Lysias and citizenship 150 note marathonomachoi 116 note 4, 203 note 31

93,

and citizenship 22-24 Pericles family of 85-87 early career 90 and Themistocles 88-89, 119 note 39 and philosophers 89-90 citizenship law of 95-107 (and passim) Phormisios 149 note 19 phratry 9 importance of 26-27, 34 note age of enrollment 33 note 30 prosecution of foreigners who

22

synteleia of 114, 128 note 115 legitimacy (see also notho1) and citizenship 31 note 20, 33 note 29, 95 lexiarchikon grammateion 73 note 22,

87-88 service

Peisistratus

Kynosarges

"liturgical

politics'

pay

191-92 note

|

in Athens 186-95 nothoi 910, 31 note 20, 33 note 29 and inheritance 15-17 and citizenship 31 note 20 theory of E. Muller 34-35 note 37

80

definition 153-60

22

152-53

growth

in premodern societies 41-45 "natural increase" 42-43 in Athens 43-44 and prosperity 43, 68-69, 71, 81 note 102 urban 58-60, 80 note 95 population of Athens Chapter III before Persian wars 45-46

passim

221 at

time

of

Persian

in mid-fifth

wars

century

46-61

61-66

in as

431 40-41, 66-68 factor in passing of citizenship law 100-102, 105-6 Protagoras and Pericles 89 and Thurii 119, note 39 proxenoi 100

public/private 4, ‘quorum’ of 6,000 ‘race’ and ‘racial

6-7 note 10 53-54, 75 note purity'

42

and citizenship law 97-98 slaves use in military forces 48, 74 note 31 and democracy 116 note 7 Solon and citizenship 14-22 inheritance laws 15 sussitoi 18, 35 note 45 [618 of Athens 175-82 and military classes 180-82 200 note 8 Theramenes 144 Themistocles 82, 83, 87, 110 note 2 decree of 48, 49, 74 note 33, 134 and Pericles 87, 88-89, 91, 119 note 39 Theozotides 149 note 18 thíasoi 18 "30,000 Athenians" 51-55 Thucydides son of Melesias 87 Thurii 89, 119 note 39

timÓmata see tele towi/country 195-97 tribe 9 Old Attic 14 Cleisthenic 14 trittues 34 note 31, 39 note 70, 93 women in phratry 12 citizenship of 129notes 28 and 29, 160-62, 163, 165-66 Xanthippos 82, 86 xenodikai 111-112

young/old

197-98

222

Index

of

Ancient

Historia

6.10,2

Aeschines

1.183 3.195:196 Aeschylus Eumenides 120 note 49 124 note 69 138 note 26 657-600 545-549 834-856 437:171 note 23 Persians 89, 116 note

Discussed

26.4

^ frag. 3:188, 7.3:175 7.4:179, 200

1

and

passim

204

note

note

8

42

.5:35 note 42

4

:2

1.85,87:195 Aristophanes Acharnians 498:162 645:162 Birds 33-34:160 40-1:162 699:190

16.5:37 note 60 21:24, 37 note 58 22.5:82 23.1:50 26.1:68 24.3:55,92 25.1:90,91 29.4:92 26.2:92 26.5:93 27 :83 27.1:90,94 27 .3:93,194 29.3:192 35.2:144 37.1:144 40.1:146 42.1-2:26, 33 note 49:200 note 8 40-51:94 $3.1:93 56.6-7:10

700:190

833:190 1239:190 1451:190 1200:190 1867:190 Da italeis 110 frag. 225 (Edmonds) Ecclesiazousae 459:160,161 574-75:172 note 28 197-198:197 1131-2:51,172 note 28 Knights 255:84 580:195 811:162 828-9:52 912-14:194 1111-1114:84 1121:195 1156-7:52 Lysistrata 63:166 note

28

591-3:142 229:162 1041-43:172

Cited

Aristotle Ath. Pol.

Andocides

341ff.:172

or

Thesmophoriazonsae 302-309:163 Wasps 577:33 nore 29 661-2:92 666:163 800-801:117 1075-90:182 1094-98: 183

Aelian

Varia

Sources

note

28

On

the

Generation

of

29,

159

Animals

729b1-20:139 Politics 1265a 14-19:101 1274b 30-1278b- 1:151-152 1275a 15:168 note 1 1275b 31-32:2 1275b 37:23,25,37 note 61,152

40:26 note

53

|Demosthenes) 42:201 note 18 59:26,95,130,133 59.16:157 59.104:114,170 note 59.111:166

16

42.22.4,15,17-18

Diodorus 18.18.4-5:177 Diogenes Laertius 2.26:142 9.50:119 note 39

Dionysius

> oD

- μὰ Μ μὴ με μὰ

ΦΦ

.

:47

ON

.65:51 .28:40,47 .29:47 ~ 90:47 .100:47 9.114:86 Hesiod Works and

Homer Iliad

40.11:17 40.25:206 46.18:11 46.22:129 57:26 57.1:164 57.31:22

Digest

30:50,51 31:24 44:50 84:48

Ὁ

1278a 28ff.:28,37 note 61 1278a 34-35:2 1289b 32:184 1291b 7-14:56 1295b 1:184 1295b 25:184 1362a 26-28:101 Rhetoric 1394a 34:169 note 6 Deinarchos 71:203 note 29 Demosthenes 23.213:128 note 115 25.51:74 note 33 39:26 39.31:165 39.35:169

A I~ WA 0OwOw0OwoOWWO@~

223

of Halicarnassus

hypothesis to Lysias 34:149 note 19 201 note 16 Empedoctes frag. 115:52 Eumelos frag. 2 (Jacoby):123 note 64 145 Eupolis frag. 118:198 Euripides Electra 1335:161 Ion 1570f£:124 Medea 297 :169 Suppliants 232-7 Harpocration s.v. nautodikai 126 note 100 8.ν. Metes 180 Berodotus 1.59.1:23 1.155:198 3.128.5:85 3.136:86 5.57:170 5.66:14,24 5.69:24 5.77:198 5.97:50,51

Days

252:52

2.362:10

9.63:11 15.557-8:155 Odyssey 7.131:156 13.192:155 17.206:156 Isaeus 3.71:12 3.42-52:31 note 20

7.39:200 note 8

10.10:159 Isocrates 8.88:145 16.25:188-189,190 Justin 2.9:74 note 25

Krateros

frag.

Kratinos 110 Cheirones Lysias frag.

4

(Jacoby):21,108

frag. 233 vi (Bude)

Theozotides):149

note

(Against

18

16.3:182 19.19:178 19.29:201 note 14 19.42:201 note 14 34.3:148 note 9 150 note 19 169 note 5 Nepos Miltiades 5.1:74 note 25 Philochoros frag. 35a (Jacoby):15,20, 27,108,191 frag. 119 (Jacoby):96,113-114, 122-3 note 63 Pindar Olym. 7.89-90:156 13.1-3:156 Pyth. 3.70-71:170 note 10 Plato Critias 112b:74 note 33 119a-b:74 note 28 Gorgias 455d:94 455e:119 note 38 515e:93

224

37:1

and

passim

Themistocles

1:15

834:188

835:146,50 note Polemon frag.88:128 Pollux 8.111:187

Solon

frag.

19 note

4 (West):159

frag. 6:154 frag. 9:154 10:155 34:154 36:14,17

8

T

UD & VA

N i

Φ

D

C

e

NO

=

2P ON

.97.1-2:143 Xenophanes frag. 16 (Diels, Kranz) Xenophon Hellenicon 2.3.24:52 Memorabilia 1.2.35:75 note 49

22.2:60,76 note 56 Theseus 25:186,204 note 43 [ Plutarch] Lives of the Ten Orators

(Ten Orators)

s.v. demopoi$tása.2

e.v. Hippias:74 note 25 Thucydides 1.24:196; 1.6:195 1.80.1:198 1.99:64 1.102:124 note 69 1.104-112: 62-64 1.107.9:88,119 note 34 1.138:89

ω

37.5:31 note 20 Solon 2:185 18.1:176 20:35 note 42,129 24:15,18-19 Bff:46 25:185

17

^

The Suda

QS

123c:178

Axiochos 369:51 Hipparchus:37 note 60 Plutarch Alcibiades 16.1:195 Cimon 10:83 14.5:118 16.2:99 Pericles 2.1:183 3.1:85 7.7:90 9.3:93 10:83 10.6:118 10.7:91 10.8:91 12:119 note 38 13.7:119 note 38 24.1-2:117 29.2:99 36.5:89

Strabo

μ

Alcibiades

29

ON μ© ..

Plato)

Sophocles Antigone 569:139 note 26 Electra 1227:161 Oedipus at Colonnus 12-13:156 184:156 927-928:157 Oedipus Tyrannos 222:171 note

δι Ne

Laws 629d:124 note 69 698b:200 note 8 741a:98 753a:169 768b:164 849a-d:157 873e:187 Republic 451cff.:172 note Symposium 175e:51 221a:182 Timaeus 50d:139 note 26

115

[Xenophon]

p.

Constitution of the

Athenians, "Old Oligarch" 1.13:795 1.10 Bekker Anecdota 257 s.v. Eupatridai: 154,189,204 note 40 DAA 330:187 6:187 I.G 10:146 39:84 41:111 45:178,202

note

23

98

225 54:117 79:160,171 note 83:135 114:54 115:30 note 15 203:125 note 76 339:125 note 76 340:125 note 76 342:111 343:111 929:78 note 79 950:125 note 76

24

112

1:38 note 66,153,162 10:81 note 99,146,169 46:127 note 109 144:127 note 109 1237:12-13,21,162 XIII 9,296:187

note

M-L 23:86,134,194,203 note 29 33:78 note 79 40:75 note 49,86 44:163,174 note 31 48:125 note 76 52:84 69:85 85:26,30 note 16,107 99:38 note 66,107 ,135,153,162 S.E.G. x 37:111

5