Wealth and the Power of Wealth in Classical Athens 0405140347, 9780405140341

Citation preview

WEALTH AND THE POWER OF WEALTH IN CLASSICAL ATHENS This is a volume in the Arno l'ress collection

John K. Davies

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 titles.

~ ARNO PRESS A New York Times Company New York• 1981

WEAI.ll'H .ANDTHE POWEROF WEAI.ll'H

IN CLASSICAL ATHENS Editorial Supervision: Steve Bedney

by

First publication in book form 1981 by Arno Press Inc. Copyright 1981 by John K. Davies Reproduced by permission of John Davies J.K.

MONOGRAPHS IN CLASSICAL STUDIES ISBN for complete set: 0-405-14025-8 See last pages of this volume for titles.

Rathbone Professor

DAVIES

of Ancient History

and Classical

Manufactured in the United States of America

University

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication

Data

Davies, John Kenyon. Wealth and the power of wealth in classical Athens. (Monographs in classical studies) Revision of pt. 1 of the author's thesis (Ph.D. --Oxford, 1965) originally presented under title: Athenian propertied families, 600-300 B.C. Bibliography: p. Includes indexes. 1. Elite (Social sciences)--Greece--Athens--History. 2. Upper classes--Greece--Athens--History. 3. Wealth--Greece--Athens--History. 4. Athens (Greece)--Genealogy. I. Title. II. Series.

HN650.5.Z9E43 ISBN 0-405-14034-7

305.5'2

80-2647 AACR2

of Liverpool

Archaeology

Preface List

of Abbreviations

I

Introduction

II

The liturgical

census

III

The liturgical

class

IV

The sources

V

Continuity

VI

Property-power

1

9 16

of wealth

38

and stability

73 88

Appendix I

The diadikasia-documents

133

Appendix II

Military

officials

151

Appendix III

Athenian

competitors

two-horse

contests

down to ?fX) B.C. in the four- and at Panhellenic

Games

167

Index I

Index of Sources

169

Index II

Index of Subjects

177

PREFACE

A'

, r,1 1cr-,r,h w~,,,doc.,

u1c.

I hope not.

~

original

1 1vamed-up cabbage la death.•

aaya the Greek pranrb

thesis of 1965 comprised thrH

Toluaea, of which

Tolumea II and III were published u Athenian Propertied Pam.lies in 1971 with and with a brief

minor .-ndmenta

introduction

rest of Tolime I, apart from one sect.ion, hu

cannibalised

lain on IIID"ahelYea largely

\IDuaed except u the basis of 1ome of 11\YOXford lectures, and an embarrassment

Com1or'• inTitation

u other coiaitaenta

Arno

Pr•••for

the rechauff;

I

11111very

their encourapment to rmae still

confusion with~,

to become a challenge

In consequence Professor

grateful

and for their

in this aeries came to him and to the confidence ib&t

contain■ ,ome vholeaome fare.

I ban made the follO'Ving

Reference■

aupenened.

to me to refurbieh it for publication

aa a timely and moat welcome solution.

from volUH I. Th•

change■

from the 1965 Yerdon. To prevent

the book aa here published ia given a separate title.

to source--terial

have ~een updated where necea1ary. Cro11-references

have been mad• to refer to ,:Y?.u published, with the COD.Tentionthat a mmber double-underlined

repreHnt•

the N14 mmber1 uaed in

!!!,

References to

modern 1cholarahip have been changed to conform with the Harrard

ey1te■,

and

in this and other vaya the bulk of the original footnotes hu been drastically 111-4.

In the hope that this book_,.

than!!!

is, I ban given tnnalationa

which r-in article •terial •-

be

■ore

aoceaaible to the Greekleaa

for all the Greek quotations and vorda

in the text. The section of the original

in~

87 (1967) hu been OllitW • .llao cut out Jau been •-

uaed for the ~roduction

repetition

theaia which bec&meu.

of -terial,

of !!!,

b1at there does unaToidably r-in

amounting in all to a fn pages.

to poat-1965 1cholarship ban been inaerW,

of the

A fn

reference■

but only vhen a particular

turn

in the argument could be directly retained :xrri

Appendix I, •inly

followed up. After

in order to redeq

to explain m,y interpretation

8011141 heaitation

avare that there is mch more to say about these do~ts,

publish further

to

essential

thoughts on them in due course,

make an

I and

but it nov seeu

interim argument available

h&II been up-dated to prOTide what purports

l£!

the promise made in

of the diadik&aia-docimenta.

for discussion.

I have

the thesis

p.

of instinct

resolution),

hope to

rather

(the needs for food, shelter,

but concerned itself

of the upper economic clu1.

to be Appendix II

to be a c0111plete, 1980-bued

list

than of real deliberation.

proper structural to me, fifteen

analysis

only rith

security,

certain

of Athenian society.

year• later,

officials

these changes are no more than a minor face-lift.

I do wish to emphasise that tbie book r-ina

unchanged in

■ ubstance

of Athenian society,

It baa inevitably

dated,

which I should now vrite.

One shortcoming is technical.

documents have stimlated

further

1200 strong, can and should be

and is

and 0Ter-empirici1t

I am veil

1117'sense

tundaaentally

ins-titutiona

mentioned in the Preface to

obligations

: to Dr D.M. Levis for further

and

Apin,

For better

society.

A third

or worse, the thesis

odating its approach within this

■ een

themes to pursue - whether in denoted by significant

1

,

10

aa

to replaca

to •cratta111U1' or •nonthat non--

only as supplements within a

shortcoming (if it is that)

is more

did not -1te heavy weather of acc-

or that theory of social description.

ita approach i• best seen as pre-theoretical, term■

for

1117'choice

Indeed,

of interpretative

of the values attached to behaviour

vords such u cbarh,

terms of modern-language concepts such

as

To them I add other

Connor for godfathering

the inclusion

and to our Departmental

secretary,

philoti.mia,

cult-pover

and

or

and

never

encouragement J to Professor li.R.

of this thesis

in the present aerie■ I

nominally Mrs Pat Sveetingham, for her profeasio-1

in the presentation

of thia typeacript

J.K.D.

I should nov alter

to emphasise more explicitly

sources of wealth should be

l£!•

(Braun 1970,

lav of 357 or to being named in

slave-owning by references

■ lave-owning,

agrarian

of a salient

to all the persona and

to membership of the

(See Al'F pp. xxvi-xxvii).

to 'industrial'

of obligation

index of vealth closely

of the nua.ncea in Chapter IV, 'The sources of veal tb

agricultural

basic.

presuppose ■,

panel of 1200 under Periandros'

agricultural'

it

way

content.

care and personal helpfulness

references

the interactions

seems

and argument can at.art from there,

If criticin

not the book

in the cavalry,

objective

uaed aa an

comparable, in the level of wealth it

some

cannot be seen u a

All the same, it still

that in its limited

Nov that new

1tudy of the Athenian cavalry

Kroll 1977), it baa become clear to me that service

the diadikaaia-document•

of the behaviour

and

I viah to repeat argument from its 1965 verlion.

trierarchic

and conflict

between 500 and 300 B.C. part

Even t<en together,

upecta

In that sense the thesis

does offer a coherent framevork for understanding of known military

I am aware too that

from vhat I vould now see u the fundamental vectors

did not start

of Athenian society

now

ui

the product

~

or in

property-power_

Y&8

Liverpool,

Auguet 1980

ver■ ion.

ABBREVIATIONS

abbreviated full

form : the list

bibliography.

system

1

The titles

to the editio

12• for Volume I and 'ii

.Agora XVII

of periodic&ls ■aTe

2'

1961

a.ccording to the

are abbrmated

a fw h&Te been expanded for clarity.

that

minor of Inacriptionea

Graecae are giTen in the form

for Volumes II-III.

XVII

BRADEEN,D,lf,The Athenian yora, monWHnt ■

funerary Andrewes

should not be taken to comprise a

which followa

of l'Annee philologique,

References

to in the text in an

here are those referred

The only vorka listed

(Princeton,

ANDRBIIES,A. 'Pbilochoroa

Inscription■•

The

1974)

on phratriea',

In~

81 (1961)

1-15.

Andrewes 1962

ANDREWS,A. 'The M,ytHene debate.•

In~

16 (1972),

64-85.

Andreves

1978

ANDRF.WES, A, 'The

(1978),

oppo ■ ition

1-8.

DAVIES, J.K, Athenian (01ford, Barron

1964

Bailey

1940

Propertied

Familiea 1 600-300 B,C,

1971)

BARR.ON, J.P. In~

In !lli§_ 98

to Periklea,'

propaganda of the Delian league',

'Religious

84 (1964),

BAILEY, B,L,

35 ff.

'The export

of Attic

black-figure

du droit

priv:

ware', In

.:!!!:?, 60 (1940), 60-70. Beauchet

1897

BMUCHE.'f,L. athlnienne

Beazley

1946

(Paris,

BEAZu,.,:,J,D, 30)(London,

Beloch 1885

L'hiatoire

BELOCII,K,J.

de la rlpublique

1897)

Potter

and painter

in ancient

Athen■ ~

1946) 'J)as

VolkTel'IDllgen Ton Attika'.

In .!!!!!:!!!!_

1

X

xi 20 (1885 ), 237-261.

14 (1953), 30-70,

Billeter

1898

BILLErER, G. Geschichte des Zinstuase■ (Leipzig,

Biscardi

1956

BISCARDI,A.

1898)

'Sul regime della comproprieta in diritto

xlii)',

In Studi in onore di Ugo Enrico Paoli (Pirenn,

attico•.

2nd ed.

1886

Bovra 1964 Braun 1970

Dov

DOIi, s.

1965

1886)

'The Athenian calendar of sacrifices

DOIi, S,

Dov 1968

'Der Dipylon-Brunnen B : Die Funde•. In,!!:! 1

'Six Athenian sacrificial

Eliot

CU:RC, M. Lea ~tegue■ athe'nien■ (Pari■ , 1893)

Ferguson 1911

FERGUSON, W,S. Hellenistic

Com1.or1971

CONNOR, W.R. The nev politician■ of fifth-century

Fine 1951

FINE, J.V,A,

'Die Bedeutung der b-lten

1963

DAUX,G.

Davies 1967

~

Davies 1975

,

Finley 1952

1949)

d'Attique

DAVIES,J.K.

Finley 1962 : un nouveau calendrier

(Erchia)•.

In

1!f!!.87 (1963), 603-634.

'Demo1thenee on liturgies:

¬e•.

In

Forna.ra

1971

Rffiev of Connor 1971 in~

'Athenian citizenabip:

the alternative,•.

47 (1975),

GeiHler

the deacent-group

and

1925

Gerhardt 1933

In£:! 73 (1977-78), 105-121.

Horoi : studies

!!f!!.92

in mortgage, real security,

21 (1962), 3-24, reprinted

society

(ed. M,I. Finley)

in the fourth century B,C.

1•

In Clase,

et Med,

Gernet 1955

in ancient Athens,

[1952])

'The Athenian demagogues•.

~

In Past and

in Studies in ancient

(London, 1974), 1-25.

FORNARA, c.w. The Athenian board of generals from 501 to

GEISSLER,P,

Einselschrift

16) (Wiesbaden, 1971)

Chronologie der altattischen

XXX)(Berlin,

Komlldie (Fhilol,

1925)

GERHARITr, P. Die attische phil.

and the Atheni&11 De Ste Croix 1953 DE STE CROIX,G,E.M. 'Demosthenes• TIMHMA

eisphora

FINU.'Y, M.I.

~-

DAVIES,J.K.

In

Athena (London, 1911)

PINLEY,M.I. Studies in land and credit

.1Q:!_(Hietoria,

374 ff, Danes 1977-78

calendars'.

The coastal demes of Attika (Toronto, 1962)

ELIOT, C,W,J,

500-200 B.C, (Nev Brunavick, N,J,,

87 (1967), 33-40.

DAVIES,J.K,

In.!!£!!. 89

(Athens, 1951)

74 (1959), 114-123.

In~

'La grande d;marchie

aacrificiel

Keramik fttr

Dedication■ from the Athenian akropolia

RAUBITSCHEK, A.E. (Cambridge, Ma.■1.

9

and land tenure in ancient Athens (Hesperia, Suppl, IX)

den griechiachen Handel•.

Daux

.Athena

1962

1971)

COOK,R.H.

In Historia

(1968), 170-186.

Clerc 1893

(Princeton,

: the

'The greater demarkhia of Erchia'.

85 (l 970~, 129-269 at 197 ff.

Cook 1959

(Festschrift

( 1965), 180-213,

BO\ffl.A,C.H. ~ (Oxford, 1964) BRAUN,K.

and institutions

(1960), 270-293.

BOCKH,A. Die Staatshawshaltung der Athener, I - II. 3rd ed. (Berlin,

of Phaenippua (Ps.-Dem.

chronology of Nikomakhos' second term'.

(Leipzig, 1887-1898) B&ckb

In Ancient society

DOW,s.

JJov 1960

Die attiache Beredaamkeit, I - III,2.

BLASS, F.

'The estate

Ehrenberg) (Oxford, 1966), 109-114.

1956), 105-143. Blau

De Ste Croix 1966 DE ~'TECROIX,G.E.M.

Metoikie im viertem Jhdt.

(di■ s.

K6nigsberg Pr,, 1933)

,, ,, dans la Grece ' . (n.. GEil.NET, L, Droit et societe ancienne c-.r i ••

1955)

(1954), 17-50, Gernet 1968

GERNET,L, Anthropologie de la Grece antique (Paris,

Glotz 1926

GLOTZ,G. Ancient Greece a.t vork (London and

~

PAGE,D,L.

GOllllle1933

GOl+!E, A.\/,

Greek literary

1968) Levis 1955

LEVIS, D,M, 'Notes on Attic inscriptions,

Lewis 1959

50 (1955), 1-36. 'Attic manumissiona', In Hesperia 28 (1959), LEVIS, D,M.

York, 1926)

Nev

pap;yri, l (London, 1942)

The population of Athens in the fifth

a.nd fourth

HA.HHISON, A.R.lrl, The la.v of Athens, I : the family a.nd property

(Oxford, 1968)

LEVIS, D.M. 'Cleisthenes

Levis 1963

Besnault 1885

Tie:i:.C. en TT.\o~-ro(, (Dill,

Hemelrijk 1925

IID-IEl.,RIJK, J.

llignett

HIGNF.l'T,C. A history

1952

(Oxford,

Abha.ndlungen zur griechischen

Ge11chichtscbreibung,

ed, H. Bloch (Leiden, 1956)

Jeffery

1948

JE.FFERI, L,H.

'The bouatrophedon sa.cra.l inscriptions

Jones 1957

JONES, A,H,M. Athenian democracy (Oxford, 1957)

Kahrstedt 1934

KAll.R.:,"Tfil1I', U,

1905-15

from

MBIGGS,R, 'A note on the population of Attica',

Meiggs 1964

in Athen, I

Meritt

MERITT! B,D,

1962

reprinted

KALINll.A, E. lJie pseudo-Xenophonthche 'A91~"~"'" Tio>-.:-1'€-1.t.

series

(Leipzig-Berlin,

95-132.

1913)

G,A, The a.rt of persuasion in Greece (London, 196-3)

Kl,;!00,;IJI,

Kraay and

KRAAY,

C.M., and E>IELEUS, V ,M,

silTer

coin.a (Ox!ord, 1962)

The

COlllpOsi tion

of

ML

Greek

Flneleus 1962 KR.UJ, C,M.

•Hoards,

••11change,

KROLL,J.H.

the origin of

MBbiu• 1968

1954

LE\IIS, D,M,

Greek historical

studies (Cincinnati,

.£!i 1962),

in Lectures in memoryof Louise Taft Semple1 first

: 1961-1965, ed, D,lrl. Bradeen (Cincinnati,

MEIGGS, R,,

and '""IS ,...,w, D•M• A selection

inscriptions

to the end of the fifth

1967),

of Greek historical

century B.C. (ox:tord,

'Note, on Attic inscriptioM,

2nd MOBIUS,H • ,!lD:!,ie!JOrname2!.!:!!!!!!n!!:t~e!.,!!d!er!:..Jgr~i:!e:!:.ch!!.i!.!s~c~h~e::,n..:Gra

ed,

'An archive of the Athenian cav,.lry'.

In

Pritchett I'.

In!!§!

-49

(Mflnchen, 1968)

J, Prosopographia. attica, KIRCHNER,

f!

Hesperia 46 (1977), 83-140, Lwia

In

1969) and

coin.age 1 • In !!!!§. 84 ( 196-4), 76-91.

Kroll 1977

.!!!:!

a.ttische Recht und RecbtsTerfahren (Leipzig, 1905-1915)

1934)

Kennady 1963

Kraay 1964

(MEIER, M,H.E., SCHOMANN, G.P., and) LIPSIUS, J.H •

78/14 (1964), 2-3.

Staa.tsgebiet und Stutsangeh6rig•

(Stuttgart-Berlin,

en Gr•ce ancienne, ed, M,I, Pinley

(Paris-The Ha.gue, 1973), 187-212. Lipsius

the Athenian Agora.', In Hesperia 17 (1948), 86 ff,

Ka.link& 1913

D.M. •The Athenian Rationes Centesilllarwa' • In

Ll."rllS,

Levis 1973

Problimes de la terre

iACOBI, P.

12

In Historia

Hesperia 37 (1968), 368-)80,

1952) Jacoby 1956

a.nil Attica.',

'DedicatiolUI of phia.la.i a.t Athens' • In

U.'\r'IS, D,M.

1925)

of the Athenian constitution

In

(1963), 22-40, Levis 1968

Utrecht,

in the stra.tegia.'.

:!!!§. 81 (1961), 118-123.

HAUVETTE-BJ,;SNAULT, A, Les atra.t~ge• a.th&nians (Pa.ris, 1885)

Hauvette-

•Double representation

LEVIS, D.M.

Levis 1961 Harrison 1968

In~

208-238,

B.C, (OlF~

\

lo>.cc..-r:-r.cc

described

in choosing a good investment,

is on the whole fair

(51) Pythodoros (50)

skill

cases where citizens

wealth by acting more), it

professional

of competence produced dynastic

two detectable

(i) that

own but their

they were dependent for their

houses which are traced

(see

in Athens mainly to a generally

to a man, scrupulous

on their

a continuity

lower Roman rates

to spare - was to be seen in the generally

as ha,often

Consequently,

but by

property

the kind of lending

there is no

that many if not most known bankers in fourth-century

Athens were, or began their

fuckh (1886, I 15/i) was on the

- that

and (ii)

xxxvi 11),

by the

on predesignated

and stability),

di·ff erences:

are two important

of Athenian bankers was not their

As with

financing,

functiona 1 di·rr erence bet"een "

However, there

classes:

debtors.

of scale

and (b} above and that by which Athenian bankers earned their

which seem to ha•re been normal

The consequence

of speculation

basic

in these examples merit

had been at least

towards money-lending

surprisingly

social

and comparison with the generally

in tracing liquidity.

rates

of debt-execution

were no less

insufficient

attitude

creditors

in the normal risks

development of techniques Finley

widespread

class

and four out of the nine identifiable

bottomry loans, partly

from the social

of speech-writers,

five or six of the 14 identifiable entry

do almost exclusively

· respect habl e save in

(52}

er.

n~Z§•X).

29f.

44gf~•IV

and 124g)

and St ephanos

Antidoros of Phaleron may be another

and so may Agyrrhios

Dern. xxxvi 29;

ii 21675, lines

(see l!!!,

of Kollytos

Alexis F 227, II 380 K;

( see

.!!!!.~~ •

Dern. :xl 52;

II) •

Dern. xix 215;

to suggest that bankers were alone in using their bribery

of influential

and Epigenes)

politicians

(such aa that of Demosthenes by Konon

or for the more subtle

and voluntary

generosity

the choregiai

and indirect

liturgies;

certainly

by Cbairephilos

of the various

the salt-fish

of ostentatious

20) or the donations

emergencies of the years round 3;0

seller

(~

;,:112~), Chrysippos the bottomry

and his brother, Eudemos of Plataia

financier

bribery

analogous in purpose were

of Lysias and Polemarchos (Lys. xii

made in eXploitation

gains for the direct

(ii 2 351), Herakleidea

of Salamis (ii 2 360), Dionysios (ii 2 363), Eucharistos

(ii 24oo), a man of

Miletoa (ii 2407), Mnemonand [-

(ii

(?) Miletos (ii

2

(ii

2

1628, lines

Philomelos

~),

(Hesperia 9 [1940] 332 no .39).

class.

separated least

It rather

body.

them across

Pbormion, and Aristolocbos)

(5) o~c~l

the liturgical

The fifth

and last

the social

It may be no accident

(Timodemos) of the seven known enfranchis entered

rather

who were able to amass a sufficient

in public goodwill to cany

(Pasion,

alone is known

looks as if it was mainly bankers,

them from the citizen

three

Yet they were probably more rarely

and his family immediately entered the

than other metic entrepreneurs, investment

2 408), Potamon of

886f) and Pandios of Herakleia

Of the men just named, Chairephilos

to have gained the citizenship, liturgical

of Herakleia

(ii 2423), the metic Meidon of Samoa

2 ii 1629 lines

366f:

analogous in effect.

-]ias

gulf that that at

and perhaps a fourth

ed bankers are known to have

class. source of wealth to be distinguished

monies, bribes

and booty:)

Since its

here consists

redistribution ones,

Dem. xxxiv 38-4o. generosity

Note the eXplicit

resources

rather

than the creation

of new

es analysed above, and there it stands apa rt f rom the four SOurc

is the further information

or were

difference

that

reliable

is almost impossible

note briefly

the politicians

liturgical

unprejudiced)

to come by.

and soldiers

condottieri

lli2~• and

!:1~)

or booty.

- Iphikrates,

quantified

All that can be done is to

who can be plausibly

suspected,

to have owed their

wealth, or

increment in it - and imprimis their class - to bribes

century

(i.e.

suspected at the time or later,

80

a substantial

membership of the three of th e fourth-

Of soldiers,

Chares, and Charidemos (see

- come into this

category,

l!J!. '{J,37;

though not, apparently,

Chabrias, (54) and the !Corinthian War produced a crop of them: point

(l!J!.~ 2~),

to Ergokles

Thrasyboulos their

of Steiria

fifth-century

respect,

(~

Aristophanes :i;31~).

predecessors

was 'in order that we might get a good reputation

amongyou' cfv, Ti,1.,f'i7,,,_-;.., Elisisi..,~v }(

40).

th

t

is

evidence that one can quote.

political

as the Old Oligarch observed,

much political

business

transacted

Xl>')\'f-r...,v

; [xen~ Ath.Pol. iii 3),

'by money' (

~TI"~

in Athena was being

and the evidence does not allow us to suppose that the practice We know only one politician's

the succeeding century.

during

profits

in any decail,

pattern

is clear,

Demosthenes

I

diminished financial

(•=- ~~oz XXI) but even so the

-=-~6~~-•

ranging from barrister's

•

fees and speech-writing

essence is obviously the

admission that their

tha

It is hardly to be supposed

positive

and

C.!!!~95!) •

career of Themistokles (/!E!._~~) (55) Al dy by the 420 1 s, from Kleon onwards. rea

the profitable

was copied by many others

and Nikopheinos

we can

were notably more abstemious in

but there is no certain

Of politicians,

(54}

(53)

of existing

His father

is now attested

of course the possibility the Platonic (55) See~

connections

8674;

cf. Aristophon,

as trierarch

(see~

that he was subsidized

.1!iQ86};

th

there is

by his son, but

of Chabrias suggest a good social

position.

and see below for Hagnon. For the fourth century Kallistratos,

rough

and Demades, to name only three.

protection-money

of the kind which Kriton paid to Archedemos (Xen.~.

Radical politics

ii 9, 4-8) to straight

bribes,

opinion

75/11 (1961) 144, quoting Hyp. v (Dem.} 24-25).

(see Brunt,~

and was tolerated

up to a point by public

There remain some minor sources such as tax-farming a travelling

merchant or retail-trader,

or activity

but the number of men whose

presence in the liturgical

class

these activities

Andokides (IV)!!-.!!, naval trading

is tiny:

of 415 (see,!!!~~), are virtually tentative

can be traced

and Chairephilos

the only examples.

conclusion

!!-.!!,salt-fish

selling

that on the whole it was difficult margins,

to give him major financ4°l ~-

and late

fifth-century

or to operate

status. ~

In the chapters certain

facets

the class~ individual various

Consequently,

1of

or in any permutation

this is the most = nppropr4nte ~Q

the impact of these

upper reaches of Athenian society,

allegedly

status,

to bitter

analysis

indication

(Nikias),

social

and

the sources

resentment of a

remains by far the best

(56)

statues

( "'-1')

I

>

and he

of men new wealthy and

and Dionysiosish ~

,

( ~o>,.~

barber-boils'

I

l

(58)

I

Vt.0'11AOV"Torrov'\I""', oe1c..xpt.iv~ Av.:1.po~, A10l/vCJ01 , (1"up""""1~1y..1d..l.

Kimon•s weapon against

of a kind startlingly

jury to infer

not

argument in the Assembly (Dern. xxi 153) but

partly

for other

1

Now, not once

the choregiai,

deployed

gives

and eloquence or to compete with

favour by choregiai

outlays

amount when it was confiscated

at the

of twice the amount from

56-57). Even as late as ea. 350 Meidias was apparently his liturgies

but to

persons who spend money in advance

but to obtain

seek office,

property

the Left in the =O's

Plutarch

•used his wealth as a political

and contemporaries

a generation

of Lakiadai

as

the same man cannot both spend a great

compulsion and covet some of the public

risk.

There is a

me if I mention what he has spent on

I do this,

bring in as evidence the fact that

gravest

influence.

388 or 387, when the speaker of Lysias xix defended

by saying,

deal without

political

arete

popular

such lavish

I.C

century.

of the mechanism involved when he describes

to popular wishes,

and other

Similarly,

both of

in the fifth

to equal Perikles•

his predecessors

In terms of this

than the primary basis

formulation

base •••• and tried

spending and carried

was of much wider scope and

importance than a simple claim for a jury's was nothing

an explicit

in the

terms of a form of spending

than liturgical

at an international

older mechanism~

survival,

The case is very different

it was

it lies

body (Dem. xlv 78: ~ ~67~, XII).

ground, with the Athenian citizen

The main value of the well-documented

than it really it at the

'appeal

(thus Perrin),

to ~• since

12

l

Olympic Games of 416 , when I sent into the lists

L.f

a number never before prize,

entered

by any private

and was second and fourth,

person,

and took care to have everything

in a style

worthy of me victory.

honourable

and they cannot be made without

leaving

impression

of power.

that

home in providing citizens,

And this

cost benefits

that he whc prides

himself

The logic

of

nowhere stated

I

more clearly

than here.

was responsible ment of costly

for bringing display

recognition.

It is true,

Thucydides was.writing, to challenge

of course,

that

Alkibiades

remark that by "Kroisos" 'extremely

It is,

and this

illustrious'

was speaking, right accounts

but we are entitled

(i.e.,

victory

of 592) that

'in Pindar's

-worth is tried

ordeal this

difference,

the point

(I),

display:

and it is not until

was not so much athletic

provide

he has passed this

this:

after

only Athenian

prowess as magnificence

the kind of notice exactly

viable

Kylon and Phrynon in the later

prominence was Kallias

Not only in such a context

Teisias

position.

seventh century,

the

prowess is known to have been followed by

such as to encourage others

for the

honours (Bowra

claim for political

given to him,attempted

scale.

and

what we know of the men in Athenian public life

for whomathletic

even secondary public

Yet there

even by poorer men, but only the latter

the base of a really

at any rate,

it

as for Alkmeon (I} and Kallias

for AJ.kibiades,

could

on a very large

to infer

that

It is,

a means by which a

prai.se and fame' (Bowra 1964, 178).

184-9) and was attainable

and

whose exploits

system the Games provide

1964,

not

aristocracy

the former might well carry with it personal

confirms

122, 1).

of the emotional background of epinician

in action,

that he deserves

was open

son of Didymias

(!'.! 7823),

and . (14) ostracism, · was

or successful to emulate him.

was wealth necessary,

The only surviving

of Kephale claimed from Alkibiades

figures

it was necessary

- the 5 or 8 tal.

in compensation

which

for the state

that

the Alkmeonidai became It is

in noting how it was from his· (I)

(13) Aglaos (?) of Athens may be a case in point:

'became visibly

known to

cf. Bacch. X (ix)

47f.

from his enrichment

) (Hdt. vi 125, 1).

at Olympia and Delphi that Kallias

an extension

common to the international

man's

is

I

would have been accepted

in effect,

( K;p.,-.._

also the background of his interpolator victories

or other

for example, the background of Herodotos'

it was from Alkmeon (I) and his chariot

had a prescriptive

prescriptive

(see below), tone,

deploy-

in the form of political

there had been a time when such a formulation question.

a man who became

q:>«ve,foC.. ) because he

(

furthermore,

Negatively,

is

I

at a time when this

and to competition

serious

logic,

competitions

£rem his city

somewhat combative and defensive

without

to be on an

glory to his city by the successful

in international

to ask for a return

nor is it unfair

) as a power-base

By that

( Alilft'l"i'~c:, ) or 'visible'

'illustrious'

as in the

R. Crawley) ).

t\urr~"'"t

(

at

envied by my fellow

should refuse

(Thuc. vi 16, 1-4 (tr. 1

I may have exhibited

but his city:

e:»..,v.c: lT.t-J'l'•c: 6.1«,N'!f-•~y1c..-'l'!l(.I. ) ( (!!at -1Vi

celebrated:

behind them an

I

I

poetry,

when a man at his own

folly,

only,

else

as

has an air of strength

on his position

expenditure

such displays

is naturally

is no useless

not himself

e_gpality with the rest'

right

or otherwise,

but in the eyes of foreigners

other instance. private

Custom regards

Again, any splendour

choruses

and won the first

( c;q.,.ivE.p..:,e'\.

the Greeks by his enormous expenditures'

all

seven chariots,

(14)

[And.:

iv 32;

E. Vanderpool,

A.R. Hands, _:ll!§.79 (1959) 78.

Hesperia

Suppl. VIII

(1949) 409-410;

loo

101

chariot

of Argos in 416( 15 ) - and the terminology

other sources

(see !if!_ p. xxv note 7) all I

( A.f'lTPO'f'}C

for 'illustriousness•

imply that

the group of families

far smaller.

the 44 certain

we find that

horse

what was needed

liturgical

class.

able and ready to undertake

It is not likely

and

to be a serious

known entries

by Athenians

Correspon-

the expense was

distortion

of the facts of four-

chariots

that

of these

families family)

spending

was politically

by estimating

it is true, recorded:

74, 3;

This implies, prices

though to pay only 3CO!!£• was being mean (Isaias recorded

Athenian prices

~

21-23;

Still,

the costs of selecting

Lys. viii

for the discrepancy.

and in the third

and of training

by revealing

adequately

(Ar.

in the fourth

century

1977) confirms this

that

the maximumpossible 1977, 88f, and

which supplanted

for

(Braun 1970)

range of prices,

times,

entries

lists,

of 'expenditure'

a fairly

chariots.

picture

for estimating

emerges.

the prevalence

distribution

of the known

To an argument founded on such

its base is too narrow to be other than

but the evidence contains

given to the trierarchy

as a political of the power base(s)

consistent

of the chronological

that

form of

the advent of the power base(s)

means available

consists

and the

ways of approach,

examining the decline

by tracing

Fortunately,

it may be objected

misleading, that

(ii)by

of four- and two-horse

evidence

There are three

prevalence

and (iii) it.

Philaidai/Kimonids,

when and for how long this

important.

The obly quantitative of 'expenditure'

account

evaluations

(Kroll

(Kroll

i£•

which preceded it,

v.43),

to have been normal.

[ The new evidence of price

century

was 1200 ~-

are both 1200

10), which is likely

the horses of the Athenian cavalry

evaluation

J~f~·

a cost per horse much more than the individual

the two other

in particular

see M!_

""°""'V ' ' -r,_v"1°o.JV E-K¥c,).."ly '\

)

11

1

(Ar

admission 0

E2!•

1275 b :,6) should not be allowed (as by Wade-Gery 19,58, 148f.) yield the inference directions note 135.

that

are identical.

the two acts, For Oliver's

of totally analysis

to

opposed political see Lewis 1963, 37

;_ . X½i,a;;+, •

1""""" I

los for be able to determine whether local

influence

mainly the same thing as the local

cohesion

The basic graphical

existence

particularly

in areas

of old and important

are the Marathonian Tetrapolis,

Tetrakomoi,

and possibly

invalidated

by the argument of Eliot Antiochis,

seen to be natural trittyes

Pallene

and Thorikos.

entities'.

none of the anomalies.

natural,

whether they coincided

with the social

Moreover, in the light

of post-1962

list

the case of Erebia,

Paiania

and Kytherros

Pentelikon

in the inland trittys

'Greater

instead

boundaries

still

remains

formed the inland

of Aigeis.

that

trittys

Paradoxically,

the evidence

there

should have been anomalies

not;

Phlya,

first

case,

at Phrearrhioi

the cult-centre

of cults

in the Kleisthenic

in 508 CM!, ~g~ and

2&~), and

the important

families

2452, line

in Alopeke (M!,

.

53), and Kydathenaion.

of the gene were scattered

Like other gene such as the Brytidai

influence,

(33)

throughout

which show a similar

to exercise

power was not such that

a cohesive

it could be effectively

by means of simple gerrymandering.

national

gentilician

and their

form of cult-power cults

is that

exercised

through the more or

of widespread appeal and importance but under

control.

Again, the evidence is largely

indirect,

times to neutralize

The chronologically

consisting

or to circumscribe

primary method was also the more indirect,

of new festivals,

to serve as alternative

focuses

2 (29) See ii 3510 and Kirchner's

trittys-system

but are In the

itself

See ii 23609and Kirchner's

(31) Hesperia

extra urbem,

at Phlya

2

(ii

C[Dem.] lix 61), they were in no position

less

by considering

of the genos Lykomidai, and Eleusis.

the two branches of the genos were living

families

. Secondly, when 380.
hler is the only possible

recorded

body, the members

schedule were effected and that

set of

of names or of property-

schedule had a fixed number of members;

formed a publicly

the legal

stringent

the decisions

concern changes in the membership of a schedule units;

had a

in thinking

It is extremely improbable

number of members.

These four considerations specifications.

if the primary list

was right

is unknown.

them clearly

and (ii)

that in the speeches

from the 1200.

open, but should at least

This still

exclude K.F. Hermann's

( 14)

suggestion

that the Thousand were cavalrymen,/while

permitting

ence that at the date at which the speeches were delivered

the infer-

meaning of the

I think not. phrase • the Thousand• would be well enough known to the jury for no further

There does exist of Athenian life

a notice pertaining

to a schedule which formed part

during parts of the working lifetimes

comment to be required

by the speaker.

teased out of 1-Carpokration' s note. Isaios,

but of which nothing is heard either

earlier

or later.

On the other hand we have in the ~-

This is dikasia- document s a Serl.·es of decisions

the body called Harpokration

s.v.

the Thousand, our sole information

x:)..,o~ 6,t.tK6 the number of changes recorded

uments, ranging

my

trierarchy

of September 362, Apollodoros

requires

that

the logically

- which were heavy enough -, but I also paid in proeisphora,

including on this

list

both members of the deme and people from other

demes who owned property

in the deme:

Though there

is little

point

I could not perform two liturgies, to deposit

either

the proeisphora.

the advances I had made on their

in speculating

behalf,

10 in ii 21932,

trierarch,

and on my return

or from changes of ownership

erties

as there

the sources

by others,

or civic

status

speculative

11

why there

Nevertheless

with the supposition

first

that

consistent

into which the Thousand would fit

and what follows

(15) ii 1930, lines However, if,

appears very probable, then there

were many more entries

briefly

sketched

by Lipsius

1905-15, 591 note 7,

a good deal more than the mere predicament

of Apollodoros.

was a liturgy

and that

tw liturgies

concurrently,

was correct

there

in his statements

was a legal

prohibition

that

the proeisphora

on the performance of

but deliberately

misleading

in his statement

of September 362 was a proeisphora.

I suggest also that

and which would also be the procedure of 362 was deliberately

conjectured(~

the lost

answer to

of approach help to indicate

3-26, might be a complete annual list, as Stschoukareff

An

has only

with the diadikasia-documents.

2

(:s3ckh 1886, I 620).

the

that the procedure a context

vi 60, and why a special

(which I suspect that Apollodoros

two lines

is no word about the

in

had a thousand members.

value.

and only the insolvent

in the case of prop-

are on the diadikasia-documents

cannot be proved,

which could have

or prop-

it illuminates

This identification

you as

how many changes per

this is available:

primary list

from others

because I was away serving

I found that

procedure seems to have been adoptea the case of citizens,

are in any case minima) are consistent

I was

was of considerable

of 1000 citizens

- whether from death or from loss of capital

- such figures

and that

or legally,

I was unable to recover

symmories or about the Three Hundred of Isaias erties

Waiving my

as trierarch

physically

in

per year on these doc-

primary list

to have been in a list

was unconcealed.

claim to exemption on the ground that I was acting

The problem has been to explain year there are likely

my name was put on the list

each of three demes, because my property

sources were left• size.

says:

did I have to pay the expenses at that time for

indemnified me had been taken first column II,

passage of (!,emostheneiiJ

complete sur-

2 31 in ii 1929 down to at least

from at least

of the expedition

''Not only, gentlemen,

the first Equally,

is the well-known and much-discussed

with 12 entries.

12 (1887) 134) and as

ii 2 1931 was a second copy of ii 21930, for the year.

differentiated

proeisphora,

specifically

in order that

simultaneous

liturgies

could not operate.

(we may fairly

say) that

the proeisphora, Consequently

that

there

the group of persons

from the "normal"

the exemption rule against For the probability

if any known group of persons

group would have been Isaios'

is high

was concerned in

Three Hundred.

will have been a very high degree of identity who were on the list

two

of trierarchs,

between

and the group of

persons who were concerned

all or nearly

all

the members of the other.

for the levying

of eisphora,

were the equipping

and despatch

voted in September

:62 {De Ste

exemption rules

members of the Three

against

(i)

of navel expeditions

two sumultaneous

elapsed after

a previous

given sufficient

proportion

ill-will, ~

as trierarchs

one (Dem. xx 8;

to contract

as proeispherontes.

presumably had priority naval expedition,

such as that

and the apostoleis

themselves

that

Since moreover service the incidence

to a useless

whether

as trierarch of any major

which I think was circumvented

cedure of ;l,2.

Its

author

for the sending-out and the provision

was surely

of the expedition that

that

on the same occasion

is in itself

when one finds

loop-holes

said by Apollodoros,

support of the law of Leptines

so notable

a departure

from

machinery being used that

It is worth noting two other

is known to have supported

against

out through

levy of money the conclusion

in the financial

pro-

That he was responsible

the identical

both is unavoidable.

on which Aristophon

off to sea.

by the special

is explicitly

for the concomitant

the same man engineered

aimed at blocking

a fleet

the levy of man-power should be carried

the demarchs and the Councillors the usual procedure

Aristophon.

50

either

loosely

or proposed meaSLU'es

administration,~-

at the same time he

which was selected

his

procedure

vi must be the case), by Apollodoros

and honestly,

by local

as a proeisphora.

He can have done

Aristophon,

in

the crippling

362, and

Aristophon

reform.

in politics

of his Boiotian

lack of constructive

circumventing

administration

One may be permitted

to guess why.

than 70 years of age in

so little

in the ~70's that

economic thinking

that Aristophon

should bear in mind the possibility

1

362.

He

but in in the

to suppose him

and expansionist

policies

and Kallistratos.

The

shown on this occasion

s concepts of economic

long before

;l,2 to suggest that we

that Aristophon

exemptions and his decree to secure Dem. xxiv 11.

trace

it is fair

for us by Aristoteles

had been crystallized

(16) Dem. xx 146;

as

it on one partic-

ever since 403 and perhaps before,

long-range

combines with the likelihood

deserves much

of the proeisphora-system

to have been out of sympathy with the reforming of the period as represented

which he did

for hi& part,

sympathies he has left

record of Athenian politics

the jury

did not, so far as we know, amount to

cannot have been much less

had been active spite

for successfully

or - as I

to iniluence

for his philotimia

defect

but his procedure

a permanent legislative

to deceive,

and with intent

not really

for realizing

before ;l,2

procedure could at

credit

deserve to receive.

existed

Given

Aristophon's

in his favour by giving himself

credit

already

with no intent

think more probable - deliberately

ular occasion:

at the very moment when it was wanted most.

situation

some kind of proeispherontic

constituted

no ready money of any consequence or

of getting

the symmories (De Ste Croix 1953, 60) he

of de facto proeispherontes

a pinch be described

rump, from which the generals

hamstrung the process

a list

(which from Isaias

38) would have

out of service

obtained

By by-passing

did two

men whose knowledge cannot but have been exact and up to date.

against

of September ;l,2, would tend to reduce the

could extract

Such a situation It was this

of the two

at once.

very cleverly

thereby rendered the exemption laws ineffective;

trierarchs-cum-proeispherontes,

in any case of conflict,

Three Hundred proeiapherontes

usefulness,

of potential

the levy of money, as of men,

such as the one

and (ii}

vii

in his decree that

things

one or two years had

Isaios

By enjoining

also of proeisphora,

liturgies

until

( 16)

354.

of public moneys, both in

should be done through the demes, Aristophon

the principal

Croix 1953, 50), the operation

to perform a second liturgy

allowed a very large

Hence, since

.

the surrender

must have included

and therefore

being obliged

occasions

(=

whichever of the two groups was the larger

Hundred):

occasions

in the proeisphora

For the date,

in ;l,2 was authorizing

2 schi:.fer 1 100, note 1.

a temi;orary return which predated

to un older

Bystem of eisrhora-collect

11

system

1.

2 The best evidence is i 76 (~ ML 73), the decree concerning the

the cymmories. first-fruits

B.

rle

know from Philochoroa in ;70/7.

were established same year the~ that

Polybios•

(FGH 321:lF41)

are connected,

is Philochoroa,

assessment

history:

of the~

property-values

the moat likely

in that

the factual

in terms of which the properties

could be equitably

distributed

ere was a re-assessment

among the new symmories.

of taxable

property,

( fl1&..58 8 , lines

16-17;

was new about the assessment into eXistence; Eisphora that,

Isokr.

of 378/7;

xvii

on most

to the eisphora So, in 378/7 (a) was a new

on property.

on the local

level

expect

was in land or physical

did perform local

the mach1"nery for the co ll ection of eisphora and th e obv1ous · peop l e to do this administrative job are the demarchs. financial

of the central

In both these

The evidence that

administration

government is quite

the demarchs

during the fifth clear

century

the demarchs are to select the

for a public

level,

eisphora.

datable

levy to raise

(Merit

money for something to do

on the deme register.

cases demarchs are acting as financial in a way exactly

administration

analogous to that which we would have administrative

officers

for the

In the absence of any other known machinery, the probability

that demarchs were the local

collectors

very high.< 17> This principle even go right naukraries

back into the sixth

of naukraries

ly naval, purposes;

of eisphora-levies

of the local

to prove anything,but

functions

century.

in some sense;.

of eisphora may

One is reluctant

tradition

and there

is Aristotle's

that the demarchs took over the functions Since,

naukraroi

(~.

functions

were 'aimed at the eisphorai

I

I

«"Tf:c"Ta.Vl'""'"'-) IT"poc,Tt viii

(Ath.Pol.

3,)

">

\

1",ie,

/

according

were local

explicit

previously

particular-

(Hesychios s.v.

statement

perfonned by the

to Aristotle,

these

and at the expenses which arise' \

\

\ •

I

\

€:;,C.llflliiijiif'?IM,

322/1 (!! 1264)

Antiphiloa,

14

Ch&riu son of Eut.bykr&tea of Kyd&thenaion,

322/1 (!! 15).46)

(I} aon of Hiaidroa

322/1?

Thymoch&rea

(I} of Spbettos,

(I} son ot Fhanoatratoe

Aristoteles,

315/4 (!! 2054)

Nikon, 306/5

(f!

Damochares (II) Aria-tylloa,

11

306/5 (ii

1487, line

11

1487, line

[ -

84}

(I} of Leukonoion,

century

1487, line

(III} of Euonymon?), 302/1

third

See also the hipp&rchB'

centuz:, list

of the fourth

-

otherwise

(I) son of FbainippoB

(first

at Olympia, 592)

(firat

(I)

the generals

from the klerouchies

5

Alkmeonides (I} son of Alkmeon (I) (first

6,[7),8

(III)

son of Kypselos

271-278 for 329/8 are not included

in thia

list.)

on ii"

1672, linea

II,

[7)

Kimon (I) 110n of Steaagoraa

Peiaistratoa

Alkibiades

-

at Olympia, 548?) :

10 11-15

Kalliu

1

(I)

(first

(I)

BODot Hippokrates

at Pan&tbenaia, 546)

(first

at Pythia,

(II} son of Bipponikos

1!!%

at Olympia, 536, [532), and

(first

525-500) :

at Olympia 532 by

!!!. ~,

V.

(I) of Alopeke (allegedly

(first

lleBcendant• of Alkllleon (I)

I!!%~•

at Pythia before 486) :

(fir.at

first

at

V,)

!!%~,

at Iathmia five times 1,,efore

486

II,

)

1

9688, II.

16

Megaklea (III)

17-19

Pronapea aon of Pronapidea

son of Hippokrates

iqsiB (firat

(I) of Alopeke (first

-• (fi-t.. of 1'r8JJi .....

l'lnatheD&ia in the aid fifth 20-22

~,VI.

!iJ!!.~•

Descendant of Alkmeon (I)

~

!!!

VII,

(II)

transference) 9

(first

III,

528) : _£! ~•

(

liBted

:!f! ~•

at P,ytbia in 570 or 566,

Olympia 500, 496, and 492 or 496 1 492, and 484) (Note that

All entries are for

stated,

Miltiades

C

.!l!!!...!!!:!.•

unless

4

B : 4386

(BeBperia 43 (1974) 312 no. 1).

Kalliu

e,

C

82)

contests

is obserTed as much as pouibla,

second at Olympia 564) : ,!E! 7826, II.

C

Bon of om]achos of IAmptra, second halt or early

2,3

306/5 @ 3716) B: ~

306/5 (!! 2128)

order

Alkmeon (I} son of Meg&kles (I)

C

11387 = 11388?) -

the four-horse

C

83)

C

Olympiodoroa ((II} aon of Diotimos

(f!

-

Chronological

C

son of Laehn

8

Games

at Ptmhellenic

A I 3455

C

1109'5}

s[ - - ], 306/5 (ii

contest■

and tvo-borae

in the four-

==-

306/5 (!! 6314}

Hegesiu,

Athenian competitor•

A : 3249

318/7 (!! 3455)

of Pbaleron,

306/5 (ii

of Dekeleia,

-

B: 11413

Demetrios

[ - - ]os of Teithru,

APPIOOJIX III

7412) A:~

318/7 (!! 322}

Aischetades,

[ - ]1,des

(f!

ns . ULJ!iiiLi

A: 15).46

of Hagnous, 319/8 (!! 3249}

Derk;yloa son of Autokles

4?

C

r

century)

(I) of Aixone and llelllokrate• at Nemea, IBthaia,

and Pythia

s

at P,ytbia, 4S6)i

at Nemea, Istbmia, and

!:!!. ~•

(I) BODof rqais (I) ot iliOlll in the fifth

tUJY cen '

Olli

or two

Jil.L Ji

169

viciorie ■

of these

23

Hepkle ■ (V)

being in the tvo-horse

eon of Hega.ltles (III)

conteet)

W•

: !!;!

of Alopeke (first

INDEX I

at Olympia, 436):

INDEX LOC0RUM

n.

!!:?~,

.llldbi&dee (III) Pu:l&thenaia, &nd fourth,

son of Kleiniu

418?, first &nd four

(II)

of Skubonidai

at

(first

at N... a a.od Pytbia by 416, firat,

other

entries

Inscriptions

second,

at Olympia, 416) 1 !!;! ~•

IX,

AE 1955, 18o : 151

13 and 32

~XY

[33]

Teiaiu

(II)

aon of Teiat-choa

of Kepbale (aubTerted

~XVII

at Olympia, 416) 1 !!;! 13479. Lo ■ t N&me 1

36

(first

at Iethllia

Ch&bri&a son of Ktesippoe

ud

before

N-&

(I) ot Aixon• (first

[ - - ]loa eon ot Promachos of Eleueia [Eleusinia?),

-

both in the two-horse

(firat

W•

!!!a!.87

&t Pytbia,

374) :

Dedications from the Athenian Akropolis

at 1'11.n&then&i& &Dd

conte ■t, before

ea, 350) 1 !!;!

12245,

39

40

Timokratee

(II)

10n of Antiphon of Krioa (first

two-horee

conteet,

in the two-horse

at Olympia in the

conte ■ t,

at Olympia, perhaps

a.nd Herm&ia. ea, 320) :

Lost Name21 (first fourth century)

at Iliei&

: !!;! ~•

46 no. 44 : 44n8 146 no,135 : 154 152 no.136 : 110 213 no.178: 44n8 255 no.225: 44n8 232 no. 197 : 44n8 318 no.296 : 110 350 f nos 326- 328 110n35 359 no.329: 111n41 364 no,330 : 31

127 no. 27: 156 no,132:

63n49 63n49

Hesperia, 5( 1936) 393 no. 10; 52n26 ,54

3287) : !!;! ~•

41,42,43 Demetrios (I) son of Pbanostr&toa of H:i&leron (first Delia,

(1963) 603 ff : 112n45

M.L. Finley, Studies in Land and Credit

3527) 1,!!;! 13772,

Dem&des (I) son ot Demeu (I) of Pai&nia (tint

23: 151 24 : 165

390) 1 !!;!

!!!_ 15086.

37,38

5

entry

at Pan&thenaia,

M:J!. ~• in the two-horse conteet,

end of the

6(1937)462 no. 10 : 155 7(1938)1 no. 1 lines 76 and 79 : 1o6 277 no. 12 : 133nl 3o6no. 29: 133nl 8(1939)3 no. 2: 153 9(1940)57 no. 6: 153 59 no. 8 : 152, 165 332 no. 39 : 66 10(1941) 14 no. 1, lines 17-18 1o6 12(1943) 28 no. 6: 58n37 34 no. 7 : 57n36 15(1946)160 no. 17: 133nl 176 no. 24 : 154 22(1953)50-51 : 155 249, Stele II: 48n19, 53n29, 54n30, 59n38, 59n40 263, Stele IV: 51n25, 59n41 268, Stele VI : 53=27-29, 54n30, 59n39 I 59n42 279, Stele VII: 59n44

286, Stele VIII : 59n45 287, Stele X : 50, 53n27, 53n29, 59nn42-43 291 Stele XI: 47 26(1957)52 no,9: 112n45 2o6 no. 52 : 152 216 no .66 : 109n31 30(1961)293 no.1 : 112n45 33(1964)21 no. 5: 157 43(1974)312 no.1 : 155, 166 313 no. 2 ;. 155 49(198o)89 ff.: 155,165 Hesperia,

Suppl. 8 (1949)274: 165

InscriptiollCI: Graecae IV 29-32 and 33-38 : 57n35 i'2 3-4 : 111 5 : 111 56 : 116n51 63: 116n51 75 : 116n51 78-79: 111n42, 147 84 : 112 125 : 116n51 129 : 112n44 134-137 : 153 296 : 158 310 : 138 313 : 57036 318 : 57036 358 : 116n51 359 : 116n51 367 : 158 376 : 58n37 393 : 31 467 : 31 816 : 154 840 : 112 842 : 112 950 : 153 2 ii 1-2 : 116n51 43: 56n33 47: 112n45 102, 104 : 154 140 : 112n45 204: 112n45

1

170

171 Inscriptions

Graecae (cont.)

56 58 73

351,360,363: 66 379 : 1.51+ 4oo, 407-409, 423: 66 1155 : 152 1230 : 109 1235 : 109n32 1237 105 f. 1241 : 138 1358 : 112n45 1487 : 166 1553-1578: 48n21, 139n12 1576a : 153 1580 : 139n11 1581 : 88n3 1594-1603: 139n11 1622: 22n16, 22n17, 89n5 1628: 66, 89n5, 91n8, 165 1629: 24n21, 66 1675: 65n52 1928-1932: 24n22, 133ff. 1934 : 109 1951 22n15 1955 : 155 2318: 32, 110n37 2342 : 109n;() 2345, lines 77 and 79 106 2 1+52 : 109 2498-9: 138 2971 155 ;()22: 26 3101 : 26 31;() : 153 3135-6: 153 3138 101n17 3209 155 3469 109 3510 109n29 3512 109n35 ;:609 109n;() 4960 112n43 5222 153 _51+29 165 5521 162

71

84

Local Scripts

Meiggs-Lewis 14: 49n22 33: 157 44 : 111 n41 49 : 56, 57n35

77 no.21

Literary

~

III 115: 154 116 : 152 117 : 57n35 X 10, 24, 28, 59 : 111 64 : 112, 116n51 211 : 57n36 ;()4: 58n37 XII 2-3 : 111 XIV 3 : 111 XVII 5 : 112 XXI 37 : 111

Sokolowski 1962, 13 no. 3 45 no. 18 : 1 2 Tod, GJIT 100: 54n;() 123: 56n33, 78

111

Alexis F 227:

Apollodoros FGll'.244 F 113 : 110n38 Aristeides

65n52

Anaxandrides F 41 : 164 Anaximenes 2 (p.22 lines 5 f ed. Hammer)83n10 Andokides, i 17: 53 i 1o6 : 118 i 115-116 : 1-13 i 132: 25 i 146: 42n6, 124n58 i 149: 93n9 iii 9 : 16n4 iii 15: 55n32, 63, 90 iv 32 : 99n14 iv 33: 101n16 iv 42: 93n9 Androtion FGH324 F ;(): F 35 : 157 An. Bekk. I 275.20:

109n31

69n86

Anon. Vit.Soph. i : 41n4 Antiphanes F 169: 64n50 F 204 : 83n10 Antiphon, DK 87

(Bo)B_51+ 39n3

Schol. 3.281 Dind.:

163

Aristophanes, Achamians 545 16n4 569 : 151 614 f.:62n47 1073 ff.: 151 Birds 799: 122n56, 152, 1_51+ "-1l22-823 with schol. 90n7 1405-1407 : 161 1442-3 : 1.51+ Clouds 18 f: 62 ~23 :100n15 37 with schol.: 147n17 739 f : 62 1156 : 62 1285 f.: 62 Ekkl. 197-198: 90 --253 schoh: 42 601-3: 88n3 823-825 : 137 Fro~ 362 schol.: 151 79 schol.: 162 681 schol.: 42n6 725-733: 128n62 1o65-6 : 88n3 Knights 44: 70n6o 129 with schol.: 42n7 225 : 36, 122n56 242-3 with schol.: 1_51+ 739-740 schol.: 42n5 912 ff: 24n21 1001 : 51n25 Ploutos 179: 84n12 84n12 1086 : 69n59 Thesm. 273: 51n25 ---iJo5 schol.:42n6 842 ff. : 64n50 Wasps 1268 f : 90n7 1:::09: 69n59 F115: 51n25 F696: 42n7

-m-:

147

Anon. Iambl. DK89 82 2,8 31

Texts Antiphon Tetr. ib 12: 93 ic 8: 95 F61 Blass : 56n34

Aischines, i 27: 125n58 i 43: 51n25 i 95 ff : 84 i 97-101: 25,43,54,72 i 101f: 43, 89n4 i 103 : 77n7 i 105 : 72 i 107 : 63 i 124-25: 51n25 ii 31 schol. : 161 ii 75: 16n4 ii 76 : 42n6 ii 147: 1o6 ii 169-170 : 152 iii 7 : 125 iii 171 : 71n61

Paton nnd Hicks, Inscriptions of Co:, "--:;to no. 148: 57n35

Insc>,r-iPJ:r,. von Priene 5 : 165

L.~. Jeffery,

15/:S 146 112, 147 16o 161

.1

11-111111

.. LJlJlL,J.JJUtl)L! 1. Ji

172

173

Aristotle, Ath.Pol. vii 3 :~ viii 1 : 36 viii 3 : 147 X 1-2 : 39

ii

2

4o

xi1:39 xii 5 : 107 xiii 5 : 107n28

xvii 4 : 118 xxi 2-4 : 107 xxi 5 : 147 xxii 2 : 110 xxvii 3 : 97 xxviii 3: 42n6, 117 xlvii 1 : 4, 36 lxi 1 : 24n21, 135 ,!2: 1123a19f: 84 E£!. 1266b17: 4o 1275b34-37: 107 and 107n28 1282a31-32: 123 1309a15 f: 26, 83n10, 95n10 1313b24-25: 47n16 .ll.!!tl• 1387a8f : 6956 1390b 27 ff : 85 F 88-89 Rose: 95n10 Arixtoxenos F 115 Wehrli : 41n 3 Athenaios, iv 168 F: 9 1n8 vi 234 D-E: 112n44, 116n51 xi 508 F: 113n47 xii 542 F : 52 xiii 610 F: 113n47 xv 696A : 113n46 Bacch. x (ix) 47ff: Com. adesp. 1325:

99n13 158

Deinarchos i 43 : 65 i 69-70: 88n3 iii 12 : 155 DemadesF 55 De Falco

117n53

Demetrios, F 136 Wehrli : 83n10, 95n10 Demosthenes, ii 29: ix 38 : 125 xii 19 : 125 xiii 20 : 125

17n7 , 19119 , 125

xiv 16 19, 35, 141 xiv 19 xiv 25 xvii 23 : 71 xviii 102-108: 13,19,22,35 xviii 112-114: 91n8 xviii 114 129n64-65 xviii 141 110n36 xviii 212 XViii 312 xix 215: xix 236 : xix 119, 125 XX : 17, 144 XX 18 13n8 XX 19: 16n5 XX 21 : 27 XX 22: 25n23 XX 146: 145n16 XX 151 : 93n9, 94n9a xxi passim: 84 xxi 1 : 52n26 xxi 13: 25n23 xxi 42-68: 89n5 xxi 98: 94 xxi 132 : 155 xxi 151 : 12 xxi 153: 13, 17n7, 93n9, 96 xxi 154 f: 25, 89n4, 94 xxi 155: 9n2, 16n5 xxi 16of: 91n8, 94 xxi 161: 89n6 xxi 164 ff.: 155 xxi 169: 94, 95n11 xxi 208f.: 12, 94n9a xxi 216: 94n9a xxi 225: 94, 95n11 xxii 44 : 82 xxiv 11: 145n16 xxiv 161 ff: 89n5 xxiv 197-198: 83n10 XXV 65 : 117 XXV 76-78: 93n9 XXVii 8: 88n3 XXVii 9 : 63 XXVii 10 39n3 XXVii 11 6o xxvii 19 79 XXVii 37 82 xxvii 53 39n3 XXViii 3 88n3

xxix 3 : 52n26 xxix 8 : 24n21 xxix 46 f. : 39n3 xxxii 15 : 61 xxxiii 6-7: 61 xxxiii 9: 79 xxxiv 6 : 61 xxxiv 38-4o: 66n53 xxxiv 50: 124n58, 128n63 XXXV 6 : 120n54 XXXV 10 : 61 XXXV 32- 3 : 61 XXXV 48 : 24n21 xxxvi 3 : 51n25 xxxvi 5 : 78 xxxvi 8 : 84n12 xxxvi 11 : 65 xxxvi 29 : 65n52 xxxvi 34-35 : 51n25 xxxvi 4o-42 : 93n9 xxxvi 42 : 95n11 xxxvi 45 : 84n12 xxxvi 50 : 79 xxxvii : 63 xxxvii 4: 43 xxxvii 37: 17n7 xxxvii 52: 64n50 xxxviii 7: 51n25, 78 xxXViii 25: 93n9 xxxviii 26 : 83n10 81n9 xxxix and xl: xxxix 8 : 25 xxxix 17 : 152 xl 52 : 65n52 xlii 3-5: 17, 19, 24n21, 52, 87 xlii 22: 28, 75 xlii 22-23: 89n4 xlii 25 : 17, 19 xliii: 74n4 xliv 35 : 14o xlv 28 52n26, 63 xlv 66: 89n4 xl V 70 : 64n50 xlv 78 : 97 xlv 85: 91n8 xlvi 13 : 91n8 xl vii 20 ff : 89n5 xlvii 48: 93n9 xlvii 54 : 83n10 xlix 6-8 : 129n64 xlix 12 : 78 xlix 31 : 62 xlix 66 : 120 l 8-9: 16n5, 18, 83n10, 143 1 13 : 83 1 17 : 61, 83

1 26: 71 lii 20 : 61 liii 9 : 83 liii 12-13: 63,83 liii 13 : 52n26 lvi 5-6 : 62 lvii 42: 88n2 lix 2 : 91n8 lix 42 : 117 lix 61 : 109

Diodoros, Bibl. Hist. x11 72,3 xiii 47,7 : 83n10 xiii 52,5 : 83n10 xiii 64,4 : 83n10 xiii 74,3: 100n15 xiii 105,1 : 21n14 xv 29,8 : 56n33 xvi 21,1 : 21 xviii 10,1-2: 90 xviii 15,8: 21 xviii 18, 4-5: 34n24 XX 4o,5 : 119

159

Diogenes Laertius, v 5 ~ 113n46 V 38 : 113n47 Ephoros

FGH 70

F 85 : 154

Etym. Magn. 760, 31 f:

106

Eupolis, Autolykos passim: Kolakes passim: 84n11 °F117: 128n62 F197: 69n58 (on p.69) F 205: 128n62

84n11

Euseb. Chron. II 94-95 Schone 103nn23-24 104n25 Harpokration, s.v. Kephisodoros Melanopos : 120n54 Chilioi diakosioi : 14o Hekataios FGHIF

127:

46n15

Hellanikos FGH 4 F 22: 104n25 FGH 323a F 23 : 106 Hellenika ~chia vi 3 : 1 n9, 90 vii 4 : 161

(Bartoletti)

155

174

175

Herodotos, i 59,5: 114n48 i 61, 3-4: 114n48 i 125, 2 : 46 iv 152, 1--4: 39 V 39,2; 73n1 V 61,2 : 113 V 66,1 : 113 V 94,1 : 118 vi 61, 2 73111 Vi 121,2 4{) vi 122,1 99 vi 125,1 : 98 vi 126 ff : 118 vi 137,3: 46n15 viii 1,1 : 15n1 Viii 1 1 2 : 15113 viii 14,1 15n1 viii 44,1 : 15112 viii 46,2: 15113 Hesych. s.v. naukleroi

vi 38: 17, 17n6, 91, 144 vi 39: 36, 88n3 vii passim: 77 Vii 35: 49n22, 52n26 xi : 74n4 xi 37 ff.: 54 xi 4o 13, 29, 75 xi 42 : 54n30, 63, 153 xi 43 : 39n3 xi 44: 51n25 xi 48 : 12 F 18 Thalheim: 141

147

Hesiod, ,!!!: 376 f : 76 Homer, Q. z 288-289: 39113 2£. "' 398 : 38112 I'> 337 f : 39n3 li 735 f,") 103 ~ 115 J 399 : 38112' ' 0

t

8 f : 39n3

38112

'

99 f'

X. 421 f, w 210, 365f 389 f : Hypereides (Jensen) ii(~). 17 : 154 i(~.) 22 : 61 24-25: 68 F 134: 19, 22n17, 83n10 Isaias

ii 27:

511125

ii 35: 50 ii 47-49 : 88113 iii 68 : 73112

iv 27-31: 93n9 11 122,26 : 53 V 26-27: 52n26 V 29; 521126 V 35-38: 25, 28, 89n4, 89n6, 93n9 V 39: 88112 V 42 : 152, 157 V 43 : 100n15 v~ 19-21 : 52n26, 53 vi 23 : 53 vi 33: 52n26, 53 vi 6o-61 : 18, 93n9, 143 vii 13-17 : 106 vii 37-42 :93n9 V

Isokrates, vii 35: 64n50, 88113,89 vii 53 : 93n9 viii 21 : 78 viii 128: 12, 83n10 Xii 145 : 831110 xiv 48: 88n2 xv 93-94: 129n65 xv 136 : 125 xv 1 1+5 19 xv 159 89 xv 160 88n3 xvi 25 105 xvi 35 93n9 xvi 46 1oon15 XVii 49 : 146 XViii 62: 94 xviii 58 : 93 I 5t ros FGH 334 F 33

Krates F 14:

41n3

47n17

Kleidemos FGH 323 F 8:

18n8, 23n18

Kratinos F 165: 47n17 F 208 69n58 (on p.70) F 212 90n7 F 295: 42n7 F 333: 62 F 46o : 151 Q!! I 196 38(b) : 54N30, 69 Ktesias FGH688 F 14, 37(33)

157

Ktesikles ap. Athen. vi 272C 49n23

34

Lykourgos, Leokr. 23 and 58: 43 Leokr. 13~ : 95, 129n65 Lysias ii 24: 88113 iii 45: 151Xen.Mem.i iii 47 : 93119

iv 1 : 76n5 vi 46 : 93n9 vii 4 and 9-10: 54n30 vii 30-32: 831110,93n9 viii 10: 100!115 X 11i : 62 xii 20: 66 xiii passim: 152 xiii 7 ff : 125 xv 5: 154 xvi 13 : 153 xvii 2-3 : 63 xix 9 : B31110 xix 15-17 , 70 xix 22 : 129n64 xix 25 : 63 xix 2/l-29: 12n6 xix 29 : 52, 52n26, 711, 83n10, 97 xix xix xix xix

30 : 70

42-44 : 78, 82, 97 48 : 81n9 56-57: 93n9, 96 xix 57-59: 831110 XX 23: 88n3 xxi 2: 9nl xxi 3 : 82 xxi 12: 89114 xxi 12 and 25 : 93n9 XXV 12-13 : 94 xxvi 4 : 95n11 xxvii 0-10: 11, 70, 117 xxviii 3: 831110 xxix 4 831110 XXX 14 152 XXX 20 : 112 XXX 26 ; 83n101 93119 xxxii 5 : 77n7 xxxii 6: 59, 60, 63 xxxii 15: 55n31, 59, 63 xxxii 24: 22n15 xxxii 26-27: 22n15 xxxiv hypoth. : 36,70 xxxiv 3 : 5B xxxiv 4 : 70 F 1 Thalheim: 42, 63 P.Ryl. III 489 col. iii lines 60-76 93n9 Menander, ~ 3/lOf : 76n6 MnesimachosF 4 : 154 Nepos, .£.£_. 5 : 16o Nikolaos FGH90 F 58

46, 47n16

Paus, i 28, 1 : 118 vii 16, 5-6: 154 viii 9, 10 : 155 X 7, 6 : 1031122 Pherekrates F 130: 4?n17 Pherekydes FGH 3 F 2 : 104n25 Philippides F 9: 71 Philochoros FGH 328 F 41 231118,137, 146 F 46 : 35 F 155 : 164 F 168 : 110n34

18n8,

Pind. P. iii Schol. (II 62-63 Dracii.) : 1031122 Plato, Alklb. 123c : 52 Euth.vpJi;;n 4c : 58 Laches 179 c-d: 85 Laws 784 b: 73 L:ysis 205 c-d : 13 lwl2,n 93b-94d: 85 ~ 343 d : 88n3 Platonios ap. Meineke, Com.Frag. I 532 : 25 Plutarch, Alkibiades vii 4: 93119 X 1 : 91n8 X 3: 93119 xxi 9 : 62n4? xxii 5 : 113 xxxiii 3 : 113 Demetrios xiv 1-2: 119 Comp.of Dern,and Cic. iii 6 61 Kirnonviii 5-7: 111n4o Nikias iii 1-2 : 97n12, 11? -;;-:j: 621147 Perikles xi 4: 16 xxiv 6: 42115 Phokion vii 5-6: 125 ----rxT-2 : 89116 xiii 6 : 153 xxviii 7 : 34n24 Solon ii 1 : 39 ~2-4: 39 xviii 1-2: 31$111 Themistokles i 4: 113 Theseus xii 1: 111n40 xxxvi 1-2 : 1111140 Moralia 187b : 71

. I ,, ••

4•i4JiC;

176 177

Plutarch ( cont) Mowia 305 b-c 9 : ll3n10 1544b: 154

INDEXII

156

vii 24, 5 : 71:l Vii 31, 4 ! 21n13 Vii 34,3: 21n13 Vii 73, 3 : 70 Viii 24, ~4: 46 Viii 40, 2 : 46 viii 92, 4 : 151

Polli_:ix viii 130: 36, 137 lX 42 : 1 3n47 Polyb. ii 62, 7: 35, 146 JOCcvi 17,7: 76n6 Poseidippos

F 11 : 76n6

Poseidonios

FG!! cl? F 31:l

Timsios,

46

Suda~414-415: 117n53 H 39: 24n21 Theophrastos, Frag. Vat. de elig. ~: 122n56,123n57 .£!!!!.iv 5 : 54n30 Vi 9 ! 04n50 XXii 3 : ll9n6 Theopompos FG!! 115 F 122 F 325: 71n61 Thucydides, i 116 1_2 i 117, 2 20n7 i 126,

ii

3 13, 15

20n1·1

11/l

16n4 16, 2 76 ii 23, 2 20n12 ii 24, 2 16 ii 26, 1 : 20n12 ii 27 : 20n12 ii 31,2 : 49 iii 7, 1 : 128 iii 36, 6 : 70 iii 50, 2 : 56n34 57n35 iii 74, 2: 52 ' iv 105, 1: 5ll vi 16, 1-4 : 9/i Vi 31, 3 ! 21n13 Vi 54, 6-7 ! 110n36 Vi 55, 1 ! 111l vi 59, 3: 118 Vi 105, 2 ! 21n13 vii 16, 2 2 1n 13 vii 17, 2: 21n13 vii 18, 3: 21n13 vii 20, 1-2: 21n 13 ii

46n12

Index of Subjects

FGH 566 F 11 : 46n15

Xenophon, Anab. vii 1, 27: 16n4 ~i D2, 161 i 6, 24 : 21 i 6, 25: 21n14 ii 1, 20: 21n14 ii 4, l:l and 26: 1.54 Vi 2, 1 : /:l3n10 Vi 2 1 10 : 163 vi 2, 39 : 125 _vi 3, 4: 124 N51:l H1pparch. i 8: 125 iX3:36 !i!:.!!!• ii 7, 2 : 54n30 ii 7, 3-4: 43 ii 7, 6: 43, 71:l ii cl, 1 : 51:J ii ll, 1-5 : 88nl ii 9, 4-1:l: 68 117 iii 4, 1 f; 70' 122n56 152 iii 4, 2 and 5.:i, : 130' iii 6, 14: 51n24 iii 11, 4: 54n30 72 £lli.. i.i 6 : tl3n10 ' ii 7 and 11: 84 Poroi iv 14: 79 iv 17-24: 79 ~. iv 30-32: 83n10 iv 31 : 59 Viii 25 ! ,54n30 Xenophon, Ath. Pol. i 3 i 13 : 11 i 11:l: 51n25 iii 3 : 67 iii 4 : 16, 135

1, 123, 121:l

absentee landlord 56 f, 60 adoption law, 73 f administrative skills, importance of, 115 f a;;onistic liturgies, lists not kept for,

24 f

numbers per year, 2'7 agricultural wealth, 31:l alienability of land, 40 anchisteia, 74 antidosis, 9, 16, 26, 76, 83 arete,

26

Aristophon, measures attributable to, 144 f athletic prowess as basis of 99 political position, Attic Stelai, 47 autourgoi, 43 f bankers, 65 ff banking, 64 ff bankruptcies 1 79 bilateral kindred, 74 booty, 66 ff bottomry loans, 60 ff bribery, 66 ff cavalrymen, vi ':f, charis, 92 ff, 129 'c'iiITdressness, 73 children, exposure of, 76 Chios, 46 choice within liturgical system, 26, 89, 91 ff citizens as bankers• agents, 65 conspicuous consumption, 84 costs of liturgies, 9, 82 cult power, 105 ff, 126 conspicuous consumption, 84 costs of liturgies, 9, 82 cult-power, 105 ff, 126 cult-properties liable to eisphora, 137 cults, regulation of, by the State, 110 ff demarchs, role in administration, 146 f Demosthenes, refom of trierarchy, 12, 19 Demotionidai, 105 ff diadikasia, 9, 16, 83, 133 ff diadikasia documents, 30, 33, 133 ff diapsephismos, 107

eiepbora, effects of incidence of, 82 f Eleusis, as cult-centre, 109 emotional detachment from land, 75 f endogamy, 76 f epidoeeia, 66, 91 declining to contribute to, ll9 eranos-loans, 62 euporoi 4, 10 ff expenditure as basis of political 96 ff, 116 f, 129 position, family ability, decline in, ll4 f family political tradition, in sixth and fifth centuries, 120 f lack of, in fourth century, 121 fragmentation of estates, 75 gene, loss of cult-power by, 112 ge~ as organic part of phratry,

06

gentilician control of cults, 109 ff Golden Age without slaves, motif of, in comedy, 47 goodwill of propertied class, need for, 90 grave monuments, 5 'Greater D