Athenian Democracy on Paper by John Paul Aldrup-MacDonald Department of Classical Studies

284 Pages·2017·4.58 MB·English

Athenian Democracy on Paper
by
John Paul Aldrup-MacDonald
Department of Classical Studies
Duke University

Date:_______________________
Approved:

___________________________
Joshua D. Sosin, Supervisor

___________________________
Jose Gonzalez

___________________________
William Johnson

___________________________
Kent Rigbsy

___________________________
Lene Rubinstein

Dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of
the requirements for the degree of Doctor
of Philosophy in the Department of
Classical Studies in the Graduate School
of Duke University

2018
Copyright by
John Paul Aldrup-MacDonald
2018
Abstract
Thousands of public records survive from democratic Athens. Nearly all of them are
inscribed on stone (or more rarely metal). A century and more of study has revealed that
these inscriptions were the tip of the iceberg. Beyond them was an apparatus of public
records, kept on perishable media, that were central to the administration of the city.
Call it the paperwork of democracy. What remains to be reconstructed are the processes
by which this paperwork was created and the significance of those processes for our
understanding of democracy. This dissertation examines the paperwork of making
decrees, the basic legislative document in Athens, using literature, court speeches, and
inscribed decrees to reconstruct the process by which decrees were written and reused
in city politics. It argues that paperwork was done in the central institution of
democracy, the assembly; that the orators better known in their capacity as masters of
speech were also masters of the rules and discourses of decree-making; that in foreign
policy these orators and their audience, the masses, brought the same rigor to
documentary texts that they brought to giving and hearing speeches. In sum, where
earlier researchers have assumed that paperwork had nothing to do with democracy,
this dissertation shows that Athenians were as clever with paperwork as they were with
oratory.

iv
Dedication
For Archer Robin, who arrived just in time.

v
Contents
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................. IV
ABBREVIATIONS ..................................................................................................................... IX
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .......................................................................................................... X
INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 1
SCOPE ........................................................................................................................................................... 7
SOURCES AND METHOD ............................................................................................................................ 9
CHAPTER DESCRIPTIONS ....................................................................................................................... 11
PROSPECTUS ............................................................................................................................................ 14
CHAPTER 1. TOWARD A PAPYROLOGY OF ATHENIAN DEMOCRACY ................... 15
1.1 BEYOND THE EPIGRAPHIC HABIT ................................................................................................. 15
1.2. TABLET AND BOOKROLL IN THE CULTURE OF ATHENS .......................................................... 23
1.2.1: Tablet and Bookroll in Athenian Recordkeeping ..................................................... 30
1.2.2 Keeping Track: Tablets and Bookrolls of Athenian Legislation ......................... 33
1.2.3: Keeping Count: Tablets and Bookrolls in the Erechtheion Inventories .......... 41
1.2.4: Tablets and Bookrolls in Athenian Archives .............................................................. 49
1.3 TABLET AND BOOKROLL IN THE COUNCIL AND ASSEMBLY: A COMIC PERSPECTIVE ......... 57
1.3.1 The Decree of Teleas .............................................................................................................. 58
1.3.2: The Rhetor as Decree-Seller .............................................................................................. 60
1.3.3: Book-Rolls in Athenian Legislation ................................................................................ 63
1.4 CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................................................... 66

vi
CHAPTER 2. DRAFTING DECREES IN DEMOCRATIC ATHENS .................................. 69
2.1: PRIOR CONSIDERATION BY THE COUNCIL ................................................................................. 74
2.2: AS A RULE DECREES WERE PROPOSED IN WRITING .............................................................. 86
2.3: THE INVOLVEMENT OF THE SECRETARY WAS MINIMAL ...................................................... 107
2.4 THE DECREE FROM ASSEMBLY TO ARCHIVE ............................................................................ 116
2.4 AMENDMENTS IN ATHENIAN DECREES ..................................................................................... 123
2.5 THE RHETOR AND HIS CRAFT ..................................................................................................... 142
2.6 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................... 146
CHAPTER 3. DOCUMENTING INTERSTATE LAW AT ATHENS .............................. 149
3.1 THE SOURCES AND NATURE OF INTERSTATE LAW IN GREECE ............................................. 149
3.2 DIPLOMACY BY DOCUMENT IN CLASSICAL ATHENS ................................................................ 160
3.2.1 Diplomacy by Decree ........................................................................................................... 166
3.2.2 Documents in the Speeches of Athenian Envoys ...................................................... 179
3.2.3 The First Embassy to Philip .............................................................................................. 184
3.2.4 The Second Embassy ............................................................................................................ 197
3.2.5 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ 202
3.3 DIPLOMACY BY DOCUMENTS IN THE COUNCIL AND ASSEMBLY ............................................ 206
3.3.1 On Halonessos ......................................................................................................................... 209
3.3.2: Text and Context in On the Peace ................................................................................ 215
3.3.3: From Speech to Text ........................................................................................................... 217
3.3.4. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................... 220
3.4 DOCUMENTING INTERSTATE LAW IN ATHENIAN DECREES .................................................. 221

vii
3.4.1 Towards a Taxonomy of Citation in Athenian Decrees ........................................ 222
3.4.2: Hewing to the Letter of the Law in IG II³ 298 and IG II³ 299 .......................... 231
3.4.3: Keeping to the Letter of the Law in IG I³ 40 ............................................................. 235
3.5 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................... 243
CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................ 245
BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................................ 254
BIOGRAPHY .......................................................................................................................... 275

viii
Abbreviations
Ancient authors are abbreviated according to LSJ.

ix
Acknowledgements
I have accrued many debts throughout this project. The biggest is to Josh Sosin, without
whom this project would never have taken off (and in all honesty would never have
landed). Kent Rigsby has read each chapter with a sharp eye and a generous spirit. Jose
Gonzalez was as enthusiastic as he was meticulous and the work is better for that.
William Johnson helped me develop a voice that was scholarly and courteous (if not
quite as genteel as his own). Lene Rubinstein, whose work provided a model for mine,
generously agreed to share her time and expertise on short notice, and helped me figure
out some ways in which this work fits into the bigger picture of law and democracy in
Classical Athens. To all five of these scholars I owe a lot.
I owe just as much to those who had little to do with the dissertation itself but
everything to do with the happiness I have experienced these past seven years. There are
too many to name them all without leaving out someone who contributed a little joy (or
a lot) to my life. But I would like to single out my parents, who are the only reason I
have made anything of myself, and Megan, who gave me the best of all reasons to finish
the work.

x
Introduction
Athenian democracy was described by one of its practitioners as “a polity in logoi.”1
Modern scholars take him to mean that democracy was “a polity based on speeches.”2
And for an obvious reason: the rhetor and the masses were the central protagonists in
the history of democracy from its beginning to its end.3 As is well-known, “rhetor”
(“speaker”) is the Athenian word for “politician.”4 And a citizen unable to persuade the
masses with his words could not occupy the center stage of Athenian politics5 (in part
because the citizens in the crowd were a raucous bunch and not above booing,
interrupting, or heckling a speaker).6 For these reasons and more, speech is rightly
treated as the central mode of politics in Athenian democracy.

1 Dem. 19.184: “There is no harm greater that anyone can do to you than telling lies, for how is it possible to
run the city securely if, for those whose polity exists in logoi, these [sc. logoi] are not true. (οὐδὲν γὰρ ἔσθ’ ὅ τι
µεῖζον ἂν ὑµᾶς ἀδικήσειέ τις ἢ ψευδῆ λέγων. οἷς γάρ ἐστ’ ἐν λόγοις ἡ πολιτεία, πῶς, ἂν οὗτοι µὴ ἀληθεῖς ὦσιν,
ἀσφαλῶς ἔστι πολιτεύεσθαι;).
2 Goldhill (2002) 4: “a constitution of speech-making.” So too Greenwood (2004) 176: “a constitution based
on speeches.”
3 Thus Yunis (1991) 179-180 observes that “[m]erely by making the speeches so prominent, at considerable
expense to other aspects of political activity, Thucydides already isolated the public forum in which the
speeches were delivered as the key factor in political decision-making.”
4 Ober (1989) 104-112.
5 Isoc. 5.81.
6 Booing: Dem. 19.46. Interrupting and heckling: Aeschin. 1.34. Although Hansen (1987) 70 states that “in
principle there was no communication from the participants to the speakers or between the participants,” he
recognizes that communication was not a one-way street, and other scholars envision an active audience.
Thus Thomas (2008) 184 emphasizes “the extent of the noise, hubbub, and generally energetic audience
participation in the mass citizen gatherings of both the fifth and the fourth century” and stresses “that this
was embraced as part of the democratic process.” Tacon (2001) 177 argued earlier that “informal banter
between the speakers themselves, interruptions of the speakers by the demos, and vocal debate between
sections of the demos aligned behind opposing politician were wholly typical and actually integral features
1