Household Interests

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Conunts _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Us, of FillNrtJ IIml TahIti "'if.a 3 Chapter 1. The Families o f the Private...

Author: Cheryl A. Cox

30 downloads 4242 Views 39MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!
Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Conunts _ _ _ _ _ _ __

Us, of FillNrtJ IIml TahIti

"'if.a

3

Chapter 1. The Families o f the Private: Orations

Chapter 2. Town and Country. Marriage and Death

38

Chapter 3. Harmony and Conflict within the Household

68

Chapter 4. Sibling R elatio nships:

105

Chapter 5 . What Was an Oikos?

130

Chapter 6. The Nonkinunan. the: Oik,,$, and the Household

168

Conclusions

209

AppendUi:. The Poliliclli Families

216

Rtjrm.as

231

lmlrx

245

pr

em

Figures and Tables _ _ _ _ _ __

Figure, 1. The BouKlid:le

5

2. The Kin Grou p of Dinrogt:nes I J . A1CIJUe. M. Sc Mps. &0.. _ it IUg/oIJ of ll{)",m itt """"" Gnvrt- (Edinburgh: Uru"' ..... ry 0( EdInburgh 1~, 1919). M_ ~ untly ""' ....-in 0( nuy< rdi.«I by Cartlcdgr, Todd . • nd Millet. argue .h .. Athen;"n bw WU>Ot be IC¥C"I"nil P. M iUrt •. '"uw. Soc io:ty and ... thcru.~ in N _: .EuqI i~" ,Iono"'" l.aII AIJ,'li<s IIIfII Soritrr, «I. P. Cartled~. P. M;U. ... and S. Todd (C » " br;.Jge: Cambo"idgc Univenity Prnt. 1990), 1- 18. In her worIdoption len on pmccdUlC: A,q.. ti"" in I V. em.wry A ......... (Copenh.>gcn : M .... um T""uLa"u", 1'....... 1993).

00'_ ,,,',,,

1.,.,

A."""

",/oms,

)[]V

I NTROOUCT I ON

m3 le 3nd fem.ale children, male 3gtl3tes were the preferred heirs, 3nd then female agnates; o nly then w;,r,s the matriline, th e moth er's side, 3dmitted to succn.sion. [n examining how th ese rul es could be circumvented, this book will study attitudes 3nd pnctices that we nt beyond the legal and social norms.4 and which in fact determined how interests in and arr.lIl gements for tra nsferring property affected family relations. For this purpose. it will depend heavily on anth ropology and as such it will be pari of 3 recent lrend ill classies to apply anthropology to roeial history.5 The first twO chapters exami ne marr iage patterns: why people ma rried and whom Ihey married. C hapte r 1 exa mines the rath er narrow topic of Olgnatic relations, exploring how even though kinsh ip endogamy. or marriage within the kinship group. reflected the Olgnatic bias in succession law. inheriunce str.ltegies. or the ways in which property was tnnsferred to individuals. could Ilevenheln.s • So"", wooL re«11dy h.".. .pplint.n,hropology to damcs in order to .....ty social .ftiNodc. and KkoI"IPcs. For utmbridge Uni\OOnity PmI. ]99] ). and r.... . VroIno«. .,4 C-"""';ty;" CJ.wiaa/ AI""" (Can,bridge: Can'bridge Un;""O< ? A,hmi... n",..... ,.. III S«i81 ec... nt. ]. Winkk< .nd F. 2ndin (Princeton. NJ.: Princeton University 1'1nS. 1990), 237-70; U. S..... u .... fillhM ...1I Sctu itt Ariomr (Vri"c~.on. N J .: PrincC\on Uniwrsity~. ]993). For .h~ grow. ing in.eTn< in the"", of ~n.hropol"ln' fOT hi""cu. ... in otha field.: D. Kenoa. "Anthropology .nd f . mily liim")....}"."','" .if r...... ;1y HUldbrid~: CamhrKlge Uni"""";ry I'rc$. f',o,/om;,.."..bo M . Golden. OilJ..., -J OilJhooJ in Q.s,,,..J 1I,1orn.< (lh hllY>OTrobInm ;n the Comp""';"" S'udy of Unilineal I:>num:' in TIot- RIiri'W II/lorn.. 19(2); ~ L:ulcn. and 1\.. Wall. M., H~ anJ "-iJr;" Au, Ti..,. (Cambridgmmic Ooo'P (Bt-rkdey. Calif.: Uni"""ity of Califomja Prell. ] 98-4). Tho ""ries of """'Y' in R . Robin, alld 1~ Laokn. cds .• mily Fomu iN HUloN f-"ropt (Urnbridgc: Cambo-idgc Uni,,,.._ ';ty Pre:u, ]933) ;nduder discutsio", 011 ,he "",ain.",....... .pedflCJ!ly lhe bbon:. ;and for ex.mple. P. SclunKllb.uer. ~The changing oou..,hoId: Aum-;.., houochold struCtUre from the seven ,cenm 10 W e.rly twetllieth n nlury;·· ibid., 3-47- 78. AI Ii",., poo ..... rewnn were ,........nto; A.

w.n.J.

sOld H'"Olies:' i" Netting. Wilk. "'mou.ld. H....sdodJs. 4 H:}. '8llecawe of;" fOCI .. 011 Llw ciminI ocholanhip hu bten ob, ,ned with whether . n Am~n;.n m.n could ha"" kgi.inUle I hild"". by on A,henian (QnCubi.... For UtstoI>U. ]ju~TI""nn·. ugurn."" ,lut Athens pcrmined. nun to Iu.., kgi.i~~ dtildrcn by an Athenian """,",ubine. " ka;ilirnat'·· or ··leg;.o1 concubin:oge'· .. i. h..u bull c.alkd, ..... dioc~ cri.ici.rcd, .nd dNn;...a by 'h" Gwri'l( /Jr. RDm.rrr r""'ily. For aoome. discutsiOll of 'he ( O",,,,,>city of the Ito.... n Iw>u;tcltoid $« S. Dixon. 1M R"""", "-Uy (B,Ulilllo ... : JohN Hopkins Univenity 1'=0, 1992). ZI On fridsbip ill AI ....".: G. M . Calhoun, A''''Ri.... Clubs in liWiriQ. 4"" U/itricn (New York; fum fl"2nk.li.n. 1970. "'f"l"inl);W. R . Connor. l "loc- ,\;""" l't>lj~ lp : _. 1907). whicb ...... rIOI intcrdi:.icipli~ry 'ppl"WCh .., the o raton: W, Wysc. no. 510:,,/10 ..j 1_ (C~mbrid~: C.mbridge Urtiven.it)' P......: N~ York: Amo.. 1979). which,.... • .-tty p,t' Mat~: ~ngc . ...mer, Wti cn.ru",kd ,hrough.h< COlIn I)"U""'. R. G ... n~ •. t-IIIUI Sodtry in a.wWl Allinu (N ....· York: !ie. M.n:in·.. 1987). J. on .he: .... IOC ..Uie idnI of compcririon; 68--71 , on pcnon.al f8--59: the quot. iJ from !'buns. 25-39. On

~

"'1'1''" '

"

m

Cop)Tipll 0 1998 ..,. Prince-Inn Uniwrsity Pres. I'ubli>l>cd by l'Ti"".. OI> Uni,""';ty PtntI. 4 1 WillWn So ...... !'rincelon. N~w Jerxy 08540 I" th.t Uni,cJ Kingdom: !'ri,,",o,, Univero.icy I'rcoo. (."hkhaf eo"p'" C""'II>;fi.6-i".""l>Ilad....

o.u"

Co:ptt) l. f.mi!y-G=«-Atheo4 H;"Oduction Guiddinn for I~ LongtViry of tt.. Council on libnry R.~rta Prioc"ol)

hUp;/ / pu P. p. ino;flO" . ~

I'rimed in tl>o U nited Su"," of Amct'in 13S791QB6

~

2

HOUSEHOW INTERESTS

_______ c

HAP T E R

1 _ _ _ _ _ __

The Families of the Private Orations

DESPITE rhe difficulties inh erent in the orations, the chronological gaps, the

td e~

leoping of events .and the falsification of fact, they are v.tlwble so urces for the srudy o f how individuals, families, lmd extended kin mani pulated blood alld ma rriage ties and \\-'ealth. Within this process of manipuiltion, patterns emerge whkh suggest how illtcl'\!'Sts in prope rty couid be sustained for scvenol generations. The focus here wiU be on how such patterns or ~tr.ltegies !;:ould reflect :ln individual's imel'e$i;S in his or her patriline, that is. the line of deKent through males from a mal e anCdlO r . We will then :l5S(15 th e role and imporunce of loale in the fomution of lIurital :illiances; " locale" here refers to marriages within the deme and the local interests motivating Itu:se unions, which hlV\" been studied by Osborne in his work on the dem~.l In addition. th~ discussion will focus 011 th~ effects of kinship exOS"IIIY, or out-marr i:l.g~, and ~ndogamy, or in- marriage, ill a family's muriage st"l"at~gies. "Localc" can also refer to th~ location of property hold.in~ alld of residence, and thc discussion here will consider how they motivated familia to ally. To what extent. then, did families and kinship gTOUp5 focus on a particubr deme or regio n whe n forming marital alliances? To what extent was the neighbo r used both in nurriagc and the larger political netwQrk? Any discusion of the neighbor mU$t cOllsid~r prmcimity; in the following discussion proximity will nOl ~nt ... il JUSt those individuals living close to each other in the city bue those rural "neighbors" who li'"ed up to eight kilom eters from e;l.ch o th er. Case studies will be provided of those fami lies in the o rat ions for whom w~ have th~ most information: by way of iIlusrntion. lh ~ pr.u: tices of other f;l1nilies will be mentioned, for whom our information is not as complet~. We begin with two kin groups. domiciled ill the city, whose 1Il0irriagc. alliances suggest in t~rests in var io u~ parts of Attica and whose family trees can be traced back to th ~ earl y and mid fifth cenwry.

THE BQUSEUOAE

No discussion o f the Bouselidac is ever uncomplicated. Although the disputcs whi ch resulted from th e death of Hagni~ [I have been discussed in great delail , It.. ~~. 0.--: 1M ~ ":ICLuMJ .-1rriird (C~mbr;d~: C:""bridflt Unn.:,.;ty I'r$. 198.'»,127/1".

"

C HAPTER I

by others, it is nevertheless possiblr, even by going down some well-worn paths. reassess (he role of the location of landed holding:'! in the selectio n of marriage partners and to indicate how kinship endogamy and adoption could be interconnected. Bousclus of (kllm CCrlmicum, whose Horuit is dated to the early fifth century, si~d fi\'e som. each of w ho m produced his own descell[ group (lDem. 1 43.19).2 One of th ese sons, Hagnias I, siTC'd Polemon and. perhaps, Phylomache I, :tIthough her paternity WilS in doubt.) Their descend:ml3 an d extended kin would carry Oil their squabbling throughout the first three quarters of the fourth ce nw ry over fh e estate of Hagnias II , son of Polemon. From a series o f trials da ring to the mid-fourth century, marriab't! p,atterru eme rge for the Bousclidae, such as the alternation of exogamy with end0g2my com bined with marriage and adoption . ThC$C: maneuvers set one oikos o f the kin group against another and allowed the encroachment o f 1I0nagnates onto Bouselid propeny (figure 1). The Bouselidae were notorious, by Athenian standards, for th eir in-murying and infighting over the estate of o ne individual, Hagnias II. son of Polemon . Polemon's sister. Phylomache I, whose paterni ty and legitim.acy were in question, contended for the estate of her brother's son, Hagnias II, against the claims of Hagn ias's half-brothers through his mother, Glaucus and Glaucon. Phylom.:l;che I had married her first cousin, h~r father's broth er's son, Phibgrus: th is Ilutria~ produc~d Euboulides II who cominued Phylon12ch~ I's cb im to 1'\3gnias's estat~ after her d~ath. There is no information as to whom Eu boulid" nurried, but he in turn sired an o nly child. a girl, Phylom.:l;che I], who continued the cbim fo r he r descent group, th e offipring of her endogamous marri:age to ) s.:cond cousin, Sosi theus. ~ Sositheus ultitm.tely descended from the Bousclid.:l;e on his mothers side: his 1Il3tern.:l;I gnndf3ther w.u C:lliistr.ltus. a Bouselid, and th~ full brother of Philagrus, Phylom.:l;ch~ J's husband. The :tlternation of exogamy with endogamy is quite evident for CallistntlU's side of th~ f:u llily. Callistntus had m.:l;rried a kiruv.'QIJ12n (father's brother's daughter's daughte:r). C:tllistrltlls'S d.:l;ughler, on the: other hand, was married outside her kin grou p 10 otle Sosi:l.1. This 1112rriage then p roduced Sositheus, who in turn married a kinswoman. his ~con d cousin Phylomac he II (mother's father's brothers so n's daughte r). Phyiomache II 's son, Euboulides III, was then ;tdopted imo th e estate o f her f:nh er Euboulides II, the son of Phyiornache P The propensity for endogamy with in the Bousdidae is obvious: indeed the group is known to h3ve cOlltncled five such unions, and possibly sc\'er;)1 more.'"

10

Sec> >.I", [hvi ... AJ>I'; 79 If, 1 W, E.1110"'1'50n, Dt H"If"i« fkrrdi,«,.: A~ AI""""" /n1tm,nguiniry in M:a.rriltgt' l':I.ttgnw' I~.th.~ CP 78 (1983): table 1. D.vin. APF. 82--tl3. (""II ,h.{ H.gniafl adopced niece "-.. the ""ugll.... of. fuU !.ib!in; md th.l.he EupokmU'S. one of the claim.:mt.1. w:u het JOlt. But ... Humph~ correctly poina OUI ("·D.te" W n. B). {hi • ....,uld &i"" Eupolemu • • ""'Y clu. """"ridinll d.urn to H:agni.... P">\Krty.

"')'$I.'''''''

"

m

FAMIL IE S OF TttE

PRI VAT E O R AT I ONS

7

sion, Euboulides II. th e son o f Phylomache I. who claimed that she was the ho-. mopatrk hill-sisler of Hlgnias II 's father, would haV\" had every right to claim the esu.tc o~~ r Glau cliS and GIaUCOII, the homometr ic half- brothers of Hagnias. 10 H agnias tla grantl y attempted to undercut th e legal norm by naming Glaucon as his second heir and, ~i bly, by stipulati ng that Giallcon marry the niece whom he, Hagn ias, had adopted as hi, fi rst heir.! 1 Because Athenian law stipulated that an adoptee was severed from his or he r oik os of origin, and the refore could not inherit from it,12 Glallcon's marriage to Hagnia! lis adopted heiress W() uld leave him in control of two estates, his own w hic h he \\-'Ould inherit fro m Glallcetes. h is father, and Hagnias's. C lauco n's full broth er, Gbucus, ente red th e 10 A. 1\" W. Harrison, 1M u,,,.:fArlwu. ""I . I (Oxfo rd: Cbre"oo" I,",". 1968). 144-46. " T ht f~ recon.truclion i. t-cd upon thc 'hconc dt.up;i>'''' of a PlunooInle, which n'_ of ,he .... n""ril'" ....d. ra,h.,. than of a Ptu.t>OSIraruo (I). who .. rmmiOfl"" by one .... nuscripc councillo. in tht inscripcion "'... P!,.,,
,b.

,Iu,

0."""·

.ta,,,,,

,Iu.,

......,.io"

tOn

Uni>Tnity~.

1994). 43-69,

The (~. du., H~gni.:tl'. hn ...... _ noc d.o.int.ed by ochc, rei",;"", during .he , in,,, bcfQn:: her dea1h ohould ,101 I""" • problc:nl. 1....... 1.8-9 (with Wysts c""ltI.. nury: W. Wy.c, T7w- Spnt/tn of t_ (1904; n::pr. Ncw Y"",, Arno, 1979). 551, ful~ by Gcrnet./)r(,;,. '29) ,~, .h... ,.,.UtO' . w+w,,, adopting on would d>oosc a hmband for he. p...-cit.ely 50 "" 10 prevt11< Iter frnm bei,,!! uilho;oc;. to M eb;m"" l>y. ki-=n. pref...ably .n . gn. ",. 0 ... hLJ point >rt IK;>W Rubin".in . AJ"plien i" lit em",,), A,,,,,,,, (Copcnll:lsen . M Ulleum TlIICllbnurn I'ress, 199)). 95-100. , ~ Hu.uou . ~ I :82-4:15. for tIM: 1lI_ on ad.lon and ,h. ""'''yill!! of .h" odopIe. s da.,I9'>, ....

h.ei"",.

M

ow pr

em

8

C H APTER

1

cont~t

because it may have bee n hi$ daughter who was selected by " l3gnias II as he-ire!is: she, in turn, would then be slated to m.arry her Cather's full brother. Glaucon.lfHagnias·s adopted heiress was Gtaucus's daughter, then the adoption of Glau.;us's daughter outside Glauc us's patrili ne was fotlowed by her marriage to Gbucon , her paternal uncle; therefore, she woul d then return to her patri line. One is reminded here of Sositheus's maneuvers: the adoption of his son infO th e house of his wife 's fathe r was accompanied by the marriab>e of his daughter to his brother's SOil. This is all conjectur,&], hut the very least that call be said is that H agnias definitely ignored all 111.1le agnaus in his inheritance pnctices alld prefe rred either the daughter of his sister, a female agn ate, or his matrilineal kinsmen. It was a preference that, despite a will, was finally overturned by the court in favor of "male agnate, Theopompus, son of C]eocritus. Theopompus was a first co usin once removed to Hagnias II (a father's father's brother's son) and seems to have been a black s he~'p in the family: he di d not marry endogamously in terms of either kill or deme. Theopomp us had a city residence, but hel d laud at Oelloe (ei ther Hippothontis or Aiantis) and came into posses5ion of his wife's brother's esta te at Prospalta by having his son adopted into th e estate, which was in the deme of his wife-'s father Apolexis of Prospalt2 (Is. t 1.49; fDem.J43.77).13 If Theopompus's land at Oenoe was in HipPOlhontis, then it was located in northwest Attica en route to his brother Stratodes' holdings which were at £leusis, in the s:lme tritT}" as Oenoe. and whieh ....'e re ~I!.O a, Thria nearby. Th"...,fon:, TheopomplIs's property lTllIy ha~ lain in the same region as that of his brother Stntodes. Unlike Theopompus's marriage, Stnwdes' marriage involved his rural neighbor: Theophon, his wife's brother, owued property at Eleusis, the dcme in which one of Stratodes' houses lay and dose to his agros (field) in Thri~. 14 'n ~ddit i on. the demc of th e ilouselidae, O"um Cenmiculll, may have bill dose to Stratocles' holdings. so that proximity of property holdings and the locatioll of the Bouselid deme pbyed a $trollg role in the formation of affinal ti cs. IS Stntocles, moreover, Us.,., ,100 Dru..-., AI'/) 85, 89, (.". Apokw: 1'0< T heopon,ptIS. ibid .• 87-418. t. D..-in, AI' I: 87-418. Thorup""', lk H"K"iat Hem/itill" 5 t , Itmng 0""_ 1> Ocum Cenmdcwn ""'" :wignC
'rgu"".'"

FA MILI ES

01' T il l!

P R I VATE

O R. ATIONS

9

owned :I house at Meli te in the ....'eStern part of the astl4 , the core of the city. on a good cOllulluniation route to the Thri:uhn plolin where his property was located. 16 The e'ltates of the two men, Srr::lltocles and his brother-in-bw, Theophon . ....'ere th en furth er united by the adoption of Str.ltodes' daughter into Theopho n's oikos; ill f:let, Theopompus listed Theophon s property unde r Srr:ltodes'est:l!e (Is. 11.41-42). There is, pos.'libly, more to l>.ly on the use of the ne igh bor: Sositheus may have been absorbed in to the Bou$eliwe benuse he \N;lS a membe r of the deme Ar:Iphen where H agnias II's bnded efute w;u Ioc;r,ted (ID em .] 43.70).17 T he nam e Sosith eus is very r:l re in the fourlh century; outside of the Or:llion (ibid., 8 1)18 it appean o nly three times. :lnd only once wi th a demotic: in :I lht fo r the phyle Aegds (IG 112 2389 1.10) d,ting to the mi d-founh cemury, where th e Sositheus listed comef from th e deme Arap hen. in which Hagnias's estale lolY. If Sosith eus o r :l ki nstruln cam e from the deme in which ol con tefted piece of Bouselid property lay. then it molkes us furthe r olppreciale how Sositheus had first-hand knowledge ofTheopompw's alleged abuse of H aglli:ls's e5tate: Theopompus aPPolrenciy had chopped down the oli"e trees on the property (h . 43.69-70), and those who held neighboring estates in .Araphen were summoned as wi moso by Sositheus. Therefore, dem e membership in Ar:lphen may well mwe been a re:lson fo r th e 80uselid CalliStr:ltus's illiolnce with Sosias olnd, thus. Sositheus' encroachmem on Bousdid blld. 19 ln thc end, hov.-cver. Sosithew see ms to have lost th e b.lttle fur the property.lO til". De H~ HIe de Cleon." Hi, .. /",;" ,)1 (19l12): 420-33 .. IJourriot ~ criticis"'lI of th~ Sl'mUlu .re t>Of without mo.ir difficultin, how.,..".. Stt C. A. Coo.11. for commem.ry .nd bibliogt:\plly on the 51.(m",.'. S« also. Tr:aill. ~ 38-41. for his obj"."ioru duo; ,he remnt col""'''' lhould nOf be ..........,d, ahhougl. 1 do t>Of "IP"" with Iili ~xbor_ mion to oj"'piify Cleon ' f.n.ily "~mnu. :H Admittedly. il it difficuk to.ooca the alent of ~:agglth. 0 .. the other lund. bae"s 5 e"'phl:ti~ Oie~ .... r. landed ....... hh which yi~ldt' Studia at Atiw:n" 1975). H 46, n,18, fulluwing Eniot'o ,ugge>Cion in G>.a!taI IX-. of A/fJo:.!, II Study of'~ PtoIiry of C.ltiJrJomn (Toronco , Uni"",..iry ofTOIQrIIO Vrno, 1%2), 1 ~9, n,36; more _~ntly, the ( oj«tu", hI~

353. MJ3. Fo, • .....,.,nt dioc""",r)' of gr.o.~"'" bdonging ru 'hi< branch of d ", EloroOOU'..,;b(, Lycurgtls'S f.mily,"'" SEC 37. 160. 161 , 162. found flr.he AiM. APr; 414; H umphreys. """Uy. 129. n. 53. .).J Tram. ~ m.p, aJthough 1",-', pou:ik: 1oco';Oll" w,",f'~'n.

"

m

fAM I L I ES Of THE PR I VAT Il O RA T I O N S

IS

followed this union twO generat io ns b ter w hen Dicaeogenes II adopted D i~eogenes III . D icaeogenes I may also haw: allied with C lean , a fellow demesman, while one of Dicaeogenes II 's sisters was ma rried to a next-doo r neighbor. The kin group of Dicaeogenes I also focused on rur.l.! dcmes, part icubrly in the northern Athenian plain wh ere they and th e Ge phyraei may have held land. Dicaeogenes' line also contr.l. cted marriages to fami lies in sou th Attica where the GephYr.l.ei ""'ere doing the same.

P O LYARATUS OF C HOLARGUS

Ki nship endogamy and repeated alliances into the sa me deme also cha ra clerite th e marriage practices of Poiyarams o f C hotargus, the affine of Dicaeogenes II (figu re 2). Polyantus had marri ed out to one o f the daughters of M enexenus; she W:.IS in turn the sister of D icaeoge-nes II of Cydathe naeu m . O ne of Pol yantu~'s daughto: rs married Cleomedon, son of Clean of C ydathe nae um; thercfore. Polyantus had married a woman fro m Cydath cnacum an d sent his d 1Ughter into that dcm e for her marriage. H is son- in-law, C leomedon. was not only of the deme of o rigin o f his wife's mothe r. but alro may have been his wife's first cousin once removed, if Cleon indeed marri.:-d the dau ghte r of Dicaeoge nes 1.).4 Therefore. Pol yar.l.tus balan ced his own exog:llnous mn riage wi th his daugh t.:-r's endogamous one. Fu rthermore, Po)ynatus's seco nd daughter seems to have followed her sister into Cydath enae ulll, by being givt:n in marr iage to Eryximachus. son of Eryxias, o f C ydath~n~~um (De m. 40.24; I G II ~ 3(63).J~ The d:i ughters' mother m.arried outside her deme of o rigin and kin group. but one of her da ughters may hJ.\"e been Ilu rri ed withi n the kin group, and both da ughters \\'eCC married into her deme o f o rigi n. The marriage of both daughters into Cyd;J.th enaeulll occurred co ntempo n neously with their lllothcr'~ atlelllplS to acq uicc sollie of her brother's es tate away from his ado pted son, D ica~n es I II (Is. 5.5 fr.) . T here is a chan ce as wen that ro me of this pro perty lay in Cydathenaeum itself..leS 11: Oobar"c. Dnro .... 48 . •uggot> tho. sonle of l)i~ gt'nes II', property t.-,.. in eydu~n.o(urn.

'"

m

16

C H APTER

I

e rt)' of hi, adoptive fathe r (ib id .• 5-6).)1 When he n:ac.hed his nujo rity. how· ever. Dicaeogenes III chill('nged this arrangemen t and. indeed, won back Ihe whole est3te. This turn of events w:u then chall enged by Dicaeogenes II 's sisters and their sons. and partic ularly by Poly.mlllu', wife (i bid .. 9 fT.) . We cannot see aU the logistics of deme association and its influence on a demeslllllll" property. although Osborne has done a good deal to illuminate th e role o f dcmesmen and the workings of deme politics and social networks. What I wish to st~ hen: is how demesmen conld be appealed to when an esule o f one of th em ""':IS in dispute; for this. fOemosthencsj44 is all esse nti:ll source.3\! In the OemOfthenic Or;J.tion. MeidyJides of Otryna. who had married outside his kin grou p to a woman from e rioa. wished to give his only child. a daughter, to his brother Archiades. The brother n:fused the offer. and the daughter w.u given in marriage to a nonkinsman. Aristotl e of Pallene. The sister of Meidylides and Archiades had :ilia Illarritd o ut to a Leostnrus of Eleusis, whose daughter th en Illuried a dclllcsman from Ele usis. who was perhaps a kinSlllll.ll of her fath er ([Dem. ) 44.13, 17, 21).~Tht son from this union, Lemr.ttCi, was the n adopted by Arc hiades imo his esr:alt. One tmy wdl wonder how these famili es met. As with any of th e f.unilies in this chapter. political activities, bnsiness, or war could have provided an opportunity for meeting but interests in look cannot be d.isIIl.issed. Although th e l()cation of Otryna is unknown, but aUigned tentatively to the city trittyS of Aegeis, -10 M eidylides and his family we~ cert.1inly domiciled in the city (ibid., IS); in fac t. his grandson was employed in the l'eiraell$ as .1 herald (ibid., 4, 10). City residence therefore .1Uowed the alliance with the family from Eleusis,.1 deme which was quite accessible to the city. Furthermore, th e speaker states that • .1fter Meidylides h.1d attempted to contract an a.lIi..1ncc for his cbugh ter with his own brother, t\n:hiades. the latter refused and retired to Salamis (ibid., 10. 18). Pn:· snmably. Archiadcs ownt"d some property on Ihis ishnd which by offihore from f leus!s and the Peiraeus . ~1 Once Leocratcs was adopted ioto Archiadcs' estat ... he sired a n.1tur.U son, left that son in the estate. .1nd returned to his native deme, Eleusis. LCQCratcs' son, LeOStr:ltus, did the same. leaving his natural son. l eOCr.ltcs II . When th e latter died without issu(', however, l eostratu! tried to have himself reenrolled into Archiadcs ' C$tat .., and. as a first step, he appealed to the demesmen of Otryna, including the demarch, to ~enlisl him into their dem ... (Leonr.ltus's ultimate goal was to h.1ve another son, Lcochares. replace U:mr.ltes II in .Archiades' cstate.)42 J1 ~ /s«u,rt of tI, .. d.y du .... r of " .. ~i. in the nortbcutern pl"n. would No'~ bin clooc: .., Pal_ l.."". Cr;", h:as abo b«n";gr>ed 100000tion is unknown : T rai.U,

n.-u. uup.

"

m

FA MI L I E S O F T H E P R I VATE O RA T IONS

It bcl doll .. 10 the fuurth c~n'ury and whim _ found "laurium. It deJ"CI$ ) young )"ned 11>1.11 luding a hors... n..- imcriptiOln, IG 1\1 7016. ",ad! simply Af:_pO"tI'fI; O tpllVE';';' (D,alogued by G . Ka kul. , M~",,"p"""" AM, . "ppl. 10 (lkrlin: Gd>r. Mum. I~). 1; 3, no. l 6. wilhou, prooopogr>.phic:ol C1)IlUnnll.j GM" the youthfulneoo oft"" m:ok flj!U"" Ih~ """+-. w hich is depic.ed .,., ,he """". m:oy .... gge>< Ih.I. LeocI"2lO died untnlr, iro. It would he >'ff)' t~mp"intl to associal~ th. d«u.cd h~", wilh the youn~' LcolI"2lO who hxI bttn odoptcd poothurr>udds ~. runt..-. dimo:noion 10 this ...herwiK ~ family 60m EkutiI. Sec now C A. CO>! . ~The Nameo of Adop«-eI.; SonK PlOIIOf>O&nphical A" • •thoughts.~ ZT'€ 107 (199;): 251- 5Z. 02 0.......... A PF. 194--%. for a dioct.wion of Ihil r.mily" m... hin>< ;o.... ~ .~al ", the dnn.n:h nuy suggest that .. It.... sotn. of the PfO\'JbitUIOf io the diJpule ~ M'rltime", .nd 1Joco; "",e aIoo 0 ....... A PI ; 511. _s R.cco:ntly. O. R. ... kin. ~The Mining lobby at Athens.~ A ....$« 19 (1989): 201.1w $l.llW"ed dta.t PoII"''''= and ~nriaJ were oIipn:hic JyI11p.>tIti~ a IllQYCrnnlC supponcd by lnining families who IUffi,rcd heavily during the !,un part of the ~Ioponnnian w... .t

'"

m

18

CHAP T 1!R 1

Other propenied f.l.mi li c:s wil h inte rests in tht" mines forged kinship links in soUl h Atli c~ . The tyralll Cr i ti ~~'$ descend:mts, if not he himsc:!f, h~d mining interests in so uth Attica; C r itiaS5 siner :;eenu 10 have married Hagnodorus of Am_ phitropc: in sou th Atti ca (Lys. 13.55).46 50 mo, Nausides of O e, who was acti\"C in the- mining district, s«ms to have been adopted by a family from Aegilia, ill sout h Atti ca.·7 This long discussion of O icacogc:nes' kln gro up and affmes has pointed o ut the connection between property holdings and demt'1 of (p""pecti ve) in-bws. In othe r families, mining act ivi t!t'1 seem 10 have ted to ma rital or ~doptive ties with fa miti es ill demes o f sout h Attica. O nce non kinsmen had been absorbed into the kin group, thC$e rebtiOll5hips could be re affirm ed by kinship endog:,ulIY, by adoption. o r by repeated allianc es into the na tive deme- o r into the demc of o ne's affines. [n th c:$e maneuvers, .uthough the disparateness of th e demes involved lIlay be at ftnt glaring. on closer examination, the .uliances re-flect a consolidation of interests in a locale o r sevcrallocalc:s in Attic:a.

THE FAMILY OF DEMOSTHENES

For the Bousdidae and Dicaeogenes' gro up. th e discussion has centered on intere5l$ in demes assigned to coastal trittye$, in the no rthern plain and in south Attica. T he re was another prominent family, that of the orato r D em05thenes, whi ch was dom iciled in th e city, with interests cd lakCO\'t'r. Jce Osborne, 0 . _ 1-1 and UUw in "aion in CbterK ;n A' ....,,_: on the ~

nur~

of Dcini.. '. sUter.

Kimion o n 1M

"".ct location of Pith ..., ..,., ~

135, ."d 136. 0,34. '" h i, diff... ult w uy whnhtt both C iron . nho D.Yi... APt; 562-63 . ... D.vin. APt; 475-76. for rRnl(x:r.ltci rnilknry in Aphid, ... • 7 R..>plud St>ky "'.. oM fin. '0 point Out Eucumon ', ..-gio....1 bias. though St>.lry did urodrt_ ntinw. ,h. di",anc~ bctw.,~n ~ph"" an.d Aphidtt..>: R . Sky. &up in Ottlt l'IJiirin (Now York.: ManyLan.d. 19(7). 189-90. Euaernon" .hecat workod. and he did not rn...ry rRrnocmcf ";1Iboulc on ,hc ;'lKr;pt;"" is Archcdicc' doughlcr. D.v;es (AI't; 475-76) h.. l.n .h••tI...iOluhip

-

.., D.vin. A I'li $62. for Euclcrnon's .......... Davies c0I1J«rnrn ,lui Hcgeso, ,lie dougfllCf o f ProJt_ en"" who was contntm"""ted on a in th. Cer.trneicus. ...... ,he doughier of Pit. . nu, t of Aphidru. If "'" rithrux"nus "mo, her (or wif.) " .... ,he own..... Iud nurtkd. "-'1UI1 /fun, s...;.ia c. 470 (And. 1.41; Dn; .., A Pr; 30, 329). 1( .10, then th. marriaBt of Andocidei >im-r 10 CalIias. son ofTdocle!. to judge /fum'M ~ n.m. Tdocln. nuy ~ ~ a mvriage 10. (eno....· dcm",,",un in C)-d.>therunJm. or nuy b.a .... bc:J1 a1[,.ncf with • man in Angelc o. Myr mmOU4). In odlcr words, Andocidn' l:in group m:ty tu..'t k Ill IWO wO.... n in nUr_ . ioge 10 the vicinity of Stciria; their oBi" ... i" turn. ",nt • WO"'1" into the city (:unity ~ Andocideo. by h:wing he. nu. ty Ihf onlO" f:u:her'. f.ther. He< ~nt. Andocide!' liKcr. bxk into. (amily whow: c u",,"n ndghborhoool f:>eili.1u:d thc alliance bcno.=1 t'M) gtUUps who _'" quite pouibIy £run, di>p.o....., .. ""II. Th. siucr of Andocidts' brotb~,_in_ bw. CaUix. Iud nurricd N;ci:ui broth • •. Eucnln of Cyttimidu. Euml..• broche,', ""'. Nidas 11. nurried lhe vKinity of A"gel< and M y.rh;...,u.. by ",.. rying lhe lia; l Y" 19. I~ I)mn, .i PI; 202-3. Th~ homonymi\>
"

m

FIlM I L I I!S OF THI! PRIVA T E O RATI ONS

29

the female line; the adoptee is ehO!len from a line o utside th e adopter's m.ale agrultic line but within his sphere o f residence o r activity. This adoptio n pr.lcti ce indicates that marital ties wen: originaUy form ed on the basis of propi nquityspouses wen: 110\ wandering fa r to marry.8 ~ How then did a Io:in group react when o ne of its own was adopted Out? In Thelllistodes' c:ue. after the adoptio n of his loOn into his father-in- law s. Lysander's, oikos., his ~'Q children by tv.'Q different wives married. while anot her daughter marri ed her father's brothers son ($ee appendix, p. 218). Although th ~ endogam ous unions occurred at th e time o f Thelllistocies' disgr.lce :.md, therefore, could have been prompted by it as ....'C1I ,8~ the c:ue of Sosith eus shows that endogamy follo ....'t'd adoption OUl witho ut the threat of political disgr.lcc: aft er Sositheus had his youngcst loOn adopted imo the esute of his wife's fath er, So5itheus's tbugiller married his brother's so n. A ~trili n e. then . ....'Q uld pnctiscendogaluy as a response to the adoption out of one of its memben. In other 1;:lSeS, howe\'Cr. the adoptee. altho ugh adopted o ut o f the patriline, will hinudf (herself) nu rry back into the patrili ne, o r a direct descendant will do so. For instance. according to Tho mpso n's reconstruction, GlauCU! o f Oeum had his tbughter adopted by his nutrilineal half-bro ther. Hagnias. of the same dcme. but the adoption was fo llowed by the d:l.Ughters marr iage to her fath er', full brother. There are other, more certain cases o f Ihe use of this str1llegy. In lsae us 10 Ar istarchus o f SypaletUis had nurri ed OUl of his deme and kin group. his bride being the daughter of Xenaenerus o f Acharna e, a nearby deme. AristlrchU5 secured the fortune of his f.lther- in-law, XerulenelU5, by having hi~ son Cyronides adopted into Xenaenetus's estate (4-7). When Aristarchus's own estate became ... Osborne. 0.- . 128. nuinlain. ,lin propinquiry In adoption is OttOr>dary m bnship ' in. I un su-euing hom: 1Iu, propir>qui,), ""II neffSUry to iniri ... "",.. i. 1I" lies for th~ funilia diSCWKCIivi,;n ........e close to ,h~ dnn~ of his >dopI:i ... funily. N.usicleo had been odop!w by. family." 0« ..... &om AVi.... A PI; 229:Th".dippuo ~ bo:cn adopcw into . notll-er f, ,,,ily of Ih~ Anl~ Ikme. A",pl..-n. Th~ adopt;... f. mily bdonged 10 • dilf=!lI pllr'm y (Is. 9 .2. )l) .nd. th~ ... I0",. would !H)( Iu... bo:lonvd 10 Thu.dippu . .. p'..ili....,,,,.. other ineidtn. (ANi 4S) invol .... th~ odoprion ofTh ...ybuJ", of Lou ... into 'he hou..- of HippoloclUdcs. ,lit son ofThnoyrncdn of l.-ouoU: .lIe "mibr;ry of _ in Ihe rwnes may HIIW" 1OlIl~ I0I'l of >gIWic kimhip: O.bome. llmoot, 2-4S n.7.1>owt-w •. 5UICIo m.. .be kinship is uncle... >OS",.. ;Og...l1Y .mong the poli.ical ch", in Eu_ ro~. SepleT1 akodiscussn Ih( p.>tlern fof ~:Wrl! f:l.milies in rnnC( ; 1« below. note 102. H. Rosmfeld. " Tht O ;m,r.>dic. ion Ik,w"tn l'n;>p$ R dkctnI ut thc MufU@:gn:>.ory. "X«pI W. "z " suntdnu + FUO (?) (200): t\n;hq>,00is + FI) (21 1): Phr.toicLes + FBI) (2 11): I"yribn'p'" + Z D (330): Thttnnn<us + ZD (.o1);Thr>i!"" + MU!) (9 1); t\phobus + MH', ",idQw ; ~h .. + MZD (118 If.): Olorus + M Z D (235-36: D.vi.. is . kqxiaJ); H ipponieus III + MMUD (265); Cimn + M ZD (3D): C1eom"don + MU!)I) (320). Rcb.ioouhip unck ... ndlor d' ...." : J>oIywc ..... + w,(t of bc homachus (6): Akibiw... III + Hippo""" (if both ",b u"d.o ""'ideo) (19); i"toending out two wOlllen to a l1l;ln's oikos, the man will be leaving his child beluud ~s heir in the woman's original kin group. O therwise, m.:l rriage to a kinswoman through the matriline could leave the offipring from that uni on at a SC'vere dis:ldvamagc le~lly: Ciron's grandson from Ciron's tirst muri;lge to his motherl siuer's son was prevented from inheri ting Ciron's esute by Ciron 's agnate, his brother's son. Sositheus. in the end, ~ppe4 1~), who bdio:w ,boo ",",our's 1Ucscem ." ,n 1M RlIr,,,,,,,, cfMO
"

m

TOWN AND COUNTR Y , MARRIII GE liND

DEIITH

39

phasizcd kinship through the f~ the r. Therefore, brothcrs' SOilS, f~thcr's brothers' sons and their des

pr

em

..0

C H APTER 2

sider findspots in deuil. for. 015 we will sec. the practices of those: domiciled in the city, regardless of demotic, could be quite different from those o f residents o f fUral are:.ls. wh ere deme and loe:.lle pbycd :.l Inge r rol e. O ne eX:.lmple in which the findspot of the gnveStone c:.I n nuke a subst:.lntial difference is in the case of Aexone. Osborne lIuintains that this deme seems to have had no connectio n with the Peiraeus. yel the findspots of gravestones recording men from this dem e show th3t sevent ee n out of t\venty o f th t$(' men, w ho were domiciled in th e city. resided ill the Peiraeus.'J M ore rece ntl y, D3msgaard- Madsen's investig;ttio n of migr.uio ns. b:.lSed on 3 thorough uudy of the findspots of the gravestones, has reinfon::fi:l a th eory c:m tiously proposed by Gomme that the cbssical era witnessed he3VY migrat ion from thc co untry to the city. 10 U nfortunately, Damsgand -Madsen's study WlIS 3 preliminary o ne 3nd did not consider mnri3ge ti es or women's mign ti ons, though it noted briefty th3t wo men were less SUtiOll3ry th31l men. 11 The basis of the present cha pter will be th e corpus of gnvc inscriptions compiled by th e Copenh3gen team o f Mogens Hernun Hansen, Lars Bjertrup, Thomas Heine Nielsen. Lene Rubinstein, and Torbe n Vesterga3rd. 12 Although th e corpus includes inse riptions of H ellenistic 3nd R OIlUIl due, the present study will foc us on those inscriptio ns of th e d :.lS$ical era. tilling from befon: c. 300 B. C, The purpose here will be to study th e nurriages conrracted by both the we3lthy and the less \\'e:.llthy, and to determine to a gre:.lter extent th3n hitherto into w hat demes Ath enians nu rried.:.Is \\'(' 11 as wh eth er th eir nurriages involved migration or kept them . more o r less. in their demes o f o rigi!>. Of prime importance 10 this study is H . Osswald's investigation of the town of Porto in northern Portugal, in the firs! half o f the seventeen th centu ry. Porto lay a few kilometers from , Ibid .. 2-3. I focus on men alom ... the "",men whose n;lmes pI'OCede a nule fWDo:ore not buril ",omen help.-d out in 1M fi~1d cert.inly fron, timo: 10 ,;n>e: R. U_ k. '" The u oour of Won .." in Cl...k al ",.hem."

toN""

CQ« (1994): ).t}-4.6;w, &I>ridd. "~ MoO! SIlent Won.. n ofG"",« .nd Roo, .. : R urall..:abour and ~n·. Lif~ in ,ho: Ancinlt World (I): GlR H (1995): 202- 17. " S« below, note S1. fur ~ won"n. p«1t.pI Iron, R ..."',,"".. who _ buried in ''''1 okn.. bUI ~pJ.rt Iiom her hlHbar>d ft' !Ht1..) . who in turn ""'" finon T nc
CHA PTER

,

TABLE Ie EJsewh~rt in Athens and Environ!

H"sNnd ~

Dm,

lIlMriplil)?, •

'1~c{ W!fo~

Dtmt

Filldspct

RnjJmlr ~

6767

Sunium

Mar:lthon

Phakrum

741 4

5unium

Ma .... lhon

XYp"te

A IlOr;! 17.1%

Cropid:lc

Cropid..:le

Ago"

AIlOr.! 17.191

Conthyle

C qJhilia

Ago"

SEC 2 1.890

Melite

CydanthenaeuII1

Ago"

SEC 14.174

Pmiae

}'aeania

A","

5396

Aelhalidae

Cephale

Cypsdi

5479

Hili.

Cmhocida.,

SepoLia

5753

Ph!y>

Aphidna

P:ttuua

7528

Sphcttus

Aetlulidac

Ambdokepi

Acharnae

I'hy!"

city

SEC 35.255

M eli!e

I-bb"

city

Sli e 29.207

Ccnm,,"

Cc nme"

c ity

",n

Hermul

Acha rnae

D aphn;

"'54

}>"'r.leU$

Ekulis

TtlIchon~

5533

Halimow

Alop«e

Tr:achones

55}}

H:olimous

HalimQUS

Tr.lchon~

-

'"

Pdr.lW5

Ro"f

n?

Chbornc no. 19

Stamiris no. 6

"

" " " "

. !itt ,>11"'. bu, ('tlS! 6028 nuy bt' ~onIing the intr>-deme l
nc~ with • city funity and rtSidel'\Ct' in the PeuxUI . ln 6929 and 69301 the group burial"""'" tI..l PnxiIU ofCof>rus " '35 buried with her h...b;.nd. N icippus of Xypete. and his broch ... and the Im... 's childres!.. Jon .. KI. pekc.and tM Salamin;oi.- .7..1'£83 (1990): 243-«1.>nd par_ .icuhrly 247. wh= Humph...,.. cmphasius tIw or;girully . M umn cent .... ~ .. Ak>p«c .nd bnllcitlber. A""bios «(.!her·s f.. her), had nurri.-d Glycc wughler of A"",hinc< of Ereh;', Throdorw' b"",hen Amilluchu. and "'nibios.rc cotlUnemnnl.-d in nl8, aha found in the I'nr>.cus. "" His "em"", .. foll",,'W b)o D.vkt, API; 21 - 22. and Humpb"')'S. "'''';/y, 11 7. b", is questioned by G.rbnd. " FIn< C".!ogue," 1>12. ).I

TOWN AND

COUNT RY , MARR I AGE AND DEATH

51

mother, Critole;J., daughter of Ph;J.nocies of Cettus, were ;ili.o of the u rne ttit~. P hanocles' ,son's SOli, Phanoeles, the son of Aristion, thell married C I('Q fmm AexOlle. abont ten kiiomefeI"$ from the city and on a good communicatio n route along th e 'west CO;J.St. In o th er words, the city f;J.mily of Phanocies fo r rv."O gene r.ni oru allied with memben of its own trittys ~nd in the third gen e rati o n ;U!ieer Mi eioll from AIUgyruS, then nurried a woman of a neighboring deme, Hilie, if the H ab.e ill our inscription refers to H alae Aexonides. Outside of the C erameicus, 5479 (table Ic) shows that Exopius of H ilie, pt:"rhap5 to be identified with a landowner in the mining di5tri ct.37 is buried with his wife, D emocleia of Cothocidae and one o f her brothers in the (:ity at Sepolia. bu t her two o ther brothers ~re buried on Salamis, where the family pmperty may have been located. ~ If so, the deme of D emoelt:"i~ 's family is knov.'n. being ofliturgic:u standing, with a symrierarchy to its c redit.39 In th e case of Exopius, therefore, his marriage alliance, besides focusing on th e mining di5trict, focu~ as well on the island of 5:llamis and th e dty, very similar to the pncti ce of the family in Pseudo-DemO$th en~ 44 outlined earlier. where: Arch iad~ resided on S:rhnus, his brother's family resided in the city, and their sister w;as marri ed to a man £rom Eleusis. Our sun'e)' indic ate~ that among th e members of several fanulies buried in th e Peiraeus, although rome members were bu ried ill the city and presumably resided there. others resided in the native, rural deme. In some cases we could .. H~,npbl"e)"-. Fdmily, 112. Th~ son i cOUlin, a falh~", bn thai tho two ~bood", .. " Sib";,,., ."d Exoce..idn ate" ..... ally f.th.c in "" nul' (~aM "nn)'f ['tbront ...: t\lhmu.rtl. Vic;-

tori1 ColIe~, 1986). map). conjrcruring t:1tr. citY or ;nl.;lod u iuys a.ignmau. S. '/lot 109 .. od .abl~ I .

"""ilJl m'....~ .,J Drollt (London: R.oudcdgn-sa>e ",;gnteloo ,he Thriasion pl.;" wh= 00 hltlbondi drmoo. On.o
m

TOWN AN D

COUNT RY , MARRIA GE AND DEAT H

55

TABLE 2c Rural Burials: Central Anio.

THII M IiSO(;ElA

5658

Anaphlyscw

An~ph!)otu!

Liopeli

5867

lbte

Erchi,

Spat ~

6()97

Erchia

6834

Erchi,

M dit~

Spm

6100

Erchu

Erchi3

Liopcsi

6135

Erchia

Erchia

Spat3

6131

Erchia

»hl~

Sp~ta

7087

"

UOpc"Si

0
acania

Liopcsi

7095

l':acania

Knl'la

7098

Puania

Liopcsi

7527

Sphcttus

5817

Acharn;M:

,.allene

R.hamnoU$

"

SECZ6.301,304

7521

S EG 21.855

Thrw;lll plain

WIVE!! BUlIFl) AWNII

'407

Anaphlystus

Acxonc

Karebl Liopesi

"I"

7111

E1cwis

Pithus

EI.. u~;s

"

Osborne no. 39

E1cusis

Conthyk

Etcu!';s

"

H alimoul

EkuSil

M cnidi

"'"

6Q.l'

"

m

TOWN AND

C OUNT RY ,

MAR R I AGE AND

TABLE 2d

Instripl;"" It

7259 SEG21.831

7376 SEC 30.219

H..JblSS). The fir"'p'" ......., hmbd.. 1II .... root "C/ur'" abo 'PP""" ,n the- au.,,,,,,h,,n group. I would sp«ub", til>! u.c,..., wu. lcimhip li~ with the: groups in SEC. Unfonu""t~1y; tJ.. find.pot ot 6218 is givw c.nistntc of )(eU1 '" wd a! ." ArisfOnitt d..ugh<e. o . wife 0( Plunodc"M 01 Eilea: SEC 31.194. 197. For u.. lwo demes callw EK"•• nd !h. ""I>IIO""Y concn-ni"ll which 0..., _ 1oc,,1N! in nonhe:>\< Attic•. ) « T,...;u. Ot......, 141-.42; ror Tric"'1'nlh ..... SliC 30.21II "",...do • C.lliltOrnKnc d..uW"'" of C"phili,. 0( "",,,,..od de""" who I...t be.n "",., inlIO' " .. n from Trio:oI Rlwnnow. c..ui<wn.... h" ..... buric co,,,,,, •. 'hen i< ro,,1d "nde",,,. o.borne"..... l.!I!d'i"", !h" women whos/= demo ""'... not m .... li<mw on the Melx alrne from rhdr hlJ$b:andi dtnu:: (.or\30-31). Gulond, '" Fi", CatalotJul\il«)(luchei f.dlef. Ccpltisiul. aIS<J :<j>pt"'rl in Tncorynth .... Ihe den"" of Calli!lom>
",1C:-nM insc"l"'ions ."" IG II' s.817.

S~,

6100. 6111 . 613S. 6430, Ml7 (2 m.unc... ).

706/), 709S. 7098. 73lO.

"III

pr

m

T O lVN ... ND COU NTRY ,

M ... RR I "' GE ... ND

DEAT H

61

were of litu rgical status and resided in the de m!! o f origi n .~ 7820 records an alliance among families of Paean ia and Oa in the same trittys and therefore neighboring; residence 'oV;l$ near Paeania (findspot at Liopesi). Two intn-deme mar_ riages are also recorded (7060, 7095) for Paeania; in these alliances, residence was in the Mesogda. at Spata and Liopesi. The families of the Mesogeia did not ma rry solely among th emse h'es, but did marry into the nonh ern inland demes: 6131 records a marriage that had a woman from Phlya migrate some len kilo metel"$ to he r husband 's deme of Er(:hia. On the oth er ha nd, 7098 records th e lo ng-dista nce mar riage of a \\-"Oman from Acharnae who ntignled to Paeania. he r husba nd's deme. O therwise wo men from distant coaslal and city demes by and large mignted 10 the inland fo r th eir marriages. 5S T he northern inland demes (table 2c) also show a great tendency for families to fo rm mari tal allian(:es with o nes fro m the same o r neighboring demes. For instance. a woman from Deceleiajoins her husba nd's family at Acharnae (58 17), w hile 5983 records the ma rriage of Nicodcmus, son of Phanias of DIXeleia, to a woman from Phegou_ nearby deme. if the conjectu red trillYs assignmem is (:orre(:r--with residence in DIXeleia, the husband's de me. Nicodemus. the proposer of a d«rec for th e phratry Demotio nim.e, 'oV;l$ a wealthy and impornllt man in both his phra try and his deme-D ecd eia, the center fo r the Demotio nidae.!16 Another family in Phe b"Ou5 (6437) se nt thei r daughter to a man in ... For 11K >tnnnu of61)5 ..... D.vio. A Pr; -102: for 6 100. ibid .. 361-62. wlKn D.V\n. follow· ing Kirchner. focls eml b«aUK then is a Iowlroplooiw &piCt...! Of! the >10m Amicntes ....... of Call. ienlles of Erch". rurnc10 .... ~ di...! befo ... his nu... ;'~ ' 0 Ariot ••du.... do"gh,.,. of l)'lis of Erchia. who n romm.mon.ed with him . D.vin n followed by o.bor .... 0.--, 134. For . m""" . .. ".iorury not •• ...., C.rUnd. "Fi", c..>logu .... 1)0, n. 20. who. ri.inll I e II I 5614. demon. >Inc .. duo Iowh.",.., oi could be oucd Of] tho: II:r:"," of married p«opk . u ~ lUCh rrurriasa ..... re·J f:lOh.,., E"thyc",,,,, of CeJr~ •. ~. be COlnlTlemo .... ed on • gnvatOf!e found in .... he". {SEC 32.279} . Tht .. on. _ ",,,!.cd but if itS flndspot.......,..Is tlut i. originally "ood in Ih. city. then T~1b WOO from .n "rho" f~ and Iud mig .......! '0 the M ~ fot her nu.rug.-. In oo:htT alliJnas linking f,,,,ilio from dHp>....'" inhnd dcmes Or Iinlliu.,. burW .. Crphi";'" of. WOINn 60rn IUwnnow who Iud been married '0 • nun flOm Thork"L 0.... firul. "xorilocal " ....... go is rett 1boo."e, cb.p< .... I. P. ll). OIl In (O,,!nIt, ""e wonun from i\Jopn •• Rmt ...4 s.-;...J iN An(ino, GImt (So:anI"Ofd, D.!i(.: Sunford Uni>Tniry l'res). 154-55. ;l D ovict, AP"; 142. Th', kkyt'-. 67 J 7•. Q unfonu ...."ly unkllOWn .

6-4

C HAPTER 1

melllonted on th e sto ne :.lI"C C lcostr:r.te's siue-r, Sostr:r.te, :m d the biter's husb:md, Er:r.tocles, $On of $o$tr:r.w s o f Oaedalid:i.e. The fe-llIini~ed form of $o$tr:r.tus for o ne womans name and the root sl mli ill the other wo m.an 's name suggest tha t they are re lated to Sostr:lWS and Er:r.tocles. $On of Sostr:ltus. Also, because Sostra tus's f:.llher was al50 named Eratocles. and the yo ull~r Er:r.tocles· fath er was named SoStr:l tus, I would infer that th e twO huslnnds were related to each oth er: they may well have been fOithe r·s brother's sons!O each o ther. III o ther words, the elder Sostr:ltus and the elder Entocles ....-ere brothers. Became th e women C:.IlIle from a different de-me from that of th eir husb:.lllds, but had simibr names to their husband or husband's fa ther, the women may well have been reb ted to their husbands through a woman. If so. it is more than likely that a fem.ale ascencbnt o f the womens husbands had been gi\-en in ma rria~ to Deximenes, the wolllen·s father. T herefore, th e ascencbm , a ki nswonu n of $o$tr:ltl.IS :.Ind Eratoclcs. went to ,",charnae-, but her cb Ugh te-TS ....-ere b rough t back to Oaed:LIidae. ~ '"' 5imib r str:ltegy has the fa mily re:.lcting to the departure o f a ki nswonun by nu.rrying within its deme. If Davies's reconstruction is correct, Meu genes o f Cydtthenaeum was hillueif married to a fellow de mcswomJIl (6587); Meta~nes' brother's cbughter. DeiiOis. the daughter ofNici.as,was -Sent o ut of her deme Cyd:i.th enaeum 10 Illarry (possibly) ,", polexis. 5011 of Euaeon of Ert:hia: th e findspot of the sto ne on which she is reco rded (6097) was at wopesi. and Iherefore nu y indicate that Delias mignlted out and resided in her husb:.llld·s deme. This mig ntio n out, howevt:r. was fo llowed by a good de..1 of intra-deme co nsolidatio n on the pari of her agmu es alld her own descenda nts. D:.Ivies surmises that Delias's brother's $On marri ed a woman o f his own deme and th:.ll Dclias's ow n gr:r.ndson ($On's SOli). PhI6Sisthe-nes, son of Eualcides of Erdua. married:.l wonu n from his deme of En::hia (6 135).6« In other words. the nlarriage of a WOnl:.l n Out of her city family and her introd uct ion in to a runl family was followed by intr:r.deme Ilu rriagcs in her families o f both o rigin and of m.arria/:.'C".

POSTSC RIPT: THE DOTAL HOROI

There has been no systemalic study 10 dale on the rcbtio n betw'Cen fmdspots o f horoi defining secured property for a dowry and the deme o f the wom.an to be married. M ethodologically, this study nu y seem hJurdous as the sam ple is \-ery "" Stt. C. A. Cox. -S;II~'" Oaugh«n .. >mt Wt "f'O'u..n.w is no .tiff• ..,,,, lhan ..m.... typos of..,_ curity uon! by the Arhen~ ...: E. M. H~lTi •. '"A J>artMBMA : Alhenim T..-minot"lP' for fk:u Security in

uueo and Dowry Agrlionl. will ",Iy m:.nl lim~ 1 .ime "" ""h~ ....... uu. for inMana: l'Iu ....ch .. bioot:"'pb~. I'luran::h" ~"'YS 0f1 .K~.ion «>want c hiloe. hov.TYef. wiD".,. be ~ .. ,hcy ",.ely ~"ain 10 Ath~ni.n indi_ vid~ 11uf>rcb in ~",I;" a difficul. ",urc~'o...., bom" d"" ...."'" of 01 ..."", ndgndgtinj: .ncn.;on ' 0 ~ .• affina. Th..., l!her W2I ...,luclant 10 Iu,.., hi. JOn ","rry . t '00 e"ty an IIIC ,"d be: thereby led '0 q"e:!.ion the olled I ,non.Ilmi. for .he union; SA", C . .U And 1lW, M..JMt, 199.201 . II A. Snfilm. " Wi"""""l! and Falst Witncl4ing: Proving Citi... mhip .. ,d Kin ldemiry In rourlhCmtury ... t ........- in AtIom .... fdnrriry ",,1/ Civic '~. ed . .... fI.oS. KCond .nd Ih,m wivn); L)'J. 14.28 (Hipponicw lJ r. wife); II. 2.6 If. (Mcncclco' wife), 10. 6 ("'" ab ,..,. .. 10 . ~) (Eue le" ,,,,,,' fi .... ""';(e); Ixm . .loO-JI (0""'.,..·. _ct. d,_ccIr:weU.

1988). 75. poinu OUII"'" :U'\On& the n>cdi~ rnoriliou. hu!oNnd', .xcns"'" ""'" for h" wif. ....... ,omidctffi adulIt""". Emocional .handon ........ wonc f. ulL w ithin "",.,i.age ,han ouUIbiliry. tee ibid .. 299.

w,,\ow,

pr

err

H OUSEHOLD

H ARMONY

AND

CO NFLI C T

75

fusio n of rn-o esUtes, tha t of her husband and that of her oileos of o ri gin (fo r exam ple, Is, 2.4-5; Oem . 27.5, 30. 12, 59.2- 3). Th is ....'aS not m erely rhetoric; the husband could be a vociferous defe nder of his wife 's clai ms to her father's eslale, should she be an heiress, o r to her brother's owe, sho uld he die without heirs (O e m . 43.3 If., 63 if.; b. 3.22 If.; 5.9 if.; 7.3; 8.4 1--42; 10. 18-20: I I A 1--42, 49).28 Funh ermo re, a wife could inAu e nce he r h usband either to adopt o ne of her killSm e n (O e m . 4 1.3 If.; Is. 2.7 fr.) or to ~nd one of the ir sons o r
the o«cions on moth"".r>ns ;mol.

n>Olh~n

ar>.ushl~n below. pp. 99-1().4.

" fo< runhcr"'f=nc ... "'c Il. M . Setup
FATHERS AND SONS, CURRENT RESEARC H

T he current trend in Jl$ychoa nalyti cal analyses o f fatherl son re lat iOll5hips in Weste rn society is to emphasize the distance of the fa ther from his fa mily, his ('mOlio nal separatio n from his children. and th e role of the mother as chief can:give r.J.8 The SC'p.;iralio n o f the Athenia n mal(' citize n from his oikf1s will be a concern in ('ha pter 5, but the studies th:u ha\'C shaped th(' following di'ICu'lSion are those that foc us on the interaction of mate ria.! and emotio nal conce rns, particularly in those soci('ti es in w hich ho nor and shame determine be havior. In his recent work on fat hen and sons ill Athe ns, Barry StnU'lS has argued that ex;llllpies from modern Greece are instructive. Among the pastoral Sarakawni of Epirus, for instance. thCTC is a great dea.! of tension ove r th e timing of transmissio n of property. In ancienc Athens, a.!tho ugh posclllon em transrniS!io n of property was the idea.!, ill fact sons could at least assUIll(' the managelll(' nt of the estate before the fathers de3th.J9 As in ancient Ath ens, $.;&raka w ni f.r.then and sons arc carefu l to prese nt thenuc:lvcs ill 3 Ull ified way. wi th the son co nstantly displaying respect fo r paternal au tho ri ty.4/) Behind this public unity, h~"Cr, the relatio nship betwe('11 fath er and SOli is delicately bala nced for th(' Sarakawni; in

tI'''''''

)' H ;' son, Ih~ ~.ur. was """.j,,ly j" debe IU ,"" 01.,,, (20) ."d d."ned ' 0 1\3"" mtagn' dowri,", '0 his .... ,,1'$ (25) . .. For ;ruur>Ce, s. H. C uh. A. G"",';n. and L. Gun~ eds .. Row.. 4"11 1lori, F.vtoi/ia (Hill><We: Th" AlUlytic ~ 19:89)0 M _ lamb. 1lw fiulo(r1 RiW, Crrm-C~/IwNl I'm,-i~ (H illotWe-: t..'"""'nct Erlb.>u", .-.....woes. t 987). '" p. Smu.. ~"'" Soou .... Aooritool Ar/Inou (f'rinc01on. N.J.: ....,n«ton Univen.ity'-""'" 1993). 67- 70. S« rollher the discu..oon below. p. 86. .... C2mpbtU, 160-61, 170-72.

H_.

pr

err

78

CHA PT E R

1

return for his son's respect. a father is fon;ed by social pressure to h~nd over man :lgenu"nt of th e estate to his dde$t son when the latter h:ls reached thirty; :lny failure to do so (ould le:.ad to th e publi(: airing of the resultant quarrel bemoeen f:lother :Iond son. Any physical or mental f~b1eness of th e fath er would also prompt the SOil to qucsti on th e older /Iun's authority.· t In o ther comm unities outside Greece. inheritance systenu in whi ch there iS:I delayed tr:msmissio n of property betray a mistrust o n the father's pari o f hil children-the father is uncen ain that his children. once they own the land and a house. will Clre for hilll properly.·2 In S('wtilcenth- and eigh tee mh-ccntury H aute- PI'O\'ence, illsolU in peasant and anis.anal families inhe rited shares of movabl es an d (:~h , but one son was selected to inherit tht: residence and the land of the father. Leg;.l.1 authority over the f.ath er'.s estate, howe\'t' r. did 1I0t enter imo effect until the f.a the r·s death. The inheriting SOil could not sell the est:lte. dispose of its WC'al th, or make a will until his father's death; only then could th e son legally own the property. Because o f such hte tralUllliuion of ownership. the inheriting 50n lived in the s.;Illll' house with his father and mother and brought a wife into th e rttidence. If the father :lIId SOli found th e si n' Jlio n intolerable and there was all agreemem on physical separation. such separation would deprive the son of any further r ight to inherit the chief estate ~ nd its residen ce. The father nill did lIot hand o\'er th e son's full shllre of the patrim011Y. a nlo\'oe that would make th e father's 1:(:0110lllic position too tenuous. In the end, physical breab rarely occurred despite tellsions that (ould ari!oe .. mo ng lIIembers of the hous.ehold, which could (Cluist of the inheriting 11011. h is wife, his p~n: n ts . and any unmarried Sibli ngs.·.} To what e:id .. 161~:

U

1S7-.f19. R . l!.rlur ."d n. FI'}"", M\>.Oj> R.,b,ion! bc1Wtt'r1 ApoIIodorus and DrinUs, ..............., do not """'" 10 ~ 1>«.. .mooch :ill "'" .i"",: $f / Po/U; Tow.mllll1ieory of AIh~nWi P.tenul lo:leoiogy 450-)99 a.c.,- in As· pm> .,AIIot";.." ftI. W. Connor tI 01 .• OMNI IJUHn~oo.w. 11 (Copenhagen: M uscum Tu ... OIltnum Prnl. 199(1). lOB. "Fot aunpln of obu.iv.o"""", K. 10.1- 2. 11.7-8; Dei". 2. 14. 18. GiYl"t\ tim .m on.on ""',.., not ...,lucUnt 10 .I/mdcr • riv:ll' fod>ct. \he virtu/J . bsC"nc:.- of c~ of ~~maI t.. Pet or abu"" is n:nwlt.ablt. 0".,.. 19.2lO whCe that his SOli nurried properly and acth'ely arranged th e nutch (l ys. 19 .16: IDem. ) 40. 12; Is. 2.18 [adoptive father]). It was a nutter of ho no r. the refore. for father and son to appear united in the protectio n of th e property of their oikos. Fathers and sorn .....'ere fttq uently $Cell in co urt trying to pn:serve their property o r that of a kinsman (Is. 5.9. 9 ,3-4; Lys. 19. 1- 2; IOcm.!44.4Q-4I ). or the SOil could plead in COOTt to have property, w heth er in land, goods, o r money, returned to his dead father's estate (Is. fro 33; Lys. 17.3 ff.. 19. 1 ff.: O em. 27- 29. 38.1 ff.. 44.3-4, 49.1 fr. ). A closer look at sollle of these cases is instru ctive. In haeos 10. C yro nides, though adopted out of his fathe r's fina ncially en· so. R . Stroud. "G "",I; [noa 'p! IOOI: Theottorides .nd ,he A,hen;';'" Orpiu",," H~ 40 (197 1): 286-30 I..and np. 287. yO !.>tty. F~",;1y. 125: Madx """U . Lno! 92-93; J""'. It lornnr. 115-86. .0 H.rd..,,, . Ltw. 1 :~: Stn" ... 64 . ~, For ;"".tlcr. 1-1,....011 . Uoo: 1:70-7 1; MxUow"U. lAw. 91: Lacoey p"".ily. 11 1- 12: ]. K. [). vieo . •. A,h..".." C n ;kruh.p: T hr o..anl Gl'OIJp an.d 1M Ahr rnalives." C) ?l (1978): 109-10: SIn ...... F.t, Iltm. 64: GoIdrn . CltiUMoJ. 23-24.

"",10m.

pr

err

H OU S E H O LD

HARM O N Y

AN D

CONF LI C T

8)

cum bered dtUC, strOVe no t to let the oikos die out. W hen he sin,:d sons, he Iud them posth umously :.!.dopted in to his deceased f~the r's dUte. T hese :.!.doptions were co ntested by his sisters son, the spe~ker, who ....~ co ntinuing th e c~use of his father, Cyronides' sister's husba nd. The husband. w hile ~Iive. had claimed thaI his wife was an heiress 10 the estate of her father. 62 In Lysias 19, the speaker is in a predicament: when :.!.sking th e state 10 hand ove r to him his siste r's dowry from the confiSCa ted property o f his brot her-in law Aristopha nes, so n of Nicophemus, he does not wan t 10 portray himself or his f:.!.the r as rap;r.cio us: he therefore em phasizes Ihat his father, when COIltr:lcring his own marri:.!.ge as well :.!.s the nu.rri:.!.ge5 of his children. did not consider Ihe weal th bu t the ancestry of his prospective affines (8, 12 fr.). Furth ermore. his f:.!.ther's we.alth now being dem:.!.nded of the sute is of small consequence COI11p:.!.n,:d to the wealth devoted to the state by both f:.!.the r :.!.nd son (ibid.. 57 ff.). T he lengthy lawsuits over Oemosthenes' estate are by now falllo us and lIluch discusscd. 63 The emphasis here will be on :.!. son's attempts to uphold the illl:.!.~ of his fath er as an innocent victim of sc heming kinsmen and frie nds in o rder to justify the son's struggl e to reg:ain his paternal estate. Th ree oratio ns (DenlOSthelles 27-29) survive in w hich Demosthenes deuils the wealth in his fathe r's estate :l.Ild the te rms of the o lder mans will. All three carry the ~me theme: Demosthe nes the elder pu t his estale into the hands of men he trusted and w ho were.all present when he made his w ill. In th e w ill Demosth ell('$ th e Eider g:avr his widow in marriage to his siSler's ron, Aphobus, :.!. nd his five-year-old da ughte r to his broth ers son, Demo phon (Oem. 27 .4 ff., 55-57; 28.4 ff.; 29.47 fr. ). H e selected a th ird gua rdian for the esta te. an old fr iend and dcmesman. Therippides of Pae:.!.ni:.!.: " His intention." Oemosthenes insists. "~that if he j oi ned these men to me by still closer ties. they \vould look after my interests all the bett er because of this added bond of ki nship" (27.4-5). In th e end, Ihe guardians extorted the we;alt h, leaving Oemosthent'S only seventy minae from an estate of arou nd fourteen talents (27.6 ff.). All three or.ltions emphasize thaI this betrayal was sudden and unjustified.bO It is li kely. however, that Oemosthenes the elder did not entirely truSt the me n to w holll he willed guardianship of his estate. T he bequest may we ll ha\'e been an attempt to hide mu ch of Oemosth enes Senior's ('Sute from Ihe SUle to a\"Oid havi ng it encumbered to pay for the tn"ason of Oemosthenes Senior's father-inU In 'he prelim; .... ry u~nti""'..,,, or 'he c_ . ,h~ oreh'as apparently in coUusion w ith the speaker's fathe r: the latter proposed a decree that would ultim:ndy have $e\'Cred I'olyeuctus' stepson from the ('State into whic h the boy had been adopted, that of his m:.tternoU gr.mdf:lther. TIle maneuver \\-'Ould then allow Po]yeuctus man:.tgcrioU control of th e estate to wh ich his wife, the boy', mother, would be the only heir (Dem. SS.30-3 J). H own-cr, given th e pos_ sibility that Polyeuctus might have been related to his wife's fa ther,:lS she was her f:.tther's heiress,9~ this particular conflict of interest migh t h:lVe led to the undermin ing of the boy's righu. The most famous $lcpfath er in our sources is Phormio, the ex-sl:.tve o f Pasio the banker. The latter, before his dea th , had acquired Athenian citizenship, :lnd Pho rmio himself won the hon or in b ter ye:.tI'$.",3 In his will Pasio :lssign ed gu arrlianship of his ('Sut e to Phormio :.tnd stipulated that his truste:d assistant Illarry his widO\o\·. Archi ppe. De:mosthenes 36 and 45. the former :.t defe:nse o f Phormio and the latte r :.t prosecution of one of his witnesses. de:tail the re:.trons why (>asio'~ cider son, ApoUodo rus, one: of the mo:;t litigio us individuals in the o r;ation!, came into conflict with Phormio ovc:r th e: latter's guudianship, Fil'$t, Phormio was give n manage:rioU control o f the ban k and was given guardianshi p of P;uio's estate, C'\'Cn though Apollodorus was an adult of around twenty-four ye:.tn of age. Apparendy l>asio did not truSt his dde:r son bec:luse of the: young lII:.tn'5 proflig:acy (36,7-8). Second. this profligacy prompted Phormio, as guard ian , to divide the estate: before: ApoUodorus'$ you nger bl'Q(he r Pasicles had reac hed hi! major ity: ApoUodorus' e:xpenditures from the undivided estate: necessi t,uc:d th e: mo\'C (36.8-9. 36). Third, Phormio and An: hippc:: h:.td {'\vo sons. who th e:n inhe:rited some: of their mother's POS$CSSiOIl5 which were taken from the: o ri gi nal estate of Pasio (36. 14. 45.28. 50.(0) . To obstruct these mane:uven, ApoUodorus contended that th e: wiU w;u a forgery: no fa ther with sons could write a will (Oem, 46. 15. 25). It is undeu whethe:r Apollodorus's a»ettion was correct: in the: fourth century men with legitimate: SOIlS are known to have made wills, particularly so :.tS to provide for the: "" Cox, ·· lnc~.~ H,

,)rot,

'" On.he adop:ion. I. uf ('i.iu ...... ip brtwndon : Roolk dgto .nd K~gan ,....,. 1978), 202; Golden. Chih/hoH. 9+-97. M

99 I" [I)" ..,.) 59.6S If.. Sl~p"'n"'I'f"'I~.> On tht' 10..." reguL.. ing the rpider>te. ICe L. Ik.u,hC1 . Hj, ,,,,.. Jw d"';t pri1ll J;IIIS'" ,."...b1jqw lJ!IlCS. ~i"" the &cs. A PI; 85-86 (l'hcopo .on Clcon.:utod the Iancr' son Iud all bftn adopted into another ....... II. Although f'o/yr"uo; "'.... nQt adoptrd. sec H .... ri_ oon.. u.., I: 152: Rubinstein. 56. argun that .n adopter eould not ."nuL .n adoption. despite th~ ck.. "a'eme m in I)cmotthenco 41 ,h.. PoIyeuctm did c:a.:tly ,ha,. RubinotO Diocles. the brother-in-law of C iron. had himself adopted i11l0 his stepfath er's estate. According to law. however, D iodes w..I.S the very person the stepfather could not ~dopt. The law staled that if the testator Iud daugh ten. the adoptee had to marry one. Diodes' stepfather had wughten who v.'ere Diodes' hOlllometric sisten. and who m. therefore. by bw D iodes could no t marry. 1)1 We have 110 idea whether Diodes forcibly usu rped the rights of his homometric sisten, as the speaker daimed, or whether his stepf~ther willingly adopled him dur ing his lifetime so as to assure himself of a male heir. In any case. the daughten violen tly defended their lost status a5 potential ~ileliroi, to the point that o ne husband \v,u killed. ~pparently by Diodes, du ring the co nftict (Is. 8.40 ff.).1J2 For the fourth ce ntury. Isaeus 31)3 tells of an ~dopted son. Endius, ~ sisler's "'!itc also ibid .. SO. '2S ThOl1lpoon. 0. H"K"i« Hsnn," CQ 27 (1977) : 3:U--JO; _ >bo Coo:. 3-4 ("" the ..... of ,J,,,d.... as. political "'''>pOn. I... Coo:. Ktncal,- 37 .nd n. I I. 10> H un,c.-, "Gossi p.- 317- 18.

-t"".,..,-

pr

em

102

C HAPT E R J

of his mother's SO il by a fonner marr iage. H;lgnias II preferred his hOlllometric brothers as his heirs, while Archippe·s attempt:! to have her children by Phormio inh erit her dowry given to her by Pasio met with no 0ppO!iition from Pasicies, though Apollodorus successrully opposed her wishes.'·' A chief concern for the son was the mo ther's dowry. Inextricably bound up with his honor and hers, it was ;l ~ element in formalizing a marriage, and therefore ffiablishing the legi timacy o f a woman's children. 1.9 The spea ker in Is.ae us 8 w;u forced to explain why his moth er was remarried with a s.rrull dowry, since: small dowri es could caSI suspicion on th e nature o f Ihe ullion (7-8). 150 The spe;lker ill Lysias 19 goes to great lengths to explai n why h is fath er married his mo ther without a dowry-his f.tther g:Jve greater importanee to he r linea~ thall to her WC"alth (1 4- 15). Furthermo re. as stated above. the dowry was absorbed into the conjugal rund ;lnd th erefore th e SOl) could use th e wealt h and inherit it. l S I N evertheless. dotal property ~lo ngcd to the woman's natal j)ilws, so the son would be quite carerul to protect the dowry from confiscat io n (Oem . 42.27,53.28-29). Because the dowry was th e mother's material link to her patriline, her son would be very interested in protecting her inheritance r ight3, should she suddenly find herself eligible to inherit. that is. if the male heit1 in her patriline had di ed leaving her 35 hei ress 10 her father or brother. even if. as noted above, these claims could be opposed. Frequen tly such inheritance IOQk the for m of adoption, the woman's son being adopted into her fath('r'§ o r brother·s estate. At other tim es, how~·\'er. the son inherited :lIS the closest in lille; his mother·s brot her had no male agnates so that heirs were sough t through th e line of the deceased's sister. The son, in other words, defended his moth er's right to inherit as a fem.ale agllate; the~ is 110 c:ue ill which a SOli is defending his moth er's right, ;lltd thus his r igh t. to inherit property strictly through the mother's matriline. A son , th erefore. could not inherit an estate thro ugh his mmher's moth er or even hu mot her's sister. 152 Qne of th e most ironic statements in the private o rat io!» deals with the individuars interest in the property of his lIl;ltrilineal kill . Sosilheus. (he speaker of Pk'udo- Demosthenes 43. was not a Bouselid (1) his falher 's side but only o n his , .. HIlrMa. " Ath.cni..n Widow;· 308. n . 2 I . o .~

Ibid., JOI; JU$l. 1"1"'-", H - 45, 70-75 r...... ditc...uon of 'he dowry. I .. ' Wyse. ' - 594.

~mr~i~ ...

tMI mar .... gc-

"'~

a ··bundlco of riglll'~; I « :abo

,~,

H lItMer. - AcM-nun Widow: 301. ,!l 1'0< the o.seo of .dopIion into a ..-h~r" Cuha, est:ok. oce I•. 10.4. 7 (C)'I"Onldcs); Dem. 42.21; Dcm. 43. 11 - 15; Dem. 5-8'»-31; t~ in whitt. 1M- role of adoption is c>Of ocacN: h. 3.55: 8. r-'m: Ii. 10., patoim (ilie '!'s of Inhcri'~"'e . nd Settlcmcnt by G", .. undowncn from tIM: f i!iccnth 10 11M: EigtllC$On. ''llmily lind I"Ioni''''''''. ]01-11; R . Whc.,on. "Affin_ 'ry and I>csa:", in s.....e",ccmh_Omury Bordeaux ." in Fmrti/y ""d Srxllllliry IN Fmtrh His'Y'. Th .. fishcrm~n. for in.calKe .... nd 10 ~mph ..izt .h~ daugl"~r'. dowry.o the dctrimen. of the 1OrU. l E. Friedl. V... jJik~: A Vill~ i~ M"",,", c.-.. (N ...... Vork: Rrnciurl and Wi .... on . 1962). 6-4-65 . • Ibid .• 63; J. C. Pcri"iany.•. HonOtlr and Stu"", in • Cyp"'" HighW>d Viu.g.:;· in mt4 s.o.-t: Tlot ""_ l bi.u in Alh~"ia" 0« E. Ka .. b note". Such ,n m ...... I1."«' pn "'".... I.... '" •• full .iblmgs: For iruu«'. Kin::hnu. PA . In5 + 5863_ ~ H unttlbno,,: H~_ "" AI.hugb 1)>Vt:linsllhe gu~rdi~1l5 (Oem. 27. 14-15). This loyalty WJ5 followed by [he marriag1: of D emos[henes' siSler to the so n of Philia by Delllochares,28 In anothe r case. sisters' sons could combine forces to unde r mine the inheritance of anolher first co usin. th e adopted son of Iheir mOlhers' brother. AfieTWO$· Insult to H .m>Q 107 (1986): 32.3-28. l. S« oho I! /"",/. 81. A (r.lgn>eoll poss,bly of 1 _ which .ppc..... o be:- conc .... .bou •• he ch,ld"", of CIC4 .. bl",go provodo,'I': .... imony 10. u eh other. The /ngonen. rtuy oho men';"" .he colubt;ltlon btN.ttn homo"'",";c h.tIf-b.."hClt. II Eupoll> IT. 208 (Kock) _ 1'1" ,. Ci .... 15.3: FG,II", 107 F~ (S,es,mbrut"'): "'hoi.. ",.ISt. 3. 446 l"

"w

(D'OO.): lAnd.) 4.33: Suda R 25 (1978): 186.

pro

err

S IB I,.ING

R E LATI ONS HIP S

11 5

4.2) ;md no t with her fam ily of nurri"'i;e,36 suggests th ... t there w;n a real bond berv.'ecn siblings here, which w.u the source for further embellishments. Like· wise, whell Hippurt ..... th . . wife of Alci bi ... des . ... ttempt . . d to di vorce her husb... nd. she sought rduge ... t her brother's ho use. but \Y;I.S forced by her hmband to re· IUrnlO his house ([And.] 4.14 : Plut . A/c. 8. 1- 5). Indeed. Alcibiades allegedl )' at· tempted to :usassinate Callias, H ipp... rete s brother. 10 gain control of the latters esme (]And.1 4. 15). for if C ... llias had died childless, his esute would have d . . \/Olved upon Hipparcte. leaving Ald hiadl"$ in m ... nagerial control. In the short term Caliias ....'aS po ....,'erless against Alcibiadcs' right as ... husba nd, but ("\·el1lu:l.II)'. not long after Hipparete's death. hr had the s.atisfaction of seeing Alcibiad1'1. 198), 111- 12. for ~:ampln of nuniet! "'''''~" wnh Ihnr or;gin2llI unck. for A,h"", one 00",.,' ditcotlnt dlrili1>a. Thi, con,bincd Prorn; 1)"".. APr: 1#; o.binn". 0.- 241. n. 30. ,7 1-1~ITlIOn .l""I ~H'I: f inky. SLC, 79: Mlo:;[)oo.o"1:n. Low, 87; Karahel;,... ··S"..;....w.,u:· !'o~. ~ t..«y. I;"";~

109... 10. H M.ny ..,f d~ -16, u .. ~.;..C' m:" "e.-57 (B ipponicu,U and ~ pos!iblc : M~" "lid ~"'~" i" lached Ihe political forum when Callias Ill . in an at.~ .•

cases. tholt ofHagnils II. it II urlCmarn whether he ,,"-e" Iud asme •. for rhe con.lenuml ...... l.ti.,....,ip 01" th~ ~.wIph;.u whom H.gll~ 11 .doptcd. ...., dj.c""'on .ba.T. duptcr 1. p. 8 . ... fo r RDman lOCiely...... R . Salk •• "'Men. Age at Muriaged him with prof.,,ution ~t the end of the fifth century ~nd :ltccmpted to hav~ Andocidcs put to (bth for the- alleged c rime (And. 1. 110-21 ). T he Sll";Itcgy of the c:~rlier nurri~~ of sist.. rs w:u no t rcstrkted to these poli tic;ally powerful. fifth-cen rury f~nJ..ilics. It was noted e~rlier how ~ neighbor often b..came: ",n ~ffine-, oftell ;l.~ ~ n:sult of the earlier m.uri agc of l1 i$ sister. Although PJ.ato nt'vt'T nl3rriffi , his siste r's Illarr i~gc allowed him co ally with a landed neighbor. thereby co nsolidating tvwo landes«",ion ht """ MC ,.iIy ,gai,.u 'ht defend"'t. n ", < 1U:ip'" (ibiJ .. 2-43). h~ ,,,ulJ uk.: ... o.>tb dt..-bim' ns .he f - . ,,·hieh os H"mph"')" .dmits. cou ld ",.. ke hir" loot foolilh or possibly k...., hin. open .0 • eM'!;" of perj ... y: "Suna! Rd...i ....... 321 . For ",;,.,u Inul"ng lToou pcoju-idcnce In "',h ... lU"" c;.,,,,u." In r,:"",... , Ess"}'l j~ A'/otrt...." Lnv, Pu/UItJ .uoJ Sou",~. r.o F;nley. SLC. 4-1-52; I·!armon. LIoot 1 :2 g~-86.

myrrh us's mother (ib id .. 26, 7 1). In any case, the law permitted the hei rless man to ado pt who mever he wished JS hei r so that hIS "iko5 would no t be extinguished. 76 In most C3SL'S the adoptee ,. S fur W..men:· '" ,..... , H>I;M ""J &tit,.,;" IIv A .......... MNi,,,",,,,,,,,,,, lliofid. ed. U. Hal ...... " .nd I). H ob..,,, (Sb"ffi"W: ShclT,'m: 3. 1 (oon of • ';"n); 5.6-7 (.he \On or g .... "'oon of • f.,het' ........; pI '0 block. ~bI< chin, from> ( ol1.>,naI '0 01 ... C>-

un

"'e (W. E.~ ... Ilr ~ H.,di.ou: ANAI""""" ,1fItnj"'II«Cut, M,..--ynr. ... ppI.~4 (1.i~'os. In l$;jeus 5 Ihc sisters of Dicaeogenes 11 and their sons qu arreled with Dicaeogcm:s Irs adopted heir, D lcaeogenes II I. T he latter was not a di rect desce ndam of the sis_ ters. but rather the son or grandson of tht'" sister of Dlcaeogenes 1I"~ father. 8!> In oth':-T words. Dicaeogenes II's Jttach mem to the mari tal family of his father's SISter conAicted With thl' strong alfachment of hi.~ own sisters and their sons to the women's paternal estate. Eve n here, however, throughout the d ispute the spea ker. the son of one of Dicaeogenes J[ '~ sisters. W":1'1 careful not to lay th e blame at his uncI!.- 's feet, but ra ther at those of the adopted son \1 fr.). In

' .' Is. 6.36. ·H (!WO broth,." p""!l1."',ou,ly ",\opted "'to Ihelr f.lhn" ,.(~) . and 1. \I.!. r"Or. "",.. ble " xlh ~xarn· r!e ...... 1
S I8L I NG

RIlL"T I ONS IlIP S

129

agnate are again evident in th e institution of adoption: a sister was socially prt:ssured into providing heirs for her decC'ase-d brother's estate, whi le brothers often sought adoptees through a sister's line, On the other hand, if a u'st'llor had not chosen his sister's ron as heir. ~uabbling could erupt between the siSler's ron alld Ihe adoplee. Hence. trUSt broke down when brolher and sister, o r more typically th e-ir descendants, beollle riv:als for Ihe original paternal esUI.. : COllllllon illlerests between broth .. r and siSler ""'ere liable 10 su rvive only ill Iheir gelleralion. No syslem was perfecl. npecially nOI for Ihe litigious families of Athetu. Iron ically, howC'\'er. a legal system thJI emp hasized the mal .. aClUall y promoted the role o f th .. wo m'lIl in th .. prn.crv:at io n of the paternal and/ or frate rnal .:slate: a sister and he r brother worked together to protect her dotal properl)'. or. in order to protect her broth .. rS est.. te. she could ally with him againSI another brother. It was the tiC' bt"tv.·C'en brother and sister that could prove essential in the lIlachinations o f the typic..1 affi uen t Athenian, who constantly strove 10 make o ther Athcnians less ""'ealthy Ihan hill\self. The same type of relations between siblings as ...."e have seen from the or:l.lions and historical sources may also be- found in fifth-celllury tra gedy. most notably in Antigone. In the play we see feuding brothers who haVC" actually killed each other, .. nd Ant igone's devotion to her dead broth er Polynekes is sUiking. She willingly dies for her chance to bury Polyncices properly and she willingly gin.""S up any chalice for nurriage and children. As noted by one scholar. the play sets up a conflict bc:t,"veell twO types of f~l]]ilies, the blood family and the family of llla rriage.88 Antigone's de\'Olioll to her brother reflects fifih -century att imdes and ....,ould not have seemed l·xc .... ssi\·e 10 the audit""nce of he r .01>"" (49). Hr, poi", tho. ItO!,JI bo,li/& or ",',",-" in !fl'...."..1 ........ ob ...... n '. ide.,] •• Id III .: ... lIu, ,he word ejtta.. .,..,sn.. Uy m~.,"ns • pe_m ......... hold. was " t>.uJ. 19lU), 2. IS It, K. Sin(\.lir./~ -.I1"'~'~ CJ.wk'" A,,.,,.. (C.."bridjj.:: C>mbridj(C U"h...._ my ....... 1988), 50. ,.. R...J ..... II h ..... I" A,w...:- Low...ul Lift (lon,!.),,: lU>utltdjrehold 1Ilt'lnbership quite diff('rently from the individuals liv~ I? Joi,u

A......... ';on

Cnwy ~nd rd"cn:11«"S: H.m..,,,. t..nr~ 1:7-11: \..ombC"rt. I""""",, 18 1-8(•. On ,he dowry. $«. r.g., H. J. % Iff. ·· npOlt.~ RF: 23: 136; Finky. SI.G. 79: HarTUoII. l.- 1:48: M...:O"""CD. L>oil In-4lll. 11> TI>< whol' 11>c:c P... O>bolllC. MSoci>I.,Mi E.'0); 246--47 (I.om'n); 314-15 (Ci",,,.nd N .o.nin",neo); 128 If. (I)c""",hmn); 99-100 (DtmadM); 547 ("' ....IIInn); J85 (Md_ )9

I)~rin,

dW); 70. 139. 158. 164. 179. 182. 189. 341 . 489. 52S, 533

(b'~'nef"l

,,"'.., '" ,he min111g district).

IL K . S",d.,e. l:lmwcm howe or cl<m '0 il. A /'1; 588 89 . .. Ste al .... XCI>. AI...... 2.7.2 K. •• O.~ APt; 427-28.

pr

err

... 0

C H APTER J

included a srlrollila. its fu rn im rr. its fenule sla\'('S, and jewelry, over aU of wh ich Phorm io then had m;lIIagerial control and which he made US(' of ([Oem.] 45.28-30). The sytroilia and the house containing the V:1ult, if not identical, were probably located close to each oth er--th e Demosthenic pa5$:lge impl;('S Phormio's residence in th e syuoikia, and becatlS(' his act ivities were centered in th e I'eirae us, his reside nce was th ere as well. On Archippe's death th is wealth was then d ivided amo ng all her children. including hef so ns by Phormio."~ Igem 6 shows this interplay benwen residence and acquisition of ......e:dth. [n the o rations we arr told that EuCteillOn owns SC'\-'t'ra\ houses; in one house he resides wi th his second wife an d thdr children. while his first wife and his children by her reside dscwherr. Euctc:mon ;Uso owns some land including a sunil fum to be inheri ted by a SOil of his second wife, However. he supplements his income through the activities of another ~'O of his l)'7rollilai which se~ as hrothe::Is. ln one of these Euctemon W:lS known to ha~ resided so ~uelldy that the:: sons of his second ..vife werr accused of being the offspring of o ne of the slavc prostitutes (12- 26),# <S [bod" 431-36 • • nd dncu!oion beJo,..; p. 160. on ..bocuce flom tho oiJ= md in ch.pt",. 6. PI'19J..-94. on !he "'" of no"ku",ncn. I); Whj.ehead, "WnrnnJ ."d N.tur.alin In Fo"rth-Century A.heTU: The C .... of Archippt'." CQ 36 (1986): 109-114. conjectures that the prncnCC' of the sY'" ",m In Archipp'" dowry i. proof Arclul'l"" .... ,,,. "'...mbiguouo on ..... i"' ... ~ (i.i.en ."d so"'ni",c:s a "'etic. Whilehud;. f01l ......",d by Scolcy. 11i>mtR, 18-19. ~ has ",,'cnUy ...,.ponded by .uring .h •• ArchiPf'phy on bonk_ tng.1« It. Bogxn. "u b.mque;; Athen ..." IV' oie.:k .v.u" J. -C.: E.... de la '1" ... ion." M ", H tJo, H (1986): 19--4'J; M,ll .... /..troll;"" 197-217. Sc-c ilio V. H "n'er. " Women~ A",hor;ty in Cw.tcal A.hcnI." EMe)) (1989): 4). n. 22 on .he b;b!;ogr>phy of .he '1u ... ion w...... her!he hom" .nd fu. _ n,ili",S' IP""n .0 Arcl>,l'1'" "''''''' ~ beq"e>I ove • ."d .00·..., ,he dowry proper . .. In hi. in(ornUl",e .rlick on '''ppk" ",mary income .",o" g thc AthclI"n dice. c.""" r 'UI'I"'r CLou'') ''''''''he", menlion •• 1>" e~ ... ;" which ~"e Dun, proM;""",,n ouppk...enll . he t:.ndcd incan", of.n Atheni.n.

,Iu.

,..,xed

w.

"'"3S'

'0

Iu.

.Iu.

''''I)'

pr

err

W H AT

WAS AN

OIK051

141

Sometimes estates consisted almost emirdy of cash : when inh erited, the cash could be co nvuted to Landed and real propen y (Oem. 38.7).47 In one case there seems to have a(:{ually been no "ikia :l.WXlated with the c:uh ";k,,s: the cash was then bi tterly fought over by a series of r ival claimants who had grt'at difficu lty proving thei r kinship with the deceased, since he had mlided outside of Athens for many yea", (Is, 4, passi m). 48 It is little wonder tha t large su ms of nsh. left in the hands of a " trusted" frie nd, ...,,.ere frequently embezzled, as we shall see. Olkia composition co uld also be affected by insolve ncy. In haeliS 10, th e speaker argues tholt his mother, th e only daughter of her father's aikos, was tec hnically an h eiress :and mould have been married to her farher's closest agn ate.4? Benuse the estate see nu to h;lVe bee n in debt, howe\'cr, the da ughter \\I:I.S nurried off to a nonkimman: her brother. who had been adopted out of the "ibn and du'refore, stricdy speaking. no longer belonged to it, paid off the estate's debu and had his 501lS posthumously adopted into hi5 oikos of origin (Is. 10. passi m ). The forms of \\1:allh could influence th e makeup of the oikOJ, to the point that the o;kos could not be equated with the family nor co uld it, as hOusehold, necessarily be equated with one single re5idence. There were filrther co mplexities, however. The use of weal th and its transmission were inextri cably bollnd up with the membership of the oil.'Os; legally, this membership was defined in ternu of kinsh ip, Even here, however, the forms that kinship could anume in the oikru we!'e nOI JUti c.

THE DOMESTIC UFE C YC LE AND ATHENIAN FAMIUES

As m:l.pped o ut by KtCi:a.l sdenti1f$, the life cycle o f a f.amily COlu iSf$ o f th ree, sometimes overlapping, stages: (1) the first stage begim with the marriage of two people and ends when the p rocre~tion of the (:lmily h:u ended : then (2) fission occurs with the marr iage of a child and (3) die o lder cou ple dies and is replaced by the f2mily of their children. ~ T hus the elementary f:l.mily, the conj ugal family uni t, is the nucleus and consists o f two successive gcnent.ions. Often a third gencr:l tion is involved in th e life cycle, and here art" included coUater:a.l kimmen who are linked closely to and therefore are living with the nuclear family.5! T hus there can be V2rious for ms of the ext ended family nnder one roof: a relative of the older generation is ~n upw:U'd extensio". a rel;ltive o f the younger genen., D avies. APF, 4 16 f.: ibid .• 506-10 fOr Timo1hn" . .. Stt o.,m. 52.9. 22- 24. for II.. nc:ott of Ibt noetK LycolI, who w:u h~;r\no. n.. t nt; ... em 0+ LIlt w:rI cbimed by an ... thenUn. CallipuJ . •• On 1M la"., conc.c rnina htilUlCl. JCC ......... cb'ple, J, p. 95. !oO M~r Fortes. inlroduction 10 1M Dtwlcp .. ,ro;ou'" eyrir itt Do", ~ri( ..d.J. Goody (DmCaml>ri¥ UnMnity P..... 1%2), 4-5,

br.,

11 [1Md ..

c.....,.,

&-9.

"

m

]42

C H A P TE R S

fion is 3n extension downw.uds, and J brother and sister of either spouse living with thl' conjugal family unit is a lateral extension. 52 Such ext ensions an:: evident in the A thenian sources. T hollUS Gallant has argued that based on three of the major onto n, ]S3ellS. Demosth enes, and Lysias. as well ;u on Davies's listing o f elite familie$, 60 10 67 pereent of the wealthy househol cls in Athens consisted on average of two to four free and rela ted individuals. Only 29 p
'u"" n .. pon~ dans La lOCi"'~ .thcnienne.'" M ... HtIv 19 (1962): .19-64; HumphftY$, " Family ~b:' 182-65. basically 'S""" wi.h the "'que""" ofbin hs and nW"roaga. "'though ..... would downda~e Boco'''philu. w.u born .n... his brothers Boeotu< .nd M.mithcus, then he would no. hove ~ded in I'l>ngo'o ho"",hoId until .he mid-37o. (D.vies, API', 367; Humphreys, ad loe., 182-413) . • 7 On .he gwrdioruhip...,., D.,,; .... Ii I'F, 18, and SOUr«$ thcrrin: On Deinonuche·. ",La.iom... ip with ~ridcs,,,,., ibid .. 379. 45!>-S7. o.l

.Iu,

pr

err

W H AT WAS AN

01"051

U S

wards in his hou~, but sent C leinias away to be reared by Ariphron, appar~ entl y to thwan Alcibiatks' influence on his younger brother (PI. Prot. 320a) . An ~ o ther tndition Stales that Alcibiades, when he beanle the tromt"llIPS of a cena in Athenia n, DemO(:l1Ites, was almost ejected from his guardiam' oikos until Peri~ d es' leniency allowed Alcibiades to remain under the same roof with him."'" Whltever the ~l1Icity of these stories, they do reflect the flexibility of residence arl1lngementli. f,lysIn.ru. of Dc>radiou.. "'... brough' up in 'he cit)' by ~ gu=lian and ",rurned on II", ....jorily.o h.iJ family Pl"OJ'Crty in
WHAT WAS AN O lK OS1

147

the r he no r his brothers nor the ir own guardian.who had never been av.'ay from Athens, had collected the mo ney. Na usimachus and Xenopeithes th en responded that their rivals' guardian . DemaretuS. had sem an agent OUt to retri eve the mon ey (ibid., 12 ff. ).76 The point here is not JUSt the wards' lo\'e fo r litigatio n, though this is obvio us. but the extended struggl e to co me to terllU with o;koJ boundar ies made even mo re indefinite by wealth accruing to it from o utsi de Ath ens. wh ich could be all egedly hidden and absorbed by a rival oiko~ . The amalgamation of guardian 's and \va rd's oikoi was further encounged by the marr iage of th e guardian to the testator's widow, or in one case, the marriage o f the guardian to his ward.77 ApoUodo rus's complaim against Phormio WoIS that his marriage to Apollodorus's mother encou n ged Phorm io's control over l>:isio's property. ApoUodorus even accused his OWII moth er of coltudiug with Phormio (Oem. 36.10 . 17- 19.60). In th e C:ISC o f Demosthencs the o n tor. one of his guardia ns. Aphobus, had bee n assigned by Demosth encs' f:u h er to marry his widow. C leoboule (Oem. 27 .4-6). Aphobus had actuall y taken up n"Sidence in the house o f Dcmosth enes' father and taken possession of C leoboulc's dowry (27. 13- 17. 46: 28.11. 15-16. 19; 29.33-34. 45). and perhaps some mOlley left in the ho use (27.53 fr., 29.46 fr.). Indeed Cleoboule may hn'e been unwilling to hand over control of her property afte r she had seen Aphobus's altempts at extortio n.7 M Although these events are well known. my poim here is thai Aph obus lived with his WoInh and th eir mother. but his relationship with C leoboule was not considered formal (27.17, 56).79 Aphobus soon afterw:a rd went 011 a trier:m:hy. and 011 his return married the daugh ter of Philo nidcs of Melile. Marital residence was in Apho bus' house (27.56 : 29,27, 48: 30.7-8, 15), yet Aphobus retained C leoboule's dowry for about ten years (27.69. 28. 11 ). [II the meant ime Aphobus still held th e guardianship of Demosthencs' estate. until Demosth encs successfull y wo n his suit, th ereby forci ng Aph obu$ to return th e \\Tealth. o r to compensate fo r th e wealth he had embe:u.led from the estate of Demosthen l"S Senior.so Guardianshi p did little. th erefore. to delineate e;kes boundaries because o f th e Huid use o f property and wealth. Ado ption did li ltJe to defi ne boundarics. but u On lonll-dimn(~ loms • ...., Mil1nt. u../i"" 8. 77 Th~n: . n: , hl't'then ..· mother Cloroboule.• nd Archippe and Phorm;o. T he n",rruge of Col1ia, "ill be dilCllued in th~ Stttion o n ..,n",rruge. p. IS2. and tb .. of I'ho. n"o ....·,11 ~ dilC.,»Cd agoi" in cb'p'e. 6. ~Iow. pp. tOJ}" 'H. For .be of. guardi.n to his "''''rd .... e b . 6.13. H . "i",n. lAw, 1:24. n . I , efi'rcliv"']y . ",we n the q,,"'io" of tbe lelP~ty o f. mo ..iage ~......,.,n . guam i.n . nd , " ",m ', mo.her: ri.h~t .be ... di.ion .b.. . Solon_ ian law fo rbode: w eh mo •• i.>ges " ... e.ron...,,, •• o. the b w so obsolete .. to be ' JII,,,,,,d by.U 0 . ._

"'.u..

"»""'g--1>; b. 10.4). The .dopcio" of~ wo",.n ' Sf"ndoon i1UQ he, brothcr~eota ... ([Dem.l 44, 19,46) nU)' .....nhaw bcoen mIn ~ bu,lh .. i",wlCe in I.. 11.41. in which. girl iI adopcHl by her mother', brother. iI unclear. The adopfion ofCMriadn by Nic_.... M. ir 3ulhen.ic, oc
c.....,

pr vem

W HA T WA S AN O I KO SI

151

whic h one of Theopompus's sons had been posth umously adopted (ibid., 47 ff.).~ In !sOleus 2. the speaker's broth er allows Menedes to adopt the speaker on th e understandin g that the speaker could manage th e estate of his brother d uring the latter's frequent tr ips from Athens ( 12). Th e logical concl usion ro rh is influ ence o f the p;lIernal ojkOl o n an indivi dual adopted ou r is seen in r1.'.'O instances. In Demosthenes 42.21 . Phae nippus enjoys the weal th of twO estates. that o f his natural father and that of his maternal grandfather, in to whose estate he has been adopted.95 Indeed th e speaker Slates (22) th at Phaenippus had two fath en (oi. lit ooi. 1latip£Q. and challenged I>hae nippus to an exchange of properry (le,lU from hi. brocher-;n -bw. fu, the tDdit;on.o« D ...i .... A PI; 544. 9S Tho",!""n MiUC1 .h>r .uch enjo)~ncn, w:.. poWbie only bee . .... I'lucnipp"" protW>ly lIr«1. IOn .nd left hi", !>th,nd in 'he a.dopt,~ ..... e (1'l>o,"poon . .. Will.... 21 . n. 27). H
A...o, 1979). 662.

pr

err

152

C HAPTER

5

REMARRIAGE

Besides guard ianship and adoption. th e pnctice of rema rriage. the resul! of a high mort~lity nle. ~dded 10 the complexity of o;k;a mcmbership by allowin g groups of half-sibli ng5 ~nd ~ffines to ellCTOllch on each other's property. Altho ugh m any of the ca$eS below h~\'C been m entio ned in former ch~pters. they bear re· pea ting h ere to underline the dynamics of cikia co mpositio n. whic h at times ag· gravated the tensio n bet\veen inleres~ of th e pauiiine and of the m atriline. Them istocles' complex nurita.l career will proMbly never be s.orted Out in every detail. precisely bttause th e children of both marriages sha red a residence, interm3rri ed, and bonded I~ther d uring polilica.l crisis (see ~ppe ndix, pp. 2 17- 18). Callias Ill 's domestic arr.lIlgem ents, resu lting from remarriage, m ade th e rounds o f gossip circuits at the end of the fifth century. H is first wife, the daughter of Glauco n of Ceram eis, bore him H ipponicus III , whom Calliu altempted to marry to his second wife's daughter by that woman's first husband, Epilycus the son of Teiunder. Ca.llius third wife W2S Chrysilla, the mother of his second wife: at Olle tillle the two women apparently shared Callias's CI;ki" (And. 1. 124-27). Although it is possible that Callias was fortu ne hunting in these marriagt:s, CalJiu seems, neve nhd ess, to have been th e legaJ guardian of C hrysilla's sons by her ....'Calthy husband Ischonuchus. The guardi311Ship presupposes a good deal of tn.!t, if not dose kinship, berv.'Cen the two m en. A m arriage to Isc homac huss widow simpl y consolidated Ca Uias 's position as the estate's protCClOr.'n:I Ciron in iueus 8 was at s.ome: poin t nurri e:d to his first cousin (mother's sister's daughter) and sired a daughter. After the dea th of his first w ife he marri ed Diocles'IIl3uilineal h~lf-sisl er, who bore him two so ns. Ciron's daughter lived ill the: same ho use in the meantime, and w hell she cal1\e of age was married , widowed, and rem arried to the speaker's father (&-10, 35-38).99 In I ~eus 7.5 ff., Apol1odoTUS, was real'Cd by h is mother's second husband Arc hedamus. Wh en Apo l1odo rus reac hed his majority h e and his stepfathe r sued his pate rnal unde, Eupolis, for ~ contes ted esUt e:. In gr.ltitude Apo llodoms adopted his ste pfather's daught er and then her so n , 100 The temporary res idence of Apollodorus and his half-siste r ill two oik,,; and twO oikia i served to ullite the two famil ies in th eir attempts to uke prope rty aW2Y from Apo llodorus '$ agnates. Likewise, Aristogeiton and his brother seem to have lived 011 C. A. ea., " lncnt Inhni. >ntt and .he t'oli,kal Forum in Fifih _Ccnmry A.he, .. ,M Cj 8$ (1989): ~2-16, ",he.., r lUggnI.h.llhe nurriago 10 Chrysilb m3)' ha"" b«n stipulated by IKi>om;,chw. See Uoo F. n H~. Mn.., WicUd Wifc of IKhonuch ....HEMC 28 (1984): 68-70, who lUggeots that Xcnophon. o..-inOJ W3> written .fin' Andocides' mllCk .nd _ n~nU 10 ckn ~ tq>U •• • i(H1 of CIu)-.iU•. .... On Ciron', widow, ..... Huntn'. "Aohcnw. W;dow," 297. ,.... w.,.e,I_ 5$7, points OU. tha. ApoIlodoru< ,,'Ot1Ityritj~ o{hi, homomelric Us.cr by ulopting hc".nd Ihcrefo", h".d .he [>0""" 10 ma.ry hn off.

pr

err

W H AT WAS AN 01K05'

l~)

with their homom etric sister, since ArislOgeilOn gave he r aw.l.y In nurrla ge ([Oem .] 25.55}. 101 Rerrurriagc and adoption figurt: largely in the pr.tcticQ; of other famili es. ' \)2 H agniass mother was remar ried to a fellow demesman of herself and her hus-band , probably while HagEuas ' \1:1$ still a young child. H e w;/,s brought up, the~ fort:. with his two half-brothen. one of whom s.:e nu 10 have: been H agnias's prefefred heir. ,OJ C hildren of a mothe-f's ~co nd marriage- w ere liable 10 asse rt claims against their half-si blinS\. Pasio's son Apollodo rus challenged his fathers donation of some of his property to his mother's dowry for her second nurriage to Phorm.io. The children from this second unio n lived in one of Pasio's residen cn with ApollodonlS 'S younger brother ?asides. Apollodorus. o n the othe r hand. aged twentyfour at his f:o.ther·s death. ~ded :o.t $Om e distan ce on his farm in the norther n plain. 104 Likewise. perh:o.ps shared residence allo,,;ed Diodt'$ in lsaeus 8 to be adopted into the estate of his moth er's seco nd husband. thereby preventing Diodt'$ ' younger h:o.lf-siMe" from inheriting from th eir f:other (40--41 ). ' os Disputes resulted from th e remarriage of th e male ho usehold head prt"ciSt'ly bc:ause th en: wen: likely to be more hei" am ong whom the property would have to be divided. In Lysias 32. an er Diogeiton remarri ed , in his one ho uschold there v.-.:re Diogeitoll. his mnernal nephews wh o were also his gr.andsom, his second wife. and th eir c hildren. Wh e n DiogeitOn's \v,mls reached th eir nujority. it was unde"tood that they ....·( mld leave D iogeiton's house--with ~ substantially reduced inherit:o nce, as it turned out (9). a redu ction chat their m other ~ttr ib uted to Diogeitou's concern for his Sf:(;ond family (ibid.• 17).'06 In lsaeus 6, it was precisely because Eu clem OIl was guardian of a woman who TC$ided with him and whom he later nUirried that he stripped his only surviving son by his first ,0, Legally opemng it .. difficult to know how Ari"oge;ton won IryritW owr W young WOfIur", . uch righu """nl 10 potr ~;m.! kinllllCn o r adopcn.., (•• hers. MxDow.::U. l.4w, M , (or . he: p. triline.1 rigIHs. On th.: om.". ,,",nd. A..... ogei.on·. ,;s.... ....,rm to ""'''''' bc-m 8''''''" in murUge to. non _ Athenian and oem ouWdc: 0( Attic:!. JO . h .. Athen",,, L>w, "\2)' IIOt ~ applied '" Ill ;' c::ao-o. On .he .uruw caoe of Timocnt...· ';"er, 0« below. cbaper by her f«ood hu.o:.nd. lIocntet adopced Ihe 001' of h .. wife by het f'n< nil . . . . . .; Dnin,

APt; 247. '00 Se.: diocussi<m in .. ,,",pier I . .be Ie. pp. 6-8; on Hagniaoi~ . ...., I) • ..;.... APF,Il24:ll. '1M Ibid., 435. for minoriry and the binh of A,,:hip!>t~ of on ,he d~",c~1 period, see J - P. Vern.m. mtroducnon 10 ProM"",! ok /a .1.''''''''''' m ~'I['''''''' (P"w Mouton. 1968). 11);]. de R,olllllly. "Gucne P"·~ en',," Cit ..:' ,b,d .. 207- 20. who pom« ou, Ihal wor w .. much more ,hom pu.:e. FM the ('urpo'" of w:lr .nd LIS dfecu 0" Athe"",,, ""'IN)' .nd Imlllunom..... M . t. fmley. 71" AM'W Ea>_r (Ilerk.ley. C.I,f : Un""
n

Copyrighted Material

156

C HAPTER S

Trier.archical expenses were costly. approxillllltely rwo thou$l.nd dr.achm.ae for ~ symr ier.archy and up (0 six thous.:a nd dr.achm~e for a role trier:nchy. 112 Not all trier.aT(:hies mandated the active se rvi ce of the trier.aT(:h---by the fourth cen tu ry. ~Ithough ~ctual trier.archic expe nses were p~id for by th e liturgist. the ~C[ivt' duty of service and therefore tlle required absence from Athens could be contr;lcted out , 1 13 Therefore not all trier.archies required absence; nevertheless. Athenia ns did le:lVe Athens for milit~ry activity. hut because the average Athenian was unwilling to participate in more distan t wars, the equipping and manning of warships with mercenar ies quickly bec~me the priVoite expense of propertied individuals. (14 Macartatus. a Bouselid affine. rold his property to purchase a trireme and sailed to Crete for a battle that cost him his life. 11$ Most iIlustr.ativt' is the almost comic episode in Pse udo-Demosthenes 49 where T imotheus. th e ro n of Conon . h:iS hypothecau:d most of his property for debts to the state and for past and upcoming expeditions. When emertaining two foreign leaders in his empty house in the Peir.aeus he is faced wi th the embulOIMing si ruation of borrowing drinki ng vessels and linens from Pasio the banker (22 ff. ).116 The general Ar iscophanes was caugh t in an equally embarlOlMing situtation whe n lodging envoys from Evab'Or.lS (Lys. \9.27). Closely associated with mil itary ac tivity and expansion was the the colonial setdement. Coloni zation sometimes led fotmilies to split up, sendi ng one member to a colony, while the remaining members sta~d in Athens. 1 17 For example, Plato's fat her had been an oib ! t o n Aegina. hut Phto's residence and land were in Athens and the northern plain.' Ie Niciafs aMOCiate Dionysius. while founding Thudi. left his ron behind in Athens (see below, p. 198). 112 Dwies. inl~;on ' 0 APF. ""j-""ii. On th~ bunkn of the tri=rehi",,1 s.:rvice. see M. C llr;", " LuUlP Avoiohnce and A",;""'it in Classkal Alhen.:· 111 1'..1 120 (1990): 1.f8 11"•• for the """t recenl di>CU$>ion. I IJ GabrIelsen. " A",idcsiJ," .31 -.32. 110 Sinclair. ~ 59: on the i","", ..ing US.>: Iu.d to ",turn to Athens to cnrol their oems in Ihci, dcme. On .he pl"ttUious e"iKenct of c1~ruch;es In wanimc. s.:c I~ G.uthier, ,. A Pmpo!' des clbuuquies . thmi _ e"".. du V' ';klr:·;n Finlry. n, II/wts. 167. 1,. I)"vi... APF. 331 , 3.3-4: figueira. Aw... ,."J Aigi ... , 57- 59. If the =dition duo ptuo "'.. ""I'-

pr'

err

Moreover, the poli tically powerful :r.nd the affluent were often amb:.wadors to foreign pata.! !~ Themhtocl es is the earliest e!Qlllple in the fifih century: he troweled extemivd y throughout the Aegean collecting tribu te. and probably enric hing himself thereby (Plut. 'l hlm. 21.1 ff.). '20 H e along with Ar i$tddes and C imon. who were the forem ost speakers in the deba t~ in th e early fifth century concernin g Spu u, .....'C.re sent there in 478. T his tende ncy to send out;\$ amba5u dor to a foreign state individuals w ho wert"" trusted by that Hate or were prominent in debates concerning it is evidenced throughout the cl:mical en . I I I T hrasybulus 50n ofTh rason, Ar i$tophanes an d C arcinus amo ng others co mb ined tri enrc hic and strategic activity with th eir rok""$ all amba.uadors. '22 At other tim("S, fo r instance, in the case of CaUi,1S II and his descendants, emb:usies were perfo rmed by several generations o f a family, I n even to th e point that H ipponicus II's "olhed "",allh? I» On th .. dale of the syntri ...."'hy. J« On';a. A PF. ~40. for the younger "'... and Archipl"". brq" PoIit;CoR 32 (1985); 1~1.

chn10 The f:roct that so many prominent individuals were thre,lIened by th e polis was not lOit o n the anci enu themselves: T heopompus and Nepos th e biographer, fo r insunce. commented [hat because of Athenian jealousies an d mistrust. prominent leaders spe:nt a good deal of t ime a\Wy from Athens (Theopompus, FCrHisl 115 F 105: Nep. Chabrias 3.3-4) . ' 41 while Demosthenes sta tes that the exile resides in a secure place in w hich he h:.as commi tted no wrong (23.38 ff.). H ow did this absence affect th e nuclear fami ly? To answer this question. the type of exi le will not be imponant. but rather the response o f kinsmen and family to that exile. In his Crilo, Plato h:.as Socrates state thCJdow. dup..... 2, PI'- 45-016. IW Sec allow, tluptcr 4: MiU .... , Ltouli., 138-J9. SUI" t1u, rlw =nucIio1lJ bervccn t~ siI.Icn· hUlbando ~ furnul beau", of I~ ottenlUted rd..;omJ!ip bc:twttn d>< 1'WO men. 3rdJ of ririttrnhip wt"K in pUce: K ~ Sak no! ~ s..k?Tt.. RJddl~ of AtherW" T... minology fur Rt.al M_ cun ry Rtvisited.~ C Q 38 ( t9S8): 35 1-8 1... p. J66...70:'..,C .M P: Milku. u..Ji"ll ....J &I",';,,,, In AFtrimt A"...", (Ca",bridB": Ca",bridge Univcni. y p,...,., 1991).224. l V. G.br~n. "41ANEPA .,.,d A4IAN Hl: OTlJ A in C lmia/ Athe ...." a Ha 12 (1986): 99114. • D. M . M ..d >o"",,,U. no.. lAw i~ CkwiooI A /MFu (ltlua. N.Y.: COrMU U niYCniry p ...... 1'178). \62-63. , [)em. 21 .78-79. 154; 28.17; [>On. 15.4--5; IPlul.1 MOt, 837 f.; Davies. APr; 241 (l....,....es). J85

(ThnIy\odl"'J ( ~of DttnoFI.h=es). 6 M . Chrnc. ~ Liturgy A~ and A~ti.wu in Clmi"l Athcru." '1;.t NI 120 ( 1990)' 163 an.d n. 78 for. fu.U of oncicm ,"mlites.

w

'11/

pr veil'

110

C H APTER'

The absolute cooper:nion which was fundamental to the exchange is never seen in our sources--(he challenged individual could be brought to co urt an d forced into th t exchange, if the challenger was successful in cOllvincing the jury that the exchange was justified, At 110 time, however, did the challenger or challengee necessarily have precise o r complete information on his rival's wealth estimates ...."ere based on declared property, p/ranffll <JUsj".' To be StreMed here is the extent to which property, its ownership. its use, ,lIld its nature. vacillate, As Gabrielsen cogen tly states; "To the extent th:1I indi vid uals other thaI) the owner himself were granted the ri ght of disposi tion of the property, we are justifi ed to asse rt tim the question of ownership had already transcended the boundaries of in unambiguous j uridical definition and moved into a 'grey' area. And we may go so faf as to define oWllOn.

i,"

,.

m

NONKINSMAN.

O I KOS.

AND

H OUSEHOLD

171

Cl'();ldllnent. Nor will [ define closely the various types of bastardy in Athens. Cynthia Panerson h:u recently argued. fo r instance. that rHlfll(ls was a quasijuridical term defining an illegitimate child whose pale rnity \\IllS acknowledged by his father. II T he foc us of the followiug discussion will be on Ihe legal muginality o f all offipring born outside of a formal un io n, or marriage, thaI is, Ihe giving o f the bride by tJIgyt. From early on in its democDcy Ath ens !Tamed its Jaws o n both the 11(lairvi"" Sc~wJ A.tate. The sum, either five hundred or one thousa nd dnchmae, was a m ction of a wea1thy man 's dtate.20 The ntJrhos v..";IS legally entitled to nothing more and could rely only o n gifts from his kinsmen to a1l e_ viale the very Il'a1 poverty he could f.tce. 21 There has been consider:able debate as to wh eth er the nolhos from an informal union between t\.\'O Atheniam would be co nsidered an Athenian citiren . Patterso n, in her recell! article on no/hoi, has extensively outlined th e debate that began wi th Uuerm:mll·S thesis that there was legal concubinage in ancient Athem in which the offipring of such a unio n would also be a gnrsios. This thesi! was then modified to SIIggat that given the nature of citizenship laws, only the offipr ing of two Athenians from an informal un io n could be citizens and. therefore, inherit. 22 H owever, I .....ould argue that a fragment o( Met1t~nd th e comic poe t at th e very least reveals Wnat Atheniam thought of such children: ill the fiagment (fr. 14 (Kassel- Austin]) the ntJlhos of Callias, that is. the son of Callias born from Chrysilla in an irregular unio n, according to gossip, was equated with a xenos, a M),);ian.2.l Although norhoi were legiti mized at th e end of th e 17 The cbuic untion o n JU'el C. A.. C O>: . M tr>eeJl. I~it>n« [Dem.] 59.16.62 f.: ~nd ' " Pall.".,n. - 8 uunk." 62 for .h~ nlOU 1ttfl1• .mru..;"n. The legilimiu,ion nuy "" me, !wi< of the La.e n-adj.ion tha • • toalIcd "bigamy
.11-...,.....

"""'i"'.;-.5-1. The cw.ic exampln here .rc M eLUndcT', ,s.."' .... and An.iphon I . 11w:Tc lw been to"'" o;kb.a.c .. ' 0 .t>" of Ut~ woman. E. W. liouh.tb challenged Utc Indilional opinion IIw sh" " "as • 1lo\T: - The ".11Ah or PhiIon<us.- AjP ~ ( I %9) : 65-12. poon. ing ou. that although Ut" "'onun"~ ........ rcd .ner ;dl~ homicide. free """cilium could ab.o "" t0rtured in ouch c""". H"",~ ... C. Carey rorrcctly 1lO'I" ("A Nooc on Torture in Athen"n Ho mi_ H iflDfi4 37 !I988I: 244). liouh.tb nowh....., coruide .. me, QIC of l )"'ia< 4 in which Ute cide obvo: is fi-e.ed by hcr nWler.nd Ihcrcforc nnllOt "" . ortured in • ~ of waul •. Carey fur_ lId m f.ct . many poles bach ...... •iIi')' .",,=1 :and feM of f. Ot',"":I. Onurio. M.y \993). n.. rumes of!Uh eould abo N g ....... '0 known ~t> (Athen . 8.342d).

pr'

err

NONJtINSMAN, O/KOS,

AND

H OUSEHOLD

177

changed by anyone in her famil y of marriage: Delll05thenes explicitly Slates that children do not have the right to gh..:: themselves a name--only the parents han' the right to give one and to reno unce it (39 ,39). [n [""eus 3 th e speaker makes a great deal o f the facc that the name o f Pyrrhus's daughter, allegedly by a Irt fllim , WlIS given:u Phile by her husband but:u C leilarete by l"yTrhus's maternal uncles; th e implieation here is that if a woman's name changed, her SUtuSwas suspect and her claim to an inheritance WlIS 10 be vinved:u fraudul ent (Is. 3.30-3 1).44 The restr ictions on th e he/a;ra and th e concubin e in classical Athens are in keeping with th e practices of other European , As.ian, and Auiean societies. In traditional Sung China, al though among the imperial families th e concubine could enjoy high status:u s.econd consort, this was not necessa ril y the case in less exalted families . Here the co ncubi ne's re lationship with her 10\1:'r was nOI permanen t: she could be shart'd with or passed on to an other man o r lIl ell . ~ 5 I n European societies concubinage was associated with the practice o f monogamy and with high sociopolitical status of the lover in a hierarchical society. Concubin es in both European and African societies ......,re o ften taken from the poorest pe0ple and those discriminated against on ethnic grounds.46 In Anglo-Saxon soci.. WyK. 1_ J 10. miMes th~ point "'h~n he lUtes tha, such rum~ changing _ nQt i~ili_ bk, ond 00 p"""" this !>t cites t!>t ~ o f N~.~~ ~ u..uglUer----i!>t u..ught~r o f • /ott...._he only ty~ of JIftlO" wi. h whom wch rum~ clunging occu=d! for AIMnnn rdun:ana to mntlion the rl3Im of. ,..,.p«t.bI~ ........... n in public. Ott It. JUlUndy the "''W'I of the f:unily member. je.louJ)' .. nd l!II oulSide" M.}>Sc:hok. c-..IJi.... .uI ~u (London: Zed llooks. 1988). .. M . C. 1lou. - Concubirugo in Ang\o-S>xon Engbnd,'" t\u,Pm 108 (19IIS): J-3. : FUnd .. n. I'm· nul. In; D. Hn!ihy. " HOInChokh in ,h ~ Early M iddle Ages:' tn N C"lt,ng, W ilk, 2" d Atnou\d, HOttMIoobh. )93; P. E. ~ '" Concubiru.gc and thu"""ofAjril"" His/cry' 29 (1988): H s-66. poinB ou, thOi concubines In 'M Uliplule _'" alwayo 010 .... used f(.,. the ..,:"CS. ""ither ,h~ ,,"Ot1"tCIt BOr their childn:n eRe". '"" .he •...,.... of a .... ,lOCK by the 5pti"-Ol eIi"""';"'n

~~

"",,,,.-ug., allhe younS wMiow, Itt V.

H UIMer. "The A,h; on \ho "..,.ninl! ot .1),"-;1, 6, M . GokIrn. CJo,l",", -.J ~;" a....;,-.,o (Ihltin""", : Joh'" Hopkin< U "i,"uity 1'rnI. 1990). 142 .nd the dltc"t.i"n in Just, m ""'. 4.1-4... 62-6.l. fur hibliognphy. Jute fed., """"",",,,", thai \ho 'ttm ...... f. irly specific: by the fourth century. n..aning -to ~"" witb a we~d wife.- ~ a.bo I'mttlOrl, " MarT"~,- S8-S9. ,~<J\IYQI. ~t ..: Dnn. 40.7: !IlX!';: +0.8: ,,1o.T)<J\6.t _ +0.8. n.

A,,,.,.,

M

pro

err

NON KI NS MA N, O I K OS , AN D

H OUSE H O LD

183

mother lmd th en lived with (auvejll(£ l) both \\Iomen, he took (£I X£) both ",-omen in the sam e house (oi ICia ),7J Altho ugh Andocides in the same or.u io n uses th e ve:rb eXw (106) to describe: the nu rriage o f his ancesto rs , the verb here defines u llias's les:s th ~ n proper livi ng arrallb>emenlS. To confuse the issue e\"en more. both Aal1 lklvro and (J\JVOI Kt w in ~ later sectio n (128) describe: Calli u's al leged un io ns with three- women, Isc ho m:.lchus·s widow, da ughter, and gn nd daughte r. In this p:.lsu ge there is th e implication of bipmy, bue fin:.lUy Andocides concedes that all alliances o r intended alliances would have bee n gtl mai. Other o ra tors play on the ambiguity o f the ....,ord £xw. [n the corpus of o ra tions ascribed to L)'1iu, o n the one hand the word is used to descr ibe: the )"Oungcr Alci biades' nui nte n ~ nce of a hcfairo before he reached his major ity (L)'1. 14.25), but on the other it C:1IIl also refer to actual marriage ( 19.18). In Aeschincs, Timarc hus allegedly possessed (i XU ) flut e gi rb and the most expensi ve: IIl'1airoi (1.75). In Pseudo-Demosthenes 59 Apollodorus puns o n both verbs £Xw and ouvo u.:too to describe: his opponent Stephallus's attempo. to pass o ff N eaera, a fo reigner and hcraira, as his wife by clai ming her children as h is own (118, 126),'~ As alrealdy stoJ Athens.. In rnedio:v.ll Glxnt « poorly Up< th:.. ~ 000" rncrnbnt of the Ioal ...istocncy ........, unceruin whether they........, kg.tlly ntarri"",, 10 each COIher. 1'here _ i ....." abIy confusion abou • .... 1<XC ,ribu,~ r"",,, Cui.> in 428 ...0,1 die-< . 3. 19; !'Iu,. A-r. 24.4; Hup...... A",......: ochotl'l.. MmQt. 23k " FQHis. )72 P 40 and. oommcnt:>ry. Kin;hmr. PA. 9cmoJth,.no tI ... ""''')' ."""'.... ,... w itnnl for IlpoDocL::>rm in 59. 123. c;."nct Ita infer=! that the ~h is • product of riviliy bc""'"",,n two political faction.: the 01 ... comUting of St~pNnut and Calliscronn ~nd ,he .... he. of ApoUodorus ."d Oemosm..na . Stt L ~r'ld, P/;a.~ """Is. ~ >'O is. (p.ria: I,.Q Ikl.k:s Lntm, 19SC fr«. 0< /Teed .ft.... his birth; no (ornW union is mc-n, ioncd. Humphreys. how_ CYCI'. C' her eno rmo us dowry would have been pan of Al d hiades ' oikos. 9S Beca use one o f the wo men. a M elian war captive, sc:c: nu to have produced a son. Hipparete's fears were partially justified. % Besides Pericles and Alci biades. we do know that D emosthenes sired twO illegitim~ te children an d WlII~ married to a citizen WOlllln from Samos, upon whom he sired a daughter. The so urces do no t st:.&te whether the infor mal relatiomhip was co ntemporaneous with the marriage.'n For other men, re!ation"" 129.5) (W~e,flU""); Iel they,....,.., fomgn .nd ,;tiz.,.,.. while lAnd. I -I cL>ims th.t they _.., sb~ wd m~."{'M.., Iw bun , Ion@: 1mtory of >ehob rohip !'or . "d . pin>< the ..,liobiliry and .",h.micie'Ile of l'L11o', S)"Iftpliu",: ~~ EItt, 120 . .. Se< and an: tM,dOn: reoeiving 3. briM from ilims. s..e:ilio Oem. 57.23. 52.

'III

pr verr

190

C HA PTER 6

THE SLAVE

There are countless detailed discussions o n th e institution of slavery in classical antiqui ty: I ~ th e focus here, however, is on the position o f the slave in the oiJros so f:.lr as it gave him o r h er the opportunity to influence the oikw and intrude into th e famil y as 3 member. This diKlIssion, however. will not be an apology for the institution of slavery; Garlan'$ definition of slavery in Greete, and particularly Athens for whith we have the most infornution, sums up the horron o f the institu tio n. The Athenian slave was a possession and as meh w.u tr.msferable. The slave in Athens enjoyed 110 legal rights to property; he or she was allowed a f:unily. but that family tould be split up at any time by the nuster. To underscore the nl:.lrginality of the slaV\:', he or she was freque ntly a no n-Greek plut ked from Thrace, Scythi a. C aria, and other o;:ouncrit$ o f Asia Minor. Sla\'CS were used for a variety of du ti es: at th e bottom ","-ere the s1a\1eli at Laurium; in the middle were the art is;l ns and domt$tic sla\le$; and at the tOP ~re the publi c sla,'CS. 101> T he following discuMion will focus on the domesti c slave. or th e slave living under th e roof o f his or her master. The domestit sla\"e was a more or less permanem member of a great lIuny households. Indeed, it seems diffi tnlt at times to teU w ho were the slaves and who the !Tee individuals in :.In l1ikia: young children "",''ere known to have been mistaken for slaves (Dem . 47 .6 1, 53. 16).101 In some hou~holds th ere was only the male head of the oiNI1! and his slaves (Xen. M(m . 2.7.2 if. ; Lye. 1. 17; Dem. 48.5 If.). Furthermo re, the ",'Oms oii«/U and uiktlis, derived from the word uikId. Forth" ",,,,1coming of the r>I'W bride. th~ ... .....w.p_~. ""J. 01~1y md R , Sino!.. 7"1ot lI1-dJi. i,. A"""" A,,,,," (M>wH. "'Anie M UII"" "';on, :· Hcsptri6 28 (1959): 208-38. !'or the livlnS 1ITanSCmcnt> for w vn HI m., ~boId. _ Hun,". PoM"If A./onu, 75 tr. 111 Finlcy, _II SMtr)'; 110: C.rUn. SLn"')\ 61 -62. ror ,h. doma'lC tJ.a",,', 10k in . he c.nlily economy; t46 for m., rnpttt w , • dom.,,'" d""" could .>rn, C'rUn olso 1lOI... t.ov.......... tha. the domestic tJ.a,,,,. bdnS u..de...... roof:lll the ,nast.... or mistrno. could be immedia.ely affected by lh. """nc. ' b;,.d l ...npe •. On ,hi, poim. _ O . I';m • ...,.,. S«W/ Dr~'~ (Cambridge, MaN.: H . rv.ttrd Un;v....;ry Preu, 1982). 175. " 2 H "n~r, PoM. A,/onu, 75 tr. IU C.rlan. ~ 146. on cOIKub; .... :III do ...... ic . Lavn. , Ot ~

ss....r

""."""'f

""I
} competency was more impo rtant than family rights in determining th e inheritance of the bank. 120 The banking business was a world apart, dominatcd by metics and ex-slaves. 121 Pasio W1ISa trustcd sl~ve of twO hanken. Antisthe nes and Archestratus, and, when freed , inhe rited the business, displacing Archt'$m.rus's son as its head. In rum, Phormio was a devoted slave to Pasio, and "''as not only frecd by Pasio. but also became guardian of POlsio's estate, which at first included fulllllan~g(' r ial concrol of both Pasio's hank and his sword flctory. In addit ion, Phormia married Pasio's widow Arthippe. These maneuvers were no doubt lided by the proximity of the ban k to Pasio's rtjidence. Phormio riot only malUged the wealth placed in the ban k by other people, but also Pasio's personal fortun e stored in the vault, l22 Furthermore, Archippe brought Pasio's rrsidence, its furnishing'! and :daves, into hcr m.arriage with Phormio, ~lId intended that her children by Phormia inherit JOIne of this property (Dem . 45.28). ' 23 Although one could argue that banking fam_ ilies, who held sW1Iy O\'er othe r people's money, were a special ~. th e flet that Pasio and Phormia acquired cit;tenship l....arnnt5 the indu$ion of this houKho ld in a discussion 011 oilwi. It provides an ex.unple of a fortull3te sl~VI: who was ab$Orbed into the kinship structure: here the wi dow's marrilge to the chief slave protected the bank's .assets. , 2 4 Nor W1IS this fact lost on Apollodorus, a cantan kerous and litigious individ ual eve u by Ath enian standards. Apollodom s's slan dering of his brother P~icltS and of his mo ther Archippe (IDem. I 45.83-84) demonstr.utS the confusion in status within an (I;kM where slavn were $0 promi1>0 For 'hi< view .nd ,h~ hi.c0l)' uf P..io\ and Phornlio'. ""....en. 0« D~ APR 428-37. E. E. Cohnt, /!thtrh'.... &_r.-l 5Mftr: A &nki.og Pmpfflivr (Princeton. NJ.: Prir>eeton UniY • 'funi/y Busi n~' : u gal Ad.."". eion. Alfectinll Wi...... >Ii St....et.~ SI""~ (1990): 2.l9-63; J. Ober. M~pon!<e ,0 Edward Cohen." ibid_, 2m. m MilIc-n. Lnldllfjl, 206 If.. who downpbys the import.nu of 'he bank fo< rruny Acbc-ni>n ci, _ iuns. Milln, argues tba, , "" banI:; was Ihe WI. """,rt for cKiu-ns who n«, Sleotry. 25). ,-'" S« ","uerson 't in!.iK~no:f ,lui JUCh oboorpoion inlo Ih. f.nilly of Ihe ex_fIUJU:r ",·o.dd M It :u, infC'l'ior~: ibid .. 24 1. m s.... bibhography in " "'poer I . nn. 6-4, 711-79.

M

pr'

err

NON X INS lit AN ,

0 I XO S , AND

H 0 USE H 0 L 0

195

one's mean status o r unowuming nature if thc neighbol'$ ""-ere not interested in one's affa..il'$ (plut. IlfIOl. 30.3; O em . 19.244). The role of the neighbor in mariul alliances h;as ;u...,ady been discussed in deta il: un io ns with neighbol'$. who ~re not always fellow demesmen (Lys, 20,\I -12).u2 ~..., f...,qu endy ...,in(orced through a complc:x ~b o ( marriages with in and without the kin, and through the practice o f adoption . These ma rital ti es ~re a presuppositio n for the mutual support th at neighbors o ffered eac h other: the neighbor occupied an inte rmediate positio n betv.-een th e immediate o;kos and the wide r co mmunity of th e polis. The neighbor was eco no mically important: he could take cart' o f a man 's property w hile that man was out of ..... th ens. and in co mpenSOltio n could receive some of his fortu ne (IOenl.] 53.4-5). O r an individual could protect his neighbo r's family from ...,crimina tio ns in setdin g a debt. appeu ;as a wit_ ness in court, o r indeed loa n mo ney to payoff a debt. UJ ..... landed neighbor could be the lessee o f an o rphan's estate, ll C losely associated wi th tht' concept of the neighbor is that of th e fritnd. The Greek ttrlll plrilill, or friendship. is a compl ex o ne defining both affect ive ti es inside th e family, but also ties of oblig:nion, du ty, and reciprocity outside it . ln fact. I»

n...1Ip< iluunce. Denl. 22.53.

"""'un ...

~7.60

If.:

~9. 171f.

(P"';o.....d T in>Othcu. lived in the l'ei",CUI), 53.8 If.: I•. 5.10-11 , Srt ilio Millen.. LtouH"" 2-3. 139-11:1. 'J.4 See "'" di!.nKUon ~ on guudU ..... ip in chap'cr 5. p. 1~$. us AJ in Ihe ~ of Den~. w~ ,ht fdIow dctnc$nun ....... n", .I
In this context, it should be restated that Euctemon ~s the guardian of, and housed. the daughter of .. friend from Lelllnos (Is. 6. 13). Close residence in this case led to the marriage of Euctemon with the yo ung woman, and their sons then comendC'd for Euctemon'$ esta te with their hal f-brother, Phi)oclemon. a $On by Euctcmon's first marriage. In the early poStclassical era. D inarchus, after his exilc and n:£um to Ath em, ~s housed by a friend Proxcnus. who chen procet'ded to steal the weal th D inarc hus had brough t wi th him from Chalcis (D ein. fro14 rBurtt]), Thlls both the equal and th e slave. individuals fro m opposite ends of the social scale. could be influenti.u re$i dent:s in an Athenian's oikos. T here lies somewhe re between these [WQ the not so cqu~ figure who could also be a resident of the oilws: there ....'ere those w ho perfo rmed se rvices on a fairly regular basis for more powerful Athe nians. It is common knowledge that the famous political figuTC'S of the fifth centu ry housffi philosophers, tutors, and artists. 1.06l)esides th~ cases. Nicias the gt:ner.d had a public spokaman. H iero, who reJa~d Nicias's politic.u and m ilitary questions and decisions to client:s and seers. H iero, who cbimed to be the son of the poet and rhetorician Di o nysiu~, the Athenian oikist in Italy. was apparently raised in Nicias' house (oikia) (plut. Nir. I ff.). 1047 Ae$C hines' father W:lS $;Iiid to have been CllIplCl)'t'd as 3 teacher by ano ther teacher, El pias. in the latter's house (O em. 18.1 29). Ar inio n, a Piataean. once li\1:d for a long time ill Dcmosthencs' home, perhaps in a homosexual relationship; in any case, the friendship facili t:l ted D emosthenes' attempts to comm unicate with Alexander of Macedon (A~"SChi n . 3.162).'·8 On his frequem trips fmm Atht'ns T imotheus the gener.li was said to have depen ded on many Athenian citizens and metics to loo k ~ fter hi$ aff3irs; two o f these Ath enians were his IDI/fjn3 Antima chus and the latte r'sgrllm mart~IS (ID em.149.7-8). In fact these two men ,",'Cre so intimately con nected with T imotheus and his est:l.te tha t when Ti motheus was brought to tr ial in the 3705 and threatened with execution, An titnachus's property was confiscated and he \\':15 execu ted . although T imothcus hilllself escaped capital pu nishment (i bid .. 9-10). Philo ndas, J M eg:uia n m« ic in Athcns. and a hireling of T imothe us. aided th e gener.l! by procuri ng a loan for a shipment of timber given to T imotheu5 by Amyntas: Philondas moved th e wood to T imo thens's house in the Pcir.le us (I Dclll. 1 49.26). W I

A,,,..,,....,

",,£>t.

' ... 1', example. 0 11 ~ndc" t« I.. II. Carur, ./Jot QNin (Oxfurd: ct.",ndo" I'rcs!:. 19li6). 142: on .., 2niOlnk Implin,io"" of ,iIhavio r, apparently ci ted the great and noble pederastic rebtionships in Greek literature and Athenian h~tory (Aeschin. 1. 132 If.). According to A~""SChi nes. homosexu al relationshi ps we re oflen shorrlived, laking place in one of the men's houses. At t imes a mall rt"Sided with his lover and the lauer's marital or original family. In Lysias 3.5-6 the speaker li~ w ith his widowed sister and her children and a male IOVl:'r, a yo ung boy from Plataea. EVI:'ntually, however, the speaker m luggles the boy out o f Athens to protect him from the attent ions of a r iVllI. 100 Tim:m;hu$ ~ s:;lid specifically to have left his father's oikill and afte r a series of hom osexw.l affairs, to have lived wi th H egesandrus while the latter was married to an hdress (Aeschin. 1.95). H el:,>esandrus. defended by his brother, denied th e charge, a denial difficult to prove, no doubt (1.69 ff.). Demosthenes ""'s s:;lid to be the 10000r of Aristarchus son of M oschw;, and not o nly resided from lime to ti m e in A ristarchus's house, wh ich was under the kyritifl of Aristarchus's widowed moth er, but was also given man ager ial control of th ree talents from the estate to ai d Aristarchus in his exile (AdChi n. 1.171-72. 2.166; Din . 1.3()-31). Furthermore, the orator repon edly lodged a young boy, Cnosion. but whether this latter was At henian o r not is uncertain. T he slander that D emosthellcs' wife also slept w ith the boy suggests that the relationship wi th th e t"rWntrrCS w:lS contemporary with D emosthenes' marriage, which did yit'ld one daught erY" In rurn, Aeschines engaged in homosexual act ivities at the age of forty-five while married and with children (A~~h i ll .

! ." 9, 136;2.151).

XENOI

Bes ides the friend, both ci tizen and noncitizen residem in Athe ns, the foreign friend whose residence was not predominandy in A thens could also haw 3 signifi ca nt influence on househo ld com position and the use of cikM wealth, at It'ast among wealthy and prominent people who spent time 3W;y from Athens. The previous chapter has stressed the &equency wi th which the prominent Athenian traveled for purpooes of war, o r of avoiding war. o r for commercial ven tures. In his work on ri tualized fr iendships. Gabriel Her nt3n has delllonstrated how xt'·

,w The "U", of Ihis boy is a ,lIaUe. of ~I~. E. W. n uili.l4. 'Tortu'" of Non_C;ri.~II' in Homi_ ude !o __ ig"'k>ns," G RRS ,} (19611): 6 t-68. ronunds til.. the boy w ... &ec ",,,,dl;un. even lhough I,",,,, W;>:I Ihe posoib'hty th."II he could be "'rt..m! for tef &ec $talUS . ..J,h,o"Sh be could no( I....., bttn "ne of.he Pt..,..,.m gn.n...d Ad",nian dtizo .... ip .fle, ' 1m••iN; 1'.1, 126C'W. !l'lul.l .\I..... 1W 5 a-b ~birm the x lOr Aodronicu. ~UCntly resided with

w,

.)n,"""hc" .... . lkgcdly Irai" '''8 ,he orOl 31 A.h~ ... is Undi1pUIM, but (or sktpcicHm :aboul ~ rer-i>..,,,,, of ri.iutubip l"ftI,ic' U;ms in nurr~ low> II, OIlier G~e k 1I~les, "'" J. -M. Hannid" "Droit de cit~ 101 nuriaS" nUxtes.w .. 10 G.-tte cw..;q"",- l'I11tO 45 (1976): 133-48. 173 1)0"';es. AI'F.217. 17< Ibid., 2 12-13. I1S

FOHut

392 FII .nd cOI",,,,,nl3ry; f. Jacoby. ~So"", R.......-ks on Ion of Ch;o.,- CQ

~1

(19~7):

12.nd n. 8; A. Pod1«ki, n.t Lift c",o.mena and Atheni,,,, "-"btinn< with Ho.pnfU1 in the fooJrth eenrury .. c.;. H is"";" 17 (L 978): 432; H ermon. RilW4lisd. 82. ,''' 1'. McKeelmk. o,.,sidm in 1M Gm-~ Cilia i" 1M Fou,,~ c""ury ".Co (london: RO\l'kpC.I:er". ~ corw:erning his being chlrged with "'"""'. 'J1H. >peake< nuy be .rguing. t.o..~.lIllOt the chngQ WCOn: f.o.bc. trun,ped up by hi. ene",in. I"'" Sec .bo lJ~viei . APr. 250. ,"" Sc-c ..,.. ib,d .. 201- 2. (or Nocophemu.; 508 for Conon', wiU . 's' On A"'''Of,hlnes· vi.its 10 Cypru' ...., ibid.. 201 - 2; on T imorhcus' inhcril:>"eo.\ 1:27 n. 1; :;">ley, II "",,~ , 16-17. I'" D.Yie!.. APF, S14. wronslY Slain th>.I !h~ wonu" """ T imOCI":""" d.aughtc •• H ....".." n-owhm: menlion> Ihio cas.:.

I... H unte.,

f'I>Iirirte A,Jor,ts,.

I II If.

P' 'fern

2 08

C H A PT ER .

htlilira, th e s1:we, the: friend, and the :unru d ullenged static o r legal ideals defin ing the vikllf ;Ill :om entity structured in terms of the legally prescribed K:1ection

of marriage partnen and th e transmission of property, To the extent that th e "'thenian polis w;as based on an aggrega te of oiiwi, the V';I ria bility of the eli te vilros was an importan t element in the life eyde of the polk

M

pr'

en

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ C QN C LUSI Q NS _ _ _ _ _ __

To PAItAPIIRA.SE Pierre Dourdieu, between the responsible man who obeys the: rules and the irresponsible nun whQ defies them there: is all.O the: weU-mc:aning bwbreaker. The laner recogni zes rul es th.at he ( l1l11101 always respect but which he cannot deny either. This behavior contributes to the entirely official $urviwl o f the rules. lOne rule in da~i cal Athens. certainly (or etite individu .. b, w.r.$ their commitm ent to kin lind family; this rule W3S reinforced by the laws of th e polis. particularly the succeMion laws. These bw~ decre~ th:!.! an individual should d~ fine himself through m.ale lines, that ideally property w",5 to p:us o n from the f.Im er to his sons in eq u:.J sh:uts. and th;>t only in th e abse nce of sons could daughters inh erit. W hen a man dkd intestate, again agn ation domi llated: th e deceased's brothers :md thei r dt'Kcnd:mts acquired his property, and o nly in the absence of brothen could useen and th eir descend-an ts inherit. If si blings from th e !l thty ~re discussing. Despite these dnwb.3.du, this infornution. and the scholarly reconstructi ons hued upo n it, yield muriage patterns tlut, as we have seen, were pl'2Cticed th roughout the classical era by families in the or.uiom and th e inK nptiom both th05e who w~re wealthy an d prominent alld those who "'-ere relatively obsc ure. For this discussion of the political famili es, of particular internt will bo:- w hy a.n d wh en kill5hip endogamy occurred and what ro le a particular dellle pbyed in a fami ly's mar ital tr.msactio ns as th at family positioned itself for power, or regrouped atter poli tical disgrace, or tried to guard itself against severe 105«$ in weailh and propnty. T he political biographies will bo:- the main source for the following discussiom. It will be obvious that allY e}GInunacion of the marriages of the political famili C1 depends 011 the political biases of the sources. Unlike in the orations. th ere is little sense of material conside ra tiolU. The following pages will focus on three gmup$, fo r which alone th ere is subs~tial info rmation 011 marriage patt erns: Themistocles' family. twO lines of the A1cmaeonids and Salaminii, :lnd the Ceryx ho use of Callias II. which maritaliy allied with eimon in the early fifth century and with A1dbiades in the ]::mer part of th e century.

THEMiSTOC LES' FAMILY

T his study could not possi bly do justice to th e scholarly work don e on Themistodes' poli tical caree r an d the vu ious debates 011 w ho his rivals and allie!! \wore. t , ,,,., li,tnllJ"" on Themit.rodn' political C1n:e. and bxkground i, voluminous, I cit~ only c.".~ .. in """u he,.., >ince. 'o lioring fO ~.n i.vith.". of L)'1im.d,," tile f.ther of Aristeides the 11......... n .•oo. ~ of Xelloph;t..u.. tile f"herof.n Aristridco whl> _ in turn 'he {.UK. of the. ge ...... l Archipp ..s (425/ 4). The.wnc" An:hippus ;,. the- ",a.cu.line form of 'he name ArchiPPhw how n ... n.gc" wilh. ",e ... be.- of. poIitj~ ci.n~ kin does not n=,ily me." oil .. " " " .... ilh Ih. polil;';;"'n binlKlf. T his will M tile ce",,,,1 .hnis in Ih. di ...... ion of Ihe Calli.. / Alcibia~. Mnesipho lkm. 57.20-21. ", H i. wi~ .nd d lild..." ~ furbiddcn to joi" him, but ~ .pi.i,ct1 o u' of th,,;mgh .he help orEpicn ..... or "'dunut coincidence is wen worth "'tflooning. hi:ks. the Son of Hippolr nu.,.." GRBS 30 (1989): 503--13. who conjcclmn. ~ Oft osmu, tfut CoMyr.< I was.n Eretri.n wife of 1'ri< c.llffi Clem... . . "d so rn'l",d ,he $telllllll . cconbngly. pl."",!!: C leln,., (I) ..., ,he C!'11t of lh~ Elder AI(1h,~de,." 1-/"".."" 21 (l '152) : ~-(> lUub",,·h.k ""''' ",,, nt«,,,llh,{ . c,ordml! to lus«n bridly di"""",d by I)rwdbem in her Itu:. th.optcr I. pp. 3-3.•lId n. II) . " d i< bridly aUUI't;,,~ 378-79 for l5Odicf~ domicile; (or the politico! cohe, ion of ,he n»rri.ogc in om c. 49(1-.480 .nd "'» ,h~""(~ of.n. to bot C'n",n' b .... h ...... 'n_law. ,. C.,... -S;"cn."' 186. l7 D wks. APr: 2.H--3S. Hmn.n" sIr.eri,..,« and ,he Poli,ia1

ppylo:.

th~

namc

1101

Itt

foron. in Fifth. Century Atht ....~ Cj 85 (1989): 35. n. 3. fur

th~

dm.at.f". Set: . 100 ,he fuHowing

M

'>o,e.

pr

em

THE

POLITI C AL FAMILIES

225

pear to have married o ut. but the marriage o f H ipponicus's dau ghler H ipparete to Alcibiades W25 sign ificant in several ways. H ipparete and Alcibiades, through their mothen, appear to have been related to Pericles.;)oO These distant links of ki m hip were concentrated in the next generation by a marriage hetv.'een fint co usins: th e daughter of Hippall'te and Alcibiades \\laS married to th e son (Hipponicus III) o f Hi pparete'5 brother. Callias III , c. 399.31 HOV>"CVer, despite these marriage alliances the unity between Callias's house and Alcibiades' house W25 not stron g, an instability to be traced back to the ea rl y fi ft h centu ry. The enmity between Cimon an d Pericles. Alci biadd' guardian. is weUkn own : Pericles' father Xa nthippus had prosecuted Cilllon's fa ther. Miltiades. in 489 fo r th e ru inous Parian expedition (Hdl. 6.38-41. 136), while Pericles himself had been one o f the prosc:cuton w ho charged Cimon for bribery. According 10 Plutarch. however, Pericles' leniency \\laS prompted by Elpi nice's interven tion (0111. 14.2 fr.; Pu. 10.4-5; Athen. 13.589e-f ). Even so, despite the alliance o f her son to Pericles' kinswoman. Elpini ce was stated to have been a vociferous crilic of Pericles and a sup po rte r of he r brother (plut. Per. 28.4-5) at a time when C imon's affin e. ThucydidC$, the so n o f Melesias, may have been challenging Periclean policy and been behind the prosecut ion of Pericles' aMOCiate$.32 On the o ther hand , Pericles W25 not above slandering the maternity of Cirno n'5 sons. J3 Funh ermoll', ~n tho ugh H ipponiClu. Elpinicc's son, g:we his daughter in nurriage to A1cibiadC$ with th e enormo us dowry of I"\venty lalents;~ H ippall'le 262-63, whoK stemm.. "'~ follow, .... um"" ,hal H ip~""e', mOlh.,. _ ""ricin' 1nd then ""ricin. i-IOWt"Yn, ""'ideo' loOn, bdQ.., hts death in " 30, _ m;\rriw, If _ follow Ph" • ..,h·, ""I"~""'" a birUuh.e for ""'kln'son .round 440 wouLd k . "" tum under ~.ble.~., hi, de.,h, In order '0 1001"" thts chronologinl crux, 10mnd the mother of AkibUdeo. ElIn, AIMJ, APF, ]9 . .l2 S« P. Kf'C11'1, ~T1>e o.,rac;'m ofThout yd,dn., son of MclcgaL,," l'hcidW, Mp:u;", and A=go",". R_ A. lhunu" , IWiti,:QI1"'/s i" Anriml C....., (London: Routltdge, 1990),49 if.. amunn ....., Cleo" w.ed th~ judicW')"I'em '0 furth.,. hi, ~1tt1_ » Stl "",uLd ref.,. .0 1M AIcn",eo"id ."e .... 'Y of Cimon', wife, bodice. l-I O.vi"", APR 19. 0" Ihe dovo-ry. l(J

I)~ APR

fi",

pro

elf


226

A I'PEN D I X

alt~ltlptl'd !O

divorce her husband. Although she WJS nO! successful. after hc-r death AlelbiJdes was cbarged with protamnl,\ thl' Eleu~imJll M yste nes. thl' wry ri tes which CJ1!bs III as" Cl'ry,,: and d,!d,>I,ld",~ would ha\'I,1C"d hit "..,.I, h. For funh .... bib!iogr.plly 0 11 ,h;, -pOcmouhencs' mothc-r. who """tn•• o /u.,.., ;"nc.i'..... ",,·.!th brotJght by he. ",«her in.o the: buC"t', m.rr"1I" wilh Clcobouk' f•• h.... G)"lon. stt' Ik n,. 27.4. 13: A"",hi". 3. 172: Stt .ho IDn n. I <W.-4-S. 61. in whuh M.ntith~ .... who h.>d no ';>ler. wimc-d to u.., his "_h.,, .. ........'Y for hn OS do we: Stt an 'roIoI!Y for Call"" II : "conii"l! .0 ,hc bi"ll •• ph ..... C.U;..

,Iu,

228

A PP EN D I X

The uSC: of kinsme n from both the p;uriline and matriline Ill:l.y be seen in :l. prominem kin group of the fift h century. Perictione, Ihe mother of Pl:tto the philosopher, W:l.5 married fi rst to Ar iston of COUyNS, who seems to h~ve cb.imed the s;!.me background in terou of his genos ;as his wife. although aCN al kiruhip is impossible to determine. Her brother, on the other h:l.nd, W;\S under the guardi:l.nship of their f:l.ther's brother's ron. C riti:l.! Iv'u On Ariston 's de:l.th. Perictione W:l.5 given in marri:tge to her mother's brother. Pyrib.mpes, a promine nt :l.mb:l.ssador of the mid-fifth century ~nd :l. Periclean associate.·$ III other words, Pyribmpn' sister, Perictione's mother, w:IS sent ou t but her daughter came back. T he complexities in the marrilgt: pract ices o f the Athe nian dite of the fifth century can be almost dazzling. In th e case of Themistoclcs and his famil y th e patriline WlS l ble to consolicbte to mitig:tte the effects o f politicll crisis, a crisis thl t followed the :l.doptioll out ofThemistocles' son into th e house o f his materll~1 gnndfather. For th e C imonids, sister followed sister imo Alo pece as Cimon ......5 expanding his political base with influent ial families from that deme. Cimon contracted alliances for his three sisters to no nkinsmen but in the next geller.nion th e marital families of twO siSlers :l.!lied by Ihe 1l1ll.rrriage o f the son o f one siSler 10 th e daughter o f the o ther. For the Alcm:l.eonids, :l. first cousin nurriage Illay have been contncted for Cleisthenes' cbugh ter to her fath er's brolher's son, Megacles IV, The un ion occurred at th e time or the ostr:l.cism of Megacles IV; hence this powerful f:l.m ily ......s consolicbting at a time of political crisis. The 111l1.rriage W;\S followed by the exogamous union of Meg;acles' daugh ter, w hile Megacles' sisler 1I1l1.y hav," rollowed all :ucenwnt into her ramily or marriagl. " c.., be ad
err

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Riferences _ _ _ _ _ _ __

AdQd:. F. , ~nd D. J. Mosley. Dip/1>mdCy ;., A'oMlIl

GUf(l'.

londow TtWlICS and H\.tbou,

1975.

Baunun, R . A. r;.,,/jrit~1 'Uials j" Anri.flI (;tr«t. london: Routledge. 1990, Bauche'!, L. HiJlllitr 411 droit p'il';' dllffJ /;1 ripHbiiq"l' ~IJ.n.;m"t. ;( ,'Ois. P:r.ris:

Ch~~li"r

Mlro::Kq. 18'17,

frye, D. "PlOpC'rly. PfOb"!'ny and Emotion: F~ rnily H iStory in ~ L«m1:Sroon," rn f,,,,,,,'ly ""J t",""i'",,": Ru ....1Sotiold, /I. .. and A, SC2flll'O. cds. ArIoCPI ...... ' dt'll/if)' lind Civir Idrol,':!!Y. lbhimore: John~ Hopkins U n;\"en.ity PresJ, 199... Bog:aen , R , & ..q..n n biI"'Iuit'lS dans /(:s arh ,(mqllff. uiden: Sijthoff, 1%8. - - -., .. ~ I»nqu~} Athenes ~u IV" ,;eck ~"~nt J .~c.: EI~! de- b question." .\I" sHew 43 (1986): 19-49, \3ollfidd, l. .. Nornu.uve Ruin ~nd l'ro~rt)' Tr~usrmssion: Rc:flec;tiou~ Oil the Link ~ _ IWttfl Marri:ll.~ and Inheriu ncc in E.. .... y Motkrn Engbnd:' III 7ht U{"ld n+ H;1IJf' c;..,',w.. l1imrin 4 PopulllriOfl ~ ..d S«i4ISfnKJ"".. Ed. l. Bonfield, It, M . Smith. ~Ild K. WrightsOn. Oxtord: BI:w:kwell. 1986. 155-76. Boose, L. E. '"Tht Fnherl Hou5(C and the Dlughrer [n h:The SltUClurn o(W~ern CuIturei D:ou\;htlll Ait;"a in tilt II~ if lm"mal Q%.,i,:atu".. fhluffiQrt; Johm Hopkins Uni~ty Press, 199\. f'''i nky. M . ]. " M~rriage s..1e ~"d Gift in the Hom.".;", Wot-ld:' Rl DA 2 (1955): 167-94.

c:

c...:

===' =

'! Jv- tI~1 ~, lkrb:ley; Uni''efSity of Callrornia Prft1., 1973. . Thr " wid ~~J. 2d ed london: Cluno and W mdus, 1m . . EtOthlHly and Sotiny I" lI.mll G..w.-. Ed. and introtl. 8. Sru.w and R . SaIkr. I·b r_

monc\swon h: Penguin. 1981. - - -.. SlwJin ,'~ i-"'ll' a"d O~d" 1 i"lInaml Adwm. j00-200 fI.e. RL-v. nt., inrrod l', Mil_ ktt. Nt'w Bruruwick: Tr.m$Ktion Books. 1985. Attntnt SI"vrt]' ....' M,enguin, 1986. . Hoc- UIt' and Abom: 11/ H IJI.xy. N ew York: ~nguin. 1987. Finley. 11.1 I., ed. Sla"")' in a.ww-a/ Anli" .. ity. Cambrid~: J-Icffi:r. 1960. - - - , cd. I~ Ik lot /t'n'!' .... c.&t ",tOttUtt. ~ri$; M outoll. 1973. FlUld,in, J.- L. r...",i/k1: 1'~m"; . ...aiSM', JO'UQ/irJ d4/11 1'1lftriro.... SOtiiti. I'ari$: J-I ~hetce. 1976. "'""cr. 1\.... ~lId O. R~nu"'. eds. r......il)· .,nJ~, B:alt;morc:,Iobns Hopkins U"ivcoil), fOrm, 1976. Fones. Mcycr. 11lIrodliction to 1k o.-.~I'" Crd.. in ~r;., C"",I'" Ed J. Goody. Cambrid8~ : Cambridg~ U nr.'Ct1iry !'fCSS . 1962. 1- 14. Fw:, R . Kinship a,,4 M~rri"Jf:C; A .. AHfl.~..J Proptcti,,,.. Hannoniliwunh: !'''''g\lin. 1%7. Foli, R . I..aoc. "Alpc1:U of l uheriuIH;e II> me G rttk Workt." In 01<x: euays in (',molr Hulory ~tN to G. Eo M. tk Sit C...u- (lfI' Hu 75'1. IJinJrd...,. Ed. I~ Caltkd~ 3nd F. D. I·b l"\'e)'. E>Irt.,..: ..... eadnn ic Imprint. 1985. 208-32. Fo>du.II. L. " HOUSw.(y in Ru"u ('''"". Ed. ). Oubisch. l>ri ncco:on. NJ.: Pri"O:IOU Univenity I>rc:s!.. 1986, 42-5 2. Fn:>!;t. F. J. Pflll.mh ~ 71mrriJ11Il/N. Prina.{Qn, N .J.: Pri.ncrton Uni''efSiry Preu. 198Q. r'\.lrl.:y. W. O. "A,ldoki&t IV C'Aga illS'l A1kib,atk,1: Fa~ or Fict>on?" H ",OIt1 117 (1989);

-===.

1" " '. Gabrielsen , V. " (MNEPA a,Mi A¢lAN HI. OnJA in 99-11 4.

CbMi~ AI~'u."

Mal

II nr

O Md)7 (19R6);

my I-' awe'T1 aut )r' k 'T1

R EFE R ENCES

235

- - -.. "The Anri!kJis I)roadu~ in Cbssini/uhens:' O MtJ 18 (1987): 7- 18. G~lb.nf. 1: W. lUd, 111111 &lm,,,/ i" Anritnl Gtrrn'. St:lnfon:l , Calif.: St:lIIfo rd UnA'I'nity Prns, 1991 . GuLm. Y. !H" i" Ihe ANini! IIUrld, Tr:iIl$.J. Lloyd. N~ York: Nonon. 11)75.

- - - . Slonwy i" A ,";"'I Gma-. Tnns.j . IJo)·d.lthKa, N.Y.: CorneD Um''I'nity I'ros. 1988. Gubnd. R . "A Fint C~dogue of Attic l'rribolosTo mbs." ABSA n (1982): 125-76.

-==:.

The I'd_. h~. N .Y.: Corn"U Univenity Pn:ss. 1987. . 71rc Gl"td, II~ of Ufo. h hx:a. N .Y.: Comdl Uni...enity I're». 1990. Garn.,... R. L.4,." md 5cJdtrr iN Clowir,,' Ar"ms. New York: 51. M~nin's PI"l3J. 1987. Gaulin. S.. and 80:0cer. J. " Dowt). ~ r.... nul" Competin on ." Amtn't.... Amh/'ftp(llogisl 92 (1990): 994-1005. Gaulhier. P: " A propos del demuqui." arhrni(nn." du v~ si"ck." ." ' 'rvbU>nn ok fa rmr (If CIi« llNinm,. Ed. M . I. finley. I'lris: Mo uton. 1973. 163-78. Gemel. L. "u malion du IOUlnent." REG 33 (1920): 12..l-68. 249-90. · "Sur l'epicier.II." REC 34 (192 1): 337-79. • DmoIir.nk i", 4.}Jtrltundm ,~ CIt,. Ed. W. F.dcr. SruulPn: Fnn~ Stc1nct'. 1995. 4J.- 60. Henfdd. M. "l.>owTy in G.(CC'C: Tcrminologia.l Vu.gr :and Historical R..eerirlnce.

University

~.

1985.

M~rru.g.:. ~nd

IXllqnphy: p.. npean'n upoIllhe S~ and D«linC' of C1><sical SJ»na." In C/am(1lI S".m~: Tttl."~1ffS lImi'" fkr Sums,. Ed. A. Powell. Nomun: Unh"Cmty of Okbbom.> Prns. 1988. 79-121 . H olbd~.J. " MMiu Il in Athem 504-480 .. c." C, R 25 (1978): 174-91 . 1"'( 1); l . Ki.uI"Jt. /." """".".1 S«id.ui1r. M2~er: Manchesccr Unio."Cnicy PtnI. 1989. Humph reys. S. Co ''Th.. NodlOi of KYllOQrgts."JHS 94 (1974): 88 95. · tI"r/,~ ""i.bt Grfflu. L.ondon: RDu~ and Kcgan ?lui. 1978.

. 1M Fa,.,,1y. IH"".... .,.J Dnuh.lcndon: R ouu... dgc and ~n Plul. 198J. · "The Date of HagniaJ" Ixath." CP 78 (1983): 219--25.

poktgr I (1985):3IH9.

Mal

3! Jhrc

Jrty

P lwe'" ut. kl'"


===.

REFEREN CES

237

"KJnshlp I'attern~ in the Atheman Courts." GRHS '27 (1986): 57- 91 . . "Famlly Quarreb."'JHS 109 (1989): 182-85 . . ·'Phrm."res in Alopeke. and the SalallliniOI."' Z I'E 83 (1990): 243--48. Hunter. V. "The Athelllan Widow and Her Km."·j,nm,a/4 FQlmly Hislory 14 (1989): 291 - 311. "Wom,"n's Authority III CJ~s~1Cal Athens."' EMC 33 (1989): 39--48. . "'Gossip and the ('ohu(s of Reputation in Classl(~1 Athcns." Pltomix 44 (1990): 2I ,,m,,, A/ism.>lotl (1'NO): 2&:'-7 1. ObeT. J . JI"j B Strauss. "Ura!ll3. Pohne~J R hctonc, mol the' Discounc ot A!hemAn [)ernoer~ft' In CIJs.,,,'ll artd H t'lklIli t>f Gre~ee" .'IBSA R(I ( 19R5). I I 9-lR Dc,,,~> : n,e DisrI~" )' of CI~.';'r,,1 .4,lIil!" CAmbridge: Cdmbndb'" UI"ver~lty Press.

=== : 1I'

ClJ",nl Athn,s ."JHS IllS (1985): 4()-S8

,wi, Fig"'''' 17,(,..1»tlfl!! C'frl! Cuy dllil Irs Cv"mrysldr Lon -

don: George Phd,p. 1987. ---~. "Soctal and EconomK hnphc~nol1s of the Leas"'g of LJl1d dnd Property m Cbss\(~! ~"d 1-l dkni~\1( Greece." 011''''' Iii (1'l88) 279-323 Os<wald , H . "[)owry_ NOTm, and Houschold FormJ(1ol1': A Caw Study from North Por_ tugal "JO),mal ~(r~"'r'ly H,s/",y 15 (I 'NO) ; 20\ -24. Ot ... L P,,,,lit,,u,,,, i" ,\ 1",I,e",/ S«ifty 11,.. II"t", y ,,( ,m Li,/,m! IrWII"llrll i'l L~".l:"flli¥. ChKJgo: Umwrmy of Ch,,' . go Press, 19i'.7. Ottcuh, 27- 79. Pocnnlh.l. "11 tihobc01U1'llo. I'mn'Slo e rOSlrJe'osmo Ji CII"Ot1~" Qo,adtTfII ,Ii "",i., 111 (\91\.J-),171 - 77_

Copyrighted Malerial

II. BfllI lI.fiN C Eli

24 1

Pllonl. A. Kirullip i" ,Itt nuf: A" A/I.''''''''~~),..j &~"

"""fit Ufo 1500-1900. Oxw

ford: Blxk...-ell. 1984. J>odlt:clri. 11.. '"'"' Li.f I/n.m.uUKh Momre:d: McClU--Qu«n·. Un;Y1:nity Prnt. 1975. J·omeruy. S. U:tIfdrsm, ""'-s, IVoI'CJ, "rod SWuo. New Yon: Schocken. 1'175. - - - . " Mlrk Gokkn. OM"" "lid aildlo..... ill Ckwit'"I/lf",,",- EMC 36 (1992):

7)-76. - - - . Xnrq:>hort~ Prns.I994.

~s : ....

s..ri41"nJ

HiJ~

c-oner''''? Oxfoni: Chrendon

Pritchcn. W. K. -The Allie Stebi 11." lJn"m.. 25 ( 1956): 178-328. JUnkin. D. -rhe Mining Lobb)' U II.them.- AwS« 19 ( 1989): 18'9-205. R.aubitschek . A. " I'bryue..- RE 20. 1:8?3-907. HThe Caw- Ag:ainS( lI.kih,ades," "/.il l~ 79 (1948): 191- 210. . HZur ~" isc:bm Cene:Uogie.... R/I.\f 98 ( 1955): 258 62. Rcnubcrg. C. EM. H~I"'" .."d Kt...btnlitk i", 4111,,,,", CritthmLmd. Mun ich: lktIICi. Hislen.. F.i...:cl.Khrifrnt 9 . W;...IndCII: F, Seciner. 1%6. RU$4CU. D. A. J"",~KIt. London: Duckwonh. 1913. $:abean, D. W. ~ NJ>C'CU of Kiruhip lkbviour 2nd p,opt:lty in Run! Western Europe be(on:: 1800.- 111 F",",ry ld u-g,11 Srlllly /3..,,..d of rile / 111'( Or"ro.s Ih ltn"orc': Lord 1l,Jenno", I'n·~s. I'X l7 .

Chi~f/r

'" HIi/",,( EII"'I)(' Ed, It. WaU , J R obin ..lnd I~ LJ
:==='



REFERENC ES

243

"",d,. Ed. T. Harcven and A. Plabm. Prmceton, N ).: Prmccton Um""mty PreM, 1987. 319-30. '\odd. S. "T he Pu rpose of Ev,dence in Atheni~n CourtS." In ,"\'omos: GUlYS j " Atltc",'an Law, P"litirs nHd &>tift)'. Ed. P. CJ rtledge. P. Millett. and S. l hdd. Cdmhridge: C~mbndgr U",\'ersity Press, 1990. 19-39. Todd. 5.. md I'. M, ll

________________ Index ________________

TH E following abbreviuions are used (with n.

-

nQ{0!'

' n. l ]

J

•

figure

2-'>Of.

I.

-

t:lblc

451.

el0. 152. 102. 103. 111 . 126. 148 . 154 ~..,.. 18.3.... 73 ond 76 A...,binn w OO'MOf, ! 16, 135-36. 139. 119, 202; ~rena of. 101. 16),0. 152. 1M Aetchyb. 162".140 .a/finoos.30, 31, 122, 124. 125, III "&'" di/Ft",,,,,, .. marriage, 7.mu. me, 0 ....... 199 An:»i>rla 16.9600. 11 7.97, 11 .liry.200-20 1

Hjcnn, f' u", 4(l ... 12. 4Q i3o«In ... """ of Mo.",~, 86-87, 112. 159. 18 1. 191. 211 Uourdiro, 1'.. O,,'Ii.... if Q T'IIro.y .. 17), 174".30. 174, 185 brom. D .• Lou\ V......... .-J Com_nil)' in 00..ritIJ AIfor,u, n ...25. 68 colbr:=1 kimhip, 26n.7S. 14 1. ..n..lulf_

s...

';bling>

rot>CObi"" (pori","",,). xviii. 125,

In .... 45-46. 177--79. 179 n.47. Ill.}: r\>k in

..'..... 1ss-89. Stt.Jw prosti.u .... fIort.:irui} Conon ,be 1F',c-. \4 •• 221. s... aIS S.ilinunii {:unily

"III

pr >rem

IN D 6X

I)"madco Ih~ on.ror. 1JS-.39. !6J Dm..p " of Sunium. 49. $31.;""... of. 49-500 ckrr,., of or;g;n. 18.52, 66: n.. rr;.g,. inlo, 15, 20-2!. 30-31 . 63 demn; (oownihip'). 11. 27; 44 r., 45r., 46-17r., 53r.. 54/" 5S/" 56-57r.; nW'iul .ll;'nces with;n. 6,11, 10. 14. 15. 11, 19. 20, 22. 48; role 00' influmc.. of demes",~ of H.gni.. II. J..-ot. 6-9. 103; kiruh.p cn_ doptny as 1C .... "'i)' 11 •• 31. »-l4. 112: ...... "u.. dueniu 11.3-4, Sf. 6-9.ll. 102; death of a"d will of. 7 ... 1 J. 9.. .19. 21); I. 86-67

""""In

forcignen. ~ ""noi (IO~) IOrgtty. 1~9

'"

8"""ra.iom, f~mily ;..- IopiInning. 67, 89,

53-«1, 61 .d5. 61-4). 65; "'pion

in ... '31.",... 6s.-my; ~n«d by Ioc:oJ c~",y. 61; in urN" setting.. 40. 41. 65 , 66-61 H icl'Orl of Ach>rn..,. 46 H ipp''"e. Sl)-51. 115, 118. 186. 225-26. 228 H ipp.. 112-13. 197 hot'lOO6u.a1iry, ",.....22. xix. 145. 1S4~.n, 18-1 . 194. 198. 200w. 1SO, 200-202. 201", 151 honor of f.mi!y, ftmiIcs',..xu.I modt>ty or ";rtut .. p.... of. 69. 7000.6. 92; ..... 1wb.and-wi(. ",].. ionship. 69, 72- 75. n; age IPP in. 70. 120-22. 14z...S5. 142;dM$ioo. <Jl

'"

labor in • .f2, 4) .., 18. 70, I J()-) I. ~ .... n .... dear family H yp2. S~ . 57, ~:

fUowing: n,igr.. ion ot ki........,......

fiom group.. 64 lpbicntn of Rhamnow. 26. 94~, 107. 155. 20-1. 206; >On of:. 'Mn. 107 ID"'" th. ontoi'. xix. 7 1. 142 -ontiont:; b . 2. 14l!. 151: b , 3. 125. 175. I n: It. 5. 10, 160: IJ. 6. 71. 179; b . 8 (on ,he >pe.ur's mothu's .....-.y). 102: b . II. 158: h. 10,3 1. 14 1.210 l00cnla.nd (.mi!y. 39, 15lf1, 102. 187.206 [schormch.. 15. 25.30. 122. 13 1. 13200, 5. 1l6-38.154,2 D ~"'ourtJ, 91. 122.-0 .66. 123.r .67. 160 Ia.............. pnctic:c. 207-8; in Wofcion. ISI)-5 1; to ..... go>'ttnill8 mar...., 116. 12g. 171H\2

"

m


250 l~gllm"'cy ch.lI~n!«". ",~"nl"')t.

t to. I t 9" 51. I 2~. mg.lflJ

'lB . 'J'). 1('J. 159. 17'J.-S 1...... bh,h-

1~~"'Jll"'~ concub,,,.,,, . ."0:trod"l_g"",,, ..."')' ')2-'J.1. 134" 18. 134. 1111; ,tr.ro'hrr. I IG" . .w, I IL. \ 24. I J7. 211. tcn_ ,"om with p-.,n)",c. ISJ Sa also hOl11o",,"4. ]I,H"(N. 1%. 1'017" IH ,",omlol\' "'~. 145. 152.15 4, 2 11. ~\1 m""h.". 1511. rd .. """,h,p wah d,ughte",. 11I.l---4. ",I."on,h'r "'lth ,.,m. ("J.-103 s.,'

"I", ",,,,,10,,,· ",olhd, brolher. I I b" 3'1. 116. I 2... 127. 21 I Mvrrh",ou, dem,·. 24. 25 . .\ I . 5'01

I.""

">Inc , h.ngms. 17(>-n. 177" 44. I'll n>l.I ,,,h,,. II\!! , 12< \. 114: ,I."".." hdnllglll": to, 12S N ...",two. 46. 47r


C opyrighted Mate rial

!N 0 EX N~...,,,,

, "d wugh'''t, t83-84. 189. 204 nelghbo .... xv. 3. 9, 21 . 26-28; .1I"Il"g ""'h, XVI. 12- 11, 22. 28 . 195, Sn """ -27, 34. 3!!-40, 48- 49. 58. 178. "Soc,.1 .nd Ilcononu, Implte.noll< of ,h. l.""'fI of Lmd .nd Property." 199 Ow,,,,,ld. 1-1_. "Dowry Nor"" .nd Hot<Sehold l'o",uu"m." ·10-41 ou,-n ... rn.g< s... ol}",uctll' (lkm, 58). 'Ill Pol~urt'" of Tcuh r.oettoo..Plttu ... h. :w I'ynhus famlly. 99, 12>. 112

......,.. ,,0001 ty .. viftuc,.69. 7()".6, 92. 183.21 1 .... me CI.Ilrure. 69 Shex.1: L .Jr .. ~ Kotiyn: Th~ Women f Ad......." 219 lhippinS ",,,,rests. 48. 49 sibling relationships. xvi. 1211. 210-12; bror.h ...... """'. rebtOoruhip. Ill. 112, 114-16. 126. 1211. 129; rn.ter nal. 'n" . 121. 106... 1. 106. 108-9; KlnmI. 9-4 ... 107. 1 U . s«.u.. brochftI_in_bw. Iu!f-d>li,,&, Sinclai •• R. K .• .1 PtMtiriJvrion in

00""'....,. ...

.ister>. 22; bu,;«i 108, 17. 29,..84. >1.

». >-4. 10 1. 162

> .."..w;Iy. k11 0' i ..... k of {enuk. 17610 .42. 17(,.

~ri... ,;"".

171

R .. ~",. L . 4000. 12. 40 run! burials. 331.• >-4, .• sSt .. 56-57,. rural f.milics.52 run! ho.....,. 136... 31 rural nw"' iagJJe i"""vnl~'"

'n.

I S5 ... 108-109. 155-56. 166. 2 12: miliury

'Theopornpu. (h. 5). 146. 1s0-51. 195 'l1>eopon1pllS the Uouoclid. 8~. 14. 8. 9~,20. ~.117.98,

180.210 T'hompoon. W. E.. Ach~nun Altilude To",,,,d W ills," 160; Ot HiIft"W Ilt.r/jc~k. H . 29 ThruybulUl of Lowu, 29 ... 84. 150 Thudippuo. 29 .. ,84. 110. 124 100. 112, 135. 18J. 188.201, TinurchLl$, H

s...

as,

dr.lft (q>hcl>ril), Iss", 12B. I~ wnlch .1Id ;ncon>

Household Interests

Household Gods

Household Gods

Household Gods

Household Gods

Household Gods

Permanent Interests

Masculine Interests

Household Gods

Household portfolios

Masculine Interests

Basic Interests

A Conflict of Interests

Archaeology of Household Activities

Household Economic Behaviors

Book of Interests

Knowledge and Human Interests

A Conflict of Interests

Grimm's Household Tales

Persons, Interests, and Justice

Standard Household Effect Co

The Archaeology of Household Activities

Russia's Energy Interests in Azerbaijan

The Archaeology of Household Activities

International Perspectives On Household Wealth

Public policies and household saving

Academic Interests and Catholic Confessionalisation

Household welfare and Vietnam's transition

Public Economics and the Household

International Comparisons of Household Saving

The Guards, Britain's Household Division

Household Interests

Household Gods

Household Gods

Household Gods

Household Gods

Household Gods

Permanent Interests

Masculine Interests

Household Gods

Household portfolios

Masculine Interests

Basic Interests

A Conflict of Interests

Archaeology of Household Activities

Household Economic Behaviors

Book of Interests

Knowledge and Human Interests

A Conflict of Interests

Grimm's Household Tales

Persons, Interests, and Justice

Standard Household Effect Co

The Archaeology of Household Activities

Russia's Energy Interests in Azerbaijan

The Archaeology of Household Activities

International Perspectives On Household Wealth

Public policies and household saving

Academic Interests and Catholic Confessionalisation

Household welfare and Vietnam's transition

Public Economics and the Household

International Comparisons of Household Saving

The Guards, Britain's Household Division

Recommend Documents