Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 39 - Christ - Liturgy Avoidance and Antidosis in Classical Athens

    Uploaded by

    Felipe Montanares
    18 views24 pages

    Original Title

    39 - Christ - Liturgy Avoidance and antidosis in Classical Athens

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    18 views24 pages

    39 - Christ - Liturgy Avoidance and Antidosis in Classical Athens

    Uploaded by

    Felipe Montanares

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 24
    Liturgy Avoidance and Antidos Matthew R. Christ Transactions of the American Philological Association (1974-), Vol. 120. (1990), pp. 147-169. Stable URL: bhtp:flinks,jstor-org/sici?sici~0360-5949% 281990429 120%3C14 73 ALAAAIC%3E2.0.CO%3B2-T ‘Transactions of the American Philological Association (1974-) is currently published by The Johns Hopkins University Press, ‘Your use of the ISTOR archive indicates your acceptance of ISTOR’s Terms and Conditions of Use, available at htp:sseww jstor org/aboutiterms.html. ISTOR’s Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you hhave obtained prior permission, you may aot download an entie issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and ‘you may use content in the ISTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use Please contact the publisher regarding any further use ofthis work, Publisher contact information may be obtained at fp jstoronpournalihupAti. Each copy of any part ofa JSTOR transenission must contain the same copyright tice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transtnission, ISTOR isan independent not-for-profit organization dedicated to creating and preserving a digital archive ot scholarly journals. For more information regarding ISTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. hup:thrwwjstor.orgy Fri Aug 4 10:40:09 2006 Transactions of the American Phitological Association 120 (1990) 147-169 LITURGY AVOIDANCE AND ANTIDOSIS IN CLASSICAL ATHENS* MATTHEW R, CHRIST Indiana University the private resources and energy of the wealthy through a system of “iurgies,” or compulsory public services, The liturgy was both a financial and a personal “obligation, requiring its performer not only to bear the costs of essential state services, but also to supervise their execution, Davies describes this system of public finance and administration as “a (for Greece) unusually effective taxation sysiem;" Lauffer, on the other hand, sees in it evidence of “perhaps the. greatest weakness” of the democratic state, namely, is economic dependence on the hm seers vein of i paps wm, raed the 1989 metings of eee Ta ret Rete dae! 28 es aes se ACA Bee a ea Mates rca Dea Oh See ee ae Lame a sae te of Fo ieee es wil be ccd by autor and te es of mule eu tae Neate Hier of Gr able Fine Cant, Me 1932 Sina ee Aer eet Ca aes ol Mi PEE 1b Say Pa ee a ae ant penn $o Tee a tee E Gas ceorbanay and Aber ciple Bay Fag Coe & Meenas Suplenes 1 ues See ee een Se GiB he di Polar Weak Mt eee RS en talents Yliy Fee ee IE eit lta Coane (Petty AU, Garris, ANE sa APAIE O22 Cited Anes” Gaul dn oy psu & Wy antes fle awa Adega 2 aE AN ie te Sika Mot ES of Cat eden at Seen eae ee ie Sie Nester SBe use er kare seal Stig rah 2 ity 92 & ate La ey He Cee ee ae ee Gat te Ee te ete ie 3 Beatie ta Shura COias Set S838 Mossé. Athens in Decline 404-86 B.C. trans. by J. Stewart (London 1973); J. Seti a tl ai Binain BOTA Bal Pon Son ee ea ign Pi tues Coe ee ee ose eee ea Sirgen, he isl ae er a dat deen oe Te eS toa Cee ee ee ee eet oe Posen Parenter iar rg a eo He fie Cont AEB § Spas aan ef Perce Wee Sag gon fad ole tis BC Good SO ann 1h he et Corry pe Sonn Dene io od oars Oa, 18 ‘Mauhew R. Christ wealthy.! This paper will explore the response of the wealthy to the liturgical system and, in particular, the nature and scale of their opposition to it fram the late fifth century on, I will argue that 1) the. problem of liturgy avoidance in ‘Athens was more serious than Scholars have allowed, and 2) the anidosis proce- dure, rather than alleviating the problem, aggravated it. 1. THE LITURGICAL SYSTEM The liturgical system underwent considerable change from the time of its inception inthe early years of the Athenian democracy until the late fourth cen- tury B. C. when it fell into disuse.? Throughout this period, however, there ‘were two basic classes of liturgical service, festival and military? 1. Festival litargies. Each year the Athenian state relied on approximately ‘one-hundred wealthy men to perform licargies in connection with its numerous festivats.* The proper functioning of these importane civic rituals depended on the zeal and energy of wealthy iturgists, whose responsibilities entailed, for ex- ample, the raining and financing of a chorus (ehoregéa) or the supervision and support of the young men training for a torch-race (gymasiarchia). Depending fon the specific service involved and the generosity ofthe performer, the cast of performing a festival liturgy ran as high as 3000 drachmae. 2. Military Huurgies. The chief military Huutgy was the wierarchy. The smooth operation of the Athenian navy rested on the efforts ofits trierarchs, each of whom maintained a trireme and supervised is crew during his year of service, The high cost ofthe vierarchy—anywhere from 4000-6000 drachinie— prompted the state to experiment from the late fifth century on with different srategies for distributing the burden fait among the rch.’ relative ltecomer (on the liturgical scene was the procisphora, which first appears in our sources in 4 Davies (1971) xvii, and Lauffer 187 2 The best itroduetion to the lisargical system i¢ Davies (1971) x (1981) 937. The figates for liungieal costs cited below in the text ace tiem Davies (1971) xxinsis T For the distinction. see Davies (1967) 33. Festival liturgies are also refered ia by geholars as “cegular litgies." since they recurred annually (et, D. 20.21; Eneoehtor). and miliary Inurgies a6 “uregular lurgies,” szee their positon was less predicsble (see, eg, Andrendes 791) tn the rd Furth cet, “ie fm cial of anual ariel spelen appeas fa have been over 97a rising 10 over 118 in a Fanathenaic year” (Bivies {19671 40). "The synatiecatchy, an arrangement whereby (wo tietarchs shared responsibility for a‘single ship, (ast appeared in the Tater Years of the Peloponnesian War and cme teensy carom i the frat decades of the fourth century. A ew of Periandros (ea, 337 B.C), however, divided responsibiives for We wierarchy among twenly groups (sjmmoriai) of sity men each. In 340 B.C. Demosthenes ‘wom pastage offs law that made the 300 wealtsest men in the sate (ell divided Inve dymnories)responsine for financisg the avy. VY. Gabrielsen, howaver. has iy revived dhe view that this law "cid noi ht lability to the 300 but only fnereased the financial burdens cared by the group" C'The Number of Atkenian Trierarchs afer ca 340 B.C," CAM 40 (1989) 148). For a succinct overview of all these developments with bibliography azd ancicnt sources, sce Rhodes (1981) o75-81, Liturgy Avoidance 149 the mid-fourth century, The 300 performers of this liturgy paid in advance the wartae (eisphora) for their tax-grOups (symmoriai)§ ‘The magistrates administered the selection of candidates for these liurgies.? After soliciting volunteecs, they proceeded to assign the remaining liturgies 0 those whom they deemed mast capable of carrying them out* Two legal proce- dures were available to those assigned against their will to public service, skepsis for those claiming that they were legally exempt, and antidasis for © The eixphora vas an imegular levy, based on s man's own assessment (timema) ‘of his wealth In 37877 B.C. te eisphora system was tearganized i Tacliate the Collection of tates: all payers of the euaphora were divided into symmories Within each symmory, the wealsiest members were tesponsible for the aivance yment (Zroelisphora) af their group's tak. On the efsphora system. sex esp. de Grok SOO. More sects uestmente clase R. Thomsen, ‘Elsphora (Gopeagen964) coritaly reviewed by a Ste Gri fn CR nd, 16 [16] (3), and P. Broa, Eisphora-—syniaxit—Seratiotike, Anales Liuéraites de PUnivesté de Besangon. no. 284 (Pars 1983) 4-73. Scholars conunue wo debae how the system operated and, in paricular, whether Uae eusphora syacoies an fuval symmories were identical. For the most fecent round of debate with eatier Bibliography, see MacDowell (1986), who. argues’ for ideniy, and. Rhodes (1982), who argues against i Although estimates of Ge number of men subject to the gisphora range from 1260 up wo 9000, the evidence, ix my opinion, favors 2 nimber toward the lower end of this range. For s survey of opinions on this Ayesiion, set Ober 126029, nates 38 and 39 wey or or Why Aristode's time, the eponymous archon administered ihe seleeion of choregot (ath. Pol. 563), except for tose at the Lenaea. The later, together wei the aymnasiarchs, fell ander the Joriadiction of the archon baileus (Ath Pol. S71)" The siratégoi snared responsibilty for slecting the 300 procis ‘pheronies (D, 425), bat delegsed selecton of tetarchs wo one of thei number {aii Pol 611), Foe farher deals on selection, see Rhodes commentary (1981) 7 these passages, Rhodes (2982) 3-4, and Jordan 61-67 3 the bes sassted the magistrates by nominating gymnasiarchs and, ix some cases, chorego’ tae Rhodes [{981] 638-39, and 624-50), Individuals might also hhominate one another, st lea for festival lsurgies (And, 1132). From 35? BO. fon's "list of men liable for the terarchy” was available (Rhodes (1982) 3). Ary magistrate seeking candidates for public service could presumably sonsule his {sg 38 well asthe simema submitted by individuals for purposes ofthe eisphora fig 37877 B.C. on (see above, note 8). PThose exempt feom public service inchided: minors (Lys. 3224: ef. D 21134. Arie Ath, Pot. $63), archons. exempt at least from ite wleraeky (D. 3027), and recipienee of grants of ateleia (oxempl Irom festival ituegies o2ly {D. 20027) Gleruchs (D. 14-16) an te disabled (ef, MacDowell 1978) 162) may ano have ew ntl eo lea thet poverty wah group for ok timation, pace D. 20.19, were eligibe for same fendiva turgies, but ROC enerally forthe wierarchy (ee Whisehesd [1977] 80-82), Tr addition, cusrent and past perlomers of public service received special con- sideration: 1)'No man could be compelled to perform «wo liturgies slmulkancously 40,8 or, appa, the same Cstvat Erg ore than once hi ie (Aa ‘th, Pol. 363), ‘tom at "yA performer of a festival liturgy was ended io ¢ one-year respite (om al publ seeen opon complaion of he ofie cD.208). on TP 3) A tuerachy In recogrston of the glester fimanclal and personal demands of his thang, received a twayeartepieve ls. 7.38). 150 Matthew R. Christ those who, though they acknowledged tier eligibility, believed that chey could identify a wealthier man to serve in their place." Estimates of how many men served regularly a lturgss in the fourth century range from 300-1200."" Although the liturgical system dictated the parameters within which the wealthy were to serve the city, it eft the individual with a certain degree of dis- cretion as to where and how exiravaganlly © perform public service.!* The ‘wealthy were encouraged, however, 10 vie with one another in performing litue- Bies conspicuousty and more frequently than the law required. The reward for those who displayed philocimia in serving the city was prestige and charis that might be exploited in the political arena or in the courts. The city and its wealthy citizens were thus, a least in theory, parties oa mutually beneficial ar- rangement whereby the city received essential services, and tte wealthy, in ex- ‘change for their benefaction, recognition and privilege. Jn encouraging the wealthy Wo surpass one another in civic munificence, the Athenian democracy adapted to its own purposes the traditional competition among aristocrats in Hellenic culture to confirm their status within the commu- nity through conspicuous expenditure." The liturgical system, as it emerged under the early democracy, provided an institutional framework within which the wealthy could continue to enjoy the benefits of prominence, including public office, while at the same time serving the needs of the state.* The wealthy did not, as far as we know, object to tis gradual redirection of their competitive expenditure to suppor the growing state. They no doubt shared in the civic pride that burgeoned especially after the Persian Wars. As the Athenian empire grow, they reaped no less than their fellow citizens the financial benefits ofthe naval expeditions on which they served as trerarchs On exemptions, see Harison 234-35, MacDowell (1978) 162, and Gabrielsen (1987) Sr. d On skepsis, see esp. Harrison 232-36, and) Rhodes (1981) 625, 849, a 8 om antidasis, see below, Section LY. Tee ee ee ee RACs 1981) 18-28, fr ie higher, Rhodes (1982) 4-5, The disparity is die to disagreement over how the ruler governing taemttony word Rhee agument emmy pion, mote cnc Most scholars, in any ease, would sree with Davies" ealeulaion ((1981] 28-39) thac a forcane of atleast thee to four talents was necessary to Qualify One as 2 member of the liturgical lass, Cl. the caloslaions of E- Ruschenbusch, “Ein Derag var Leturgie und vat Eughora” 2PE 59 (1948) 237-40, Gn the clement of choice, see Davies (1981) 24-26, and 91. Davies, now: ‘ever, veresimatas the degree to which individuals were free {9 choose not 12 Derform festival fugies, at Rhodes roves ((1982) 4). ‘Gn charts ara seward for public service, see Davies (1971) xvii, and (1981) 93100, Dover 292-95, and Ober 226-80, On the imporianee of experdire in. the arinocraie ethos, see A. Szastynska- a Gardva: chee Pindue,” Eos 63 (1977) 205-9, and Davies (1981) 58299) Sinise (188-90) and Ober (33) ity note how the demseracy adapted to its advantage this atstorratic cade of competition, Lauffer (157) and 1. T. Roberts (“Arislocratc Democracy: The Perseverance of Tumocrauc Principles in ‘Athenian Government,” Athenaeum na. 64 [1986] 309) exaggerate the extent 0 set te Hari saem caked wit democrat rns Hon poligea oie” at a key inducement fo wiling pubic service, see pssst (Arist | Rhet. ad Alon. 1424920-32 Limugy Avoidance 151 As the fifth century progressed, however, democratic reforms severely m= ited the number of offices availabe tothe conspicuous linrgist, and a new breed ‘of politician won popular support aot so much by private beneficence as expen- diure from the public coffers." Although our fragmentary source material for the mid-fifth century does not permit us to trace the impact of these develop ments on the attitudes of liturgists, more than one wealthy Athenian must have viewed the new situation with cynicism and suspicion. Our first documentation of resentment toward public service appears in the “Old Otigarch,” a weatise dat- ing perhaps to the outbreak of the Peloponnesian War ([Xen.] Ath, Pof.).13).!” To all appearances, however, it was the final years of the Peloponnesian War that triggered a crisis in the relationship between tie state and its wealthy citi- zens. Alter the defeat in Sicily (413) and the revolt af its allies (412), the city called increasingly on the wealthy to shoulder the costs of the war. At the same time, however, the wealthy—many of whom were already politically disenchanted—were themselves hard-pressed by the economic turmoil that accompanied the war. inthis period signs of opposition to the liturgical system appear regulary and prominendy in our sources.°° in the fourth century, the relationship between the state and its wealthy cit- izens continued to be a troubled one. Tensions were peehaps at their highest dur- ing the Corinthian War (395-386) and the Social War (357-355). In each case, economic hard times made the wealthy especially sensitive to the pressure on them 19 support the city's cosy military expeditions.» Even in times of eco- nomic revival, however, reseniment persisted. tis against this backdrop chat we rust understand the state's repeated attempts inthe fourth century to reform the liturgical system and the system for collecting the eisphora.# 6 For an analysis of the new politicians, see W. R. Connor, The New Polit cians of ith Century. Athans (Princeton 1971). On Perils! use af ube moneys ta counteract Cimon's private expendiwure, see Arist Ata. Pol. 373-4 and Plut. Per. 9. Isocrates (De Pace 13) exhicizes similar tactics in the fourth cen Ton the reaise's date of composition, see Ostwald 182a, 28 38 On the heavy eisphora dung the Decelean War, see D.S. 1347.7, 52.5, and 64.4. For the city's increasing dependence an te wealthy” at this time, see Osisald 344, and Davies (1981) 90. On Athenian finance during this period, see Ry Meiges, The Athenian Empire (Oxford 1972) 369 ig" For evidence of opposition in the Tate fifth century, soe Lys, (c. 35 (Thatheim) (after 413 B.C), Lys. 20.23 (ca, 410 B.C), As. Ran. 1063-68 (405 B.C), Lys. 21.12 (4032 B.C), and Tsoe, 18.59-60 (400/399 B.C, referring to the situation im 408 B.C.) “Son tensions between the rich and the state in dhe early yeats of the fourth ccontury, see Mosse 12-17, Strauss 55-59, and Ober 98-99. Aristophanes” late ays teflect the social and’ economic pressures of this period: ses David 3-5, and BD." Olson's forthcoming article, “Economics and Weology ig Arstophanes’ eat HCP 9S (1950) On eggions during ead ay the Social War tee Maseé 34-55, and G. L, Cawkwell, “Eubulus," JAS $3 (1963) 65. On fourdr century reforms, see above, nates $ and 6. 182 Matthew R, Christ M1, THE RELUCTANT LITURGIST To assess the nature and scale of opposition to the liturgical system among the wealthy, we must first sppreciate that our sources are for the most part bi- sed toward recording compliance. In public decrees, for example, the Athenian sate apparently preferred uo laud dutiful liturgists rather than censure cheats.” Furthermore, the man who performed state service readily boasted ofthat fact in speeches before popular audiences and built monuments to commemorate his benefaction, while the liturgy dodger did his best to escape notice. For evidence of antisocial atitudes and behavior among tie wealthy we are forced to rely on 1) the writings of elite authors, including Isocrates and Xenophon; 2) oratory, especially the slanders of litigants against one another; and 3) comedy, with its frequent caricatures of the rich To accept at face value individual statements within any of these sources is clearly dangerous. To reject them collectively, however, is to miss an excellent opportunity 40 gain insight into the attitudes of Athens” liturgical class. Indeed, taken as a group these sources provide a plausible and relatively consistent portrayal of the private fears, resentment and ‘eynicism of the rich in Athens. Let us first consider the evidence for such feelings among the wealthy, and then auemmpt co determine their impact on the ‘behavior of these men. Scholars have tended to focus their attention t00 narrowly on the question as to whether the complaints of the wealthy about their civie obligations were “tegitimate.°" Feven if such an objective evaluation is possible, it is largely inelevant 0 our understanding of the perceptions and misperceptions upon which the wealthy based their response. to the liturgical system. A further hin-

    You might also like