KernosRevue internationale et pluridisciplinaire de religion

grecque antique

9 | 1996

Varia

Conflicting Authorities. Asylia between Secularand Divine Law in the Classical and HellenisticPoleis

Angelos Chaniotis

Electronic versionURL: http://journals.openedition.org/kernos/1157DOI: 10.4000/kernos.1157ISSN: 2034-7871

PublisherCentre international d'étude de la religion grecque antique

Printed versionDate of publication: 1 January 1996ISSN: 0776-3824

Electronic referenceAngelos Chaniotis, « Conflicting Authorities. Asylia between Secular and Divine Law in the Classicaland Hellenistic Poleis », Kernos [Online], 9 | 1996, Online since 21 April 2011, connection on 19 April2019. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/kernos/1157 ; DOI : 10.4000/kernos.1157

Kernos

Kernos, 9 (1996), p. 65-86.

ConflictingAuthorities.

Asylla betweenSecularandDivine Law

in theClassicalandHellenisticPoleis

1. Conflicting authorities: The problem1

As the story goes (Hdt., l, 157-159), in the late 6th century the LydianPaktyeshad takenrefuge as a suppliantin Kyme after an unsuccessfulrevoitagainstthe Persians.Vpon the demandof the Persiansto handhim over, Kymeaskedthe oracleat Didyma how to dealwith Paktyesin the way most likely towin the favour of the god. The surprisinganswerwas to deliver him to thePersians.A secondembassywas sentto the oracleand its spokesmanrepeatedthe question,addingthat, in spite of their fear of Persianpower, the Kymeansdid not dare to follow the initial instructionsuntil they might receive fromApollon clearinstructionsuponhow they shouldact. Yet, the answerremainedthe same.Vpon this, the envoyAristodikos went all round the outsideof thetemple driving away the birds which had built their neststhere; while he wasdoing it, he hearda voice from the adytonsaying: "Most impious amongmen,how dareyou do this wicked thing?Would you canyoff the suppliants(toÙçi.KÉ'taç) from my temple?"And the envoyreplied: "Lord Apollon, do you protectyour suppliants,yet tell the menof Kyme to abandontheirs ?" "Yes," answeredthe god; "1 do indeed,that you may suffer the soonerfor your impious deedＨ ｡ Ｈ ｪ ｅ ｰ ｾ Ｈ ｪ ｡ ｶ Ｇ ｴ ｅ Ｉ Ｌ and nevercomehereagain to consultmy oracleabouthandingover suppliants."As very often in ancientreligions, a seeminglyinconsistentbehaviourof the deity tums out to be a test of the mortals'morality and faith.Thus the divine messagebecomesevenmore clear: Suppliantseither in a cityor in a sanctuaryshouldbe protectedat aU events,no matterwhat hascausedthemto seekprotection.

Now anotherstory. In Euripides'Ion Kreousahasattemptedto poisonIon,not knowing that hewas her own son.Asking the choruswhereto run andfindrefuge (1. 1250-1260),she is advisedto run to the altar, since it is impious toslay a suppliant (h:Énv où 8Éf.uç cpOVE{JEtV). Kreousaobjects: "But l perish in

1 This paperwas presentedat the Colloquium in Athens and in lectures in HeidelbergandBase!. l am very greatful to many auditors for their comments.especially to Professors'FritzGschnitzer(Heiderberg)and Michael Peachin(New York. who has also improved the English textsubstantiaIly).Ali datesare B.C.. if not indicatedotherwise.

66 A. CHANIOTIS

accordwith the law (té!> VÔj.lq> ûÉy' oÂÂ'Uj.laÙ." "But first they haveta lay handsonyou," replies the chorus. "Uponthe altar take your seat.For, if they slay youhere,your blood will caU to heavenfor vengeanceon the murderers."For thisreasonher pursuer,Ion, makesthe earliestattackagainstthe institution of asyliain the Greekliterary tradition (1. 1312-1320);2'Shamethat a god ordainedbadlaws for mortals, statutesnot in wisdom framed! Never should unrighteouspersanssit on altars,but theyshouldbe houndedthence.Unmeetis that handssin-stainedshould touch the gods.But righteousmen, whoeverwaswronged,shoulddaim their sanctuary,andnot the goodandevil comealike hither ta winthe sameboon of the gods" (translationof Arthur Way, partly changed).Thedistinction betweenthe secularnomoswhich condemnsthe assailantand thedivine themiswhich protectsthe suppliant, regardlessof the crime he hascommitted,is dear; equaHydearis Ion's condammationof this indifferenceofthe divine law towardsthe suppliants,righteousandunrighteousalike.3

Despitethe obvious differencesbetweenthe two stories,the moral is stillthe same:Divine law recognizesno limits in the protectionof suppliants.Forthe shakeof convenienceI will caU this protectionasylia, althoughthis termcan be used with a variety of meaningsin the ancient sources,from theinviolability of every sanctuaryand the personalinviolability of an individualguaranteedby a foreign city, to the prohibition of reprisaIsagreeduponby twocommunities,or the inviolabiliy of certain sanctuariesrecognizedby kings,cities, and confedel'ations.4 In this paperI shaHrefer exdusivelyta the inviola-bility of everysanctuary,a right probablyas old as the sanctuariesthemselves.Whena suppliantis harmedor dl'aggedout of the sanctuary,this action (sylan)resemblesthe theft of divine property; the violation of asylia is hierosylia.5 By

Cf P. STENGEL, s.v. Asylon, in RE, II. 2 (1896), c. 1882; H. BOLKESTEIN, 1V0bltt'itigkeil undArmenpflegeim vorcbristlicben Altertum, Utrecht, 1939, p. 247f.; ]. MIKALSON, Honor Tby Gods:PopularReligion ill Greek Tragedy, Chape!Hill-London, 1991, p. 75: U. SINN, GreekSanctuariesasPlaces of Refuge, in N. MARINATOS - R. HÂGG (eds.), Greek Sanctuaries: New Appl'Oacbes,London-NewYork, 1993,p. 108 n. 11.

3 On this passageseeA.P. BURNETT, Human Resistanceand Divine Persuasionin Euripides'Ion, in CPb, 57 (1962), p. 99 with n. 36: she points out that Euripideskeepshis distancefrom Ion'scriticism (see infra, the end of my article); cf MIKALSON, op. cit. (n. 2), p. 75 with n. 33. Similarcriticism also in EURIP., Herakl., 259: Oedipus,fr. 1049N (infra, n. 14).

4 On the various notions of asylia see F. VON \VOEJS, Das AsylwesenAgyptens in derPtolemt'ierzeitunddie spt'itereEntwickhlllg, München, 1923, p. 4f.: E. SCHLESINGER,Die griecbiscbeAsylie, Giessen,1933,p. 2-6, 28-38, 53-71: 1. \VENGER, s.v.Asylrecbt,in RAC, 1 (1950), p. 837f.: D. VANBERCHEM, Trois cas d'asylie arcbal'que, in AiH, 17 (1960), p. 21-33: ph. GAUTHIER, Symbola.Lesétrangerset la justice dans les cités grecques,Nancy, 1972, p. 209-284, esp. 209-226, 226-230:B. BRAVO, Sulân. Représailleset justice privée contre des étrangers dans les cilés grecques,inASNP,10 (1980), p. 747-750: U. SINN, DasHeraion von Peracbora.Eine sakraleScbutzzonein derkorintbiscbenPeraia, in AiDA/(A), 105 (1990), p. 71f.: MIKALSON, op. cit. (n. 2), p. 69-77 (asylum inAthenian tragedy): SINN, art. cit. (n. 2), p. 90f.

5 SCHLESINGER,op. cil. (n. 4), p. 30-33: GAUTHIER, op. cit. (n. 4), p. 226: MIKALSON, op. cil.(n. 2), p. 73 with n. 16.

ASYLIA IN THE CLASSICAL AND HELLENISTIC POLElS 67

coming into physical contact6 with a sacredplace the suppliantis somewhatincorporatedin the sanctityof the place,becomingin a sensepropertyof thegod. "1 give my bodyas sacredpropertyto the god to have,"asKreousaputs it(1. 1285: iEpàv 'tà crrollcx 'tep flEep Ùtùroll' ËxEtv).7 This rule knows no exceptions.Thealtar is an "unbreakableshield,strongerthana fortification wall", the "abodeofthe gods a protection common to aIl men", to use the words of Aischylos(Hiket., 190) and Euripides(Herakl., 260) respectively.8Considerationsof sin,guilt, right, andjusticehaveno bearingon the daim of a suppliantto remaininthe sanctuaryor to be delivered to his pursuers.In Euripides' HerakleidaiO. 236-246) the Athenianking Demophonpresentsthe reasonsfor acceptingthe suppliants,who had taken refuge in the sanctuaryof Zeus Agoraios:kinship, the obligationto repayagoodservice,the personalandpolitical shameof Athens,respectto Zeus'altar.9 Demophonmakesno allowancefor whatevermay have causedthe Herakleids to seek asylum. Beside the evidenceofAtheniandrama,collectedand discussedrecentlyby J. Mikalson (note 2), thisattitudeis confirmedby legal sources.Lysias, e.g., describinghow the 30 tyrantsin Athens siezedtheir victims from the altars, comments:"Becauseof theirbehaviouryou havefound no shelterfrom your wrongs (àùlKouIlÉvouç) in eithertemples or altars, which save even the wrongdoers('tDîç àÙlKOÛcrt).,,10 Thequestionof morality and justice is not raised in the extant leges sacraeonsupplication.ll A decreeof Tralleis, confirmedin the 4th centuryby a Persian

6 On the ritual of supplicationseeJ. GOULD, Hiketela, inJHS, 93 (1973), p. 74-103, esp. 75-85:cf SCHLESINGER,op. cit. (n. 4), p. 32-36: SINN, ait. cit. (n. 4), p. 73-75: MIKALSON, op. clt. (n. 2),p. 72 with notes8 and 9: SINN, art. clt. (n. 2), p. 88-92: W. POTSCHER,Die Strukturder Hlkesle, inWS, 107/108(1994-1995),1, p. 51-75 (= Sphalros.HansSchwablzum 70. Geburtstaggewidmet).

7 SCHLESINGER,op. cit. (n. 4), p. 33: GAUTHIER, op. cit. (n. 4), p. 226: MIKALSON, op. clt.(n. 2), p. 73 with n. 14.

8 On the unlimited characterof asylia seeSCHLESINGER,op. Clt' (n. 4), p. 2, 52: cf H. LLOYD-JONES, TheJusticeofZeus, Berkeley-LosAngeleS-London,19832

, p. 5 and 30 (on Zeus Hikesios):MIKALSON, op. clt. (n. 2), p. 76.

9 MIKALSON, op. clt. (n. 2), p. 71 and 257 n. 5.

10 LYS., XII, 98: cf DIo CHRYS., XXXI, 88 ＨＱＺｾｖ àcruÀÎav, nv ltapÉxoucrl1:oîç q:>avÂolç oi 1:01OÛtOl1:6ltol): ACHILL. TATIUS, VIII, 2 (Icai 1:oÎç J,tèv ltOVT\poÎç ai 1:rov ieprov à(J{pàÀewllhBOa<JlKlX1:WPUYllV); cfSINN, art. cit. (n. 2), p. 108. Notice, however, that respectfor the asylum does not mean that any(further) requestof the suppliantwouId be automaticallyaccepted(MIKALSON, op. clt. [no 2], p. 72).

11 On the 'cathartic law' of Lindos (SEG, XXXIX, 729: 3rd centulY) and two related texts fromKyrene (LSS, 115 B 29-59: 4th century) and Selinous (M.H. ]AMESON - D.R. ]ORDAN - R.D.KOTANSKY, A Lex Sacrafrom Sel/nous,Durham, 1993 (GRBSMonographs,11), p.8-17: mid-fifthcentury)seeV. KONTORINI, 'AvéKooreç bnypaq:>Èç P6oov, II, Athens, 1989, 17-29 (no. 1), who arguesconvincingly that the iKÉcrlOl mentionedin the 'cathartic law' of Kyrene are suppliants,and notvisitants or hostile spirits (cf the recentdiscussionof the Kyreneanlaw by R. PARKER, Mlasma:PolI/ution and Purification ln Early Greek Religion, Oxford, 1983, p. 347-351 with the olderbibliography: cf now ChI'. A. FARAONE, Talismanand Trojan Horses: Guardian Statuesln GreekMyth and Rltual, New York-Oxford, 1992, p. 81f.): the latter view ls still adoptedby]AMESON-]ORDAN-KOTANSKY, op. cit., p. 54-57, 116-120,who interpret the respectivepassagesof the legessacraeof Selinousand Kyrene as related to visitants: however, they do not exclude the possibility

68 A. CHANIOTIS

king, establishingthe asylia Cinviolability) and hiketeria (the right to acceptsuppliants)of the sanctuaryof DionysosBakchios,protectsthe iviolability ofevery suppliant, regardlessof the reason he sought divine protection:12

"Nobodyshouldwrong a suppliant... Nobodyshouldeitherwrong a suppliantorremainindifferentwhenhe seesa suppliantbeeingwronged;otherwiselet himandhis whole stockbe destroyed."

The blind and indifferent application of this rule might clearly lead toproblems.The presenceof suppliantsin a sanctuarycould easily jeopardizeacity's safety,sincecriminal elementsandpersonswilling to do anythingin theirdespaircould be amongthem; even if the fugitives were innocentvictims ofinjustice their presencein a city would provoke their pursuer'senmity.13ThisphenomenoncouId also underminethe political authorityand the authorityofsecular law: Can a community tolerate that native and foreign murderers,thieves, runawayslaves,traitors, and debtorsfind safety, impunity, or releasefrom the burdenof their debtsin a sanctuary?And if runawayslaveshadsomejustification for their escape,claiming to be the victims of cruel treatment,whatabout alreadyconvictedcriminals, found guilty by secularcourts, as was thecaseof Kreousa,convictedfor her crime Cl. 1251: ＢＬｾ＼ｰ｣ｰ Kpœtlleetcr'),but safe inthe god'sadyta. Ion's criticism is not unique.In Euripides'lost tragedyOedipusCfr. 1049N) an anonymousspeakerin an unknowncontextexpressesthe sameconflict betweensecularauthorityCthe authorityof a court) and the divine lawprotecting,invariably, asylia: "When a manwho is unjustsits at an altar, l wouldbid the tradition farewell and, not fearing the gods,would takehim off to court.A bad man ought always to suffer badly".14 Until the 2nd centuryA.D. similaraccusationsare not uncommonin the literary sources,especiallyin relation tothe sanctuariesof Asia Minor Ce.g., the Attemisionat Ephesos),whereaccording

that these legessacraemay concern the purification of homicides (p. 57f.). For PtolemaicEgyptseeVON WOEts, op. cit. (n. 4). p. 171.

12 [sAM, 75, 1. 5-12: iKETIlPlTW dv(Xl !;,IO/vuawtBaKXIWt ｾｗｴ ÙTJI.lOa(jwt, 'IKÉTIlv /ll) àÙtKEÎV. / "OpoçiEpàç

aauÀoç!;,lOvuaou/ BâKXOU. Tàv ｩ ｋ ｾ ｔ ｊ ｖ /ll) àÙtKEÎV / Ｏｬｔｊｾ àÙtKOU/lEVOV 1tEplOp&V, / Ei ùÈ ＯｬｾＬ ÉçroÀTJ dVal Katat'nà[v] / Kat ｾ ￠ yÉVoç (Xl'noû. Cf the similar languagein HOT., III, 48, 3: ou Ｑ ｴ ｅ ｰ ｬ ｏ ｰ ｗ ｖ ｾ ｅ ￇ à1tÉÀKEtV wùçiKÉmç ÉK ｾｯ ipoû; for the resistenceof peopleagainstviolations of asylia see infra, n. 21; cf alsoEURIP., Herakleid., 254: Kat 1twç ùlKatov ｾ ￠ ｶ ｩ ｋ ｾ ｔ ｊ ｖ aYEtV ｾｬＺ［ PAUS., VII, 25, 1 (oracle of ZeusDodonaios):/lTJÙ' ｩｋｾ｡ àÙtKEÎV' iKÉmt Ù' iEpol ｾｅ Kat uYVOI. On the distinction betweenbiketeriaanasylia (esp. in hellenistic times) see, e.g., VON WOEB, op. cif. (n. 4), p. 74; P. DEBORD, Aspectssociauxet économiquesde la vie religieusedans l'Anatolie gréco-romaine,Leiden, 1982 (EPRO,88), p. 285.

13 For criminals in sanctuariessee infra, n. 15. For the problemsin the SamianHeraion (Infra,§ 4) see F. SOKOLOWSKI, T7Je l(alrT)Àol in tbe Heraion of Samos,in ZPE, 29 (1978), p. 144f.;1. SOVERINl, Il "commerclo nel tempio": Osservazlonisul regolamentodei kapèlol a Samo(SECXXVII, 545), in Opus,9-10 (1990-1991),p. 75-77, 84. For supplicationprovoking the pursuer'sattacksee, e.g., the aforementionedstory of Paktyesand the evidencein Attic drama: SCHLESINGER,op.cif. (n. 4), p. 41-43; M. OSTWALD, From Popular Soverelgnlyto tbe Sovereigntyof Law, Berkeley-Los Angeles-London,1986, p. 141-145;MIKALSON, op. cft. (n. 2), p. 71; cf SINN, art. clt. (n. 2), p. 92.

14 EURlP., Oedipus,fr. 1049 N; cf MIKALSON, op. cif. (n. 2), p. 75 with n. 33.

ASYLIA IN THE CLASSICAL AND HELLENISTIC POLEIS 69

to Strabo,Tacitus,andPlutarchaIl kinds of criminal elements,runawayslaves,anddebtorsfound refuge.15

This inherent conflict betweendivine and secular authority becameincreasingly apparentas and wherever the state institutions grew anddeveloped,and the solution of legal conflicts becameless a matterof privatereprisaIsand arbitration and more an issueof public courts. Athenian dramaoften reflects this conflict betweensecularand religious authority, Sophokles'Antigonebeing the bestknown play with such a theme,but hardly the onlyexample.16 Here, asyliawill presenta casestudyfor this kind of conflicts. Thisparticular issuewas not a conflict betweenmagistracies,since in the Greekpolis no sharp distinction betweensecularand religious offices existed, thepriestsbeingin mostcaseselectedofficiaIs of the community.It was primarily aconflict betweenan unwritten custom,transmittedfrom generationto genera-tion and regardedas a divine command,on the onehand,and legal regulationsintroducedin a relatively late period, on the other. The evidencequotedso farshowsthat the Greekshadrealizedthe problem,whosedimensionsshouldnotbe underestimated.As Ulrich Sinn hasrecentlydemonstrated,we must assumethat from the classicalperiodon largenumbersof suppliantsran to Greeksanc-tuariesandsometimesremainedthere for a long time, so that installationsfortheir lodging becamenecessary.17This paper,however,concernsitself with the

15 STRAB., XIV, 1, 23: ... ＧａｶｾｲｯｶＨｯｵ Bè ｂｴｬｬＢＧ｡｣ｮ｡｣ｲ｡ｶｾｯ toÛto (sc., the inviolable area) lCal｣ｲｕｉＮｬＱｬ･ｰｴＢＧｾￔｖｴｯￇ 'tfj àcru"'(q;JlÉpoçn ｾｦ｜ llô",eroç' Ècpavll Bè ｾｯｾｯ ｾＢＧ｡ｾ･ｰｯｶ lCal È1l1 ｾｯ￮ lCalCoupyotçllotoÛVｾｾｶ llÔ",tV; TAC., Ann., III, 60: crebrescebatenim Graecaspel' urbes licentia atque impunifasasylastatuendi,. complebantur templa pessimis servitorum,. eodem subsidio obaerati adversumcrediforessuspectfquecapifallum crimilJum receptahantur, nec ul1um salis validum imperiumerat coercendisseditionibuspopuli flagitia hominum ut caerimoniasdeum protegentis:PLUT.,Mor., 828d (de vifandoaerealieno, 3): ｾｯ￮ ｸｰ･ｷ｣ｲｾ｡ｴＬ omv ｬ ｃ ｡ ｾ ｡ ｣ ｰ ｵ ｹ ｲ ｯ ｣ ｲ ｴ ｖ eiç ｾｯ lepov m'nf\ç, àcruÂ.(avllapÉxet lCal èXBetav àllo ｾ Ｆ ｶ Baveirov. Cf BOLKESTEIN, op. cif. (n. 2), p. 246: SINN, art. cif. (n. 4),p. 108: H. ENGELMANN, Beifrilge zur ephesischenTopograpbie,in ZPE, 89 (1991), p. 295 (on APOLL.TYAN., l, p. 363 ed. KA YSER). Similar accusationsin PtolemaicEgypt: VON \VOEB, op. clf. (n. 4),p.137, 140, 171-174: see esp. BGU, VI, 1212 C = M.-T. LENGER, CO/pus des ordonnancesdesPtolémées,Bruxelles, 1964, p. 222-225, no. 82 (measuresof Ptolemy IV Philopator against theexploitationof asylia for the purpuseof àBrocnBtlC(a):on this text seeVON \VOEB, op. clt. [no 4], p. 19-21, 119f.): in imperial times: Th. PEKÂRY, Das r6mlsche Kaiserblldnls ln Staat, Kult undGesel1schaftdargestel1tanbandder Scbrljtquel1en,Berlin, 1985, p. 130f. (with bibliography).

16 See,e.g.,OST\VALD, op. cif. (n. 13), p. 137-171,; MIKALSON, op. cit. (n. 2), esp.69-131.

17 SINN, mt. cif. (n. 4), p. 53-116, esp. 67-69, 77, 83-97, 106-110:SINN, art. cif. (n. 2), p. 88-109(measuresfor the lodging of suppliants): cf MIKALSON, op. clt. (n. 2), p. 70f. and 257 n. 2 (fifth-century episodesinvolving asylum). For PtolemaicEgypt seeL. DELEKAT, Katocbe, Hierodulie undAdoptionsfrellassung,München, 1964, p. 48-85. According to a restorationof a decreeof Kastabos(P.M. FRASER - G.E. BEAN, 77Je RhodianPerala and Islands, London, 1954, p. 24-27, no. 15, 2ndcentury) proposedby]. COOK - \V.H. PLOMMER, Tbe SanctltalJ/ of Hemifbea at Kastabos,Cambridge,1966, p. 65, the sanctuaryof Hemitheatook measuresfor the lodging of hiketai (1. 3-4):ｾ ｯ ｾ ･ ｊ ｬ ｶ ･ ｵ ｾ ｯ ｻ ｬ Ｑ ｬ ｡ ｰ ｸ ｯ ｶ ｾ ｯ ￇ Èv ｋ｡｣ｲｾ｡ｾｲｯＬ ＱｬＰｾＱ ｾ￠ｶ 1CÂ.(crtV ｾＦｶ ｛ｬｬｃｬ･ｾ｡ｶ oux llCavoûonoç.This restorationis, however, not certain, ｛ ｂ ｡ ｊ ｬ ｬ ･ ｾ ｡ ｶ Ｌ ｛ ｣ ｰ ｵ ￂ Ｎ ｬ ･ ｾ ｡ ｶ et. sim. being possiblealternatives:besides,the wardblketescan also meanthe pilgrim, in general.For this text and the proposedrestorationsseenow\V. BLÜMEL, Die Inschrljten der rhodlscben Peraia, Bonn, 1991 (Inscbr. grlecb. Stildte ausKleinaslen,38), p. 110f. no. 401: A. BRESSON,Recueildes inscriptionsde la Péréerhodienne(PéréeIntégrée),Paris,1991,p. 68-72 no. 44.

70 A. CHANIOnS

measuresGreekpoleis took not in order to provide lodging to suppliants,butin arderto get rid of them.

The epigraphicand literary evidenceassembledhere18 shows that theGreekstried in manyways to escapefrom the embarassingsituationof peopleevading the grasp of secular law by appealingto an old and unalterabletradition. In the changingworld of the archaicpolis the idea of unlimited asyliapresenteda relie of an old notion of guilt, for which intention and planningplayedno rôle and only the concretedeedcounted.This idea was difficult toaccomodatewith a new conceptof justicewhich prevailedincreasinglyfromthe late 7th century.The introductionof a new, differentiatednotion of guilt,which distinguishedbetweenintention and accident,had significant effeetsontwo centralareasof ancientreligiosity, i.e., asylia and miasma.Asylia on theone handwas increasinglyregardedas the right of victims of injustice; formiasma,not only the deed,but also the thoughtbecameincreasinglyimportant.Yet, despitethesetendenciesand developmentsthe persistenceof sacredlawpreventedthe formulation of dear,unequivocal,generallyapplicablerules forthe acceptanceor rejectionof daimsof supplication.This conflict of authoritywas not solvedafter aIl. In this paperl concentrateon the wOrld of the Greekpoleis, leaving asideHellenistic or Romanregulations,where the problemwasseen in a different way due to the different structuresof power and thedifferent traditions.19

The most obvioussolutionwas of coursesimply to violate asylia, hopingthat the godswould turn a blind eye to the violation, especiallyif the pursuedpersanwas clearly a criminal. After aIl, the godswere the only guarantorsofasylia. Until the Hellenistic age there is no evidencefor a legal procedureagainstpersonswho hadviolated asylia.20 Given the lack of a legal protection

18 l know of no comprehensivecollection and discussionof the relevantsources.Referencestopart of the evidenceare found in many discussionsof the subjectof asylia and supplication,e.g.,K. LATTE, Heiliges Recht. Untersuchungenzur Geschichteder sakralen RechtsformeninGriechenland,Tübingen, 1920, p. 107f.; Chf. HABICHT, SamischeVolksbeschhïsseder hellenisti-schenZeit, in MDAI(A), 72 (1957), p. 229 (treatmentof suppliantslaves); G. THÛR - H. TAEUBER,Pl'OzeflrechtlicherKommentarzur "Krilmerinschrlft" aus Samos,in AnzeigerAkad. lVlen, 115(1978), p. 214f., 219-221; KONTOR/NI, op. cU. (n. 11), p. 19 n. 10; SINN, al1. cU. (n. 2), p. 92f., 95;SOVERINI, al1. cit. (n. 13), p. 106, n. 202-204.

19 On Ptolemaic Egypt see VON WOEB, op. cU. (n.4), esp. p. 12-25, 92-104 (on the 'Asylie-Klausel' found in contracts,with which the borrowerpromisednot to seekasylum if unableto repaythe debt), 62-74 (on the 'ùyroytlloç-Klausel'),171-174(on the exemptionof debUorespublic/); for thesignificance of the local, pre-Ptolemaicelement see VON WOEB, op. clt. (n. 4), p. 33-47. Formeasureslimiting the right ad statuasconfugerein the Roman Empire see VON WOEB, op. cU.(n. 4), p. 206-211; PEKÂRY, op. clt. (n. 15), p. 130f.; in late antiquity: L. \'V'ENGER, "OpOI 'AervÂfaq, inPhilologus,86 (1931), p. 427-454;WENGER, al1. cU. (n. 4), p. 841f.

20 The classicaland many later legessacraeabout asylia and supplicationleave the protectionof asylia to the vengeanceof the gods: ISAM, 29, 1. 8-15 (Metropolis, 4th cent.): [bCÉl1lV] Ilh Ù1tÉÀ.KEtV /[......] ｅＱｴｬ･ｲｾｬｘＯ｛ .. ,,]V 1l11IlÈ / [Ilpâv] 1l11(S)ÈV allt/[KoV.] oç Il' [av] àlltlCÎ]/[erllt], Ilh e'lÀ.roç ｬｘｴＧ＾Ａ｛ｾＦｴ h] ｍｾｾｬｬｐ [hlflXÀ./[À.llcr]{lX; ISAM, 75, 1. 9-12 (Tralleis, 4th century): ｾ ｯ ｶ ｩ ｋ ｾ Ｇ Ｑ ｖ Ilh ÙlltKEÎV / ＱｬＱＱｾ àlllKOUIlEVOV 1tEPlOpâv,/ ei IlÈ ｉｬｾＬ EÇroÀ.ll dVlXt KlXi ｬｘｕｾｯ｛ｖ｝ / KlXi ｾｯ yÉvoç ｡ｵｾｯ［ ISAM, 85 (Ephesos,2nd cent.): ｾ ｯ ｾ ｉ ｬ ｅ ｖ ｏ ￇ ｾ ｦ ｪ

Ｇ ａ ｛ ｰ ｾ ｬ ｬ ｴ ｬ ｬ ｯ acruÀ.ov]/1tâv, ocrov ëcrro Ｑｴ｛ｅｰｴｾＶＮｯｵﾷ oç Il' liv]/ Ｑ ｴ ｬ ｘ ｰ ｬ ｘ ｾ ｡ ｻ ｖ Ｇ Ｑ ｴ Ｌ ｡ ｵ ｾ ｯ [lX{nov ｬｘｩｾｴ｡｣ｲｅｾｬｘｴ｝ or

ASYLIA IN THE CLASSICAL AND HELLENISTIC paLEIS 71

of asylia, staries about the violent removal of suppliants from altars andsanctuariesare not uncommon,but our sourcesnever neglegt ta stigmatizethese instancesof sacrilegeand to interpret any misfortune that befell theviolator in the future as expressionof the divine anger.21 If the victims of theviolation happenedto be innocent, this only made things worse; but theviolation of asylia was condemnedeven if the suppliantswere convicts orcriminals. Equallycommonas the violation of asylia is the effort to get arounditdeceitfully, e.g., by interrupting the physical contactbetweenthe suppliantsand the sacredplace or by forcing the suppliantsto leave the sanctuarybyburning them out, walling them up, prohibitting their food supply, or simplypromising to give them a fair trial or guaranteea safe departureand thenseizing and killing them.22 Sometimes,negotiationsserved bath parties,securingfor the suppliants,especiallydebtors,a bettertreatment,and permit-ting the authoriÙesto saveface.23 One of thesemethods,the prohibition offood supply (especially to runaway slaves), was institutionalized in sornesanctuariesin the Hellenisticage, i.e., in AndaniaandSamos(§ 4 andnote 58).

True, it was often easierto apply tricks than to introducec1earlegallimita-tions of asylia. Despitethe fact that the Greekswere consciousof the problemthat asylia could be exploitedby criminal elementsand despite theoccasionalcriticism, they were extremelyreluctantto introducec1ear,direct, andunambi-guous limitations. The documentaryevidencerevealsbasically three ways to

｛ ￨ ｭ Ｖ ｯ ｴ ｾ ｯ Ka! ｾ ｏ yévoç]. For the godsas protectorsof asylum: MIKALSON, op. cit. (n. 2), p. 76f. In theHellenistie period the violation of asylia couId be prosecutedas sacrilege:see,e.g., LSS, 158, 1. 2f.(Kos, 3rd cent.); l.Cret., II, Hi 2 1. 48f.; GAUTHIER, op. cif. (n. 4), p. 268f. (Pergamon,2nd cent.); VONWOEB, op. cif. (n.4), p. 110, cf p. 106f. (Ptolemaic Egypt). PLAUT., Rudens,839-891 impliesprosecutionfor violation of an asylum (1. 839f.: vlo/enfla de ara dectpereVeneris vo/uif). Alsoviolators of the Lindian 'Iaw on suppliants'were prosecutedfor hierosylia: SEG, XXXIX, 729, 1. 7-12;seeKONTORINI, op. cit. (n. 11), p. 26. The hellenisticevidenceusually concernsthe asylia explicitlygranted to certain sanctuariesand recognizedby kings and foreign communities;on this type ofasylia seeGAUTHIER, op. cit. (n. 4), p. 226-230.

21 For testimoniaand discussionsee, e.g., STENGEL, art. cit. (n. 2), c. 1882; SCHLESINGER,op.clt. (n. 4), p. 33f.; J. MIKALSON, AthenlanPopu/arReligion, ChapelHill-London, 1983, p. 99; SINN,mt. cif. (n. 4), p. 78f., 109f.; MIKALSON, op. cif. (n. 2), p. 69f., 72f., 75; SINN, mt. cif. (n. 2), p. 93. Onviolations of asyla in PtolemaieEgypt seethe testimoniain VON WOEB, op. cit. (n. 4), p. 8f., 137-139,167-170 Ｈ ､ ｣ ｲ ｾ ｴ ｬ ｸ ｳ ｣ ｲ ･ ｡ ｬ Ｌ ｅ ｋ ｾ ｴ ￢ ｳ ｣ ｲ ･ ｡ ｩ Ｎ ltapsvoxÀsÎv); cf R. SCHOLL, CO/pus der pto/emilischenSk/aventexte,Stuttgart, 1990, l, p. 303. For the outrageor eventhe resistenceof peopleand priestsagainst violations of asylia see VON WOEB, op. cif. (n. 4), p. 90-92; a nice example is found inPLAUT., Rudens,615-705(citizensof Kyrene defendtwo suppliantgirls); cf ACHILL. TATIUS, VIII, 2-3and supra,n. 12.

22 Seeesp. SINN, mt. cif. (n. 4), p. 78-80, 97, 110f. Examplesfrom Attie tragedy:MIKALSON, op.cif., p. 73 with notes 17-18. Furtherexamples:STENGEL, art. cif. (n. 2), c. 1882; DELEKAT, op. cli.(n. 17), p. 60f.; GOULD, art. clt. (n. 6), p. 82f. See esp. the inscription from the SamianHeraiondiscussedbelow (§ 4).

23 See, e.g., THUC., III, 70, 5; cf DEMOSTH., 18, 107; BOLKESTEIN, op. cit. (n. 2), p. 246. Acharacteristiecase of negotiations is reported in an inscription from Seuthopolis (early 3rdcentury?). ft contains the oath of Berenikeand her sons,who guaranteedthe safe departureof asuppliantfrom the sanctuaryof the Samothrakiangods: IGBu/g., III 2, 1731; seethe new edition andcommenaryof K,-L. ELVERS, Del' "Eld der Berenikeund Ihrer S6hne": elne Edition von IGBulg.III2, 1731, in Chiron, 24 (1994), esp.p. 252-261.

72 A. CHAN10T1S

deal with the problem: a) by prohibiting persansmost likely ta seekasylum,e.g., convietedandpollutedpersans,from enteringa sanctuaryin the first place(§ 2); b) by having measuresagainstsuppliantwrongdoersconfirmed by thegodsthroughoracles(§ 3); and c) by conferringon the religious personneltheauthorityta expell suppliantslaves(§ 4).

2. Prohibitions against unwelcome intruders in sanctuariesand the caseof the ￠ ｹ ｲ ｯ ｹ ｴ ｾ ｯ ｴ

The evidencefor measuresexcluding from sanctuariespersanswho mighttry ta escapethe graspof law is primarily Attie. A fragmentaryAttie decree(ca.432/1) relatedta works on the Acropolis24 providesfor the building of a wall,sathat neitherrunawayslavesnor thievescouId enterthe sanctuary(hoIt [oç] âvopcmÉtEçIlè è[at]ëtll110è ÀOItOO{lt[EÇ]). The work was ta be carriedout within twomonths,and threearcherswere ta be set thereasguards.AlreadyB.W. Lollinghaspointedout that the runawayslavesandthieveswere ta be kept out of theAcropolis, sa that they would not seekasylum there.25 We should notice thesilenceof this decreeas ta the fate of fugitives andcriminals,who did manageta get into the sanctuary.Were they beyondthe responsibilityof the Athenianauthorities,or were at least the priestsallowed ta expell these intrudersfromthe sanctuary(see infra § 4)?

As we may infer from Attie forensiespeechessomecategoriesof convietswere excludedfrom sanctuaries.It shouldbe underlinedherethat theseprovi-sions aimedprimarily at protectingthe sanctuariesfrom pollution, and not atprohibiting the exploitationof asylia. Andokidesmakesan allusion ta an Attielaw whieh forbade persansconvietedas atimoi ta enter sanctuaries.Deathwould be the penaltyof violators (OÙK ｾ｡ｴ｡ｬ aùterEiç ta iEpavto'iv OEo'iV EicrtÉVatｾ àItOOavE'itat); obviously, supplication could not save them.26 A similarimpediment is mentionedin Lysias' speachagainstAndokides (VI, 24). Adecreepassedby the AtheniansprovidedthatAndokideswas ta be barredfromthe marketplaceand the temples,sa that even if wrongedby his enemieshecould get no redress(Kat ItpOaEljI11CPtaaaOal\lIlE'iÇ aùtavEïpyecrOattfjç àyopâçKattrov iEProv, matE11110'àOIKOUIlEVOV \lIta trov ÈXOprov ouvaaOalOtK:11v ｡ｾｅￎｶＩＮ Bere, thead hoc regulationaimedat deprivingAndokidesfrom the protectionof asylia.Analogouslaws prohibitedmenwho failed ta take the field, deserters,cowardmen, andwomenengagedin adulteryta enterpublic sanctuaries.27

24 lG, 13, 45 (lG, 12, 44).

25 Cf LATTE, op. cil. (n. 18), p. 107; SINN, ait. cil. (n. 4), p. 79; SINN, ait. cil. (n. 2), p. 92.

26 ANDOK., 1, 33; cf D. MACDOWELL,TheLaw /n Class/calAlbens,London, 1978, p. 73f.

27 [DEMOSTH.], 59, 87; AISCH., 3, 177. Cf A.R,W. HARRISON, The Law ofAlbens.TheFami/y andProperly, Oxford, 1968,p. 36: MIKALSON, op. cif. (n. 21), p. 99; MACDOWELL, op. cif. (n. 26), p. 125.

ASYLIA IN THE CLASSICAL AND HELLENISTIC POLEIS 73

Analogousregulationscan be found outsideAttica. Narrating one of theattrocitiesin Spartaafter the deathof Kleomenes,the butcheringof ephorsinthe sanctuatyof Athena Chalkioikos, Polybios28 stretchesthe fact that thisparticularsanctuatysecuredthe safetyevenof personscondemnedto deathCiCaltOln<xcrt'toîç lCa'ta<puyoûcrtＧｴｾｶ ucr<paÀElaVnapEm(EÛaSE'to iEp6v, lC&V 9ava'tou'ttç lilCa'talCElCptIlÉVoÇ), thus indicating that this wasnot the generalrule,z9Therewereobviously somesanctuaries,at least at his time, which did not offer safety tapersonscondemnedto death.We shouldmentionin this contextthe amphic-tionic decreeof 346/45 againstthe defeatedPhokiansafter the Third SacredWar, accardingto which the fugitive PhokiansasweIl as anyotherpersanwhohad participated in the plundering of the sanctuatywere to be arrestedwhereverthey might be (uyroytllOt nav'to9Ev).3Ü F. von WoeB has pointed outthat in the Ptolemaicdocumentatymaterial the ward uyroytlloç is usedas asynonymof 'deprivedof asylia' ("auchohneAsylschutz")andassumedthat thisclauseaimed at depriving the personsinvolved in the Delphic sacrilegefromthe protection of asyla.31 This is, however, not certain. The sameclauseisfound in the decree proposedby Aristokrates for the mercenatyleaderCharidemosin 352 B.C. (Demosth.,XXIII, 34: €av 'ttç unolC'tElVn XapîolllloV,uyroytlloç €cr'tO) nav'tax6eEV); as Demosthenesexplains, here uyroytlloç €cr'tO)naV'tax69Evmeansliable to seizureelsewherethan in Athenianterritoty (XXIII,35: ｮｾｶ Èv 'tft l,IlEOanft, uyroytllov ÈlC 'tftç crullllaxîooçnacrllç).

In the light of theseregulations,we may understandproperlya Hellenistictex sacra from Eresosconcerningitself with ritual purity.32 The text lists thepersonsnot allowed to entera sanctuaty:impious people(cf 1. 1: dcr'tElXEtVEùcrEpÉaç),persons polluted by death, birth, and sexual intercourseO'. 2-9).Excludedwere also perhapskillers (not necessarillymurderers)33and certainlytraitors (1. la: [<povÉaç?]oÈ ｉｬｾ dcr'tElXEtv 1l110Ènpo80'tatç).The prohibition againstkillers, if this restorationshouldbe correct,caneasilybe explainedin termsofpollution. The exclusionof traitors is mare problematic.The nature of theirtreacherousbehaviourCtowardstheir friends or their countty) is not specified.Traitors, too, can be regardedas Illapoî, as Parkerhasput it, becauseof their

28 POLYB., N, 35, 3. Cf SINN, art. cft. (n. 4), p. lOS.

29 Vgl. BOLKESTEIN, op. cft. (n. 2), p. 245 (without this testimony).

30 DIOD., XVI, 60, 1: 'toùç IiÈ 1tE<jlEuy6mç 't&v <1>OlI(ÉOlV I(a\ 't&v ifJ..)..IfJV 't&v ｾｅＧｴｅ＼ｬＧｘＱＱＱＨＶＢｃＨｶ ri\ç iEpocruÀ{açÉvayEÎç E!v(.(\ I(a\ ￠ ｹ ｲ ｯ ｹ ｻ ｾ ｯ ｵ 7t<XV"COSEV.

31 VON WOEB, op. clt. (n. 4), p. 6s, 70f.

32 LSCG, 124 (2nd cent.).

33 Another plausible alternative is [1;Évolçl: see L. ZIEHEN, Leges Graecorum Sacrae. ParsA/tera. Pasco 1. LegesGraeciaeet Insu/aruIII, Leipzig, 1906, p. 306: cf T. WÂCHTER, Reinheits-vorschriften lm grlechischenKu/t, GieBen, 1910, p. 120; on the exclusion of foreigners fromsanctuariessee Infra, n. 36.

74 A. eHANloTlS

"shamelessnessthat causesthem ta disregardnormal constraints.,,34It is, there-fore, concievablethat the primary aim of this regulationwas to protect thesanctuaryfrom pollution. However, whateverits origin may have been, ineffect it excludedfrom entrance,and consequentlyfrom protection in thesacredprecinct,two groupsof persansmost likely to seekasylumthere,killersand traitors, Le., persansprosecutedby the families of their victims, by secularauthorities,or by political opponents.

As we haveseen,there is sorneevidencethat persanswho were legallyprosecuted,or evencondemned,were not allowed to entera sacredprecinct.The preoccupationwith pollution most probably explains these measuresagainstconvicts and criminals, as it explains, for instance,measuresagainstlodging in sanctuaries.35 But evenif the primary aim of theseregulationswasnot to prohibit the exploitationof an asylonby criminals, their resultwas afteraIl the exclusionof thesepeoplefrom the areaprotectedby the asylia. Weshouldnote here that thereexistsanothergroup of prohibitionswhich are natrelated ta asylia, but still could Ctheoretically)be used ta keep outside asanctuarypotential suppliants:l meanregulationsprohibiting the entranceofforeignersin certainsanctuaries.36 Sincemostasylumseekerswere foreignerstothe placewhere they soughtprotectionCe.g.,victims of civil strife and wars),theseclauseseffectively deniedthementranceto the sanctuaries.

The aforementionedprovisionsmost likely couId provide the authoritieswith an excuseto lay handson certainsuppliantsafter they had enteredthesanctuaryand approachedthe altars. Obviously, chargesof crimes committedwithin the inviolable areacould also be usedas excusesfor the expulsionofsuppliants.A storygoes,e.g., that the philosopherMenedemosof Eretria, whowas living asa suppliantin the Amphiareionat Oropos,wascompelledto leavethe sanctuarythrough a decreeof the Boiotian league;sornegolden gobletsweremissing,and the philosopherwas accusedof stealingthem.37 But thereis

34 PARKER, op. cft. (n. 11), p. 5 n. 18, p. 317 n. 48. For the moral condamnationof treasonseeLATTE, op. cit. (n. 18), p. 69, 73f.: K. LATTE, Schu/dund sandein der griechischenReligion, inARW'; 20 (1920), p. 267f.; B. SNELL, Dichtung und Gesellschaft.Studienzum EinflujS der Dicbteraufdas sozialeDenkenund Verhalten lm alten Grlechenland,Hamburg, 1965, p. 63-65 und DieEntdeckungdes Gelstes.Studien zur Entstehungdes europalschenDenkensbel den Grlechen,Gottingen, 19754, p. 65f. Ctreacherousfriends): P.W. VAN DER HORST, 71Je Sentencesof Pseudo-Phocylideswlth Introduction and Commentmy,Leiden, 1978, 123f. (on PS.-PHOKYLIDES,1. 16-17).Treasonis an insult to the gods: H.W. PARKE - D.E.W. WORMELL, TheDelphlc Oracle, Oxford, 1956,l, p. 380-382; A.W.H. ADKINS, Merft and Responslblllty:A Study ln Greek Values, Oxford, 1960,p. 110 n. 17; PARKER, op. cit. (n. 11), p. 186-188.

35 See,e.g., LSAM, 55 = IXnidos, 160 (Knidos, 4th cent.).

36 Cf supra, n. 33 and further examplesin WÂCHTER, op. cft. (n. 33), p. 118-123;e.g., LSCG, 110(Paros, 5th cent.): XaÉvco tlOplih cou 9ÉJ.\lç : LSS, 49 (Delos, 5th/4th cent.): 3Évcoi OUX oall] Ècrt[Évm].P. BUTZ, A SacredProhibition on DelosID 68, A andB, in BCH, 118 (1994), p. 69-98 demonstratesthat the latter prohibition concernsthe Archegesionof Delos; she suggeststhat it was primarilyaddressedagainstthe Athenians(ca. 404-394or 386-377B.e.).

37 DrOG. LAERT., II, 142: Kat ÔIÉtplpevÈv 'QpC01t0Èv t0 tO\) 'AcpuxpecoieP0'Ëv9axpuarov1tOt1]plCOVÙ1toÀoJ.\Évcov,Ka9acpacrlv"EpJ.\I1t1tOÇ,ô6YJ.1atlKOIV0 trov BOlcotrovÈKeÀeucr91lJ.\eteÀgeîv.

ASYLIA IN THE CLASSICAL AND HELLENISnC POLEIS 75

a huge difference betweenexcusesand legitimacy. The dilemma remained.Could a secularregulation(a law or a decree)violate an unequivocaldivine lawwhich protectedal! suppliants,without causingthe angerof gods?And this ishardly the only problem. The lex sacrafrom Eresosprohibited traitors fromenteringthe sanctuary,But who decideswho is a traitor and how? What oneregardstreasonis certainly interpreteddifferently by the allegedtraitor. Sincethe latter did not have the right to enter the sanctuaryin the first place, wemay assumethat his pursuerswould have an excuseto drag him out withoutthe fear of provokingthe gods'anger.But could the accusedpersonstill defendhimself?

3. Suspensionof the suppliant's status through oracles

This questionbrings us to the secondpossiblesolution, Le., the oracularapprovalof measuresagainstsuppliants.We haveseenalreadythat Kyme hadtried to shift the responsibilityof a decisionin the caseof Paktyesta the oracleof Didyma.38 Thereis more andbetterevidencefor this procedure.

The mostenigmaticinscriptionof Arkadia, the 'Gottesurteilvon Mantineia'(ca. 460),39may be relatedto a procedureagainstsuppliants.This text consistsof a list of personsconvictedfor the murderof severalmen and a girl in thesanctuaryof Alea and a dossierof documentsrelatedto the judicial procedureagainstthem. Sincethis text hasbeenmost recentlythe objectof an exhaustivestudy by G. Thür and H. Taeuber,who also offer a detailedpresentationofprevious interpretations,1 will discusshere only the implications of thisdocumentfor asylia, focusingon the few certainpointsof the document.

The inscription beginswith the namesof thirteen(accordingta Thür andTaeuber)or twelve (accordingto 1. Dubois) men convictedfor killing sornemenand a girl in the sanctuaryof AthenaAlea (1, 1-13, cf 1. 25-28). Accordingto Thür'spersuasiveinterpretationthe instructionsfor the trial (with the chargeanda referenceto the legal consequncesin caseof conviction) arestatedat theend of the inscription.4ü Theseinstructionsdistinguishbetweena defendantwho is mentionedby name (Themandros)and a group of anonymousdefen-dants. The instructionsfor both groups follow exactly the samepattern, asshownbellow (the differencesareunderlined):

38 SINN, art, cft. (n. 4), p. 79.

39 lG, v 2, 262. Most recenteditions: L. DUBOIS, Recherchessur le dialectearcadlen, Louvain-la-Neuve, 1986, II, p. 94-111: G. THÜR - H. TAEUBER, Prozessrecht/lchelllschriften der grlechlschenPolels.Arkadlen(SBAkad. W'len, 607), Wien, 1994, p. 75-98 no. 8.

40 THÜR, in THÜR-TAEUBER, op. cft. (n. 39), p. 86f. n. 26.

76 A. CHANIOTIS

Anonymousdefundanœ Themandros

d0Éuavôpoç(seebelow)ljlov Éç Ècrn

E[tcrE] tOV àvôpovEtcrEtâçljlapSÉv[0]toV tÔtE à1tuSo;VôVtOViv to [iEpoî]

" S '--rlｋ ｾ ￇ ｾ ｾ 1tpocrcr o;YEVEÇ to FE pyo tOtOtE eo[vhoçiv ｾￔｖｬｪｬｏｖ S'E[VlXt]·

eïQK..iv tOiEpoîtOV tOtE [à1tuSavovtov]ljlovÉç Ècrn .Etcr' autoçEtcrE [tOV Ècryovov] crtç KàtoppÉVtEpOVetcrEt[ov àvôpov] EtcrEtâçljlapSÉvo(seeabove)

d ôè1tpocrcrSo;YEvèçto FÉpy[o[ Kàç uècpovÉç ｾ

lÎl,o;[ov IvlXt] lÎl,o;ovevlXt

One of the manycontroversialissuesrelatedta this text is the questionasta whetherthe phrase'in the sanctuary'in the instructionsfor the trial againstthe anonymousdefendants(Et crtç iv roiepoî tOV tÔtE [à1tuSo;vôVtov]ljlovÉç Ècrn)modifies the participle à1tuSo;vôv'tOv(as is the casein the instructionsfor the trialof Themandros,Le., "if anyoneis the murdererof thosewho werekilled then inthe sanctuary") or the pronoun crtç (Le., "if anyoneof the men in thesanctuaryis the murdererof thosewho were killed then,,).41At first sight thecorrespondenceof the formulationsusedin the two instructions(Et crtç iv tOiEpoîtOV tÔtE [à1tuSo;vôVtov]ljlovÉç Ècrn - d 0ÉI.lo;vôpOçljlovÉç ÈcrnE[tcrE] tOV àvôpovEtcrEtâçljlo;pSÉv'[o] tOV tÔtE à1tuSo;vôv'tOviv tl;> [iEpoî]) seemsto speakfor the first interpre-tation. However, the correspondenceis not so close: In the first instructionthephrase'in the sanctuary'pecedesthe participle à1tuSo;VôVtOV, in the secondinstruction it follows. Furthermore,G. Thür has arguedthat if we acceptthelatter translationC'anyoneof the men in the sanctuary'),the reasonthat adifferent procedurehad to be followed for the anonymousdefendants(in thesanctuary)and Themandrosbecomesapparent.The two different proceduresare due preciselyta the fact that aIl the othermurderers,alongwith membersof their families, had soughtasylumin the sanctuaryafter their deed,whereasThemandrosdid not. Thür's interpretationcanbe strengthenedby sornefurthersignificant differences between the two instructions:42 a) in the case ofThemandrosthere is no referenceta an oracle (Kà] tO XPEcrtÉpWV); b) theinstruction for Themandrosmentionsthe possibility (probablyThemandros'allegation)that Themandroswas only presentin the sanctuary(1tpocrcrSo;YEVÉÇ),either during the murder or at a different point,43 but was not one of themurderers.Both differencescan be explainedif we acceptThür's interpre-

41 Discussionand older bibliography in THÜR-TAEUBER, op. cft. (n._39), p. 87 n. 29.

42 Cf THÜR, in THÜR-TAEUBER, op. cft. (n. 39), p. 88 n. 32.

43 On the different interpretationsof npocrcreuyevéçseeTHÜR-TAEUBER, op. cft. (n. 39), p. 88n.33.

ASYLIA IN THE CLASSICAL AND HELLENISTIC POLEIS 77

tation. For Themandros'trial no referenceto an oraclewas necessary,sincehewas not a suppliant.He could be tried accordingto the city's laws on homicide.Gnly he, the only defendantwho did not seekasylumin the sanctuaryafter theincident, could claim that he wasnot presentin the sanctuaryduring the killings(or accordingto a different understandingof the word npocrcrSayevÉç,that he wasonly an eyewitness).44

Threefurther enigmasof this inscriptioncanalso be answeredif we followThür's line of interpretation.First, the only legal consequencesof the convictionmentionedin the text are confiscationof property(1. 15-17: 'tov XpelllX'tOV ne'toîçF0tlCtlX'tat(ç) 'tâç Seo ÈVat ICcX FotlCtaç McracrcrSat'tcXç av 0 ù' èŒcraç; 1. 19-20:ànucreùOlltv[OÇ]'tov xpella'tOv'ta Àaxoç) andexpulsionfrom the sanctuaryfor boththe convicts and all their male descendantsO, 20-21: ùnexolltVoÇ ICcX 'toppÉv'tepovyÉvoç ÈVat alla'tanav'taùnù 'toî iepoî), truelly a peculiarpunishmentfor 'normal'murderers.Second,the goddessis mentionedexplicitly amongthe recipientsofthe confiscatedproperty O, 15-17; cf 1. 1: [Fo]<pÀÉacrt o'{ùe iv 'AÀÉav);45 shereceived aH the movable property, whereasthe immovableswere to bedistributed,probablyamongthe relativesof the victims. This provision clearlyindicatesthat the crime committedhad wrongedthe goddess,too. And third,the various documentsquotedin this dossiermake allusion to two separateconvictionsof the defendants:a) through the goddessby meansof an oracle,andb) by judges,probablythroughvotesO, 14-15: ocrÉOt /Xv xpecr'tÉpovICa'taICptveg yvocrtat ICaICptSÉe;1. 18-19: Ènt 'toîù' ÈÙtJC(xcrallevli 'te SeaçICcXÇ oi ÙtICacrcr'tat; cf1. 18-19: [ICcX] 'ta xpecr'tÉpwv).46The peculiaritiesｾ ｩ ｴ ｨ which the text confrontsus(involvement of the goddessas victim, plaintiff, and recipient of the fine,exclusionof the convictsand their descendantsfrom the sanctuary)cannotbefully explainedsimply by attributing them to the fact that the murderswerecommitted in the sacred precinct or that the victims may have beensuppliants.47 Thesepeculiarities,togetherwith the different procedurefollowedfor Themandros,suggestthe foHowing (admittedly speculative)scenario.Severalmen committedmurdersin the sanctuaryof Alea. While the murderers-exceptfor Themandros-were enjoying the benefitsof asylia in the sanctuary,the families of their victims were crying out for revenge.The community ofMantineia was divided and powerless,while the priests saw themselvesconfrontedwith the bizarre situation of offering protectionto men who hadpolluted the sanctuaryby committingmurdersin the sacredprecinct. Preciselythis gave the solution to the problem. If the murdererscould not be chargedwith murderby the secularauthoritiesor by the families of the victims, they

44 THÜR, in THÜR-TAEUBER, op. clt. (n. 39), p. 88 n. 33.

45 Cf DUBOIS, op. clt. (n. 39), II, p. 111: "sont redevablesà l'égard d'Aléa": THÜR-TAEUBER, op.cft. (n. 39), p. 77: "Die Folgendensind verurteilt zugunstender Alea" (cf p. 80 n. 1).

46 The interpretationof yvrocrîa and the reconstructionof the procedureare alsa matters ofcantroversywhich cannatbe discussedhere: seeTHÜR-TAEUBER, op. clt. (n. 39), p. 77, 92-96.

47 Cf THÜR-TAEUBER, op. clt. (n. 39), p. 88 n. 30.

78 A. CHANIOnS

could be chargedby the goddessfor their sacrilege.Their conviction meanttheir exclusionfrom the sanctuary,Le., terminatedtheir statusassuppliants(cfthe aforementionedanecdoteaboutMenedemos,note 37). Themandros,whowasnot in the sanctuary,was alsoconvictedon the samecharge,andhis nameappearsalongwith the namesof the others.

Such consultationof an oracle is not unique. An analogousinteractionbetweenan oracleandsecularauthoritiesis attestedin Athensonecenturyafterthe 'Gottesurteilvon Mantineia'. The Athenian politician Kallistratos, havingbeenaccusedof treason,was condemnedto deathby the Atheniansin 361. Hefled to Methone and later to Delphi, where he receivedone of Apollon'spuzzling oracles.Shouldhe return to Athens,he would havefair treatmentbythe laws (av eÀ8n ＧａＸｾｶ｡ￇｅＧｴｅｕｓｅＧｴ｡ｴ 'trov VOJ.lOOv).48So he cameback (ca. 356) andtook refugeat the altar of the Twelve Gods. Nonetheless,he was put to deathby the state,which interpretedthe oracle'sreferenceto the fair treatmentbythe laws as an encouragementto punish the wrongdoer('to yàp 'trov vOJ.lOOV 'toîçitÔtlCT1KOCH 'tuXEîv 'ttJ.looptaÈcr'ttv' 6 ôÉ YE 8EOÇ op8roça7tÉÔooKE'tOîç TtOtlCT1J.lÉvotÇKoÀucrat'tov at'ttov).

The aforementionedtestimoniaimply that on certainoccasionsauthorities-civil authorities-felt themselvesencouragedby oraclesto disregardthe rightsof suppliants.A fragmentarylex sacraof the 4th century from Metropolis inIonia with prescriptionson purity may also be related to this phenomenon.After a seriesof prohibitionsaboutpollution from sexualintercourse,we find aclauseaboutsuppliants:49

[iKÉ'tllV] ｊＮｬｾ a7tÉÀKEtV[ ] Èmcr'ta-

10 [ ]v J.lllÔÈ[ôpav] J.lll(8)Èv &Ôl-[KOV.] 8ç ô' [av] ｡ ￔ ｬ ｾ ﾭ[crll1], ｊＮｬｾ ElÀOOÇ aù-｛ Ｇ ｴ ｲ ｯ ｬ ｾ ｝ ｍ ｾ Ｇ ｴ ｬ ｬ ｐ ｛ ｾ ｝ raÀ-

15 [Àllcr ]ta.

JosephKeil andAnton von Premersteinrestoredthe cormptpassageO. 9-10) in the following way: [Bi ｊＮｬｾ 'tov] È7tlO"'tU[J.lEVO]V, Le. "nobodyshould drag asuppliantaway, exceptfor the supervisorof the sanctuary;nor shouldanybodywrong (Le., a suppliant)in any way. Whoeverwrongs (a suppliant),let MeterGalesianot be merciful to him.»50 An alternativerestorationhasbeenproposedby FranciszekSokolowski: [iKÉ'tllV] ｊＮｬｾ a7tÉÀKE1V [pooJ.loîç]Èmcr'tuJ.lEVOV, Le. "nobody

48 LYC., Leokr., 93; on this oracleseePARKE-WORMELL, op. cft. (n. 34), Il, p. 104f.

49 LSAM, 29, 1. 8-15.

50 J. KEIL - A. VON PREMERSTEIN,Bericht über eine Drltte Reisein Lydien und angrenzendenGebietenIoniens, Wien, 1914, 103 no 154. 'E1tt<H(XJ,lEVOÇ from EcpÎ(nŒJ,lat(Ion. E1tÎ<nŒJ,lŒt), 'ta be setover, persanin authority' (LSj, s.v., with examples).

ASYLIA IN THE CLASSICAL AND HELLENISnC POLElS 79

should drag a suppliantaway, who/while he sits on an altar." Sokolowski'srestorationis tautological.The addition "a suppliantwho/while he sits on thealtar" is superf1uous,since the word hiketesdenotesexactly this action.51 Onthe countrary,the right of religious authoritiesto decidethe fate of a suppliantis attestedCinfra). This makesthe first restorationpreferable,but not certain.

4. Judicial proceduresagainstsuppliant slaves

The evidence presentedso far draws the picture of anything but asystematic,uniform, and successfuleffort to clear up the grievancesrelatedwith unlimited asylia. Wherewe hopedto detect generalrules, we found adhoc reactions.This result standsin a markedcontrastto the regulationsaboutsuppliant slaves.52 In their casewe do find clearcut rules and unequivocaltestimoniaaboutthe jurisdiction of priestsin mattersof asylia.

In Athens, at the latestfrom the classicalperiod on, the Theseionwas thepreferredrefuge of slaveswho run away from their mastersbecauseof harshtreatment.53 Their hopewas not to changetheir legal status,Le., to be manu-mitted, but simply to be resold (1tpâatv ai1:Etv).54 The evidence, reviewedrecentlyby K.A. Christensen,implies that when the master opposedhis slave'spurchase,a prosecutionof the masteron a chargeof ｾ ｰ ｩ ￇ ｴ ｶ took placeunderthe supervisionof the priests of Theseus.55 The rôle of the priests in thisprocedureis not mentionedin the sourcesregardingAthens,but is clear in the

51 Notice, e.g., that in the Samianinscription quotedbelow (notes64-65) the ward i1CÉtllÇ (1. 9,13, 17) and the periphrasisoi KaSîÇoVtEÇEiç ta iEp6v (1. 21) are neverusedin the samecontext, butalternatively. For KaSîÇElv as terminus technicusfor the act of supplicationseee.g. LATTE, op. clt.(n. 18), p. 106f.; SINN, ait. clt. (n. 4), p. 74 with n. 68.

52 On runaway slavessee F. KUDLIEN, Zur sozlalenSituation desjlachttgen Skiaven in derAntlke, in Hermes,116 (1988), p. 232-252 (with bibliography). On runawayslavesas suppliantsseeibid., p. 243-245; cf D. DAUBE, Civil Disobediencein Antiquity, Edinburgh,1972, p. 57f.

53 For harshor unjust treatmentas an excusefor runawayslavescf KUDLIEN, al1. cft. (n. 52),p. 240f.

54 POLL., VII, 13: 0/)' 01 vûv cpacritOÙç oiKétaç1tp&crIV ahEÎv,ËcrtlV EÙPEÎV Èv 'APlcrtOcpa.vouç"Qpalç'Èlloi! Kpa.tlcrt6v ÈcrtlV Eiç ta 011crEÎov/)paIlEÎV,! ÈKEÎ /)', Ëroç av 1tp&O"lV EüProllEV, lléVEIV (fr. 567 K. = 577Kassel-Austin),&VtIKPUÇ /)' Èv taÎç Eim6ÀI/)oç II6ÀEcrl' KaKà tOla./)E!1ta.crxoucra1l11/)È 1tp&O"lV aÎtro (fr.225 K. = 229 Kassel-Austin);PLUT., Mor., 166d: Ëcrtl Kat /)OUÂOIÇ v61l0ç ÈÂEuSEpÎava.1toyvoûO"\1tp&cr\Vai'tEÎcrSalKat /)Ecr1t6tllV ｉｬｅｴ｡ｾ｡Ｎￂｅｉｖ ÈmElKÉcr'tEpOV. Furthersources:K.A. CHRISTENSEN,77Je77Jeselon:A SlaveRefugeat Athens,in AJAH, 9 (1984) [1990], p. 23-25. VON WOEB, op. cft. (n. 4), p. 175-180assumesthat the samesystemapplied also to PtolemaicEgypt; cf (with reservations)SCHOLL, op.cft. (n. 21), p. 303.

55 CHRISTENSEN, art. cft. (n. 54), p. 23-32, esp. 25-27. The same view had already beenexpressedby J.H, LIPSruS, Das attlsche Recht und Rechtsveifahren,Leipzig, 1912, II, p. 643;cf LATTE, op. cft. (n. 18), p. 107; VON WOEB, op. cft. (n. 4), p. 175-180.In Egypt, tao, decisionsaboutthe rejectionof suppliants(a.yroYIIlOV) were taken underthe responsibilityof the priests: VON WOEB,op. cft. (n. 4), p. 73f., 165-170,175. On the ｹ ｰ ｡ ｣ ｰ ｾ ￜ ｾ ｐ ｅ ｲ ｯ ￇ Ù1tÈp /)ouÀrov seeDEMOSTH., XXI, 47; ATHEN.,VI, 267a; cf KUDLIEN, art. clt. (n. 52), p. 245; D.M. MACDOWELL, Demosthenes,AgainstMeldlas(Oration [21]). Edlted with Introduction, Translation, and Commentary,Oxford, 1990, p. 263-268.

80 A. CHANIOTIS

procedureabout runawayslavesin the mystery inscription of Andania.56 Thesacredmen (iepoO designatedan areata be a refuge for slaves.57 No persanwasallowed ta harborthem, employthem, or offer themfood.58 The priesthadthe exclusiveresponsibilityin decidingwhich slavewas ta be deliveredta hismaster (éntKptVetv, KataKptVetv, napalh06vat).This regulation envisagesonlyslavesFromMessene.RunawayslavesFrom otherareaswere excludedFrom thisprocedure,probablyfor practical reasons,namely, ta avoid controversieswithpersansFrom abroadclaiming the ownershipof suppliants.59 Sa, the runawayslavesFrom otherareasasweIl as the runawayslaveswho werenot returnedtatheir masterswere either set free or (more probably)stayedin the sanctuaryandservedassacredslaves(cf infra).60

Similar measuresareknown From SamosandEphesos.A fragmentarylettersent by Ptolemy III Euergetes(246-222) ta Samosdescribes,accordingta thepersuasiveinterpretationby Chr. Habicht,61 a procedurewhich should be

56 ISCG, 65, 1. 80-84: ｱＩ｜Ｉｙｉｾｏｖ ･ｔｾｅｖ ｾｯ￮ OOUMIÇ' mîçOOUMIÇ Ｇｐｕｙｉｾｏｖ ￋＨｭｯｾｯ lEPOV, w8cbçav ollEpolà1tooelçrovnｾｯｶ ｾＰＱｴｏｖＬ lCal ｾＱＱＸｅｬ Ù1tOOEXÉcr8romùç ｯ ｰ ｡ Ｑ ｴ ｾ ｡ ｾ Ｑ Ｑ Ｐ ｣ ｲ ｬ ｾ ｏ ｏ ｅ ｨ ｲ ｯ ｾ Ｑ Ｑ Ｐ Ëpya Ｑｴ｡ｰｅｸｾｲｯＧ 0 oÉ1tOlOOV 1tapà ｾ ￠ ｙ ｅ ｹ ｰ ｡ ｾ ｾ ｶ ｡ Ù1tOOIICOÇ ￋ｣ｲｾｲｯ ｾｏｏｉ ICUPlrol ｾ￢ ｾｯ ｣ｲ＼ｾ｡ｾｯ àçlaçOI1tÂ.acrlaçlCal Ｑｴｭｾｬｯｵｯｰ｡ｸｾ￠ 1tEVmlCocrlâv'0oÉ lEpEÙÇ Ｑｴｬｬｃｰｉｖｾｲｯ 1tEpl ｾｏｏｖ ｏｰ｡Ｑｴｅｾｉｉｃｏｏｖ ocrollCa ｾｶｭｬ ÉIC ｾ￢ ￠ｾｅｾｰ｡ 1toÂ.wç,lCal ocrouçICa lCamlCplvEl, Ｑｴ｡ｰ｡ＰＶｾｲｯ ｾｯ￮ ICUPIOIÇ' av oÉ ｾｾ 1tapaolorol,｣ｲｾｲｯ ｾｏｏｉ ICUplrol ￠Ｑｴｏｾｰｘｅｉｖ ￋｘｏｖｾＱＮ

Cf LATTE, op. clt. (n. 18), p. I07; VON WOEB, op. cft. (n. 4), p. 175f. n. 3; SCHLESINGER,op. clt.(n. 4), p. 38; HABICHT, op. clt. (n. 18), p. 229; THÜR-TAEUBER, op. clt. (n. 18), p. 220f.

57 For parallelsseeSCHLESINGER,op. clt. (n. 4), p. 29 n. 4.

58 Cf the inscription from Samos(Infra, n. 63) and THÜR-TAEUBER, op. clt. (n. 18), p. 215 n. 17;SOVERINI, art. clt. (n. 13), p. 75-77. On the difficulties of suppliantslavesta supply themselveswithfood in Egypt seeSCHOLL, op. cft. (n. 21), p. 303; cf KUDLIEN, al1. clt. (n. 4), p. 244f. G. DUNST, Zudem samlschen lCalr1)Àol-Gesetz,in ZPE, 18 (975), p. 174 n. 19 disagreedwith the usualinterpretationof ｾ Ｑ Ｑ Ｐ Ëpya Ｑｴ｡ｰｅｘｾｲｯ and translatedthis phraseas "man sail sie in Friedenlassen".But this clauseclearly includes measureslimiting the rights of runawayslavesbefore their officialacceptance. Cf Chr. HABICHT, Hellenlstische Inschriften aus dem Heralon von Samos, inMDAI(A), 87 (1972), p. 221; 1. KOENEN, The SamlanStatute on /(a1r1)Àol ln thePreclnctofHera, inZPE, 27 (977), p. 216 n. 15.

59 For a lively picture of such controversiessee, e.g., PLAUT., Rudens,706-838; cf ACHILL.TATIUS, VIII, 1.

60 Unfortunately, the text is not clear in this point. The phrase ｣ ｲ ｾ ｲ ｯ ｾ ｏ ｏ ｉ ICUPICOI ￠ＱｴｏｾｰｘｅｉｖËxovn can either mean "it shall be permittedfor the slave ta flee from the master who owns him"or "it shall be permitted for the master ta run away with the slave in his possesssion":see thediscussion in CHRISTENSEN,art. cft. (n. 54), p. 26f. The former interpretation is favoured byLATTE, op. clt. (n. 18), p. 107; cf CHRISTENSEN,al1. cft. (n. 54), p. 27; M.W. MEYER, The AnclentMysterles:A Sourcebook,New York, 1987, p. 56 ("the fugitive is ta be allowed ta leave the masterin chargeof him"). The latter Interpretationis acceptedby THÜR-TAEUBER, op. clt. (n. 18), p. 220n. 55 ("er muB den Zugriff des Herm auf den 'verurteilten'Sklaven dulden"); VON WOEB, op. cft.(n. 4), p. 175f. n. 3 suspectedthat the slave was either resold or returned ta the master, whopromisedta treat him better in the future. LATTE, Ibid. also suggestedthat asylia was the primaryroot of manumissionin the form of dedicationta a deity (tbld., 105-108); cf F. SOKOLOWSKI, TheReal Mealling of Sacral Manumission,in HThR, 47 (1954), p. 173-181; but see the criticism ofF. BOMER, Untersuchungenaber die Religion der SkIaven ln Griechenlandund Rom, Wiesbaden1960,II, p. 14f. with n. 3 and5.

61 HABICHT, op. cft. (n. 18), p. 226-231 no 59; cf THÜR-TAEUBER, op. clt. (n. 18), p. 213 n. 4;SOVERINI, art. cft. (n. 13), p. 84.

ASYLIA IN THE CLASSICAL AND HELLENISTIC POLEIS 81

followed in the caseof runawayslaves(1. 9f.: unÈp 'tÔ>V lCa'ta<peuy6v'troveiç 'to[iepov crroll<l'troV]). A court (hieron dikasterion?)presidedover by the neopoiai62

interrogatedthe fugitive slave and his master, and if the master'sargumentswere stronger,the suppliantslavewas given back to him (1. 3-5: napa8t86va[t/8È 'toîç lCupiotç a1.l't ?]Ô>v, <hav Ènt 'tÔ>V veronotÔ>v 8tlCawÀ.0Y[11/8Év'teç<pavepotc1cr]tveùyvrollovÉO"'tepaÀ.Éyov'teç). At the beginningof the preservedfragment(1. 3) kingPtolemyprobably referedto a similar procedurein Alexandria which shouldserveas a mode!for the SamianHeraion.Chr. Habicht is probablyright sugges-ting, e.g., the following restoration:[--- lCa86nlCat Èv 'A]À.eSav8petat8WtlCeî'tat.63

AnotherHellenistic inscriptionfrom the Heraion,also publishedand discussedby Chr. Habicht,64forbadetradersto supportsuppliants(ilCÉ'tat) and especiallysuppliantslaves('toùç lCa8iÇov'taçOilCÉ'taÇdç 'to iep6v) in any way, e.g., by provi-ding them with food (cf supra, note 58), employing them in their shops,orhaving transactionswith them.65 Offencesagainstthis regulationswere proba-bly brought before a hieron dikasterion,which had jurisdiction for offencescommitedin the sanctuary.66The slaves,whosemasterswere found guilty ofan offence,may have remainedin the Heraionand servedas hieroi paides.67Achilles Tatius explainsin his novel Leukippeand Kleitophon the procedurefollowed in the Artemision of Ephesos.68 The temple was accordingto hisreport accessibleonly to men, virgins, and runawayfemale slaves,who were

62 This is the Interpretationof THÜR-TAEUBER, op. cit. (n. 18), p. 221f., againstHABICHT, op.cit. (n. 18), 228f. who thoughtthat the naopoiaihadfull jurisdiction, Le., servedas judges.

63 HABICHT, op. cif. (n. 18), p. 231. The restorationproposedby F. PIEJKO, Responseof anUnknown Cify to Magnesia ConcemingRer Asylia, in RSA, 17/18 (1987/88) [1989], p. J87(c(Jl[o<m\ÂjÂElv 1tpOçTtllâç lva Èv 'AA]Eçav15pda.t15lOl1ŒÎtaùmakesno sense.

64 HABICHT, mt. cif. (n. 58), p. 210-225no. 9. Here l quote the paltly revisededition of the textby THÜR-TAEUBER, op. cit. (n. 18), p. 209-212(cf SEC,XXVII, 545).

65 Seeespecially1. 8-9: 1tapaKa1t11A[E]UcrEI15èa[inoÎç / OtitE 150ÛÂoçOtitE cr)tpatlOm,çOtitE allEpyoço{)reiKér1Jç KtA.; 1. 12-13: oi 15è1l1crSillcrailEvoloù1tapa15wcrou[crlvtà. m/llT)AEÎa otitE àllÈp]yilll Dure iKér1Jl KtA.;1. 16-18: [oi 1l1crSOlO'allE]voloùxU1to15Èçonal1tapà.15ouAouoùSèv[où15è1tap'/ ilcérovoù15è1tapà.cr)tpatlwwuoù15è1tapà.àllÈpyouoù15èàyopiixn[v?oùSèvhoovcrÎtillV tOOV ÈK ｴ｝ｾ xwpaçY1VOllÉVillV OtitE aAAo oùSèv];Il. 20-23 (oùX ull[o15Éçov!ta.t15èÉv toÎç Kall]T)AdolÇ rovç 1W(}{t;ovraçohcéraçelçra lepavo[ù15è1tap/ÉçoucrlvËpyaO]titE crÎta oM' ullo15Éçovt<Xl 1tap'aùtoov où15èv [tpOllilll / où15è1tapEupÉcr]ElOù15Elllâù. For a detaileddicussionseeTHÜR-TAEUBER, op. cif. (n. 18), p. 212-225.For a discussionof this inscription seealsoDUNST, art. cit. (n. 58), p. 171-177;KOENEN, art. cit. (n. 58), p. 211-216;SOKOLOWSKI, mt. cit. (n. 13),p. 143-147;SOVERINI, art. cit. (n. 13), p. 59-121.

66 THÜR-TAEUBER, op. cit. (n. 18), p. 219-222;cf DUNST, mt. cit. (n. 58), p. 177.

67 HABICHT, op. cif. (n. 18), 230; cf HABICHT, art. cit. (n. 58), p. 224f.; THÜR-TAEUBER, op. cif.(n. 18), p. 216 n. 36; SOVERINI, mt. cif. (n. 13), p. 79f.

68 ACHILL. TATIUS, VII, 13: tO 15è1taAalOV ｡ｾ｡ｷ ｾｶ yuva.tçtV ÈAEUSÉpa.tÇottoç0VEWÇ, àv15pacrl15èÈ1tEtÉtpa1ttoKat1tapSÉvO\ç.d 15É tlÇ EI'crill Ｑｴ｡ｰｾａｓｅ ｹｵｶｾＬ Savatoçｾ ｶ Tt 15111:11, 1tATtV d Ill, 15ouAT) tlÇ ｾｶ

ÈYKaAoûcrati!> 15EO'1totn.tautn15è ｾｶ iKEtEUElv tl,v SEOV,oi 15èapxoVtEçÈ15lmsovaùtntE Kai ti!> 15Ecrll0tn·Kat El Ilèv 015Ecr1totT)çoù15èvËtUXEV à151KOOV,aùSlçtl,v SEpalla.tvavｍｉｬｾ｡ｶｅｶＬ 0llocraçIll, ｉｬｶｔＩ｣ｲｬｋ｡ｾ｣ｲｅｬｶ ｾｋ｡ｴ｡＼ｰｵｾＧ El 15èË150çEvTt SEpa1talva15IKa.taAÉYE1V, ËIlEVEV aùtoû15oUAT) tj\ SEi!>. For the reliability of thisinformationseethe remarksof DEBORD, op. cif. (n. 12), p. 81 and 352 n. 38; as he points out, PLUT.,Alex., 42 and CIC., Verr., 1, 85 may reflect this practice; cf LATTE, op. cif. (n. 18), p. 107f. On theasylia of the EphesianArtemision seealso VAN BERCHEM, art. cif. (n. 4), p. 24-26.

82 A. CHANIOTIS

accusingtheir masterof wrongdoings(cf ÈYICCXÂOÛcrCX, àùn.:Ôlv) and assumedthestatusof suppliants.The caseof the slavewas decidedby a court presidedoverby magistrates,69and if the masterwas found to have committedno injusticeagainsther, he took the woman bac1<:; if not, the suppliant remainedin thesanctuaryas the goddesses'slave. This explicit evidencefor runawayslavesremainingas sacredslavesin the sanctuarywhere they hadfound refugemaypossibly explain the grave stones of hieroi found near the sanctuaryofPoseidonat Tainaron,known to haveservedas a placeof refugefor helots, atleast in one instance,i.e., during their greatrevoIt in the 5th century.7°Thesesacred slaves may have been runaway helots, who had found asylia inPoseidon'ssanctuary.

For the judiciary procedureswhich decidedthe fate of suppliantslavestheliterary and documentarysourcesuseunequivocallegalterms, e.g., È7ttlCptVEtv,

ICCX'tCXlCptVEtv, ÙtlCcxwÂoyEÎcr8cxt, ÙtlCaÇEtV, ÈYICCXÂEÎV. To this evidencewe may add amore problematictestimony,an early legal inscription from Gortyn (early 5thcentUlY), which seemsto have forbidden the purchaseof suppliant slaves(vcxEuovm) for one year (after they had taken refuge in a sanctuary).71It hasbeensuggested,that this regulationgave the slaveand the masterthe oppor-tunity to cometo an arrangement,perhapswith arbitrationof the priest.72

The developmentof special-andmore or lessuniform- regulationsin thecaseof suppliantslavescameaboutfor a variety of reasons.In their casetheproblemwas obviouslymostpressingand, given the significant economicandsocial implications, a uniform solution was neededurgent/y. In addition, the

69 THÜR-TAEUBER, op. clt. (n. 18), p. 221 have demonstratedthat this is how we shouldunderstandthe expressionoi üpxovteçelHKaÇov (cf ACHILL. TATIUS, VII. 12, 1).

70 For the epitaphsof blerol see].DUCAT, Esclavesau Ténare, in M.-M. MACTOUX - E. GENY(eds.), MélangesP. Lévêque4. Religion, Paris, 1990, p. 192f.; BOMER, op. clt. (n. 60), II, p. 153f.doubts that these bieral were slaves; D. PLACIDO, Los lugares sagrados de los bi/otas, in]. ANNEQUIN - M. GARRIDOTTORY (eds.), Religion et antbropologlede l'esclavageet desformesde dépendance,Paris, 1994, p.127-145.On the sanctuaryat Tainaronas asylonsee.e.g., BOMER, op.clt. (n. 60), II, p. 18f.; but see the reservationsof ]. DUCAT, al1. clt., p. 184-186and ID., Les bi/otes,Paris, 1990, p. 130f., 183-187, cf p. 11, 25f., on the question if the Spartanhelots had any specialrelations with this sanctuary.For asylum seekersserving as enkatocbolin Egypt cf DELEKAT, op.clt. (n. 17), p. 71-85, 94f. (partly speculative);cf alreadyVON WOER, op. clt. (n. 4), p. 140-164and179 (fugitive slavesas hierodouloi). Cf also the caseof a personwho found asylon in a sanctuaryinGalatia,offering his servicesthere (i1ceTI\ç Kal ùltT\petrov.1ùBoucrcroupty[q»:].G.C. ANDERSON, A CeltlcCult and Two Sites ln RomanGalatla, in jHS, 30 (1910), p. 164 no. 2 (3rd cent. A.D.): on this textseealso DEBORD, op. clt. (n. 12), p. 355 n. 72, 453 n. 187.

71 I.Cret., IV, 41, col. IV, 1. 6-10: tOV liÈ FOIKÉa tOV Élt/lliIÔ>tevov ＾ｴｾ O:ltoliMlSal >tÎ)te vaeuovta/ >tÎ)t' ｾK'O:ltÉÂ.ST\1 tO Èv/lauto; seenow R. KOERNER, lnscbriftlicbe Gesetzestexteder fl'lïben grlecblscbenPolis, Koln-Wemar-Wien, 1993, p. 384-386 no. 128 (text, commentary,and older bibliography).Cf I.Cret., IV, 72, col. l, 1. 39-49 = KOERNER, op. clt., p. 454f., 462f. no. 163. Cf LATTE, op. cit. (n. 18),p. 107. Another Gortynian regulationabout fugitive slaves:1.Cret., IV, 47, 1. 31f. = KOERNER, op. clt.,p. 408f., 411 no 138.

72 KOERNER, op. cit. (n. 71), p. 386. For casesof negotiationsseesupra, n. 23. Cf SCHLESINGER,op. clt. (n. 4), p. 41. The reconciliationbetweenrunawayslave and master is mentionedby PHILOALEX., De vil1., 124 as the last alternative before the sale to anothermaster (eiç O:liôÂ.ouç ÈÂ.ScbvlCataÂÀayùçtÙç Xroplç ÈvÉlipaç,ei liÈ >tÎ), tO yoûv ltavucrtatOVltpaSeiç).

ASYLIA IN THE CLASSICAL AND HELLENISTIC POLEIS 83

presenceof suppliantslavesin sanctuariescould be easily reconciledwith thecurrentdivine and secularlaw. On the one hand, they were not regardedaspolluted, and on the other, their supplicationdid not changetheir legal condi-tion but only their owner. There is no evidencethat they were manumitted;they were either sold to anothermaster,or returnedto their owner, or wereallowed to stayin the sanctuaryasslavesof the god.

5. Asylla: The right of the 'wronged'

Despitethe diversecharacterof the evidenceon limitations of asylia, thisevidencesupportsat leastoneclearconclusion.At the latestfrom the early 5thcentury,asyliaandsupplicationwere increasinglybecomingclaimswhieh oughtnot be respectedautomatieally,but only after a close examinationof eachindividual case.Sacredand civil authoritiesresponsiblefor sanctuariesclaimedfor themselvesthe right to take the final decisionof accepting,rejecting, orexpelling suppliants.In the caseof slaves,only the vietims of cruel violencewere grantedthe right to remain in the sanctuariesjas D. Daubehas pointedout, the supplicationof slaveswaspersemorally justifiable.73 Similarly, in thecaseof free personsa distinction seemsto have beenmade betweenthosewho soughtasylia becausethey had beenwronged(oi âÙt1COUj.lEVOt), and whowantedto avoid further injuries, andthosewho fled to sanctuariesafter a crime,in order to avoid the punishmentorderedby secularlaw. We may notice howoften the notion of âÙt1Œîcreat appearsin our sourcesin the contextof suppli-cation.74 It seemsthat the emphasison the idea that a suppliantis the vietim ofinjusticewas relatively recent,attestedfor the first time in the 5th century.Theidea that asylia should not be provided anymore unconditionallyand auto-matically to anyonewho hadreacheda sacredprecinctis expressedindirectlyalso in Attie drama,whieh often presentssuppliantsexplainingwhy they areseekingasylumandunderliningthe fact that they havebeenwronged.They donot simply demandprotectionsecuredby divine law, but defendtheir claimwith argumentswhieh resembleforensie speeches.1 reproducehere onlyKreousa'sadvocacyin Euripides''Ion': "1 only tlY to slay you, an enemyto myhouse,"sheexplainsO, 1291: ËK'tEtVa cr' DV'ta ltoÂÉj.ltoV ù6j.lOlÇ Ej.loîç); "you woulddwell in my house,taking what is mine by force" (1. 1295: Ëj.lEÂ-Â-EÇ OiXEîv 'tuj.l',

73 DAUBE, art. clt. (n. 52), p. 57: KUDLIEN's disagreement(art. cft. ln. 52], p. 243) disregardstheaforementionedevidence.

74 LYS., 6, 24: KO:\ ltpocreljlflCjlÎcro:crfJo:t u/leîç o:iHOV etpyecrfJO:I ｾｩｪ àyopuçKO:\ ｾｩｩｊｶ \epiiJv, ｩｊｊ｣ｲｾ･ /lflÔ'a0l1(oVIl6VOV UltO ｾｩｩｊｶ exfJpiiJvôUVo:crfJO:IÔÎKf\V ｯＺｾ･￮ｶｪ 12, S: oih' av \epàoihe ｾ ｏ ｊ Ｏ ｬ ｯ ｜ U/luç aOl1<ovllévovC;".wCjleÂ-1jcro:v; ACHILL. TATIUS, VII, 13: el /lÈv 0 ･｣ｲｬｴＶｾＱｪ oùôÈv ｾｾｵｸ･ｶ aOIKwv: cf LSAM, 29, 1. 12-13: oç ô'[av] aOl1aj[07/I]; LSAM,75, 1. 9-10: ｾｯｶ ｜ｋ￩ｾｶ /ln ｡ｏｬＱ￮ｶＯＯｬＱｪｾ aOl1<ovlleVOVlteplOpuv. Cf also BRAVO, art.cft. (n. 4), p. 719f. and SOS (examplesof uyelv andcruÂ-uv regardedas àÔIKÎo:).

84 A. CHANIons

èl.wÛ ptl(: ÀUpcOv). A daim that hasto be defendedis obviouslyliable to approvalor rejection.75

Of decisive importancefor our understandingof the reasonswhy theGreekschangedtheir attitude toward the unlimited and invariable asyHa is apassagein Thucydides(IV, 97-98). The defeatedAthenians (424 B.e.) hadfortified Apollon's sanctuaryat Delion. Thebanenvoysdemandedtheir depar-ture, appealingto the commonGreekcustomto abstainfrom sanctuariesandpointing out that the Athenianswere polluting the holy place.In their responsethe Atheniansassumedthe position of suppliantsexplainingthat they had notenteredthe sanctuarywith the intent to harm it, but ratherin order to defendthemselvesagainstthosewho werewronging them (roùç àÙtKoÛV'tUÇ) from it,76"Altars are a refuge in cases of involuntary misdeeds('téov àKO'\)O'troVallup'tllllà'trov), and transgressionis a term appliedto thosewho do evil withoutcompulsionand not to thosewho are driven by misfortunesta someact ofdaring."n Thucydideslimits the right to asylia to personswho were eitherwronged or wronged others unwillingly (cf oMÈv OÜ'tE 'tûû ÀOt1tOÛ bc6vreçpÀIX\VEtV; 'trov al(OvO'Îrov allup'tlllllX'trov ｋｕＧｴｕｬｰＧ｜Ｉｙｾｖ dvut 'toùç ProlloUÇ). Thus heappHesto asylia an important innovation of archaic law, the differentiationbetwen intention, responsibility, and accident,attestedfor the first time inDrakon'slaws on homicide.78 This innovationwas gradually, reluctantly, andonly sporadicallyadoptedby sacredlaw, too. A lex sacrafrom Kleonai from thefirst half of the 6th centuryexplicitly statesthat personswho kill in self-defence

75 For other examples see SCHLESINGER, op. cif. (n. 4), p. 39f. Based on this evidenceSCHLESINGER,op. cit., p. 43 evensuggestedthat in Athens the popularassemblydecidedabout theacceptanceof suppliants;this assumptioncannotbe suppartedby the documentarysources.

76 THUC., IV, 98, 1: oi 'A911VuîolltÉll\j1uVtEÇ ltupàtOÙç BOlOltOÙÇ ÉUUtWV JalPUKUtOÛ llÈv iEpoû olitEàÙlIcijel"C(1 ｾ＼ｰｃＨＨｬＢｃＨｖ oùÙÈvolitE toû ÀOl1tOÛ ÉK6vtEÇ PMX\j1EIV' OÙÙÈ yàp ｴ ｾ ｖ ￠ ｰ ｸ ｾ ｶ ÈcrEÀ9EÎv Èlt! to{mjl, àÀÀ' '{vuÉçUÙtoÛ 'toùçàÙIKoûvmçlllXÀÀov cr<plXÇ àlluvrovml.

77 THUc., IV, 98, 6: KU! yàp'twv àKoucrlrovUlluP'tlllllhrov ｬＨｃＨｭ＼ｰｵｾｶ E!VC(l 'toùçProllouÇ,ltUPUVOlllUV 'tEÈlt! 'toîç ｬ ｬ ｾ àVUY1C\1KUKOîçâvollucr9ijvC(lKu! OÙK Èlt! toîç àltà'twv ÇUll<P0pwV 'tl Ｇ ｴ ｯ ｬ ｬ ｾ ｣ ｲ ｕ ｣ ｲ ｉ ｖ Ｎ VON WOEB, op.cif. (n. 4), p. 173 n. 1 thought that the view expressedby Thucydideswas generally acceptedinGreece.This is hardly the case;Thucydidesreflects a relatively late stageof development.For theNear Easternview that asylia applies only ta unintentianalcrimes seeVON WOEB, op. cit., p. 173n. 1; SCHLESINGER,op. cit. (n. 4), p. 42 with n. 1. Cf JUST., Nov., 17,7 pr.: üÀÀroç 'tE ｾ ÈK 'tWV iEpwvàcr<pUÀEWoù toîç àÙIKOÛcrlV, àÀÀà 'toîç àÙIKOUllÉVOIÇ ùÉùotC(lltupà'tOÛ V6110U, KU! OÙK àv Elll ùuvu'tàvÉKU'tEpOV icrxupIÇEcr9C(l'tft ltupà'tWV àcruÂcov't6ltrov àcr<pUÀElfi(, KU! 'tàv àÙIKOÛV'tU KU! 'tàv àÙIKOUllEVOV.

78 On this innovation see R. MASCHKE, Die Willensiehreim griechischenRecht, Berlin, 1926,p. 77f., 150-159,D.M. MACDOWELL, AthenianHomicideLaw in theAgeofthe Orators, Manchester,1963, p. 60-69, 125f.; ADKINS, op. cit. (n. 34), p. 304-308, 319-328,J. TRIANTAPHYLLOPOULOS, DasRechtsdenkender Griechen,München,1985, p. 13f., 105-107n. 94-98; G. RICKERT, 'EICwv andalCrov inEarly Greek Thougbt,Atlanta, 1989, esp. p. 76, 86, M. GAGARIN, Bouleusisin AthenianHomicideLaw, in G. NENCI - G. THÜR (eds.), Symposion1988. Vortrage zur griechischenund hellenisti-schenRechtsgeschicbte,Siena-Pisa,6.-8. funi 1988, Koln-Wien, 1991, p. 81-99. Cf A. DIHLE, DiegoldeneRegel.Eine Einftïhrung in die Geschicbteder antiken undfnïhcbristlichen Vulgaretbik,Gottingen, 1962, p. 15-18, 48-52; A. DIHLE, Die Vorstellungvom Wil/en in der Antike, Gottingen,1985,esp.31-78.

ASYLIA IN THE CLASSICAL AND HELLENISnC POLEIS 85

or who haveslain a cursedpersonarenot miaroi;79 andfrom the middle of the4th century, under the influence of this development, the leges sacraeincreasingly demand not only the external purity of the body, a purityindependentof intentions,but also the purity of the mind.8o

The newunderstandingof miasmaand the transformationof asylia from aprotectionwhich is offered automaticallyand unconditionally,to an institutionfor which ethical and legal considerationapply, shouldbe seenas part of thesamedevelopment.In both caseswe are dealingwith conditionsestablishedautomatically,as soon as a personperformsa certainactivity. In both cases,originally, questionsof guilt and intention did not play any rôle. In both casesthe more differentiatedunderstandingof guilt initiated a significant change.Asylia transformeditself from a right which had to be offered automaticallytaanypersanwho claimedit within a sacredprecinctto a privilege which shouldbe grantedonly if certain moral and legal conditionswere fulfilled; similarlymiasmawas increasinglyregardeda stateof the mind, andnot an automaticallytransmittabletaint.81 Last1y, in both casesthe Greeksremainedinconsistent.Relics of the old conceptsof asyliaandmiasmacanbe found in the literary anddocumentaysourcesuntil imperial times.82

6. Conclusions

The Greekswere, in general,extremelyreluctantaboutthe introductionoflaws that might limit or evenregulateasylia, probablydue to their convictionthat divine law is superiorto secularauthority (cf infra). However, from thelate 7th centurysecularlaw, especiallythe legislationon homicide, introducedafine differentiationin the notion of guilt, which graduallyinfluencedthe sacredlaw. The idea that divine protectioncould not be offered automaticallyandinvariably ta criminals beganta prevai!. Already in the 5th centurywe encoun-ter in EuripidesandThucydidesthe first voicesendorsingthe view that suppli-cation is the right only of the 'wronged'.From the early 5th centurywe alsofind in the documentalYsourcesindicationsof an increasingpreoccupationwiththe exploitation of asylia by criminals. The testimonia(§ 2-3) do not reveal asystematicapproachto this issue,but rather take the form of exceptional,ad

79 LSCG, 56; see now KOERNER, op. cit. (n. 71), p. 93-95 no. 32; for this developmentcf PARKER, op. cif. (n. 11), p. 110-114.

80 See A. CHANIOnS, Reinheitdes Kopers, Reinheifdes Sil1l/es in den griechischenKu/t-gesetzen.Ein epigraphischerBeitrag zurgriechischenAuffassungvon Sehuld,in J. ASSMANN - Th.SUNDERMEIER, Sehuld und Identitilt (Studien zum Verstehenfremder Religionen), Gütersloh(forthcoming); cf PARKER, op. eit. (n. 11), p. 320-324.

81 Severalearly epigraphicsourcesfor this idea: PORPH.,De abstinentia,II, 19, 5; CLEM. ALEX.,Stramateis,V, 1, 13, 3 (inscription at the Asklepieion of Epidauros);M. ERRINGTON, Insehriftenvon Euramos,in EpigrAnat, 21 (1993), p. 29f. no 8 (Euromos, sanctuaryof Zeus Lepsynos, 2ndcent,); cf LSCG, 129 (Eresos,4th cent.); LCret., l, xxiii 3 (Phaistos,2nd cent.).

82 For asylia seesupra,n. 10. For miasmasee,e.g., LSCG,55 (Athens,2nd centA.D.).

86 A. CHANIOTIS

hoc measuresto face a situation threateningto get out of control. As we mayinfer from later sources,these measures(appeal to oracles, impedimentsagainstpotential intruders)failed to regulateasylia effectively (supra, notes10and 15). Gnly in the caseof runawayslaveswe do find clearand unequivocalrules.The priests(Andania,Athens?)or magistrates(Ephesos,Samos)examinedthe chargesof the slavesagainsttheir mastersanddecidedwhethera slavewasto be returnedto the master, resold, or kept in the sanctuaryas a sacredslave(§ 4).

Even the efforts of Greekcities to setcertainlimits to an institution deeplyrooted in religious customsnever questionedthe supremacyof divine oversecularlaw. This conviction is clearly expressedin the legal sources,e.g., inLysias, who in his speachagainstEratosthenescastigatedthe thirty tyrants forviolating the rights of suppliants,exactly because"they conceivedtheir ownauthority Ｈ ￠ ｰ ｘ ｾ Ｉ being more secure (pepalO"CÉpa)than the vengeanceofgods."83Consequently,eventhe regulationsfor the limitation of asylia usuallyhad a religious foundation; e.g., they aimed at protecting sanctuariesfrompollution, theywereapprovedby oracles,or they engagedreligious personnel.

Under theseconditions, the bitter criticism of Ion againstthis divine law(OElVOV ye, Elvll"Coîç "Coùç VO/lO'llç roç où lCa}"ooç ëEllllCev 6 Eleoç) or the threat of theanonymousspeakerin Euripides' Oedipus("Cov vO/lOV xaîpetv Eoov..., où "CpÉcraçEleouç) seem,at first sight, to break the constraintsrespectedby the Greeks.This impressionis, however,misleading.In the further developmentof the Ion(perhapsalso of the Oedipus) a surprise awaits the protagonist. Had Ionviolated the asylum,he would havekilled -unknowingly-his own mother.84 Aseeminglylogical and just regulationwould have allowed Ion to committ theworst crime, matricide, it would have openedthe way to an even greaterinjustice. Here, too, the divine law revealsitself superiorto humanconside-rations, and the insight of the changableand unpredictablefate of menimpedesthe restrictionof oneof the mosthumaneinstitutionsof the Greeks.

Angelos CHANIOTISNew York UniversityFaculty of Arts and ScienceDepartmentof Classics25 Waverly PlaceNew York NY 10003-6790U.S.A.

83 LYS., 12, 96; cf. EURIP., Herakleid., 258 (cnw.làç llÉ<pUKUÇ rav Beoû IfÂdw CPPOYWY; this isDemophon'sreaction to the heroldsdemandto deliver suppliants).

84 BURNETI, art. cif. (n. 3), p. 99 and n. 36 (Ion "delivers his speechagainstthe sacrednomosof asylum in circumstancesarrangedto demonstratethe enormity of his attempt to judge whatheavenhas established,for the audienceknows that if he follows his secularsenseof justice andbreaks the 'senseless'divine law he will causethe death of his own mother"); MIKALSON, op. clf.(n. 2), p. 75.