The entry of Philip II into the territory of Abdera (Demosth. 23.183; Polyaen. 4.2.22), variously dated between 355 and 347 BC, resulted in the expulsion of Athenian partisans. This honorary decree for some exiles from Abdera fits perfectly into this context. In Athens, under the archonship of Archias (346/5 BC), while a revision (diapsephisis) of the Athenian civic registers was underway due to Demophilos’ decree, the people honoured three Abderite citizens, brothers Dioskourides, Charmes and Anaxipolis, as benefactors of Athens (ll. 14-17). The inscription clarifies that these individuals were exiles seeking refuge in Athens. This is demonstrated by the mention of a specific procedure, the legal supplication (ll. 7-9), through which the exiles appealed to the Athenian authorities. A passage from the Constitution of the Athenians (43.6) describes its working. We are told that a supplication meeting convened in Athens annually, allowing anyone, regardless of status, to address the population while carrying a supplicant’s twig. The procedure described by Aristotle finds corroboration and additional details in the epigraphic evidence: the suppliant would first approach the council, probably after placing the olive branch on the altar. It was the councillors’ responsibility to assess whether the plea was legitimate (as noted by the adjective used, namely ennomos, cf. ἔννομα ἱκετεύειν, at ll. 8-9 of the inscription) and not illegal (paranomos), i.e. morally and legally acceptable. After passing this examination, the Council would draft a series of proposals to be discussed by the Assembly. In the case of Dioskourides, the Council proposed entrusting he and his brothers to the care (epimeleia) of the councillors, strategoi and magistrates serving in poleis under Athenian control, thus ensuring that the honoured would suffer no harm (ll. 17-20). The discussion of the matter in the Assembly concluded with the proposal of Eubolides (councillor, but also demarch of the small deme of Halimous and recipient of the invectives of the actor Euxitheos in the Demosthenic oration Against Eubulides) to ratify the Council’s recommendations and to invite the honourees to a banquet at the Prytaneion.
As the initiator of the amendment to the Assembly’s initial decree (ll. 22-23), Diopeithes of Sphettos proposed adding a clarification concerning the reception of the exiles, specifically to extend the right to reside in Athens to the honoured and their descendants ‘until they return home’ (ἕως ἂν κατέλθωσι-[ν εἰς τ]ὴ̣ν αὑτῶν, ll. 32-33), thus demonstrating that the people of Athens commit to honouring benefactors and supporting their friends in times of need. This is the first attestation of the expression, which may imply the introduction of a temporary welfare regime, i.e., an attempt to limit the duration of assistance for refugees. This expression appears infrequently; it is, however, documented, with some variations, in four other inscriptions on political exiles from 346/5 to 320/19 BC: IG II3 404 (refugees probably from Neapolis, 345-230 BC); IG II3 316 (Acarnanian refugees, 337 BC); IG II3 452 (decree for Peisitheides of Delos, 334 BC); IG II2 545 + 2406 (Thessalian refugees, 320/19 BC). An analysis of these documents clarifies that the clause never appears in direct connection with naturalisation measures, but rather with the enjoyment of fiscal privileges. The meaning of this limitation remains unclear.
It is perhaps only a coincidence that the first attestation of the clause dates to 346/5 BC, during the diapsephisis which purged the civic body of non-citizens. More pertinently, a reference in the speech Against Leptines addresses the presence of undeserving individuals in Athens who benefited from tax exemptions while posing as Megarians and Messenians (Demosth. 20.131), the latter being groups of refugees who had been welcomed in Attica and granted tax privileges. It is also worth considering that the Athenian honours system was susceptible to corruption, as the orators frequently accused the proponents of honorary decrees of having acted from purely economic interest (Din. 1.43; Demosth. 23.94). However, the limitation ‘until they return home’ does not seem to have been applied to metics, even those who enjoyed exemption from metoikion. This phrase may be suggested to capture the widespread aspiration of political exiles to return to their homeland as soon as political conditions allowed. Confirmations of this notion are the request of the Plataean exiles to the Athenians to let them recover their homeland (ἀποδοῦναι τὴν χώραν ἡμῖν καὶ τὴν πόλιν, Isoc. 14.56) and the Athenians’ pledge to assist the political exile Arybbas of Epirus in returning to Macedonia and regaining power (IG II3 404).
1 θεοί vac. Ἄβδηρος vac. Ἀθηνάα Διοσκουρίδης
vacat Διονυσοδώρου·
I.3 ἐπὶ Ἀρχίου ἄρχοντος, ἐπὶ τῆς Ἀκαμαντίδ-
ος ἐνάτης, ἧι Κηφισόδωρος Ἀθηνοφάνους
5 Φλυεὺς ἐγραμμάτευεν· τῶν προέδρων ἐπε-
ψ̣ήφιζεν Πρωτίας Ἀχαρνεύς· Εὐβολίδης Ἀν-
τ̣ιφίλο Ἁλιμούσιος εἶπεν· περὶ ὧν Διοσκορ-
[ί]δης ὁ Ἀβδηρίτης ἔδοξεν ἔννομα ἱκετεύει-
ν ἐν τεῖ βουλῆι, ἐψηφίσθαι τῆι βολῆι τοὺς π-
10 ροέδρους, οἳ ἂν λάχωσι προεδρεύειν εἰς τὴν
πρώτην ἐκκλησίαν προσαγαγεῖν αὐτὸν πρὸ-
ς τὸν δῆμον καὶ χρηματίσαι, γνώμην δὲ ξυ-
νβάλλεσθαι τῆς βουλῆς εἰς [τὸν] δῆμον, ὅ[τι]
[δ]οκεῖ τῆι βουλῆι, ἐπε[ιδὴ εὐ]ε̣ργ̣έ̣τ̣α̣ι̣ [ἦσαν το͂]
15 [δή]μο τοῦ Ἀθηναίων Διο[σκ]ουρίδης καὶ [οἱ ἀ]-
[δελφοὶ αὐ]τοῦ Χαρμῆς καὶ Ἀναξίπολις οἱ Δι[ο]-
[νυσοδ]ώρο το͂ Ἀβδηρίτου ὑεῖς, ἐπιμελεῖσ[θ]-
[αι α]ὐτῶν τὴν βουλὴν καὶ τοὺς στρατηγὸς κ-
[αὶ] τοὺς ἄρχοντας τοὺς ἐν ταῖς πόλεσι ταῖς
20 [Ἀ]θηναίων, ὅπως ἂν μὴ ἀδικῶνται· ἐπαινέ-
σαι δὲ Διοσκουρίδην καὶ καλέσαι ἐπὶ ξένια̣
II.22 εἰς τὸ πρυτανεῖον εἰς α̣ὔριον. vv Διοπείθης
[Δι]οπείθους Σφήττιος εἶπεν· περὶ ὧν ἔδοξ-
εν τῶι δήμωι Διοσκουρίδης ἔννομα ἱκετε-
25 ύειν, ὅπως ἂν ὁ δῆμος ὁ Ἀθηναίων [τ]ιμᾶι τ-
οὺς εὐεργέτας καὶ ἐπιμελῆται τῶν ἀεὶ δε-
ομένων φ̣ίλων τῆς πόλεως, ἐψηφίσθαι τ-
ῶι δήμωι τὰ μὲν ἄλλα καθάπερ τῆι βουλ-
ῆι, εἶναι δὲ Διοσκουρίδει καὶ Χαρμῆι καὶ
30 [Ἀ]ναξιπόλιδι τοῖς Διονυσοδώρου τοῦ
[Ἀβ]δηρίτου παισὶν καὶ τοῖς ἐ̣κ̣ τούτων
[οἰκ]εῖν Ἀθήνησιν, ἕως ἂν κατέλθωσι-
[ν εἰς τ]ὴ̣ν αὑτῶν· εἰ[σφ]έρειν δὲ αὐτοὺς
[τὰς εἰσφορὰς — — — c.13 — — —] μ̣ετὰ
[— — — — — — — — — — — — — —]
Gods. Abderos. Athena. Dioskourides, son of Dionysodoros.
Decree 1
In the archonship of Archias, in the ninth, of Akamantis V, for which Kephisodoros son of Athenophanes of Phlya was secretary. Of the presiding committee Protias of Acharnai was putting to the vote. Euboulides son of Antiphilos of Halimous proposed: concerning those things for which Dioskourides of Abdera is deemed to have made legal supplication in the Council, the Council shall resolve: that the presiding committee allotted to preside in the next Assembly shall introduce him to the People and put the matter on the agenda and submit the opinion of the Council to the People that it seems good to the Council, since Dioskourides and his brothers, Charmes and Anaxipolis the sons of Dionysodoros of Abdera, were benefactors of the Athenian People, the Council and the generals and the archons in the cities of the Athenians shall take care of them so that they come to no harm; and to praise Dioskourides and invite him to hospitality in the city hall tomorrow.
Decree 2
Diopeithes son of Diopeithes of Sphettos proposed: concerning those things for which Dioskourides is deemed to have made legal supplication to the People, in order that the Athenian People may honour its benefactors and take care of friends of the city in need at any time, the People shall resolve: in other respects as proposed by the Council, but Dioskourides and Charmes and Anaxipolis, the children of Dionysodoros of Abdera, shall be permitted to live at Athens until they return to their own city; and they shall pay[capital taxes] . . . with [the Athenians] … (translated by S. Lambert).
- L.J. Bliquez, Philip and Abdera, Eranos 79, 1981, 65-79
- K. Chryssanthaki, Les trois fondations d’Abdère, REG 114, 2001, 383-406
- K. Chryssanthaki, L’histoire monetaire d’Abdère en Thrace (VIe s. av. J.-C.- IIe s. ap. J.-C.), Athènes 2007
- B. Gray, Stasis and Stability: Exile, the Polis, and Political Thought, c. 404-146 BC, Oxford 2015
- A.S. Henry, Honours and Privileges in Athenian Decrees, Hildesheim, Zürich, New York 1983
- S.N. Koumanoudes, Σώτιμος Δωσιθέου Kυρεναῖος, Horos 4, 1986, 11-18
- S.D. Lambert, Inscribed Athenian Laws and Decrees 352/1-322/1 BC: Epigraphical Essays, Leiden, Boston 2012
- P. Liddel, The Honorific Decrees of Fourth-century Athens: Trends, Perceptions, Controversies, in C. Tiersch (ed.), Athenische Demokratie im 4. Jh.: zwischen Modernisierung und Tradition, Stuttgart 2016, 311-333
- L. Loddo, Ἕως ἂν κατέλθωσιν εἰς τὴν αὐτῶν: Did the Athenians Reduce their Reception of Refugees in the Fourth Century BC?, Pallas 112, 2020, 199-230
- L. Loddo, I rifugiati politici nella Grecia antica, Bologna 2022
- F.S. Naiden, Ancient Supplication, Oxford 2006
- C. Veligianni-Terzi, Wertbegriffe in den attischen Ehrendekreten der Klassischen Zeit, Stuttgart 1997
- R. Zelnick Abramowitz, Supplication and Request: Application by Foreigners to the Athenian Polis, Mnemosyne 51, 1998, 554-573