Our understanding of the tumultuous relationship between the Boeotian koinon and Demetrius Poliorcetes, as documented in literary sources (Plut. Demetr. 39-40; D.S. 21, fr. 25-27; Polyaen. 3.7.2 and 4.7.11), has recently gained a new insight from Akraiphia, a city within the koinon located on the eastern shore of Lake Copais. This new find is an honorary decree for the metics who fought alongside the citizens of Akraiphia, followed by a list of the names of the recipients of privileges. The decree is inscribed on the main face of a marble block, the origin of which is unknown, while the list is found on the left side of the stone. Prosopography has clarified that these individuals were foreign residents in Boeotia. The editor Kalliontzis, who connected the decree with the list, suggests that these metics likely fought in one of the wars against Demetrius Poliorcetes (Δαµάτριον, ll. 8-9; cf. in the same chronological context, from Akraiphia, the metrical epigram for Eugnotos (Cairon 2009, n. 46), a metic who died in battle while trying to repel Demetrius’ army at Onchestos). The inscription is dated to the early 3rd century BC, with 293 BC—the year of Demetrius’ first expedition into Boeotia—serving as a reliable terminus post quem. While a more precise dating is impossible, despite the mention of the archon Xenokritos in l. 8, several plausible contexts exist: 292 BC, after the conclusion of Poliorcetes’ first campaign in Boeotia; 291 BC, during the second Boeotian revolt against Demetrius as he attempted to conquer the Thracian kingdom; or after 287 BC, when Demetrius lost control of Boeotia and restored the Theban constitution (Plut. Demetr. 46.1).
To those metics of Akraiphia—referred to in the genitive plural τῶν πεδαϝοίκων, l. 6, which is the expected Doric/Eolic form of the Attic μέτοικος, cf. πε<δ>άϝοικοι in IG IV 552, l.8 and πεδάϝο<ι>ϙ̣οι in IG IV 615, l. 2, both from Argos—who fought against Demetrius and defended the polis, the people of Akraiphia granted fiscal equality (ϝισοτέλιαν, l. 10), meaning the privilege of paying the same taxes as full citizens. Similar concessions to resident foreigners are known in other contexts. First, in Athens, several cases exist where metics were rewarded with isoteleia for their military support: see IG II3 1, 418, a decree for Asklepiodoros; IG II2 505, a decree for Nicander, son of Antiphanes, from Ilium, and Polizelos, son of Apollophanes, from Ephesus. Second, the reasons behind granting this fiscal privilege—the willingness not to abandon the city and to fight alongside the Akraiphians—contrast the accusations levelled at Athenian citizens for leaving the city and not taking up arms, choosing instead to live as metics abroad (Philon in Lys. 31.14 and Leokrates in Lyc. 1.43). Third, while individual grants of isoteleia are fairly common in the Boeotian koinon, particularly in connection with proxenia (IG VII 2858, 2866; I.Oropos 21; SEG 23.289), this document stands out as it attests to a rare case of mass isoteleia granting, comparable to the Athenian decree for the Tenians residing in Attica (IG II3 1, 883). Lastly, the Akraiphia case is significant because fiscal equality applies not only to the taxes owed to the polis for which the metics fought but also to those owed to the Boeotian koinon.
According to Kalliontzis’ proposed restoration in ll. 1-2, the metics who received honours were registered among the sympoliteuomenoi. This registration is unusual since in Akraiphia the verb ἀπογράφω appears in military catalogues as an act of enrolment among the ephebes (IG VII 2715-2720). Moreover, the meaning of sympoliteuomenos is unclear. The hypothesis that the term sympoliteuomenoi is to be linked to a convention of sympoliteia between different communities, understood as sharing federal citizenship, seems unlikely, as does their interpretation as simple metics (as cautiously suggested by Freitag) or as citizens who enjoyed federal citizenship but not local citizenship (Rzepka). Similarly, the idea that the sympoliteuomenoi were foreigners connected to the koinon by an isopoliteia agreement (Lefèvre) contradicts the inscription’s explicit mention of metics honoured with isoteleia.
What is certain is that the term in literary tradition indicates ‘member of a state’ and thus ‘fellow citizen’ (e.g., Isoc. 3.4; 12.246). To explain the proposed integration, Kalliontzis referenced various literary and epigraphic documents to clarify the expression. First, a decree from Pharsalus attests to a politography in which some sympoliteuomenoi ἐξ ἀρχᾶς who fought alongside citizens were granted citizenship (IG IX 2, 234). The comparison is only partially fitting. In Pharsalus, anaplerosis was used, the act of replenishing the citizen body in circumstances of particular emergency by drawing from members of the koinon (as noted by Lonis), similar to what occurred in Larisa by decision of Philip V (IG IX 2, 517, where the recipients came from Crannon and Gyrton; cf. Mari – Thornton 2016), or more likely from penestai (Decourt 1990; penestai also seem to have been the recipients of naturalisation decrees from Mopsion published by Garcia Ramon – Helly – Tziafalias 2007). In contrast, in Akraiphia, there seems to have lacked both a naturalisation provision and land grants. Second, some documents from the Aetolian koinon, particularly asylum decrees, feature the formula πολιτεύοντες ἐν Αἰτωλίᾳ or οἰκοῦντες/κατοικεόντες ἐν Αἰτωλίᾳ (IG XII 2 15; IG XII 5 526; IG IX 1² 1 192; especially the formula [Αἰτωλοῖς καὶ τοῖς συμπολιτευομένοις με]τ’ Αἰτωλῶν in the treaty between Demetrius Poliorcetes and the Aetolians, SEG 48.588, l. 16). The fact that in the Aetolian decrees the πολιτεύοντες are distinguished from full citizens—οἱ Αἰτωλοί—suggests a clear differentiation of status between the two groups (Lasagni). A more appropriate comparison seems to be with the framework provided by the Anonymous of Oxyrhynchus (Hell.Oxy. 16.2-3), which describes how the beotarchs were selected in the Boeotian koinon. The author notes that Thebes provided four beotarchs, two in its own name, and two on behalf of Plataea, Skolos, Erythrai, Skaphai, and all other places that were originally connected in a sympoliteia but were at that time subject to Thebes. The sympoliteuomenoi of Plataea were not citizens of Plataea but belonged to the meros of Plataea and fought alongside the Plataeans.
A1 [- – – c. 7 – – -]ιω ἄρχοντος τοιὶ ἀπεγράψανθο ἐν τὼς συ[µπο]-
[λιτευοµέ ?]νως καττὸ ψάφισµα τῶ δάµω·
[- – – c. 6 – – -] Mειλιῆος ἔλεξε· δεδόχθη τοῖ δάµοι ὅπως κὰ ϝιδῶ[νθι]
[πάντε]ς τοὶ Ἕλλανες ὅτι Ἀκρηφιεῖες πολλὰν ἐπιµέλειαν πο[ιῶνθι]
5 [τῶ]ν χρεισίµων ἐν τοῖς κηροῖς γ[ι]νυµένων τῆ πόλι, δεδόχθ[η τοῖ]
[δ]άµοι, ὅποττοι τῶν πεδαϝοίκων συνεπολέµεισαν τὸµ π[όλε]-
µον τὸµ περιστάντα περὶ τὰν πόλιν τὸν ποδ Δα‑
µάτριον ἐπὶ Ξενοκρίτω ἄρχοντος κὴ διέµειναν ἐν τῆ πόλι πι[θό]‑
µενοι τοῖς ἀρχόντεσσι κὴ ταδδόµενοι ὅποις ἕκαστον κατέτ[αξαν],
10 εἶµεν αὐτοῖς ϝισοτέλιαν δεδοµέναν παρ τᾶς πόλιος κὴ α[ὐτοῖς]
κὴ τοῖς ἐκγόνοις, ἐµφερόντεσσι ἐν τὰν πόλιν κὴ ἐν τὸ κο[ινὸν]
Βοιωτῶν ἅ κα κὴ τοὶ ἄλλοι πολῖτη ἐµφέρωνθι· ἐπιµέλεσ[θη δὲ]
τὼς πολεµάρχως ὅπως µειδὶς αὐτὼς ἀδικίει, ὅπ[ως δὲ]
ἁ δωριὰ κουρία ἴει αὐτοῖς ἐµ πάντα τὸν χ[ρόνον, κὴ φανε]‑
15 ροὶ ἴωνθι ὁπόττοις δέδοτη ἁ ϝισοτ[έλια παρ τᾶς πόλιος, ἀπο]‑
γράφεσθη αὐτὼς ποττὼς π̣[ολεµάρχως τὼς ἐπὶ nomen]
ω ἄρχοντος ἐν τοῖ πρόσθα [- – – – – – – – – – – – – – ἀπο]-
γράψαντας αὐτῶν τὰ ὀνύµα̣[τα – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – ]
ἐν τοῖ δάµοι· ἐπὶ δέ κα ἀν[αγράψωνθι τὰ ὀνύµατα – – – – – – – ]
20 ἠ τίς κα β̣ε̣ί̣λ̣ε̣ι̣τ̣η̣ [τῶν πολιτῶν – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – -]
B1 Κάρπος Διωνουσίω, Φι[λέ]-
τηρος Καλλίππω, Πύ[ρραν]-
δρος Λίοντος, Ἑρµάϊ[ος Ἑρ]-
µαΐω, Θίων Δαµοτέλ[ιος],
5 Μένων Δαµοτέλιος, [Σω]-
τειρίδας Δαµοστρότιος,
Πανκλεῖς Σιµίαο, Ὀνασίων
Παράλω, Διωνουσόδωρος Χα-
ριξένω, Δρόµων Διωνουσο-
10 δώρω, Πατρώνδας Πάτρων-
ος, Θρασοκλεῖς Ἀρχεβώλω,
Ζώπυρος Θρασοκλεῖος, Ἐρά-
[των] Στροτώνιος, Νικόλαος
[- – – – – – – – – -]Ν Θιαγέ-
15 [νιος – – – – – – – – – – – – – – -]
A1. When [- – -] was archon, the following individuals were registered among the sympoliteuomenoi according to the decree of the people. [- – – -] son of Meilias made the proposal; the people resolved that all Greeks should know that the citizens of Akraiphia take great care of those who have been helpful to the city in difficult times. The people resolved: to those metics who participated in the war threatening the city against Demetrius under archon Xenokritos and who remained in the city obeying the archons and aligning themselves where assigned, the city grants both them and their descendants equal status in tax payments, so that they pay to the city and to the koinon of the Boeotians the same taxes as other citizens. The polemarchs shall ensure that no one does them injustice, so that this privilege remains valid forever, and the names of those to whom the city has granted tax equality shall be recorded with the polemarchs under the archon [?] in front of [?], after having written their names […] before the assembly of the people; after [writing the names…], if any [of the citizens] wishes…
B1. Karpos son of Dionysios, Phileteros son of Kallippos, Pyrrandros son of Lion, Hermaios son of Hermaios, Thion son of Damoteles, Menon son of Damoteleis, Soteiridas son of Damostrotos, Pankleis son of Simias, Onasion son of Paralos, Dionysodoros son of Charixenos, Dromon son of Dionysodoros, Patrondas son of Patron, Thrasokleis son of Archebolos, Zopyros son of Thrasokleis, Heraton son of Stroton, Nikolaos […] son of Thiaghenes …
- K. Buraselis, Considerations on Symmachia and Sympoliteia in the Hellenistic Period, in K. Buraselis, K. Zoumboulakis (eds.), The Idea of European Community in History, II. Aspects of Connecting Poleis and Ethne in Ancient Greece, Athens 2003, 39-50
- J.C. Decourt, Décret de Pharsale pour une politographie, ZPE 81, 1990, 163-184
- K. Freitag, Zur Integration von Neubürgern in den griechischen Bundesstaaten in Hellenistischer Zeit—Ein Problemaufriss, in L.M. Günther (ed.), Migration und Bürgerrecht in der Hellenistischen Welt, Wiesbaden 2012, 83-95
- P. Funke, Die Aitoler in der Ägäis. Untersuchungen zur sogenannten Seepolitik der Aitoler im 3. Jh. v. Chr., in E. Winter (ed.), Vom Euphrat bis zum Bosporus. Kleinasien in der Antike, (Festschrift für E. Schwertheim zum 65. Geburtstag), Bonn 2008, 253-267
- P. Funke, Aitolia and the Aitolian League, in H. Beck, P. Funke (eds.), Federalism in Greek Antiquity, Cambridge 2015, 86-117
- Y. Kalliontzis, Akraiphia et la guerre entre Démétrios Poliorcète et les Béotiens, BCH 141.2, 2017, 669-696
- J.A.O. Larsen, Greek Federal States: Their Institutions and History, Oxford 1968
- C. Lasagni, Politeia in Greek Federal States, in A. Busetto, L. Cecchet (eds.), Citizens in the Graeco-Roman World: Aspects of Citizenship from the Archaic Period to AD 212, Leiden – Boston 2017, 78-109
- F. Lefèvre, Traité de paix entre Démétrios Poliorcète et la confédération étolienne (fin 289?), BCH 122, 1998, 109-141
- R. Lonis, L’anaplerôsis ou la reconstitution du corps civique avec des étrangers, in R. Lonis (ed.), L’étranger dans le monde grec 2: Actes du deuxieme Colloque sur l’etranger, Nancy 19-21 septembre 1991, Nancy 1992, 245-270
- M. Mari, J. Thornton, Città greche tra conservazione e modelli rivoluzionari. Megalopoli, Larisa e i re macedoni nel III secolo a.C., Studi Ellenistici 30, 2016, 139-195
- J. Pascual, La sympoliteia griega en las épocas clásica y helenística, Gerión 25.1, 2007, 167-
- J. Rzepka, The Rights of Cities within the Aitolian Confederacy, Valencia 2006
- J. Rzepka, Federal Imperialism: Aitolian Expansion between Protectorate, Merger and Partition, in H. Beck, K. Buraselis, A. McAuley (eds.), Ethnos and Koinon. Studies in Ancient Greek Ethnicity and Federalism, Stuttgart 2019, 167-174
- J.B Scholten, The Politics of Plunder: Aitolians and their Koinon in the Early Hellenistic Era, 279–217 B.C., Berkeley 2000
- J.B. Scholten, The Internal Structure of the Aitolian Union: A Case-study in Ancient Greek Sympoliteia, in The Idea of European Community in History, II. Aspects of Connecting Poleis and Ethne in Ancient Greece, Athens 2003, 65-80L. Boffo-M. Faraguna, Le ‘poleis’ e i loro archivi. Studi su pratiche documentarie, istituzioni e società nell’antichità greca, Trieste 2021.