CIDV 534 Manumission at Delphi of Arsinoa, slave of Xenon

Manumission at Delphi of Arsinoa, slave of Xenon

CID V 534 Date: 153/2–144/3 BC

In the archonship of Eukles at Delphi^[1], in the month of Poitropios, when the members of the Council for the first six months were Eudokos son of Praxias and Hagesilaos son of Tarantinos, when Politas son of Asandros was secretary, and in Athens Xenokles was general in the month of Posideon. On the following conditions, Xenon son of Philistos (5)of Athens^[2] has sold to Apollo Pythios a female body (sōma gunaikeion), whose name is Arsinoa of homeborn birth, for the price of ten minas of silver^[3], and he has the whole price, inasmuch as Arsinoa entrusted the purchase to the god, on the condition that she be free and unclaimable as property (anephaptos) by anyone for her whole life, doing whatever she wishes and departing wherever she wishes. Guarantor (bebaiōtēr) (10)according to the law of the city: Eudokos son of Praxias of Delphi.^[4] If anyone should seize Arsinoa with a view to enslaving Uninscribed space her, let both the seller Xenon and the guarantor Eudokos provide the deed of sale (15)to the god under guarantee. If they should not provide the deed of sale to the god under guarantee, let them be liable (praktimoi) according to the law of the city, and similarly let anyone who happens to be present have the power to seize Arsinoa (from them), since (20)she is free, (and let them) not be accountable or subject to any charge or fine. Witnesses: Nikolaos son of Timon, Kallimachos and Hybrilaos sons of Mnasidamos, Andron son of Xenokles, Philistos son of Xenon, Chaleians. Dionysios son of Iranion, Babylos (25)son of Aiakidas, Laiadas son of Babylos, Xenon son of Xenokritos Damophilos son of Herakleidas, Timokritos son of Eukleidas, Delphians.

Greek text

References:

CID V 534 (Translated text) (AIO)

SGDI II 2089 (PHI)

Translation by: Jonas Osnabrügge

Images: Archimage - (1, 2)

Monument type: Wall

Inscription type: Decree (Manumission record)

Findspot: Delphi (Great Polygonal Wall, section 50) (In situ)

Transliterations on Places on

[1] This decree belongs to a series of over a thousand manumissions recorded in the sanctuary of Delphi, ranging from the late third century BC to the first century AD (the manumission records from Delphi are now collected in CID V.1; on manumissions at Athens, see Meyer, Metics, no. 1 with notes; on Attic inscriptions at Delphi, see IG II³ 4, 17 with notes). The manumission was usually enacted through the fictitious sale of a slave to the god Apollo. This was necessary because slaves were legally incapable of acting as a contracting party, even if they acquired the resources to buy their freedom (cf. H. Rädle, Historia 19, 1970, 613-17). This text, inscribed on three blocks of the great polygonal wall, which supports the south side of the terrace of the Temple of Apollo, records the manumission of Arsinoa, formerly a slave of Xenon son of Philistos of Athens (on whom, see n. 2). Like most slaves manumitted at Delphi, Arsinoa was female (cf. C. W. Tucker, TAPhS 112, 1984, 225-36). As guarantor (bebaioter), Eudokos son of Praxias, a member of the council at Delphi (ll.1-2; on whom, see n. 4), is responsible and liable for the process of fictitious sale to Apollo and manumission. The text follows the standard structure of these manumission documents (cf. J. D. Sosin, TAPA 145, 2015, 328–31): a date, establishing a synchronism between the magistrates of Delphi and the city or cities from which the parties involved come (in this case, Athens; cf. S. Follet, Topoi 8, 1998, 244), followed by the names of master and slave (ll. 4–5). After that, the price is stated (l. 5), followed by what can be understood as a receipt of payment (l. 6: “and he [i.e. Xenon] has the whole price”). The subsequent clauses state the conditions of Arsinoa’s freedom (ll. 7–10). This decree lacks a paramone-clause, which required the slave to remain with their former master to perform certain services for them (roughly a third of the decrees from Delphi include this clause, cf. Sosin, 2015, 325). Then, the guarantor of the manumission and his responsibility to assure Arsinoa’s freedom are recorded (ll. 10–15), followed by a grant of legal immunity to anyone intervening on Arsinoa’s behalf to secure her liberty (ll. 17–20). The final lines list the witnesses, in this case five people from Chaleion and six from Delphi. The archon Eukles served during the sixth Delphic priesthood (153/2–144/3 BC). CID V p. 376 dates his archonship to 145/4 BC, but this is speculative. [2] The Athenian provenance of the seller Xenon son of Philistos has been strongly questioned for two reasons: the appearance of a Philistos son of Xenon from Chaleion, in the list of witnesses (ll. 23-24) and the use of a general instead of the eponymous archon in the Athenian date (l. 3). G. Daux proposed that Xenon was related to Philistos of Chaleion and was a citizen of Chaleion who had been honoured with Athenian citizenship (on Athenian citizenship grants in the Hellenistic period, see G. J. Oliver in J.-C. Couvenhes and S. Milanezi, Individus, groupes et politique à Athènes, 2007, 273–92), but this does not explain the irregular dating formula. Several solutions to the issues surrounding the provenance or citizenship of Xenon and the dating formula have been proposed, but so far, none of them are fully satisfactory (G. Daux, Delphes au II^e et au I^er siècle, 1936, 646-47; S. Follet, 1998, 244 n. 4; Mulliez, CID V p. 458). [3] Ten minas (= 1000 drachmae) was a rather high price for a female slave; they were usually manumitted at a cost of three to five minas. Arsinoa may have had special talents or skills which would explain such a high price. However, such details are rarely mentioned in manumissions (cf. Tucker, 1984, 226). [4] The guarantor, Eudokos son of Praxias, was also one of the Delphic councillors during the first six months of this year (ll. 1-2) and is named elsewhere as a magistrate of Delphi (cf. CID V 462; 535; 536; 539). He also appears as guarantor in seven other manumission decrees from Delphi between ca. 170 and 130 BC (CID V 318; 373; 379; 460; 551; 574; 589; and F.Delphes III 3, 59), as witness in several other manumission documents (CID V 535; 536; 539; 462), and appears in an uncertain role in F.Delphes III 3, 243, l. 3.

Added: 5 Jun 2023
Updated: 1 Dec 2023
Feedback

ID: AIO_2624