OR 183A Decree to republish Draco’s law on homicide

Decree to republish Draco’s law on homicide

OR 183A Date: 621/0 BC or 409/8 BC

Diognetos of Phrearrhioi was secretary.^[1]

Decree of 409/8 Diokles was archon (409/8). The Council and the People decided. Akamantis^V was in prytany. Diognetos was secretary. Euthydikos was chairman. –phanes proposed: (5) the inscribers or writers-up (anagraphes) of the laws shall inscribe (anagraphsanton) Draco’s law on homicide,^[2] taking it over from the king (basileos),^[3] with the secretary of the Council, on a stone stele and set it down in front of the royal stoa (stoas tes basileias). The official sellers (poletai) shall make the contract in accordance with the law, and the Greek treasurers (hellenotamiai) shall provide the money.

“Draco’s law” (10) First axon.^[4] And or Even if anybody kills anybody not from forethought,^[5] he shall be exiled. The kings (basileas) shall pronounce responsible (dikazen) for homicide [the one who himself killed or the one?] who planned it; the appeal judges (ephetas) shall decide it (diagnonai). There shall be reconciliation (aidesasthai), if there are a father or brother or sons, to be granted by all, or the objector shall prevail. If these (15) do not exist, then as far as cousinhood and cousin, if they are all willing to grant reconciliation, or the objector shall prevail. If none of these exists but he killed unwillingly and the fifty-one appeal judges (ephetai) decide that he killed unwillingly, let ten members of the phratry allow him to enter if they are willing: let these be chosen by the fifty-one on the basis of their excellence (aristinden). And those who killed (20) previously shall be liable to this ordinance. There shall be a proclamation against the killer in the agora by those as far as cousinhood and cousin; there shall join in the prosecution cousins and cousins’ sons and brothers-in-law and fathers-in-law and phratry members . . . is responsible for homicide . . . the fifty- (25) one . . . convict of homicide . . . If anybody kills a killer, or is responsible for his being killed, when he is keeping away from a frontier market and Amphiktyonic contests and rites, he shall be liable to the same things as for killing an Athenian; the appeal judges (ephetas) shall decide . . . (36) . . . he is a free man. And if he kills a man by defending immediately when the man is forcibly and unjustly taking and removing, that man shall have been killed without penalty . . . . . . (56) Second axon. . . .

Previous - ML 85 Next - ML 87
Greek text

References:

OR 183A (Translated text) (AIO)

IG I³ 104 (IG Online) (PHI)

SEG 66.37

Syll.³ 111

Stroud, Drakon's Law, 42-7 (l. 12)

ML 86

Fornara, Translated documents 15

Koerner, Gesetzestexte 11

Nomima I, 02

Translation by: Stephen Lambert, P. J. Rhodes

Images: Aleshire - (1)
Athenian Democracy - (1)
Ohio - (1)

Monument type: Stele

Inscription type: Decree (Council and People), Law

Original location: Agora (Royal Stoa)

Findspot: Athens (EM 6602)

Transliterations on Places on

[1] Since the legislation of Solon in the early 6th cent. BC (conventionally 594/3 BC), there had been no systematic revision of Athenian law and in the fifth century the Assembly had been unconstrained in its scope to make decisions (or "decrees", psephismata). The laws of Athens had been at issue in the oligarchic revolution of 411, with the oligarchs claiming to restore the "ancestral laws" and reverse the "improper" changes made by the democracy. Against this background in 410/9 the restored democracy undertook a revision of the laws, about which we are richly informed in Lysias 30 and Andokides 1.81-84, albeit that the evidence of neither author can be taken at face value (both were making contentious cases) and the authenticity of the so-called "decree of Teisamenos" relating to the revision, preserved in the manuscripts of Andok. 1.83-84, is questionable. See M. Canevaro, "Making and changing laws in ancient Athens", in E. M. Harris, M. Canevaro eds., Oxford Handbook of Ancient Greek Law (forthcoming, this chapter published online 2015) sect. 6; cf. J. Shear, Polis and Revolution (2011), 70-101, 238-245. Certain facts about the process, however, seem clear. A committee of anagrapheis ("writers-up" or "inscribers") of the laws worked until the Thirty came to power in 404, and continued on the restoration of democracy in 403/2 until 400/399. Its task was not to make new laws, but to collect and rationalise existing law. One gains the impression from Lysias 30, a speech directed against one of the anagrapheis, Nikomachos, that the committee operated independently, but it is clear both from Andok. 1.81 and from the prescript to this inscription that they were required to submit their work to the Assembly for approval, following which it was to be inscribed and set up in the Royal Stoa (Stoa Basileios). Athenians liked to think of the laws in force as the "laws of Solon", and continued to refer to them in this way in the fourth century, albeit that the revision of 410/9-400/399 included post-Solonian elements (demonstrably the case with the sacrificial calendar). In homicide law, however, they continued to apply what they thought were the "ordinances (thesmoi) of Draco", a 7th-century lawgiver whose law on this subject was thought to have been the only part of a wider body of laws not to have been superseded by Solon's work (cf. Andokides 1.81-82; Ath. Pol. 7.1).

Apart from this inscription, other parts of the revised code surviving on stone are, from the first phase of the revision (410-404), laws about the Council of 500, IG I³ 105, a law about the trierarchy, IG I³ 236a, a law about taxes or contributions, IG I³ 237, a very fragmentary law of uncertain purpose, SEG 39.18, and the sacrificial calendar of Athens, SEG 52.48B. This first version of the revised sacrificial calendar was superseded by a second revision, carried out in 403/2-400/399, which is the only extant epigraphical product of the revision of the laws which postdates 403/2, SEG 52.48A.

At around the same time as this revision of the laws an official state archive seems to have been established in the Metroon in the Agora, in which were deposited papyrus (?) texts of both laws and decrees (J. Sickinger, Public Records and Archives in Classical Athens, 1999, 105-38; on this archive see also M. Faraguna, Historika 7, 2017, 23-52 = SEG 67.11). It is not clear whether all the revised laws produced in 410-399 were inscribed on stone, as well as being deposited in the archive. A special body of lawmakers (nomothetai) was appointed on the restoration of democracy in 403/2. They established the legislative system and principles that were to apply in the fourth-century democracy (see further Canevaro sect. 6). Under this system laws, made by the lawmakers (nomothetai), were formally distinguished from decrees of the Assembly, and the latter had to be in accordance with the law (for more detail see RO 25 with note 1). [2] It is uncertain how far the text inscribed authentically represents "Draco's law". [3] The Athenian archon of this description. [4] Solon's, and apparently Draco's, laws were published on axones (cf. Ath. Pol. 7.1, Plut. Sol. 25.1-2), which were perhaps four-sided wooden objects which revolved on axles, enabling the text on each side to be read by turning the "axle". [5] The Greek word kai with which this law begins can be translated "even" or "and". The latter is perhaps more likely here, in which case some material from the beginning of the law has been omitted from this republication. [6] The subject of most of the surviving part of Draco's law is involuntary homicide, for which the penalty is normally to be exile, unless the victim's close relations or, in the absence of such, phratry members (on phratries see IG II² 1237), come to an agreement with the killer (cf. Ath. Pol. 57.3). The case seems to be decided by the 51 ephetai (who may have been members of the Areopagos), in a court presided over by the "kings", i.e. the Athenian archon known as the "king" sitting with the leaders of the four old Ionian tribes (the phylobasileis. The old tribes had been superseded for most purposes by Cleisthenes' ten tribes, but retained some remnant functions, including in a sacrificial context, see SEG 52.48A, especially F3). E. M. Harris, Hyperboreus 22, 2016, 203-16 (= SEG 66.37), criticises the current restoration of ll. 33-35 (which we do not include), and reports that he is working on a new edition of the inscription.

Added: 8 Oct 2013
Updated: 7 Jan 2024
Feedback

ID: AIO_306