IGI3 40 Athenian relations with Chalkis

Athenian relations with Chalkis

IG I³ 40 Date: 446/5 (or 424/3?) BC

ἔδοχσεν τε͂[ι β]ολε͂ι καὶ το͂ι δέοι. Ἀντιοχὶς ἐ[πρυτ]- άνευε· Δρακ[ον]τίδες ἐπεστάτε. Διόγνετος εἶπε· κατὰ τάδε τὸν ℎόρκον ὀμόσαι Ἀθεναίον τ- ὲν βολὲν καὶ τὸς δικαστάς· οὐκ ἐχσελο͂ Χα- (5)λκιδέας ἐχ Χαλκίδος οὐδὲ τὲν πόλιν ἀνά- στατον ποέσο οὐδὲ ἰδιότεν οὐδένα ἀτιμ- όσο οὐδὲ φυγε͂ι ζεμιόσο οὐδὲ χσυλλέφσο- μαι οὐδὲ ἀποκτενο͂ οὐδὲ χρέματα ἀφαιρέ- σομαι ἀκρίτο οὐδενὸς ἄνευ το͂ δέμο το͂ Ἀθ- (10)εναίον, οὐδ’ ἐπιφσεφιο͂ κατὰ ἀπροσκλέτο οὔτε κατὰ το͂ κοινο͂ οὔτε κατὰ ἰδιότο οὐδ- ὲ ἑνός, καὶ πρεσβείαν ἐλθο͂σαν προσάχσο πρὸς βολὲν καὶ δε͂μον δέκα ἑμερο͂ν ℎόταν πρυτανεύο κατὰ τὸ δυνατόν. ταῦτα δὲ ἐμπ̣- (15)[ε]δόσο Χαλκιδεῦσιν πειθομένοις το͂ι δέ- [μ]οι το͂ι Ἀθεναίον. ℎορκο͂σαι δὲ πρεσβεία- [ν] ἐλθο͂σαν ἐχ Χαλκίδος μετὰ το͂ν ℎορκοτο͂- ν Ἀθεναίος καὶ ἀπογράφσαι τὸς ὀμόσαντ- ας. ℎόπος δ’ ἂν [ὀ]μόσοσιν ℎάπαντες, ἐπιμελ- (20)όσθον ℎοι στ[ρ]ατεγοί. vacat κατὰ τάδε Χαλκιδέας ὀμόσαι· οὐκ ἀπο[σ]τέ- σομαι ἀπὸ το͂ [δ]έμο το͂ Ἀθεναίον οὔτε τέ[χ]ν- ει οὔτε μεχανε͂ι οὐδεμιᾶι οὐδ’ ἔπει οὐδὲ ἔργοι οὐδὲ το͂ι ἀφισταμένοι πείσομαι, κ- (25)αὶ ἐὰν ἀφιστε͂ι τις κατερο͂ Ἀθεναίοισι, κ- αὶ τὸν φόρον ℎυποτελο͂ Ἀθεναίοισιν, ℎὸν ἂν πείθο Ἀθεναίος, καὶ χσύμμαχος ἔσομα- ι ℎοῖος ἂν δύνομαι ἄριστος καὶ δικαιότ- ατος καὶ το͂ι δέμοι το͂ι Ἀθεναίον βοεθέσ- (30)ο καὶ ἀμυνο͂, ἐάν τις ἀδικε͂ι τὸν δε͂μον τὸν Ἀθεναίον, καὶ πείσομαι το͂ι δέμοι το͂ι Ἀθ- εναίον. ὀμόσαι δὲ Χαλκιδέον τὸς ℎεβο͂ντ- ας ℎάπαντας· ℎὸς δ’ ἂμ μὲ ὀμόσει, ἄτιμον αὐτ- ὸν ἐ͂ναι καὶ τὰ χρέματα αὐτο͂ δεμόσια καὶ (35)το͂ Διὸς το͂ Ὀλυμπίο τὸ ἐπιδέκατον ℎιερὸ- ν ἔστο το͂ν χρεμάτον. ℎορκο͂σαι δὲ πρεσβε- ίαν Ἀθεναίον ἐλθο͂σαν ἐς Χαλκίδα μετὰ τ- ο͂ν ℎορκοτο͂ν το͂ν ἐν Χαλκίδι καὶ ἀπογράφ- σαι τὸς ὀμόσαντας Χαλκιδέον. vacat (40)Ἀντικλε͂ς εἶπε· ἀγαθε͂ι τύχει τε͂ι Ἀθεναί- ον ποε͂σθαι τὸν ℎόρκον Ἀθεναίος καὶ Χαλ- κιδέας, καθάπερ Ἐρετριεῦσι ἐφσεφίσατ- ο ℎο δε͂μος ℎο Ἀθεναίον· ℎόπος δ’ ἂν τάχιστ- α γίγνεται, ἐπιμελόσθον ℎοι στρατεγοί. (45)ℎοίτινες δὲ ἐχσορκόσοσι ἀφικόμενοι ἐ- ς Χαλκίδα, ἑλέσθαι τὸν δε͂μον πέντε ἄνδρ- ας αὐτίκα μάλα. περὶ δὲ το͂ν ℎομέρον ἀποκ- ρίνασθαι Χαλκιδεῦσιν, ℎότι νῦμ μὲν Ἀθε- ναίοις δοκεῖ ἐᾶν κατὰ τὰ ἐφσεφισμένα· ℎ- (50)όταν δὲ δοκε͂ι βολευσάμενοι ποέσοσι τὲ- ν διαλλα[γ]έν, καθότι ἂν δοκε͂ι ἐπιτέδ̣ειο- ν ἐ͂ναι Ἀθεναίοις καὶ Χαλκιδεῦσιν. τὸς δ- ὲ χσένος τὸς ἐν Χαλκίδι, ℎόσοι οἰκο͂ντες μὲ τελο͂σιν Ἀθέναζε, καὶ εἴ τοι δέδοται ℎ- (55)υπὸ το͂ δέμο το͂ Ἀθεναίον ἀτέλεια, τὸς δὲ ἄ- λλος τελε͂ν ἐς Χαλκίδα, καθάπερ ℎοι ἄλλο- ι Χαλκιδέες. τὸ δὲ φσέφισμα τόδε καὶ τὸν ℎόρκον ἀναγράφσαι, Ἀθένεσι μὲν τὸν γρα- μμ[α]τέα τε͂ς βολε͂ς ἐστέλει λιθίνει καὶ κ- (60)αταθε͂ναι ἐς πόλιν τέλεσι τοῖς Χαλκιδέ- ον, ἐν δὲ Χαλκίδι ἐν το͂ι ℎιερο͂ι το͂ Διὸς το͂ Ὀλυμπίο ℎε βολὲ Χαλκιδέον ἀναγράφσασ- α καταθέτο. ταῦτα μὲν φσεφίσασθαι Χαλκ̣- ιδεῦσιν. ^vvvv τὰ δὲ ℎιερὰ τὰ ἐκ το͂ν χρεσμ- (65)ο͂ν ℎυπὲρ Εὐβοίας θῦσαι ὁς τάχιστα μετὰ ℎιεροκλέος τρε͂ς ἄνδρας, ℎὸς ἂν ἕλεται ℎ̣- ε βολὲ σφο͂ν αὐτο͂ν· ℎόπος δ’ ἂν τάχιστα τυθ- ε͂ι, ℎοι στρατεγοὶ συνεπιμελόσθον καὶ τ- ὸ ἀργύριον ἐς ταῦτα [π]αρεχόντον. vacat (70)Ἀρχέστρατο[ς] εἶπε· τὰ μὲν ἄλλα καθάπερ Ἀ- ντικλε͂ς· τὰς δὲ εὐθύνας Χαλκιδεῦσι κατ- ὰ σφο͂ν αὐτο͂ν ἐ͂ναι ἐν Χαλκίδι καθάπερ Ἀθ- ένεσιν Ἀθεναίοις πλὲν φυγε͂ς καὶ θανάτ- ο καὶ ἀτιμίας· περὶ δὲ τούτον ἔφεσιν ἐ͂να- (75)ι Ἀθέναζε ἐς τὲν ἑλιαίαν τὲν το͂ν θεσμοθ- ετο͂ν κατὰ τὸ φσέφισμα το͂ δέμο· περὶ δὲ φυ- λακε͂ς Εὐβοίας τὸς στρατηγὸς ἐπιμέλεσ- θαι ℎος ἂν δύνονται ἄριστα, ℎόπος ἂν ἔχε- ι ℎος βέλτιστα Ἀθεναίοις. (80) ℎόρκος.

Previous - Syll.³ 52 Next - Syll.³ 65
Translated text

References:

IG I³ 40 (Translated text) (IG Online) (PHI) (AIO)

SEG 67.24

Syll.³ 64

ML 52

Fornara, Translated documents 103

Axon 445 (Axon)

AIO Papers 8 pp. 11-31 (AIO Paper)

OR 131

Translation by: Stephen Lambert, Robin Osborne

Images: Acropolis Museum - (1)
Aleshire - (1)
Ohio - (1)

Monument type: Stele

Inscription type: Decree 1 (Council/People?), Decree 2 (People), Decree 3 (Council/People?)

Original location: Acropolis

Findspot: Acropolis (Acropolis Museum 6509)

Transliterations on Places on

[1] For a fuller discussion of this inscription see AIO Papers 8, section 2 (SEG 67.24).

Thuc. 1.113-14 records that, after the Athenian defeat at Koroneia in spring 446 BC, and subsequent withdrawal from Boeotia, Euboea revolted. The revolt was put down by Pericles, who reached agreement with the other cities, but removed the population from Hestiaia, settling it with Athenians. This inscription belongs most plausibly in this context, though it can not be ruled out that it dates to 424/3, when, according to FGH 328 Philochoros F130, the Athenians campaigned against Euboea (not mentioned by Thucydides). The later date is argued for by H. Mattingly at CQ 52, 2002, 377-79, and in A. P. Matthaiou and R. K. Pitt eds., Athenaion Episkopos. Studies ... Mattingly, 2014, 11-18, cf. N. Papazarkadas in J. Ma et al. eds. Interpreting the Athenian Empire, 73-74, and cf. SEG 67.24.

According to Herodotos, in 506 BC Athens invaded Euboea, defeated the Chalkidians in battle and confiscated the land belonging to the hippobotai there (“horse-rearers”, a wealthy aristocracy, cf. Aristotle, Pol. 1289b 36-39 and F618), giving it to 4,000 Athenian settlers (“cleruchs”), adding the detail that they kept those hippobotai whom they captured in fetters, releasing them in due course for a ransom of two minai each. The fetters, says Herodotos were still to be seen on the acropolis in his time (Hdt. 5.77; for the Athenian victory dedication see IG I³ 501). Plut. Per. 23 narrates the Euboean revolt of 446 in terms similar to Thucydides, but locates the expulsion of the hippobotai in this context, probably misplacing in time the expulsion recorded by Herodotos. There is also a garbled recollection of Herodotos' narrative at Aelian, VH 6.1. Thucydides implies that in 446 there were expulsions only from Hestiaia and that seems consistent with the terms of the oath sworn by the Athenians at ll. 4 ff. of this inscription (applicable to Chalkis and Eretria). AIUK 4.2 no. 3 is usually taken to be the decree providing for the Athenian settlement in Hestiaia in 446 BC, though some scholars have thought that it too dates to 424/3. [2] This stele, labelled at the bottom OATH, may have belonged in a pair with another to the left, containing the text of a treaty between Chalkis and Athens and perhaps labelled TREATY (SYNTHEKAI). Part of an oath in identical wording is preserved as IG I³ 39, and is usually taken to be from the oath for Eretria (q.v. however for a different suggestion). Decrees containing interstate agreements sealed by oaths to the gods were especially appropriate to be inscribed and set up in the sacred heart of the city, the acropolis. [3] Seems to imply that the Assembly regularly met four times a prytany (i.e. every 9-10 days) at this period, as it did in the 4th century (Ath. Pol. 43.3). [4] In contrast to the oath in the decree about Erythrai, IG I³ 14, ll. 21-29, the wording in ll. 22-31 binds the Chalkidians to be loyal to Athens alone; there is no mention of its allies. On the other hand, unlike in Erythrai, Athens does not in this decree interfere in Chalkis' internal constitutional arrangements, perhaps because it was already a democracy. [5] Following the suppression of the revolt, Athens had apparently taken hostages from Chalkis to guarantee their good behaviour. Chalkis had now made an approach for them to be released or exchanged, which the Athenians here rebuff for the time being. On the meaning of diallagē in 51, "reconciliation" (i.e. between Athens and Chalkis), or "exchange", see Papazarkadas, SEG 67.24. [6] The first part of this obscurely worded provision seems to represent a concession to Chalkis: foreigners there are to be obliged to pay taxes to Chalkis. It goes on to specify, however, that exceptions are to be made for foreigners who are residents of Chalkis and therefore exempt from Athenian taxation, and for those who enjoy special privileges of tax exemption at Athens. Neither of these groups, it seems, is to be liable to Chalkidian taxes. We do not know enough of the background to see whether this represents a tax privilege at Chalkis for Athenian residents of Chalkis (including cleruchs?) and those specially favoured by Athens. It may be that taxes on trade are partly or mainly at issue, in which case, even if Athenian residents of Chalkis were tax exempt, Athenian citizen or metic traders with Chalkis who were not actually resident there would still be obliged to pay taxes to Chalkis on goods traded. [7] Apparently a specialist in oracles (chresmologos) from, or associated with, Hestiaia, referred to by Aristophanes, Peace 1047 (421 BC) and Eupolis Poleis F231 K-A (about the same time). His involvement here was perhaps connected in some way with the more radical measures taken by Athens against Hestiaia in 446. [8] We take euthynai here, as invariably in inscriptions in such contexts, to refer to the processes whereby officials were held to account. By the time of Antiphon 5.47 (ca. 420) it seems that Athens insisted that all cases arising in allied cities and involving the death penalty be referred to Athens.

Added: 20 Jan 2016
Updated: 22 May 2023
Feedback

ID: AIO_1029