Poine: a study in ancient Greek blood-vengeanceTreston, Hubert Joseph
History
Poine: a study in ancient Greek blood-vengeance
Treston, Hubert Joseph
Criminal law (Greek law); Greece -- Civilization; Greek drama (Tragedy) -- History and criticism; Homicide (Greek law); Vendetta
So far we have assumed that only two States were involved in the
homicide. But let us suppose that an Athenian slew a Theban at Argos. It
would seem that the Athenian slayer, if he elected to become an exile
rather than to die, was debarred from three places or rather three
States, namely, Athens, Thebes and Argos. Plato, speaking of involuntary
homicide between strangers, metics, and citizens, says[198]: ‘If a
stranger involuntarily kills a stranger in the city, let anyone who
wishes prosecute him in accordance with the same laws: if the slayer is a
metic, let him go into exile for a year: if he is a complete foreigner,
let him, if he shall have killed a stranger or a metic or a citizen, be
banished for his whole life from the country which has power over these
laws,[199] and if he returns contrary to the law let the guardians of
the laws punish him with death.’ The city which has ‘authority or power
in regard to these laws’ must be, in this case, the city in which the
deed took place. Thus, a person guilty of involuntary homicide could in
certain circumstances be debarred for ever from the place in which the
deed occurred, and for at least a year from the land of the victim and
also from his native land. Who could have enacted such laws except an
international authority?
The operation of such an authority is also revealed in the laws regarding
ἀνδροληψία, or the seizure of hostages, when a murderer was not tried or
punished by a ‘foreign’ State. A law which is attributed to Dracon, but
which clearly must have had its origin in some national or central Greek
authority of pre-Draconian days, reads as follows[200]: ‘If anyone dies
a violent death, his relations shall be entitled to take hostages on his
behalf, until (the people concerned) either challenge a verdict of murder
at a trial (δίκας τοῦ φόνου ὑπόσχωσιν) or extradite the slayers: and
the taking of hostages shall extend to three persons but not more.’ The
meaning of the law may be thus illustrated: if an Athenian slew a Theban
at Argos, and if the Argives ignored the deed, and no one prosecuted the
slayer, the relatives of the Theban could come to Argos and seize the
first three men whom they met, and hold them as hostages till the Argives
either tried the slayer or handed him up to the Thebans. We have taken an
extreme case, but it is such a case which Demosthenes has in mind when he
comments[201] on the law. In historical Greece, the duty of prosecution
was normally limited to the relatives of the slain. The slaying of
strangers was therefore likely to pass without prosecution. But this
right of ἀνδροληψία was an important corrective of the laxity of this
system. Relatives, living at a distance, ignorant of the actual slayer,
might be regarded as impotent since they knew not whom to accuse. But the
seizure of hostages would speed up the revelation of the criminal!
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account