Glazebrook A., Prostituting Female Kin (Plu. Sol. 23.1-2), 2006.pdf

(183 KB) Pobierz
?
UNIVERSITÀ DEGLI STUDI DI MILANO
FACOLTÀ DI GIURISPRUDENZA
DIKE
Rivista di storia del diritto greco ed ellenistico
8
2006
?
INDICE
A
TENE
Delfim F. Leão
Sólon e a legislação em matéria de direito familiar
Allison Glazebrook
Prostituting Female Kin (Plut. Sol. 23.1-2)
Richard V. Cudjoe
The Purpose of the «epidikasia» for an «epikleros» in Classical Athens
5
33
55
C
HIO
Michele Faraguna
Terra pubblica e vendite di immobili confiscati a Chio
nel V secolo a.C.
89
L
OCRI
E
PIZEFIRI
Vania Ghezzi
I Locresi e la legge del laccio
101
R
ASSEGNA
CRITICA
Martin Dreher
Bürgerstaat und Basisdemokratie
(«Ideologische Begriffe in der Geschichtswissenschaft», 1)
115
L
ETTURE
Ilias N. Arnaoutoglou
Panayotis D. Dimakis: in memoriam
Alberto Maffi
Nuove pubblicazioni
163
171
?
Allison Glazebrook
PROSTITUTING FEMALE KIN
(Plut.
Sol.
23.1-2)
Although Solon’s reforms seem to have averted a crisis in Athens,
brought greater protection to the people, and recognized «Athenian»
as an identity
1
, it is commonly acknowledged that his
nÒmoi
2
relat-
ing to women had few benefits for women themselves (Blundell
1995, p. 75; Fantham
et al.
1994, pp. 74-76; Just 1989, pp. 22-23;
Arthur 1973, p. 36). They restricted the number of garments women
could wear in public to three, calculated the amount of food and
drink they could carry on their person to one obol’s worth, lim-
ited their movements at night, and reduced women’s involvement
in funerary ritual (Plut.
Sol.
21; Dem. 43.62-63). The laws relating
to marriage customs limited the amount of their dowry and trous-
seau (Sol. 20)
3
. These laws most commonly affected elite women,
and thus the elite in general, since they limited the use of female
adornment in conveying status and reduced the ostentation of mar-
riages and also public funerals by eliminating hired mourners
4
.
See Solon, fr. 4; Arist.
Ath. Pol.
5-10 and Plut.
Sol.
13-25, on the nature of the crisis
and his reforms. See Patterson (2005, pp. 270-273), Lape (2002-2003), Manville (1990,
pp. 124-126, 132-136, 143-147, 156) and Halperin (1990) on Solon as the creator and
restrictor of the concept of Athenian citizenship.
2
From here on translated as «laws».
3
There is some debate as to whether
fern»
refers to dowry (Leduc 1992, p. 286) or
simply trousseau (Vernant 1980, rpt. 1996, p. 67). Leduc argues that
fern»
does refer
to a dowry, since limits on the trousseau follow, and suggests that Solon restricted the
dowry by no longer allowing land, traditionally accompanying the bride sometime in
the past, as part of the dowry.
4
On the laws in general see Arthur (1973, pp. 31-36); Blundell (1995, p. 162); Fan-
tham
et al.
(1994, pp. 46-47, 75-76). For such legislation, particularly in the case of fu-
nerals, as curbing female behaviour and the use of women as a medium of elite display
and also reducing rivalry between kinship groups see Humphreys (1983, pp. 85-87), Just
1
34
Allison Glazebrook
They further were likely intended to protect the integrity of the
household and its property (Arthur 1973, pp. 33-34; Blundell 1995,
p. 75; Fantham 1994, p. 75; Lape 2002-2003, pp. 120-126). Such
laws, however, also had an impact on women generally and per-
haps reflect changing gender roles with the rise of the polis and the
importance of marriage in conveying status to offspring in Athens
(Arthur 1973, p. 36; Lape 2002-2003, pp. 129-130) now that citizen-
ship became dear (a trend that would continue as democracy de-
veloped)
5
. Restrictions on women’s movement, for example, reflect
a desire to control licentiousness, as Plutarch comments (Sol. 21),
but more specifically female sexuality – afterall, Euphiletus’ wife got
involved with Eratosthenes after he had seen her at the funeral of
Euphiletus’ mother (Lys. 1.8).
The foci of this paper are the laws on sexual misconduct involv-
ing women attributed to Solon. The most comprehensive passage
on these laws is Plutarch’s
Sol.
23.1-2, where they are referred to as
oƒ perˆ tîn gunaikîn nÒmoi
. I quote them in full here with the well-
known Loeb translation by Bernadotte Perrin:
moicÕn mþn g¦r ¢nele‹n tù labÒnti dšdwken: ™¦n d’¡rp£sV tij ™leu-
qšran guna‹ka kaˆ bi£shtai, zhm…an ˜katÕn dracm¦j œtaxe, k¨n proa-
gwgeÚV, dracm¦j e‡kosi, pl¾n Ósai pefasmšnwj pwloàntai, lšgwn t¦j
˜ta…raj: aátai g¦r ™mfanîj foitîsi prÕj toÝj didÒntaj. [2] œti d'oÜte
qugatšraj pwle‹n oÜt'¢delf¦j d…dwsi, pl¾n ¨n m¾ l£bV parqšnon ¢ndrˆ
suggegenhmšnhn.
6
… [Solon] permitted an adulterer caught in the act to be killed; but if
a man committed rape upon a free woman, he was merely to be fined
a hundred drachmas; and if he gained his end by persuasion, twenty
drachmas, unless it were with one of those who sell themselves openly,
(1989, p. 198) and Seaford (1994, pp. 74-86).
Contra
Blok who argues that funerary leg-
islation was «meant to regulate the relations between the living and the dead» (p. 197)
and thus minimize pollution (2006, pp. 197-247). On the significance of the funerary
restrictions to women’s relation to the public sphere see Alexiou (1974, pp. 21-22).
5
Scholars commonly attribute a concept of citizenship to Solon. See Lape (2002-
2003, p. 127 and n. 1 above). Cantarella, however, argues for such a change and concern
as early as Drakon (1987, pp. 39-40) and (2005, p. 240). See also Gagarin who argues that
while Solon appears to have recognized some concept of citizenship, Drakon also «ap-
pears to associate certain rights with the status of being an Athenian» (1986, pp. 80, 140).
6
Greek text is from the Teubner edition (Ziegler, 4
th
edn, 1969, pp. 82-123). Note
that Perrin follows Bekker (Tauchnitz, 1855) and so reads
lšgwn d¾ t¦j ˜ta…raj
instead
of
lšgwn t¦j ˜ta…raj
.

Plik z chomika:

Inne pliki z tego folderu:

Inne foldery tego chomika:

Zgłoś jeśli naruszono regulamin