The Solonian Amnesty Law (Plu. Sol. 19.3–4) and the Athenian Law on Homicide

IF 0.1 3区 历史学 0 CLASSICS CLASSICAL JOURNAL Pub Date : 2021-12-30 DOI:10.1353/tcj.2021.0006
Christopher J. Joyce
{"title":"The Solonian Amnesty Law (Plu. Sol. 19.3–4) and the Athenian Law on Homicide","authors":"Christopher J. Joyce","doi":"10.1353/tcj.2021.0006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Ever since Ruschenbusch published his seminal study of the laws of Solon, the near universal assumption in scholarship has been that the Solonian ‘amnesty law’, quoted by Plutarch, is a genuine document. Yet, scholars have found no convincing route around the problem identified by Plutarch, that the law as cited cannot combine with the silence of Draco about the Areopagus. This paper argues that the text which Plutarch quoted at Sol. 19.3, Solon’s ‘amnesty law’, was authentic, but for none of the reasons conventionally given. A fresh consideration of the law on homicide will lead to the conclusion that its original purpose was to limit the power of the magistrate to inflict punishment, and to protect the rights of the killer by taking account of extenuating circumstances such as involuntary or lawful killing. Draco did not need to refer to the Areopagus because, by unwritten tradition, this was the court before which all homicide cases had previously been tried, without possibility of appeal. The first written law on homicide transferred jurisdiction from the Areopagus to other courts in the event of extenuating circumstances, such as justifiable or involuntary killing, which explains Draco’s silence.","PeriodicalId":35668,"journal":{"name":"CLASSICAL JOURNAL","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CLASSICAL JOURNAL","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/tcj.2021.0006","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"CLASSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract:Ever since Ruschenbusch published his seminal study of the laws of Solon, the near universal assumption in scholarship has been that the Solonian ‘amnesty law’, quoted by Plutarch, is a genuine document. Yet, scholars have found no convincing route around the problem identified by Plutarch, that the law as cited cannot combine with the silence of Draco about the Areopagus. This paper argues that the text which Plutarch quoted at Sol. 19.3, Solon’s ‘amnesty law’, was authentic, but for none of the reasons conventionally given. A fresh consideration of the law on homicide will lead to the conclusion that its original purpose was to limit the power of the magistrate to inflict punishment, and to protect the rights of the killer by taking account of extenuating circumstances such as involuntary or lawful killing. Draco did not need to refer to the Areopagus because, by unwritten tradition, this was the court before which all homicide cases had previously been tried, without possibility of appeal. The first written law on homicide transferred jurisdiction from the Areopagus to other courts in the event of extenuating circumstances, such as justifiable or involuntary killing, which explains Draco’s silence.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
《梭罗大赦法》索尔19.3-4)和雅典的杀人法
摘要:自从Ruschenbusch发表了他对梭伦法律的开创性研究以来,学术界几乎普遍的假设是,普鲁塔克引用的梭伦“大赦法”是一份真实的文件。然而,学者们没有找到令人信服的途径来解决普鲁塔克所指出的问题,即所引用的法律不能与德拉科对阿雷奥巴古的沉默相结合。本文认为,普鲁塔克在Sol. 19.3中引用的文本,即梭伦的“大赦法”,是真实的,但没有任何传统给出的原因。重新审议关于杀人的法律将得出这样的结论,即其最初目的是限制治安法官施加惩罚的权力,并通过考虑到诸如非自愿或合法杀人等可减轻罪行的情况来保护凶手的权利。德拉科不需要提到阿略帕古,因为根据不成文的传统,所有杀人案都是在这个法庭审理的,没有上诉的可能。第一部关于杀人罪的成文法将司法管辖权从阿律巴古转移到其他法院,在情有可原的情况下,比如正当的或非自愿的杀人,这解释了德拉科的沉默。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CLASSICAL JOURNAL
CLASSICAL JOURNAL Arts and Humanities-Classics
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: The Classical Journal (ISSN 0009–8353) is published by the Classical Association of the Middle West and South (CAMWS), the largest regional classics association in the United States and Canada, and is now over a century old. All members of CAMWS receive the journal as a benefit of membership; non-member and library subscriptions are also available. CJ appears four times a year (October–November, December–January, February–March, April–May); each issue consists of about 100 pages.
期刊最新文献
The Fluidity of Gender Roles in Catullus: A New Interpretation of Poem 11 Introducing Superhero Tales into the Classroom: Greek Myth and the Changing Nature of Story A Learned Dog: Roman Elegy and the Epitaph for Margarita The Decree Culture of Greek Sanctuaries (Delos, Delphi, the Amphiareion at Oropos and Elsewhere): The Epigraphic Dimension Education in Late Antiquity: Challenges, Dynamism, and Reinterpretation, 300–550 CE by Jan R. Stenger (review)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1