Defining Citizenship in Archaic Greece ed. by Alain Duplouy and Roger Brock (review)

he edited volume under review began as two conferences in 2009 and 2010. The contributors are all respected scholars in the field who represent an array of methodological approaches to citizenship. The uniting factor is the recognition of the archaic period as a valuable era of study in its own right, rather than solely a precursor to the classical age, and an overt rejection of the traditional view of citizenship based on Aristotle’s standard of holding office and administering justice. Looking beyond an institutional definition of citizenship that privileges political office, the volume showcases what it meant for the Greeks of the archaic period to be citizens from the standpoint of descent and participation. An examination of the table of contents reveals the impressive range of contributions. The chapters explore the role of military obligations, commensality, religion, athletics, associations, luxury and other community delimiting activities. The volume serves both as a compilation of the current state of scholarship on archaic Greek citizenship and as a call to action, with some chapters laying the groundwork for future developments in the field. Rather than produce the most cursory summaries of all the chapters within the constraints of this review, I will instead highlight representative chapters, in particular those that gesture towards new directions for the field. Thus, exclusion by no means indicates a lack of quality or appeal. The book opens with Duplouy’s wide-ranging survey that lays out traditional approaches to citizenship and the general response to them of the past couple of decades. Announcing from the outset that his survey will not be comprehensive, he manages to dip into controversies without getting bogged down. Despite his caveat, the chapter is a useful outline of the main currents of scholarship for those wishing to situate the chapters that follow.