POINE

A STUDY IN ANCIENT
GREEK BLOOD-VENGEANCE

By
HUBERT J. TRESTON, M.A.
PROFESSOR OF ANCIENT CLASSICS IN
UNIVERSITY COLLEGE,
CORK

Rien de ce qu’ont pensé les Hellènes n’est indifférent
à l’histoire de la civilisation.—Glotz

LONGMANS, GREEN AND CO.
39 PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON, E.C. 4
NEW YORK, TORONTO
BOMBAY, CALCUTTA AND MADRAS
1923

Made in Great Britain

PREFACE

It has not been my purpose in writing this book to occupy myself in expanding or discussing some articles written on Greek criminal law in a learned dictionary of antiquities. While it is true that ancient law, however crude and obscure its expression, is not so repulsive, so inhumanly technical as medieval or modern law, and while it is also true that a writer on Greek blood-vengeance cannot avoid an occasional reference to legal formulae and technique, nevertheless I feel that a merely legal treatise would not advance the prospects of Greek education or our knowledge of Greek civilisation, for the simple reason that no one but a professed student of ancient law could be induced to read it!

This work is intended rather as a supplement to the study of Greek literature, history, and archaeology. The first part contains an analysis of important elements of Homeric civilisation, an account of the different strata in the Homeric society and of the religious beliefs and practices of the Homeric Greeks. This section owes much to the pioneer work of Ridgeway and of Leaf; it carries, so to speak, into remote corners and crevices the light which their genius has thrown on the general nature and structure of early Greek society.

The second part is concerned with the Middle Age of Hellenism (1000 B.C.-600 B.C.): it is an attempt to explain the social and religious evolution of the Hellenes and to interpret the homicide laws of the historical period in the light of that evolution. This section is inevitably the most ‘legal’ portion of the work, but an effort is made, even at the cost of what might appear excessive repetition, to avoid an unduly technical exposition, and the literary aspect of the subject is constantly emphasised.

The third part is an enquiry into the origin and development of the legends which are found in Attic tragedy. These legends are permeated with references to homicide, and I have attempted to render less obscure and difficult the problems of blood-vengeance which they contain. As such an attempt would be utterly impossible without a previous discussion of the homicide laws of Greece, the account of these laws which I have given in the second part of the work should be regarded as a necessary preliminary to the subsequent analysis of these legends.

The extent of my indebtedness to modern writers on this and kindred subjects is sufficiently indicated in the footnotes and the second section of the Index. I must, however, express, in addition, my obligations to Professor Goligher, of Trinity College, Dublin, for his kind encouragement, assistance, and advice.

My best thanks are due to my friend and colleague, Mr. W. H. Porter, for his generous co-operation in reading and correcting the proofs of this work and for his valuable criticisms and suggestions. In particular, I owe to him the alteration which I have adopted, on p. 195, in connection with the restored Draconian inscription.

I should like also to record my appreciation of the accuracy and efficiency of Messrs. Spottiswoode, Ballantyne & Co.’s Reader.

H. J. T.

Cork, June 1923.

CONTENTS

PAGES
BOOK I
POINE IN HOMER
CHAPTER I
Section I: The general principles of blood-vengeance, analysed and illustrated: modes of vengeance of modern races in the Balkans, in the Mediterranean area, and in South America: modes of the ancient Germans, the Anglo-Saxons, and the Welsh: Burgundian, Norman, Israelite systems[1-11]
Section II: Nature of the Homeric Society: Views of Leaf and Ridgeway: feudal militarism and tribalism[12-22]
CHAPTER II
The Pelasgian system of blood-vengeance: current views explained and criticised: author’s view: proofs from the text of Homer: question of a distinction between murder and manslaughter, and between justifiable and unjustifiable homicide: collectivity in vengeance[23-63]
CHAPTER III
The Achaean system explained according to author’s theory: proofs from Homeric text: question of discrimination, amongst Achaeans, between murder and manslaughter, and between justifiable and unjustifiable homicide: no collectivity or solidarity in vengeance[64-77]
CHAPTER IV
Judicial aspect of homicide in early Greece: current views criticised: author’s theory based on distinction between Achaean and Pelasgian societies: arguments from survivals in historical times: meaning of δικασπόλοι βασιλῆες: the Trial Scene in the Homeric Shield of Achilles: origin of trials for homicide[78-94]
CHAPTER V
Religious aspect of homicide in early Greece: current views: digression on evolution of Greek religion: ancestor-worship: nature-worship: animal sacra: image-magic: anthropomorphism: Achaean and Pelasgian contributions to Homeric religion: fusion of Achaean and Pelasgian dogma and ritual: religious aspect of kin-slaying amongst Pelasgians and Achaeans: origin and evolution of the Erinnyes: origin of homicide-purgation: comparison of Pelasgian with Achaean Erinnys, and of Homeric Erinnys with post-Homeric and ‘tragic’ Erinnys[95-126]
BOOK II
POINE FROM HOMER TO DRACON
CHAPTER I
Section I: Social transitions: fall of Achaean Empire and its causes: Achaean survivals: political changes in post-Homeric times: post-Homeric migrations: Sparta and Boeotia: the Hesiodic age of chaos: tribal stability and decay: evolution of the Attic State; aristocracy and democracy[127-137]
Section II: Religious and legal transitions in post-Homeric times: Asiatic-Greek intercourse: compromise between Asiatic and Greek ideas adopted in regard to homicide: origin of Apolline purgation system: Apollo and pollution: rise of Apolline influence: organisation of theocratic nobles: origin of the laws of Dracon: proofs of author’s theory from Greek legends, from Plato and Demosthenes: extradition: pollution-doctrine and wergeld: question of legality of ‘private settlement’ for homicide in historical Athens[138-190]
CHAPTER II
The Draconian Code: restored inscription of 409/8 B.C. and author’s explanation: other Draconian homicide-laws derived from Demosthenes: Plato’s code confirms and supplements these data: classification of Attic homicide-laws as follows: (a) those relating to accidental homicide, to death caused by animals or inanimate objects, and to homicide by persons unknown: (b) those relating to justifiable and to justifiably accidental homicide: (c) those relating to manslaughter: (d) those relating to wilful murder: some problems suggested by these laws: origin of confiscation of property: evolution of State-execution: parricide and kin-slaying: historicity of Plato’s legislation regarding homicide[191-242]
CHAPTER III
The Attic Homicide Courts: Attic legends concerning origin of courts for homicide: the accounts of Pollux, of Aristotle, of Demosthenes: question of γραφὴ φόνου: Plato’s Euthyphro: author’s theory of the origin of Attic courts for homicide: Dracon and the Ephetae: Solon and the Areopagus: the Exegetae[243-275]
BOOK III
POINE IN ATTIC TRAGEDY
CHAPTER I
Aeschylus: Agamemnon, Choephoroe, Eumenides, Suppliants and Seven against Thebes[276-302]
CHAPTER II
Sophocles: Electra, King Oedipus, Oedipus at Colonus, Antigone, Ajax and Trachinian Maidens[303-331]
CHAPTER III
Euripides: Electra, Orestes, Iphigenia at Aulis and Iphigenia in Tauris, Phoenician Maidens and Suppliants, Mad Hercules, Heracleidae, Medea, Hippolytus, Ion, Andromache, Hecuba, Bacchae, Alcestis, Troades and Helen[332-422]
Conclusion[422-424]
INDEX[425-427]