Θόρυβος, εὐστάθεια και το κανονιστικό πλαίσιο των αθηναϊκών λατρευτικών σωματείων

Θόρυβος, εὐστάθεια και το κανονιστικό πλαίσιο των αθηναϊκών λατρευτικών σωματείων (EL)

Αρναούτογλου , Ηλίας Ν.

Επετηρίς του Κέντρου Ερεύνης της Ιστορίας του Ελληνικού Δικαίου (EL)

Βλέπε πίνακα πηγών στις σελ. 44-77 τη μέλετης (EL)

I. Ν. Arnaoutoglou: Thorybos, eustatheia and the normative framework of Athenian cult associations The normative framework of Athenian cult associations has been studied mainly from an institutional aspect. In this article I suggest to approach it through the lenses of two distinct (or even opposing) notions, tumult (thorybos) and stability (eustatheia). Following a brief presentation of the current debate on thorybos in the ancient Athenian socio-political context, I analyze the normative framework produced by the associations themselves (appended at the end with a rendering in modern Greek). Questions of organization and cult are prominent in Hellenistic regulations, while in Roman era associations intervene to catalogue its membership and penalize their improper behaviour during meetings. Athenian cult associations punish the non-payment of contributions, the non-implementation of their decisions, the non-compliance of their magistrates and members to their respective duties. Associations usually impose a pecuniary fine, most often fixed and rarely left to the discretion of the group. They could also exclude a member from their functions and events or expel him from the association altogether. Usually magistrates were responsible for the imposition and enforcement of penalties; the assembly of members was very rarely involved. The normative framework of Athenian (and perhaps Greek) associations controlled disagreement, disruption, arguments and opposition through tol¬erance of tumult and noise. In contrast, in the Roman era there was little scope for forbearance even of occasional outbursts of disruption, since the Roman attitude towards associations was culminated in the volatile first-century BC political contests. A strict set of rules, reflected both in Greek and Roman evidence, dictated and regulated the expected behaviour even during the association’s gatherings, see e.g. IG ii2 1368. However, it would be mistaken to attribute this hardening of rules only to Roman influence or to imagine a manichaistic depiction of good-tolerant Greeks against bad-intolerant Romans; since the early Hellenistic era, there were efforts to limit the vocal expression of disagreement and hostility in the deliberation processes (EN)

Επετηρίδα (EL)

2016

Δίκαιο της ελληνορωμαϊκής αρχαιότητας-Αστικό δίκαιο-Γενικές Αρχές (EL)

Δίκαιο της ελληνορωμαϊκής αρχαιότητας-Ποινικό Δίκαιο-Ουσιαστικό δίκαιο (EL)

Λέξεις-κλειδιά: σωματεία, θίασος, θιασῶται, ὀργεῶνες, ἐρανισταί, Ἡρακλιασταί, Ἰόβακχοι, ἀρχερανιστής, αδικήματα, ποινές, πρόστιμα, διαγραφή μέλους, αποκλεισμός μέλους, εκτέλεση αποφάσεων. Key-words: thiasos, thiasotai, koinon, archeranistes, Herakliastai, Iobakchoi, eranistai, penalties, tumult, stability, rule violations, enforcement, exclusion, expulsion, property penalties (EL)

English

Text

Academy of Athens

Research Centre for the History of Greek Law

Κέντρον Ερεύνης της Ιστορίας του Ελληνικού Δικαίου (ΚΕΙΕΔ)

Μελέτες Ιστορίας Δικαίου