C Centro de destino

An Athenian decree regulating the political situation in Erythrai,417 dating to 453/2,418 is the first epigraphical attestation of any phrourarchia, and it highlights the intersection of military and civil authority in an imperial context. Although the original stone is now lost and the inscription only exists in copies, there is no scholarly controversy about the presence of an Athenian phrourarchos in the polis.419

The decree was likely the Athenian response to an Erythraian revolt, one possibly led by a local tyrant who enjoyed Persian backing, following Athens' defeat in Egypt c. 454.420 Athenian officials, a phrourarchos and at least one episkopos (overseer),421 were sent by the Athenians to preside over the creation of a new constitution at Erythrai. After the initial boule

(executive council)was selectedby lot, the inscription states that the

417_{See Map 4.}

418_{SEG 34.5 = IG I}3_{, 14 = SEG 31.5 = Mattingly 1984, 344–346; See Highby 1936, 1–33 for general}

background and a reconstruction of the decree, who argues for a date in the 460s due to paleographic reasons; See Meritt 1937, 360 for arguments against Highby’s interpretation of the letter forms; Rhodes 2008, 504–506 accepts a date in the late 450s.

419_{Meiggs 1943, 23.}

420_{Thuc. 1.110; Kagan 1969, 98–99; Meiggs 1943, 22; cf. Highby 1936, 1–33 who argues for more local}

authority.

“...the episkopos and the phrourarchos will oversee the establishment of the current boule, and in the future the boule and the phrourarchos [will do so],

[no] less than thirty days before the boule leaves office.”422

At Erythrai the Athenian episkopos was an interim office, whose authority was restricted to supervising the lot that selected the initial boule. There is no deviation from the position's typical function as a temporary overseer over new Athenian settlements and the

reorganization of allied constitutions within the Athenian Empire.423

In contrast, the phrourarchos was a permanent foreign military presence which remained at Erythrai and influenced the political life of the subject polis.424 Although the boule was selected by lots in Erythrai itself, oversight by the phrourarchos,and the presence of armed Athenians phrouroi,425strongly suggests Athenian supervision,426 if not outright control,427 of the proceedings. At the very least the presence of Athenian soldiers was a strong reminder of who actually held the ultimate authority in Erythrai.

A major concern of the Athenian demos was the potential return of Erythraian exiles, who were possibly the supporters of a former tyrant.428 The boule swore that

“...[I will not] take back the exiles, nor.... will I be persuaded to do so by anyone else, [specifically] the exiles who fled to the Medes, without [the permission] of the boule of the Athenians and the people, nor of those who remain here will I exile [anyone] without [the permission] of the boule of the Athenians and the [Athenian] people...”429

422_{IG I}3_{, 14, ll.13–16: “...δ]ὲκαὶκατασ[τ]ε̑σαι [τ]ὲ̣νμὲνν[ῦν] βολὲν [τ]ὸς [ἐπισκ]|[όπ]οςκαὶ [τὸν] φ̣ρ[ό]ρ̣αρχον,} τὸδὲλοιπὸντὲν̣βολὲνκαὶτὸν [φρόρ]|αρχον, μὲ̣ὄλε[ζ]ονἒ [τ]ρ̣ιάκ̣ονταἑ̣μ[έ]ρ̣αςπ[ρὶ]νἐ̣χσιέναι [τὲνβολ]|έν...”

423_{Balcer 1977, 252.}

424_{Highby 1936, 19; Nease 1949, 105.}

425_{Ibid., ll.42 & 46. The context is unclear, but the presence of a phrouroi is certain.} 426_{Balcer 1976, 259.}

427_{Kagan 1969, 98–100.}

428_{See Forsdyke 2005, 207 for the importance of exiles.}

This decree had the effect of moderating politics at Erythrai, ensuring that any sentences of exile or expulsion followed a clear judicial process.430 Such interference with the exiles' return was not just a political matter, but was also Athenian intrusion into a religious exercise, as it was highly likely that returning exiles would come as suppliants.431 _{Such a level of}

Athenian interference may have been viewed as intolerable, but the presence of the

phrourarchos and the phrouroi enforced compliance. This excerpt also shows the practical limits placed on the authority of the phrourarchos by Athens, as the boule in Erythrai could not simply petition the Athenian phrourarchos to allow specific exiles back; such a request had to be addressed to the Athenian boule and demos directly.

Another inscription related to this decree432 further stipulates that it was neccesary

“...to record these things and set up the oath on stone, and the oath of the boule in the

polis [on the acropolis],and the phrourarchos shall inscribe the same at Erythrai on the acropolis...”433

This stele, in addition to the physical presence of the phroura and the phrourarchos, was a constant reminder to the Erythraians of their subservient status and the unquestioned domination of the Athenians. In this case, they made no effort to disguise the language of the decree or to make the presence of the phrourarchos more tolerable to the local population; instead they celebrated the institution in the most conspicuous location in the cowed polis,

πείσο̣[μ]α̣[ιτο̑νἐς] Μέδοςφ̣ε[υ]γ̣ό[ντο]νἄνευτε̣̑[ς] β̣ο[λε̑ςτε̑ς] |[Ἀθε]ναίονκαὶτο̑ [δ]έ̣μο [ο]ὐδὲτο̑νμενόντον ἐχσελο̑ [ἄ]ν[ευ] τε̣̑ςβ̣[ο]|[λε̑ς] τ̣ε̑ςἈθεναίονκαὶ [τὸ] δ̣έμ̣ο [ο]ὐδὲτο̑νμενόντονἐχσελο̑ [ἄ]ν[ευ] τε̣̑ςβ̣[ο]|[λε̑ς] τ̣ε̑ς Ἀθεναίονκαὶ [τὸ] δ̣έμ̣ο...” 430_{Forsdyke 2005, 208–209.} 431_{Naiden 2006, 384.} 432_{Woodhead 1997, 5.} 433_{IG I}3 _{15 ll. 42-45: “ἀναγράφσαιδὲταῦτακαὶτὸνὅ]|[ρ]κονἐ[ν] λι[θ]ίνειστέλει [καὶτὸνὅρκοντὸντε̑ςβολε̑ς} ἐμπόλ]|ει, Ἐ[ρυθ]ρᾶ[σ]ιδὲἐντε̑ιἀκρ[οπόλειτὸνφρόραρχονἀναγράφσα]|ι...”

which served as a glaring reminder of Athenian control and dominance.434

The phrourarchos and the phrourion in Erythrai were directly answerable to an external power and were in no way placed under local administration. The phrourarchos was an Athenian officer in a foreign polis, and played an important supervisory role in the new political order. The emphasis of the decree is on internal governance and the obligations of Erythrai to Athens, not on the responsibility of Athens as a defender of Erythraian interests or of the polis itself. Although the decree did outline some civic powers of the phrourarchos, these were intentionally left vague. Even though the boule was selected by lot, the power of the phrourarchos, in conjunction with the boule to “establish” a new boule after each election could be interpreted to support Athenian interests, and there was little the Erythraians could effectively do in opposition to Athenian dominance.

Although no information survives on the selection process of the Athenian phrourarchos

at Erythrai, a near contemporary inscription from c. 450435 is believed to reflect another, unidentified polis that was under an Athenian phrourarchos.436 This highly fragmentary inscription mentions a phrourarchos437 in addition to the boule and acropolis.438 There is also a reference to 30 years,439 _{which could be the age requirement for holding the phrourarchia.}

It is possible that such a requirement was a general feature of the Athenian phrourarchia, but such a hypothesis remains highly speculative.

434_{See Thomas 1994, 43–44 for comparanda.} 435_{Woodhead 1997, 4–5.}

436_{Meritt 1945, 82–83 First thought this inscription was related to Erythrai; He withdrew this assignment in}

Meritt 1946, 246–248; See also Woodhead 1997, 5.

437_{IG I}3 _{16 ll. 8: “[φ]ρόρα̣ρ̣χον...”, ll. 11: “φ̣ρόραρχον...”, ll.12: “...φ̣ρ̣ό̣[ραρχον...”} 438_{Ibid., ll. 7, 10.}