. A Greek-English Lexicon
MDAI(A) — Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archàologischen Instituts. Athenische Abteilung
МЕР — Minima epigraphica et papyrologica
OCD — The Oxford Classical Dictionary. Oxf., 1949
ОТ — Ostrakismos-Testimonien I: Die Zeugnisse antiker Autoren, der Inschriften und Ostraka über das athenische Scherbengericht aus vorhellenistischer Zeit (487–322 v. Chr.). Stuttgart, 2002
PaP — Polis and Polemos: Essays on Politics, War and History in Ancient Greece in Honor of D. Kagan. Claremont, 1997
RA — Revue archéologique
QUCC — Quaderni urbinati di cultura classica
RE — Paulys Realencyclopfldie der klassischen Altertumswissenschaft
REA — Revue des etudes anciennes
REG — Revue des etudes grecques
RFIC — Rivista di filologia e d'istruzione classica
RFP — Ritual, Finance, Politics: Athenian Democratic Accounts Presented to D. Lewis. Oxf., 1994
RhM — Rheinisches Museum für Philologie
RPGAW — Religion and Power in the Ancient Greek World. Uppsala, 1996
RPLHA — Revue de philologie, de littérature et d'histoire anciennes
RSA — Rivista storica dell'antichita
SEG — Supplementum epigraphicum Graecum
SIFC — Studi italiani di filologia classica
TAPhA — Transactions of the American Philological Association
ZPE — Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik
ΑΔ — Αρχαιολογικόν Δελτίον
Summary
1. During last years ancient historians often note the importance that studying political institutions of Greek democracy has for better comprehension of that State system. One of such institutions — and one that played a significant role in the life of fifth-century B.C. democratic Athens — was ostracism. It can be defined as politically motivated extrajudicial banishment from the polis of the most influential citizens, for a fixed period (10 years), without any deprivation of civil rights (including property rights) and with subsequent full restoration of political rights. The banishment was exercised through the demos' vote in the assembly, using a special procedure (with inscribed clay sherds as ballots).
When applying to the history of ostracism, the author was led by the following reasons. On the one hand, he considered it a possibility to make a contribution to the researching the institutional aspect of political life in the democratic Athenian polis, especially as many historical and procedural details of ostracism remain up till now debatable and not enough clear, although the institution has long been studied in world scholarly literature (as to Russian historiography, the phenomenon of ostracism has been subject of almost no study yet). On the other hand, it was also a possibility to dive, so to say, to the very milieu of the classical Athenian political struggle, to the boiling of passions, interweaving of interests, high tension of internal conflict — all features distinctive of that struggle. Ostracism was one of its principal elements. It is possible to say without any exaggeration that a large and exceptionally important historical period (almost coinciding chronologically with framework of the fifth century B.C.) passed «under the badge of ostracism». So when studying that institution one constantly has to consider non-institutional factors, such as clashes of different factions, interrelations of political elite and the demos, mechanisms of forming and displaying public opinion in the democratic polis. It is in that way that ostracism may and should be investigated: at the «junction» of institutional and non-institutional approaches, of constitutional history and history of political processes, in the context of public life in the whole.
Presently, Athenian ostracism is attracting more and more attention in the world research literature. In some respects, it is promoted by broadening of the source base, mainly by publications of ostraka (clay "ballots") discovered in Athens in large quantities. In the light of these finds that carry very valuable information, the study of ostracism in becoming one of the most prospective and urgent trends in investigating classical antiquity.
2. The principal object of this work is to undertake a study of Athenian ostracism as full and comprehensive as possible under present condition of sources. Such an object conditions specific tasks we have to deal with. They include consideration and solution of the following problems:
— the chronology of ostracism (Chapter I);
— the origin of ostracism; time, causes and purposes of its introduction (Chapter II);
— the procedure of ostracism (Chapter III);
— functions of ostracism in the political system of Athenian democracy and its role in the political life of the democratic polis; main stage in the history of ostracism (Chapter IV);
— causes of falling of ostracism into disuse in the late fifth century B.C.; institutional mechanisms that replaced it (Chapter V).
As ostracism in its «classical» form functioned in the Athenian state throughout the fifth century B.C. (from 487 to 415), it is this piece of time that is chiefly under consideration in the book. At the same time, also used are some data belonging both to the earlier, archaic epoch (it is necessary to expose «roots» of ostracism, those institutional realities from which it had grown) and to the later period, the fourth century B.C. (as during that period ostracism was in nominal existence, although never in use, and also as such perspective allows to trace how the «end of ostracism» influenced the general political situation). In connection with ostracism, the book deals principally with Athenian material, as it (and only it) has some degree of integrity and comprehensiveness and allows responsible conclusions. This circumstance conditions geographical framework of the investigation. Scant and contradictory information on ostracism in other Greek cities is analyzed in a special excursus (Appendix I).
3. As we have told above, for a comprehensive study of ostracism the most desirable method would be a constructive synthesis of «institutional» and «non-institutional» approaches, provided positive sides of both. In our case, it should be manifested in researching the institution in question in close connection with political processes of the epoch and society that used it. The general methodological base of the work is the system conception of polls as an integral political and socio-cultural body in which all aspects of public and ideological life are interconnected and mutually conditioned; so they must be investigated not separately but integrally.
In other words, we believe that isolated analysis of material out of touch with the historical epoch should be avoided. In particular, the institution of ostracism should be a subject of thorough study in the context of polls, as an integral element of its political system and political life. We see as one of our tasks an attempt to show how general changes in the classical Athenian polls naturally influenced ostracism (its introduction, more frequent or rare use, becoming obsolete). One may say that our general methodology is most similar to the concept of histoire totale advanced by French historians of the Annales school. We are faraway from primitive determinism, from a notion about rigid conditioning of on forms of social reality («secondary» or «superstructural») by others («primary» or «basic»), whether the latter are interpreted as economic relations, or political system, or mentality of the epoch, or anything else. In our opinion, all those spheres developed and evolved as parts of an integral body, only through close mutual connections.
As applied to the history of ostracism, such an approach implies, in particular, disagreement with the common opinion of that institution as exclusive feature of democratic poleis. In the course of investigation we try to show that ostracism (surely if we deal not only with its specific «Clisthenic» form, but take the phenomenon on a broader base) was not determined by democracy, but could be (and really was) used in one or another form in various Greek political systems, such as aristocracy, oligarchy, etc. Ostracism was an outcome rather of polis as such than of some specific polis form.
For most effective and comprehensive research of Athenian ostracism such a methodological approach is very useful as correlated study of diverse source types. It is especially actual for ostracism, for, as we shall see below, there are two main kinds of sources that give information on it. They are, a) data of ancient narrative tradition, and b) ostraka and inscriptions on them, that is, artifacts of material and epigraphic character. Both of these source types have strong as well as weak sides. So, the main value of ostraka consists in the fact that they are contemporary and absolutely authentic sources. However, information they bear can be fully interpreted only in light of written sources, as inscriptions on these "ballots" are short, often in poor condition and in any case mostly do not contain any facts relating to specific causes of one or another ostrakophoria and to its historical context. As to the narrative tradition of ostracism, it is naturally much more informative. It contains information on a number of important details of ostracism and its history. But at the same time data kept by ancient writers are sometimes contradictory, and in some cases there are grounded doubts in the question of trustworthiness. It is ostraka that can serve in the greatest degree for verification of written information. Thus, the two above-mentioned kinds of sources on ostracism are mutually complementary.
The comparative-historical method also takes some place in the study. As ostracism displays certain features of resemblance with archaic forms of banishment, which had religious and ritual character (in particular with the scapegoat rite peculiar to many ancient cultures), we have to touch upon specificity of rites in question and to compare them with ostracism, in order to better define origins and characteristics of the latter.