What is meant by archaic laws

Editions de la Sorbonne


1 Today you can easily fall back on newer editions, IGT; Nomima.

2 Our sources do not allow us to assume an original state of “law of the thumb”. Even the stronger strives to legitimize his right of access to the opponent in front of society.

3 Gagarin 2008, pp. 19-23.

4Wolff 1961; Cantarella 2002; see the summary assessment by Maffi 2007, p. 200f.

5 Gagarin 2008, p. 15.

6 Cantarella 2001.

7 Summary Thür 2007, and Thür 2006, pp. 1.30-136; see the critical voices, which Maffi 2007, pp. 187-201 follows.

8 S. about Ulf 1990; Raaflaub 1997 (separate bibliography in the appendix); Wees 2002 (separate bibliography in the appendix). Social references are neglected at Maffi 2007 and Gagarin 2008.

9 The scene has recently become incorrect as a private invitation to take an oath, as proklësis ice horkon, interpreted, Gagarin 2005, p. 89, and Gagarin 2008, p. 24.

10 Thür 2007, pp. 188-190.

11 Gagarin 2008, pp. 17-19 with references to older literature.

12Latte 1920, pp. 7-9; on Germanic legal history most detailed Brunner 1928, pp. 498-560 (500-503); See also Buchda 1971, Sp. 1553f., and Schmidt-Wiegand 1978, Sp. 1956, both with further literature.

13 See Nehlsen's research in 1972.

14 Gagarin 2008, pp. 27-30, although elsewhere, Gagarin 2005, pp. 89f., He vehemently speaks out against comparative law in the judgment of evidence.

15 Westbrook 2003.

16 S. Thür 2007, p. 191.

17 S. the literature cited above note 8.

18 Wolff 1961, p. 11 f.

19 Wolff 1961, p. 57f.

20 S. the discussion in Thür 2006, pp. 139f. In detail, but not convincing, see Gagarin 2010, pp. 138f. (at my objection, Thür 2010a, P. 147, inserted into the written version of the lecture; I cannot go into more detail here at the time this article is going to press).

21 IGT, No. 90, Nomima I, No. 81, around 650 BC. Chr .; discussed in detail by Gagarin 2008, pp. 45-49.

22 Thür 2006, p. 140.

23 IC IV 72, col. XI 26-31: τòν δικαστάν, ὄτι μὲν κατὰ / μαίτυρανs ἔγρατται δικάδδ / εν ἔ ἀπόμοτον, δικάδδεν ἆι ἔ / γρατται, τõν δ'άλλõν ὀμνύντ / α κρίνειν πορτὶ τὰ μολιόμεν / α (The dicastas should, if it is written that he has to decide according to witnesses or an oath, decide how it is written, otherwise pass a judgment under oath according to what has been presented.) Quotations according to column and line refer to the Great Inscription in the following. For the text, see Maffi 2003 and Gagarin 2010.

24 See III 5-9 and XI 48-50.

25 IX 37-40, see the text cited in the next note; formally one cannot distinguish between witnesses and “oath helpers” (see below note 27f.). Gagarin 1989, p. 49, also assumes that in Gortyn the witnesses always have to take an oath.

26 IX 37-40 ... (μαίτυρες) ... ἀποπõνιόντον. ἐ δέ κ´ ἀ / ποίƑεποντι, δικαδδέτο ὀμόσ / α <ν> τα αὀτòν καὶ τòνς μαίτυρ / ανς νικἐν τò πλόον (should the ... this wins with the simple amount).

27 II 36-41: αἰ δέ κα πονέι δολό / σαθθαι, ὀμόσαι τòν ἐλό / ντα τõ πεντεκοντασὐτατέ / ρο καὶ πλίονος στν καταπ πλίονος πὐτν τντν (if απτν καὶ πλίονος πὐƑὶντντ means αποτν, if απτν πὐƑὶντντ, if απονε πƑὶƑὶντ ντ, if απτν πὐƑὶντντ, says απτν, if απτν πὐƑὶντντ, if απτν, if απτν πὐƑὶντντ, says απτν, when απτν, if απτν πὐτε κπτν be, the catcher should swear because of fifty staters and more himself five, each one under a curse, ...). The function of the sworn as oath helper is evident here.

28 III 49-53, IV 6-8; see also II 15-16.

29Latte 1920, p. 9; to the oath assistants ibid. P. 31, 40. Davies 2005, p. 312, incorrectly assumes two opposing party oaths; right Parker 2005, p. 71, and Maffi 2003, p. 82. I know of only one case of opposing party diseases from Gortyn, IC IV 81, 11-16 (not "IV 48", as incorrectly cited by Thür 2009a, p. 493; around 450 BC); after the probable addition (Nomima, II No. 47; see also Gagarin 2008, p. 140f, and Gagarin 2010, p. 139f.) Here, the party wins the process that calls on more people to swear (differently Latte 1920, p. 14). On the meaning of the double party oath in the Drakon law and in the Athenian process of the 5th and 4th centuries, see Thür 2006, pp. 146f., On the Middle East see below note 46.

30 I 14, 17/18, 20, 22, II 19/20, IX 30/31, 37, 45/46, 51, 52, X 31/32. The compound is only documented in Gortyn. In IX 37/38 ἀπολέγομαι is used synonymously, which usually means “to speak against something / someone”; only the opposing party can be meant here.

31 Both times πορτὶ τὰ ἀποπōνιόμενα.

32 For text, see note 26 above.

33 The preposition άπο-indicates the hostile direction, see above note 30.

34 Text see above note 23.

35 Strassmaier 1889, p. 216f. (cuneiform text only). Mr Gerhard Ries kindly made the cuneiform sources and literature available to me at the Leopold Wenger Institute in Munich. I owe him special thanks for the transcription and translation of the certificate used here. Numerous authors have dealt with Nbk 366: Köhler and Preiser 1890, p. 12f. (Eng. transl., Com.); Koschaker 1911, pp. 46-48 (Transkr., German transl., Comm.); Wish 2003, pp. 922f .; Wells 2004, p. 123 (com.), 176-178 (transcr., English transl., Com.).

36 Text: “so he gave”, but probably a scribal mistake, see parallel text Nbk 227, 9 and 266, 7, where the present / future tense “he will give” is used in the same context (G. Ries).

37 Kohler and Preiser 1890, pp. 12f., And Koschaker 1911, pp. 46-48; also San Nicolò 1932, p. 333, note 3.

38Wunsch 2003, p. 922, already with reference to the 2004 book by Wells 2004; On pp. 108-126 Wells finds a total of 40 documents from the Neo-Babylonian period, which he classifies as “conditional verdicts” (p. 109). Comparative law to the evidence judgment San Nicolò 1932, p. 333f., To which the von Wells 2004, p. 109, Amn. 86, the cuneiform literature cited (more recent German literature see above note 12).

39 I follow (with Ries) the interpretation of Koschaker 1911, p. 48, note 15, who corrects the interpretation of Kohler and Preiser 1890; Wells 2004, pp. 123, 177, still takes the older opinion, according to which Gudadu surety (guarantor, cosigner) and Katimü were debtors.

40 What the service or replacement service consisted of can be left open here, see Koschaker 1911, pp. 46-48, and Wells 2004, pp. 123, 176-178.

41 All authors (and CAD Μ II, p. 186) see in line 3 the witnesses in the plural, only Wells 2004, p. 177, translates the expression with the singular; this question is also irrelevant for my following considerations.

42Wells 2004, pp. 123, 177f. believes that the performance of Katimû (the alleged debtor) has only been postponed by pledging another person. This is not compatible with the alternative of conditional acquittal (line 10) or conditional guilty verdict (line 12). He also corrects the perfect form in line 12 (citing Nbk 361 and 363).

43Wells 2004, pp. 110, 118, 123.

44San Nicolò 1932, p. 334 with literature. An oath is of course not expressly mentioned in the present document, but the "conviction" of the opponent (Z. 10f.) Must be assumed according to the usual procedure.

45 See Streck 1993, p. 65, note 5: in front of a god symbol; Joannès 1996, p. 172f., Speaks of a magical circle, of the sun and stars as "witnesses".

46 Cf. in Gortyn XI 46-55 the presence of the dicastas in the case of the oath to be taken out of court, probably to control compliance with the form and thus the success of the oath.

47Wells 2004, p. 129, in the detailed note 137. Joannes 1996, p. 172, cites a document (PBS 2/1 140), in which both parties swore opposing oaths and the court had to find the truth; it upheld the plaintiff's assertion. In earlier epochs of Mesopotamia the decision in such cases was made by the river ordal; on these see Ries 1989. On the double party oath in Gortyn and Athens see note 29 above.

48 p. Otto's inventory in 2008.

49Wells 2004, p. 110; See also p. 128, where the comparison with the Greek “rationality” for the archaic period should be taken with caution. The judicial decision is not made here or there after free, rational assessment of testimony, but is automatically given with the taking of an oath. The evidence of the oath is definitely more “rational” than the old Babylonian ordal process.

This digital publication was created using automatic optical character recognition.