Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner.  Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Lysias 12 and Lysias 31: Metics and Athenian citizenship in the aftermath of the thirty
Bakewell, Geoff
Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies; Spring 1999; 40, 1; ProQuest
pg. 5

Lysias 12 and Lysias 31: Metics and 
Athenian Citizenship in the 

Aftermath of the Thirty 
Geoff Bakewell 

T
HE SPEECHES LYSIAS 12 Ken·a. 'Epa'tocrSevou<; and Lysias 

31 Ka'ta. <l>iA,(J)vo<; date to roughly the same time period, 
403--401 B.C.! The former was likely delivered at the ac­

countability proceeding (EuSuva) of Eratosthenes, one of the 
Thirty who sought to remain in Athens under the terms of the 

reconciliation agreement of 403.2 The latter formed part of the 
competency hearing (ooK1Ilacria) for Philon, a man selected by 
lot to serve on the reconstituted boule.3 Both speeches fault the 
defendants for their actions during the tyranny.4 Moreover, they 

lK. J. Dover, Lysias and the Corpus Lysiacum (Berkeley 1968), holds that 
most Lysian speeches apart from 12 were products of consultation and 
collaboration between logographer and client. S. Usher, "Lysias and His 
Clients," GRBS 17 (1976) 31-40, defends the traditional view of independent 
composition by Ly:sias. M. Weissenberger, Die Dokimasiereden des Lysias (orr. 
16, 25, 26, 31) (Beitr.z.klass.Phil. 182 [Frankfurt 1987]) 149-152, accepts 
Lysias as the author of 31. S. Usher and M. Najock, "A Statistical Study of 
Authorship in the Corpus Lysiacum," Computers and the Humanities 16 (1982) 
85-105, at 104, are less certain, assigning it "a marginal position" in this 
regard. The rhetorical similarity between speeches 12 and 31 addressed below 
constitutes another argument for the authenticity of the latter. 

2T. Murphy, "The Vilification of Eratosthenes and Theramenes in Lysias 
12," AlP 110 (1989) 40-49, at 40, places the speech in the "twenty-day period 
following 12 Boedromion, 403." 

3Weissenberger (supra n.1) 401 argues for a date shortly before 401/0 B.C. 
"spatestens zur Dokimasie des Friihjahres 401." 

4 Under the terms of the reconciliation agreement, Athenians were not to 
pursue grievances against one another which dated to the rule of the Thirty. On 
orators' frequent disregard of this principle of Ill, I1VT1<HKUK£'iv (Ath.Pol. 39.6), 
see P. J. Rhodes, A Commentary on the Aristotelian Athenaion Politeia2 (Oxford 
1993) 472. 

Greek, Roman, and ~yzantine Studies 40 (1999) 5-22 
©2000 GRBS 

5 



Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner.  Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

6 LYSIAS 12 AND L YSIAS 31 

employ a similar rhetorical gambit: they use metics as a point of 
reference in evaluating the deeds of the accused, who were 
citizens. In particular, the speeches note that some metics acted 
better than did some citizens.s One implication of this argument 
is that from the point of view of the polis, good 1l£'t01KOl are 
preferable to bad not-1ml. Lysias takes this good metic/bad 
citizen comparison one step further. In casting Eratosthenes and 
Philon as individuals devoted to money and inclined to place 
their own good above that of the polis, he assimilates them to 
the worst of metic stereotypes. These speeches of Lysias pro­
vide valuable evidence for Athenian attitudes towards citizen­
ship during the restoration of the democracy. In particular, they 
suggest that at least some Athenian citizens saw shortcomings 
in distinctions based solely on heredity. The fact that the city 
subsequently reinstated Perikles' citizenship law of 451/0 
should not obscure the importance of Lysias' claim that birth 
alone is insufficient for citizenship. Indeed, the orator's explicit 
formulation that people must also want to be citizens, and the 
apparent willingness of some of his citizen listeners to 
countenance it, deserves just as much notice as Athens' famed 
political moderation after the overthrow of the Thirty. 

1. Bad citizens and good metics 
One prominent claim of both Lysias 12 and Lysias 31 is that 

in the turbulent times of the rule of the Thirty, civic status was 
an unreliable predictor of men's behavior. He argues that under 
the circumstances, some metics proved to be better Athenians 
than did some citizens. In Lysias 12, the orator says that his 
father Kephalos was persuaded to immigrate to Athens by 

SLysias' speech Opo<; 'Imto8£pcH\v employs the same gambit (fr.1.135-206 
Gernet-Bizos), but is not treated in this article because its date mar be substan­
tially later (e.g., after 394). If T. Loening, "The Autobiograyhica Speeches of 
Lyslas and the Biographical Tradition," Hermes 109 (198 ) 287-289, is cor­
rect that it dates to 403 or 402, this further strengthens the arguments advanced 
here. 



Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner.  Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

GEOFF BAKEWELL 7 

Perikles, and that his family lived there quietly for many years. 
They were supporters of the democracy and stayed out of the 
law courts, neither harming anyone nor being harmed. The ad­
vent of the Thirty changed all that. The oligarchs executed his 
brother Polemarchos and would have done the same to Lysias 
had he not escaped. He fled to Megara, and his family's prop­
erty was confiscated. He summarizes this period in his family 
history thus (12.20): 

aU' OUtffie; de; fH.taC; oux to. XPtlJ.Lata E~llJ.Laptavov, WCJ1tEP (Xv 
£tEPOt J.LqaAffiv aOtKllJ.Latffiv opyTjv EXOVtEC;, ou tOUtffiV a~ioue; 

yE ovtae; til ltOAEt, aAAa ltacrae; (J.LEV) tae; XOPllyiae; XOPTj­
ytlaavtae;, ltOAAaC; 0' d(j(popae; £laEvqKoVtae;, KoaJ.Liouc; 0' "wac; 
autoue; ltapExovtae; Ka!. to ltpoatattoJ.LEvOV ltowuvtac;, EXOpOV 0' 
ouOEva KEKtllJ.LEVOUC;, ltOAAOUe; 0' 'AOTjvaiffiv £K trov ltOAEJ.LiffiV 
AUaaJ.LEVouc;· tOWUtffiV iJ~iffiaav OUX OJ.LOiffiC; J.LEtotKOUVtae; WaltEp 
auto!' EltOAltEUovtO. 
But they were wronging us on account of money, in the way that 
others might who are angry at great injustices. We did not 
deserve these things with respect to the city, but had fulfilled 
all our choregic duties, and had paid many special taxes; we 
were orderly and did what was assigned us, made no enemies, 
and ransomed many Athenians from our foes. They deemed us 
worthy of such treatment, and as citizens conducting the govern­
ment behaved far differently than we who were metics.6 

Throughout the passage Lysias emphasizes the differences be­
tween his family and the Thirty. He and his relatives acted like 
the best sort of citizens; their civic virtue shone all the more 
brightly when viewed against the actions of Eratosthenes and 
his cohorts. The final phrase sums up these differences in con­
duct: the opposition between ll£t01KOUY'tW; and E7tOAt't£UOY'to is 
pronounced, and is strengthened by the OUX Ollotm<; ... wcr7t£p 

construction. The conduct of Lysias and his family, who were 
1l£'t01KOt, was unlike, i.e., superior to, that of the Thirty, who 
were 7tOAt'tat governing Athens. 

6The text is that of Hude. All translations are my own. 



Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner.  Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

8 LYSIAS 12 AND LYSIAS 31 

Lysias 31 adopts the same tactic, attacking Philon by com­
paring his conduct with that of the metics who fought alongside 
Thrasyboulos. While they risked life and limb to help the demos, 
Philon took no side in the struggle, fleeing to Oropos. At one 
point in the trial, the unnamed accuser urges the jurors to punish 
Philon on the following grounds (31.29): 

'til; 0' oln~ av dlCO'tO)<; f7ttn!lTtcr£t£V U!ltV, d 'to\><; !l£'toilCou<; !lEV, 
on OU lCU'ta 'to 1tPOcr11lCOV euu'tot<; f~OTteTJcruv 'tip OTt!lCP, fn!lTt(w't£ 
a~iO)<; 'tT\<; 1tOA£o)<;, 't01hov OE, on 1tUpa 'to 1tPOcrT\lCOV euu'tf{> 1tPOU­
OO)lC£ 't~v 1tOAtV, !l~ lCoAacr£'t£, d !lTt y£ UAACP nv! !l£i~ovt, 'tn y£ 
1tUpoucrn an!l itt; 
Who would not rightly blame you, if you honored in a fashion 
worthy of the city the metics because they assisted the people 
out of proportion to their obligation, but will not punish this 
man because he betrayed the city contrary to his obligation, if 
not with some greater penalty, then at least with the present 
dishonor? 

As in the passage from Lysias 12, antitheses drive home the 
point. The 'tOUC; !l€Wll(OUC; !lEV is balanced by the 'to\)'tov 8E: on 
the one hand the me tics, on the other this man Phil on (who as a 
prospective ~oUA€u'tilc; was a citizen). The me tics helped the 
people, the citizen betrayed the city; the metics acted out of 
proportion to their obligation, Philon acted contrary to his obli­
gation. 

Whitehead has categorized remarks of this sort as an a 
fortiori topos resting on a largely negative stereotype of metics 
at Athens: "if (mere) metics do or suffer something, then surely 
citizens ... "7 According to him, such comparisons focus atten­
tion primarily on citizen behavior; Lysias is urging his listeners 
to raise their expectations for citizens. Yet the comparisons here 
also have the effect of ennobling metic behavior. In Lysias 12.20, 
for instance, the lines leading up to the metic/ citizen compari-

7D. Whitehead, The Ideology of the Athenian Metic (Cambridge 1977: here­
after WHITEHEAD) 55. While he specifically includes Lys. 31.29 in this topos, he 
does not mention Lys. 12.20. 



Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner.  Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

GEOFF BAKEWELL 9 

son stress that the orator and his family served as choregoi, paid 
taxes, were orderly,S made no private enemies, ransomed Athen­
ian prisoners. In a phrase, they did what was assigned to them 
by the city, 'to rtpoa'tu't'to~EVOV rtOlOUV'tUC;.9 Likewise, Lysias 
31.29 reminds the audience that metics comprised a substantial 
portion of Thrasyboulos' support.lO In fighting for the city, these 
men went beyond the call of duty (ou KU'tU 'to rtpoallKov 

Euuw'iC;). Thus even though the primary thrust of Lysias' metic/ 
citizen comparisons was to cast the defendants in a bad light, 
they also contained an important implication which stood con­
ventional civic wisdom on its head: with regard to the rtOA.1C;, 

good metics were preferable to bad citizens.ll 

2. Eratosthenes and Philon: metaphorical metics 
The primary effect of these metic/ citizen comparisons was 

to contribute to the negative portraits of Eratosthenes and 
PhilonY Yet Lysias does more than suggest that these two 
failed to live up to what was expected of citizens. With the 
metic/ citizen comparison hanging in the air, Lysias goes one 
step further: he shrewdly recasts the defendants as metics of 

8Whitehead 58 notes that the word K6cr!!to~ is frequently applied to metics in 
honorific decrees. On Lysias' use of the term see R. Seager, "Lysias Against the 
Corndealers," Historia 15 (1966) 179. 

9Lysias' language here recalls that of IG 112 10.8 in which rewards are 
assigned to those who assisted the demos in the Piraeus Kat E1tOtOV ta 1tpocr­
tat[t6!!EVa]. Many of those referred to in the inscription were of course metics. 

lOOn metic support for Thrasyboulos see P. Krentz, The Thirty at Athens 
(Ithaca 1982: hereafter KRENTZ) 84, and 73 on Lysias' own involvement in 
supplying the forces at Phyle with mercenaries and shields. 

uOn the evolution of Athenian notions of citizenship see P. B. Manville, 
The Origins of Citizenship in Ancient Athens (Princeton 1990). On Athenian 
civic ideology see A. L. Boegehold and A. Scafuro, Athenian Identity and Civic 
Ideology (Baltimore 1994). 

12For the thorough-going way Lysias set about this in the case of Era­
tosthenes see Murphy (supra n.2). Lysias went to similar lengths against 
Philon, claiming that his mother had not even trusted him to bury fier properly. 
See Weissenberger (supra n.1) 178: "auch in diesem Abschnitt demonstriert der 
Logograph seine Meisterschaft, mit einem Minimum an Beweismaterial ein 
Maximum an Wirkung zu erzielen." 



Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner.  Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

10 LYSIAS 12 AND L YSIAS 31 

the worst sort. According to him, both men are devoted to 
money, and place their own good above that of the city. The 
orator lays great stress on the fact that at one point Philon 
actually took his possessions and, fleeing, chose to live as a 
metic at Oropos rather than as a citizen at Athens. Lysias 12 
and Lysias 31 thus portray Eratosthenes and Philon as stereo­
typical metics, men for whom possessions trump polis. 

In the popular imagination, metics were strongly linked with 
money. Several things contributed to this reputation. First and 
foremost, economic factors prompted many men to leave their 
native lands and immigrate to AthensY Second, metics were 
often artisans and traders rather than farmers, and as such had 
more frequent dealings with money.14 Legal restrictions com­
prised a third factor. Metics at Athens were barred from 
£1K't110'1';, the ownership of land and houses. 15 They were thus 
denied some of the most significant investment opportunities 
open to Athenian citizens, and forced to store their assets in 
forms that tended to be more portable, less visible, and more 
easily concealed.16 The fact that metics held so many of their re­
sources in this form of aq>av~.; oUO'ta 17 undoubtedly prompted 

13Whitehead 18: "the fact that so many did choose 'to 'Alh,veat l1£'totKEtV 
cannot plausibly be attributed to the attractions of metic-status as such but the 
more l?eneral assets of Athens-which, for the majority, meant the economic 
activihes of a large city and major port." 

14P. Krentz, "Foreigners Against the Thirty: IG 112 10 Again." Phoenix 34 
(1980) 298-306, at 305, notes that of the 69 identifiable professions listed for 
the (non-citizen) honorees of IG 112 10, 31 were "in handicrafts or small manu­
facturing, and 19 in trade and selling." R. Randall, "The Erechtheum Workers, 
AlA 57 (1953) 203, notes that 39% of the workers listed in the Erechtheum 
building inscriptions were metics. 

ISD. Hennig, "Immobilienerwerb durch Nichtburger in der klassischen und 
hellenistischen Polis," Chiron 24 (1994) 305-344. 

16T. Figueira" Sitopo/ai and Sitophylakes in Lysias' "Against the Grain­
dealers": Governmental Intervention in the Athenian Economy," Phoenix 40 
(1986) 149-171, at 168. For the impressive contents of Lysias' own strongbox 
(Kt~o)'t6r;) see Lys. 12.10. 

171 use the term in a loose, descriptive sense here. V. Gabrielsen, "<I>ANEPA 
and A<I>ANHI OYIIA in Classical Athens," CIMed 37 (1986) 103-104, suggests 
that the distinction between <pavEpa ouaia and a<pavlJr; ouaia had more to do 
with an owner's attitude towards his possessions than their nature per se. 



Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner.  Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

GEOFF BAKEWELL 11 

popular speculation about the extent of their wealth, partic­
ularly in a community the size of ancient Athens.Is This com­
bination of factors led to a linkage between metics and money in 
the popular mind. Indeed, when in 403 the Thirty decided that 
they wanted money, their thoughts turned to metics as a group. 
According to Lysias 12.6-7, 

eEoYVt~ yap Kat nEicrrov EAEyOV EV 'tOl~ tPU1Kovta 1tEpt trov 
/.lEtOtKroV, ro~ dEY tlVE~ t11 1tOAttEi<;x ax96/.lEVOt· KaAAtcrtllV oilv 
dvat 1tp6<pacrtV tl/.lropElcr9at !lEV oOKElv, tip 0' EPYCP XPll/.lattSE­
creat· 
Theognis and Peison were speaking among the Thirty about 
the metics, that some of them were hostile to the government. 
They said that there was a wonderful pretext for seeming to 
take revenge, but in fact to make money. 

The Thirty's desire to settle political scores is described as a con­
venient excuse concealing the real motive: profit. 19 The fact that 
metics were marginal figures less capable of resistance (both 
legally and otherwisefo undoubtedly played a part in their selec-

18Plato's portrait of Kephalos in Republic I contains a vivid example of 
both the visibility of metic wealth and the public comment it occasioned. At 
329E Kephalos has claimed that he bears the trials of old age well because of 
his good character-he notes that he is both K6crJllO~ (see supra n.8) and d\KOA.O~ 
(having a good disposition). Sokrates responds:"'O Kephalos, I think that most 
people do not believe you when you say this, but think that you bear old age 
easily not on account of your character but because you have amassed a great 
fortune' (oux 1:0 1tOA.A.i,V oucrtav KEK1:llcr9at). 'You speak the truth', said Keph­
alas." 

19Some scholars have challenged the accuracy of this account of the metic 
proscriptions. Krentz 80-82 sees them as genuinely politically motivated. So 
does D. Whitehead, "Sparta and the Thirty Tyrants," AncSoc 13-14 (1982) 
105-130, who notes the ways in which the Thirty sou~ht to reshape Athens 
along the lines of Sparta. He sees in the metic proscnptions an interesting 
paraIlel with the Spartan krypteia's attacks on helots: "The issue was funda­
mentally one of prmciple-of nerve, indeed ... Could the Thirty themselves, 
each and every one of them, pick out a victim and kill him? As the regime met 
mounting o~position, unflincnmg resolve was vital, and such a rite de passage 
would certaiiily sort the men from the boys" (128). It seems likely that all three 
motives (financial, political, and initiatory) were involved. For the purposes of 
the argument here,nowever, what matters is that Lysias could plausibly claim 
to a citizen audience that the proscriptions were motivated by metics' money. 

20For the disadvantages metics faced in legal actions see Rhodes (supra n.4) 
654-655. 



Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner.  Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

12 LYSIAS 12 AND LYSIAS 31 

tion as victims. Yet their suitability as a target for confiscations 
only makes sense if they had, broadly speaking, a reputation for 
wealth.21 

Thus Lysias locates the persecution of his family within the 
broader context of the Thirty's desire for money. In particular, 
he focuses on why the Thirty wanted money. According to him, 
Theognis and Peison claimed the government was in tight finan­
cial straits (12.6): €A.qov EV tOt<; tptaKOVt<x ... 1tavt())<; oE t'hv IlEv 
1tOA.1V 1tEvEcr8at, t'hv (0') apx'hv OEtcr8at XPTJllat())V (Uthey were 
saying among the Thirty ... that the city was extremely short of 
money, and their government lacked funds").22 One possibility 
is that the Thirty needed this money to pay Sparta in return for 
the hoplite garrison sent to Athens to bolster their regime.23 Yet 
according to Lysias, the Thirty's desire for money sprang less 
from political necessity than common venality. Indeed, he 
immediately follows the oratio obliqua reporting the speech of 
Theognis and Peison with a set of editorializing remarks. He 
claims that these two easily persuaded the rest of the Thirty be­
cause they thought nothing of killing men, but set great store by 
seizing money (12.7): a1tOK"ttvVUVat IlEV yap av8pO:)1tou<; 1tEpt ou­
OEVO<; llYouv"to, A.<XIl~aVEtV OE XPTjIl<X"t<X 1tEpt 1tOA.A.OU E1tOlOuVtO. 
For oligarchs like Eratosthenes, the value of money exceeded 
that of men. 

The venality of the Thirty is the point of detail after damning 
detail in Lysias 12. Peison's rapturous gaze upon Lysias' 

21 The sources disagree about how many metics were targeted by the Thirty. 
Lysias (12.7) mentions ten, Xenophon (Hell. 2.3.21) thirty, and Diodorus 
Slculus (14.5.6) sixty. According to Lysias, Theognis and Peison were speaking 
about metics as a group (m::pt 'trov J,lE'tOtKOlV, 12.6). 

22Krentz 81 rightly asks how Lysias would have known what was said at 
this meeting. Here too what Lysias claims is more important than its truth 
value. 

23 Xen. Hell. 2.3.21: EOO~E 0' au'to'i~, 01t0l~ EXOtEV Kat 'to'i~ 'PpouP01~ XPlJJ,la'ta 
Ot06vat, Kat 'trov J,lE'tOtKOlV Eva EKa(J'tov A.a~Elv, Kat au'tOu~ J,lEV U1tOK'tElVat, 
'tex OE XPlJJ,lam au'trov U1tocrTWlJvacr9at (" And they decided, so that they might 
be able to pay the garrison, for each of them to seize one of the metics, and to 
kill the men, and to confiscate their possessions"). Krentz, Xenophon Hellenika 
II.3.11-IV.2.B (Warminster 1995) 129, is skeptical of this claim. 



Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner.  Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

GEOFF BAKEWELL 13 

wealth (12.10), the catalogue of assets he seizes (12.11), even 
Melobios' theft of the earrings from the ears of Polemarchos' 
wife (12.19) all serve to emphasize the Thirty's greed. In his de­
scription of Peison's behavior at chapters 8-10 Lysias provides 
a convenient distillation of his view of the motivations of the 
Thirty as a whole. Lysias was at horne entertaining foreigners 
(~£VOt) when the oligarchs burst in. The intruders drove out his 
guests and handed Lysias himself over to Peison. Here Lysias, 
fearing the worst, bribed Peison to let him escape (12.8): eyffi oE 
nEto(Ova jlEv llPo}'t(Ov Ei ~ou".ot't6 jlE owOat xp~jla'ta Aa~rov' 0 
0' £<paoKEv, Ei rcoAAa £111 ("I asked Peison if he would be willing 
to save me in return for money. He agreed, if it was a lot"). 
Peison seems to employ a sliding scale in which every favor has 
its price. Lysias promised to give him a talent of silver and, 
doubting Peison's trustworthiness, made his captor swear an 
oath (12.9) This Peison did, calling down destruction upon 
himself and his children should he betray Lysias (12.10). Yet 
just moments later he reneges, seizing three talents of silver, four 
hundred Cyzicene staters, one hundred Darics, and four silver 
phialae (12.11). Peison values money so much that he stains his 
honor, endangers the lives of his children, and insults the gods. 
Lysias' reason for describing Peison's behavior at such length is 
of course to tar Eratosthenes with the same brush. In their 
devotion to lucre, Eratosthenes and his friends fit popular ster­
eotypes about metics. 

Another reproach commonly directed against me tics at 
Athens was that they put their own desires ahead of the good 
of the polis.24 In the idiom of late fifth-century political in­
vective, metics were often suspected of doing whatever they 
wanted, rcOtEtV 0 n o.v ~ouA(Ovmt. This charge was an all-

24 Eur. Supp. 888-900 explicitly describes one of the seven attackers of 
Thebes, Parthenopaios, as a metic whose interests coincided fully with his 
city's. Yet as Whitehead 37 notes, this idealizing description implies that the op­
posite was more likely true: metics' interests were generally thought to diverge 
from those of their host polis. 



Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner.  Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

14 L YSIAS 12 AND LYSIAS 31 

purpose bludgeon that could also be applied to citizens.25 Yet it 
may have been thought to have a special application to metics. 
In Lysias 22 Ku'ta 'trov O"t't01tWAWV, for instance, the following 
exchange takes place between a citizen accuser and a metic de­
fendant (22.5): 

Ei1t£ au £Iloi, 1l£'tOtKO~ £1; NaL Mf'totKft~ o£ 1tO'tfPOV ffi~ 1t£tao­
IlfVO~ 'tOt~ VOIlOt~ 'tOt~ 'til~ nOAf(o~, 11 ffi~ not~a(Ov 0 'tt (Xv 13ouAn; 
"Tell me, are you a metic?" "Yes." "And do you live as a metic 
in order to obey the laws of the city, or to do whatever you 
want?" 

Here the accuser posits a dichotomy: a metic either obeys the 
laws or does what he wants. However, the accuser has not 
offered the defendant a neutral choice here; he has stacked the 
deck. For elsewhere we find obedience to the laws strongly 
linked to citizenship. In Crito, for instance, the Laws tell Sokra­
tes that they offer all Athenians a clear choice upon coming of 
age: take their property and emigrate (/1£'tOtK£tV) elsewhere, or 
remain in Athens and obey the laws (SID-E). Thus the citizen 
accuser in Lysias 22 puts the accused metic in a hard place. Of 
course he must say that he resides in Athens to obey the laws, 
but the pointed mention of his metic status calls into question 
his claim. 

Lysias has recourse to this 1tOt£tV 0 "[t (Xv ~OUAWV'tat formula 
when he begins his final summation for the jurors against Era­
tosthenes (12.84-85). He urges them to convict the man, and 
marvels at his audacity in even presuming to defend his conduct 
at an £u8uvu. Eratosthenes must either be contemptuous of the 
jurors, or be relying on the assistance of unnamed oligarchic ac­
complices who have come to the court as spectators to influence 
the jury.26 Lysias notes their presence, and urges the jurors to 

25 Seager (supra n.S) 179: "for individuals to do 0 'tt av ~ouAWvtat is in dem­
ocratic Athens an unfailing sign of sedition." 

26 On the phenomenon see A. Lanni, "Spectator Sport or Serious Politics? ot 
ltEPtE(HllKO'tE<; and the Athenian Lawcourts," IHS 117 (1997) 187 n.5S. 



Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner.  Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

GEOFF BAKEWELL 15 

consider the deterrent effect of their vote. He claims that the 
oligarchic audience has not come so much to help Eratosthenes, 
but 

~YOUIlEVOl 1tOAA11V aOEW.V mpien EcrEcr8cn trov (tE) 1tE1tpaYIl£­
vwv Kat tou Aomou 1tOlElV 15 n av ~OUAwvtcn, el tou~ IlEYicrtwv 
KaKrov aitiou~ Aa~OVtE~ aq111crEtE. 
thinking that they will enjoy much amnesty for their deeds 
and have much freedom to do whatever they want in the 
future, if you [jurors] will acquit those guilty of the greatest 
evils now that you have them in hand (12.85). 

Here Lysias tries to tie Eratosthenes to his oligarchic brethren, 
who (like him) await the opportunity 1tOlE1V 0 'tt av ~ouArov­
·tat.27 Thus in his speeches Lysias often turns to a truism of civic 
ideology: citizens live in the city intending to obey the laws, 
whereas non-citizens do not. Against Eratosthenes, the orator 
employs this "truth" in a novel way: he claims the oligarchs put 
their own desires ahead of obedience to the laws, and as such 
are more akin to metics than citizens. 

Lysias adopts a similar approach in the case against Philon. 
At 31.5-6 he attacks his opponent's suitability to serve on the 
boule, and describes at some length the class of people to which 
he belongs: 

EYW yap oi)je aAAou~ nva~ <Plllll OiKawv dvcn !3ouAEunv 1tEpt 
lWrov, ~ tou~ 1tpO~ t,!> dval ltOAita~ Kat E1tl8uIlOUvta~ toutou. 
tOUtOl~ IlEV yap IlEYaAa to. Ota<p£poV'ta Ecrnv E~ tE ltpattElV 
t11V 1tOAlV ti)vOE Kat aVE1tlt1l0£iro~ Ola to avaYKalov cr<picrlV 
autol~ ~YElcrecn elval IlEt£Xnv to Il£PO~ trov Onvrov, Wcr1tEP Kat 
trov aya8rov IlEt£XOUcrl' 15crOl OE <pucrn IlEv ltOAltai elm, YVWllll OE 
xproVtcn w~ 1tacra yil 1tatpt~ aUtol~ Ecrttv EV ~ av to. E1tt'ti)Ona 
EXrocrtv, Oi>tOl of\Aoi etmv 15tl KaV 1tap£VtE~ to tf\~ 1tOAEro~ KOlVOV 
aya80v Eltt to ramrov lOWV K£POO~ EA80lEV 010. to 1111 t11v 1tOAtv 
aAAa t11V oucriav 1tatpiOa raUtOl~ ~YElcr8cn. 
For I say that it is unjust for any others to serve on our council 

27Xenophon (Hell. 2.3.23) notes that the Thirty got rid of Theramenes be­
cause they considered him an obstacle to doing whatever they wanted to ('to 
ltotEtV (5 'tt ~OUAOlV'tO). 



Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner.  Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

16 L YSIAS 12 AND L YSIAS 31 

except those who, in addition to being citizens, also want to be 
citizens. For it makes a great difference to them that this city 
fares well and suitably, because they think it is necessary for 
them to have a share of its horrible fortunes, just as they also 
share its good things. But all those who on the one hand are 
citizens by birth, yet on the other are of the opinion that every 
land in which they have their daily needs met is their home­
land, these clearly would pursue their own private gain even 
if it meant abandoning the city's common good, because they 
think their homeland is not their polis but their possessions. 

There are several things to note about this passage. First, Phil on 
is ranked among those who are citizens by birth (cpuo-n) yet 
think that every land in which their necessities are met is their 
homeland. Moreover, the strong possibility exists that the inter­
ests of such people will diverge from those of the city. While 
true citizens cannot fare well when Athens fares poorly, this is 
not true for the likes of Philon: when the going gets tough, they 
truly get going. In this regard Philon and his ilk are cast as stereo­
typical metics with no lasting attachment to any particular 
land. For them, 1t<X'tpis means not polis but possessions: home is 
where the oucriu is. 

Here again Lysias uses powerful antitheses to stress the con­
trast. According to him, Phil on and friends would sacrifice the 
good of the city for their own private well-being. They pursue 'to 
Ea'll'tWV r8wv lCEp80s while eschewing 'to 'tlls 1tOA£(J)s lCOlVOV 
ayu80v. 'to lCEp80s, financial gain, outweighs 'to ayu8ov, a less 
tangible good. The former is described as r8tov, a private posses­
sion, the latter as lCOlVOV, belonging to the public. EUU'tWV points 
out that such men are concerned above all with themselves; their 
interest in the 1tOAls is minimal. In many ways, then, this 
passage is an expanded description of men who do 0 'tt av ~ou­
A(J)V'tUt. In this regard Philon seems a stereotypical metic. Lest 
anyone miss the point, Lysias pounds it home moments later. 
Phil on did more than resemble the average me tic: he actually 
became one. After Thrasyboulos and his forces moved from 



Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner.  Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

GEOFF BAKEWELL 17 

Phyle to the Piraeus, Phil on acted differently from all other 
citizens ('to. Evav'tla a1taO't 'to'i~ a.AAot~ 1tOAi'tm~ E1tOlllO'E, 31.8). 
Lysias describes his departure from Attica thus (31.9): 

crucrKEuaCHIJ.1Evo<; yap ta EautOU Ev8EVOE Ei<; tT,v tlltEpOplav 
E~ci>KT]crE, Kat EV 'QpOl1t<!> J.1EtOlKWV Katan8d<; E7tt 7tpocrtatou 
iPKEt, ~oUAT]8d<; 7tap' EKElV01<; IlEt01KEtV J.1UAAov 11 IlE8' lJJ.1&v 
7tOAltT]<; dvat. 
Having collected his things, he emigrated from here beyond 
the border, and paying his me tic fee in Oropos was living 
under the supervision of a prostates, wanting to be a metic 
among them rather than a citizen with you. 

Lysias' description stresses several demeaning elements of 
Philon's life as a metic in Oropos. First of all, he had to pay the 
fee charged by the community for the right to reside there. 28 

Moreover, he was forced to live under the supervision of an 
Oropian citizen who served as his legal representative.29 Lysias' 
citizen audience would likely have found the choice of such a 
life unbecoming.30 Thus as in the case against Eratosthenes, Lys­
ias portrays Phil on as a stereotypical metic whose possessions 
and private interests mean more to him than his citizenship. 

3. A new criterion for citizenship: 'tOu~ 1tpO~ tip dvm 1tOAi'ta<; 
Kat E1tt8uJ.1ouv'ta<; 'tou'tOu 
For much of the second half of the fifth century the Athenian 

democracy strictly enforced Perikles' law of 451/0 restricting 
citizenship to those born of two Athenian parents.31 However, 
the strategic and tactical necessities of the Peloponnesian War 
led to a blurring of the distinctions between Athenians and non-

28 For arguments that metics likely found this unpalatable see Whitehead 76. 
29For a detailed summary of the various views on the nature of the ltpO­

crtatT]~ see Whitehead 90-92. 
305. C. Todd, The Shape of Athenian Law (Oxford 1993) 197. 
31 On Perikles' citizenship law see C. Patterson, Pericles' Citizenship Law of 

451-50 B.C. (New York 1981). 



Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner.  Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

18 L YSIAS 12 AND L YSIAS 31 

Athenians.32 Upon assuming power, the Thirty reacted by re­
establishing and strengthening the distinction between citizens 
and non-citizens. They restricted the franchise to 3,000 and 
expelled many non-citizens from the aO"'tu proper.33 The Thirty 
were in turn toppled by Thrasyboulos and his supporters, who 
included many non-citizens. Thus as the Athenians went about 
restoring the democracy in 403, they had several significant 
decisions to make regarding citizenship. The most important of 
these concerned which criteria to employ, and how (if at all) to 
address any resulting inequities. 

The metic/ citizen comparisons in Lysias 12 and Lysias 31 
contain evidence for Athenian attitudes towards citizenship 
during this important' period. Beneath the speeches' rhetorical 
surface lie at least three important propositions. The first is that 
the citizen/metic distinction was to a certain extent arbitrary 
and unfair. While some metics (such as Lysias' family and the 
supporters of Thrasyboulos) deserved to be citizens on the 
basis of their devotion to Athens, some citizens (such as Era­
tosthenes and Phil on) did not, given their pursuit of money and 
self-interest.34 A second proposition is that the rigid separation 
of metics and citizens based solely on heredity was not in the 
best interests of the city. The remarks at Lysias 31.5 are 
particularly suggestive here. Lysias argues that it is not enough 

320n the grant of citizenship to the Plataians see [Dem.] 59.104. On the 
enfranchisement of those who fought at Arginusae see Ar. Ran. 190-191, 
693-694, and Hellanikos FGrHist 323a F 25. On the conferral of Athenian 
rights on the Samians see IG P 127. For the privileges the Euboeans received see 
Lys. 34.3. [Xen.] Ath.Pol. 1.10-12 links the difficulty in distinguishing among 
citizens, metics, and slaves on the streets of Athens to the military importance of 
the latter groups. On the difficulties in determining the civic status of some of 
those listed on polis casualty lists see N. Loraux, L'invention d'Athenes (Paris 
1981) 32-37. E. Cohen, The Athenian Nation (Princeton 2000), arsues that the 
blurring of political distinctions was in fact broadly charactenstic of fifth­
and fourth-century Athens. On his view many metics "became fully involved in 
Athenian life, and physically and culturally indistinguishable from the mass of 
politai" (72). 

33Krentz 64-66. See also Whitehead (supra n.19). 
34Their actions under the Thirty proved a decisive test of their worth; on 

the importance of such moments in defining a man cf ThUc. 2.42.1-3. 



Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner.  Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

GEOFF BAKEWELL 19 

to be born a citizen; one should also want to be a citizen. The 
only ones who belong on the council (or in the demos for that 
matter) are 'tous 1tPOs 'to dvat 1tOAi'tas Kat £1tt8u/-Louv'tas 
'tQ{)'tou. Citizens should thus have an affective attachment to 
their 1tOA1s, and be willing to put its good above their own. 
Lysias' description of those who fail to meet this standard 
begins with the phrase oO'Ot 8£ <puO'ft /-L£V 1toAl'tai dO't. This 
reference to <jluO'£t calls to mind the Sophistic vO/-Losj<jluO'ts 
debate of the late fifth century; Lysias' suggestion that <jluO'ts in 

and of itself should not suffice for citizenship hints at a role for 
VO/-L0S.35 In political terms, it suggests the possibility of 
enfranchising deserving non-citizens by legal means. Finally, a 
third proposition is that there are those who fit the metic 
stereotype: some people really do place their own interests 
before those of the polis. Given this fact, the indiscriminate 
bestowal of citizenship should be avoided. 

Lysias' metic/ citizen comparisons and their underlying prop­
ositions should not be interpreted as isolated views or special 
pleading by the orator on behalf of his fellow metics.36 On the 
contrary, they seem to have had a least a modicum of support 
among Athenian citizens. For Lysias was first and foremost a 
successful logographer:37 as such, his primary goal was to win 
cases. And this in turn meant playing to the views of his audi­
ence. Lysias would certainly have been hesitant to put forward 
notions known to be offensive to his citizen listeners. Lysias 12 
is particularly noteworthy in this regard because its audience 
was probably a jury of citizens drawn exclusively from the 

35 On the v0I10<;!q>UGtC; distinction see M. Ostwald, From Popular Sovereignty to 
the Sovereignty of Law (Berkeley 1986) 260-266. 

36For Lysias' own fortunes as a metic see [Plut.] Mar. 835c-836D. The strong 
probability that speech 31 was not delivered by Lysias makes the claim of 
special pleading even less likely in that instance. 

37His track record was such that he is said ([Plut.] 836A) to have lost his case 
with only two of the hundreds of orations he authored. 



Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner.  Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

20 LYSIAS 12 AND LYSIAS 31 

upper classes.38 Lysias 12 and Lysias 31 thus suggest that at 
least some Athenian citizens were sympathetic to redressing in­
equities created by the traditional Periklean citizenship criteria. 
Indeed, before it was blocked by Archinos on a charge of ypaqrh 

rtapavoj.lO>v, Thrasyboulos' proposal to enfranchise his support­
ers (including metics and slaves) passed the Athenian ekklesia.39 

In the end, however, Athens' response to questions involving 
citizenship proved to be conservative. With regard to criteria, 
the city voted down Phormisios' proposal to restrict the fran­
chise on the basis of both birth and land ownership,4o adopting 
instead the measures of Aristophon and Nicomenes to reinstate 
Perikles' citizenship law.41 With regard to specific individuals, 
Thrasyboulos' decree failed. And while a subsequent similar 
measure, IG n2 10, again sought to reward his supporters, its 
provisions are unclear; as David Lewis recently noted, in the 
absence of new fragments "there can be no certainty about the 
date or nature of the awards."42 Thus the prevailing post-Thirty 
attitude towards non-citizens was ultimately stingyY Archinos, 
the blocker of Thrasyboulos' decree, had his own proposal 
enacted. Men who claimed to have accompanied the demos back 

38Ath.Pol. 39.6 states that Eu9uvut for those of the Thirty, the Ten, and the 
Eleven who chose to remain in Athens were to be held EV 'toi.; 'tu n,.tTllla'tU 
1tUPEXOIlEvol';. See Rhodes (supra n.4) 470. 

39 [Plut.) Mor. 835F; Ath.Pol. 40.2. 
40 According to Dion. Hal. Lysias 32, Phormisios proposed 't1,v OE 1tOAt'tElUV 

Ill, 1tacrtv aAAu 'tOi.; [tl,V 1 yijv Exoucrt 1tUPUOOUVUl. 
410stwald (supra n.35) 507-508. 
42D. Lewis, "The Epigraphical Evidence for the End of the Thirty," in 

Aristote et Athenes, ed. M. PH~rart (Paris 1993) 223. For the text of the decree 
see M. J. Osborne, Naturalization in Athens (Brussels 1981-82) I 37-41. For an 
overview of the issues involved see Osborne II D6, 26-43. For a somewhat 
representative sampling of other views see Krentz (supra n.14) (decree con­
cerned primarily With icrO'tEAEtU); Whitehead, "A Thousand New Athenians." 
LeM 9 (1984) 8-10 (decree a ~rant of citizenship); and P. Harding, "Metics, 
Foreigners, or Slaves? The ReCIpients of Honours in IG 11210," ZPE 67 (1987) 
176-182 (most of those honored were slaves rather than metics). 

43 By contrast, Cohen (supra n.32) 68 characterizes the reenactment of the 
Periklean measure as an 'extraordinary liberalization." His view, based 
largely on Nicomenes' rider, does not take into account the restrictive tenor of 
the other measures described above. 



Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner.  Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

GEOFF BAKEWELL 21 

from Phyle were vetted by the council; those surviving this 
scrutiny received a block grant of a thousand drachmas to per­
form sacrifices and dedications. As Aeschines notes, this left 
each man an olive wreath and the sorry sum of less than ten 
drachmas.44 A proposal of Theozotides was likewise adopted. 
This measure provided state support for the orphans of those 
who died fighting to restore the demos. However, it was careful 
to limit this support to children of YVT)(HOt citizens who died; 
me tic children were passed over.45 Non-citizens even received 
little when it came to reversing the expropriations of the Thirty. 
While lands and houses were restored to their previous (citizen) 
owners, holders of moveable property were not so lucky: they 
had to repurchase their belongings from the current posses­
sors.46 (As noted above, metics were barred from owning land 
or houses.) Only in death, it seems, did Athens make no distinc­
tions between citizens and metics in rewarding the valorous. 
According to [Lysias] 2 'E1tt'ta<ptOt;, those ~EVOt who died fight­
ing for the restoration of the demos were mourned and buried at 
public expense along with the citizens.47 

In the fourth century Athens was repeatedly praised for its 
political moderation and consequent success in implementing 
the reconciliation agreement.48 Indeed, the encomia continue to 
this day. According to Ostwald, lithe nexus of events that 
ended the war between Athens and the Lacedaemonians and at 

44Aeschin. 3.187. Scholars now associate this measure with the remains of 
the decree published by A. Raubitschek, "The Heroes of Phyle," Hesperia 10 
(1941) 284-295. Note however that in the context of the speech it is in 
Aeschines' interest to minimize the award made to the returnees. 

45R. Stroud, "Greek Inscriptions: Theozotides and the Athenian Orphans," 
Hesperia 40 (1971) 280-30l. 

46Lys. fr.l.34-47. Some me tics were probably de facto property owners, 
concealing their ownership through citizen middIemen. (For a later example of 
the phenomenon see M. Leimo and P. Remes, "Partnership of Citizens and 
Metlcs: The Will of Epicurus," CQ 49 [1999] 161-166.) Such metics would 
have been particularly harmed by the terms of the reconciliation. 

47Lys. 2.66. Note that the orator describes these men as 1tu'tpiou 'tilv ap€'tilv 
f]Y'1cra~EvOl ("believing that excellence was their homeland"). 

48 E.g. Aeschin. 2.176, Ath.Pol. 40.3, Dem. 24.135. 



Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner.  Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

22 LYSIAS 12 AND LYSIAS 31 

the same time terminated the hostilities between the oligarchical 
remnant in the city and its opponents in the Piraeus constitutes 
one of the most inspiring episodes in Athenian history, if not 
even in human history."49 While Athens' reputation for even­
handedness between oligarchs and democrats is deserved, we 
should not forget those to whom the reconciliation was less 
kind: metics. Indeed, it is unclear that even the metics who 
fought alongside Thrasyboulos ever received much in the way of 
tangible gratitude from the city.5o Thus in praising the demo­
cratic restoration we should at the same time remember Lysias 
and those Athenians sympathetic to the notion that civic merit 
was not necessarily linked to birth. Although their voices did 
not carry the day during the period 403-401, they made an im­
portant if fleeting statement. In claiming that only l"Ou<; n;po<; 'rip 

dvat 1tOAt.w; Kat E1tteU~ouv'ra<; 'rou'rou should be citizens, 
Lysias provided one of the first explicit formulations of the 
"consent" principle of citizenship.51 

October, 2000 Classical & Near Eastern Studies 
Creighton University 
Omaha, Nebraska 68178 
gbakewe@creighton.edu 

490stwald (supra n.35) 497. Krentz 120 comments that "overall, the Athen­
ians earned the congratulatory words of Aristotle ... [the reconciliation] must 
be judged a triumph-a brilliant one, for a Greek polis." 

SOTo interpret IG I12 10 as a grant of citizenship to these metics (Ostwald 
[supra n.35] 508-509; Whitehead [supra n.42]) seems to go beyond the current 
evidence. See supra 20. 

SIOn the continuing legacy of the "consent" principle in U.s. citizenship 
law see P. Schuck, Citizens, Strangers, and In-Betweens: Essays on Immigration 
and Citizenship (Boulder 1998) 207-216. 

I wish to thank Prof. Jerise Fogel and the anonymous referee at GRBS for 
their invaluable assistance. I also wish to thank the National Endowment for 
the Humanities, whose Summer Stipend (1998) provided me with generous sup­
port during the initial stages of this project.