The Ancient Library

Scanned text contains errors.

On this page: Nomothetes


any man produced before the judges a fictitious law (ou/c tWa v6jj.ov], he was punishable with death. (Demosth. c.Arist. 807.)

As the SticaorTai (chosen as explained under dicastes) performed the functions both of judge and jury, it is evident that the important question, how the laws of Athens worked, depends on the discretion which in practice they exercised in the interpretation of the written law. This is only to be discovered by a careful perusal of the Attic orators, and is too wide a question to be discussed here. Much light is thrown on the subject by Aristotle (Rfiet. i. 15), who, in treating of judicial matters, always has in view the practice of the Athenian courts. He reckons the v6^oi among the cirexvoi iriffTeis, and advises the orator, when the law of the country is against him (eav evdvrios y 6 yeypafjL/jievos t<£ Trpdy/AaTt) to appeal to the universal law of justice or equity (r&5 kolvi»> v6/jL<p Kal rots eTTieiKearw, &s SiKaioTcpois). For (stiys he) if the written law is contrary to justice, it is not a law, ov yap Troje? rb epyov rov vo/aov. From this it may be seen, that the notions enter­tained by the Athenians of the discretion to be ex­ercised by a judge were somewhat different from our own. There existed at Athens no class of persons corresponding to our counsel or attorneys, whose business or profession it was to expound the laws. The office of the efryyral related only to religious observances. [exegetae.] According to the principle of the constitution, every citizen was bound to watcli over the preservation of the laws, and to inform against and prosecute any per­sons who transgressed them. The people, either on the bench or in the assembly, were the ulti­mate judges. (Lycurg. c. Leoc. 148, ed. Steph.)

As to the difference between ro/xos and i/^j<j>iff,aa, and as to the manner in which laws were enacted or repealed, see nomcxthetes. [C. R. K.J


Argos, Thales of Miletus, Bias of Priene, Chilon, who improved the laws of Lycurgus, and Pytha­goras, may be reckoned in this class. ( Wachsm. vol.i. pt.i. p. 212.) But the name of vo^aQsrfis is given tear3 e'£oxV to Solon and Lycurgus ; for they not only introduced codes of laws, but were the founders of constitutions (TroAfretcu), which, though from time to time modified and altered, and sometimes even suspended, remained more or less in force, so long as Athens and Sparta existed

NOMOTHETES (vofjLoBenf)s\ legislator, is a word which may be applied to any person who causes laws to be enacted. Thus, Pericles and Themistocles are called vo/xo^erat, movers or pro­posers of laws. (Lys. c. Nicom. 186, ed. Steph.) It is, however, more commonly given to those emi­nent men whose laws have been celebrated for their intrinsic merit, or for the important influence which they exercised over the destinies of their country. Such were Minos of Crete, Draco at Athens, Zaleucus at Locri and Charondas, whose laws were distinguished for their aiepigeta, and were received at Rhegium, Catana, and other Chal-cidian states. (Aristot. Pol. ii. 9. § 8 ; Hermann, Pol. Ant. § 88, 89.) Many other men have been honoured with this title, either for having im­proved the laws of their countrymen, or as having by their writings, their counsel, and good example, led to the introduction of a sound moral discipline among them. These were the sages or wise men, called by Diogenes Laertius (i. 40) avveroi ti ical vouoOtTiicoi. Pittacus of Lesbos, Phidon


as republics. (Aristot. Pol. ii. 9. § J.) So high was the esteem in which Solon was held by the Athenians, as the founder of their social polity, that although many important reforms were ef­fected at various periods, he still continued to be regarded as the laivgiver (6 voj*oQeT7}s\ and the whole body of laws passed under his name. Wachsmuth (vol. i. pt. i. p. 268) remarks that on this account, whenever a law of Solon is cited, we may suspect that it contains interpolation. On the other hand, we should bear in mind that in all the changes which took place in the Athenian consti­tution, the reformers aimed at preserving the main principles of Solon's policy. Cleisthenes, who esta­blished the Srj^ai, remodelled the c/>wAal, and made other changes, is characterised by Aristotle (Pol. ii. 6. § 11) as having for his object av£

There is this remarkable difference between the legislation of Solon and that of other Greek law­givers, that he did not (as they did) endeavour to secure fixity and finality for his institutions. Za­leucus and Charondas are said to have made it a capital crime to propose new laws. Lycurgus for­bade young men to censure the laws ; and when he went on his last journey, from which he never re­turned (the story says), he bound his countrymen by an oath to observe all his laws till his return. Solon exacted a similar oath of the Athenians for only ten years. (Herod, i. 29; Wachsm. vol. i. pt. i. p. 211 ; Thirlwall, Gr. Hist. vol. i. p. 295.)

But Solon also devised regulations by which the laws might undergo periodical revision, and be amended as occasion required. At the first Kvpia e/c/cA7?cria in every year, any person was at liberty to point out defects in the existing code or propose alterations. If his motion was deemed worthy of attention, the third assembly might refer the matter to a legislative committee, called j/o,uo0eTcu. This committee was selected by lot from the Heliastic body ; it being the intention of Solon to limit the power of the popular assembly by means of a superior board emanating from itself, composed of citizens of mature age, bound by a stricter oath, and accustomed to weigh legal prin­ciples by the exercise of their judicial functions. The number of the committee, so appointed, varied according to the exigency of the occasion. The people appointed five advocates (trui/St/cot) to attend before the board and maintain the policy of the existing institution. If the proposed measure met the approval of the committee, it passed into law forthwith. Besides this, the Thesmothetae were officially authorised to review the whole code, and refer all statutes which they considered unworthy of being retained to the vopoOeTai. (Hermann, Pol. Ant. § 131 ; Wachsm. vol. i. pt. i. p. 260 ; Thirl­wall, vol. ii. p. 46 ; Demosth. c. Timocr. 706.)

Hence appears the difference between i^r^/aym and v6[Jios. The mere resolution of the people in assembly was a ^Tj^iff/ia, and only remained in force a year, like a decree of the senate. Nothing. was a law that did not pass the ordeal of the voiioOerai. The democracy of Solon was therefore one of that kind, in which (as Aristotle says), Kvpios %v 6 yo/jLos, aAA' ov rb Tr\jj6QS. (Pol. iv. 4. § 3 ; Hermann,, PoL Ant. § 67. n. 8 ; Demosth. c. Aristoc. 649, 651.) Privilegia required to be passed by six thousand of the people in assembly, giving their votes secretly. The naturalization of a foreigner is an example of a privileyium j for

3 f 3

About | First | English Index | Classified Index | Latin Index | Greek Index



page #  
Search this site
All non-public domain material, including introductions, markup, and OCR © 2005 Tim Spalding.
Ancient Library was developed and hosted by Tim Spalding of