1. Finley, Moses I., The Ancient Economy (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1973; repr. 1999), 51 Google Scholar.

2. Oulhen, Jacques opportunely recalls this in his chapter on Athenian society in Le monde grec aux temps classiques, vol. 2, Le IV^e siècle, ed. Brulé, Pierre et al. (Paris: PUF, 2004), 274 Google Scholar.

3. The three terms are sometimes used today in a misleadingly interchangeable manner, as is the case in Hunter, Virginia’s introductory chapter “Status Distinctions in Athenian Law,” in Law and Social Status in Classical Athens, ed. Hunter, Virginia and Edmondson, Jonathan (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 1-29 Google Scholar.

4. Zurbach, Julien, “The Formation of Greek City-States: Status, Class, and Land Tenure Systems,” Annales HSS (English Edition) 68, no. 4 (2013): 617-57 Google Scholar, here p. 626.

5. Ibid., 624.

6. Duplouy, Alain, Le prestige des élites. Recherches sur les modes de reconnaissance sociale en Grèce entre les X^e et V^e siècles avant J.-C. (Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 2006)Google Scholar.

7. Ibid., 258.

8. Loraux, Nicole, “To Repoliticize the City,” in The Divided City: On Memory and Forgetting in Ancient Athens, trans. Pache, Corinne with Fort, Jeff (New York: Zone Books, 2002), 45-62 Google Scholar; Azoulay, Vincent and Ismard, Paulin, “Les lieux du politique dans l’Athènes classique. Entre structures institutionnelles, idéologie civique et pratiques sociales,” in Athènes et le politique. Dans le sillage de Claude Mossé, ed. Pantel, Pauline Schmitt and de Polignac, François (Paris: Albin Michel, 2007), 271-309 Google Scholar.

9. Finley, , “Between Slavery and Freedom” [1964], and “The Servile Statusesof Ancient Greece” [1960], in Economy and Society in Ancient Greece (London: Chatto and Windus, 1981), respectively 116-32Google Scholar and 133-49, especially pp. 131-32.

10. With the exception of Kamen, Deborah, Status in Classical Athens (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

11. Finley, Economy and Society, 131. Duplouy cites the term “continuum” in Le prestige des élites, 258. However, he uses the notion of status in a social rather than a legal sense, whereas in 1964 Finley was still using it in the strict sense.

12. Finley, Economy and Society, 132.

13. For Finley circa The Ancient Economy, only the Classical Greek city—essentially Athens—seems to have had real importance before the Roman Empire. Even though this work was a panorama covering 1,500 years of history (pp. 29 and 58), only rare examples are drawn from the Hellenistic period, such as the Delian leases (pp. 114-15) or what he calls the “credit crisis” at Ephesus at the beginning of the third century BCE (p. 143). Finley’s lack of knowledge about the epigraphic richness of the Aegean basin is striking when, in discussing the honors granted to benefactors, he mentions “the numerous brief epigraphical texts at our disposal” (p. 164)—a considerable error even in 1973. In his book on the horoi or “hypothecation-markers” used to mark lands placed in security, the author hardly ventured beyond the beginning of the second century BCE. See Finley, , Studies in Land and Credit in Ancient Athens, 500-200 B. C.: The Horos Inscriptions (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1951)Google Scholar.

14. I say “despite themselves” because the notion that “Greek law” legitimately existed is not unanimously upheld, especially for the Classical period: see Gagarin, Michael, “The Unity of Greek Law,” in The Cambridge Companion to Ancient Greek Law, ed. Gagarin, Michael and Cohen, David (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 29-40 CrossRefGoogle Scholar. According to Mélèze-Modrzejewski, Joseph, on the other hand, the Hellenistic period saw the development of a common and “universal” Greek law: see his foreword to Julie Vélissaropoulos-Karakostas, Droit grec d’Alexandre à Auguste, 323 av. J.-C.-14 ap. J.-C.: personnes, biens, justice (Athens: Centre de recherches de l’Antiquité grecque et romaine, Fondation nationale de la recherche scientifique, 2011), 1-20 Google Scholar.

15. Democracy, embodied by institutions that recurred from one city to another (Assembly, Council, courts, supervision of magistrates, etc.), was a model that experienced unprecedented expansion throughout the Hellenistic period, especially during the third century BCE—a kind of golden age for this type of political regime: see Gauthier, Philippe, “Les cités hellénistiques,” in The Ancient Greek City-State, ed. Hansen, Mogens Herman (Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1993), 211-31Google Scholar, especially pp. 217-18, which evokes a “democratic koinē.”

16. The Inventory of Archaic and Classical Poleis (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), compiled under the direction of Hansen, Mogens and Nielsen, Thomas H. Google Scholar, counts no less than 1,035 items for both periods combined (p. 6), even if all of these cities did not necessarily exist simultaneously. Their number must have been greater during the Hellenistic period, considering the hundreds of poleis founded in the east after Alexander the Great’s death.

17. A number of inroads have already been made in both chronological directions: Pantel, Pauline Schmitt, La cité au banquet (Paris: Publications de la Sorbonne, 1992; repr. 2011)Google Scholar; Ismard, Paulin, La cité des réseaux. Athènes et ses associations VI^e-I^er siècle av. J.-C. (Paris: Publications de la Sorbonne, 2010)Google Scholar. In the opposite sense, Henri Van Effen-terre and Françoise Ruzé have compiled a list of legal practices during the Archaic period, thanks to the collection of inscriptions in their Nomima. Recueil d’inscriptions politiques et juridiques de l’archaïsme grec (Rome: École française de Rome, 1994-1995).

18. See the account given in Azoulay and Ismard, “Les lieux du politique.”

19. Isopoliteia was the reciprocal or unilateral granting of citizenship by a Greek community to all the members of another community through a decree or a treaty: see Gawantka, Wilfried, Isopolitie. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der zwischenstaatlichen Beziehungen in der griechischen Antike (Munich: C. H. Beck, 1975)Google Scholar. Sympoliteia was the merging of two or more civic bodies, which led to the creation of a shared citizenship. It was therefore simultaneously connected to federalism and the absorption of one or more cities by another larger one: Reger, Gary, “ Sympoliteiai in Hellenistic Asia Minor,” in The Greco-Roman East: Politics, Culture, Society, ed. Colvin, Stephen (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 145-80Google Scholar; Pascual, José, “La sympoliteia griega en las épocas clásica y helenística,” Gerión 25, no. 1 (2007): 167-86 Google Scholar.

20. Gauthier, Philippe, Symbola. Les étrangers et la justice dans les cités grecques (Nancy: Université de Nancy II, 1972)Google Scholar; Gauthier, , Les cités grecques et leurs bienfaiteurs, IV^e-I^er siècle avant J.-C. Contribution à l’histoire des institutions (Athens/Paris: École française d’Athènes, 1985)Google Scholar.

21. Gauthier, , “Sur le citoyen romain,” Commentaire 6, no. 2 (1979): 318-23 Google Scholar; Gauthier, , “‘Générosité’ romaine et ‘avarice’ grecque: sur l’octroi du droit de cité” [1974] and “La citoyenneté en Grèce et à Rome: participation et intégration” [1981], in Études d’histoire et d’institutions grecques. Choix d’écrits (Paris/Geneva: Droz, 2011), respectively pp. 1-12 Google Scholar and 13-34.

22. Nicolet, Claude, The World of the Citizen in Republican Rome, trans. Falla, Paul S. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980), 237 Google Scholar.

23. Sherwin-White, Adrian Nicholas, The Roman Citizenship (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1939; repr. 1973)Google Scholar.

24. As he did, for example, in the introduction to the English translation of his work, admitting that there was a wide gap between the ideal and reality.

25. Gauthier, “Sur le citoyen romain,” 320.

26. “The foreigner who obtained the ciuitas Romana on an individual basis obtained civil rights in particular: the protection of his person, his property, and his activities were equal to those who were henceforth his cives, meaning his fellow citizens. He became part of a community of law.” Gauthier, “‘Générosité’ romaine et ‘avarice’ grecque,” 212.

27. This refers to the direct tax on wealth: see Tributum, Claude Nicolet. Recherches sur la fiscalité directe sous la République romaine (Bonn: R. Habelt, 1976)Google Scholar.

28. Gauthier, “La citoyenneté en Grèce et à Rome,” 169.

29. Tacitus, Annals, 11.24. Claudius’s speech, as reported by the historian, is a reconstitution. For a comparison with the original text, refer to the Claudian tables in Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum 13.1668 or Inscriptiones Latinae selectae 212.

30. Gauthier also draws on the recurrent reference to the granting of “participation” (metousia, metechein) to foreigners in the inscriptions. However, this reference raises more problems than it solves, as shall be seen.

31. Gauthier makes constant reference to Aristotle throughout his writings, as is the casein”La citoyennetéen Grèce età Rome,” 18. Many other examples can also becited.

32. Aristotle, Politics 3.1274b38-1275b21.

33. Aristotle, Politics 3.1275b21-34.

34. This requirement obviously troubled Aristotle, for it could not account for the original citizenship of those who founded the cities, as highlighted by Patterson, Cynthia, “Athenian Citizenship Law,” in Gagarin, and Cohen, , The Cambridge Companion to Ancient Greek Law, 267 Google Scholar.

35. Whitehead, David, “Norms of Citizenship in Ancient Greece,” in City-States in Classical Antiquity and Medieval Italy: Athens and Rome, Florence and Venice, ed. Molho, Anthony, Raaflaub, Kurt, and Emlen, Julia (Stuttgart: F. Steiner, 1991), 135-54Google Scholar, especially pp. 137-41 (on Aristotle). See also: Mossé, Claude, “La conception du citoyen dans la Politique d’Aristote,” Eirene 6 (1967): 17-21 Google Scholar; and the detailed analysis of Johnson, Curtis, “Who is Aristotle’s Citizen?,” Phronesis. A Journal for Ancient Philosophy 29, no. 1 (1984): 73-90 Google Scholar. Since Jacqueline Bordes excludes Aristotle from her analysis, there is no discussion of the passage from Politics regarding the individual definition of politeia in her Politeia dans la pensée grecque jusqu’à Aristote (Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1982). This includes the conclusion, which is nevertheless about the philosopher and is entitled “L’histoire institutionnelle: Aristote” (ibid., 434-54). A subsequent article by the same author mentions politeia only in the collective sense of political regime: see Bordes, , “La place d’Aristote dans l’évolution de la notion de politeia ,” Ktèma 5 (1980): 249-56 Google Scholar.

36. For how these terms were employed, see Aristotle, Politics 1.1258b9-10. The use of chrēsis in the definition of the citizen through dual paternal and maternal ancestry directly stems from this distinction: see 3.1275b21-34.

37. Aristotle, Politics 3.1275a2.

38. Gauthier, Symbola.

39. “We need not here consider those who acquire the title of citizen in some exceptional manner.” Aristotle, Politics 3.1275a6.

40. Aristotle, Politics 3.1278a26-29.

41. On the semantics employed in this construction of the citizen, see Josine Blok’s ongoing work, which deconstructs the Greek politeia> (in Aristotle) by carefully distinguishing levels of participation (and by integrating female citizens). While awaiting the forthcoming release of her book Citizenship, Cult and Community (to be published by Cambridge University Press), see Blok, Josine, “Becoming Citizens: Some Notes on the Semantics of ‘Citizen’ in Archaic Greece and Classical Athens,” Klio 87, no. 1 (2005): 7-40 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

42. Aristotle, Politics 3.1275a22.

43. Ibid.

44. For example, see Aristotle, Politics 3.1275Ы8-19: έξουσία κοι,νωνείν άρχης 3ουλευτι.κης ή κρί,τί,κης, or “the right to participate in deliberative or judicial office.” Here, the word “archō is used in the distributive sense and not to refer to the sole power of the magistrate.

45. Whitehead, “Norms of Citizenship,” 139-40.

46. Aristotle, Politics 3.1278a35-36: ϕανερον έκ τουτων, καί ‘ότι λέγεταί μάλί,στα πολίτης ό μετέχων των τι,μων, “... a citizen in the fullest sense means the man who shares in public office” (and not “in honours” as indicated in Rackham’s English translation).

47. Aristotle, Politics 3.1281a31: τι,μάς λέγομεν εΧναί τάς αρχάς [translation modified]. It seems to me that despite the function of attribute carried by the word τι,μάς, which could imply that “[the] offices are honours,” here it is more a matter of an equivalence between the two terms than an inclusion of the second term in the larger sphere of the first.

48. “A native not admitted to a share in the public timai is like a metic.” Aristotle, Politics 3.1278a38.

49. Aristotle, Politics 3.1275b5-6.

50. Whitehead, David, The Ideology of the Athenian Metic (Cambridge: Cambridge Philological Society, 1977), 70 Google Scholar.

51. The expression was coined by Robert, Louis, “Théophane de Mytilène à Constantinople,” Comptes rendus des séances de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres 113, no. 1 (1969): 42-64 Google Scholar, here p. 42: “The Greek city did not die at Chaeronea, nor under Alexander, nor at any point during the Hellenistic period.”

52. On this conception of the Hellenistic period, see Gauthier, Philippe’s introduction to Citoyenneté et participation à la basse époque hellénistique, ed. Fröhlich, Pierre and Müller, Christel (Paris/Geneva: Droz, 2005), 1-6 Google Scholar.

53. “The regime of the notables was the normal outcome of a direct democracy. ... Since social inequality entailed inequality in talent, leisure and prestige, the result was never in doubt.” Veyne, Paul, Bread and Circuses: Historical Sociology and Political Pluralism, trans. Pearce, Brian (London: The Penguin Press, 1990), 85 Google Scholar.

54. Gauthier, Les cités grecques, 72.

55. Gauthier, “Introduction,” 4.

56. Responding to the Athenian’s question whether there “will ... be any State bordering close on it,” Clinias answers: “None at all, and that is the reason for settling it.” Plato, Laws 4.704c. On the city of the Magnetes, see Bertrand, Jean-Marie, “L’utopie magnète: réflexions sur les Lois de Platon,” in The Imaginary Polis, ed. Hansen, Mogens H. (Copenhagen: Det Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskab, 2005), 152-63Google Scholar.

57. This is expressed, for example, in Aristotle, Politics 3.1275b20-21: “A city is a collection of such persons sufficiently numerous, speaking broadly, to secure independence of life (autarkeia )” [translation modified].

58. This is, for instance, the opinion of Osborne, Michael J., Naturalization in Athens, vol. 3, The Testimonia for Grants of Citizenship, and vol. 4, The Law and Practice of Naturalization in Athens from the Origins to the Roman Period (Brussels: Paleis der Academie, 1981-1984), respectively pp. 144-45Google Scholar and 167-68. According to Osborne, the Athenians became more liberal on this issue from the second half of the second century BCE. Graham J. Oliver calls his premise into question in an article showing, on the contrary, that their parsimony continued (including during the second century BCE), and that it was only from the second third of the first century BCE that the situation changed substantially. See Oliver, Graham J., “Citizenship: Inscribed Honours for Individuals in Classical and Hellenistic Athens,” in Individus, groupes et politique à Athènes de Solon à Mithridate, ed. Couvenhes, Jean-Christophe and Milanezi, Silvia (Tours: Presses universitaires François-Rabelais, 2007), 273-92CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

59. Picard, Olivier, “De la citoyenneté classique à la citoyenneté d’époque romaine: essai de conclusion,” in Patrie d’origine et patries électives. Les citoyennetés multiples dans le monde grec d’époque romaine, ed. Heller, Anna and Pont, Anne-Valerie (Bordeaux: Ausonius, 2012), 341-45Google Scholar, here p. 341 (author’s emphasis).

60. Fournier, Julien, “L’essor de la multi-citoyenneté dans l’Orient romain: problèmes juridiques et judiciaires,” in Heller, and Pont, , Patrie d’origine et patries électives, 79-98 Google Scholar, here p. 83 and n. 14; Müller, Christel, “De l’époque classique à l’époque hellénistique: la citoyenneté des Grecs, une citoyenneté en mutation ? Réflexions sur la question de l’appartenance multiple,” in Studi Ellenistici 29 (2015): 355-69 Google Scholar.

61. See the article by Savalli, Ivana, “Collections de citoyenneté et internationalisation des élites civiques dans l’Asie Mineure hellénistique,” in Heller, and Pont, , Patrie d’origine et patries électives, 38-59 Google Scholar. Here Savalli partially revises (in terms of chronology) the point of view adopted in her previous article on new citizens: see Savalli, , “I neocittadini nelle città ellenistiche. Note sulla concessione e l’acquisizione della politeia ,” Historia. Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte 34, no. 4 (1985): 387-431 Google Scholar.

62. On the Achaean league and the notion of sympoliteia, see Rizakis, Athanase D., “La double citoyenneté dans le cadre des koina grecs: l’exemple du koinon achéen,” in Heller, and Pont, , Patrie d’origine et patries électives, 23-38 Google Scholar.

63. On enktēsis as a constitutive element of the federal politeia in Boeotia, see Müller, Christel, “La procédure d’adoption des décrets en Béotie de la fin du III^e s. av. J.-C au I^er s. ap. J.-C.,” in Fröhlich and Müller, Citoyenneté et participation à la basse époque hellénistique , 95-119 Google Scholar, here p. 100.

64. Gauthier, “‘Générosité’ romaine et ‘avarice’ grecque,” 207 (which clearly evokes the terms of this debate).

65. I thus completely agree with what is proposed in Blok, “Becoming Citizens,” 8-9. According to the author, “the most common word for ‘male citizen’ in classical Athens, politês, is often taken to carry generally the meaning of ‘a citizen with political power.’ The fact that Aristotle in his ‘Politics’ (1275b12) defines the citizen in precisely this way, has seemed to be a convincing argument for this perception.” Through scrupulous terminological analysis, Blok goes on to demonstrate the rich semantic range of politeia, especially for the city’s female population. The same dissatisfaction is present in Davies, John K., “The Concept of the ‘Citizen,’” in Poleis e politeiai, ed. Cataldi, Silvio (Turin: Edizioni dell’Orso, 2004), 19-30 Google Scholar, here p. 21: “The model of the development of the state and of the idea of citizenship set out by Aristotle, though still influential among historians of political theory, tells us a great deal about Aristotle and about the activity of reflection about political practice which culminates in his work, but virtually nothing about the actual historical processes which engendered the Greek concept of citizenship.”

66. I borrow this simple and clear definition from Tran, Nicolas, “The Work Statuses of Slaves and Freedmen in the Great Ports of the Roman World (First Century BCE-Second Century CE),” Annales HSS (English Edition) 68, no. 4 (2013): 659-84 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, here p. 659. My intention is not to discuss the validity of this definition—certain historians continue to use the term “order,” as in Hansen, Mogens H., Athenian Democracy in the Age of Demosthenes (Oxford: Blackwell, 1991), 86 Google Scholar, or Duplouy, Le prestige des élites, 257—nor to discuss the operative nature, within social space, of the concept of status. On this last point, I refer the reader to the introduction I co-authored with Moatti, Claudia for the volume Statuts personnels et espaces sociaux. Questions grecques et romaines (Paris: Éditions de la MAE, forthcomingGoogle Scholar).

67. Zurbach, “The Formation of Greek City-States.”

68. “Citizenship is not constituted by domicile in a certain place (for metics and slaves share such a right with the citizens).” Aristotle, Politics 3.1275a7-8 [translation modified].

69. I thus agree with Éric Perrin-Saminadayar, who observed that “civic divisions,” or “clivages civiques,” to use his term, were strongly maintained in Hellenistic Athens. See Perrin-Saminadayar, , “Images, statut et accueil des étrangers à Athènes à l’époque hellénistique,” in Le barbare, l’étranger: images de l’autre, ed. Nourrisson, Didier and Perrin, Yves (Saint-Étienne: Publications de l’université de Saint-Étienne, 2005), 67-91 Google Scholar, citation at p. 80.

70. Lefèvre, François, ed., Corpus des inscriptions de Delphes, vol. 4, Documents amphictio-niques (Athens: École française d’Athènes, 2002)Google Scholar, 127.3-5; also Dittenberger, Wilhelm, ed., Sylloge inscriptionum graecarum, 3rd ed. (Leipzig: apud S. Hirzelium, 1915-1924)Google Scholar (hereafter Syll. ³), 729.3-5. The mention of women is a well-known rarity, even ifit does not directly pertain to my argument. On the notion of participation in connection with gender regimes, see Cuchet, Violaine Sebillotte, “Gender Regimes and Classical Greek Antiquity in the Fifth and Fourth Centuries BC,” Annales HSS (English Edition) 67, no. 3 (2012): 401-30 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, especially pp. 426-27.

71. Fränkel, Max, Die Inschriften von Pergamon, vol. 1, Bis zum Ende der Königszeit (Berlin: W. Spemann, 1890), no. 249 Google Scholar; also Dittenberger, Wilhelm, ed., Orientisgraeci inscriptiones selectae, 2 vols. (Leipzig: 1903-1905), 338 Google Scholar; and Austin, Michael M., The Hellenistic World from Alexander to the Roman Conquest, A Selection of Ancient Sources in Translation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 430-31CrossRefGoogle Scholar, no. 248.

72. Ibid., δεδόσθαι πολιτε´αν [τ]οΐς ύπογ[εγραμμέ]νοί.ς (l. 11-12) and εΐς δε τους παροίκους μετατεθηνοα τους (l. 20).

73. Gauthier, Philippe, “Métèques, périèques et paroikoi: bilan et points d’interrogation,” in L’étranger dans le monde grec, ed. Lonis, Raoul (Nancy: Presses universitaires de Nancy, 1988), 23-46 Google Scholar. Gauthier brilliantly establishes an urban and a rural model for the relationship between cities and the foreigners that lived in them, with foreigners from the exterior in the former, and, so to speak, “indigenous foreigners” in the latter.

74. Jean-Marie Bertrand, “À propos des paroikoi dans les cités d’Asie Mineure,” in Fröhlich and Müller, Citoyenneté et participation à la basse époque hellénistique, 39-49, here p. 39.

75. Wankel, Hermann, ed., Inschriften griechischer Städte aus Kleinasien, vol. 11.1, Die Inschriften von Ephesos. Nr. 1-47 (Bonn: R. Habelt, 1979)Google Scholar, no. 8.43-48; also Syll. ³ 742.2. See Bertrand, “À propos des paroikoi,” 48.

76. The full record is addressed by Rhodes, Peter J. and Osborne, Robin, Greek Historical Inscriptions, 404-323 BC (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003), pp. 20-27 Google Scholar, no. 4.

77. Whitehead, The Ideology of the Athenian Metic, 2.

78. Ibid., 7-10. See Roubineau, Jean-Manuel, “La condition d’étranger de passage dans les cités grecques: statut de droit ou position hors-la-cité) ,” in Mobilités grecques. Mouvements, réseaux, contacts en Méditerranée, de l’époque archaïque à l’ époque hellénistique, éd. Gapdetrey, Laurent and Zurbach, Julien (Bordeaux: Ausonius, 2012), 162-70Google Scholar.

79. Edmond Lévy, “Métèques et droit de résidence,” in Lonis, L’étranger dans le monde grec, 55-60. For the opposing argument see: Hennig, Dieter, “Immobilienerwerb durch Nichtbürger in der klassischen und hellenistischen Polis,” Chiron 24 (1994): 305-44 Google Scholar, here p. 311 n. 19; Gauthier, , “Epigraphica IV. Étrangers résidents et privilèges civiques,” Revue de philologie, de littérature et d’histoire anciennes 74, no. 1 (2000): 109-14 Google Scholar.

80. Aristotle, Politics 3.1275а7-8.

81. Dittenberger, Wilhelm, ed., Inscriptiones Graecae (hereafter IG), vol. 7, Megaridis Oropiae Boeotiae (Berlin: Reimer, 1892)Google Scholar, no. 4127.4-6: [κή εΐμεν αυτ]ϋς τά τψχα κη τά ‘λλιχ ϕι,λάνθρωπα πάντα κ[αθάπερ τθς αλλυς προξ]ένυς κη ευεργέτης τας πόλί,ος Άκρηφι,είων. See Christel Müller, “Les Italiens en Béotie du II^e siècle av. J.-C. au I^er siècle ap. J.-C,” in Les Italiens dans le monde grec, II^e siècle av. J.-C.-I^er siècle ap. J.-C.: circulation, activités, intégration, éd. Christel Müller and Claire Hasenohr (Athens: École française d’Athènes, 2002), 89-100, here pp. 90-91 and n. 10.

82. These honors have notably been studied by Gauthier in Les cités grecques, 16-39. He establishes precise chronological and typological distinctions between the treatment of foreigners and citizens—for example, with respect to the granting of the title of euergetē s.

83. On statues, see Ma, John, Statues and Cities: Honorific Portraits and Civic Identity in the Hellenistic World (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

84. Henry, Alan’s Honours and Privileges in Athenian Decrees: The Principal Formulae of Athenian Honorary Decrees (Hildesheim/Zurich/New York: G. Olms, 1983)Google Scholar represents a notable exception, but remains mostly descriptive and does not extend beyond Athens.

85. Gauthier only discusses some of them, such as proxenia or politeia, as an appendix to his study on the marks of honor shared by foreigners and citizens: see Gauthier, Les cités grecques, 129-31.

86. Ma, “Towards a Grammar of Honours,” chap. 1 of Statues and Cities, 15-38.

87. For a foreigner, the proxenia required hosting or protecting—at home or elsewhere—the citizens of the city that granted him the privilege. On the proxenia, see Mack, William, Proxeny and Polis: Institutional Networks in the Ancient Greek World (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Habicht, Christian, “Die Ehren der Proxenoi. Ein Vergleich,” Museum Helveticum 59 (2002): 13-30 Google Scholar.

88. The expression is from Nicolas Kyriakidis’s forthcoming article on Delphic definitions of proxenia, to be published in Moatti and Müller, Statuts personnels et espaces sociaux.

89. On the enktēsis, see: the classic study by Pěcírka, Jan, The Formula for the Grant of Enktesis in Attic Inscriptions (Prague: Univerzita Karlova, 1966)Google Scholar; Hennig, “Immobilienerwerb.”

90. On the ateleia, see Carrara, Aurélie, “La fiscalité des échanges extérieurs dans le monde grec (Égypte exclue) du VI^e siècle à la conquête romaine” (PhD diss., Université Michel de Montaigne-Bordeaux III, 2011)Google Scholar.

91. On isoteleia, see: Whitehead, The Ideology of the Athenian Metic, 11-13; Kamen, Status in Classical Athens, 56-58. These two works take different views on the scope of this fiscal equality.

92. Petrakos, Vasilis, ed., Oi epigraphes tou Oropou (Athens: Archaeological Society, 1997), no. 26 Google Scholar.

93. On new citizens during the Hellenistic period, see the indispensable study by Savalli, “I neocittadini,” which in particular analyzes the procedure of their inscription in the civic body.

94. Müller, Christel, D’Olbia à Tanaïs. Territoires et réseaux d’échanges dans la mer Noire septentrionale aux époques classique et hellénistique (Bordeaux: Ausonius, 2010), 390, no. 20 Google Scholar.

95. Another problem is determining whether ateleia was a civic right or not. For Alain Bresson, “one can thus suspect that customs exceptions for commercial purposes, granted either collectively to large categories of foreigners or on an individual basis provided that they were numerous, could have had as a necessary counterpart customs tax exemptions for citizens.” Bresson, Alain, L’économie de la Grèce des cités, fin VI^e-I^er siècle a.c., vol. 2, Les espaces de l’échange (Paris: Armand Colin, 2008), 80-81 Google Scholar. This would imply that the cities’ tax revenues were based first and foremost on the passage of foreigners. It remains an open question.

96. Finley, Economy and Society, 130-31.

97. Harpocration, s.v. “isotelēs kai isoteleia.”

98. Henry, Honours and Privileges.

99. On the potential nature of the politeia in the decrees granting it, see Gauthier’s remarks in his review of Osborne, Michael J.’s Naturalization in Athens (Brussels: Koninklijke academie voor wetenschappen, letteren en schone kunsten van België, 1981-1983)Google Scholar: Gauthier, , “L’octroi du droit de cité à Athènes,” Revue des études grecques 99, nos. 470/47 (1986): 119-33 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, here pp. 128-30, reprinted in Études d’histoire et d’institutions grecques, 48-51. Above all, see Gauthier, Les cités grecques, 150-52.

100. On this point, see Oliver, Graham J., “ Ateleia —The Economic Function of Honours,” chap. 1.5 in War, Food and Politics in Early Hellenistic Athens (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007), 30-37 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

101. This is the expression used, in a rather incidental way, by Gauthier, Les cités grecques, 27. However, it does not overlap with the use of the term for referring to metics, which Whitehead rejected in The Ideology of the Athenian Metic, 70. Jean-Manuel Roubineau believes that the isoteleia is a status in the same manner as the metoikia, yet this changes nothing: an isotēles remained a foreigner whatever his tax advantages. See Roubineau, Jean-Manuel, “La fiscalité des cités grecques aux époques classique et hellénistique,” in Économies et sociétés en Grèce classique et hellénistique, ed. Brun, Patrice (Toulouse: Presses universitaires du Mirail, 2007), 179-200 Google Scholar, here pp. 193-96.

102. This case is clearly considered by Savalli, “I neocittadini,” 392-96.

103. IG II³1.316. See also Rhodes and Osborne, Greek Historical Inscriptions, no. 77.

104. Bosnakis, Dimitris and Hallof, Klaus, eds., IG XII 4.1 (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2012), no. 103 Google Scholar. See also Vélissaropoulos-Karakostas, Droit grec, 136-38.

105. Kamen, Status in Classical Athens. To summarize, Kamen sets out to fulfill Finley’s project but then contents herself with describing additional categories that are simply more numerous than the three standard ones.

106. On the various forms of groupings (which nevertheless are not equivalent to statuses), see most recently Fröhlich, Pierre and Hamon, Patrice, eds., Groupes et associations dans les cités grecques (III^e siècle av. J.-C.-II^e siècle apr. J.-C.) (Paris/Geneva: Droz, 2013)Google Scholar. Recognition of the existence of these highly varied groups is akin to Claudia Moatti and Wolfgang Kaiser’s idea of “gradations of foreignness that make any unitary definition of the term ‘foreigner’ futile”: see Moatti, Claudia and Kaiser, Wolfgang, introduction to Gens de passage en Méditerranée de l’Antiquité à l’époque moderne , ed. Moatti, Claudia and Kaiser, Wolfgang (Paris: Maisonneuve et Larose, 2007)Google Scholar, 12. It seems to me that it is necessary to make a clear distinction between what counts as a legal status—which was clear for cities (if not for us), regardless of the person being considered—and the group or subgroup of reference, whether assigned or assumed, which provided descriptive elements of the relations (necessarily complex and stratified) that the foreigner had with his or her host city. For example, the above-mentioned groups of residents who obtained the politeia in Pergamon in 133 BCE had different denominations (katoikountes, Macedonians, Mysians, katoikoi, etc.) that recount so many “microhistories” of their relations with the city. These different forms of grouping, which began to be formalized in the work published by Fröhlich and Hamon, were similar to the Aristotelian notion of koino¯nia (community), as analyzed in Aristotle, Nichomachean Ethics 8.9.4-6. This, however, is another subject.

107. On the notion of a contract applied to the euergetic relationship, see Müller, , “Évergétisme et pratiques financières dans les cités de la Grèce hellénistique,” Revue des études anciennes 113, no. 2 (2011): 345-63 Google Scholar.

108. To cite just one example among many, see the decree from Samos that granted honors to two Argians, Pythoklēs and Hellanikos, son of Pythodo¯ros, around 306 BCE “so that all may know that the Samians grant in return to their benefactors marks of recognition worthy of their good deeds.” Hallof, Klaus, ed., IG XII 6.1 (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2000)Google Scholar, no. 24.14-17.