Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T04:20:03.125Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The abolition of the liturgical chorēgia and the creation of the agōnothesia in Athens: new considerations on a debated issue

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 December 2020

Delphine Ackermann
Affiliation:
Université de Poitiers and Université de Picardie Jules Verne*
Clément Sarrazanas
Affiliation:
Université de Poitiers and Université de Picardie Jules Verne*

Abstract:

No ancient source indicates when the agōnothesia, attested for the first time in 307/6 BC, was introduced in Athens. Scholars have long attributed its creation, along with the abolition of the liturgical chorēgia, to the government of Demetrius of Phalerum (317–307 BC), motivated by oligarchic ideology and a desire to preserve the wealth of rich citizens. This traditional thesis has recently been challenged, with some scholars attributing the creation of the agōnothesia to the restored democratic government of 307 BC and others to the government of Phocion (322–318 BC). A new look at epigraphical and literary documents hitherto neglected or imperfectly understood (especially from the Attic demes) allows the authors to establish that the liturgical chorēgia disappeared at the beginning of the government of Demetrius of Phalerum, around 316 BC. The institution of the agōnothesia had a precedent (hitherto overlooked) in Lycurgan Athens with the new festival of the Amphiaraia of 331 BC. Both measures were in fact consensual and must not be interpreted as strictly oligarchic in inspiration. The creation of the agōnothesia was above all a pragmatic response on Athens’ part to the major changes that occurred in the agonistic world in the late fourth century.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

[email protected] and [email protected]. Delphine Ackermann is a member of Laboratoire HERMA (EA 3811) and Clement Sarrazanas is a member of Laboratoire TRAME (EA 4284) and of LabEx ARCHIMEDE. The first version of this paper was delivered at the international conference ‘Greek Drama V’, held at the University of British Columbia (Vancouver, Canada) on 5–8 July 2017. We are very grateful to the organizers of this event, Hallie Marshall and Toph Marshall (University of British Columbia), for their wonderful welcome and for giving us the opportunity to present our conclusions to a large audience of specialists in theatre studies. We would like especially to thank Willie Major (Louisiana State University) for his help concerning Menander’s works and all of the scholars present in Vancouver who were kind enough to discuss our presentation and to make useful comments and suggestions. Our warmest thanks go to Jason Harris and Stephen D. Lambert for their respective proofreadings and suggestions for improving this paper. Finally, we would like to thank the University of British Columbia for financially supporting our accomodation in Vancouver. Delphine Ackermann is very grateful to Laboratoire HERMA (EA 3811) and Clement Sarrazanas to LabEx ARCHIMEDE for financial support. This project is supported by LabEx ARCHIMEDE via the ‘Investissement d’Avenir’ program ANR-11-LABX-0032-01. Unless indicated otherwise, translations from Greek into English are those of the authors.