ATELEIA
ATELEIA (
ἀτέλεια) is generally
immunity or exemption from some or all of the duties which a person has to
perform towards the state. Immunities may be granted either as a privilege
to the citizens of a state, exempting them from certain duties which would
otherwise be incumbent on them, or they are given as honorary distinctions
to foreign kings, states, communities, or even private individuals. With
regard to the latter the ateleia was usually an exemption from custom duties
on the importation or exportation of goods, and was given as a reward for
certain good services. Thus Croesus received the ateleia at Delphi (
Hdt. 1.54), the Deceleans at Sparta (
Hdt. 9.73), and Leucon, the ruler of Bosporus, at
Athens. (Dem.
c. Lept. p. 466 ff.) At Athens the immunity
might be either general (
ἀτέλεια
ἁπάντων, Demosth.
l.c. p. 475.60) or
partial. The former included exemption from customs duties; from liturgies,
other than the trierarchy; in some rare exceptions, from the
εἰσφορὰ or property tax, which, as a rule, no
Athenian citizen could escape; from providing victims for sacrifice
(
ἀτέλεια ἱερῶν, Demosth.
l.c. p. 495.126), in which case the victims were
provided at the cost of the state (Boeckh,
P. E. p. 86,
note); and in the case of resident aliens, from the
μετοίκιον (
ἀτέλεια
μετοικίου, Demosth.
c. Aristocr. p. 691.211). The
ἀτέλεια ἁπάντων was only granted to
foreigners who had been distinguished as
εὐεργέται or public benefactors; and Demosthenes argues
(
c. Lept. p. 470.44) that practically no use was ever
made of it by the small number of persons who enjoyed it. Partial
ἀτέλεια consisted in exemption from any one or
more of the above burdens. The descendants of Harmodius and Aristogeiton
probably enjoyed all these exemptions, except that from the
εἰσφορά. The most common case was that of
immunity from customs duties, which was somewhat freely granted for the
purpose of encouraging commerce. The trierarchy stood upon a different
footing from other liturgies: none could be exempt but the nine archons
(Demosth.
Lept. p. 465.28). Exemption from military service,
again, requires to be considered by itself: it does not seem to have formed
a part of the general conception of
ἀτέλεια, but was legally enjoyed by all members of the
βουλὴ or senate (Lycurg.
c.
Leocr. § 37), by the archons for the time being, by the
τελῶναι or farmers of taxes (Demosth.
c. Neaer. p. 1353.27), and by those who traded by sea,
although with them the privilege must have been under regulation to prevent
fraud (Schol.
ad Arist.
Plut.
905,
Acharn. 399; Suid. s. v.
ἔμπορός εἰμι). Actors appear to have been altogether
excused from military service by sea or land, and choreutae under certain
restrictions; but agreeably to the general Athenian practice, such excuses
were liable to be disputed by a
γραφὴ
ἀστρατείας (Demosth.
Olynth. iii. p. 31.11;
c. Mid. p. 577.193;
c. Boeot. de Nom. p.
999.16). in or about B.C. 356, Leptines carried a law by which all
ἀτέλειαι were abolished; Demosthenes procured
the repeal of it in 355, and his speech against the law of Leptines is the
chief source of our information. The loss to the state, he argues, was quite
inappreciable: since the
ἀτέλεια was
enjoyed by not more than ten foreigners and five or six citizens. The notion
of a reciprocal
ἀτέλεια and full
citizenship between Athens and Byzantium rests on the doubtful authority of
a document in Demosth.
de Cor. p. 256,
§ § 90, 91, and is not supported by anything in the text
of the speech. On the whole subject, compare Wolf,
Prolegom. ad
Lept. p. lxxi. ff.; Boeckh,
P. E. p. 85 ff:
[
W.W]
