고대 아테네 사회신분의 불명확성 및 중첩성 = The Ambiguity and Duality of Social Status in Ancient Athens

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

M.I. Finley insists that the more advanced the Greek city-state, the more it will be found to have had true slavery rather that 'hybrid' types like helotage. That is, more bluntly put, the cities in which individual freedom reached its highest expression - most obviously Athens - were cities in which chattel slavery flourished. According to him, even when the crisis turned into civil war and revolution, slavery remained unchallenged. And, all through Greek history, the demand was 'Cancel debts and redistribute land,' and there was no protest from the free poor, not even in the deepest crisis, against slave competition. Finley says again that there are no complaints - as there might well have been - that slaves deprive free men of a livelihood, or compel free men to work for lower wages and longer hours.
Finley's view makes the point on the assumption that there was a kind of clear division between freedom and slavery. In my view, however, it is difficult clearly to divide between them, as the concept of freedom as well as slavery exposes itself to diverse deviation.
To comprehend the social status of the polis, first of all, we can set up two categories of dividing social status between public and private relations. In Sparta where the public restriction was somewhat intense, the public law prevailed over the private. The main social casses were divided according to social function. The group of warriors were citizens, and the farmers were non-citizen subordinates. In Athens, however, where the enslavement of human body by debt was in principal prohibited by Solon, much more weight was given to the private order than the public. The public and political power had relatively less influence to privated economic activity.
In Athens, the public status is made on the basis of private relations. It is different, however, which among various social elements was preferred. For example, in the age of Solon, the beginning of 6the C. B.C. the rights and duties of citizens are distributed to the degree of wealth, but the citizen law Pericles in the midst of 4th C. B.C changed it to birth.
As the criteria of citizenship are changeable, and the social status is often dualistic and ambiguous, the dispute was not so sparse. The citizen law itself does not assure the application in reality. It would be wrong to regard the law itself as the real situation. Thus, the foreigner with wealth might hehave like a citizen, while, by contrast, the poor citizen could be suspected as a foreigner. Furthermore, there were not only complete citizenship, but incomplete on like alien residents and citizen's children.
The division between free men and various kinds of subordinates is often ambiguous and indefinite. The concepts of doulos and oiketes include the entire scope from free man to the extreme form of slave who is not free to a high degree. Even the free man might temporarily have the status of subordinate. When anyone, even if he is in subordination, concerned another social status at the same time and could very likely be reinstalled in his former position, it is difficult to regard him just as a slave. We can definitely say as slave a person who has much less such kind of possibility.
The doulos and oiketes in Athens now and then might not be definate social classes but concerned just some kind of duty to a definite subject of rights, and not to society in general. In this case the relation of two subjects does not transfer to the third party. These are different from the helots of Sparta who belong to a community of public status.
As each doulos of Athens belongs to his private master and his degree of subjectivity and personal social situation was not identical, mutual cooperation between them for unified resistence was not posible. This is different from the helots who united to rise in revolt. In Athens, the aquisition of freedom could be acquired by diverse private liberation, as well as overall social settlement of cancelation of debts and redistribution of land which could provide means of livelihood. The cancelation of debts and redistribution of land were directed to a same purpose of social equality with the revolt of the helots, even if the reformation processes was not the same.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 서언
• Ⅱ. 가정(oikos)과 촌락(kome) 및 플리스
• Ⅲ. 시민
• 1. 시민권자와 불완전시민권자
• 2. 미기록 관행에 의한 불명확성
• 3. 시민권 여부가 불명확한 사례
• Ⅳ. 둘로스(doulos)
• 1. 다양한 형태의 둘로스
• 2. 불완전한 예속의 둘로스
• 3. 둘로스 신분 여부의 불명확성
• Ⅴ. 오이케테스(oiketes)
• 1. 다양한 형태의 오이케테스
• 2. 오이케테스 신분의 중첩성 및 가변성
• Ⅵ. 결론