Slave Life and Prosopography in the Attic Curse Tablets: An Introduction

The past three decades have been particularly fruitful for the study of ancient Greek slavery and magic alike. Discussions of slavery have expanded beyond legalistic and terminological issues and enslaved people are now understood to have led complex (occupational, social, and familial) lives. [1] Similarly, investigation of curse tablets has illuminated various aspects of ancient social and religious life. [2] Yet, although rich in information, neither historians of slavery nor epigraphists have produced a sustained examination of slavery in these documents. The 2024 publication of all known Attic curse tablets under the aegis of Inscriptiones Graecae makes the present moment particularly opportune for such a concentrated study. [3] My project seeks to identify, collect, and analyze all Attic curse tablets relating to slavery, paying particular emphasis to their implications for slave life and prosopography.

The corpus consists of c. 500 tablets that record a range of social, commercial, political, legal, and other disputes. Persons from all walks of life – “whether a woman or man or slave or free or foreigner or citizen or domestic or alien”, as one tablet reads (IG II/III³ 8, 1, 394) [4] – could resort to magic to bind persons of equally varying statuses. Grounded in the world of the marketplace, the streets, and the taverns, these documents can provide a unique, bottom-up view into slaves’ daily lives at Athens that our (predominantly) elite-centric sources cannot. Although there are over 1,000 curse tablets in various languages and from across the Mediterranean, I have chosen to investigate the Attic curse tablets in particular for two reasons. First, because they constitute a corpus, and thus exbibit some continuity in terms of naming formulae and epigraphic habits and, second, because their context, that of Athens – the most well-studied Greek polis – means that much can be extracted even from brief or fragmentary documents. This project, however, can open the door to similar investigations based on other corpuses.

By my count, no fewer than 56 tablets are directly relevant to the project and might be separated into three groups. The first, and easiest to identify, consists of tablets that employ slave terms, e.g. doulos (146, 317, 355), oiketes (407, 356, 362), paidiske (347, 348), or language of ownership, e.g., the one owned by X (223, 355, 371).

Group two can be identified based on Athenian naming practices, not least since stereotypically slave names feature prominently in the tablets, e.g., Kerdon (48), Karion (90), Moschion (104, 174, 180), Skythes (124, 186), Manes (178, 339, 454) etc. [5] Although these do not prove slave status, additional clues often make it likely. Such a clue is that within individual tablets, which list various names, they are the often only ones missing a patronymic or membership of a civic subdivision (a demotic name) – both associated with enfranchisement. No. 143, Side A lines 3 and 5 are an apt example of this:

Group three can be identified through a mix of naming and epigraphic habits. It consists of persons identified by their personal name and occupational title. That some are of slave status is stated directly, e.g., ‘Tychon the slave stallholder’ (362), ‘Agathon the slave tavernkeeper’ (356). Yet, one notes that at times occupations served as stand-ins when a person did not have a demotic or patronymic, e.g., if they were enslaved. [6] No. 188 Side B col. VI, for instance, curses the following:

Lines 117 to 120 identify individuals by their personal name and deme. This changes for lines 121 and 122: the occupational title in the former may indicate slave status, while the ἐκ + deme formula of the latter is indicative of metic status for free non-citizens. This formula is applied across this tablet’s 120 lines as well as in other tablets. A similar trend in epigraphic habit has been noted by Mills McArthur in the accounts of the epistatai at Eleusis. In one instance the accounts record the names of clothes dealers: Callias of Megara, Stephanus the clothes-dealer (ἱματιοπώλης), Midas of Megara, Syrus living in Collytus, and Antheus of Hamaxantia (I.Eleusis 159, lines 45-47). Although all of them are recorded as selling clothes, only Stephanus’ name is accompanied by his occupational title. “We are left to conclude that Stephanus ἱματιοπώλης is a slave, and his occupation is provided because no other forms of civic identification were available to him.” [7]

During my fellowship, I focused on identifying slaves in the documents through the methodology just explained. This was done in combination with investigating the contents of individual tablets and the elements that might contradict slave status (e.g., direct involvement in court), as well as broader trends of naming formulae within the corpus. This latter part of my research has also begun to grapple with whether the use of occupational titles within (and beyond) the corpus points to an ‘epigraphy of slavery’.

Following this, the majority of my time was devoted to prosopographic study of the enslaved persons identified in relevant tablets and, where possible, mapping of their social ties (owners, associations, competitors etc.). This will enable for the reconstruction of aspects of slave life, not least the chances for cross-status relationships and the various arenas in which slaves could exist. For the latter, I have paid special attention to the at least 26 occupational titles recorded in the tablets. Investigation of these can contribute towards a more granular study of the Athenian economy and, where slaves are concerned, granular study of their lives beyond the familiar occupations of agriculture, banking, and mining. [8] My particular interest is slave specialization and the networks and leverage this might have brought about, leverage that could be used to improve their condition or find their freedom.

I am grateful to the Center for supporting both this project and my stay in DC. I also owe thanks to my cohort for listening attentively and sharing their thoughts on my research. I aim to publish the results of this project in a major journal in the field of Greek history and epigraphy. I will also contribute aspects of prosopography to the SLaVEgents project, as well as translations and commentaries of select tablets to Attic Inscriptions Online.