Ostracism - Revision history

Etenne at 22:43, 2 July 2022

2022-07-02T22:43:45Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:43, 2 July 2022
Line 12:		Line 12:
	==Modern procedure==		==Modern procedure==
	In modern times, boylovers are sometimes ostracized socially by, for example, expulsion from online communities or probationary associational restrictions, or exclusion from immigration to foreign countries. A modern method of preemptively excluding boylovers from the community before they can engage in pederastic relationships is to find them guilty of crimes that fall short of physical contact, such as [[child pornography]] possession, and then imprison them, forbid them from having unsupervised contact with minors, kick them off sites such as [[Facebook]], etc. [[NAMBLA]] members have also been forbidden from marching in [[gay rights]] parades. NAMBLA itself was ostracized by the [[International Lesbian and Gay Association]].		In modern times, boylovers are sometimes ostracized socially by, for example, expulsion from online communities or probationary associational restrictions, or exclusion from immigration to foreign countries. A modern method of preemptively excluding boylovers from the community before they can engage in pederastic relationships is to find them guilty of crimes that fall short of physical contact, such as [[child pornography]] possession, and then imprison them, forbid them from having unsupervised contact with minors, kick them off sites such as [[Facebook]], etc. [[NAMBLA]] members have also been forbidden from marching in [[gay rights]] parades. NAMBLA itself was ostracized by the [[International Lesbian and Gay Association]].
			{{Navbox Ancient Greece}}
	[[Category:Ancient Greece]]		[[Category:Ancient Greece]]
	[[Category:Conflict in society]]		[[Category:Conflict in society]]

Dandelion: Added an internal link

2018-03-02T07:05:16Z

Added an internal link

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:05, 2 March 2018
Line 8:		Line 8:
	According to [[Plutarch]], the ostracism was considered valid if the total number of votes cast was at least 6,000. According to a fragment of Philochorus, the "winner" of the ostracism must have obtained at least 6,000 votes. Plutarch's evidence for a quorum of 6,000, on a priori grounds a necessity for ostracism also per the account of Philochorus, accords with the number required for grants of citizenship in the following century and is generally preferred.		According to [[Plutarch]], the ostracism was considered valid if the total number of votes cast was at least 6,000. According to a fragment of Philochorus, the "winner" of the ostracism must have obtained at least 6,000 votes. Plutarch's evidence for a quorum of 6,000, on a priori grounds a necessity for ostracism also per the account of Philochorus, accords with the number required for grants of citizenship in the following century and is generally preferred.

	The person nominated had ten days to leave the city. If he attempted to return, the penalty was death. Notably, the property of the man banished was not confiscated and there was no loss of status. After the ten years, he was allowed to return without stigma. It was possible for the assembly to recall an ostracised person ahead of time; before the Persian invasion of 479 BC, an amnesty was declared under which at least two ostracised leaders—Pericles' father Xanthippus and Aristides 'the Just'—are known to have returned. Similarly, Cimon, ostracised in 461 BC, was recalled during an emergency.		The person nominated had ten days to leave the city. If he attempted to return, the penalty was death. Notably, the property of the man banished was not confiscated and there was no loss of status. After the ten years, he was allowed to return without stigma. It was possible for the assembly to recall an ostracised person ahead of time; before the [[Persian Empire\|Persian]] invasion of 479 BC, an amnesty was declared under which at least two ostracised leaders—Pericles' father Xanthippus and Aristides 'the Just'—are known to have returned. Similarly, Cimon, ostracised in 461 BC, was recalled during an emergency.

	==Modern procedure==		==Modern procedure==

Etenne: /* Ancient procedure */

2015-12-05T13:43:45Z

Ancient procedure

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:43, 5 December 2015
Line 6:		Line 6:
	Each year the Athenians were asked in the assembly whether they wished to hold an ostracism. The question was put in the sixth of the ten months used for state business under the democracy (January or February in the modern Gregorian Calendar). If they voted "yes", then an ostracism would be held two months later. In a section of the agora set off and suitably barriered, citizens gave the name of those they wished to be ostracised to a scribe, as many of them were illiterate, and they then scratched the name on pottery sherds, and deposited them in urns. The presiding officials counted the ostraka submitted and sorted the names into separate piles. The person whose pile contained the most ostraka would be banished, provided that an additional criterion of a quorum was met, about which there are two principal sources:		Each year the Athenians were asked in the assembly whether they wished to hold an ostracism. The question was put in the sixth of the ten months used for state business under the democracy (January or February in the modern Gregorian Calendar). If they voted "yes", then an ostracism would be held two months later. In a section of the agora set off and suitably barriered, citizens gave the name of those they wished to be ostracised to a scribe, as many of them were illiterate, and they then scratched the name on pottery sherds, and deposited them in urns. The presiding officials counted the ostraka submitted and sorted the names into separate piles. The person whose pile contained the most ostraka would be banished, provided that an additional criterion of a quorum was met, about which there are two principal sources:

	According to Plutarch, the ostracism was considered valid if the total number of votes cast was at least 6,000. According to a fragment of Philochorus, the "winner" of the ostracism must have obtained at least 6,000 votes. Plutarch's evidence for a quorum of 6,000, on a priori grounds a necessity for ostracism also per the account of Philochorus, accords with the number required for grants of citizenship in the following century and is generally preferred.		According to [[Plutarch]], the ostracism was considered valid if the total number of votes cast was at least 6,000. According to a fragment of Philochorus, the "winner" of the ostracism must have obtained at least 6,000 votes. Plutarch's evidence for a quorum of 6,000, on a priori grounds a necessity for ostracism also per the account of Philochorus, accords with the number required for grants of citizenship in the following century and is generally preferred.

	The person nominated had ten days to leave the city. If he attempted to return, the penalty was death. Notably, the property of the man banished was not confiscated and there was no loss of status. After the ten years, he was allowed to return without stigma. It was possible for the assembly to recall an ostracised person ahead of time; before the Persian invasion of 479 BC, an amnesty was declared under which at least two ostracised leaders—Pericles' father Xanthippus and Aristides 'the Just'—are known to have returned. Similarly, Cimon, ostracised in 461 BC, was recalled during an emergency.		The person nominated had ten days to leave the city. If he attempted to return, the penalty was death. Notably, the property of the man banished was not confiscated and there was no loss of status. After the ten years, he was allowed to return without stigma. It was possible for the assembly to recall an ostracised person ahead of time; before the Persian invasion of 479 BC, an amnesty was declared under which at least two ostracised leaders—Pericles' father Xanthippus and Aristides 'the Just'—are known to have returned. Similarly, Cimon, ostracised in 461 BC, was recalled during an emergency.

Etenne at 13:42, 5 December 2015

2015-12-05T13:42:30Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:42, 5 December 2015
Line 13:		Line 13:
	In modern times, boylovers are sometimes ostracized socially by, for example, expulsion from online communities or probationary associational restrictions, or exclusion from immigration to foreign countries. A modern method of preemptively excluding boylovers from the community before they can engage in pederastic relationships is to find them guilty of crimes that fall short of physical contact, such as [[child pornography]] possession, and then imprison them, forbid them from having unsupervised contact with minors, kick them off sites such as [[Facebook]], etc. [[NAMBLA]] members have also been forbidden from marching in [[gay rights]] parades. NAMBLA itself was ostracized by the [[International Lesbian and Gay Association]].		In modern times, boylovers are sometimes ostracized socially by, for example, expulsion from online communities or probationary associational restrictions, or exclusion from immigration to foreign countries. A modern method of preemptively excluding boylovers from the community before they can engage in pederastic relationships is to find them guilty of crimes that fall short of physical contact, such as [[child pornography]] possession, and then imprison them, forbid them from having unsupervised contact with minors, kick them off sites such as [[Facebook]], etc. [[NAMBLA]] members have also been forbidden from marching in [[gay rights]] parades. NAMBLA itself was ostracized by the [[International Lesbian and Gay Association]].

	[[Category:Ancient ~~Greek society~~]]		[[Category:Ancient Greece]]
	[[Category:~~Social rejection~~]]		[[Category:Conflict in society]]

Lysander: Created page with "'''Ostracism''' (Greek: ὀστρακισμός, ostrakismos) was a procedure under the Athenian democracy in which any citizen could be expelled from the city-state of Athens..."

2015-05-10T20:52:00Z

Created page with "'''Ostracism''' (Greek: ὀστρακισμός, ostrakismos) was a procedure under the Athenian democracy in which any citizen could be expelled from the city-state of Athens..."

New page

'''Ostracism''' (Greek: ὀστρακισμός, ostrakismos) was a procedure under the Athenian democracy in which any citizen could be expelled from the city-state of Athens for ten years. While some instances clearly expressed popular anger at the citizen, ostracism was often used preemptively. It was used as a way of neutralizing someone thought to be a threat to the state or potential tyrant.

==Ancient procedure==
The name is derived from the ostraka, (singular ostrakon , ὄστρακον), referring to the pottery sherds that were used as voting tokens. Broken pottery, abundant and virtually free, served as a kind of scrap paper (in contrast to papyrus, which was imported from Egypt as a high-quality writing surface, and was thus too costly to be disposable).

Each year the Athenians were asked in the assembly whether they wished to hold an ostracism. The question was put in the sixth of the ten months used for state business under the democracy (January or February in the modern Gregorian Calendar). If they voted "yes", then an ostracism would be held two months later. In a section of the agora set off and suitably barriered, citizens gave the name of those they wished to be ostracised to a scribe, as many of them were illiterate, and they then scratched the name on pottery sherds, and deposited them in urns. The presiding officials counted the ostraka submitted and sorted the names into separate piles. The person whose pile contained the most ostraka would be banished, provided that an additional criterion of a quorum was met, about which there are two principal sources:

According to Plutarch, the ostracism was considered valid if the total number of votes cast was at least 6,000. According to a fragment of Philochorus, the "winner" of the ostracism must have obtained at least 6,000 votes. Plutarch's evidence for a quorum of 6,000, on a priori grounds a necessity for ostracism also per the account of Philochorus, accords with the number required for grants of citizenship in the following century and is generally preferred.

The person nominated had ten days to leave the city. If he attempted to return, the penalty was death. Notably, the property of the man banished was not confiscated and there was no loss of status. After the ten years, he was allowed to return without stigma. It was possible for the assembly to recall an ostracised person ahead of time; before the Persian invasion of 479 BC, an amnesty was declared under which at least two ostracised leaders—Pericles' father Xanthippus and Aristides 'the Just'—are known to have returned. Similarly, Cimon, ostracised in 461 BC, was recalled during an emergency.

==Modern procedure==
In modern times, boylovers are sometimes ostracized socially by, for example, expulsion from online communities or probationary associational restrictions, or exclusion from immigration to foreign countries. A modern method of preemptively excluding boylovers from the community before they can engage in pederastic relationships is to find them guilty of crimes that fall short of physical contact, such as [[child pornography]] possession, and then imprison them, forbid them from having unsupervised contact with minors, kick them off sites such as [[Facebook]], etc. [[NAMBLA]] members have also been forbidden from marching in [[gay rights]] parades. NAMBLA itself was ostracized by the [[International Lesbian and Gay Association]].

[[Category:Ancient Greek society]]
[[Category:Social rejection]]