74 MARK wOOLMER
thirty-two inscriptions honoring men for their commercial services during
the fifth and fourth centuries BCE, it is recorded that relatives of the honorand
were accorded the same honors and privileges as the recipient.^26 IG II^2 12, for
instance, explicitly states that the grant of asylia bestowed on Pythophanes and
his property also extended to the other members of his family. Similarly, IG
II^2 360 (= IG II^3 367) records that Heracleides of Salamis and his descendants
will be proxenoi of the people of Athens and will have enktesis of both land and
house according to the law, and they shall serve on campaign and pay eisphora
as if full citizens. With the majority of sons adopting their father’s profession
(more often than not taking over the family business), the extension of honors
to include the descendants of a professional merchant should be interpreted as
a calculated move motivated by a desire to establish lasting relationships and to
secure future services and benefactions.^27 Although it is impossible to ascertain
the extent to which this policy was successful, the case of Chaerephilus and
his sons indicates that it could be. Although Chaerephilus’ sons were awarded
citizenship because of their father’s commercial services, at least one of them,
Pheidippus, is believed to have carried on the family business (Alexis fr. 6; fr.
221 K-A). Furthermore, after Chaerephilus’ death, his sons continued to be
benefactors of Athens, undertaking numerous liturgies throughout the 320s
and thereby demonstrating how lucrative these relationships could be.^28The Suppression of Piracy
The Athenians were clearly aware of the link between lower mercantile trans-
action costs and an increase in the volume of market activities. More signif-
icantly, they also understood that the lowering of transaction costs required
intervention from the state – an illustrative example of which is the Athenian
efforts to limit incidences of piracy. This activity had the potential to cause
considerable disruption to maritime trade as the plundering of shipping sig-
nificantly increased transaction costs: in turn, these higher costs dissuaded
merchants from conducting business in Athens, resulting in reduced levels of
market activity and thus curtailing the growth and expansion of Athenian
markets.^29 Accordingly, the suppression – or, if possible, eradication – of piracy
was a major concern for Athens during the fifth and fourth centuries BCE.
The Athenians employed a range of strategies to counter the problem, which
included sporadic campaigns designed to ‘clear the sea of pirates’, the creation
of alliances and pacts against piracy, the construction of naval outposts, and the
organization of naval convoys to protect merchant vessels sailing to Athens.
Despite the effectiveness of naval campaigns as a method for suppressing piracy
(e.g., the expedition in 334/3 BCE commanded by the general Diotimus, IG
II^2 1623, lines 276–85), their huge expense and impracticality meant they were
used sparingly. Even a campaign designed to identify and punish select groups