AREOPAGUS, a bare, rocky hill, 3 7of t. high, north-west of the acropolis of Athens. The ancients interpreted the name as "Hill of Ares," but Ares was not worshipped on the Areopagus. Another explanation connects the name with arai, "Curses," known as Semnai, "awful goddesses," whose shrine was a cave at the foot of the hill, of which they were the guardian deities. The council of the Areopagus (i7 iv Haw I3ovXt)), is to be compared with the council of elders which we find among primitive peoples. Under the kings of Athens it must have re sembled the council of elders described by Homer; it was the chief factor in the work of transforming the kingship into an aristocracy. Aristotle (AM. Pol., viii. 2) attributes to it for the period of aristocracy the appointment to all offices, the chief work of administration, and the right to punish in cases, not only of violation of laws, but also of immorality. This evidence is cor roborated by the remnants of political power left to it in later time, and by the designation boule, which indicates that the body was once a State council. In addition to its political functions, the council from the time of Draco exercised jurisdiction in certain cases of homicide. We may suppose that the name "Boule of the Areopagus" developed from the simple term boule, in order to distinguish it from the new Boule (q.v.), or Council of Four Hundred. The reforms of Solon ( 594 B.C.) tended practically to limit the council of the Areopagus, though constitutionally it re tained all its earlier powers augmented by the right to try persons accused of conspiracy against the state. It had power to inhibit in the Four Hundred or in the Ecclesia, (q.v.) any measure which it judged unconstitutional or prejudicial to the State, and in the levy of fines for violation of law or moral usage it remained irresponsi ble. The tyrants (q.v.) left to the council its cognizance of murder cases (56o-510 B.c.) , and the nominal enjoyment of its preroga tives. The council seems to have suffered no direct abridgment of power from the reforms of Cleisthenes (q.v.) . In 487 B.C., how ever, the introduction of the lot in filling the archonship (see ARCHON) began to undermine its position through affecting the ability of its members. This deterioration was necessarily slow; in 48o B.C., on the eve of the battle of Salamis, the council of the Areopagus succeeded in manning the fleet, thereby regaining the confidence and respect of the people. The patriotic action of the council enabled it to recover considerable administrative control, which it exercised for the next 18 years, although its deterioration in ability, as well as the rapid rise of democratic ideas, prevented it from re-establishing its supremacy. Ephialtes (462 B.c.), Archestratus and Pericles (q.v.), carried measures for the transfer of most of its functions to the Boule, the Ecclesia, and the popular courts of law. Among these functions were jurisdiction in cases of impiety, the supervision of magistrates and the censor ship of the morals of citizens, and the inhibition of unconstitu tional resolutions in the Boule and the Ecclesia. It retained juris diction in cases of homicide and the care of sacred olive trees. From this time (462 B.c.) to the establishment of the "Thirty Tyrants" (404 B.c.), the Areopagitic council, degraded still further by the absolute use of the lot, was a political nullity. After the surrender of Athens and the appointment of the "Thirty," the appeal of the laws of Ephialtes and Archestratus prepared the way for the rehabilitation of the council as guardian of the constitution. The Areopagites could not hope to recover their full supremacy, but they did exercise considerable political influence, especially in crises. In the time of Demosthenes, accordingly, we find them annulling the election of individuals to offices for which they were unfit, exercising during a crisis a disciplinary power ex tending to life and death over all the Athenians "in conformity with ancestral law," procuring the banishment of one, the racking of another, and the infliction of capital punishment on several of the citizens. This authority seems to have been delegated to them by the Ecclesia. Lycurgus claims that by their action during the crisis after Chaeroneia (q.v., see also PHILIP II.), they saved the State. Under Roman supremacy they had jurisdiction in cases of forgery and tampering with the standard measures; also the supervision of buildings, and the care of religion and of education. From the overthrow of the "Thirty" to the end of their history (c. A.D. 40o), they held a reputation for ability and integrity.
The jurisdiction of the council in cases of homicide was as follows :—accusations were brought by relatives; on receiving the accusation the king-archon made three investigations of the case in the three successive months. After the examination he assigned the ' case to the proper court and presided over it during the trial which took place in the open air, that the judges and the accuser might not be polluted by being brought under the same room with the offender. The accuser and the accused, standing on two white stones termed "Relentlessness" (Anaideia) and "Outrage" (Hubris) respectively, bound themselves to the truth by solemn oaths. Each was allowed two speeches, and the trial lasted three days. After the first speech the accused, unless charged with parricide, was at liberty to withdraw into exile. If condemned, he lost his life, and his property was confiscated. A tie vote acquit ted. (Aeschylus, Eumenides 735.) (See GREEK LAW.) BIBLIOGRAPHY.--Among other works may be mentioned G. Gilbert, Bibliography.--Among other works may be mentioned G. Gilbert, Constitutional Antiquities of Athens and Sparta (Eng. trans., 1895) F. Cauer, "Aischylos and der Areopag.," in Rhein. Mus. (1895) ; L. Whibley, Companion to Greek Studies (3rd ed., 1916) with useful bibliography. See also CLEISTHENES, PERICLES and ATHENS.