AREIOP'AGIIS (Gr. for "Mars' hill"), a mount lying to the w. of the acropolis, at Athens, and celebrated as the spot where the most venerable court of justice in ancient times held its sittings. It is not easy to determine satisfactorily why the hill obtained its name; most probably it was on account of sacrifices having been offered there at an early period to the god of war; but all its historic importance is derived from the Areiopagitic council, the origin of which reaches far back into antiquity, and is ascribed by some to the semi-mythological Cecrops. Orestes, according to tradition, was tried before this court, and it is certain that it must have existed long before the first Messenian war (740 n.c.), for the Messenians, in offering to submit to its decisions certain points of dis pute, speak of it, even then, as " old." Solon, however, made many changes in its con stitution, enlarging its sphere of jurisdiction to such an extent that it ceased to be any longer a mere criminal court, and acquired henceforth social and political powers in addition to the former. Before Solon's time it was strictly oligarchical. It now became a tertium quid between aristocracy and democracy, the new qualification for office introduced by Solon being property instead of birth. It thus naturally allied itself with aristocracy, so that we can perfectly understand why it should have been considered a check upon the impetuous democracy, though it would, perhaps, be fairer to regard it as a check upon both extremes. It is not known how many members were included in its council. The nine archons—if they had recommended themselves by a faithful dis charge of their duties—were elected life-members of it. Solon made the council "over seers of everything," and we find instances of their manifold authority in the subsequent history of Greece. They granted money, at the time of the Persian invasion, from a reserve treasury of their own, the ordinary public treasury being empty. After the battle of Cleroneia, they executed all who had deserted their country. in social mat
ters, their powers appear to have been curiously minute. They had officers whom they scut or accompanied into private houses, on occasion of a festivity, to see that the rooms were not overcrowded; they called to account persons who lived in such riotous extrav agance that their example might be considered hurtful to the community, and conferred marks of honor on those of an opposite character. Their sphere of influence seems to have extended itself to religion also. Innovations in the worship of the gods, neglect of the sacred ceremonies, impiety in any form, brought the offenders under the rebuke and punishment of the A. It is likewise asserted that they possessed and exercised great authority in the education of the young, although this statement, and that regarding some charitable functions attributed to them, are of dubious value.
Until the time of Pericles, the brilliant and powerful ruler of the democracy, the A. continued to maintain its ancient dignity. He i e soon discovered, however, that it would prove an insurmountable obstacle to the realization of his desig-ns if not shorn of its privileges. After much and vigorous opposition, he succeeded in carrying a decree (458 n.c.), by which, as Aristotle says, the A. was "mutilated," and democratic tribunals acquired supreme authority. It is, however, far from being clear what were the precise changes which Pericles effected, whether he abridged its powers as a criminal, or as a social and political court. From the high estimation in which it was held for centuries after, in the first of these capacities, we are inclined to think that it was its social and political supremacy that was destroyed. Probably the A. was made responsible to the demur, or body of citizens. It lingered in life for a very long period. We hear of it as late as 380 A. D., and it would seem, from the case of St. 'Paul, that it possessed in his day a certain authority in religious matters.