For this class, will be working with primary sources, written speeches from Athenian law court cases in the 400s and 300s BCE about marriage and inheritance, to investigate the impact on women's lives of laws regulating citizenship, marriage and inheritance. These speeches were written by skilled orators including Isaeus, Demosthenes, and Lysias to be delivered by the actual parties to the suit. We only have one side of each case and we do not know which side eventually won.

BEFORE CLASS

READ:

Ideally: read as much as you can of L&F # 91-107 (Chapter 4: Legal Status in the Greek world), Cheryl A. Cox, Marriage in Ancient Athens. and this overview.

The L&F readings can be challenging to analyze and discuss partly because it was the Athenian practice not to mention the names of citizen women in court; they were referred to as wife, daughter or sister in ways that made clear who had legal control over them. L&F passage are highlighted in yellow in the discussion below, as are the key terms.

Essential: read L&F 107 (some notes and questions on it are under "4. Citizen producing women vs. non-citizen producing women" in the overview below) :

COMPLETE AND SUBMIT the Neaera quiz

You will be asked this question:

What was the settlement that resulted from the arbitration between Phrynion and Stephanus over Neaera? (L&F 107)

IN CLASS:

After a presentation from me on law at Athens, you will work in teams analyzing L&F 107, against Neaera. We will reconvene to discuss this famous case together once you are done with the group work.

Time permitting, we'll then look at both sides of some other interesting law cases. We'll choose from the following:

L&F 98 The widow of Diodotus complains about her Kyrios Diogeiton

L&F 103 Euctemon's sons complain about his relationship with Alce

L&F 105 Euphiletus claims that his murder of his wife's lover Eratosthenes was justified

L&F 106 A stepmother is accused of poisoning

CHEKCLIST OF KEY TERMS

polis

oikos

demos

phratry

deme

boule

ecclesia

isonomia

kyrios

dowry

engue

epikleros

porne

pallake

hetaira

OVERVIEW

1. Citizenship and Democracy at Athens

Athens is unusual because it had robust and well-developed procedures for involving the people (Greek word dēmos) in the government of the polis. These procedures were developed over a long period of time. Some of what we know about them comes from a text called The Constitution of the Athenians attributed to Aristotle (it was discovered in 1879); a photo of the papyrus is below:

unrolled papyrus with text in multiple columns British Library (Papyrus 131). Image source

Before democracy, Athens was ruled by magistrates or officials called (‘archons”) plus the boulē, the council of archons that met on the hill close to the acropolis called the Areopagus
In 621 BCE the archon Draco worked to establish harsh laws that privileged aristocrats over others. The harshness of his laws became so well known that even now when people want to describe very harsh rules or laws they can call them 'draconian.'
Some years after that, Solon (c. 638-558 BCE) made substantial changes to the political structure. He was chief archon in 594 BCE.

1. Solon reformed laws to cancel debts which had obligated free men to put themselves into slavery to pay off what they had borrowed. This seems to have had the consequence of incentivizing Athenians to seek out and enslave persons elsewhere in the Greek world to seize their labor.
2. Solon formulated many Athenian laws, which we know about because arguments in surviving ancient Athenian court cases often quote them.
3. Solon defined 4 levels of wealth which corresponded to 4 levels of eligibility for public office. He set up the boulē as a 400 member council; men in the top three property classes could serve in it. Solon allowed all Athenian citizen men to participate in the ecclesia, the citizen assembly which met on the Areopagus and voted on the proposals made by the boulē.
4. L&F 92 is plausibly viewed as a copy of Solon's regulation of the behavior of women at funerals. What is prohibited? This too is part of Solon's project of trying to smooth out conflicts between men at Athens, the theory being that if men can't pay large numbers of women to mourn at funerals, then it will be easier, in general, for wealthier and less wealthy Athenian men to co-exist peacefully..

Cleisthenes, as chief archon in 508/7 BCE made additional changes. (As we shall see, it will turn out that Romans also made some significant changes to their government around this same time.)
1. Cleisthenes articulated the principle that Athens was to be governed by isonomia, which means 'equality under the law' (iso (equal) + nomos (law))
2. Cleisthenes changed the boulē to be 500 men, each chosen at random to serve for a year by his neighborhood precinct, called a deme.
3. Cleisthenes set up a structure of ten 'tribes' each associated with a different famous legendary Athenian. Each tribe was made up of thirty demes, ten from the city, ten from the shore, and ten from the country. The aim of this structure was to incentivize a cooperative outlook among different types of people and minimize conflicts between say farmers versus city dwellers.
Pericles lived from about 495 to 429 BCE and played a leading role in Athenian government from about 460-429BCE. He led Athens during the beginning of the Peloponnesian Wars, the wars fought between Athens and Sparta during the years 431-404 BCE.

1. Pericles led effort to rebuild temple of Athena and other buildings on Acropolis after the destructions that happened during the Persian Wars.
2. In 451 BCE Pericles organized the passing of a law that restricted citizenship to children of two Athenian parents. In 429 he had the rule changed to allow sons of his mistress to be citizens after his sons (of his wife) died in the plague that swept through Athens; shortly thereafter he himself died of the plague.

2. Mythical justification for restriction of citizenship: autocthony (birth from earth itself)

Athenians used myth to justify the political restrictions on citizenship at Athens. In particular, they told the story that their ancestor Erichthonius had been born on the acropolis itself from the earth itself. This happened when Hephaestus, god of the forge, tried to have sex with Athena. She pushed him away and he spilled semen on her thigh. When she used a piece of wool to wipe it off and threw it on the ground, Erichthonius was born from earth itself (the Greek word for earth 'chthon' appears in his name. Athenians asserted that all Athenians were descended from Erichthonius and thus had a kind of genetic connection to the land. In the image below, the earth goddess Gaia reaches up to hand the baby Erichthonius to Athena. (She is going to hide him in a basket and give him to three girls who live on the Acropolis and tell them not to look in the basket. When they look, they are so alarmed that they throw themselves off of the Acropolis). Erichthonius grows up to become a foundational king of Athens.

3. The phratry as a mechanism for tracking citizenship

The main mechanism of recognizing the transmission of citizenship to children was the phratry. Phratries were kinship-based organizations in Athens at which the births of citizen children would be acknowledged and remembered over time. At the age of 18 a boy would be admitted to the group of men of the deme from whom members of the boule would be chosen by lot. If there were any questions about whether a man was really a citizen, inquires could be made with the phratry to see if members of the phratry remembered his birth. You can see a cases where the phratry's authenticating function is at issue in L&F 102 and 103.

4. Citizen producing women vs. non-citizen producing women

Citizen status allows a man to participate in democratic government, to own land in Athens and Attica, and allows him the capacity to produce citizen children. Women who can produce citizen children thus have a double status: they are excluded from government, but they are central to the continuance and sustainability of the polis. Hence there is a major division between wives who can enable men to transmit citizenship to children and other women whom men take as short or long term sexual partners who cannot transmit citizenship to children. No laws prevent a man from having sex outside of marriage with anyone who is not a citizen man's wife or child, but it was objectionable to set up another woman in the home a man shared with his wife, or for a man who had a citizen producing wife to treat another woman in a way that looked too much like a citizen-producing wife.

These words were used to refer to different categories of women that men paid for sex. An individual woman could be understood as belonging to any of these categories, depending on the context.

porne: a sex worker available "to anyone who wishes"

pallake: a concubine, a long term partner receiving financial support typically from one man, perhaps living in a household supported by him (separate from the household he maintained with his wife, if he had one)

hetaira (also spelled hetaera): the masculine form of this Greek noun, hetairos, means friend and companion. In the feminine it is used to refer to a woman who provides entertainment and /or sex, especially at a symposium (drinking party). The idea is that a hetaira has some choice about with whom she spends her time, although in practice there may have been many pressures exerted on a woman in this situation.

L&F 93 discusses arrangements to be made regarding Archippe, the concubine of the extremely wealthy banker Pasion after Pasion's death. A talent was a very large amount of money
What indicates that Archippe was probably not a woman who could produce citizen children?
L&F 94 records the will of Aristotle, including arrangements made regarding his children and for his concubine Herpyllis. To what extent can Herpyllis have a say in what will happen to her after Aristotle's death?
L&F 100 Even in a non-citizen producing situation the woman's family might try to protect and provide for her with a contract-type arrangement "Even men who give their female relatives as concubines make agreements about what will be given to them as concubines"
L&F 102 There were no public legal documents kept on file to document marriages. Rather, the legality of the marriage existed in the perception and memory of the community, which could include a wedding feast, a feast for the wedding given for the phratry, and the wife's participation in the Thesmophoria, especially if she was chosen by the other wives to preside as well as introducing sons of the marriage to the phratry.
L&F 107 Neaera is an extensive set of excerpts of a case that considers whether a woman named Neaera who was claimed to be a citizen producing wife was actually a concubine. We will discuss this case in class.
- Stephanus is being sued for the crime of giving a daughter in marriage under false pretenses. Stephanos had claimed that his daughter Phano was a citizen and he gave Phano in marriage twice, first to Phrastor and then to Theagenes. Theagenes held the position at Athens of Archon Basileus (King Archon), which involved several rituals that he and his wife had to carry out for the city as a whole. There was a great emphasis on the idea that the wife of the king archon was not correct in every way, so obviously if Phano is not really a citizen that is a big problem. To establish that Phano is not a citizen, the speaker attacks the character and reputation of Phano's mother and Stephanus' wife Neaera. The case turns on the issue of whether Neaera was a citizen producing wife or not. Neaera was about 70 years old when the case was tried around 340 BCE.
- See if you can answer these questions:
- 18-24 Who was Nicarete and why is she relevant for discerning or judging Neara's citizenship status? How is Lysias' behavior relevant to Neaera's status?
  29 How did Neaera leave the household of Nicarete?
  29-32 How was Phrynion involved in Neaera's departure from Corinth?
  33-35 Why did Neaera leave Athens and go to the town of Megara?
  36-47 What was the nature of the relationship between Neaera and the Athenian man Stephanus?
  41-47 Why did Phrynion sue Stephanus and what was the result?
  49- 59 Neaera had a daughter named Phano. What was the nature of Phano's relationship with Phrastor?
  50 What is the punishment if any one gives in marriage a woman who he claims is an Athenian citizen but actually is not?
  59-60 What happened when Phrastor tried to register his and Phano's son at his phratry?
  72-86 When Phano was given in marriage by Stephanus to Theogenes, what religious duties did Phano have to do? Why was this a problem?
  86 What laws about adultery are quoted here?
  110 -114 Women are excluded from courts, trials and public life at Athens. In your opinion, why does the speaker ask the jury members to think about what they will tell their wives about the case?
  122 According to the speaker, if Stephanos had wanted to assert that Phano is the child of him and an earlier citizen wife, whom would he have had to call as witnesses, and how would those witnesses be treated?
Isaeus 3 On the Estate of Pyrrhus, 8-16.The dispute in the case below deals with the question of who will inherit the property of a man named Pyrrhus and turns on whether the woman named Phile was his daughter by a wife or a concubine. Nicodemus says that his sister was legally married to Pyrrhus and Phile was their daughter. The speaker argues against this that Phile's mother did not live like a citizen-producing woman.

But I desire first to ask some questions. Nicodemus has deposed that he married his sister to a man who possessed a fortune of three talents; what dowry does he allege that he gave with her? Next, did this wedded wife leave her husband during his lifetime or quit his house after his death? And from whom did the defendant recover his sister's dowry after the death of him to whom he has deposed that he gave her in marriage? [9] Or, if he did not recover it, what action did he think fit to institute to obtain her maintenance or the restitution of her dowry against the man who was for twenty years the tenant of the estate? Or did he ever, during all that long period, go and make any claim upon the heir regarding his sister's dowry in the presence of any witness? I should be glad to learn what was the reason why none of these steps has been taken in favor of a woman, who, according to the defendant's evidence, was legally married. [10] Furthermore, has anyone else taken this man's sister in legal marriage, either of those who had dealings with her before she knew our uncle, or of those who associated with her during his acquaintance with her, or of those who did so after his decease? For it is clear that her brother has given her in marriage on the same terms to all those associated with her. [11] If it were necessary to enumerate all these persons one by one, it would amount to no small a task. If you bid me do so, I would mention some of them; but if it is as unpleasant to some of you to hear as it is to me to mention such matters, I will content myself with producing the actual depositions made at the previous trial, none of which they thought fit to contest. Yet when once they have themselves admitted that the woman was at the disposal of anyone who wished to take her, how can it be reasonably conceived that she was also a wedded wife? [12] And indeed, since they have never impeached the evidence on this very point, they have in fact admitted all this. You, too, when you have heard the actual depositions, will understand that the defendant has obviously borne false witness, and that those who judged the case gave a proper and a legal sentence when they decided that the estate could not pass to a woman of irregular birth [i.e. she was not known to be a citizen]. Read the depositions; and you, please stop the water-clock.“Depositions” [13]

That the woman, whom the defendant has deposed that he gave in legal marriage to our uncle, was a courtesan who gave herself to anyone and not his wife, has been testified to you by the other acquaintances and by the neighbors of Pyrrhus, who have given evidence of quarrels, serenades, and frequent scenes of disorder which the defendant's sister occasioned whenever she was at Pyrrhus's house. [14] Yet no one, I presume, would dare to serenade a married woman, nor do married women accompany their husbands to banquets or think of feasting in the company of strangers, especially mere chance comers. Yet, our adversaries did not think fit to make any protest against the evidence of any of those who testified to these things. And to prove that what I say is true, read the deposition to them again.“Deposition” [15]

Now read the depositions about those who associated with her, so that the judge may realize that she was a courtesan at anyone's disposal and that she certainly never bore a child to any other man.⁷“Depositions” [16]

I beg you then to bear in mind the number of persons who have given evidence that this woman, whom the defendant has deposed that he gave in marriage to our uncle, was common to all who wished to associate with her, and that she obviously was never married to or lived permanently with anyone else.

5. Kyrios

Kyrios is the Greek term for the male head of the household. The kyrios has responsibility for all women and children and enslaved persons of the household. While men cans sleep with anyone they want except another citizen man's wife or child, there are social and legal incentives to ensure that a kyrios does not spend resources that should be used to support the citizen women and children of the household into pursuing his own pleasure outside of the marriage. Part of the kyrios' responsibility was to arrange for the proper marriage of his citizen producing daughter(s); he would make these arrangements by providing a dowry and executing a contract with the groom.

L&F 98 The widow of Diotodus claims that the kyrios who now has charge of her has been deceitful and has cheated her sons of property that they are entitled to.

6. The Dowry and engue

The dowry was an amount of assets that the bride's family gave to the husband. Giving a dowry and describing the arrangement in a contract (engue, pronounced en-goo-ay, also spelled engye) between the father and the husband was part of what made a marriage evident and significant in the eyes of the community. The bride did not even need to be present for the marriage described in the contract to be legal.
A large dowry could give a wife a lot of leverage in the marriage. The husband can benefit from the dowry financially during the marriage, but he cannot sell it, and if the husband and wife divorce, the dowry has to be returned to the wife's family. If the wife died and left no children, the dowry also was returned to her family. If there were children, the children inherit the dowry from their mother.

Was the dowry the property of the woman? yes and no. If by property we mean something she has control over, then no. L&F 99: "the law expressly forbids children and women from being able to make a contract [about anything worth] more than a bushel of barley. " This means that, for example, if a woman tried to lend someone money from her dowry, if they did not pay the money back she could not sue them. Such a contract would be unenforceable because women were prohibited from making such contracts. On the other hand, in the case below, a wife attempts to protect her dowry items (furniture etc) from being violently seized by men who claim that her husband owes them money, asserting that the items are her property.

Theophemus, however, instead of going with me to the bank and receiving the amount of his judgement, went and seized fifty soft-woolled sheep of mine that were grazing and with them the shepherd and all that belonged to the flock, and also a serving-boy who was carrying back a bronze pitcher of great value which was not ours, but had been borrowed. And they were not content with having these, but went on to my farm [53] （I have a piece of land near the Hippodrome, and have lived there since my boyhood, and first they made a rush to seize the household slaves, but since these escaped them and got off one here and another there, they went to the house, and bursting open the gate which led into the garden（these were this man Evergus, the brother of Theophemus, and Mnesibulus, his brother-in-law, who had won no judgement against me, and who had no right to touch anything that was mine）—these men, I say, entered into the presence of my wife and children and carried off all the furniture that was still left in the house. [54] They thought to get, not so much merely, but far more, for they expected to find the stock of household furniture which I formerly had; but because of my public services and taxes and my liberality toward you, some of the furniture is lying in pawn, and some has been sold. All that was left, however, they took away with them. [55] More than this, men of the jury, my wife happened to be lunching with the children in the court and with her was an elderly woman who had been my nurse, a devoted soul and a faithful, who had been set free by my father. After she had been given her freedom she lived with her husband, but after his death, when she herself was an old woman and there was nobody to care for her, she came back to me. [56] I could not suffer my old nurse, or the slave who attended me as a boy, to live in want; at the same time I was about to sail as captain of a triereme and it was my wife's wish that I should leave such a person to live in the house with her. They were lunching in the court when these men burst in and found them there, and began to seize the furniture. The rest of the female slaves (they were in a tower room where they live), when they heard the tumult, closed the door leading to the tower, so the men did not get in there; but they carried off the furniture from the rest of the house, although my wife forbade them to touch it, [57] and declared that it was her property, mortgaged to secure her marriage portion; she said to them also, “You have the fifty sheep, the serving boy, and the shepherd, whose value is in excess of the amount of your judgement” (for one of the neighbors knocked at the door and told her this). Furthermore she told them that the money was lying at the bank for them, for she had heard me say so. “And, if you will wait here,” she said, “or if one of you will go after him, you shall take the money back with you at once; but let the furniture alone, and do not carry off anything that is mine—especially since you have the full value of your judgement.” [58] But although my wife spoke in this way, they not only did not desist, but when the nurse took the cup which was set by her and from which she had been drinking, and put it in her bosom to prevent these men from taking it, when she saw that they were in the house, Theophemus and Evergus, this brother of his, observing her, treated her so roughly in taking the cup from her [59] that her arms and wrists were covered with blood, as they wrenched her arms and pulled her this way and that in taking the cup from her, and she had lacerations on her throat, where they strangled her, and her breast was black and blue. And they pushed their brutality to such extremes, that they did not stop throttling and beating the old woman, until they had taken the cup from her bosom. [60] The servants of the neighbors, hearing the tumult and seeing that my house was being pillaged, some of them called from the roofs of their own houses to the people passing by, and others went into the other street and seeing Hagnophilus passing by, bade him to come. Hagnophilus, when he came up, summoned by a servant of Anthemion, who is a neighbor of mine, did not enter the house (for he thought he ought not to do so in the absence of the master), but, standing on Anthemion's land, saw the furniture being carried off and Evergus and Theophemus coming out of the house. [61] And not only did they go off with my furniture, men of the jury, but they were even on the point of taking away my son, as though he were a slave, until Hermogenes, one of my neighbors, met them and told them that he was my son.

To prove that I am speaking the truth in this, the clerk shall read you the depositions.“ Depositions ” {Demosthenes] 47, Against Euergus, 52-61.

7. Adultery

L&F #105 Euphiletus claims he was entitled to kill his wife’s lover because he found them in bed together. The lover's relatives object that the lover was caught in the street, not the house, and it is not permitted to kill an adulterer unless you catch him actually having sex with your wife.

Background: Adultery vs. Rape under the law: One of the arguments made by Euphiletus in his own defense is that adultery is distinguished from rape in Athenian law, and that the two crimes are punished differently. Rape is punishable by a fine paid not to the woman but to her kyrios: husband or father, similarly in the case of a raped boy. Adultery may be punished in the following way: if the adulterer is caught in the act by the woman’s husband or father (or other kyrios), he (the kyrios) may not be punished for killing the adulterer. Note that the kyrios is not required to kill the adulterer, he is only permitted to do so without being punished. In the event that this did not take place, the adulterer could be charged with adultery and penalized with a fine (not the death penalty).

There are two kinds of reasoning behind this law.

adultery is more dangerous threat to an oikos because it might introduce an illegitimate child into the oikos (a child born of rape would be exposed, presumably)
adultery takes place at home, rape takes place outside the home (i.e. adultery is a more concrete violation of the boundaries of the oikos)

The privileging of the oikos underlies both reasons. The actual experience of the woman is irrelevant, except that if a man finds his wife is adulterous, he must divorce her (and might be asked to give back part of her dowry). A husband could be prosecuted for tolerating an adulterous wife. Once she has been divorced for adultery she cannot attend some religious ceremonies, especially the Thesmophoria, a festival celebrated by married women at Athens in honor of Demeter and Persephone. cf. L&F # 104

8. Divorce

A husband could divorce his wife for any reason just by sending her away. It seems that no matter what the reason for the divorce, when the marriage ended the dowry had to be returned to the wife’s family. Probably (at least until a child was born, and possibly after) the wife’s father could also end the marriage and reclaim the dowry, perhaps especially if the husband had been spending money inappropriately.

There was a procedure by which a wife could apply to the magistrate to obtain a divorce; it is not clear how much this requirement to go through government channels prevented women in practice from dissolving marriages. In a prosecution speech against the Athenian military commander and politician Alcibiades, Alcibiades is said to have physically prevented his wife from applying to the archon (magistrate) for a divorce when she was upset about how he was bringing other women into their home:

I am astonished, furthermore, at those who are persuaded that Alcibiades is a lover of democracy, that form of government which more than any other would seem to make equality its end. They are not using his private life as evidence of his character, in spite of the fact that his greed and his arrogance are plain to them. On his marriage with the sister of Callias he received a dowry of ten talents; yet after Hipponicus [the bride's father]⁹ had lost his life as one of the generals at Delium, Alcibiades asked for and got another ten talents, on the ground that Hipponicus had agreed to add this further sum as soon as Alcibiades should have a child by his daughter. [14] Then, after obtaining a dowry such as no Greek had ever obtained before, he behaved in so profligate a fashion, bringing mistresses [hetairas], slave and free, into the bridal house, that he drove his wife, who was a decent woman, to present herself before the Archon, as she was legally entitled to do, and divorce him. At that he gave conspicuous proof of his power. He called in his friends, and carried off his wife from the Agora by force, showing the whole world his contempt for the magistrates, the laws, and his fellow Athenians in general. Andocides, Against Alcibiades 13-14.

9. An accusation of poisoning

If a man had children from two different wives in succession, rivalries and inheritance disputes could arise. In L&F 106, after the death of a man, his son by the first wife prosecutes the second wife for murder. There is an incentive for the son to prosecute to gain control over the assets his father left behind.

10. Brotherless heiress - epikleroi: uncles marrying nieces

L&F 96 If a kyrios only has a daughter, the inheritance goes to her. There is a special word for a brotherless heiress: epikleros. This word does not mean 'she gets the property' in the sense of getting to control what happens to it. Rather, it means 'she who is attached to the property.'

Every oikos has its own cult of ancestors. A kyrios, as head of the household, wants his household to continue to honor him in this household cult after he dies. If he has a son, the son will inherit the household and honor the kyrios in the household cult.

L&F 97 If the inheritance goes to a woman, it is the duty of the father’s next of kin to marry her or arrange for her marriage. Even if a woman is already married, if she is her father’s only heir the male next of kin can require that she leave her husband if she does not already have a child who can inherit her father's oikos.

In other words, women only inherit when there are no appropriate male heirs, In such cases the heiress becomes the responsibility of the father’s next of kin, often his brother. This brother, the girl’s uncle, was to marry her or to giver her away to someone else. The incentive for uncle to marry niece is to keep all the property in the family. The father's family want the property to be kept in their family. Therefore there is a strong preference that the husband of the epikleros be already related to them. In fact, the father's brother is entitled to claim the girl in marriage, even if he is much older than she is and even if she is already married (as long as there is no male child as yet). The laws of Solon codified this procedure (it might have been around earlier though) and in addition provide that (since the point of the whole exercise is to provide an heir for the father's oikos, the uncle (or whoever marries the heiress) must sleep with her at least three times a month.

Note that in L&F 98, we have one of these uncle-niece marriages.

There were three wealthy brothers (I use Dad, Stepmother, and Widow for the unnamed people in the case). Let's cast it as a movie to help picture it in our heads.

Widow is the child of Dad's first wife.

After Dad died, his daughter Widow married her uncle Diodotus and had sons and a daughter.

Also after Dad died, Dad's second wife Stepmother married Diogeiton.

When Diodotus died, Diodotus left instructions that Diogeiton should be Widow's kyrios.

Now Widow's son-in-law is concerned about $$$, and he sponsors a lawsuit that accuses Diogeiton of taking money that should properly belong to Widow's sons and spending it on the children Diogeiton has had with Stepmother.

11. Adoption

If there are no heirs, the property goes to extended family on the father's side in a strict order of succession as specified in L&F #96. But this was viewed as an unappealing option, because if you bequeath an oikos to someone who already has one, then probably the family cult would basically be neglected. The ideal situation for the continuation of an oikos is its inheritance by someone who doesn't already have one. In such a situation a man who has no heirs might try to adopt a younger man who was already a citizen. There were no procedures for adopting orphaned or abandoned children and granting them citizen status.

In L&F 103, note how the non-citizen producing woman Alce is said to have persuaded Euctemon to introduce one of her sons into his phratry under his own name. This is the procedure for adoption: to introduce the person to the phratry. At that time it was necessary to swear a sacred oath that the person was a citizen, and the phratry had to consent to the introduction. As you see, Euctemon's phratry, on the prodding of Euctemon's citizen son, intially rejected Alce's son until Euctemon got his citizen son to back down by threatening to marry someone else and have more children.
On the Estate of Menecles 7-17In the case below, the speaker explains how he was adopted by a childless man named Menecles. Menecles had been married to the speaker's sister, but arranged to divorce her so she could marry someone else. Much later on other relatives objected to the adoption and tried to prove that the speaker was not entitled to inherit Menecles' oikos.

Two or three months later Menecles, with many expressions of praise for our sister, approached us and said that he viewed with apprehension his increasing age and childlessness: she ought not, he said, to be rewarded for her virtues by having to grow old with him without bearing children; [8] it was enough that he himself was unfortunate. He, therefore, begged us to do him the favor of marrying her to someone else with his consent. We told him that it was for him to persuade her in the matter, for we would do whatever she agreed. [9] At first she would not even listen to his suggestion, but in course of time she with difficulty consented. So we gave her in marriage to Elius of Sphettus, and Menecles handed over her dowry to him—for he had become part-lessee of the estate of the children of Nicias—and he gave her the garments which she had brought with her to his house and the jewelry which there was. [10] Some time after this Menecles began to consider how he could put an end to his childless condition and have someone to tend his old age and bury him when he died and thereafter carry out the customary rites over him. He saw that my opponent had only one son; so he thought it wrong to ask him to give him his son to adopt and so deprive him of male offspring. [11] Thus he could find no nearer relative than us; he, therefore, approached us and said that he thought it right, since fate had decreed that he should have no children by our sister, that he should adopt a son out of the family from which he would have wished to have a son of his own in the course of nature; “I should like, therefore,” he said,“to adopt one of you two, whichever is willing.” [12] My brother, on hearing this, expressed his approval of Menecles' proposal and agreed that his age and solitary condition required someone who would look after him, and remain at home; “I,” he said, “as you know, go abroad; but my brother here” (meaning me） “will look after your affairs as well as mine, if you wish to adopt him.” Menecles approved of his suggestion and thus adopted me. [13]

I wish next to prove to you that the adoption was carried out in the proper legal manner. So please read me the law which ordains that a man can dispose as he likes of his own property, if he does not possess male issue of his own. The law-giver [Solon], gentlemen, legislated thus, because he saw that for childless persons the only refuge for their solitary condition, and the only possible comfort in life, lay in the possibility of adopting whomsoever they wished. [14] The law thus allowing Menecles, because he was childless, to adopt a son, he adopted me, not by a will made at the point of death, as other citizens have done, nor during illness; but when he was sound in body and mind, and fully aware of what he was doing, he adopted me and introduced me to his fellow-wardsmen in the presence of my opponents and enrolled me among the demesmen and the members of his phratry. [15] At the time my opponents raised no objection to his action on the ground that he was not in his right mind, although it would have been much better to have tried to win him over to their point of view during his lifetime rather than insult him now that he is dead and try to desolate his house. For he lived on after the adoption, not one or two years, but twenty-three, and during all this period he never regretted what he had done, because it was universally acknowledged that he had been well advised in what he did. [16] To prove the truth of these statements, I will produce before you, as witnesses, the wardsmen, the members of the phratry, and the demesmen, and, to prove that Menecles was at liberty to adopt me, the clerk of the court shall read you the text of the law in accordance with which the adoption was made. Please read these depositions and the law.“Depositions. Laws.” [17]

The law itself makes it clear that Menecles was free to adopt anyone he liked as his son; that he did adopt a son, the wardsmen, the demesmen, and the members of the confraternity have provided evidence. Thus we have clearly proved it, gentlemen, the witness¹⁰ has attested the truth of it, and my opponents cannot say a word against the actual fact of the adoption. [18] Isaeus 2.