as well as to those who are entirely aliens to the British empire. The former, however, are treated for several purposes as British subjects even without being so naturalized.
In most countries a lengthened sojourn is a condition precedent to naturalization. In Belgium, the United Kingdom, North America and Russia the period of such sojourn is fixed at five years, in France, Greece and Sweden at three, in the Argentine Republic two, while in Portugal a residence of one year is sufficient. In Germany, Austria and Italy no period of residence is prescribed, while in Austria a ten years' residence confers per se the rights of citizenship. In the United States an alien desiring to be naturalized must declare on oath his intention to become a citizen of the United States; two years afterwards must declare on oath his intention to support the constitution of the United States and renounce allegiance to every foreign power, including that of which he was before a subject; must prove residence in the United States for five years, and in the state where his application is made for one year, as a good citizen; and must renounce any title of nobility. In France an alien desiring naturalization, if he has not resided continuously in the country for ten years, must obtain permission to establish his domicile in France; three years after (in special cases one year) he is entitled to apply for naturalization, which involves the renunciation of any existing allegiance.
See further, Allegiance, International Law (Private); also Bar, Private International Law (Gillespie’s translation); Hansard, Law relating to Aliens; Cutler, Law of Naturalization; Cockburn, Nationality; Cogordan, Nationalité; Heffter, Europäisches Völkerrecht; Hall, Foreign Jurisdiction of the British Crown; Westlake, International Law—Peace, and Private International Law (4th ed.). (Jno. W.)
NAUARCHIA (Gr. ναῦς, ship, ἀρχή, command), the supreme command of the Spartan navy. The office was an annual one and could not be held more than once by the same man (Xen. Hell. ii. 1. 7). This law might be evaded in special cases; the new admiral might not be sent to take over the command until some time after his election, which took place at midsummer (Beloch in Philologus, xliii. p. 272 sqq.), and meanwhile his predecessor remained de facto admiral; or the retiring admiral might, after the expiry of his term, hold an appointment as secretary (ἐπιστολεύς) to one who, though titular admiral, was really placed under his orders or even kept at Sparta altogether. Being independent of the kings and hampered by no colleague, the nauarch wielded such power that Aristotle is hardly going too far when he says (Politics, ii. 9. 22), ἡ ναυαρχἰα σχεδὸν ἐτέρα βασιλεία καθέστηκεν. He was subject only to the ephors, who, if he proved incompetent, could depose him (Thuc. viii. 39), though they usually preferred to send out an advisory committee (σύμβουλοι). An admiral might appoint his ἐπιστολεύς to command a portion, or even the whole, of the fleet, and if the former died in office the secretary succeeded to his post.
For a detailed discussion see J. Beloch, “Die Nauarchie in Sparta,” in the Rheinisches Museum, xxxiv. (1879) 117-130, where a complete list of nauarchs known to us will be found; regarding the time of the election this is corrected by a later article of the same writer (Philologus, loc. cit.). See also A. Solari, Ricerche Spartane (Livorno, 1907), 1-58; G. Busolt, “Staats- und Rechtsaltertümer” (Iwan Müller’s Handbuch der klassischen Altertumswissenschaft, iv.), § 96; G. E. Underhill’s edition of Xenophon, Hellenica, i., ii., note on i. 5. 1. (M. N. T.)
NAUCK, JOHANN AUGUST (1822–1892), German classical scholar and critic, was born at Auerstädt in Prussian Saxony on the 18th of September 1822. After having studied at Halle and held educational posts in Berlin, he migrated in 1859 to St Petersburg, where he was professor of Greek at the imperial historico-philological institute (1869–1883). He died on the 3rd of August 1892. Nauck was one of the most distinguished textual critics of his day, although, like P. H. Peerlkamp, he was fond of altering a text in accordance with what he thought the author must, or ought to, have written.
The most important of his writings, all of which deal with Greek language and literature (especially the tragedians) are the following: Euripides, Tragedies and Fragments (1854, 3rd ed., 1871); Studia Euripidea (1859–1862); Tragicorum Graecorum Fragmenta (1856, last ed., 1889), his chief work; Index to the Fragments (1892); text of Sophocles (1867): revised edition of Schneidewin’s annotated Sophocles (1856, &c.); texts of Homer, Odyssey (1874) and Iliad (1877–1879); the fragments of Aristophanes of Byzantium (1848), still indispensable; Porphyrius of Tyre (1860, 2nd ed., 1886); Iamblichus, De Vita Pythagorica (1884); Lexikon Vindobonense (1867), a meagre compilation of the 14th or 15th century. See memoir by T. Zielinski, in Bursian’s Biographisches Jahrbuch (1894), and J. E. Sandys, History of Classical Scholarship, iii. (1908), pp. 149–152.
NAUCRARY, a subdivision of the people of Attica, which was certainly among the most primitive in the Athenian state. The word is derived either (1) from ναῦς (a ship) and describes the duty imposed upon each naucrary, of providing one ship and two (or, more probably, ten) horsemen; or (2) from
ναίειν (to dwell), in which case it has to do with a householder census. The former is generally accepted in view of the fact that the naucraries were certainly the units on which the Athenian fleet was based. The view once held (on the strength of a fragment of Aristotle, quoted carelessly by Photius) that the naucrary was invented by Solon may now be regarded as obsolete (see the Aristotelian Constitution, viii. 3). Each of the four Ionian tribes was divided into three trittyes (“thirds”), each of which was subdivided into four naucraries; there were thus 48 naucraries. The earliest mention of them is in Herodotus (v. 71), where it is stated that the Cylonian conspiracy was put down by the “Prytaneis (chief men) of the Naucraries.” Although it is generally recognized that in this passage we can trace an attempt to shift the responsibility for the murder of the suppliants from the archon Megacles, it is highly improbable that the Prytaneis of the Naucraries did not play a part in the tragedy. Thucydides is probably right, as against Herodotus, in asserting that the nine archons formed the Athenian executive at this period. It may be conjectured, however, that the military forces of Athens were organized on the basis of the naucraries, and that it was the duty of the presidents of these districts to raise the local levies. It is certainly remarkable that the Aristotelian Constitution of Athens does not connect the naucrary with the fleet or the army; from chapter viii. it would appear that its importance was chiefly in connexion with finance (ἀρχὴ τεταγμένη πρός τε τὰς εἰσφορὰς καὶ τὰς δαπάνας). The naucrary consisted of a number of villages, and was, therefore, a local unit very much in the power of the naucraros, who was selected by reason of wealth. The naucraros superintended the construction of, and afterwards captained, the ship, and also assessed and administered the taxes in his own area. In the reforms of Cleisthenes, the naucraries gave place to the demes as the political unit. In accordance with the new decimal system, their number was increased to fifty. Whether they continued (and if so, how long) to supply one ship and two[1] (or ten) horsemen each is not certainly known. Cheidemus in Photius asserts that they did, and his statement is to a certain extent corroborated by Herodotus (vi. 89) who records that, in the Aeginetan War before the Persian Invasion, the Athenian fleet numbered only fifty sail.
See Photius (s.v.), who is clearly using the Ath. Pol. (he quotes from it the last part of his article totidem verbis); Schömann, Antiq. (p. 326, Eng. trans.)—quoted by J. E. Sandys (Ath. Pol. viii., 13)—refutes Gilbert, Greek Constitutional Antiquities (Eng. trans., 1895), and in Jahrb. Class. Phil. cxi. (1875) pp. 9 seq.; A. H. J. Greenidge, Handbook of Greek Const. Hist. p. 134; history of Greece in general; for derivation of name, G. Meyer, Curtius’ Studien (vii. 175), where Wecklein is refuted. (J. M. M.)
NAUCRATIS, an ancient Greek settlement in Egypt. The site was discovered by Professor W. M. Flinders Petrie in 1884, on the eastern bank of a canal, about 10 m. W. of the present Rosetta branch of the Nile. In ancient times it was approached by the Canopic mouth, which was farther to the west. The identification of the site is placed beyond doubt by the discovery of inscriptions, with the name of the town, and of great masses of early Greek pottery, such as could not have existed anywhere else. The site was excavated in 1884–1886 by the Egypt Exploration Fund, and a supplementary excavation was made by the British School at Athens in 1899. A list of the temples of Naucratis is given by Herodotus (ii. 178); they were the Hellenion, common to all the colonizing cities, and those dedicated
- ↑ See footnote to Cleisthenes (1), ad fin.
