Archaic Athens

On ancient Athens, click here (done by faculty); photo from my first visit to Athens in 1896.

The Problem: As Greece became more stable and prosperous, the institutions that had provided for security in the Dark Ages were challenged. Those areas that were relatively more developed and more prosperous were also areas in which tyranny also became prominent. Why did tyranny develop in such cities? and how did the experience affect the move toward democratic institutions? Here we consider the case of Athens.

A Summary of the Changes in the Athenian Constitution

  1. The Impact of the Spartan Revolution
    1. The constitutional settlement at Sparta was important not just for what happened at Sparta, but because it gave other emerging poleis a model for action and for a new political order. The cities near the Isthmus all went through a phase of tyranny and generally took on more democratic forms.
    2. The most fundamental problem for all emerging states was to break down the power of the clans/tribes and well as regionalism. The institutional 'tools' of reformers were
      1. law codes: written and publicly displayed codes institutionalized traditional practices and made it more difficult for the old elite to control politics. ESHAG 62
      2. voting by residence/district; not by clan/descent.
      3. hoplite reform (from cavalry to heavy infantry); new tactics made old aristocratic military system redundant and led to shift in real political power.
  2. Cylon and Draco (ca. 630 B.C.)
    1. Athens had been under the control of the Eupatridae (the old aristocracy) whose power was based on tradition, on their ownership of the land and on their ability to organize their clients Note ESHAG 63 for the weltanschauung of one aristocrat). Note the role of the personal and familial = patronage.
    2. Cylon attempted to establish a tyranny indicating that:
      1. the nature of "wealth" was changing;
      2. newly wealthy could afford arms and, thereby, had the means to make their demands felt; and this group may have supported Cylon.
      3. Megacles, of the Alcmaeonid clan, was the chief magistrate (archon) and, to end the affair, had executed the followers of Cylon during a truce.
    3. Probably not coincidental that first Athenian law code, that of Draco, follows in about 620.
      1. nothing remarkable about it except that the penalties are very harsh
      2. still, an objective, written law code is better than allowing the aristocrats to interpret tradition.
      3. Whatever the causes (see below), it is clear that there was considerable agitation for "debt" relief including an end to enslavement for debt.
      4. The dynamics "...Draco laid down his statutes (thesmoi, see below) in the following manner. A share in the politeia (state) had been given only to those who provided their own arms and armour..." ACG Doc 65b.
      5. Background: because individuals became more prosperous, the number of individuals who could provide their own arms grew, and so too did the demand / agitation for further reform. hence: the state became more inclusive, and it also became more stable. Specifically...
        1. with return to stability, there was increasing population pressure on limited amount of land
        2. inalienability of land
        3. status of hectemoros = serf/indentured servant or sharecropper; at least some of those who rose in wealth demanded relief from the obligations.
      6. Solon, in 594 (??) secured legislation ending the status of hectemoros and forbidding an Athenian to be sold into slavery for debt. This was called a seisachteia.
  3. Solon's constitutional reforms. 1stview; 2ndview.
    1. To begin to break the power of the clans, he divided the population into four classes based on wealth/service potential. Better balance of privilege and responsibility. The number of those 'in power' (i.e., in the first three classes) doubled [inclusion]. A significant achievement.
    2. more significant were
      1. establishment of a council of 400 (100 from each of the traditional "tribes") which would prepare business for assembly
      2. assembly receives regular meeting dates (probable!).
      3. independent courts established to hear legal business esp at the local level.
    3. Conceptual basis of Solon's compromise: "I gave the demos as much privilege as they have a right to; I neither degraded them from rank nor gave them free hand; and for those who held the power and were envied for their wealth, I worked it out that they also should have no cause for complaint. Thus would the demos be best off...neither given excessive freedom nor put to restraint."
  4. The Aftermath
    1. The reforms did not lead to a end to clan violence surrounding elections, rather, the factions solidified into three distinct regional groups that began to redefine the clan structure
      1. the "plainsmen": the old aristocrats who controlled the best of the Attic farmland. They and their retainers wished to preserve their control of the state. The clan of the Philaidai provided leadership.
      2. the "coastal" faction, including the former hectemoroi and the bulk of the urban population. The Alcmaeonid clan provided the leadership, though this family's authority was weakened by the pollution attached to its name.
      3. Emerging was a third faction of "hillsmen" representing the poorer of the rural inhabitants. Solon was a member of this faction, but the the leadership was provided by the clan of the Pisistratidae.
    2. Significance of Solon
      1. A written constitution to supplement and develop the legal code; law now above magistrates, regular meeting of an elective and legislative demos (= popular assembly).
      2. Together with the seisachteia there is a definition of citizenship; right to vote, to legislate and to be free of enslavement for debt.
  5. The Tyranny of the Peisistratidai. The years following Solon's reforms were not peaceful. Many disturbances at elections indicate intense competition among aristocrats.

    Peisistratus's first period of rule

    ca. 560-559 B.C.

    Peisistratus's second period of rule

    ca. 558-557 B.C.

    Peisistratus's final installation as tyrant spent ten years building cash resources (=mercenaries) and allies (esp. among other tyrants)

    546 B.C.

    death of Peisistratus

    527 B.C.

    murder of Hipparchus (younger son)

    514/513 B.C.

    expulsion of Hippias (elder son)

    510 B.C.
    1. Peistratus: From the faction of Solon, but an extremist; a successful general (capture of Nisaea). He profited by the success of Solon and was closely associated with him personally. His tyranny marked by economic expansion, cultural and civic development (a new loyalty). Note the role of the tyrant in transition to greater inclusion
    2. Tyranny of his son, esp. of Hippias
      1. Economic downturn in Greece [more in next lecture];
      2. There is unrest and repression in a cycle.
      3. Harmodius and Aristogeiton.
      4. Sparta told by Apollo to do her duty.
  6. Was the tyranny a failure of the Solonic Reforms? No. Peistratus, to gain support, had allowed many marginal figures to enjoy citizenship.
    1. Solon had not dealt directly with social pyramids, hence struggles continued among aristocracy; they had means (i. e., the resources) to continue the struggle. Nonetheless, they (including the later reformer Cleisthenes) were in exile for long periods of time and consequently lost control of clients because they were unable to provide protection. Mutual obligation broke down.
    2. More important was the fact that the P. encouraged rapid economic growth, growth that gave more Athenians a chance to acquire resources of the hoplite class. Initially these people helped the P., because they saw aristocrats as the greater threat.
    3. General success of attempts to transfer loyalty to state, development of cultural patriotism. Temples, festivals, fountains, public buildings; citizens proud of Athens.
    4. Tyrants encouraged immigration esp. of traders, craftsmen and professionals, of individuals who, though initially beholden to the P., nonetheless formed the core of the democratic movement, and demanded inclusion.
  7. Reforms of Cleisthenes: (sovereignty of the demos, identification of demos and stratos, rule of law)
    1. Cleomenes, king of Sparta, and his army expelled the Peisistratidai, and established Isagoras.
      1. Note by this time Sparta had given up the idea of further conquest in Greece and relied on diplomacy: Having established a 'Peloponnesian League' in which she, Sparta, had one vote, and her 'allies' another vote.
      2. Action required consensus. A successful innovation all, and one that acted against tyranny. Compromise and inclusion?
    2. But Isagoras, trying to restrict citizenship to the 'few' [on the Spartan model], failed to establish consensus. ...and when Cleisthenes was getting the worst of it [the struggle with Isagoras], he added the entire demos to his body of supporters (i.e., his clan) ACG 75. Esp here those who could afford to serve in the army and the immigrants seeking inclusion.
    3. Political Reforms of Cleisthenes / Pericles : "His (Cleisthenes) aim was to mix them (citizens) up, that more of them might have a share in the polititeia . ACG 76
      1. Deme (approx. = village) to be basic unit, not descent...no longer clear then who was a new and how an older citizen.
      2. Attica divided into three regions, city, coast, interior; demes of each region distributed through ten trittyes, so that each of the ten tribes has one trittys from each region.
      3. Council of 500 elected each year to prepare agenda. Each deme elects proportionally from the over 30 years of age; latter a combination of election and sortition. So that all might serve, pay eventually introduced.
      4. Citizens, who status was uncertain, were now formally enrolled
      5. A board of ten generals (strategoi) elected, one from each tribe.
      6. Areopagus continues as an institution of great moral force (all ex-archons were members), but power significantly reduced.
  8. General Conclusion: Engine of liberal reform was the gradual increase in personal wealth (clear in the archaeological record...construction activity, pottery, etc) and in the number of citizens [the middle] with resources to serve in the army and to articulate their demands. Here is what Aristotle says: the role of the middle: "And this [the middle] is the class of citizens which is most secure in a state, for they do not, like the poor, covet other men's goods; nor do others covert theirs, as the poor covet the goods of the rich; and as they neither plot against others, nor are themselves plotted against, they pass through life safely...Thus it is manifest that the best political community is formed by citizens of the middle, and those states are likely to be well administered in which the middle is large and stronger if possible than both the other classes." and note the consequences of that compromise: Aristotle says. "...for while they were ruled by tyrants the Athenians were no better in war than any of their neighbors, but one they had got rid of their tyrants they became far and away the best. What this proves is that while they were oppressed they were like men laboring for a master--and unwilling to make an effort; but when they had been liberated, each man had his own incentive for working hard. Herodotus in ACG 74.
Consider the following:

Notes on Vocabulary

Deme, Trittys, Tribe

Athens, like most Greek cities, had been divided into tribes based on descent. This gave aristocratic families a natural way of securing influence, because relatives tended to stick together. The people of Attica had also often clumped in regional groupings, as in the days of Peisistratus, and this had let to dangerous internal disorder, with people from one part of Attica set against those from another. Cleisthenes completely reorganized the Athenian state into a new, artificial, and rather complicated system. In his system the basic unit was the deme, the village or neighborhood in which one lived. These demes when then put together into 30 somewhat larger units called trittyes. Cleisthenes then formed his 10 new tribes by combining one trittyes from different parts of Attica, one from the coastal region, one from the city, and one from inland. These tribes would form the units in the Athenian army, and the Athenian Council. The result was to put Athenians from different parts of Attica together into the same political units; it's a bit like having some people from Alaska and some from Alabama belong to the same congressional district.

Council

Solon may already have set up a council: but we know nothing about it. It is under Cleisthenes that the Council or Boule (sometimes translated by it's Latin equivalent and called a Senate) became important. It would consist of 50 members chosen by lot from each of the 10 tribes. The Council would thus be a geographically balanced body, one of whose functions was to tie Athenians together regardless of where they lived or who they were related to. The Council's main task was to prepare legislation for the Athenian Assembly, but it also had certain functions we would associate with the executive branch of government. Each tribe's group of 50 would be on duty for one tenth of the year to oversee any business that needed immediate attention.

Assembly

The most important body in the Athenian democracy was the popular assembly, in which all male citizens could participate. The Assembly would meet a number of times each month, and the first 6000 or so Athenians citizens to arrive (all that could fit in the meeting place of the Assembly) would deliberate and vote on all important state actions. The assembly had the powers of our congress, and was not checked by any powerful executive or judicial branches, for public officials became progressively less important at Athens, and the judicial branch consisted of large juries of citizens who had interests similar to those of the members of the Assembly. Cleisthenes increased the power of the Assembly largely by making use of it to push through his reforms. By this precedent he ensured that all important laws had to be passed by a vote of the people as a whole. It is now fair to call Athens a democracy--so long as we note that women, slaves, and immigrants were not allowed to vote.

Note that the two political bodies of Athens, the Assembly and the Council, had rather different roles: the Council made proposals which the Assembly could vote upon and amend. They also may have had somewhat different memberships. To get to the Assembly meeting you would have to come to Athens; as many Athenians lived 15 or 20 miles out in the countryside, this would have been quite a burden, and so it is possible that city-folks were over-represented (rather the opposite of today). The Council, though, was automatically geographically diversified by Cleisthenes' play, which ensured that people from the countryside at least had some say at that stage of the deliberations.

From thesmos to nomos

The Athenian vocabulary for "law" changed in an interesting way in Cleisthenes' day, and Cleisthenes himself may have been responsible for the change. Solon's laws were known as "thesmoi"; the word is related to the Greek verb meaning to put or place, and refers to the process by which law is imposed by a law-giver or other authority. Solon was a good and wise man, and was given his power by the people; but he was still imposing laws on the people. Nomos, by contrast, refers to custom and tradition, customs and traditions already present in the society rather than being imposed from on high. Thus by referring to statues as "nomoi" rather than "thesmoi" one gives law an entirely different meaning. No longer are laws imposed on "us" by someone else: "we" make our own laws. Thus the Athenians were beginning to take charge of their own government. And just in time; for they would need all their strength to meet the challenges of the 5th century.