Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T22:03:25.508Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

I. The Athenian Democracy and its Critics1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 December 2011

A. H. M. Jones
A. H. M. Jones
Affiliation:
Professor of Ancient History in the University
Get access

Extract

It is curious that in the abundant literature produced in the greatest democracy of Greece there survives no statement of democratic political theory. All the Athenian political philosophers and publicists whose works we possess were in various degrees oligarchic in sympathy. The author of the pamphlet on the ‘Constitution of the Athenians’ preserved among Xenophon's works is bitterly hostile to democracy. Socrates, so far as we can trace his views from the works of Xenophon and Plato, was at least highly critical of democracy. Plato's views on the subject are too well known to need stating. Isocrates in his earlier years wrote panegyrics of Athens, but in his old age, when he wrote his more philosophical works, became increasingly embittered against the political régime of his native city. Aristotle is the most judicial in his attitude, and states the pros and cons, but his ideal was a widely based oligarchy. With the historians of Athens, the same bias is evident. Only Herodotus is a democrat, but his views have not carried much weight, partly because of his reputation for naïveté, and partly because his explicit evidence refers to a period before the full democracy had evolved. Thucydides is hostile: in one of the very few passages in which he reveals his personal views he expresses approval of a régime which disfranchised about two-thirds of the citizens, those who manned the fleet on which the survival of Athens depended. Xenophon was an ardent admirer of the Spartan régime.

Type
Research Article
Information
Cambridge Historical Journal , Volume 11 , Issue 1 , 1953 , pp. 1 - 26
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1953

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

2 I have not, save for occasional references, included Aristophanes–or, for that matter, the tragedians–in my survey, because with Gomme (Classical Review, LII (1938), 97–107)Google Scholar I hold that Aristophanes wrote comedies and not political tracts. While he makes it fairly obvious that he strongly disliked certain features of the democracy, such as vulgar politicians like Cleon, he does not–and did not intend to–preach political doctrine, and his jokes cannot necessarily be taken for criticism.

3 Pol[itics], v, ix, 15 (1310a).

4 Pol. vi, ii, 3 (1317b); iv, 20 (1319b).

5 vii, 37; cf. vii, 20, xii, 131.

6 viii, 557b.

7 Ibid. 563 b. The same complaint about metics and slaves is made in [Xenophon], Ἀθ[ηναίων] πολ [ιτεία], i, 10–12.

8 See Dem[osthenes], xxi, 46–50 and ix, 3 on slaves.

9 Thuc[ydides], ii, 37. 2.

10 Cf. Eurip[ides], Hippolytus, 421–3; Ion, 670–2.

11 xx, 106.

12 Mem[orabilia], I, ii, 12 ff.; cf. Aeschines, 1, 173.

13 Republic, viii, 558c; cf. Laws, vi, 757.

14 vii, 21; cf. iii, 14.

15 Pol. ii, ix, 1–5 (1280a); v, 2–7 (1301a); vi, ii, 2 (1317b). In vi, iii (1318a) Arist[otle] makes an ingenious attempt to combine democratic and oligarchic equality.

16 For praise of ἰσότης see Eurip. Supplices, 404–8, 433–41; Phoenissae, 535ff.

17 xxi, 67.

18 xxiv, 59.

19 Thuc. 11, 37. 1.

20 Xen. Hell[enica], II, iii, 51.

21 Pol. iii, xi, 1–2 (1281b); in §5 he limits this argument to certain bodies of men only, excluding those in which the majority are [brutes].

22 Pol. iii, xi, 14 (1282a); here again he limits the argument to cases where the majority are not [too slavish].

23 Protagoras, 319b–323a.

24 Xen. Mem. 1, ii, 9.

25 xxxix, 10–11.

26 Arist. ἈAθ. πολ. 55. 2; cf. Lysias, xvi and xxxi, for hostile speeches at δοκιμασία.

27 Ibid. 43. 4.

28 Ibid. 48. 3–5, 54.2.

29 Thuc. 11, 37. 1.

30 Plato, Menex[enus], 238cd.

31 Arist. Pol. 11, xii, 2 (1273b)

32 For the fourth century see Sundwall, J., ‘Epigraphische Beiträge’, Klio, Beiheft IV (1906), §§ 2, 5, 8Google Scholar.

33 [Xen.] Ἀθ. πολ. i, 3.

34 Mem. iii, iv, 1.

35 xix, 237. In 282 Demosthenes states what he thinks are the proper qualifications for high office—trierarchies, liturgies, etc. Cf. the vulgar abuse of Cleon and other politicians as being low persons engaged in trade by Aristophanes in the Knights.

36 Aristophanes jibes at ambassadors with their 2 drachmae a day (Acharnians, 66, 90) a nd military officers with 3 drachmae (ibid. 595–607).

37 Pol. iv, vi, 5–6 (1293a); elsewhere Aristotle is prepared to accept political pay, provided that precautions are taken to prevent the poor outnumbering the rich (iv, xiii, 6 (1297a), xiv, 13 (1298b)).

38 See my Athens of Demosthenes, pp. 20ff.

39 Lysias, xiii, 20. Rich men like Demosthenes and Apollodorus apparently found no difficulty in securing a seat on the council when convenient (Dem. xxi, iii; xix, 154, 286; lix, 3–4). See also J. Sundwall, op. cit. § 1 (pp. 1–18).

40 Gorgias, 515e.

41 Arist. Ἀθ. πολ. 62. 3.

42 Ibid. 43. 3.

43 See my Athens of Demosthenes, p. 23 and n. 85.

44 vii, 54; viii, 130. But see n. 38.

45 Pol. iv, iv, 25 (1292a); vi, 2–6 (1292b–93a).

46 Mem. iv, iv, 13–14.

47 Mem. 1, ii, 40–6.

48 xxiv, 76.

49 Andocides, 1, 81–5.

50 As in Tod, Gr[eek] Hist[orical] Inscr[iptions] 12, 74; Arist. Ἀθ πολ. 29. 2.

51 This appears from the fact that the commissioners of 411 thought it necessary to repeal the λραφὴ παρανόμων (and other similar constitutional safeguards) before any substantive change of the law was proposed (Arist Ἀθ πολ. 29. 4; Thuc. viii, 67. 2).

52 Dem. xx, 88 ff.; xxiv, 18 ff.: Aesch[ines], III, 38 ff.

53 Dem. xx, 91; Aesch. iii, 3.

54 Dem. lix, 4.

55 Aesch. iii, 194.

56 Dem. lix, 5.

57 1, 4, repeated verbatim in iii, 6.

58 xxiv, 5.

59 xxiv, 75–6.

60 Contra Leocratem, 4.

61 iii, 5.

62 Hell. 1, vii.

63 Ibid. 11, iv, 43. Cf. Plato, Menex., 243e, Epistolae, vii, 325b, and Isocr[ates], xviii, 31–2, 44, 46, 68.

64 [Xen.] Ἀθ πολ. i, 4–9.

65 viii, 557a.

66 Pol. in, vii, s (1279b); viii, 2–7 (1279b–80a); iv, iv, 1–3, 6 (1290ab).

67 vi, 39. 1.

68 Cf. [Xen.] Ἀθ πολ. i, 3; Dem. xxiv, 112; Arist. Ἀθ πολ. 21. 1; Eupolis, fr. 117. Cf. note 32.

69 J. Sundwall, op. cit. § 8 (pp. 59–84).

70 viii, 128.

71 xv, 159–60.

72 See my Athens of Demosthenes, pp. 1–12.

73 Cf. Xen. Mem. iii, iv, 3; Dem. xix, 282.

74 xxi, 1–5.

75 Dem. xx, 8 shows that a man could claim a year's exemption after a liturgy: if there were, as Demosthenes says (xxi, 21), only about sixty liturgies to fill per annum, they cannot have fallen very often on the individual rich citizen.

76 xxi, 156 (cf. 154).

77 Isaeus, v, 35–6.

78 Lysias' client reckons 6 talents for 7 years (xxi,2); Demosthenes states that a contractor would take over a trierarchy for 1 talent (xxi, 155), but himself paid only 20 minae (a third of a talent) in lieu of performing a (half?) trierarchy (xxi, 80). In Lysias, xix, 29 and 42, the speaker claims to have spent 80 minae (1⅓ talents) on three (half?) trierarchies.

79 Isaeus, vii, 32, 42.

80 Isocr. xviii, 59–60; Lysias, xxxil, 24; Dem. L, 39, 68.

81 Dem. xlvii, 21, 44; cf. xiv, 16–17.

82 Lysias, xxi, 2. He could have claimed two years' exemption after each year of service (Isaeus, vii, 38).

83 Lysias, xix, 29, 42–3.

84 Isocr. xv, 145.

85 Lysias, xix, 57–9.

86 Ibid. 63.

87 Dem. xxvii, 7–9; cf. xxviii, 11; xxix, 59.

88 Dem. xviii, 102–4; xxi, 154–5.

89 Isocr. xv, 160; cf. Plato, Rep. viii, 565a; Arist. Pol. v, v, 1, 5 (1304b–1305a); vi, v, 3, 5 (1320a).

90 Sycophants are fully dealt with in R. J. Bonner and G. Smith, The Administration of Justice from Homer to Aristotle, 11, Chapter iii, and Lofberg, J. O., Sycophancy in Athens (Chicago, 1917)Google Scholar.

91 Arist. Ἀθ. πολ 35. 4; Xen. Hell. 11, iii, 21; Lysias, xii, 5ff.

92 Plutarch, Moralia, 843 D.

93 xxx, 22; xxvii, 1; xix, 11. There is a similar suggestion in Aristophanes, Knights, 1358–61.

94 x, 44–5.

95 iii, 33–6.

96 Ἀρχὴ ἄνδρα δείξει seems to be a democratic proverb; it is attributed to Bias of Priene by Aristotle (Ethica Nicomachea, v, i, 16) and quoted by Demosthenes (proem 48).

97 11, 18–19.

98 11, 65. 7–11.

99 Apart from the unfavourable notices in iii, 36. 6 and iv, 21. 3 there is a note of spite in iv, 28. 5 and 39. 3 and especially in v, 16. 1.

100 Dem. XL, 25.

101 1, 98. 4.

102 Thucydides' use of the word δουλόω is discussed in The Athenian Tribute Lists, iii, PP. 155–7.

103 v, 85–113.

104 iii. 37–40 (esp. 37.2).

105 11, 63.

106 1, 75–7.

107 vi, 82–7 (esp. 85. 1).

108 1, 22. 1.

109 [Lysias], ii, 55–7; Isocr. iv, 100–9, 117–20; xii, 54. 59–61, 68.

110 242a-243a.

111 1, 8, 4–5; viii, 2. 1–2.

112 iii, 47. 2.

113 iii, 27.

114 iv, 84–8.

115 iv, 110–13, 123. 1–2, 130. 2–7.

116 viii, 9. 2–3, 14. 1–2.

117 viii, 44. 1–2.

118 viii, 21, 72; Xen. Hell. 11, ii, 6; iii, 6; Tod, Gr. Hist. Inscr. 12, 96; 11, 97.

119 Herodotus, ix, 35. 2; cf. Andrewes in Phoenix, vi (1952), 1–5, for the chronology.

120 Thuc. v, 81. 1. It is worth noting that the Mantinaeans before the battle speak of their anticipated position if they lost it (and became allies of Sparta again) as δουλεία (Thuc. v, 69. 1).

121 Xen. Hell, iii, ii. 21ff.

122 Incidentally Sparta took hostages from her Arcadian allies to insure their loyalty (Thuc. v, 61. 5).

123 Thuc. 1, 139. 3, 144. 2.

124 For Athens the evidence is collected in Hill, G. F., Sources for Greek History (edd. Meiggs, and Andrewes, , 1951), p. 355Google Scholar, and in The Athenian Tribute Lists, iii, pp. 149–54. Sparta sometimes installed or tightened oligarchies without any pretext, as at Argos and Sicyon (Thuc. v, 81. 2).

125 1, 97. 1.

126 1, 141. 6–7.

127 iii, 10–12, esp. 10. 4–5 and 11. 3–4. The chronology is studiously vague, but the Mitylenaeans are referring to a period after 449 (when Athens had ‘relaxed their hostility to the Persians’) and indeed to a time when the only allies on the congress still supplying ships were Chios and Lesbos, that is 440 at the earliest. The Mitylenaeans would scarcely be at such pains to excuse their submissiveness to Athens in voting for war against rebel allies unless they had done so recently in a famous case.

128 1, 121. 1.

129 The Spartans later had a guilty conscience about this (Thuc. vii, 18. 2).

130 As in 440, when Corinth persuaded the Peloponnesian congress not to make war on Athens (Thuc. 1, 40. 5). The initiative in this earlier proposal to violate the Thirty Years' Peace must have come from Sparta, since she alone could summon a league congress, and naturally only did so when she approved the proposal to be debated.

131 Samos herself had 70 ships in 440 (Thuc. 1, 116.1), and Lesbos and Chios provided 45 to assist Athens against her (1, 116. 2, 117. 2). This was far from their full strength, for Chios in 411, after losses in the Sicilian expedition (vi, 43; vii, 20. 2), had 60 ships left (viii, 6. 4).

132 As the ‘Old Oligarch’ explains ([Xen.] Ἀθ. πολ. i, 14–16). For an Athenian defence of the system see Thuc. 1, 77; Isocrates, iv, 113; xii, 60.

133 The clause in the alliance between Sparta and Athens, ἢν δὲ ἡ δουλεία, ἐπανιστῆται ἐπικουρεῖν Ἀθηναίους Λακεδαιμονίοις, appears to have been standard, seeing that Sparta was able to call up all her allies in the great revolt of 463 (Thuc. 1, 102. 1; cf. ii, 27. 2 for Aegina, iii, 54. 5 for Plataea and Xen. Hell, v, ii, 3 for Mantinea).

134 iii, 36. 4.

135 This emerges from Tod, Gr. Hist. Inscr. i, 62. The subscriptions were evidently collected by the Spartan admiral Alcidas (see F. E. Adcock, ‘Alcidas ἀργυρολόγος in Mélanges Glotz, 1, 1–6) who seems to have called twice at Melos, on his way out and on his way back—hence the two Melian subscriptions recorded.

136 Thuc. iii, 91. 1–2.

137 Thuc. iii, 52. 4, 68. 1–2.

138 The phrase is used in Pol. iii, iv, 12 (1277b); iv, xii, 3 (1296b); iv, xiv, 7 (1298a); v, x, 30, 35 (1312b); v, xi, ii (1313b); vi, v, s (1320a). From the first three passages it appears that Aristotle considered a democracy ‘extreme’ when working people are in a majority and can hold office, and the people is sovereign.