The Athenian Origins of Direct Democracy |
|
Originally the polis referred to a defensible area to which farmers of a
particular area could retreat in the event of an attack. The Acropolis
in The scale of the polis was indeed small. When the philosopher Aristotle (384-322 B.C.) came to discuss the origins of the polis in his book POLITICS in the early 4th century B.C. he suggested that "it is necessary for the citizens to be of such a number that they knew each other's personal qualities and thus can elect their officials and judge their fellows in a court of law sensibly." Before Aristotle, Plato fixed the number of citizens in an ideal state at 5040 adult males. For Plato (c.427-c.347 B.C.), as it was for Aristotle, the one true criteria of the size of the polis was that all the citizens know one another. The issue at stake here is between public and private worlds. The ancient Greeks did not really see two distinct worlds in the lives of the citizenry. Instead, the public world was to be joined with the private world. The citizens in any given polis were related to one another by blood and
so family ties were very strong. As boys, they grew up together in schools,
and as men, they served side by side during times of war. They debated one
another in public assemblies – they elected one another as magistrates – they
cast their votes as jurors for or against their fellow citizens. In such a society
– the society of the polis – all citizens were intimately and directly
involved in politics, justice, military service, religious ceremonies,
intellectual discussion, athletics and artistic pursuits. To shirk one's
responsibilities was not only rare but reprehensible in the eyes of the Greek
citizen. Greek citizens did not have rights, but duties. A citizen who did
not fulfill his duties was socially disruptive. At the polis of Every polis was different from another. For example, some poleis had different names for the months of the year. Although there were similarities and differences between the city-states, they all made the effort to preserve their own unique identity. What we call the ancient Greek world was really hundreds of independent city-states or poleis. No one polis was a replica of another. Those who lived within the confines of a city state considered everyone else to be inferior. Furthermore, those people who did not speak Greek were referred to as barbar, the root of our word barbarian.
From Lycurgus (no one knows who this man was or why his name carried so much significance for the Spartans), we learn that boys left home at the age of seven. They were organized into troops and played competitive games until their 18th year, when they underwent four years of military training. From the ages of 18 to 28 they lived together in barracks. At the age of 30, they became citizens in their own right. Amongst themselves they were called "Equals" – in the eyes of everyone else, they were Spartans. There was state education for girls who lived at home but who were also organized into troops. Boys and girls met together to learn basic studies as well as to dance, sing and play musical instruments. Relations between the sexes was much more free than anywhere else in the Greek world. However, after marriage (usually at 30 for men, 16 for women), the husband ate at the men's club until the age of 60 while his wife remained at home. The Spartan state arranged for a basic equality in land holding and
provided the citizens with laborers, called helots (conquered people such as
the Messenians who became Spartan serfs). In other
words, the economy was based on the idea that slaves would labor to supply
the Spartan armies with food, drink and clothing. As a result, the slave
population of The Spartan constitution was mixed, containing elements of monarchy, oligarchy and democracy. The oligarchic element was represented by a Council (gerousia) of elders consisting of twenty-eight men over the age of sixty who were held office for life. The elders had important judicial functions and were also consulted before any proposal was put before the Assembly of Spartan citizens. The Assembly (apella) consisted of all male citizens over thirty years of age. In theory, it was the Assembly who was the final authority but in practice the real function of the Assembly was to ratify decisions already decided upon by the elders and kings For the Greeks, citizenship – that is, the active participation of all citizens in politics – was considered to be the supreme creative art. In essence, the city-state was synonymous with its citizenry. Like a sculptor, the citizen molded a fully rounded society to his preconceived notion of what that society ought to be. The system developed by the Spartan state by the late 6th century B.C. was
deliberate and purposeful. It was created not just to keep the ever-growing
population of helots in check but rather to realize man's full ideal within
the society of the polis. The Spartan ideal was austere, severe and limited
according to our standards. But when political thinkers such as Plato decided
to create their own ideal society on paper, they turned to
Around the year 600 B.C., and while Lycurgus was
reforming the legal system of the Spartan state, Solon's system excluded all those people who did not own any productive
land – women, children, slaves, resident aliens, artisans and merchants.
However, with the constitutional reforms of Solon, men from newer and less-established
families could work their way up economically and achieve positions of
political leadership. Solon did not end the agricultural crisis in In 561, the former military leader Pisistratus (c.600-527 B.C.) appeared at By the middle of the 6th century, the city had grown in size and in wealth. Furthermore, the common people had become more sure of themselves -- they had a high standard of living, more leisure time at their disposal and were far-better informed than their ancestors had been. Since a tyrant like Pisistratus wanted to give his power over to a more popular base of support, it was during his reign that the average citizen obtained his political experience. Furthermore, because men continued to qualify for office on the basis of wealth, and since incomes were rising in the 6th century, there was a greater number of citizens being included in the operation of the government. Pisistratus was succeeded by his eldest son, Hippias, whose rule was somewhat similar to that of his
father. In 514 B.C., his brother Hipparchus was
murdered and Hippias became nervous and
suspicious. Finally, one of the noble clans exiled by the sons of Pisistratus, the Alemaeonids,
won favor with the oracle at Cleomenes' friend Isagoras
held the leading position in Cleisthenes took an unprecedented action by turning to the people for political support and won with it a program of great popular appeal. In 508 B.C., Cleisthenes instituted a new political organization whereby the citizens would take a more forceful and more direct role in running the city-state. He called this new political organization demokratia, or democracy – rule by the entire body of citizens. He created a Council of Five Hundred which planned the business of the public assemblies. All male citizens over the age of thirty could serve for a term of one year on the Council and no one could serve more than two terms in a lifetime. Such an organization was necessary, thought Cleisthenes, so that every citizen would learn from direct political experience. With such a personal interest in his democracy, Cleisthenes believed that there would be no citizens to conspire and attempt to abolish the system. Cleisthenes also divided all Athenians into ten tribes (replacing the original four). The composition of each tribe guaranteed that no region would dominate any of them. Because the tribes had common religious activities and fought as regimental units, the new organization would also increase devotion to the polis and diminish regional division. Each tribe would send fifty men to serve on the Council of Five Hundred
(thus replacing Solon's Council of 400). Each set of fifty men would serve as
a presiding committee for a period of thirty-five days. The Council convened
the Assembly – an Assembly which, as of the year 450 B.C. – consisted of
approximately 21,000 citizens. Of this number, perhaps 12-15000 were absent
as they were serving in the army, navy or were simply away from Membership on the Council was for one year but it was possible to serve a second term. A minimum of 250 new members had to be chosen every year and it has been suggested that 35-45% of all Athenian citizens had experience on the Council. Serving on the Council of Five Hundred was a full time job and those who did serve were paid a fee. Every year 500 Council members and 550 Guards were chosen by lot from the villages of the Athenian polis. These men were scrutinized by the Council before they were chosen so that alternates were always available. The rapid turnover in the Council ensured (1) that a large number of Athenians held some political position in their lifetime and that (2) the Assembly would contain a larger and more sophisticated membership. The Assembly contained all those citizens who were not serving on the Council of 500 or who were not serving as public officials. The Assembly had forty regular meetings per year – there were four meetings in each 35 day period into which the Council's year was divided. The first meeting discussed the corn supply, the qualifications of officials, questions of defense and ostracisms. The second meeting was open to any issue, while the third and fourth meetings were given over to debates on religion and foreign and secular affairs. Special meetings or emergency sessions could be called at any time. Around 460 B.C., Pericles (c.490-429 B.C.) used the power of the people in the law courts and the Assembly to break up the Council of Five Hundred. Under Pericles, ATHENIAN DEMOCRACY came to mean the equality of justice and the equality of opportunity. The equality of justice was secured by the jury system, which ensured that slaves and resident aliens were represented through their patrons. The equality of opportunity did not mean that every man has the right to everything. What it did mean is that the criteria for choosing citizens for office was merit and efficiency and not wealth. Whereas Solon had used the criterion of birth for his officials and Cleisthenes had used wealth, Pericles now used merit. This was the ideal for Pericles. What indeed happened in practice was quite different. The Greek historian Thucydides (c.460-c.400 B.C.) commented on the reality of democracy under Pericles when he wrote: "It was in theory, a democracy but in fact it became the rule of the first Athenian." And the historian Herodotus (c.485-425 B.C.) added that "nothing could be found better than the one man, the best." This "one man, the best," was the aristoi, the word from which we get the expression aristocracy. So, what began as Greek democracy under Cleisthenes around 500 B.C., became an aristocracy under Pericles by 430 B.C. The Council of Five Hundred and the Assembly met often and what they
discussed focused on decidedly local issues. But they also discussed what we
could only call democratic theory – that is, they constantly debated
questions like what is the good life? and what is
the best form of government? But perhaps the most important of all were
discussions and debates over the issues of war. And this is important to
grasp for the 5th century, the classical age of |