Discussion Of How Democratic Was Ancient Athens
The ancient Athenians are believed to be the “architects” of the modern-day democracies, the creators of a solid foundation that was further modified and reshaped later, turning into what we call democracy nowadays “Government of the people by the people for the people” (Abraham Lincoln). It is relatively easy to define what we mean under the group-name people today, but in ancient Athens only male citizens were believed to be the ones who the power belonged to, enjoying more or less the equal rights to participate in governance of the city-state directly (yet, “some animals were more equal”; George Orwell), excluding certain members of the society, more precisely half of it, composed by women, slaves, etc. The controversy might arise regarding ancient Athenian preferences inside “demos” – the members of the Assembly and Boule by Solon or ten tribal division and new grouping model of Attica by Cleisthenes. Others might argue whether democracy was the best alternative for ancient Athens or if it really solved any of their problems. Nevertheless, when one is discussing the scale, the Athenian democracy was democratic enough to be called democratic.
First of all, the political background at the “birthplace” of democracy was as follows: Archaic Greece was experiencing oligarchy and tyranny of noblemen, pre-democratic nature of political power was well-structured organization in favor of aristocrats consisted of: Archons – noblemen, council of Areopagus – ex-archons and organ of people with no intervention or influence on decision making. Early Athenian democracy is characterized by the increased number of participants in actual decision making, election of Archons by assembly, democratic laws and Heliaea. Direct engagement into politics of thirty thousand male citizens should be regarded as democratic action when the given past for comparison is Eupatrid monopoly. When we speak about Solon’s reforms one might argue that modern day democratic principles were neglected by putting people into different groups and using wealth as a measurement. The critics and the general success of Solon’s reforms might downgrade the level of Athenian democracy according to modern standards, however, wealth has always been defining the level of direct or indirect influence on politics without existing special names to diverse social groups with different backgrounds in any of the modern democracies.
Secondly, not only new reforms were democratic but they progressed over time. Some might argue that Cleisthenes who tried “to perfect” democracy had the immoral purpose when he implemented his reforms. Even though he involved more citizens into decision-making, tried to diminish the power of aristocrats and protect people from the oppression of local noblemen by implementing new administrative units, critics arise about the ultimate goal of his actions. Some historians believe that his aim was to expand his power by weakening other aristocrats with new political model. Although the motive is also important, yet more important is the result and the actions - people as a whole benefited, more people from all the regions were engaged into active political life directly, the idea behind this highly complicated system was to make the assembly work with increased number of required meetings. Consequently, we can say it worked. Level of active participation into politics was higher in ancient Athens and is one of the major differences with modern democracies. Our democracies are representative; ancient Athenian was direct. Also, further democratic was selection by lot to ensure that rich and powerful men would not be favored by election. Participation was encouraged; to guarantee the attendance all travelling expenses were covered too. Different sources claim that any attempt to profit from public positions was severely punished. There are several distinctive elements which prove highly democratic values of ancient Athens.
Some historians believe that many written principles of Greek democracy were taking place for the wrong aim. For example, Ostracism introduced by Cleisthenes and later practiced for more than one hundred years by several political leaders is believed to aim for reduction of internal rebellion. The ruling power could never be weakened or threatened, therefore Ostracism was misused. Historians believe Pericles went too far practicing Ostracism with his so called radical democracy by getting rid of all the potential tyrants. However, 6000 votes were required to exile a person, as democracy means rule of people, voting citizens were decision-makers, thus avoiding internal unrest if anyone was too powerful and dangerous for the polis.
Practicing Ostracism should be regarded as one of the democratic events too. However, there is a room for conspiracy. To attend the assembly meetings and actively participate in political life it was necessary to have enough free time - “Schole”. Therefore, wealthier individuals were more powerful having slaves done most of the manual work. It is believed that few the most influential citizens dominated the political arena and these elite groups might also have really good “rhetors” who could easily mislead demos by emotional speech and achieve preferable decisions like execution of six generals after they won the battle of Arginousai. Historian K. A. Raaflaub stated: “no polis had ever dared to give all its citizens equal political rights, regardless of their descent, wealth, social standing, education, personal qualities, and any other factors that usually determined status in a community”. Nevertheless, ancient Athens in this regard is not any different from modern day democracies. People can be manipulated and no modern democracy can guarantee an equal access to information as well as the identical understanding and justification from everyone even if any aims for it.
In conclusion, roots of democracy in ancient Athens were somewhat different from “perfect” democracy, however, many practical manifestations of democratic principles experimented in Archaic and Classical Greece are pedestals of modern day democracies. Ideal democracy never existed neither in ancient Athens nor in recent society, according to modern democratic principles level of Athenian democracy might seem lower than what democracies intend to achieve today, yet deserves to be called democratic. In addition, Solon’s complicated and wordy laws written with the aim to make people think is already a right attempt and a step forward to democratic society.
