Download Was Athenian Democracy Truly Democratic

Shane Farrell
History and Political Science (SF)
04301587
Was Athenian Democracy Truly Democratic?
It was the Athenian’s who first coined the term ‘Democracy’, meaning, quite
literally, rule by the people (or demos). It was a system of government that ended
following the rise of Alexander the Great but has, in the last century or so, re-emerged
as the favoured choice of government in most developed countries. However “today’s
concept of democracy has only a very slight resemblance, if any, to the concept that
was revered in the fifth century BC”1. Presently, Liberal Democracy is the form of
government which is the most popular in the western world. Although variations do
occur in the institutions, voting mechanisms and systems of government, they all
follow the same basic idea of representative government elected by the people.
Whether electing trained professionals to represent you is the best or, in the modern
era, only way to conduct a modern democracy is an issue to be debated. What does
hold true is the fact that Athenian democracy was conducted extremely differently 2
from the democratic systems of today. In this essay I will examine the system of
government in place in Athens at that time, the formation and composition of its
executive body (Council of 500), the makeup and powers of the citizenry, ultimately
with a view to assessing whether or not Athenian Democracy truly was democratic.
Before I do this, however, I must contextualise Athens in the 4th Century BC.
By modern standards Athens was an extremely small city with population estimates
ranging from 200,000 to 250,000 (including slaves). It was a society largely
dependent on the labour of slaves. Indeed AHM Jones states that there were probably
around 124,000 slaves living in Athens in the 4th Century BC3. As a result of this
several historians have put forward the question ‘was Athenian democracy based on
slave labour?’ i.e. was the direct democracy that existed in Athens solely due to the
fact that the work of slaves gave citizens the opportunity to engage in politics. This is
a hotly disputed issue, for example GC Field argues against this statement saying that
“the majority of the citizen’s worked with their hands and a great many of them did
not own any slaves at all”4. On the other hand Jones notes that “the assembly and the
juries seem…to have consisted predominantly of middle class citizens rather than of
the poor” and that “there is evidence that the council also was mainly filled by the
well-to-do”5. This would suggest that only those citizens wealthy enough to possess
slaves could engage in politics.
A major difference compared to modern democracy is that Athenian
Democracy was a direct democracy. Citizens themselves conducted political affairs
rather than electing representatives. Topics were decided upon by a body known as
the Council of 500 and it was left to the assembly (ekklesia) to discuss these topics
thoroughly before a decision was made. Any male citizen over eighteen years of age
was automatically eligible to attend. Assemblies were held at least forty days a year,
more in times of crisis or times of war. It is fair to say that Athenians did take an
active interest in politics as “normal peace-time attendance (of the Assembly) may
1
Sartori, Giovanni: ‘Democratic Theory’ p250
Bowden, Hugh: ‘Classical Athens and the Delphic Oracle: Divination and Democracy’ p33
3
Jones, AHM: ‘Athenian Democracy’ p79
4
Field, GC: ‘Political Theory’ p277
5
Jones, AHM: ‘Athenian Democracy’ p50
2
have been well over 5,000”6 – this is extremely impressive if we consider Paul
Cartledge’s estimate that the citizen body numbered 30,000.7
The Council of 500, the main decision makers, was chosen annually by lot. As
with magistrate councillors, any citizen over thirty years of age could sit on the
council. To ensure a more democratic system, checks were in place to ensure that no
one could serve on it for more than two years in their life, however several exceptions
were allowed if “officers were elected by the whole body of citizens”8. The council
was very active, meeting every day except on festivals
What is impressive is that the assembly was open to every citizen
without distinction of wealth or profession, and that one man’s vote counted just the
same as another’s.9 In order to facilitate the participation of citizens (especially the
poorer ones) in politics, the 6,000 jurors, the council of 500 and the 300 odd
magistrates were all paid for their services at various rates. Also every citizen had an
equal right to express an opinion or to make a proposal, this would be listened to by
the mass of citizens present and they would then vote on the issue. “Freedom of
speech was generally regarded as one of the fundamental features of democracy”.10 In
Athens criticism of the democracy was freely permitted. This was extremely radical
for the time, especially compared to Sparta. As Demosthenes says “In Sparta you are
not allowed to praise the laws of Athens or of this state or that, far from it, you have to
praise what agrees with their constitution”11. Indeed Field states that “Athenian
democracy can very rarely, if ever, have taken an important decision without hearing
arguments from all points of view”12. Also any citizen, unless disqualified by criminal
conduct, could take part in public offices. “The idea seems to have been that each
board should represent, as it were, a fair sample of the whole citizen body”13. Also the
idea was that no body or individual would hold large amounts of power, rather it was
to be the assembly, in which every citizen had the right to participate, that decided on
policies. Indeed “even the most important offices…were not supposed to have any
special responsibility for the framing of policy”14. The assembly had at least four
functions: it made executive pronouncements (decrees, such as deciding to go to war
or granting citizenship to a foreigner); it elected some officials; it legislated; and it
tried political crimes. Administration on the other hand, was in the hands of
officeholders with over a thousand appointed each year. Most officeholders were
chosen by lot, with a much smaller (and more prestigious) group elected. As opposed
to assemblies, individuals had to nominate themselves for both selection methods. By
and large the power exercised by these officials was routine administration and quite
limited. A check was in place to ensure that most officeholders only held power for a
year.
Similar to the Assembly, the Athenian legal system and Court structure
(dikasteria) had huge citizen participation. Massive juries between 200 and 6,000
citizens (above 30 years) heard cases argued by litigants and thereafter decided upon a
verdict. As time went on the courts increased their powers and took on some of the
previous work of the assemblies, such as the trying of political prisoners.
6
Ibid p107
Carteledge p3
8
Field, GC: ‘Political Theory’ p281
9
Ibid p280
10
Ibid p280
11
Jones, AHM: ‘Athenian Democracy’ p44
12
Field, GC: ‘Political Theory’ p280
13
Ibid p281
14
Ibid p281
7
The Athenian system of government does truly appear to be extremely
democratic from what we have seen thus far. On closer examination this is not the
case. The main criticism levelled at Athenian Democracy was that its citizen body was
extremely narrow and that political participation appeared to have been an exclusively
male event. Paul Cartledge estimates the Athenian population at 250,000, with 30,000
as “fully paid citizens”15 – that is to say, adult males of Athenian birth. Athens was
therefore an extremely elitist society in which women, slave’s foreigners (metics) and
those barred by atima (usually a punishment for criminals) had no say in political
matters. But despite AHM Jones’ claim that “foreigners and slaves were exceptionally
well treated in Athens” this certainly questions the validity of whether Athenian
Democracy truly was democratic. The fact that roughly twelve per cent of the
population controlled the rest is inconceivable by the modern standards of democracy.
Another criticism of the Athenian system is that although citizens were
empowered to make decisions collectively, once made, the citizen is completely
subject to the laws of the state (polis). As Hobbes put it “The Athenians…were free;
that is, free commonwealths; not that any particular men had the liberty to resist their
own representative but that their representative had the liberty to resist or invade other
people”16.
As we have seen, the Athenian system of government was remarkable and
extremely radical for its time. It was the most obvious example of a direct democracy
the world has ever seen. Citizens, unlike in modern democracies, were given a real
say in the political developments of the day. A cleverly devised system ensured that a
huge percentage of the population enjoyed some form of political power at some
stage, via the random selection of councillors to the Council of 500. Also, the fact that
any citizen could discuss the topic brought to the assembly by the Council ensured
mass participation and detailed examinations of all aspects of a topic. Thus among its
citizen body yes, Athenian democracy truly was democratic – indeed even more so
than the liberal democracies of today. However, one must take into account that the
range of citizenry was extremely narrow, and due to the fact that women, slaves and
foreigners were excluded, I must conclude that, in the modern sense at least, Athenian
democracy was not truly democratic.
Bibliography:
Bowden, Hugh: ‘Classical Athens and the Delphic Oracle: Divination and
Democracy’ (Cambridge, 2005)
Field, GC: ‘Political Theory’ (London, 1965)
Finley, MI: ‘Democracy Ancient & Modern’ (London, 1969)
Jones, AHM: ‘Athenian Democracy’ (Oxford, 1975)
Sartori, Giovanni: ‘Democratic Theory’ (New York, 1965)
Cartledge, Paul: ‘The Democratic Experiment’ in BBC history.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/greeks/greekdemocracy_01.shtml
15
16
Cartlege, paul: Website
Sartori, Giovanni: ‘Democratic Theory’ p260