Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
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