1. Rachael Gale
HST 321: Ancient Greece
Professor Ferngren
March 10, 2015
The Dēmocratia of Athens
It has been questioned whether Athens’ democracy was even a democracy to begin with.
There are many critics of her government who have criticize the Athenian citizenship law, her
use of slavery, as well as the limited rights given to women and they claim she wasn’t a
democracy. Ancient writers, like Thucydides, called the Athens under the leadership of Pericles
aristocratic and anything but democratic (Plutarch, Pericles, 9). Yet there are others who support
Athens’ claim to being a dēmocratia, that is, a government ruled by the dēmos, the citizen-body.
Malcolm F. McGregor defined democracy as this and Athens was ruled by the people as ancient
critic of The Old Oligarch eludes to when he wrote: “The objection may be raised that it was a
mistake to allow the universal right of speech and a seat in the council” (McGregor, p. 1; The
Old Oligarch, p. 1). In order to assess the Athenian government, one must know its foundations,
how it ran, whom it was ran by, and also the culture of the Athenians.
Athenian democracy had its basic foundations laid in 594 B.C. under Solon, the
eponymous archon (Plutarch, Solon, 14). His character has been described as someone who was
a lover of knowledge, just, and also a man of wealth and principle. Plutarch records, “when he
was far advanced in years he could still say ‘I never cease to learn as I grow old.” (Plutarch,
Solon, 12). Then later he wrote: “They saw that he, more than anyone else stood apart from the
injustices of the time.” Plutarch also stated: “the rich were ready to accept him as a man of
wealth and the poor as a man of principle” (Plutarch, Solon, 14). When he was elected as archon
there was discontent in society which had sprung up from a depression, massive debt, and the
population’s relationship with the Hectemoroi who received one sixth of debtors’ land as

2. 2
payment of debt. So, Solon was appointed to fix these problems and while he was leader he set
forth numerous reforms.
Solon’s reforms included disburdenment, abolition of slavery as a method of paying debt,
economic reforms, and constitutional reforms. By setting forth seisachtheia, which is translated
as ‘disburdenment,’ Solon cancelled all debts, and then to prevent future excessive debt Solon
declared no one could enslave themselves as a debt security. Plutarch wrote: “The first measure
which he put into force decreed that existing debts were wiped out and that in future nobody
could accept the person of a debtor as security” (Plutarch, Solon, 15). Beyond his quick method
of disposing of the debt, Solon also took steps to prevent future debt by changing the coinage
from the Aeginetic standard to the Euboic standard. Euboea had the most colonies in all of
Greece so changing the coinage would open more viable trade routes and in turn, better the
Athenian economy. Along with this he prohibited every product but oil from being exported
from Athens. In fact, Solon held this decree so highly that any offender had to pay 100 drachmae
and would be cursed by the archon. This heavy fine was placed so that Athenian products would
stay in the country to help feed and support her and rather than other city-states (Plutarch, Solon,
24). He also made a surprising law concerning citizenship: “it granted naturalization only to
those who had been permanently exiled from their own country, or who had emigrated with their
families to Athens to practise a trade” (Plutarch, Solon, 24). No one before or after Solon would
grant Athenian citizenship to foreigners ever again.
These constitutional reforms are what set up the Athenian democracy to become what it
would be under Pericles. Solon didn’t change the offices of state already in the government, but
he did adjust the disbursement of power. Prior to Solon, the Eupatrid, or aristocrats, had held the
power in Athens, but after his reign, Eupatrid’s power was split amongst four property classes.

3. 3
The top property class, the Pentacosiomedimni, “received an annual income of 500 measures or
more of wet and dry produce.” The second class had an income of 300 measures, and they were
known as the Knights because they could afford a horse. The following class was the Zeugitai, or
Hoplite class, and they received an annual income of 200 measures of produce. The last property
class was the Thetes, who made less than 200 measures a year.
Now, the new property classes set up by Solon each had a certain amount of power in the
different areas of the Athenian government. Prior to his rule there were two main areas of
government: the archons (magistrates) and the Areopagus. An archon’s leadership was divided
into three roles: the basileus, which conducted the cults and judged lawsuits about religious
matters; the polemarch was the war archon and he led the polis’ troops into battle as their
general; and lastly the Eponymous archon. The Eponymous archon was the most powerful
person in all of Athens. According to Sarah Pomeroy, the Eponymous archon “had overall
supervision of public affairs, including presiding over the council and the assembly and judging
nonreligious cases” (Pomeroy, p.123). However, these were overwhelming responsibilities so
eventually they were divided further into six Thesmothetai who were placed as judicial officials
over court cases. As for the council of the Areopagus, they had no direct power, but they did
have a very powerful influence over the archons. It consisted of ex-magistrates who previously
had held office. Although their specific role is unknown, it is supposed that they gave advice to
the archons.
Solon added three new bodies to the government in order to redistributed power. Solon
created the Ecclesia, the Boule, and the Heliaea. The Ecclesia, or Assembly, was where any of
the property classes could participate in the government. The main duty of the body was to vote
upon the laws presented by the Boule. The Boule consisted of 400 men, with 100 being from

4. 4
each property class, and according to Plutarch, “its functions were to deliberate public business
in advance of the general assembly, and not to allow any matter to be brought before the people
without its having been previously considered” (Plutarch, Solon, 18, 19). Lastly, the Heliaea was
a court of appeals. Any property class was allowed to be a juror and Solon created the Heliaea so
that the common people would have protection and further privilege. It is recorded that he
proudly stated:
To the mass of the people I gave the power they needed, neither degrading them, nor
giving them too much rein: for those who already possessed great power and wealth I
saw to it that their interests were not harmed. I stood guard with a broad shield before
both parties and prevented either from triumphing unjustly (Plutarch, Solon, 18).
Now this is the timocracy in which Pericles came to be archon over. There had been
some changes between him and Solon, such as the breakup of political power from regions,
which had allowed the aristocrats to come into power once more, to ten tribes that were divided
into 168 demes (pieces of land) under Cleisthenes. Also, under Themistocles, the archons
stopped being elected and began to be chosen by lot and in their place ten strategoi, or generals,
were elected to make sure there were high competent men in charge of the military (McGregor,
p. 5). Other than those two major changes in the government though, when Pericles came to
power, he inherited a government that had its foundation set up by Solon.
Athens, under the leadership of Pericles, became a radical democracy, meaning, it was a
democracy that favored the Thetes, the lower property class. Pericles transformed the
government in this way by providing introducing compensation. He provided a way for the
Thetes and those who couldn’t afford to travel to the polis to participation in government. This

5. 5
first began with paying jurors, and eventually the entire Assembly, with a small wage (Pomeroy,
p. 162). As an impressive general, Pericles also used the Athenian military as an avenue not only
to strengthen Athens, but to give more power to the Thetes. Plutarch records: “Pericles also
sailed into the Black Sea with a large and splendidly equipped fleet…he demonstrated to the
neighbouring barbarian states… their confidence and their freedom to sail wherever they chose
and to dominate these waters” (Plutarch, Pericles, 20). Pericles built up a strong navy! A critic of
Athens makes note that “the dominant power is master of the sea” (The Old Oligarch, p. 4). Who
was the dominate power? Athens was the dominate power, thus Athens was the master of the
sea.
The rise of the navy’s power is important in order to understand the rise of the radical
democracy. Prior to Pericles, it was the Zeugitai, or Hoplite class, that had held most of the
power in society. They were able to hold that power because they had enough money to buy their
own hoplite armor. This advantage over the Thetes allowed them to experience the benefits and
honor of serving in the polis’ army. Also, prior to the introduction of compensation, the Zeugitai
had held the majority of votes in the Assembly since they were able to leave their work for a few
days to participate. Athens had held the Hoplite class in high esteem. So, it can be seen, that not
only with the Thetes being able to participate in the government, they were now able to carry the
pride of the Athens. It was the navy that kept Athenian empire in check and also kept their trade
routes safe from attack. Even the author of The Old Oligarchy wrote, “it is to this same lordship
of the sea that Athenians owe the discovery, in the first place, of many of the luxuries of life
through intercourse with other countries” (The Old Oligarch, p. 4). It was to the Thetes that
Athens now owed their thanks to, not the Zeugitai.

6. 6
Participation in government was an important aspect of the life of an Athenian. In
Pericles’ Funeral Oration Pericles stated: “our ordinary citizens, though occupied with the
pursuits of industry, are still fair judges of public matters; for unlike any other nation, regarding
him who takes no part in these duties not as unambitious but as useless” (Pericles’ Funeral
Oration, p. 3). To not participate in government on a consistent basis meant to give up one’s
power in the government. According to Pericles, that citizen would be useless. So, since every
citizen who could participated in the government did, the introduction of compensation lead to a
dramatic increase in the rate of participation in government. To deal with this increase, Pericles’
put forth a law that repealed Solon’s citizenship law. In 451/0 B.C., Pericles said that only those
with two Athenian parents could be considered citizens (Plutarch, Pericles, 37).
To us, to take citizenship away from someone seems implausible. Especially in the
United States of America (U.S.), where citizenship is easily attainable, the law passed under
Pericles would seem inconceivable. When assessing this law however, it is crucial not to have
presentism nor essentialism. Presentism is the concept that something is only valid if it can be
applied to modern values and understandings and essentialism is the idea that every concept has
been the same throughout all history. It must be understood that the democracy in Athens, is not
the same, and could not be the same democracy as the one present in the U.S. today. McGregor
wrote that “we tend to forget what democracy really is and we have allowed the adjectives
“democratic” and “undemocratic” to become synonyms for “good” and “bad,” whereas they are
in truth merely terms of description” (McGregor, p. 1). This must carefully be considered when
we ask questions and criticize the Athenian government about her citizenship laws, her empire,
as well as her use of slavery.

7. 7
When we apply these concepts to Athens, we find that her idea of citizenship was quite
profound. In Athens, to be a citizen, meant that one was autochthonous, meaning “sprung from
the soil.” To Athenians, citizenship wasn’t a matter of liking or disliking a particular person, nor
was it a matter of what we call today racism. To be a citizen merely meant to be a descendent of
the beings who had originally been “sprung from the soil” (Pericles’ Funeral Oration, p. 1).
Women too, although they were not part of the dēmos, were citizens. Pericles’ law of 451/0 B.C.
said, “Athenian parentage on both sides” (Plutarch, Pericles, 37). Citizens were both male and
female. In the U.S. there was a time when the country was a democracy and women had
citizenship, but not right to vote. So who are we to refute their claim to being a democracy, when
we mimicked her steps ourselves?
Athens was a world with very distinct social group separation, however, if one were to
walk down the streets of Athens, it would be nearly impossible to tell the difference between the
slaves, metics, and citizens. It has been said that slaves and metics had an “extraordinary amount
of license granted” (The Old Oligarch, p. 2). In fact, the ancient critic wrote that not only was it
illegal to hit a slave or a foreigner, if it were to be legal, it would have been impossible to tell if
the person was one since the Athenians weren’t any better clothed than them. Although, slaves
and foreigners couldn’t own their own land, they were the craftsmen and merchants of Athens
and frequently became wealthy. Along with these things, they even helped to fight in the navy
amongst the Athenians (The Old Oligarch, p. 2). Overall, slavery in Athens wasn’t oppressive,
and unlike the slavery that was in the U.S., slaves were treated like human beings and respect.
Thucydides was an ancient critic who lived within half a century after Pericles and he
refuted Athens claim of being a democracy. He said that Athens under Pericles was a
“democracy in name, but in practice government by the first citizen” (Plutarch, Pericles, 9).

8. 8
Although he was in the minority in his thinking, there were elements of Pericles’ reign that could
support Thucydides thinking. For instance, like all tyrants, Pericles made Athens a beautiful city
through the construction of buildings. He adorned the city and put together temples and public
buildings with great speed. Unlike tyrants though, Pericles didn’t construct the buildings to gain
people’s admiration. In fact, the people originally cried out against the buildings because the
money hadn’t come from Athens’ treasury, but from her allies. It was extra money from the
allies’ tribute that he used to better the economy. Despite the people fear, Pericles continued to
have the buildings constructed since the money belonged “not to the people who give it, but to
those who receive it” (Plutarch, Pericles, 11).
Another fact that supports Pericles as a tyrant can be found in the case when there was
60,000 hoplite troops sitting outside of Athens’ walls. Pericles purposefully decided to avoid
calling the Assembly together for vote on whether Athens should fight or not, so that Athens
wouldn’t fight. He did this out of fear that Athens would call for war. His reasoning behind this
was that he was acting like a “helmsman of a ship who, when a storm sweeps down upon it in the
open sea, makes everything fast, takes in sail and relies on his own skill and takes no notice of
the tears and entreaties of the sea-sick and terrified passengers” (Plutarch, Pericles, 33). Yet,
examples like this can only be shown in moments of necessity, when the decision of the dēmos
would be opposite of the need of Athens. Normally, Pericles would go to the Assembly and obey
their commands and the laws they passed. For example, when the Athenians were in fear that the
Spartans would attack them with great force the following summer, they longed to bring Cimon,
Pericles’ rival, back early from his ostracism. Despite Cimon being a fierce rival of his, Pericles
“did not hesitate to grant the people their wish and himself proposed the decree to recall his
opponent” (Plutarch, Pericles, 10). McGregor affirms that Pericles was not a tyrant or possessed

9. 9
the power of one. “What he did possess was influence, the kind of influence that accrues from
integrity, and political courage, a quality that we seek in statesmen” (McGregor, p. 6).
Although not everything the Athenians did was ‘good’ that doesn’t mean it her
government wasn’t democratic. If anything, she had more of a democracy that any government
that exist today, for her government was run by the entirety of the people. Athens was a place of
freedom, even with its slavery, and her government was the voice of the dēmos, not under
control of one sole leader.