Athens – A History of the World`s First Democracy

The author, a historian at Trinity College, analyzes the history of democracy in Athens. Athens first began to move away from aristocratic rule around 600 BC, when the famous reforms of Solon abolished debt bondage and opened up political office to the wealthy (rather than just those who were aristocrats by birth).One hundred years later, after a few decades of being ruled under a tyranny, Athens experienced major democratic reforms under Cleisthenes. Cleisthenes replaced the clan-based tribal divisions of Athenian society with grassroots democracy. Local villages were organized as democratic "demes". Every citizen was a member of a "demes", and membership passed from father to son, thereby rendering the "demes" gradually less territorially based. Cleisthenes also categorized Athens into three regions (City, Coast, and Interior), with each region divided into ten districts. There were ten tribes, with each tribe containing one district from each region. Thus, each tribe included a cross-section of Athenian society.Further, each tribe contributed fifty members to the 500-member Council, with the fifty members coming from the "demes" in proportion to the "demes" size. The Council prepared proposals that were then presented to and voted on by the Assembly, the gathering of all citizens in Athens (although not every citizen participated in every Assembly gathering).Democracy was further increased throughout the fifth century BC by providing that most offices would be chosen by lot, not vote. This ensured that many citizens would experience political leadership, but no one individual would be able to build up a power base. To further ensure democratization and the limitation of any individual building up a power base, Athens paid office holders (ensuring that even poor citizens could serve) and gave the Assembly the power to "ostracize" (i.e., banish) individuals who were gathering too much power. Eventually, Athens even began paying citizens to attend the Assembly, thereby further increasing the ability of poor citizens to participate.However, the author notes that the most important roles -- generals and those in charge of Athens's finances -- were elected, not chosen by lot. Thus, even Athenian democracy recognized a role for expertise.Democratic society naturally lends itself to freedom of speech, given that democracy requires citizens to convince others of their views. Thus, fifth century BC Athens saw an explosion in cultural life, whether it be in theater or philosophy. However, the philosophers were often critical of democracy and presented Nietzschean arguments about the social construction of law and the attempt of law and ethics to constrain the natural rule of the powerful. Persuaded by these arguments, groups of young aristocrats began to push for a move back toward an oligarchic/aristocratic system. At the same time, populist "demagogues" began to rail against the leading role still played by the aristocracy in the democracy.Unfortunately for Athens, both the aristocrats and the demagogues supported a jingoistic foreign policy. The author convincingly argues that the mass of Athenians supported an aggressive, militaristic foreign policy, inspired in part by their (not inaccurate) belief that Athens was the most advanced city-state in Greece. However, this aggressive foreign policy alienated Athens from the other city-states, caused the other city-states to turn toward Sparta as a liberator, resulted in multiple military misadventures, and eventually brought defeat at the hands of Sparta near the end of the fifth century BC. Further, the Athenian massesAfter Sparta defeated Athens at the end of the fifth century BC, Athenian democracy was briefly abolished and replaced by the brutal rule of the Thirty Tyrants. However, the Thirty Tyrants were quickly overthrown (although Socrates would be executed in part for his connection to the Thirty Tyrants) and Athens established its democracy on firmer grounds. Laws were written down, codified, and placed in public for comment and analysis. Time lapses were put in between the proposal of a law and its vote, so as to ensure more moderation.Thus, the fourth century BC proved to be high point of Athenian democracy, although Athens was eventually conquered by Alexander the Great and, by the end of fourth century BC the democracy was no more.Interestingly, the author argues for an important role in military techniques and technology for the development of democracy. As other authors have argued, the development of hoplite warfare turned narrow aristocracies into broader oligarchies, as the hoplites (essentially the middle or upper middle class) demanded a role in the government they were defending. And the Athenians development of naval power -- which required the use of large numbers of people, many of them from the lower economic stations -- further expanded oligarchy into democracy.

I read this book after reading Donald Kagan’s classic “ Pericles and Athenian democracy”. I wish I would have discovered this book beforehand as it widened considerably my perspective. If one needs to understand the birth of Ancient democracy , its trials and tribulations as well as its remarkable achievements this is the book to read. Its comprehensive approach, sober analysis and objective appraisal of one of the most fascinating and productive periods of history, are second to none. A most enjoyable read that covers the most salient aspects of the social and cultural life of Ancient Athens, as well as her complex political and military entanglements. This is not just about Athens but about the whole of Greece which after its defeat of the Persians, turned to fratricidal wars because of Imperial and ideological rivalries.The book contains an enlightening epilogue that contrasts modern representative democracy with the Athenian model of direct democracy. The enclosed detailed maps are an additional bonus.The author succeeded in imparting his passion and enthusiasm to the reader and gave her much food for thought, at a time when the ideals of the “rule of the people “ and accountability are under threat, even in the old established democracies.

The print in this book is microscopic -- the average letter is about 1mm to 1.5mm tall. It's like reading one long footnote.