Though there is no evidence of early contact with the Chinese, tokens from the Indus Valley civilization have been found in Mesopotamia that date from the time of Sargon and Mesopotamian tools have been found in Egypt dating from the proto-dynastic period. These eastern centers of civilization became the source from which Western civilization sprang, and the link between the two is probably to be found on the Mediterranean island of Crete.Crete is ideally situated to perform such a role. It is located between Greece and Asia Minor, with Egypt to the south and Mesopotamia to the east. Other benefits of Crete's geographical location will be given attention shortly.Like so many other ancient civilizations, that of Crete was lost to history; in this case for over 3500 years. Though there was a great deal told of the pre-Homeric world in the Illiad and the Odyssey, scholars refused to consider that these poems might possess more than just literary value to the historian. Then, 1n 1870, an amateur archaeologist named Heinrich Schliemann, amid much ridicule, set out to find the legendary city of Troy of the Trojan War, the conflict around which both poems were written. He found that which he sought, situated on the coast of Asia Minor, and then turned his sights to the Greek mainland, where he unearthed two other ancient cities: Mycenae and Tiryns. Together these three cities established beyond any doubt that, though the Homeric poems were certainly embellished history, there was nevertheless a core of historical truth around which the epics were structured.
Schliemann was convinced that he had stepped directly into the World of the Gods. This massive beehive tomb he dubbed the Treasury of Atreus, and it is certainly the most impressive bit of Mycenean architechture. Schliemann's discoveries inspired another archaeologist, Arthur Evans, to begin digging in Crete. Evans simply expected to find further offshoots of the Mycenean culture that Schliemann had discovered on the mainland. Instead, he discovered a civilization more ancient and far more interesting than anything Schliemann had unearthed. Evans had dug up the Minoans.From the beginning it needs to be understood that what we know of the Minoans is based completely on archaeological evidence. Though the Minoans possessed a written language, it has yet to be deciphered. This being the case, what we do know of the Minoan culture is completely speculative, but the abundance of evidence gives a substantial weight of certainty to many conclusions that have been reached about the Minoans.We do know that Crete had been settled by 3000 BC, by a people who probably migrated from Asia Minor. We also know that by 2000 BC they were using a system of hieroglyphic writing, possibly reflecting an Egyptian influence. (go to PHAISTOS DISK) They built magnificent palaces, significantly lacking any effectual defensive fortifications.Crete is an island with a comfortable climate and fertile soil. The primary advantage to an island environment is that it allows civilization to progress with relatively little external threat. One need only note the security from invasion that the English enjoyed for centuries, protected only by their narrow channel. A second advantage is that it allows the civilization to develop in relative isolation, thereby achieving a high degree of distinctiveness from other civilizations. While the Egyptians were dealing with the Hyksos and the Mesopotamian were coping with the Akkadians, Amorites, and Assyrians, the people of Crete were simply enjoying their prosperity. The disadvantage of such an environment is that natural resources tend to be limited and populations tend to expand. Soon the latter begins to exhaust the former, and the people either migrate or they find, either through conquest or trade, new sources to meet their needs. To compensate this disadvantage, the Minoans opted for traded, and developed into a formidable sea-going commercial power. The entire Minoan civilization was based on trade, with precious little being devoted to military expenditures. This trade centered around three crops, the so-called "Mediterranean Triad" of grain, grapes, and olives. Manufactured goods, particularly jewelry, was traded as well. Since the exchange of goods inevitably leads to an exchange of ideas, the Minoan civilization soon spread throughout the Aegean.Distribution of wealth was remarkably even throughout Crete. The trade had generated a substantial income, and the limited size of the island seems to have weeded from the Minoans the lust for territorial expansion which is generally characteristic of a prosperous folk. They were also free from the expense of maintaining a standing army and the substantial government bureaucracy that goes with it. They did develop an extensive navy, but it seems to have been primarily mercantile rather than military, with limited defensive capabilities.This concentrated mercantile activity produced a huge amount of wealth, which was subsequently poured into building projects, art, and apparently, recreation. The Cretans, for instance, were the only people in antiquity to produce multi-room dwellings for even the poorest of their citizens. The norm for such societies was for each family to occupy a single room, and there would be little deviation from this until the seventeenth century in Europe. In the excavated city of Gournia, however, one can easily discern the poorer parts of town, and even there the people are living in four, five, and six room houses. The Cretans were also the first to build a plumbing system into their buildings, a technology that was forgotten when the Minoan society collapsed.Another result of the accumulated wealth was that the Cretan civilization was the first to accumulate a vast amount of leisure time for the entire population, and an apparently inevitable result of large amounts of leisure is the development of recreational sports. The Minoans seem to have been as addicted to sports as the modern American, and the most popular of these sports on ancient Crete were boxing and an unusual exercise which archaeologists have named bull-jumping. Apparently the bull would charge a single jumper, or perhaps a row of jumpers, and as the animal lowered his head to impale his tormentor, the jumper would grasp the bull by the horns. Naturally, the bull would then attempt to throw the additional weight from his head, and the jumper would use the added momentum to vault over the bull. Interestingly, sports in the Minoan civilization did not suffer from gender differentiation. Women are portrayed as frequently as the men participating in boxing and bull jumping.The immense concentration of wealth in a small population led to an explosion of visual arts. The art of most early people is utilitarian; a tool to be used in worship and in politics. The Minoans, on the other hand, painted with no other goal than the production of something beautiful. The walls of the palaces were covered with intricate geometric designs and stylistically drawn pictures of the octopus and dolphins.As far as our knowledge goes, it appears that around 1500 years BC most of the cities on Crete were destroyed by an earthquake. It would seem that these earthquakes were triggered by the massive eruption of a volcano located on the nearby island of Thera. Based on the size of the crater the explosion was four or five times as powerful as that of Krakatoa in 1883, and that explosion possessed the destructive force of a 600 kiloton atomic bomb. In the Krakatoa explosion almost a cubic mile of rock was thrown into the air, the noise was heard hundreds of miles away, and the dust was carried 17 miles into the air, circling the globe several times and causing red sunsets around the world for over a year. 36,000 people were killed by the explosion and the subsequent tidal waves. Based on this we can only imagine the destructiveness of the Thera explosion. MYCENEANS The Myceneans apparently had moved into the Greek mainland around 2000 BC. In the process they drove out or destroyed a metal-using, agricultural people. We know next to nothing of this people, but we do know that they spoke a non-Indo-European language. The primary evidence for this is the large number of Greek cities and words that have no known origin, particularly those classes of words that end in -ssos or -ssa. One of the most significant words in the Greek language, thalassa, meaning 'sea' is not Greek at all but a remnant and a memorial to the former inhabitants of the land. These early Greeks were soon well established in the land and contact with the Minoans through trade soon brought forth the fruits of culture. The Minoans, however, were not able to infect the Myceneans with their pacifistic lifestyle. The cities of the Myceneans were heavy fortresses with extremely thick perimeter walls. Whereas the ruler of the Minoans was more of a CEO than a king, the Mycenean monarch was a warlord who established and maintained his position through military might.Not content to remain behind their fortified walls, the Myceneans frequently engaged in raids on their neighbors. They struck out at the Hittites in Asia Minor, at Mesopotamia, and raided the Egyptian delta. The most famous of these raids was that launched against the city of Troy, a wealthy commercial town on the coast of Asia Minor. This raid, of course, was remembered as the Trojan War, and formed the basis of the Illiad and the Odessey. Archaeological evidence indicates that Troy was completely destroyed by the Mycenean Greeks.Like most societies that are dominated by an extremely powerful ruler, the Myceneans expended a great deal of manpower and resources burying their king. In the early years the Mycenean rulers were buried in deep shaft graves, but around 1500 BC they began interring their kings in large chambers cut into the side of a hill. (SEE THE EARLIER DESCRIPTION OF THE TREASURY OF ATREUS)At the peak of their power, shortly after the destruction of Troy, the Myceneans were suddenly swept from history. Around 1200 BC the populations of the cities began to decrease, and within one hundred years they were completely abandoned. Many scholars have sought to explain this by noting that another Greek people, the Dorians, had descended from the north and destroyed the Myceneans. This may be true, but there is no evidence of an invasion. The cites were not destroyed, but simply abandoned, and the Dorians initially seemed to live in small, agriculturally based, tribally-governed villages. It seems more likely that the population succumbed either to disease or to an economic collapse.The demise of Mycenean civilization left no urbanized culture on the Greek mainland. In a rare historic occurrence writing disappeared from Greece. For the next four hundred years we know practically nothing of what went on. Artwork is absent, and the Greeks abandoned their large commercial network. Many of the smaller villages were abandoned and it seems that the Greeks returned to a life of pastoral nomadism. Some seem to have left the mainland and moved to the nearby islands. Historians have aptly named this period the Greek Dark Ages. During the latter part of the ninth century BC, structure once again begins to creep into the lives of the Greek people, and this structure is seen most clearly in the epic poetry of Homer and the rise of the polis.Homer, if he existed, lived sometime in the eighth century BC. His two great epics, The Iliad and The Odyssey, encapsulated traditions that were already ancient, and were fundamental in shaping the Greek spirit, religion, and worldview. For centuries Greek children recited the verses of and found their role models in these epics.The Iliad deals with a small segment of the final years of the Trojan War, a conflict that had taken place centuries earlier during the Mycenean period. The "wrath of brave Achilles" and the unfortunate consequences of that wrath is the theme of the epic. Agamemnon, the king of the Greeks, insulted the honor of Achilles by forcing him to give up his lawful spoil, a beautiful girl named Briseis, whom he had taken in battle. His pride gravely wounded, Achilles, the greatest of the Greek warriors, refuses to join the battle on the following day, hoping to regain his honor by demonstrating that his valor and strength in battle were irreplaceable. Only after his dearest friend, Patroclus, is slain does Achilles again take up the sword.As an instrument of education, the Iliad taught two ideals which would establish a foundation for later Greek thought. First, man lives in a universe of consequence, and poorly-conceived action will inevitably have undesirable results. The actions of men, and of the gods as well, are controlled by an unseen, but ever-present, fate or necessity. The second foundational ideal taught in Homer is the Greek concept of Arete, generally translated by the term excellence. The Greeks sought to realize the fulness of human potential, to unite nobility of thought with nobility of action. Here, in seed form, was the beginnings of Greek humanism, which would be refined by the philosophers and later fused with Hebrew theology to form the basis of Western Civilization.The second substantial development to emerge from the Greek Dark Ages was the Polis, roughly translated as 'city-state,' and the most characteristic of all Greek political institutions.To understand the nature of Greek politics, one must know something of Greek geography. In simplest terms, Greece is a patchwork of well-watered plains divided by numerous mountain ridges. Although the agricultural population living on each of these plains all spoke dialects of the same language and shared a common heritage, the isolation provided by the mountain ranges insured that they would develop a degree of cultural distinctiveness. With the passing of years, populations would grow and economies develop to the point where commerce and the need for mutual protection led to the formation of an urban center. This center was usually established around an easily defensible site on the plain, a high place or acropolis. Soon the society would mature to the point where a government was necessary to regulate commerce, maintain order, and provide for defense, and from these needs the polis was born.In the beginning the polis was simply the center of social life, the location of the marketplace, temples, and seats of government. After a few centuries, however, the polis became the center of life itself for the Greeks. When Socrates was given the choice of execution by ingesting hemlock and exile from the polis, he chose the latter, for without the polis his life would have no meaning. A few years later Aristotle would make a statement that has been immortalized in a poor translation: "Man is a political animal." A more accurate translation would run something like "Man is a creature whose nature is defined by existence in a polis." What was this quintessential aspect of Greek life, and how did it come to occupy such a dominant position?The answer to that question lies in the nature of the Greek mind itself and the need of the Greek to vindicate his actions and exhibit his excellence before his peers. The average polis consisted of less than 5,000 men. Women, children, and slaves were excluded from this aspect of life. The concept of the polis therefore contains the economic, religious, and social connotations that we associate with a city, the fierce independence and patriotism that we associate with a modern nation, yet because of its small scale it also contains a fraternal aspect. Perhaps it might best be expressed by the sense of pride and belonging that one gains from being associated with a school that has a well-defined personality; a strong sports tradition, a long-standing reputation for academic excellence, or a recognized historical position. A sense of belonging and brotherhood was created that literally defined the life of the member.It was the distinctiveness and independence of each individual poleis that gave the Greeks such a well defined character, yet it was these same attributes that eventually led to their downfall. Though temporary alliances were common between the poleis, the Greeks were never able to effectively unify. The alliances were strong enough to withstand and overcome the might of Persia, but not the power of Macedon and later Rome. Greek history, by and large, consists of the constant bickering between these city-states, and with the exceptions of Athens and Sparta, this in-fighting prevented any of them from rising to a position of prominence.
There is little known regarding the history of Athens prior to the 5th century, and much of what has come down from ancient sources is shot through with legend, speculation, and embellishment. It seems that during the 7th and 6th centuries Athens was embroiled in political infighting, a phenomena that was not uncommon throughout Greece during this period. Around 640 B.C. a coup was attempted by a tyrant named Cylon, (Define tyrannos) but this failed to produce any lasting result, save the creation of a sense of anxiety among the aristocracy. The situation of the small freeman in the area around Athens continued to deteriorate. For the most part, the source of this deterioration was a lack of established economic policy. Athenian law provided that the estate of a man was to be divided equally among all his sons, and after three or four generations even a large holding of land would be reduced to an insignificant plot. Additionally, the soil in these small plots soon became exhausted, and those who worked the plots were forced to mortgage them at ruinous rates of interest. Many freemen were forced to sell their children or themselves into slavery to satisfy their debts. A law code was enacted around twenty years after the Cylonian coup by Draco, in 620 B.C., designed to bring the social life of the polis under some degree of control. It was an unusually severe piece of legislation, with death as the penalty for most infractions. The primary purpose of the code seemed to be to limit the power of the aristocracy who, until this time, had acted as their own law within the confines of their estates. By limiting this authority, it was hoped that the resentment and hostility of the freemen who worked the estates could be pacified. The code of Draco, however, succeeded only in increasing the resentment of the landed nobility and their oppression of their laborers. It was only a matter of time before open rebellion broke out.The background of this tension was deeply rooted in the political traditions of early Athens. At this time in Athens only the members of the aristocratic class were able to hold governmental office. Of these offices by far the most prestigious was the office of Archon. In the beginning there were only three archons. The Archon Basileus, or King Archon, led the state in regard to religious matters. The Archon Polemarchos was the chief military officer, and the final archon, the eponymous archon, exercised executive authority. The Greeks dated their history, not as we do in reference to an event in the past, i.e. the birth of Christ, but from the name of the archon who held the eponymous office for that particular year.In addition to their control of these primary offices, the aristocracy dominated the Council of the Areopagus. The primary purpose of this body was to advise the archons in their governance of the polis. When this aristocratically dominated social structure is placed in contrast with the irrepressible love of freedom that was so characteristic of the Greek people, it becomes obvious that Athens was on the verge of a significant political transformation.
The economic, political, and social situation in Athens and the surrounding area reached a critical stage in the early years of the 6th century. The nobility of Athens became convinced that the people of Attica, the area surrounding the polis, would soon install a tyrant. In order to circumvent this political catastrophe, the Athenian nobility established Solon, a fellow aristocrat, as the eponymous archon, charging him with the tasks of rewriting the Athenian constitution and addressing the city's economic woes. Traditionally it is held that Solon rose to the archonship in 594, though others argue for a date about twenty years later. Most of what we know of Solon is derived from a rather extensive collection of poetic fragments, apparently written by the statesman himself, in which he sought to emphasize the virtues of his policies. Unfortunately, most of the fragments exist only in the Life of Solon authored by Plutarch around the end of the first century A.D.To use the Greek metaphor, Solon found himself trapped between Scylla and Charybdis, between the established aristocracy on the one hand, and the discontented citizenry on the other. Due to his own aristocratic background, Solon tended to mistrust the common people, and he regarded any popular leader as a tyrant in the making. He realized, however, that failure to address the concerns of the body politic would surely result in popular uprising.Solon responded to the crisis by enacting what became known as the seisachtheia, a Greek term meaning 'lifting-of-burdens'. The seisachtheia was essentially a three-pronged attack upon the economic ills of the city. First, Solon canceled all debts, which had an immediate and severe leveling effect in Athenian society. He then repealed the laws that enabled a debtor or his family to be sold into slavery in order to satisfy a financial obligation. Finally, Solon enacted laws that placed a freeze on the rent that could be charged to tenant farmers employed as laborers in the fields of their landlords.Solon also redefined the nature of Athenian citizenship by shifting the basis from the status into which an individual was born to the economic status the individual was able to achieve. Four classes of citizens:--500 measure men--These were the wealthiest of the citizen; Men who possessed farms that yielded at least 500 bushels per year. These were also the only men qualified to hold the position of Archon. --"Horsemen" or the 300 Measure Men--These were less wealthy than the first class, but still had enough resources to own a horse.-- "Yoke men" or the 200 Measure Men--This group could not afford a horse, but were able to own a team of oxen.--serfs- The serfs were the poorest members of society, people of limited means who may have owned a small amount of property, but could not qualify for citizenship. Still, the position of Archon and membership in the Areopagus was limited to citizens of the first two classes, though the "yoke men" could rise to minor political offices. Officials were still elected by the Areopagus, so, in essence, Athens was still an oligarchy, but it was an open oligarchy rather than the previous form in which membership was determined by birth only. The authority of the Areopagus was further diluted by the creation of a second popular council, the Boule, which was open to citizens of all classes. Athens now had what amounted to a two-chambered legislative body, a Senate and a House of Representatives.Another significant change instituted by Solon was the creation of a popular court of judicial appeal, in effect giving the legislature the ability to overturn the decisions of the Judicial Archon.Solon called his new governmental policies Eunomia, which means 'Good Law,' or 'Harmonious Law.' Yet here, another principle of history is seen in action. Any government is essentially a codification of the religion of the people, and it is successful only to the extent that it conforms to those beliefs. That Solon was able to successfully implement his reforms indicates that a radical shift had occurred in the way the Greeks conceptualized their gods and the nature of the universe.Solon was concerned that the redistribution of wealth created by his policies of eunomia would generate prosperity among those who did not possess the ethical ability to deal with such abundance. This in turn would create a sense of self-satisfaction, a sin the Greeks knew as koros. It is the same sin that the New Testament describes when the wealth man makes the statement to himself "Soul, thou hast much goods laid up for many years. Take thine ease. Eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die." The reply from heaven to such a statement was Thou fool. This night thy soul shall be required of thee!"This self-satisfaction inevitably led to what the Greek mind considered to be the greatest sin, that of hubris, which the modern translator generally renders by the term 'pride.' Hubris, however, was a much broader concept than can be conveyed by the English word. The concept behind the hubris is that an individual, by his thoughts, words, and deeds, considers himself to possess a station in the scheme of the universe that is denied to him. It can be that facet of character expressed by the serf who refuses to recognize the position of the aristocrat, or the hero who refuses to recognize his position as a mere mortal in dealing with the gods. The Greeks illustrated the meaning of hubris with the story of Icarus.Icarus was the son of the great inventor Daedalus, an ancient Leonardo da Vinci, and Daedalus had constructed wings made of feathers held together by wax. His father agreed to allow Icarus to attempt the test flight, yet he warned him that he must not attempt to soar higher than the birds, for beyond that is the sphere of the gods, and in to that sphere mortals must not venture. When the young man realized that he could indeed fly, he discarded the warnings of his father and began to climb, until he approached the path in which the chariot of the sun travels. Now the Greeks believed that the sun was a blazing chariot driven by Helios, the god of the sun, and pulled by fiery horses. Icarus decided that he would wait and see the sun-god in his daily rounds, something no mortal had ever accomplished. As Helios drew near, however, the heat of his chariot melted the wax that held the wings together and hubris-filled Icarus plummeted to his death.This also exemplifies Solon's contention that Hubris always leads to ate. Ate literally means 'ruin,' but the Greek term has an extensive moral content. It generally signifies a delusion or a state of mind that leads to disastrous consequences. It was the hubris of Achilles that led to the ate, or ruin of the Greeks in the Iliad. For Solon this cycle of koros-hubris-ate was the adversary against which he posited his eunomia. If the aristocracy did not seek to educate the masses in the ethical art of prosperity, he argued, then the people of Athens would enter into a cycle of koros-hubris-ate and bring disaster down on the state in the form of a tyrant.For Solon this cycle is nothing more than an expression of the retributive justice of the gods, particularly Zeus, the head of the Greek pantheon. By this time the gods had undergone a radical transformation. Zeus was no longer the love-making, carousing party god of Homer. He was the sustainer of the order of the universe. The Greeks called this universal order dike, usually translated as 'justice' but more akin to the concepts of tao and rta that have been discussed in other contexts.The Greeks, however, had a unique insight into this divine justice. Whereas the Hebrews maintained that a man would be punished for his misdeeds in the afterlife, and the Hindus asserted that man would be punished for his misdeeds in a future life, the Greeks believed that a man's descendants would bear the judgment for his sins. This enabled the Greeks to logically answer why those who live a good life were frequently forced to endure judgments for which there was no apparent cause. If a good man suffered it was because he was having to deal with the consequences of his ancestors' sins.The cycle of koros-hubris-ate and the concept of dike thus gave the reforms of Solon a powerful religious foundation. Though his diagnosis of Athenian social ills was logical, and his poetic defense of his eunomia earned him the title 'wisest of the Greeks,' his logic, poetry, and wisdom were not enough to prevent the rise of the long-feared Athenian tyrant.Though Solon was an aristocrat, and most of his reforms were instituted to insure the long-term survival of the aristocracy, most of his fellow noblemen saw only that their estates and their positions were being devoured by their social inferiors. During this time the aristocracy was divided into three contending factions, each led by a great family, and these factions were designated by the geographical areas under their control: the coast, the plain, and the hills. These factions were usually at odds with one another as to how Athens should be governed, but the rise of the common people under the Solonian reforms had given them a common cause for concern. Solon had indeed brought about some degree of economic leveling, but this in turn had generated a great deal of social polarization, and it was this polarization that made the rise of a tyrant inevitable.The tyrant was an aristocrat named Pisistratus, related by marriage to Solon. His first bid for absolute control occurred in 560, when he appeared before the Areopagus, showing a wound that he insisted had been given him by the enemies of the people, and requesting a personal bodyguard. A number of aristocrats disagreed. Solon, who knew his relative well, suspected that the wound was self-inflicted, and added his own substantial prestige to the protest, arguing that individually the Athenians were wise as foxes, but together they were nothing more than a flock of geese. It was to no avail, and with a force of four hundred, instead of the fifty men he had requested, Pisistratus seized control of the city. He remained in power for five years, until he and his forces were driven into exile by the combined might of nobles from the Shore and the Plain.Solon's assessment of the collective Athenian intelligence was validated in 550 BC, when Pisistratus made his second bid for rulership of Athens by being led to the Acropolis by the goddess Athena herself (actually, it was an uncommonly tall and beautiful woman, riding about in an extravagant chariot, but what better device could have been chosen to distract the men of the city from resistence?). It took a year for the aristocrats to come to their senses and again relieve Pisistratus of his duties.In 546, however, Pisistratus returned with enough backing to seize the city for the third time, remaining in that position until his death in 527 B.C. Whereas Pisistratus' two initial bids for power were accomplished through a ruse and brought to an end by manipulation of the political system, his final rise to power was initiated and sustained by far more practical means.While in exile, Pisistratus was able to raise and support a private army, and once he had established himself he maintained his control through the use of a strong personal body guard, the exile of his political rivals (and of course, confiscating their property for the good of the state) as well as taking hostages from key political families and insuring their well-being on the condition of the families' cooperation.The people of Athens had come to reverence the constitution of Solon, so Pisistratus made no effort to suspend it. He did, however, manipulate it with the skill of a master politician. The Archons continued to be elected, but they were always men whom Pisistratus had in his back pocket. When things were not going his way, much like our own FDR, he was not afraid to stack the deck. Pisistratus insured the friendship of the people by generous land grants, made possible by his confiscation of aristocratic estates, as well as by an extensive program of public works. He found employment for the masses in building programs, he developed of an extensive pottery industry, and began to develop the silver mines to the south of Athens. He secured public money to underwrite the Athenian poets, established trade routes to the Black Sea, and brought about cultural unity by his support of various public festivals, as well as the construction of the first significant temples on the acropolis. Theatres were established. Although Pisistratus had came into power as a tyrant, he proved to be an able statesman, and in the end he had raised Athens from a position of insignificance to that of the most influential of all Grecian Poleis.Pisistratus was succeeded in 527 by his sons, Hippias and Hipparchus, whose names demonstrate their aristocratic roots ('horseman' and 'ruler of horses,' respectively). Hippias showed some promise as a ruler, and faithfully continued his father's policies. Hipparchus, on the other hand, took little interest in politics, and utilized his position as co-regent to maintain a rather improvident lifestyle. This lifestyle caught up with Hipparchus when he entered into competition with another aristocrat for the affections of an attractive boy. The aristocrat concluded that the most expedient way to end this love triangle was to have the brothers killed and put an end to the tyranny. As a result, Hipparchus was killed in 514, and his brother was driven into exile in 510 by members of the aristocratic factions exiled by Pisistratus, who had over the years managed to secure the support of the Spartan general, Cleomenes.The fall of the house of Pisistratus insured the return of the old aristocratic families and a resumption of their political infighting. The assistance of Cleomenes allowed a member of the pro-Spartan faction, Isagoras, to be elected as Archon in 507, but he was promptly overthrown by Cleisthenes, another aristocratic champion of the people. Isagoras again called upon his Spartan allies, and the Spartans responded with a woefully inadequate force, which was eventually corralled upon the Acropolis and forced into surrender.For a time it seemed that Cleisthenes would follow the pattern of Pisistratus, and establish himself as a tyrant. This, however, would not prove to be the case. The wisdom and practicality of Solon rather than the heavy-handedness of Pisistratus would be his inspiration. From the beginning Cleisthenes set out to bring the political infighting of the aristocracy to an end. Solon had effectively dealt with the economic tensions of the state, and Cleisthenes sought to complete his work by terminating the influence of the established aristocratic families.Since the earliest times the Athenians had been divided into four great tribes, and voting took place in accordance with this arrangement. There was also the geographic division into coast, plain, and hills, which made it possible for three great families to control the way in which the four tribes exercised their vote. The system enjoyed the sanction of tradition, but for any reform to be effective, the system had to be broken, and Cleisthenes devised a simple, but rather drastic solution to the dilemma. He would totally re-map the political terrain of Attica, that large portion of Greece, of which Athens was the capital. He began by establishing a new system of 10 tribes. Then he divided Attica up into 30 geographical districts. These 30 divisions were then split among the different regions. Ten were located in Athens, ten covered the coastal regions, and ten covered the inland regions. Each of the new ten tribes was made up of groups from each of these three new geographic divisions. Though it seems to be an unworkably artificial system, this new geographic and political partitioning effectively broke the hold of the great families, and the survival of the system was secured by insuring that the local communities remained intact.Cleisthenes also instituted a number of changes within the boule, or council, that had been instituted by Solon. The council now consisted of five hundred men, with fifty coming from each of the ten tribes. These men were chosen by lot from a number of candidates selected from the various communities, or demes.The power of this council was significant, for it was given the ability to impeach public officials who improperly discharged their office. Consequently, the boule greatly diminished the authority of both the Archons and the Areopagus, thereby further weakening the old aristocracy. By virtue of its substantial size and the employment of lots to elect its membership, no one individual could gain a disruptive measure of authority.Between 508 and 450 BC, the constitution of Cleisthenes underwent substantial evolution, in each case further limiting the authority of the aristocracy and enhancing the movement toward a true democracy. By far the most significant individual in the development of radical Athenian democracy was Pericles (495-429 BC). During the latter half of the fifth century the Greeks became obsessed with the fear that too much power would again be concentrated in one man, and they took several rather drastic preventative measures. It is not necessary to reproduce that discussion here. Instead, I will comment on some of the peculiar features of this system.To begin, in the latter half of the fifth century officials, with the exception of the ten generals, were appointed by lot from candidates selected by the general population. Though the prospects were of incompetence in office were slightly higher, in the minds of the Athenians such a risk was worth taking if it insured a regular rotation of power. No one would have the opportunity to accumulate too many "friends in high places." Bribery was virtually impossible, and, most importantly, the system insured a widespread participation in the life of the polis.A second institution designed to prevent the concentration of power was the initiation of the process of ostracism. At the yearly meeting of the assembly a vote was taken on whether any individual constituted a threat to the well-being of the polis. If it was agreed that a threat did exist, a second vote was taken. At the time of the second vote, members of the assembly were asked to scratch the name of the hazardous individual on a broken piece of pottery, known in ancient Greece as ostraka, hence 'ostracism.' The winner of this vote, if he may be called a winner, was exiled from the polis for ten years. It was indeed a strong incentive not to become too influential.As a result of this new system, a substantial change took place in the archonship. The authority of the archon basilius and the eponymous archon was substantially diminished, while that of the archon polemarchos, the military archon was substantially enhanced. In the defence of one's nation the ideal of absolute democracy must give way to practicality. One cannot risk incompetence in the military leadership. Even so, the generals were seldom given more voice than others in the matter of public policy. The assembly, under the direction of the Boule, were absolute. Though anyone could address the assembly, the only individuals to receive substantial recognition were those who had an unusually strong and persuasive personality, or those who supported policies that had a substantial amount of popular backing. Athens during this period came closer to realizing true democracy than at any other time in human history.The downside to true democracy is that it is subject at anytime to deteriorate into mob rule. Indeed, following the death of Pericles this virtually came to pass when an Athenian named Cleon began to stir up the lower classes in the assembly against the wealthy. The Greeks referred to such men as demagogues, a derogatory term meaning 'leaders of the people.' Frequently these demagogues were wealthy members of the merchant class who traditionally stood in an adversarial role toward the aristocracy.Just as radical, but more easily corrupted was the new legal system put into place by the proponents of radical democracy. The juries were uncommonly large, generally totaling 501 jurors, and these were also selected by lot. A jury, however, is just as vulnerable to the rhetoric of a demagogue as is the general population, and unpopular political figures were frequently brought before these courts and condemned on trumped up charges. It was just such a court that condemned Socrates for corrupting the minds of Athenian youth.Following Athens in terms of historical significance was the polis of Sparta. Like Athens, little is known of the history of Sparta prior to the seventh century. It is speculated that Sparta came into being when two militaristic tribes merged their population, though the only real evidence for this is that Sparta possessed a joint hereditary kingship. In addition to the two kings, the government of Sparta was made up of an aristocratic senate consisting of 30 elders, and a lower house, the Assembly of Warriors, whose primary function seems to be deciding when it was appropriate to declare war. There were also five state officers known as ephors who were elected yearly. These, along with the Senate, controlled life in Sparta. The kings seem to have possessed only ceremonial significance by the fifth century.Late in the seventh century the Spartans conquered the neighboring territory of Messenia, reducing the population to serfs, whom the Spartans called Helots. The need to control this extremely large subject population, more than any other factor, served to define the Spartan society. A constitution was written, attributed to the law-giver Lycurgus, and as a result Sparta was transformed into the most militaristic state in history. (For example, Sparta was alone in having a secret police force, designed to detect and crush any sign of rebellion among the helots.) All emphasis was placed on military training and preparedness rather than on political participation or the cultural and artistic elaboration of the polis. Thus Sparta was a polis that lacked the usual marks of such a community: the 5th-century historian Thucydides made a particular point of remarking that later ages, if they judged by the archaeological remains, would never guess the power and the prominence which Sparta enjoyed, since Sparta, lacked the grand temples and other public buildings that marked, e.g., its rival, Athens. The absolute focus on military training and discipline led the Spartan hoplites to be the most feared land force in Greece. Many envied Sparta its unity and its military successes, but Sparta was generally viewed with fear and distrust, as an altogether closed and claustrophobic society. In a curious anticipation of the modern "Cold War," Sparta came to be cast as the antithesis of Athens: the closed, militaristic, xenophobic, philistine community which placed duty to the state above individual rights, as opposed to the open, cultured democracy where respect for the individual led to the flourishing of state and individual alike.
