30-11-2006
How elitist were the reforms of Cleisthenes?
Cleisthenes came from the Alcmaeonoid family of
Athenian Greeks. Previously, Pisitratus had set up a tyranny in Athens which
Pisistratus’s son Hippias had inherited. With the help of the Alcmaeonid
family, Cleisthenes was able to overthrow Hippias, but lost power to Isagoras,
another Athenian seeking power, who began another tyranny with none being
able to match his power in Athens. He was not a popular ruler and was
eventually banished by the council backed up by the people of Athens.
Cleisthenes returned and took over as ruler of Athens. Cleisthenes was a
revolutionary in that he brought about radical forms of democracy to Athens for
the first time through his reforms.
“Now
Cleisthenes of Athens, following the lead of his grandfather and namesake
Cleisthenes of Sicyon, decided, out of contempt, I imagine, for the Ionians,
that his tribes should not be the same as theirs, so as soon as he had won the
support of the common people of Athens, previously held in contempt, he renamed
the tribes and increased their number…” [1]
Cleisthenes abolished the traditional four tribes that existed (who were chosen
on family and descent) and instead organised the people into ten tribes based
on where they lived. The new tribes were named mostly after Athenian heroes.
The way the tribes were organised now meant that a more political and fair
system was in placed compared to the former social division where the heads of
the most important families would rule. Every tribe had members from the three
regions of Athens (city, coast and inlands). This was so that all the interest
groups possible were being represented. It did bring unity of Attica because
all the three areas were being equally represented and each could voice their
opinions better. The assembly of the council where they vote on issues and
discuss various aspects of economic and politic interest, was opened to any
registered citizen which allows them to see and feel closer to the workings of
their economy. As well as serving to be a more fair representation of the
people, the new tribe system served to weaken the power of the aristocracy who
had in fact been the cause of tyrannies of the past. [2]The
other aristocrats had their regions split into different tribes which served to
reduce their influence. Cleisthenes however did maintain his own family and
tribe stay a lot more powerful than the others. Their strongholds were not
split up between the other tribes.
Cleisthenes also changed Solon’s (the previous law-giver over fifty
years before Cleisthenes’ rule) council structure from the four hundred four
tribe based council to five hundred ten tribe council. Each tribe contributed
fifty people each who were chosen by the people to represent them. The fifty
people chosen had to be from the top three economic classes as well as be over
thirty years old. In this way, although power has been diluted past the
oligarchy of past, the reform is fairly elitist in that you still had to be
rich to have a chance of leading. Another point to note is that although all
male citizens could vote, some of them in the more rural areas of Attica chose
not to as it would mean going on a trip to Athens. In these areas, aristocrats
had a better chance as they could afford the journeys.
Cleisthenes also introduced local councils
(demes) which consisted of hamlets, villages or even cities. This is the
predecessor or mayors. Cleisthenes sought to take the focus away from being a
member of the tribes to being a member of the state. New citizens would be judged on ancestry, but
Cleisthenes changed it so being a member of a deme was enough to qualify for
citizenship. This again was weakening the hold of the elite aristocrats.
Religion was left untouched by Cleisthenes. He was aware of the importance of
religion and so he left the older social structures than had strong religious ties.
Ostracism is often credited to Cleisthenes[3].
This is the process of voting to exile a citizen of Athens for a period of ten
years. This was often used to exile people that seemed to be gaining too much
power so a tyranny can be prevented in the future. Strictly, ostracism is not
the same as exile as property is retuned to the ostracised person when they
return. A possible reason for the invention of ostracism is that as the
aristocratic system was undermined and Pisistratus, the previous tyrant, had
powerful, wealthy relatives that remained in Athens, Cleisthenes hoped to avert
the danger of tyranny.
Cleisthenes ignored foreign policy and relations with Sparta and the rest
of Greece deteriorates into war. He also made it a requirement that each tribe
contribute a general who commanded a hoplite regiment and horsemen. Herodotus
remarks on how effective the military of Athens was in its democratic infancy,
especially in successfully dealing with the Boeotian and Euboean invasions. [4]
Cleisthenes named his reforms ‘isonomia’ which translates to “equality
under the law”. When looking at the reforms of Cleisthenes outlines, we can see
that there are elements of elitism in some of them, the vast majority of the
reforms were quite the opposite. They served to break down the elite and give
the people more power over their leaders. The reforms led to a more active
participation by the people of Attica, especially those that were not
represented in the past. The re-shaping of the Athenian society was definitely
a positive one which led to a more efficient way of governing. So in
conclusion, I would say that the reforms were not very elitist at all but quite
the opposite.
Bibliography
Herodotus – The Histories
Encyclopaedia Britannica – Cleisthenes
Aristotle – Athenian Constitution and Politics
J.B. Bury – A History of
Greece
No comments:
Post a Comment