Athenian Democracy

Athens in the 5th to 4th century B.C. had an extraordinary system of government, whereby all male citizens had equal political rights, freedom of speech, and the opportunity to participate directly in the political arena. This system was democracy. Further, not only did citizens participate in a direct democracy whereby they themselves made the decisions by which they lived, but they also actively served in the institutions that governed them, and so they directly controlled all parts of the political process.

Other city-states had at one time or another systems of democracy — notably Argos, Syracuse, Rhodes, and Erythrai. In addition, sometimes oligarchies could involve a high degree of political equality. But the Athenian version of democracy, starting around 460 B.C. and ending around 320 B.C. and involving all male citizens, was certainly the most developed. Any citizen could speak to the assembly and vote on decisions by simply holding up their hands. The majority won the day.

The Institutions of Democracy

The word democracy (dēmokratia) derives from the Greek words dēmos, which refers to the entire citizen body, and kratos, meaning rule. Any male citizen could, then, participate in the main democratic body of Athens, the assembly (ekklēsia). In the 4th and 5th centuries B.C., the male citizen population of Athens ranged from 30,000 to 60,000 people depending on the period. The assembly met at least once a month, more likely two or three times, on the Pnyx hill in a dedicated space which could accommodate around 6,000 citizens. Any citizen could speak to the assembly and vote on decisions by simply holding up their hands. The majority won the vote and the decision was final. Nine presidents, elected at random and holding the office one time only, organized the proceedings and assessed the voting. 

Specific issues discussed in the assembly included deciding military and financial offices, organizing and maintaining food supplies, initiating legislation and political trials, deciding to send envoys, deciding whether or not to sign treaties, voting to raise or spend funds, and debating military matters. The assembly could also vote to exile from Athens any citizen who had become too powerful and dangerous for the polis, or city-state. In this case there was a secret ballot where voters wrote a name on a piece of broken pottery. An important element in the debates was freedom of speech, which became, perhaps, the citizen’s most valued privilege. After suitable discussion, temporary or specific decrees were adopted and laws defined. The assembly also ensured decisions were enforced and officials were carrying out their duties correctly.

There was in Athens (and several other city-states) a smaller body, called the boulē, which decided or prioritized the topics that were discussed in the assembly. In addition, in times of crisis and war, this council could also take decisions without the assembly meeting. The council was composed of 500 citizens who were chosen at random and who served for one year.

In addition to all these political institutions were the law courts which were composed of 6,000 jurors and a body of chief judges chosen annually at random. Indeed, there was a specially designed machine of colored tokens used to ensure those selected were chosen randomly, a process judges had to go through twice. It was here in the courts that laws made by the assembly could be challenged and decisions were made regarding exile, naturalization, and debt.

This complex system was, no doubt, meant to ensure a suitable degree of checks and balances to any potential abuse of power, and to ensure each traditional region was equally represented and given equal powers. With people chosen at random to hold important positions and with terms of office strictly limited, it was difficult for any individual or small group to dominate or unduly influence the decision-making process either directly themselves or, because one never knew exactly who would be selected, indirectly by bribing those in power at any one time.

Participation in Government

As we have seen, only male citizens who were 18 years or over could speak (at least in theory) and vote in the assembly, while positions such as judges and jurors were limited to those over 30 years of age. Therefore, women, slaves, and resident foreigners were excluded from the political process.

The mass involvement of all male citizens and the expectation that they should participate actively in the running of the polis is clear in this quote from Thucydides: “We alone consider a citizen who does not partake in politics not only one who minds his own business but useless.” Direct involvement in the politics of the polis also meant that the Athenians developed a unique collective identity and probably too, a certain pride in their system. This pride is shown in Pericles‘ famous Funeral Oration for the Athenian dead in 431 B.C., the first year of the Peloponnesian War:

Athens’ constitution is called a democracy because it respects the interests not of a minority but of the whole people. When it is a question of settling private disputes, everyone is equal before the law; when it is a question of putting one person before another in positions of public responsibility, what counts is not membership of a particular class, but the actual ability which the man possesses. No one, so long as he has it in him to be of service to the state, is kept in political obscurity because of poverty. (Pericles quoted in Thucydides 2.37)

Citizens probably accounted for 10% to 20% of the polis population, and of these it has been estimated that only 3,000 or so people actively participated in politics. Of this group, perhaps as few as 100 citizens — the wealthiest, most influential, and the best speakers — dominated the political arena both in front of the assembly and behind the scenes in private conspiratorial political meetings and groups. These groups had to meet secretly because although there was freedom of speech, persistent criticism of individuals and institutions could lead to accusations of conspiring to create tyranny and so lead to exile.

Critics of democracy, such as Thucydides and Aristophanes, pointed out that not only were proceedings dominated by an elite, but that the people could be too often swayed by a good orator or popular leaders (the demagogues), get carried away with their emotions, or lack the necessary knowledge to make informed decisions. Perhaps the most notoriously bad decisions taken by the Athenian dēmos were the execution of six generals after they had actually won the Battle of Arginusae in 406 B.C. and the death sentence given to the philosopher Socrates in 399 B.C.

Conclusion

Democracy, which had prevailed during Athens’ Golden Age, was replaced by a system of oligarchy after the disastrous Athenian defeat in Sicily in 409 B.C. during the Peloponnesian War. The constitutional change, according to Thucydides, seemed the only way to win much-needed support from Persia against the old enemy Sparta and, further, it was thought that the change would not be a permanent one. Nevertheless, democracy in a slightly altered form did eventually return to Athens and, in any case, the Athenians had already done enough in creating their political system to eventually influence subsequent civilizations two millennia later.

In the words of historian K. A. Raaflaub, democracy in ancient Athens was “a unique and truly revolutionary system that realized its basic principle to an unprecedented and quite extreme extent: no polis had ever dared to give all its citizens equal political rights, regardless of their descent, wealth, social standing, education, personal qualities, and any other factors that usually determined status in a community.”

Ideals such as these would form the cornerstones of all democracies in the modern world. The ancient Greeks have provided us with fine art, breath-taking temples, timeless theatre, and some of the greatest philosophers — but it is democracy that is, perhaps, their greatest and most enduring legacy.