Demokratia

University of Waikato
POLS 108 – 11B Political Life in Ancient World: Citizens, Slaves and Emperors
Essay 1
Luis Cifuentes
SID: 1167973

Demokratia, formula without replica

The Athenian system of Demokratia is, as seen by different authors, the result of the Athenian society of the time when it was created, given certain characteristics of both demographics and collective thought inthe Polis.
Many authors agree with the mentioned above when saying that it would not be possible to bring Athenian democracy as it was in ancient Greece to the modern world, an example of this is Sartori’s position which recognizes the Demokratia as the embryo and archaic version of today’s democratic ideals (Sartori 1965. P. 264).
Then, it is pertinent to describe the elements which apparentlymade possible the birth and development of democracy as understood by Athenians, and leave the comparison of modern and ancient democracy for later.
The first element perhaps is historical. The Athenian democracy, as that which emanated from Cleisthenes’ constitution, was born after the end of the Pisistratisds tyranny, yet the first not as a direct result of the latter, but apparently as theoutcome of a political grievance between Cleisthenes and Isagoras for the archonship. When Cleisthenes was defeated it made him take an unprecedented step: he made the common people his hetairoi (aristocratic intimates) . Little is said on how he gained the common people’s favor, but it is feasible to think that a population who had already witness the arbitrariness of tyranny or a government of a fewwould lean into bet for Cleisthenes proposal when saying he “wanted the state run by the people as a whole” , followed by a promise of political equality (Isonomia).
With the support Cleisthenes gained from the common people a new constitution came. A new set of institutions was introduced, but the most important feature was the new tribal structure and how it would be the base for the citizen’sinvolvement in the political configuration of the demokratia. The new constitution cemented the path for the type of government that would prevail in Athens in the centuries to come.
Although the arrival of the new constitution was groundbreaking the two remaining elements were the ones that had it running. As a second element we might see the size of Athenian population and its territory (Mayo1960 p. 36). The little area and the small number of inhabitants (compare to today’s societies) made it possible for Cleisthenes’ democratic constitution’s institutions to function as planned. The little area allowed the polis to be the center of the selflessness Athenians’ life (Sartori 1965, p. 253) ; precisely the lack of the concept individuality as we know it today permitted the Athenians toput the interests of the city automatically as higher (Mayo 1960, p. 44), “for the Greek therefore the city was a life in common; its constitution, as Aristotle said, was a ‘model of life’ rather than a legal structure” .
Even if the elements allowed Athenian democracy to develop in the polis, these were not the only features for which it succeeded at that time. The new constitution brought withit elements and principles that grew strong in the life of Athenians.
In order to understand how Demokratia worked and the principles which underlay it, is again prudent to make a pause, and mention a few institutions, and from that point construct the real image of the Athenian democracy.
The new constitution created a new tribal structure, mentioned before, and new political institutions ofwhich, for pragmatic purpose, only the main ones in relation to the democratic ideals will be described.
The new tribal division modified the one introduced by Solon (594 B.C.) and created demes, which were the basis of the new structure of democracy . The new political institution were now to be filled by citizens of every demes; this gave now a much greater importance to the concept of...