CULTURAL HISTORY OF 5TH CENTURY BCE ATHENS: AN INTERDISCIPLINARY COLLEGE CURRICULUM PDF Free Download

Name: CULTURAL HISTORY OF 5TH CENTURY BCE ATHENS: AN INTERDISCIPLINARY COLLEGE CURRICULUM PDF
Author: ryan144958

1 / 301

0 views•301 pages

CULTURAL HISTORY OF 5TH CENTURY BCE ATHENS: AN INTERDISCIPLINARY COLLEGE CURRICULUM PDF Free Download

CULTURAL HISTORY OF 5TH CENTURY BCE ATHENS: AN INTERDISCIPLINARY COLLEGE CURRICULUM PDF free Download. Think more deeply and widely.

CULTURAL HISTORY OF 5TH CENTURY BCE ATHENS: AN

INTERDISCIPLINARY COLLEGE CURRICULUM

A Project

Presented to the Department of Humanities and Religious Studies

California State University, Sacramento

Submitted in partial satisfaction of

the requirements for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

Humanities

Michael Eddy Wooten

FALL

2024

CULTURAL HISTORY OF 5TH CENTURY BCE ATHENS: AN

INTERDISCIPLINARY COLLEGE CURRICULUM

A Project

Michael Eddy Wooten

Approved by:

_________________________________________, Committee Chair

Dr. Jeffrey Brodd

_________________________________________, Second Reader

Dr. Joel Dubois

____

Date

iii

Student: Michael Eddy Wooten

I certify that this student has met the requirements for format

contained in the University format manual, and that this project is

suitable for electronic submission to the library and credit is to be

rewarded for this project.

____________________, Graduate Coordinator__________________

Dr. Victoria Shinbrot Date

Department of Humanities and Religious Studies

Abstract

CULTURAL HISTORY OF 5TH CENTURY BCE ATHENS: AN

INTERDISCIPLINARY COLLEGE CURRICULUM

Michael Eddy Wooten

Statement of Problem

Due to shrinking enrollment rates in history and humanities, I would

like to create an interdisciplinary course curriculum that focuses on a

brief snapshot in history and dives deep into the culture looking at its

art, politics, values, and government while also conducting an in-

depth study of the historical narrative throughout this period in order

to revitalize and reimagine this course of study. The corresponding

Project does this by utilizing an interdisciplinary approach in history

and humanities and focuses entirely on 5th-century BCE Athens while

making as many plausible connections as possible with modern events

in order to arrive at a relatable curriculum.

Sources of Data

I have looked at the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System

to uncover the shrinking enrollment and reduction in history and

humanities majors over the last decade. I have also examined the

Sierra and Solano Community Colleges course catalogs which

showed they omitted the humanities program entirely. The following

are my primary, contemporary and modern secondary sources,

literature, as well as handouts included in the appendices that I used to

shape the curriculum for this project course:

1. Robin Osborne, The World of Athens: An Introduction to

Classical Athenian Culture 2nd Edition

2. Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War

3. Herodotus, The Histories

4. Victor Davis Hanson, A War like No Other: How the Athenians

and Spartans Fought the Peloponnesian War

5. Plutarch, Greek Lives

6. Sophocles, Antigone

7. Aeschylus, The Persians

8. Aristophanes, Lysistrata

9. Hesiod, Works and Days

Conclusions Reached

I believe the shortened timeline and the interdisciplinary approach as

well as the connection with modern historical events within this

course reimagines the way the material is presented and would

generate deeper comprehension and more enthusiasm for the material

and perhaps for the humanities and history at large. The varied

pedagogical approach which includes lectures, group activities,

interactive theater, and group debates creates a more dynamic

classroom.

, Committee Chair

Dr. Jeffrey Brodd

________________________________

Date

vii

DEDICATION

I would like to dedicate this to my lovely fiancé. Without her love,

support, and eternal patience this endeavor would not have been

possible.

viii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to specifically thank Dr. Victoria Shinbrot, Dr. Joel

Dubois, and Dr. Jeffrey Brodd for all of their assistance and support

during the completion of this project. I would also like to thank the

entire faculty of the Department of Humanities and Religious Studies

whose tireless efforts provide the students with both challenging and

thought-provoking courses and curricula.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Dedication...........................................................................................vii

Acknowledgements...........................................................................viii

List of Tables......................................................................................xii

Chapter

1. INTRODUCTION............................................................................1

Problem ........................................................................................1

Project Purpose/Opportunity.........................................................4

Course Design Methodology.......................................................10

Course Organization...................................................................24

Course Syllabus..........................................................................25

2. COURSE UNITS............................................................................30

Unit 1A: The Seeds of Political Thought in Greece...................30

Unit 1B: Solon and Cleisthenes: The Road

to Democracy...............................................................41

Unit 1C: Understanding Athenian Democracy and

its Institutions...............................................................51

Unit 1 Test...................................................................................61

Unit 2A: Athenian Society..........................................................65

Unit 2B: Athenian Values and Obligations.................................78

Unit 2C: The Road to Empire.....................................................85

Unit 2D: Interlude at the Theater with Aeschylus

and The Persians..........................................................97

Unit 2 Test.................................................................................102

Unit 3A: From Delian League to Athenian

Empire........................................................................106

Unit 3B: Sparta and Athens: A Difference in

Philosophy..................................................................115

Unit 3C: Back to the Theater with Sophocles...........................128

Unit 3D: The Art of Pottery.......................................................132

Unit 3 Test.................................................................................145

Unit 4A: Prelude to Greek World War......................................149

Unit 4B: The Highlights and Lowlights of the

Peloponnesian War.....................................................166

Unit 4C: Athenian Comedy and Anti-War Rhetoric.................182

Unit 4D: For the Love of Wisdom: Athenian

Philosophy..................................................................186

Unit 4 Test.................................................................................194

3. CONCLUSION.............................................................................199

Conclusion................................................................................199

Reflections and Recommendations...........................................202

Appendix A. Homer and the Beginning of Political Thought in

Greece.........................................................................204

Appendix B. Poetry of Solon the Lawgiver......................................215

Appendix C. Politics by Aristotle.....................................................217

Appendix D. Aristotle on Cleisthenes...............................................228

Appendix E. Division of Power in the Athenian Government..........231

Appendix F. Persian Empire.............................................................232

Appendix G. Poetry of Tyrtaeus.......................................................243

Appendix H. Greek Vase Painting an Introduction...........................245

Appendix I. Sophocles......................................................................254

Appendix J. Crito by Plato................................................................259

Appendix K. Pottery PowerPoint Presentation.................................271

Bibliography......................................................................................287

xii

LIST OF TABLES

Tables Page

1. Course Organization by Units................................................24

Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION

Problem

Humanities and history courses covering ancient Greek culture

often cover large swathes of time hitting the central points as deemed

important in textbooks and they rarely have any large-scale interaction

with each other; history focusing on a timeline and the cause-and-

effect narrative while humanities focuses on the cultural contribution

to the arts and does not participate in a deep or lengthy engagement of

the historical backdrop. The ancient Greek history courses I’ve taken

also generally begin in the far-distant past of the Minoan and

Mycenaean civilizations of the 3rd and 2nd millennia eventually

jumping forward over two millennia to the Classical Period and

ending with Alexander the Great in the 4th century BCE, largely

omitting the Dark Ages while mentioning in passing the contributions

of Homer and Hesiod during the Archaic Age. Much of this material,

like the Minoan and Mycenaean civilization lectures, students have

covered already in similar fashions in a survey course of early western

civilization so it becomes redundant and the students can become

disinterested. With that said, we have seen as much as a twenty-nine

percent reduction in humanities majors since 2012 and history majors

have had one of the steepest declines, thirty-five percent, since the

Great Recession of 2008

. I think reimagining the format is a good

place to start. Many colleges and universities, like CSU Sacramento

offer separate undergraduate humanities and history courses focusing

on ancient Greek studies and the curricula overlaps but, inherently,

these courses have different goals in mind. This is the problem I am

attempting to address with my project and the creation of this

following course of study. I think this separation of history and

humanities and the attempt to cover cumbersome time periods as well

as the disengagement with modern society creates a disconnect for

students in the study of ancient societies like the Greeks which has

caused a growing apathy towards the subjects. A trend that is

evidential in the national decline in history and the humanity majors

provided by the aforementioned study. We also see this trend locally

as community colleges in our immediate area, Sierra Community

College and Solano Community College specifically, have dropped

the humanities program altogether. And the programs at our own

university, CSU Sacramento, have suffered a dip in enrollment which

Statistics provided by American Academy of Arts & Sciences taken from the

Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System

has in turn created a decline in class availability and variety

(specifically graduate courses).

Project Purpose/Opportunity

This need to bolster enthusiasm and enrollment in humanities

and history gives educators an opportunity to get creative and try a

different approach with the curriculum. Connecting art, literature, and

the humanities in general with a comprehensive study of prominent

historical events over a briefer period of time and connecting it all

with events throughout our own modern culture and society offers a

deeper and more layered understanding of a society and culture like

the ancient Greeks. Consequently, it is my contention that the

students’ interest in a humanities and history course, in this case

ancient Athenian history and humanities, would be piqued and their

comprehension level of the material would benefit significantly by

merging these studies into an interdisciplinary curriculum over a

briefer span of time. This will allow the creation of a course that

offers a more profound and more tightly focused analysis of the

material. A curriculum that ideally stretches beyond the textbook and

utilizes and largely examines the period through a variety of primary

sources joined with semi-contemporary and modern secondary

sources, literature, and art thereby creating a rewarding

interdisciplinary and full-throated investigation of the subject matter

which serves to create a symbiosis between the two disciplines; each

working together to create a clearer picture of the course subject

matter. A course that interweaves events from modern society and

culture in order to link the past with modernity in order to achieve

greater enthusiasm and comprehension. In the journal article,

“Exploring pedagogical approaches for connecting the past, the

present and the future in history teaching,” researchers analyzed

different pedagogical approaches to teaching ancient history and one

of the approaches that yielded positive results was making historical

analogies to modern events. The researchers’ conclusions showed,

“The historical analogy approach, on the other hand, was not only

easy to implement but also elicited students’ engagement and

enthusiasm, and the teachers were surprised by the competences their

students appeared to have. The approaches helped the teachers make

connections among the past, present, and future and as such were

useful in view of their daily teaching practice” (van Straaten et al. 61).

I think a relevant example of the failure of the same tired approach to

education would be reading Shakespeare’s Hamlet in a course on

English literature that neglects to recognize the interdisciplinary

opportunity to include material about the historical and cultural

significance of the Protestant Reformation and its influence on

Shakespeare; much of the content and religious allusion would be lost

upon the reader. And to take it a step further failing to draw a link

between a modern television series like “Sons of Anarchy,” which

heavily borrowed from the Shakespeare play, is a missed opportunity

to give it a modern relevance. Utilizing this interdisciplinary approach

and concentrating on a snapshot of history in a single Greek city-state,

in the case of my project Athens in the 5th century BCE, provides a

hyper-focused and demanding curriculum that can be both more

challenging and equally more rewarding for students. In their article, “

Lessons from the Trenches: A Transdisciplinary Approach to the Great

War,” Corey Campion and Trevor Dodman reimagine and reinvigorate

the historical presentation of WWI with the inclusion of modern

literature and WWI contemporary poetry. Their curriculum “began

with a four-day study of Pat Barker’s 1991 novel Regeneration which

fictionalizes the lives of real soldiers, including war poets Siegfreid

Sassoon and Wilfred Owen” (Campion and Dodman 339). The

inclusion of Barker’s novel and the poetry of the British war poets

exposes the students to the psychological effects of war and the

resulting PTSD suffered by the soldiers thereby giving a far more in-

depth, engaging, and revitalized approach to studying WWI. Campion

and Dodman concluded that their approach yielded positive results in

enthusiasm among their students and success across multiple

disciplines because, “Knowledge of the ways in which historians

approach and seek to understand specific time periods would help

English majors contextualize literary texts, while an awareness of the

tools used by literary scholars to evaluate prose and poetry would

enhance history majors’ engagement with the primary sources on

which their work is based” (Campion and Dodman 349). It is my

intention with this project to create a course that is inspired by this

approach. A course that can theoretically be offered at multiple

collegiate levels as a reading and writing intensive investigation

merged with large-scale class and group interaction which merges the

historical narrative of 5th-century Athens with the humanities during

this period and provides further relevance with comparisons to

modern events, ultimately delving into the cause and effect of major

events along this timeline while utilizing these events as a necessary

backdrop to the social, political, literary and artistic expressions of the

Athenians during its Golden Age. In the article “Towards a model of

teaching disciplinary boundaries – History with Literature and

Literature with History: Theoretical implications” by Elias Schweiler

et al., they offer further support for this trans and interdisciplinary

approach to education. They state, “Students majoring and minoring

in different subjects may be exposed to differing perspectives more or

less by chance and are often left to reflect on these differences on their

own.” (Schweiler et al. 141). They conclude in their article that the

“bringing together two disciplines...reflecting and most importantly

articulating the disciplinary boundaries within and between each

discipline can help students in gaining a deeper understanding...this

potential is difficult to achieve solely in a traditional, homogenous,

intra-disciplinary context” (Schweiler et al. 155). Campion, Dodman,

and Schweiler’s multi-disciplinary and trans-disciplinary approaches

offer support to the benefits and worthwhileness in the undertaking of

this interdisciplinary project to merge ancient history and humanities

into a cooperative academic endeavor during a brief but vital moment

in the history of western civilization while providing relevance with

modern parallels. An endeavor that I believe will increase

understanding and encourage excitement toward the study of ancient

culture, specifically in this case, ancient Athenian society during its

5th-century BCE Golden Age; hopefully in the end reinvigorating

students’ interest in studying and majoring in history and the

humanities.

Course Design Methodology

The course is organized into four different units that will assist

the students’ comprehension of this material with an interdisciplinary

approach that mixes different genres including politics, art, and

philosophy against a truncated but in-depth historical narrative and

timeline so the class is dynamic and does not become mired in

specific topics and understands the historical influence on the

humanities and vice versa. This class also links major events during

this time period to modern events so the students can make

connections to the relevancy and cyclical nature of history. This

variety allows for different modes of thought and perhaps greater

academic success as certain topics will pique a students’ interest more

than others. The course includes unit examinations, evaluating the

students’ comprehension of the material. The students will also be

required to give short written answers on discussion posts and respond

to the posts of their fellow classmates, promoting an exchange of

ideas. They will have five longer formal writing responses that will

allow them to expound on ideas that were discussed in the lectures or

readings. There is also a small art assignment that will allow students

that possess the gift of artistry to express themselves. Often, the class

will also be asked to work in small groups and engage with each other

in the realm of Athenian theater or debate philosophical and political

topics. This alteration to the traditional class format promotes a free-

flowing exchange of opinions on the material prompting the students

to leave their comfort zone and explore ideas from their fellow

students that come from different backgrounds and cultures.

The first unit of the course commences by briefly examining

factors that led to the rise of the polis as Greece moves from the Dark

Age into the Archaic Age in order to provide a foundation for Athens’

transformation from oligarchical rule to democracy. We will look at an

essay by Kurt Raaflaub, “Homer and the Beginning of Political

Thought in Greece,” which offers the theory that the roots of political

thought can be found in the writings of Hesiod and Homer and

discusses the elements that were expressed in these writings which led

to the rise of the polis. It is his contention that the dynamic

interactions between the characters of Agamemnon and Achilles

speaks volumes about the political atmosphere that evolved from the

Mycenaean collapse to the Archaic Age, the periodic home of the

poets, Homer and Hesiod. The course then moves into the 6th century

BCE and discusses the events that led to Athenian democracy and the

major players and forces that were involved like Solon and

Cleisthenes. It is important for the students to understand that while

we learn about particular historical figures, it is crucial to keep in

mind that changes by marginalized social groups and the ‘others’ of

society are just as important. In his essay, Raaflaub speaks about the

importance of the ‘semi-aristocrats’ and the hoplite soldier and an

army manned by the small farmer owners in instituting social change.

In the article “Teaching Movements in History: Understanding

Collective Action, Intersectionality, and Justice in the Past” by

Christopher C. Martell contends that “the great men approach to

history has had negative effects” and this ignores the fact that

“typically thousands or even millions of people were engaged in most

movements” (Martell 346). With that said, we will focus on the social

and political unrest by the different societal groups which demanded a

fresh and fair outlook at government and mandated that the Athenian

archon, Solon, make the needed and requisite changes to more-or-less

level the political and social aspects of their society. During this

course unit we then switch gears from the political to the arts and

humanities and examine the well-articulated poetry that Solon

composed. This provides the students with an insightful glimpse into

Solon beyond just a nebulous, semi-legendary historical figure. By

examining his poetry, Solon becomes a three-dimensional person who

expressed the fears, hopes, and anxieties of an entire society through

verse. I believe exposing the students to Solon’s artistic expression

does not mire the subject matter in names, dates, and politics but

provides a new and exciting look at these historical figures and

movements that may engage a larger cross-section of the class as we

blend history, politics, and art all into one. The merging of these

disciplines creates a curriculum with more depth in the material at the

appropriate expense of breadth.

The course unit then switches gears again by providing an in-

depth dissection of the different facets of the Athenian government.

We look at the slow evolution of the Athenian government from a

burgeoning democracy during the time of Solon, falling sideways into

tyranny under Pisistratus and his sons Hippias and Hipparchus, and

then reemerging under the Cleisthenic reforms as a more clearly

established government by and for the Athenian male citizens. This

section is a movement into the realm of political science and the

dynamics of governmental bodies, systems, and power. The students

will discover the intricate design of checks and balances within the

Athenian government and the world’s first truly unique experiment

with democratic institutions; a humanistic approach to governance as

it depends on the trust that all male citizens can contribute to the

health of the state with limited consideration to wealth, tribe, or

familial background.

The first two sections of the second unit of the course provides

the foundation for the journey into Athenian theater in the final

portion of the unit by discussing the social roles, institutions, and

values in Athenian society. We will take a close look at the social

institutions like the household, marriage, and work and look at the

roles men, women, and slaves played within these realms. While

Athens is a male-dominated society it is vital to look at all of the

elements that allowed it to function because without them it would

surely have failed. The course takes a look at the predominant values

of Athenian culture during this period so the students understand that

all of these elements combined with a democratic system of

governance were the precursors to a society where literary and artistic

creation was allowed to flourish. Throughout this unit, the historical

backdrop we explore is the Persian War and the rise of the political

Delian League as a response to the continued Persian threat in the

Aegean Sea; an understanding of the Delian League as the precursor

to the construction of the Athenian empire in the subsequent unit.

Along with the textbook, the students will be assigned lengthy

readings from chapters of Herodotus’ Histories and Plutarch’s Greek

Lives. While Herodotus is not a historian by modern standards due to

his inclusion of the Greek gods, the supernatural, and a reliance on

folk tales, he still offers a unique perspective as he wrote merely

twenty years after the end of the Persian Wars and like Plutarch he

traveled the Greek world extensively; much of his work is still reliable

and is drawn upon by modern scholars and utilized in modern

textbooks. The same can be said about Plutarch who wrote about 600

years after Herodotus but his biographies bring an insightfulness and

provide a deeper understanding of the lives of the various Greek

political leaders who are major instigators and the driving forces of

social and political policy evolution that we encounter throughout our

journey. Finally, this section looks at the oldest remaining Athenian

tragedy still in existence, The Persians, by the playwright Aeschylus.

All of our lessons lay the groundwork for students to gain a deeper

understanding of this literary work and its expression of Athenian

values and civic pride in their infant democratic system; ideas

Aeschylus was attempting to express to his audience while

denouncing the dangers of autocracy that they witnessed from the

Persian governmental system.

The third unit of the course uses the historical and political

transformation of the Delian League to an Athenian empire as the

historical backdrop. In doing this, we will mainly utilize the primary

source of Thucydides’ History of the Peloponnesian War to track this

transformation. Thucydides, being an ostracized Athenian general

during the Peloponnesian War, created a historical approach to

understanding the events that led up and took place during this

conflict between Athens and Sparta; an approach that is widely

celebrated as the world’s first truly historic look at the political

dynamics of Athens throughout this period. Many secondary sources

and textbooks draw from Thucydides so we will combine our own

textbook and overcome its limitations by utilizing this primary source.

We will also take a close look at Spartan society during this unit so the

students can compare Athens with its greatest geopolitical rival

throughout the latter part of the 5th century BCE. It is beneficial for

the students to understand that the ideological differences between

these cultures coupled with the infractions of the Athenian empire set

them on track to an unavoidable military collision. This unit also

looks at the works of the Spartan poet Tyrtaeus giving the students the

opportunity to compare the creative focus of Spartan literature with

their Athenian counterparts.

This unit also takes the students back to the theater of

Dionysus to discuss, arguably, the greatest Athenian playwright,

Sophocles, and his best work, Antigone. Antigone is a masterful

tragedy that asks many questions about society including the role of

government, the role of Athenian women in society, and the abuse of

power when civil laws transgress natural law. It also addresses the

consequences of hubris which is demonstrated by both Creon and

Antigone in the play. Sophocles, like Aeschylus, was interested in the

vitality of their democratic system of government and had his own

ideas about the negative consequences of autocratic rule by a

monarch. Sophocles further demonstrates how Athenian culture was

never stagnant but continued to evolve throughout the 5th century as

he made his own innovative contributions to theater which included

complex storylines and more actors on the stage at one time.

We finish this unit by staying in the arts and discussing

Athenian contribution to pottery. I believe it is beneficial to begin this

section in the Dark Ages and discuss Athens’ lengthy contribution to

Greek pottery during the Proto-Geometric period of the 11th and 10th

centuries BCE. The students will understand the importance of

pottery, not just in the artistic milieu but across multiple disciplines

like history and archaeology and they will be able to identify the

different periods and the differing shapes and uses of the pottery. The

first and perhaps most important reason pottery is central to both of

these fields is pottery lasts and, for many archaeological sites and

cultures, it is all we have to go by. Although it may seem unimportant

to the onlooker, pottery speaks a great deal about the civilizations that

left it behind. Throughout Dark Age Greece, pottery is one of the

limited historical records that were left but they provide a wealth of

cultural insight. The Kerameikos grave site in Athens showed

archaeologists how Athens was the creator and leading supplier of

Proto-Geometric pottery during this period making it an important site

dating back to the 11th century BCE. Pottery not only tells us where

the people lived following the Mycenaean collapse but it provides an

idea of how many made up a community and, if we are lucky, the

make-up and hierarchical structure of their society. The students can

connect Athens’ long-time success in this artform to the time period

our course centers on and the red figure pottery that was made famous

by the Athenians during their Golden Age. Pottery that was well-

crafted and extremely durable due to the revolutionary three stage

process invented by the Athenian potters that highlighted its much

lauded and beautifully displayed red figure design. Most of these

pottery eras provide an insight into the Athenian gods, values, rituals,

and a sample of everyday life. If pottery is pervasive and we find it in

other civilizations, historians can glean that this civilization had a

complex and organized system of commerce in which they traded

with other societies. When pottery evolves into a higher quality finish

with intricate and masterful designs, it tells us that this society now

has people specializing as artisanship so they have moved beyond

merely subsistence living. The students will come to realize and

appreciate that everything left behind, especially pottery, is another

piece of the puzzle giving us a clearer picture of past civilizations and

crucial to archaeology, ancient history, and humanities as all of these

disciplines work prodigiously alongside each other.

The fourth and final unit of this course frames the first and

second Peloponnesian Wars as the historical backdrop heavily relying

on Thucydides’ History of the Peloponnesian Wars and Victor Davis

Hanson’s modern scholarship, A War like No Other: How the

Athenians and Spartans Fought the Peloponnesian War to inform our

study. We will look at the Pentecontaetia in Thucydides’ historical

inquiry to uncover what historians have termed the first

Peloponnesian War. Thucydides aptly lays out all of the incidents that

led to this initial conflict, the subsequent brokering of peace, and then

the outbreak of the second and final Peloponnesian War. Hanson’s

historical inquiry provides the class with insights into these events and

in-depth study into the moments that shifted the momentum away

from the Athenian empire and toward Sparta and its allies. This

section focuses on the shift in Athenian attitude toward their Greek

allies and their adoption of a realpolitik stance in diplomatic relations.

Many of these complicated relationships show up as beautifully

recorded dialogues in Thucydides’ investigation.

The third section of this unit returns to the theater to look at

Aristophanes’ comedy, Lysistrata. Framing the Peloponnesian War as

the historical backdrop is crucial in giving the students a steady

foundation to approach this comedy. Like his contemporary tragic

playwright Euripides, Aristophanes created a comedy steeped in ant-

war rhetoric. After nearly a century of non-stop war and a devastating

plague, Athenian society was ready for a long-needed break.

Lysistrata gives a satirical account of the Athenian women banding

together and abstaining from sexual intercourse in order to get the

Athenian men to end the Peloponnesian conflict. Following the tragic

and devastating Sicilian expedition in 411 BCE, Athens lost a

considerable amount of its navy, the treasury was nearly empty, and

families were left with gaping holes due to the large rate of casualties.

Lysistrata uses comedy to provide insight into a growing ant-war

rhetoric among the Athenian populace. The play also challenges

gender roles as Aristophanes shows his audience how women, who

were given a limited role in public life, understand better than the men

that ending this costly war is the best course of action. In this comedy,

Aristophanes uses comedic tools such as farce, slapstick, word play

and bawdy humor to entertain the audience. Our in-depth study of the

Peloponnesian War gives the students a much-needed insight into its

pervasively destructive force that prompted plays like Lysistrata and a

growing antipathy toward this war between the Peloponnesian League

and the Athenian empire.

Finally, the course concludes with a detailed look at the

contributions of the Athenian philosophers Socrates and Plato and

their reaction to the sophist’s influence on Athenian education and

politics. The sophists taught a form of moral relativism which

concerned Socrates and Plato. The study of Thucydides’ dialogues in

his History of the Peloponnesian War reveal the outcomes of this

moral relativism by political statesmen like Cleon and Alcibiades in

the Athenian subjugation of fellow Greeks and their practice of

realpolitik when dealing with allies, tribute states, and weaker subject

city-states. Socrates created his dialectic to challenge the notions of

the Athenians in a search of an objective and pure definition for ideas

such as justice, morality, and beauty however what Socrates was

really challenging was the Athenians’ sense of moral superiority. It

was this constant questioning by Socrates which caused his fellow

Athenians to condemn him and ultimately execute him. The historical

backdrop of the Peloponnesian War is crucial in understanding the

fate of Socrates as we see the Athenian empire and the resulting war

and the large rate of casualties that ensued destroy the institutions of

family and create an immoral greed and savagery among the Athenian

populace. In this section of the unit the students will also be exposed

to Plato’s Crito and they will get the opportunity to debate with each

other the logic and conclusions of Socrates’ persistence to adhere to

the public’s condemnation of him which led to his execution while his

friends attempt to sway him to escape jail and Athens.

In addition to an interdisciplinary approach, the course also

utilizes a variety of pedagogical mediums and practices ranging from

group activities, short videos, PowerPoint presentations, class

participation in learning and engagement of the comedies and

tragedies offered by the Athenian theater, peer engagement and

interaction in Athenian poetry through discussion posts, creative art

assignments, interactive games and class debates. These self-evident

and diverse cross-sectional pedagogical approaches keep the

classroom fresh, encourages student participation and inclusion in the

learning process, and acknowledges different learning styles and the

diverse backgrounds of students. The organization of this course is as

follows:

Course Organization

Table 1: Course Organization by Units

Unit 1

1. Rise of the

polis

2. Athenian road

to democracy

3. Outline of

Democratic

government

Unit 2

1. Social roles

2. Values

3. Persian War

and Delian

League

4. Aeschylus’

The Persians

Unit 3

1. Transition to

empire

2. Spartan society

and philosophy

3. Sophocles’

Antigone

4. Athenian pottery

Unit 4

1. Events leading

Peloponnesian

War

2. Major events of

Peloponnesian

War

3. Aristophanes’

Lysistrata

4. Athenian

philosophy

Course Syllabus

Cultural History of Athens in the 5th Century BCE

History/Humanities

Utopian Community College

Instructor: Michael Wooten

E-mail: mwooten@utopiacc.edu

Class Schedule: Tues/Thurs 1:00-2:15 Room: 202 More Hall

Office Hours: Tues/Thurs 11:00-12:30

Course Length: Eighteen-week semester course

Course Description:

This course is an interdisciplinary examination of the history and

culture of Athens during the 5th century BCE. We will look at the

function of the polis and Athenian democracy while discussing the

role of the citizens and non-citizens in classical Athens. This course

will examine the lives of Athenian families and discuss traditional

Athenian values and ethics. This course goes beyond the textbook and

utilizes period historical books by Plutarch, Herodotus, and

Thucydides and contemporary works by scholars like Victor Davis

Hanson and Kurt Raaflaub. We will also take a journey into the

Athenian theater of tragedy and comedy and read works by the

playwrights: Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Aristophanes. This course

will discuss Athenian pottery which was pervasive throughout the

Mediterranean and understand its importance across the fields of

history and archaeology. This course take an in-depth journey into the

function of the Athenian navy and how the triremes functioned. We

will focus on some of the major political figures that helped shape the

Athenian city-state and the philosophers that shaped western thought.

We will also discuss how these philosophers shaped the contributions

of later thinkers leading to large contributions into the American

experiment by the founding fathers. Finally, this course will look at

the two major wars during this century, Persian and Peloponnesian,

and discuss how each affected the formation and decline of the

Athenian Golden Age.

Required Texts:

10. Robin Osborne, The World of Athens: An Introduction to

Classical Athenian Culture 2nd Edition

11. Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War

12. Herodotus, The Histories

13. Victor Davis Hanson, A War Like No Other

14. Plutarch, Greek Lives

15. Sophocles, Antigone

16. Aeschylus, The Persians

17. Aristophanes, Lysistrata

18. Hesiod, Works and Days

Required Materials:

1. Scantrons and bluebooks for unit tests

Course Objectives:

1. Students will develop a deepened understanding

of 5th-century BCE Athenian history, culture,

values, government, and politics

2. Students will increase their ability to critically

analyze literary and historical works and express

their ideas in short formal papers, discussion

posts, and class discussions

3. Students will often be required to work

efficiently in small groups throughout the

semester in order to foster a classroom that values

the inclusion of ideas from all students.

Classrooms are a diverse space in which students

can learn as much from their peers as they can

from the assigned reading material

Student Responsibility:

Student responsibility is simple, show up to class on time, turn off

electronic devices, and read the assigned material. Attendance and

participation will be 20% of the grade so students should be prepared

to contribute to class discussions and work in small groups. Students

will also be asked to be respectful of their classmates and remember

that discussions should proceed at the collegiate level.

Assignments and Grading:

All assignments are to be submitted on their assigned due date. Late

work will not be considered.

Discussion Posts (6 @ 50 points each)

Unit Exams (4 @ 150 points each)

Short Papers (5 @ 200 points each)

Creative Pottery Assignment (1 @ 50 points)

Attendance and Participation (See Below)

A (100%-90%) B (89%-80%) C (79%-70%) D (60%-60%) F (59%

& below)

Attendance and Participation Policy:

Attendance in class and participation in the discussions is paramount

in understanding the material because it relies heavily on group

activity and class interaction during discussions. Every three classes

that a student misses results is a reduction in your overall grade.

Example: After three unexcused absences, the best the student can

hope for is a B and so forth. If the student shows up to class

unprepared to discuss the material that can also count as an absence.

Collegiate Level Writing:

Students will be expected to write at the collegiate level in this course.

This includes an introductory paragraph with a thesis. Supporting

paragraphs that utilize evidence from the course material to support

the thesis which is properly cited within the body of work. It also

includes a level of sophistication like transitions between the

supporting paragraphs and ending the paper with a conclusion; proper

word choice and grammar will also figure into the grade.

Chapter 2 COURSE UNITS

Unit 1A: The Seeds of Political Thought in Greece

Required reading for this unit:

1. “Homer and the Beginning of Political Thought in Greece” by

Kurt A. Raaflaub

Objective:

The opening section of this course looks at the seeds of

political thought in the 8th century BCE Greece that are reflected in

the epic poems of Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey. In order to do this, the

students are assigned a selection by Kurt A. Raaflaub titled, “Homer

and the Beginning of Political Thought in Greece.” Raaflaub’s article

is an overview of the changing political landscape that was prevalent

in Greece as it was emerging from the Dark Ages into the Archaic

Age. Beginning with a brief overview of Homer provides the students

a foundation from which the course can begin to build. It is important

for the students to have an understanding and familiarity of the

political and ethical messaging within the epic poems because they

are emblematic of the contemporary political and social hardships

while providing a moral and social compass for the Greeks throughout

the Archaic and the Classical Periods. It is possible that some students

may not have read both or even one of these epic poems, so before

this lecture begins it would be beneficial to break the class into small

groups and give them several minutes to congregate and produce a list

of five things they remember about either of the Homeric epic poems.

I will then ask each group to read their lists aloud so the entire class is

privy to ideas and events that they may have forgotten or are learning

for the first time. This allows me to measure their experience with and

understanding of Homeric poetry while creating a safe environment

where ideas can be freely expressed. The remainder of this class will

be a lecture giving a brief synopsis of the Iliad and the Odyssey as it

pertains to the reading while creating an outline of the major points of

Kurt Raaflaub’s essay. It is critical for the students to understand that

Athenian democracy was not created in a vacuum but it was an

evolutionary process that begins to take shape centuries prior to the

Classical Period as Greece recovered from its Dark Age collapse.

Lecture/Discussion:

The lecture for this class is centered on the reading by Kurt

Raaflaub titled “Homer and the Beginning of Political Thought in

Greece.” Raaflaub’s contention is that the seeds of political thought

existed in the early writings of the epic poetry of Homer and Hesiod.

We will be focusing on Homer specifically in this lecture. Raaflaub

states that the power dynamic that is present in the Iliad between

Achilles and Agamemnon is representative of the struggle between the

aristocracy and the small farmers during the Dark Age and Archaic

Age of Greece which were a result of the disastrous fall of the

Mycenaean palace civilization. Although other scholars disagree with

Raaflaub and contend that the epic poetry was apolitical by nature, his

five conclusions provide a succinct summarization of the movement

from this fractured society, left behind by the by the fall of the

Mycenaean civilization, toward the infancy of the polis which

Raaflaub believes exists in the pages of Homer’s Odyssey and Iliad.

The following are the conclusions from Raaflaub’s essay that I will

present in lecture and it will assist in the students’ basic understanding

of the roots of political thought that were prevalent in Homer which

were assuredly a reflection of the time period in which he wrote:

Conclusion 1:

Greece, being devoid of all powerful kingships and any strong

centralized government, no longer values strict obedience and

subordination that was pervasive throughout the socially stratified

society of the palace-centered Mycenaean society. Therefore, Homer

presents characters that think independently like Achilles and

Odysseus and are not bound to a divinely ordained supreme ruler that

was emblematic in other Near Eastern cultures like the Egyptians and

the Persians. Achilles is able to withdraw from war when his war prize

is absconded and his honor is smeared without severe reprisal from a

king as Agamemnon lacks this level of absolute authority. Instead,

Agamemnon and Odysseus have to persuade, cajole, and respond with

gifts in order to lure Achilles to rejoin the conflict. Of course, none of

this works and it is only through the death of his close mate Patroclus,

at the hands of Hector, would Achilles be shoved into the rampaging,

killing machine hurling him toward his prophesied demise.

Conclusion 2:

The second premise that Raaflaub hopes his readers take away

and crucial for the class to understand is that the fracturing of Dark

Age society was a major factor to the rise of the polis in the Archaic

Age due to the lack of any central unifying leadership combined with

a geographical isolation due to Greece’s divisional mountainous

topography, and the absence of outside threats during this time. The

combination of all of these factors allowed the Greeks to evolve

organically and independently without the need to artificially unite

against some impending foreign force. These factors helped transform

Greece into a land that lacked large scale political unification but

loosely unified under a common language, ancestry, theology and

value system systematically expressed in the Homeric epic poetry. All

of these factors combined with a recovering economic system

produced a burgeoning political system where the so called elite and

the hoi polloi were not significantly divided economically and

ideologically. This landscape gave birth to a more widely inclusive

oligarchical system which transformed into small localized Greek

city-states.

Conclusion 3:

The inability of the ambitious aristocrats to seize power was

due to the small economic division between them and what Raaflaub

terms the ‘semi-aristocrats’ or small middle-class farmers during this

period of economic downturn and slow recovery. Another significant

factor in the aristocracy's inability to grab power and alienate the

middle class was its inclusion in the army during the rise of the citizen

hoplite soldier. Raaflaub contends this power dynamic is evident in

The Iliad as we previously discussed with Agamemnon’s inability to

exercise absolute control over Achilles. Instead, he is forced to

compromise with Achilles due to the disastrous results caused by

Achilles separating himself from the group. Raaflaub also contends

that the lack of an outside threat gave rise to Greece’s embracement of

sports in which men competed to display their aretē or excellence.

These games, which evolved into the Panhellenic games, served as a

bulwark in support of the evolving polis because the participants

began to identify not only with their oikos but as members of these

burgeoning city-states.

Conclusion 4:

The rise of population during the Archaic Age and the

aristocracy’s continued dependence on the middle class brought an

increase in social mobility and the aforementioned need for the

aristocrats to compromise with their less wealthy cohorts. In the

Odyssey, Homer gives his readers examples of a bloated aristocracy

who are concerned with their own gain and consuming the community

food stores to the point of gluttony over the welfare of Ithaca. These

greedy men were unwilling to compromise and put the community

before themselves so they were destroyed by Odysseus and

Telemachus. These ideals are important in a society that is attempting

to recover on a local scale without a central figure or king. The

willingness to compromise and work together creates a return to

economic undertakings and risks like seafaring trade which largely

disappeared during the Dark Ages of Greece. This also led to an

increase in colonization as Greeks struck out to seek their fortune

elsewhere spreading their culture throughout the Mediterranean and

being influenced by other regions. The increased social and political

importance of the middle-class farmers and merchants will be critical

to the rise of Athenian democracy in the 6th and 5th centuries BCE.

Conclusion 5:

An increased communication between these newly formed

Greek city-states, trade with the outside world, and the increased

ability to compromise led to innovative ideas along with the courage

to make reforms and explore new options. Raaflaub contends that the

Seven Sages of Greece and the wisdom of Delphi assisted in making

reforms in the city-states in order to overcome stalemates or an

overwhelming political dominance when the power dynamics shifted

too far to one side. This ability and humility to seek outside assistance

was central in the Odyssey. Homer demonstrates this in Odysseus’s

experience with the Phaiakians as they exemplify the ideal Greek,

emblematic in their attentiveness to the rules of supplication and xenia

or hospitality. These two ideas are crucial in a pre-Judeo-Christian

world where clemency, mercy, and the ritual guest host relationship

were foreign to many nation states. This relationship reinforced Greek

civility and bolstered their growing identity that being Greek was

synonymous with civilization and moral excellence while much of the

outside world were ignorant barbaroi.

Historical Connection:

I think a worthy historical connection to make with the rise of

the polis is the fall of the Roman Empire and the fractured kingdoms

throughout Europe during the early Middle Ages or what historians

used to call the Dark Ages. After the fall of the Mycenaean palace

society, Greece likely fell under the rule of local warlords just as we

say in Europe following the collapse of the western Roman empire.

Europe invoked a feudal system with a hierarchical system of lords

and vassals but due its topography Greece was extremely isolated so

we saw the development of the eupatridae and the semi-aristocratic

farmers and then the bottom of society, probably just workers. One of

the key factors was the hoplite soldier and their importance in

defending a territory. This gave them considerable political clout in

the development of the democratic system.

Unit 1A Assignment Discussion Post (30 points)

Please write two paragraphs that compare a work of art or literature

that similarly influences or reflects the nation of the United States as

the Homeric epic poems did the ancient Greek city-states. Please also

respond to the posts of two fellow students.

This discussion post will allow the students to consider what they

have learned about Homeric epic poetry, the influence these poems

had on the Greeks and their reflection of the values and social

structures of Archaic Greek society. Considering these influences, the

students will locate a work of art or literature that influenced or

reflected the national ethos of the United States: liberty, equality, and

diversity. Making these connections will solidify this lesson as they

reflect on how our own society has been influenced by and is reflected

in art and literature and they will realize that these aesthetic

expressions exist in all societies, even those as far removed as the

ancient Greeks from the United States. They will also continue to

comment on two classmates’ discussion posts which serves to expose

them to ideas that they never considered due to the diverse

background and heritages in many American classrooms while

providing a safe and encouraging workspace where students feel free

to express their own ideas.

Unit 1B: Solon and Cleisthenes: The Road to Democracy

Required reading for this unit:

1. Plutarch Greek Lives selection on Solon

2. Aristotle on Cleisthenes handout

3. The World of Athens: An Introduction to Classical Athenian

Culture (pp. 1-15)

4. Selections of poetry by Solon

5. Thucydides History of the Peloponnesian War (pp. 108-109)

Objective:

The objective of this class session is to discuss events that led

up to and heavily influenced the government of ancient Athens. We

will begin by discussing the Cylonian Revolt in Athens where the

Athenian aristocrat, Cylon, attempted a coup to usurp political power

and take over Athens. This will give the students an idea of the civil

unrest that persisted during this period. These events will move the

discussion toward the important response to the Cylonian affair which

were the Draconian laws, Athens first set of written laws. These laws

were established by the Athenian archon, Draco, in the 7th century

BCE. The objective is to create a foundation of political dissension so

the students understand that events such as these created a sense of

desperation among the Athenians ultimately leading to the selection of

Solon as archon and legal innovator where he was tasked with

creating a constitution that allowed Athens to thrive. We will then talk

about Solon’s departure and Athens’ inability to progress under their

new democracy which lead to the seizure of power by Pisistratus.

Finally, by the end of the 6th century BCE, following periods of

tyranny from Pisistratus and his sons, the Athenians once again

handed over their government to an aristocrat by the name of

Cleisthenes to make further changes to Solon's institutions which led

to a full-fledged democracy for Athenian male citizens; it is important

to stress that this government was, as were most governments in

ancient societies, not for the majority but for a select few. With that

said it was the world's first attempt at a democratic government by the

people.

The second objective is to conduct a group discussion

concerning the selections of poetry by Solon. The class will break up

into groups of four depending on class size and discuss the selections

of assigned poetry. Each member of the group will contribute

something they learned about Solon or Athens through his poetic

excerpts and fragments. Poetry may not be within every student’s

wheelhouse so discussing it in small groups provides a safe space

where students can learn from each other and gain confidence in their

own interpretations.

Lecture/Discussion:

The following lecture pinpoints the political and social

upheaval in Athens throughout the 7th and 6th centuries BCE. It will

cover the Cylonian affair as discussed in both the Plutarch and

Thucydides. Cylon was an Athenian aristocrat who married the

daughter of Theogenes, dictator of the city-state of Megara. Cylon

sought advice from the Delphic Oracle whereby he was ordered to

seize the Acropolis during a religious festival dedicated to Zeus.

Cylon's coup was thwarted after the rope that they tied to Athena’s

statue, giving them suppliant status, broke on their way to trial so his

followers were seized and stoned to death. However, Cylon and his

brother managed to escape. Although it is difficult to know which part

of the story is specious or hyperbole it does communicate the political

unrest that was prevalent throughout this period. It also hints at the

state of the Athenian government at this time as it refers to the nine

archons or magistrates so the students can conceive that the

aforementioned political unrest was the result of an overbearing and

arrogant oligarchical aristocracy.

The result of this coup was a codification of laws which was

tasked to the archon, Draco. His laws were in direct response to the

political unrest and blood feuds that ensued due to a lack of due

process under codified law. However, Draco’s laws were swift and

severe: Plutarch states that even the conviction of idleness could bring

about the penalty of death. It is critical for the students to understand

that the Athenians believed their city-state could not continue unless

somebody mediated an overhaul of their political system toward a

more egalitarian institution.

This tale of political upheaval aptly guides the lecture towards

the introduction of the Athenian, Solon, who earned the moniker The

Lawgiver. The issues that were paramount and unequivocally

burdened the Athenians, which Solon sought to rectify, were the

following:

1. Growing disparity between the wealthy and the poor which

caused crushing debt from loans.

2. This debt set up the institution of the hektemeroi or the sixth

parters who were farmers that had to give away 1/6 of their

crop yield to their creditors as a penalty for outstanding debt.

3. Athenians were being sold off to foreign lands as debt slaves

by their creditors, including children.

Solon introduced seisachtheia or the shaking off of burdens. He

cancelled debts and initiated appropriate and manageable interest rates

by creditors. He made the hektemeroi and debt slavery illegal

institutions. Solon also sought out the citizens that were sold to

foreign countries and brought them home. He repealed Draco’s law

code in exchange for a more sensible and humane constitution. He

opened up archonships or magistracies to citizens based on wealth

instead of birth thus striking a chord against the eupatridae or

aristocracy. The new archonship wealth qualifications were the

following:

1. Pentakosiomedimnoi: highest class of magistrate qualification

(Athenians whose farms produced 500 bushels annually)

2. Hippeis: second highest class of magistrate qualification

(Athenians whose farms produced 300 bushels annually and

they could also maintain a horse)

3. Zeugitai: third highest class of magistrate qualification

(Athenians whose farms produced 200 bushels annually)

4. Thetes: These were landless Athenians that could not hold

office but they could participate in the Ekklesia (Assembly) or

the Dikasteria (Jury Courts)

Previous to Solon’s reforms, the archonships were appointed by

the Areopagus which were essentially comprised of elite aristocratic

members of the eupatridae. Students will understand that Solon’s

intention was to break the hold of the eupatridae so he enacted

legislation in which all former archons could now become members

of the Areopagus. Solon also established the Boule or the Council of

400 from the four traditional tribes of Athens. This council took

power from the Areopagus because they become the governmental

body that prepared the agenda that would be discussed in the Ekklesia

and ultimately voted upon. The Areopagus was relegated to protecting

laws which gave it veto power and it sat in judgement and debated

cases concerning the impeachment of magistrates and homicide.

Solon also wanted to garner a sense of patriotism by establishing

legislation that disenfranchised citizens who did not speak out and

actively attempt to prevent acts of sedition. He issued laws that

guaranteed the legal binding of wills so land could be passed on to not

only family but friends. Finally, he made it illegal to speak ill of the

dead in public; a law no doubt to prevent familial feuds.

This unit will also briefly cover the 6th century BCE tyrannical

government of Pisistratus who usurped power with his sons Hippias

and Hipparchus. After Solon instituted his changes, Athenians

continued to have internal disputes. Pisistratus gained notoriety as a

general that captured the port of Nisaea and ended the blockade that

was causing a perpetual food shortage in Athens. He then usurped

power and became a tyrant on several occasions ultimately passing

the torch to his two sons. Hippias and Hipparchus were overthrown

and assassinated respectively. The rule of Pisistratus and his sons was

not unpopular as they developed the Athenian economy, Panathenaea

and the Dionysian festivals. The unpredictable and paranoid rule of

Pisistratus’ sons, leading to the murdering of Athenian citizens,

resulted in the Athenian revolution in 509 BCE whereby King

Cleomenes of Sparta intervened and cast out the last tyrant Hippias

who fled to Persia. This was prompted by the Alcmeonid Athenian

family whose prominent patriarch was Cleisthenes.

The lecture will focus on the role of Cleisthenes and his

reformers and how they changed the political landscape of Athens

going forward. He guaranteed an isonomic society where all male

citizens had equal rights under the law. He destroyed the old

aristocracy by dismantling the four tribes that were based on familial

tradition and imposed ten new tribes named after legendary Greek

heroes. The Boule was changed to 500 members composed of these

new ten tribes. These new tribes made up 139 demes which were

divided up into trittyes or geographical areas of Athens: coastal,

countryside, and urban. All ten tribes had demes from the different

geographical locations. Cleisthenes knew this would have a twofold

effect: it would destroy the patronymic identity for the new

demonymic identity and the politics and livelihoods were different

between these three regions so every region will be represented within

the tribe and they will have to learn how to work together and

compromise. Cleisthenes instituted the random selections by lot to

positions of power that was not based on the eupatridae or solely on

Solon’s wealth system; only certain positions that handle finances and

the military continued to be appointed by vote and had wealth

considerations. One such position was the strategos or military leader.

Athens voted on ten strategoi every year: one for each tribe. Each

tribe was also responsible for supplying a contingent of soldiers that

made up the hoplite army of Athens.

Finally, Cleisthenes introduced the social institution of

ostrakos or ostracism. In order to avoid the uprising of another tyrant

or demagogue, the Athenians had the opportunity to vote and ostracize

a citizen for up to seven years. A savvy institution which allowed the

citizens recourse if they felt individuals were dominating the civic and

political landscape.

Modern Connection:

The easiest modern or somewhat modern link to with the

history of Solon and Cleisthenes and their struggle to form a

democratic city-state is our own founding fathers and their struggle to

liberate from Great Britain and create a nation of their own. The

parallels between the two are plentiful as we see between the

Athenians being crushed by debt and Britain’s attempt to get their

colonies like the United States to pay for their European wars through

heavy taxation. Founding fathers like Benjamin Franklin and Thomas

Jefferson were of course heavily influenced by the philosophy of

ancient Athenian thinkers like Socrates and Plato and non-Athenians

like Aristotle. All of these philosophies were filtered through the

enlightenment thinkers of Great Britain like Thomas Hobbes and John

Locke.

Unit 1B Assignment Discussion Post (30 points)

Please write a two-paragraph response to Solon’s poetry, paying close

attention to issues or concerns expressed in his poetry. Please also

respond to the posts of two fellow classmates.

This discussion post will focus on the humanizing poetry selections

written by Solon. This gives the students an opportunity to realize that

Athenians like Solon were multidimensional people with concerns

and reservations just like everybody else. While learning about

monumental historical figures, it is assumed that these larger-than-life

people knew exactly which decision would lead them down the

correct path; Solon’s poetry is evidence that this is not always the

truth and these people were filled with the same doubts that trouble

modern people while deciding their best course of action.

Unit 1C: Understanding Athenian Democracy and its Institutions

Required reading for this unit:

1. The World of Athens: An Introduction to Classical Athenian

Culture (Chapter 6)

2. Aristotle on democracy handout

3. Handout illustrating the Athenian government

Objective:

The objective of this section is quite simply to develop an

intimate understanding of the Athenian democratic system. The

students will learn about the important democratic institutions and

what their function within the Athenian government during the

Classical period following the Cleisthenic reforms. They will come to

understand that Athens gave its citizens a sense of identity and

patriotism due to this revolutionary governmental experiment. This

new identity championed this early idea of humanism as the citizenry

developed faith in the ability of people from all wealth classes to

make a pragmatic decision and competently fulfill positions of

importance; ideas that resonated during the Renaissance and into

modernity. This separated Athens from other city-states and gave them

a sense of manifest destiny and an arrogant superiority in relation to

not only the barbaroi but their fellow Greeks. Understanding this

concept will help the students grasp the Athenians willingness to

eventually subjugate fellow Greek city-states.

Lecture/Discussion:

Ekklesia (Assembly):

The Ekklesia or assembly was the backbone of Athenian

government. All male citizens over the age of 18 could take part in the

general assembly. They met on the Pnyx hill in the southwest of the

agora. The Ekklesia made laws and decisions about policy concerning

war, national defense, and the food supply for example. The agenda

for discussion by the Ekklesia was prepared by the council of 500 but

they could make alterations and table discussions for the future. All

citizens could address the assembly, however some constituencies

hired direct rhetores or professional speakers to present their position.

Students will understand that direct democracy demanded civic-

minded citizens who were aware of the issues that were vital to the

health of their city-state, a very different dynamic than our

representative government. In order for all citizens to participate, the

Athenians began offering payment to citizens who were present at

meetings of the assembly. This ensured that citizens from all

economic classes could participate.

Boule (Council of 500):

The council is made up of 50 men serving at a time from the

newly formed Athenian tribes created by Kleisthenes. The council

was split up across ten months throughout the year where a board of

50 of the 500 would serve at a time, which was known as a prytany.

The Boule deliberated the probouleis or the matters that they deemed

should be brought before the Ekklesia. The Boule was an executive

body that never decided or dictated policy or law to the Ekklesia.

Once the Ekklesia made their decision on an issue or created policy,

the Boule made sure it was conducted by the proper administrator or

magistrate.

Archai (Magistrates/Officials):

The most important archons were the ten strategoi elected

from the ten tribes. They held tremendous military and political sway

over the city-state. The strategoi were one of the few archons

continued to be elected, the rest were chosen by lot. They were also

able to serve successive terms: Perikles was strategos for 15 years.

Other high-ranking archons were the hellenotamiai or the ten

treasurers one from each of the ten tribes. They oversaw expenditures

throughout the empire. They were chosen by lot with property

qualifications, which was abolished in the 4th century B.C.E. All

archons had to be over thirty and undergo dokimasia which was

scrutinization of their standing in the community. Outside of the

strategoi and the hellenotamiai, the original nine archonships

(Eponymous Archon, Polemarch, Archon Basileus and six

Thesmothetai), remained relevant in civic and religious life of Athens

as they were in charge of state festivals. They also presided over

lawsuits involving metics and foreigners. The nine archons were

originally elected from the top two wealth classes established by

Solon. However, Cleisthenes changed the selection process to

appointment by lot. By the 4th century BCE, the archonships were

open to all wealth classes including the thetes. Finally, there were

another eleven officials who maintained the prisons and were

responsible for all legal punishments. These were arguably the most

vital magistracies in Athens but hardly the entirety. Aristotle claimed

there were 700 officials in all during the Classical period of Athens.

Kerux and Presbeis (Heralds and Envoys):

The herald was appointed by the Ekklesia and enjoyed divine

protection in Greek culture. They summoned and controlled the

meetings of the Boule and the Ekklesia. They were sent abroad to

make sure other city-states were providing their agreement of tribute

to the Athenian empire. They served as messengers but they could not

negotiate with foreign entities. The heralds played a vital role in

combat; he declared war, asked for a truce, and commenced

negotiations. These duties could put him in peril so that is where his

protection from the gods presented itself as vital to his survival.

The presbeis or envoys functioned as ambassadors to foreign

countries. They were chosen from the wealthy Athenians and the

elders of the community; it was required that the presbeis was over 50

to serve in this capacity. While the kerux prompted negotiation

proceedings, the presbeis or envoys were in the position to actually

negotiate and make demands and concessions. They were given a

minimal salary so their expenses were paid by themselves, thus it was

vital for these men have considerable wealth.

Areopagus (Law Court):

The Areopagus was a body of the ruling elite before Solonic

and Cleisthenic democracy and it was made-up of the eupatridae that

previously served as one of the elite archons. By the Classical period,

the Areopagus was a court of law that heard cases concerning

homicide arson and sacrilegious behavior. All former archons could

take part in the Areopagus.

Dikasteria (Jury Courts):

Solon established the original jury court of appeals. The juries

jurors that heard a case numbered between 201 to 2501 depending on

the circumstances of the case. Juries were selected from an annual

body of 6000 Athenian male citizens. These cases were not presided

under a judge but the jury itself would confer and debate the presented

circumstances presenting their decision after a vote. The jurors were

given stipends for their service as it was possible they would sit on

juries up to 200 days out of the year. All cases were initiated by

private citizens as there was no district attorney or justice department.

Cases were divided up into two classes: graphe and dike. Graphe

were cases brought by any volunteer as a representative of the city-

state where dike cases were cases where an individual was wronged

and was seeking justice and restitution. Women, children, and slaves

were not allowed to give evidence in these proceedings; however,

slaves could give evidence if it were extracted through torture.

Examples of graphe: hubris, temple robbery, and piety, and desertion

Examples of dike: wounding with malice, breaches of contract,

slander, false witness, and murder

Liturgies and Property Tax:

Wealthy Athenians were required to help fund the government

and state festivals. For example, a trierarch was a wealthy Athenian

who was responsible for funding a trireme and its crew for one year,

while a festival liturgy included financing musical, athletic, and

dramatic festivals. Athenians did not collect taxes except during

periods of war where the Athenian Ekklesia could initiate an eisphorai

or an emergency collection of income taxes. These increased

following the collapse of the Athenian Empire and the loss of the

tributes.

Aristotle on Democracy:

The handout the students received is an account of Aristotle’s

views on democracy. I think it is important for the students to

understand that while many Athenians loved their system of

government, great thinkers like Aristotle and Plato before him saw the

many flaws produced by democracy. This reading also provides the

students a prophetic glimpse at the problems the Athenians will face

during the latter part of this century. Aristotle believed that

democracy, left unchecked, could lead to mob rule and demagoguery

where the masses were making decisions based solely on emotion and

not reason. He advocated a government that had mixed institutions,

much like the Spartan and the later Roman forms of government. With

that said, Aristotle understood that democracy, operating for the

common good, could be a viable system of government yet it only

worked if the citizens had guaranteed liberty.

Written Assignment #1 (2-3 Page Essay 200 points)

Essay option 1:

Between Solon and Cleisthenes, who do you think made the most

significant contributions to Athenian democracy? Why? Support your

response with at least three examples using quotes from our readings

when applicable.

Essay option 2:

Which of the institutions in the Athenian government were the most

vital to the function and health of the city-state and its democracy?

Why? Support your response with quotes from our readings when

applicable.

The students will have the option to choose between two different

writing prompts. The assignment serves as an opportunity to critically

consider the material we have covered so far combined with the act of

organizing their thoughts into an argument and writing it out in an

organized essay. Studies suggest this process solidifies what they have

learned on a variety of levels. The necessity of providing quotes gives

them the chance to review the readings and consider how this

information supports or rejects their central theses. The students will

have one week to complete this assignment which gives them ample

time to complete this task.

This essay will be graded by their ability to address the prompt

while writing at a collegiate level including a central thesis,

supporting paragraphs that do not deviate from the thesis and a

conclusion. The essays must utilize a collegiate writing style that

includes transitions between paragraphs, collegiate-level syntax,

proper punctuation, and a sophistication that reflects the student has

considered and understood the material presented. All of these

standards are laid out in the course syllabus. The essays will be graded

and returned with commentary so they can make adjustments to their

style or content on subsequent assignments.

Unit 1 Test

Multiple Choice, Matching, and Short Answers (100 Points)

1. How many members of the Boule were there under the

Solonian constitution? 400

2. During the Athenian tribal monarchy, historians surmise that

the Areopagus was most likely what? Advisors to the chief

3. According to Raaflaub, what was a major factor leading to the

rise of the polis? Fracturing of Dark Age society

4. Which predecessor to Solon was known for constructing a

severe law code in Athens? Draco

5. What was the name of the fourth wealth class in Athens that

could not hold office until the mid-5th century BCE? Thetes

6. Which governmental body met on the Pnyx hill in the

southwest of the Athenian agora? Ekklesia

7. Which institution, which required 1/6 of the farmer’s annual

yield, was abolished by Solon? Hektemeroi

8. Who was the political “usurper” that took control of Athens

after Solon established his changes? Pisistratus

9. Why did Solon establish wealth as the prerequisite for election

to certain archonships? Decrease the influence of the

eupatridae

10. How many tribes were created under Kleisthenes’ reforms?

Ten

11. Wealthy Athenians would often be asked to fund a naval vessel

for an entire year, it was known as? Trierarchy

12. Which magistrate had the authority to travel abroad and

negotiate peace treaties? Presbeis

13. Which elected officials took the place of the polemarch in

military affairs? Strategoi

14. Matching Question

Solon I canceled debt slavery

Cleisthenes I created 10 tribes that were made up

of demes

Hippeis My wealth class required that I

maintain a horse

Areopagus I became a law court that adjudicated

homicides

Kerux I traveled abroad to make sure city-

states were paying their tribute

Dikasteria I am a jury court made up of between

201 to 2,501 Athenians

Pentakosiomedimnoi I am a wealth class whose farm

produces 500 bushels annually

Hoplite I am instrumental in defense of my

city-state and the rise of the ‘semi-

aristocrats’

Penelope’s Suitors I symbolize a bloated aristocracy that

was not civic-minded

Council of 500 I am a political institution that

prepares the agenda for the Ekklesia

15. What event in the 6th century BCE was a coup against the

oligarchical Athenian archons? Cylonian Affair

16. What was the dikamasia? Background check for a magistrate

position

17. What are the types of cases that came before the jury courts?

graphe and dike

18. Why were the Athenian aristocracy more willing to

compromise with smaller farmers during the late Dark Age

and early Archaic Age according to the Raaflaub reading? Rise

of the hoplite soldier

19. Which of these describes an issue that Solon addressed during

his period of reform? Athenians sold as slaves

20. Which Spartan king assisted the Athenians by casting out the

tyrant, Hippias? Cleomenes

21. What did Aristotle say in the reading was the underlying

necessity of democracy? Liberty

Short Answer Questions

1. Why was Solon’s institution of wealth requirements important

for Athens’ progress toward democracy?

2. What social ills did Solon focus his notion of seisachtheia?

3. Describe two of Raaflaub’s conclusions concerning the rise of

the polis?

Unit 2A: Athenian Society

Required reading for this unit:

1. The World of Athens: An Introduction to Classical Athenian

Culture (Chapter 5 pp. 146-199)

Objective:

The objective of this unit is to introduce the class to Athenian

society, its institutions, relationships, and the roles that the citizens

and non-citizens played. They will get a feel for the different lives

Athenians led if they were male or female and rich or poor. We will

look at institutions like marriage, work, slavery, and the role the oikos

played in the lives of Athenians. They will learn what a basic

education consisted of for Athenian boys and girls. We will talk about

the role of homosexuality in Athenian society as well as prostitution.

The class will learn about the expectations of metics or foreigners in

Athenian society. Although they did not share the benefits of

citizenship, they were expected to play a vital role in Athens. These

next two units are extremely important for the student’s success in the

remainder of the class as it hinges on their ability to grasp Athenian

life. As we move forward into theater and art, they must understand

Athenian society and values because the tragedies and comedies draw

from and critique these social norms.

Lecture/Discussion:

Role of the Oikos:

The oikos or household was the base unit of Athenian society.

The ideal Athenian was every bit as loyal and attentive to their

household as they were to the city-state. Family members lived their

entire leaves and were buried in tombs that resided on the oikos. The

tombs themselves were signs to the other households that ‘our’ oikos

has been on this land for generations; it was a sign of pride and

commanded respect from their fellow Athenians. The oikos was not

merely made up the people of the household, but it included the land,

animals, slaves, and all of the equipment they owned to work the farm

and make it productive. Essentially, the oikos was its own self-

sufficient city-state. The kurios was the male head of the household

and he represented the oikos and all of its members in any legal

matters. The Athenians did not practice primogeniture but instead the

land was passed down equally to all of the sons of the kurios. If there

were no sons then a will may dictate inheritance; often times Athenian

men would adopt sons if they did not have any of their own. If neither

option is viable, the city-state would then decide who would possess

the land. The oikoi made up demes or districts and an Athenian male’s

legal standing depended on his registry in the deme following his 18th

birthday; this being a significant reform by Cleisthenes which made

the deme a central part of Athenian society. Wives and daughters

could not inherit land in Athens. If the kurios died married but without

a male heir, the wife and daughters were considered epikleroi and they

came with the oikos as part of the inheritance. The daughters were

expected to marry into the family of the beneficiary.

Marriage:

The main function of marriage in Athenian society was for the

purpose of procreation and producing a male heir to inherit the oikos.

Large families were problematic because if there were multiple sons

then the land was split into smaller parcels. The problem with not

having multiple children is that the infant mortality rate was

extremely high so they had to play the odds otherwise they might end

up with no one to inherit the oikos. Having too many girls could also

be a burden on the family because the kurios would have to give the

girls away to the husband’s oikos with a wedding dowry. Because of

these reasons, Athenians practiced infanticide to keep the children at a

manageable level; female babies were more susceptible to these

practices due to the costliness of the dowry. Girls were generally

married off before puberty. This process was seen as an exchange of

property as the kurios ‘gave away’ the bride to the groom; a ritual that

is still prevalent in contemporary religious marriages but now it is a

symbolic gesture of a parent’s approval of the bride’s choice of

groom. In Athenian society, a spouse could ask for a dissolution of the

marriage but, in these instances, the dowry must be handed back to

the kurios. Men were allowed to have relationships outside of the

marriage but if a wife were unfaithful, the husband could kill the other

man. This was due to the nebulous nature of property and inheritance

rights in the event the woman became impregnated by another man. A

woman’s singular role in a marriage was taking care of the household.

She was rarely scene outside of the home except to visit family or

friends or during religious festivals. If a married woman was scene in

a public place, like the agora, it reflected poorly on the husband

because it was a sign of poverty and an inability for him to provide as

a man; this was especially true of the wealthy Athenians but women

took a larger more egalitarian role on poorer farms. Ultimately,

marriage was a partnership where each participant had a role to play

and they felt it was successful if both the wife and the husband stuck

to their prescribed roles.

Life on the Farm:

For the prosperous oikos, husbands and wives led vastly

different lives. Women remained in the home to perform tasks like

preparing meals, making clothes, and spinning wool; wealthy women

oversaw slaves who performed many of these necessary jobs. Wealthy

men were civic-minded and spent much of their time in the public

sphere like the agora, stoa, or the Ekklesia conferring with their fellow

Athenians about the issues of the day. They also held symposiums in

the andron, or the part of the home that was reserved only for men.

Husbands and wives from less prosperous oikoi both worked

the farm and shared many of the tasks because they could not afford

slave labor. However, the tasks were still delineated between ‘man’s

work’ and ‘woman’s work.’ Their homes still included the andron

where it was unseemly for women to venture. Poorer Athenian men

participated in politics as their wealthy counterparts but they had to

stay closer to their oikoi so they stayed in their deme to debate the

current political quandaries.

Regardless of the wealth class, Athenians shared many of the

same obligations and habits. Athenians from all wealth classes were

expected to participate in the army or the navy. Depending on their

wealth, they were either a fully armored hoplite, member of the

cavalry, light infantry, or a rower on a battle trireme. Both wealthy

and less prosperous spent little time indoors at home but usually

worked or lounged in their courtyards. For this reason, neither wealth

classes spent money or effort on decoration or adornment to the

interior of the home.

Prostitution:

Prostitution was legal in Athenian society but was usually not

performed by any Athenian women but relegated to women from the

metic class. Prostitutes were generally put into one of three different

classes. There were hetairai or courtesans who were hired to take part

in symposiums and drinking parties because they were educated and

took part in the conversations. The pallakai were concubines that

were usually slaves from the spoils of war and they lived in the home

and served under the Athenian women. Finally, at the bottom rung

were the pornai which worked on the streets of Athens and in

brothels.

Homosexual Relationships:

Sexual relationships between boys and men, paidika and

erastes respectively, were common before the boys reached puberty or

could grow a beard. These relationships could be a source of honor if

the relationship included the development of the boys into civic-

minded Athenians. They served as a source of mentorship for the

young Athenian boys. However, if the relationship was purely sexual

or it lasted past puberty, it was a source of shame for the man because

it was seen as inappropriate. In that same vein, it was shameful for a

man to force himself on a boy, sexually, or for a kurios to sell his son

like a prostitute; this last act was also a violation of Athenian law.

Little is known about homosexual relationships between

women but they most likely existed. But we do hear about these

relationships in excerpts of poetry from poets like Sappho from the

island of Lesbos.

Education:

Athenian males began their education around the age of seven

depending on the family but it was a private affair that received no

mandates or curriculum requirements from the city-state. Depending

on their wealth status, boys were either sent off to a school in their

deme or they had a private education from an educated tutor. On the

other hand, girls were taught by their mothers how to complete

domestic chores and maintain a household but many Athenian girls

could read and perform basic math. The four main areas of education

for boys were literacy, math, music, and physical education; the epic

poetry of Homer and Hesiod were the focus when they were taught

literacy and writing. The method for teaching was constant reiteration

until the students committed the lesson to memory. Wealthy Athenians

would also hire the sophists to teach their sons the art of rhetoric so

they could be influential speakers in the Ekklesia; sophists claimed

they could teach aretē or excellence of virtue in any subject.

Music was an important part of education because it was

pervasive throughout Athenian life. The main instruments the boys

learned to play were the aulos or a double reeded flute and the lyre

which was a stringed instrument resembling a miniature harp.

Athenian music was integral at the khoros or public dance and it

accompanied comedies and tragedies during the Dionysian Festivals.

Athenian men would also hire musicians to play during their drinking

parties or symposiums.

Physical fitness was vital to an Athenian boy’s education

because they would all serve in the army or navy in some function.

Fitness took the form of running, long jump, javelin and sicus

throwing, boxing, and wrestling. It was considered a civic virtue for

Athenian men to be in peak physical shape. Physical prowess was also

celebrated at the Panhellenic and Panathenaic games. Athenians

would bring great honor to their city-state and their tribe, and

ultimately their deme if they performed well in these games.

Work:

The preferred livelihood that brought the most prestige in the

community was owning a farm and working the land; for wealthy

farmers that meant slaves doing the majority of the labor. Athenian

farms grew wheat, barley, grapes, and olives; Athenian olive oil was a

staple of trade throughout the Mediterranean. Athenian farms could

not produce enough grains to feed Athens so they did import from

different parts of the Mediterranean like Egypt and the Black Sea

region. Trade and craftsmanship were not careers that brought great

prestige but in a complex society like Athens it had its share of

artisans and merchants and, with their access to a wide array of

markets, it could bring in great wealth to its participants. The Laurion

silver mines provided stable coinage throughout this period that was

also a tremendous catalyst for trade. Besides olive oil, Athenian

pottery was in demand throughout the ports of the Mediterranean. The

diversification of farms into producing a surplus that could be sold at

different markets was prevalent throughout the Classical period of

Athens. However, many Athenian farmers and artisans did not

personally take part in this trade because they were busy running the

Athenian government and trade was fraught with danger from boats

sinking, piracy, and many other unforeseen disasters.

Slavery:

Slavery was pervasive in Athens because it was cheap and

necessary on the larger farms. However, Athenian farming in the

Mediterranean provided a lot of downtime so it was not necessary to

have large amounts of slaves on farms as was seen the American

south. Slaves came to Athens as captured soldiers in foreign wars and

children being sold into slavery to pay off debts; it is worthwhile to

note that Greeks rarely enslaved each other. Slave labor was the

backbone of silver mining in the Laurion mines; a practice that was

rigorous, dangerous, and led to a short life for a slave. Depending on

their background, slaves could be used in a variety of other capacities

like artisanry and working on a merchant ship.

Metics (Foreigners):

Metics resided in Athens for different reasons: mean seeking

economic opportunities or they were former slaves that were given

their freedom and now they were attempting to maneuver through

Athenian life. Metics, for the most part, could not become citizens nor

could they own land unless it was willed to them. Athenian society

respected the law even when it involved foreign people. Metics were

also required to have a patron sponsor their extended stay in Athens.

Even though they were not citizens, Metics had civic responsibilities

which included paying residency taxes and agreeing to serve in the

military if their stay exceeded one month. Many of these foreigners

brought their own customs, some which were adopted by the

Athenians like the Thracian cult of Bendis. Wealthy metics were often

required to performed liturgies like their Athenian counterparts.

Death:

Burial rites were an elaborate process and the deceased were

celebrated annually by their families as they continued to perform

these rites at their tombs; part of land inheritance was the promise to

continue to perform these rites annually. Dying in service of the city-

state was a tremendous honor because these citizens would receive a

public burial. We see this displayed by Thucydides in his History of

the Peloponnesian War which provides the funeral oration of Pericles.

Wealthier Athenian families were able to erect a gravestone with an

epitaph. Before the burial, the bodies were bathed, anointed, dressed

and adorned with garland and laid on a stone bier. The body was laid

to rest after three days at sunrise and it was wrapped in a shroud and

covered with a cloak. During the Classical period, Athenians mostly

buried their dead except during battle; fallen soldiers were cremated

on the battlefield. Following the burial, the family returned to the

burial site on the ninth day and performed further rites. The Athenians

believed that family members that were buried improperly would

torment them until they were given the proper rites.

Group Activity:

This activity will break the students into groups of four and I

want them to consider and debate the roles of the metics and their

treatment by the Athenians. The question to consider is are they

treated fairly. Would the Athenians benefited by creating a path to

citizenship for the people that lived as foreigners in their land and

contributed to their economy? I think this is an interesting topic and

debate because it is a topic that is currently hotly debated in the

United States. It is a topic that can spur some very interesting

conversation.

Unit 2B: Athenian Values and Obligations

Required reading for this unit:

1. The World of Athens: An Introduction to Classical Athenian

Culture (Chapter 4 pp. 127-145)

2. Hesiod’s Works and Days

Objective:

This lecture is essentially a continuation of Athenian society

but it focuses on the Athenian value system and social obligations. As

previously stated, these lectures are vital to comprehending the

remainder of this course, specifically pertaining to the value system of

Athenian society. Our journey into the theater and look at the great

Athenian playwrights will be a muddled confusion if the students do

not comprehend these two lectures so it important that I take my time

and make sure they feel comfortable before we move forward. Many

of these concepts will be extremely foreign to most of the students,

depending, of course, on their ethnic background. I will encourage

students that come from a diverse background to share their own

values as they correspond to this lecture, careful of course to keep the

class focused on the lecture at hand.

Lecture/Discussion:

Timē or honor was important to Athenians and it involved

recognition by the entire city-state as success in war, games, or the

festivals. Aidos or ‘eyes on you’ was the Athenian word for shame and

it was to be avoided at all costs; an example of punishment from

shame was when Thucydides, as strategos, lost the battle at

Amphipolis during the Peloponnesian War so he was the victim of the

dreaded ostrakos and was exiled for several years. Honor and shame

cultures can be extremely fickle; on top one day and a goat the next.

Athenians, like most Greeks, were known for their competitive

natures: physically and intellectually. A celebrated tragedy brought

acclaim to individuals, demes, and city-states just as somebody

winning in the Panhellenic and Panathenaic games. This could lead to

personal rivalry so Athens was careful to legislate against these

negative outcomes from competition because of the history of feuds

between families resulting in bloody revenge. Because of this,

Athenian culture was careful to temper feelings of ambition which

could lead to envy and spiteful retribution. This was the central

message in many of the tragedies and it showed up in their

constitution in the form of the ostrakos; Athenians could be exiled if

their fellow citizens felt they were practicing demagoguery and

promoting their own self-interests above the city-state. In extreme

cases, Athenians were pronounced to have earned atimia, or a

complete loss of honor. In severe cases, this could lead to the

disenfranchisement of Athenian citizenship and the loss of any access

to the Ekklesia or the jury courts. They were essentially thrown out of

civilization and back into the wild to fend for themselves.

The dynamics of Athenian relationships were categorized as

the following:

1. Philoi or friends in a reciprocal relationship where obligations

were and received from both parties.

2. Ekhthroi or enemies and it was a hostility fueled relationship.

We see this between Aristophanes and Cleon.

3. Outsider or somebody with which Athenians had no

obligation.

4. Women were seen ostensibly as both providers of life, like

Penelope in the Odyssey and bedeviled temptresses, like

Medea in the eponymous play by Euripides.

Obligation and reciprocity were the main underlying foundations for

all of these relationships.

These are the primary virtues in Athenian culture taught to succeeding

generations and expressed in Homer, Hesiod, and the playwrights:

Hubris: This was an assault on one’s character with the intent to cause

public humiliation due to the receiver exhibiting excessive pride,

specifically publicly.

Sophrosyne: This virtue meant discretion, moderation, prudence, all

acquired through a disciplined mind and body. This virtue is iterated

in Delphi by these two affirmations, ‘Know thyself’ and ‘Nothing in

excess.’

Aretē: This virtue is the pursuit and achievement of excellence in all

undertakings but it should be tempered with modesty to avoid hubris.

Dikaiosyne: This is important in Athens because it refers to justice,

treating fellow citizens fairly, and most importantly fairness with the

enactment of laws and in the trials.

Andreia: This virtue is bravery, not just in battle, but having integrity

and standing up for one’s beliefs especially in the face of adversity.

Philia: This virtue is central to the reciprocal relationships between

Athenian men. It involves formation of relationships based on mutual

respect, loyalty, and expression and agreement of a shared value

system.

Xenia: This virtue means hospitality and it was important when it

comes to strangers and guests especially because the world could be

dangerous and unpredictable. This ensures that fellow Greeks take

care of each other because most, if not all, recognized this virtue as

vital to civilization.

Written Assignment #2 (2-3 Page Essay 200 points)

Write a 2–3-page essay on Hesiod’s Works and Days answering this

question: What are some of the values and social or political

institutions that Hesiod advocates and celebrates and do these parallel

the values and institutions in Classical Athens?

The purpose of this assignment is to get the students to critically

examine this piece of poetry in order to assess its cultural significance

within Classical Athenian culture. Hesiod’s Works and Days expresses

the importance of competition, justice, and an agrarian livelihood.

These are the same values that Athenians embraced for much of their

Classical period. The students will need to perform a close critical

analysis to pull these embedded values out of this work. Performing a

critical analysis on epic poetry like Works and Days or the Odyssey

strengthens the students skills to assess the cultural importance of

primary sources as well as provide answers as to why Homer and

Hesiod continued to be read in Classical Athens centuries after they

were written. Finally, contemplating and completing this writing

assignment will link the textbooks and lectures to the primary

material, therefore deepening their understanding of the primary and

secondary sources that we utilize and our discussions in the

classroom.

Unit 2C: The Road to Empire

Required reading for this unit:

1. Plutarch Greek Lives selection on Themistocles

2. The World of Athens: An Introduction to Classical Athenian

Culture (Chapter 1 pp. 15-21)

3. The Persian Empire Handout

4. Herodotus The Histories (Chapters 6, 8, and 9)

Objective:

The goal of this section is to communicate how wars between

the Persian Empire and the Greek city-states assisted in propelling the

Athenians onto the world stage while ultimately serving as

justification for a defensive alliance, ultimately leading to the

Athenian empire. The Athenian success in battle against the Persians

as well as their development of a formidable navy began to warrant

concern among Sparta and its fellow members of the Peloponnesian

League. Athens’ formidability and military power coupled with its

economic boon from the discovery of a lucrative silver vein in the

Laurion mines suggested the beginnings of a shift in power among the

Greek city-states. Along with their economic and military success, the

Persian War provided evidence that their newly formed democracy

under the Cleisthenic constitution stood up to the rigor of war and

strife without backsliding into tyranny or an oligarchical coup among

the wealthy faction of Athenians thus giving them confidence in this

new system of government and the citizens which made it function.

This unit, combined with the previous material, gives the

students sufficient background knowledge so we can consider the

political unrest that ensues following the conflicts with Persia as well

as provide enough context to tackle more complex subjects like the

Athenian theater; following this juncture, we will be able to pivot and

read The Persians, a drama written by the playwright and participant

in the Battle of Marathon, Aeschylus. Their current assigned readings

continue to expose them to the insightful writings of Plutarch and his

biography of the Athenian strategos, Themistocles, while also

introducing them to selections from The Histories by Herodotus and

his position on the important events surrounding the Persian conflicts.

This unit will further assist the students in comprehending how the

Athenians acquired their empire and why it led to an impending and

unavoidable war with Sparta and its allies.

Lecture/Discussion:

A necessary place to begin this lecture is during the 8th and 9th

centuries BCE when Greek colonization was pervasive throughout

different parts of the Mediterranean, specifically focusing on modern-

day Turkey and the Ionian colonies. While many of these colonies

were self-sustaining city-states, they still were linked to their native

city-state and felt comfortable calling on them for assistance. The

aggressive expansion of the Persian Empire led to an overwhelming

transgression into the Ionian territory and the installation of their own

satraps or governors. The Ionian city-states responded by rebelling

against the Persians due to their sense of autonomy and independence

which was endemic in the spirit of the Greek colonizers and the Greek

ethos writ large.

The Ionian city-state, Miletus, under the tyrant Aristagoras

recruited the help of Athens and Eretria and rebelled against the

Persian Empire. The two notable events during the Ionian Revolt were

the burning of the city of Sardis, an important Persian outpost, and the

naval Battle of Lade. I believe the students would benefit from a short

video on YouTube.com titled “Battle of Lade: Darius of Persia crushes

the Ionian Revolt” so I included it in this lecture. This video is an

engaging reenactment of this naval battle which features tactics and

strategies of trireme warfare. The video gives the class a visual

experience which assists in their comprehension while cementing the

lesson in their memories. Eventually the Persians were successful and

they recaptured the Ionian city-states and razed Miletus in 494 BCE.

These events are important because it was the initial phase of the

Greco-Persian Wars as it caused Persia to turn its ire to the Greek city-

states, specifically Athens.

In response to their impudent behavior, Darius sent a force

against Eretria and Athens under the leadership of Hippias the son of

Pisistratus and former tyrant over Athens. The Athenians were joined

by the Plataeans and engaged the Persian army at the Battle of

Marathon in 490 BCE. Athenian strategoi vacillated at the idea of

fighting a much larger Persian force but the strategos, Miltiades,

swayed the opinion of his fellow strategoi and convinced them to

engage the Persians at Marathon using his attack formation; a plan

that was affirmed by the polemarch, Kallimakos. Miltiades’s strategy

of outflanking the Persians was a gamble because it left the middle

section of their troops exposed but it paid off and won the day. At this

point we will watch another video from YouTube.com that beautifully

details this battle titled “Miltiades-Ancient Greece-The Battle of

Marathon.”

Miltiades was the son of Kimon, an accomplished Olympiad

in the sport of chariot racing, who was jealously killed due to his

success by Hippias and Hipparchus. Miltiades spent part of his early

career as the governor of Khersonesos guarding the Hellespont. In 490

BCE he was elected strategos of Athens and he was the man with an

overwhelming amount of military experience and the Athenians

prudently heeded his advice and adopted his strategy; a plan that

crushed the Persian force at Marathon and transported the Athenians

into the geopolitical spotlight. The Spartans showed up too late to take

part in the Battle of Marathon but just in time to witness the strength

and burgeoning threat of a powerful and confident Athens.

After Darius died, his son Xerxes became his successor. In 480

BCE, ten years after their embarrassing defeat at Marathon, Xerxes

assembled a massive fleet and army to invade Greece. On their march

to Greece, Xerxes and his army were briefly delayed at the Battle of

Thermopylae where a contingent of Greek soldiers led by 300 Spartan

hoplites heroically stood their ground against the Persian onslaught.

But, due to a treasonous Greek named Ephialtes, the Persians were

shown a goat trail that allowed the Persians to surround the Spartans

and defeat them in battle but not before losing thousands of men to the

Spartan elite fighting force. Xerxes also lost some of his ships due to

storms and bad weather on their journey. The Persians did however

conquer much of northern Greece including Thessaly, Phocis,

Boeotia, Attica, Euboea, and they razed and destroyed the Athenian

acropolis. In 479 BCE, Xerxes’ navy was lured into a narrow strait

and decimated by the Athenian fleet at the Battle of Salamis and his

army was destroyed at the Battle of Plataea and again at the Battle of

Mycale. The ability of the Greek city-states to coalesce into a deadly

fighting force exposed the Achilles heel of the Persian Empire; they

were a loose confederation of countries that paid taxes to a central

emperor and provided soldiers to his army but they lacked a common

culture, language, or religion to hold them together.

It is also important for the students to understand who the

Athenian Themistocles was, the role he played in the second Persian

invasion of Greece, and the plan he had for the Athenian city-state

going forward. Plutarch’s biographical look at Themistocles provides

ample depth to his background and humble beginnings but the

following are the most important takeaways:

1. Themistocles was the driving force behind building a strong

navy and developing the harbor at Piraeus with silver from the

Laurean mines.

2. It was his strategy to abandon Athens and let the Persians

plunder and destroy their land in order to match them at sea.

3. He duped Xerxes into engaging the Athenians in the narrow

straits of Salamis where the Athenians could take advantage of

their maneuverability and destroy the Persian fleet.

4. Themistocles’ ideas were the blueprint for the subsequent

period of Athenian success which relied exclusively on their

naval force.

5. Finally, he was a key proponent of the construction of the long

walls which secured Athens and connected the city-state to its

harbor at Piraeus.

Herodotus and The Histories:

The class was assigned an extensive reading of Herodotus’

historical investigations called The Histories. Many historians view

Herodotus as a source for information surrounding the Greco-Persian

conflicts but it is important to keep in mind that he was born four

years prior to the end of the primary Greco-Persian conflicts so much

time had passed when he began compiling and writing on this subject.

Due to this reason and others, historians are hesitant to call his book a

historical novel. However, the assignment exposes the students to

classical authorship and an example of literature that in many ways is

as close as we can get to a primary source of the Persian Wars.

Chapter six in the reading covers the end of the Ionian Revolts

and the beginning of the Greco-Persian conflict. It talks about the

subjugation of the Ionian city-states under Persian control and Darius’

preparation and invasion of Greece. Herodotus relates how the Perian

army, led by Datis and Artaphernes, sailed across the Aegean Sea and

fought the Athenians and a contingent of Plataeans at the Battle of

Marathon in 490 BCE. He states that the Athenian army routed the

Persian army as they lost only 192 men compared to 6,400 Persians,

surely unreliable numbers. Herodotus’s account of the victory at

Marathon exemplifies the subsequent bolster in Athenian confidence

and self-sufficiency as their democracy survived the onslaught and

they did it without assistance from the Spartans.

The next assigned section, chapter eight, picks up after the

Spartans were defeated at Thermopylae but inflicted devastating

physical and psychological damage on the Persians. The most

important takeaway occurred during the Persian invasion and

destruction of the Athenian Acropolis and Themistocles’ plan to

vacate the city-state and move the populace to the island of Salamis.

Herodotus states that Themistocles received an oracle from Delphi

that states they would be saved by their ‘wooden walls’ which he

understood to mean their navy. It is these types of additions which

lends the interpretation of Herodotus’ novel as a work of literature that

is partly fictional fancy while Thucydides tends to lean toward the

empirical and factual omitting superstition and religion. With that

said, Herodotus aptly demonstrates how the annihilation of the

Persians in the narrow straits at the Battle of Salamis in 479 BCE

prompted the Athenians to subsequently invest in their naval power;

Themistocles, of course, being the driving force toward this political

and military ideology.

The final section assigned, chapter nine, details the final defeat

of the Persians and what he deemed were the end of the Greco-Persian

conflicts at the Battles of Plataea and Mycale in 479 BCE. He also

describes the rebuilding of the Athenian Acropolis and the beginning

of their hegemony in the Aegean through the Delian League;

eventually transforming into what historians call the Athenian Empire.

While it was not his intention, Herodotus sets the stage for the final

and most costly war during this century between the Spartans and the

Athenians. The Spartans warily eyed the Athenians after their

remarkable display of courage and military might and ingenuity at

Marathon, Salamis, and Plataea. The Athenians were now a true threat

to Sparta’s military dominance over Greece.

Modern Connection:

There are many parallels that can be drawn between Athens

following the Persian War and the United States after their

involvement in the First World War. Previously, the United States was

an isolationist nation with a robust economy. Following WWI, the

United States like Athens after the Persian conflicts was thrust to the

forefront on the world stage and became a superpower. Athens

economy and wealth ballooned following the initial Persian Wars with

the creation of the Delian League and the tributes they collected

which allowed them to become the naval superpower of the Aegean

Sea. The discovery of a silver vein in the Laurion mines also added to

their superfluous wealth during this period.

Unit 2C Assignment Discussion Post (30 points)

What effect do you think the Greco-Persian wars had on the Athenians

and their view of their position in the Greek world and of their own

democratic form of government? Why? Please respond in at least two

paragraphs. Also respond to two other classmate’s posts.

This discussion post will allow the students to consider the

importance of these events before we proceed to what Thucydides

termed the Pentecontaetia or the account of the next fifty years. The

lectures and the readings should lead them to the conclusion that

while the conflicts with Persia bolstered their confidence and affirmed

their governmental philosophy, they proceeded through the remainder

of this century as a source of enmity and jealousy from the other

Greek city-states. Their long walls would have also looked like

nuclear warheads in our modern consideration of war and would have

been perceived by the other city-states as a threat. The walls combined

with an immensely fierce navy and a vast war chest was intimidating

to their rival city-states because it made them theoretically

indestructible and impervious to an attack by a hoplite army or the

land siege. The Spartans were previously seen as the military power

and protector of Greece evidenced by their call for help during the

Athenian revolution in 508 BCE. Following the Persian wars, Athens

became a legitimate threat to Sparta and the hegemony of the

Peloponnesian League.

Unit 2D: Interlude at the Theater with Aeschylus and The

Persians

Required reading for this unit:

1. The World of Athens: An Introduction to Classical Athenian

Culture (Chapter 8 pp. 304-319)

2. Aeschylus’ The Persians

Objective:

This diversion away from politics and war will take the

students into the milieu of Athenian culture. One of the greatest gifts

the Athenians and the Greeks gave the world was dramatic expression

through the theater. The main objective will be to learn how the

theater evolved in Athens in a brief lecture and then spend the rest of

the class taking turns reading from Aeschylus’ tragedy The Persians.

The Persians is the oldest of the surviving Greek tragedies. It is rather

short so we can get through most of it in in one class and what is left

the students can finish at home. The students will glean from this

lecture that freedom and democracy in the proper mix can facilitate a

tremendous amount of creativity. This is evident in the success of the

Athenian theater and its wildly prolific playwrights: Aeschylus,

Sophocles, Euripides, and Aristophanes. They will also need to pull

out of the reading the lessons that Aeschylus is conveying to his

audience, messages like the pitfalls of hubris or the righteousness of a

democratic system. They will need to perform a close textual analysis

coupled with their previous lessons to answer the writing prompt in

their next assigned essay.

Lecture/Discussion:

Greek drama originated during religious festivals, specifically

ones dedicated to Dionysus. The festivals generally lasted for five or

six days during which time three sets of tragedy triplets were

presented each followed by a satyr and also five comedies. These

plays were sponsored by either the Athenian city-state or a wealthy

citizen as part of a liturgical donation. Thespis was the first person to

step away from the chorus to play a role as an actor. The role of the

chorus in the plays differed but mainly they provided background

information throughout the dramas or they reflected popular opinion,

attempting to assist the flawed character by providing moral truisms

that echoed the Greek value system. The two popular types of plays

were tragedies and comedies and the major playwrights of the two

genres were Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides for the genre of

tragedy and Aristophanes for comedy. Tragedies focus on a serious

theme where the main character exhibits a tragic flaw which will

serve to be his or her downfall. On the other hand, comedy satirized

popular Athenian figures or events and were generally more light-

hearted. The actors in these plays wore elaborate costumes and masks

with expressions that elucidated different emotions of the character.

The masks also allowed the same actor to play different parts; the

audience attributed the mask to the character not the actor. The masks

also served to transform a regular Athenian citizen into heroic and

legendary figures of mythology like Jason or Heracles. Women were

not allowed to take part in the theater so all of the roles were played

by men. The Athenians built their theater on the south slope of the

Acropolis into the hillside. Theater, like everything Athenian, was

highly competitive and the winners were heralded with acclaim and

notoriety throughout the Greek world. The physical aspects of the

theater included these key features:

Theatron: the area where people sat, usually on a hillside as in Athens

Orchestra: a circular space where the chorus performed

Skēnē: a backdrop that also served as the dressing room for the actors

Parodus: passageways through which the actors entered and exited

the stage

100

Following the lecture, the students will be taking turns reading

the play aloud and encouraged to ask questions which will create

topics of discussion. I will facilitate this by posing my own questions

to the class throughout the reading. This type of forum will allow the

students to consider points raised by their classmates which will help

them in their next assignment.

Modern Connection:

A modern link between Aeschylus’ play The Persians which

celebrated the strength of their democratic government against a

powerful enemy is our own national anthem, “The Star-Spangled

Banner,” which was constructed during the War of 1812 by Francis

Scott Key after he witnessed Britain’s bombardment of Fort McHenry

during the Battle of Baltimore. Like Aeschylus’ play, “The Star-

Spangled Banner” is a celebration of the American experiment against

a might empire for the second time.

101

Written Assignment #3 (2-3 Page Essay 200 points)

What ideas or values is Aeschylus attempting to convey in his tragedy,

The Persians? Please use quotes from his play to support your claims.

The goal of this assignment is to get the students to think critically

about the Athenian theatre and the ideas that they were trying to

transmit to the audience. In Aeschylus’ play, The Persians, the

students have a wide range of topics to discuss. Politically, Aeschylus’

play is a celebration of Athenian democracy and the righteousness of a

free citizenry as opposed to being a subject of an autocratic ruler like

the Persian empire. He also speaks about the value of humility and

moderation and asserts that Xerxes downfall is an underestimation of

his opponent and an overestimation of the fighting ability of his own

army. In Greek terms, Xerxes exemplifies a lack of sophrosyne

leading to his expression of hubris, resulting in him being knocked off

his pedestal and brought down to a level with the rest of humanity.

These are some of the more salient themes in Aeschylus’ work so they

can expound on these in their paper or analyze a variety of other

pertinent themes that can be gleaned from Aeschylus’ play.

102

Unit 2 Test

Multiple Choice, True/False, and Short Answer Questions (100

Points)

1. What is the base unit of Athenian society? Oikos

2. (T/F) The oikos only included the people in the household.

False

3. Which Greek virtue can best be described as discretion and

moderation? Sophrosyne

4. (T/F) Athenians viewed competition as a vile part of existence.

False

5. Which group had to pay a tax to reside in Athens after a month

of residency and agree to serve in the military? Metics

6. What is the main function of marriage in Athenian society?

Procreation of a male heir

7. What event served as the initial spark of the Greco-Persian

Wars? Ionian revolt

8. What was the practice used in Athens to keep children,

specifically female children, at an appropriate level?

Infanticide

103

9. Which Ionian city-state reached out to Athens and Sparta for

assistance against the Persians? Miletus

10. Who was the Persian king during the Battle of Marathon?

Darius

11. Which Athenian strategos designed the military plan at

marathon which assisted in defeating the Persians? Miltiades

12. Who did Plutarch say was the driving force behind the full

investment in an Athenian navy? Themistocles

13. Which Greek god’s festival is attributed to the invention of the

theater? Dionysus

14. (T/F) The orchestra was a circular area in the theater where the

chorus performed. True

15. What was the name of the theatrical backdrop that also served

as the dressing area for the actors? Skēnē

16. Which naval battle was a resounding defeat for the Persians?

Battle of Salamis

17. (T/F) Athenian women were not allowed to participate in the

religious festivals. False

18. Which Athenian virtue meant having bravery and integrity in

battle and in your everyday life? Andreia

104

19. (T/F) Every Athenian farmer utilized slave labor. False

20. Which value embodies the notion of justice and treating

people fairly? Dikaiosyne

21. What was a staple product produced by Athenian farms? Olive

oil

22. (T/F) Miltiades was the guiding proponent to building the

Athenian long walls? False

23. In chapter six of Herodotus’ The Histories, who was the runner

that that ran from Marathon to Athens to inform them of

Athenian victory? Pheidippides

24. Which Athenian value is best described as the striving for

excellence in all undertakings? Aretē

25. What was the name of the passageways in which Athenian

actors entered and exited the stage? Parodus

26. What did the actors wear, allowing them to transform

themselves into mythical characters like Jason and Herakles?

Masks

27. In Aeschylus’ play, The Persians, who advises Xerxes to never

attack the Hellenes again? Ghost of Darius

105

28. Who was the first actor to step away from the chorus and

speak his own lines? Thespis

29. Which Persian commander was killed at the Battle of Plataea

in 479 BCE which led to a collapse in Persian morale and their

defeat? Mardonius

30. Following the defeat of the Persians, Herodotus describes the

punishment of traitors and collaborators from which Greek

city-state? Thebes

Short Answer Questions

1. In what ways did Athenian society differ for Athenian male

citizens and Athenian women?

2. In the readings of The Histories by Herodotus and Aeschylus’

tragedy, The Persians, how was the Persian king Xerxes

portrayed and what did each say about Xerxes’ failure as a

leader?

3. Who saw the Athenian long walls as a threat? Why?

106

Unit 3A: From Delian League to Athenian Empire

Required reading for this unit:

1. The World of Athens: An Introduction to Classical Athenian

Culture (Chapter 6 pp. 236-247, 259-280)

2. Thucydides History of the Peloponnesian War selection on

Pentecontaetia (pp. 87-103)

3. Plutarch Greek Lives selection on Pericles

Objective:

The main objective of this lesson is to cover the fifty years

after the end of the Persian Wars as Athens is transformed from a

small city-state to the naval empire of the Aegean Sea; or what the

historian, Thucydides, aptly termed the Pentecontaetia. The students

will understand how and, more importantly, why the Delian League

was formed from a contingent of city-states that wanted to assist the

Athenians in expelling the Persian Empire from the territory

surrounding the Aegean Sea. They will come to understand how the

transformation of the Delian League into the Athenian Empire was

prosecuted under the watchful eye of politicians like Pericles and

Cimon. We will discuss how defensive alliances like the Delian

League and the Peloponnesian League are precursors to much larger

107

conflicts which will come to fruition at the end of the 5th century BCE

during the Peloponnesian War. The lecture will also take a close look

at the Athenian navy, specifically the components, personnel, and

functionality of an Athenian trireme. Finally, this section is a good

place to introduce the Athenian statesman and strategos, Pericles, and

briefly discuss who he was and what were his political and social

influences during this period.

Lecture/Discussion:

After the final major battles between the Persians and the

Greek alliance, Sparta left the alliance because they needed their

soldiers home due to the constant threat of helot revolt from the

Messenians. They were also fearful of the deleterious effects of

outside influence due to Pausanias’ mysterious relationship with

Xerxes. Pausanias was the regent king of Sparta until Leonidas’ son,

Pleistarchus, came of age to take the throne for the Agiad royal house.

He led the Greek army at the crucial Battle of Plataea where the

Greeks defeated the Persian army led by the Persian general

Mardonius. However, in 478 BCE, Pausanias was recalled to Sparta to

stand trial for accusations of inappropriate war time activities which

consisted of releasing prisoners who were friends and relatives to

108

Xerxes. He also was said to adopt the Persian style of dress and

behavior. He was eventually acquitted of these charges but was

recalled for a second time and thrown in jail by the ephors, or Spartan

oversight committee.

With the dissolution of the Hellenic League, Athens took a

central role in driving the Persians out of the Aegean Sea by forming

the Delian League in 478 BCE; thusly named due to the treasury for

the league existing on the island of Delos. The Athenians quickly

turned this league to their advantage. Firstly, the members swore an

oath of allegiance, not to the league members and its foundational

principles, but to the city-state of Athens. Secondly, this arrangement

made Athens the hegemon city-state so they appointed their own

treasurers to handle the finances of the league. Finally, the charter

stated that the Athenians decided which city-state paid their tributes

through cash or trireme ships.

It is evident in Thucydides’ History of the Peloponnesian War

that the league was successful. The historian states that the league

took back the city of Eion, colony of Eretria, in Thrace and enslaved

all the Persian soldiers. The Athenian strategos and son of Miltiades,

Cimon, took command of this expedition. Thucydides tells us they did

109

the same thing to the island of Skyros in the Aegean Sea. Cimon and

the navy were successful with their violent crusade against the

Persians during their multiple land and sea battles in Pamphylia where

they destroyed around 200 of the Phoenician triremes and routed the

Persian forces. The league also went to the island of Euboea and

liberated the city-state of Carystus and then forced the city-state to

join the Delian League. Carystus’ forced inclusion into the Delian

League brought about an ominous transformation to the climate of the

Delian League as it was a sign of things to come.

The first affair that began to tear at the spirit of the Delian

League’s charter was the incident with the island city-state of Naxos.

Naxos felt, like many in the alliance, that the Persian threat had been

mostly neutralized and the tribute to the league was an unbearable

hardship so they concluded that their membership in the league had

run its course. However, the Athenians ‘disagreed’ with Naxos and

forced them back into the league but no longer an ally but instead a

subject state to Athens, confiscated all of their naval vessels and

changed their tribute from triremes to gold. It is important for the

class to know that this incident was the initial paradigmatic shift from

a free alliance of city-states to the Athenian Empire.

110

The second important was the revolt by the island city-state of

Thasos. Thasos held rights to rich gold mines on the mainland in

Thrace which the Athenians became interested in acquiring. Thasos

was besieged by the Athenians for over two years during which time

they attempted to garner help from the Spartans. At this time, the

Spartans were dealing with another slave revolt from the Messenians

so they could not send troops. Thasos gave in to the Athenians who

promptly dismantled their walls, confiscated their fleet and, like

Naxos, stripped them of their full member status in the Delian League

and made them a subject state.

In 454 BCE, the Athenian aristocrat, Pericles, was

instrumental in moving the Delian League treasury from the

traditional location on the island of Delos to Athens. The Athenians

began to spend the money on building projects and festivals in Athens

which was outside the agreed upon charter. They also issued the

Megarian Decrees which prohibited the city-state of Megara, member

of the Peloponnesian League, from using the ports of the city-states in

the Delian League. These sanctions were an attempt to damage the

economy of Megara but they also had harmful effects on the Athenian

allies; these sanctions were not consulted or debated by the allies,

111

instead Athens acted on its own behalf. All of these events were clear

indicators that the Delian League had transmogrified into an empire

with Athens holding sole hegemonic power.

Athenian Navy and Trierarch:

The main Greek naval combat vessel was known as the

trireme. It had three levels of rowers, totaling 170 in all, and utilized

sails and masts for longer excursions. Hoplite marines also travelled

on the trireme and they were used to board other vessels or the

triremes would come aground for land battles between the marines

and the enemy army. The trireme was an exceptionally light vessel so

it could travel fast but, due to its weight, the crew had to be wary of

adverse weather. The crew performed maneuvers during battle that

required timing and a trained crew who were flexible and could enact

orders immediately without question. One popular maneuver was the

diekplous where a trireme swung around quickly to ram the enemy

with its bronze keel or break its oars and leave it immobile. Athens

could supply the entire fleet with its own citizens and metics but they

relied on mercenaries and slaves. The success of the trireme always

depended on its officers and that started with the trierarch.

112

The trierarch was the wealthy Athenian citizen who sponsored

and supplied a trireme for an entire year. The first responsibility of the

trierarch was hiring a competent crew of officers because the

trierarch did not have the naval experience to train and lead a crew.

The most important officers were the kubernetes (steersman),

keleustes (rowing officer), and the prorates (bow officer). The ship

also consisted of an auletes (piper) to provide music and rhythm for

the rowers. The trierarchs were responsible for purchasing all of the

equipment for rigging a trireme: rope, masts, sails, anchors, ladders,

oars, and all of the sailing tackle. However, Athens paid the rowers

and officers. The same crew would stay together for the entire year of

the trierarch’s responsibility allowing them to become a proficient and

cohesive machine that could succeed in combat by performing the

requisite combat maneuvers. Like all things Athenian, their arose a

competition between the trierarchs to lead the most well-trained and

outfitted trireme who perform successfully in naval battle.

Introduction to Pericles:

Pericles is the arguably the most influential Athenian during

the 5th century BCE. He was the son of Xanthippus, former strategos

during the early part of the 5th century. Xanthippus married the niece

113

of Cleisthenes and had political ties to the famous Alcmaeonid clan.

The biography of Pericles by Plutarch offers the students important

insight into who Pericles was and his contributions to Athens. In 443

BCE, Perikles became strategos and he held that position for most of

the next fifteen years until his death during the Peloponnesian War.

Like Themistocles, Pericles understood that the Athenian navy was

the heartbeat of its military and guaranteed the success of Athenian

society. The best way to ensure the continued strength of the navy was

to take the tributes from the Delian League city-state members and

utilize them to transform Athens into a naval empire. When this was

accomplished, Pericles sponsored vast employment by taking the

tributes from the Delian League treasury, which now resided in

Athens, and sponsoring building projects, like the Parthenon, on the

Athenian acropolis. He was a shrewd politician that knew appearing

too often in public and voicing too loud of an opinion led to ostracism

so he would have other rhetoricians argue his opinions in the Ekklesia,

keeping himself in the immediate foreground wisely out of the

dangerous spotlight. Plutarch remarks that Pericles was fearful of his

powerfully persuasive voice as he engendered comparisons to the

tyrant, Pisistratus; comparisons that were not meant to be

114

complimentary and he understood to be dangerous. Pericles was a

proponent of moderation and prudence when it came to seeking out

new places to conquer and expanding the empire. He knew that

Athens would eventually have to answer to the Peloponnesian League

for its expansion and incursions into the Spartan sphere of influence,

it was only a matter of when. So, he concluded it was necessary to

keep the empire to a manageable level and not succumb to greed and

excess more than they already had.

115

Unit 3B: Sparta and Athens: A Difference in Philosophy

Required reading for this unit:

1. Plutarch Greek Lives selection on Lycurgus

2. Poetry by Tyrtaeus Handout

Objective:

The objective of this unit is to take a dive into Spartan society.

The students will come to understand that the differences between

Sparta and Athens were not mainly political or economic but

differences mired in completely different philosophies. Athenian

society was free to explore intellectual and philosophical fancies

while Spartan society centered on discipline and physical exploits.

These were not merely exploits performed during the Panhellenic

games but they were trials and hardships of both the Spartan agoge

and life as a professional hoplite soldier; Spartan society wholly

revolved around the military as this was a spartiates one and only true

profession. These differences were vital in understanding the collision

course between Athens and Sparta ultimately leading to the

Peloponnesian conflict.

116

Lecture/Discussion:

Lycurgus the Lawgiver and The Great Rhetra

There is almost no verifiable evidence of Lycurgus’ existence.

Plutarch submits that historians believed Lycurgus lived during the

first Panhellenic games in the 8th century BCE because there was a

record of the first discus used in these games bearing his name. It is

theorized that Lycurgus was a member of the Eurypontid royal house

in Sparta. And it was his ancestor, King Sous, who was the man

responsible for enslaving the Messenians and forcing them to perform

all of the hardships of farming and producing food; the Eurypontid

line of kings was named after Sous’ son Eurypon. Their descendant,

Lycurgus, was a theoretically a man of incredible intellect and he

famously sailed around the Mediterranean and studied a variety of

cultures in order to create the ideal form of government; Plutarch

remarks that he was claimed to have visited Egypt, Libya, and even

went as far as Iberia. Upon his return to Greece, Lycurgus visited the

oracle at Delphi where the Pythian priestess blessed his quest to bring

a new order and government to the Spartan people. He returned to

Sparta and introduced the city-state to his Great Rhetra, understood as

a great proclamation. None of this is verifiable and it is mostly

117

shrouded in myth and lost in history except for the governmental and

social structures that remained; institutions attributed to Lycurgus but

more than likely evolving over time during different social hardships

and strife.

Governmental Structure of the Great Rhetra

The government of Sparta featured oligarchical, monarchical,

and democratic institutions that were morphed together to form of

government that was highly praised by great thinkers like Plato,

Aristotle, and even into the Enlightenment where French philosopher

Jean Jacques Rousseau thought Spartan society and government were

ideal. The following were the components of the Spartan government.

Diarchy (Two Kings):

The two kings of Sparta came from the Eurypontid and Agiad

royal houses. Their main functions were to lead the army into battle,

serve as religious officials during festivals and ceremonies, they

represented two votes in the Gerousia, and they served as judges

during cases of adoption, public works, and any disputes over

inheritance.

118

Gerousia (Council of Elders):

The Gerousia was made up of 28 Spartan citizens over the age

of sixty; with the two kings it made 30 members in all of the

Gerousia. The members were elected by the Apella and they

maintained their positions their entire lives, similar to Supreme Court

system in the United States. Their main function was to prepare the

agenda that was to be voted on by the Apella. They also served as

judges in criminal cases that involved death or exile as the penalty.

Apella (Assembly):

The apella was made up of all Spartan warriors over the age of

thirty. The main functions of the Apella were to vote for the members

of the Gerousia and members of the annual board of ephors. They

also had a vote in issues that involved declaring war or peace on a

city-state, debatable issues on foreign policy, and voting on all laws

and policies proposed by the Gerousia.

Ephors (Oversight Committee):

Ephors were five officials that were elected annually by the

Spartan Apella. They were a watchdog committee that provided

checks and balances the diarchy and the Gerousia. They had the

authority to depose kings, a certain amount of control over foreign

119

policy, military operations, civil administration, and they supervised

the Agoge to make sure its adherence to the Great Rhetra.

Agoge (Training camp and Rite of Passage):

The Agoge was the life blood of the Spartan way of life. This

was an institution where families surrendered sons to be subjected to a

grueling boot camp that trained them to be Spartan citizen warriors.

As newborn babies, males were inspected for any obvious flaws or

defects. If they did not pass the test then they were exposed and left to

die. Those that did pass were bathed in wine as infants because it was

thought this would strengthen their constitution. They were ignored

when they cried as Spartan society and the phalanx held no place for

weakness. Male children were taken at the age of seven from their

homes and lived in barracks with other children and supervised by an

appointed pack leader whose job was to haze and discipline their

pack, which included severe corporal punishment. The boys were

conditioned to replace their parents as the central figures in their lives

and think of the pack as their family. The Agoge included strength and

weapon training and dancing which developed coordination and

dexterity in battle. The boys trained barefoot to strengthen and harden

their feet; everything they did had a purpose directed at excelling in

120

combat. As they got older, the trainees were encouraged to steal to

highlight their stealth and resourcefulness; both necessary attributes

when the army is far from home on a military campaign. If they were

caught stealing, they were beaten to train them to do better; any

violation of the Agoge rules resulted in a form of corporal

punishment. They were taught to speak in concise sentences, just

enough to convey their point. Before a boy could graduate from the

Agoge and join the army, he had to live for one year out in the wild,

surviving the elements while hunting and sometimes stealing to feed

himself. After they successfully passed this stage, the Spartan boys

took part in the krypteia, which was an annual event where the

Spartans terrorized and killed the helot slaves to keep them

subservient. Now approximately 20 years old, the Spartan boys joined

the army and ate in the male-only mess halls to integrate into military

society. If they survived to thirty years old, they became a spartiate

and received full citizenship whereupon they received land and slaves

to work it, married a Spartan woman, and could take part in the

Apella. They remained on active duty until they were sixty years old.

Other members of Spartan Society

Spartan Women:

121

Much can be said about Spartan women because their lives

were quite different from other Greek women. Spartan women were

encouraged to stay physically fit, practice sports and dance so they

could have strong Spartan children. They were taught to read and

write so they were capable managers of the household. Unlike the

Athenians, Spartan women could inherit property and pass it along

making them an important part of the Spartan economic system. This

also guaranteed that, while they could not hold political office, their

wealth gave them influence within the city-state. Wives and husbands

lived separately until the male reached the age of thirty and he no

longer had to reside in the barracks.

Perioikoi (‘Dwellers Around’ or Laconians that were not

Spartans):

The perioikoi were free non-Spartan citizens who lived in the

surrounding villages in the Laconian region. They were responsible

for manufacturing and trade but they also served as an auxiliary

hoplite infantry to the Spartan army. They were essentially under

Spartan rule but could not participate in any official function in the

government. For the most part, the Spartans left them to their own

122

autonomous communities but required them to fill vital functions in

Spartan society.

Helots (Slaves):

Helots for the enslaved Messenians who worked the land and

provided food for the Spartans. The helots were treated very poorly

but they had a central role in Sparta maintaining its militaristic

society.

Spartan Value System

Spartan values were emblematic of a society that prioritized

their military and all of the character traits that go along with those

institutions. Some of the values mirrored their fellow Greek city-states

but some were solely Spartan.

Aretē (Excellence and Virtue):

Like their Athenian counterparts, Spartans sought to achieve

aretē throughout every aspect of their lives. However, Spartan aretē

was strongly associated to their military society so it consisted of

courage, strength, and performance on the field of battle coupled with

an adherence to a strict moral code that honored the gods and their

community.

123

Agoge (A System of Discipline and the Ideal of Endurance):

The Agoge was not just an institution but it represented the

value of discipline which was the backbone of Spartan society. Sparta

could not maintain its militaristic society without a strict adherence to

discipline. Their superior training created soldiers that were trained

not to quit in battle, no matter the odds.

Andreia (Courage):

Spartans, as soldiers, highly valued courage and bravery

specifically in battle. A preferred death for a Spartan was to die in

battle fighting the enemy. Soldiers were not allowed to run from the

enemy. An often-used Spartan maxim was ‘to either come home with

your shield or on it.’

Austerity:

Like the early Romans, Spartans valued a simple life and they

were averse to luxury and excess. This was reflected in their lifestyle,

clothing, diet, and every facet of their existence.

Equality:

Spartan full citizens were known as homoioi or equals. They

were all expected to live the same austere lives with little regard for

124

wealth or excess. This was important in creating a cohesive military

devoid of jealousy and divisiveness.

Community:

Spartan society was communal and the needs of the city-state

were prioritized over individual desires. This was obvious in a variety

of facets, including offspring. The Spartans would practice eugenics

and breed the strongest male with the healthiest woman to create

superior soldiers with little consideration to marriage or inheritance

rights.

Xenophobia (Fear or Wariness of Outsiders):

Spartan society was off limits to outsiders. They did not often

welcome strangers into their society because of the deleterious

influences prevalent in the outside world; influences that they feared

would disrupt their regimented and disciplined social structures.

Group Activity:

In this section and the previous section we have learned about

life as a Spartan soldier and life as an Athenian seaman. In small

groups I want to discuss the differences, positives, and negatives of

these two lives and the group needs to decide which life they would

125

prefer. I would the group to come up with two reason they would

prefer that life and two drawbacks for choosing that lifestyle.

Modern Connection:

Throughout our own American culture we have folk tales like

the Spartan tale of Lycurgus. I think making a connection to modern

folk tales is relevant for the students. For example, the story about the

founding father, George Washington, and the parable about not telling

a lie after he chopped down the cherry tree. We also have the folk tale

of Paul Bunyan and his giant blue ox named Babe. Paul is credited

with creating many of the giant land formations throughout the United

States like the Grand Canyon. The stories of Paul Bunyan, like all

stories, have a function. Loggers used these stories to entertain

themselves and commiserate over the dangers of their occupation. As

we see with the United States, it was important for the Greeks to have

their own folk tales because it gave their society a great albeit

mythical foundation.

Modern Connection:

I think a viable modern connection between the ideological

divide between the Spartans and the Athenians can be seen in the 20th

century and the Cold War that ensued between the United States and

126

the Soviet Union. While it did not lead to another world war like the

Peloponnesian War, it did come close on a number of occasions like

the Cuban missile crisis during Kennedy’s presidency. Also, the two

nations did not engage each other directly in war but they did fight a

number of proxy wars specifically in Vietnam and Afghanistan.

127

Unit 3B Assignment Discussion Post (30 points)

We have now discussed both Athenian and Spartan societies during

the 5th century BCE. What aspects of both societies do you find

appealing or interesting and which parts do you not? Please write at

least two paragraphs in response to this question. Please respond to

the posts of two other classmates.

This discussion post allows the students to consider the differences

between these two societies which were the dominant political and

military powers during this period. The main takeaway from this post

is that societies that occupy the same political space but embrace

vastly different ideologies are often destined to clash especially when

one sees the others as an impending threat; a threat whose dominance

needed to be stifled before all of the city-states in Greece folded to

Athenian hegemony and Sparta was surrounded by only enemies.

These political conclusions would embroil the Athenians in an

inexorable conflict with Sparta and her allies, the Peloponnesian

League.

128

Unit 3C: Back to the Theater with Sophocles

Required reading for this unit:

1. Sophocles’ Antigone

2. Handout on Sophocles

Objective:

This unit takes the students back to the theater of Dionysus to

discuss, arguably, the greatest Athenian playwright and his best work,

Antigone. Antigone is a masterful tragedy that asks many questions

including the role of government, the roles of Athenian women in

society, and the abuse of power when civil laws transgress natural law.

It also addresses the consequences of hubris which is demonstrated by

both Creon and Antigone. Sophocles, like Aeschylus, was interested

in the vitality of their democratic system of government and had his

own ideas about the negative consequences of autocratic rule by a

monarch. As we did with Aeschylus’ The Persians, the students will

take turns reading in class and wherever we leave off, they will finish

the rest at home. I will comment on the portions of the play that

address these previous themes while encouraging the students to bear

in mind our previous discussions on Athenian values when reading

these works. I will encourage them to offer their own commentary and

129

ask questions. An open forum allows for a free exchange of ideas so

students can benefit from their fellow classmate’s insightful

interpretation of the events surrounding Antigone.

Lecture/Discussion:

The lecture and discussion is taking turns reading the play and

discussing the main themes of Antigone. We will also discuss the

assigned article on Sophocles and note the alterations and additions he

made to the theater like adding more actors into scenes and dealing

with a variety of complex issues that continued to be pondered by 19th

and 20th century psychoanalysts; Sigmund Freud and his Oedipus

Complex being one of the most noteworthy. The article also mentions

his addition of painted scenic backdrops in his plays which added to

the theatrical experience which carried its viewers out of reality to a

world of fantasy inside the mind of the playwright brought to life on

the stage. Sophocles was also as civic minded as any other Athenian

and held a variety of roles in government, specifically he was elected

to be part of the hellenotamiai or body of treasurers and as strategos

alongside Pericles.

130

Modern Connection:

The modern use of CGI or computer-generated imagery has

innovated our own experiences at the theater. The realization of

creating realistic images has allowed for the creation of entire movie

franchises as seen by Marvel and DC, which are owned by Disney and

Warner Media respectively. These innovations have brought to life

characters like the Incredible Hulk in ways that were not previously

imaginable. The students will see how Sophocles’ contributions,

which seem obvious to us now, created a revolutionary and exciting

theater experience for the ancient Athenians.

131

Written Assignment #4 (2-3 Page Essay 200 points)

What ideas or values is Sophocles attempting to convey in his tragedy,

Antigone? Please use quotes from his play to support your claims.

The goal of this assignment is to get the students to think critically

about the Athenian theatre and the ideas that they were trying to

transmit to the audience. In Sophocles’ play, Antigone, the students

have a wide range of topics to discuss. Politically, Sophocles’ play

creates a debate between natural law and civil law. He also speaks

about the value of humility and moderation and asserts that the

downfall of both Antigone and Creon are their unwillingness to

compromise which is bolstered by their self-righteous motivations. In

Greek terms, both Antigone and Creon exemplify a lack of

sophrosyne leading to their expression of hubris. These are some of

the more salient themes in Sophocles’ work so they can expound on

these in their paper or analyze a variety of other pertinent themes that

can be gleaned from the play, Antigone.

132

Unit 3D: The Art of Pottery

Required reading for this unit:

1. The World of Athens: An Introduction to Classical Athenian

Culture (Chapter 8 pp. 331-351)

2. Handout on Greek pottery

3. Visual PowerPoint presentation in Appendix N.

Objective:

The goal of this unit is to discuss, with much depth, Athenian

pottery. We will go beyond the 5th century BCE and begin with the

Athenian protogeometric period during the Dark Ages and end by

discussing red and black figure pottery in the Classical Period. The

students will learn how the Athenians decorated their pottery during

these various periods and the development of innovation in production

utilized to improve their pottery, making it more durable and ornate.

The class will be able to recognize the different types of pots that

were created as well as their purpose in different aspects of Athenian

society. We will discuss the various subject matters and themes that

were painted on the pottery. Finally, the class will learn the

significance and importance of pottery to archaeologists and

133

historians as they piece together and attempt to better understand the

history of ancient societies like Athens.

Lecture/Discussion:

Periods of Athenian Pottery

Proto-Geometric Period (1050 BCE to 900 BCE):

This period marked the transition from Mycenaean to Dark

Age Greek society. The main decorative motifs used during this

period included concentric circles and semi-circles created using a

compass style instrument and a variety of brushes of differing width.

Other common motifs included horizontal bands that were painted in

either black or dark brown against the natural color of the clay. The

Athenians also filled in spaces on the pots with triangles and arcs and

they included wavy lines usually found on the necks of the pot which

gave the art a sense of motion.

The Proto-geometric period featured rudimentary

advancements in pot making. We know that the Athenians made

improvements to the pottery wheel during this period which led to

symmetry and refinement in the final product. They also made

improvements to their firing techniques which resulted in the creation

of pottery that was more durable and conversely less fragile. Finally,

134

they utilized slip and glaze to refine the pottery. Slip is a clay and

water slurry that can be used for pouring molds, decoration, or

adhering pieces, like handles, to the pot. While glaze provided a

finished, polished look that made the pottery appeal to the consumer.

These innovations in method and technique created the foundation for

subsequent styles and pottery designers.

Geometric Period (900 BCE to 700 BCE):

The Geometric Period included a larger variety of shapes,

styles and more complicated designs on the pots. During the latter

stages of the Geometric Period, the pots began to feature pictures of

animals and humans in mythological, funerary, and combat settings.

The common motifs for this period featured meanders that were

interlocking geometric patterns which symbolized both unity and

infinity. The potters also utilized zigzag and cross-hatched patterns

which served to add texture and rhythm to the design. Like the

previous period, the Geometric Period utilized triangles but now also

included diamonds to fill in space for symmetry and balance. They

also displayed their evolving mastery of this craft with more

complicated patterns like swastikas and checkerboards. The design

135

motifs were separated on the pot within registers which featured

horizontal bands creating distinct sections of theme and decoration.

Technically speaking, the Geometric Period invoked an

approaching expert-level precision to design and crafting due to a

continued improvement to firing techniques which produced more

durable pottery with a consistency in design and color. This period

also saw an increased variation in pot size, especially pottery used as

grave markers.

Orientalizing Period (750 BCE to 600 BCE):

The Orientalizing Period showed clear influences from Egypt

and the ancient Near East; an influence which indicated the recovery

of trade and commerce within the Mediterranean. The central motifs

during this period was the use of animals like lions, sphinxes, and

griffins coupled with floral patterns that included the lotus and

palmettes. It utilized foreign techniques like engraving and intricate

detail. This period saw the beginning of black figure pottery which

was painting pictures in black silhouette on natural clay color;

incising detail into the silhouette and using red and white paint colors.

Some of the main themes during this period included depictions of

heroes and narrative images of famous myths.

136

Black Figure Period (700 BCE to 500 BCE):

This period developed the black figures that were used during

the Orientalizing Period. Potters used slip to paint figures that turned

black during the firing process. They then incised details into the

black which created details by revealing the red clay underneath. They

also made use of red and white paints to create the black silhouette

imagery. The main decorative motifs during this period were

mythological stories, gods, heroes, and animals. However, they began

to paint depictions of everyday life like athletes competing in the

Panhellenic games, soldiers in battle, and your everyday Athenian

male at a symposium.

The Athenians created a noteworthy advancement to the firing

process during this period turning it into a three-phase method. The

initial phase was the oxidizing phase and the pottery was fired in

oxygen-rich setting which turned the pot to red. The next step was

called the reducing phase, oxygen was reduced to allow the slip to

turn black. The final stage reintroduced oxygen, turning the pot back

to red while the slip remains giving the potter the beginning of a

design he will enhance with incisions and red and white paint.

137

There are three notable potters that were highly skilled in their

craft. The first is Exekias who gave us the famous amphora of

Achilles and Ajax playing dice. The next artist is known as the Amasis

painter and he is known for the pot titled Dionysus and the Maenads.

His name is unknown but his work was pervasive throughout the

Archaic Period. The last potter that was named Sophilos, known for

the Sophilos Dinos which is a black figure wine bowl. All three were

masters of their craft and their names and work survived from

antiquity into modernity.

Red Figure Period (530 BCE to 300 BCE):

This genre of pottery was developed due to the artistic

limitations of the black figure silhouettes. With this genre, the figures

were left in red clay and the background was painted black. The

details no longer had to be incised into the black silhouette, but they

could be painted directly onto the red figures. The fire process was

exactly the same only reversing the roles of the black and the red. The

red figure pots allowed for more complex narratives and scenes. The

artists could also depict emotion and movement with the red figure

genre enhancing the narration, making the stories come to life. The

138

mythological motif remained in this style but there was more of an

emphasis on everyday scenes.

There were three notable Athenian artists that excelled in red

figure pottery. The first was Euphronios who was known for his

depiction of the mythological death of the Trojan hero, Sarpedon. The

second Athenian potter, Euthymides, was known for the amphora, the

Three Revelers, which depicted Hector on one side and three men

dancing on the other side. The last potter was known only as the

Berlin Painter, and his famous creation was the Kithara Player.

Types of Athenian/Greek Pottery

Amphora:

The amphora was a tall, two-handled vessel used for storing

wine, oil, or grains. It had a narrow neck and a large body and, during

the Archaic and Classical Periods, it often depicted and celebrated

mythological imagery.

Kylix:

The kylix was a shallow drinking cup with a wide bowl and

two horizontal handles. These were prevalent at drinking parties and

they often had interior designs that were revealed to its handler as the

wine was consumed.

139

Krater:

The krater was a large pot mainly used for mixing wine and

water. The Athenians and most of Greek society diluted their wine

with water to avoid becoming intoxicated too quickly. The different

styles of krater included the bell krater, volute krater, and column

krater.

Hydria:

The hydria is a pot with three handles used for transporting

water; two horizontal handles were designed to carry the pot and one

vertical handle for pouring.

Lekythos:

The lekythos was a small vessel that was used to carry oil

during funeral processions. The pot had a tall, slender body with a

narrow neck and it was decorated with scenes from daily life or it

often depicted the administering of funerary rites.

Oinochoe:

The oinochoe was a wine jug with one handle and a spout. It

was used for pouring wine and it featured beautiful curves and

creative patterns.

140

Skyphos:

The skyphos was a deep drinking cup with two horizontal

handles. It was a simply designed cup made for everyday use.

Alabastron:

The alabastron was a narrow vessel used to store perfume. It

usually did not have any handles and it featured a rounded bottom.

Pyxis:

The pyxis was a small, cylindrical box that had a lid and the

Athenians used them for storing jewelry or cosmetics.

Kantharos:

The kantharos was a deep cup with two handles that was

utilized during Dionysian festivals or rituals. Its shape symbolized

abundance and revelry or celebration, an homage to Dionysus.

Historical Significance of Pottery

Why do we care about pottery? There are a number of reasons

that pottery is important in the archaeological and historical fields.

The first and perhaps most important reason pottery is central to both

of these fields is pottery lasts and, for many archaeological sites and

cultures, it is all we have to go by. Although it may seem unimportant

to the onlooker, pottery speaks a great deal about the civilizations that

141

left it behind. Throughout Dark Age Greece, pottery is one of the

limited historical records that were left. However, it tells us where the

people lived following the Mycenaean collapse and can give us an

idea of how many made up a community and, if we are lucky, the

make-up and hierarchical structure of their society. As evident on the

later pottery, it gives us an insight into their gods, values, rituals, and a

sample of everyday life. If pottery is pervasive and we find it in other

civilizations, we can glean that they had a system of commerce and

they traded with these other societies. When pottery evolves into

higher quality finish with intricate and masterful designs, that tells us

that this society now has people specializing as artisans so they have

moved beyond merely subsistence living. Everything left behind,

especially pottery, is another piece of the puzzle giving us a clearer

picture of past civilizations.

Group Activity:

The students will briefly get together in a group and produce a

list of the five items that we will leave behind as a society which will

assist people in the future in understanding who we are. It cannot be

any recorded devices telling them because that is obvious. It has to be

items that really encapsulate us as a society. This exercise will

142

hopefully make connections to ways that future archaeologists will be

able to define our society just as archaeologists today attempt to figure

out the past through pottery.

143

Unit 3D Assignment Creating Art (30 Points)

We have learned about ten different styles and five different eras of

Greek pottery so I would like you to take a piece of construction

paper, crayons or color pencils and design your choice of pot.

However, instead of telling the story of the Athenians, I want you to

include a picture or narrative scene or design that tells me about

something that is important in your own culture or family. Please also

include some of the Greek motifs in your design. If you are not

artistic, try your best. You will be graded on your effort not your

artistic quality. In addition, I want you to write 2-3 paragraphs telling

me why you picked this design and how it is important to you. Be

prepared to discuss these in small groups.

This assignment allows the students to be creative and, for those that

possess artistic gifts, to excel. It also serves as an easy thirty points for

the students to make up ground if they did not do well on previous

assignments. There are no wrong answers as long as they put in the

effort. This assignment also helps them understand that there is an

incredible amount of effort and labor hours that go into creating

pottery in the ancient world so the stories, designs, motifs, and quality

144

of the end product were important to the potters and it was a badge of

honor for the Athenian society as a whole.

145

Unit 3 Test

Multiple Choice, True/False, and Short Answer Questions (100

Points)

1. What was the name of the steersman on the Athenian trireme?

Kubernetes

2. Which brother did Antigone want to honor with a burial in

Sophocles’ play, Antigone? Polyneices

3. Which piece of pottery included the column, volute, and bell

designs? Krater

4. Which famous Athenian potter was known for his depiction of

Achilles and Ajax playing dice? Exekias

5. Which era of pottery design included motifs of animals like lions,

sphinxes, and griffins borrowing from nations like Egypt?

Orientalizing Period

6. What was the name of the section in Thucydides’ History of the

Peloponnesian War which detailed the important events of the

fifty years following the Greco-Persian Wars? Pentecontaetia

7. What was the name of the Spartan council of elders that was

made up of 28 men over the age of 60? Gerousia

146

8. Who were the freemen that ‘dwelled around’ the Spartans in

Laconia? Perioikoi

9. What was an innovation to the theater credited to the playwright

Sophocles? More actors on the stage at once

10. (T/F) The Proto-Geometric Period was known for swastika and

checkerboard designs. False

11. What age did Spartan boys leave their homes and join the Agoge?

Seven

12. What was the name of the two Spartan royal houses that ruled as

part of the diarchy? Agiad and Eurypontid

13. Which pot had three handles, two for carrying and one for

pouring? Hydria

14. During the Geometric Period, artists used what device to draw

perfect circles on the pottery? Compass

15. In Antigone, what has King Creon decreed concerning

Polyneices? He was not to be buried

16. What function did the auletes perform aboard the Athenian

triremes? They played the pipe for rowing rhythm

17. (T/F) Spartan women could inherit land and pass their inheritance

along. True

147

18. What pot was a small, cylindrical box with a lid used to store

cosmetics or jewelry? Pyxis

19. Which two city-states rebelled against Athens for forcing them to

stay in the Delian League and attempting to steal their gold

mines? Naxos and Thasos

20. Who was the son of Miltiades that ousted the Persians from the

island of Skyros and the city-state of Eion? Cimon

21. Which savvy politician promoted Athenian building projects like

the Parthenon? Pericles

22. Which pot was narrow and used to store perfume? Alabastron

23. During which pottery period, from 900 BCE to 700 BCE, do we

see a larger variety of shapes, styles and more complicated

designs on the pots? Geometric

24. (T/F) The helots were enslaved Messenians forced to work the

Spartan farms. True

25. What is a reliable source of information for archaeologists and

historians because of its ability to persist throughout long periods

of time? Pottery

26. Which Spartan value describes their fear of outside foreign

influence in their city-state? Xenophobia

148

27. Who was the son of Xanthippus, a heroic Athenian strategos that

gained fame in the Battle of Mycale during the Persian War?

Pericles

28. (T/F) Spartans referred to themselves as Presbeis which means

equals. False

29. In Antigone the playwright, Sophocles, is attempting to raise a

discourse concerning which two kinds of law? Civic and natural

law

30. Which league of city-states was concerned with driving the

Persians out of the Aegean Sea region? Delian League

Short Answer Questions

1. What were the responsibilities of the trierarch?

2. How were the lives of Spartan women different from their

Athenian counterparts?

3. Describe some of the main differences in societal structure and

philosophy between the Athenians and the Spartans?

149

Unit4A: Prelude to Greek World War

Required reading for this unit:

1. Thucydides History of the Peloponnesian War (pp. 96-123,

49-87)

Objective:

The primary goal of this unit is to look at the events that

influenced the start of the second Peloponnesian War which was

fought, sporadically, from 431 BCE to 404 BCE between the Athenian

Empire and the Peloponnesian League. In order to accomplish this,

we must begin by examining the events of the obscure first

Peloponnesian War which consisted of a series of battles fought

between the Athenians and the members of the Peloponnesian League,

specifically Corinth, approximately between the years 460 BCE to

445 BCE. We will rely mainly on Thucydides’ History of the

Peloponnesian War to guide us through these years. Thucydides

succinctly describes the conflicts that made-up the first war and he

beautifully lays out the arguments and delegations represented by both

sides as they debate on the best course of action to move forward,

including the logistics and the probable outcomes if the belligerents

embroiled a vast majority of the Greek city-states into a more

150

pervasive second war to address their political disagreements. For all

of his merits, Thucydides neglected laying out these events in the

order that they took place so I will need to arrange the readings in an

order that makes them more comprehensible for the students; the

lecture and discussion will mirror this order.

Lecture/Discussion:

The First Peloponnesian War (460 BCE to 445 BCE):

Throughout the Classical Period, Megara was always a

strategically important city-state because it sits on the Isthmus of

Corinth between the Peloponnesus and Attica, serving as a natural

border state between the two leagues. Megara was also strategically

located because of its two ports; Nisaea on the east sheltered by the

Saronic Gulf and Pagae on the west facing the Corinthian Gulf, giving

it distinctive access to western and eastern Greece. Due to its location,

Megara was engaged with the city-state of Corinth in ongoing border

disputes. They ultimately decided it was in their best interest to seek

protection from the Athenians so they joined the Delian League (soon

to be the Athenian Empire) in 460 BCE, summarily defecting from the

Peloponnesian League. Athens immediately constructed walls around

Megara to its port city at Nisaea, mimicking their own strategy at their

151

port of Piraeus. This created more animosity between the two leagues

and inculcated a sense of fear from Sparta and Corinth because

Megara was a major link in the chain of Athens controlling the trade

routes throughout the Aegean Sea. Domination of the trade routes and

ports meant Athenian control of imported food, goods, and the ability

to collect tariffs, an excellent source of income to fund an empire.

Athens understood that if they were going to subjugate their enemies

and perhaps all of Greece, control over the artery of shipping

throughout the Aegean was a vital place to start.

During the Megarian incident, the Athenians targeted two

other port cities in the Saronic Gulf called Haliae and Kekryphalia.

Little is known except that the Athenians landed at Haliae and

Kekryphalia in an attempt to subjugate these ports but they were met

with resistance by the navies of Corinth and Epidaurus. By this point,

the Athenian navy was very experienced from fighting battles

throughout the Aegean against the Persians and their naval ally the

Phoenicians so they were able to quickly defeat both of the Corinthian

and Epidaurian trireme navies and assume control of two more ports

in the Saronic Gulf.

152

Following these conflicts in 458 BCE, Athens sent their fleet

to target Aegina, another large island port in the Saronic Gulf. The

Athenians defeated Aegina’s naval force, landed on the island, and

began to besiege their town. The Corinthians and Epidaurians landed

a contingent of hoplites on the island to assist Aegina. In a further

attempt to draw the Athenians from Aegina, the Corinthians launched

an attack against Megara thinking the Athenians would be spread too

thin between their forces besieging Aegina and part of their fleet in

Egypt assisting an uprising there; no doubt the Athenian assistance in

Egypt was their attempt to get a foothold in Northern Africa. The

Athenians assembled an ad hoc army from the old and young to face

the Corinthian army at Megara. The first battle was indecisive but

twelve days later they fought again, trapped the retreating Corinthian

army, and stoned them to death. This was a devastating blow dealt to

the Corinthians and the Peloponnesian League.

In 457 BCE, the Phocians, and Athenia ally, invaded the city-state

of Doris which was considered the ancient homeland of the Spartans.

Responding to their calls for assistance, the regent king, Nicomedes,

defeated the Phocians and forced them to return the area they

controlled in Doris. Following the battle, the Spartans were uncertain

153

how to return home because the Athenians held strategic positions

barring an easy, uneventful journey. They remained in Boeotia for a

short time pondering and debating their best route home. Seizing the

opportunity to come to the aid of Phocis and inflict damage on the

Spartan army, the Athenians gathered their hoplite forces and met the

Spartans at the Battle of Tanagra where they were defeated by the

professionally trained contingent of Spartan hoplites. One month later

the Athenians returned to fight under the leadership of the strategos,

Myronides, who thoroughly defeated the Corinthians at Megara. The

Spartans had already returned home at this point but the Boeotians, a

Spartan ally with Thebes as it strongest city-state, engaged the

Athenians at the Battle of Oenophyta. The Athenians defeated the

Boeotians and tore down the walls of Tanagra and made it a subject

state to the burgeoning Athenian Empire. Their victory at Oenophyta

gave them control over much of Boeotia, excluding Thebes, and

influence over there ally Phocis thereby cementing their control over

central Greece. Following in the heels of these battles in central

Greece, Aegina fell to the Athenians and they were compelled to

surrender their navy and become a subject state to Athens, forced to

pay a tribute.

154

In 455 BCE, under the leadership of the strategos, Tolmides, the

Athenian fleet sailed to the Peloponnesus and burned the Spartan port

at Gytheion. This was a daring event by the Athenians that

demonstrated their navy’s ability to land and strike quickly. The event

was a major setback for the Spartans as Gytheion was their largest

port and housed much of their fleet of triremes. Events like these,

served as primary examples for the need of the Peloponnesian League

to mount a united attack at the emboldened Delian League that

continued to increase in dominance and exert its hegemony over much

of the Greek city-states.

The Athenians continued to support the Egyptians who were

trying to hold out against subjugation by the Persian Empire. The

Persians attempted to bribe the Spartans to invade Attica in order to

force the Athenians to recall their fleet, but Spartan shortsightedness

and their xenophobic distaste for anything foreign prompted them to

send away the Persian emissaries. Eventually, Persia proved too

powerful to hold off and they defeated the Egyptians and their allies.

Athens attempted to supply further aid to Egypt, so they sent out fifty

more triremes. The Athenian ships were attacked by the Persian army

and Phoenician fleet whereby Athens lost most of these ships,

155

destroying their desire for a foothold in Northern Africa at the expense

of the Persian Empire.

In 454 BCE, Pericles led a land and sea expedition against the

city-state of Sicyon located along a valuable trade route in the

Corinthian Gulf near the city-state of Corinth. Pericles took 1,000

hoplites and captured the city of Sicyon. The idea was to use Sicyon

as a base of operation to exert further pressure against Corinth and the

Peloponnesian League. The broader perspective of the capture of

Sicyon is that it provided more fuel for the Corinthians in the

subsequent debates in Sparta.

Three years later in 451 BCE, the Athenian Empire and the

Peloponnesians both agreed they were exhausted from the ongoing

confrontations and decided to agree to a five-year truce. The truce did

not resolve the ongoing issues between the belligerent states but only

called for a cessation to battle. Cimon was given credit for negotiating

this truce since the Spartans widely respected him. The Athenians

would lose the leadership of Cimon shortly after the truce as they

were attempting to besiege Citium, a city on the island of Cyprus, in

their attempt to capture another strategic port city.

156

By 449 BCE, the Athenians and Spartans were once again

embroiled in a conflict this time over the independence of the Temple

at Delphi, known as the Second Sacred War. The Spartans supported

the Delphians and their quest for independence from Phocis. The

Athenians assisted the Phocians in reclaiming Delphi from the

Delphians and Sparta. This battle had little strategic consequence but

it is merely emblematic of the continuous unresolved conflict between

the opponents. However, these events prompted a rebellion against the

nominal Delian League by Boeotia, Euboea, and Megara; important

city-states that did not feel their subjugation by Athens was beneficial

to their safety. These events prompted King Pleistoanax of Sparta to

invade Attica and burn the countryside as far up as Eleusis but, being

the conservative Spartans, they promptly stopped and went home.

Boeotia and Megara maintained their independence but Euboea was

recaptured by Perikles.

Following these events in 446 BCE, the thirty-year truce was

signed by Athens and the Peloponnesian league in which Athens

agreed to return Megara and other city-states seized by the Athenians

from the members of the Peloponnesian League. Its terms recognized

each city-state’s sphere of influence and agreed not to interfere in each

157

other’s alliances or territories. They were to respect the neutrality of

certain Greek city-states and not force them to join their alliances.

Finally, any future disputes were to be settled through arbitration.

Only six years later in 440 BCE, a war broke out between the

island of Samos and the Ionian city-state of Miletus over the city of

Priene in Asia Minor. Samos and Miletus were both members of the

Delian League but Pericles and the Athenians came to the aid of

Miletus and subjugated the people of Samos. With the assistance of

the Persian satrap at Sardis, the Samians were able to reclaim their

island expelled the Athenian hoplite contingent and magistrates. The

Athenian navy blockaded the island and the hoplites besieged the

town until the Samians were forced to surrender. Samos became a

subject state and they were forced to pay an indemnity while their

fleet was confiscated. During these events, the Samians appealed to

Sparta and Corinth for aid but the Peloponnesians adhered to the

tenets of the treaty and stayed out of the conflict. Thucydides uses

events like these to compare the willingness of the members of the

Peloponnesian League to abstain from foreign wars while the

Athenians were quick to become involved in conflict, especially when

it was a strategic and economic benefit to their empire. These events

158

also highlight Athens’ willingness to use its military strength to not

just police and quell conflicts but enslave civilizations, specifically

former allies and fellow Greeks.

Disputes over Epidamnus, Corcyra, and Potidaea (435 BCE to

432 BCE):

The dispute between Epidamnus and Corcyra was a

convoluted conflict between colony and mother country over internal

conflicts and shifts in governmental ideologies. However, these

conflicts were important in the sense that it, once again, pitted the

Athenians against the Corinthians. The Epidamnians received

assistance from Corinth, who was the original homeland to Corcyra

while Corcyra appealed to the Athenians for help. Corinth was

enraged because it abstained from the Samian Wars and avoided

Delian League affairs, but Athens could not extend them the same

courtesy by not becoming involved in the internal strife of Epidamnus

and Corcyra.

Potidaea was also a Corinthian colony but they were part of

the Delian League. Potidaea was a strategically located port city

located in northern Greece on the Chalcidian peninsula. Athens,

concerned that Potidaea would defect to the Peloponnesian League,

159

insisted Potidaea take down their walls and submit to Athenian rule by

expelling the Corinthian magistrates. Corinth was once again angered

by the willingness of the Athenians to usurp control over their former

colonies and autonomous city-states so they sent military assistance to

Potidaea. Under the leadership of the Athenians Callias and Phormio,

they besieged Potidaea for two years before they surrendered. The

wider impact of these three disputes was the realization by the

members of the Peloponnesian League that war with Athens was

inexorable.

Megarian Decrees (432 BCE):

Athens issued decrees against the city-state of Megara probably

instigated by Perikles. The degrees were likely enacted for its

defection from the Delian League and rejoining of the Peloponnesian

League. The Athenians came to the aid of Megara due to their

mistreatment by Corinth, surely they felt betrayed. Megara was also

accused of harboring the Athenian’s runaway slaves and encroaching

on sacred land in Attica. As a response to these charges, Athens barred

Megara from trading in any markets that were controlled by the

Athenians or its allows; during this period, Athens held a tremendous

amount of authority in most markets in the Aegean. These decrees put

160

a stranglehold on Megara’s economy and it enraged the Corinthians as

they were again on good terms with Megara.

The Debate at Sparta (432 BCE):

The debate at Sparta was attempting to answer the question which

concerned the next course of action the Peloponnesian League should

take against the Delian League and Athens. The Spartan assembly

listened to the positions of two different delegations and two Spartan

leaders: the Corinthians, Athenians, the Spartan king, Archidamus,

and the Spartan ephor, Sthenelaidas.

The Corinthians were the first delegation to speak and they were

incensed with the aggressive behavior of the Athenians because they

have brazenly subjugated formerly free Greek city-states in the name

of the Delian League. They have interfered in Corinthian affairs at

Corcyra, Epidamnus, and Potidaea. And their recent treatment of

Megara created economic hardships for a city-state that relied on free

trade. The Corinthians blamed the Spartans and their unwillingness to

act against Athens’ aggressive behavior and accused them of being

conservative to a fault. Corinth pleads with the Spartans to consider

the Athenian greed and their constant need for more to feed their

political monster, now called the Athenian Empire, which is never

161

satiated. The delegation ends their speech by subtly suggesting to

Sparta that if they refused to assist the members of their league then

perhaps the Corinthians will have to look for other political alliances.

The Athenian delegation spoke in their own defense. They

stated that they repelled the Persians at Marathon and Salamis during

the Greco-Persian Wars. However, unlike the Spartans, they did not

stop there but took their triremes, pursued the Persians, and pushed

them out of the Aegean Sea. The Athenians were asked for help from

the future members of the Delian League, so they risked the safety of

their city-state to continue the war against the Persians. In their eyes,

they earned every advantage they received from the Delian League,

including an empire. The Athenians pointed the accusatory finger

back at the delegation council and declared every city-state present

would have acted in the same manner as the Athenians when

presented with the opportunity of an empire. They concluded by

warning the Spartans that they had a large navy and vast resources so

attacking Athens would not go well for the Peloponnesian League.

The next to speak was King Archidamus II, one of the two

kings of Sparta. Archidamus was a wise and moderate man, thanks to

his advanced years, and having fought many battles did not believe

162

leaping into a war of this magnitude was particularly sagacious. He

knew that this war would be lengthy considering the circumstances of

the Peloponnesian League and the Athenian Empire. The Spartans did

not have much of a navy and they did not have the economy nor the

resources the Athenians had acquired. He advised the Spartans to seek

arbitration while spending the next few years building up their city-

state to a level the Athenians would fear and respect.

The final person to speak was the Spartan ephor, Sthenelaidas.

He delivered a passion-filled speech that was meant to appeal to the

emotions of the delegation at the expense of reason. He declared that

the Athenians had simply broken the thirty-year truce and it was the

responsibility of Sparta to respond with immediate action. He

declared that Sparta must defend their allies and protect their honor. A

speech that raised the temperature by brazenly announcing what the

Spartans are duty-bound to do without the wisdom of explaining how

this type of response was possible.

Thucydides included the Spartan debate for a variety of

reasons. Firstly, it clearly defines the causes of the Peloponnesian War

and each participants stance on these events. The Corinthians had a

fair complaint that their autonomy as a free city-state was threatened

163

by the bloated Athenian war machine and their membership in the

Peloponnesian League required a response. The Athenians offered a

defense that included some fair points not the least of which was the

Spartan’s unwillingness to continue engaging the Persian Empire until

they were no longer an impending threat. Interestingly, Thucydides’

point about the goal of a political entity, like the Athenian Empire, to

continue acquiring power when they have the opportunity was echoed

in the famous rhetorician, Lorenzo Valla’s, treatise “On the Donation

of Constantine.” Valla attacked the church’s position that Constantine

would hand over the Western Roman Empire when, he contends, it is

the goal of any sovereign or political institution to acquire more or at

the very least retain what they have. However, Athen’s seemingly

innocent contention that they were an unassuming partner in the

Delian League without hidden aspirations and agendas is clearly false

but Thucydides shows his audience that political righteousness

depends solely on perspective. Finally, Thucydides offers a

comparison between the experienced wise soldier in King Archidamus

and the brash, emotion-filled ephor, Sthenelaidas. One understands

the danger of combat and offers a moderate position while the other is

a vocal demagogue that uses emotive words to rile a crowd into a

164

frenzy to exert his will. It is a character study of two individuals, one

who deserves to be heard and heeded while the other offers nothing

but bombastic rhetoric with little substance. Unfortunately, they voted

with the ephor and decided to go to war; a disastrous outcome for all

of Greece but predictable was certainly Thucydides’ implication for

including the record of this debate.

Spartan Ultimatum and Athenian Response:

Sparta sent an ultimatum to Athens outlining their concerns which

must be met or they would be forced to go to war. By this time,

Athens was far too large of an empire to be perturbed by the Spartan

saber rattling, even an army as formidable as Sparta. The following

were their demands:

1. Remove the Alcmoenid curse from Athens. This was a

reference to Pericles and his family’s participation in the

Cylonian Affair from the 6th century BCE.

2. Recall the Megarian Decrees and the economic blockade on

Megara.

3. Restore autonomy to the Greek city-states that have been

subjugated and enslaved in the name of the Delian League.

165

Pericles’ Response and Strategy:

1. Obviously, Pericles was unwilling to ostracize himself to

satisfy the Spartan delegation.

2. Pericles stated that the Megarian Decrees were a necessary

response to Megara’s previous transgressions, which included

breaking their alliance with the Delian League, harboring

Athenian runaway slaves, and encroaching on sacred Athenian

land.

3. The city-states joined the Delian League of their own free will

and it was not the right of the Peloponnesian League,

according to the truce, to make requests or intrusions into

Athenian affairs.

4. The strategy was simple, vacate the countryside and use their

long walls to protect them from land attacks. Also, utilize their

navy to provide food and supplies, while disrupting

Peloponnesian imports and sea-going commerce. Do not field

a hoplite army to engage the Spartans or its allies.

166

Unit 4B: Highlights and Lowlights of the Peloponnesian War

Required Reading for this unit:

1. Thucydides History of the Peloponnesian War (pp. 136-151,

212-223, 400-408)

2. Victor Davis Hanson A War Like No Other (Chapter 3, pp. 65-

88, Chapter 7, pp. 201-233)

Objective:

Our goal in this section of the unit is to cover some of the

major events that took place during the Peloponnesian War. It is

impossible to look at the entire war and analyze each event,

discussing the long reaching effects of a conflict that lasted over 25

years which involved two generations of Athenian citizens; perhaps if

we dedicated the entire semester this could be achieved. Instead, we

will focus our time on the possible and pick out the most noteworthy

events of the war: the first year of war and Pericles’ funeral oration,

the plague that inflicted Athens in the early stages of the war,

Mytilenean debate, Melian dialogue, Sicilian expedition, and finish

with the war at sea spanning the final ten years. These events give the

class a wide array of political and military drama to dissect and

together they exemplify, in their own way, the political and moral

167

decline that marked the end of the Athenian empire and Classical

Athens.

We will use two sources to assist our exploration: Thucydides’

History of the Peloponnesian War and Victor Davis Hanson’s book, A

War Like No Other. Thucydides’ book is a staple for peering into the

events that surrounded the Greek conflict. While Hanson is a

renowned scholar of Classical Athens and he provides a thorough

examination, discussing the cause and effects of major events

throughout this conflict. I believe Hanson’s perspective and insight

would be beneficial for the students’ comprehension of the material as

he lends his years of experience and insight into this lengthy affair.

Lecture/Discussion:

The First Year of War, Pericles’ Funeral Oration, and Plague:

The Spartan strategy under King Archidamus II was simple, to

invade the countryside of Attica, setting fire to their food supply in an

attempt to provoke Athens to vacate their position behind their

protective walls and engage Sparta in a hoplite battle. Athens resisted

the temptation to defend their ancestral farms but instead they clung to

the wisdom of the Periclean strategy which kept them behind their

long walls relying on their navy for food and supplies. The Athenians

168

responded to Archidamus' attack by sending out their navy to perform

raids on the coast of the Peloponnese. In one event, they landed at

Methone, a Spartan territory, and began to destroy their fortifications,

but the Spartan officer Brasidas happened to be nearby so he took 100

hoplites and engaged the Athenian marines, sending them retreating

back to their ships. They then landed at Elis and laid waste to the

countryside. They captured the port city of Pheia but a contingent of

Peloponnesians recaptured the city, sending the Athenians back to

their ships. Athens strategy was simply to cause mayhem for the

Spartans who always held a tenuous control over the Messenians and

the helots. They were also looking for a strategic site close to the

Peloponnese to launch their sporadic attacks, guerrilla warfare style.

In the autumn of 431 BCE, the Athenians took their entire

army and invaded Megara under the command of Pericles. They were

reinforced by the triremes that were returning from the Peloponnese.

Their intention was to destroy Megara and capture their two port

cities. These ports were strategically crucial for the Corinthians

because it allowed them to launch their ships in the Corinthian Gulf

and the Saronic Gulf. Besides causing chaos and destruction, the

169

Athenians were not able to recapture Megara; not until 424 BCE were

the Athenians able to recapture the Megarian port city of Nisaea.

During the winter of 431 BCE and the end of the first year of

fighting, Pericles gave his funeral oration which was a celebration to

the fallen soldiers who gave their lives for Athens. As the students

previously learned, a public burial was a tremendous honor for the

Athenians. Pericles’ funeral oration is one of the most celebrated

speeches handed down to us from the Greeks. It honored the dead by

celebrating what they were fighting for, the city of Athens. The speech

goes beyond just eulogizing the fallen soldiers, but it is political

rhetoric and propaganda meant to inspire the Athenians as Pericles, no

doubt knew, they had a long road ahead of them in the war. In the

speech, Pericles speaks about the achievements of Athens and its

democratic governmental system. He praises the cultural

achievements and refers to Athens as the ‘school of Hellas.’ His

speech is meant to inspire the citizens that will continue to sacrifice

their lives and declares they will have immortality in name for making

the ultimate sacrifice for the survival of Athens. Pericles references

the most important virtues the Athenians can extoll during this

anticipated protracted conflict and they are perseverance and sacrifice.

170

These two virtues will make the greatest difference to the outcome of

the war. he urges the living to look to the dead and emulate their lives

if they are going to be victorious against their enemies. Pericles

speech portrays Athens as the beacon of righteousness, freedom, and a

collective consciousness dedicated to civic duty.

Unfortunately for the Athenians, shortly after Pericles’ funeral

oration, a plague devastated the city-state of Athens due to the

overcrowding in the city and the lack of a large-scale sanitation and

waste removal plan. The Athenians died so quickly and in such large

numbers that it was not unusual to find pyres stacked high with

multiple bodies as the families no longer had the strength or the

wherewithal to adhere to traditions and offer the dead their funerary

rites and rituals.

According to Hanson, the plague brought about lawlessness in

Athens. People began to participate in debauchery and the celebrated

Athenian value of moderation was replaced by living for the day

because the plague made no guarantees for tomorrow. Some of the

Athenians believed their water supply was poisoned by the Spartans

or the plague was a response to an old prophecy. Hanson remarks that

the genius of Thucydides’ historical investigation was not to indulge

171

in the fantastic but to respond only to what he and others have

observed and can corroborate. Hanson offers an insightful opinion on

the reason Thucydides dedicates on entire section to the plague in a

militarily driven account. He believes it is Thucydides’ philosophical

leanings to explore and highlight the nature of people and show how

quickly civilization can devolve into brutality, throwing aside any

attempts toward morality and virtue; when you cross that bridge, it is

easy to continue to make those transgressions. This is an insight the

students should keep in mind as we continue along this path of events.

Thucydides seems to contend and Hanson concurs that the plague was

the largest contributing factor to Athens eventually losing the

Peloponnesian League. The Periclean strategy of attrition might have

frustrated the conservative Spartans until they lost interest. However,

the plague devastated Athens while killing the man with the best

possible strategy to victory, Pericles. Those that survived and were

thrust into positions of authority and leadership would show contempt

for the Periclean strategy of restraint.

Modern Connection:

A modern connection to Pericles’ funeral oration is three of

John F. Kennedy’s speeches during his presidency. These speeches

172

lauded the greatness of America due to its willingness to accept

challenges like going to the moon and the willingness to hold

themselves and their leaders accountable in order to defend their

freedom. The speeches stated that America promoted wisdom through

moral restraint, a central part of the Athenian ethical system. Kennedy

praised America for surviving toil with their determination and grit.

Like Pericles, Kennedy praised America as a beacon of liberty and

freedom to be emulated by the rest of the world.

Mytilenean Debate:

In 427 BCE, the Mytileneans took control of the island of

Lesbos and began to revolt against the Athenian leadership on the

island. The revolt was nominally supported by both the Spartans and

their kinsmen, the Boeotians. Under the leadership of Cleippides, the

Athenians set sail for Lesbos to quash the rebellion. The ten triremes

attributed to Athens by Lesbos and operating in their fleet were placed

under arrest. The Mytileneans attempted to discuss arbitration options

with the Athenians while also sending a trireme in secrecy to Sparta

for support.

The Mytilenean address to the Spartan assembly succinctly

framed the power dynamic with the Delian League, demonstrating

173

how Athens secured dominance by subjugating the weak and

temporarily leaving the stronger city-states independent. This

strategy’s goal was to isolate the stronger, independent city-states,

forcing them to eventually succumb to Athenian leadership. The goal

of the Mytileneans was to convince the Spartans that they could be

trustworthy, loyal allies and the only reason they were defecting from

the Delian League was that Athens altered the charter of the league

from defeating the Persians to empire building at the expense of the

other members of the confederacy. The Spartans, already well-versed

in the Athenian subjugation of Greek city-states, welcomed the

Lesbians into the Peloponnesian League. However, the Spartans fleet,

under Alkidas, did not reach Lesbos in time so the Mytileneans were

forced to surrender to the Athenians.

The Athenians forced the Mytileneans to send ambassadors

with the Spartan Saleuthus to Athens to plead their case. Upon their

arrival, the Athenians promptly executed Saleuthus and the Ekklesia

decreed that all male citizens of Mytilene were to be executed and the

women and children slaved. They immediately sent a trireme to

execute this resolution however, when cooler heads prevailed, a

debate ensued between Cleon and Diodotus which was recorded by

174

Thucydides. Cleon was a populist that liked to appeal to the mob in

order to garner support based on emotion. He makes a comment about

the shortcomings of democracy when it comes to acting swiftly and

severely. He claims that only harsh punishment will keep the league

members from revolting. Diodotus took the opposing view that mass

execution might strike fear, but in the long term it would only

embolden the league members to strike out against Athens. He

suggested punishing the leaders but not the entire population. The

Athenians revised their stance and sent another trireme to overtake the

first, retract the original orders, and enforce the new orders. The

Athenians executed the leaders, confiscated Mytilene’s fleet, and took

their land and doled it out to Athenian citizens.

Some of the main takeaways from this affair was how extreme

Athens had become following the commencement of the

Peloponnesian War and the devastation of the plague. We talked about

how delegates and heralds were sacred positions but the Athenians did

not hesitate to execute Saleuthus, a transgression of the civilized

treatment of ambassadors specifically during a state of war. The

Athenians no longer honored the precept that the subjugation of

fellow Greeks was unacceptable behavior; a view that began when

175

they no longer honored the notion that the charter of the Delian

League represented an assembly of allies in which Athens merely held

a leadership role. Instead, the allies became subject states to an

Athenian empire that used the tribute treasury to enhance and

strengthen their own city-state. We also see the emergence of poor

governance from demagogues like Cleon as Athens quickly loses its

moral compass and sense of propriety following the death of apt and

moderate leaders like Pericles.

Melian Dialogue:

Melos was an island in the Aegean Sea that remained neutral

at the start of the war even though they were originally a Spartan

colony. In 416 BCE, the Athenians, under the leadership of

Alcibiades, became hostile to the Melians forcing them to join the

Peloponnesian side thereby opposing the Athenians and their imperial

leanings. Thucydides writes this exchange in dialogue form which

serves to provide an authentic exchange where the Athenian notion of

realpolitik is displayed at the expense of justice and clemency when

dealing with a small but independent city-state. Essentially this

dialogue demonstrates how the strongest get to make all the rules in

the theater of power politics. The Melians attempted to appeal to the

176

Athenians during this conversation before being forced into a military

response, but neither action was successful. In the end, the Athenians

enacted the decree that they rescinded in the Mytilenean affair,

executing the men, selling the women and children into slavery, and

repopulating the island with Athenians; they destroyed an entire

civilization in the name of imperial might versus right.

Thucydides uses the Melian dialogue to show the steep decline

of Athenian morality and civility. Their empire, the war, and the

plague eradicated Athenian decency leaving behind a society bereft of

virtue and any sense of clemency. The unity of the Greek identity that

forged the alliance during the Greco-Persian Wars had given way to

greed, paranoia, and unethical and debaucherous behavior fueled by

an unquenchable desire for more, especially more at whatever cost.

The Sicilian Expedition:

Hanson states that in 415 BCE, the Athenians felt a sense of

duty to respond to cries for help from the city-states of Segasta and

Leontini on the island of Sicily. They were being threatened with

subjugation by the much larger metropolitan city-state of Syracuse

who had Dorian roots. In reality, the Athenians saw dollar signs from

the Sicilian economy. Most wars have a rallying cry or banner to draw

177

support and inspiration but wars are never fought without the pretense

of gain in some form. Pro-imperial constituencies led by Alcibiades

saw Sicily as a steppingstone into more lucrative markets in Italy and

northern Africa. These ideas flew in the face of the advice and

strategy Pericles laid out for the for Athens but his death brought to

the stage brash young statesman who wanted to continue what their

parents started and increase the Athenian Empire's power and

influence throughout the Mediterranean. The problem was the peace

of Nicias treaty left them on shaky ground with Sparta and its allies.

However, the grain supplies and markets were too good to pass up and

would solve Athenian food shortages while simultaneously creating

supply issues in Sparta.

Syracuse itself was a large, successful democratic city-state,

not unlike Athens. One of the major problems of this expedition was

Athens did not have the intelligence to understand the terrain they

would fight upon and the need for cavalry over hoplites nor did it

appear they understood the military might of Syracuse. They also sent

a triad of generals that could not have been more different. Alcibiades

was a wealthy handsome but arrogant hot head that suffered from the

rashness of youth that likes to leap before they look. Nicias was the

178

elder statesman that was cautious to a fault, who preached prudence

and moderation; adhering to the quintessential Athenian value system

that embraced sophrosyne. The third general was Lamachus who had

a good military mind but was not as wealthy as the other two so they

treated him with an elitist and dismissive disposition. The expedition

was doomed before it really got any traction. As soon as they landed,

Alcibiades was recalled to Athens to appear before a court to answer

for sacrilegious behavior. In a moment of treachery, he decided to

betray his countrymen and sailed for Sparta to advise the enemy on

the Athenian military expedition in Sicily. Lamachus died within the

first year and Nicias did not heed his strategy to aggressively charge

Syracuse especially after learning that the Athenians did not have the

support in Sicily from the other city-states that they had anticipated.

Instead, he attacked cities around Syracuse but not but did not engage

the enemy that they sailed hundreds of miles to subjugate.

By 413 BCE, the Athenians were summarily defeated by the

Syracusans and the contingent of Peloponnesians sent to assist thanks

to Alcibiades’ duplicitousness. The Athenians lost an estimated 40,000

to 50,000 soldiers, over 200 triremes, and their treasury in the

Parthenon was nearly empty. The empire was all but dead but it would

179

take eleven more years of war and the influx of Persian money,

primarily used to build a Spartan fleet, before the Spartans could bury

the corpse. After another eleven years of extremely bloody naval

battles, the Athenians surrendered after the Battle of Aegospotami in

405 BCE. By March of 404 BCE, the Spartans demolished the

Athenian walls and instituted an oligarchic regime called the Thirty

Tyrants. Although they only ruled for eight months until Athens

regained control of their city, the empire and the Golden Age of

Athens were over for good.

Modern Connection:

I think the students would benefit from a comparison of the

defensive alliance structure of the Peloponnesian War with that of

World War I. This connection shows how defensive alliances can

escalate local conflicts into major wars as evident in both of these

situations.

Modern Connection:

I also believe there is a modern connection between the moral

despair experienced by the Athenians during the plague and our

moder experience with COVID19. An experience that left people in a

moral crisis as they experienced the death of family members but due

180

to the unparalleled magnitude of this health emergency, they were not

allowed to be present. The Athenians could not perform the necessary

burial rites for loved ones because of the massive rate of death and

fear of continuous spread of the disease.

181

Unit 4B Written Assignment #5 (2-3 Page Essay 200 Points)

There is an axiom that states, “Power corrupts and absolute power

corrupts absolutely.” Keeping in mind all we have learned about the

first and second Peloponnesian Wars and all of its participants, where

do we find truth in this statement? Explain and make sure you cite

from our reading.

This assignment is interesting because the easy answer is examining

the conduct of the Athenians. They supply ample evidence in support

of this statement with respect to their conduct with their allies in the

Delian League. However, we can also see it in Sparta who, arguably,

sold out their political virtues in the end to accept assistance from

Greek’s hated enemy, the Persians. There are examples in the

individual participants like Alcibiades and Cleon who irresponsibly

took their leadership roles in search of wealth and glory. We also see it

with Pericles who supported the notion of using the tribute funds to

beautify Athens at the expense of its trusting allies. The period of the

Athenian Empire is a smorgasbord of examples to draw support for

this essay.

182

Unit 4C: Athenian Comedy and Anti-War Rhetoric

In class video: Lysistrata (Yo uTube.com)

Reading requirements:

Aristophanes’ comedic play Lysistrata

Objective:

The goal of this lesson is to head back to the theater for a comedy

by Aristophanes, titled Lysistrata. Lysistrata is a humorous antiwar

comedy first performed in 411 BCE following the debacle of the

Sicilian expedition. In the play, the Athenian woman, Lysistrata,

organizes a strike to withhold sex from the Athenian men until they

cease the fighting. This play is a commentary and critique of the

ongoing war that has cost so many Athenian lives and destroyed

families. It also challenges gender roles as Aristophanes shows his

audience how women, who were given a limited role in public life,

understand better than the men that ending this costly war is the best

course of action. In this comedy, Aristophanes uses comedic tools

such as farce, slapstick, word play and bawdy humor to entertain the

audience. We will spend this class session watching a YouTube video

of the play and the students will read the play on their own. A visual

presentation will assist the students’ reading of this comedic play

183

because plays are meant to be performed not read; many of the

nuances are lost in reading.

Lesson/Discussion:

During this period in Athens, the students will learn that many

prominent Athenians, like Aristophanes and his tragedian cohort,

Euripides, created content that was explicitly ant-war. Aristophanes,

who lived from 446 BCE to 366 BCE, was the only comedic

playwright whose work still exists. He was born to a wealthy family

and he was clearly educated, which is evident in the sophistication of

his plays. His plays are known for their quick wit and clever use of

language. This play that we will be covering, Lysistrata, is probably

his most famous play and it is emblematic of Aristophanes’ style to

provide social and political commentary. The main themes of the play

are the publics deep-seeded desire for peace and an investigation into

gender roles. Surely, during this time of ongoing war and the not-too-

distant devastation from the plague, women have taken a larger, more

public role in society. Aristophanes’ play is a comedic commentary on

the misogynistic and male-dominated Greek society coupled with a

celebration of the stifled intelligence and insightfulness of Athenian

women.

184

Modern Connection:

I think it is relevant to connect the anti-war rhetoric of

Aristophanes to the modern reaction of the counterculture to the

Vietnam conflict during the 1960s. We can look at the rebellious

musical “Hair” and make comparisons to Lysistrata. We can also look

at the genre of folk music and rock n’ roll that was steeped with anti-

war rhetoric during the 1960s. We can compare this with the alteration

of revolutionary lamentation funerary art and pottery that was a

product of the extreme grief experienced during the Peloponnesian

War.

185

Unit 4C Assignment Discussion Post (30 Points)

What fundamental aspects of war and human nature is Aristophanes

criticizing in Lysistrata? Please write at least two paragraphs in

response to this question. Please respond to the posts of two other

classmates.

Aristophanes’ play offers a plethora of comments not just on the war

but on the nature of humanity in general. The students can look at the

brutality of combat and the need for many of the men to express this

side of their nature in war. Lysistrata also includes a commentary on

political greed and the societal irresponsibility of so many wasted

lives. He also makes a comment on the need for men to subjugate, not

just other city-states, but their wives and family members.

Aristophanes’ work expresses a reexamination of gender roles in a

quintessential misogynistic Athenian society.

186

Unit 4D: For the Love of Wisdom: Athenian Philosophy

Reading Requirements for this unit:

Handout on Plato’s Crito

Objective:

The goal of this lesson is to take a brief look at Athenian

philosophy. One of the greatest gifts the Athenians gave western

culture was the philosophical musings of two men: Socrates and his

student Plato; Aristotle is the third of the great trio but he was not

technically Athenian. Socrates and Plato influenced generations of

future thinkers like Kant, Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, Hume, Descartes,

and the list goes on with their thoughts on epistemology, morality and

ethics, and the ongoing struggle between the rational and the

empirical. These subjects fill volumes of books and we have only one

unit lesson to dedicate to the subject but I feel this class would be

incomplete unless we said something on the subject. So, we will take

Socrates and Plato as a single entity with regards to their

philosophical contributions because, due to the use of Socrates as the

main protagonist in many of Plato’s dialogues, it is difficult to know

with certainty where one ends and the other begins. We will take a

quick survey at the history of each man and talk about their

187

contributions to philosophy. The students will be assigned the Platonic

dialogue, Crito, to read at home and they will respond to a discussion

post. It will also be extremely useful to set the proverbial stage by

beginning with the contributions of the Sophists because

Socratic/Platonic philosophy partially exists as a response to what

they deemed a diabolical distortion of the search for truth.

Lesson/Discussion:

Sophists:

The sophists were a group of itinerant teachers who traveled

the Greek world to teach subjects like mathematics, reading, writing,

and, most importantly, philosophy and rhetoric for monetary gain.

They taught moral relativism and practical ethics which, plainly

stated, were lessons on how to speak forcefully and be successful in

public debates at the agora and within the Ekklesia. Their students

were generally children from the wealthier classes whose parents

wanted them to be successful in civic life and attain governmental

positions of importance. The students learned that truth could be

subjective and weak arguments could be made to appear as strong

proclamations of the truth. Their rhetorical style often embodied

demagoguery which appealed to the emotions of the listener rather

188

than a representation of objective facts or truths. Their use of moral

relativism worried Athenians like Socrates and Plato who thought the

endeavor toward morality and ethical behavior should be grounded in

the objective not the subjective; they believed the sophists were

irresponsible teachers that corrupted their students. Many of Plato’s

dialogues revolve around the idea that sophistry is a superficial form

of knowledge that sends people spiraling away from the search for the

true virtues. The following are a sample of the more prominent

sophists:

Protagoras of Abdera: sophist that was known for moral relativism

and coined the phrase ‘man is the measure of all things’

Gorgias of Leontini: sophist who believed that persuasive speech

shaped our reality

Hippias of Elis: sophist known as a polymath, expert in multiple

fields such as math, poetry, history, grammar, etc.

Prodicus of Ceos: sophist that was respected by Plato and known for

his ideas on the linguistics and the influence of precise words and

language

189

Socrates:

Socrates was an Athenian born c. 470 BCE and lived until his

political execution in 399 BCE; a date that many historians claim is

the end of the Athenian Golden Age. Socrates is considered the father

of modern western philosophy. Although he did not write anything

down that has been preserved, students like Plato recorded much of

his methods and teachings. He was the son of Sophronicus, a

stonemason, and served as a hoplite soldier during the Peloponnesian

War. His main contributions to philosophy were in ethics,

epistemology, and his famous method of inquiry called the Socratic

Method. The Socratic Method (Elenchus) is a cooperative form of

dialogue with an interlocutor where Socrates asks a series of probing

questions to examine their core beliefs on universal ideas like truth,

justice, and beauty. The intention was not always to bring about a

clear answer but it centered on the act of critical thinking to reveal

logical inconsistencies in ideas and beliefs and clarify philosophical

concepts; the endeavor stressed the importance of the pursuit of truth

in morality, ethics, and virtue through rational thought. Socrates was

known to proclaim that he was the only Athenian that was sure that he

knew nothing, which made him wiser than most. He was also known

190

for holding the belief that the unexamined life was not worth living;

the idea that self-reflection was critical to our existence. Another tool

he used is termed the Socratic Ignorance, which was a philosophical

stance that he practiced during his investigations which emphasized

humility and one’s limitations in knowledge; the main idea of this is

that in order to search for truth it is sometimes necessary to suspend

one’s preconceived notions and previous knowledge on the matter. He

was a rabid critic of the sophists and believed that absolute truth could

be reached through rational thought and reason. The great irony of his

life is that he, instead of the sophists, was convicted of impiety and

corrupting the youth and executed in 399 BCE.

Plato:

The man we know as Plato, who lived from c. 427 BCE to c.

347 BCE, was actually named Aristocles after his grandfather. Plato,

which means broad or broad forehead, was a nickname thought to

have been given to him by his wresting instructor; the name stuck. He

was born near the beginning of the Peloponnesian War but did serve

in the military near its end from 409 BCE to 404 BCE. He was born

into a wealthy family and his father, Ariston, was rumored to have

descended from the Athenian kings. His mother, Perictione, was said

191

to be related to Solon the Lawgiver. He was exposed to the teachings

of Socrates as a young man and the execution of his teacher had a

profound effect on his subsequent ideas of government, social

structures, and the search for meaning in universal ideas like justice

and the nature of the soul; ideas that were expressed in famous

writings like The Republic and The Timaeus. His concept of Forms or

universals heavily shaped western philosophy throughout the Middle

Ages and had a profound effect on Neo-Platonism and Christianity.

Like his teacher, his influences were felt in the philosophical pursuits

of ethics and epistemology coupled with his own thoughts on

metaphysics and political and societal theory.

Group Activity:

During this course unit, following the discussion post

assignment, the class will break up into groups of six that are divided

into two teams of three. Each team will either defend or oppose the

logic of Socrates in Plato’s Crito. They will attempt to influence and

change the stance of the other team. This allows the students to learn

from their peers and react to opposing positions on a topic. They will

need to construct a logical argument to defend their position and

present it to the opposing team in order to sway them away from their

192

own position. This activity builds skills in group cooperation and

logical reasoning and it is an alteration to the lecture pedagogical

paradigm encouraging students to leave their comfort zones and learn

from each other.

193

Unit 4D Assignment Discussion Post (30 Points)

What is Socrates’ argument in Crito for not wanting his friends to help

him escape from prison? What is the bigger picture that he is trying to

convey? Please write at least two paragraphs in response to this

question. Please respond to the posts of two other classmates.

Crito is one of Plato’s shorter dialogues but it is a brilliant defense of

social contracts that inspired the later works of Locke, Hobbes, and

Rousseau. The philosophy of Socrates and Plato is difficult to

understand if you have never been exposed. Plato’s writings can be

very subtle with deeper meanings embedded in the text. The students

will benefit from a discussion post and reading other classmates’ ideas

on the material.

194

Unit 4 Test

Multiple Choice, True/False, and Short Answer Questions (100

Points)

1. What did the sophist, Gorgias, believe shaped our reality?

Persuasive speech

2. In Plato’s dialogue, Crito, what unspoken relationship did

Socrates believe citizens had with their city-states? Social

contract

3. What were the two major events that Victor Davis Hanson

believed caused the downfall of the Athenian Empire? The

plague and the Sicilian expedition

4. What was the name of the cooperative form of dialogue used

by Socrates which included probing questions? Socratic

method

5. In the play, Lysistra, what do the females use against the men

to force them to the end the war? Withhold sex

6. Which Greek civilization did the Athenians completely destroy

by killing all of the men and enslaving the women and

children? Melian

195

7. Which speech in Thucydides’ History of the Peloponnesian

War is thought to be a masterpiece of rhetorical and political

propaganda? Pericles’ funeral oration

8. What was the name of the of the short-lived oligarchical

institution that was instituted by the Spartans on the Athenian

city-state following the Peloponnesian War? Thirty Tyrants

9. Which city-state was subject to an economic blockade by the

Athenians causing the Spartans to issue an ultimatum? Megara

10. Who were the itinerant teachers that traveled the Greek world

teaching rhetoric and moral relativism? Sophists

11. Who were the Spartan king and ephor that had opposing views

during the Spartan Debate? Archidamus II and Sthenelaidas

12. (T/F) Socrates’ student, Aristocles, was nicknamed Plato

which meant broad forehead. True

13. (T/F) Herodotus was the great Athenian historian who wrote

about the Peloponnesian War. False

14. What was the ironic name of the anthropomorphized statue at

the end of Lysistrata? Peace

196

15. What was the name of the conflict where the Athenians fought

the Spartans over the rights of Delphi and its inhabitants?

Second Sacred War

16. In 440 BCE, which two Greek city-states battled over the city

of Priene in Asia Minor? Miletus and Samos

17. (T/F) Socrates educated the children of wealthy Athenians so

they could learn to speak forcefully in the agora and Ekklesia.

False

18. Which Athenian strategos defected to Sparta when he was

recalled in order to stand trial for sacrilegious behavior?

Alcibiades

19. Which Athenian strategos had a great military mind but was

largely ignored during the Sicilian expedition leading to a

disastrous outcome for Athens? Lamachus

20. Which final naval battle ended the Peloponnesian War in 405

BCE? Battle of Aegospotami

21. (T/F) Aristophanes was a tragic playwright who lived in

Athens in the 5th century BCE. False

22. Which strategos during the Sicilian expedition was known for

being conservative to a fault? Nicias

197

23. Which two gulfs did Megara have access to as they were

strategically positioned on the Corinthian isthmus? Saronic

and Corinth

24. During the First Peloponnesian War, which port city did

Athens build walls around mimicking their strategy at Piraeus?

Nisaea

25. (T/F) During the final years of the Second Peloponnesian War

in 431 BCE, Athens and Sparta fought a series of bloody land

battles. False

26. To which ancient Athenian was Plato’s mother, Perictione,

rumored to have been related? Solon

27. Plato’s Crito was the inspiration for which later philosophers

who wrote about social contracts? Hobbes, Locke, and

Rousseau

28. During the Second Peloponnesian War in 415 BCE, which

city-state did the Athenians attempt to subjugate due to their

prime shipping location? Syracuse

29. Which sophist was known as a polymath claiming expertise in

math, poetry, history, and grammar? Hippias of Elis

198

30. Which of the major Athenian values was thrown to the

wayside during the uncertainty of the plague? Sophrosyne

Short Answer Questions

1. Briefly explain how the plague and the Sicilian expedition

were the two major contributors to Athens losing the

Peloponnesian War.

2. Briefly explain why Socrates does not want Crito to help him

escape from prison.

3. What does the play, Lysistrata, tell us about the Athenian

opinion toward the Peloponnesian War? Why?

199

Chapter 3 CONCLUSION

Conclusion

The assembly of this course has been an exciting endeavor that

has further convinced me that interdisciplinary practices are crucial in

creating engaging curriculum that challenges students in a variety of

ways. The traditional approach of presenting the ancient Greek society

over an expansive and unwieldy timeline waters down the subject

matter and does not inspire the imagination of the students nor does it

enhance their comprehension in any dramatic fashion. I believe this

project demonstrates the usefulness of looking at brief, manageable

periods of history in order to dives more deeply into the curriculum.

Integrating the humanities with a focused historical narrative,

ultimately creating an interdisciplinary approach, adds depth to the

subject matter that yields an approach to the timeline that is far more

interesting than the traditional. It also creates a pliability to the course

because the humanities provides a plethora of subject matter options

and the manageable timeline makes the integration of impromptu

lessons on art or philosophy nearly seamless.

This course largely moves away from textbooks and relies

heavily on primary sources, semi-contemporary secondary sources,

200

and modern scholarship which I believe is a relatively more engaging

approach to the material. This time period featured the first two

attempts at modern scholarship in history by Herodotus and

Thucydides so it would be an academic misstep not to lean heavily

upon this material. Not to mention Plutarch lived and wrote within the

same cultural era so he likely had access to more material, which he

attained during his expansive travels, that is no longer available to us.

His biographies on key Athenians figures that are mentioned in our

textbook and in lectures offer a much more complete insight and fuller

picture of who these people were beyond their accomplishments. The

class also gets to engage with writings from great thinkers like Plato

and Aristotle as they provide their opinions on democracy, social

contracts, and historical accounts of Athenians like Cleisthenes who

were integral in shaping Athenian society and governmental practice

during the 5th century BCE.

Subject material only gets us part way to our goal of

reimagining the course of study. The pedagogical approach that I have

implemented asks the students to be active participants in the process

which is why class participation is so important as I indicated in the

course syllabus. The students will engage with each other throughout

201

the semester, specifically during their discussion posts, group

activities, participation during class during sessions on the Athenian

theater, and debates. This allows them the opportunity to be exposed

to ideas from students that come from different backgrounds and

cultures which, if they are open to it, can shape and realign their own

perspective.

Alterations to our approach to what material we present and an

interdisciplinary approach being central to how we present it coupled

with more interactive pedagogical styles may inspire students to

return to humanities and history courses.

202

Reflections and Recommendations

Since history is part of the social sciences, it occurred to me as

I continued to revisit the content of this project and its units that the

students might benefit by linking the material to different periods of

history, including modern events. For example, the plague that

devastated Athens during the Peloponnesian War shares some

commonalities with the COVID19 crisis that we all recently lived

through. The Athenians experienced a moral crisis as their family

members died all around them in such alarming numbers that they

were not able to send them along their way to the afterlife with a

proper burial. The crisis was so great that it completely altered

lamentation pottery practices and styles. During the COVID19 crisis

we witnessed people being outraged as their loved ones died in

hospitals alone because they were not allowed to be by their sides due

to the threat of massive spreading and the overwhelmingly

unprecedented burden it placed upon doctors and nurses thereby

disrupting common hospital practice and policy.

I think the Peloponnesian War itself shares commonalities in

causation with World War I. The defensive alliances between city-

states and ensuing leagues mirrors the defensive alliances we saw

203

among the Central Powers and The Triple Entente during the First

World War. These alliances pulled many city-states and nations into

war and turned a local conflict into a much more devastating war.

The antiwar rhetoric from Euripides and Aristophanes mirrors

what we saw in the United States during the Vietnam conflict of the

1960s. Like Aristophanes’ Lysistrata and Euripides’ Trojan Women,

the counterculture of the 1960s created rebellious musicals like “Hair”

and a genre of anti-war folk music by musicians like Bob Dylan and

ensemble groups like Crosby, Stills, Nash, and Young.

These are some recommendations to enhance these lectures

and connect the curriculum to other historical and modern world

events. I believe this to be a pedagogical approach that makes the

material more relevant and can increase comprehension and perhaps

an interest in humanities and history courses.

204

Appendix A.

Homer and the Beginning of Political Thought

in Greece

Kurt A. Raaflaub

[. . .]

To use the epics as historical evidence poses serious problems. For my

present purposes it suffices simply to state my position. In the form in which

they survive, the Iliad and Odyssey each are the work of one and possibly the

same ""monumental'' poet who lived in the late eighth century in Ionia. Unlike

the events and actions that are attributed to the heroes and therefore elevated

into a superhuman sphere, the world in which they live and act is human, real,

accessible, and understandable to the poet's audience. The practical aspects of

life such as the extended household (oikos), the early stages of the polis,

agriculture, trade, and war, assemblies and council, relationships within the

community and the value system of the leading class

these practical aspects

form a system that is sufficiently consistent in itself to mirror a historical society

which, according to Moses Finley, is to be dated in the tenth and early ninth

centuries, according to others

and more probably

a little later. However that

may be, much more important is that the social, political and moral concerns

we find in the epics, are the concerns of a real society and, at least in this

respect, the poet's own.

Nevertheless, the epics are primarily artistic masterpieces of the highest

order. Equally, the poets and bards aimed primarily at entertaining their

listeners and glorifying their ancestral heroes. Accordingly we should

expect the epics to present, even in their more contemporary elements, a

highly positive picture of the ""aristoc- racy.''2 Over vast stretches that is

indeed the case. But there are notable exceptions, and these are particularly

useful for our purposes. Some of them we have already discussed; let us

look at a few more.

Iliad I and II

The Iliad begins with the quarrel between Achilles and Agamemnon which

is caused by two bad mistakes on the part of the king and results in Achilles'

withdrawal from the war. In its basic outline this story certainly was very

old. In our poet's interpret- ation it is a conflict between the leader and his

most eminent ally. Achilles is the better fighter and the son of a goddess but

he is not equal to Agamemnon who commands the greater number of men.

The stronger has to subordinate himself to the more powerful: a difficult

situation which requires tact and mutual respect, qualities that are lacking in

both. Achilles is perfectly justified in doing and saying what he does; he has

every right to remind Agamemnon of his duties, to point out his mistakes,

and to be offended by the king's decision to make another pay for his own

loss. But that it is

205

Kurt A. Raaflaub, ""Homer and the Beginning of Political Thought in Greece,''

in Proceedings of the Boston Area Colloquium Series in Ancient Philosophy 4

(Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1988), 1-25,

pp. 8-22.

Achilles, of all people, who says these things, and how he says them, is

unbearable for the king who feels threatened by a conspiracy of the seer and

the overbearing chieftain. In order to save his face and position, he must

demonstrate his power over the rival

whatever the consequences,

that you may learn well

how much greater I am than you, and another man

may shrink back from likening himself to me and

contending against me.

(I 185-187; cf. 287-291)

This is a realistic scene, probably one familiar enough to the audience. It

gains an additional dimension because the poet is not satisfied with

describing the quarrel between the heroes but strongly emphasizes its

consequences for the community. Agamemnon is aware of his obligation as

a leader: ""I myself desire that my people be safe, not perish'' (117). But his

pride prevails and causes immense disaster for his people, so that Achilles

can justly call him ""devourer of his people.''3

On the other hand, by withdrawing from the war, Achilles provides the

immediate cause for the Greeks' suffering; and he knows it (240-244):

Some day longing for Achilleus will come to the

sons of the Achaians, all of them. Then stricken at

heart though you be, you will be able

to do nothing, when in their numbers before man-

slaughtering Hektor they drop and die. And then you

will eat out the heart within you

in sorrow, that you did no honor to the best of the Achaians.

By sacrificing the common good to their personal feelings, both heroes, then,

violate the ""heroic code'' and thereby threaten the very basis of their

privileged position. For the hero's honor is tied to his obligation of protecting

and saving his people4

an obligation clearly described in Sarpedon's often

quoted address to Glaukos5 and admirably met by Hector, the ""Saviour of

the city'' par excellence, whose son Skamandrios is named Astyanax, ""Lord

of the city,'' by the Trojans in gratitude for his father's achievement.6

Thus both heroes are at fault, but the primary responsibility lies with the

king. He therefore has to bear the brunt of popular anger, as it is expressed

so vividly in the famous Diapeira of Book II. As a result of the king's attempt

206

to test the resolve of his men the masses rush to the ships. No, this war is not

popular, especially after Achilles' withdrawal. With great difficulty

Odysseus restores order. But one man goes on ranting against the king:

Thersites, full of disorderly words, ""vain, and without decency, forever

quarreling with the princes,'' the ugliest man in the camp: bandy- legged and

lame on one foot, with stooped shoulders and a narrow chest, a pointed skull

and almost bald (II 212-219). The poet tries hard to discredit him from the

beginning, and when Thersites at the end gets his deserved beating the

crowd is ecstatic: the greatest deed Odysseus has ever done (244-278).

Having thus made clear that this man counts for nothing, the poet can let him

say what actually is to be taken very seriously.7 For what Thersites says not

only is explicitly described as venting the anger of the masses (222 f.) but

corresponds closely with Achilles' criticism of the king in Book I. He berates

Agamemnon for his greed and obsession with women, and continues (233-

242):

It is not right for

you, their leader, to lead in sorrow the sons

of the Achaians. My good fools, poor abuses,

you women, not men, of Achaia, let us go

back home in our ships, and leave this man

here

by himself in Troy to mull his prizes of honor

that he may find out whether or not we others are helping him.

And now he has dishonored Achilleus, a man much

better than he is . . . But there is no gall in Achilleus'

heart, and he is forgiving.

Otherwise, son of Atreus, this were your last outrage.

We may conclude, then, that the king's self-centered and irresponsible behavior

not only threatens the well-being of the army and the success of the whole

enterprise, but has caused a deep crisis of leadership. The rebellion of the most

important vassal with all his followers, the enthusiastic ""vote by feet'' of

the whole army to end the war there and then, and the tirades of the antihero

par excellence are all expressions of profound dissatisfaction with the king.

Odysseus' firm refutation of

polykoira

e, rulership by many, supports this

conclusion (203 f.). Fortunately for those in power, it is still relatively easy

to contain the masses. But in my view scenes such as those described in Iliad

I and II attest an awareness that the masses fighting in the war and sitting

in the assembly represent at least a potential power factor. Otherwise it would

be futile for Achilles, Hector, and Thersites to decry the people's passiveness

and lack of courage.

207

Odyssey II

I think it can be shown that such dissatisfaction among the masses is aimed

not only at the king, as in the cases of Paris/Priam and Agamemnon, but

at large sections of the leading class. As is shown in the Odyssey, the

conflict between communal and individual interests is a problem as much in

peace as in war. When the survival of the community is not threatened by war

the powerful nobleman with his household (oikos) is almost autonomous.

Community and king cannot expect from him more than voluntary cooperation;

there are no legal or practical possibilities short of violence to impose a superior

will on an unwilling oikos. At the same time an individual or oikos that is

threatened by others cannot expect help from the community; they have to help

themselves or seek protection under a more powerful patron.

However, Book II of the Odyssey shows beginnings of change in this respect

as well. Odysseus has been gone for twenty years and is supposed dead. A

band of suitors, sons of the best families from near and far, have occupied

Odysseus' house, pressuring his wife Penelope to agree to a new marriage which

would at the same time determine the succession, and threatening the king's

oikos with economic ruin, thereby also weakening Telemachos' chances to

succeed his father. Encouraged by Athena, Tele- machos finally decides to

fight back. He convenes an assembly. There has not been one for twenty

years; the reason must be important: a threat of war or some other urgent public

business (30-32). The assembly, that is, does not deal with private affairs,

not even those of the oikos of the king. Yes, says Telemachos, I know; in fact,

I have no such public business to offer for discussion

(41-

44) but the (private)

evils that have befallen my house, caused by the suitors,

are beyond all justice, beyond endurance. Do you feel no self-

reproach yourselves, no shame for the reproach of your neighbors, of

those who live all around you here? You should shrink from the anger

of the gods; the gods in their indignation may bring your misdoings

down on your own heads. I appeal to you by Olympian Zeus himself, I

appeal by Themis, who convenes men's councils, cease from these

ways . . . [unless] my noble father once did in malice some harm to the

Achaeans for which in counter-malice you take your revenge on me

by hounding on these men against me? (45-79; W. Shewring's prose

transl.)

So, though private business, it is of public concern, because the reputation

of the community is at stake, and its safety may be in peril if indeed the gods

punish injustice (143 f., cf. I 378-380). As also in the case of Hesiod,

Telemachos' strongest argu- ment is based on religious belief and hope.9

Zeus promptly sends an omen which is interpreted by the seer Halitherses:

Odysseus is close, the suitors are in mortal danger, many others in Ithaca will

be hurt; let us straighten things out while there is still time (161-169). To no

avail: the people, though overcome by compassion, keep silent (81-83), and

the suitors are not impressed: they fear neither Telemachos nor the gods and

see no reason to drop their competition for queen and kingship (85 ff., esp.

111-128; 198-201).

208

Then old Mentor gives a remarkable speech (229-241), insisting on three

points. First, he does not reproach the suitors for their violent deeds, because

they are staking their own lives in injuring the house of Odysseus (235-238,

cf. 281-284). In other words: what else do you expect of young noblemen?

It is their problem if in their competition for power and rank they use the

most vicious methods and risk their lives. This does not seem to me to mirror

a high opinion of the behavior typical of noblemen.

Second, he criticizes the people in the assembly:

It is the rest of you I am indignant with, to see how you all sit dumbly

there instead of rebuking them and restraining them; you are many;

the suitors are few. (239-241)

What appears a distant possibility in the Iliad is here turned into a direct

appeal, expressed not by the despicable Thersites but by the respected

Mentor. Here we grasp the very beginnings of the concept of communal

responsibility.

Third, Mentor justifies the need for such communal involvement:

I could wish that henceforward no sceptered king should set himself

to be kind and gentle and equitable; I would have every king a tyrant

and evil-doer, since King Odysseus goes utterly unremembered among

the people that once he ruled with the gentleness of a father. (230-234;

cf. V 8-12)

That means: Odysseus was a good king without the faults one ordinarily

expects from men in his position.10 As Penelope says to the suitors

in Book IV (687-695):

Never, in either word or deed, did he wrong any man among the

people, though that is the way of heaven-protected kings; true, a king

will befriend one man, but then he will persecute another. With

Odysseus it was never so; he was never a tyrant to any man. But

your own . . . shameful actions show themselves plainly for what they

are, and past kindness leaves you ungrateful now.

For these merits, the community is obliged to Odysseus and to his family.

To ignore such obligations violates traditional rules of behavior,11 just as the

behavior of some of the suitors is doubly objectionable because they are

ignoring their personal obligations toward their benefactor Odysseus.12

Moreover, by showing such a lack of gratitude, the community sets a

negative example; henceforth, there will be no incentive for a king to put

the interest of the community above his own.

Telemachos appeals to the sentiments of the people and stresses moral and

religious

concerns; Mentor argues politically: what appears to be a private

209

struggle in fact is of central importance to the community as a whole, not

only because it affects its present reputation and safety, but because it is

going to determine in the future the relationship between king and

community and thereby the well-being of all. To shed passiveness and take

a stand therefore is indispensable. I think what we have here is the earliest

case in which a causal relationship is observed on a primarily political, not

moral or religious, level, and then applied to a political issue.13

Mentor, however, remains unsuccessful as well. Since the leading families

of Ithaca support their sons among the suitors there is no powerful leader (like

Achilles in Iliad I) to lend political assistance to popular sentiment.

Nevertheless the suitors fear that Telemachos might eventually succeed in

arousing the people against them (IV 630- 672). Their first attempt to

assassinate him fails; they meet secretly to devise a better plan. One of them

says:

He himself is gifted in mind and counsel, and the people now by no

means look kindly on us. We must act, then, before he summons the

Achaeans to assembly

When they

hear of our wickedness they will take it hard; I fear they will turn to

violence, drive us out from our own country and force us to seek

some foreign land. (XVI 361 ff., esp. 374-382)

Their plan, of course, will not be realized.

Indeed, the people and assembly are by no means negligible factors; their

reactions and sentiments are watched carefully, and in the right

circumstances and with the right leader they might suddenly play a much

more significant role. We should remember here, as Eric Havelock points

out, that the assembly also has an important function in jurisdiction and that

it must witness public acts.14 Moreover, the men it is composed of form a

decisive part of the army; as Joachim Latacz shows convincingly, the battle

scenes and parades of armies in the Iliad mirror the early stages of the

massive hoplite formation which could not exist without the involvement of

large segments of the non-aristocratic population.15

Furthermore, the Odyssey emphasizes the relations between upper and lower

classes, rich and poor, powerful and weak. The problems of hunger and

poverty, and the misery of the socially underprivileged are often described.

Several times their plight is connected with the vicissitudes of human fate that

can turn a king into a beggar, refugee, or slave: Odysseus and Eumaeus are

obvious cases.

Those outsiders are protected by Zeus. They are treated in an

exemplary way by the Phaeacians, Telemachos, Penelope, and Eumaeus. And

again it is the suitors, the elite of noble

youth, who consistently and deliberately violate the norms of socially

acceptable behavior. Their disaster therefore represents deserved

punishment brought about by the gods and just men. Thus from its very

beginning Greek social and political thought pays attention to the

relationships not only between equals but also between unequals in the polis,

and it does not hesitate to condemn the negative behavior of at least parts of

210

the nobility.17

To sum up this part of my argument, the concerns emphasized by the epic

poet in the scenes we have discussed so far all deal with basic problems of

life and relation- ships in a community. The thought devoted to these

concerns is political thought. It occupies a remarkably prominent place

already in these earliest works of western literature. In keeping with the

literary and poetic nature of these works, such thought is fully integrated into

the narrative and expressed through action and speech. In other words, the

poet uses traditional mythical narrative to discuss ethical and political

problems that are important to his audience. By creating positive and

negative models of social behavior, by illuminating the causes and

consequences of certain actions and relating those to the well-being of the

community, the poet raises the level of awareness among his listeners, he

forces them to think, he educates them. Here then, to say it paradoxically, in

non-political poetry in a prepolitical society, lie the roots of Greek political

thought.

Hesiod

It would be tempting to present a similar analysis of political thought in

Hesiod. For reasons of space I have to limit myself to a very brief comment.

While the problem of justice plays a much larger role in the Homeric epics

than I was able to show in my short expose', it is absolutely central in

Hesiod's poems, particularly in the Works and

Days. Hesiod too sees the well-

being of the entire community threatened by irrespon-

sible actions of its

leaders, although the conditions in peaceful rural Boeotia lead him to

concentrate not on the power struggles among the nobles and the military

side of their leadership but on their role as judges.18 Their venality and

preference for crooked sentences cause him to reflect on the relationship

between justice and prosperity of individual and community, and to

recognize the all-important function of Zeus, the protector of justice who

blesses the just and punishes the unjust. Although he cannot offer proof, his

strong belief in the justice, power, and care of Zeus stimulates him to

describe his insight in a series of impressive images such as the fate of the just

and unjust cities (225-247) or the maltreatment of the goddess Dike,

Justice, the daughter of Zeus, who howls

when she is dragged about by bribe-

devouring men whose verdicts are crooked

when they sit in judgment . . .

She rushes to sit at the feet of Zeus Kronion

and she denounces the designs of men who are

not just, so that the people pay for the reckless

deeds and evil plans of kings whose slanted

words twist her straight path.

(220f.; 259-262; transl. A. Athanassakis)

211

The significance of all this for the early development of political and legal

thought has long been recognized.19 No less significant is Hesiod's effort to

complement the negative picture of a world dominated by human injustice

with the positive picture of the just, fair, and responsible rule of Zeus among

the gods. This picture is drawn in rich detail in the Theogony, which has less

frequently been read with careful attention to its political aspects.20 Like

Homer, Hesiod does not argue abstractly. Rather, he skilfully uses the

possibilities offered by myth, genealogy and dramatic narrative to develop

a complex set of concepts and to present a coherent model of good leader-

ship, thereby providing a challenging response to one of the most urgent

social and political problems of his own time.

Conclusion: The Origin of Political Thought

Let me summarize and then explain. Already in its earliest manifestations

Greek thought dealt intensively with the following problems, among others:

the detrimental

consequences of conflicts within the leading class and of

irresponsible actions of kings

and noblemen; the possibilities of avoiding such

conflicts and actions or controlling and overcoming them if they occurred;

the discrepancy between communal and individual interests; the possibilities

of improving and enforcing justice; the responsi- bility of community and

nobility for the socially underprivileged and the outsiders; the political and

moral problems connected with war.

These all are political problems that were of great importance for the

survival and well-being of the community and that were to occupy Greek

thought for centuries to come. Moreover, although a decisive role as

promoters and enforcers of justice is attributed to the gods and particularly

to Zeus because there is no sufficiently powerful and just human agent to

rely upon for such purposes, the problems tackled by political thought fit into

an entirely human framework of cause and effect. In other words, the gods

punish evildoers and their communities and, through seers, poets, or leaders

blessed by them, they may offer advice about salutary measures to be taken

in a crisis, but they neither cause nor solve such a crisis.21 Rather, the crisis

is caused by specific human mistakes or irresponsible acts within a given

society, and it must be solved by that society itself. It is man's responsibility

for the well-being of his community, therefore, upon which political thought

focuses its attention from the very beginning, and that, I think, sets Greek

political thought apart from any prede- cessors or parallels that may have

existed in other civilizations, whether earlier or contemporary; that makes it

truly political thought.22

A striking example for the difference I am trying to define can be found

by comparing the Hesiodic explanation of the origin of evil in the world and

its Sumerian counterpart. In Hesiod Pandora brings all the evils into the

world as punishment for the crimes of Prometheus who tried to deceive Zeus

and acted against Zeus' strict orders. Prometheus, though divine, is the patron

par excellence of man and thereby the leader of the human community at

large.23 Therefore, just as the city has to pay for the wrongs committed by its

king or one of its citizens, so mankind has to suffer for the injustice

212

committed by their leader.24 According to the Sumerian myth, the evils came

into existence when Enki, the god of sweet waters, and Ninmah,

the goddess of the earth, quarrelled at a party. In Thorkild Jacobsen's words,

the evils were created, ""in a moment of irresponsibility, when the gods were

in their cups and succumbed momentarily to envy and a desire to show

off.''25

If this, then, is the beginning of Greek political thought, there immediately

follows the question of ""why then and there?'' What were the causes and

preconditions that made such thought possible or necessary in archaic

Greece? I shall conclude by outlining a few observations that may help to

answer this difficult question.26 First, archaic Greek society was not

dominated by a sacred kingship. Unlike the situation in earlier Near Eastern

societies, obedience and subordination were not the principal virtues.27

Greek religion did not demand the passive acceptance of an absolute divine

will. Authority was not unassailable; criticism and independence were not

principally excluded.

Second, after the turmoils of the Dark Ages Greek society was split into

small and often topographically confined units in which the polis gradually

became the pre- dominant form of community. There did not exist any large

and centralized territorial states because, it seems, the formation of such

states was required neither by major external threats nor by economic

necessities. For centuries the Aegean World was pretty much left to itself.

Wars mostly consisted of neighborhood conflicts that rarely threatened the

existence of the community.28 The tribal kingship inherited from the

period

of transition and migration was weak. The king was a primus inter pares whose

position was based on his personal resources and qualities. The members of

the ""proto-aristocratic'' leading class envisaged by Homer and Hesiod

enjoyed basic equality. In their intensive competition for influence and

power the king was vulner-

able to criticism like everyone else. Eventually

kingship proved unnecessary altogether

and disappeared in most places.29

Third, the aristocracy that gradually emerged was ambitious. Their efforts

to set up barriers against those not belonging to their circle30 failed, however,

because, despite their glorious self-presentation, only a relatively small gap

separated them from the broad ""middle'' class of independent farmers.

These ""semi-aristocrats''31 played an increasingly indispensable role in the

hoplite army and assembly, a role that in a rudimentary form is already

visible in Homer. The nobility therefore depended on that large landowning

middle class, had to recognize and increasingly respect their sentiments and

were in turn open to criticism. Criticism, that is, was possible, and in those

small, open communities, in which everybody knew everybody, reasons for

criticism were easily found. Furthermore, because of the lack of massive

external pressure and the relatively harmless nature of war there was no need

of a strong, disciplined, and cohesive class of leaders. Typically, the

aristocracy soon sought to prove its excellence in an alternative area, that of

sports. The significance of all this becomes even clearer if one compares it

with the situation in early Rome.32

213

Fourth, all this happened in a period of rapid social change.33 The

population was growing. The polis developed into a tight unit in which the

communal element was

strengthened at the expense of the individual oikos, and

power and political procedures

were formalized and somewhat

depersonalized. Colonization, seafaring, and trade

offered many opportunities

for success and economic gain. Social and political mobility

increased. Many

non-nobles acquired enough wealth and self-confidence and had proved

their capabilities sufficiently to enter competition with the aristocracy

which, in turn, lost much of its cohesion, exclusiveness, and unquestioned

predominance.

214

This complex development was compounded by a deep crisis which affected large parts of Greece

in the seventh century.34 Often it resulted in violent confrontations between the mostly aristocratic

wealthy landowners and large parts of the smaller landholders who were tied to the former through

various forms of dependency. These conflicts usually ended in some sort of social compromise

between the classes and in the possibility of increased political participation by at least those farmers

who fought in the hoplite army.

Fifth, in these crises it became necessary to find new ways of solving conflicts. Each polis had its

own institutions and customs; comparison with those of others must have been easy and frequent.

In the course of colonization such opportunities of comparison were used more frequently and new

solutions were tried out, particularly since the colonists often came from different towns and might

have left home precisely because of their dissatisfaction with the existing order and the social conflicts

caused by it.

Such violent conflicts demanded compromises and creative solutions. Often those

involved agreed upon a procedure of mediation and legislation by a person or group standing above

the parties. The connection between some of those mediators, belonging to the group of the ""Seven

Sages,'' and Delphi seems to indicate that such efforts were encouraged and supported by that

panhellenic sanctu- ary. Delphi also played an important role in collecting information and giving

advice in matters of colonization. All these tasks required an increasingly wide-spread, highly developed,

and highly respected culture of political thought which found its expression in remarkably complex,

radical, and innovative solutions. It suffices to mention the reforms introduced in Athens by Solon

and Cleisthenes at the beginning and end of the sixth century.

Many of these five factors existed already in the late eighth century, although they became more

pronounced and significant over the next 200 years. They formed

the preconditions for the emergence

and further development of political thought, the framework in which such thought was not suppressed but

possible and eventually even necessary. Finally, there is a sixth factor, the immediate cause that provoked the

earliest manifestations of political thought and remained one of its most cogent stimuli. This is

the

dissatisfaction with the shortcomings of aristocratic leadership, the discrepancy between the

interests of community and individual which we found at the core of Homer's and Hesiod's political

concerns. By observing, criticizing and even refuting some of the values, norms, and attitudes of

the aristocracy, the early thinkers were provoked to analyze and define the essential problems and

needs of the community, and then to conceive and propagate alternative values and possibilities of

behavior. Thus it is the long drawn-out confrontation between the claims of the community and

those

of an individualistic aristocracy to which the Greeks owed not only the polis in its classical form and an

autonomous political sphere within the polis, but also the impetus

and development of their political

thought.

215

Appendix B. Poetry of Solon the Lawgiver

Eunomia

These things my spirit bids me

teach the men of Athens:

that Dysnomia

brings countless evils for the city,

but Eunomia brings order

and makes everything proper,

by enfolding the unjust in fetters,

smoothing those things that are rough,

stopping greed,

sentencing hybris to obscurity

making the flowers of mischief to whither,

and straightening crooked judgments.

It calms the deeds of arrogance

and stops the bilious anger of harsh strife.

Under its control, all things are proper

and prudence reigns human affairs.

The Man Whose Riches Satisfy His Greed

The man whose riches satisfy his greed

Is not more rich for all those heaps and hoards

Than some poor man who has enough to feed

And clothe his corpse with such as God affords.

I have no use for men who steal and cheat;

The fruit of evil poisons those who eat.

Some wicked men are rich, some good men poor,

But I would rather trust in what's secure;

Our virtue sticks with us and makes us strong,

But money changes owners all day long.

216

Justice and the City

Our city will never perish because of Zeus,

Or through the plans of the happy immortal gods—

For our guardian is great of spirit: the one born of a mighty father,

Pallas Athena holds her hands over us.

But the very citizens plot to destroy this great city,

being dragged off by wealth in their folly.

The leaders of the people think unjustly, and

in their arrogance prepare to receive great pains:

For they do not know how to restrain themselves from excess,

or how to temper their present feasting in peaceful harmony,

But rather grow wealthy as they are persuaded of unjust deeds;

not sparing possessions sacred or civic, they steal,

snatching away left and right—

Nor do they heed the seeds of the foundations of Justice

who, silently, knows what happens and what has been,

and comes, in time, always, avenging.

There comes a wound, unavoidable, presently, to every city,

which goes quickly into wretched slavery—

which awakens civil discord, and sleeping war—

which destroys the lovely youth of many—

for in meetings that are dear to the unjust

a well-beloved city is swiftly laid waste by her enemies.

These evils then run among the citizenry: many of the needy

go into a foreign land, sold,

and bound with unseemly fetters,

and bear by force the shameful labors of slavery.

Thus this common evil enters every house,

nor are the outer doors still willing to hold it out.

It leaps a high fence, and even if a man should flee into the corner

of his inner chamber, by all means, it finds him.

These things my heart urges me to teach the Athenians:

how unsound governance gives greatest evils to a city,

sound governance shows everything orderly and suitable,

and often binds fetters around the unjust,

and levels off the unequal, arrests surfeit, tempers blazing arrogance,

withers the blooming flowers of ruin,

straightens crooked judgments, makes prideful deeds

to be mild, arrests the works of dissension,

stops the bile of torturous strife, and so it is that through it

everything concerning humans is made wise and harmonious.

217

Appendix C. Politics by Aristotle

Written 350 B.C.E

Translated by Benjamin Jowett

Part I

We have now considered the varieties of the deliberative or supreme power in states, and

the various arrangements of law-courts and state offices, and which of them are adapted

to different forms of government. We have also spoken of the destruction and

preservation of constitutions, how and from what causes they arise.

Of democracy and all other forms of government there are many kinds; and it will be well

to assign to them severally the modes of organization which are proper and advantageous

to each, adding what remains to be said about them. Moreover, we ought to consider the

various combinations of these modes themselves; for such combinations make

constitutions overlap one another, so that aristocracies have an oligarchical character,

and constitutional governments incline to democracies.

When I speak of the combinations which remain to be considered, and thus far have not

been considered by us, I mean such as these: when the deliberative part of the

government and the election of officers is constituted oligarchically, and the law-courts

aristocratically, or when the courts and the deliberative part of the state are oligarchical,

and the election to office aristocratical, or when in any other way there is a want of

harmony in the composition of a state.

I have shown already what forms of democracy are suited to particular cities, and what of

oligarchy to particular peoples, and to whom each of the other forms of government is

suited. Further, we must not only show which of these governments is the best for each

state, but also briefly proceed to consider how these and other forms of government are to

be established.

First of all let us speak of democracy, which will also bring to light the opposite form of

government commonly called oligarchy. For the purposes of this inquiry we need to

ascertain all the elements and characteristics of democracy, since from the combinations

of these the varieties of democratic government arise. There are several of these differing

from each other, and the difference is due to two causes. One (1) has been already

mentioned- differences of population; for the popular element may consist of

husbandmen, or of mechanics, or of laborers, and if the first of these be added to the

218

second, or the third to the two others, not only does the democracy become better or

worse, but its very nature is changed. A second cause (2) remains to be mentioned: the

various properties and characteristics of democracy, when variously combined, make a

difference. For one democracy will have less and another will have more, and another

will have all of these characteristics. There is an advantage in knowing them all,

whether a man wishes to establish some new form of democracy, or only to remodel an

existing one. Founders of states try to bring together all the elements which accord with

the ideas of the several constitutions; but this is a mistake of theirs, as I have already

remarked when speaking of the destruction and preservation of states. We will now set

forth the principles, characteristics, and aims of such states.

Part II

The basis of a democratic state is liberty; which, according to the common opinion of

men, can only be enjoyed in such a state; this they affirm to be the great end of every

democracy. One principle of liberty is for all to rule and be ruled in turn, and indeed

democratic justice is the application of numerical not proportionate equality; whence it

follows that the majority must be supreme, and that whatever the majority approve must

be the end and the just. Every citizen, it is said, must have equality, and therefore in a

democracy the poor have more power than the rich, because there are more of them, and

the will of the majority is supreme. This, then, is one note of liberty which all democrats

affirm to be the principle of their state. Another is that a man should live as he likes. This,

they say, is the privilege of a freeman, since, on the other hand, not to live as a man likes

is the mark of a slave. This is the second characteristic of democracy, whence has arisen

the claim of men to be ruled by none, if possible, or, if this is impossible, to rule and be

ruled in turns; and so it contributes to the freedom based upon equality.

Such being our foundation and such the principle from which we start, the characteristics

of democracy are as follows the election of officers by all out of all; and that all should

rule over each, and each in his turn over all; that the appointment to all offices, or to all

but those which require experience and skill, should be made by lot; that no property

qualification should be required for offices, or only a very low one; that a man should not

hold the same office twice, or not often, or in the case of few except military offices: that

the tenure of all offices, or of as many as possible, should be brief, that all men should sit

in judgment, or that judges selected out of all should judge, in all matters, or in most and

in the greatest and most important- such as the scrutiny of accounts, the constitution, and

private contracts; that the assembly should be supreme over all causes, or at any rate over

the most important, and the magistrates over none or only over a very few. Of all

magistracies, a council is the most democratic when there is not the means of paying all

the citizens, but when they are paid even this is robbed of its power; for the people then

draw all cases to themselves, as I said in the previous discussion. The next characteristic

219

of democracy is payment for services; assembly, law courts, magistrates, everybody

receives pay, when it is to be had; or when it is not to be had for all, then it is given to the

law-courts and to the stated assemblies, to the council and to the magistrates, or at least to

any of them who are compelled to have their meals together. And whereas oligarchy is

characterized by birth, wealth, and education, the notes of democracy appear to be the

opposite of these- low birth, poverty, mean employment. Another note is that no

magistracy is perpetual, but if any such have survived some ancient change in the

constitution it should be stripped of its power, and the holders should be elected by lot

and no longer by vote. These are the points common to all democracies; but democracy

and demos in their truest form are based upon the recognized principle of democratic

justice, that all should count equally; for equality implies that the poor should have no

more share in the government than the rich, and should not be the only rulers, but that all

should rule equally according to their numbers. And in this way men think that they will

secure equality and freedom in their state.

Part III

Next comes the question, how is this equality to be obtained? Are we to assign to a

thousand poor men the property qualifications of five hundred rich men? and shall we

give the thousand a power equal to that of the five hundred? or, if this is not to be the

mode, ought we, still retaining the same ratio, to take equal numbers from each and give

them the control of the elections and of the courts?- Which, according to the democratical

notion, is the juster form of the constitution- this or one based on numbers only?

Democrats say that justice is that to which the majority agree, oligarchs that to which the

wealthier class; in their opinion the decision should be given according to the amount of

property. In both principles there is some inequality and injustice. For if justice is the will

of the few, any one person who has more wealth than all the rest of the rich put together,

ought, upon the oligarchical principle, to have the sole power- but this would be tyranny;

or if justice is the will of the majority, as I was before saying, they will unjustly

confiscate the property of the wealthy minority. To find a principle of equality which they

both agree we must inquire into their respective ideas of justice.

Now they agree in saying that whatever is decided by the majority of the citizens is to be

deemed law. Granted: but not without some reserve; since there are two classes out of

which a state is composed- the poor and the rich- that is to be deemed law, on which both

or the greater part of both agree; and if they disagree, that which is approved by the

greater number, and by those who have the higher qualification. For example,

suppose that there are ten rich and twenty poor, and some measure is approved by six of

the rich and is disapproved by fifteen of the poor, and the remaining four of the rich join

with the party of the poor, and the remaining five of the poor with that of the rich; in such

a case the will of those whose qualifications, when both sides are added up, are the

220

greatest, should prevail. If they turn out to be equal, there is no greater difficulty than at

present, when, if the assembly or the courts are divided, recourse is had to the lot, or to

some similar expedient. But, although it may be difficult in theory to know what is just

and equal, the practical difficulty of inducing those to forbear who can, if they like,

encroach, is far greater, for the weaker are always asking for equality and justice, but the

stronger care for none of these things.

Part IV

Of the four kinds of democracy, as was said in the in the previous discussion, the best is

that which comes first in order; it is also the oldest of them all. I am speaking of them

according to the natural classification of their inhabitants. For the best material of

democracy is an agricultural population; there is no difficulty in forming a democracy

where the mass of the people live by agriculture or tending of cattle. Being poor,

they have no leisure, and therefore do not often attend the assembly, and not having the

necessaries of life they are always at work, and do not covet the property of others.

Indeed, they find their employment pleasanter than the cares of government or office

where no great gains can be made out of them, for the many are more desirous of gain

than of honor. A proof is that even the ancient tyrannies were patiently endured by them,

as they still endure oligarchies, if they are allowed to work and are not deprived of their

property; for some of them grow quickly rich and the others are well enough off.

Moreover, they have the power of electing the magistrates and calling them to account;

their ambition, if they have any, is thus satisfied; and in some democracies, although they

do not all share in the appointment of offices, except through representatives elected in

turn out of the whole people, as at Mantinea; yet, if they have the power of deliberating,

the many are contented. Even this form of government may be regarded as a democracy,

and was such at Mantinea. Hence it is both expedient and customary in the

aforementioned type of democracy that all should elect to offices, and conduct scrutinies,

and sit in the law-courts, but that the great offices should be filled up by election and

from persons having a qualification; the greater requiring a greater qualification, or, if

there be no offices for which a qualification is required, then those who are marked out

by special ability should be appointed. Under such a form of government the citizens are

sure to be governed well (for the offices will always be held by the best persons; the

people are willing enough to elect them and are not jealous of the good). The good and

the notables will then be satisfied, for they will not be governed by men who are their

inferiors, and the persons elected will rule justly, because others will call them to account.

Every man should be responsible to others, nor should any one be allowed to do just as he

pleases; for where absolute freedom is allowed, there is nothing to restrain the evil which

is inherent in every man. But the principle of responsibility secures that which is the

greatest good in states; the right persons rule and are prevented from doing wrong, and

the people have their due. It is evident that this is the best kind of democracy, and why?

221

Because the people are drawn from a certain class. Some of the ancient laws of most

states were, all of them, useful with a view to making the people husbandmen. They

provided either that no one should possess more than a certain quantity of land, or that, if

he did, the land should not be within a certain distance from the town or the acropolis.

Formerly in many states there was a law forbidding any one to sell his original allotment

of land. There is a similar law attributed to Oxylus, which is to the effect that there should

be a certain portion of every man's land on which he could not borrow money. A useful

corrective to the evil of which I am speaking would be the law of the Aphytaeans, who,

although they are numerous, and do not possess much land, are all of them husbandmen.

For their properties are reckoned in the census; not entire, but only in such small portions

that even the poor may have more than the amount required.

Next best to an agricultural, and in many respects similar, are a pastoral people, who live

by their flocks; they are the best trained of any for war, robust in body and able to camp

out. The people of whom other democracies consist are far inferior to them, for their life

is inferior; there is no room for moral excellence in any of their employments,

whether they be mechanics or traders or laborers. Besides, people of this class can readily

come to the assembly, because they are continually moving about in the city and in the

agora; whereas husbandmen are scattered over the country and do not meet, or equally

feel the want of assembling together. Where the territory also happens to extend to a

distance from the city, there is no difficulty in making an excellent democracy or

constitutional government; for the people are compelled to settle in the country, and even

if there is a town population the assembly ought not to meet, in democracies, when the

country people cannot come. We have thus explained how the first and best form of

democracy should be constituted; it is clear that the other or inferior sorts will deviate in a

regular order, and the population which is excluded will at each stage be of a lower kind.

The last form of democracy, that in which all share alike, is one which cannot be borne

by all states, and will not last long unless well regulated by laws and customs. The more

general causes which tend to destroy this or other kinds of government have been pretty

fully considered. In order to constitute such a democracy and strengthen the people, the

leaders have been in the habit including as many as they can, and making citizens not

only of those who are legitimate, but even of the illegitimate, and of those who have only

one parent a citizen, whether father or mother; for nothing of this sort comes amiss to

such a democracy. This is the way in which demagogues proceed. Whereas the right thing

would be to make no more additions when the number of the commonalty exceeds that of

the notables and of the middle class- beyond this not to go. When in excess of this point,

the constitution becomes disorderly, and the notables grow excited and impatient of the

democracy, as in the insurrection at Cyrene; for no notice is taken of a little evil, but

when it increases it strikes the eye. Measures like those which Cleisthenes passed when

he wanted to increase the power of the democracy at Athens, or such as were taken by the

222

founders of popular government at Cyrene, are useful in the extreme form of

democracy. Fresh tribes and brotherhoods should be established; the private rites of

families should be restricted and converted into public ones; in short, every contrivance

should be adopted which will mingle the citizens with one another and get rid of old

connections. Again, the measures which are taken by tyrants appear all of them to be

democratic; such, for instance, as the license permitted to slaves (which may be to a

certain extent advantageous) and also that of women and children, and the aflowing

everybody to live as he likes. Such a government will have many supporters, for most

persons would rather live in a disorderly than in a sober manner.

Part V

The mere establishment of a democracy is not the only or principal business of the

legislator, or of those who wish to create such a state, for any state, however badly

constituted, may last one, two, or three days; a far greater difficulty is the preservation of

it. The legislator should therefore endeavor to have a firm foundation according to the

principles already laid down concerning the preservation and destruction of states; he

should guard against the destructive elements, and should make laws, whether written or

unwritten, which will contain all the preservatives of states. He must not think the truly

democratical or oligarchical measure to be that which will give the greatest amount of

democracy or oligarchy, but that which will make them last longest. The demagogues of

our own day often get property confiscated in the law-courts in order to please the people.

But those who have the welfare of the state at heart should counteract them, and make a

law that the property of the condemned should not be public and go into the treasury but

be sacred. Thus offenders will be as much afraid, for they will be punished all the same,

and the people, having nothing to gain, will not be so ready to condemn the accused. Care

should also be taken that state trials are as few as possible, and heavy penalties should be

inflicted on those who bring groundless accusations; for it is the practice to indict, not

members of the popular party, but the notables, although the citizens ought to be all

attached to the constitution as well, or at any rate should not regard their rulers as

enemies.

Now, since in the last and worst form of democracy the citizens are very numerous, and

can hardly be made to assemble unless they are paid, and to pay them when there are no

revenues presses hardly upon the notables (for the money must be obtained by a property

tax and confiscations and corrupt practices of the courts, things which have before now

overthrown many democracies); where, I say, there are no revenues, the

government should hold few assemblies, and the law-courts should consist of many

persons, but sit for a few days only. This system has two advantages: first, the rich do not

fear the expense, even although they are unpaid themselves when the poor are paid; and

secondly, causes are better tried, for wealthy persons, although they do not like to be long

223

absent from their own affairs, do not mind going for a few days to the law-courts. Where

there are revenues the demagogues should not be allowed after their manner to distribute

the surplus; the poor are always receiving and always wanting more and more, for such

help is like water poured into a leaky cask. Yet the true friend of the people should see

that they be not too poor, for extreme poverty lowers the character of the democracy;

measures therefore should be taken which will give them lasting prosperity; and as this is

equally the interest of all classes, the proceeds of the public revenues should be

accumulated and distributed among its poor, if possible, in such quantities as may enable

them to purchase a little farm, or, at any rate, make a beginning in trade or husbandry.

And if this benevolence cannot be extended to all, money should be distributed in turn

according to tribes or other divisions, and in the meantime the rich should pay the fee for

the attendance of the poor at the necessary assemblies; and should in return be excused

from useless public services. By administering the state in this spirit the Carthaginians

retain the affections of the people; their policy is from time to time to send some of them

into their dependent towns, where they grow rich. It is also worthy of a generous and

sensible nobility to divide the poor amongst them, and give them the means of going to

work. The example of the people of Tarentum is also well deserving of imitation, for,

by sharing the use of their own property with the poor, they gain their good will.

Moreover, they divide all their offices into two classes, some of them being elected by

vote, the others by lot; the latter, that the people may participate in them, and the former,

that the state may be better administered. A like result may be gained by dividing the

same offices, so as to have two classes of magistrates, one chosen by vote, the other

by lot.

Enough has been said of the manner in which democracies ought to be constituted.

Part VI

From these considerations there will be no difficulty in seeing what should be the

constitution of oligarchies. We have only to reason from opposites and compare each

form of oligarchy with the corresponding form of democracy.

The first and best attempered of oligarchies is akin to a constitutional government. In this

there ought to be two standards of qualification; the one high, the other low- the lower

qualifying for the humbler yet indispensable offices and the higher for the superior ones.

He who acquires the prescribed qualification should have the rights of citizenship. The

number of those admitted should be such as will make the entire governing body

stronger than those who are excluded, and the new citizen should be always taken out of

the better class of the people. The principle, narrowed a little, gives another form of

oligarchy; until at length we reach the most cliquish and tyrannical of them all, answering

to the extreme democracy, which, being the worst, requires vigilance in proportion to its

224

badness. For as healthy bodies and ships well provided with sailors may undergo many

mishaps and survive them, whereas sickly constitutions and rotten ill-manned ships are

ruined by the very least mistake, so do the worst forms of government require the greatest

care. The populousness of democracies generally preserves them (for e state need not be

much increased,since there is no necessity tha number is to democracy in the place of

justice based on proportion); whereas the preservation of an oligarchy clearly depends on

an opposite principle, viz., good order.

Part VII

As there are four chief divisions of the common people- husbandmen, mechanics, retail

traders, laborers; so also there are four kinds of military forces- the cavalry, the heavy

infantry, the light armed troops, the navy. When the country is adapted for cavalry, then a

strong oligarchy is likely to be established. For the security of the inhabitants depends

upon a force of this sort, and only rich men can afford to keep horses. The second form of

oligarchy prevails when the country is adapted to heavy infantry; for this service is better

suited to the rich than to the poor. But the light-armed and the naval element are wholly

democratic; and nowadays, where they are numerous, if the two parties quarrel, the

oligarchy are often worsted by them in the struggle. A remedy for this state of things may

be found in the practice of generals who combine a proper contingent of light-

armed troops with cavalry and heavy-armed. And this is the way in which the poor get

the better of the rich in civil contests; being lightly armed, they fight with advantage

against cavalry and heavy being lightly armed, they fight with advantage against cavalry

and heavy infantry. An oligarchy which raises such a force out of the lower classes raises

a power against itself. And therefore, since the ages of the citizens vary and some are

older and some younger, the fathers should have their own sons, while they are

still young, taught the agile movements of light-armed troops; and these, when they have

been taken out of the ranks of the youth, should become light-armed warriors in reality.

The oligarchy should also yield a share in the government to the people, either, as I said

before, to those who have a property qualification, or, as in the case of Thebes, to those

who have abstained for a certain number of years from mean employments, or, as at

Massalia, to men of merit who are selected for their worthiness, whether previously

citizens or not. The magistracies of the highest rank, which ought to be in the hands

of the governing body, should have expensive duties attached to them, and then the

people will not desire them and will take no offense at the privileges of their rulers when

they see that they pay a heavy fine for their dignity. It is fitting also that the magistrates

on entering office should offer magnificent sacrifices or erect some public edifice, and

then the people who participate in the entertainments, and see the city decorated

with votive offerings and buildings, will not desire an alteration in the government, and

the notables will have memorials of their munificence. This, however, is anything but the

fashion of our modern oligarchs, who are as covetous of gain as they are of honor;

225

oligarchies like theirs may be well described as petty democracies. Enough of the manner

in which democracies and oligarchies should be organized.

Part VIII

Next in order follows the right distribution of offices, their number, their nature, their

duties, of which indeed we have already spoken. No state can exist not having the

necessary offices, and no state can be well administered not having the offices which tend

to preserve harmony and good order. In small states, as we have already remarked, there

must not be many of them, but in larger there must be a larger number, and we should

carefully consider which offices may properly be united and which separated.

First among necessary offices is that which has the care of the market; a magistrate

should be appointed to inspect contracts and to maintain order. For in every state there

must inevitably be buyers and sellers who will supply one another's wants; this is the

readiest way to make a state self-sufficing and so fulfill the purpose for which men come

together into one state. A second office of a similar kind undertakes the supervision and

embellishment of public and private buildings, the maintaining and repairing of houses

and roads, the prevention of disputes about boundaries, and other concerns of a like

nature. This is commonly called the office of City Warden, and has various departments,

which, in more populous towns, are shared among different persons, one, for example,

taking charge of the walls, another of the fountains, a third of harbors. There is

another equally necessary office, and of a similar kind, having to do with the same

matters without the walls and in the country- the magistrates who hold this office are

called Wardens of the country, or Inspectors of the woods. Besides these three there is a

fourth office of receivers of taxes, who have under their charge the revenue which is

distributed among the various departments; these are called Receivers or Treasurers.

Another officer registers all private contracts, and decisions of the courts, all public

indictments, and also all preliminary proceedings. This office again is sometimes

subdivided, in which case one officer is appointed over all the rest. These officers are

called Recorders or Sacred Recorders, Presidents, and the like.

Next to these comes an office of which the duties are the most necessary and also the

most difficult, viz., that to which is committed the execution of punishments, or the

exaction of fines from those who are posted up according to the registers; and also the

custody of prisoners. The difficulty of this office arises out of the odium which is

attached to it; no one will undertake it unless great profits are to be made, and any one

who does is loath to execute the law. Still the office is necessary; for judicial decisions

are useless if they take no effect; and if society cannot exist without them, neither can it

exist without the execution of them. It is an office which, being so unpopular, should not

be entrusted to one person, but divided among several taken from different courts. In like

226

manner an effort should be made to distribute among different persons the writing up of

those who are on the register of public debtors. Some sentences should be executed by

the magistrates also, and in particular penalties due to the outgoing magistrates should be

exacted by the incoming ones; and as regards those due to magistrates already in office,

when one court has given judgement, another should exact the penalty; for example, the

wardens of the city should exact the fines imposed by the wardens of the agora, and

others again should exact the fines imposed by them. For penalties are more likely to be

exacted when less odium attaches to the exaction of them; but a double odium is incurred

when the judges who have passed also execute the sentence, and if they are always the

executioners, they will be the enemies of all.

In many places, while one magistracy executes the sentence, another has the custody of

the prisoners, as, for example, 'the Eleven' at Athens. It is well to separate off the

jailorship also, and try by some device to render the office less unpopular. For it is quite

as necessary as that of the executioners; but good men do all they can to avoid it, and

worthless persons cannot safely be trusted with it; for they themselves require a guard,

and are not fit to guard others. There ought not therefore to be a single or permanent

officer set apart for this duty; but it should be entrusted to the young, wherever they are

organized into a band or guard, and different magistrates acting in turn should take charge

of it.

These are the indispensable officers, and should be ranked first; next in order follow

others, equally necessary, but of higher rank, and requiring great experience and fidelity.

Such are the officers to which are committed the guard of the city, and other military

functions. Not only in time of war but of peace their duty will be to defend the walls and

gates, and to muster and marshal the citizens. In some states there are many such offices;

in others there are a few only, while small states are content with one; these officers are

called generals or commanders. Again, if a state has cavalry or light-armed troops or

archers or a naval force, it will sometimes happen that each of these departments has

separate officers, who are called admirals, or generals of cavalry or of light-armed troops.

And there are subordinate officers called naval captains, and captains of light-armed

troops and of horse; having others under them: all these are included in the department of

war. Thus much of military command.

But since many, not to say all, of these offices handle the public money, there must of

necessity be another office which examines and audits them, and has no other functions.

Such officers are called by various names- Scrutineers, Auditors, Accountants,

Controllers. Besides all these offices there is another which is supreme over them, and to

this is often entrusted both the introduction and the ratification of measures, or at all

events it presides, in a democracy, over the assembly. For there must be a body which

convenes the supreme authority in the state. In some places they are called 'probuli,'

227

because they hold previous deliberations, but in a democracy more commonly

'councillors.' These are the chief political offices.

Another set of officers is concerned with the maintenance of religion priests and

guardians see to the preservation and repair of the temples of the Gods and to other

matters of religion. One office of this sort may be enough in small places, but in larger

ones there are a great many besides the priesthood; for example, superintendents of

public worship, guardians of shrines, treasurers of the sacred revenues. Nearly connected

with these there are also the officers appointed for the performance of the

public sacrifices, except any which the law assigns to the priests; such sacrifices derive

their dignity from the public hearth of the city. They are sometimes called archons,

sometimes kings, and sometimes prytanes.

These, then, are the necessary offices, which may be summed up as follows: offices

concerned with matters of religion, with war, with the revenue and expenditure, with the

market, with the city, with the harbors, with the country; also with the courts of law, with

the records of contracts, with execution of sentences, with custody of prisoners, with

audits and scrutinies and accounts of magistrates; lastly, there are those which

preside over the public deliberations of the state. There are likewise

magistracies characteristic of states which are peaceful and prosperous, and at the same

time have a regard to good order: such as the offices of guardians of women, guardians of

the law, guardians of children, and directors of gymnastics; also superintendents of

gymnastic and Dionysiac contests, and of other similar spectacles. Some of these are

clearly not democratic offices; for example, the guardianships of women and children-

the poor, not having any slaves, must employ both their women and children as servants.

Once more: there are three offices according to whose directions the highest magistrates

are chosen in certain states- guardians of the law, probuli, councillors- of these, the

guardians of the law are an aristocratical, the probuli an oligarchical, the council a

democratical institution. Enough of the different kinds of offices.

228

Appendix D. Aristotle on Cleisthenes



After the overthrow of the tyranny, the rival leaders in the state were Isagoras son of

Tisander, a partisan of the tyrants, and Cleisthenes, who belonged to the family of the

Alcmeonidae. Cleisthenes, being beaten in the political clubs, called in the people by giving

the franchise to the masses. Thereupon Isagoras, nding himself left inferior in

power, invited Cleomenes, who was united to him by ties of hospitality, to return to Athens,

and persuaded him to 'drive out the pollution', a plea derived from the fact that the

Alcmeonidae were suppposed to be under the curse of pollution. On this Cleisthenes

retired from the country, and Cleomenes, entering Attica with a small force, expelled, as

polluted, seven hundred Athenian families. Having eected this, he next attempted to

dissolve the Council, and to set up Isagoras and three hundred of his partisans as the

supreme power in the state. The Council, however, resisted, the populace ocked together,

and Cleomenes and Isagoras, with their adherents, took refuge in the Acropolis. Here the

people sat down and besieged them for two days; and on the third they agreed to let

Cleomenes and all his followers de art, while they summoned Cleisthenes and the other

exiles back to Athens. When the people had thus obtained the command of

aairs, Cleisthenes was their chief and popular leader. And this was natural; for the

Alcmeonidae were perhaps the chief cause of the expulsion of the tyrants, and for the

greater part of their rule were at perpetual war with them. But even earlier than the attempts

of the Alcmeonidae, one Cedon made an attack on the tyrants; when there came another

popular drinking song, addressed to him:

Pour a health yet again, boy, to Cedon; forget not this duty to do,

If a health is an honour betting the name of a good man and true.



The people, therefore, had good reason to place condence in Cleisthenes. Accordingly,

now that he was the popular leader, three years after the expulsion of the tyrants, in the

archonship of Isagoras, his rst step was to distribute the whole population into ten tribes in

place of the existing four, with the object of intermixing the members of the dierent tribes,

and so securing that more persons might have a share in the franchise. From this arose the

saying 'Do not look at the tribes', addressed to those who wished to scrutinize the lists of the

old families. Next he made the Council to consist of ve hundred members instead of four

hundred, each tribe now contributing fty, whereas formerly each had sent a hundred. The

reason why he did not organize the people into twelve tribes was that he might not have to

use the existing division into trittyes; for the four tribes had twelve trittyes, so that he would

229

not have achieved his object of redistributing the population in fresh combinations. Further,

he divided the country into thirty groups of demes, ten from the districts about the city, ten

from the coast, and ten from the interior. These he called trittyes; and he assigned three of

them by lot to each tribe, in such a way that each should have one portion in each of these

three localities. All who lived in any given deme he declared fellow-demesmen, to the end

that the new citizens might not be exposed by the habitual use of family names, but that

men might be oicially described by the names of their demes; and accordingly it is by the

names of their demes that the Athenians speak of one another. He also instituted

Demarchs, who had the same duties as the previously existing Naucrari,-the demes being

made to take the place of the naucraries. He gave names to the demes, some from the

localities to which they belonged, some from the persons who founded them, since some of

the areas no longer corresponded to localities possessing names. On the other hand he

allowed every one to retain his family and clan and religious rites according to ancestral

custom. The names given to the tribes were the ten which the Pythia appointed out of the

hundred selected national heroes.



By these reforms the constitution became much more democratic than that of Solon. The

laws of Solon had been obliterated by disuse during the period of the tyranny, while

Cleisthenes substituted new ones with the object of securing the goodwill of the masses.

Among these was the law concerning ostracism. Four year after the establishment of this

system, in the archonship of Hermocreon, they rst imposed upon the Council of Five

Hundred the oath which they take to the present day. Next they began to elect the generals

by tribes, one from each tribe, while the Polemarch was the commander of the whole army.

Then, eleven years later, in the archonship of Phaenippus they won the battle of Marathon;

and two years after this victory, when the people had now gained self-condence, they for

the rst time made use of the law of ostracism. This had originally been passed as a

precaution against men in high oice, because Pisistratus took advantage of his position as

a popular leader and general to make himself tyrant; and the rst person ostracized was one

of his relatives, Hipparchus son of Charmus, of the deme of Collytus, the very person on

whose account especially Cleisthenes had enacted the law, as he wished to get rid of him.

Hitherto, however, he had escaped; for the Athenians, with the usual leniency of the

democracy, allowed all the partisans of the tyrants, who had not joined in their evil deeds in

the time of the troubles to remain in the city; and the chief and leader of these was

Hipparchus. Then in the very next year, in the archonship of Telesinus, they for the rst time

since the tyranny elected, tribe by tribe, the nine Archons by lot out of the ve hundred

candidates selected by the demes, all the earlier ones having been elected by vote; and in

the same year Megacles son of Hippocrates, of the deme of Alopece, was ostracized. Thus

for three years they continued to ostracize the friends of the tyrants, on whose account the

law had been passed; but in the following year they began to remove others as

well, including any one who seemed to be more powerful than was expedient. The rst

230

person unconnected with the tyrants who was ostracized was Xanthippus son of Ariphron.

Two years later, in the archonship of Nicodemus, the mines of Maroneia were discovered,

and the state made a prot of a hundred talents from the working of them. Some persons

advised the people to make a distribution of the money among themselves, but this was

prevented by Themistocles. He refused to say on what he proposed to spend the money, but

he bade them lend it to the hundred richest men in Athens, one talent to each, and then, if

the manner in which it was employed pleased the people, the expenditure should be

charged to the state, but otherwise the state should receive the sum back from those to

whom it was lent. On these terms he received the money and with it he had a hundred

triremes built, each of the hundred individuals building one; and it was with these ships that

they fought the battle of Salamis against the barbarians. About this time Aristides the son of

Lysimachus was ostracized. Three years later, however, in the archonship of Hypsichides,

all the ostracized persons were recalled, on account of the advance of the army of Xerxes;

and it was laid down for the future that persons under sentence of ostracism must live

between Geraestus and Scyllaeum, on pain of losing their civic rights irrevocably.

231

Appendix E. Division of Power in the Athenian Government

232 
 
 
 
Appendix F. Persian Empire 
The government of ancient Persia was based on an efficient bureaucracy which 
combined the centralization of power with the decentralization of administration. 
The Achaemenid Empire (c. 550-330 BCE) founded by Cyrus the Great (r. c. 550-530 
BCE) is sometimes claimed to have invented this form of government but actually drew 
on earlier models of Akkadian and Assyrian administration. 
The Achaemenid model would be followed by successive empires in the region – 
the Seleucid Empire (312-63 BCE), Parthia (247 BCE-224 CE), and the Sassanian 
Empire (224-651 CE) – with little modification because it was so effective. The 
government was a hierarchy with the emperor at the top, administrative officials and 
advisors just below him, and secretaries below them. The empire was divided into 
provinces (satrapies) administered by a Persian governor (satrap) who was responsible 
only for civil matters; military matters in a satrapy were handled by a general. This 
system prevented any satrap from raising a rebellion because he had no access to the 
military and discouraged the same by a military leader because he lacked private funds to 
entice troops to rebel. 
This form of government remained in use from c. 550 BCE through 651 CE, again with 
little modification, until the Sassanian Empire fell to the Muslim Arabs in the 7th 
century CE. It was the most effective model of government in the ancient world, 
influencing the form of government adopted by the Roman Empire, and its basic model 
is still in use in the present day. 
Early Models 
THE CONCEPT OF CENTRALIZED POWER 
ADMINISTERED THROUGH TRUSTED OFFICIALS 
WAS DEVELOPED BY SARGON OF AKKAD AFTER HE 
ESTABLISHED THE FIRST MULTI-CULTURAL EMPIRE 
IN THE WORLD. 
The concept of centralized power administered through trusted officials was developed 
by Sargon of Akkad (r. 2334-2279 BCE) after he established the Akkadian 
Empire (2334-2083 BCE), the first multi-cultural empire in the world. Sargon selected 
his administrators from those he felt he could trust (known as “Citizens of Akkad”) and 
granted them power to govern in the over 65 cities which made up his empire. 

233 
 
 
 
He also made use of the power of religion, placing his daughter, Enheduanna (l. 2285-
2250 BCE) in the position of High Priestess of Ur in Sumer to encourage piety and 
adherence to the established order. Although Enheduanna is the only known example of 
such positioning, it is likely Sargon did the same in the temples of other cities. 
The governors of each city were supervised by Sargon's agents who would make surprise 
visits to ensure their loyalty and efficient use of resources. Sargon's initiatives created a 
stable environment, which allowed for the development of a strong infrastructure of 
roads, improvements to cities, and a postal system. 
Sargon and his successors became legendary in Mesopotamia long after their empire fell 
and the Akkadian model was reformed by the Assyrian king Tiglath Pileser III (r. 745-
727 BCE) of the Neo-Assyrian Empire. Tiglath Pileser III (birth name Pulu) was the 
provincial governor of the city of Kahlu (also known as Nimrud) under the reign 
of Ashur Nirari V (r. 755-745 BCE). Provincial governors were responsible for 
administering the monarch's decrees but, increasingly, acted autonomously in their own 
interests, and Ashur Nirari V made no move to stop this. By 746 BCE, dissatisfaction 
with Ashur Nirari V's negligence resulted in a civil war – possibly initiated by Pulu, 
though this is unclear – pitting the factions of the provincial governors against the ruling 
house. Pulu killed Ashur Nirari V and his family in a coup, seizing power and taking the 
throne name of Tiglath Pileser III. 

234

King Tiglath-pileser III

Osama Shukir Muhammed Amin (Copyright)

His first order of business afterwards was to make sure he would not someday experience

the same sort of coup. He cut the size of provinces in half, increasing their number from

12 to 25 so that the smaller regions would not be able to muster as many men in arms as

before. He then reduced the power of provincial governors, placing two men in power

over each province each of whom had to agree on policy decisions before they could be

enacted and, further, he made these governors eunuchs so that there was no chance of a

governor making a power-grab in order to establish a family dynasty.

With this system in place, he then borrowed from the Akkadian model and established an

intelligence network by which trusted administrators would visit the provinces

unannounced to make sure everything was running as he wished. Tiglath Pileser's model

would serve the Neo-Assyrian Empire well until its fall in 612 BCE to a coalition led by

the Medes and Babylonians.

235

Achaemenid Government

The Medes became the dominant power in the region until they were overthrown

by Cyrus the Great c. 550 BCE and were the civilization which had earlier adopted the

satrapy system used by the Assyrians. The Medes kept the system more or less intact and

it was this model Cyrus drew on for his own while modifying the model of the

Assyrians. Herodotus notes how “the Persians adopt more foreign customs than anyone

else” (I.135) and this was certainly true of Cyrus in forming his government. Both the

Akkadian and Assyrian empires ruled over diverse people across vast regions, and while

initially successful, both had fallen. In an effort to prevent that from happening to his

own creation, Cyrus took the best aspects of the earlier governments and ignored those

which caused the most problems.

One of the most hated policies of the Assyrian Empire was the practice of deportation

and relocation of large populations. The decision of the Assyrians to relocate people was

not made hastily or harshly – families were kept together and people were chosen for

their particular talents and skills – even so, this was no consolation to those uprooted

from their homes and transported to some foreign region. Other unpopular Assyrian

policies were the practice of making anyone conquered (who was not then sold into

slavery) an “Assyrian” as an integral part of the empire and also the proliferation of

temples to the supreme Assyrian god Ashur throughout conquered regions. In 612 BCE,

when the Median-Babylonian coalition destroyed the cities of Assyria, they paid special

attention to temples and statues of the gods and kings they had come to hate.

236 
 
 
 
 
Cyrus the Great 
Siamax (CC BY-SA) 
 
It has been argued that Cyrus was a Zoroastrian based on the religion having developed 
in the region c. 1500-1000 BCE and references to the Zoroastrian god Ahura 
Mazda associated with Cyrus. Ahura Mazda was already the supreme god of the ancient 
Iranian pantheon, however, long before the prophet Zoroaster (Zarathustra) received 
his vision. Whatever Cyrus' personal beliefs, he did not force them on anyone else. 
Everyone in the empire was free to worship whatever god they pleased in any way they 
wanted to. 
Cyrus famously freed the Jews from the so-called Babylonian Captivity and even helped 
fund the rebuilding of their temple in Jerusalem. Any conquered people were allowed to 
remain where they had always lived, doing whatever they had always done, and all Cyrus 
asked was that taxes were paid, men were provided for the armies, and everyone should 
try to get along with each other as best they could. 

237

His government was based on his supreme central rule enacted by the decentralized

satrapies who, as with the Assyrian system, were checked up on by Cyrus' officials - the

eyes and ears of the king. There are no recorded revolts during the reign of Cyrus the

Great and a testament to his success as empire-builder and ruler is how he was addressed

by the people who referred to him as their father.

After Cyrus' death in 530 BCE, his son Cambyses II (r. 530-522 BCE) extended the

empire into Egypt and continued the same policies. Cambyses II is often portrayed as an

unbalanced and inefficient monarch, but this is most likely because he made so many

literate enemies among the Egyptians and Greeks. He does seem, however, to have

pursued harsher policies than either his father or his successor Darius I (the Great, r.

522-486 BCE). One example of this is his reaction to the royal judge Sisamnes accepting

a bribe. According to Herodotus:

Cambyses slit his throat and flayed off all his skin. He had thongs made out of

the flayed string and he strung the chair on which Sisamnes had used to sit to

deliver his verdicts with these thongs. Then he appointed Sisamnes' son to be

judge instead of the father whom he had killed and flayed and told him to bear

in mind the nature of the chair on which he would sit to deliver his verdicts.

(V.25)

When Darius the Great came to power, he instituted a new paradigm through

his law code known as the Ordinance of Good Regulations. This work only exists now in

fragments and citations from later writers but seems to have been based on the

earlier Code of Hammurabi (r. 1792-1750 BCE). One of Darius I's stipulations was that

“no one, not even the king, can execute anyone who has been accused of only a single

crime…but if after due consideration he finds that the crimes committed outweigh in

number and gravity the services rendered, then he can give way to anger” (Herodotus

I.137).

238 
 
 
 
 
Darius I Inscribed Stone Weight 
Osama Shukir Muhammed Amin (Copyright) 
 
When a royal judge named Sandoces was found guilty of taking a bribe, Darius I ordered 
him crucified. After considering his own law, however, he recognized that the good 
Sandoces had done as judge outweighed his single crime of accepting the bribe and so he 
was pardoned though, instead of returning to his former position, he was made a 
provincial governor (Herodotus I.194). 
Darius I divided the empire into seven regions: 
• Central Region: Persis 
• Western Region: Media and Elam 
• The Iranian Plateau: Parthia, Aria, Bactria, Sogdiana, Chorasmia, and Drangiana 
• The Borderlands: Archosia, Sattagydia, Gandara, Sind, and Eastern Scythia 
• The Western Lowlands: Babylonia, Assyria, Arabia, and Egypt 

239

• The Northwestern Region: Armenia, Cappadocia, Lydia, Overseas Scythians,

Skudra, and Petasos-Wearing Greeks

• The Southern Coastal Regions: Libya, Ethiopia, Maka, and Caria

Each of these regions was then further divided into twenty satrapies. To make sure the

satraps were performing their duties honestly, Darius I kept Cyrus the Great's earlier

system which was now refined for the smaller satrapies. He placed a Royal Secretary in

each province who would assist the satrap but report to Darius. There was also a Royal

Treasurer who oversaw government expenditure, approved whatever projects the satrap

needed money for, and also reported to Darius. The dual-responsibility of satrap and

military commander remained the same with a Garrison Commander in charge of a

province's armed forces but no access to the treasury.

Darius also kept the practice of “trusted men” who would appear without notice to check

up on each province. These were known as the Royal Inspectors whose principal

responsibility was to make sure government officials were performing their duties

honestly but there was also a committee of trusted men who assessed taxes in the region

and registered citizens to make sure that taxes were being levied fairly by the satrap and

that all taxes were going where they should.

Seleucid & Parthian Governments

Darius I's successors continued these policies although none of the later monarchs were

as effective as he had been. When the Achaemenid Empire fell to Alexander the

Great in 330 BCE, it was replaced by the Seleucid Empire founded by one

of Alexander's generals, Seleucus I Nicator (r. 305-281 BCE). Seleucus I kept the

Achaemenid model of government intact but placed Greeks in positions of power

throughout the provinces. This policy caused resentment, and after Seleucus I's death, his

successors had to deal with numerous rebellions.

THE PARTHIANS FAVORED KEEPING CLIENT

KINGS ON THEIR THRONES IN ORDER TO

ENCOURAGE A SENSE OF CONTINUITY IN THE

PROVINCES.

Among the people who rebelled were the Parthians in 247 BCE. Their first king, Arsaces

I of Parthia (r. 247-217 BCE) also kept the Achaemenid model and was so busy

establishing his empire at the Seleucids' expense that he made little revision to it. His

successors, however, would make significant changes. The empire was divided into

Upper Parthia (Parthia and Armenia) and Lower Parthia (Babylonia, Persis, Elymais).

240

These five regions were divided into provinces but were not always administered by a

Parthian official. The Parthians favored keeping client kings on their thrones in order to

encourage a sense of continuity in the provinces and loyalty of the provincial monarch to

the empire.

This policy did not always work so well, however, as the client kings were apt to seize on

any perceived weakness of the central government and advance themselves through

alliances with enemies of the state – which, in Parthia's case, was increasingly

the Roman Empire. It was not Rome that brought down the Parthian Empire, however,

but the vassal king Ardashir I (r. 224-240 CE) who founded the Sassanian Empire.

Sassanian Government

The Parthian system of government resulted in a much looser administration than the

Achaemenid model. The five regions, sometimes governed by client kings and sometimes

by officials picked by the court, were not as cohesive an entity and lacked the failsafe

Darius I had made integral to running an empire. After Ardashir I overthrew the last

Parthian king Artabanus IV (r. 213-224 CE), he embarked on a series of military

campaigns to tighten control over Parthian lands and centralize the government.

Ardashir I was a devout Zoroastrian and founded his vision of government on the Five

Principles of the religion:

• The supreme god is Ahura Mazda

• Ahura Mazda is all-good

• His eternal opponent, Ahriman (also Angra Mainyu), is all-evil

• Goodness is apparent through good thoughts, good words, and good deeds

• Each individual has free will to choose between good and evil

After Ardashir united the former Parthian Empire under his rule (and expanded it), he

followed the same example as his predecessors in adopting the Achaemenid model of

government only now the government officials were expected to honor Zoroastrian

beliefs and practices. This is not to say Zoroastrianism never played a part in Persian

government before the Sassanians. Xerxes I (486-465 BCE) and other Achaemenid kings

were practicing Zoroastrians, but they never made the faith part of their political

platform.

Zoroastrianism informed the Sassanian government and became the state religion, but

this did not mean that people of other faiths were excluded from public service or

persecuted under Ardashir I or his son and successor Shapur I (r. 240-270 CE). Shapur I,

in fact, welcomed people of all faiths into the empire and allowed Jews and Buddhists to

build temples and Christians to erect churches. Shapur I saw himself as an embodiment

of the holy warrior king advancing the truth of Zoroastrianism against the forces of

241 
 
 
 
darkness and evil epitomized by the Roman Empire. Shapur I was almost universally 
successful in his engagements against Rome and became a model for his successors. 
 
Coin of Shapur I 
TruthBeethoven (CC BY-SA) 
 
The religious tolerance of the Sassanian Empire was continued until the reign of Shapur 
II (309-379 CE) who saw Christianity as a Roman faith, which sought to subvert the 
truth of Zoroastrianism. Under Shapur II's reign, the Avesta (Zoroastrian sacred work) 
was committed to writing and Christians were persecuted throughout the empire. 
Religious tolerance continued to be extended to those of other faiths not associated with 
Rome and so Shapur II's persecutions are regarded as more of a political than religiously-
motivated policy. 
The persecutions did not last beyond his reign and his successor, Ardashir II (r. 379-383 
CE), reinstituted the earlier policy of acceptance of all faiths. The greatest of the 

242

Sassanian kings was Kosrau I (also known as Anushirvan the Just, r. 531-579 CE) who

returned the Sassanian Empire to the early vision of Ardashir I and Shapur I but with a

greater focus on education and cultural refinement.

Conclusion

Kosrau I's successors maintained the model of government even though, in the early 7th

century CE, the empire was periodically decentralized as nobles asserted themselves in

different regions. The Sassanian Empire fell when it was conquered by the invading

Muslim Arabs in 651 CE who also applied the basics of Achaemenid government to their

territories in that one ruler (a shah) decreed the law which was then implemented by

satraps. Under Muslim rule, however, non-Muslims would eventually be required to pay

a tax to live among them and the policy of religious tolerance was discarded in favor of

conversion.

The Achaemenid Persian model of government became the standard for rule in Central

Asia through Mesopotamia from c. 550 BCE through 651 CE, allowing for the

development of one of the richest cultures in the world. As noted, the Persian model

influenced that of the Roman Empire, which would further impact later cultures right up

to the present-day example of the United States of America whose governmental

paradigm is based on Rome's.

The only serious flaw in the model was that an individual ruler was never fully secure in

his position because kingship was thought to be conferred by the gods or a single god,

Ahura Mazda. A court noble or satrap who mounted a successful revolt would be

considered chosen by divine forces for rule while the deposed would have simply

deserved his fate.

Even so, it is clear that a number of monarchs in each of the different empires seem to

have been genuinely favored by the nobility and common people, primarily because of

benefits given like reduced taxes. This same paradigm is seen today around the world in

governments whose people favor a leader only as long as it benefits them personally.

Basic human motivation has not changed since recorded time and there have been many

different forms of government to try to manage and channel it positively. Among these is

the Persian model which served the ancient empires well for over a thousand years and

whose influence continues to be felt in the modern era.

243

Appendix G. Poetry of Tyrtaeus

1. Let a man learn how to fight by first daring to perform mighty deeds,

Not where the missiles won't reach, if he is armed with a shield,

But getting in close where fighting is hand to hand, inflicting a wound

With his long spear or his sword, taking the enemy's life,

With his foot planted alongside a foot and his shield pressed against shield,

And his crest up against crest and his helm up against helm

And breast against breast, embroiled in the action—let him fight man to man,

Holding secure in his grasp haft of his sword or his spear!

2. They lament him, young and old alike,

and the whole city mourns him with bitter longing,

and his tomb and his children are famous among men,

and his children’s children and his descendants thereafter.

Neither does his noble fame [kleos] or his name ever perish,

but even though he is beneath the earth he becomes immortal [athanatos]—

whoever distinguishes himself in bravery by standing stead-fast and fighting

for the sake of his land and children, and is destroyed by furious Ares.

3. For 'tis a fair thing for a good man to fall and die fighting in the van for his native

land, whereas to leave his city and his rich fields and go a-begging is of all things

the most miserable, wandering with mother dear and aged father, with little

children and wedded wife. For hateful shall such an one be among all those to

whom he shall come in bondage to Want and loathsome Penury, and doth shame

his lineage and belie his noble beauty, followed by all evil and dishonour. Now if

so little thought be taken of a wanderer, and so little honour, respect, or pity, let us

fight with a will for this land, and die for our children and never spare our lives.

Abide then, O young men, shoulder to shoulder and fight; begin not foul flight nor

yet be afraid, but make the heart in your breasts both great and stout, and never

shrink when you fight the foe.18 And the elder sort, whose knees are no longer

nimble, fly not ye to leave them fallen to earth.19 For 'tis a foul thing, in sooth, for

an elder to fall in the van and lie before the younger, his head white and his beard

hoary, breathing forth his stout soul in the dust, with his privities20 all bloody in

his hands, a sight so foul to see and fraught with such ill to the seer, and his flesh

also all naked; yet to a young man all is seemly enough, so long as he have the

noble bloom of lovely youth, aye a marvel he for men to behold, and desirable

244

unto women, so long as ever he be alive, and fair in like manner when he be fallen

in the vanguard. So let each man bite his lip with his teeth and abide firm-set

astride upon the ground.

245

Appendix H. Greek Vase Painting an Introduction

by Dr. Renee M. Gondek

Niobid Painter, Niobid Krater, Attic red-figure calyx-krater, c. 460-450 B.C.E., 54 x

56 cm (Musée du Louvre)

Useful for scholars

Pottery is virtually indestructible. Though it may break into smaller pieces (called

sherds), these would have to be manually ground into dust in order to be removed

from the archaeological record. As such, there is an abundance of material for

study, and this is exceptionally useful for modern scholars. In addition to being an

excellent tool for dating, pottery enables researchers to locate ancient sites,

reconstruct the nature of a site, and point to evidence of trade between groups of

people. Moreover, individual pots and their painted decoration can be studied in

detail to answer questions about religion, daily life, and society.

Shapes and Themes

246

Diagram of Greek pot shapes (British Museum)

Made of terracotta (fired clay), ancient Greek pots and cups, or “vases” as they are

normally called, were fashioned into a variety of shapes and sizes (see above), and

very often a vessel’s form correlates with its intended function. For example,

the krater was used to mix water and wine during a Greek symposium (an all-male

drinking party). It allows an individual to pour liquids into its wide opening, stir the

contents in its deep bowl, and easily access the mixture with a separate ladle or

small jug. Or, the vase known as a hydria was used for collecting, carrying, and

pouring water. It features a bulbous body, a pinched spout, and three handles

(two at the sides for holding and one stretched along the back for tilting and

pouring).

247

In order to discuss the different zones of vessels, specialists have adopted terms

that relate to the parts of the body. The opening of the pot is called the mouth;

the stem is referred to as the neck; the slope from the neck to the body is called

the shoulder; and the base is known as the foot).

On the exterior, Greek vases exhibit painted compositions that often reflect the

style of a certain period. For example, the vessels created during the Geometric

Period (c. 900-700 B.C.E.) feature geometric patterns, as seen on the

famous Dipylon amphora (below), while those decorated in the Orientalizing

Period (c. 700-600 B.C.E.) display animal processions and Near Eastern motifs, as

is visible on this early Corinthian amphora (The British Museum).

Later, during the Archaic and Classical Periods (c. 600-323 B.C.E.), vase-paintings

primarily display human and mythological activities. These figural scenes can vary

widely, from daily life events (e.g., fetching water at the fountain house) to heroic

deeds and Homeric tales (e.g., Theseus and the bull, Odysseus and the Sirens),

248

from the world of the gods (e.g., Zeus abducting Ganymede) to theatrical

performances and athletic competitions (for example, the Oresteia, chariot

racing). While it is important to stress that such painted scenes should not be

thought of as photographs that document reality, they can still aid in

reconstructing the lives and beliefs of the ancient Greeks.

Dipylon Amphora, c. 750 B.C.E., ceramic, 160 cm (National Archaeological

Museum, Athens)

Techniques, Painters and Inscriptions

To produce the characteristic red and black colors found on vases, Greek

craftsmen used liquid clay as paint (termed “slip”) and perfected a complicated

three-stage firing process. Not only did the pots have to be stacked in the kiln in a

specific manner, but the conditions inside had to be precise. First, the

temperature was stoked to about 800° centigrade and vents allowed for an

oxidizing environment. At this point, the entire vase turned red in color. Next, by

sealing the vents and increasing temperature to around 900-950° centigrade,

249

everything turned black and the areas painted with the slip vitrified (transformed

into a glassy substance). Finally, in the last stage, the vents were reopened and

oxidizing conditions returned inside the kiln. At this point, the unpainted zones of

the vessel became red again while the vitrified slip (the painted areas) retained a

glossy black hue. Through the introduction and removal of oxygen in the kiln and,

simultaneously, the increase and decrease in temperature, the slip transformed

into a glossy black color.

Briefly, ancient Greek vases display several painting techniques, and these are

often period specific. During the Geometric and Orientalizing periods (900-600

B.C.E.), painters employed compasses to trace perfect circles and used silhouette

and outline methods to delineate shapes and figures (below).

Frieze with mourning figures (detail), Dipylon Amphora, c. 750 B.C.E., ceramic, 160

cm (National Archaeological Museum, Athens)

Around 625-600 B.C.E., Athens adopted the black-figure technique (i.e., dark-

colored figures on a light background with incised detail). Originating in Corinth

almost a century earlier, black-figure uses the silhouette manner in conjunction

with added color and incision. Incision involves the removal of slip with a sharp

instrument, and perhaps its most masterful application can be found on

250

an amphora by Exekias (below). Often described as Achilles and Ajax playing a

game, the seated warriors lean towards the center of the scene and are clothed in

garments that feature intricate incised patterning. In addition to displaying more

realistically defined figures, black-figure painters took care to differentiate gender

with color: women were painted with added white, men remained black.

Exekias (potter and painter), Attic black-figure amphora (detail showing Ajax and

Achilles playing a game), c. 540-530 B.C.E., 61.1 cm high, found Vulci (Gregorian

Etruscan Museum, Vatican City)

The red-figure technique was invented in Athens around 525-520 BCE and is the

inverse of black-figure (below). Here light-colored figures are set against a dark

background. Using added color and a brush to paint in details, red-figure painters

watered down or thickened the slip in order to create different effects.

Watered down slip or “dilute glaze” has the appearance of a wash and was used

for hair, fur, and anatomy, as exemplified by the sketchy coat of the hare and the

youth’s musculature on the interior of this cup by Gorgos (below). When

thickened, the slip was used to form so-called “relief lines” or lines raised

251

prominently from the surface, and these were often employed to outline forms.

Surprisingly similar to red-figure is the white-ground technique.

Gorgos, Attic Red-figure Kylix (interior), c. 500 B.C.E. (Agora Museum, Athens)

Though visually quite different with its polychrome figures on a white-washed

background, white-ground requires the craftsman to paint in the details of forms

just like red-figure, rather than incise them (see the Kylix below).

Alongside figures and objects, one can sometimes find inscriptions. These identify

mythological figures, beautiful men or women contemporaneous with the painter

(“kalos” / “kale” inscriptions), and even the painter or potter himself (“egrapsen” /

“epoiesen”). Inscriptions, however, are not always helpful. Mimicking the

252

appearance of meaningful text, “nonsense inscriptions” deceive the illiterate

viewer by arranging the Greek letters in an incoherent fashion.

Attributed to the Villa Giulia Painter, Attic white ground kylix (drinking cup), c.

470 B.C.E., terra-cotta, red figure, white ground, 6.2 x 16.2 cm (The Metropolitan

Museum of Art)

Vases and Reception

The overall attractive quality of Greek vases, their relatively small size, and—at

one point in time—their easily obtainable nature, led them to be highly coveted

collector’s items during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Since the later

part of the nineteenth century, however, the study of vases became a scholarly

pursuit and their decoration was the obsession of connoisseurs gifted with the

ability to recognize and attribute the hands of individual painters.

253

The most well-known vase connoisseur of the twentieth century, a researcher

concerned with attribution, typology, and chronology, was Sir John Davidson

Beazley. Interested in Athenian black-, red-figure, and white-ground techniques,

Beazley did not favor beautifully painted specimens; he was impartial and studied

pieces of varying quality with equal attention. From his tedious and exhaustive

examinations, he compiled well-over 1000 painters and groups, and he attributed

over 30,000 vases. Although some researchers since Beazley’s death continue to

attribute and examine the style of specific painters or groups, vase scholars today

also question the technical production of vessels, their archaeological contexts,

their local and foreign distribution, and their iconography.

254

Appendix I. Sophocles

Sophocles of Kolōnos (c. 496 - c. 406 BCE) was one of the most famous and celebrated

writers of tragedy plays in ancient Greece and his surviving works, written throughout the

5th century BCE, include such classics as Oedipus Rex, Antigone, and Women of Trachis.

As with other Greek plays, Sophocles' work is not only a record of Greek theatre but also

provides an invaluable insight into many of the political and social aspects of ancient

Greece, from family relations to details of Greek religion. In addition, Sophocles'

innovations in theatre presentation would provide the foundations for all future western

dramatic performance, and his plays continue to be performed today in theatres around

the world.

The three great Greek tragedians were Aeschylus (c. 525 - c. 456 BCE), Euripides (c. 484

- 407 BCE), and Sophocles. Their works were usually first performed in groups of threes

(not necessarily trilogies) in such religious festivals as the competitions

of Dionysos Eleuthereus, notably the City Dionysia in Athens. The plays were often

performed again in lesser theatres around Greece, and the best were even distributed in

written form for public reading, kept as official state documents for posterity, and studied

as part of the standard Greek education.

Life

Sophocles had an exceptionally long career. His first competition entry was in 468 BCE

and his last (whilst still alive) was in 406 BCE when he was 90. Clearly a great admirer

of his fellow playwrights, Sophocles even dressed the actors and chorus of his final play

in mourning to mark the death of Euripides in 407 BCE. Sophocles won at least 20

festival competitions, including 18 at the City Dionysia. He also came second many times

and never had the ignominy of being voted third and last in competitions. Sophocles was,

therefore, at least in terms of victories, the most successful of the three great tragedians.

Tremendously popular in his own time, Sophocles was one of the Great Greek Tragedians

& an innovative playwright.

As a child, Sophocles had been the chief dancer in the festivities to celebrate victory over

the Persians in 479 BCE. Early in his career Sophocles even acted in his own plays, but

due to a weak voice he settled into the role of writer only. The playwright, based on his

practical experience of acting no doubt, seems to have had a favourite principal actor, one

Tlepolemus. As to Sophocles' character we have hints from Aristophanes, the great writer

of Greek Comedy, who describes his contemporary as 'easy-going' and 'relaxed'.

Outside of theatre life, Sophocles was also an active member of the Athenian polis. He

was a state treasurer (hellenotamiai) between 443 and 442 BCE and a general

255

(alongside Pericles) involved with putting down the revolt on Samos in c. 441 BCE. In

413 BCE he sat on the ten-man council (the probouloi) which was convened to deal with

the crisis of Athens' failed Sicilian expedition against Syracuse. In later life the

playwright was involved in a legal battle with his son who claimed his father was senile

and so sought his inheritance and control of the family property. We know that Sophocles

was a pious individual and actually a priest in the hero cult of Halon. Following his death,

the tragedian was himself honoured with a cult when he was renamed Dexion.

The tragedy Play Oedipus Rex famously presents king Oedipus, who fell in love with his

mother.

Approach & Innovation

Tremendously popular in his own time, Sophocles was also an innovative playwright, as

he added a third actor to the tragedy play format and was the first to employ painted

scenery (to suggest a rural scene, for example), sometimes even changing scenery during

the play. The use of three actors (playing multiple roles and wearing masks) was a major

breakthrough as now much more sophisticated plots became possible. Sophocles,

therefore, stands between the earlier Aeschylus and the later Euripides. Sophocles was

more interested in realistic action than his predecessors but kept the chorus segment (a

group of up to 15 actors who sang rather than spoke their lines) as a more participatory

cast member than his successors. For Sophocles the chorus became both a protagonist

and a commentator on the events of the play, creating a closer relationship with the

audience.

256

Greek Tragedy Mask

Sophocles was also a great user of theatrical metaphor, for example, blindness in the

Oedipus plays and bestiality in Women of Trachis, and his work in general sought to

provoke and disturb the audience from their ready acceptance of what is 'normal' and

what is not, forcing them through the play's characters to make difficult or even

impossible choices. Other techniques he used to convey meaning and emphasis were

dramatic entrances and exits of actors and the repeated use of significant props such as

the urn in Electra and the sword in Ajax. Finally, in the language itself that Sophocles

used we see more innovation. Rich language, highly formalised but with flexibility added

by running over sentences and including segments of more 'natural' speech, and the

unusual use of pauses result in Sophocles achieving a greater rhythm, fluidity, and

dramatic tension than his contemporaries.

257

The plays of Sophocles, like those of his contemporaries, drew on classic tales of Greek

mythology. This was the convention of tragedy (tragōida), and the familiarity of the story

and setting to the audience allowed the writer to focus on specific elements and interpret

them in a novel way. Sophocles is very often not so concerned with what happened (the

audience already knew this) but with how these events happened. Another typical feature

is that amongst the principal characters, there is usually a hero figure with exceptional

abilities whose over-confidence and pride ensure a tragic ending.

One of his most famous works is Antigone in which the lead character pays the ultimate

price for burying her brother Polynices against the wishes of King Kreon of Thebes. It is

a classic situation of tragedy - the political right of having the traitor Polynices

denied burial rites is contrasted against the moral right of a sister seeking to lay to rest her

brother. A theme that runs through Sophocles' work is right battling against right and that

the characters are mistaken in their interpretation of events. Only when tragedy results,

when in fact, it is all too late, do the characters recognise truth.

Theatre of Segesta

Sophocles' Works

We know that Sophocles wrote around 120 plays in all but these have survived only in a

fragmentary form. A reasonable chunk of the satyr play The Searchers survives but in

many cases only a few lines have withstood the ravages of time. Sophocles' seven

surviving complete tragedies are:

258

• Antigone (c. 442 BCE) about a woman torn between public and private duty.

• Oedipus Rex aka Oedipus the King (429 - 420 BCE) about the famous king who

loved his mother a little too much.

• Philoctetes (409 BCE) on how Odysseus persuades the hero to join the Trojan

War.

• Oedipus at Colonus (401 BCE) the final part of the trilogy about Oedipus.

• Ajax (date unknown) on the hero of the Trojan War and his wounded pride.

• Electra (date unknown) about two siblings who take revenge for their father's

murder.

• Women of Trachis (date unknown) about the wife of Hercules and her failed

attempt to regain her husband's affections.

Conclusion

Sophocles then, has not only provided us with several masterpieces of literature, but

through his innovations he also helped establish the standard formula for Greek Tragedy,

which along with Greek Comedy, would define the foundations of all western theatre for

millennia. The work of Sophocles has also escaped the boundaries of theatre and

provoked discussion and reaction in other fields, notably psychology and the work of

Sigmund Freud, which is perhaps testimony to the depth and difficulties of interpretation

in the plays of this great Greek master.

259

Appendix J. Crito by Plato

Written 360 B.C.E

Persons of the Dialogue

SOCRATES

CRITO

Scene

The Prison of Socrates.

Socrates. WHY have you come at this hour, Crito? it must be quite early.

Crito. Yes, certainly.

Soc. What is the exact time?

Cr. The dawn is breaking.

Soc. I wonder the keeper of the prison would let you in.

Cr. He knows me because I often come, Socrates; moreover. I have done him a kindness.

Soc. And are you only just come?

Cr. No, I came some time ago.

Soc. Then why did you sit and say nothing, instead of awakening me at once?

Cr. Why, indeed, Socrates, I myself would rather not have all this sleeplessness and

sorrow. But I have been wondering at your peaceful slumbers, and that was the reason

why I did not awaken you, because I wanted you to be out of pain. I have always thought

you happy in the calmness of your temperament; but never did I see the like of the easy,

cheerful way in which you bear this calamity.

Soc. Why, Crito, when a man has reached my age he ought not to be repining at the

prospect of death.

Cr. And yet other old men find themselves in similar misfortunes, and age does not

prevent them from repining.

260

Soc. That may be. But you have not told me why you come at this early hour.

Cr. I come to bring you a message which is sad and painful; not, as I believe, to yourself

but to all of us who are your friends, and saddest of all to me.

Soc. What! I suppose that the ship has come from Delos, on the arrival of which I am to

die?

Cr. No, the ship has not actually arrived, but she will probably be here to-day, as persons

who have come from Sunium tell me that they have left her there; and therefore to-

morrow, Socrates, will be the last day of your life.

Soc. Very well, Crito; if such is the will of God, I am willing; but my belief is that there

will be a delay of a day.

Cr. Why do you say this?

Soc. I will tell you. I am to die on the day after the arrival of the ship?

Cr. Yes; that is what the authorities say.

Soc. But I do not think that the ship will be here until to-morrow; this I gather from a

vision which I had last night, or rather only just now, when you fortunately allowed me to

sleep.

Cr. And what was the nature of the vision?

Soc. There came to me the likeness of a woman, fair and comely, clothed in white

raiment, who called to me and said: O Socrates-

"The third day hence, to Phthia shalt thou go."

Cr. What a singular dream, Socrates!

Soc. There can be no doubt about the meaning Crito, I think.

Cr. Yes: the meaning is only too clear. But, O! my beloved Socrates, let me entreat you

once more to take my advice and escape. For if you die I shall not only lose a friend who

can never be replaced, but there is another evil: people who do not know you and me will

believe that I might have saved you if I had been willing to give money, but that I did not

261

care. Now, can there be a worse disgrace than this- that I should be thought to value

money more than the life of a friend? For the many will not be persuaded that I wanted

you to escape, and that you refused.

Soc. But why, my dear Crito, should we care about the opinion of the many? Good men,

and they are the only persons who are worth considering, will think of these things truly

as they happened.

Cr. But do you see. Socrates, that the opinion of the many must be regarded, as is evident

in your own case, because they can do the very greatest evil to anyone who has lost their

good opinion?

Soc. I only wish, Crito, that they could; for then they could also do the greatest good, and

that would be well. But the truth is, that they can do neither good nor evil: they cannot

make a man wise or make him foolish; and whatever they do is the result of chance.

Cr. Well, I will not dispute about that; but please to tell me, Socrates, whether you are not

acting out of regard to me and your other friends: are you not afraid that if you escape

hence we may get into trouble with the informers for having stolen you away, and lose

either the whole or a great part of our property; or that even a worse evil may happen

to us? Now, if this is your fear, be at ease; for in order to save you, we ought surely to run

this or even a greater risk; be persuaded, then, and do as I say.

Soc. Yes, Crito, that is one fear which you mention, but by no means the only one.

Cr. Fear not. There are persons who at no great cost are willing to save you and bring you

out of prison; and as for the informers, you may observe that they are far from being

exorbitant in their demands; a little money will satisfy them. My means, which, as I am

sure, are ample, are at your service, and if you have a scruple about spending all

mine, here are strangers who will give you the use of theirs; and one of them, Simmias

the Theban, has brought a sum of money for this very purpose; and Cebes and many

others are willing to spend their money too. I say, therefore, do not on that account

hesitate about making your escape, and do not say, as you did in the court, that you will

have a difficulty in knowing what to do with yourself if you escape. For men will love

you in other places to which you may go, and not in Athens only; there are friends of

mine in Thessaly, if you like to go to them, who will value and protect you, and no

Thessalian will give you any trouble. Nor can I think that you are justified, Socrates, in

betraying your own life when you might be saved; this is playing into the hands of your

enemies and destroyers; and moreover I should say that you were betraying your

children; for you might bring them up and educate them; instead of which you go away

and leave them, and they will have to take their chance; and if they do not meet with

262

the usual fate of orphans, there will be small thanks to you. No man should bring children

into the world who is unwilling to persevere to the end in their nurture and education. But

you are choosing the easier part, as I think, not the better and manlier, which would rather

have become one who professes virtue in all his actions, like yourself. And, indeed, I am

ashamed not only of you, but of us who are your friends, when I reflect that this entire

business of yours will be attributed to our want of courage. The trial need never have

come on, or might have been brought to another issue; and the end of all, which is the

crowning absurdity, will seem to have been permitted by us, through cowardice and

baseness, who might have saved you, as you might have saved yourself, if we had been

good for anything (for there was no difficulty in escaping); and we did not see how

disgraceful, Socrates, and also miserable all this will be to us as well as to you. Make

your mind up then, or rather have your mind already made up, for the time of deliberation

is over, and there is only one thing to be done, which must be done, if at all, this very

night, and which any delay will render all but impossible; I beseech you therefore,

Socrates, to be persuaded by me, and to do as I say.

Soc. Dear Crito, your zeal is invaluable, if a right one; but if wrong, the greater the zeal

the greater the evil; and therefore we ought to consider whether these things shall be done

or not. For I am and always have been one of those natures who must be guided by

reason, whatever the reason may be which upon reflection appears to me to be the best;

and now that this fortune has come upon me, I cannot put away the reasons which I have

before given: the principles which I have hitherto honored and revered I still honor, and

unless we can find other and better principles on the instant, I am certain not to agree

with you; no, not even if the power of the multitude could inflict many more

imprisonments, confiscations, deaths, frightening us like children with hobgoblin

terrors. But what will be the fairest way of considering the question? Shall I return to

your old argument about the opinions of men, some of which are to be regarded, and

others, as we were saying, are not to be regarded? Now were we right in maintaining this

before I was condemned? And has the argument which was once good now proved to be

talk for the sake of talking; in fact an amusement only, and altogether vanity? That is

what I want to consider with your help, Crito: whether, under my present circumstances,

the argument appears to be in any way different or not; and is to be allowed by me

or disallowed. That argument, which, as I believe, is maintained by many who assume to

be authorities, was to the effect, as I was saying, that the opinions of some men are to be

regarded, and of other men not to be regarded. Now you, Crito, are a disinterested person

who are not going to die to-morrow- at least, there is no human probability of this, and

you are therefore not liable to be deceived by the circumstances in which you are

placed. Tell me, then, whether I am right in saying that some opinions, and the opinions

of some men only, are to be valued, and other opinions, and the opinions of other men,

are not to be valued. I ask you whether I was right in maintaining this?

263

Cr. Certainly.

Soc. The good are to be regarded, and not the bad?

Cr. Yes.

Soc. And the opinions of the wise are good, and the opinions of the unwise are evil?

Cr. Certainly.

Soc. And what was said about another matter? Was the disciple in gymnastics supposed

to attend to the praise and blame and opinion of every man, or of one man only- his

physician or trainer, whoever that was?

Cr. Of one man only.

Soc. And he ought to fear the censure and welcome the praise of that one only, and not of

the many?

Cr. That is clear.

Soc. And he ought to live and train, and eat and drink in the way which seems good to his

single master who has understanding, rather than according to the opinion of all other

men put together?

Cr. True.

Soc. And if he disobeys and disregards the opinion and approval of the one, and regards

the opinion of the many who have no understanding, will he not suffer evil?

Cr. Certainly he will.

Soc. And what will the evil be, whither tending and what affcting, in the disobedient

person?

Cr. Clearly, affecting the body; that is what is destroyed by the evil.

Soc. Very good; and is not this true, Crito, of other things which we need not separately

enumerate? In the matter of just and unjust, fair and foul, good and evil, which are the

subjects of our present consultation, ought we to follow the opinion of the many and to

fear them; or the opinion of the one man who has understanding, and whom we ought to

264

fear and reverence more than all the rest of the world: and whom deserting we shall

destroy and injure that principle in us which may be assumed to be improved by justice

and deteriorated by injustice; is there not such a principle?

Cr. Certainly there is, Socrates.

Soc. Take a parallel instance; if, acting under the advice of men who have no

understanding, we destroy that which is improvable by health and deteriorated by

disease- when that has been destroyed, I say, would life be worth having? And that is- the

body?

Cr. Yes.

Soc. Could we live, having an evil and corrupted body?

Cr. Certainly not.

Soc. And will life be worth having, if that higher part of man be depraved, which is

improved by justice and deteriorated by injustice? Do we suppose that principle,

whatever it may be in man, which has to do with justice and injustice, to be inferior to the

body?

Cr. Certainly not.

Soc. More honored, then?

Cr. Far more honored.

Soc. Then, my friend, we must not regard what the many say of us: but what he, the one

man who has understanding of just and unjust, will say, and what the truth will say. And

therefore you begin in error when you suggest that we should regard the opinion of the

many about just and unjust, good and evil, honorable and dishonorable. Well, someone

will say, "But the many can kill us."

Cr. Yes, Socrates; that will clearly be the answer.

Soc. That is true; but still I find with surprise that the old argument is, as I conceive,

unshaken as ever. And I should like to know Whether I may say the same of another

proposition- that not life, but a good life, is to be chiefly valued?

Cr. Yes, that also remains.

265

Soc. And a good life is equivalent to a just and honorable one- that holds also?

Cr. Yes, that holds.

Soc. From these premises I proceed to argue the question whether I ought or ought not to

try to escape without the consent of the Athenians: and if I am clearly right in escaping,

then I will make the attempt; but if not, I will abstain. The other considerations which

you mention, of money and loss of character, and the duty of educating children, are, I

fear, only the doctrines of the multitude, who would be as ready to call people to life, if

they were able, as they are to put them to death- and with as little reason. But now, since

the argument has thus far prevailed, the only question which remains to be considered is,

whether we shall do rightly either in escaping or in suffering others to aid in our

escape and paying them in money and thanks, or whether we shan not do rightly; and if

the latter, then death or any other calamity which may ensue on my remaining here must

not be allowed to enter into the calculation.

Cr. I think that you are right, Socrates; how then shall we proceed?

Soc. Let us consider the matter together, and do you either refute me if you can, and I will

be convinced; or else cease, my dear friend, from repeating to me that I ought to escape

against the wishes of the Athenians: for I am extremely desirous to be persuaded by you,

but not against my own better judgment. And now please to consider my first position,

and do your best to answer me.

Cr. I will do my best.

Soc. Are we to say that we are never intentionally to do wrong, or that in one way we

ought and in another way we ought not to do wrong, or is doing wrong always evil and

dishonorable, as I was just now saying, and as has been already acknowledged by us? Are

all our former admissions which were made within a few days to be thrown away? And

have we, at our age, been earnestly discoursing with one another all our life long only to

discover that we are no better than children? Or are we to rest assured, in spite of the

opinion of the many, and in spite of consequences whether better or worse, of the truth of

what was then said, that injustice is always an evil and dishonor to him who acts

unjustly? Shall we affirm that?

Cr. Yes.

Soc. Then we must do no wrong?

266

Cr. Certainly not.

Soc. Nor when injured injure in return, as the many imagine; for we must injure no one at

all?

Cr. Clearly not.

Soc. Again, Crito, may we do evil?

Cr. Surely not, Socrates.

Soc. And what of doing evil in return for evil, which is the morality of the many-is that

just or not?

Cr. Not just.

Soc. For doing evil to another is the same as injuring him?

Cr. Very true.

Soc. Then we ought not to retaliate or render evil for evil to anyone, whatever evil we

may have suffered from him. But I would have you consider, Crito, whether you really

mean what you are saying. For this opinion has never been held, and never will be held,

by any considerable number of persons; and those who are agreed and those who are not

agreed upon this point have no common ground, and can only despise one another, when

they see how widely they differ. Tell me, then, whether you agree with and assent to my

first principle, that neither injury nor retaliation nor warding off evil by evil is ever right.

And shall that be the premise of our agreement? Or do you decline and dissent from this?

For this has been of old and is still my opinion; but, if you are of another opinion, let me

hear what you have to say. If, however, you remain of the same mind as formerly, I will

proceed to the next step.

Cr. You may proceed, for I have not changed my mind.

Soc. Then I will proceed to the next step, which may be put in the form of a question:

Ought a man to do what he admits to be right, or ought he to betray the right?

Cr. He ought to do what he thinks right.

Soc. But if this is true, what is the application? In leaving the prison against the will of

the Athenians, do I wrong any? or rather do I not wrong those whom I ought least to

267

wrong? Do I not desert the principles which were acknowledged by us to be just? What

do you say?

Cr. I cannot tell, Socrates, for I do not know.

Soc. Then consider the matter in this way: Imagine that I am about to play truant (you

may call the proceeding by any name which you like), and the laws and the government

come and interrogate me: "Tell us, Socrates," they say; "what are you about? are you

going by an act of yours to overturn us- the laws and the whole State, as far as in you

lies? Do you imagine that a State can subsist and not be overthrown, in which the

decisions of law have no power, but are set aside and overthrown by individuals?" What

will be our answer, Crito, to these and the like words? Anyone, and especially a clever

rhetorician, will have a good deal to urge about the evil of setting aside the law which

requires a sentence to be carried out; and we might reply, "Yes; but the State has injured

us and given an unjust sentence." Suppose I say that?

Cr. Very good, Socrates.

Soc. "And was that our agreement with you?" the law would sar, "or were you to abide by

the sentence of the State?" And if I were to express astonishment at their saying this, the

law would probably add: "Answer, Socrates, instead of opening your eyes: you are in the

habit of asking and answering questions. Tell us what complaint you have to make

against us which justifies you in attempting to destroy us and the State? In the first place

did we not bring you into existence? Your father married your mother by our aid and

begat you. Say whether you have any objection to urge against those of us who regulate

marriage?" None, I should reply. "Or against those of us who regulate the system of

nurture and education of children in which you were trained? Were not the laws, who

have the charge of this, right in commanding your father to train you in music

and gymnastic?" Right, I should reply. "Well, then, since you were brought into the world

and nurtured and educated by us, can you deny in the first place that you are our child

and slave, as your fathers were before you? And if this is true you are not on equal terms

with us; nor can you think that you have a right to do to us what we are doing to you.

Would you have any right to strike or revile or do any other evil to a father or to

your master, if you had one, when you have been struck or reviled by him, or received

some other evil at his hands?- you would not say this? And because we think right to

destroy you, do you think that you have any right to destroy us in return, and your

country as far as in you lies? And will you, O professor of true virtue, say that you are

justified in this? Has a philosopher like you failed to discover that our country is more to

be valued and higher and holier far than mother or father or any ancestor, and more to be

regarded in the eyes of the gods and of men of understanding? also to be soothed, and

gently and reverently entreated when angry, even more than a father, and if not

persuaded, obeyed? And when we are punished by her, whether with imprisonment or

268

stripes, the punishment is to be endured in silence; and if she leads us to wounds or death

in battle, thither we follow as is right; neither may anyone yield or retreat or leave his

rank, but whether in battle or in a court of law, or in any other place, he must do what his

city and his country order him; or he must change their view of what is just: and if he

may do no violence to his father or mother, much less may he do violence to his country."

What answer shall we make to this, Crito? Do the laws speak truly, or do they not?

Cr. I think that they do.

Soc. Then the laws will say: "Consider, Socrates, if this is true, that in your present

attempt you are going to do us wrong. For, after having brought you into the world, and

nurtured and educated you, and given you and every other citizen a share in every good

that we had to give, we further proclaim and give the right to every Athenian, that if he

does not like us when he has come of age and has seen the ways of the city, and made our

acquaintance, he may go where he pleases and take his goods with him; and none of us

laws will forbid him or interfere with him. Any of you who does not like us and the city,

and who wants to go to a colony or to any other city, may go where he likes, and take his

goods with him. But he who has experience of the manner in which we order justice and

administer the State, and still remains, has entered into an implied contract that he will do

as we command him. And he who disobeys us is, as we maintain, thrice wrong: first,

because in disobeying us he is disobeying his parents; secondly, because we are the

authors of his education; thirdly, because he has made an agreement with us that he will

duly obey our commands; and he neither obeys them nor convinces us that our

commands are wrong; and we do not rudely impose them, but give him the alternative of

obeying or convincing us; that is what we offer and he does neither. These are the sort of

accusations to which, as we were saying, you, Socrates, will be exposed if you

accomplish your intentions; you, above all other Athenians." Suppose I ask, why is this?

they will justly retort upon me that I above all other men have acknowledged the

agreement. "There is clear proof," they will say, "Socrates, that we and the city were not

displeasing to you. Of all Athenians you have been the most constant resident in the

city, which, as you never leave, you may be supposed to love. For you never went out of

the city either to see the games, except once when you went to the Isthmus, or to any

other place unless when you were on military service; nor did you travel as other men do.

Nor had you any curiosity to know other States or their laws: your affections did not go

beyond us and our State; we were your especial favorites, and you acquiesced in our

government of you; and this is the State in which you begat your children, which is

a proof of your satisfaction. Moreover, you might, if you had liked, have fixed the penalty

at banishment in the course of the trial-the State which refuses to let you go now would

have let you go then. But you pretended that you preferred death to exile, and that you

were not grieved at death. And now you have forgotten these fine sentiments, and pay no

respect to us, the laws, of whom you are the destroyer; and are doing what only

269

a miserable slave would do, running away and turning your back upon the compacts and

agreements which you made as a citizen. And first of all answer this very question: Are

we right in saying that you agreed to be governed according to us in deed, and not in

word only? Is that true or not?" How shall we answer that, Crito? Must we not agree?

Cr. There is no help, Socrates.

Soc. Then will they not say: "You, Socrates, are breaking the covenants and agreements

which you made with us at your leisure, not in any haste or under any compulsion or

deception, but having had seventy years to think of them, during which time you were at

liberty to leave the city, if we were not to your mind, or if our covenants appeared to you

to be unfair. You had your choice, and might have gone either to Lacedaemon or Crete,

which you often praise for their good government, or to some other Hellenic or foreign

State. Whereas you, above all other Athenians, seemed to be so fond of the State, or, in

other words, of us her laws (for who would like a State that has no laws?), that you never

stirred out of her: the halt, the blind, the maimed, were not more stationary in her

than you were. And now you run away and forsake your agreements. Not so, Socrates, if

you will take our advice; do not make yourself ridiculous by escaping out of the city.

"For just consider, if you transgress and err in this sort of way, what good will you do,

either to yourself or to your friends? That your friends will be driven into exile and

deprived of citizenship, or will lose their property, is tolerably certain; and you yourself,

if you fly to one of the neighboring cities, as, for example, Thebes or Megara, both of

which are well-governed cities, will come to them as an enemy, Socrates, and their

government will be against you, and all patriotic citizens will cast an evil eye upon you as

a subverter of the laws, and you will confirm in the minds of the judges the justice of

their own condemnation of you. For he who is a corrupter of the laws is more than likely

to be corrupter of the young and foolish portion of mankind. Will you then flee from

well-ordered cities and virtuous men? and is existence worth having on these terms? Or

will you go to them without shame, and talk to them, Socrates? And what will you say to

them? What you say here about virtue and justice and institutions and laws being the best

things among men? Would that be decent of you? Surely not. But if you go away from

well-governed States to Crito's friends in Thessaly, where there is great disorder and

license, they will be charmed to have the tale of your escape from prison, set off with

ludicrous particulars of the manner in which you were wrapped in a goatskin or some

other disguise, and metamorphosed as the fashion of runaways is- that is very likely;

but will there be no one to remind you that in your old age you violated the most sacred

laws from a miserable desire of a little more life? Perhaps not, if you keep them in a good

temper; but if they are out of temper you will hear many degrading things; you will live,

but how?- as the flatterer of all men, and the servant of all men; and doing what?- eating

and drinking in Thessaly, having gone abroad in order that you may get a dinner.

270

And where will be your fine sentiments about justice and virtue then? Say that you wish

to live for the sake of your children, that you may bring them up and educate them- will

you take them into Thessaly and deprive them of Athenian citizenship? Is that the benefit

which you would confer upon them? Or are you under the impression that they will be

better cared for and educated here if you are still alive, although absent from them;

for that your friends will take care of them? Do you fancy that if you are an inhabitant of

Thessaly they will take care of them, and if you are an inhabitant of the other world they

will not take care of them? Nay; but if they who call themselves friends are truly friends,

they surely will.

"Listen, then, Socrates, to us who have brought you up. Think not of life and children

first, and of justice afterwards, but of justice first, that you may be justified before the

princes of the world below. For neither will you nor any that belong to you be happier or

holier or juster in this life, or happier in another, if you do as Crito bids. Now you depart

in innocence, a sufferer and not a doer of evil; a victim, not of the laws, but of men. But if

you go forth, returning evil for evil, and injury for injury, breaking the covenants and

agreements which you have made with us, and wronging those whom you ought least to

wrong, that is to say, yourself, your friends, your country, and us, we shall be angry with

you while you live, and our brethren, the laws in the world below, will receive you as an

enemy; for they will know that you have done your best to destroy us. Listen, then, to us

and not to Crito."

This is the voice which I seem to hear murmuring in my ears, like the sound of the flute

in the ears of the mystic; that voice, I say, is humming in my ears, and prevents me from

hearing any other. And I know that anything more which you will say will be in vain. Yet

speak, if you have anything to say.

Cr. I have nothing to say, Socrates.

Soc. Then let me follow the intimations of the will of God.

THE END

271

Appendix K. Pottery PowerPoint Presentation

 

272





273





274





275





276





277











278























279













.

280



281



282













283



284



















285



286



287

Bibliography

Aeschylus, and Philip Vellacott. Prometheus Bound and Other Plays. Penguin, 2003.

Campion, Corey, and Trevor Dodman. “Lessons from the Trenches: A Transdisciplinary

Approach to the Great War.” History Teacher, vol. 54, no. 2, Feb. 2021, pp. 337–

55. EBSCOhost,

search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eft&AN=149797834.

Cartwright, Mark. “Sophocles.” World History Encyclopedia, 29 Sept. 2013,

www.worldhistory.org/sophocles/.

Classics and Ancient History @ Warwick. “Lysistrata.” YouTube, 27 June 2016,

www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYY88WNC_1Q. Accessed 21 Oct. 2024.

Gerber, Douglas E. Greek Elegiac Poetry: From the Seventh to the Fifth Centuries B.C.

Harvard University Press, 1999.

“Greek Vase-Painting, an Introduction – Smarthistory.” Smarthistory.org,

smarthistory.org/greek-vase-intro/.

Gladius Et Historia. “BATTLE of LADE: DARIUS of PERSIA CRUSHES the IONIAN

REVOLT.” YouTube, 10 Sept. 2017, www.youtube.com/watch?v=hM5B75hrIKc.

Accessed 21 Oct. 2024.

Hanson, Victor Davis. A War like No Other: How the Athenians and Spartans Fought the

Peloponnesian War. Random House, 2006.

Herodotus. The Histories Herodotus ; Translated by Aubrey de Slincourt. Penguin, 2003.

Hesiod, and M. L. West. Theogony ; and, Works and Days. Oxford University Press,

2008.

288

Mark, Joshua J. “Ancient Persian Government.” World History Encyclopedia, 14 Nov.

2019, www.worldhistory.org/Persian_Government/.

Martell, Christopher C., and Kaylene M. Stevens. “Teaching Movements in History:

Understanding Collective Action, Intersectionality, and Justice in the

Past.” History Teacher, vol. 56, no. 3, May 2023, pp. 343–66. EBSCOhost,

search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eft&AN=164495368.

Osborne, Robin. The World of Athens: An Introduction to Classical Athenian Culture.

Cambridge University Press, 2008.

Panagiotis Constantinou. “Miltiades - Ancient Greece - the Battle of Marathon (with

Narration & Subtitles).” YouTube, 14 Sept. 2022,

www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TgYV_odXaA. Accessed 21 Oct. 2024.

Plato/ Lee, Desmond (TRN)/ Lane, Melissa (INT). The Republic. Penguin Group USA,

2007.

---. et al. Five Dialogues Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, Meno, Phaedo.

Indianapolis/Cambridge Hackett, 2002.

---. “The Internet Classics Archive | Crito by Plato.” Classics.mit.edu, 360AD,

classics.mit.edu/Plato/crito.html.

Plutarch. Greek Lives. Oxford Unversity Press, 2008.

---. “The Internet Classics Archive | Lycurgus by Plutarch.” Classics.mit.edu,

classics.mit.edu/Plutarch/lycurgus.html.

Robinson, Eric W. Ancient Greek Democracy: Readings and Sources. Blackwell, 2005.

289

Schwieler, E., & Ekecrantz, S. (2017). Towards a model of teaching disciplinary

boundaries – History with Literature and Literature with History: Theoretical

implications. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 16(2), 141-

155. https://doi-org.proxy.lib.csus.edu/10.1177/1474022215572051

Sophocles, et al. The Theban Plays Oedipus the King, Oedipus at Colonus, Antigone.

Johns Hopkins University Press, 2009.

Stalley, R. F., et al. Politics (Oxford World’s Classics). Oxford University Press, 2009.

“The Internet Classics Archive | Politics by Aristotle.” Classics.mit.edu,

classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/politics.html.

Thucydides Atheniensis Halimuntius, et al. History of the Peloponnesian War

Thucydides ;Translated by Rex Warner ; with an Introduction and Notes by M.I.

Finley. Penguin Books, 1972.

van Straaten, Dick & Wilschut, A. & Oostdam, Ron. (2018). Exploring pedagogical

approaches for connecting the past, the present and the future in history teaching.

Historical Encounters. 5. 46-67.

0 views·301 pages

CULTURAL HISTORY OF 5TH CENTURY BCE ATHENS: AN INTERDISCIPLINARY COLLEGE CURRICULUM PDF Free Download

CULTURAL HISTORY OF 5TH CENTURY BCE ATHENS: AN INTERDISCIPLINARY COLLEGE CURRICULUM PDF free Download. Think more deeply and widely.

Uploaded by ryan144958 on 5/2/2026

/301

100%