Greece in the Classical Age

The Question: This is the formative period of western civilization. Every subsequent "renaissance" consciously attempted to emulate and re-create the the achievements of this period. The Greek, and in particular the Athenian contribution, has affected and defined our notions of politics, of science, and of the arts. How can we account for the achievement and vitality? Two closely related concepts:
1. The Greeks were consciously aware of their achievement, and indeed linked that achievement to the notions of citizenship and consensual government. Herodotus on the effects (also in your sourcebook with more context). Croessus and Solon; and again. "Tellus of Athens, sire." Full of astonishment at what he heard, Croesus demanded sharply, "And wherefore dost thou deem Tellus happiest?" To which the other replied, "First, because his country was flourishing in his days, and he himself had children both beautiful and good, and he lived to see children born to each of them, and these children all grew up; and further because, after a life spent in what our people look upon as comfort, his end was surpassingly glorious. In a battle between the Athenians and their neighbors near Eleusis, he came to the assistance of his countrymen, routed the foe, and died upon the field most gallantly. The Athenians gave him a public funeral on the spot where he fell, and paid him the highest honors." Significance. Happiness can only be attained when one's family and one's state prosper; one must be ready to die to defend them. They must be worthy of the ultimate sacrifice. NB: the funeral oration of Pericles makes the same point. Favors the many, equal protection for all; merit not wealth counts, live the good life [public rituals, etc], open to trade, an open society [live as we please], cultivate refinement
2. This achievement found its focus at Athens, not incidentally because it had the largest body of citizens, but also because of the city's generally more tolerant atmosphere (note best evidence for this is Funeral Oration of Pericles, DWP Ch 3) encouraged historians and social critics to live and to write there. It was characterized by a commitment of a significant proportion of the population to sustained, rational analysis/criticism of nature and society and in a public context (the subject of the next lecture, but esp true in the role of theater and public discourse). "The unexamined life is not worth living" Socrates
We will be exploring this theme all week. Note the following:
1. The cultural achievement was the greatest precisely in that state that expanded its citizen body the furthest creating what modern historians label as a 'radical democracy' in that it was far more inclusive than other Greek states.
2. Note that application of the principle those who vote, fight and vice versa, meant that the more inclusive citizen-body of the Athensians gave them a substantially larger miliary establishment. Cf. the the problem of rule described in the previous lecture.
Background to the Classical Age (510-370): chronologically bracketed by the Persians Wars (490-479 BC) and the Peloponnesian War (432-404 BC). Also a period of intense conflict between city-states. It is one of the great paradoxes of western civilization that periods of great intellectual and political achievement come also in the context of war and turmoil. Specifically, conflicts found their origin in
1. The tension between individual cities each of which hoped to control the access to resources necessary for urban life (agon/arete) and the strong sense of autonomy felt by the citizens of the threatened state.
2. The Persians, who had a healthy respect for Greek martial ability after their defeats in 490 and 480, subsidized this strife as a way to protect their own empire.
Athens and Sparta:
1. The Athenian Empire [aka Delian League] and the Sparta / Peloponnesian League [led by Sparta]: This period 480-431 (analogous to the "cold war") is usually divided into two periods based on the changes in the structure of the Athenian League.
2. Forces at Work: What follows is complex, but goes to the heart of the perception of democracy at Athens
  1. Until 448, Athens pursued an anti-Persian policy with the active cooperation of her allies. Allies and Athenians 'voted' and 'fought' together in the Delian / Athenian League.
  2. After 448 the allies opted to pay taxes rather than to serve themselves.
    1. To replace the lost manpower, the Athenians used the tax income to expand her citizen body (by providing the poorer citizens with subsidies and benefits). As the allies we no longer 'fighting' they effectively lost their 'vote' in the League.
    2. Without the "vote", the autonomy of the allies was gradually, but systematically, lost and they began to look to Sparta, the rival of Athens, to liberate them from a system that had become oppressive [aka taxation without representation].
3. A broader problem: Imperialism and democracy, the case of Athens. Why is it that democratic states appear to be expansionistic or imperialistic? NOTE: The evidence for the consequences may be found in DWP Ch 3 (especially the Melian Dialog). Two considerations:
  1. Herodotus writes: "while the Athenians were oppressed under a despotic govt, they had no better success at war than any of their neighbors, yet, once the yoke was flung off (and concensual government established), they proved the finest fighters in the world." That is, the Greeks believed that democracy and consensual government served "to liberate energies", to make states more stronger and competitive. frrev
  2. Thucydides, the most important Athenian historian, argues the case of Athenian imperialism somewhat differently:
    1. The justification for the Delian League / Empire (480-430 BC) was first and foremost to liberate and to defend the Greek states from the threat of Persia, but also to ensure peace and to secure trade in the Aegean. The Delian League began then as a voluntary organization
    2. Athens' ability to pursue this policy successfully depended not only on the cooperation of her allies, but also on the continuation and development of her democracy (those who fight, vote). Means had to be found to subsidize the participation of the lower classes both in governing and in fighting. Funds for this purpose were obtained from the allied "contributions" aka taxes .
    3. The political position of the popular leaders (demagogues = "a speaker or political leader who attempts to gain political influence by impassioned appeals to the emotions and prejudices of the populace" ) depended on expanding the number of voters/fighters, and concurrently finding the means to pay for their participation with social programs. Hence, the demagogues position was tied to the program of what may be called "imperial" expansion. That is, the democratic leaders raised taxes on the allies to support social policies at home.
    4. The more Athens exploited /taxed (and without representation!) her allies, the more restless they became, the more likely they were to appeal to Sparta and to Persia (!) for support. Hence, and to complete the circle, the more important it was that Athens oppose those powers by all available means and especially by the proven ability of the democracy to produce manpower.
4. Conclusion / significance: Marx and Engels on this problem...
  1. Imperialism is not a consequence of a particular form of government.
  2. States with a relatively developed system of consensual govt are more successful at marshalling their resources and more successful in global competition.
  3. imperial overreach.