AHS3712
Question 1:
Athenian Branches of Democracy
The Assembly:
Otherwise known as the Ekklesia, the Assembly was regarded as the sovereign
governing body of Athens. Eligible citizens from any demos were able to attend
Assembly meetings, held every 8 to 10 days in a hillside auditorium known as the Pnyx.
Of course, citizenship in Athens was restricted to free men only, and those who could
vote had to be of age, thus only a small portion of the population were included. Here,
speeches and debates deliberating on various topics were conducted by
representatives. There were no political parties during that period and views were
decided upon through voting by show of hands. Decisions were made regarding taxes,
war, treaties and foreign policy, construction and religion, laws were written and revised
and approval or condemnation of public officials’ conduct also took place, sometimes in
the form of ostracism, whereby a citizen was expelled from the city-state for 10 years. If
chosen, it was a citizen’s obligation to attend the Assembly. As it was often expensive to
do this, a method of payment was introduced in order to entice people to participate.
The Assembly was impared in that it was only allowed to discuss and decide on topics
that the Boule had approved, and could not alter any existing laws by passing simple
decrees. If a citizen did decide to propose a decree deemed unconstitutional, they were
subject to a “graphe paranomon” or “prosecution for having proposed an unlawful
decree” and tried before the Court (Aristot. Ath. Pol. 59.2; Dem. 24.33). However,
eligible citizens had a far greater role to play than previously and found power in voting.
The Boule:
The Boule was structured to represent what could be described as the “full-time
government” of Athens. It developed from the grouping of noble elders previously
forming the King’s body of advisors. As the political scene changed, nobility by
wealth overtook one’s birthrite. Solon is said to have created the reformed Boule by
altering its grouping and selection in order to guide the assembly, with Cleisthenes
further reforming it to expanded so that five hundred members were given roles, thus
the name the Council of Five Hundred emerged. Members had to be citizens over
the age of 30 years in order to serve, and could only do so twice. Athenian citizens
were divided into 10 tribes with 50 members from each tribe serving on the coucil.
These members were chosen through random selection to hold their office for the
period of one year. The chairman were also chosen by lottery and held their position
for 24 hours only, with 50 other coucil members on duty to help out if emergencies
occured. Those chosen had to be approved by their demes, were required to have
political experience and deemed suitable for public office. This sortition was often
, AHS3712
viewed as a way to avoid corruption and prevent influential individuals from
dominating the political landscape unfairly. The standing committee would alternate
turn in periods of thirty-six days before switching out to another member, promoting
inclusivity by ensuring members were from different geographic subdivisions of the
state. All fifty members on duty at a specific time were housed and fed in a building
close to their meetings called the Prytaneion. Unlike the Ekklesia, their meetings
were held daily and the council did most of the hands-on work. The Boule also
encountered issues with the funds neccessary to attend, and so was aided by the
introduction of councillors receiving payment for their duties. Part of the coucil’s
function was to plan the agenda of the Assembly meetings and Carey describes it as
a steering committee for the Assembly, as well as it’s “executive arm” (Carey. 2006).
They had the say in what matters would be deliberated upon, however no laws could
be made without the approval from the Assembly. Aside from internal affairs, other
functions included overseeing the military and financial matters of the state, advising
generals, drafting various disscussions for the assembly to deliberate on, dealing
with ambassadors from other city-states, approving elected magistrates as well as
having special powers granted to them in times of crisis. Overall they could be
summed as the representative ruling authority over the citizen assembly.
The Courts:
The Dikasteria were the Athenian popular courts, an institution where citizens
argued cases before a group of lottery-selected jurors. More than 500 of these jurors
were chosen from a pool of citizen volunteers over the age of thirty through a system
of sortition. There were 6000 jurors selected in total, with no presiding judge as
such. These men were deemed part of the sovereign demos, and assigned to
various courts through a further casting of lots. These courts were said to have an
almost unlimited power, with Artistotle quoted to have said that they “contributed
most to the strength of democracy”. It was the demos who brought forward cases to
court, argued for prosecution and delivered verdicts by majority rule to criminals and
law offendors.Often public affairs found stronger expression in the Courts than in the
Assembly, one of the main reasons being that the courts decided whether or not a
particular proposal or law was illegal. Many orators found fame in these courts and
persuasive public speaking became a sought-after skill, unfortunately this did not
always work in democracy’s favour. The job of a juror was accessible to all income
brackets provided they had citizenship and they were paid small wages for their
work in order to encourage more volunteers, as a result many jurors were elderly
and retired. These wages came from taxes levied on the metoikoi, allie’s
Question 1:
Athenian Branches of Democracy
The Assembly:
Otherwise known as the Ekklesia, the Assembly was regarded as the sovereign
governing body of Athens. Eligible citizens from any demos were able to attend
Assembly meetings, held every 8 to 10 days in a hillside auditorium known as the Pnyx.
Of course, citizenship in Athens was restricted to free men only, and those who could
vote had to be of age, thus only a small portion of the population were included. Here,
speeches and debates deliberating on various topics were conducted by
representatives. There were no political parties during that period and views were
decided upon through voting by show of hands. Decisions were made regarding taxes,
war, treaties and foreign policy, construction and religion, laws were written and revised
and approval or condemnation of public officials’ conduct also took place, sometimes in
the form of ostracism, whereby a citizen was expelled from the city-state for 10 years. If
chosen, it was a citizen’s obligation to attend the Assembly. As it was often expensive to
do this, a method of payment was introduced in order to entice people to participate.
The Assembly was impared in that it was only allowed to discuss and decide on topics
that the Boule had approved, and could not alter any existing laws by passing simple
decrees. If a citizen did decide to propose a decree deemed unconstitutional, they were
subject to a “graphe paranomon” or “prosecution for having proposed an unlawful
decree” and tried before the Court (Aristot. Ath. Pol. 59.2; Dem. 24.33). However,
eligible citizens had a far greater role to play than previously and found power in voting.
The Boule:
The Boule was structured to represent what could be described as the “full-time
government” of Athens. It developed from the grouping of noble elders previously
forming the King’s body of advisors. As the political scene changed, nobility by
wealth overtook one’s birthrite. Solon is said to have created the reformed Boule by
altering its grouping and selection in order to guide the assembly, with Cleisthenes
further reforming it to expanded so that five hundred members were given roles, thus
the name the Council of Five Hundred emerged. Members had to be citizens over
the age of 30 years in order to serve, and could only do so twice. Athenian citizens
were divided into 10 tribes with 50 members from each tribe serving on the coucil.
These members were chosen through random selection to hold their office for the
period of one year. The chairman were also chosen by lottery and held their position
for 24 hours only, with 50 other coucil members on duty to help out if emergencies
occured. Those chosen had to be approved by their demes, were required to have
political experience and deemed suitable for public office. This sortition was often
, AHS3712
viewed as a way to avoid corruption and prevent influential individuals from
dominating the political landscape unfairly. The standing committee would alternate
turn in periods of thirty-six days before switching out to another member, promoting
inclusivity by ensuring members were from different geographic subdivisions of the
state. All fifty members on duty at a specific time were housed and fed in a building
close to their meetings called the Prytaneion. Unlike the Ekklesia, their meetings
were held daily and the council did most of the hands-on work. The Boule also
encountered issues with the funds neccessary to attend, and so was aided by the
introduction of councillors receiving payment for their duties. Part of the coucil’s
function was to plan the agenda of the Assembly meetings and Carey describes it as
a steering committee for the Assembly, as well as it’s “executive arm” (Carey. 2006).
They had the say in what matters would be deliberated upon, however no laws could
be made without the approval from the Assembly. Aside from internal affairs, other
functions included overseeing the military and financial matters of the state, advising
generals, drafting various disscussions for the assembly to deliberate on, dealing
with ambassadors from other city-states, approving elected magistrates as well as
having special powers granted to them in times of crisis. Overall they could be
summed as the representative ruling authority over the citizen assembly.
The Courts:
The Dikasteria were the Athenian popular courts, an institution where citizens
argued cases before a group of lottery-selected jurors. More than 500 of these jurors
were chosen from a pool of citizen volunteers over the age of thirty through a system
of sortition. There were 6000 jurors selected in total, with no presiding judge as
such. These men were deemed part of the sovereign demos, and assigned to
various courts through a further casting of lots. These courts were said to have an
almost unlimited power, with Artistotle quoted to have said that they “contributed
most to the strength of democracy”. It was the demos who brought forward cases to
court, argued for prosecution and delivered verdicts by majority rule to criminals and
law offendors.Often public affairs found stronger expression in the Courts than in the
Assembly, one of the main reasons being that the courts decided whether or not a
particular proposal or law was illegal. Many orators found fame in these courts and
persuasive public speaking became a sought-after skill, unfortunately this did not
always work in democracy’s favour. The job of a juror was accessible to all income
brackets provided they had citizenship and they were paid small wages for their
work in order to encourage more volunteers, as a result many jurors were elderly
and retired. These wages came from taxes levied on the metoikoi, allie’s
