Democracy in Ancient Athens
Davison, Timothy J
ERH-201WX-03
MAJ Garriott
HR: Sources, easybib for works cited
The art of rhetoric flourished and constantly changed in ancient Greece, especially Athens, for various reasons, largely because of Democracy. Although rhetoric was a heavily debated term, especially between Aristotle and Plato, it certainly flourished in ancient Athens. One of the most prominent reasons that rhetoric became so important was because of the Athenian value of Democracy and the cultural and social values that helped shape Democracy. The value of Democracy also had a crucial role in the development of rhetoric, and those who used it, as rhetoric drastically changed with the development of Democracy. Furthermore, the value of Democracy had a direct impact on education in ancient Athens. The value of Democracy and the places where Democracy took place had crucial roles in the development of ancient Athens and the use of rhetoric. The value of Democracy and the use of rhetoric became very important overtime in ancient Athens because of the changes in culture and society within ancient Athens.
Rhetoric, as we know it, promotes persuasion and is the ability to see multiple sides to an argument and choose the best overall means to persuade others. It is very easy to understand why rhetoric would have flourished in the Democracy of ancient Athens because of the way that Democracy is structured. Democracy is a form of government where citizens govern themselves and represent themselves. Since citizens represent themselves, and do not have someone that speaks on their behalf, it is very important for them to be able to speak for themselves and learn to understand and work with other people. Therefore, it is easy to see why the teachings of rhetoric became so popular during the rise of the Athenian Democracy. An example of how rhetoric would be used in this type of setting is members of the government using it to see multiple sides in an argument, choosing the best overall means and persuading others to take their side in the particular argument.
The value of Democracy at first only thrived in certain social classes because of the nature of the Athenian culture. First of all, in ancient Athens everyone (i.e. male citizens) had the right of Isegoria, which is the right to speak publically and participate in public functions. At first, only Aristocrats were able to use this Isegoria, and therefore participate in Democracy because they were the Archons (magistrates of justice). Since the aristocrats were primarily the only citizens able to participate in Democracy at first, rhetoric was only used by the aristocrats to represent themselves rather than representing the citizens of Athens. Therefore, only the rich and noble aristocracy had the opportunity to earn an education and learn how to speak publically. The use of rhetoric and those who use it would begin to change over time, as more citizens would be put in a position that they could use it.
Although this use of Democracy would change because of changing cultural conditions, it is important to understand how rhetoric was used before these changes occurred. We can call this the pre-Democratic era since the only citizens to participate in the government were the aristocrats, which is not what a Democracy is. Therefore, the use of rhetoric in this setting was much different than it was when Athens became more Democratic. In this pre-Democratic Athens aristocrats would meet and use rhetoric to deliberate about laws that would mostly benefit them, rather than the society. Furthermore, these aristocrats would not represent the population of Athens, which would make this form of government anti-Democratic. As Athens became more Democratic, the use of rhetoric would change because more citizens would be representing themselves in the government.
During this pre-Democratic time period, education was only offered to the aristocrats because they were the only citizens that required it to speak in the government. This would seriously limit the understanding and use of rhetoric to a select minority of the Athenian population. Therefore, it is easy to say that there was a direct correlation between Democracy and education in ancient Athens since education was only offered to those that participated in government. This will change as alongside the value of Democracy as the changing cultural conditions in Athens brought more citizens into the government.
The Athenian culture and the use of Democracy began to change over time because of a multitude of reasons. As Athens went to war and conquered more land, there was an increase in the number of slaves brought in. The middle class citizens of Athens saw this as an opportune time to become involved in civic duty. By oppressing others, the middle class was granted the right to participate in civic duty (i.e. participate in democracy, vote) and the lower class would become the middle class. Therefore, this would increase the use of rhetoric because a larger amount of citizens would be participating and deliberate in government. This would also have an impact on education, as these citizens would look to become educated so they could represent themselves in the government.
Furthermore, the amount of citizens able to participate in civic duty began to increase because of certain individuals. Pericles stated that if citizens were unable to pay the monetary fee to voice their opinion in public, they could instead serve as a bureaucrat in place of paying this fee. The ability to serve as a bureaucrat instead of paying caused a tremendous influx in the amount of citizens that were able to voice their opinion publically. Along with codifying the law in Athens, Solon stated that citizens would be able to become Archons (Magistrate of Justice) if they owned property. This especially helped middle class citizens become Archons because most of them owned property but were not able to be an Archon since they were not aristocrats. This caused a larger amount of citizens to become involved with government, therefore causing them to use rhetoric.
Along with the growth of the ancient Athenian Democracy, the requirement for education grew as well. Since the aristocrats were traditionally the only citizens to be formally educated, the middle and lower classes needed an education so they were able to speak formally and represent themselves in the Democracy. As the Athenian Democracy began to grow and middle class citizens began to participate in it, the requirement for education grew. Universities did not yet exist during this period of time; so Athenian citizens earned their education from other means, such as from the teachings of the Sophists. Furthermore, the Sophists would begin to charge their students for their teachings and would teach anyone who would pay, regardless of social class. Therefore, the rise of Democracy had a direct impact on education in ancient Athens.
The growth of Democracy not only had a direct influence on the requirement for education in ancient Athens, but also the art of education. The Sophists, though often criticized for it, changed the means of education in Athens. The Sophists, such as Gorgias, would teach their students about the use of contradictory arguments and the ‘magic’ of persuasion. Gorgias boasts about rhetoric by calling it magic and displays this ability in his Encomium by turning the opinion of Helen from that of a villain to a victim. Although some rhetoricians, such as Plato, call this cookery, the middle class still has the knowledge of persuasion. The Sophists would also teach based off of their relativism that they learned during their travels. This education, which was taught by the sophists, provided middle class citizens with the ability to speak for and represent themselves in the Athenian Democracy. This is a tremendous change compared to the pre-Democratic Athens because citizens are now able to represent themselves rather than only aristocrats representing themselves.
As the Democratic assembly, also known as the ekklesia, became much larger due to these cultural conditions, the meeting places for the assembly needed to be larger. The official meeting place for the ekklesia was known as the Pnyx. The word Pnyx has the Greek meaning of “packed together tightly.” The Pnyx was built to suit the Democracy because it was built on a hill with seats looking down toward the speaker’s platform.
Rhetoric would flourish in the government because it was a place where citizens could deliberate and argue about the creation of laws. Citizens would argue by using their ability to persuade others through disoi logoi. Although the Athenian Democracy was run by it’s citizens, it was not a mob rule because the Athenians understood checks and balances. Aristotle, in his work “On Rhetoric,” talks about three forms of rhetoric, which are deliberative, epidictic and forensic. Aristotle states that deliberative rhetoric is used to speak about the future. This form of rhetoric is especially prevalent in the Athenian Democracy because all citizens that had the right of Isegoria would use it to deliberate about future laws. Members of the government would use this deliberative rhetoric to try to explain how and why a certain law should or should not be enacted in the future. This required members of the government to think about the future and provide their reasoning for why this law would or would not benefit the future of the state.
There were three different types of laws in ancient Athens during this time period. These laws were known as nomos, phesmos and physis. Both phesmos, which were laws that derived from kings, and physis, which were laws of nature, did not have much to do with rhetoric but nomos laws did. Nomos, otherwise known as social norms, were laws that were agreed upon by the demos (people). All citizens that were able to participate in government would argue about nomos laws in the Democracy. Therefore, rhetoric would be used in the creating of these laws since members of the government would use their words to try to persuade others and get them on their side. Rhetoric played a smaller role in the laws of physis as well since the government would reason with one another to define the proper laws of nature.
Rhetoric as we know it now, and as it was in ancient Athens varies from place to place. Therefore, these laws, especially the nomos laws, would differ from city to city in Athens because of differing cultures/societies. One thing in particular that the Sophists spoke about was the term endoxa, which was a cultural or social norm for a specific group, and how it differed from place to place. These different endoxas would cause politicians to change their rhetoric and methods of persuasion based on the specific city that they are in. The Sophists learned about this in their travels and referred to the application of it as common sense, since one had to realize the cultural and societal settings that they were in. Although many citizens in Athens admired the sophists, and even paid them, they had their critics. Plato, in his Gorgias, criticizes the sophists for taking money, being very boastful and making exaggerated claims.
It is easy to see the importance of having an education for participation in this form of government. Middle class citizens, with little to no government experience, had to learn how to represent themselves and go up against the experienced and educated aristocrats in the Democracy. It is also easy to understand why the middle class began to use persuasion, as taught by the sophists, and why many aristocrats, such as Plato, criticized it. It was a way for middle class citizens to become educated, at a relatively cheap cost, and learn how to speak in public. The aristocracy saw this as a threat to their rule over Athenian government and clearly had a disdain for it. Plato, in his Gorgias, called rhetoric cookery and did not recognize it as a true art. Along with other aristocrats, Plato thought that persuasion, as taught by the sophists, did not support the truth. Furthermore, Plato, in his Gorgias, lumps politicians and rhetoricians together as corrupt flatterers.
Rhetoric is not a constant and never will be. It changes with the times and with different cultural or social settings (endoxa). This interpretation of rhetoric is clear to see during the development of Athenian Democracy. Rhetoric changed because of various cultural conditions such as the development of Democracy. The value of Democracy in ancient Athens had a direct impact on the use of rhetoric. It changed the way rhetoric was used, taught, perceived, etc. The Athenian Democracy also provided more citizens with the opportunity for an education. Overall, the value of Democracy had a direct influence on rhetoric and much more in ancient Athens.
Works Cited
Blackwell, Christopher W. “Athenian Democracy: A Brief Overview.” Athenian Democracy: A Brief Overview. Stoa, 28 Feb. 23. Web. 21 Oct. 2016.
Glowacki, Kevin T. “The Ancient City of Athens: The Pnyx.” The Ancient City of Athens: The Pnyx. Stoa, 24 Oct. 2016. Web. 07 Nov. 2016.
Gorgias, and Douglas M. MacDowell. Encomium of Helen. Bristol: Bristol Classical P., 1982. Print.
Herrick, James A. The History and Theory of Rhetoric: An Introduction. 05th ed. Boston: Allyn and Beacon, 2005. Print.
Plato, and Benjamin Jowett. Gorigas, New York: C. Scribner’s Sons, 1871. Print.