The Works of the Rev. Jonathan Swift/Volume 2/A Discourse of the Contests and Dissensions between the Nobles and the Commons in Athens and Rome/Chapter 2
CHAP. II.
OF THE DISSENSIONS IN ATHENS, BETWEEN THE FEW AND THE MANY.
THESEUS is the first, who is recorded, with any appearance of truth, to have brought the Grecians from a barbarous manner of life, among scattered villages, into cities; and to have established the popular state in Athens, assigning to himself the guardianship of the laws, and chief command in war. He was forced, after some time, to leave the Athenians to their own measures, upon account of their seditious temper, which ever continued with them, till the final dissolution of their government by the Romans. It seems, the country about Attica was the most barren of any in Greece; through which means it happened, that the natives were never expelled by the fury of invaders, (who thought it not worth a conquest) but continued always aborigines; and therefore retained, through all revolutions, a tincture of that turbulent spirit, wherewith their government began. This institution of Theseus appears to have been rather a sort of mixed monarchy, than a popular state; and for aught we know, might continue so during the series of kings, till the death of Codrus. From this last prince Solon was said to be descended; who, finding the people engaged in two violent factions of the poor and the rich, and in great confusion thereupon; refusing the monarchy, which was offered him, chose rather to cast the government after another model, wherein he made provisions for settling the balance of power, choosing a senate of four hundred, and disposing the magistracies and offices according to men's estates; leaving to the muldtude their votes in electing, and the power of judging certain processes by appeal. This council of four hundred was chosen, one hundred out of each tribe, and seems to have been a body representative of the people: though the people collective reserved a share of power to themselves. It is a point of history perplexed enough; but thus much is certain, that the balance of power was provided for; else Pisistratus, called by authors the tyrant of Athens, could never have governed so peaceably as he did, without changing any of Solon's laws[1]. These several powers, together with that of the archon or chief magistrate, made up the form of government in Athens, at what time it began to appear upon the scene of action and story.
The first great man bred up under this institution, was Miltiades, who lived about ninety years after Solon, and is reckoned to have been the first great captain, not only of Athens, but of all Greece. From the time of Miltiades to that of Phocion, who is looked upon as the last famous general of Athens, are about 130 years: after which, they were subdued and insulted by Alexander's captains, and continued under several revolutions a small truckling state, of no name or reputation, till they fell, with the rest of Greece, under the power of the Romans.
During this period from Miltiades to Phocion, I shall trace the conduct of the Athenians with relation to their dissentions between the people and some of their generals; who, at that time, by their power and credit in the army, in a warlike commonwealth, and often supported by each other, were, with the magistrates and other civil officers, a sort of counterpoise to the power of the people; who, since the death of Solon, had already made great encroachments. What these dissensions were, how founded, and what the consequences of them, I shall briefly and impartially relate.
I must here premise, that the nobles in Athens were not at this time a corporate assembly, that I can gather[2]; therefore the resentments of the commons were usually turned against particular persons, and by way of articles of impeachment. Whereas the commons in Rome, and some other states, as will appear in a proper place, though they followed this method upon occasion, yet generally pursued the enlargement of their power by more set quarrels of one entire assembly against another. However, the custom of particular impeachments being not limited to former ages, any more than that of general struggles and dissensions between fixed assemblies of nobles and commons, and the ruin of Greece having been owing to the former, as that of Rome was to the latter, I shall treat on both expressly; that those states who are concerned in either (if at least there be any such now in the world) may, by observing the means and issues of former dissensions, learn whether the causes are alike in theirs; and if they find them to be so, may consider whether they ought not justly to apprehend the same effects.
To speak of every particular person impeached by the commons of Athens, within the compass designed, would introduce the history of almost every great man they had among them: I shall therefore take notice only of six, who, living in that period of time when Athens was at the height of its glory, as indeed it could not be otherwise while such hands were at the helm, though impeached for high crimes and misdemeanours, such as bribery, arbitrary proceedings, misapplying or embezzling publick funds, ill conduct at sea, and the like, were honoured and lamented by their country, as the preservers of it, and have had the veneration of all ages since paid justly to their memories.
Miltiades was one of the Athenian generals against the Persian power, and the famous victory at Marathon, was chiefly owing to his valour and conduct. Being sent some time after to reduce the island of Paros, he mistook a great fire at a distance, for the fleet; and being no ways a match for them, set sail for Athens; at his arrival he was impeached by the commons for treachery, though not able to appear by reason of his wounds, fined 30000 crowns, and died in prison. Though the consequences of this proceeding upon the affairs of Athens, were no other than the untimely loss of so great and good a man, yet I could not forbear relating it.
Their next great man was Aristides. Beside the mighty service he had done his country in the wars, he was a person of the strictest justice, and best acquainted with the laws as well as forms of their government, so that he was in a manner chancellor of Athens. This man, upon a slight and false accusation of favouring arbitrary power, was banished by ostracism; which, rendered into modern English, would signify, that they voted he should be removed from their presence and council for ever. But however, they had the wit to recall him, and to that action owed the preservation of their state by his future services. For, it must be still confessed in behalf of the Athenian people, that they never conceived themselves perfectly infallible, nor arrived to the heights of modern assemblies, to make obstinacy confirm, what sudden heat and temerity began. They thought it not below the dignity of an assembly to endeavour at correcting an ill step; at least to repent, though it often fell out too late.
Themistocles was at first a commoner himself: it, was he, that raised the Athenians to their greatness at sea, which he thought to be the true and constant interest of that commonwealth; and the famous naval victory over the Persians at Salamis, was owing to his conduct. It seems the people observed somewhat of haughtiness in his temper and behaviour, and therefore banished him for five years; but finding some slight matter of accusation against him, they sent to seize his person, and he hardly escaped to the Persian court; from whence, if the love of his country had not surmounted its base ingratitude to him, he had many invitations to return at the head of the Persian fleet, and take a terrible revenge: but he rather chose a voluntary death.
The people of Athens impeached Pericles for misapplying the publick revenues to his own private use. He had been a person of great deservings from the republick, was an admirable speaker, and very popular. His accounts were confused, and he could not then give them up; therefore merely to divert that difficulty, and the consequences of it, he was forced to engage his country in the Peloponnesian war, the longest that ever was known in Greece, and which ended in the utter ruin of Athens.
The same people having resolved to subdue Sicily, sent a mighty fleet under the command of Nicias, Lamachus, and Alcibiades: the two former, persons of age and experience; the last, a young man of noble birth, excellent education, and a plentiful fortune. A little before the fleet set sail, it seems one night the stone-images of Mercury, placed in several parts of the city, were all pared in the face: this action the Athenians interpreted for a design of destroying the popular state; and Alcibiades, having been formerly noted for the like frolicks and excursions, was immediately accused of this. He, whether conscious of his innocence, or assured of the secrecy, offered to come to his trial before he went to his command; this the Athenians refused. But as soon as he was got to Sicily, they sent for him back, designing to take the advantage, and prosecute him in the absence of his friends, and of the army, where he was very powerful. It seems he understood the resentments of a popular assembly too well to trust them; and therefore, instead of returning, escaped to Sparta; where his desires of revenge prevailing over his love to his country, he became its greatest enemy. Mean while the Athenians before Sicily, by the death of one commander, and the superstition, weakness, and perfect ill conduct of the other, were utterly destroyed, the whole fleet taken, and a miserable slaughter made of the army, whereof hardly one ever returned. Some time after this Alcibiades was recalled upon his own conditions by the necessities of the people, and made chief commander at sea and land; but his lieutenant engaging against his positive orders, and being beaten by Lysander, Alcibiades was again, disgraced, and banished. However, the Athenians having lost all strength and heart since their misfortune at Sicily, and now deprived of the only person that was able to recover their losses, repent of their rashness, and endeavour in vain for his restoration; the Persian lieutenant, to whose protection he fled, making him a sacrifice to the resentments of Lysander the general of the Lacedemonians, who now reduces all the dominions of the Athenians, takes the city, razes their walls, ruins their works, and changes the form of their government; which though again restored for sometime by Thrasybulus (as their walls were rebuilt by Conon) yet here we must date the full of the Athenian greatness; the dominion and chief power in Greece from that period to the time of Alexander the Great, which was about fifty years, being divided between the Spartans and Thebans. Though Philip, Alexander's father (the most christian king of that age) had indeed some time before begun to break in upon the republick of Greece by conquest or bribery; particularly dealing large money among some popular orators, by which he brought many of them, as the term of art was then, to Philippize.
In the time of Alexander and his captains, the Athenians were offered an opportunity of recovering their liberty, and being restored to their former state; but the wise turn they thought to give the matter, was by an impeachment and sacrifice of the author, to hinder the success. For, after the destruction of Thebes by Alexander, this prince designing the conquest of Athens was prevented by Phocion the Athenian general, then ambassador from that state; who, by his great wisdom and skill at negotiations, diverted Alexander from his design, and restored the Athenians to his favour. The very same success he had with Antipater after Alexander's death, at which time the government was new regulated by Solon's laws: But Polyperchon, in hatred to Phocion, having by order of the young king, whose governor he was, restored those whom Phocion had banished, the plot succeeded. Phocion was accused by popular orators, and put to death.
Thus was the most powerful commonwealth of all Greece, after great degeneracies from the institution of Solon, utterly destroyed by that rash, jealous, and inconstant humour of the people, which was never satisfied to see a general either victorious, or unfortunate; such ill judges, as well as rewarders, have popular assemblies been, of those who best deserved from them.
Now, the circumstance which makes these examples of more importance, is, that this very power of the people in Athens, claimed so confidently for an inherent right, and insisted on as the undoubted privilege of an Athenian born, was the rankest encroachment imaginable, and the grossest degeneracy from the form that Solon left them. In short, their government was grown into a dominatio plebis, or tyranny of the people, who by degrees had broke and overthrown the balance, which that legislator had very well fixed and provided for. This appears not only from what has been already said of that lawgiver, but more manifestly from a passage in Diodorus[3]; who tells us, that Antipater, one of Alexander's captains, abrogated the popular government in Athens, and restored the power of suffrages and magistracy to such only, as were worth two thousand drachmas; by which means, says he, that republick came to be again administered by the laws of Solon. By this quotation it is manifest that great author looked upon Solon's institution, and a popular government, to be two different things. And as for this restoration by Antipater, it had neither consequence nor continuance worth observing.
I might easily produce many more examples, but these are sufficient: and it may be worth the reader's time to reflect a little on the merits of the cause, as well as of the men, who had been thus dealt with by their country. I shall direct him no farther than by repeating, that Aristides was the most renowned by the people themselves for his exact justice and knowledge in the law; that Themistocles was a most fortunate admiral, and had got a mighty victory over the great king of Persia's fleet; that Pericles was an able minister of state, an excellent orator, and a man of letters; and lastly, that Phocion, beside the success of his arms, was also renowned for his negotiations abroad, having in an embassy brought the greatest monarch of the world at that time, to the terms of an honourable peace, by which his country was preserved.
I shall conclude my remarks upon Athens with the character given us of that people by Polybius. About this time, says he, the Athenians were governed by two men; quite sunk in their affairs; had little or no commerce with the rest of Greece, and were become great reverencers of crowned heads.
For, from the time of Alexander's captains till Greece was subdued by the Romans, to the latter part of which this description of Polybius falls in, Athens never produced one famous man either for counsels or arms, or hardly for learning. And indeed it was a dark insipid period through all Greece: for, except the Achaian league under Aratus and Philopœmen; and the endeavours of Agis and Cleomenes to restore the state of Sparta, so frequently harrassed by tyrannies occasioned by the popular practises of the ephori, there was very little worth recording. All which consequences may perhaps be justly imputed to this degeneracy of Athens.