The two great cities of Greece - Sparta and Athens, have adapted similar, yet different laws that shaped them differently. Although Lycurgus was the first lawgiver of Sparta, little is known about his history today as he is overlooked because of the other great known heroes from Sparta. Lycurgus took the first step towards law making that dealt with inequality and injustice, and brought relief among the Leconian citizens. He was seen as a natural leader, and that was one of the major reasons for the citizens to follow his laws as they were applied. Solon, from Athens, was famous for writing the Athenian laws, which also assured justice and equality among the citizens of the Salamis While both Lycurgus and Solon innovated new laws to reinforce equality and justice into the Greek cities, there lied strengths and weaknesses. Lycurgus’ reforms were bounded by the needs of solely the citizens, whereas, Solons’ reforms thrived to prosper the city itself, besides guaranteeing equality among the citizens.
One of his first and foremost innovations of Lycurgus that affirmed the notion of equality among the Leconian citizens and their rights was the idea of an institution of Elders. By establishing the twenty-eight Elders, Lycurgus ensured that there was a safe and steady balance between the senate and the power of the kings that was inclining towards tyranny. The significant part of this innovation was the idea of having equal votes and rights to contribute to important matters within the city (pg.8). By giving people the right to elect the members who would serve them, the law provided flexibility and security among the citizens. A second of Lycurgus' reforms, which was revolutionary yet played a major role in dealing with ine...
... middle of paper ...
...e’s leisure and essential needs by taking out luxury and distributing and allocating rich people’s properties. It seemed injustice to the rich people because they, more or less, earned their wealth and it the poor did not have to do much to have access to the lands. Even though Solon did not secure the poor people’s future, he did as much as he was capable of without being unfair to either group.
The laws in both cities were eventually established and were meant to deal with inequalities and injustice within. But with strengths, there were weaknesses in the laws for both leaders, which more or less influenced the steps towards equality. Yet, despite the short or long term faults, what stood out most was Lycurgus and Solon’s emergence as leaders and their lawmaking process, which brought equality and justice among the people for a long period of time.
The governments of these two city-states were not alike in many ways. “It is true that our government is called a democracy, because its administration is in the hands, not of the few, but of the many,” (Document 3). Athens’ government was what we would consider today a direct democracy. This means that their government was run by the people, or in other words “the many”, rather than a couple government officials, or “the few”. Although Athens was running their city as a government by the people, Sparta had a different form of government. “it is made up of oligarchy, monarchy, and democracy,
At first glance, the picture of justice found in the Oresteia appears very different from that found in Heraclitus. And indeed, at the surface level there are a number of things which are distinctly un-Heraclitean. However, I believe that a close reading reveals more similarities than differences; and that there is a deep undercurrent of the Heraclitean world view running throughout the trilogy. In order to demonstrate this, I will first describe those ways in which the views of justice in Aeschylus' Oresteia and in Heraclitus appear dissimilar. Then I will examine how these dissimilarities are problematized by other information in the Oresteia; information which expresses views of justice very akin to Heraclitus. Of course, how similar or dissimilar they are will depend not only on one's reading of the Oresteia, but also on how one interprets Heraclitus. Therefore, when I identify a way in which justice in the Oresteia seems different from that in Heraclitus, I will also identify the interpretation of Heraclitus with which I am contrasting it. Defending my interpretation of Heraclitean justice as such is beyond the scope of this essay. However I will always refer to the particular fragments on which I am basing my interpretation, and I think that the views I will attribute to him are fairly non-controversial. It will be my contention that, after a thorough examination of both the apparent discrepancies and the similarities, the nature of justice portrayed in the Oresteia will appear more deeply Heraclitean than otherwise. I will not argue, however, that there are therefore no differences at all between Aeschylus and Heraclitus on the issue of justice. Clearly there are some real ones and I will point out any differences which I feel remain despite the many deep similarities.
Law is to country just like soil is to plants. If the soil is right and appropriate then the the plant will flourish. If laws are just and its conditions are right, then the state will benefit from it. Without an appropriate law, the state will be in complete chaos. In the same case, two different lawgivers from different nations were given the same mission: to help make their states better than it was. Solon, an Athenian archon who was elected to make Athens and its city states thrive and remove this nation from its disastrous state. On the other hand, there’s Lycurgus, a Spartan man, whose mission was to help make Sparta also a thriving nation based on his first hand experiences he had during his travels (mostly from Egypt and Crete). At the end of the day, these two lawgivers had a different notion of justice and they each dealt with social inequalities in their city in their own way.
The main architect of Athenian law was Solon. It is unknown when Solon was born. He died in 559 BC. (Plutarch). Solon allowed everyone to participate in court (Stockton 19). He created a code of laws based on justice, balance, and good order (Muller). Solon abolished the practice of debt bondage (Muller). Solon created the Council of 400 (Boule), and a court called the Heliaia. (Muller) Solon divided Athenians into classes in accordance with their income (Plutarch). The lowest class, the thetes, was ineligible for election to office (Plutarch). However, they could still come into the assembly and act as jurors (Plutarch). The other classes, from lowest to highest, were zeugits, hippies, and pentakosiomedimnoi (Muller).
Spartan culture is a great example of how a society’s infrastructure will directly affect both, its social structure and superstructure. It also serves as a warning that any society that becomes too rigid in its structure and too static in its values will not last long when confronted with more agile and adaptable cultures. This paper will explore why Sparta became the Hellenic army par excellence, how this worked to create a very specific social structure founded on martial values, and, finally, how that social structure would ultimately be the undoing of the culture.
In an attempt to promote justice and equality, Lycurgus and Solon fostered political, social, and economic reformations in their cities. Lycurgus instituted elders, redistributed land, made currency worthless, and established common messes. Lycurgus created a strictly equal city. However, it limited Sparta as a whole to advance. On the other hand, Solon works to resolve this problem in Athens by creating fairness for people with different upbringing. Solon allotted political privilege according to wealth instead of lineage, abolished slavery, and wiped the poor’s slate of debt clean. To alleviate social injustice, Lycurgus promoted strict equality while Solon understands socioeconomic inequalities are inevitable and still attempts to even out the playing field so that each person has the agency to advance.
Dionysius I of Syracuse garnered a reputation as a warmongering tyrant who harmed his people with his oppressive regime. However many surviving sources that explore his rule were written by people who were ideologically opposed to perceived tyrants. It is therefore quite possible that aspects of Dionysius rule where left out or exaggerated to suit the author`s anti-tyrannical agenda. It is the intention of this paper to argue that Dionysius rule did in fact benefit Syracuse more than he harmed it during his lifetime. His domestic and foreign affairs will be explored in order to show how he in fact benefitted the Syracusan state as well as the majority of its people. It will however also be argued that his legacy did harm the Syracusan state but that overall Dionysius rule was beneficial in his lifetime.
The law of Sparta was written and developed by Lycurgus (Blundell). Lycurgus was a famous law maker of the Spartan culture and he is credited with founding many of Spartan institutions and militant reforms (Blundell). One
One of Plato's goals in The Republic, as he defines the Just City, is to illustrate what kind of leader and government could bring about the downfall of his ideal society. To prevent pride and greed in leaders would ensure that they would not compromise the well being of the city to obtain monetary gains or to obtain more power. If this state of affairs becomes firmly rooted in the society, the fall to Tyranny begins. This is the most dangerous state that the City become on i...
Athens and Sparta are both infamous Greek city states. Both could not be more different, yet similar in the way they governed their own city state. Another, main difference was the women’s rights and roles in the system. Athenian and Spartan women both were considered to be second to their male counterparts. Spartan women had more rights than Athenian women. Through, research realizing that the Spartan women were slightly greater role than Athenian women.
Sometime during the period of 594/3 to 570 B.C., the citizens of Athens gave one of their foremost statesmen, Solon, the task of creating new laws for them because of troubles that had been plaguing them. There are several theories as to when Solon's work was completed. The date of Solon's legislation has always been in question and a date that everyone agrees with has never been proposed. There is evidence for several different dates. The first is 594/3, the year in which Solon was the Eponymous archon in Athens. This argument has several claims to its defense but also many arguments against it. Another major date proposed is not so much a specific date as it is a span of time in which he may have started and/or completed his nomothesia. The span of time proposed is between ca. 580 - 570 B.C. The date of 580 - 570 B.C. is by far the more likely date for him to have completed his legislation. The arguments for this case are far more convincing than those arguing that he completed his legislation in his archonship during 594/3. The first is that it would be very difficult to complete a project so large as to write an entire law code in one year. The next is that it was recorded by Aristotle that Solon travelled for a ten year peiod and on his journeys, viewed the laws of other lands. It makes sense that he would then have written his laws after that. Another major argument in favour of the later date is that there was much trouble in Athens in the 590's and 80's. This was probably the trouble which spurred the people of Athens to have Solon create new laws, on the other hand if the situation in Athens was as bad as Aristotle would have us believe then why would Solon wait to lay down the law, it would have m...
Sparta became the leading military power within Greece and expanded their territory by conquering Messenia, after which they turned the conquered Messenians into helots (unfree residents who were forced to work the lands of the state), until they rose up in a rebellion, which spurred significant political change for Sparta. All citizens were made legally equal, and Sparta was led by two kings fulfilled the role of military leaders, a council of nobles, and five ephors who were elected by the citizens. The Helots continued to work the land, while Spartan citizens devoted themselves to military training that began at the age of 7. Athens also faced important changes at the time, but reacted much differently than Sparta. The Athenians created a democracy. In 621 B.C.E., Draco published the first law code of the Athenian polis. The code was harsh, but “embodied the idea that the law belonged to all citizens” (McKay, 122) and soon led to reformations more in favor of the common people of Athens, and allowed common citizens to both participate and vote on issues within the government and encouraged all full citizens to participate within the
The march towards developing a democratic society is often obstructed with societal unrest due to the influence of the status quo on the instruments of power. Before the rule of Solon, Athens underwent this same rule, as there was much discontent among the social classes in Athens. The society suffered financial disparity that often was the trigger for the war among the rich and poor in the society. This was a major factor that forced Solon into power to institute policies that would see a reformed Athens. By so doing, the society was looking for an avenue that would guarantee democracy and a society that is fair for everyone. The city-state of Athens was the epicenter of the revolution for the Athenian democracy during the fifth century BC. In the Athenian democracy, the electorate voted for the legislation of bills instead of a direct democracy where the electorates are tasked with electing representatives who later developed the bill. Among the first people who made significant contributions to the development of the Athenian democracy were Solon (594 BC), Cleisthenes (508/7 BC), Pericles (495 – 429 BC) and Ephialtes (462 BC). Pericles was the longest serving democratic leader who contributed much development in democracy in the city. This paper will give an account of the age of the Pericles.
We have now examined Thucydides' strongest arguments for Athenian rule. It is clear that Athens had a stronger claim to rule than the Melians had to remain sovereign. We also know that Athens' claims hold up when we examine them for validity. Thucydides beliefs in Athens' claims were therefore well founded.
Government and its different forms appears many times throughout Herodotus’s Histories, sometimes its positive and other times its negative, however in the readings Herodotus demonstrates that it is not the Athenian democratic values that makes freedom but rather the absence of tyranny along with equality among men. Herodotus’s assessment of Athenian democracy is overall a positive development to Greek cultural identity in the eyes of Herodotus.