Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Tyranny in ancient greece
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Many extensive examples of tyranny have existed in ancient Greece. One of the most influential examples is considered to be Thrasybulus, who was the tyrant of Miletus during the 7th century. Thrasybulus is manly well known for his action of walking through a field of corn with a messenger from Corinth. Thrasybulus believed that a ruler needed to remove its competition or the ruler would be eliminated. After his influence, tyranny would soon take an impact in the region and societies would not respond very well. Thrasybulus set the foundation for how many tyrants would rule for years to come. Thrasybulus would often do unusual actions to give out credible advice. For example, Corinth sent a messenger to Thrasybulus for advice on modes to rule.
The result, Thrasybulus led the messenger without the city, and took him into a field of corn, through which he began to walk. While Thrasybulus asked him again and again concerning his coming from Corinth, he broke off and threw away such ears of corn as overtopped the rest (Spielvogel 62). In such a case, the message Thrasybulus was trying to get across to the messenger is that a ruler must remove others who may have the power to overthrow the ruler. This is to protect the ruler and make sure he can establish what he wants in what he is ruling. Thrasybulus would recommend banishing the higher class and more powerful citizens because they would pose a threat. If a ruler did something the higher class did not approve of, the ruler could possibly get overthrown. In order to insure the security of the ruling position, one has to eliminate the competition. Thrasybulus advised the destruction of all the leading citizens, treated his subjects from this time forward with the greatest cruelty (Spielvogel 62). He seen the higher class as an enemy and wanted them to be treated cruelly. Many tyrants followed the advice that Thrasybulus stated. They began to become considerably oppressive, especially by their rivals for political power. Periander, who ruled Corinth, soon became known as a bad tyrant and ruled for 40 years. Tyrants were taking advantage of their power and becoming evil. They treated their citizens awfully and began to eliminate their enemies. Tyranny in ancient Greece soon took a turn for the worst. The children and grandchildren of tyrants, who tended to be corrupted by their inherited power and wealth, often became cruel and unjust rulers, making tyranny no longer seem such a desirable institution (Spielvogel 62). Tyranny soon left the region, but the impact it had on Greek history can not be erased. The rule of narrow aristocratic oligarchies was destroyed (Spielvogel 62). Once tyranny left, more people got the chance to participate in the way their communities were governed. This ultimately led to the construction of democracy in some communities, but in others, oligarchies somehow managed to stay in power. The Greek states started to establish a variety of governments that differed from community to community. Thrasybulus was a tyrant who set an example for many tyrants to come. He was often the one to give out advice on how to rule under certain circumstances. He gave out advice by demonstrating certain acts such as walking through a field of corn. After his influence, tyranny would soon take a down fall after the tyrants started to abuse their powers. Thrasybulus believed in eliminating anyone the might threaten the rein of a tyrant. Thrasybulus was a very persuasive tyrant.
...for the Pythia at Delphi to be used, the people seeking advise are completely dependent on the interpreters to receive the answer to their questions, and thus have no choice but to be left with second hand advice; it had to go through the priests before the one seeking advice could receive an answer. With this in mind, it is hardly possible to be quite sure of how precise the priests interpreted Pythia’s utterances, and how well they really knew how to do their jobs --regardless of how wholeheartedly the people of Greece believed in them.
Throughout history, many great figures possessing extraordinary qualities have reshaped the past and have manipulated historical events. Such an example is Themistocles. Themistocles, thriving from 524-459 BCE, was an Athenian politician who was renowned by many as a great leader who obtained intellect, courage and integrity. Also known as being the saviour of Greece, the profound individual believed that the entirety of the human political experience could be reduced to symmetry and order. In order to unleash his true potential, though, he was forced to relocate from the remoteness of eastern Africa into the city, marrying the daughter of Lysander of Alopeke. Thus, it can be stated that Themistocles was a profound politician who possessed
The Gortyn law code was a series of civil laws in use at around 450 B.C.E in modern day Crete . Unlike the name suggests these laws were not a code, but specific ad hoc responses to crisis as they occurred in Gortyn and surrounding areas . The writing itself focuses on civil laws such as divorce, rape and property rights. The majority of punishments for crimes in Gortyn were monetary rather than physical pain or imprisonment, like other city states in ancient Greece. The laws themselves can also shed light on other law practices throughout Greece at this time, as many law makers would visit Gortyn and study the inscriptions. However, due to the vast differences between many city states as well as change over time there are many differences
Thrasymachus, tired of holding his tongue back, barges into the argument and asks Socrates exactly what justice is; since Socrates cannot answer Thrasymachus offers his perception:
Some might argue that, under the rule of Pericles, democracy thrived in Athens. Pericles stood for democracy and dedicated his career to creating an Athens which was not only a beacon to the world but also a shining light of democracy during a Monarchist age. While Pericles was in office, all remnants of the previous oligarchic system were replaced with a democratic system in which all social and economic classes had influence. Pericles praised Athens system of government in his famous funeral oration:
...ders are unable to adequately rule their people. It is evident to me that a tyrant need not be a particularly evil or dangerous leader, but merely one who cares more about his own power and honor than the people he leads, who lets his pride and greed overwhelm his responsibilities to the city or society he has been entrusted with. Agamemnon never tortured or killed his own men, but his judgment in protecting his men was compromised by his desire to gain honor in the sight of others. Tyranny can be overwhelming or subtle, but the very hint of its existence is sure to cause disharmony in the government, leading to the unjust, and thus unhappy society that Plato described.
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.
There is considerable evidence for the praise of democracy in the Histories. An example of praise for democracy is Herodotus’s disregard for tyranny as a political system . Through the description of Peisistratos’s rule, Herodotus acknowledges the limitations and faults with having a tyrannical government. Herodotus describes Peisistratos rule as period of Athenians being oppressed, held down form being truly free, unable to reach its potential. According to Herodotus, even the best of all men, if they are presented with the power that comes with being a tyrant, that moral man will inevitably fall to power and corruption. Herodotus gives the impression that the Athenians under Peisistratos were oppressed and divided, because of this Herodotus, through evidence of Peisistratos’s rule, suggests that tyranny leaves the state in a weakened condition. However, Herodotus believed that in a democracy no one man can have absolute rule or power, so there can be no corruption of the law.
The debate between Thrasymachus and Socrates begins when Thrasymachus gives his definition of justice in a very self-interested form. Thrasymachus believes that justice is only present to benefit the ruler, or the one in charge – and for that matter any one in charge can change the meaning of justice to accommodate their needs (343c). Thrasymachus provides a very complex example supporting his claim. He states that the man that is willing to cheat and be unjust to achieve success will be by far the best, and be better than the just man.
...sm, the security dilemma is never fully advanced as an adequate explanation of Athenian imperialism. Thucydides included human impulses such as self-interest and honour, rooted in human nature, as the necessary basis for the law of nature that the strong will dominate the weak. Combined, the expansion of power driven by honour, self-interest and the security dilemma "makes for a much more virulent realism," making the possibility of any common good remote, but not impossible. Thucydides emphasises the importance individual motivations have on political events and decisions; personal ambitions and fears have influence and are a driving force. However, he also highlights that man is morally aware, that he controls his own actions despite the permanent condition of his nature, and that rational action combines morality with expediency, not necessity with expediency.
Thrasymachus believes that the definition that justice is what is advantageous for the stronger. Thrasymachus definition quote
...s are a paradigm case of those in control. The essence of ruling is, therefore, to be unjust and that is why a tyrant is a perfect ruler. He always knows what is to his advantage and how to acquire it. Thrasymachus’ view of justice is appealing but therein lies a moral danger and this is refuted by Socrates.
The fool believes that “injustice … may not sometimes stand with that reason… when conduceth to such a benefit...” (90). Hobbes invalidates the fool by arguing that a man who does this will never be accepted into a commonwealth and he will not survive without one. “He which declares he thinks it reason to deceive those that help him can in reason expect no other means of safety…” [91]. Thrasymachus on the other hand promotes the idea of a person who will always be tempted not to follow what is “just” because of the belief that life will be more rewarding if you can get away with being “unjust”. He believes that a “fool” will do as he pleases and reap only the benefits and not the punishment. If Thrasymachus looked at justice in Hobbes’ perspective, he would not see the need to maintain a social contract if a person is able to get away with breaking
The Greeks system of democracy was an entirely new concept when it was created, and one that has had lasting affects as it continues to influence present day politics around the globe. Modern day democracies may very well not exist if it wasn’t for the success the Athenians had with democracy. Today we look back at these ancient civilizations and we try to better our current society by learning from their mistakes and building on their success.
...stotle on the other hand was the teacher of Alexander the Great, a man who many people think the best leader of the time.