Developments in Athens in the 7th and 6th centuries bc

Athens was the prime example of a turannis paving the way for a democracy. We have the impression that in the 7th century BC. Athens lagged a little behind many other states, such as Corinth, but toward 600 BC a development took place here that would eventually give this polis an advantage over the rest of Greece. Around 620 BC in Athens, the criminal code was for the first time put into writing by a certain Dracon—in a later period, his laws had the reputation of being “draconian”—which implied a weakening of aristocratic power, because now for the first time the “state” to some extent limited the often endless feuds between aristocratic families and at the same time restricted the freedom of action of aristocratic judges. Yet, tensions in Athens remained strong because here the richer landowners could sell their insolvent debtors into slavery outside Attica. Many Athenians had become the debtors of the richer landowners by pledging their land as security against their loans and, presumably, failing this, their own persons, with the looming risk of being sold abroad in the end. This situation seemed to present an opportunity for a seizure of power by a would-be turannos who could find support in the mass of discontented citizens.

Probably to prevent this, around 590 BC a generally respected and distinguished magistrate called Solon was given extraordinary powers in order to reorganize the polis.

Solon’s measures were mainly the following: first, Athenian citizens who had been sold abroad were as far as possible brought back, and borrowing with one’s own person as security was henceforth forbidden. Also, the worst forms of the dependency of poor peasants on richer landowners came to an end, although we do not know the exact measures that Solon took to accomplish this. But the result of his reforms in this field is certain: all Athenian citizens were henceforth free in the eyes of the law, but many of them remained very poor, because a redistribution of land, a remedy that some turannoi had resorted to, was not permitted by Solon. In the political reorganization of Athens, he strengthened the role of the assembly of the people and undermined to some extent the position of the aristocracy. Traditionally, the population of Attica consisted of three orders or “classes”: the hippeis or “knights,” literally, those who owned horses; the zeugitai or “plowmen” (i. e., the owners of a yoke with two oxen, the possession of which separated the not so poor from the poor); and the thetes, a word meaning something like “servants” or “landless laborers.” Solon now introduced a system according to which nobody would automatically, on the basis of birth, belong to one of these classes; henceforth, one would be assigned to one of the classes on the basis of property assessment. Property was measured in annual yields of grain. Moreover, from the hippeis Solon separated a new class of rich citizens, the highest in this system, called thepentakosiomedimnoi (“500-bushel-men,” who harvested at least 500 medimnoi or bushels of grain each year). In many respects, this organization remains rather obscure to us; the property assessments recorded for the other classes, 300 bushels for the hippeis, 200 or 150 for the zeugitai, are dubious, to say the least. Nevertheless, the thrust of Solon’s reforms is clear. The political rights of the citizen population were now closely bound up with membership of one of these property classes. From the two highest classes, the yearly magistrates or archontes were selected, while the former archontes became members for life of the Areopagus, a council named after the Areios pagos, the hill of Ares, a small hill at the foot of the Acropolis, the main fortress hill and religious center of the city. The assembly of all the citizens would elect the archontes and would also function as the supreme court of appeal if necessary, sitting in judgment of the archontes themselves. With this, the lower classes acquired more political influence than they ever had, although the reins of power were still with the elite. At the same time, the economic problems of a large part of the population remained. Solon’s work of reform had not been all-encompassing; nevertheless, one can discern in it the basis of Athens' later democracy.

After Solon had renounced his extraordinary powers—a gesture that earned him the lasting reputation of being a wise and disinterested man—it soon turned out that the internal problems of Athens had not all been solved. Rival aristocratic factions opposed each other, among whom was Pisistratus, a man who was popular among the poorer citizens. Around 560 BC, he tasted power for the first time by seizing the Acropolis with a group of followers—that is, according to the tradition told one century later, the details of which are hard to verify. Resistance from the other aristocrats led to his expulsion. After a short second stint in power—again, according to tradition—he finally succeeded shortly after 550 BC with the military support of friends and mercenaries from outside

Athens in defeating his opponents and establishing his turannis permanently. According to a later tradition, Pisistratus was a mild ruler who as far as possible left existing laws and the existing “constitution” untouched. Presumably, he reorganized some of the state cults, such as that of Dionysus and of the city goddess Athena. In their turn, these cults with their accompanying festivals would be a great stimulus for athletic competitions and the arts. Not only a certain pan-Athenian feeling but also a certain pride in the new glory of Athens were thereby enhanced, although it remains unclear to what extent this was a conscious policy of Pisistratus. For the mass of smallholders and landless citizens, his rule was, presumably, advantageous in that he supported them with loans and probably also distributed land among them. Attica underwent a partial transformation: it became a land of small and medium landowners who apart from barley and wheat now also grew olives and grapes. The olive oil must at least partially have been destined for export. With this olive oil and with the development of a high-quality ceramic industry, there opened up some space in Athenian society for commerce and for the emergence of people who no longer earned their livelihood with agriculture—however small this group, it would always remain an important part of the citizen population of Athens.

In all probability, the authority of the Athenian turannos rested on the support of professional hoplites: mercenaries from outside Athens, but, presumably, also poorer Athenian citizens who had been equipped at the expense of the turannos and served him personally. Aristocratic opponents had fled or were exiled. In the course of time many reconciled themselves with the monarchical regime and returned. But under Hippias, who after the death of his father Pisistratus continued the turannis, an opposition movement of aristocrats built up. This movement gathered strength when after a few years Hippias’ brother was murdered, albeit not for political but for purely personal reasons. The two perpetrators, who had themselves been killed, were celebrated by Athenian exiles—as they would be later by the Athenian democracy—as “tyrannicides” or “tyrant-slayers” and national heroes. Hippias’ rule thereupon became more oppressive, and he managed to disarm the citizens. Aristocratic exiles then pressured Sparta to mount a military invasion in Attica. In 510 BC, Hippias under Spartan pressure had to leave Athens, and found refuge with the Persians in Asia Minor. With that, the period of the turannis in Athens came to an end.