Akademisk avhandling--Stockholm. / Includes bibliographical references.

Submitted by Filipe dos Santos (fsantos@pucsp.br) on 2018-11-09T10:23:23Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Rafael Tubone Magdaleno.pdf: 1744752 bytes, checksum: 92589a757d6579a5773932d15a846ce4 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2018-11-09T10:23:23Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Rafael Tubone Magdaleno.pdf: 1744752 bytes, checksum: 92589a757d6579a5773932d15a846ce4 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2018-09-17 / Conselho Nacional de Pesquisa e Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico - CNPq / The present paper intends to investigate the Athenian democracy. An idea that spread out and expanded to other pillars: its institutions, its imaginary, its Law. It seeks the specific status of this idea within the Greek civilizational panorama – especially the classical period, which is conventionally said to go from the 7th to the 4th century BCE – and to link this idea – a democratic one – to the juridical composition that supported it. The paper shows how it differs from our current legal structure and how binding the concepts of Law, of freedom and of democratic political regime were in that primeval time. This study is based on a literature review of democratic Athens, but also of interrelated notions, such as the history of democracy, Roman Law – which serves as a counterpoint to Athenian Law. Finally, we consider that Athenian democracy is not only structured just as direct democracy. It has institutions. It values freedom over the law; legal-political decisions take place within the Εκκλησία and may be reviewed; it presupposes a civic formation for public participation and generates a community linked to the notion of public word, in which the sophists are the "teachers" par excellence / O presente trabalho pretende investigar a democracia ateniense. Uma ideia que se espraia e se distende em outros sustentáculos: suas instituições, seu imaginário, seu direito. Busca-se o estatuto específico dessa ideia no panorama civilizacional grego – em especial na época clássica, que convencionalmente se diz ir do século VII ao IV a.C. – e vincular essa ideia – democrática – à composição jurídica que lhe sustentava. O trabalho mostra o quanto ela se diferencia de nossa estrutura jurídica hodierna e o quanto são vinculativos os conceitos de direito, de liberdade e de regime político democrático nesse momento primevo. Esse estudo baseia-se em revisão bibliográfica sobre a Atenas democrática, e também sobre as noções inter-relacionadas, como, por exemplo, a história da democracia e o direito romano – que serve de contraponto ao direito ateniense. Por fim, pensamos que a democracia ateniense não se estrutura apenas como democracia direta. Ela possui instituições; ela valoriza a liberdade sobre a lei; as decisões jurídico-políticas se dão no seio da própria Εκκλησία, podendo ser revistas; ela pressupõe uma formação cívica para a participação pública e gera uma comunidade vinculada à noção de palavra pública, em que os sofistas são os “professores” por excelência

Traditional accounts of ancient law make the following generalizations: Athenian law was a system of amateurs and, consequently, arbitrary and irrational. Roman law, by contrast, gradually became a system of specialized professionals. Legal scholars (jurists) interpreted and developed the law and advocates represented litigants. Thanks to specialization, Roman law became rational and consistent--a foundation for Rome's imperial administration as well as many modern legal systems. Bruce Frier has argued in a landmark book that this development ("the rise of the Roman jurists") began in the last century of the republic, and that it was endorsed by Cicero. By examining how Cicero and the Attic orators discuss legal expertise and litigation, I seek to revise this standard picture in two ways. First, I argue that Athenians were not hostile to legal knowledge per se, but to expertise in litigation. I find, furthermore, that learning from the laws was part of the moral training of Athenian citizens. I then argue that Cicero's attitude towards legal expertise was not progressive, but reactionary. Litigation was a moral issue in the Roman republic no less than in democratic Athens. In Cicero's opinion, the true legal expert--whether an orator, a jurist, or a statesman--is a figure with the moral authority to resolve conflicts without debate. Cicero promulgates an ideology of law wherein litigation ideally would be unnecessary, and citizens' disputes would be resolved by their "natural" superiors. / text

In recent years, there has been a resurgence of interest in Xenophon as a historian, literary artist, and political philosopher. However, scholarly research on the Poroi--the only work of political economy to survive from antiquity--has been minimal. To date, no book-length, synoptic analysis of the text exists. This dissertation contributes significantly to filling this lacuna in the scholarship while also serving to enhance our understanding of fourth-century Athenian political discourse and ideology, finance, and economics. I argue that the Poroi is a unique anti-imperialistic discourse that aims to demonstrate the ways in which the Athenians can maintain themselves financially without exploiting other states. While Xenophon's objectives of alleviating the poverty of the Athenians and increasing their revenues are conventional, the means by which he intends to achieve these goals are innovative. Unlike his contemporaries, Xenophon recommends employing financial resources derived not from empire but rather from peaceful economic activities. Specifically, I contend that the Poroi boldly challenges the parasitic, consumer-based orientation of Athens' imperial economy by proposing practical measures meant to transform Athens into a center of silver mining, manufacture, and free commercial exchange. Xenophon's vision for Athens' new economy, I submit, even displays features of modern rational capitalism. To advance this argument, I adopt a contextualist approach that situates Xenophon's ideas both in the immediate historical milieu of fourth-century Athens and within the history of economic and political thought. I am therefore able to highlight the points of contact between the Poroi and subsequent developments in the history of ideas and thus to underscore the groundbreaking aspects of Xenophon's political economy. My study parts company with previous interpretations in two fundamental ways. First, Xenophon's attempt to improve the financial condition of the Athenians stems from a desire not to promote or to retard the political activity of the people but to eliminate the injustice of Athenian imperialism. Second, his program to stimulate the Athenian economy necessarily entails the development of the productive forces of Attica. In brief, such a radical transformation of Athenian fiscal and economic practices represents nothing short of a "reorientation" of Athenian political economy. / text

No description available.

Thesis (doctoral)--University of Göteborg, 1993. / Added t.p. with thesis statement and abstract inserted. Includes bibliographical references (p. 8-17).

When looking at Dark Age Greece, one of the most important sites to consider is Athens. The Dark Age was a transitional period between the fall of Mycenaean Greece of the Bronze Age, and Archaic Greece of the Iron Age. This period is called the Dark Age because the palaces that ruled the Mycenaean age collapsed, and with them fell civilization in mainland Greece. Writing, fine art, massive architecture, trade, and luxury goods disappear from mainland Greece. But Athens survived the fall of the Mycenaeans. In order to understand the reason why Athens survived one must look at what the causes of the fall of the Mycenaeans were. Theories range from raiders and invasion, to natural disasters, such as earthquakes, droughts, and plagues. One must also examine Greece itself. The landscape and climate of Greece have a large impact on the settlement of the Greeks. The land of Greece also affects what Greek communities were able to do economically, whether a city would be rich or poor. It is because Athens is located in Attica that it survived. Attica had the poorest soil in the Mycenaean world, and was the poorest of the major cities, therefore, when looking at the collapse of the Mycenaeans being caused by people, there would be no reason for said people to raid or invade Athens and Attica. It is because Athens survives that it is such an important site. Athens survived the fall of the Mycenaeans and in doing so acts as a refugee center and a jumping off point for the remaining Mycenaeans to flee east, to the Aegean islands and Anatolia. Athens also stayed occupied during the Dark Age and because of this it was able to make some advancements. In particular Athens was a leader in mainland Greece in the development of iron. Not only this, but Athens became a cultural center during the Dark Age, inventing both proto-geometric and geometric pottery. These styles were adopted by the rest of the Greek world, and Athens was looked to as the influence for these styles. It is because Athens was the poorest city and Attica the poorest area during the Mycenaean age that it survived. Because it survived it was able to continue to develop and in turn influence the rest of mainland Greece.

After the defeat of the Greek forces in the Lamian War the Athenians agreed to Antipater's demand for unconditional surrender. As result of the terms the Macedonian general demanded Phocion became pre-eminent in Athens for a few years from 322/1 to 319/8 B.C. It is my belief that, although he did not seek to become leader in Athens, Phocion none-the-less accepted his new role out of a sense of duty and a firm belief that he was the only person suited for the job. Here was a man whose logical, pragmatic and unemotional attitude to political and world affairs enabled him to rise above what he believed to be the short-sightedness of his contemporaries and accurately assess the future for Athens and the city-state's place in the new world order. Of course our picture of Phocion is taken, mainly, from Plutarch's encomiastic Life of Phocion. According to his account the Athenian general and statesman did not want war but peace and prosperity. He did not believe the Athenians capable of defeating Macedonia. Instead, he felt that the people should accept their new position in the world and make the best of the situation. It should not be forgotten, however, that Plutarch was writing at a time when Europe was under the yoke of the new superpower: Rome. He saw the benefits of living in Greece at a time when the city-states were no longer continually involved in internecine warfare. It was, perhaps, this appreciation of the state of his own world, gained with the benefit of hindsight, that gave rise to his admiration of (what he perceived to be) Phocion's foresight. Phocion appeared to understand, as Plutarch did, that there was no reason why Athens could not still be prosperous. Plutarch's Phocion saw the city-state's future as no longer being primarily reliant on military preparedness but rather on trade and sound economic policy. With the protection of the powerful Macedonian overlord Athens would be free to enjoy life in relative peace and prosperity. Ultimately, Plutarch has had a significant influence on our understanding and appreciation of Phocion the general, statesman and man. The aim of this paper then is, with the use of other primary and secondary sources, to look beyond Plutarch's encomium and attempt to find the real Phocion. In particular, I will be examining the aging general's role in Athenian affairs after the Lamian War. This pivotal time in Athenian history has received too little attention. Life in Athens changed dramatically after Antipater defeated the Greek forces at the Battle of Crannon. The Athenians lost their freedom and autonomy and were fated never to regain the hegemony of the Greeks. Moreover, they had failed to live up to the glorious deeds of their ancestors. It was Phocion's task to help his people to come to terms with this new state of affairs and to find a place for Athens in the new world order. And so, political life in Athens was turned upside down as democracy was changed to oligarchy.

Thesis (MPhil (Ancient Studies)--University of Stellenbosch, 2007. / The main purpose of this study is to investigate and describe the differences between the fifth-century city states of Athens and Sparta. The approach I use is that of altérité (“otherness”). I look in particular at four of the most important social phenomena: women, slaves, the army and the political structures. In these respects there are extensive differences between the two city states: Athens acquired its slaves through buying them or as spoils of war over time and on an individual basis; Sparta conquered and enslaved a whole nation, the Messenians, early on to serve permanently as their slaves. Athenian women enjoyed no social or legal freedom or rights; Spartan women enjoyed all these rights and could own and inherit property and goods. In Athens, since the time of Themistocles the fleet was regarded as much more important than the infantry; Sparta had very early on developed a professional infantry which was regarded as the best right through the Greek-speaking world. Athens started changing its constitution at a relatively late stage, but once started, continued to work on it until they attained an early form of democracy; Sparta never developed beyond the monarchical stage, but did adapt it to suit their needs. The second purpose of this study is to discover and attempt to explain why the above-mentioned differences are so great. The point here is not so much that Athens was the model city state which everybody tried to emulate, but rather that Sparta was the city state which was significantly different from any of the others.

The purpose of this thesis is to defend Athenian democracy against a long-established suspicion that the Athenian government, with its radical form of popular participation, was not only incompetent but also dangerous. There are two serious misunderstandings in this traditional view; one is the myth of the decline of Athens after the death of Pericles, the other being the outright denial of Athenian democracy by its philosophers, Xenophon and Plato. These two common presumptions about Athenian history and philosophy are therefore examined. The historical examination focuses on three important events: the law reform, the reconciliation and the trial of Socrates. All of them were conducted by Athenian democracy at the end of the fifth century B.C., a period of time that is often cited for the failure of democracy. However, it is found that the democracy demonstrated its excellent ability to manage political conflicts through the laws and the reconciliation. As to the infamous trial of Socrates, there were reasons for the popular suspicion of the Philosopher’s way of life. Following what we have learnt in the historical survey, we search for responses to the three events in the works of Xenophon and Plato. There are passages, though often dismissed by scholars, which indicate remarkable recognition of the democratic achievements in domestic politics. As regards the trial of Socrates, there are also signs of second thoughts in their works that reveal understandings of the democracy’s condemnation of philosophy. The works of Socrates’ pupils show mixed evaluation rather than outright denial of Athenian democracy. The traditional suspicion of Athenian democracy is therefore problematic due to its misconception of Athenian history and philosophy.