'Aristocracy' in Athenian diplomacy

Greece and Rome, 2020

On the neglected role of monetisation in forming the Greek aristocracy of the archaic and classical periods

Ancient Society, 1994

Interpersonal relations in ancient Athenian society were constructed either on the basis of kinship (real or fictitious) or on the basis of friendships. The history of archaic Athens, about which some scholars use terms implying patronage, is largely the attempt to shake off the burden of the nobility's monopoly on land and political power 1. However, classical Athenian society seems to be free of clientelism. The reconstruction of the realities of Athenian society, from which any reference to or hint of clientelism is missing, is largely patterned on the realities of the West European social ideals. In this ideological context, the archetype of democracy could not have been considered in clientelistic terms. The ideal configuration of the Athenian social life relies on the assumption that clientelism is a feature of backward societies, in relation to the civilised West European ones. It was claimed that patron-client relationships appear only in the context of societies in transition from traditional organisation to a market-oriented social organisation. In fact, clientelism knows no limits; it appears in the social life of countries as far apart as Latin America, the Mediterranean (European and Islamic), sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East, and Southeast Asia. Accordingly, it presents a wide range of forms and variations. The analytical approach of anthropologists and sociologists 2 has made possible the gradual development of a consensus concerning the salient features of patron-client relationship 3. A patron-client relationship can be described as a construction of trust outside the boundaries of tradi-* An earlier version of this paper was discussed in November 1993 at a Departmental Seminar, at the University of Glasgow. I would like to thank all the participants, and especially Prof. D.M. MacDowell, for their remarks and comments that helped clarify certain ambiguities. 1 See P.B. MANVILLE, The Origins of Citizenship in Ancient Athens, Princeton 1990, p. 111-116. Cf. M. STAHL, Aristokraten und Tyrannen im archaischen Athen, Stuttgart 1987, p. 99-104, who rejects the existence of clientelistic links in archaic Athens on the ground that aristocracy was competitive and held offices on the basis of their achievement rather than networks of clients. Colonisation was one of the factors that averted the development of clientelistic links. 2 Discussion and criticism of the earlier literature in S.N. EISENSTADT-L. RONIGER,

1986

The magistrates, priests and families attested between 167/6 B.C. and A.D. 13/4 belong to a governing class which may be regarded as a large civic class and several partly overlapping elites: a political elite, comprised of the members of the Areopagus, as well as a religious elite, a liturgical elite, a military (or ephebic elite) and a cultural-educational elite. The political elite is the most exclusive segment of the governing class. The other elites and the civic class form a descending hierarchy of peripheral families. In the course of seven chapters, the following conclusions are presented: (1) the governing class is in a constant state of flux as new families are recruited from below or through the admission of new citizens to Athens; (2) the analysis of the careers (or sequence of offices held by the members of the governing class) shows that certain types of offices are usually held at a particular age or point in an individual's public life, and changes in the number and type of offices available to an individual reflect changes in the nature of political life at Athens during this period; (3) during the generation following the acquisition of Delos in 167/6 B.C., pro-Roman families of the established aristocracy are predominant in the ranks of the governing class at both Athens and on Delos; (4) these families soon decline and the recruitment and composition of the governing class evolve during the transition to the second generation following c. 130 B.C.; (5) the revolution of 88/7 B.C. is an indirect consequence of demographic changes at Athens during the preceding generation; (6) during the Roman civil wars the governing class is found to be divided into competing factions; (7) finally, the emergence of a new and primarily hereditary governing elite may be documented during the reign of Augustus. An appendix tabulates all dated Athenian magistrates (and inscriptions) during this period. Other appendices discuss several chronological difficulties, the ephebic instructors and undated archons. i i i I must first thank Dr. D.J. Geagan, who suggested this topic for my dissertation and directed me in its completion; I especially thank him for his critical and careful reading of the final drafts. I would also like to thank Dr. J. Trueman, who chaired the supervisory committee, and Dr. T. Hoey of the Department of Classics, who has always been very helpful. The assistance of the following institutions is also gratefully acknowledged: The Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada for a doctoral fellowship in 1983-84; the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, where, in 1984-85, the research for this dissertation was completed; the Thompson-Waisglass Fund for a bursary which paid my fees at the American School; the Program Committee of the Canadian Archaeological Institute at Athens for awarding a fellowship which enabled me to reside in Athens during 1984-85; and Memorial University of Newfoundland. I would also like to mention here Dr. A.G. McKay of the Department of Classics, whose support and kindness helped make my graduate study at McMaster University both challenging and rewarding. Finally, I thank my wife, Anne-Marie Lewis, for all her help. iv Table of Contents Preface 1. The Nature of the Governing Class 2. The Offices of the Governing Class 3. Governing Families and the Cleruchy on Delos 4. The Governing Class in Transition 5. The Revolution of 88/7 B.C. 6. Athens During the Roman Civil Wars 7. Conclusion: The Governing Class Under Augustus Appendix A.

The members of the local elite of the Greek cities, firmly rooted in the reality of their times, fully accepted since Augustus' reign the Roman authority whose benefits they recognized. Nevertheless, through their political integration secured via the civitas and by taking offices on the imperial or provincial level they continued to ensure the functioning of traditional social and political institutions, particularly in the area of cultural and agonistic life, in the form of banquets, festivals, and games. Their twin attachment to Rome and to their homeland appointed them as mediators between their cities and the Roman administration in the domain of both cultural life and political realities. The close attachment of the civic notables to their patris was expressed by various benefactions and services, which embellished their cities and enhanced their importance compared to their rivals. The recognition by their fellow citizens for these services is expressed in honorific decrees that maintain the civic memory of benefactions and their continuing and increasing social role. The members of this 'class' were considered the model of a new civic ethical behaviour whose basic elements correspond to a long tradition of civic values

Late Antique Athens has long been thought of as a part of the Eastern Empire but, for much of the fourth century, it was controlled by western emperors and governed by pagan western senators, some of whom had literary careers. This article examines the effect Athens's fourth century western administrators had on the uniquely Athenian way elites advertised their social status through a combination of devotion to Athenian civic life, traditional cult, and intellectual pursuits.

A Companion to Greek Lyric, edited by L. Swift, 2022

What, in this chapter, is meant by aristocratic culture goes far beyond the traditional scholarly focus on aristocratic ideals, aristocratic artistic patronage, and aristocratic lifestyle in all its main manifestations. Instead, it is related to a more general notion of archaic and early classical Greek culture I will try to substantiate. 1 In a nutshell, I will argue that due to its universal appeal, aristocratic culture of the archaic period was a main integrative force of early Greek civilisation-in both its social and its geographical dimension. Accordingly, Greek aristocracy was above all a cultural phenomenon. Meanwhile, we must start with definitions, since the very title of this essay is no longer self-explanatory.