Croesus on the Funeral Pile. (See p. 95.)- From an Ancient Vase.

CHAPTER X.

PEISISTRATUS.

1. Early Division of Attica into Twelve Independent States, said to have been united by Theseus. 2. Abolition of Royalty. Life Archons. Decennial Archons. Annual Archons. 3. Twofold Division of the Athenians. (1.) Eupatridæ, Geomori, Demiurgi. (2.) Four Tribes: Geleontes, Hopletes, Ægicores, Argades. § 4. Division of the Four Tribes into Trittyes and Naucrariæ, and into Phratriæ and Gene or Gentes. 5. The Government exclusively in the Hands of the Eupatrida. The Nine Archons and their Functions. The Senate of Areopagus. § 6. The Legislation of Draco. 7. The Conspiracy of Cylon. His Failure, and Massacre of his Partisans by Megacles, the Alcma onid. Expulsion of the Alcmæonidæ. § 8. Visit of Epimenides to Athens. His Purifi cation of the City. 9. Life of Solon. 10. State of Attica at the time of Solon's Leg islation. 11. Solon elected Archon, B. c. 594, with Legislative Powers. 12. His Seisachtheia or Disburdening Ordinance. § 13. His Constitutional Changes. Division of the People into Four Classes, according to their Property. § 14. Institution of the Senate of Four Hundred. Enlargement of the Powers of the Areopagus. The Athenia Government continues an Oligarchy after the Time of Solon. § 15. The Special Laws of Solon. 16. The Travels of Solon. § 17. Usurpation of Peisistratus. Return and Death of Solon.

§ 1. THE history of Athens before the age of Solon is almost a blank. its legendary tales are few, its historical facts still fewer. Cecrops, the

first ruler of Attica, is said to have divided the country into twelve districts, which are represented as independent communities, each governed by a separate king. They were afterwards united into a single state, having Athens as its capital and the seat of government. At what time this important union was effected cannot be determined. It took place at a period long antecedent to all historical records, and is ascribed to Theseus, as the national hero of the Athenian people.† The poets and orators of a later age loved to represent him as the parent of the Athenian democracy. It would be a loss of time to point out the folly and absurdity of sưch a notion. Theseus belongs to legend, and not to history; and in the age in which he is placed, a democratical form of government was a thing quite unknown.

§ 2. A few generations after Theseus, the Dorians are said to have invaded Attica. An oracle declared that they would be victorious if they spared the life of the Athenian king; whereupon Codrus, who then reigned at Athens, resolved to sacrifice himself for the welfare of his country. Accordingly he went into the invaders' camp in disguise, provoked a quarrel with one of the Dorian soldiers, and was killed by the latter. Upon learning the death of the Athenian king, the Dorians retired from Attica without striking a blow; and the Athenians, from respect to the memory of Codrus, abolished the title of king, and substituted for it that of Archon ‡ or Ruler. The office, however, was held for life, and was confined to the family of Codrus. His son, Medon, was the first archon, and he was followed in the dignity by eleven members of the family in succession. But soon after the accession of Alcmæon, the thirteenth in descent from Medon, another change was introduced, and the duration of the archonship was limited to ten years (B. c. 752). The dignity was still confined to the descendants of Medon; but in the time of Hippomenes (B. C. 714) this restriction was removed, and the office was thrown open to all the nobles in the state. In B. C. 683, a still more important change took place. The archonship was now made annual, and its duties were distributed among nine persons, all of whom bore the title, although one was called the archon pre-eminently, and gave his name to the year. The last of the decennial archons was Eryxias; the first of the nine annual archons, Creon.

Such is the legendary account of the change of government at Athens, from royalty to an oligarchy. It appears to have taken place peaceably and gradually, as in most other Greek states. The whole political power was vested in the nobles; from them the nine annual archons were taken, and to them alone these magistrates were responsible. The people, or general body of freemen, had no share in the government.

§ 3. The Athenian nobles were called Eupatride. Their name is as

* See p. 14.

† For details see p. 18.

Η "Αρχων.

cribed to Theseus, who is said to have divided the Athenian people into three classes, called Eupatrida, Geomori or husbandmen, and Demiurgi* or artisans. The Eupatrida were the sole depositaries of political and religious power. In addition to the election of the archons, they possessed the superintendence of all religious matters, and were the authorized expounders of all laws, sacred and profane. They corresponded to the Roman patricians; while the two other classes, who were their subjects, answered to the Roman plebeians.

There was another division of the Athenians still more ancient, and one which continued to a much later period. We have seen that the Dorians in most of their settlements were divided into three tribes. The Ionians, in like manner, were usually distributed into four tribes. This division existed in Attica from the earliest times, and lasted in full vigor down to the great revolution of Cleisthenes (B. c. 509). The four Attic tribes had different appellations at various periods, but were finally distinguished by the names of Geleontes (or Teleontes), Hoplètes, Egicores, and Argades, which they are said to have derived from the four sons of Ion. The etymology of these names would seem to suggest that the tribes were so called from the occupations of their members; the Geleontes (Teleontes) being cultivators, the Hopletes the warrior-class, the Ægicores goat-herds, and the Argades artisans. Hence some modern writers have supposed that the Athenians were originally divided into castes, like the Egyptians and Indians. But the etymology of these names is not free from doubt and dispute; and even if they were borrowed from certain occupations, they might soon have lost their original meaning, and become mere titles without any significance.

§ 4. There were two divisions of the four Athenian tribes, one for political, and another for religious and social purposes.

For political purposes each tribe was divided into three Trittyes, and each Trittys into four Naucrariæ.§ There were thus twelve Trittyes and forty-eight Naucrariæ. These appear to have been local divisions of the whole Athenian people, and to have been made chiefly for financial and military objects. Each Naucrary consisted of the Naucrări, or householders, who had to furnish the amount of taxes and soldiers imposed upon the district to which they belonged.

The division of the tribes for political and social purposes is more fre- religions (?) quently mentioned. Each tribe is said to have contained three Phratriæ,

each Phratry thirty Gene or Gentes, and each Genos or Gens thirty

* Ευπατρίδαι, Γεωμόροι, Δημιουργοί.

† Φύλον, pl. Φύλα.

† Γελέοντες or Τελέοντες, Οπλητες, Αἰγικορεῖς, ̓Αργάδεις.

§ Τριττύς, Ναυκραρία.

Navkpapos seems to be connected with vaíw, dwell, and is only another form for

ναύκλαρος οι ναύκληρος.

heads of families.* Accordingly there would have been twelve Phratriæ, three hundred and sixty Gentes, and eighteen hundred heads of families. It is evident, however, that such symmetrical numbers could never have been preserved, even if they had ever been instituted; and while it is certain that the number of families must have increased in some gentes, and decreased in others, it may also be questioned whether the same number of gentes existed in each tribe. But whatever may be thought of the numbers, the phratriæ and gentes were important elements in the religious and social life of the Athenians. The families composing a gens were united by certain religious rites and social obligations. They were accustomed to meet together at fixed periods to offer sacrifices to a hero, whom they regarded as the common ancestor of all the families of the gens They had a common place of burial and common property; and in case of a member dying intestate, his property devolved upon his gens. They were bound to assist each other in difficulties. There was also a connection between the gentes of the same phratry, and between the phratriæ of the same tribe, by means of certain religious rites; and at the head of each tribe there was a magistrate called the Phylo-Basileus,† or King of the Tribe, who offered sacrifices on behalf of the whole body.

The

§ 5. The real history of Athens begins with the institution of annual archons, in the year 683 B. C. This is the first date in Athenian history on which certain reliance can be placed. The duties of the government were distributed among the nine archons, in the following manner. first, as has been already remarked, was called The Archon by way of pre-eminence, and sometimes the Archon Eponymus, § because the year was distinguished by his name. He was the president of the body, and the representative of the dignity of the state. He was the protector of widows and orphans, and determined all disputes relating to the family. The second archon was called The Basileus or The King, because he represented the king in his capacity as high-priest of the nation. All cases respecting religion and homicide were brought before him. The third archon bore the title of The Polemarch,¶ or Commander-in-chief, and was, down to the time of Cleisthenes, the commander of the troops. He had jurisdiction in all disputes between citizens and strangers. The remaining six had the common title of Thesmothetæ,** or Legislators. They

* Pparpia, i. e. brotherhood: the word is etymologically connected with frater and brother. The word Tévos, or Gens, answers nearly in meaning to our clan. The members of a γένος were called γεννῆται οι ὁμογαλάκτες.

† Φυλοβασιλεύς.

† Ο Αρχων.

§ Αρχων ἐπώνυμος.

O Bariλeus. In the same manner the title of Rex Sacrificulus or Rex Sacrorum was retained at Rome after the abolition of royalty.

Τ Ο Πολέμαρχος.

**Deoμóbeтal. The word Oeopoí was the ancient term for laws, and was afterwards supplanted by νόμοι. The later expression for making laws is θέσθαι νόμους.

had the decision of all disputes which did not specially belong to the other three. Their duties seem to have been almost exclusively judicial; and for this reason they received their name, not that they made the laws, but because their particular sentences had the force of laws in the absence of a written code.

The Senate, or Council of Areopagus, was the only other political power in the state in these early times. It received its name from its place of meeting, which was a rocky eminence near the Acropolis, called the Hill of Ares (Mars' Hill).* Its institution is ascribed by some writers to Solon; but it existed long before the time of that legislator, and may be regarded as the representative of the council of chiefs in the Heroic Ages. It was originally called simply The Senate or Council, and did not obtain the name of the senate of Areopagus till Solon instituted another senate, from which it was necessary to distinguish it. It was of course formed exclusively of Eupatrids, and all the archons became members of it at the expiration of their year of office.

§ 6. The government of the Eupatrids, like most of the early oligarchies, seems to have been oppressive. In the absence of written laws, the archons possessed an arbitrary power, of which they probably availed themselves to the benefit of their friends and their order, and to the injury of the general body of citizens. The consequence was great discontent, which at length became so serious, that Draco was appointed in 624 B. C. to draw up a written code of laws. He did not change the political constitution of Athens, and the most remarkable characteristic of his laws was their extreme severity. He affixed the penalty of death to all crimes alike; -to petty thefts, for instance, as well as to sacrilege and murder. Hence they were said to have been written not in ink, but in blood; and we are told that he justified this extreme harshness by saying, that small offences deserved death, and that he knew no severer punishment for great ones. This severity, however, must be attributed rather to the spirit of the times, than to any peculiar harshness in Draco himself; for he probably did little more than reduce to writing the ordinances which had previously regulated his brother Eupatrids in their decision of cases. His laws would of course appear excessively severe to a later age, long accustomed to a milder system of jurisprudence; but there is reason for believing that their severity has been somewhat exaggerated. In one instance, indeed, Draco softened the ancient rigor of the law. Before his time all homicides were tried by the senate of Areopagus, and, if found guilty, were condemned to suffer the full penalty of the law, - either death, or perpetual banishment with confiscation of property. The senate had no power to take account of any extenuating or justifying circumDraco left to this ancient body the trial of all cases of wilful murder; but he appointed fifty-one new judges, called Epheta,† who were to

stances.

* Ο Αρειος πάγος.

† Εφέται.