Phoenix 1955 Greek Tyranny

Classical Association of Canada
Greek Tyranny
Author(s): Mary White
Source: Phoenix, Vol. 9, No. 1 (Spring, 1955), pp. 1-18
Published by: Classical Association of Canada
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1085948
Accessed: 30/11/2008 02:53
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cac.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the
scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that
promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
Classical Association of Canada is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Phoenix.
http://www.jstor.org
GREEK TYRANNY
MARY WHITE
THE word
tyranny
in Greek
history
does not denote one
simple,
un-
changing institution,
nor should it be assumed that it means a form of
government essentially
similar in all the cases to which it is
applied.
I shall discuss here1
only
the earliest
tyrannies
in the Greek world-the
tyrannies
of the seventh and sixth centuries
B.C.,
which arose under
quite
different conditions and
were,
for that
reason,
different in character
and
purpose
from the later
dictatorships
of various times and
places
in
the Greek world.
Tyranny
or
dictatorship was,
of
course,
in Greece as
elsewhere a
recurring phenomenon.
In the late sixth and
early
fifth
centuries it was a device used
by
Persia to
govern
the Greek cities of
Asia Minor within the Persian
Empire.
The famous western
tyrants
of
Sicily
and South
Italy appeared
in the sixth and
especially
the fifth and
fourth
centuries;
and there occurred elsewhere shorter or
longer periods
of
tyranny.
These
belong
to a time when in Greece itself conditions had
changed;
the
early tyrannies
had been
overthrown,
and a reaction
against tyranny
had set in
owing
to the combined influence of
Sparta,
who was
proud
of the fact that she had been
always
without
tyrants
(aite arvpavvevTos
Thuc. 1.
18.1)
and had
helped
in the
expulsion
of some
of the
tyrants,
and of Athens
where,
after the
tyranny,
the
triumphant
progress
of
democracy
and
imperialism
exercised
great
influence on
political thought.
These later
tyrannies
conform to the modern
meaning
of the
term;
indeed,
the term
acquired
its technical
meaning
from their character
and from discussions of different
types
of
government by
historians and
philosophers,
who had them in mind when
they
described
tyranny
as a
form of
demagogy,
a
perversion
of
monarchy, oligarchy,
or
democracy.
The earliest
tyrants
were not
demagogues
for the
simple
reason that
there was as
yet
no demos
upon
whose shoulders
they
could rise.
They
belong
to an earlier
stage
of
political development
and can more accur-
ately
be described as the successful
champions
of a
growing
middle
class,
who overthrew the restrictive aristocracies of birth and so freed their
cities for a
development
which under favourable circumstances could
and sometimes did lead to
democracy.
The
early tyrannies
are thus sui
generis
and must be studied in the
context of their times to be understood. It is even doubtful whether the
term
rvpavvos
was
commonly
and
generally applied
to them in their own
day.
The word was still rare at that time and had a
variety
of
meanings;
certainly
it had no restricted and technical
meaning
until the end of the
'This
paper
was read before the American Historical Association in New York on
December
28,
1954.
1
THE
PHOENIX,
vol. 9
(1955)
1
THE PHOENIX
fifth
century.
Its
origins
are
obscure,
it is not a Greek nor
Indo-European
term.
Whatmough's opinion,2
which has won wide
acceptance,
is that
it is
Lydian
and is related to a
group
of
Lydian
names:
Tvpa-a, Turnus,
Tvpaavot
and its alternative form
Tvpprlvol (the
Greek term for the Etrus-
cans),
Tuscus and the older
Tursco,
and
Turan,
the Etruscan name for
Venus. The
probability
of
Lydian origin
derives some
support
from the
fact that the earliest use of
any
form of the word in Greek is
by
Archi-
lochos
referring
to his
contemporary, Gyges
of
Lydia
(ca.
687-652
B.c.):3
I care not for the wealth of
golden Gyges,
nor ever have envied
him;
I am not
jealous
of the works of
Gods,
and I have no desire for
lofty despotism (JeyaY&Xr7s O'iK E p&o
TvpavvlPos);
for such
things
are far
beyond my
ken.
Here
rvpavvis
denotes the
sovereign power
of a
wealthy monarch,
and is
probably simply
a
synonym
for absolute or
royal power.
Such continues
to be one of its common
meanings
in both
poetry
and
prose.
But as
early
as
Alkaios, Theognis,
and Solon it has the
derogatory
sense of
despotic
power
based on fraud or violence. There
may
be some
suggestion
of this
meaning
even in the first use
by
Archilochos of
Gyges,
a resourceful
usurper
who in a
palace intrigue
killed his
predecessor,
married his
queen,
and
by
a
vigorous
and devious
policy
established the Mermnad
dynasty
as the
ruling power
in Anatolia
(Hdt.
1.
8-12).
Alkaios
(Frs.
48 and
87)
is the first to use the word of a Greek leader.
He
applies
it to
Pittakos,
the
aesymnetes
or dictator elected as mediator
between the
aristocrats, among
whom Alkaios and his brothers were
prominent,
and the
party
of Melanchros and
Myrsilos.
Aristotle
(Politics
1285
a30-b4)
describes
aesymnetes
as an elective form of
tyranny,
re-
sembling tyranny
in
being despotic,
but
resembling kingship
in
being
elective and constitutional. Alkaios has all the aristocratic
contempt
for
an
upstart,
and
objects
to Pittakos because he is
low-born, KaKorrarpltas.
When he
says
that all
praised
Pittakos and set him
up
as
tyrant (CTaraavro
7rpavvov),
he uses
rvpavvos
as a term of
personal
abuse and not as the
proper
word to use of the constitutional nature of his
position.
Pittakos
was
scarcely
more a
tyrant
in the later
accepted
sense of the term than
was Solon in
Athens,
who held similar
power
for the
year
of his archon-
ship (Aristotle,
Ath. Pol. 5.2.
eiXovro Kolvi 8LaXX\aKTrlv
KaL
&pXoovra 26Xova).
Theognis
uses various forms of the term in three
passages (823-824;
1181-1182; 1204),
Solon three times
(Fr. 23,
lines
6, 9, 19; cf.
Fr.
10,
3-4
where the word is not used but the idea is
present),
both
poets
in the
sense of
despotic
rule but neither
referring
to a
particular
individual.
In the fifth
century,
when the
tyrants
had been driven out
and,
in
2Joshua Whatmough,
The Foundations
of
Roman
Italy (London 1937)
231.
3Archilochos,
Fr.
22,
E.
Diehl, Anthologia Lyrica
Graeca3
(Leipzig 1952)
3. 10-11.
The other
fragments
of the
lyric poets
cited will be referred to
by
the numbers of
this,
or for Alkaios the
second,
edition. The translation is
by J.
M.
Edmonds, Elegy
and
Iambus
(Loeb
Classical
Library,
London
1931)
2.
110,
Fr. 25.
2
GREEK TYRANNY
Athens
especially, democracy
had won its
glorious
victories over the
Persian,
in whose train had been the
ex-tyrant Hippias
and the other
Peisistratidai,
all forms of one-man rule were
execrated,
Persian
monarchy
and Greek
tyranny
alike. This can be seen in the honours
paid
to Har-
modios and
Aristogeiton
who murdered
Hipparchos. They
became the
tyrannicides,
their statues were set
up
in the
Agora,
and in the scolion
or
drinking song celebrating
their deed the refrain reads:
OTE TOrbv
pavvov
KaveT?7v
iaOVO6Iovos
Tr 'ASOvas ErotLao'LrTv
When
they
slew the
tyrant
and
gave equal
laws to Athens.4
Here
tyranny
is
specifically
contrasted with
isonomia,
an earlier term
for
democracy.
The Athenian dramatists have a similar attitude towards absolute
power. They
use the word
tyrannos frequently,
both of the
power
of the
gods-Zeus, Apollo,
and Eros-and of human
princes;
almost
always
it
contains the
suggestion
of a
newly acquired
or
dangerously arbitrary
power
which is
likely
to be
irresponsibly
misused. Sometimes this is
explicit,
as in
Sophocles' Oedipus Tyrannus
873:
V3pts
VTreVL
rTvpavvov
Pride breeds
tyranny.
In other
passages
there can be seen an effective double entendre between
the conventional
meaning
of
king
and the
derogatory meaning
of
despot.
Although
the Attic use of the word was
becoming increasingly
coloured
with this
derogatory meaning,
the Ionic continued to have both senses.
The two
fifth-century historians,
the Ionian Herodotos and the Athenian
Thucydides
illustrate this. Herodotos
applies
it
constantly
to oriental
kings
and their
power, occasionally
even to
governors
or
satraps,
and
regularly
to the various Greek
tyrants,
in fact to one-man rule of
any
kind with no
implication
about the character of the rule. But in other
places,
and these are the more
emphatic,
it is
despotic power
as
opposed
to freedom
(eXevOepil
1.
62.2),
or to
oligarchic government (IooKparia
5. 92.
a2);
and in the famous Persian debate on the virtues of
democracy,
oligarchy,
and
monarchy (3. 80-82)
it is
significant
that
Otanes,
who
recommends
democracy,
uses both
tobvvapxos
and
TrVpavvos
interchangeably
of one-man rule while
Dareios,
who recommends the retention of the
monarchy,
uses
,oOvvapxos only. Thucydides,
on the other
hand,
restricts
4C. M.
(now
Sir
Maurice) Bowra,
Greek
Lyric Poetry (Oxford 1936)
415-421. For a
full discussion of the
tyrannicide
cult see F.
Jacoby,
Atthis
(Oxford 1949)
158-164 and
notes;
K.
Schefold, "Kleisthenes,"
MusHelv 3
(1946) 59-86;
V.
Ehrenberg,
"The
Origins
of
Democracy,"
Historia 1
(1950) 530-534;
G. W.
Williams,
"The Curse of the Alk-
maionidai
II,"
Hermathena 79
(1952) 4-11;
G.
Vlastos, "Isonomia," 4AP
74
(1953)
340-344.
3
THE PHOENIX
the term to the well known
tyrants
of Greece and the West or to
tyranny
as an
illegal
and
despotic
form of
government.
The two most
striking
passages
in the latter sense describe the Athenian
Empire:
Perikles'
remark in the second book
(2.
63. 2:
cws rvpavviSa 'yap 8srl exere aVOrTv, Xv
Xagl3ev .Lev aiLKov 5OKEl etvai, &etvaL
6U
ErTLKiLvvvov.),
"For what
you
hold
is,
to
speak
somewhat
plainly,
a
tyranny;
to take it
perhaps
was
wrong,
but to let it
go
is
unsafe,"
is echoed
by
Kleon
later,
in his
speech
about
the
punishment
of
Mitylene (3.
37. 2: ort
Tvpavvl6a eXETr rvY
apXrv).
Even this brief account of the
history
of the term indicates that there
is no
certainty
that the
tyrants
of the seventh and sixth centuries were
so called
by
their
contemporaries.
If
they were,
it denoted their absolute
power,
or was a term of censure and
abuse;
it was not a technical de-
scription
of a
type
of
government.
In the fifth
century
it is
applied
to
them,
but has two other distinct uses: as a
synonym
for
royal
or absolute
power,
and as a
synonym
for ill
gotten
or
despotically
exercised
power.
Only by
the end of the
century
is the latter restricted and technical
meaning
established.
When it was the fashion to
regard
Ionia as the
pioneer
in all
things
Greek,
it was
thought
that Greek
tyranny
was modelled on
Gyges
of
Lydia,
and the
probable Lydian origins
of the word and its first
appli-
cation to him were cited as corroborative evidence. On this
theory
the
idea of
tyranny
first took root in the Greek cities of Asia
Minor, perhaps
in
Ephesos
where we hear of Melas the son-in-law of
Gyges,
or in Miletos
where
Thrasyboulos
was a famous
tyrant;
thence it
spread
to mainland
Greece. But Melas is
nothing
but a
name,
and
Thrasyboulos
was a
contemporary
of
Periander,
who
belonged
to the second
generation
of
tyranny
in Corinth. What evidence we have
points
in the
opposite
direction,
to the conclusion that the earliest
tyrants
were in Greece
itself,
the
group
at the
Isthmus,
the
Kypselids
in
Corinth,
the Ortha-
gorids
in
Sikyon,
and
Theagenes
in
Megara.
Whether the career and
methods of
Gyges provided
a
pattern
for the Isthmian
tyrants
can be
only
a
conjecture
from the fact that
during
and after
Gyges' reign
Greek-Lydian
relations first became
frequent
and close. On the other
hand it is certain that the conditions which
gave
rise to these
tyrannies
were
peculiarly Greek,
and bear little relation to
anything
we
know,
or
can
guess,
of the circumstances
attending
the
palace
revolution and
change
of
dynasty
in
Lydia.
In the Isthmian cities Dorian aristocracies had succeeded the
kingships
established at the time of the Dorian
invasions, kingships
which still
persisted
at
Argos
and
Sparta.
We know more of the Corinthian aristo-
cracy
than of the
others; they
were the
Bacchiads,
a
group
of Heraklid
land-owning
families who intermarried
among
themselves and
jealously
monopolized
all
political power
in Corinth.
They
were an able and
vigorous group
who in the
early days
of the colonial movement to the
4
GREEK TYRANNY
West
planted
two of the most famous and successful
colonies, Corcyra
and
Syracuse
in 733 B.C.
They
seem to have been the first to see the com-
mercial
possibilities opened up by
this Greek
expansion
to the
West,
and instead of
remaining merely
a
land-owning aristocracy, solving
the
problems
of
growth by continuing
to
export population
in
colonies, they
encouraged
Corinth to
supplement
her limited
agricultural
resources
by
crafts and trade. Strabo
(8.
6.
20, C378) says
of them: rTO
k7roprov a&6Ew
&Kapir6oavro, "they fearlessly reaped
the fruits of commerce." It is
signifi-
cant that Corinth sent out
only
the two
early colonies;
thereafter it is
her
pottery, Proto-Corinthian,
one of the loveliest of the
'Orientalizing'
wares,
which
appears
in ever
increasing quantities
not
merely
in the
West but
throughout
the Greek markets. Corinth became famous for her
innovations in naval architecture and ca. 704
(Thuc.
1. 13.
3)
lent one of
her
shipwrights
to Samos to build four
ships
of the new
style.
This was
probably
the
penteconter,
a
type
of
ship which,
with its
fifty
rowers as
well as
sails,
was much less
dependent
on winds and currents and could
make faster and safer
journeys
than the older
ships.5
The
very
success of the Bacchiads in
availing
themselves of and
adapting
themselves to the
expanding opportunities
of the
early
seventh
century
was their
undoing.
The twin claims of land and birth
upon
which
an
aristocracy
relies for its exclusive
political
control were
challenged by
the
appearance
of a
growing
middle class. This middle class was not an
exclusively
mercantile
group
in contrast to a
land-owning aristocracy;
there seems to have been no such clear distinction.6 Both
groups
had
both
agricultural
and mercantile
interests,
and land was still the
principal
form of
security. Inevitably,
as some families outside the aristocratic
group grew wealthy
and
prominent, intermarriages
took
place.
Alkaios
and
Theognis,
themselves die-hard
aristocrats, complain bitterly
of such
marriages,
which
corrupt
noble blood with base-born stock.
The new
prosperity
was reflected in a
change
of
military equipment
and tactics.
Hoplite
tactics
replaced
the older
long-range type
of
fighting
in which the aristocratic
cavalry
had borne the burden and heat of the
day, supported by
a
lightly
armed and
poorly
trained militia.
Although
less
expensive
than
cavalry equipment, hoplite
armour was much heavier
and more
expensive
than that
formerly
used
by
the
fighters
in the
ranks,
and
hoplite
tactics involved
long training
and
drilling by
a
compact
body
of
fighters
whose success
depended upon
their
discipline
and
effective
cooperation.
The middle classes contributed the
hoplite phalanx,
and this
gave
added force to their resentment
against
the aristocratic
monopoly
of
political power
and exclusive
right
to
interpret justice.
Hesiod of
Boeotia,
the earliest
poet
of mainland
Greece,
voices the
5Rhys Carpenter,
"The Greek Penetration of the Black
Sea," AJA
52
(1948)
1-10.
6See A.
Andrewes,
"Probouleusis:
Sparta's
Contribution to the
Technique
of Govern-
ment," Inaugural Lecture,
Oxford
1954,
13-15.
5
THE PHOENIX
gathering
storm of
protest against princes
who twist
justice
to their
own ends.
The answer of the Bacchiads to both criticism and demands was the
frequent
answer of a
privileged class, greater
harshness and
repression.
When,
in
addition,
Corinth was unsuccessful in wars with her
neighbours
Argos
and
Megara
and her
colony Corcyra,
the situation was
ripe
for a
revolution.
Kypselos brought
the discontent to a head for his own
personal advantage
and seized
power
with the
support
of the middle
classes. The stories of
Kypselos' parentage,
of his rise to
power,
and of
his
policy
thereafter all stress that hatred of the
oppression
of the Bac-
chiads was the sentiment that rallied
support
for him. Claims to rule
based on the
prestige
of birth are
notoriously
hard to
break,
and a
strong
personality, able,resourceful,
and
ruthless,is
needed to initiate a successful
revolution.
Kypselos
was a man of these
qualities.
Nicolaus of Damascus
says
that
Kypselos
became
polemarch,
in which office the mildness of
his
judicial
decisions
contrasting
with the harsh decisions of the Bacchiads
made him
popular
so that he was able to make himself
tyrant
without
the usual
bodyguard.7
We
may
be
sceptical
of some of the details of the
story,
but there is little reason to doubt that
Kypselos
had the
loyal
support
of the middle-class
hoplite
soldiers. The first
thing
he did was to
kill or drive out the
Bacchiads,
some of whom fled to
Corcyra, Sparta,
and the West.
Periander, Kypselos'
son and
successor, displayed
the
same
implacable
hatred of the Bacchiads.
They
were
expelled
from their
refuge
in
Corcyra,
and a son of Periander installed as
regent.
It seems
clear, therefore,
that the Corinthian
tyranny
arose in
protest against
the
Bacchiad
monopoly
of
power,
and that the studied
policy
of the
Kypselids
was to break that
power
for ever.
In
Sikyon
the
pattern
was similar. The
Orthagorid tyrants
were
animated
by hostility
to the aristocratic Dorian
families,
and themselves
belonged
to the fourth and non-Dorian tribe. The
renaming
of the tribes
(Hdt.
5.
68),
to us a
childishly spiteful gesture,
was Kleisthenes'
telling
attack
upon
the
prestige
of the Dorian
aristocracy. Orthagoras,
the
founder of the
tyranny,
is described as the son of a cook or a butcher
(ua,yetpos). As a
young
man he
distinguished
himself in his
military
service with the
repPlro6XoL,
frontier
guards,
became their
commander,
and
eventually polemarch.
Then with the
help
of the
hoplites
he seized the
tyranny.8
For
Megara
there is less evidence about the establishment of Thea-
genes,
but the little there is is
significant.
Aristotle
says
in the Politics
(1305a)
that
Theagenes
secured
power
after
slaughtering
the flocks and
herds of the
wealthy.
In the Rhetoric
(1357b)
he
says that, urged by
the
poor
who hated the
wealthy,
he obtained a
bodyguard
and so became
7Nic. Dam. Fr.
57,
F.
Jacoby,
FGH IIA
(Berlin 1926)
356-357.
8p. Ox. 11.
1365, Jacoby,
FGH
IIA,
504-505.
6
GREEK TYRANNY
tyrant.
It should be remembered that
Megara
in the seventh
century
had
founded a
group
of colonies at and around the
Bosporus,
the two most
famous
being Chalkedon,
an
agricultural colony
in a
quiet bay
on the
southern
shore,
and seventeen
years
later
Byzantion
on the northern
shore at the
gates
of the Euxine in a
position
to control the trade in and
out of the Black Sea.
Megara
had an
aristocracy which,
like the Bac-
chiads,
had
exploited
the
possibilities
of
colonization;
their flocks and
herds and the wool
trade,
as Ure
suggests,9
were an
important part
of
their wealth. Aristotle's evidence indicates that in
Megara
too the
tyranny
was a movement to overthrow
aristocracy.
These Isthmian
tyrannies
are the earliest Greek
tyrannies,
so far as
can be inferred from the evidence we have.
They begin
in the second half
of the seventh
century; Kypselos
is
usually
dated ca.
655, Orthagoras
about the same
time,
and
Theagenes
in the 630's.1?
It seems to me
that,
if it is correct to
say
that
tyranny
in these
places
was a movement
against
the aristocracies of birth led and
supported by
a
rising
middle
class,
its
geographic position
is
significant.
The
Isthmus,
lying
between the Corinthian and Saronic
gulfs,
stands at the centre
of the
principal
trade routes: the route to the West which had been
opened up by
the
early
colonial
movement,
and the routes to the
East,
to Asia
Minor, Syria,
and
Egypt,
and to the Black Sea. Here the
impact
of new
developments
was most
quickly
and most
acutely felt,
and
brought
in its wake
political change.
The idea
spread eastward,
and
many
cities in Asia Minor seem to have had
tyrannies
in the
early
sixth
century.
What we know of
Thrasyboulos
of Miletos and the
struggles
in
Mitylene
in which the
poet
Alkaios
participated suggests
that in these
places
also it was a reaction
against aristocracy.
In
Samos,
where I have
attempted
to show that the
tyranny began
as
early
as the 560's with the
piratical
activities of
Aiakes,"
it was the overthrow of the
landowners,
the
7yEuo6'poL,
which
gave
Aiakes the
opportunity
to seize
personal power.
In
Athens, tyranny appeared
with Peisistratos in
561/60
under
special
circumstances which I shall discuss later.
Although
the first
tyrannies
in the newer cities of the West arose in the
early part
of the sixth
century,
it was not until the end of the
century
and the
beginning
of the fifth
century
that most of the cities had
tyrants. By
this time
tyranny
had
become
simply
a
designation
for
personal power
or
dictatorship
and had
lost its former
significance
as a
symptom
of social and
political develop-
ment.
Similarly
the later
tyrannies
in Asia Minor
supported by Lydia
9P. N.
Ure,
The
Origin of Tyranny (Cambridge 1922)
266-267.
'?For
the usual
chronology
see H. T. Wade
Gery,
CAH3
(Cambridge 1929) Chap. 22.6,
pp.
548-570 and the note on
pp.
764-765. For a later
dating
of the
Kypselids
see
H. R. W.
Smith,
"The Hearst
Hydria," University of California
Publications in Classical
Archaeology,
Vol.
1,
No. 10
(1944)
241-290.
1"The Duration of the Samian
Tyranny," JHS
74
(1954)
36-43.
7
THE PHOENIX
or Persia were an artificial
prolongation
of the earlier institution and
cease to have
any
real interest for us.
Having
examined the circumstances under which the first
tyrannies
arose,
we now ask what was the nature of a
tyrant's power.
Was it a
form of
government
based on constitutional
enactments;
if
so,
what was
the constitutional
formula;
if
not,
wherein did a
tyrant's power
lie?
The evidence is
discouragingly scanty
and
vague,
but there is none to
suggest
that
tyranny
was a form of
government
with
any
constitutional
pattern
of its own. The
opposite
seems more
likely,
that the
tyrants
did
not make
any
radical
changes
in the constitutions of their cities.
How,
then,
did
they
work?
Basically
I think it was
by
a
change
of
personnel.
The families of the former aristocracies were
killed, expelled,
or
suppressed,
except
for the few who were
willing
to make their
peace
and work with
the
tyrants. They
were
replaced by
the
supporters
of the
tyrants,
the
people
who had
grown prosperous
in the
period
of
expansion,
who made
up
the
hoplite armies,
and had
helped
the
tyrant
to set himself
up.
That
they
were
capable
of
taking responsibility
is clear from the fact
that their
respective
cities continue to
grow
more
prosperous
and
vigor-
ous. Far from there
being any sign
of even a
temporary retrogression
caused
by inexperience,
there is
expansion
and
development
in
every
sphere.
In
Corinth, although
the Bacchiads were
expelled, yet
the
city's
commerce
grew,
Proto-Corinthian
pottery
was succeeded
by
the Cor-
inthian
styles, Early, Middle,
and
Late,
which until about 550 dominated
the
pottery
markets of the whole Greek world. In
Sikyon
Kleisthenes'
non-Dorian tribe became the Rulers and the Dorian tribes were
degraded,
yet Sikyon
in the first half of the sixth
century
became for the
only
time
in its
history
a Greek
power
of the first rank. And so one could continue
through
the whole list. The
tyrants
doubtless drew for their
personnel
upon
that class which had
gained experience
and wealth but had hitherto
been excluded from
political power,
and the event
amply
demonstrated
their
capacity.
Did the
tyrant
himself hold
any
one of the
regular
offices?
Again
the
evidence is
incomplete.
For Corinth and
Sikyon
there are
only
the
traditions that
Kypselos
and
Orthagoras
held
military posts
with the
hoplite
armies when
they
seized
power.
For Samos there is one valuable
piece
of
evidence,
the
inscription
on the seated statue dedicated
by
Aiakes or his successors which reads: "Dedicated
by
Aiakes son of
Bryson
who secured the
booty
for Hera KarTa Trv
rl-rTaavw,
"when he was
CtrfT&ra'S."
This
perhaps
indicates that Aiakes held the
position
of
CertLrTrs
while he exercised what later
generations
would call a
tyranny.
The most
interesting
evidence is for Athens. Both Aristotle (Ath.
Pol.
16. 2.
8)
and
Thucydides (6.
54.
6)
are
emphatic
that the Peisistratids
were careful not to disturb the
existing
constitution embodied in the
laws of
Solon,
but
Thucydides
adds this
significant
reservation:
7rXjv
KaO'
8
GREEK TYRANNY
o6ov aLel rva
e7reEMXrovTo aOfUv atrsV
kv rals
'pXaOs elvaL-"except
in so far
as
they
took care that some of themselves should
always
hold the archon-
ships."
Here we see how the
tyranny
worked. The
archonships
were held
by
the
party
of the
tyrants,
and the archons became life members of the
Areopagos
at the end of their
year
of office. The archons were the chief
executive
magistrates
of Athens at this
time,
and the
Areopagos
in the
words of Aristotle
(,th.
Pol. 8.
4.)
"still
supervised
the
greater
and more
important parts
of
public
life."
Through
control of these two branches
of the administrative
machinery
the
policy
of the
tyrants
could be
carried out without further violence to the Solonian constitution. Peisis-
tratos himself had
probably
been
polemarch
when he
captured
Nisaea
from
Megara
in the
Megarian
wars and was thus
already
a member of
the
Areopagos
before he became
tyrant.
The archon list inscribed on
stone ca. 425
B.C.,
a
portion
of which was discovered in the American
excavations of the
Agora
and
published
in
1939,12
shows that
Hippias,
the eldest son and heir of
Peisistratos,
became archon in
526/5
as soon
as
possible
after his father's
death,
and that his
son,
the
younger
Peisis-
tratos,
was archon in
522/1.
Two other names in the list are
interesting.
Kleisthenes was archon in
525/4, indicating
that the Alkmaionid
family,
which had
gone
into exile when Peisistratos seized
power,
had become
temporarily
reconciled to the
tyranny
and had returned to hold office in
the
early years
of
Hippias' rule, only
to
go
into exile
again probably
after
the murder of
Hipparchos. Miltiades,
archon in
524/3, belonged
to the
Philaid
family
which from the
beginning
had been
willing
to
cooperate
with the
tyranny.
For Athens then we have
enough
evidence to
say
with some assurance
that the
tyrants
worked
through
the
regular magistrates
and
council,
without
disturbing
the constitution. But this was
only
their modus
operandi-their
real
power
was neither
dependent upon
these offices nor
circumscribed
by
them.
They
held a
personal power
far
surpassing any
office
by
virtue of their successful overthrow of the
aristocracy,
their
successful
leadership
of their
supporters,
and the benefits of their
policy
to the
city
as a whole.
Usually,
at least
by
the second
generation,
the
tyrant
took the
precaution
of
having
a
bodyguard,
for fear was not a
negligible
factor in their success.
Although
the scale is
larger
and the
machinery
more
complex, Augustus' power
in the
early Principate
offers
many analogies.
His
prestige
was won
by
the
victory
of
Actium,
and his
victory brought
a new
personnel
into the Roman
oligarchy
of
office.
Although
he was careful to take
only
certain
specific
offices and
powers
and
proclaimed
that he had restored the
republic,
no one was
under
any
delusion as to the extent of his real
power,
which
pervaded
every aspect
of the life of the
empire,
and was even
greater
because not
12The
fragment
is
published
with a
photograph
and
commentary by
B. D. Meritt in
Hesperia
8
(1939)
59-65.
9
THE PHOENIX
explicit.
There are
many
similarities between
tyranny
and
principate,
and a
tyranny
in the smaller context of the
city
state needed less ma-
chinery.
To take another
analogy
closer in time
though perhaps
less
similar in
character,
Perikles'
power
in
fifth-century
Athens
during
the
last fifteen
years
of his life when he was
continuously
elected
general
was
much
greater
than the
generalship.
It rested in his
ability
to
carry
with
him the Ekklesia in all
questions
of
policy.
As
Thucydides says (2.
65.
9)
Athens was in name a
democracy,
in
reality
it was
government by
the
first citizen. The Ekklesia had
by
the constitutional
changes
of Kleis-
thenes, Ephialtes,
and Perikles himself become
sovereign,
and he who
led the
city
must lead it. In the earlier
period
before the demos had such
power,
it was
through
archons and
Areopagos
that the
tyrants
must
work.
We ask
next;
what did the
tyrants try
to do and how much did
they
achieve? In the first
place, they
led their cities to
greater
material
prosperity, by encouraging
a diversified
economy
in which
agriculture
continued to hold an
important place
but was
supplemented by
an ever-
increasing development
of such crafts as
pottery,
metal
work,
and
textiles,
and of
export
trade with the
ship-building
and mercantile
activity
which must
accompany
it. Corinth
provides
a
good
illustration.
There, using
the excellent
clay
which is one of Corinth's most valuable
natural
resources,
the
many
small establishments of the Potters'
Quarter,
the
Kerameikos, produced
vast
quantities
of all kinds of
pottery
and
terracotta
figurines
to flood the Greek
markets;
roof-tile factories made
and
exported
the
special type
of roof-tiles invented in
Corinth;
terracotta
architectural decorations for
temples
and
public buildings
were
shipped
abroad and have been found in such
places
as Thermon and
Kalydon
in
Aetolia; perfume
was made to fill the thousands of little decorated
aryballoi
or
perfume bottles,
one of the most common
types
of Corinthian
pottery.
Other
exports
were
perishable
and less
easy
to
trace,
but from
literary
sources we know that Corinth was famous for bronzes and other
metal
work,
and textiles. Some of the bronzes survive and are discussed
and illustrated
by Payne
in Necrocorinthia. There is also the famous
golden
bowl dedicated
by
the
Kypselids
at
Olympia,
now in the Boston
Museum of Fine Arts.
The
Kypselids gave
Corinth her first
coinage,
a means of
exchange
to
facilitate this mercantile
development.
Within the
previous generation
coinage
had been invented and came into use first in
Lydia
and the
Greek cities in Asia Minor.
Aegina
had issued the first silver
coinage
in
Greece
itself,
the silver turtles. The
beginning
of Corinth's
coinage
with
the
winged Pegasos
as its device is now dated about 600
B.C.,
and was
probably
the second
example
of
coinage
in
European Greece,
to be
followed
shortly by
Athens.13
laFor
this later
dating
of the
early coinages
see E. S. G.
Robinson,
"Coins from the
Ephesian
Artemision
Reconsidered," JHS
71
(1951)
156-166.
10
GREEK TYRANNY
Corinth built and maintained a
navy
of both
warships
and merchant
ships.
A canal was cut
through
the isthmus between Leucas and the
mainland so that
ships
would not have to sail outside Leucas. Periander
planned
a canal
through
the Isthmus of Corinth but was unable to
carry
it out.
To secure raw materials and to
safeguard
the routes to the West
against any
interference from a hostile
Corcyra,
the
Kypselids planted
a series of colonial foundations of a new and
imperialist type
on the
north-west coast of Greece:
Leucas, Ambracia,
and Anaktorion
just
north of the Corinthian
Gulf,
and
Apollonia
north of
Corcyra.
Potidaia
on the Isthmus of Pallene in Chalkidike was
clearly designed
to secure
timber from Macedonia and minerals. In each a member of the
Kypselid
family
was
placed
as
viceroy
(as
was done also in
Corcyra
itself
by
Periander when he
expelled
the exiled
Bacchiads),
and the colonies were
kept
under strict Corinthian control. This control was maintained
long
after the end of the
tyranny;
in the fifth
century
even their coins were
certainly
sometimes and
may usually
have been minted in Corinth and
were the Corinthian 'colts' with
distinguishing
letters for each
colony.
The second
aspect
of
tyrant policy
which I wish to
emphasize
arises
directly
out of this mercantile
development,
that
is,
urbanization. The
city
of Corinth must have
grown enormously during
the
seventy-odd
years
of the
tyranny. Many people
were
employed
in the various small
industrial and commercial businesses and had to live in the immediate
area of the
city
and its harbours. It was in this
period
and due to these
causes that what we think of as the
typical city-state
came into
being.
A Greek
city-state
consists not
only
of the urban and harbour area with
its industrial
establishments, shops
and market
place,
civic
offices,
temples
and
public buildings,
and the
population employed by
all these
businesses,
but also of the
country
and its
villages
with the
agricultural
population.
Until the time of mercantile
expansion
the urban area was
little more than the seat of
government
and the
city cults,
and a
place
of
refuge
in case of
attack;
the
country
and
villages
were more
important.
The situation
changed
at this
period
and the urban centre of the
city-
state
began
to be built
up
with a much
larger population earning
its
living
therein. Water
supplies, drainage, streets,
market
places, public
buildings,
new
temples,
and
city
walls
appear,
the outward and visible
signs
of the new
city-state.
Little of this remains in
Corinth,
so
thoroughly
was it
destroyed by
the Romans in 146
B.c., except
for the Potters'
Quarter
with a few remains of a
city wall,
and the two fountain-houses of
Peirene and
Glauke,
the earliest structures of which
belong
to the
tyrants.
A
good
and abundant water
supply
was one of the first needs
of a
growing population
in a
country
like Greece which is short of water.
It
is, therefore,
not
surprising
that fountain-houses and
aqueducts
are
among
the best known
public
works of the
tyrants.
The choice
by
the
Kypselids
of the
winged
horse
Pegasos
as the device for their coins was an
11
THE PHOENIX
ingenious piece
of
propaganda
for the fountain of
Peirene,
which in
legend gushed
forth where
Pegasos
struck his hoof as he mounted into the
air. The
temple
of
Apollo,
the
only
other
early building
left in
Corinth,
was built a little later than the
period
of the
tyranny
but was
part
of the
same
policy
and testifies to the resources accumulated
by
the
tyrants.
In the third
place,
the
tyrants
made their cities
powers
of the first
rank
by
a
vigorous foreign policy,
a munificent
generosity
to the influ-
ential Greek
shrines,
and an
enlightened patronage
of the arts. The
Kypselids
treated on
equal
terms with the
kings
of
Lydia
and
Egypt,
arbitrated in
disputes
between
cities,
and maintained
friendly
relations
with other
tyrants.
Their dedications at
Delphi
and
Olympia
excited the
admiration of future
generations.
Their
patronage
of the arts was a
deliberate
part
of their
policy; they
needed artists and craftsmen for
the
designing
and
executing
of
pottery,
metal
work, textiles,
and terra-
cottas;
architects and
sculptors
for the new
buildings
and for their
dedications at home and abroad.
They
were
equally
interested in
attracting poets
to their courts. The result was a brilliant
period
in the
development
of both arts and literature.
The Samian
tyrants
of the sixth
century displayed equal vigour
and
resource in their
policies.
The most acute
problem
for them from the
middle of the
century
onward was
foreign
relations: how to
preserve
their
independence
in the face first of Kroisos' threat to
conquer
the
islands as well as the coasts of Asia
Minor, then,
when Kroisos fell and
Asia Minor became
part
of the Persian
Empire,
of Persia's more relentless
pressure.
Aiakes built a
strong navy
of
penteconters,
and cultivated
close relations with
Egypt,
so that Samos was in a
position
to fall heir
to the vacant
thalassocracy
when the
previous thalassocrat, Phokaia,
was
ruthlessly subjected
to Persia. Aiakes
apparently (Hdt.
1.
169)
made
token submission to
Persia,
but
Persia,
without a
navy
of her own until
she
conquered
Phoenicia and
Egypt,
was in no
position
to interfere with
Samos'
virtually independent
control of the
Aegean
sea-lanes.
Polykrates
inherited both
navy
and
foreign policy.
He converted the
navy
of
pente-
conters into a
navy
of
triremes,
the new
type
of
warship,14
and
improved
the harbour of Samos
by building
the mole which Herodotos
(3. 60)
mentions,
and maintained the alliance with Amasis of
Egypt
until
Kambyses'
attack on Amasis forced him to choose between Persia and
Egypt.
He seized
every opportunity
of
strengthening
his
position
in the
Aegean: by
alliance with
Lygdamis
of
Naxos, by subjecting
some of the
islands and
dedicating
Rhenaia to the Delian
Apollo,
whose festival he
celebrated,
and
by giving refuge
to Arkesilaos of
Cyrene.15 Polykrates'
14J. A.
Davison,
"The First Greek
Triremes,"
CQ 41
(1947)
18-24.
15Lygdamis
of
Naxos, Polyainos 1.23;
the islands and
Rhenaia,
Thuc.
1.13;
for the
suggestion
that Rhodes
may
have been one of
them, Bowra,
Greek
Lyric Poetry, 260-262;
the celebration of the
Delia,
H. W.
Parke, "Polykrates
and
Delos,"
C2 40
(1946)
105-
108;
Arkesilaos of
Cyrene,
Hdt. 4.
155,
159.
12
GREEK TYRANNY
enemies
charged
him with a
piratical
blockade of the
Aegean,
but in
reality
Samos did the Greek cause
important
service in these
years by
building up
a
strong
bulwark of naval
power
in the
Aegean against
Persian westward
expansion.
The domestic
policy
of the Samian
tyrants
is less well known than
that of either the Corinthian or Athenian
tyrannies, chiefly
because
attention is focussed on their
foreign
relations and the dramatic tale of
Polykrates'
fall
(Hdt.
3.
120-125).
The evidence for the office of
krtarar7rs
which Aiakes held has
already
been
mentioned;
there is no evidence of
what,
if
any,
office
Polykrates
held.
Hostility
to the
aristocracy
of
'y7wob6po,
overthrown
by
Aiakes when he seized
power, persisted
to the
time of
Polykrates,
who to be rid of them sent them as his
contingent
to
Kambyses
for the invasion of
Egypt. They
went instead to
Sparta
and with
Spartan
and Corinthian assistance tried
unsuccessfully
to drive
out
Polykrates.
The interest of the
tyranny
in commerce is obvious. Samos was one
of the three states to have a
separate
temenos at
Naukratis;
her close
connexions with
Cyrene
and the
West,
the
semi-piracy
of her naval
policy-all point clearly
to
vigorous
commercial
activity,
as does
Poly-
krates'
reputation
for wealth and his
prosperity.
The
public
works of the Samian
tyranny
were famous. Herodotos
(3. 60)
mentions the three notable structures: the harbour mole to which
reference has
already
been
made,
the Heraion built
by Rhoikos,
and the
water tunnel of
Eupalinos.
There were two
temples
to Hera: an older
temple,
the
channelling
of whose column bases was commented on as late
as the first
century
A.D.
by Pliny (N.H.
36.
90),
was
destroyed
soon after
its
completion
about the middle of the sixth
century,
and a new and
larger temple-"the largest
of all
temples
known to
us," says
Herodotos-
was laid out on the
site, utilizing
in its foundations the column bases of
the earlier structure. This
temple
was in
process
of
building
when
Poly-
krates was killed about 522
B.C.,
and was not
completed
until Hellenistic
and Roman times. Its foundations with the beautiful column bases cut
and fitted into the
masonry may
still be seen in Samos
to-day.
The
water tunnel was
deservedly regarded
as one of the most remarkable
engineering
works of the ancient world. It
brought
water into the
city
of Samos from a
spring
a little more than a mile
away,
on the other
side of the mountain to the north of the
city.
The water was carried in
pipes
for about half a mile to the
mountain,
then a
tunnel, eight
feet
high
and
eight
feet wide and rather less than half a mile
long,
was
dug
through
the
mountain,
both to
carry
the water
pipes
and to
provide
a
means of
escape
from the
city.
It
emerged
inside the
city
walls and the
water was taken
by
another conduit to a fountain-house somewhere in
the
city.
Tunnels were driven from both ends of the mountain at the
same
time, meeting
in the middle. At the
junction
the section from the
north was found to be
only
about
twenty
feet west of the section from
13
THE PHOENIX
the south and about eleven feet
higher,
and connexion between them was
made without undue
difficulty.
The tunnel must have taken at least
fifteen
years
to build and
required
considerable
knowledge
of both
surveying
and
engineering.
It and the two
temples
are evidence for two
generations
of
tyranny
at
Samos, beginning
as
early perhaps
as the
second
quarter
of the
century,
rather than the usual view that
Polykrates
(ca.
532-522
B.c.)
alone was
tyrant.'6
Many
men of
science, artists,
and
poets
are associated with the Samian
tyranny.
Rhoikos was the architect of the
Heraion;
Theodoros is named
by
some authorities as
joint architect,
and the two are said to have in-
vented the hollow
casting
of bronze statues. Theodoros was one of the most
famous metal workers of the
period
and made
many
well known works
of art such as the bowl dedicated
by
Kroisos at
Delphi
and the emerald
ring
of
Polykrates (Hdt.
1.
51;
3.
41). Mnesarchos,
the
gem engraver
and
father of the
philosopher Pythagoras,
was an older
contemporary
of
Rhoikos and Theodoros.
Pythagoras
himself disliked the
tyranny
and
left
Samos,
first for his earlier visits to
Egypt
and
Babylon,
and
eventually
for Kroton in the West.
Eupalinos
of
Megara
was
brought
as
engineer
for the tunnel. It has been
suggested
that Thales and
Anaximander,
whose
floruit
coincided with the Samian
tyranny,
acted as consultants
for the
surveying
of the tunnel. Demokedes of
Kroton,
the
physician
who
later treated Dareios and
Atossa,
was attracted to Samos
by Polykrates
by
the
large salary
of two talents a
year (Hdt.
3.
131).
Two
poets
are known to have been at the court of the Samian
tyrants.
Ibykos
of
Rhegion
went to Samos in the
days
of
Aiakes,
and there
spent
most of the rest of his
days.
A
poem
found at
Oxyrhynchus
ends with a
graceful compliment
to the
young Polykrates:
Kai a(, IIoXiKpaTrE,
KX,OS
&a0Trov
tT E
s,
cW KaT'
aOLtav Katl e.obv KXCos.
Anakreon of Teos was
brought by Polykrates
as tutor for his
son,
and
remained until
Polykrates' tragic death,
when
Hipparchos
of Athens
sent a
penteconter
to
convey
him to Athens. Most of his
poetry
was
written in Samos.17
The
courageous, though ruthless, foreign policy,
the
magnificent pro-
gramme
of
public works,
and this
galaxy
of artists and
poets
made the
Samian
tyranny
one of the most brilliant and memorable in Greek
history.
I have
deliberately
left to the end the Athenian
tyranny,
which
though
typical
in some of its
aspects,
is in
many
of its most
important
features
'6For full discussion of the
length
of the Samian
tyranny
and details of the
public
works and the
patronage
of the arts below see the article cited in
JHS
74
(1954)
36-43.
"For
Ibykos' poem
and discussion of Anakreon see
Bowra,
Greek
Lyric Poetry 259-264,
287-305.
14
GREEK TYRANNY
unusual. From its
very beginning
the Athenian
tyranny
was a less
violent reaction
against
the older
aristocracy
because of the reforms of
Solon which
preceded
it. Solon had made
property
the basis for
eligibility
to office and so broken the
Eupatrid monopoly
of the
archonship
and
the
Areopagos.
Families of wealth and influence outside the
Eupatrid
circle,
like the Philaids and Peisistratos himself from
Brauron,
were
enabled to hold office
by
the
change.
The Solonian
changes, however,
were not
accepted
without bitter resentment. The
antagonism
between
the two
parties
of the Plain and
Coast,
the
opponents
and
supporters
of
Solon's
reforms, gave
Peisistratos the
opportunity
to
organize
his own
personal party,
the Diakrioi or
Hill,
with which he seized
power
in
561/60.
His
personal following
was not at first
strong enough,
and he was driven
out
twice,
the second time for a
long ten-year exile,
before he
finally
returned victorious in 546. He was
tyrant
then until his death in
528/7,
and his eldest son
Hippias
succeeded to his
power
until he was
expelled
in
511/10.
The
thirty-six years
of
tyranny
were a
period
of enforced
political peace during
which the bitter rivalries of the
nobles,
which had
harassed Athens both before and after
Solon,
died out. Some families
like the Alkmaionidai went into
exile,
others like the Philaids remained
to work with the
tyrants,
still others refrained from
opposition
because
hostages
had been taken and
deposited
in Naxos. We have
already
observed how Peisistratos was able to
carry
out his
policies
within the
framework of the Solonian constitution.
People
were reconciled to the
constitution
during
these
years,
and the difficult transition from birth
to wealth was
peacefully accomplished.
The increase in
prosperity
made
more
people eligible
for the various
offices,
the
property qualifications
of which Solon had established. The
general
effect was a
levelling
of
political
differences and a
widening
of the circle of
political experience,
so that after the
tyranny
Athens
was,
in a real
sense, ready
for Kleis-
thenes' democratic reforms.
The economic
development
of the whole
country
did much to
produce
that middle
class,
with
enough stability
and leisure to devote itself to
politics,
needed for Kleisthenic
democracy.
Peisistratos was able to loan
money
to
poor
farmers to enable them to transfer from cereal cultivation
to more
profitable agricultural crops
such as olives and
vines,
and so had
relieved the severe economic distress which Solon could not cure and had
established on a sound basis the class of small farmers which continued
to be hereafter an
important
element in the Athenian
economy.
At the
same
time,
like all other
tyrants,
he
encouraged
the industrial and
mercantile
development
of the
city.
From about 550 Athenian
pottery
ousts Corinthian from the
markets; black-figure
is followed
by red-figure
as the finest
pottery
of the Greek world. Athens embarked on a remarka-
ble
building programme,
which laid the foundations of the future form
of the
city
and also
immediately provided employment
for artisans of
15
THE PHOENIX
all
sorts, architects, sculptors,
masons,
carpenters,
metal
workers,
and
a host of other trades. The introduction of the tetradrachm
coinage
and
its immediate
popularity
facilitated Athens'
growing
trade.
The urban
development
so characteristic of the
tyrant period
else-
where is
conspicuous
in Athens
also,
but
accompanying
and
comple-
menting
it is a
policy arising
out of the
special
circumstances of
Attica,
that
is,
the unification of Attica around Athens as its centre. Not
long
before Solon's time the
synoicism
of Attica had been
completed by
the
incorporation
of
Eleusis,
but there remained the task of
welding
the
whole into a
strong
and
permanent unity.
And this the
tyrants
accom-
plished by
a
policy
both astute and
imaginative.
Their concern for the
small farmer class as well as the
expansion
of
employment
for artisans
and workmen of all kinds has
already
been noted. To this in no small
measure was due the success of their efforts to create a united state.
The
prosperity
of rural and urban elements was
interdependent; agri-
culture no
longer
had to
provide
for
virtually
the whole
population,
and
with the removal of overstrain on its resources both
groups
shared a new
prosperity.
But there was another side of the unification which has not hitherto
been
given
sufficient
recognition,
the
part played by
festivals and cults.
On the
Acropolis
a new
temple
to Athena was built and the Great Pana-
thenaic festival was made the
symbol
of the
synoicism;
indeed the festival
of the
Synoikia
was its initial
ceremony.
After the
days spent
in athletic
contests,
musical
competitions,
and the famous recitations of
Homer,
the festival culminated on the 28th of Hekatombaion in the
great pro-
cession to the
Acropolis
when the whole
people
made its
offerings
to
Athena. In this
magnificent
and solemn
pageant
the varied life of Attica
found its ideal
representation.
In the
Agora
was built the Altar of the Twelve
Gods,
six
pairs
of the
principal
deities
worshipped throughout
Attica. This was made the
central mile-stone for a road
system
of Attica.
Local cults from different
parts
of Attica received a new
importance
and
dignity by
the establishment of festivals and
temples
in
Athens,
so
that
they
became cults for the whole of Attica. The most famous
is,
of
course,
the festival of
Dionysos
of
Eleutherai,
now
brought
to
Athens;
a
temple
of
Apollo
was built on the south
slope
of the
Acropolis
and in his
honour were
performed
the choruses out of which
grew
the
great
dramatic
competitions
of
tragedy
and
comedy. Similarly
the Eleusinian
Mysteries
became an Athenian
festival;
Artemis of
Brauron,
the
village
from which
Peisistratos
came,
was
given
her
precinct
on the
Acropolis;
the
younger
Peisistratos dedicated an altar to the
Pythian Apollo;
and the enormous
temple
of the
Olympian
Zeus was
begun, although
not
completed,
before
the
expulsion
of the
tyrants.
There is some reason to believe that Solon
16
GREEK TYRANNY
had
begun
this
policy
of
providing
cults for the whole
people,
but un-
doubtedly
it was the
tyrants
who
exploited
it with brilliant
success.l8
Patronage
of the
arts,
a usual feature of the
tyrants' policy,
was more
extensive and more fruitful here than elsewhere.
Vase-painters, sculptors,
architects, poets,
and musicians were drawn to Athens
by
the
generous
opportunities
offered there.
Anyone
who wishes to understand and
appreciate fully
the
genius
of the Peisistratids need
only study
the
amazing progress
in all the arts in the last
years
of the sixth
century
and
the full
flowering
of the fifth
century.
In their
foreign policy
can be seen the same clear
insight,
the same
shrewd
judgement
as to where Athens' future fortunes would lie.
They
maintained
friendly
and
pacific
relations with their
neighbours
in Greece
itself,
but turned their
eyes
to the island
world,
to the
Hellespont,
and
to the Thracian coast. The
tyrant
of Naxos was
assisted,
and
Delos,
where the Ionians celebrated the festival to the Delian
Apollo,
was
purified.
Whether
they
had
any
direct connexion with the
contemporary
tyranny
in Samos we do not know but it is
probable.
North of the Helles-
pont
a
colony
of Athenian settlers was taken
by
Miltiades to the Cherson-
ese. To
Sigeion
on the
south,
which had been for some
years
in
dispute
between Athens and
Lesbos,
an
illegitimate
son of Peisistratos was sent
as
viceroy,
and it
passed
into Athenian
possession.
These two
places
on
either side of the
Hellespont helped
to ensure the safe
passage
of food
and materials from the Black Sea to an Athens no
longer raising
sufficient
grain
for her own needs. Likewise in Thrace the Peisistratids held
mining
property
on the
Strymon
River and had
friendly
relations with
Macedon,
the source of lumber and
ship
timbers. These were
only
tentative
begin-
nings,
but
they lay
in the areas where Athens after the Persian Wars
organized
the Delian
Confederacy,
and foreshadowed her
fifth-century
expansion.
However,
the later
years
of the
tyranny
were clouded
by
the
suspicious
harshness of
Hippias
after the murder of
Hipparchos,
and
by
the
ap-
proaching
shadow of Persia.
Hippias prepared
for the future
by making
his
peace
with Persia and when he was
expelled
medized
openly
and
went to Susa. He was with the Persians at
Marathon,
and members of
his
family accompanied
the
great
Persian
expedition
of
480/79.
The
tyranny
thus
acquired
a double
stigma
in Athens: the natural reaction
against
it
accompanying
the exhilaration of
newly
won
freedom,
a
headier
draught
in Athens than elsewhere for within three
years
Kleis-
thenes introduced the tribal reforms and
democracy;
and also the
stigma
of medism. It is small wonder that the word
tyranny acquired
in Athens
its bitter connotations in the
years immediately following.
Later
gener-
18I hope
to discuss the Peisistratids' contribution to the
synoicism
of Attica and their
establishment of cults and festivals in a
study
of the Athenian
tyranny.
17
THE PHOENIX
ations were nearer the truth when
they
looked back to the
tyranny
as a
golden
age,
6 ekrl
Kpovov
lt3os (Aristotle,
Ath. Pol. 16.
7).
In conclusion we have one more
question
to ask: what was the life
expectancy
of
tyranny
and to what did it lead?
Tyranny rarely
lasted
more than two or three
generations.
This is understandable. The
personal
power
of
tyrants
was
accepted
and
supported
in order to break the
oppressive
rule of the older aristocracies of birth. Two or three
generations
were
enough
to ensure that there could be no return to the old
r6gime.
Then the individual
champions
could be
dispensed with;
in most cases
by
the second
generation
their rule came to be
regarded
as
repressive.
The circumstances
attending
their overthrow differed in each
city,
but
the basic reason was the same:
they
had outlived their
necessity. They
were succeeded
by types
of
government differing
in the
proportion
of
the
population
who now shared in the effective business of adminis-
tration.
Property qualifications might
restrict the number of those who
held office and directed
policy
so that it became a merchant
oligarchy
as at
Corinth,
or as at Athens the
assembly might
be
given
the direction
of
policy
and the
average
citizen
might
hold office and sit on the council
so that it became a
democracy.
In
spite
of
differences,
both the oli-
garchies
and democracies of the classical
period
were
governments
more
broadly
based than
formerly.
The
significance
of the
early tyrannies
was
two-fold.
They brought
to an end forever that
rigid
aristocratic control
which, by denying competence
outside an
arbitrarily
fixed
circle,
ham-
pered growth;
more
important, they provided
the
positive impetus
to
development
in all fields which
encouraged initiative,
enriched both
material and intellectual
life, broadened the horizons of their
cities,
and
prepared
them for the future.
18