[Authors and titles are listed at the end of the review]
In 2016, during his visit to Athens, President Obama said:
We’re indebted to Greece for the most precious of gifts—the truth, the understanding that as individuals of free will, we have the right and the capacity to govern ourselves. For it was here, 25 centuries ago, in the rocky hills of this city, that a new idea emerged. Demokratia. Kratos—the power, the right to rule—comes from demos, the people … [T]he flame first lit here in Athens never died. It was ultimately nurtured by a great Enlightenment. It was fanned by America’s founders…
A powerful statement, indeed. But is that true? Did one and the same political idea link a place, a regime, and the history of the U.S.A? Old and respected roots are a strong support for all forms of government, nor is this a recent attitude: a reference to the ‘constitution of the ancestors and to eminent founders (mythical or historical), was usual even in ancient Greek cities. What matters is to measure the weight of ideal principles and of actual facts, the impact of the political theory and the development of the praxis: this requires an approach capable of disentangling the different faces of a fascinating but complicated subject.
This collection of studies examines some aspects of the multifaceted theme of “democratic tradition”, supplementing to some extent the Brill’s Companion to the Reception of Athenian Democracy. From the Late Middle Ages to the Contemporary Era, edited by Dino Piovan and Giovanni Giorgini in 2021 (Leyden-Boston, Brill). The focus is on the Athenian democracy, rather than on a generic “Greek” or “ancient” democracy. The early Roman Republic, which once was revered as an immortal paradigm for political analysis (so for Machiavelli, commenting on Livy’s first books in his Discorsi), was eventually superseded, when on closer historical scrutiny its archaic history proved untenable. The Roman Empire, conversely, became the admired and/or detested paradigm of all forms of caesarism, in opposition to democratic discourse. As far as ancient Greek democracy is concerned, it is also worth noticing that the tradition has largely marginalized other political experiences in Greece, or Magna Graecia, and polarized the opposition between Athens and Sparta. In fact, the unquestionable primacy of Athenian democracy is quite recent, and largely a function of the more extensive evidence, and of a myth: that of Pericles’ Funeral Oration, as reported by Thucydides in the 2nd book of his historical work, a text which is often quoted or referred to in this volume.
The preface delineates three principal directions in the research: the analysis of similarities and differences between ancient and contemporary democracy, the history of democratic (forms of) governance to the present day, and the reception of ancient models into modern political theory and praxis. Continuity and discontinuity emerge as recurrent elements throughout this discussion; the papers clearly illustrate the evolution of scholarly engagement with this topic, in response to new political challenges, or under the impulse of new sources and new tools for interpreting them. The diachronic sequence of the papers reveals a shift between a broader concept (democracy as the rule of all citizens) and a more ‘restricted’ and critical vision (democracy as the rule of the ‘demos’ in opposition to other factions). Major changes occurred during the 18th century and later because of the development of historicism. Different but still relevant steps are represented by the momentous impact of the Aristotelian Athenaion Politeia (after its publication in 1892), and by the clash of opposite ideologies in the 20th century.
The initial essay by Giovanni Salmeri examines the influence of Greek political thought in the 16th century, especially in Carlo Sigonio’s De republica Atheniensium (1568). It was not the first phase of the debate on Athenian democracy. An intense study of Aristotle’s Politics had been carried out during the Middle Ages and was later complemented by the reading of Plato’s political treatises. Modern republics, such as Florence and Venice, were frequently compared to their ancient predecessors, and Athens eventually emerged as the most exemplary paradigm. However, Sigonio and many other scholars knew well, despite the limited evidence available, that Athens had taken different political forms over time. Thus, political theorists had to choose between two different models: the ‘radical’ democracy, and its ‘tempered’ version, instituted by the sage Solon.
Thucydides instead provided a significant basis for Thomas Hobbes’ interest in ancient democratic systems, and Kinch Hoekstra believes that a comprehensive analysis of Hobbes’ political theory is essential for an accurate interpretation. While Hobbes is not typically regarded as the progenitor of modern and ‘consitutional’ theories of democracy, he is recognised as a strong analyst of the dynamics inherent within those systems, especially regarding the ‘absolute’ power of the demos which can be seen in the radical phases of Athenian politics. Various perspectives on this issue are meticulously discussed, and the very idea of an ‘Hobbesian democracy’ repeatedly challenged. A meticulous reader of Thucydides as he was, Hobbes was well aware of the limits of democratic Athens. Nevertheless, he was convinced that it was a legitimate form of government, which was capable of preserving the rights and the opportunities of a large group of citizens. Using the ancient historian as his main guide, he concluded that all democracies require a form of restricted leadership: even restricted to one single gifted individual, as happened during Pericles’ regime.
Nevertheless, the debate on political theory had not been entirely and uniformly antidemocratic prior to the Enlightment and the French revolution: Maurizio Giangiulio notes that during the 17th and 18th centuries in Europe the discourse regarding democracy did not invariably regard Athens as the exemplar. Scholars engaged in discussions about the negative aspects of popular government, both in ancient and in modern states. Eventually the reference to Athens became commonplace, and it served as a comparative tool for some modern republican entities such as Switzerland, Holland, and Venice. This debate prepared the ground for the political theories and constitutional discussions that occurred during the French revolution.
Luca Jori explores a different dimension: rather than considering the ‘static’ effects in the reception of ancient democratic thought, he investigates its ‘dynamic’ potential. Is there recognisable evidence of ancient theories influencing the developments of modern democracies? The Athenian model had a positive impact on the development of liberalism in the 19th century. As a case study, he uses an important excerpt from Thucydides (2.37.2), which was studied by George Grote and John Stuart Mill. The idea of an ancient paradigm of ‘tolerance’ within civic and political life has been interpreted as indicative of continuity between ancient and modern political experiences.
Ugo Fantasia’s paper digs into the discontinuity in the reception of Athenian democracy that followed the publication of the Aristotelian Athenaion Politeia in 1892. A forgotten detail in the tradition about Aristides shows that even an incorrect element, which has been superseded by subsequent research, may still retain some importance. Plutarch (Life of Aristides, 22,1) is the only source referring to the story that Aristides introduced a reform, opening the civic magistracies in Athens to members of all census classes. This reform is not mentioned in the Constitution of the Athenians so must be false. Until 1892, however, the prestige surrounding the personality of Aristides had beenis being given credit for the alleged reform, and that had an actuinfluence on the public debate in France and in the United States. There was cCriticism was not lakingtoo, had allegedly defaced the well- balance constitution created by Solon. The liberals, instead, saw in this reform an important step towards a complete democratization of the Athenians’ institutions.
Ettore Cinnella’s paper explores a less trodden path: the role of classical culture in the political debate of pre-revolutionary Russia. The most relevant influence was that of German classical culture, but some works inspired by a liberal attitude, like Grote’s, also had an impact. In his book on Athenian democracy, published in 1867, Vasilij Vasil’evskij expressed a positive judgment on the democratic government, but privileged Solon over Cleisthenes, and frequently criticized the radical phase of ancient Athens. Other Russian scholars, whose works remained unknown in Europe, deserve a place in the history of classical scholarship. This is the case of Vladislav Buzeskul, author of the History of the Athenian Democracy (1909), who had a well-informed vision of Pericles and a positive judgment of the structures of the Athenian state but was also well aware of some limits of the Periclean model, as well as of the conservative attitude of the Athenian demos. This paper reminds readers of the importance of forgotten books: except for Rostovcev, only some ‘marxising’ books translated after WWII take account of Russian research on the ancient world.
Dino Piovan discusses the role of Greek democracy in contemporary political theory. The paper provides a well-reasoned synopsis of different theories. This seems useful, considering the problems caused by the present general crisis of democratic praxis and theories. The analysis covers scholars who declared themselves ‘enemies’ as well as ‘friends’ of the ancient democracy. Political theory experienced a major change from the age of liberalism to WWII, and this evolution cannot be overlooked. Thus the position of every scholar needs to be precisely related to the time it was expressed. Isaiah Berlin’s liberal approach to ‘liberty’ was informed by Benjamin Constant’s essay (1819), but he was also influenced by the challenges of the ‘cold war’. The end of the confrontation between the blocks eventually revealed a new (and short-lived) phase in the democratic tradition. If conflicting opinions have been expressed since 1989 about the nature of ancient democracy and its importance in modern political debate, the main issues have actually been the form of political representation, decision-making, and direct democracy. Political theory is not the amusement of a small group of theorists. David Graber, one of the leaders of “Occupy Wall Street,” did not put focus in his books on ancient Athenian democracy, but used evidence from Athens as an instrument to radically question ‘classical’ political theory. Democracy now has to face the charges of being mostly a Western construct, unable to take account of different experiences practiced elsewhere around the globe, and that of recently becoming a tool more efficient in repression than in promotion of freedom.
Paulo Butti de Lima underlines in his closing remarks that the papers in this book are much more than a comfortable collection of stuff about the ‘reception’ of Athenian democracy, since they involve a rich interplay between sources, history, and politics. It is becoming clear that we are at a major turning point: the study of political theory is now led by scholars who have not had a classical education, and trained classicists are at risk of being left on the sidelines of the debate. This is hardly a benefit, and serious consequences may ensue, if the debate develops a ‘global’ approach and a radical orientation to the present, neglecting the legacy of, say, Thucydides or Aristotle. The connection between war and democracy is also rightly underscored. Even if it is central in Pericles’ Funeral Oration, the very idea of fighting (not for rights, but with guns) has become problematic in Western democracies. But the pacifism of the 1960s seems untenable today, and the new cold-war atmosphere apparently requires new attitudes, which could link democratic approaches to frankly repressive political models.
The papers are in Italian. This choice could restrict the volume’s reach. But all the articles originate from a thorough examination of a large and multilingual literature on the topic, offering readers a comprehensive exploration of a subject that involves various historical, philosophical, and political traditions. This book, much like the Companion that inspired it, seeks to bridge the gap between academic disciplines which are increasingly distant. And this is indeed an essential and timely task.
Authors and titles
Ugo Fantasia, Luca Iori, Introduzione
Giovanni Salmeri, Carlo Sigonio e la scoperta dell’Atene classica nella Venezia di metà Cinquecento
Kinch Hoekstra, Thomas Hobbes e la democrazia. L’eredità ateniese
Maurizio Giangiulio, Senza Atene? Costellazioni discorsive democratiche tra XVII e XVIII secolo in Europa. Aspetti e problemi
Luca Iori, George Grote e John Stuart Mill interpreti dell’Epitafio di Pericle
Ugo Fantasia, Prima della Costituzione degli Ateniesi di Aristotele: il mito di Aristide riformatore democratico
Ettore Cinnella, Indagini e riflessioni sulla democrazia ateniese nella Russia prerivoluzionaria
Dino Piovan, Teoria politica e democrazia greca nel XXI secolo
Paulo Butti de Lima, Epilogo. I rivoluzionari democratici ateniesi