CHAPTER V.

ORIGIN OF THE ATTIC STATE.

How the state gradually developed by partly transforming the organs of

the gentile constitution, partly replacing them by new organs and

finally installing real state authorities; how the place of the nation

in arms defending itself through its gentes, phratries and tribes, was

taken by an armed public power of coërcion in the hands of these

authorities and available against the mass of the people; nowhere can we

observe the first act of this drama so well as in ancient Athens. The

essential stages of the various transformations are outlined by Morgan,

but the analysis of the economic causes producing them is largely added

by myself.

In the heroic period, the four tribes of the Athenians were still

installed in separate parts of Attica. Even the twelve phratries

composing them seem to have had separate seats in the twelve different

towns of Cecrops. The constitution was in harmony with the period: a

public meeting (agorâ), a council (bûlê) and a basileus.

As far back as we can trace written history we find the land divided up

and in the possession of private individuals. For during the last period

of the higher stage of barbarism the production of commodities and the

resulting trade had well advanced. Grain, wine and oil were staple

articles. The sea trade on the Aegean Sea drifted more and more out of

the hands of the Phoenicians into those of the Athenians. By the

purchase and sale of land, by continued division of labor between

agriculture and industry, trade and navigation, the members of gentes,

phratries and tribes very soon intermingled. The districts of the

phratry and the tribe received inhabitants who did not belong to these

bodies and, therefore, were strangers in their own homes, although they

were countrymen. For during times of peace, every phratry and every

tribe administered its own affairs without consulting the council of

Athens or the basileus. But inhabitants not belonging to the phratry or

the tribe could not take part in the administration of these bodies.

Thus the well-regulated functions of the gentile organs became so

disarranged that relief was already needed during the heroic period. A

constitution attributed to Theseus was introduced. The main feature of

this change was the institution of a central administration in Athens. A

part of the affairs that had so long been conducted autonomously by the

tribes was declared collective business and transferred to a general

council in Athens. This step of the Athenians went farther than any ever

taken by the nations of America. For the simple federation of autonomous

tribes was now replaced by the conglomeration of all tribes into one

single body. The next result was a common Athenian law, standing above

the legal traditions of the tribes and gentes. It bestowed on the

citizens of Athens certain privileges and legal protection, even in a

territory that did not belong to their tribe. This meant another blow to

the gentile constitution; for it opened the way to the admission of

citizens who were not members of any Attic tribe and stood entirely

outside of the Athenian gentile constitution.

A second institution attributed to Theseus was the division of the

entire nation into three classes regardless of the gentes, phratries and

tribes: eupatrides or nobles, geomoroì or farmers, and demiurgoi or

tradesmen. The exclusive privilege of the nobles to fill the offices

was included in this innovation. Apart from this privilege the new

division remained ineffective, as it did not create any legal

distinctions between the classes. But it is important, because it shows

us the new social elements that had developed in secret. It shows that

the habitual holding of gentile offices by certain families had already

developed into a practically uncontested privilege; that these families,

already powerful through their wealth, began to combine outside of their

gentes into a privileged class; and that the just arising state

sanctioned this assumption. It shows furthermore that the division of

labor between farmers and tradesmen had grown strong enough to contest

the supremacy of the old gentile and tribal division of society. And

finally it proclaims the irreconcilable opposition of gentile society to

the state. The first attempt to form a state broke up the gentes by

dividing their members against one another and opposing a privileged

class to a class of disowned belonging to two different branches of

production.

The ensuing political history of Athens up to the time of Solon is only

incompletely known. The office of basileus became obsolete. Archons

elected from the ranks of the nobility occupied the leading position in

the state. The power of the nobility increased continually, until it

became unbearable about the year 600 before Christ. The principal means

for stifling the liberty of the people were--money and usury. The main

seat of the nobility was in and around Athens. There the sea trade and

now and then a little convenient piracy enriched them and concentrated

the money into their hands. From this point the gradually arising money

power penetrated like corrugating acid into the traditional modes of

rural existence founded on natural economy. The gentile constitution is

absolutely irreconcilable with money rule. The ruin of the Attic

farmers coïncided with the loosening of the old gentile bonds that

protected them. The debtor's receipt and the pawning of the

property--for the mortgage was also invented by the Athenians--cared

neither for the gens nor for the phratry. But the old gentile

constitution knew nothing of money, advance and debt. Hence the ever

more virulently spreading money rule of the nobility developed a new

legal custom, securing the creditor against the debtor and sanctioning

the exploitation of the small farmer by the wealthy. All the rural

districts of Attica were crowded with mortgage columns bearing the

legend that the lot on which they stood was mortgaged to such and such

for so much. The fields that were not so designated had for the most

part been sold on account of overdue mortgages or interest and

transferred to the aristocratic usurers. The farmer could thank his

stars, if he was granted permission to live as a tenant on one-sixth of

the product of his labor and to pay five-sixths to his new master in the

form of rent. Worse still, if the sale of the lot did not bring

sufficient returns to cover the debt, or if such a debt had been

contracted without a lien, then the debtor had to sell his children into

slavery abroad in order to satisfy the claim of the creditor. The sale

of the children by the father--that was the first fruit of paternal law

and monogamy! And if that did not satisfy the bloodsuckers, they could

sell the debtor himself into slavery. Such was the pleasant dawn of

civilization among the people of Attica.

Formerly, while the condition of the people was in keeping with gentile

traditions, a similar downfall would have been impossible. But here it

had come about, nobody knew how. Let us return for a moment to the

Iroquois. The state of things that had imposed itself on the Athenians

almost without their doing, so to say, and assuredly against their will,

was inconceivable among the Indians. There the ever unchanging mode of

production could at no time generate such conflicts as a distinction

between rich and poor, exploiters and exploited, caused by external

conditions. The Iroquois were far from controlling the forces of nature,

but within the limits drawn for them by nature they dominated their own

production. Apart from a failure of the crops in their little gardens,

the exhaustion of the fish supply in their lakes and rivers or of the

game stock in their forests, they always knew what would be the outcome

of their mode of gaining a living. A more or less abundant supply of

food, that would come of it. But the outcome could never be any

unpremeditated social upheavals, breaking of gentile bonds or division

of the gentiles against one another by conflicting class interests.

Production was carried on in the most limited manner; but--the producers

controlled their own product. This immense advantage of barbarian

production was lost in the transition to civilization. To win it back on

the basis of man's present gigantic control of nature and of the free

association rendered possible by it, that will be the task of the next

generations.

Not so among the Greeks. The advent of private property in herds of

cattle and articles of luxury led to an exchange between individuals, to

a transformation of products into commodities. Here is the root of the

entire revolution that followed. When the producers did no longer

consume their own product, but released their hold of it in exchange for

another's product, then they lost the control of it. They did not know

any more what became of it. There was a possibility that the product

might be turned against the producers for the purpose of exploiting and

oppressing them. No society can, therefore, retain for any length of

time the control of its own production and of the social effects of the

mode of production, unless it abolishes exchange between individuals.

How rapidly after the establishment of individual exchange and after the

transformation of products into commodities the product manifests its

rule over the producer, the Athenians were soon to learn. Along with the

production of marketable commodities came the tilling of the soil by

individual cultivators for their own account, soon followed by

individual ownership of the land. Along came also the money, that

general commodity for which all others could be exchanged. But when men

invented money they little suspected that they were creating a new

social power, that one universal power before which the whole of society

must bow down. It was this new power, suddenly sprung into existence

without the forethought and intention of its own creators, that vented

its rule on the Athenians with the full brutality of youth.

What was to be done? The old gentile organization had not only proved

impotent against the triumphant march of money; it was also absolutely

incapable of containing within its confines any such thing as money,

creditors, debtors and forcible collection of debts. But the new social

power was upon them and neither pious wishes nor a longing for the

return of the good old times could drive money and usury from the face

of the earth. Moreover, gentile constitution had suffered a number of

minor defeats. The indiscriminate mingling of the gentiles and phrators

in the whole of Attica, and especially in Athens, had assumed larger

proportions from generation to generation. Still even now a citizen of

Athens was not allowed to sell his residence outside of his gens,

although he could do so with plots of land. The division of labor

between the different branches of production--agriculture, trades,

numberless specialties within the trades, commerce, navigation,

etc.--had developed more fully with the progress of industry and

traffic. The population was now divided according to occupations into

rather well defined groups, everyone of which had separate interests not

guarded by the gens or phratry and therefore necessitating the creation

of new offices. The number of slaves had increased considerably and must

have surpassed by far that of the free Athenians even at this early

stage. Gentile society originally knew no slavery and was, therefore,

ignorant of any means to hold this mass of bondsmen in check. And

finally, commerce had attracted a great many strangers who settled in

Athens for the sake of the easier living it afforded. According to the

old constitution, the strangers had neither civil rights nor the

protection of the law. Though tacitly admitted by tradition, they

remained a disturbing and foreign element.

In short, gentile constitution approached its doom. Society was daily

growing more and more beyond it. It was powerless to stop or allay even

the most distressing evils that had grown under its very eyes. But in

the meantime the state had secretly developed. The new groups formed by

division of labor, first between city and country, then between the

various branches of city industry, had created new organs for the care

of their interests. Public offices of every description had been

instituted. And above all the young state needed its own fighting

forces. Among the seafaring Athenians this had to be at first only a

navy, for occasional short expeditions and the protection of the

merchant vessels. At some uncertain time before Solon, the naukrariai

were instituted, little territorial districts, twelve in each tribe.

Every naukraria had to furnish, equip and man a war vessel and to detail

two horsemen. This arrangement was a twofold attack on the gentile

constitution. In the first place it created a public power of coërcion

that did no longer absolutely coincide with the entirety of the armed

nation. In the second place it was the first division of the people for

public purposes, not by groups of kinship, but by local residence. We

shall soon see what that signified.

As the gentile constitution could not come to the assistance of the

exploited people, they could look only to the rising state. And the

state brought help in the form of the constitution of Solon. At the same

time it added to its own strength at the expense of the old

constitution. Solon opened the series of so-called political revolutions

by an infringement on private property. We pass over the means by which

this reform was accomplished in the year 594 B. C. or thereabout. Ever

since, all revolutions have been revolutions for the protection of one

kind of property against another kind of property. They cannot protect

one kind without violating another. In the great French revolution the

feudal property was sacrificed for the sake of saving bourgeois

property. In Solon's revolution, the property of the creditors had to

make concessions to the property of the debtors. The debts were simply

declared illegal. We are not acquainted with the accurate details, but

Solon boasts in his poëms that he removed the mortgage columns from the

indented lots and enabled all who had fled or been sold abroad for debts

to return home. This was only feasible by an open violation of private

property. And indeed, all so-called political revolutions were started

for the protection of one kind of property by the confiscation, also

called theft, of another kind of property. It is absolutely true that

for more than 2,500 years private property could only be protected by

the violation of private property.

But now a way had to be found to avoid the return of such an enslavement

of the free Athenians. This was first attempted by general measures, e.

g., the prohibition of contracts giving the person of the debtor in

lien. Furthermore a maximum limit was fixed for the amount of land any

one individual could own, in order to keep the craving of the nobility

for the land of the farmers within reasonable bounds. Constitutional

amendments were next in order. The following deserve special

consideration:

The council was increased to four hundred members, one hundred from each

tribe. Here, then, the tribe still served as a basis. But this was the

only remnant of the old constitution that was transferred to the new

body politic. For otherwise Solon divided the citizens into four classes

according to their property in land and its yield. Five hundred, three

hundred and one hundred and fifty medimnoi of grain (1 medimnos equals

1.16 bushels) were the minimum yields of the first three classes.

Whoever had less land or none at all belonged to the fourth class. Only

members of the first three classes could hold office; the highest

offices were filled by the first class. The fourth class had only the

right to speak and vote in the public council. But here all officials

were elected, here they had to give account, here all the laws were

made, and here the fourth class was in the majority. The aristocratic

privileges were partly renewed in the form of privileges of wealth, but

the people retained the decisive power. The four classes also formed the

basis for the reorganization of the fighting forces. The first two

classes furnished the horsemen; the third had to serve as heavy

infantry; the fourth was employed as light unarmored infantry and had to

man the navy. Probably the last class also received wages in this case.

An entirely new element is thus introduced into the constitution:

private property. The rights and duties of the citizens are graduated

according to their property in land. Wherever the classification by

property gains ground, there the old groups of blood relationship give

way. Gentile constitution has suffered another defeat.

However, the gradation of political rights according to private property

was not one of those institutions without which a state cannot exist. It

may have been ever so important in the constitutional development of

some states. Still a good many others, and the most completely developed

at that, had no need of it. Even in Athens it played only a passing

role. Since the time of Aristides, all offices were open to all the

citizens.

During the next eighty years the Athenian society gradually drifted into

the course on which it further developed in the following centuries. The

outrageous land speculation of the time before Solon had been fettered,

likewise the excessive concentration of property in land. Commerce,

trades and artisan handicrafts, which were carried on in an ever larger

scale as slave labor increased, became the ruling factors in gaining a

living. Public enlightenment advanced. Instead of exploiting their own

fellow citizens in the old brutal style, the Athenians now exploited

mainly the slaves and the customers outside. Movable property, wealth in

money, slaves and ships, increased more and more. But instead of being a

simple means for the purchase of land, as in the old stupid times, it

had now become an end in itself. The new class of industrial and

commercial owners of wealth now waged a victorious competition against

the old nobility. The remnants of the old gentile constitution lost

their last hold. The gentes, phratries and tribes, the members of which

now were dispersed all over Attica and completely intermixed, had thus

become unavailable as political groups. A great many citizens of Athens

did not belong to any gens. They were immigrants who had been adopted

into citizenship, but not into any of the old groups of kinship.

Besides, there was a steadily increasing number of foreign immigrants

who were only protected by traditional sufferance.

Meanwhile the struggles of the parties proceeded. The nobility tried to

regain their former privileges and for a short time recovered their

supremacy, until the revolution of Kleisthenes (509 B. C.) brought their

final downfall and completed the ruin of gentile law.

In his new constitution, Kleisthenes ignored the four old tribes founded

on the gentes and phratries. Their place was taken by an entirely new

organization based on the recently attempted division of the citizens

into naukrariai according to residence. No longer was membership in a

group of kindred the dominant fact, but simply local residence. Not the

nation, but the territory was now divided; the inhabitants became mere

political fixtures of the territory.

The whole of Attica was divided into one hundred communal districts,

so-called demoi, every one of which was autonomous. The citizens living

in a demos (demotoi) elected their official head (demarchos), treasurer

and thirty judges with jurisdiction in minor cases. They also received

their own temple and divine guardian or heros, whose priest they

elected. The control of the demos was in the hands of the council of

demotoì. This is, as Morgan correctly remarks, the prototype of the

autonomous American township. The modern state in its highest

development ended in the same unit with which the rising state began its

career in Athens.

Ten of these units (demoi) formed a tribe, which, however, was now

designated as local tribe in order to distinguish it from the old sex

tribe. The local tribe was not only an autonomous political, but also a

military group. It elected the phylarchos or tribal head who commanded

the horsemen, the taxiarchos commanding the infantry and the strategic

leader, who was in command of the entire contingent raised in the tribal

territory by conscription. The local tribe furthermore furnished,

equipped and fully manned five war vessels. It was designated by the

name of the Attic hero who was its guardian deity. It elected fifty

councilmen into the council of Athens.

Thus we arrive at the Athenian state, governed by a council of five

hundred elected by and representing the ten tribes and subject to the

vote of the public meeting, where every citizen could enter and vote.

Archons and other officials attended to the different departments of

administration and justice.

By this new constitution and by the admission of a large number of

aliens, partly freed slaves, partly immigrants, the organs of gentile

constitution were displaced in public affairs. They became mere private

and religious clubs. But their moral influence, the traditional

conceptions and views of the old gentile period, survived for a long

time and expired only gradually. This was evident in another state

institution.

We have seen that an essential mark of the state consists in a public

power of coërcion divorced from the mass of the people. Athens possessed

at that time only a militia and a navy equipped and manned directly by

the people. These afforded protection against external enemies and held

the slaves in check, who at that time already made up the large majority

of the population. For the citizens, this coërcive power at first only

existed in the shape of the police, which is as old as the state. The

innocent Frenchmen of the 18th century, therefore, had the habit of

speaking not of civilized, but of policed nations (nations policées).

The Athenians, then, provided for a police in their new state, a

veritable "force" of bowmen on foot and horseback. This police force

consisted--of slaves. The free Athenian regarded this police duty as so

degrading that he preferred being arrested by an armed slave rather than

lending himself to such an ignominious service. That was still a sign of

the old gentile spirit. The state could not exist without a police, but

as yet it was too young and did not command sufficient moral respect to

give prestige to an occupation that necessarily appeared ignominious to

the old gentiles.

How well this state, now completed in its main outlines, suited the

social condition of the Athenians was apparent by the rapid growth of

wealth, commerce and industry. The distinction of classes on which the

social and political institutions are resting was no longer between

nobility and common people, but between slaves and freemen, aliens and

citizens. At the time of the greatest prosperity the whole number of

free Athenian citizens, women and children included, amounted to about

90,000; the slaves of both sexes numbered 365,000 and the

aliens--foreigners and freed slaves--45,000. Per capita of each adult

citizen there were, therefore, at least eighteen slaves and more than

two aliens. The great number of slaves is explained by the fact that

many of them worked together in large factories under supervision. The

development of commerce and industry brought about an accumulation and

concentration of wealth in a few hands. The mass of the free citizens

were impoverished and had to face the choice of either competing with

their own labor against slave labor, which was considered ignoble and

vile, besides promising little success, or to be ruined. Under the

prevailing circumstances they necessarily chose the latter course and

being in the majority they ruined the whole Attic state. Not democracy

caused the downfall of Athens, as the European glorifiers of princes and

lickspittle schoolmasters would have us believe, but slavery

ostracizing the labor of the free citizen.

The origin of the state among the Athenians presents a very typical form

of state organization. For it took place without any marring external

interference or internal obstruction--the usurpation of Pisistratos left

no trace of its short duration. It shows the direct rise of a highly

developed form of a state, the democratic republic, out of gentile

society. And finally, we are sufficiently acquainted with all the

essential details of the process.

The origin of the family, private property, and the state · 第 6 / 10 章