1. _The Prehistoric Period._--The history of primitive Athens is
involved in the same obscurity which enshrouds the early development of
most of the Greek city-states. The Homeric poems scarcely mention
Attica, and the legends, though numerous, are rarely of direct
historical value. In the Minoan epoch Athens is proved by the
archaeological remains to have been a petty kingdom scarcely more
important than many other Attic communities, yet enjoying a more
unbroken course of development than the leading states of that period.
This accords with the cherished tradition which made the Athenians
children of the soil, and free from admixture with conquering tribes.
Many legends, however, and the later state organization, point to an
immigration of an "Ionian" aristocracy in late Mycenaean days. These
Ionian newcomers are almost certainly responsible for the absorption of
the numerous independent communities of Attica into a central state of
Athens under a powerful monarchy (see THESEUS), for the introduction of
new cults, and for the division of the people into four tribes whose
names--Geleontes, Hopletes, Argadeis and Aegicoreis--recur in several
true Ionian towns. This centralization of power (_Synoecism_), to which
many Greek peoples never attained, laid the first foundations of
Athenian greatness. But in other respects the new constitution tended to
arrest development. When the monarchy was supplanted in the usual Greek
fashion by a hereditary nobility--a process accomplished, according to
tradition, between about 1000 and 683 B.C.--all power was appropriated
by a privileged class of Eupatridae (q.v.); the Geomori and Demiurgi,
who formed the bulk of the community, enjoyed no political rights. It
was to their control over the machinery of law that the Eupatridae owed
their predominance. The aristocratic council of the Areopagus (q.v.)
constituted the chief criminal court, and nominated the magistrates,
among whom the chief archon (q.v.) passed judgment in family suits,
controlled admission to the genos or clan, and consequently the
acquisition of the franchise. This system was further supported by
religious prescriptions which the nobles retained as a corporate secret.
Assisted no doubt by their judicial control, the Eupatridae also tended
to become sole owners of the land, reducing the original freeholders or
tenants to the position of serfs. During this period Athens seems to
have made little use of her militia, commanded by the polemarch, or of
her navy, which was raised in special local divisions known as
Naucraries (see NAUCRARY); hence no military _esprit de corps_ could
arise to check the Eupatrid ascendancy. Nor did the commons obtain
relief through any commercial or colonial enterprises such as those
which alleviated social distress in many other Greek states. The first
attack upon the aristocracy proceeded from a young noble named Cylon,
who endeavoured to become tyrant about 630 B.C. The people helped to
crush this movement; yet discontent must have been rife among them, for
in 611 the Eupatrids commissioned Draco (q.v.), a junior magistrate, to
draft and publish a code of criminal law. This was a notable concession,
by which the nobles lost that exclusive legal knowledge which had formed
one of their main instruments of oppression.
2. _The Rise of Athens._--A still greater danger grew out of the
widespread financial distress, which was steadily driving many of the
agricultural population into slavery and threatened the entire state
with ruin. After a protracted war with the neighbouring Megarians had
accentuated the crisis the Eupatridae gave to one of their number, the
celebrated Solon (q.v.), free power to remodel the whole state (594). By
his economic legislation Solon placed Athenian agriculture once more
upon a sound footing, and supplemented this source of wealth by
encouraging commercial enterprise, thus laying the foundation of his
country's material prosperity. His constitutional reforms proved less
successful, for, although he put into the hands of the people various
safeguards against oppression, he could not ensure their use in
practice. After a period of disorder and party-feud among the nobles the
new constitution was superseded in fact, if not in form, by the
autocratic rule of Peisistratus (q.v.), and his sons Hippias and
Hipparchus. The age of despotism, which lasted, with interruptions, from
560 to 510, was a period of great prosperity for Athens. The rulers
fostered agriculture, stimulated commerce and industry (notably the
famous Attic ceramics), adorned the city with public works and temples,
and rendered it a centre of culture. Their vigorous foreign policy first
made Athens an Aegean power and secured connexions with numerous
mainland powers. Another result of the tyranny was the weakening of the
undue influence of the nobles and the creation of a national Athenian
spirit in place of the ancient clan-feeling.
The equalization of classes was already far advanced when towards the
end of the century a nobleman of the Alcmaeonid family, named
Cleisthenes (q.v.), who had taken the chief part in the final expulsion
of the tyrants, acquired ascendancy as leader of the commons. The
constitution which he promulgated (508/7) gave expression to the change
of political feeling by providing a national basis of franchise and
providing a new state organization. By making effective the powers of
the Ecclesia (Popular Assembly) the Boule (Council) and Heliaea,
Cleisthenes became the true founder of Athenian democracy.
This revolution was accompanied by a conflict with Sparta and other
powers. But a spirit of harmony and energy now breathed within the
nation, and in the ensuing wars Athens worsted powerful enemies like
Thebes and Chalcis (506). A bolder stroke followed in 500, when a force
was sent to support the Ionians in revolt against Persia and took part
in the sack of Sardis. After the failure of this expedition the
Athenians apparently became absorbed in a prolonged struggle with Aegina
(q.v.). In 493 the imminent prospect of a Persian invasion brought into
power men like Themistocles and Miltiades (qq.v.), to whose firmness
and insight the Athenians largely owed their triumph in the great
campaign of 490 against Persia. After a second political reaction, the
prospect of a second Persian war, and the naval superiority of Aegina
led to the assumption of a bolder policy. In 483 Themistocles overcame
the opposition of Aristides (q.v.), and passed his famous measure
providing for a large increase of the Athenian fleet. In the great
invasion of 480-479 the Athenians displayed an unflinching resolution
which could not be shaken even by the evacuation and destruction of
their native city. Though the traditional account of this war
exaggerates the services of Athens as compared with the other champions
of Greek independence, there can be no doubt that the ultimate victory
was chiefly due to the numbers and efficiency of the Athenian fleet, and
to the wise policy of her great statesman Themistocles (see SALAMIS,
PLATAEA).
3. _Imperial Athens._--After the Persian retreat and the reoccupation of
their city the Athenians continued the war with unabated vigour. Led by
Aristides and Cimon they rendered such prominent service as to receive
in return the formal leadership of the Greek allies and the presidency
of the newly formed Delian League (q.v.). The ascendancy acquired in
these years eventually raised Athens to the rank of an imperial state.
For the moment it tended to impair the good relations which had
subsisted between Athens and Sparta since the first days of the Persian
peril. But so long as Cimon's influence prevailed the ideal of "peace at
home and the complete humiliation of Persia" was steadily unheld.
Similarly the internal policy of Athens continued to be shaped by the
conservatives. The only notable innovations since the days of
Cleisthenes had been the reduction of the archonship to a routine
magistracy appointed partly by lot (487), and the rise of the ten
elective strategi (generals) as chief executive officers (see
STRATEGUS). But the triumph of the navy in 480 and the great expansion
of commerce and industry had definitely shifted the political centre of
gravity from the yeoman class of moderate democrats to the more radical
party usually stigmatized as the "sailor rabble." Though Themistocles
soon lost his influence, his party eventually found a new leader in
Ephialtes and after the failure of Cimon's foreign policy (see CIMON)
triumphed over the conservatives. The year 461 marks the reversal of
Athenian policy at home and abroad. By cancelling the political power of
the Areopagus and multiplying the functions of the popular law-courts,
Ephialtes abolished the last checks upon the sovereignty of the commons.
His successor, Pericles, who commonly ranked as the "completer of the
democracy," merely developed the full democracy so as to secure its
effectual as well as its theoretical supremacy. The foreign policy of
Athens was now directed towards an almost reckless expansion (see
PERICLES). The unparalleled success of the Athenian arms at this period
extended the bounds of empire to their farthest limits. Besides securing
her Aegean possessions and her commerce by the defeat of Corinth and
Aegina, her last rivals on sea, Athens acquired an extensive dominion in
central Greece and for a time quite overshadowed the Spartan land-power.
The rapid loss of the new conquests after 447 proved that Athens lacked
a sufficient land-army to defend permanently so extensive a frontier.
Under the guidance of Pericles the Athenians renounced the unprofitable
rivalry with Sparta and Persia, and devoted themselves to the
consolidation and judicious extension of their maritime influence.
The years of the supremacy of Pericles (443-429) are on the whole the
most glorious in Athenian history. In actual extent of territory the
empire had receded somewhat, but in point of security and organization
it now stood at its height. The Delian confederacy lay completely under
Athenian control, and the points of strategic importance were largely
held by cleruchies (q.v.; see also PERICLES) and garrisons. Out of a
citizen body of over 50,000 freemen, reinforced by mercenaries and
slaves, a superb fleet exceeding 300 sail and an army of 30,000 drilled
soldiers could be mustered. The city itself, with its fortifications
extending to the port of Peiraeus, was impregnable to a land attack. The
commerce of Athens extended from Egypt and Colchis to Etruria and
Carthage, and her manufactures, which attracted skilled operatives from
many lands, found a ready sale all over the Mediterranean. With tolls,
and the tribute of the Delian League, a fund of 9700 talents
(L2,300,000) was amassed in the treasury.
Yet the material prosperity of Athens under Pericles was less notable
than her brilliant attainments in every field of culture. Her
development since the Persian wars had been extremely rapid, but did not
reach its climax till the latter part of the century. No city ever
adorned herself with such an array of temples, public buildings and
works of art as the Athens of Pericles and Pheidias. Her achievements in
literature are hardly less great. The Attic drama of the period produced
many great masterpieces, and the scientific thought of Europe in the
departments of logic, ethics, rhetoric and history mainly owes its
origin to a new movement of Greek thought which was largely fostered by
the patronage of Pericles himself. Besides producing numerous men of
genius herself Athens attracted all the great intellects of Greece. The
brilliant summary of the historian Thucydides in the famous Funeral
Speech of Pericles (delivered in 430), in which the social life, the
institutions and the culture of his country are set forth as a model,
gives a substantially true picture of Athens in its greatest days.
This brilliant epoch, however, was not without its darker side. The
payment for public service which Pericles had introduced may have
contributed to raise the general level of culture of the citizens, but
it created a dangerous precedent and incurred the censure of notable
Greek thinkers. Moreover, all this prosperity was obtained at the
expense of the confederates, whom Athens exploited in a somewhat selfish
and illiberal manner. In fact it was the cry of "tyrant city" which went
furthest to rouse public opinion in Greece against Athens and to bring
on the Peloponnesian War (q.v.) which ruined the Athenian empire
(431-404). The issue of this conflict was determined less by any
intrinsic superiority on the part of her enemies than by the blunders
committed by a people unable to carry out a consistent foreign policy on
its own initiative, and served since Pericles by none but selfish or
short-sighted advisers. It speaks well for the patriotic devotion and
discipline of her commons that Athens, weakened by plague and military
disasters, should have withstood for so long the blows of her numerous
enemies from without, and the damage inflicted by traitors within her
walls (see ANTIPHON, THERAMENES).
4. _The Fourth Century_--After the complete defeat of Athens by land and
sea, it was felt that her former services on behalf of Greece and her
high culture should exempt her from total ruin. Though stripped of her
empire, Athens obtained very tolerable terms from her enemies. The
democratic constitution, which had been supplanted for a while by a
government of oligarchs, but was restored in 403 after the latter's
misrule had brought about their own downfall (see CRITIAS, THERAMENES,
THRASYBULUS), henceforth stood unchallenged by the Greeks. Indeed the
spread of democracy elsewhere increased the prestige of the Athenian
administration, which had now reached a high pitch of efficiency.
Athenian art and literature in the 4th century declined but slightly
from their former standard; philosophy and oratory reached a standard
which was never again equalled in antiquity and may still serve as a
model. In the wars of the period Athens took a prominent part with a
view to upholding the balance of power, joining the Corinthian League in
395, and assisting Thebes against Sparta after 378, Sparta against
Thebes after 369. Her generals and admirals, Conon, Iphicrates,
Chabrias, Timotheus, distinguished themselves by their military skill,
and partially recovered their country's predominance in the Aegean,
which found expression in the temporary renewal of the Delian League
(q.v.). By the middle of the century Athens was again the leading power
in Greece. When Philip of Macedon began to grow formidable she seemed
called upon once more to champion the liberties of Greece. This ideal,
when put forward by the consummate eloquence of Demosthenes and other
orators, created great enthusiasm among the Athenians, who at times
displayed all their old vigour in opposing Philip, notably in the
decisive campaign of 338. But these outbursts of energy were too
spasmodic, and popular opinion repeatedly veered back in favour of the
peace-party. With her diminished resources Athens could not indeed hope
to cope with the great Macedonian king; however much we may sympathize
with the generous ambition of the patriots, we must admit that in the
light of hard facts their conduct appears quixotic.
5. _The Hellenistic Period._--Philip and Alexander, who sincerely
admired Athenian culture and courted a zealous co-operation against
Persia, treated the conquered city with marked favour. But the people
would not resign themselves to playing a secondary part, and watched for
every opportunity to revolt. The outbreak headed by Athens after
Alexander's death (323) led to a stubborn conflict with Macedonia. After
his victory the regent Antipater punished Athens by the loss of her
remaining dependencies, the proscription of her chief patriots, and the
disfranchisement of 12,000 citizens. The Macedonian garrison which was
henceforth stationed in Attic territory prevented the city from taking a
prominent part in the wars of the Diadochi. Cassander placed Athens
under the virtual autocracy of Demetrius of Phalerum (317-307), and
after the temporary liberation by Demetrius Poliorcetes (306-300),
secured his interests through a dictator named Lachares, who lost the
place again to Poliorcetes after a siege (295). After a vain attempt to
expel the garrison in 287, the Athenians regained their liberty while
Macedonia was thrown into confusion by the Celts, and in 279 rendered
good service against the invaders of the latter nation with a fleet off
Thermopylae. When Antigonus Gonatas threatened to restore Macedonian
power in Greece, the Athenians, supported perhaps by the king of Egypt,
formed a large defensive coalition; but in the ensuing "Chremonidean
War" (266-263) a naval defeat off Andros led to their surrender and the
imposition of a Macedonian garrison. The latter was finally withdrawn in
229 by the good offices of Aratus (q.v.). At this period Athens was
altogether overshadowed in material strength by the great Hellenistic
monarchies and even by the new republican leagues of Greece; but she
could still on occasion display great energy and patriotism. The
prestige of her past history had now perhaps attained its zenith. Her
democracy was respected by the Macedonian kings; the rulers of Egypt,
Syria, and especially of Pergamum, courted her favour by handsome
donations of edifices and works of art, to which the citizens replied by
unbecoming flattery, even to the extent of creating new tribes named
after their benefactors. If Athens lost her supremacy in the fields of
science and scholarship to Alexandria, she became more than ever the
home of philosophy, while Menander and the other poets of the New Comedy
made Athenian life and manners known throughout the civilized world.
6. _Relations with the Roman Republic._--In 228 Athens entered into
friendly intercourse with Rome, in whose interest she endured the
desperate attacks of Philip V. of Macedonia (200-199). In return for
help against King Perseus she acquired some new possessions, notably the
great mart of Delos, which became an Athenian cleruchy (166). By her
treacherous attack upon the frontier-town of Oropus (156) Athens
indirectly brought about the conflict between Rome and the Achaean
League which resulted in the eventual loss of Greek independence, but
remained herself a free town with rights secured by treaty. In spite of
the favours displayed by Rome, the more radical section of the people
began to chafe at the loss of their international importance. This
discontent was skilfully fanned by Mithradates the Great at the outset
of his Roman campaigns. His emissary, the philosopher Aristion, induced
the people to declare war against Rome and to place him in chief
command. The town with its port stood a long siege against Sulla, but
was stormed in 86. The conqueror allowed his soldiers to loot, but
inflicted no permanent punishment upon the people. This war left Athens
poverty-stricken and stripped of her commerce: her only importance now
lay in the philosophical schools, which were frequented by many young
Romans of note (Cicero, Atticus, Horace, &c.). Greek became fashionable
at Rome, and a visit to Athens a sort of pilgrimage for educated Romans
(cf. Propertius iv. 21: "Magnum iter ad doctas proficisci cogor
Athenas"). In the great civil wars Athens sided with Pompey and held out
against Caesar's lieutenants, but received a free pardon "in
consideration of her great dead." Similarly the triumvirs after Philippi
condoned her enthusiasm for the cause of Brutus. Antony repeatedly made
Athens his headquarters and granted her several new possessions,
including Eretria and Aegina--grants which Octavian subsequently
revoked.
7. _The Roman Empire._--Under the new settlement Athens remained a free
and sovereign city--a boon which she repaid by zealous Caesar-worship,
for the favours bestowed upon her tended to pauperize her citizens and
to foster their besetting sin of calculating flattery. Hadrian displayed
his special fondness for the city by raising new buildings and relieving
financial distress. He amended the constitution in some respects, and
instituted a new national festival, the Panhellenica. In the period of
the Antonines the endowment of professors out of the imperial treasury
gave Athens a special status as a university town. Her whole energies
seem henceforth devoted to academic pursuits; the military training of
her youth was superseded by courses in philosophy and rhetoric; the
chief organs of administration, the revived Areopagus and the senior
Strategus, became as it were an education office. Save for an incursion
by Goths in A.D. 267 and a temporary occupation by Alaric in 395, Athens
spent the remaining centuries of the ancient world in quiet prosperity.
The rhetorical schools experienced a brilliant revival under Constantine
and his successors, when Athens became the _alma mater_ of many notable
men, including Julian, Libanius, Basil and Gregory of Nazianzus, and in
her professors owned the last representatives of a humane and moralized
paganism. The freedom of teaching was first curtailed by Theodosius I.;
the edict of Justinian (529), forbidding the study of philosophy, dealt
the death-blow to ancient Athens.
The authorities for the history of ancient Athens will mostly be found
under GREECE: _History_, and the various biographies. The following
books deal with special periods or subjects only:--(1) _Early Athens_:
W. Warde Fowler, _The City-State_, ch. vi. (London, 1893). (2) _The
fifth and fourth centuries_: the "Constitution of Athens," ascribed to
Xenophon; W. Oncken, _Athen und Hellas_ (Leipzig, 1865); U. v.
Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, _Aus Kydathen_ (Berlin, 1880); L. Whibley,
_Political Parties at Athens_ (Cambridge, 1889); G. Gilbert, _Beitrage
zur inneren Geschichte Athens_ (Leipzig, 1877); J. Beloch, _Die
attische Politik seit Perikles_ (Leipzig, 1884). (3) _The Hellenistic
and Roman periods_: J.P. Mahaffy, _Greek Life and Thought_, from 323
to 146 (London, 1887), chs. v., vi., xvii.; A. Holm, _Greek History_
(Eng. trans., London, 1898), iv. chs. vi. and xxiii.;
Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, _Antigonos von Karystos_ (Berlin, 1881), pp.
178-291; W. Capes, _University Life in Ancient Athens_ (London, 1877);
A. Dumont, _Essai sur l'Ephebie attique_ (Paris, 1875). (4) _The Latin
rule_: G. Finlay, _History of Greece_ (Oxford ed., 1877), vol. iv. ch.
vi. (5) _Constitutional History_: The Aristotelian "Constitution of
Athens"; U. v. Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, _Aristoteles und Athen_
(Berlin and Leipzig, 1893), vol. ii.; G. Gilbert, _Greek
Constitutional Antiquities_ (Eng. trans., London, 1895), pp. 95-453;
A.H.J. Greenidge, _Handbook of Greek Constitutional History_ (Oxford,
1896), ch. vi.; J.W. Headlam, _Election by Lot at Athens_ (Cambridge,
1891). (6) _Finance and statistics_: A. Boeckh, _The Public Economy of
the Athenians_ (Eng. trans., London, 1828); Ed. Meyer, _Forschungen
zur alten Geschichte_ (Halle, 1899), vol. ii. pp. 149-195. (7)
_Inscriptions: Corpus Inscriptionum Atticarum_, with supplements
(Berlin, 1873-1895). (8) _Coins_: B.V. Head, _Historia Numorum_
(Oxford, 1887), pp. 309-328. (M. O. B. C.)
8. _Byzantine Period._--The city now sank into the position of a
provincial Byzantine town. Already it had been robbed of many of its
works of art, among them the Athena Promachos and the Parthenos of
Pheidias, for the adornment of Constantinople, and further spoliation
took place when the church of St Sophia was built in A.D. 532. The
Parthenon, the Erechtheum, the "Theseum" and other temples were
converted into Christian churches and were thus preserved throughout the
middle ages. The history of Athens for the next four centuries is almost
a blank; the city is rarely mentioned by the Byzantine chronicles of
this period. The emperor Constantine II. spent some months here in A.D.
662-663. In 869 the see of Athens became an archbishopric. In 995 Attica
was ravaged by the Bulgarians under their tsar Samuel, but Athens
escaped; after the defeat of Samuel at Belasitza (1014) the emperor
Basil II., who blinded 15,000 Bulgarian prisoners, came to Athens and
celebrated his triumph by a thanksgiving service in the Parthenon
(1018). From the Runic description on the marble lion of the Peiraeus it
has been inferred that Harold Hardrasda and the Norsemen in the service
of the Byzantine emperors captured the Peiraeus in 1040, but this
conclusion is not accepted by Gregorovius (bk. i. pp. 170-172). Like the
rest of Greece, Athens suffered greatly from the rapacity of its
Byzantine administrators. The letters of Acominatus, archbishop of
Athens, towards the close of the 12th century, bewail the desolate
condition of the city in language resembling that of Jeremiah in regard
to Jerusalem.
9. _Period of Latin Rule: 1204-1458._--After the Latin conquest of
Constantinople in 1204, Otho de la Roche was granted the lordship of
Athens by Boniface of Montferrat, king of Thessalonica, with the title
of Megaskyr ([Greek: megas kyrios]= great lord). His nephew and
successor, Guy I., obtained the title duke of Athens from Louis IX. of
France in 1258. On the death of Guy II., last duke of the house of la
Roche, in 1308, the duchy passed to his cousin, Walter of Brienne. He
was expelled in 1311 by his Catalonian mercenaries; the mutineers
bestowed the duchy "of Athens and Neopatras" on their leader, Roger
Deslaur, and, in the following year, on Frederick of Aragon, king of
Sicily. The Sicilian kings ruled Athens by viceroys till 1385, when the
Florentine Nerio Acciajuoli, lord of Corinth, defeated the Catalonians
and seized the city. Nerio, who received the title of duke from the king
of Naples, founded a new dynasty. His palace was in the Propylaea; the
lofty "Tower of the Franks," which adjoined the south wing of that
building, was possibly built in his time. This interesting historical
monument was demolished by the Greek authorities in 1874,
notwithstanding the protests of Penrose, Freeman and other scholars. The
Acciajuoli dynasty lasted till June 1458, when the Acropolis after a
stubborn resistance was taken by the Turks under Omar, the general of
the sultan Mahommed II., who had occupied the lower city in 1456. The
sultan entered Athens in the following month; he was greatly struck by
its ancient monuments and treated its inhabitants with comparative
leniency.
10. _Period of Turkish Rule: 1458-1833._--After the Turkish conquest
Athens disappeared from the eyes of Western civilization. The principal
interest of the following centuries lies in the researches of successive
travellers, who may be said to have rediscovered the city, and in the
fate of its ancient monuments, several of which were still in fair
preservation at the beginning of this period. The Parthenon was
transformed into a mosque; the existing minaret at its south-western
corner was built after 1466. The Propylaea served as the residence of
the Turkish commandant and the Erechtheum as his harem. In 1466 the
Venetians succeeded in occupying the city, but failed to take the
Acropolis. About 1645 a powder magazine in the Propylaea was ignited by
lightning and the upper portion of the structure was destroyed. Under
Francesco Morosini the Venetians again attacked Athens in September
1687; a shot fired during the bombardment of the Acropolis caused a
powder magazine in the Parthenon to explode, and the building was rent
asunder. After capturing the Acropolis the Venetians employed material
from its ancient edifices in repairing its walls. They withdrew in the
following year, when the Turks set fire to the city. The central
sculptures of the western pediment of the Parthenon, which Morosini
intended to take to Venice, were unskilfully detached by his workmen,
and falling to the ground were broken to pieces. Several ancient
monuments were sacrificed to provide material for a new wall with which
the Turks surrounded the city in 1778.
During the 18th century many works of art, which still remained _in
situ_, fell a prey to foreign collectors. The removal to London in 1812
of most of the remaining sculptures of the Parthenon by Lord Elgin
possibly rescued many of them from injury in the period of warfare which
followed. In 1821 the Greek insurgents surprised the city, and in 1822
captured the Acropolis. Athens again fell into the hands of the Turks in
1826, who bombarded and took the Acropolis in the following year; the
Erechtheum suffered greatly, and the monument of Thrasyllus was
destroyed. The Turks remained in possession of the Acropolis till 1833,
when Athens was chosen as the capital of the newly established kingdom
of Greece; since that date the history of the city forms part of that of
modern Greece. (See GREECE: _History, modern_.)
GENERAL BIBLIOGRAPHY.-W.M. Leake, _Topography of Athens and the Demi_
(2nd ed., London, 1841); C. Wachsmuth, _Die Stadt Athen im Alterthum_
(vol. i., Leipzig, 1874; vol. ii. part i., Leipzig, 1890); E. Burnouf,
_La Ville et l'acropole d'Athenes aux diverses epoques_ (Paris, 1877);
F.C. Penrose, _Principles of Athenian Architecture_ (London, 1888);
J.E. Harrison, _Mythology and Monuments of Ancient Athens_ (London,
1890); E. Curtius and A. Milchhofer, _Stadtgeschichte von Athen_
(Berlin, 1891); H. Hitzig and H. Blumner, _Pausanias_ (text and
commentary; vol. i., Berlin, 1896); J.G. Frazer, _Pausanias_
(translation and commentary; 6 vols., London, 1898. The commentary on
Pausanias' description of Athens, contained in vol. ii. with
supplementary notes in vol. v., is an invaluable digest of recent
researches); H. Omont, _Athenes au XVII^e siecle_ (Paris, 1898, with
plans and views of the town and acropolis and drawings of the
sculptures of the Parthenon); J.H. Middleton and E.A. Gardner, _Plans
and Drawings of Athenian Buildings_ (London, 1900); E.A. Gardner,
_Ancient Athens_ (London, 1902); W. Judeich, _Topographie von Athen_
(Munich, 1905; forming vol. iii. part ii. second half, in 3rd edition
of I. von Muller's _Handbuch der klass. Altertumswissenschaft_). The
history of excavations on the Acropolis is summarized in M.L. d'Ooge,
_Acropolis of Athens_ (1909); see also A. Botticher, _Die Akropolis
von Athen_ (Berlin, 1888); O. Jahn, _Pausaniae descriptio arcis
Athenarum_ (Bonn, 1900); A. Furtwangler, _Masterpieces of Greek
Sculpture_ (appendix; London, 1895); A. Milchhofer, _Uber die alten
Burgheiligtumer in Athen_ (Kiel, 1899). For the Parthenon, A.
Michaelis, _Der Parthenon_ (texts and plates, Leipzig, 1871); L.
Magne, _Le Parthenon_ (Paris, 1895); J. Durm, _Der Zustand der antiken
athenischen Bauwerken_ (Berlin, 1895); F.C. Penrose in _Journal of
Royal Institute of British Architects_ for 1897; N.M. Balanos in
[Greek: Ephemeris tes kyberneseos] (Athens, August 25, 1898). For the
Dionysiac theatre, A.E. Haigh, _The Attic Theatre_ (Oxford, 1889); W.
Dorpfeld and E. Reisch, _Das griechische Theater_ (Athens, 1896);
Puchstein, _Die griechische Buhne_ (Berlin, 1901). For the "Theseum,"
B. Sauer, _Das sogenannte Theseion_ (Leipzig, 1899). For the Peiraeus,
E.I. Angelopoulos, [Greek: Peri Peiraios kai tun limenou] (Athens,
1898). For the Attic Demes, A. Milchhofer, _Untersuchungen uber die
Demenordnung des Kleisthenes_ (in transactions of Berlin Academy,
Berlin, 1892); Pauly-Wissowa, _Realencyclopadie der class.
Altertumswissenschaft_ (supplement, part i., article "Athenai";
Stuttgart, 1903). For the controversies respecting the Agora, the
Enneacrunus and the topography of the town in general, see W.
Dorpfeld, _passim_ in _Athenische Mittheilungen_; C. Wachsmuth, "Neue
Beitrage zur Topographie von Athen," in _Abhandlungen der sachsischen
Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften_ (Leipzig, 1897). A. Milchhofer, "Zur
Topographie von Athen," in _Berlin. philol. Wochenschrift_ (1900),
Nos. 9, 11, 12. For the Byzantine and medieval periods, William
Miller, _Latins in the Levant_ (London, 1908); F. Gregorovius,
_Geschichte der Stadt Athen im Mittelalter_ (2 vols., Stuttgart,
1889). Periodical Literature. _Mittheilungen des kais. deutsch. arch.
Instituts_ (Athens, from 1876); _Bulletin de correspondance
hellenique_ (Athens, from 1877); _Papers of the American School_ (New
York, 1882-1897); _Annual of the British School_ (London, from 1894);
_Journal of Hellenic Studies_ (London, from 1880); _American Journal
of Archaeology_ (New York, from 1885); _Jahrbuch des kais. deutsch.
arch. Instituts_ (Berlin, from 1886). The best maps are those in _Die
Karten van Attika_, published with explanatory text by the German
Archaeological Institute (Berlin, 1881). See also Baedeker's _Greece_
(London, 1895); Murray's _Greece and the Ionian Islands_ (London,
1900); Guide Joanne, vol. i. _Athenes et ses environs_ (Paris, 1896);
Meyer's _Turkei und Griechenlander_ (5th ed., 1901). (J. D. B.)
ATHENS, a city and the county-seat of Clarke county, Georgia, U.S.A., in
the N.E. part of the state, about 73 m. E. by N. of Atlanta. Pop. (1890)
8639; (1900) 10,245, of whom 5190 were negroes and only 114 were
foreign-born; (1910, census) 14,913. It is served by the Georgia, the
Central of Georgia, the Southern, the Seaboard Air Line and the
Gainesville Midland railways. Athens is an important educational centre.
It was founded in 1801 as the seat of the university of Georgia, which
had been chartered in 1785. Franklin College, the academic department of
the university, was opened in 1801, and afterwards the State College of
Agriculture and Mechanic Arts (the School of Science, 1872), the State
Normal School (co-educational, 1891), the School of Pharmacy (1903), the
University Summer School (1903), the School of Forestry (1906), and the
Georgia State College of Agriculture (1906), also branches of the
university, were established at Athens, and what had been the Lumpkin
Law School (incorporated in 1859) became the law department of the
university in 1867. Branches of the university not in Athens are: the
North Georgia Agricultural College (established in 1871; became a part
of the university in 1872), at Dahlonega; the medical department, at
Augusta (1873; founded as the Georgia Medical College in 1829); the
Georgia School of Technology (1885), at Atlanta; the Georgia Normal and
Industrial College for Girls (1889), at Milledgeville; and the Georgia
Industrial College for Colored Youth (1890), near Savannah. At Athens
also are several secondary schools, and the Lucy Cobb Institute (for
girls), opened in 1858 and named in honour of a daughter of its founder,
Gen. T.R.R. Cobb (1823-1862). The city has various manufactures, the
most important being fertilizers, cotton goods, and cotton-seed oil and
cake; the value of the total factory product in 1905 was $1,158,205, an
increase of 70.9% in five years. Athens was chartered as a city in 1872.
ATHENS, a village and the county-seat of Athens county, Ohio, U.S.A., in
the township of Athens, on the Hocking river, about 76 m. E.S.E. of
Columbus. Pop. (1890) 2620; (1900) 3066; (1910) 5463; of the township
(1910) 10,156. It is served by the Baltimore & Ohio Southwestern, the
Toledo & Ohio Central (Ohio Central Lines), and the Hocking Valley
railways. The village is built on rolling ground rising about 70 ft.
above the river (which nearly encircles it), and commands views of some
of the most beautiful scenery in the state. There are several ancient
mounds in the vicinity. Athens is the seat of Ohio University
(co-educational), a state institution established in 1804, and having in
1908 a college of liberal arts, a state normal college (1902), a
commercial college, a college of music and a state preparatory school.
In 1908 the University had 53 instructors and 1386 students. South of
the village, and occupying a fine situation, is a state hospital for the
insane. In the vicinity there are many coal mines, and among the
manufactures are bricks, furniture, veneered doors, and shirts. The
municipality operates the water-works. When the Ohio Company, through
Manasseh Cutler, obtained from congress their land in what is now Ohio,
it was arranged that the income from two townships was to be set aside
"for the support of a literary institution." In 1795 the townships
(Athens and Alexander) were located and surveyed, and in 1800 Rufus
Putnam and two other commissioners, appointed by the Territorial
legislature, laid out a town, which was also called Athens. Settlers
slowly came; the town became the county-seat in 1805, was incorporated
as a village in 1811, and was re-incorporated in 1828.