But what contributed most to their good government of the state was that of the two
recognized kinds of equality—that which makes the same award to all alike and that which
gives to each man his dueFor these two kinds of equality
cf. Isoc. 3.14 ff.; Isoc. 2.14;
Plat. Rep. 558c, and Plat.
Laws 757b; Aristot. Pol. 1301a 26
ff.—they did not fail to grasp which was the more serviceable; but,
rejecting as unjust that which holds that the good and the bad are worthy of the same
honors,
and preferring rather that which rewards and punishes every man according to his deserts,
they governed the city on this principle, not filling the offices by lot from all the
citizens,The method of electing the various magistrates
changed from time to time, and is much less simple than Isocrates here represents it to
be. For example, election of the chief magistrates, the archons, by lot (though from a
previously selected group) is at least as old as Solon. On the other hand, in Isocrates'
day officers who had supervision over military and financial affairs were elected by
show of hands in the General Assembly. See Gilbert, Greek Constitutional
Antiquities(English translation) pp. 216 ff. It seems clear, however, that
after Cleisthenes all classes of citizens, the poor as well as the rich, became eligible
to the offices (Plut. Arist. 22) and that election by
lot became increasingly a device to further pure democracy. but selecting the
best and the ablest for each function of the state; for they believed that the rest of the
people would reflect the character of those who were placed in charge of their affairs.
Furthermore they considered that this way of appointing magistrates was also more
democratic than the casting of lots, since under the plan of election by lot chance would
decide the issue and the partizans of oligarchy would often get the offices; whereas under
the plan of selecting the worthiest men, the people would have in their hands the power to
choose those who were most attached to the existing constitution.
The reason why this plan was agreeable to the majority and why they did not fight over
the offices was because they had been schooled to be industrious and frugal, and not to
neglect their own possessions and conspire against the possessions of others, and not to
repair their own fortunes out of the public funds,He is
thinking of pay, not only for the magistrates, but for attendance at the sessions of the
jury courts, of the General Assembly, etc. See Isoc. 8.130.
Aristotle (Aristot. Ath. Pol. 24) states that
since the changes which were introduced by Aristides over twenty thousand Athenians
earned their livelihood in public service of one sort or another. In the same work (62)
he gives a brief sketch of the pay for such services. but rather to help out the
commonwealth, should the need arise, from their private resources,For the public spirit of the old democracy see Isoc.
4.76; Isoc. 8.42 ff.; Isoc.
12.145 ff. and not to know more accurately the incomes derived from the
public offices than those which accrued to them from their own estates.