Panathenaicus

At the same time they appointed to the magistracies those who had been selected beforehand by the members of their respective tribes[*](Aristotle (Aristot. Ath. Pol. 8) states that Solon enacted that the election to the offices should be by lot from candidates selected by each of the tribes. For example, each tribe selected then candidates for the nine archonships, and among these the lot was cast. Cf. Isoc. 7.22.) and townships,[*](The numerous “demes” into which Attica was divided.) having made of the offices, not prizes to fight for or to tempt ambition,[*](See Isoc. 7.24-25 and notes.) but responsibilities much more comparable to the liturgies,[*](See Introduction to the Antidosis.) which are burdensome to those to whom they are assigned, although conferring upon them a kind of distinction. For the men who had been elected to office were required to neglect their own possessions and at the same time to abstain no less from the gratuities which are wont to be given to the offices than from the treasures of the gods. (Who under the present dispensation would submit to such restrictions?)

Furthermore, those who proved conscientious in the performance of these duties, were moderately praised and then assigned to another similar responsibility, whereas those who were guilty of the slightest dereliction were involved in the deepest disgrace and the severest punishment. So that no one of the citizens felt about the offices as they now do, but they then sought to escape from them much more than they now seek to obtain them,

and all men were agreed that no truer democracy could be found, nor one more stable or more beneficial to the multitude, than that which gave to the people at the same time exemption from such cares and sovereign power to fill the offices and bring to justice those who offended in them[*](See Isoc. 7.27 and note.)—exactly the position which is enjoyed also by the most fortunate among despots.

And the greatest proof that they were even better satisfied with this regime than I say is this: we see the people at war with other polities which fail to please them, overturning them and slaying those at their head, but continuing to enjoy this polity for not less than a thousand years,[*](A very round number indeed. Tradition dated Theseus, whom Isocrates seems here to regard as the last of the kings, about 600 years before this time.) remaining loyal to it from the time when they received it down to the age of Solon and the tyranny of Pisistratus, who, after he had placed himself at the head of the people and done much harm to the city and driven out the best of her citizens as being partizans of oligarchy, brought an end to the rule of the people and set himself up as their master.[*](A pleasanter picture of the “tyranny” of Pisistratus is found in Aristot. Ath. Pol. 14 ff.)

But perhaps some may object—for nothing prevents breaking into my discourse—that it is absurd for me to presume to speak as though I had exact knowledge of events at which I was not present when they transpired. I, however, do not see anything unreasonable in this. I grant that if I were alone in relying on traditions regarding what happened long ago or upon records which have been handed down to us from those times I should with good reason be open to attack. But in fact many men—and men of discernment, too—will be seen to be in the same case with me.

But apart from this, were I put to the test and the proof I could show that all men are possessed of more truth gained through hearing than through seeing and that they have knowledge of greater and nobler deeds which they have heard from others than those which they have witnessed themselves. Nevertheless it is wise for a speaker neither to ignore such false assumptions—for they might perhaps confuse the truth were no one to gainsay them—nor again to spend too much time refuting them, but only enough to indicate to the rest of the audience the arguments by which they might prove that the critics speak beside the mark, and then to go back and proceed with the speech from the point where he left off. And this is what I shall do.

I have now sufficiently discussed the form of the polity as it was in those days and the length of time during which our people continued to enjoy it. But it remains for me to recount the actions which have resulted from the excellence of their government. For from these it will be possible to see still more clearly that our ancestors not only had a better and sounder polity than the rest of the world but also employed the kind of leaders and advisers which men of intelligence ought to select.

Yet I must not go on speaking even on this point, without first prefacing it with a word of explanation. For if, disdaining to take notice of the criticisms of people who are able to do nothing but find fault, I were to review one after the other not only the other achievements of our ancestors but also the ways and practices in warfare by which they prevailed over the barbarians and attained to glory among the Hellenes, inevitably some will say that I am really speaking of the ordinances which Lycurgus laid down and the Spartans follow.