worst of it, managed to win popular support’ (5, 66). He initiated democratic reforms
by the reorganisation of existing institutions. All Greek states were divided into tribes
based originally on ties of kin. At Athens there were four tribes with their own priests
and leaders; as well as endowing their members with a sense of identity, they
also served as subdivisions of the state for administrative and military purposes.
Cleisthenes created ten new tribes made up of three subdivisions called trittys, each
from quite different parts of the state. Each trittys was further subdivided into demes,
membership of which was extended to all free citizens. Each deme, of which there
were 140, kept a record of its members and was represented on the boule (council)
according to its size. The reorganization, although seemingly highly artificial, was
successful in extending the franchise, in breaking the local power of the eupatridai and
in discouraging the kind of regional grouping that had been exploited by Peisistratus.
The institution of ostracism, so named from the potsherd or ostrakon on which
a name was inscribed, is sometimes associated with Cleisthenes, though it was not
used until 487. It may have been introduced as a safeguard against tyranny. If an
ostracism was voted for by the assembly (ekklesia), it was subsequently held in the
agora under the supervision of the archons. A vote of 6,000 was required. The penalty
entailed exile for ten years without confiscation of property.
By the beginning of the fifth century, therefore, although the main offices were
still largely the preserve of the wealthy and the aristocratic, the ordinary citizens had,
in theory, equality before the law, isonomia, and some measure of participation in the
political process. Later Athenians recognized in their constitution after Cleisthenes
the substantial beginnings of their radical democracy. Other Greek states developed
on similar lines from aristocracy through tyranny to oligarchy, but oligarchy remained
the predominant constitution; few states gave to the people the power invested in
them at Athens in the assembly, the law court and the ballot box.
Sparta
It is not possible to suggest a comparable Spartan political evolution because the
Spartans themselves did not write their history and other Greeks regarded their insti-
tutions as the product of one lawgiver, Lycurgus, whose constitutional arrangements
had remained essentially unchanged over time, the embodiment of eunomia(good
order). Modern historians doubt this and some have even doubted that Lycurgus was
a historical figure.
Spartan arrangements can be seen to have grown from the consequences of
her early conquests. Situated in the district of Laconia which had been settled by the
Dorians, the Spartans first incorporated neighbouring settlements into their state;
some of these perioikoi, ‘dwellers round about’ had some limited independence,
others became serfs, known as helots, who were bound to the land which they
52 THE GREEKS