-
Chapter 4. Athens and Regimes in History
- Baylor University Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
Introduction In Herodotus’ survey of actual historical regimes, Athens stands at the peak of the political possibilities that he explores.1 It is Athens, not Sparta, which is responsible for preserving Greek freedom against Persian attempts to incorporate Greece into a Persian empire ruled by a single Persian king. Crucial for Athens’ service to Greek freedom is the Athenian mind’s inclination , like that of the Persians, toward universal truths, such as the nature of human beings unclothed by custom or regime. Herodotus demonstrates the Athenian grasp of the universal in his account of the battle of Marathon. The Athenians are victorious over the Persians because they approach the latter not as divine conquerors destined to rule but as human beings like themselves who share the same nature. The Athenian access to universal or natural truth leads them to possess a form of courage that differs from that possessed by the Spartans. As demonstrated in the battle of Thermopylae, Spartan courage is defensive and characterized by a self-regarding spiritedness that seeks to defend its boundaries and what is its own. Spartans on the battlefield “stand firm” or are at rest. The Athenians, on the other hand—as demonstrated in their actions at the battles of Marathon and Salamis—possess an aggressive form of courage that is characterized by a spiritedness directed outwards. It leads to the attempt to transcend boundaries, to look on and possibly acquire what is foreign to oneself. Athenians on the battlefield and at sea are in motion. Their grasp, Chapter 4 Athens and Regimes in History 107 in mind, of the universal or that which is at rest leads the Athenians, like the Persians, to be on the move politically. Although Herodotus indicates that the Athenians possess a higher type of courage than the Spartans, he also implies that this in itself creates the danger that Athens will become as imperial as Persia. Herodotus points to the prospect that Athens, like Persia, may attempt to imitate in the political world the universalism that they grasp in the natural world. The Athenian mind’s access to universal truth, with the particular form of courage and the danger of empire that it spawns, is derived from Athens’ democratic regime. The Athenian democracy, characterized by isegorie, or the equality and freedom of speech, moves the Athenians from a belief in the divine foundation of their regime to a human one, and thus allows the Athenians to internalize their regime. For the Athenians, the regime is something within themselves and not a product of something, such as the gods, outside themselves. Because the human rather than the divine is brought to light as the source of politics, Athens is able to solve the difficulty of combining equality with government by instituting self-government. Moreover, unlike the Egyptians, Scythians, and Persians, the Athenians are more successful in integrating the whole of human nature, both body and soul, in a way that makes possible a life according to the highest human potential—or seeing things in the way that Herodotus does. This includes an appreciation for the complex character of speech. Athenians, guided by Themistocles, understand that words can have more than one meaning, incorporating permanence and change, the universal as well as the particular, and thus require interpretation for the truth to be revealed. Speech, especially divine speech, can both reveal and conceal the truth at the same time. Herodotean scholarship has been divided over the question of whether or not the Histories reveals a systematic analysis of politics. Sara Forsdyke argues that it is only in the last two decades that scholars have begun to view Herodotus as a thinker with deep political understanding rather than simply as a storyteller of the wondrous with no interest in politics. Specifically, Forsdyke points to recent trends that recognize Herodotus’ narrative of Spartan and Athenian history in the pre-Persian Wars, archaic period as an important reflection of the values, beliefs, and ideologies of his later fifthcentury BCE Greek audience.2 Also, Forsdyke argues that in his explanation of Persian expansion and in his portrait of Persian king Xerxes, Herodotus intends to draw a tacit parallel between the imperialism of Persia—the perceived injustice of which was confronted by the Greeks, led by Athens, during the Persian Wars—and the imperialism of Periclean Athens at the root of the Peloponnesian War.3 108 Herodotus and the Philosophy of Empire [34.237.245.80] Project MUSE (2024-03-19 14:15 GMT) Scholars...