“There seems to be scarcely any discussion of individual
liberty as a conscious political ideal (as opposed to its actual existence) in
the ancient world.”
Isiah Berlin wrote that in his essay, Two concepts of liberty, first published in 1958. Berlin was a distinguished, Russian born,
British social and political theorist, philosopher and historian
of ideas. His view should not be lightly dismissed, but he does seem to have understated
the extent of discussion of individual liberty as a conscious political ideal
in ancient Athens and Attica.
Why should we care whether people in the ancient world
discussed individual liberty as a conscious political ideal, or just took it
for granted? I think we should care because the reasons why norms of liberty
emerged and disappeared in parts of the ancient world may have contemporary
relevance. An understanding of the role played by conscious endorsement or
opposition in sustaining or eroding norms of liberty in the ancient world might
help us to understand the presence, absence, strength or fragility of those
norms in various parts of the world today.
In one of his online articles about Ancient Greece’s
Legacy for Liberty, Roderick Long draws attention to the views of Hesiod,
along with Homer one of the twin founders of Greek epic poetry. Hesiod’s poems
appear to date from the 8th or 7th century BCE.
In his poem, Works and Days, Hesiod advocates respect for the rights of
others. He advises his brother Perses, to “put away all notions of violence”
for “fish, and wild animals, and the flying birds” may “feed on each other,
since there is no idea of justice among them,” but “to men [Zeus] gave
justice,” which is the “best thing they have.” Hesiod
condemns both force and fraud: the grabbing of goods either by “force of hands”
or by “cleverness of … tongue.”
Hesiod contrasts war and market competition as “two Strifes”
with different natures:
“There is one Strife who builds up evil war, and slaughter.
She is harsh; no man loves her ….
But the other one was born the elder daughter of black Night. …
she is far kinder.
She pushes the shiftless man to work, for all his laziness.
A man looks at his neighbor, who is rich: then he too
wants work …. Such Strife is a good friend to mortals.
Then potter is potter’s enemy, and craftsman is craftsman’s
rival; tramp is jealous of tramp, and singer of singer”.
In The Other Greeks, Victor Hanson notes that Hesiod
presented an ideology of reward for honest toil in agriculture. Secure property
rights gave the owners of small farms incentives to work hard. Successful
farmers were able to expand their holdings. Hesiod’s views about the virtue of
hard work were presumably shared by the owners of many small farms at the
beginning of the polis period of ancient Greece.
Hanson argues that the owners of small farms had a strong
impact on the development of democracy in ancient Athens. He notes that by the
early 6th century BCE Athens had free markets and “was struggling
toward the formal political recognition of a true class of yeomanry, who owned
their own plots and sought political representation equal to their economic
success".
Most of these farmers were apparently hoplites (citizen
soldiers) who made up nearly half the citizen population of the early poleis
after having been incorporated by the Solon, a famous lawmaker, into the Athenian
political system around 600 BCE. Hanson comments:
“An enormous social transformation had obviously taken place
in Greece, nothing less than the creation of an entire class, which through
sheer preponderance of numbers overwhelmed the aristocratic culture of Dark-Age
Greece."
The Athenian democracy gave citizens considerable individual
liberty as well as the right to participate in politics. According to Thucydides,
the leading Athenian politician Pericles (c. 495-429 BCE) declared:
“The freedom which we enjoy in our government extends also
to our ordinary life. There, far from exercising a jealous surveillance over
each other, we do not feel called upon to be angry with our neighbour for doing
what he likes”.
Writing later, Plato and Aristotle agreed with that
assessment, but were critical of the individual liberty they saw exercised in
Athens. Roderick Long suggests that Plato makes Athenian democracy sound like
the panarchist ideal: there is “no compulsion to rule in this city, even if you
are qualified to rule, or to be ruled if you do not want to be; or to be at war
when the others are at war, or to keep the peace when the others are keeping
the peace,” so that democracy constitutes not so much a single political system
as a “supermarket of constitutions” where each person can “pick out whatever
pleases him”. Aristotle suggested that according to the democratic conception,
“freedom and equality consists in every one’s doing what they please,” so that
“every one may live as he likes.”
Plato and Aristotle seem to have exaggerated the extent of
liberty in Athens in order to argue against democracy. In assessing the extent of liberty in ancient
Athens it should also be remembered that many of residents were non-citizens or
slaves.
An eminent ancient historian also discussed freedom of
speech as a political ideal. Herodotus (c. 484-425 BCE) puts into the mouth of Artabanos,
advisor to Xerxes, a defense of the distinctively Athenian ideal of freedom of
speech:
“O king, if opinions opposed to one another be not spoken,
it is not possible to select the better in making the choice, but one must
accept that which has been spoken”.
Did imposition of the death penalty on Socrates (399 BCE) for exercising freedom of speech conflict with that ideal? Chris
Berg suggests that Socrates’ use of irony and rhetorical skill to induce people into questioning their beliefs would have been seen to be
contrary to the purpose of Athenian speech freedoms. Socrates might have appeared
to be deceitful because he was not forthright in expressing personal views. That
interpretation of events is consistent with Plato’s account of the defence Socrates
offered at his trial. Rather than defending his right to freedom of speech, Socrates asserts that he is honest and undeceitful.
Although the norms of liberty that existed in ancient Athens seem to
have evolved without much conscious effort, they were not taken for granted. There
was considerable discussion of the extent to which individual liberty was
desirable, and the weight of intellectual opinion seems to have generally been
more sceptical of the merits of liberty than it is today.
No comments:
Post a Comment