CL70: OCTOBER SYLLABUS

9. T. Sep. 30: Early Lawgivers II: Citizens and Community in Athens
Readings: Ancient Greece, pp. 159-178; Solon (HO4 E and Gagarin & Woodruff, pp. 25-30; Plutarch, Life of Solon 13-24 (HO4 K); HO4 H #2 (the tyrannicides); I (Cleisthenes); L (early city laws).
Questions: 1. You read about the economic, social, and political problems Athens was facing in the late 7th and early 6th century. Let's now look at Solon's own statements. What problems does he see in Athenian society? Whom does he hold responsible for this trouble? What solutions does he propose?
2. How does Solon distribute power among the classes? What does he do (and not do) for the lower classes? On the basis of his own statements: would you consider Solon a democrat?
3. What does Plutarch add to our knowledge of Solon1s career and reforms? Which of his laws express most clearly his political thought and intentions?
4. Like Hesiod, Solon sees a direct causal connection between the conduct of the ruling aristocracy and disaster for the entire community. The prime document of Solon's political thought is the poem on "good government" (eunomia, 4 W, including the middle section omitted by G&W and reprinted in HO4 E1). Prepare a political analysis of this poem and compare Solon's thought with that of Hesiod (as expressed especially in the Works and Days). A famous German classicist once said that both authors state exactly the same. Do you agree? Why or why not?
5. Solon's reforms were not able to prevent the rise of tyranny. In what ways did tyranny change social conditions and outlooks in Athens and Attica? After the fall of tyranny, factional strife broke out again. Cleisthenes then introduced a comprehensive package of social and political reforms. What did they consist of and what was their purpose? How did they affect the distribution of power?

Please note: short quiz (readings to this point, including this class); brief identifications and short essay)

10. Th. Oct. 2: The Early Philosophers; Conclusion: the Beginnings of Political Thought
Readings: Ancient Greece, pp. 121-24; Xenophanes, Heraclitus, Democritus (G&W pp.38-39, 151-63); Anaximander, Alkmaion, Thales, Xenophanes (HO 5); Jacobsen, "Mesopotamia"; Westbrook, "Social Justice" (posted on website).
Questions: 1. Xenophanes is one of the most original early thinkers, consciously refuting views that had a long and noble ancestry. What are his main theses and against whom or what is he polemicizing? Heraclitus is often called "the dark." His thoughts are preserved only in small fragments and in form of aphorisms. Do you recognize any threads running through his statements, any common elements?
2. The fragments you have been reading represent a small selection, picked for their relevance in our present context. To the extent, then, that these philosophers were concerned at all with human society and political aspects, what were their main concerns?
3. We have now studied the earliest manifestations of Greek political thought, ranging from Homer in the late 8th century BCE to the early philosophers in the late sixth century. List the issues these writers were concerned with. Are there common elements in the political problems addressed by Homer, Hesiod and Solon? And are there common elements in the solutions proposed by these authors?
4. You have read Jabobsen's article. What are the significant differences between the Mesopotamian and archaic Greek societies and their views on the relationship between the divine and human world? To what extent do such differences help to explain, respectively, the absence and the emergence of political thought (at least of the type we met in the Greek sources)? What about the status of the persons who engage in political thought? [It might be interesting, perhaps in a termpaper, to extend such a comparison to the ancient Hebrews.]
5. Our main question is why political thought developed in early Greece and why it took the form we have observed. Think again about what you read in Ancient Greece about the early Greeks, their country, their activities, their outlook. In addition to the aspects emphasized in the previous question, what preconditions do you see in early Greek society that might have favored this development? Preconditions create a situation favorable for such a development but they don't necessarily provoke it. What then were the causes? Why did people in early Greece actually begin to think politically?

Part II: Tragedy and Political Thought

11. T. Oct. 7: Introduction: Greek Drama; The Tragic Poet as Teacher; Aristophanes, Frogs
Readings: Aristophanes, The Frogs (including introduction).
Questions: 1. Aristophanes performed The Frogs in 405, shortly before Athens' collapse and capitulation in the Peloponnesian War (an intermittent war, lasting almost 30 years, between the "power blocs" of Athens and Sparta, comparable with an ancient world war; we shall deal with it in the final section of this course). The play begins with the descent to the underworld of Dionysos, the god of the theater, who, after the death of the last of the great tragedians, wants to retrieve a good poet. The play ends with his bringing Aeschylus back to the upper world with the explicit charge to save Athens. Why should a poet (and particularly this one) be thought of as being capable of such an accomplishment?
2. The play contains a great contest between Aeschylus and Euripides. What is it about? What are the main differences between the two authors that are emphasized here, and why are these important? What does this comedy tell us about the social function of drama, and what do we learn from that about the social function of poetry in general?

12. Th. Oct. 9: The Discovery of Liberty: Aeschylus, Persians
Readings: Ancient Greece, pp. 178-215; HO 6; Aeschylus, The Persians (including Vellacott1s introduction on Aeschylus and this play); Aeschylus, Oresteia: only Foley's introduction, pp. 6-17.
Questions: 1. Like epic poetry, tragedy usually deals with mythical themes. The Persians is the only surviving exception. Less than ten years after the great victories over the Persians, with much of their city still in ruins, this play must have been an emotional experience to the Athenians. Do you think that what Aeschylus puts on stage is history? Why or why not?
2. What are the main differences between Greeks and Persians (in every respect, including political aspects), as Aeschylus represents them? How do these differences compare with those we observed between Achaeans and Trojans in the Iliad?
3. How does the playwright explain the Greek victory? Why did Xerxes fail? How does the poet distribute right and wrong? Is any of this potentially significant for Athens, the victor, as well? If so, what message does the poet expect his audience to take home? To approach it differently: is the Persians entirely and only a "patriotic play" celebrating a great victory? Or does it contain a warning, does it urge the audience to think about other aspects as well?
4. HO 6 contains a few passages from Herodotus, a historian who about fifty years after the Persian Wars wrote their history. Do you find in Aeschylus elements that presage Herodotus1 interpretation of the significance of these events?

T. Oct. 14: No class

13. Th. Oct. 16: Aeschylus: The Discovery of Democracy (Suppliant Women)
Readings: Ancient Greece, 215-245; Aeschylus, Suppliant Women; Handout 7: "The Reform of Ephialtes"
Questions: 1. What are the main concerns in the The Suppliants? The play is located in Argos, and the myth is an Argive myth that has nothing to do with Athens. Why would the story dramatized in this play be of interest to the Athenians? And if it was, what advantage might the poet have seen in using a non-Athenian myth and location?
2. The leader, as always in myth, is a king. The chorus, coming from Egypt (a non-Greek country!), and the king himself, however, have very different views of his role in the polis. How could we best describe and explain this difference, and why is it important? When faced with the suppliants' request, what is the king's political and ethical dilemma?
3. The Suppliants was performed in 463, that is, one year before the reforms realized by Ephialtes in 462. According to Aristotle1s history of the Athenian constitution (in HO 7), by these reforms the old aristocratic council of the Areopagus was stripped of most of its powers; these were transferred to the popular assembly and other democratic institutions. Does knowledge of this historical and political context help us better to understand the play's political message?
4. More explicitly, some scholars (although by no means all) believe that this play provides a justification for democracy. Do you agree? If yes, what would you see as the main arguments in favor of this constitution? If not, why not?

14. T. Oct. 21: Aeschylus: From Tyranny and Civil Strife to Communal Integration
Readings: Aeschylus, The Furies; Foley¹s introduction, pp. 17-40; HO 8 (summary of Agamemnon and The Libation Bearers); if you have time please read the Agamemnon in full.
Questions: 1. What is the immediate and what the ultimate cause of the events described in the Agamemnon? How does the poet present the relationship between leader and community; the problem of power and tyranny; the problem of justice? In particular, what claims conflict in this play? Is it clear who is right? How does the private sphere (the power structure and relationships within the family) interact with the public sphere (the power structure and relationships in the city)?
2. The Furies presents on stage a conflict between an older generation of gods (represented by the Furies) and a younger generation (represented by Zeus, Apollo, etc.). What beliefs, rules, and claims are represented by each side? Which side, if any, is endorsed by the poet? And how is this conflict resolved?
3. The Furies was performed in 458, only four years after Ephialtes¹ reforms. Does our knowledge of the preceding political events (see HO 7), shed any light on this conflict of generations and its resolution by Athena? What might Aeschylus¹ political message to his Athenian audience have been? How does the creation of the Areopagus fit into this picture?
4. Look back to the Suppliants (performed 463, one year before Ephialtes¹ reforms). Do you see any connection? Is Aeschylus¹ position toward democracy the same or different in the two plays?

Part III: Theory and Political Thought: The Impact of the Sophists

15. Th. Oct. 23: Sophistic Theory and the Controversy about the Nature of Law
Readings: Ancient Greece, pp. 255-74, esp. 270-74); GW pp. xix-xxxi; Hippias, no. 5 (GW pp. 216-217); Antiphon, no. 7 (GW pp. 244-247); Thrasymachus, nos. 1-4 (GW pp. 254-256); Critias, no. 5 (GW pp. 260-262); Alcidamas, no. 1 (GW p. 276); Anonymus Iamblichi (GW pp. 290-295); Hippocrates, nos. 1-2 (GW pp. 164-165); Herodotus no. 3 (GW p.82); Handout 9 (Sophists in Plato), nos. 1, 3 (pp. 1-4, 9-17).
Questions: 1. The sophists were individual teachers and thinkers who traveled from city to city and gave lectures as well as instruction for pay. Their thinking covered many areas. Although their ideas or concerns differed greatly from each other, they shared certain characteristics which make them very interesting to our present purpose. Based on what you read about it, list some of these characteristics and some of the topics in which they were mostly interested.
2. Antiphon, Thrasymachus and Callicles all develop one major theory (although they do it in slightly different ways) concerning the opposition between human and natural law (nomos and physis). This theory was very influential in contemporary thinking; it is important, therefore, to understand it well. Try to summarize concisely what the theory says and how the three authors differ.
3. In what ways would such a theory be able to affect political reality in democratic Athens and in Greek interstate relations?
4. In what ways did sophistic theories concern thinking about social and class distinctions? What might the consequences of such thinking be?
5. The Critias fragment (GW #5) gives a radical interpretation of the origins of religion. Does this view have predecessors which we encountered in earlier readings? How does this view fit in with more general trends in sophistic thinking?

Please note: short paper II due (to writing fellows): see below.
Those who wish to write a research paper: start to think about a topic (due 11/20, at the latest).

Your task in the short paper is to provide a political interpretation of Aeschylus¹s Prometheus Bound. The questions below are intended only to stimulate your thinking. You do not need to discuss all of them. It is most important that you focus on the questions that you find most interesting and that you develop your own thesis, that you formulate questions nd thesis clearly, and that you construct a logical and compelling argument. The more you can link your interpretation to issues we discussed earlier in the course (especially, but not exclusively, Hesiod and Aeschylus) the better.
Questions: 1. Why is Zeus described as a tyrant in this play? What is the main conflict analyzed here? Who is right? To represent Zeus as a tyrant represents a drastic decision. Compare the characterization of Zeus and the conflict between Zeus and Prometheus in this play with Hesiod¹s treatment of these topics. What, do you think, was Aeschylus¹ purpose in taking such a radical step?
2. Keep in mind that the Prometheus Bound was the first play of a trilogy (that is, a sequence of three connected plays). How do you imagine the problems it presents might have been resolved in the later plays? Could this Zeus have emerged later in a more positive role as we saw it in earlier sources?
3. Scholars are divided as to whether this play is really by Aeschylus. If it is (and we assume here that it is), it would be Aeschylus¹ last play, written in 457. Can you think of ways in which this play might have been meaningful to the Athenians at that time? Are the issues it deals with related in any way to those analyzed in the Furies?
4. This play is radically different from most other tragedies in other respects as well. For example, it is not situated in a polis nor, for that matter, in the world of humans. Humankind does show up, though, but in a strange and frightening way. How does this part of the play compare with stories we read earlier (esp. in Hesiod)?

16. T. Oct. 28: (a) Sophocles, Antigone: Private and Communal Obligations
(b) Conclusion of part II: Tragedy and Political Thought
Readings: Ancient Greece, pp. 246-55, 274-86; Sophocles, Antigone (will be circulated) Questions on (a): 1. Kreon and Antigone both stress obedience to a superior principle; since they take these principles as absolutes, their claims are irreconcilable. What are these principles and how are they justified?
2. Gods do not appear on stage in this play, yet religious issues are central to it. What sort of religious message emerges from this play?
3. It seems that the figure of Kreon, the ruler of Thebes, undergoes a significant transformation in the course of the play: he begins as a good leader and ends being a tyrant. Mark or list specific passages in which this transformation is depicted. Does Sophocles¹ handling of this character suggest a political agenda? How do various people or groups react to this leader?
4. Is Antigone¹s gender an issue in the tragedy? Would the play¹s effect be significantly altered if it were, instead, a surviving brother who insisted on Polyneices¹ burial?

Questions on (b): 5. What are the areas of political concern in the plays we have read so far? Do the same concerns show up repeatedly? How does tragedy deal with such concerns? Are they ever stated directly? To what extent are we justified in analyzing dramatic situations in terms of political thought?
6. Greek women had few legal rights and were virtually absent from the social and political interactions of men. How, then, do we explain the prominent role women play in various tragedies?
Do you see connections between the "political" in tragedy and in epic poetry? Is it significant that both genres mostly work with mythical themes? How, overall, did tragedy serve as a medium of political thought in Athenian society. What have we learned about the social function of drama in this society?

17. Th. Oct. 30: Sophists, Rhetoric, and Democracy
Readings: re-read Ancient Greece, pp. 215-19; Protagoras, nos. 1-6, 14-33 (GW pp. 173-75, 186-189); Gorgias, nos. 1-3 (GW pp. 190-203); Prodicus, no. 4 (GW pp. 211-214); Antiphon no. 1, 3 (GW pp. 219, 229-36); Handout 9 (Sophists in Plato) # 2 (pp. 4-9); Aristophanes, Clouds with Arrowsmith¹s Introduction.
Questions: 1. One of the main issues most sophists dealt with was rhetoric. Why was this attractive to their clients, in what ways was rhetoric useful, and why might it have been especially important in Athens? Gorgias¹ and Antiphon¹s "model speeches" give us an indication of the techniques the sophists taught; what was the main purpose of such teaching?
2. Gorgias was the most famous orator of his time: what distinguishes his art and with what arguments did he "sell" his skill? Why does Socrates take Gorgias so seriously? Was Gorgianic rhetoric a threat to democracy?
3. Protagoras claimed, more generally, to teach "political skills." What is the foundation of this claim, and how was Protagoras going to realize it? What are Socrates¹ main points of criticism in discussing this claim?
4. Do you find Aristophanes¹ portrait of Socrates in the Clouds plausible‹as plausible as Plato¹s? (The issues are succinctly stated in Arrowsmith¹s introduction.) If Aristophanes¹ version was not supported by facts, why was he able to get away with it? Although we are not talking about Socratic-Platonic philosophy in this course, it is worth thinking about why Aristophanes was able at all to portray Socrates (in our view, a philosopher) as a sophist.
5. To a large extent, this is a play about education and rhetoric. What theories are being attacked and ridiculed here? What impact might such theories have had on politics and the community?
6. What serious political issues are mentioned in The Clouds? Does Aristophanes treat these issues seriously beneath a humorous façade? Does his social criticism function positively (e.g., proposing solutions to problems) or only negatively?