How to Study ArchitectureCaffin, Charles H. (Charles Henry)
History
How to Study Architecture
Caffin, Charles H. (Charles Henry)
Architecture -- History
Hellenic, however, never implied a national bond. The Hellenes were
never united as one people under one government. Hellas was a congeries
of independent states which even allowed their colonies, from the first,
complete self-government. The bond which loosely held them together was
the common sense of superiority to all other races; and as their
civilisation developed, a common pride in its glory, not that this was
sufficient to prevent continuous rivalry and frequent warfare between
states and cities. Consequently, there is properly speaking no such
thing as Greek history; nor would it be profitable for our purpose to
trace the rise and decline of the several states. It is better to
consider Hellenism as a principle, the more or less common ideal of a
people, not confined to Hellas, but spread over the littoral of the
Mediterranean; wherever Hellenes settled--a race of mariners and
merchants, thinkers and artists, who lifted themselves to so high a
pitch of civilisation, that it became a source of inspiration to all
subsequent culture.
In the Minoan and Mycenæan Age the political system was a monarchy that
combined the functions of high priest and commander-in-chief. In the
Homeric Age there were still kings who led their armies and acted as the
intermediaries of the gods, but their power was controlled by a _Boule_,
or consulting assembly. With the Dorians the rule of kings passed to
that of oligarchies, chosen from one or more of the noble classes whose
claim to government was founded on birth and the ownership of land. They
were associated with a Boule, representative of the privileged classes,
while the priestly functions were exercised by magistrates, who,
however, were drawn from the aristocracy.
In many parts of Hellas the oligarchies gave way to “tyrannoi.” These
are not to be understood in the sense that our word “tyrant” has. They
were a step in the evolution of popular government, inasmuch as they
were a means of breaking up the exclusive authority of the privileged
classes. To consolidate their own power, the tyrannoi sought the favour
of the populace and made concessions in the direction of popular
government. Accordingly, while some of the tyrannoi were succeeded by a
return to the oligarchies, in more cases they prepared the way for a
democratic form of government.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account