The Sexes in Science and History: An inquiry into the dogma of woman's inferiority to man — John Shaqi
The Sexes in Science and History: An inquiry into the dogma of woman's inferiority to manGamble, Eliza Burt
Philosophy
The Sexes in Science and History: An inquiry into the dogma of woman's inferiority to man
Gamble, Eliza Burt
Sex; Women -- History; Women -- Social conditions
All important political privilege is engrossed by the Eupatrids, who
consist of a certain number of “clans” claiming a special nobility,
but not belonging to any single tribe, or distinguishable from the
ignoble clans, otherwise than by the possession of superior rank and
riches. The rest of the citizens constitute an unprivileged class,
personally free, but with no atom of political power, and are roughly
divided, according to their occupation, into yeoman-farmers and
artisans. The union of the Eupatrids in the same tribes and phratries
with the Geomori and Demiurgi, seems to show that the aristocracy of
Athens was not original, like that of Rome, but grew out of an earlier
and more democratical condition of things—such, in fact, as we find
depicted in the Homeric poems.... Thus at Athens, as elsewhere, in the
heroic times, there was undoubtedly the idea of a public assembly,
consisting of all free-men; but this institution seems entirely to
have disappeared during the centuries which intervened between Codrus
and Solon.[166]
[166] Rawlinson, book v., essay ii.
During the three hundred years which followed the death of Codrus,
nothing of great importance is observed concerning the growth of
Grecian institutions. Doubtless their development was characterized
only by the strengthening of the aristocracy and the stimulation of
those egoistic principles which are essential in the establishment of
an oligarchy. That in course of time the power attached to the office
of archon also became a menace to the people’s liberties is shown in
the fact that in the first year of the seventh Olympiad, B.C., 752, the
life archonship was brought to a close and the term of office reduced
to ten years. Although the office was still limited to the family of
Codrus, the incumbent became amenable to the elders or chiefs for his
acts. However, that this movement was not wholly in the interest of the
masses of the people is shown in the fact that during the following
thirty years the Eupatrids, or members of the aristocratic party, had
drawn to themselves all the power belonging to the archonship. It
is observed that during the reign of the fourth decennial archon, a
pretext having been found to depose him, the reigning family or gens
was declared as having forfeited its right to rule and the office was
thrown open to all Eupatrids. Nine archons from among the aristocratic
party, with all the powers formerly belonging to the supreme archon,
conveyed to them, were chosen as a governing board,[167] and were
to continue in office for one year. Selected by and from among the
Eupatrids, their legislation was wholly in the interest of the wealthy
and privileged classes.
[167] Rawlinson, book v., essay ii.
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