Due to its weakened state as outlined in Part 17, Athens stayed away from military involvements during the last half of the 350s.  At the same time, Philip of Macedonia continued to expand his reach and aspirations, conquering Thessaly and appearing ready to move into Central Greece and thus closer to Athens. 

After the alliance with Sparta, initial military action was inclusive and sporadic.  Athens began to move to re-establish its empire with limited success. Then, after some success by both sides, a crucial battle took place. 

As discussed in The appearance and construction of Democracy - childhood to maturity in Greece, Part 11, Athens was considerably weakened militarily due to the alliance between Sparta and the Persian empire.

The basic structure of the judicial system was set by the end of the fifth century. However, in the fourth century there was considerable additional development….The role and control of the Assembly continued throughout the fourth century. There were a number of changes made to increase the involvement of the Assembly, principally focused on making the Assembly as representative as possible and expanding participation.

Having discussed the Council of 500, in the next several posts I will do same for the other key components of Athenian democracy in the fourth century: the Council of the Areopagus, the Magistrates, Defense, Finance, the Courts, and the Assembly.

The most apparent result of the democratic reforms was that for the first time, a wide-ranging, clear, updated, and definitive code of written laws was created.

While the long saga of dealing with hubris and the focus on seeking power and wealth demonstrates the allure of these dynamics, at long last (in part due to exhaustion?) Athens showed that it could lessen the influence of these cancers.

The movement to a new version of democracy was based on a partnership between the political clubs and some intellectually sophisticated aristocrats. The clubs provided the terror tactics to crush opposition and the aristocrats developed a new constitution.

Without question, the period of 460 - 430, discussed in the prior three Posts, were one of most important and influential periods in European history. Democracy had come of age, a powerful empire was created, and there was a golden age of cultural development and transformation. However, trouble had continued to brew….

Along with Athens reaching a new height of democratic governance, power, and wealth, an artistic and intellectual explosion occurred that remains one of the most storied periods in both European and world history.

At first glance, the attitude of the Athenians to either rule or be ruled sounds reasonable - they chose not to be ruled and therefore needed an empire to ensure this. However…

Democracy in Greece played a part in the successful performance of Athens in the Persian wars which ended in 468. The result of the wars was an Athenian empire. But, as is often the case (or always?) with empires, there is never enough - power and wealth want more power and wealth. Power and wealth walk hand in hand becoming imbued with hubris and arrogance along the way.

As mentioned at the end of the prior post, the Funeral Oration of Pericles was the fullest explication of Democracy at the time and one of the most revered documents in the history of democracy.

Pericles was a member of the highest ranks of the aristocracy. And, importantly, his education went considerably beyond the traditional upper class education. Here again, we will see the power of ideas in effect even in a time of near constant warfare and an emphasis on military power.

As per the prior post, there was much credit to give to the Athenians and their new political structure. However, the growing power and confidence and consequent hubris, began to change the Delian League as Athens progressively asserted its will on its allies.

Over its first 40 years, the fledgling Athenian democracy was severely challenged by nearly continuous war. As part of outlining this period, I invite the reader to test the following hypothesis: While the timeframe and many other details differ, are there notable (and instructive) parallels between this period and beyond, and the first 140 years of American democracy?

As we have seen repeatedly, movement forward in Democracy’s development was often triggered by discord and its’ frequent consequences of violence and chaos. This continued at the end of the reign of Peisistratus (see the appearance of Democracy, birth to infancy in Greece, Part 5).

In this second series, I continue outlining the early years of Democracy. The prior 5-part series, The appearance of Democracy - birth to infancy in Greece, covered the development of the seeds and some saplings (750 to 500 B.C.).

This section, The appearance & construction of Democracy - childhood to maturity in Greece, moves forward in time to the growth of a fully formed tree. (500 to 322 B.C.).