The Reception of Athenian Democracy in French Culture from the Enlightenment to the Second Empire

chapter 5 The Reception of Athenian Democracy in French Culture from the Enlightenment to the Second Empire

Pascal Payen

1 Prolegomena

Athenian democracy is one of the most complex political and cultural objects to have been developed over the period marked, in France, by the Enlighten- ment and the development of liberal thinking right up to the Second Empire (1852–1870). The difficulties faced by the Ancien Regime in the eighteenth century followed by its disappearance, open the way to a broad debate covering other political experiments, above all Rome and Sparta up to the Revolution. The historical interest conferred on Athens as a democracy is both slower and later, but nonetheless constant starting in the 1730s, throughout the eighteenth century and covering the first half of the nineteenth century, although the hu- manists’ rediscovery of Thucydides and Plutarch, the two main ancient sources, could have served to spotlight the nature of the Athenian regime. Because Thucydides had indeed been translated, admittedly badly, as early as 1527 by Claude de Seyssel, using Lorenzo Valla’s (1448–1452) Latin version published in 1483, and the Life of Pericles was available in Jacques Amyot’s fine transla- tion, along with all the Parallel Lives, in 1559. To no avail, and Athens remained a great unknown, largely down to the highly critical regard focused by these sources on the city. For Thucydides, Athenian “democracy” is merely a “name” masking the domination of the “first citizen” (Thuc. 2.65.9). And as for Plu- tarque, he is against this sort of politeia on principal (Per. 9.1; 11.1; 12.2). How then could the notion of “Athenian democracy” have surfaced in French pre-Enlightenment culture? Thucydides’ and Plutarch’s resistance to this association, postpones the advent of a concept that will only really figure in modern European political science history with the arrival of George Grote’s History of Greece (1846–1856).1 In the meantime, monarchical theorist Jean Bo- din (1530–1596), in his Methodus ad facilem Historiarum cognitionem (1566), deemed the Athenian misthophoric system to be everyday rabble-rousing

1 See Kierstead’s chapter in this volume.

(chap. vi). Bodin took his cue from the Athenian constitution (1.3; 1.13), an anon- ymous oligarchic pamphlet, included by one of those accidents, characteristic of manuscript tradition, in the works of Xenophon, on which he was highly knowledgeable. In his Les Six livres de la République (1576), he considers that a study of Thucydides’ texts brings proof that Athens is a democratic city,2 for which the crucial turning point in the “popular” nature of the regime is due to Aristides and Pericles.3 Henceforth, throughout the seventeenth century and the construction of absolute monarchy, the Athenian democratic regime could only project itself as a radical counter model, even if the official line they would like to stress was the monarchic traits of Thucydides’ (2.65.8–9) as well as Plutarch’s (Per. 15.1) Pericles respectively. Athens, along with Pericles4 is more or less ignored around this time, plus it should also be remembered that during the illustrious “Quarrel between the Ancients and the Moderns” (1687–1714), the Greeks, defended by the Ancients, tasted defeat.5 Thus it is that on the eve of the Age of Enlightenment, the notion of Athenian democracy is as fragile as the Greek legacy is almost bereft of substance: the classical authors and espe- cially the historical sources have a minute place in the collège6 curricula; published work, whether critical or not, is lacking7, and knowledge of the language is the reserve of a small elite, to the “detriment” of the all-powerful Latin.8 Nothing would appear able to stop a long period of decline, starting in the years 1560s at the end of the Council of Trent (1548–1563), without the erudite humanist movement and the period of the “Antiquarians” being able to curb this. Finally, it is worth recalling that from within the ranks of iconic figures, the true heroic and moral underpinnings of democratic Athens, no one politician between Solon and Cleisthenes, between Aristides and Pericles seems to have prevailed in the long term. From the Greek side, the great politician tow- ering above the others is in fact the Spartan Lycurgus9 whose laws guarantee stability in contrast to the anarchy of democracy. Despite this multitude of obstacles, Athens is increasingly perceived under the guise of its “popular government”. This stems not only from ancient sources

2 Cambiano (2003), 170–9. 3 Cambiano (2003), 183. 4 Bouvier (2010), 704. 5 Lecoq (ed.) (2001). 6 Grell (1995), 984–988. 7 Burke (1966); Morineau (1988), 425–460; Momigliano (1992), 45–60; Grell (1995), 287–301. 8 Waquet (1997). 9 Quantin (1989).