DOCSLIB.ORG

Morality, Institutions and Economic Growth: Lessons from Ancient Greece

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Morality, Institutions and Economic Growth: Lessons from Ancient Greece Munich Personal RePEc Archive Morality, institutions and economic growth: Lessons from ancient Greece Bitros, George and Karayiannis, Anastassios Athens University of Economics and Business 26 November 2006 Online at https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/994/ MPRA Paper No. 994, posted 01 Dec 2006 UTC Morality, institutions and economic growth: Lessons from ancient Greece* By George C. Bitros1 and Anastassios D. Karayiannis2 Abstract We show that the character and the morality of citizens are important ingredients of economic growth because they go hand in hand with the great institutions of private property, democ- racy, and free markets. Our approach enables us to establish this result by reference to the structure and performance of the ancient economies of Athens and Sparta during the period 490-338 BC. Athens grew vastly wealthier than Sparta essentially because its institutions were optimally adjusted to confront the basic scarcity of grains, whereas the institutions of Sparta were optimally adjusted to sustain its military supremacy. However, in both cases there emerged systems of morality, which secured the operating efficiency of their institutions. Therefore, poor countries in search of potent strategies for rapid economic growth should not just try to emulate the institutions of economically advanced countries. At the same time, they should put the emphasis of their efforts to setting up agoge systems, so as to infuse into the character of their citizens compatible “ethos”. For, without the latter, no matter how success- fully they adapt the institutions of democracy and free markets, rapid economic growth will be inhibited from the lack of an environment of generalized morality. In this regard, the ideal type model of agoge is the one that prevailed in ancient Athens 25 centuries ago. JEL Classification: O10, B11, N30 Keywords: ancient Greece, morality, institutions, economic growth 1 Professor, Department of Economics, Athens University of Economics and Business, 76 Patission St, 10434, Athens, Greece. 2 Associate Professor, Department of Economics, University of Piraeus, 80, Karaoli & Dimitriou, 18534, Pi- raeus, Greece. Corresponding Author: Anastassios D. Karayiannis Department of Economics University of Piraeus Tel: 22970-22258 Fax: 210-4142301 E-mail: [email protected] * Acknowledgements: We wish to thank, T. Amemiya, C. Perrotta, C. Baloglou, T. Lianos, and I. Pepelasis- Minoglou, for their valuable comments and suggestions. The usual disclaimer applies. 2 (From a dialogue between Pope Benedict XIV and Voltaire somewhere in the grateful memory of mankind) ………………………………………………………………... Voltaire: I still think that philosophers can dispense with morality. Pope Benedict XIV: How naïve you are. Are children capable of philosophy? Can children reason? Society is based upon morality, morality is based upon character, character is formed in childhood and youth long before reason can be a guide. We must infuse morality into the individual when he is young and malleable; then it may be strong enough to withstand his indi- vidualistic impulses, even his individualistic reasoning. I am afraid you began to think too soon. The intellect is constitutional individualist, and when it is uncontrolled by morality it can tear society to pieces. ……………………………………………………………………………... Durant and Durant, (1967), The Story of Civilization, The Age of Voltaire, vol. 9, 791. 1. Introduction Thinking and policy advice about questions relating to economic development have changed dramatically over the last 50 years. In the two decades following World War II economists thought, and policy advisors from international organizations suggested to poor countries, that the quickest road to development was to save and invest, in order to accumulate modern and hence more productive capital, to educate their labor force, so as to meet the demand for various skills that accompanies industrialization, to give emphasis to exportable goods, so as to alleviate the deficits in the balance of payments, etc. But the results were not encouraging. The industries they established became dormant and inefficient behind the tall walls of protection from international competition. The educational systems they set up to train their citizens, led to mis- alignments with demanded skills, whereas many of their better minds emigrated to advance coun- tries in search of better opportunities; and in general, as certain authors have noted,1 the biggest beneficiaries of these development strategies may have been the high-priced consultants who recommended them. Thus, in view of the persistence of poverty in many parts of the world and the inability of prevailing growth theory to provide effective policy guidance, economists turned to the hy- pothesis that the culprit to blame was geography. Admittedly since it determines the climate, the resource endowments, the incidence of diseases and the ecology, geography should influ- ence the technology of a country as well as the incentives of its citizens. But given that policy 1 For a critique of the failure of neoclassical growth theory and policy to help many countries to escape from their poverty trap, see, for example, Krueger (1993). 3 makers cannot exercise meaningful control over these variables, the geography hypothesis presented a gloomy outlook for many countries located in disadvantaged regions, and pro- voked researchers into looking for more efficient development strategies in other directions. This search led to the realization that poor countries lack better markets, more educated peo- ple, and more modern capital, because they do not have well defined systems of property rights, the rule of law is lax, the freedom of exchange is restricted, etc. Thus, by attributing the differences in living standards between rich and poor nations to these fundamental causes, researchers proposed the so-called institutions hypothesis.2 Tests of this hypothesis have shown that institutions do matter for economic growth. But in as much as the results from these tests provide considerable and encouraging evidence, the establishment of effective institutions is not an easy undertaking. This is so because the choices of desirable forms of institutions and the degree of their effectiveness have been found more recently to depend on various context specific factors, that arise from differences not only in geography but also in historical developments, political economy circumstances and other initial conditions. Still, from the research by Platteau (1994), Yaffey (1998), Fehr and Schmidt (1999) and others, it turns out that there are certain fundamental context invari- ant processes that contribute positively, either by improving the quality of life per se, or by facilitating the establishment and the functioning of wealth enhancing institutions. One of them being morality that Pope Benedict XIV stressed in the captioned passage from his imaginary discussion with Voltaire. So for us it is fascinating to add to this literature by look- ing at the difference that morality made to the distinctly disparate levels of wealth that the classical Athens and Sparta reached at the peak of their power. With this agenda in mind, our plan is to characterize the nature of the relationship be- tween morality and growth promoting institutions by drawing on the case of ancient Greece. By doing so, it is our hope that a clear picture of the fundamental differences between Athens and Sparta will emerge, which will explain in a convincing manner why only Athens became the main economic power in classical antiquity. This endeavor is undertaken in the next three sections. In particular, in Section 2 we present a brief account of what we know with relative certainty about the stylized features pertaining to the economies of the two city-states during the 150 year period from the victory of Greeks in Marathon against the Persians in 490 to 430 BC., i.e. the year that Sparta attacked Athens thus starting the Peloponnesian War, and from then to 338 during which the economic growth in the two city-states decelerated (Isager and 2 Hodgson (1988) gives an early list of authors and writings that contributed to the foundation of the school of Institutional Economics. 4 Hansen, 1975, 52-5). In Section 3 we attempt to answer the following questions: a) the econ- omy of Athens was organized according to a proto-capitalistic market system, whereas that of Sparta had all the characteristics of a centrally administered economy. Did this fundamental dif- ference influence their economic performance? b) Aside from the differences in their economic organization, the two city-states differed also in the moral norms that prevailed among their citi- zens. Which were their main differences? c) Significant differences were also observed in the processes for infusing moral norms to their citizens, as well as in the institutions for monitoring moral behavior and discouraging transgressions. To what extent might these differences in moral norms be attributed to the differences in the organization of the respective economies? Then, in Section 4 we turn to the lessons that we can derive from the above discussion, and, finally, Sec- tion 5 contains a synopsis of our conclusions. 2. The stylized features of the two economies From Aristotle’s Politics and The Athenian Constitution in antiquity, to Fustel des Coulages (1866), Glotz (1928), Finley (1981) and numerous other writers, we have come to know how the city, i.e. the Greek Polis, evolved through association and symbiosis. The first unit
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 341 BC the THIRD PHILIPPIC Demosthenes Translated By
    1 341 BC THE THIRD PHILIPPIC Demosthenes translated by Thomas Leland, D.D. Notes and Introduction by Thomas Leland, D.D. 2 Demosthenes (383-322 BC) - Athenian statesman and the most famous of Greek orators. He was leader of a patriotic party opposing Philip of Macedon. The Third Philippic (341 BC) - The third in a series of speeches in which Demosthenes attacks Philip of Macedon. Demosthenes urged the Athenians to oppose Philip’s conquests of independent Greek states. Cicero later used the name “Philippic” to label his bitter speeches against Mark Antony; the word has since come to stand for any harsh invective. 3 THE THIRD PHILIPPIC INTRODUCTION To the Third Philippic THE former oration (The Oration on the State of the Chersonesus) has its effect: for, instead of punishing Diopithes, the Athenians supplied him with money, in order to put him in a condition of continuing his expeditions. In the mean time Philip pursued his Thracian conquests, and made himself master of several places, which, though of little importance in themselves, yet opened him a way to the cities of the Propontis, and, above all, to Byzantium, which he had always intended to annex to his dominions. He at first tried the way of negotiation, in order to gain the Byzantines into the number of his allies; but this proving ineffectual, he resolved to proceed in another manner. He had a party in the city at whose head was the orator Python, that engaged to deliver him up one of the gates: but while he was on his march towards the city the conspiracy was discovered, which immediately determined him to take another route.
    [Show full text]
  • Looking for Interpreter Zero: the Irony of Themistocles
    Looking for Interpreter Zero: The Irony of Themistocles Themistocles and his historians reflect a range of attitudes to language, identity and loyalty, giving us a sense of attitudes towards interpreters far back in time and memory. Christine ADAMS. Published: March 1, 2019 Last updated: March 1, 2019 Themistocles was a rare example of a Greek who could speak a foreign language …[1] This sense of a common tongue was the decisive criterion for determining who were Greeks [2] Herodotus (484-425 BCE) tells the story of the cradle of western civilisation in The Histories of the Persian Wars, relating the stories of the Greeks and their neighbours - those they called Barbarians - and giving detailed information about the peoples of the Mediterranean as well as the lead up to the wars, before giving an account of the wars themselves. “By combining oral accounts of the past with his own observation of surviving monuments, natural phenomena and local customs, he produced a prose narrative of unprecedented length, intellectual depth and explanatory power.”[3] Histories shows an awareness of the need for language intermediaries, drawing a distinction between linguists and the ‘interpreters’ of dreams or oracular pronouncements and citing instances of interpreters at work. There were Greek-speaking communities in Egypt, for instance. The Pharaoh Psammetichus had allowed them to settle and had honoured all of his commitments to them. He had even “intrusted to their care certain Egyptian children whom they were to teach the language of the Greeks.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 9 Study Guide Key
    Chapter 9 Study Guide Key 7th Grade World History Vocabulary Cavalry – a unit of soldiers who ride horses. The Persian empire was known for their use of cavalry, helping to make them so victorious in battle Hellenistic – Greek-like - when a cultural idea is heavily influenced by Greek ideas (Example – cities of Alexandria created by Alexander.) Alliance – agreement to work together – as in the Persian Wars Vocabulary Phalanx – A square fighting formation – commonly used by Alexander & Sparta Satraps – governors in the Persian empire Helots – Slaves in Sparta – made up majority of population & heavily relied upon Parthenon – Great temple in Athens dedicated to the goddess Athena. Commissioned by Pericles after the Persian Wars. People to Know Cyrus the Great – Rebelled against the Medes to create the Persian Empire. Known for letting others keep their customs to help prevent rebellions Darius I – Leader of the Persians when Greek mainland city-states sent help to the Ionian city- states. Leader during the Battle of Marathon People to Know Xerxes I – the son of Darius. Was the leader of the Persian Wars during the battles of Thermopylae, Salamis & Plataea. Set up his golden throne to watch the Battle of Salamis – which he lost, forcing him to retreat to Persia Philip of Macedonia – Father of Alexander the Great. Conquered the Greek city-states. Alexander the Great – Macedonian King – came to power after his father was murdered. Helped to create the largest empire in the world at that point. Never lost a battle. Died at age 32 from malaria. People to Know Plato – a student of Socrates.
    [Show full text]
  • Utilizing Athenian History in the De Corona
    Utilizing Athenian History in the De Corona Lawrie Whitmore ’16 Abstract The De Corona, given by the famous Athenian orator Demosthenes, depicts him battling against his fierce rival Aeschines. While the speech’s goal was to defend a fellow Athenian being prosecuted for awarding Demosthenes for his services to the city, Demosthenes attempts to justify his award by defending his actions against Philip and his son Alexander the Great of Macedonia and mainly focuses on his personal rivalry with Aeschines. Considered one of the greatest orations in history, one of the main strategies utilized in the De Corona by Demosthenes is an appeal to past Athenian history, such as the Persian Wars. Through this strategy Demosthenes explains how he deserves praise for his actions taken against Macedonia. One of the greatest criticisms of Demosthenes made by his rival Aeschines is how he pales in comparison to other famous Athenians of the past. In fact, a large part of Aeschines’ speech Against Ctesiphon, sections 178-188, is dedicated to how Demosthenes is in no way fit to be compared to the great Athenian forefathers, bringing up famed statesmen such as Themistocles, Miltiades, and Aristides. Aeschines states, “But I by the Olympian gods do not think it is fit to remember those men on the same day as this monster!” (ἀλλ᾽ ἔγωγε μὰ τοὺς θεοὺς τοὺς Ὀλυμπίους οὐδ᾽ ἐν ταῖς αὐταῖς ἡμέραις ἄξιον ἡγοῦμαι μεμνῆσθαι τοῦ θηρίου τούτου κἀκείνων τῶν ἀνδρῶν, Aes. 3.182). While this invective would seem to discourage Demosthenes from referencing Athenian history, he still constantly discusses it throughout his speech, especially the events of the Persian Wars and Themistocles, who led the city for a large part during this time period.
    [Show full text]
  • Three Aspects of Spartan Kingship in Herodotus Rosaria Vignolo Munson
    5 Three Aspects of Spartan Kingship in Herodotus Rosaria Vignolo Munson erodotus’ Histories are governed by the rule of resemblance: they explain the nature of a given historical phenomenon by sug­ gesting similarities to unrelated phenomena entirely different in Hother respects.! We may safely state, in particular, that Herodotus’ analysis of any form of personal power is inseparable from his representation of monarchical rule. This was an essential feature of the foreign culture that threatened the integrity of Hellas at the time of the Persian wars, and it provided the Greeks with a foil for self-definition. The components of the monarchical model in Herodotus have often been discussed,^ and I need only to recall a few points. The speech of Otanes in the Constitutional Debate is the basic theoretical document (3.80). The monarch is here defined as an individual who “can do what he wants without being accountable” (dvevOvvco Trottem ra /SouXerat). When placed in such a position, even the best of men finds himself outside the normal way of thinking (/cat yap av tov aptcTOV avhputv TravTwv (TTavTU e? TavTTjv TTjv apy^v e/cxd? twv ewOoToiv voripdraiv cTTpcreid) and commits many unbearable things (iroWd /cal dracrOaka) out of u/3pts and cpOovos. Typically, the monarch subverts ancestral laws (Ttarpta vopaia), he does violence to women, and he puts people to death without trial. I am happy to dedicate this chapter to Martin Ostwald with gratitude and admiration. 1. The importance of analogical thought in Herodotus is widely recognized. See espe­ cially the work of Immerwahr (1966) and Lateiner (1989, 191-96).
    [Show full text]
  • ATINER's Conference Paper Proceedings Series LIT2017-0021
    ATINER CONFERENCE PRESENTATION SERIES No: LIT2017-0021 ATINER’s Conference Paper Proceedings Series LIT2017-0021 Athens, 22 August 2017 Themistocles' Hetairai in a Fragment of Idomeneus of Lampsacus: A Small Commentary Marina Pelluci Duarte Mortoza Athens Institute for Education and Research 8 Valaoritou Street, Kolonaki, 10683 Athens, Greece ATINER’s conference paper proceedings series are circulated to promote dialogue among academic scholars. All papers of this series have been blind reviewed and accepted for presentation at one of ATINER’s annual conferences according to its acceptance policies (http://www.atiner.gr/acceptance). © All rights reserved by authors. 1 ATINER CONFERENCE PRESENTATION SERIES No: LIT2017-0021 ATINER’s Conference Paper Proceedings Series LIT2017-0021 Athens, 24 August 2017 ISSN: 2529-167X Marina Pelluci Duarte Mortoza, Independent Researcher, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Brazil Themistocles' Hetairai in a Fragment of Idomeneus of Lampsacus: A Small Commentary1 ABSTRACT This paper aims to be a small commentary on a fragment cited by Athenaeus of Naucratis (2nd-3rd AD) in his Deipnosophistai. This is his only surviving work, which was composed in 15 books, and verses on many different subjects. It is an enormous amount of information of all kinds, mostly linked to dining, but also on music, dance, games, and all sorts of activities. On Book 13, Athenaeus puts the guests of the banquet talking about erotic matters, and one of them cites this fragment in which Idomeneus of Lampsacus (ca. 325-270 BCE) talks about the entrance of the great Themistocles in the Agora of Athens: in a car full of hetairai. Not much is known about Idomeneus, only that he wrote books on historical and philosophical matters, and that nothing he wrote survived.
    [Show full text]
  • On Organization (Dem. 13) Jeremy Trevett
    Demosthenes' Speech "On Organization" (Dem. 13) Trevett, Jeremy Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies; Summer 1994; 35, 2; ProQuest pg. 179 Demosthenes' Speech On Organization (Dem. 13) Jeremy Trevett OUBTS ABOUT THE AUTHENTICITY of the thirteenth speech D of the Demosthenic corpus, fIfpi cr'\)v'ta~fw~ (On Or­ ganization), have been repeatedly entertained since the nineteenth century.! The trend this century has been towards accepting it as genuine, but the most recent discussion of the problem argues forcibly against this view. 2 One hesitates to add to what has already been written on the subject, but the view that it is spurious should not be left holding the field. The objections that have been raised are far from cogent; moreover, it is essential to look at the speech as a whole, rather than concentrate on one or two passages that are thought to present difficulties.3 The question is important, as we need to know whether the speech can be used as evidence of Demosthenes' thought and the development of his political views. Absolute proof is unattainable, but in what follows I argue that the speech is almost certainly genuine. Testimonia. As the speaker identifies himself as Demosthenes (13.12), the speech must be either genuine or a deliberate fake; it cannot be a work of the fourth century wrongly attributed to him. No ancient scholar expresses any doubt about its authen- 1 The principal discussions (hereafter cited by author's name only) are: F. B LASS, Die attische Beredsamkeit2 IILl (Leipzig 1893) 401 ffj ]. M. F OSSEY, • A Demosthenic Doublet (XIII, 22-24 and XXIII, 198-200)," LeM 11 (1986) 77fj ].
    [Show full text]
  • Poleis, Choras and Spaces, from Civic to Royal. Spaces in the Cities Over
    PYRENAE, vol. 47 núm. 2 (2016) ISSN: 0079-8215 EISSN: 2339-9171 (p. 27-38) © Borja Antela-Bernárdez, 2016 – CC BY-NC-ND REVISTA DE PREHISTÒRIA I ANTIGUITAT DE LA MEDITERRÀNIA OCCIDENTAL JOURNAL OF WESTERN MEDITERRANEAN PREHISTORY AND ANTIQUITY DOI: 10.1344/Pyrenae2016.vol47num2.2 Poleis, Choras and spaces, from Civic to Royal. Spaces in the cities over Macedonian rule from Alexander the Great to Seleucus I Poleis, Choras y espacios, de cívicos a reales. Territorios en las ciudades bajo dominio macedonio de Alejandro Magno a Seleuco I BORJA ANTELA-BERNÁRDEZ Departament de Ciències de l’Antiguitat i l’Edat Mitjana. Facultat de Lletres. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona Edifici B. Carrer de la Fortuna, E-08193 Bellaterra (Cerdanyola del Vallès) [email protected] The conquest of Asia by Alexander the Great led the Macedonian tradition to a new challenge in order to control and manage the landscape and its resources in the new territories. As far as these territories were spear-won lands, the usual perspective of the Argead Kingdom, itself a result of conquests, still had validity. Nevertheless, this Macedonian tradition must also conceal the Greek cities founded within the new Hellenistic Kingdoms, and also the native population. In order to understand the construction of relationships between royal and city spaces during Alexander’s rule and in the very early configuration of the Hellenistic Monarchies, the break between the Classical Poleis and the Hellenistic ones must be described, paying attention to the difference between the classical chora as city space and the new Hellenistic reality of the shared politiké and basiliké chora.
    [Show full text]
  • The Battle of Marathon: the Stunning Victory and Its Contribution to the Rise of Athens
    Studia Antiqua Volume 5 Number 2 Article 5 December 2007 The Battle of Marathon: The Stunning Victory and Its Contribution to the Rise of Athens Doug Marsh Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/studiaantiqua Part of the History Commons BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Marsh, Doug. "The Battle of Marathon: The Stunning Victory and Its Contribution to the Rise of Athens." Studia Antiqua 5, no. 2 (2007). https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/studiaantiqua/vol5/iss2/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Studia Antiqua by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. The Battle of Marathon: The Stunning Victory and Its Contribution to the Rise of Athens Doug Marsh THENS had never before been faced with so great a threat as the approach APersian forces to the Greek mainland in 490 b.c.e. Angered by the insolence of Athens and Eretria, which had recently supplied aid to rebelling Ionian cities, the Persian king Darius dispatched his generals Datis and Ataphernes “with the charge to reduce Athens and Eretria to slavery and to bring the slaves back into his presence.” Both Herodotus and Plato saw this dispatch as a mere pretext to accomplish his true aim: to enslave all of Greece and Europe.1 He moved first against the Eretrians, “reputed to be amongst the noblest and most warlike of the Hellenes of that day (and they were numer- ous); but he conquered them all in three days.”2 Having accomplished his objective against Eretria, Darius next turned his gaze to Athens, leaving it and its citizens to decide whether they ought to attempt to resist their seemingly inevitable defeat.3 Faced with almost certain ruin, many Athenian generals did not wish to fight, “seeing that they were too few to fight with the army of the Medes.” With the voting generals evenly split between those for and against fighting, the deciding vote was to be cast by Callimachos, the polemarch.
    [Show full text]
  • Week 7: the Persians Wars
    Week 7: The Persians Wars Lecture 12, Marathon, Key Words Aryans Media Babylonia Lydia Persia Cyrus Achaemenid Armenia Syria Cappadocia Croesus Cambyses Egypt India Sudan Persian Gulf Darius Samos Polycrates Scythia Macedon Miltiades Danube Earth and Water Boeotia Chalcis Corinth Demaratus Cleruchs Aegina Ionian Rebellion Aristagoras Miletus Naxos Sardis Eretria Lade Hipparchus archon 496/5 Phrynichus Chersonnesus Piraeus Themistocles 1 Mardonias Thrace Mt. Athos Rapprochement Datis Artaphernes Delos Carystus Pheidippides Pan Carneia Arête Beach head Cavalry Archers Plataeans Herakleion Marshes Charadra Soros Cynosura Phaleron Dromoi Grundy Stoa Poikile Aeschylus Hastings Spanish Armada Neville Chamberlain Bertrand Russell Churchill Marlborough Holocaust Sophocles Euripides Aristophanes Socrates Plato Aristotle Phidias Parthenon Pericles Scientific Revolution Western Civilization Marathonomachoi 2 Chronological Table for Persian History and the Persian Wars 2000-1000 Indo-Iranians migrate from the Eurasian plains of south Russia, across the Caucasus Mountains and into upper-Mesopotamia; others move east of the Caspian Sea and into the Indus river valley (founders of the Aryan Sanskrit civilization). 1150-1000 Phrygians migrate from the Balkans into central Anatolia; spread of iron technology: early Iron Age (1150-550). 950 Phrygian kings establish capital at Gordium and unite Anatolian plateau. 900-612 Assyria dominates the Near East. 844 Assyrian records refer to the Iranian tribes, the Persians. 836 Assyrian records mention the Medes. 705-690 Phrygian power shattered by Cimmerians (Iranian or Thracian nomads, who swept over Asia Minor and Syria at the end of the 8th /early 7th century); Lydia becomes independent of Phrygia. 700-675 Medes coalesce into a united kingdom under the initiative of the Mede Deioces (Hdt.
    [Show full text]
  • The Persian Wars
    The Persian Wars The Limits of Empire And the Birth of a Greek World View Median Empire • Cyaxares: – Attacks Lydia in 590 BC. – On 28 May 585 BC. the war ends. • Astyages (585-550 BC.) – Married Aryenis in 585 BC. – Gave Mandane to Cambyses I before 580 BC. – Deserted by his troops and defeated by his grandson, Cyrus, in 550 BC. Cyrus the Great • King of Anshan in 560 BC. • Attacked Media in 550 BC. • Defeated Croesus of Lydia in 547/6 BC. • Defeated Babylon in 539 BC. • Died in 530 BC. attacking the Massagetae The Persian Empire Cambyses • King of Babylon by 27 March, 538 BC. • Great King in Sept, 530. • Invaded Egypt in 525. • Cambyses was “not in his right mind, but mad” (Hdt.3.25). • Died accidentally in 522 BC. • Succeeded by Smerdis, March 522 • Smerdis killed September 522 BC Darius I • Two years of rebellions: consolidated power by 520 BC. • Reorganization into 20 satrapies • Invaded Scythia via Europe in 513 • Satrapy in Europe, Skudra (Thrace) • Construction of Persepolis • 507: Accepted ‘Earth and Water’ from Athens. Empire of Darius I Persia in the Aegean The Ionian Revolt • Aristagoras, Tyrant of Cyzicus and Miletus – Convinced Persians to invade Naxos – Four month siege failed in 499 – Aristagoras and Histiaeus launch revolt of the Ionians Ionian Revolt • Cleomenes refused to participate • Athens contributed 20 ships – “Perhaps it is easier to fool a crowd…” (Hdt. V.97). – Sardis sacked, the temple of Cybele burned. – Ionian army defeated near Ephesus – Athenian aid withdrawn – Aristagoras killed in Thrace Ionian Revolt Persian Response • 498 • Took Byzantium, Chalcedon, the Troad, Lamponium, Lemnos and Imbros – Defeated the Ionian army at Ephesus – Took Clazomenae and Cyme • 497-494 – Besieged Miletus and campaigned in that area • 494 BC.
    [Show full text]
  • The Themistocles Naval Decree of 483/2 BCE and the Greek Referendum of 2015: a Comparative Analysis of Choice Set Under Direct Democracy Procedures
    Munich Personal RePEc Archive The Themistocles Naval Decree of 483/2 BCE and the Greek Referendum of 2015: A comparative analysis of choice set under direct democracy procedures Economou, Emmanouel/Marios/Lazaros and Kyriazis, Nicholas and Metaxas, Theodore University of Thessaly, Department of Economics, University of Thessaly, Department of Economics, University of Thessaly, Department of Economics 15 June 2015 Online at https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/76421/ MPRA Paper No. 76421, posted 26 Jan 2017 15:32 UTC The Themistocles Naval Decree of 483/2 BCE and the Greek Referendum of 2015: A comparative analysis of choice set under direct democracy procedures Emmanouil M.L. Economou1, Nicholas C. Kyriazis2 and Theodore Metaxas3 1,2,3 University of Thessaly, Department of Economics Korai 43 PC: 383 33 Volos, Thessaly, Greece, Emmanouil M.L. Economou () e-mail: [email protected] Abstract: In the present essay we examine decision-making and choice under direct democracy procedures, focusing on two famous examples: Themistocles’ Naval Law of 483/2 BCE and modern Greece’s referendum of June 2015. They concerned, in a broad sense, the choice between the finance of public good(s) versus the increase in available personal income. We analyse the similarities and differences in the institutional setting, the means available for discussion and consensus building and the actual outcomes, which were different: in ancient Athens the outcome was in favour of the “public good” defense and in modern Greece, it was of no consequence since the final actual outcome was contrary to the referendum. Lastly, we offer some thoughts regarding the different outcomes, which were dependent on the specific perceptions of each issue, the possibility of disaggregation of choice elements, the time horizon and historic context and the perception of citizens-voters, as to the “quality” of their government.
    [Show full text]