Whipple 1
Authorship of The Athenian Constitution
Although the many various copies of The Athenian Constitution are credited to the
philosopher Aristotle, there is still much debate on whether he is actually the author, or was just
given credit due to his authority during his time. The Athenian Constitution is considered to be
written between 332 and 322 BCE. This time period would certainly allow Aristotle to remain an
option for its authorship. Aristotle lived from 384 to 322 BCE. In adolescence, Aristotle was sent
to study under Plato where he soaked up knowledge and began developing his own view of the
world around him. After his time at the academy he traveled to Asia Minor where he made
advances in his previous notions and added new experiences and disciplines to his wealth of
knowledge. Soon he had become known for his intellect. In 343, Aristotle was called to Macedon
to tutor King Philip’s son, Alexander (Shields 2008). After mentoring Alexander and collecting
even more knowledge, he returned to Athens and founded a school of his own. Aristotle was an
expert in many fields and wrote extensively on a variety of them, but as far as government is
concerned he only used one measurement for an effective government. Shields writes, Aristotle
maintained that as long as a system of government encouraged “human flourishing” and “human
happiness” it would be the correct system of government no matter the form (2008). Shields
makes an excellent point when he describes Aristotle’s view that liberty should only be a tool in
forming the thriving polis, but not the sole goal. While he believes that an oligarchy is the wrong
form of government because it favors a few ruling rich class, he also argues against a strict
democracy which puts the power into the hands of the citizens, who he feels don’t hold the merit
to control government. The author of The Athenian Constitution goes along with this thought in
chapters 29 and 33. In these chapters the author tells of the change in political structure during
the Peloponnesian War from a democracy to an oligarchy and eventually back to a democracy in
Whipple 2
chapter 33. It shows that when the democracy was having hard times, especially in managing
war funds, the people would turn to an oligarchy for stabilization. This doesn’t last for long for
as the author writes, “Then they overthrew the Four Hundred, entrusting affairs to the Five
Thousand of the hoplite class and solving there should be no stipend for any office.” (77). The
constant cycling of forms of government is used as evidence to support Aristotle as the author,
because it reflects his notion of these forms of governments as imperfect.
Despite the piece’s congruency with Aristotle’s political outlook, there is a growing
opinion that the work actually comes from one of his students of his school. While there isn’t any
hard evidence there are strong logical appeals made for this argument. First, Aristotle is credited
with writing over 150 constitutions. It is highly unlikely that he would be the sole author of all
these works in his lifetime. It is much more likely that his students helped him compose a portion
of his works. Rhodes points out in his introduction that Aristotle often used his students to
collect research, so it is entirely possible that the students produced some of his documents as
well (Rhodes 13). He also makes the point that Aristotle did not consider himself an Athenian
and often was detested while there. There is no reason for him to write The Athenian
Constitution personally (13). Secondly the writing style of The Athenian Constitution is different
from what is expected from Aristotle. The author is more straight to the point and is quite easy to
comprehend. This is different from Aristotle which is known to incorporate more literary
devices. Rhodes makes an excellent point when he says that the author of The Athenian
Constitution didn’t do a good job of fact checking (12). There are a number of incorrect facts and
misguided assumptions. Aristotle would have been more careful than to make these mistakes. No
matter the authorship, the work is still from educated source from the time period.
Whipple 3
Bias
The use of bias in The Athenian Constitution is very slight. As previously mentioned,
there is bias in the sense of Aristotle’s view of government. His ideal government of a small
form of democracy where the decisions are not left to the public, but a select few of great merit
and desire for social progress is evident throughout the document. Other forms of government
such as oligarchy, strict democracy, and tyranny are constantly portrayed as ineffective. This
would still probably be true of one of his students. If the author were a student, they would most
likely share Aristotle’s distaste for these governments. The author also seems to have a certain
inclination towards Solon, the appointed archon in 594 BCE. The author portrays him as a great
champion of the people, as well as fair in the reconstruction of positions of power. For example,
in chapter six the author says, “Solon was so moderate and impartial in other respects that, when
he could have got the rest of the people into his power and made himself tyrant over the city, he
instead accepted the hatred of both sides and set a higher value on honour and safety of the city”
(47). Other than these two instances the document is mostly factual statements about the
different changes of government and their structures. It focuses more on supplying information
than speculating on its content.
Date
At the time in which The Athenian Constitution was written, Athens had been defeated
by Philip of Macedonia in the battle of Chaeronea a few years earlier. Athens had been in an
agreement with Philip to help him invade Persia, but after taking advice from an orator they
decided to back out of the effort. This infuriated Philip which eventually led to the battle of
Chaeronea. Despite losing the battle, Athens was fortunate enough that Philip left the poleis for
the most part autonomous (Coffin,118). It was probably written to stand as record for how the
Whipple 4
constitution was in Athens in uncertainty of the Macedonian attack. The Athenian Constitution
itself focuses on the end of the fifth century. During this time the Peloponnesian War had just
ended and the people of Athens set up the oligarchy of the Thirty. Following the new oligarchy
was a series of attacks on Athenian by Sparta. There was great corruption and greed in Athens.
The Thirty became more like tyrants. They removed Solon’s laws in the constitution, so they
could remain unchecked. They also killed people to retain power, stole riches and land, and made
laws to gain even more power. Eventually a group of exiles from Phyle rid Athens of The Thirty,
but following years were in discourse without a proper government system. In 403 BCE the
democracy is reinstated in Athens in the form of chapter 42 through 69 in The Athenian
Constitution.
Motive for Composition and Use
I believe the motive for composition was purely for historical records. I’m inclined to
think that the author wrote it to inform future generations of the many changes and hardships
they went through to get to their present state. It also provides an account of the current political
layout which can be used to educate their people or foreigners. Perhaps a secondary motive of
the piece is act as a learning tool. It provides documentation of how to wrongly form a
constitution in the first half of the work. Another, maybe more distant, goal of the piece is to
study the human condition. Aristotle was also largely fond of the sciences, so it’s not too far of a
reach to assume, if Aristotle was the author, that he could use it as a medium to explain human
nature. The work does provide a multitude of information on what man finds to be important in
society. It demonstrates while some men covet freedom others find security during difficult times
in a supreme authority. It is also has references to greed, deception, and compassion.
Whipple 5
I believe it was used in accordance with the design of the author. It would be hard to
misinterpret the use of the document. The Athenian Constitution would most likely read as a
compilation of the history of the Athenian’s constitution, and to a lesser degree their history as a
whole. The work mentions important battles such as the battle of Marathon and the Persian
Wars, as well as important historical persons like Thucydides, the grandfather of Thucydides the
historian (65,67,198).
Impact on its Culture
The impact the writing on its culture was probably small at the time. Its main impact was
most likely as a source of knowledge about past constitutions and government functions. The
later chapters were probably influential in teaching the common people about their current
constitution. A secondary impact it had was improving literacy of the culture. As it was read for
teaching purposes the reader was being taught reading skills. I believe the most important
underlying impact it had was growth of a cultural identity and pride. This collection of history
gives its people a sense of unity; because in the writing they can see their people grow and
advance to where they are today. They also had to feel pride because they had finally found a
constitution that works for their society. Although the impact might not have been noticeable at
the time, it surely crept into the minds of all that read it.
Evaluation as a Source
The Athenian Constitution at first glance would seem to be a good source in all the cases
mentioned regarding the overall change in government form, the individual components of these
systems, a timeline of events in Athens, and the current instated constitution at the time of the
author. In regard to the overall change in political systems the work seems to be a fairly basic
source of information. The work traces the evolution of the Athenian constitution from basic
Whipple 6
archonship all the way the end of the rule of the Thirty and the institution of the current
democracy of Athens. This can be relied upon as factual because they can be checked through
history and were hard at the time to interpret wrongly. It is an entirely different case for the
information on individual components of the governments. While the titles and some functions
are seen in other writings, most if not all the knowledge of these details are taken from accounts
of the past. It is harder to trust these facts about earlier politics, because they are not witnessed
by the author themself. These facts were taken by faith by the author and by extension it is much
harder for today’s society to trust a secondary source. In addition, during the time in which these
practices were first recorded, it is hard to say the citizens of the even more ancient Athens had
efficient methods of recording history. We can conclude the timeline as mostly accurate because
we can use its reference to important historical events, such as battles, and well known people to
confirm its sequence of events. As for the current constitution stated in the final chapters, we can
assume these details to be the most reliable. They have more credibility because they were
written about the author’s current time period, but of course tiny details like numbers and trivial
practices can’t necessarily be taken on their face. Overall it can be helpful in understanding the
time’s view on what constitutes a citizen and their role, the appointment to office, and the
designation and operation of their jury courts. For example in chapter 42, it is described that
young men are first given military training and then patrol the country (88). This represents the
importance of being a strong and contributing member in Athenian society.
The document can also be used as a source for studying ancient Athenian culture. It
shouldn’t be used as a complete analysis of Athenian culture, but certain aspects can be retrieved
from the writing. We can see how Athenian’s referenced time before the current sense of
democracy. Throughout the struggle to find their stride in politics, they reference time periods by
Whipple 7
the archonship of time. For example, “In the forty-ninth year after the battle of Salamis, the
archonship of Pythodorus, the Peloponnesian War broke out.” (70). These stamps of time cannot
be relied on in the factual timeline. Referencing a political structure doesn’t concede confidence
in its point in time because it can change depending on interpretation of the archonship. There is
a greater span of time the archonship can represent. It also provides a look at gender equality at
the time. Throughout the text it hints at the superior status of men to women. Whether it is
previous societies of Athens or the account of the current one, no passage mentions women in
any of the roles in political life. This shows that men were considered to hold more merit than
women because merit was highly considered in the appointing of office. Overall it is a
respectable source of information on the time. It has its doubts like an ancient source, but still
cannot be overlooked for the quality insight it gives into ancient Athenian government and daily
life.
Whipple 8
Works Cited
Coffin, Judith, et al. Western Civilizations. 17. Vol. 1. New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 2011.
Mark, Joshua. Athens. 28 April 2011. 15 November 2013 <http://www.ancient.eu.com/Athens/>.
Rhodes, P.J. Aristotle The Athenian Constitution. London: Penguin Books, 1984.
Shields, Christopher. Aristotle. 25 September 2008. 15 November 2013
<http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle/>.