The Greek Tyrannies: C. 650 — 510 BC

The Period of Tyrannies

From 650 when Cypselus established a tyranny at Corinth to 510 when the sons of Peisistratus fell at Athens many Greek cities were controlled by tyrants. Tyrants also came to power in many cities of Ionia and Sicily. However, the term “tyrant” does not necessarily imply brutality, and many of the Greek tyrants ruled with a measure of popular support; usually, the first generation tyrants were brought to power by popular feeling and the second generation tyrants, losing this popular basis, would resort to force and subsequently be overthrown. Factions among the nobles could cause the leaders of one faction to ally with the revolutionary sentiments, though it is not always the case that revolutions were lead by disaffected aristocrats. The leaders of a successful faction would be called tyrannus (tyrant), a term which did not originally have the negative associations that it carries today. Aristotle in his Politics identified the main reason why tyrants came to power: “The tyrant is installed in power from among the people [demos] and the masses against the wealthy so that the people suffer no injustice at their hands.” He also noted that on other occasions a king might aim at becoming a despot, or an aristocrat achieve preeminence. The majority of tyrants were aristocrats who opted to oppose their class interest and become champions of the people.

The quality of the primary sources for this period is doubtful. Ephorus of Cyme during the middle of the C4th BC wrote a history of the period, but his work is lost and only fragments remain; even so, Ephorus, like Herodotus, was not careful to distinguish fact from legend. However, three poets of the period, Tyrtaeus of Sparta, Alcaeus of Mytilene and Solon of Athens are useful primary sources; however, they were writing poetry not history.

Examples

Argos

There is some difficulty about dating the events associated with the life of King Pheidon of Argos. He is mentioned by Herodotus has having expelled the Elean presidents from the Olympian Games. It can be argued that he gave military and political support to the Pisatans who gained control of the Olympiad in either the 8th (748 BC) or 28th (668 BC) games. 668 BC seems the most likely date. However, Ephorus places Pheidon earlier than this, and Herodotus fifty years later.

It is possible that Pheidon was responsible for the Argive victory over the Spartans at the battle of Hysiai in 669 BC, which was fought over the dispute between Sparta and Argos regarding the border plain of Thyrea. According to legend (as related by Ephorus) the Peloponnese was divided among the three descendants of Heracles — one brother received Messenia, the second Lacdeaimon and the third, Temenus, the Argolid. Following the death of Temenus the Argolid divided into smaller states, but Pheidon is credited with having “regained the lot of Temenus” — that is, with reuniting the Argolid under Argive rule. It is probable that Pheidon was a constitutional king who developed into a tyrant. It is arguable that this was as a result of his introduction of hoplite tactics which would also account for his victory over the Spartans. His increased power would have come through the support he enjoyed from the hoplite militia. From that basis he would have been able to overthrow the aristocratic government. However, all of this is quite speculative.

Corinth

Corinth was one of the wealthiest cities of Greece where trade was not as despised as in some other city-states. Its position on the isthmus made it pivotal in controlling the trade routes east and west, particularly as the voyage around the Peloponnese (Cape Malea) was so hazardous. Corinth also established itself as a manufacturing centre in its own right, and its merchant fleet controlled a large proportion of the freight trade in the West.

The aristocratic family of the Bacchiads established a monopoly over political power in Corinth; permitting no marriage of its members outside the family and taking it in turns to elect the king from among themselves. Corcyra rebelled against Corinthian rule and winning a naval engagement against them in c. 664 BC, gained its independence. The defeat of Corinth by its colony Corcyra may have created a focal point for growing discontent in Corinth with this situation. Corinth may also have been under pressure from the rising power of Argos under Pheidon.

Cypselus was the son of a lame daughter of the Bacchiads who had a husband drawn from outside the family on account of her unattractiveness. He was educated abroad and on returning to Corinth became popular with the people and elected polemarch, that is “war leader”. He became the leader of “people” and ousted the Bacchiads c.657 BC. Apparently, he was so popular that he did not require a bodyguard, which does imply that he had the support of the middle classes. Very little is known about the details of his reign, except that during it the city enjoyed peace and prosperity.

His son, Periandros, reigned for forty-four years. He was reputed to be one of the “Seven Wise Men” of his time, but was ruthless as well as resourceful. His plan for a canal across the isthmus was not realised, but he did establish a causeway over which ships could be hauled on transports. Nonetheless, he became unpopular and his sons died before him. He was succeeded by his nephew, Psammetichos, who was overthrown. The government reverted to a form of oligarchy.

Under Cypselus and his successor Periander Corinth flourished, and founded colonies at Leucas, Anactorium, Ambracia and Apollonia. They also founded Epidamnus in collaboration with Corcyra, implying that Corinth had achieved a rapprochement with its former colony by this time. Corinth formed an alliance with Miletus and so gained access to eastern markets. Corinth cultivated the friendship of Athens, judging in favour of Athens against Mytilene in a dispute over the control of Sigeum. Periander's successor was named Psammetichus in honour of the Egyptian king, Psamtek.

Sicyon

A tyranny lasting an unprecedented 100 years was established at Sicyon by Orthagoras, who was reputed to be the son of a cook, which lasted from c. 650 to c. 550 BC. One of his successors was Cleisthenes (c. 600 — 570 BC) who adopted deliberately ethnic policies that were also hostile to Argos. Firstly, he tried to abolish the cult of the Argive hero Adrastus, but was prevented from doing this by the Delphic Oracle; then he set up a rival cult of Melanippus. Following that he renamed the tribes giving the Dorian tribes insulting names, such as “pig men”. Thus it appears that Cleisthenese did everything he could to identify himself as the leader of the non-Dorians in Sicyon. The Spartans deposed him around the middle of the C6th BC, but they were not able to abolish the names of the Dorian tribes that he had created for another sixty years.

Asia Minor

In Asia Minor the Persians were responsible for imposing tyrants on the Ionian cities there because this was the form of government that they preferred. This is what emerges from the poetry of Alcaeus who records the history of the successive tyrannies at Mytilene

Causes

Population growth and land hunger

During the C8th BC the economies of Archaic Greece flourished and one consequence was over-population during the second half of the C8th BC. Fertile land was limited in supply and the custom of dividing the land equally between male heirs also caused problems. One result of this was a period of extensive colonization. Another result was land hunger and rising debt. This created a class of discontented citizens. One stimulus to political revolution was the belief, probably a myth, held by most peasants throughout Greece, that during some golden age in the past land was more equitably distributed; therefore, there was a constant cry for redistribution of land, naturally enough resisted by the aristocracy. Hesiod, a farmer of the village of Ascra in Boeotia, in his Works and Days also illustrates the problem of land hunger. The starting point for this work by Hesiod is his complaint concerning the division of land between himself and his brother, whom he accuses of getting an unfair portion by bribing the aristocratic magistrates. Solon's writings also deal with the social problems caused by insufficient arable land.

Money was invented in Lydia and was introduced into Europe via Aegina around 625 BC. As a result, it became easier to buy and sell land. It also became possible to accumulate debt. However, as the work of Hesiod indicates, it was possible to trade in land even before the invention of money. The introduction of money is likely to have increased social tensions, the causes of which already existed.

Economic expansion and the rising “middle class”

It is no contradiction that the deterioration in the conditions of one class runs hand in hand with the economic rise of another. The colonies had corn to spare for export, and this was imported by mainland Greece, particularly Athens but also the Peloponnese; mainland Greece, in turn, exported luxury goods. Thus the seventh and sixth centuries were a period of considerable economic growth throughout the Greek world of the Mediterranean. The greater trade created new sources of wealth — manufacturers and merchants — who were potential rivals for power in the city state. The rising standards of living for the merchant class were a stimulus to revolutionary developments in art, literature and politics. Thus another factor in the rise of tyrants would be the rise of this new economically powerful class of merchants and industrialists. The landed aristocracy resented this and fought against sharing power with them. The poetry of Theognis of Megara (c. 550 BC) reflects aristocratic feelings of outrage at seeing power going to people “unworthy” of it. Thucydides explicitly refers to the increasing wealth of Greece as a factor in the rise of tyrannies. By contrast Hesiod also stands for the “middle-classes” — he is a malcontent who is criticizing narrow aristocratic society. By contrast, Homer represents to the aristocratic point-of-view, and his portrayal of the heroes of the golden age, who are brave and honourable, but sensitive and vengeful, would strike a resonant cord with his aristocratic audience. But during the C7th BC the voices of protest, represented by Hesiod, became more influential.

Cultural developments are indicative of rising economic power. Greek geometric art disappeared. New motifs were inspired by oriental styles, not drawn from pottery itself, but from ivories, jewelry, metalwork and textiles. From the Egyptian pattern of alternating lotus flowers and buds was derived the “egg and tongue” and “egg and dart” motifs. The ionic pillar was derived from similar pillars used in Syria. Vases become decorated with friezes depicting animals such as wild goats, lions, sphinxes, dogs and hares. Vases were decorated with images of muscular men and themes were adopted from the tales of Greek heroes. During the C7th the Corinthians developed a “Protocorinthian” style which was very fine and carefully crafted. Later, excessive demand for this work led to the evolution of a “ripe Corinthian” style in which the work is not so fine. Athens began to produce Black-figure ware as a result of which they were able to lure much western trade away from Corinth. The Corinthians countered with imitations of the Athenian produce, but by 550 BC the Corinthian export trade had ceased. Most painting and sculpture of the period has not survived. Early Greek sculpture shows Egyptian influence. The most popular them is that of naked young men, statues set up over the graves of men who died young. Subsequently, korai (maidens) appear as a theme, for example, in a series made for the Acropolis. Temples originally made of timber and brick were rebuilt in stone.

Hoplite tactics

The early Greek army was based on the aristocrat and his “phatry” — that is, those people attached to his family by clan ties. At some stage this unit was replaced by the citizen hoplite; defence required the participation of all able-bodied men capable of equipping themselves as hoplites. The hoplite phalanx was usually eight men deep and success in battle depended on the weight and cohesion of the line; thus the predominance of the aristocrat in military affairs was much reduced.

Most scholars believe that a principle cause of the rise of tyrants was the change in military tactics at this time — with hoplite infantry replacing aristocratic champions. However, there is considerable debate about this. For example, Snodgrass believes that the innovation of hoplite tactics took place over the course of a century, from c.750 to c.650 BC, that there was a considerable transition period, and that rather than hoplite citizens bringing about tyrannies, the tyrants themselves were responsible for the introduction of hoplite tactics. Vase paintings depict the hoplite phalanx from the middle of the C7th. The first vase to depict a hoplite-like formation is the Chigi vase of 660 — 650 BC. On the other hand Cartledge and Salmon advocate the view that there was a decisive period of change between 700 and 675 BC, particularly with the invention of the hoplite shield and Corinthian helmet. The shield as two grips and is suitable only for use in a infantry phalanx, being less maneuverable than the single grip type associated with the heroic age. By 675 BC this shield was in wide use, arguing for a decisive introduction of hoplite tactics around 700 BC. Likewise, the Corinthian helmet was made from a single sheet of bronze and was suitable for withstanding a frontal assault but had restricted side vision. This argues strongly in favour of the theory that hoplite tactics were introduced prior to 700 BC. However, a third view is advanced by Morris who claims that there was no revolution in tactics at all and that the phalanx or something like it was in use as early as the heroic age.

Support for the theory that the change in military tactics brought about a new political situation comes from Aristotle, who in his Politics comments “the class that does the fighting for the state wields the supreme power in this constitution, and those who bear arms have a share in its government.” He also in another passage refers to the population increase of the period as another cause of the change in government.

Factional politics

The aristocracies of each city state ceased to act as one body organized around their class interest; factions developed within them. It is possible that the colonizing activity of the period gave impetus to this development; the establishment of a colony would require an organization and constitution and would stimulate debate about politics.

Ethnic tensions

There were powerful ethnic differences among the Peloponnesians, and these could be exploited by leaders for political gain. The cause of the ethnic tension was the conquest of the Peloponnese by the Dorians c. 1000 BC with the consequent reduction to serfdom of pre-Dorians. This tension was heightened when in the C7th BC Sparta conquered its neighbour Messenia. Throughout the Peloponnese there were underprivileged classes who were primarily ethnically non-Dorian. Tyrants could appeal to one ethnic group in order to win popular support.

The downfall of tyrants

We may speculate that prosperity was not enough to quiet the Greek desire for full participation in the politics of the state. Rule under a tyrant might bring prosperity, but the administration of justice could be arbitrary and this irked.

Tyranny was not a long-term solution to the political problems of the Greek city state. It implied the concentration of political power in one man's hand, or in the faction that he represented. A tyrant would typically rise to power on the back of some wave of discontent, but once the initial source of malcontent was redressed, the imbalance created by the concentration of power would create political tensions of their own. A more permanent solution to the political problem implies a compromise between the claims of the aristocracy and the claims of the people — a mixed constitution with elements of both oligarchy and democracy (though, of course, not in the sense that we understand democracy, since every Greek state had classes of permanently underprivileged peoples — slaves or serfs and women were not represented in government). Thus, the tyrannies were inherently unstable. Nonetheless, in most cases it can be argued that they were beneficial. They provided a temporary solution to the political problem, and most tyrants sought to improve the economic well-being of the cities they served, with ambitious plans for public works. The cases of Corinth and Athens (discussed in another chapter) illustrate these benefits.

Once the counter-movement against the tyrant's regime developed, usually under his successor, the tyrant, now threatened, would resort to force to maintain his power. This would increase resentment and tension and be likely to hasten his overthrow. Each city had at least two factions, and the faction dispossessed of power could call in the assistance of a foreign power — for example, at Sicyon where Sparta intervened. The Spartan constitution (see separate chapter) acted as an inspiration to one faction. For example, the C7th poet Terpander of Lesbos praises it.

Theagenes the tyrant of Megara is a typical example. His public works programme involved building an aqueduct to bring running water into the city. However, he was himself driven into exile at some later stage. Most dynasties founded by tyrants were short-lived; one exception being the dynasty founded at Sicyon by Orthagoras.