Classics 470 Democracies Ancient and Modern

Fall 2010 Prof. Vincent Farenga

What is this course about?

CLAS 470 takes an in-depth look at the two societies in the Greco-Roman world that
deserve to be called ―democratic‖: Athens 508 – 322 BC Rome from 509 – 31 BC.

1. We will examine the political histories of democratic Athens and republican Rome, but
also their political institutions, practices, values, and ways of life.

2. We’ll use written sources in Greek and Roman history, philosophy, political theory,
oratory and biography to see how each society organized citizens and non-citizens,
engaged in decision-making and law-making, and developed different leadership roles
and leader – follower dynamics.

3. We’ll also consider how the reputations of Athenian democracy and Roman
republicanism have changed in the modern world—and whether we should look today to
these two societies as a prototype or model for modern democracies.

4. To answer these two questions, we’ll examine innovations and controversies in recent
scholarship by ancient historians and classicists.

Course Goals: What sort of knowledge and skills will you acquire?

1. You will learn about the key events and individuals responsible for the revolutions that
produced democratic Athens and republican Rome. You’ll also understand how each key
political and legal institution functioned and contributed to a system that put degrees of
political power into the hands of ordinary people. You’ll understand how Athenians
and Romans assembled, deliberated, voted, dispensed justice, and responded to
leaders. You’ll acquire a deeper understanding of core democratic values like freedom,
equality, competition for individual merit and honor, and how elite and common citizens
managed their differences to develop a common democratic or republican culture.

2. Case studies taken from ancient historians, philosophers and speechwriters will draw you
into some of the most memorable political deliberations and legal/criminal judgments in
each society. You’ll share in the reasoning, prejudices, and emotions that emerge from
the conflicting perspectives of male citizens, women, foreigners, and slaves. Key
document discussion will also give you the chance to join other students in identifying
crucial information, generating comparisons, engaging in disagreements, and reaching
conclusions.
3. You’ll become familiar with the theoretical attempts by major thinkers like Plato,
Aristotle, Polybius, Cicero and Machiavelli to understand (and control) the problems
and controversies of democratic and republican society.

4. Recent scholarship will involve you in the current reevaluation of Athenian democracy
and Roman republicanism. You’ll be able to judge each society as a model for, or as an
alternative to, the values and practices of today’s democratic societies.

Course requirements

1. Commitment to participation: you should be ready each time class meets to engage in
well-informed discussions of case studies and key documents. You should also be
prepared to contribute information on important facts, events, individuals, etc., and to
volunteer your opinion on major questions or controversies. (When case studies are
discussed, each student will receive an individual evaluation). Each student will also
report to the class on one recent, controversial work of scholarship [15 % of final grade]

2. Short written assignments. You’ll be asked to write a report of 4-5 pp. on two of the
case study discussions we have considered. Reports are due on the dates indicated [20%]

Exams. There will be a midterm and a final exam. No make-up exam will be provided
unless you have a personal emergency or illness; you must contact Prof. Farenga for
approval. [Midterm: 20%, Final 25%.]

3. Final Project: a research project (research paper, an original case study presentation or
key document analysis, a leadership profile & evaluation). [20%]

Study and Research Aids: To help with assigned readings, ―focus questions‖ will be provided for
some key documents and case study preparations for each case study. These highlight the key
information and developments you should look for and key concepts you should recognize.

Policy on written assignments: If a report is submitted after 5 pm on the due date, it will be
considered one day late and will receive a penalty of ½ grade (5 points). Each additional day late
accrues a penalty of ½ grade. After 3 days, the assignment will not be accepted. N.B. Electronic
submissions are not accepted—hard copy only.

Policy on academic integrity: We will adhere rigorously to the university's policies on academic
integrity as described in SCampus. Violations, during exams or through plagiarism in written
work, will be reported to the Office for Student Conduct.

Policy on Grade of “Incomplete”: A grade of IN can only be assigned if you do not complete
work after the end of the 12th week because of illness or personal emergency. Prof. Farenga
must, however, approve assignment of this grade. The missed work must be completed within
one academic year.
Statement on Students with Disabilities: Any student requesting accommodations based on a
disability is required to register with Disability Services and Programs (DSP, STU 301; x00776)
each semester. A letter of verification for approved accommodations can be obtained from DSP.
Please have the letter delivered to Prof. Farenga ASAP.

Required Readings

You’ll find the following texts at the USC Bookstore; some of them (as indicated) are also
available on Reserve in Leavey. They are listed in the order we’ll use them.

Hansen, Mogens H. 1999. The Athenian Democracy in the Age of Demosthenes. U Okla P,
ISBN 0806131438 [also Reserve]
Aristotle. 1996. The Politics and the Constitution of Athens. Cambridge UP, 0521484006 [also
Reserve]
Thucydides 1994. Of Justice, Power and Human Nature. Hackett P, 0872201686.
Plutarch 1998. Greek Lives. U Oxford P, 019825011. [also on Reserve]
Millar, Fergus. 2002. The Roman Republic in Political Thought. UP New England,
1584651997.
Livy. History of Rome Books 1-5. Hackett P, 0872207234.
Cicero 1999. On the Commonwealth and On the Laws. Cambridge UP, 0521459591 [also on
Reserve]
Machiavelli, Niccolo. Selected Political Writings. (Discourses on Livy). Hackett P, 087220247.

Other required readings are available online through Ares Electronic Reserve, Blackboard,
USC’s ebrary, or in hard copy on the Reserve list in Leavey. [see Syllabus]

Instructor: Vincent Farenga, Prof., Classics & Comparative Lit, THH 256-R, x00106,
farenga@usc.edu. Office hours for Fall: Tu 11-12 and Th 2-3 in THH 256-R & by appointment.

COURSE SYLLABUS

Week 1

Aug 24

1. Course intro: What is this course about? Its goals, requirements, procedures, policies.

Aug 26

1. In world history, how common have democratic societies been? Is it basically a Western
type of society, or is it found in non-Western societies? Does it have a core element?

2. How and why did the Athenians reorganize their society into a democracy in 508/7 BC?

Readings: Sen 2003, ―Democracy and Its Global Roots,‖ The New Republic 229, n. 14,
on Blackboard;
 Hansen 1999: 27-43 (―The Athenian Constitution down to 403 BC‖ in
Athenian Democracy in the Age of Demosthenes,);
Aristotle 1996: 211-42 (secs. 1-41 in Constitution of Athens. [57 pp]

Week 2

Aug 31

1. Core values of the democracy: equality, freedom, and public vs. private life.

2. Case study. Herodotus stages an imaginary, cross-cultural debate: Which is the superior
political society: monarchy, oligarchy or democracy? See Case Study 1 (Blackboard).

3. Key Document Discussion. Pericles’ Funeral Oration.

Readings: Hansen 1999: 55-85;

Herodotus 1998: 204-208 (Histories 3.80-87, Ares Elec Reserve);
Aristotle 1996: 243-4 (sec. 42 in Constitution of Athens);
Thucydides 1993: 39-46 (Pericles’ Funeral Oration, in On Justice, Power &
Human Nature);

Sep 2 Citizenship

1. What did it mean to be an Athenian citizen, a metic, a slave? How does Aristotle theorize
the nature of citizenship and non-citizenship?

2. How were citizens divided into groups by age, location, & descent? (Ephebes, demes,
trittyes, tribes.) Citizen rights, duties, and social classes

3. Key Doc: How do you know an Athenian citizen when you see him? Lysias 23 ―Against
Pancleon‖ (387 BC).

Readings: Hansen 1999: 86-124;

Aristotle 1996: 11-19 and 61-69 (The Politics 1.1-1.6 & 3.1-3.5);
Lysias 2000: 245-51 (―Against Pancleon,‖ in Speeches, on ebrary). [104]

Week 3

Sep 7 Institutions: Assembly

1. The citizen assembly: crucible of Athenian democracy? Organization & dynamics.

2. How did leaders try to persuade citizens in assembly speeches? By contrast how did
citizens of one state try to persuade those of other states?

3. Key docs: Pericles’ War Speech; Last Speech; debate on Mytilene; Platean debate.
Readings: Hansen 1999: 123-60;
Aritsotle 1996: 244-5 (sec. 43 in Constitution of Athens;
Thucydides 1993: 31-36 (Pericles’ War Speech), 52-56 (Pericles’ Last Speech),
66-76 (Mytilenean debate), & 76-87 (Plataean debate).

Sep 9

1. Deliberation: how vital to democracies ancient and modern?

2. Case studies: deliberation in the Assembly on war: (a) Should Athens invade Sicily?
(415 BC); (b) should Athens fight Philip II of Macedon? (351 BC).

Readings: Thucydides 1993: 102-109 (Nicias’ and Alcibiades’ speeches on Sicily);

Demosthenes 1970: 188-98 (―Philippic I,‖ Greek Political Oratory, Ares
Elec Reserve);
Aristotle 1996: 76-78 (in Politics 3.11);
Gutmann & Thompson 2004: 1-21 (―What Deliberative Democracy Means,‖ in
Why Deliberative Democracy? on Ares Elec Reserve). [103]

Week 4 Institutions: Law-making

Sep 14

1. Were Athenian laws and law-making the keystone of the democracy? Unlike modern
law, how did Athenian law have an ―open texture‖?

2. How can innovations in deliberation improve our own democratic decision-making and
law-making on today’s critical issues?

3. Case study: Dialogue between Athenians & Melians: Could changes in their process of
deliberation have led to a less deadly outcome in 416 BC?

Readings: Hansen 1999: 161-77;

Harris 2000 (―Open Texture in Athenian Law,‖ in Dikê 3, Ares Elec Reserve);
Gutmann & Thompson 2004: 21-48 (Why Deliberative Democracy? Ares Elec
Reserve);
Thucydides 1993: 102-109 (Melian dialogue).

Sep 16

1. Was Athenian law flexible or rigid? Was the Athenian people’s changing opinion about
law (―popular sovereignty‖) more decisive than the abstract ―rule of law‖?
 2. How deliberative was Athenian legal decision-making? Key doc: pseudo-Demosthenes’
―Against Aristogeiton‖ ca. 325 BC.

Readings: Allen 2000: 179-90 (―The Rule of Judgment vs. the Rule of Law,‖ in The World
of Prometheus, Ares Elec Reserve);
Cohen 1995: 227-44 (―The Rule of Law and Democratic Ideology in Classical
Athens,‖ in Die Athenische Demokratie, ed. Eder, Ares Elec Reserve);
Demosthenes 25.1-27 & 92-101 (―Against Aristogeiton,‖ Ares Elec Reserve)
[119]

Week 5 Institutions: The Law Courts

Sep 21

1. Were the law courts the foundation of the democracy? How were they organized? How
did a case come to trial? What was the dynamics of a jury trial?

2. Case studies: homicide cases for the prosecution (Antiphon 1) and for the defense
(Lysias 1).

Readings: Hansen 1999: 178-203;

Aristotle 1996: 259-63 (secs. 63-69 in Constitution of Athens);
Antiphon 1998: 9-16 (―Against the Stepmother‖ in Antiphon & Andocides, on
ebrary);
Lysias 2000: 13-24 (―On the Death of Eratosthenes,‖ in Speeches, on ebrary).

Sep 23

1. How did citizens use the law courts to wage political & social war on one another?

2. What were: graphê paranomôn (indictment for illegal law-making), eisangelia

(impeachment proceeding), and euthynai (audit for illegal financial gain)? How were
they related to ostracism?

3. In 330 BC how does one political leader (Aeschines) use the courts to attack another
(Demosthenes) for graphê paranomôn?

Readings: Hansen 1999: 203-224;

Rhodes 1998 (―Enmity in Fourth-Century Athens,‖ in Kosmos, edds. Cartledge,
Millett & von Reden, on Ares Elec Reserve);
Aeschines 3.1-24 (―Against Ktesiphon,‖ on Ares Elec Reserve). [96]
Week 6

Sep 28 FIRST REPORT ON CASE STUDY DUE AT START OF CLASS TODAY

Institutions: the Council of 500

 1. The role of the Council of 500 and the archons (magistrates) in the democracy.

2. Aristotle’s description of the Council and the theoretical link between

democracy and its magistracies.

3. Key doc: a disabled citizen pleads to the Council of 500 for his state pension.

Readings: Hansen 1999: 225-65;

Aristotle 1996: 245-49 (secs. 43-49 in Constitution of Athens);
Aristotle 1996: 153-66 (The Politics 6);
Lysias 2000: 252-59 (―For the Disabled Man,‖ in Speeches, on ebrary).

Sep 30 Leadership as a Democratic Practice

1. What types of leaders did the democracy encourage? How were they recruited? What
were their motives?

2. Why didn’t Athens have political parties?

3. Who was Athens’ first truly democratic leader?

Readings: Hansen 1999: 266-87;

Plutarch 1998: 78-111 (―Life of Themistocles,‖ in Greek Lives)
Recommended: Plutarch 1998: 118-39 (―Life of Cimon,‖ in Greek Lives). [118]

Week 7

Oct 5

1. What were leader – follower dynamics like early in the democracy? Did Pericles’
leadership follow this pattern or break with it?

2. What is a ―demagogue‖? Are all democratic leaders ―demagogues‖?

3. Leadership profiles: presentations on Pericles, Nicias, Alcibiades.

Readings: Finley 1985: 38-75 (―Athenian Demagogues,‖ in Democracy Ancient & Modern,
on Ares Elec Reserve);
Plutarch 1998: ―Life of Pericles‖ or ―Life of Nicias‖ or ―Life of Alcibiades‖ in
Greek Lives.
Oct 7 1. How did democratic leadership change in the fourth century?

2. Key doc: Plutarch’s ―Life of Demosthenes.‖

Reading: Plutarch ―Life of Demosthenes‖ (364-94) on Ares Elec Reserve. [104]

Week 8 Rejecting Democracy: Voices of Dissent

Oct 12

1. Why did some intelligent Athenians despise democracy? Case study: the ―Old
Oligarch’s‖ ―Constitution of the Athenians.‖

2. Key doc: Plato’s critique of democratic society and the democratic character.

Readings: ―Old Oligarch’s‖ ―Constitution of the Athenians‖ in Aristotle and Xenophon

1975: 37-47 on Ares Elec Reserve;
Plato, Republic 8 (555b-565d) (225-36) on Ares Elec Reserve.

Oct 14 MIDTERM EXAM TODAY. See Policy on Exams. [21]

Week 9 The Roman Republic’s Mythical and Historical Beginnings

Oct 19

1. What is republicanism? What did Rome contribute to its development?

2. Why are the origins of Rome, and of the Republic, accessible through myth and legend?
What do historians today think were the Republic’s historical origins? Legendary
themes: tyrant-slaying, conflict of orders, secession of plebs; arrogant patricians.

Readings: Millar 2002: 1-11 (―Introduction,‖ in The Roman Republic in Political Thought);
Livy 2006, History of Rome 1.1-1.26 (pp. 9-40);
Raaflaub 2006: 125-46 (―Between Myth and History: Rome’s Rise from Village
to Empire‖) on Ares Elec Reserve.

Oct 21

1. Case study: Why is the rape of Lucretia the Republic’s founding myth?

2. Key doc: Livy’s hymn of praise to Roman liberty.

3. Is there one reform that made Rome a republic? Or is it a combination of reforms?

Readings: Livy 2006 History of Rome 1.32-60 (47-83; 2.1 (84-5); 2.23-40 (111-133) [121]

Week 10 Institutions: Consulate, Senate, Plebeian Assembly, Tribunate

Oct 26

1. How accurate is the idea that the Republic’s constitution ―mixed‖ elements of monarchy,
oligarchy, and democracy?
 2. What evidence makes the early Republic look like two societies (one of elites, the other
of commoners) co-existing side-by-side?

Readings: Millar 2002: 12-36 (―Greek Observers‖);

North 2006: 256-77 (―The Constitution of the Roman Republic‖) on Blackboard.
Livy 2006 History of Rome 3.8-29 (172-98). Recommended: 3.30-59 (198-236)

Oct 28

1. Key doc: The Greek historian Polybius analyzes the Roman constitution.

2. How does Cicero create a philosopher’s version of the development of the constitution?

Readings: Polybius 1979: 302-318 (6.1-18 in The Rise of the Roman Empire, Ares Elec
Reserve);
Cicero 1999: 13-32 & 33-57 (secs. 1.26-71 & 2.1-69 in On the Commonwealth
(De republica). [130]

Week 11 Institutions: Citizen Assemblies

Nov 2

1. Citizen Assemblies: how were they organized and conducted?

2. Case study: How should a magistrate address an assembly? Cicero on going to war
under Pompey’s leadership in 66 BC.

Readings: Lintott 1999: 40-64 (―The Assemblies‖ in Constitution of the Roman Republic on
Ares Elec Reserve);
Millar 1998: 13-48 (‖The Roman Crowd in Perspective‖ in The Crowd in Rome in
the Late Republic, on Ares Elec Reserve;
Cicero 1989: 35-44 & 47-59 (―On the Command of C. Pompeius‖ in Selected
Political Speeches on Ares Elec Reserve).

Nov 4 Institutions: the Senate

1. Why was the Senate the Republic’s dominant political institution?

2. Case study: Cicero mobilizes the Senate to meet a crisis of political terrorism in 63 BC.
Why does his own account differ from the historian Sallust’s?

Readings: Lintott 1999: 65-88 (―The Senate‖) (availability tba);

Cicero1989: 129-45 (―Fourth Speech against Catilina‖ in Selected Political
Speeches, on Ares Elec Reserve);
 Sallust 1963: 215-27 (from ―The Conspiracy of Catiline‖ in The Jugurthine War
and the Conspiracy of Catiline on Ares Elec Reserve. [129]

Week 12

Nov 9 SECOND REPORT ON CASE STUDY DUE IN CLASS TODAY

Institutions: Major Magistrates

1. Consul, praetor, dictator, proconsul, propraetor, censor: What were their different
functions? Their powers? [potestas, imperium, collega, provincia, auspicia]

Readings: Lintott 1999: 94-120, 121-37, & 144-46 (―The Higher Magistrates‖ &
―Tribunes . . .‖) on Blackboard;
Cicero 1999: 157-63 ([imperium of magistrates] and 164-67 [on tribunes] in On
the Laws 3.1-15 and 3.19-26).

Nov 11 Institutions: Tribunes; the Contio

1. The tribunes of the plebs; their powers and privileges {sacrosancticity, intercessio,
auxilium, provocatio]

2. The contio as the primary stage for communication between leaders and common citizens

3. Key docs: (a) consul Marius boasts of his non-aristocratic credentials for leadership in
107 BC; (b) Cicero’s brother sends him advice on how to campaign for the consulship.

Readings: Morstein Marx 2004: 34-67 (―Setting the Stage‖ in Mass Oratory and Political
Power in the Late Republic, on elecReserve);
Sallust 1963: 116-22 (Marius’ speech in Jurgurthine War, photocopy);
Quintus Tullius Cicero, ―Advice on Running for Consul‖ (photocopy). [91]
Week 13

Nov 16 Practices & Values: What Motivated Roman Aristocrats?

1. Honor, courage in war, eloquence, public service, freedom to compete.

2. Presentations: profiles of leaders Cato, Scipio, T. Gracchus, Marius, Sulla [photocopies

from Plutarch’s Roman Lives]

3. How did the Republic’s system of criminal justice work? How were the courts
organized? Who served on juries?

Readings: Rosenstein 2006: 365-82;

Riggsby 1999: 1-20 (―What Can We Know . . . ‖ in Crime & Criminality in
Ciceronian Rome on Ares Elec Reserve)
Nov 18 Institutions: the Law Courts

1. Case study: Cicero defends M. Caelius Rufus on charges of murder & attempted
poisoning.

2. Presentation of profiles of leaders: Cicero and J. Caesar [from Plutarch]

Readings: Riggsby 1999: 97-105 (―The oratio pro Caelio‖ Crime & Criminality, photocopy);
Cicero 1989: 166-193 (―In Defence of M. Caelius Rufus‖ in Selected Political
Speeches, photocopy). [72]

Week 14 No class on Nov 23 and Nov 25 (Thanksgiving Holiday) [0]

Week 15

Nov 30 Evaluating the Republic

1. How did later ages evaluate the Republic? Machiavelli’s Discourses.

Readings: Millar 2002: 157-82 (―Cicero’s Rome: What Aristotle Might Have Thought‖ in
The Roman Republic in Political Thought;
Millar 2002: 50-79 (―Looking Back on the Republic: the Empire, Middle Ages,
Machiavelli‖);
Machiavelli 1994: 82-104 (Discourses on Livy, in Selected Political Writings).

Dec 2

1. Continued discussion of Machiavelli’s Roman Republic.

2. From today’s perspective, how democratic was the Republic?

Readings: Machiavelli 1994: 104-124 & 158-72;

Millar 2002: 135-56 (―Some Contemporary Approaches‖). [133]

Dec 9 FINAL PROJECT DUE BY 5 PM TODAY in THH 256-R. See Policy on Assignments.

Dec 14 FINAL EXAM TODAY 2 – 4 pm. See Policy on Exams.