Summary: Cleisthenes was an Athenian politician who remodeled its system of government in Classical times. By changing the government from a grass-roots level, Cleisthenes set Athens on a path which would end in the creation of full democracy. The following is an explanation of how this was achieved, and also touches on the benefits which Cleisthenes (and his family) may have received as a result. It also considers the validity of the Classical sources of history regarding Cleisthenes. A more summarised version of the changes instituted by Cleisthenes may be found here and here. A further explanation of Athenian political and democratic history (for context) may be found here. A certain amount of Classical knowledge is assumed (or can be found in the other nodes), but I will pipelink in any additional explanation.

Scholars of Classics have often disagreed about which reforms of Athenian politics and life Cleisthenes introduced, but all are in agreement over the fact that the reforms attributed to him are important. Having received enough influence with the demos¹ to introduce the concept of his reforms, Cleisthenes made changes to society and its organisation, to politics, the military, religion and culture. There is no doubt that Cleisthenes helped to pave the way for full democracy through his introduction of isonomia, leaving behind a lasting legacy. Cleisthenes seems to have moved his proposals as a private citizen to the Ekklesia during a period of uncertainty - after years of tyranny, anarchy and invasion by foreign powers (the Spartans and their Peleponnesian satellites). As a life member of the Areopagus, Cleisthenes was both generally well-known and well-regarded by the citizens of Athens, to whom he proposed his reforms. One of the first major changes which scholars generally agree should be attributed to Cleisthenes is the changing of the Solonian instituted Council (Boule) of Four Hundred for a new Council of Five Hundred. This more expansive council matched in with another reform of Cleisthenes, the reorganisation of the traditional tribes and family alliances of Attic citizens which facilitated the enfranchisement of classes without land (thetes), such as the alien immigrants of the trades, the metics. Other reforms attributed to Cleisthenes, such as those regarding the military, the vote of ostracism, and the creation of demes are questioned by various scholars, and require discussion.

The first major reform that is attributed to Cleisthenes is the reorganisation of the citizen body, and the subsequent breaking of the regional power of the aristocracy. Attica was formed into ten artificial tribes either by lot or manipulation (scholarly debate has not yet reached a consensus), each comprising three trittyes². Whether or not the demes existed before Cleisthenes is a matter which has been the subject of academic debate, and it is unlikely that the issue will ever be resolved - the main primary source of the matter, Herodotus, is ambiguous in his wording about the creation of tribes, trittyes and demes - "[Cleisthenes] changed the names of the tribes and increased their number[...] and distributed the demes among the ten tribes³". It has been hypothesised that the demes existed before the reforms of Cleisthenes, others believe that only the country demes existed. It any case, it seems plausible that they evolved without manipulation, as the demes seem to be naturally structured for the most part, comprising a village or two which are geographically close.

Whether or not Cleisthenes created the demes, it seems certain that he allocated these structural units to the trittyes (although whether this was by lot or plan is debated) and from these created the ten new tribes of Attica. It is interesting, too, to note that the tribes were named after ten eponymous heroes (nine from Attica, and one from an allied state, "Aiantis"), chosen from a list of 100 and approved by the Pythia of Delphi. In securing the sanction of Delphi, Cleisthenes helped to ensure the acceptability of his reforms in the public eye, and thus their durability.

The creation of the new tribes was critical - it allowed the enfranchisement of new citizens into the previously strictly-controlled citizen lists. A number of people in Attica were landless, and without citizenship as defined by the aristocracy and the reforms of Solon. Citizenship (traditionally, and after the fall of the Peisistratids) was judged upon ancestry, and Cleisthenes instituted a change which saw citizenship become based upon membership of a deme. With the suggested use of demotics in the place of patronymics, the new citizens of Attica could blend into the state with relative ease, creating a more unified citizen body. The deme, therefore, grew in importance as an organ of the state. It maintained a register of citizens, and was led by a new position - the demarch⁴. Moreover, the previous relationship between land ownership and the ability to vote was broken - now, all male citizens who were recorded in the deme registries could vote. The deme was also represented not only at tribal assemblies by elected representatives, but also in the Council of Five Hundred. Deme assemblies could be attended by male citizens over the age of eighteen.

The Council of Five Hundred was a natural evolution of the Solonian Council of Four Hundred as the tribal reforms took place. The Solonian Council had comprised 100 representatives from each of the existing four tribes, and the replacement Council was composed of fifty representatives from each of the ten new tribes. Each deme sent nominees to the tribal assembly, where they were chosen (it is thought by lot) to represent the tribe in Athens at this Council. The Council met according to schedule, guided by a steering committee (ie, a tribe's representatives) for a tenth of the year, and ran the day-to-day administration of Attica, also preparing items for discussion in the less-regularly-meeting Ekklesia⁵. It seems definite that this revised Council was created by Cleisthenes, although it was only executive in function and could not create policy, working in close harmony with the Areopagus.

The tribes also held a significance in other areas of the Cleisthenic reforms. In the military, each tribe eventually elected a general (strategos) who would comprise the military council of ten, superseding the previous authority of the four generals of the old tribes (although it is thought that the old naukeries were kept, despite Aristotle's belief that they were superseded by the demes, and some believe that they were increased in number), with the Polemarch still in a position of overall command.

The breaking of the tribes served another purpose, quite aside from that of political representation of the demos and of the military - it decreased the regional power of the aristocracy. It has been suggested that the reorganisation of the people into artificial tribes was orchestrated by Cleisthenes for the benefit of his family, the aristocratic Alkmeonids, and certainly when looking at a map of their strongholds (and that of their allies), it appears that their influence remained generally unbroken. The rest of the aristocracy, it appears, were not so fortunate in that their strongholds were split between different tribes, effectively breaking their regional hold - the aristocracy were thus unable to regain the influence that they had lost under the rule of the tyrants, allowing the integration of the new citizens with greater ease (previously, the aristocracy had been in the position to deny citizenship of phratries and thus of the tribes).

Hand in hand with the reforms of the citizen lists came political reforms that gave more political authority to the lower classes. Leaving the Solonian classes (thetes to pentacosiomedimnoi) intact, Cleisthenes opened up to the thetes the opportunity to attend the Ekklesia, something which they had previously been denied. However, it must be noted that although all male citizens could now vote, it appears that many did not, simply because they lived in demes which were geographically isolated from Athens, where the assembly of the people met. Here, the aristocracy were in a better position to vote as they could afford to attend (with bureaucratic positions unpaid, power remained in the hands of the wealthy).

Legal reforms were also considered by Cleisthenes, although this area was left alone more than any other area of Attic society. The Heliaea of Solon was seemingly left untouched, although the authority of the Areopagus suffered somewhat as the Council of Five Hundred (and to a lesser extent, the Ekklesia) grew in importance. However, it appears that the judicial functions of the Areopagus and archons remained untouched, and that a greater accountability for political office was legislated. It also appears that in capital trials, judgement was reserved for the Ekklesia.

Religion was also changed under the leadership of Cleisthenes. Local cults and deities had been left alone during the Solonian reforms, although the Peisistratids had begun to emphasise worship of Athena (centred around Athens). Under Cleisthenes, the local cults which had been controlled by the region's aristocrats were split into different demes, and thus became associated to different tribes, weakening further the regional influence of the aristocrats. Cleisthenes seems to have also extended the policy of the tyrants, emphasising the unifying worship of Athena, and expanding the religious festivals endemic to Athens to the surrounding demes, such as Eleusis and Brauron. The emphasis of Athens as a cultural centre of Attica by the tyrants was also extended by Cleisthenes, with the arts and intellectual pursuits being encouraged, and the continuation of the Panathenaic Games, and theatre. However, the old tribal alliances still existed as both social and religious units, representing a more traditional unificiation, despite their decreased importance.

It seems certain that Cleisthenes' reforms were to the benefit of the majority of society, and also to the Alkmeonidai. The aristocracy, who had fallen in importance during the reign of the tyrants, did not recover most of their power, but nor were they stripped of the privileges that they already held - even though there was greater eligibility amongst the general citizen populace to hold more important positions, the aristocracy retained their hold on the archonships and generalships simply because they could afford to work in unpaid positions. Conversely, it is apparent that the lowest class, the thetes (and the previous metics) benefited from the Cleisthenic reforms. Now full and indisputable citizens, these people without land (or without a significant amount of it) benefited from the ability to vote in the Ekklesia, thus ensuring that the reforms stayed in place, and securing their position in society.

The aristocratic family of Cleisthenes, the Alkmeonidai, certainly appear to have benefited from the reforms, as hypothesised earlier. Aside from keeping their strongholds and cult area (and that of their allies) within the countryside of Attica, the family also held influence in Athens. Many of the newly-enfranchised citizens were based in Athens itself and were grateful to Cleisthenes (a significant proportion of these people had been the skilled alien immigrants of the Solonic reforms whose citizenship had been revoked after they lost the protection of their rights granted during the tyranny, and for whom there had been little provision of land), thus giving the Alkemeonidai a powerful base of support in the Ekklesia, most of whom were in the position to attend the assembly's meetings.

Other significant beneficiaries and casualties of the reforms were widely spread throughout the populace. The people as a whole benefited from this new and almost all-encompassing constitution, in that the administration of the state now had a specific and regular system in place which was largely representative of the population. Conversely, some tribes fared worse than others in that their trittyes were not geographically similar, and could in fact be considerably split, thus impeding communication and attendance of meetings by any but the members of their city demes.

The social, political and legal reforms of Cleisthenes were certainly a watershed in Attic civilisation, and paved the way for the revolution of politics from isonomia to democratia. By carefully altering selected parts of society as it existed in the post-Solon and post-tyranny era, Cleisthenes was able to secure a more unified and stable society, with a greater proportion of the population holding a political voice. Although some groups of society benefited from these reforms more than others, it could be concluded that as a whole, the Cleisthenic reforms promoted democracy, as summed up by Aristotle in his Politics when speaking about how to create a democracy: "New tribes and phratries should be created in addition to the old; private cults should be reduced in number (2) and made public; every contrivance should be employed so that all mix with each other as much as possible and former loyalties are broken down.⁶" If this is how democracy is achieved, then certainly, Cleisthenes was one of the men who paved the way for that system of government.

Footnotes:

1. Cleisthenes has been said to have won over the people of the Ekklesia by promising to hand over governance of Attica during his political struggle against the Spartan-backed Isagoras.
2. One or more demes from each of the following three regions: city, coast and inland.
3. Herodotus, Histories (5.69) in Stanton, G.R., Athenian Politics c.800-500BC : A Sourcebook, (London 1990) p. 139
4. Aristotle, in his Athenaion Politeia says that the demarch was no more than a re-naming of the old position of naukraroi, also saying that the demes replaced the nauraries.
5. It is thought that the Ekklesia met a few times per month to vote on matters put forward by the Boule. Occasionally, it met for special votes, such as that of ostracism, although it is very much debated whether this reform was Cleisthenic or not.
6. Aristotle, Politics (1319b 19-27) in Stanton, Athenian Politics c800 - 500BC : A Sourcebook, p. 148

Sources:

• Personal knowledge from studying Classics
• Terry Buckley, Aspects of Greek History : 650-323BC, Routledge, London, 1996, pp. 119-143
• C. Hignett, A History of the Athenian Constitution, Oxford University Press, Clarendon, 1952, pp. 108-158
• J.M. Moore, Aristotle and Xenophon on Democracy and Oligarchy, Chatto & Windus, London, 1975, pp. 141-246
• Martin Otswald, From Popular Sovereignty to the Sovereignty of Law - Law, Societ and Politics in Fifth-Century Athens, University of California Press, Berkley, 1986, pp. 175-181
• G.R. Stanton, Athenian Politics c.800-500BC : A Sourcebook, London, 1990, p. 138-190
• Kleisthenes' Reforms 508-7BC at http://plaza.ufl.edu/caleb98/turner/kleisthenes.html