Making direct democracy work: A rational-actor perspective on the graphe paranomon in ancient Athens

George Tridimas, Carl Hampus Lyttkens, Anna Lindgren

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

The specific way the Athenians set up their democracy presents both theoretical and empirical challenges. Decisions were taken by majority vote in the Assembly. To keep politicians in line, the Athenians first used ostracism, which however was replaced by the graphe paranomon around 415 BCE. The latter provided that anybody who had made a proposal in the Assembly could be accused of having made an unconstitu¬tional suggestion, bringing a potentially severe penalty if found guilty. We know of 35 such cases between 403 and 322. During the fourth century the notion of illegality was extended to a mere question of political undesirability. Henceforth any decision by the Assembly could be overturned by the courts, but if the accuser failed to get at least 20% of the jury votes, he was punished instead. While these rules can be seen as a safeguard against bad decisions, they also provided the Athenian politicians with important information about the relative strength of their political support. This effect has not been analysed before, and it may help explain the relative stability of political life in classical Athens. Furthermore this analysis also contributes to our understanding of a curious but often overlooked fact, namely that the decrees of the Athenian Assembly to a great extent concerned honorary rewards, and the use of the graphe paranomon in turn was largely focussed on the honorary decrees.
LanguageEnglish
Pages389-412
Number of pages24
JournalConstitutional Political Economy
Volume29
Issue number4
Early online date7 Jun 2018
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 31 Dec 2018

Fingerprint

direct democracy
statutary order
politician
voter
illegality
political support
accused
reward
penalty
democracy
Athens
Direct Democracy
Direct democracy
Decree
Politicians
Vote

Keywords

  • Ancient Athens
  • graphe paranomon
  • direct democracy
  • judicial review
  • voter information
  • stability of policy
  • jury composition

Cite this

@article{b100cee9cd5644d493d7109dcdeaea55,
title = "Making direct democracy work: A rational-actor perspective on the graphe paranomon in ancient Athens",
abstract = "The specific way the Athenians set up their democracy presents both theoretical and empirical challenges. Decisions were taken by majority vote in the Assembly. To keep politicians in line, the Athenians first used ostracism, which however was replaced by the graphe paranomon around 415 BCE. The latter provided that anybody who had made a proposal in the Assembly could be accused of having made an unconstitu¬tional suggestion, bringing a potentially severe penalty if found guilty. We know of 35 such cases between 403 and 322. During the fourth century the notion of illegality was extended to a mere question of political undesirability. Henceforth any decision by the Assembly could be overturned by the courts, but if the accuser failed to get at least 20{\%} of the jury votes, he was punished instead. While these rules can be seen as a safeguard against bad decisions, they also provided the Athenian politicians with important information about the relative strength of their political support. This effect has not been analysed before, and it may help explain the relative stability of political life in classical Athens. Furthermore this analysis also contributes to our understanding of a curious but often overlooked fact, namely that the decrees of the Athenian Assembly to a great extent concerned honorary rewards, and the use of the graphe paranomon in turn was largely focussed on the honorary decrees.",
keywords = "Ancient Athens, graphe paranomon, direct democracy, judicial review, voter information, stability of policy, jury composition",
author = "George Tridimas and Lyttkens, {Carl Hampus} and Anna Lindgren",
year = "2018",
month = "12",
day = "31",
doi = "10.1007/s10602-018-9263-4",
language = "English",
volume = "29",
pages = "389--412",
journal = "Constitutional Political Economy",
issn = "1043-4062",
number = "4",

}

Making direct democracy work: A rational-actor perspective on the graphe paranomon in ancient Athens. / Tridimas, George; Lyttkens, Carl Hampus; Lindgren, Anna.

In: Constitutional Political Economy, Vol. 29, No. 4, 31.12.2018, p. 389-412.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Making direct democracy work: A rational-actor perspective on the graphe paranomon in ancient Athens

AU - Tridimas, George

AU - Lyttkens, Carl Hampus

AU - Lindgren, Anna

PY - 2018/12/31

Y1 - 2018/12/31

N2 - The specific way the Athenians set up their democracy presents both theoretical and empirical challenges. Decisions were taken by majority vote in the Assembly. To keep politicians in line, the Athenians first used ostracism, which however was replaced by the graphe paranomon around 415 BCE. The latter provided that anybody who had made a proposal in the Assembly could be accused of having made an unconstitu¬tional suggestion, bringing a potentially severe penalty if found guilty. We know of 35 such cases between 403 and 322. During the fourth century the notion of illegality was extended to a mere question of political undesirability. Henceforth any decision by the Assembly could be overturned by the courts, but if the accuser failed to get at least 20% of the jury votes, he was punished instead. While these rules can be seen as a safeguard against bad decisions, they also provided the Athenian politicians with important information about the relative strength of their political support. This effect has not been analysed before, and it may help explain the relative stability of political life in classical Athens. Furthermore this analysis also contributes to our understanding of a curious but often overlooked fact, namely that the decrees of the Athenian Assembly to a great extent concerned honorary rewards, and the use of the graphe paranomon in turn was largely focussed on the honorary decrees.

AB - The specific way the Athenians set up their democracy presents both theoretical and empirical challenges. Decisions were taken by majority vote in the Assembly. To keep politicians in line, the Athenians first used ostracism, which however was replaced by the graphe paranomon around 415 BCE. The latter provided that anybody who had made a proposal in the Assembly could be accused of having made an unconstitu¬tional suggestion, bringing a potentially severe penalty if found guilty. We know of 35 such cases between 403 and 322. During the fourth century the notion of illegality was extended to a mere question of political undesirability. Henceforth any decision by the Assembly could be overturned by the courts, but if the accuser failed to get at least 20% of the jury votes, he was punished instead. While these rules can be seen as a safeguard against bad decisions, they also provided the Athenian politicians with important information about the relative strength of their political support. This effect has not been analysed before, and it may help explain the relative stability of political life in classical Athens. Furthermore this analysis also contributes to our understanding of a curious but often overlooked fact, namely that the decrees of the Athenian Assembly to a great extent concerned honorary rewards, and the use of the graphe paranomon in turn was largely focussed on the honorary decrees.

KW - Ancient Athens

KW - graphe paranomon

KW - direct democracy

KW - judicial review

KW - voter information

KW - stability of policy

KW - jury composition

U2 - 10.1007/s10602-018-9263-4

DO - 10.1007/s10602-018-9263-4

M3 - Article

VL - 29

SP - 389

EP - 412

JO - Constitutional Political Economy

T2 - Constitutional Political Economy

JF - Constitutional Political Economy

SN - 1043-4062

IS - 4

ER -