The Social, Political and Economic Situation in Athens

Archaic Greece
Student Name
Course
Instructor
Date
Question: What was Solon trying to achieve with his reforms? How do they reflect the social, political and economic situation in Athens?
Introduction
Reforms are an effective way of restructuring enterprises and systems to assist in attaining long-term objectives. They are the means of improving or amending what is wrong, unsatisfactory, and corrupt. In Athens, the emergence of Solon was a major change on both the political, social, and economic levels. The ideas Solon put forward through his writings helped move Athens from the oppression of dictators to another reality of a moderate democratic form. The Athenian lawgiver brought about a new constitution and a political dispensation for Athens. The changes granted several political, economic, and civil rights to the citizens who had remained disenfranchised. The prevailing laws were not enough as the hoplite power increased, and so did the threat of tyrant. However, in 594, the Athenians entrusted Solon to compromise a city-state divided based on different political opinions. The nobility was keen to maintain its power but at the same time willing to compromise. The poor peasants wanted their debt written off, the release from debt-induced slavery, and the retribution of land. Solon was aware of the danger unless he could bring a compromise between the nobility and the rest of the population. The legacy of Solon in Athens is evident. He was an opponent of tyranny and a moderate politician with a heart for both the rich and the poor. The combination allowed Solon to become a radical reformer.[Sagstetter, Kelcy. Solon of Athens: The man, the myth, the tyrant?. University of Pennsylvania, 2013.] [Ibid] [Duplouy, Alain. "The So-Called Solonian Property Classes: Citizenship in Archaic Athens." Annales. Histoire, Sciences Sociales-English Edition 69, no. 3 (2014): 409-439.]
The Debt Problem
Athens was experiencing a period of economic crisis. In particular, land ownership was problematic because it was concentrated in the hand of a few aristocracy. A majority of the citizens survived as dependents (hektemoroi) to those with the land. The hektemoroi paid out 1/6th of their harvest to the landowners. When the harvest was poor, the farmers did not survive. To cater to their families, the laborers had to put up their bodies as collateral so that they could borrow from their employers. It was challenging to repay the loans. The interest rates were very high, and also, the poor farmers were living on less than 5/6th of the whole produce. Failure to pay the debt forced them into slavery. Social inequalities escalated because of the increasing debt for the poor workers. The aristocratic landowners became wealthier while the poor farmers continued to sink in debt. The majority of the population was in debt, with the poor living on the starvation line. Such a huge divide destroyed the social fabric and was a recipe for a violent social response. Aristotle notes that the disparity between the rich and the poor had peaked. The creditors were ruthless in forcing the people to sell even their children.[Gallant, Thomas W. "Agricultural systems, land tenure, and the reforms of Solon." Annual of the British School at Athens 77 (1982): 111-124.] [Antoniades, Andreas, and Ugo Panizza. "How ‘demos’ met ‘cracy’: debt, inequality, money." Third World Thematics: A TWQ Journal 2, no. 6 (2017): 727-743.] [Ibid] [Ibid.] [Aristotle. Constitution of Athens. Translated by Thomas J. Dymes. Online Library of Liberty, 1891. http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/aristotle-constitution-of-athens.]
The increasing debt was due to the increasing pressure on the resources. Athens had not sent part of its population to colonies like the other Greek cities. The growing population meant that intense cultivation was needed, which continued to diminish the fertility of the soil. Peasants would often pledge part of the coming year’s harvest when they did not produce enough for the year. Since productivity was falling, a majority of the peasants could not pay their obligations and hence were subjected to debt bondage. Furthermore, a shift in the “monetary regime” had occurred. Athens transitioned from a natural economy to a monetary one based on metal currency. The new system disadvantaged the peasants because of the different rules. The money economy was subject to fluctuations and was determined by different forces that poor farmers did not control. The new approach shifted power from the peasants to those with money. The farmers had little control over the new system. For instance, they could not determine the time of debt payment hence they were forced to sell their produce immediately after harvest when grain was plenty and hence cheap. The changing rules continued to favor the rich why disadvantaging the poor farmers.[Sealey, R. A History of the Greek City States, Ca.700-338 B.C. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1976.]
Solon came in to deal with the destructive power that debt had created. The Athenians requested Solon to solve the economic mayhem to avoid a breakout of social war. Solon had two costly options. On the one hand, reinforcing the prevailing powers of the rich would lead to a possible social war. The poor would reach a peak and resist any attempts of the rich landowners to control them. On the other hand, redistributing the land to the poor would lead to resistance from the rich. Solon abandoned tyranny and came up with a middle way to accommodate both the rich and the poor. His reforms annoyed both sides because they expected Solon to be on their side. Solon's first act of reforms was known as the seisachtheia, which entailed canceling all debts. The act also forbade the enslavement of the people for debt and led to the liberation of those enslaved. Because of this approach, Solon created a sense of belonging for all Athen...