The concept of universal justice in governance, for the rich and poor alike, emerged within Athens during the decline of her oligarchy, and was codified by the great lawgiver Solon in the 6^th century B.C. He annulled the traditional authority of the Areopagus, freed all Athenian slaves and granted them citizenship within a new system that provided all politai—albeit to a limited extent—a voice in governance, all for the sake of maintaining this universal justice.[1] While Solon implemented these measures practically, two centuries later the Divine Plato would discuss his own concepts of justice through theoretical inquiry, under the ideal of the Republic, giving much credit to Solon in the process as one of the seven sophoi.[2] Solon’s reforms to redress inequality laid the foundation for Athens’ transition from oligarchy, with many deeming them the seeds of democracy, simply nurtured by Cleisthenes. Plato, by contrast, rejected democracy, and thus might seem at odds with Solon’s legacy. Yet such a view is too simple; for in Plato’s condemnation of democracy, he aligns his vision of justice and governance with that of Solon, explicitly opposing Cleisthenes’ approach, thereby positioning himself as the true reviver of Solon’s principles and, in many ways, his ideological heir.

            Before discussing Plato and his accordance with Solonian politics, a number of premises must be established. Firstly, it is clear that the political system developed by Solon should not be called democracy, since this is the term used to describe the Cleisthenian system and would thus be anachronistic. Nor should Solon’s system be referred to as “limited democracy,” “proto-democracy,” or similar, for it was fundamentally aristocratic, or at least timocratic.[3] Solon divided the Athenian population into four classes, granting each equal representation in the Boule, a council of four hundred, which assumed many responsibilities previously held by the Areopagus, the former supreme authority under the oligarchy. A democratic interpretation of this system immediately falls apart when considering that two out of the four represented classes—the pentacosiomedimnoi and the hippeis—were from the wealthy aristocracy, while one—the zeugitai—were the often-affluent middle class. This left the thetes or the majority of the demos with only one fourth of the council;[4] clearly, this was not the rule of the people (demokratia).

Secondly, it is important to recognize that Solon did not design his system with an inherent capacity for future development; rather, as lawgiver of Athens, he intended his framework to provide a stable foundation for the city’s governance that would endure going forwards. According to Plutarch, Solon decreed that his laws were to remain unchanged for one-hundred years, [5] a stipulation that Cleisthenes disregarded when he introduced his democratic reforms less than a century later, despite viewing himself as the ideological heir to Solon.[6] Further, Eva Stehle notes that “Solon’s position vis-à-vis the Athenians… appears rather like that of Zeus in [the] Odyssey.”[7] This is because in his poetry, Solon often operates with prescient, almost semi-divine forethought; as though he is aware of Athens’ potential fate should it ignore his counsel, warning them in a prophetic manner.[8] It should not have been, then, that Solon’s system was altered as it was by Cleisthenes, who—rather than simply delivering Athens from her tyrants and reforming back to the ways of Solon—radically innovated the system of tribes and demes in place of Solon’s classes and altered the Boule entirely.[9]

Now turning once more to Plato, his admiration of Solon as a lawgiver of great wisdom[10] invites reflection, for Platonic political philosophy appears to draw heavily upon Solon’s principles rather than oppose them.[11]  For even if Solon had permitted reforms after his laws were enacted, they would have defied his intent for justice had they led to democracy, which Plato argues often devolves into chaos and tyranny.[12] In his Republic Plato stresses the need for balance in governance through Socrates’ discourse with Adeimantus: “’Wealth and poverty,’ I said, ‘One produces luxury, idleness and revolution, the other meanness of spirit, poor workmanship–and of course revolution as well.’” [13] He argues that extremes of both wealth and poverty lead to injustice, instability and division, making it essential to maintain moderation; that a stable and unified society may endure. Solon’s system, as according to Plato’s ideal, was fundamentally rooted in balance and moderation, aiming for the maintenance of the noble and the good. He preserved the aristocratic influence of the previous oligarchic system, whilst preventing the injustice and luxurious indulgence innate to it. This political balance is evident in Solon’s class system—which Cleisthenes later disposed of—where the thetes were granted representation sufficient to avoid exploitation by the elite, yet limited enough to prevent them from ruling over their superiors. To Plato the possibility of the latter was one of the major flaws in the democratic system.[14] It is in the Republic—where Plato expresses his disdain for democracy—that he also expresses his admiration for Solon, through the character of Socrates, as the “great lawgiver of Athens,”[15] for his ideal city needs a philosopher-king of like ability. Thus is it disproven that Solon’s practical reforms and Plato’s ideals were at odds.

Having established that Solon’s political system was neither democratic nor aligned with Cleisthenes’ reforms, but was instead reflected most purely in Plato’s ideals, it becomes clear that he was the true ideological heir to Solon. While Cleisthenes’ innovations sought to expand popular rule, they abandoned the careful balance of power and moderation upon which Solon had built his government. Plato, by contrast, upheld the principle that justice resides in harmony and balance, both in the state and the soul, calling upon Solon’s efforts to temper aristocratic dominance with the measured inclusion of the lower classes. Solon’s vision, rooted in the preservation of order and the prevention of extremes, found its philosophical counterpart in Plato’s Republic, where the lawgiver serves as a steward of justice, ensuring the well-being of the polis. Thus, it was not Cleisthenes, with his radical restructuring, but Plato, in philosophizing his ideal society, who honored Solon’s legacy most faithfully.

---

[1] Eva Stehle, “Solon’s Self-Reflexive Political Persona and Its Audience” Solon of Athens, eds. Josine Blok & Andre Lardinois,(Brill Academic Publishers, 2006) pp. 92-93.

[2] Kathryn A. Morgan, “Solon in Plato,” Solon in Tragedy, Solon in the Making: The Early Reception of the Fifth and Fourth Centuries, eds. Gregory Nagy & Maria Noussia-Fantuzzi, (Walter de Gruyter GmbH, 2015) pp. 136

[3] Kurt A, Raaflaub, “Athenian and Spartan Eunomia, or: What to do With Solon’s Timocracy?” Solon of Athens, eds.  Josine Blok & Andre Lardinois, (Brill Academic Publishers, 2006) pp. 422.

[4] Pseudo-Aristotle, Athenian Constitution trans. Frederic G. Kenyon (Project Gutenberg, 2008) 7.2-4.

[5] Plutarch, Life of Solon, The Parallel Lives, trans. Bernadotte Perrin (Harvard University Press, 1914), chap. 25, sec. 1.

[6] J. A. .R Munro, “The Ancestral Laws of Cleisthenes,” The Classical Quarterly (Cambridge University Press, 1939) pp. 84

[7] Eva Stehle, “Solon’s Self-Reflexive Political Persona and Its Audience” pp. 92.

[8] Eva Stehle, “Solon’s Self-Reflexive Political Persona and Its Audience” pp. 92-93

[9] Alain Duplouy, “The So-Called Solonian Property Classes: Citizenship in Archaic Athens” trans. Christophe Réthoré, Annales. Histoire, Sciences Sociales, 69^th Year (Cambridge University Press, 2014) pp. 420.

[10] Maria Carla Giammarco, Cosa Pensava Platone di Solone? (University of L’Aquila Press, 2021) pp. 2

[11] Plato, The Republic trans. Tom Griffith, synopsis, pp. xlvi-xlvii.

[12] Plato, The Republic trans. Tom Griffith, Book 8, 564b, pp. 278.

[13] Plato, The Republic trans. Tom Griffith, Book 4, 420b, pp. 113.

[14] Plato, The Republic trans. Tom Griffith, Book 8, 562a, pp. 276-277.

[15] Plato, The Republic trans. Tom Griffith, Book 10, 598d, pp. 319.