What do you think?
Rate this book
Η τυραννία στην αρχαία Ελλάδα
Η μελέτη της πολιτικής κατάστασης στην αρχαϊκή Ελλάδα, όπως θα καταδειχτεί σε κάθε κεφάλαιο αυτού του βιβλίου, δυσχεραίνεται από την έλλειψη λεπτομερειακών στοιχείων του είδους εκείνου που θα μπορούσε να φωτίσει τους μηχανισμούς της διακυβέρνησης και της δομής των τάξεων. Ο ιστορικός δεν πρέπει βέβαια να απελπίζεται εφόσον, φυσικά, γνωρίζει το κενό που υπάρχει στις πηγές του. Συχνά, όμως τείνει να θωρακίζει τις απόψεις του με εκφράσεις όπως π.χ. «πιθανόν» και «δυνατόν». Τέτοιες εκφράσεις αμφιβολίας παραμένουν στο κείμενό μου, μολονότι προσπάθησα να στηριχτώ σε υλικό, γύρω από το οποίο μπορεί κανείς να μιλάει με βεβαιότητα.
228 pages, Paperback
First published June 1, 1956
1 person is currently reading
58 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
March 2, 2025
Andrewes explores the nature of Greek tyranny, explores their historical context, and delineates the historical events surrounding various tyrannies throughout the Ancient Greek World.
A tyrant was an autocrat who seized power through unofficial means and outside the established constitutional order. Tyrants had no official recognized position in the constitution of the state. They also typically weren’t hereditary—although there were exceptions—unlike true monarchs. The origin of tyrants stems from the breakdown of aristocratic rule in the face of changing economic conditions, often leading to civil strife and chaos, which allowed tyrants to seize power to institute strong government as anecdote to the anarchy. Tyrants justified their rule as being more efficient than previously existing governments that were unable to solve these internal social pressures or external political problems.
Typically tyrants gained power by leading popular movements against the ruling aristocrats. Andrewes views tyranny arising as a transfer of power from the aristocratic elites to a wider group of citizenry represented by the hoplites. He points to King Pheidon’s victory over Sparta at the Battle of Hysiae in 669 BCE as possibly being due to an early adoption of hoplite tactics before anyone else and that Pheidon should possibly be seen as “a precursor of the tyrants (41) and if true would support the thesis that tyrants gained their support from the hoplite class. Andrewes considers “the tyrants represent a revolution against aristocracy [that] . . . mark a turning-point between two systems of government (14).” The system that followed after tyrannies was generally in the form of a democracy or oligarchy in which political decisions were made by a council and assembly.
In the original Greek context tyrants weren’t necessarily bad or evil rulers, but rather a single person controlling political power. Although Greek thinkers did offer opprobrium against people suspected of being a tyrant. The early writers of the 7th century often had no negative stigma associated with tyrant, and used it interchangeably with king. While 4th century philosophers viewed monarchs and tyrants as the positive and negative versions of the same coin.
Andrewes also explores many individual tyrants. The tyrants of Corinth were Cypselus and his son Periander who overthrow the aristocratic Bacchiads. They brought Corinth to its height of power, creating numerous Greek colonies, supporting a powerful navy, annexing Epidaurus, and supported various poets such as Arian of Lesbos who is said to have invented the dithyramb. Nevertheless, Periander also had a reputation for using social repression and brutality to maintain his power. Some tyrants like Cypselus of Corinth and Orthagoras of Sicyon likely maintained long rule as tyrants by holding mild policies that were acceptable to the majority, countering the assumption that all tyrants were brutal and repressive rulers.
Other tyrants like Cleisthenes stoked racial division between Dorian and non-dorians and fostered war against Argos as part of his tyranny. His policies included ending recitations of Homer that praised the Argives, trying to remove a shrine to the Argive hero Adrastus who was a former king of Sicyon, and changing the names of Dorian tribes shared between Sicyon and Argos to insulting names. These policies may have been less from genuine racial sentiments and more ploys to stir up strong negative feelings to keep power.
Alceus the poet offers us the unique perspective of the dispossessed aristocrat forced into exile and conspiring with his fellow exiled aristocrats against the succession of tyrants of Mytilene in Lesbos. In this group, the tyrant Pittacus was unique in that he was an elected tyrant brought to power to provide peace against civil strife, which ironically was caused by aristocrats like Alceus who resisted sharing power.
Polycrates established a tyranny on Samos that subjugated numerous islands in warfare through a strong navy and as an enemy of Persia. Eventually he switched sides during the reign of Cambyses and was killed by Oroites the Persia governor of Lydia who rebelled against Darius. He sponsored poets such as Ibycus of Rhegium and Anacreon of Teos. This is the same tyrant from which Pythagoras fled. While Histiaeus and Aristagoras as tyrants of Miletus orchestrated the failed Ionian revolt against Persia. It likely began as attempt to subdue Naxos and after that failed became an opportunistic power grab.
Andrewes considers the Tyrants of Syracuse different from many of those that appeared in Greece and not fitting Aristotle’s formula. A series of tyrants of Syracuse called the Deinomenids included Gelon who allied with Theron tyrant of Argigentum to defeat the Carthaginians at Himera, his brother and successor Hieron who defeated the Etruscan’s at Cumae in 475, and the final tyrant Thrasymbulus who lost power against the supporters of Gelon’s son. Next was Dionysus who seized power in Syracuse during a series of military conflicts against the Carthaginians in Sicily.
While many Greek city-states fell to tyrants places like Sparta avoided tyranny for much of its history through its peculiar political arrangements. Andrewes believes the difficulties of the Second Messenian War discredited Aristocratic government, but learning from the mistakes of Corinth that led to tyranny, Sparta opted for political and social reform that “gave Sparta the first hoplite constitution of Greek history (75).”
Athens also avoided tyranny in the 6th century through Solon’s reforms that balanced the desires of the aristocrats and wealthy by giving wealthy non-aristocrats access to political power and assisted the poor citizen economically-depressed by the switch from a barter economy to a money economy by abolishing debt slavery and creating four classes based on wealth and land which had different access to governance, while also giving them a chance to challenge rulings by upper class magistrates through appeal to jury, preventing a civil war and tyrannical takeover.
Eventually Peisistratus was successful at making himself tyrant of Athens after three failed attempts using mercenaries hired with silver acquired from mines in Thrace while in Eretria. He arose during fighting between different factional parties vying for political power: the men of the plains, the men of the city, and the men of the coast. His accomplishments as tyrant include large-scale building projects to foster national pride, encouraged Panhellenic religious festivals like the Panathenaic festival and Dionysia, began the dramatic competitions during the Dionysia, added Homeric recitation to Panathenaic festival, and offered patronage to poets. Andrewes even argues Peisistratus had an important role in the development of the tyranny by replacing aristocratic factions with a stable government and weakening dependence on lesser patronage.
Outside forces also played a role in tyranny. As Persians conquered the Greeks of Asia Minor they often installed tyrants to control the rebellious Greeks. In the Macedonian and Hellenic period, tyrants either served as external enforcers of Macedonian policy or last ditch efforts of Greek independence and freedom from external rule.
A tyrant was an autocrat who seized power through unofficial means and outside the established constitutional order. Tyrants had no official recognized position in the constitution of the state. They also typically weren’t hereditary—although there were exceptions—unlike true monarchs. The origin of tyrants stems from the breakdown of aristocratic rule in the face of changing economic conditions, often leading to civil strife and chaos, which allowed tyrants to seize power to institute strong government as anecdote to the anarchy. Tyrants justified their rule as being more efficient than previously existing governments that were unable to solve these internal social pressures or external political problems.
Typically tyrants gained power by leading popular movements against the ruling aristocrats. Andrewes views tyranny arising as a transfer of power from the aristocratic elites to a wider group of citizenry represented by the hoplites. He points to King Pheidon’s victory over Sparta at the Battle of Hysiae in 669 BCE as possibly being due to an early adoption of hoplite tactics before anyone else and that Pheidon should possibly be seen as “a precursor of the tyrants (41) and if true would support the thesis that tyrants gained their support from the hoplite class. Andrewes considers “the tyrants represent a revolution against aristocracy [that] . . . mark a turning-point between two systems of government (14).” The system that followed after tyrannies was generally in the form of a democracy or oligarchy in which political decisions were made by a council and assembly.
In the original Greek context tyrants weren’t necessarily bad or evil rulers, but rather a single person controlling political power. Although Greek thinkers did offer opprobrium against people suspected of being a tyrant. The early writers of the 7th century often had no negative stigma associated with tyrant, and used it interchangeably with king. While 4th century philosophers viewed monarchs and tyrants as the positive and negative versions of the same coin.
Andrewes also explores many individual tyrants. The tyrants of Corinth were Cypselus and his son Periander who overthrow the aristocratic Bacchiads. They brought Corinth to its height of power, creating numerous Greek colonies, supporting a powerful navy, annexing Epidaurus, and supported various poets such as Arian of Lesbos who is said to have invented the dithyramb. Nevertheless, Periander also had a reputation for using social repression and brutality to maintain his power. Some tyrants like Cypselus of Corinth and Orthagoras of Sicyon likely maintained long rule as tyrants by holding mild policies that were acceptable to the majority, countering the assumption that all tyrants were brutal and repressive rulers.
Other tyrants like Cleisthenes stoked racial division between Dorian and non-dorians and fostered war against Argos as part of his tyranny. His policies included ending recitations of Homer that praised the Argives, trying to remove a shrine to the Argive hero Adrastus who was a former king of Sicyon, and changing the names of Dorian tribes shared between Sicyon and Argos to insulting names. These policies may have been less from genuine racial sentiments and more ploys to stir up strong negative feelings to keep power.
Alceus the poet offers us the unique perspective of the dispossessed aristocrat forced into exile and conspiring with his fellow exiled aristocrats against the succession of tyrants of Mytilene in Lesbos. In this group, the tyrant Pittacus was unique in that he was an elected tyrant brought to power to provide peace against civil strife, which ironically was caused by aristocrats like Alceus who resisted sharing power.
Polycrates established a tyranny on Samos that subjugated numerous islands in warfare through a strong navy and as an enemy of Persia. Eventually he switched sides during the reign of Cambyses and was killed by Oroites the Persia governor of Lydia who rebelled against Darius. He sponsored poets such as Ibycus of Rhegium and Anacreon of Teos. This is the same tyrant from which Pythagoras fled. While Histiaeus and Aristagoras as tyrants of Miletus orchestrated the failed Ionian revolt against Persia. It likely began as attempt to subdue Naxos and after that failed became an opportunistic power grab.
Andrewes considers the Tyrants of Syracuse different from many of those that appeared in Greece and not fitting Aristotle’s formula. A series of tyrants of Syracuse called the Deinomenids included Gelon who allied with Theron tyrant of Argigentum to defeat the Carthaginians at Himera, his brother and successor Hieron who defeated the Etruscan’s at Cumae in 475, and the final tyrant Thrasymbulus who lost power against the supporters of Gelon’s son. Next was Dionysus who seized power in Syracuse during a series of military conflicts against the Carthaginians in Sicily.
While many Greek city-states fell to tyrants places like Sparta avoided tyranny for much of its history through its peculiar political arrangements. Andrewes believes the difficulties of the Second Messenian War discredited Aristocratic government, but learning from the mistakes of Corinth that led to tyranny, Sparta opted for political and social reform that “gave Sparta the first hoplite constitution of Greek history (75).”
Athens also avoided tyranny in the 6th century through Solon’s reforms that balanced the desires of the aristocrats and wealthy by giving wealthy non-aristocrats access to political power and assisted the poor citizen economically-depressed by the switch from a barter economy to a money economy by abolishing debt slavery and creating four classes based on wealth and land which had different access to governance, while also giving them a chance to challenge rulings by upper class magistrates through appeal to jury, preventing a civil war and tyrannical takeover.
Eventually Peisistratus was successful at making himself tyrant of Athens after three failed attempts using mercenaries hired with silver acquired from mines in Thrace while in Eretria. He arose during fighting between different factional parties vying for political power: the men of the plains, the men of the city, and the men of the coast. His accomplishments as tyrant include large-scale building projects to foster national pride, encouraged Panhellenic religious festivals like the Panathenaic festival and Dionysia, began the dramatic competitions during the Dionysia, added Homeric recitation to Panathenaic festival, and offered patronage to poets. Andrewes even argues Peisistratus had an important role in the development of the tyranny by replacing aristocratic factions with a stable government and weakening dependence on lesser patronage.
Outside forces also played a role in tyranny. As Persians conquered the Greeks of Asia Minor they often installed tyrants to control the rebellious Greeks. In the Macedonian and Hellenic period, tyrants either served as external enforcers of Macedonian policy or last ditch efforts of Greek independence and freedom from external rule.
October 18, 2023
I highly recommend this short, wonderfully written book. At 70 years old it is still a fantastic treatment of the subject and offers a wider vista into ancient Greek history than just the title would suggest. The writing is economical. The author is evenhanded in his analysis, and is quite happy to forgo speculation when the facts are meager.
May 4, 2025
Slightly outdated 70 years after its publication (i.e. the claim that zeugitai is the same as hoplites has since been disproved), occasionally drowned in excessive details, but very well structured, quite informative and totally readable, much more so than most of similar books on specific historical topics.
October 10, 2017
Read my senior year in college in connection with an Ancient History class. Excellent survey of some of the tyrants who ruled in some of the Greek city-states of ancient times.
November 11, 2016
An intelligent overview of the history of tyrannies in ancient Greece. Andrewes quibbles unadvisedly with Aristotle and Plato over the issue of "good tyrants" - which betrays his relatively narrow reading of their theoretical work on the issue - but does much to reconstruct the murky story of Greece's earliest tyrannies and the political conditions which made them possible.
August 4, 2011
Though a classical book on Greek Tyranny, the ideas are still popping out afresh from the pages of this well organized book that treats the scarce data on the issue systematically and without any exaggeration. Andrewes has written a solid book for both experts and laymen.
January 3, 2010
Also read for Greek History class at Penn State.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews