{"title":"亚里士多德和反身艺术。在国外消息来源的支持下,亚里士多德对于民主民权大礼服,亚略巴格和诺莫西西亚的演讲","authors":"Gertrud Dietze-Mager","doi":"10.7358/erga-2022-002-gdie","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article discusses the discrepancy between Aristotle’s representation of the Athenian politeia and the information contained in external sources. First we examine his statement that the demagogues manipulate the size and structure of the citizen body by admitting persons of doubtful background in order to broaden their power base. The external sources show no such practice in Athens in the 5th nor in the 4th century: they prove that the three mass citizenship grants in Athenian history were not due to demagogic manipulation but to situations of need, and that on top citizenship criteria became increasingly strict. Next his picture of the 4th century Areopagus as an institution stripped of political and constitutional powers is critically assessed against external sources which show that Aristotle’s description does not match the facts. The article finally tries to clarify why Aristotle chose to never mention the Athenian nomothesia in his writings. It concludes that not only the way in which he presents information about the Athenian state, but also, and more importantly, his decision to exclude information from his narrative are influenced by his conservative views and seem to be guided by his wish to paint a dark picture of the contemporary Athenian politeia.","PeriodicalId":37877,"journal":{"name":"Erga-Logoi","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Aristoteles und die Kunst des Verschweigens. Die aristotelische Darstellung von demokratischer Bürgerrechtsverleihung, Areopag und nomothesia im Licht externer Quellen\",\"authors\":\"Gertrud Dietze-Mager\",\"doi\":\"10.7358/erga-2022-002-gdie\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article discusses the discrepancy between Aristotle’s representation of the Athenian politeia and the information contained in external sources. First we examine his statement that the demagogues manipulate the size and structure of the citizen body by admitting persons of doubtful background in order to broaden their power base. The external sources show no such practice in Athens in the 5th nor in the 4th century: they prove that the three mass citizenship grants in Athenian history were not due to demagogic manipulation but to situations of need, and that on top citizenship criteria became increasingly strict. Next his picture of the 4th century Areopagus as an institution stripped of political and constitutional powers is critically assessed against external sources which show that Aristotle’s description does not match the facts. The article finally tries to clarify why Aristotle chose to never mention the Athenian nomothesia in his writings. It concludes that not only the way in which he presents information about the Athenian state, but also, and more importantly, his decision to exclude information from his narrative are influenced by his conservative views and seem to be guided by his wish to paint a dark picture of the contemporary Athenian politeia.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37877,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Erga-Logoi\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Erga-Logoi\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7358/erga-2022-002-gdie\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Erga-Logoi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7358/erga-2022-002-gdie","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
Aristoteles und die Kunst des Verschweigens. Die aristotelische Darstellung von demokratischer Bürgerrechtsverleihung, Areopag und nomothesia im Licht externer Quellen
The article discusses the discrepancy between Aristotle’s representation of the Athenian politeia and the information contained in external sources. First we examine his statement that the demagogues manipulate the size and structure of the citizen body by admitting persons of doubtful background in order to broaden their power base. The external sources show no such practice in Athens in the 5th nor in the 4th century: they prove that the three mass citizenship grants in Athenian history were not due to demagogic manipulation but to situations of need, and that on top citizenship criteria became increasingly strict. Next his picture of the 4th century Areopagus as an institution stripped of political and constitutional powers is critically assessed against external sources which show that Aristotle’s description does not match the facts. The article finally tries to clarify why Aristotle chose to never mention the Athenian nomothesia in his writings. It concludes that not only the way in which he presents information about the Athenian state, but also, and more importantly, his decision to exclude information from his narrative are influenced by his conservative views and seem to be guided by his wish to paint a dark picture of the contemporary Athenian politeia.
Erga-LogoiArts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊介绍:
Erga-Logoi is a peer-reviewed open-access journal of ancient history, literature, law and culture, as broadly conceived in geographical and chronological terms. Evoking Thucydides'' methodological exordium (although in that context the opposition obviously has a different value), the name of the Journal was chosen to reflect its intention of looking at the ancient world paying attention to both “facts” (historical events, artistic production, material culture) and “words” (literary, historical, legal production in its oral and written forms). On these bases, the Journal embraces a unified approach to the ancient world, rejecting sectional perspectives for an interdisciplinary focus, reflecting these complex articulated civilizations. The Journal, published every six months, is open to contributions of a historical, philological, literary, archaeological, artistic, and legal nature. It is multilingual, thereby aiming to foster the development of international debate on the ancient world and its legacy.