Greek Notions of Justice: Introduction
When a person commits a crime or a violation, they are brought before a court of law, with a judge and jury, to decide what an appropriate punishment should be. However, as modern as our society may be, this form of justice originated in Ancient Greece as early as the XIVth century BCE.
Of course, the system of justice we use today is not the same as the one developed in Greece around the same time the Stonehenge was being built: it took hundreds of years and dozens of reforms for the courts of law to become similar to those we know today. What we call justice was known as "dike" in Greek, which was more than just a word, but rather the concept of that which is just. In Ancient Greece, although Man (an aptly used term, since women were not allowed to engage in political activities) created courts to decide civil infractions, the word of the gods was still considered the supreme judgment. In fact, Dike was the goddess of mortal justice and spirit of fair judgment, showing us that even the justice the Greeks held in such high esteem was controlled by the divine. It is therefore interesting to study the impact of religious beliefs in Ancient Greek notions of justice, whether in literary portrayals or actual events.
When a person commits a crime or a violation, they are brought before a court of law, with a judge and jury, to decide what an appropriate punishment should be. However, as modern as our society may be, this form of justice originated in Ancient Greece as early as the XIVth century BCE.
Of course, the system of justice we use today is not the same as the one developed in Greece around the same time the Stonehenge was being built: it took hundreds of years and dozens of reforms for the courts of law to become similar to those we know today. What we call justice was known as "dike" in Greek, which was more than just a word, but rather the concept of that which is just. In Ancient Greece, although Man (an aptly used term, since women were not allowed to engage in political activities) created courts to decide civil infractions, the word of the gods was still considered the supreme judgment. In fact, Dike was the goddess of mortal justice and spirit of fair judgment, showing us that even the justice the Greeks held in such high esteem was controlled by the divine. It is therefore interesting to study the impact of religious beliefs in Ancient Greek notions of justice, whether in literary portrayals or actual events.
Although the evolution of Greek justice spans a very extensive period of time, from the creation of the court of Delphi as shown in Aeschylus' Eumenides throughout the remainder or history, four names strike out as founders of the systems we know today:
- Solon (circa 638-558 BCE)
- Socrates (470-399 BCE)
- Plato (428-347 BCE)
- Aristotle (384-322 BCE)
Greek Notions of Justice: Short History of Athenian Democracy
When we talk about the Greek judicial system, it is mainly a reference to the system of justice put in place in Athens. Up until then, the judicial system was ruled by revenge: if one was wronged, they would avenge themselves (a term almost synonymic with murder), usually with help from friends or family against the offender, which would lead to the offender's family avenging themselves, and so on. The result was usually a long-lasting family feud, much like the one in Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet.
Another commonly accepted form of justice was godly vengeance. In Ancient Greece, it was common for a family to be "cursed by the gods" for and offence committed by an ancestor long ago, which still affected their descendants. This is the case of the Oedipus family in Aristotle's Antigone, for example, or the House of Atreus in Aeschylus' Oresteia. With curses such as these, it was thought that only full devotion to the gods would one day curb their wrath, and so mortal justice did little to help or affect those who were cursed.
The concept of Greek justice began with Solon, in the Vth century BCE. He reformed the judicial system so that each man would have an equal chance at representation before a court of judges. However, personal vengeance was still a large part of the judicial system. In the third play from his Oresteia tragedy, the Eumenides, Aeschylus condemns personal vengeance and pleads for its removal from the Greek way of life. The Oresteia was also produced as a critique of the recent political uprising in Athens which threatened to remove democracy as the political system in place.
Throughout the next two centuries, several other thinkers applied their knowledge to the question of Athenian justice, such as Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. The Athenian judicial system was set up on the Aeropagus, a hill in Athens where the court would meet to discuss the issue at hand. To bring someone to court, one had to do the following in order:
1) One had to tell the person they were starting a legal case against them, and give them the date, time, and place at which the hearing would take place.
2) One had to post a message near the court specifying the names of the two parties, the charges, and the date, time, and place of the hearing.
3) During the hearing, both parties had the chance to speak before the judge and explain their side of the story. If the judge deemed the case worthy of a court session, he would appoint a second court day when the issue would be decided before a jury. This hearing made sure that only cases that required the intervention of a jury would be voted in court, and not a mere squabble.
4) The jury was selected among volunteers (the size of the jury varied, as some cases had over 500 jurors deciding their outcome). These volunteers had to be over 30, but had to be impartial so as to decide the fate of the parties fairly. Although the judge presided over to court and kept order, the jury decided the final verdict.
5) The day of the trial, both sides presented their case. To do this, they were allowed to call on witnesses to defend their account of the story. After both sides had presented their case, the jurors voted for the side they thought was in the right. The majority ruled.
Punishments varied from case to case. In Homer's time, both sides presented an object as their prize in a sort of gamble: if they one the case, they would bring back both objects from the court case. In later democratic times, both sides proposed a punishment for the one who had lost the case and the jury decided between these two (they were not allowed to present a third option).
In the IVth century BCE, Greece was conquered by Philip of Macedon, who ruled over a league of city-states as their king. Under Philip, and later his successor Alexander the Great, the court of Athens was still allowed to exist, yet any decision made by Philip or Alexander would overrule the verdict of the court.
- Solon (circa 638-558 BCE)
- Socrates (470-399 BCE)
- Plato (428-347 BCE)
- Aristotle (384-322 BCE)
Greek Notions of Justice: Short History of Athenian Democracy
When we talk about the Greek judicial system, it is mainly a reference to the system of justice put in place in Athens. Up until then, the judicial system was ruled by revenge: if one was wronged, they would avenge themselves (a term almost synonymic with murder), usually with help from friends or family against the offender, which would lead to the offender's family avenging themselves, and so on. The result was usually a long-lasting family feud, much like the one in Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet.
Another commonly accepted form of justice was godly vengeance. In Ancient Greece, it was common for a family to be "cursed by the gods" for and offence committed by an ancestor long ago, which still affected their descendants. This is the case of the Oedipus family in Aristotle's Antigone, for example, or the House of Atreus in Aeschylus' Oresteia. With curses such as these, it was thought that only full devotion to the gods would one day curb their wrath, and so mortal justice did little to help or affect those who were cursed.
The concept of Greek justice began with Solon, in the Vth century BCE. He reformed the judicial system so that each man would have an equal chance at representation before a court of judges. However, personal vengeance was still a large part of the judicial system. In the third play from his Oresteia tragedy, the Eumenides, Aeschylus condemns personal vengeance and pleads for its removal from the Greek way of life. The Oresteia was also produced as a critique of the recent political uprising in Athens which threatened to remove democracy as the political system in place.
Throughout the next two centuries, several other thinkers applied their knowledge to the question of Athenian justice, such as Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. The Athenian judicial system was set up on the Aeropagus, a hill in Athens where the court would meet to discuss the issue at hand. To bring someone to court, one had to do the following in order:
1) One had to tell the person they were starting a legal case against them, and give them the date, time, and place at which the hearing would take place.
2) One had to post a message near the court specifying the names of the two parties, the charges, and the date, time, and place of the hearing.
3) During the hearing, both parties had the chance to speak before the judge and explain their side of the story. If the judge deemed the case worthy of a court session, he would appoint a second court day when the issue would be decided before a jury. This hearing made sure that only cases that required the intervention of a jury would be voted in court, and not a mere squabble.
4) The jury was selected among volunteers (the size of the jury varied, as some cases had over 500 jurors deciding their outcome). These volunteers had to be over 30, but had to be impartial so as to decide the fate of the parties fairly. Although the judge presided over to court and kept order, the jury decided the final verdict.
5) The day of the trial, both sides presented their case. To do this, they were allowed to call on witnesses to defend their account of the story. After both sides had presented their case, the jurors voted for the side they thought was in the right. The majority ruled.
Punishments varied from case to case. In Homer's time, both sides presented an object as their prize in a sort of gamble: if they one the case, they would bring back both objects from the court case. In later democratic times, both sides proposed a punishment for the one who had lost the case and the jury decided between these two (they were not allowed to present a third option).
In the IVth century BCE, Greece was conquered by Philip of Macedon, who ruled over a league of city-states as their king. Under Philip, and later his successor Alexander the Great, the court of Athens was still allowed to exist, yet any decision made by Philip or Alexander would overrule the verdict of the court.