West European Studies

Unlike the contemporary concept of a constitution, which is the fundamental law of a state that defines the basic policies and principles of the government, the declaration of unity among its citizens and the promotion of their welfare, the establishment of justice, the insurance of peace and order, and the protection of their territory for the end purpose of gaining the national and global recognition of the countrys independence and self governance, the Athenian constitution is a historical account about the Athenians struggle towards democratic governance. It simultaneously provided the contextual background or the experience of the Athenian society in discussing the composition of the Athenian political system and its form of government.  Hence the Athenian constitution does not contain a series of declarations about policies and the political structure, which are subjected to change via amendments, but a historical description of the Athenian democracy, which, nevertheless, reflected the evolving nature of the same. 

Context
Much like any other modern constitution that was established following a series of local conflicts and disorders as well as through active negotiations and compromises among people, the Athenian constitution evolved through the same painstaking process that reflects their unique historical experiences.  The principal difference is that the Athenian constitution was written not after all conflicts had been finally resolved, but during which the Athenian polity was still evolving. Hence, it included a rather explanatory depiction of the course of events.  In particular, the constitution reflected the transition of the Athenian government from the oligarchic government to the constitutional democracy.

In earlier times, before Greece was organized into independent city states, such as Athens, the political landscape was composed of minor monarchs who presided over small groups of neighboring people and controlled territories of their immediate surroundings, comparable to tribal communities. Through mergers, collaborations, intermarriages, wars and other similar methods, some kings were able to expand their territorial rule.  In certain locations, individual kings acquired the power over larger territories. This may be how Theseus congregated the different independent towns of the Attic peninsula as a unified political state under the centralized government at Athens.  Thus, the establishment of the Athenian state was credited to him (Walker, 1995).

From absolute monarchies in its early inception, the government structure in Athens evolved towards oligarchies, in which an inconsiderable number of rich, land-owning aristocrats ruled the land. This was a significant development as the plurality of rulers prevented the governance of the city state from the whims and caprices of a single ruler or dictator, who in earlier times was endowed the title and powers of a god. The oligarchic structure of government or magistrates composed of the King, the Polemarch, and the Archon during the time of Draco is reflected in the first book of the Athenian constitution which served as the starting point for the chronological account of the development of Athenian democracy described in the constitution.  The Athenian constitution primarily paralleled the laws of Solon, which catered and leaned towards the welfare of the masses.  Two of the revolutionary and pro people laws of Solon included the abolition of using a persons freedom as collateral for a debt and the right to appeal in a democratic. Solons regime can essentially be depicted as the alteration from oligarchy to democracy as they contained elements of both government forms. For example, the membership to the Archons was expanded to other wealthy families, although, still limited to aristocrats while ordinary people were given a channel to voice out their sentiments through the Assembly.  However, such conversion was disrupted by the reign of tyrannical rulers that followed until the Athenian constitution which, subtly reinstate the Laws of Solon that served as the foundation to renovate their impaired constitution. 

Objectives of the Writer
Some scholars traditionally attribute the Athenian constitution to be written by Aristotle. Others, however, do not discount the possibility that it was authored by some of his students. Based on the contents of the constitution per se, it can be inferred that the writer intended to make a description of the historical developments of democracy and the political constitution of Athens.  Thus, the detailed account of how laws were made including the historical experience of Athenians, allow readers to deeply and comprehensively understand the context of the progression and culmination of Athenian democracy.

Biases in the Document
Considering that the Athenian constitution described the transition to democracy in a rather narrative manner, it was inevitable for the writer to obliquely criticize and discredit that earlier forms of governance from which the Athenian democratic society evolved, particularly the oligarchic practices which were especially pervasive during the reign of the earlier tyrants.  The laws and changes in the constitution were principally meant to address problems and tribulations that the people suffered. Thus, the text subtly interpreted history in light of contemporary events. For instance, the abolition of freedom as collateral reflected the enslavement of the working class.  One can deduce the proliferation of slavery of the poor including children because of debt. Freedom of the people is a core characteristic of democracy, hence, the abolition of freedom as collateral signaled one of the earlier ways of how freedom is protected and institutionalized which can now be found in the bill of rights in most modern constitutions (Acton, 2007). In other issues, the right to appeal to the jury revealed the lack of equality before the law in society while the creation of the Assembly evinced the utter lack of mechanism for ordinary people to participate in the governance process. Thus, old political structure perpetuated the delineation and abuse of the upper class of the lower class.

Historical significance
The modern western civilization had been founded on the basis of the Greek civilization (Thornton, 2000).  Hence, In providing a historical account of how the classical democracy was established and worked during its time, Athenian constitution imparted the pillars of democracy that world enjoys today. (Aristotle and Rhodes, 1984) Specifically, the Athenian constitution which reflected the classical model of democracy, initially bestowed the framework by which contemporary democracies today are constituted. For one, it reflected the basic framework that elaborates the democratic process in government.  It crudely defined the powers and duties of the three main branches of government namely the executive, legislative and judiciary (Harris, 2006).  In the legislative branch, the presence of the council and assembly is antecedent to the bicameral system while the assembly per se is arguably a precursor of a party list system because it allows representation of the marginalized sectors of society.  More importantly, because the Athenian constitution reflected an evolution rather than an absolute declaration of policies, it showed an unwritten principle of any democratic institution which recognized the limitations in the wisdom of the leaders in framing an absolute law.  As the constitution continues to evolve, it remains open to changes or amendments so that it will continue to be responsive and sensitive to the needs of the citizens.