The Greek City-State: Ideology or Archaeology?

The Greek City-State: Ideology or Archaeology?

Hurwit, an acclaimed art historian, suggests that a Greek city-state, or polis, "was an idea, the equivalent of a particularly intense communal or corporate spirit," and that, by extension, "Greeks themselves became political animalsÐ'--creatures of a polis" (Hurwit 73). I, too, think that a polis is a group of individuals who not only defined themselves through the city they lived in, but also vis-Ð" -vis literary movements, warfare tactics, political institutions, religion, and athletics. Furthermore, these aforementioned ideas "cannot be excavated" (Hurwit 73). Consequently, by examining the various historical factors that led up to the emergence of the polis, we shall see how these ideas aided in the process of creating the physical manifestation of the polis.

First of all, let us examine how revolutions in warfare could have helped with the conception of the polis. In the Iliad, the ancient epic poet Homer consistently focuses on the rich, elite warrior-class of men who are fighting to save their honor and defend what they are entitled toÐ'--their own inherited social and economic status. However, Homer does give mention to the poor paupers who fight alongside the powerful warrior-class. Thersites, who is introduced in Book II of the Iliad, illustrates this by questioning the Achaeans motives for going to war. In turn, Odysseus, in a public show of manliness, berates him mentally, and physically harms him, thus showing Thersites (and the audience) his lowly social status. This reiterates the widely accepted idea that poor men, such as Thersites, were forced to fight in the Trojan War (as they had no individual say in the matter) because the concept of individuality was severely condemned by the ruling class. In this passing instance, we can see the germ of the polis, exemplified by Thersites' unwillingness to fight and his daring, explosive rejection of aristocratic values.

While Thersites serves as a mouthpiece for the common man, within the polis itself the advent of hoplite warfare is born. Hurwit describes Hoplites as "well-to-do, non aristocrats who could afford costly body armor and round shields." These men "formed the states' first (and densely packed) line of defense" (Hurwit 143). Undoubtedly, these men exemplified a more Classical approach to warfare, whereas Homer's description of war is more historically Archaic. However, the juxtaposition of the two time periods indicates the progression, and even rejection, of fighting for the ruling class.

Consequently, Thersites may be seen as a figurehead of rebellion, even as a premonition of ideologies to come in the Classical era. On the one hand, the Hoplites were ideologically a middle class phenomenon; on the other hand, the warriors of Homer's day were fighting to profit the elite. For the Hoplites, fighting in a war was a civic duty (albeit a mandatory one), as opposed to a decree from the King. In addition, Hoplite warfare (ideologically speaking) focuses more on banding individuals from various city-states with a view of staving off the enemy. Conversely, Homer shows us in the archaic period that there were more unruly, individual combats out on the battlefield, rather than more organized "lines of defense," which the Hoplites provided. This indicates a shift from fighting for the King to fighting for an individual's respective polis.

Now that we have seen this ideological shift, we shall better see what a city-state is. The invention of the alphabet, the eventual spread of literacy, and subsequent change in literary styles, all led up to the formation of individual cultural identity, which is collectively known as the polis. Towards the middle of the 8th century, the Greek alphabet was invented. Hurwit disagrees with "most scholars [who] have assumed that the Greeks learned to write for the same reason that the Phoenicians wrote: to keep commercial records" (Hurwit 89). Hurwit, in fact, asserts that because most of the archaeological evidence supports his rejection of said theory, that writing (at first) was not used to record corporate interests, but to record poetry. However, why do the above scholars (whom Hurwit fails to cite) think the Greeks followed in the Phoenician footsteps? The idea that writing was created out of a need to record "commercial interests" lends itself nicely to the idea of the polis, since each city-state seemed to function autonomously. Perhaps this particular reason for writing came after the Greeks started writing poetry. Yet it seems unfathomable that the Greeks, at the end of the archaic period, were chiefly concerned with just writing and recording poetry, especially if there was a population boom and communities were flourishing.

Before exploring the idea of poetry, and how this phenomenon relates to the polis, let us explore the idea of the individualÐ'--which seems to be a major ideological association of the polisÐ'--and how the individual asserts himself through physical manifestations of writing on material objects. Much of the archaeological evidence in the latter part of the Archaic period consists of various vases, cups, etc., that have personal names inscribed, thus introducing the idea of personal ownership and individuality. From a modern perspective markings of ownership seems natural, if not arbitrary; for the Greeks, such markings were deliberate assertions of individuality.

One of the more intriguing archaeological finds Hurwit discusses is the discovery of an inscription on a cup that reads: "I am Nestor's cup/Good to drink fromÐ'..." (Hurwit 89). The idea of personal property and individuality are interwoven here. Hurwit thinks that the owner is not really Nestor (the allusion is probably to the monumental gold cup of Nestor, King of Pylos). Undoubtedly the cup belonged to someone who was familiar with HomerÐ'--but let us not rule out the possibility that an actual Nestor (not just a Homeric character) existed. What is more significant here is the idea of differentiating property, and in the process showing one's social status. It is a widely accepted supposition that Homer was passed down orally (only later preserved in the written form) by the aristocracy to preserve the elitism of the ruling class. The polis itself offered an alternative mode of identification, and the above mentioned cup could very well be indicative of the backlash that the upper-class were receiving.

On