How did democracy work in ancient Athens?

At the centre of public decision-making stood the ekklesia, or Assembly, which held authority to pass decrees, enact laws, declare war, approve treaties, and supervise officials by direct vote.

Every adult male citizen aged eighteen and above had the right to attend, and although doing so required time and effort, attendance gave each man a voice in decisions that affected the entire city.

Meetings occurred on the Pnyx Hill, where thousands gathered regularly throughout the year.

The Assembly met about forty times each year, with attendance at major sessions sometimes reaching 6,000 men.

This figure was unusual for ordinary meetings, and it was the quorum required for important decisions such as ostracisms or certain judicial actions.

Each meeting typically began with religious rituals, followed by public calls for speakers to present motions or speak in favour or opposition to proposals. 

Often, the ekklesia debated probouleumata, which were early measures drafted by the Boule, but it kept final authority over their approval.

Citizens raised hands to vote, and although the results were not tallied, officials judged which side had more hands raised.

At first, many poorer citizens attended less often due to the loss of daily income, so from the fourth century BCE, Athens introduced a small attendance payment to widen participation and prevent control by wealthier classes.

For major decisions such as ostracisms, which exiled individuals for ten years without a formal trial, special procedures applied and required a minimum turnout of 6,000 citizens for the vote to be valid.

To prepare business for the Assembly and run the day-to-day business of the state, Athens relied on a smaller council known as the Boule, composed of 500 citizens selected by lot each year.

Each of the ten tribal units provided fifty members, and no man could hold a place on the Council more than twice, although modern scholars have noted that this limit may not have been strictly enforced in every case.

As a result, the Council spread responsibility widely, and this reduced the risk that too much power would sit in a few hands.

Members generally met daily in the Bouleuterion to handle finances, supervise workers, oversee public contracts, manage the navy’s supplies, and review visitors from other city-states before they addressed the ekklesia. 

Each tribal group rotated into the role of prytaneis for one-tenth of the year, and during that period it took on day-to-day leadership tasks.

Within that group, one man was chosen by lot every day to chair the meetings and hold the state seal.

To remain constantly available for emergencies, the prytaneis lived and ate in the Tholos beside the council chamber, where they could respond quickly to urgent events.

The Tholos had been built around 470 BCE and was used as both residence and dining hall for those on duty.

As the body that set the agenda for the Assembly, the Boule ensured the smooth operation of Athenian politics between the scheduled meetings of the full citizen body.

To reduce the influence of personal wealth or political alliances, Athens appointed most of its public officials by sortition.

Each year, the Assembly filled around 700 magistracies by drawing lots from a pool of eligible and willing citizens.

The system included a range of positions, such as market inspectors, judges, treasurers, supervisors of building projects, and key religious officials like the Archon Basileus, who oversaw religious rites and homicide trials.

Importantly, no man could hold the same office twice, and every magistrate submitted to dokimasia, a public review before taking office, followed by euthyna, a formal check at the end of the term.

Aristotle described both procedures in his Athenian Constitution. 

In a few offices where experience and leadership mattered, especially in military roles, elections replaced sortition.

Ten strategoi, or generals, were elected annually, and they could hold this post repeatedly if they retained public support.

Prominent men such as Themistocles and Pericles had held this post for multiple years.

Pericles, in particular, won election to the strategia each year for fifteen years in a row from 443 to 429 BCE.

This allowed them to influence policy and lead campaigns without holding civil office.

Still, elected officials remained accountable to the people, and if their actions caused suspicion, they could face immediate prosecution that might end in exile or even execution, a result that depended on the verdict of the courts or the vote of the Assembly.

For many Athenian citizens, participation in the courts was understood as a public duty rather than a separate profession.

Each year, 6,000 citizens aged thirty or older enrolled as jurors, and daily lots assigned hundreds of them to cases that involved theft, contracts, religious violations, political corruption, or homicide.

Depending on the case, juries ranged from 201 to over 1,000 men, and their large size made bribery harder and reinforced the idea that justice belonged to the people. 

Litigants spoke for themselves, with no professional advocates allowed, though some hired speechwriters known as logographers to compose their arguments.

Strict time limits governed their speeches, measured by a klepsydra, or water clock.

After arguments finished, jurors voted immediately without discussion, and they placed discs into marked urns.

Jurors used two types of discs, one hollow and one solid, to indicate their vote for acquittal or conviction.

The side with the most votes won, and no appeal followed. As a result, the courts settled private disputes and also closely examined public officials, cancelled unlawful decrees, and judged proposals challenged by the graphe paranomon, which was a procedure that allowed citizens to denounce any motion that conflicted with existing laws. 

At times, juries wielded their power with dramatic effect, and very famous trials such as that of Socrates in 399 BCE before a jury of 501 citizens demonstrated how public mood could influence verdicts.

Even so, most Athenians generally trusted the jury system more than any single judge because they believed that the combined decision of their peers best protected the laws and customs of the state.

From the moment an Athenian male had turned eighteen, he entered a system that, at least in principle, demanded a clear role as a citizen.

First, he swore the ephebic oath, which pledged loyalty to the city, then completed two years of military training and service before he had gained full rights.

During this period, ephebes performed garrison duties at frontier posts such as the coastal fort at Sunium.

Thereafter, he remained eligible to sit on juries, attend the Assembly, or hold office.

Political activity and military duty worked alongside religious duties and formed spheres that overlapped, and a good citizen took part in each without hesitation. 

To remove barriers to engagement, Athens introduced daily payments for jury service, Assembly attendance, and most public offices.

Jurors had initially received two obols per day, later raised to three, which provided a basic daily wage.

The stipends remained small, but they allowed poorer citizens to participate without serious personal loss.

Wealthy men, by contrast, often fulfilled liturgies, or required public services, which might require a man to equip a trireme or to take responsibility for a costly public event such as a dramatic festival or a state banquet.

Common liturgies included the choregia and the trierarchy, and if a man believed someone richer should bear the cost, he could initiate an antidosis, which was a legal exchange of estates to test the claim.

Such duties brought prestige, but they also placed financial strain and opened wealthy men to legal challenges if they failed to meet their responsibilities. 

As a political system, Athenian democracy, at least in its ideal form, required more than attendance or voting.

It expected its citizens to speak well, reason clearly, judge fairly, and stay watchful in the defence of their rights.

Institutions existed to direct power from below, where the people watched, acted, and judged on a daily basis, rather than to restrain power from above.