Kratos and Other Forms of Power in the Two Constitutions of the Athenians

IF 0.3 3区 历史学 0 CLASSICS POLIS Pub Date : 2022-09-07 DOI:10.1163/20512996-12340378
Daniela Cammack
{"title":"Kratos and Other Forms of Power in the Two Constitutions of the Athenians","authors":"Daniela Cammack","doi":"10.1163/20512996-12340378","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n What did kratos imply in the classical democratic context? Focusing on the two Constitutions of the Athenians traditionally attributed to Xenophon and Aristotle respectively, this article explores differences among kratos and three proximate terms: archē (de facto governance or magistracy), kuros (authority, perceived as legitimate), and dēmagōgia (leadership). With Benveniste and Loraux, it argues that kratos specifically signalled ‘superiority’ or ‘predominance’, as revealed in combat or other form of contest. Dēmokratia thereby connoted the forceful predominance of the dēmos (‘assembly’, ‘collective common people’) over the rest of the community, including office-holders (archontes, archai) and political leaders (dēmagōgoi). The association of kratos with force directs attention to the martial underpinnings of classical demotic authority, incidentally highlighting a weakness in modern democracy: the dēmos’ lack of kratos over the political elite when that elite controls military and police power.","PeriodicalId":43237,"journal":{"name":"POLIS","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"POLIS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/20512996-12340378","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"CLASSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

What did kratos imply in the classical democratic context? Focusing on the two Constitutions of the Athenians traditionally attributed to Xenophon and Aristotle respectively, this article explores differences among kratos and three proximate terms: archē (de facto governance or magistracy), kuros (authority, perceived as legitimate), and dēmagōgia (leadership). With Benveniste and Loraux, it argues that kratos specifically signalled ‘superiority’ or ‘predominance’, as revealed in combat or other form of contest. Dēmokratia thereby connoted the forceful predominance of the dēmos (‘assembly’, ‘collective common people’) over the rest of the community, including office-holders (archontes, archai) and political leaders (dēmagōgoi). The association of kratos with force directs attention to the martial underpinnings of classical demotic authority, incidentally highlighting a weakness in modern democracy: the dēmos’ lack of kratos over the political elite when that elite controls military and police power.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
雅典两部宪法中的奎托斯和其他形式的权力
奎托斯在古典民主背景下暗示了什么?本文聚焦于传统上分别被认为是色诺芬(Xenophon)和亚里士多德(Aristotle)提出的雅典人的两部宪法,探讨了奎托斯和三个近似术语之间的差异:archu(事实上的治理或行政),kuros(权威,被认为是合法的)和dēmagōgia(领导)。对于Benveniste和Loraux,他们认为kratos明确地传达了“优势”或“优势”,这在战斗或其他形式的竞争中表现出来。Dēmokratia因此意味着dēmos(“大会”,“集体平民”)对社会其他部分的强势优势,包括公职人员(执政官,archai)和政治领袖(dēmagōgoi)。奎托斯与武力的联系将人们的注意力引向了古典民主权威的军事基础,顺便强调了现代民主的一个弱点:当政治精英控制着军事和警察权力时,dēmos缺乏奎托斯对政治精英的控制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
POLIS
POLIS CLASSICS-
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
33
审稿时长
7 weeks
期刊最新文献
The Concept of Partnership in Book II of the Republic Socratic Contempt for Wealth in Plato’s Republic Praxis as Property: the Concept of Justice in Plato’s Republic Political Performativity in Performance Culture: Xenophon’s Hipparchikos and the Dithyrambic Chorus The King’s House or the Tyrant’s Palace? Rethinking Persia in Herodotus’s History
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1