To what extent do you think Solonís reforms angered the wealthy nobles or the poor? Give reasons for your views


Solonís reforms angered many wealthy nobles in that he had, through seisachtheia, struck a financial blow on them by cancelling debts and forcing them to give up those who had been enslaved to them by debt. Solonís possible introducion of the Boule, the council of 400, 100 from each Ionic tribe, took away the aristocratsí power to judge local disputes Ė this undermined the aristocrats power and was disliked by many nobles. The legal reforms Ė the right of appeal to the dikasterion and third-party address meant that anyone could appeal against a decision made by an archon or against the wrongdoings of archons which also displeased the aristocracy because it weakened the stranglehold which it had on the poor people since usually it was aristocrats with their tendency to further their own class who made up the Areopagus. In changing the classes so that the new system was timocratic and your class was based on wealth and how much grain you could produce on your land (Solon did not restore the nobles to theeir traditional position so they were angered.


Solonís reforms angered many poor people because he had not fully redistributed the wealth and property as they expected him to so they were frustrated at what they saw. The fact that the new class system did not allow them much chance to climb up the social ladder - it was virtuallyimpossible Ė meant that many of the poor were angered. Moreover, since the franchise was still class-based the poor did not have a chance to voice their opinions and put into power people who represented them and their wishes. Solonís reforms did not provide for the poor peopleís financial situation in the future Ė they ended up being wholly depedent upon their creditors once again since they, even if they could not be enslaved by debt and had their own land to work on and take all the produce from, could not sustain themselves financially.


In the 5th and 9th year after Solon left Attica for Egypt there was no archon appointed. This is indicative of the dissention of many in Attica and the political insability aftrer Solonís archonship and reforms. More notably in the 13th year after Solonís reforms Damasias remained archon for 2 Ĺ years when he was only legally allowed one year in office of archon and had to be forcibly removed by the people. Thus Solonís reforms had angered many rich and poor and did not prevent the increase of instability. Attica was wracked with political difficulties.


However Solonís refoms pleased a lot of poor people in that the right of appeal and 3rd-party redress had given them the right to challenge wrongdoings of archons and the changes he made to the Assembly meant that all classes could be involved in the administration of the state (but whilst not being involved in policy making) which was similar to the reforms of the court Ė he let all classes attend the court which meant a broder base of people were represented in it and were empowered in that they had the final decision on the debt. Seisachtheia was very


pleasing to many poor people but, nevertheless, temporary in its benefits.


Solon pleased, to a certain extent much of the noble sentiment Ė he did not get rid of the original 4 Ionic tribes, phratries nor clans Ė they were still the base of religion and registration of citizenship and also Solon did not remove the Areopagusí supervisory powers or right to try homicide cases so the nobles still had great power: the top three classes still had the exclusive right to vote on so they sill had a stranglehold on the poor.


How did Peisistratus and Hippias unify Athens?


Peisistraus and Hippias made Athens more unified than it had ever been previously and built on the foundations made by Solon and his reforms.


The introduction of deme judges undermined the nobles who previously had the right to judge local disputes and reduced the grip that the aristocracy had on the poor. Equally an important to the unity of Attica was Peisistratusí removal of factional strife between the leading noble