Aristocrats and Non-aristocrats in the City-state
For the city-state to be created as a political institution in which all free men had a
share, non-aristocratic men had to insist that they deserved
equitable
treatment1, even if aristocrats were to remain in
leadership positions and carry out the policies agreed on by the group. The invention of
the concept of citizenship as the basis for the city-state and the extension of citizen
status to non-aristocrats responded to that demand. Citizenship above all carried
certain legal rights, such as access to courts to resolve disputes, protection against
enslavement by kidnapping, and participation in the religious and cultural life of the
city-state. It also implied participation in politics, although the degree of
participation open to poor men varied among the different city states. The ability to
hold public office, for example, could be limited in some cases to owners of a certain
amount of property or wealth. Most prominently, citizen status distinguished free men
and
women2 from
slaves3 and
metics (resident aliens)4, foreigners who were officially granted
limited legal rights and permission to reside in a city-state that was not their
homeland. Thus, even the poor had a distinction setting themselves apart from
others.