Who wants to speak? The question of the free speech in the Ancien Athens

Abstract

During the 5th century BC in Athens flourished a political system in which essential state decisions were made through the participation of citizens. It had an enormous historical impact, so that it can be seen as a true precursor to current democratic systems. Public participation requires necessarily a degree of freedom of expression. That is why this ancient system, despite lacking a concept of civil rights, is an excellent laboratory to understand the problem, of the right to free speech: in such a small society and delimitated time arise many of its current controversial
questions. However, we lack studies about this period drawing relevant conclusions for our current times. Regarding political discussions in the assembly, a distinction was made between the power to speak that is common to all citizens (isegoria) and the requirements of the public speeches known as parrhesia. Beyond the interdiction to present proposals opposing to the basic principles of the democratic system, the control of public speech is done by social pressure rather than by the law. Speeches are to be presented without being too direct and scandalizing the public, who may silent the speaker. At the same time, the boom of the theater and its enormous impact on society functioned akin to a real mass media. In the field of theater, in an initial phase there were hardly any legal restrictions to what was said in a play. If anything, just to protect the reputation against falsehoods. Progressively, the fear of the political impact of theater leads to enact more restrictive rules such as those prohibiting to mention real names of citizens. Threats of sanctions managed to erase almost any critical component in the plays. This reaction to free speech coincides with an authoritarian drift that will soon lead to the end of the democratic regime. It brings also a subtle extension of the rules about impiety from the field of religion to that of public speech. Strong sanctions were applied to those disseminating ideas or doctrines contrary to the basic political principles of the city. While these sanctions were presented as a defense of democracy against aristocratic threats, history shows that instead they were its prelude. The study of the period shows that, regarding free speech, the distance between formal recognizance of equality and its real exercise is always relevant, in any system. Furthermore, the Athenian experience shows the risks of mechanisms of absolute militant democracy imposed without instruments of flexibility that allow social change. Above all, the classical Greek experience highlights the need for a normative concept of free speech as a right in order to permanently ensure a space of expression immune to any public interference.

Summary:
I. Rights and freedom of expression in Athens in the 5th century BC. II. Free speech in the assembly. 1-Parrhesia and isegoria. 2-The free speech as a political right. 3-Limits to the expression at the assembly. III-Free speech in theater. 1-Without prior censorship. 2-Limits to the theatric expression. IV-Impiety as a limit for dissidents. V-Five Athenian lessons.