Ancient Greek City-States: Citizenship and Government
A Greek polis governed a citizen community and its surrounding territory through local laws and offices. Its inhabitants could live in an urban centre or dispersed villages, as at Sparta. Citizens held defined rights and obligations, while resident foreigners and enslaved people occupied separate legal positions.
Poleis developed during the Archaic period, about 800–480 BC, and maintained local government under later kingdoms. Athens expanded adult male citizen participation through its Assembly. Sparta combined two hereditary kings with elders and elected magistrates.
On this page6 sections
The polis as a political community
The Greek word polis could refer to a state, a community or the body of citizens that constituted it. The urban centre was only one part of this arrangement. The countryside, farms and smaller settlements belonged to the same political community, even when the population was dispersed rather than concentrated behind city walls. Sparta provides a clear example of this variation. Thucydides described the Lacedaemonians as living in villages in the old Greek fashion, yet Lacedaemon was still treated as a polis.
The creation or enlargement of a polis could involve synoecism, the joining of settlements into one political community. This might mean the physical concentration of habitation in a single urban centre, the creation of common walls and facilities, or the legal incorporation of separate communities without a complete physical relocation. Athens, for example, came to include the wider region of Attica, including its port at Piraeus. The political union therefore did not require every inhabitant to live in one built-up settlement.
A politeia defined the organisation of civic authority, including laws and eligibility for office. Dependent poleis could retain these institutions beneath a stronger state or within a federation.
Citizenship and exclusion
Citizenship was a defined status within a community, rather than a description of everyone who lived there. Aristotle’s political definition emphasised participation in judging and governing, but civic membership also had meanings beyond the vote. Citizen women in Athens, for example, belonged to the community without Assembly rights. Rules of descent, admission, office-holding and military service varied among poleis and changed over time.
Civic subdivisions connected membership with institutions. These could include tribes, demes (local districts and citizen communities) and other groups, each with its own functions. At Athens, deme affiliation became hereditary through the father after the reorganisation under Cleisthenes: a citizen did not simply change deme when he moved. Local registers and tribal arrangements helped organise service on the Council and establish claims to citizenship.
Resident foreigners and enslaved people generally lacked citizenship. Citizen women in Athens belonged to the community through descent but could not vote in the Assembly. Property qualifications restricted access to some offices among men.
Assemblies, councils and magistrates
The assembly was the principal body through which the citizen population could act collectively. Known in some contexts as the ekklesia, it could debate and decide public matters. Its authority varied greatly. In a more democratic constitution it met regularly and exercised broad powers; under more restrictive or autocratic arrangements it might meet rarely or possess limited influence.
Councils prepared business and organised continuing administration. Later accounts attribute a Council of Four Hundred to Solon, though its historicity is disputed. The Council of Five Hundred established after Cleisthenes’s reforms is better documented: its members represented the reorganised tribes and worked alongside the Assembly, magistrates and courts.
Magistrates carried out specific responsibilities such as supervising markets, overseeing religious observances, administering public funds or leading military forces. Eligibility, selection by election or lot, length of service and scrutiny differed between communities. Athenians initiated cases before citizen juries through specified procedures. Relatives retained a role in homicide prosecutions. Greek law and courts explains the remedies available under different legal statuses.
Oligarchy, tyranny and democracy
Greek communities used several forms of government, and these categories often changed over time. An oligarchy placed political power in the hands of a restricted group, commonly defined by birth, property or both. Early Athens illustrates this pattern through the aristocratic control of the archonship. Solon’s reforms did not create full democracy, but they widened participation by allowing poorer citizens to attend the assembly and courts and by limiting the authority of officials.
Tyrants seized or concentrated personal power outside established constitutional arrangements. Early examples include rulers at Corinth and Sicyon. Elite rivalry and armed support contributed to some takeovers, whose causes remain disputed. Cleisthenes reorganised Athenian citizens into ten tribes and established the Council of 500. Adult male citizens participated in the Assembly, while women, foreigners and enslaved people lacked its voting rights.
Athens and Sparta as different civic models
Athenian citizens proposed and voted on measures in the Assembly. A council prepared business, and magistrates carried out defined tasks. Citizen juries decided legal cases.
Sparta combined hereditary kingship with a council of elders, ephors and an assembly. Later accounts connected this arrangement with Lycurgus, but the institutions developed through a history that cannot be securely reduced to one lawgiver’s programme. Their powers and relationships also changed, including during the reform struggles of the Hellenistic period.
Spartan power depended on a restricted citizen body supported by helot labour, performed by an unfree agricultural class, and by alliances with other communities. The Peloponnesian League linked Sparta with states such as Corinth and Elis through arrangements that served their interests as well as Spartan leadership.
Government and Society in Ancient Sparta: Citizenship, Power and Social Order
Federations, dependent poleis and Hellenistic kings
A polis did not have to be completely sovereign to retain its civic identity. Communities could enter federations with binding obligations, become connected to a larger polis or remain dependent while keeping local institutions. The Perioeci, free noncitizen inhabitants of communities around Sparta, illustrate the complexity of these relationships. They lived in their own communities and were treated as free in some respects, but they were subject to Spartan interests and served the Spartan state.
Relations between civic institutions and kings also varied. Sparta retained kingship while limiting royal action through the ephors, annually elected magistrates, the Gerousia, a council of elders, and the assembly. Elsewhere, monarchic authority could give way to aristocratic offices, tyranny or broader citizen participation.
At Priene, a purpose-built council hall stood beside the agora. Its tiered seats provided room for collective civic business in the Hellenistic city. Hellenistic kings could impose garrisons and control external policy while civic magistrates continued local administration. Other cities joined federal leagues coordinating diplomacy and military service.