Greeks Drawing Lots

The role of drawing lots in classical Athenian democracy – Brief reminder of the role of sortition in classical Athenian democracy. Focus on some problems relating to the duties of the municipal administration : what tasks were involved ? why were some provided by election and others by drawing lots ? what role could the slaves provided to the citizens drawn by lot (e. g. astynomoi) for the execution of their task play ?

Citizen identity is central to democracy. The Athenian civic self-representation has been the subject of modern studies, such as Lape’s (2010) Race and citizen identity in the classical Athenian democracy (CUP), recently, who offers an elegant framework for the theorization of citizen identity in classical Athens. However, little scholarly attention has been given to the rhetorical reconstruction of civic identity in Demosthenic forensic oratory. As part of the process of aligning themselves with (and engaging) their audience and alienating the audience from their opponent, litigants often articulate narratives of civic identity, relying on common values, (democratic) codes of political conduct, morality and ideology, to complement their legal argumentation. These reconstructions take the form of antithetical representations of oneself as a valuable member of the citizen group, having a share in civic ethos, political conduct, and morality with what comprises the ‘civic’ identity, as against the ‘other’, the ‘outsider’. This article examines the speeches written for cases of graphē paranomōn in the Corpus Demosthenicum, which are highly politically charged and accordingly, illustrates strands of the elaborate rhetoric of civic identity. It looks at the way speakers exploit ideas/concepts (e.g. slavery vs freedom), social expectations regarding performance of civic obligations/duties, and manipulate the emotions of the audience by drawing on shared attitudes and social norms on private (e.g. exclusion from the citizen-body as a result of sexual activity) or political grounds (cf. oligarchic/tyrannical vs democratic conduct). It also reveals how reconstructions of civic identity are interwoven with legal argumentation, both in prosecution and defense speeches.

Ancient Greeks drew lots within a broad spectrum of practices and conventions, reflecting the values, practices, and egalitarian mindset that were prevalent for nearly three centuries before the appearance of the lot as the salient feature of Athenian democracy. Greeks often turned to random choices by drawing lots to ensure equality and fairness and avoid undue influence and corruption. Being the first book of its kind to discuss drawing lots, the Introduction defines the purpose and framework of the book and its use of evidence from archaeology, myth, poetry, drama, ritual, historiography, and political thought and practice. It stresses vocabulary and key concepts, such as horizontal society, the egalitarian mindset, equal portions and the relation to ideas of equality and fairness, mixture and integration of citizens, the role of the gods, and the relevance to modern democracies. A road map of the contents of parts I and II is provided.

In this revised and updated edition of a definitive collection of source material, Matthew Dillon and Lynda Garland present a wide range of documents on Greek social and political history from 800 to 399 BC, from all over the Greek World. Ancient Greece includes: source material on political developments in Greece, including colonization in the Mediterranean and the Black Sea, Athenian democracy, the constitution of Sparta and the Peloponnesian war detailed chapters on social phenomena, such as Greek religion, slavery and labour, the family and the role of women clear, precise translations of documents taken not only from historical sources but also from inscriptions, graffiti, law codes, epitaphs, decress, drama and poetry, many of which have not previously been translated into English concise, up-to-date bibliographies and commentaries for each document and each section. An ideal course text for all students of ancient history and classical studies.

This chapter charts how drawing lots for the polis offices was introduced and gradually spread in ancient Greece. The first known case was in early sixth-century Athens, where the statesman Solon introduced allotment from preselected, elite candidates. But his innovation had only limited success and was soon largely abandoned. Following a wave of initiatives across the Greek world to increase the political power of the demos around 500, poleis diverged more prominently than before into oligarchies and democracies. Some oligarchies adopted drawing lots for office to solidify the equality and coherence of their own circle. Among the democracies, Athens is by far the best known and best documented. In 508/7, Cleisthenes created the framework for Athens’ democracy, drawing lots to mix the citizens into new subgroups. Solon’s system of allotment was reintroduced in 487, and after the 460s, the lot was applied widely to polis office and governance in Athens. Many other democratic poleis came to use allotment for office, but none equaled Athens in the scale and duration of the practice. Besides political offices, cultic offices were drawn by lot in several poleis. This ancient use of the lot in Athens probably supported Solon’s introduction of lots for political office; in other poleis, the same pattern possibly played a role. Dedicated Endnotes discuss Solon’s laws and different accounts of them in our sources, drawing lots in the Ancient Near East, the diagramma (constitutional decree) for Cyrene, the body politic in Cleisthenes’s system, and clay tokes from Athens for allotment of offices.

The study of ancient Greece is essential for the proper understanding of the evolution of modern Western medicine. An important innovation of classical Greek medicine was the development of a body of medical theory associated with natural philosophy, i.e. a strong secular tradition of free enquiry, or what would now be called "science" (Eπiστnμη). Medical education rests upon the ancient Greek foundations and its history remains a fascinating topic for modern physicians and medical teachers. As Drabkin so eloquently noted half a century ago: "the history of medical education will show how lasting was the influence of the ancient system of medicine, not only in its substantive contributions, but in its devotion to reason, in its attitude toward the relation between science and the medical art, in its concept of disease and classification of diseases, in its ethical attitudes and standards and in countless other ways".1 MEDICAL EDUCATION THROUGH "MAGIC" AND "RELIGION" In prehistoric times, magic and religion were a fundamental part of the healing practice. Therefore, the first primitive medical practitioners were witch doctors or sorcerers. Through a gradual process that lasted for centuries, superstition and religion were replaced by rational inquiry and explanation. At its beginnings, ancient Greek medicine was undoubtedly influenced by neighbouring regions such as Babylonia and Egypt or even more distant civilizations such as India and China.2 As medical practice was tied to magic and religion, so too was medical education symbolized in myth. Thus, the first Greek medical teacher was probably Chiron (Xípωv), the human-horse mythological figure. According to Homer, Chiron taught Asclepius the secrets of the drugs that relieve pain and stop bleeding. Chiron was so famous in his era that the sons of many noble families, including Jason (Iáσovαò), Achilles (Aχiλληαò) and other Homeric heroes, became his apprentices and lived with him during early adolescence studying philosophy and the sciences, including medical arts. Among his teachings the "techni" (τéχvη) (art) of caring for the ill and injured was included.3 Asclepius (Aσκληπióδ) was the God of Medicine in Ancient Greece and he was worshiped in hundreds of temples (Asclepions) throughout Greece. The remains of such shrines may still be seen at Epidaurus (Eπíδαvpoò), Cos (Kώ;ò), Athens (Aθηvα), and elsewhere. Asclepions (Aσκληπieíα) were founded at the 6th century B.C. and served as mysticistic centers of medical education for selected "godly blessed" priests. Patients visiting these sacred sanctuaries were treated by a healing ritual known as incubation, or temple sleep. They slept overnight in the dormitory, or abaton (áβατo), and were visited in their dreams by Asclepius and his daughters Hygeia and Panacea or by one of his priests, who gave them divine advice and inspiration. They reported their dreams to a priest the next morning. The pilgrims were either spontaneously healed or the priest prescribed a cure based on their dream. Evidently, the temple healers relied largely on the use of psychological methods, i.e. suggestion through the use of charms, rituals and incantations, but they also employed physical means, some if which were genuinely efficient. Thus, the temple patients were also offered hydrotherapy and enjoyed theatre, music, poetry and a good diet. It must be emphasized that the temple physicians of Asclepions differed from lay medical practitioners and there is no evidence that they acted as tutors to lay physicians. Patients who visited the Asclepions and treated by the ritual therapeutics were usually cases that were given up as incurable by lay medicine.4 Asclepius' legacy was bequeathed by his sons and students Podaleirius (IIoδαλpípeioò) (Internist) and Machaon (Mαχαóv) (Military surgeon) who also appeared in the homeric epics (8th century B.C.). It is notable how the passing of medical knowledge from generation to generation in Ancient Greece is so characteristically reflected in the Asclepius' family. Even Aclepius' father, Apollo, was originally considered the God of Medicine before inheriting his mantle to his sons. With the passage of time, the influence of superstition and religion on medicine steadily decreased until the boundary of rationality and magic was demarcated by the arrival of Hippocrates' rational medicine.5 However, it appears that, despite the occasional competitive bouts between these different types of healers, the Asclepian temple physicians generally existed side by side, in uneasy proximity, throughout the centuries with the Hippocratics until the formers' practice was eventually perceived as a pagan rite and thus rejected by early Christianity. MEDICAL "CRAFTSMEN" AND THE MENTORING OF MEDICINE IN ANCIENT GREECE The division between medicine as a "science" and medicine as an "art" is an ancient one. The ancient Greeks frequently contrasted the non-scientific practitioner to the theoretically grounded physician/philosopher. According to Plato, a medical apprenticeship that was based only on observation and experience was routine and impersonal in comparison to those physicians who strived to make the understanding of nature fundamental to their art and teaching.6 It appears that the majority of medical practitioners did not concern themselves with biological theories and philosophy. However, the few that did care about the nature of health and the underlying anatomic and physiological changes behind a particular disease, were considered the leaders of their profession.5 Greek doctors usually practiced privately but were occasionally employed by a city-state as public health officers who treated citizens without charge. These state-salaried physicians were supported by a special tax called "iatrikon" (Iαtpiκóv) and sometimes received additional benefits including tax reductions, free pass to recreational centres and statues erected in their honour. Such state participation in citizen health care is evidenced throughout antiquity and began as early as the 6th century B.C. However, no evidence exists that these civic physicians were involved in medical education or that special taxes like the "iatrikon" were used to finance public medical education. Various texts from the Hippocratic Collection help us understand Greek medical practice during the antiquity. A surprisingly large part of medical practice of that period seems to reflect the physician's insecure position. Thus, a good diagnostician aimed to impress the patient and win his confidence. The practice of prognosis was also an important proof of competence and a valuable psychological tool in gaining the patients' trust. On the other hand, physicians tended to decline cases that were obviously incurable in order to avoid any loss of reputation. To ensure that physicians would not amass too much wealth, they were advised to adjust their fees to each patient's means and, when necessary, treat them without payment. While some doctors were permanent residents in a particular city, a large number travelled from place to place searching for a living in response to the demand for doctors and seeking to possess intimate knowledge of the ailments peculiar to each region.5 No system of formal medical education or any curriculum program that issued diplomas to successful medical students existed in the classical antiquity. Even the first centres of medical excellence such as Cos and Cnidos and, later on, the museum of Alexandria (Aλεξávδpiα) did not provide any legally recognized certification or formal system of teaching. On the other hand, physicians who were associated with one of the major medical schools were probably more in demand compared to their less prestigiously educated peers. The passing on of knowledge through mentoring was highly regarded in the Greek antiquity from as early as Homer's (Oμηpoò) time.7 Accordingly, medical knowledge was bequeathed from father to son or to the physician's assistant via a master-apprentice relationship: the apprentice learned by observing and assisting his master curing patients.8 Such medical education was fundamentally practical. The student learned to take detailed medical history from the patient, his relatives or friends, catalogue observable regularities, and accordingly formulate rational hypotheses, explanations and treatments. He was trained to properly use his senses of observation, hearing, smelling, palpating and carefully examine the patient's pains, mental state, position in bed, fever, breathing, and excretions (urine, feces and sweats). The patient's pulse was also examined but its profound diagnostic significance was not elaboratively catalogued at these times. Practical experience was an essential component of the medical craft taught to the apprentice. As was noted in the Hippocratic texts: "He who aspires to practice surgery must go to war". A competent student would also attend the patient as a nurse in serious cases. Good students would complement such practical work with the study of books (e.g. the Hippocratic Collection, Dioskorides' book of herbals and drug preparation) in order to combine knowledge with experience and obtain self confidence and autonomy. The quality of training depended on the master's skills and the student's prowess. The length of education depended on the depth of the apprentice's studies and on his intellectual skills and competence.1 In theory, medical training was open to every man. Of course, the aspiring physician required a master willing to train him and the successful medical protégée required certain characteristics, including above-average intelligence and a firm grasp of reality. But in principle, the pursuit of medical knowledge in ancient Greece was unrestrained. Evidently, medical practice retained a very "free market" approach throughout the ancient world. The Babylonians characteristically presented their sick at the market place in search of those persons who could advise and/or treat the disease. In line with this attitude, no legally recognized method existed to prevent amateur and inadequately trained physicians or various kinds of quacks from practicing in Greek antiquity. One established himself as a doctor not by presenting his training certifications but by vigorously defending the reputation he acquired in practice and by carefully cultivating the confidence of his clients. The physicians' fierce competition with other healers, his conscience, and the patient's demands for efficacy were his only restrictions and incentives for self-improvement. The only possible evidence of completed medical training and qualification may have been the Hippocratic Oath, as well as attendance to one of the major medical schools. It may be strange that the ancient Greek civilization, with all its sophistication, failed to establish any means of protection from ignorant and potentially dangerous physicians. But one needs to remember the distinct features of ancient Greece that could explain why this system persisted and even how it could work adequately for so many centuries. The Greek region was literally fragmented into hundreds of independent city-states and this hindered any possible attempt of a unified professional evaluation policy. Therefore the ancients had to rely on the self-policing apprentice system by which Greek medical education was organized. Each of the masters, who were successful and experienced physicians, would take care in recruiting, selecting and training their apprentices and carefully monitor their progress to ensure the quality of their education, which was important to reputation of the master as well as the student. THE ROOTS OF RATIONAL MEDICINE First medical schools The first medical schools were founded in Greece and in the Southern Italy (Magna Grecia) regions of Sicily and Calabria. In the classical antiquity, medical "schools" were essentially schools of thought formed by an influential medical practitioner and his followers. There were no academic buildings dedicated to medical training. The "school" was essentially realized wherever its adherents would gather. With the coming of the 5th century B.C. the most famous of such centers were Cos, where Hippocrates (Iππoκpáτηò) was born, and Cnidus, situated just opposite of Cos on Asia Minor. These ancient Greek states developed medical schools that served as hallmarks of medical education. The doctors associated with these schools shared knowledge and certain medical practices; medical students retained a master-apprentice relation with their teachers and observed their masters treating diseases and prescribing measures such as good diet, exercise, and herbal remedies. Aspiring surgeons were trained as assistants to a military surgeon accompanying troops on a campaign. The instruction was of course very informal and there was no established certificate of the student's right to practice.1 Hippocratic medicine Hippocrates was born in about 460 B.C. on the island on Cos, an island of the coast of Asia Minor in the Dodecanese (Δωδεκávησα), where he developed his immensely influential rational school bringing about the transition from empiricism to scientific medicine in antiquity. During his lifetime, Hippocrates was undoubtedly the most renowned physician and teacher of medicine. Soranus stated that Hippocrates traced his descent and medical knowledge from his father Heraclidos (Hpáκλεiδoò) and Asclepius. He practiced medicine in his birthplace of Cos but also ventured in other parts of Greece including Athens, Sicily, Alexandria, Cyrine and Cyprus; he died in Thessaly at an advanced age in about 377 B.C. Although Hippocrates is widely considered the father of medicine and well-known scribes such as Plato and Aristotle have documented a number his achievements, there is little knowledge about his actual life and biography. There is even a possibility that Hippocrates was actually not one but many men of the same name.9 Whether Hippocrates was one man or several, the works attributed to him mark the stage in Greek medicine where physicians were encouraged to offer rational explanations concerning the cause and character of disease and health, instead of superstition and magic. Hippocrates' rational medicine was notably based on common sense and substituted divine intervention in favour of a profound, practical philosophy. Hippocrates is thought to have originated the concept of the "four humours" (plegm, yellow bile, black bile and blood) in medical physiology. The humoural doctrine stated that good health was the result of the harmonious equilibrium and blending of the four humours. Thus, disease was explained as the consequence of humoural imbalance. Relative excess of each humour resulted in particular personality types. An abundance of blood, yellow bile, black bile or phlegm was respectively associated with the sanguine, phlegmatic, choleric and melancholic temperaments. Hippocratic medicine notably emphasized maximum conservation in all medical treatments according to the famous Hippocratic motto: "to help or at least to do no harm". Hippocrates put more emphasis on diet and recommended a restricted use of drugs, which is to be expected if one considers that the rational medical use of herbs required a thorough systemization of the botanical world that would only be achieved a century after Hippocrates' death by Theophrastus (Teófpασtoò). Hippocrates also knew well how to describe a disease clearly and concisely and recorded treatment outcomes, both failures as well as successes.9 He also introduced the first concepts of medical ethics contained in the Hippocratic oath which still serves as the ethical nucleus of today's physicians.10 Hippocratic medicine gave emphasis on the patient rather than the disease and concentrated on experience and on the visual aspect of observation rather than theory. On the other hand, Cos' rival school, Cnidus, focused on a reductionist conception of disease, similar to the modern approach. However, Hippocrates' school achieved more wealth and recognition because it focused on the patient, while the school of Cnidus concentrated on studying the disease in the absence of the necessary technical instruments and general scientific infrastructure that could carry out its ideas the School of Cnidus ceased to exist, whereas that of Hippocrates flourished. The conflicting philosophies of medical education and the different interpretations of the nature of medicine (medicine as science versus medicine as art) raged on for several centuries until the unifying influence of Galen's (ταληvóò) (129-200 A.D.). Theories and research became the standard system that was passed on to later ages all the way to the 16th century. Medical education through the Hippocratic collection It is possible that Hippocrates was the author of only some, or even none, of the texts that comprise the Hippocratic Collection (Corpus Hippocraticum), a compilation of over 70 medical treatises that are traditionally attributed to him. Hippocrates' students and his two sons, Thessalus and Draco, were the successors of the Hippocratic tradition and a large part of the Hippocratic Collection, including the Oath, was written by them. The Hippocratic tradition became the accepted standard for medical education and these texts were taught in universities throughout most of the ancient West and during the Renaissance until the 19th century. The Hippocratic collection contained a series of aphorisms, among which is the well-known "Life is brief, art is long, opportunity is fleeting, experience is fallacious, judgement is difficult" (often shortened to the Latin tag, "Ars longa, vita brevis"). These passages are the foundation of Hippocrates' philosophy and lay much stress to careful, repetitious thought before a medical intervention. Such aphorisms are followed by case histories, summary accounts of the climatic conditions, brief comments on diseases, symptoms and prognostic indications, many of which remain valid.9 Post-Hippocratic era In the following century the work of Aristotle (Apτστéληò), regarded as the first great biologist, incalculably influenced medicine. Aristotle was a student of Plato at Athens and tutor to Alexander the Great (Mέγας Aλέξαvδρoς). His interests and studies included the entire world of living things. He was the founder of comparative anatomy and embryology and his work influenced scientific and medical thinking for the next 2 millennia.5 Following Aristotle's time, the centre of Greek culture shifted to the Egyptian city of Alexandria. The famous medical school of Alexandria was established in about 300 BC and replaced Cos and Cnidos as the foremost centre of medical excellence. Its two founders and best medical teachers were Herophilus (Eρóφιλoς), who is known as the first anatomist in history, and Erasistratus (Eρασίστρατoς), whom some regard as the founder of physiology. Medical studies at this great school were based on a more professional tutorship by its renowned teachers supplemented by practical apprenticeship under one of these physicians. Thus, the earlier periods' master-apprentice relationship was gradually replaced by that of professor-student. Due to this notable change in the character of medical education, large numbers of students were tutored by fewer professors. This university atmosphere did not in itself preclude clinical instruction and bedside teaching. It did however introduce a new non-professional direction for medical education in the sense that some students studied biology and medicine not for the purposes of professional practice but as part of scientific and philosophic exploration. This division of studies probably depended on each student's social status, with the more wealthy protégées generally preferring to focus on an academic approach to medicine. There were also certain individuals who studied almost every possible subject matter (polymaths). Such an endeavour to encompass all knowledge would have been incompatible with a busy medical practice. The tripartite division of medical education can be seen from as early as Aristotle's time described as "the physician who is a craftsman, the scientific physician, and the man who has studied medicine as part of his education".1 The museum of Alexandria continued as a centre of medical teaching even after the Roman Empire had attained supremacy over the Greek world. The medical education of women Women in Greek antiquity avoided examination and treatment from male physicians, a fact that often hindered successful treatment. This should not come as a surprise considering that ancient Greek women were taught from a young age to be ashamed of their bodies. Before the 5th century B.C. childbirth was almost exclusively entrusted to female kin and neighbours who had themselves given birth. Some of these women stood out because of their skills and became known by the title of "maia" (Mαία) or "midwife". Most midwife practitioners were usually trained from other midwives. The story of Agnodice (Aγvoδίκη), who according to myth was the first female to achieve the role of physician despite this being forbidden by law, has been cited by many Western midwives during the Renaissance in an attempt to medicalize childbirth. It seems that there were women in ancient Greece who studied medicine serving alongside leading male physicians and practiced obstetrics and gynaecology. As of yet there are few data regarding the involvement of women in general medical practice other than gynaecology.1,5,11 CONCLUSION Medical education in ancient Greece closely mirroring the evolution of ancient Greek though originates from magic and religion which is gradually superseded by more objective and leading to the Hippocratic rational medicine that with the of of ancient medical education such as the reputation system of medical education and practice may be peculiar But on these ancient can also the fundamental concepts that to modern practice. In a world that was by the first great medical schools a more ethical practice to their students and these were and by the today's medicine. than two to the of modern medical education.

Classical Athenian democracy is rightly famous but democracy flourished in other parts of the Greek world as well. In this clear and fascinating book, Matthew Simonton traces the emergence, growth, consolidation and decline of democratic city-states over the millennium down to the fifth century CE. He argues for the widespread and highly participatory nature of democratic constitutions across the Greek world, particularly in the fourth, third, and second centuries BCE. Readers will also learn to appreciate the characteristic ideological, institutional, and material-cultural features of democratic poleis. The evidence marshalled includes literary texts, inscriptions, coins, archaeological remains, and monumental art. The book does not shy away from the fact that ancient Greek democracies both empowered lower-class men but also rested on a series of exclusions (of women, enslaved people, and foreigners). Nevertheless, dēmokratia emerges as a major facet of ancient Greek culture and society.

This chapter presents the text of a lecture on the growing popularity of Greek democracy as a topic in school and university curricula. It argues that that the modern penchant for reading the meaning of democracy through the lens of the authoritative institutions of government has had a substantial impact on the way ancient Greek democracy has been understood. It suggests that the study of the ancient Athenian democracy should be conducted with a cultural/ideological approach rather than a constitutional approach.

Periclean Athens represents one of the most remarkable social systems in the world's history in terms of innovative output in almost all fields of thought and endeavour. This paper presents a discussion on some of the findings of a research project analyzing the Athenian sociopolitical organization from a systems perspective. The Viable Systems Model was used by the authors as a framework for examining the reorganization of Athens' sociopolitical structure by Cleisthenes in 508/7 BC; this structure was to provide the basis for Classical Athenian democracy. The analysis provides fresh insight for those with an interest in organization theory or classical history.

Attic Building Accounts and the Athenian Jury

This chapter discusses the basic structure of Athenian government. It also describes how it resembled the governments of other Greek city-states, and reviews the intricate relationship between “society” and “government” in ancient Athens. It first introduces a conservative reconstruction of Athens in the fifth and fourth centuries B.C. Not long after the period of Solon's reforms, Athens fell under the control of the tyrant Peisistratus and his sons. The important trends that began under Peisistratus are reported. In addition, Athenian history in the classical period is elaborated upon. The Lamian War (323–322) ended in Athenian failure. In 322, classical Athenian democracy and independent Athenian government both ended.

Publics and audiences in ancient Greece

The article deals with the historical stages of the creation, development, and formation of a human rights institute. The ideological and theoretical heritage of Ancient Greece and Rome, which is the basis for the study of ideas about justice, social equality, and human freedom, is analyzed based on the analysis of the fundamental ideas of the most famous thinkers of antiquity. It was the philosophers of antiquity who initiated the concept of "natural law", which was formed over the centuries by the desire of man to understand the world, determine his place in society and politics. From the time of antiquity, the concept of human rights gradually began to emerge; Subsequently, the concept of equality, freedom of person, person, and citizen were formed. Ancient philosophers came up with the idea of law in general and the idea of human rights under the requirements of their time and conditions of social development. Over time, the ancient perception of social equality, justice, dignity, independence, and freedom of man became the starting point and benchmark of European political culture. The early period of the development of political and legal doctrines in ancient Greece is associated with the time of the formation of ancient Greek statehood. It was at this time that an attempt was made to give rationalist ideas about ethical and legal order in human affairs and relations instead of mythological ones. It should be noted that ancient Greek views on human rights were formed in mythological ideas about the origin of policies and divine justice. That is why rights come from the divine order of justice, which became the basis for the category equality. Only what corresponded to the concept of equality (within the concept of justice) was understood as right. In ancient Greek politics, customs and mono-norms gradually transformed towards protecting the dignity of citizens. The polite democracy gave impetus to the emergence of freedom, which promoted the emergence of equal political rights among the citizens of this policy. In the Greek city-state, the law first emerged as a specific phenomenon, and the life of the policy began to be compulsory for everyone. Subsequently, the Pythagoreans (VI –V centuries BC) formulated an important role in shaping the idea of legal equality and justice, using numerical proportions, that is, the ratio of certain parameters. The provision that "fair is to pay another equal" essentially introduces the coupon principle. Subsequently, this reflected Solon (7th-6th centuries BC) in his reforms. It eliminated debt slavery and, as a result of the compromise between nobility and demos, introduced a moderate censorship democracy in Athens. All citizens of the policy should equally be protected by the law and obey its mandatory rules (1). Recognized the law as a requirement of legal equality of free citizens of the policy, slaves did not apply the legal rules. Equality was considered in two respects: equality in law and equality before the law. Developed by Roman lawyers provisions in which a person acts as a subject of law, determine the legal status of a person, establish the freedom and formal equality of people under natural law, define Roman citizenship as a special legal status of a person, the distribution of the right to private and public, etc. contributed to the awareness of legal the importance of human rights in the context of the systematic doctrine of the legal nature of the relationship between the individual and the state. Roman law, extending to a state which it regarded as the object of its study along with positive law, ensured a legal relationship between the state and the individual, which was crucial for the development of the institution of the protection of individual rights in the world at that time (14, p. 119). In relation to individuals, the state was not above the rule of law, but directly its component part, which has all the basic properties of a law. The basis of a just and legal relationship between the individual and the state recognized the law, not the state. The individual and the state must be law-abiding subjects of legal relations, that is, act according to the rules of law. Conclusion. To sum up, we can point out that the first theoretical developments and statutory provisions of the law go back to ancient times. The thinkers of Ancient Greece and Rome initiated the basic concepts of justice, equality, autonomy. It was then that ideas about political rights, lawmaking, democracy, and the personal responsibility of citizens were formed. However, freedom was not universal, it did not belong to slaves, and they were not the subjects of relations in the policy. The population of the policies was divided into different social and ethnic groups and accordingly had different legal status. Such inequality was the norm, so the priority was given to a policy or state that was enshrined in legislation. However, in Ancient Greece, there were also certain individual rights of citizens such as the right to speak; private property rights; the right to participate in government; the right to hold office; to participate in national meetings; the right to participate in the administration of justice; the right to appeal against illegal acts, etc. In Ancient Rome, this list was supplemented by the right to bargain, freedom of movement, the right of the people's tribune to veto, the ban on torture, the adversarial process of the lawsuit, etc. Keywords: Antiquity period, city-policies, human rights, legal equality, society, justice.

Review Article: Drawing Lots: Review of Irad Malkin & Josine Blok, Drawing Lots: From Egalitarianism to Democracy in Ancient Greece

"This article attempts a comprehensive study of the origin, development, institutions and social impact of Athenian democracy. Through in-depth analysis, the complexities and intricacies of this prestigious political system are illuminated, and its achievements and shortcomings are highlighted. Athenian democracy is often recognized as one of the earliest experiments in democratic governance and still remains a subject of study by historians, political scientists, and scholars. Athenian democracy, which emerged in ancient Greece in the fifth century BCE, was a crucial period in human history, not only shaping the political landscape of the time but also influencing subsequent democratic movements throughout the centuries. Drawing on extensive scholarship and primary sources, the article examines the historical context of the emergence of Athenian democracy and emphasizes the contributions of key figures such as Solon and Clysphenes to its development. It examines the institutions of Athenian democracy, including the ekklesia, boule, dikasteria, and ostracism, and analyzes their role in citizen participation and decision-making. The article also examines the democratic ideals and values that inspired Athenian society, including equality, freedom, civic virtue, and responsibility, and explores the limitations and exceptions inherent in the system. "