Tyrants are not rooted in a single period. Instead, they are eternal as they still exist in some shape or form in the modern age. The connection between tyrants of the past and present was their utilization of a military force. This force ensured the security of their rule. They also did some good things for the people which helped to balance out the use of military force.
Tyrants of the ancient Greek world brought numerous advantages during their rule. One of those benefits was a renewed focus on international trade. The tyrant Pisistratus ensured that trading relations between Attica and powerful states such as Syria, Cyprus, and Spain remained in good favor. As a result, the trade of Attica pottery flourished under his rule. There was a massive increase in trade with Syria, Cyprus, and Spain for these pottery pieces. Additionally, Pisistratus influenced Attica pottery with his support of religion. One particular god he focused on was Dionysus and his love for wine drinking (Pomeroy 2020, 137). These scenes were incorporated into Attica pottery and helped to increase trade. Pisistratus also popularized the Athenian coin. The Athenian coin became the currency of the Aegean (Pomeroy 2020, 136). Pisistratus also provided an increase in the number of jobs available. His position of power enabled him to sanction building projects that celebrated his rule. As a result, a large number of jobs were available for the poor. One drastic change that was initiated by Pisistratus was the construction of public fountains. These would replace the private wells that only aristocrats had. Public fountains were a benefit to the public as it produced more work for the poor. Pisistratus also favored the poor. He showed this when he gave money to the poor so that they could make a living off farming (Ranum 2020, 22). Pisistratus understood that he needed the people to be happy with him to secure his authority. The gift of material goods was an enticing way to gain the favor of the people. Pisistratus also did not stand idle when it came to conflict. Famous writers such as Aristotle praised his diplomatic ability when dealing with domestic and regional issues. Pisistratus did not radically shift the laws and rules of the city to accumulate more wealth. Pisistratus understood that abolishment of laws would make him a ruler who ruled with no restrictions. Instead, he kept the laws of the previous oligarchs in place (Hammond 1982, 406). He ensured that he was legitimized through legal codes and offices and kept the nobles happy. Pisistratus was also able to work with other states. Gaining alliances was an instrumental skill in the survival of his city-state. Pisistratus achieved this when he agreed to join both Athens and Sparta in preparation for the rise of Cyprus. Overall, the rule of Pisistratus was a golden age because of his impressive qualities. These qualities consisted of diplomacy and his attention to the economy. As a result, he ensured peace at home and abroad while bolstering the opportunities of the poor.
Additionally, Evagoras was another tyrant that was celebrated as a hero of the Greek peoples. He had a festival that was dedicated to him. It was called the Evagoras (IX) (Rhodes 2019, 435). The festival involved heroic actions of Evagoras who hellenised a city that was under the influence of barbarians. He was seen as spreading Greek ideas and culture. Furthemore, he was praised for his valiant actions against the mighty Persians. He was perceived as a man who did not want to bow down to the Persians and fought to protect Greece from the barbarous invaders. Thus, Evagoras was a tyrant who did not fall under the definition that was commonly associated with it. He was a hero to the people rather than an oppressor.
Similarly, another pair of tyrants who provided a wealth of benefits to the people was Gelon and Hieron. These tyrants lived in Sicily. Gelon was a smart man who also realized that he needed the support of his subjects to rule. He partitioned a large number of temples and public works in his capital Syracuse (Sian 2006, 101). The plethora of available jobs was a strong selling point for the people as they did not have enough opportunities in the first place. Gelon also did not stop there. He gave the new population of an area in his city housing. This act further reinforced the notion that Gelon was acting for the benefit of the people. Some examples of these public works that he initiated included the bouleutêrion and an ekklêsiastêrion. Both these buildings were for the people as a bouleutêrion was a council house for the popular assembly. An ekklêsiastêrion fulfilled the same purpose. The construction of these buildings demonstrated that Gelon was aware that the people felt the need to be an active member in civic life. Even though his rule did not permit any change, the recognition of this was essential in maintaining the public’s support of him. Gelon also understood the importance of religion. An example of this is his initiation of a new ceremonial area near the temple of Athens. Worship of the gods was an essential theme in the Greek world. His support of it strengthened his favor with the people. Additionally, Gelon emphasized his importance as a savior with his victories at the battles of Himera and Cumae (Sian 2006, 128). Gelon did this by inscribing his name at the site of the battle and claimed glory for himself and his family name. Gelon had saved all of Greece from the threat of slavery to a foreign master. Hieron was also an essential figure at the battle of Cumae. Pindar reinforced the idea that Hieron was a true panhellenic hero who, like his brother, had saved all of Greece. The contribution of Pindar is significant because he wrote about the gods. Thus, the victory of Hieron had divine qualities as well. Pindar attributed Hieron's achievement against the Etruscans to him alone (Sian 2006, 133). The skill of Hieron was incredible as he defeated the Etruscan army by his own hands. Overall, the actions of Gelon and Hieron gave many chances to the people to live a better life than they previously had. Additionally, they were responsible for the preservation of the Greek world.
A similarity between ancient and modern tyrants was their choice to suppress people who did not agree to their authority. Dionysus was a tyrant in Sicily who ensured his rule by killing or exiling the rich within the communities that they had conquered (Sian 2006, 69). Dionysus had effectively removed dangerous threats to his power. Furthermore, he aimed to make citizens powerless by poverty. To do this, he levied enormous taxes against citizens. As a result, the citizens were poor. Dionysus increased his wealth. Two effects of this were it kept the citizens in poverty while Dionysus was able to continue paying his mercenaries. The suppression of peoples has also been demonstrated in modern day Belarus. Alexander Lukashenko is the dictator of Belarus and has employed similar methods to maintain his power. Lukashenko used secret police to remove any threats to his authority and was responsible for the raiding of non-government organizations that resisted against the society that Lukashenko had envisioned. Lukashenko wanted state factories that had massive workforces (Wilson 2011, 225). The NGO’s were unhappy with this arrangement and started to lobby for change. As expected, Lukashenko organized the dismantling of the organizations. Candidates of the parties were jailed and tortured to reinforce the message that they were being intimidated into silence. Furthermore, Lukashenko’s actions were so threatening that one of the members instantly fled the country once he got out of jail (Wilson 2011, 234). Lukashenko was a man who was not willing to have his power at risk. The destruction of a group was a gentle reminder that he had the means and the motivations to make them disappear. Lukashenko is also responsible for the disappearance of 150 influential people that were involved in forms of government resistance (Wilson 2011, 226). All of this was at the hands of his secret police. Thus, both Dionysus and Lukashenko share a similar trait between each other. The use of military force to control and destroy potential threats to their authority was instrumental in the stability of their power.
In essence, the actions of ancient tyrants have given me a new understanding of how modern tyrants perceive the security of their power. The stark time difference between them does not erase how they employed methods of suppression to maintain their authority. Both Dionysus and Lukashenko realized that the most knowledgeable and wealthy people posed the biggest threats to their rule. Dionysus ensured that his mercenaries were always by his side. He guaranteed this by accumulating wealth at the expense of the citizens. Likewise, Lukashenko employed the use of a similar force who used fear and violence to secure the rule of their leader. For Lukashenko, it is working as he has been in power for the past twenty-six years. Similarly, Dionysus was in control for a long time as well. The suppression of the peoples through armed men was a prominent factor in the longevity of their rule.
Bibliography
Hammond, N.G.L The Cambridge ancient history. The expansion of the Greek world, eighth to sixth centuries B.C. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982.
Lewis, Sian Ancient tyranny Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2006.
Pomeroy, Sarah Burstein, Stanley Donlan, Walter Roberts, Jennifer Tandy, David Tsouvala, Georgia A brief history of ancient Greece. New York: Oxford University Press, 2020.
Ranum, Orest Tyranny from ancient Greece to renaissance France Palgrave: Springer international publishing, 2020.
Rhodes, P.J Tyranny in Greece in the Fifth and Fourth Centuries B.C. Durham: Durham University Press, 2019.
Wilson, Andrew Belarus: the last dictatorship in Europe New Haven: Yale University Press, 2011.