Four Ancient Authors to Understand Greek Federalism

Guest post by Triantafyllos Zacharakis, Dr. in Ancient Greek History

Greek Federal States: An Alternative to the Polis

City-state (polis) was the main political entity in the ancient Greek world, the ideal political community aiming at the highest of all goods, according to Aristotle (Pol. 1252a). However, polis was not the only form of political organization. On the contrary, supra-polis organizations such as federal states (Koina) were widespread all over the ancient Greek world at least since the 5th century BC and particularly during the Hellenistic period.

In general terms, Koina were regional states created by poleis usually belonging to the same ethnos (e.g. Boeotian, Achaean, Aetolian, Thessalian). These poleis kept their autonomy (e.g. political institutions, judicial system and laws etc.), but they conceded some of their competences to the federal structure: mainly the handling of foreign policy and defense, but also some aspects of economy (e.g. currency, taxes) and justice (e.g. laws, arbitrations between cities). Koina had their own institutions, magistrates, and deliberative bodies, such as boule and/or ekklesia. Assuring a more efficient military and economic cooperation by combining the resources of the fractured world of separate poleis was the main incentive of creating a Koinon.

Unfortunately, ancient literature on federalism is scarce, since ancient Greek political thought is dominated by the concept of polis and in most cases, inscriptions are the main source for the study of the Greek federal states. However, there are authors who give us important information on some Koina or highlight crucial aspects of Greek federalism.

1. The Oxyrhynchus Historian

The Oxyrhynchus Historian, as scholars call him, was an author of the late 5th-early 4th century BC whose work, Hellenika, is known only from fragments. In one of them (Hell. Oxy. 16, 3-4), he gives a description, the first one in ancient Greek literature, of the political organization of a federal state, the Boeotian Koinon in the early 4th century BC. The Oxyrhynchus Historian points out a crucial aspect of ancient Greek federalism, i.e. equality between poleis-members of the Koinon. As he says: “each community shared in the common treasury, paid its taxes, appointed jurymen, and shared equally in public burdens and benefits”. In other words, all cities had the same rights (e.g. appointing federal magistrates), but at the same time they had the same obligations (e.g. paying taxes and contributing to the federal army).

2. Xenophon

In Xenophon’s Hellenika we do not have any description of Koinon’s organization. However, through his narrative of the events of the 4th century BC Xenophon points out indirectly some important issues concerning federalism, i.e. the benefits which the creation of a Koinon entails, the risk of transformation of the Koinon into hegemony of one polis, and the conflict between proponents and opponents of federalism within poleis.

More specifically, Xenophon narrates that when, in 382 BC, Olynthus, the chief city of the Chalcidian Koinon in the peninsula of Chalcidice invited under threat of coercion two neighboring cities, Acanthus and Apollonia, to join, these two cities denied and turned to Sparta for help. Xenophon preserves the speech of Cleigenes, the ambassador of Acanthus to Sparta. From this passage (Hell. 5, 2, 12-19) we learn first that Olynthus has become a hegemonic power within Koinon forcing other cities to join it and second that Koinon offers important benefits, i.e. the multiplication of military and economic resources provided by the different poleis, which have made the Chalcidian Koinon hard to defeat. As Cleigenes points out: “And yet at this moment they already have not less than eight hundred hoplites and far more than that number of peltasts; while as for horsemen, if we also become united with them, they will have more than one thousand […] For what indeed is there to hinder such expansion, seeing that the country itself possesses ship-timber and has revenues from many ports and many trading-places, and likewise an abundant population on account of the abundance of food?”.

In another passage (Hell. 6, 5, 6-7) Xenophon describes the conflict between two opposite camps formed within the city of Tegea in Arcadia regarding the issue of participation of the city in the Arcadian Koinon (370 BC). As Xenophon says, proponents of participation in the Koinon claimed that “whatever measure was carried in the common assembly should be binding on the several cities as well”, whereas those who were against the participation insisted “to leave their city undisturbed and to live under the laws of their fathers”. This episode proves that regardless of the benefits that Koinon offered, not all citizens of a polis were eager to concede part of their local autonomy to a federal structure.

3. Polybius

Polybius is by far the most important author when we talk about Koina. The historian from Megalopolis was one of the most fervent proponents of federalism and particularly of the Achaean Koinon in which he served as a magistrate, like his father Lykortas.

Polybius stresses the power of the Achaean Koinon which has started in the beginning of the 3rd century BC as a union of Achaean poleis to protect themselves from the Macedonians and has managed to unify Peloponnese in one state under common institutions and laws. As he says (II 37, 9-10): “For while many have attempted in the past to induce the Peloponnesians to adopt a common policy […] this object has been so much advanced, and so nearly attained, in my own time that not only have they formed an allied and friendly community, but they have the same laws, weights, measures and coinage, as well as the same magistrates, senate, and courts of justice”.

For Polybius, Koinon’s success was not only due to the military and economic benefits which provided, as Xenophon points out, but also to its principles, equality and democracy, which made it an attractive option for the poleis of Peloponnese. With his own words (II 38, 6-8): “One could not find a political system and principle so favorable to equality and freedom of speech, in a word so sincerely democratic, as that of the Achaean League […] For by reserving no special privileges for original members, and putting all new adherents exactly on the same footing, it soon attained the aim it had set itself, being aided by two very powerful coadjutors, equality and humanity”. Like the Oxyrhynchus Historian, Polybius evokes a core element of ancient Greek federalism, i.e. equality between member-poleis in the sharing of benefits and obligations.

We can assume that Polybius was right, since the Achaean Koinon has managed to keep its autonomy and to resist to major powers, i.e. Hellenistic monarchs and Rome, throughout the 3rd and first half of the 2nd centuries BC, being the last state of mainland Greece which has lost its freedom to the Romans in 146 BC.

4. Plutarch

Finally, in his work Parallel Lives Plutarch has dedicated two biographies to the most prominent statesmen of the Achaean Koinon, Aratus of Sicyon (271-231 BC) and Philopoimen of Megalopolis (253-183 BC). Both provide valuable examples of federal leadership. Aratus’s career is associated with the empowerment and expansion of the Achaean Koinon, whereas Philopoimen stands out more as a military leader.

In a passage of the Life of Aratus (Arat. 24, 4-5), Plutarch stresses Aratus’ dedication to the federal idea emphasizing, like Polybius and Xenophon, the power derived by the union of the different cities: “For they saw that he [Aratus] put first and foremost, not wealth, not fame, not friendship with kings, not his own native city's advantage, but only the growth in power of the Achaean League. For he considered that the Greek states which were weak would be preserved by mutual support when once they had been bound as it were by the common interest, and that just as the members of the body have a common life and breath because they cleave together in a common growth, but when they are drawn apart and become separate they wither away and decay, in like manner the several states are ruined by those who dissever their common bonds, but are augmented by mutual support, when they become parts of a great whole and enjoy a common foresight”.

What These Authors Teach Us About Greek Federalism

Overall, although we do not have a treatise on Greek federalism, as we have on polis thanks to Aristotle, we can see that federalism was discussed either directly or indirectly in the work of major Greek authors throughout Antiquity. Power in unity, the benefits that a Koinon provides, i.e. the multiplication of military and economic resources, key features of the federal organization, such as equality between member-poleis, conflict between proponents and opponents of the federal idea, the risk of hegemony are some of the issues that can be traced in their works providing us with useful insight regarding federalism and interstate cooperation.

For further reading, see: Bearzot, C. 2015. “Ancient theoretical reflections on federalism” in H. Beck – P. Funke (ed.), Federalism in Greek Antiquity. Cambridge, 503-511. Mackil, E. 2013. Creating a common polity: Religion, economy, and politics in the making of Greek koinon. Berkeley.

Editorial note

The above article reflects the author's own interpretation of the ancient evidence and modern scholarship on Greek federalism. As with many subjects in ancient history, scholarly views may differ on particular questions of interpretation. Mind the Greeks publishes contributions from researchers and writers to encourage discussion and engagement with the ancient Greek world.