‘Plain’, ‘Shore’, and ‘Hill’ in early Athens

All those concerned with the early history of Athens must give some consideration to the three ‘parties’ (the term used in this discussion rather than ‘faction’) which, it was believed in classical antiquity, divided Attica in the first half of the sixth century B.C. and formed the background to the career of Peisistratos. A considerable bibliography might be assembled on this subject and there would be little excuse for adding to it, did the present writer not feel that previous treatment of the problems involved has been too brief and disjointed. It is intended here first to examine at some length the questions at issue, even if this entails some repetition of generally accepted ideas, and then to hazard some general observations on Athenian affairs of the period.There are, in fact, four heads under which the problems must be treated: (i) the reality of the existence of regional divisions of Attica such as the parties presuppose, and their localization; (ii) the question of the degree to which parties are, in the ancient sources, connected with these regions; (iii) the question how far persons of whose position and activities we know something can be connected with the regions and the parties; (iv) the validity of the generally accepted views of the aims and policy of the parties and their supposed leaders, followed by an effort to discover an issue which divided Athens and gave rise to the tradition of party strife.