THE ARYAN MIGRATIONS 35 and who were held in subjection. Sparta was almost the only state of importance which was never brought under a Tyrant, and in fact never departed from a hereditary kingship. But instead of having one hereditary monarch, she had two hereditary kings. Though their powers were extremely restricted they made it practically impossible for any one man to snatch at a despotism. The real power of the state, however, lay in the hands of a small body called the Ephors, who themselves held office only for a year. In the sixth century B.C. Sparta was recognised as the most powerful of the Greek states ; and where- ever any concerted action was proposed among those states she had a predominant voice in their counsels, and an acknowledged right to their military leadership. In strong contrast to Sparta was Athens, who, without especially devoting herself to military organisation or the pursuit of military glory, became in the fifth century the • i r o r . ' „., , Athens, rival of Sparta lor supremacy in the Hellenic world. Unlike Sparta, Athens had progressed steadily from the monarchy of early times to democracy, or government which sought to give expression to the will of the people at large. The kings had gradually lost their royal functions, which were partly divided among officers called Archons, who held office for a fixed period which finally became a year ; and were partly absorbed by the council of the nobles. But more and more the freemen strove to obtain increased rights in the appointment of public officers and in eligibility to public offices. At last the free citizens came to be divided into classes mainly according to the extent of their property, the different classes having different degrees of political power, until by degrees all were admitted to full political rights. But this did not come about until the middle of the fourth century. In Athens, as everywhere else, there was a large slave population which had no political rights at all. The most famous among the law- givers of Athens was Solon, who in the sixth century arranged the quarrels of the aristocracy and the commons so as greatly to increase the power of the latter, while still giving a dominant voice to the former. But after the time of Solon, the system still failed to satisfy
