Ancient & modern
COMMENTATORS continue to huff and puff about the 'tragedy' of the Conservative party tearing itself apart. Democrats will not blink an eyelid. The purpose of a party is to serve the interests of the people. If the Tories cannot organise themselves to do that, they should kindly leave the stage. But to prevent them ripping themselves to pieces, they might consider writing ostracism into their constitution.
Halfway through the Athenian year, the Assembly (all male citizens over 18, who took all the decisions that Parliament today so selflessly makes on our behalf) decided whether to hold an ostracism. If it did, then two months later each citizen wrote on an ostrakon (piece of pot) the name of a citizen they wished to see banished. As long as at least 6,000 citizens voted, the man with the most votes was duly ostracised, i.e. had to leave Athens within ten days and not return for ten years. He did not forfeit citizenship or property; after ten years he could return without disgrace or any loss of rights.
What was the purpose of this agreeable institution? One cannot discount people's desire to rid the country of someone they found personally insupportable. If we were to dig up an ostrakon dump, we would doubtless find any number of single votes cast against individual citizens who had got up at least one person's nose. But, given that the decision to hold an ostracism was a political one taken by the Assembly, it looks as if its main purpose was to ensure that, if the Assembly really was hung up week after week on an issue because they found it difficult to decide between the solutions provided by different individuals, then the air could be cleared by having one of those individuals physically shown the door for ten years.
Thus, for example, during the wars against Persia in the 480s BC, three Athenian grandees who were sympathetic to the Persian cause were ostracised; another was ostracised in 461 BC for showing excessive enthusiasm for Sparta: Thucydides. son of Melesias (not the historian) was ostracised in 443 BC for opposing Pericles. An ostracism may not have made things any better, but it certainly made them less confusing.
Now that lain Duncan Smith leads the Conservative party and the Europhiles are sharpening their knives to get rid of him as soon as possible, the case for Ken Clarke's ostracism is irresistible. Exile would be preferable, but removal from Parliament would do: the rule would be that Clarke could come back only after the next election.
Peter Jones
Previous page
