ABSTRACT
On the basis of internal evidence (no external evidence survives), Assemblywomen was very likely produced at the Dionysia of 391,1 twenty years after Lysistrata and Women at the Thesmophoria. During that interval the Athenians had experienced momentous upheaval and change. They had lost the Peloponnesian War, and with it their navy, their empire and much of their national pride, in 404; two oligarchic regimes had replaced the democracy, first in the summer of 411 and then immediately following the war (the regime of the thirty “tyrants” that was overthrown in a bitter counterrevolution led by democratic exiles);2 and after they had restored the democracy the Athenians had made changes in their constitution in the hope of eliminating the most irresponsible features of full popular sovereignty, on which many blamed the loss of the war. One of the reforms relevant to Assemblywomen was the introduction of pay for attendance at assembly meetings, on the model of the payment for jury service earlier introduced by Perikles.3 The goal was to insure a larger and more representative turnout, with more opportunity for ordinary citizens to voice their concerns.4 These goals seem to have been achieved, since the payment quickly grew from one obol to three, and in Assemblywomen there is both anxiety about not getting to the assembly on time (only the first 6000 attendees were paid) and much discussion about the concerns of ordinary citizens. The reformed democracy turned out to be both stable and effective, remaining unchallenged until Athens fell under Macedonian rule in 322.
