Max Weber's Athens: The entanglement between charismatic domination and non-legitimate domination

Contemporary reconstructions of Max Weber's theory of democracy have failed to recognise Weber's comparative-historical approach vis-& agrave;-vis the question of democracy. This article addresses this gap with respect to his understanding of Athenian democracy. It demonstrates that Weber's interpretation of Athenian democracy provides a dual understanding of domination. On the one hand, Weber describes the demagogues in Athens as exercising charismatic domination through their oratory skills over ordinary citizens. On the other hand, Weber characterises the institutional structure of Athenian democracy with the atypical case of non-legitimate domination [nichtlegitime Herrschaft]. Weber maintains that the holders of office in Athens were ultimately accountable and responsible to the ordinary people who exercised their political power in popular assemblies and popular courts. Weber interprets Athenian democracy as characterised by the entanglement between charismatic domination and non-legitimate domination. Thus, this article argues that Weber's concept of Herrschaft is an open concept which results in his amalgamation of charismatic domination and non-legitimate domination in explaining the institutionalisation of Athenian democracy. In the end, how to maintain political leadership within democratic institutional structures was the question of democracy for Weber.