This book covers the central topic of ‘exile’ extensively, and certainly concerns ‘the politics of expulsion in ancient Greece’ but falls somewhat short of the mark on ‘ostracism and democracy’. Nevertheless, the book has a great deal to offer anyone tackling a topic in this field, contains a great deal of insight into German authors on the subject for those still learning the language, and Sara Forsdyke has an excellent writing and academic style, with plenty of helpful and clear references to the original evidence and established scholarly arguments other than her own.

The first chapter involves rather a lot of lead-in via an overview of ‘Dark Age’ and early archaic settlements, which may not be relevant to those who are already familiar with this general area of scholarship. Forsdyke waffles a bit in the background information (of the first two chapters), much of which is covered extensively elsewhere, and doesn’t really seem necessary to me. It ends up a bit over-long when she could have referred back to existing scholarship. Much of the discussion about Peisistratus and Panathenaic cultural symbols and ceremony, for instance, is very interesting with regards to his political career, but not really related to the central topic. However, I understand that she may have felt the need to justify some of her more unconventional views (i.e. that seventh to sixth century demos interference in Megara, Samos, and Corinth was not contradictory or undermining to aristocratic forms of rule there), many of which are crucial to her points about continuing factors in forms of exile. Nevertheless, it means that a significant portion of the book is not directly related to her stated topic. There’s also a lot of overlap between Mytilene / Megara / Samos / Corinth in Chapter 2, so the reading experience becomes a bit repetitive (consistently noticeable in this book, but I suppose prepared for readers who only read one chapter?).

Unfortunately there is not quite as much on ‘ostracism’ itself as the title promises: it is more fit into the general narrative on exile, carried on from the ‘archaic’ section, and a generalised discussion of democracy that contextualises the institution (with ‘cause and effect’ putting democratic norms first, before ostracism and other institutions established at the time). Furthermore, discussion is mainly contained in Chapter 4, which even in itself is not wholly concerned with ostracism, but with the fifth and early fourth centuries and the theme of exile therein. It’s followed by a lot about miscellaneous forms of excel and the later oligarchic period, wedged in at the end of this section, which doesn’t really continue on from the discussion of ostracism very well (although I understand that the change to legalistic forms of social control is important to acknowledge, and I suppose it demonstrates that the elite violence ‘solved’ by ostracism failed to achieve stability in the long term). Since it’s directly referenced in the book’s title, I think it would have been ideal to have a whole chapter focused on ostracism, rather than fitting it into one part of a massive chapter on the democratic period in general.

This book is excellent on the subject of archaic exile and the instability it caused, and how it came to be replaced by the democratic norms of exile, with the result of ostracism in particular: I suspect this was originally the book’s premise. Some of the other periods and discussions clustered around this point are more adjacent than connected to this central theme, in particular the discussion of the Athenian Empire and the others I have mentioned above (though the final chapter on Greek perspectives on exile gives focus to a too-often rejected aspect of the topic, bringing the focus back to where it should be). Nevertheless, where the book’s apparent focus lies, Forsdyke’s penetrating analysis allows for an original and sound view of this question, in a way that acknowledges the socio-political links between ‘older’ and ‘newer’ forms of exile where other writers tend to shy away.