In this post, I shall review Greg Anderson’s ambitious 2018 book ‘The Realness of Things Past: Ancient Greece and Ontological History‘.

Anderson, in the reviewed book, ‘proposes a fundamental change in the rules of historical engagement, a paradigm shift that would be roughly equivalent to the quantum revolution in modern physics.’ He argues that we should view each past way of life on its own ontological terms and abandon the categories we apply to them. The Ancient Athenians had no knowledge of ‘religion’, ‘state’ or ‘economy’, these are purely inventions of our own peculiar modern way of being. Meanwhile, we should view the Greek gods as having agency- yes, according to Anderson, they existed because the Athenian world had different rules to ours. Furthermore, the region of Attica was a living organism composed of different components that functioned together, it was not a ‘state’. To argue for this radical acceptance of ontological alterity, Anderson covers a wide range of subjects and disciplines including quantum mechanics, anthropology, postcolonialism and posthumanism.

He begins his account by outlining the traditional view of Classical Athens. Concepts like ‘democracy’ are criticised. Anderson exposes a number of contradictions, if we were to see Athens as such a thing. Firstly, how do we explain Athens imperialistic domination of 170 Greek poleis around the Aegean basin? Secondly, modern accounts are confused by how ‘democratic’ Athenians could hold superstitious beliefs. To many today, it would seem odd that they could be democratic and still hold such beliefs. However, Anderson is keen to point out that such a contradiction only emerges when we place our own expectations on Athens.

Anderson, however, in presenting his account of the fallacies of our way of historical thinking, portrays modernity in a homogenous fashion. For example, many believe in God and democracy, there is no contradiction there. Furthermore, there are many non-democratic countries in the modern world. It would be wrong to presume that everyone would apply the same categories to Classical Athens.

Nevertheless, Anderson’s point that there are alternate ways of being historically is well evidenced throughout the book. For example, the pre-colonial Hawai’ians were not individuals, instead they all participated in the being of the king. Furthermore, the description of Late Medieval society as a ‘body’ again shows there are different ways of existing than the modern Western individual.

A methodological issue that Anderson should have addressed is pertinent here. He takes a literal approach to the sources- in other words he accepts what they say without question. If the Athenians thought there were Gods then they must exist, if Attica is described as a body then it must have been a living organism. Critics could suggest that an ontological approach simply mistakes literary topoi for reality. Just because a writer said something, does not mean he intended it to be took literally. On the other hand, Anderson certainly provides a robust account of the ontological grounds for accepting the alterity of past ‘worlds.’ Quantum mechanics, for example, displaces the idea of an observation independent reality. Meanwhile, posthumanism questions the divide between nature and culture, genetics and nurture, environment and self. There are therefore grounds for believing there could have been alternate ‘worlds’ unlike our own. Of course, on a related note, perhaps due to quantum mechanics and posthumanism, Anderson could have reduced the emphasis on the domination of his notion of Western/Cartesian thinking. His idea of modernity does not stand scrutiny, when considered alongside the theories he mentions.

The final section of the book is focused on portraying what the alternative Athens would have looked life. One suggestion is that individuals were oikoi– family or household units. Athenian oikoi were part of the larger organism that they all comprised of. Individuals, in a sense, were dividuals, they were all components of a wider lifeform. There were also Gods and so rituals formed the main means through which this organism was sustained. Potentially, rituals were even more important than any economic, social or legal actions when it came to maintenance. Households also formed wider groups of being, which in themselves formed Demos, the unitary body. Overall, then Anderson’s portrayal of Classical Athens is quite unlike our ‘democratic’ and ‘individualistic’ conception of it.

Anderson’s book is radical and is somewhat attractive due to the way it appreciates past experiences and does not convert them into modern renditions. However, as highlighted, there are some issues that are addressed if ontological history is to gain wider acceptance. Nevertheless, Anderson remains thought-provoking throughout.