Solon was chosen (as preeminent archon, the highest office, an annually established office with defined duties, but he was given two further roles: to act as arbiter between the elite and the masses, and as a lawgiver) because he was the man least implicated in the errors of the time. He was neither associated with the rich and their injustice, nor involved in the necessities of the poor.

He had things, an affinity, with both the rich and the poor. Trusted by both sides.

We think he came to this reputation in part because he came to compose and perform oral poetry. He's the first known Athenian poet. He won a reputation as a wise, cultivated person. His father's generosity had given away much of the fotune, and Solon went into trade, unusual for an elite, amassing wealth and contacts and wisdom.

In order to be fair (joinig might and right) he actually treats rich and poor differently. He sets up a boundary and a shield between the parties, not to allow either to defeat the other unjustly. You need to see both parties to see where to set the boundary marker and how to weild the shield appropriately. To prevent excessive graspingness on either side.

He set a secure floor under the poor (no loans on the security of the debtors person, and one-time cancellation of both private and public loans).

He set up new political rules for the poor. Hearing appeals from the decisions for office-holders, serving on the popular juries, and holding office-holders to account in other ways. He didn't make all political power equal, but he gave the poor these roles which bolstered their standing.

He saw he had to impose a bargain that could be acceptable to both sides. He could only go as far as the rich would allow. Civil war wouldn've ensued.

The practice of justice is not predicated on a moral duty (for Solon) but on profit motive of the necessary parties. Prudent obedience, fear of the suffering of the loss of justice.

The rich are going to be able to influence the outcome unduly. Solon set some justice but where there was far more power on the side of the rich. (Rawles woudn't call this justice at all).

But through his laws (and poetry) sought (we assume) to cultivate a deeper, more transformative sense of justice. He sought to build a true civic understanding of justice beyond this tolerable bargain. To temper one-upmanship. It might start off as a bargain, but then people's committments need to be transformed if justice is truly going to be attained and maintained. It was never meant to be the last word, which would be from reflective equillibrium.

Walzer, inequality in one domain can create inequality in another. Solon's economic inequality shouldn't bleed over into political inequality.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uw7Sw_BpZQU