#14: The History of the Peloponnesian War by Thucydides

Written by Brennan Johnson; Edited by Matthew Mandelberg

Background:

Ancient Greece was divided into areas called city-states.  These city-states were initially ruled by kings, but by 750 BCE, the nobles in most city states had overthrown the kings and became rulers, forming an oligarchy. However, the rivalry among these aristocrats and the discontent of the oppressed masses was so great in some city-states that non-hereditary rulers (ambitious aristocrats who appealed to the people (demos)) began to take power over the government.This type of rule was a step toward a democratic government because these non-hereditary rulers considered the rights and power of the people. Many of the city-states retained oligarchies, but some city-states, notably Athens, moved toward democracy (Dunken 102).

After the reforms of Solon and the tyranny of Pisistratus the power of the nobility in Athens was greatly reduced and many citizens had become franchised. Around 510 BC, Cleisthenes came to power and became the most powerful statesman in Athens.  Cleisthenes proposed a constitution that made Athens a democracy. In addition to reforming the basis of Athenian citizenship, Cleisthenes established the Council of 500, which became the chief arm of government with all executive administrative control. It was composed of 500 men and every male citizen was eligible for a seat. However, until 462BCE, an aristocratic court retained its powers over the aristocracy and had the ability to act as a provisional government in times of an emergency (3 years before the Oresteia). The new democracy threatened the Spartans and other city-states. It successfully competed against them for trade routes and its ethos could undermine their own regimes.

In 460 BC, the Council of 500 elected Pericles as head of the government. Pericles limited the power of the aristocratic institutions and reformed the definition of the Athenian citizen. With a stipend, even the poor could serve. Under Pericles' rule, the Athenian government came closer to being an absolute democracy than any other government in the ancient world.

In 432BCE, war breaks out between the Athenian and Delian Leagues. Unlike the Persian War, it is not a defensive war. Because they do not share governments, it is not quite a civil war either. In 429BCE Pericles dies.

In 411BCE, Thucydides dies, and in 404 BCE the war ends with the establishment of Athens as an oligarchy. Despite the defeat, Athens becomes an even more radical democracy in the following decades and outlives Sparta in historical significance.

Thucydides (Th.) as a historian:

Page 35: Th. states his purpose for documenting the Peloponnesian War. He believed that “it was going to be a great war and more worth writing about than any of those which had taken place in the past. [His] belief was based on the fact that the two sides were at the very height of their power and preparedness…and that the rest of the Hellenic world was committed to one side or the other…”

Page 48: Th. says that his history differs from the histories of the past because he eliminated the “romantic element” in his work and thus it is not as exaggerated as the epic poetry. This comment functions to distinguish him from both Homer and Herodotus.  Th. goes on to say, “my history [may] seem less easy to read…[but] it is enough for me, however, if these words of mine are judged useful by those who want to understand clearly the events which happened in the past and which (human nature being what it is) will, at some time or another and in much the same ways, be repeated in the future. My work is not a piece of writing designed to meet the taste on an immediate public, but was done to last forever.” Th. is writing this document not only to provide raw historical data to his contemporaries and to future readers, but also to serve as a model and guide for future historians.

Th.'s history also differs from past histories because it is recorded in a strict chronological fashion. Homer's accounts contain many flashbacks and side stories; Herodotus deviates from the timeline to provide ethnographic information. Th. moves from summer to winter to summer to winter. But despite this attempt to remain chronologically faithful, he still must choose which spontaneously occurring events he wants to record.  Hence, his history is necessarily partial and biased.

Page 46-47: Th. speaks of his methods. He says “in investigating past history, and in forming the conclusions which I have formed, it must be admitted that one cannot rely on every detail which has come down to us by way of tradition.” Therefore, he “made it principle not to write down the first story that came [his] way, and not to be guided by [his] own general impressions” (p. 48). He, like Herodotus, recorded first-hand experiences or credible eyewitness accounts. In regard to the speeches that he includes in his text, Th. explains that “while keeping as closely as possible to the general sense of the words that were actually used, [he wrote]…what, in [his] opinion, was called for in each situation.

Homer, Herodotus, and Thucydides all attempt to investigate the moral and political actions of humans. The epic poet does this through myths; the historian does this through collecting details and applying reason to make causal sense of them. The comment was made in class that Herodotus records his calculations in his texts; that is to say, he displays his cognitive steps to the reader. Thucydides, by contrast, relays his conclusions and asks his reader to trust that his calculations are correct.

Narrative Structure:

Th. structures the defeat of Athens as a tragedy; the death of Pericles signaling the beginning of Athen’s downfall or reversal of fortune (peripateia): when Pericles is at the height of his power, Athens is at the height of its power; when Pericles dies, Athens begins to fall.

Th. maintains distinct personalities for Sparta, Athens and the allies of each. He depicts Sparta as having a “slow and cautious” character that maintains a conservative resistance to change. He describes Athens, on the other hand, as a young progressive city that is devoted to action and innovation. Th. makes these personalities quite evident not only in his own descriptions, but also in the rhetoric of his composed speeches and the events that he chooses to record.

Further, Th. uses juxtaposition to structure his narrative. Consider the paring of the Corinthian and Corcyraean speeches given to the Athenians (pages 54-62). Corinth plays the role of Sparta; Corcyra plays the role of Athens.   

Th. and the reasons for the War:

Th. considers the following the reasons for the Peloponnesian War.

1.               Athenian empire-building

2.               Spartan fear [this was played upon by Corinth and Thebes:  Corinth used this fear to control the trade routes before Athen’s rise to power; Thebes (which of all the major city-states didn’t fight against the Persians in the Persian War) had a longstanding enmity for Athens]

3.               military build-up

Th. explains in pages 36-49 that the activity of pirates caused people to settle together for protection. This induced a need for supplies to support the community, which meant increasing the population. As the populations increased, the community's power increased and to maintain this power, the community continued to grow. The larger population needed more supplies and eventually the community engaged in imperialistic activity, creating an empire. Once one begins empire building, it is difficult to stop. Neighboring communities began to fear this growth in military, economic, and political power and take protective measures (i.e. military build-up) and polarize the international community. Th. concludes that wars, then, are inevitable.

Th. and Oracles:

Page 156: Th. regards oracles with contempt and often barely discusses them. He recalls a verse that was delivered in the past: “War with the Dorians comes, and a death will come at the same time.” Th. says that there was controversy as to the exact phrasing of the verse, but he was sure that the phrasing would always change to fit the circumstance of the people. This view of oracles deviates from that of Homer and Herodotus. Homer uses oracles frequently to explain occurrences; Herodotus relies on them as secondary or tertiary explanations. Th. says that they are only consulted when reason has broken down, when the social order has broken down, and when people are in distress.

Works Cited

Dunken, William.  “Greece: Governments.”  Desk Encyclopedia. Tutland: 1996  p. 102-5