Of ThucydidesBiases And Their Consistencies In Greek History

The Peloponnesian war lasted from 431 to 404 B.C. and was profoundly influenced by two Athenian men, Pericles and Alcibiades. Though Pericles and Alcibiades were related by blood they were quite different. Pericles was a diplomat, he approached matters with a level head and tried to find a solution that did not end in bloodshed. Alcibiades was less stable, he either fought, manipulated, or ran when confronted with a problem. Both men spoke eloquently enough to move almost the entire city of Athens, using their words to bend people to their will.  What was different between them was what their will was, one cared about the city and its wellbeing, the other cared about his own wellbeing.

16). Homer told stories and history traveling across the country and followed a mythopoetic tradition, but nothing was recorded (Hoefferle, p. 16-17). The revolutionary shift came from the emergence of historians who criticized Homer’s lack of applied rationalist methods to the study of their past (Hoefferle, p. 16). Herodotus was the first to break away from that tradition and “attempted to study the world through observable evidence” ( Hoefferle, p. 17) Herodotus’ thinking was very different and intuitive for the time period.

Action from necessity is a constantly recurring theme in Thucydides’ The Landmark Thucydides: A Comprehensive Guide to the Peloponnesian War. A sentiment used to explain the growth of the Athenian Empire which some Athenians espoused to an assembly at Sparta best quantifies necessity, “. . . we were necessarily compelled at first to advance the hegemony to where it is—especially by fear, and then by honor, and later by benefit.” (Selected Passages 1.75.3). This claim, referred to as the Athenian Thesis, is used to advance the two following implications: all states act with the motivations of fear, honor and interest and no one can condemn a state for doing so. The Athenian Thesis influences the way many of the Athenian elite structure their patterns of reasoning in both noticeable and subtle ways.

This conveys that Athens is confident enough in their security to allow people to enter their city because they believe that they are the most powerful nation of all. However, this is inaccurate because Athens and Sparta were equal in power at the beginning of the war. Thucydides presents courage when he quotes from Pericles that Athens is powerful because they have a natural courage in comparison to a state induced courage like Sparta. However, Thucydides presentation of courage is inaccurate because by talking about the greatness, security, and courage of Athens Pericles is forcing a state induced courage on the Athenian people by giving them no reason to question the outcome of the war. Thucydides presentation of courage and security in Pericles speech was accurate to the citizens of Athens because they are given no other reasons to contradict Pericles claim. Also, the presentation of security and courage is used to make Athens seem greater and more powerful than they actually were to future nations.

A reading of Thucydides’, Pericles’ Funeral Oration and The Melian Dialogue uncovers both contrasting and comparable viewpoints on Athenian politics, power, aims of war, and empire. Thucydides presents two differing characteristics of Athens, one as the civilizer in Pericles’ funeral oration and the other as an tyrant in the Melian dialogue. In the funeral oration delivered by Pericles during the first year of the war, the Athenian leader emphasizes the idealized personal image of the Athenians in regard to their constitution and good character. Pericles goes on to praise the Athenian democratic institution of Athens that contributes to their cities greatness; in Pericles’s own words, “The Athenian administration favors the many instead of few… they afford equal justice to all of their differences” (112, 2.37). This quote emphasizes the good character of the Athens’ to coax and encourage the Athenians to preserve and better their great empire into the future. On the other hand, in the Melian dialogue, this notion of justice and equality is irrelevant; one, because Athens compared to Melos, is the stronger of the two and thus, is more powerful. Further, Athens, will continue to acquire absolute power and build its empire by conquering Melos and whomever else stands in its way. Through Pericles’ funeral oration and the Melian dialogue, the following conclusions/themes will demonstrate both the changing and somewhat stable nature of Athenian policy with regards to empire,

In the Aftermath of the Peloponnesian war between Athens and Sparta, Pericles, Athens’ general and statesmen, delivered a powerfully comforting eulogy to the polis of Athens, assuring the people that their city state is in good hands, and easing the pain of all the families and relatives of the deceased. He uses several rhetorical devices throughout his speech to gain a positive emotional appeal by his audience and makes assertions in the attempt to enhance and transform the perception of him by the audience.

In 431 B.C., even before the Peloponnesian War, Athens’ strength compared to other Greek polises was evident. Athens had islands, a powerful, a well-trained navy, and one, if not the best, general at the time: Pericles. Pericles says in his speech that, “war is inevitable,” but in fact the war was preventable (72). Even with all of the military strengths and assets that Athenians had afforded to them, they chose to be merciful to the Peloponnesians who were in no shape to go to war. They did not have the experience, money, manpower, or means to participate in a lengthy war and Pericles makes the citizens aware of this (70). Pericles is both modest and humble for choosing to point out these facts which in turn helps the Athenians see the potential

Pericles' Funeral Oration is a famous speech given during the time of the Peloponnesian War. Though the exact words of Pericles famous Funeral Oration made around 430 B.C are unknown, the speech’s purpose and meaning was recorded by Thucydides. Thucydides was a notable Greek historian, who often reported what was said as he would have said it. The speech was delivered by Pericles around the end of the first year of the Peloponnesian War. He was a prominent political and military leader in Athens during this time. Though a high level of education was normal for Athenian political figures during this time, Pericles was said to have excelled above most others. He was so

In the midst of the Trojan war, King Agamemnon is distraught after his loss of Chryseis. As a form of compensation, Agamemnon demands that Achilles forfeit his war prize: Briseis, princess of Lyrnessus. Unhappy with this course of action, Achilles withdraws from the war. Generals, trusted advisors, soldiers, and healers under King Agamemnon’s rule deliver deliberate speeches and debate as to if and why Agamemnon should keep or return Briseis to Achilles for his return. Speaker 1, who spoke in favor of Agamemnon keeping Briseis, incorporates all three rhetorical appeals and adopts a commanding tone of voice in order to persuade the soldiers to continue battling despite the loss of Achilles. In contrast, Speaker 14, who was opposed to Agamemnon keeping Briseis, explores pathos and demonstrates the effectiveness of repetition while directly addressing Agamemnon.

Purposely difficult and intentionally obsessive, Plato’s Phaedrus is an exceedingly difficult read that defies all conventional logic as a piece of discourse. The text is extremely subjective, open to interpretation and individual creativity as to what or whom the narrative is about. Written by Plato, a close disciple of Socrates, this text is set along the Illissus river where Phaedrus and Socrates meet for a day of speech, debate, rhetoric and okay…flirting. Phaedrus leads of the day and recites a speech by his close friend Lysias, who Phaedrus considers to be a top speechmaker. Socrates then, after chiding by Phaedrus unleashes two speeches of his own that overshadow and refute Lysias claim so boldly that Phaedrus is so taken by the

Making use of rhetoric devices and compromising the ideals of democracy breach the ideals of traditions in the Greek society. Unlike that in the “Clouds”, Thucydides does not show any sign of flaws of the traditional values.

Herodotus marked a new way of recording and interpreting history: conducting research. He recorded what he saw, heard, and experienced as he traveled around places like the Mediterranean Sea, the Black Sea, and as far up as Babylon. He went on expeditions and encountered much of his information through in person exchange, an accomplishment surely to be considered great. Martin believes Herodotus explored an extensive amount of history and peoples and showcased a spectrum of topics like “war, politics, religion, commerce, geography, climate, ethnography, and individual human motivations” (Martin 7). In his writings called The Histories, Herodotus begins with The Story of Croesus and

The book written by Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War, contains two controversial debates between distinguished speakers of Athens. The two corresponding sides produce convincing arguments which can be taken as if produced as an honest opinion or out of self-interest. The two debates must be analyzed separately in order to conclude which one and which side was speaking out of honest opinion or self-interest, as well as which speakers are similar to each other in their approach to the situation.

Unlike the others, Nicias is not easily persuaded by words of victory, and does not favor the war due to his Aristocratic soul where his logistikon governs his thumos and epithumeticon. In Nicias' speech he produces sound arguments that show protest to their irrationality and quick decision- making of the Athenians. First he makes sensible suggestion to the assembly when says ."..not to draw on ourselves a war that is no business of ours, after so short a deliberation on so weighty affair...." Nicia's directly addresses their hastiness when he said `I will let you know that your haste is unseasonable, and you will not easily achieve your goals" and he reminds Athenians that "the least success comes by way of desire, and the most by planning ahead." Hence

Thucydides, in structuring the Melian Dialogue explicitly shows us that the Melos is a smaller and weaker nation in comparison to Athens however, the Melians’ illogicality of weakness to go up against Athens can somewhat justify the Athenians act of being greedy. The Athenians stresses the senselessness of resistance and the inescapably of capitulation but the Melians remain steadfast in their decision to be neutral and tries to shift the argument to issues of justice and hints at the possibility of human and divine assistance. The Athenians aware of the weakness of the Melians says, “Your strongest arguments depend upon hope and the future, and your actual resources are too scanty, as compared with those