The Peloponnesian War marked the history of civilization as we know it today, and thanks to the evidence that remains, modern society can solve the mystery and trace the responsible of unleashing such events. After reading and analyzing the information compiled in the book The Making of the West about the involvement of Athens and Sparta in the Peloponnesian war, the determination of Athens’ culpability for most of the occurrences leading to the war becomes evident and irrefutable.
The Peloponnesian war was only the climax led by a series of events starring the rivalry between Sparta and Athens. Their story began many years before when Athens asked help from Persia in fear of an attack from Sparta. The Athenian ambassadors knew the conditions
…show more content…
Ten years later Xerxes I, Persian ruler Darius’s son, tried to attack Athens in the Great Persian Invasion. Athens was weak and had to put their pride aside to ask their former nemesis, Sparta, for help. Sparta could have refused because the problem was not with them, but instead they agreed and acted heroically in the battle of Thermopylae. During this battle, Sparta sacrificed their army to gain time for the Athenians. (Hunt 79) This gesture showed the solidarity Sparta was offering to the Greeks. If it would not have been for the Spartans, Athens would have most likely lost the war and would not have established the Athenian empire.
The Persian Invasion could have been the end of a long rivalry in the story of Athens and Sparta. However, Athens decided to go back to their deceiving habits by building a stone wall around the agora and the most important parts of Athens. (Hunt 83) They did not deceive Sparta by building the wall, but by suspiciously hiding and denying their intentions to build it. These misunderstandings kept happening with Athens because they did things that were not necessarily unjustified, but kept them under questionable
…show more content…
Sparta tried to solve the conflict in a civilized manner. (Hunt 100) After Athens did not comply with Sparta’s request, Sparta decided to take action through violent means. The difference between Sparta’s action to help their allies and Athens’ betrayal to Persia, was that Sparta was trying to preserve the alliance with Corinth and Megara, while Athens had no business interfering in the Persian-Ionian conflict. Sparta was being a loyal ally, just like Athenians should have been to the Persians for the time that they helped them, even if it had been a misunderstanding from
The Greek victory against Persia was largely due to efforts of mainly Athens but also Sparta as well. Athens was responsible for the major turning points of the Persian invasions, while Sparta was responsible for the deciding battle. Miltiades, with his skilful battle strategies, defeated the Persians during their second invasion at Marathon, which gave Athens a confidence boost on their military. During the third invasion, when the Athenians were evacuated to Salamis, Themistocles had devised a plan to trick the Persians which had resulted in Persian army without a supply line. Sparta?s importance had revealed during their sacrifice at Thermopylae and at Plataea, where they provided the most effective part of the army.
The Peloponnesian War pitted the Athenians against the Spartans. The Peloponnesians’ were an alliance of city-states controlled by Sparta. These two powerful city-states became locked in a struggle for dominance of the eastern Mediterranean area. The roots of the conflict and in particular this expedition is highly complex. As Thucydides says in his history of the war, the underlying cause was Spartan fear of Athens' expansive power. But, the triggering event was Athens' aggressive behavior towards Corinth, an ally of Sparta.
The Peloponnesian war was fought between the two city states in ancient Greece, being Athens and Sparta. These two cities had alliances that, between them, included close to every Greek city-state. The Peloponnesian war was inevitable because Athens was too hungry for power, and tried to take total control of Greece. Athens’s growth in military and economic power led to the beginning of a bloody war.
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.
Throughout the Ancient Greek world, there have been many wars and standoffs. However, there has been only one which changed the course of Greek history forever; the Peloponnesian War. Caused by the growing tension between Athens and Sparta, it came and left, leaving only destruction in its wake. The defeat of Athens in the Peloponnesian War caused the downfall of Greece, and the end of the Classical Age.
The Peloponnesian War between the city-states of Athens and Sparta (and their respective allies) lasted from 431-404 BC. Conflicts between the two cites dated back further, however, with
It is remarkable how timeless the Speech of Archidamus is. One could easily imagine the Spartan King were speaking to a modern occupied territory, itching for a revolt. King Archidamus urges the Spartans to head caution when entering war with Athens. He has “seen too many wars” [pg 25, 80] The battles he has witnessed in his lifetime have swayed him of any naive fascination with war. He has learned that violence begets violence, so one should only enter a battle they are prepared to win. Archidamus explains that Athens is stronger in terms of wealth, military might and political power. If the Spartans take the offensive route under these circumstances, they will surely loose both in combat and in terms of public relations. [pg 26, 81] Furthermore, Archidamus explains later that Athens had agreed to mediation, making any fight that Sparta were to start an unlawful preemptive attack. [pg 28, 85] The King assures his people he is not blind to their suffering, he just envisions better ways of ending it. [pg 26, 82] One of these methods would be to create partnerships with other nations who would lend armed forces and capital to the cause. To be done in tandem with confederation would be the accumulation of Sparta’s assets. Archidamus predicts that under these circumstances, Athens could be motivated to surrender. Under the very different circumstances from which he is speaking, the King pushes to avoid war at all costs citing that “complaints can be resolved, whether they are
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
The Peloponnesian War brought disease, destruction, famine, widespread civil wars, and a huge loss of life. The war was a complete catastrophe for Athens, who never fully regained their empire back. Sparta won the war, but they didn’t become a great city and a new empire was never built. Sparta attempted to lead the Greeks, but soon fell short and new leaders were called forth.
The Greeks showed more unity during the Second Persian War. Xerxes assembled a Persian army including soldiers from all parts of the Eastern world in order to
Undeniably, the ancient Greek society places a heavy emphasis on values and traditions. The two texts of the “Clouds” by Aristophanes and “History of the Peloponnesian war” by Thucydides, although contextually divergent, are actually conceptually convergent. Both texts are built around the central theme of the collapse of conventional values. While the breakdown of traditional values in the “History of the Peloponnesian war” is presented in a more metaphorical and symbolical manner, the downfall of conventional values in the “Clouds” is on a more direct basis. Although both texts essentially convey across the same solemn message that the relinquishment of
The Peloponnesian war (431–404 BC) was an ancient Greek war fought by Athens against the Peloponnesian led by Sparta. Thucydides famously claims that the war started “because the Spartans were afraid of further growth of Athenian power, seeing as they did have the greater part of Hellas was under the control of Athens”. The two main protagonists from opposing sides Lysander and Alcibiades had the most influential impact on the end of the war.
of events which I am going to look at to see if there was a single
The Peloponnesian War was the turning point in Athenian hegemony in Ancient Greece. It was fought in 431 B.C. between the Delian League, led by Athens, and the Peloponnesian League led by Sparta. According to Thucydides, Athens’ imposing hegemonic status and its overwhelming quest for more power made the Peloponnesian War and Athens’s eventual fall from power inevitable. Despite the Athenians having a far more superior navy and being considerably wealthier, they were defeated and made subjects of Sparta. In this paper, I will discuss Thucydides’ and Socrates’ reasons for why
Finally, this paper examined the impact that protracted conflict has on a democracy. By looking at the events of the Peloponnesian War we saw the consequences of such a conflict on the Ancient Greek’s nation states political culture, decision-making, national values, ethics, domestic politics and state’s economic viability. Athens being a good example was much affected in those aspects and more seriously it even changed its traditional political culture of democracy to oligarchy in order to win the war. Moreover, its economic viability was in shambles and could no longer be able to manage the expensive war. All these points are relevant in the modern days. Despite these insights the jigsaw puzzle that remains is lack of 100% prediction of