Thucydides set out to narrate the history of what this individual believed is a great war, one needing both superb power and great management. Although he measured success through both equally economic and military ability, Thucydides dictated the history from the Peloponnesian War through a multitude of magnificent messages by main figures in Greece to exhibit the impact of political command on the result of the warfare. Leadership was especially vital in Athens due to the democratic nature of its govt: the city’s leaders had been elected by people and therefore reflected the mentality in the city-state as well as citizens. The introduction of the Athenian empire marked a radical departure via Hellenistic custom, and the construction of a powerful navy, and also the timing in the Persian attack, provided Athens the opportunity to end up being the major pressure in the Mediterranean. Thucydides clearly discusses the roles of Athenian commanders in the development of the Athenian empire, coming from Pericles to Alcibiades, to be able to emphasize the decline of morality and justice in Athens. Thucydides clearly points out the consequences in the weaker quality of command in Athens, but does not specify what sparked the moral destruction of Athenian government. With this in mind, one need to question what caused the qualitative drop of the city’s leaders.
At the Second Lacedaemonian Congress, Athenians contended it was unavoidable that they might seize the opportunity to build a great empire when given the chance, contending, “It has always been legislation that the weaker should be subject to the more powerful. ” (I. 76. 2) Nevertheless, their particular conclusion relating the principles and actions of your empire to Athenian well-being reflected a statewide idea that “praise is due to almost all who¦respect rights more than their particular position forces them to. inch (I. seventy six. 3) Prewar Athens would not view a great empire since just merely through the use of electricity, instead, that they clearly distinguished between the two and thought that a highly effective empire presented an opportunity for justice to reign great in the mindsets of their citizens. Thucydides viewed Pericles as “the best person of all to get the needs of the state” because of his ability to transfuse this distinction in the Athenian citizens. (II. 65. 4) Pericles noticed Athens’ wealth and electric power as a means intended for political flexibility and ethnic growth. Simply by stating, “We cultivate refinement without luxury and expertise without effeminacy, wealth we employ even more for use than for show, inch he was in a position to dissuade Athenian citizens’ desire for personal gain, replacing it with interests in proper rights and ethnical advancement. This individual pushed this notion even further by claiming that it was continue to in the interest of the wealthy to keep democracy even when civil unrest (due for the plague) insecure to damage Athens’ vulnerable political balance:
I am in the opinion that national greatness is more to the advantage of exclusive citizens than any individual well-being coupled with general public humiliation. A man may be individually ever so well off, yet if his country can be ruined he must be destroyed with that, whereas a flourishing commonwealth always gives chances of salvation to sad individuals. Since then a state can support the misfortunes of private citizens, while they can not support hers, it is surely the duty of everybody to be ahead in her defense. (II. 60. 1-5)
Pericles argued that the wealthy reap the benefits of democracy and patriotism as it provided these a sense of secureness: the opportunity for public success always been around even if a single was to drop his high economic standing. By building a link among self-interest and national greatness in democracy, Pericles surely could confine personal gain into a realm separate from nevertheless dependent on the population interests in the city. Simply by effectively subordinating pursuits for wealth and power and successfully tying self-interest to political proper rights and ethnic advancement, Pericles exemplified the pinnacle of Athenian greatness in the eyes of Thucydides. His ideals emanated the Athenian notion that an empire could possibly be just, great rule proven this to become true.
After Pericles’ funeral oration, Thucydides remarks on the being successful Athenian rulers’ failure to effectively control the population and convince these to serve the location. With regard to Pericles’ successors, Thucydides states, “Each grasping at supremacy, they will ended by committing even the conduct of state affairs to the vagaries of the bunch. ” (II. 65. 10) Without a leader as superior and powerful as Pericles, citizens began to yearn because of their personal amusement rather than the greatness of the point out. (II. 61. 4)
The Mytilenian Controversy denoted the first step in the fall of Periclean Athens. Rivalling desires of power and personal interest were symbolic in the strains of war, as well as the speeches delivered at the issue conveyed a shift from Pericles’ opinion in the great things about justice and democracy. Cleon, an Athenian statesman and former challenger of Pericles, denied the fact that justice is usually worthy of praise, and instead argued that reward is due onto those who completely utilize their very own power, regardless of morality. To find the Athenian government, states, “Your disposition is a despotism, and your topics disaffected conspirators, whose compliance is guaranteed not by your suicidal snack bars, but by superiority given you by your strength. ” (III. 37. 2) In Cleon’s conception, Athenian government simply functioned due to its immense power and ability to strike fear into its citizens. Justice was of simply no concern to Cleon, and morality was equivalent to electric power itself. Though Cleon’s placement did not succeed a majority political election in the Athenian council, it is worth noting, “the show of hands was almost similar, ” proving that the Periclean mindset was all but deserted or reflectivity of the gold, and will come to slowly vanish altogether. (III. 49. 1)
Several years later on, Thucydides comprehensive a private argument between Athenian generals and Melian statesmen in order to determine the destiny of Melos, a small area colony of Sparta. The points submit by the Athenian generals through the debate were symbolic with the shift away from Periclean Athens, from the idealistic pragmatism of Pericles for the immoral challenging abuse of power that epitomized the latter many years of the Peloponnesian War. As the idea that electrical power is alluring to all males remained constant, the Athenian contention that “right, because the world goes, is only under consideration between means in electric power, while the good do the actual can plus the weak suffer what they must” directly contradicted the approval for enlargement put forward by the Athenian citizens at the Second Lacedaemonian Congress. (V. 89) Years of war had used up Athens’ assets and had exhausted its citizens of their quest for justice and culture, Athenian motives experienced undergone a complete turnaround as well as the beliefs that symbolized Periclean Athens had been destroyed. Electric power had become Athens’ main fascination, and what was best for the city as a whole not anymore came into account. “Justice and honor, inch the Athenians continued, “cannot be implemented without threat. ” (V. 107) The hardships and sufferings induced by the battle resulted in the best perversion of Pericles’ perspective.
The final crushing hit to prewar Athenian beliefs can be approved to Alcibiades, whose behavior revealed the complete dissolution of Athens’ cohesive and efficient democratic community. Alcibiades’ opinions in favor of self-indulgence and personal growth was a total inversion from the logic offered in Pericles’ funeral oration, and the déclaration put forth by Alcibiades’ assertions worked against democracy as well as the original vision of an empire for the advancement of justice and culture. Once faced with the threat of punishment, Alcibiades fled to Sparta to be an consultant to the Spartan oligarchy. Since his plan in Syracuse had failed, Alcibiades noticed his betrayal of Athens as a chance to reestablish his own electrical power and prosperity. The effects of Alcibiades’ defection to Sparta were drastic: his avocation to deliver the Peloponnesian navies into battle led to Athens’ inability in the Sicilian Expedition. (VI. 92) Alcibiades, in truth, had no commitment to Athens at all and in turn used his citizenship as a means for getting power and wealth. It became clear that personal growth had become the central emotion in Athens when Alcibiades was selected general (before he fled to Sparta) by the same democratic program he had coldly corrupted through treason previously in his political career. Athens had become a town fixated upon private curiosity, and Alcibiades was the epitome of this mentality.
Thucydides had written, “In serenity and success states and individuals have got better sentiments¦but war removes the easy way to obtain daily wishes and so demonstrates a tough master that brings many men’s heroes to a level with their fortunes” (III. 82. 2). This was precisely the transform Athens experienced, and the reason behind its eventual demise. Prewar Athens looked at its empire as an efficient tool for implementing justice and broadening cultural awareness, but with its economic progress and its leaders’ abuse of power emerged a people enthusiastic about self-interest.
Thucydides. The Landmark Thucydides A thorough Guide to the Peloponnesian Battle. New York: Free Press, 1998.