Study Guide to The Peloponnesian War by Thucydides

Intelligent Education

• Editore: Dexterity
• Anno: 2020
• ISBN:
  9781645425090
• Edizione: 1
• Argomento: Guías de estudio
• Categoria: Guías de estudio

A comprehensive study guide offering in-depth explanation, essay, and test prep for Thusydides' The Peloponnesian War, considered to be one of the earliest historical novels to be written in a scholarly setting.

As a historical novel of fifth-century B.C., The Peloponnesian War is an account of the war between Sparta and Athens. Moreover, the writer, Thucydides, was an Athenian general during the war. This Bright Notes Study Guide explores the context and history of Thucydides' classic work, helping students to thoroughly explore the reasons it has stood the literary test of time. Each Bright Notes Study Guide contains:

- Introductions to the Author and the Work

- Character Summaries

- Plot Guides

- Section and Chapter Overviews

- Test Essay and Study Q&As

The Bright Notes Study Guide series offers an in-depth tour of more than 275 classic works of literature, exploring characters, critical commentary, historical background, plots, and themes. This set of study guides encourages readers to dig deeper in their understanding by including essay questions and answers as well as topics for further research.

INTRODUCTION TO THUCYDIDES

 

In 493 B.C. the Persian War, one of the most decisive in world history, was begun between the large and powerful Persian Empire and the Greek city states. Had Persia won, it is quite possible that western civilization would never have developed, and in its place, a semi-oriental despotism would have controlled the world. But the Greeks, led by the democratic city-state of Athens, won the war, thus preserving their remarkable civilization, not the least of whose accomplishments was the idea of democracy.

Athens was the leader of the Delian League, an organization formed during the war as a defensive alliance against Persia. The League was not dissolved after the war, for the Greeks feared that Persia might rise up once more. In time, Athens transformed this alliance of equals into a vehicle for her own aggrandizement, in particular using its funds for her own interests. Within a few decades Greece was once more threatened with conquest. Whereas the Persians were foreigners who attempted to conquer Greece and subjugate it to a tyranny, Athens was a fellow member of the civilization, which spoke in terms of sharing its knowledge and accomplishments with less fortunate cities. Nevertheless, this was imperialism, and the other members of the Delian League began to break away from Athens, turning to Sparta, a powerful state which was not a member of the League.

There were many differences between the two states. Athens was Ionian while Sparta was Dorian. These were two separate peoples with differing cultures. (A third group, the Aeolians, included such states as Naupactus, Thebes, and Thermum.) Athens was a democratic sea power, while Sparta was an oligarchic land power. Athenian culture and learning was superior to that of Sparta. The Spartans were conservative in all things, while Athenians were noted for their willingness to take risks. Thus, although they had a common heritage and had fought together against Persia, the two states had long standing differences.

By the middle of the fifth century B.C. Athenian imperialism had reached serious proportions. Potidaea, a colony of the Dorian city of Corinth and an unwilling member of the Athenian empire, refused to allow Athens to interfere in her internal affairs. In addition, Corinth’s colony of Corcyra had founded a colony of its own, Epidamnus. When Corinth and Corcyra disputed the status of the colony, Athens took Corcyra’s side, further alienating the Corinthians. Finally, Athens issued the Megaran decrees, which ruined the rich carrying trade of the Dorian colony of Megara. These, then, were the underlying and immediate causes of the war.

THUCYDIDES

Although little is known of his early life, it is believed that Thucydides was born sometime between 470 B.C. and 460 B.C. His family was wealthy, owning gold mines on the Thracian coast.

Thucydides’ early life went almost unrecorded. It is believed that he studied philosophy under Anaxagoras, a dualist who was later expelled from Athens for his views on religion. There is a story of his having burst into tears of joy on hearing Herodotus, the “father of history,” read his works. Later on Herodotus congratulated Olorus, Thucydides’ father, on the fine literary taste of the son.

Thucydides was a general in the early part of the Peloponnesian War. He failed to relieve the Athenian forces at Amphipolis in time to prevent their falling to the Spartan commander, Brasidas, and for this was exiled from Athens for twenty years. He went to his family estates in Thrace, and observed the rest of the war from a distance. After the war Thucydides returned to Athens, where he died around 400 B.C.

Thucydides visited almost every theater of the war, and to a great extent relied upon his own observations in his work. In addition, he looked through the documents, spoke to eyewitnesses whenever possible, and verified his material with individuals involved in the conflict. In short, he is considered the first “scientific historian.” Some writers believe Thucydides was attempting to do for history what Socrates was doing for philosophy-to view it with rationalistic objectivity.

Thucydides was a Sophist, a member of a group whose beliefs were diametrically opposed to those of Socrates on many issues. He believed that there were no absolute truths and, as the greatest Sophist of them all, Protagoras said, “man is the measure of all things.” It was this relativism which led to his attempts at detachment, which in turn resulted in an apparent willingness to criticize Athens, his native city, which he admired. In all probability, his exile (perhaps at the hands of Cleon, who is an “anti-hero” in the book) added to this somewhat.

Like most educated Greeks of his day, Thucydides was strongly interested in and influenced by the drama, and he wrote in a style resembling that of the tragedy. In Greek tragedies the sin of pride (hybris) is followed by an act of folly, and then by punishment (nemesis). Thus, in the Peloponnesian War, the Athenians were defeated because of sins committed during the fighting.

In this, we can see that Thucydides had a mechanistic view of history; there is little room for free will in his philosophy. When faced with similar problems, he believed, all men will react in similar ways. Nor does Thucydides believe the gods can interfere in human affairs. Like all Sophists, he did not think that one had to bring in the deities to explain human affairs. As one author wrote, “Properly to appreciate Thucydides, one may contrast the History of the Peloponnesian War with the Book of Kings (in the Bible). Each book records how catastrophe overwhelmed a city, and each book attempts to explain why. Chronologically, the two books were separated by only about two hundred years, but in attitude they are light-years apart.”

Believing as he did that humans act the same in similar circumstances, Thucydides thought his history of the war could be read with profit by future generations, and the lessons of the war could be applied to prevent future conflicts. Thus, Thucydides wrote his book as a lesson in morality as well as a history. As such, it often presents facts as fitted into preconceived patterns, a method which today’s historians try to avoid. In addition, he tended to stress political and military events, and almost completely ignored economic and social factors. Still, Thucydides is generally regarded as one of the greatest historians of all times.

PELOPONNESIAN WAR

TEXTUAL ANALYSIS

BOOKS 1 AND 2

CHAPTER 1

Thucydides tells us that he began to write his book at the beginning of the War, for he knew even then that it would be the most important event in Greek history. In the early period, there was no unity on the peninsula. This came with the Trojan War, in which for the first time the city-states acted together. This War was decided by sea power, which Thucydides believed was the most important source of Greece’s strength. After the war, those cities with large armies declined, while those with important navies became more powerful. At this time the old hereditary monarchies began to give way to tyrannies resting on wealth and naval strength.

The city-states unified once more during the Persian Wars, after which two rival blocs appeared. The Athenian group was based on naval power, while the Lacedaemons (Spartans) headed a military confederation. “Athens imposed contributions in money on all but Chios and Lesbos.” Conflicts began between the Athenian and Spartan states, and the underlying cause of the conflict was the growth of Athens’ power and Sparta’s fear of encirclement.

CHAPTER 2

The immediate cause of the war was Athens’ attempt to intervene in a conflict between the city-states of Corinth and Corcyra. The Corcyraeans asked Athens for help, and received a defensive alliance from the Athenian Assembly. Since Corinth was allied with Sparta, the groundwork for an Athenian-Spartan war was laid.

Next followed two incidents which heightened tensions. An Athenian-Corcyraean naval force clashed with one from Corinth. Athens said her action was purely defensive, but Corinth claimed it constituted aggression, and broke a truce which formerly had existed.

The second incident involved the Athenian attempt to prevent a revolt of Potidaea. Sparta promised the Potidaeans assistance, and armed with this backing, Potidaea and other states revolted against Athens. The Peloponnesian League, headed by Sparta, sent aid. The Athenians, led by Callias and Phormio, blockaded Potidaea and routed her allies, including Corinth.

CHAPTER 3

Corinth called a meeting of the Peloponnesian League at Sparta to discuss Athenian provocations. The Corinthian envoys speak, telling the Spartans they are too conservative and hesitant. Their isolation prevents them from realizing that dynamic Athens was in the process of taking over all Greece. Athens is weak but acts strong, while Sparta, though strong, behaves as though it were weak. The Athenians, in response to this, observe that their leadership is deserved, due to their actions in the Persian Wars. “That empire we acquired by no violent means, but because you were unwilling to prosecute to its conclusion the war against the barbarian, and because the allies attached themselves to us and spontaneously asked us to assume the command.” Then King Archidamus of Sparta expresses his belief that Spartan caution is well advised, and proclaims his opposition to war. But Sthenelaidas, an Ephor, speaks for war, and the assembly follows him rather than the King.

Comment

The following points may be observed.

(1) Thucydides shows the various steps leading to war, showing how one builds upon the other.

(2) The speeches of the Corinthians and Athenians set a pattern which is followed for the rest of the book. Most of the author’s ideas are presented in this fashion.

(3) Many historians see a similarity between the background of the Peloponnesian War and World War I. In both cases it is the allies, and not the main powers, which move for war, and in both cases the existence of an expansionist power (Athens and Germany) disturbs the status quo. Thucydides, who believed that history repeated itself, would have appreciated this.

CHAPTER 4

Thucydides begins this chapter by recounting the expansionist activities of Athens after the Persian Wars. The Spartans were disturbed at the construction of a wall around Athens and the growth of Athenian naval power. But Themistocles, the Athenian leader, was able to still their fears. The Athenians fortified their port of Piraeus and constructed a new harbor, both of which acts were viewed with suspicion by other city-states. At the same time the Spartan commander, Pausanias, conducted raids against Cyprus and Byzantium, which struck fear in the hearts of other Greek states. They appealed to Athens for leadership, and were accepted, thus forming the basis for the Athenian empire. During the next few years Athens continued to expand, Spartan mistrust grew, and the allies of each power clashed with the other.

CHAPTER 5

Wishing to discover their chances of success against the Athenians, the Spartans went to Delphi to consult the Oracle, who answered “that if they put their whole strength into the war, victory would be theirs, and the promise that he himself would be with them, whether invoked or uninvoked.” Then the Spartans called a second Congress at Lacedaemon and put the question of war or peace before their allies. The Corinthians spoke, urging war due to Athenian provocations, and observing that the strength of the League was such that victory would surely be theirs. Then embassies were sent to Athens “in order to obtain as good a pretext for war as possible.” The Spartans tried to turn the Athenians against Pericles, their leader, but failed. Then Thucydides digresses, and tells of the treachery of Pausanias of Sparta and Themistocles of Athens, both of whom die.

In taking up the story once more, Thucydides relates the demands made by Sparta against Athens, which amounted to a breakup of the Athenian empire. Pericles urged the Athenians to refuse all the demands and not yield an inch. If war comes, he said, the Athenians, through their naval power, would be able to take care of themselves easily. He would be willing to free Athens’ allies if Sparta would do the same with theirs, and be willing to arbitrate the dispute. Still, Pericles maintains his strong line at the end of his speech. “It must be thoroughly understood that war is a necessity; but that the more ready we accept it, the less will be the ardour of our opponents, and that out of the greatest dangers communities and individuals acquire the greatest glories.” The Assembly takes his advice, making war inevitable.

BOOK TWO

CHAPTER 6

When Thebes, an ally of Sparta, attacks Plataea, an ally of Athens, in the Spring of 431 B.C., the war may be said to have begun. The Thebans were repulsed, and prisoners were taken. Athens sent reinforcements to Plataea, and prepared for war. Sparta ordered her allies to build up their military and naval forces. Both sides were eager for war. “Zeal is always at its height at the commencement of an undertaking; and on this particular occasion Peloponnese and Athens were both full of young men whose inexperience made them eager to take up arms, while the rest of Hellas stood straining with excitement at the conflict of its leading cities.”

Comment

Thucydides makes two points at the outset of Book Two. First, the Theban prisoners were treated with a measure of humanity, and second, both sides were eager for war, viewing it as a sort of game. In later years, the author shows that both attitudes change drastically.

After the Plataean incident, the Spartans organized their allies for an expedition against Athens. Archidamus, leader of the Spartans, made a speech in which he tells his officers of his tactics and strategy.

Comment

At this point, Thucydides reveals his interest in and mastery of military matters. This speech is considered one of the best short statements of Greek military thinking.

The Athenian leader, Pericles-a friend of Archidamus though his foe-organized the Athenian force for the defense. Realizing that the walls of Athens were impregnable, he commanded the people of the outlying districts to gather within the city. Although it was difficult to leave their homes, the citizens listened to Pericles, and Athens was crowded with humanity.

Archidamus then marched on Athens, and was criticized for hesitating before attacking the town of Aenoe. This delay gave the Athenians needed time to organize their defenses. The attack on Aenoe failed, and Archidamus was obliged to bypass it and head for Athens instead. He tried to lure Pericles out of the city in order to engage in open combat, but the Athenians, safe where t...