The Peloponnesian War: The Sicilian debate, sacrilege, false hope (6:1-62)

The same winter the Athenians, with greater forces than they had before sent out with Laches and Eurymedon, resolved to go again into Sicily; and if they could, wholly to subdue it: being for the most part ignorant both of the greatness of the island, and of the multitude of people, as well Greeks as barbarians, that inhabited the same; and that they undertook a war not much less than the war against the Peloponnesians. For the compass of Sicily is little less than eight days’ sail for a ship; and though so great, is yet divided with no more than twenty furlongs, sea measure, from the continent.
(Book Six, Chapter 1)

And though it were thus great, yet the Athenians longed very much to send an army against it, out of a desire to bring it all under their subjection; which was the true motive; but as having withal this fair pretext, of aiding their kindred and new confederates . But principally they were instigated to it by the ambassadors of Egesta, who were at Athens and earnestly pressed them thereto.
(Book Six, Chapter 6)

But they [Athenian leaders] that came after [Pericles], being more equal amongst themselves, and affecting every one to be the chief, applied themselves to the people and let go the care of the commonwealth. From whence amongst many other errors, as was likely in a great and dominant city, proceeded also the voyage into Sicily; which was not so much upon mistaking those whom they went against, as for want of knowledge in the senders of what was necessary for those that went the voyage. For through private quarrels about who should bear the greatest sway with the people, they both abated the vigour of the army, and then also first troubled the state at home with division. Being overthrown in Sicily, and having lost, besides other ammunition, the greatest part of their navy, and the city being then in sedition; yet they held out three years , both against their first enemies and the Sicilians with them, and against most of their revolted confederates besides, and also afterwards against Cyrus the king’s son, who took part with, and sent money to the Peloponnesians to maintain their fleet; and never shrunk till they had overthrown themselves with private dissensions.
(Book Two, Chapter 65)

"Fool!" cried the hunchback. "You fell victim to one of the classic blunders. The most famous is 'Never get involved in a land war in Asia,' but only slightly less well known is this: 'Never go in against a Sicilian when death is on the line.'"
(The Princess Bride)

Map of Sicily
Picture source

This post looks at Chapters 1 through 62 of Book Six, covering the activities of the spring and summer of 415 BC. All quotes come from the Thomas Hobbes translation.

Athens previous involvement in Sicily: Beginning in 427 BC, Athens had answered an ally's call for help in Sicily. In 424 BC after the conference at Gela, Athens had been asked to leave Sicily. Hermocrates the Syracusian had rallied support for “Sicily for the Sicilians” but his meddling in other cities’ affairs after Athens left makes it clear he was more interested in Sicily for Syracuse. Two years after leaving Sicily, Athens had sent a general to try and rally anti-Syracuse support but failed to build any coalition.

The ambassadors from Egesta arrived in Athens during the winter of 416/5 BC requesting help against Selinus, an ally of Syracuse. Each time the topic of Sicily arises Thucydides claims that the Athenian aim was to conquer it and add it to their empire. Athens responds to the request by sending their own ambassadors to Egesta to see (1) if they had the money to support such an expedition, and (2) how did the war between Egesta and Selinus stand? The ambassadors return with enough silver to cover the cost of sixty ships for a month, plus reports of a great store in the Egestaean treasury and temples.

Athens agrees to send sixty ships to Sicily with Alcibiades, Nicias, and Lamachus as commanders with absolute authority to aid Egesta, resore the people of Leontine back in their city (if there was time), and “to order all other the affairs of Sicily as they should think most for the profit of the Athenians.” This hardly seems like a call to expand the empire, although it does attempt to expand their influence on the island. Furthermore, sixty ships was the total sent on their previous Sicilian expedition (twenty ships initially, forty ships approved later). As much as Thucydides wants to pin empire-building on the earlier expedition it was clear that sixty ships was not going to subdue the island. More importantly, what did the Athenians believe? They were angered with the generals that abandoned the earlier campaign, fining or banishing the commanders, but was their anger for not adding more to the empire or underachievement in the stated goals?

Thucydides does not provide any speeches from the assembly called to send the sixty ships to Sicily. Five days after that decision the assembly met again to discuss the ways and means of assembling such a force. Nicias requests to speak, hoping to change their mind from the earlier decree. Looking at his argument and what he addresses is the closest we can come to divining what the arguments were at the earlier meeting. His initial complaints were that the decision was made after only a short deliberation, the mission was a weighty affair, and the decision was made on the claims of the Egestaeans’ (“strangers”) wealth. After claiming he is seeking to “apprehend the best” for the city and not over concern for “the danger of my person”, he acknowledge the weakness of the peace with Sparta he had championed. Foreseeing the possibility that enemies might renew the war while the forces were away or if something bad happened to those forces, he echoes Pericles’ admonition not to “seek a new dominion before we assure that which we already have.” He also acknowledges that the signing of the peace had relied on “the misfortunes of our enemies”, hardly a long-term basis for stability.

Nicias continues to address the more modest goal of helping Egesta while keeping Athens safe: “The question with us therefore, if we be well advised, will not be of the Egestaeans in Sicily, but how we may speedily defend our city against the insidiation of them that favour the oligarchy.” Nicias then directly attacks Alcibiades and adds an appeal to the older crowd who would remember the plague and earlier troubles in war. His final rebuke is aimed at the Egestaeans, telling them that Athens’ reply should be they can finish the war they started. Nicias focuses on the more modest goals during his oration instead of the call for expanding the empire, although empire-building is addressed. Combined with ‘only’ sixty ships having been initially approved, I find Thucydides claim of subjecting all of Sicily overstated. Those approving such a measure, however, may have had Thucydides’ goal in mind as a secondary matter after the initial, more modest goals were achieved.

Thucydides gives a brief description of Alcibiades. While everyone acknowledged the good things Alcibiades had done for Athens they doubted his motives. Thucydides describes Alcibiades as a self-interested prick keen on excess, using his public achievements to increase his personal wealth. His first concern addresses the attacks from Nicias, saying his personal splurges bring the city “glory and profit”, allowing strangers to marvel at Athens’ greatness. His portrait of the Sicilians looks at their lack of arms and defense—if his opinion in this matter were shared by others, Thucydides would be correct in Athens’ underestimation of the opposition.

During the Melian dialogue, the Athenians repeated the point that hope was not a plan. Yet that is what we find here from Alcibiades, who forecasts “we shall have many of the barbarians, upon hatred of the Syracusians, to take our parts against them there”. He is not worried about the Peloponnesians attacking while the ships are gone since the generals will leave a “navy sufficient to oppose theirs behind us”. Alcibiades also reminds the Athenians why they took Egesta on as an ally—not that Athens expected direct help from them but that Egesta would harass Athenian enemies in Sicily. Alcibiades brings to the forefront a motif that has been hinted at several times, that of rest versus motion. Athens became the empire it is through motion, and “a state accustomed to be active, if it once grow idle, will quickly be subjected by the change.” In Book One the description of Spartan and Athenian characteristics by the Corinthians used different words but included the concept of rest (Sparta) and motion (Athens). Also, we see the idea of pre-emption again as Alcibiades states “it is as necessary for us to seek to subdue those that are not under our dominion, as to keep so those that are”. Ever since Delium the need to frame a conflict as pre-emptive and defensive becomes standard in a call to arms.

Nicias, seeing approval of the expedition still popular, speaks one more time. Thucydides says Nicias intended to scuttle the invasion by ludicrously inflating the requirements of the trip and judging by his speech I think that’s an fair assessment. Nicias has already failed at bluffing once when Cleon took Nicias up on the offer to lead the expedition to Pylus. His bluff here provides one of the major miscalculations guaranteeing Athens’ failure if they sustain a sizeable loss. He begins by noting all the things Syracuse has that an expedition of only sixty ships will not have. If he is to be one of the leaders of the expedition, Athens needed to provide a much larger contingency and make sure they are sufficiently provided to insure success. Ironically, he notes that many possible allies might be scared of the Athenians and their designs—by significantly inflating the invasion force his concern becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. He concludes by offering to resign his commission to anyone “of a contrary opinion”, effectively guaranteeing no one will oppose him. The assembly follows along with his disastrous bluff and swells the size of the expedition.

The additional irony of this expedition lies with Athens regeneration during the peace: “The city had by this time recovered herself from the sickness and from their continual wars, both in number of men fit for the wars, grown up after the ceasing of the plague, and in store of money gathered together by means of the peace: whereby they made their provisions with much ease.” Yet they were willing to risk this recovery in order to go to war again.

Distractions during the preparation for the Sicilian expedition occur. Gary Corby has a good blog entry on the mutilation of the statues of Hermes that occurred one night (although most translations say most of them were scarred, not every one…it’s difficult to tell from the text). This action was viewed as an ominous sign about the expedition in addition to a political action against democracy in Athens. (Sidenote—this provides yet another irony with the Melian dialogue in which the Athenians deride Melos’ reliance on the gods. Now that purported omens appear unfavorable to Athens, its citizens go berserk.) Soon after the defacements, various men step forward and make claims about mutilations to other statues and how certain high-standing officials “had in private houses acted the mysteries of their religion in mockery”. Alcibiades’ name surfaces as one of the accused in the latter. Alcibiades demands a trial before he leaves with the expedition, not wanting to be tried in absentia. His enemies successfully delay the trial, though.

Thucydides goes into detail on the Athenian fleet setting off, a fantastic production that excited the city. Leaders in Syracuse are split on believing the news of the Athenian fleet’s sailing to Sicily. Hermocrates speaks to the Syracusian assembly, stressing Sicilian unity again (with Syracuse leading the way, of course), recommending ambassadors be sent out to talk about the “common danger” and unite as many as possible. He perceives that the greatness of the Athenian fleet will terrify other Sicilians, effecting more confederations with Syracuse. Like Thucydides, the believes “in truth they aspire to the dominion of all Sicily.” Thucydides has Hermocrates say that “the man of most experience amongst their [Athenian] commanders hath the charge against his will; and would take a light occasion to return”, an incredible piece of intelligence so early in the conflict. The leaders of Syracuse are still divided on believing the Athenians are coming. Athenagoras, the chief magistrate, finds it incredible that Athens would come while a war “not yet surely ended” (echoing Nicias acknowledgement to the non-believers of the peace). Athenagoras’ oration goes all over the place, including the bizarre claim that he knows the Athenians aren’t bringing horses with them but he doesn’t believe they are coming. He also echoes ideas found in other speeches, such as the need for pre-emption and how sedition is more to worry about than any outside enemy. After a ringing defense of democracy over oligarchy, Athenagoras yields the floor to a general so that the city can prepare for Athens while scouts are sent to ascertain if they really are coming.

From Corcyra, Athens sends its own scouts to Sicily to see if cities would receive them. Things begin to go wrong almost immediately. Most cities, even former allies, refuse to receive Athenian ships. Did the increase in the size of the fleet and additional men cause concern? Or would they have been denied even with a smaller fleet? The fleet sails to Rhegium (on the toe of Italy) where they camp but aren’t allowed into the city. Even worse, Rhegium refuses further help in the expedition. So much for hope as a plan. Speaking of false hope, the scouts return with word about the lack of money in Egesta, the promise of plenty having been an elaborate ruse played upon the initial Athenian delegation. Their “first hope” crossed, the three generals present their opinions on the next steps. Nicias thought it best to go to Selinus, “against which they were chiefly set forth”, and if money were not forthcoming from Egesta they should sail home after a show of power. Alcibiades wants to send heralds to every Sicilian city offering an alliance, at which point they can evaluate restoring the Messanians and then attacking Selinus and Syracuse. Lamachus thought it best to go directly to Syracuse, taking them before they had much time to prepare for an attack. The element of surprise or unpredictability has played a key role in many of the battles of this war, which makes such an audacious plan believable.

Lamachus eventually seconds Alcibiades’ plan. The Athenians try but fail to secure alliances with Messana, Naxos, and Catana (all along the eastern coast of Sicily). Ten ships sail into the harbor of Syracuse to reconnoiter it and proclaim their intentions. Catana ends up allying with the Athenians through accident and provides a new base for the fleet. Camarina, on the southern shore, also refuses to receive the Athenians—at some point Alcibiades’ plan should be recognized as unworkable. And then the weirdness set in…

An official ship from Athens arrives to recall Alcibiades and some of his soldiers, some for charges related to the profanation of the mysteries and others for damage to the Hermae. After the expedition left for Sicily, the Athenians had accepted all theories and claims of responsibility with little inquiry, throwing one and all into prison and executing many. Memories of the tyrannies that Athens had suffered (which Thucydides takes pains to correct) convinced many that the profanation and destruction were part of a plot to restore a tyranny or install an oligarchy. A witch-hunt ensues and Alcibiades name occurs repeatedly as one of the plotters and many minor incidents are interpreted to create more suspicion. The savagery of citizen against citizen recalls the licentiousness in Athens during the plague. Alcibiades begins the trip back to Athens but escapes at Thurii (in the ‘arch’ of Italy’s boot), eventually making it to the Peloponnesus. His trial continues without him and he is condemned to death.

The remaining generals divide the fleet. Many towns refuse to accept them and the Athenians compound the Sicilians distrust by taking the city of Hyccara (enemies with Egesta) and enslave the inhabitants, ransoming them to fund the expedition. The summer ends on this inauspicious start of the Sicilian expedition.

---

Several times the Sicilian expedition is described as the equal to the war with Sparta (by Thucydides and Athenagoras, among others), yet it didn’t have to be that way. The initial sixty ship commitment was significant but would not have proved an overwhelming defeat, even if completely destroyed. There was always the risk of escalation once underway, just as the earlier commitment swelled from twenty to sixty ships. During the debate, Nicias’ bluff changes everything—with more ships and a large number of troops and support staff going to Sicily, their loss had the potential to be devastating. I don’t know if I’m reading it correctly, but the assembly turned everything over to the generals upon approving the expanded mission. If so, this confirms Diodotus’ concern that the people make decisions but do not hold themselves accountable for them. Making matters worse are the questionable motives of the new leaders.

It was clear Nicias’ heart wasn’t in the expedition, wanting to return once the promised money from Egesta wasn’t forthcoming. The sheer size of the fleet and army may have terrified supposed or potential allies as few cities received them. Alcibiades may have been the one general bold enough to make the expedition work although Lamachus’ plan to immediately attack Syracuse, catching them by surprise, might have worked, too. Now Alcibiades was a fugitive. The disunity in post-Periclean Athens, where public and private interests were no longer in harmony, gives credence to Cleon’s claim that a democracy cannot head an empire. This struggle between what is best for the individual and what is best for the state permeates this section of Thucydides, especially during Nicias’ and Alcibiades’ speeches before the assembly.

The Peloponnesian War: The Melian dialogue (5:84-116)

YouTube link
A modern re-enactment of the negotiations between the Athenians and the Melians as reconstructed by Thucydides, the ancient Greek historian of the Peloponnesian War (taken from The War that Never Ends, 1991, directed by Jack Gold)

This post looks at Chapters 84 through 116 of Book Five, covering what is commonly called the Melian dialogue. All quotes come from the Thomas Hobbes translation.

The island of Milos had stayed neutral during the Peloponnesian war, refusing to become a subject of Athens. As the war progressed, though, Athens encroached upon the island which responded with open hostility. In 416 BC, Athens sent Cleomedes and Tisias as commanders to bring Melos under Athenian control, whether through submission or other means.

I’ve copied the summary of the dialogue from Wikipedia to keep the post from never ending, but the text of the dialogue can be found online several places such as here or here.

The Athenians, in a frank and unpretentious manner, offer the Melians an ultimatum: surrender and pay tribute to Athens, or be destroyed.
The Melians argue that they are a neutral country and not an enemy, so Athens has no need to crush them. The Athenians counter that if they accept Melos's neutrality and independence, they would look weak: people will think they spare Melos because they are not strong enough to conquer it.
The Melians argue that an invasion will alarm the other neutral Greek states, who will become hostile to Athens for fear of being invaded themselves. The Athenians counter that the Greek states on the mainland are unlikely to act this way. It is the more volatile island states and the subjects they have already conquered that are more likely to take up arms against Athens. The Melians argue that it would be shameful and cowardly of them to submit without a fight. The Athenians counter that the debate is not about honor but about self-preservation.
The Melians argue that though the Athenians are far stronger, there is still a chance they could win. The Athenians counter that only the strong have a right to indulge in hope; the weak Melians are hopelessly outmatched.
The Melians argue that the gods will protect them because they are in the right, and that their Spartan kin will come to their defense. The Athenians counter that gods and men alike respect strength over moral arguments; the strong do as they can and the weak suffer what they must. They also argue the Spartans have nothing to gain and a lot to lose by coming to Melos's defense – mere kinship will not motivate them.
The Athenians conclude the argument by saying there is no shame in submitting to a stronger enemy. The Melians do not change their minds and politely dismiss the envoys.

The blunt talk about power and empire are nothing new for Athens. The Athenian envoys who ‘happened’ to be in Sparta during their initial debate on declaring war: “So that, though overcome by three the greatest things, honour, fear, and profit, we have both accepted the dominion delivered us and refuse again to surrender it, we have therein done nothing to be wondered at nor beside the manner of men. Nor have we been the first in this kind, but it hath been ever a thing fixed, for the weaker to be kept under by the stronger.” This outlook has pretty much guided Athenian outlook and attitude throughout the war. Pericles tried to tone it down temporarily but upon his death the Athenians had followed a more aggressive interpretation of this (at least until they lost several major battles). Even the Spartan Brasidas had talked about the right of power when threatening the Acanthians: “For it is more dishonourable, at least to men in dignity, to amplify their estate by specious fraud, than by open violence. For the latter assaileth with a certain right of power given us by fortune; but the other, with the treachery of a wicked conscience.” Within this viewpoint, such expansion by force is a natural law. Melos (of course) objects, saying that Athens seeks “the point of profit in the place of justice,” although Athens explains that justice can only exist in disputes between equals.

Framing the debate in Melian terms leads us nowhere. Athens concedes that justice has nothing to do it, they are acting in their own self-interest. They also deflect the question of piety, taking the question of religion out of the equation. The Melians take several stabs at convincing the Athenians that that isn’t the case but the clearly fail to change their minds. The Athenians boil the central question down to Melian actions—do the Melians act in a manner best for their self-interest? After all attempts to persuade the Athenians otherwise, the Melians will have to concede or fight. The Melians put their trust in assistance from chance, the gods, and the Spartans…all of which let them down.

When reading this passage, a natural tendency is to compare this to other speeches. The one speech I usually see this dialogue compared to the most is Pericles’ funeral oration in which he sings the praises of the Athenian democracy but there is not necessarily a contradiction between the two passages. In that speech Pericles acknowledges that what Athens had gained, and what their ancestors handed down to them, had been obtained and enlarged by war. Pericles points out that Athenians enjoy justice under the laws, but this is a justice between equals (Athenian citizens) and within their empire. This is the part that provides the biggest contrast, however, highlighting the difference between Athens’ qualities (freedom, openness, generosity) and their actions (butchering and enslaving the Melians). The last speech of Pericles that Thucydides presents fits in with the Melian dialogue as well. In that speech, Pericles acknowledges that Athens is an empire that was unjustly taken up but would be “unsafe to lay down.” Athens must do what is best for Athens.

Maybe a better comparison would be with the speeches of Cleon and Diodotus during the debate on the fate of Mytilene. Then, as now, guilt or innocence is not the question—Mytilene and Melos are guilty in Athenian eyes. For the debate on Mytilene, the question revolves around what is the best punishment for that guilt while both speakers look at the larger issue—how does an empire deal with internal revolt? For Melos, the question revolves around the best way for them to submit to Athens—through submission or destruction and Athens put the choice in their hands. Melos says that should not even be a choice and declines Athens request for submission and Athens starts a siege. Eventually there were some within Melos “that practiced to have it given up, they yielded themselves to the discretion of the Athenians: who slew all the men of military age, made slaves of the women and children; and inhabited the place with a colony sent thither afterwards of five hundred men of their own.”

There are other echoes I find in this dialogue. One comes from Melos’ notice that fortune rises and falls, pointing out that Athens may need help from cities that are currently weak. The idea of fortune’s rise and fall has been presented several times, notably in peace negotiations between Athens and Sparta. Athens deflects this statement, noting the truth of it but saying the new power will act in its own self-interest and Athens will accept that.

Another echo comes from the battle of Delium, where both Boeotia and Athens paint the engagement as defensive and thus acceptable for preemptive action. In this case, Athens sees Melian independence as a threat to their power. Subjecting Melos would enhance their image and therefore their security. Might doesn’t necessarily make right, but might allows the city/state to pursue its self-interest.

The Melian dialogue provides a fascinating look at the clash between the political realism of Athens and the ideals of justice championed by Melos. I keep coming back to Cleon’s statements in the debate on Mytilene and how closely Athens continues to follow his advice (even though he lost that debate). During his speech Cleon championed consistency, even when such a decision is bad (it is best that bad laws be consistently followed). Another of Cleon’s points was that a democracy was incapable of governing an empire, something that Athens was learning to reconcile. I’m looking forward to the upcoming section on the debate on invading Sicily (again) and seeing how the arguments presented so far will reverberate in that debate.

Map of ancient Greece
Picture source

The Peloponnesian War: Amphipolis II, a peaceless peace, Mantinea (5:1-83)

This post looks at Chapters 1 through 83 of Book Five, covering the end of the one-year truce, the second battle of Amphipolis, and the beginning of the “false peace”. All quotes come from the Thomas Hobbes translation. As usual with Thucydides, he has packed a lot of information into a short passage. I will focus on just a few events that hopefully provide a flavor of this section.

After the one-year truce expires, Cleon convinces the Athenians to send him on an expedition to Thrace. He visits Scione (still under siege) then goes to Torone, which the Athenians take. The Boeotians take Panactum, a fortress on the Athenian border. Meanwhile, Athens sends a general to Sicily to gather allies against Syracuse and attempt to rescue exiles from Leontini—he was unsuccessful in both tasks.

Amphipolis (Part II)
The first battle of Amphipolis led to Sparta taking the city and Thucydides’ exile from Athens. The second battle saw another Spartan victory but both the Athenian Cleon and the Spartan Brasidas were killed. Thucydides says that both sides now desired peace, going into detail on the reasons (as he saw them; Chapters 14 & 15):

Presently after the battle of Amphipolis and return of Rhamphias out of Thessaly, it fell out that neither side did any act of war, but were inclined rather to a peace: the Athenians for the blow they had received at Delium, and this other a little after at Amphipolis; and because they had no longer that confident hope in their strength, on which they relied when formerly they refused the peace, as having conceived upon their present success that they should have had the upper hand; also they stood in fear of their own confederates, lest emboldened by these losses of theirs they should more and more revolt; and repented that they made not the peace after their happy success at Pylus, when occasion was offered to have done it honourably: and the Lacedæmonians on the other side did desire peace, because the war had not proceeded as they expected; for they had thought they should in a few years have warred down the power of Athens, by wasting their territory; and because they were fallen into that calamity in the island, the like whereof had never happened unto Sparta before; because also their country was continually ravaged by those of Pylus and Cythera, and their Helotes continually fled to the enemy; and because they feared lest those which remained, trusting in them that were run away, should in this estate of theirs raise some innovation, as at other times before they had done. Withal it happened, that the thirty years’ peace with the Argives was now upon the point of expiring; and the Argives would not renew it without restitution made them of Cynuria: so that to war against the Argives and the Athenians, both at once, seemed impossible. They suspected also that some of the cities of Peloponnesus would revolt to the Argives: as indeed it came afterwards to pass.

These things considered, it was by both parts thought good to conclude a peace; but especially by the Lacedæmonians, for the desire they had to recover their men taken in the island. For the Spartans that were amongst them, were both of the prime men of the city, and their kinsmen. And therefore they began to treat presently after they were taken: but the Athenians, by reason of their prosperity, would not lay down the war at that time on equal terms. But after their defeat at Delium, the Lacedæmonians, knowing they would be apter now to accept it, made that truce for a year, during which they were to meet and consult about a longer time.

Thucydides makes it clear he doesn’t like Cleon, describing his death in less than honorable terms. While his description of Brasidas had always been admiring, Thucydides paints these opposing generals as the principal opponents of peace, Brasidas because of the honors he received in war. Thucydides claims Cleon thought “his evil actions would more appear and his calumniations be the less believed” during a peaceful interlude. King Pleistoanax in Sparta and Nicias in Athens are more prominent now, both desiring peace. Athens needed the threat of Spartan building a fortification in Attica (a bluff? real?) to push them to conclude negotiations.

What’s so funny about war, hate and disharmony?
The peace, such that it was, lasted about eight years (422 – 414 BC). The treaty between Sparta and Athens that Thucydides details had serious flaws. Athens had lost cities to forces not necessarily friendly with Sparta so their restoration could not be guaranteed. Sparta sold out several of their allies and acquisitions, making a mockery of their war claim of freedom for the Greeks. In addition, the peace would depend on the cooperation of third parties not exploiting divisions between Athens and Sparta. Disagreements within each city would exacerbate tensions as well. The machinations of the Athenian leader Alcibiades helped ensure an alliance between Athens and Argos. Other cities helped humiliate Sparta, such as during the 420 BC Olympic games when the Eleans accused Sparta of breaking the sacred truce of the festival. Thucydides argues that this false peace was simply an interlude in one, long war:

And for six years and ten months they abstained from entering into each other’s territories with their arms: but the peace being weak, they did each other abroad what harm they could; and in the end were forced to dissolve the peace made after those ten years, and fell again into open war.

In this section (Chapters 25 & 26) Thucydides provides an introduction to the “weak peace”, explaining (finally) that he had been exiled after the first battle of Amphipolis. The Athenian Alcibiades made the most of the alliance with Argos, using them to invade Epidaurus as an Athenian proxy. Alcibiades took advantage of the overwhelming desire for peace to plot, scheme and push the envelope on what could be done yet avoid open hostilities. Athens’ actions did not technically violate the peace treaty but it was clear they were playing fast and loose with the intent. In addition, the city’s alliances worked to isolate Sparta and their allies.

A battle between the Spartan king Agis’ troops and the Argive army was about to take place when a last-second truce, proposed by the Argives, was accepted by Agis. While the last-second cease-fire was surprising, the armies on both sides were furious—they wanted the battle to take place. Upon Alcibiades’ late arrival, he scolds the Argives for proposing a truce without Athenian approval and gets them to join an attack against a Spartan ally in Arcadia. Orchomenus falls and the Spartans’ anger at Agis boils over. It seems many people wanted a fight and the punishment of the few principled men that had held the peace insured that wish would be fulfilled. In addition, Spartan prestige reaches a new low as they are seen as weak in spirit and resolve while running away from conflicts. The rumor of Tegea going over to the Argive coalition raised the stakes for Sparta and guaranteed that Agis would lead troops north another time, this time with conflict necessary for Agis and Sparta to retain any credibility.

Battle of Mantinea
Thucydides spells out the details of a hoplite battle in theory, then in practice during this major land battle. Agis tried to force his Argive opponents into conflict by destroying crops in the area but the harvest is mostly over. The Argive forces have taken a strategic position on the mountains and Agis recklessly drives the Spartans up the hills. One of the “ancient [wise] men” advises Agis to halt. Agis’ desperate situation inspires a plan of drawing his opponents onto the plains by threatening damage from the diversion of local waterways.

Agis waffles between being an adept commander on the field and an inept one. Each army promises to outflank their opponents’ right side. Agis orders his captains to reposition themselves, but they fail to follow his orders (later earning an exile). Because of Argive miscalculations, the Spartans still carry the day but pull their strength at the last moment—there’s a surreal moment where Spartan and Athenian troops were facing each other and Agis, possibly realizing the damage such a direct conflict could entail, allows the Athenian troops to escape. Agis, whether through design or accident, has set the stage for a successful alignment of Argos with Sparta and a major blow to Athens. With the victory at Mantinea, Sparta has regained prestige in the Greek world. The struggle between democratic and oligarchic factions in several cities threatens to bring Athens or Sparta (or both) into their conflicts. Even Argos' alliance, which Sparta had been able to win with the victory at Mantinea, would vacillate between Athens and Sparta depending on which faction was in power.

A break for today

I’m going to take a break today from reading and posting. Well, except for this post, which will ramble about my first (remembered) introduction to Thucydides. I was an impressionable third-grader when my parents decided to go see “Patton”. For some reason, they decided to take me. The theater was so crowded we had to sit apart and I soaked in the movie. I caught the references to Thucydides when Patton tells of his plan to invade Sicily as well as Patton falling asleep while reading The Peloponnesian War. While I always wanted to read the work, my first “push” came from seeing that movie. Unfortunately it took me forty years to get around to it.

Now that I think about it, a reference to “Patton” earned me one of my few visits to the principal’s office. Six years after seeing the movie, during a class read-along on Shakespeare, I was reading the part of Brutus. I had fashioned something to look like a scroll using two pencils and a piece of paper. Instead of reading the lines at one point I waved my "scroll" and exclaimed, “Caesar, you magnificent bastard! I read your book!” Why I thought I wouldn’t get in trouble escapes me now. Probably then, too.

The Peloponnesian War: Delium, Amphipolis I, Truce (or consequences), Thespiae (4:89-135)

This post looks at Chapters 89 – 135 of Book Four, covering the winter of 424/3 BC through the spring of 422 BC. Included in this section is the battle of Delium, one of the major ground battles during the entire Peloponnesian War. All quotes come from the Thomas Hobbes translation.

Map of Ancient Attica
Picture source

Delium
The Athenian plot for attacking Boeotian cities began to fail as the carefully orchestrated timing the plan required failed—the generals Hippocrates and Demosthenes mistake which day the raids are to start. In addition, the Athenian plans had been betrayed to the Boeotians who strengthen their troops in several of the cities to deter Athenian attacks. Hippocrates marches to Delium, taking the temple of Apollo and fortifying it. This desecration adds another example of the breakdown of social mores during this war, a favorite Thucydidian them…unfortunately there would be more. After the fortification is ready, Hippocrates has the troops head home toward Athens while leaving a small garrison at the temple.

Boeotian troops follow the Athenian troops. As the Athenians cross the border, most generals approve “not giving battle”. Pagondas, a Theban general whose turn it was to lead that day, disagrees and gives a rousing speech to the soldiers. Even though most of the Athenian troops have left Boeotia and were no longer an immediate threat he paints the battle as defensive in nature, a preemptive strike to keep the Athenians from returning. He reminds them that they defeated Athens at Coroneia years earlier and had achieved peace, establishing “a great security: which lasted till this present.” Pagondas’ speech persuades the men to attack.

Hippocrates apparently didn’t realize the failure of Demosthenes to strike his targeted city, meaning he would face the bulk of Boeotia’s army. Realizing that enemy troops are pursuing him, he has his men readied for battle and provides a speech to them. He stresses the defensive nature of this battle even though they are “in the territory of another”. Preemption proved to be the cause of the day for the Athenians as well: “For in the territory of these men, you fight for your own. If we get the victory, the Peloponnesians will never invade our territories again, for want of the Bœotian horsemen. So that in one battle, you shall both gain this territory, and free your own.” Thucydides provides details on the composition of the battle lines, noting some innovation by Pagondas in arranging a deep wing of Thebans. The right wing of the Boeotians gradually force the Athenians to give ground. The Boeotian left wing was routed, with Athenians positioned there so disorganized during all the killing that “through ignorance slew one another.” Pagondas has some of his cavalry peel off from the right wing and circle behind a hill to reinforce his left wing,

whereby that wing of the Athenians which was victorious, apprehending upon their sudden appearing that they had been a fresh army, was put into affright: and the whole army of the Athenians, now doubly terrified by this accident and by the Thebans that continually won ground and brake their ranks, betook themselves to flight. Some fled toward Delium and the sea; and some towards Oropus; others toward the mountain Parnethus; and others other ways, as to each appeared hope of safety. The Bœotians, especially their horse and those Locrians that came in after the enemy was already defeated, followed killing them.

Only night prevented many of the Athenians from being slaughtered. Thucydides, in a later description (Book IV, Ch. 125) of Macedonian flight, describes what happened this way: “ (as it is usual with great armies, to be terrified upon causes unknown) being suddenly affrighted, and supposing them to be many more in number than they were, and even now upon them, betook themselves to present flight.” While it’s easy to second-guess Hippocrates and note he would have lost little had he continued back to Athens and avoided a fight, it took the brilliant tactics of Pagondas to secure such a stunning victory.

In ancient Greece a common procedure after a battle was the request for the dead to be returned for proper burial. The Boeotians, noting the sacrilege of the Athenians occupying the temple in Delium, refuse the Athenian request. The Boeotians state that the Athenians have transgressed “the universal law of the Grecians” in their profane actions, highlighting “that the invader of a another’s country should abstain from all holy places in the same”. The Athenians in reply make excuses that they weren’t doing any wrong at the temple and that the Boeotians are “more irreligious by far” by bartering with the dead. Sacrileges continue to pile up as the Athenian corpses rot on the battlefield. The Boeotians eventually assemble a large type of flamethrower that drives the Athenians out of the temple in Delium. With the temple restored, the Boeotians return the Athenian dead, seventeen days after the battle.

With the loss at Delium and Brasidas stirring revolt in Thrace, the tide has definitely turned against the Athenians. Demosthenes, after failing at the surprise attacks in Boeotia, turns to the coast near Corinth but is beaten back by the locals at Sicyonia. All is not well for Athens, and it’s only going to get worse.

The battle of Delium
Picture source

Amphipolis
The Spartan general Brasidas, still in the area of Thrace and Macedonia, attacked the Spartan colony Amphipolis. Thanks to help from conspirators in the city, Brasidas is able to take a key bridge to the city by surprise. The gates of the city remain secure and the residing Athenian general, Eucles, “sent unto the other general, Thucydides the son of Olorus, the writer of this history,” for support. Wishing to avoid a strengthened Athenian force, Brasidas presents generous terms to the citizens of Amphipolis if they capitulate. The citizens agree to surrender the city. That evening, Thucydides arrives too late to save Amphipolis but is able to protect the nearby city of Eion from Brasidas. Additional cities in the area, seeing the fall of Amphipolis and the generous treatment by Brasidas, join the revolt from Athens. Thucydides points out some of the flaws in the reasoning of these cities:

For they thought they might do it boldly, falsely estimating the power of the Athenians to be less than afterwards it appeared, and making a judgment of it according to [blind] wilfulness rather than safe forecast: it being the fashion of men, what they wish to be true to admit even upon an ungrounded hope, and what they wish not, with a magistral kind of arguing to reject. Withal, because the Athenians had lately received a blow from the Bœotians, and because Brasidas had said, (not as was the truth, but as served best to allure them), that when he was at Nisæa the Athenians durst not fight with those forces of his alone, they grew confident thereon, and believed not that any man would come against them. But the greatest cause of all was, that for the delight they took at this time to innovate, and for that they were to make trial of the Lacedæmonians, not till now angry , they were content by any means to put it to the hazard. Which being perceived, the Athenians sent garrison soldiers into those cities, as many as the shortness of the time and the season of winter would permit.

Thucydides does not go into detail about the fallout in Athens over the loss of Amphipolis other than to note the citizens’ fear. It would have been interesting to hear directly about his trial for charges of treason (translation: failure to hold Amphipolis) and sentence of banishment from Athens. I’m sure I won’t be the first to note that his portrayal of the events around Amphipolis’ fall reads like a defense of his actions, pointing to failure by Eucles to protect the bridge and to the generous terms from Brasidas (out of fear) accelerating the city’s fall. Thucydides’ history rehabilitates his reputation in a way that his defense before the Athenians apparently was unable to achieve.

Map of ancient Greece
Picture source

Truce. Sort of.
Following up on the victory at Amphipolis, Brasidas requested more forces to be sent from Sparta while he was able to build ships upon the river Strymon (where Amphipolis was located). “But the Lacedæmonians, partly through envy of the principal men, and partly because they more affected the redemption of their men taken in the island and the ending of the war, refused to furnish him.” I’m not sure that covers all possibilities since Sparta had recently begged for peace from Athens and was happy to sign a truce a few months later.

Without receiving reinforcements from Sparta, Brasidas pushed on to the Chalcidice peninsulas and accepted the revolts of several cities while capturing others. His victories seemed to have the effect Sparta had wanted and in the spring of 423 BC a one-year truce was signed.

The Lacedæmonians and Athenians, in the spring of the summer following, made a cessation of arms presently for a year: having reputed with themselves, the Athenians, that Brasidas should by this means cause no more of their cities to revolt, but that by this leisure they might prepare to secure them; and that if this suspension liked them, they might afterwards make some agreement for a longer time : the Lacedæmonians, that the Athenians fearing what they feared, would upon the taste of this intermission of their miseries and weary life, be the willinger to compound, and with the restitution of their men to conclude a peace for a longer time. For they would fain have recovered their men, whilst Brasidas his good fortune continued; and whilst, if they could not recover them, they might yet (Brasidas prospering, and setting them equal with the Athenians) try it out upon even terms, and get the victory.

Thucydides lays out the terms of the truce, but I’ll point out one clause that I think shows how desperately Sparta wanted peace: “This is thought good by the Lacedæmonians and their confederates. But if you shall conceive any other articles more fair or of more equity than these, then shall you go and declare the same at Lacedæmon. For neither shall the Lacedæmonians nor their confederates refuse anything that you shall make appear to be just.”

Problems begin immediately after the truce is signed. Scione, a city on one of the peninsulas off Chalcidice, revolts from Athens and Brasidas accepts their alliance. When Athenians arrive with news of the truce, Brasidas lies and says the revolt happened before the truce was signed. “Whereupon, by the advice of Cleon, they [the Athenians] made a decree, to take them by force and to put them all [in Scione] to the sword. And, forbearing war in all places else, they prepared themselves only for that.” Then Mende, a city on the same peninsula as Scione, revolts and Brasidas accepts their alliance. Both Mende and Scione prepare for an expected Athenian attack.

Brasidas works with the Macedonian king Perdiccas—although Thucydides doesn’t give a reason, I would guess it’s because of their (fraying) alliance. Perdiccas leads their joint troops into Lynchus against the king with whom he held a grudge, even though Brasidas upset Perdiccas on the previous invasion because Brasidas mediated a peace, much to Periccas’ chagrin. After an initial victory, the two leaders learn that a supposed ally has switched sides. Because of their fear at this news, the Macedonians desert the battlefield and head home (this is the incident with the quote about unknown causes terrifying an army). Brasidas sees the Macedonians have fled and intends a retreat to support Mende and Scione, exhorting his men by telling them that barbarians cannot defeat a united Greek defense. Their retreat to Chalcidice proves successful, Brasidas remaining in the rear to help fight off opponents. Brasidas’ men are enraged at the Macedonian desertion and kill any oxen or keep any bundles from the Macedonian baggage train they find. Needless to say, Perdiccas and Brasidas have a falling out and the Macedonian king switches sides once again.

While Brasidas was away with Perdiccas, the Athenians attempt to take Mende. They are initially rebuffed (and Nicias wounded) so they ravage the nearby countryside over the next few days. As the Spartan leader Polydamidas exhorts the Mendaeans to defend their city but an altercation causes the citizens to revolt. When the Mendaeans open the gates without any agreed terms with the Athenians, the city is sacked by Athenian troops. These troops then besiege Scione (the siege is still ongoing at the end of this Book). The spiteful Perdiccas allies with the Athenians and has Spartan troops blocked from marching to help Brasidas. Brasidas attempts to take Potidaea during the winter of 423/2 BC (still during the truce) but fails.

Thespiae
The Thespians must have felt like an accursed people. Their men were positioned on the left wing of the Boeotian lines at Delium. Not only were most of their men slaughtered in that conflict (because of their sacrificial position against the Athenian right wing—considered a place of honor), Thebes pulled down the walls of their city because of Thespian “Atticism”. Thebes really did it simply because they had always wanted to and now they could with “the flower of their [Thespian] youth was slain in the battle against the Athenians.”

Almost sixty years earlier, during the Persian wars, the Thespian contingency had been the only other force to stay with the Spartans at Thermopylae:

The allies then who were dismissed departed and went away, obeying the word of Leonidas, and only the Thespians and the Thebans remained behind with the Lacedemonians. Of these the Thebans stayed against their will and not because they desired it, for Leonidas kept them, counting them as hostages; but the Thespians very willingly, for they said that they would not depart and leave Leonidas and those with him, but they stayed behind and died with them. The commander of these was Demophilos the son of Diadromes. (7.222 from Herodotus)

The epigram for the Spartans has always be remembered: "Oh stranger, tell the Spartans that we lie here obedient to their words." But Philiades composed an epigram for the 700 Thespians that fell: "The men who once dwelled beneath the crags of Mt. Helicon, the broad land of Thespiae now boasts of their courage." The loss for the Thespians didn’t stop there during the Persian wars. The Thebans made sure to point out to Xerxes that Thespiae fought against him when the Persian troops continued toward Attica after the victory at Thermopylae:

While the commanders from the Peloponnese argued thus, an Athenian had come in reporting that the Barbarians were arrived in Attica and that all the land was being laid waste with fire. For the army which directed its march through Boeotia in company with Xerxes, after it had burnt the city of the Thespians (the inhabitants having left it and gone to the Peloponnese) and that of the Plataians likewise, had now come to Athens and was laying waste everything in those regions. Now he had burnt Thespiai and Plataia because he was informed by the Thebans that these were not taking the side of the Medes. (8.50)

Troops from Thespiae also show up at the battle of Plataea the next year, although Herodotus notes they “were without heavy arms”, a recognition of what they lost at Thermopylae. (All quotes from Herodotus come from the G. C. Macaulay translation at Project Gutenberg.)


Since I’m planning on reading Xenophon’s Hellenika this year, I’ll save what happens to the Thespian troops during the battle of Nemea (394 BC) for that discussion.

---

Just before I hit "Publish" I found a five-part article that Victor Davis Hanson wrote for Military History Quarterly titled "Delium: The Battle Only One Man Wanted". The five parts can be found here:

1. The Battle
2. The Aftermath
3. The Armor and Ranks
4. Innovation and the Battlefield
5. Coalition Warfare

They provide more detail and are laid out better than what I have--highly recommended.

The Peloponnesian War: Cythera, Sicily (Part Two), Megara, Brasidas (4:52-88)

Map of ancient Greece
Picture source

Five hundred chapters to go. Not that I’m counting. This post looks at Chapters 52 – 88 of Book Four, covering the summer of 424 BC. As you might have guessed from the subjects in the post heading it was a busy few months. All quotes come from the Thomas Hobbes translation.

Cythera
Athens attacked and won the island of Cythera, located at the mouth of the Gulf of Laconia (just south of Sparta). The island was a strategic victory on several fronts. While the capture of a key trading spot was important, the psychological damage to the Spartans was immeasurable. Thucydides points out the Spartan mindset had changed drastically:

And if ever they were fearful in matter of war, they were so now: because it was contrary to their own way to contend in a naval war, and against Athenians, who thought they lost whatsoever they not attempted. Withal, their so many misfortunes in so short a time, falling out so contrary to their own expectation, exceedingly affrighted them. And fearing lest some such calamity should again happen as they had received in the island, they durst the less to hazard battle; and thought that whatsoever they should go about would miscarry, because their minds, not used formerly to losses, could now warrant them nothing.

In a sense, this was exactly the goal of Pericles but it was obtained in an aggressive manner that he had not attempted. Pericles did not seek to defeat the Spartans but to dissuade them from continuing the war. With Athens’ more aggressive tactics after Pericles’ death they were in a position to do exactly that. However when they turned down the Spartan appeal for peace, Athens finds itself continuing the war in order to achieve victory.

Returning from their victory at Cythera, Athenians stopped at Thyrea (on the border between Argolis and Laconia on the map) and captured the city. The Athenians “burnt it, and destroyed whatsoever was in it.” From Book Two, Chapter 27, “The same summer, the Athenians put the Æginetæ, man, woman and child, out of Ægina; laying to their charge that they were the principal cause of the present war.” Sparta had allowed the Æginetæ to relocate in Thyrea. The Athenians who captured the city put to death “as many as they had taken” of these residents. The atrocities committed in the war continue to mount.

Sicily
At least in one place peace was flourishing. Truces were being struck in Sicily and a conference was to be held in Gela “for making of a peace.” Hermocrates, a Syracusian, gives a passionate speech, calling for Sicilian unity. He claimed the Athenians sought to subdue the island for their own gain. Instead, the cities ought to ask Athens to leave and not ask any foreigner again for assistance or arbitration on matters concerning Sicilians. Hermocrates’ speech was a powerful call of Sicily for the Sicilians and it convinced the cities to call an end to the war. A major selling point to some would allowances that left spoils in the hands of victors. The Athenian generals approved the peace and sailed away from Sicily.

There were several ironies in Hermocrates’ speech. Syracuse’s earlier aggression against other cities on the island had prompted the call to Athens for intercession. In his speech, Hermocrates mentions that “it is no dishonour to be overcome kinsmen of kinsmen, … any one by another of us, being neighbours and cohabiters of the same region”. This sounds like he is laying the groundwork for future aggression by Syracuse and the hope that no one calls on Athens for help.

The Athenian generals (Pythodorus, Sophocles, and Eurymedon) were banished or fined upon their return to Athens. The assembly could not conceive that a reinforced Athenian navy couldn’t be successful in conquering Sicily when the initial smaller foray had been accomplished so much. The generals were charged “as men that might have subdued the estates of Sicily, but had been bribed to return.” The initial guidance “to test the possibility of taking the states of Sicily into their own hands” now sounds more like a command to take it than just test the waters. If Spartan morale was lower than it should have been, the Athenian mindset was sky-high:

So great was their fortune at that time, that they thought nothing could cross them; but that they might have achieved both easy and hard enterprises, with great and slender forces alike. The cause whereof was the unreasonable prosperity of most of their designs, subministering strength unto their hope.

Megara
Weary of the war, in particular the annual raids by Athens and no assistance from anyone, certain Megaraen leaders (“patrons of the commons”) approached Athenian leaders to take the city. The democratic faction feared Athens less than they feared the oligarchic group that had been banished from Megara. The democratic leaders, though, did not work in the open but planned a conspiracy to deliver the city to the Athenians. Athenian troops were able to take the long walls built from Megara down to its port city Nisæa. As the Athenians army was about to storm Megara, one of the conspirators revealed the plot to the Megareans, foiling the conspiracy. The Athenians capture Nisæa from the Peloponnesian garrison and destroy the long walls between the cities. Before the Athenians could turn back to Megara, the Spartan Brasidas and his confederate forces show up to protect Megara. After a small skirmish without a clear winner, the Athenian and Spartan troops begin a stand-off outside the city. Brasidas appealed to the Megareans and, after an initial refusal, they open the city to him. The Athenian troops decline to fight and leave. Most of the Megareans that had been part of the conspiracy with Athens slipped away from the city when the oligarchic faction returns. The oligarchs establish control of the city and kill about one hundred people they believed cooperated with Athens.

The Athenian general Demosthenes departed Megara in order to assist cities in Bœotia wanting “to change the form of the Bœotian government, and to turn it into a democracy according to the government of Athens”. There were three cities targeted, all to be attacked on the same day. Success in these revolts might not completely turn Bœotia to Athenian control but it would put severe pressure on all of the area. These plots will be continued in the section covered by the next post.

Brasidas
Thucydides has mentioned the Spartan general Brasidas several times, each reference short but admiring. Chapters 78 to 88 focus on his mission to the northeast part of Greece to provoke cities to revolt from Athens and also provides the setting of his first speech in the history. His trip to the area proves to be a success because “by showing himself at that present just and moderate towards the cities, he caused the most of them to revolt”. (Moderation continues to be stressed when discussing Spartan characteristics.) These areas hope that other Spartans will be just like Brasidas. The Macedonian king Perdiccas enlists Brasidas to help settle some personal scores but Brasidas defuses the situation without a fight (enraging Perdiccas).

In Acanthus (on the Chalcidice mainland near the Xerxes canal), Brasidas attempts to encourage them to revolt from the Athenians. Thucydides, before presenting his speech, makes a backhanded compliment that Brasidas “was not uneloquent, though a Lacedæmonian”. It is a stirring speech. Bracidas hammers home Sparta’s apparent goal, repeating a variation of the following several times: “[T]the reason why the Lacedæmonians have sent me and this army abroad, is to make good what we gave out in the beginning for the cause of our war against the Athenians: which was, that we meant to make a war for the liberties of Greece.” Brasidas also reiterates this point that Sparta will allow cities to maintain whatever government they chose. The speech wins over the Acanthians who vote to revolt from Athens. A nearby city also revolts from Athens later that summer.

There are several dark passages in Brasidas’ speech, though. After listing all the reasons that the Acanthians should revolt, he says that if they refuse Sparta will waste “your territory, to compel you to it.” For the good of everyone else, don’t you know.

”Nor shall I think I do you therein any wrong; but have reason for it for two necessities: one of the Lacedæmonians, lest whilst they have your affections and not your society, they should receive hurt from your contributions of money to the Athenians; another of the Grecians, lest they should be hindered of their liberty by your example. For otherwise indeed we could not justly do it; nor ought we Lacedæmonians to set any at liberty against their wills, if it were not for some common good. We covet not dominion [over you]; but seeing we haste to make others lay down the same, we should do injury to the greater part, if bringing liberty to the other states in general we should tolerate you to cross us. Deliberate well of these things: strive to be the beginners of liberty in Greece; to get yourselves eternal glory; to preserve every man his private estate from damage, and to invest the whole city with a most honourable title.”

Holding a gun to someone’s head and saying they have a choice isn’t really providing a choice. There is another passage in his speech that isn’t troubling but I’ve noticed this theme in several speeches and wanted to note it. The idea involves the use of the “right of power”:

”For it is more dishonourable, at least to men in dignity, to amplify their estate by specious fraud, than by open violence. For the latter assaileth with a certain right of power given us by fortune; but the other, with the treachery of a wicked conscience.”

Funny…in asking for peace, Sparta claimed that Athens shouldn’t take advantage of their right of power recently given by fortune. It’s all a matter of perspective—when you have power it is OK to use. There is another irony in Brasidas’ speech that Thucydides sets up when Sparta includes some of their Helots with Brasidas’ army in order to reduce any opportunity for revolt. For those unfamiliar with Helots, here is the definition from the glossary in The Landmark Thucydides:

Although Helot-type unfree laborers are known elsewhere, in Thucydides these are the lowest class of the Spartan state who lived in oppressive, hereditary servitude, and who were for the most part engaged in agriculture. They lived throughout Laconia and also in adjacent Messenia, where the Helot system had been extended by Spartan conquest, and they apparently far outnumbered their masters, who feared as well as exploited them.

The opportunity to send 700 Helots out of Sparta with Brasidas reminds Thucydides of a previous event in Sparta:

For they did also this further, fearing the youth and multitude of their Helotes: for the Lacedæmonians had ever many ordinances concerning how to look to themselves against the Helotes. They caused proclamation to be made, that as many of them as claimed the estimation to have done the Lacedæmonians best service in their wars, should be made free; feeling them in this manner, and conceiving that, as they should every one out of pride deem himself worthy to be first made free, so they would soonest also rebel against them. And when they had thus preferred about two thousand, which also with crowns on their heads went in procession about the temples as to receive their liberty, they not long after made them away: and no man knew how they perished.

Almost all of the atrocities committed to this point have been in relation to the war, whether carried out directly by Athens or Sparta or allowed to happen as they watched (the latter scenario happening at least twice on Corcyra). With institutionalized Spartan atrocities as a background, Thucydides presents Brasidas’ speech in which he declares they were fighting “a war for the liberties of Greece.” I doubt anyone in ancient Greece batted an eye at this juxtaposition. The tension between morality and self-interest, explored in depth with the Melian dialogue later in the history, gets an additional dimension for the modern reader.

The Peloponnesian War: Pylus (Pylos) and Sphacteria (4:1-51)

The first fifty-one chapters of Book Four cover activity that occurred in 425BC. I’ll focus on the Athenians setting up fortifications at Pylus (as spelled in my version, “Pylos” in most modern texts) and their siege of the Spartans on the island of Sphacteria. All quotes come from the Thomas Hobbes translation.

Pylus can be found on this map on the western shore of the Peloponnese (about 50 miles west of Sparta).

Map of Sphacteria
Picture source

Pylus
Demosthenes had “lived privately” since his return to Athens. The forty ships that Athens promised to send to Sicily were about to sail when the city told Demosthenes he could “make use of the same galleys, if he thought good so to do, about Peloponnesus.” So he had control part of the way while Eurymedon and Sophocles had responsibility for the overall mission (Pythodorus, the original third general, had already arrived in Sicily). Demosthenes “willed” the fleet to put into Pylus, wishing to establish a foothold on the Peloponnesus, as well as requesting the soldiers to fortify Pylus (saying he had come there for no other reason) but he is denied on all accounts. First the fleet is driven to Pylus by a storm and eventually the soldiers get bored, deciding to build a fort “of their own accord.” Pylus proved to be a location “strong by nature, and needed no fortifying at all.”

After finishing a protective wall, the Athenians continue on their mission to Sicily but leaving Demosthenes with five ships to defend Pylus. Spartan response to Athens establishing a foothold in their area “set lightly by it”, although several key Spartans realize the hazard it represents. Spartan ships and troops arrive at Pylus to lay waste to the Athenian hastily constructed fort. Demosthenes, knowing he’s in trouble, sends two of his ships to catch the generals that had just left to request their return. The Spartans try to block the harbor, taking the nearby island of Sphacteria to help bar entry. Demosthenes anticipated where the Spartans would attack and fends off them off. The Spartan Brasidas proves to be valorous, fainting from his wounds. Thucydides finds the battle ironic, mentioning twice that the Athenians fought from land against the Spartans in ships. The battle goes toward the Athenians as they take several of the Spartan ships.

Peace?
Magistrates from Sparta visit the scene of the battle and realize they need to ask for a truce regarding Pylus. While the absolute number of trapped Spartan troops does not look large, they represent a sizeable percentage of the total Spartan army. The Athenians agree to allow the Spartans on Sphacteria to be supplied while a Spartan assembly visits Athens. The Spartan embassy to Athens proves to be a revealing encounter. The Spartan speech points out to Athens that they are in the ascendency only because of Spartan misjudgments in tactics and that the Athenians are capable of the same misjudgments. The Spartans offer an alliance that would help settle the conflicts in Greece. But then they make a startling admission…or at least it was to me (as anyone that slogged through my posts on the first Book and the causes of the war would testify). The Spartans appeal to the Athenians’ sense of being seen as providing peace: “For they [other allies on both sides in Greece] make war, not knowing whether side begun”. In this case, the Spartans echo my confusion. And they had every right to think that Athens would accept their proposal—after all, Athens had requested peace a few years earlier.

Thucydides’ disdain for Cleon surfaces again, describing him as “a popular man at that time, and of greatest sway with the multitude.” He persuades the Athenian assembly that they need to take Spartan hostages and demand the return of cities ceded in the 445 BC peace treaty in order to guarantee peace. The Spartans don’t reject these demands out of hand but request a private conference between representatives of each side. After all, if you’re contemplating selling out your allies, you don’t want to do it in public for all to see. The Athenian representatives reject the private conference and the Spartans envoys leave. The Athenians refuse to release the Spartan ships (also being held hostage) and terminat the truce at Pylus. Athens sends more ships to help “guard the island”.

Sphacteria
The siege of Sphacteria officially begins, taxing the Athenians because of the lack of natural supplies in the area. As time passes and nothing is settled, Athenians become angry that their troops are tied up on Pylus for so long. They probably regret the chance for peace that they turned down, especially if the leverage they had in trapping the Spartan troops on Sphacteria ends up slipping through their fingers. Cleon feels he is the one being judged since he helped turn the Athenians away from a peace treaty. We see an open split between him and the general Nicias at this point. Cleon glances

at Nicias the son of Niceratus, then general, upon malice and with language of reproach: saying it was easy, if the leaders were men, to go and take them there in the island; and that himself, if he had the command, would do it. But Nicias, seeing the Athenians to be in a kind of tumult against Cleon, for that when he thought it so easy a matter he did not presently put it in practice; and seeing also he had upbraided him, willed him to take what strength he would that they could give him, and undertake it. Cleon supposing at first that he gave him this leave but in words, was ready to accept it; but when he knew he would give him the authority in good earnest, then he shrunk back; and said, that not he, but Nicias was general; being now indeed afraid, and hoping that he durst not have given over the office to him. But then Nicias again bade him do it, and gave over his command [to him] for so much as concerned Pylus; and called the Athenians to witness it. They, (as is the fashion of the multitude), the more Cleon declined the voyage and went back from his word, pressed Nicias so much the more to resign his power to him, and cried out upon Cleon to go. Insomuch as not knowing how to disengage himself of his word, he undertook the voyage; and stood forth, saying, that he feared not the Lacedæmonians, and that he would not carry any man with him out of the city, but only the Lemnians and Imbrians that then were present, and those targettiers that were come to them from Ænus, and four hundred archers out of other places: and with these he said, added to the soldiers that were at Pylus already, he would within twenty days either fetch away the Lacedæmonians alive, or kill them upon the place. This vain speech moved amongst the Athenians some laughter, and was heard with great content of the wiser sort. For of two benefits, the one must needs fall out; either to be rid of Cleon, (which was their greatest hope), or if they were deceived in that, then to get those Lacedæmonians into their hands. (emphasis mine)

You can do it better Cleon? Fine, do it! Cleon chooses Demosthenes as “his companion” having heard of his exploits, especially what he had done in Pylus. Demosthenes was probably having some misgivings at this point, remembering his earlier losses at Aetolia since several circumstances were similar. But chance lent a hand. Soldiers cooking their dinner begin a major fire that strips much of the trees on the island of Sphacteria, allowing the Athenians to prepare their troops better since they can ascertain the enemy’s numbers and locations. The Spartans have been able to hold out so long on a barren isle thanks to supply help from free men and helots promised rewards and freedom.

The Athenians invade the island, taking and killing the guards and alighting to higher ground where possible. While the fighting lasts all day, a contingent of Athenian allies circle behind the Spartans in the fort and force a wry comparison from Thucydides:

And the Lacedæmonians, being now charged with their shot both before and behind, were in the same case (to compare small matters with great) that they were in at Thermopylæ. For then they were slain by the Persians, shut up on both sides in a narrow path: and these now being charged on both sides, could make good the place no longer; but fighting few against many, and being weak withal for want of food, were at last forced to give ground: and the Athenians by this time were also masters of all the entrances.

Talk about damning with faint praise. Cleon and Demosthenes know the Spartans are worth more alive than dead so they allow them to surrender. The sight and rumor of Spartans voluntarily surrendering would be a publicity coup for the Athenians. Cleon’s star shines brighter than ever since his promise, “as senseless as it was, took effect: for within twenty days he brought home the men as he had undertaken.” Opinions around the Greek world changes since everyone expected that Spartans “should never, neither by famine nor whatsoever other necessity, have been constrained to deliver up their arms, but have died with them in the hands, fighting as long as they had been able”. Their hard-fought reputation was now being called into question.

Other activity during the year
Sicily: Messana revolted from the Athenians. Syracusians could now use Messana as a base for their expanded fleet and harass Rhegium (just across the narrow strait). Messana took all their forces against Naxos but nearby mountain residents assisted in routing the Messanians. The Athenian troops attempt to take Messana but fail. They retire to Rhegium and “the Grecians of Sicily warred one upon another without the Athenians.”

Corinth: Athens demonstrates its increasing aggressiveness as Nicias takes troops to Corinth. The Athenians get the better of the Corinthians in a battle but do not follow up their victory, mistaking arriving men as hostile forces, retiring from the field when they were at their highest advantage. Athens does use the foothold gained in the area to take additional nearby cities.

Corcyra: at the site that provided the spark for the war, the Corcyraen oligarchs had been harassing the “commons” of the city. With Athenian help the banished oligarchs are captured and placed on a separate island for their protection under a truce. Some of the Corcyraen commons induce the oligarchs to attempt an escape, breaking the truce with Athens. The Athenians turn the oligarchs over to the Corcyraen people who murder most of them in torturous fashion. Many of the oligarchs commit suicide to avoid such treatment. “And thus ened this far-spread sedition, for so much as concerned this present war: for of other seditions there remained nothing worth the relation.”

Persia: Athenians intercept an ambassador from the king of Persia and read his letters which are a response to Spartan requests for help. The Persian king, expressing confusion at differing requests, had asked the Spartans “if therefore they had any thing to say for certain, they should send somebody to him with this Persian [Artaphernes, the Persian ambassador]'. Athenian envoys are sent to Ephesus with Artaphernes (the reason is not given—probably to let the king know the Athenians know about the Spartan requests?). When they reach Ephesus, though, they find out that the king Artaxerxes (son of Xerxes) had recently died so the Athenian envoys return home. Two quick notes: 1) Persian power and support could be a game-changer in the war, adding men and material that would greatly benefit those aided, and 2) Sparta, supposedly fighting to free the Greeks from Athenian control, turns to the Persians? The irony meter just red-lined. The Athenians clearly didn’t take the implications of Persian involvement in the war seriously at this point by simply leaving upon the news of Artaxerxes' death.

Happy New Year
So where do the Greek powers stand entering 424 BC? Athens’ fortunes are clearly ascending. They had Sparta requesting a peace treaty that would have been beneficial to both sides but, as proposed, did not completely solve current issues or address long-term peace. Spartan hostages were held in Athens while the Spartan fleet was nearly wiped out with the loss of their ships at Sphacteria. Corinth, one of the early instigators in trouble, was a shadow of its former self.

The key, to paraphrase Donald Kagan in his book The Peloponnesian War, will be what kind of victory or peace agreement Athens wants to achieve. They clearly smarted from the peace treaty they signed at the end of the first Peloponnesian War in 445 BC (the so-called thirty-years peace agreement), feeling they had signed under duress. Did they want to be in Sparta's place when that treaty was signed? (And did they consider the ramifications regarding how Sparta would view such a peace over time?) Or did they want to go for complete mastery of Greece? Whatever the mindset, everything going their way with their new aggressive policy (especially with Cleon and Demosthenes) would probably skew any consideration of peace.

The Peloponnesian War: Sicily (Part One), Demosthenes (3:86-116)

The last chapters of Book Three, from Chapters 86 to 116, reflect a change in strategy in the war for Sparta and Athens and Thucydides’ narrative changes to follow the activity. Also, as the war progresses, new characters emerge as significant players in the history. There is a lot going on in this short section so I’m going to focus on just two items. These books cover from the winter of 427/6 BC through the winter of the next year. All quotes come from the Thomas Hobbes translation.

Map of Sicily
Picture source

Sicily
The citizens of Leontini on Sicily sent a request to Athens to assist them in their dispute with Syracuse. The Leontines appealed to Athens stating an ancient alliance and to their common Ionic background. Athens responded with their assent, stating their common descent, “but intending both to hinder the transportation of corn from thence into Peloponnesus, and also to test the possibility of taking the states of Sicily into their own hands.” These are pretty extraordinary reasons if true. Cutting off grain importats to Sparta was quite a change in Athenian tactics put in place by Pericles, which focused on defensive tactics around Athens and harassment by the navy around the Peloponnese. Pericles also said Athens should not extend their empire, something the second hidden reason contradicted. But Pericles was gone and the situation on the ground was different, especially after the plague’s impact and the cost of the war accrues. In addition, when Corcyra requested help before the start of the war (Book I, Chapter 36), one of the reasons they gave to Athens was to help Corcyra because of their strategic location: “For it lieth so conveniently for sailing into Italy and Sicily, that it can both prohibit any fleet to come to Peloponnesus from thence, and convoy any coming from Peloponnesus thither: and is also for divers other uses most commodious.” Corcyra was nominally still an Athenian ally but conditions had dramatically changed with the civil strife there. Athens initially sent twenty ships to Sicily, a small number but one the Leontines gladly accepted.

The Athenians set up their base in Rhegium in Italy (the ‘toe’ of the boot), attempting to take Syracuse-friendly islands just north of Sicily. The death of one Athenian general leaves Laches in sole command of their fleet. With the help of allies, he is able to take Messana and controls the strait between Italy and Sicily. Athens and the Sicilian allies invade several cities and islands around Sicily, some successful, some not. Pythodorus arrives in Sicily for the changing of the fleet command from Laches. At the request of its Sicilian allies, Athens agrees to send forty more ships, “conceiving that the war there would the sooner be at an end, and desiring withal to train their men in naval exercise.”

Map of ancient Greece
Picture source

Demosthenes
I am leaving out much in this section, such as Thucydides noting the plague’s return in Athens, volcanic eruptions, numerous earthquakes, and destructive tsunamis (which Thucydides attributes to the earthquakes). Instead I wanted to focus on the first appearance of the Athenian general Demosthenes. I will mention that both Sparta and Athens are using more aggressive strategies, going further afield in their offensive attacks and accepting requests from cities to assist with protection. Much of the following action takes place in the central-west of Greece—locations that can be found close to the notation for the Ionian Sea on the above map.

The Acarnanians asked Demosthenes to erect a wall to secure their city from their enemies. Instead, Demosthenes is persuaded by residents in Naupactus to attack the Aetolians, which he agrees to do because it furthers Athens’ interests. Demosthenes’ plan reflects a bold, aggressive approach, hoping to enlist locals to drive through Phocis to Boeotia. Allies begin to desert him, though, which undermines his plans. Despite the desertions Demosthenes invades Aetolia and meets with victories in his opening battles. The Aetolians had time to regroup, attacking the Athenians and routing them and their allies. “There died very many of the confederates, and a hundred and twenty men of arms of the Athenians; that was their number, and all of them able me: these men of the very best died in this war.” The Athenians retired to their ships at Naupactus and returned to Athens. Well, all returned except for Demosthenes. “[H]e was afraid of the Athenian people for the loss that had happened.” The Athenians proved unforgiving of combat losses, willing to sanction or banish (or worse) losing generals.

Thanks to the Athenian loss, the Aetolians convinced the Spartans to assist them in protecting their region, especially around Naupactus. Demosthenes, staying in the area, arranged for defense of the city with the Arcarnanians (who he had earlier spurned). In a subsequent battle, Demosthenes devises a plan to offset his shortage of men as compared to the Peloponnesian army (which is supplemented with troops from nearby Ambracia). Knowing he will be outflanked, Demosthenes has men lie in ambush, attacking when the opposing troops begin to surround him. The Athenians and their allies rout the Peloponnesian army, causing the surviving Spartan general to request safe retreat for his troops. Instead of announcing the agreement in the normal manner Demosthenes privately agrees to the request, intending to disgrace the Spartans who will appear to slink away from their allies. As Spartan troops begin to slip away, their allies see what is going on and begin to flee as well. Athenian allies, not knowing of the agreement, fall upon the escaping troops and slaughter many of them.

When Demosthenes learns that additional troops from Ambracia are on the march toward to the site of the recent battle, he positions his men for another ambush and some trickery. I’ll let Thucydides tell this part:

And the next morning before day, he invaded the Ambraciotes whilst they were yet in their lodgings and knew not what was the matter, but thought rather that they had been some of their own company. For Demosthenes had placed the Messenians on purpose in the foremost ranks, and commanded them to speak unto them as they went in the Doric dialect, and to make the sentinels secure; especially, seeing their faces could not be discerned, for it was yet night. Wherefore they put the army of the Ambraciotes to flight at the first onset, and slew many upon the place: the rest fled as fast as they could towards the mountains. But the ways being beset, and the Amphilochians being well acquainted with their own territory and armed but lightly, against men in armour unacquainted and utterly ignorant which way to take; they lit into hollow ways and to the places forelaid with ambushes, and perished. And having been put to all manner of shifts for their lives, some fled towards the sea ; and when they saw the galleys of Athens sailing by the shore, (this accident concurring with their defeat), swam to them, and chose rather in their present fear, to be killed of those in the galleys, than by the barbarians and their most mortal enemies the Amphilochians. The Ambraciotes with this loss came home, a few of many, in safety to their city. … For this loss was greater than, in the like number of days, happened to any one city of Greece in all this war. I have not written the number of the slain; because it was said to be such as is incredible for the quantity of the city.

With these victories, Demosthenes returned to Athens. I hope we see more of this character. While Athens sends out small parties around the Hellenic world, Demosthenes appears to be the one general with a vision for winning (or losing) battles in a grand fashion.

The Peloponnesian War: War is an intermediate stage between peace and civil war (3:51-85)

Map of Greece
Corcyra (Corfu) is located toward the upper left (c1)
Plataea isn't depicted, but is southwest of Thebes (E4)
Picture source

The post’s title comes from Leo Strauss’ essay on Thucydides and it describes perfectly the short section in Book Three, Chapters 51 – 85, covering the fall of Plataea and the civil strife in Corcyra. All quotes come from the Thomas Hobbes translation.

Plataea
Thucydides has mentioned incidents from the Spartan/Theban siege of Plataea several times already (and the exploits are interesting but would take too long to relate) but we don’t get a fuller history of the conflict between Plataea and Thebes until after the city falls. The Plataeans plead their case to the Spartan judges while the Thebans’ response fills in many blanks on the conflict. After the presentations from both sides, the Spartans ask the Plataeans one question: did you help us in this war? (How could they? They had been besieged for four years at this point.) The chosen Plataeans, one by one, answer no. The Spartans have two hundred Plataeans put to death as well as twenty-five Athenians trapped in the city during the siege. The women of Plataea are sold into slavery. Sparta turns Plataea over to the Thebans who raze the city.

The Spartan judgment of Plataea stands in contrast with the Athenian discussion of Mytilene. The Athenians never judge Mytilene’s guilt, deliberating on what punishment is just and expedient. Sparta doesn’t debate Plataea’s punishment, instead “judging” their guilt, although it was more of a show trial. The Spartans make their ruling based on political expediency—they need the Thebans as allies. “So far were the Lacedæmonians alienated from the Platæans, especially, or rather altogether for the Thebans’ sake, whom they thought useful to them in the war now on foot.” Political expediency came up during the Athenian debate on the penalties for Mytilene but so did justice since Athens could point to an actual crime, that of Mytilene breaking their treaty. Sparta could only point to Plataea helping Athens.

Corcyra and civil war
The Athenian ally Corcyra became a central focus again when Corinth returned the captives captives they held back to the island. The returning Corcyreans planned to undermine their government in order to help Corinth and Sparta. The former captives try to end Corcyra’s alliance with Athens but that motion fails. They are able to win a resumption of friendship with the Peloponnesian alliance, though. The plotters put one of the democratic leaders on trial for attempting to enslave the island to Athens but that fails. That leader turns the tables and wins a judgment against the plotters. The plotters (mostly former oligarchs or in a league with them) turn from legal means to assassination, breaking into the council meeting to kill many members. Violence escalates between the democratic and oligarchic factions and peaceful solutions are ruled out. A Peloponnesian fleet, led by Alcidas, wins a skirmish against the Corcyrean navy but the Athenian ships already at the island keep Alcidas from complete victory. Brasidas urges Alcidas to attack again the next day to take advantage of Corcyra’s confusion but Alcidas chooses to flee .

I’ll let Thucydides take over at this point because his powerful description of the terror on Corcyra is used to describe the coming state of affairs across the Hellenic world. I realize these are long excerpts but they are well worth reading (going from mid-Chapter 81 through Chapter 84). Some of the oligarchs have returned to Corcyra having been promised a trial. Eurymedon, the Athenian general, does nothing to stop any of the following actions:

And coming to the temple of Juno, they persuaded fifty of those that had taken sanctuary, to refer themselves to a legal trial; all which they condemned to die. But the most of the sanctuary men, that is, all those that were not induced to stand to trial by law, when they saw what was done, killed one another there–right in the temple; some hanged themselves on trees, every one as he had means made himself away . And for seven days together that Eurymedon stayed there with his sixty galleys, the Corcyræans did nothing but kill such of their city as they took to be their enemies; laying to their charge a practice to have everted the popular government.

It’s not clear why Eurymedon allowed the slaughter to continue. Did he think it helped Athens? Was this a change in Athenian tactics? Here are a few reasons "the like in the like space had never been seen before”:

Amongst whom, some were slain upon private hatred, and some by their debtors, for the money which they had lent them. All forms of death were then seen; and (as in such cases it usually falls out) whatsoever had happened at any time, happened also then, and more. For the father slew his son; men were dragged out of the temples, and then slain hard by; and some immured in the temple of Bacchus, died within it. So cruel was this sedition; and seemed so the more, because it was of these the first.

This didn’t just happen on Corcyra but became widespread across the Hellenic world. Those favoring a democracy would turn to Athens, the oligarchy to Sparta.

82. For afterwards all Greece, as a man may say, was in commotion; and quarrels arose everywhere between the patrons of the commons, that sought to bring in the Athenians, and the few, that desired to bring in the Lacedæmonians. Now in time of peace, they could have had no pretence, nor would have been so forward to call them in; but being war, and confederates to be had for either party, both to hurt their enemies and strengthen themselves, such as desired alteration easily got them to come in. And many and heinous things happened in the cities through this sedition, which though they have been before, and shall be ever as long as human nature is the same, yet they are more calm, and of different kinds, according to the several conjunctures.

War, the “violent master”, changes everything as men descend into civil war. Language has no meaning. The rule of law becomes passé. A perverted sense of manliness trumps moderation. Debate has been replaced with scheming.

For in peace and prosperity, as well cities as private men are better minded, because they be not plunged into necessity of doing any thing against their will. But war, taking away the affluence of daily necessaries, is a most violent master, and conformeth most men’s passions to the present occasion. The cities therefore being now in sedition, and those that fell into it later having heard what had been done in the former, they far exceeded the same in newness of conceit, both for the art of assailing and for the strangeness of their revenges. The received value of names imposed for signification of things, was changed into arbitrary. For inconsiderate boldness, was counted true–hearted manliness: provident deliberation, a handsome fear: modesty, the cloak of cowardice: to be wise in every thing, to be lazy in every thing. A furious suddenness was reputed a point of valour. To re–advise for the better security, was held for a fair pretext of tergiversation. He that was fierce, was always trusty; and he that contraried such a one, was suspected. He that did insidiate, if it took, was a wise man; but he that could smell out a trap laid, a more dangerous man than he. But he that had been so provident as not to need to do the one or the other, was said to be a dissolver of society, and one that stood in fear of his adversary. In brief, he that could outstrip another in the doing of an evil act, or that could persuade another thereto that never meant it, was commended. To be kin to another was not to be so near as to be of his society: because these were ready to undertake any thing, and not to dispute it. For these societies were not made upon prescribed laws of profit, but for rapine, contrary to the laws established.

Trust cannot exist in these circumstances. Corcyra and other Greek cities to follow in these civil wars resemble licentious Athens during the plague. In other words, civil strife is a man-made plague.

And as for mutual trust amongst them, it was confirmed not so much by divine law, as by the communication of guilt. And what was well advised of their adversaries, they received with an eye to their actions, to see whether they were too strong for them or not, and not ingenuously. To be revenged was in more request than never to have received injury. And for oaths (when any were) of reconcilement, being administered in the present for necessity, were of force to such as had otherwise no power; but upon opportunity, he that first durst thought his revenge sweeter by the trust, than if he had taken the open way. For they did not only put to account the safeness of that course, but having circumvented their adversary by fraud, assumed to themselves withal a mastery in point of wit. And dishonest men for the most part are sooner called able, than simple men honest: and men are ashamed of this title, but take a pride in the other.

(For fun, compare that last section to the opening of Cleon’s speech during the Mytilene debate) “For these love to appear wiser than the laws, and in all public debatings to carry the victory, as the worthiest things wherein to show their wisdom; from whence most commonly proceedeth the ruin of the states they live in. Whereas the other sort, mistrusting their own wits, are content to be esteemed not so wise as the laws, and not able to carp at what is well spoken by another: and so making themselves equal judges rather than contenders for mastery, govern a state for the most part well. We therefore should do the like; and not be carried away with combats of eloquence and wit, to give such counsel to your multitude as in our own judgments we think not good.”

Despite claims to the contrary, each faction destroys everything in their path "out of avarice and ambition", including those trying to remain neutral.

The cause of all this is desire of rule, out of avarice and ambition; and the zeal of contention from those two proceeding. For such as were of authority in the cities, both of the one and the other faction, preferring under decent titles, one the political equality of the multitude, the other the moderate aristocracy; though in words they seemed to be servants of the public, they made it in effect but the prize of their contention: and striving by whatsoever means to overcome, both ventured on most horrible outrages, and prosecuted their revenges still farther, without any regard of justice or the public good, but limiting them, each faction, by their own appetite: and stood ready, whether by unjust sentence, or with their own hands, when they should get power, to satisfy their present spite. So that neither side made account to have any thing the sooner done for religion [of an oath], but he was most commended, that could pass a business against the hair with a fair oration. The neutrals of the city were destroyed by both factions; partly because they would not side with them, and partly for envy that they should so escape. In seditions and confusion, they that distrust their wits, suddenly use their hands, and defeat the stratagems of the more subtle sort.

Thucydides makes it clear that Corcyra isn’t an isolated case but such desolation will spread throughout Greece during the war.

83. Thus was wickedness on foot in every kind throughout all Greece by the occasion of their sedition. Sincerity (whereof there is much in a generous nature) was laughed down: and it was far the best course, to stand diffidently against each other, with their thoughts in battle array, which no speech was so powerful, nor oath terrible enough to disband. And being all of them, the more they considered, the more desperate of assurance, they rather contrived how to avoid a mischief than were able to rely on any man’s faith. And for the most part, such as had the least wit had the best success: for both their own defect, and the subtlety of their adversaries, putting them into a great fear to be overcome in words, or at least in pre–insidiation, by their enemies’ great craft, they therefore went roundly to work with them with deeds. Whereas the other, not caring though they were perceived, and thinking they needed not to take by force what they might do by plot, were thereby unprovided, and so the more easily slain.

Thucydides again stresses the need for modesty (moderation)—a Spartan attribute.

84. In Corcyra then were these evils for the most part committed first; and so were all other, which either such men as have been governed with pride rather than modesty by those on whom they take revenge, were like to commit in taking it; or which such men as stand upon their delivery from long poverty, out of covetousness, chiefly to have their neighbours’ goods, would contrary to justice give their voices to: or which men, not for covetousness, but assailing each other on equal terms, carried away with the unruliness of their anger would cruelly and inexorably execute.

Human nature, unconstrained by the law, gives in to baser conduct.

And the common course of life being at that time confounded in the city, the nature of man, which is wont even against law to do evil, gotten now above the law, showed itself with delight to be too weak for passion, too strong for justice, and enemy to all superiority. Else they would never have preferred revenge before innocence, nor lucre (whensoever the envy of it was without power to do them hurt) before justice. And for the laws common to all men in such cases, (which, as long as they be in force, give hope to all that suffer injury), men desire not to leave them standing against the need a man in danger may have of them, but by their revenges on others to be beforehand in subverting them.

(Again for fun, here is Diodotus' comment during the Athenian debate over Mytilene)"They have it by nature, both men and cities, to commit offences; nor is there any law that can prevent it."

Concepts that bind men together, whether in families or through laws, are ignored when such factional fighting begins. Man’s true nature outside of civilization has been revealed.