A comment on the authors approach to historical writing as demonstrated by Thucydides (Thucydides, 'History of the Peloponnesian War', Book 6, chapter 15 (pp.418-19) and an analysis of the historical problems raised in this passage.

University Degree Linguistics, Classics and related subjects

Michael G W Thomas The Open University

A comment on the authors approach to historical writing as demonstrated by Thucydides (Thucydides, ‘History of the Peloponnesian War’, Book 6, chapter 15 (pp.418-19) and an analysis of the historical problems raised in this passage.

Thucydides’ history of the Peloponnesian War describes many great events and the people that shaped them. In the selected passage (Thucydides, Warner R (Translator), ‘History of the Peloponnesian War’, Book 6, chapter 15, pp.418-19) Thucydides spends the bulk of chapter outlining the character of Alcibiades, specifically his excesses and extravagances as well as his role in the fate of Athens and the course of the war. This chapter has the honour of providing the introduction to the character of Alcibiades and sets his place in the history of the war and the fate of his home city, Athens.

This chapter is written purely as a descriptive text, this is done presumably to add authority to this section and to appear impartial. Neither Alcibiades nor Nicias are quoted or paraphrased and no evidence is cited beyond general knowledge such as the ‘fall’ of Athens. Thucydides is at pains to explain that Alcibiades motivations are based on both his conflict with Nicias, personal wealth, ambition and honour. The final line of the chapter sets the scene for a speech by Alcibiades to explain why he is best suited for the leadership of the Sicilian expedition.

Thucydides makes several judgements about Alcibiades, which though not supported by evidence do damage his character and perhaps play on the hubris nature of his person. Like one of the great warriors of the ‘Golden Age’, Alcibiades conduct in war is described as excellent but his general character is flawed. This positive nature of his character may have something to do with Thucydides being a general in the same conflict, perhaps even a form of mutual respect for their responsibilities of state and eventual fall from grace (both men were exiled during military service). The remainder of Alcibiades character seems extravagant, with reference to horse breeding and being unable to fund all that he would want though no examples are used. Thucydides attempts to make us feel comfortable with his writing style that feels highly informative though lacks fact. Alcibiades is shown to have many problems to his character, especially with his part in the downfall of Athens though little information is given in this passage as to Alcibiades role in this momentous event.

He creates grandiose speeches for his main characters such as the speech by Alcibiades (ibid., Book 6, chapter 16) in a similar vein to the famous Funeral Oration of Pericles (ibid., Book 2, Chapter 3). As mentioned in the OCD (Hornblower, S, 1996, ‘The Oxford Classical Dictionary’, Page 1517-18) Thucydides aimed at exactness in his work (Thucydides, Warner R (Translator), ‘History of the Peloponnesian War’, Introduction, pp.11), to the extent that he would not write down the first story he heard (unlike Herodotus) but wanted confirmation and details to gain a detailed and impartial account. For his great speeches though he had to rely upon historical imagination and write what he would think they would say. Thucydides is also supposed to have made notes (Hornblower, S, 1996, ‘The Oxford Classical Dictionary’, Page 1518) of speeches for use in his history. It would therefore seem fair to assume that part, if not more of his speeches would contain a degree of truth in them.

The major historical issue raised by this passage is that of Alcibiades’ lifestyle and importance in the story of the war. Thucydides suggests that he lived a lifestyle above that which he could afford, was ambitious for power, honour and wealth and was also considered by others as a possible tyrant. Though Thucydides does point out that his conduct of war was good everything else he says leans to the negative though he does imply that it was ‘others’ views that caused the problems at home rather Alcibiades, perhaps a little sympathy for him? Both of these characters were ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

Thucydides was a major supporter of Pericles and of Periclean Athens (Hornblower, S, 1996, ‘The Oxford Classical Dictionary’, Page 1519) and this might have tainted his views on Pericles and his supporters, Alcibiades being one of Pericles favourites (ibid., p1519). Further information on Thucydides relationship and attitudes towards Pericles, Socrates and Alcibiades would considerably help in understanding some of the comments he makes. Given that he was so enthused by Pericles it is strange that he is able to be so negative about Alcibiades, this may give us a hint as to Thucydides attempt to be as impartial and narrative as possible.

To research this problem in more depth I would want to study several more contemporary texts with respect to Alcibiades, Pericles and Thucydides. After examination of another translation of Thucydides’ history there were a few differences that might make work on either the original text or a different translation useful. The edition by Crawley (Crawley R, 1910, ‘The History of the Peloponnesian War’, Book VI, chapter XVIII, page 412) uses much harsher language in its description of Alcibiades. For example:

…publicly his conduct of the war was as good as could be desired, individually his habits gave offence to everyone, and caused them to commit affairs to other hands, and thus before long to ruin the city (Athens).

Here Alcibiades conduct in the war is nowhere near as glowing as the equivalent passage translated by Warner (Thucydides, Warner R (Translator), ‘History of the Peloponnesian War’, Book 6, chapter 15, pp.419), ‘in a public capacity his conduct of the war was excellent…’ Further research upon the original would therefore seem prudent.

There has been much modern research on the major personalities of the war as well as Thucydides history itself. The character of Alcibiades himself is diverse and further reading of modern literature on this particular person would be useful. Finally there were obviously links between many of the great characters of this period and some reading on the actual people and their relationships between each other would help in my understanding of what Thucydides wrote about Alcibiades and also, why he did it.

To research this particular area in more depth it would be important to analyse Plato’s Symposium as Alcibiades is used prominently in this text. Although this book represents him as an arrogant young man it must carry some information with regards to his ‘real’ character. Plutarch’s Lives would give us more information on the character of him and Pericles as well as the attitudes of these writers from different periods. Xenophon mentions Alcibiades in his Hellenica and as this follows on from Thucydides’ incomplete history it could add more information to his character, especially his involvement in the fall of Athens. The work of Moses I, Cartwright and

Cawkwell would all provide excellent modern scholarship on the work of Thucydides and in particular, his style, attitudes and possible peculiarities. For the study of Alcibiades the work by Benson E.F should shed further light. A detailed bibliography is provided showing possible areas of further research with both classical and modern texts.

A secondary issue raised in this passage that is also of note is the repeated mention of the fall of Athens. This is a very important issue as Thucydides was considered (Radice B, 1973, ‘Who’s who in the Ancient World’, Page 239), ‘the most modern of the Greeks’ and used a style of historical writing that makes frequent reference to the cause and consequences of events.

There is considerable mention of the fact that Thucydides almost certainly modified his history (Hornblower, S, 1996, ‘The Oxford Classical Dictionary’, Page 1,517) and that most of his comments on the fall of Athens were added after the fall of Athens in 404BC. This will certainly alter the perspective of his writing about Alcibiades, as with hindsight he could update his account of events written many years earlier. Thucydides was exiled for a good part of the time he spent writing his history though he did return to an Athens that had recently witnessed the triumphant return of Alcibiades in 407BC. As well as this he would have witnessed the defeat and humiliation of Athens in 404BC. According to the OCD (ibid., Page 1,517) this was the time when he performed much of his changes to the text. In the last decade of the fifth century what were the attitudes of Athenians to the memories of statesmen like Pericles and Alcibiades? These people were to be the first people to read Thucydides’ history. Did Thucydides have to modify his history in 404BC (approximately) to adapt to modern attitudes of the war and its main historical figures, notably Pericles, Nicias and Alcibiades? During this time the infamous Thirty Tyrants were installed and though short lived (Thorley J, 1996, ‘The Athenian Democracy’, Page 76), they were responsible for the death of Alcibiades amongst many others and were considered as a (ibid., page 76) ‘…corrupt and vicious regime. Being such an ardent supporter of Pericles would Thucydides perhaps have sympathised with those such as Alcibiades during his final years and his eventual murder?

In conclusion I would continue the study of these two issues by analysing further contemporary texts such as Xenophon, Plutarch and Plato whilst studying Thucydides style and approach to historical writing. Additional reading on Thucydides himself and his relationship towards the key figures in his history as well as his attitudes would be of great importance.

Bibliography

Thucydides, Warner R (Translator), ‘History of the Peloponnesian War’, Book 6, chapter 15 (pp.418-19)

Crawley R, 1910, ‘The History of the Peloponnesian War’, Book VI, chapter XVIII, page 412

Hornblower, S, 1996, ‘The Oxford Classical Dictionary’, Page 1,517-18

Radice B, 1973, ‘Who’s who in the Ancient World’, Page 53 and 239

Thorley J, 1996, ‘The Athenian Democracy’, Page 76

Study of Thucydides

Thucydides, Warner R (Translator), ‘History of the Peloponnesian War’

Crawley R, 1910, ‘The History of the Peloponnesian War’

A good translation of Thucydides would be essential and the Warner edition is considered by most to be a good, standard text. Crawley’s work would also be useful to cross-study.

Moses I, 1977, ‘Portable Greek Historians: The Essence of Herodotus, Thucydides, Xenophon, Polybius’, Penguin Books

For more specific information on the study of Thucydides and his particular style of narrative there is Moses’ work. A comparison of these historians, specifically Thucydides and Xenophon would be highly useful. Especially with regards to styles of ‘speeches’, cause and consequence and bias.

Cartwright, 1997, ‘Historical Commentary on Thucydides’, Univ. Michigan

Cartwright’s work is highly considered as a commentary on Thucydides and this must be a good starting point for further research in this area, especially for general reading of the period and for comparison between different translations.

Cawkwell G, 1997, ‘Thucydides and the Peloponnesian War’, Routledge, Taylor & Francis Books Ltd

A relatively new but controversial work. Cawkwell challenges the representation made by Thucydides over Alcibiades, Demosthenes, the relationships with Pericles and Thucydides views on the Athenian Empire. This would appear to conflict with much of the work by Cartwright and Moses and should prove interesting.

The character of Alcibiades

Benson E.F, The Life of Alcibiades

The work on Alcibiades by Benson would be of interest for further information on the character of Alcibiades and for direction in further study of this man.

Griffith T, 2000, Plato’s Symposium

Describes a symposium between Socrates, Alcibiades and Aristophanes. May contain valuable material on the character of Alcibiades though its historical value is dubious.

Ian Scott-Kilvert (Translator), 1901, Plutarch’s ‘The Rise and Fall of Athens: Nine Greek Lives’

Good description of famous Greek characters, especially Pericles and Alcibiades and a source frequently used for understanding the great men of the time.

Fall of Athens

Thucydides, Warner R (Translator), ‘History of the Peloponnesian War’

There is frequent mention of the fall of Athens though the details are sketchy. This is a good place to put the event into its historical context though.

Xenophon, Warner R (Translator), ‘A History of the My Times, Book 1

Details the extent of the war from where Thucydides left off, especially the calamity at Athens during the siege and eventual surrender.

Thorley J, 1996, ‘The Athenian Democracy’, Page 76

A general text that covers the social and political changes after the war. Contains information on governmental structure and the Thirty Tyrants.