Thucydides\' Ambiguous History: Did \'Might

Thucydides' ambiguous history:

Did 'might make right' during the Peloponnesian War?

"...we both know that decisions about justice are made in human discussions only when both sides are under equal compulsion; but when one side is stronger, it gets as much as it can, and the weak must accept that." -- Athenians at Melos (Book 5, Paragraph 89; p.103 in Woodruff)

In the ancient Greek author Thucydides' chronicle of the Peloponnesian War between Athens and Sparta, Athens is often presented as the more morally superior of the two nations in terms of its structure of government. This is not simply based upon the author's partisanship or jingoism (although the author is an Athenian). Rather it is based upon Thucydides' conviction that Athens' democratic values were fundamentally superior to oligarchic Sparta. The purity of the Athenian model is perhaps best and most famously articulated in Pericles' funeral oration.

Yet Pericles' funeral oration highlights the paradoxes of ancient Athens even in its first sentences: Pericles begins by praising the freedom the ancestors of his contemporary Athenians won for the nation. "We are more an example to others…It is called a democracy, because it is not managed for the few of the people, but the majority" (Woodruff 40). But Pericles also notes the fact that Athens presides over a great empire, presumably limiting the freedom of the residents of other Greek city-states within its sphere of influence. The most notable act of Athenian hubris and disregard for the rights of others was manifest in its treatment of Melos, the tiny Peloponnesian island that wished to remain neutral during the conflict. Athens said that it could not permit Melos to remain independent. Athens acknowledged that its demand that Melos side with Athens or face destruction was not democratic or fair. But Athens could not allow Melos to be an example to other Greek nations that Athens was weak and would allow other city-states to act against its interests -- more rebellion was likely to ensue. The "freedom and generosity" of the Athenian spirit, its openness to strangers, and tolerance is not present in the Athenian interactions with Melos (Woodruff 41). The one protest one could make in favor of Pericles' interpretation of Athenian values is that Athens did not engage in deception with Melos -- it was very open that what it was doing was morally wrong, but tactically advantageous. It made no "long speech no one would believe, of fine moral arguments" (Woodruff 103). However, Pericles' claim that Athens did not need support to uphold its borders falls completely flat in the face of Athenian desperation to hold onto its empire.

Thucydides, writing with the benefit of hindsight and the knowledge of the outcome of the war shows the Athenians in a far more ambiguous light than Pericles the politician, who was speaking to memorialize the dead. Thucydides shows the cowardice of the Athenians during the plague, as Athenians even turned against one another, in fear -- another example of might making right. Thucydides somewhat disenchanted view of Athens is partially due to his status as an exile -- he was deprived of his command due to no real fault of his own (he was unable to reach a critical strategic location in time to prevent it falling to the Spartans). Thus Thucydides was able to travel around the region and see the war from both sides: "I was able to observe things more closely and without distraction" (Woodruff 102).