Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essays about pericles funeral oration
Essays about pericles funeral oration
Essays about pericles funeral oration
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essays about pericles funeral oration
QEP Writing Assignment When reading the two excerpts from Thucydides it is clear that his book, The History of the Peloponnesian War, was written to memorialize Athenian history. Although it is considered to be the first textbook it was still written by an Athenian so analysis of the excerpts are still required. But while analyzing the two excerpts will provide information about the reliability of the document, it will also provide insight to answer the question “What is the author trying to say about his native city of Athens?” Beginning with Pericles’ Funeral orientation the level one analysis is as follows. It was written by Thucydides in 431 BC. The excerpt is taken from book two of The History of the Peloponnesian War. In this excerpt Thucydides has made a record of the speech that Pericles gave near the end of the war in the first year. To summarize the excerpt Pericles is chosen by the city to deliver a eulogy for the …show more content…
war’s casualties from the first year. He is considered to exceed the others in wisdom and dignity. In his speech he talks about the strength of Athens and its greatness while skipping over the weaknesses that it has also. He emphasized the unique government that Athens has forged which other cities later copy. Some characteristics that are used to explain Athens superiority are trust, courage, duty, and involvement. He also talks many times about how Athenians are people who follow laws and that makes them great. Pericles also remarks that we all die at some point but what matters more is what we do while we are alive. He tells of how the ancestors of the Athenians achieved immortality through their will to flee only from dishonor and to confront danger. Through this summary it can be seen that Pericles holds Athens above the other cities. So by telling us the story of Pericles, Thucydides is trying to show how the passionate the people of Athens were and what their philosophy for life was. But even though we get an answer from this excerpt level two analysis shows that it is a little biased. Level two analysis shows that the intended audience of Pericles speech is the Athenians at the funeral of the fallen warriors.
But the audience of Thucydides is future readers. The purpose of writing this chapter was to show the greatness of Athens as viewed by Pericles. Although the speech shown in this excerpt shows a little bias, the important thing to note is that Thucydides is only an observer and his views are not seen so the document itself is reliable even if the excerpt is biased toward the greatness of Athens. The second source is the excerpt of the Melian Dialogue. It was also written by Thucydides and is also from his book The History of the Peloponnesian War written in 431 BC. It is a description of the way that Athens acted hostile towards the island of Melos. It describes the negotiations that took place between Athens and Melos. This document shows a different side of Athens. It can be seen as more hostile and unfriendly. The commanders sent to negotiate were told to get the island under control by any means
necessary. Overall the two excerpts seem to be reliable even though Thucydides who fought in the war wrote them, they still show both sides of Athens. Thucydides is trying to show the reader that although Athens is a great city and accomplished wonders they still became corrupted in a way by trying to conquer and govern other islands by any means instead of peacefully backing away when Melos refuses. So in the end he shows that his city is not perfect despite all that it accomplished.
The French Revolution, the American Civil War, the constant civil conflicts in certain parts of Africa in recent history and even today; these are all historical clashes of countrymen. They all also contain stories of immense atrocities. The violence, bloodshed, and ruthlessness that were seen throughout these events were appalling. They were made perhaps even more so by the fact that theses horrors were inflicted upon one another by countrymen, brothers and sisters, fathers and mothers. The civil war or stasis at Corcyra during the Peloponnesian War was no different. This paper will detail the events surrounding the conflict and attempt to give scope to it as a mirror into the rest of the conflict.
Pericles did not wish to simply reiterate what Athens had achieved, but rather he wanted to address how and why Athens achieved. He believed that Athenian politics, culture, and character were more relevant to the deceased soldiers than their ancestor’s military successes. Accordingly, he praised these elements of Athenian society and in the process justified the soldiers’ sacrifice. He spoke “but what was the road by which we reached our position, what the form of government under which our greatness grew, what the national habits out of which it sprang; these are the questions which I may try to solve before I proceed to my eulogy upon these men; since I think this to be a subject upon which on the present occasion a speaker may properly dwell, and to which the whole assemblage, whether citizens or foreigners, may listen with advantage.” (2.36.4).
Pericles ascended to power at the empire’s height and was, according to Thucydides, the city’s most capable politician, a man who understood fully the nature of his city and its political institutions and used his understanding to further its interests in tandem with his own. After Pericles, however, Thucydides notes a drastic decline in the quality of Athenian leaders, culminating in Alcibiades, the last major general to be described in The Peloponnesian War. While he is explicit in this conclusion, he is much more reticent regarding its cause. What changed in Athens to produce the decline in the quality of its leadership? The development of an empire is a change strongly emphasized in the Archeology as a radical departure from the Hellenic tradition, and consequently a major source of conflict among the Greeks.
Pericles’s funeral oration was given to honor the soldiers lost in war by commemorating the military accomplishments of the Athens government and to distinguish the roles of men and women in Athens society. Pericles’s speech was given in 430 B.C.E at the end of the first year of war. He then died a year late in 429 B.C.E. Pericles’ Funeral Oration is included in Thucydides’ writing titled History of the Peloponnesian War.
Rodney, Sydney. "Pericles." Ancient Greece. University Inc., 11 May 2003. Web. 7 Dec. 2013. .
The Peloponnesian War was fought from 431-409 BC. It was a civil war between the Greek city-states and was lead by Sparta and it’s allies against the dominating Athenian government. The Athenian leader, Pericles, was a learned scholar and an ingenious military general. His speeches were known for their ability to motivate and give courage to a crowd whether it was to his soldiers in the final moments right before a battle or to a gathering in the streets of Athens. After the first few battles of the Peloponnesian War, Pericles was asked to give the funeral oration for those that were slain in defense of Athens. He did not offer his condolences to the families of those that died, but he offered them comfort. He did this because the men that died in those battles did not do so in vain, for dying in defense of one’s city-state had nothing to do with vanity in the eyes of the ...
Thucydides’ version of Pericles’ “Funeral Oration” can be read as more of an ironic rendering of Pericles’ original speech since The History of the Peloponnesian War is not just considered to be a historical account but also a “highly imaginative piece of work” in which Thucydides made characters involved in the war say what he believed they actually meant instead of what they might have originally said (Thucydides Introduction pg. x). In the “Funeral Oration”, Pericles praises certain
The book written by Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War, contains two controversial debates between distinguished speakers of Athens. The two corresponding sides produce convincing arguments which can be taken as if produced as an honest opinion or out of self-interest. The two debates must be analyzed separately in order to conclude which one and which side was speaking out of honest opinion or self-interest, as well as which speakers are similar to each other in their approach to the situation.
Thucydides, Dent, J. M., & Dutton, E. P. (1910). The Peloponnesian War. London & New
The causes of the Peloponnesian War proved to be too great between the tension-filled stubborn Greek city-states of Athens and Sparta. As Thucydides says in Karl Walling’s article, “Never had so many human beings been exiled, or so much human blood been shed” (4). The three phases of the war, which again, are the Archidamian war, the Sicilian Expedition and the Decelean war, show the events that followed the causes of the war, while also showing the forthcoming detrimental effects that eventually consumed both Athens and eventually Sparta effectively reshaping Greece.
Pericles Funeral Oration is a speech that was given by Pericles whom was the Athenian 's Strategos (military commander) and written down by the famous historian, Thucydides that was an Athenian that attended the speech. The speech is Pericles effort to rally the Athenian people and lift their spirits and moral at a funeral after losing soldiers or member of war in the first battle of the Peloponnesian war, so that they would continue the good fight and not give up. Pericles attempts this by telling the Athenian people that their way of life, their form of democracy, what their ancestors fought for, their great military and policies, their constitution are all at stake and they must standup in order to preserve the beautiful culture
Kagan, Donald. Pericles of Athens and the birth of democracy. New York: Free Press ;, 1991.
In this paper, I will first extract Thucydides views from the Melian Dialogue and then analyze whether or not these views are well founded. Thucydides believed that the Athenians had the stronger argument. Proof of this lies in the way Thucydides picked the arguments for each side. For the moment, we will disregard the actual content of the arguments, and look at argumentation forms and the flow of the debate. The Melians argued using consequences of an Athenian take over.
It is widely known that the Athenians highly valued their warrior class, and they saw the warriors as a ring of the higher circle of the society. The Athenians were very proud of Athena and its traditions, as well. Athenian’s thought that Athena was the best, none could be better. The funeral oration was aimed to respect the fallen as well as to keep up the national pride and its passion to protect their nation. The speech was a eulogy which focused on the eminence of Athens and its predecessors. Usually a son was chosen to give the eulogy. The law required the speech to have several essential components. The speech had to concerning the lives of the deceased. At his eulogy’s end, Pericles spoke in regard to the soldiers. The speech talked about the life that the departed lived and the achievements which they gained. Pericles wanted the citizens to recall the soldiers but to forget about the tragedy that had occurred. He wanted the departed’s lives to be remembered, but not their demise. The speech helped the Athenians appreciate what their ancestors had died for and how they shou...
...a cut above the method of the poets and the prose-writers. Thucydides takes pride in the fact that he is not promoting myth, that he has a historian's concern with truth. Yet Thucydides as historian falls short of latter-day historians, for he does not record speeches as they were spoken but instead reconstructs them according to what he thinks people might have said. Thucydides is more accurate when it comes to the action of the war than the speeches. One notes, however, that even with regard to the action of the war he is handicapped by the limitations of his sources. He cannot, like modern-day historians, turn to documents, films, photographs, newspaper accounts, etc..., but must rely exclusively on oral testimony. Even so, he acts much more like a historian when it comes to the action of the war than when it comes to the speeches associated with the war.