Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
History of the peloponnesian war sparknotes
Strengths and weaknesses of peloponnesian war strategies
History of the peloponnesian war sparknotes
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: History of the peloponnesian war sparknotes
In ancient Greek history, we are able to find and learn about many important wars that took place. Arguably, one of the most devastating and important wars in Greek history was the Peloponnesian War. The war lasted for a brutal 27 years, which resulted in a tremendous loss of life and economic turmoil for Sparta, Athens and their allies. The reason that this war was so important was the effect that it had on Athens and its political system. As a result from the Persian Wars, Greece felt the need to form an alliance to defend themselves against future attacks. In 478 BCE, the Greek city-states all united to form the Delian League and Athens became the leader of the league. Sparta, however, decided not to join, which led to extreme tension between Athens and Sparta. Due to Athens’ arrogance, such as collecting all the wealth and misusing funds on extravagant buildings, members of the league became unhappy which led to the collapse of the league and the start of the war. In the Melian Dialogue by Thucydides, one of our primary sources, it describes the scenario between the polis Melos and Athens when Melos wanted to withdraw from the league. Thucydides’ record claims, “Athenians: the fact that you are islanders and weaker than others rendering it all the more important that you should not succeed in baffling the masters of the sea. Melians: what is this but to make greater the enemies that you have already, and to force others to become so who would otherwise have never thought of it?” In this scenario, the Athenians are displaying their arrogance and power by referring to themselves as “the masters of the sea”, which is accurate because they did have the strongest navy. But like the Melians said, the Athenians are gaining more ene... ... middle of paper ... ...ity under the law” and it was essentially Athenian democracy. During the start of the war, the Athenians were led by Perikles, who died at the hand of a great plague in 429 BCE. His death brought a huge degree of discouragement within Athens and they began to use dangerous strategies instead of Perikles’ careful leadership. It’s often thought that democracies seek peace, but that was definitely not the case in Athens. The outcome of the war ends up being a complete disaster for Athens. Even though it was a disaster, the damage was less than normal for a losing Greek city-state. Following defeat, Athens’ democracy was temporarily dissolved. The cultural aspect of Athens was able to remain intact and by the time Aristotle was born, Athens was able to regain its political status. Works Cited Thucydides, Book 5, chapters 84-116 Plutarch, The Life of Solon, 29-31
There is no coincidence that the rise of Athenian Democracy goes chronologically hand in hand with the rise of the Athenian Navy. Following the defeat of the Persians by the Greeks, Athens’ naval successes allow it to surpass the previous naval power of Corinth; create the Delian league to fund and support this navy; and eventually ruffle enough feathers with their fellow Hellenic neighbours that they inspire the Peloponnesian war. Overall their naval reputation and intimidation comes from the skill of the men who maneuver and command the ships, and the tool they use to wield their power, the Athenian trireme. By looking at the design of the trireme, and the work and numbers put both into the ship and the men that drive it, hopefully both the wealth and skill of the Athenian navy can be appropriately highlighted. In the end, it is this immense power and resources that allow the Athenians to overstep their limits and caused such demoralizing defeats such as the expedition at Syracuse and the eventual loss of the Peloponnesian war, after which they prove unable to grow to the same undefeated sea power they were.
Investigating Athens' Treatment of Her Allies During the period of 478-431, Athens’ treatment of her allies changed dramatically as she rose to become the leader of an empire. The establishment of the Delian League marked the beginning of a significant series of events, which lead to Athens’ rise to extreme power. From the evidence of Thucydides and the inscriptions, it is possible to track the progress of these events and the rapidly changing treatment that Athens enforced upon her allies. The Delian League was an establishment formed in 478 BC. A large number of Greek cities formed an alliance under this league and together aimed to provide a strong defence against Persia, under the leadership of Athens.
"It might be suggested the ability of the allies to pay tribute is the strength of Athens" (The Old Oligarch, I, 15). Indeed. It is this characteristic in particular of the Delian League that leads it to be rightfully called the Athenian Empire. If each state had maintained its own fleet, and sent it to join the League in its expeditions, they would have held on to a significant measure of independence. Instead, a critically large enough portion of the league members abdicated control over their own military (by their own choice or by force) and simply paid cash to Athens, giving that city the ability to maintain an empire through the use of military might.
... one another until they were no more. From the Persian War to the Peloponnesian the two states had changed a lot of the years. Starting from their greatest alliance yet first moment of subtle rivalry, the Persian War. Although they were indistinctly competing against one another, without each other they could not have dominated. Then there were the two blows to the peace treaty. The first blow being the Athenian assistance in the battle between Corinth and Corycra. The second blow being the idea to burn Corinth’s town down. Although these were remarkable mistakes the Athenians saw nothing wrong with them. Lastly, was the war. In 431 B.C. the Peloponnesian War broke out between the two allies, after all they had been through, their alliance was over. War was bound to happen, although they lived in tranquility for so long, one or the other was destined to break out.
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).
The Peloponnesian War and the Decline of Leadership in Athens Thucydides set out to narrate the events of what he believed would be a great war—one requiring great power amassed on both sides and great states to carry out. Greatness, for Thucydides, was measured most fundamentally in capital and military strength, but his history delves into almost every aspect of the war, including, quite prominently, its leaders. In Athens especially, leadership was vital to the war effort because the city’s leaders were chosen by its people and thus, both shaped Athens and reflected its character during their lifetimes. The leaders themselves, however, are vastly different in their abilities and their effects on the city. Thucydides featured both Pericles and Alcibiades prominently in his history, and each had a distinct place in the evolution of Athenian empire and the war it sparked between Athens and Sparta.
“The conflict of Athens and Sparta is supposed to serve as a lesson for what can happen to any people in any war in any age” (Hanson, 7). How Thucydides was right when he made this statement, when you compare the Peloponnesian War and the Cold War, the similarities are striking. Even though these wars occurred thousands of years apart the are very similar. They both lasted for many decades and even though the Cold War had not involved any fighting it has themes that echo all the way back to the Peloponnesian War where its occupants fought with crud weapons compared to today’s modern technology. The Peloponnesian War and the Cold War can be compared to the events leading up to the war, because of their common ambition in that the nations involved
The Peloponnesian War (431-404 B.C.) was a conflict between the Athenian Empire and the Peloponnesian League led by Sparta that resulted in the end of the Golden Age of Athens. The events of the war were catalogued by the ancient historian Thucydides in The History of the Peloponnesian War. Thucydides’ writings showed the ancient Greek belief that there is a parallel between the city-state and the character of its citizens; in order for the city-state to be successful, its citizens must be virtuous. Thucydides did not believe that the true cause of the Peloponnesian War were the immediate policies of the Athenian Empire against the city-states in the Peloponnesian League but rather the fundamental differences in the character of the two city-states
It was a series of consequential events, spurred on by democratic failure, not one key turning point, that resulted in the decisive defeat of the Athenians by the Peloponnesians, with the aid of Persia. Because of democratic fickleness, with or without Pericles the Athenians were doomed for defeat, and therefore the death of Pericles was not the key turning point, rather it was only a factor which determined the length of the Peloponnesian War.
...a trail of destruction in its wake, this war changed the entire course of Ancient Greek history. Even though there has been countless wars in Greek history, the Peloponnesian War was definitely the one with the most consequences.
The Peloponnesian War was between the Greek cities of Athens and Sparta due to the growing tensions that continued to grow between the two cities that eventually came to a breaking point. The Peloponnesian War, which can be divided into three phases known as: The Archidamian War, The Sicilian Expedition and The Decelean War, is one of the greatest event in Greek history and an analysis of the causes and effects of this war will give us a better understanding for how the cities of Athens and Sparta came to war and the impact it left behind.
The book The Spartacus War by Barry Strauss is an in depth look at one of Roman history’s most legendary events, the gladiator revolt led by Spartacus. Spartacus has become a legend, creating a storyline that has inspired many movies and television shows, such as Stanley Kubrick’s epic Spartacus in 1960, starring the legendary Kirk Douglas. Spartacus has inspired a perfect mix of men over time with various backgrounds and beliefs, from Stalin and Marx, to Voltaire, and even to Ronald Reagan. How though, did Spartacus create a massive revolt of slaves that would create a massive problem for the mighty Rome? Strauss attempts to create a chronology of the Spartacus War using his vast knowledge of the Italian landscape, ancient documents, and archaeological evidence, as well as provide the reader with the historical reasons that might have created a perfect combination of causes to create the Spartacus legend.
In section 110, the Melians threatened that if their allies the Lacedaemonians were provoked by the takeover of Melos, they might attack Athens itself: "...the Cretan sea is a large place; and the masters of the sea will have more difficulty in overtaking vessels which want to escape than the pursued in escaping. If the attempt should fail they may invade Attica itself, and find their way to allies of yours whom Brasidas did not reach: and then you will have to fight, not for the conquest of a land in which you have no concern, but nearer home, for the preservation of your confederacy and of your own territory. " In addition, the Melians complained that they would be thought of as cowards if they surrendered, and they warned the Athenians that hostility would turn other neutral city-states against them. The Melians offered mere speculation. Their arguments sound like the work of a weak and desperate g... ...
In Thucydides’ History of the Peloponnesian War, Pericles commends the ergon of Athenian heroes, which has placed them in the realm of logos, while directing the Athenians to follow these ideals of logos. The maintenance and continued success of Athens' political establishment relies on the prevalence of polis, rationality and discourse over family, emotion and reckless action. However, the indiscriminate turns of fate and fortune, often place logos in opposition with the base, primal nature of ergon. Both Thucydides and Sophocles recognize that when logos conflicts with the unexpected ergon, the preservation of rationality and unanimity among the citizens of the polis depend on the leadership of a single honest leader. In the History of the Peloponnesian War, Thucydides presents Pericles as a man of logos, whom Athens needs to achieve its full potential as an empire and later to rescue her from disaster. Likewise, Sophocles presents Theseus, in Oedipus Colonus, as the perfect successor of Pericles, who returns Athens to its former glory before the end of the war. In these two examples, we see that the dominance of logos over ergon within a polis lies in the ability and logos of the city’s current leader.
The Peloponnesian War is the conflict between the Peloponnesian League, led by Sparta, and the Delian League, led by Athens. Much of our knowledge on the causes and events of the Peloponnesian War, depends on the Athenian Thucydides 460-400 BC, writer of the History of the Peloponnesian War. He served as an Athenian commander in Northern Greece during the early years of the war until the assembly exiled him as he lost an outpost to the enemy. During this exile, he was able to interview witnesses on both sides of the conflict. Unlike Heredotus, he concentrated on contemporary history and presented his account of the war in an annalistic framework that only occasionally diverts from chronological order.