Review: The Peloponnesian War, by Thucydides

I re-read this history (which is nearly two and a half thousand years old) recently, and it’s still amongst my favourites. The edition I have is published by Penguin, with translation by Rex Warner and introduction/notes by MI Finley.

Thucydides wrote an account of most of the Peloponnesian War, which occurred in the 5^th century BC between Athens and Sparta, and their respective allies. It lasted decades and was rather complicated. Unlike some other ancient conflicts there weren’t persistent strong characters who defined the war (the exception might be Alcibiades, but only to an extent) which may be why it’s not quite as well-known as the Second Punic War or Alexander’s campaigns.

The author himself was an Athenian who played a brief role in the War before being exiled. He then spent years writing of the conflict, but appears to have died before he could finish it.

Thucydides wrote in a precise, factual manner. Although some elements are guessed at (the specific wording of speeches, for example) most of these are guided by speaking to witnesses or documentation. Although sometimes coloured by personal views (he was not a fan of Cleon), he does not appear biased in general terms for or against Athens, Sparta, Syracuse or any other player in the game, and is not afraid to condemn his own side when he felt they were in the wrong.

His approach (contrary to many ancient historians) of including specific numbers where possible and giving detail as to battle and siege where it existed enables a more lively and accurate account to come out. Whilst written with a cool, calculated hand, Thucydides does a great job of portraying success and plight as the fortunes of war ebbed and flowed.

As he himself wrote, this is intended to be an objective account of what happened that will stand the test of time, and on that score it’s a clear success.

The sometimes dry style and willingness of the writer to use an eight clause sentence if that’s what it takes to write what he wants to write may mean this isn’t ideal for a beginner to classical history (that said, I got it fairly early on and didn’t have particular problems). The footnotes and appendices do a good job of explaining what needs to be explained. There are also several maps in the back (perhaps a few more would’ve been helpful, though maybe I’m being picky).

The only real downside is that the book is unfinished, but it is still substantial, covering over two decades and 600 pages.

I’d advocate reading this after Thucydides, but can also strongly recommend the excellent single volume history of the Peloponnesian War by Donald Kagan.

Thaddeus

Book Review: The Peloponnesian War, by Thucydides (and Rex Warner)

The Peloponnesian War happened the best part of 25 centuries ago between the Ancient Greek city states of Sparta and Athens. Athens was a sea power that, perhaps counter-intuitively for a democratic state, maintained an empire and forced lesser powers to pay tribute. Sparta enjoyed dominion over the Peloponnesus, the peninsula of Greece, through a mighty reputation for prowess in battle.

Thucydides was a brilliant writer, possibly the earliest proper historian. Yes, Herodotus was first, but Herodotus also talked nonsense at times. Thucydides related events which he not merely heard of second hand, but participated in, to a limited extent.

He was a minor and not terribly successful Athenian general, but did spend many years working on his excellent book. Like Polybius, he is more concerned with truth and fact than Livy-like exaggerations, although it is probable that in parts his mind was swayed by personal interest.

One similarity with Livy is that Thucydides does sometimes invent speeches when he cannot know what was said. Whilst not strictly historical, I find that (for both authors) this does actually add to the value of the history, and the sentiments expressed by Thucydides are likely to at least be approximately accurate.

The war lasted for decades and the two principle cities involved were supported by scores of weaker allies who were either strong-armed or persuaded through friendship or reason to side with Sparta or Athens. Unlike the Second Punic War, which was dominated by the excellent Hannibal, there was no one predominant figure, probably due to the lengthy nature of the war.

Thucydides writes in a detailed, dedicated way, and is quite happy to have a sentence that lasts 8 lines and has 12 clauses if it makes his point. He does an excellent job of describing not only what happened, but explaining why it happened. In addition to detail he also paints a good picture of the more general situation and atmosphere in a given time and place. For example, at the height of the conflict numerous cities were torn between siding with Athens or Sparta and the two sides within a city would embark upon bloody rampages, moderation was accorded cowardice and murder was rife.

I would also say that the book is as relevant today as it was the day it was written. I imagine that if Blair and Bush had read it, and viewed with horror the unnecessary expedition the Athenians mounted to try and defeat Syracuse when Sparta was on her knees they may have been dissuaded from invading Iraq when Afghanistan seemed to be going so well.

The book is not especially easy to read, but it is absolutely worth the effort. It chronicles the ebb and flow of an ancient conflict but the principles involved are as true today as they ever were.

I can also recommend Donald Kagan’s excellent book (The Peloponnesian War: Athens and Sparta in Savage Conflict) which is festooned with fantastic maps and puts a lot of what Thucydides writes into a more understandable context.

Thaddeus