Persuasion in Ancient Greece

Andrew Scholtz, Instructor

Study Guides. . .

Thucydides 1

Word Note: "Sparta!"

When your text says "Lacedaemon" or "Lacedaemonian," that means, respectively, "Sparta" or "Spartan."

Inroductory Comments

For us, these readings are interesting chiefly not as a narrative of the Peloponnesian War (431-404 BCE), but as an exploration of national temper and popular mood in relation to the challenges faced by public speakers - for instance, by the Corinthians at the war debate in Sparta, and by Pericles, the great Athenian statesman.

Readings Journal Entries: "Spin" in Thucydides

We've been talking some about spin; I think we'll be talking more. So, do we find spin in Thucydides? If so, where? Why is it used? How does it work? Do you view it as a valid or invalid means of persuading? Why?

You can address that in our text through through the "lens" of three speeches by one and the same orator, Pericles, addressing much the same issue, the justification for war, from one speech to the next. So, . . .

1. In "Pericles' War Speech" (pp. 31-36, 1.140-146), how does Pericles "spin" the war he urges against Sparta and its allies? How is that the same or different from what you read. . .
2. In the "Periclean Funeral Oration" (pp. 39-46, 2.35-46), where the orator focuses on what it is that that Athens is fighting for? How is the war and its justification "spun" there?
3. And how does that compare with the "spinning" of war and its rationale in "Pericles' Last Speech" (pp. 52-56, 2.59-64)?

But there are other speeches that can be approached as "spin," notably, those delivered in the course of the war debate held at Sparta (pp. 16-29, 1.68-86).

WHAT IS SPIN? From the OED s.v. "spin" [2.] g.: "A bias or slant on information, intended to create a favourable impression when it is presented to the public; an interpretation or viewpoint. Freq. in phr. to put a positive (negative, etc.) spin on. colloq. (chiefly U.S. Pol.)."

Think of it as a way of finessing the reception of information, controlling value associations it will produce in addressees, audiences, etc. Ancient rhetoricians actually had a name for that that: khrōma (Greek) or color (Latin), "color," i.e., how you "color" (i.e., spin) a fact, argument, and so on.

Author and Work

• Thucydides son of Oloros (not to be confused with the statesman and rival of Pericles, Thucydides son of Melesias!), ca. 460-ca. 400 BCE
  • Athenian aristocrat, general, historian
  • Victim of the plague, from which he recovered
  • As one of the elected generals in 424, Thucydides was found guilty of mishandling his command, and was condemned to exile, which gave him access to a variety of sources invaluable in researching his history
• Work: History of the Peloponnesian War
• Thucydides spent his years in exile researching and writing his history of the war between Athens and Sparta, 431-404 BCE
• He advertises himself as a more "scientific" historian than his contemporaries or predecessors
• He is particularly interested in psychology and the art of persuasion
• Hence of special interest to us are his speeches, reconstructions which may (or may not??) actually record the "general sense" of speeches actually delivered (see book 1 sect. 22, p. 47)

Larger Themes, Issues

• What is the picture of Athenian democracy that emerges in these readings?
• What is the picture of Pericles' leadership?
• What is the picture of peitho? Is it . . .
  • Rational discussion leading to prudent decision making?
  • Opportunistic manipulation?
  • A mix of the two, or something else altogether?

Historical Background: The Peloponnesian War I

Athens plus its allies and subjects: the latter being mostly the Aegean islands and Greek cities along the northern and eastern coasts of the Aegean sea

versus

Sparta and its allies: most of of the Peloponnese Peninsula (where Sparta is), but not Achaea or Argos. Also allied with Sparta are Megara, Thebes, etc.

• Map showing allied and neutral territories prior to war. (From Microsoft Encarta)

After Athens had taken over from Sparta the leading role in the ongoing struggle against Persia, the Athens-led, anti-Persian "Delian League" gradually became an empire (arkhe) over which Athens "tyrannized" (Pericles' term, "Your empire is now like a tyranny," p. 161).

The growing power of Athens alarmed, among others, Corinth and Megara, both of which belonged to the Spartan-led "Peloponnesian League." Sparta itself, always very conservative in its foreign policy, was reluctant to act, but in 432 was finally prevailed upon to lead a war against the Athenians.

The first phase of the war, from 431-421, is conventionally referred to as the "Archidamian War," after Archidamus, the Spartan king who led the Peloponnesian forces. During this initial phase, the Peloponnesians concentrated on land-based assaults on Athenian interests along the northern Aegean coast (the "Thraceward Region") and on Attica itself. The Athenians, possessing inferior land forces, concentrated on naval assaults, mostly against Peloponnesian interests along the west coast of Greece. The result was more or less a stalemate leading to the Peace of Nicias in 421 BCE.

Prelude to War

• 454 Treasury of the Athens-led Delian League transferred to Athens; the alliance becomes an empire (arkhe)
• 446/5 Thirty Years' Peace concluded with the Peloponnesians
• 433 Athens interferes with the Corinthian colony of Corcyra
• 432 Potidaea, a Corinthian colony but subject to the imperial power of Athens, revolts from the Athenian empire
• 432 The Megarian Decree passed by Athens: Megara forbidden to trade with Athens or any of the allies of Athens (this proves highly damaging for Megara, a member of the Peloponnesian League)
• 432 War debated and declared by the Spartan assembly and by the Peloponnesian League

First Phase: The "Archidamian War"

• 431 Various actions, including the Peloponnesian invasion of Athens. (From this point on, the invasion of Attica by Sparta and its allies will be an almost annual event)
• 431/30 The Periclean Funeral Oration delivered
• 430 Plague breaks out at Athens
• 429 Death of Pericles (plague)
• 421 Peace of Nicias

Guide to Reading; Questions

Note: Readings cited by book and section number - e.g., 1.2-4 = book 1, sections 2 through 4

Introductory Material (1.1, 16-22)

• The importance of the topic
• The use that Thucydides makes of speeches

Speeches play an important role in Thucydides' History, but remember: it is the historian who has set down these speeches in writing; he had no written originals from which to work. How close they are to the presumed originals (what Pericles and the others actually said), or even if they are close at all, remains a thorny issue, and one beyond the scope of this class. Let's just approach the speeches as Thucydides' way of exploring issues and illustrating points.

Debate at Sparta (1.66-78)

Sparta and its allies debate as to whether they should go to war over infractions of the treaty between the Athenian alliance and the Spartan alliance; Athens answers the charges.

Corinthian speech (1.68-71)

• What impression are you left with of the national character of the Spartans?
• Of the Athenians
• What does the contrast revolve around?
• What is it that motivates the Athenians?

Athenian speech (1.73-78)

Compare/contrast Athenian self-representation with what has just been said about them by the Corinthians

• How do Athenians claim to treat subject states in their empire?
• How do they rationalize/justify this treatment?
• Do they claim to rule the empire by peitho or bia or both?

Pericles' First Speech (in Thucydides, that is: 1.139-146)

Pericles' reasons for going to war, and his recommendations for how to fight the war. (For Pericles' war strategy, see just below, "The first incursion into Attica.")

For our purposes, the key passage is §141 (pp. 119-120). In that passage, . . .

• Just how are the Peloponnesians (Spartans mainly, but also Spartan allies) weaker than the Athenians (according to Pericles)?
• What facts condition decision-making among the Peloponnesians?
• What is the implied contrast of Athenians with Peloponnesians?

The First Incursion into Attica (2.18-22)

The key thing to remember is Pericles' policy of avoiding land battles with the Peloponnesians - this means that the enemy will be allowed to invade Attica almost unopposed, while Athenians hide behind the impregnable walls of their city (and send ships out to harry the Peloponnesians).

• How do Athenians react to the implementation of that policy?
• What does Pericles choose to do (or not to do) in response, and why? Where is peitho in all this?

Pericles' Funeral Oration (2.34-46)

Funeral Orations (epitaphioi): An epitaphios logos was the oration spoken by a leading Athenian citizen in connection with the public funeral given for the war dead of that particular year (see p. 143, §34). They were conventionally occasions for celebrating Athens' glorious past, and for praising the self-sacrifice of citizen-soldiers who had died in battle.

Main issues

• What is this Funeral Oration all about?
• Does it seek to persuade Athenians of anything?
• If so, what is that, and how does it go about it? (And does it do a good job?)
• What is the picture of Athenian democracy that emerges in this speech? Is there a contrast, implicit or otherwise, with Sparta?

Specific Quotations-Questions

What does Pericles mean when he says . . .

• "Our love of what is beautiful does not lead to extravagance; our love of the things of the mind does not make us soft" etc. (p. 147, §40)
• "Taking everything together then, I declare that our city is an education to Greece . . ." (p. 147, end of §40)
• "What I would prefer is that you should fix your eyes every day on the greatness of Athens, and become lovers [erastai, from eros, "love/lust"] of her" (p. 149, §43)
  • Why fall in love with her - or to give you some of the Greek, "become her erastes (lover)," a very concrete image?
  • How does eros figure as a civic virtue?

Pericles' Last Speech (2.60-64); Thucydides Assessment of Pericles as Statesman and Orator (2.65)

• Compare and contrast the final speech with the Funeral Oration in terms of tone, persuasive goals, and persuasive approach
• What does the historian mean when he says, "So, in what was nominally a democracy, power was really in the hands of the first citizen" (p. 164)? Was the Periclean democracy truly a democracy?
  • Can we validly call it "democracy" if Pericles' leadership, whether based on peitho, bia, dolos - whatever -, amounted to something like one-man rule, i.e., monarchy, perhaps even tyranny of a sort?
  • BUT CAN WE CALL IT TYRANNY SIMPLY BECAUSE ONE MAN EXERCISED SO MUCH INFLUENCE? Be VERY careful, there is a HUGE risk of unnuanced, circular argument here, AND THAT IS VERY BAD!
  • Can we call it democracy if women and so many others were excluded from the franchise (= political rights)
  • Please approach in a fair and balanced way - let's not jump to conclusions!!

[top]