Comparison between Pericles’ third speech and Alcibiades’speech in the Sicilian debate

Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »

Deliberative rhetoric

The nature of the δημος does not invalidate the importance of deliberative rhetoric in Thucydides’ view. According to the text there is a difference between the δημος which has to be persuaded and the ρήτορες who put forward proposals for consideration. “On the questions of greatest importance and in the present circumstances, we speakers should claim to think further ahead than you who consider what is immediately in front of you, especially since we who give the advice can be called to account but you who listen cannot” (άλλως τε και υπεύθυνον την παραίνεσιν έχοντας προς ανεύθυνον την υμετέραν ακρόασιν) (3.43.4). Thucydides regards deliberation before action as essential (2.40.2; 3.42.1 – 2; 6.8.4), so it must be concluded that the first two qualities of a good statesman, namely, an understanding of the current political situation and the ability to persuade his audience to his point of view (2.60.5) applied to the orators as well and that the other two qualities, namely patriotism and integrity, determined whether their influence on the incorrigible δημος would benefit the community7 or not.

POST-PERICLEAN RHETORIC

In a parallel exercise, the study secondly tries to show that post-Periclean rhetoric, especially in the Mytilenean and Sicilian debates, is symptomatic of the decline in the calibre of the Athenian leadership. In Thucydides’ opinion, Athens fell from the height of her greatness to catastrophe in Sicily (2.65.5; 11) and defeat by Lacedaemon because of her leaders. In the encomium on Pericles (2.65.8 – 11) he lauds Pericles and criticises the “successors”, motivating his statements by a description of Pericles’ good governance and the successors’ failings. At the same time he furnishes enough detail about Pericles’ rhetorical style to infer the demagogic rhetoric used by the successors. The process of deterioration in the leadership can therefore be traced through the way in which they address and control the δημος and through the purposes behind their rhetoric.

The Epitaphios

“Both the first and last speeches are saturated with the contrast between Pericles and the fickle multitude which is incompatible with the Epitaphios” (Flashar 1969, 36). The picture of the Athenian δημος which emerges from Thucydides’ narrative, differs completely from Pericles’ description in the Epitaphios. There is one aspect which is relevant here, namely Pericles’ claim that the Athenians valued discussion and instruction before they undertook anything (2.40.2 – 3). This claim is contradicted by Pericles’ own actions. Earlier in the same year he had refrained from calling an Assembly “lest they make mistakes by coming together in a passionate rather than a reasonable state” (2.22.1). Their emotions had been aroused by the invasion of Attica and by Pericles’ refusal to attack the invaders. They felt rage against him, abused him and considered him responsible for their troubles. By preventing discussion, he was able to keep them from making themselves vulnerable to the Lacedaemonians. The discrepancy between the reality and the ideal picture in the Epitaphios has been explained in various ways10. A likely possibility is that in the Epitaphios Thucydides makes Pericles describe his own characteristics and not those of the δημος, in which case the Epitaphios could be regarded as a further encomium on Pericles.

READ EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN ESTABLISHMENT OF THE STATE HIGHWAY CALIBRATION SECTIONS

CRITICISM OF LACEDAEMON

A picture of the Lacedaemonian tradition which is traduced here by the Corinthians, can be built up from what they say and from Archidamus’ response later on: – The practices bequeathed to them by the πατέρες (1.85.1) include an orderly temper (το εύκοσμον) which manifests itself in their sobriety and phlegmatic temperament. They are neither carried away by flattery, nor provoked by invective into hazardous undertakings (1.84.2). The reckless brilliance of the Athenians, as described by the Corinthians, forms a strong contrast : they are adventurous beyond their power (παρα δύναμιν), daring beyond their judgment (παρα γνώμην) and sanguine in danger (1.70.3). – The Corinthians taunt the Lacedaemonians: their caution, conservatism and slowness to act make them do less than their strength warrants and even make them distrust what their judgment has confirmed, because they think that there will be no end to danger (1.70.3). According to Archidamus the Lacedaemonians’ slowness and dilatoriness were great advantages and resulted in “ελευθέραν και ευδοξοτάτην πόλιν δια παντος νεμόμεθα” (we have always inhabited a city, both free and of the highest fame) (1.84.1a).

RHETORICAL TECHNIQUES

Every point of tradition is shown to be negated by the characteristics of the Athenians to the detriment of Lacedaemon (see above). The qualities on which the Lacedaemonians had prided themselves, are shown to be disadvantages in the face of the Athenian characteristics. It is a rhetorical technique which would have had a strong impact on the Lacedaemonian audience: if the Lacedaemonian tradition of cautious conservatism is shown to work in favour of Athenian expansionism, the very thing that the Lacedaemonians feared, the demonstration would bring about a feeling of insecurity. If tradition cannot be relied upon, what then? The logical implication is that the Lacedaemonians should act contrary to tradition and out of character, not with deliberation and delay but innovatively and quickly. In order to counter the Athenian threat, they must act like the Athenians.

CONTENTS :

1. Introduction
2. The first congress at Sparta
- Introduction
- The Corinthian speech
- The Athenian speech
- Archidamus’ speech
- Sthenelaidas’ speech
3. The Mytilenean debate
- Introduction
- Cleon
- Diodotus
4. The Sicilian debate
- Introduction
- Nicias
- Alcibiades
- Alcibades’ speech at Sparta
5. Comparison between Pericles’ third speech and Alcibiades’speech in the Sicilian debate
6. Conclusion
Annexures
Bibliography