1. Ktema es aiei ‘A possession for ever’
‘possession into always’
This is a description of a book, A History of the Peloponnesian War. This was a long conflict from 431 to 404BC between Athens and Sparta, the two greatest military powers in ancient Greece: Athens was dominant by sea, Sparta on land; and both had many ally towns throughout Greece. The author Thucydides wanted his book to be read for all time afterwards, so at one point he says he wants it to be a ktema es aiei, a possession for ever. So far, his hope has been realised: it is one of the most read books from ancient Greece, nearly 2,500 years later. Note: Thucydides’ name is pronounced ‘thoo-sid-id-ais’. About the book The book The History of the Peloponnesian War by Thucydides: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Peloponnesian_War If you enjoy history, and particularly military history, you would find it a good read. Thucydides’ History is very clear in style and quite analytical, so is quite like a modern history book; but it also contains a lot of good narrative. Thucydides sought to be objective and detached and there is some debate about how much he managed to achieve that: is there some bias ? Certainly, he managed to combine good story-telling with clear analysis, which is no mean feat. Thucydides is widely regarded as one of the finest writers of prose among the ancient Greeks, second only to Plato. The translation by Rex Warner in Penguin Classics is recommended: it is very clear and easy to read. https://www.amazon.co.uk/History-Peloponnesian-War-Classics/dp/0140440399 Books 1 (the start of the war) and 3 (decline in standards) are probably the best place to start. The account of the Sicilian Expedition in Books 6 and 7 is also a good, self-contained narrative. The Peloponnesian War: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peloponnesian_War Detail The book is a thorough account of a major and long-running conflict, and the author sought to analyse its causes and nature thoroughly, and so to identify the general patterns in warfare. For this reason, he hoped and believed his work would last forever. He correctly saw the war as particularly significant, because it was between the two superpowers of ancient Greece and involved nearly all of Greece, since most of the other cities were aligned with either Athens or Sparta; and because the cultures of the two cities were so different: Athens emphasised culture and freedom, Sparta discipline and the military and also Athens had a dominant navy, Sparta a dominance army. It was, effectively an all-out civil war between two different approaches to life. Because the conflict was large and important, Thucydides saw it as a suitable study for the general patterns in times of war, and he treats the subject as a sort of test case study. The history begins with these words: 'Thucydides the Athenian wrote the history of the war fought between Athens and Sparta, beginning the account at the very outbreak of the war, in the belief that it was going to be a great war and more worth writing about than any of those which had taken place in the past.' (Book 1.1) For example, he notes:
-the extent to which states will go in order to survive in a war: the people of Athens retreated from the countryside and lived within large walls near the city
-the risks which states will take in order to seek to win: the Athenians launched a huge naval expedition to Sicily
-the decline of public standards under the stress of war – the decline of politics into demagoguery (the rise of Cleon), negative changes in language as it excused poor behaviour with euphemisms and a general decline in care and respect for people. Most famously, the Athenian assembly condemned to death the people of Mytilene for disloyalty, though quickly changed their mind.
-the importance of citizenship and alignment in war: whether a city or town aligned with Athens or Sparta, and how much loyalty they showed, was very significant for how they fared (rather like smaller states during the Cold War in their relationship with the USA or USSR).
Did you know ? There is a counter-view that the Peloponnesian War was not really one large conflict and was not as important as Thucydides says. Some see it instead as really made up of lots of little conflicts, as part of the ongoing tensions between large city-states such as Athens, Sparta, Thebes and Argos which went on for hundreds of years. They would argue that Thucydides simply framed it as a large important conflict, and people have generally accepted that – partly persuaded by the sheer excellence and grandeur of his book.
Did you know ? Thucydides actually took part in the war as a general for Athens, and he recounts his own exploits in the third person. After a failure in battle, he was retired, which gave him time to write this book.
Did you know ?: Thucydides did not finish his account of the war. It only goes to the year 411BC (the war ended in 404 BC); and also the account ends abruptly. We don’t know why it is unfinished, but the most likely explanation is that Thucydides died before completing it. The account does not appear to be aware of events at the end of the war in 404 BC, so most likely Thucydides died before then.
Background
The two outstanding historians of ancient Greece are Herodotus and Thucydides, both from the 400s BCs. They are often compared and contrasted.
Both books are long, about 400 pages in a modern edition, and they both attempt to bring reasoning, order and analysis of causes into their accounts, rather than simply to record events.
However, they were very different in style and content.
Herodotus is usually seen as the first modern-style historian, gathering a range of evidence, looking for causes and applying reason; and Thucydides developed the genre to a clearer and crisper form.
Herodotus wrote about the Greek-Persian Wars of 490 and 480BC. He is noted for story-telling and his interest in different customs of people (ethnography). His work is meandering, colourful and lively. We would see his style as old-fashioned, pre-scientific and a bit naïve and endearing, while stirring and uplifting. However, he clearly brought an inquiring, open approach to history-writing: he is open about varying accounts and uncertainty and shares this with the reader. Thucydides wrote about the Peloponnesian War of 431 to 404 BC. He is noted for a clear, detached, analytical approach, with clear conclusions. He is much more like a modern history writer. The stock and reputation of these two goes up and down over time. Herodotus has been out of favour for much of the 20th century as unreliable and disorganised, but archaeology has been suggesting his accounts are more accurate than people have assumed; while recently some have been questioning whether Thucydides is as rational and objective as he gives the impression of being: his clear conclusions may sometimes only be his opinion.
Comments