Thucydides Rhetorical Analysis

680 Words2 Pages

Thucydides expresses how a combination of fear and greed escalates in the rhetoric of two opposing camps to divide a nation through his focus on personalities. As an example, Thucydides provides the case of the Athenians' ally Corcyra, when civil war broke out during the Peloponnesian War. This precedent acts as a model of foreshadowing for the Athenians between Nicias and Alcibiades, as they attempt to sway the crowd using negative and positive examples about whether they should go to war with Sicily. During the civil wars in Corcyra, Thucydides emphasizes how the relationship between the democratic and oligarchic party escalates, as the people are motivated by greed, which leads to fear. Thucydides describes how parties had to take action "fearing that they might lose a debate or find themselves out-maneuvered in intrigue by their quick-witted enemies, they boldly launched into action" (3.83). By focusing on action, Thucydides demonstrates how the power of words can affect the masses, since each party works for its own self-interest and revenge. While each …show more content…

He exhibits his competitive nature with his words, "I have a better right than others to hold the command and that I think I am quite worthy of the position" (6.16). Alcibiades uses this positive rhetoric to remind the crowd of the fame he brought to Athens with his horse-breeding. His confidence about his own right to rule would have soothed the crowd about their chances of winning, since he had won for them not only in the Olympics, but also in battle. Thucydides, however, emphasizes this phrase with Alcibiades' character to show how Alcibiades' greed overcomes the self-interest of the common people. If the Athenians would have won against Sicily, Alcibiades would have gained wealth from vital resources like timber for more ships (6.90) to keep up his extravagant

Open Document