Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay on the city of athens
Athens history essay
The development of Athens
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essay on the city of athens
Athens was the beacon of culture in the ancient Mediterranean world. This polis produced written language, democracy, created art, structured great architectural works, and made many other countless, modern achievements. Traditionally, Athenians chose a path of nomos as opposed to phusis and would criticize individuals who deviated from that path, mainly through social ostracism. However, Athens slowly began to lose its identity with the loss of self-control and traditional values. This drastic change over time was what led to the downfall of the once amazing metropolis of Athens.
Throughout his work, Thucydides compares and contrast the old Athens he respected to the new, tyrannical Athens. It is clear within his writings that Thucydides did not like what Athens had become and he did not support democracy. “The Athenians were the first Greeks to put their weapons away and change to a more relaxed and luxuries style of life” . The author also makes a note of how the Athenians treated their neighbors and fellow Greeks. Instead of keeping the peace treaty after the Persian War and honoring their allies, Athens raged war due to their greed . “Over time, however, the Athenians took into their hands the ships of all their allies except for Chios and Lesbos, and ordered each of them to make certain monetary payments” . A later
…show more content…
Once the rest of Greece learned of the defeat in Sicily, other poleis, including Sparta, rose up against the city of Athens . Many Athenians feared that they would be treated with the same cruelty they showed the other Greeks who they conquered. “Sparta did not destroy Athens, but merely tore down the long walls between Athens and Piraeus that had secured Athenian access to the sea and took away all but twelve triremes of the Athenian navy.” Even though democracy is not blamed by name, Thucydides blamed democracy since it was a failed
According to Thucydides, t... ... middle of paper ... ... henian who had lead the siege against Samos, realised this but also appreciated the dangers of changing this tactic all together – ‘Your empire is now like a tyranny: it may have been wrong to take it; it is certainly dangerous to let it go’. To this extent, it is reasonable that Athens should use such extreme measures, as it seemed to be the only way in which she could uphold her power and keep her allies close. Yet by doing so she had transformed the original aims of the Delian League entirely, which had a purpose to promote freedom and independence.
The effects of this go far beyond the imbalance of military power between Athens and her tributaries, however. The Old Oligarch lists four main areas where the existence of the Empire benefits the common people of Athens, thus giving impetus to radicalize democracy and justify the expansion and strengthening of the Empire, and giving is reason to find an ongoing justification for its existence. The first is the building of the disproportionately large Athenian navy. Second is the overall flattening of the Athenian social pyramid, raising the relative status of the lowest classes of society, and exemplified by the way that Athens becomes a magnet for aliens to live and work, and gives unusual freedom and opportunity to slaves. Third is that the allies are compelled to have their court cases tried in Athenian courts, bringing both prestige and financial reward to Athens. Finally, the centralizing effect of these things, and the obvious maritime nature of the Empire, make Athens a trading center, m...
When two great and powerful city-states ban together for a common cause the results will in turn will have great expectations. Those expectations were met when an undermanned Greek army defeated the large Persian Army throughout the course of the Persian War. The problem occurs when each of the city-states’ own ego gets in the way of the cause. They handily defeated the Persians, but the Athenians took the credit for it, and paid homage to themselves, through elaborate celebrations of victory. In their minds, they were at the head of Hellas. The Spartans took exception to this and rightfully so. The credit has to go to them as well, for the large part that they played in the victory over Persia. This dissension in the end had a lot to do with the Peloponnesian War. Never mind the military structures and governments that each set up, which made their differences clear cut. There was no way to avoid the war between these two great powers, it was inevitable, just as Thucydides had predicted.
We have now examined Thucydides' strongest arguments for Athenian rule. It is clear that Athens had a stronger claim to rule than the Melians had to remain sovereign. We also know that Athens' claims hold up when we examine them for validity. Thucydides beliefs in Athens' claims were therefore well founded.
Nor were the democratic Athenians comfortable with the artificial collision of oligarchical armored farmer. In the wake of the Persian Retreat (479B.C.E) Athens fleet increased. Nurtured on the tribute of vassal states in Aegean, Athens did not mothball its triremosi instead, they became a “beginning”. Police force of sources for its Greek subject allies overseas. Like some Spartans, imperial Athens too saw little needs to limit warfare to a single afternoon.
Athens government and military is considerably different from their neighbors. According to Pericles, Athens government is not a copy of our neighbors...
The book written by Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War, contains two controversial debates between distinguished speakers of Athens. The two corresponding sides produce convincing arguments which can be taken as if produced as an honest opinion or out of self-interest. The two debates must be analyzed separately in order to conclude which one and which side was speaking out of honest opinion or self-interest, as well as which speakers are similar to each other in their approach to the situation.
The causes of the Peloponnesian War proved to be too great between the tension-filled stubborn Greek city-states of Athens and Sparta. As Thucydides says in Karl Walling’s article, “Never had so many human beings been exiled, or so much human blood been shed” (4). The three phases of the war, which again, are the Archidamian war, the Sicilian Expedition and the Decelean war, show the events that followed the causes of the war, while also showing the forthcoming detrimental effects that eventually consumed both Athens and eventually Sparta effectively reshaping Greece.
Herodotus believed that freedom from tyranny, democracy, had a positive effect on Greek cultural identity because tyranny’s are inevitably and fundamentally weak. Tyranny weakens the city state by corruption in high offices with in the city state and suppressed new ideas and growth with in the city state. Herodotus’ opposition to tyranny is deduced from the fact that no Greek state lasted long in tyranny. As for democracy having a positive effect on Greek cultural identity, Herodotus praises the democratic system, because he sees equality as a good thing each man is able to achieve for himself while strengthening the city state. If the people are prospering and achieving then the city state prospers and grows. Democracy allowed for people to have a voice and effect change. Through democracy Greeks were able to control their own destiny, and their own success.
In 465 BC Sparta was hit with an earthquake and left them devastated. Athens sent relief to try and help but Sparta refused. According to Thucydides, Athens felt disrespected in the fact that they were denied help and helped the Helots revolt. Sparta picked itself back up and successfully defended themselves from a post earthquake attack by the Helots. This would not be the last time Athens has been down though. There were many times when Sparta had been controlled by Athens in the war but, Sparta continued to fight. For Example, The Athenian Navy participated in one of the most important naval battles fought in the war called the battle of Naupactus that took place in 429 BC,which Athens won, and this battle drained the Spartans because of the overwhelming size of the Athenian navy. The Athenians captured and slew some of the remaining Spartans. This battle left the Spartans bruised, distraught and even questioning the outcome of the war written by Thucydides in his book The History of The Peloponnesian
Tyranny is an opposite of democracy and a complementary to monarchy. Some monarch could turn into a tyrant king, whose best interest was their own and their ultimate goal to gain power and greed. For instance, the Persian kings, Darius and Xerxes, were in pursuit to seize Athens that led to the battle of Thermopylae and Salamis. Although Sparta and Athens were united during the Persian Wars, the two separated, which culminated the Peloponnesian Wars, thus Sparta Hegemony over Athens. Thereafter, Athenian’s replacement of democracy was embedded by Sparta called the “Tyrant of 30,” the pro-Spartan oligarchies. During their reign of terror, these tyrants went into a killing spree of Athenian citizens, seized their property, and banished and executed a few democratic supporters. An important exiled democratic supporter, Thrasybulus, formed an alliance with other Greek cities, which were displeased with the Tyrant of 30, besieged the city of Piraeus, Athens’ chief port. By 600 BCE, most city-states were ruled by
Thucydides recounts the events that took place during the civil war in Corcyra. In the year 427 tensions between the Democrats and Oligarchs exploded into civil war, both sides hailing allies from all over the world for aid. At first the Oligarchs received aid from large a Peloponnesian naval fleet, which gave the democrats a scare. However, the Democrats receive back up from an ever-larger Athenian fleet, sending the Democrats into a killing frenzy of all who supported the Oligarchy. Thucydides describes the situation during the civil war in Corcyra by saying that the citizens are sharply divided into two camps, consisting of Democrats on one side and Oligarchs on the other. There is a complete lack of trust on both sides and traditional values and social norms are being completely disregarded. As stated by Thucydides “In war, due to the availability of opportunity aggressiveness rises to the surface” (3.82),
...edicted it would, and without a leader like him willing to direct them away from this mindset rather than pander to it to get votes, the political constitution of the city was doomed to dissolve. Speaking of the revolution in Corcyra, which occurred after the Athenian decision to spare Mytilene but before its destruction of Melos, Thucydides wrote, “In peace and prosperity states and individuals have better sentiments, because they do not find themselves suddenly confronted with imperious necessities; but war takes away the easy supply of daily wants and so proves a rough master that brings most men’s characters to a level with their fortunes” (III.82.2). This was precisely the change Athens underwent, and the cause of its eventual demise.
As can be expected from pioneer governmental institutions, Athenian democracy was not perfect. In fact it was far from it. It resulted in the establishment of poor policies by aggressive populists who sought "...private ambition and private profit...which were bad both for the Athenians themselves and their allies." (Thucydides). These self interested populist leaders with personal gain in mind established extensive internal political instability "...by quarrelling among themselves [and] began to bring confusion into the policy of the state." (Thucydides). Repeated opportunities to accept terms of peace after the battles of Pylos (425), Arginusae (406) and Aegospotami (405) were ignored by the inefficient Athenian demos eventually resulting in the devastation of the once dominant city-state. Internal political strife can also be attribu...
The Peloponnesian War (431-404 B.C.) was a conflict between the Athenian Empire and the Peloponnesian League led by Sparta that resulted in the end of the Golden Age of Athens. The events of the war were catalogued by the ancient historian Thucydides in The History of the Peloponnesian War. Thucydides’ writings showed the ancient Greek belief that there is a parallel between the city-state and the character of its citizens; in order for the city-state to be successful, its citizens must be virtuous. Thucydides did not believe that the true cause of the Peloponnesian War were the immediate policies of the Athenian Empire against the city-states in the Peloponnesian League but rather the fundamental differences in the character of the two city-states