Rate this book

Clear rating

1 of 5 stars 2 of 5 stars 3 of 5 stars 4 of 5 stars 5 of 5 stars

The History of the Peloponnesian War

by Thucydides, Rex Warner (Translator), Moses I. Finley (Introduction and Notes)

3.82 of 5 stars 3.82 · rating details · 10,853 ratings · 330 reviews

Written four hundred years before the birth of Christ, this detailed contemporary account of the long life-and-death struggle between Athens and Sparta stands an excellent chance of fulfilling its author's ambitious claim. Thucydides himself (c.460-400 BC) was an Athenian and achieved the rank of general in the earlier stages of the war. He applied thereafter a passion for...more

Paperback, Revised Edition, 648 pages

Published September 30th 1954 by Penguin Classics (first published -411)

more details... edit details

Get a copy:

More…

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Lists with This Book

The Guns of August by Barbara W. Tuchman

Best History Books

24th out of 943 books — 757 voters

The Most Influential Books in History

120th out of 661 books — 1,836 voters

More lists with this book...

Community Reviews

(showing 1-30 of 3,000)

filter | sort: default (?) | rating details

Jan 19, 2008 Chris rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

I first read Thucydides in college, using Rex Warner's translation in the Penguin edition. As a frosh with little background in ancient history and political science, I didn't have the proper perspective to realize Th.'s critical place in western historiography and political thought. As a junior, I re-read Th., this time in a course on ancient historians. At that point, having had modest exposure to Hobbes, Machiavelli, Burke, Clausewitz and the like, I was better equipped to appreciate Th.'s me...more I first read Thucydides in college, using Rex Warner's translation in the Penguin edition. As a frosh with little background in ancient history and political science, I didn't have the proper perspective to realize Th.'s critical place in western historiography and political thought. As a junior, I re-read Th., this time in a course on ancient historians. At that point, having had modest exposure to Hobbes, Machiavelli, Burke, Clausewitz and the like, I was better equipped to appreciate Th.'s method--particularly his analyses in the vein of what we'd call "realism" today. Last year I tackled Th. again, this time in Strassler's amazing Landmark edition, and I am grateful that it was available for my third go at probably the most difficult classical author I've run into.

I won't go into details on Th. himself--I'm not a historian and anything I say expounding on how great he was, etc. will of course come off as amateurish and pointless. I will go into how much I admire the product of Strassler's labor of love (he's an unaffiliated scholar) in producing the Landmark edition. First of all, the translation is refreshingly readable and doesn't have the relative stuffiness of an early 20th-century Oxbridge rendering (which, er, I actually rather enjoy every now and then :-)). Second, the marginal timelines, the extensive but not suffocating footnotes, and maps (all carefully placed next to the relevant narrative) make it unnecessary for the reader to flip pages and lose the flow of the story. Furthermore, its appendices are a treasure trove of ancillary information: there is background information on the Athenian polis and imperial administration and the corresponding systems on the Peloponnesian side; discussions of the more technical aspects of ancient warfare; and pages on other topics such as the currency, religion and ethnic groups of the Greeks, each written by a specialist.

In summary, I have nothing but good things to say about this edition--I only wish I'd been able to use it as an undergraduate. I also note that Strassler has just come out with a similar edition of Herodotus. Can't wait to check that one out...(less)

7 likes · like · see review

Dec 14, 2009 Steven Peterson rated it 5 of 5 stars

This is one of the early classic "histories" written. Of course, Herodotus had written his "History" before. But his acceptance of the role of gods in history renders Thucydides' hard-headed accounts of the Greek internecine warfare a further advance in historiography. Thus, we begin to experience something like a real history in this volume (and that does not denigrate the real contributions of Herodotus).

This is a nice volume. The Introduction by M. I. Finley sets the stage; the translation b...more This is one of the early classic "histories" written. Of course, Herodotus had written his "History" before. But his acceptance of the role of gods in history renders Thucydides' hard-headed accounts of the Greek internecine warfare a further advance in historiography. Thus, we begin to experience something like a real history in this volume (and that does not denigrate the real contributions of Herodotus).

This is a nice volume. The Introduction by M. I. Finley sets the stage; the translation by Rex Warner is (as far as I can tell) serviceable. The work of Thucydides comes through in this collaboration.

Thucydides' focus is on the origins of this bloody inter-Greek war. The forces of Athens (and her allies) against Sparta (and her allies) is the center of this work. He notes the cause (page 49): "What made war inevitable was the growth of Athenian power and the fear which this caused in Sparta." This is, as noted earlier, a fairly hard-headed view of history. To use contemporary terms, the author was something like a "realist."

Some major parts of the work. . . . One of these is the funeral oration by Pericles, the Athenian leader. He spoke of what made Athens special. His death, according to Thucydides, was harmful to the Athenian cause. He says (page 163): "For Pericles had said that Athens would be victorious if she bided her time and took care of the navy, if she avoided trying to add to the empire during the course of the war, and if she did nothing to risk the safety of the city itself. But his successors did the exact opposite. . . ."

This work has much of interest in it. Just one example. The Melian dialogue featured a debate between the Melians and Athenians. The Melians argued that morality was on their side. The Athenians acknowledged the argument, but also noted that they had the numbers and the weapons. This is an early debate between two schools of thought in international relations--idealists versus realists. The hard-nosed attitude of the Athenians won out in this case. . . .

In some ways, Thucydides is best understood by reading Herodotus and then comparing the two, so that one can get a sense of one of the first historians and then someone who adopts a different posture as historian. This is a very good version of Thucydides (from someone who cannot read Greek, by the way). Well worth looking at if a person is interested in the devastating Peloponnesian War.
(less)

3 likes · like · see review

Jan 10, 2009 Alcyone is currently reading it · review of another edition

Favorite quote:
"The absence of romance in my history will, I fear, detract somewhat from its interest, but if it is judged worthy by those inquirers who desire an exact knowledge of the past as an aid to the understanding of the future, which in the course of human things must resemble if it does not reflect it, I shall be content.
In fine I have written my work not as an essay with which to win the applause of the moment but as a possession for all time." -Thucydides

6 likes · like · see review

Aug 11, 2012 Nate Huston rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Fine. I nerded out on this one too. I really liked it. Might I suggest, however, that it is exceedingly beneficial (it was to me, at least) to take a look at Donald Kagan's lectures on the same subject. You can view them or download them at http://oyc.yale.edu/classics/clcv-205.... Lectures 18-21.

Anyhow, while the detail with which Thucydides recounts some of the battles can be tedious at times(though perhaps not to a military historian), the subject matter dealt with is timeless. Pericles's fun...more

3 likes · like · see review

Mar 29, 2013 Erik Graff rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition Recommends it for: everyone

Recommended to Erik by: Harold Kintner

Shelves: history

For over three years I was a history major at Grinnell College. In the junior year only one course requirement remained, historiography, a course taught by only one faculty member. That was fine by me until we got to Augustine's City of God which, at the time, I thought was absolutely crazy and unreadable (I've since read it). Having almost completed the requirements for a religion degree as well by then, I switched majors and graduated on schedule.

Although Augustine was unsupportable, I very mu...more

1 like · like · see review

May 08, 2007 Gardner rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

The first great history book. In addition, there are spectacular passages like the Melian Conference where the Athenian envoy states:

For ourselves, we shall not trouble you with specious pretences- either of how we have a right to our empire because we overthrew the Mede, or are now attacking you because of wrong that you have done us- and make a long speech which would not be believed; and in return we hope that you, instead of thinking to influence us by saying that you did not join the Laceda...more

3 likes · like · see review

Dec 14, 2011 Mike Hankins rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: ancient, military-history

There's no reason to "review" Thucydides himself -- he's The primary source for the Peloponnesian War, and his history is incredibly well written, smart, insightful and exciting. It holds up incredibly well and is very readable for the student or they hobbyist today.

The only thing here to "review" is this edition itself, which is just plain awesome. Full of good notes, maps on nearly every page (and the kind of maps you want, they show the area and places being referenced in the text on that pag...more

1 like · like · see review

Mar 12, 2013 Uco Library added it · review of another edition

Shelves: travis-biddick

Some conveniences require great ingenuity in their contrivance—clockwork, anesthetics, and air travel, for example. Other conveniences require nothing more than common sense—umbrellas, bicycles, the word “why”, and Robert Strassler’s The Landmark Thucydides: a Comprehensive Guide to the Peloponnesian War.

The twenty years of the Peloponnesian War between Sparta and Athens burdened its ancient historian, Thucydides, with the task of describing many battles fought on land and sea. Perhaps more terr...more Some conveniences require great ingenuity in their contrivance—clockwork, anesthetics, and air travel, for example. Other conveniences require nothing more than common sense—umbrellas, bicycles, the word “why”, and Robert Strassler’s The Landmark Thucydides: a Comprehensive Guide to the Peloponnesian War.

The twenty years of the Peloponnesian War between Sparta and Athens burdened its ancient historian, Thucydides, with the task of describing many battles fought on land and sea. Perhaps more terrible, however, are the demands this war and its narrative have placed on the imaginations of its readers, who in the pre-Strassler era of publication, (which ended in 1996 with the appearance of this excellent version of Thucydides’ work), have labored in vain to reconstruct in topographical and maritime exactitude the clear accounts of each battle. Like other ancient histories published in our time, it exists in a Penguin Classics edition with an appendix of half a dozen or so maps of the regions in which the conflict played out. But these are very general outlines of the geography, by no means conveying the physical facts of the military campaigns in breadth or in detail.
And let’s face it: after thumbing to the back of a book five times to track Brasidas’ campaign to retake Platea from the Athenians, do we really even bother to look at the maps anymore?

This edition of the History of the Peloponnesian War eliminates the need to refer to different pages by placing the maps in the margins of the text itself. Strassler has further assisted the reader by including a marginal outline that summarizes the events, location, and date of each paragraph’s narrative. Many times throughout the narrative, conflicts flare up in separate locations; by including dates and place-names in his margin outlines, Strassler has released the reader from the need to take notes, literally or mentally. Despite the wealth of information presented on the page, the layout remains uncluttered and easy on the eyes. Because of this superb editorial work, Thucydides’ history is now easily accessible in its whole integrity to those of us who do not have a primary interest or aptitude in military history, (though of course readers who do have such an interest will also benefit from the plethora of illustrative maps).

In particular, these visual aids support the textual descriptions of two battles that mark major turning points in the war: the defeat of the Peloponnesians on the island of Sphacteria and the destruction of the Athenians’ Sicilian expedition at Syracuse. Both battles involve complex and, in the former case, ambiguous manoeuvers by the forces involved, making Strassler’s maps indispensable to fully understand their significance. In the latter case, without multiple illustrations of the walls and counter-walls erected by both armies at Syracuse, it is difficult to imagine just how the besiegers became the besieged.

While the story of this war in large part consists of its battle narratives, Thucydides’ riveting accounts of philosophical debates and political intrigue, as well as his own critical commentary, comprise an equally major part. In fact, all of the military campaigns demonstrate the tragic degeneration of character in the Athenian citizen and the civilization to which he belongs. The humility and gratitude present in the funeral oration of Pericles, the forbearance of the Athenian population during the plague of 430 B.C., speak to a magnanimous virtue, without which the people of Athens would likely have been unable to grant mercy four years later to the allied population of Mytilene after its revolutionary fit.

The Mytilenian debate has its counterpart in the Melian Dialogue, occurring ten years later. When the leaders of Athens sailed against the rather small island of Melos, which had remained neutral during the war and done no wrong, they offered the islanders a choice between destruction and an enforced alliance requiring monetary tribute to Athens, insisting on their right to attack any independent island, a right they justified solely on the basis of their power. The Athenians went further: they castigated the Melians for their foolishness in resisting Athens and overestimating their chances of survival. This cruel act of Athenian aggression provides the background for the supreme, ironic tragedy of the war—namely, the Athenians’ own foolish and arrogance in sending their entire army on the Sicilian Expedition, for no good reason, and to no good end.

Human nature and the destiny of individuals, political responsibility and the soundness of the state, receive ample treatment in this history. When the narrative turned its attention to these subjects and their themes of decay, sacrifice, fear, and epistemology, I found myself reading with more excitement. Other readers will approach Thucydides’ history with their own interests and expectations. But all readers of The Landmark Thucydides will appreciate it for animating the very parts they would likely have skipped over in an earlier edition.
(less)

like · see review

Nov 14, 2012 Ken Moten rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: non-fiction-stuff, history-stuff

For all points and purposes I will clarify now that though I read most of this book this review will center on "The Melian Dialogue". I am going to post the paper that I wrote for class on this particular part of the war because I think it though playing a small part summed up major part of this conflict as a whole:

The Melian Dialogue by Thucydides – Reaction Essay

“Melians: But we believe that they would be more likely to face even danger for our sake, and with more confidence than for others,...more For all points and purposes I will clarify now that though I read most of this book this review will center on "The Melian Dialogue". I am going to post the paper that I wrote for class on this particular part of the war because I think it though playing a small part summed up major part of this conflict as a whole:

The Melian Dialogue by Thucydides – Reaction Essay

“Melians: But we believe that they would be more likely to face even danger for our sake, and with more confidence than for others, as our nearness to Peloponnese makes it easier for them to act, and our common blood ensures our fidelity.”

International relations are a very tricky thing. The failed negotiations over and subsequent conquest of the Melians by the Athenians have become a milestone of international relations during war time. You have the Melians, who have been in a state of official neutrality and whose size is much smaller than Athens and the Delian League, being pretty adamant that their traditional allies the Spartans would help them. The actual dialogue is very interesting as it tells us a lot of, I feel, awkward and shocking details about international prestige that are still true today. I was impressed at the seeming impartiality of Thucydides account of the negotiation. It was noted early on in the chapter (section 84) that the neutrality was maintained until the Athenians themselves took to plundering that the Melians became openly hostile. That might suggest that if Athens had not have done such things the Melians may have token a more favorable attitude in submitting to the Delian League. Of Course we get to the “dialogue” proper and see that independence is something that is worth just a little more to the Melians than to the other Spartan colonies/allies.

The Athenian diplomats on their part realize when they are not brought before the public proper but are taken to just the leaders of the colony realize that rhetorical flourish will not cut it and get down to business, making it plain that “we will receive you on good terms and you will be a loyal colony of Athens” to paraphrase. The Melians aren’t keen on this but offer a compromise to join Athens as equals. The Athenian diplomats aren’t having that and now take great pains to remind the Melian leaders that Athens is much bigger and much more powerful and any hold-out against it would be folly. The Melians make the offer again, and now the Athenians become even more direct and frank and what they say sends a chill up my spine because it makes me wonder how many big countries still think like this (hint, hint), [97]“they think...that if any maintain their independence it is because they are strong, and that if we do not molest them it is because we are afraid; so that besides extending our empire we should gain in security by your subjection; the fact that you are islanders and weaker than others rendering it all the more important that you should not succeed in baffling the masters of the sea.” This admission may be one of the most shocking, damning, and probably, common excuse for military aggression ever used. The Melians also bring up their confidence in the gods’ favor and more importantly the fervent help of the Spartans. The Athenian diplomats say that they themselves are confident in who the gods support (Athens would ultimately lose the war to Sparta, keep note) and remarked that the Spartans while good warriors when their own interest are at stake are much more pragmatic when others need help. This is also something that has not changed in the international community (hello Syrian conflict). In the end the Athenians fail miserably to convince the Melians to peacefully submit and in a year’s time as Thucydides himself remarks, “the Melians surrendered at discretion to the Athenians, who put to death all the grown men whom they took, and sold the women and children for slaves, and subsequently sent out five hundred colonists and inhabited the place themselves.”
(less)

like · see review

Sep 04, 2012 Brandon T. rated it 4 of 5 stars

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here. "History of the Peloponnesian War" is Thucydides' account of the complex fighting between Greek city-states and their allies that brought the empire of ancient Athens to an end.

Thucydides was the intellectual descendent of Herodotus, Greece's first true historian. However, Thucydides differed significantly on points of methodology, making his work more akin to that of modern historians. He refrained from referring to myths as historical fact whenever he could, and gave little credence to omens a...more

like · see review

May 14, 2012 Karl H. rated it 3 of 5 stars · review of another edition

The Peloponnesian War was, to say the least, a challenging read for me. Thucydides is writing about a war that happened thousands of years ago, in a completely different culture, in an area where I don't know the geography, between a bunch of states that no longer exist. Oh yes, and there is no unified dating system at the time either. It’s also clear from reading the Peloponnesian War that Thucydides was an aspiring general, not an aspiring poet. One review I encountered while searching for a d...more The Peloponnesian War was, to say the least, a challenging read for me. Thucydides is writing about a war that happened thousands of years ago, in a completely different culture, in an area where I don't know the geography, between a bunch of states that no longer exist. Oh yes, and there is no unified dating system at the time either. It’s also clear from reading the Peloponnesian War that Thucydides was an aspiring general, not an aspiring poet. One review I encountered while searching for a different translation stated that Thucydides “uses a style that might lead a reader to think that he deliberately was putting his readers through some kind of torture.” Well, torture might be putting too fine a word on it, but Thucydides sure doesn’t pamper his readers. He throws a barrage of names, places and generals at you, assuming that his readers are going to know where, what and who he is talking about. If you aren’t a classics scholar, you might not know, for instance, that the Lacedaemonians that Thucydides goes on and on about are just another name for the Spartans. He also jumps around from place to place so he can cover everything chronologically, and this makes following the locations of all the battles and generals tricky. I recommend that anyone who tries reading Thucydides to get a good critical edition with lots of footnotes, maps and as readable a translation as you can find. Blanco was who I wound up with, but there might be better versions out there.

Having not read Herodotus, I can’t properly say just how much of the historical discipline Thucydides invented. But I have read Homer, and I do think there’s an interesting comparison to be made there. Thucydides, after all, never mentions Herodotus directly, but he talks about Homer’s facts and figures at length. I think in many ways, Thucydides saw himself as embodying a factual, realistic vision of history in contrast to Homer (and presumably Herodotus, who wrote accounts of history down where the Gods showed up in battle). Homer was very poetic when he wrote that Helen’s was the “face that launched a thousand ships”, but Thycudides notes that for one Agamemnon being the leader of the alliance probably had more to do with it, and for two the number one thousand seems dreadfully inflated.

In Homer, war is treated as kind of a crapshoot that comes down to emotional intensity, the favor of the Gods, and the justice of the cause. Greece is destined to win the Trojan War because the stealing of Helen was a violation of hospitality, so the majority of Gods decree it to be so. Achilles fights up to the walls of Troy because he’s super angry, not because he came up with some clever stratagem. Ajax might be kicking butt, but if suddenly Zeus comes down and says “Nope, not today” the Trojans are going to win. In Homer, it’s the favor of the Gods that makes all the difference. The course of events is determined by the gods. And in a fine tradition leading to the present day, people continue to feel that right makes might.

Thucydides was probably the first to react to the notion that the side that was more just would be favored by the Gods and win. It’s pretty astonishing in that context to read the debate between Athens and the island of Melos which Athens plans to conquer. Melos complains that the invasion of Athens is unjust and that the gods will punish the Athenians. Athens responds “Yeah, it’s unjust. So what? Who cares about justice? The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must. Oh and by the way, the gods aren’t going to fly down and help you guys.” And then Athens steamrolls the colony, kills off all the men and sells the women into slavery. Every decision is made as part of a rational calculus of interests. This rational, realist approach is also reflected in how Thucydides describes battle. For him, it’s not primarily about the emotions of the combatants and the will of the Gods. It’s all about reason and strategy- who has the high ground, who outflanks who, who has retrofitted their ships to better fight in a harbor.

The question of whether or not Thucydides actually is the 100% factual rational historian he presents himself as really only occurred to me near the end of the text. Were the Athenians really so cynically frank about their motives? After all, even the most bellicose dictators today at least come up with some meager justification for their actions, why not Athens? Why is it that Thycudides didn’t cite his sources when apparently Herodotus did? Are those long speeches actually verbatim (or near it) as Thycudides claims, or was Thycudides taking a bit of poetic license himself by amalgamating different thoughts, speeches and points that were made over the course of a debate? And though decisions are often made based on reason, its not like people are emotionless robots- some emotion and irrational behavior sneaks in there too.

I admit that I found Thucydides tough going, and honestly, I don’t know if I learned a ton about the Peloponnesian War, but I wouldn’t say it was completely a waste of time. Reading it inspired a lot of thought, and showed me a bit about where some of our frames and ideas in political thought and history came from. Just don't expect any poetry.
(less)

like · see review

Jan 08, 2012 Stuart rated it 5 of 5 stars

Thucydides' classic history of the thirty-year clusterf--k known as the Peloponessian War. Takes you back to 432BC, where the glory of the Persian War is a distant memory and a grasping, ambitious Athens is pushing the limits of their peace treaty with the arch-conservative Sparta. As in World War I, a complex network of alliances turns a conflict between two minor cities into a conflagration that devours the Greek world.

This was a book that I'd been meaning to read since I blew it off in colleg...more Thucydides' classic history of the thirty-year clusterf--k known as the Peloponessian War. Takes you back to 432BC, where the glory of the Persian War is a distant memory and a grasping, ambitious Athens is pushing the limits of their peace treaty with the arch-conservative Sparta. As in World War I, a complex network of alliances turns a conflict between two minor cities into a conflagration that devours the Greek world.

This was a book that I'd been meaning to read since I blew it off in college, and I'm glad I finally got back to it. As with all books from the pre-industrial era, you have to slow down and sink into a world where attention spans weren't determined by e-mail pings and constant background noise. Once you do that, it's fascinating.

There were several unexpected currents that surprised me. One was that Athens represented democracy and that Sparta represented oligarchy. So, if you're an oligarch living in a democratic city, you plot and scheme to call in the Spartans. If you want to overthrow the local overlords, you call in the Athenians. Either comes with a price, as you're then on the hook to back them in their various wars of "liberation." No bystanders were allowed. Athens viewed the very idea of a neutral state as an incitement to rebellion to their subject cities.

Athens comes off as overambitious and selfish, draining their "allies" of money so that they can build the Parthenon and all the other monuments still standing on the Acropolis. Sparta, (and you should read Plutarch here for the background) comes off as a rather dull, insular militaristic society that, aside from murderously repressing and terrorizing the semi-slave helots that support it, pretty much keeps to itself.

Thucydides also relates the speeches of politicians at each of the many decision points in the war. It's fascinating to see how little those speeches have changed, though they've been dumbed down for television now. When the first batch of Athenians is killed in their useless war, a panegyric is delivered about how they died for the glory of Athens. There's Cleon, the bloodthirsty Athenian rabble-rouser who thrives off conflict and innuendo. Alcibiades, the Achmed Chalabi-like opportunist who sells out his native Athens to the Spartans, then the Spartans to the Persians, then the Persians to the Athenians, anything that would keep him on top. The arguments for war are often facile and self-serving, as politicians play on the fears of their citizens. Conquests are always somehow for self-preservation, or to liberate populaces and bring them democracy. Hey, why does this sound familiar?

This was a devastating war that could have easily been avoided, and Thucydides editorializes in a brief but very penetrating ways about the egos and hopes that drive countries to destruction.

What I grasped from this book is that ambitious men are still selling the same garbage they were 2500 years ago, and that peace is the ultimate good.(less)

1 like · like · see review

Jul 23, 2011 David Sarkies rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: history

I really liked this book, but then I generally really like books that deal with ancient history and are a retelling of events that were beyond our lifetimes, such as this one. This book, though incomplete (namely because the author died before he could complete it) tells of a war between the rival Greek city states of Athens and Sparta. I could (and would like to) write a thesis on this book, but I will stick to my main theme, and that is the invasion of Sicily. As I read it, I though as to whe...more

like · see review

May 12, 2011 Kenny rated it 5 of 5 stars

I need more stars! Thucydides is the man. In 1947, George Marshall "doubt[ed] seriously whether a man can think with full wisdom and with deep convictions regarding certain of the basic issues today" without having read this book. The parallels between the Cold War and the Peloponnesian War as T. describes it are certainly striking. My two favorite sections of this book are the civil war in Corcyra, which T. describes as representative of many civil wars going on in the Aegean at the time--and w...more

4 likes · like · see review

Mar 19, 2011 Nicholas Whyte rated it 3 of 5 stars

This is a classic work of history, about the war between Athens and Sparta in the 430s and 420s BC. I'm not terribly interested in the war itself, or the geographical details (though I would have liked it if my Penguin edition had put useful maps in the text closer to the descriptions of events taking place on obscure islands); I hoped to find out from reading it the extent to which Thucydides' reputation as the first proper historian is justifiable.

What I found was rather different to what I ex...more This is a classic work of history, about the war between Athens and Sparta in the 430s and 420s BC. I'm not terribly interested in the war itself, or the geographical details (though I would have liked it if my Penguin edition had put useful maps in the text closer to the descriptions of events taking place on obscure islands); I hoped to find out from reading it the extent to which Thucydides' reputation as the first proper historian is justifiable.

What I found was rather different to what I expected. This is not an academic history as we know such things, but a commentary on contemporary international relations, propagandistically crafted for a particular domestic interpretation in Athens, rather like most of the books you can find in shops on the War on Terror or the Cold War. Thucydides' use of rhetoric, his visibly partial citation of evidence and his dramatic reconstruction of conversations at which he was not present are all familiar tactics from today's literature. He would have been very much in his intellectual element as a crafter of drama-documentaries. I rate it as fascinating artistically - particularly the complex character of Alcibiades - but barely history.

I blame Thucydides directly for the useless mess that is most academic research into international relations. In Thucydides' account (the Melian dialogue is the most obviously fictional passage, but there are many others) decisions about war and peace (and, later in the text, internal revolution) are made on the basis of perfect or near-perfect knowledge of the international and local situation, after mature reflection and rational debate of the alternatives. It's a lovely fairy-tale and it's not surprising that many people choose to believe it; I had not appreciated, however, that it went back so far. Irrational decisions are only made by the deranged, who are normally anonymous (eg the people of Corcyra in 3.84, or the Syracusans who mistreat the Athenian captives in 7.86-87).

I know I'm not being fair; Thucydides is at the very beginning of recorded history, and it is amazing that a book written 2430 years ago is still lucidly intelligible (and interrogable) on its own terms. Pericles' funeral oration (2.34-46), in particular, whether by Pericles or Thucydides, is a brilliantly eloquent appeal to the emotions of those who have lost their loved ones in the service of their country, and is far ahead of anything else I have read on that subject in terms of literary quality. But I think his inability, for whatever reason, to examine the cultural context of his time, and to be honest about his own political situation, weakens the truth of the book.

Apart from the general issue of the book's ideological purpose, there are a lot of interesting points of detail here. As a lapsed astronomer, my eye was caught by the three eclipses mentioned, especially the first, where we are told that "the sun took on the appearance of a crescent and some of the stars became visible before it returned to its normal shape" (1.28). I was a bit surprised about the stars becoming visible even though this was not a total eclipse. A little research, however, got me to Mercury being close to maximum elongation 25 degrees from the Sun, and Venus approaching superior conjunction and 15 degrees from the sun, and I suppose both would have been visible if the Sun was sufficiently dimmed.

In 5.16 we read of accusations that "Pleistoanax... and his brother Aristocles had bribed the priestess at Delphi to give oracles to the Spartan delegations, commanding them to bring home from abroad the seed of the demigod son of Zeus". The what??? of who??? I checked the original: Διὸς υἱοῦ ἡμιθέου τὸ σπέρμα - what on earth can it be?

Snerk in 4.84 about Brasidas, who "was not at all a bad speaker, for a Spartan."

Anyway, very glad to have finally ploughed through this.(less)

2 likes · like · see review

Kenny Well, I realize that people did make a lot of irrational decisions, then as now, so that the people in Thucydides seem unrealistically cold-blooded an...more
updated Mar 28, 2012 10:38pm

Stuart I thought you were a bit too hard on Thucydides. With regard to it not being an academic history: I doubt there were many written texts to consult, as...more
Jan 21, 2012 10:30pm

Karl H. According to my edition, apparently the prophecy was that they should "bring the seed of the demi-god Zeus from foreign lands into their own, because...more
May 14, 2012 04:40pm

Sep 26, 2010 James rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: history

One of the guys who taught me Latin in college told me that translating Thucydides from the original Greek was extraordinarily difficult and had, over the millenia, yielded some strange results.

I don't know ancient Greek, so I can only assess the text's merits as a work of history. At the beginning of the text Thucydides announces that Athens' war with Sparta was world-shattering and world-defining. An event of such considerable import, thus, required a new form of analysis, one that attempts to...more One of the guys who taught me Latin in college told me that translating Thucydides from the original Greek was extraordinarily difficult and had, over the millenia, yielded some strange results.

I don't know ancient Greek, so I can only assess the text's merits as a work of history. At the beginning of the text Thucydides announces that Athens' war with Sparta was world-shattering and world-defining. An event of such considerable import, thus, required a new form of analysis, one that attempts to stand back from events and to be as objective as possible; that peers into matters and brings to light the underlying power dynamics shaping decisions. Thucydides, who was an early particpant in the war as a general, intends to offer such an analysis.

Perhaps the most famous translator of Thucydides was Thomas Hobbes, and it seems that Hobbes took a number of philosophical cues, especially in regards to human nature, from this Athenian historian's unfinished manuscript. Thucydides seems to have a somewhat bleak view of humanity. Amassing power, a group (state, polis) necessarily acts to protect its own. No wonder then Thucydides' assertion that the cause of the Peloponnesian War centered around the threat that Sparta perceived Athens, a budding economic and naval power, to represent. Donald Kagan, in his own book on the war, explains how much more complicated the dynamic was that gave rise to the conflict, but nevertheless when you're dealing with specific localities and repositories of power who are so close in proximity and enmeshed in a bundle of complex and tenuous alliances, the inevitability of conflict would, as Thucydides argues, appear immenent.

Some of the sections that really got to me were the famous funeral oration by Pericles (this short part can be read on its own and remains still a masterpiece of rhetoric) and Thucydides' description of when the plague hit Athens. There are many other great sections but these, typical as they might be, still stand out to me.

This is an important book that should be read more widely by people. I first read it in a political theory class, but have since come back to it here and there, especially as I come across bits of subtle influence it has had on subsequent thinkers. (less)

1 like · like · see review

Aug 30, 2010 Ghostnebula rated it 4 of 5 stars

Anyone who's red Herodotus should read Thucydides if only to compare and contrast the styles of both authors. Beginning more or less where The Histories left off (after the defeat of the Persians by the combined Greek army), Thucydides shows how the democratic imperialism of Athens 'becomes a tyrrany' (shades of US foreign policy after the defeat of the evil empire of the east?) and he should know being an Athenian general himself.

Unlike Herodotus, Thucydides doesn't go for silly folk tales, my...more

like · see review

Mar 31, 2013 S.J. Pettersson rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: worn-spines

This is an astounding legacy from two and a half millennia ago which very existence clearly prove that 1. Mankind's intelligence has not increased one iota over the last two centuries, and in most likelihood nor over the preceding centuries prior to these annals of sophistry in which you can find the origin of pretty much every major speech of every major leader of every major (or minor) country or power ever since. 2. Since we clearly never seem to learn anything from history (the very concept...more

like · see review

Jul 03, 2007 Dacia rated it 1 of 5 stars Recommends it for: Only people REALLY interested in Ancient Greek politics and war.

Shelves: oldclassics, politicalmanipulation

BORING!!!!! I didn't like this one bit. I can't say I remember much now, but I do remember the general feeling of being bored out of my mind. On second consideration, I suppose there is always some sense of marvel at anything written so long ago, because they play on the same sorts of human emotions we have today. All in all though, it's definitely not something anyone would read for fun. It has some scholarly interest, but is best taken in [very] small doses.

1 like · like · see review

Oct 07, 2009 Paul rated it 5 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: political-theory, history

"The Corcyraeans...went to the sanctuary of Hera and persuaded about fifty men to take their trial, and condemned them all to death. The mass of the suppliants who had refused to do so, on seeing what was taking place, slew each other there on the consecrated ground; some hanged themselves upon the trees, and others destroyed themselves as they were severally able. During seven days...the Corcyraeans were engaged in butchering those of their fellow-citizens whom they regarded as their enemies: a...more

like · see review

Jun 27, 2009 Gabriel Aguilera rated it 5 of 5 stars

A guide to my rating system
*********************************************************************
5 Stars: This book is a timeless classic and undisputed member of the literary canon. I read and loved it.

4 Stars: This book is a personal classic. A book I am happy to read again and again and think you would enjoy it too.

3 Stars: This is a book I read and thoroughly enjoyed. I recommend only if you are interested in the subject matter.

I do not list books that I would not eagerly pick up and read ag...more

like · see review

Nov 23, 2012 Matt Danner rated it 5 of 5 stars

I highly recommend the Landmark edition. The maps, notes, and supplementary essays greatly enhance understanding. Then, follow up with Xenophon's Hellenica, which discusses the final years of the war (and other things).

Despite the fact that this was written more than 2,000 years ago this is an incredibly readable and fascinating account. It is also remarkably even-handed despite Thucydides' direct participation in the war and subsequent shabby treatment. This should be the first book read by any...more

like · see review

May 03, 2012 Cartavio rated it 5 of 5 stars

As hard to read as rewarding when you manage to keep reading. There is something misterious about this book. Seems like if it had been written to last forever. Everything, atrocities and speeches, battles and betrayals, all is explained with the same detachment, with the same cold, elegant precision. It reads as if every sentence was carved in stone. Reminds me of the Parthenon, just as simple and beautiful today as it was twenty four centuries ago.
Thucydides has a very modern mindset. There is...more

like · see review

Jan 03, 2013 Erin Cataldi rated it 2 of 5 stars

Shelves: library-journal-reviews

Here's another audiobook review for the Library Journal. It's written according to the journal's standards so it doesn't have my usual quirkiness, but oh well.

Written nearly half a millennium before the birth of Christ, Thucydide’s, The History of the Peloponnesian War continues to be one of the most powerful and influential works of our time. This masterpiece brings to life a convincing account of the struggle between the empires of Athens and Sparta over expansion, shipping, and trade and in t...more

like · see review

Mar 11, 2010 Jim rated it 5 of 5 stars

What I love about the best ancient Greek literature is how startlingly modern it could be. This is particularly true of Euripides (whom I regard as a 21st century dramatist) and The History of the Peloponnesian War by Thucydides. The accounts of the Corcycran revolution, the so-called Melian Dialogue (in which Athens shows itself to be somewhat less enlightened than reputed), and the utter disaster of the Sicilian Expedition can just as easily be taking place now in remote parts of the world.

The...more

2 likes · like · see review

Sep 09, 2007 Edgar Olegario R.P. rated it 4 of 5 stars Recommends it for: History

Over the years one observes his own knowledge base expand. There are books that fill slowly and there are books that change everthing. This is one that changes so much that it is as if you are watching a line of falling dominos. I remember my freind Dave telling me he was reading the book and I was reading it too as a result. Thank God for old childhood friends.

1 like · like · see review

Mar 28, 2013 Joseph Monaco rated it 4 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: a699

General George C. Marshall once argued that all soldiers should begin their military career by studying Thucydides. After reading this for the first time, I can see why this is valuable, objective history--when in my previous education have I ever studied this before? Sadly, I don't have any recollection of studying Thucydides or the Peloponnesian War.

Tom Ricks would probably agree (WWGMD?) that Thucydides' story of the Peloponnesian War fosters perpetual lessons on the interactions between int...more

like · see review

Feb 13, 2013 Dayla rated it 4 of 5 stars

I really don't enjoy reading books about battleground tactics, but I found this book to be very interesting, nonetheless.

George Marshall (whom I adore) spoke to a group of Princeton students in 1947 and remarked on the need for all of them to read Thucydides' "The History of the Peloponnesian War" as it "...has come still closer to us, so that Thucydides now speaks to our ear."

Who had come close?

Well the Pelop War was fought between the democratic Athens and the totalitarian Sparta parallelin...more

like · see review

Aug 21, 2008 Terence rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: history-general

Thucydides may not have been one of Athens' best generals but he was certainly one of her best historians.

I think his style of history and the uses he advocated for studying it influenced my young, impressionable mind into making it the focus of my studies and interests.

1 like · like · see review

Apr 03, 2013 Marc L rated it 2 of 5 stars · review of another edition

Shelves: ancient-greece

Saai relaas: opeenvolging van feiten; geen dramatische diepgang, enige psychologische dimensie in redevoeringen, nadruk uitsluiten op het militaire.
Beperkt objectiviteitsstreven: Boek 1 lichtjes anti-atheens (imperialisme), boek 2 licht pro-Atheens (Pericles). In vergelijking met Herodotus zelfs een lichte achteruitgang, want die gaf tenminste de verschillende meningen, Thucydides bepaalt zelf vooraf de oorzaak-gevolg-relatie (geen ruimte voor onzekerheid).
Het centrale thema op de achtergrond i...more

like · see review

« previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 … 99 100 next »

new topic
Discuss This Book

There are no discussion topics on this book yet. Be the first to start one »

Recommend it | Stats | Recent status updates

combine
Other Editions (1)

More editions...

Genres

History

84 users

War

55 users

War > Military

51 users

Classics

47 users

Non Fiction

46 users

Literature > Ancient

42 users

Politics

38 users

Military > Military History

34 users

Literature

28 users

Philosophy

23 users

See top shelves...

Readers also enjoyed similar books

About Thucydides

Thucydides (c. 460 B.C. – c. 395 B.C.) (Greek Θουκυδίδης, Thoukydídēs) was a Greek historian and author of the History of the Peloponnesian War, which recounts the 5th century B.C. war between Sparta and Athens to the year 411 B.C. Thucydides has been dubbed the father of "scientific history" due to his strict standards of evidence-gathering and analysis in terms of cause and effect without refere...more

More about Thucydides...

Books by Thucydides

On Justice, Power and Human Nature: Selections from The History of the Peloponnesian War

History of the Peloponnesian War: Bk. 1-2 (Loeb Classical Library)

The Peloponnesian War, Bk. 2 (Greek and Latin Classics)

History of the Peloponnesian War, Bk. 7-8 (Loeb Classical Library)

History of the Peloponnesian War: Bk. 5-6 (Loeb Classical Library)

More…

Share This Book

Facebook Twitter Your website

Trivia About The Peloponnesian...

2 trivia questions

More quizzes & trivia...

Quotes from The Peloponnesian War

“Self-control is the chief element in self-respect, and self-respect is the chief element in courage.” — 72 people liked it

“For the whole earth is the tomb of famous men; not only are they commemorated by columns and inscriptions in their own country, but in foreign lands there dwells also an unwritten memorial of them, graven not on stone but in the hearts of men. Make them your examples, and, esteeming courage to be freedom and freedom to be happiness, do not weigh too nicely the perils of war."

[Funeral Oration of Pericles]” — 47 people liked it

More quotes…

title link	preview: The History of the Peloponnesian War
avg rating	preview: The History of the Peloponnesian War Goodreads rating: 3.82 (10853 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/261243.The_History_of_the_Peloponnesian_War?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1347332927l/261243.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/261243.The_History_of_the_Peloponnesian_War?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]The History of the Peloponnesian War by Thucydides[/url]

The History of the Peloponnesian War

Friend Reviews

Community Reviews

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website