Scan barcode
hilly_em's review against another edition
Boring, put me into a reading slump, a good historical reference text but not to be read intensely
matthewabush's review against another edition
4.0
It is tough to fight your way through this book, but it was worth the effort for me.
lordchanticleer's review against another edition
Reviewing History of the Peloponnesian War is an odd task; there's so much that can be said about these 600 pages that one Goodreads review can't really do justice to what Thucydides accomplished here more than 2000 years ago. This book is at the same time a historical account of the arguably most interesting period of Ancient Greek history, a political treaty and a philosophical essay, yet it's as gripping as a fictional novel. And I must say that in my view Thucydides excels in each one of these (well, in some more than others).
Much has been said about what History of the Peloponnesian War is actually about. In general terms, it's obviously about the conflict between Athens and Sparta that threw Greece into war for more than twenty years; rather than just a historical account of this war, however, Thucydides' work feels more like an analysis of the fall of an empire caused by hubris (in this case, Athens), the overreaching consequences of war and it's effects on other states. This comes from a deep volition to actually engage with his material in more than one way. This means that the text is not only narrating what happened, but in some ways trying to make sense of it and explore its implications.
Of course this wouldn't have the same methodological rigor as contemporary historiography, but for someone that lived several centuries before Christ, Thucydides' take feels refreshingly modern. Perhaps the most clear example of this would be his famous account of the plague of Athens (surprisingly, I found out recently that this was probably an Ebola epidemic; in a Chad movement Thucydides not only contracted it but survived to tell the tale), in which he writes:
This shows that Thucydides is not exclusively worried about the events of the war itself, but also on its implications for man and the state on a philosophical level. In History of the Peloponnesian War, the war is not just a conflict, but something that actively shapes man's relation to himself, others and society: he actually spends a long part of the text narrating the events involving Athenian democracy and how it was affected by the fight with the Lacedaemonians and the failure of the Sicilian expedition. Hubris is a theme that permeates the entire work, and considering how the conflict played out almost seems like an omen. This was heavily present in [a:Herodotus|901|Herodotus|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1507925438p2/901.jpg] [b:The Histories|1362|The Histories|Herodotus|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1399225547l/1362._SY75_.jpg|488198], but while Herodotus just wrote what people told him without too much of a critical eye, Thucydides tried to give an account of the war as it really happened (after all, the man could see it before his eyes); yet there's an odd fantastical dimension to it, almost as if divine providence actually played a role in the events.
While Herodotus spends a lot of time discussing somewhat dubious stories (but no less entertaining), Thucydides engages in political realism: both Athens and Sparta act on self-interest, and their conflicts eventually involved the entirety of Greece. The Melian Dialogue is a clear example of this. Despite being an Athenian himself, Thucydides' description of Athens' dialogue with the Melians does not paint the city in a positive light, yet it's a gripping and somewhat accurate description of international relations.
It's passages like these that make this book have perennial relevance and renewed interest (though one must be careful here; it would not be bright to think that the concepts present in politics during the ancient world would have 1:1 correspondence in contemporary times), despite being difficult. Thucydides is not an easy read: his prose is not the easiest one (not in English, at least; I've read it through one of the volumes in the Great Books of the Western World collection, although I've seen a lot of complaints about his prose in Ancient Greek) and there are so many names, shifting alliances, places, battles and events that it's almost impossible to remember every single detail. Yet events such as the Funeral Speech and the Sicilian Expedition are still fresh in my mind after all this time.
Unfortunately, Thucydides died before the end of the war and thus could not finish his History. The conclusion to the conflict can be found in the much less impressive [b:A History of My Times|261228|A History of My Times|Xenophon|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1532421664l/261228._SY75_.jpg|253196], which is worth reading but does not reach the heights of this one. Despite this, Thucydides account of the war in the Peloponnese is still a must-read for anyone interested in the ancient world, politics or western literature.
Much has been said about what History of the Peloponnesian War is actually about. In general terms, it's obviously about the conflict between Athens and Sparta that threw Greece into war for more than twenty years; rather than just a historical account of this war, however, Thucydides' work feels more like an analysis of the fall of an empire caused by hubris (in this case, Athens), the overreaching consequences of war and it's effects on other states. This comes from a deep volition to actually engage with his material in more than one way. This means that the text is not only narrating what happened, but in some ways trying to make sense of it and explore its implications.
Of course this wouldn't have the same methodological rigor as contemporary historiography, but for someone that lived several centuries before Christ, Thucydides' take feels refreshingly modern. Perhaps the most clear example of this would be his famous account of the plague of Athens (surprisingly, I found out recently that this was probably an Ebola epidemic; in a Chad movement Thucydides not only contracted it but survived to tell the tale), in which he writes:
In other respects, too, the plague marked the beginning of a decline to greater lawlessness in the city. People were more willing to dare to do things which they would not previously have admitted to enjoying, when they saw the sudden changes of fortune, as some who were prosperous suddenly died, and their property was immediately acquired by others who had previously been destitute. So they thought it reasonable to concentrate on immediate profit and pleasure, believing that their bodies and their possessions alike would be short-lived. No one was willing to persevere in struggling for what was considered an honorable result, since he could not be sure that he would not perish before he achieved it. What was pleasant in the short term, and what was in any way conducive to that, came to be accepted as honorable and useful. No fear of the gods or law of men had any restraining power, since it was judged to make no difference whether one was pious or not as all alike could be seen dying. No one expected to live long enough to have to pay the penalty for his misdeeds: people tended much more to think that a sentence already decided was hanging over them, and that before it was executed, they might reasonably get some enjoyment out of life.
This shows that Thucydides is not exclusively worried about the events of the war itself, but also on its implications for man and the state on a philosophical level. In History of the Peloponnesian War, the war is not just a conflict, but something that actively shapes man's relation to himself, others and society: he actually spends a long part of the text narrating the events involving Athenian democracy and how it was affected by the fight with the Lacedaemonians and the failure of the Sicilian expedition. Hubris is a theme that permeates the entire work, and considering how the conflict played out almost seems like an omen. This was heavily present in [a:Herodotus|901|Herodotus|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1507925438p2/901.jpg] [b:The Histories|1362|The Histories|Herodotus|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1399225547l/1362._SY75_.jpg|488198], but while Herodotus just wrote what people told him without too much of a critical eye, Thucydides tried to give an account of the war as it really happened (after all, the man could see it before his eyes); yet there's an odd fantastical dimension to it, almost as if divine providence actually played a role in the events.
While Herodotus spends a lot of time discussing somewhat dubious stories (but no less entertaining), Thucydides engages in political realism: both Athens and Sparta act on self-interest, and their conflicts eventually involved the entirety of Greece. The Melian Dialogue is a clear example of this. Despite being an Athenian himself, Thucydides' description of Athens' dialogue with the Melians does not paint the city in a positive light, yet it's a gripping and somewhat accurate description of international relations.
It's passages like these that make this book have perennial relevance and renewed interest (though one must be careful here; it would not be bright to think that the concepts present in politics during the ancient world would have 1:1 correspondence in contemporary times), despite being difficult. Thucydides is not an easy read: his prose is not the easiest one (not in English, at least; I've read it through one of the volumes in the Great Books of the Western World collection, although I've seen a lot of complaints about his prose in Ancient Greek) and there are so many names, shifting alliances, places, battles and events that it's almost impossible to remember every single detail. Yet events such as the Funeral Speech and the Sicilian Expedition are still fresh in my mind after all this time.
Unfortunately, Thucydides died before the end of the war and thus could not finish his History. The conclusion to the conflict can be found in the much less impressive [b:A History of My Times|261228|A History of My Times|Xenophon|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1532421664l/261228._SY75_.jpg|253196], which is worth reading but does not reach the heights of this one. Despite this, Thucydides account of the war in the Peloponnese is still a must-read for anyone interested in the ancient world, politics or western literature.
scipio_africanus's review against another edition
4.0
Had its ups and downs. Interesting at parts and a bit of a slog in others. Not as good as Herodotus in my opinion. One can appreciate what Thucydides was trying to do being true to history and trying to avoid myth and legend ETC. Still glad I read it and can cross it off the list.