Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 05-15-2008, 05:31 PM
 
28,895 posts, read 54,134,340 times
Reputation: 46680

Advertisements

We wanted a fresh topic. So here it goes.


After initial reverses, Athens begins to increase its stranglehold on its rival, using superior diplomacy and naval forces to slowly constrict the Spartans.

Then comes Alcibiades, who somehow convinced the Athenians and their allies to launch the Syracusan expedition all the way to Sicily, even though Syracuse wasn't a factor in the war. The result was a military catastrophe, siphoning off men and material to the main theater. The Spartans were able to rally and eventually defeated the Athenians.

Had Alcibiades never lived, what do you think would have happened? What would have happened had Athens prevailed over Sparta? Would our world history be utterly different today?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-16-2008, 06:46 PM
 
594 posts, read 1,778,139 times
Reputation: 754
Quote:
Originally Posted by cpg35223 View Post
We wanted a fresh topic. So here it goes.


After initial reverses, Athens begins to increase its stranglehold on its rival, and naval forces to slowly constrict the Spartans.

Then comes Alcibiades, who somehow convinced the Athenians and their allies to launch the Syracusan expedition all the way to Sicily, even though Syracuse wasn't a factor in the war. The result was a military catastrophe, siphoning off men and material to the main theater. The Spartans were able to rally and eventually defeated the Athenians.

Had Alcibiades never lived, what do you think would have happened? What would have happened had Athens prevailed over Sparta? Would our world history be utterly different today?
Alcibiades was chameleon-like, taking on the manners and customs of whatever side he chose to influence. He seemed to be a charlatan and opportunist of the first order. Having read three books last year on Hannibal, I thought Alcibiades seemed wanting in all of the great qualities that marked Hannibal under extreme conditions. Here is what the National Geographic book, Greece and Rome: Builders of our World says about Alcibiades:

"Athens was lured into her catastrophic campaign against Syracuse by Alcibiades, one of history's most audacious scoundrels. Ward of Pericles, friend of Socrates, rake, reveler, general, he led a disastrous expedition to Sicily but was called home to answer charges of sacrilege. Instead he fled to Sparta, where he seduced the queen. Athens condemned him to death. So did Sparta for his double-dealing. Alcibiades promptly defected to the Persians, but turned on them. Fickle Athens restored his command. He won some victories over Sparta, then his fleet lost a battle while he was away. He fled to a stronghold on the Hellespont, later died in Phrygia, slain, says one account, by the avenging brothers of a wronged maiden."

Had Alcibiades never lived it may have been to the credit of Athens. Perhaps if Athens had prevailed over Sparta, there may have been some kind of amalgamation of the two city states. I doubt that our world would have been greatly changed. Sooner or later, all great powers seem to exhaust themselves and slip from the scene. As it turned out, "... Athens fell in 404, a naval giant paradoxically toppled by a land power." A rising power was already emerging on the world stage -- Macedonia.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2008, 07:52 PM
 
28,895 posts, read 54,134,340 times
Reputation: 46680
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Walmsley View Post
Alcibiades was chameleon-like, taking on the manners and customs of whatever side he chose to influence. He seemed to be a charlatan and opportunist of the first order. Having read three books last year on Hannibal, I thought Alcibiades seemed wanting in all of the great qualities that marked Hannibal under extreme conditions. Here is what the National Geographic book, Greece and Rome: Builders of our World says about Alcibiades:

"Athens was lured into her catastrophic campaign against Syracuse by Alcibiades, one of history's most audacious scoundrels. Ward of Pericles, friend of Socrates, rake, reveler, general, he led a disastrous expedition to Sicily but was called home to answer charges of sacrilege. Instead he fled to Sparta, where he seduced the queen. Athens condemned him to death. So did Sparta for his double-dealing. Alcibiades promptly defected to the Persians, but turned on them. Fickle Athens restored his command. He won some victories over Sparta, then his fleet lost a battle while he was away. He fled to a stronghold on the Hellespont, later died in Phrygia, slain, says one account, by the avenging brothers of a wronged maiden."

Had Alcibiades never lived it may have been to the credit of Athens. Perhaps if Athens had prevailed over Sparta, there may have been some kind of amalgamation of the two city states. I doubt that our world would have been greatly changed. Sooner or later, all great powers seem to exhaust themselves and slip from the scene. As it turned out, "... Athens fell in 404, a naval giant paradoxically toppled by a land power." A rising power was already emerging on the world stage -- Macedonia.
Why paradoxically? While Athens naval supremacy was an asset, it certainly had limited usefulness because Athens was not an island.

Second, I would offer that the quote is thought provoking, but ignores a couple of key points.

1) Macedonia expanded into the vacuum caused by the collapse of Athens at the end of the Peloponnesian Wars. It certainly would not have been fait accompli for Macedonia to automatically control the isthmus.

2) Had Athens prevailed, would a larger collection of states been consolidated under Athenian leadership? Further, given Athens' emphasis on learning, philosophy and the arts, what would have been the fate of Grecian civilization with its attendant advances in science? Would the resulting civilization been an effective counterweight to an emergent Rome?

Interesting questions to say the least.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2008, 07:18 PM
 
594 posts, read 1,778,139 times
Reputation: 754
Quote:
Originally Posted by cpg35223 View Post
Why paradoxically? While Athens naval supremacy was an asset, it certainly had limited usefulness because Athens was not an island.

Second, I would offer that the quote is thought provoking, but ignores a couple of key points.

1) Macedonia expanded into the vacuum caused by the collapse of Athens at the end of the Peloponnesian Wars. It certainly would not have been fait accompli for Macedonia to automatically control the isthmus.

2) Had Athens prevailed, would a larger collection of states been consolidated under Athenian leadership? Further, given Athens' emphasis on learning, philosophy and the arts, what would have been the fate of Grecian civilization with its attendant advances in science? Would the resulting civilization been an effective counterweight to an emergent Rome?

Interesting questions to say the least.
My background in Greek history is sketchy, but I would suggest that sea power was the key to Athens' strength as a military power. Sea power enabled them to thwart Persian efforts to gain a foothold in Greece and perhaps saved a larger Persian entry into Europe. Athens' naval victory at Salamis was very significant in its historical consequences. Although Sparta was a very formidable land power, their geographic location wasn't especially favorable to the development of sea power. As one writer said, "Sparta fronted on a dangerous section of the Mediterranean." An excellent book that provides more detail of this and other eras in sea power is Gerard Fiennes' "Sea Power and Freedom."

In the first Peloponessian war, Athens blockaded Sparta's outlets to the sea. It wasn't until Athens' dissipated its resources in the disastrous war in Sicily, that Sparta, fueled by Persian money, was able to build a navy and seriously challenge Athens on the sea. In fact, Sparta lured Athenian sailors away with the promise of better wages. Under the command of Lysander, Sparta's new navy caught the weakened Athenians in an unguarded period and defeated them. Later, Sparta installed their puppet government called Thirty Tyrants in control of Athens.

As for the emergence of Macedonia and the consolidation of Greek city states, I would defer to someone else's opinion on that, but I would imagine it took several decades and an iron hand to bring them together. It must have been something like what Tito imposed on the several ethnic states of Yugoslavia. Anyway, it's an interesting subject that I hope some others will join in with some input.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:17 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top