Search Results

This chapter focuses on Knights as the first play that Aristophanes produced on his own behalf. It mentions that Knights was performed at the Lenaea of 424 B.C. and won first prize, defeating the Satyrs of Cratinus and the Porters of Aristomenes. It also talks about how Knights was produced as a violent attack on Cleon, who was credited for the victory at Pylos during the Peloponnesian War and became a national hero. The chapter criticizes the whole style of political leadership in Knights, of which Cleon was the foremost representative. It describes the deep pessimistic content of the play, in which the Athenian people are portrayed by the old man Demosthenes, who is shown as being so stupid and gullible.

This chapter offers a reading of Thucydides’ Mytilenean debate, which unfolds at two seemingly disconnected levels: an exchange between Cleon and Diodotus over how to treat Mytilene, a rebellious Athenian ally, and an argument over the Athenians’ practices of public deliberation in the Assembly. The chapter argues that both strands of the debate ultimately hinge on the problem of assessing aitia - questions of responsibility, cause, and blame. Cleon promises the Athenians that assessments of responsibility are simple and transparent, and that policy and action will follow directly from such assessments. Diodotus offers in exchange a more complicated view. He points to limitations on political actors’ abilities to assess responsibility and act on such assessments in both domestic politics and in foreign affairs. As Diodotus stresses, however, a vision of politics where assessments of aitia are de-emphasized is in tension with the Athenian commitment to holding orators accountable for their advice. Looking to Athens’ conduct later in the war, the chapter argues that the Athenians may not ultimately accept Diodotus’ vision of a prudent city, one that recognizes the limits of the politics of responsibility and accountability, even if his motion carries the day in the debate over Mytilene’s fate.

This chapter examines two Athenian speeches on opposite sides of an issue: how to treat the Mytileneans who revolted trying to seek greater freedom from Athens. In his speech, Cleon denounces the defects of democracy and argues that Mytilene should be punished. Diodotus insists that the Athenians should consider what treatment of Mytilene will be to their advantage in dealing with future revolts. The chapter first discusses the debate in Athens concerning Mytilene before describing the events surrounding the fall of Plataea to the Spartans and their allies. It then compares the ways that Sparta treats the fallen city of Plataea with how Athens treats Mytilene, highlighting the ambiguities in Athens's treatment of Mytilene and Plataea. It also explores Diodotus's account of the power of the passions and Thucydides's portrayal of Diodotus in which he illustrates a politics cognizant of both the advantageous and the just, ennobled by the generosity or liberality that Pericles presented as a defining feature of Athens's excellence.

This chapter examines the breakdown of the rule of law during the Peloponnesian War and its impact on the Athenian military. It first reviews the traditional methods of gaining power and influence in Classical Athens. It then shows how a change in political culture occurred in the 420s. Before this decade politicians used ostracism to attack their enemies. This changed after 430, when some politicians exploited the weaknesses of the Athenian courts to eliminate their opponents. The leading practitioner of these new tactics was Cleon. The chapter shows how Cleon attempted to drag the tactics he used in the courts into the Assembly during the debate about the punishment of Mytilene. It traces the use of these tactics by other politicians after Cleon's death and the disastrous impact they had on Athenian military leadership.

The Patriot Rebellion during the Obama administration demonstrated just how well conservative western frustrations with federal land management were woven into a national conservative challenge to federal authority, and it illustrated how well-integrated the militias were in conservative politics. Indeed, the line between mainstream and extreme political protest were blurred considerably compared to the Sagebrush Rebellion. The Patriot Rebellion was led by the largely Christian Tea Party movement, which used the language and symbols of the American Revolution to condemn the Obama administration and the federal government generally as unconstitutional tyrants. And it was carried further by the armed Patriot Movement, in which people claimed they were prepared to kill for the Constitution.

In this chapter, Edith Hall reconsiders the figure of Cleon, the archetypal Athenian demagogue, with the aim of illuminating Aristophanes’ Knights, in which Cleon is represented by the Paphlagonian slave of Demos. When Cleon’s story is retold in modern histories of Athens or of democracy, it is almost always colored by one of our two (hostile) major sources, Aristophanes and Thucydides. Hall points out that at the end of the Knights the Paphlagonian slave is elevated to the office of beloved statesman. A whole tradition of scholarship—motivated, Hall thinks, in part by fear of the play’s radical implications—has argued that Aristophanes ironically undermines the general joy of the ending. But in this case subtlety is being sought where little is to be found. This has implications for our understanding of Cleon’s standing among the poorer Athenians who supported him, and for our reading of Thucydides’ portrait of Cleon.