Melian Dialogue Analysis PDF

Preview

Summary

Analysis of both sides of the argument in the Melian Dialogue ...

Description

Dominic Scacco Professor Fomin Greek Civilizations 20 December 2018 The Athenian Power Trip In the Melian Dialogue, the Athenians use democracy as a cover for tyranny. One would suspect that Athens would practice justice in its true form, as democracy is born from their culture. Unexpectedly, Athenians more often made use of a warped version of justice, in which the their superiority elevates them above having to look out for the common good of all. There is no justice at all but only the thirst for power and expansion of their empire. The overarching argument of the Melian Dialogue is that the Athenians believe they are entitled to land outside of their own, because they overthrew the Persians and guard trade waters, in turn benefiting all. They are so delusional and conceited that they march onto neutral land, where no threat to them exists, and demand the immediate surrender into the Athenian Empire. If this offer is refused, troops destroy the city and enslave all of the innocent citizens. Where is the justice in this ‘democracy?’ According to the Athenians, justice in human affairs exists only when both parties are equal. In their words, “the powerful exact what they can and the weak grant what they must” (Thuc. 5.89). These confused people have the mindset that because they are more powerful, they do not have to recognize the rights of the humans who aren’t as strong. This is a belief found in tyranny, not democracy. In democracy everyone has a voice, and a voice is able to affect change. The Athenians let the Melians have a voice while participating in a discussion with them, but they do not allow the voice of the Melians to actually mean anything or affect any change… how

democratic of them!

After all, they arrived with an entire army and navy even before

‘negotiations’ with the Melians took place. Their intent from the beginning was to conquer more land, not make negotiations. The Athenians claim that they are looking out for the wellbeing of Melos and want to preserve their island, but the only immediate threat to Melos is Athens… in other words, they aren’t truly looking to preserve the island of Melos, they are giving an ultimatum; surrender now and your city will be ‘preserved’ or fight and your city will perish. “We see that, although you may reason with us, you mean to be our judges…” (Thuc. 5.86). The Athenians came to Melos with a plan. Throughout the dialogue, the representatives from Athens speak as though there is a truly better option that the Melians would be foolish not to accept; surrender. As an alternative, they could have acted democratically and reasonably by hearing their opponent’s argument and making a decision that would benefit everyone’s needs. Instead they gave only two options in which they would come out victorious either way, by letting the Melians decide in which way they want to be defeated. This is half democracy. The Melians can choose between a peaceful surrender or a horrific end to their city, but either way they are deciding on their own end and the Athenian’s victory. The fact that they are given an opportunity to decide is democratic, but the fixed outcome of either decision (their loss) taints this democracy. The actions of the Athenians thus far has proved to be far from democratic, but more so tyrannical and oppressive. When evaluating their language used in the dialogue, this impression is only further intensified, “and you who are islanders, insignificant islanders too, must not be allowed to escape us” (Thuc. 5.97).

They cannot leave Melos in peace because it is an

insignificant island, and doing so would make Athens look weak (Thuc. 5.95). The Melian’s response to this is that Athens will make enemies of other neutral islands. To this the

representatives from Athens say that all islanders who are under no control are already enemies to the empire. But why are they enemies to the empire? Because they are under no control when they should be under Athenian control? Or because while they are still neutral they have the power to wage war on Athens? Either way, it is clear that Athens is just searching for as much control as possible and spreading their empire, “for we are not doing or claiming anything which goes beyond common opinion… by law of their [gods and man] nature wherever they can rule they will” (Thuc. 5.105). Athenians hide behind this natural law that they claim humanity inherited from the gods. They use this law as a veil of innocence to hide their thirst for power, barbaric tendencies, and crumbling idea of democracy behind. Forced to surrender to Athens after attempting to fight for their city, Melos falls. All military age men are killed, and all women and children are turned into slaves. Five hundred Athenian citizens are sent to colonize Melos, and the island is another bloodstain on the map of Athens’ barbarianism. The actions of the Athenian representatives in the Melian Dialogue directly portray the kind of democracy happening in Athens at the time. It’s a tainted version of democracy, that the Athenians use to justify the barbaric and unstoppable spread of their empire....