Hubris vs. Humility
I suppose I will continue with my thoughts from my previous entry, but with the expansion of the idea of Thucydides’ recognition of patterns in human nature.
The pattern I saw throughout the book was Thucydides noting various balances between hubris and humility of various groups of people, and explicating what became of said people. For example, the Athenians began with humility – they knew that, in order to win the Persian war, they had to give up all they had to become a stronger power – and ended up with tremendous hubris that lead to their fall. That sacrifice of material wealth, rather than protection of it, shows that they knew they were capable of victory (why destroy buildings if losing would mean living in rubble under the Persian power), but that they knew that they would have to give up their pride in their monuments and buildings to win (88). Under Pericles, the Athenians had a similar show of humility: moving into the city walls from the surrounding areas when the Spartans attacked. “It was sadly and reluctantly that they now abandoned their homes and the temples time-honored from their patriot past, that they prepared to change their whole way of life, leaving behind they what each man regarded as his own city (135).” These people gave up their pride and slept in shrines or temples, but all for the greater good of Athens. Athens sat in a balance between “Pericles’ Funeral Oration” and “The Policy of Pericles.” Pericles knew that the Athenians should not overestimate their power or become too confident in their abilities, and while he was their leader, they didn’t (see page 163: “[Pericles] appears to have accurately extimated what the power of Athens was…[she] would be victorious if she bided her time and took care of her navy, if she avoided trying to add to the empire during the course of the war…”). However, after his death, they became over-confident, tried to fight battles they could not win (Sicily), and put themselves in the position to be greatly hated (feigning equality with the Melians by engaging in dialogue, then expressing that their power was inherent to them and that nothing would change it…over-confidence to the extreme). This over-confidence, lack of humility, or hubris, lead to their demise.
Conversely, the Spartans were cautious and never seemed to reach beyond their means in battle. They did not rise to ultimate power, but they did defeat Athens by knowing both their strengths and their weaknesses.
This pattern – humility leading to success leading to confidence leading to hubris leading to downfall – seems to be a universal warning as well as an outline for the rise and fall of most major empires. Inherent loyalty, the kind Pericles spoke of in his funeral oration, is great as long as it is somewhat humble. The overwhelming patriotism seems to have blinded the Athenians as they took on stronger and stronger foe. As the last (reputed) empire, the US could heed to Thucydides recognition of this fall from power. As we become an increasingly patriotic nation, we stop realizing our faults and open ourselves up to attack on the weaknesses we forgot we had.
On an entirely different note, I noticed that we talked a little of the women’s role in the war – how they were mostly subservient and “didn’t count” in the politics of Athens. It reminded me of Aristophanes’ Lysistrata, which is a satire about the Peloponnesian war and has the women of the cities cause the war to end. Although entirely fictional, the work was written around the same time, and the characterizations of the women from the various cities mirrors the ones we discussed in class (the Athenian women are strong and in charge of the situation, the Spartan woman is a tough country bumpkin…).
The pattern I saw throughout the book was Thucydides noting various balances between hubris and humility of various groups of people, and explicating what became of said people. For example, the Athenians began with humility – they knew that, in order to win the Persian war, they had to give up all they had to become a stronger power – and ended up with tremendous hubris that lead to their fall. That sacrifice of material wealth, rather than protection of it, shows that they knew they were capable of victory (why destroy buildings if losing would mean living in rubble under the Persian power), but that they knew that they would have to give up their pride in their monuments and buildings to win (88). Under Pericles, the Athenians had a similar show of humility: moving into the city walls from the surrounding areas when the Spartans attacked. “It was sadly and reluctantly that they now abandoned their homes and the temples time-honored from their patriot past, that they prepared to change their whole way of life, leaving behind they what each man regarded as his own city (135).” These people gave up their pride and slept in shrines or temples, but all for the greater good of Athens. Athens sat in a balance between “Pericles’ Funeral Oration” and “The Policy of Pericles.” Pericles knew that the Athenians should not overestimate their power or become too confident in their abilities, and while he was their leader, they didn’t (see page 163: “[Pericles] appears to have accurately extimated what the power of Athens was…[she] would be victorious if she bided her time and took care of her navy, if she avoided trying to add to the empire during the course of the war…”). However, after his death, they became over-confident, tried to fight battles they could not win (Sicily), and put themselves in the position to be greatly hated (feigning equality with the Melians by engaging in dialogue, then expressing that their power was inherent to them and that nothing would change it…over-confidence to the extreme). This over-confidence, lack of humility, or hubris, lead to their demise.
Conversely, the Spartans were cautious and never seemed to reach beyond their means in battle. They did not rise to ultimate power, but they did defeat Athens by knowing both their strengths and their weaknesses.
This pattern – humility leading to success leading to confidence leading to hubris leading to downfall – seems to be a universal warning as well as an outline for the rise and fall of most major empires. Inherent loyalty, the kind Pericles spoke of in his funeral oration, is great as long as it is somewhat humble. The overwhelming patriotism seems to have blinded the Athenians as they took on stronger and stronger foe. As the last (reputed) empire, the US could heed to Thucydides recognition of this fall from power. As we become an increasingly patriotic nation, we stop realizing our faults and open ourselves up to attack on the weaknesses we forgot we had.
On an entirely different note, I noticed that we talked a little of the women’s role in the war – how they were mostly subservient and “didn’t count” in the politics of Athens. It reminded me of Aristophanes’ Lysistrata, which is a satire about the Peloponnesian war and has the women of the cities cause the war to end. Although entirely fictional, the work was written around the same time, and the characterizations of the women from the various cities mirrors the ones we discussed in class (the Athenian women are strong and in charge of the situation, the Spartan woman is a tough country bumpkin…).
posted by Rebecca at 1:59 PM
<< Home