The Just and the Advantageous in Thucydides: The Case of the Mytilenaian Debate
- 1 June 1984
- journal article
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in American Political Science Review
- Vol. 78 (2) , 485-494
- https://doi.org/10.2307/1963377
Abstract
As no passage in Thucydides is more important, so none is more dramatic than the Mytilenaian Debate. Having resolved to punish harshly a rebel city, the Athenians repent and reconsider. Exhorted by Kleon to maintain their original decision and by Diototos to abandon it, the Athenians must scrutinize the relationship between justice and expediency. Diodotos, who professes to argue from interest only, narrowly prevails in the debate. There is, however, much more to his speech than meets the eye. For it proves misleading to say that he is arguing merely from interest—and then, on a deeper level, to say that he is arguing from justice. In fact no passage in Thucydides, including the Melian Dialogue, raises starker questions about the status of political justice.Keywords
This publication has 12 references indexed in Scilit:
- Reason and necessity: Thucydides iii 9–14, 37–48The Journal of Hellenic Studies, 1978
- Thucydides' View of Athenian ImperialismAmerican Political Science Review, 1974
- The Revolt at MytileneAmerican Journal of Philology, 1971
- Megara and MytilenePhoenix, 1968
- TA Δ EONTA EIΠEIN: CLEON AND DIODOTUSBulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies, 1965
- The Mytilene Debate: Thucydides 3.36-49Phoenix, 1962
- Post-Periclean Democracy in Action: The Mytilenean Debate (Thuc. III 37-48)Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, 1956
- Diodote contre Cléon. Quelques aperçus sur la dialectique de ThucydideRevue des Études Anciennes, 1940
- Thucydides and the Science of HistoryThe American Historical Review, 1930
- On the Implicit Ethics and Psychology of ThucydidesTransactions of the American Philological Association (1869-1896), 1893