Archidamus and Pericles during the Greek Wars

A detailed Summary of Archidamus and Pericles during the Greek Wars

Pericles of Athens and Archidamus of Sparta devised net assessments that both believed would provide strategies that would bring victory and peace for their respective states. This essay will show that Archidamus did a better job of net assessment prior to the outbreak of the Peloponnesian War. A clear definition and understanding of net assessment is necessary. Prof Thomas Mahnken of the Naval War College, provided the following definition: "Net assessment is a process that helps you understand the nature of the war upon which you are embarking, identify your comparative advantage, and devise a strategy to capitalize upon your strength and exploit your enemy's weakness" (Mahnken, Student Handout, p. 1). This definition can be broken down into three elements, 1) understanding the nature of the war, 2) identifying the strengths and weaknesses of the enemy to identify a comparative advantage, and 3) devise a strategy to achieve victory. I will touch on these elements, other key principles, and the history of the war itself as the foundation to support my argument.

Before examining the main issue, it is important to note the goals in which the two leaders in question are attempting to achieve with their respective speeches

In addition to understanding the nature of the war, Archidamus not only assessed correctly the strengths of the enemy, but also correctly assessed the abilities of his own state. Archidamus understood that the means of his own state offered no comparative advantage that would defeat Athens, and Sparta would have to acquire new allies to be successful. It was not until years into the war when Sparta found foreign resources that they gained the advantage needed to defeat Athens. Archidamus recommended the strategy of seeking and acquiring new allies in his speech of 432 BC, when he said, "The means will be, first, the acquisition of allies, Hellenic or barbarian it matters not, so long as they are an accession to our strength naval or financial" (Thucydides, The Landmark Thucydides, p 46).

The history of the Peloponnesian War provided many examples that Archidamus, the wise and confident leader of Sparta, provided an assessment prior to the outbreak of the war that was slightly better than the assessment of Pericles. Pericles net assessment led to a strategy that history shows was filled with flaws. In the end, the outcome of the war most likely had very little to do with the assessments made by Pericles and Archidamus in their famous speeches in 432 BC. The friction of war, chance, unpredictable events and many other factors requires leaders to conduct constant re-assessment to seek out the comparative advantage in order to constantly update their understanding of the nature of the war. After 27 years of on and off fighting the great Peloponnesian War ended with the weaker state with the great land army defeating the stronger state with a superior navy.

There are some obvious flaws in Pericles assessment and strategy. Pericles strategy relied on Sparta to eventual abandon their unlimited political aim and give up the fight. This was unlikely to happen and indeed; the Spartans went years of devastating the Attica lands. The only cost to the Spartans being the march into Attica and the days it took to destroy the crops and property of Attica. Although the Spartan army posed no threat to the Athenian people while they were safe behind the walls of Athens, Pericles failed to understand the psychological and physical impact that this strategy would have on his own people. The people of Attica and Athens were suffering enormous hardships and going against all that was natural to them. Pericles severally overestimated the will of his own people in adhering to the Peliclean strategy and this caused enormous problems for Pericles personally and undoubtedly for the Athenian war effort. It was only Pericles dynamic leadership and influence that kept the majority in agreement with the strategy, and after Pericles died, Athens and its allies adopted a more offensive strategy.

Clausewitz in describing the importance of the nature of the war stated, "The first, the supreme, the most far-reaching act of judgment that the statesman and commander have to make is to establish by that test the kind of war on which they are embarking; neither mistake it for, nor trying to turn it into, something that is alien to its nature. This is the first of all strategic questions and most comprehensive..." (Clausewitz, On War, pp. 88-89). If the process of net assessment is to help in understanding the nature of the war, it only makes sense that I start the argument by showing that Archidamus had a better understanding of the nature of the war, as described by Clausewitz, than Pericles.

Some common words found in the essay are:
Landmark Thucydides, Athens Spartans, Student Handout, Peloponnesian War, Attica Athens, Sea Archidamus, Origins War, Thucydides Indeed, War Archidamus, Simply Pericles, nature war, understanding nature war, understanding nature, thucydides landmark thucydides, thucydides landmark, landmark thucydides, net assessment, peloponnesian war, spartans allies, pericles assessment, strategy pericles, assessment pericles, landmark thucydides 46, strategy achieve victory, spartans ravaged lands,

Approximate Word count = 2469
Approximate Pages = 10 (250 words per page double spaced)

Category: History