This research examines texts by Thucydides and Xenophon with a view toward determining whether and to what extent each presents democracy as a positive or negative feature of Athens. The research will compare texts by each commentator that deal with roughly the same subject matter and discuss the pattern of ideas each uses in analyzing the impact of democracy on Athenian life.
In his account of the Peloponnesian War, Thucydides takes the view that the beginning of the end of Athens as a world power (in the known world of the classical period, of course) came about in part as a consequence of the great victory that Athens and Sparta (Lacedaemon, to Thucydides) shared when they beat back the Persian invasion. Scarcely had the Persians been driven back than some political factions in Athens sought to dispose of democracy in Athens and to amplify an already growing Athenian empire. However, a coalition led by Sparta that included some Athenian colonies opposed Athenian expansionism and indeed brought battles to Athens. Athens' response was to suppress the peoples, such as the Aeginetans (Chapter 6), but Athens suffered casualties in battle. That was the occasion for Pericles' famous oration speech, which valorizes democracy but which blithely ignores the fact of rising Athenian imperialism:
Our constitution does not copy the laws of neighbouring states; we are rather a pattern to others than imitators ourselves. Its administration favours the many instead of the few; this is why it is called a democracy. If we look to the laws, they afford equal justice to all in their private differences. . . . The freedom which we enjoy in our government extends also to our ordinary life (Thucydides).
Thus Pericles, who declares (and declares and declares) why Athens "is worthy of admiration." States competing with Athens "have no such blessings to lose" (Thucydides, Ch. 6)--which, it turns out, makes them fair game for conquest. As Thucydides ...