Today's Passage
This passage describes the devastating plague that struck Athens in 430 BCE during the second year of the Peloponnesian War.
Crawley Translation (1910)
But while the nature of the distemper was such as to baffle all description, and its attacks almost too grievous for human nature to endure, it was still in the following circumstance that its difference from all ordinary disorders was most clearly shown. All the birds and beasts that prey upon human bodies, either abstained from touching them (though there were many lying unburied), or died after tasting them. In proof of this, it was noticed that birds of this kind actually disappeared; they were not about the bodies, or indeed to be seen at all. But of course the effects which I have mentioned could best be studied in a domestic animal like the dog.
Such then, if we pass over the varieties of particular cases which were many and peculiar, were the general features of the distemper. Meanwhile the town enjoyed an immunity from all the ordinary disorders; or if any case occurred, it ended in this. Some died in neglect, others in the midst of every attention. No remedy was found that could be used as a specific; for what did good in one case, did harm in another. Strong and weak constitutions proved equally incapable of resistance, all alike being swept away, although dieted with the utmost precaution. By far the most terrible feature in the malady was the dejection which ensued when any one felt himself sickening, for the despair into which they instantly fell took away their power of resistance, and left them a much easier prey to the disorder; besides which, there was the awful spectacle of men dying like sheep, through having caught the infection in nursing each other. This caused the greatest mortality. On the one hand, if they were afraid to visit each other, they perished from neglect; indeed many houses were emptied of their inmates for want of a nurse: on the other, if they ventured to do so, death was the consequence. This was especially the case with such as made any pretensions to goodness: honour made them unsparing of themselves in their attendance in their friends’ houses, where even the members of the family were at last worn out by the moans of the dying, and succumbed to the force of the disaster. Yet it was with those who had recovered from the disease that the sick and the dying found most compassion. These knew what it was from experience, and had now no fear for themselves; for the same man was never attacked twice—never at least fatally. And such persons not only received the congratulations of others, but themselves also, in the elation of the moment, half entertained the vain hope that they were for the future safe from any disease whatsoever.
Modern Translation
The nature of this plague defied all attempts at description, and its assaults on the human body were almost beyond endurance. Yet there was one particular aspect that most clearly distinguished it from ordinary diseases. All the carrion birds and animals that normally feed on human corpses either refused to approach them (despite the many bodies lying unburied) or died after consuming them. Evidence for this was clear: such birds completely vanished from the area; they were nowhere near the corpses, nor could they be seen anywhere else. The effects I describe were most easily observed in domestic animals, particularly dogs.
These, then, were the general characteristics of the plague, though I pass over the many peculiar variations in individual cases. During this time, the city remained free from other common illnesses; or if any did occur, they inevitably developed into this disease. Some victims died in complete abandonment, others despite receiving every possible care. No specific cure could be found; what helped one patient harmed another. Physical strength or weakness made no difference—the disease swept away all equally, regardless of how carefully they were treated. By far the most terrible aspect of the illness was the psychological despair that overcame anyone who felt the first symptoms. This immediate loss of hope destroyed their will to fight, making them far more vulnerable to the disease. Additionally, there was the horrific sight of people dying like sheep after catching the infection while caring for others. This caused the highest death toll. Those who feared to visit the sick died from neglect—entire households were wiped out for lack of caregivers. Yet those who dared to help also died. This was especially true of those who prided themselves on virtue: their sense of honor compelled them to care for friends without regard for their own safety, even when family members had already collapsed from exhaustion and grief. However, those who had recovered from the disease showed the greatest compassion toward the sick and dying. Having experienced the illness themselves, they no longer feared it, since no one was attacked twice—at least not fatally. These survivors not only received everyone's congratulations but also, in their momentary euphoria, half-believed themselves immune to all future diseases.
Historical Context
This passage describes the devastating plague that struck Athens in 430 BCE during the second year of the Peloponnesian War. The disease, possibly typhus or typhoid fever, killed approximately one-third of Athens' population, including Pericles. Thucydides, who contracted but survived the plague himself, provides this eyewitness account of its symptoms and social effects. The plague occurred while the Athenian population was crowded within the city walls following Pericles' strategy of avoiding land battles with Sparta. This catastrophe severely weakened Athens both demographically and psychologically, marking a turning point in the war and contributing to the eventual erosion of Athenian power and social cohesion.
Key Themes
Annotations & References
Ancient Greek Medicine
Greek medicine in the 5th century BCE was still developing from religious healing toward rational observation. The Hippocratic school emphasized natural causes of disease, but effective treatments remained limited. Thucydides' clinical description reflects this empirical approach while acknowledging medicine's limitations.
Learn more →The Plague of Athens
The exact nature of the plague remains debated among scholars. Proposed identifications include typhoid fever, typhus, smallpox, measles, and even Ebola. Recent DNA analysis of dental pulp from mass graves suggests typhoid fever as the most likely candidate.
Learn more →Athenian Social Values
The passage illustrates core Athenian values: philotimia (love of honor) compelling citizens to help others despite personal risk, and the social obligation to care for friends and family. The plague's disruption of these norms represented a fundamental breakdown of civilized society.
Learn more →Parallel Ancient Sources
Lucretius: De Rerum Natura (Book 6, lines 1138-1286)
Lucretius provides a poetic adaptation of Thucydides' plague narrative, emphasizing the philosophical implications of human suffering and mortality within an Epicurean framework.
Read passage →Diodorus Siculus: Library of History (Book 12.45)
Diodorus briefly mentions the plague at Athens, noting its demographic impact but providing less clinical detail than Thucydides, focusing instead on its strategic consequences for the war.
Read passage →Plutarch: Life of Pericles (Chapters 34-38)
Plutarch describes how the plague affected Pericles personally, killing his sons and sister before ultimately claiming his own life, emphasizing the disease's impact on Athenian leadership.
Read passage →Discussion Questions
- How does Thucydides' empirical description of the plague reflect the emerging rationalist worldview of 5th-century Athens, and what are its limitations?
- What does the behavior of survivors who believed themselves immune reveal about human psychology in extreme circumstances?
- How does the conflict between self-preservation and social duty during the plague illuminate tensions in Athenian civic values?
- In what ways might Thucydides' personal experience as a plague survivor have influenced his historical method and philosophical outlook?