Today's Passage
This passage occurs during the first Athenian expedition to Sicily (427-424 BCE), when Athens intervened in local conflicts between Sicilian cities.
Crawley Translation (1910)
“For myself, though, as I said at first, the representative of a great city, and able to think less of defending myself than of attacking others, I am prepared to concede something in prevision of these dangers. I am not inclined to ruin myself for the sake of hurting my enemies, or so blinded by animosity as to think myself equally master of my own plans and of fortune which I cannot command; but I am ready to give up anything in reason. I call upon the rest of you to imitate my conduct of your own free will, without being forced to do so by the enemy. There is no disgrace in connections giving way to one another, a Dorian to a Dorian, or a Chalcidian to his brethren; above and beyond this we are neighbours, live in the same country, are girt by the same sea, and go by the same name of Sicilians. We shall go to war again, I suppose, when the time comes, and again make peace among ourselves by means of future congresses; but the foreign invader, if we are wise, will always find us united against him, since the hurt of one is the danger of all; and we shall never, in future, invite into the island either allies or mediators. By so acting we shall at the present moment do for Sicily a double service, ridding her at once of the Athenians, and of civil war, and in future shall live in freedom at home, and be less menaced from abroad.”
Such were the words of Hermocrates. The Sicilians took his advice, and came to an understanding among themselves to end the war, each keeping what they had—the Camarinaeans taking Morgantina at a price fixed to be paid to the Syracusans—and the allies of the Athenians called the officers in command, and told them that they were going to make peace and that they would be included in the treaty. The generals assenting, the peace was concluded, and the Athenian fleet afterwards sailed away from Sicily. Upon their arrival at Athens, the Athenians banished Pythodorus and Sophocles, and fined Eurymedon for having taken bribes to depart when they might have subdued Sicily. So thoroughly had the present prosperity persuaded the citizens that nothing could withstand them, and that they could achieve what was possible and impracticable alike, with means ample or inadequate it mattered not. The secret of this was their general extraordinary success, which made them confuse their strength with their hopes.
Modern Translation
As for me, although I represent a powerful city—as I mentioned earlier—and although I could focus on attacking others rather than defending myself, I am willing to make concessions in anticipation of these dangers. I have no intention of destroying myself merely to harm my enemies, nor am I so consumed by hatred that I imagine I can control both my own plans and the unpredictable forces of fortune. Instead, I am prepared to surrender whatever is reasonable. I urge the rest of you to follow my example voluntarily, rather than waiting until the enemy forces you to do so. There is no shame in kinsmen yielding to one another—Dorian to Dorian, or Chalcidian to fellow Chalcidians. More importantly, we are all neighbors, inhabitants of the same land, surrounded by the same sea, and united under the common name of Sicilians. We will undoubtedly wage war again when circumstances demand it, and we will make peace among ourselves through future negotiations. But if we are wise, we will always stand united against foreign invaders, recognizing that harm to one threatens us all. Never again should we invite outsiders to our island, whether as allies or arbitrators. By taking this course, we perform a double service for Sicily: we simultaneously free ourselves from the Athenians and from civil war. In the future, we shall enjoy freedom in our own land and face less danger from foreign threats.
After Hermocrates delivered this speech, the Sicilians accepted his counsel and agreed among themselves to end the conflict. Each party retained its current possessions, with the Camarinaeans receiving Morgantina in exchange for payment to Syracuse. The Athenian allies summoned their commanders and informed them of their decision to make peace, noting that Athens would be included in the treaty. With the generals' consent, the peace was finalized, and the Athenian fleet subsequently departed from Sicily. When they returned to Athens, the citizens exiled Pythodorus and Sophocles, while fining Eurymedon, accusing them of accepting bribes to leave when they could have conquered Sicily. Such was the extent of Athens' current success that the citizens believed nothing could resist them. They thought they could accomplish anything—whether feasible or impossible, regardless of whether their resources were sufficient or inadequate. This delusion stemmed from their remarkable string of victories, which led them to conflate their actual power with their boundless ambitions.
Historical Context
This passage occurs during the first Athenian expedition to Sicily (427-424 BCE), when Athens intervened in local conflicts between Sicilian cities. Hermocrates of Syracuse delivers a crucial speech at the Congress of Gela (424 BCE), urging Sicilian unity against Athenian imperialism. His pan-Sicilian rhetoric successfully convinces the warring cities to make peace, forcing the Athenian fleet to withdraw. The passage's conclusion reveals Athenian hubris at its height: the democracy punishes its generals for accepting a reasonable peace rather than conquering Sicily. This episode foreshadows the disastrous Sicilian Expedition of 415-413 BCE, demonstrating how Athenian overconfidence and imperial ambition would ultimately lead to their downfall. Thucydides uses this moment to illustrate the dangerous psychology of unchecked power.
Key Themes
Annotations & References
Sicilian Identity
Hermocrates appeals to a nascent Sicilian identity that transcends traditional ethnic divisions (Dorian vs. Ionian). This pan-Sicilian nationalism represents an early example of regional identity formation in response to external threats, anticipating later developments in Sicilian history.
Learn more →Athenian Democracy and War
The punishment of the generals reveals how democratic assemblies could make irrational decisions driven by imperial ambition. This incident exemplifies the tension between democratic decision-making and strategic wisdom that Thucydides frequently explores.
Learn more →Greek Kinship Diplomacy
Hermocrates invokes ethnic kinship (Dorian to Dorian) as a basis for political cooperation. This reflects the complex interplay between ethnic identity and political allegiance in the Greek world, where shared ancestry could override immediate conflicts.
Learn more →Parallel Ancient Sources
Diodorus Siculus: Library of History (Book 12.54)
Diodorus provides an alternative account of the Congress of Gela and Hermocrates' speech, offering additional details about the negotiations and emphasizing Syracuse's leadership role.
Read passage →Plutarch: Life of Nicias (Chapter 12)
Plutarch discusses Athenian ambitions in Sicily and the political atmosphere in Athens that led to punishing generals for making peace, providing insight into Athenian imperial psychology.
Read passage →Xenophon: Hellenica (Book 1.1.27-31)
Xenophon describes similar instances of Athenian generals being prosecuted for military decisions, showing this as a pattern in Athenian democratic practice rather than an isolated incident.
Read passage →Discussion Questions
- How does Hermocrates' appeal to Sicilian unity compare to modern examples of regional identity formation in response to external threats?
- What does the Athenian punishment of their generals reveal about the relationship between democracy and empire? Can democratic states make rational foreign policy decisions?
- How does Thucydides use this episode to illustrate his views on the relationship between power, success, and judgment?
- Is Hermocrates' distinction between internal conflicts and external threats a sustainable political principle? When should local rivalries give way to collective security?