As recorded by Thucydides, the Melian Dialogue describes the series of negotiations that might have occurred between the Athenians and the Melians, before Athens laid siege to Melos during the Peloponnesian War. The dialogue unfolds as a debate, with the Athenians claiming their military superiority justified their wish to conquer Melos, and the Melians appealing to ethics and claiming their wish to remain independent was morally just. This event would have occurred in 416 B.C.E., when Athens and Sparta had a temporary truce. Athens demanded that the independent Melos pay tribute, and Melos ultimately refused despite being a much smaller power than Athens.
Athens opens the dialogue by demanding that Melos must submit and pay tribute, or they will be destroyed. They claim they are able to make this demand simply because they are more powerful, identifying themselves as strong and Melos as weak. This would be an argument based on reasoning that it is natural for the strong to conquer the weak, and any other attempt to negotiate peace would be futile. The Melians respond by claiming that there is no need for Athens to conquer Melos, and that Melos is not Athens’ enemy.
Use your promo and get a custom paper on
"Considerations of the Melian Dialogue".
The Athenians then present a counter-argument, claiming that if they were to let Melos remain independent, it would make Athens seem vulnerable. To this end, they argued that if they had the power to conquer Melos, they should do it, and this was not only expected, but natural. If they did not conquer Melos, Athenians back home would think their leaders were unable to conquer a seemingly insignificant state.
The Melians then claim that an attack on Melos will put other states on guard, who may declare war on Athens if it is perceived as overtly aggressive. The Athenians argue against this point by saying the independent states, such as Melos, are the ones who present the greatest danger. Interestingly, although the Athenians discount this point, this is actually what happens later in the war, once Sparta eventually liberates and occupies Melos with the rule of the thirty tyrants. However, Athens does not agree, and simply states they are acting against Melos before Melos can act against Athens. The Melians then claim they will be forced to fight if Athens invades, or they will be cowardly; however, Athens counters by saying surrender is not shameful if the situation is hopeless. The Melians then state there is a chance they will win, to which Athens responds they are simply being foolish. Finally, the Melians states the gods will help Melos win because of the justness of their cause. The Athenians say the gods will not intervene. In the end, the Athenian envoys were sent away, and when the Athenian military arrived, they killed the Melian army and enslaved the rest of the population.
This dialogue was included by Thucydides in order to show the mindset of the Athenians, who adhered to a philosophy that the strongest are justified in their actions based on strength alone, but also to highlight nuances of diplomacy that can be learned from the dialogue. On one hand, Athens was able to easily destroy the Melians, as they predicted. However, they also created enemies, and the Spartans ultimately liberated Melos, although they also conquered it, but killed many Athenians in response. This shows how strength does not always result in an enviable outcome, and just because Athens was able to force Melos to submit, in the long term this was not the best choice. They had proven themselves to be overly aggressive, as the Melians predicted, which ultimately led to their own downfall in the Peloponnesian War.
