After Pericles’ death, Thucydides foreshadows the plight of all later leaders, noting they were unable to rule the people as Pericles had, instead they “managed all these affairs in the opposite way” and “resorted to handing over affairs to the people’s pleasure” (2. 65), resulting in frequent missteps. Although this is presented to the reader, they still search for hope as the later leaders struggle to find the perfect balance of rationality and wisdom Pericles had achieved.
There are frequent similarities between Pericles and his successors, but for Kleon, those similarities do not align him closer to the greatness of Pericles but rather highlight their differences. Before his first speech, Pericles is introduced as “the ablest in both speaking and acting” (1. 139). Likewise, Kleon is introduced as “the most violent of the citizens and by far the most persuasive among the people at the time” (3. 36). Here Thucydides not only marks their similarity in persuasive ability but also highlights their differences in personality, noting Kleon’s more violent tendencies.
Because of the noticeable parallels between both Pericles’ and Kleon’s epithet, it draws more attention to Kleon’s additional description of violence. Their speeches start off much the same way, challenging the view of the demos and not looking to be approved by the people by saying what they want to hear. Kleon challenges the Athenians’ wish to rethink their treatment of the Mytileneans (3. 37) and Pericles challenges the Athenians’ notion that the plague had hurt the Athenian cause (2. 60).
However, from there, Kleon strays from the path of Pericles and argues that democracy cannot rule an empire and Athens is, in fact, a tyranny and in so being they must come down hard on the Mytileneans as the only reason they obey Athens is because of the Athenian’s strength (3. 37). Pericles also mentions Athens is “like a tyranny”, but uses it to try to keep the Athenians rallied around the war effort, reminding them they must defend their allies because that is the source of prestige for Athens (2. 63). Again, these structural similarities bring out the conceptual differences betweenPericles and Kleon.
While Pericles turns his analogy of Athens as a tyranny into a positive and uplifting reminder of why the Athenians are powerful, Kleon uses it to argue the Athenian democracy is not working. Although both leaders use the same analogy, Pericles twists it into a positive light while Kleon brings out all the faults in Athens. Kleon also criticizes the Athenians’ decision making. He argues that Athens has been hurt by its use of refined rhetoric because, while the intelligent try to act smarter than the laws, the commoners “find it proper to be less learned than the laws” and “[act] as impartial judges rather than competitors” (3. 7). Ironically, Thucydides mentions that the future leaders “were more on an equal playing level and each striving to become first, even resorted to handing over affairs to the people’s pleasure” after Pericles’ passing, implying they were competing for power over Athens (2. 65).
While Kleon hypocritically criticizes the intelligent for something he himself is doing, Thucydides’ note that leaders like Kleon seemed to let the people take over creates another contrast between the two. Pericles led the people and Kleon was led by them (2. 5). This portrays Pericles as a strong man who is able to let himself be disliked in order to accomplish what he thinks is best for Athens. However, while Kleon challenges the people, he concedes to the people in order to get their votes. Kleon further proposes that Athenians should not make their decisions purely on good speeches because they are not based on what is feasible, but what will sound best to the people, highlighting a fundamental difference between him and Pericles (3. 38).
Pericles believes that every decision should be made logically and be well thought through. For example, he does not call an assembly when the Athenians are upset with the Spartans burning down their land, not wanting to “make mistakes by coming together in a passionate rather than a reasonable state” (2. 22). However, Kleon encourages the people to make their decisions based on emotions and rage, asking the people to “return to [their] feelings during the ordeal” when first notified of the Mytilenean revolt (3. 40).
While Pericles wants the people to make decisions while they are calm and can completely flush out an issue, Kleon urges the people to not think, but make decisions in the moment based on their emotions and not go back on their decisions. Not only does Kleon dislike the assemblies where the Athenians make their decisions, but he also challenges his opposers in an ad hominem attack, arguing that they are “motivated by profit” when writing a speech that “attempts to mislead” (3. 38). This is a direct attack towards the opposing speaker, not at all an argument on why they should be punishing the Mytileneans so severely.
This reinforces his dislike of the Athenian debates in their assembly as this limits the ability to have a genuine exchange of views to create Athenian policies and intimidates the people into not giving their honest advice, thus creating mistakes (3. 42). Kleon’s ad hominem attack towards his opposer undermines the democratic institution of Athens and contrasts Pericles’ logical approach to persuasion, instead trying to influence the people’s view of the speaker to bolster his argument. However, some of Kleon’s argument is based on Pericles’ strategy to win the war.
They both believe that Athens cannot win the war while fighting both their allies and the Lacedaemonians, yet arrive at different conclusions on how to follow through. While Pericles focuses on not expanding the empire (2. 65), Kleon wants to suppress the revolting Mytileneans to the point of no return, arguing that there is no understandable reason they should have revolted. The Mytilenenas were not repressed but joined with the Lacedaemonians, which is far worse than rebelling (3. 39).
This contrast appears all the more stark because when speaking to he people who seem to have changed their mind, both orators – Pericles on going to war and on his plan to have everyone live in Athens as well as Kleon on how to punish the Mytileneans (1. 140, 2. 61, 3. 38) – say almost word for word: “I am of the same opinion as ever” (1. 140). This phrase ties Pericles’ and Kleon’s speeches together but also highlights that they are certainly not of the same caliber. Their identical phrases coupled with their arguments bring out both Pericles’ stoic and level-headed nature and Kleon’s violent and uncaring disposition, highlighting their differences in ethos.
Similarly, both Pericles and Kleon look ahead to the consequences of their actions, although Kleon to a lesser extent. Pericles thoroughly thinks through the advantages and disadvantages of going to war (1. 141-143) and has enough foresight to know Archidamos might choose not to burn Pericles’ land in part because of their friendship, but also to make the Athenians upset with him (2. 13). Kleon notices that the Athenians have to suppress the revolters from the start because it will set a precedent for stopping the rest of their allies from revolting.
If they eased the Mytileneans’ punishment, then ally after ally would rebel, either causing a weaker ally unable to pay tribute money or losing that ally and the tribute money altogether (3. 39). Although they both show the ability to predict outcomes in the future, their predictions match their contrasting personalities. Pericles’ prediction is more thought through and fleshed out, whereas Kleon focuses on how others will see Athens and their reactions to that view.
Furthermore, by never placing a speaker in opposition to Pericles, Thucydides implies there was no other side that needed to be heard – Pericles’ word was fact. In contrast, Kleon was opposed by Diodotus and eventually lost the debate (3. 40), showing he was not as powerful an orator as his predecessor. Thucydides is also able to get across his view on the Athenian democracy, arguing that while Pericles was the leader, it was “in name a democracy [and] became in actuality rule by the first man” (2. 65).
However, after Pericles, it became more of a fight for a leadership osition, each man trying to gain the confidence and support of the people by giving in a little to their wants (2. 65). In this sense, it ventured even farther from a democracy to mob rule where all leaders either concede to the people or act in self-interest (2. 65). Using Pericles and Kleon as counterparts, Thucydides presents two ends of the Athenian democracy, yet neither is a democracy in it’s truest form, implying Thucydides does not think that there is a true democracy in Athens, but rather a better version, that being Pericles, and a worse one, that of Kleon.
Through their speeches, Thucydides is able to set up a stark contrast between Pericles and Kleon. While Kleon imitates Pericles in words and is ultimately a persuasive speaker, they are fundamentally different. By placing Pericles’ phrases in the mouth of Kleon, it creates a dichotomy between the two, juxtaposing their views of Athens and their leadership styles, emphasizing Pericles’ virtues while bringing out the more aggressive side in Kleon.
