A Final Appeal to the Melians

In The Melian Dialogue, the people on the isle of Melos have been given a proposition by the Athenians: either submit to the Athenians, or face certain destruction under the might of the Athenian military. The Melians have stated that being colonist of the Lacedaemonians, they expect them to come to their aid if they were attacked. Additionally, the Melians feel as though they are the righteous ones in this exchange and can count on assistance from the gods – and therefore feel thoroughly protected. This précis is based on paragraph 111 of the dialogue, in which the Athenians are arguing that the Melians are making a nonsensical choice in refusing their offer of alliance, especially given their lack of viable options.

The paragraph starts out with the Athenians conceding that yes, the Melians may be able to convince Lacedaemon to come to their aid, but that still is not going to save them. They continue in saying that there has never been a time in the past that a state coming to the aid of an Athenian target has ever deterred Athens from attacking, and this time is no different. Furthermore, the Athenians point out that despite the Melian’s initial claim that their first and foremost priority is the safety of their people at large, that they have yet to give any counterarguments, nor have they broached anything of note that would lead any reasonable man to believe that they would be delivered from destruction.

They base this assertion on the fact that the Melians are placing their hopes of salvation not on their own ability to defend themselves, but on the goodwill of others outside of their control, and that is a completely unreasonable expectation to base the very existence of their entire civilization on. This is especially true when Melos has zero efficacy in the face of the force shown from Athens as it is well established that the isle of Melos has little to no chance in matching the military might of Athens.

In the face of continued Melian dissention, the Athenians were utterly shocked in their lack of reason lamenting: “For surely you cannot dream of flying to that false sense of honour which has been the ruin of so many when danger and dishonour were staring them in the face.” Being consummate realist, the Athenians held the door open for their reversal of their conclusion as they reasoned with the Melians that there have been several men who have fallen prey to conjectures such as honor. And that these men, while holding on to their pride have suffered all sorts of injurious things far worse than merely the loss of their honor. But this need not be the case with the Melians, Athens argued, because there is no honor lost in submitting to a stronger city, and no profit in willfully walking towards certain death.

However, the Melians remained obstinate, no doubt holding fast to the belief that they would be reduced to slaves if they would submit to Athens. This is interesting because within this short dialogue, slavery is mentioned three times – but never by the Athenians and always by the Melians. There was a short inference when the Athenians said in response to accusations of wanting to enslave the Melians that “To you the gain will be that by submission you will avert the worst; and we shall be all the richer for your preservation.” By using the word “submission” one could properly infer that the Athenians meant slavery. The problem with that line of thought is that there are several other means of submission that would just as easily fit within the broad stroke of “submission”.

Here in paragraph 111, we have the first clear and unequivocal statement of intention from the Athenians when they say “If you are wise you will not run this risk; you ought to see that there can be no disgrace in yielding to a great city which invites you to become her ally on reasonable terms, keeping your own land, and merely paying tribute; and that you will certainly gain no honour if, having to choose between two alternatives, safety and war, you obstinately prefer the worse.” So no, they would not be turned to slaves, in contrast they would maintain ownership of their land, while paying a tax. And while at this point they have no allegiances to anyone in this war, being an “ally” infers a further benefit by way of protection from Athens – the ruler of the waters that surround their island.

The Athenians close their argument by allowing the Melians more time to think about what they were doing, imploring them to deliberate over this decision “over and over” and to truly ponder over the fact that they only have one shot to get this right. And with this one decision they will either save or destroy their entire country. The dialogue eventually ends with the Melians continued refusal – followed shortly thereafter by their swift annihilation.