Classical Greece, War and Ethics: An Analysis

Fifth century Greece is often attributed with being the birthplace of modern democracy, law, and western humanities. Greek city-states developed different forms of governance with very different political structures and strengths. Greek colonization led to the spread of the Greek language and Greek culture, but it also resulted in tensions with the neighboring Persian empire, culminating in the Persian Wars.  Athens, home to Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Sophocles and many other philosophers, mathematicians, and playwrights seems a likely contender for most influential and modernly advanced polis (Greek city-state). Athens also developed a culture of science, culture, and philosophy, and became a powerful city state. However, many other city-states such as Delphi, Thebes, Athens, Corinth, Olympia and Sparta, despite warring, participated in modernly ethical wartime practices some of which are outlined in the source articles below.

Get Help With Your Essay
If you need assistance with writing your essay, our professional essay writing service is here to help!
Essay Writing Service

In “Remembering war in fifth-century Greece: ideologies, societies, and commemoration beyond democratic Athens”, an article submitted to “World Archaeology Vol. 35(1): 98-111 The Social Commemoration of Warfare”: author Polly Low posits that focus of this topic prior to this paper is centered on the democratic state of Athens, due to their relatively modern governing ideology. However, there is evidence of other non-democratic, and from the lens of Athenian citizens, savage states participating in “Athenian” commemoration of its dead. Low utilizes three archeological
sources of evidence to demonstrate the extents to which war dead were
commemorated in the various polis(city-states) in classical Greece around 5th
century BC. All of which come from anti-Athenian city states(Megara, Tanagra,
and Thespia).
Low’s
first example is a Megarian white marble stele, 76cm in height and 53-56cm in
width, which has inscribed a list of twenty-six names of deceased combatants
listed under their respective tribal headings. It is unknown if this stele had
any total, unifying heading as it was not preserved. The list of names is
comprised of an uneven number of names distributed among the listed tribes,
along with the names of non-citizens. The inclusion of non-citizens (slaves,
exiles, and/or allies) under the heading “epoikoi” is paralleled in Athenian
commemorative displays, yet rare outside of Grecian practices. 1
The
second evidence is of a memorial from the Boeotian city of Tanagra. This
casualty list is inscribed as four columns in black stone. There is no heading,
definitively, unlike the first example it has been fully preserved. The list of
63 names contains no patronymics (a name derived from the name of a father or
ancestor). Two of the names on this list are described as Eretrieus (from the
city of Eretria) and are the only two which have any other qualifiers. Although
it is likely that these individuals participated in battle in defense of
Tanagra, it is significant to note their inclusion despite not being members of
the polis. Despite being a common practice in Athens, the oligarchical Boeotia
recognized the importance of lives given in defense of the state, despite their
origin.2
The
third, final, and most important evidence presented by Lowe is that of the
state war memorial in Thespiae which in 424BCE was still a Boeotian city-state,
among the best-preserved examples from classical Greece. The important
discovery was a large enclosure (32m x 23m) which seems to have been in one of
the city’s main cemetery. “When excavated, the enclosure was found to contain
the traces of a large funeral pyre, with remains of cremated bodies and of
extensive grave offerings: ceramics, glass, and terra- cottas, as well as
bronze and bone objects, and traces of foodstuffs… As well as this cremation,
the tomb also contained seven inhumations. The reason for this anomaly is not
quite clear. The possibility that the different form of burial reflects a
difference in the status of the dead cannot be ruled out, although there is no
good evidence to support this view”3 as there was no discernable
difference in the quality of the burial, nor the quality or quantity in the
offerings. It is likely that “these inhumations took place after the cremation:
these bodies might be those who died of their wounds some time after the battle…
It seems improbable, at any rate, that there was any great chronological gap
between the two kinds of burial, since the inhumations certainly precede the erection
of the stone enclosure (the head of one of the skeletons lies under the line of
the east enclosure wall.”4 When reconstructed it was determined that
at one point there would have been 25 stelae containing 300 names, prominently
displayed on the front wall of the enclosure. On the remaining stelae 102 names
are displayed, 10-12 on each. Apart from two, names are listed without
patronymics. Those two exceptions, Tisimeneis and Polynikos, which are listed
with pythionika and olymoionika respectively, as victors of Pythian and Olympic
games.5
Lowes examples indicate that commemoration of the “war-dead” was an important feature of Greek civilization even outside of the popularized Athens. “Democratic Athenians saw in their traditions of commemorating their war-dead something intrinsically Athenian and something
intrinsically democratic. The fact that the oligarchic Thespians were,
simultaneously, engaged in objectively very similar practices, or that the
Athenian monuments also commemorated non-Athenians, does not mean that those
Athenians were deluded in their beliefs, but shows, rather, the extent to which
the meanings of commemorative monuments of this sort are not fixed by the
nature of the monuments themselves, but derive their shape from the changing
contexts in which they are found.” 6 In “The Laws of War in Ancient
Greece”, published in Law and History Review, Vol. 26, No. 3, Law, War, and
History (Fall, 2008), pp.469-489, author Adriaan Lanni discusses the laws,
mostly unspoken, governing war between the polis (city-states) in classical
Greece, and examines to what extent these laws affected the tactics and actions
taken by these city-states. Lanni breaks the question down into four constituent
elements.
Firstly,
how were these laws formed? Most of the laws governing interstate war stemmed
from “laws common to all men”, that is laws that most citizens intrinsically
acted regarding, not being formulated or written. Often these laws resulted from
religious thinking at the time.
Secondly, by what mechanisms were these unspoken laws enforced? Despite evidence of instances of violations being punished by other parties in multi-state agreements, or abstract punishments delivered by the gods in response to behavior that didn’t follow religious mandates, Lanni indicates that the laws were often not enforced by other states, but by the actions of the state itself in an effort to retain or improve its reputation “Reputational damage may have been the most effective sanction against violating the laws of war. Honor and status were the currency of the Greek world…The ramifications of a damaged reputation extended beyond loss of honor: the typical Greek city-state’s security and economic success depended on its relationships with other states via treaties,
alliances, and informal friendship (philia) relationships.”7 Because
of the influential nature of nationalism and the honor attributed to those who
distinguished themselves in battle, the influence of laws of war affected all
levels of many armies.
Thirdly–
what, specifically, were these “laws common to all men”? Lanni describes four
such laws: Protection of Sacred Places, People, and Events — temples,
sanctuaries, and other religious buildings were not to be disturbed, even in
wartime.
Immunity
for Heralds and Ambassadors – “International law granted immunity to heralds
(professional messengers used to communicate with foreign states) and ambassadors
(citizens who were appointed to represent their polis and negotiate with a
foreign state). This norm enjoyed widespread acceptance by the Persians as well
as Greeks.”8Treatment
of Enemy Dead – “Respectful treatment and return of the enemy dead was another
well-entrenched norm with religious origins. Stripping a dead soldier to claim
his armor was standard practice, but by the early classical period it was
considered contrary to international law to mutilate or harm the body in any
way. This norm sprang from religious rather than humanitarian or dignitary
concerns: to deny burial was to interfere with the funeral rites required by
the gods.”9Treatment
of Captives – “Because Greek religion was devoid of ethical content, religious
beliefs and customs did not give rise to norms making war more humane… In
Greece, the code of honor generally required simply “helping one’s friends
and hurting one’s enemies;” nothing, least of all compassion and mercy in
battle, was owed to the soldiers or citizens of enemy state.”10 It’s
interesting to note however that this thought was not total in terms of its acceptance by Greek citizens, as many philosophers and playwrights challenged this norm.Finally,
Lanni answers the question “Did the Laws of War Constrain Greek States?” Yes.
And no. Greek city-states were only constrained by these common laws insofar as
they contributed to their reputation, or lack thereof, and to the prescriptions
of the gods. As expected, of non-binding laws, these laws were also taken into
consideration along with the interests of the state’s welfare.
When
comparing “The Laws of War in Ancient Greece” and “Remembering war in
fifth-century Greece: ideologies, societies, and commemoration beyond
democratic Athens” the former takes a broad approach of looking at the wartime
practices of Greek city states, whereas the latter looks at a specific aspect
of these practices, commemoration of the war-dead. Interestingly “The Laws of
War in Ancient Greece” makes a point attributing those acts of commemoration to
religious mandate, which “Remembering war in fifth-century Greece: ideologies,
societies, and commemoration beyond democratic Athens” does not. Both articles
describe the somewhat enlightened and progressive practice of honoring
casualties of war as well as dictates that constrain wartime practices. “Remembering
war in fifth-century Greece: ideologies, societies, and commemoration beyond
democratic Athens” seeks to, and in my opinion, succeeds in proving that many
Greek polis, not just Athens, took part in an important element of these common
practices. In “The Laws of War in Ancient Greece” this is attributed likely to
the religious mandates as denying a burial would interfere with funeral rites.
Professor Polly Low author of “Remembering war in fifth-century Greece: ideologies, societies, and commemoration beyond democratic Athens” is a professor of classical and ancient Greece at Durham University in Durham, United Kingdom. He has authored several journal articles, as well
as his own book, and edited several other books on classical Greece. He studied
at Oxford obtaining an undergraduate degree and Cambridge for his PhD. 11
Professor
Adriaan Lanni author of “The Laws of War in Ancient Greece” is a professor of
Criminal Law at Harvard university and in addition teacher several legal
history courses on ancient Greek and Roman law. “She received a B.A., summa cum
laude, in Classical Civilization from Yale University, an M.Phil. in Classics
from Cambridge University, where she was a Marshall Scholar, a J.D. from Yale
Law School, and a Ph.D. in History from the University of Michigan.”12
Both authors, I think were motivated by a desire to examine to what extent historical law and humanities during wartime affects current practices of diplomacy and wartime law. With increased international tensions stemming from religious and national conflicts, modern diplomats and historians may want to look to the successes and prescription of past nations. Fifth century Greece contributed much to modern ethics, wartime law, modern democracy, and western humanities. By examining the practices of these key societies, it may be possible to make better decisions about the future of international policy.
Bibliography
Harvard Law School. “Adriaan Lanni.” Harvard Law School. Accessed November 17, 2018. https://hls.harvard.edu/faculty/directory/10503/Lanni.Lanni, Adriaan. “The Laws of War in Ancient Greece.” Law and History Review 26, no. 3 (2008): 469-89. http://www.jstor.org/stable/27641604.Low, Polly. “Remembering War in Fifth-Century Greece: Ideologies, Societies, and Commemoration beyond Democratic Athens.” World Archaeology 35, no. 1 (2003): 98-111. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3560214.“Staff.” Department of Classics and Ancient History Staff. Accessed November 17, 2018. https://www.dur.ac.uk/classics/staff/?id=17406.