Etymologically, Democracy originates from the Greek word (demokratia) which means “rule of the people”, which instinctively was found from (demos) “people” and (krastos) “power” or “rule”, during the 5th century B.C denote the political trends and systems which encompassed most Greek city-states, evidently Athens. Notably, from the Greek perspective of things, contemporary writers like Larry Diamond have tried to explain Democracy from a purely 21st century point of view, trying as much as possible to bestow certain key elements on modern day Democracy (Diamond, 2004).
Inherent in Democracy is the personality of a statesman. A statesman from a layman’s point of view is usually a politician, diplomat or other notable public figure that has had a long and respected career at the national and international level. Statesman as the term denotes (diplomat or other notable public figure), is prevalent in the 5th and 4th century history of Greece. Pericles and Alcibiades are considered by the Greeks (Athenians especially), as their most notable and praised statesmen who fostered the course of democracy. This write-up will therefore look at the roles of Pericles and Alcibiades (in the realm of democracy) in Greek (Athenian) history and also focusing on each party’s true statesmanship based on their achievements. I will like to state emphatically that sources on these two personalities are from Plutarch and Thucydides, as they are considered to have given accounts on them. In a more pressing and elaborative sense, other sources may come in handy.
Pericles was born in Athens in about 495 BC to a family of wealth and position. His father, Xanthippus, was also a statesman, and his mother, Agariste, was a member of the politically powerful Alcmaeonid family. Pericles himself first gained fame in the spring of 472, when he provided and trained the chorus for Aeschylus' play 'The Persians'. According to Herodotus, Agariste dreamed, a few nights before Pericles' birth that she had borne a lion. Interestingly, legends say that Philip II of Macedon had a similar dream before the birth of his son, Alexander the Great (Herodotus, VI, 131). One interpretation of the dream treats the lion as a traditional symbol of greatness, but the story may also allude to the unusually large size of Pericles' skull, which became a popular target of contemporary comedians (who called him "Squill-head", after the Squill or Sea-Onion) (Ehrenberg, 1990: 239). Although Plutarch claims that this deformity was the reason that Pericles was always depicted wearing a helmet, this is not the case; the helmet was actually the symbol of his official rank as strategos (Cunningham and Reich, 2005: 73).
Diversifying the achievements of Pericles, we shall encounter numerous achievements to his name which accorded him the title of a statesman. Pericles, after the radical democracy of Ephialtes, seemed willing to follow a populist policy in order to cajole the public. According to Aristotle, Pericles' position can be explained by the fact that his political opponent, Cimon, was both rich and generous and was able to gain public favor by extravagantly handing out portions of his sizable personal fortune (Kenyon, 1891). Samons argues, however, that Pericles had enough resources to make a political mark by private means, had he chosen to (Samons, 2004: 80). In 461 BC, Pericles achieved the political dismissal of this opponent through ostracism.
Cimon’s ostracism paved the way for Pericles to foster the populist social movement. He first proposed a decree that permitted the poor to watch theatrical plays without paying, with the state covering the cost of their admission. With other decrees he lowered the property requirement for the archonship in 458–457 BC and bequeathed generous wages on all citizens who served as jurymen in the Heliaia (the supreme court of Athens) sometime just after 454 BC (Fornara and Samons, 1991: 67-73). His most controversial measure, however, was a law of 451 BC limiting Athenian citizenship to those of Athenian parentage on both sides (Rhodes, 2005).
These measures prompted Pericles' critics to hold him accountable for the gradual downfall of the Athenian democracy. Pericles also sought for the expansion and maintenance of all democratic institutions (Paparrigopoulos, 1925: 145). Hence, he enacted legislation granting the lower classes access to the political system and the public offices, from which they had previously been barred (Kenyon, 1891). Pericles, from conviction believed that it was necessary to raise the demos, in which he saw an unexploited source of Athenian power and the vital section of Athenian military supremacy (Samons, 2004: 65). The fleet, backbone of Athenian power since the days of Themistocles, was worked almost entirely by members of the lower classes (Fine, 1983: 377-378).
Cimon realized and was certain that democracy had reached its peak and Pericles' reforms were leading to the impasse of populism. According to Paparrigopoulos, Cimon was justified because Athens, after Pericles' death, sank into political turmoil. Paparrigopoulos maintains that an unparalleled regression descended upon the city, whose glory perished as a result of Pericles' populist policies (Paparrigopoulos, 1925: 145).
The "glory that was Greece" reached its height in the 5th century BC, in Athens, under the leadership of the statesman Pericles. He opened Athenian democracy to the ordinary citizen, he built the magnificent temples and statues on the Acropolis, and he created the Athenian empire. In 454 the treasury of the league was transferred from Delos to Athens. Pericles used the defense money to rebuild the temples of the gods that had been destroyed by the Persians in 480. Pericles argued that the allies were paying for their defense and, if that were assured, Athens did not have to account for how the money was spent. In 447 work started on the Parthenon, and the sculptor Phidias began work on the statue of Athena. It was from the alliance's treasury that Pericles drew the funds necessary to enable his ambitious building plan, centered on the "Periclean Acropolis", which included the Propylaea, the Parthenon and the golden statue of Athena, sculpted by Pericles' friend, Phidias (Hurwit, 2004: 87). In 449 BC Pericles suggested a decree allowing the use of 9,000 talents to finance the major transformation program of Athenian temples (Buckley, 1996: 206). Vlachos points out the utilization of the alliance's treasury, introduced and executed by Pericles, as one of the largest misappropriations in human history; this misappropriation financed, however, some of the most artistic creations of the ancient world (Vlachos, 1974: 62-63).
Moving forward, I shall now turn my attention and focus on unmasking Alcibiades. Alcibiades was the last famous member of his mother's aristocratic family, the Alcmaeonidae, which fell from fame after the Peloponnesian War. He played a major role in the second half of that conflict as a strategic advisor, military commander, and politician. According to Plutarch, Alcibiades had several famous teachers, including Socrates, and was well trained in the art of Rhetoric. He was noted, however, for his unruly behavior, which was mentioned by ancient Greek and Latin writers on several occasions. Alcibiades took part in the Battle of Potidaea in 432 BC, where Socrates was said to have saved his life (Plato, Symposium: 220e) and again at the Battle of Delium in 424 BC. Alcibiades had a chiefly close relationship with Socrates, whom he admired and respected (Sykoutris, 1934: 159). According to Plutarch, Alcibiades "feared and reverenced Socrates alone, and despised the rest of his lovers" (Plutarch, VI).
Alcibiades first rose to eminence when he began promoting aggressive Athenian action after the signing of the Peace of Nicias. That treaty, an uneasy truce between Sparta and Athens signed midway through the Peloponnesian War, came at the end of seven years of fighting during which neither side had gained a decisive advantage. Thucydides reports, (Cawkwell, 1997) that Alcibiades was upset that the Spartans had negotiated that treaty through Nicias and Laches, overlooking him on account of his youth (Sealey, 1976: 353). Alcibiades’ rise to prominence is characterized chiefly with the Sicilian expedition where he is appointed general together with Nicias and Lamachus, all three of whom were given full powers to do whatever was in the best interests of Athens while in Sicily (Thuc 6.26).
This height that Alcibiades attained was short lived when he was blamed for a religious scandal. This was a religious scandal and was seen as a bad omen for the mission. Plutarch recounts that Androcles, a political leader, used false eyewitnesses who accused Alcibiades and his friends of disfiguring the statues, and of profaning the Eleusinian Mysteries. Later his opponents, chief among them being Androcles and Thessalus, Cimon's son, recruited orators to argue that Alcibiades should set sail as planned and stand trial on his return from the campaign. Alcibiades was suspicious of their intentions, and asked to be allowed to stand trial immediately, under penalty of death, in order to clear his name (Plutarch, 19). This request was denied, and the fleet set sail soon after, with the charges unresolved (Thuc 6.29).
The motive under discussion however is not to delve deep into the reasons for he being blamed for the religious scandal, but rather how his contributions towards Athens, places him at the helm of being gratified a statesman. Kagan believes that while Alcibiades was a commander of substantial ability, he was no military genius, and his buoyancy and drives went far beyond his skills. Hence he was capable of important errors and serious inaccuracies. Kagan argues that at Notium, Alcibiades committed a serious error in leaving the fleet in the hands of an inexperienced officer, and that most of the credit for the brilliant victory at Cyzicus must be assigned to Thrasybulus (Kagan, 1991: 419-420).
Thucydides admits in a short digression that "publicly his conduct of the war was as good as could be desired" (Thuc, VI). According to Fotiadis, Alcibiades was an indomitable general and, wherever he went, victory followed him; had he led the army in Sicily, the Athenians would have avoided disaster and, had his countrymen followed his advice at Aegospotami, Lysander would have lost and Athens would have ruled Greece. Paparrigopoulos also believe that the Sicilian Expedition, prompted by Alcibiades, was a strategic mistake (Paparrigopoulos, 1925: 272).
Vlachos, a Greek Academician, emphasizes the constant interest of Athens for Sicily from the beginning of the war. According to Vlachos the expedition had nothing of the extravagant or adventurous and constituted a rational strategic decision based on traditional Athenian aspirations (Vlachos, 1974: 206). Vlachos asserts that Alcibiades had already conceived a broader plan: the conquest of the whole West (Vlachos, 1974: 202-203). He intended to conquer Carthage and Libya, then to attack Italy and, after winning these, to seize Italy and Peloponnesus. The initial decision of the ecclesia provided however for a reasonable military force, which later became awkwardly large and costly because of Nicias's demands (Vlachos, 1974: 206). Kagan criticizes Alcibiades for failing to recognize that the large size of the Athenian expedition undermined the diplomatic scheme on which his strategy rested (Kagan, 1991: 419-420).
To sum up in brief, these achievements of both Pericles and Alcibiades went a long way in the history of Greece, especially Athens, to somewhat aid them through their course. However, to be able to draw a definite distinction between these two personalities in accordance with their deeds and accord any, if possible the title of a true statesman will be burdensome. This will be difficult since Athenians considered them to have played a vital role in their quest for expansionism. The Athenians however do not give a definite criterion as to whom a “true statesman” is and whom to accord it to.

REFERENCE 1. Buckley, T (1996). Aspects of Greek History 750–323 BC. United Kingdom, Routledge. 2. Cawkwell, G (1997). Thucydides and the Peloponnesian War. United Kingdom, Routledge. 3. Cunningham L.S., Reich J.J. (2005). Culture and Values. Thomson Wadsworth 4. Ehrenberg, V.L. (1990). From Solon to Socrates. United Kingdom, Routledge 5. Fine, J.V.A (1983). The Ancient Greeks: A critical history. Harvard University Press 6. Fornara, C.W., Loren J.S II (1991). Athens from Cleisthenes to Pericles. Berkeley: University of California Press 7. Herodotus. The Histories, trans.: David Grene (1987). Chicago: University of Chicago Press 8. Hurwit, J.M. (2004). The Acropolis in the Age of Pericles. Cambridge University Press 9. Kagan, D (1991). The fall of the Athenian Empire. Cornell University Press 10. Kenyon, F.G (Ed), (1891). Aristotle on the Constitution of Athens. Trustees of the British Museum 11. Paparrigopoulos, K (1925), History of the Hellenic Nation. (Volume Ab). Eleftheroudakis 12. Plato, Symposium, trans.: Benjamin Jowett (1871). 13. Plutarch. (1916), Life of Pericles in The parallel Lives. Loeb Classical Library edition, Vol. III 14. Plutarch. (1916). Life of Alcibiades in The parallel Lives. Loeb Classical Library edition, Vol. III 15. Rhodes, P.J. (2005). A History of the Classical Greek World. Blackwell Publishing 16. Samons, L.J (2004). "The Peloponnesian War". What's Wrong with Democracy? Los Angeles, California: University of California Press 17. Sealey, R (1976). "The Peloponnesian War". A History of the Greek City States, 700–338 BC. University of California Press 18. Sykoutris, I (1934). Symposium (Introduction and Comments). Estia. 19. Vlachos, A (1974). Thucydides' Bias. Estia, (in Greek).