Nemesis: Alcibiades and the Fall of Athens

by David Stuttard

Alcibiades was one of the most dazzling figures of the Golden Age of Athens. A ward of Pericles and a friend of Socrates, he was spectacularly rich, bewitchingly handsome and charismatic, a skilled general, and a ruthless politician. He was also a serial traitor, infamous for his dizzying changes of loyalty in the Peloponnesian War. Nemesis tells the story of this extraordinary life and the turbulent world that Alcibiades set out to conquer.

David Stuttard recreates ancient Athens at the height of its glory as he follows Alcibiades from childhood to political power. Outraged by Alcibiades’s celebrity lifestyle, his enemies sought every chance to undermine him. Eventually, facing a capital charge of impiety, Alcibiades escaped to the enemy, Sparta. There he traded military intelligence for safety until, suspected of seducing a Spartan queen, he was forced to flee again—this time to Greece’s long-term foes, the Persians. Miraculously, though, he engineered a recall to Athens as Supreme Commander, but—suffering a reversal—he took flight to Thrace, where he lived as a warlord. At last in Anatolia, tracked by his enemies, he died naked and alone in a hail of arrows.

As he follows Alcibiades’s journeys crisscrossing the Mediterranean from mainland Greece to Syracuse, Sardis, and Byzantium, Stuttard weaves together the threads of Alcibiades’s adventures against a backdrop of cultural splendor and international chaos. Navigating often contradictory evidence, Nemesis provides a coherent and spellbinding account of a life that has gripped historians, storytellers, and artists for more than 2,000 years.

Genres: History, Biography, Nonfiction, Ancient History, Politics, Greece, Classics

380 pages, Hardcover

First published April 1, 2018

About the author

David Stuttard is a British theatre director, classical scholar, translator, lecturer on classical literature and history, and author, primarily of historical works on the ancient world.

Reviews

[Brad Lyerla · Rating 4 out of 5]

Upon a second reading, I liked NEMESIS a bit more the second time around. I am adding another star to my rating. Stuttard’s biography of the infamous and incorrigible Alcibiades is solidly good. I recommend it, though it sheds only a bit of light on Plato’s references to Alcibiades in his Socratic dialogues.

Here are a few other thoughts.

First, it is a mistake to read this book on an e-reader. The notes are in the back and it is enormously frustrating not to have immediate access to them as you read. You will also want access to Stuttard’s map of the ancient Aegean and to his chronology/timeline.

Second, Alcibiades is a fascinating creature in many ways: vain, charismatic, insecure, proud, handsome, eloquent, seductive and devious. After reading Stuttard’s account, it is confirmed in my mind that he was not the sort of man who should ever have been trusted with anything important. Though talented and physically beautiful, his defining characteristic was his unquenchable ambition that inevitably caused him to be unreliable. He inflicted damage upon enemy and friend alike more or less equally. Among many other disgraceful acts, he is thought by many to have arranged the murder of his own wife. The dust cover of NEMESIS does not lie. Alcibiades defected to an enemy many times in his 25 plus years as a soldier. His falseness eventually caught up with him and he was assassinated while attempting to meet and ingratiate himself to the Great King of Persia after Alcibiades had been run out of Athens for the fourth time (having been invited back repeatedly by the fickle Athenians). Alcibiades was still in his forties when he was murdered.

Third, Alcibiades is of interest to someone like me because he appears in a handful of Plato’s dialogues and two are named for him. Although those two, Alcibiades I and Alcibiades II, are not confirmed to be authentic works of Plato. Alcibiades is a principal character in Plato’s Symposium and he appears in Gorgias and Protogoras. He may be in other of Plato’s dialogues too, but those are the ones that I can name off the top of my head.

Fourth, Alcibiades is tied to Socrates because he is said to have been Socrates’ lover. Stuttard does not examine this question closely. He accepts that Socrates rebuffed Alcibiades’ attempts to seduce Socrates when Alcibiades was still a youth. (Alcibiades admitted as much.) But Stuttard acknowledges that when Alcibiades attained majority, he served in the Athenian army with Socrates and for many months he and Socrates shared a tent while on campaign. This occurred after Socrates had saved Alcibiades’ life. Alcibiades was about twenty years old and Socrates would have been in his mid-forties. I do not know what to make of this, if anything. But it seems to have been debated down the centuries as if it were a matter of great importance. So Stuttard could not avoid it in his book. For my part, I think Stuttard chose well to play this subject down. In any event, Socrates seems not to have had an important role in Alcibiades’ life during the last 25 years or so.

Socrates outlived Alcibiades by a few years. The regime that sentenced Socrates to drink hemlock was the same regime in Athens that chased Alcibiades to Asia Minor before his assassination, but their deaths do not seem to be connected in Stuttard’s view.

[Charles Haywood · Rating 5 out of 5]

We live in an age lacking dynamic leadership. We are instead led, if one can call it that, by men who are clowns, feminized, or confused—or, often, by confused feminized clowns. The idea of a charismatic, ambitious, intelligent, unapologetically masculine leader has entirely vanished from our minds, in part because we see no examples among us, and in part because we are indoctrinated such men are retrograde and properly consigned to the past, and we should accept our new, apparently vat-grown, “leaders,” typically resembling some hybrid of John Kerry and Trigglypuff. Still, a heretical little voice whispers to us, pointing out that eras of human flourishing and accomplishment are always led by men of glory, and asking us, why is that?

To answer that question, and learn some related lessons, we cannot do better than review the life of one of the most famous Athenians—Alcibiades, son of Cleinias. Born in 450 B.C. and dead by the arrows of assassins forty-six years later, his life must be read to be believed. In past eras, his story was taught to schoolchildren and known by all, but no longer, since schoolchildren are only taught about stupid, unimportant, unaccomplished (or pernicious) people who check the right identity politics boxes. At least among sectors of the Right, though, Alcibiades has recently returned to the spotlight, thanks to the pseudonymous Bronze Age Pervert’s peerless reimagining of Mitt Romney if he had been Alcibiades. Romney could never have been Alcibiades; that’s the joke, and the point—but to fully get the joke, it helps to know the background, and this outstanding book is a good way to learn it.

You don’t have to be on the Right, though, to benefit from knowing about Alcibiades, and David Stuttard’s Nemesis captures Alcibiades in all his genius and contradiction. We know from the title that the ending is not a happy one for the main character. Or maybe it is, given his premises, and the premises of the time. The Greek philosophers knew, as was carved on the façade of the temple at Delphi, that man should pursue “Nothing in Excess.” But the philosophers, though we remember them as the most important men of the age, were in fact often looked down upon by the doers of the age, who did not, usually, respect the Delphic maxim. And none less so than Alcibiades.

Alcibiades’s motivations are clear, even at this great distance. His core motivation, common among the Greeks but taken to a fever pitch by the greatest among them, was the desire, like Achilles, “always to be best and to surpass all others.” For us, tempered by two thousand years of Christian belief, of exaltation of charity, love, and selflessness, and contempt for pride as being the greatest sin, it is hard to truly embrace this attitude. But the desire to be best, better than others, is a natural attitude among men, held with greater or lesser fierceness (and nearly completely lacking in women, even if nowadays sometimes shallowly implanted by ideological indoctrination). Everything Alcibiades did was to advance this goal, with a single-mindedness, an obsessiveness, that always characterizes those who accomplish great things—but with terrible costs, for others and, ultimately, for Alcibiades, though he would not have counted any of that cost.

As with all histories of the Ancient World, for nearly every event he narrates, Stuttard has to select among competing sources, usually written years later, often of dubious veracity. Thucydides’s "History of the Peloponnesian War" is his main source; Stuttard suggests, without exactly claiming, that Alcibiades may have been a direct source for Thucydides, offering his own spin, which is certainly possible and would explain various elements of the "History." (I don’t know if this theory is original to Stuttard.) The contemporaneous plays of Aristophanes pillory Alcibiades (often lightly disguised), but as the author notes, Alcibiades was always enormously controversial, so even from such direct sources an accurate picture cannot be guaranteed, and sources from centuries later are even less reliable. Still, the basic story of Alcibiades’s life is not in dispute.

He was born in 450 B.C., a member of the Athenian elite, with high aristocratic lineage from both his parents, though his mother’s family had been exiled more than once. His mother, Deinomache, was married and divorced from Pericles, the greatest Athenian of the age, before she married Cleinias. And when Cleinias was killed in battle in 447, Alcibiades was sent to the household of Pericles to be raised as his ward. Thus, Alcibiades grew up during the years of Athens’s greatest glory, after the defeat of the Persians and before the Peloponnesian War. Tales, perhaps apocryphal but showing how he was viewed by contemporaries, are told of his childhood and adolescence. The tales prefigure his later reputation, as a boundlessly immodest, but super-competent, glory hound always willing to take risks greater and matters further than others, disrespectful of authority, prone to using violence to settle arguments, and hyper-sensitive to slights or to being seen as other than the best in any endeavor. And, given his social role as a member of the aristocratic elite and a member of Pericles’s household, he was also exposed to the rough-and-tumble of Athenian politics, which was not a gentle sport.

When the Peloponnesian War began in 431, Alcibiades eagerly went to war. He fought as a hoplite at the Athenian victory at Potidea, early in the war; it was told that, advancing too far into the enemy’s ranks, he had to be saved by Socrates, under whom he had earlier studied. Naturally, his bravery was admired, in that age when martial bravery was the core measure of a man, and Alcibiades rapidly entered the public life of Athens, funding liturgies and engaging in politics. But he was also already collecting enemies, lots of them, as we can tell from his being repeatedly satirized in the plays of Aristophanes. The war ground on, with Alcibiades enrolling in the cavalry, which fit since he was obsessed with horses, a typical aristocratic pursuit. He again and again showed his bravery and managed to not be hurt or killed, and when he turned thirty, he became eligible for elective offices, both military and civil. At that moment, however, Athens and Sparta signed the Peace of Nicias in 421, pushing the pause button on the war.

During the troubled Peace, Alcibiades pushed an aggressive line, keeping himself in the forefront of Athenian politics, and of Greek politics more generally, entering multiple winning chariot teams at once at the Olympic games and spending every day, all day, being a tireless self-promoter. He was instrumental in demanding the destruction of Melos, the aftermath of the famous Melian Dialogue, which encapsulates the dominant Athenian attitude of the time toward other Greeks. Naturally, all this made him even more enemies, who sourly, but perhaps accurately, viewed his self-promotion as that of a man who wanted, not like Pericles to be “first citizen,” but to be a tyrant.

Fitting the pattern that characterized his life, Alcibiades reached too far. When the war fired up again, he was one of the major advocates for the massive Athenian expedition in 415 to conquer Syracuse, which failed disastrously and resulted in tens of thousands of Athenian deaths. It was just prior to the launch of that expedition that Athens was rent by the mysterious destruction of the Herms, idols set up throughout the city as defenders of it. Suspicion fell on Alcibiades, known to be irreligious (though, as Stuttard points out, it is extremely unlikely that Alcibiades would have deliberately jeopardized the Syracusan expedition he had worked so hard to accomplish). And then his enemies also accused him of profaning the sacred Eleusinian Mysteries—but postponed his trial until the Syracusan expedition, on which Alcibiades would sail, should return.

And sail he did. But neither he nor the expedition returned. Halfway through the expedition, with his enemies working overtime back in Athens, the Assembly sent a ship to arrest Alcibiades and return him to Athens to stand trial for impiety and sacrilege. Instead, he fled to Sparta (and the Sicilians destroyed the rest of the Athenians), Athens’s greatest enemy, and offered his services to them. At this point, two related characteristics of Alcibiades come to the fore. First, he was able to, apparently overnight, completely adapt himself to an alien culture, and participate in it at the highest levels, as if he had been born to it. Second, he turned traitor at the drop of a hat; this was only the first instance. Alcibiades was for one thing only: Alcibiades, and the rest of his career is testimony and confirmation.

It helped his transition that Alcibiades had Spartan friends and connections, some by happenstance, some because the Athenian aristocracy always had a tense relationship with democracy and tended to feel commonality with other Greek city-states that had an aristocratic government. Back in Athens, Alcibiades was formally cursed by the priests, all his wealth was confiscated, and a stone set up listing his disgrace. To boot, he was sentenced to death in absentia.

He ignored Athenian rage, and used his rhetorical charm to convince the Spartans he was really on their side. He promptly began feeding the Spartans state secrets learned in Athens, and giving them excellent strategic advice, while engaging in sophistry like “I’m doing all I can to reclaim a homeland I no longer have.” Then he had an affair with the wife of one the of two Spartan kings (he was, no surprise, a famous playboy in Athens too), probably fathering a son by her. He also became involved in the machinations between Sparta and Persia, the latter angling again for influence over Greece, especially in Ionia. Stuttard deftly describes the complex Persian involvement in the war, although he has the annoying habit of insisting on using Old Persian forms of names, hence Dārayavahuš, instead of Darius.

The Persians played off the Spartans against the Athenians, but at this time were supporting the Spartans. So, fighting in Ionia, perhaps sensing a wavering of Spartan support for him, Alcibiades fell in with the local satrap, Tissaphernes. For Alcibiades was not only a first-class orator; he also had that type of personality difficult to withstand in person, which meant that he often carried the day in the fiercely argumentative councils of his time. The defect in relying on that talent to win arguments, though, is that when you’re absent, the effect wears off. In the 1990s, before he returned to Apple, Steve Jobs ran NeXT, and he kept the company afloat by wooing investors caught in his famous “reality distortion field.” But he couldn’t enchant everyone at once, or use his talents on consumers, and so his company never really succeeded. For such men (and they are all men), it is only when underlying conditions conspire to push your line in your absence, to make it stay appealing and the obvious choice, that this strategy will work for long, and Alcibiades was always being called away. (Moreover, the flip side of the reality distortion field is often narcissism without self-reference, combined with a belief in your own destiny. These are probably necessary elements to its success, but faced with the right opponents, and the slightest setback, this can be used against you.) So when the Spartans arrived to arrest Alcibiades, he had already shifted his loyalties to the Persians, in 412 yet again skipping out just ahead of the executioner.

Now Alcibiades morphed into a Persian, effete in Greek eyes, but effective in the tangled politics of Persia. He helped the Persians play the Spartans against the Athenians. Soon enough, the desperate Athenians, negotiating with Alcibiades, offered Tissaphernes a better deal than the Spartans for Persian support—including eliminating Athenian democracy, and letting Alcibiades return, because Alcibiades convinced them he controlled Tissaphernes. Which he didn’t, but he figured he would worry about that later. But he didn’t go back to Athens yet, instead fighting in northern Ionia and Thrace, now against the Spartans. In 407, finally, he stage-managed his return to Athens, to great acclaim, as the savior who would now lead the city, at long last, to victory.

Then it all went permanently wrong, after so many years of juggling, balancing, and lucky escapes. The Persians went back to the Spartans; it became clear Alcibiades had lied about his influence. He sailed out as commander of the Athenian fleet and lost most of it, at the Battle of Notium (conducted recklessly by an incompetent subordinate, but Alcibiades got the blame). He could win no victories on sea or land, but needed money, so he looted a city loyal to Athens. Quickly, and logically, the Athenians turned against him, and once again, Alcibiades got out while the getting was good—to Thrace, land of hard-drinking horsemen, cousins of the Greeks, where he had allies, and again mutated himself, to a Thracian prince.

But in 404, Sparta finally defeated Athens, and imposed the oligarchical rule of the Thirty on Athens. The Thirty acted to eliminate their enemies, and their enemies included Alcibiades, a free floating threat who might pop up any day to destabilize the fragile state. Alcibiades, sensing the danger, unwisely left Thrace, where he was relatively safe and functioned as a warlord, and moved back to Persia. The satrap Pharnabazus put him under house arrest, in Phrygia, and Alcibiades waited for an audience with the Great King—no doubt, he hoped to once again rise to glory, and could not do so in backward Thrace. But the Athenians and the Spartans both wanted him dead; Pharnabazus obliged, sending his own uncle and brother to do the job. They stole his weapons, set his house on fire and shot him down as he rushed out to fight, naked, with only a dagger. So passed Alcibiades, son of Cleinias, to his eternal reward, whatever that may be.

I keep promising lessons for today, so what are those, or some of those? First, Alcibiades is a prototypical Man of Destiny. My belief is that such a man will inevitably rise to power following a future fracture, and though the timing is impossible to predict, I’d guess sooner rather than later. Troubled times call forth such men, even if we have mostly forgotten they exist. Much of the reason Alcibiades was able to cut his flaming arc across the sky was the instability of his times. War, economic turmoil, changes in attitudes, all played a part; in a more stable time with less tolerance for flash, say Augustan Rome, he would have toed the line or ended up quickly dead. But in the right circumstances, such a man can become dominant nearly overnight (something hinted at in Trump’s rise, with all his gross defects and without most of the virtues of Alcibiades).

As Stuttard . . . [Review completes as first comment]

[Petra · Rating 5 out of 5]

I am in love with the most charismatic anti-hero of ancient Greece. Alcibiades life story is bigger drama than any ancient writer could have come up with.

And the way the author tells the story of Alcibiades is pure mastery.
As I read it I felt like I was living in Greece at the time and completely understood their mentality.

[Piker7977 · Rating 5 out of 5]

Important figure. Important biography. Important history. Important legacy.

This is a superb biography of the Greek figure which also fills a historiographical void. Stuttard crafts his study of Alcibiades not so much as a pure biography, but rather as an examination of how this man fit into the larger context of Athens during the Peloponnesian War. One can compare this to Donald Kagan's Pericles of Athens and the Birth of Democracy. Perhaps biographies of Classical Greek figures are limited to this treatment due to a lack of sources, but this approach works quite well as it compliments other studies of Athens while letting the reader become more familiar with figures like Nicias, Callias, and Lysander.

Stuttard's historiographical approach is timely. I am surprised that there haven't been more biographies of demagogues and histories of democracies run amok; ancient and contemporary. Nemesis fits this category well to serve as a timely study of how those who harness the power of a demos can wield and use it for selfish ends. Consider this quote from page 270:

"As Alcibiades as their general, they felt they were invincible. The People, too, the city's democratic poor, were captivated. Surely the best thing now, they thought, would be for Alcibiades to assume complete control, to take the role of tyrant, beneficent, efficient like Peisistratus a hundred and more years before, a guiding shepherd to his flock. If only he were untouchable by those who envied him! Then he could pass executive decisions, untrammeled by the weight of law! Then he could rid the city of the windbag armchair generals and so-called politicians, who loved to debate, but were so blatantly incapable of producing tangible results! Then he could make Athens great again!"

There are a couple of other passages from the book that portray the excitement and momentum of a pure democracy. Alcibiades's rise and fall in Athens, rise and fall in Sparta, flirtations with Persia, return to Athens, and then one last fall in Thrace remind us how dangerous these shape-shifting demagogues can be to not only their home polis, but also the world that surrounds them. On the other hand, his biography also looks at how these people can benefit a polis if allowed.

Created in a democracy, forged during a war, and fallen during the endgame, Alcibiades's tale is one that needs to be written, read, rewritten, and reread throughout the ages. Thank you David Stuttard.

[Michael Tobert · Rating 5 out of 5]

It's hard to imagine that a scholarly book about a fifth century BC Athenian, could be unputdownable, but this one is.

Ancient Greece has always attracted me; attracted me, that is, in a romantic, nostalgic sort of way rather than as a prompt to getting down to some hard graft and really understanding what was going on. I did attempt Thucydides’ History of the Peloponnesian War when I was a youth but, if I got any distance with it (which I probably didn’t), nothing remains. Now David Stuttard has produced a book that is scholarship without the tough chewy bits, serious history that slips down like honey.

Here’s the background … The first half of the 5th century BC saw the Athenians triumphant; the Persians routed at Marathon (490BC), the Athenian empire extending to Asia Minor (now Turkey), democracy established under Pericles, the building of the Parthenon, arts and literature promoted and Athens the undisputed cultural centre of the Ancient Greek world. The fifth century ended with the sacking of Athens by the Spartans, dictatorship imposed and the Ionian Greek cities ceded to Persia; a fall from grace for which one of Athens best generals, most charismatic of speakers and most adventurous in love and war bore much of the responsibility: Alcibiades.

The problem with Alcibiades was that he was, in modern parlance, a bit up himself. When you come first, second and third in the most prestigious event at the Olympics, the chariot race, a bit of modesty is called for; not celebrations that would make an oriental pasha seem parsimonious. When you go to Sparta as an honoured guest, it’s not a good idea to sire the heir to the Spartan throne when the King is away on campaigns. These, and many more arrogant indiscretions besides, were the sort of things that made enemies. It doesn’t matter how good a general you may be – and Alcibiades was one of the best – your little peccadilloes will come back to haunt you.

Enemies, lesser men, the dull, the boring; that’s who Alcibiades blamed for his career in treachery. It was his enemies who would have put him on trial for gross impiety if he hadn’t jumped ship before they could catch him. Instead, like Coriolanus (a sort of poor man’s Alcibiades), he preferred to go over to the arch-enemy, Sparta. There, he traded his inside track on Athenian thinking for the post of General in the Spartan army. He did well – he won battles for the Spartans – but, also, couldn’t resist the temptation to seduce the Spartan queen; not a good career move. Accordingly, he was forced to pack his suitcase once more and hotfoot it out, this time to Persia. From there, back to Athens as Commander in Chief – the Athenians must have been (and were) desperate – until savouring for too long the fruits of an unexpected victory over Sparta, he was unprepared for the Spartan resurgence. The Athenian fleet was lost and his enemies weren’t happy; ‘I told you so,’ ‘we shouldn’t have trusted him in the first place’ etc. Alcibiades was obliged to make a quick exit once more, this time to Thrace where he lived as a warlord. From Thrace, his much-travelled suitcase found its way back to Persia, but, alas, no happy landings for it there. Alcibiades was cut down in a hail of arrows while sleeping with his two favourite concubines. What other ending would have sufficed?

David Stuttard has called his book Nemesis. Nemesis is what the gods dish out to mortals who get too big for their boots. Before nemesis, comes hubris or the kind of overweening arrogance which cries out for punishment. Alcibiades’ life is a study in hubris and David Stuttard gives us chapter and verse.

But the book gives us much else besides; the details of the fighting between the Greek City States for one thing. I hadn’t realized the Greeks were such a warlike lot; for a small country, whose cities are no more than a stone’s throw apart, they were forever at each other’s throats. The bonus of war was either tribute – neither Athens nor Sparta could run their empires on indigenous wealth – or retribution, or helots (slaves). So they went after whatever targets were to hand even if that particular target was just down the road. But the downside of so much blood, was that the real Spartan or the real Athenian became an endangered species whose number had to be augmented by promoted slaves.

The book also reminds us that the Greeks believed in their gods. Somehow this seems surprising; that one of the most intellectual, questioning societies there has ever been could imagine that divine power resided on Mt Olympus. Yet they did. They erected monuments and temples to their gods, they listened to their advice and they didn’t fight battles, or do almost anything, unless the auspices were good. Perhaps, though, not so odd; not very different to what most other societies have done in the millennia that followed.

And the book provides the answer to an age-old question; who was Lysander? When I was at school, we had to sing a song called the British Grenadiers: “Some talk of Alexander and some of Hercules / of Hector and Lysander and such great names as these / but of all the world’s brave heroes there’s none that can compare / with a tow row row row row row for the British Grenadiers.” Well, I knew who Alexander was and Hercules and Hector, but this Lysander? Never heard of him. Now, thanks to David Stuttard, I have; he was the Spartan general who defeated the Athenians and brought the Peloponnesian war to an end. Who knew?

And afterwards, after the defeat of Athens? Well, the wheel turned. The dictators whom the Spartans had imposed on Athens were driven out and democracy restored. After years of supporting Sparta, the Persians decided to bankroll Athens. Other states – Corinth, Argos and Boetia – upset at Spartan brutality rallied round the Athenian cause. The Spartans were defeated, their hegemony at an end. The good times were back. It was the era of Plato and Aristotle and of the cultural supremacy of Athens once again. All were able to raise a glass to the restoration of the old verities, even poor old Socrates, the one time friend and defender of Alcibiades, who was deemed guilty by association and forced to fill his glass with hemlock. For a small country, the Greeks were always free and easy with the lives of their great men.

[Christopher · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent biography of my favorite classical era figure. I engaged with it in more detail here:
https://geotrickster.com/2018/09/04/a...

[Elizabeth · Rating 4 out of 5]

4.5 stars

Stuttard does an excellent job of describing the Peloponnesian War, Athens, the wider Mediterranean world, and Persia along with the role Alcibiades plays in the war itself. Starting with the Alcmaeonids (Alcibiades' ancestors) and tracing how Athens flourished as an empire builder to the birth of Alcibiades himself, Stuttard does an excellent job of world building that allows the reader to grasp what Athens was really like, its politics, religion, and how the Peloponnesian War came to be. Alcibiades story is woven throughout so that this is both history and biography.

Alcibiades was quite the character. Starting at a young age he started to make a name for himself. He could also act quite scandalous which would come back to haunt him later. He was a student of Socrates which would affect both Alcibiades and Socrates (think hemlock). Alcibiades became a great orator, politician, and general. And very, very rich. He also manages to make and alienate friends, allies and former allies, and a good portion of Athens population. He is accused of sacrilege but manages to escape arrest (Alcibiades was quite the charmer and could talk himself out of quite a bit of trouble) and switches sides to the Spartans, Athens' mortal enemy. Remember how Alcibiades was a charmer? Well, he charmed the Spartan queen that he ended up her lover and fathered her son. Of course, the Spartan king doesn't take to kindly to Alcibiades fathering a son on his wife (the adultery wasn't so much an issue but the issue of lineage and heredity were). So Alcibiades scarpers off to Persia, another mortal enemy of Athens. Till he wears out his welcome there and doesn't follow through on his promise to convince the Persians to support Athens instead of Sparta. He ends up back in Athens after several major military victories. But then Sparta kicks Athens butt and Alcibiades takes off for Thrace. But that doesn't go so well so he again runs off to the Persians again where he eventually ends up dead.

Stuttard does an excellent job of weaving history, world building, religion, politics, Persian court politics and world, Sparta and its world, and the story of Alcibiades all into an excellent story. The reader gets enough details, dates and other relevant information without being overwhelmed. It doesn't read like a dry history book but a well developed story.

My only quibble and the reason this isn't 5 stars was an editing issue. There were times when a name was spelled one way in one sentence and then spelled another way in the next sentence and spelled three or four different ways on one page. Somebody should have caught these especially since it was not a common name. The other was the slight overuse of exclamation marks at the ends of sentences. You can emphasize a point without an exclamation mark. Like I said, that was an editing issue and didn't really detract.

[Steve Llano · Rating 5 out of 5]

It should not surprise me that this book was written by someone with experience and love of the theater. The entire time I read it I was shocked that a historian would take such time to craft rich description of scenes, motives, and events. I found it refreshing, but once I realized Stuttard's background, my surprise shifted dramatically. Yes that's a pun.

I am surprised that someone so oriented toward the professional theater would have such a command of history, particularly of ancient history, which, as anyone who studies it can tell you, is rife with sketchy sources. Stuttard handles all this exactly how he should: By presenting accounts of events in engaging terms, then reflecting on which one is the most likely. Stuttard is not afraid to make the case for what he sees as the most likely account, which I find to be the best way to articulate such history.

Alcibiades's life story I sort of knew, but now I have a lot more appreciation for it, as well as much more on-the-ground relief and perspective of what it must have been like to live during those times. I am afraid to say it but Alcibiades - or anyone close to his abilities - would easily master any of our political systems or international orders, and he wouldn't break a sweat doing it. It's a great way to re-engage Athenian, and Greek history at the time when that history is most mysterious and most celebrated. But you might wonder why after reading this.

Stuttard's expertise as a dramaturg and theater scholar comes out in this book in amazingly helpful ways, as he situates popular plays and performances in the context of Athenian politics, as well as the international scene - which can be quite complex. This addition really helps the reader understand what people must have thought about all the politics and all the wars, and what their opinion of Alcibiades - perhaps the most famous politician of the ancient world next to Pericles - must have been.

[Saman Koliaea · Rating 4 out of 5]

A great book about an interesting man that I strangely enough had not heard of before. I also liked learning more about the context that Socrates and Plato lived and worked in.

[Francis · Rating 4 out of 5]

Biografie over het leven van Alcibiades, tijdgenoot van Socrates en Plato. Reeds in de oudheid was hij al een zeer controversieel figuur, zowel beroemd als berucht, geliefd als bespot. Iemand die polariseert, hoewel hij eigenlijk geliefd wil worden en grootse plannen heeft.

Als ik een vergelijking met een moderne figuur mag maken, zou dat Trump zijn, hoewel Trump zijn redenaarschap en moed verbleekt met die van Alcibiades. Trump zou vervolgens nog naar Rusland moeten vluchten en uiteindelijk naar China om de vergelijking compleet te maken.

Want Alcibiades heeft zowel de Atheners, de Spartanen en de Perzen gediend. De schrijver probeert zo objectief mogelijk te blijven, wat zeker moeilijk zal zijn geweest met een figuur die in z'n tijd al veel gevoelens opwekte. Toch blijft het een goed leesbaar verhaal.

Doorheen het boek verkrijg je veel inzicht over hoe het leven was in het oude Griekenland, met de verschillende steden die verbonden sloten ofwel verbraken. De democratieën en oligarchieën, de politieke vetes en familiale vetes... in dit alles speelt de (anti-)held Alcibiades een grote rol!

[Susan · Rating 5 out of 5]

It's all about him. Alcibiades and the Fall of Athens reminds me of the Machiavelli quote, if you want to see your enemy perish, wish him the greatest of success. No one can handle that.

Alcibiades is the Benedict Arnold of the Pelopennesian War who like Arnold believed that the Athenians owed him more. The difference is Al was a spoiled brat from the beginning and Arnold wanted to be one. Still Stuttard tells a good tale of how Al recommended by Sokrates rose to power and could have been the equal of Perikles except for his incredible arrogance. Plutarch wrote that "if ever a man was ruined by his own glory it was Al." The hubris is astounding and by the time he sells out Athens to the Spartans you have to wonder WHY? Wasn't Athens paying tribute enough? Seems not. A pathetic man, but a great tale.

[Ollie · Rating 4 out of 5]

4.5/5
- love all the background context! Came for Alkibiades, stayed for the Ancient Greek history
- really well written, very vivid
- almost felt like i was watching a documentary. I could see it all happening!

[Caleb Burns-Viterbo · Rating 5 out of 5]

Set around 100 years before the birth of Alexander the Great of Macedonia, Nemesis looks at the life of the Athenian Aristocrat Alcibiades, one of the most fascinating and layered figures in classical Greece.

Wealthy, well-connected, handsome, and ruthlessly ambitious, Alcibiades is one of the central figures and instigators of the Peloponnesian War, leading to the downfall of his home, Athens.

Egotistical, hot-tempered and arrogant, Alcibiades played all sides for his own self-aggrandisement and glory. His life is a good lesson on the danger of ability and ambition without discipline and moral fibre.

A serial traitor, his sheer force of personality and raw charisma led to him being a general for Athens, an advisor for the Spartans, the favourite of a powerful Persian ruler, back to an Athenian General, and then to a Thracian warlord before eventually leading to his downfall, where he died naked and alone under a hail of javelins in Anatolia.

It’s interesting to see how scandalised he is throughout his life for his ‘impious’ and extravagant lifestyle, with the salacious rumour of seduction, murder and tyrannical ambition surrounding him wherever he goes. But yet, he has the uncanny ability to endear and ingratiate himself nearly anywhere, including the highest circles of Ancient Mediterranean power politics.

This is probably one of the most riveting biographies I’ve read, and the fact he’s not as famous as some of the other illustrious figures of ancient history is a real shame. I hate to say it, but I came to admire what must have been an extremely magnetic man deeply.

I enjoy Stuttard’s writing style, with it almost feeling like a novel at times, and the detail he puts into explaining the culture and ideologies of the places seen in the story gave me a much deeper understanding of the ancient eastern Mediterranean, taking you through Athens, Sparta, Sicily, the Persian empire and Thrace among others.

[Colin · Rating 5 out of 5]

Alcibiades has always fascinated me: student of Socrates, archetypal rich bad-boy, accused of sacrilege, he betrayed Athens to become Spartan, but then believed to have seduced the wife of a king of Sparta, be fled Sparta and indeed Greece to become an adviser to the Persian court, when his welcome in Persia ran out, he was able to effect a brief return to power in Athens, before fleeing to the hinterland of Thrace, where he was finally assassinated. Such a brilliant, treacherous, mercurial character of such ability and yet such a shadow hanging over him . . . There's never been anyone quite like him since. Oh, there was P. Clodius Pulcher and L. Sergius Catilina in Rome, with some of the good looks, charisma, ability, and hints of sacrilege, but no one to equal Alcibiades. This is a thorough and excellent biography of the man and history of his times.

[Shane Kiely · Rating 4 out of 5]

An account of the life of one of the key figures of the Peloponnesian War between Athens & Sparta (& a variety of allies) that raged throughout much of the late 5th century BCE. In terms of the war as a whole there are phases that are noticeable by the absence of detailed account, the actual details of the notorious Sicilian campaign are scant for example but that’s because the protagonist wasn’t involved after the earliest stages. As an account of Alcibiades (& the milieu to which he belonged) I think this struggles to be topped in terms of a popular history. The marriage of historical detail with readability is almost pitch perfect. I’d definitely recommend for any one interested in learning more about a fascinating figure & the impact he played on his World.

[Giekes · Rating 3 out of 5]

Degelijk, vlot lezend, populariserend synthesewerk over een intrigerende periode die, via de Romeinen vooral, in de laatste eeuwen nog steeds veelbesproken is. Aan de hand van het figuur Alcibiades lezen we over de Atheense democratie, Pericles, Socrates, de Peloponnesische oorlogen, Grieken en Perzen (en Italiërs, Carthagers, ja zelfs Thraciërs (!))

Helaas is de auteur ook weer in een typische valkuil van de populariserende geschiedvertelling getrapt: ondanks het bij aanvang duiden van de beperkingen van het bronnenmateriaal en de context, gaat David Stuttard in het laatste deel van het boek - niet toevallig in het deel over militaire gebeurtenissen waarbij Alcibiades betrokken is - te ver mee in enthousiast vertellen van een sterk verhaal (inclusief uitroeptekens), worden er te weinig nuances gemaakt en beginnen de voetnoten te vaak opeens een hele tijd naar één bron te verwijzen (bijvoorbeeld Xenofon)...

Wat mij betreft zouden bovendien veel waarheidszoekende beschouwingen, nuanceringen en verwijzingen naar de huidige stand in en de beperkingen van het onderzoek die in voetnoot verwerkt staan, in de tekst zelf moeten verwerkt zijn - bijvoorbeeld te veel zoals deze in voetnoot: "Zoals met veel verhalen omtrent Alcibiades' jeugd (en volwassenheid) het geval is, inclusief de hier volgende anekdotes, is de authenticiteit ervan twijfelachtig" (blz. 341). Door deze te veel in de voetnoten te 'dumpen', gaan lezers toch weer te veel dingen 'voor waarheid aannemen'. Stuttard spreekt zelf trouwens ook over 'aannames'.

Opvallend: ook in voetnoot in plaats van in de inleiding zelf: "De kwestie van de betrouwbaarheid van bronnen plaagt alle biografieën van personen uit de oudheid, maar is in het geval van Alcibiades bijzonder problematisch. David Gribbles 'Alcibiades and Athens' (Londen, 2011) geeft een waardevolle bespreking van de problemen, maar concludeert dat Alcibiades zelfs in zijn eigen tijd al zo controversieel was dat schrijvers perioden in zijn leven overdreven of verzonnen om hem als voorbeeld te gebruiken in morele of politieke disputen, met als gevolg dat het werkelijke gedrag van de echte Alcibiades onmogelijk te achterhalen valt. Zoals in de inleiding wordt aangegeven, moeten biografen proberen het bewijsmateriaal te wegen aan de hand van wat er over de bredere context bekend is en zich voortdurend bewust blijven van de beperktheid en onbetrouwbaarheid van de bronnen. Om een lopend verhaal te krijgen, moeten er soms keuzes worden gemaakt of zelfs aannames worden gedaan waarmee niet elke lezer het eens zal zijn, maar waar mogelijk zijn die keuzes en aannames in de tekst of in de noten verantwoord."

[Roy · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'm of two minds: Alcibiades has got to be one of the most interesting figures in Roman history. I know of no other person who was a Greek, then a Spartan, a Persian and then a Greek again.

No matter what one thinks of him, he suffered a terrible death.

On the other hand, although I enjoyed the book, I wish that someone like Colleen McCullough had written it.

[Raymond · Rating 5 out of 5]

A life and times history centering on Athen's number one bad boy Alcibiades. A very well written popular account that starts out by going through the source material before launching into epic narrative for the remainder of the book. I'd say this is a perfect accompaniment to a general history of the Peloponnesian War.

[Monteiro · Rating 4 out of 5]

Alcibiade is fun to read about, never saw such a God favored main character in real history... even if all is exaggerated and legend aided, Alcibiade he is just fun. The writing is at time tedious as D. Stuttard tries for a historical yet main public tone which sometimes drags but Alcibiade carries the book like he carried in his time.

[Ruth King · Rating 5 out of 5]

What a fantastic book. Alcibiades is an incredible character and so interesting to read about. The story flows like fiction. Sometimes storytelling feels prioritised over objectivity, but this keeps the book packed with details without becoming too heavy.

[Thomas Van Daele · Rating 4 out of 5]

Alcibiades is als de persoon die ter sprake komt tijdens een gesprek op café, en diezelfde persoon komt wonder boven wonder het café binnen, en ge vraagt met grote verbazing: "Hé is da die gast ni?!", waarop uw gesprekspartner antwoordt: "Ja da is 'm, maar blijf daar maar van weg."

[Martha · Rating 4 out of 5]

If you should think that we live in nationally violent times, read Ancient Greek history. Alcibiades was a successful general, intriguer and generally colorful Grecian living 400'sBC and an example of a clever successful schemer

[Evelyn · Rating 4 out of 5]

3.75

[Xander · Rating 4 out of 5]

I wanted a bit more on Alcibiades as a person, but that is probably asking a lot considering the age of the evidence. Other than that, a good history.

[Sjowil · Rating 2 out of 5]

Te gedetailleerd in geschiedkundige feiten, te weinig aandacht voor het verhaal

[Joe · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very good description of the life and times Alcibiades, but also a well done history of the later stages of the Peloponnesian war.

[Clara]

10/10 for telling me about this real world Odysseus and giving me a new "problematic fave". Gotta love how he conquered two cities with the trojan strategy

[Jaime García Suárez · Rating 3 out of 5]

Soy ese

[Aveee · Rating 4 out of 5]

smash honestly

[Elijah · Rating 4 out of 5]

David Stuttard takes on the challenge of wading through sparse, often-conflicting sources to provide a readable and exciting biography of one of the most fascinating characters in Classical Greece. He details the historical context surrounding the life of Alcibiades before describing his time as the ward of Pericles and his early rise to prominence in Athens. Where concrete information is scarce or unreliable, Stuttard fills in the blanks with detail about what would have been typical for an Athenian youth of high standing such as Alcibiades. He includes, too, stories of questionable veracity which are “typical of anecdotes which cling to the young Alcibiades." If they may not all provide an accurate testimony as to Alcibiades’ actual behavior in his early years, they certainly provide insight into the way his character was viewed by his contemporaries, which is perhaps equally relevant.

Documentation is more readily available for later periods of Alcibiades’ life, but no less conflicting or confusing. Rather than provide only a synthesis of what is already known, Stuttard’s interpretation carries his own beliefs and suggestions as to what is and is not plausible about previous accounts. He challenges previous scholarship and examines the reliability of his chief source, Thucydides. Stuttard is of the opinion that Thucydides's source for many of his accounts was Alcibiades himself, and suggests that it's Alcibiades's spin which has been preserved as historical fact-- though he notes that this does not necessarily make the account inaccurate.

As a tale of Alcibiades’ life, Nemesis feels complete. There are few gaps in Stuttard’s timeline. Though the details of Alcibiades’ endeavors are not always known, Stuttard’s attention to detail is admirable, and he at least attempts to paint a picture of what is likely from the scant information surviving, straying only occasionally into the realm of the imaginary. His interpretation of the facts certainly makes logical sense and proves convincing overall. Although much of the truth of Alcibiades’ life cannot be known, and Stuttard’s arguments do not prove definitive, his work is commendable in its adherence to what is most probable, and certainly provides a narrative that seems likely, given all the facts that are known. If nothing else, he captures some of Alcibiades's charisma, and helps the reader feel that we understand him better.

The prose style is direct and clear, aiming for simplicity and ease of understanding, but his analysis of his sources is well-founded and well-informed. The work is suitable for a general audience, and perhaps inclines itself more towards the general reader than the academic, but it provides something for more serious scholars of Classical Greece or Alcibiades in particular, too.