Pericles' Funeral Oration: Source Analysis Example

With his funeral oration given by Thucydides, Pericles flaunts his patriotic sentiments for Athens, maintaining consistent respect for the deceased and arguing for their preservation in memory. For Pericles, the population of Athens is forever indebted to those who fought in the name of their city-state, as their endeavors contributed to every political facet of their lives: democracy, equal justice, and individual liberties. For these reasons, Pericles argues that not only the dead be remembered for their unequivocal honor in battle, but that the citizens uphold the values of said deceased. Without these values, society no longer upholds greatness. 

Pericles’ introduction is one of appraisal and inquiry. After commenting on the idea of public funerals, praising them for their intrinsic nature to devote honor to the dead, he delivers an important preamble - that delivering an effective commemoration, in that sense that it satisfies all familiar parties of the dead, shouldn’t be considered. Instead, the dead’s contributions to the world should speak for themselves, and not be elaborated by the living who hope to satisfy the thoughts of those who knew the dead. Pericles recognizes the difficult nuances of funeral commencements, saying, “For it is difficult to say neither too little nor too much; and even moderation is apt not to give the impression of truthfulness” (par 1). The irony of the situation is that Persciles still wrote a speech despite slandering the prospect. Perhaps Pericles wrote the speech to deviate conventions and usher in newness to the idea. He then beings a lengthy deviation concerning the greatness of Athens, first describing the military endeavors that have brought about all the pleasures of daily political life. He mentions the power of their institutions, and makes clear that they are made fulfilled by the people who fought for Athens’ preservation. This patriotic detour sets the tone for much of his speech, playing as an important argumentative device. 

Much of this section of Perciles’ speech appeals to the audience’s patriotic sensibilities. He argues that Athens’ administration and superior military training secures the citizen's amenities. By evoking the honor and tribulations of the soldier who fights for Athens’, he establishes an argument for how exactly the society they live in has come to suit their needs. Without a military that wins wars and preserves Athens’ governmental structure, the tenants of individual liberty, democracy, and equal justice are threatened. Despite Athen’s reputation as a military superpower, Pericles continually emphasizes how much the city provides to others, and shows that his argument for keeping its principles aren’t based on grounds of imperialism. He leans more towards the defensive nature of statehood, as opposed to the offensive. He says, “We alone do good to our neighbors not upon a calculation of interest, but in the confidence of freedom and in a frank and fearless spirit” (par 6). Elaborating on the cause of those fighting in battle, Pericles speaks on the undying influence of the people who fought for Athens. Their collective efforts of bravery ultimately exuded an individual appreciation within their culture. Importantly, these collective means extend to the duty of the common man - without a promotional and long-lasting structure for the ideas promoted by those who fought, the engrained political arrangements of Athens are rendered ephemeral, and wither away. Insofar as people make the collective effort to secure their societies’ principles, they will maintain said ideas. There’s a reason why Pericles describes at length the political superiority of Athens, it’s because he wants to remind his audience that what they take for granted can be taken from them with ease. For him, no honor means no democracy, and therefore no freedom. 

Towards the end of his speech, Pericles remarks on those who’ve passed their days of significant societal contribution. He wants them to know that despite them no longer being at their best, they nonetheless can live fulfilled by the respect of their peers - live through honor. By bringing this up, he affirms the argument that even late in life, those people can still experience plenty of joy through the conditions of honor. He doesn’t just account for those with the responsibility of bestowing honor on the old, reminding the old themselves of honor’s capacity to make them happy. As he says, “For the love of honor alone is ever young, and not riches, as some say, but honor is the delight of men when they are old and useless” (par 9).

While not in full disagreement, I have criticisms of Perciles. We should keep in mind the contributions of those who’ve made our societies the way they are, but not strictly to honor them. Percilues discounts the individual who doesn’t enjoy the present state of things insofar as they benefit the collective. Though he does plenty of preamble on the greatness of Athens, and makes it his duty to persuade the audience into his view on the city-state, one shouldn’t praise it only on the grounds that he mentions - though they may be admirable. Slavery, relentless torture, and the unreasonable execution of figures like Socrates, who were killed for promoting new ideas in good faith, were all normal Ancient Greece. While Perciles is right in telling the audience that it is there duty to ensure the life-affirming politics of Athens; democracy, equal justice, etc, this argument fails to consider those oppressed by the state. We should not just be honoring those who’ve contributed good political ideals as a means of preservation, but also remember those who have bestowed oppressive principles so we can reconfigure our world to better it and avoid  conservative stagnation.