The actions and decisions of were overwhelmingly harmful to . Discuss.

Alcibiades was an Athenian military general and diplomat who played a crucial role during the course of the . Despite being a brilliant general whose strategies led the Athenians to many naval victories, his actions and decisions nevertheless played a part in the ultimate downfall of Athens in the war.

Alcibiades played a crucial part in securing multiple naval victories for Athens during the Decelean War (413-403). After Athens’s defeat at Sicily, Alcibiades was able to lead the Athenian navy ‘to a spectacular recovery’ (Kagan) despite the large scale damage caused by the defeat. His leadership caused the defeat of the Spartan fleet in the Hellespont at Abydos in 411, and Cyzicus in 410. His actions also helped regain control over trade routes from the Black Sea, which led to the Athenians naming him as strategoi autokratores (general with unlimited power) in 407, with power above all other generals. This was the ‘only such instance in Athenian history’ (Cartwright), showing the Athenians’ recognition of Alcibiades’s abilities and his role in the rebuilding of their navy.

Despite this, Alcibiades was also responsible for multiple major setbacks to Athenian military power. His flight from Athens to directly caused Athens’s defeat in Sicily, as despite being the ‘main architect of the plan’ (Kagan), he was not there to guide the Athenian navy to carry it out. While his strategy was voted for and approved by the Ekklesia (assembly), his flight from Athens and Lamachus’s death during the Siege of Syracuse in 414 caused Nicias, who was most reluctant to carry out Alcibiades’s plan, to serve as general. Meanwhile, Alcibiades was able to convince the Spartans to send fleet to Syracuse under Gylippus, who was able to take advantage of Nicias’s mistakes and bring victory to Sparta. Rhodes stated that Alcibiades’s action resulted ‘in the utter destruction of the Athenian expeditionary force’. also hold Alcibiades responsible for the Spartan fortification of Decelea in 413, as he wrote that ‘[Sparta was] much more inclined to action when they heard Alcibiades spelling out the detail with what they considered to be expert knowledge’. The Spartan fort at Decelea did ‘immense harm to the Athenians’ as it kept ‘year-round pressure’ on Athens (Rhodes) and helped more than 20 thousand slaves to escape from the silver mines at Larium in the first year of construction. As Larium was Athens’s major source for financing their fleet, the loss of slaves severely sabotaged Athens’s ability to rebuild its navy. The assistance Alcibiades provided for Sparta were a major blow to Athens’s formerly superior navy.

Alcibiades’s actions also caused the Athenians’ sense of immense distrust towards him. His role in Athens’s Oligarchic Revolt in 411 and ‘raising false hopes of Persian financial support’ (Cartledge), as well as deserting the Battle of Notium in 406 caused the Athenians’ wariness of his actions, as demonstrated in the final battles during the Peloponnesian War. During the Battle of Aegospotami in 404, Alcibiades attempted to provide advice and warnings to the Athenian generals in charge, yet his warnings were undermined due to his unscrupulous reputation, and Alcibiades was ‘sent away as the Athenian generals were not prepared to trust him’ (Rhodes). Meiggs noted that ‘the Athenians could never trust him enough to take advantage of his talents’, demonstrating that even when it was in his best intention to help the Athenians, his advice tends to be ignored due to the harmfulness of his previous actions. While Alcibiades was a brilliant military general and strategist who had the abilities to lead Athens to victory, his selfish and ambitious motives were incredibly harmful to Athens both militarily, politically, and psychologically. Ultimately, his actions and decisions led to Athens’s defeat.