LoBue, Gaby: The Melian Dialogue in Terms of Sociological Theory

Blog Post #1 - POLS170

Gaby LoBue

The Melian Dialogue in Terms of Sociological Theory

The hierarchical dynamic is clearly defined in the Melian Dialogue, where Melian leaders were given the choice of life or death by the Athenian rulers. Readers could assume that the Melian leaders would choose life, but this expectation doesn’t take into account how powerful group identity can be. The Melian Dialogue discusses many sociological theories on group identity, and explains why the Melians would rather wither than lose their sense of self. In addition, the Athenians exhibit behaviors similar to a ‘thin identity’, whereas the Melians express functions of a ‘thick identity’.  

Sociological studies on group identity have an overarching notion of an ‘us versus them’ perspective, where humans naturally categorize themselves and place others in their peripheral. These identities grow strong in times of insecurity, where people tend to rely on those in the same group as them. We can see this clearly in The Melian Dialogue, where Melian rulers refused the idea of joining the Athenians and adopting their ways of life. The Melians have identified Athenians as “them”- a group of people not similar to them, therefore no kinship will be established. The Melians, however, have history with Spartans, as they were a Spartan colony until they became independent. This common ancestry between them has led Melians to believe that they should be able to trust the Spartans more. This shows, no matter how inconsequential a commonality could be, these linkages between people are qualities humans naturally rely on. As mentioned above, humans are always drawn to those who they are familiar with, and these collective identifications are important when reasoning options. They ultimately chose the route of “honor” portraying a utmost form of devotion to their colony and fellow members. Athenians exploited this with no remorse. 

Generally, the actions taken on both sides of the dialogue exude characteristics of ‘thick’ and ‘thin’ identities. A ‘thick’ identity is one that is very strong and encompasses one’s whole livelihood. With the information given in this text, readers can see how Melians were very proud of who they were, and were unwilling to adhere to Athenian demands. As an independent colony, member’s lives revolved around their community, and can be assumed that their community was intertwined with each member’s personal life. Athenians, through their quest of conquering territories, come at a cost of their own connection to their community. It’s easy to say that fighting for the people of Athens is noble and creates a strong group dynamic, but their personal ties to the colony were fading. Fighting and conquering to bring more people in their community doesn’t help maintain their societal connection. Their lives revolve around fighting and not the normal customs of Athenian life. This unequivocally describes a ‘thin’ identity, one where one’s culture is on the outskirts of their daily activities. It could be argued that they were creating a new identity revolving around the idea of conquering Greece, but the Athenian ideology was no longer embedded in their lifestyle.

Referenced texts discussed in SOCI100 –

• Cornell, Stephen, and Douglas Hartmann. Ethnicity and race: Making identities in a changing world. Sage Publications, 2006. pp 75-98 (A Constructionists Approach)

• Jenkins, Richard. Social Identity. Routledge. pp 1-6, 80-89