A true enough evaluation of Lysander. Still, Lysander ignored or twisted the orders of Sparta for his own benefit. I realize that such a reading of his life may be merely my own interpretation, but Lysander can hardly be considered an obedient and docile member of the Spartan polis.

I also agree that Alcibiades' lifestyle is what gained him the mistrust of his contemporaries. But those contemporaries who opposed Alcibiades were generally the elite. The commoners often followed the elite and I would argue that it was more than his lifestyle that brought Alcibiades down: it was his political opponents constant harping on that lifestyle which convinced the wishy washy (sorry to use that phrase - perhaps fickle would be a better word to use) Athenians to remove Alcibiades.

It is interesting to note that his enemies did not want to accuse Alcibiades of any wrong doing before he left for Sicily. They wanted him to leave so they could stir up the population against him. Likewise it was again while Alcibiades was away that his enemies struck. They were conscious of the fact that with Alcibiades in town, they could never have convinced the people to level charges against him (chalk it up to his lispy, but honeyed, tongue).

The two things which brought about Alcibiades' downfall were such small things that it must have required considerable effort to rouse the people against him. The profanation of the Eleusinian Mysteries should hardly be called minor, in general, but in this case it is relevant. It is likely that Alcibiades did profane the Eleusinian Mysteries. The rather detailed account of the incident leads me to believe that he was guilty as charged. Nevertheless, as Walter Ellis* pointed out in his book on Alcibiades, this was in all likelihood merely part of the initiation rites of an hetaireiai. This means that Alcibiades would hardly have been the only one guilty of such a crime (though it must have been easy to convince the people that it was a heinous crime given that the hetaireiai were an aristocratic institution).

The second was the minimal defeat of the Athenian fleet during Alcibiades' absence from the fleet. While a clear thinking Assembly (I realize that the phrase "clear thinking Assembly" should perhaps never be used seriously) would not have assigned blame to Alcibiades for such a small setback, one led by his political enemies would have. Neither instance should have resulted in such drastic consequences for Alcibiades, but they did. I believe this shows the influence of his enemies at work.

Alcibiades was extravagant, flamboyent and dissolute, and the people of Athens loved him for it. They followed him around, hanging on his every word. He was the talk of the town, and even those who disagreed with him liked him personally (much like those who disagree with Bill Clinton in America tend to like the man personally). While his personal flaws did lead to his downfall and removal from a position of power, I would argue that they sould not have done so. Neither downfall was of such a serious nature that Alcibiades shouldn't have been able to weather them. But his great success led to his downfall. His enemies could shine a bright light on him.

On the Sicels, I agree that it is possible that had he been successful in his plan, he might have aroused the Carthaginians. It is one reason, I believe, that he didn't ask for as a big a fleet as was finally sent. Alcibiades' plan did not hinge on a huge Athenian outlay of men and material. Instead, as was his custom, Alcibiades sought to gain as much as possible while putting as little as possible on the line (eg the Quadruple Alliance and the Battle of Mantinea). It was Nicias' speech which convinced the clear thinking Athenians (ooops, sorry, did it again) to send approximately double what Alcibiades himself had recommended. The smaller Athenian contingent could have gone a long way in allaying Carthaginian fears.

Of course, I realize that such a debate is full of what ifs and could have beens. Nevertheless, I think the evidence exists in Thucydides for rehabilitating Alcibiades. It is time that his flamboyancy stopped detracting from his accomplishments.

*I believe it was Ellis. It has been a long time since I read it, and I don't have a copy on hand. If I can, I will provide the reference.