Return of the Envoys from Egesta
Three Athenian ships returned from Egesta with disappointing news, revealing that only thirty talents of the promised funds were available, which led to disappointment among the generals. The Rhegians, who were expected to support the Athenians due to their kinship with the Leontines, also rejected Athenian requests.
Deception by Egestaeans
The Egestaeans had previously deceived Athenian envoys by showcasing silver offerings in the temple of Aphrodite at Eryx. Their wealth appeared greater due to the inclusion of borrowed gold and silver vessels, damaging the credibility of the Athenian commanders in front of their troops.
Nicias’ Strategy
Nicias proposed an immediate attack on Selinus as it was the primary mission. If the Egestaeans provided funds, they would proceed; if not, they would demand provisions for sixty ships and negotiate with the Selinuntians. His intention was to display Athenian power and zeal to their allies.
Alcibiades’ Proposal
Alcibiades argued against returning without action, suggesting they should use an envoy to recruit Sicilian allies and persuade neutral tribes to join their cause. His focus was on cultivating relationships with the Messenians, a crucial location for controlling Sicily.
Lamachus’ Direct Action Plan
Lamachus favored attacking Syracuse directly while the enemy was unprepared, believing that fear would provide the Athenian forces with a tactical advantage. He asserted the need for using the element of surprise to capitalize on their military might.
Generals' Council
During the generals' council, various strategies were deliberated, with Nicias concentrating on financial viability and preserving Athenian resources. Alcibiades and Lamachus shared opposing views on whether to pursue direct combat or strategic diplomacy.
Relations with Sicilian Cities
Alcibiades aimed to forge alliances with various Sicilian cities, excluding Syracuse and Selinus, and prioritized building relationships with neutral parties, noting that their support could lead to strategic advantages against their enemies.
Opportunities and Risks in Syracuse
Nicias emphasized the significance of striking when the Syracuse fortifications were vulnerable. However, he expressed concerns regarding the security of Athenian resources and the possibility of losing their foothold in Sicily.
Outcome of Initial Engagements
The Athenians engaged the Syracusans but experienced mixed success, resulting in fluctuating morale. Significant casualties were observed on both sides during direct confrontations, illustrating the conflict's intensity.
Effects of Leadership Changes
The death of Lamachus created a leadership vacuum, compelling Nicias to lead alone, which altered the dynamics among Athenian forces. Solidifying his authority became essential as Athenian unity faced challenges from external pressures and internal strategies.
Athenians' Siege Strategies
The Athenians constructed a dual wall around Syracuse to tighten the siege, with Nicias focusing on strategies that would maximize Athenian security while minimizing exposure to enemy cavalry.
Mobility and Tactics
Gylippus, the Spartan commander, executed aggressive tactics to exploit Athenian weaknesses during key moments in the siege. Continuous evaluations of Athenian strengths and weaknesses informed Syracusan responses.
Concluding Moves and Preparations
As the Athenians prepared for ongoing conflict, they aimed to reinforce their ranks with additional troops and cavalry from Athens as winter transitioned into spring. Ongoing negotiations and shifting strategies reflected the operational landscape shaped by their previous engagements.
External Pressures and Developments
The evolving situation was influenced by ongoing Venetian campaigns and the necessity of forming alliances within both Sicily and the broader Greek world. Tensions in key allied relationships notably affected Athenian strategies in the conflict.
