An anomaly among Britain’s North American colonies, Pennsylvania initially lacked an organized militia in its engagement with Native Americans or with other imperial powers, focusing its energies instead on diplomacy and trade with such groups in the early decades of its colonial existence. During the period known as The Long Peace, extending from the 1680s through the 1740s, Pennsylvania established friendly relations with local Indian tribes that enabled the colony to expand territorially and to prosper economically. The Quakers who founded the colony and dominated its politics deemed a militia not only immoral but also impractical to Pennsylvania’s fortunes. Virtually defenseless, frontier communities in Pennsylvania suffered an onslaught when the colony’s former long-time Indian allies and trade partners joined the French in their war against Britain, in what became the French and Indian War (1754-63). Desperate to protect the frontier, the Pennsylvania assembly passed a militia act in 1755. Though the act proved futile as a tool for military defense (it forbade militia service lasting longer than three days), the militia allowed frontier communities to organize for the first time, frontiersmen took an increasingly active role in maintaining and advancing their own social and political interests. The desire to defend themselves during the French and Indian War and subsequent Pontiac's Rebellion (1763-65) fashioned Pennsylvania's diverse frontier population into a coherent frontier culture. Frontiersmen deployed the organizational power of the colonial militia to defend their own interests against, first, the Pennsylvania assembly, and shortly after against the British on the eve of the American Revolution.

The death of Pericles and the Peloponnesian War saw the clash of two very different political cultures as the conservative aristocracy came into contact with the demagogues. The conflict between them would have profound effects on Athenian politics as well as the outcome of the war itself as both tried to assert dominance in a chaotic period of change. War gave the demagogues the opportunity to achieve power at the expense of the aristocracy, as had happened during the Affair at Pylos, the Mysteries and the Herms, and the Trial of the Generals. However, war also gave aristocrats with oligarchic sympathies the opportunity to lash out against the demagogues and their assault on traditional modes of politics through events such as the Mutilation of the Herms and the Coup of the Four Hundred. The more the demagogues pushed, the more the aristocracy resisted with opportunists such as Alcibiades and Callixeinus manipulating the resulting chaos for personal gain. This vicious battle for control of Athens served to destabilize its society and pave the way for their eventual defeat at the hands of the Spartans. This thesis explores the role the Athenian demagogue played in the Peloponnesian war as well as their relationship to the traditional ruling class within democratic Athens.