Agesilaus The Last Spartan King

Word Count: 2213 |

Agesilaus was born in the Euroypontid family, (one of the two, which being the agiads and the eurypontid royal dynasties of Sparta, in 444/443), as the second son of King Archidamus (477-426). Agesilaus’ elder half-brother was Agis II, whose reign started in 426 and lasted until 400.
Agis’ normal successor would have been his son Leotychidas, but he was generally considered to be a child Alciabades, an Athenian adventurer who had stayed at Sparta as an exile. For some time, there was a lot of arguing going on. Agesilaus objected to Leotychidas’ reign, saying that he was a mere bastard; the prince replied by saying that there was an oracle that warned against a ‘lame king.’ The debate was concluded when Lysander, Sparta’s best commander and a personal friend of Agesilaus, declared that the (lysander, 400b.c). So, in 400, Agesilaus was accepted as king by the Spartans.
Lysander was the proponent of a militant and aggressive foreign policy, and from now on Agesilaus had to follow this policy too. In the year of his accession, he sent general Thibron to what is now Turkey in order to protect the Greek towns against oppression by the Persian satrap Tissaphernes. The expeditionary force consisted of some 5,000 members of the Spartan alliance, 300 Athenians, and the 6,000 surviving Greek mercenaries of the army that had been used by the Persian pretender Cyrus the Younger
to attack his brother, king Artaxerxes II Mnemon. Extra power was added to Thibron’s force by an alliance with Egypt, which had once been a Persian satrapy but had recently become independent under Amyrates, a new Pharoah.
The size of the expeditionary force was considerable, but the army’s movements were not well coordinated with that of the navy. Thibron and (after 399) his successor Dercyllidas wasted their time in Hellespontine Phrygia, fighting against the forces of satrap Pharnabas. Finally, Dercyllidas’ army moved to the south and invaded Caria, where it could have united with the Spartan navy and might have expelled the Persian navy from the Aegean, but now Pharnabazus and the satrap of Lydia, Tissaphernes, united their forces and lured the Spartans to the north. Shortly before the two armies joined battle, an armistice was concluded near Magnesia.
The two governments might have concluded a peace treaty on the terms agreed by Dercyllidas and Tissaphernes: Sparta would evacuate Asia, and Persia would recognize the independence of the Greek towns in Ionia. However, during the negotiations, the Persians continued to build a large navy in Phoenicia, and king Agesilaus concluded that the Persian peace offer was not seriously meant. Now, Agesilaus decided to invade Asia personally. Lysander would be his assistant. They took 8,000 soldiers with them.
In the spring of 396, Agesilaus offered a sacrifice at Aulis in Boeotia, praying for a safe crossing of the Aegean Sea. The site was well chosen: this was the place where, according to well-known legends, the Spartan king Agamemnon had once sacrificed before he went to Troy. Unfortunately, Agesilaus’ sacrifice was soiled by the behavior of Boeotian cavalry, and reinforcements that had been promised by Sparta’s Greek allies did not turn up. The omens were bad.
Nevertheless, Agesilaus’ campaign started successfully. He first sailed to Ephesus and concluded a truce with satrap Tissaphernes, which gave him a free hand to attack Pharnabazus. Lysander did the job. (Tissaphernes agreed to the truce because he expected reinforcements.)
In the winter of 396/395, Agesilaus recruited extra soldiers among the Ionian Greeks, and in the spring, he defeated Tissaphernes in the neighborhood of Sardes. The spoils were very large, and Tissaphernes was killed by one Tithraustes, who was sent as the new satrap of Caria and Ionia. He was a clever diplomat, who paid a large amount of money to Agesilaus, under the condition that he went back to the north and attacked Pharnabazus.
When Agesilaus was marching to the north again, he received new instructions from the Spartan government: he had to sail to and attack Caria (which was suffering from the change of satrap) and continue to the east, to Cilicia. This strategy made sense. It had been employed by the Athenians in the fifth century, and was a better way to expel the Persians from the Aegean region than fighting against the satraps of Hellespontine Phrygia and Caria/Ionia.
Unfortunately, Agesilaus was unable to do this. He raided the satrapy of Pharnabazus (as he had promised to Tithraustes) and acquired large spoils. But the satrap of Hellespontine Phrygia did not come to terms, and therefore, the naval offensive had to be postponed. Agesilaus decided on a march to the interior of Asia along the Royal road. However, his progress was slow because he was unable to capture the towns – the Spartans were famous for their inability to conduct siege warfare. This gave the Persians opportunity to build up a new navy, and to find a capable admiral, the Athenian Conon.
In 395, Conon and the Persian navy captured Rhodes, which was to be their base for operations in the Aegean Sea. In 394, Conon was ready to strike. But so was Agesilaus, who had by now reached Gordium. However, the summer of 395 had seen several risings against the Spartan hegemony in the mainland of Greece, especially in Boeotia. This forced the Spartan government to recall Agesilaus in the spring of 394.
Agesilaus was forced to return to the Greek mainland where he defeated the Boeotians on 14 August 394, near Coronea.
By now, the Corinthian War had started: Sparta had to fight against the Boeotians, Corinthians, Athenians, and the Persian navy. They had gathered at Corinth to invade the Peloponnese, but the Spartans had defeated the invaders in June or July. Agesilaus’ victory at Coronea was a further Spartan success. Twenty-three years were to pass until a Greek army again dared to oppose the Spartans.
In 392-390, Agesilaus was the most important Spartan general in an inconclusive war that concentrated on the region surrounding Corinth. In 389, he was fighting in Acarnania in the west, which he forced into surrender. However, the Spartans were unable to break their opponents’ strength, and the enemy coalition was incapable of pushing back the Spartans. Both sides used mercenary armies, which marked the beginning of a professionalisation of the conduct of war.
Meanwhile, Conon and the Persian navy were master of the Aegean Sea and ravaged the coasts of the Peloponnese. Persian gold sponsored Thebes and Corinth. The Spartans understood that Persia was their real enemy, and opened negotiations with Tiribazus, who had succeeded Tithraustes as satrap of Ionia and Caria. At a peace congress, the Spartan envoy Antalcidas suggested the cession of all Greek towns in Asia and requested the independence and autonomy of the Greek towns in Europe.
By now, Athens had become dangerous for the Persian king Artaxerxes: it had rebuilt parts of its empire and was threatening Cyprus. Besides, it had concluded an alliance with the Egyptian king Achoris. Therefore, the king agreed to Antalcidas’ proposal. He was to side with Sparta for such time as Athens refused to sign a peace treaty. Antalcidas now seized the Athenian possessions near the Hellespont and a second Spartan fleet blockaded Athens. Ultimately, Athens gave in, and the King’s Peace was concluded: all Greek towns were to be independent and autonomous, and the common peace was to be guaranteed by Sparta (387/386). In other words, the war-weary towns on the Greek mainland accepted Sparta as their leader, and the Greek towns in Asia were sacrificed to the great king.
For almost a decade, Greece remained peace. However, in the last week of 379, Thebes revolted and expelled its Spartan garrison. At Sparta, the conduct of the war was entrusted to Agesilaus. He took his task very seriously, improved the recruiting system of the Spartan army, and invaded Boeotia in the autumn of 378. However, he was unable to conduct a siege, the Thebans did not offer battle, and he was forced to return to Sparta, having looted the country. The same happened in 377. The garrisons that he left behind in Boeotia, were expelled one by one by the Thebans.
The Theban successes in Boeotia covered Athens, which reorganized its empire in the Second Delian League. The Athenians were just as successful as the Thebans (377). When Athens had regained its former naval superiority, it concluded a peace treaty with Sparta, which grudgingly gave in to have its hands free in Boeotia (July 374).
In the summer of 371, the Spartan king Cleombrotus, Agesilaus’ younger colleague, invaded Boeotia with a large army that was to settle all accounts. At Leuctra, it met the Theban army of Epaminodas which was perhaps half the size of the Spartan army. However, the Thebans placed their troops at an angle with the Spartan troops, and were able to concentrate their forces on one section of the Spartan battle line. They broke through the Spartan lines, and their victory was complete. For the first time, the Spartans had been defeated by an army smaller than their own. Even worse, it had hardly any soldiers left, and the next decades it was to look for money to buy mercenaries
Immediately, the Spartan coalition began to disintegrate. The Spartans gave Agesilaus, now 73 or 74 years old, full powers to reform the constitution and strengthen the army, but he did not have the imagination to find new ways.
In the winter of 370/369, the Boeotians again did the impossible: they invaded the Peloponnese and attacked Sparta at home. The Spartan populace wanted to attack the army of Epaminondas, but Agesilaus convinced them that they were no match for the Thebans. However, he managed to defend Sparta itself – or so it seemed. Probably, Epaminondas knew that looting Sparta was unnecessary, because there was nothing to take away from this poor village. Meanwhile, Agesilaus renewed the peace treaty with Athens.
In 368, Sparta was really defeated – without a battle. This time, the Thebans managed to liberate the helots of Messenia, which had always been the work force of the Spartans. This meant the economic collapse of Sparta. Agesilaus sent envoys to Persia, but they did not obtain the money Sparta needed to buy mercenaries. On the contrary, the great king wanted the King’s Peace to be renewed, with Thebes as supreme Greek power. To Athens and Sparta, this was unacceptable.
Agesilaus now started a career as a mercenary general. In 367, he joined forces with Ariobarzanes, a satrap revolting against the great king. In this way, he hoped to earn the money Sparta needed. He was not unsuccessful, and when the Thebans again invaded the Peloponnese in 362, he managed to prevent the capture of Sparta. However, when the Spartans and Athenians attacked the Theban expeditionary force at Mantinea, where they experienced another defeat.
The result was a stalemate, because the Theban leader Epaminondas died in action. In the winter, a League of Greek City-States was formed, which swore to observe a general peace. Unfortunately, Sparta was unable to join. It could not accept the loss of Messenia and would try to force its inhabitants back into servitude.
However, it lacked the financial means to reorganize its army. Therefore, Agesilaus again became a mercenary leader, this time siding with the Egyptian king Teos, who was preparing an attack on the Persian territories in Syria. However, when his expeditionary force had reached Phoenicia, news arrived that Teos’ brother Tjahapimu, the governor of Egypt, had revolted and had offered the throne to Nectanebo II (360). Almost immediately, Agesilaus sided with the new pharaoh.
One of the problems the new king had to cope with, was another would-be king at Mendes in the eastern Delta, but the mercenaries of Agesilaus made quick work of him. It was the last victory of the old man. Nectanebo no longer needed him, and sent him back with a bonus of 250 talents. When Agesilaus reached Cyrene, he fell ill and died. Nectanebo kindly ordered that the corpse would be royally embalmed before it would be sent to Sparta.
Agesilaus had a weakness not only for personal love but also personal hate. That was particularly true with respect to Thebes. In his persistent wars, he violated the law of Lycurgus that forbade the Spartans to make war for a long time with the same enemy. In so doing, he taught the Thebans to be better soldiers and eventually made them a match for the Spartans. When Agesilaus was later carried home wounded from a battle with the Thebans, a Spartan said to him: “The Thebans have repaid you well for making soldiers of men who before had neither the will nor the skill to fight.”
This was the end of Agesilaus. He had been a courageous and disciplined soldier, whose bad fortune it was that he had survived the era in which courage and discipline were the road to success. In the fourth century, generals had to be more creative, and this was precisely the quality he was lacking. Agesilaus also lacked the imagination to reform the Spartan constitution after the defeat at Leuctra. In spite of his personal courage, he was the wrong man to lead Sparta after 371.

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

Allegory Of American Pie By Don Mc Lean

Ask anyone what was the defining moment in the rock history of the 1960s was and all you will get is a one word answer: Woodstock. The three day rock festival that defined an era was only one of many music festivals of the '60s. But Woodstock has come to symbolize, "an era of peaceful, free- loving, drug- taking hippie youth, carefree before harsher realities hit..." (Layman 40). The Woodstock festival ended a century filled with many metamorphoses of rock'n'roll, from the era of pop music to the rebirth of folk music to the invention of acid rock. But some cynics say that rock'n'roll died with the death of Buddy Holly before the 60s even began. One such person is Don McLean. The poet behind the haunting epic song about the death of 'danceable' music, McLean wrote the ever popular song, "American Pie" (appendix 1). The most important song in rock'n'roll history, "American Pie", is the song about the demise of rock'n'roll after Buddy Holly's death and the heathenism of rock that resulted. Although McLean himself won't reveal any symbolism in his songs, "American Pie" is one of the most analyzed pieces of literature in modern society. Although not all of its secrets have been revealed, many "scholars" of the sixties will agree that the mystery of this song is one of the reasons it has become so successful- everyone wants to know the meanings of its allegories. Proof of "American Pie's" truth lies in the allegory of the song. Many People enjoy the song but have no idea what it means- Who is the Jester? What is the levee? When the deeper story is found, the importance of the song is unearthed. "American Pie" is not only a song, it is an epic poem about the course of rock'n'roll...

Carl Orffs Philosophies In Music Education

While Carl Orff is a very seminal composer of the 20th century, his greatest success and influence has been in the field of Music Education. Born on July 10th in Munich, Germany in 1895, Orff refused to speak about his past almost as if he were ashamed of it. What we do know, however, is that Orff came from a Bavarian family who was very active in the German military. His father's regiment band would often play through some of the young Orff's first attempts at composing. Although Orff was adamant about the secrecy of his past, Moser's Musik Lexicon says that he studied in the Munich Academy of Music until 1914. Orff then served in the military in the first world war. After the war, he held various positions in the Mannheim and Darmstadt opera houses then returned home to Munich to further study music. In 1925, and for the rest of his life, Orff was the head of a department and co-founder of the Guenther School for gymnastics, music, and dance in Munich where he worked with musical beginners. This is where he developed his Music Education theories. In 1937, Orff's Carmina Burana premiered in Frankfurt, Germany. Needless to say, it was a great success. With the success of Carmina Burana, Orff orphaned all of his previous works except for Catulli Carmina and the En trata which were rewritten to be acceptable by Orff. One of Orff's most admired composers was Monteverdi. In fact, much of Orff's work was based on ancient material. Orff said: I am often asked why I nearly always select old material, fairy tales and legends for my stage works. I do not look upon them as old, but rather as valid material. The time element disappears, and only the spiritual power remains. My...

Johann Sebastian Bach Biography

Throughout the history of music, many great composers, theorists, and instrumentalists have left indelible marks and influences that people today look back on to admire and aspire to. No exception to this idiom is Johann Sebastian Bach, whose impact on music was unforgettable to say the least. People today look back to his writings and works to both learn and admire. He truly can be considered a music history great. Bach, who came from a family of over 53 musicians, was nothing short of a virtuosic instrumentalist as well as a masterful composer. Born in Eisenach, Germany, on March 21, 1685, he was the son of a masterful violinist, Johann Ambrosius Bach, who taught his son the basic skills for string playing. Along with this string playing, Bach began to play the organ which is the instrument he would later on be noted for in history. His instruction on the organ came from the player at Eisenach's most important church. He instructed the young boy rather rigorously until his skills surpassed anyone?s expectations for someone of such a young age. Bach suffered early trauma when his parents died in 1695. He went to go live with his older brother, Johann Christoph, who also was a professional organist at Ohrdruf. He continued his younger brother's education on that instrument, as well as introducing him to the harpsichord. The rigorous training on these instruments combined with Bach?s masterful skill paid off for him at an early age. After several years of studying with his older brother, he received a scholarship to study in Luneberg, Germany, which is located on the northern tip of the country. As a result, he left his brother?s tutelage and went to go and study there. The teenage years brought Bach to several parts of Germany where he...


Michelangelo was pessimistic in his poetry and an optimist in his artwork. Michelangelo?s artwork consisted of paintings and sculptures that showed humanity in it?s natural state. Michelangelo?s poetry was pessimistic in his response to Strazzi even though he was complementing him. Michelangelo?s sculpture brought out his optimism. Michelangelo was optimistic in completing The Tomb of Pope Julius II and persevered through it?s many revisions trying to complete his vision. Sculpture was Michelangelo?s main goal and the love of his life. Since his art portrayed both optimism and pessimism, Michelangelo was in touch with his positive and negative sides, showing that he had a great and stable personality. Michelangelo?s artwork consisted of paintings and sculptures that showed humanity in it?s natural state. Michelangelo Buonarroti was called to Rome in 1505 by Pope Julius II to create for him a monumental tomb. We have no clear sense of what the tomb was to look like, since over the years it went through at least five conceptual revisions. The tomb was to have three levels; the bottom level was to have sculpted figures representing Victory and bond slaves. The second level was to have statues of Moses and Saint Paul as well as symbolic figures of the active and contemplative life- representative of the human striving for, and reception of, knowledge. The third level, it is assumed, was to have an effigy of the deceased pope. The tomb of Pope Julius II was never finished. What was finished of the tomb represents a twenty-year span of frustrating delays and revised schemes. Michelangelo had hardly begun work on the pope?s tomb when Julius commanded him to fresco the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel to complete the work done in the previous century under Sixtus IV. The overall organization consists of four large triangles at...

Oscar Wilde

Oscar Fingal O'Flahertie Wills Wilde was born in Dublin Ireland on October 16, 1854. He is one of the most talented and most controversial writers of his time. He was well known for his wit, flamboyance, and creative genius and with his little dramatic training showing his natural talent for stage and theatre. He is termed a martyr by some and may be the first true self-publicist and was known for his style of dress and odd behavior. Wilde, 1882 His Father, William Wilde, was a highly accredited doctor and his mother, Jane Francesca Elgee, was a writer of revolutionary poems. Oscar had a brother William Charles Kingsbury along with his father's three illegitimate children, Henry, Emily, and Mary. His sister, Isola Emily Francesca died in 1867 at only ten years of age from a sudden fever, greatly affecting Oscar and his family. He kept a lock of her hair in an envelope and later wrote the poem 'Requiescat' in her memory. Oscar and his brother William both attended the Protora Royal School at Enniskillen. He had little in common with the other children. He disliked games and took more interest in flowers and sunsets. He was extremely passionate about anything that had to do with ancient Greece and with Classics. Wilde during school years In 1871, he was awarded a Royal School Scholarship to Trinity College in Dublin and received many awards and earned the highest honor the college offered to an undergraduate, the Foundation Scholarship. In 1874, he also won the College's Berkley Gold Medal for Greek and was awarded a Demyship to Magdalen College, Oxford. After graduating from Oxford, Oscar moved to London with his friend Frank Miles, a well-known portrait painter of the time. In 1878 his poem Ravenna was published, for which he won the...

The History Of Greek Theater

Theater and drama in Ancient Greece took form in about 5th century BCE, with the Sopocles, the great writer of tragedy. In his plays and those of the same genre, heroes and the ideals of life were depicted and glorified. It was believed that man should live for honor and fame, his action was courageous and glorious and his life would climax in a great and noble death. Originally, the hero's recognition was created by selfish behaviors and little thought of service to others. As the Greeks grew toward city-states and colonization, it became the destiny and ambition of the hero to gain honor by serving his city. The second major characteristic of the early Greek world was the supernatural. The two worlds were not separate, as the gods lived in the same world as the men, and they interfered in the men's lives as they chose to. It was the gods who sent suffering and evil to men. In the plays of Sophocles, the gods brought about the hero's downfall because of a tragic flaw in the character of the hero. In Greek tragedy, suffering brought knowledge of worldly matters and of the individual. Aristotle attempted to explain how an audience could observe tragic events and still have a pleasurable experience. Aristotle, by searching the works of writers of Greek tragedy, Aeschulus, Euripides and Sophocles (whose Oedipus Rex he considered the finest of all Greek tragedies), arrived at his definition of tragedy. This explanation has a profound influence for more than twenty centuries on those writing tragedies, most significantly Shakespeare. Aristotle's analysis of tragedy began with a description of the effect such a work had on the audience as a "catharsis" or purging of the emotions. He decided that catharsis was the purging of two specific emotions, pity and...

Scholarship Essay About Goals

Ever since I was a young kid I have always been interested with aircraft. I was so curious of how airplane's fly. I remember taking my toys apart to see how it works. As a kid I wanted to go to the airport to watch the airplanes land and fly and pondered how this happens. Other kids wanted to go to the amusement places. As I grew older I became more and more interested in aircraft and the technology behind it. I always involved myself with aviation early on. I read books and magazines on aviation, took museum tours, built model airplanes. When I was younger my father would take me to aircraft repair facilities where I would watch in great fascination. In my teens, went up to the military bases and befriended many soldiers involved with aircraft and asked them numerous questions. I got to meet many aeronautics engineers and borrowed their old textbooks and read them till the wee hours of the morning. As technology improved with information superhighway, I logged on the web. Stayed up for hours and hours searching through web pages and web pages of information about aircraft and technology. I started my elementary school in the Philippines, then we moved to U.S. and continued my high school education and graduated. Enrolled at the CCSF to pursue my college education and now I am in the 2nd year in CCSF taking aeronautics. My goal now is to obtain my AS degree from the City College of San Francisco (CCSF) so I can transfer to a University and get a Bachelors degree and to continue for my Masters degree in Aeronautics Engineering. I will strive hard to reach the peak level of my career which is a Professor and hopefully to be an aeronautic professor so...

Circus Circus Enterprises Case Studies

Executive Summary: Circus Circus Enterprises is a leader and will continue to be in the gaming industry. In recent years, they have seen a decline in profit and revenue; management tends to blame the decrease on continuing disruptions from remodeling, expansion, and increased competition. Consequently, Circus has reported decreases in its net income for 1997 and 1998 and management believes this trend will continue as competition heightens. Currently the company is involved in several joint ventures, its brand of casino entertainment has traditionally catered to the low rollers and family vacationers through its theme park. Circus should continue to expand its existing operations into new market segments. This shift will allow them to attract the up scale gambler. Overview Circus Circus Enterprises, Inc founded in 1974 is in the business of entertainment, with its core strength in casino gambling. The company?s asset base, operating cash flow, profit margin, multiple markets and customers, rank it as one of the gaming industry leaders. Partners William G. Bennett an aggressive cost cutter and William N. Pennington purchased Circus Circus in 1974 as a small and unprofitable casino. It went public in 1983, from 1993 to 1997; the average return on capital invested was 16.5%. Circus Circus operates several properties in Las Vegas, Reno, Laughlin, and one in Mississippi, as well as 50% ownership in three other casinos and a theme park. On January 31,1998 Circus reported net income of 89.9 million and revenues of 1.35 billion, this is a down from 100 million on 1.3 billion in 1997. Management sees this decline in revenue due to the rapid and extensive expansion and the increased competition that Circus is facing. Well established in the casino gaming industry the corporation has its focus in the entertainment business and has particularly a popular theme resort concept....

Effect Of Civil War On American Economy

The Economies of the North and South, 1861-1865 In 1861, a great war in American history began. It was a civil war between the north and south that was by no means civil. This war would have great repercussions upon the economy of this country and the states within it. The American Civil War began with secession, creating a divided union of sorts, and sparked an incredibly cataclysmic four years. Although the actual war began with secession, this was not the only driving force. The economy of the Southern states, the Confederacy, greatly if not entirely depended on the institution of slavery. The Confederacy was heavily reliant on agriculture, and they used the profits made from the sale of such raw materials to purchase finished goods to use and enjoy. Their major export was cotton, which thrived on the warm river deltas and could easily be shipped to major ocean ports from towns on the Mississippi and numerous river cities. Slavery was a key part of this, as slaves were the ones who harvested and planted the cotton. Being such an enormous unpaid work force, the profits made were extraordinarily high and the price for the unfinished goods drastically low in comparison; especially since he invention of the cotton gin in 1793 which made the work all that much easier and quicker. In contrast, the economical structure of the Northern states, the Union, was vastly dependent on industry. Slavery did not exist in most of the Union, as there was no demand for it due to the type of industrial development taking place. As the Union had a paid work force, the profits made were lower and the cost of the finished manufactured item higher. In turn, the Union used the profits and purchased raw materials to use. This cycle...

Evaluation Of The Effectiveness Of Trade Embargoes

Although I am a strong critic of the use and effectiveness of economic sanctions, such as trade embargoes, for the sake of this assignment, I will present both their theoretical advantages and their disadvantages based upon my research. Trade embargoes and blockades have traditionally been used to entice nations to alter their behavior or to punish them for certain behavior. The intentions behind these policies are generally noble, at least on the surface. However, these policies can have side effects. For example, FDR's blockade of raw materials against the Japanese in Manchuria in the 1930s arguably led to the bombing of Pearl Harbor, which resulted in U.S. involvement in World War II. The decades-long embargo against Cuba not only did not lead to the topple of the communist regime there, but may have strengthened Castro's hold on the island and has created animosity toward the United States in Latin America and much suffering by the people of Cuba. Various studies have concluded that embargoes and other economic sanctions generally have not been effective from a utilitarian or policy perspective, yet these policies continue. Evaluation of the effectiveness of Trade Embargoes Strengths Trade embargoes and other sanctions can give the sender government the appearance of taking strong measures in response to a given situation without resorting to violence. Sanctions can be imposed in conjunction with other measures to achieve conflict prevention and mitigation goals. Sanctions may be ineffective: goals may be too elusive, the means too gentle, or cooperation from other countries insufficient. It is usually difficult to determine whether embargoes were an effective deterrent against future misdeeds: embargoes may contribute to a successful outcome, but can rarely achieve ambitious objectives alone. Some regimes are highly resistant to external pressures to reform. At the same time, trade sanctions may narrow the...