Sleepwalkers in Athens: Power, Norms, and Ambiguity in Thucydides
Abstract
This paper reevaluates different readings of Thucydides, assisted by an analysis of the causes of the Peloponnesian War. The paper argues that Thucydides’ own account of the outbreak of the Peloponnesian War hints at a more nuanced and pluralist methodology compared to the one that has traditionally been associated with his celebrated approach to the “truest reason” of the war. Relations between the “immediate” causes and the “truest reason” why war broke out can best be understood through the prism of a particular approach to levels of analysis, one that strives to master a more abstract understanding in order to transcend and harness the richness, the complexity, even the ambiguity of actual interactions, interactions that Thucydides understood so well. But the complexity and ambiguity of actual interactions do not seem to lead to war as an inevitable outcome. In the absence of a systematic approach to the relations between levels, harnessing the sensitive understanding of actual events preceding the war manifests itself almost as a response to an aporia: what Thucydides implies is that – given the participants’ mind-sets, preconceptions, norms, culture, and interests – a number of conditions that must be analysed at a higher level of abstraction may render a certain outcome probable.
Full Text: PDF DOI: 10.15640/rhps.v3n1a2
Abstract
This paper reevaluates different readings of Thucydides, assisted by an analysis of the causes of the Peloponnesian War. The paper argues that Thucydides’ own account of the outbreak of the Peloponnesian War hints at a more nuanced and pluralist methodology compared to the one that has traditionally been associated with his celebrated approach to the “truest reason” of the war. Relations between the “immediate” causes and the “truest reason” why war broke out can best be understood through the prism of a particular approach to levels of analysis, one that strives to master a more abstract understanding in order to transcend and harness the richness, the complexity, even the ambiguity of actual interactions, interactions that Thucydides understood so well. But the complexity and ambiguity of actual interactions do not seem to lead to war as an inevitable outcome. In the absence of a systematic approach to the relations between levels, harnessing the sensitive understanding of actual events preceding the war manifests itself almost as a response to an aporia: what Thucydides implies is that – given the participants’ mind-sets, preconceptions, norms, culture, and interests – a number of conditions that must be analysed at a higher level of abstraction may render a certain outcome probable.
Full Text: PDF DOI: 10.15640/rhps.v3n1a2
Browse Journals
Journal Policies
Information
Useful Links
- Call for Papers
- Submit Your Paper
- Publish in Your Native Language
- Subscribe the Journal
- Frequently Asked Questions
- Contact the Executive Editor
- Recommend this Journal to Librarian
- View the Current Issue
- View the Previous Issues
- Recommend this Journal to Friends
- Recommend a Special Issue
- Comment on the Journal
- Publish the Conference Proceedings
Latest Activities
Resources
Visiting Status
Today | 82 |
Yesterday | 82 |
This Month | 2690 |
Last Month | 3285 |
All Days | 1249043 |
Online | 10 |