Thesis (doctoral)-Universität, Regensburg, 2007. / Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Virginia. / Also available online through Digital Dissertations.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Virginia, 2003. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 344-364).

No description available.

No description available.

This project illuminates Thucydides’ political thought through a novel interpretation of the first book of the History of the Peloponnesian War. It explores how Thucydides reveals the human causes of war through the outbreak of a particular war, the Peloponnesian war. The primary claim is that Thucydides intends the breakdown of the Thirty Years’ Peace between Athens and the Peloponnesians, which inaugurates the great Peloponnesian war, to be understood by grasping how the characters of the Athenian and Spartan regimes contribute to the outbreak of the war and, crucially, how Athens and Sparta differently express human nature. In broad outline, the History’s first book reveals how the regime characters of Athens and Sparta inform their respective foreign policies, but also how the interaction between the two cities—informed by the distinctive necessities pressing upon them—causes the Hellenic status quo to tremble and fall. Throughout the first book, while never obscuring the specific events triggering war, Thucydides progressively develops and expands his original statement that it was Spartan fear of Athenian power that compelled the fighting. The study argues that necessity (or compulsion) is the bright thread that Thucydides uses to guide his reader through the episodes of the first book, from the immediate causes of the Peloponnesian war to the human causes of war, from the particular events to the History’s universal themes.

This project illuminates Thucydides’ political thought through a novel interpretation of the first book of the History of the Peloponnesian War. It explores how Thucydides reveals the human causes of war through the outbreak of a particular war, the Peloponnesian war. The primary claim is that Thucydides intends the breakdown of the Thirty Years’ Peace between Athens and the Peloponnesians, which inaugurates the great Peloponnesian war, to be understood by grasping how the characters of the Athenian and Spartan regimes contribute to the outbreak of the war and, crucially, how Athens and Sparta differently express human nature. In broad outline, the History’s first book reveals how the regime characters of Athens and Sparta inform their respective foreign policies, but also how the interaction between the two cities—informed by the distinctive necessities pressing upon them—causes the Hellenic status quo to tremble and fall. Throughout the first book, while never obscuring the specific events triggering war, Thucydides progressively develops and expands his original statement that it was Spartan fear of Athenian power that compelled the fighting. The study argues that necessity (or compulsion) is the bright thread that Thucydides uses to guide his reader through the episodes of the first book, from the immediate causes of the Peloponnesian war to the human causes of war, from the particular events to the History’s universal themes.

For over two thousand years, Plato’s superiority to Thucydides was taken as an article of faith in Western philosophy. Nietzsche was the first to challenge this verdict by asserting his view—on philosophical grounds—that Thucydides was the more penetrating analyst of the human condition. Other than Nietzsche’s consideration of the two thinkers, surprisingly little has been done to investigate the connections between the two greatest Greek prose writers. My purpose in this dissertation is to rekindle this debate in light of new evidence to see what—if anything—can be gained by examining the relationship between how Plato and Thucydides treat the problem of Athenian imperialism. More specifically, I believe and attempt to show that: (1) Plato silently but explicitly directs his readers to different parts of the History through the use of textual references and thematic patterns; (2) Plato uses these textual allusions to highlight the common ground between the two thinkers, and that Plato understands Thucydides to be an ally to his philosophic aims; (3) Plato and Thucydides agree that the underlying cause of Athenian imperialism can be attributed to a combination of greed (pleonexia) and the internalization of specific sophistic teachings that, whether intended by the sophists or not, support unbridled appetitiveness as the best way of life; and (4) Plato and Thucydides largely agree on the solution to the problem—that pleonexia must be extirpated from the ruling order. / text

Thesis (doctoral)--Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, 1968. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (p. 271-279).

Thesis (doctoral)--Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, 1968. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (p. 271-279).