semester ii, 2011/2012, Essay 1

PS2203/EU2203

Question 3: What themes does Thucydides discuss that would qualify his book as a ‘possession for

all time’? Is he justified in making this claim?

Tan Xie Zhu Joy

A0084162J

Question 3: What themes does Thucydides discuss that would qualify his book as a

‘possession for all time’? Is he justified in making this claim?

Thucydides tells us that he wrote The History of the Peloponnesian War for the

objective of providing “an exact knowledge of the past as an aid to the interpretations of the

future” (I.22). By trying to provide us with as accurate and as objective a history as possible,

we can see a deliberate restraint on his part to not tell us what he thinks (Welch, 2003).

While we see the occasional injection of his own commentary, there is no recognizable

immediate theoretical claim that he makes. Yet, I believe that we should not take

Thucydides’ work as a mere recounting of 27 years of history, for he also intends for his

work to be a “possession for all time” (I.22). As such, I think that he wishes us to see certain

themes in his work that are universal, i.e. they transcend the passage of time and we can

see these themes at work even in the political activity of the modern times.

Indeed, Thucydides clearly expressed the view that history will repeat itself,

asserting that the future, “which in the course of human things, must resemble if not reflect

[the past]” (1.22). Why? I think we find that he gives us the answer later in Book III, where

he writes, with fervor, of the sufferings “such as have occurred and will always occur as long

as the nature of mankind remains the same; though in a severer or milder form, and varying

in their symptoms, according to the variety of the particular cases” (3.82). I personally

believe that when we compare the events of ancient Greece as recounted in Thucydides’

work with the events that have happened in the modern world, we can see a stark

resemblance between them. This is because I agree with Thucydides that human nature is

fundamentally unchanging. As such we who live in the modern world can identify with the

characters in Thucydides’ work that lived in ancient Greece; we understand the reasons they

take certain courses of action, and we understand the arguments they make. This essay will

focus on the theme of human nature in Thucydides’ work – what shapes human behavior,

and the implications of human motivations on political activity. For me, Thucydides’

exploration of human nature in all its complexity justifies his work as one of enduring

relevance.

In Thucydides’ work, interplay between the themes of human nature (phusis) and

convention (nomoi) can be seen to be extremely important in determining the construction

of social order. According to a Sophist named Antiphon, phusis, referring to humans’ natural

impulse to gratify immediate private desires, works in opposition to nomoi, referring to

man-made laws, or edicts of laws that are arrived by consent (Freeman, 1971). Antiphon

goes on to encourage people to break free from traditional conventions and to pursue their

private desires (Freeman, 1971). However, as Saxonhouse notes, the Greek polis was based

on “the belief in the validity, divinity and permanence of conventions” and that if the

Sophist’s view was accepted by society, it would likely have led to the destruction of the

polis (1978, pp.463). As Thucydides wrote his work during the intellectual crisis sparked by

the Sophists, this conflict between nomoi and phusis appears often within the speeches in

his work, showing his sensitivity to this issue (Saxonhouse, 1978). Despite Thucydides having

been called a “pupil of the Sophists” (Jaeger, 1965, pp.402) by some scholars, I believe that

he took the stance that accepting nomoi was necessary for social order and civilization to

exist. We can see this especially clearly in Pericles’, who represents the height of Athens’

greatness, funeral oration. The first sentence of Pericles’ speech makes reference to

tradition. While he questions the ancestors’ belief that words could adequately honor those

who died for the city, he obeys tradition and proceeds with the speech (2.35). Here, we see

that while Pericles finds fault with tradition, he does not disobey it and instead tells the

people that “it is just and proper on such an occasion to give [the ancestors] such honor of

remembrance”. Saxonhouse claims that the stability of society is based on the pursuit of

conventions which have been followed by tradition (1978, pp.468).

The realists, especially the classical realists, however, would disagree and instead

argue that Thucydides was translating the individual’s pursuit of self-interests and power

into the interaction of political communities with each other, and that for him, phusis would

prevail over nomoi (Crane, 1998; Romily, 1990). They are likely to cite specific speeches in

the text that make reference to universal laws of human nature or behavior displayed by

characters that seem to lend justification to the dominance of phusis. Examples could

include the description of the moral disintegration in Athens during the onset of the plague,

which left many in Athens dead or dying, in Book II, where men, not knowing when they

would die, “became utterly careless of everything whether sacred or profane” (2.52). Nomoi

was dispensed with, as can be seen from the way they did away with the burial rites and

sacred rituals, instead disposing of the corpses in any way, even sometimes resorting to “the

most shameless modes of burial, throwing the bodies of family and friends on the already

burning pyres of others” (2.52). Thucydides also describes how “lawless extravagance”

became common, and how men no longer feared the gods or human laws (2.53).

The moral disintegration in Corcyra during the internal revolution could also be

another example, where Corcyreans “butcher” all the enemies they could lay hands upon in

response to an increasing hatred that arose from political and private causes (3.70-81).

Here, nomoi is violated, as “sons were killed by their fathers, supplicants dragged from the

altar and slain on it, while some were even walled up in the temple of Dionysus and died

there” (3.81). Similar to the way the plague in Athens ushered in a period of lawlessness, so

the Corcyrean revolution also ushered in a period where the whole Hellenic world was

thrown into disarray as democratic factions sought to assume power with the support of

Athens and oligarchic factions, with the support of Sparta (3.82). Realists, to back their claim

that phusis will eventually always prevail over nomoi would quote this of Thucydides: “the

sufferings which revolution entailed upon the cities were many and terrible, such as have

occurred and will always occur as long as the nature of mankind remains the same; though

in a severer or milder form, and varying in their symptoms, according to the variety of the

particular cases” (3.82). This passage appears to be proof that Thucydides believed the

worst of human nature; that the cases of the plague in Athens and the Corcyrean revolution

merely brought human nature to the forefront by stripping away the pretences of morality

and justice.

However, I disagree that Thucydides was that pessimistic about human nature. If we

put the above quote in the context of its following line which states that during peace time,

individuals have “better sentiments”, but “war takes away the easy supply of daily wants,

and so proves a rough master that brings most men’s characters to a level of their fortunes”

(3.82). Here, we see a reversal in causality. It can be inferred that Thucydides is not asserting

that extreme circumstances reveals flaws in our human nature, instead, circumstances

shapes human behavior. Over here, I would like to clarify that when I asserted that human

nature is fundamentally unchanging, I did not mean that human nature was homogenous, I

meant that human reactions to circumstances tend to be similar, even across time. Even

now, during times of crises such as war, we generally expect to see crimes rates, such as

looting, pillaging, acts of vandalism go up, as a sign of a growing disregard for morality. At

the same time, during periods of economic boom or long periods of peace, we expect to see

crime rates go down. It must be noted that human nature is not that deterministic and there

are always individuals that are exceptions. Indeed, Thucydides does address this too. A case

in point would be the Melian Debate, where when faced with a choice of almost certain

destruction or subjection to Athens, the Melians chose to resist because the idea of

subjection offended their sense of justice (5.86-112). So here we can see that extreme

circumstances can also bring out the best in people, although it also does permit for the

worst human impulses to be brought out.

The theme of nomoi versus phusis is still very relevant to the modern world today,

whether in the field of domestic politics or international relations. Nomoi restrains phusis,

and as long as individuals or individual states respect the conventions, by being committed

to a sense of justice or respect for other individuals, we can expect to see a flourishing of

civilization. For example, Edward Gibson observed that the balance of power structure

functioned well in 18th century Europe due to conventions such as common systems of arts,

laws and manners, and this “mutual influence of fear and shame imposed moderation on

states and their leaders” and “instilled in them a common sense of justice and honor”

(Morgenthau, 1982, pp.60). Thus, despite desiring to expand power, they moderated their

ambitions and respected the rights of others to exist. However, when there is a breakdown

of conventions, we can expect to see individuals behaving in a manner that is aggressively

self-gratifying at the expense of morality. Morgenthau attributed the world wars as well as

the Cold War to the breakdown of nomoi in the international community. Thucydides’

discussion on nomoi and phusis thus leads us to conclude that justice is a prerequisite for

the fulfillment of self interest in the long term. This lesson for me, justifies Thucydides’ claim

that his work is indeed a “possession for all time”.

References

Crane, Gregory. Thucydides and Ancient Simplicity: the Limits of Political Realism. Berkley and Los

Angeles: University of California Press, 1998. Print.

Freeman, Kathleen. "On Truth."Ancilla to the Pre-Socratic Philosophers. Cambridge: Harvard

University Press, 1971. Print.

Jaegar, Werner. Paideia: The Ideals of Greek Culture. New York: Oxford University Press, 1965. Print.

Morgenthau, Hans J. In Defense of the National Interest: A Critical Examination of American Foreign

Policy. Lanham: University Press of America, 1982. Print.

Romily, Jacqueline de. La construction de la verite chez Thucydides. Paris: Julliard Press, 1990. Print.

Saxonhouse, Arlene W. . "Nature and Convention in Thucydides' History."Palgrave Macmillan

Journals 10.4 (1978): 461-487. JSTOR. Web. 17 Feb. 2012.

Thucydides, The History of the Peloponnesian War, trans. Crawley, Richard, (2007).

Bostonleadershipbuilders. Web. 12 Feb. 2012.

Welch, David, “Why International Relations Theorists Should Stop Reading Thucydides”, Review of

International Studies, 29, (2003): 301-319