ツーキューディデースのψυσιζ観とη αληθεστατη προψασιζの関係について

抄録

It is the object of the present article to throw light on the interpretation of η αληθεστατη προφασιζ (I 23, 6) It is generally admitted today that Thucydides is the first who attributed the true cause of the Peloponnesian war to the growth of Athenian power and Spartan fear, distinguishing it from the immediate causes which were widely accepted as the true cause by his contemporary and later ancient writers I myself share in this general opinion, too But whether the growth of the Athenian power and Spartan fear are all that what Thucydides calls the truest cause of the war means or not, I think, still open to discussion To answer this question is the immediate concern of my article Besides the first reference to the truest cause in I 23, 6 there are two other passages (188 & 118, 2) which are, though the word η αληθεστατη προφασιζ does not appear in them, usually thought also to explain the truest cause From these passages we can learn that by the growth of Athenian power and Spartan fear Thucydides reveals the Spartan motive for beginning war Since the Peloponnesian war began actually with Spartan invasion into Attica in 431 B C, the Spartan motive to decide on making war can be considered as the true cause of the war But not as the truest cause For, while in I 23, 6 η αληθεστατη προφασιζ is explained as αφανεστατη λογω, Thucydides says that the Spartan motive was openly discussed by Spartans themselves And αναγκασαι in the same passage, which accurately corresponds in import to αναγκασθεντεζ in V 25, 3 whose subject is both Athenians and Spartans, indicates that neither Spartans and Athenians forced the others to make war Then what is it that forced them both in spite of their will ? Thucydides sets it forth through the mouth of a Corinthian and an Athenian speaker at the first Conference at Sparta In a word, it is universal human nature (το ανθρωπινον). Thucydides applies here an elaborate dialectical method to analyse the true nature of Athenian expansion and of Spartan conservatism which encouraged the former and he succeeded in tracing the cause of the war back to human nature So far we can conclude that η αληθεστατη προφαριζ has two sides On the one hand we have the growth of Athenian power and Spartan fear, that is, the Spartan motive to decide for making war, on the other hand human nature To prove that we are not on the wrong track, I further discussed the prognostic value which Thucydides attaches to his work The purpose of Thucydides' writing a history of the Peloponnesian war is "to understand clearly the events which happened in the past and which (human nature being what it is) will be repeated in the future" (trans by R Warner) He insists here that the History can give the readers clear knowledge of the past events and provide them with foresight into analogous problems in the future Clear knowledge of past events (το σαφεζ των γενομενων) is not τα γενομενα itself, nor equal to το ακριβεζ των γενομενων (accurate and detailed knowledge of the past events) It is acquired only when one penetrates below the mere surface of actual political phenomena, that is, into the innermost forces working behind actual events Thucydides thinks of human nature φυσιζ as these forces And it is φυσιζ which links clear knowledge of the past events closely with insight into analogous problems in the future For, when one studies how human nature reacted under certain circumstances in the past, one can perceive beforehand into approximately which direction human nature will push events in similar circumstances in the future Therefore, clear knowledge of the past events is indispensable for the acquirement of insight into analogous problems in the future Thus, already at the beginning of the History, we can expect that the course of events will be described from two view-points, that of actual politics and that of eternal human nature To add a few words in

(View PDF for the rest of the abstract.)