Thucydides the Constructivist

Author(s): Richard Ned Lebow

Source: The American Political Science Review, Vol. 95, No. 3 (Sep., 2001), pp. 547-560
Published by: American Political Science Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3118232
Accessed: 30/03/2009 18:42

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=apsa.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the
scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that
promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

American Political Science Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
The American Political Science Review.

http://www.jstor.org
 Ameica
Poiia Science
American Political cec Review
eiwVl.9,N.3Spebr20 Vol. 95, No. 3 September 2001

Thucydides the Constructivist

RICHARD NED LEBOW The Ohio State University
he most superficiallevelof Thucydides'
historyexaminesthe destructiveconsequencesof domestic
and foreign policies framed outside the language of justice. His deeperpolitical-philosophical aim
was to explorethe relationshipbetweennomos (convention) and phusis (nature) and its implications
for civilization.Thucydidesconcludesthat nomos constructsidentitiesand channelsand restrainsthe
behaviorof individualsand societies.Speechand reason(logos) in turnmakenomospossiblebecauseall
conventionsdependon sharedmeanings.Thefeedbackloop betweenlogoi (words)and ergoi (deeds)
createdGreekcivilizationbut also the internationaland civilstrife(stasis)associatedwiththe Peloponne-
sian War.Internationalsecurityand civil orderdependupon recoveringthe meaningsof wordsand the
conventions they enable. Thucydidesshould properlybe considered a constructivist.

M ovementsestablishgenealogiesto legitimize cessful politicalactors(Bury1975;de Ste. Croix1972;

themselves.To makeChristianitymore attrac-
tive to Jews,the New TestamenttracesJesus's
lineage to King David. Realists claim Thucydidesas
their forebear. In recent years, a numberof interna-
tionalrelationsscholarshave offeredmore subtleread-
ings of his historythat suggestrealismis only one facet
of his work.1I make a more radicalassertion:Thucy-
dides is a foundingfather of constructivism.The un-
derlying purpose of his history was to explore the
relationshipbetweennomos (convention,custom,law)
andphusis (nature)and its implicationsfor the devel-
opment and preservationof civilization.2His work
showsnot only how languageand conventionestablish
identities and enable power to be translated into
influence but also how the exercise of power can
underminelanguageand convention.Thucydides'un-
derstandingof these relationshipswas insightfuland
points to the possibility,indeed the necessity, of a
symbiotic and productive partnershipbetween two
currentlyantagonisticresearchtraditions.
REALISTSAND THEIRCRITICS
Since the time of Thomas Hobbes, Thucydideshas
been celebratedas a realist,as someone who stripped
awayall moralpretensesto expose the calculationsof
power and advantagethat of necessity motivate suc-
Richard Ned Lebow is Professor of Political Science, History, and
Psychology, The Mershon Center, The Ohio State University, Co-
lumbus, OH 43201-2602 (lebow.l@osu.edu).
The research was supported by the Rockefeller Foundation and its
Bellagio Center. I am very grateful to David Hahm, Brien Hallett,
Victor Hanson, Clarissa Hayward, Bruce Heiden, Friedrich Kratoch-
wil, Peter Nani, Dorothy Noyes, Niall Slater, and Barry Strauss for
their generous assistance.
1 All English references to Thucydides in this article refer to The
Landmark Thucydides:A ComprehensiveGuide to the Peloponnesian
War, ed. Robert B. Strassler (New York: Free Press, 1996).
2 Nomos first
pertained to customs and conventions before some of
them were written down in the form of laws and, later, to statutory
law. Hesiod makes the first known usage, and Plato later wrote a
treatise, Nomoi, in which he suggests that long-standing customs
have higher authority than laws. Nomos can refer to all the habits of
conforming to an institutional and social environment. Phusis is used
by Homer to designate things that are born and grow and can be
derived from the verb phuein, and later it became associated with
nature more generally.
Kagan 1969;Meiggs 1972). Neorealistsassert that his
historyvindicatestheir emphasison the system level
and containsimplicitpropositionsabout power transi-
tion and the onset of hegemonic war as well as the
inabilityof norms and conventionsto keep the peace
underconditionsof internationalanarchy(Gilpin1986;
Waltz 1979). Other realists, most notably Michael
Doyle (1997), offer more nuanced readings that at-
tempt to understandThucydides in the context in
which he wrote. A growingnumberof scholarschal-
lenge the claims of neorealists, and some question
whether Thucydidesis adequatelycharacterizedas a
realist.
Detailed analysisof Thucydides'historyin the mid-
nineteenthcenturycalled into questionits consistency
and unity. This researchgave rise to the Thucydides-
frage, a controversyabout how many distinct parts
there are to the history,the order in which they were
written, and what this reveals about the evolution of
the author'sthinkingover approximatelytwo decades
of researchand writing.Thucydideswas considereda
coldly detachedand dispassionaterationalist,a scien-
tist in the traditionof Hippocrates,in search of an
"objective"and timelessunderstandingof politics and
war. Because ordered thought and presentationare
absolutely essential to such an enterprise, scholars
assumedthat Thucydideswould have "cleanedup"his
manuscriptto remove all the inconsistenciesif he had
lived long enough.
The postwarattackon positivismin social sciences
and history encouraged a rethinkingof Thucydides.
Wallace (1964), Bowersock(1965), and Stahl (1966)
made the case for a passionateand politicallyengaged
writerwho can be considereda critic of the scientific
approachto history.Connor'sThucydides(1984) rep-
resents a dramatic break with the past in that it
attemptsto restorea "unitarian" readingof the history.
To Connor,Thucydidesis a masterfulpostmodernist
who carefullystructureshis text to evoke an intended
set of responses.He uses omissions,repetitions,and
inconsistenciesin the form of argumentsand judg-
mentsthat are "modified,restated,subverted,or totally
controverted"(p. 18) to tell a more complexstoryand
convey a more profoundunderstandingof the human
condition.Ultimately,Connor(pp. 15-8) argues,"the

547
 o
Thcddstethe Constructivist
Thucydides sr ci
work leads the reader-ancient or modern-far be-
yond the views and values it seems initiallyto utilize
and affirm."
Thucydides'careful attention to language is the
startingpoint of another seminal study, WhenWords
Lose TheirMeaning,by James Boyd White (1984).
Accordingto White, people act in the world by using
the languageof the world.To understandtheirbehav-
ior and the social context that enables it, we need to
track the ways in which words acquire,hold, or lose
meanings and how new meanings arise and spread.
White contendsthat Thucydidesrecognizedthis truth,
andhis conceptionof meaningtranscendsthe lexicalto
encompassunderstandingsof self, manners,conduct,
and sentiment.Changesin meaninginvolvereciprocal
interactionsbetweenbehaviorand language,whichare
trackedby Thucydidesin his speeches, debates, and
dialogues.As the PeloponnesianWar progresses,the
terms of discourse that function at the outset in
intelligiblewaysshiftandchange,andthe languageand
community(homonoia) constitutedby it deteriorate
into incoherence.
When the Athenians can no longer use the tradi-
tional languageof justificationfor their foreignpolicy,
they struggleto find an alternatelanguage,and they
finallyresort to assertionsof pure self-interestbacked
by militaryclout. Such a language is not rooted in
ideas, is unstable, and deprives its speakers of their
culture and identities.By using it, the Atheniansde-
stroy the distinctionsamong friend, colony, ally, neu-
tral, and enemy and make the world their enemy
througha policy of limitlessexpansion.In effect, they
abandon the culture throughwhich self-interestcan
intelligentlybe defined, expressed,and bounded. By
the time of the Siciliandebate, the Athenianscan no
longerspeak and act coherently,and this failureis the
underlying reason for their empire's decline. For
Thucydidesand for White,the historyof the Athenian
empire not only indicatesthe tension betweenjustice
and self-interestbut also revealsthat theyvalidateand
give meaningto each other.
Garst (1989) relies on White'sargumentsto accuse
neorealistsof havinga narrowdefinitionof powerand
of unfairlyprojectingit onto Thucydides.Thucydides
shows that Athenian imperialismwas successfulwhen
powerwas exercisedin accordwith well-definedsocial
conventions governing Greek speech and behavior.
These conventionsare ignored as the war progresses.
The Melian Dialogue and the Sicilian debate reveal
how the Athenians destroyed the rhetoricalculture
through which their interests as an imperial power
were intelligently formulated and expressed. Their
foreignpolicybecamea policyof coercionandlimitless
expansion.For Garst,this processillustratesthe power
of agency and reveals that foreign policy is rarely,if
ever, a mechanicalresponseto a balanceof power.
For Crane (1998), Thucydides'history is a realist
classicbecause it revealshow the strongdominatethe
weak and intereststrumpjustice.But Thucydidescon-
sidered such behaviora fundamentaldeparturefrom
traditionalGreekpractice,in whichforeignpolicywas
an extension of aristocraticfamily connections and
548
isS p e b r202001
September
enmeshedleaders and theirpoleis in a web of mutual
obligations.The Corinthianplea to the Athenian as-
sembly not to ally with Corcyra,based on Corinth's
priorrestraintduringthe Samianrebellion,reflectsthis
approach and uses the time-honoredlanguage and
argumentsof reciprocity.The Athenians reject the
appeal because they formulate their interests and
foreignpolicyon the basisof immediateinterests.They
act as if alliancesare markettransactions:short-term
exchanges unaffected by past dealings. Thucydides
consideredthis approachto politics destructiveof the
relationshipsthat are the true source of securityand
prosperity. Pericles, who speaks for Thucydides
(2.60.2-4) on this question in his funeral oration,
insiststhat the individualis nothingwithoutthe state,
but at the time of the SiciliandebateAlcibiadesasserts
that the state countsfor nothingif it does not support
him as an individual(6.92.2-5). The single-minded
focus on self-interest was the underlyingcause of
discord at home and reckless expansionismabroad.
Cranebelieves that Thucydides'goal was to reconsti-
tute the "ancientsimplicity"(euethes)of the aristocracy
in a new, rationalizedform.
Rahe (1996) also acknowledgestwo sides to Thucy-
dides: the hard-headedanalystof power politics and
the critic of realism. Thucydides'portrayalof post-
Periclean Athens shows how lust (eros) for power
ultimatelymade prudentcalculationof advantageand
calibrationof means and ends impossible.The Melian
Dialogue and the debate over the Sicilianexpedition
indicatethat Athenianshad lost all sense of measure
and proportion;they had become imperviousto rea-
soned argumentand thereforeto the risksinherentin
theirinitiatives.Thucydideswantsreadersto recognize
that without moral boundarieshumanbeings develop
unlimited ambitions.The sober constructionof self-
interest requiresrestraint,which in turn requiresac-
ceptance and internalizationof the claims of justice
and humandecency.
Forde (1989, 1992) and Orwin (1994) approach
Thucydidesfrom a more Straussianperspective.Forde
criticizesneorealistsfor ignoringjustice,a concernthat
was central to such early postwar realists as Hans
Morgenthauand John Herz. He contendsthat Thucy-
dides, like Plato, recognizedthe possibilityof reconcil-
ing justice and interest throughthe citizen's love for
and identificationwith his polis-the principaltheme
of Pericles'funeraloration.In post-PericleanAthens,
citizensput theirself-interestfirst,and this led to acute
discord, domestic instability,and defeat. For Orwin,
Thucydidespaints an "unflinching"portrait of the
harshnessand even brutalityof the time but with the
goal of showing how human beings, through their
"humanity,"can transcendboth the securitydilemma
and cripplingdomestic discord.To do this they must
take justice seriously.
Ober (1989, 1998) blends the traditionsof classical
and internationalrelations scholarship.He invokes
Austin's(1975) conceptionof performativespeech acts
and Searle's (1995) distinction between brute and
social facts to analyzeAthenian politics (Ober 1998).
He argues that Searle's all-importantdistinctionbe-
American Political Amerian
SciecePoitica
Science Reiew
Review Vl.
Vol. 95
95, No. 3

tween social and brute facts becomes blurredin the influence.Pericles himself was their principalpatron.
contextof the awesomepowerwieldedby the Athenian Sophistswere subversiveof the old aristocraticorderin
assembly.Debates and decisionsbecame "socialfacts" the deepest sense, for they maintainedthat arete(ex-
because successfuloratorsimposed their own speech- cellence, especially the kind that made a man a re-
dependentmeaningson brutefacts.As brutefacts and spected leader) could be acquiredthroughstudy, not
socialmeaningsdiverged,the latterbecamethe basisof just throughheredityand lifelongassociationwith men
policy, and this led to disaster.In this conflictbetween of good breeding. Thucydidesrejected some Sophist
words (logoi) and deeds (erga), Ober contends that teachings-he was undoubtedlytroubledby the social
Thucydides'sides with the latter.The historyattempts consequencesof Sophistridiculeof objectivestandards
to reconstructergathroughthe applicationof scientific of justice.But he was greatlyattractedto their style of
principlesof data collectionand evaluation(techne)to argument,which he adopted for his own and quite
the past, and by doing so it points the way to a similar differentpurposes.
process in everydaypolitics. In his treatmentof the originsof the Peloponnesian
My analysisbuilds on these works but differsfrom War,Thucydidesprovidesa strikingexampleof his use
them in importantrespects.I take issue with some of of the sophistic method. At the onset (1.23.5-6) he
their interpretationsor reach the same conclusionby attributesthe war to "the growth of the power of
differentroutes. My main differencewith my political Athens, and the alarmwhich this inspiredin Sparta,
science and classicalcolleagues concernsthe purpose made war inevitable."He goes on to describeAthens
of the history;I contend it is about the rise and fall of and Sparta making their respective cases before the
civilizationand what mightbe done to salvageit.3 My courtof publicopinion.By his use of the wordpropha-
analysisbuildson Connor'sinsightthat the structureof sis, which was widely used before the law courts as a
Thucydides'text providesclues for reconcilingsome of rationalizationfor suits, Thucydidessignals to more
his seeminginconsistencies.Towardthis end, I identify sophisticatedreaders that charge and countercharge
four layersto the history:(1) the natureand relation- are little more than propagandathat obscuresthe real
ships amongpower,interest,andjustice;(2) Athens as causes of the war (Rawlings 1981). The subsequent
a tragedy;(3) the relationshipbetween nomos (con- narrativeand paired speeches of Book I describethe
vention, customand law) and phusis (nature);and (4) deeper causes:Sparta'sfear for its way of life, whichis
the relationshipbetween erga and logoi and its impli- threatened by the political, economic, and cultural
cationsfor civilization.Each layeraddressesa different transformationof Greece spearheadedby Athens;the
question,and the successiveanswerscan be read back abilityof third parties to manipulateSpartafor their
to provide a deeper understandingof the questions own parochial interests; and the miscalculationof
posed by previouslayers.For Connor,omissions,rep- leaders throughoutGreece at criticaljuncturesof the
etitions,inconsistencies,and subvertedsentimentsand crisis (Lebow 1991, 1996).
argumentsare intended to move readers to deeper Thucydidesrequiresa dedicatedand thoughtfulau-
understandings.I see them playing this role within dience. Readersmust be willingto recognizemultiple
levels, and I arguethat Thucydidesoffersthe structure levels of analysisas well as the questions and argu-
of his narrative,choice of language,and implicitrefer- mentsspecificto these levels,andtheymustponderthe
ences to other fifth-centurytexts-Herodotus' History, implicationsof any apparentcontradictions.The his-
the Hippocraticcorpus,andthe tragediesof Aeschylus, torycannotbe read in a linearmanner;one mustmove
Sophocles,andEuripides-as "signs"(semata)to move backandforthbetweensectionsof the text to graspthe
us from one level of the text to the next. contrastsand ironies embeddedin structureand lan-
There are sound historicaland textual reasons for guage and the ways in which differentcontexts and
reading Thucydides this way. Fifth-centurysophists ordersof presentationencode insightsand interpreta-
considered themselves teachers and intended their tions. Not all inconsistenciescan be resolved in this
works or oral presentationsas courses of study.They way, and those that remain are intended to draw
opened with the statement of a problem and simple attentionto tensions inherentin the situationand the
responses to it and went on to develop increasingly possibilityof a deeper truththat helps reconcilethem.
complexand sophisticatedargumentsthatoften under- Heraclitus taught that the world is a battleground
cut their initial argument.At the deepest levels, their between opposing forces and that philosophersmust
argumentswere left implicitto encouragestudentsto look beneath the surface to find the deeper unity
drawthe intendedconclusionsfor themselves.Sophists (harmonia)that unites them. Thucydides,as did Plato,
dominatedAthenianphilosophyduringthe secondhalf thoughtand wrote in this binarytradition.
of the fifth century and had considerable political
POWER,INTEREST,AND JUSTICE
3 We must distinguishbetween Greek civilizationand civilizations
more generally.Thucydidescertainlyhad in mindthe restorationof Almost all the works I have discussed address ques-
civil societyand internationalorderin Athens and Greece. Did he tions of interest and justice in the history.There is a
look beyond Greece geographicallyor historically?Fifth-century near consensusthat Thucydides'depiction of the so-
Greekswere awareof other contemporary(e.g., Egypt,Persia)and calledrealismof the Atheniansdoes not reflecthis own
past (Mycenaeanand Homeric)civilizations.Thucydideshad a clear views. Justice must be consideredbecause it provides
sense of the rise and fall of civilizationsand describeshis history"as
a possessionfor all time,"so it is reasonableto inferthat he looked the languagefor any reasonableformulationof inter-
to a futurereadershipbeyondthe confinesof Greece. est. Otherwise,interests are equated with power and

549
Thucydides the
th
TuyIde Constructivist
osrciitSpebr20
result in policies of aggrandizement.White (1984),
Garst (1989), Forde (1992), Orwin (1994), Rahe
(1996), and Crane(1998) develop this thesis from the
"inside out" perspectiveof Athenians attemptingto
manage,protect,and expandtheir empire.Thucydides
is also interestedin the "outsidein" perspective:how
allies,enemies,and neutralsrespondto Athens and its
policies. His work documentsnot only the process by
whichAthenssuccumbedto a foreignpolicyof limitless
expansionbut also the reasonssucha policywas bound
to fail.
As noted elsewhere(Lebowand Kelly n.d.),
Thucydidesdistinguishedbetween hegemoniaand arkhe,
both of whichare mostfrequentlytranslatedas hegemony.
For fifth-and fourth-century Greeks,hegemoniawas asso-
ciatedwithtime-the gift of honor [Meiggs1972;Perlman
1991].Timewasbestowedinformallyby free consentof the
Greek communityas rewardfor achievements,and re-
tainedby consent,not by force.SpartaandAthenswere so
honoredbecauseof theircontributionsduringthe Persian
Wars. Athens also earned time because her intellectual
and artistic accomplishmentsmade her the "school of
Hellas."Arkheconnotedsomethingakin to our notion of
politicalcontrol,and initiallyappliedto authoritywithina
citystate andonlylaterto ruleor influenceovercitystates.
The semanticfield of archewas graduallyextendedto
encompasstyranny.
By 416, when the assemblyvoted to occupy Melos
and subdue Sicily,Thucydidesmakes it clear that the
Athenian empire was an arche based primarilyon
military might. The structure and language of the
MelianDialogue marka radicalbreakwith past prac-
tice. The Meliansdeny the Athenianenvoys access to
the people, grantingonly a privateaudiencewith the
magistratesand the few (olgioi).The exchangeconsists
of brachylogies:short,blunt,alternatingverbalthrusts,
suggestive of a military encounter. The Athenians
dispense with all pretense. They acknowledgethey
cannot justify their invasionon the basis of provoca-
tions or their rightto rule. They deny the relevanceof
justice, which only comes into play between equals.
"Thestrongdo whattheycan, and the weaksufferwhat
they must,"and the Meliansshould put their survival
firstand submit(Thucydides,5.89). The Melianswarn
that the Athenian empirewill not last forever, and if
the Atheniansviolate the establishednormsof justice
and decency their fall "would be a signal for the
heaviestvengeance and an example for the world to
mediate upon" (5.90). The Athenians insist they are
only concernedwith the present and the preservation
of their empire. The Melians suggest it is in their
mutual interest for Melos to remain neutral and a
friendof Athens.The Atheniansexplainthatneutrality
would be interpretedas a sign of weaknessby other
island states "smartingunder the yoke" (5.99) and
would serve as a stimulusto rebellion."The fact that
you are islandersand weakerthan othersrendersit all
the more importantthat you should not succeed in
bafflingthe mastersof the sea" (5.91-9). Contempo-
raryGreekswouldhavebeen shockedby the failureof
Athens to offer any justification (prophasis)for its
invasionof Melos and by its repudiationof the Melian
550
September2001
offer of neutralityon the groundsthat "your[Melian]
hostilitycannot so hurt us as your friendship"(5.95).
Fifteen years into the war the Athenians repudiate,
indeed invert,core Greekvalues.
The rhetorical style of the envoys reinforces the
impression conveyed by their words. Dionysius of
Halicarnassus(1975, 31) considered their language
"appropriateto orientalmonarchsaddressingGreeks,
but unfit to be spoken by Atheniansto Greekswhom
they liberatedfrom the Medes."Thucydidesseems to
have modeled his dialogueon a passagein Herodotus
(7.8), in which the Persianking Xerxes discusseswith
his councilof advisorsthe wisdomof attackingGreece
(Connor 1906;Cornford1984). The languageis simi-
lar, and the argumentsrun parallel;Xerxes alludes to
the law of the strongerand the self-interestof empires.
Herodotus(8.140, 144) also describesan offerof peace
and friendshipthat Xerxesmade to Athens and Sparta
on the eve of his invasion.The Athenians spurn his
olive branchand accept the danger of confrontinga
seeminglyinvincibleforce in the name of Greek free-
dom and culturalidentity,just as the Meliansrejectan
Athenianofferof alliancebecauseof the valuetheyput
on theirfreedom.These parallelswouldnot havebeen
lost on contemporaries.For Thucydides,as for many
Greeks, the Athenians of 416 have become the Per-
siansof 480, the symbolof rankdepotismin the Greek
world.
The Meliansoffera long view on the fate of empires.
The Atheniansfocus on the immediatefuture,and in
their pursuitof short-termgain alienate allies and dry
up whateverreservoirof good will their early heroic
behavior had created. By the time of the Melian
Dialogue, they have antagonizedeven neutrals and
close allies, which makes their fear of the security
dilemmaself-fulfilling.Thucydidestells us throughthe
voice of the Meliansthat rawforce can impose its will
at anygivenmoment,but few empireshavethe military
and economiccapabilityto represstheirsubjectsindef-
initely. Allies who see themselves as exploited will
sever the bonds when the opportunityarises. Oppres-
sion also leaves memoriesthat inhibitfuture attempts
at empirebuilding.In 378, when Athens tried to form
the Second Athenian Confederacy,most of Greece
resisted. Hegemoniais an essential precondition of
sustainableempire.
Realists define the national interest in terms of
power. Many regardinternationallaw and associated
norms as impedimentsto state interests unless they
provide a rhetorical cover for policies whose real
purposeit is to maximizepower and influence.Thucy-
dides opposed such a narrowview of state interests.
Pericles was praiseworthybecause he made foreign
policy responsiveto his vision of long-termAthenian
interests,and he used his personalstandingand rhe-
toricalskills to win popularsupportfor these policies.
The demagogueswho followed him were at best suc-
cessfultacticians.They advocatedforeignpoliciesthey
expected to be popularwith the masses (ho homilos)
and were more interestedin their own fortunes than
those of their polis. Periclesunderstoodthat the over-
riding interest of Athens was preservation of the
American
er Political
P Science Review Vol. 95, No. 3
I -

empire,and this requiredboth navalpower and legit- tive and markcriticalmomentsof decisionand turning
imacy. To maintainthe latter, Athens had to act in points. The speeches are also vehicles for moving
accordwith the principlesand values that had earned thematicallytoward greater depth, compassion, and
hegemonia, and it had to offer positive political and ethical sophistication.In Thucydides, the speeches
economic benefits to allies. Because post-Periclean highlight critical junctures, sometimes suggest their
Athens consistently chose power over principle, it contingency,but alwaysexamine opposing courses of
alienatedallies and thirdparties,lost hegemonia,and action and the justificationsprovidedfor them. They
weakenedits powerbase.The MelianDialogueandthe also track the progression-really the descent-of
Sicilian expedition are pathologicaldeparturesfrom Greece fromrelativelysecuresocietiesboundtogether
rationalself-interest. by convention,obligation,and intereststo a condition
of disorder and even anarchy, a transformationto
which I shall return.
ATHENS AS TRAGEDY
Anothercommonalityin the Greekliterarytradition
Fifth-centurytragediesdramatizedthe lives of individ- is the use of heroes to providecontinuityand structure
uals to convey insights into human beings and their to the text. Modernwriterson the origins,course,and
societies as well as criticallyexamine or reaffirmfun- consequences of wars frequently acknowledge the
damentalvalues of the community.Cornford(1907) prominentrole of key actors, but they almost always
and Euben (1990), among others, have discussed providesome kind of general,sociologicalframework
Thucydides'relationshipto tragedyand the structural to understandand assessthe decisionsand behaviorof
similaritiesbetweenhis historyandthe tragedies.Alker these people (Herwig 1997; Murrayand Millet 2000;
(1988, 1996)contendsthat the historymightbe read as Weinberg 1994). Herodotus and Thucydidesdo the
the tragedyof the empire'srise and fall and the Melian reverse;they rely on the words, actions, and fate of
Dialogue as a "moralityplay"about might and right. heroesto movethe narrativealongandgive it meaning.
Bedfordand Workman(2001) suggestthat Thucydides Herodotus uses the story of Croesus to set up the
adopted the tragic form to develop his critique of centralsaga of Xerxes. Solon warnsCroesusto recog-
Athenianforeignpolicy.I believe he wantedreadersto nize his limits and restrainhis ambitions,and Xerxes
experiencehis historyas a tragedyand to move from receives similar advice from Artabanus. Both men
emotionalinvolvementwith the storyto contemplation neverthelessembarkupon ambitiousmilitaryventures
of its general lessons,just as they mightwith a theat- that end in catastrophe.Early in Book One, Thucy-
rical production. dides (1.9-11) uses the story of Agamemnonand the
In his only statement about his intent, Thucydides Trojan War-in which an alliance held together by
(1.22) offershis historyas "anaid for the interpretation navalpowerconfrontsa majorland power-to provide
of the future,whichin the courseof humanthingsmust an overview of what will follow. Elsewhere in the
resembleit if it does not reflectit."The cyclicalpattern history,the stories of individualsand cities prefigure
he has in mindis not just aboutthe growthand decline the fate of more important personages and major
of empires but, more generally,how success spawns powers,especiallyAthens.
excessive ambition,overconfidence,and self-destruc- There is a more fundamentaldifferencein the way
tive behavior. ancientGreekandmodernhistoriansapproachheroes.
The Greek literarytraditionwas largelyan oral one, Most contemporaryworksdwell on the particularmix
and Herodotus, author of the first long historical of background,personalqualities,and experiencethat
narrative,was paid to read sections of it aloud (Luce make people distinctas individuals.They do this even
1997).His wordsare chosenwith theirsoundsin mind, when these figuresare intendedto be emblematicof a
and his style, lexis eiromene(literally,speech strung class, movement, or set of shared life experiences.
together), is related to epic poetry. He introducesan Herodotus and Thucydideshardlyever take note of
idea or action, defines it by approachingit from idiosyncraticattributes;like the authorsof epic poetry
different perspectives, and expands its meaning and drama,they are interestedin using individualsto
throughthe appositionof words,phrases,and clauses. create archetypes.They stress the qualities,especially
Opinion is dividedabout Thucydides,who wrote at a strengths and weaknesses, their heroes share with
time when the oral traditionwas declining(Havelock other heroes. The typicality,not the uniqueness, of
1963;Lain Entralgo1970). Thucydidescan be appre- actors and situationsis a central conventionof fifth-
ciated if read aloud, but it would be difficultto grasp century poetry, tragedy, and prose. Even Pericles,
deeper layers of meaning. His text is written in a whomThucydidesoffersas the modelof a modernman
complex and idiosyncraticstyle that requires careful of politics, is a stereotype.He is the sum of qualities
analysis to discover and work through its purpose. that make him an ideal leaderin a transitionaldemoc-
Thucydidesmakesextensiveuse of parallelsin setting, racy and a benchmarkfor his successors.All subse-
structure,andlanguagewith otherpassagesin his work quent leaders possess differentcombinationsof some
and those of other writers.He intendedhis historyto of his qualitiesbut neverall of them-to the detriment
be read and studied. of Athens. Nicias displayshonesty and dedicationbut
The embeddingof oral forms in a literarytext is lacks the skill and stature to dissuade the assembly
commonto Herodotus,Thucydides,and Plato. In The from undertakingthe Sicilian expedition.Alcibiades
Iliad, from which so much of this tradition derives, has intelligenceand rhetoricalskill but uses them to
paired and group speeches are as importantas narra- advancehis careerat the expense of his city.

551
Thucydides the Constructivist
Thucydides the Constructivist
Greek tragedies consist of archetypicalcharacters
who confrontarchetypicalsituations.The tragichero,
like his Homeric predecessor,is a self-centered,nar-
cissisticfigurewho revels in his own importanceand
comes to believe that he is not bound by the laws and
conventionsof man. These manifestationsof ego and
their consequencesare often exploredthrougha stan-
dard plot line: Success carries with it the seeds of
failure.Successintoxicatesheroes;it encouragesthem
to form inflated opinions of themselves and their
abilitiesand to trustin hope (elpis)ratherthanreason.
It makesthem susceptibleto all kindsof adventuresin
which reasonwould dictatecautionand restraint.The
Greeks used the word ate to describethe aporia this
kindof seductioninducesand associatedit withhamar-
tia (missing the mark). Hamartialeads the hero to
catastropheby provokingnemesis(wrath)of the gods.
Herodotus frames his treatment of Croesus and
Xerxesin termsof this progression(Beye 1987).Intox-
icated by his riches, Croesusmisinterpretsthe oracle
who tells himthat a greatempirewill be destroyedif he
invades Persia. He is defeated and only saved from
beingburnedat the stakeby the mercyof his adversary.
Xerxes is an ambitiousbut cautiousleader who accu-
mulates enormous power. His exaltation and pride
neverthelessgrowin proportionto his success,and ate
makes him vulnerableto hamartia.At first, he resists
Mardonius'suggestion to exploit the revolt of the
Ionians to invade Greece and add Europe to his
empire.Subsequentdreamschangehis mind and lead
him to a fatal errorof judgment.His sense of omnip-
otence leads him to attemptto punishthe Hellespont
for washing away his bridge across it in a storm.
Nemesisat Salamisis inevitable,andfromthe perspec-
tive of Herodotusand Greek tragedy,the destruction
of the Persianfleet and, later, armyrepresentsless a
triumphof the Greeksthan a failureof Xerxes.
Thucydidesbegins where Herodotusleaves off and
shiftsthe locus of the narrativefrom Persiato Greece.
The Athenians,the principalagents of Xerxes'neme-
sis, repeatthe cycle of success,overconfidence,miscal-
culation,andcatastrophe.Indeed,the Athenianvictory
over Xerxesat Salamis,whichmarksthe emergenceof
Athens as a militarypower, sets the cycle in motion.
Athens achievesa stringof victoriesuntil ambitionand
overconfidencelead to militaryand politicaldisasters:
the complete annihilationin 454 of the expeditionto
Egypt,the revolt of Erythraeand Miletusin 452, and
the defeat at Coroneain centralGreece in 446 (Thucy-
dides 1.104,109-10). These setbackstemporarilycom-
pel Atheniansto recognizethe limitsof theirpower.In
449 they makepeace with Persia,and in 446 they agree
to the ThirtyYears'Peacewith Sparta.UnderPericles,
Athensdevotesits energiesto consolidatingthe sprawl-
ing empire. But like Xerxes, Pericles is unable to
exerciserestraintin the longerterm. Convincedof his
ability to control events at home and abroad, he
persuadesan initiallyreluctantassemblyto seize the
opportunityof alliancewith Corcyrain the erroneous
expectationthat the worst possible outcome will be a
short war in which Spartawill discoverthe futilityof
opposing Athens. This initial hamartialeads to war,
552
September 2001
September 2001
plague, the death of Pericles, a prolongedwar, and
abandonmentof Pericles'defensivestrategy.A second
hamartia,the Sicilianexpedition,urgedon the assem-
bly by Alcibiades,leads to nemesis.
Cleon, intended to representa figure intermediate
between Pericles and Alcibiades, shows none of
Pericles'cautionor thoughtfulness.He is as unscrupu-
lous as Alcibiades-Thucydides calls him "the most
violent man at Athens"-but not as clever in his
pursuit of power (Thucydides3.36). He launches a
stingingverbalattackon Nicias, accusinghim and his
troops of cowardicein facing the Spartansin Pylos.
Nicias offers to stand aside and let Cleon assume
commandof his forces. Cleon discountsthis as mere
rhetoricalposturing,but Nicias then resignshis com-
mand. Cleon tries desperatelyto back down, but the
assembly,rememberinghis earlierbravura,will not let
him do so (4.24-9). Cleon is forced to sail for Pylos,
where he and Demosthenessucceed,much to Cleon's
surpriseand relief, in overwhelmingthe Spartansin
short order (4.29-42). In the aftermathof his victory,
Sparta sued for peace to secure the return of its
hostages,and the Archidamianphase of the Pelopon-
nesian War comes to an end.
Not contentwiththe peace,Alcibiadesconvincesthe
assemblyto renewthe warandembarkupon a policyof
imperialexpansion.Thucydidesregardsthe decisions
to ally with Corcyraand conquer Sicily as the most
fateful decisionsof the assembly;each is a hamartia,
and togetherthey lead to nemesis.In discussingthese
decisions,he suggeststhe real motivesof the assembly
and hints at the contradictionsthese entail as well as
the unexpectedand tragicconsequencesthat will fol-
low (1.44; 4.65). The decision to ally with Corcyra
requires a second debate in which the assemblyre-
verses itself. This also happens in the punishmentof
Mytileneand the Sicilianexpedition(1.44; 3.36; 6.8).
But the most important similarity,which sets the
Corcyraand Siciliandecisionsapartfrom other events
in the history,is that Thucydidesprovides"archeolo-
gies"that establishthe backgroundfor the momentous
events that will follow (Thucydides1.2-13, 6.2-6; see
Connor 1984;Rawlings1981). He not only heightens
the connectionthroughhis use of this analyticalparal-
lel but also suggeststhatwe read the Siciliandebateas
a new beginning, a history within the history that
describesdecisionsand events that deserveequal bill-
ing with those that led to the war.
Nicias does his best to dissuadethe assembly,which
is utterlyignorantof the size and populationof Sicily,
from sailing against an island so large, distant, and
powerful.As does Artabanusin his plea to Xerxes,
Nicias urges(6.9-14) the Atheniansto keep what they
haveandnot risk"whatis actuallyyoursfor advantages
whichare dubiousin themselves,andwhichyou mayor
maynot attain."Alcibiades,cast in the role of Mardo-
nius, makes light of the risks of the expedition and
greatlyexaggeratesits possible rewardsto the assem-
bly. He does not attempt to rebut the argumentsof
Nicias but makes a calculated,emotional appeal to a
receptive audience. Nicias comes forward a second
time (6.20-3) and, recognizingthat direct arguments
American PoliticalScience
American Political Science Review
Review Vol. 95, No. 3
Vol.

against the expeditionwill not carrythe day, tries to sooner or later undermine and defeat any effort to
dissuade the assemblyby insisting on a much larger constructan internationalorderbased on norms,con-
force and more extensive provisions than originally ventions,law, and underlyingcommoninterests.Is this
planned.To his surprise,the more he demandsfrom inferencewarranted?
the assembly,the more eagerit becomesto supportthe Heraclitusmaintainsthat nature (phusis) tends to
expedition,convincedthat a force of such magnitude conceal itself, and its seeminglycontradictorymanifes-
will be invincible(6.24-6). tations have an underlyingunity (harmonia)that can
There are strikingsimilaritiesin plot and language be discoveredthroughreflection.Thucydidesbases his
between Thucydides'accountof the Athenian assem- inquiry on this assumption and searches for some
bly and Herodotus' depiction of Xerxes at Abydus means of getting beneath the establishedsocial order
(Connor 1984; Rahe 1996). Thucydidesdescribesthe and day-to-daybehavior to discover what truths lie
Sicilianexpeditionas more extravagantthananyGreek underneath.Plato attemptssomethingsimilarand for
campaignthat proceeded it by virtue of its lamprotes much the same reason.Thucydidesmodels his inquiry
(splendor)and tolma(audacity).These are wordsused on medicalresearch(Cochrane1929).Hippocratesand
by Herodotus and other Greeks to describe Xerxes' his followerschartthe courseof diseasesin the human
court and militaryplans.Readersof Thucydideswould body,notingthe symptomsthatappearat the onset and
have found his work old-fashioned.He could assume how these build to a critical moment or crisis stage
that they were familiarwith the works of Aeschylus, (kairos) that leads to death or recovery.Thucydides
Sophocles, Euripides, and Herodotus and that most appliesthis methodto the social diseasesof revolution
would recognize his personificationof Athens as a and war; he describestheir manifestationsand charts
tragic hero and the mordantcomparisonhe intended their course throughthe body politic to the point of
between Athens and Persia. This format and analogy social strife (stasis) and the disintegrationof civil
would encourage readers to consider the story of society.As physicianssoughtto learnsomethingabout
Athens as the basis for generalizationsabout Greece the nature of the human body from studying the
and the humancondition. progressionof illness, so Thucydideshoped to learn
about the humanmind.
NOMOSVERSUS PHUSIS Thucydides(2.47-54) makes the link between phys-
ical and social diseases explicit in his analysisof the
Greek city-stateswere isolated from one anotherand Athenian plague of 430-28. He begins by noting the
the widerworldby mountainrangesor largebodies of common view that the disease arrivedin Athens via
water.In the fifth century,economicgrowth,immigra- Africa but refuses to speculate about its causes. Fol-
tion, and improvementsin shipbuildingenabled the lowingHippocratictradition,"I shall simplyset down
Greeksto expandtheirtravelandtradeandlearnmore its nature,and explainthe symptomsby whichperhaps
about the customs of other peoples. In the process, it may be recognizedby the student, if it should ever
they began to question their long-standingbelief that breakout again"(2.48.3).He describesin clinicaldetail
their social practiceswere gods-givenand moved to- the onset of the disease, subsequentsymptoms,varia-
ward a position of culturalrelativism.In Athens there tion in the course of the illness, the sufferingand
was an intense, century-longdebate about the relative fatalityit causes, and the disfigurementof survivors.
importanceof humannature (phusis) and convention The plague left the city crowded with dead and
(nomos) (Finley [1942] 1967; Kerferd 1981). Pindar, dying. Bodies accumulatedand decayed in houses,
who declaredthat custom is the masterof us all, and half-dead creatures roamed the streets in search of
Herodotus,who offereda detailedand nonjudgmental water, and sacred places were full of the corpses of
accountof the diversityof humanpractices,anchored those who came there seekingrelief. As rich and poor
one pole of this debate.Sophoclesresistedtheiragnos- died off in large numbers,the social fabric began to
ticism and relativism.Plato, in his Protagorasand the unravel."Men, not knowingwhat was to become of
Republic, would offerthe most sophisticated defense of them, became utterly careless of everything,whether
the underlyingimportanceof innate qualities. sacred or profane" (2.52.3). Family responsibilities
Realists and some classicistsassert that for Thucy- were ignored in violation of the most fundamental
dides phusistrumpsnomos (Crane1998;de Ste. Croix ethical principle of Greek society: the obligation to
1972;Romilly 1990). They cite referencesin speeches help one's ownphiloi. People were increasinglyafraid
to universal laws that govern human behavior and to visit one another, and many sufferersdied from
behavior that appears to lend substance to these neglect. Sacredritualswere ignored,burialrites were
claims.One exampleis the justificationfor empirethe dispensedwith, and corpses were disposed of in any
Athenian envoysoffer to the Spartanassemblyon the which way. Some residents resorted to "the most
eve of the war. They are doing nothing more than shamelessmodesof burial,throwingthe bodiesof their
acting in accordwith "the common practice of man- family or friends on the already burning pyres of
kind" (he anthropeiaphusis) that "the weaker should be others" (2.52.3). "Lawlessextravagance"became in-
subject to the stronger"(Thucydides1.76). The Athe- creasinglycommon,and men "coolyventuredon what
nians give the same justificationto the Melians. If they had formerlydone in a corner"(2.53.1). Those
neorealists and their classical allies are right, then who suddenly inherited wealth "resolved to spend
human drives for dominance (arche), ambition (phi- quicklyand enjoy themselves,regardedtheir lives and
lotimia), and self-aggrandizement (pleonexia) will riches as alike thingsof the day"(2.53.2). Fear of the

553
 the Constructivist
Thucydidesthe
Thucydides Constructivist
gods and humanlawsall but disappeared,as "eachfelt
that a far severer sentence had been alreadypassed
upon them all and hung over their heads, and before
this felt it was only reasonableto enjoy life a little"
(2.53.4).
The other stasis that Thucydidesrecordsin detail is
political:the revolution,civil violence, and moral dis-
integrationof Corcyrain the 420s (3.70-81). As in the
account of the plague, he begins with a detailed,
precise, almost day-by-daydescriptionof what tran-
spired.This sets the stage for a more impressionistic
account, followed by generalizationsbased on that
account, and he ends with a depictionof the gravest
atrocities. Violent conflict between democratic and
oligarchicfactions,interventionby the foreignallies of
both, and internalrevolutionculminatein seven days
of "butchery"in which Corcyreans,consumedby ha-
treds arisingfrom privateand politicalcauses, kill as
manyof theirenemiesas theycan lay theirhandsupon.
As in Athens, everyconventionis violated:"Sonswere
killedby theirfathers,and suppliantsdraggedfromthe
altaror slain upon it, while some were even walled up
in the temple of Dionysusand died there"(3.81.4-5).
Justas the plagueushersin an era of lawlessnessand
boldness (tolma) that significantlyaffects domestic
politicsandforeignpolicy,so the Corcyreanrevolution,
for much the same reason, is the precursorof similar
developmentsin other cities. After Corcyra,Thucy-
dides (3.82) tells us, "the whole Hellenic world" is
convulsed as democraticfactions seek to assume or
maintainpowerwith the help of Athens, and oligarchs
do the samewiththe supportof Sparta."Thesufferings
which revolutionentailed upon the cities were many
and terrible, such as have occurred and alwayswill
occur, as long as the nature of mankindremainsthe
same, thoughin a severeror milderform, and varying
in their symptoms, according to the variety of the
particularcases"(3.82.1).
These extreme situations bring out the worst in
humanbeings,and the passagejust quotedcan be read
as support for the universalityand immutabilityof
human nature. But Thucydides(3.82.2) modifies his
generalizationin the next sentence: "In peace and
prosperitystatesandindividualshavebettersentiments
because they do not find themselves suddenly con-
frontedwith imperiousnecessities;but war takes away
the easy supplyof dailywants, and so proves a rough
masterthatbringsmost men'scharactersto a level with
their fortunes."The arrow of causation is reversed;
stasisdoes not so muchrevealthe hiddencharacterof
people as it shapes that character.People who have
little to live for behave differentlyfrom people who
have much to lose. The qualifier"most"is important
because it indicates that not everyone responds the
same way to social stimuli, not even in the most
extreme situations.In his descriptionof the plague,
Thucydides(2.51) uses parallel constructionsto de-
scribehow some people, fearfulof succumbingto the
disease, isolated themselves at great costs to friends
and family;others placed honor above survival,and
"honor made them unsparingof themselves."Some
survivorsparticipatedin the greatestexcesses,whereas
554
September 2001
September 2001
others were unstintingin administeringto the ill and
dying.The same bifurcatedresponsecan be observed
at the other end of the spectrum, in secure and
prosperoussocieties:The majorityof people adhereto
social and religious conventions, and a minority is
unconstrainedand destructivein behavior.
Thucydideshas a less deterministicunderstandingof
human nature.By removingthe constraintsand obli-
gations arising from convention, stasis permits the
fullest expressionof the worst humanimpulses,but in
some people it brings out the best. The plague and
Corcyreanrevolution, and the wide range of other
"tests"to which human beings are subjected in the
courseof the PeloponnesianWar,indicatethat human
nature encompasses a range of needs, desires, and
impulses, some of them contradictory(Kokaz 2001).
People appeardrivenby their needs for self-preserva-
tion, pleasure, recognition, and power but also by
needs for love, honor, and esteem. The Melian Dia-
logue offers a nice counterpoint to the Corcyrean
revolution in this respect. Opposition to Athens is
futile, but the Melians choose to resist because they
value freedommore than self-preservation.
The Hippocraticphysicianstaughtthat phusisvaried
according to the environment.Some believed that
traitsacquiredthroughsocial practice(nomos) could,
over time, modifynature(phusis).Thucydidesbelieves
that behavior is the result of a complex interaction
between the two. If human nature could not be har-
nessed for constructiveends, civilizationwould never
have developed.This conclusionrefocusesour atten-
tion on the meta-themeof Thucydides'narrative:the
rise and fall of Greek civil society and the circum-
stancesin whichpositiveand negativefacets of human
naturecome to the fore.
LOGOIAND ERGA
Ober (1998) maintainsthat Thucydidesprivilegeserga
over logoi. From Thucydides'perspective,both deeds
and words are social constructions,but he gives pride
of place to logoi. Social facts and social conventions
create the intersubjectiveunderstandingson which all
action depends. Social facts often misrepresentbrute
facts, but Thucydides considers this discrepancya
double-edgedsword.It can prove destructive,as it did
in the Siciliandebate, for the reasonsOber describes.
But it is potentiallybeneficial,if not essential, to the
maintenanceof community.Democratic ideology in
Athens exaggeratedthe equality among classes and
downplayedpolitical, economic, and social inequali-
ties. It reconciledthe demosto the existingsocialorder
and mutedthe classtensionsthat led to violentconflict
and civil wars in many other polities. The Athenian
democraticideologyrestedon myths:on social facts at
variancewith realityand on a historythat bore only a
passingrelationshipto so-calledempiricalfacts, as the
Archeologyin Book One convincinglydemonstrates.
It is no coincidencethat observationsabout words
(Thucydides3.82) follow directly on a discussionof
how the Corcyreanrevolution affected the rest of
Hellas."Revolutionranits coursefromcityto city,and
AmericanPolitical
American PoliticalScience
Science Review
Review Vol.
Vol. 95,
95, No.
No. 3

the places which it arrivedat last, from havingheard exceedinglydifficultto understand,and eat their flesh
what had been done before, carriedto a still greater raw";in the Mytileniandebate, to characterizewhat
excessthe refinementof theirinventions,as manifested many Athenians think about the previousday's deci-
in the cunningof their enterprisesand the atrocityof sion to execute all the Mytilenians;and to describethe
their reprisals"(3.82.3). Language is the vector by stasis that convulsedthe Greek world beginningwith
whichthe disease of revolutionspreads,but it is also a the revolutionin Corcyra.Rahe (1996) suggests that
contributingcause of constantmovement(kinesis)and the word is used on the last two occasionsto indicate
destruction(Saxonhouse1996).Not just in Corcyrabut that the war, plague, and revolutions reversed the
throughoutmuch of Greece, "wordshad to change process describedin the Archeology.The measureof
their ordinarymeaningsand to take those whichwere rest (hesuchia) and peace civilizationbrought about
now given them." Thucydides(3.82) gives a string of was disruptedby the movement(kinesis)of war,which
examples,and all indicatethe extentto whichmeanings underminedconventions(nomoi), includingthose of
and the values they expressedwere subverted: language,and encouragedthe kind of brazen daring
Recklessaudacitycame to be consideredthe courageof a (tolma) that provoked "raw"and savage deeds. The
Greeks became increasinglyirrationaland inarticulate
loyal supporter;prudent hesitation, specious cowardice;
moderationwas held to be a cloakfor unmanliness;ability (alogistos) and, like animals, no longer capable of
to see all sides of a question, incapacityto act on any. employingthe logos (rationalfacilities and language)
Franticviolence became the attributeof manliness;cau- necessaryfor communaldeliberation.
tious plotting a justifiable means of self-defense. The Is the rise and fall of civilizationinevitable?Greek
advocateof extrememeasureswas alwaystrustworthy; his mythand saga portraya largelyunalterableworld,but
opponenta man to be suspected.To succeedin a plot was one that is only tenuouslyconnected to the time in
to have a shrewdhead, and to divinea plot still shrewder; which the audiencedwells.The
but to try to provide againsthavingto do either was to great playwrightscar-
ried on this tradition, and the tragic sense of life
breakup your partyand to be afraidof your adversaries.
dependson the inevitabilityof nemesis and the immu-
Words are the ultimate convention, and they also tabilityof things(Beye 1987).Likethe plots of so much
succumbed to stasis. Altered meanings not only myth and epic, tragedyalso relies on the intervention
changed the way people thought about one another, of the gods and the power of situationsto generate
theirsociety,and theirobligationsto it but also encour- pressuresandpsychologicalstatesthatmove the action
aged barbarismand violence by undermininglong- along and leave limited choice to the individual.In
standing conventions and the constraints they en- Agamemnon(176-83), Aeschylusexplainsthat "Zeus
forced. Thucydides(3.82.8) attributesthis process to shows man the way to think, setting understanding
"the lust for power arisingfrom greed and ambition; securelyin the midst of suffering.In the heart there
and from these passions proceeded the violence of drips instead of sleep a labor of sorrowingmemory;
parties once engaged in contention."Politiciansused and there comes to us all unwillingprudentmeasured
"fairphrasesto arriveat guiltyends"and degradedand thought; the grace of gods who sit on holy thrones
abasedthe language. somehow comes with force and violence." Orestes
Thucydides follows the introductory remarks in confrontsa dilemmanot of his own makingand from
Book One with the so-called Archeology(1.2-21), in whichthere is no exit. The chorus,whose lines I quote,
which he describes the rise of Hellenic culture. In reminds us that the most he can do is preserve his
contrastto other fifth-centuryaccountsof the rise of dignity and learn from his suffering.Herodotus im-
civilization,less emphasisis placed on agricultureand ported this tradition into prose. His Xerxes has no
the development of material technology and more control over his fate; the power of Persia and the
stressis givento the powerof tyrantsto cobbletogether insolence of the Greeks compel him to attempttheir
smallsettlementsinto increasinglylargerkingdomsand conquest. When he has second thoughts, the gods
alliances. He portrays archaic Greece as being in intervene through Mardoniusto push him to invade
constantmovementas a result of frequentmigrations Greece,just as the Argivesare compelledto makewar
due to populationgrowth,depletion of local agricul- againstTroyby Athena,who speeds downfrom Olym-
tural resources, and the depredationsof pirates and pus to convince Odysseusto prevent their departure
invaders.Civilization,defined as a state of peace and (Homer 2.135-210).
rest (hesuchia),only became possiblewhen communi- For Herodotus,the stories of Croesus and Xerxes
ties combinedto undertakecommonaction, including are concrete manifestationsof a timeless cycle of
the suppressionof piracy. Common action required hubris-ate-hamartia-nemesis that can be expected to
common understanding;languagewas the vehicle of repeat itself so long as humanswalk the earth. The
this understandingand the veryfoundationof political same attitudeof resignationand acceptancehas been
stabilityand civilization.Civilizationis also due to a attributedto Thucydides.Some of his actorsdo artic-
reinforcingcycle of logoi and erga. The Archeology ulate this perspective.The Athenian envoys at Sparta
sets the stage for the historyof decline that follows. portraythemselvesas prisonersof historyand seem to
Greeks distinguishedmen from animals by their understandthat they are playing roles in a grand,
abilityto speak and their preferencefor cooked meat. historicaldrama,althoughnot yet framedas a tragedy
The word omos (raw) is used three times by Thucy- (1.75). Pericles warns his countrymenthat one day
dides (3.94, 3.36, 3.82.1):to describean Aetolian tribe they, too, will be forcedto yield "inobediencewith the
so uncivilized that "they speak a language that is generallaw of decay"(2.64).

555
Thucydides the Constructivist
Thucydides the Constructivist
Thucydidesis not as pessimistic as many realist
readingssuggest.Whywould he invest decades in the
researchand writing of the history and offer it as a
"possessionfor all time" if he thought humanbeings
and their societies were the prisonersof circumstance
andfate? He musthavebelievedthat people possessat
least some abilityto control their destiny.The appro-
priate analogyis to psychotherapy.Freudiantherapy
assumesthat people will repeatedlyenact counterpro-
ductivescriptsuntil they confrontand come to terms
with the experiencesthat motivatethis behavior.This
can only be achievedthroughregression;people must
allow themselves to relive painful experiences they
have repressed and come to understandhow these
shape their present behavior. Sophists relied on a
somewhatsimilarprocess.Theirworkswere offeredas
courses of study that engage the emotions and mind.
By experiencingthe elation, disappointment,anguish,
and other emotions a storyprovoked,and by applying
reason to work through its broader meaning and
implications,readers could gain enlightment.Hippo-
craticphysiciansput great store in the curativepower
of words. Euripides' Phaedra and Andromachede-
scribe words as sources of power and psychological
compensation.The playsof Aeschylusare basedon the
maximof pathei mathos,of learningand transcending
one's situationthroughthe pain associatedwith under-
standingthat situation.There is ample Greek prece-
dent for Thucydides'project.
Like analysts,neithersophistsnor tragicplaywrights
tell people what lessons to learn; all believe that
genuine understanding(saphesskopein) can only be
internalizedand influencebehaviorif it arises from a
processof catharticself-discovery.Thucydides'history
encouragesAtheniansand other Greeksto relivetrau-
maticpoliticalexperiencesin the mostvividway and to
workthroughtheir meaningand implicationsfor their
lives and societies.I believe he harboredthe hope that
such a course of "therapy"could help free people of
the burdens of the past and produce the kind of
wisdomthatenablessocietiesto transcendtheirscripts.
Transcendingold scriptsrequiresan alternativevo-
cabulary.Crane(1998) arguesthat Thucydideswanted
to reconstructthe aristocraticideology, the "ancient
simplicity"to which he was born and raised. He was
undeniablyattractedto the "ancientsimplicity."Evi-
dence for this lies in the locationof his discussionof it
in the text (3.83),whichfollowshis descriptionof stasis
at Corcyra.The intended inference is that religion,
honor, and aristocraticvalues promote a tranquiland
secure social and political order, and their decline
removes restraints to unprincipled self-aggrandize-
ment.
The passage is unabashedlynostalgicbut also bru-
tally realistic.The ancient simplicityhad not merely
declined;it had been "laugheddownand disappeared"
(Thucydides3.83). Here and elsewhere Thucydides
recognizesthe gulf between the old and the new, and
he knows the life-style associated with the ancient
simplicityhas passed and cannot readilybe restored.
Greece, and especiallyAthens, has been transformed
by what can only be called a processof modernization.
556
September 2001
September 2001
Population growth, coinage, trade, the division of
labor, major militaryundertakings,and empire have
givenriseto new classes,new ideasandvalues,andnew
social and political practices to cope with a more
complicated and competitive world. The Athenian
empirehas become so powerfulthat it no longerneeds
to rely on the standardpattern of client-patronrela-
tions, based on obligationand the mutualexchangeof
favors and services.Success has made the traditional
system of political relationshipsand the values on
which it rested look old-fashionedand unnecessary,
even a hindrance.The fate of Spartaalso testifies to
this change. Its influence in Greece derived largely
from the symboliccapital it had accumulatedin the
formof reliabilityin the eyes of others,especiallyallies.
Spartanshadgone to warto preservethiscapitaland in
the vain hope that defeat of Athenswouldstaveoff the
changes that threatenedtheir traditionalway of life.
Spartaemergedas the victor in the war,but it was no
longer the same polis. Spartanshad to become more
like their adversaryto defeat it, which is perhapsthe
most compelling evidence that the old ways were
doomed.
Thucydidesrecognizesthe impracticality of tryingto
turnthe clockback;the aristocraticorderandits values
had become anachronistic,and the effortto reimpose
oligarchicrule at the end of the PeloponnesianWar
failed miserably.He has a subtler project in mind:
Adapt older values and language to present circum-
stances to create a more workablesynthesisthat can
accommodateprogressbut mitigateits excesses.Ober
(1998) contends that Thucydideslooked to Periclean
Athens for his model. It functionedwell becauseof the
balanceof powerbetween the masses (ho demos) and
the smallerelite of rich,influential,and powerfulmen
(hoidunatoi).The need of each groupto take the other
into account and the presence of leaders such as
Pericles, who mediated and muted these class-based
tensions,led to policiesthat often reflectedthe interest
of the community (hoi Athenaioi), not merely the
democraticor aristocraticfaction.
In Book One, ThucydidesportraysPericlesas some-
one who personifies the ancient simplicitybut has
masteredthe new arts of oratoryand statecraft.His
success in governingAthens under the most trying
circumstancesmay have convinced Thucydidesthat
such an amalgamwas desirableand possible. But his
praiseof Periclesis anotherone of his judgmentsthat
is in part subvertedlater in the text. In Book Four,
ThucydidesoffersHermocratesof Syracuseas another
role model (Connor 1984; Monoson and Loriaux
1998). He is intendedto be a counterpointto Pericles
and a more accurate guide to how foreign policy
restraintcan be sold to the publicand a more peaceful
internationalorder maintained.
In his appeal to Siciliansfor unity againstAthens,
Hermocratesinvertskey realisttenets of foreignpolicy
that are associatedwith Pericles(Thucydides4.59-64).
Connor(1984) observesthat the "lawof the stronger"
becomes an injunctionfor the weaker to unite, and
Hermocrates(4.62) goes on to exploitthe widespread
fear of Athens to justifyforethoughtand restraintbut
 American
Political
American Political Science Review
Science Review
urges common defensive action. On the eve of war
Pericles sought to inspire confidence in his fellow
citizens,but Hermocrateswantsto intensifytheirfears.
Athens and its enemies attributedAtheniansuccessto
ingenuity,speed of execution, and confidence in the
ability to face challenges (Thucydides1.68-71, 2.35-
46). Hermocratesfinds strength in the restraintand
caution that come from recognitionof the limits of
knowledgeand powerand contemplationof the future
(promethia)with an eye toward its unpredictability.
Periclesurgedhis countrymento spurnSparta'speace
overtures,but Hermocratesfavorsaccommodationand
settlement.Successorsof Pericles,especiallyCleon and
Alcibiades,encouragedthe Atheniansto contemplate
the rewards from imperial expansion. Hermocrates
implicitlyurgeshis audienceto considerthe advantages
they alreadypossess and the loss that war may entail.
Hermocrates-and Thucydides-had an intuitive
graspof prospecttheory(Levy1992,1996;Tverskyand
Kahneman1992),whichis based on the robustpsycho-
logical finding that people are generally more con-
cernedwith preventingloss than they are with making
gains.
Sophistspioneered the rhetoricalstrategyof "anti-
logic." Zeno silenced his opponents by showinghow
their argumentsalso impliedtheir negationsand were
thus contradictory(Kerferd1981). Thucydidesmakes
extensiveuse of antilogic.He examineseveryso-called
law of politics, appears to validate it, but ultimately
subvertsit by showingthe unintendedand contradic-
tory consequencesthat flow from its rigorousapplica-
tion. This is most obviouswith the principlesespoused
by demagogueslike Cleon, but it is also true of more
honorablepoliticianslike Pericles.Thucydidesdid not
spoon feed conclusions;he wanted readers to draw
them by reflecting on his narrative,speeches, and
dialogues.Hermocrates'speech is the most overt at-
tempt to point readersin the rightdirection.Through
emotionsand intellect-feeling the painof the rise and
fall of Athens and graspingthe reasonsthis occurred-
readers could experience the history as a course of
"logotherapy."Its larger purpose was to make them
wary not only of the sweet and beguiling words of
demagoguesbut also, as Monosonand Loriaux(1998)
suggest, of any politician who advocates policies at
odds with conventions that maintain domestic and
internationalorder.This cautionis the firstand essen-
tial step toward the restructureof language and the
reconstitutionof conventionsthatcan permiteconomic
and intellectual progress while maintainingpolitical
order.
THUCYDIDESTHE CONSTRUCTIVIST
Fifth-centuryGreece experiencedthe firstMethodenst-
reit. "Positivists"insisted on the unity of the physical
and socialworldsas well as the existenceof an ordered
reality that can be discoveredthroughthe process of
inquiry.They were opposed by "constructivists," who
regardedthe social world as distinctand humanrela-
tions as an expressionof culturallydetermined and
Vol.
Vol. 95,
95, No. 3
No. 3~~~~~~~~~~
ever evolvingconventions.4Early Greek thinkersac-
cepted the divine natureof the world and considered
human customspart of an overall,unified scheme of
nature.The goal of the Ionian protophysicistswas to
discoverthe originalprinciple,the arche, that deter-
mined all the other regularities,social and physical,of
the universe. Reality was out there, waiting to be
describedin termsof impersonalforces and the agency
that also expressedthose forces. In the fifth century,
sophists directed their inquiry away from nature to
humanbeings.Accordingto Jaeger (1939-45, 1.306),
"the conceptofphusis was transferredfrom the whole
universeto a singlepartof it-to mankind;and there it
took on a special meaning.Man is subjectto certain
rules prescribedby his own nature."
This shift coincidedwith exposureto alien cultures
and the discoveryof practicesthat differedremarkably
fromthose of the Greeks.People in these culturesalso
found differentmeanings in the same events. Philo-
sophical inquiryand experience of cultural diversity
combinedto encouragea subjectivistepistemologyin
which nomos was contrastedwith phusis and consid-
ered by manya more importantdeterminantof human
behavior. The deeds themselves (auta ta erga) and
conceptof the "realworld"becameproblematic,as did
the assumption that either could be understood
through observation.Democritus (1956, fragments9
and 11), proclaimedthat things were "sweet by con-
vention, bitter by convention,hot by convention,cold
by convention,"and he went on to reason that all
observationwas illegitimate.Such skepticismencour-
aged the belief that truthwas relative(Lloyd 1978).
Givensophisticepistemology,it is not surprisingthat
it spawneda cognate to postmodernism.Protagoras,
who is the best known representative,regarded all
claims to knowledgeas nothing more than rhetorical
strategiesfor self-aggrandizement. Justicewas a con-
cept invoked by the to
powerful justifytheir authority
and advance their parochial interests. Philosophical
nihilismreached its fullest expressionin Critias,who
definedjustice in terms of power and found justifica-
tion for this in humanpractice-the veryargumentthe
Athenian envoys made at Melos. Critiasis good grist
for the mill of any contemporarycriticof postmodern-
ism. A politician and one of the thirty tyrantswho
briefly ruled Athens after its defeat in 404, he was
infamous for his corruption and brutality (Guthrie
1969;Strauss1986).Platorepresenteda reactionto the
sophists;he was horrifiedby their reductionof law to
customand by the equationof justicewith tyranny.He
parodiedsophistsin his dialogues(see especiallyPro-
tagoras) and argued against their efforts to explain
4 I do not want to
exaggerate the parallels between ancient and
modern philosophies of social inquiry; there were important differ-
ences in ideas and the relative timing of social and scientific
advances. In the modern era, advances in mathematics have contrib-
uted to modern science and, ultimately, the social sciences. In
Greece, the age of mathematical discovery came after these philo-
sophical debates were under way. Athenian interest in mathematics
began a generation after Thucydides; Euclid wrote his Elements at
the end of the fourth century, and Archimedes made his contribu-
tions almost a century later.
557
Thucydides the Constructivist
Thucydides the Constructivist
physicaland social realitypurely in terms of its phe-
nomenalaspects.He sought to restoreobjectivityand
the statusof universallaws by discoveringan underly-
ing, ultimate realitythat would provide a foundation
for a universal nation of justice and social order
(Guthrie1969;Kerferd1981).
Like contemporaryconstructivists,Thucydideswas
fascinated by convention (nomos) and the role it
played in regulating human behavior. The history
makes clear that he regardedconventionsnot only as
constraintsbut also as framesof referencethat people
use to understandthe worldand define their interests.
It may be going too far to claim that Thucydides
initiatedthe "linguisticturn"in ancientphilosophy,but
he certainlysharedthe constructivistemphasison the
importanceof language,whichhe thoughtenabledthe
shared meaningsand conventionsthat make civiliza-
tion possible. His history explores the relationship
betweenwords and deeds and documentsthe double-
feedback loop between them. Shared meanings of
wordsare the basis for conventionsand civic coopera-
tion. Whenwordslose theirmeaning,or theirmeaning
is subverted,the conventionsthat dependon them lose
their force, communicationbecomes difficult,and civ-
ilizationdeclines.Thucydidesexploitedthe growthand
evolution of the Greek languagefor purposesof ex-
pressionand precision,and he probablycoined more
neologisms that any other fifth-centuryauthor. One
goal of the history is the considered restorationof
traditionalmeanings of words to help resurrectthe
conventionsthey sustained.5In this sense, he antici-
pates Plato.
The core of constructivismis hardto definebecause
thereis so muchvariationamongauthors.In a thought-
ful analysisof this literature,Hopf (n.d.) suggeststhat
constructivismhas two components.The firstis appre-
ciation of social structure,whetherunderstoodsocio-
logically, as in the thin institutionalistaccounts of
Finnemoreand Sikkink(1998) and others, or linguis-
tically,as attemptedby Kratochwiland Ruggie (1986),
Kratochwil(1989), Onuf (1989), and Ruggie (1998).
The secondcomponentis the acceptanceof the mutual
constitutionof agentsand structures(Kratochwil1989;
5 Well before Thucydides, Greek philosophy debated the importance
and meaning of language. There was some recognition that it
mediated human understanding of reality and thus constituted a
barrier to any perfect grasp of that reality. An attempted solution was
to assert that names are not arbitrary labels but imitations of their
objects. Others (e.g., Hermogenes) insisted that words are arbitrary
in origin and do not represent any reality. Socrates tried to split the
difference by arguing that things have a fixed nature that words
attempt to reproduce, but the imitation is imperfect, and this is why
languages vary so much. Moreover, all attempts at imitation become
corrupted over time.
Considerable effort went into recapturing the meaning of words
and names in the late fifth century, and Thucydides must be situated
in that tradition. I see no evidence that he believed in the original
meaning of words, but certainly he wanted to restore earlier mean-
ings, supportive of homonoia, that had been subverted. Plato, in
Phaedrus, 260b, makes a similar argument when he discusses a skilled
rhetorician who convinces someone to use the name "horse" to
describe a donkey and thus transfers the qualities of one to the other.
He is clearly tilting at rhetoricians and politicians who advocate evil
as good.
558
September 2001
September 2001
Kratochwiland Ruggie 1986;Onuf 1989).Constructiv-
ism, in its thickerlinguisticversion,is interestedin the
logic of intelligibility,that is, what makessome actions
more imaginableand thus more probablethan others.
The thin version gives more weight to the role norms
play in advancinginterests than to the creation of
normsby identities.
Thucydidesis undeniablya constructivistand may
have been the original practitionerof the thicker
linguisticversion. His historyexamineshow language
shapesthe identitiesandconventionsin termsof which
interestsare defined.He drivesthis point home in the
most graphicway by showingthat it is impossibleto
formulateinterestsat all whenconventionsbreakdown
and the meaningof languagebecomessubverted.Tra-
ditionalGreeksocial intercourse,domesticand "inter-
national,"was embedded in a web of interlocking
relationshipsand obligationsand governedby an elab-
orate set of conventions.Dealingswith foreignerswere
an extension of domestic relations. There was no
specificwordfor internationalrelations-the closest is
xenia, which generallyis translatedas "guest friend-
ship."
War was not infrequentbut was limited in means
and ends. With rareexceptions,the independenceand
social systemof other city-stateswere respected;wars
were waged to establishprecedenceand settle border
disputes.Combatwas highlystylizedandwas designed
to minimize casualties and allow individualsto gain
honor through the display of heroism. Truces were
obligatoryto permitboth sides to gathertheirdead and
the victor to erect a trophy(Adcock 1957). With the
introductionof the hoplite phalanxand later develop-
ments againstmassivePersianarmies,the characterof
warchangedsomewhat,but mostconventionswere still
observed.They did not break down until late in the
PeloponnesianWar,when even the quasi-sacredtruces
that enabledproperdisposaland honoringof the dead
often were no longer observed.
To the extent that realist readings of Thucydides
addressthe breakdownof conventions,these changes
are attributedto the effects of war, which is "a rough
master"(3.82.2). This explanationis not convincing,
because the Persianwarswere equallyharsh,yet most
conventionsheld. Modern analogies spring to mind.
The AmericanCivil War was brutalby any standard,
but both sides generallyobservedthe conventionsof
war. Confederatemistreatmentof African American
prisonersof warwas the principalexception,but even
this reflected a convention. Troops on both sides
behavedin waysthat baffleus today.At BloodyAngle
at Gettysburg,New Yorkersrefusedto followordersto
fire on the remnant of retreating Alabamians and
insteadthrewtheir caps into the air and cheeredthem
for theirbravery.In WorldWar I, Germanand Allied
armiesbehavedon the whole quite honorablytoward
each other and civilians,in sharp contrast to World
War II, especiallyon the Easternfront,whichapprox-
imatedThucydides'depictionof barbarism.The differ-
ences were not due to the harshnessor durationof war
but to the characterof the political systems. When
languagewas subvertedand conventionsignored or
 Ameica
American Political cec Review
Science eiwVl Poiia
destroyed,as in Nazi Germany,the rationalconstruc-
tion of interestwas impossible,waraimswere limitless,
and the rules of warfarewere disregarded.
Thucydidestakes the constructivistargument an-
other step and implies that civil society is also what
actors make of it. Following Hobbes, most realists
maintain that the distinguishingfeature of domestic
society is the presence of a Leviathanthat overcomes
anarchyand allowsorderto be maintained.For Thucy-
dides,the characterof domesticpoliticsrunsthe gamut
fromhighlyordered,consensual,andpeacefulsocieties
to those wrackedby anarchyand bloodshed.It is not a
Leviathan that is critical but the degree to which
citizens construct their identities as members of a
community(homonoia,literally,being of one mind)or
as atomistic individuals.When the former view pre-
vails, as it did in PericleanAthens and in Greece more
generallybefore the PeloponnesianWar, conventions
restrainthe behaviorof actors,whetherindividualsor
city-states.When the latter dominates,as in Corcyra
and almost in Athens after 412, civil society disinte-
grates, and even a Leviathancannot keep the peace.
The domesticenvironmentin these situationscomes to
resemblethe war-torninternationalenvironment,and
for the same reasons.
CONCLUSION
The historydriveshome the truththat a strongsense of
communityis equallyessential to domestic and inter-
national order. Some rational choice formulations-
againfollowingHobbes-acknowledge this realityand
recognizethat it is necessaryto preservethe rules of
the game if actors collectivelyare to maximizetheir
interests.They highlightthe paradoxthat a focus on
short-term interests-by individuals, factions, or
states-can underminethe order or environmenton
which the rationalpursuitof interestdepends.Thucy-
dides would regardthe tragedyof the commonsas an
unavoidableoutcomein a culturein whichthe individ-
ual increasinglyis the unit to whom advertisersand
politiciansappeal and in terms of whom social scien-
tists conductresearch.He would not find it surprising
that a significantpercentageof the citizens of such a
society cannot see any reason for or imagine any
benefit that might accruefrom payingtaxes.
The importance of community,and of identities
defined at least partlyin terms of it, was not lost on
traditionalrealists.Morgenthau([1951]1982,61) cited
Edward Gibbon's observation that the balance of
power functionedwell in the eighteenth centurybe-
cause Europe was "one great republic"with common
standardsof "politenessand cultivation"and a com-
mon "systemof arts, and laws, and manners."As a
consequence,the "mutualinfluenceof fear and shame
imposedmoderationon the actionsof states and their
leaders"and instilled in all of them "some common
sense of honorandjustice"(p. 60). Howevermuchthey
desiredto increasetheir powerat the expenseof their
neighbors,they limited their ambitionsbecause they
recognizedthe right of others to exist and the funda-
mental legitimacyof the internationalpolitical order.
5 No.
Vol. 95, o 3
Morgenthauregardsthe breakdownof this sense of
communityas the underlyingcause of both worldwars
andthe threatto humanityposed by the ColdWar.The
same objectioncan be raisedaboutliberal,institution-
alist approachesthat stress the role of institutionsin
creatingand maintainingorder.Those institutionsmay
flourish and function as they do-when they do-
because of an underlyingsense of community.
Thucydides'historysuggeststhat interestandjustice
are inextricablyconnected and mutuallyconstitutive.
On the surfacethey appearto be in conflict,and almost
everydebate in his historyin one form or anotherpits
considerationsof interestagainstthose of justice. But
Thucydides,like Democritus,is interestedin the un-
derlyingand often hidden nature of things. At that
level, the historyshows that interestscannot be intel-
ligentlyconsidered,formulated,or pursuedoutside a
homonoiaand the identitiesit constructsand sustains.
The creation and maintenanceof homonoia depends
on enduring individualcommitmentsto justice and
respectfor other humanbeings (or politicalunits). In
the most fundamentalsense, justice enables interests.
Materialist interpretationsof Thucydides, which
overwhelminglyare realist,offera superficialand one-
sided portrayal.Constructivistreadingsmustavoidthis
error.Thucydidesis both a realistand a constructivist.
Stasis and homonioa represent two faces of human
beings;both are inherentin their phusis. Materialism
and constructivismare equallygermaneto the studyof
internationalrelations.They need to build on Thucy-
dides' researchprogram,that is, discover the condi-
tions that underlie stasis and homonoia and what
caused transitions between them. For this reason
alone, the historyis "a possessionfor all time."
REFERENCES
Adcock, F. E. 1957. The Greek and Macedonian Art of War.Berkeley:
University of California Press.
Aeschylus. 1938. Agamemnon. In The Complete Greek Drama, vol. 1,
ed. Whitney J. Oates and Eugene O'Neill, Jr. New York: Random
House. Pp. 167-225.
Alker, Hayward R. 1988. "The Dialectical Logic of Thucydides'
Melian Dialogue." American Political Science Review 82 (Septem-
ber): 806-20.
Alker, Hayward R. 1996. Rediscoveriesand Reformulations:Human-
istic Methods for International Studies. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Austin, J. L. 1975. How to Do Things with Words, 2d. ed., ed. J. 0.
Urmson and Marina Sbisa. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Bedford, David, and Thom Workman. 2001. "The Tragic Reading of
the Thucydidean Tragedy." Review of International Studies 27
(January): 51-67.
Beye, Charles Rowan. 1987. Ancient Greek Literatureand Society, 2d
rev. ed. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Bowersock, Glen P. 1965. "The Personality of Thucydides. Antioch
Review 35 (1): 135-45.
Bury, J. B., and Russell Meiggs. 1975.A Historyof Greece to the Death
of Alexander the Great, 4th rev. ed. New York: St. Martin's.
Cochrane, Charles. 1929. Thucydides and the Science of History.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Connor, W. Robert. 1984. Thucydides. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.
Cornford, F. M. 1907. ThucydidesMythistoricus.London: Arnold.
Crane, Gregory. 1998. Thucydides and the Ancient Simplicity: The
Limits of Political Realism. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University
of California Press.
559
Thucydidesthe Constructivist
Democritus. 1956. In Die Fragmenteder Vorsakratiker,ed. Hermann
Diels and Walther Kranz.Berlin: Weidmannsche Verlagsbuchhand-
lung. Pp. 56-7.
De Ste. Croix, G. E. M. 1972. The Originsof the Peloponnesian War.
London: Duckworth.
Dionysus of Halicarnassus. 1975. On Thucydides,trans. W. Kendrick
Pritchett. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Doyle, Michael W. 1997. Waysof Warand Peace. New York: Norton.
Ellis, J. R. 1991. "The Structure and Argument of Thucydides'
Archeology." Classical Antiquity 10 (2): 344-75.
Euben, J. Peter. 1990. The Tragedyof Political Theory:The Road Not
Taken. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Finley, John H., Jr. [1942] 1967. Thucydides.Ann Arbor: University
of Michigan Press.
Finnemore, Martha, and Kathryn Sikkink. 1998. "International
Norm Dynamics and Political Change." InternationalOrganization
52 (Autumn): 887-918.
Forde, Steven. 1989. TheAmbition to Rule. Alcibiades and the Politics
of Imperialismin Thucydides.Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Forde, Steven. 1992. "Varieties of Realism: Thucydides and Machia-
velli." Journal of Politics 54 (May): 372-93.
Garst, Daniel. 1989. "Thucydides and Neorealism" International
Studies Quarterly33 (1): 469-97.
Gilpin, Robert. 1986. "The Richness of the Tradition of Political
Realism." In Neorealism and Its Critics, ed. Robert O. Keohane.
New York: Columbia University Press. Pp. 301-21.
Guthrie, W. K. C. 1969. A History of Greek Philosophy, 5 vols.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Havelock, Eric A. 1963. Preface to Plato. Cambridge: Harvard
University Press.
Herodotus. 1958. The Histories of Herodotus of Halicarassus, trans.
Harry Carter. New York: Heritage Press.
Herwig, Holger H. 1997. The First WorldWar:Germanyand Austria-
Hungary, 1914-1918. London: Arnold.
Homer. 1951. The Iliad of Homer, trans. Richmond Lattimore.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Hopf, Ted. N.d. ConstructingInternationalRelations at Home: Finding
Allies in Moscow, 1995-1999. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Forthcoming.
Jaeger, Werner. 1939-45. Paideia: The Ideals of Greek Culture, 3
vols., trans. Gilbert Highet. Oxford: Blackwell.
Kagan, Donald. 1969. The Outbreakof the Peloponnesian War.Ithaca,
NY: Cornell University Press.
Kerford, G. B. 1981. The Sophistic Movement. Cambridge: Cam-
bridge University Press.
Kokaz, Nancy 2001. "Moderating Power: A Thucydidean Perspec-
tive." Review of Interational Studies 27 (January): 27-49.
Kratochwil, Friedrich V. 1989. Rules, Norms, and Decisions: On the
Conditions of Political and Legal Reasoning in International Rela-
tions and Domestic Affairs. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Kratochwil, Friedrich V., and John Gerard Ruggie. 1986. "Interna-
tional Organization: A State of the Art on an Art of the State,"
International Organization49 (Autumn): 753-75.
Lain Entralgo, Pedro. 1970. The Therapyof the Word in Classical
Antiquity, ed. and trans. E. J. Rather and John M. Sharp. New
Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Lebow, Richard Ned. 1991. "Thucydides, Power Transition Theory,
and the Causes of War." In Hegemonic Rivalry:From Thucydidesto
the Nuclear Age, ed. Richard Ned Lebow and Barry S. Strauss.
Boulder, CO: Westview. Pp. 125-68.
Lebow, Richard Ned. 1996. "Play It Again Pericles: Agents, Struc-
tures and the Peloponnesian War." European Journal of Intera-
tional Relations 2 (June): 231-58.
Lebow, Richard Ned, and Robert Kelly. N.d. "'Thucydides and
Hegemony': Athens and the United States." Review of Interna-
tional Studies 27 (October). Forthcoming.
560
September2001
Levy, Jack S. 1992. "An Introduction to Prospect Theory." Political
Psychology 13 (June): 171-86.
Levy, Jack S. 1996. "Loss Aversion, Framing and Bargaining: The
Implications of Prospect Theory for International Conflict." Inter-
national Political Science Review 17 (2): 179-95.
Lloyd, Geoffrey E. R. 1978. Magic, Reason and Experience:Studies in
the Origins and Development of Greek Science. Cambridge: Cam-
bridge University Press.
Luce, T. J. 1997. The Greek Historians. London: Routledge.
Meiggs, Russell. 1972. The Athenian Empire. Oxford: Oxford Uni-
versity Press.
Monoson, S. Sara, and Michael Loriaux. 1998. "The Illusion of
Power and the Disruption of Moral Norms: Thucydides' Critique
of Periclean Policy." American Political Science Review 92 (June):
285-98.
Morgenthau, Hans J. [1951] 1982. In Defense of the National Interest:
A CriticalExamination of American Foreign Policy. Lanham, MD:
University Press of America.
Murray, Williamson, and Allan R. Millet. 2000. A War to Be Won:
Fightingthe Second WorldWar.Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univer-
sity Press.
Ober, Josiah. 1989. Mass and Elite in Democratic Athens: Rhetoric,
Ideology, and the Power of the People. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.
Ober, Josiah. 1998. Political Dissent in DemocraticAthens: Intellectual
Criticsof Popular Rule. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Onuf, Nicholas Greenwood. 1989. World of Our Making: Rules and
Rule in Social Theoryand InternationalRelations. Columbia: Uni-
versity of South Carolina Press.
Orwin, Clifford. 1994. The Humanity of Thucydides. Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press.
Perlman, Shalom. 1991. "Hegemony and Arche in Greece: Fourth-
Century Views." In Hegemonic Rivalry: From Thucydides to the
NuclearAge, ed. Richard Ned Lebow and Barry Strauss. Boulder,
CO: Westview. Pp. 269-86.
Rahe, Paul A. 1996. "Thucydides Critique of Realpolitik." In Roots
of Realism, ed. Benjamin Frankel. Portland, OR: Frank Cass. Pp.
105-41.
Rawlings, Hunter R., III. 1981. The Structureof Thucydides.Prince-
ton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Romilly, Jacqueline de. 1990. La construction de la verite chez
Thucydide. Paris: Julliard.
Saxonhouse, Arlene W. 1996. Athenian Democracy: Modem Myth-
Makersand Ancient Theorists.South Bend, IN: University of Notre
Dame Press.
Searle, John R. 1995. The Constructionof Social Reality. New York:
Free Press.
Stahl, Hans-Peter. 1966. Thucydides:Die Stellung des Menschen im
geschichlichen Prozess. Munich: C. H. Beck.
Strauss, Barry S. 1986. Athens after the Peloponnesian War. Ithaca,
NY: Cornell University Press.
Thucydides. 1996. The Landmark Thucydides: A Comprehensive
Guide to the Peloponnesian War, ed. Robert B. Strassler. New
York: Free Press.
Tversky, Amos, and Daniel Kahneman. 1992. "Advances in Prospect
Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty." Journal of
Risk and Uncertainty5 (2): 297-323.
Wallace, W. P. 1964. "Thucydides."Phoenix 18 (4): 251-61.
Waltz, Kenneth. 1979. The Theoryof InternationalPolitics. Reading,
MA: Addison-Wesley.
Weinberg, Gerhard L. 1994. A World at War:A Global History of
World War II. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
White, James Boyd. 1984. When WordsLose TheirMeaning: Consti-
tutions and Reconstitutionsof Language, Characterand Community.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.