Positivist realists, and indeed historians, have praised this methodology as the first scientific gathering of the facts of its type. He also presents his methodology, and explains how he came to have the information and accounts stated in the History. Whereas previous historical documents, such as those of Herodotus, were littered with incidents of poetic license or novelties, Thucydides states that he intends to write an accurate history, presenting and interpreting only the facts. In Book One he begins by explaining the tone and intention of the book.
Thucydides died before the History could be completed. Thucydides’ History of the Peloponnesian War is divided into eight books that together cover twenty-one of the twenty-seven years of the Peloponnesian war – the war fought between Athens, and its empire, and the Peloponnesian League, led by Sparta at the end of the 5 th century BC. Finally, the conclusion will weigh up the results drawn from the discussion and assess Thucydides’ place in International Relations scholarship. Then the arguments for and the arguments against its inclusion in International Relations scholarship will be considered.
In this review I will first look at the content of the text, its tone, and its intention as Thucydides states it. However, scholars such as Gilpin (1984), who argues that the history is indeed located in the realist tradition, oppose this view and defend the realist possession of Thucydides. Welch (2003), Garst (1989), and others have argued that Thucydides has been hijacked and used as a mouthpiece to express and justify views that he not only didn’t imply in his work, but may have outright disagreed with. Recently however, certain scholars have begun to doubt the realist commandeering of this ancient writing. Indeed, while reading his History of the Peloponnesian War, it is not hard to see how so many theorists have appropriated his work as an example of the everlasting realist qualities inherent in politics. Thucydides is often cited as the father of realism in International Relations.
0 kommentar(er)
