Introduction To Antiquity Development Of INR Lecture Week 1

Introduction Antiquitydevelopment Of Inr Lecture Week 1antiquity

Introduction: Antiquity Development of INR – Lecture Week 1 Antiquity • Why do we need to return to antiquity? • Do events and philosophies speak to our own ideas and political practices? • What is the historical legacy of ideas from antiquity that have come to us? • Do we find theories of politics or of “IR” in antiquity? • Is it possible to really understand ancient texts as their authors intended? Brown, “Marx and Engels” Brown, “Marx and Engels” Thucydides • Lived before Plato & Aristotle. • General during the Peloponnesian War (c. 431–404 BC). Result is Sparta victory. • History of the Peloponnesian War (written 7 years before the end of the war). • The polis is Thucydides’ main political unit; no indication of larger Pan-Hellenic union. • “In fine, I have written my work, not as an essay which is to win the applause of the moment, but as a possession of all time.” Thucydides Cont. • More than just a narrative history: there are theoretical positions that can be teased out. • Was Thucydides offering a “scientific” account of the causes of war between Sparta and Athens? (i.e., an objective analysis of events). • Or was there a normative claim? Practical moral objectives; a tragic sensibility? Thucydides Cont. • What was the cause of the war between Sparta and Athens? Sea power vs. Land Power; cultural center vs. provincial estate; trade vs. self-sufficiency. • Increasing division of Greece into two alliance systems: Delian League and Peloponnesian League. • Thucydides: “The Growth of the power of Athens, and the alarm which this inspired in Sparta, made war inevitable.” Thucydides Cont. • Prelude to War: naval rivalry between Corcyra and Corinth. • Corcyra allies itself with Athens and Corinth with Sparta. • Deep-root of war: Fear => Security Dilemma. • Uncertainty of future intentions. • Perception of a lack of alternative to war. Better to fight now than wait until losing becomes inevitable. • Similar calculation in Germany 1914 and fear of Franco-British encirclement. Thucydides Cont. • Two types of Fear: • 1) Mutual fear between two great powers => entails mutual respect. Potential for destabilization when there’s an imbalance of fear (i.e., when one power becomes increasingly powerful). • 2) Fear of tyranny of one power over another (i.e., Mytilene revolt against Athens). Thucydides Cont. • Fear is central for Thucydides. • The emergence of Empire is a consequence of fear; think of the significance of fear today to propel American national security and foreign policy. Why are we so fearful? Thucydides Cont. • Key moments: (importance in his text of speeches, generally rewritten by him). • Pericles' Funeral Oration: Eulogy of Athens. • Mytilene Debate: Athenian response to the revolt of Mytilene. • Corcyrean Revolution: Slaughter of anyone opposed to democratic faction. • Melian Dialogues: You’re either with us or against us. Thucydides the Tragedian • What is a Tragedy? • Dionysus (God of win/win-making) gives Icarius wine and tells him to introduce it to shepherds throughout Attica. The Shepherds get drunk and suspect that Icarius is up to no good and murder him. While dying he remembered that when he previously planted the grapes he caught a goat poaching them and in a fit of rage he had it killed. He then skinned it and improvised a dance to honor the goat. • Hence tragedy = “goat song”. Tragos = he-goat; aeidein = “to sing”. Cont. • Tragedy becomes a significant genre of theatrical/choral performance in Ancient Greece. • Aeschylus, Sophocles, Euripides. • Example: Antigone • Tension between natural and state law; Antigone caught between the two and only reconciliation is suicide. • Creon is punished by the Gods. Cont. • Tragic Trajectory: Hubris (Excessive self-pride) -> Hamartia (error, tragic flaw) -> nemesis (wrath of the Gods). • What does tragedy impart to the spectator? • Aristotle: catharsis, pity and fear leads to cleansing or purification (medical sense); understand one’s limits => an ethical notion. Aristotle on Politics • Aristotle: man is a political animal, zoon politikon, we have a natural impulse to live with others; friendship is a natural instinct in the human race; seems to extend beyond Greece. • Nonetheless, natural difference between Greeks and non-Greeks. Greeks act in conformity with reason; barbarians lesser functions and therefore prone to being ruled – assumed. • The main problem Aristotle identifies is the manner in which barbarians don’t distinguish between women and slaves: “But among barbarians no distinction is made between women and slaves, because there is no natural ruler among them: they are a community of slaves, male and female.” • Which for him means they don’t live according to reason, which implies that there is a natural hierarchy between men, women and slaves. The fact that barbarians don’t live according to reason implies that they are only fit to be ruled by Greeks. • Can barbarians change? Can they learn Greek and behave like Greeks? No, intrinsic features of being other, non-Greek. Their telos is inferior. Aristotle Cont. • Is the political equivalent to management of the household? • “The conclusion is evident: that governments which have a regard to the common interest are constituted in accordance with the strict principles of justice, and are therefore the true forms; but those which regard only the interest of the rulers are all defective and perverted forms, for they are despotic, whereas a state is a community of freemen.” • What is the state for? The good life? (Happiness, eudemonia).

Paper For Above instruction

The exploration of antiquity's influence on contemporary political and international relations (IR) theories reveals a rich legacy rooted in the foundational ideas of ancient Greece and historical figures like Thucydides and Aristotle. Understanding these origins allows us to contextualize modern concepts, appreciate their historical roots, and critically evaluate their relevance today.

The necessity of returning to antiquity stems from recognizing that many principles governing current political practices are echoes of past philosophies. Ancient Greece laid the groundwork for political thought, especially through the development of ideas concerning justice, power, and the nature of human association. As Thucydides meticulously analyzed the Peloponnesian War, he provided insights into the causes of conflict, emphasizing the role of power dynamics, fear, and security dilemmas. Thucydides' account illustrates that perceptions of threat and self-interest perpetually shape state behavior, themes that remain relevant in contemporary IR scholarship.

Moreover, Thucydides' portrayal of the war's causes—sea power versus land power, cultural identity versus provincialism, trade versus self-sufficiency—parallels modern geopolitical tensions. His focus on fear as a driving force behind conflict, especially the security dilemma, highlights a perennial aspect of international relations: states' actions driven by perceived threats rather than actual intentions. This idea unfolds vividly in the Melian Dialogue, where power politics manifests as a stark choice: submission or resistance, echoing real-world diplomatic scenarios grounded in power asymmetries.

Aristotle's contributions extend further into understanding human nature and the purpose of the state. His assertion that man is a "political animal" underscores the intrinsic social impulse shared across civilizations, forming a cornerstone of political theory. Aristotle’s categorization of regimes—distinguishing between just and perverted forms—provides a normative framework for evaluating governments based on their commitment to the common good. His insistence that the state’s purpose is to facilitate the good life and happiness (eudaimonia) continues to influence contemporary debates on governance and political economy.

Additionally, Aristotle’s reflections on natural hierarchies—particularly his views on barbarians, women, and slaves—highlight enduring debates about power, equality, and justice. His belief in natural inequalities justified the subjugation of certain groups, reflecting early ideas about social order that still resonate in modern discussions about legitimacy and authority. Critically, these notions challenge contemporary values, encouraging a reassessment of the universality of human rights and democracy, which stand against hierarchical and exclusionary traditions rooted in antiquity.

The tragic genre of Greek theater, exemplified by Sophocles' Antigone, offers insights into human conflict and morality. Tragedies embody the tragic trajectory of hubris, hamartia, and nemesis, illustrating how excessive pride and moral errors lead to downfall. The emotional catharsis experienced by the audience symbolizes an ethical awakening—recognition of human limits and the importance of humility. These themes inform modern political analysis, especially in understanding leadership failures and the consequences of hubris in international decision-making.

Furthermore, the philosophical debates of ancient Greece about governance, morality, and human nature underscore the timeless relevance of these ideas. For instance, Aristotle’s distinction between regimes based on justice versus tyranny remains relevant in evaluating contemporary political systems. The ancient focus on the purpose of the state—achieving the good life—provides a normative standard against which political legitimacy can be appraised today.

In conclusion, the influence of antiquity on modern IR and political thought is profound and multifaceted. The foundational ideas from Thucydides and Aristotle continue to shape our understanding of power, conflict, and governance. Recognizing these legacies not only enriches our comprehension of current international dynamics but also invites a critical reflection on the values and assumptions underpinning contemporary political practices. As we analyze present-day issues, returning to ancient insights allows us to appreciate the continuity of human concerns and the enduring quest for justice, stability, and peace in the international arena.

References

• Brown, G. (2014). Marx and Engels. Routledge.
• Thucydides. (c. 431–404 BC). History of the Peloponnesian War. Translated by R. Edwards.
• Aristotle. (2009). Politics. Translated by C. Lord. Oxford University Press.
• On tragedy: Aristotle’s Poetics (trans. 1997).
• Hansen, H. (2000). The Tragedy of Greek and Roman Law. Routledge.
• Foucault, M. (2000). Power/Knowledge. Vintage.
• Machiavelli, N. (1532). The Prince.
• Jackson, R. (2011). International Relations. Routledge.
• Wendt, A. (1999). Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge University Press.
• Keohane, R. & Nye, J. (2001). Power and Interdependence in the 21st Century. Longman.