Sometime in the second half of the fifth century BCE, the Athenian general Thucydides wrote a history of the war between Athens and Sparta. He composed the work, he said, “not as an essay which is to win the applause of the moment, but as a possession for all time.” Ever since, statesmen and philosophers have turned to Thucydides’ History for instruction.

In this course we will consider what Thucydides can teach us about the permanent questions of political life: What are the origins of political order? What qualities constitute human excellence? What is war, and why do humans often long for it? We will also consider questions of especial relevance to our own time: How should democratic statesmen respond to plagues? Why does political order break down into factional strife? Under what conditions does a rising power make war “inevitable”? Students will read much of Thucydides’ History over the course of six sessions. By the end of this time we will gain some appreciation for why Thucydides’ masterpiece has proven to be a “possession for all time.”

Image: La mort d’Alcibiade Philippe Chéry 1791

Hugh Liebert on Thucydides

This course is offered by Humanities at Hertog. It takes place weekly on Tuesdays, via Zoom, from 6 PM to 8 PM ET. Fellows will receive a $150 stipend contingent upon participation in the course and completion of a brief response paper. All course materials will be provided.

Faculty

Hugh Liebert

Hugh Liebert is a Professor of American Politics in the Department of Social Sciences at the United States Military Academy in West Point, New York, where he teaches courses in political philosophy, American politics, and civil-military relations. He is the author of Plutarch’s Politics.

Preview the Syllabus by Week/Session

Readings:

  • Thucydides, Book 1–1.146 (pp. 3–85)

Discussion Questions:

  1. What makes the Peloponnesian War “a great war, and more worthy of relation that any that had preceded it” (1.1)?
  2. What is the relationship between material prosperity, security, beauty, and politics, in Thucydides’ “archaeology” (1.2–1.18)?
  3. Why does the “real cause” of the war differ from the causes alleged by either side (1.23)? Are you persuaded that under certain conditions war can be “inevitable”?
  4. Why does Thucydides include speeches as well as narrative in his text (1.22, 32–1.44)?
  5. The Corinthians argue that Athenians and Spartans differ in character (1.68–1.71). Are you persuaded that an assessment of national character should influence foreign policy decisions? Based on the reading so far, are the Corinthians right about the characters of Athenians and Spartans?
  6. What are the sources of Athenian power (1.89–1.117)? How do they compare to the sources of Spartan power?
  7. What is Pericles’ strategy for winning the war (1.140–1.144)? How does it compare to Themistocles’ vision of Athens and Archidamus’s vision of Sparta?

Readings:

  • Thucydides, Book 2.1-65 (p. 89-128)

Discussion Questions:

  1. Thucydides says that at the beginning of the war that Greece was full of young men “eager to take up arms.” Why, according to Thucydides, do young men love war?
  2. Compare Archidamus’s leadership of Sparta to Pericles’ leadership of Athens. Why does Thucydides give both leaders speeches of advice and exhortation, but only Pericles a funeral oration?
  3. Why does Pericles use the funeral oration to describe the Athenian regime? How does Pericles’ view of Athens in the funeral oration compare to that of the Corinthians (1.58-71)?
  4. How does the plague change Athenian life? Why does Thucydides choose to juxtapose the Athens of Pericles’ oration with Athens under the plague?
  5. How effective is Pericles’ leadership in response to the plague? How does it compare to his leadership in response to Sparta?
  6. Why, in his final speech, does Pericles describe the Athenian Empire as a tyranny (2.63)?
  7. To what degree can Pericles be blamed for the Athenians’ failure to follow his advice after his death (2.65)?

Readings:

  • Thucydides, Book 3.1-87 (p. 159-202), 4.46-48 (p. 248-9)

Discussion Questions:

  1. Why is Cleon “most powerful with the People” (3.36)?
  2. In the Mytilinean debate, what is the best case for Cleon and the best case for Diodotus (3.37- 3.48)? Which speaker do you find more persuasive?
  3. Compare and contrast Athens’ policy towards Mytilene with Sparta’s towards Plataea (3.52- 68).
  4. What does the Corcyrean revolt (3.70-3.85) teach us about the nature of parties and the nature of politics? Compare Corcyra during its revolution to Greece in the archaeology (1.2-1.18) and Athens during the plague (2.47-2.54).
  5. How do the cases of Mytilene, Plataea, and Corcyra, help us to understand the conditions for peace without the elimination of one party to the conflict?

Readings:

  • Thucydides, Book 4.102-4.119 (p. 279-288), 5.1-5.26 (p. 301-317), 5.84-116 (p. 350-357)

Discussion Questions:

  1. What makes peace between Athens and Sparta possible? Why does the peace fall apart?
  2. What qualities allow Brasidas to succeed as a general? How do these qualities relate to the character of the Spartans?
  3. Why did Thucydides write the exchange at Melos (5.84-5.111) as a dialogue?
  4. The Athenians speak of “a necessary law of nature” that governs gods and men (5.105). Does the result of the Melian dialogue confirm or call into question this law?
  5. Could the Athenians have persuaded the Melians? Are the Melians right or wrong to resist the Athenians?

Readings:

  • Thucydides, Book 6.1-6.61 (p. 361-396), 6.89-6.93 (p. 412-416), 7.10-7.24 (p. 432-440), 7.42-7.87 (p. 451-478)

Discussion Questions:

  1. Why does Thucydides juxtapose the Melian dialogue and the Sicilian expedition?
  2. Why are the Athenians persuaded by Alcibiades rather than Nicias? Why, after Nicias’s second speech, do the Athenians “fall in love with the enterprise” of sailing to Sicily?
  3. Compare and contrast the Athenian and Syracusean regimes, as described in the opening chapters of Book How do Hermocrates and Athenagoras’s speeches compare to those of Nicias and Alcibiades?
  4. What does Alcibiades’ recall and subsequent speech at Sparta teach us about Alcibiades, Sparta, and Athens?
  5. What qualities cause Nicias to fail as a general? How do these qualities relate to the character of the Athenians? To what degree can Athens’ failure in Sicily be attributed to Nicias’s generalship, as distinct from bad fortune, the Athenian regime, the strategy of Athens’ enemies, and other potential causes?
  6. At the beginning of the book, Thucydides says that the “real cause” of the war was “the one which was formally most kept out of sight” (1.23). Compare Thucydides’ account of the causes of war to his account of the causes of events within the war. What, according to Thucydides, causes strategies and expeditions to succeed or fail?

Readings:

  • Review Thucydides, Books 2.48, 4.104-107, 5.26
  • Hobbes, “On the Life and History of Thucydides”
  • Allison, “The Thucydides Trap: Are the U.S. and China Headed for War?” The Atlantic (2015)

Discussion Questions:

  1. How do you understand Thucydides’ actions in the war, as depicted in his History, to relate to his writing the History? How does Hobbes understand the relationship between life and history?
  2. Hobbes says that “for [Thucydides’] opinion touching the government of the state, it is manifest that he least of all liked the democracy.” Do you agree with Hobbes’ assessment?
  3. Hobbes praises Thucydides for avoiding digressions and “precepts, (which is the philosopher’s part),” since “the narration itself doth secretly instruct the reader, and more effectually than can possibly be done by ” How does Hobbes’ analysis of Thucydides’ method on this point illuminate other philosophical and historical works you have read, such as those written by Hobbes himself?
  4. What does Allison get right and wrong about Thucydides’ account of the Peloponnesian War’s origins? How else might Thucydides’ work illuminate contemporary strategic challenges?
  5. Allison writes: “Managing [the U.S.-China] relationship without war will demand sustained attention, week by week, at the highest level in both countries. It will entail a depth of mutual understanding not seen since the Henry Kissinger–Zhou Enlai conversations in the 1970s.” To what extent do the speeches and debates depicted in Thucydides support the idea that mutual understanding between potential enemies can forestall conflicts? To what extent does Thucydides’ project as a whole contribute to improvement in political outcomes, as distinct from wisdom regarding politics?

Other Courses You Might Be Interested In

Generalship: High Command in War

Examine what it means to command at the very highest levels of war with a former CENTCOM commander.

Emily Wilson’s Iliad

Should a poem both beautiful & barbaric be easy to read?

Thucydides and the Peloponnesian War

Study the Peloponnesian War with renowned classicist and historian Donald Kagan.

Foundations of Grand Strategy

Assess grand strategic theory and practice in Thucydides and Plutarch.

Machiavelli’s The Prince

Study the classic treatise that brought Machiavelli fame—and infamy.

War Studies Program

Learn the theory, practice, organization, and control of war and military forces.

Biography Image

Gen. Kenneth F. McKenzie Jr.

Gen. Kenneth ‘Frank’ McKenzie Jr. is the former Commander of United States Central Command. He led a distinguished 42-year military career, commanding at multiple levels within the Marine Corps and serving on the Joint Staff. His leadership roles included commanding the First Battalion, Sixth Marines, and the 22nd MEU (SOC) during combat deployments to Afghanistan and Iraq.

Biography Image

Jakub J. Grygiel

Jakub Grygiel is an Associate Professor at the Catholic University of America. From 2017–18, he was a member of the Policy Planning Staff at the U.S. Department of State. His most recent book is Return of the Barbarians: Confronting Non-State Actors from Ancient Rome to the Present.

Mick Ryan

Mick Ryan is a retired major general in the Australian Army. He is now an adjunct fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington DC, and a non-resident fellow of the Lowy Institute in Sydney. In January 2023 Mick was also appointed as an Adjunct Professor at the University of Queensland in Brisbane, Australia.