Δεν υπάρχουν πολλά που να μπορεί να γράψει κανείς για ένα τόσο κλασικό έργο. Σε προσωπικό επίπεδο ξεχωρίζω τα κομμάτια λόγων, δημηγοριών και συζητήσεων, με σπουδαιότερα των διάλογο Αθηναίων-Μηλίων (βιβλίο Ε) και φυσικά τον Επιτάφιο του Περικλή (βιβλίο Β). 
Σχετικά με την παρούσα έκδοση, η μετάφραση του Βενιζέλου σε απλή καθαρεύουσα, αν και σίγουρα μεγάλης λογοτεχνικής αξίας, υπήρχαν στιγμές που με έβγαζε από τον αναγνωστικό ρυθμό.

"História da Guerra do Peloponeso" foi escrito no século V a.C por Tucídides, sendo por isso mesmo um registo histórico de incomensurável valor, mas é também um marco da História enquanto disciplina académica. Neste último sentido, fez-me compreender que apesar de na última década me ter dedicado a ler mais e mais História, na verdade continuo longe da mesma, em termos académicos. Interessam-me as histórias sobre a História, não me interessam tanto os relatos descritivos, mesmo que mais fidedignos ou verdadeiros. Não me move chegar “à verdade”, move-me mais a ideia de que aquilo que se conta é baseado numa realidade. Desde logo, porque mesmo num livro tão descritivo, tão emocionalmente neutro e objetivo, é possível denotar viés a ponto de hoje alguns historiadores o classificarem mesmo como apenas literatura. Claro que falo de um ponto de vista externo, não leio estas obras para documentar a minha investigação, se assim fosse falaria de modo distinto. Como leio apenas pelo prazer de ler, esse é maior quando a História usa o melhor da arte narrativa para chegar a nós, mesmo colocando em causa parte da sua factualidade que aceito bem quando é feito por via da especulação, mas não tanto quando pela mera invenção.

continua no VI: https://virtual-illusion.blogspot.com...

Thucydides account of the Peloponnesian war is beyond interesting, the historian's deep insight into the human condition and profound focus on realism which contrasts him to his contemporary Herodotus as well as his stringent attempts to be as unbiased as possible truly makes Thucydides *the* historian.

His vivid description of the plague of Athens which he himself was afflicted from, the brutal realism of the Melian dialogue and his account of the failure of the Sicilian expedition make his history. That being said it was abit difficult to follow, he certainly doesn't have the clear writing of Caesar so the book can be demanding and it helps that you have an interest in the topic.

If you ever wanted to tackle Thucydides, this is the way to do it. It's beautifully laid out, with helpful maps and other material. The reading experience is profoundly moving, not really for the style but for the sheer weight of human folly on display. This should be required reading for politicians of all stripes.

Not an easy read, but an interesting one.

Herodot jeste otac istorije, ali čitanje njegovih  Istorija na trenutke podseća na čitanje bajki. A te bajke, skoro uvek jako zabavne, ponekad su bliže Homeru nego istoriji.

Tukidid je otprilike istorija kakvom je zamišljamo. Vikipedija neka ti bude pri ruci kako bi bolje razumeo kontekst, ali pred tobom jeste vrsni istoričar. Ovde možda imamo manjak romantike, ali dešavanja su opisana jasno i gusto - i mnogo približnije istoriografiji. Iz prepričavanja dešavanja razumemo da je neke događaje preživeo i sam, ali i da je potrošio godine razgovarajući sa ljudima sa atinske i sa spartanske strane. Opis ekspedicije na Siciliju je i detaljan i tragičan - a iako je bio jedno vreme atinski general, objektivan je, često i podsetnik da zlatno doba Atine i nije bilo toliko zlatno za sve koji su se s Atinom susretali u to vreme.

Osim što je odličan istoričar, Tukidid je i dobar pisac. Piše jasno, direktno. Možda mi se činilo da je negde štedeo na rečima - ali kad stigne do govora... Kakav je to vatromet svaki put! Da ovo delo sadrži samo govore državnika i generala, bilo bi vredno najviše ocene. Ma, vredelo bi i da sadrži samo Periklove govore (zašto političari danas ne govore tako?) Kako Tukidid kaže u jednom trenutku, trudio se da dođe do zapisa stvarno održanog govora, ali ako to nije moguće, sastavljao ga je onako kako najbolje odgovara govornikovoj ličnosti, situaciji i idejama strane koju govornik zastupa. Ti govori su filozofija za sebe - etika, moral, vrline, mane, retorika, religioznost...

Da bi potpuno uživao u Tukididu, treba da ti je jasna istorija 5. veka p.n.e. Pomoći će ako si čitao Herodota, Platona ili grčke tragičare. Još bolje ako si bio na mestima o kojima priča. Ali i da nisi... ova knjiga objašnjava zbog čega su neka dela - klasici za sva vremena.

Is 600 pages long, 10 of which are amazing. The other 590 don't justify the 10. Contains long sections which are lists of where ships came from. Basically not worth reading unless you are desperate to know the minutiae of the war. Author touches on a few interesting points such as the role of perspective in history, the importance of objectivity, and a few timeless characteristics of human nature. However he does not bother to dwell on these points. Spoiler: it ends in mid sentence!

1⭐️ thucydides, shut ya mouf

AT LAST, it is MINE.

Thukydides, kendisinin de komutan olarak katıldığı Atina koalisyonu ile Sparta müttefikleri arasında 27 yıl süren savaşın ilk 21 yılını anlatıyor. Eser tamamlanamamış ancak yine de bütünlüğünden bir şey kaybetmemiş. Homeros ve Herodot’tan farklı olarak Thukydides, tanrıları işe karıştırmadan insanların ve kentlerin kendi arzu ve hırsları çerçevesinde olayların sebebini araştırıyor; konudan sapmadan, sağ soldan duyduklarıyla konuyu daha eğlenceli hale getirme tuzağına düşmeden olayları aktarıyor. Bu anlamda modern tarih yazıcılığına diğer ikisinden daha iyi bir ilk örnek oluyor. Hal böyle olunca okuması daha zor ve karmaşık. Dikkatiniz dağıldığında kim kimdi unutabiliyorsunuz, çünkü çok sayıda kent, çok sayıda komutan, kişi, politikacı var ve çıkarların seyrine göre taraf değiştirebiliyorlar.

Atina’nın başını çektiği demokrasi ile Sparta’nın başını çektiği oligarşi yönetimlerinin insanların toplumsal yaşamına ve ahlaki bakışlarına yansımalarını da görmek çok hoş. Ve Thukydides’in her karar anında bir büyük komutanı ya da kralı konuşturması tarafların motivasyonlarını anlamak açısından güzel bir tat bırakıyor. Perikles’in cenaze konuşması, Brasidas’ın “bir Spartalı olmasına rağmen” yüksek diplomasi ve ikna kabiliyeti, Atina’nın korkunç sonuçlara yol açan Sicilya çıkarması ve Sparta’nın yaklaşan büyük zaferiyle Atinalıların demokrasiye azalan inançları öne çıkan temalar.

Thucydides was an Athenian general and historian who lived from 460-400BC. He perceived the outbreak of war between Athens and Sparta in 431BC as "more worthy than any that had preceded it". Early in the fifth-century BC, normally inimical Greek city-states had united under the tutelage of Athens and Sparta to resist Persian invasions. Post-Persian Wars, Athens and Sparta maintained empires, with the latter holding pre-eminence in the region. However, the former--primarily through its navy--substantially grew in power. Thucydides subsequently argues that "it was the rise of Athens, and the fear that this instilled in Sparta, that made war inevitable."

"The History of the Peloponnesian War" is a seminal work in history and international relations. Thucydides chronicles the conflict using careful source cross-referencing, eyewitness testimony, and personal recollections. Such scrupulous study was feasible because Thucydides was a wealthy individual with spare time (he was ostracised from Athens for two decades after their defeat at the Battle of Amphipolis in 423 BC). He subtly critiques Herodotus' historiography, asserting his commitment to historical truth rather than uncritically relaying tales. Moreover, despite his Athenian affiliation, Thucydides endeavours to remain impartial, criticising Athens and praising adversaries when deserved.

The foundational underpinning of realist theories in international relations is encapsulated within this text. Key tenets of realism include states as the primary actors in global politics; the international system is anarchic; state conduct is driven by rational self-interest; and states pursue power to ensure self-preservation. Additionally, Thucydides' insights resonate with contemporary dynamics of great power politics. This is exemplified by Graham Allison's concept of the Thucydides Trap: a framework characterising the likelihood of conflict between a rising and an established power--i.e., China and the United States.

In the "Funeral Oration," Pericles--the Athenian leader at the onset of this war--asserts that Athens' casus belli was to preserve their laws, liberty and democracy. However, Thucydides exposes the fallacy of this claim through the Melian Dialogue. This exchange contrasts Athens' idealist motivations, revealing instead an adherence to realist precepts. Melos, a neutral city-state, declined an alliance with Athens. In retribution, Athens murders all male inhabitants and enslaves the women and children. Thucydides asserts the axiom, "the strong do what they can, and the weak do what they must." Athens' rationale for control over the island was rooted in power, not liberalist ideology.

Thucydides provides a chronological examination of this war. Although it concluded with Spartan victory in 404BC, this book abruptly finishes mid-sentence in 411BC. It is thought Thucydides died before completion. Thucydides' outlines the major themes of the war, including plague in Athens, the Peace of Nicias as a de facto continuation of proxy warfare, the disastrous Sicilian campaign by the Athenians, and Spartan collaboration with Persia. The book, however, is lengthy at 700 pages and at times is quite confusing to follow, particularly given the myriad engagements waged among numerous city-states across decades. Nonetheless, Xenophon's "A History of My Times" provides a contemporaneous account of the final years of this war.

What I love about the best ancient Greek literature is how startlingly modern it could be. This is particularly true of Euripides (whom I regard as a 21st century dramatist) and The History of the Peloponnesian War by Thucydides. The accounts of the Corcycran revolution, the so-called Melian Dialogue (in which Athens shows itself to be somewhat less enlightened than reputed), and the utter disaster of the Sicilian Expedition can just as easily be taking place now in remote parts of the world.

The Peloponnesian War even had its own Neocon in Alcibiades. He was largely responsible for Athens undertaking the Sicilian Expedition, only to be called back by the Athenian leadership for sacrilege. Thereupon, he made his escape at Thurii, went over to the Spartans, where he gave them excellent advice in combating the Athenians. Then, when the Spartans began to suspect him, he went over to Tissaphernes, the Persian Governor of Asia Minor. (Later still, he returned to Athens.)

I recommend the Rex Warner translation but urge readers to have a copy of The Landmark Thucydides at hand for its numerous and excellent maps, if not for its somewhat archaic translation by Richard Crawley.