Aristos Eikastes—Ned Lebow as a ‘Themistoclean’ Classicist

Part of the Pioneers in Arts, Humanities, Science, Engineering, Practice book series (PAHSEP, volume 2)


For Themistocles was a man who exhibited the most indubitable signs of genius; indeed, in this particular he has a claim on our admiration quite extraordinary and unparalleled. By his own native capacity, alike unformed and unsupplemented by study, he was at once the best judge in those sudden crises which admit of little or of no deliberation, and the best prophet of the future, even to its most distant possibilities. An able theoretical expositor of all that came within the sphere of his practice, he was not without the power of passing an adequate judgment in matters in which he had no experience. He could also excellently divine the good and evil which lay hid in the unseen future. In fine, whether we consider the extent of his natural powers, or the slightness of his application, this extraordinary man must be allowed to have surpassed all others in the faculty of intuitively meeting an emergency.


Classical Text International Politics Political Thought Classical Realism Political Message 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Blösel, Wolfgang, 2004. Themistokles bei Herodot: Spiegel Athens im fünften Jahrhundert. Studien zur Geschichte und historiographischen Konstruktion des griechischen Freiheitskampfes 480 v. Chr. (Stuttgart: Steiner).Google Scholar
  2. Connor, Walter Robert, 1977. A Post-Modernist Thucydides? in: CJ 72,4 (1977), 289–298.Google Scholar
  3. Connor, Walter Robert, 1984. Thucydides (Princeton: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
  4. De Romilly, Jacqueline, 1963. Thucydides and Athenian Imperialism (Oxford: Blackwell).Google Scholar
  5. Finley, John Huston, 1942. Thucydides (Cambridge/Mass.: Harvard University Press).Google Scholar
  6. Flashar, Hellmut, 1969. Der Epitaphios des Perikles. Seine Funktion im Geschichtswerk des Thukydides (Heidelberg: Winter).Google Scholar
  7. Gomme, Arnold Wycombe; Andrewes, Antony; Dover, Kenneth; [all names and first name are needed] et al., HCT IV 1970. A Historical Commentary on Thucydides, Vol. IV: Books V 25—VII (Oxford: Clarendon Press).Google Scholar
  8. Kagan, Donald, 1991. Pericles of Athens and the Birth of Democracy (New York: xxx).Google Scholar
  9. Lebow, Richard Ned, 1979. “Thucydides on Arms Control: His Speech to the American Senate”, in: Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 35 (December 1979), 6–7.Google Scholar
  10. Lebow, Richard Ned, 1991. “Thucydides, Power Transition, and the Causes of War”, in: Lebow, Richard Ned; Strauss, Barry Stuart (eds.), Hegemonic Rivalry. From Thucydides to the Nuclear Age (Boulder–San Francisco–Oxford: Westview), 125–168.Google Scholar
  11. Lebow, Richard Ned, 1996. “Play it again Pericles. Agents, Structures and the Peloponnesian War”, in: European Journal of International Relations, 1996,2, 231–258.Google Scholar
  12. Lebow, Richard Ned, 2001. “Thucydides the constructivist”, in: American Political Science Review 95 (2001), 547–560.Google Scholar
  13. Lebow, Richard Ned, 2003. The Tragic Vision of Politics. Ethics, Interests and Orders, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
  14. Lebow, Richard Ned, 2007. “Thucydides and Deterrence”, in: Security Studies 16,2 (2007), 163–188.Google Scholar
  15. Lebow, Richard Ned, 2008. The Ancient Greeks and Modern Realism: Ethics, Persuasion, and Power, in: Bell, Duncan (ed.) Political Thought and International Relations. Variations on a Realist Theme, Oxford, 26–40.Google Scholar
  16. Lebow, Richard Ned 2010. Forbidden Fruit: Counterfactuals and International Relations, (Princeton: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
  17. Lebow, Richard Ned, 2012. “International relations and Thucydides”, in: Morley, Neville; Harloe, Katherine (eds.), Thucydides and the Modern World. Reception, Reinterpretation and Influence from the Renaissance to the Present (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 197–211.Google Scholar
  18. Lebow, Richard Ned, 2014. Archduke Franz Ferdinand lives! A World without World War I, (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan).Google Scholar
  19. Lebow, Richard Ned; Strauss, Barry Stuart (eds.), 1991. Hegemonic Rivalry. From Thucydides to the Nuclear Age (Boulder–San Francisco–Oxford: Westview).Google Scholar
  20. Manuwald, Bernd, 1979. “Der Trug des Diodotos (Zu Thukydides 3,42–48)”, in: Hermes 107,4 (1979), 407–422.Google Scholar
  21. Morley, Neville; Harloe, Katherine (eds.), 2012. Thucydides and the Modern World. Reception, Reinterpretation and Influence from the Renaissance to the Present (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
  22. Ober, Josiah, 2006. “Thucydides and the Invention of Political Science”, in: Rengakos, Antonios; Tsakmakis, Antonis (eds.), Brill’s companion to Thucydides (Leiden–Boston: Brill), 131–159.Google Scholar
  23. Orwin, Clifford, 1994. The Humanity of Thucydides (Princeton: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
  24. Rood, Tim, 1998. Thucydides. Narrative and Explanation (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
  25. Thauer, Christian; Wendt, Christian (eds.), 2015. Thucydides and Political Order (New York: Palgrave Macmillan), 2 volumes.Google Scholar
  26. Wendt, Christian, 2015. “Thucydides as a ‘statesmen’s manual?’”, in: Thauer, Christian; Wendt, Christian (eds.), Thucydides and Political Order (New York: Palgrave Macmillan).Google Scholar
  27. Will, Wolfgang, 2003. Thukydides und Perikles. Der Historiker und sein Held (Bonn: Habelt).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Freie Universität BerlinBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations