Thucydides on Harmodius and Aristogeiton, Tyranny, and History

Abstract

The Harmodius-and-Aristogeiton 'digression' or 'excursus' in Thucydides Book 6 is one of the most unusual passages in the entire work. Older scholarly incomprehension or denigration of its importance 1 has been gradually replaced by the growing perception that it plays a crucial role in explaining-something 2-in Thucydides' history. The unexpected veer into a sketch of the story at 1.20 and the surprise of its lengthy presentation later (6.53-9), in the midst of a narrative devoted to something else entirely (or so it would seem), single out the excursus as especially worthy of close attention and suggest that Thucydides intended as much. Here previous scholarly analyses of the excursus are briefly surveyed. The episode will then be given another close reading (I), compared to its two frames, Thucydides' narrative of the Athenian response to the mutilation of the herms and the profanation of the Mysteries, and the Sicilian Expedition and its failure (II), and then all three-episode and two frames-examined in relationship to the famous Thucydidean statement on method (1.20-2) with which the episode is-uniquely-closely related (III). 3 Parallels in language at all levels suggest, first, that the excursus marks the moment in its larger framing narrative at which the Athenians truly became tyrannical, how this tyranny is defined, and why it happened at this moment; why-second-the Athenians made the bad decisions about Sicily that they did; and, third, what the relationship between evidence, clarity, contemplation, understanding, and decision should have been, all also of crucial concern in 1.20-2. The emphatic association of the Harmodius-and-Aristogeiton story with Thucydides' statement of historical method and historical ambition in 1.20-2 suggests strongly that his presentation of Harmodius and Aristogeiton is a paradigmatic demonstration of how to establish the facts, but also of how the correct assessment of evidence permits precision (), which in turn leads to clarity ()-the 'useful' contribution Thucydides wanted his work, above all, to make-so that his historical ambition, that through careful scrutiny the past would have correct meaning(s) for readers in the present, would be fulfilled. One strand of scholarship on the purpose of the digression denied that Thucydides intended to draw a connection between 514, when the tyrant Hippias' brother 13 * With my thanks to

La ‘edad de los tiranos’: una aproximación a las ambigüedades de la tiranía arcaica

“…27 La intención de Tucídides era trazar un paralelismo entre los gobiernos tiránicos y la política de la Atenas de su tiempo Meyer 2008Meyer , 24. 28 gernet 1980 El autor del trabajo nos advierte sobre la influencia de las dictaduras modernas en nuestro concepto de tiranía griega y dictadura romana (kalyVaS 2007, 412-413); pese a ello, creemos que no logra distanciarse de este enfoque y termina por asumir el cliché.…”