安提丰与雅典民主政治
发布时间：2018-11-24 13:18
【摘要】：公元前5世纪下半叶,整个希腊——尤其是雅典,都充满着对知识的创新与热情,包括诗歌、哲学、医学、宗教、历史等等。知识分子试验性地研究出一种在公共集会进行口头交流的新方式,以及一种新的交流媒介——写作,由此产生了演说和演说家。安提丰是阿提卡十大演说家中的第一个,也是第一个撰写法庭演说的人。由于留存下来的安提丰的作品种类多样,既有演说作品,又有哲学作品,甚至还有一篇《释梦》,而且风格迥异,所以学界对于他的身份一直存疑。本文只研究撰写演说词并参加公元前411年寡头政变的身份明确的安提丰。通过研究安提丰的三种不同身份:寡头政治家、贵族和演说家,探讨贵族身份与民主政治,演说与民主政治的关系,试图构建一个不一样的安提丰。第一章在简单描述公元前411年的寡头政变经过的基础上,详细分析安提丰在这场政变中所扮演的角色:组织寡头俱乐部、“阴谋”的真正策划人。并且通过对安提丰在政变失败后所演讲的辩护词进行分析,阐释安提丰对这场政变的看法;对这场政变的目的、性质进行再解释:这场政变是一个“善意的骗局”。第二章详述贵族身份为安提丰成为政治家提供了哪些便利的条件:金钱、人脉、家族关系、受教育的机会。由于材料较少,辅之以亚西比德的案例。从公元前5世纪开始,民众排斥贵族,质疑精英阶层的现象越来越严重。平民认为只要是贵族就是反民主的、寡头的,贵族与民众之间的冲突越演越烈。这也是公元前411年和前407年两场寡头政变的诱因之一。结合这一情况,分析平民与贵族对立的原因,贵族政治与民主政治的辩证关系。第三章重点分析安提丰完整保留下来的三篇法庭演说词:《控告继母下毒》、《赫洛德斯被杀》、《合唱团男孩》。分析这三篇演说在论证方式、论据布置、情感呼吁等方面的不同,来解析安提丰的演说才能和风格。作为第一位“演说词撰写者”,推测他不亲自发表演说,选择替委托人撰写演说稿的原因。阐释安提丰为何能凭借演说才能成为寡头派的领导人,以此带入分析演说在民主政治中的地位:演说家能左右政治决策。至此,我们可以看到一个较为丰满的安提丰形象。作为一个演说家,他本应该是民主政治下,最积极的公民。出于各种各样的原因:不愿意、政治抱负不合时宜、不受信任等等,晚年才在政治舞台展露头角。无论是贵族、演说家还是寡头派政治家,都与民主政治紧密相关着。通过讲述安提丰的生平,可以发现一个不一样的民主政治。
[Abstract]:In the second half of the 5th century BC, the whole of Greece, especially Athens, was full of innovation and enthusiasm for knowledge, including poetry, philosophy, medicine, religion, history and so on. Intellectuals experimented with a new form of oral communication at public gatherings, and a new medium of communication, writing, which gave rise to speeches and orators. Antiphon was the first of Attica's ten orators and the first to write a court address. Because the remaining works of Antiphon are of various types, including speeches, philosophy and even a "Dream of interpretation", and the style is very different, scholars have always questioned his identity. This article only studies Antiphon, who wrote speeches and participated in an oligarchic coup in 411 BC. By studying the three different identities of Antiphon: oligarch, aristocrat and orator, the relationship between aristocratic identity and democracy, and the relationship between speech and democratic politics, the author tries to construct a different Antiphon. The first chapter, based on a brief description of the coup of the oligarchs in 411 BC, analyzes in detail the role played by Antiphon in the coup: organizing the oligarchic club and the real mastermind of the plot. By analyzing the defense of Antiphon's speech after the coup failed, the author explains Antiphon's views on the coup, and explains the purpose and nature of the coup: the coup is a "well-intentioned scam". Chapter two details the convenience of aristocratic status for Antioch to become a politician: money, connections, family connections, and educational opportunities. Because of the shortage of materials, it was supplemented by the case of Asibeid. From the 5th century BC, the public rejected aristocrats and questioned the elite more and more seriously. The common people believe that the aristocracy is anti-democratic, oligarchic, and the conflict between the aristocrats and the populace is intensifying. This was also one of the causes of two oligarchic coups in 411 BC and 407 BC. Combined with this situation, this paper analyzes the causes of the opposition between the common people and the aristocrats, and the dialectical relationship between aristocratic politics and democratic politics. Chapter three focuses on the three remaining court speeches by Antiphon: accusing stepmother of poisoning, killing Herodes, and Chorus Boys. This paper analyzes the differences in argumentation, argument arrangement and emotional appeal among the three speeches to analyze Antiphon's speech ability and style. As the first oratory writer, speculate why he chose to write a speech for his client instead of speaking in person. Explain why Antiphon was able to become an oligarchic leader by speaking in order to analyze the position of speech in democratic politics: orators can influence political decisions. At this point, we can see a fuller Antioch image. As an orator, he was supposed to be the most active citizen in democracy. For a variety of reasons: reluctance, untimely political ambition, lack of trust and so on, later in life in the political arena. Aristocrats, orators and oligarch politicians are closely related to democracy. By telling about Antiphon's life, a different democracy can be found.
【学位授予单位】：上海师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：K125
本文编号：2353871
[Abstract]:In the second half of the 5th century BC, the whole of Greece, especially Athens, was full of innovation and enthusiasm for knowledge, including poetry, philosophy, medicine, religion, history and so on. Intellectuals experimented with a new form of oral communication at public gatherings, and a new medium of communication, writing, which gave rise to speeches and orators. Antiphon was the first of Attica's ten orators and the first to write a court address. Because the remaining works of Antiphon are of various types, including speeches, philosophy and even a "Dream of interpretation", and the style is very different, scholars have always questioned his identity. This article only studies Antiphon, who wrote speeches and participated in an oligarchic coup in 411 BC. By studying the three different identities of Antiphon: oligarch, aristocrat and orator, the relationship between aristocratic identity and democracy, and the relationship between speech and democratic politics, the author tries to construct a different Antiphon. The first chapter, based on a brief description of the coup of the oligarchs in 411 BC, analyzes in detail the role played by Antiphon in the coup: organizing the oligarchic club and the real mastermind of the plot. By analyzing the defense of Antiphon's speech after the coup failed, the author explains Antiphon's views on the coup, and explains the purpose and nature of the coup: the coup is a "well-intentioned scam". Chapter two details the convenience of aristocratic status for Antioch to become a politician: money, connections, family connections, and educational opportunities. Because of the shortage of materials, it was supplemented by the case of Asibeid. From the 5th century BC, the public rejected aristocrats and questioned the elite more and more seriously. The common people believe that the aristocracy is anti-democratic, oligarchic, and the conflict between the aristocrats and the populace is intensifying. This was also one of the causes of two oligarchic coups in 411 BC and 407 BC. Combined with this situation, this paper analyzes the causes of the opposition between the common people and the aristocrats, and the dialectical relationship between aristocratic politics and democratic politics. Chapter three focuses on the three remaining court speeches by Antiphon: accusing stepmother of poisoning, killing Herodes, and Chorus Boys. This paper analyzes the differences in argumentation, argument arrangement and emotional appeal among the three speeches to analyze Antiphon's speech ability and style. As the first oratory writer, speculate why he chose to write a speech for his client instead of speaking in person. Explain why Antiphon was able to become an oligarchic leader by speaking in order to analyze the position of speech in democratic politics: orators can influence political decisions. At this point, we can see a fuller Antioch image. As an orator, he was supposed to be the most active citizen in democracy. For a variety of reasons: reluctance, untimely political ambition, lack of trust and so on, later in life in the political arena. Aristocrats, orators and oligarch politicians are closely related to democracy. By telling about Antiphon's life, a different democracy can be found.
【学位授予单位】：上海师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：K125
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前7条
1 晏绍祥;;雅典民主政治的危机与民主信仰的重塑[J];史学集刊;2012年01期
2 蒋保;;民众的统治抑或奴隶主贵族阶级的寡头统治?——雅典民主政治新论[J];安徽史学;2009年03期
3 杨巨平;王志超;;试论演说家与雅典民主政治的互动[J];世界历史;2007年04期
4 黄洋;;古代与现代的民主政治[J];史林;2007年03期
5 蒋保;;演说与雅典民主政治[J];历史研究;2006年06期
6 晏绍祥;;演说家与希腊城邦政治[J];历史研究;2006年06期
7 黄洋;雅典民主政治新论[J];世界历史;1994年01期
，本文编号：2353871
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/shekelunwen/xifanglishiwenhua/2353871.html
最近更新
教材专著
