Koncept spravodlivej vojny v klasickom Grécku
The Concept of Just War in Classical Greece

Summary/Abstract: In general, the just war tradition is portrayed as a product of Christian political theology and the majority of scholars dates its origin to the 4th century AD. This common view, however, represents a rather selective perspective on the just war tradition. It ignores the fact that the reflections on the justifcation of war in terms of human and divine justice precede the writings of the early Christian theologians. If we pay a more detailed attention to the historical and philosophical writings of the classical Greek period, we discover a rich and colourful world of thinking about the idea of just war. Despite the fact that we will not fnd there any systematic just war theory, the ideas that were in the centre of classical Greek authors’ interest, notably that of Herodotus, Thucydides, Plato and Aristotle, constitute an important consideration for both today's understanding of the origin of this tradition and the concept of just war itself.The main objective of this article is to present a reflection on just war in the classical period of Greek history and to challenge the widely accepted belief that the tradition of just war is a product of Christian political thought and political theology. The paper consists of four parts in which attention is primarily paid to the works of the Greek historians Herodotus and Thucydides and philosophers Plato and Aristotle as well as to the writings of some other authors, especially orators of the classical period. The first portion of the paper is to show the way in which the issue of the causes of war is viewed in the frst historical works, Herodotus’s Histories and Thucydides's History of the Peloponnesian War, and to present the issue of starting a war by means of so-called “immediate” and “hidden” causes of war that are mentioned by both Herodotus and Thucydides. The second part attempts to interpret this approach and points to the importance of the concept of retaliation for the Greek thinking about starting a war and legitimate reasons for war. subsequently, this portion tries to argue to the benefit of the view that the concept of retaliation and the idea of reciprocity stood at the origin of the concept of just war. The third part draws attention to the way in which the topic of just war was approached by orators of the classical period and points to one of the main challenges of the moral thinking about war brought by the sophists. The fourth part focuses on two philosophical works, Aristotle's Constitution and Politics. First of all, it tries to reconstruct how the topic of war was approached by Plato in his reflection on the just state and to clarify what conditions are placed by him on the participants in some military conflicts. secondly, it zeroes in on the interpretation of Aristotle's concept of just war by means of the analysis of the three types of just war that can be identified in this work. In conclusion, the article summarizes the findings of its previous parts and characterizes important moments that are typical for the concept of just war in classical Greece.It can be stated that the practical and theoretical reflections on the violent nature of war based on the principle of reciprocity in the broad sense brought into being the concept of just war in classical Greece. The practice of relations among city-states and the thinking of Greek historians, orators and philosophers show that the conduct of war required giving reasons for starting the war and the concept of justifiable retaliation for injustice inflicted constituted the basis for thinking about just war. Just war was not purely of a defience nature, but it rather had a retributive character, which, however, practically meant that any harm to a polis or wrongdoing towards the allies could provide a legitimate cause for war or grounds for intervention and, as the dialogue Alcibiades shows, the role of orators was to persuade the audience that they became the “victim of war”. In this regard there were very few limitations and the idea of justice was also compatible with hegemony of a dominant state or a war against natural slaves. The elasticity of the concept of just war thus created a situation in which it was relatively easy to justify almost anything. Only after the experience with the Peloponnesian War there was an effort to restrict and regulate internal conflicts and to divert energy toward wars with non-Greek ethnics.At the same time the Greek authors, however, offer a way of thinking for the assessment of the justification of war that is in many respects similar to what we today refer to as the tradition of just war. It is a reflection that although attaches great importance to politics and political life, it also attempts to allow for and show a different view of justice and the concept of good life. Thus, this reasoning asks itself questions such as: To what extent can the past events and old wrongs be taken as a cause of war? Is it deciding who first is going to use military force or can another kind of violent deed be also considered aggression? What kind of provocation is sufficient for the justification of starting a war? It also includes an idea of a close relationship between ethics and military training and the need for training in controlling passions brought about by the violent nature of war or an idea of the importance of education that enables to understand against whom it is just to use military force and how this force is to be used. Last but not least, it also says that war should not be an end in itself but only a means to achieve peace in the world in which the state must be constantly prepared for war. such a conclusion, however, has major consequences for how we today think about the origin and identity of the tradition of just war and opens new questions as regards the relationship of the early Christian political thought and the origin of the reflection on just war.

• Details
• Contents