【摘要】：公元前5世紀(jì)下半葉,整個(gè)希臘——尤其是雅典,都充滿著對(duì)知識(shí)的創(chuàng)新與熱情,包括詩(shī)歌、哲學(xué)、醫(yī)學(xué)、宗教、歷史等等。知識(shí)分子試驗(yàn)性地研究出一種在公共集會(huì)進(jìn)行口頭交流的新方式,以及一種新的交流媒介——寫(xiě)作,由此產(chǎn)生了演說(shuō)和演說(shuō)家。安提豐是阿提卡十大演說(shuō)家中的第一個(gè),也是第一個(gè)撰寫(xiě)法庭演說(shuō)的人。由于留存下來(lái)的安提豐的作品種類多樣,既有演說(shuō)作品,又有哲學(xué)作品,甚至還有一篇《釋夢(mèng)》,而且風(fēng)格迥異,所以學(xué)界對(duì)于他的身份一直存疑。本文只研究撰寫(xiě)演說(shuō)詞并參加公元前411年寡頭政變的身份明確的安提豐。通過(guò)研究安提豐的三種不同身份:寡頭政治家、貴族和演說(shuō)家,探討貴族身份與民主政治,演說(shuō)與民主政治的關(guān)系,試圖構(gòu)建一個(gè)不一樣的安提豐。第一章在簡(jiǎn)單描述公元前411年的寡頭政變經(jīng)過(guò)的基礎(chǔ)上,詳細(xì)分析安提豐在這場(chǎng)政變中所扮演的角色:組織寡頭俱樂(lè)部、“陰謀”的真正策劃人。并且通過(guò)對(duì)安提豐在政變失敗后所演講的辯護(hù)詞進(jìn)行分析,闡釋安提豐對(duì)這場(chǎng)政變的看法;對(duì)這場(chǎng)政變的目的、性質(zhì)進(jìn)行再解釋:這場(chǎng)政變是一個(gè)“善意的騙局”。第二章詳述貴族身份為安提豐成為政治家提供了哪些便利的條件:金錢、人脈、家族關(guān)系、受教育的機(jī)會(huì)。由于材料較少,輔之以亞西比德的案例。從公元前5世紀(jì)開(kāi)始,民眾排斥貴族,質(zhì)疑精英階層的現(xiàn)象越來(lái)越嚴(yán)重。平民認(rèn)為只要是貴族就是反民主的、寡頭的,貴族與民眾之間的沖突越演越烈。這也是公元前411年和前407年兩場(chǎng)寡頭政變的誘因之一。結(jié)合這一情況,分析平民與貴族對(duì)立的原因,貴族政治與民主政治的辯證關(guān)系。第三章重點(diǎn)分析安提豐完整保留下來(lái)的三篇法庭演說(shuō)詞:《控告繼母下毒》、《赫洛德斯被殺》、《合唱團(tuán)男孩》。分析這三篇演說(shuō)在論證方式、論據(jù)布置、情感呼吁等方面的不同,來(lái)解析安提豐的演說(shuō)才能和風(fēng)格。作為第一位“演說(shuō)詞撰寫(xiě)者”,推測(cè)他不親自發(fā)表演說(shuō),選擇替委托人撰寫(xiě)演說(shuō)稿的原因。闡釋安提豐為何能憑借演說(shuō)才能成為寡頭派的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人,以此帶入分析演說(shuō)在民主政治中的地位:演說(shuō)家能左右政治決策。至此,我們可以看到一個(gè)較為豐滿的安提豐形象。作為一個(gè)演說(shuō)家,他本應(yīng)該是民主政治下,最積極的公民。出于各種各樣的原因:不愿意、政治抱負(fù)不合時(shí)宜、不受信任等等,晚年才在政治舞臺(tái)展露頭角。無(wú)論是貴族、演說(shuō)家還是寡頭派政治家,都與民主政治緊密相關(guān)著。通過(guò)講述安提豐的生平,可以發(fā)現(xiàn)一個(gè)不一樣的民主政治。
[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.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：上海師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：K125

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前7條

1 晏紹祥;;雅典民主政治的危機(jī)與民主信仰的重塑[J];史學(xué)集刊;2012年01期

2 蔣保;;民眾的統(tǒng)治抑或奴隸主貴族階級(jí)的寡頭統(tǒng)治?——雅典民主政治新論[J];安徽史學(xué);2009年03期

3 楊巨平;王志超;;試論演說(shuō)家與雅典民主政治的互動(dòng)[J];世界歷史;2007年04期

4 黃洋;;古代與現(xiàn)代的民主政治[J];史林;2007年03期

5 蔣保;;演說(shuō)與雅典民主政治[J];歷史研究;2006年06期

6 晏紹祥;;演說(shuō)家與希臘城邦政治[J];歷史研究;2006年06期

7 黃洋;雅典民主政治新論[J];世界歷史;1994年01期

，

本文編號(hào)：2353871