Lenses of Anlaysis Home Section Title
Table of Contents Resources Menu
Introduction
Framework
First Lens
Second Lens
Third Lens
Case Study
First Lens
Second Lens
Third Lens
Question Strings
Introduction
International Security
International Economics
Environmental Issue
Regional Instability

A First-Lens Analysis
Introduction

Printer-friendly Version

A First-Lens analysis starts with the few people in positions of authority to affect the direction of events. To begin, a First-Lens analysis must determine who made or shaped the key choices. The First Lens assumes that individuals are causal variables. Thus, once key individuals are identified, analysis must focus on the attributes of those individuals that influenced certain decisions. What were their motivations and intentions? Did their personal backgrounds shape their decision making?

In the case of Thucydides, a First-Lens focus raises the issue of historical accuracy. Thucydides recounts the Peloponnesian War by presenting key leaders' speeches instead of the standard military historical narrative that details battles and alliance-making. Classicists argue about the accuracy of these speeches. Does Thucydides provide verbatim transcripts, or are the speeches reconstructions of the speaker's general message? Can we ascribe a particular argument to a particular person, or does each speech reflect an opinion held by an entire political faction? The debate over accuracy revolves, in particular, around Thucydides's own statement that "my method has been, while keeping as closely as possible to the general sense of the words that were actually used, to make the speakers say what, in my opinion, was called for by each situation" (Thucydides, The Peloponnesian War. Translated by Rex Warner. New York: Penguin Classics, 1985, p. 47). Exactly how much interpretation and bias might flow from Thucydides's opinion is difficult to determine.

The problem of First-Lens accuracy, however, is not confined to the study of ancient events. Evaluating speeches in modern case studies is also a difficult research task. In many speeches, individuals are attempting to reach several different audiences. This creates the possibility that the same words might be interpreted very differently by different audiences. Individuals may also wish to create a false impression or confuse audiences through disinformation. It is important, therefore, to examine the context of speeches—looking beyond the actual words—to ascertain the speaker's underlying intentions and interests.

What role did individual leadership play in the outbreak of the Peloponnesian War? Here, again, Thucydides is a problematic source. As he recounts the war, he provides detailed descriptions of leaders and analyses of their decisions. He clearly sees individuals as important to the course of the war. However, in detailing the prelude to the war and in addressing why the war began, Thucydides is much less forthcoming. He offers minimal assessments of the specific role critical leaders played in the final decisions in favor of war.

Despite this limitation, we have sufficient sources on one important leader. A First-Lens analysis of why Athens and Sparta went to war must consider the influence and decisions of the Athenian leader Pericles, who, despite pursuing policies of moderation, became the deciding voice in favor of war with Sparta.


First Lens Variable

PROFILE: PERICLES

 

Printer-friendly Version  
Credits Copyright 2001 W. W. Norton & Company Copyright 2001 W. W. Norton & Company