<論説>伝クセノフォン『アテナイ人の国制』の成立年代

Abstract

この作品の成立年代については、十九世紀中葉以後多数の学者によって多くの説が主張されてきた。その結果年代推定の手掛りとなる記事はすでに作品のなかからすべて取出され、新たに見出される余地はないようにみえる。しかも今日においても成立年代について定説が確立されたといえる状態にはない。ところで従来の研究では、年代推定の手掛りとなる記事その他は指摘しても、それを手掛りとして選んだ理由の説明は不足であった。それが年代推定を不確定にし、諸説を生むことにもなった。この研究状況において年代推定の決め手は、説得的かつ充分な理由づけにあるといえよう。 まず推定の基本的留意事項を掲げ、ついで多数の学者がその間に年代を推定している紀元前四三一―二四年の間に収まる説を中期説とし、この間以後とみる後期説、この間以前とみる前期説を批判した後、中期説の有利さを論証する。さらに中期説のなかでも四二五－四年説が正しいとしてその諸理由を詳細にのべたあと、四三一―三〇年説を批判して、結論的考察を行なう。

The date of composition of this work has been diversely discussed by many scholars since the middle of the last century. They seem to have already found all of the statements in the work that could be clues to the presumption of the date and we could find no new clues. Nevertheless, there is still no generally accepted opinion about the date. This can be attributed to the fact that while each scholar has identified his own clues, none has fully explained why his clues made it possible for him to presume the date. In view of this, it is most necessary to provide good and persuasive reasons for the carefully selected clues. Some conditions that are indispensable to making a correct presumption will be presented first. Next, the opinion which argues that the work was written between 431 and 424 B. C., and which is supported by the majority of scholars, will be called the "middle period view". Later period and earlier period views, which presume the date of composition to be later or earlier than the "middle period", will be both refuted ; then the view of the middle period will be shown to be correct. We make a distinction between the view of 431-430 B. C. and the view of 425-424 B. C. within the middle period, and try to prove the correctness of the latter on the basis of good reasoning while arguing against the former. Finally, the presumption of terminus post quem and terminus ante quem will be discussed as a conclusion.