In the 1971 article, "The Obligation of History," the Cambridge historian Geoffrey Woodhead interpreted the ancient Greek philosopher Thucydides to assert that "it is not morally wrong to use it (power) in promotion of honor and advantage' (Woodhead,) and that Thucydides "rightly discounted' (Woodhead) things like "face saving moral reasons" (Woodhead) as well as "envy and hatred" (Woodhead). While Thucydides was a political realist who argued that morality had no place in political decisions, he also supported the notion that the ethical moderation that came from Western styled democratic systems had benefits; as regimes which were unchecked by such moderations were doomed to fall. Thus, the judicious balance between idealism and realism practiced in politics and international relations will be analyzed. There are three parts to the essay. The first will detail Thucydides' school of thought regarding the use of power, the second will detail his views on how notions of justice and morality are intertwined with the exercise of power and the third section will conclude with an interpretation of how Woodhead's understanding of Thucydides' complex views on power and morality was incomplete. Primarily, as one of the founders of political realism, Thucydides would have subscribed to the position set out by the German scholar Hans Morgenthau that "Power is the central fact of political life. You cannot create lasting order among a group of human beings without the exercise of power" (Realist, 2). Political realists tend to believe that morality is not as effective a catalyst when it comes to political action, as brute force. Indeed, this view can be supported by Thucydides' account of human nature which according to him, serves the interests of the strong because the strong can shake off any notions of morality; morality which supposedly exists to serve those who are weaker than they are. In On Justice, Power, and Human Nature, Thucydides'