作为古希腊罗马世界仅有的一部留存至今，且基本完整的纪行类作品，波桑尼阿斯的《希腊纪行》在古典学研究中占据着举足轻重的地位，是后人研究古希腊史的基本史料之一，是古希腊罗马文学中指南类体裁研究的孤本，同时也是学界探究公元二世纪罗马帝国文化现象的一手史料。本文拟从研究波桑尼阿斯世界观的角度入手，深入探讨《希腊纪行》中带有浓重悲观主义色彩的神人观、民族观和政体观，进而剖析波桑尼阿斯悲观主义思想背后的历史文化背景及其个人动机。散见于《希腊纪行》一书中的大量证据表明，波桑尼阿斯突出强调人在诸神与命运面前的卑微地位，哀叹希腊民族自由岁月的不可复得，否定一切现存政体在造福民众方面的可行性，对人类世界的总体前景持悲观态度。在《希腊纪行》中，波桑尼阿斯贬低了人类的主观能动作用，刻意忽略对万神殿、凯旋门、高架水渠、罗马式竞技场等具有典型拉丁民族特色的景点的介绍，对君主制与民主制同样持批判态度，反映出作者自身意味深长的独特用意。论文认为，波桑尼阿斯的悲观主义世界观是时代的产物。以斯多葛主义为代表的悲观主义哲学思潮风行，地中海世界政治权力高度集中，民族关系错综复杂，道德文化日趋衰落；以及罗马统治者在帝国东部恩威并施，强行推广拉丁文化，掠夺希腊地区的艺术珍品，这些都是波桑尼阿斯悲观主义思想产生的基本背景。另一方面，波桑尼阿斯本人因循守旧、不切实际的偏执价值评判标准也是造成其作品消极色彩的重要因素。文章最后总结了探究波桑尼阿斯世界观的意义，认为它有助于后人修正自吉本、蒙森以来视安东尼王朝为人类历史“黄金时代”的片面论断，为学者深入研究二世纪罗马帝国境内希腊知识精英这一重要群体提供了珍贵的微观标本。

As the sole periegesis in classical world handed down almost entirely, Description of Greece by Pausanias is of key importance in classical studies. This work serves as one fundamental document on ancient Greek history, the only existing copy for us to study the type of periegesis in Greek and Roman world; and it is also one piece of primary material for historians to study certain cultural phenomena of the Roman Empire in 2nd century A.D. The thesis attempts to make a breakthrough by interpreting the world view of Pausanias, discussing his view on the relation between gods and men, relation between Greeks and Romans, and that among monarchy, oligarchy and democracy, and go on to dissect the relevant historical background and personal motivation.Many evidences scattering in Description of Greece show that Pausanias overemphasized the humbleness of mankind in front of gods and fate, lamented on the loss of freedom among Greeks, arbitrarily denied the effectiveness of all three existing regimes for promoting people’s welfare, and took a pessimistic attitude to human society’s overall prospects. In Description of Greece, Pausanias debased human subjective initiative; he intentionally neglected sight spots with a typical Latin feature, such as pantheons, triumphal arches, aqueducts, Roman arenas; and he took a critical attitude to monarchism as well as democracy. These practices revealed the author’s profound intention. In the writer’s opinion, the pessimistic outlook of Pausanias was the product of his times. In the early Roman Empire, pessimistic philosophies like Stoic were flourishing, the power of the Mediterranean world was being centralized, the national relationships were complex and morality and culture were in decline. By violence as well as mercy, Roman rulers made Latin culture widespread in the East and took away many valuable artworks from Greece. All of these contributed to the birth of Pausanias’ pessimistic thoughts. On the other hand, the conservative and utopian value judging standard of Pausanias himself was also responsible for the gloomy color in his work. At the end of the thesis, the writer summarized the significance of the analysis on Pausanias’ outlook. He believes that it may help later historians realize the insufficiency of Roman social management in 2nd century A.D. and give a second thought for the one-sided description of the reign of ‘Five Good Emperors’ as the Golden Age of human history, which has been formed and overemphasized ever since the time of Edward Gibbon and Theodor Mommsen; and the study can also provide scholars with a precious microcosmic sample for studying the noteworthy group of Greek intellectuals living in Roman Empire of the 2nd century A.D.