History of the Peloponnesian War

For afterwards, even the whole of Greece, so to say, was convulsed; struggles being every where made by the popular leaders to call in the Athenians, by the oligarchical party, the Lacedaemonians. [*]( Here, as in I. 36. 3, the participle and the finite verb are made to answer to each other, οὐκ ἄν ἐχόντων—ἐπορίζοντο, whereas it should have been either οὐκ ἄν εἶχον πρόφασιν—ἐπορίζοντο, or οὐκ ἄν ἐχόντων—τῶνἐπαγωγῶν ποριζομένων. —Arnold. The only way to avoid this confusion of constructions would be to understand ἐχόντων and ἑτοίμων again after πολεμουμένων. And as they would have had no pretext for calling them in, nor have been prepared to do it, in time of peace, but were so in time of war,—occasions of inviting them were easily supplied, when this war had broken out. But from the fact of no commentator (so far as I am aware) having adopted this method, there are probably greater objections to it than, I confess, present themselves to my own mind.) Now they would have had no pretext for calling them in, nor have been prepared to do so, in time of peace. But when pressed by war, and when an alliance also was maintained by both parties for the injury of their opponents and for their own gain therefrom, occasions of inviting them were easily supplied to such as wished to effect any revolution.

And many dreadful things befell the cities through this sedition, which occur, and will always do so, as long as human nature is the same, but [*]( For a similar use of μᾶλλον compare IV. 19. 7, εἴτε καὶ ἐκπολιορκηθέντες μᾶλλον ἂν χειρωθεῖεν) in a more violent or milder form, and varying in their phenomena, as the several variations of circumstances may in each case present themselves. For in peace and prosperity both communities and individuals have better feelings, through not falling into [*]( Literally compulsory, i. e. which compells a man to do what he would otherwise not think of.) urgent needs; whereas war, by taking away the free supply of daily wants is a violent master, and assimilates most men's tempers to their present condition, The states ten were thus torn by sedition, and the later instances of it in any part, from having heard what had been done before, exhibited largely an excessive refinement of ideas, both in the eminent cunning of their plans, and the monstrous cruelty of their vengeance.

The ordinary meaning of words was chanced by them as they thought proper. For reckless daring was regarded as courage tat was true to its friends; prudent delay, as specious cowardice; moderation, as a cloak for unmanliness; being intelligent in every thing, as being useful for nothing.

Frantic violence was assigned to the manly character; cautious plotting was considered a specious excuse for declining the contest. The advocate for cruel measures was always trusted; while his opponent was suspected. He that plotted against another, if successful, was reckoned clever; he that suspected a plot, still cleverer; but he that forecasted for escaping the necessity of all such things, was regarded as one who broke up his party, and was afraid of his adversaries.

In a word, the man was commended who anticipated one going to do an evil deed, or who persuaded to it one who had no thought of it. Moreover, kindred became a tie less close than party, because the latter was more ready for unscrupulous audacity. For such associations have nothing to do with any benefit from established laws, but are formed in opposition to those institutions by a spirit of rapacity.

Again, their mutual grounds of confidence they confirmed not so much by any reference to the divine law as by fellowship in some act of lawlessness. The fair professions of their adversaries they received with a cautious eye to their actions, if they were stronger than themselves, and not with a spirit of generosity. To be avenged on another was deemed of greater consequence than to escape being first injured oneself.

As for oaths, if in any case exchanged with a view to a reconciliation, being taken by either party with regard to their immediate necessity, they only held good so long as they had no resources from any other quarter; but he that first, when occasion offered, took courage [to break them], if he saw his enemy off his guard, wreaked his vengeance on him with greater pleasure for his confidence, than he would have done in an open manner; taking into account both the safety of the plan, and the fact that by taking a treacherous advantage of him he also won a prize for cleverness. And the majority of men, when dishonest, more easily get the name of talented an, when simple, that of good, and of the one hear ashamed, while of the her hey are proud. Now the cause of all these things was now proper pursued for the gratification of covetousness and ambition and the consequent violence parties when once engaged in contentio.

For the leaders in the cities, having a specious profession on each side, putting forward, respectively, the political equality of the people, or a moderate aristocracy, while in word they served the common interests, in truth they made them their prizes. And while struggling by every means to obtain an advantage over each other, they dared and carried out the most dreadful deeds; heaping on still greater vengeance, not only so far s was just and expedient for he state, but it the measure of what pleasing to either party in each successive case: an whether by an unjust sentence of condemnation, or on [*]( Or, χειρί may be taken by itself, in opposition to μετὰ ψήφου ἀδίκου καταγνώσεως: but the rhythm of the sentence appears better with the ether construction.) gaining the ascendency by the strong hand, they were ready to glut the animosity they felt at the moment. Thus piety was in fashion with neither party; but those who had the luck to effect some odious purpose under fair pretences were the more highly spoken of. The neutrals amongst the citizens were destroyed by both parties : either because they did not join them in their quarrel, or for envy that they should so escape.