Archidamus

The perils which befell them on the march, and the other incidents[*](Such as are told in Apollod. 2.8.3.) which have no bearing on the present theme, I need not take the time to describe. Let it suffice that, having conquered in war those who dwelt in the regions which I have mentioned, they divided their kingdom into three parts.[*](Procles and Eurysthenes, twin sons of Aristodemus, along with Temenos and Cresphontes, sons of Aristomachus, drew lots for Argos, Lacedaemon, and Messene.) Now you men of Sparta have until this day remained faithful to the oaths and to the covenants which you made with my forefathers;

therefore in time past you have fared better than the rest of the world, and in time to come you may reasonably hope, if you continue as you have been, to fare better than at present. But the Messenians went so far in their wickedness that they plotted against and slew Cresphontes, albeit he was the founder of their state, the sovereign of their land, a descendant of Heracles, and once the leader of their armies.

His sons, however, escaped the perils which confronted them and threw themselves upon the mercy of Sparta, beseeching us to come to the aid of their dead father[*](According to the usual account, it was Aepytus, a son of Cresphontes, who avenged the death of his father. Apollod. 2.8.5.) and offering us their land. And you, after inquiring of Apollo, and being directed by him to accept this gift and avenge the wronged, thereupon beleaguered the Messenians, forced them to surrender, and thus gained possession of their territory.

I have not, it is true, recounted in detail our original titles to this land (for the present occasion does not permit me to go into legendary history, and I have had to set them forth with too great brevity for clearness); yet I am sure that even this brief statement makes it evident to all that there is no difference whatever between the way in which we acquired the land which is acknowledged to be ours and the land to which our claim is disputed. For we inhabit Lacedaemon because the sons of Heracles gave it to us, because Apollo directed us to do so, and because we fought and conquered those who held it; and Messene we received from the same people, in the same way, and by taking the advice of the same oracle.

To be sure, if we are in a mood not to defend our title to anything, not even if they demand that we abandon Sparta itself, it is idle to be concerned about Messene; but if not one of you would consent to live if torn from the fatherland, then you ought to be of the same mind about that country; for in both cases we can advance the same justifications and the same reasons for our claim.

Then again you are doubtless well aware that possessions, whether private or public, when they have remained for a long time in the hands of their owner, are by all men acknowledged to be hereditary and incontestable. Now we took Messene before the Persians acquired their kingdom[*](In 559 B.C., when Cyrus became ruler of Persia.) and became masters of the continent, in fact before a number of the Hellenic cities were even founded.

And yet notwithstanding that we hold these titles, the Thebans would on the one hand restore Asia as his ancestral right to the barbarian,[*](By the peace terms of Pelopidas. See introduction to this oration.) who has not yet held sway over it for two hundred years, while on the other hand they would rob us of Messene, which we have held for more than twice that length of time;[*](Messene was not actually subdued until 724-723 B.C. Perhaps Isocrates is speaking loosely, or perhaps he follows another source than Pausanias, who is almost our sole authority for this period. However, the conquests of Alcamenes took place about 786 B.C., and Isocrates perhaps refers to this or a similar event. See Paus. 4.4.3. Dinarchus (Din. 1.73) gives the same figure as lsocrates.) and although it was only the other day that they razed both Thespiae and Plataea to the ground,[*](Plataea was destroyed about 372 B.C., and Thespiae shortly after. See Dio. Sic. 15.46.4 and Xen. Hell. 6.3.1. Others give the date as 374 B.C.) yet now, after a lapse of four hundred years, they propose to settle their colonists in Messene acting in both cases contrary to the oaths and covenants.[*](Cf. the Peace of Antalcidas. See Isoc. 4.115 ff. and note.)

Were they restoring those who are truly Messenians, they would still be acting unjustly, but at least they would have a more plausible pretext for wronging us; but as the case stands, it is the Helots whom they are trying to settle on our frontier,[*](See introduction.) so that the worst fate which threatens us is not that we shall be robbed of our land contrary to justice, but that we shall see our slaves made masters of it.

You will perceive still more clearly from what follows both that we are now dealt with most unfairly and that in the past we held Messene justly. For in the many wars which have befallen us we have before this at times been forced to make peace when we were in much worse case than our foes.[*](such were the Peace of Nicias (421 B.C., Thucyd. v. 18), the Peace of Antalcidas, and the separate peace between Athens and Sparta (Xen. Hell. 6.2.1).) But, although our treaties were concluded under circumstances in which it was impossible for us to seek any advantage,

yet, while there were other matters about which differences arose, neither the Great King nor the city of Athens ever charged us with having acquired Messene unjustly. And yet how could we find a more thoroughgoing judgement on the justice of our case than this, which was rendered by our enemies and made at a time when we were beset with misfortunes?

That oracle, moreover, which all would acknowledge to be the most ancient and the most widely accepted and the most trustworthy in existence, recognized Messene as ours, not only at the time when it commanded us to receive the country as a gift from the sons of Cresphontes and to go to the aid of the wronged, but also later, when the war dragged on and both sides sent delegations to Delphi, the Messenians appealing for deliverance and we inquiring how we could most speedily make ourselves masters of their city, the god gave them no answer, thus showing that their appeal was unjust, while to us he revealed both what sacrifices we should perform and to whom we should send for aid.[*](in the second Messenian War, 685-668 B.C., the Athenians are said to have sent Tyrtaeus, the lame school-master, to the aid of the Spartans. See Pausanias iv. 15.)

And yet how could anyone furnish testimony more significant or clearer than this? For it has been shown, first of all (since nothing prevents our restating these points briefly), that we received the country from its rightful owners; secondly, that we took it by war, precisely as most of the cities in those days were founded; further, that we drove out those who had grievously sinned against the children of Heracles—men who by right should have been banished from the sight of all mankind; and, finally, it has been shown that the length of our tenure, the judgement of our enemies, and the oracles of Apollo all confirm our right to the possession of Messene.

Anyone of these facts is enough to refute the assertions of those who presume to allege against us either that we now refuse to conclude peace because of a desire for aggrandizement, or that we then made war on the Messenians because we coveted what was not our own. I might perhaps say more than this about our acquisition of Messene, but I consider what I have already said to be sufficient

Those who advise us to make peace declare that prudent men ought not to take the same view of things in fortunate as in unfortunate circumstances, but rather that they should always consult their immediate situation and accommodate themselves to their fortunes, and should never entertain ambitions beyond their power, but should at such times seek, not their just rights but their best interests.

In all else I agree with them, but no man could ever persuade me that one should ever deem anything to be of greater consequence than justice;[*](For this Isocratean idealism cf. Isoc. 8.31-35.) for I see that our laws have been made to secure it, that men of character and reputation pride themselves upon practicing it, and that it constitutes the chief concern of all well-regulated states;

further, I observe that the wars of the past have in the end been decided, not in accordance with the strongest forces, but in accordance with justice; and that, in general, the life of man is destroyed by vice and preserved by virtue. Therefore those should not lack courage who are about to take up arms in a just cause, but far more those who are insolent and do not know how to bear their good fortune with moderation.[*](Cf. Isoc. 1.42 and Isoc. 12.31-32.)

Then, too, there is this point to consider: At present we are all agreed as to what is just, while we differ as to what is expedient. But now that two good things are set before us, the one evident, the other doubtful, how ridiculous you would make yourselves if you should reject that course which is acknowledged to be good and decide to take that which is debatable, especially when your choice is a matter of such importance!

For according to my proposal you would not relinquish a single one of your possessions nor fasten any disgrace upon the state; nay, on the contrary, you would have good hope that taking up arms in a just cause you would fight better than your foes. According to their proposal, on the other hand, you would withdraw at once from Messene, and, having first committed this wrong against yourselves, you would perhaps fail to secure both what is expedient and what is just—and everything else which you expect to gain.

For as yet it is by no means evident that if we do as we are bidden we shall henceforth enjoy lasting peace. For I think you are not unaware that all men are wont to discuss just terms with those who defend their rights, while in the case of those who are over-ready to do what they are commanded they keep adding more and more to the conditions which at first they intended to impose; and thus it happens that men of a warlike temper obtain a more satisfactory peace than those who too readily come to terms.

But lest I should seem to dwell too long on this point, I shall abandon all such considerations and turn at once to the simplest of my proofs. If no people, after meeting with misfortune, ever recovered themselves or mastered their enemies, then we cannot reasonably hope to win victory in battle; but if on many occasions it has happened that the stronger power has been vanquished by the weaker, and that the besiegers have been destroyed by those confined within the walls, what wonder if our own circumstances likewise should undergo a change?