Panathenaicus

When, then, the Dorians who invaded the Peloponnesus divided into three parts both the cities and the lands which they had taken from their rightful owners, those of them who received Argos and Messene as their portions ordered their affairs very much as did the Hellenes in general. But the third division of them, whom we now call Lacedaemonians, were, according to close students of their history, more embroiled in factional strife than any other people of Hellas. Moreover, the party which looked down upon the multitude, having got the upper hand, did in no wise adopt the same measures regarding the issues of that conflict as the other Hellenes who had gone through a similar experience.

For the latter suffered the opposing party to live with them and share in all the privileges of the state, excepting the offices and the honors, whereas the intelligent class among the Spartans held that such men were foolish in thinking that they could live in the same city with those against whom they had committed the greatest wrongs and yet govern the state in security; they themselves did nothing of the sort, but instead set up amongst their own class the only kind of equality and democracy[*](Those who enjoyed citizenship in Sparta are called by Aristotle (Aristot. Pol. 8.7) o(/moioi, “equals.” Cf. Isoc. 7.61.) which is possible if men are to be at all times in complete accord, while reducing the mass of the people to the condition of Perioeci,[*](In historical times the population of Laconia, the valley of the Eurotas river, was made up of the Spartans, who lived in the city of Lacedaemon (Sparta seems to have been a later name); the Helots, serfs bound to the soil, who worked the estates owned by the Spartans, paying a high rental, sometimes half the crop; and the Perioeci, free-holders of land, who were scattered in villages throughout theEurotas Valley—“the land of a hundred towns,” possessing apparently their own local governments, but under the general control and supervision of the Spartan state. These, like the Helots, were probably made up mainly of earlier inhabitants conquered by the Spartans. See Gilbert, Greek Constitutional Antiquities pp. 30 ff. Isocrates' picture of the driving out of the Perioeci from participation in the Spartan state as the result of a bitter factional fight seems to rest on a very doubtful tradition. See Grote's extended discussion of this passage, vol. 2, pp. 367 ff.) subjecting their spirits to a bondage no less abject than that endured by slaves.

And having done this, they disposed of the land, of which by right every man should have had an equal share, seizing for themselves—the few—not only the richest but more than any of the Hellenes possess, while to the mass of the people they apportioned only enough of the poorest land so that by working laboriously they could hardly gain their daily bread. Then they divided the multitude into the smallest groups possible and settled them upon many small tracts—groups who in name were spoken of as dwelling in cities, but in reality had less power than the townships with us.

And, having despoiled them of all the rights which free men ought to share, they imposed upon them the greatest part in all dangers. For in the campaigns which were conducted by their kings they not only ranged them man for man side by side with themselves, but some they stationed in the first line, and whenever need arose to dispatch a relief-force anywhere and they themselves were afraid of the hardships or the dangers or the length of time involved, they sent them forth to take the brunt of the danger from all the rest.

But why make a long story by detailing all the outrages which were visited upon the common people? Why not, rather, mention the greatest of their misfortunes and refuse to be burdened with the rest? For over these people, who have from the beginning suffered evils so dreadful, but in present emergencies are found so useful, the Ephors have the power to put to death without trial as many as they please,[*](The Perioeci, like the Helots, were subject to military service more and more as the pure Spartan population declined; but Isocrates' complaint that they were made to take the brunt of danger is probably an exaggeration. However, the power of the Spartan magistrates, the Ephors, to condemn them to death without trial is well attested. See Gilbert, Greek Constitutional Antiquities p. 58.) whereas in the other states of Hellas it is a crime against the gods to stain one's hands with the blood of even the basest of slaves.

But the reason I have at some length gone into their domestic policy and the wrongs which they have committed against the common people is, that I may ask those who applaud all the actions of the Spartans whether they applaud these also and whether they look upon those struggles as righteous and honorable which have been carried on against these men.

For I, for my part, regard them as having been great and terrible and the source of many injuries to the defeated and of many gains to the victors—gains for whose sake they are at all times continually waging war—but not, no, not as righteous or even as honorable or becoming to men who lay claim to excellence. I speak, not of excellence as that word is used in the arts or in many other activities, but of the excellence which in the hearts of good men and true is engendered in company with righteousness and justice. And it is this kind of excellence which is the subject of my whole discourse.

But depreciating this, some men heap praise upon those who have committed more crimes than all others and are not aware that they are betraying their own thoughts and showing that they would praise also men who, already possessing more wealth than they need, would not scruple to slay their own brothers and friends and associates so as to obtain their possessions also. For such crimes are parallel to the things which the Spartans have done. And those who applaud the latter cannot escape taking the same view also of the crimes which I have just mentioned.

I marvel that there are none who regard battles and victories won contrary to justice as more disgraceful and fraught with greater reproaches than defeats which are met without dishonor—and that too, knowing that great, but evil, powers prove often stronger than good men who choose to risk their lives for their country.

For such men are much more deserving of our praise than those who, while ready and willing to face death to gain the possessions of others, are yet in no wise different from hireling soldiers. For these are the acts of men depraved, and if men of honest purpose sometimes come off worse in the struggle than men who desire to do injustice, we may attribute this to negligence of the gods.

But I might apply this point also to the misfortune which befell the Spartans at Thermopylae, which all who have heard of it praise and admire more than the battles and victories which have been won over adversaries against whom wars ought never to have been waged,[*](Cf. Isoc. 5.148; Isoc. 4.90; Isoc. 6.99-100.) albeit some are without scruple in extolling such successes, not realizing that nothing is either righteous or honorable which is not said or done with justice.[*](The high moral tone here is, like the plea for absolute justice as a principle of foreign policy in the Peace, inconsistent with the “practical” doctrine of Isoc. 12.117-118. See note on 118.)

But the Spartans have never given a thought to this truth; for they look to no other object than that of securing for themselves as many of the possessions of other peoples as they can. Our ancestors, on the other hand, have shown concern for nothing in the world so much as for a good name among the Hellenes; for they considered that there could be no truer or fairer judgement than that which is rendered by a whole race of people.