Panathenaicus

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.

And they have been manifestly of this mind both in their government of the state in other respects and in the conduct of the greatest affairs. For in the three wars,[*](Three “wars,” with no attention to chronology: (1) that against Xerxes; (2) the warfare connected with the Ionian Colonization; (3) four campaigns summarized as one, all dealing with invasions: (a) that against Eumolpus and the Thracians; (b) that against the Scythians; (c) that against Eurystheus; (d) that against Dareius.) apart from the Trojan war, which were fought by the Hellenes against the barbarians—in all these they placed our city in the forefront of the fighting. Of these wars, one was the struggle against Xerxes,[*](See Isoc. 12.49 ff.) in which they were as much superior to the Lacedaemonians in every crisis as were the latter to the rest of the Hellenes.

Another was the war connected with the founding of the colonies,[*](See Isoc. 12.42 ff. and Isoc. 12.164 ff.) in which none of the Dorians came to help them, but in which Athens, having been made the leader of those who were lacking in the means of subsistence and of all others who desired to join with her, so completely reversed the state of affairs that, whereas the barbarians had been wont in times past to seize and hold the greatest cities of Hellas, she placed the Hellenes in a position where they were able to do what they had formerly suffered.

Now as to the two wars, I have said enough earlier in this discourse.[*](In 49 ff., 42 ff., 164 ff.) I shall now take up the third, which took place when the other Hellenic cities had just been founded and while our own city was still ruled by kings. In those days there occurred at the same time very many wars and very great perils. I could neither ascertain nor set forth the history of all of them,

and I shall pass over the great bulk of the things which were then done, but do not now press upon us to be told, and shall endeavor to inform you as briefly as I can of the enemies who attacked our city, of the battles which deserve to be recalled and recounted, of their leaders, and, furthermore, of the pretexts which they alleged, and of the strength of the peoples who joined in their campaigns. For these details will be enough to discuss in addition to what we have said about our adversaries.

For our country was invaded by the Thracians, led by Eumolpus,[*](See Isoc. 4.68; Isoc. 6.42; Isoc. 7.75.) son of Poseidon, who disputed the possession of Athens with Erechtheus, alleging, that Poseidon had appropriated the city before Athena; also by the Scythians, led by the Amazons,[*](See Isoc. 4.68.) the offspring of Ares, who made the expedition to recover Hippolyte,[*](A queen of the Amazons, who, according to one legend, being enamored of Theseus, deserted her own people and followed him to Athens. In one tradition she meets her death fighting against the Amazons, who came to recover her. Paus. 1.2.1.) since she had not only broken the laws which were established among them, but had become enamored of Theseus and followed him from her home to Athens and there lived with him as his consort;

again, by the Peloponnesians, led by Eurystheus,[*](See Isoc. 4.58 ff.) who not only refused to make amends to Heracles for his ill-treatment of him but brought an army against our ancestors with the object of seizing by force the sons of Heracles, who had taken refuge with us. However, he met with the fate which was his due. For so far did he fail of getting our suppliants into his power that, having been defeated in battle and taken captive by our people, he became the suppliant of those whom he had come to demand of us, and lost his own life.

Later than Eurystheus, the troops dispatched by Dareius[*](See Isoc. 4.71-72, Isoc. 4.85-87.) to ravage Hellas landed at Marathon, fell upon more misfortunes and greater disasters than they had hoped to inflict upon our city, and fled in rout from all Hellas.

All these whom I have instanced, having invaded our country—not together nor at the same time, but as opportunity and self-interest and desire concurred in each case—our ancestors conquered in battle and put an end to their insolence. And yet they did not forsake their true selves[*](See for the figure and the thought, Isoc. 12.32; General Introduction.) after they had achieved successes of such magnitude nor did they experience the same misadventure as those who, owing to the exercise of good and wise judgement, have attained great wealth and good reputation, but who, owing to excess of good fortune, have grown overweening, lost their senses, and have been brought down to lower and meaner circumstances than those which they enjoyed before.

On the contrary, they escaped all such aberrations and remained steadfast in the character which they had because of the excellence of their government, taking more pride in their state of soul and in the quality of their minds than in the battles which had been fought, and being more admired by the rest of the world because of this self-control and moderation than because of the bravery displayed in their perils.

For all men saw that the fighting spirit is possessed by many even of those who outdo others in villainy, while that spirit which is beneficent in all things and is helpful to all men is not shared by the depraved, but is engendered only in men who are of good birth and breeding and education—even such as were those who then governed our city and brought to pass all the good things which I have described.

Now I observe that the other orators close their discourses with the greatest and most memorable deeds, but, while I commend the wisdom of those who hold and practise this principle, yet I am not in a position to do this same thing, but am compelled to go on with my discourse. The reason why, I shall explain presently, after first saying just a word.

After I had written out my discourse as far as what has been read, I was revising it with three or four youths who are wont to spend their time in my society. And when, on going over what I had written, it seemed to us to be good and to require only an ending, it occurred to me to send for one of those who had studied with me[*](It has been conjectured, with no degree of certainty, that the pupil here referred to was Theopompus, the historian.) but had lived under an oligarchy and had elected to extol the Lacedaemonians. I did this in order that, if any false statement had escaped me, he might detect it and point it out to me.