Panathenaicus

Now both Athens and Lacedaemon incurred the hatred of their subjects and were plunged into war and confusion, but in these circumstances it will be found that our city, although attacked by all the Hellenes and by the barbarians as well, was able to hold out against them for ten years,[*](The last decade of the Peloponnesian War, from what he terms the Decelean War, 413 B.C. (see Isoc. 8.37, 84, note.), to the fall of Athens 404-403 B.C.) while the Lacedaemonians, though still the leading power by land, after waging war against the Thebans alone and being defeated in a single battle,[*](Leuctra, 371 B.C.) were stripped of all the possessions which they had held and involved in misfortunes and calamities which were very similar to these which overtook ourselves.[*](See Isoc. 8.105.)

More than that, our city recovered her power in less years than it took to overthrow it, while the Spartans after their defeat at Leuctra have not been able even in a period many times as long to regain the position from which they fell, but are even now[*](Under the Peace of Antalcidas. See Isoc. 4.115, note.) no better off than they were then.

Again, I must set forth how these two cities demeaned themselves toward the barbarians;[*](Compare the treatment of this topic in Isoc. 4.100-132.) for this still remains to be done. In the time of our supremacy, the barbarians were prevented from marching with an army beyond the Halys river[*](See Isoc. 4.144.) and from sailing with their ships of war this side of Phaselis,[*](See Isoc. 4.118, Isoc. 7.80, note.) but under the hegemony of the Lacedaemonians not only did they gain the freedom to march and sail wherever they pleased, but they even became masters over many Hellenic states.

Well then, does not the city which made the nobler and prouder covenants with the Persian king, which brought to pass the most and the greatest injuries to the barbarians and benefits to the Hellenes, which, furthermore, seized from her foes the sea-coast of Asia and much other territory besides and appropriated it to her allies,

which put an end to the insolence of the barbarians and the poverty of the Hellenes, and which, besides, waged war in her own cause more capably than that city which is famed for her skill in warfare, and extricated herself from her misfortunes more quickly than these same Lacedaemonians—does not this city, I say, deserve to be praised and honored more than the state which has been outdistanced by her in all these respects? This, then, is what I had in mind to say on this occasion in comparing the achievements of Athens and Lacedaemon and the wars which they fought at the same time and against the same adversaries.

But I think that, while those who find these words distasteful to listen to will not deny that what I have said is the truth nor, again, will they be able to cite other activities of the Lacedaemonians through which they brought to pass many blessings to the Hellenes, yet they will attempt—

as is ever their habit—to denounce our city, to recount the most offensive acts which transpired while she held the empire of the sea, to present in a false light the adjudication of lawsuits in Athens for the allies[*](Members of the Confederacy of Delos had to bring certain lawsuits, especially those which involved disloyalty to the league in any way, to Athens for trial. See Isoc. 4.113, note.) and her collection of tribute[*](See Isoc. 7.2, note.) from them, and above all to dwell on the cruelties suffered at her hands by the Melians and the Scionians and the Toronians,[*](For the treatment of Melos and Scione see Isoc. 4.100, note, and 109. Torone was captured by Cleon in 422 B.C. The men of the town were sent as prisoners to Athens, and the women and children sold into slavery (Thuc. 5.3).) thinking by these reproaches to sully the benefactions of Athens which I have just described.

Now I, for my part, could not gainsay all the things which might justly be said against our city, nor would I attempt to do so; for I should be ashamed, as I have already said in another place,[*](In Isoc. Letter 2.16.) when all other men are of the opinion that not even the gods are free from guilt, were I to strain my conscience and attempt to persuade you that our commonwealth has never erred in any instance whatsoever.

Nevertheless, I think I shall do one thing, namely, show that the city of the Spartans, in handling situations such as I have mentioned, has been much more harsh and severe than Athens, and that those who seek to promote the reputation of the Spartans by calumniating us are short-sighted in the extreme and are themselves to blame for the bad repute which their own friends[*](That is, the Spartans.) incur at our hands.

For whenever they make such charges against us, to which the Lacedaemonians are more open than ourselves, we do not find it difficult to cite against Sparta a graver offence in each case than that which has been charged against Athens. For example, in the present instance, if they bring up the fact that the law-suits of the allies were tried in Athens, is there anyone so slow of wit as not to find the ready retort that the Lacedaemonians have put to death without trial more of the Hellenes[*](See Isoc. 4.113, note.) than have ever been brought to trial and judgement here since the founding of our city?

And if they make any complaint about our collection of the tribute, we shall be ready with a like rejoinder. For we shall show that our ancestors far more than the Lacedaemonians acted for the advantage of the states which paid them tribute. For, in the first place, these states did this, not because we had so commanded, but because they themselves had so resolved at the very time when they conferred upon us the supremacy by sea.

In the next place, they paid their quotas, not to preserve Athens, but to preserve their own democratic polity and their own freedom and to escape falling into such great misfortunes, through the setting up of oligarchies, as were suffered under the decarchies and the domination of the Lacedaemonians. And, more than that, they paid these contributions, not from funds which they had treasured up through their own efforts, but from resources which they possessed through our aid.[*](The account here given of the Confederacy of Delos is a fair statement. It was in its origin a voluntary association of the Ionian Greeks, partly against Sparta, but mainly against the Persian Empire, not for protection merely, but for the enrichment of its members at the expense of the barbarians. Each member contributed its quota to the common cause, the more powerful members in ships the weaker in money, fo/ros. The quotas appear to have been fixed by Aristides, although approved by the synod of the allies. See Thuc. 5.18; Aristot. Ath. Pol. 23-24.)