That large patriotic sentiment, which dictated the magnanimous answer
sent by the Athenians[21] to the offers of Mardonius in 479 B.C.,
refusing in the midst of ruin present and prospective, all temptation
to betray the sanctity of Pan-hellenic fellowship,—that sentiment
which had been during the two following generations the predominant
inspiration of Athens, and had also been powerful, though always
less powerful, at Sparta,—was now, in the former, overlaid by more
pressing apprehensions, and in the latter completely extinguished.
Now it was to the leading states that Greece had to look, for holding
up the great banner of Pan-hellenic independence; from the smaller
states nothing more could be required than that they should adhere
to and defend it, when upheld.[22] But so soon as Sparta was seen to
solicit and enforce, and Athens to accept (even under constraint),
the proclamation under the king’s hand and seal brought down by
Antalkidas,—that banner was no longer a part of the public emblems
of Grecian political life. The grand idea represented by it,—of
collective self-determining Hellenism,—was left to dwell in the
bosoms of individual patriots.
[21] Herodot. viii, 143.
The explanation which the Athenians give to the Spartan envoys,
of the reasons and feelings which dictated their answer of
refusal to Alexander (viii, 144), are not less impressive than
the answer itself.
But whoever would duly feel and appreciate the treason of the
Spartans in soliciting the convention of Antalkidas, should read
in contrast with it that speech which their envoys address to the
Athenians, in order to induce the latter to stand out against the
temptations of Mardonius (viii, 142).
[22] The sixth oration (called Archidamus) of Isokrates sets
forth emphatically the magnanimous sentiments, and comprehensive
principles, on which it becomes Sparta to model her public
conduct,—as altogether different from the simple considerations
of prudence and security which are suitable to humbler states
like Corinth, Epidaurus, or Phlius (Archidamus, s. 105, 106, 110).
Contrast these lofty pretensions with the dishonorable realities
of the convention of Antalkidas,—not thrust upon Sparta by
superior force, but both originally sued out, and finally
enforced by her, for her own political ends.
Compare also Isokrates, Or. xii. (Panathen.) s. 169-172, about
the dissension of the leading Grecian states, and its baneful
effects.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account