Greece -- History -- Peloponnesian War, 431-404 B.C.
Oaths of reconciliation, being only proffered on
either side to meet an immediate difficulty, only held good so long as
no other weapon was at hand; but when opportunity offered, he who first
ventured to seize it and to take his enemy off his guard, thought this
perfidious vengeance sweeter than an open one, since, considerations of
safety apart, success by treachery won him the palm of superior
intelligence. Indeed it is generally the case that men are readier to
call rogues clever than simpletons honest, and are as ashamed of being
the second as they are proud of being the first. The cause of all these
evils was the lust for power arising from greed and ambition; and from
these passions proceeded the violence of parties once engaged in
contention. The leaders in the cities, each provided with the fairest
professions, on the one side with the cry of political equality of the
people, on the other of a moderate aristocracy, sought prizes for
themselves in those public interests which they pretended to cherish,
and, recoiling from no means in their struggles for ascendancy engaged
in the direst excesses; in their acts of vengeance they went to even
greater lengths, not stopping at what justice or the good of the state
demanded, but making the party caprice of the moment their only
standard, and invoking with equal readiness the condemnation of an
unjust verdict or the authority of the strong arm to glut the
animosities of the hour. Thus religion was in honour with neither
party; but the use of fair phrases to arrive at guilty ends was in high
reputation. Meanwhile the moderate part of the citizens perished
between the two, either for not joining in the quarrel, or because envy
would not suffer them to escape.
Thus every form of iniquity took root in the Hellenic countries by
reason of the troubles. The ancient simplicity into which honour so
largely entered was laughed down and disappeared; and society became
divided into camps in which no man trusted his fellow. To put an end to
this, there was neither promise to be depended upon, nor oath that
could command respect; but all parties dwelling rather in their
calculation upon the hopelessness of a permanent state of things, were
more intent upon self-defence than capable of confidence. In this
contest the blunter wits were most successful. Apprehensive of their
own deficiencies and of the cleverness of their antagonists, they
feared to be worsted in debate and to be surprised by the combinations
of their more versatile opponents, and so at once boldly had recourse
to action: while their adversaries, arrogantly thinking that they
should know in time, and that it was unnecessary to secure by action
what policy afforded, often fell victims to their want of precaution.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account