History of the Peloponnesian War | Page 7

with their allies, a duel into which all the Hellenes sooner or later
were drawn, though some might at first remain neutral. So that the
whole period from the Median war to this, with some peaceful intervals,
was spent by each power in war, either with its rival, or with its own
revolted allies, and consequently afforded them constant practice in
military matters, and that experience which is learnt in the school of
danger.

The policy of Lacedaemon was not to exact tribute from her allies, but
merely to secure their subservience to her interests by establishing
oligarchies among them; Athens, on the contrary, had by degrees
deprived hers of their ships, and imposed instead contributions in
money on all except Chios and Lesbos. Both found their resources for
this war separately to exceed the sum of their strength when the
alliance flourished intact.
Having now given the result of my inquiries into early times, I grant
that there will be a difficulty in believing every particular detail. The
way that most men deal with traditions, even traditions of their own
country, is to receive them all alike as they are delivered, without
applying any critical test whatever. The general Athenian public fancy
that Hipparchus was tyrant when he fell by the hands of Harmodius and
Aristogiton, not knowing that Hippias, the eldest of the sons of
Pisistratus, was really supreme, and that Hipparchus and Thessalus
were his brothers; and that Harmodius and Aristogiton suspecting, on
the very day, nay at the very moment fixed on for the deed, that
information had been conveyed to Hippias by their accomplices,
concluded that he had been warned, and did not attack him, yet, not
liking to be apprehended and risk their lives for nothing, fell upon
Hipparchus near the temple of the daughters of Leos, and slew him as
he was arranging the Panathenaic procession.
There are many other unfounded ideas current among the rest of the
Hellenes, even on matters of contemporary history, which have not
been obscured by time. For instance, there is the notion that the
Lacedaemonian kings have two votes each, the fact being that they
have only one; and that there is a company of Pitane, there being
simply no such thing. So little pains do the vulgar take in the
investigation of truth, accepting readily the first story that comes to
hand. On the whole, however, the conclusions I have drawn from the
proofs quoted may, I believe, safely be relied on. Assuredly they will
not be disturbed either by the lays of a poet displaying the exaggeration
of his craft, or by the compositions of the chroniclers that are attractive
at truth's expense; the subjects they treat of being out of the reach of
evidence, and time having robbed most of them of historical value by

enthroning them in the region of legend. Turning from these, we can
rest satisfied with having proceeded upon the clearest data, and having
arrived at conclusions as exact as can be expected in matters of such
antiquity. To come to this war: despite the known disposition of the
actors in a struggle to overrate its importance, and when it is over to
return to their admiration of earlier events, yet an examination of the
facts will show that it was much greater than the wars which preceded
it.
With reference to the speeches in this history, some were delivered
before the war began, others while it was going on; some I heard
myself, others I got from various quarters; it was in all cases difficult to
carry them word for word in one's memory, so my habit has been to
make the speakers say what was in my opinion demanded of them by
the various occasions, of course adhering as closely as possible to the
general sense of what they really said. And with reference to the
narrative of events, far from permitting myself to derive it from the first
source that came to hand, I did not even trust my own impressions, but
it rests partly on what I saw myself, partly on what others saw for me,
the accuracy of the report being always tried by the most severe and
detailed tests possible. My conclusions have cost me some labour from
the want of coincidence between accounts of the same occurrences by
different eye-witnesses, arising sometimes from imperfect memory,
sometimes from undue partiality for one side or the other. The absence
of romance in my history will, I fear, detract somewhat from its interest;
but if it be judged useful by those inquirers who desire an exact
knowledge of the past as an aid to the interpretation of the future,
which in the course of human things must resemble if it does not reflect
it, I shall be content.