Today's Passage
This passage comes from a speech by the Corinthians at the Congress at Sparta in 432 BCE, immediately before the outbreak of the Peloponnesian War.
Crawley Translation (1910)
“We have also other ways of carrying on the war, such as revolt of their allies, the surest method of depriving them of their revenues, which are the source of their strength, and establishment of fortified positions in their country, and various operations which cannot be foreseen at present. For war of all things proceeds least upon definite rules, but draws principally upon itself for contrivances to meet an emergency; and in such cases the party who faces the struggle and keeps his temper best meets with most security, and he who loses his temper about it with correspondent disaster. Let us also reflect that if it was merely a number of disputes of territory between rival neighbours, it might be borne; but here we have an enemy in Athens that is a match for our whole coalition, and more than a match for any of its members; so that unless as a body and as individual nationalities and individual cities we make an unanimous stand against her, she will easily conquer us divided and in detail. That conquest, terrible as it may sound, would, it must be known, have no other end than slavery pure and simple; a word which Peloponnese cannot even hear whispered without disgrace, or without disgrace see so many states abused by one. Meanwhile the opinion would be either that we were justly so used, or that we put up with it from cowardice, and were proving degenerate sons in not even securing for ourselves the freedom which our fathers gave to Hellas; and in allowing the establishment in Hellas of a tyrant state, though in individual states we think it our duty to put down sole rulers. And we do not know how this conduct can be held free from three of the gravest failings, want of sense, of courage, or of vigilance. For we do not suppose that you have taken refuge in that contempt of an enemy which has proved so fatal in so many instances—a feeling which from the numbers that it has ruined has come to be called not contemptuous but contemptible.
“There is, however, no advantage in reflections on the past further than may be of service to the present. For the future we must provide by maintaining what the present gives us and redoubling our efforts; it is hereditary to us to win virtue as the fruit of labour, and you must not change the habit, even though you should have a slight advantage in wealth and resources; for it is not right that what was won in want should be lost in plenty; no, we must boldly advance to the war for many reasons; the god has commanded it and promised to be with us, and the rest of Hellas will all join in the struggle, part from fear, part from interest. You will be the first to break a treaty which the god, in advising us to go to war, judges to be violated already, but rather to support a treaty that has been outraged: indeed, treaties are broken not by resistance but by aggression.
Modern Translation
We possess additional strategies for waging this war—most notably, inciting rebellion among their allies, which remains the most effective means of stripping them of the revenues that constitute their true power. We can also establish fortified strongholds within their territory, along with numerous other tactics that cannot be anticipated now. War, more than anything else, refuses to follow predetermined rules; instead, it generates its own solutions in response to immediate circumstances. In such situations, those who confront challenges with composure achieve the greatest security, while those who succumb to emotion invite proportional catastrophe.
We must recognize that this is not merely another territorial dispute between neighboring states—something that might be tolerable. Rather, we face in Athens an adversary capable of matching our entire alliance, indeed surpassing any individual member. Unless we unite—every nation, every city standing together—she will defeat us piecemeal, exploiting our divisions. This defeat—however harsh the word—would mean nothing less than absolute enslavement. That Peloponnese should even whisper such a possibility brings shame; that we might witness numerous states subjugated by one brings deeper disgrace still.
Posterity would judge us either as deserving our fate or as accepting it through cowardice, proving ourselves unworthy heirs to fathers who liberated Greece. We would stand condemned for permitting a tyrant-city to emerge in Greece while claiming to oppose individual tyrants within our own states. Such behavior exhibits three fundamental failures: lack of wisdom, courage, and vigilance. Surely you haven't embraced that fatal contempt for one's enemy—an attitude that has destroyed so many that we now call it not 'contemptuous' but 'contemptible.'
Yet dwelling on past errors serves us only insofar as it benefits our present situation. Looking forward, we must preserve what we have while intensifying our efforts. Excellence through struggle is our ancestral inheritance—a tradition you must not abandon simply because you currently enjoy some advantage in wealth and resources. What was gained through hardship must not be squandered in prosperity. Multiple factors demand we advance boldly to war: divine command accompanies divine promise of support, and all Greece will rally to our cause, whether motivated by fear or self-interest.
You will not be treaty-breakers—the god himself, in counseling war, acknowledges the treaty's prior violation. Rather, you defend a compact already transgressed. Treaties are broken through aggression, not resistance.
Historical Context
This passage comes from a speech by the Corinthians at the Congress at Sparta in 432 BCE, immediately before the outbreak of the Peloponnesian War. The Corinthians are urging the Spartans and their allies to declare war on Athens, which has been expanding its empire and threatening Peloponnesian interests. The speaker addresses Spartan concerns about breaking the Thirty Years' Peace treaty signed in 446/5 BCE. This speech represents a crucial moment when the Greek world stood on the brink of a devastating conflict that would last nearly three decades. The Corinthians employ both strategic arguments about Athens' vulnerability through its allies and moral arguments about freedom versus tyranny to overcome Spartan hesitation.
Key Themes
Annotations & References
Athenian Empire and Revenue
Athens' power depended heavily on tribute (phoros) from allied cities in the Delian League, amounting to hundreds of talents annually. This funded Athens' navy and public works. The Corinthians correctly identify this as Athens' critical vulnerability.
Learn more →Greek Concepts of Freedom and Tyranny
The speech contrasts eleutheria (freedom) with tyranny, both for individuals and cities. Calling Athens a 'tyrant city' (tyrannis polis) was powerful rhetoric, as Greeks traditionally opposed one-man rule and valued autonomy.
Learn more →Religious Justification for War
The reference to divine command likely refers to the Delphic Oracle's response that Sparta would win if it fought with full commitment. Religious sanction was crucial for justifying war in Greek society.
Learn more →Parallel Ancient Sources
Plutarch: Life of Pericles (29-31)
Describes the same pre-war tensions from the Athenian perspective, including Pericles' strategy of avoiding land battles and relying on naval supremacy and imperial revenues.
Read passage →Diodorus Siculus: Library of History (12.39-40)
Provides an alternative account of the Spartan decision for war, emphasizing economic motivations and Corinthian pressure on Sparta.
Read passage →Xenophon: Hellenica (2.2.19-20)
Describes the eventual fall of Athens and loss of its empire, fulfilling the Corinthian strategy of targeting Athens' allies and revenues.
Read passage →Discussion Questions
- How does the speaker's characterization of war as unpredictable and improvisational challenge conventional Greek military thinking?
- What makes the 'tyrant city' metaphor so powerful, and how might Athenians have responded to this characterization?
- How does the appeal to hereditary virtue and ancestral values reflect broader Greek cultural values about identity and obligation?
- Is the distinction between 'breaking' and 'defending' a treaty merely sophistry, or does it reflect genuine Greek legal thinking?