Читаем The Historians' History of the World 03 полностью

“I don’t understand,” he said, “these long speeches of the Athenians. They have praised themselves abundantly, but they have never rebutted what is laid to their charge—that they are guilty of wrong against our allies and against Peloponnesus. Now if in former days they were good men against the Persians, and are now evil-doers against us, they deserve double punishment as having become evil-doers instead of good. But we are the same now as we were then: we know better than to sit still while our allies are suffering wrong: we shall not adjourn our aid, while they cannot adjourn their sufferings. Others have in abundance wealth, ships, and horses—but we have good allies, whom we are not to abandon to the mercy of the Athenians: nor are we to trust our redress to arbitration and to words, when our wrongs are not confined to words. We must help them speedily and with all our strength. Nor let any one tell us that we can with honour deliberate when we are actually suffering wrong—it is rather for those who intend to do the wrong, to deliberate well beforehand. Resolve upon war then, Lacedæmonians, in a manner worthy of Sparta. Suffer not the Athenians to become greater than they are: let us not betray our allies to ruin, but march with the aid of the gods against the wrong-doers.”

With these few words, so well calculated to defeat the prudential admonitions of Archidamus, Sthenelaidas put the question for the decision of the assembly—which at Sparta was usually taken neither by show of hands, nor by deposit of balls in an urn, but by cries analogous to the ay or no of the English House of Commons—the presiding ephor declaring which of the cries predominated. On this occasion the cry for war was manifestly the stronger. Yet Sthenelaidas affected inability to determine which of the two was the louder, in order that he might have an excuse for bringing about a more impressive manifestation of sentiment and a stronger apparent majority—since a portion of the minority would probably be afraid to show their real opinions as individuals openly. He therefore directed a division—like the speaker of the English House of Commons when his decision in favour of ay or no is questioned by any member—“Such of you as think that the truce has been violated and that the Athenians are doing us wrong, go to that side; such as think the contrary, to the other side.” The assembly accordingly divided, and the majority was very great on the warlike side of the question.

The first step of the Lacedæmonians, after coming to this important decision, was to send to Delphi and inquire of the oracle whether it would be beneficial to them to undertake the war. The answer brought back (Thucydides seems hardly certain that it was really given) was—that if they did their best they would be victorious, and that the gods would help them, invoked or uninvoked. They at the same time convened a general congress of their allies to Sparta, for the purpose of submitting their recent resolution to the vote of all.

[432-431 B.C.]

If there were any speeches delivered at this congress in opposition to the war, they were not likely to be successful in a cause wherein even Archidamus had failed. After the Corinthian had concluded, the question was put to the deputies of every city, great and small indiscriminately: and the majority decided for war. This important resolution was adopted about the end of 432 B.C., or the beginning of January 431 B.C.: the previous decision of the Spartans separately, may have been taken about two months earlier, in the preceding October or November 432 B.C.

Перейти на страницу:

Похожие книги

Отцы-основатели
Отцы-основатели

Третий том приключенческой саги «Прогрессоры». Осень ледникового периода с ее дождями и холодными ветрами предвещает еще более суровую зиму, а племя Огня только-только готовится приступить к строительству основного жилья. Но все с ног на голову переворачивают нежданные гости, объявившиеся прямо на пороге. Сумеют ли вожди племени перевоспитать чужаков, или основанное ими общество падет под натиском мультикультурной какофонии? Но все, что нас не убивает, делает сильнее, вот и племя Огня после каждой стремительной перипетии только увеличивает свои возможности в противостоянии этому жестокому миру…

Айзек Азимов , Александр Борисович Михайловский , Мария Павловна Згурская , Роберт Альберт Блох , Юлия Викторовна Маркова

Фантастика / Научная Фантастика / Попаданцы / Образование и наука / Биографии и Мемуары / История
Брежневская партия. Советская держава в 1964-1985 годах
Брежневская партия. Советская держава в 1964-1985 годах

Данная книга известного историка Е. Ю. Спицына, посвященная 20-летней брежневской эпохе, стала долгожданным продолжением двух его прежних работ — «Осень патриарха» и «Хрущевская слякоть». Хорошо известно, что во всей историографии, да и в широком общественном сознании, закрепилось несколько названий этой эпохи, в том числе предельно лживый штамп «брежневский застой», рожденный архитекторами и прорабами горбачевской перестройки. Разоблачению этого и многих других штампов, баек и мифов, связанных как с фигурой самого Л. И. Брежнева, так и со многими явлениями и событиями того времени, и посвящена данная книга. Перед вами плод многолетних трудов автора, где на основе анализа огромного фактического материала, почерпнутого из самых разных архивов, многочисленных мемуаров и научной литературы, он представил свой строго научный взгляд на эту славную страницу нашей советской истории, которая у многих соотечественников до сих пор ассоциируется с лучшими годами их жизни.

Евгений Юрьевич Спицын

История / Образование и наука