[Revised from the New York Herald of May 9, 1870.]
VICTORIA C. WOODHULL’S FOURTH PAPER—A RETROSPECT OF ANCIENT GRECIAN AND
ROMAN HISTORY.
[Below we present the fourth subdivision of Mrs. Woodhull’s treatise
on “The Tendencies of Government,” from which it will be perceived
that the lady has delved deep into the mines of governmental lore, and
is vigorously training for the Presidential sweepstakes of 1872:]
Regarding the earliest traditions of Greece, it can be said they are
less indefinite than those of Egypt or Assyria. No country of antiquity
can be reverted to with more admiration and respect than this. In
whatever light her history is considered, illustrious examples of true
greatness abound. If her military career be reviewed, where can more
glory be found to have been achieved? If her government be examined,
where has greater wisdom and moderation ever been exercised? If the
comparative advancement of science, literature, art and philosophy made
within her domain be appealed to, where has greater proficiency ever
been attained? If the personal characteristics of her great men be
analyzed, where has patriotism ever risen to so sublime a degree? In
many respects Greece may be considered the school-house of the world,
wherein it has been taught the rudimentary principles of knowledge,
especially that species of knowledge that conduces to the development of
wisdom.
The territory of ancient Greece was by no means the Greece of to-day,
but embraced all that country lying southward from Illyria and Thrace,
now forming a part of Turkey in Europe. It then consisted of the
provinces of Epirus, Peloponnesus, Greece proper, Thessaly and
Macedonia, besides many islands in the Ægean Sea. The earliest
inhabitants of Greece of whom anything is known were the Pelasgi, who
“knew no other law than force, were ignorant even of agriculture, and
fed on roots and herbs.” A people called the Hellenes, from Asia,
mingled with them, and their common name became Greeks, from Græcus, the
son of Pelasgus. Although Greece was afterward the seat of so much
knowledge and wisdom, it does not appear that these originated among the
descendants of its original inhabitants, but that they sprung from the
Phœnecian and Egyptian colonies that from various causes found their way
into Greece.
Of the constant internal strife carried on between the several Grecian
provinces no mention will be made. The first of these to arise was
Sicyon, followed by Argos, Mycenæ, Athens, Sparta, Corinth and Macedon.
When the population of any of these became large, it was the custom to
send out colonies, thus distributing Grecian influence, instead of by
war. The powerful cities of Rhegium, Syracuse, Sybaris, Crotona,
Tarentum, Gela, Locris, Messina, Marseilles and Agrigentum, were formed
from such colonies. For the space of a thousand years, or until 520
years B. C., the Grecians appear to have confined their operations
within their own dominions. Being continually engaged in war with each
other, they had no opportunity of carrying on aggressive warfare—this
was never a Grecian characteristic, though so forcibly illustrated by
Alexander of Macedon, and by Cimon and Agesilaus, for retaliation rather
than aggression.
It is to be specially observed as illustrating the part Greece performed
in the general advancement and diffusion of civilization that while all
other great nations were made so by aggressive conquests, Greece rarely
ever made war except in self-defence. The influence other nations had
upon the world was gained by conquering contiguous countries. The
influence Greece exercised was by diffusing among other nations the
principles of science, philosophy and government and by commercial
intercourse. Thus it is found that up to the time of the first Persian
invasion there had been no concentration of the military forces of the
several provinces, except as they had taken sides against each other in
their feudal wars.
The Persian attempt to subjugate Greece was most unpropitious from the
very onset. Mardonius marched a large army into the very heart of
Greece, with scarcely any opposition; but his fleet, in approaching the
coast of Macedon, encountered a storm, and was destroyed. Meanwhile,
Mardonius took no pains to encamp his vast army in a place or form of
security. A mere band of Thracians, taking advantage of this, fell upon
the Persians in the night, and completely routed the whole army. This
double defeat, by such unexpected means, caused Mardonius to return
quickly into Asia.
Nothing daunted by this defeat, which he attributed to the inexperience
of Mardonius, Darius dispatched another army, consisting of 500,000 men
and 600 ships. The fleet first captured Eretrea, while the army caused
such consternation in Greece that only Sparta, of all the provinces,
responded to the Athenian call for succor. The Spartan troops, even, did
not arrive in time to participate in the battle of Marathon, where
Miltiades, with 10,000 Athenians, completely routed the whole Persian
army. This victory gained by the Greeks over an army outnumbering theirs
nearly twenty times, was, no doubt, the inspiring cause by which all
succeeding victories over the Persians were gained. It taught the Greeks
that a few determined men, fighting in defence of their country, were
mightier than a multitude with no such incentive. Through the course of
succeeding ages the Grecians exhibited a noble emulation of, and desire
to imitate, if not excel, their ancestors, who fought and conquered at
Marathon.
Xerxes, the successor of Darius, persisting in his determination to
destroy Greece, crossed the Hellespont on a “bridge of boats,” with an
army of 1,700,000 and 80,000 horse, to which submitting countries added
300,000, so that he appeared before the pass of Thermopylæ with
2,000,000 men. Against this force Leonidas opposed 12,000 Spartans and
allies. The whole power of the Athenians had been turned into
preparations for naval warfare, which, as the sequel showed, was the
salvation of Greece. The manner in which Leonidas and his 300 Spartans
defended Thermopylæ, still further raised the determination of the
Greeks to resist after the same fashion all movements of the invaders.
On the same day as the battle of Thermopylæ a great, though indecisive,
naval battle was fought at Artemesium. Xerxes advanced upon, captured
and burned Athens. The fate of Greece seemed decided; but the great
naval battle of Salamis entirely changed the face of affairs. Xerxes
being secretly informed that it was the intention of Themistocles to
proceed with the Athenian fleet and destroy his “bridge” across the
Hellespont, precipitately abandoned Greece, leaving Mardonius with
300,000 men and instructions to subdue Greece “if he was able.” At the
battle of Platæa, which soon followed, Mardonius was completely
defeated, and the same day the remainder of the Persian fleet was
destroyed at Mycale.
Having thus rid themselves of the Persians the Athenians set about to
rebuild their city. The Spartans, fearing Athens would gain great naval
superiority over them, opposed it; thus the Grecians were no sooner rid
of a common foe than strife broke out among themselves. This tendency
arose from the process of individualization and is specially
illustrative of the progress of evolution. Athens was rebuilt, and, as
the Spartans feared, soon exceeded all other States in power and
splendor. Athens also became the centre of the arts and sciences,
knowledge of which was at this time rapidly developed. Sparta, no longer
able to endure the overbearing pride of Athens, brought on the
Peloponnesian war. This war devastated Greece and enslaved Athens.
Sparta in turn was compelled to yield to Epaminondas, the Theban. In
spite of this terrible war, poets, philosophers, artists and statesmen
continued to arise, commerce flourished and the customs of the people
were raised to the highest degree of perfection.
But a time of unhappiness soon came upon this too prosperous condition.
Philip of Macedon, bold and cunning, took advantage of the dissensions
that at all times prevailed, and by a sudden _coup de main_ thought to
make himself master of all Greece. It can be asserted that not Greece,
but one man, for forty-eight years continually frustrated the designs of
Philip, who himself said, “The eloquence of Demosthenes did me more harm
than all the armies and fleets of the Athenians. His harangues are like
machines of war and batteries raised at a distance, by which all my
projects and enterprises are ruined. Had I been present and heard that
vehement orator declaim I should have been the first to conclude that it
was necessary to declare war against me. Nor can I reach him with gold,
for in this respect, by which I have gained so many cities, I find him
invincible.” Antipater also says of him, “I value not the galleys nor
armies of the Athenians. Demosthenes alone I fear. Without him the
Athenians are no better than the meanest Greeks. It is he that arouses
them from their lethargy and puts arms into their hands almost against
their will. Incessantly representing the battle of Marathon and Salamis,
he transforms them into new men. Nothing escapes his penetrating eye,
nor his consummate prudence. He foresees all our designs; he
countermines all our projects and disconcerts us in everything. Did the
Athenians confide in him and follow his advice we should be irremediably
undone.”
From all that can be gathered about this remarkable man it may seriously
be considered whether, had he had the power of a Sesostris, a Cyrus or
an Alexander, he would not have conquered and ruled the world. But the
Athenians failed to follow his advice, and were reduced to submission to
Macedon by the youthful Alexander, who said of him, when he passed
Thermopylæ, “Demosthenes called me a child when I was in Illyria; he
called me a young man when I was in Thessaly: I must now show him before
Athens that I am a man grown.”
After the conquest was complete Alexander summoned at Corinth
representatives from the several Grecian States, and requested from them
the supreme command of all their armies against the Persians. No
assembly ever held was embryotic of more momentous events. It was the
Western World taking counsel and resolving upon the destruction of the
Eastern, and was the initiatory step to almost incredible events, and to
the revolutions that were to change the condition of the whole world,
through the unexampled career of him who caused its assembling.
After the death of Alexander, the several Grecian States renewed the
struggle for freedom. The Romans, who had risen in the West, becoming
involved in the strife, proved fatal to Greece; for in the year 146 B.
C. the capture of Corinth reduced Greece to a Roman province.
During the whole period of strife from the battle of Platæa, the arts
and sciences flourished in a most extraordinary manner. Indeed, it was
the golden age of art. The Grecian colonies were still more prosperous
than their mother country. Alexandria, in Egypt, especially, became
famous as the seat of learning. In the time of Augustus, the Greeks lost
even the shadow of their former freedom and ceased to be an independent
people; but they became the instructors of their conquerors; for their
language, manners, customs, learning, arts and tastes spread over the
whole Roman empire. After a time the Romans came to esteem the Greeks as
the most worthless of creatures.
Asiatic luxury, acquired from the Persians, had wholly corrupted the
Greek’s ancient love of freedom, and a mean servility became substituted
therefor. At the beginning of the fourth century the people scarcely
showed a single trace of their former noble characteristics of
simplicity and grandeur; and thus Greece passed into her condition of
unimportance.