peace during war. With this pronouncement of Polybius, whose philo- Appeals for sophic grasp of political conditions, understanding of the international relationships, and penetration into compli- Peloponnesian cated issues are ever apparent, may be compared the observations of Thucydides, hardly less luminous on broad questions of national policy. At the assembly of the Peloponnesian allies at Sparta, 432 B.C., where divers grievances were alleged against Athens, the Corinthian envoys, addressing the representatives, exhorted them to vote for war : “ Acknowledging, then, allies, that there is no alternative, and that we are advising you for the best, vote for war; and be not afraid of the immediate danger, but fix your thoughts on the durable peace which will follow. For by war peace is assured, but to remain at peace when you should be going to war may be often very dangerous. The tyrant city which has been set up in Hellas is a standing menace to all alike; she rules over some of us already, and would fain rule over others. Let us attack and subdue her, that we may ourselves live safely for the future, and deliver the Hellenes whom she has enslaved." 1 At a previous meeting of the confederates in Sparta, in the same year, Archidamus, the aged Lacedaemonian φόβον, οὐδὲ Πίνδαρον τὸν συναποφηνάμενον αὐτοῖς ἄγειν τὴν ἡσυχίαν διὰ τῶνδε τῶν ποιημάτων, τὸ κοινόν τις ἀστῶν ἐν εὐδίᾳ τιθείς ἐρευνασάτω μεγαλανορος ἡσυχίας τὸ φαιδρὸν φάος. δόξας γὰρ παραυτίκα πιθανώς εἰρηκέναι, μετ ̓ οὐ πολὺ πάντων αἰσχίστην εὑρέθη καὶ βλαβερωτάτην πεποιημένος ἀπόφασιν· εἰρήνη γὰρ μετὰ μὲν τοῦ δικαίου καὶ πρέποντος κάλλιστόν ἐστι κτῆμα καὶ λυσιτελέστατον, μετὰ δὲ κακίας ἢ δειλίας ἐπονειδίστου πάντων αἴσ χιστον καὶ βλαβερώτατον. 1 Thuc. i. 124 : “ ἀλλὰ νομίσαντες ἐς ἀνάγκην ἀφίχθαι, ὦ ἄνδρες ξύμμαχοι, καὶ ἅμα τάδε ἄριστα λέγεσθαι, ψηφίσασθε τὸν πόλεμον, μὴ φοβηθέντες τὸ αὐτίκα δεινὸν, τῆς δ ̓ ἀπ' αὐτοῦ διὰ πλείονος εἰρήνης ἐπιθυμήσαντες· ἐκ πολέμου μὲν γὰρ εἰρήνην μᾶλλον βεβαιοὗται, ἀφ' ἡσυχίας δὲ μὴ πολεμῆσαι οὐχ ὁμοίως ἀκίνδυνον. καὶ τὴν καθεστηκυίαν ἐν τῇ Ἑλλάδι πόλιν τύραννον ἡγησάμενοι ἐπὶ πᾶσιν ὁμοίως καθεστάναι, ὥστε τῶν μὲν ἤδη ἄρχειν τῶν δὲ διανοεῖσθαι, παραστησώμεθα ἐπελθόντες, καὶ αὐτοὶ ἀκινδύνως τὸ λοιπὸν οἰκῶμεν, καὶ τοὺς νῦν δεδουλωμένους Ἕλληνας ἐλευθερώσωμεν.” Polybius on peace. Thucydides. king, esteemed alike for his ability and his prudence, counselled the assembly to observe discretion, and not rashly to rush to arms. He had had, he observed, great experience of wars, and he was sure that such of his hearers as were advanced in years, and had experienced the ravages of warfare, would not, as men too often did, desire war because they had never known it, or in the belief that it was either a good or a safe proceeding,μήτε ἀγαθὸν καὶ ἀσφαλές. . . Polybius, again, states that when the Arcadians in the course of time advanced a claim for Lasion and the whole district of Pisa, being compelled to defend their territory and change their habits of life, they neglected to recover from the Greeks their ancient and ancestral immunity from pillage, but were content to remain just as they were. "This, in my opinion," he comments, was a short-sighted policy. For peace is a thing we all desire, and are willing to submit to anything to obtain; it is the only one of our so-called blessings that no one questions. If, then, there are people who, having the opportunity of obtaining it, with justice and honour, from the Greeks, without question and for perpetuity, neglect to do so, or regard other objects as of superior importance to it, must we not look upon them as undoubtedly blind to their true interests ?" 2 Polybius' glorification of an honourable peace may again be compared with the deliverance of his predecessor, Thucydides. Thus Hermocrates, the Syracusan, addressing the congress of Sicilian States, 424 B. C., urges them, in a speech marked by persuasive eloquence and political wisdom, to make peace amongst themselves, as 1Thục. i. So. 2 Polyb. iv. 74: ... οὐκ ὀρθῶς κατά γε τὴν ἐμὴν περὶ τοῦ μέλ λοντος ποιούμενοι πρόνοιαν· εἰ γάρ, ἧς πάντες εὐχόμεθα τοῖς θεοῖς τυχεῖν, καὶ πᾶν ὑπομένομεν ἱμείροντες αὐτῆς μετασχεῖν, καὶ μόνον τοῦτο τῶν νομιζομένων ἀγαθῶν ἀναμφισβήτητόν ἐστι παρ' ἀνθρώποις, λέγω δὴ τὴν εἰρήνην, ταύτην δυνάμενοί τινες μετὰ τοῦ δικαίου καὶ καθήκοντος παρὰ τῶν Ἑλλήνων εἰς πάντα τὸν χρόνον ἀδήριτον κτᾶσθαι παρολιγωροῦσιν ἢ προυργιαίτερόν τι ποιοῦνται τούτου, πῶς οὐκ ἂν ὁμολογουμένως ἀγνοεῖν δόξαιεν ; the only means of keeping the Athenians out of Sicily. "And why," asked he, "if peace is acknowledged by all to be the greatest of blessings, should we not make peace among ourselves? Whatever good or evil is the portion of any of us, is not peace more likely than war to preserve the one and alleviate the other? And has not peace honours and glories of her own unattended by the dangers of war?"1 Euripides likewise makes Cassandra say how incon- Other appeals sistent with wisdom is the prosecution of war: φεύγειν μὲν οὖν χρὴ πόλεμον, ὅστις εὖ φρονεῖ· εἰ δ ̓ ἐς τόδ' ἔλθοι, στέφανος οὐκ αἰσχρὸς πόλει (It behoves him therefore, whosoever is wise, to avoid war ; but Once more, Polybius relates that the Rhodian legate, in his plea for union in Greece urged before an assembly of Aetolians at Heraclea, 207 B.C., argued thus: "For if you were carrying on a war which, though profitlessand most wars are that was yet glorious from the motive which prompted it, and the reputation likely to accrue from it, you might be pardoned perhaps for a fixed determination to continue it; but if it is a war of the most signal infamy, which can bring you nothing but discredit and obloquy,-does not such an undertaking claim considerable hesitation on your part 3 1 Thuc. iv. 62 : τὴν δὲ ὑπὸ πάντων ὁμολογουμένην ἄριστον εἶναι εἰρήνην πῶς οὐ χρὴ καὶ ἐν ἡμῖν αὐτοῖς ποιήσασθαι; ἢ δοκεῖτε, εἴ τῷ τι ἔστιν ἀγαθὸν ἢ εἴ τῳ τὰ ἐναντία, οὐκ ἡσυχία μᾶλλον ἢ πόλεμος τὸ μὲν παύσαι ἂν ἑκατέρῳ τὸ δὲ ξυνδιασώσαι, καὶ τὰς τιμὰς καὶ λαμπρότητας ἀκινδυνοτέρας ἔχειν τὴν εἰρήνην, ἄλλα τε ὅσα ἐν μήκει λόγων ἄν τις διέλθοι ὥσπερ περὶ τοῦ πολεμεῖν ; 2 Troad. 400-402. 3 Polyb. xi. 4 : καὶ γὰρ εἰ κατά τινα τύχην ἐπολεμεῖτε πόλεμον ἀλυσιτελῆ μέν, ἐπειδὴ παντὶ πολέμῳ τοῦτο παρέπεται κατὰ τὸ πλεῖστον, ἔνδοξον δὲ καὶ κατὰ τὴν ἐξ ἀρχῆς ὑπόθεσιν καὶ κατὰ τὴν τῶν ἀποβαινόντων ἐπιγραφήν, ἴσως ἄν τις ὑμῖν ἔσχε συγγνώμην φιλοτίμως διακειμένοις. εἰ δὲ πάντων αἴσχιστον καὶ πολλῆς ἀδοξίας πλήρη καὶ βλασφημίας, ἆρ ̓ οὐ μεγάλης προσδεῖται τὰ πράγματα ἐπιστάσεως ; for peace. of war not rare in Rome. And similar sentiments are expressed by Xenophon as to peace being in the estimation of mankind the greatest good.1 Denunciations As in the case of Greek writers, so amongst the Romans we not infrequently find denunciations of war, and the insistence of the superiority of peace to war. Thus Silius Italicus emphasizes that peace is the best of all things given to mankind, and that one peace is better than innumerable triumphs— Justice claimed for wars. "Pax optima rerum quas homini novisse datum est; pax una triumphis And so Sallust says that the wise wage war for the sake of others. Now if, judging from the warlike activity of the Greek and Roman peoples, they do not appear to have invariably preferred peace to war, nor to have always adopted the wise counsel of statesmen and philosophers, they, at all events, usually claimed justice for their wars, and were, if necessary, prepared to demonstrate that their proceedings were legitimate, and in accordance with accepted principles and general opinion, in obedience to Hellenic law, the vouμa 'EXλývwv, or the law of nations, the ius gentium, as the case may be. And so we find that the Greeks first, then the Romans-more particularly the latter with their specialized fetial law-did much towards regularizing and humanizing the conduct of hostilities, that they redeemed the arbitrament of the sword from the customary excesses and brutalities, from the blood-thirsty rapacity of the oriental and other nations, whether predecessors or contemporaries, and 1 Xenoph. Hieron. ii. 7: αὐτίκα γὰρ εἰ μὲν εἰρήνη δοκεῖ μέγα ἀγαθὸν τοῖς ἀνθρώποις εἶναι, ταύτης ἐλάχιστον τοῖς τυράννοις μέτεστιν· εἰ δὲ πόλεμος μέγα κακὸν, τούτου πλεῖστον μέρος οἱ τύραννοι μετέχουσιν. that they laid the solid foundations of an international law of war. war. The most important matters comprised in this law of Chief matters war relate to the recognition of certain valid grounds for in the law of commencing hostilities; to the declaration of war, and the necessary formal preliminaries; various relaxations, including the granting of safe-conducts, the right of asylum, and the claims of suppliants; the right of the conqueror, and the occupation of enemy territory, and seizure of booty; the protection of temples, graves, and sacred objects generally; the inviolability of certain individuals; the burial of the dead; the conclusion of truces and armistices; prisoners of war, their ransom and exchange; spies; hostages; elements of neutralization and neutrality; contraband; in maritime war, questions of commercial intercourse, blockade, embargo; and, finally, the formal and solemn conclusion of peace. It is by no means asserted or implied that in regard to all these questions an elaborate scientific code was in operation, or even in existence. But, it were no less than blind unreason and obstinate prejudice to condemn the rules that prevailed because, as a body, they were inferior to the systematized structure of provisions of modern States. Now we may proceed to consider the various grounds Grounds for for war. war. to the bellum. Even in the heroic epoch in Greece, no war was Regular undertaken without the belligerents' alleging a definite preliminaries cause considered by them as a valid and sufficient war a iustum justification therefor, and without their previously demanding reparation for injuries done or claims unsatisfied. The Romans invariably took scrupulous precautions to make sure that any particular war they were about to undertake was a 'just war,' a iustum bellum. Iustum is here understood in the sense of the war being commenced and prosecuted in accordance with the necessary formalities required by the positive |