The Origin, Tendencies and Principles of Government / A review of the rise and fall of nations from early historic time to the present; with special considerations regarding the future of the United States as the representative government of the world and the form of administration which will secure this consummation. Also, papers on human equality, as represented by labor and its representative, money; and the meaning and significance of life from a scientific standpoint, with its prophecies for the great future.

by Victoria C. Woodhull

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.