28 Law and Morality Abroad (to ca. ad 1550)War (of 431– 404 bc) between Athens and Sparta, related a famous instance
in which considerations of law or justice played no part. Th is occurred in
416/15 bc, when Athens refused to respect the wishes of the inhabitants of
the island of Melos, originally a Spartan colony, to remain neutral. Th e pleas
of the Melians were brushed aside by the Athenian military commanders,
who asserted the existence of “a general and necessary law of nature to rule
what ever one can.” Th ey warned that following “the path of justice and
honor” was likely to prejudice the higher goals of self- interest and security.
Th e warning was no idle one. When the Melians declined to join the Athe-
nian side, they were immediately attacked. Th is “Melian Dialogue” (as it is
commonly known) has become one of the canonical texts of the realist
school of international relations— and of skeptics of international law in
general.
It should be appreciated, though, that this same historian also provided
some instructive illustrations of legal considerations playing a part in war-
fare. One of these concerned an attack by Th ebes against Plataea in 427 bc,
in which Sparta assisted Th ebes in achieving victory. Th e defeated Plataeans
immediately appealed to the better nature of the victors, urging them not
“to take as your standards of justice your own immediate advantage.” In-
stead, the Spartans should “[judge] sincerely between right and wrong”—
meaning that they should acknowledge that the Th eban attack had been an
act of unjustifi able aggression. Th e Plataeans maintained that their own con-
duct had been consistent with “the general law that one is always justifi ed in
resisting an aggressor.” Th ey further warned the Spartans to “beware lest pub-
lic opinion” condemn them for treating the Plataeans unjustly. Th e Th ebans
countered by asserting that they had been invited to intervene by a faction in
Plataea. It is of interest that the Th ebans conceded that, on its face, their action
did appear to be unjust— and that there was even “a certain justice” in the
Plataean attacks on them aft er the intervention.
Th ucydides relates another interesting incident in which mutual accusa-
tions of war crimes were leveled, this time between Th ebes and Athens fol-
lowing Th ebes’s victory at the Battle of Oropus in 424/23 bc. Th e Th ebans
accused the Athenians of having occupied and fortifi ed a temple, contrary
to the customary rule of inviolability of temples in war. In addition, the
Athenians were accused of having used water for everyday use that should
have been reserved for religious usage only. Th e Athenians’ defense was to