The CDPD Public Domain Collection for CDTV 3/CDPDIII.bin/books/plutarch/fabius&pericles

Text File | 1992-07-31 | 6KB | 95 lines

                                      75 AD
                     THE COMPARISON OF FABIUS WITH PERICLES
                                  by Plutarch
                           translated by John Dryden

  WE have here had two lives rich in examples, both of civil and
military excellence. Let us first compare the two men in their warlike
capacity. Pericles presided in his commonwealth when it was in its
most flourishing and opulent condition, great and growing in power; so
that it may be thought it was rather the common success and fortune
that kept him from any fall or disaster. But the task of Fabius, who
undertook the government in the worst and most difficult times, was
not to preserve and maintain the well-established felicity of a
prosperous state, but to raise and uphold a sinking and ruinous
commonwealth. Besides, the victories of Cimon, the trophies of
Myronides and Leocrates, with the many famous exploits of Tolmides,
were employed by Pericles rather to fill the city with festive
entertainments and solemnities than to enlarge and secure its
empire. Whereas, Fabius, when he took upon him the government, had the
frightful object before his eyes of Roman armies destroyed, of their
generals and consuls slain, of lakes and plains and forests strewed
with the dead bodies, and rivers stained with the blood of his
fellow-citizens; and yet, with his mature and solid counsels, with the
firmness of his resolution, he, as it were, put his shoulder to the
falling commonwealth, and kept it up from foundering through the
failings and weaknesses of others. Perhaps it may be more easy to
govern a city broken and tamed with calamities and adversity, and
compelled by danger and necessity to listen to wisdom, than to set a
bridle on wantonness and temerity, and rule a people pampered and
restive with long prosperity as were the Athenians when Pericles
held the reins of government. But then again, not to be daunted nor
discomposed with the vast heap of calamities under which the people of
Rome at that time groaned and succumbed, argues a courage in Fabius
and a strength of purpose more than ordinary.
  We may set Tarentum retaken against Samos won by Pericles, and the
conquest of Euboea we may well balance with the towns of Campania;
though Capua itself was reduced by the consuls Fulvius and Appius. I
do not find that Fabius won any set battle but that against the
Ligurians, for which he had his triumph; whereas Pericles erected nine
trophies for as many victories obtained by land and by sea. But no
action of Pericles can be compared to that memorable rescue of
Minucius, when Fabius redeemed both him and his army from utter
destruction; a noble act combining the highest valour, wisdom, and
humanity. On the other side, it does not appear that Pericles was ever
so overreached as Fabius was by Hannibal with his flaming oxen. His
enemy there had, without his agency, put himself accidentally into his
power, yet Fabius let him slip in the night, and, when day came, was
worsted by him, was anticipated in the moment of success, and mastered
by his prisoner. If it is the part of a good general, not only to
provide for the present, but also to have a clear foresight of
things to come, in this point Pericles is the superior; for he
admonished the Athenians, and told them beforehand the ruin the war
would bring upon them, by their grasping more than they were able to
manage. But Fabius was not so good a prophet, when he denounced to the
Romans that the undertaking of Scipio would be the destruction of
the commonwealth. So that Pericles was a good prophet of bad
success, and Fabius was a bad prophet of success that was good. And,
indeed, to lose an advantage through diffidence is no less blamable in
a general than to fall into danger for want of foresight; for both
these faults, though of a contrary nature, spring from the same
root, want of judgment and experience.
  As for their civil policy, it is imputed to Pericles that he
occasioned the war, since no terms of peace, offered by the
Lacedaemonians, would content him. It is true, I presume, that Fabius,
also, was not for yielding any point to the Carthaginians, but was
ready to hazard all, rather than lessen the empire of Rome. The
mildness of Fabius towards his colleague Minucius does, by way of
comparison, rebuke and condemn the exertions of Pericles to banish
Cimon and Thucydides, noble, aristocratic men, who by his means
suffered ostracism. The authority of Pericles in Athens was much
greater than that of Fabius in Rome. Hence it was more easy for him to
prevent miscarriages arising from the mistakes and insufficiency of
other officers; only Tolmides broke loose from him, and, contrary to
his persuasions, unadvisedly fought with the Boeotians, and was slain.
The greatness of his influence made all others submit and conform
themselves to his judgment. Whereas Fabius, sure and unerring himself,
for want of that general power, had not the means to obviate the
miscarriages of others; but it had been happy for the Romans if his
authority had been greater, for so, we may presume, their disasters
had been fewer.
  As to liberality and public spirit, Pericles was eminent in never
taking any gifts, and Fabius, for giving his own money to ransom his
soldiers, though the sum did not exceed six talents. Than Pericles,
meantime, no man had ever greater opportunities to enrich himself,
having had presents offered him from so many kings and princes and
allies, yet no man was ever more free from corruption. And for the
beauty and magnificence of temples and public edifices with which he
adorned his country, it must be confessed, that all the ornaments
and structures of Rome, to the time of the Caesars, had nothing to
compare, either in greatness of design or of expense, with the
lustre of those which Pericles only erected at Athens.


                            THE END