THE　COMPARISON　OF　ALCIBIADES　WITH　CORIOLANUS
  by　Plutarch
  translated　by　John　Dryden
  HAVING　described　all　their　actions　that　seem　to　deserve
  commemoration；　their　military　ones；　we　may　say；　incline　the　balance
  very　decidedly　upon　neither　side。　They　both；　in　pretty　equal
  measure；　displayed　on　numerous　occasions　the　daring　and　courage　of　the
  soldier；　and　the　skill　and　foresight　of　the　general；　unless；　indeed；
  the　fact　that　Alcibiades　was　victorious　and　successful　in　many
  contests　both　by　sea　and　land；　ought　to　gain　him　the　title　of　a　more
  complete　commander。　That　so　long　as　they　remained　and　held　command
  in　their　respective　countries　they　eminently　sustained；　and　when
  they　were　driven　into　exile　yet　more　eminently　damaged；　the　fortunes
  of　those　countries；　is　common　to　both。　All　the　sober　citizens　felt
  disgust　at　the　petulance；　the　low　flattery；　and　base　seductions
  which　Alcibiades；　in　his　public　life；　allowed　himself　to　employ　with
  the　view　of　winning　the　people's　favour；　and　the　ungraciousness；
  pride；　and　oligarchical　haughtiness　which　Marcius；　on　the　other
  hand；　displayed　in　his；　were　the　abhorrence　of　the　Roman　populace。
  Neither　of　these　courses　can　be　called　commendable；　but　a　man　who
  ingratiates　himself　by　indulgence　and　flattery　is　hardly　so　censurable
  as　one　who；　to　avoid　the　appearance　of　flattering；　insults。　To　seek
  power　by　servility　to　the　people　is　a　disgrace；　but　to　maintain　it
  by　terror；　violence；　and　oppression　is　not　a　disgrace　only；　but　an
  injustice。
  Marcius；　according　to　our　common　conceptions　of　his　character；　was
  undoubtedly　simple　and　straightforward；　Alcibiades；　unscrupulous　as
  a　public　man；　and　false。　He　is　more　especially　blamed　for　the
  dishonourable　and　treacherous　way　in　which；　as　Thucydides　relates；
  he　imposed　upon　the　Lacedaemonian　ambassadors；　and　disturbed　the
  continuance　of　the　peace。　Yet　this　policy；　which　engaged　the　city
  again　in　war；　nevertheless　placed　it　in　a　powerful　and　formidable
  position；　by　the　accession；　which　Alcibiades　obtained　for　it；　of　the
  alliance　of　Argos　and　Mantinea。　And　Coriolanus　also；　Dionysius
  relates；　used　unfair　means　to　excite　war　between　the　Romans　and　the
  Volscians；　in　the　false　report　which　he　spread　about　the　visitors　at
  the　Games；　and　the　motive　of　this　action　seems　to　make　it　the　worse　of
  the　two；　since　it　was　not　done；　like　the　other；　out　of　ordinary
  political　jealousy；　strife；　and　competition。　Simply　to　gratify　anger
  from　which；　as　Ion　says；　no　one　ever　yet　got　any　return；　he　threw
  whole　districts　of　Italy　into　confusion；　and　sacrificed　to　his　passion
  against　his　country　numerous　innocent　cities。　It　is　true；　indeed；　that
  Alcibiades　also；　by　his　resentment；　was　the　occasion　of　great
  disasters　to　his　country；　but　he　relented　as　soon　as　he　found　their
  feelings　to　be　changed；　and　after　he　was　driven　out　a　second　time；
  so　far　from　taking　pleasure　in　the　errors　and　inadvertencies　of
  their　commanders；　or　being　indifferent　to　the　danger　they　were　thus
  incurring；　he　did　the　very　thing　that　Aristides　is　so　highly　commended
  for　doing　to　Themistocles；　he　came　to　the　generals　who　were　his
  enemies；　and　pointed　out　to　them　what　they　ought　to　do。　Coriolanus；　on
  the　other　hand；　first　of　all　attacked　the　whole　body　of　his
  countrymen；　though　only　one　portion　of　them　had　done　him　any　wrong；
  while　the　other；　the　better　and　nobler　portion；　had　actually　suffered；
  as　well　as　sympathized；　with　him。　And；　secondly；　by　the　obduracy
  with　which　he　resisted　numerous　embassies　and　supplications；　addressed
  in　propitiation　of　his　single　anger　and　offence；　he　showed　that　it　had
  been　to　destroy　and　overthrow；　not　to　recover　and　regain　his
  country；　that　he　had　excited　bitter　and　implacable　hostilities　against
  it。　There　is；　indeed；　one　distinction　that　may　be　drawn。　Alcibiades；
  it　may　be　said；　was　not　safe　among　the　Spartans；　and　had　the
  inducements　at　once　of　fear　and　of　hatred　to　lead　him　again　to　Athens；
  whereas　Marcius　could　not　honourably　have　left　the　Volscians；　when
  they　were　behaving　so　well　to　him：　he；　in　the　command　of　their
  forces　and　the　enjoyment　of　their　entire　confidence；　was　in　a　very
  different　position　from　Alcibiades；　whom　the　Lacedaemonians　did　not　so
  much　wish　to　adopt　into　their　service；　as　to　use　and　then　abandon。
  Driven　about　from　house　to　house　in　the　city；　and　from　general　to
  general　in　the　camp；　the　latter　had　no　resort　but　to　place　himself
  in　the　hands　of　Tisaphernes；　unless；　indeed；　we　are　to　suppose　that
  his　object　in　courting　favour　with　him　was　to　avert　the　entire
  destruction　of　his　native　city；　whither　he　wished　himself　to　return。
  As　regards　money；　Alcibiades；　we　are　told；　was　often　guilty　of
  procuring　it　by　accepting　bribes；　and　spent　it　ill　in　luxury　and
  dissipation。　Coriolanus　declined　to　receive　it；　even　when　pressed　upon
  him　by　his　commanders　as　an　honour；　and　one　great　reason　for　the　odium
  he　incurred　with　the　populace　in　the　discussions　about　their　debts
  was；　that　he　trampled　upon　the　poor；　not　for　money's　sake；　but　out
  of　pride　and　insolence。
  Antipater；　in　a　letter　written　upon　the　death　of　Aristotle　the
  philosopher；　observes；　〃Amongst　his　other　gifts　he　had　that　of
  persuasiveness；〃　and　the　absence　of　this　in　the　character　of　Marcius
  made　all　his　great　actions　and　noble　qualities　unacceptable　to　those
  whom　they　benefited：　pride；　and　self…will；　the　consort；　as　Plato　calls
  it；　of　solitude；　made　him　insufferable。　With　the　skill　which
  Alcibiades；　on　the　contrary；　possessed　to　treat　every　one　in　the　way
  most　agreeable　to　him；　we　cannot　wonder　that　all　his　successes　were
  attended　with　the　most　exuberant　favour　and　honour；　his　very　errors；
  at　times；　being　accompanied　by　something　of　grace　and　felicity。　And　so
  in　spite　of　great　and　frequent　hurt　that　he　had　done　the　city；　he
  was　repeatedly　appointed　to　office　and　command；　while　Coriolanus　stood
  in　vain　for　a　place　which　his　great　services　had　made　his　due。　The
  one；　in　spite　of　the　harm　he　occasioned；　could　not　make　himself　hated；
  nor　the　other；　with　all　the　admiration　he　attracted；　succeeded　in
  being　beloved　by　his　countrymen。
  Coriolanus；　moreover；　it　should　be　said；　did　not　as　a　general　obtain
  any　successes　for　his　country；　but　only　for　his　enemies　against　his
  country。　Alcibiades　was　often　of　service　to　Athens；　both　as　a
  soldier　and　as　a　commander。　So　long　as　he　was　personally　present；　he
  had　the　perfect　mastery　of　his　political　adversaries；　calumny　only
  succeeded　in　his　absence。　Coriolanus　was　condemned　in　person　at
  Rome；　and　in　like　manner　killed　by　the　Volscians；　not　indeed　with
  any　right　or　justice；　yet　not　without　some　pretext　occasioned　by　his
  own　acts；　since；　after　rejecting　all　conditions　of　peace　in　public；　in
  private　he　yielded　to　the　solicitations　of　the　women　and；　without
  establishing　peace；　threw　up　the　favourable　chances　of　war。　He
  ought；　before　retiring；　to　have　obtained　the　consent　of　those　who
  had　placed　their　trust　in　him；　if　indeed　he　considered　their　claims　on
  him　to　be　the　strongest。　Or；　if　we　say　that　he　did　not　care　about
  the　Volscians；　but　merely　had　prosecuted　the　war；　which　he　now
  abandoned；　for　the　satisfaction　of　his　own　resentment；　then　the
  noble　thing　would　have　been；　not　to　spare　his　country　for　his　mother's
  sake；　but　his　mother　in　and　with　his　country；　since　both　his　mother
  and　his　wife　were　part　and　parcel　of　that　endangered　country。　After
  harshly　repelling　public　supplications；　the　entreaties　of　ambassadors；
  and　the　prayers　of　priests；　to　concede　all　as　a　private　favour　to
  his　mother　was　less　an　honour　to　her　than　a　dishonour　to　the　city
  which　thus　escaped；　in　spite；　it　would　seem；　of　its　own　demerits
  through　the　intercession　of　a　single　woman。　Such　a　grace　could；
  indeed；　seem　merely　invidious；　ungracious；　and　unreasonable　in　the
  eyes　of　both　parties；　he　retreated　without　listening　to　the
  persuasions　of　his　opponents　or　asking　the　consent　of　his　friends。　The
  origin　of　all　lay　in　his　unsociable；　supercilious；　and　self…willed
  disposition；　which；　in　all　cases；　is　offensive　to　most　people；　and
  when　combined　with　a　passion　for　distinction　passes　into　absolute
  savageness　and　mercilessness。　Men　decline　to　ask　favours　of　the
  people；　professing　not　to　need　any　honours　from　them；　and　then　are
  indignant　if　they　do　not　obtain　them。　Metellus；　Aristides；　and
  Epaminondas　certainly　did　not　beg　favours　of　the　multitude；　but　that
  was　because　they；　in　real　truth；　did　not　value　the　gifts　which　a
  popular　body　can　either　confer　or　refuse；　and　when　they　were　more　than
  once　driven　into　exile；　rejected　at　elections；　and　condemned　in　courts
  of　justice；　they　showed　no　resentment　at　the　ill…humour　of　their
  fellow…citizens；　but　were　willing　and　contented　to　return　and　be
  reconciled　when　the　feeling　altered　and　they　were　wished　for。　He　who
  least　likes　courting　favour；　ought　also　least　to　think　of　resenting
  neglect；　to　feel　wounded　at　being　refused　a　distinction　can　only　arise
  from　an　overweening　appetite　to　have　it。
  Alcibiades　never　professed　to　deny　that　it　was　pleasant　to　him　to　be
  honoured；　and　distasteful　to　him　to　be　overlooked；　and；　accordingly；
  he　always　tried　to　place　himself　upon　good