[1] And now since we have completed this Life also, let us come at once to the Comparison. In this respect, then, they were alike, namely, that both were founders of their own greatness; but it was a peculiar virtue in Lysander that he obtained all his high offices with the consent of his fellow-citizens, and when affairs were in a sound condition; he did not force anything from them against their will, nor did he acquire any power which was contrary to the laws.
[2]
1
and so in Rome at that time, since the people was corrupt and their government in a distempered state, men of various origin rose to power. And it was no wonder that Sulla held sway, when such men as Glaucia and Saturninus drove such men as Metellus from the city, when sons of consuls were butchered in assemblies, when silver and gold purchased arms and men to wield them, and laws were enacted with fire and sword in defiance of all opposition.
But in a time of sedition, the base man too is in honour,
[3] Now I do not blame the man who, in such a state of affairs, forced his way to supreme power; but I cannot regard his becoming first man, when the city was in such an evil plight, as a proof that he was also the best man. Whereas Lysander, since Sparta was at the height of good government and sobriety when she sent him forth upon the greatest commands and undertakings, was virtually decided to be first of her first men, and best of her best.
[4] Lysander, therefore, though he often surrendered his power into the hands of his fellow-citizens, as often received it back again, since the honour accorded to virtue continued to rank highest in the state; but Sulla, when he had once been chosen leader of an army, remained in arms for ten years together, making himself now consul, and now dictator, but always being a usurper.
Comparison of Lysander and Sulla. Plutarch. Bernadotte Perrin (Translator). Cambridge, MA. 1916.
Sponsored by Perseus Project, Tufts University.
Funding provided by Tufts University.