seems to them to have won a great victory.[16]
[10] Lit. 'and further, wars there are, waged against forcibly- subjected populations whether by free states'-- e.g. of Olynthus, 'Hell.' V. ii. 23, or Athens against her 'subject allies' during the Pel. war--'or by despotic rules'-- Jason of Pherae ('Hell.' VI.) Al. 'wars waged by free states against free states, and wars waged by tyrants against enslaved peoples.'
[11] Does {o en tais polesi} = 'the citizen'? So some commentators; or (sub. {polemos}) = 'the war among states' (see Hartman, op. cit. p. 248)? in which case transl. 'all the hardships involved in international war come home to the tyrant also.' The same obscurity attaches to {oi en tais polesi} below (the commonly adopted emend. of the MS. {oi sunontes polesi} = 'the citizens,' or else = 'international wars.'
[12] 'The pleasures incidental to warfare between states'; al. 'the sweets which citizens engaged in warfare as against rival states can count upon.'
[13] Reading {analambanousin}, or, if after Cobet, etc., {lambanousin}, transl. 'what brilliant honour, what bright credit they assume.'
[14] 'To have played his part in counsel.' See 'Anab.' passim, and M. Taine, 'Essais de Critique,' 'Xenophon,' p. 128.
[15] Lit. 'they do not indulge in false additions, pretending to have put more enemies to death than actually fell.'
[16] Cf. 'Hipparch,' viii. 11; 'Cyrop.' VIII. iii. 25; 'Thuc.' i. 49.
But the tyrant, when he forebodes, or possibly perceives in actual fact, some opposition brewing, and puts the suspects[17] to the sword, knows he will not thereby promote the welfare of the state collectively. The cold clear fact is, he will have fewer subjects to rule over.[18] How can he show a cheerful countenance?[19] how magnify himself on his achievement? On the contrary, his desire is to lessen the proportions of what has taken place, as far as may be. He will apologise for what he does, even in the doing of it, letting it appear that what he has wrought at least was innocent;[20] so little does his conduct seem noble even to himself. And when those he dreaded are safely in their graves, he is not one whit more confident of spirit, but still more on his guard than heretofore. That is the kind of war with which the tyrant is beset from day to day continually, as I do prove.[21]
[17] See Hold. (crit. app.); Hartman, op. cit. p. 260.
[18] Cf. 'Mem.' I. ii. 38.
[19] Cf. 'Anab.' II. vi. 11; 'Hell.' VI. iv. 16.
[20] 'Not of malice prepense.'
[21] Or, 'Such then, as I describe it, is the type of war,' etc.
III
Turn now and contemplate the sort of friendship whereof it is given to tyrants to partake. And first, let us examine with ourselves and see if friendship is truly a great boon to mortal man.
How fares it with the man who is beloved of friends? See with what gladness his friends and lovers hail his advent! delight to do him kindness! long for him when he is absent from them![1] and welcome him most gladly on his return![2] In any good which shall betide him they rejoice together; or if they see him overtaken by misfortune, they rush to his assistance as one man.[3]
[1] Reading {an ate}, or if {an apie}, transl. 'have yearning hearts when he must leave them.'
[2] See Anton Rubinstein, 'Die Musik and ihre Meister,' p. 8, 'Some Remarks on Beethoven's Sonata Op. 81.'
[3] Cf. 'Cyrop.' I. vi. 24 for a repetition of the sentiment and phraseology.
Nay! it has not escaped the observation of states and governments that friendship is the greatest boon, the sweetest happiness which men may taste. At any rate, the custom holds[4] in many states 'to slay the adulterer' alone of all 'with impunity,'[5] for this reason clearly that such miscreants are held to be destroyers of that friendship[6] which binds the woman to the husband. Since where by some untoward chance a woman suffers violation of her chastity,[7] husbands do not the less honour them, as far as that goes, provided true affection still appear unsullied.[8]
[4] Lit. 'many of the states have a law and custom to,' etc. Cf. 'Pol. Lac.' ii. 4.
[5] Cf. Plat. 'Laws,' 874 C, 'if a man find his wife suffering violence he may kill the violator and be guiltless in the eye of the law.' Dem. 'in Aristocr.' 53, {ean tis apokteine en athlois akon . . . e epi damarti, k.t.l. . . . touton eneka me pheugein kteinanta}.
[6] See Lys. 'de caed Eratosth.' S. 32 f., {outos, o andres, tous biazomenous elattonos zemias axious egesato einai e tous peithontas . ton men gar thanaton kategno, tois de diplen epoiese ten blaben, egoumenos tous men diaprattomenous bia upo ton biasthenton miseisthai, tous de peisantas outos aution tas psukhas diaphtheirein ost' oikeioteras autois poiein tas allotrias gunaikas e tois andrasi kai pasan ep' ekeinois ten oikian gegonenai kai tous paidas adelous einai opoteron tugkhanousin ontes, ton andron e ton moikhon . anth' on o ton nomon titheis thanaton autois epoiese ten zemian}. Cf. 'Cyrop.' III. i. 39; 'Symp.' viii. 20; Plut. 'Sol.' xxiii., {olos de pleisten ekhein atopian oi peri ton gunaikon nomoi to Soloni dokousi. moikhon men gar anelein tio labonti dedoken, ean d' arpase tis eleutheran gunaika kai biasetai zemian ekaton drakhmas etaxe' kan proagogeue drakhmas aikosi, plen osai pephasmenos polountai, legon de tas etairas. autai gar emphanos phoitosi pros tous didontas}, 'Solon's laws in general about women are his strangest, for he permitted any one to kill an adulterer that found him in the act; but if any one forced a free woman, a hundred drachmas was the fine; if he enticed her, twenty;--except those that sell themselves openly, that is, harlots, who go openly to those that hire them' (Clough, i. p. 190).
[7] Or, 'fall a victim to passion through some calamity,' 'commit a breach of chastity.' Cf. Aristot. 'H. A.' VII. i. 9.
[8] Or, 'if true affection still retain its virgin purity.' As to this extraordinary passage, see Hartman, op. cit. p. 242 foll.
So sovereign a good do I, for my part, esteem it to be loved, that I do verily believe spontaneous blessings are outpoured from gods and men on one so favoured.
This is that choice possession which, beyond all others, the monarch is deprived of.
But if you require further evidence that what I say is true, look at the matter thus: No friendship, I presume, is sounder than that which binds parents to their children and children to their parents, brothers and sisters to each other,[9] wives to husbands, comrade to comrade.
[9] Or, 'brothers to brothers.'
If, then, you will but thoughtfully consider it, you will discover it is the ordinary person who is chiefly blest in these relations.[10] While of tyrants, many have been murderers of their own children, many by their children murdered. Many brothers have been murderers of one another in contest for the crown;[11] many a monarch has been done to death by the wife of his bosom,[12] or even by his own familiar friend, by him of whose affection he was proudest.[13]
[10] Or, 'that these more obvious affections are the sanctities of private life.'
[11] Or, 'have caught at the throats of brothers'; lit. 'been slain with mutually-murderous hand.' Cf. Pind. Fr. 137; Aesch. 'Sept. c. Theb.' 931; 'Ag.' 1575, concerning Eteocles and Polynices.
[12] See Grote, 'H. G.' xi. 288, xii. 6; 'Hell.' VI. iv. 36; Isocr. 'On the Peace,' 182; Plut. 'Dem. Pol.' iii. (Clough, v. p. 98); Tac. 'Hist.' v. 8, about the family feuds of the kings of Judaea.
[13] 'It was his own familiar friend who dealt the blow, the nearest and dearest to his heart.'
How can you suppose, then, that being so hated by those whom nature predisposes and law compels to love him, the tyrant should be loved by any living soul beside?
IV
Again, without some moiety of faith and trust,[1] how can a man not feel to be defrauded of a mighty blessing? One may well ask: What fellowship, what converse, what society would be agreeable without confidence? What intercourse between man and wife be sweet apart from trustfulness? How should the 'faithful esquire' whose faith is mistrusted still be lief and dear?[2]
[1] 'How can he, whose faith's discredited, the moral bankrupt . . .'
[2] Or, 'the trusty knight and serving-man.' Cf. 'Morte d'Arthur,' xxi. 5, King Arthur and Sir Bedivere.
Well, then, of this frank confidence in others the tyrant has the scantiest share.[3] Seeing his life is such, he cannot even trust his meats and drinks, but he must bid his serving-men before the feast begins, or ever the libation
