[3] On the word {kalokagathia} so translated, see Demosth. 777, 5.
Whilst he would not suffer any image[4] of his bodily form to be set up (though many wished to present him with a statue), he never ceased elaborating what should prove the monument of his spirit, holding that the former is the business of a statuary, the latter of one's self. Wealth might procure the one, he said, but only a good man could produce the other.
[4] See Plut. 'Ages.' ii. (Clough, iv. p. 2); also Plut. 'Ap. Lac.' p. 115; ib. p. 103; Cic. 'ad Div.' V. xii. 7.
As for riches, he employed them not with justice merely, but with liberality, holding that for a just man it is sufficient if he let alone the things of others, but of a liberal man it is required that he should take of his own and give to supply another's needs.
He was ever subject to religious fear,[5] believing that no man during his lifetime, however well he lives, can be counted happy; it is only he who has ended his days with glory of whom it can be said that he has attained at last to blessedness.[6]
[5] See 'Cyr.' III. iii. 58, and for the word {deisidaimon}, see Jebb, 'Theophr. Char.' p. 263 foll.; Mr. Ruskin, Preface to 'Bibl. Past.' vol. i. p. xxv.
[6] See Herod. i. 34; Soph. 'Oed. Tyr.' 1529; and Prof. Jebb's note ad loc.
In his judgment it was a greater misfortune to neglect things good and virtuous, knowing them to be so, than in ignorance. Nor was he enamoured of any reputation, the essentials of which he had not laboriously achieved.[7]
[7] Or, 'for which he did not qualify himself by the appropriate labour.'
He was one of the small band, as it seemed to me, who regard virtue, not as a thing to be patiently endured, [8] but as a supreme enjoyment. At any rate, to win the praise of mankind gave him a deeper pleasure than the acquisition of wealth; and he preferred to display courage far rather in conjunction with prudence than with unnecessary risks, and to cultivate wisdom in action more than by verbal discussion.
[8] Or, 'as a system of stoical endurance,' 'a kind of stoicism.' But we must not let Xenophon, who is a Socratic, talk of the Stoa. If we knew certainly that the chapter was a much later production, the language would be appropriate enough.
Very gentle to his friends, to his enemies he was most terrible. Whilst he could hold out against toil and trouble with the best, nothing pleased him better than yielding to his comrades. But passion was kindled in him by beauty of deed rather than of person.[9]
[9] Or, 'beauteous deeds rather than bodily splendour.'
Skilled in the exercise of self-command in the midst of external welfare, he could be stout of heart enough in stress of danger.
Urbanity he practised, not with jest and witticisim, but by the courtesy of his demeanour.
In spite of a certain haughtiness, he was never overbearing, but rich in saving common sense. At any rate, while pouring contempt upon arrogance, he bore himself more humbly than the most ordinary man. In fact, what he truly took a pride in was the simplicity of his own attire, in contrast with the splendid adornment of his troops; or, again, in the paucity of his own wants, combined with a bountiful liberality towards his friends.
Besides all this, as an antagonist he could hit hard enough, but no one ever bore a lighter hand when the victory was won.[10]
[10] Lit. 'he was the heaviest of antagonists and the lightest of conquerors.'
The same man, whom an enemy would have found it hard to deceive, was pliability itself in the concerns of his friends. Whilst for ever occupied in laying these on a secure foundation, he made it a ceaseless task to baffle the projects of the national foe.
The epithets applied to him are significant. His relatives found in him a kinsman who was more than kind. To his intimates he appeared as a friend in need who is a friend indeed. To the man who had done him some service, of tenacious memory. To the victim of injustice, a knight-errant. And to those who had incurred danger by his side, a saviour second only to the gods.
It was given to this man, as it appears to me, to prove exceptionally that though strength of body may wax old the vigour of a man's soul is exempt from eld. Of him, at any rate, it is true that he never shrank from the pursuit of great and noble objects, so long as[11] his body was able to support the vigour of his soul. Therefore his old age appeared mightier than the youth of other people. It would be hard to discover, I imagine, any one who in the prime of manhood was as formidable to his foes as Agesilaus when he had reached the limit of mortal life. Never, I suppose, was there a foeman whose removal came with a greater sense of relief to the enemy than that of Agesilaus, though a veteran when he died. Never was there a leader who inspired stouter courage in the hearts of fellow-combatants than this man with one foot planted in the grave. Never was a young man snatched from a circle of loving friends with tenderer regret than this old graybeard.
[11] Reading, {megalon kai kalon ephiemenos, eos kai to soma, k.t.l.} See Breitenbach.
The benefactor of his fatherland, absolutely to the very end; with bounteous hand, even in the arms of death, dealing out largesse[12] to the city which he loved. And so they bore him home to his eternal resting-place;[13] this hero, who, having raised to himself many a monument of his valour over the broad earth, came back to find in the land of his fathers a sepulture worthy of a king.[14]
[12] See above, ii. 31.
[13] See for this remarkable phrase, Diod. i. 51.
[14] See 'Pol. Lac.' xv. 9.
