that if he expended so much to win a choric victory with a single tribe,[5] he will be ready to expend more to secure a victory in war with the whole state to back him.
[5] See Dem. 'against Lept.' 496. 26. Each tribe nominated such of its members as were qualified to undertake the burden.
Nic. Do you really mean, Socrates, that it is the function of the same man to provide efficient choruses and to act as commander-in-chief?
Soc. I mean this, that, given a man knows what he needs to provide, and has the skill to do so, no matter what the deparment of things may be--house or city or army--you will find him a good chief and director[6] of the same.
[6] Or, 'representative.'
Then Nicomachides: Upon my word, Socrates, I should never have expected to hear you say that a good housekeeper[7] and steward of an estate would make a good general.
[7] Or, 'economist'; cf. 'Cyrop.' I. vi. 12.
Soc. Come then, suppose we examine their respective duties, and so determine[8] whether they are the same or different.
[8] Lit. 'get to know.'
Nic. Let us do so.
Soc. Well then, is it not a common duty of both to procure the ready obedience of those under them to their orders?
Nic. Certainly.
Soc. And also to assign to those best qualified to perform them their distinctive tasks?
That, too, belongs to both alike (he answered).
Soc. Again, to chastise the bad and reward the good belongs to both alike, methinks?
Nic. Decidedly.
Soc. And to win the kindly feeling of their subordinates must surely be the noble ambition of both?
That too (he answered).
Soc. And do you consider it to the interest of both alike to win the adherence of supporters and allies?[9]
[9] In reference to the necessity of building up a family connection or political alliances cf. Arist. 'Pol.' iii. 9, 13.
Nic. Without a doubt.
Soc. And does it not closely concern them both to be good guardians of their respective charges?
Nic. Very much so.
Soc. Then it equally concerns them both to be painstaking and prodigal of toil in all their doings?
Nic. Yes, all these duties belong to both alike, but the parallel ends when you come to actual fighting.
Soc. Yet they are both sure to meet with enemies?
Nic. There is no doubt about that.
Soc. Then is it not to the interest of both to get the upper hand of these?
Nic. Certainly; but you omit to tell us what service organisation and the art of management will render when it comes to actual fighting.
Soc. Why, it is just then, I presume, it will be of most service, for the good economist knows that nothing is so advantageous or so lucrative as victory in battle, or to put it negatively, nothing so disastrous and expensive as defeat. He will enthusiastically seek out and provide everything conducive to victory, he will painstakingly discover and guard against all that tends to defeat, and when satisifed that all is ready and ripe for victory he will deliver battle energetically, and what is equally important, until the hour of final preparation has arrived,[10] he will be cautious to deliver battle. Do not despise men of economic genius, Nicomachides; the difference between the devotion requisite to private affairs and to affairs of state is merely one of quantity. For the rest the parallel holds strictly, and in this respect pre-eminently, that both are concerned with human instruments: which human beings, moreover, are of one type and temperament, whether we speak of devotion to public affairs or of the administration of private property. To fare well in either case is given to those who know the secret of dealing with humanity, whereas the absence of that knowledge will as certainly imply in either case a fatal note of discord.[11]
[10] Lit. 'as long as he is unprepared.'
[11] L. Dindorf, 'Index Graec.' Ox. ed.; cf. Hor. 'Ep.' II. ii. 144, 'sed verae numerosque modosque ediscere vitae,' 'the harmony of life,' Conington.
V
A conversation held with Pericles the son of the great statesman may here be introduced.[1] Socrates began:
[1] Or, 'On one occasion Pericles was the person addressed in conversation.' For Pericles see 'Hell.' I. v. 16; vii. 15; Plut. 'Pericl.' 37 (Clough, i. 368).
I am looking forward, I must tell you, Pericles, to a great improvement in our military affairs when you are minister of war.[2] The prestige of Athens, I hope, will rise; we shall gain the mastery over our enemies.
[2] 'Strategos.'
Pericles replied: I devoutly wish your words might be fulfilled, but how this happy result is to be obtained, I am at a loss to discover.
Shall we (Socrates continued), shall we balance the arguments for and against, and consider to what extent the possibility does exist?
Pray let us do so (he answered).
Soc. Well then, you know that in point of numbers the Athenians are not inferior to the Boeotians?
Per. Yes, I am aware of that.
Soc. And do you think the Boeotians could furnish a better pick of fine healthy men than the Athenians?
Per. I think we should very well hold our own in that respect.
Soc. And which of the two would you take to be the more united people --the friendlier among themselves?
Per. The Athenians, I should say, for so many sections of the Boeotians, resenting the selfish policy[3] of Thebes, are ill disposed to that power, but at Athens I see nothing of the sort.
[3] 'The self-aggrandisement.'
Soc. But perhaps you will say that there is no people more jealous of honour or haughtier in spirit.[4] And these feelings are no weak spurs to quicken even a dull spirit to hazard all for glory's sake and fatherland.
[4] Reading {megalophronestatoi}, after Cobet. See 'Hipparch,' vii. 3; or if as vulg. {philophronestatoi}, transl. 'more affable.'
Per. Nor is there much fault to find with Athenians in these respects.
Soc. And if we turn to consider the fair deeds of ancestry,[5] to no people besides ourselves belongs so rich a heritage of stimulating memories, whereby so many of us are stirred to pursue virtue with devotion and to show ourselves in our turn also men of valour like our sires.
[5] See Wesley's anthem, Eccles. xliv. 1, 'Let us now praise famous men and our fathers that begat us.'
Per. All that you say, Socrates, is most true, but do you observe that ever since the disaster of the thousand under Tolmides at Lebadeia, coupled with that under Hippocrates at Delium,[6] the prestige of Athens by comparison with the Boeotians has been lowered, whilst the spirit of Thebes as against Athens had been correspondingly exalted, so that those Boeotians who in old days did not venture to give battle to the Athenians even in their own territory unless they had the Lacedaemonians and the rest of the Peloponnesians to help them, do nowadays threaten to make an incursion into Attica single-handed; and the Athenians, who formerly, if they had to deal with the Boeotians[7] only, made havoc of their territory, are now afraid the Boeotians may some day harry Attica.
[6] Lebadeia, 447 B.C.; Delium, 424 B.C. For Tolmides and Hippocrates see Thuc. i. 113; iv. 100 foll.; Grote, 'H. G.' v. 471; vi. 533.
[7] Reading {ote B. monoi}, al. {ou monoi}, 'when the Boeotians were not unaided.'
To which Socrates: Yes, I perceive that this is so, but it seems to me that the state was never more tractably disposed, never so ripe for a really good leader, as to-day. For if boldness be the parent of carelessness, laxity, and insubordination, it is the part of fear to make people more disposed to application, obedience, and good order. A proof of which you may discover in the behaviour of people on ship- board. It is in seasons of calm weather when
