The Online Library of Liberty

A project of Liberty Fund, Inc.

• Plutarch’s Lives
• Agesilaus and Pompey
• Agesilaus.
• Comparison of Pompey and Agesilaus.
• Alexander, CÆsar, Phocion and Cato the Younger
• Alexander.
• CÆsar.
• Cato the Younger.
• Agis.
• Cleomenes.
• Caius Gracchus.
• Comparison of Tiberius and Caius Gracchus, With Agis and Cleomenes.
• Appendix.

COMPARISON OF TIBERIUS AND CAIUS GRACCHUS, WITH AGIS AND CLEOMENES.

Having given an account severally of these persons, it remains only that we should take a view of them in comparison with one another.

As for the Gracchi, the greatest detractors and their worst enemies could not but allow, that they had a genius to virtue beyond all other Romans, which was improved also by a generous education. Agis and Cleomenes may be supposed to have had stronger natural gifts, since, though they wanted all the advantages of good education, and were bred up in those very customs, manners, and habits of living, which had for a long time corrupted others, yet they were public examples of temperance and frugality. Besides, the Gracchi, happening to live when Rome had her greatest repute for honor and virtuous actions, might justly have been ashamed, if they had not also left to the next generation the noble inheritance of the virtues of their ancestors. Whereas the other two had parents of different morals; and though they found their country in a sinking condition, and debauched, yet that did not quench their forward zeal to what was just and honorable.

The integrity of the two Romans, and their superiority Page 554 to money, was chiefly remarkable in this; that in office and the administration of public affairs, they kept themselves from the imputation of unjust gain; whereas Agis might justly be offended, if he had only that mean commendation given him, that he took nothing wrongfully from any man, seeing he distributed his own fortunes, which, in ready money only, amounted to the value of six hundred talents, amongst his fellow-citizens. Extortion would have appeared a crime of a strange nature to him, who esteemed it a piece of covetousness to possess, though never so justly gotten, greater riches than his neighbors.

Their political actions, also, and the state revolutions they attempted, were very different in magnitude. The chief things in general that the two Romans commonly aimed at, were the settlement of cities and mending of highways; and, in particular, the boldest design which Tiberius is famed for, was the recovery of the public lands; and Caius gained his greatest reputation by the addition, for the exercise of judicial powers, of three hundred of the order of knights to the same number of senators. Whereas the alteration which Agis and Cleomenes made, was in a quite different kind. They did not set about removing partial evils and curing petty incidents of disease, which would have been (as Plato says), like cutting off one of the Hydra’s heads, the very means to increase the number; but they instituted a thorough reformation, such as would free the country at once from all its grievances, or rather, to speak more truly, they reversed that former change which had been the cause of all their calamities, and so restored their city to its ancient state.

However, this must be confessed in the behalf of the Gracchi, that their undertakings were always opposed by men of the greatest influence. On the other side, those things which were first attempted by Agis, and after wards consummated by Cleomenes, were supported by the great and glorious precedent of those ancient laws concerning frugality and levelling which they had themselves received upon the authority of Lycurgus, and he had instituted on that of Apollo. It is also further observable, that from the actions of the Gracchi, Rome received no additions to her former greatness; whereas, under the conduct of Cleomenes, Greece presently saw Sparta exert her sovereign power over all Peloponnesus, and contest the supreme command with the most powerful princes of the time; success in which would have freed Greece from Illyrian and Gaulish violence, and placed her once again under the orderly rule of the sons of Hercules.

From the circumstances of their deaths, also, we may infer some difference in the quality of their courage The Gracchi, fighting with their fellow-citizens, were both slain, as they endeavored to make their escape; Agis willingly submitted to his fate, rather than any citizen should be in danger of his life. Cleomenes, being shamefully and unjustly treated, made an effort toward revenge, but failing of that, generously fell by his own hand.

On the other side it must be said, that Agis never did a great action worthy a commander, being prevented by an untimely death. And as for those heroic actions of Cleomenes, we may justly compare with them that of Tiberius, when he was the first who attempted to scale the walls of Carthage, which was no mean exploit. We may add the peace which he concluded with the Numantines, by which he saved the lives of twenty thousand Romans, who otherwise had certainly been cut off. And Caius, not only at home, but in war in Sardinia, displayed distinguished courage. So that their early actions were no small argument, that afterwards they might have rivalled the best of the Roman commanders, if they had not died so young.

In civil life, Agis showed a lack of determination; he let himself be baffled by the craft of Agesilaus, disappointed the expectations of the citizens as to the division of the lands, and generally left all the designs which he had deliberately formed and publicly announced, unperformed and unfulfilled, through a young man’s want of resolution. Cleomenes, on the other hand, proceeded to effect the revolution with only too much boldness and violence, and unjustly slew the Ephors, whom he might, by superiority in arms, have gained over to his party, or else might easily have banished, as he did several others of the city. For to use the knife, unless in the extremest necessity, is neither good surgery nor wise policy, but in both cases mere unskilfulness; and in the latter, unjust as well as unfeeling. Of the Gracchi, neither the one nor the other was the first to shed the blood of his fellow-citizens; and Caius is reported to have avoided all manner of resistance, even when his life was aimed at, showing himself always valiant against a foreign enemy, but wholly inactive in a sedition. This was the reason that he went from his own house unarmed, and withdrew when the battle began, and in all respects showed himself anxious rather not to do any harm to others, than not to suffer any himself. Even the very flight of the Gracchi must not be looked upon as an argument of their mean spirit, but an honorable retreat from endangering of others. For if they had staid, they must either have yielded to those who assailed them, or else have fought them in their own defence.

The greatest crime that can be laid to Tiberius’s charge, was the deposing of his fellow tribune, and seeking afterwards a second tribuneship for himself. As for the death of Antyllius, it is falsely and unjustly attributed to Caius, for he was slain unknown to him, and much to his grief. On the contrary, Cleomenes (not to mention the murder of the Ephors) set all the slaves at liberty, and governed by himself alone in reality, having a partner only for show; having made choice of his brother Euclidas, who was one of the same family. He prevailed upon Archidamus, who was the right heir to the kingdom of the other line, to venture to return home from Messene; but after his being slain, by not doing any thing to revenge his death, confirmed the suspicion that he was privy to it himself. Lycurgus, whose example he professed to imitate, after he had voluntarily settled his kingdom upon Charillus, his brother’s son, fearing lest, if the youth should chance to die by accident, he might be suspected for it, travelled a long time, and would not return again to Sparta until Charillus had a son, and an heir to his kingdom. But we have indeed no other Grecian who is worthy to be compared with Lycurgus, and it is clear enough that in the public measures of Cleomenes various acts of considerable audacity and lawlessness may be found.

Those, therefore, who incline to blame their characters, may observe, that the two Grecians were disturbers even from their youth, lovers of contest, and aspirants to despotic power; that Tiberius and Caius by nature had an excessive desire after glory and honors. Beyond this, their enemies could find nothing to bring against them; but as soon as the contention began with their adversaries, their heat and passions would so far prevail beyond their natural temper, that by them, as by ill winds, they were driven afterwards to all their rash undertakings. What could be more just and honorable than their first design, had not the power and the faction of the rich, by endeavoring to abrogate that law, engaged them both in those fatal quarrels, the one, for his own preservation, the other, to revenge his brother’s death, who was murdered without any law or justice?

From the account, therefore, which has been given, you yourself may perceive the difference; which if it were to be pronounced of every one singly, I should affirm Tiberius to have excelled them all in virtue; that young Agis had been guilty of the fewest misdeeds; and that in action and boldness Caius came far short of Cleomenes.

APPENDIX.

The Lives in the fourth volume were translated as follows: —

Agesilaus, by W. Needham, M. D.

Pompey, by W. Oldys, LL. D.

Alexander, by Mr. Evelyn, (one of the minor compositions of the author of Sylva, and not unworthy of him).

Cæsar, by the Rev. Dr. James Smalridge.

Phocion, by Ph. Fowke, M. D.

Cato the Younger, by Stephen Waller, LL. D.

Agis, by Sir Robert Thorold, Bart.

Cleomenes, by the Rev. Mr. Creech, Fellow of All-Soul’s College, Oxford. The translator of Lucretius, whose name has appeared before in Vols. I. and II. as of Wadham College. He became Fellow of All-Souls afterwards.

Tiberius and Caius Gracchus, by John Warren, Fellow of Catherine Hall, Cambridge.

end of vol. iv.

The favorite show of boys on horseback, which Virgil takes occasion to describe in the fifth Book of the Æneid, 545-603. Trojaque nunc, pueri, Trojanum dicitur agmen.

[* ]Attic minæ.

[† ]White-shields.

Life of Pompey,page 50 . — Ah, cruel sire! how dear thy son to me! is from the Prometheus Unbound, the lost play of Æschylus, where Hercules releases whom his father Jupiter had bound. Pompey’s father was of course a Pompeius like himself, Cnæus Pompeius Strabo; but the name of Strabo made way in the son’s case for that of Magnus.

Page 136 . — A temple or chapel dedicated to Venus Victrix, or, the Victorious, formed the highest part of Pompey’s theatre at Rome.

Life of Phocion,page 329 . — When fortune fails, the sense we had before, Deserts us also, and is ours no more, is said by Antigone to Creon, in the play of Sophocles (Antigone, 563).

Page 346 . — Unwise one, wherefore is what the sailors say to Ulysses in the story of the Cyclope, when they are rowing their boat from the shore, and Ulysses, though he has already by one bold speech provoked the Cyclope to hurl a rock which had nearly intercepted them, is, nevertheless, eager to accost him once again with a taunt.

Life of Agis,page 445 . — We follow these, though born their rightful lords, said by the herdsmen of their flocks, is a fragment conjectured to belong to the lost play of the Herdsmen, in which, apparently, the death of Protesilaus by the hand of Hector was the great event, the chorus being a company of herdsmen. It is No. 447 in Dindorf’s fragments.

Page 489 . — Rhœteum and Helicus are unknown. Possibly the right names are Zœtium and Helisson which are Arcadian towns in Pausanias.

Page 491 . — Polybius, in his second book, is Plutarch’s authority for much of the history; the passage referred to here is II., 64, 2.

Life of Tiberius Gracchus,page 506 . — The story of the two snakes is told by Cicero (de Divinatione I., 18, II., 29), who says it was left on record by Caius Gracchus in a letter written to Marcus Pomponius.

Page 517 . — The words in revellings and bacchic play are from the Bacchæ of Euripides (317). Tiresias, defending the bacchic rites to Pentheus, who forbids them, says that

• Even in revellings and bacchic play,
• She that is modest, modest still will stay.

There is a story told of a banquet in Sicily where Dionysius bade all the company get up, each one in his turn, put on a purple gown, and perform a dance; Plato declined, quoting the words of Pentheus (Bacchæ, 835), “I cannot go into a woman’s robes;” Aristippus complied, and quoted Tiresias, in the same play, as above.

Page 554 . — The ordinary small legislation about petty cases of theft and breach of contract and the like is compared by Plato in the Republic (IV., p 426) to cutting the Hydra (quid leges sine moribus Vanæ proficiunt?) a fundamental change of principle is needed in the training, education, and discipline of mankind; in a commonwealth where this exists all minor observances will follow as a matter of course, and where it does not, these complex regulations are worse than useless.