On the other hand, the anger of Alkibiades caused
great misfortune to his countrymen; yet as soon as he found that they
had relented towards him he returned cheerfully to his allegiance, and
after being banished for the second time, did not take any delight in
seeing their generals defeated, and could not sit still and let them
make mistakes and uselessly expose themselves to danger. He did just
what Aristeides is so much praised for doing to Themistokles; he went to
the generals, although they were not his friends, and pointed out to
them what ought to be done.
Marcius, again, is to be blamed for having made the whole of Rome suffer
for what only a part of it had done, while the best and most important
class of citizens had been wronged equally with himself, and warmly
sympathised with him. Afterwards, although his countrymen sent him many
embassies, beseeching his forgiveness for their one act of ignorance and
passion, he would not listen to them, but showed that it was with the
intention of utterly destroying Rome, not of obtaining his own
restoration to it, that he had begun that terrible and savage war
against it. This, then, may be noted as the difference between their
respective positions: Alkibiades went back to the Athenian side when the
Spartans began to plot against him, because he both feared them and
hated them; but Marcius, who was in every respect well treated by the
Volscians, could not honourably desert their cause.
Pages:
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599