| We may set Tarentum retaken against
Samos won by Pericles, and the conquest of Euboea we may well balance with
the towns of Campania; though Capua itself was reduced by the consuls Fulvius
and Appius. I do not find that Fabius won any set battle but that against
the Ligurians, for which he had his triumph; whereas Pericles erected nine
trophies for as many victories obtained by land and by sea. But no action
of Pericles can be compared to that memorable rescue of Minucius, when
Fabius redeemed both him and his army from utter destruction; a noble act
combining the highest valour, wisdom, and humanity. On the other side,
it does not appear that Pericles was ever so overreached as Fabius was
by Hannibal with his flaming oxen. His enemy there had, without his agency,
put himself accidentally into his power, yet Fabius let him slip in the
night, and, when day came, was worsted by him, was anticipated in the moment
of success, and mastered by his prisoner. If it is the part of a good general,
not only to provide for the present, but also to have a clear foresight
of things to come, in this point Pericles is the superior; for he admonished
the Athenians, and told them beforehand the ruin the war would bring upon
them, by their grasping more than they were able to manage. But Fabius
was not so good a prophet, when he denounced to the Romans that the undertaking
of Scipio would be the destruction of the commonwealth. So that Pericles
was a good prophet of bad success, and Fabius was a bad prophet of success
that was good. And, indeed, to lose an advantage through diffidence is
no less blamable in a general than to fall into danger for want of foresight;
for both these faults, though of a contrary nature, spring from the same
root, want of judgment and experience.
As for their civil policy, it is
imputed to Pericles that he occasioned the war, since no terms of peace,
offered by the Lacedaemonians, would content him. It is true, I presume,
that Fabius, also, was not for yielding any point to the Carthaginians,
but was ready to hazard all, rather than lessen the empire of Rome. The
mildness of Fabius towards his colleague Minucius does, by way of comparison,
rebuke and condemn the exertions of Pericles to banish Cimon and Thucydides,
noble, aristocratic men, who by his means suffered ostracism. The authority
of Pericles in Athens was much greater than that of Fabius in Rome. Hence
it was more easy for him to prevent miscarriages arising from the mistakes
and insufficiency of other officers; only Tolmides broke loose from him,
and, contrary to his persuasions, unadvisedly fought with the Boeotians,
and was slain. The greatness of his influence made all others submit and
conform themselves to his judgment. Whereas Fabius, sure and unerring himself,
for want of that general power, had not the means to obviate the miscarriages
of others; but it had been happy for the Romans if his authority had been
greater, for so, we may presume, their disasters had been fewer.
As to liberality and public spirit,
Pericles was eminent in never taking any gifts, and Fabius, for giving
his own money to ransom his soldiers, though the sum did not exceed six
talents. Than Pericles, meantime, no man had ever greater opportunities
to enrich himself, having had presents offered him from so many kings and
princes and allies, yet no man was ever more free from corruption. And
for the beauty and magnificence of temples and public edifices with which
he adorned his country, it must be confessed, that all the ornaments and
structures of Rome, to the time of the Caesars, had nothing to compare,
either in greatness of design or of expense, with the lustre of those which
Pericles only erected at Athens. |
Return to the Table of Contents
Return to List of Authors and Books
