we have here had two lives rich in examples, both of civil and militaryexcellence. let us first compare the two men in their warlike capacity.pericles presided in his commonwealth when it was in its most flourishingand opulent condition, great and growing in power； so that it maybe thought it was rather the common success and fortune that kepthim from any fall or disaster. but the task of fabius, who undertookthe government in the worst and most difficult times, was not to preserveand maintain the well-established felicity of a prosperous state,but to raise and uphold a sinking and ruinous commonwealth. besides,the victories of cimon, the trophies of myronides and leocrates, with the many famous exploits of tolmides, were employed by pericles ratherto fill the city with festive entertainments and solemnities thanto enlarge and secure its empire. whereas, fabius, when he took uponhim the government, had the frightful object before his eyes of romanarmies destroyed, of their generals and consuls slain, of lakes andplains and forests strewed with the dead bodies, and rivers stainedwith the blood of his fellow-citizens； and yet, with his mature andsolid counsels, with the firmness of his resolution, he, as it were,put his shoulder to the falling commonwealth, and kept it up fromfoundering through the failings and weaknesses of others. perhapsit may be more easy to govern a city broken and tamed with calamitiesand adversity, and compelled by danger and necessity to listen towisdom, than to set a bridle on wantonness and temerity, and rulea people pampered and restive with long prosperity as were the athenianswhen pericles held the reins of government. but then again, not tobe daunted nor discomposed with the vast heap of calamities underwhich the people of rome at that time groaned and succumbed, arguesa courage in fabius and a strength of purpose more than ordinary.
we may set tarentum retaken against samos won by pericles, and theconquest 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 theligurians, for which he had his triumph； whereas pericles erectednine trophies for as many victories obtained by land and by sea. butno action of pericles can be compared to that memorable rescue ofminucius, 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 overreachedas fabius was by hannibal with his flaming oxen. his enemy there had,without his agency, put himself accidentally into his power, yet fabiuslet 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 pointpericles is the superior； for he admonished the athenians, and toldthem beforehand the ruin the war would bring upon them, by their graspingmore 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 goodprophet of bad success, and fabius was a bad prophet of success thatwas good. and, indeed, to lose an advantage through diffidence isno less blamable in a general than to fall into danger for want offoresight； for both these faults, though of a contrary nature, springfrom the same root, want of judgment and experience.
as for their civil policy, it is imputed to pericles that he occasionedthe war, since no terms of peace, offered by the lacedaemonians, wouldcontent him. it is true, i presume, that fabius, also, was not foryielding any point to the carthaginians, but was ready to hazard all,rather than lessen the empire of rome. the mildness of fabius towardshis colleague minucius does, by way of comparison, rebuke and condemnthe exertions of pericles to banish cimon and thucydides, noble, aristocraticmen, who by his means suffered ostracism. the authority of periclesin athens was much greater than that of fabius in rome. hence it wasmore easy for him to prevent miscarriages arising from the mistakesand insufficiency of other officers； only tolmides broke loose fromhim, and, contrary to his persuasions, unadvisedly fought with theboeotians, and was slain. the greatness of his influence made allothers submit and conform themselves to his judgment. whereas fabius,sure and unerring himself, for want of that general power, had notthe means to obviate the miscarriages of others； but it had been happyfor 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 nevertaking any gifts, and fabius, for giving his own money to ransom hissoldiers, 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 andallies, yet no man was ever more free from corruption. and for thebeauty and magnificence of temples and public edifices with whichhe adorned his country, it must be confessed, that all the ornamentsand structures of rome, to the time of the caesars, had nothing tocompare, either in greatness of design or of expense, with the lustreof those which pericles only erected at athens.
the end