Humanitext Reader

Plutarch · Comparison of Alcibiades and Coriolanus §3.1-3.3

Attitudes toward Money, Persuasion, and Sociability

Passage 3 of 5 · Greek

Summary

The author compares Alcibiades and Marcius regarding their attitudes toward money, their persuasiveness, and their sociability, examining how these differences affected the citizens' feelings toward them and their political successes.

§3.1χρήματα τοίνυν ὁ μέν Ἀλκιβιάδης καὶ λαβεῖν οὐκ εὖ πολλάκις ἐκ δωροδοκιῶν καὶ διαθέσθαι κακῶς εἰς τρυφὴν καὶ ἀκολασίαν ἱστόρηται· Μάρκιον δὲ σὺν τιμῇ διδόντες οἱ στρατηγοὶ λαβεῖν οὐκ ἔπεισαν.
As for money, Alcibiades is recorded often to have taken it dishonorably from bribes and to have spent it badly on luxury and licentiousness; on the other hand, though the generals offered it to Marcius with honor, they could not persuade him to accept it.
διὸ καὶ μάλιστα τοῖς πολλοῖς ἐπαχθὴς ἦν ἐν ταῖς περὶ χρεῶν διαφοραῖς πρὸς τὸν δῆμον, ὡς οὐκ ἐπὶ κέρδεσιν, ἀλλὰ διʼ ὕβριν καὶ περιφροσύνην τοῖς πένησιν ἐπηρεάζων.
For this reason, he was especially offensive to the multitude in the disputes concerning debts against the people, since he seemed to be harassing the poor not for the sake of gain, but out of insolence and contempt.
§3.2Ἀντίπατρος μέν οὖν ἐν ἐπιστολῇ τινι γράφων περὶ τῆς Ἀριστοτέλους τοῦ φιλοσόφου τελευτῆς, πρὸς τοῖς ἄλλοις, φησὶν, ὁ ἀνὴρ καὶ τὸ πείθειν εἶχε. τὰς δὲ Μαρκίου πράξεις καὶ ἀρετὰς τοῦτο μὴ προσὸν ἐπαχθεῖς ἐποίησεν αὐτοῖς τοῖς εὖ παθοῦσι, τὸν ὄγκον αὐτοῦ καὶ τὴν ἐρημίᾳ σύνοικον, ὡς Πλάτων εἶπεν, αὐθάδειαν μὴ ὑπομείναντας τοῦ δʼ Ἀλκιβιάδου τοὐναντίον ἐπισταμένου χρῆσθαι τοῖς προστυγχάνουσιν οἰκείως, οὐδὲν θαυμαστὸν ἐν οἷς κατώρθου τὴν δόξαν ἀνθεῖν μετʼ εὐνοίας καὶ τιμῆς εὐημεροῦσαν, ὅπου καὶ τῶν ἁμαρτημάτων ἔνια πολλάκις χάριν εἶχε καὶ ὥραν.
Now, Antipater, writing in a certain letter about the death of the philosopher Aristotle, says, among other things, "The man had also the power of persuasion." But the actions and virtues of Marcius, because this was not present, made them offensive to those very people who had received benefits, since they could not endure his haughtiness and his self-will, which is "a companion of solitude," as Plato said; whereas Alcibiades, on the contrary, knowing how to treat those who met him in a friendly manner, it is no wonder that in his successes his glory flourished and prospered with goodwill and honor, since even some of his errors often possessed grace and charm.
§3.3ὅθεν οὗτος μέν οὐ μικρὰ βλάψας οὐδʼ ὀλίγα τὴν πόλιν ὅμως ἀπεδείκνυτο πολλάκις ἡγεμὼν καὶ στρατηγός, ἐκεῖνος δὲ μετιὼν ἐπὶ πολλαῖς ἀριστείαις καὶ ἀνδραγαθίαις ἀρχὴν προσήκουσαν ἐξέπεσεν.
Hence, the former, although he did no small nor few injuries to the city, was nevertheless often appointed leader and general; but the latter, though pursuing a fitting office on the strength of many exploits and deeds of valor, was rejected.
οὕτω τὸν μέν οὐδὲ πάσχοντες κακῶς ἐδύναντο μισεῖν οἱ πολῖται, τῷ δὲ περιῆν θαυμαζομένῳ μὴ φιλεῖσθαι.
Thus, the citizens could not hate the one, even when they were suffering ill at his hands, while to the other, though he was admired, it was his lot not to be loved.

Notes

  1. §3.2τοῦτο μὴ προσὸν — A participle construction consisting of the pronoun τοῦτο (referring to the previously mentioned 'power of persuasion') and προσόν, the neuter singular present participle of πρόσειμι (to be present). It functions like an accusative absolute or a nominative absolute expressing cause or attendant circumstance: 'this not being present.'
  2. §3.2αὐτοῖς τοῖς εὖ παθοῦσι ... μὴ ὑπομείναντας — An anacoluthon (case discordance) where the dative 'to those very people who had received benefits' (αὐτοῖς τοῖς εὖ παθοῦσι) is followed by the participle 'not enduring' (ὑπομείναντας) in the accusative plural. The case shifts to the accusative under the influence of the implicit logical subject of the action.
  3. §3.3τῷ δὲ περιῆν θαυμαζομένῳ μὴ φιλεῖσθαι — The imperfect 3rd person singular περιῆν (from περίειμι, 'to remain over' or 'to fall to one's share as a result') is used with the dative of interest/reference 'to the other [who was admired]' (τῷ δὲ ... θαυμαζομένῳ) and the infinitive phrase 'not to be loved' (μὴ φιλεῖσθαι) acting as the subject. It expresses that 'for the other, despite being admired, the remaining result was not to be loved.'

Cite this passage

Plutarch, Comparison of Alcibiades and Coriolanus §3.1-3.3. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0007.tlg017.humanitext-grc2:3.1-3.3

Please note the AI-draft status of the translation and the date accessed.

Translation, notes and summary are AI-generated drafts, revised through reader feedback.