§1.1ταῦτα ἔστιν ἃ περὶ Εὐμενοῦς καὶ Σερτωρίου μνήμης ἄξια παρειλήφαμεν.
These are the things worthy of memory that we have received concerning Eumenes and Sertorius.
ἐν δὲ τῇ συγκρίσει κοινὸν μὲν ἀμφοτέροις ὑπάρχει τὸ ξένους καὶ ἀλλοδαποὺς καὶ φυγάδας ὄντας ἐθνῶν τε παντοδαπῶν καὶ στρατευμάτων μαχίμων τε καὶ μεγάλων ἡγουμένους διατελεῖν, ἴδιον δὲ Σερτωρίῳ μὲν τὸ παρὰ πάντων τῶν συμμάχων δεδομένην ἔχειν διὰ τὸ ἀξίωμα τὴν ἀρχήν, Εὐμενεῖ δὲ τὸ πολλῶν διαφερομένων περὶ τῆς ἡγεμονίας πρὸς αὐτὸν ἐκ τῶν πράξεων λαμβάνειν τὸ πρωτεῖον καὶ τῷ μὲν ἄρχεσθαι βουλόμενοι δικαίως εἵποντο, τῷ δὲ ἄρχειν μὴ δυνάμενοι πρὸς τὸ συμφέρον ὑπήκουον.
In their comparison, what is common to both is that, being strangers, foreigners, and exiles, they continued to lead all kinds of nations and warlike and powerful armies. On the other hand, what is peculiar to Sertorius is that he held his command as given by all his allies because of his worth, while to Eumenes, it is that, though many disputed the hegemony with him, he obtained the first place from his actual deeds. And to the former, people followed justly, wishing to be ruled, while to the latter, being unable to rule, they submitted for the sake of utility.
§1.2καὶ γὰρ ὁ μὲν Ἰβήρων καὶ Λυσιτανῶν Ῥωμαῖος, ὁ δὲ Χερρονησίτης Μακεδόνων ἦρχεν, ὧν οἱ μὲν ἔκπαλαι Ῥωμαίοις ἐδούλευον, οἱ δὲ τότε πάντας ἀνθρώπους ἐδουλοῦντο.
For the former, a Roman, ruled over Iberians and Lusitanians, and the latter, a Cherronesian, over Macedonians, of whom the former had long been subject to the Romans, while the latter at that time enslaved all mankind.
καὶ Σερτώριος μὲν ἀπὸ βουλῆς καὶ στρατηγίας θαυμαζόμενος, Εὐμενὴς δὲ διὰ τὴν γραμματείαν καταφρονούμενος ἐφʼ ἡγεμονίαν προῆλθεν.
Moreover, Sertorius advanced to leadership being admired because of his senatorial rank and praetorship, whereas Eumenes was despised because of his scribeship.
οὐ μόνον τοίνυν ἐλάττοσι πρὸς τὴν ἀρχὴν ἀφορμαῖς, ἀλλὰ καὶ μείζοσι πρὸς τὴν αὔξησιν ἐχρήσατο κωλύμασιν Εὐμενής.
Eumenes, therefore, employed not only fewer resources for his command, but also greater obstacles to its increase.
§1.3καὶ γὰρ ἄντικρυς τοὺς ἐνισταμένους καὶ κρύφα τοὺς ἐπιβουλεύοντας εἶχε πολλούς, οὐχ ὥσπερ τῷ ἑτέρῳ φανερῶς μὲν οὐδείς, λάθρα δὲ ὕστερον καὶ ὀλίγοι τῶν συμμάχων ἐπανέστησαν.
For he had many who opposed him openly and plotted against him secretly, unlike the other, against whom no one did so openly, and only a few of his allies rose up later and in secret.
διὸ τῷ μὲν ἦν πέρας τοῦ κινδυνεύειν τὸ νικᾶν τοὺς πολεμίους, τῷ δὲ ἐκ τοῦ νικᾶν ὁ κίνδυνος ὑπὸ τῶν φθονούντων.
Consequently, for the former, conquering his enemies was the end of his danger, while for the latter, danger arose from his very victory because of those who envied him.