like savages, into distant solitudes and inaccessible woods. A certain proof of the advantage Lucullus had in this respect, is, that the Persians, as if they had suffered nothing from Cimon, soon made head against the Greeks, and cut in pieces a great army of theirs in Egypt; whereas Tigranes and Mithridates could effect nothing after the blow they had received from Lucullus. Mithridates, enfeebled by the conflicts he had undergone, did not once venture to face Pompey in the field instead of that, he fled to the Bosphorus, and there put a period to his life. As for Tigranes, he delivered himself, naked and unarmed, to Pompey, took his diadem from his head, and laid it at his feet; in which he complimented Pompey, not with what was his own, but with what belonged to the laurels of Lucullus. The poor prince, by the joy with which he received the ensigns of royalty again, confessed that he had absolutely lost them. However, he must be deemed the greater general, as well as the greater champion, who delivers his adversary, weak and breathless, to the next combatant.

Besides, Cimon found the king of Persia extremely weakened, and the pride of his people humbled, by the losses and defeats they had experienced from Themistocles, Pausanias, and Leotychidas; and their hands could not make much resistance, when their hearts were gone. But Lucullus met Tigranes fresh and unfoiled, elated and exulting in the battles he had fought and the victories he had won. Nor is the number of the enemy's troops which Cimon defeated, in the least to be compared to that of those who gave battle to Lucullus.

In short, when we weigh all the advantages of each of these great men, it is hard to say to which side the balance inclines. Heaven appears to have favoured both; directing the one to what he should do, and warning the other what he should avoid. So that the gods bore wit

ness of their virtue, and regarded them as persons in whom there was something divine.

LESSON LXXXI.

Sertorius and Eumenes compared.

THESE are the most remarkable particulars which history has given us concerning Eumenes and Sertorius. And now to come to the comparison. We observe first, that though they were both strangers, aliens, and exiles, they had, to the end of their days, the command of many warlike nations, and great and respectable armies. Sertorius, indeed, has this advantage, that his fellow-warriors ever freely gave up the command to him on account of his superior merit; whereas many disputed the post of honour with Eumenes, and it was his actions only that obtained it for him. The officers of Sertorius were ambitious to have him at their head; but those who acted under Eumenes never had recourse to him, till experience had showed them their own incapacity, and the necessity of employing another.

The one was a Roman, and commanded the Spaniards and Lusitanians, who for many years had been subject to Rome; the other was a Chersonesian, and commanded the Macedonians, who had conquered the whole world. It should be considered too, that Sertorius the more easily made his way, because he was a senator, and had led armies before; but Eumenes with the disreputation of having been only a secretary, raised himself to the first military employments. Nor had Eumenes only fewer advantages, but greater impediments also in the road to honour. Numbers opposed him openly, and as many formed private designs against his life; whereas no

man ever opposed Sertorius in public, and it was not till towards the last, that a few of his own party entered upon a private scheme to destroy him. The dangers of Sertorius were generally over when he had gained a victory; and the dangers of Eumenes grew out of his very victories, among those who envied his success.

Their military performances were equal and similar, but their dispositions were very different. Eumenes loved war, and had a native spirit of contention; Sertorius loved peace and tranquillity. The former might have lived in great security and honour, if he would not have stood in the way of the great; but he rather chose to tread for ever in the uneasy paths of power, though he had to fight every step he took the latter would gladly have withdrawn from the tumult of public affairs; but was forced to continue the war, to defend himself against his restless persecutors. For Antigonus would have taken pleasure in employing Eumenes, if he would have given up the dispute for superiority, and been content with the station next to his; whereas Pompey would not grant Sertorious his request to live a private citizen. Hence, the one voluntarily engaged in war, for the sake of gaining the chief command; the other involuntarily took the command, because he could not live in peace. Eumenes, therefore, in his passion for the camp, preferred ambition to safety; Sertorius was an able warrior, but he employed his talents only for the safety of his person. The one was not apprized of his impending fate; the other expected his every moment. The one had the candid praise of confidence in his friends; the other incurred the censure of weakness; for he would have fled, but could not. The death of Sertorius did no dishonour to his life; he suffered that from his fellow-soldiers which the enemy could not have effected.

Eumenes could not avoid his chains, yet after

the indignity of chains, he wanted to live; so that he could neither escape death, nor meet it as he ought to have done; but, by having recourse to mean applications and entreaties, put his mind in the power of the man who was only master of his body.

LESSON LXXXII.

Demosthenes and Cicero compared.

THESE are the most memorable circumstances in the lives of Demosthenes and Cicero that could be collected from the historians which have come to our knowledge. Though I shall not pretend to compare their talents for speaking; yet this, I think, I ought to observe, that Demosthenes, by the exertion of all his powers, both natural and acquired, upon that object only, came to exceed in energy and strength, the most celebrated pleaders of his time; in grandeur and magnificence of style, all that were eminent for the sublime of declamation; and in accuracy and art, the most able professors of rhetoric. Cicero's studies were more general; and, in his treasures of knowledge, he had a great variety. He has left us a number of philosophical tracts, which he composed upon the principles of the academy. And we see something of an ostentation of learning in the very orations which he wrote for the forum, and the bar.

Their different tempers are discernible in their way of writing. That of Demosthenes, without any embellishments of wit and humour, is always grave and serious. Nor does it smell of the lamp, as Pytheas tauntingly said, but of the water-drinker, of the man of thought, of one who was characterized by the austerities of life. But

Cicero, who loved to indulge his vein of pleasantry, so much affected the wit that he sometimes sunk into the buffoon; and by affecting gaiety in the most serious things to serve his client, he has offended against the rules of propriety and decorum. Thus, in his oration for Cælius, he says, "Where is the absurdity, if a man, with an affluent fortune at command, shall indulge himself in pleasure? It would be madness not to enjoy what is in his power; particularly when some of the greatest philosophers place man's chief good in pleasure ?"

When Cato impeached Murena, Cicero, who was then consul undertook his defence; and, in his pleading, took occasion to ridicule several paradoxes of the stoics, because Cato was of that sect. He succeeded so far as to raise a laugh in the assembly; and even among the judges. Upon which Cato smiled, and said to those who sat by him, "What a pleasant consul we have !" Cicero, indeed, was naturally facetious; and he not only loved his jest, but his countenance was gay and smiling. Whereas Demosthenes had a care and thoughtfulness in his aspect, which he seldom or never put off. Hence

his enemies, as he confesses, called him a morose ill natured man.

It appears also from their writings, that Demosthenes, when he touches upon his own praise, does it with an inoffensive delicacy. Indeed he never gives into it at all, but when he has some great point in view; and on all other occasions is extremely modest. But Cicero, in his orations, speaks in such high terms of himself that it is plain he had a most intemperate vanity. Thus he cries

out:

Let arms revere the robe, the warrior's laurel

Yield to the palm of eloquence.

At length he came to commend not only his own actions and operations in the commonwealth, but his