Lucullus may be accounted especially fortunate in having died when he
did, so that he did not witness the ruin of his country by the civil
wars, but departed this life while Rome, though corrupt, was yet a
free state. And in this he resembles Kimon more than in any other
point; for Kimon also died while the Greeks were at the height of
their prosperity, and before they had begun to fight against one
another. Indeed, Kimon died in his camp, while acting as
commander-in-chief of his country's forces, at the siege of Kitium in
Cyprus; not retired home, as if worn out with hard service, nor yet
indulging in feasting and wine-drinking, as though that were the end
and reward of his military achievements; like that life of eternal
drunkenness which Plato sneers at the Orphic school for promising to
their disciples as their reward hereafter.
A peaceful retirement, and a life of literary leisure, is no doubt a
great comfort to a man who has withdrawn himself from taking any
active part in politics; but to perform notable exploits with no
object in view except to obtain the means of enjoyment, and to pass
from the command of armies and the conduct of great wars to a life of
voluptuous indolence and luxury seems unworthy of a philosopher of the
Academy, or of any who profess to follow the doctrine of Xenokrates,
and to be rather fit for a disciple of Epikurus. It is a remarkable
circumstance that the youth of Kimon seems to have been licentious and
extravagant, while that of Lucullus was spent in a sober and virtuous
fashion. Clearly he is the better man that changes for the better; for
that nature must be the more excellent in which vice decays, and
virtue gains strength. Moreover, both Kimon and Lucullus were wealthy;
but they made a very different use of their wealth. We cannot compare
the building of the south wall of the Acropolis of Athens, which was
completed with the money won by Kimon in the wars, with the luxurious
pavilions and villas washed by the sea which Lucullus erected in
Neapolis with the spoils he had taken from the barbarian enemies of
Rome. Still less can we compare the generous and popular hospitality
of Kimon with the Eastern profusion and extravagance of Lucullus's
table; for Kimon, at a small expense, fed many of his countrymen
daily, while the other spent enormous sums to provide luxuries for a
small circle of friends. Yet this difference in their habits may have
been caused by the times in which they lived; and no one can tell
whether Kimon, if he had returned home and spent an old age of
indolence and unwarlike repose, might not have even exceeded Lucullus
in riotous luxury; for he was fond of wine and of society, and, as has
been told in his life, was greatly addicted to women. But success in
war or in politics so delights ambitious natures that they have no
time for pursuing minor pleasures. Had Lucullus died at the head of
his army, I suppose that the most captious critic could scarcely have
found anything to blame in his life. So much, then, for their mode of
living.
II. Now with regard to their warlike operations, there can be no doubt
that both proved themselves to be consummate commanders, both by land
and by sea; yet, as we are accustomed to call those athletes who have
in one day been successful both in wrestling and in the pankratium by
the name of notable victors, so Kimon, who in one day won a victory
both by sea and by land, thus gaining a double triumph for Greece,
deserves to be given some place above all other generals. Moreover,
Lucullus was given the chief command by his country, but Kimon won for
his country the honour of commanding the other Greek states. Lucullus
found his country in command of allies, and by their aid overthrew the
enemy, but Kimon found his country acting under the command of others,
and by his own force of character both made Athens the leading state
in Greece and overcame the enemy, for he drove the Persians from the
sea, and persuaded the Lacedæmonians to resign their claims to
supremacy. If we are to believe it to be the greatest proof of ability
in a general to be loved and willingly obeyed by his soldiers, then we
see that Lucullus was despised by his soldiers, while Kimon was
esteemed and looked up to by his allies, for the soldiers of Lucullus
revolted from him, while the Greek states revolted from Sparta in
order to join Kimon. Thus the former was sent out in chief command,
and returned home deserted by his men, while the other, though sent
out to act as a subordinate under the command of others, ended by
returning as commander-in-chief of them all, having succeeded, in
spite of the greatest difficulties, in obtaining three great
advantages for his countrymen, namely, having delivered them from the
fear of their enemies, having given them authority over their
confederates, and established a lasting friendship between them and
the Lacedæmonians. Both commanders attempted an enormous task, the
conquest of Asia; and both were forced to leave their work unfinished.
Kimon was prevented by death, for he died at the head of an army and
in the full tide of success; while one cannot altogether think that
Lucullus was not to blame for not having tried to satisfy the
complaints of his soldiers, which caused them to hate him so bitterly.
In this point Lucullus and Kimon are alike; for Kimon was often
impeached by his countrymen, who at last banished him by ostracism, in
order that, as Plato said, they might not hear his voice for ten
years. It seldom happens that men born to command can please the
people, or have anything in common with them; because they cause pain
by their attempts to rule and reform them, just as the bandages of a
surgeon cause pain to the patient, when by their means he is
endeavouring to force back dislocated limbs into their proper
position. For this reason, methinks, neither Kimon nor Lucullus
deserve blame.
III. Lucullus accomplished by far the greater exploits of the two, as
he marched beyond the Mount Taurus with an army, being the first
Roman who ever did so, and also crossed the river Tigris, and took and
burned the royal cities of Asia, Tigranocerta, Kabeira, Sinope, and
Nisibis, in the sight of their kings. Towards the north, he went as
far as the river Phasis; towards the east as far as Media; and
southwards as far as the Red Sea and the kingdom of Arabia, subduing
it all to the Roman Empire. He destroyed the power of two mighty
kings, and left them in possession of nothing but their lives, forcing
them to hide themselves like hunted beasts, in trackless wastes and
impassable forests. A great proof of the completeness of Lucullus's
success is to be found in the fact that the Persians soon after
Kimon's death, attacked the Greeks as vigorously as if they had never
been defeated by Kimon at all, and defeated a large Greek army in
Egypt; while Tigranes and Mithridates never recovered from the
overthrow they sustained from Lucullus. Mithridates was so crushed and
broken in strength that he never dared to march out of his
entrenchments and fight with Pompeius, but retired to Bosporus and
died there; while Tigranes of his own accord came into the presence of
Pompeius naked and unarmed, and cast down his royal diadem at his
feet, not flattering him for the victories which he had won, but for
those for which Lucullus had triumphed. He was well pleased to be
allowed to resume the ensigns of royalty, and thereby admitted that he
had before been deprived of them. He, therefore, is to be held the
better general, as he is the better wrestler, who leaves his enemy
weakest for his successor to deal with. Moreover, Kimon found the
power of the Persians impaired, and their spirit broken by the series
of defeats which they had sustained from Themistokles, Pausanias, and
Leotychides, and was easily able to conquer men whose hearts were
already vanquished: whereas Lucullus met Tigranes when he was full of
courage, and in the midst of an unbroken career of victory. As for
numbers, one cannot compare the multitudes who were opposed to
Lucullus with the troops who were defeated by Kimon. Thus it appears
that from whatever point of view we regard them, it is hard to say
which was the better man, especially as heaven seems to have dealt so
kindly with them both, in telling the one what to do, and the other
what to avoid: so that it seems to appear by the testimony of the gods
themselves, that they were both men of a noble and godlike nature.