Oration 56
Imperial Dio Chrysostom Greek- D. Which do you prefer — to hear prudent discourses about Agamemnon, from which one may benefit the mind, or does Agamemnon named "son of Atreus" annoy you in the discourses? — Not even if you should speak of Adrastus son of Talaus, or of Tantalus, or of Pelops, should I be vexed, if I am going to become better for it. — D. And indeed I lately recalled certain arguments, which I would set forth, if you would consent to answer me when I ask.
- Speak, as to one who will answer. — D. Are there certain rulers of men, just as some are of goats, others of swine, some of horses, and some of cattle — all these being called in common "herdsmen"? Or have you not read this verse of Cratinus: "I am established a shepherd, I herd goats and I herd cattle"? — I could not tell you whether it is better to name all keepers of animals "shepherds." — D. Not of the irrational only, my good man, but of men too, if one ought to put any trust in Homer about these matters. But why did you not answer my original question? — Which one? —
- D. Tell me: are there certain rulers of men? — Why, how should there not be? — D. Who are these? By what names do you call them? I mean not the commanders of soldiers in war (for we are wont to name "generals" the leaders of the whole army; just as, in detail, the ruler of a company is called a company-commander, and the ruler of a rank a rank-commander, and the ruler of the fleet an admiral, and the ruler of a single trireme a trierarch; and there are several others so called, rulers in war over small bodies, because then men have need of the greatest forethought and leadership);
- nor do I happen to be inquiring about the chorus-leaders, whoever they are called, who give the signal to the singers and lead off the tune; nor about the leaders of the symposia; nor if any others receive over a part of mankind, for a single action or for a stated time, some charge or rule; but the very rulers of men, men engaged in public life and farming, as it may happen, and simply living — as Cyrus ruled the Persians, and Deioces the Medes, and Hellen those named after him, and Aeolus the Aeolians, and Dorus the Dorians, and Numa the Romans, and Dardanus the Phrygians.
- — But you asked nothing hard; for all these whom you now name were called, and were, kings; and this rule of which you speak — to rule men in general and to give orders to men while not accountable — is called kingship. — D. Do you, then, not consider it kingship, that of the Heracleidae in Lacedaemon, who reigned so long a time? For those men did not do everything as seemed good to them, but in many things obeyed the ephors,
- once this office was established in Sparta, in the reign of Theopompus, for a year at a time, and nonetheless prevailed over the kings; so that Pausanias son of Cleombrotus, the victor at Plataea, they wished to cast into prison, and when he fled for refuge into the temple of Athena, they killed him there; and it profited him nothing, neither that he was of the line of the Heracleidae, nor that he was guardian of a boy, nor that he had led all Hellas, not Sparta alone.
- And later Agesilaus, while warring against the Great King and having conquered in battle near Sardis and mastered all lower Asia, they summoned home to themselves, sending a single servant; and he put off not a single day, though he had become master of so many Greeks and so many barbarians. Was not Agesilaus, then, king of Sparta, who obeyed other rulers? — And how could these be kings, by the exact account of kingship? —
- D. Will you, then, deny that even Agamemnon at Ilium was king of the Argives and Achaeans, because he had over his rule, as guardian, an older man, Nestor of Pylos? At his bidding the wall about the ships was built and the trench thrown round as a defence of the ships' station; and Agamemnon divided the army into ranks — which before, it seems, fought at random — both foot and horse, all confusedly mingled together, Pylians and Argives and Arcadians and Boeotians. But Nestor afterward enjoined him to divide the army by tribes, "that clan might aid clan, and tribes aid tribes."
- "And thus," he said, "you will know both the good and the bad of your leaders"; and if of the leaders, plainly of the soldiers too — at the same time teaching the magnitude of the benefit. — And with what intent did he do this? — D. That Agamemnon might know the general's art even after his death. And so very obedient was he to Nestor that not only, if Nestor present enjoined anything, did he do it eagerly, but not even if he thought Nestor said something in a dream would he omit it. At any rate the dream about the battle thus deceived him, being made in the likeness of Nestor.
- And he obeyed not only Nestor, who seemed wisest of the Achaeans, but did nothing even without the elders. At any rate, whenever he was about to lead out the army, persuaded by the dream, he did not lead it out before the council of the elders sat down by the ship of Nestor. Nor did he make the trial which he wished to make of the multitude — whether they still wished to stay and fight it out while Achilles was wrathful — otherwise than after first introducing it into the council. But most demagogues do not shrink from bringing before the people decrees not predeliberated. He, however, having deliberated with the elders, then made mention before the multitude about the conduct of the war. —
- This is nothing strange, that being a king he gave a share in counsel to the others and had a counsellor trusted on account of his age, while he himself was master of all affairs. Since why did he act as he did in the matter of Briseis, not persuaded by Nestor, the best man? — D. Just as indeed many private men too, not obeying the rulers nor the laws, do many things unlawfully, for which they also undergo their accountings; are they not, then, brought into the law-court and penalized, each according to the penalty he seems to deserve? —
- Certainly. — D. What then? Does not Agamemnon seem to you, having disobeyed at that time, afterward to render account to Nestor, when he accuses him of that deed among the wisest of the allies, the leaders themselves, bringing against him the assessment of what he must suffer or pay — a most grievous accusation, inasmuch as he was a clever orator — saying that he has long been heavy at heart over the affair:
- "ever since, O scion of Zeus, you went and took the girl Briseis from the tent of the wrathful Achilles, in no way according to my mind. For I, indeed, earnestly dissuaded you much; but you, yielding to your great-hearted spirit, dishonoured the best of men, whom even the immortals honoured; for you hold the prize you took. But even now, still, let us take thought."
- And, by Zeus, not only did he render him accountable in words, but also brought against him, for his error, the heaviest penalty of all. For he bids him entreat Achilles and do everything to persuade the man. And he assesses against himself, first, money — like those convicted in the law-courts — all that he says he can pay in requital for the outrage; and among other things he undertakes to swear an oath, with victims slain, concerning Briseis, that in truth he never even laid a hand on her after taking her;
- and, instead of merely transferring her from tent to tent, he promises to give much gold and horses and tripods and cauldrons and women and cities; and at the last, as though this were not enough, of his three daughters to give in marriage whichever he wishes — a thing no one was ever condemned to suffer: in return for a handmaid, and that a captive who had suffered nothing, to be compelled to give his daughter in marriage with a great dowry and without bride-gifts. And yet of this judgement we know no private suit decided more bitterly.
- Does it seem to you, by the gods, that Agamemnon ruled the Greeks unaccountably, and not rather underwent quite exact accountings for everything he did? But let us leave the discourse about these matters of his, sufficiently treated yesterday, and proceed to some other. — No, by the gods; rather, try to say all you have to say about the same matter, since I have only just now scarcely grasped the theme of the discourse. For I think you wish to speak about rule, or kingship, or something of the kind.