Hiero | Page 8

those hid chambers where lie stowed away the happiness and the unhappiness of mankind.
[3] There is some redundancy in the phraseology.
I repeat then, I little marvel that the multitude should be blinded in this matter. But that you others also, you who are held to see with the mind's eye more clearly than with the eye of sense the mass of circumstances,[4] should share its ignorance, does indeed excite my wonderment. Now, I know it all too plainly from my own experience, Simonides, and I assure you, the tyrant is one who has the smallest share of life's blessings, whilst of its greater miseries he possesses most.
[4] Lit. "the majority of things"; al. "the thousand details of a thing."
For instance, if peace is held to be a mighty blessing to mankind, then of peace despotic monarchs are scant sharers. Or is war a curse? If so, of this particular pest your monarch shares the largest moiety. For, look you, the private citizen, unless his city-state should chance to be engaged in some common war,[5] is free to travel wheresoe'er he chooses without fear of being done to death, whereas the tyrant cannot stir without setting his foot on hostile territory. At any rate, nothing will persuade him but he must go through life armed, and on all occasions drag about with him armed satellites. In the next place, the private citizen, even during an expedition into hostile territory,[6] can comfort himself in the reflection that as soon as he gets back home he will be safe from further peril. Whereas the tyrant knows precisely the reverse; as soon as he arrives in his own city, he will find himself in the centre of hostility at once. Or let us suppose that an invading army, superior in force, is marching against a city: however much the weaker population, whilst they are still outside their walls, may feel the stress of danger, yet once within their trenches one and all expect to find themselves in absolute security. But the tyrant is not out of danger, even when he has passed the portals of his palace. Nay! there of all places most, he feels, he must maintain the strictist watch.[7] Again, to the private citizen there will come eventually, either through truce or terms of peace, respite from war; but for the tyrant, the day of peace will never dawn. What peace can he have with those over whom he exercises his despotic sway?[8] Nor have the terms of truce been yet devised, on which the despotic ruler may rely with confidence.[9]
[5] {koinon}, i.e. making demands upon the eneriges of all the citizens in common, as opposed to the personal character of war as conducted by a despot = "public," "patriotic," "national" war. Al. borne by the particular {polis} as member of a league, whether of states united for the time being in a {summakhia}, or permanently in a confederacy = a "federal" war.
[6] "Even if serving on a campaign in the enemy's country."
[7] Or, "he has to exercise the utmost vigilance."
[8] "With those who are 'absolutely governed,' not to say tyrannically ruled."
[9] Or, "which the tyrant may accept in faith and go his way rejoicing."
Wars doubtless there are,[10] wars waged by states and wars waged by autocratic monarchs against those whom they have forcibly enslaved, and in respect of these wars there is no hardship which any member of the states at war[11] can suffer but the tyrant will feel it also. That is to say, both must alike be under arms, keep guard, run risks; and whatever the pains of defeat may be, they are equally sustained by both. Up to this point there is no distinction. The "bitters" are equal. But when we come to estimate the "sweets" derivable from warfare between states,[12] the parallel ceases. The tyrant, if he shared the pains before, no longer shares the pleasures now. What happens when a state has gained the mastery in battle over her antagonist? It would be hard (I take it) to describe the joy of that occurrence: joy in the rout, joy in the pursuit, joy in the slaughter of their enemies; and in what language shall I describe the exultation of these warriors at their feats of arms? With what assumption they bind on their brows the glittering wreath of glory;[13] with what mirth and jollity congratulate themselves on having raised their city to newer heights of fame. Each several citizen claims to have shared in the plan of the campaign,[14] and to have slain the largest number. Indeed it would be hard to find where false embellishment will not creep in,[15] the number stated to be the slain exceeding that of those that actually perished. So truly glorious a thing it seems to them to have won