hes, abuse, and
suspicion from Nektanebis because he forbade him to fight, and by
consistently carrying out his own judicious policy saved the Egyptians
against their will. He not only guided Sparta safely through that
terrible crisis, but was enabled to win a victory over the Thebans in
the city itself, which he never could have done had he yielded to the
entreaties of the Lacedaemonians to fight when their country was first
invaded. Thus it happened that Agesilaus was warmly praised by those
whose opinions he had overruled, while Pompeius made mistakes to
please his friends, and afterwards was reproached by them for what he
had done. Some historians tell us, however, that he was deceived by
his father-in-law, Scipio, who with the intention of embezzling and
converting to his own use the greater part of the treasure which
Pompeius brought from Asia, urged him to fight as soon as possible, as
though there was likely to be a scarcity of money. In these respects,
then, we have reviewed their respective characters.

V. Pompeius went to Egypt of necessity, fleeing for his life; but
Agesilaus went there with the dishonourable purpose of acting as
general for the barbarians, in order that he might employ the money
which he earned by that means in making war upon the Greeks. We blame
the Egyptians for their conduct to Pompeius; but the Egyptians have
equal reason to complain of the conduct of Agesilaus towards
themselves; for though Pompeius trusted them and was betrayed, yet
Agesilaus deserted the man who trusted him, and joined the enemies of
those whom he went out to assist.

LIFE OF ALEXANDER.

I. In writing the Lives of Alexander the Great and of Caesar the
conqueror of Pompeius, which are contained in this book, I have before
me such an abundance of materials, that I shall make no other preface
than to beg the reader, if he finds any of their famous exploits
recorded imperfectly, and with large excisions, not to regard this as
a fault. I am writing biography, not history; and often a man's most
brilliant actions prove nothing as to his true character, while some
trifling incident, some casual remark or jest, will throw more light
upon what manner of man he was than the bloodiest battle, the greatest
array of armies, or the most important siege. Therefore, just as
portrait painters pay most attention to those peculiarities of the
face and eyes, in which the likeness consists, and care but little for
the rest o