1.1
SUCH being the history of these men, it is clear that our comparison of them will have few points of difference or dissimilarity to show.
1.2
For the wars which both conducted were against notable antagonists; in the one case against the Macedonians, in the other against the Carthaginians. Their victories, too, were far-famed: the one took Macedonia and brought the royal line of Antigonus to an end in its seventh king; the other abolished all the tyrannies in Sicily and set the island free.
1.3
One might, indeed, argue otherwise, and say that Perseus was strong and victorious over the Romans when Aemilius engaged him, while Dionysius, when Timoleon engaged him, was altogether crushed and desperate.
1.4
And, again, it might be said in favour of Timoleon that he conquered many tyrants and the force of the Carthaginians, large as it was, with what soldiers he could get, not having at his service, as Aemilius had, men who were experienced in war and taught to obey orders, but men who were hirelings and disorderly soldiers, accustomed to consult their own pleasure in their campaigns.
1.5
For when equal successes follow an unequal equipment, the greater credit accrues to the commander.
2.1
Further, in their administration of affairs both were just and incorruptible; but Aemilius, it would seem, was made so from the outset of his career by the laws and customs of his country, while Timoleon’s great probity was due to himself.
2.2
There is proof of this in the fact that the Romans in the time of Aemilius were, all alike, orderly in their lives, observant of usage, and wholesomely fearful of the laws and of their fellow citizens; whereas, of the Greek leaders and generals who took part in Sicilian affairs during the time of Timoleon, not one was free from corruption except Dion.
2.3
And Dion was suspected by many of being ambitious for a monarchy and dreaming of a kingdom like that in Sparta.
