For the most part, such men may be seen enjoying high favour in the courts of kings and among the friends of governors and princes, where envy is great, suspicions are countless, and occasions for flattery and slander are frequent. For where hope runs ever high, there envy is more bitter, hate more dangerous, and rivalry more cunning. All eye one another sharply and keep watch like gladiators to detect some part of the body exposed. Everyone, wishing to be first himself, shoves or elbows his neighbour out of his way and, if he can, slyly pulls down or trips up the man ahead. In this way a good man is simply upset and thrown at the start, and finally thrust off the course in disgrace, while one who is better versed in flattery and cleverer at such unfair practices wins. In a word, it is “devil take the hindmost !” ; for they quite confirm Homer’s saying: Impartial war adds slayer to the slain.Iliad 18, 309. So, as their conflict is for no small stake, they think out all sorts of ways to get at each other, of which the quickest, though most perilous, road is slander, which has a hopeful beginning in envy or hatred, but leads to a sorry, tragic ending, beset with many accidents.

Yet this is not an insignificant or a simple thing, as one might suppose; it requires much skill, no little shrewdness, and some degree of close study. For slander would not do so much harm if it were not set afoot in a plausible way, and it would not prevail over truth, that is stronger than all else, if it did not assume a high degree of attractiveness and plausibility and a thousand things beside to disarm its hearers.

Generally speaking, slander is most often directed against a man who is in favour and on this account is viewed with envy by those he has put behind him. They all direct their shafts at him, regarding him as a hindrance and a stumbling-block, and each one expects to be first himself when he has routed his chief and ousted him from favour. Something of the same sort happens in the athletic games, in footraces. A good runner fram the moment that the barrier falls Races were started in antiquity by the dropping of a rope or bar. thinks only of getting forward, sets his mind on the finish and counts on his legs to win for him; he therefore does not molest the man next to him in any way or trouble himself at ail about the contestants. But an inferior, unsportsmanlike competitor, abandoning all hope based on his speed, resorts to crooked work, and the only thing in the world he thinks of is cutting off the runner by holding or tripping him, with the idea that if he should fail in this he would never be able to win. So it is with the friendships of the mighty. The man in the lead is forthwith the object of plots, and if caught off.his guard in the midst of his foes, he is made away with, while-they are cherished and are thought friendly because of the harm they appeared to be doing to others.

As for the verisimilitude of their slander, calum- niators are not careless in thinking out that point; all their work centres on it, for they are afraid to put in anything discordant or even irrelevant. For example, they generally make their charges credible by distorting the real attributes of the man they are slandering. Thus they insinuate that a doctor is a poisoner, that a rich man is a would-be monarch, or that a courtier is a traitor.

Sometimes, however, the hearer himself suggests the starting-point for slander, and the knaves attain their end by adapting themselves to his disposition. If they see that he is jealous, they say: “He signed to your wife during dinner and gazed at her and sighed, and Stratonice was not very displeased withhim.” In short, the charges they make to him are . based on passion and illicit love. If he has a bent for poetry and prides himself on it, they say : “No, indeed! Philoxenus made fun of your verses, pulled them to pieces and said that they wouldn’t scan and were wretchedly composed.” Toa pious, godly man the charge is made that his friend is godless and impious, that he rejects God and denies Providence. Thereupon the man, stung in the ear, so to speak, by a gadfly, gets thoroughly angry, as is natural, and turns his back on his friend without awaiting definite proof.

In short, they think out and say the sort of thing that they know to be best adapted to provoke the hearer to anger, and as they know the place where each can be wounded, they shoot their arrows and throw their spears at it, so that their hearer, thrown off his balance by sudden anger, will not thereafter be free to get at the truth; indeed, however much a slandered man may want to defend himself, he will not let him do so, because he is prejudiced by the surprising nature of what he has’ heard, just as if that made it true.

A very effective form of slander is the one that is based on opposition to the hearer’s tastes. For instance, in the court of the Ptolemy who was called DionysusProbably Ptolemy Auletes, father of Cleopatra, who styled himself "the new Dionysus.” there was once a man who accused Demetrius, the Platonic philosopher, of drinking nothing but water and of being the only person who did not wear women’s clothes during the feast of Dionysus. If Demetrius, on being sent for early the next morning, had ‘not drunk wine in view of everybody and had not put on a thin gown and played the cymbals and danced, he would have been put to death for not liking the king’ s mode of life, and being a critic and an opponent of Ptolemy’s luxury.

In the court of Alexander it was once the greatest of all slanderous charges to say that a man did not worship Hephaestion or even make obeisance to him —for after the death of Hephaestion, Alexander for the love he bore him determined to add to his other great feats that of appointing the dead man a god. So the cities at once erected temples; plots of ground - were consecrated ; altars, sacrifices and feasts were established in honour of this new god, and everybody’s strongest oath was “By Hephaestion.” If anyone smiled at what went on or failed to'seem quite reverent, the penalty prescribed was death. The flatterers, taking hold of this childish passion of Alexander’s, at once began to feed it and fan it into flame by telling about dreams of Hephaestion, in that way ascribing to him visitations and cures and accrediting him with prophecies; and at last they began to sacrifice to him as “‘ Coadjutor” and "Saviour.”In this way they made him out the associate of Apollo. Alexander liked to hear all this, and at length believed it, and was very proud of himself for being, as he thought, not only the son of a god but also able to make gods. Well, how many of Alexander's friends, do you suppose, reaped the results of Hephaestion’s divinity during that period, through being accused of not honouring the universal god, and consequently being banished and deprived of the king’s favour?

It was then that Agathocles of Samos, one of Alexander’s captains whom he esteemed highly, came near being shut up in a lion’s den because he was charged with having wept as he went by the tomb of Hephaestion. But Perdiccas is said to have come to his rescue, swearing by all the gods and by Hephaestion to boot that while he was hunting the god had appeared to him in the flesh and had bidden him tell Alexander to spare Agathocles, saying that he had not wept from want of faith or because he thought Hephaestion dead, but only because he had been put in mind of their old-time friendship.