Comparison of Lycurgus and Numa

In the second place, then, it is granted that, just as musicians tune their lyres, so Lycurgus tightened the strings at Sparta, which he found relaxed with luxury, and Numa loosened the strings at Rome, where the tones were sharp and high; but the task was more difficult in the case of Lycurgus. For his efforts were to persuade the citizens, not to take off their breast-plates and lay aside their swords, but to cast away gold and silver, and abandon costly couches and tables; not to cease from wars and hold festivals and sacrifices, but to give up feasting and drinking and practise laboriously as soldiers and athletes.

Wherefore the one accomplished all his ends by persuasion, through the good-will and honour in which his people held him; but the other had to risk his life and suffer wounds, and scarcely then prevailed.

Numa’s muse, however, was gentle and humane, and he converted his people to peace and righteousness, and softened their violent and fiery tempers. And if we must ascribe to the administration of Lycurgus the treatment of the Helots,

a most savage and lawless practice, we shall own that Numa was far more Hellenic as a lawgiver, since he gave acknowledged slaves a taste of the dignity of freedom, by making it the custom for them to feast in the company of their masters during the Saturnalia[*](A mid-winter harvest festival in honour of Saturnus.) For this too was one of the institutions of Numa, as we are told, who thereby admitted to the enjoyment of the yearly fruits of the earth those who had helped to produce them. Some, however, fancy that this custom was a reminder of the equality which characterized the famous Saturnian age, when there was neither slave nor master, but all were regarded as kinsmen and equals.

In general, both alike manifestly strove to lead their peoples to independence and sobriety; but as regards the other virtues, the one set his affections more on bravery, the other on righteousness; unless, indeed, the different natures or usages on which the government of each was based required different provisions.

For it was not out of cowardice that Numa put a stop to the waging of war, but to prevent the commission of injustice; neither was it to promote the commission of injustice that Lycurgus made his people warlike, but that they might not suffer injustice. Accordingly, in removing the excesses and supplying the deficiencies of their citizens, both were forced to make great innovations.

And surely, as regards the arrangement and classification of the citizens under their respective governments, Numa’s was strongly popular and inclined to favour the masses, resulting in a promiscuous and variegated commonalty of goldsmiths, musicians, and leather-workers; but that of Lycurgus was rigid and aristocratic, relegating the mechanical arts into the hands of slaves and aliens, but confining the citizens themselves to the use of the shield and the spear, so that they were artificers of war and servants of Ares, but knew and cared for nothing else than to obey their commanders and master their enemies.

For freemen were not even permitted to transact business, that they might be entirely and forever free, but the whole apparatus of business was turned over to slaves and Helots, just like the preparation and serving of their meals. Numa, on the contrary, made no such distinctions, but, while he put a stop to military rapacity, he prohibited no other gainful occupation. Nor did he reduce the great inequalities resulting therefrom,

but left the acquisition of wealth wholly unrestricted, and paid no attention to the great increase of poverty and its gradual influx into the city. And yet it was his duty at the very outset, while as yet there was no general or great disparity of means, but people still lived on much the same plane, to make a stand against rapacity, as Lycurgus did, and take measures of precaution against its mischiefs; for these were not trifling, but furnished the seed and source of the most and greatest evils of after times.