Cyropaedia

And of whom else is it said that by the munificence of his gifts he makes himself preferred above even brothers and parents and children? Who else was ever in a position like the Persian king to punish enemies who were distant a journey of many months? And who, besides Cyrus, ever gained an empire by conquest and even to his death was called father by the people he had subdued? For that name obviously belongs to a benefactor rather than to a despoiler.

Moreover,[*](The king’s eyes and king’s ears) we have discovered that he acquired the so-called king’s eyes and king’s ears in no other way than by bestowing presents and honours; for by rewarding liberally those who reported to him whatever it was to his interest to hear, he prompted many men to make it their business to use their eyes and ears to spy out what they could report to the king to his advantage.

As a natural result of this, many eyes and many ears were ascribed to the king. But if any one thinks that the king[*](Hdt. i. 114; Aesch. Pers. 980) selected one man to be his eye, he is wrong; for one only would see and one would hear but little; and it would have amounted to ordering all the rest to pay no attention, if one only had been appointed to see and hear. Besides, if people knew that a certain man was the eye, they would know that they must beware of him. But such is not the case; for the king listens to anybody who may claim to have heard or seen anything worthy of attention.

And thus the saying comes about, The king has many ears and many eyes; and people are everywhere afraid to say anything to the discredit of the king, just as if he himself were listening; or to do anything to harm him, just as if he were present. Not only, therefore, would no one have ventured to say anything derogatory of Cyrus to any one else, but every one conducted himself at all times just as if those who were within hearing were so many eyes and ears of the king. I do not know what better reason any one could assign for this attitude toward him on the part of people generally than that it was his policy to do large favours in return for small ones.

That he, the richest man of all, should excel[*](Cyrus excelled in generosity) in the munificence of his presents is not surprising; but for him, the king, to exceed all others in thoughtful attention to his friends and in care for them, that is more remarkable; and it is said to have been no secret that there was nothing wherein he would have been so much ashamed of being outdone as in attention to his friends.

People quote a remark of his to the effect that the duties of a good shepherd and of a good king were very much alike; a good shepherd ought, while deriving benefit from his flocks, to make them happy (so far as sheep can be said to have happiness), and in the same way a king ought to make his people and his cities happy, if he would derive benefits from them. Seeing that he held this theory, it is not at all surprising that he was ambitious to surpass all other men in attention to his friends.

And, among other proofs, Cyrus is said to have[*](Cyrus’s theory of wealth vs. that of Croesus) given Croesus one splendid practical demonstration of the correctness of this theory, when the latter warned him that by giving so much away he would make himself poor, whereas he was in a position to lay up in his house more treasures of gold than any other man. And how much gold, pray, Cyrus is said to have asked, do you think I should have by this time, if I had been amassing it, as you propose, ever since I have been in power?

Croesus named some large sum. Well, then, Croesus, said Cyrus in reply, send along with Hystaspas here a man in whom you have most confidence. And you, Hystaspas, said he to him, go the round of my friends and tell them that I need money for a certain enterprise; for, in truth, I do need more. And bid them write down the amount they could each let me have, and affix their seals to each subscription, and give it to Croesus’s messenger to deliver here.