I. The above are all the noteworthy particulars which we have been able to collect about Theseus and Romulus.  It seems, in the first place, that Theseus of his own free will, and without any compulsion, when he might have reigned peacefully in Troezen, where he was heir to the kingdom, no mean one, longed to accomplish heroic deeds:  whereas Romulus was an exile, and in the position of a slave; the fear of death was hanging over him if unsuccessful, and so, as Plato says, he was made brave by sheer terror, and through fear of suffering death and torture was forced into doing great exploits.  Moreover, Romulus’s greatest achievement was the slaying of one man, the despot of Alba, whereas Skeiron, Sinis, Prokrustes, and Korynetes were merely the accompaniments and prelude to the greater actions of Theseus, and by slaying them he freed Greece from terrible scourges, before those whom he saved even knew who he was.  He also might have sailed peacefully over the sea to Athens, and had no trouble with those brigands, whereas Romulus could not be free from trouble while Amulius lived.  And it is a great argument in favour of Theseus that he attacked those wicked men for the sake of others, having himself suffered no wrong at their hands; whereas the twins were unconcerned at Amulius’s tyranny so long as it did not affect themselves.  And although it may have been a great exploit to receive a wound in fighting the Sabines, and to slay Acron, and to kill many enemies in battle, yet we may compare with these, on Theseus’s behalf, his battle with the Centaurs and his campaign against the Amazons.  As for the courage which Theseus showed in the matter of the Cretan tribute, when he voluntarily sailed to Crete with the youths and maidens, whether the penalty was to be given to the Minotaur to eat, or be sacrificed at the tomb of Androgeus, or even to be cast into dishonoured slavery under an insolent enemy, which is the least miserable fate mentioned by any writer, what a strength of mind, what public spirit and love of fame it shows!  In this instance it seems to me that philosophers have truly defined love as a “service designed by the gods for the care and preservation of the young.”  For the love of Ariadne seems to have been specially intended by Heaven to save Theseus; nor need we blame her for her passion, but rather wonder that all men and women did not share it.  If she alone felt it, then I say she deserved the love of a god, because of her zeal for all that is best and noblest.

II.  Both were born statesmen, yet neither behaved himself as a king should do, but, from similar motives, the one erred on the side of democracy, the other on that of despotism.  The first duty of a king is to preserve his crown; and this can be effected as well by refraining from improperly extending his rights as by too great eagerness to keep them.  For he who either gives up or overstrains his prerogative ceases to be a king or constitutional ruler, but becomes either a despot or demagogue; and in the one case is feared, in the other despised by his subjects.  Still the one is the result of kindliness of disposition, and the other that of selfishness and ferocity.