Aristides

Themistocles joined a society of political friends, and so secured no inconsiderable support and power. Hence when some one told him that he would be a good ruler over the Athenians if he would only be fair and impartial to all, he replied: Never may I sit on a tribunal where my friends are to get no more advantage from me than strangers.

But Aristides walked the way of statesmanship by himself, on a private path of his own, as it were, because, in the first place, he was unwilling to join with any comrades in wrong-doing, or to vex them by withholding favours; and, in the second place, he saw that power derived from friends incited many to do wrong, and so was on his guard against it, deeming it right that the good citizen should base his confidence only on serviceable and just conduct.

However, since Themistocles was a reckless agitator, and opposed and thwarted him in every measure of state, Aristides himself also was almost compelled—partly in self-defence, and partly to curtail his adversary’s power, which was increasing through the favour of the many—to set himself in opposition to what Themistocles was trying to do, thinking it better that some advantages should escape the people than that his adversary, by prevailing everywhere, should become too strong.

Finally there came a time when he opposed and defeated Themistocles in an attempt to carry some really necessary measure. Then he could no longer hold his peace, but declared, as he left the Assembly, that there was no safety for the Athenian state unless they threw both Themistocles and himself into the death-pit. On another occasion he himself introduced a certain measure to the people, and was carrying it through successfully, in spite of the attacks of the opposition upon it, but just as the presiding officer was to put it to the final vote, perceiving, from the very speeches that had been made in opposition to it, the inexpediency of his measure, he withdrew it without a vote.