Polybius [writes]: "there is something hard to understand about the topic [and] hard to state precisely. For it is not easy to declare whom we should truly consider a traitor. For it is clear that we should not simply consider traitors either those men who voluntarily devise common policy to serve certain kings or dynasts, or those who, influenced by circumstances, persuade their own countries to change to new friendships and alliances from established ones -- not even these. Far from it: for often men of this kind have been responsible for the greatest benefits to their countries."[1] "But whatever men in difficult circumstances or because of their own insecurity or advantage or because of disputes with opposing factions hand over their cities to their enemies, or whoever accepting garrisons and using assistance from outside for their own initiatives and purposes subject their countries to the domination of those more powerful -- to all such men one would appropriately apply the name of treachery, those whom no advantage or evil has ever accompanied, nor things which are opposite according to the agreement of all."[2]