A general, as Polybios says,[1] who 'was in other respects a perfect man in statesmanlike character. For [he was] certainly proficient in speaking and understanding and concealing what had been decided, and, moreover, amiable in dealing with political differences,[2] and in binding friends to himself and acquiring allies [he was] second to none. Again, in concocting operations, deceits, and plots against the enemy and in bringing these to a conclusion through his own endurance and daring, he was tremendous.[3] Yet this same man, whenever[4] he wished to contend for [success] in the field,[5] was sluggish in thoughts, irresolute in applications, and in person unable to face danger. For this reason he filled the Peloponnese with battle monuments referring to [victories over] him, and in this respect he was almost always easy for the enemy to deal with. Thus men's natures not only have in their bodies a certain diversity, but even more in their souls, so that the same man will not only be, in those actions that are disparate, well endowed in respect of some and the opposite in respect of others, but concerning closely similar [actions] the same man will be both very intelligent and very slow, likewise both very daring and very cowardly. Well, these things are not paradoxical, but are familiar and well known to those willing to pay attention.[6] For in hunts, some men are bold in the face of the wrenchings[7] of wild animals, but the same men are despicable in the face of weapons and enemies; and they may be adept and practical both[8] in military service on a man-against-man basis and individually, but collectively inefficient and when in military formation of a number of men.'[9]