Comparison of Lysander and Sulla (2.1-2.2)

It is true, indeed, that Lysander attempted, as I have said, to change the form of government, but it was by milder and more legal methods than Sulla’s; by persuasion, namely, not by force of arms, nor by subverting everything at once, as Sulla did, but by amending merely the appointment of the kings. And it seemed but natural justice, in a way, that the best of the best should rule in a city which had the leadership in Hellas by virtue of his excellence, and not of his noble birth.

For just as a hunter looks for a dog, and not the whelp of a certain bitch, and a horseman for a horse, and not the foal of a certain mare (for what if the foal should prove to be a mule?), so the statesman makes an utter mistake if he enquires, not what sort of a man the ruler is, but from whom he is descended. And indeed the Spartans themselves deposed some of their kings, for the reason that they were not kingly men, but insignificant nobodies. And if vice, even in one of ancient family, is dishonourable, then it must be virtue itself, and not good birth, that makes virtue honourable.