On the next day he again officiated, offering a thank-offering to the gods for his recovery.  When this sacrifice was finished, he went home and lay down, and before any one noticed how changed he was, he fell into a delirious trance, and died in three days, having in his life wanted none of those things which are thought to render men happy.  Even his funeral procession was admirable and enviable, and a noble tribute to his valour and goodness.  I do not mean gold, ivory, and other expensive and vain-glorious apparatus, but love, honour, and respect, not only shown by his own countrymen, but also by foreigners.  For of the Iberians, Ligurians, and Macedonians who happened to be in Rome, the strongest carried the bier, while the elder men followed after, praising Aemilius as the saviour and benefactor of their countries.  For he not only during his period of conquest had treated them mildly and humanely, but throughout the rest of his life was always bestowing benefits upon them as persons peculiarly connected with himself.  His estate, they say, scarcely amounted to three hundred and seventy thousand sesterces,[A] which he left to be shared between his two sons; but Scipio, the younger, consented to give up his share to his brother, as he was a member of a rich family, that of Africanus.  Such is said to have been the life and character of Aemilius Paulus.

[Footnote A:  Little more than L3000.]

COMPARISON OF PAULUS AEMILIUS AND TIMOLEON.

I. The characters of these men being such as is shown in their histories, it is evident that in comparing them we shall find few differences and points of variance.  Even their wars were in both cases waged against notable antagonists, the one with the Macedonians, the other with the Carthaginians:  while their conquests were glorious, as the one took Macedonia, and crushed the dynasty of Antigonus in the person of its seventh king, while the other drove all the despots from Sicily and set the island free.  Unless indeed any one should insinuate that Aemilius attacked Perseus when he was in great strength and had conquered the Romans before, whereas Timoleon fell upon Dionysius when he was quite worn out and helpless:  though again it might be urged on behalf of Timoleon that he overcame many despots and the great power of Carthage, with an army hastily collected from all sources, not, like Aemilius, commanding men who were inured to war and knew how to obey, but making use of disorderly mercenary soldiers who only fought when it pleased them to do so.  An equal success, gained with such unequal means, reflects the greater credit on the general.

II.  Both were just and incorruptible in their conduct:  but Aemilius seems to have had the advantage of the customs and state of feeling among his countrymen, by which he was trained to integrity, while Timoleon without any such encouragement acted virtuously, from his own nature.  This is proved by the fact that the Romans of that period were all submissive to authority, and carried out the traditions of the state, respecting the laws and the opinions of their countrymen:  whereas, except Dion, no Greek leader or general of that time had anything to do with Sicilian affairs who did not take bribes:  though many suspected than Dion was meditating making himself king, and that he had dreams of an empire like that of Sparta.