Towards the middle of his account of the First Punic War, Polybius describes how the Spartan Xanthippus helps the Carthaginians to recover their self-confidence after two successive defeats at sea and on land, and to win a major victory over the Romans and their hitherto invincible leader, M. Atilius Regulus (1.32–35). Xanthippus arrives at a critical juncture, when the Carthaginians are faced with not only the Romans who are preparing to besiege them, but also with the Numidian attacks and the problems caused by the mass of inhabitants of the countryside who have flocked to the city. Thanks to his experience, Xanthippus realizes that the Carthaginians’ failures are due to the fact that their leaders choose to fight in places where they cannot make use of their cavalry and elephants, and when he assumes command of the army himself, he routs the enemy and takes Regulus captive. Polybius, commenting on the events, observes that in this case the verse of Euripides, “one wise counsel conquers many hands” (ἓν σοφὸν βούλευμα τὰς πολλὰς χέρας νικᾷ),1 was confirmed, since one man destroyed an army thought to be invincible and extremely efficient in war (1.35.4–5).

Polybius expresses his belief that a single man can affect the course of history by his behavior on other occasions, too. At 8.3.3, for example, at the opening of his description of the Roman siege of Syracuse, he repeats the observation he made concerning the Xanthippus episode, noting that the would-be conquerors did not reckon with the power of Archimedes or foresee that “in some cases the genius of one man accomplishes much more than any number of hands” (μία ψυχὴ τῆς ἁπάσης ἐστὶ πολυχειρίας ἐν ἐνίοις καιροῖς ἀνυστικωτέρα). The Romans, indeed, remain encamped around the city for eight months, unable to conquer it because all their efforts are countered by Archimedes’ defensive machines, leading Polybius to exclaim in admiration, in the same spirit as his previous comment, “Such a great and marvellous thing does the genius of one man show itself to be when properly applied to certain matters” (εἷς ἀνὴρ καὶ μία ψυχὴ δεόντως ἡρμοσμένη πρὸς ἔνια τῶν πραγμάτων μέγα τι χρῆμα φαίνεται γίνεσθαι καὶ θαυμάσιον, 8.7.7). He makes yet another similar statement on the great things that can be achieved by the right man at 9.22.6, when describing the many problems that Hannibal caused the Romans: “Such a great and wonderful product of nature is a man with a mind properly fitted by its original constitution to execute any project within human power” (οὕτως μέγα τι φύεται χρῆμα καὶ θαυμάσιον ἀνὴρ καὶ ψυχὴ δεόντως ἁρμοσθεῖσα κατὰ τὴν ἐξ ἀρχῆς σύστασιν πρὸς ὅ,τι ἂν ὁρμήσῃ τῶν ἀνθρωπίνων ἔργων). At 39.4.1–2, moreover, commenting on the concord that arose among the Aetolians after the death of Lyciscus, Polybius notes that human nature is so powerful (τηλικαύτη τίς ἐστιν, ὡς ἔοικε, δύναμις ἐν ταῖς τῶν ἀνθρώπων φύσεσιν), that entire armies and nations may experience the greatest evil and the greatest good owing to the behavior of a single man (δι᾽ ἑνὸς ἀνδρὸς ἀρετὴν καὶ κακίαν).

In the Histories many examples are to be found confirming this view. Polybius presents some of the most iconic leaders of antiquity, who achieved great deeds thanks to their abilities, and others who, on the contrary, did not live up to their role and caused irreparable damage. However, although most of Polybius’ leaders have attracted intense interest, the subject of leadership has not been treated as a key concern of the work, on a par with the presentation of the expansion of Roman rule. Polybius is primarily thought of as the historian of the rise of Rome into a great power of the time. Admittedly, the way in which the subject of the work is described in the proem of the first book can reasonably lead to such a conclusion. At 1.1.5 Polybius promises, specifically, that in his work he will explain by what means and under what system of government (πῶς καὶ τίνι γένει πολιτείας) almost all the nations of the world have been defeated in less than fifty-three years. This picture is further reinforced by his famous analysis in the sixth book, where the Roman success is presented as largely resulting from the flawless operation of their system of government and institutions. However, the expansion of Roman dominion was achieved following a long series of military enterprises in which the leadership skills of the participating generals played a vital part. Polybius, moreover, alongside the events of Roman history, provides a detailed account of the developments all around the Mediterranean basin that contributed to its conquest by Rome — developments set in motion by leaders whose characteristics and behaviors also form the object of systematic presentation.

How strongly the Histories are permeated by an interest in leadership is also evident from the way in which Polybius envisages the audience whom he is addressing. Polybius, of course, claims in the proem that the subject of his work can leave no reader unmoved (1.1.4–5). At 9.1.2–5, however, recalling Thucydides’ famous admission that the lack of story–like elements in his work will make it less pleasurable to read (1.22.4), Polybius, too, recognizes that his exclusive focus on political and military events will only win the attention of one type of reader, those who enjoy such subjects, but will seem tedious to most (τῷ δὲ πλείονι μέρει τῶν ἀκροατῶν ἀψυχαγώγητον παρεσκευάκαμεν τὴν ἀνάγνωσιν). Moreover, Polybius clearly stresses that he is not addressing only those who are interested in politics and war simply as enquiring readers, but also men of action, political and military leaders who may find themselves facing similar situations to those he describes, and those who aspire to such roles in future. Thus he is very often careful to underline the benefits arising from his discussions to men of action, as, for example, when explaining the distinction between the cause, the pretext, and the beginning of a war (3.7.5), or when referring to Philip V’s change for the worse (7.11.2).2 In several cases, indeed, he does not hesitate to openly urge men of action to learn from the events he narrates and adjust their behavior accordingly.3 These frequent authorial comments show that Polybius’ work contains abundant material which is not only relevant to the art of leadership but can even assist (aspiring) leaders to fulfil their obligations successfully.

It is noteworthy, and typical of his especial familiarity with the theme of leadership, that in one case Polybius offers us the opportunity to observe the process by which he himself contributes as a mentor to the development of the leadership qualities and skills of a person who entrusts him with that duty. At 31.23–24 he describes the scene in which the young Scipio Aemilianus complains to Polybius that he pays more attention to his older brother Fabius, and asks him if this is because he thinks him quiet, indolent, and an unworthy successor to his illustrious forebears. Polybius reassures the young man that the only reason he engages more with his older brother is due to the latter’s seniority, and offers to help Scipio speak and act in a way worthy of his family, assuring him that he will find no better supporter (μηδένα συναγωνιστὴν καὶ συνεργὸν ἄλλον εὑρεῖν ἂν ἡμῶν ἐπιτηδειότερον, 31.24.8). At 31.25–29 there is a detailed description of the program Scipio followed in order to stand out among his peers for his prudence, generosity, and courage. Although Polybius’ role is only mentioned explicitly in the part of the program concerning the acquisition of courage (31.29.8), the fact that this section is preceded by the scene of the conversation between the two men and the emphasis on the familiarity and frequency of their communication (31.24.9–25.1) leave us in no doubt that the historian’s wise guidance was one of the chief reasons why “the fame of Scipio in Rome advanced so far and became so brilliant more quickly than it should” (ἐπὶ τοσοῦτο προέκοψε καὶ θᾶττον ἢ καθῆκεν ἐξέλαμψεν ἡ τοῦ Σκιπίωνος ἐν τῇ Ῥώμῃ δόξα, 31.23.2). Scipio’s achievements and virtues reflect honorably on Polybius himself, reminding readers, especially those interested in matters of leadership, that they are studying an author who knows the subject intimately, having played such a key role in the development of the abilities and the broader shaping of the character of the future conqueror of Carthage.

It is commonly acknowledged that there has been a remarkable surge of interest in Polybius in recent decades. To the monumental works of Walbank (1957–1979) and Pédech (1964) has been added a series of monographs approaching Polybius’ fragmentary work from many different angles and highlighting its wealth and complexity.4 Eckstein’s Moral Vision in the Histories of Polybius (1995) underlined the historian’s genuine interest in the moral dimension of the events and behaviors he...