XXII. 262–263 (tr. Samuel Butler); Achilles to Hector.
Iliad (c. 750 BC)
Ὡς οὐκ ἔστι λέουσι καὶ ἀνδράσιν ὅρκια πιστά, οὐδὲ λύκοι τε καὶ ἄρνες ὁμόφρονα θυμὸν ἔχουσιν.
The Iliad of Homer, Rendered into English Prose (1898), Book XXII
Book XXII, lines 287–289; spoken by Achilles.
Translations, Iliad (1997)
Source: The Prince (1513), Ch. 18
Variant translations of portions of this passage:
Every one admits how praiseworthy it is in a prince to keep faith, and to live with integrity and not with craft. Nevertheless our experience has been that those princes who have done great things have held good faith of little account, and have known how to circumvent the intellect of men by craft, and in the end have overcome those who have relied on their word.
Ch. 18. Concerning the Way in which Princes should keep Faith (as translated by W. K. Marriott)
A prince being thus obliged to know well how to act as a beast must imitate the fox and the lion, for the lion cannot protect himself from traps, and the fox cannot defend himself from wolves. One must therefore be a fox to recognize traps, and a lion to frighten wolves.
You must know there are two ways of contesting, the one by the law, the other by force; the first method is proper to men, the second to beasts; but because the first is frequently not sufficient, it is necessary to have recourse to the second.
Context: A prince being thus obliged to know well how to act as a beast must imitate the fox and the lion, for the lion cannot protect himself from snares, and the fox cannot defend himself from wolves. One must therefore be a fox to recognise snares, and a lion to frighten wolves. Those that wish to be only lions do not understand this.
Context: How laudable it is for a prince to keep good faith and live with integrity, and not with astuteness, every one knows. Still the experience of our times shows those princes to have done great things who have had little regard for good faith, and have been able by astuteness to confuse men's brains, and who have ultimately overcome those who have made loyalty their foundation. You must know, then, that there are two methods of fighting, the one by law, the other by force: the first method is that of men, the second of beasts; but as the first method is often insufficient, one must have recourse to the second. It is therefore necessary to know well how to use both the beast and the man. This was covertly taught to princes by ancient writers, who relate how Achilles and many others of those princes were given to Chiron the centaur to be brought up, who kept them under his discipline; this system of having for teacher one who was half beast and half man is meant to indicate that a prince must know how to use both natures, and that the one without the other is not durable. A prince being thus obliged to know well how to act as a beast must imitate the fox and the lion, for the lion cannot protect himself from snares, and the fox cannot defend himself from wolves. One must therefore be a fox to recognise snares, and a lion to frighten wolves. Those that wish to be only lions do not understand this. Therefore, a prudent ruler ought not to keep faith when by so doing it would be against his interest, and when the reasons which made him bind himself no longer exist. If men were all good, this precept would not be a good one; but as they are bad, and would not observe their faith with you, so you are not bound to keep faith with them.... those that have been best able to imitate the fox have succeeded best. But it is necessary to be able to disguise this character well, and to be a great feigner and dissembler.
“And so the lion fell in love with the lamb…”
he murmured. I looked away, hiding my eyes as I thrilled to the word.
"What a stupid lamb," I sighed.
"What a sick, masochistic lion."
Edward Cullen and Bella Swan, p. 274
Twilight series, Twilight (2005)
Affurisms: Slips of the Pen http://books.google.com/books?id=Wpk_AAAAYAAJ&q="The+lion+and+the+lamb+may+possibly+sumtime+lay+down+in+this+world+together+for+a+fu+minnits+but+when+the+lion+kums+tew+git+up+the+lamb+will+be+missing"&pg=PA227#v=onepage The Complete Works of Josh Billings (1876)
Widely attributed to Franklin on the Internet, sometimes without the second sentence. It is not found in any of his known writings, and the word "lunch" is not known to have appeared anywhere in English literature until the 1820s, decades after his death. The phrasing itself has a very modern tone and the second sentence especially might not even be as old as the internet. Some of these observations are made in response to a query at Google Answers. http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=389308
The earliest known similar statements are:
A democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.
Gary Strand, Usenet group sci.environment, 23 April 1990. http://groups.google.com/group/sci.environment/msg/057b1c6389f4776f?dmode=source
Democracy is not freedom. Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to eat for lunch. Freedom comes from the recognition of certain rights which may not be taken, not even by a 99% vote.
Marvin Simkin, "Individual Rights", Los Angeles Times, 12 January 1992. http://articles.latimes.com/1992-01-12/local/me-358_1_jail-tax-individual-rights-san-diego
Democracy must be something more than two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.
James Bovard, Lost Rights: The Destruction of American Liberty (1994), ISBN 0312123337, p. 333.
Also cited as by Bovard in the Sacramento Bee (1994) http://www.giraffe.com/gr_wolves.html
Misattributed
Variant: Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.
“Though lions to their enemies they were lambs to their friends.”
The infernal Marriage, part 2, Chapter 4 (1834).
Books
