Plutarch, Comparison of Lycurgus and Numa
Bernadotte Perrin, Ed.

2. In general, both alike manifestly strove to lead their peoples to independence and sobriety; but as regards the other virtues, the one set his affections more on bravery, the other on righteousness; unless, indeed, the different natures or usages on which the government of each was based required different provisions. [2] For it was not out of cowardice that Numa put a stop to the waging of war, but to prevent the commission of injustice; neither was it to promote the commission of injustice that Lycurgus made his people warlike, but that they might not suffer injustice. Accordingly, in removing the excesses and supplying the deficiencies of their citizens, both were forced to make great innovations.

[3] And surely, as regards the arrangement and classification of the citizens under their respective governments, Numa's was strongly popular and inclined to favour the masses, resulting in a promiscuous and variegated commonalty of goldsmiths, musicians, and leather-workers; but that of Lycurgus was rigid and aristocratic, relegating the mechanical arts into the hands of slaves and aliens, but confining the citizens themselves to the use of the shield and the spear, so that they were artificers of war and servants of Ares, but knew and cared for nothing else than to obey their commanders and master their enemies. [4] For freemen were not even permitted to transact business, that they might be entirely and forever free, but the whole apparatus of business was turned over to slaves and Helots, just like the preparation and serving of their meals. Numa, on the contrary, made no such distinctions, but, while he put a stop to military rapacity, he prohibited no other gainful occupation. Nor did he reduce the great inequalities resulting therefrom, [5] but left the acquisition of wealth wholly unrestricted, and paid no attention to the great increase of poverty and its gradual influx into the city. And yet it was his duty at the very outset, while as yet there was no general or great disparity of means, but people still lived on much the same plane, to make a stand against rapacity, as Lycurgus did, and take measures of precaution against its mischiefs; for these were not trifling, but furnished the seed and source of the most and greatest evils of after times. [6] But as regards the redistribution of the land, Lycurgus, in my opinion, is not to be censured for making it, nor Numa for not making it. In the one case, the resulting equality was the foundation and base of his polity; but in the other, since the allotment of lands was recent, there was no urgent reason for introducing another division, or for disturbing the first assignment, which probably was still in force.