Plutarch's Lives: Volume II

Βίοι Παράλληλοι #2

by Plutarch, John Dryden (Translator), James Atlas (Introduction)

Plutarch's Lives, written at the beginning of the second century A.D., is a brilliant social history of the ancient world by one of the greatest biographers and moralists of all time. In what is by far his most famous and influential work, Plutarch reveals the character and personality of his subjects and how they led ultimately to tragedy or victory. Richly anecdotal and full of detail, Volume I contains profiles and comparisons of Romulus and Theseus, Numa and Lycurgus, Fabius and Pericles, and many more powerful figures of ancient Greece and Rome.

The present translation, originally published in 1683 in conjunction with a life of Plutarch by John Dryden, was revised in 1864 by the poet and scholar Arthur Hugh Clough, whose notes and preface are also included in this edition.

Genres: History, Classics, Biography, Nonfiction, Philosophy, Ancient History, Ancient

706 pages, Paperback

First published August 22, 2015

About the author

Plutarch (later named, upon becoming a Roman citizen, Lucius Mestrius Plutarchus; AD 46–AD 120) was a Greek historian, biographer, and essayist, known primarily for his Parallel Lives and Moralia. He is classified as a Middle Platonist. Plutarch's surviving works were written in Greek, but intended for both Greek and Roman readers.

Reviews

[Darwin8u · Rating 5 out of 5]

“To be ignorant of the lives of the most celebrated men of antiquity is to continue in a state of childhood all our days”
― Plutarch



Vol 2., includes the following micro-biographies and comparisons*:

Sertorius v. Eumenes
Agesilaus v. Pompey
Alexander & Cæsar &
Phocion & Cato the Younger
Agis & Cleomenes v.
Tiberius Gracchus & Caius Gracchus
Demosthenes v. Cicero
Demetrius v. Antony
Dion v. Marcus Brutus
Aratus & Artaxerxes
Galba & Otho

Probably the best summary/description of this book was written by Plutarch himself, so why re-invent the wheel:

It was for the sake of others that I first commenced writing biographies; but I find myself proceeding and attaching myself to it for my own; the virtues of these great men serving me as a sort of looking-glass, in which I may see how to adjust and adorn my own life. Indeed, it can be compared to nothing but daily living and associating together; we receive, as it were, in our inquiry, and entertain each successive guest, view

Their stature and their qualities,

and select from their actions all that is noblest and worthiest to know.

Ah, and what greater pleasure could one have?

or, what more effective means to one’s moral improvement? Democritus tells us we ought to pray that of the phantasms appearing in the circumambient air, such may present themselves to us as are propitious, and that we may rather meet with those that are agreeable to our natures and are good, than the evil and unfortunate; which is simply introducing into philosophy a doctrine untrue in itself, and leading to endless superstitions. My method, on the contrary, is, by the study of history, and by the familiarity acquired in writing, to habituate my memory to receive and retain images of the best and worthiest characters. I thus am enabled to free myself from any ignoble, base, or vicious impressions, contracted from the contagion of ill company that I may be unavoidably engaged in, by the remedy of turning my thoughts in a happy and calm temper to view these noble examples.
― Plutarch, Lives

* Not all the biographies in Vol 2 are comparisons (or said better, some are compared more and others are simply paralleled more).

[Daniel Chaikin · Rating 2 out of 5]

It’s not a good thing when I’m disappointed I read a book. This, of course, isn’t a bad book. It’s a special relic, full historical details that are only captured here, or at least that are captured only here in this way, from this quirky 1900-year-old perspective. The cumulative impact of all these lives is a multifaceted view of a few key points in classical history – the rise and fall of the Greeks and their experimental governments, including the chaos that was the Athenian democracy, and the formation, tumultuous history and death of the Roman Republic, which faded into empire. The Greeks may come across a little tired and done over, but the leading characters in the later Roman Republic are fresh and come together to create a memorable synergy from all these full distinct enlarged egos colliding, with winners, losers, violent consequences, upper-class purges, some fascinating compatibilities, and ultimately the pulsing heart, the dedication to this Republic found most deeply in those who lost it. It’s easy to look on this, look at what Cato the Younger failed to do, and wonder at the reflection in our own times, and it’s not a comforting thought.

Plutarch was a Greek scholar who toured Rome and the empire and most likely taught his sort of middle-Platonic philosophy, who never mastered Latin, yet who took copious notes and who then retired back in Greece and began to write works in Greek that spread widely and are still around. The existing lives (it seems some are lost) are paired prominent Romans and Greeks with similar life trajectories. A lot of these characters are pretty obscure, but he captures the main names. For those who like ancient Greece, the lives of the great Athenians Themistocles, Pericles, and Alcibiades are captured, and criticized, along with some lesser ones like Aristides, Cimon and Nicias. And Lysander, the Spartan who eventually defeated Athens. Plutarch throws in Theseus, Lycurgus, and Solon for foundations, and Pelopidas because he co-led the Theban revolt against Sparta, leading the all-gay army of lovers, the Theban Sacred Band. The ancient Romans get covered too, from Romulus through the Punic wars. Odd names like Poplicola and Coriolanus or Cato the Elder show up. Publius, the name signed to the Federalist Papers, references Poplicola, as he helped found the Roman Republic. But Roman history really comes alive first through the civil wars between Marius and Sulla (around 80 bce), and then through the personalities involves in the death to the Republic. The members of the first triumvirate, Crassus, Pompey and Julius Caesar, each get a long chapter. Their counters in the Senate, the failed heroes of the Republic, Cato the Younger, Cicero and Brutus, make the best chapters in the book. This Cato the younger, who committed suicide rather than surrender to Caesar, was for me the most distinctive and memorable character here. Of course, there is also Plutarch’s famous take on Mark Antony and his dramas with Cleopatra, which led to a Shakespeare’s play. Three Shakespeare plays come from Plutarch – Coriolanus, Julius Caesar and Anthony and Cleopatra.

Plutarch captures something of the memories of these larger than life personalities. A happy Julius Caesar who liked everyone, even his enemies, and who, upon Cicero’s surrender, walked with him chatting amiably, leaves an impression of the clubby Roman upper class. As does the old man, Galba, another happy well-liked general who might not hesitate to condemn thousands to death, and who yet managed only about week alive in Rome as emperor before he was dispatched. Or Pompey the Great who was living it up so well and in such control of Rome yet found himself caught off-guard, completely unprepared, when Caesar crossed the Rubicon. And Plutarch captures the chaos of these eras. There was never any peace in Athenian democracy or its empire, or in the Roman Republic where senators would murder political enemies, or, so things evolved, where senators were killed in the hundreds in mass political purges, called proscriptions (by which Cicero fell). And, new to me, was the chaos left behind by the death of Alexander the Great. Asia was left with power vacuums filled inadequately by warlords at the mercy of their fickle armies. And Greece was left with no dominant power, and it seems everyone fought everyone, desperately and constantly, often with both sides of a battle funded by the same nearby Mediterranean power.

So, it’s not a bad book, actually it’s a gem, but it’s a tough read. It’s already a massive amount of data, but Plutarch makes it thicker, leaving the reader flooded in endless detail. Reading means wading through rumors and counter rumors and strange prophecies predicting everything. It’s tough to every gain any speed or momentum, only a slow inertia allowed me to slowly pass through. It’s a disappointing because it was work. Whatever the enjoyment, and there was some, it was far less than the reward. After four months of exhausted reading, 1481 pages at 3½ to 4 minutes a page, I’m putting this down thinking only, thank goodness, and good riddance. Maybe I’ll feel differently later on.

-----------------------------------------------

29. Plutarch's lives, The Dryden Translation, Volume 2 by edited by Arthur Hugh Clough
written: c 120 ce
translation: 1683 (and not by Dryden)
editing and notes 1859
format: 696-page paperback
acquired: December
read: May 4 – Jun 27
time reading: 42 hr 32 min, 3.7 min/page
rating: 2

[Lou · Rating 4 out of 5]

"After reading some part of the history of Alexander, [Caesar] sat a great while very thoughtful, and at last burst into tears. His friends were surprised and asked him the reason for it.
'Do you think,' he said. 'I have not just cause to weep, when I consider that Alexander at my age had conquered so many nations, and I have all this time done nothing that is memorable.'"

same bro. same.



***I read certain chapters from this book designated for my school assignments. I did not read the whole book start to finish.

[Caroline · Rating 5 out of 5]

I have chosen rather to epitomize the most celebrated parts of their story, than to insist at large on every particular circumstance of it. It must be borne in mind that my design is not to write histories, but lives. And the most glorious exploits do not always furnish us with the clearest discoveries of virtue or vice in men; sometimes a matter of less moment, an expression or a jest, informs us better of their characters and inclinations, than the most famous sieges, the greatest armaments, or the bloodiest battle whatsoever. Therefore as portrait-painters are more exact in the lines and features of the face, in which the character is seen, than in the other parts of the body, so I must be allowed to give my more particular attention to the marks and indications of the souls of men, and while I endeavor by these to portray their lives, may be free to leave more weighty matters and great battlesl to be treated of by others.

This quote is from the opening of the life of Alexander, whom Plutarch compares to Caesar. It is true that Plutarch leaves out much of the detail of Alexander’s and Caesar’s campaigns as presented by Arrian and by Caesar himself, but he’s pretty exhaustive on many other individuals. Read straight through, one battle can bleed into the next. But the genius of Plutarch as a historian of ancient times is that he keeps treating the same events from the perspective of different participants. Thus you gradually build up an understanding of the events through repetition in the same way that you get a 360 view of yourself in a three way mirror. Chief among the topics that he treats from these differing viewpoints are the Roman Civil Wars and the disputes among the various Greek states.

I quickly began to consider Plutarch mainly as the instructor of generations of English schoolboys on the subjects of honor, courage, strategy, perfidy, forms of government, statesmanship, negotiation, leadership, ‘civilization', political economy, oratory, women, a stiff upper lip, and dozens of other topics. As these Greeks and Romans criss-crossed the known world, I imagined later Englishmen remembering these lessons as they traveled, traded, negotiated, and fought in ‘Gaul’, north Africa, Afghanistan, Persia, and so on. They would have remembered hundreds of examples of generals who didn’t think that the enemy would undertake a certain course of action, and were caught off guard. They would have remembered others who trusted where they shouldn’t. They would have remembered those who won glory that lasted to their own day by marching to certain death.

But, those schoolboys also learned that glory sometimes required ruthless decisions and that these Greek and Roman ‘civilized’ men slaughtered hundreds of thousands of people, sometimes with compunction but with little regret if the enemy were ‘barbarians’. All to conquer territory, only sometimes to defend their own land. This book is surely at least part of the source of the thirst for empire. In the same side of the balance belongs Plutarch’s almost exclusive portrayal of ‘the people’ as fickle, irresponsible, and susceptible to the persuasion of every demagogue.

Some segments are case studies in the wages of sin or folly, such as Anthony’s infatuation with Cleopatra or the incestuous and nepotistic goings on in Artaxerxes court. Yet other segments give you the perfect arcane name to apply to an acquaintance or celebrity who is the epitome of, say, righteous and rigid morality: Cato is the man. (Of course one has heard of Cato, but this will communicate what a pain in the rear he must have been to be around.) The two aspects of the book, the various perspectives on the same events and the wide variety of types of events/characters, are what make such a long work, work. Also interesting throughout is Plutarch’s attitude toward divination and the Gods. Sometimes he seems to castigate those who believe in reading the innards of a sacrifice victim; at other times he seems quite serious in drawing the reader’s attention to portents and the Gods directing the outcome of events.

This was a multi-month listening project. I definitely drifted off occasionally during battle passages (the Demetrius segment seemed endless), but the anecdotes make up much of the book and always pull you back into the work. In each portrait Plutarch has a section where he gathers a number of short exchanges or quotes, often quite funny, that give you the essence of the character of the man. Again and again you will say to yourself, ‘Oh, that’s where that saying or story comes from.’ And Dryden’s skill shows in the little poetic snippets of ancient plays and poems sprinkled throughout. For example, in discussing how Crassus, Pompey and Caesar could not be content with simply governing their shares of the gigantic Roman Empire, Plutarch cites some poetry they ‘knew and had read’ which Dryden renders:

The gods, when they divided out ‘twixt three,
This massive universe, heaven, hell, and sea,
Each one sat down contented on his throne,
And undisturbed each god enjoys his own,”

[Betawolf · Rating 4 out of 5]

What makes a good Life? I think I'm narrowing it down. First, you should almost certainly kill a lot of people -- if you've never commanded an army in battle or overseen the sack of a city, you're basically nobody. What, you think this is amateur hour? Sulla had thousands of people executed outside while he was addressing the Senate, just to make a point, and he's still one of the more mixed-record guys in this volume. Second, prophetic dreams. If you're sleeping and you're not receiving vaguely cryptic messages from the gods telling you exactly what you should do about the situation at hand, then why are you even sleeping? Anybody who's anybody gets told things in their dreams. Finally, it might help if you're nice to people, avoid the temptations of luxury, and sometimes spare cities from bloodbaths, particularly if those happen to be the cities where famous Greek biographers will grow up.


Anyway, details below.

Pelopidas -- A life defined by a great friendship with Epameinondas, various acts of valour against tyrants, and some historic import in his taking as hostage one Philip of Macedon. Also, I loved the crux Pelopidas was put in by a prophetic dream:

So now Pelopidas, when asleep in the camp, seemed to see the maidens weeping over their tombs and invoking curses on the Spartans, and Skedasus, who bade him sacrifice a red virgin to the maidens, if he wished to conquer his enemies. And as this command seemed to him shocking and impious, he started up and consulted the prophets and the generals. Some of them forbade him to neglect or disobey the warning, quoting the famous old instances of Menækeus the son of Kreon and Makaria the daughter of Herakles, and, in later times, Pherekydes the philosopher, who was killed by the Lacedæmonians, and whose skin, according to some oracle, is still kept by their kings, and Leonidas, who following the oracle did in some sort offer himself as a victim on behalf of Greece; and futhermore they spoke of those persons whom Themistokles sacrificed to Dionysus before the sea-fight at Salamis. All these are verified by the success which followed them. And again, Agesilaus when starting from the same place that Agamemnon did to fight the same enemies, was asked by the god, during a vision at Aulis, to give him his daughter as a sacrifice; but he did not give her, but by his softheartedness ruined the expedition, which ingloriously failed. Others spoke on the other side, urging that so barbarous and impious a sacrifice could not be pleasing to any of the powers above, for, they said, it is not the Typhons and giants of legend that rule in heaven, but the father of all gods and men. To believe that there are deities that delight in the blood and slaughter of mankind is probably a foolish fancy; but if there be such, it is our duty to disregard them and treat them as powerless, for these strange and shocking desires can only take their origin and exist in feeble and depraved minds.

Marcellus -- Who needs to learn strategy when you can just kill all the enemy commanders in single combat? Well, it turns out that when you end up besieging a city defended by Archimedes, bodily courage is not enough.

Archimedes opened fire from his machines, throwing upon the land forces all manner of darts and great stones, with an incredible noise and violence, which no man could withstand; but those upon whom they fell were struck down in heaps, and their ranks thrown into confusion, while some of the ships were suddenly seized by iron hooks, and by a counter-balancing weight were drawn up and then plunged to the bottom. Others they caught by irons like hands or claws suspended from cranes, and first pulled them up by their bows till they stood upright upon their sterns, and then cast down into the water, or by means of windlasses and tackles worked inside the city, dashed them against the cliffs and rocks at the base of the walls, with terrible destruction to their crews. Often was seen the fearful sight of a ship lifted out of the sea into the air, swaying and balancing about, until the men were all thrown out or overwhelmed with stones from slings, when the empty vessel would either be dashed against the fortifications, or dropped into the sea by the claws being let go.

I wonder how much of the worldwide military R&D budget this passage alone is responsible for.

For most of the engines on the walls had been devised by Archimedes, and the Romans thought that they were fighting against gods and not men, as destruction fell upon them from invisible hands.

Strangely, given his very warlike nature, Marcellus seems to be a softening influence on Rome, bringing her art and more civil treatment of foes.

Aristeides -- The other half of the story of Themistokles in many ways, although this time around we get a much more detailed treatment of what happened at the battle of Platæa, including a lot of the blow-by-blow involving the Spartans that made the first engagement. Aristeides seems mostly to be venerated for sense of justice and fairness in all things, and a comparative lack of interest in his own advancement.

Cato the Elder -- A parsimonious self-made man, who treated himself, his public offices and his estate with discipline -- generally a praiseworthy thing, but Plutarch passes specific comment on Cato's habit of selling slaves once they have grown too old:

I for my own part consider that his conduct in treating his slaves like beasts of burden, and selling them when old and worn out, is the mark of an excessively harsh disposition, which disregards the claims of our common human nature, and merely considers the question of profit and loss. Kindness, indeed, is of wider application than mere justice; for we naturally treat men alone according to justice and the laws, while kindness and gratitude, as though from a plenteous spring, often extend even to irrational animals. It is right for a good man to feed horses which have been worn out in his service, and not merely to train dogs when they are young, but to take care of them when they are old. When the Athenian people built the Parthenon, they set free the mules which had done the hardest work in drawing the stones up to the acropolis, and let them graze where they pleased unmolested. It is said that one of them came of its own accord to where the works were going on, and used to walk up to the acropolis with the beasts who were drawing up their loads, as if to encourage them and show them the way. This mule was, by a decree of the people of Athens, maintained at the public expense for the rest of its life. The racehorses of Kimon also, who won an Olympic victory, are buried close to the monument of their master. Many persons, too, have made friends and companions of dogs, as did Xanthippus in old times, whose dog swam all the way to Salamis beside his master's ship when the Athenians left their city, and which he buried on the promontory which to this day is called the Dog's Tomb. We ought not to treat living things as we do our clothes and our shoes, and throw them away after we have worn them out; but we ought to accustom ourselves to show kindness in these cases, if only in order to teach ourselves our duty towards one another. For my own part I would not even sell an ox that had laboured for me because he was old, much less would I turn an old man out of his accustomed haunts and mode of life, which is as great an affliction to him as sending him into a foreign land, merely that I might gain a few miserable coins by selling one who must be as useless to his buyer as he was to his seller.

This biography is also packed full of great aphorisms; Cato led a long, fruitful, and opinionated life. He also, interestingly, generated a pro-genocide meme to sign off all his speeches with.

Plutarch focuses mostly on the nature of the two men's households when comparing them -- Aristeides was famously of meagre wealth even after attaining public office, while Cato came from poverty and died wealthy from his own efforts.

Philopoemen -- As Plutarch will have it, Philopoemen is the final gasp, a last echo of the former great men of Greece, just as their civilisation was being subsumed by that of Rome. His main virtues were all of excellence in warfare, not being particularly wise or even-tempered, often ruled by passion. His capture and death have a certain ironic tragedy to them, though, and Plutarch always brings the drama to the fore.

Titus Flamininus -- A first, I think, in Plutarch selecting for comparison two men who actually met each other.

The homage which was paid Philopœmen in all public assemblies by the Achæans vexed Flamininus, who felt angry that a mere Arcadian, who had gained some credit as a leader in obscure border warfare, should be treated with as much respect as the Roman consul, who was acting as the protector of all the peoples of Greece.

He is praised for his defeat of Philip, but also, and perhaps more importantly, the diplomatic victories he achieved in bringing Greek cities over to Rome peacefully. Parts of this biography make it clearer why the defeat of Philip was so important -- this was Rome moving up into the big leagues and taking one of Alexander's successors, moving from being a regionally significant power to being a superpower in the sight of greats like Antiochus. It's also an important moment for Plutarch, living in a very Roman Greece, as it signifies the 'liberation' of Greece from both Macedon and its internal war.

Flamininus and the Romans, however, not only obtained the praise of the Greeks in return for the benefits which they had conferred upon them, but also gained the trust and confidence of all mankind by their noble acts. Not only cities, but even kings who had been wronged by other kings came to them for redress, so that in a short space of time, with the assistance, no doubt, of the divine favour, all the world became subject to them.

Pyrrhus -- The genealogy of this name is apparently ripe with opportunity for confusion, as Pyrrhus was apparently the nickname of Achilles' son Neoptolemus, and the name of one of his sons that founded a dynasty. This dynasty became suspiciously obscure until one Tharrhypas, father of the father of the father of the famous Pyrrhus. Anyway, our character has quite a dramatic early life, involving a dangerous river crossing while being pursued by forces of the throne's usurpers, and is himself rather unusual. To give a taste of Plutarch's wandering enthusiasm:

The appearance of Pyrrhus was more calculated to strike terror into the beholder than to impress him with an idea of the dignity which becomes a king. He had not a number of separate teeth, but one continuous bone in his upper jaw, with only slight lines showing the divisions between the teeth. He was thought to be able to cure diseases of the spleen by sacrificing a white cock, and then gently pressing with his right foot in the region of the spleen of the sufferer, who lay upon his back meanwhile. No man was so poor or despised that Pyrrhus would not touch him for this disorder if requested to do so. He also received, as a reward, the cock which was sacrificed, and was much pleased with this present. It is said that the great toe of that foot had some divine virtue, so that when the rest of his body was burned after his death, it was found unhurt and untouched by the fire. But of this hereafter.

There are a bunch of interesting campaigns in Pyrrhus' life, but the account of the war between Pyrrhus and Rome is unusual in that it really paints Rome as morally upstanding even while Pyrrhus was winning his campaign into the grave. The siege of Sparta is also one of those great moments in Plutarch, ambitious fail-fast Pyrrus battering himself bloody against the beautiful unyielding Laconic insanity. His death, also, is a great story -- this great general and warrior, struck down in the end by a tile thrown by a poor old woman.

Caius Marius -- One of the most relentlessly negative Lives I've seen. Our subject is ambitious, ruled by passion, deceitful, jealous and while he seems to have served extremely well in the defence of Rome against the Cimbri and Teutonnes, he was ultimately a traitor to the Republic, siding with populist despots and, after fleeing a death-sentence, returning and instituting a brutal series of purges. He seems mostly the bad-guy in other people's stories. But the Life also gives us this:

But those who have no memory and no sense, let the things that happen ooze away imperceptibly in the course of time; and consequently, as they hold nothing and keep nothing, being always empty of all goodness, but full of expectation, they look to the future and throw away the present. And yet fortune may hinder the future, but the present cannot be taken from a man; nevertheless, such men reject that which fortune now gives, as something foreign, and dream of that which is uncertain: and it is natural that they should; for before reason and education have enabled them to put a foundation and basement under external goods, they get and they heap them together, and are never able to fill the insatiate appetite of their soul.

Lysander -- Essentially skips any attempt at an early life to focus on Lysander's role in winning the Peloponnesian war. While Plutarch stresses Lysander's underhandedness, his overbearing tyranny and his nepotism, it's not difficult to see how he also in many ways was a preface to Alexander in his conquest of the Greek cities, his growing personal cult, and his efforts at arranging a conquest of Persia. Ultimately, though, he was restrained by the Laconic laws and other circumstance, and never became the Greek emperor he might have been.

Sulla -- Another precursor story, but a far more bloody one. In the Life of Caius Marius, you get the impression that Sulla was the protector against Marius and his despotic allies. As it turns out, that was only true until Sulla himself held power in Rome -- the purges and atrocities he carried out when he conquered were if anything worse than the previous reign of terror. His later life shows some sign of either mellowing or regret, putting aside the dictatorship and focusing much more (it would seem) on his private life. His end was not clean -- rotting away from disease, he finally ruptured himself by shouting for someone to be strangled.

while Sulla performed greater achievements, Lysander committed fewer crimes:

Kimon -- Plutarch opens this pair with a longer dedication explaining why he wants to honor Lucullus (as a native of the city Lucullus once saved), which is a little confusing as an introduction to the life of Lucullus' Greek counterpart, Kimon. Notwithstanding some early rumours of incest, and more minor vices, Kimon was an extraordinarily successful general in the age of Athenian supremacy:

If, however, he really was a careless drunkard, and yet took so many cities and won so many battles, it is clear that if he had been sober and diligent he would have surpassed the most glorious achievements of any Greek, either before or since

Kimon served his city well, but was mistrusted by its citizens as a result of his positive sentiment towards the Lacedæmonians, and his ostracism from the city seems to reflect more on the popular sentiment against their rival state than on his personal conduct, which was later recalled to be excellent.

Lucullus -- Not an excellent entry onto the world stage, to pursue a frivolous lawsuit and attract the sponsorship of the man soon to be a blood-soaked dictator -- even if Lucullus avoided actually becoming part of that massacre. For a while, Lucullus was one of those charmed commanders, trouncing numerically superior forces across Asia. Notable achievement: he foiled an assassination plot by taking a midday nap.

[The assassin Olthakus] would have entered the tent without any suspicion, if sleep, that has been the cause of the death of many generals, had not saved Lucullus; for he happened to be asleep, and Menedemus, one of his chamber-attendants, who was standing by the door, said that Olthakus had not come at a fit time, for Lucullus had just gone to rest himself after long wakefulness and many toils. As Olthakus did not go away when he was told, but said that he would go in, even should Menedemus attempt to prevent him, because he wished to communicate with Lucullus about a matter of emergency and importance, Menedemus began to get in a passion, and, saying that nothing was more urgent than the health of Lucullus, he shoved the man away with both his hands. Olthakus being alarmed stole out of the camp, and, mounting his horse, rode off to the army of Mithridates, without effecting his purpose.

But the tides of fortune turn, and Lucullus' haughty disregard for his own men would set in motion his downfall, coupled with their growing mutinous attitude as they became rich on sacked cities, and tired of the constant campaigning. No matter how good your command in battle, if your army won't follow you anywhere, you're a little hamstrung.-- he struggled even to get men to march in his triumph.

Yet, judging by the extravagance of his retirement, Lucullus does seem to have managed to make an awful lot of money from his campaigns, suggesting that some of the muttering from his men might not be entirely unfounded. Luxurious banquets constantly sound only decadent, but the public libraries stocked at his expense suggest it wasn't all wasted on frivolities. A note tells me we also owe our knowledge of the cherry to Lucullus, who brought the tree into Europe from Cerasus, the fruit named after this place.

[Antonios Athenaeus · Rating 5 out of 5]

Plutarch’s Lives never feels outdated. What impressed me most is how clearly he reveals the motives, strengths, and weaknesses of each figure without turning them into myth. The paired biographies create a natural rhythm—one life illuminating the other—and the moral insights emerge almost χωρίς να το επιδιώκει.

It’s a book that forces you to pause and think about what truly shapes a leader and how small decisions cascade into history. Dense at times, yes, but consistently rewarding. Anyone interested in strategy, character, or the ancient world will find something meaningful here. A classic for a reason.

[Robert Cruthirds · Rating 5 out of 5]

For a history buff, I give this five stars. Others may consider it only four or less stars since many original sources were either lost or destroyed, therefore Plutarch had to rely on oral traditions and texts that were often flawed and opinionated.

Many of these lives can be cross referenced with other sources to get a fuller, more accurate representation. Plutarch's insights as to the nature and consequences of the rivalries amongst the various Hellenic city-states I found to be quite revealing. Apparently, many leading Athenians including Pericles himself, chose to ignore or rebuff offers of peace from Sparta and other cities.

Most of the narratives rely on a heavy dose of military history, some of which makes for several pages of gruesome battles. This is particularly true of Crassus and his misguided foray into Syria.

[فؤاد · Rating 4 out of 5]

در اين هنگام رومولوس، همچون تمام كسانى كه به قدرت نامحدود مى رسند، خلقش تغيير كرده، خودكامه و خودپسند شد. هر چند به ظاهر براى جلب رضايت مردم، دستور داد هر ساله نمايندگانى انتخاب كنند تا امور را سامان دهند، ولى اين افراد دخالتى در امور نداشتند و مجبور بودند بدون اظهار نظر دستورات شاه را گوش كنند.

پس از مدتى رومولوس به نحو غريبى ناپديد شد. همه حدس زدند كه سناتورها در نابودى اش دست داشته اند. گفته اند وقتى در معبد ولكان عبادت مى كرد ناگاه سناتورها بر سرش ريخته قطعه قطعه اش كردند و هر يك قطعه اى را در زير رداى خود جا داد و از معبد خارج كرد.

اما سناتورها براى پنهان ماندن اين امر، شايعه كردند كه رومولوس در ميان طوفان و رعد و برق و آسمان لرزه، به عرش اعلى صعود كرده، و مردم را امر كردند كه او را تقديس كنند و به عنوان خدا بپرستند. مردم از شنيدن چنين بشارتى غرق مسرت شدند و از آن پس با وجد و اميد رومولوس را پرستش كردند.

پلوتارک
حیات مردان نامی

[Robert Sheppard · Rating 5 out of 5]

WHAT EVERY EDUCATED CITIZEN OF THE WORLD NEEDS TO KNOW IN THE 21ST CENTURY: THE GREAT HISTORIANS OF WORLD HISTORY--HERODTODUS, THUCYDIDES, SIMA QIAN, IBN KHALDUN, THE SECRET HISTORY OF THE MONGOLS, JULIUS CAESAR, PLUTARCH, LIVY, POLYBIUS, TACITUS, GIBBON, MARX, SPENGLER & TOYNBEE----FROM THE WORLD LITERATURE FORUM RECOMMENDED CLASSICS AND MASTERPIECES SERIES VIA GOODREADS—-ROBERT SHEPPARD, EDITOR-IN-CHIEF




"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." is an apt admonition to us all from George Santayana, who, in his "The Life of Reason," echoed the similar earlier words of the conservative philosopher Edmund Burke. But the great histories and historians of World History bring us far more than events of nations, chronicles of the Rise and Fall of Civilizations, or lessons and precedents from the past; they also constitute a fundamental part of World Literature, bringing us great reading experiences and exciting sagas as in Thucydides' "History of the Peloponesian War," in-depth portraits and readings of the character of great men and shapers of the world as in Plutarch's "Parallel Lives" and China's "Records of the Grand Historian" by Si Ma Chen, and deep philosophical and scientific insights into the workings of human society its environment as revealed in the panoramic visions of great Islamic historian Ibn Khaldun, Karl Marx, Oswald Spengler and Sir Arnold Toynbee. As such, in our modern globalized world of the 21st century, where not only our own history, but also the interrelated histories of all of nations show so clearly that "the past is always present," and therefore every educated citizen of the modern world has an obligation to read the great works of history from all major civilizations to even begin comprehending the living world about us and the ultimate meaning of our own lives.




WHAT WAS THE FIRST WORK OF HISTORY IN THE WORLD?



If to begin our survey we put the daunting threshold question of what was the firs work of "history" in human experience, like most radical questions we will find that the answer all depends on how we put the question and define its terms. "History" undoubtedly began with the campfire stories of Neolithic man about families, tribes and conflicts far before the invention of writing. Histories were passed down in oral sagas memorized by poets such as Homer's "Iliad and Odyssey," and only centuries later recorded in script. But true history begins with works of systematic analysis and interpretation of human events, and in that light the general consensus is that the first great work of World History was that of the Greek historian Herodtodus in the 5th Century BC, "The Histories."




HERODTODUS, AUTHOR OF "THE HISTORIES"




Herodtodus (5th Century BC) is thus often referred to as "The Father of History," a title conferred upon him by Cicero amoung others, but also disparagingly as "The Father of Lies" by some of his critics. He was born in Halicarnassus, a Greek city which had become part of the Persian Empire that enjoyed strong trade relations with Egypt. He travelled widely, spending time in Periclian Athens, Egypt, Persia and Italy and collected histories, tales and historical lore wherever he traveled, noting the customs of the people, the major wars and state events and the religions and lore of the people. He wrote in a "folksy" style and purported to record whatever was told to him, which led to critics deploring some of the "tall tales" or mythical accounts in his work, but which Herodtodus himself said he included without judgment to their ultimate truth to illustrate the historical beliefs of the peoples he encountered. His primary focus was to explain the history and background of the Persian War between the Greeks and the Persian Empire, though he also included cultural observations of other peoples such as the Egyptians. His "Histories" is entertaining and interesting, though somewhat voluminous and scattered for the modern reader unfamiliar with the context.




THUCYDIDES, MASTER OF REPORTORIAL AND EYEWITNESS HISTORY




Thucydides (460-395 BC) is most remembered for his epic "History of the Peloponnesian War" of Greece which recounts the struggle for supremacy and survival between the enlightened commercial empire of Athens and its reactionary opponent Sparta, which ended in the defeat of the Athenians. His approach and goal in writing was completely different from Herodtodus, as he was himself a General in the wars he wrote about and set out to provide "the inside story" of eyewitnesses and personal accounts of the major participants in the great events of their history so that their characters, understanding, strategies and actions could be closely judged, especially for the purpose of educating future statesmen and leaders. This approach was later shared by Polybius in his "The Rise of the Roman Empire." As a more contemporary history it is often more exciting to read, and establishes the tradition followed by Livy and others of including the "key speeches" of the leaders in war council, the "inside story" of their schemes and motivations, and rousing tales of the ups and downs of fast-moving battles. It contains such classics such as Pericles "Funeral Speech" for the ballen war heroes reminiscent of Lincoln's Gettysburg address. It is a must for those seeking to understand Classical Greece and a rich and exciting read.




SIMA QIAN, AND THE "RECORDS OF THE GRAND HISTORIAN" OF HAN DYNASTY CHINA



Sima Qian (Szu Ma Chien/145-86 BC) is regarded as the greatest historian of China's long and florid history and his personal tragedy is also held up as an example of intellectual martyrdom and integrity in the face of power. He like his father was the chief astrologer/astronomer and historian of the Han Imperial Court under Emperor Wu. His epic history "Records of the Grand Historian" sought to summarize all of Chinese history up to his time when the Han Dynasty Empire was a rival in size and power to that of Imperial Rome. He lived and wrote about the same time as Polybius, author of "The Rise of the Roman Empire," and like him he wrote from the vantage point of a newly united empire having overcome centuries of waring strife to establish a unified and powerful domain. In style, his history has some of the character of Plutarch in his "Lives" in that it often focuses on intimate character portraits of such great men as Qin Shi Huang Di, the unifier and First Emperor of China, and many others. It also contains rich and varied accounts of topic areas such as music, folk arts, literature, economics, calendars, science and others. He was the chief formulator of the primary Chinese theory of the rise and fall of imperial dynasties known as the "Mandate of Heaven." Like the theory of the Divine Right of Kings, its premise was that Emperors and their dynasties were installed on earth by the divine will of heaven and continued so long as the rulers were morally upright and uncorrupted. However, over centuries most dynasties would suffer corruption and decline, finally resulting in Heaven choosing another more virtuous dynasty to displace them when they had forfeited the "Mandate of Heaven," a kind of "Social Contract" with the divine rather than with mankind. Then, this cycle would repeat itself over the millennia.

His personal life was occasioned by tragedy due to his intellectual honesty in the "Li Ling Affair." Two Chinese generals were sent to the north to battle the fierce Xiongnu hordes against whom the Great Wall was constructed, Li Ling and the brother-in-law of the Emperor. They met disaster and their armies were annihilated, ending in the capture of both. Everyone at Court blamed the disaster on Li Ling in order to exonerate the Emperor's relative, but Sima Qian, out of respect for Li Ling's honor disagreed publicly and was predictably sentenced to death by Emperor Wu. A noble like Sima Qian could have his death sentence commuted by payment of a large fine or castration but since he was a poor scholar he could not afford the fine.

Thus, in 96 BC, on his release from prison, Sima chose to endure castration and live on as a palace eunuch to fulfill his promise to his father to complete his histories, rather than commit suicide as was expected of a gentleman-scholar. As Sima Qian himself explained in his famous "Letter to Ren An:"


“If even the lowest slave and scullion maid can bear to commit suicide, why should not one like myself be able to do what has to be done? But the reason I have not refused to bear these ills and have continued to live, dwelling in vileness and disgrace without taking my leave, is that I grieve that I have things in my heart which I have not been able to express fully, and I am shamed to think that after I am gone my writings will not be known to posterity. Too numerous to record are the men of ancient times who were rich and noble and whose names have yet vanished away. It is only those who were masterful and sure, the truly extraordinary men, who are still remembered. ... I too have ventured not to be modest but have entrusted myself to my useless writings. I have gathered up and brought together the old traditions of the world which were scattered and lost. I have examined the deeds and events of the past and investigated the principles behind their success and failure, their rise and decay, in one hundred and thirty chapters. I wished to examine into all that concerns heaven and man, to penetrate the changes of the past and present, completing all as the work of one family. But before I had finished my rough manuscript, I met with this calamity. It is because I regretted that it had not been completed that I submitted to the extreme penalty without rancor. When I have truly completed this work, I shall deposit it in the Famous Mountain. If it may be handed down to men who will appreciate it, and penetrate to the villages and great cities, then though I should suffer a thousand mutilations, what regret should I have?”

— Sima Qian




JULIUS CAESAR: HISTORY AS AUTOBIOGRAPHY AND AUTOMYTHOLOGY




Julius Caesar was famous for writing accounts of his own military campaigns, most notably in his "History of the Gallic Wars." Curiously, he writes of himself in the third person. Though a personal history, his writing contains little introspection or deep analytical thought and is rather the action-drama of the campaign, with special care to show his own personal courage and leadership. Before the 20th century most European schoolboys would read the work as part of their efforts to learn Latin in Grammar School. Later famous leaders such as Winston Churchill also followed in Caesar's tradition in writing history alonside making it, for which he received the Nobel Prize. Caesar's work is worth reading and exciting in parts, though sometimes becoming repetitive in the minutiae of the endless conflicts.




THE GREAT ROMAN HISTORIES: LIVY, POLYBIUS, TACITUS, SEUTONIUS AND AMMIANUS MARCELLINUS



The thousand-year history of the Roman Republic and Empire can be gleaned from these five great historians in the order presented. For the earliest history of the founding of the Roman Republic from the 6th-4th Centuries BC Livy (59BC-17 AD) in his "Ab Urbe Condita Libri" (From the Founding of the City) is the best source, tracing the saga from the tale of Aeneas fleeing from fallen Troy to the Rape of the Sabine Women, Romulus & Remus, the tyranical Tarquin Kings, the Founding of the Republic, the evolution of the Roman Constitution and up to the sack of the city by the Gauls in the 4th Century BC. Though ancient history is presumed to be boring, I surprisingly found Livy's account surprisingly lively, almost a "can't put down read."

Polybius (200-118 BC) then picks up the story in his "The Rise of the Roman Empire" tracing the three Punic Wars with Carthage, Hannibal's campaign over the Alps and Rome's entanglement with the collapsing Greek Empire of Seleucis, Macedon and the Ptolmeys until attaining supremacy over the entire Mediterranean. Polybius is a surprisingly modern historian who saw as his challenge to write a "universal history" similar to that of our age of Globalization in which previously separate national histories became united in a universal field of action with integrated causes and effects. He was a Greek who was arrested and taken to Rome and then became intimate with the highest circles of the Roman Senate and a mentor to the Scipio family of generals. He like Thucydides then attempts to tell the "inside story" of how Rome rose to universal dominance in its region, and how all the parts of his world became interconnected in their power relations.

Tacitus (56-117 AD) continues the story after the fall of the Republic and rise of the Roman Empire under the emperors. Along with his contemporary Seutonius who published his "History of the Twelve Caesars" in 121 AD, he tells of the founding of the Empire under Julius Caesar, the Civil Wars of Augustus involving Mark Anthony & Cleopatra, the Augustan "Golden Age" and the descent into unbelievable corruption, degeneration, homicidal and sexual madness and excess under Caligula and Nero, followed by a return to decency under Hadrian and Marcus Aurelius. The endstory of the Roman Empire is reflected in Ammianus Marcellinus (395-391 AD) who wrote in the time of Julian the Apostate who unsuccessfully tried to shake off Christianity and restore the old pagan and rationalist traditions of Classical Greece and Rome.




PLUTARCH, THE GREAT HISTORICAL BIOGRAPHER




Plutarch (46-120 AD) is most famous for his historical biographies in "Parallel Lives" or simply "Lives." He was, like Polybius, a Greek scholar who wished to open understanding between the Greek and Roman intellectual communities. His "Parallel Lives" consists of character portraits and life histories of matching pairs of great Greeks and great Romans such as Alexander and Caesar, hoping to enhance appreciation of the greatness of each. Much of Shakespeare's knowledge of the classical world reflected in his plays such as "Julius Caesar," "Anthony and Cleopatra" and "Coriolanus" came from reading Plutarch in translation. His character analyses are always insightful and engaging to read. His biographical method was also used by the great near-contemporary Sima Qian of Han Dynasty China.



IBN KHALDUN, ISLAMIC PIONEER OF MODERN HISTORY, SOCIOLOGY AND ECONOMICS



One of the blind spots in our appreciation of World History is the underappreciation of the contributions of Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406) and many other Islamic and non-Western thinkers, including Rashīd al-Dīn Fadhl-allāh Hamadānī (1247–1318), a Persian physician of Jewish origin, polymathic writer and historian, who wrote an enormous Islamic history, the Jami al-Tawarikh, in the Persian language, and Ala'iddin Ata-Malik Juvayni (1226–1283) a Persian historian who wrote an account of the Mongol Empire entitled Ta' rīkh-i jahān-gushā (History of the World Conqueror). Of these Ibn Khaldun was the greatest and a theoretical forerunner of our modern approaches to history, far ahead of his time and little appreciated in either the Western or the Islamic world until recently. His greatest work is the The "Muqaddimah" (known as the Prolegomena) in which he anticipated some of the themes of Marx in tracing the importance of the influence of economics on history, including the conflict between the economic classes of the nomadic pastoral and herding peoples, the settled agriculturalists and the rising urban commercial class. Like Marx he stressed the importance of the "economic surplus" of the agricultural revolution and the "value-added" of manufacture, which allowed the rise of the urban, military and administrative classes and division of labor. He stressed the unity of the social system across culture, religion, economics and tradition. He even anticipated some of the themes of Darwin and evolution, tracing human progress in its First Stage of Man "from the world of the monkeys" towards civilization. Toynbee called the Muqaddimah the greatest work of genius of a single mind relative to its time and place ever produced in world history.



THE SECRET HISTORY OF THE MONGOL EMPIRE



"The Secret History of the Mongol Empire" was precisely that, a private history written for the family of Ghengis Khan recording its rise and expansion from Ghengis Khan's humble personal origin to an empire stretching from China to Poland and Egypt. Its author is unknown but it contains an engaging account of the Khanate, the royal family and its traditions and the incredible expansion of its domain. While not a theoretical work it provides a useful missing link in our understanding of the Mongol Empire as a beginning stage of modern Globalization and a conduit for sharing between civilizations, East and West, and, unfortunatelyh for the transmission of the Black Plague across the world.



THE GREAT MODERNS: GIBBON, MARX, SPENGLER & TOYNBEE



The "must read" classics of modern World History include the work of Edward Gibbon "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire" which traces its fall to a decline in civic virtue, decayed morals and effeminacy amoung the public and the debilitating effects of Christianity vis-a-vis the rationalism of the Greek-Roman heritage. Marx, of course is central to modern history, not only formulating the laws of social development based on economics, class conflict and the transition from agricultural to capitalist economies, but also formulating the revolutionary program of Communism. Oswald Spengler was a remarkable German amateur historian whose "Decline of the West" traced a theory of "organic civilizations" that have a birth, blossoming, limited lifespan and death like all living creatures. He held this to be a cyclical universal historical process of civilizations now exemplified by the West entering the stage of spiritual exhaustion and collaps in warfare. Arnold Toynbee charted a similar process analyzing 26 civilizaitons across all human history, but differed with Spengler in that he believed moral reform and a return to Christian ethics could revive the West and forestall its decline.



SPIRITUS MUNDI AND WORLD HISTORY



In my own work, the epic contemporary and futurist novel Spiritus Mundi World History plays a central role as various characters such as Professor Riviera in the Mexico City Chapter and Prof. Verhoven of the Africa chapters discourse on human history, evolution, evolutionary biology and the rise of civilization, culminating with the quest of the protagonists led by Sartorius to establish a United Nations Parliamentary Assembly for global democracy, a globalized version of the EU Parliament as a new organ of the United Nations.



World Literature Forum invites you to check out the great historians of World History and World Literature, and also the contemporary epic novel Spiritus Mundi, by Robert Sheppard. For a fuller discussion of the concept of World Literature you are invited to look into the extended discussion in the new book Spiritus Mundi, by Robert Sheppard, one of the principal themes of which is the emergence and evolution of World Literature:


For Discussions on World Literature and n Literary Criticism in Spiritus Mundi: http://worldliteratureandliterarycrit...


Robert Sheppard


Editor-in-Chief
World Literature Forum
Author, Spiritus Mundi Novel
Author’s Blog: http://robertalexandersheppard.wordpr...
Spiritus Mundi on Goodreads:
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/17...
Spiritus Mundi on Amazon, Book I: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00CIGJFGO
Spiritus Mundi, Book II: The Romance http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00CGM8BZG


Copyright Robert Sheppard 2013 All Rights Reserved

[None Ofyourbusiness Loves Israel · Rating 5 out of 5]

If you thought ancient history was all dusty scrolls and solemn statues, you are in for a surprise! Plutarch’s Lives Part II is an enthralling narrative, seamlessly intertwining the gravitas of Greek and Roman heroes with captivating anecdotes that would intrigue even the most erudite scholar. It is a delightful romp through history, where every page offers a new lesson in leadership, bravery, and the occasional absurdity of human nature.

Pelopidas, known for his valor, once saved his friend Epaminondas in battle by risking his own life. Despite his wealth, he lived austerely and once pointed to a blind, crippled pauper named Nicodemus, saying, "Yes, money is necessary—for Nicodemus".

Marcellus, famed for his martial prowess, once saved his brother Otacilius in Sicily by shielding him with his own body. After capturing Syracuse, he was so impressed by Archimedes' inventions that he spared the mathematician's life and invited him to Rome.

Aristides, called "the Just," inscribed his own name on an ostrakon for a man who wanted him ostracized simply because he was tired of hearing Aristides praised. During the Battle of Plataea, he was so trusted that the Greeks left their money and valuables with him for safekeeping.

Cato the Elder, known for his austerity, once refused costly garments for his daughters, fearing they would make them appear less beautiful. Known for his frugality, he once sold an old warhorse rather than pay for its upkeep, demonstrating his extreme thriftiness.

Philopoemen, mistaken for a servant, once helped a hostess chop firewood, demonstrating his humility. Known for his simplicity, he once wore a cloak so tattered that a friend had to buy him a new one, which he reluctantly accepted.

Titus Flamininus, known for his temper, once pardoned a man who had insulted him, showing his capacity for mercy. After defeating Philip V of Macedon, he announced the freedom of Greek cities at the Isthmian Games, causing such joy that people wept and embraced him.

Pyrrhus, after a costly victory against the Romans, famously remarked, "Another such victory and we are undone." After a battle, he was found by his soldiers sleeping with his head on a shield, showing his readiness for combat even in rest.

Marius, upon hearing that the Teutones were approaching, confidently declared that he had already provided them with land—referring to their graves. During his military campaigns, he was known for his superstition and once refused to embark on a campaign because of a bad omen involving a sacrifice.

Lysander, after capturing fifteen Athenian ships, erected a trophy to commemorate his victory. After his naval victory at Aegospotami, he sent a message to Sparta simply stating, "Athens is ours," showcasing his brevity and confidence.

Sylla, known for his harshness, once jested that his complexion made him look like a mulberry sprinkled with meal, highlighting his self-deprecating humor.

Cimon, after defeating the Persians, used the spoils to fortify the Athenian Acropolis. After a victory, he planted a garden with the spoils of war, which he opened to the public, showing his generosity.

Lucullus, famed for his luxurious lifestyle, once hosted a banquet for himself alone, saying, "Lucullus dines with Lucullus," emphasizing his love for luxury.

Nicias, during the Sicilian Expedition, tried to delay the Athenian retreat by interpreting an eclipse as a bad omen, which ultimately led to disaster.

Crassus, known for his wealth, once extinguished a fire in Rome by buying the burning buildings and then putting out the flames, turning a profit from disaster.

[Petra · Rating 5 out of 5]

Worth every minute of reading. Learned tremendous amount about ancient world and leadership as a whole.
There is not one leader who is perfect.
But even the imperfect albeit effective ones are way too rare yet, can create tremendous change for the better or worse.

If anyone wants to hear my opinion on the best leader in history, it must be Caesar. Close behind is Pericles, Lycurgus, Themistocles, Solon, Flaminius,Numa, Cato the Elder,…
On the other hand there are entertaining bad boys like Alcibiades, Demetrius, Sulla and can I say Alexander?

It is not an easy read because the history is highly condensed and important events are sometimes mentioned in one sentence.

However, Plutarch does really good job to highlight the personality and character of each leader in very interesting anecdotes.

[Scott · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book reads like a dry data dump of biographical information, because on the surface that is precisely what it is. People have compared Plutarch to Shakespeare and I cannot begin to fathom why this might be. Shakespeare's intent was to entertain while Plutarch's was more to deliver moral messages. Neither strictly intended to portray historical figures as accurately as possible.

The stories themselves do often have humor in them, but it's mostly lost in translation. Others have found this same work to be extremely funny, but it just isn't my thing. Each to their own.

[J]

Plutarch does for biography what Herodotus does for history. He organizes it into a coherent narrative, blending specific examples of a person's known conduct with a wide variety of secondary information, some of which is obviously hearsay, all in an attempt to roughly nail down a series of individuals. The mini-biography format is actually pretty original and each one is easily digestable in an hour or two. He's obviously still very concerned with classical virtues and ideals, which do color the writing in ways which can oftento verge on propoganda. I think of this as more of a good reference book to dip into occasionalyl as opposed to something you just read cover to cover at one time.

[Ben · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great series! Classic!

Great philosophy book

4.1/5

[Illiterate · Rating 4 out of 5]

More elegant and generous studies of lives and morals.

[Cooper Ackerly · Rating 5 out of 5]

Although Plutarch may not be the most accurate historian or the most interesting one, his Lives have been the textbook for great men and women throughout history and should be required reading if only for the sake of cultural literacy.

[Grace Whary]

**i only read Alexander & Caesar but they were very good

[Anatoly Puzyrevsky · Rating 5 out of 5]

Без перебільшення велика праця. Прочитання двох томів Плутарха обсягом десь в 1500+ сторінок або 48 біографій (а також супутніх матеріалів) зайняло у мене десь пів року. Набір персоналій про яких пише Плутах настільки різноманітний та яскравий що про кожного з них в пору робити фільм або міні серіал. Окрема якість цих робіт в тому що це не суха збірка дат та подій які були повʼязані з тим чи іншим персонажем, а саме приклади характеру, типажу та вольових якостей цих людей як вони це використовували та до чого це призвело. Чудовий набір рольових моделей як треба та й особливо як НЕ треба робити.

[John Yelverton · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was an absolutely amazing read as Plutarch takes a Grecian and Roman hero (though he does break this pattern with Artaxerxes) who lived similar lives or dealt with similar situations, presents the reader with their biography, and then compares the two subjects. Like the first volume, this makes for absolutely fascinating and enriching reading.

[Barry]

We owe much of our current understanding of the ancients - Caesar, Alexander, Antony, Cleopatra, Cicero, etc - to Plutarch, whose approach was not strict biography as we've come to expect, but a moralistic rendering of parallel lives of the Greek and Roman titans of their time. Fascinating.

[Daniel Callister · Rating 3 out of 5]

There are a lot of versions of Plutarch's Lives of Illustrious Men, Vol 2. The version I read was vol. 2 of 3, 584 pages, translated by John Dryden "and others" published New York, John B Alden, 1887, and includes the following contents:

Pyrrhus
Caius Marius
Lysander
Sylla
Comparison of Lysander with Sylla
Cimon
Lucullus
Comparison of Lucullus with Cimon
Nicias
Crassus
Comparison of Crassus with Nicias
Sertorius
Eumenes
Comparison of Sertorius with Eumenes
Agesilaus
Pompey
Comparison of Pompey and Agesilaus
Alexander
Caesar
Phocion

I read this bit by bit over the course of a couple years. It was fascinating and, due to its nature, very easy to pick up for a while and set back down. Some of the more colorful snippets include:

from Pyrrhus:
"Pyrrhus, in great anger, broke away violently from his guards, and, in his fury, besmeared with blood, terrible to look upon, made his way through his own men, and struck the barbarian on the head with his sword such a blow, as with the strength of his arm, and the excellent temper of the weapon, passed downward so far that his body being cut asunder fell in two pieces. This stopped the course of the barbarians, amazed and confounded at Pyrrhus, as one more than man..."

from Caius Marius:
"But as they pursued those that fled to their camp, they witnessed a most fearful tragedy; the women, standing in black clothes on their wagons, slew all that fled, some their husbands, some their brethren, others their fathers; and strangling their little children with their own hands, threw them under the wheels, and the feet of the cattle, and then killed themselves. They tell of one who hung herself from the end of the pole of a wagon, with her children tied dangling at her heels. The men, for want of trees, tied themselves, some to the horns of the oxen, others by the neck to their legs, that so pricking them on, by the starting and springing of the beasts, they might be torn and trodden to pieces. Yet for all they thus massacred themselves, above sixty thousand were taken prisoners, and those that were slain were said to be twice as many."

from Sylla:
"By these courses he [Sylla] encouraged a disease which had begun from unimportant cause, and for a long time he failed to observe that his bowels were ulcerated, till at length the corrupted flesh broke out into lice. Many were employed day and night in destroying them, but the work so multiplied under their hands, that not only his clothes, baths, basins, but his very meat was polluted with that flux and contagion, they came swarming out in such numbers. He went frequently by day into the bath to scour and cleanse his body, but all in vain; the evil generated too rapidly and too abundantly for any ablutions to overcome it. There he died of this disease..."

[Richard Bracken · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Spartans had a maxim, which was essentially, “never attack a walled city”. My initial thought was that this made sense because maybe doing so can lead to a dramatic increase in casualties. Of course, that was a ridiculous assumption on my part because we’re talking about Spartans here, who stand out once again in Plutarch’s Lives, Volume II. The actual reason you never do that? Why, Silly, don’t you know? Because, “the bravest may fall by the hand of the most worthless man, or even by that of a woman or a child”, as they toss rocks and debris down upon you from the city walls. These guys!

This idea that the most honorable way to die was in combat with another warrior, Mano y Mano, is illustrated in a particular battle. The Spartans were very religious and would never engage in a battle, no matter how well drawn up they were, unless the animal sacrifice they conducted in front of the troops prior to the commencement was “favorable”. So this one time everyone is drawn up and ready to go. The goat is brought out in front and killed, but the entrails are confusing, so they bring up another goat. While this is all going on the the Lacedæmonians (Spartans) have all been ordered to hold their shields quietly rested on the ground at their feet, without attempting any resistance, while their leader, Pausanias, sacrifices again.

Meanwhile the enemy's cavalry is closing in on them and arrows are being shot into their ranks. At this moment, “Kallikrates, the tallest and handsomest man in the whole Greek army, is said to have been mortally wounded by an arrow. When dying, he said that he did not lament his death, for he left his home meaning to lay down his life for Greece, but that he was grieved that he had never exchanged blows with the enemy before he died”.

After a bit more drama with the sacrifice, the Spartans continue to offer no resistance, “but...standing still in their ranks, shot at by the arrows of the enemy, awaiting the time when it should be the will of the gods and their general that they should fight”, word finally comes that the sacrifice has become favourable and victory prophesied. The army is commanded to sot themselves in order of battle, “and then at once the Lacedæmonian force resembled some fierce beast turning to bay and setting up his bristles, while the barbarians saw that they had to deal with men who were prepared to fight to the death”. The Spartans then proceed to unceremoniously cream the enemy.

***

One account that I particularly appreciated regarded how important it was to the Spartans, while to be the best militarily, not to become corrupted by it. At one point Sparta has dominated the entire peninsula and finds itself in charge of a league of city states. Unfortunately, this begins to cause some of their generals to become enticed by the opportunities that can come from such power.

“When they (the Spartan people) perceived that the heads of their generals were being turned by the greatness of their power, they of their own accord withdrew from the supreme power [altogether], and no longer sent any generals to the wars, choosing rather to have moderate citizens who would abide by their laws at home, than to bear rule over the whole of Greece”.<\blockquote>

Awesome.

[Mark Kaplan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Plutarch lived in the first century AD (born in A.D. 45) and lived during and after the time of Nero. He provides insight from material available to him at the time, which includes histories of those who lived before and testimonies of those who lives within his time. These volumes were actually titled "Parallel Lives" as they set comparable Greek and Roman figures alongside each other. And there are plenty of extras, such as the details of Cleopatra's life, as contained in his chapter on Anthony, and the depth of their love affair which far exceeded my personal expectations. Many of the figures in these volumes have been lost to time but others have remained with us, due to the continued study of their writings by the students of Latin and Greek, and the work of artists whether they be sculpted or ensconced in dramas by figures like William Shakespeare. Shakespeare clearly drew on this work for his Histories "Julius Cesar", Coriolanus" and "Antony and Cleopatra". This is quite possibly the biggest payoff for modern readers. Plutarch's biographies add depth and complexity to characters who appear in Shakespeare's works but without whose own stories come across almost extraneous.

There are many jewels hidden within these pages, such as how Cleopatra determined to die by the poison of an asp (specifically), and how the political scene at the time not only allowed Cesar to cross the Rubicon with his troops, but practically opened the door for him.

A must for any student of the classics, this 17th century translation stands the test of time. Any over of biographies of great men, both famous and infamous is incomplete without this text. In Plutarch's own words, "Such objects we find in the acts of virtue, which produce in the minds of mere readers about them an emulation and eagerness that may lead them on to imitation." We can only hope so.

[Joshua Horn · Rating 4 out of 5]

his is the best book on ancient history I've ever read. Usually with ancient history very little is recorded. Usually all we know is from one or two historians, and all modern authors can really add is some archaeological findings and their own opinions. That why I prefer to read the original sources. The problem with doing that is that many are fragmentary, and sometimes it can be quite hard to understand the context of what they are talking about.

Plutarch is far easier to read than most authors first because it is a collection of short biographies. If you are lost, just wait. In a few pages he's on to the next character. And many of them are famous people that many interested in history will already have some understanding of. He also goes into some quite interesting asides that reveal his understanding of science and philosophy.

I listened to this as an audio book. I haven't looked into what print editions are available, but this would be much improved by a edition with a short introduction for each of the biographies. Often Plutarch dives right in, and unless you have already heard of the person it takes quite a while to figure out who it is and what is going on. Also helpful would be maps and critical notes.

One thing great Plutarch does that many modern historians do not is analyze and judge his subjects. His format is to compare a Greek and a Roman that he thought had similar lives, and compare their virtues and vices. It's interesting to see what he thought was important. He seemed to thing that great and successful men had some sort of virtue. Thus the hero of one live could be shown to really be a villain in another.

[Readius Maximus · Rating 5 out of 5]

I have to recommend Plutarch's Lives referred to by some with good reason "the Bible of Heroes". Plutarch compares one Greek and one Roman who led similar lives and writes a chapter on each and then has a short section comparing them, praising their virtues and showing where they fell short. The authors purpose, which he achieves nearly 2k years later, is that by reading the lives of great men we will want to emulate their virtues and avoid their vices.

Prerequisite reading: My philosopher friend said I must read Aristotle's Ethics and Politics and I found it extremely helpful to fully appreciate it.

Upsides: Uplifting, moral, great primary source of history (although it is not as factual as the modern mind would be pleased having much anecdotes and stories that are contradictory, although I found it charming and psychologically interesting and honest), inspiring, you will be a great reader by the end.

Downsides: Long nearly 1.5k pages, comes with tough pre recs, tedious to read at times, sometimes absolutely confusing as there are times when he is just not clear who he is currently talking about.

Favorite comparisons: Pompey and Agesilous. One oversaw the end of the republic, the other the downfall of Sparta and his Kingdom. Tragic but feels relatable to our present age.

Cato the younger and Phocion. Both just and austere men who stood for the common good, one against tyrants trying to end the republic, the other against foreign tyrants and an unruly and base population. One Roman and one Athenian.

[Jeremy · Rating 4 out of 5]

I ended up liking these more than I expected. Of course, I've only ready Julius Caesar and Mark Antony's chapters so far, but they were quite good. Reading these biographies is not the easiest - they have very long paragraphs, but I expected them to be drier than at least these chapters were. We are told in introductions to this book that they are not so much histories as they are biographies of each person's character. For at least these two chapters that was not the case, they contain much history of their lives and major exploits, though I understand there are many inaccuracies and inconsistencies in Plutarch's history, so they are not to be read as absolute history.

There are many comparison chapters as well, which Plutarch, a Greek, was writing to compare Greek and Latin lives with an ultimate goal of bringing the two cultures closer together. I found the comparison chapter that included Antony to be uninteresting.

This is best to read as a dip-in. No reason for me to read every life, but certain other lives seem to be more popular, and I'll probably dip into those in the future. Others I have on the list are Brutus, Alexander the Great, Cato the Younger, Cicero, Coriolanus (the third life that Shakespeare based a play on, including the two I read above), Pericles, and Antonius.

[Rylan Bowe · Rating 5 out of 5]

Plutarch never gets old. I read the Roman lives + the life of Alexander, and I have to say, the book does not read like it was written 2000 years ago. Before reading this book, in case you haven't already been told, Plutarch was less of a historian and more of a moralist, so if you are looking to for a definitive history absent of exaggeration and inaccuracy, then this book probably isn't for you. But if you really want to understand who these legends of history were as people, then the exaggerations and inaccuracies will serve their intended purpose. The book is dense and riddled with complicated sentences, that take multiple readings to at least somewhat understand, but overall it is definitely worth the read if you are interested in understanding the virtues of some of the most important people of antiquity.

[Thomas St Thomas · Rating 4 out of 5]

Plutarch does a nice job of helping the reader get to know these famous men through their characters and not just their famous deeds.

A must read for anyone wanting to understand the arc of our culture and history, but not one of my favorite canonical books. I don’t imagine I’ll go back and reference or re-read any of either volume. At times it was hard to follow why things were significant as I am not very familiar with the Greek and Roman political structures. Some characters would show up and I had no idea who they were.

[Dwayne Hicks · Rating 5 out of 5]

A significant but worthwhile investment. This second volume covers many of antiquity's greatest men: Pompey, Alexander, Caesar, Cato, the Gracchi, Demosthenes, Cicero, Antony, Brutus. Plutarch focuses on natural law and the wisdom of a balanced life as he takes you through incredible highs of human splendor and power - as well as remarkable lows of vice and violence. (Although the Artaxerxes bio near the end illustrates the relative civility of Rome and Greece... This brief excursion into "barbarian" Persia contains more brutality than all the preceding Classical lives put together.)

[Stuart Dean · Rating 5 out of 5]

The continuation of Plutarch's work including the real big names. Caesar and Alexander, Demosthenes and Cicero, Cato, Antony, Brutus, Phocian, and Artaxerxes. Ends with the not so great Galba and Otho. Excellent reading about the movers and shakers of the ancient world. Not always completely factual, but Plutarch was writing lives, not history. The basis for many more scholarly works on history, plus the source for such writers as Shakespeare and Goethe. Required reading for any serious or unserious person interested in the time period.