Plutarch's Lives: Volume I

Βίοι Παράλληλοι #1

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

Plutarch's Lives, written at the beginning of the second century A.D., is a 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 in1864 by the poet and scholar Arthur Hugh Clough, whose notes and preface are also included in this edition. Publisher: Modern Library 2001 Author: Plutarch Translated by: John Dryden Volume: 1 Format: 816 pages, paperback ISBN: 9780375756764

Theseus, Romulus, Lycurgus, Numa, Solon, Poplicola, Themistocles, Camillus, Pericles, Fabius, Alcibiadas, Coriolanes, Timoleon, Aemilius Paulus, Pelopidas, Marcellus, Aristides, Marcus Cato, Philopoemen, Flaminius, Pyrrhus, Caius Marius, Lysander, Sylla, Cimon, Lucullus, Nicias, Crassus

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

766 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 100

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]

"...beyond this there is nothing but prodigies and fictions, the only inhabitants are the poets and inventors of fables" Plutarch, The Lives of the Noble Grecians and Romans, Vol 1.



Plutarch, one of the great early biographers summarizes the lives of Greek and Roman military and political leaders and compares them to illuminate the virtues and failings of their leadership. Vol 1., includes the following micro-biographies and comparisons:

Theseus v. Romulus
Lycurgus v. Numa Pompilius
Solon v. Poplicola
Themistocles v. Camillus
Pericles v. Fabius Maximus
Alcibiades v. Coriolanus
Timoleon v. Aemilius Paulus
Pelopidas v. Marcellus
Aristides v. Cato the Elder
Philopoemen v. Flamininus
Pyrrhus v. Gaius Marius
Lysander v. Sylla
Cimon v. Lucullus
Nicias v. Crassus



The first two sets are more myth (Theseus v. Romulus) & folklore (Lycurgus v. Numa) and less biography, but it appears Plutarch realized that all history and biography NEEDS a beginning, even a vague and foggy genesis, and felt he would do a better job at it than another writer, thinker, biographer. Plus, he was teaching morals not history.

Most of these characters, leaders, politicians, thinkers in Vol 1 of 'Lives' I've come across in other classical writings, but Plutarch possessed a lot of information that current historians no longer possess, plus his approach is fairly no nonsense and pragmatic. I expect Vol 2 will be even more interesting as it heads into later "Noble" lives that are both more proximate to Plutarch, more well-known, and where more information is available. So far, however, I can see why early readers of the 17th-century translation by Dryden or 16th-century translation by North flocked to Plutarch mainly for his moralizing and less for his biographical skills.

I personally need to figure out if I prefer the Dryden translation or the North translation better (I own both). I would also be curious about later translations (Langhorne or Perrin). So, I'll probably pick one of the shorter biographies and read 2 or 3 or 4 different translations to see which I like, if I have the time and energy in a month or so.

Anyway, a wide reader can also see Plutarch's influence on Montaigne, Shakespeare, Boswell, Bacon, Hamilton, etc. IF he continues at this level or better this is one of those books I'm sure to travel back to both as a resource and a respite.

[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--HERODOTUS, 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 Herodotus in the 5th Century BC, "The Histories."




HERODOTUS, AUTHOR OF "THE HISTORIES"




Herodotus (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 Herodotus, 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

[Betawolf · Rating 4 out of 5]

Imagine you want to create Epic Rap Battles of History, except it's 100AD, YouTube doesn't exist yet, and rather than beating the streets learning all the most aggressive rhymes for 'suck it' you're a fuckin' nerd who's been studying all the historical authorities of antiquity. That's- well, almost nothing like this, really, but it at least sort of gestures in the right direction.

In his Parallel Lives, of which this is the first of four volumes in translation, Plutarch is providing biographies of all the major figures of history (read: Rome and Greece, this is 100AD) and pairing them off against each other in search of-- well, it's not exactly clear what he's looking for exactly, but something like insight into character and how fortune, vices and virtues interplay in the stories of great figures. Each Roman so far has been paired with a Greek, and Plutarch tends to pick figures who are vaguely comparable in terms of the structure of their lives.

The main two impressions I've got so far are firstly that Plutarch is remarkably even-handed: because he's writing a metric tonne of biographies, he doesn't usually get particularly attached to any one character, so his commentary on them comes off as quite fair, weighing atrocities and failures against glories and mitigating factors without a sense of his hand upon the scales. Secondly, he is quite evidently enthusiastic about his work, brimming with stories to the extent that even within a biography he will sometimes be seized with an aside that he will pursue passionately for a passage or two before a final 'But enough of that'. He also sees no reason to limit himself to the purely biographical, and if somebody's life story is tied up with a particular historical campaign then he happily details all the relevant events (in quite entertaining style) even if they didn't involve his subject. The result is sometimes a little scatterbrained, but quite charming.

It is perhaps needless to say, but Plutarch is one of our major surviving authorities on many of the events described in these Lives, and beyond just entertainment and studies of virtue, this (first volume of four) has been a whirlwind of classical history education. The focus being primarily on individuals rather than a national history gives the reading narrative pull. This has drawbacks in terms of the lens of things Plutarch bothers to include (this is for the most part not a social history, but the battles are often detailed), but also helps bring events to life -- it's one thing to hear about the effects of reforms, but quite another to see how they slot into events in the reformer's private life. I'd hesitate to rely entirely upon Plutarch's authority, but he's a great prod for events and periods I'd be interested in reading about in more modern treatments. The Long & Stewart translations feel appropriate for the content, and I plan to continue with the other volumes pretty much immediately.

Below, I include my notes on each Life in this volume.

Theseus -- Fun, being largely myth, but very episodic, and there are many differing authorities offering sometimes wildly different versions of certain stories, the only common elements seeming to be most of the places and people involved. I hadn't heard of Theseus' ignominious death before, it's a typically Greek ending, with the man first disgraced by his abduction of Helen bringing ruin to his city and then dying without celebration in exile.

Romulus -- Everyone remembers the wolf, but not the woodpecker? The word for she-wolf might also be the word for whore, which would simplify things a little. Also, did you know horoscopes could be reversed? So says Taroutius:

it belongs, he argued, to the same science to predict the life of a man from the time of his birth, and to find the date of a man's birth if the incidents of his life are given

Also, Romulus apparently just disappeared suddenly at age 38, in what now reads like a mix of Biblical myth and an alien abduction. Certainly a cooler ending than Theseus'.

Lykurgus -- Quite an opening. Literally everything about this man is disputed, but Plutarch doesn't try to give us all accounts. Instead, most of this life is devoted to description of the fascinating Spartan lifestyle.

Some foreign lady, it seems, said to [Gorgo, the wife of Leonidas], "You Laconian women are the only ones that rule men." She answered, "Yes; for we alone bring forth men."

There is so much in here that is just amazing -- the Spartan social system, the brilliant quotes and anecdotes -- though surprisingly little of it is specifically about Lykurgus as a person. The manner of his death, a noble suicide, is quite interesting for the parallel it runs with a certain influential Greek from another city.

Numa -- an odd comparison for Lykurgus, but I guess the main similarity is their role as a reformer of nations. Numa was peaceable and religious, and turned his people briefly to a less warlike stance, which may have been necessary to integrating them as one nation. Plutarch sees most similarity in their general virtues of self-control, piety and ability. It's also key that neither of them wanted the throne. Plutarch is a little harsh on Numa for not being so radical in vision as Lykurgus, but his point that Numa's peace ended immediately after him, and really to Rome's benefit, but Lykurgus' system made Sparta the Hellenic colossus that it was, and long endured.

Solon -- As you might expect, mostly concerned with the reforms of Athenian law and stabilisation of society. However, a few fun details do come through too:

Some writers argue, on chronological grounds, that Solon's meeting with Croesus must have been an invention. But I cannot think that so famous a story, which is confirmed by so many writers, and, moreover, which so truly exhibits Solon's greatness of mind and wisdom, ought to be given up because of the so-called rules of chronology, which have been discussed by innumerable persons, up to the present day, without their being ever able to make their dates agree.

Poplicola -- Perhaps better known as Publius Valerius? An interesting public figure of influence in Roman history, and not one I was aware of before reading. The transition from monarchy to the republic is an element of Roman history I've never really read about, and it seems like it might be quite worth pursuing, apparently including quite a protracted period where the old king wars with the new republic. Poplicola doesn't seem especially unique for his situation -- he made various canny decisions, but seems mostly motivated by the prospect of public office, whereas Solon is more easily painted as disinterested and altruistic.

Themistokles -- One of the first really interesting characters, Themistokles is a schemer, ambitious for power, 'excessively fond of admiration' and well-versed in statecraft -- yet this isn't an evil vizier story. As the story goes, he managed to position himself as a patriot while also appearing to be a defector to Xerxes, craftily securing his ambitions whatever the outcome might be. This turned out to be farsighted, as he ended up having to flee Greece and throw himself on Xerxes' mercy (which was, it seems, extensive).

Camillus -- Another interesting character I had not heard of before, and an excellent match for Themistokles, both of them being in a way saviours of their cities despite those cities being lost to the enemy, and both of them being exiled. This is also one of the most action-packed lives so far, with lots of well-described battles and sieges and intrigue. Strangely, the comparison section is missing, so it's not clear what Plutarch made of them.

Perikles -- A surprisingly philosophical opening to justify Parallel Lives.

That which is in itself admirable kindles in us a desire of emulation, whether we see noble deeds presented before us, or read of them in history. It was with this purpose that I have engaged in writing biography

Things to know about Perikles, other than his pivotal role in the Athenian golden age and that his death seems in ways to have cost Athens the Peloponnesian War (which he also started): he had a really big head. Like, multiple authorities insert jokes about how big his head was. Must've been huge. Perhaps not unconnected to this, he is also described as having an exceptionally self-serious manner.

He also seems to have been something of a despot, using public funds to bribe the people, destroying a system of courts with juries chosen by lot, exiling political opponents, and making use of the common defence fund of Greek allies to build glorious monuments in Athens. He even carved out a personal exception to a law he instituted which had caused many Athenians to be sold into slavery.

Fabius Maximus -- This is a pretty thrilling biography, mostly for its detailed account of the war against Hannibal, filled with portents and mythic overtones. It is somehow fitting that Fabius died when Hannibal left Italy. But there's also personal detail:

His own personal nickname was Verrucosus, because he had a little wart growing on his upper lip. The name of Ovicula, signifying sheep, was also given him while yet a child, because of his slow and gentle disposition.

Imagine having such a grand, inspiring name as 'Fabius Maximus', and everyone calling you Sheepy or Wartface.

Plutarch's right to point out that Fabius generally treated his domestic rivals much better than Perikles did. Though both are characterised by their cautious approach to defensive warfare, Fabius seems to have been more generally timid whereas Perikles only adopted caution in the conflict with Sparta, pointing to being ruled by reason rather than a sheepy character.

Alkibiades -- such a strange and contradictory figure, a devoted follower of Socrates who was also a reviled proto-despot, loved for his generous use of his wealth but hated for his bullying. It's somehow quite appropriate that he was the treacherous author of the Sicilian folly and also condemned in a highly dubious blasphemy case. Yet he also saved Athens later in the war, and his overall record is ambiguous -- neither clearly self-serving nor simply patriotic. He resembles in some ways Themistokles, even presenting that model for comparison to Artaxerxes.

Coriolanus -- This biography would've been extremely useful reading before watching Shakespeare's play. Coriolanus is a warrior hero, the sort of man who can rally routing troops and turn them around into the thick of battle, a hulk whose charge breaks a shield-wall. Exactly the sort of person who should not go into politics, because 'tact' is for people who fear death. Upon being banished, however, he seems to have developed a great deal of cunning, and his plots against Rome are quite deadly. The whole story is, by the way, quite gripping -- I can see why you'd want to adapt it for the stage.

The key similarity with Alkibiades is obvious:

Both alike obtained great success for their native countries while they remained in command of their countrymen, and both succeeded even more remarkably when fighting against them.

Timoleon -- Plutarch approaches this next pair more explicitly looking for the lessons to be learnt from their stories. It's perhaps a particularly bad time to start on this, however, as Timoleon's story includes a great number of examples where pivotal events are decided through the whims of fortune -- Timoleon unexpectedly coming upon his superior enemy just as they were disorganised in setting up camp, an assassin sent to kill Timoleon struck down in the crowd by the son of one of his previous victims, the Carthaginian admiral leaving the straits unguarded just as the Corinthian forces arrived unexpectedly...

The speedy rout of Hiketes and capture of the city may be justly ascribed to the skill of the General; but the fact that not one of the Corinthians was killed or wounded is due to Timoleon's good fortune, which seemed to vie with his courage and try to make those who read of his exploits wonder at their good luck more than their merit.

He even got a mid-battle thunderstorm while attacking a much larger army at a river crossing -- and the dead even turned out to be uncommonly wealthy. Plutarch doesn't miss the clear role of fortune in Timoleon's campaign, and points out that even in his being in Sicily rather than Greece at that time he was fortunate, as he avoided the internal strife of Greeks killing Greeks, and got to die of old age, beloved by everyone around him. It's perhaps a bit much to say he led a charmed life, given what happened with his brother, but it's certainly a pretty good one.

Aemilius -- Plutarch seems particularly taken with Aemilius, though from the biography he gives it's not terribly clear why. The two great campaigns of Aemilius' life are commendable achievements, especially the speedy and extremely lucrative one in Macedon, but the exploits don't seem to speak as deeply of personal virtue as some of the other biographies. Aemilius was a retiring, unambitious but extremely capable general -- I agree that is actually better than a life wracked with dramatic highs and low, but the extent of Plutarch's admiration is difficult to fathom. He doesn't even seem that great a match for Timoleon, as you can hardly call a man lucky whose young sons both die when he is meant to be celebrating a triumph.

[Daniel Chaikin · Rating 3 out of 5]

22. Plutarch's lives, The Dryden Translation, Volume 1, edited by Arthur Hugh Clough
written: circa 120 ce
translation: 1683 (and not by Dryden)
editing and notes 1859
format: 785 page paperback
acquired: December
read: Feb 27 – May 2
time reading: 48 hr 43 min, 3.7 min/page
rating: 3

A weird decision to read this, but it's become somehow meaningful to me in a way I don't exactly understand and that may not have anything to do with the text. The text is a strange relic of the Roman era. Plutarch was a Greek scholar during the high Roman Empire and wrote in Greek and may not have spoken Latin well. After doing whatever cultural touring he did in life, which included extensive travelling, collecting vast notes, he spent his later years in Greece as a priest at Delphi, writing. The parallel lives was his largest single work. The remnants of his possible 200 other works are collected in [Moralia], mostly philosophical writings.

Lives has a philosophical underlying component, a kind of "Middle Platonic" view on the morality of leaders through history, but mainly it's an historical work, a collection of paired biographies. Each prominent Roman is paired with a prominent Greek with similar aspects in their life trend. These are lengthy biographies, collected from a variety of sources. Then their lives are compared in brief essays. The general consensus is that Plutarch should not be taken as historically accurate, as his interest was in the morality and the story telling, not the accurate, well-documented history of the modern sense. He does occasionally note his sources within the text, and even expresses notes of skepticism here and there. And he seems to be internally consistent, as he often covers the same event in different lives from different perspectives. But, despite the consensus of soft accuracy, you will find he is often cited today as the main source for parts of the histories of Greece and Rome. Some Wikipedia articles basically summarize his essays from this work as the entire article on historical figures who, outside Plutarch, are mostly unknown. These are the kind of things that force me to re-visit or re-think ancient history, that undermine to me what we think we know.

As a historian Plutarch is really frustrating in that he loves and focuses on rumors, attributing major historical occurrences to unlikely details in someone's personal life. I constantly had to ask myself, that, even if what he had just described were completely true, is there any way it could have been accurately recorded.

The reading of this is an odd experience. I always had in mind that I was reading the "Dryden translation", a translation John Dryden put his name on, but did not apparently actually contribute to, and so I have little sense of how accurate any of this is in meaning or tone. This work of Plutarch is famous because of the way he tells these stories. They are fast and bring in immense detail and sometimes that combination can make for some vivid stories. But it's a tough read. The rush through details, one on top of the next, is relentless. Then major points of the story will be sort of sneaked into the text, leaving this reader forced to backtrack here and there to find where I lost the thread. And every part of this info dump begs some critical evaluation and a whole lot of skepticism. I would try at times just to blindly believe everything he says, but I had force that.

Plutarch was important in the late Renaissance when his focus on morality was of interest. His works, translated to English by Thomas North in 1579, were key source material for several of Shakespeare's plays. But it seems his importance has faded. There are no major new complete translations of his work. Newer translations focus on parts, and may break up these lives into just some of the Greek or Roman characters (and presumably re-order them chronologically). For me, he's a name that caught my attention and that my brain somehow needed to pin down by reading. I'm halfway through.

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

Plutarch's Lives, also known as Parallel Lives, is like the ancient world's version of a celebrity gossip column, but with a lot more toga and a lot less scandal (sometimes). Written in the early 2nd century AD, this collection pairs notable Greek and Roman figures to draw moral and ethical comparisons. Think of it as the original "Who Wore It Better?" featuring heavyweights like Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, and Pericles. Plutarch's goal wasn't just to dish out historical events; he wanted to explore the character and virtues of these individuals, giving us the ancient equivalent of a deep dive into their Instagram feeds.

One of the most entertaining aspects of Lives is its insanely rich anecdotal content and detailed portrayal of its subjects - too much to absorb in one reading. Plutarch brings a treasure trove of obscure details and fascinating facts into the personalities and moral choices of these historical figures, offering readers a nuanced understanding of their virtues and flaws, albeit not exactly historically accurate. This approach makes the work not only a valuable first take as an historical resource but also a timeless study of human nature. The comparisons between Greek and Roman figures highlight the cultural and ethical values of the ancient world, making it a delightful read for those interested in philosophy and history taken with a grain of salt.

Despite being written nearly two millennia ago, Plutarch's exploration of leadership, morality, and human behavior remains surprisingly relevant today. The work's influence is evident in its impact on later literature and historical writing. For anyone interested in classical history or the enduring questions of human character, Lives offers a profoundly engaging journey through the lives of some of history's most fascinating personalities.

Sure took me a while to get through. Onwards to part ii...

[Stupac · Rating 4 out of 5]

Plutarch's lives are an excellent place to start for a cursory study of the classical world. Plutarch of Chaeronia (in Greece) in the days of the Roman Empire was not contemporary with many of the figures he biographizes, but draws heavily from primary sources and oral traditions no longer extant. Don't forget also that he was a priest at the temple of Apollo at Delphi, so the predictions (and overriding theme of fate and the occasional miracle) of the famous oracle there play a heavy role in many of the "lives." On controversial details, he often gives both conflicting accounts, which is a nice touch. I personally really enjoyed the reading of Theseus and Romulus, the founders of Athens and Rome respectively. But all of them are valuable into the insight of history, and of how people considered these almost mythical heroes. These days you don't even need a book to read ancient works, you can find all of Plutarch's works online here:

http://www.livius.org/pi-pm/plutarch/...

[فؤاد · Rating 4 out of 5]

وقتى روميان شهر "گزانتوس" را تصرف كردند، اهالى شهر شبانه حمله كرده دژكوب‌هاى رومى را آتش زدند. آتش سرايت كرد و خانه‌هاى مجاور را در بر گرفت. "ماركوس بروتوس" فرمانده روم، كه مى ترسيد تمام شهر طعمه حريق شود، فرمان داد سربازانش به كمك شهر بشتابند، اما ناگاه چنان خشم و جنونى بر اهالى شهر غلبه كرد كه قابل بيان نيست. بزرگ و كوچك از همه سو، از بالاى بام‌ها، بر سر سربازان رومى كه در صدد نجات شهر بودند، سنگ و آجر مى‌زدند، و نه فقط همين، بلكه تا مى‌توانستند چوب و هيزم در آتش مى‌ريختند تا لهيب آن تمام شهر را فرا گيرد.

چون شعله به همه جا سرايت كرد، بروتوس سوار بر اسب در اطراف مى‌گرديد و به اهالى شهر التماس مى‌كرد كه به خود رحم كنند، اما هيچ كس توجه نمى‌كرد. مردان و زنان، زارى‌كنان خود و كودكان خود را به ميان آتش مى‌انداختند. برخى خود را از ارتفاعات پرت مى‌كردند، پدران سر كودكان خود را با خنجر مى‌بريدند، جوانان جامه از تن كنده عريان در مقابل پدران مى‌ايستادند تا هلاكشان سازند.

سربازان، پيرزنى را به بروتوس نشان دادند كه كودك مرده خود را به گردن آويخته، با مشعل خانه خود را آتش مى‌زد؛ اما بروتوس نتوانست نگاه كند، و ندبه‌كنان مقرّر كرد كه هر كس يكى از اهالى را نجات دهد جايزه دريافت مى‌كند، ولى با تمام كوششى كه كردند، تنها توانستند پنجاه نفر را نجات دهند.

به اين ترتيب، اهالى گزانتوس زیر بار سلطه رومیان نرفتند و خاطره اجدادشان را كه در جنگ با پارسيان خود را سوزانده بودند، دوباره زنده ساختند.

پلوتارک
حیات مردان نامی

[Robert Cruthirds · Rating 5 out of 5]

Plutarch's Lives is perhaps the very first attempt to document events in the lives of men who forged and shaped the times in which they lived. This was a difficult task for Plutarch, as many of the original primary sources of information were either lost or destroyed well before he began his research.

So he seems to have relied much on oral history or written sources that were revisions of original documents. Despite these obstacles, I think we can believe that Plutarch represented these lives according to the best information available to him.

[Matt · Rating 2 out of 5]

Dense. And not a lot of fun.

Plutarch, a Greek in the first century A.D. who later became a Roman citizen, drafted his Lives as a moral inquiry. He selected from history a well-known Greek and a well-known Roman and wrote briefly on each. He then concludes with a couple pages comparing their lives in terms of who can be thought of as a better man- in terms of generalship, politics or whichever other quality he feels is most comparable between them. Today, these comparisons have been collected into a couple volumes (or 11 if you want to shell out the money for the incomparable Loeb collection).

He is considered one of the first biographers and is credited with preserving the views that Roman citizens had of these prominent figures. However, as history, it is suspect. Plutarch, much like Herodotus, loves the story more than the facts. His Lives are filled with inconsequential anecdotes next to tales of military campaigns. But the anecdotes are not inconsequential to Plutarch. Since he is more interested in moral development, the quiet moments of distinguished men are considered to be more indicative of character than their accomplishments on the world stage. Unfortunately, according to people who really know their history, the recitations of the more historically significant events contain inaccurate dates and events, which relegates Plutarch to an archiver of perception rather than fact. For some, this may be just as interesting.

Plutarch’s purpose fits with his time. His life was during the time of Middle Platonism. The good was something that was inherent and could be seen in the mind. Therefore, men of quality could be learned from if,in turn, we are in a place to accept our failings“…for high and noble minds seldom please the vulgar…” (pg. 764, The Comparison of Lucullus with Cimon).

I was hoping after this first one hundred, two hundred or three hundred pages, I’d get into the rhythm of this book and it would read easier. I didn’t and it didn't. This translation was assembled by John Dryden in the 17th century and was revised by the English poet A.H. Clough in the 19th century. And it feels like it. It’s dry and ponderous. But maybe Plutarch was too. I don’t read Latin so I’m stuck with what’s given to me. This is probably best read in pieces as it was originally compiled. Short comparisons between two lives. It was not originally intended as an 800 page monolith.

And this is just Volume 1.

_______________________________

My favorite passage came out of the life of Marcus Cato and it's not even about him:

The little country house of Manius Curius, who had been thrice carried in triumph, happened to be near his farm; so that often going thither, and contemplating the small compass of the place, and plainness of the dwelling, he formed an idea of the mind of the person, who being one of the greatest of the Romans, and having subdued the most warlike nations, nay, had driven Pyrrhus out of Italy, now, after three triumphs, was contented to dig in so small a piece of ground, and live in such a cottage. Here it was that the ambassadors of the Samnites, finding him boiling turnips in the chimney corner, offered him a present of gold; but he sent them away with this saying;

that he, who was content with such a supper, had no need of gold; and that he thought it more honorable to conquer those who possessed the gold, than to possess the gold itself. pg. 503.

[Mihai Zodian · Rating 5 out of 5]

Plutarch's Lives is an antidote to the modern skepticism about politics. It inspired Machiavelli, Shakespeare, and many others. It teaches the reader about the greatness and the frailty of people and the ambiguities of political action. Therefore, it is a welcome relief in troubled times.

Written at the height of the Roman Empire by a Greek scholar, The Lives contains short biographies of the most famous leaders from Antiquity. They are paired and compared, Plutarch being interested in their qualities and defects. They are grouped according to a dominating quality. They range from legendary founders to historical figures.

Plutarch was a master of the significant detail, which he theorized. He began The Life of Lysander by describing a statue depicting the controversial Spartan commander with long hair and beard. And he is portrayed as such, an ambitious leader, a valuable strategist who crushed Athens' might in the Peloponnesian War, even at sea or by diplomacy. Lysander was one of the sources for the famous analogy of humans with lions and foxes, and he is compared with Sylla, the Roman leader who destroyed the Republic in the name of its salvation (they are evenly matched).

In Lives, Cato is greater than life. He's presented as a strong-willed leader and a good tactician. Plutarch doesn't forget about his rigidity and he criticises him for it, but, in the end, the Roman politician is shown as the embodiment of philosophical values in politics. Even when the end was closing, he remained a master of his destiny, as the Stoics have taught him.

And the stories go on and on. Plutarch's Lives is very long, which may be a drawback. It's also about men and a platonic and classical ideal of manhood. With all these issues, the result is impressive, because it leaves a feeling of grandeur and vulnerability difficult to match.

[Steven Peterson · Rating 4 out of 5]

One of the devices of Plutarch is to draw comparisons between the famous Greeks and later Romans. For instance, the first sketch in this version features the Athenian Theseus. Plutarch equates him to a Roman founder, Romulus.

There is the story of Themistocles, whose talents helped to defeat the Persian fleet at Salamis and whose strategizing was a key part of the Greeks' overall victory. There is also the tale of the unhappiness that he faced afterwards, including the ironic flight from Athens. His death, by suicide, was designed to avoid his having to lead a fleet against the Greek fleet.

The work continues with a depiction of the great Pericles, followed by the story of Alcibiades. Alexander the Great is also discussed, along with a handful of other noble Greeks.

This is a wonderful introduction to classical Greece. For those interested in a deeper sense of the roots of Western civilization, this provides a nice entrée.

[Rick Davis · Rating 5 out of 5]

Plutarch is a fantastic storyteller and historian. He is usually careful to cite his sources and he frequently discusses variant accounts of events, but, far from being a dry academic, he brings the men he writes about to vibrant life. He also doesn't mind spicing his stories up with some gossip, although he usually notes when his stories deviate from what is historically probable. He places both the virtues and vices of famous men on display, and allows the reader to see the comparisons between men of different times and stations as they encounter the same ethical dilemmas and temptations. No wonder this book was for centuries considered required reading for young people.

[David Sarkies · Rating 4 out of 5]

Biographies of Some Ancient Folk
25 April 2021

I do wonder what the actual definition of noble is. The reason I ask this question is because the people whom Plutarch has included in this collection wouldn’t necessarily be what I would consider upstanding people. I guess the thing is that probably what we are looking at are not necessarily morally upstanding people – and ignoring the fact that these lot were pretty racist, especially the Greeks, and treated women pretty badly as well. Then there is the fact that a lot of them were involved in fighting battles, some coming up from the lower ranks. We even have Mark Anthony included in the collection and he is portrayed as being little more than a thug.

What is interesting though is what is missing – there is not one philosopher or playwright amongst the collection, which leads me to believe that maybe what Plutarch is writing about is not so much morally upstanding people, or even quite educated people, but rather he is writing about famous rulers. In this regards, if we consider a modern collection, it might be that such a book would contain the likes of Margaret Thatcher, Richard Nixon, and Charles DeGaulle, but leave out the likes of Martin Luther King, Stephen Hawkings, and Martin Scorsese. Sure, Nixon isn’t really liked all that much, especially amongst people who actually remember when he was president. Further, would Donald Trump be included in a modern edition if Plutarch were writing today – he did include Otho, who pretty much stabbed his partner in the back so he could become emperor.

I guess the modern idea of noble is what we expect from our leaders, that is that they are upstanding individuals who are beyond repute, that live particularly moral lives. Of course, we don’t seem to look for that in our leaders these days, especially in the Anglo-sphere. Instead, we seem to be electing clowns and cowards. Okay, Biden won, but the scary thought is that almost half of the country voted for a lying womaniser who still has delusions that the election was stolen from him. Sure, I like Boris Johnson, he’s a bit of a clown, and has a classical education, but I certainly wouldn’t have voted for him. As for us here in Australia, we have a Prime Minister that buggers off to Hawaii when the country is on fire, delegates all of the heavy lifting during the pandemic to the states, and completely stuffs up the vaccine roll out (and then proceeds to delegate the responsibility to the states). Yet people still admire him.

Yeah, nobility seems to be something that is missing from our political leaders of late, though I do feel that Biden does seem to represent that trait (as did Obama, and also Bush Jnr, though I would raise questions as to whether one would consider Clinton to be a noble character). Personally, here in Australia, I felt that Turnbull was also a noble character, but the climate change denialists and the mining lobby pretty much kicked him out and replaced him with a happy clapper who runs and hides when the proverbial shit hits the fan.

The thing is that nobility hasn’t always had that definition, particularly when we consider how in the past it simply referred to the ruling class. This is where I suspect the idea comes from, especially since the translation that I read was the Dryden translation. Back in those days nobility didn’t mean that the person was fine and upstanding, but rather that they were members of the aristocracy. In fact there were quite a lot of rulers, and members of the aristocracy, that certainly didn’t fit the category of fine and upstanding individuals – which is probably why the French decided to go around to remove all of their heads.

So, I guess when it comes to this collection of biographies, we aren’t necessarily looking at fine and upstanding individuals, but rather rulers that back in Plutarch’s day were well known. The idea here is that I suspect that Plutarch is using these lives to demonstrate to his pupils, and later readers, the type of ruler that will become famous, and live for posterity. Of course, the fact that Plutarch has included a person in his collection means that they have been remembered. Some of them are well known, such as Caeser and Mark Anthony, others not so much, such as Galba and Otho (though they are the odd ones out). So, in conclusion, I’d suggest that Plutarch is providing us with examples of what a ruler does that leads him (or her) to be remembered long after they are gone, the types of feats that they accomplish, and the things that they will be remembered for. This, I suspect, is the purpose of his work.

Oh, I probably should mention that the original title is Parallel Lives, this title, no doubt, was coined by John Dryden, and it is the one that has stuck. I suspect that the reason Dryden used this title was because in his day noble basically referred to the ruling class.

[Spencer Wright · Rating 4 out of 5]

A little dry, but very interesting! I love being able to get the stories of these people from such a relatively near contemporary

[Truls Ljungström · Rating 4 out of 5]

I allmänhet finns det en del söta detaljer, och dryden översatte väl. Detta sagt kanske det inte är biografier som måste läsas av var och en.

[Keeko · Rating 5 out of 5]

You can see why this book is still being read 2,000 years, give or take a few. I would give it 10 stars if I could. Cover to cover adventure, passion, betrayal, heart, and humor. You can tell how much he loved the characters because he brings them to life. I teared up a bit when I finished it because I didn't want to leave them. And as a side note, every time now when I hear a politician or political strategist praised for a brilliant tactic or for "remaking the political landscape," I'll be thinking, "So and so did that a couple of thousand years ago. I read it in Plutarch." New dogs and old tricks.

[Victoria · Rating 4 out of 5]

My favorite section in this book, and one of my favorite reads of the curriculum this year, was that of Lycurgus and the society he built in Sparta. The culture of minimal legislation, common possessions, few words, and more leisure is such a foreign lifestyle, and I still think about it often. I'm still left pondering how it is necessary to have community in order to have happiness and whether it is necessary to isolate ourselves in order to have the best community.

Another fun topic of discussion after reading this book was to determine how St. John's and the USNA match up with the societies of Solon and Lycurgus.

[Illiterate · Rating 4 out of 5]

Edifying biographies, with colorful anecdotes & interesting digressions. Agreeable and humane.

[Fraser Kinnear · Rating 4 out of 5]

Why Plutarch would argue for reading his book:

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.

Every story is interesting, and every pair of stories derive new lessons about people and history. But certain themes persist that reflect Plutarch’s very pragmatic, stereotypically Roman character. Take this line, although it is describing a Greek, which is one Marcus Cato would have approved:

And therefore all those who have written well on politics, as Plato, Diogenes, and Zeno, have taken Lycurgus for their model, leaving behind them, however, mere projects and words; whereas Lycurgus was the author, not in writing but in reality, of a government which none else could so much as copy

Leading a life of a “doer” means sacrificing, or even perhaps reviling, unproductive time. In the Pericles profile, Plutarch remarks on the wastefulness of impractical vocations or avocations:

It was not said amiss by Antisthenes, when people told him that one Ismenias was an excellent piper. “It may be so,” said he, “but he is but a wretched human being, otherwise he would not have been an excellent piper.”… He who busies himself in mean occupations produces, in the very pains he takes about things of little or no use, an evidence against himself of his negligence and indisposition to what is really good

I suppose versions of these values echo today, in Protestant work ethic, or Kipling’s chastisement to “fill every minute with sixty seconds run,” or Teddy Roosevelt hagiography. But sometimes, the distance between our culture and Rome’s becomes clear. In what must have been the ultimate “at least he made the trains run on time” comment, after describing Sulla’s violent proscriptions, he concludes on the man:

Sylla, when he had made himself master of the city, which then upheld the dominion and power of Mithridates in opposition to him, restored her to liberty and the free exercise of her own laws; Lysander, on the contrary, when she had fallen from a vast height of dignity and rule, showed her no compassion, but abolishing her democratic government, imposed on her the most cruel and lawless tyrants. We are now qualified to consider whether we should go far from the truth or no in pronouncing that Sylla performed the more glorious deeds, but Lysander committed the fewer faults, as, likewise, by giving to one the pre-eminence for moderation and self-control, to the other for conduct and valour.

Perhaps Plutarch’s point is that we shouldn’t argue with results. So many of his Greek subjects failed at building something that outlived them. Lycurgus was the ultimate Spartan, but led to towards becoming a failed state. Themistocles and Alcibiades were inspiring leaders who flamed out in disgrace. Solon dropped his work and Athens to figure itself out. Pericles died too soon, but clearly history had caught up to him, in spite of his conservative positioning.

Greece fought all her battles against, and to enslave, herself; she erected all her trophies to her own shame and misery, and was brought to ruin and desolation almost wholly by the guilt and ambition of her great men. A foreign people, appearing just to retain some embers, as it were, some faint remainders of a common character derived to them from their ancient sires, a nation from whom it was a mere wonder that Greece should reap any benefit by word or thought, these are they who have retrieved Greece from her severest dangers and distresses, have rescued her out of the hands of insulting lords and tyrants, and reinstated her in her former liberties.

Other lessons to be had… learning from historical figures how to step down gracefully from leadership when you fail:

Fabius, after his men had picked up the spoils of the field, retired to his own camp, without saying any harsh or reproachful thing to his colleague; who, also, in his part, gathering his army together, spoke and said to them: “To conduct great matters and never commit a fault is above the force of human nature; but to learn and improve by the faults we have committed, is that which becomes a good and sensible man. Some reasons I may have to accuse fortune, but I have many more to thank her; for in a few hours she hath cured a long mistake, and taught me that I am not the man who should command others, but have need of another to command me; and that we are not to contend for victory over those to whom it is our advantage to yield. Therefore in everything else henceforth the dictator must be your commander; only in showing gratitude towards him I will still be your leader, and always be the first to obey his orders.”

Or an appreciation that political spin has always existed:

The way which, the moderns say, the Athenians have of softening the badness of a thing, by ingeniously giving it some pretty and innocent appellation, calling harlots, for example, mistresses, tributes customs, a garrison a guard, and the jail the chamber, seem originally to have been Solon’s contrivance, who called cancelling debts Seisacthea, a relief, or disencumbrance

Or managing early success:

It may be observed, in general, that when young men arrive early at fame and repute, if they are of a nature but slightly touched with emulation, this early attainment is apt to extinguish their thirst and satiate their appetite; whereas the first distinctions of more solid and weighty characters do but stimulate and quicken them and take them away like a wind in the pursuit of honour; they look upon these marks and testimonies to their virtue not as a recompense received for what they have already done, but as a pledge given by themselves of what they will perform hereafter, ashamed now to forsake or underlive the credit they have won, or, rather, not to exceed and obscure all that is gone before by the lustre of their following actions.

Perhaps one of the rarest lessons for one to find was in Coriolanus’s story. Perhaps this is why Shakespeare found so much wealth in Plutarch:

He had never learned how essential it is for any one who undertakes public business, and desires to deal with mankind, to avoid above all things that self-will, which, as Plato says, belongs to the family of solitude; and to pursue, above all things, that capacity so generally ridiculed, of submission to ill-treatment. Marcius, straightforward and direct, and possessed with the idea that to vanquish and overbear all opposition is the true part of bravery, and never imagining that it was the weakness and womanishness of his nature that broke out, so to say, in these ulcerations of anger, retired, full of fury and bitterness against the people.

This one that probably resonated with Edmund Burke:

Lycurgus would never reduce his laws into writing; nay there is a Rhetra expressly to forbid it. For he thought that the most material points, and such as most directly tended to the public welfare, being imprinted on the hearts of their youth by a good discipline, would be sure to remain, and would find a stronger security, than any compulsion would be, in the principles of action formed in them by their best lawgiver, education. And as for things of lesser importance, as pecuniary contracts, and such like, the forms of which have to be changed as occasion requires, he thought it the best way to prescribe no positive rule or inviolable usage in such cases, willing that their manner and form should be altered according to the circumstances of time, and determinations of men of sound judgment. Every end and object of law and enactment it was his design education should effect.

In all, absolutely fantastic. Very much looking forward to part 2!!!

[Miguel Dominguez · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read Ben Franklin's autobiography a couple of years ago. As a youth in colonial Boston, he did not have access to a large library, but the books he had were quite formative: Scripture, Pilgrim's Progress, and Plutarch's Lives. Reasoning that I could get Ben Franklin's results by copying his methods, I decided to start reading those.

I wish I read Plutarch's Lives 15 years earlier. So many great tales of heroism and villainy, virtue and vice. I think about Lycurgus daily. All of these men were great, but some succeeded more than others depending on their vices, their ability to persuade their fellow man, and the magnitude of the envy they inspired in their rivals. This is really a great moral and practical education for aspiring leaders. And I'm only halfway through, there's a second volume!

[Katie · Rating 2 out of 5]

If you think working out is boring, try running on the treadmill jamming to Plutarch lmaooo

Of course this wasn't the most captivating read for me, but hey, he had his moments. Sometimes you read something to try to be smart and tell someone else you read it hahaha

I tried to pick an excerpt of some interesting people at least - Theseus, Cisero, Romulus, and Antony

The soul of a lover lives in someone else’s body - of Antony when he deserts everyone to run after Cleopatra - icon

And Plutarch was kinda funny sometimes -- "w/ his very ugly daughters" lmaooo

[Nancy · Rating 5 out of 5]

#Classic filled with important information about iconic figures.
Plutarch's Lives

Reading this book takes discipline,
after 100 pgs...my eyes glaze over.
C'est fini!

Review

[Ryan Winfield · Rating 5 out of 5]

An interesting series of case studies on piety and valor, and a perfect supplement to having just read "The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire."

[Caleb Freeman · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a great companion book for Nichomachean Ethics because Aristotle’s ideas are fleshed out in the way Plutarch judges the different princes. It was also very readable for me and gave me a deeper understanding of Ancient Rome and Greece.

[Joe Holt · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read the Waterfield translation of Greek lives but didn’t see it in Goodreads. Super readable and a fascinating portrait of power and what it does to people. Agesilaus made me so sad

[Anatoly Puzyrevsky · Rating 5 out of 5]

Definitely one of the best biography compilations I've ever read

[Morgan Moore · Rating 5 out of 5]

A very dense book but a perfect read for those interested in Roman/Greek history and mythology.

[Ava · Rating 4 out of 5]

I’d like to read this in full sometime, for my own Frankensteinian pleasure, however we read Lycurgus and Solon for seminar to compare Spartan and Athenian politics. This book is a fascinating conversation starter, and raises questions both ancient and woefully contemporary.

[bedheaded · Rating 5 out of 5]

Listened to the Bernard Mayes reading of this, which was sufficiently old and gravel-y. I got exhausted by the end of it, hearing about different wars without much context or contiguousness with the previous Greek / Roman lives, but the life pairs in their own right are all very interesting.
Favorites were Lycurgus, Timoleon, and Marius.

[Joe Murphy · Rating 5 out of 5]

Now THIS is a book