# Volume One **What is Plutarch's Lives, Volume I all About?** First off, this volume is part of a celebrated work by the ancient Greek writer Plutarch. It's a collection of biographies, specifically designed to familiarize us with "the greatest men and the greatest events of the ancient world". This particular edition is a translation from the Greek by Aubrey Stewart and the late George Long, published in 1894. It includes a preface, a life of Plutarch himself, and several paired biographies of famous Greek and Roman figures. **Why Read Plutarch? A Timeless Favorite!** The preface makes a compelling case for why Plutarch has remained a favorite author "from the period of the revival of classical literature in Europe down to our own times". It's not just dry history; Plutarch has a remarkable ability to "gossip pleasantly while instructing solidly". He breathes life into historical figures, making them seem so "intensely human and lifelike in their faults and failings as well as in their virtues" that we might feel we've personally known them. This approach dispels the schoolboy's doubt about whether these ancient names belonged to real, living people. Isn't that a wonderful way to connect with the past? **Meet the Author: Plutarch of Chaeroneia** The "Life of Plutarch" section gives us some lovely insights into the man behind these vivid portraits. Plutarch was born likely between A.D. 45 and A.D. 50 in the small town of Chaeroneia in Boeotia, Greece. His family seems to have deep roots there. He wasn't confined to his hometown, though. We learn he studied under a master named Ammonius at Athens. He also visited Italy and Rome, and probably even lived there for a time. Interestingly, he admits he didn't have much time to practice Latin while in Rome, being busy with public affairs and giving philosophy lessons. This might be why he often gained understanding of Latin words from the facts he already knew, rather than the other way around. Some suggest he never acquired a "very exact knowledge of the language", though later sections suggest he did become "well read in the literature of Rome". This makes you wonder how he navigated studying Roman history! It's even suggested that he wrote all his Roman Lives _after_ returning to Chaeroneia. While in Rome, besides researching for his Roman Lives, he delivered lectures on philosophy and other subjects. These lectures might even have been the basis for many of his short treatises, now known collectively as the 'Moralia'. He dedicated some of his books, including the Lives, to friends like Sossius Senecio, who seems to have encouraged his move to Rome. A cool anecdote tells of a nobleman, Rusticus, attending his lecture in Rome and refusing to open a letter from the Emperor Domitian until Plutarch finished speaking – a testament to how captivating his lectures must have been. We also get glimpses into his family life. His wife was Timoxena, and he wrote a touching letter to her about the death of their daughter, also named Timoxena. He had sons named Autobulus and Plutarch, to whom he dedicated a treatise. He seems to have been a man who cherished his domestic life, described as "self-respecting amiable... a king in his own house, surrounded himself with select friends". He even found "scarcely an erasure, as in a book well written, in the happiness of his life". What a lovely thought! Plutarch also held a significant public role as a priest of Apollo at Delphi for many years. This position likely provided income and, being a short journey from Chaeroneia, didn't interfere much with his other work. **Plutarch's Unique Approach to Biography** So, what did Plutarch aim to do with these Lives? He explains it himself in the introduction to his Life of Alexander (quoted in the preface): he doesn't write _histories_, but _Lives_. He believes that a person's character is often revealed not by grand battles or major events, but by "some slight circumstance, a word, or a jest". Like a painter focusing on the face and eyes, Plutarch looks for the "signs of a man's character" to create a portrait of his life. This approach means he avoids the pitfalls of modern biographers who identify too closely with their subject and try to make all actions look good. Plutarch, thankfully, includes both the "faults and failings as well as... virtues". He shows us a person's "good and bad acts, of his good and bad qualities; he makes no attempt to conceal the one or the other". The reader is left with a "mixed opinion" of the characters, though the favorable or unfavorable side usually wins out. He also avoids giving a complete chronicle or lingering on a hero's decline and death, focusing instead on the "remarkable events... and such incidents as will enable us to judge of his character". Only if a death was noteworthy would he spend more than a few lines on it. His object in writing was ultimately moral. He wrote, initially, to profit others, but later found it profitable for himself, looking at the histories "as if he had looked in a glass, and seeking to reform his life in some sort, and to forme it in the mould of the vertues of these great men". He saw this process as a way of "familiar haunting and frequenting" these noble figures. He aimed to receive "memorials of the great and good" into his mind to help him reject base things. This focus on virtue and character is a defining feature, and the preface notes that his morality is "of the purest and loftiest type". Reading these Lives, we are told, can make us better, increasing our "detestation of all that is mean and disingenuous" and strengthening our admiration for what is "truthful and generous". While he might not have had the "critical sagacity which discerns truth from falsehood" and can be "often inaccurate and often diffuse; that his anecdotes are sometimes absurd, and his metaphysical speculations not unfrequently ridiculous", he preserved a vast number of facts that would otherwise be lost, thanks to being a "great reader" with access to large libraries. **The Structure: Parallel Lives** A key feature of Plutarch's work is the "Parallel Lives" structure. He pairs a famous Greek figure with a similar Roman figure and often provides a comparison at the end. This volume contains several of these pairings, as listed in the contents: - Theseus (Greek) and Romulus (Roman), founders of great cities. - Lykurgus (Greek) and Numa (Roman), lawgivers and early rulers. - Solon (Greek) and Poplicola (Roman), statesmen and figures who shaped their republics. - Themistokles (Greek) is included, though his pair, Camillus (Roman), is listed in Volume II's content. The comparisons, like that between Numa and Lykurgus, highlight their shared traits like self-control, piety, and political skill, but also fascinating differences, such as Numa accepting a throne offered to him and Lykurgus giving one up. The comparison between Solon and Poplicola touches on Solon's ideas about happiness versus Poplicola's actual glorious life and death. Perikles and Fabius Maximus, though paired, are described in Volume II, but their comparison is mentioned in the first volume's preface. This preface comparison highlights their similar dispositions (gentleness, justice) and service to their countries, noting Perikles dealt with prosperity and Fabius with adversity. **A Glimpse at Some Figures in Volume I** Volume I introduces us to some truly foundational figures: - **Theseus:** The legendary founder-hero of Athens, whose story involves mythological elements but Plutarch seeks the more credible accounts. His descent is traced from ancient Athenian kings and the Pelops family. We hear the famous tale of his father Aegeus leaving tokens (sword and sandals) under a stone for him to claim when he came of age. - **Romulus:** The founder of Rome. His story includes the dramatic birth of twins to Rhea Silvia (or Ilia/Silvia), a Vestal virgin, their miraculous survival after being cast out, suckled by a she-wolf and fed by a woodpecker. He's described as a religious prince and credited with instituting the Vestals and the sacred staff called _lituus_. Like Theseus, his early life involves divine or miraculous elements. - **Lykurgus:** The stern Spartan lawgiver. The sources mention conflicting accounts of his ancestry. His reforms aimed at creating an austere and disciplined society. He famously didn't write down his laws, believing they should be ingrained by habit and training. His laws discouraged luxury (e.g., specifying simple house construction) and limited frequent war with the same enemy. Spartans were taught a sharp, concise style of speaking (Laconian speech). The Oracle at Delphi praised him as god-like. Aristotle is noted as saying Lykurgus didn't receive as much honor in Lacedaemon as he deserved, despite having a temple. - **Numa:** The second king of Rome, known for his piety and peace-loving nature. There are debates about his connection to the Greek philosopher Pythagoras due to the time difference, though some see resemblances between Roman and Laconian customs. He was reluctant to become king, preferring a quiet life of philosophy and peace. He is credited with religious institutions, including the Vestals (though Romulus is also mentioned) and burying sacred books with him to keep them from being written down. - **Solon:** The Athenian lawgiver and poet. We see a glimpse of his awareness of political dangers, recognizing the different attitudes of the poor and rich towards a potential tyrant. - **Poplicola:** Originally Publius Valerius, a key figure in the overthrow of the Roman monarchy and establishment of the Republic. He was known for his eloquence, wealth, and kindness to the poor. He was a staunch defender of liberty, swearing an oath never to yield to the deposed kings. He uncovered a conspiracy involving even the consul's nephews. Notably, when the people worried about his power and large house, he immediately tore down his house to show he wasn't aiming for tyranny, earning him the name Poplicola, "lover of the people". He also humbled the symbols of consular power by removing the axes from the fasces and bowing them to the people. We hear about his role during the siege by Porsena, including famous Roman heroes like Horatius Cocles and Mucius Scaevola. - **Themistokles:** An Athenian statesman and general who, after falling out of favor, fled to the Persian king Artaxerxes. He impressed the king with his cleverness (likening human speech to tapestry) and charm, even learning Persian to speak directly to the king. He was highly honored at the Persian court. **About the Translation** This specific edition is a new one, complementing the earlier translations of George Long. Stewart aimed to give Plutarch's meaning in "plain language," striving for accuracy ("neither more nor less"). He mentions comparing his work with German and French translations to avoid errors, noting the merits and sometimes inaccuracies of previous English versions, such as North's (translated from French, not Greek) and the Dryden edition ("from the Greek by several hands"). This effort suggests a commitment to providing a reliable and understandable text for the reader. **Points for Further Exploration** This briefing just scratches the surface! Plutarch's Lives are full of fascinating details and comparisons that spark curiosity. Here are some avenues you might enjoy exploring further: 1. **Plutarch's Historical Accuracy:** The preface mentions he is "often inaccurate" but preserves many facts. How do his accounts of figures like Romulus, Lykurgus, or Perikles compare with modern historical or archaeological understanding? 2. **The Influence of "Small Incidents":** Plutarch prioritizes showing character through minor events. Can you find specific examples in these Lives where a single anecdote or saying reveals a great deal about a person's nature? 3. **The Art of Comparison:** How effectively does Plutarch use the "Parallel Lives" and the concluding comparisons to highlight virtues, vices, and lessons? Do the pairings always feel natural and insightful? 4. **Plutarch's Philosophy and Morality:** Given his background and purpose, how do his philosophical leanings and moral viewpoints shape his presentation of historical figures? Are there consistent moral themes he emphasizes? 5. **Comparing Translations:** How might reading different English translations (like North's or the Langhornes') of the same Life change your perception of the historical figure or Plutarch's style? 6. **Life in Ancient Greece and Rome:** What do the details in these Lives, even the small ones about daily life, customs, or political processes, tell us about the societies in which these men lived? (For instance, the notes about Athenian self-description as Autochthones or the structure of triremes). # Volume Two While Plutarch is perhaps most famous for his _Parallel Lives_, he also wrote over seventy-five essays known collectively as the _Moralia_. These essays are just as important for understanding Plutarch, covering everything from ethical advice and philosophical discussions to cultural subjects, memorable sayings, and even practical tips for social situations like funerals or dinner parties. He tackles lively questions like how to spot a flatterer, whether meat-eating is moral, and even the age-old chicken-or-egg question. Now, when we look at _Volume II_, our sources give us some clues about what might be inside. Based on footnotes and content lists, Volume II likely contains the Lives of figures such as Themistokles, Romulus, Aristides, and Cato. It also seems to include the comparison of Aristides and Cato. The preface provided in the sources, which appears before the listing of Volume I's contents, sets the stage for the entire collection of _Lives_, suggesting it applies to Volume II as well. The goal of these _Lives_, Plutarch explains, isn't to write full histories that cover every single event. Instead, he focuses on the "Lives" of individuals. He believes that a person's character, their virtue or vice, isn't always best shown by the biggest actions like battles or sieges. Sometimes, a small detail, a comment, or even a joke can reveal more about a person's character than immense military campaigns. It's like a painter who captures a likeness by focusing on the face and eyes rather than the whole body. Plutarch's aim is explicitly moral. He uses history as a kind of mirror to help order and shape his own life based on the virtues of others. He selects the most important and illuminating actions from his subjects' lives. This experience, for him, is like having these great figures as house-guests, entertaining them through history and exploring "the greatness and quality of the man". It's a way of self-improvement. This approach means that in the Lives found in Volume II, and indeed throughout the _Parallel Lives_, Plutarch takes a linear narrative from birth to death, concentrating on public actions but also paying attention to family life. He delights in anecdotes and respects historical truth, but ultimately, his commitment is to understanding and portraying the character of his subjects. He wasn't the only one writing biographies in antiquity, but his approach, especially compared to contemporaries like Nepos, who wrote very selective sketches, is far more detailed and thematically complex. A key aspect of the _Parallel Lives_, including those likely found in Volume II, is their unique structure. They are meant to be read in pairs, usually a Greek Life followed by a Roman one. Many pairs include a comparison, or _synkrisis_, at the end, and often open with a prologue introducing the two individuals. This structure isn't just for show! Plutarch makes it clear that a major purpose is to reveal the moral character of these statesmen. He aims to show their "virtue and vice," which he sees in moral, judgmental terms – essentially, what is right and wrong, good and bad behavior. The comparative structure, _synkrisis_, is a powerful tool. It encourages us, the readers, to evaluate two behavioral patterns by comparing them. This helps to bring out the nuances of virtuous qualities or traits when seen in different individuals who have interesting similarities and differences. It makes the analysis fruitful and educational. Plutarch's selection of subjects is partly driven by the teaching value their lives offer. For example, the comparison of Aristides and Cato would invite us to think about their similar traits and actions in their respective Greek and Roman contexts. Plutarch also uses comparisons beyond just the explicit pairs. He might compare one Greek figure to another, or one Roman to another, to highlight subtle variations in virtues like bravery, wisdom, or justice. He might even introduce figures from literature or philosophy, like Socrates, adding layers of intertextuality and suggesting deeper moral or historical parallels. This multi-layered comparison, even within a single life or pair, is truly remarkable. The traits Plutarch is interested in often relate to public life and statesmanship. He's keen to explore what makes a man great, and he often links this to effective leadership. Informed decision-making, or _prohairesis_, is fundamental to this. He wants readers to engage their minds and intellect in judging characters. Interestingly, the tone Plutarch takes is often sympathetic, viewing mistakes not as deep wickedness but as shortcomings in a specific virtue, out of a "respect for human nature". He also encourages the reader's active participation in judging the subjects. He believes discrimination, "the power to make distinctions," is a key rational capacity. This allows us to learn from both good and bad examples and judge the correct response. Plutarch drew upon a wealth of sources for his _Lives_, including classical historians like Herodotus, Thucydides, and Xenophon. He also used contemporary sources like laws, poems, and speeches, and found Plato's writings particularly important for exploring relationships and ideas. While very familiar with Greek literature and history, he made a significant effort to research his Roman Lives, consulting Latin sources. He wasn't afraid to question sources either, as seen in his treatise "On the Malignity of Herodotus". He often omits or simplifies parts of earlier narratives, shifting the focus to moments or anecdotes that best illustrate character or motives. This transforms narrative into a kind of model, emphasizing character and interpretation over mere historical continuity. One fascinating aspect that would be explored in the Lives in Volume II, as throughout the collection, is the interplay between Greek and Roman culture. Plutarch, being Greek himself, naturally had a strong foundation in Greek learning. His perspective, shaped by classical Greek thought, the Second Sophistic, and his life as a local aristocrat, heavily influenced how he analyzed Roman affairs. Hellenic culture and civilization were central to his view. He saw tensions and hybridity between the two worlds, sometimes portraying Romans as sharing less desirable traits with "barbarians" while also being capable of adhering to Greek values, with education playing a restraining role. He even proposed a threefold division of humanity: Greek, Roman, and barbarian. Yet, there were also shared concerns between the Greek and Roman elite he wrote about, such as a preference for aristocracy and respect for statesmen and religious customs. Volume II, like the rest of the Lives, also serves as a tool for moral and political education. Plutarch explicitly presents himself as a teacher of correct behavior. He aims to "improve" his readers by presenting historical figures as examples to guide conduct. The political advice he gives, sometimes in other works like _Praecepta gerendae reipublicae_, overlaps with the themes in the _Lives_. He encourages concord among Greeks and justice in the administration of the Empire, commending Roman politicians who benefit Greeks. Beyond the Lives, Volume II could also implicitly connect to other areas of Plutarch's work. For instance, his diverse roles, including priest and civic official, are reflected in his writings. His work on symposia, like the _Quaestiones convivales_ (Table Talk), shows the intellectual unity of his oeuvre, blending historical, moral, philosophical, and social themes. These works demonstrate his creativity and versatility as a storyteller. In terms of style, Plutarch is not trying to imitate the language of earlier Greek writers precisely. Instead, he uses a vast vocabulary and a "mosaic" of allusions and quotations to place himself in the classical tradition. He employs a range of styles suitable for different occasions. His language is rich, full of imagery and allusiveness. Plutarch's _Lives_, including those in Volume II, had a tremendous and lasting impact through the centuries. They were read and copied in Byzantium, influencing scholars and writers like Photios, Arethas, Psellos, and Metochites. They circulated through excerpts, epitomes, and complete manuscripts, shaping views on virtue, rhetoric, and biographical writing. Later, during the Italian Renaissance, Latin translations made the _Lives_ widely accessible and they became a prime model for biographers, influencing their structure, focus on character, and use of anecdotes, sometimes even leading to new parallel lives being composed. In the Spanish Renaissance, Plutarch was seen as a master of life instruction, suitable even for religious discourse, and his name was used as a cultural touchstone. The French Renaissance and Enlightenment also saw Plutarch's _Lives_ spark critical discussions about history and biography, influencing everything from political philosophy to tragedy, with figures like Montaigne openly acknowledging their debt to him. **Ideas and Questions for Further Exploration:** - Given Plutarch's emphasis on using small details to reveal character, how do the specific anecdotes chosen for the Lives in Volume II (like those for Themistokles, Romulus, Aristides, and Cato) shed light on their personalities and moral fiber? - How does Plutarch's "Greekness" and his perspective on Roman politics influence his portrayal of the Roman figures in Volume II? Does he apply the same moral yardsticks to Greek and Roman statesmen, or are there subtle differences? - Considering the concept of the "macrotext," which suggests connections across Plutarch's entire work, what recurring themes or motifs might appear in the Lives in Volume II that also show up in his _Moralia_ essays? Are there synergies between the Lives and the Moralia that deepen our understanding of either collection? - Plutarch uses the comparative method (_synkrisis_) to highlight similarities and differences between paired individuals. How does the comparison of Aristides and Cato work? What virtues, vices, or character traits does Plutarch emphasize in their comparison, and what lessons is he trying to impart? - Plutarch positions himself as a moral educator and encourages the reader's active judgment. As you read the Lives in Volume II, what are you prompted to judge or distinguish? How does Plutarch guide your interpretation without being overtly prescriptive?