Plutarch--October Classics Book Club

[PatH]

Plutarch's Lives

Plutarch at the Museum of Delphi, Greece.

Ruins of the temple of Apollo at Delphi, where Plutarch was a priest

The readers have spoken and our next read October 1 will be: Plutarch (c.46 A.D.- c. 120 A.D.) in his famous "Lives" or Lives of the Noble Grecians and Romans; also called Parallel Lives.


     Schedule:

     Oct. 1-?: Pompey

     Oct. ?:  Antony

     Oct. ?: Alcibiades, Coriolanus and comparison

     Oct. ?: Demosthenes, Cicero and comparison

     ?:  Windup

Pompey the Great

Questions for Week I: Pompey:

1. Someone once saidthat everyone wants either money, fame, or power. Which of these was most important to Pompey? What avenues were open to Romans to acheive these goals? Does this differ from modern society?

2. If Plutarch wrote these lives as moral lessons for the young, what do you feel is his moral assessment of Pompey? What is yours?

3. In a period where there was almost no threat to the Roman Empire from the outside, there was almost constant war. Other than reasons already given , what do you think are the reasons for this? Are there any parallels in modern times?

4. How is the US government based on the Roman Republic. What does Pompey's life tell us about how that Republic worked in practice? How is that different from the way ours works (or is it)? Could our Republic be ended at one stroke as the Roman's was?

5. What does Pompey's life tell us about the role of women in Patrician Roman society?

Discussion Leaders: JoanK and  PatH

Clough Translation-Roshanarose's Link

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

[PatH]

Roshanarose, I wouldn't call anyone a whinger for complaining about what you're about to have done.  But Babi's advice is consoling.

Nothing is cast in stone in this discussion.  If enough people want to read more than is scheduled, it could happen.

This morning (Fri) I'm off to the west coast to meet my new granddaughter.  I'm taking Plutarch along in the daypack I use for a carryon--at great personal sacrifice, since it weighs 5 pounds.  We'll see if I read it or just sleep most of the 7 hour journey.

[Babi]

 PatH, I can't help remembering his attitude toward Flora after he gave his buddy
permission to 'borrow' her. He never touched her again. The marriage with Aemilia, a
woman who was married to another man and was pregnant by him?  I can't imagine him being
more than polite to her. Her father had much to answer for, IMO.
 I would be happy to spend another day or two on Pompey. This bio. is longer than I
realized, and covers so much ground.  I have no objection to switching to Marc Antony
if that is what the others prefer. I can always read Artaxerxes on my own. We will need
to bear in mind that Plutarch definitely disapproved of Marc Antony; he was one of the
'bad' examples in Plutarch's choice of subjects.

 JOANK, that selection from Virgil is great! If that's what his 'Georgics' are like,
I must see more of them.

  Back to Pompey,  I do love that magnificent scene in which Pompey, despite all  his honors,  approaches the censors leading his horse, like any other knight,  to give account of his military service and request discharge.  Plutarch describes a scene of people watching in silent amazement.   The senior censor asks the required question: “Pompeius Magnus, I
demand of you whether you  have served the full time of the wars that is prescribed by law.”
To which Pompey replies,  “Yes.  I have served all, and all under myself as general.”  Upon
which the crowd went wild with delight.  I think I would have been cheering right along with them.

  I was amazed to read of how wealthy and powerful the pirates had become.  I knew they were
a plague to shipping on the Mediterranean at that time, but purple sails? Silver-plated oars?
Coastal cities placed under tribute?   Plutarch also writes that the religious mysteries of Mithras
were instituted by these pirates.  Adopted by them, perhaps, but from what I could find out, it
had it’s origins elsewhere.  Here’s what I found; scroll down below the row of ads.
 http://www.answers.com/topic/mithras

[Mippy]

Good morning,
I'm still reading Pompey, now on Kindle as well, it is better after all.  Then, later, for comparison, I began Marcus Antonius, which reads well and I hope we do that section next.

The Brutus in the Pompey section is the father of the Brutus who was in the gang of Caesar's enemies.   Plutarch does say that later on.
                                        
Thanks, Ev, for posting the McCullough book title I forgot.

Once of the problems is lack of dates, isn't it?  I ought to research a time line, but cannot do it today.  

[kidsal]

Don't care which we read next as finally have the complete set.  Artaxerxesis is a short read so perhaps could squeeze him in.  But Antony OK with me.

[pedln]

I’m behind in my reading (and in a lot of other things, it sems), but am getting a lot from your posts here. Since there is so much to grasp here they really help zero in on what’s important.   Pompey’s ability to get what he asked for amazed me too, Babi.  And the other some posts touched on how some facts might have been exaggerated  -- such as the size of the armies.  I wondered at that – 40,000 soldiers?  That would be like moving my city.

I’ll go along with whatever for the next reading, as I know nothing about the scheduled one and very little about Antony.

[JudeS]

Eeek! I'm getting senile!

why did I write Alexsander instead of Marc Antony?

It's just a mistake, not senility I hope.

[JoanK]

JUDE: no, I've met you, and you are far from senile.

BABI: glad you like the Virgil. The part I posted was excerpted from a longer piece that's not so interesting. For years, I've had "The Aeneiad"(sp.) at the top of my "must read" list, and always chickened out.

PEDLIN: "Since there is so much to grasp here they really help zero in on what’s important". I agree. When I first read Pompey, all the detail really overwhelmed me. All the people and battles flow together.

I admit to downloading on my computer a childs version of Plutarch, hoping it would help me sort things out.

By the way, if you think Plutarch doesn't like Antony, you should see what he does to Artaxerxes.

[JoanK]

One of the things that blew by me was how much power Pompey was given to fight the pirates. Thanks for pointing that out, PatH. Is this the beginning of the end for the Republic? Who had the power to give him all that power?

I'm still struggling with the differences between the Roman Republic and ours. Is there a difference that will enable ours to last, while the Roman's didn't? Or not?

[JudeS]

Joan
Re your interesting question of the differences between the Roman republic and ours...
In trying to research this fascinating idea (surely  there is a book to be written about this) I was not sure if you are talking about the Roman Republic or the Roman Empire.
I am now quoting from Wiki :
The Roman Empire :44BC-1453AD
Roman Republic which preceded it had been subverted by civil war after existing for 500 years.
The events that divided the eras were:
1)Julius Ceasar's appointment as perpetual dictator (27BC)
2)Battle of Actium (31BC)
3)Roman Senates granting to Octavion the honorific "Augustus".(27BC)

In trying to peruse the article further I found that I was so weak in background in this matter that to answer your question in the way it deserves it will take a more knowledgeale person than I.

[Frybabe]

Well, Jude, I went on the hunt for more info and came up with lots, but nothing very concise so far. There are a number of some books the deal with the Roman Constitution itself and others that attempt a comparison. I remember some hype a year or so ago about a book called Are We Rome?, but that deals with comparing the US with Rome as a whole. As for the Roman Republic vs. our Constitution there are some, but this book struck me as interesting. http://books.google.com/books/about/American_republicanism.html?id=zN7lgzjettgC It deals with our founding fathers and the Roman authors they read. Keep in mind that the "republicanism" they are talking about is as in Republic not the Republican Party.

One of the other things we tend to forget in trying to compare the US with Rome is that some of our foundations were also rooted in English Common Law and the Magna Carta (such as limited government). I suppose if we went far enough back with that line, though, it would also lead to Rome.

How much of Greek democracy was influential to the US and to the Roman constitutions and law?

Let us know what else you dig up.

[Mippy]

Good morning, everyone!
For all of you who want to read more about Pompey, Crasus, Brutus, and Marcus Antonius (Mark Antony) my strong suggestion is to read A. Goldsworthy: Julius Caesar.  This wonderful history book is much more than a biography of Caesar!  The author covers Roman history, including pirates, with excellent details, and he's written other histories, too.   Do look him up on Amazon.
    Have a great weekend.  We are off to Boston to visit our family, then on Sun headed south to see VA family, then home to FL.
  See y'all Wed ... if the crick don't rise ... and on to Antonius!

[Babi]

 Thanks for the 'heads up', JOANK. I suppose what I really need is someone like you to
tell me where the good parts are!  If I had to plow through too much 'not so interesting'
to get to the good stuff, I'd probably never make it.

By the way, if you think Plutarch doesn't like Antony, you should see what he does to
Artaxerxes

.  On reflection, I suppose that doesn't really surprise me. After all, it
was the Greeks and Romans that Plutarch thought worth emulating.  The ethical ones, of
course.

   The power bestowed on Pompey as Admiral of the Mediterranean, both Sea and coast, was
unprecedented.  Really,  I think there can be few figures in history that equal his accomplishments.   Nor one who so consistently withdrew to private life and declined
to take advantage of the adulation accorded him, at least in the beginning.  Even his own friends
felt he was being 'trivial’,  insincere, in his protestations when Rome gave him such enormous
control over so much of the Empire. (Another historian Appian, called ‘artful’ what Plutarch saw as noble.  It should be noted, tho’,  that Appian was a supporter of Caesar’s faction.)

  It does seem that when Pompey was personally affronted, or felt that someone had
made him appear foolish, he was harsh and unforgiving.  I believe he did have an enormous
ego,  which he was able to conceal well by his congenial manners. Over time, with all the
adulation, the popularity and honors,....it would not be surprising if it went to his head.  Not
many could remain unchanged by all that.

[JoanK]

ROSE: I didn't mean to pass over your preference for Artaxerxes. I wanted to read him too, to get a Persian in here. Maybe we can do him after Antony. have you read the selection?

[JoanK]

jUDE: so the Roman republic lasted twice as long as ours has before falling apart! Hmmmm. I guess nothing is permanant. Makes you think.

And the Civil Wars are given as the cause. The Republic was already weak in the period we are reading, if Pompey could have that much power.

FRY: that book sounds like just the thing. If the writing isn't too dense, I'll give it a try.

MIPPY: that sounds great, too. We're kind of skipping Julius: but we're getting a lot of him in the other two.

BABI: I like your analysis of Pompey's character. I'm having trouble viewing that character within the context of the times. Much that seems cruel to us was just accepted behavior then. When we read Antony, whom Plutarch doesn't like, we'll be able to do our own comparison.

[JudeS]

I looked at all the things I didn't know on this topic and decided to choose to further research the one I know the LEAST about. Possibly many or even most of you are more knowledgeable on this  than I but here goes anyhow.

The Battle of Actium (cited as one of the three reasons the Republic fell and turned into an Empire)

The battle of Actium was the decisive confrontation between the forces of Octavian and the combined forces of Mark Antony and Cleopatra VII . It took place on Sept. 2,31BC on the Ionian Sea near the city of Actium at the Roman Province of Expirus vitus in Greece.
Octavius's fleet was commanded by Marcus Agrippa while Antony was supported by the ships of Queen Cleopatra of Ptlolemaic Egypt.
Octavius's victory enabled him to consolidte his power over Rome and its dominions making hin an Emperor and sole ruler.

Fearing to bore you I will stop here but I'm sure we will get finer(and more) details as we read about Mark Antony.

[PatH]

Babi, I agree he must have had a huge ego, and I suspect he had it from the start.  Remember how he managed to get a huge Triumph early in his career, before it was really appropriate, and when he didn't yet fit the ground rules, whatever they were for such.

I'm curious about the details of a Triumph.  It's obviously official, with rules involved, and has some sort of standing, like a medal or an increase in rank  When Pompey meets Lucullus, it's remarked that although Lucullus is the elder, as well as having priority in the order of consulships, Pompey's two triumphs made him the greater man.

And who paid for all that pomp?  The state, or the recipient of the honor?

[PatH]

Pompey must have had a superb military strategic sense to win so many battles.  We don't get much of this, but there's one example of his thinking.  One of the many times he's chasing Mithridates (who keeps popping up again like a bad penny) he takes over a good strategic spot which M had had to abandon because there was no water.  P took a look at the plant life, figured out from this where to dig wells, and soon had plenty of water.

[kidsal]

From the Encylopaedia Britannica:

Triumph, Latin triumphus ,  a ritual procession that was the highest honour bestowed upon a victorious general in the ancient Roman Republic; it was the summit of a Roman aristocrat’s career. Triumphs were granted and paid for by the Senate and enacted in the city of Rome. The word probably came from the Greek thriambos, the name of a procession honouring the god Bacchus. To triumph in republican times a man was required to have been a magistrate cum imperio (holding supreme and independent command) who had won a major land or sea battle in the region considered his province, killing at least 5,000 of the enemy and ending the war. The ceremony began with a solemn procession from the Triumphal Gate in the Campus Martius to the Temple of Jupiter on the Capitol, passing through the forum and the Via Sacra (“Sacred Way”) along streets adorned with garlands and lined with people shouting, “Io triumphe.”
 The magistrates and members of the Senate came first in the processions followed by musicians, the sacrificial animals, the spoils of war, and the captured prisoners in chains. Riding in a chariot festooned with laurel, the victorious general (triumphator) wore the royal purple and gold tunic and toga, holding a laurel branch in his right hand and an ivory sceptre in his left. A slave held a golden crown over the general’s head while repeatedly reminding him in the midst of his glory that he was a mortal man. The general’s soldiers marched last, singing whatever they liked, which included ribaldry and scandal against their commander, probably as a way to avert the evil eye from him. On reaching the Capitoline temple the general presented his laurel, along with thank-offerings, to the image of Jupiter. The prisoners were usually slain, and the ceremony concluded with a feast for the magistrates and Senate.
A general who did not earn a triumph might be granted an ovatio, in which he walked or rode on horseback, wearing the purple-bordered toga of an ordinary magistrate and a wreath of myrtle.
In the last century of the Roman Republic the rules were sometimes bent. Pompey celebrated two triumphs without having held a regular magistracy, and Julius Caesar allowed two of his subordinates to triumph. Under the empire only the emperors or members of their families celebrated triumphs, because the generals commanded under their auspices as lieutenants (legati); the only honour the generals received was the right of wearing triumphal costume (ornamenta triumphalia) on festivals, and even these were cheapened and lost their military connections. There were still triumphs of Christian emperors (e.g., Honorius in 403), and the theme was revived in new and spectacular forms in Renaissance art.

[Dana]

The Roman republic lasted till the death of caesar....42 BC .
The Roman empire lasted in the west till 476AD,  and in the East till the end of the 6th century.
 The British empire lasted from about 1770 (Clive of India) till the end of WW1 (nothing,compared to the Romans)
The America empire or sphere of influence really began after WW2.......we'll just have to wait and see.........so far we're neophytes.....  

[roshanarose]

I have been doing some searching for info about Athenian democracy.  I had studied it in the past but needed to refresh my memory.  Here is a thumbnail sketch :

The advent of Ancient Greek democracy goes back to its fledgling stages with Solon the reformer c.600BC

100 years later democracy was ushered in by Cleisthenes (an Athenian) c.500 who along with many others was unhappy with the harsh rule of Peisistratus, grandson and namesake of the "benevolent dictator".  The political radical reform was introduced by Cleisthenes c.508/7 and became the first Athenian democratic constitution.

Ephialtes c.490(not the one who betrayed Leonidas at Thermopylae) and Pericles c.480/479 shone in the glow of a reasonably stable democratic government and Greece finally defeated the Persians in the final battle at Salamis.

In 411 oligarchy returned to Athens.  

However, democracy was reimposed a year later and stayed in place until 322 when it was terminated by Alexander the Great.  

Democracy was still the form of government in places in Greece that Alexander had not conquered.

The arrival of the Romans extinguished Ancient Greek democracy for good.

Source:
www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/greeks
If you scroll down on this site you will see the differences between Ancient Greek democracy and modern democracy as we have it today.

[roshanarose]

Unfortunately, I have had problems accessing the original website I used for the above.  The one I have given you will get you there but there will be a bit of double clicking going on, sorry folks.

Finally, you should click on the article by Professor Paul Cartledge "The Democratic Experiment".

www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/greeks/

[Babi]

 Thanks for that interesting information on triumphs, KIDSAL. It added some details for
me.
  Of sideline interest, I was fascinated by the brief comments on Mithridates concubine, a young
woman named Hypsicrates.  She "dressed like a Persian horeman,  accompanied the king in all
his flight, never weary even in the longest journey, nor ever failing to attend the king in perso,
and look after his horse too.." .   I wanted to know more about this woman, and found this site:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypsicratea
 
 Also, I didn't know there were Amazons reported by Plutarch, with information as to where they came from, their dress, and some of their customs.  I had half suspected the women were
legends that grew from some vague source. 

[PatH]

Kidsal, thanks.  You covered every question I could think of about Triumphs.  I note that 2 of Pompey's 3 Triumphs didn't fit the rules.

Babi, the info about Hypsicrates is fascinating.  What a woman!  I wonder what became of her when Mithridates killed himself; Plutarch doesn't say.

[JoanK]

JUDE: the battle of Actium figures prominantly in Pluitarch, and is very interesting. I hope GINNY comes in at that point: I've heard her talk about it before, and raise some interesting questions (WHAT was Cleopatra thinking?)

[JoanK]

Let's move on to Antony on Wednesday. That's time to read it.

A warning on names. They repeat, since everyone is related to everyone, due to all these political marriages. So in the Antony section, we have two Pompeys and two Caesars (a title, not a name?), and a second Brutus. What Plutarch seems to do: the first time he mentions someone, he gives the full name: after that he assumes you know who he's talking about.

Antony's story overlaps that of Pompey and Julius Caesar. At the beginning, our Pompey figures. After that Pompey's death, Plutarch introduces a Gauis (sp?) Pompey, presumably the son of ours, who is referred to as Pompey thereafter.

The same thing happens with the Caesars. At first, the Caesar mentioned is Julius, but his  full name is only mentioned once. Then, after Julius' death, Plutarch introduces Octavius,  (Julius's younger relative who afterwards became Augustus Caesar). From then on, when he says Caesar, he means Octavius. Watch for this switch: Julius is important at the beginning of the story, Octavius at the end.

This sounds more complicated than it is. And if we think the wrong Caesar did something, so what? We can call it Caesar salad.

There are minor characters where I suspect the same thing happens. But to me, it's not worth the trouble to keep track of them.

[Frybabe]

The quick and dirt links to:

Pompey the Younger  

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnaeus_Pompeius


Sextus Pompey

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sextus_Pompey

Sextus had one daughter before he was executed, Gnaeus died childless. Named Pompeia Magna, she seems to have disappeared from history after her father's death.

[PatH]

Roshanarose, that's a very interesting site about Greek democracy.  It will be useful when we get to Alcibiades.

[PatH]

When I read the chapter through the first time, the end seemed like the last act of a Shakespearean tragedy, where everything comes unraveled for the hero, and he goes down to his tragic end.

Rereading it, I see that Pompey's life is the whole play, with the classic structure: the upward slope, the hero succeeding more and more, until the turning point in the third act, where things start coming apart, getting worse and worse until the final catastrophe at the end of the fifth act.

He starts out as a promising young general, winning more and more battles, getting honors and triumphs.  Finally he is given huge power: a giant fleet, an army, dominion over most of the land anyone cared about.  He gets rid of the pirates, and goes on to the east, getting rid of Mithridates, annexing Syria and Palestine, and setting things in order.  Back to Rome, general acclaim, and a Triumph that lasted two days.

Here we are in the middle of the third act.  Plutarch says "And well had it been for him had he terminated his life at this date, while he still enjoyed Alexander's fortune, since all his after-time served only either to bring him prosperity that made him odious, or calamities too great to be retrieved." He uses his power poorly until "at last he was overthrown even by the force and greatness of his own power"

He had dismissed his troops before entering Rome (Caesar didn't make this mistake) so he had to preserve his power by politicking, and took up with some unsavory characters.  Pompey, Caesar, and Crassus allied as the First Triumvirate.  They each got something out of it, but they were basically rivals.  Crassus dies.  So does Julia, and she was one thing holding Caesar and Pompey together.  Now they are at each other's throats, and it's all downhill from here--defeat and betrayal.

[JoanK]

It's a shame that Shakespeare didn't write that into a play.

[roshanarose]

ROSE: I didn't mean to pass over your preference for Artaxerxes. I wanted to read him too, to get a Persian in here. Maybe we can do him after Antony. have you read the selection?

JoanK - Thank you for being so thoughtful.  No need for Artaxerxes unless he is democratically voted in.

[JoeF]

Hello everyone,
i'm very tardy, due to credible excuses, but won't bore you with these. Thankfully, i was able to read the many discussion questions and comments from the past week from this lively group. Very keen insights help me to begin my readings of Pompey and, next, Marc Anthony.

once i finally d/loaded the $1.99 version of Plutarch (with the table of contents), i was able to find my way. Previously, i got the electronic version w/o TOC, a free version. it was nice, esp for background and translators' comments. But, having the TOC surely does make for a lot less work.

With the above stated, I am beginning Pompey, now, and hope to be up-to-speed with the group as you begin Marc Anthony.
Sincerely,
Joe F

[PatH]

Welcome, Joe, better late than never.

If you've been reading along, you already know that the secret to survival is not to try to sort out all the names.  You'll already know who most of the heavyweights are.  See you back soon.

[JoanR]

Good morning!  I've been here -- this has been a wonderful experience - being introduced to Plutarch by such a great story of a great life.  I've been greedily enjoying all the posts too.
  I've been wondering if Pompey's story would fit Aristotles definition of tragedy.  He did seem to have a "fatal flaw" - that of hubris. since he was endowed with physical beauty and success in all his endeavors, he must have thought that he would always win out - thus the "pride" and thus the fall.  Has it been made into a play at all?  His ending was so tragic - I could hardly read the last few pages.

[EvelynMC]

I have enjoyed reading all your posts.  They were all very enlightening and this has been a real learning experience for me.

I have started reading Anthony, and it seems easier to read.  Or perhaps I'm just getting used to Plutarch's way of writing.

Evelyn

[JudeS]

PatH
I imagined the whole story of Pompey as a play by Shakespeare. I was grappling with the problem of how he would show the last scene on the water when I realized that it was Plutarch writing the story and not Shakespeare.
Perhaps William S. would have done the last bit of the story on the shore rather than on the water.

Who would play Pompey in the movie version of the play? Perhaps the young Marlon Brando or maybe someone has a more current actor to suggest?

[ginny]

How DID Shakespeare handle boat scenes? There should be one, surely, in Antony and Cleopatra? I think the boat scene is such a metaphor, here, almost poetic and   pivotal to emphasizing lo how the mighty have fallen.

You've got all the contrasts there, deftly defined in boats. The  drawing up by his own rag tag fleet of ships,  much reduced in size and being some ships of war and some merchant vessels,   to the Egyptian coast line. No flotilla of impressive ships waiting to come out from Egypt in welcome.   Pompey's wife and family on his own ships,  his family almost as a  Greek chorus lamenting and watching the final downfall.  Pompey holding out hope, bravely addressing his wife as he steps into a mean fishing boat,  the inhospitable nature  of his reception, having to ride in total silence, on that fishing boat,  I love that scene, it's so poignant.  Hope rising and falling. Hope rises as the family sees what appears to be a royal procession coming down to the shore.  As the Egyptian boat approached it hailed him as Imperator: Commander, the title in stark contrast to the reception.

The reader remains in suspense, too, not really knowing how it will turn out. Hope rises and falls.  The excuses for the fishing  boat while at the same time they saw soldiers clambering aboard the King's boats and the shore covered with soldiers:  escape was impossible. Hope falls with the inhospitable reception from Septimius, shame on him, in the fishing boat.  Pompey doesn't give up, even then, he turns and prepares his speech. And then the end. Gosh. That was a brave man.  No wonder Caesar cried.

What did you all make of the last words he spoke to his wife? What did he mean, I wonder?

[JoanK]

JOE F: Glad you're here. We're winding up Pompey, so if you start with Antony, you're right up-to-date.

JOANR: good to hear from you.

Hope you lurkers will let us know you're there once in awhile.

EVELYN: I found Antony easier too. I think it's a little of both.

I'll put up Antony queastions today or tomorrow. Meanwhile, does anyone know what happened to Cleopatra BEFORE she met Antony?

Who could play Pompey? Hmmmm.

[JoeF]

Dear JoanR,
ok, beginning with Anthony is fine by me.
thank you,
joef

[JoanR]

Dear JoeF  We have 3 Joans  -  JoanP, JoanK and me.  I rather believe that you meant the message for JoanK but I'll happily take any message!!