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. 1-10: Pompey

     Oct. 11- 20:  Antony

     Oct. 21-?: Cicero

     Oct. ?: Coriolanus

     ?:  Windup

Marcus Tullius Cicero

Bertel Thorvaldsen, copy of Roman original, ca 1800

Cicero denouncing Catiline (Cesare Maccari)

Questions for Cicero

1. What is the role of the Orator in Roman society? Is there anyone in British or US history comparable to Cicero and the role he played?

2. What were Cicero's ambitions? His strong and weak points? How did they help/hurt him?

3. Cicero is the first Roman we've read about who was not accomplished in battle. How did this hurt him? How did it help him? What is the relationship between the army and politics in Rome?

4. Cicero is best known for suppressing Catiline's revolt. How did he do that?

5. Cicero is criticized all his life for executing Catiline's fellow rebels without a trial. Yet later, Augustus Caesar calmly agrees to execute Cicero as part of a bargain for power. What is the difference?

6. Are we getting to know our guide, Plutarch any better? What does this section tell us about his character?  
  

Discussion Leaders: JoanK and  PatH

Clough Translation-Roshanarose's Link

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

[pedln]

In that picture of the statue -- he kind of looks like Joe Biden, crabby or not.

Sorry to have been such a dropout.  I don't read fast, and have had trouble keeping up with everything I want to read.  But we'll be reading Cicero pretty soon in Latin class, so I will be following the posts here for sure.

[JoanK]

Great! I envy you.

[JudeS]

I found Cicero a mixed bag i.e.A brilliant orator and lawyer and an unlikeable personality.
After reading a number of articles on Cicero as well as Plutarch's chapter here are some of the highs and lows I came across.

"Would that he had been able to endure prosperity with greater self control and adversity with greater fortitude"..wrote Asinus Pollo a contemporary Roman statesman and Historian.

Cicero divorced both of his wives. The marriages were for convenience (money, connections). After Cicero was killed and his head and hands put on public display his ex-wife pulled out his tongue and stuck it with pins, saying: This is my revenge
against his powers of speech".

Cicero ws extremely attached to his daughter who died in childbirth. He wrote "I have lost the one thing that bound ne to life."  Cicero also had a son who , against his Father's wishes , had a successful military career.His Father wanted him to study Philosophy but of course he didn't.

Cicero inspired the Founding fathers of the U.S. an of the French Revolution. John Adams said," All the ages of the world have not produced a greater philosopher". While Fredrich Engels wrote:"the most contemptable scoundrel in history for upholding republican democracy while denouncing land and class reforms."

The Catholic Church deemed him a"righteous pagan" and his works preserved and read.

Most fascinating of all I found was that his theories had a major influence on Copernicus who said that Cicero's theory that the earth moves through space was one of the precedents for his scientific work.

[Frybabe]

Thanks, JudeS, for those asides. I was aware of most, but not his influence on Copernicus.

What do you think Cicero was striving for? I suspect he, above all, wanted to be famous. I suppose a certain amount of power comes with fame, but I don't think power was his main driver. I think he wanted to be the best and recognized as being the best among his rivals.

Did you notice how he flip-flopped between alliances several times?  I think he did this to stay in the game so he would continue to be noticed, be influential, and not forgotten or pushed aside.

[PatH]

It's good that we have you to help with the background research, Jude.  I had no idea Cicero had any notions about astronomy.  Plutarch doesn't dwell on Cicero's non-speech writings, but there were huge numbers of letters. philosophical and political works.  He seems to have had an important formative influence on Latin style.  No doubt pedln will eventually be able to tell us all about it.

[PatH]

Frybabe, I agree he wanted fame more than power.  He also seems to have had an idealized notion of what the state should be like, security and good principles being of prime importance, and to have been working for this at least some of the time.

Yes, he did tend to change sides--a sense of self-preservation and some timidity in sticking his neck out.

[Babi]

 I found Mr. Pollo's comment odd, JUDE.  I have the impression from Plutarch
that Cicero was not one who 'flashed his wealth' so to speak. In fact, he is
said to have in income sufficient to his needs, but not excessive wealth. So
far I have found no instance in which he showed a lack of self-control.
 His wives did not seem to hold any great interest for him. With his reputation
for the quick and sharp retort, I am not surprised to hear that his wives may
have had to put up with it's use on them.

  I agree with FRYBABE. Cicero basked in praise. He accepted no fees from his
clients; perhaps the opportunity to shine before the courts and Senate were
reward enough.  There is no question of the high caliber of his oratory, and
no question as to his integrity.
  He was, I think, timid and cautious in his decisions. Perhaps, at PAT notes, a strong
sense of self-preservation.  But definitely not 'for sale'. 

 Apparently, Plutarch's poor opinion of Cicero's poetry was justified, as none
of it has survived.

[Mippy]

As far a whether or not Cicero lived a life of modesty:                  
he had around eight different country villas, so he did not live quietly or in a moderate-size house.   As far as accepting fees, no Roman lawyers or barristers received direct fees.   Most of them received lavish gifts, such as loot from the provinces or houses.
                                                      
Many of his speeches, including those studied in our Latin classes, were rewritten after being given.   Cicero wanted to leave a more perfect version of his thought to posterity than what had been spoken in the Senate.

Apparently there was nothing like our congressional records in the Roman Senate in the days before Cicero.   His famous secretary/slave named Tiro developed a method of taking shorthand notes, and his transcribed notes were useful to Cicero in the revisions of his speeches.

[PatH]

I can see a need for country villas, since Cicero kept making Rome too hot to hold him.   What do you think of his Latin style, Mippy?  That's assuming you have any energy left to appreciate it after sweating through translating it.

[JudeS]

This is from the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy (IEP)Cicero.  a very long and indepth look at Cicero, his accomplishments and his weaknesses.

In the first paragraph we find :"He placed politics above philosophical study, the latter being important in its own right but was even more valuable as the means to a more effective political action."

Perhaps that is the answer to JoanK's question:"What were Cicero's ambitions ?"

They also say "Plutarch's Life of Cicero" was written a century after his death and has no firsthand knowledge of the events he describes. Plutarch's goal was also to offer MORAL LESSONS rather than to simply record events.
The Roman historian Sollust's  "Conspiracy of Catiline" offers a description of the events twenty years after the events and fails to give Cicero the same degree of importance he gave himself.

[Babi]

 Why on earth is there such a large space after my last post?

 Oh, well.  MIPPY, you are destroying my illusions, but I think you are probably
perfectly correct. Of course he would 'tidy up' his orations when writing them
down for posterity. I knew his income came from a number of country 'villas',
but I have the impression that few, if any, were very grand. Mostly income-
producing farms. I am quite prepared to abandon that impression if the facts
are otherwise.

  JUDE reminds us, and a timely reminder, too, that Plutarch was more interested
in promoting ethics and morality than accurately reporting history. He does, on
the whole, highly approve Cicero by that standard. It's a pity we don't know
his sources as to the historical events, but they do include enough personal
detail to suggest a high degree of accuracy.
  I haven't read Sollust's account, so I can't comment on that. I do know, tho'
that most of the ancient historians considered the military events and the
military leaders to be the important issues. The back-home politicos were
of less interest.

[JoanK]

BABI:" I do know, tho'
that most of the ancient historians considered the military events and the
military leaders to be the important issues. The back-home politicos were
of less interest."

And peace was of less interest than war. As PatH and I were talking about, Cicero seemed to consistantly work for peace; in putting down Cateline's rebellion with relatively little bloodshed for example. Earlier, he had been sent out to quell a rebellion, and managed to do so peacably, by good governance. When he came home, expecting praise, no one remembered what he had done. If he had faught a big battle, everyone would have praised him, maybe even given him a "triumph"! Thus a military society.

[PatH]

Cicero is the first Roman politician we've read about without significant military ability.  Pompey, Julius and Augustus Caesar, and Antony all continued to fight impressive battles, even while in ruling positions.  Given the amount of infighting and backstabbing in Roman politics, it was an impressive feat to hold onto your power when you were out of town much of the time.

[PatH]

Mippy and Babi, I can think of another reason Cicero might have to edit his speeches.  Plutarch says when he was nervous he tended to deliver speeches poorly.  Perhaps many of the speeches weren't declaimed well at the time.

That early shorthand is kind of interesting.  I wonder what it was like.

[Babi]

 Considering the plans Lentulus and his allies had made...wholesale slaughter of
the populace and torching the city of Rome...I was surprised that there was even room
for debate over whether they should be put to death.  It did seem to me that Cicero
was definitely timid in this matter and seemed more concerned with possible danger
to himself from vengeful relatives.  He had done an excellent job so far as watchfulness
and securing the safety of the city.  But he was most reluctant to stick his neck out
and order the death of the culprits.
   I do need to correct what I said earlier. I  had read selections from Sallust, esp. his
work on Catiline, but did not recall them when reading Plutarch.  In reporting the
arrest and trial of the conspirators in Rome, he has little to say about the role of
Cicero, but instead focuses on the opposing arguments of Julius Caesar and Marcus
Cato.  These two, as Sallust himself wrote, “towered above their contemporaries,
though their characters presented the sharpest of contrasts..”
  I note this comment in Michael Grant’s analysis of Sallust as historian: “..although
his own career had not been ethically flawless, he chose to see every issue in terms of
virtue and vice, even while offering cogent social and economic descriptions.”

[Mippy]

One more round on Cicero and Catilina, if I may:
Please note that Cicero or any consul had no mechanism for suppressing insurrection.   There was not a "national guard" at his finger tips!  Cicero had to move his listeners with oratory, which he famously did indeed accomplish.
           
Here's a non-wikipedia link:

http://gluedideas.com/Encyclopedia-Britannica-Volume-5-Part-1-Cast-Iron-Cole/Catiline-Lucius-Sergius-Catilina.html

[JoanK]

From Mippy's link above " others maintain that Catiline's object was simply the cancelling of his huge debts."

When we were reading the history of Rome in "The Story of Civilization", and again here, I noticed that throughout Roman history whenever someone wanted the support of the people, the first thing they promised was the cancellation of debt. I don't have a clear picture of how the Roman economy worked, but it is clear that it was an ecomony built on debt. No matter how often the debt was cancelled, the next would-be leader was able to get favor by cancelling debt again. Meanwhile, the interest paid on these loans must have been tremendous.

Is this beginning to sound familiar? 

[PatH]

That's a good link, Mippy, makes the conspiracy somewhat clearer.  No one seems to be really certain of it's extent, or even exactly what they were up to, but it was obviously dangerous.  The article says:

"Cicero paid more regard to the effect than to the truthfulness of an accusation."

This reminds me of Plutarch, saying that Cicero "...made the Romans feel how great a charm eloquence lends to what is good, and how invincible justice is, if it be well spoken...."  

Plutarch seems to assume honesty of presentation on Cicero's part.

[PatH]

About executing Lentulus and the others:

  It did seem to me that Cicero was definitely timid in this matter..

Yes, he was timid, and only agreed when some other orators insisted.  But he had good reason to hesitate.  There wasn't really any legal precedent for it, and he kept getting blamed for it for the rest of his life.

[ginny]

Well I now understand for the first time what somebody means when they say they are getting a lot out of reading the discussion when in fact they are not up on the reading.

I'm way behind you all in the dust but tremendously enjoying your discussion of Cicero, he has to be one of the most complex men in history.   I find him fascinating and if you read Everitt's biography  you can't help but agree, and he draws on Plutarch a lot.

I did not know that about Copernicus either but  Cicero wrote about solar systems beyond our galaxy, he was quite a man, very very complex. I am so glad we are reading him, (fits in nicely with Antony,  too, good call).  He's definitely left a mark on us today, too, here he is in 2011 at the equivalent of the  Federal Court in Rome, a gigantic building, the Hall of Justice takes up the equivalent of several blocks and is sinking under its own weight:






I got left in the dust of Actium. I'm reading Stacy  Shiff's account now. Herod!!! and his suggestion: just kill Cleopatra and it will be ok Antony. ahahahaaaaaaaaaaaa

Thank you Pat for the young man's project of Actium, I love anything with battle movements. I'm a little confused on some of the tactics shown so I'm still reading but I'm finding treasures beyond compare.

Let me share this little bit while they are still waiting at Actium:

Schiff: "From the distance Antony's camp must have offered a splendid sight, with its vast and variegated armies, the flashes of gold-spangled purple- red robes. Towering Thracians in black tunics and bright armor mingled with Macedonians in fresh scarlet cloaks. Medians in richly colored vests. A Ptolemaic military cloak, woven with gold, might feature a royal portrait or a mythological scene. The scruffy Greek lowland blazed with costly equipment, with gleaming helmets and gilded breastplates, jeweled bridles, dyed plumes, decorated spears. The bulk of the soldiers were Eastern, as were an increasing number of rowers, many of them raw recruits. With them assembled an ecumenical collection of arms: Thracian wicker shields and quivers joined Roman javelins and Cretan bows and long Macedonian pikes."

Wow. What a picture pre battle, so reminiscent of other more recent wars, the excitement initially, the pomp. Then the reality.  There, of course, lay half of Antony's problems with troops pre malaria, but isn't that a marvelous picture? She also points out Cleopatra was the only one from the  leadership  who could speak to them in their own languages and they, being from the East, had no problem with a woman leader.  But the Romans did. Really really did.

Schiff is of the "new school" of historical conclusion,  in saying the entire flight  of Cleopatra and Antony at Actium  was obviously  a pre established plan. She makes a good case.  I did not know that most of the  Romans could not swim.

Sorry to interject, wanted to contribute something but am hopelessly mired in Actium at the moment. Am really enjoying the Cicero discussion, had never heard the thunderstorm bit.

  Oh, the Fulvia who spit on Cicero's head and put hatpins thru his tongue?  

She was  not Cicero's ex wife, but rather the first wife of  Antony, then she  married  Clodius, who was a notorious hater of Cicero,  and Curio. Cicero had attacked her in his speeches, and that was how she felt she got revenge. She was an enthusiastic participant in the proscriptions, (!?!)  but  having lost Antony and  "all interest in life"  after starting the Perusine war, she died in 40.

Super discussion, I am enjoying reading it so much!  

[Babi]

This is the sort of personal glimpse that makes me appreciate Plutarch so much.
The reference to Cicero’s wife, Terentia...”she was otherwise in her own nature neither
tender-hearted nor timorous, but a woman eager for distinction (who, as Cicero himself
says, would rather thrust herself into his public affairs, than communicate her domestic
matters to him)..”   

   I was struck by the careful way in which someone’s death was announced.  No one
wanted to actually say the 'inauspicious’ word 'dead’.  The safer custom was to declare
“They did live.”.
                                                         

[Frybabe]

Ginny,  thanks for clarifying which Fulvia attacked Cicero's tongue. I thought it was not his wife, but didn't have the time to go look it up. I am somewhat behind, too. I never finished Pompey or Antony and am still in the middle somewhere with Cicero.

[JudeS]

Ginny
Sorry about my mistake with the "lady" who jabbed Cicero's tongue with the needle. Indeed it was Fulva, Antony's wife who did that particular deed.

I keep reading  and came upon this remark in one of the articles.
Antony ordered Cicero's hands cut off because he had used them to write the "Phillipics" against Antony. He believed that
Cicero would never support the Triumvirates measures of dealing with the assasins and th subsequent division of spoils.

If you put into google "Cicero's death" there is a video that the makers of" Rome" did that purport to show Cicero being killed by Herennius. It is much less brutal then the written descriptions of the event.

[JoanK]

" I did not know that most of the  Romans could not swim." We do know that later most british sailors could not swim. It's mentioned in a number of places.

Makes me wonder about the history of swimming. Were Romans swimmers? What stroke did Romans use? does it resemble our modern strokes? What odd questions these discussions bring up!

Back to Cicero: what do you all think of his power gained through the power of his oration alone? Can you imagine that happening today? I admit, as one who always goes to sleep during political speeches, it's hard for me to imagine!

[Babi]

  It really surprised me to read that one historian claimed Cicero's speaking style was very poor
and disjointed.  Poor delivery is hardly likely to have the influence claimed here for Cicero's
orations.
    Such a complex character, Cicero.  So many fine qualities, an admirable man, yet so
desirous of that admiration.  Plutarch says “he created himself much envy, and offended very
many, not by any evil action, but because he was always lauding and magnifying himself.”He did this in his writings as well, which means we would have to take those with a ‘grain
of salt’.   More succinctly, Plutarch writes “he was intemperately fond of his own glory”.
  Ah, but how many of us are all of a piece, so to speak.  We all have our foibles, and we’re
fortunate if they are not of a kind to irritate those around us.

[Babi]

I see my posts are breaking up again.  I've clicked on the 'ripped page' icon,
so hopefully that will be corrected now.
  I've been reading the examples of Cicero's sharp wit and tongue. Some of
them I could understand and appreciate; others were no doubt puns whose
meaning is lost to me. 
  Could one of you Latin scholars interpret the comment, "Axios Crassou"
for me?  I'm sure it must be very clever, if I only had some idea what it
means. 

[Frybabe]

It looks Greek to me, Babi. Crassou could be Greek for Crassus, but I don't know what the phrase means either.

[ginny]

That's a good question and a great story. I don't read ancient Greek, and it is Greek,  but the story is quite famous, so I do know this one.

Crassus was crass and noted for his greed.

This young man,  son of Crassus,  favored in appearance  a man called Accius apparently so much so that it was remarked on, like Prince Harry's appearance, so Cicero,  after the young man had made a speech which got roars of approval (thus piquing Cicero who valued his rank as an orator) remarked sourly that it was befitting or worthy of  a Crassus (or possibly he meant an Accius) . Either way it was a scathing sarcastic  remark and the Accius part was downright nasty.

That tongue of Cicero again.

[pedln]

He seems to have had an important formative influence on Latin style.  No doubt pedln will eventually be able to tell us all about it.

It will probably be 2012 before our  Latin class gets to the section of Cicero readings, but our text has pointed out certain aspects of his style.   I’m sure Ginny can expand on all these and explain them further.


He likes lots of figures of speech, many of which are still used today
Anaphora, repetion  of a word at the beginning of phrases and clauses
Correlatives – conjunctions and adverbs used in pairs, to form balanced clauses, such as either or, neither nor,  both and, etc.
The style of the period – long sentences with phrases and clauses and the thought not revealed until the end.  (oh goody       )

And many others too numerous to mention.  I’m looking forward to it, even the long convoluted ones, and am glad the text makes a habit of pointing out these different aspects.

[JoanR]

I think that when we did Cicero in high school Latin we only translated his speeches - those lambasting Catiline are all I faintly remember!
Reading Plutarch has been an eye-opener and has led me to some other sources: the Modern Library edition of "The Basic Works of Cicero" for one.  His essay "On Old Age" is really interesting and casts a different light on the man than you get from Plutarch.
The introduction to the book is quite useful - one passage says " for the vacillation and opportunism the blame is partly on the exigencies of political life and its accepted standards, but partly also, surely, on Cicero's academic criteria in philosophy and his training as a lawyer.  He was always able to see the merit in either side of a question and his advocate's eloquence naturally tended to heap up arguments of probability on the side which happened to be expedient."
  This is a pretty nifty little book and I think I'll have to chase down a used copy on ABEbooks!

[ginny]

That question #1 is such a good question!!!

Isn't it oratory which has just about killed Governor Perry's chances at the nomination?  How important IS the ability to speak and persuade in 2011? Is it possible to HAVE great speakers without the teleprompter?

 When I think of great speakers, I think of Winston Churchill How like Cicero was he would you say, role wise?

Who else? Ronald Regan? Are any of our famous speakers writing their own material?  I never have understood why people make so much negativity  of President Obama's teleprompters, don't they all use them?

But on  Cicero, that's a great list, Pedln and I found a fascinating article  by Dr. Harris of Middlebury College, Vermont. Here are a couple of excerpts. I  find his POV fascinating as to today's speech versus what it was in our congress even 100 years ago! I am astounded at the sheer amount of Cicero's writings extant and how things have changed.  This, to me, is out of this world, note the influence of Greek oratory on Cicero:

...Suffice it here to survey the ten volumes of 500 pages each which constitute the printed works of Cicero in a modern (e.g. Teubner) series.

The speeches are the best known, since they constitute in this country a part of the high-school required reading in Latin. The elaborate style was derived from models over several centuries of Greek rhetorical discipline and speechmaking, which Cicero took seriously. Thoroughly acquainted with the Ten Attic Orators and the theoreticians, he adapted their language to Latin, favoring the flowery or as it was then called, "Asiatic" style, which became a synonym for Ciceronian rhetorical style.

Tiro, a diligent slave perfected a system of Latin shorthand, which served to preserve fairly accurately Cicero's speeches. A number of medieval MSS in "Tironian annotation" survive, containing much of the master's speeches and perhaps more than we are aware of, since the specialization required for a study of this exoteric field deters all but the most laborious of scholars. The list of extant speeches is immense, the text fills several volumes. The commonly read speech against Cataline and Pro Archia Poeta represent the very tip of the iceberg; Catullans should read the Pro Caelio, while a serious historian has to peruse all the speeches carefully.

If one opens the pages of the American Congressional Report of a century ago, one will find Ciceronian periods completely dominating the verbal art. The tripartite sentence, the verb at the end jamming in the punch meaning home suddenly with delayed force, the aposiopeseis., the overstatements in sarcastic vein, the tricks and devices of rhetorical discipline are all too evident. Indeed Cicero was praised since the Renaissance as the supreme orator, his golden voice of persuasion was assumed to be the business of any congressional orator, since the schools had reinforced this view from the days when the first Latin paradigms were learned. This was the great period of English and American Rhetoric.

In the 20th c. this ground to an end. As we reminisce, the accents of Ciceronian eloquence now sound quaint, as antique as the gingerbread decoration on overdeveloped Victorian mansions. Nowadays we have moved into a new type of rhetoric, which relies on short, pungent phraseology, interspersed with long pauses for the radio or TV audience to catch up, and written mostly in the language of the people, with only so much "highfalutin' speechifying" as a politician thinks will confirm him as thoroughly American. The days of Ciceronian diction are gone, probably forever, and when we read his grand speeches, we have to disassociate ourselves from the world around us. This makes the speeches a bit foreign, tedious and finally boring, unless one can develop a taste for the niceties of an antique style which has passed into cultural oblivion.

From: http://community.middlebury.edu/~harris/LatinAuthors/Cicero.html

[JoanK]

That's very interesting. I remember reading that in this country at the time of Abraham Lincoln oratory was much prized. People flocked to hear a good speaker, and expected him to keep speaking for hours on end.

Ginny, do you have a translation of Cicero's speech against Cataline?

[JoanK]

Our month of October has come to an end. We'll leave the discussion open for a few more days to finish Cicero. It looks like we were too ambitios scheduling four readings for the month. But we always have the option of returning to Plutarch later: perhaps another session with Greeks only.

[JudeS]

Ginny
I read the first two paragraphs of Dr Harris's article in one of the other articles on the internet..  However the final two paragraphs that bring it up to date I found fascinating.

I was thinking of great orators and could come up with only three: Winston Churchill,
Abraham Lincoln and FDR. These men lived in very dramatic times and also had great command of the language.

Bill Clinton, though not a great orator, had an amazing charisma that mesmerized his listeners.


Thanks JoanK for all your hard work.
This discussion opened up many doors for me that had been closed or never opened.

[ginny]

Oh Jude, of course: Lincoln and FDR! Good ones!!  I wonder, thinking over that excellent question #1, how  Media, or maybe "THE MEDIA" have taken over our own political process and removed the need for orators to BE gifted orators?   Is it all appearance and superficiality now?

ISN'T Dr. Harris stunning?

JoanK, I did find, when you first brought it up, after exhaustive looking hahaha one of Cicero's speeches but upon reading Dr. Harris' entire article for what he thought memorable, I thought perhaps Cicero's essay on old age (De Senectute) might be of better  interest.

Here are some excerpts, it's written as if it were a conversation on the subject, and of course has many famous lines:


From: http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Cicero/Cato_Maior_de_Senectute/text*.html

Cato Maior De Senectute
by
Cicero

And, indeed, when I reflect on this subject I find four reasons why old age appears to be unhappy: first, that it withdraws us from active pursuits; second, that it makes the body weaker; third, that it deprives us of almost all physical pleasures; and, fourth, that it is not far removed from death. Let us, if you please, examine each of these reasons separately and see how much truth they contain.

6 "Old age withdraws us from active pursuits." From what pursuits? Is it not from those which are followed because of youth and vigour? Are there, then, no intellectual employments in which aged men may engage, even though their bodies are infirm? Was there, then, no employment for Quintus Maximus? And none, Scipio, for your father Lucius Paulus, the father-in-law of that best of men, my son? And those other men, like Fabricius, Curius, and Coruncanius — were they doing nothing, when by their seldom and influence they were preserving the state?

....... Those, therefore, who allege that old age is devoid of useful activity adduce nothing to the purpose, and are like those who would say that the pilot does nothing in the sailing of his ship, because, while others are climbing the masts, or running about the gangways, or working at the pumps, he sits quietly in the stern and simply holds the tiller. He may not be doing what younger members of the crew are doing, but what he does is better and much more important. It is not by muscle, speed, or physical dexterity that great things are achieved, but by reflection, force of character, and judgement; in these qualities old age is usually not only not poorer, but is even richer......

....... rashness is the product of the budding-time of youth, prudence of the harvest-time of age.

 But, it is alleged, the memory is impaired. Of course, if you do not exercise it, or also if you are by nature somewhat dull. Themistocles had learned the names of all the citizens of Athens by heart; do you think, then, that after he became old he was wont to address as Lysimachus one who in fact was Aristides? I, for instance, know not only the people who are living, but I recall their fathers and grandfathers, too; and as I read their epitaphs I am not afraid of the superstition that, in so doing, I shall lose my memory; for by reading them I refresh my recollection of the dead. I certainly never heard of any old man forgetting where he had hidden his money! The aged remember everything that interests them, their appointments to appear in court, and who are their creditors and who their debtors.

 And how is it with aged lawyers, pontiffs, augurs, and philosophers? What a multitude of things they remember! Old men retain their mental faculties, provided their interest and application continue; and this is true, not only of men in exalted public station, but likewise of those in the quiet of private life. Sophocles composed tragedies to extreme old age; and when, because of his absorption in literary work, he was thought to be neglecting his business affairs, his sons haled him into court in order to secure a verdict removing him from the control of his property on the ground of imbecility, under a law similar to ours, whereby it is customary to restrain heads of families from wasting their estates. Thereupon, it is said, the old man read to the jury his play, Oedipus at Colonus, which he had just written and was revising, and inquired: "Does that poem seem to you to be the work of an imbecile?" When he had finished he was acquitted by the verdict of the jury.

Think you, then, that old age forced him to abandon his calling, or that it silenced Homer, Hesiod, Simonides, Stesichorus, or Isocrates, and Gorgias (whom I have mentioned already), or any of those princes of philosophy Pythagoras, Democritus, Plato, and Xenocrates, or Zeno and Cleanthes of a later time, or Diogenes the Stoic, whom you both have seen at Rome? Rather, did not activity in their several pursuits continue with all of them as long as life itself?

 But come now — to pass over these divine pursuits — I can point out to you Roman farmers in the Sabine country, friends and neighbours of mine, who are scarcely ever absent from the field while the more important operations of husbandry, as sowing, reaping, and storing of the crops, are going on. Although this interest of theirs is less remarkable in the case of annual crops, — for no one is so old as to think that he cannot live one more year — yet these same men labour at things which they know will not profit them in the least.

He plants the trees to serve another age


But it is our duty, my young friends, to resist old age; to compensate for its defects by a watchful care; to fight against it as we would fight against disease; to adopt a regimen of health;  to practise moderate exercise; and to take just enough of food and drink to restore our strength and not to overburden it. Nor, indeed, are we to give our attention solely to the body; much greater care is due to the mind and soul; for they, too, like lamps, grow dim with time, unless we keep them supplied with oil. Moreover, exercise causes the body to become heavy with fatigue, but intellectual activity gives buoyancy to the mind. For when Caecilius speaks of "the old fools of the comic stage," he has in mind old men characterized by credulity, forgetfulness, and carelessness, which are faults, not of old age generally, but only of an old age that is drowsy, slothful, and inert. Just as waywardness and lust are more often found in the young man than in the old, yet not in all who are young, but only in those naturally base; so that senile debility, usually called "dotage," is a characteristic, not of all old men, but only of those who are weak in mind and will......


O glorious day, when I shall set out to join the assembled hosts of souls divine and leave this world of strife and sin! For I shall go to meet not only the men already mentioned, but my Cato, too, than whom no better man, none more distinguished for filial duty, was ever born. His body was burned by me, whereas, on the contrary it were more fitting that mine had been burned by him; but his soul, not deserting me, but ever looking back, has surely departed for that realm where it knew that I, myself, must come. People think that I have bravely borne my loss — not that I bore it with an untroubled heart, but I found constant solace in the thought that our separation would not be long......

..... For these reasons, Scipio, my old age sits light upon me (for you said that this has been a cause of wonder to you and Laelius), and not only is not burdensome, but is even happy. And if I err in my belief that the souls of men are immortal, I gladly err, nor do I wish this error which gives me pleasure to be wrested from me while I live. But if when dead I am going to be without sensation (as some petty philosophers think), then I have no fear that these seers, when they are dead, will have the laugh on me! Again, if we are not going to be immortal, nevertheless, it is desirable for a man to be blotted out at his proper time. For as Nature has marked the bounds of everything else, so she has marked the bounds of life. Moreover, old age is the final scene, as it were, in life's drama, from which we ought to escape when it grows wearisome and, certainly, when we have had our fill.

There, written in the words of a man who died 43 BC are some startling words to leave us with. It's a shame I had to remove his beautiful words about the joys of farming, they could be sung, but the entire thing is there if anybody would like to read it and to have some idea of his character.

Have really enjoyed the discussion, it ended too soon!   I am so glad we've gotten to read Plutarch. Frybabe,  and anybody who abandoned Pompey for Cicero, do turn to the last 2 or so pages  of Pompey, and read them if nothing else: nobody should miss his death? It's one of the more memorable parts of Plutarch.

Plutarch  was a good choice that you all made, a Greek but we've essentially read his Roman biographies, a perfect first choice for your vote and beautifully led by JoanK and PatH! I just wish I could have kept up, I'm still at Actium  with Antony.

Vale atque vale

[roshanarose]

When Crassus expressed admiration of the Stoic doctrine, that
the good man is always rich, "Do you not mean," said Cicero, "their
doctrine that all things belong to the wise?" Crassus being generally
accused of covetousness. One of Crassus's sons, who was thought so
exceedingly like a man of the name of Axius as to throw some suspicion
on his mother's honour, made a successful speech in the senate. Cicero,
on being asked how he liked it, replied with the Greek words Axios
Crassou.

Plutarch has put it so very delicately that Axius may or may not be the son of Crassus, but after Crassus had made his statement echoing the Stoic doctrine, appears to confirm that Axius must be the son of Crassus.  This is a bit oblique to me as I have only read this small part of Plutarch on Cicero.  It definitely seems that Plutarch is  probably insulting both Crassus and Axius with just those two words as he was smarting at Axius successful oratory, while being thoroughly annoyed by Crassus in general.  So he decided to send that barb effectively insulting both men.  Touche!!

That -ou ending is definitely genitive, though, as is -os a very common singular masculine nominative noun ending.  It is the same in Modern Greek.

Ginny - I meant to ask.  Did we get the word "crass" from Crassus the individual, or did the word exist already in Latin and was just applied to Crassus as an insulting nickname.  The chicken or the egg?

[Babi]

 But, GINNY, what would "accius" imply?  Ass?
 Your excerpt now has me curious to read not only some of Cicero's speeches, but some of the
old Congressional speeches as well. I was quite startled to learn that a form of shorthand had
been developed by and had played such a part in preserving Cicero's speeches.
  And the text from Cicero's speech on old age. There we are, seeking "intellectual employment" though I'm not sure how 'active' that is. I must take offense, however, at the suggestion that my impaired memory implies that either I don't exercise it, or I am by nature somewhat dull.

The style of the period – long sentences with phrases and clauses and the thought not revealed until the end.  (oh goody     )

 (Pedlin...that gave me a chuckle.)

JOANR, thanks so much for that quote from the introduction to Cicero's 'Basic Works'. I found
it very helpful in better understanding the seeming inconsistencies in the man.

[ginny]

That's a good question RoshannaRose,  and I don't know!  Crassus is an old family name in Latin AND a Latin adjective. As an adjective it means solid, thick, dense, fat and gross, greatly swollen. Of the atmosphere it means  thick, dense or heavy. Then it has other meanings like a sound beating. It also means solid, coarse grained, dull, or uneducated.  Plautus used it as an adjective  and he died in 184 BC.

Crassus was also a family name in the gens Licinius. The most distinguished members were Lucius Licinius Crassus, an orator, 140-91BC, and Marcus Licinius Crassus the triumvir, d. 53 BC. . Wikipedia seems to have a good bit on the family but I really am afraid to trust their information. They do point out it was a cognomen  and that:

Another family of the Licinii bore the cognomen Varus, which means "crooked, bent," or "knock-kneed." The Licinii Vari were already distinguished, when their surname was replaced by that of Crassus. This was a common surname, which could mean "dull, thick," or "solid," and may have been adopted because of the contrast between this meaning and that of Varus.[3][6]

The problem with this citation is that citation  6 is Cassell's and they don't say this. That is, they give the definition of the words but not the inferences made here.  I also read Smith which is citation  3 and tho he has a lot on the Licinius family he also does not mention why they took up the name Crassus as a family name.



It's interesting that the definition of our word crass from Webster's is:

\ˈkras\
Definition of CRASS
1
a : gross ; especially : having or indicating such grossness of mind as precludes delicacy and discrimination b : being beneath one's dignity <crass concerns of daily life> c —used as a pejorative intensifier <crass flattery> <crass propaganda>
2
: guided by or indicative of base or materialistic values <crass commercialism> <crass measures of success>
— crass·ly adverb
— crass·ness noun


    A few people seemed shocked by her crass comments.
    <a loudmouthed jerk given to rude jokes and crass comments>
    Minor criticism though it was compared to the rest, the most galling calumny of all as far as Gaius Marius was concerned was the perpetual inference that he was unacceptably crass because he had no Greek. —Colleen McCullough, The First Man in Rome, (1990) 1991


Origin of CRASS
Latin crassus thick, gross
First Known Use: circa 1625

So this is a long way of saying I don't know when or why the Licinius family took on the name of crassus and which came first but it's an intriguing question!  

[ginny]

But, GINNY, what would "accius" imply?  Ass?

It would imply that he was illegitimate, the son of Accius instead of Crassus, his supposed father who, if the Accius reference were correct, was cuckolded.


I must take offense, however, at the suggestion that my impaired memory implies that either I don't exercise it, or I am by nature somewhat dull.

hhaaa, well one thing's for sure, he was the original "use it or lose it" guy, 2000 years ago. I think it's more an exhortation to keep mentally active than a condemnation.