Customer Reviews

Plutarch: Lives of Noble Grecians and Romans (Modern Library Series, Vol. 1)

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

As well as being a great historian Plutarch was a philosopher who used the examples of good and infamous men alike to reinforce his conception of morality and what the best in a man can truly be. Unlike other classical historians, he doesn't just accept stories about individuals at face value but always mentions conflicting facts in the historical record. He often digresses in mid narrative, but never to the reader's frustration, as it is always with an eye to the social practice's and political environment of the people of whom he writes, analyzing deeply with an anecdote here or an quotation there the merits and demerits of that society, and leaving us with a clearer picture of the classical mind-set as well as we might know it. As for the translation of Dryden which my fellow reviewer below much bemoans, I can only say that as a classic of English prose style it ranks only second to Gibbon and reminds us that Plutarch means not just to educate, but to delight and entertain as well; such an achievement is not easily matched without the advantage of genius.

These writings are 100% essential to have as a basis for understanding Western civilization. The description of Sparta here is the benchmark. Understanding the modern issues of culture and development can be made much richer by reading the laws of Solon (who laid down the groundwork for Democracy) and Lycurgus (Sparta - the ultimate egalitarian state) you can see the seeds of a dichotomy that has lived to this day.

This two volume set contains the lives of many of the people that you hear about again and again. If you plan to study the classics and read Plato, the Histories or other of the great books, these books are a perfect companion. Instead of reading them straight through, you can read about people as you come across them.

With much soul searching I gave the books 4 stars instead of 5. The reason for this is that the translations are challenging. They are not terrible and they are better than other tranlations I have seen, but they have endless sentences and word choices that are not common in modern American English. If you are into personal growth, this may not be a bad thing, because you can look up the words and expand your vocabulary, but it does make it somewhat more slow going than it could be.

Plutarch's Lives is one of my all time favorite books. I especially enjoy the "gay windows" in Alcibiades life and the description of Archimedes defense of Syracuse. My three star rating has nothing to do with Plutarch and everything to do with the terribly outdated translation "update" by Sir Clough. Sure, as another reviewer points out, it is vocabulary enhancing, but Plutarch was not a Victorian English gentleman. If you like Victorian prose, read a Victorian novel or something. I would actually prefer to read Dryden and company's undoctored original than wade through Clough's train wreck, as I find 18th century prose an easier read, and Dryden was a better writer.

If someone were to do a modern translation of the Lives, more people would be able to enjoy it. Unfortunately, the sad truth is that you can probably count the number of good classical translators on one hand, and how many of them have the time to translate Plutarch?

Twain's pejorative definition of `classic' need not apply. I define classic as that (text) which speaks to the heart over an extended duration - perhaps for several generations, as in `classic rock', or several millennia, as in Plutarch's "Lives". I probably never would have read Plutarch, were it not for a glorious discovery of Montaigne in mid-life. Having acquired enough distaste for the copious demands required to master classical languages after five years of Latin in secondary school, I made an arbitrary and direly misguided vow to eschew all Classics courses at the university level. And thus again is revealed the fateful difference between post-modern (post-1945), and the modern (c. 1500 - August 5, 1945) pedagogy, of which I unwittingly, if serendipitously, caught the tail end. The modern cannon required thorough immersion in the classics, and, for many years, Plutarch was required reading in the best schools, and should be even now. The author of the Shakespearian plays came to Plutarch by way of Montaigne (and likely read the Amyot translation, and only later the North, if at all), and the English schools came to Plutarch by way of Shakespeare. We might say that the revival of Plutarch was one of the most far reaching achievements of the Northern Renaissance.
At one point in his celebrated chronicle of the self, Montaigne (as a shaper and bona fide member of that cannon, guardian of some of what is best in our cultural inheritance) amusedly reveals that, when his critics believe they are attacking his work, they are actually attacking Plutarch and/or Seneca, so profound is their presence in his writing, and, in his "Defense of Plutarch and Seneca", he declares that . . . "my book [is] built up purely from their spoils".

And what a book it is! But Plutarch's magnum (see the 14 volumes of the Loeb Classical Library for his other works), is the greater. Montaigne is one of the great students of the self. Plutarch is the first (and may yet still be the definitive) historian of virtue. Montaigne, in scrutiny of his own nature, seeks to recognize the limitations and potentials of the self, and thereby sketch our general spiritual contours. Plutarch, in an unparalleled series of real life, historically and culturally pivotal, examples, shows us what they are.

The book records in the most remarkably intimate style (Plutarch has few peers as a master of narrative and an uncanny ability to ferret out of detail the significance of individual actions as a unified whole), the major events in the lives of the most impacting figures of the ancient world. Therefore, like the best novels, the book forms a world in itself, a lost world, the world of our ancestors, through a landscape drawn of actions and consequences. The structure of the book is such that an account of the seminal moments in the life of a noble Greek and then of a noble Roman are brought forth in pairs, followed by a comparison. In some sections of the work these comparisons are absent. They appear at some point in antiquity to have either been lost to or removed from the text, which would seem to explain why, for instance, there is no comparison of Alexander and Caesar. But the comparisons are brilliant, and eminently instructive.

Of course, from the details alone, we may draw our own inferences. Alexander, as a mere teen, leading his troops in hand-to-hand combat, won his first battle fighting uphill at night. Caesar, a heavy drinker, was wont to ride horseback at full tilt with his hands clenched behind his back. He had a life-long passion for Cato's sister and it is said that from their relationship, which continued through their respective marriages, Brutus was born. Et tu? Of course, one cannot fail to mention, even in this briefest review of the abundantly rich description in the nearly 1,300 pages which comprise the book, the death of Cato the Younger - one of the most exquisitely drawn figures in the book. Hunted down with the remnants of his troops into the wastelands of Carthage by the army of Octavius Ceasar in an effort to snuff out the last vestiges of republican resistance and opposition to Empire, realizing that the last realistic hope for freedom is lost, Cato attempts ritual suicide (a Stoic custom common to Roman nobility) by disembowelment. As Plutarch describes the scene, ". . . he did not immediately die of the wound; but struggling, fell off the bed, and throwing down a little mathematical table that stood by, made such a noise that the servants, hearing it, cried out. And immediately his son and all his friends came into the chamber, where, seeing him lie weltering in his own blood, great part of his bowels out of his body, but himself still alive and able to look at them, they all stood in horror. The physician went to him, and would have put in his bowels, which were not pierced, and sewed up the wound; but Cato, recovering himself, and understanding the intention, thrust away the physician, plucked out his own bowels, and tearing open the wound, immediately expired." In Seneca's words: "For Cato could not outlive freedom, nor would freedom outlive Cato."

However, the life most appropriate for the contemporary reader, I feel (and wish that every member of the shadowy corporate/military junta that seems to be ruling us these days would read and take to heart) is the life of Crassus. Crassus was the most successful businessman in the history of the Roman Empire. Plutarch relates that at one time he owned virtually one-third of the real estate in Rome. However, such mind-boggling success was not enough for him. His yen, and later, obsession, was to be revered as a great military leader, a world conqueror, expand the domain of the already burgeoning Empire, and the object of his fantasies was the area of the world at that time known as Mesopotamia and Persia, today as Iraq and Iran. We follow as he makes extensive preparations, investing his own fortune and a great deal of the nation's wealth into outfitting an army for the venture. And at first, the invasion of Mesopotamia seems to go well. But the centers of population are spread out over great stretches of desert, and the occupation never really succeeds, because a central authority cannot be solidly established. Crassus, however, remains undaunted, even though the troops are becoming mutinous as supplies begin to run thin. Led on by treacherous advisors, he enters Parthia (somewhere in the vicinity of modern day Syria). Plutarch describes the grueling denouement with his usual detachment, aplomb, and gifted eye for pertinent detail. Having lost the greatest fortune in the world, he proceeds to lose his troops, then his sons, and finally his life. These lessons are never too late for the learning, and my apologies to Twain, but a classic is a text which retains its urgency to be read, and read now.

I read the Dryden/Clough translation. Dryden was never my favorite writer of his period, the late 17th century - hardly a match for Burton or Milton, in my opinion, but he was poet laureate, and this work I love - his English is fine, and resonates with classic dignity. Clough, the mid-nineteenth century British scholar who revised the translation, befriended Emerson when he traveled to England, and became a sort of mentor to the New England Transcendentalists in general. We can be grateful for such a wonderful rendering for one of the very greatest and most edifying masterpieces.

I have provided a more indepth review of this edition for the Modern Library paperback, but I thought it might be worth repeating one or two comments from that review here.

First, this is called the "Dryden Translation" -- the quotations marks are intentional, because Dryden is not actually the translator. He may have provided some oversight for the translating activity, but the text of the lives were originally translated by others, primarily academics from Oxford and Cambridge. Dryden's one direct contribution is a life of Plutarch which survives here as a few paragraphs at the end of Clough's introduction. The publisher, Jacob Tonson, appears to have used Dryden's name, Dryden was one of his star writers, to gain extra sales.

Secondly, Clough's editiorial work has long been regarded as an improvement on the original, but Clough himself, after having started on the revision, decided he really wanted to start from scratch with a whole new translation. His nineteenth century publishers would not let him do so. As it was, it took him six years to revise the seventeenth century translations of Dryden's academic peers. The result is, nonetheless, quite readable and has been the standard ever since.

Today the Loeb translation is generally regarded as superior (I have not made the comparison myself, but I have seen a review in an academic journal that was written at the time that the Loeb translation first appeared; the side-by-side comparisons in that review were pretty compelling). However, the Loeb is much more expensive and the casual reader should, no doubt, be more than satisfied with this translation.

I felt I needed to add these comments to counter some of the reviews that suggest that Dryden's writing or Clough's editing were superior or inferior based upon what amounts to a reader's casual critique -- a fine thing in its way, but in this case not at all supported by the facts. Hopefully, with this review we may set aside any notions that this is "Clough's trainwreck" or an example of Dryden's fine prose. It is neither.

None of this changes the quality of the work itself. This is still a readable and very good (if not the best) translation of a piece of writing that has its own inherent interests, details of which one may find in other reviews posted here.

It is a shame that such an interesting, and historicaly valuable work such as Plutarch's lives is so difficult for modern readers. Though many others have commented on how difficult this English is for the modern reader, consider the following quote taken at random, from the first two sentences of the life of the Roman Camillus:

Among the many remarkable things that are related of Furius Camillus, it seems singular and strange above all, that he, who continually was in the highest commands, and obtained the greatest successes, was five times chosen dictator, triumphed four times, and was styled a second founder of Rome, yet never was so much as once consul. The reason of which was the state and temper of the commonwealth at that time; for the people, being at dissension with the senate, refused to return consuls, but in their stead elected other magistrates, called military tribunes, who acted, indeed, with full consular power, but were thought to exercise a less obnoxious amount of authority, because it was divided among a larger number; for to have the management of affairs entrusted in the hands of six persons rather than two was some satisfaction to the opponents of oligarchy.

Ugh. And on it goes. The North translation is even worse, to my ear. The best translation that I've found is the Loeb Classical Library. However, they are spread across eleven volumes, making for a very expensive acquisition.

Plutarch's lives has biographies of various people such as Lycurgus, who made laws for Sparta, Caius Marius, a Roman who led his army victoriously against the Teutonish, Cimbrish, and Ambronish invaders. Shakespeare based his play on Julius Caesar from an account of the same person in Plutarch's Lives. This book contains a lot of information and you'll probably like it if your really into Greco-Roman history, but it is a tough read.

In response to the review below:

"Simple pleasure" is worth something; Dryden's Plutarch, promoted in "yet another" publication, is worth even more.

? This translation by this talented poet is rendered "useless" by the absence of "reference numbers"? Plutarch is not about "indexing", but about morality, courage, and fate. This is an excellent book, by an excellent translator, and it is good to know that so many publishers are interested in keeping it alive.

This is an astonishing volume. Who would have expected a "page turner" out of a tome written in the 2nd century A.D.? So much for cultural and temporal hubris--this is magnificent reading.

After the Turks had conquered Constantinople refuges brought manuscripts of Plutarch to Italy. It was the right time. Secular scholars and enlightened clerics took a new interest in the learning of Antiquity and the Greek language. For the first time since the fall of Rome, Homer was not just a name, but actually read in the original. And PlutarchÕs ÒLivesÓ became the handbook for the European gentlemanÕs higher education. In fact through many channels, Plutarch reintroduced the ancient concepts of republican freedom and democracy to a world that seemed to have completely forgotten that they ever existed.

Plutarch became the United States secret founding father; Thomas Jefferson and the under-signers to the constitution, they all had grown up with Plutarch on their school desks. He infused them with the spirit of democracy: ÒFor all we know, opposite parties or factions in a commonwealth, like passengers in a boat, serve to trim and balance the unsteady motions of power; whereas if they combine and come all over to one side, they cause to overset the vessel and carry down everything.Ó And he conveyed a grasp of the larger picture: ÒEconomy, which is but money-making, when exercised over men, becomes policy.Ó

With Plutarch, liberalism raises its voice and in Tiberius GracchusÕ (163-133 B.C.) speech, he recorded for us this timeless indictment of Òconservative valuesÓ and Òpatriotism:Ó Ò... The beasts find refuge in their dens, but men who for the safety of their country expose their lives in service, breathe on borrowed air in the open day. Having no roof of their own, with wive and children, they wander from place to place. Is it not ridiculous to hear generals exhort their soldiers to fight for the hearth of their ancestors, when not any of so many Romans own altar or monument, neither have even a house to defend? They fight and they are slain, but it is for the wealth of other men. Being called masters of the world, they have not one square-inch of land to call their own.Ó

But, always the realist, and himself living under despotic rule Plutarch adds: Òin a time when right is weak, we may be thankful if might assumes a form of gentleness,Ó because, (and he quotes Cato:) Òby nature a king is a man-eating animal.Ó PlutarchÕs grasp on human nature was already very advanced, before the barbaric notion of original sin threw society back into the ethical stone age: ÒMen by nature is not a wild animal or unsocial creature, neither was he born so, but makes himself what he naturally is not by vicious habit. He is civilized and grows gentle by a change of place, occupation, and manner of life, as wild beasts become tame and domesticated. With good reason, those who train horses and dogs, endeavour by gentle means to cure their angry and intractable tempers, rather than by cruelty and beating.Ó

Without being an atheist, PlutarchÕs comment on a situation equivalent to Gen. 22:2, reveals a discerning grasp on the motives and sentiments which underpin faith into the irrational and he urges: Òthat such a barbarous and impious obligation could not be pleasing to any Superior Being or to the father of gods and men; that it is absurd to imagine any divinities or powers taking delight in slaughter and sacrifices of men; or, if there were such, they are to be neglected as weak and unable to assist! Because such unreasonable and cruel desires can only proceed from weak and depraved minds.Ó And: Òthe worship most acceptable to the gods is that which comes from a cheerful heart.Ó

To fully appreciate his greatness, one has to remember, that Plutarch was neither a thinker, nor one of the great intellectual luminaries of his period - just a very bright popular writer and educator, but also a human being of integrity, culture, and a rare capacity for compassion. He influenced Western art as much as Western politics. For his dramas, Shakespeare lifted entire passages from NorthÕs translation. And no other writer in all Antiquity would have cared to take notice of the dog who jumped into the sea and swam side to side with the galley which carried his family, when during the Persian war the entire population of Athens was to be evacuated to Troezen. For lack of shipping space domestic animals and pets had to be left behind. The dog didnÕt quite make it and drowned short of the shores of Salamis.

Often Plutarch conveys a sense of wellbeing, of a Golden Age, and he still holds his sway over our imagination. The most interesting chapter for anthropologists, is the portrayal of Lycurgus and his laws. Himself a product of a patriarchal society, Plutarch had not a clue, that his accurate description of Spartan customs, would depict one of the last matriarchal societies that had survived the coup de tat of the patriarchs. Utopian fantasies often become the excuse for totalitarian atrocities on dissenting minds - Plutarch was never part of the posse. But I remember him best for the little story about a freight-galley sailing in a moonlit night leeward of the Aegean coast, when the sailors suddenly heard a voice carrying over from the near by shore: ÒTravellers, tell the CorinthianÕs, the Great Pan is dead.Ó

Plutarch was a loving husband and father, an incorruptible administrator and conscientious ambassador for his people, a humanist and a model for liberalism ever since. There are books you want to have in your briefcase if that is all you are allowed to carry away from disaster and war; books that keep you company in your most difficult hour. PlutarchÕs ÒLivesÓ is definitely one of them. It had been of tremendous influence, but unlike the Bible, of a wholesome and humanizing influence. Mommsen called Plutarch Òmellow and sweet as the honey from Mount Hymettos.Ó Who is to say, that ancient paganism had nothing to contribute to the modern world?