2 June, 2003
Makers of Rome, Plutarch (366 pp, MMPB, 1965). Trans. Scott Kilvert
Every once in a while, I get a yearning for some good old-fashioned University of Chicago learnin'. Except that back in the U of C, I never learned much about Ancient Rome. Lots about Ancient Greece, but no Rome. That's my fault, for taking History of Science and political philosophy classes rather than Western Civ.
One thing we read, back in the day, was some selections from Plutarch's Parallel Lives of eminent Greeks and Romans (but only the Greek parts). The Lives was a series of short biographies of famous Romans, each paired with a biography of a famous Greek, who Plutarch considered to be similar in some way. For example, Julius Caesar was paired with Alexander the Great-- empire-builders both. And so, I decided to read this collection of some of Plutarch's Roman Lives.
This book contains nine stories: Coriolanus, Fabius Maximus, Marcellus, Cato the Elder, Tiberius Gracchus, Gaius Gracchus, Sertorius, Brutus, and Mark Antony. Altogether, these guys span about 500 years of Roman history. For the most part, these are not hagiographies or slanderologies; Plutarch portrays and discusses his subjects' negative characteristics as well as the positive characteristics which inspired him to write their stories in the first place. It is not all factually correct-- Plutarch was more interested in telling good stories about interesting people than in dull details like the exact year in which some battle was fought. That being said, I think that the general course of events is accurately portrayed, to the best of Plutarch's knowledge. (Which knowledge is better in the Roman case than in the Greek one, due to the fact that the relevant Roman history was more recent-- Mark Antony lived during Plutarch's great-grandfather's time.) The main exception, I think, would by Mark Antony-- Plutarch really didn't like him.
The Lives are very accessible; Plutarch's focus on character and psychology is in keeping with modern storytelling conventions. I found most of the stories to be entertaining, as well as interesting.
One thing that struck me in reading these biographies was how little the general shape of politics has changed in over 2000 years. Then, as now, there was the party of the wealthy elite and the party of the common folk. The rich were greedy and used the machinery of government to further enrich themselves. The people were fickle, and often convinced to vote for leaders who did not have their interests at hearts. At least we haven't descended to political assassination in the streets of the capital. Not yet, at any rate, although we're getting pretty good with character assassination.
And, if even half of what Plutarch wrote is true, Brutus was The Man.