Universidad De Málaga. Spain Utah State University

Scholarly Journal of the International Plutarch Society VOLUME 13 (2016) • ISSN 0258-655X

UNIVERSIDAD DE MÁLAGA. SPAIN

VOLUME 13 (2016) UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY. LOGAN, UTAH, USA Ploutarchos, n.s. 13 (2016) Scholarly Journal of the International Plutarch Society Guidelines for Ploutarchos n.s. Editorial Board: Editor: Dr. Frances B. Titchener, Department of History, Utah State University, Logan, UT.84322- 1. Languages. Manuscripts may be written in any of the official languages of the IPS: English, French, 0710. Phone: (435) 797-1298, FAX: (435)797-3899, e.mail: [email protected] German, Italian, Latin, Modern Greek, Portuguese, and Spanish. Book Review Editor: Dr. Vicente Ramón Palerm. Área de Filología Griega, Facultad de Filoso- 2. Abstracts & Key-Words: Articles will be sent together with key-words and an abstract in English not fía y Letras, Universidad de Zaragoza, C/ Pedro Cerbuna 12, 50009, Zaragoza. Spain. Phone: longer than seven lines. (0034) 976761000 (ext. 3810), e.mail: [email protected] 3. For mat: Manuscripts must be typed double-spaced on Times-New Roman 11. The length of manu- Coordinators: Dr. Aurelio Pérez Jiménez, Área de Filología Griega, Facultad de Filosofía scripts must not exceed 15000 words without previous agreement with the editors. Manuscripts must y Letras, Universidad de Málaga, 29071 Málaga, Spain. Phone: (0034)952131809, FAX: be sent in electronic version (PC Microsoft Word Windows) as an attached file to an e-mail message. (0034)952131838, e.mail: [email protected] & Dr. Delfim Ferreira Leão, Instituto de Es- 4. Bibliography: The text of the paper should be followed by a list of references, including at least those tudos Clássicos, Faculdade de Letras, Universidade de Coimbra, Largo Porta Férrea, 3000-370 works cited more than twice in the notes. Coimbra, Portugal, e.mail: [email protected] 5. Quotations in notes: Names of ancient authors should not be capitalized, names of modern authors Advisory Board: should be written in versalitas only when in notes or in the bibliography: K. Ziegler (note), but K. Paola Volpe Cacciatore ([email protected]), Università di Salerno, President of the IPS Ziegler (main text). Delfim Ferreira Leão, [email protected], Universidade de Coimbra, Honorary President of the IPS A) Frequent quotations (more than twice): Refer to bibliography, citing by author’s name, year of Jeffrey Beneker ([email protected]), University of Wisconsin; Philip R. Bosman ([email protected]. edition, and pages: e.g. K. Ziegler, 1951, col. 800. za), University of Stellenbosch; Frederick E. Brenk ([email protected]), Arrupe House Jesuit Community; B) Single quotations: Either follow the procedure indicated in 5 A) or incorporate the entire reference John Dillon ([email protected]), Trinity College, Dublin; Joseph Geiger ([email protected]), in the notes, according to the following conventions, which are the same as for the bibliography (with The Hebrew University of Jerusalem; Aristoula Georgiadou ([email protected]), University of the single exception that in the bibliography the surname should precede the initial, e.g. Ziegler, K., Patras; Anna Ginestí Rosell ([email protected]), Katholische Universität Eichstätt-Ingolstadt; Olivier “ Plutarchos von Chaironeia” , RE XXI (1951), cols. 636-962. Guerrier, [email protected], Université de Toulouse; Katarzyna Jazdzewska (kjazdzewska@ a) Books: Author (in the case of joint authorship, separated by a comma, with the final name pre- gmail.com), University of Warsaw; Anastasios G. Nikolaidis ([email protected]), University of ceded by & ), comma, title of work in italics, comma, volume in Roman numerals (where applicable), Crete; Christopher Pelling ([email protected]), Christ Church, Oxford; Aurelio Pérez Jiménez comma, place of publication, comma, year (with superscript number of editions if not the first, and ([email protected]), Universidad de Málaga; Lautaro Roig Lanzillotta ([email protected]), year of the first edition in parenthesis), comma, and quoted pages: University of Groningen; Geert Roskam ([email protected]), Katholieke Universiteit Leuven; - D. A. Russell, Plutarch, London, 1973, pp. 3-5. Philip A. Stadter ([email protected]), University of N.C. at Chapel Hill; Sven-Tage Teodorsson (Teo- b) Articles: Author, comma, title in quotation marks, comma, name of the journal (for the abbrevia- [email protected]), University of Gothenburg; Maria Vamvouri ([email protected]. tions of journals follow the conventions of L’Année Philologique), comma, volume number in Arabic ch), Université de Lausanne; Luc Van der Stockt ([email protected]), Katholieke Universiteit numerals, year in parenthesis, and pages (without abbreviation if they correspond to the entire article): Leuven; Alexei V. Zadorojnyi ([email protected]), University of Liverpool. - C. P. Jones, “ Towards a Chronology of Plutarch’s Works” , JRS, 56 (1966) 61-74. ISSN: 0258-655X - C. P. Jones, “ Towards a Chronology of Plutarch’s Works” , JRS, 56 (1966), p. 65. Depósito Legal: MA-1615/2003 c) Wor ks in collabor ative volumes: Cite as with articles, followed by the quotation of the collab- © International Plutarch Society orative work (if cited several times, according to the same conventions as under 5A above): e.g.: F. E. Brenk, “ Tempo come struttura nel dialogo Sul Daimonion di Socrate di Plutarco” , in G. D’ Iippolito Ploutarchos n.s. is an International Scholarly Journal devoted to research on Plutarch’s Works, on & I. Gallo (eds.), Strutture formali dei Moralia di Plutarco. Atti del III Convegno plutarcheo, Pal- their value as a source for ancient history and as literary documents and on their influence on Huma- ermo, 3-5 maggio 1989, Napoli, 1991, pp. 69-82. nism. It is directed to specialists on these topics. The principal areas of research of this journal are 6. Quotations fr om ancient author s: Author, comma, work, book (Arabic numerals), full stop, chapter Classical Philology, Ancient History and the Classical Tradition. (Arabic numerals), comma, paragraph (Arabic numerals), or: Author, comma, book (Roman num- Contributions and Selection Procedures: Contributions must be sent to the Coordinator, Prof. Aurelio bers), chapter or verse (Arabic numerals), full stop, paragraph (Arabic numerals). Pérez Jiménez or to the Editor, Prof. Frances Titchener, before the 30th March of each year. Articles and a) Abbreviations of Greek works and authors: for preference, cite according to conventions of notes will be published following positive evaluation by two external referees. the Liddell & Scott or of the DGE edited by F. R. Adrados & others. Version on-line: https://impactum.uc.pt/en/content/revista?tid=48526&id=48526 b) Abbreviations of Latin works and authors: follow the Thesaurus Linguae Latinae. Headline design: Prof. Sebastián García Garrido. Universidad de Málaga ([email protected]). c) Examples: Covers images: Front cover: Numa and Egeria. Felice Giani's painting in the Palazzo Milzetti, Faenza, - Authors cited with title of work: X., Mem. 4.5,2-3; Plu., Arist. 5.1; Hom., Od. 10.203. Ravenna (su concessione del Ministero dei Beni Culturali e del Turismo, Polo Museale dell'Emilia - Authors cited without title of work: B., I 35; Paus., V 23.5; D. S., XXXI 8.2. Romagna). Back cover: Sacrifice by Numa. AR Denarius 97 A.D. (coin reverse), L. Pomponius Molo 7. Not es r ef er ences: References (in Arabic numbers) to the footnotes must precede always the signs of (Photo by Lübke & Wiedemann KG, Leonberg). Courtesy of Fritz Rudorf Künker GmbH & Co.KG, punctuation, e.g.: “…correspondait à l’harmonie psychique1. Dans l e Ti mée2 et l a République3, ...” Osnabrück (Auction 295, Lot 539, from 25.9.2017), http://www.kuenker.com 8. Greek & non-Latin Fonts: For Greek and other non-Latin texts, use Unicode fonts. *ඎංൽൾඅංඇൾඌൿඈඋ3਌ਏਕਔਁ਒ਃਈਏਓ਎ਓ /DQJXDJHV0DQXVFULSWVPD\EHZULWWHQLQDQ\RIWKHR൶FLDOODQJXDJHVRIWKH,36(QJOLVK)UHQFK German, Italian, Latin, Modern Greek, Portuguese, and Spanish. 2. Abstracts & Key-Words: Articles will be sent together with key-words and an abstract in English not longer than seven lines. 3. Format: Manuscripts must be typed double-spaced on Times-New Roman 11. The length of manuscripts must not exceed 15000 words without previous agreement with the editors. Manuscripts must EHVHQWLQHOHFWURQLFYHUVLRQ 3&0LFURVRIW:RUG:LQGRZV DVDQDWWDFKHG¿OHWRDQHPDLOPHVVDJH 4. Bibliography: The text of the paper should be followed by a list of references, including at least those works cited more than twice in the notes. 5. Quotations in notes: Names of ancient authors should not be capitalized, names of modern authors should be written in versalitas only when in notes or in the bibliography: K. Zංൾ඀අൾඋ (note), but K. Ziegler (main text). A) Frequent quotations (more than twice): Refer to bibliography, citing by author’s name, year of edition, and pages: e.g. K. Zංൾ඀අൾඋ, 1951, col. 800. B) Single quotations: Either follow the procedure indicated in 5 A) or incorporate the entire reference in the notes, according to the following conventions, which are the same as for the bibliography (with the single exception that in the bibliography the surname should precede the initial, e.g. Zංൾ඀අൾඋ, K., “Plutarchos von Chaironeia”, RE XXI (1951), cols. 636-962. a) Books: $XWKRU LQWKHFDVHRIMRLQWDXWKRUVKLSVHSDUDWHGE\DFRPPDZLWKWKH¿QDOQDPHSUH- ceded by &), comma, title of work in italics, comma, volume in Roman numerals (where applicable), FRPPDSODFHRISXEOLFDWLRQFRPPD\HDU ZLWKVXSHUVFULSWQXPEHURIHGLWLRQVLIQRWWKH¿UVWDQG \HDURIWKH¿UVWHGLWLRQLQSDUHQWKHVLV FRPPDDQGTXRWHGSDJHV - D. A. Rඎඌඌൾඅඅ, Plutarch, London, 1973, pp. 3-5. b) Articles: $XWKRUFRPPDWLWOHLQTXRWDWLRQPDUNVFRPPDQDPHRIWKHMRXUQDO IRUWKHDEEUHYLD- WLRQVRIMRXUQDOVIROORZWKHFRQYHQWLRQVRI/¶$QQpH3KLORORJLTXH FRPPDYROXPHQXPEHULQ$UDELF numerals, year in parenthesis, and pages (without abbreviation if they correspond to the entire article): - C. P. Jඈඇൾඌ, “Towards a Chronology of Plutarch’s Works”, JRS, 56 (1966) 61-74. - C. P. Jඈඇൾඌ, “Towards a Chronology of Plutarch’s Works”, JRS, 56 (1966), p. 65. c) Works in collaborative volumes: &LWHDVZLWKDUWLFOHVIROORZHGE\WKHTXRWDWLRQRIWKHFROODE- orative work (if cited several times, according to the same conventions as under 5A above): e.g.: F. E. Bඋൾඇ඄, “Tempo come struttura nel dialogo Sul Daimonion di Socrate di Plutarco”, in G. D’Iංඉඉඈඅංඍඈ & I. Gൺඅඅඈ (eds.), Strutture formali dei Moralia di Plutarco. Atti del III Convegno plutarcheo, Pal- ermo, 3-5 maggio 1989, Napoli, 1991, pp. 69-82. 6. Quotations from ancient authors: Author, comma, work, book (Arabic numerals), full stop, chapter (Arabic numerals), comma, paragraph (Arabic numerals), or: Author, comma, book (Roman numbers), chapter or verse (Arabic numerals), full stop, paragraph (Arabic numerals). a) Abbreviations of Greek works and authors: for preference, cite according to conventions of the Liddell & Scott or of the DGE edited by F. R. Adrados & others. E $EEUHYLDWLRQVRI/DWLQZRUNVDQGDXWKRUVfollow the Thesaurus Linguae Latinae. c) Examples: - Authors cited with title of work: X., Mem. 4.5,2-3; Plu., Arist. 5.1; Hom., Od. 10.203. - Authors cited without title of work: B., I 35; Paus., V 23.5; D. S., XXXI 8.2. 7. Notes references: References (in Arabic numbers) to the footnotes must precede always the signs of SXQFWXDWLRQHJ³«FRUUHVSRQGDLWjO¶KDUPRQLHSV\FKLTXH1. Dans le Timée2 et la République3, ...” *UHHN QRQ/DWLQ)RQWVFor Greek and other non-Latin texts, use Unicode fonts. (Página deixada propositadamente em branco)

Ploutarchos, n. s., 13 (2016)

I.- Articles

M. Lucchesi, “Gylippus in Plutarch’s Parallel Lives: Intratextuality and Readers”...... 3-32 Chr. Pelling, “Plutarch the Multiculturalist: Is West always Best?”...... 33-52 A. Podlecki, “Plutarch in Fifth-century Athens”...... 53-100 F. B. Titchener, “Side by Side by Plutarch”...... 101-110

II.- Notes and Varia

1. Necrologicae...... 111-116

I. “Ricordo di Italo Gallo” (Padula, 20 aprile 1921 – Salerno, 24 aprile 2016), by Paola Volpe Cacciatore...... 111-114 II. Françoise Frazier (Paris, 17 février 1959 - Paris, 14 décembre 2016), by Olivier Guerrier & Olivier Munnich ...... 114-116 2. F. B. Titchener, “Note”...... 116 3. J. F. Martos Montiel, “A propósito de una Tesis Doctoral sobre Plutarco”.....116-119

III.- Book Reviews

Jann Bremmer, Initiation into the Mysteries of the Ancient World, De Gruyter, Berlin-Boston, 2014 (L. Lesage-Garriga)...... 121-124 Françoise Frazier, Histoire et Morale dans les Vies Parallèles de Plutarque, seconde édition, revue et augmentée, Paris, 2016 (C. Alcalde-Martín)...... 124-127 New Collective Publications (2015-2016)...... 127-128

IV.- Bibliography Section

Articles. An annotated bibliography 2012 (Stefano Amendola, Serena Citro, Mariella De Simone, Timothy Duff, Françoise Frazier, Angelo Giavatto, Rai- ner Hirsch-Luipold, Lautaro Roig Lanzillotta, Luisa Lesage-Gárriga, Delfim Leão, Vicente Ramón Palerm, Fabio Tanga, Maria Vamvouri, Ana Vicente)...... 129-160 (Página deixada propositadamente em branco) Gylippus in Plutarch’s Parallel Lives: Intratextuality and Readers* by Michele Lucchesi Facoltà Teologica di Torino [email protected] Abstract Plutarch’s portrayal of Gylippus is consistent both in the Moralia and in the Parallel Lives. In particular, Gylippus’ main traits clearly recall the Spartans’ virtues and vices described in the five Spartan Lives. Furthermore, the presence of Gylippus as a secondary character in the Life of Pericles and in the Life of Nicias creates a strong link between these biographies and the Lives of Lycurgus and Lysander. Different types of readers can variously actualise such intratextual connections. We can infer that the Parallel Lives require attentive readers willing to engage actively in the reading process and to interpret the narrative fruitfully, following the author’s indications embedded in the texts and activating their history recollection. Key-Words: Gylippus, Intratextuality, Readers, Aemilius Paulus-Timoleon, Pericles, Nicias, Sparta, Parallel Lives, Plutarch.

ntroduction devoted to Spartan heroes (Lycurgus, Ancient Sparta is one Lysander, Agesilaus, and Agis and of Plutarch’s favourite Cleomenes) and discuss in detail the topics in the Parallel Li Spartan constitution, society, religion, Ives. Five biographies are and politics. In these Lives, Plutarch * This article is a revised and expanded version of a paper originally delivered at the XII Simposio Internacional de la Sociedad Española de Plutarquistas, held at the University of Extremadura (Cáceres) in 2015. I take this opportunity to express my gratitude to the organisers Prof. Manuel Sanz Morales, Prof. Jesús Ureña Bracero, Prof. Míryam Librán Moreno, and Prof. Ramiro González Delgado. I would also like to thank sincerely Prof. Christopher Pelling, who read my manuscript and corrected many mistakes: all the remaining inaccuracies are, of course, my own responsibility. In this article, for the Greek text I have used the most recent volumes of the Teubner editions of Plutarch’s Parallel Lives and Moralia. The translations are my adaptations of those in the various volumes of Loeb Classical Library.

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 3-32 ISSN 0258-655X 4 Michele A. Lucchesi narrates the most crucial phases of in comparison with the protagonist or the history of Sparta: the origin of the some other character of a Life, without city and the foundation of its main having any part in the storyline. political institutions, the end of the In this article, I examine the case Peloponnesian War and its hegemony of Gylippus, the great Spartan general over the Hellenic world, the crisis in the who won glory against the Athenians fourth century BC and the attempt to during the Sicilian expedition in the restore its greatness in the third century fifth century BC, but was later forced BC. After reading these five Spartan into self-exile for embezzling part of Lives, one can reasonably infer that the silver (or coined silver money) Plutarch tried to project a consistent gained by Lysander as war booty image of ‘Spartanness’. after numerous victories in Asia and Sparta and illustrious Spartans, Greece1. In addition to the probably however, are present in other Lives too. spurious De liberis educandis (10 In particular, in some biographies the B), Plutarch refers to Gylippus and narrative ‘features’ Spartan political his actions in several Lives, including leaders and rulers as secondary cha the Life of Lysander (16-17.1), within racters in historical episodes ‘starring’ both narrative passages and edifying other (Spartan and non-Spartan) pro comparisons. I aim to analyse these tagonists. In these cases, the relevance texts in order to understand which of the Spartan characters in the plot aspects of Gylippus’ story are may not necessarily correspond to emphasised the most and the readers whether they played an important and are more frequently prompted to think yet subordinate role in the actual events of. I will also discuss to what extent, or to whether they were only marginally from Plutarch’s perspective, Gy involved in them. Sometimes, famous lippus’ behaviour was consistent with Spartans are even simply mentioned the Spartan values portrayed in the

1 On Gylippus, apart from Plutarch, the main historical sources are Thucydides (6.93.2-3, 104.1-2; 7.1-7, 11.2, 12.1, 21.1-5, 22.1, 23.1-4, 37.2, 42.3, 43.6, 46, 50.1-2, 53.1, 65.1- 69.1, 74.2, 79.4, 81-83, 85-86, 8.13.1) and Diodorus Siculus (13.7.2-8.4, 28, 34.3-4, and, especially for the scandal and its consequences, 13.106.8-10), who was certainly influenced by Ephorus. Gylippus is also mentioned by Aelian (VH 12.43), Aelius Aristides (Or. 5 364, 366, 367, 372, 375; Or. 6 379 L.-B.; Rh. 1.13.2.1 S.), Isocrates (Archid. 6.53), Lucianus (Hist. Conscr. 38), Maximus Tyrius (21.3, 23.2), Polyaenus (Strat. 1.39.4, 42.1-2), Posidonius (in Ath. 233e-234e=FGrHist 87 F 48c), and Seneca (Nat. 1.1.14). See J.-F. Bommelaer, 1981, pp. 36-37 and 201-202, P. Cartledge, 1987, pp. 88-90, 20022, pp. 221-225 and 269-270, J. Christien, 2002, pp. 174-179, T.J. Figueira, 2002, pp. 142-144, S. Hodkinson, 1994, p. 198, 2000, pp. 155-157, 165-167, and 172, A. Powell, 1988, pp. 189-191.

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 3-32 Gylippus in Plutarch’s Parallel Lives 5 five Spartan Lives. I shall investigate, starvation, a story unknown to the other therefore, whether Plutarch considered literary sources and probably fabricated Gylippus a typical Spartan leader or at Sparta for propaganda purposes (Ath. an exceptional figure, different from 233f-234a). As David thoughtfully com the other rulers of Sparta, and how mented, not only was the episode meant he presented his interpretation to the to be a warning against greed, but it also readers. In this regard, I will try to reaffirmed Gylippus’ ultimate respect distinguish between Plutarch’s actual for the Spartan values, since he acknow readers and the ideal reader, as far as ledged his fault and inflicted capital they can be reconstructed from the punishment on himself, as decreed by 3 texts2. First, I will focus my attention the Spartan court . In Posidonius’ view, on some ‘isolated’ references, which then, Gylippus embodied Spartanness appear in texts whose main subject is despite his sad fate. neither Gylippus nor Sparta. Subse Plutarch, too, often portrayed Gy quen tly, I will concentrate on Gylippus lippus as emblematic of men’s rise to as a secondary character in the Lives prominence and fall into disgrace. We of Pericles, Nicias, and Lysander, can begin our analysis of this approach where his presence acquires more to Gylippus’ vicissitudes with the De considerable significance. liberis educandis, although this work ‘Isolated’ references is usually considered spurious by the majority of modern scholars (10 B): Gylippus’ dramatic downfall made him look a tragic figure, a paradigmatic By putting their hands to wrongful gains, some men have example of how a single wrongful act could wasted the good repute of their ruin one’s outstanding reputation, earned earlier lives, just as it happened in years of heroic deeds and tremendous to Gylippus the Spartan, who success. In this respect, Posidonius added was banished from Sparta as an an even more dramatic dimension to exile, because he had secretly un- Gylippus’ ruin by recording his suicide by done the bags of money4.

2 With ideal reader I indicate the image of the ideal recipient of Plutarch’s works; the ideal reader “understands the work in a way that optimally matches its structure, and […] adopts the interpretive position and esthetic standpoint put forward by the work” (W. Schmid, 2010, p. 55). On the ideal reader, see U. Eco, 200610, pp. 50-66, W. Iser, 1978, pp. 27-38, W. Schmid, 2010, pp. 51-57. 3 E. David, 2002, p. 30. 4 Plu. De lib. educ. 10 B: Τὰς χεῖράς τινες ὑποσχόντες λήμμασιν ἀδίκοις τὴν δόξαν τῶν προβεβιωμένων ἐξέχεαν· ὡς Γύλιππος ὁ Λακεδαιμόνιος τὰ σακκία τῶν χρημάτων παραλύσας φυγὰς ἀπηλάθη τῆς Σπάρτης. Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 3-32 ISSN 0258-655X 6 Michele A. Lucchesi

As one can notice, there is no The parallel with Gylippus implies introduction to Gylippus. The “bags of that the readers activate their prior money”, too, are taken as familiar to the knowledge of Greek history so as to readers: the misappropriation of money, ‘decode’ Plutarch’s words. Conversely, that is, briefly summarised in one single uninformed readers might not be able to sentence without any detail, is meant grasp the sense of Plutarch’s reference to be sufficient to identify the famous due to its extreme conciseness, so that Spartan commander and to make him be the sentence would remain obscure. recognised as an exemplary case of good Analogous succinctness is used repute destroyed. The text, then, demands again in the formal synkrisis between the readers’ ability to expand on the very Aemilius Paulus and Timoleon, where limited data provided and to unpack Plutarch, loosely citing Timaeus Gylippus’ story once the recollection of (FGrHist 566 F 100c), writes that the Spartan history has been triggered. Syracusans dismissed Gylippus due to In the Parallel Lives, another passage his love of riches (φιλοπλουτία) and in which not much information is given greediness (ἀπληστία) (Comp. Aem.- about Gylippus is Dio. 49.6. The Spartan Tim. 41(2).4)5. Gylippus’ greed is seen Gaesylus’ arrival in Sicily to assume in correspondence with that of other command of the Syracusans and to commanders such as the Spartan Pharax join the admiral Heracleides in fighting and the Athenian Callippus in order to against Dion is compared with Gylippus’ prove that at that time the Greeks, unlike very similar mission: the defence of the Romans, had corrupted military Syracuse against the Athenians. In this leaders who lacked discipline and did case too, Plutarch employs a very brief not follow the laws (Comp. Aem.-Tim. formula: “As Gylippus had formerly 41(2).2-6). In Plutarch’s view, Sicily was done” (ὡς πρότερόν ποτε Γύλιππος). the place where such moral weakness Yet these few words were evidently was completely exposed when the Greeks thought to be enough to remind the became directly involved in military in readers of Gylippus and to suggest that terventions. By contrast, therefore, Ti the Syracusans run the risk of facing the moleon’s rule distinguished itself as same situation created by the Spartan much more virtuous than that of his pre intervention in the fifth century BC. decessors (Comp. Aem.-Tim. 41(2).7).

5 Plu. Comp. Aem.-Tim. 41(2).4: “Furthermore, Timaeus (FGrHist 566 F 100c) says that the Syracusans sent away Gylippus in ignominy and dishonour, as they found him guilty of love of riches and greed while he was general” (Τίμαιος δὲ καὶ Γύλιππον ἀκλεῶς φησι καὶ ἀτίμως ἀποπέμψαι Συρακουσίους, φιλοπλουτίαν αὑτοῦ καὶ ἀπληστίαν ἐν τῇ στρατηγίᾳ κατεγνωκότας). See n. 34, n. 39, and n. 41 of this article. ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 3-32 Gylippus in Plutarch’s Parallel Lives 7

Thus, in the final comparison between Plutarch offers the same analysis of Aemilius Paulus and Timoleon the Spartan decay and applies the same reference to Gylippus aims to illustrate or equivalent terms as in the other a tendency displayed by all of the Greek Lives6. In Plutarch’s view, therefore, commanders of a historical period, and the concept of φιλοπλουτία is closely does not allude to a specifically Spartan related to Sparta, a topic to which we 7 trait. Interestingly, however, Plutarch shall return later in this article . uses the word φιλοπλουτία, which is Yet, once again, an uninformed employed again at Lyc. 30.5 and Lys. audience, reading only the text of Comp. 2.6, where the reasons for Spartan Aem.-Tim. 41(2).4, can hardly regard deca dence are thoroughly discussed. In Gylippus’ φιλοπλουτία as a moral fault both passages, Plutarch explains that, linked to Lysander’s unwise decision by sending to Sparta vast sums of silver and Sparta’s decline. Rather, it is and gold obtained in war, Lysander plausible to think that the actual readers filled the city with love of riches and may primarily (though not exclusively) luxury (τρυφή), acting against Spartan consider the general moral implications society’s long-established distaste for of the remark concerning the Spartan wealth (incidentally, Gylippus’ scandal strategos, without necessarily noticing of booty is not cited). In Agis/Cleom. Plutarch’s adaptation of a typically 3.1, moreover, even though without Spartan argument to a broader (non- mentioning Lysander and Gylippus, Spartan) context8. The synkrisis between

6 Plu. Agis/Cleom. 3.1: “After the desire for silver and gold first crept into the city, and also, on the one hand, greed and stinginess followed along with the acquisition of wealth, and, on the other hand, luxury, softness, and extravagance, too, with the use and enjoyment of it, Sparta fell away from most of her noble traits” (ἐπεὶ παρεισέδυ πρῶτον εἰς τὴν πόλιν ἀργύρου καὶ χρυσοῦ ζῆλος, καὶ συνηκολούθησε τοῦ πλούτου τῇ μὲν κτήσει πλεονεξία καὶ μικρολογία τῇ δὲ χρήσει καὶ ἀπολαύσει τρυφὴ καὶ μαλακία καὶ πολυτέλεια, τῶν πλείστων ἐξέπεσεν ἡ Σπάρτη καλῶν). See p. 16. 7 On φιλοπλουτία connected with Sparta or other Spartan characters, see also Plu. Comp. Lys.- Sull. 41(3).7, Agis/Cleom. 13.1; cf. Apopth. Lac. 239 F. Other literary sources on φιλοπλουτία at Sparta: Ar. Resp. 8.550d-551b, D.S. 7.12.8, X. Lac. 14. In the Parallel Lives, the only other figures characterised by φιλοπλουτία are Crassus (Crass. 1.5, 2.1-2, 14.5) and Seleucus (Demetr. 32.7-8). Note that Gylippus, the Spartans, and Sparta are never mentioned in the De cupiditate divitiarum (in Greek, Περὶ φιλοπλουτίας). See also n. 14 of this article. 8 Plutarch may have followed his typical method of work, using notes (hypomnēmata) and preparatory drafts about Sparta and the Spartan characters to write about Gylippus on multiple occasions. Cf. n. 34, n. 39, and n. 41 of this article. On Plutarch’s method of work and hypomnēmata, see M. Beck, 1999, C.B.R. Pelling, (1979) 2002, 2002, pp. 65-68, P.A. Stadter, 2008, 2014a, 2014b, L. Van der Stockt 1999a, 1999b, 2002, 2004, 2014, pp. 329-330, B. Van Meirvenne, 1999. Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 3-32 ISSN 0258-655X 8 Michele A. Lucchesi

Aemilius Paulus and Timoleon, no involving Gylippus are framed postu netheless, also presupposes that the lates that the ideal reader is able to ideal reader can recognise the wider interpret so iconic a historical figure relevance of love of riches associated on the basis of a profound historical with Gylippus and Sparta, exploring it knowledge and in light of Plutarch’s as a recurrent theme that runs through interpretation. the series of the Parallel Lives, The Life of Pericles especially in the biographies of the Spartan heroes. In other Lives, Plutarch’s comments on Gylippus assume greater significance. To sum up, these first passages, Let us take the case of the Life of Pericles, which we have discussed, recall very where Plutarch recounts the crucial concisely the defining moments of episodes of Gylippus’ existence (22.4): Gylippus’ life (particularly his role in Cleandrides was the father of the Sicilian expedition and his later Gylippus, who made war against fall), presenting him as a paradigm of the Athenians in Sicily. Nature, military expertise and covetousness. as it were, seems to have pas- The references to Gylippus can be sed love of riches on to him as concretely read with different degrees a congenital disease, because of of understanding (depending on the which he, too, being caught ac- readers’ acquaintance with ancient ting badly, was shamefully ba- history, the various literary sources, nished from Sparta. These facts, Plutarch’s biographies, and so forth), therefore, we have explained in the Life of Lysander10. but do not create strong intratextual connections within the Parallel Lives, The digression about Gylippus is not even with regard to the Spartan inserted into a narrative section where Lives9. Nonetheless, the way in which Plutarch discusses Pericles’ strategy the comparisons and the comments against the Spartans. In particular,

9 In reference to the Parallel Lives, I prefer the term intratextuality to intertextuality, since I consider the whole series a macrotext, that is, a complex semiotic unit formed by different texts (the Lives and the pairs), which maintain their autonomy, but, simultaneously, are in close thematic and formal interrelationship with one another. This definition of macrotext is inspired (with major modifications) by that which M.C orti, 1975, applied to Italo Calvino’s I racconti di Marcovaldo and then G. D’Ippolito, 1991, applied to the entire Plutarchan corpus. 10 Plu. Per. 22.4: οὗτος δ᾽ ἦν πατὴρ Γυλίππου τοῦ περὶ Σικελίαν Ἀθηναίους καταπολεμήσαντος. ἔοικε δ᾽ ὥσπερ συγγενικὸν αὐτῷ προστρίψασθαι νόσημα τὴν φιλαργυρίαν ἡ φύσις, ὑφ᾽ ἧς καὶ αὐτὸς αἰσχρῶς ἐπὶ κακοῖς ἔργοις ἁλοὺς ἐξέπεσε τῆς Σπάρτης. ταῦτα μὲν οὖν ἐν τοῖς περὶ Λυσάνδρου δεδηλώκαμεν. Cf. n. 34, n. 39, and n. 41 of this article. ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 3-32 Gylippus in Plutarch’s Parallel Lives 9

Plutarch claims that Pericles had success who suffered from love of money in avoiding going into open battle (φιλαργυρία) – another key term, syno when the Spartans, led by Pleistoanax nymous with φιλοπλουτία, which we and his advisor Cleandrides, invaded encountered earlier in this article – as and occupied Attica. By bribing the a congenital disease (συγγενικὸν νό two Spartan leaders, Pericles made σημα )12. In this case, therefore, love of them retreat from the plain of Eleusis money (or love of riches) is not viewed (446 BC) (Per. 22.1-3). According to as a moral fault attributed to all of the some authors, Plutarch adds, this was Greek commanders, as in the Life of a recurrent stratagem and every year Timoleon, but as a family characteristic Pericles used to pay ten talents to induce common to Cleandrides and Gylippus. the Spartans to postpone the war, so that the Athenians could have more time to The cross-reference to the Life of prepare for the conflict Per( . 23.2). Lysander, however, also opens up the possibility of a broader and deeper ana While celebrating Pericles’ political lysis of φιλαργυρία/φιλοπλουτία as the shrewdness, Plutarch also directs primary cause of Sparta’s moral deca the readers’ attention towards the dence and subsequent political and consequences faced by the Spartan social weakness. For Plutarch does not rulers. The Spartans levied a very heavy fine on Pleistoanax, who could not seem to inform the readers only about pay it and was consequently exiled11. the completion of an earlier biography Cleandrides, on the other hand, fled where they can find more details about from Sparta and received the death sen Gylippus, but encourages them to examine Pericles and Lysander in light tence in absentia (Per. 22.3). By men 13 tioning Gylippus, Cleandrides’ son, of one another as complementary texts . Plutarch places emphasis on the conti In the Life of Lysander, as we will nuity between different generations of see in the last section of this article, Spartan political and military leaders, Plu tarch offers a more exhaustive

11 On Pleistoanax’ levy, cf. Ephorus, FGrHist 70 F 193 (at Scholia Ar. Nu. 859). 12 Plutarch often described Spartan politics through medical metaphors and images of the body: e.g. Plu. Comp. Agis/Cleom.-T.G./C.G. 44(4).3, Ages. 3.7, 21.10, 30.1-2, 33.3, Comp. Ages.-Pomp. 81(1).2, 82(2).1-3, Lyc. 4.4, 5.3, 8.3, Lys. 22.11, Comp. Lys.-Sull. 39(1).2. 13 On the cross-references inviting to examine the Lives and the pairs in close connection with one another, see T.E. Duff, 2011b, pp. 259-262. On cross-references, cf. also A.G. Nikolaidis, 2005, C.B.R. Pelling, (1979) 2002, pp. 7-10. Attempts to read Lives and pairs together or against one another: J. Beneker, 2005 (Caesar, Pompey, and Crassus together), B. Buszard, 2008 (Pyrrhus-Marius against Alexander-Caesar), J. Mossman, 1992 (Phyrrus against Alexander), C.B.R. Pelling, 2006, 2010, P.A. Stadter, (2010) 2014. Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 3-32 ISSN 0258-655X 10 Michele A. Lucchesi account of how Gylippus tried to steal ver, comments that Lycurgus was not a large sum of the money that Ly concerned about money per se, but sander dispatched to Sparta, after esta about the greed (φιλαργυρία) caused blishing Spartan supremacy in Asia and by it. The Spartans’ solution, therefore, Greece. He also explains how silver was useless, since it was merely based coinage (which bore the forgery of on the fear of the law, while they should an owl because of the Athenians) was have sought to strengthen their souls14. found in Gylippus’ house thanks to a By reading Pericles in connection tip-off from a servant (Lys. 16). More with Lysander, then, one can plausibly importantly, in addition to Gylippus’ infer that the reference to Gylippus and exile after the eruption of the scandal, the Sicilian expedition alludes to the Plutarch describes the reaction of the Athenians’ change of military strategy Spartans (Lys. 17). Being worried that in a later phase of the Peloponnesian Lysander’s silver and gold would ruin War and to their inability to exploit the entire Spartan body politic, altering the Spartan rulers’ love of riches and irremediably Sparta’s traditional aver corruption, something that Pericles sion to luxury (which was reflected in managed to do effectively. In Plutarch’s the Lycurgan constitution), the most view, that is, considering the later crisis prudent (φρονιμώτατοι) of the Spartiates of Sparta, Pericles’ measures were convinced the ephors to introduce an wiser and more far-sighted than those iron currency, which only the state of his successors, and gave Athens could possess, and to threaten the death more chances of victory. Furthermore, penalty to the citizens who accumulated Pericles was right in restraining the money for private use. Plutarch, howe Athenians’ immoderate desire to

14 On the Spartans’ radical rejection of wealth and Lycurgus’ reforms in this matter, see Plu. Agis/Cleom. 5.2, 9.4, 10.2-5, 10.8, 31(10).2, Lyc. 8-10, 13.5-7, 19.2-3, 19.11, 24.2-4, Comp. Lyc.-Num. 23(1).7, 24(2).10-11, Lys. 30.7. On the attempt of Agis and Cleomenes to restore the Lycurgan austerity and to redistribute the land, see Plu. Agis/Cleom. 4.2, 6.1-2, 7.2-3, 8, 19.7, 31(10).7-11, 33(12).4-5, Comp. Agis/Cleom.-T.G./C.G. 42(2).4. On Sparta and luxury, cf. also n. 7 of this article. In general, on property and wealth in Sparta, cf. Alc. I 122d-123b, Ar. Pol. 2.1269b21-32, 2.1270a11-29, 2.1271a3-5, 2.1271b10-17, Pl. Lg. 3.696a-b, R. 8.547b-d, 8.548a-b, 8.549c-d, 8.550d-551b, Plb. 6.45.3-4, 6.46.6- 8, 6.48.2-8, X. Lac. 7. Among modern scholars, however, there is no consensus on the literary evidence regarding Sparta’s disdain for coinage. S. Hodkinson, 2000, especially pp. 155-182, has very convincingly argued that the literary sources (even retrospectively) ‘invented’ the tradition of Spartan prohibitions against currency because of the political turmoil at the beginning of the fourth century BC. A reassessment of this complex question suggests a situation of increasing inequality in property ownership and wealth among the Spartiates. Cf. also J. Christien, 2002, pp. 172-185, T.J. Figueira, 2002, pp. 138-160. On Plutarch and wealth, see P. Desideri, 1985, C.B.R. Pelling, forthcoming. ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 3-32 Gylippus in Plutarch’s Parallel Lives 11 conquer new territories (Per. 21.1-2), fourth century BC. Yet, this also an impulse that proved disastrous on suggests that Sparta’s decline, which the occasion of the enterprise in Sicily was not unavoidable, derived from the (cf. Nic. 12.1-2)15. Spartans’ difficulty to adjust to their On the other hand, by highlighting new role as hegemonic leaders of the that both Cleandrides and Gylippus Greek world, a theme that Plutarch had the same vice of φιλαργυρία and develops in the Spartan Lives and met the same fate, Plutarch also seems may be further expanded through the to urge the readers to reflect on how comparison with fifth century Sparta differently the Spartans responded to as much as with Periclean Athens. the same type of threat, which came The analysis of Per. 22.4 allows us from outside the city. While Pericles’ to draw some conclusions. While in the money only influenced Cleandrides’ passages examined in the first part of decisions, in the case of Gylippus this article the references to Gylippus foreign money (perhaps even Athenian have the nature of examples and a money) produced a major modification moralistic tone, in the Life of Pericles of the Spartan customs and broke Gylippus’ vicissitudes are viewed mo the unity among the citizens, which re closely in their historical context, Lycurgus’ polity had maintained for though still from a moral perspective. centuries16. Thus, in Pericles’s time In this case too, it is difficult to Spartan society was stronger and rea imagine whether and to what extent dier to defend its values than in the the concrete audience of the Lives

15 As P.A. Stadter, (1975) 1995, p. 160 thoughtfully noticed, honesty and caution in war are two of the qualities that characterised Pericles as much as Fabius, on which Plutarch based the parallelism of the two Lives. 16 In the Spartan Lives, the use of foreign money to conduct military operations abroad, even at the cost of betraying the traditional Spartan values, constitutes an extremely important issue with regard to the fourth century BC. See, Plu. Ages. 9.5-6 (the creation of a cavalry force at Ephesus with the help of the rich), 10.6-8 (the satrap Tithraustes gave Agesilaus money to leave Lydia), 11 (the controversial relationship with Spithridates), 35.6 (Agesilaus’ search for money to continue the war against Thebe), 36.2 (Agesilaus fought as a mercenary for the Egyptian Tachus), 40.2 (Agesilaus accepted money from Nectanebo II), Lys. 2.8 (the anecdote of the dresses offered by Dionysius), 4 (Cyrus granted the ‘economic means’ for the Spartan fleet), 6.4-8 (Callicratidas’ request for money from Cyrus), 9.1 (Cyrus gave Lysander money for the fleet). On the same topic, cf. also Plu. Agis/Cleom. 27(6).2 (Cratesicleia financed Cleomenes’ campaign against the Achaeans), 40(19).8 (Cleomenes offered Aratus money to leave the custody of Acrocorinth), 44(23).1 (Cleomenes freed numerous Helots in exchange for money so as to continue the war), 48(27).1-4 (importance of money for war). Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 3-32 ISSN 0258-655X 12 Michele A. Lucchesi was capable of a careful and nuanced concepts such as φιλαργυρία helps the reading of the text, remembering implied reader recognise Gylippus’ and taking into account Plutarch’s function as ‘intratextual connector’ evaluation of Gylippus’ actions and between different Lives, which can their effects in the Life of Lysander. We stimulate the recollection of historical may assume that some actual readers information as much as of Plutarch’s did have a previous knowledge of fifth- reading of it. The cross-reference, in this fourth century Sparta as much as of respect, might even appear redundant. Plutarch’s opinion about its hegemony Its presence, nonetheless, can also ma and later economic, social, and political ke us reconstruct a second type of difficulties, but others may not have had abstract reader in addition to the ideal the same level of competence. Besides, recipient of the Life: a virtual addressee, the same applies to modern readers too. a narratological category that implies The cross-reference, moreover, does the Roman politician Sosius Senecio not provide any certainty about the (cf. Dem. 1.1, Dion 1.1, Thes. 1.1), but publication of the Life of Lysander or the is certainly broader than the historically actual readers’ real chance of reading it determined addressee of the Parallel before the Life of Pericles, since it simply Lives18. Indeed, as already suggested, it seems to indicate the phase of writing up. seems unlikely that such an addressee is Indeed, the Lives’ period of composition someone who does not know anything does not necessarily coincide with the 17 about the Life of Lysander and needs time of their release . to be advised to read it. Rather, the Just as Comp. Aem.-Tim. 41(2).7, first person plural verb δεδηλώκαμεν however, the text of Per. 22.4 also appears to bind together the author and implies an ideal reader who is perfectly the addressee (‘I’ and ‘you’), and serves able to interpret and develop the as a reminder of the common reflection correlation between Cleandrides and made elsewhere rather than as a form of Gylippus, gleaning Plutarch’s insight pluralis maiestatis meaning the author’s into the later development of Spartan self19. The presumed addressee, then, history in order to make a more accurate will activate the intratextual connection assessment of the Life of Pericles. established by the cross-reference and The employment of key words and will combine Plutarch’s analysis of

17 See A.G. Nikolaidis, 2005, 286-287, C.B.R. Pelling, (1979) 2002, p. 9. 18 On the presumed addressee, see W. Schmid, 2010, pp. 54-56. 19 In this case, the presumed addressee merges with the extradiegetic narratee; cf. G. Genette, 1983, pp. 260. C.B.R. Pelling, 2002, pp. 267-282 has examined many examples of complicity between extradiegetic narrator and narratee. ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 3-32 Gylippus in Plutarch’s Parallel Lives 13

Gylippus in the Life of Lysander with successes as the only strategos of the that of Cleandrides in the Life of Pericles. Athenians, after Alcibiades’ departure This, on the one hand, confirms that and Lamacus’ death (Nic. 18.9): the various possibilities (considering At that time, Gylippus, too, the ideal reader and the presumed who was sailing from Sparta to addressee) of reading the two Lives help the Syracusans, as he heard in light of one another are embedded during his journey their being in Plutarch’s text. On the other hand, walled off and their difficulties, the relationship between author and even so completed the rest of the implied addressee is not merely infor route, thinking, on the one hand, ma tive or didactic, nor includes step- that Sicily had already been by-step instructions, but leaves the taken and, on the other hand, that he would guard the cities of the addressee ample freedom to verify and Italiotes, if that could happen in investigate further the results of the some way21. author’s historical research and moral evaluation. Such a strategy is confirmed Gylippus’ ‘sudden’ appearance in by the choice of not contrasting explicitly the Life is no surprise, considering that the Spartans’ handling of wealth before also in other biographies secondary and after the Peloponnesian War. characters who play an important role in the events narrated are presented in a The Life of Nicias similar fashion (e.g. Alcibiades in Ages. We can now turn to the Life of 3.1 and Lys. 3.1). In the Life of Nicias, Nicias, where Gylippus is portrayed as moreover, one may safely assume that Nicias’ antagonist during the Sicilian some knowledge of Thucydides seems expedition20. Gylippus is introduced to be taken for granted in the audience, into the narrative in medias res, while as Pelling has convincingly argued22. Plu tarch discusses Nicias’ initial Nonetheless, there is a correspondence

20 According to C. Jones, (1966) 1995, pp. 106-111 (cf. also A.G. Nikolaidis, 2005, pp. 285-288) the Lives of Nicias and Crassus were probably published late in the series, after Lycurgus-Numa, Lysander-Sulla, and Agesilaus-Pompey, more or less in the same period as Aemilius Paulus-Timoleon. On Gylippus as Nicias’ antagonist, see G. Vanotti, 2005, pp. 452-453. On Plutarch’s interpretation of Nicias, see C.D. Hamilton, 1992, pp. 4213-4221, A.G. Nikolaidis, 1988, L. Piccirilli, 1990, F. Titchener, 1991, 1996, 2000, 2016. For a comparison between the Life of Nicias and Plutarch’s historical sources, see L. Piccirilli, 1993, pp. xii-xiii and xvi-xxviii, G. Vanotti, 2005. 21 Plu. Nic. 18.9: ὅπου καὶ Γύλιππος ἐκ Λακεδαίμονος πλέων βοηθὸς αὐτοῖς, ὡς ἤκουσε κατὰ πλοῦν τὸν ἀποτειχισμὸν καὶ τὰς ἀπορίας, οὕτως ἔπλει τὸ λοιπὸν ὡς ἐχομένης μὲν ἤδη τῆς Σικελίας, Ἰταλιώταις δὲ τὰς πόλεις διαφυλάξων, εἰ καὶ τοῦτό πως ἐγγένοιτο. 22 See C.B.R. Pelling, (1992) 2002, pp. 117-134. Cf. also F. Titchener, 2016, pp. 105-106. Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 3-32 ISSN 0258-655X 14 Michele A. Lucchesi between Nicias’ indifference towards the reaction of the Athenian soldiers such a quiet ‘entrance on stage’ and his was of sarcastic derision. In particular, absolute confidence that he would soon they mocked Gylippus’ being alone obtain the capitulation of Syracuse, with his threadbare cloak (τρίβων) an atypical moment of courage that and staff (βακτηρία), and made fun of Plutarch does not hesitate to define his hair, which was shorter than that as contrary to Nicias’ nature (cf. Nic. of the Spartan prisoners of Sphacteria, 18.11: ὁ δὲ Νικίας εὐθὺς αὐτὸς καὶ παρὰ who were also stronger than him (Nic. φύσιν ὑπὸ τῆς ἐν τῷ παρόντι ῥύμης καὶ 19.4)23. The Siceliotes, too, initially held τύχης ἀνατεθαρρηκώς), which was Gylippus in no esteem (Nic. 19.5-6): usually characterised by defeatism and Timaeus (FGrHist 566 F cowardice (cf. Nic. 1.2, 2.5, 7.3, 8.2, 100a) says that the Siceliotes, 10.6, 11.1, 12.5, 14.2, 16.9). Being too, made no account of Gylip- completely ignored, Gylippus could pus, later on, indeed, when they land in a secure location and could start accused his despicable covetous- assembling a large army, something that ness and stinginess, and, on the greatly surprised even the Syracusans, other hand, when they jeered at who were no longer expecting to receive his threadbare cloak and hair as help (Nic. 18.11-12). they saw him for the first time. Then, however, Timaeus says Not only Nicias, however, but also that, as Gylippus appeared like the Athenian troops and the Siceliotes an owl, many flew to him, join- underestimated Gylippus. When first ing the army willingly. And this Gongylus from Corinth and then a latter statement is more truthful messenger from Gylippus himself than the first one. For perceiving announced that the Spartan general the symbol and the reputation of was coming in support of Syracuse, the Sparta in the staff and the cloak, Syracusans found new hope and took they banded together. Not only up their arms, preparing themselves Thucydides, but also Philistus, for fighting again (Nic. 19.1-2). Yet, who was a Syracusan and an eye- when Gylippus sent a herald to the witness of the events, says that the 24 Athenians, asking them to leave Sicily, whole achievement is due to him .

23 Cf. Plu. Nic. 7.1, 8.1, and especially 10.8: the captives were members of the noblest and most powerful Spartan families. 24 Plu. Nic. 19.5-6: Τίμαιος δὲ καὶ τοὺς Σικελιώτας φησὶν ἐν μηδενὶ λόγῳ ποιεῖσθαι τὸν Γύλιππον, ὕστερον μὲν αἰσχροκέρδειαν αὐτοῦ καὶ μικρολογίαν καταγνόντας, ὡς δὲ πρῶτον ὤφθη, σκώπτοντας εἰς τὸν τρίβωνα καὶ τὴν κόμην. εἶτα μέντοι φησὶν αὐτὸς, ὅτι τῷ Γυλίππῳ φανέντι καθάπερ γλαυκὶ πολλοὶ προσέπτησαν ἑτοίμως ‹συ›στρατευόμενοι. καὶ ταῦτα τῶν πρώτων ἀληθέστερά εἰσιν· ἐν γὰρ τῇ βακτηρίᾳ καὶ τῷ τρίβωνι τὸ σύμβολον ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 3-32 Gylippus in Plutarch’s Parallel Lives 15

As one can notice, in chapter 9 of the can infer, then, that Plutarch shows the Life of Nicias Plutarch draws Gylippus’ Athenians misreading Gylippus’ signs portrait, but he does it indirectly from of ‘Spartanness’ or, worse, not worry his opponents’ point of view. Through ing about them at all, a mistake for the focalisation of the narrative on the which they later paid a huge price. Athenians the readers are reminded of 25 By describing the reaction of the some typically Spartan features . In Siceliotes, conversely, Plutarch sum antiquity, both a threadbare cloak and marises Gylippus’ story. As in other a staff represented the symbols of the texts scrutinised in this article, here Spartan soldiers’ frugality and moral too the usual topic of Gylippus’ greed strength, as is often pointed out in the 26 is mentioned. The terms employed by Parallel Lives . Similarly, the custom Plutarch are again very significant, as of keeping long hair and beard was first they echo the Spartan Lives. While in prescribed by Lycurgus to the soldiers Plutarch’s works αἰσχροκέρδεια (despi (later it became a tradition) in order cable covetousness) is not exclusively to make “the handsome more comely asso ciated with Spartan characters, on and the ugly more terrible” (τοὺς the contrary, μικρολογία (stinginess) μὲν καλοὺς εὐπρεπεστέρους, τοὺς δὲ – a concept on which Plutarch often αἰσχροὺς φοβερωτέρους), as we can concentrates his attention – is repea read in the Life of Lycurgus (22.2) and tedly related to the image of Sparta 27 in the Life of Lysander (1.1-3) . One and the Spartans28. In the Life of Age

καὶ τὸ ἀξίωμα τῆς Σπάρτης καθορῶντες συνίσταντο, κἀκείνου τὸ πᾶν ἔργον γεγονέναι φησὶν οὐ Θουκυδίδης μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ Φίλιστος, ἀνὴρ Συρακούσιος καὶ τῶν πραγμάτων ὁρατὴς γενόμενος. See n. 34, n. 39, and n. 41 of this article. 25 Other instances of Plutarch’s use of focalisation to explore cognition (what the characters see and understand) and emotion (how they react) and to encourage the readers’ interpretative reflection is examined by C.B.R.P elling, 2009, pp. 512-515 and 522-526. 26 On the threadbare cloak as a Spartan symbol, see Plu. Ages. 14.2, 30.3 (the dirty cloaks of the Spartan ‘fearful’), Agis/Cleom. 37.7, Lyc. 30.2. On the staff, see Plu. Lyc. 11.2 and 11.10, Apophth. Lac. 227 A (Lycurgus hit Alcander with his staff). Cf. also Plu. Phoc. 10.1: Archibiades the ‘Laconizer’ always had long beard and wore a threadbare cloak. On other historical sources for these Spartan symbols of command, see L. Piccirilli, 1993, p. 293. Cf. also S. Hornblower, (2000) 2011. 27 See also Plu. Apophth. Lac. 228 E and X. Lac. 11.3. Cf. the ephors forbidding the Spartans to wear moustache: Plu. Agis/Cleom. 30(9).3, De ser. num. vind. 550 B. 28 Apart from the Life of Nicias, αἰσχροκέρδεια occurs only in Plu. Cat. Min. 52.8 and De Stoic. rep. 1046 C. Historical figures characterised by μικρολογία: Plu. Aem. 12.6, 23.9 (Perseus), Alex. 69.2 (Artaxerxes III Ochus), Brut. 39.2 (the Caesarians) Cat. Ma. 5.1, 5.7 (Cato the Elder), Cat. Mi. 22.3 (Catiline), Crass. 6.6 (Crassus), Galb. 3.2 (Galba), 19.3 Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 3-32 ISSN 0258-655X 16 Michele A. Lucchesi silaus, we can read that, after losing the image of the Siceliotes joining Spithridates’ support in Asia, Agesilaus Gylippus just as birds flying to an owl. was ashamed of the poor reputation of Considering that the owl is one of the stinginess and illiberality (μικρολογία few animals that attack and eat their καὶ ἀνελευθερία), which was attached own kind, as Plutarch argues in the Li to him as much as to Sparta (Ages. fe of Romulus (9.6) and, less clearly, 11.5). Similarly, as we have already in the Life of Demosthenes (26.6), this anticipated, in the Life of Cleomenes can be regarded as a powerful metaphor stinginess (μικρολογία) and greed for Sparta’s aggressive imperialism, (πλεονεξία) are considered among the its unwitting victims among the other main causes of the crisis of Sparta in Greek states, and its collapse provoked the fourth century BC. Finally, the re by the same factors that had made it rise. semblance with an owl, too, can be Before Lysander or Agesilaus, that considered a veiled reference to the is, Gylippus too moved from Sparta scandal of the silver coins, which Gy to undertake an enterprise abroad (cf. lippus stole from Lysander’s booty29. Lyc. 30.5), which was successful from Indeed, by placing the signs of Gy a military perspective, but had also lippus’ moral ambiguity together with negative consequences for the Greeks as the symbols of the Spartans’ autho much as for Sparta30. The values of the ritative power and rigorous virtue (once Lycurgan tradition, which permeated again, the cloak and the staff), which Spartan society, and the Spartan lifestyle the Siceliotes, unlike the Athenians, could not be maintained intact and pure recognised and trustfully followed, in non-Spartan contexts nor could be Plutarch allusively evokes in a few lines imposed to non-Spartan populations. a theme explored in greater detail in the Especially in times of war, the strict Spartan Lives: Sparta’s controversial Spartan code of conduct could even be hegemony over the Hellenic world. counterproductive to Sparta itself. For This hypothesis can be confirmed by instance, in Asia the unscrupulous and

(Nero), Luc. 17.6 (the Roman soldiers), Them. 5.1 (Themistocles). Critical reflection on μικρολογία: Plu. Comp. Arist.-Cat. Ma. 31(4).3, Pel. 3.2, De adulat. 56 C, 60 E, 74 B, De Alex. fort. virt. 333 F, 337 C, Amat. 762 C, De cup. div. 525 E-F, 526 C, De cur. 515 E, De Herod. mal. 859 E (reference to Sparta), Plat. quaest. 1002 E, De prof. virt. 82 B, Quaest. conv. 634 B, 703 B, 706 B, De tuend. san. 123 C, 125 E, 137 C, De virt. mor. 445 A. 29 See pp. 23-25. 30 In this regard, it is noteworthy that in the Life of Nicias Plutarch omits to discuss how the Spartans, following Alcibiades’ suggestion, decided to send Gylippus to Sicily; cf. Alc. 23.2. In the Life of Nicias, then, the narrative leaves it unclear whether Gylippus’ intervention was only due to his decision or whether it was part of a Spartan strategy. ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 3-32 Gylippus in Plutarch’s Parallel Lives 17 in many respects un-Spartan attitude of the destiny of the Greeks, Gylippus’ Lysander and Agesilaus about raising vicissitudes anticipated the major political funds for war, establishing alliances and cultural transformations of the period with the Persians, and subjugating other of Lysander and Agesilaus as much as Greek cities through the oligarchic Sparta’s later decadence. Furthermore, by regimes of the harmosts certainly focusing on the point of view of Nicias, contrasted with Callicratidas’ virtuous the Athenians, and the Siceliotes, Plutarch (and perfectly Spartan) style of command highlights their fault of misjudging (cf. Lys. 3-4, 6-9, 13-14, and Ages. 9-12). Gylippus, without fully understanding Yet, unlike Callicratidas, Lysander and the risks that his involvement in the Agesilaus – as much as Gylippus – were Sicilian conflict posed32. As we shall see, successful31. In Plutarch’s view, this the narrative will elucidate these topics in proves that Lycurgus’ aim was not to the last part of the Life of Nicias. make Sparta govern other cities, despite Thanks to his great military expe the Greek cities’ desire to be ruled by rience (ἐμπειρία), Gylippus managed the Spartans and to have Spartan leaders to reorganise the Syracusan troops and (ἡγεμόνες) (Lyc. 30.4-31.1). Indeed, from led them to a first victory by simply the beginning Sparta’s hegemony’s “taste modifying their tactics. Subsequently, was unpleasant and bitter” (εὐθὺς γὰρ ἦν he went from city to city to create τὸ γεῦμα δυσχερὲς καὶ πικρόν, Lys. 13.9). a large coalition against the Athe Thus, in the Life of Nicias the nians (Nic. 19.7-10). Despite the first description of the first impression successes (especially the conquest of created by Gylippus provides already Plemmyrium), however, many Syra an interpretive key to some critical cusans were tired of and annoyed with issues that are developed in the course Gylippus (Nic. 21.5). In fact, these of the narration. In particular, it seems diffi culties of relationship, which re to suggest that in a crucial phase of the mained present on the Syracusan side Peloponnesian war, which changed throughout the hostilities (cf. Nic. 26.1),

31 On the successes and moral ambivalence of Agesilaus and Lysander in Plutarch, see E. Alexiou, 2010, C. Bearzot, 2004a, pp. 15-30, 2004b, pp. 127-156, 2005, J.M. Candau Morón, 2000, T.E. Duff, 1999, pp. 161-204, E. Luppino, 1990, C.B.R. Pelling, (1988) 2002, pp. 292-297, P.A. Stadter, (1992) 2014a, pp. 258-269. 32 In Lys. 1 and Ages. 2, too, the portraits of Lysander and Agesilaus respectively are presented through internal focalisations and are characterised by the observers’ difficulty in pinning down the two protagonists’ exterior qualities (e.g. see the difficult identification of Lysander’s statue at Delphi and Agesilaus’ lack of images). These initial false impressions correspond to the Greeks’ inability to understand and oppose the rule of Lysander and Agesilaus; cf. T.E. Duff, 1999, pp. 162-165. Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 3-32 ISSN 0258-655X 18 Michele A. Lucchesi did not make Nicias and the Athenians strategoi and bringing them to Sparta, avoid their reverse. moreover, forms a correspondence with the episode of the prisoners of Towards the end of the final battle Sphacte ria, something that revels how between Athenians and Siceliotes, while different motivations were from Nicias’ the Athenians are being slaughtered at desire of peace and what different an the river Asinarus, Nicias and Gylippus outcome similar situations produced come into direct contact for the first for the Athenians and the Spartans (Nic. time in the Life. Plutarch writes that 7-9). Gylippus, therefore, fits well in the Nicias pleaded for mercy and begged Life as Nicias’ Spartan counterpart: his Gylippus to treat the Athenians with behaviour also displays problematic traits moderation and gentleness (μετρίως analogous to those of the other characters. καὶ πρᾴως), just as the Athenians had previously done with the Spartans when Gylippus could not carry out his plan they concluded the peace treaty (Nic. about the Athenian captives as he would 9.4-9). Despite being moved by Nicias’ have desired, since the Syracusans harshly words, Plutarch adds, the real reason rejected his proposal. As Plutarch claims, that drove Gylippus to spare Nicias’ life not only did they become arrogant after and to stop the massacre was a craving defeating the Athenians, but also they did for personal glory (δόξα) (Nic. 27.5-6). not easily tolerate Gylippus’ roughness (τραχύτης) and the Spartan style of Indeed, throughout the Lives of Nicias authority (τὸ Λακωνικὸν τῆς ἐπιστασίας) and Crassus the theme of the search for during the war (Nic. 28.3). By focalising glory is inextricably intertwined with again the narrative on the Syracusans, that of the self-images and façades therefore, Plutarch completes the outline which the various characters project to of Gylippus’ ‘Spartanness’, which started or create of one another, generating a at Nic. 19, and emphasises how the net of reciprocal hopes, ambitions, false Spartan code of conduct was incompatible expectations, and frustrations33. As we with a different culture. Indeed, in non- saw earlier in respect to his arrival in Spartan environments such as Syracuse Sicily, Gylippus’ exterior image con and Sicily, the traditional Spartan virtues veyed an erroneous impression to the were perceived as unbearable and were observers. His longing for δόξα too, consequently rejected. then, continues this thematic thread. The Interestingly, Plutarch follows up reference to keeping alive the Athenian on the Syracusans’ criticism against

33 See Plu. Nic. 4.1, 5.3, 6.1-2, 6.7, 8.5, 9.8, 11.1, 11.3, 12.5, 15.2, 18.10, 20.7, 21.6, 23.5, 26.5, 30.3, Crass. 6.5, 7.2, 7.7, 10.1, 10.8, 11.10, 21.6, 21.9, 23.7, 24.1, 26.6, 33.8, Comp. Nic.-Crass. 36(3).5, 38(5).3.

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 3-32 Gylippus in Plutarch’s Parallel Lives 19

Gylippus with the scandal of Lysander’s amined with greater precision in booty and Gylippus’ embezzlement of the Life of Lysander35. money (Nic. 28.4): Plutarch resumes the idea of Gy As Timaeus (FGrHist 566 lippus’ greed, which is present already 34 F 100b) says, the Syracusans at Nic. 19.4, as we saw earlier. In this accused Gylippus of a certain case too, Plutarch’s focus of attention stinginess and greed, an inher- is not only Gylippus but also Sparta. ited infirmity because of which For the conclusion of Gylippus’ story his father Cleandrides too, be- is narrated to discuss the aftermath of ing convicted of bribery, fled the the Sicilian expedition, as is proven country, and he himself, having abstracted thirty out of the thou- by the fact that at Nic. 28.5-6 we also sand talents that Lysander sent to learn about the death of Demosthenes Sparta, and having hidden them and Nicias, and at Nic. 29-30 about under the roof of his house, af- the fate of the Athenian soldiers and ter being later denounced, most the reaction of the Athenian citizens to shamefully forfeited everything. the news of their army’s annihilation. These things, however, are ex- Furthermore, by recalling to memory

34 In the Life of Nicias as much as in the synkrisis between Aemilius Paulus and Timoleon, as seen earlier in this article, Plutarch mentions Timaeus’ historical work, whose negative tone probably reverberates across the Lives. Yet Timaeus’ FGrHist 566 F 100c at Comp. Aem.-Tim. 41(2).4, FGrHist 566 F 100a at Nic. 19.5, and FGrHist 566 F 100b at Nic. 28.4, despite expressing very similar ideas and moral judgment on Gylippus and his relationship with the Syracusans, also show substantial differences of content (Gylippus banned from Syracuse vs Gylippus exiled from Sparta) and present different key terms (in particular, note φιλοπλουτία and ἀπληστία in Comp. Aem.-Tim. 41(2).4 vs αἰσχροκέρδεια and μικρολογία in Nic. 19.5 vs μικρολογία and πλεονεξία in Nic. 28.4). Similarly, Nic. 28.4 and Per. 22.3-4 (for which, too, Plutarch probably used Timaeus), the two passages that narrate Cleandrides’ conviction, differ markedly: Cleandrides’ escape vs Cleandrides’ escape and death sentence in absentia; ἀρρώστημα πατρῷον vs συγγενικὸν νόσημα. This suggests that Plutarch re-elaborated Timaeus’ text and variously adapted it to his biographies, depending on the context and purpose of each target section. The Timaean fragments within the Lives, therefore, should be considered quite loose references rather than verbatim quotations. See also n. 39 and n. 41 of this article. On Plutarch’s knowledge and use of Timaeus, see J.M. Candau Morón, 2004/2005, 2009, 2013, pp. 30-35, F. Muccioli, 2000. 35 Plu. Nic. 28.4: ὡς δὲ Τίμαιός φησι, καὶ μικρολογίαν τινὰ καὶ πλεονεξίαν κατεγνωκότες, ἀρρώστημα πατρῷον, ἐφ᾽ ᾧ καὶ Κλεανδρίδης ὁ πατὴρ αὐτοῦ δώρων ἁλοὺς ἔφυγε, καὶ οὗτος αὐτός, ἀπὸ τῶν χιλίων ταλάντων ἃ Λύσανδρος ἔπεμψεν εἰς Σπάρτην ὑφελόμενος τριάκοντα καὶ κρύψας ὑπὸ τὸν ὄροφον τῆς οἰκίας, εἶτα μηνυθείς, αἴσχιστα πάντων ἐξέπεσεν. ἀλλὰ ταῦτα μὲν ἐν τῷ Λυσάνδρου βίῳ μᾶλλον διηκρίβωται. Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 3-32 ISSN 0258-655X 20 Michele A. Lucchesi

Gylippus’ father Cleandrides, Plutarch connection between Gylippus’ story aims to explain the motivation behind and Spartan history, and Plutarch’s Gylippus’ behaviour, whereas at Per. interpretation of them. Furthermore, 22.3-4 he places more emphasis on the lack of background information Cleandrides and the charge of bribery, on Gylippus, the employment of key which Gylippus also had to face. words and concepts specifically related Indeed, Cleandrides’ conviction and to Sparta’s society, culture, and politics, the definition of Gylippus’ μικρολογία the presence of signs and metaphors and πλεονεξία as inherited (πατρῷον, evocative of the Spartan world, the which can also mean ‘of the fathers’ reference to Cleandrides and the cross- or ‘ancestral’) hint that the causes of reference to the Life of Lysander are all Gylippus’ moral weakness concerning textual elements that invite a process of money derived from and were embedded ‘decoding’ and interpretation in light of in Spartan culture, a theme that the Plutarch’s view of Sparta. The various readers are encouraged to explore possibilities offered by such a process further by reading the Life of Lysander. can be fully actualised by the ideal Gylippus’ trajectory, then, if inserted into reader, as s/he is completely familiar the broader context of Spartan history, with the Parallel Lives and is able to as the cross-reference invites the readers read them in combination with one to do, can be considered the symbol another, following the intratextual links of the ephemeral nature of Sparta’s established by the character Gylippus. imperialism, which was destined to cause Sparta’s social, political, and As in the similar case of Per. 22.4, institutional crisis because of its intrinsic nonetheless, the cross-reference also nature. Sparta was not well equipped to entails a virtual addressee, whom Plu use money and riches nor to become a tarch advises to continue studying Gy hegemonic state36. Ultimately, then, lippus and Sparta through the Life of put in a wider perspective, the victory Lysander. In this regard, the passive verb against the Athenians in Sicily did not διηκρίβωται conveys a lower sense of yield the Spartans any long-term benefit. complicity between the narrator and the Analogously to the Life of Pericles, narratee than that of the cross-reference the analysis of the Life of Nicias in the Life of Pericles, where Plutarch performed so far also shows that the uses the plural form δεδηλώκαμεν. Yet numerous references to Gylippus imply διηκρίβωται expresses a greater need for an ideal reader capable of activating the addressee to elicit the information his/her prior knowledge of the facts so contained in the Life of Lysander so as as to understand all of the aspects of the to integrate his/her supposedly imperfect

36 Cf. pp. 10-11 and 22-25. ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 3-32 Gylippus in Plutarch’s Parallel Lives 21 knowledge. Plutarch’s text, therefore, ing taken a large amount of silver creates a distance between the virtual from each, sewed them up again, addressee and the ideal reader, which not knowing that there was a small corresponds to two slightly different levels tablet in each sack indicating its and modes of reading and understanding. sum. After coming to Sparta, he hid what he had stolen under the The Life of Lysander tiling of his house, but handed over the sacks to the ephors and Finally, let us move to the Life of showed the seals. When, however, Lysander, the biography where Plutarch the ephors opened the sacks and provides a more detailed account of counted the silver, its amount did Gylippus’ involvement in the scandal not match the written notes and the of Lysander’s booty (Lys. 16-17.1): fact perplexed them, until a servant After settling these matters, of Gylippus, speaking in riddles, Lysan der himself sailed away to pointed out to them that many Thrace, but what remained of the owls were sleeping under the til- money and all the gifts, and crowns ing. For because of the Athenians which he had himself received the mark of most of the coinage (since many people, as was natu- of the time, as it seems, was owls. ral, offered presents to a man who Gylippus, therefore, having committed so disgraceful and ignoble had the greatest power and was, in an act in addition to his previous a manner, master of the Hellenic brilliant and great deeds, went into world), he dispatched to Sparta by voluntary exile from Sparta37. Gylippus, who had held command in Sicily. Gylippus, however, as it We have already illustrated the is said, having undone the seams political and social repercussions of of the sacks at the bottom and hav- Lysander’s decision to send to Sparta the

37 Plu. Lys. 16-17.1: ὁ δὲ Λύσανδρος ἀπὸ τούτων γενόμενος, αὐτὸς μὲν ἐπὶ Θρᾴκης ἐξέπλευσε, τῶν δὲ χρημάτων τὰ περιόντα, καὶ ὅσας δωρεὰς αὐτὸς ἢ στεφάνους ἐδέξατο, πολλῶν ὡς εἰκός διδόντων ἀνδρὶ δυνατωτάτῳ καὶ τρόπον τινὰ κυρίῳ τῆς Ἑλλάδος, ἀπέστειλεν εἰς Λακεδαίμονα διὰ Γυλίππου τοῦ στρατηγήσαντος περὶ Σικελίαν. ὁ δέ ὡς λέγεται τὰς ῥαφὰς τῶν ἀγγείων κάτωθεν ἀναλύσας, καὶ ἀφελὼν συχνὸν ἀργύριον ἐξ ἑκάστου, πάλιν συνέρραψεν, ἀγνοήσας ὅτι γραμματίδιον ἐνῆν ἑκάστῳ τὸν ἀριθμὸν σημαῖνον. ἐλθὼν δὲ εἰς Σπάρτην, ἃ μὲν ὑφῄρητο κατέκρυψεν ὑπὸ τὸν κέραμον τῆς οἰκίας, τὰ δὲ ἀγγεῖα παρέδωκε τοῖς ἐφόροις καὶ τὰς σφραγῖδας ἐπέδειξεν. ἐπεὶ δὲ ἀνοιξάντων καὶ ἀριθμούντων διεφώνει πρὸς τὰ γράμματα τὸ πλῆθος τοῦ ἀργυρίου καὶ παρεῖχε τοῖς ἐφόροις ἀπορίαν τὸ πρᾶγμα, φράζει θεράπων τοῦ Γυλίππου πρὸς αὐτοὺς αἰνιξάμενος ὑπὸ τῷ κεράμῳ κοιτάζεσθαι πολλὰς γλαῦκας· ἦν γάρ ὡς ἔοικε τὸ χάραγμα τοῦ πλείστου τότε νομίσματος διὰ τοὺς Ἀθηναίους γλαῦκες. ὁ μὲν οὖν Γύλιππος αἰσχρὸν οὕτω καὶ ἀγεννὲς ἔργον ἐπὶ λαμπροῖς τοῖς ἔμπροσθεν καὶ μεγάλοις ἐργασάμενος, μετέστησεν ἑαυτὸν ἐκ Λακεδαίμονος. Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 3-32 ISSN 0258-655X 22 Michele A. Lucchesi war booty captured during his military vices such as μικρολογία, πλεονεξία, campaigns and how insufficient Plutarch φιλαργυρία, or φιλοπλουτία, which judged the Spartiates’ countermeasure, constitute his defining traits in otherLives that is, the iron currency38. Now we (Comp. Aem.-Tim. 41(2).4, Per. 22.4, Nic. can concentrate our attention on some 19.4 and 28.4). This can be elucidated aspects of the text and the way in which by the fact that, as we saw earlier in Gylippus is portrayed. this article, in the Spartan Lives these As in all of the other passages that we concepts are employed to determine what have examined, in the Life of Lysander causes and effects Lysander’s actions too Plutarch introduces Gylippus into had on Sparta. In the Life of Lysander, the narrative without providing many that is, the focus remains on Sparta and background details, except for the brief the Spartans’ problematic relationship mention of his command in Sicily and with money and wealth. Unlike the non- the generic “previous great deeds”. Once Spartan biographies, here Plutarch does again, then, the readers are expected to not need to represent Gylippus with have a sufficient historical knowledge specifically Spartan characteristics nor to be able to identify Gylippus. Yet, to make him recognisable as a symbol while the sequence of Gylippus’ actions of ‘Spartanness’, since he is already an and his theft of the booty money are integral part and expression of Spartan described with great accuracy, Plutarch society. Indeed, the Spartans’ faults and does not attribute to the Spartan strategos weaknesses are naturally Gylippus’ too39.

38 See pp. 10-11 and 20. For an analysis of Plutarch’s Lives of Lysander and Sulla, see E. Alexiou, 2010, J.M. Candau Morón, 2000, T.E. Duff, 1999, 161-204, F. Muccioli, 2005, C.B.R. Pelling, (1988) 2002, pp. 292-297, D.A. Russell, (1966) 1995, pp. 90-94, P.A. Stadter, (1992) 2014a, pp. 258-269. 39 With regard to the terminology used by Plutarch to identify Gylippus, we might also try to view the differences between the Life of Lysander and the non-Spartan biographies as due to the composition process of the Lives. First came the analysis of the crisis of Sparta in the Spartan Lives, where Plutarch closely related (and ‘bound’) certain words and concepts to the Spartan protagonists and Spartan society, but not to Gylippus, who only has a marginal role in the narrative of Lysander. Then came the connection between Gylippus and Sparta in non-Spartan biographies through meaningful terms already employed in the Spartan Lives. This would entail that the Spartan Lives, in particular Lycurgus and Lysander, were prepared before or roughly in the same period as the other biographies where Gylippus is mentioned, possibly with the use of preliminary notes on Sparta and Spartan characters and pre-publication drafts. The variations between the non-Spartan biographies, conversely, may be due to memory lapses or simple stylistic preferences. The complexity of Plutarch’s method of work, however, and its many stages do not allow us to prove this hypothesis conclusively. The relative chronology of the release of Lycurgus-Numa, Lysander-Sulla, Pericles-Fabius, Nicias-Crassus, and Aemilius Paulus- ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 3-32 Gylippus in Plutarch’s Parallel Lives 23

This interpretation can be confirmed Gylippus’ presence in the Life of by another remarkable difference Lysander, however, is still very signi between Lys. 16 and the other references ficant. The ideal reader of the Lives to Gylippus in non-Spartan biographies: cannot fail to notice that in Plutarch’s the absence of explanation for the view Gylippus represented an especially stealing. Plutarch’s moral evaluation of noteworthy antecedent of Lysander as Gylippus is quite generic and there is a leader who successfully conducted no attempt to illuminate Gylippus’ true military campaigns abroad and, more motivations or the influence of his nature importantly, expanded the Spartan in and character flaws upon his decisions fluence outside the Peloponnese at the (the adjectives αἰσχρός and ἀγεννής do expense of the Athenians. As we have not reveal the exact causes of ethically bad already recalled, in the Life of Lycurgus behaviour). Despite Gylippus’ undeniable Plutarch stresses the continuity between responsibility, moreover, in Lys. 17.2 we Gylippus, Lysander, and all of the other learn that the Spartiates placed the highest Spartan leaders who guided Greek blame on Lysander. Indeed, the second part of the Life is devoted to scrutinise cities (Lyc. 30.5). In the narrative of what passions drove the protagonist’s Lysander, then, the involvement of political actions (e.g. Lys. 19.1-6). Thus, both Lysander and Gylippus in a poli since Lysander and his relationship with tical affair that radically changed Sparta Sparta are the centre of attention, Gylippus’ is in itself emblematic of the strong embezzlement of money becomes an similarity between their policies. Indeed, episode functional to this topic, without Lysander’s conquests in Asia mirrored 40 being investigated in its own right. Gylippus’ success in Sicily .

Timoleon is not of great help either. While Lycurgus-Numa probably preceded the other pairs, it is not clear which position in the series was occupied by Lysander-Sulla. C. Jones, (1966) 1995, pp. 106-111 placed it before Pericles-Fabius, Nicias-Crassus, and Aemilius Paulus-Timoleon, but his solution is disputed; cf. A.G. Nikolaidis, 2005, pp. 307-308, who believes that Lysander-Sulla was one of the last pairs to be published. Cf. n. 8 and n. 41 of this article. 40 Gylippus and Lysander may have truly shared similar political views, because they were both mothaces, but this hypothesis cannot be confirmed only by Plu. Lys. 16. Cf. U. Bernini, 1988, pp. 145-146 n. 477, followed by G. Vanotti, 2005, pp. 460-461: their arguments in favour of a political conflict between Lysander and Gylippus, as if Gylippus’ embezzlement were part of a strategy to undermine Lysander’s authority, seem highly speculative. The common origin and social status of Lysander and Gylippus, which is mentioned by Aelian (VH 12.43), is accepted by J.-F. Bommelaer, 1981, p. 36, P. Cartledge, 1987, pp. 28-29, 20022, p. 269, G.L. Cawkwell, 1983, p. 394, but is rejected by L. Piccirilli, 1991. Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 3-32 ISSN 0258-655X 24 Michele A. Lucchesi

On the other hand, the very fact the money destined to Sparta (Lys. 17.2), that Gylippus was the first Spartan Plutarch significantly omits Cleandrides’ ‘contaminated’ by Lysander’s foreign bribery and Gylippus’ previous contrasts money warns the readers that, according with the Syracusans, suggesting that to Plutarch, all of the Spartans run the Gylippus’ greed, no matter whether it serious risk of compromising, if not instilled an aggressive attitude towards losing, their traditional identity. In this the allies or whether it was useful to the sense, considering that in Plutarch’s Spartan interests abroad, could disrupt view the owl is an animal who eats his the balance among the citizens at Sparta. own kind (as we saw in regard to Nic. The menace lurking in Gylippus’ house, 19.5), the image of many owls sleeping therefore, may lead to the conclusion that under Gylippus’ roof can be considered in Plutarch’s opinion, although Lysander a metaphor for the Spartans in danger was to blame, Gylippus’ command in of starting a struggle for riches against Sicily started the series of events (that is, one another. To strengthen the idea that the Spartan hegemony) that could alter Gylippus was attacked by the power of the intrinsic nature of Sparta41.

41 Plutarch’s account of Gylippus’ scandal in Lys. 16-17 poses several historical problems: the time of the events (that is, Plutarch places the scandal after the end of the Peloponnesian war), Gylippus’ unawareness of the tablets, the real amount of money stolen, the role of the servant; see J. Christien, 2002, pp. 174-175, S. Hodkinson, 2000, pp. 172-173, L. Piccirilli, 1997, pp. 256-257. There are also remarkable discrepancies between Lys. 16- 17, the other passages of the Lives where Plutarch writes about Gylippus (Nic. 19.5-6 and 28.4, Per. 22.2-4, Comp. Aem.-Tim. 41(2).7), and Diodorus’ version (13.106.8-10). S. Alessandrì, 1985 – followed by L. Piccirilli, 1993, pp. 309-310, 1997, pp. 256-257, G. Vanotti, 2005, pp. 460 n. 38 – formulated the hypothesis that both Lys. 16-17 and D.S. 13.106.8-10 derive from Ephorus. Diodorus, however, places the booty affair at the time of the siege of Samos, adds a digression on Gylippus’ father (whom he calls Clearchus), does not narrate the intervention of the servant, and records the stealing of a much larger sum than in Plutarch. In Alessandrì’s view, such differences are due to Diodorus’ insertion of a Timaean excerptum (p. 1087) into his work. According to Alessandrì, moreover, Plu. Per. 22.2-4 would primarily follow Ephorus (on the basis of FGrHist 70 F 193 and D.S. 13.106.8-10), but the connection between Gylippus and Cleandrides would be Plutarch’s reworked supplement. Finally, Plu. Nic. 19.5-6 and 28.4, and Comp. Aem.-Tim. 41(2).7 would primarily follow Timaeus, as Plutarch explicitly says (in particular, the reference to Cleandrides at Nic. 28.4 would be similar to the Timaean excerptum in D.S. 13.106.8-10). C.B.R. Pelling, (1992) 2002, 135 n. 6, argues that for the Life of Nicias Plutarch may have drawn from Timaeus more information and details than is usually believed, so that Timaeus’ influence would not be simply limited to the citations. Both these theories are convincing and compatible with one another, pace L. Piccirilli, 1993, p. 309. In addition to them, one can stress that Plutarch’s use of historical sources was not mechanical. In fact, it involved a considerable degree of selection and re-elaboration, and the ability to adapt the same or ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 3-32 Gylippus in Plutarch’s Parallel Lives 25

Indeed, as for the other passages of Lysander can allow the ideal reader where Plutarch writes about Gylippus, to interpret the crucial episode of the the analysis of Lys. 16-17.1 too shows crisis of Sparta in light of one the most that the text requires a minimum level important phases of Spartan history – of historical knowledge. Otherwise, one the Spartan intervention in Sicily – and can easily assume that an uninformed Plutarch’s interpretation of it. audience would find it difficult to Conclusion identify Gylippus correctly or to un derstand completely his involvement Coming to some conclusions, one in Lysander’s story. Similarly, we can plausibly claim that in the Parallel can hypothesise that the ideal reader Lives Gylippus is portrayed as a of the Parallel Lives is able to grasp character coherent with the image of the underlying meaning of the scene Sparta developed in and conveyed by involving Gylippus, the theft, and the the Spartan Lives. To be more accurate, ‘owls’ through his/her general history overall Gylippus displays the same recollection and acquaintance with combination of purely Spartan traits the other Plutarchan Lives. Unlike and inconsistencies in ‘Spartanness’ the Life of Pericles and the Life of as the other great Spartan leaders of Nicias, however, in the passage of the his time, whom Plutarch examines in Life of Lysander discussed above the his biographies. His virtues and vices, intratextual connection with other Lives that is, were ultimately not too different is not established by special ‘memory from those of Lysander, and for that triggers’: as already said, key words or matter of Agesilaus too. concepts, and a characterisation that Through Gylippus’ presence as a highlights typically Spartan features secondary character in the Life of Pericles or personality traits are absent. Rather, and in the Life of Nicias, Plutarch creates it is Gylippus the character himself a strong connection between these bio that can direct the readers towards graphies and the Spartan Lives, inviting previous historical works as much as the readers to examine them in light of other Plutarchan biographies where he one another. Thus, Pericles’ strategy is mentioned. His presence in the Life against the Spartans as much as Nicias

analogous contents to different contexts. This may have already happened in the early phases of the composition of the Lives. Thus, as we have tried to show in this article, the presence or absence of references to Cleandrides, the use of moral terms specifically related to Sparta, the employment of the medical metaphor, the emphasis on the image of owls, are all elements that, once found in Timaeus and Ephorus as described by Alessandrì, Plutarch may have decided to integrate into the narrative of the various Lives so as to offer a characterisation of Gylippus as credible, nuanced, and apt to each narrative situation as possible. On Plutarch’s use of historical sources, see C.B.R. Pelling, (1980) 2002, pp. 91-115. Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 3-32 ISSN 0258-655X 26 Michele A. Lucchesi and the Athenians underestimating Gy the actual readers of the Parallel Lives lippus can be better evaluated against stand in between these two opposite Gylippus’ quintessentially Spartan na poles. Following the author’s indications ture and the later crisis of Sparta. Si embedded in the texts and activating their mi larly, the political and institutional history recollection, the actual readers changes that Sparta underwent because may be able to recognise the intratextual of Lysander can be more deeply links between the Lives and to read the understood by considering at the same various biographies in combination with time the involvement of Gylippus one another. Their competence may vary in Sicily and the very beginning of depending on their prior familiarity with Spartan hegemony consequent to the Greek and Roman history as much as victory against the Athenians. with Plutarch’s works, but it can also gradually improve as the reading process This shows that in Plutarch’s view continues. Indeed, the less prepared history is a complex subject, which are the readers, the more necessary requires attentive readers willing Plutarch’s textual indications become. to engage actively in reading and interpreting the texts so as to form As the cross-references can prove, personal views and to learn from the however, Plutarch neither merely im posed his vision of the historical facts events assessed. Accordingly, the Pa on the Parallel Lives nor restricted the rallel Lives imply a wide spectrum readers’ freedom of interpretation. In of readers. At one end, as repeatedly this regard, one cannot but agree with the suggested in this article, one can assu recent scholarship that has emphasised me that there are readers with a mi how the collaborative effort between nimum level of historical knowledge, the readers and the author entailed by without which the references to Gy the Parallel Lives does not involve lippus and Spartan history become Plutarch’s purely expository didacticism hardly comprehensible. At the other or explicit advices on how to approach end, as one can infer from the passages the text, not even in places where one analysed earlier, one can find the ideal might expect them such as the prologues reader, who is fully able to actualise all or the final synkriseis42. This aspect of of Plutarch’s intratextual connections the relationship between Plutarch and the and to interpret the narrative fruitfully, readers, which has been usually related having a thorough knowledge of ancient to the Lives’ moralism and the readers’ history as much as of Plutarch’s views willingness and capability to draw moral on it. One can reasonably presume that lessons from them, can be extended

42 See, in particular, T.E. Duff, 2007/2008, especially pp. 13-15, 2011a, P.A. Stadter, 2003/2004. ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 3-32 Gylippus in Plutarch’s Parallel Lives 27 to the analysis of history. Just as the Lisandro e Agesilao a Confronto in readers, as they can be reconstructed Plutarco”, in A. Pérez Jiménez & F. from the texts, in general appear to Titchener (eds.), 2005, pp. 31-49. share Plutarch’s philosophical principles Bearzot, C., Landucci, F. (eds.), as a starting point for their own moral - Contro le “Leggi Immutabili”: Gli assessment of the characters, which they Spartani fra Tradizione e Innovazione, Milan, 2004. are called to conduct through a critical Beck, M., reading of the Lives, so by following - “Plato, Plutarch, and the Use and Plutarch’s interpretation of the historical Manipulation of Anecdotes in the Lives events they are also encouraged to of Lycurgus and Agesilaus: History form their own judgment on the Greek of the Laconic Apophthegm”, in A. and Roman past and on the complex Pérez-Jiménez, J. Garcia López & interaction between great individuals R.M. Aguilar (eds.), Plutarco, Platón y Aristóteles: Actas del V Congreso and their cities and states. Internacional de la I. P. S., Madrid, Indeed, the case study of Gylippus’ 1999, pp. 173-187. presence in the Parallel Lives, even in Beneker, J. “Plutarch and the First occasional ‘isolated’ references, shows Triumvirate: Thematic Correspondences in Plutarch’s Lives of Caesar, Pompey, the importance of intratextual connectors and Crassus”, in L. de Blois, J. Bons, to make it easier to the readers the exa T. Kessels, & D.M. Schenkeveld (eds.), mination of history within and across 2005, pp. 315-325. the Parallel Lives. Bernini, U., - Lysandrou kai Kallikratida Synkrisis: Bibliography Cultura, Etica e Politica Spartana fra Alessandrì, S., Quinto e Quarto Secolo a.C. Venice, - “Le Civette di Gilippo (Plut., Lys., 16- 1988. 17)”, ASNS 15/4 (1985), pp. 1081-1093. Bommelaer, J.-F., Alexiou, E., - Lysandre de Sparte: Histoire et Tradi - “Plutarchs Lysander und Alkibiades als tions, Paris, 1981. “Syzygie”: Ein Beitrag zum moralischen Buszard, B., Programm Plutarchs”, RhM 153 (2010), - “Caesar’s Ambition: A Combined Read pp. 323-352. ing of Plutarch’s Alexander-Caesar and Pyrrhus-Marius”, TAPA 138 (2008): pp. Bearzot, C., - “Spartani ‘Ideali’ e Spartani ‘Anomali’”, 185-215. in C. Bearzot & F. Landucci (eds.), Candau Morón, J.M., 2004a, pp. 3-32. - “Plutarch’s Lysander and Sulla: Inte - “Lisandro tra Due Modelli: Pausania grated Characters in Roman Historical l’Aspirante Tiranno, Brasida il Perspective”, AJPh 121/3 (2000), pp. Generale”, in C. Bearzot & F. Landucci 453-478. (eds.), 2004b, pp. 127-160. - “Plutarco como Transmisor de Timeo: - “Philotimia, Tradizione e Innovazione: La Vida de Nicias”, Ploutarchos n.s. 2 (2004/2005), pp. 11-34. Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 3-32 ISSN 0258-655X 28 Michele A. Lucchesi

- “Plutarco Transmisor: Timeo de Tauro Desideri, P., menio (FGrHist 566) y la Vida de Ti - “Ricchezza e Vita Politica nel Pensiero di moleón”, in E. Lanzillotta, V. Costa, & G. Plutarco”, Index 13 (1985), pp. 391-405. Ottone (eds.), Tradizione e Trasmissione D’Ippolito, G.. degli Storici Frammentari in Ricordo - “Il Corpus Plutarcheo come Macrotesto di Silvio Accame (Atti del II Workshop di un Progetto Antropologico: Modi e Internazionale, Roma, 16-18 febbraio Funzioni della Autotestualità”, in G. 2006), Tivoli, 2009, pp. 249-280. D’Ippolito & I. Gallo (eds.), Strutture - “Le Coordinate Letterarie dei Tras Formali dei Moralia di Plutarco: Atti del missori: La Storiografia Greca Fram III Convegno Plutarcheo (Palermo, 3-5 mentaria negli Autori di Età Impe riale”, maggio 1989), Naples, 1991, pp. 9-18. in F. Gazzano & G. Ottone (eds.), Le Età Duff, T.E., della Trasmissione: Alessandria, Roma, - Plutarch’s Lives: Exploring Virtue and Bi sanzio. Atti delle Giornate di Studio Vice, Oxford, 1999. sulla Storiografia Greca Frammentaria - “Plutarch’s Readers and the Moralism (Genova, 29-30 maggio 2012), Tivoli, of the Lives”, Ploutarchos n.s. 5 (2007- 2013, pp. 11-37. 2008), pp. 3-18. Cartledge, P. - “Plutarch’s Lives and the Critical - Agesilaos and the Crisis of Sparta, Bal Reader”, in G. Roskam & L. Van der timore, 1987. Stockt (eds.), Virtues for the People: - Sparta and Lakonia: A Regional History Aspects of Plutarch’s Ethics, Leuven, 1300 to 362 BC, London-New York, 2011a, pp. 59-82. 20022. - “The Structure of the Plutarchan Book”, ClAnt 30/2 (2011b), pp. 213-278. Cawkwell, G. L., - “The Decline of Sparta”, CQ 33 (1983), Eco, U. , pp. 385-400. - Lector in Fabula: La Cooperazione In terpretativa nei Testi Narrativi, Milan, Christien, J., 200610. - “Iron Money in Sparta: Myth and Histo ry”, in A. Powell & S. Hodkinson (eds.), Figueira, T.J., - “Iron Money and the Ideology of 2002, pp. 171-190. Consumption in Laconia”, in A. Powell & Corti, M.. S. Hodkinson (eds.), 2002, pp. 137-170. - “Testi o Macrotesto? I Racconti di Genette, G. Marcovaldo di I. Calvino”, Strumenti - Narrative Discourse: An Essay in Critici 9 (1975), pp. 182-197. Method, Ithaca-New York, 1983. David, E.. Hamilton, C.D., - “Suicide in Spartan Society”, in T. - “Plutarch’s Life of Agesilaus”, ANRW J. Figueira (ed.), Spartan Society, 2.33.6 (1992), pp. 4201-4221. Swansea, 2004, pp. 25-46. Hodkinson, S., de Blois, L., Bons, J., Kessels, T., Schenke - “‘Blind Ploutos’? Contemporary Images veld, D.M. (eds.), of the Role of Wealth in Classical - The Statesman in Plutarch’s Works II: Sparta”, in A. Powell & S. Hodkinson The Statesman in Plutarch’s Greek and (eds.), The Shadow of Sparta, London, Roman Lives, Leiden-Boston, 2005. 1994, pp. 183-222.

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 3-32 Gylippus in Plutarch’s Parallel Lives 29

- Property and Wealth in Classical Spar rences and the Sequence of the Parallel ta, Swansea, 2000. Lives”, in A. Pérez Jiménez & F. Hornblower, S., Titchener (eds.), 2005, pp. 283-323. - “Sticks, Stones and Spartans: The Pelling, C.B.R., Sociology of Spartan Violence”, in H. - “Plutarch’s Method of Work in the van Wees (ed.), War and Violence in Roman Lives”, JHS 99 (1979): pp. 74- Ancient Greece, London, 2000, pp. 96; reprinted with a postscript in B. 57-82; reprinted in S. Hornblower, Scardigli (ed.), 1995, pp. 265-318, and Thucydidean Themes, Oxford, 2011, pp. with modifications in Id., 2002, 1-44. Humble, N. (ed.), - “Plutarch’s Adaptation of His Source- - Plutarch’s Lives: Parallelism and Pur Material”, JHS 100 (1980) pp. 127- pose, Swansea, 2010. 140; reprinted with modifications in Id., 2002, pp. 91-115. Iser, W., - The Act of Reading: A Theory of Aesthe - “Aspects of Plutarch’s Characteriza tic Response, Baltimore-London, 1978. tion”, ICS 13/2 (1988), pp. 257-74; reprinted with modifications in Id., Jones, C., 2002, pp. 283-300. - “Towards a Chronology of Plutarch’s - “Plutarch and Thucydides”, in P.A. Stad Works”, JRS 56 (1966): 61-74; reprinted ter (ed.), 1992, pp. 10-40; reprinted with in B. Scardigli (ed.), 1995, pp. 95-123. modifications in Id., 2002, pp. 117-141. Luppino, E., - “The Apophthegmata Regum et - “Agesilao di Sparta: Tra Immagine e Imperatorum and Plutarch’s Roman Realtà”, in M. Sordi (ed.), L’immagine Lives”, in Id., 2002, pp. 65-90. dell’Uomo Politico: Vita Pubblica e - “‘You for Me and Me for You…’: Morale nell’Antichità, Milan, 1991, pp. Narrator and Narratee in Plutarch’s 89-109. Lives”, in Id., 2002, pp. 267-282. Montes Cala, J.G. et al. (eds.), - Plutarch and History, Swansea, 2002. - Plutarco, Dioniso y el Vino: Actas del - “Breaking the Bounds: Writing about VI Simposio Español sobre Plutarco, Julius Caesar”, in B. McGing & J.M. Madrid, 1999. Mossman (eds.), The Limits of Ancient Mossman, J., Biography, Swansea, 2006, pp. 255-280. - “Plutarch, Pyrrhus and Alexander”, in - “Seeing through Caesar’s Eyes: Foca P.A. Stadter (ed.), 1992, pp. 90-108. lisation and Interpretation”, in J. Grethlein & A. Rengakos (eds.), Narra Muccioli, F., - “La Critica di Plutarco a Filisto e Ti tology and Interpretation: The Content meo”, in L. Van der Stockt (ed.), 2000, of Narrative Form in Ancient Literature, pp. 291-307. Berlin-New York, 2009, pp. 507-526. - “ Gli Onori Divini per Lisandro a Samo: - “Plutarch’s ‘Tale of Two Cities’: Do A Proposito di Plutarchus, Lysander the Parallel Lives Combine as Global 18”, in L. de Blois, J. Bons, T. Kessels, Histories?”, in N. Humble (ed.), 2010, & D.M. Schenkeveld (eds.), 2005, pp. pp. 217-235. 198-213. - “Cashing in Politically: Plutarch on the Late Republic”, forthcoming. Nikolaidis, A.G., - “Is Plutarch Fair to Nikias?”, ICS 13/2 Pérez Jiménez, A., Titchener, F. (eds.), (1988), pp. 319-333. - Historical and Biographical Values - “Plutarch’s Method: His Cross-Refe of Plutarch’s Works: Studies Devoted

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 3-32 ISSN 0258-655X 30 Michele A. Lucchesi

to Professor Philip A. Stadter by the - “Mirroring Virtue in Plutarch’s Lives”, International Plutarch Society, Málaga- Ploutarchos n.s. 1 (2003/2004), pp. 89-96. Logan, 2005. - “Notes and Anecdotes: Observations Piccirilli, L. on Cross-Genre Apophthegmata”, in - “Nicia in Plutarco”, AALig 47 (1990), Nikolaidis (ed.), The Unity of Plutarch’s pp. 351-368. Work: ‘Moralia’ Themes in the ‘Lives’, Features of the ‘Lives’ in the ‘Moralia’, - “Callicratida, Gilippo e Lisandro Erano Berlin-New York, 2008, pp. 53-66. Motaci?” CCC 12 (1991): pp. 265-269. - “Parallels in Three Dimensions”, in - La Vita di Nicia: Introduzione e Note, N. Humble (ed.), 2010, pp. 197-216; in MG. Angeli Bertinelli et alii (eds.), reprinted in Id. Plutarch and His Roman Plutarco: Le Vite di Nicia e Crasso, Readers, Oxford, 2014, pp. 286-304. Milan, 1993. - “Before Pen Touched Paper: Plutarch’s - La Vita di Lisandro: Introduzione e Preparations for the Parallel Lives”, in Note, in MG. Angeli Bertinelli et alii Id., Oxford, 2014a, pp. 119-129. (eds.), Plutarco: Le Vite di Lisandro e - Plutarch and His Roman Readers, Silla, Milan, 1997. Oxford, 2014a. Powell, A., - “Plutarch’s Compositional Technique: - Athens and Sparta: Constructing Greek The Anecdote Collections and the Political and Social History from 478 Parallel Lives”, GRBS 54 (2014b), pp. BC, London, 1988. 665-686. Titchener, F., Powell, A. & Hodkinson, S. (eds.), - Sparta: Beyond the Mirage, Swansea, “Why Did Plutarch Write about Nicias?”, AHB 5 (1991), pp. 153-158. 2002. - “The Structure of Plutarch’s Nicias”, Russell, D., in J.A. Fernández Delgado & F. - “On Reading Plutarch’s Lives”, G&R Pordomingo Pardo (eds.), Estudios sobre 13 (1966), pp. 139-154; reprinted in B. Plutarco: Aspectos Formales. Actas del Scardigli (ed.), 1995, pp. 75-94. IV Simposio Español sobre Plutarco Scardigli, B. (ed.), (Salamanca, 26 a 28 de Mayo de 1994), - Essays on Plutarch’s Lives, Oxford, Salamanca, 1996, pp. 351-357. 1995. - “Practical Rhetoric in Plutarch’s Nicias and Thucydides 7.86.5”, in L. Van der Schmid, W., Stockt (ed.), 2000, pp. 519-527. - Narratology: An Introduction, Berlin- - “Side by Side by Plutarch”, Plutarchos, New York, 2010. n.s., 13 (2016) 101-110. Stadter, P.A., Van der Stockt, L., - “Plutarch’s Comparison of Pericles and - “A Plutarchan Hypomnema on Self- Fabius Maximus”, GRBS 16 (1975): pp. Love”, AJP 120 (1999a), pp. 575-599. 77-85; reprinted in B. Scardigli (ed.), - “Three Aristotles Equal but One Plato: 1995, pp. 155-164. On a Cluster of Quotations in Plutarch”, - “Paradoxical Paradigms: Plutarch’s in J.G. Montes Cala et al. (eds.), 1999b, Lysander and Sulla”, in Id. (ed.), 1992, pp. pp. 127-140. 41-55; reprinted in Id., 2014a, pp. 258-269. - (ed.) Rhetorical Theory and Praxis in - (ed.), Plutarch and the Historical Tra Plutarch: Acta of the IVth International dition, London-New York, 1992. Congress of the International Plutarch

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 3-32 Gylippus in Plutarch’s Parallel Lives 31

Society (Leuven, July 3-6, 1996), pp. 331-340. Louvain, 2000. - “Compositional Methods in the Lives”, - “Καρπὸς ἐκ φιλίας ἡγεμονικῆς (Mor. in M. Beck (ed.), A Companion to 814C): Plutarch’s Observations on the Plutarch, Oxford, 2014, pp. 321-332. Old-boy Network”, in P.A. Stadter & L. Van Meirvenne, B., Van der Stockt (eds.), Sage and emperor: - “Puzzling over Plutarch: Traces of a Plutarch, Greek intellectuals, and Ro Plutarchean Plato-Study concerning man Power in the Time of Trajan (98-117 Lg. 729 a-c”, in J.G. Montes Cala et al. A.D.), Leuven, 2002, pp. 115-140. (eds.), 1999, pp. 527-540. - “Plutarch in Plutarch: The Problem of Vanotti, G., the Hypomnemata”, in I. Gallo (ed.), - “Gilippo in Plutarco”, in A. Pérez Jimé La Biblioteca di Plutarco: Atti del IX nez & F. Titchener (eds.), 2005, pp. 451- Convegno Plutarcheo, Naples, 2004, 463.

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 3-32 ISSN 0258-655X (Página deixada propositadamente em branco) Plutarch the Multiculturalist: Is West always Best? by Christopher Pelling University of Oxford [email protected]

Abstract Is Plutarch a multiculturalist, recognising the value of non-Greek cultures along with Greek? Does he even go as far as Antiphon in the fifth century and deny any firm dividing line between barbarian and Greek? There are some traces of this, particularly an awareness that all may recognise the same gods; the Romans in particular may share some underlying traits with the Greeks while also showing differences. But Alexander the Great, even if the On the Virtue or Fortune of Alexander essays present him as unifying East and West, does so by imposing Greek values; the Life shows little interest in his learning anything from eastern values and philosophy. The alien culture to inspire most respect is that of Egypt, and the Isis and Osiris in particular accepts that there is much wisdom that Greeks share with Egyptians. Key-Words: Multiculturalism, Polarities, Racism, Alexander, Gymnoso- phists, Egypt, Syncretism.

lutarch, we feel, is one of life in all its manifestations, yet of us. He would be deliberately avoiding the unseemly and thoroughly at home trying to present the best side of his subjects’2: one can just see him in the in a convivial confe bar late at night, surrounded by acolytes P1 rence setting , this ‘understanding and of a much younger generation, gently intellectually curious person, someone pleased by our interest and admiration, who is serious but not stuffy, aware occasionally putting us right on so

1 As so many of us felt ourselves at home amid the breathtaking scenery and warm hospitality of Banff. I have tried to preserve the feel of this genial occasion by keeping some of the informality of my original delivery. My second paragraph in particular prompted some lively audience participation. 2 Stadter, 1988, p. 292.

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 33-52 ISSN 0258-655X 34 Christopher Pelling mething, but always doing so with new experience and a new conversation, gentle tact and making sure that no-one that readiness to accept that wonder is really misbehaved and the party went so important and may always be there with a civilised swing. This is surely around the next corner…. Yes, he the second most attractive personality would fit in pretty well as well. of classical antiquity. And a lot of his Herodotus, indeed, will be a lurking moral views, even if sometimes on the presence in a lot of what follows: for pompous side, are pretty attractive too. it is so tempting to want both Plutarch That is even true on gender issues: we and Herodotus to be attractive on racial may get impatient with debating whether issues as well, people who are prepared heterosexual or homosexual love is the to find virtue and admirability wherever better in Amatorius, but equally I dare they may be. After all, Antiphon in the say most of us would be on the side he fifth century could say that clearly favours when Ismenodora wants to marry young Bacchon: well, why not? we are equally adapted by natu re to be both Greek and barba Yes, this is the character I would second- rian… in all this, there is no firm most like to be like. dividing line between barbarian Second-most? Who then could beat and Greek: we all breathe the him? Not Socrates, surely: no, I have same air through our mouths and enough people edging away from me in noses, we all laugh when we are happy and cry when we are sad, bars already. Thucydides? Oh, lighten we take in sounds through our up. Pindar? Nobody could understand hearing, we see with the same a word I said. Cicero? Nobody else rays of light, we work with our would ever get a word in. Caesar? Can’t hands, we walk with our feet (fr. understand why I seem to be making 44B D–K)3. people so nervous. Aristotle? There are It was not impossible to think in five types of reason why one wouldn’t that way, though we should also notice want to be Aristotle…, one of them that exactly what Antiphon says—not we we would have to deal with the young are all the same, but we are all equally Alexander, who was surely a tough adapted to be the same, which is not pupil. No, the one I would put ahead quite the same thing. It still seems that is Herodotus, for very much the same Antiphon is insisting that the distinction reasons – that unflagging curiosity, between Greek and barbarian is a matter that strong projection of an amiable of νόμος rather than φύσις, very much personality who is always eager for a what Aristotle famously denied.

3 As supplemented by POxy 3647: see Pendrick, 2002, ad loc.

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 33-52 Plutarch the Multiculturalist: Is West always Best? 35

It is not difficult to find Herodotus where Darius’ predecessor Cambyses making his audience think critically had indeed been showing himself about such distinctions. The familiar a ‘madman’—that ‘madman’ who locus classicus is Darius’ seminar on would scoff. He had mocked Egyptian cultural relativism in Book 3: the king religious practices so spectacularly that asked some Greek visitors whether they he even killed the Apis bull, an animal would eat their dead fathers, and met that the Egyptians held particularly with shock and horror; then he asked sacred (3.29). This is a point in some Indians whether they would be the narrative when Greek listeners prepared to cremate them, and met with and readers might feel particularly a similar response. If he had wished, superior at the expense of those brutal Herodotus could have made this an domineering Persians; yet it is here that example to show how primitive those we see this other Persian king, Darius, Indians were in comparison with the showing himself much more sensitive morally sophisticated Greeks, and how to cultural differences than the Greeks Darius was not much better if he failed in the story, and presumably than many to realise that; but in fact the conclusion of the audience, who would largely drawn is very different. have shared that horror at the Indian So these practices have beco practices. It is the Persian who emerges me enshrined as customs just as as the man with cultural insight, not they are, and I think Pindar was the Greek, and nothing could make it right to have said in his poem that plainer that these foreigners—even custom is king of all. (Herodotus these tyrannical Persian foreigners— 3.38.4, tr. Waterfield) are not all the same. That sets any Herodotus is clearly on Darius’ side, complacent Greek readers or listeners for that was surely Darius’ point too in back on their heels. staging his demonstration. The story Can we find anything of the same in shows how all peoples think their own Plutarch? Yes, sometimes we can. The customs best, and (as Herodotus has end of Isis and Osiris is very respectful just made explicit) ‘only a madman’ to Egyptian ideas about religion (and would scoff at what others do (3.38.2). we might remember that Plutarch’s Just as important is the narrative most revered teacher was the Egyptian subtlety of the context. Herodotus could Ammonius)4: the gods are the common have put this in many different places, possession of all humanity, and they do but in fact puts it at the end of a sequence not differ among Greeks and barbarians

4 Jones, 1967; Swain, 1997, pp. 182-4; Opsomer, 2009; Klotz, 2014, pp. 214-7; Stadter, 2015, pp. 193-5.

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 33-52 ISSN 0258-655X 36 Christopher Pelling

(377C-E, cf. below); everyone has similar to the balance in Edith Hall’s trail- the same initial knowledge of them blazing Inventing the Barbarian of 1989, and honour for them, even if different not about Plutarch at all but concentrating peoples use different names (377D); on Greek tragedy, with lots of glances and the greatest and most beneficial of across to Herodotus (and Hartog, though humans have become gods, as ‘we have Hall’s and Hartog’s emphases are rather come to think, not regarding different different)7: four chapters, about fifty ones as belonging to different peoples, pages each, on polarities which are not some Greek and some barbarian and almost universally denigratory about some northern and some southern, but barbarians; then an epilogue, half the common to all just as sun and moon are length of the other chapters, on ‘The common to all’ (377F)—not far, then, polarity deconstructed’. Since then there from the sort of argument that Antiphon has been something of an industry in was using. But then we can look also at deconstructing the polarity a good deal all those passages collected so well by more, in both tragedy and Herodotus. Thomas Schmidt, and discussed before Some of that scholarly action has him by Tasos Nikolaidis5. Schmidt’s been in the direction of regarding distribution of material is particularly Herodotus and particularly Aeschylus’ interesting: five lengthy chapters on Persians as foundational texts not basically negative characteristics— just of ‘Orientalism’, as Edward Saïd savagery, over-confidence (θρασύτης), represented them, but also of the critique wealth and luxury, numerousness—not of Orientalism, at least occasionally perhaps negative in itself, but almost making readers and listeners uneasy always bringing out the superiority of the about any West-is-best complacency smaller numbers that defeated them— and providing them with some material and simple worthlessness (φαυλότης); that could challenge those prejudices as then a relatively short chapter on ‘positive well as some that could feed them. I have traits’, including a few ‘noble savages’ had my own say there on both tragedy (as Bessie Walker called them when and Herodotus, though oddly enough my talking about Tacitus)6 and, interestingly, contributions have not reduced everyone a disproportionate number of impressive else to a silence of stunned agreement8. women. Those proportions are very Can’t think why.

5 Schmidt, 1999; Nikolaidis, 1986. 6 Walker, 1952. 7 Hall, 1989; Hartog, 1988. On those differences of emphasis see Pelling, 1997a. 8 Tragedy: Pelling, 1997c and 1997d: Garvie, 2009, pp. x-xxii agrees; Harrison, 2000 does not. Herodotus: Pelling, 1997a.

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 33-52 Plutarch the Multiculturalist: Is West always Best? 37

It would be welcome if we could powerful men above’ as he calls them in say something similar of Plutarch—but a haunting phrase in Advice on Public there, immediately, lies the first warning: Life (814C). As soon as the Romans start we know the temptation of finding what impinging on the Greek world, people we want to find, and overemphasising can tell the difference. Pyrrhus looks or over-interpreting the bits that fit across at the Roman army he faces and the picture that we like. None of us comments that ‘that barbarian taxis is needs any warning that modern liberal not barbarian: we shall see how it goes’ approaches to racial differences are, (Pyrrh. 16.7). They did indeed see how indeed, very modern, as specific and it went, and for the next few hundred maybe more specific to our own time years Greeks learned not to be too and culture than any other. If we wanted dismissive. The world of the Table Talk any such reminder, it is salutary to recall is eloquent there, where sophisticated that when the First World War was over, dinner guests may be local Greeks or in all the idealism of the Peacemaking may be visiting Roman grandees, and of 1919 and amid all the concerns to by then Roman grandees can come from accommodate ethnic self-determination anywhere: one of them, Lucius Sulla, is in the new map of Europe and the far East, a Carthaginian. We have to be careful one proposal that got nowhere was a mild not to think of a total fusion into just suggestion from Japan that Woodrow one Greco-Roman cultural amalgam: it Wilson’s fourteen principles might be is better to think of ‘code-switching’, expanded to include a statement of racial so that people can talk Greek and talk equality. That was just a non-starter, and Roman, and indeed think Greek and not just because Wilson was facing an think Roman in ways which go beyond election where the votes of the American the simple language that they happen south would be crucial. Japan attracted to be speaking at the time. Andrew little support from anyone 9. Wallace-Hadrill is very good on this in Rome’s Cultural Revolution10. It is One thing is clear. By Plutarch’s time most interesting to see the ways that there is not a simple Greek-barbarian Romans behave at the Greek dinner divide, for one reason in particular: table, as they code-switch too. They are Rome and the Romans, ‘those most in relaxed mode, so they do not play

9 Macmillan, 2001, esp. pp. 325-30. Particularly telling was the attitude of the British Foreign Secretary Balfour, not one of the major players on this specific issue: ‘the notion that all men were created equal was an interesting one, he found, but he did not believe it. You could scarcely say that a man in Central Africa was equal to a European’ (Macmillan, p. 326). 10 Wallace-Hadrill, 2008. See also now Madsen–Rees, 2014. Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 33-52 ISSN 0258-655X 38 Christopher Pelling the ‘powerful one above’ too much; respect too. Otherwise he would hardly Greeks also know not to overstep the have written the Parallel Lives, after all, limit, and they too behave with proper and the Roman Questions shows an utter tact; and Romans are careful to talk fascination with Roman customs for their about topics appropriate to the Greek own sake. Still, there is not usually the dinner table, matters of philology and radiant admiration of an Aelius Aristides, culture rather than the best way to or even of Dionysius of Halicarnassus in 11 manage an army or an empire . If I the proem to his history: can be allowed an Oxford moment, it My readers will learn from reminds me so much of what happens my history that Rome have bir when a politician visits his or her old th to a multitude of virtues from college: they are so careful at the dinner the very moment of its founda table to try to behave like dons rather tion—examples of men whose than powerbrokers, and talk about all match has never been seen in any the good and intellectually demanding city, Greek or barbarian, for their books they have read, not realising piety or their justice or their self- that when left on our own we are more control in all their lives or their likely to be talking about last night’s formidable prowess in warfare. football. It is all quite demanding. (Roman Antiquities 1.5.3). So there are two worlds, but they —though it is true enough that know one another and they mesh: that Dionysius too goes on to have some is going to be true even if we accept sharp things to say once the history is that Table Talk has an element of the underway, especially when he glances aspirational and idealising too, and forward to the late Republic. Plutarch that not every visiting Roman was so certainly feels he can tell Romans so un boorish. At least those idealised Ro me home truths. Coriolanus and Ma mans treat Greeks with respect. Con rius would have been so much more trast the Roman matron in Lucian, who satisfactory if they had only had a has a tame Greek philosopher but uses proper Greek education: the Muses him to take care of her pet bitch on a would have tempered all that bad temper journey, and the animal nestles in his and inability to acclimatise to political lap, licking his beard, pissing down life. And what of all those great Roman his front, and finally giving birth to her successes on the battlefield? Doesn’t litter under his cloak (Philosophers for that show how marvellous they are? Hire 34-5). And Plutarch, quite evidently, That is a question requiring a treats Romans and Roman culture with lengthy answer for men who de

11 Cf. Pelling, 2011, pp. 209-10.

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 33-52 Plutarch the Multiculturalist: Is West always Best? 39

fine ‘advance’ in terms of wealth, or German wars. Scythia too was luxury, and empire rather than a great task that remained, and safety, restraint, and an honest India as well; and they had an ex independence. (Comparison of cuse that was not inglorious for Lycurgus and Numa 4.12-13) such greed, for they could claim that they were civilising the The reserve there is clear, and really barbarians. For what Scythian rather bold. cavalry or Parthian arrows or The end of Pompey is particularly Indian wealth would have re interesting here, that passage when sisted 70,000 Romans attacking the two armies are shaping up on the them in arms, with Pompey and Caesar in command, men whose battlefield of Pharsalus and ‘a few of the name they had heard even befo best of the Romans, and some Greeks re they heard of Rome? For such who were there but not participating’, 12 were the unapproachable and va reflected on the madness of it all . ried and savage tribes they had Perhaps they are ‘Greeks’ simply because traversed in arms. (Pomp. 70). we are deep in Greece at the time, but That, then, is what they ought to have the viewpoint is still marked as at least been doing, fighting the barbarian in the partly that of an outsider, even if there east; and there is not much doubt that it are a few of the best of the Romans there would be fighting for fighting’s sake, or to think along similar lines. The thinking rather for the sake of greed. They might does not project the same reserve about ‘claim’ that they were civilising the Roman militarism as in the Lycurgus and barbarians, but that is all it would be, Numa passage; here it is more a point a claim. We shall see later whether the about the way that militarism is directed, similar civilising claims that were made that ‘plight to which greed and rivalry had about Alexander had more substance brought the empire’. in them; and Alexander is very much By now, had they wished a subtext in the background of this to rule in peace and enjoy their passage, that Alexander whom Caesar past achievements, the greatest and Pompey could have played over and the best parts of land and again if only they had chosen. sea were already theirs, and open for them to do so; had they still So far this Pompey passage may wanted to gratify a thirst for tro look like the view of not just an outsider phies and triumphs, they could but a rather condescending one: if only have drunk their fill of Parthian these benighted Romans had been able

12 The following paragraphs expand some comments in a chapter in Titchener–Zadorojnyi, forthcoming.

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 33-52 ISSN 0258-655X 40 Christopher Pelling to get their act together… But the pair on an upward surge, yet they laid of Pompey is Agesilaus; and Alexander hold upon her; they turned upon had been in the air in Agesilaus too, most one another the arms that were notably when Agesilaus is about to set levelled against barbarians and off on an eastern conquest. This time it the war that they had driven out had been a matter of playing Alexander of Greece. I do not myself agree ahead of his time, and Agesilaus had even with Demaratus of Corinth when he said that those Greeks had gone through the preliminary essentials at been robbed of a great pleasure Aulis (ch. 6), though rather less messily who had not seen Alexander sit than Agamemnon before him. ting on Darius’ throne; no, I think But at this moment Epicydidas the they would have done better to Spartiate arrived, announcing that a shed tears at the thought that this great Greek war was besetting Sparta, had been left for Alexander by those who had at that time expen and so the ephors were summoning ded the lives of Greek generals at him and commanding him to help the Leuctra, Coroneia, Corinth, and people at home. ‘You Greeks! You in Arcadia. (Agesilaus 15.2-4) are the inventers of barbarian evils.’ [Euripides, Trojan Women 764]. So this capacity to shed the blood of those who should be your own There may be particular bite in that people is not just a Roman thing. It is Euripidean quotation, as in the original Greek as well, and this is not the only it is aimed by the captive Andromache occasion on which Plutarch tells that against the brutal conquering Greeks— home truth to the Greeks, pointing one of the ways, then, that Greek that perpetual tendency to conflict, tragedy ‘deconstructs the polarity’, to philoneikia, and fragmentation13. On go back to that chapter-heading of Edith the Greek side it is more of an inter-city Hall (above). Here, though, it is not a combat, on the Roman it is more the criticism aimed by an ‘Oriental’ against powerful individuals—even closer kin, Greeks: it is one equally well-aimed in Caesar’s and Pompey’s case—who but delivered by a Greek against other clash so destructively; but one can still Greeks, just as it is Greek against Greek see these as different versions of the in the conflicts themselves. same disease. We are not so far from the For what else could one call world of Thucydides, where different that jealousy and that combina peoples again show differences. His tion and array of Greek forces Athens and Sparta contrast just as much against themselves? Fortune was as Plutarch’s Greece and Rome, and for

13 Especially at Flam. 11: Pelling, 2002, pp. 182, 243-4. Cf. Pyth. or. 15.401C-D, which I discuss at Pelling, forthcoming.

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 33-52 Plutarch the Multiculturalist: Is West always Best? 41 that matter as Herodotus’ Greece and thought of On the Fortune of the Persia. But national or civic differences Romans, and in that case I think this is also have their limits, and there may, probably right anyway but for different in Plutarch as in Thucydides, be an reasons14. With the Alexander essays it underlying human nature that comes is less clear-cut, and it is quite possible out in different but comparable ways. that his knowledge there of Alexander So ‘Plutarch the multiculturalist’? detail is precisely because he has just Yes, or at least ‘biculturalist’, in the been researching it for the Life. We just sense of acknowledging and respecting cannot be sure. the differences between Greek and Ro Let us start with ‘civilising the East’, man ways, here in their bad aspects as that notion that we noticed would just so often in their good and intriguing have been a pure sham on the Roman ones; but they still have an underlying side. That is certainly in the air for basis of unity. When Plutarch looks at Alexander. We know that that idea of Rome at least, the Other is not as Other Alexander as a ‘philosopher in arms’ as all that. And that is very much what was used in the Alexander account some of us have been saying about written by his steersman Onesicritus, tragedy and Herodotus. who also—we can trace—was consi What we make of the eastern derably interested in the customs that foreigners—not the Romans, but the Alexander came across in the far East; Romans’ potential victims in those might- that phrase ‘philosopher in arms’ in have-beens of Pompey and Caesar—is fact comes in a quotation in Strabo, another question. They do not seem to be describing the admiration for Alexander getting much sympathy so far. felt in those terms by an Indian sage15. Onesicritus is normally thought to be They may—or may not—get more an important influence on Plutarch’s sympathy if we turn to the man who did Alexander essays, and indeed he is get his eastern act together, Alexander quoted both there and in the Life16. himself. The twinned essays On the Certainly that idea of the philosopher in Virtue or Fortune of Alexander essays arms, the bringer of culture and benefit used to be thought of as earlier than as well as conquest, is prominent in the Life, usually because their highly those essays, and if it is rhetoric it is ‘rhetorical’ slant was dismissed as a sometimes wonderful rhetoric. He is sign of juvenility; the same has been arguing what he admits to be ‘the most

14 Pelling, 2011, p. 211; and 2014, p. 154. 15 Onesicritus FGrH 134 F 17a = Strabo 15.1.63–5; cf. F 5. 16 Hamilton, 1969, pp. xxxi-xxxiii; and below.

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 33-52 ISSN 0258-655X 42 Christopher Pelling paradoxical thing of all’, that Alexander in Antiphon and in Isis and Osiris, ‘just was not just a philosopher but a better as we all breathe the same air …’ and philosopher than Plato and Socrates: ‘we see the same sun and moon’. There Plato wrote one Republic, and is a lovely essay of Arnold Toynbee persuaded noone to live like that on the theme ‘What if Alexander had because it was so forbidding; died old’, purporting to be written by a Alexander founded more than court historian in Alexandria under the seventy cities among barbarian reign of Alexander LXXVI17: Plutarch races and spread Greek culture got there first, and a bit less wordily. through Asia, overcoming their It is a picture that is developed (ch. 6, uncivilised and savage habits 329A-D) with another comparison with of before. Hardly anyone reads those cerebral philosophers, again to Plato’s Laws, but tens of thou Alexander’s advantage: Zeno argued sands adopted Alexander’s and that we should ‘think of all humankind still live by them today. (On the as our fellow-demesmen and fellow- Fortune of Alexander 1.328D-E). citizens’, ruled by a single law, but And more, much more. Rather a that was just a fantasy and a dream: spot of the Macedonian white man’s Alexander turned it into reality. And he burden, in fact. A little later we get a did not do what Aristotle commended, view of him as leading the world to one ruling the Greeks as a leader but the government. barbarians as a despot, treating one He conducted himself like a lot as friends and relatives and the man who was making the whole other as animals or plants, but ‘came world subject to one rationality as a shared harmostes and reconciler to and one system of governments, everyone’, ‘mixing lives and characters wanting to bring all humans to and marriages and ways of life as if in a gether as a single people. If the single krater, telling everyone to regard Heaven that had brought Alexan the world as their native country, the der here had not snatched his camp as their acropolis and garrison, the soul back so quickly, a single law good as their kinsmen, the bad as their would have governed all human aliens’. Great stuff: no wonder that this kind and they would have all been was a key text for that rosy-eyed picture looking towards a single justice as of ‘Alexander the Great and the unity of they look on a single sun. (330D). mankind’ famously argued once by W.W. ‘Look on a single sun’ rather along the Tarn, and just as famously demolished lines of that trope we have already seen by Ernst Badian18.

17 Toynbee, 1969. 18 Tarn, 1933; Badian, 1958. ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 33-52 Plutarch the Multiculturalist: Is West always Best? 43

So: Plutarch the multiculturalist? lead to. But it is clear who is to be the No, not really. There is certainly that boss: the subjects will be brought ‘to ‘world as one village’ aspect—though accept the Macedonians as rulers rather one can still ask if Plutarch, if he were than hating them as enemies’ (330A, cf. not pushing this particular rhetorical line, 342A in the second essay), even if it is would really commit to the downgrading clear too at times that violence is going to of all those favourite philosophers, be necessary for people’s own good20. He especially Plato. There is doubtless some is ‘taming and softening them like wild drawing here too on later, post-Zeno animals’ (330B). Thomas Schmidt is good ideas of cosmopolitanism, just as there on this: the glorification of Alexander is is in On The Fortune of the Romans, in fact an exaltation of Greek values21. there with the Roman empire as the boon of Providence to grant the world That was the essays; what about the stability and bring the warring empires to harmony (316E–317C)19. But it is not just Life? The first thing to note is that there one village, it is one culture too, and it is is virtually nothing of that ‘philosopher Greek culture that Alexander is ‘spreading in arms’ notion, nor of the one- through Asia’ (328D-E, quoted above). village idealism: Onesicritus is quoted That ‘one village’ passage culminates (Alexander 8.2, 15.2, 46.1, 61.1, 65.2), in an exhortation to judge Greek and but not for that. The marriages at Susa, barbarian not by dress but ‘to define so central to the fusion idea, are barely Greek in terms of arete and barbarian in mentioned at all, and when they are the terms of kakia’ (329C), and that is what emphasis falls on the sumptuousness the fusion of blood and customs should of the wedding feast (70.2)22. It is a

19 Swain, 1989, pp. 507-8; Pelling, 2007, p. 257. 20 I have here benefited greatly from discussion withÁ lia Rosa Rodrigues, whose Coimbra dissertation (‘The figure of the lawgiver in Greek political tradition until Plutarch’) stresses how often violence is necessary if a dispensation is to last. 21 Schmidt, 1999, pp. 283-6, concluding ‘Toutefois, le système de référence reste fondamentalement grec. La glorification d’Alexandre est en fait une exaltation des valeurs grecques.’ Cf. Nikolaidis, 1986, p. 239: in the Alexander essays ‘Plutarch makes a very general distinction between Greeks and barbarians to the effect that the former are good, whereas the latter are bad’. 22 Tarn, 1933 cited five passages for his ‘unity of mankind’ thesis: one of these does come from Alexander (as opposed to two from the essays), but it does not seem to support very much. This is the legomenon at 27.10, the idea that Alexander may have thought that God was the shared father of everyone but made the best of humans particularly his own, given as one of several possible explanations why Alexander may have seen Ammon as his ‘father’. But does this go beyond Homer’s presentation of Zeus as the ‘father of gods and humans’ but also having favourites?

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 33-52 ISSN 0258-655X 44 Christopher Pelling particularly clear illustration of how fifty talents he sent Xenocrates Plutarch regards different ideas and and the seriousness with which themes, and arguably different standards he took Dandamis and Calanus. of verisimilitude, as appropriate for that (Alexander 8.5). sort of essay and for works requiring There is much that one could say the sober and analytic historical eye. It about the way that the Life tracks is magnificent, but it is not history, and through this later relationship to Hellenic therefore it is not biography either. culture, and much of it has been said Philosophy is relevant, though, in two recent treatments by Mossman and that is where Aristotle comes in. and Whitmarsh24. But let us go straight He is recruited to take care of young to the end, and those final encounters Alexander’s education, and this is with the Indian sages Dandamis and allowed two chapters near the beginning Calanus. They come immediately after (chs. 7–8). We are also given the im Alexander’s meeting with the strange pression there of an Alexander who Gymnosophists (chs. 64-5). Those chap is all set up to be that ambassador for ters also have been much discussed, as Greek culture, with Aristotle’s corrected there is some something about naked version of the Iliad under his pillow Indian philosophers that does capture every night, other Greek texts sent for the imagination: people have been most when he is en route, and his remark that interested in whether this might all be he loves Aristotle as much as his father true, and whether there is any authentic (admittedly a mixed compliment in the Indian wisdom embedded in the stories25. circumstances), as he owes his life to But, for the moment, let us just ask what his father but his good life to Aristotle. they are doing in the Life, and particularly Those initial chapters also make clear whether they really show that unimpaired that the relationship between the two ‘enthusiasm and yearning for philosophy’ later cooled, and one can trace that that that early passage promised. tepidity as the Life continues23; still, First, the Gymnosophists, these Indian that enthusiasm and yearning (pothos ) for philosophy, inborn philosophers who ‘were thought to be in him and nurtured from those particularly skilful and economical with early years, was never lost from their words in question and answer’ (64.1). his soul: that is shown by the ho We should note that Alexander is going to nour he paid Anaxarchus and the put them to death, starting with the first

23 Alex. 17.9, 54.1-2, 55.8-9, 74.5, 77.3. 24 Mossman, 2006; Whitmarsh, 2002. 25 See esp. Stoneman, 1995.

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 33-52 Plutarch the Multiculturalist: Is West always Best? 45 one to answer wrongly, then all the all the Then there is the meeting with others—a sort of Cyclops cave in reverse. Dandamis and Calanus—or rather not True, these were the people who had been the meeting in Dandamis’ case: in Plu particularly active in stimulating a revolt, tarch, as in Strabo but not in Arrian, and so it is no wonder that he is a trifle Alexander has just sent someone to cross: still, if this is knowledge meeting get him27. That envoy was in fact power, it is not a particularly sympathetic Onesicritus, and this is one of those sort of power. One recent commentator passages that presumably go back to describes Alexander as ‘sardonic, savage, him. Here there is a little more interest like a cat amusing himself with his 26 in what they say, though there is rather prey…’ . He does let them off in the more interest in the nakedness: Calanus end, but that seems pretty whimsical too. insists that Onesicritus strip off before And knowledge meeting power? he talks to him. But what is difficult is There does not seem a lot of knowledge to find anything distinctly eastern in in the Gymnosophists’ answers, nor what they say. Dandamis hears about anything particularly eastern; if Alexan Socrates and Pythagoras and Diogenes, der does not seem particularly in and says that they seem good chaps, but terested in their answers’ content, that far too conventional, far too respectful is because there is not much content of nomoi. There may be a distant anyway. It all basically seems clever- echo of the Crito here; but Diogenes clever, and not much more: ‘which conventional? That certainly conveys is the most intelligent animal ever the way that we are in a different born?’ ‘The one that humans have thoughtworld, but it also has the air not yet found’, presumably because of the moment in Herodotus when they’re so damned clever at concealing Anacharsis reports his impressions themselves. ‘Which is the older, day or of Greece—all rather intellectually night?’ ‘The day, by one day?’ Alexander disappointing except for the Spartans, is understandably bemused, but is the only people who can give and receive simply told ‘if the questions are difficult, logos (4.77). In each case the point is to so should the answers be’. It is pretty set Greeks back on their heels, not to poor stuff: some have tried to find Cynic point out anything distinctive about the philosophy there, but it is hard enough to foreigner’s own cultures. Dandamis also find any philosophy at all. We are a long asks why Alexander should have come way from the world of Aristotle. so long a way: that is not very different

26 Bosman, 2010, p. 192. 27 Alex. 65; Strabo 15.1.63-5; Arr. An. 7.1.5-6. On the divergences cf. Hamilton, 1969, pp. 179-80 and the BNJ commentary on Onesicritus FGrH 134 F 17a (M. Whitby)

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 33-52 ISSN 0258-655X 46 Christopher Pelling from the exchange of Cineas and Pyrrhus chapters30: perhaps they are more than (Pyrrh. 14)—what on earth is the point? that, ‘macabre’, as Alexander’s self- Why not just sit back now, and enjoy a destruction reaches its climax—all that drink right away? heavy drinking, all that excess of grief And so one could go on. When for Hephaestion and so on. Anything Richard Stoneman tried to find genuine but a ‘philosopher in arms’ here, clearly. Indian thought in all this he did get Part of that macabre tinge comes from somewhere, but with the versions in Calanus, as he sets fire to himself: I other sources, not this one28. Plutarch shall meet Alexander soon, he says, in just does not seem very interested in Babylon (69.6–7). Caesar too will end, alien wisdom here, or really very much memorably, with his own ghost telling in anything that Indian thought has Brutus that ‘I will see you at Philippi’: to offer beyond a spot of nakedness ‘yes,’ replies Brutus, ‘I will see you and bizarrerie: it is hardly radiating there’ (Caes. 69.11). Death is in the multicultural open-mindedness to what air, there as here: macabre indeed, and this fascinating world has to offer. Yes, once again so very different from the odd things happen over there, none clear philosophical air of Alexander’s odder than when Calanus builds his own youth and of Aristotle. But eventually the impression is one of philosophy— funeral pyre and self-immolates. But Greek philosophy—gone wrong. There there does not seem much to learn from is nothing wrong or difficult with that. Whitmarsh argues that Plutarch is Hellenicity here, it is Alexander that has here ‘test[ing] his own conceptions of gone to pieces. It is all very different from Hellenism in the crucible of narrative’ the essays, and not at all multicultural. and offering ‘a voyage of self-discovery This work is just not very interested in (and in a sense self-destruction) for his the fascination of the East. But then this readers as well as his subject’29; yet, as peculiarly rich Life has so many other tests go, it is not that harrowing. This is things to be interested in, and they are not an episode to make any complacent points about Alexander the individual, Greeks lose their sleep. not about the world he conquered. The emphasis rests more on what has been lost, not on anything that is One other thing that this suggests been gained. Mossman talks about the is the wisdom of Thomas Schmidt’s ‘melancholy’ aspects of those final sub-title—‘la rhétorique d’une ima

28 Stoneman, 1995; cf. again the BNJ commentary on FGrH 134 F 17a. 29 Whitmarsh, 2002, pp. 191-2. 30 Mossman, 2006, p. 292. I say more about this in Pelling, forthcoming.

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 33-52 Plutarch the Multiculturalist: Is West always Best? 47 ge’. Thankfully, we no longer use ral and necessary causes, while words such as ‘mere rhetoric’ to be others were not lacking in his dismissive, even in the case of works torical or physical intelligence. that seem intellectually underwhelming (Isis and Osiris 353E). such as those Alexander essays: they In Herodotus’ Malice he waxes are what they are, and the ideas are indignant at the way that Herodotus interesting ones. Perhaps the notion represented Greece as drawing so many that Alexander is a greater philosopher of their religious ideas and customs from than Plato and Aristotle can even Egypt, “using the effronteries and legends set a complacent Greek back on his of the Egyptians to subvert the most heels, rather like Dandamis’ remark holy and sacred truths of Greek religion” about those over-conventional figures (857C-E): but here he stresses instead Socrates and Diogenes. They make that “the wisest of the Greeks”, Solon, one think, perhaps think more deeply Thales, Plato, Eudoxus, Pythagoras and than the final chapters of the Life; or at maybe Lycurgus too, themselves came least think about different things. But to Egypt to learn what they could from Plutarch’s rhetoric can go in different the priests (Isis and Osiris 354D-E). directions, and his mindset is flexible Plutarch can even use Egyptian ideas enough not always to think the same to correct the notions of Democritus, things about racial differences or about Epicurus, and the Stoics about the anything else. destructive powers of nature (369A). Let us end by going back to Isis In this mindset he is even generous in and Osiris. The passages quoted earlier treating Persian ideas too, though not so strike a different note from anything we generous as about Egyptian: he brings have seen in any of the Alexander works. in some ideas about Zoroastrianism, for That essay as a whole is anything but instance (369D-70E). Wisdom, it seems, dismissive: Egyptian ideas and Egyptian is to be found anywhere and everywhere: religious ceremonies are taken very whatever the cultural differences, those seriously, in all sorts of ways: they may culturally formulated insights may be obscure and strange, they may need each carry an element to illuminate a a lot of decoding (and the decoding is wisdom that everyone shares. ‘There is often pretty obscure too), but they are nothing wrong with regarding the gods certainly worth the effort. as common to all and not seeing them For there was nothing irratio as peculiar to the Egyptians’ (377C)— nal or legendary or based on su or, we might add, to the Greeks either: perstition, as some claim, among ‘Isis and her associated gods belong to the foundations of their cults; all humanity, and all humanity knows instead some were based on mo them’ (377D).

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 33-52 ISSN 0258-655X 48 Christopher Pelling

That helps to explain the great It is still true that this sort of approach, effort that he expends in that work indeed like Bush’s, implies a certain on investigating equivalences: Osiris generosity, accepting that the Egyptians is Dionysus, Sarapis is Pluto, and so have not simply got it all wrong, and in on (often with a ‘they say that’, but this work in particular that generosity is Plutarch is quite ready to play the game clear. The Egyptian insight is just as good himself too, e.g. 362B, 364D-E). That as the Greek, and may even be better. sort of syncretistic approach seems to So here we have a qualification of us frankly odd. Why should different Thomas Schmidt’s general conclusion, cultures have gods that they define in that Plutarch does not distinguish all the same way? Why can’t we say that that much between different types of one culture defines its gods and marks barbarian; though I would rather em off their typical activities in one way and phasise again the wisdom of that subtitle, another in another? But that is basically because we are on the whole a godless La rhétorique d’une image, and stress lot, at least as far as polytheistic gods that Plutarch can think and argue in are concerned. We therefore assume different ways at different times and in that that attribution of characteristics different mindsets. One recalls again how is no more than nomos, and there in Isis and Osiris he is more generous is no reason at all why each culture towards and interested in Persian wisdom should choose to picture their gods or than in the Alexander works, and much demarcate their spheres in related ways. more ready to accept the Greek debt to But if you really believe that those gods Egyptian thinking than in Herodotus’ exist, are out there somewhere, then it Malice. Foreigners and foreign culture makes better sense to say that different offer him a repertoire of possibilities and cultures might have inklings of the same thought-prompts, and the issue should not gods even if they put them in different be reduced to a single, monolithic ‘what ways31. For all we know, George W. Plutarch thinks’. Bush’s notorious claim that Christians Finally, why Egypt? What is so and Muslims worship the same god special about the country to inspire may have been based on some similar that generous, open-minded mindset thinking. Egyptians ‘know about’ a god (and not in Isis and Osiris alone, we and call him Osiris, the same god as the might add32)? Probably we should not Greeks know about and call Dionysus. be surprised. Egypt had always been

31 Cf. Chiai, 2013, pp. 56–7, who puts this point particularly well. 32 Cf. e.g. Numa 4.1, 14.9, On the Decline of Oracles 429F, God’s Slowness to Punish 552D, Amat. 764A-B.

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 33-52 Plutarch the Multiculturalist: Is West always Best? 49 like that, with all its suggestion of of narrative’ and ethnography. When intriguing, ancient wisdom: this, after Herodotus tells the Helen story (2.112- all, is the theme of Phiroze Vasunia’s 20), it is the Egyptian Proteus who has Gift of the Nile. It was that already the moral high ground, not those wife- for Plato and Aristotle; it is something stealing and child-sacrificing Greeks: special already in Homer, with that hint so much for any vaunted Greek moral of the riddling and the enigmatic in the superiority33. Even in Isis and Osiris story of Proteus: it is enigmatic still for we have not found anything quite Plutarch, and it is interesting that it is like that, just a readiness to look for when Cleopatra is at her most beguiling common denominators in Greek and and seductive and dangerous that Egyptian wisdom and use both as a Plutarch calls her ‘the Egyptian woman’, path to insight. Perhaps Ammonius had τὴν Αἰγυπτίαν (Antony 25.3, 29.6, 31.4, taught Plutarch more than we think34. How to tell a Flatterer from a Friend 61A). Virgil did something similar— Bibliography sequiturque (nefas!) Aegyptia coniunx Badian, E., (Aeneid 8.688)—but the associations for - “Alexander the Great and the Unity of Plutarch may be even more many-sided Mankind”, Historia, 9 (1958) 425–44. than they are for Virgil. Beck, M. (ed.), - A Companion to Plutarch, Malden, And of course Herodotus did all that Chichester, 2014. too. Were there time enough to discuss Bosman, P., how Herodotus uses Egypt, one could - “The Gymnosophist riddle context (P. argue that he does do a lot more of the Berol. 13044): a Cynic text?”, GRBS, sort of thing that Whitmarsh finds in 50 (2010) 175–92. Plutarch’s Alexander and I do not: using Chiai, G. F., Egyptian customs and traditions not - ‘Wie man von fremden Göttern erzählt: just to put Greek and Persian history in Herodot und der allmächtige Gott in den anderen Religionen’, in K. Geus, their chronological place, as Egyptian E. Irwin, and T. Poiss (eds.), Herodots history goes back so much further, Wege des Erzählens, Frankfurt am but also to ask searching questions Rhein, 2013, 55–82. about Greece, ‘testing [his audience’s] Garvie, A. F., conceptions of Hellenism in the crucible - Aeschylus: Persae, Oxford, 2009.

33 Plutarch himself was (or affected to be) outraged by this: Herodotus’ Malice 857B. 34 Including, perhaps, some of the dangers that attend such genial conferences along with the pleasures: at least, Ammonius found a tactful (though extreme) way of remonstrating with those who had lunched too well before an afternoon discussion (How to Tell a Flatterer from a Friend 70E). The food at Banff was excellent too, and so was the behaviour.

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 33-52 ISSN 0258-655X 50 Christopher Pelling

Hall, E., Pelling, C., - Inventing the Barbarian: Greek Self- - “East is East and West is West – or definition through Tragedy, Oxford, 1989. are they? National stereotypes in Hamilton, J. R., Herodotus”, Histos (1997a) (http:// - Plutarch, Alexander: a Commentary, research.ncl.ac.uk/histos/Histos_ Oxford, 1969. BackIssues1997.html: updated and annotated version in R. Munson (ed.), Harrison, T., Oxford Readings in Herodotus, Oxford, - The Emptiness of Asia: Aeschylus’ 2013, 360–79). Persians and the History of the Fifth - (ed.), Greek Tragedy and the Historian, Century, London, 2000. Oxford, 1997b. Hartog, F., - “Aeschylus’ Persae and history”, in C. - The Mirror of Herodotus: the Repre Pelling (ed.), Greek Tragedy and the sen tation of the Other in the Writing of Historian, Oxford, 1997c, 1-19. History (tr. J. Lloyd: Fr. original 1980), - “Conclusion: tragedy and ideology”, in Berkeley & London, 1988. C. Pelling (ed.), Greek Tragedy and the Jones, C.P., Historian, Oxford, 1997d, 213-35. - Plutarch and History: Eighteen Studies, - “The teacher of Plutarch”, HSCP, 71 Swansea, 2002. (1967) 205–13. - “Greek historians on Rome: Polybius, Klotz, F., Posidonius, and Dionysius of Halicar - “The sympotic works”, in Beck, 2014, nassus”, in J. Marincola (ed.), The 207–22. Blackwell Companion to Ancient Histo Macmillan, M., riography, Oxford, 2007, Vol. I, 244–58. - Peacemakers, London, 2001. - “Putting the –viv- into conviviality: the Quaestiones Conuiuales and the Lives”, Madsen, J. M. & Rees, R. (eds.), in F. Klotz & K. Oikonomopoulou - Roman Rule in Greek and Latin Writing: (eds.), The Philosopher’s Banquet: Double Vision (Impact of Empire 18), Plutarch’s Table Talk in the Intellectual Leiden & Boston, 2014. Culture of the Roman Empire, Oxford, Mossman, J., 2011, 207–31. - “Travel writing, history, and biography”, - “Political philosophy”, in Beck, 2014, in B.C. McGing & J. Mossman (eds.), 149–62. The Limits of Biography, Swansea, - “Space travel and time travel in Plutarch”, 2006, 281–303. in A. Georgiadoi & K. Oikonomopoulou Nikolaidis, A., (eds.), Space, Time and Language in - “Plutarch on Greek and barbarian Plutarch’s Visions of Greek Culture, characteristics”, WS, 20 (1986) 229–244. Berlin & New York, forthcoming. Opsomer, J., Pendrick, G.J., - “M. Annius Ammonius: a philosophical - Antiphon the Sophist: the Fragments, pro file”, in M. Bonazzi & J. Opsomer Cambridge, 2002. (eds.), The Origins of the Platonic Schmidt, T., System: Platonisms of the Early Empire - Plutarque et les barbares: La rhétorique and their Philosophical Contexts, Lou d’une image, Coll. d’Études Classiques vain, 2009, 125–86. 14, Louvain, 1999.

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 33-52 Plutarch the Multiculturalist: Is West always Best? 51

Stadter, P., Tarn, W. W., - “The proems of Plutarch’s Lives”, ICS, - “Alexander the Great and the unity of 13 (1988) 275–95. mankind”, Proceedings of the British - Plutarch and his Roman Readers, Academy, 19 (1933) 123–66. Oxford, 2015. Toynbee, A., - “If Alexander the Great had lived on”, Stoneman, R., Some Problems of Greek History, Ox - “Naked philosophers: the Brahmans in the ford, 1969, 441–86. Alexander historians and the Alexander Vasunia, P., Romance”, JHS, 115 (1995) 99–114. - The Gift of the Nile: Hellenizing Egypt Swain, S., from Aeschylus to Alexander, Berkeley, - “Plutarch’s de Fortuna Romanorum”, 2001. CQ, 39 (1989), 504–16. Walker, B., - “Plutarch, Plato, Athens, and Rome”, in - The Annals of Tacitus: a Study in the J. Barnes & M.T. Griffin (eds.), Philoso Writing of History, Manchester, 1952. phia Togata II: Plato and Aristotle at Ro Wallace-Hadrill, A., me, Oxford, 1997, 165–87. - Rome’s Cultural Revolution, Cambrid ge, 2008. Titchener, F. B. & Zadorojnyi, A., Whitmarsh, T., - The Cambridge Companion to Plutarch, - “Alexander’s Hellenism and Plutarch’s Cambridge, forthcoming. textualism”, CQ, 52 (2002) 174–92.

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 33-52 ISSN 0258-655X (Página deixada propositadamente em branco) Plutarch in Fifth-century Athens by Anthony Podlecki University of British Columbia [email protected] Abstract This article explores Plutarch’s contribution to our knowledge of fifth-century Athens through an examination of his biographies of Kimon, Themistokles, Perikles, Aristeides, Nikias, and Alkibiades. The article assesses the information that Plutarch conveys and, in addition, sets his work into its broader historical context through comparison with other ancient sources, and in particular with the history of Thoukydides. Key-Words: Kimon, Themistokles, Perikles, Aristeides, Nikias, Alkibiades, Thoukydides, Athens.

y plan in this the Persian threat, rose to greatness as paper is to look hegemon of a far-flung and powerful again at what coalition of mainly maritime states in may be called the eastern Mediterranean. We leave Plutarch’s con her towards century’s end just as her tribution—andM it is a not inconsiderable fleet, previously undefeated save for one—to our knowledge of the personal a setback in Egypt in the 450s, has side of fifth-century Athenian history. suffered a series of devastating blows Even if history is not exclusively (as first in Sicily and then in a final, Thomas Carlyle maintained) the study humiliating defeat at Aigospotamoi on of the great men (and women) of their the Hellespont in 405 BCE. periods, these were certainly important I examine the Lives of Kimon, actors in the dramatic events in which, Themistokles, Perikles, Aristeides, in the first part of the century, Athens Nikias, and Alkibiades. Plutarch is almost met her demise and then, in the interested in these six men as public aftermath of her surprising repulse of figures, generals who, to a greater or

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 ISSN 0258-655X 54 Anthony Podlecki less degree, involved themselves in the his catholic tastes and the generosity political events of their city. Beyond he displays in sharing with his readers this, however, Plutarch strove to give his the results of his research. Beyond that, readers a feeling for them as individual however, and more importantly for our personalities: the inventive and purposes here he brings his subjects manipulative Themistokles; Aristeides alive as persons. They are individuals, the paragon of civic and personal and, after reading what Plutarch has to virtue; Kimon a superlative general but say about them, we feel we have come a bon vivant, somewhat old-fashioned to know them and (to use a somewhat and probably a womanizer; Perikles, hackneyed phrase), “where they are (or the aristocrat who, paradoxically, had were) coming from”. almost irresistible appeal among ordinary Athenians; Nikias, a plutocrat who got 1. Kimon involved in public events (if we are to In the sequence of Athenian Lives accept Plutarch’s view, based on a near- that I intend to deal with here the pair consensus of the sources he was drawing Kimon-Lucullus were the earliest that upon) almost in spite of himself and Plutarch composed1. As we will see, the whose dithering cost Athens a victory Kimon is in many ways similar to the in the Sicilian campaign; and, lastly, Aristeides. Both men are characterized Alkibiades, the lion-cub who grew into by Plutarch as being “aristocratic” in 2 one of Athens’ most successful but their political propensities ; they both also most self-centered (and most self- had well-deserved reputations as generals destructive) of generals. and are presented by Plutarch as such, rather than, say, as political figures like I should add in full disclosure Themistokles and Perikles. But the Kimon that I came to these Lives originally seems to me to be a more interesting and and still value them highly for their varied enterprise than the Aristeides. straightforwardly historical value. They For one thing Kimon’s career covered a are immensely rich treasure-troves of wider time-period than Aristeides’s, with information about the events in which important developments for Athens both their subjects participated. Plutarch was internally and as a city bent on extending an assiduous and careful researcher her influence far beyond Attika. Plutarch (however one is to define that term), also had at his disposal, and appears to and we should be grateful to him for have made good use of, a wider range of

1 After some deliberation I have decided to discuss these Lives in the presumed order of their composition (see Jones, 1966, pp. 67-68; Nikolaidis, 2005, p. 318) rather than a chronological sequence of their subjects’ activities. 2 Cim. 10.8; Arist. 2.1.

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 Plutarch in Fifth-century Athens 55 source material, some of it contemporary. his youth he acquired a bad reputation Thus, Plutarch delves into fifth- for wild living and fondness for century elegy (Melanthios, Arkhelaos, drink. In addition Plutarch reports Kritias), comedy (Kratinos, Eupolis, on the authority of Stesimbrotos of Aristophanes), travelogue or personal Thasos—a contemporary witness, as memoir (Ion of Khios), and political Plutarch points out—that Kimon had diatribe (Stesimbrotos of Thasos). The no instruction in music (that is, poetry) result is a fully rounded and convincing or any other of the so-called “liberal” portrait of this perhaps somewhat accomplishments, and did not have underestimated fifth-century figure. Athenian cleverness or the gift of the After a rather lengthy and somewhat gab, but a nobility and candour, and rambling Proem, Plutarch launches into what you might call a Peloponnesian the Life proper with useful information kind of soul5. This gives Plutarch the about Kimon’s family background— opportunity of quoting a line from his Thracian origins on his mother’s Euripides’s Likymnios, where Herakles is side (for which Plutarch cites as described as “plain and straightforward, evidence “[elegiac] poems addressed virtuous in the extreme”6. to Kimon himself by Arkhelaos and Melanthios”). Plutarch then moves to It’s not clear how much of this Plu Kimon’s connection with Thoukydides t arch took directly from Stesimbrotos. the historian, whose gravestone, he What is clear is that we owe a debt to tells us in an aside, could be seen in the Plutarch for taking the trouble to look at Kimoneian burial grounds3. After a brief his work On Themistokles, Thoukydides flashback to the sad end experienced [son of Melesias] and Perikles. As A. by Kimon’s father Miltiades4, Plutarch W. Gomme points out, “Plutarch is gives his readers information about the first known writer to have read some of Kimon’s personal qualities. In him”7. Another writer whom Plutarch

3 Cim. 4.3. Plutarch returns to the Kimoneia burial grounds at the end of the Life, and implies that he has taken the trouble to look at them (μέχρι νῦν, Cim. 19.5). Cf. also Marcellinus (Vit. Thuc. 17), who adds, “where the graves of Herodotos and Thoukydides can be seen”. Herodotos locates them “outside the city [by the Melitides (most westerly) gate] beyond the road that is called ‘Through the Hollow’ (διὰ Κοίλης)” (6.103.3). 4 The tradition about Miltiades’s death was confused (Hdt. 6.132-136, with the note of Blamire, 1989, p. 91, on Cim. 4.4). 5 Cim.4.5; FGrH 1002 [107] F 4. The renumbering is by Engels, 1998a, who provides a measured and informative commentary on the fragments. 6 Fr. 473.1; translation of Collard & Cropp, 2008, p. 563. 7 Gomme, 1945, p. 37. He also notes that Athenaios is “the only other [writer] to have quoted from this pamphlet”. He adds (p. 36, n. 2) that he has “no reason to doubt” that the

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 ISSN 0258-655X 56 Anthony Podlecki rescued from relative obscurity was spoils or the prisoners after a campaign Ion of Khios, a prolific and versatile he chose the prisoners—for whom their contemporary author, whose work families were soon willing to pay large rather strangely entitled Ἐπιδημίαι, sums as ransom9. “Sojourns”, would have fallen into Plutarch picks up at various points oblivion but for Plutarch’s antiquarian in the narrative the theme of Kimon’s interest. He cites Ion for Kimon’s roving eye. The poet Melanthios, he physical appearance: a big man with reports, wrote an elegy poking fun 8 thick, curly hair which he wore long . at Kimon for his involvement with Later in the Life Plutarch relates at a lady named Asteria, whose family some length a story told by Ion of how, were from Salamis, and another named while still a boy, Kimon came to Athens Mnestra (which might, I suppose, be from Khios and was a guest at a dinner programmatic). We would know almost party given by a certain Laomedon. As nothing about this poet Melanthios if part of the after-dinner entertainment Plutarch had not taken an interest in Kimon was asked to sing and he him. In the treatise Conjugal Precepts acquitted himself well (οὐκ ἀηδῶς)— (144C), Plutarch reports that Melanthios and this in spite of his having had no ridiculed Gorgias of Leontini who formal instruction, as Stesimbrotos discoursed on Concord at Olympia but maintained—whereupon one of the could not bring harmony into his own guests complimented Kimon as being life: his wife was jealous over Gorgias’s cleverer than Themistokles, who used involvement with a slave girl. to boast that even though he had never For all his womanizing Kimon, learnt to sing or play the lyre, he knew Plutarch insists, was genuinely fond of how to make a city great (Cim. 9.1; his wife—a woman programmatically Plutarch will mention Themistokles’s named Isodike and a member of the riposte again in the Themistokles). Kimon genos to which Perikles belonged, then went on to relate a stratagem of the Alkmaionidai, and when she died his. When given a choice of keeping the consolatory elegies were written for

other stories in Plutarch about Kimon’s relations with women, and of Elpinike’s relations with Perikles and Polygnotos, are from Stesimbrotos. So, too, Blamire, 1989, p. 6, citing Cim. 4.6, 4.8 and 15.3. 8 Cim. 5.3; FGrH 392 F 12. Leurini, 2005, offers a succinct inventory of Plutarch’s debts to Ion. 9 Cim. 9.1; FGrH 392 F 13. Blamire, 1989, p. 5, suggests Ion as a possible source also of an anecdote involving Kimon’s retort to a Corinthian heckler during the campaign against the revolting helots (Cim. 17.1-2), Kimon’s judging of the dramatic competitions of 468 (8.7-9), Kimon and a Persian defector (10.9), and Perikles’s “going easy” on Kimon at the latter’s prosecution in 463 (14.3-5).

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 Plutarch in Fifth-century Athens 57

Kimon by the philosopher Arkhelaos10. in the aftermath of Kimon’s successful Who would have known that this suppression of the revolt of Thasos in celebrated “physical” philosopher and 463 BCE. He was brought to trial on alleged teacher of Sokrates also wrote the somewhat improbable charge that he elegies? For this fact Plutarch cites had taken bribes from King Alexander with approbation the Stoic philosopher of Macedon not to invade his territory. Panaitios, whom we shall encounter Perikles was among the prosecutors again in the Life of Aristeides11. and, according to a story Plutarch reports on the authority of Stesimbrotos, Not surprisingly we learn in this Life Elpinike pleaded with him to go easy a fair amount about Kimon’s sister or on her brother, but Perikles just smiled half-sister Elpinike12. The wags had it and said, “You’re too old for this sort of that Kimon started having sex with her thing, Elpinike”. Plutarch caps the tale by “while he was still a neos”, and that remarking that Perikles, who had been she was romantically involved as well the “most vehement” (σφοδρότατος) with the mural painter Polygnotos, who accuser, did not press for a conviction allegedly painted her likeness on one but stood up just once to go through the of the figures in the murals of the Stoa motions of bringing an accusation15. (It is Poikile13. In spite of, or maybe because more than a little suspicious that a variant of, all this, the family saw to it that she of this story occurs in the account of a married well, to Kallias Lakkoploutos, proposal for Kimon’s early recall from the famous plutocrat whom we shall ostracism allegedly made by Perikles16). hear of again in the Life of Aristeides, and it was this lucrative marriage that, In chapter 10 Plutarch draws the according to Plutarch, enabled Kimon attention of his readers to certain to pay his father Militades’s fifty-talent initiatives Kimon took to boost his fine14. Elpinike’s name crops up again ratings with the Athenian voters17.

10 Cim. 4.10. She was the daughter of Euryptolemos and granddaughter of Megakles, and so first cousin of Perikles’s mother, Agariste. 11 Cim. 4.10, fr. 125 von Straaten; cf. Plut., Arist. 1.6-8, 27.4. 12 If half-sister, she would have been Miltiades’s daughter by his first wife, not Hegisipyle. 13 Cim. 4.6. 14 Cim. 4.8. There were other, conflicting, versions of how Miltiades’s fine was paid. 15 Cim. 14.5 (repeated at Per. 10.6, where Stesimbrotos is not named), FGrH 1002 [107] F 5. 16 Per. 10.5, with the note of Holden, 1894, p. 116. 17 In Cim. 10.1 Plutarch says Kimon was using the funds that accrued from his military operations, and note also 14.3: Kimon at his trial claimed to have “adorned the city by enriching her at her enemies’ expense”. (This, as we shall see, does not jibe with the implication in the Perikles that Kimon used his private wealth, whereas Perikles had to rely on the surplus in the imperial treasury.) Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 ISSN 0258-655X 58 Anthony Podlecki

Among a variety of benefactions hard pressed the Athenian troops were Plutarch reports that he removed the he allegedly turned up with his tribal fences on his estates so that anyone contingent (Oineis) and offered his who wished could come in and pick assistance; he was rebuffed (by the the fruits; he also laid on free meals Boule in the Life of Kimon, by Perikles, in his home “so that the poor… would of course, in the Perikles) but his 100 be able to concentrate on their duties tribal colleagues all fell in the battle. as citizens”. Plutarch then notes a When the Athenians suffered a decisive discrepancy in his sources: Aristotle and humiliating defeat at the hands of (Ath. 27.3) said these benefactions were their Peloponnesian adversaries, they available not to the Athenians at large passed a special decree of recall, moved (the version ascribed to Theopompos, by Perikles, so that Kimon could return whom, though Plutarch does not name, five years early21. This whole story he appears to be following here18), looks—to me, at any rate—somewhat but only to Kimon’s demesmen, fishy, not least because, in the parallel Lakiadai. Plutarch will re-use much account in the Life of Perikles, Plutarch of this material in the Life of Perikles, remarks that according to “some where Perikles is forced to introduce a writers”—commentators think he had variety of “demagogic” measures like Stesimbrotos in mind—Elpinike again kleruchies and the theoric allowance engineered the deal: her brother was to compete with Kimon’s largesses19. to be recalled and the leadership of the Plutarch moves on to list public works Athenian forces divided between him initiated by Kimon, and reports that he and Perikles, Kimon to take command used the spoils of war for the south wall of two hundred ships (the figure is from of the Akropolis, plane trees in the Agora, Thoukydides 1.112) and pursue the and rehabilitation of the Academy20. campaign against the Persians by sea, Theopompos was also behind while Perikles was to have supreme Plutarch’s account both in this Life power in domestic matters. and in the Perikles of Kimon’s alleged Another major characteristic of involvement in the battle of Tanagra Kimon’s that Plutarch returns to several in Boiotia (c. 456 BCE). Kimon was times in the Life was his Laconism. living in exile because of his ostracism (We have already noted Plutarch’s— a few years before, but, seeing how or Stesimbrotos’s—remark that his

18 FGrH 115 F 89; cf. Athenaios (12.533A-B), citing Book 10 of Theopompos’s Philippika. 19 Per. 9.2. 20 Cim. 13.5-7. 21 Cim. 17.4-8; Per.10.1-4; FGrH 115 F 88.

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 Plutarch in Fifth-century Athens 59 temperament was more Peloponnesian Kritias’s somewhat critical remark than Athenian.) He famously named —in what work is not clear— that in one of his sons, presumably his first- pressing for a positive response to born, “Lakedaimonios”. Plutarch Sparta’s appeal, Kimon “was putting reports that Kimon was so relentless his country’s benefit second to Sparta’s in his praise of things Spartan that the advantage”25. The Spartan request Athenians got fed up with hearing him was opposed by Perikles’s associate say, whenever he wanted to dissuade Ephialtes, who urged the Athenians them from a course of action, “That’s “not to aid or raise up a city that was not what the Spartans would do”—this Athens’ rival but leave her where she on the authority of Stesimbrotos22. had fallen and let Sparta’s pride be Plutarch gives an account of the trampled down”. If Plutarch’s account debate at Athens in the late 460s about can be trusted—he cites no authority whether to send aid to the Spartans for his view—Kimon attempted when their helots had revolted and they unsuccessfully to get the Athenians to appealed to Athens for help. Plutarch repeal the reforms of c. 462 BCE that aptly cites the lines in Aristophanes’s docked the powers of the Areiopagos26. Lysistrata describing the Spartan The debate seems to have turned nasty, envoy—somewhat improbably named for Plutarch says that the democratic Perikleidas—sitting at the altar, all pale reformers dredged up the old slanders in his scarlet cloak, asking for troops23. of Kimon’s involvement with his half- And Plutarch once more draws on Ion sister and his Laconism, and it was this of Khios for the report that Kimon verbal sparring match that Plutarch says won the Athenians over to his side by the comic poet Eupolis was referring to urging them “not to allow Greece to years later in the lines (from his play go lame or Athens be deprived of their Poleis of c. 422 BCE): Kimon “was yoke-fellow”24. Plutarch also cites not a bad fellow, but he loved to tipple,

22 Cim.16.3; FGrH 1002 [107] F 7. In Stesimbrotos’s account of Kimon’s trial after Thasos Kimon is reported to have boasted that, as a proxenos of Sparta (and unlike others who were proxenoi of wealthy Ionian and Thessalian cities), his admiration for their “economy and moderation” made it improbable that he would have yielded to an offer of money by the Macedonian monarch. 23 Cim. 16.8; Ar., Lys. 1137 ff. 24 Cim. 16.10; FGrH 392 F 14. 25 Cim. 16.9; Kritias Vorsokr. 88 fr. B 52. Plutarch had earlier quoted an elegiac couplet in which Kritias mentioned Kimon’s μεγαλοφροσύνη as his distinguishing characteristic (Cim. 10.5, fr. 8 West). 26 Cim. 15.3.

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 ISSN 0258-655X 60 Anthony Podlecki and was an idler, and would sometimes oracle at Delphi which he consulted, make his bed in Sparta leaving Elpinike “discovered” Theseus’s bones and here all by herself”27. (To this Plutarch organized their ceremonious return and comments, rather huffily, “If an idle reinterment at Athens. “This exploit”, and drunk Kimon could capture so Plutarch remarks, “contributed more many cities and win so many battles, than any other to Kimon’s high standing obviously no Greek before or after him with the people”29. A few years later could have surpassed his exploits when Kimon and the rest of the board of he was sober and paying attention”). generals were given the unusual honour of being appointed extraordinary judges Plutarch is the only other source for the Dionysia when Sophokles, in besides Aiskhines in his speech Against his maiden appearance, won first prize, Ktesiphon to record three celebratory 469/8 BCE, and, according to Plutarch, epigrams erected to commemorate a Aiskhylos went off to Sicily in a huff signal victory won by the Athenian and died there30. forces under Kimon in the first allied undertaking of the renewed hostilities Kimon died while on campaign in against the Persians, who c. 476 BCE Kypros c. 450 BCE, a sad event which were driven out of Eion on the Strymon Plutarch marks by a short passage from 31 River in Thrace, and the inhabitants the comedy Arkhilokhoi of Kratinos , enslaved28. The Eion campaign was who praised Kimon as a “man who was followed by an attack on the Dolopian godlike, most hospitable and by far the 32 inhabitants of Skyros in the Cyclades. best leader of the Panhellenes” . Plutarch “They enslaved the inhabitants and follows up this quote from Kratinos with colonized the island themselves”, is a bon mot by Gorgias of Leontini: Kimon “acquired wealth in order to use it, and Thoukydides’s dry comment (1.98.2). 33 Plutarch fleshes out the episode with used it in order to be honoured” . an account of how Kimon, following In the Life of Kimon Plutarch a convenient lead provided by the provides a full and believable portrayal

27 Cim. 15.4, PCG fr. 221. 28 Cim. 7. 4-6; Th. 1.98.1, Aiskhines 3 Against Ktesiphon, 183-5, Tzetzes Lykophron 417 (see Blamire, 1989, p. 113). Heroic resistance by the Persian governor Boges is reported by Herodotos (7.107), naming Kimon. 29 Cim. 8.5-7, also Thes. 36; Paus. 3.3.7; Schol. Ar., Pl. 627; Arist., Ath. fr. 4. 30 Cim. 8.7-8. The implied date of Aiskhylos’s death is, of course, erroneous. 31 Dated by Bakola, 2009, p. 71, to “sometime between 435 and 422”. 32 Cim. 10.4; PCG fr. 1.2-3. 33 Cim. 10.5; Vorsokr. 82 B 20.

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 Plutarch in Fifth-century Athens 61 of his subject. Readers come away But Thoukydides tells an exciting story with a clear view of Kimon’s relatively of Themistokles’s escape from Athens uncomplicated character: gruff, sometime in the later 470s—a rebuff likeable, something of a bon vivant by the Kerkyreans when he asked for and definitely a ladies’ man. A man of asylum there, the theatrical appeal action rather than a thinker, much less to King Admetos of the Molossoi, an amateur musician, he was a capable Themistokles clutching the infant prince general, who could take bold steps as he made his plea, his threat to the sea- when these were called for, even at the captain transporting him from Pydna to cost of his own political capital with Ephesos via Naxos, his letter of appeal Athenian voters (the Thasos campaign, to Artaxerxes, and his final haven, a the helot revolt). The narrative flows hero battered but unbowed, living out smoothly. Plutarch deploys a variety his last years as a Greek mini-potentate of relevant source-material, all among barbarians in Magnesia, making the while following—when it was promises to the Great King that he had available—the narrative thread in his no intention of ever carrying through. best source, Thoukydides (and falling With Thoukydides providing this back, when he needed to fill gaps, on thrilling, faintly exotic, model, how respectable second-string players like could Plutarch’s own imagination not Theopompos). All in all, the Kimon is be fired, if not to surpass at least not fall the shortest, but also one of the most dismally short of his great predecessor? successful of these fifth-century Lives. It is reassuring to us as we critically sift through this Life that in the Themistokles 2. Themistokles Plutarch cites both Herodotos and If we did not have Thoukydides’s so- Thoukydides, the former three times called “Excursus” on Themistokles at and Thoukydides twice34. But from the close of Book I of The Peloponnesian the number of times Herodotos’s name War, we might be tempted to write off appears in Ziegler’s testimonia —some much of what Plutarch tells us about this 34, apart from the direct citations—, it extraordinary—I believe the modern is clear that Plutarch’s debt to Herodotos term might be “conflicted”—hero as is far larger —indeed, pervasive. From later fiction, the fevered ravings of a his rich knowledge of the fifth-century Douris of Samos, or material largely poetic corpus Plutarch excerpts valuable invented by the later writers of Athenian material about Themistokles’s personal history, the so-called Atthidographers. relationship with Simonides35 and—not

34 Hdt. 7.6, 17.1, 21.1; Th. 25.2, 27.1. 35 Simonides, Them. 1.4, 15.4.

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 ISSN 0258-655X 62 Anthony Podlecki a fan of Themistokles—Timokreon of Themistokles was approached by Rhodes36. Of fifth-century prose writers Simonides to do him a favour which he draws on Ion of Khios37 and the Themistokles considered out of line censorious Stesimbrotos of Thasos38. (τι τῶν οὐ μετρίων). Themistokles refused: why would Simonides expect Let’s start with the poets. The most him to do something παρὰ νόμον when interesting—to me, at least—is the close he, Simonides, would never consider relationship Themistokles seems to singing παρὰ μέλος41? On some other have had with Simonides. He has a fairly occasion, Themistokles got a little large presence in this Life. To establish personal in his banter, commenting that Themistokles’s connection with the it did not make sense for Simonides genos of Lykomidai, whose telesterion, to pour abuse on the Corinthians— or initiation-house, had been burnt when? where?—while he himself had down during the Persian occupation, portrait-busts made of himself although Plutarch reports, on Simonides’s he was ugly to look at (ὄντος αἰσχροῦ authority, that Themistokles had it τὴν ὄψιν)42. Much more substantial restored and decorated with paintings at is the information Plutarch provides his own expense. (A probable inference later when he paraphrases a poem of is that the information was contained in Simonides celebrating the “Sea-fight at some kind of celebratory poem, perhaps Salamis”, “no more brilliant action at 39 written for the occasion .) There are a sea had ever been undertaken by Greeks couple of pleasant anecdotes connecting or barbarians” “thanks to the courage the two men in chap. 5. While serving and zeal of the sailors, and the planning in some kind of official capacity— and cleverness of Themistokles”43. Plutarch here calls him “general”40— Much later in the Life Plutach quotes

36 Timokreon, Them. 21. 37 Them. 2.4. (cf. Cim. 9.1). 38 Them. 2.5, 4.5. 39 Them. 1.4. Marr, 1998, p. 72, suggests that it may have been a commemorative epigram, inscribed on the wall of the building after it was restored by Themistokles. 40 Them. 5.6. Plutarch repeats the anecdote elsewhere (Reg. et imp. apoph. 185D; De vit. pud. 534E; Praec. ger. 807B) where, as Marr, 1998, p. 82, points out, the office Themistokles held was the archonship. 41 This is a pun, for μέλος is a synonym for νόμος in one of its senses. 42 Cf. Marr, 1998, p. 82, on the background on this (for Plutarch’s biographical purposes, slightly irrelevant) exchange. 43 Them. 15.4. I have adapted some of the translation of Marr, 1998, p. 111, citing also De Her. mal. 869C-871B.

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 Plutarch in Fifth-century Athens 63 three passages from Timokreon of Queen at vv. 341-43 that “The multitude Rhodes in which, as Plutarch remarks, of ships in Xerxes’s fleet ... were no less the Rhodian poet attacked Themistokles than 1000, and those of outstanding speed rather bitterly (πικρότερον). The back 207” (1207 was to become the canonical story here appears to be (or so Timokreon number, repeated by all later writers: claimed) that Themistokles promised Herodotos, Isokrates, Diodoros—and to see that Timokreon was restored to here, in Plutarch). his homeland after the war, and then Old Comedy, normally a rich went back on his word—after taking a source of gossip and bawdy invective, bribe, according to Timokreon. Plutarch offered only slim pickings, probably reports that Timokreon pursued his poetic because by the time comedies began vendetta still further, heaping insults on to be performed at the Lenaia festival Themistokles when the latter had been shortly before 440 BCE (they were condemned on a charge of Medism included in the City Dionysia from and was living in exile. (Interestingly, the 480s) Themistokles was long off Timokeron also picked a poetic fight the local political scene, indeed, off with Themistokles’s friend Simonides, any scene even on a late chronology. if verses under the poets’ names in the Plutarch did, however, remember that Palatine Anthology are to be credited). in Knights (presented at the Lenaia The other fifth-century lyric poet 424 BCE) the Sausage-seller refutes cited in the Life is Pindar, who celebrated Paphlagon’s claims to have done the allied victory in the sea-battle off more for Demos than Themistokles, Cape Artemisium in northern Euboia who “kneaded the Peiraieus on to the in late summer 480 BCE as the place city” (v. 815). Plutarch quibbles with “where the sons of the Athenians laid this: what really happened was that the bright foundation of freedom”44. Themistokles “fastened the city on to (Plutarch was evidently very attached to Peiraieus and the land on to the sea”46. the phrase which he quotes in four other Almost at the end of the Life Plutarch places in his works45.) For the number adduces the valuable testimony of Plato of ships in Xerxes’s fleet, what better Comicus, four lines which Diodoros, source of information than Aiskhylos, the third-century writer on topography, who, as Plutarch says, “both knew and claimed supported his identification confirmed the number strongly”, when of a monument near the great harbour he had the Messenger in Persians tell the of Peiraieus as the “Tomb of The

44 Them. 8.2; Pi. fr. 77 Race; I quote his translation. 45 Apoph. Lac. 232E; Mul. virt. 250E; De sera num. 552B; De Her. mal. 867C. 46 Them. 19.4.

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 ISSN 0258-655X 64 Anthony Podlecki mistokles”: “Your tomb, mounted have studied under Anaxagoras and high in a lovely spot where seafaring Melissos the physical philosopher? merchants will address it, in view of all Anaxagoras and Melissos, Plutarch who sail in or out, and itself a spectator says huffily, were contemporaries of at every trireme race”47. Pe rikles, so Stesimbrotos has “got his 49 Of fifth-century prose writers Ion and chronology wrong” . According to Stesimbrotos—whom we have encoun Stesimbrotos Themistokles had to get tered already in the Life of Kimon—had his plans to enlarge the Athenian fleet some items to offer. Without naming accepted by the people in the face of Ion as his source, Plutarch recounts opposition from Miltiades (Them. 4.5; again how Themistokles, when at social Plutarch does not comment, although gatherings he was put on the defensive his readers—and we—would know that by those who thought of themselves as with Militades off the scene by 489, this more “cultured and refined”, retorted would have been another example of rather brusquely (φορτικώτερον) that poor chronology). Finally, Stesimbrotos “even though he had never learnt to gave a strange variant of what happened sing or play the lyre, he did know how to Themistokles after he left Greece. to make a city great”48. The Thasian According to him, Themistokles went pamphleteer Stesimbrotos was the from mainland Greece to Sicily, where sour ce Plutarch loved to hate. He cites he sought asylum at the court of Hieron him eleven times in these Athenian and offered to marry Hieron’s daughter Lives, three of which are in this Life, (the other item for which Plutarch cites and often Plutarch rejects—sometimes Stesimbrotos is plausible enough, that strongly—Stesimbrotos’s testimony. Kimon brought a capital charge against Apart from its title (On Themistokles, the man who helped get Themistokles’s wife and children out of Athens to Thoukydides [son of Melesias] and 50 Perikles), virtually nothing can be rejoin him in exile ). asserted with certainty about the nature Five times in this Life Plutarch and date of publication of his book. cites Phanias or Phainias of Eresos on What Stesimbrotos reported about Lesbos, who was a pupil of Aristotle Themistokles Plutarch found less than and “a typical scholar and writer of the satisfactory. How could Themistokles early Peripatetic school”51. Plutarch

47 Them. 32.6; FGrH 372 F 35; PCG fr. 199. 48 Them. 2.4 = Cim. 9.1; Ion FGrH 392 F 12. 49 Them. 2.5; FGrH 1002 [107] F 1 οὐκ εὖ τῶν χρόνων ἁπτόμενος. 50 Them. 24.7; FGrH 1002 [107] F 3 51 Engels, 1998c, 291. For an up-to-date treatment of various aspects of Phainias’s life and writings see now Hellman and Mirhady, 2015. ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 Plutarch in Fifth-century Athens 65 goes out of his way to praise him as who stood firm”—μονίμων ὁπλιτῶν “a philosopher and not unversed in - into mariners and seafarers58 and in literature”52. He draws on Phainias for a Meno we are told that Themistokles’s variety of items: Themistokles’s mother son Diophantos had been taught by was not Thracian, as generally believed, his father, if nothing else, how to be but a Carian named Euterpe53. With the a good horseman59. The Aristotelian fleet off Artemisium Themistokles used Constitution of Athens, a ready source a particularly tricky scheme to prevent for many constitutional details in one of the ship captains from breaking these Lives, is cited here for the eight- ranks and sailing away54. As part of drachma stipend paid by authority of his Salamis narrative Plutarch tells at the Areiopagos to the Athenian sailors length the story of how some Persian before Salamis60. royals, Xerxes’s nephews, were taken In the Nikias Plutarch speaks with captive and sacrificed to Dionysos a note of justified pride of what he ὠμηστής55. (This is where Plutarch feels he can add to his written sources stops to pay Phainias the compliment and the traditions he has inherited as just mentioned. He will repeat the tale a Greek man of learning: monuments, in the Life of Aristeides56). He cites dedications, inscriptional evidence Phainias again for variant versions of which he has himself examined. In two minor details in the last, the Asian, this category are to be placed the part of Themistokles’s life57. votive plaque that Themistokles set up Plutarch cites Plato twice in this to commemorate his choregic victory Life. In the Laws, Themistokles is in 477/6 with plays by Phrynikhos61. faulted for turning Athenian “hoplites Plutarch mentions, very likely from

52 Them. 13.5; FGrH 1012 F 19. 53 Them. 1.2; FGrH 1012 F 17. 54 Them. 7.7; FGrH 1012 F 18: a one-talent “bribe” which, if the man, Arkhiteles, did not accept, Themistokles would denounce him for accepting bribes. 55 Them. 13.2-5; FGrH 1012 F 19. 56 Arist. 9.2. 57 Them. 27.8; FGrH 1012 F 20, Themistokles’s meeting with the chiliarch Artabanos; Them. 29.11; FGrH 1012 F 22, two additional tributary cities to those mentioned by Thoukydides, Perkote for bedding and Palaiskepsis for clothing. 58 Them. 4.4; Laws 706C. 59 Them. 32.1; Meno 93B. 60 Them. 10.6; Ath. 23.1-2. 61 Them. 5.5, probably Phoinissai, allegedly a model for Aiskhylos’s Persians. Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 ISSN 0258-655X 66 Anthony Podlecki autopsy, the shrine Themistokles had ephors not to oppose his plan, whereas οἱ built near his own house in Melite, πλεῖστοι said it was by deception62. When dedicated to “Artemis Best Counsellor”, Themistokles made his final escape to the in which—much to the displeasure of the Persian court, the value of his confiscated Athenians—he placed a bust of himself, property was set at one hundred talents by which Plutarch says survived right down Theopompos, eighty by Theophrastos63. to his own time, καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς. He describes Plutarch rejects Theopompos’s report that dedications made to celebrate the victories when in exile Themistokles “wandered at Artemision in N. Euboia; “the stone”, about” Asia. Instead, he accepts the Plutarch remarks, “when rubbed gives off common view that he settled in as a the colour and odour of saffron” (Them. grandee in Magnesia64. From Theo 8.4). Plutarch closes his Life with a short phrastos’s “On Kingship” Plutarch retails account of Themistokles’s descendants. the story of Themistokles arousing the ire He adds valuable personal details of his of the spectators at the Olympic games dealings with the Themistokles who was against Hiero of Syracuse65. a contemporary of his at Athens, and who was the beneficiary of certain honours The structure of the Themistokles is that had been accorded Themistokles’s relatively simple. Chapters 1 - 17 are descendants by the people of Magnesia “almost pure narrative”66, covering the where he ended his days. period to the close of the Persian Wars. Theopompos, thought to be an There follows a bridge chapter 18 devoted important though unnamed source in to anecdotes and apophthegms, eight of some of these Lives, is cited three times each, a larger number in a single chapter in the Themistokles, and Theophrastos than any Athenian Life except Phokion, twice. Theopompos’s was the lone where chapter 9 has ten anecdotes and dissenting voice in Plutarch’s sources apophthegms67. Then the narrative re for the way Themistokles managed the sumes, chapters 19-31 dealing with events refortification of Athen over the oppo from 479 BCE to Themistokles’s death in sition of the Spartans: Theopompos said 460/59 BCE on the high chronology or Themistokles had bribed the Spartan 450/49 BCE on the low68.

62 Them. 19.1; FGrH 115 F 85. 63 Them. 25.3; FGrH 115 F 86; FHSG fr. 613. 64 Them. 31.3; FGrH 115 F 87. 65 Them. 25.1; FHSG fr. 612; Mirhady, 1992, pp. 137-38. 66 See Gomme, 1945, p. 61. 67 Podlecki, 2005, p. 273 and p. 275. 68 Marr, 1998, pp. 159-60, on the (unresolvable) problems. ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 Plutarch in Fifth-century Athens 67

Pelling called the Themistokles “not record of all the other men who were later on the whole one of Pluarch’s most dubbed, sometimes with a slight tone of thoughtful or incisive Lives”69, but it disparagement, δημαγωγο ί. What could remains a real treasure-trove to students have impelled a man of (as Plutarch of fifth-century Athenian history who believed) a staunchly “aristocratic” have to look in unlikely places to back ground and temperament to initiate, reconstruct the details of this strange at various points in his career, measures but fascinating individual70. that were, or could be characterized as, shamelessly “crowd-pleasing”? Plu 3. Perikles tarch set himself the formidable task of When Plutarch sat down to collect his trying to elucidate for his readers, and thoughts for his Life of Perikles he knew for us, the reasons why and the stages he had a problem, several problems, by which this unlikely transformation in fact. Sources he could consult (or occurred, but in my opinion he was remember) were spotty and partisan. only partially successful in this enter They offered him next to nothing about prise, and the real motives behind Perikles’s early life, although he could some of Perikles’s undertakings remain of course fall back on traditions about shrouded in mystery. the Alkmeonidai. In addition, many of I shall start with an overview of the accounts with which he was familiar the major sources Plutarch relied on in (Stesimbrotos, Theopompos) were ac composing the Perikles. tively hostile, and they singled out an unattractive characteristic of Perikles’s For the last part of Perikles’s career personality, his aloofness (σεμνότης). Plutarch sensibly relied heavily upon Plutarch knew that he could deal with this Thoukydides the historian, whom he by turning it into a positive virtue, μεγα cites by name five times: Per. 9.1 = λοφροσύνη, high-mindedness. Further 2.65.10, the famous aperçu, that Athens more, although Perikles’s background was “in name a democracy but in fact the was one of privilege and he kept company arkhê of the foremost man”; Per.15.3, with others of his kind, he became the recapitulated at Per.16.3 = 2.65.8 προστάτης τοῦ δήμου with the best track praise of Perikles’s incorruptibility71;

69 Pelling, 1992, p. 29 (= 2002, p. 132). 70 It is worth quoting Gomme, 1945, p. 61, for an appreciation of Plutarch’s achievement: “everything Themistokles did, both great and small, illustrates his remarkable, complex, but yet simply drawn, character, which for Plutarch is all high lights and darkness; and there was much material, full of interest if somewhat monotonous in tone”. 71 Perikles’s incorruptibility was a feature that clearly impressed Plutarch. He returns to it twice in the Comparison 30(3) 5 and 6. Interestingly, as Rhodes, 1988, p. 243, points out, Thoukydides has Perikles in his last speech make this claim in his own behalf (2.60.5). Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 ISSN 0258-655X 68 Anthony Podlecki

Per.28.2 Thoukydides is named among Plutarch’s citations, Ion was no friend historians who, by their silence, refute of Perikles, but showed a strong bias the charge laid by Douris of Samos that towards Kimon. In a claim that savours Perikles had dealt with the rebellious of personal animus, Ion charged Peri Samians with excessive brutality; kles with having “a rather disdainful Per.28.8 = 8.76.4 the Samians had come and arrogant manner of address, very close to defeating the Athenians in and…his pride had in it a good deal that revolt; Per.33.1 = 1.127.1, on the of superciliousness and contempt for eve of the outbreak of hostilities the others”73. (Kimon, by contrast, elicited Spartans made the unrealistic demand Ion’s praise for his “ease, good humour that war could be averted if the Athe and polished manner”). In the account nians should “drive out the curse” of of the Samian Revolt later in the Life, Perikles’s genos, the Alkmeonidai and clearly chiming in with this rather (viz., by exiling Perikles himself). To sour account of Perikles’s manner, Ion is these specific citations, however, there cited for Perikles’s boast that, whereas should be added the numerous echoes it had taken Agamemnon ten years to of Thoukydides that Ziegler tabulates in capture Troy, he had brought Samos his testimonia. A good example of this to heel in nine months74. Stesimbrotos is Plutarch’s comment at Per. 13.16 on of Thasos likewise appears to have the difficulty a historian faces in getting been no admirer of Perikles. Four at the truth of past events = 1.22.3. (In times in this Life Plutarch cites his passing, I note that this is similar to work On Themistokles, Thoukydides the way Plutarch uses Thoukydides in [son of Melesias] and Perikles, but Kimon72, where he cites the historian little can be gleaned about it from the five times by name but follows him in meagre remains and generally the tone a general way in his narrative of the is negative, even abusive. The reader period after the Persian Wars.) Another is treated to scurrilous gossip about contemporary witness was Ion of Khios. Perikles’s involvement with the wife of His enigmatically titled Sojourns (Epi his son Xanthippos (Per. 13.6, FGrH dêmiai) was a potentially fruitful source 1002 [107] F 10b), which Plutarch of information, especially of a personal dismisses as “shocking and completely nature. As far as we can tell from unfounded”. These unsavoury rumors

72 Ziegler, in the Teubner edition, notes this general similarity, pointing to Cim. 6 = Th. 1.94.5; Cim. 11 = Th. 1.99. 73 Per. 5.3, tr. Scott-Kilvert, FGrH 392 F 15. To these charges of arrogance, disdain for others and superciliousness I shall return later. 74 Per. 28.7; FGrH 392 F 16.

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 Plutarch in Fifth-century Athens 69 according to Stestimbrotos had been and brokered a deal with Perikles to spread by Xanthippos himself and father secure her brother’s early recall from and son remained unreconciled even to ostracism (Cim. 17.8, Per.10.5, where the death of the latter in the plague (Per. Plutarch ascribes the story to ἔνιοι77). 36.6, FGrH 1002 [107] F 11). More In spite of Plutarch’s professed promising as historical fact are a couple distaste for and disapproval of Old Co of items from the Samian campaign. medy78, luckily for us he was not above In his epitaphios for the Samian War enlivening his narrative with a barrage dead Perikles made the memorable of the anti-Periklean invective to be comparison of the casualties to the found there. Students in any subsequent immortal gods for, he said, “We cannot period are deeply indebted to his see the gods, but we believe them to researches in this area for the light be immortal from the honours we pay thrown on the social and cultural, as them and the blessings we receive from 75 well as at times also political history of them” . It looks as if Stesimbrotos had the period79, Since I have explored the given a fairly full account of the Samian evidence at several reprises previously, campaign, for Plutarch records a tactical I shall summarize the results in more detail (which, however, he rejects Per. or less tabular form80. Plutarch inserts 26.1, FGrH 1002 [107] F 8). Plutarch into his narrative direct quotations (or also recounts the story here of Kimon’s in one instance, a paraphrase) from sister Elpinike supposedly intervening six comic poets, as well as three times with Perikles and pleading with him to excerpting from authors to whom he show clemency toward her brother at the re fers generically as οἱ κωμικοί, οἱ latter’s trial c. 462 BCE, a detail he had κωμῳδοποιοί, αἱ κωμῳδίαι vel sim. already reported in the Kimon, where In the following table I list them in 76 he names Stesimbrotos as his source . roughly chronological order with the Stesimbrotos may also be behind the number of passages quoted or referred story that Elpinike intervened yet again to by Plutarch in curved brackets ( ),

75 Per. 8.9, trans. Scott-Kilvert; FGrH 1002 [107] F 7. 76 Per.10.6; Cim. 14.5; FGrH 1002 [107] F 5. 77 Holden, 1894, p. 116. 78 Comp. Ar. et Men. 853B and following. 79 I sidestep here the knotty question of whether, and to what extent, Plutarch was directly familiar with the comic works from which he cites so appositely and amusingly (a pre-existing compilation cannot be ruled out, but for our purposes here the issue has no relevance). 80 Fuller discussions at Podlecki, 1973; Podlecki, 1987 [1990], pp. 81-88; Podlecki, 1998, pp. 169-76. Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 ISSN 0258-655X 70 Anthony Podlecki and an indication by understrike of 524-527 [2] [6]. whether the author in question is cited Telekleides (2) 3.6 an unnamed play or mentioned in another Life and using PCG fr.47 [1] [5]; 16.2 an unnamed boldface to indicate an occurrence play PCG fr. 45 [6]. in the Moral Essays (Moralia). After the name of each author I tabulate the Plato Comicus (1) 4.4 an unnamed section of the Life where the reference play PCG fr. 207 [7]. or citation occurs and where possible, Hermippos (1) 33.8 an unnamed the number assigned to the passage in play, possibly Fates PCG fr. 47 [6] [7]. Kassel-Austin PCG. Figures in square brackets [ ] following each citation οἱ κωμικοί (3) 7.8 PCG fr. 700 [6]; refer to the introductory tabulation of 13.15 PCG fr. 702 [7] 16.1 PCG fr. 703 themes touched on in the passage (in [4]; 24.9 PCG fr. 704 [2]. some cases, more than one), as follows: Perusal of the above table confirms 1. Themes a preliminary impression that the come dians did not hesitate to look for easy [1] Perikles’s alleged cranial pecu laughs by alluding to Perikles’s oddly liarity; [2] his liaison with Aspasia, and shap ed head: “head-gatherer”, “squil- the notoriety this occasioned; [3] his headed Zeus”, Zeus the “head-god” Zeus-like, “Olympian” comportment; (Kratinos, with a subtle side reference [4] “tyrannical” behaviour imputed to to his “Zeus-like” behaviour); “head- him; [5] his involvement with Athenian man [κεφάλαιον] of the Underworld- building projects; [6] external, imperial, dwellers” (Eupolis); “with a big head initiatives; [7] other. ache …in his eleven-couched head” 2. Authors (Telekleides). Aspasia too was an easy Kratinos (5) 3.5 from Kheirons target. In an astonishing display of PCG fr.258 [1] [4], from Nemesis PCG comedic παρρησία Kratinos had one fr. 118 [1] [3]; 13.8 an unnamed play of his characters say in an unnamed PCG fr. 326 [5]; 13.10 from Thracian play, “Buggery gave birth to Hera- Women PCG fr. 73 [1] [3] [5] [7]; 24.9 Aspasia, the bitch-faced concubine”, an unnamed play PCG fr. 259 [2]. where the reference to Hera would have had overtones of Perikles as Zeus, Eupolis (2) 3.7 from Demes PCG an identification which could also be fr.115 [1]; 24.10 also from Demes PCG evoked by comments such as Aristo fr.110 [2] [7]. pha nes’s famous lines about the way Aristophanes (3) 8.4 Akharnians Perikles “thundered and lightened” and 531 paraphrase [3]; 26.4 from Babylo “wore a terrible lightning bolt in his nians PCG fr.71 [6]; 30.4 Akharnians tongue”. Perikles’s “tyrannical” actions

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 Plutarch in Fifth-century Athens 71 could also be attacked more directly and embargo on Megarian exports in re more ominously: some comic writers ta liation. Plutarch names the comic whom Plutarch does not name referred writer Hermippos83 twice, first and to Perikles and his associates as “new less reliably in chapter 32 as the Peisistratids”. Of historical interest sponsor of a decree charging Aspasia are Kratinos’s jokes about Perikles with asebeia with an additional charge “dragging his feet” in the completion of of procuring free-born women for the “middle” Long Wall from the city to Perikles (this possibly from a comedy Peiraieus and ludicrously wearing the rather than an actual indictment84). Odeion on his head, apparently just after Plutarch proceeds in the following escaping a vote of ostracism81. Plutarch chapter to quote a seven-line excerpt quotes an excerpt from Aristophanes’s from an unnamed play in which one first production,Babylonians , produced of Hermippos’s characters addresses in 426 BCE: “How multi-lettered are Perikles as “King of satyrs” and asks, the Samian people!” Plutarch places “Why are you not willing to take up this in the context of the punishment a spear [and fight], but keep offering of branding meted out to prisoners on frightening speeches about the war, both sides in the Samian campaign82. but have the soul of a Teles?”—an In the four-line snippet quoted from individual otherwise unknown but Akharnians Dikaiopolis produces a clearly a by-word for cowardice—“You travesty of events that precipitated the gnash your teeth when the knife-edge Peloponnesian War: the real reason it is sharpened on the hard whetstone, broke out was some pranks by young hot bitten by fiery Kleon”. “King of satyrs” bloods on both sides culminating in the implies lecherousness, presupposed by Megarians capturing two of Aspasia’s stories given currency by the κωμικ οί pornai and Perikles engineering the that some of Perikles’s close associates

81 Plutarch quotes Kratinos’s lines again in this context at De glor. Ath. 351A. It is not clear what wall Kratinos’s joke referred to. If Plutarch was correct in citing Plato’s Gorgias (455E) for the detail that Sokrates heard Perikles proposing the project, it cannot have been the Long Walls, which Thoukydides dates between 459 and 457 BCE (discussion at Podlecki, 1987, p. 47, and Podlecki, 1998, pp. 99-100, 170). 82 It is not clear how much credibility should be put in Plutarch’s explanation: foreheads of the Samian prisoners tattooed by their Athenian captors with a sêmaina, a Samian warship, Athenian captives being branded with an owl. 83 Two additional fragments not in Perikles: PCG fr.69 “a head as big as a pumpkin”; PCG fr. 70 “Say, there, tickle my head, will you?” 84 In an interesting talk at the annual meetings of the Classical Association of Canada Prof. Ian Storey of Trent University suggested that the play was Fates, for which he proposed a date of 430 BCE. Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 ISSN 0258-655X 72 Anthony Podlecki acted as procurers85. The charge against to build, others to throw down again, Perikles that he “was all talk, but no treaties, power, force, peace, wealth and action” reflects the pressure ikles Per happiness”. Eupolis’s Demes, produced was under in the early years of the war after Perikles’s death (c. 412 BCE), had to move from a defensive to an offensive a scene in which various generals and stratgegy. And Kleon, his soon-to-be statesmen of a bygone age were conjured successor as prostates, appears here, from Hades, with Perikles emerging last. 86 as Gomme noted , for the first time He asks the general Myronides, who in the historical record. The unnamed had preceded him, “And my bastard, κωμῳδοποιοί whom Plutarch cites at is he still alive?” —the audience will chap. 7.8 charged that Perikles had have recognized the allusion to his son given in to pressures for expanding the by Aspasia, the younger Perikles— to empire: the demos “no longer had the which Myronides replies, “Yes, and he nerve to obey authority, but nibbled at would have been a man long before now Euboia and leapt on the islands”, where if he were not so scared of the blemish of the reference to Euboia is probably the whore” (Per. 24.10). to be taken as an allusion to Perikles’s speedy action in suppressing the island’s As is his custom in these Lives revolt in 446 BCE (Per. 22.1, 23.3-4). Plutarch combs through traditions Allegations that Perikles was arrogating concerning philosophical “succession” to himself “tyrannical” power could be and comes up with names of his subject’s spelled out in detail, as in a trenchant “teachers”, those who exercised a for three-line excerpt from an unnamed play mative intellectual or moral influence. by Telekleides quoted by Plutarch at He took over, somewhat uncritically, Per. 16.2, where perhaps the Chorus are Plato’s jeu-d’esprit that Perikles owed mocking the Athenians for handing over his “high-mindedness” to Anaxagoras’s 87 to Perikles “both tribute from the cities ethereal philosophizing . Plutarch re and the cities themselves, some to bind, ferences Plato again in discussing the others to loose [this appears to refer deleterious (from an aristocrat’s stand to various adjustments in the tribute- point) effects of the Areiopagos re payments the allies were expected to pay forms of c. 461 BCE, like a cupbearer annually to Athens], walls of stone, some “pouring out undiluted freedom for the

85 Per. 13.15, Pheidias, Pyrilampes. 86 Gomme, 1956, p. 75. 87 Per. 4.6 - 5.1, 8.1-2, where Plutarch names Plato and paraphrases the passage (Phaidros 270A). The comment of Yunis, 2011, p. 209, is apposite: “both the overall tone and specific terms used by S[okrates] are unmistakably ironic”. ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 Plutarch in Fifth-century Athens 73 citizens”88. As already noted a passage of the Samian campaign Plutarch re in Gorgias provided the (somewhat cords two details from a work by problematic) information that Sokrates Aristotle no longer extant: Per. 26.3, personally heard a proposal by Perikles fr. 535 Rose, Perikles himself was de re garding Athens’ fortifications89. Plu feated by the philosopher Melissos tarch cites Plato’s Menexenos for the in an early sea battle and Per. 28.2, re port that Aspasia “was reputed to fr. 536 Rose, where Plutarch names have associated with many Athenians Aristotle, along with Thoukydides and Ephoros, as sources which he says did who wanted to learn rhetoric from not support the claim by Douris of her”90. Still probing for information Samos that Perikles brutalized Samian about Perikles’s teachers Plutarch prisoners-of-war. Aristotle’s pupil and turns to the Aristotelian Constitution successor Theophrastos is cited three of Athens (27.4) and comes up with the times. For the first two Plutarch does names of Damon (or Damonides) and not identify the treatise from which the somewhat shadowy Pythokleides 91 they are drawn: Perikles’s alleged of Keos . Plutarch also adduces the annual dispatch of 10 T to Sparta to Constitution for the name of Ephialtes’s stave off the war (Per. 23.2, FHSG assassin, Aristodikos of Tanagra, and fr. 615) and the name of Simmias as uses it to counter the alternative (and Perikles’s accuser in summer 430 BCE scurrilous) version propagated by Ido (Per. 35.5, FHSG fr. 616)93. From meneus of Lampsakos that it was Theophrastos’s Ethics comes a story of Perikles who orchestrated the removal how Perikles on his deathbed scoffed of his erstwhile colleague in the at his own gullibility in accepting an Areiopagos reforms92. In his narrative amulet to restore his health94. Plutarch

88 Per. 7.8; Pl., R. 562D. 89 See n. 81 above, with the comments of Dodds, 1966, p. 210, on the Gorgias passage, 455E. 90 Per. 24.7 = Pl., Mx. 235Ε. Plutarch recognizes that some (in fact, probably all) of this was μετὰ παιδιᾶς. 91 Per. 4.1-4 (with an apt citation from Plato Comicus [PCG fr. 207] in which someone addresses Damon as “the Khiron who brought up Perikles”—who is thereby being likened to Akhilleus) and Per. 9.2. Since Pythokleides’s name occurs, along with Damon and Anaxagoras, in the Platonic First Alkibiades (118C), it is generally held that Plutarch’s reference to Aristotle is an error. 92 Per.10.8; Ath. 25.4; Idomeneus FGrH 338 F 8. 93 Gomme, 1956, pp. 182-83, for some uncertainties surrounding this prosecution. 94 Per. 38.2; FHSG fr. 463. Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 ISSN 0258-655X 74 Anthony Podlecki castigates the scandal-monger Douris which Plutarch had little sympathy, of Samos at Per. 28.2 for “magnifying so Plutarch knew that he had to use Perikles’s alleged brutality at Samos the source with caution and do a little into a tragedy”. (He cannot, however, laundering, if necessary. Plutarch refrain from retailing some of the grisly names Aiskhines the Socratic as his details from Douris’s account, FGrH source for two items, Aspasia taking 76 F 67). The extent to which Plutarch up with Lysikles “the Sheep-dealer” drew on Theopompos is still a matter after Perikles’s death (Per. 24.6) and of debate among scholars95. At Per. 9.2 Perikles’s tearful appeal to the jurors to he repeats material he had presented in show clemency to Aspasia at her trial the Kimon (10.1-2) regarding Kimon’s (Per. 32.5). From external evidence we largesses, the popularity these gained know that it was another disciple of for him, and the counter-measures Sokrates, Antisthenes, who was behind Perikles took—allegedly on the advice the silly story that Perikles always of his “teacher” Damon/Damonides— kissed Aspasia when he left home in the to “out demagogue” his opponent. In morning and returned again at night98. his comment on the Kimon passage A. From somewhere in his capacious Blamire drew attention to Theopompos memory (or notes) Plutarch came up with FgrH 115 F 89, which was “followed the excellent squib by Kritolaos (perhaps almost verbatim, but not named” by to be identified with the second century Plutarch96. A. Blamire further re BCE head of the Peripatetic school) that marked that, although Plutarch does Perikles, like the state galley Salaminia, not cite Theopompos either there or in “saved himself for great occasions”99. the Perikles, he “must be considered an important source for both”97. I want to move now to some Theopompos had made Perikles a ty problems that Plutarch had to face when pical demagogue, a conclusion with he came to organize his material for

95 Thus Connor, 1968, pp. 114-15, sees him as the source of the demagogic measures that Plutarch enumerates in Per. 11, 13 and 34, possibly also Kimon’s early recall from ostracism (Per. 10.4; Cim. 18.1 = FGrH 115 F 88). 96 Blamire, 1989, p. 129. 97 Blamire, 1989, p. 8. See also the terse but important discussion by Wade-Gery, 1958, pp. 235-38, with his conclusion that “Perikles the villain, not Kimon the hero, was the central figure in Theopompos”. 98 Athenaios 13. 589E; FGrH 1004 Ff 7 a-b (Per. 24.9; with commentary at J. Engels, 1998c, pp. 104 - 105). For Plutarch’s take on Perikles’s relationship with Aspasia see Beneker, 2012, pp. 43-54. 99 Kritolaos fr. 37 b Wehrli; Per. 7.7; Praec. ger. 811C-D, where Plutarch adds the name of the other state galley, Paralos. ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 Plutarch in Fifth-century Athens 75 the Life of Perikles and the strategies speaking in public before the late 470s. Plutarch used to address them. First, the The improbability of the story being sources said nothing about Perikles’s true is obvious, and in fact an expanded early life. Plutarch does the best he can, version in Valerius Maximus faces mentioning his father Xanthippos’s the problem and tries, not altogether victories in the Persian Wars, and the successfully, to bridge the gap. There dream that his mother Agariste had it is “a very old man who in his youth” just before giving birth that she would had heard Peisistratos and was in the “bring forth a lion”100. The explanation audience when the young Perikles gave Plutarch came up with to explain his his first public speech101. Plutarch and/ subject’s absence from the public or his source appears to have been duped scene before the 460s was that he was by passages from Old Comedy, such as keeping a low profile out of fear of being the one at Per.16.1 already mentioned, ostracized. What prompted this fear, where Perikles’s followers are satirized according to Plutarch, was his “wealth, as the “new Peisistratids” and he himself distinguished family and very powerful is called on to “swear an oath that he will 102 friends” (Per. 7.2) which might arouse not become a tyrant” . Pressed to tell a suspicion among the populace that his readers something about Perikles’s he was aiming at tyranny (Per.7.4). early years Plutarch can do no better than But Plutarch introduces an additional insist that “although he had taken no part explanation, which seems rather implau in political affairs, he showed himself sible: people thought Perikles bore a brave and careless of danger in military striking resemblance to the tyrant Pei campaigns” (Per. 7.2; about which these sistratos and there were old men who might have been Plutarch is silent). were amazed by another characteristic Another potential obstacle to his the two men shared, “a melodious biographer was the uniformity with voice, and a very fluent and rapid style which the sources, when they addressed of speaking”. Peisistratos died in 527 the topic of Perikles’s personal qualities, BCE. Perikles will not have been heard put at the top of the list a characteristic

100 Per. 3.2, closely paraphrasing Herodotos (6.136.2). 101 Val. Max. 8.9 ext 2 (an adaptation of Shackleton Bailey’s translation). 102 One of the reasons Plutarch adduces for Damon’s ostracism was that he was φιλοτύραννος. Also relevant in this context is Plutarch’s report that Perikles’s opponents claimed that his policies were a “terrible hubris and a blatant exercise of tyranny over Greece” (Per. 12.2). The eulogy with which Plutarch closes the Life returns to this theme: “Then it was [sc. after Perikles’s death] that that power of his, which had aroused such envy and had been denounced as a monarchy and a tyranny, stood revealed in its true character as the saving bulwark of the state” (Per. 39.4 tr. Scott-Kilvert). Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 ISSN 0258-655X 76 Anthony Podlecki labeled variously as ὄγκος, σεμνότης, could thus—to turn Kritolaos’s barb into φρό νημα, ἀξίωμα or, if you were tolerant a compliment—“save himself for great or even well-disposed, τὸ μεγαλόψυχον, occasions”. μεγαλοφροσύνη (as we saw, detractors Finally, and this was perhaps the like Ion labeled it μεγαλαυχία, ὑπερ οψία and περιφρόνησις τῶν ἄλλων). most challenging task Plutarch set How does Plutarch deal with this un himself, he had to account for the fact, comfortable datum? Well, it was be which his sources made abundantly cause (as Plato insisted in the Phaidros) and undeniably clear, that this blue- the young Perikles fell under the spell of blooded aristocrat was responsible for Anaxagoras who instilled in him a love a host of crowd-pleasing, “demagogic” of “ethereal” matters, “rare fied” thinking enactments, and that these seem to and a corresponding “elevated” style of have been scattered over various speaking (Per. 4.6, 5.1 and 8.1-2: “by points in Perikles’s public career. What applying this training to the art of oratory accounted for this apparent discrepancy he far excelled all other speakers”, Scott- between Perikles’s beliefs and his be Kilvert’s trans). From Anaxagoras Pe ha viour? The short, and ultimately un rikles learned the importance of with sa tisfactory, explanation Plutarch pro drawing from frivolous and time-wasting duces is that Perikles had to fend off activities such as dinner parties103, and opposition from other political leaders adopting an ascetic lifestyle—like an who at various stages in their careers athlete in training104. As a corollary be presented a serious challenge to Pe nefit of this conversion, Perikles could rikles for προστασία τοῦ δῆμου. First, delegate less pressing public business to Kimon. His personal wealth, Plutarch trusted subordinates who would thus be says (returning to material that he had made to feel they had an important role already used in the Kimon106), allowed to play in his grand scheme105. Perikles him to initiate a variety of social welfare

103 The theme of withdrawal from social events (Per. 7.5-6) is suspect, in part because Plutarch tells a similar story about Nikias, who, however, had different reasons for doing so (Nic. 5.1-2). The motif recurs in the Themistokles (3.4, a related story of Themistokles’s “conversion” from youthful pranks and debauchery to serious statesmanship). 104 Plutarch uses the image specifically in connection with the “training in political life” allegedly given Perikles by Damon (Per. 4.2). 105 Per. 7.7. The ability to assign tasks to subordinates, Plutarch insists, was important for anyone aspiring to a career in public life (Praec. ger. 812C-D). Note that Perikles apparently went too far in the case of Metiokhos (Praec. ger. 811F citing three lines from an anonymous comic writer lampooning his officiousness,PCG fr. 741). 106 Plutarch is effusive in his praise: his “unstinting generosity…surpassed even the legendary hospitality and benevolence of ancient Athens” (Cim. 10.6, tr. Blamire). ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 Plutarch in Fifth-century Athens 77 programs. Finding himself thus out Although Plutarch says Perikles could demagogued (καταδημαγωγούμενος) not afford to match the lavish scale of Perikles put into practice the advice Kimon’s largess, his ploutos, as we have of his mentor Damon to “give the seen (Per.7.2), made him susceptible people their own”: he turned to a to ostracism. Later in the Life when he distribution of public property (πρὸς is discussing the ambitious building τὴν τῶν δημοσίων διανομήν Per. 9.2). program initiated by Perikles after the But there is some incoherence in the removal of his last serious opponent way Plutarch presents the match- Thoukydides son of Melesias, Plutarch up between Kimon and Perikles in has him respond to the carping criticism this respect. It is not at all clear that that he was misusing surpluses in the Kimon’s largesse was totally paid for imperial treasury to “tart up” the city out of his own pocket. We are told with gorgeous temples and other public that after his victory at the Eurymedon works, “Chalk it up to my own personal River in 468/7, the captured spoils were account —and let my name be put on sold and “the people had ample funds the dedicatory inscriptions” (Per.14.1). available for various purposes”; the A further difficulty: the “demagogic” south wall of the Akropolis was “built measures Perikles is alleged to have from the proceeds of that campaign” had to resort to against his “true” nature (Cim. 13.5 tr. Blamire). In returning simply to outmaneuver his opponents to this topic in chapter 10 he remarks, exist for Plutarch in a kind of chro “Now that Kimon had ample funds at nology-free cloud. In fact, they were not his disposal through the success of introduced as Plutarch suggests at spe his military operations, he was able to cific crisis-points in Perikles’s career spend what he had gained with honour (Per. 9.3, 11.4), but sporadically, spread from the enemy still more honourably out over the period 460-430 BCE. upon the citizens of Athens” (Cim.10.1, Plutarch implies that Perikles in his tr. Blamire), and he proceeds to specific exercise of power in the uninterrupted items of social welfare, removal of the succession of generalships after fences from his estates, changes of the removal of Thoukydides son of clothing and hand-outs of money to the Melesias was following the promptings needy. In concluding his discussion of of his true, “aristocratic”, nature and this topic in Perikles Plutarch mentions had left the popularity-buying tactics among Kimon’s achievements that he behind. But in discussing the pressures had “won the most brilliant victories Perikles was feeling in the summer of over the Persians and filled the city with 431 because of his “defensive” policy money and treasure” (Per. 9.5, tr. Scott- of keeping the Athenians cooped up Kilvert). The other side of the balance within the city walls and refusing to has some inconsistencies as well. bow to charges of inaction and even

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 ISSN 0258-655X 78 Anthony Podlecki cowardice from noisy critics like Kleon, Perikles’s buddies dismiss him for Perikles reverted to measures that would his pro-Spartan leanings and Per assuage the people’s anger: “to placate ikles has to show how superior he is the people…he won back some of by fighting more bravely and even his popularity by giving them various recklessly than usual. The people have subsidies and proposing grants of a change of heart and so Perikles too, conquered territories” (Per. 34.2 tr. Scott- in a breathtaking volte-face, sponsors Kilvert). Plutarch returns to this topic in a decree for Kimon’s recall. “Some his summing up of Perikles’s career in sources” had it that the rapprochement the Comparison: unlike Fabius, Perikles was effected by Kimon’s sister Elpinike had the opportunity as general to “stuff and that hereafter there was to be a the city with holidays and festivals” division of command, Kimon taking (ἐνεορτάσαι ... καὶ ἐμπανηγυρίσαι τὴν charge of the war at sea and Perikles πόλιν Fabius 28 [1] 2). given carte blanche to exercise power in the city. Obviously, little if any of We need to take Plutarch’s view 107 of the (relatively) smooth and steady this can be accepted as historical . trajectory of Perikles’s development Concluding this episode in the Kimon, as a political leader with a measure of Plutarch remarks that Perikles’s change critical skepticism. I conclude with a of position vis-à-vis Kimon illustrates brief summary of items which, for lack how “in those days partisanship had to of a better term, I will call the pluses give way to expedient compromise for and minuses of this Life. I start with the common good and ambition, that the minuses, items Plutarch asks his most powerful of human emotions, gave 108 readers to accept with very little, if any, way to the exigencies of the state” . evidential support. The “Congress Decree” (chapter First, the campaign at Tanagra 17), too, has all the earmarks of a skill (spring 457 BCE; Per. 10.1-6, Cim. ful fabrication, perhaps in the fourth 17.4-9). Plutarch’s narrative is riddled century when so-called “universal with improbabilities. Kimon, though in historians” were looking for documents exile, shows up to prove that in spite to inject some realismus into their of what his critics say he is a patriot. narra tives. There may be some solid

107 Some of it may derive from Theopompos (FGrH 115 F 88). Athenaios (13.589E-F) reports that the “price” exacted by Perikles for engineering Kimon’s early recall was having sex with Elpinike. Note that the “division of powers” motif is picked up again at Praec. ger. 812F: “one of them [Perikles] was more gifted for civic government, the other for war” (tr. Fowler). 108 Cim. 17.9, tr. Blamire. ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 Plutarch in Fifth-century Athens 79 facts in the farrago of gossip, innuendo to Khersonese, Naxos, Andros, Thrace and outright calumny in Plutarch’s and Thourioi (Per.11.5, with a further narrative of the run-up to the actual account of the Khersonese venture at invasion by the Peloponnesians in 19.1). We are given a very full account spring 431, but I feel fairly safe in of a major expedition to the Black Sea rejecting (or at least withholding assent with Lamakhos as co-general and a from) all the theatrics surrounding the subsequent settlement of Athenians at alleged “trials” of Pheidias, Aspasia and Sinope110. Not quite at mid-point but at Anaxagoras in chapters 31 and 32109. a climactic position in the Life stands the It would be good to be able to famous panegyric to Perikles’s vision distinguish fact from fantasy in the for the educative role of Athens towards stories involving the troubled rela the rest of Greece embodied in the tionship between Perikles and his magnificent structures on the Akropolis eldest son Xanthippos. Reports of a (Per. 12) together with Plutarch’s sexual involvement by Perikles with surprisingly detailed information about his daughter-in-law can safely be dis individual structural features and missed, as even Plutarch realized. architects’ names (Per.13.6-13). But for What of the financial aspects, Perikles’s his interest we should not have known parsimony and his daughter-in-law’s about Perikles’s personal involvement in resent ment of it (Per. 36.2-6)? One arrangements for musical performances at the Panathenaia (Per.13.11). As would like to believe that Plutarch had often, Plutarch includes items which, by a reliable source for Perikles’s arrange implication, he has taken the trouble to ments regarding annual income from search out and record: the marble slab on his estates (Per.16.3-6), but again, the Akropolis recording Pheidias’s work introduction of the name of Perikles’s on the Athena Parthenos (Per.13.14); house slave-manager, Evangelos, does the inscription on the forehead of the not guarantee authenticity. bronze wolf at Delphi certifying Athens’ On the plus side of the ledger right of προμαντεία (Per. 21.3) and Plutarch frequently produces items Perikles’s nine victory trophies (Per. that have the look of hard fact for 38.3, Comparison [Fabius] 29 [2]. 1). To which he gives no provenance. He lists return briefly to the railery (and worse) settlements sent on Perikles’s initiative against Perikles by the comic poets

109 It is usually held that the naming of informers and accusers gives the accounts some credibility, but in fact these are as susceptible to fabrication as other circumstantial details. 110 Per. 20.1-2 with the discussion of Gomme, 1945, pp. 367-68, where Theopompos is cited (FGrH 115 F 389). Discussing these settlements elsewhere in his Commentary Gomme (p. 379, n.1) allows himself to remark that Plutarch is “carefree… in chronological matters”. Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 ISSN 0258-655X 80 Anthony Podlecki which Plutarch abundantly reports, 10 to 21 is reliable. But at the same time we are grateful for the glimpse these this very dependence on Herodotos extracts give us into what prominent makes us—at least sometimes—want to (and not so prominent) public figures in put Plutarch away and turn to the source fifth-century Athens were subjected to. nearer to the events being narrated. Gomme judged the Perikles to be “the Presumably part of Plutarch’s mission as most complex and the most interesting he saw it was to save his contemporary of these [Fifth-century] Lives (perhaps readers the trouble of doing that (as well the most interesting of all), and the most as, of course, to entertain them with valuable to the historian”111. Plutarch’s some interesting facts about his subject). admiration for his subject stands out Besides Herodotos Plutarch cites by on every page, and if this leads him to name a handful of other sources and gloss over, or leave unexplained, some in the opening chapter he gives a vir faults of character and inconsistencies tuoso demonstration of his skill in de of behaviour, that seems a small price ploying them. The theme here is, Be to pay for the pleasure (and profit) to be cause Aristeides was just, was he, as was derived from reading this specimen of generally believed, also poor? Demetrios ancient biography at its best. of Phaleron in his treatise On Sokrates—a work Plutarch cites several times in this 4. Aristeides Life—used a variety of arguments to It has long been recognized that counter the “poor Aristeides” view. He Plutarch’s main source for most of the owned an estate in Phaleron, where he historical material in the Life of Aristei was in fact buried; he held the office of des was Herodotos’s Histories. Plutarch archon—this was another contentious names him twice in the Life, one of point that Plutarch returns to later— these a quibble over Herodotos’s figure which was restricted to the top property for the fallen at the battle of Plataia112. class. He was ostracized, a procedure This dependence on Herodotos is both that, according to Demetrios, “was not a strength and a weakness of this Life: inflicted on the poorer citizens, but only a strength because we can relax in the on members of the great houses whose knowledge that the information purveyed family pretensions excited envy”113 and about the tactics of the battles of Salamis he dedicated tripods in the precinct of in chapters 8 and 9 and Plataia in chapters Dionysos commemorating a choregic

111 Gomme, 1945, p. 65: a rare but well-deserved accolade. 112 Arist. 16.1, Hdt. 9.46; Plut., Arist. 19.7; Hdt. 9.85. In the Comparison he cites Herodotos’s assigning the “finest victory” at Plataia to Pausanias Cato( mai. 29 [2].2; Hdt. 9.64). 113 Arist.1.2, tr. Scott-Kilvert; FGrH. 228 F 43. ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 Plutarch in Fifth-century Athens 81 victory (which, Plutarch adds, “were illustrate the care Plutarch has taken pointed out even in our own day”). The with his source-material. He wants his first three “proofs” of Aristeides’s non- readers to feel that they are in the hands poverty adduced by Demetrios Plutarch of an industrious and careful researcher, passes over in silence (and so shall we). who has consulted a variety of sources, He attacks the last argument by pointing presented evidence on disputed points out that choregoi often used not their fairly, and reached conclusions they own money but someone else’s, like should accept as being as near to the 115 Plato114, who was bankrolled in his truth as one is likely to get . liturgy of a dithyrambic chorus of boys After this impressive display of by Dion of Syracuse, and Epaminondas, source-criticism Plutarch launches whose choregiai were financed by into his main theme in these opening Pelopidas. Besides, Plutarch adds, there chapters, the total dissimilarity, deep was some question about the identity of personal animosity and fierce political the victorious choregos mentioned in rivalry between the two towering the inscription. The Stoic philosopher figures of Athenian resistance to the Panatios of Rhodes (c. 150 BCE), whom Persians, the subject of the present Life Plutarch will cite again later (Arist. and his arch-rival Themistokles, whose 27.4), argued that the name Aristeides Life Plutarch had already completed and appeared twice in the choregic victor from which—not surprisingly—he re- lists, but both were much later. Plutarch uses some material (a point to which I reports that Panaitios based his refutation shall return). The cleft between the two on epigraphic as well as prosopographical ran deep, to the level, in fact, of each grounds. The inscription was in Ionic man’s physis, and this, Plutarch claims letter-forms, therefore after 403 (on the authority of anonymous sources: BCE, and the Aristeides named there ἔνιοι...φασι, Arist. 2.2 ), could be seen appeared in connection with another in the way they behaved even in their poet, Arkhestratos, who was active not boyhood years. Themistokles’s nature, during the Persian War period but in the “resourceful, daring, unscrupulous, Peloponnesian. and ready to dash impetuously into any I have gone into this first chapter of undertaking”, was in sharp contrast the Life of Aristeides at some length to to Aristeides’s, which was “founded

114 Cf. Diogenes Laertios 3.3, citing Athenodoros (1st cent. CE Stoic philosopher in a work entitled Peripatoi, “Walks”). 115 I note the similar evaluation of Pelling, 2002, p. 144, that Plutarch in this section of the Life “is using his wide reading and general knowledge very effectively”. Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 ISSN 0258-655X 82 Anthony Podlecki upon a steadfast character, which was when he felt this had to be done to intent on justice and incapable of any thwart some particularly dangerous falsehood, vulgarity or trickery even initiative by Themistokles117. There in jest”116. The difference showed were occasions when he would oppose itself also in the way the two men a Themistoklean initiative simply to discharged their public duties, and here check his opponent’s rise to power: “he Plutarch dips into his extensive stock of thought it better that the people should anecdotal material. When an unnamed lose out on some things that were Athenian commented to Themistokles advantageous to them rather than have that he would be a good magistrate his opponent’s power grow through provided that he was fair and impartial winning every contest” (Arist. 3.1). to all, Themistokles replied, “I hope Plutarch claims—on what authority I shall never sit on a tribunal where he does not say—that Aristeides my friends do not get better treatment would often use other men to bring from me than strangers do” (Arist. 2.5). his measures to the Assembly so that Aristeides for his part took a different Themistokles would not oppose them tack. On one occasion, after having just because they were Aristeides’s proposed a bill before the Assembly initiatives (Arist. 3.4). In chapter 4 and having argued for it successfully Plutarch describes an elaborate legal so that it looked like it would pass, sparring match between the two men he nevertheless, after listening to the involving charge and countercharge over speeches by the opposition and being Themistokles’s alleged embezzlement convinced that his bill was not in the and misuse of public monies. Stripped best interests of the people, moved to to its bare essenetial, the story—where have it withdrawn before a final vote Idomeneus’s name crops up for one was taken (Arist. 3.3). And there were of the details118—was that because times when he was prepared to bend his Aristeides had uncovered financial high principles and resort to subterfuges malpractice by Themistokles the latter

116 Arist. 2.2, tr. Scott-Kilvert. The contrast is adumbrated in the earlier Life where Aristeides is characterized as πρᾷος... φύσει καὶ καλοκαγαθικὸς τὸν τρόπον (Them. 3.3). 117 Anecdotes illustrating the rivalry (not always harmful) between the two men had a long pedigree, such as the story Herodotos tells of Aristeides and Themistokles discussing how best to keep the Peloponnesian fleet from abandoning their position at Salamis and sailing away to the Isthmus (with Aristeides’s telling comment, “Let the rivalry between us be now as it has been before, to see which of us shall do his country more good”, 8.79. tr. Godley). As Plutarch tells it, in the run-up to Salamis, Aristeides “gave [Themistokles] all the aid he could both in advice and in action, and for the sake of Athens he helped his bitterest enemy to become the most famous of men” (Arist. 8.1, tr. Scott-Kilvert). 118 I return to this point below. ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 Plutarch in Fifth-century Athens 83 got his claque to support a motion to held the office of archon eponymous have Aristeides removed from office immediately [after Marathon]”. Per and fined. The people then repented contra, Demetrios of Phaleron held of their action and not only absolved that Aristeides was archon “just a Aristeides of the fine but restored him little before his death, after the battle to his office119. Aristeides then laid an of Plataia”120. Plutarch critiques this: elaborate ruse to entrap those whom his “in the public records” there was no investigations had shown to be the likely Aristeides listed after Plataia but there culprits. He pretended to turn a blind was an Aristeides named as archon in eye to their shady financial dealings the year after Marathon. (It has been and, when the proper moment arrived, suggested that Plutarch consulted the list he rose in the Assembly and denounced from the Atthis, not from examination of their misdeeds, saying, “When I acted the records themselves, but no matter; in an upright way and did my job you he took the trouble of looking up the list condemned me, but now that I have of archons121). As Plutarch’s discussion connived at your misdeeds you praise shows, his sources also betrayed con me. I am more ashamed of your present fusion over whether Aristeides—if he honouring of me than of your former was archon—was chosen by lot as De condemnation, and I am sorry for you metrios of Phaleron maintained (Arist. because you think it more praiseworthy 1.2), or by election, as Idomeneus held to cozy up to criminals than to keep a (Arist. 1.8), therefore after 487BCE122. secure lock on public funds” (Arist. 4.7). Plutarch was widely versed in the It is a good story, and Plutarch takes dramatic, lyric and elegiac poetry of evident pleasure in telling it. his subjects’ era, and seems, to judge At Arist. 5.9-10 Plutarch touches from his citations, to have kept a sharp on the controversy of when if ever look-out for apposite material, which Aristeides was archon, and his dis in many cases he used to liven up what cussion again allows him to display may have struck some readers as rather control of his sources. He starts with bland narrative. But when he pressed the the assertion, found somewhere in his “Search” button in his library—or his books (or his memory) that “Aristeides memory—the results for “Aristeides”

119 The whole tale shows suspicious similarities to the demos’s treatment of Perikles in 430 BCE (Per. 35.4-5). 120 FGrH 228 F 44. 121 Discussion at Perrin, 1901, p. 275; I. Calabi Limentani, 1964, p. 26 (n. on Arist. 5.10). Plutarch’s testimony is accepted by Develin, 1989, p. 57. 122 Arist., Ath. 22.5, with the discussion of Rhodes, 1981, pp. 272-74. Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 ISSN 0258-655X 84 Anthony Podlecki were disappointing. He re-uses the tag were sacrificed to Dionysos ὠμηστής, from Aiskhylos’s Seven against Thebes an episode mentioned briefly at Arist. about the doomed prophet Amphiaraos, 9.2 and reported fully at Them. 13.2- “He wanted not to seem, but to be, just, 5, where Plutarch names Phainias of reaping the harvest from deep furrows Eresos as his source, and praises him of his mind, from which excellent plans as ἀνὴρ φιλόσοφος καὶ γραμματῶν develop”123. There is a passing reference οὐκ ἄπειρος, “both a philosopher and to οἱ κωμικοί, the comic poets, making not unversed in literature”. He draws fun of descendants of the hugely wealthy on Idomeneus of Lampsakos for Kallias, who was Aristeides’s kinsman several pieces of information. He is (Arist. 5.8), and a brief quote from an credited with works “On the Socratics” unnamed comic writer—Eupolis has and “On Demagogues”, and it is un been suggested—which slammed his clear from which Plutarch drew his rival Themistokles, “a clever man, but information. As already mentioned, could not control his fingers” Arist( . 4.3, Plutarch identifies Idomeneus as his Eupolis [?] PCG fr. 126). source for the story that Themistokles successfully prosecuted Aristeides for Not surprisingly, there are some embezzlement after his year as ἐπι duplications with the Life of The με λητὴς δημοσίων προσόδων, “Su mistokles, which was written earlier. The pervisor of the Public Revenues”125. two men were rivals in other respects Later in the Life Plutarch challenges but also because they were in pursuit of Idomeneus’s assertion that Aristeides the same eromenos, Stesileos of Keos. himself went as ambassador to Sparta In the Themistokles Plutarch had named in spring 479 to get the Spartans on his source, the Peripatetic Ariston of side to face the Persian invading force Ioulis on Keos (so the boyfriend was under Mardonios; Plutarch points out a local celebrity)124. Plutarch retails that in the actual decree authorizing the the story that some Persian royals embassy the ambassadors named were captured in the sea-battles of 480 BCE Kimon, Xanthippos and Myronides126.

123 Arist. 3.5; Seven against Thebes 562-4; cf. De aud. 32D; De cap. et inim. 88B; Reg. et imp. apoph. 186B. 124 Arist. 2.3; Them. 3.2. Ariston fl. 225 BCE probably from Ariston’s Ἐρωτικὰ ὁμοῖα, “Erotic Examples” (see Fortenbaugh &White, 2006, p. 206). The story crops up again in Aelian, who does not name a source (VH 13.44). 125 Arist. 4.4; FGrH 338 F 7. How much of this we can believe is unclear. The title is generally held to be an anachronism. Gomme, 1945, p. 76, n. 1, at least was dismissive of “the untrustworthy Idomeneus”, but he allows that Idomeneus’s source may have designated Aristeides simply as ταμίας. 126 Arist. 10.10; FGrH 338 F 6; Plutarch’s correction derives possibly from Krateros’s Decrees. ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 Plutarch in Fifth-century Athens 85

On the other hand, in the confused and way suited their interests best, and put conflicting testimony about whether the blame on him (Arist. 25.1). In the Aristeides ever held the eponymous Comparison of Aristeides and Cato, archonship and, if he did, whether Plutarch comments that while Cato’s this was through election or sortition, frugality made him a model to others, it looks as if Idomeneus, who held Aristeides “was so poor as to bring that Aristeides was elected archon, even his righteousness into disrepute” was on the winning side against (Cato mai. 3.2 tr. Perrin). Demetrios of Phaleron, who plumped Information was to be gleaned from for allotment. Plutarch retails the the abundant tradition concerning anecdote with which Aristeides’s Aristei des’s kinsman Kallias Daidou name was ever after to be associated, khos, “Torchbearer” at the Eleusinian the illiterate and uncouth voter at an Mysteries. At Arist. 5.7-8 Plutarch ostrakophoria for whom Aristeides— tells a story how he (in stark contrast uncomplainingly—inscribed his own 127 to Aristeides) enriched himself in a name on an ostrakon . Plutarch very discreditable way after the battle perhaps became conscious that his of Marathon, and so earned for himself audience—like the unnamed fellow in and his descendants the unflattering the anecdote—might get fed up with epithet “Lakkoploutoi”, “Pit-rich”. To always hearing Aristeides referred to as wards the end of the Life we are given “the Just”, so he calls in the testimony of a lengthy account of Kallias’s trial on Theophrastos—possibly from the περὶ a capital charge. His accusers charged καιρῶν—for the view that Aristeides him with stinginess in not providing for may have been (as well as seemed) his cousin Aristeides, so Kallias called habitually just in private matters, but him as a character witness to attest that in public affairs he was prepared to go his offers of material assistance had along with what was necessary for the been frequent, and just as frequently general good of his country, even if this refused, with the opportunity for a bon required, on occasion, a certain amount mot by Aristeides, that “he had better 128 of injustice . Elsewhere Plutarch cause to be proud of his poverty than reports that when the Athenians had Kallias of his wealth”. The voters left to tighten their grip on the allies, the court with the same sentiments: they Aristeides told them to act in whatever would rather be poor with Aristeides

127 Arist. 7.7-8. Plutarch tells the story again in the Sayings of Kings and Commanders (186A). It had occurred already in Cornelius Nepos’s Aristeides (3.1), which may suggest Theopompos as the source. 128 Arist. 25.2; FHSG fr. 614. Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 ISSN 0258-655X 86 Anthony Podlecki than rich with Kallias. Plutarch cites as Marathon (Arist. 5), but he is probably his source for this story Aiskhines the wrong about Aristeides’s tribe Antiokhis Socratic129 and he goes on to mention being drawn up next to Themistokles’s that Plato singled out Aristeides among tribe Leontis. He recounts an enquiry the famous fifth-century leaders for his to the Delphic oracle on Aristeides’s refusal to pander to the demos130. initiative before the battle of Plataia Plutarch draws on personal expe (Arist.11.3-9); this may or may not be rience and local traditions in an historical. He also records a proposal by extended account of the aftermath of the Aristeides after Plataia that archons be battle of Plataia (Arist. 20-21). Eighty elected from the whole body of voters talents from the spoils were handed (Arist. 22.1), about which moderns have over to the Plataians, with which they shown some skepticism. rebuilt the sanctuary of Athena, set up Plutarch closes his Life, as with the shrine and decorated the temple some others, by offering a dazzling with frescoes which have remained in array of information about Aristeides’s perfect condition μέχρι νῦν (Arist. 20.3). descendants (and here again he mines Arrangements were also made for an material from the Socratic tradition). annual sacrifice to the fallen held by the The items included are: a conviction Plataians, a ritual carried on, Plutarch at the end of Aristeides’s life on the says, μέχρι νῦν (Arist. 21.3, again at unlikely charge of accepting bribes from 21.8, “These rites have been observed some of the Ionians during the tribute- by the Plataians ἔτι καὶ νῦν”). Plutarch assessment (Arist. 26.1, Krateros then goes on to describe the celebrations. FGrH 342 F 12, but Plutarch says he in full, and interesting, detail. was unable to find corroboration in the There is some new material, for other works he consulted on how badly which Plutarch does not name a source; the Athenians treated their leading how much credence should we give men); state-sponsored dowries to his it? He says Aristeides was a ἑταῖρος daughters; a subvention in cash and of Kleisthenes the Lawgiver (Arist. property to his son Lysimakhos, on the 2.1131). Plutarch is also the only source motion of Alkibiades, and a daily food for Aristeides’s part in the battle of allowance to Lysimakhos’s daughter

129 Arist. 25.9 (from the dialogue Καλλίας); 75 [fr. 32] SSR. As we saw, Plutarch drew on Aiskhines for two items regarding Perikles and Aspasia (Per. 24.6; 66 [fr. 23] SSR, Per. 32.5; 67 [fr. 24] SSR). 130 Gorgias 526B. 131 Also at Praec. ger 791A, 805F. As Calabi Limentani, 1964, p. 11, notes, if this connection is historical, Aristeides will have been born c. 520 BCE. ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 Plutarch in Fifth-century Athens 87

Polykrite (Arist. 27.3, Kallisthenes with great variety, in a manner designed FGrH 124 F 48). to arouse amazement and consternation Plutarch’s subject did not have in his readers—no, Plutarch does not peculiarities or depths of character that want his work compared to that of the would call for analysis and explanation incomparable Master’s. But the fourth by a biographer intent on holding his century historian Timaios of Taormina, audience’s intention, not the austere that’s another matter. Plutarch is prepared and brooding profundity of a Perikles, to go head-to-head with him, with a little nor the creative inventiveness and often help from Philistos of Syracuse, who charming egotism of a Themistokles, not lived through the Sicilian campaign (as Plutarch tells us towards the end of the Alkibiades’s unpredictability and manic 133 iconoclasm. Aristeides’s signature virtue Life ) and whose work—of which was εὐστάθεια, a dignified determination little is known beyond what Plutarch has to maintain a steady footing once he had chosen to tell us—he accuses Timaios of decided to take a stand that he considered churlishly disparaging. to be in the best interests of those he So what does Plutarch say he can add had been called on to serve—not very to what had already been written about exciting, perhaps, but admirable both in Nikias? He will not go over again at any itself and for the rarity with which it was length material already to be found in to be found in other leading figures of Thoukydides and Philistos, but he feels fifth-century Athens. he must touch on the episodes briefly, if only not to seem, he says, careless or 5. Nikias lazy. What he has looked for are items Plutarch opens his Life of Nikias by that have gone unrecorded by others telling his readers that he knows he has or have been treated only haphazardly competition in choosing this subject. He (σποράδην), such as information that cannot hope to match Thoukydides’s was be found in ancient dedications magisterial account of the Sicilian and inscriptions. His purpose is to expedition, which Plutarch eulogizes provide not a collection of useless in glowing terms here and in the essay stories, but material that will lead to Fame of the Athenians132. Thoukydides’s a deeper understanding of Nikias’s narrative, he says, is characterized by character and temperament. Let’s see an inimitable vividness (ἐνάργεια) in how well Plutarch has succeeded in portraying emotions and character, and this enterprise.

132 De glor. Ath. 347A. Plutarch aptly cites the dictum attributed to Simonides, “painting is silent poetry, and poetry is painting given a voice”. 133 Nic. 19.6. Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 ISSN 0258-655X 88 Anthony Podlecki

In a long and rather involved a statue of Athena on the Akropolis discussion of Nikias’s characteristic (which, Plutarch adds, had lost its gold cautiousness (εὐλάβεια) which could be plating), and a shrine in the precinct read as timidity and defeatism, Plutarch of Dionysos surmounted by tripods tries to make the paradoxical case that commemorating Nikias’s choregic this was really taken by οἱ πόλλοι as a victories135; these choregic monuments virtue: the masses took his nervousness by Nikias and his brothers drew the (τὸ ψοφοδεές) as a sign that he did not attention also of Plato, who mentions look down on them (although earlier them in the Gorgias (472A). Plutarch in the chapter Plutarch had mentioned then gives his readers an expanded Nikias’s “gravity”, τὸ σεμνόν), but version of an event dealt with in more rather feared them. He formulates summary fashion by Thoukydides, this—counterintuitive—view with an the purification and re-dedication of aphorism: “The masses can have no the island of Delos winter 426/5136. greater honour shown them by their Thoukydides does not mention Nikias superiors than not to be despised”134. by name but Plutarch naturally turns the Plu tarch then mentions Nikias’s efforts spotlight on him. He outdid the show to outmaneuver his main political oppo put on by the Samian tyrant Polykrates, nent, Kleon; he courted popular fa that Thoukydides describes: he had vour in a time-honoured tactic used by joined the nearby island of Rheneia wealthy politicians, lavish expenditures to Delos only by a chain; Nikias used on choral and athletic events such as a specially built bridge of boats over Athens had not seen before. Plutarch which at dawn he solemnly led a chorus then makes good on one of his promises chanting hymns. Among other lavish to highlight new material. To testify to expenditures by Nikias Plutarch lists a Nikias’s opulent benefactions he cites bronze palm-tree (Leto was said to have two dedications which, he says, have held on to a palm tree on Delos when survived to his own day (καθ’ ἡμᾶς), in labor with her twins) and an estate

134 Nic. 2.6 (Perrin’s trans. modified). Cf. Nic. 4.3: apparently because of his superstition, Nikias gave money to those who could harm him just as much as to people who deserved his benefactions; bad men made money from his cowardice (δειλία) and good men from his philanthropia. 135 Stadter in Waterfield, 1998, p. 419, remarks that an inscription points to the dedication being by a later Nikias in 320/19 BCE. 136 Nic. 3.5-7; Th. 3.104. Gomme, 1945, p. 415, says Plutarch “does not connect this [i.e. Nikias’s organizing of choruses and other ceremonies] with the purification of Delos, of which he says nothing”. But I think that is the natural supposition, that Plutarch had this event in mind. ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 Plutarch in Fifth-century Athens 89 whose annual revenues were made over to Nikias when he remarks that “most of to the Delians for their ritual purposes the Athenians [i.e. in the army], taking (“at which they were to pray to the gods the incident to heart, urged the generals for Nikias’s welfare”, Plutarch adds). to wait” (7.50.4, tr. Forster Smith). As chap. 4 opens you can almost After a brief glance at the source of hear Plutarch debating with himself Nikias’s great wealth, the leases he held over what could be taken as “vulgar to the silver mines at Laureion and the and ostentatious displays”. Were these army of slaves he used to work them, aimed at increasing Nikias’s prestige Plutarch moves on to some testimonies and satisfying his ambition? No, he from Old Comedy. Three are otherwise decides; these were more probably the unknown. The first is a passage from a result of his piety (εὐσέβεια). Here he play of Telekleides (title not preserved) notes, naturally enough, Thoukydides’s in which the speaker alleges that Nikias remark about Nikias’s “excessive re paid a four-mina bribe to Kharikles, lian ce upon divination” (7.50.4). Plu apparently a συκοφάντης, to cover tarch then inserts, on the authority of up some unsavoury act. The second, an exceedingly obscure Eretrian writer from Eupolis’s Marikas (421 BCE., 137 of dialogues named Pasiphon , an a satirization of Hyperbolos), sub explanation in malam partem: Nikias stantiates a characteristic of Nikias that kept a mantis at his house ostensibly Plutarch will take up in the following for consultations on public matters but chapter, his reclusiveness. Third comes really to make sure he was investing a line from Aristophanes’s Knights his own money profitably. Perhaps the where Kleon boasts about his ability best known—and most regrettable— to “shout down the speakers and rattle example of Nikias’s δεισιδαιμονία (ταράξω) Nikias” and fourth, a couplet influencing the course of history was his from an unnamed play of Phrynikhos decision to delay the Athenian retreat taking a shot at Nikias’s bravery—or from Sicily because of the lunar eclipse alleged lack of it138. of 27 August 413 BCE. Plutarch remarks disapprovingly that Nikias “now be In chapter 5 Plutarch describes at came more and more oblivious of his length how paranoid Nikias was about other duties and completely absorbed informers. We are told that he never in sacrifice and divination” Nic.( 24.1 tr. dined out, or took part in discussions Scott-Kilvert). But Thoukydides is fairer with friends, and indeed avoided social

137 The claim was made that he tried to pass off his dialogues on famous figures as written by Aiskhines the Socratic (Diog. Laert. 2. 61). 138 Telekleides PCG fr. 44; Eup. PCG fr. 193; Ar., Eq. 358; Phryn. PCG fr. 62. Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 ISSN 0258-655X 90 Anthony Podlecki contacts of any kind. When he had being ostracized, Perikles changed his some official post, he would stay in habits entirely. “The only street along the office from morning to night and, if which he could be seen walking was there was no public business to attend to, the one to the agora or the Council he kept himself locked up at home with Chamber”. Perikles also, we are asked one of his friends guarding the door and to believe, stopped accepting invitations sending away callers with the excuse that to dinner with his friends. (Plutarch Nikias had no time for visitors because says he kept up this reclusive behaviour he was so deeply immersed in affairs of through all the years of his public life, state. Plutarch names as Nikias’s mentor with one exception, the wedding- feast 139 in this weird (and somewhat dishonest) given by his cousin Euryptolemos ). behaviour an individual called Hiero, Plutarch then provides some salutary— about whom we know even less than to Nikias—examples of leaders whose the person whom Plutarch identifies as successes got them into trouble with the 140 his father, Dionysios surnamed Khalkos, people . To escape envy Nikias made “Bronze (Bronzino)”. This latter was a a point of attributing his successes to his poet whose works survived (Plutarch good fortune and the gods’ favour. Then, implies that he had read them; about 25 as if remembering his promise at the of his elegiac verses are to be found in beginning of the Life to leave out nothing modern collections), and who was one of importance, Plutarch provides a (very) of the colonists who went out to the abbreviated list of successes—and not in Athenian foundation at Thourioi in S. chronological order (Nic. 6.3-4).. To be Italy in 443 BCE. I would be prepared noted in this connection is the verdict of Thoukydides that Nikias “did better in to accept some of this—maybe not all— his military commands than anyone else but for the suspicious similarities with a of his time” (5.16.1141). story Plutarch tells also about Perikles who, as a young man, was afraid that the After giving a somewhat fuller demos would think he had aspirations account of operations in the Korinthiaka to become a tyrannos (Plutarch says in 425 BCE (Nic. 6.4), Plutarch settles people thought he looked like the tyrant into his main narrative, Nikias’s Peisistratos). So, to avoid the risk of commands from Pylos (chapters 7 - 8)

139 Per. 7.1-5. 140 Nic. 6.1. For our purposes perhaps the most interesting is Antiphon of Rhamnous, whose downfall Plutarch attributes to ἀπιστίᾳ τῶν πολλῶν. His name will come up again in the Alkibiades (3.1). 141 The follow-up is also of interest. Thoukydides claims that Nikias was pressing for peace in 422/1 BCE “while still untouched by misfortune and still held in honour” because he “wished to rest on his laurels, to find an immediate release from toil and trouble both for ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 Plutarch in Fifth-century Athens 91 to the Sicilian debacle (chapters 12 - sheer cowardice” (δειλίᾳ Nic.8.2). This 30), with side glances at the arrival of seems to me rather unfair. Thoukydides Alkibiades on the Athenian political reports that “Kleon never thought scene (chapter 9), negotiations for the Nikias would τολμῆσαι ὑποχωρῆσαι 143 peace which bore Nikias’s name (end the leadership” to Kleon . Plutarch of chap. 9 - 10 [τὸ Νικίειον 9.9]), and did not care for Kleon any more than the infamous ostracism of Hyperbolos Thoukydides did, and he comments (ch.11142). All, or almost all, of this on Kleon’s boorish behaviour as a is straight out of Thoukydides. Why public speaker: he shouted abuse at his opponents, slapped his thighs, threw should Plutarch try to better what open his cloak, and paced about as he he acknowledges to have been done was speaking144. He also in this chapter superbly well by the master, who he treats his reader to two passages from told us in chapter 1 treated the Sicilian Aristophanes, one known, from Birds campaign “incomparably, surpassing (Dionysia 414 BCE) where Peishetairos even his own high standards” (Nic.1.1)? tells Tereus, “It’s no longer time for There are a few points, however, napping, or succumbing to Nikias- that seem to me worthy of comment. dithers (μελλονικιᾶν 638-9, where, In retelling the events of the Pylos according to N. Dunbar, the verb-form campaign, Plutarch says that Nikias implies a morbid physical condition145). gave up his command to Kleon “out of The other quote is from Farmers of

himself and for his fellow citizens, and to leave behind him the name of one whose service to the state had been successful from start to finish. He thought that these objectives were to be achieved by avoiding all risks and by trusting oneself as little as possible to fortune (ὅστις ἐλάχιστα τύχῃ αὐτὸν παραδίδωσι) and that risks could be avoided only in peace” (5.16.1, trans. Warner; my italics). 142 At Nic. 11.7 Plutarch quotes 3 lines from Plato Comicus (PCG fr. 203) accusing Hyperbolos of being a “branded slave”, and at 11.10 he cites Theophrastos for the minority (and probably erroneous) view that in the notorious ostracism of 417 BCE it was not Nikias but a certain Phaiax who colluded with Alkibiades to secure Hyperbolos’s removal (FHSG fr. 639, with discussion of Mirhady, 1992, pp. 196-200). 143 Th. 4.28.2. Gomme, 1956, p. 468, comments that this was “characteristic also of Nikias’ daring” (Gomme’s emphasis). This is particularly interesting in light of the fact that at Nic. 12.5 = Alc. 18.1, Plutarch gives τόλμα as Alkibiades’s distinguishing characteristic as contrasted with Nikias’s εὐλάβεια and προνοία. 144 Nic. 8.6. This appears to be from the Constitution of Athens (28.3), referred to elsewhere by Plutarch but not here. In his Life of Tiberius Gracchus (2.2) Plutarch says that Gaius Gracchus declaimed in the manner of Kleon. 145 Dunbar, 1995, p. 414.

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 ISSN 0258-655X 92 Anthony Podlecki the late 420s, where the implication lady’s mother, Timandra, who was with is that Nikias offered a bribe of 1000 Alkibiades at the end, and wrapped his talents to resign his command at Pylos body in her own clothes for burial (Alc. (fr. 102 Henderson). In his narrative 39.8). The story is reported by Athenaios of the negotiations that led to peace in (13.588C) as deriving from the 6th book 421 Plutarch cites Theophrastos (FHSG of Polemon’s “Against Timaios”. Since fr. 639), who maintained that Nikias used Plutarch cites Polemon the Periegete148 bribery so that the lot would fall against elsewhere (Aratos 13.2), he is very the Spartans, so they would have to go likely Plutarch’s source here. Later first, before the Athenians, in surrendering Plutarch quotes a couplet which he the territories they had captured in the ascribes to Euripides, characterizing it 146 Arkhidamian War . In his discussion of as an ἐπικήδειον, a lament sung before the mutilation of the herms Plutarch lists burial, “These men won 8 victories among the omens that boded ill for the over men of Syracuse, as long as the expedition that at Delphi crows pecked gods’ favour stood in equipoise for both away at and defaced a gold statue of sides”149. Plutarch indulges in a short Athena mounted on a bronze palm-tree, exercise in source-criticism in chapter a dedication by the Athenians from their 19 when he quotes various authors— aristeia in the Persian Wars (Nic. 13.5). Timaios, Thoukydides and Philistos Plutarch does not name his source here, are named—for differing views about but other evidence points to Kleidemos 147 the impression made by the Spartan the Atthidographer . Gylippos and his effect upon the At the end of chapter 15 Plutarch course of the fighting. Timaios held makes brief mention of Alkibiades’s that the Sicilians did not think much capture of the “barbarian stronghold” of of him, but Plutarch throws in his lot Hykkara in Sicily in the winter of 415/14 with Thoukydides and Philistos, whose BCE; among the captives taken was the view was that Gylippos’s arrival in courtesan Laïs, whom Alkibiades took spring 414 BCE transformed the whole back to the Peloponnese. It was this balance of the campaign, for he used

146 Nic. 9.9. 147 Apud Paus. 10.15.3. Levi (1971: 445 n. 99) gives some useful information. There are ten pages of fragments in FGrH III.B, 323; he published c. 350 BCE, and the only earlier Atthidographer was Hellanikos of Lesbos. 148 Polemon of Ilion, fl. 190 BCE, a Stoic geographer, especially interested in monuments and dedications at Delphi, Athens and Sparta. The Aratos reference is to a painting of the tyrant Aristratos of Sikyon (c. 350 BCE) in which Apelles was said to have had a part. 149 Nic. 17.4, fr. 1 Diehl, T 2 Kannicht.

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 Plutarch in Fifth-century Athens 93 the same resources of men, horses, and “to this day” (μέχρι νῦν 28.6) and in the arms but with different—and decisively final chapters he recounts the celebrated superior—tactics150. The fatal lunar anecdote concerning some of the Athe eclipse of 27 August 413 gives Plu nian prisoners in the stone quarries who tarch (chapter 23) the excuse for a lear had been able to win their freedom by ned excursus on eclipses, citing phi reciting verses from Euripides’s plays; lo sophers (Anaxagoras, Protagoras, some survivors even made a point of So krates, Plato) and historical autho visiting the poet when they got back to rities (Philokhoros [FGrH 328 F 135], Athens and thanking him for the service Autokleides [FGrH 353 F 7] and τὰ he had, albeit unwittingly, rendered them. ἐξηγητικά, Commentaries). Plutarch And in the final chapter (Nic. 30), the tries to exculpate Nikias—somewhat— terrible news of the disaster brought to the by noting, probably on Philokhoros’s disbelieving, and later grieving, people of authority, that Nikias’s household seer, a Athens by the barber from Peiraieus152. man named Stilbides, had recently died As a fitting epitaph we may quote and so the brake this man normally put Plutarch’s pithy observation: “No one on Nikias’s more extreme superstitious 151 could find fault with his actions, for once fears had been removed . In his he got started he was an energetic doer; description of the final battle inra Sy it was in getting started that he was a cuse harbour, Plutarch rises, at least ditherer whose nerve failed him”. (Nic. partially, to the emotive heights of his 16.9; it is more epigrammatic in Greek). model: it “aroused as much anguish and passion in the spectators as in 6. Alkibiades those who were fighting” (Nic. 25.2 = “[T]he protagonist of the Life of Th. 7.71). The Life ends with a personal Alcibiades is a very difficult character reminiscence. Plutarch says he was told to judge because his behaviour is far that an elaborately worked gold and from consistent”153. Plutarch’s readers purple shield said to belong to Nikias were—and are—fortunate in that for could be seen in a temple in Syracuse the public side of his subject’s life,

150 Nic. 19.5-6; Timae. FGrH 566 F 100 a; Philist. FGrH 556 F 56. Similarly, Nic. 28.4- 5, where Plutarch sides with Philistos (FGrH 556 F 55) and Thoukydides (7.86), who reported that the generals were put to death on order of the Syracusans vs. Timaios (FGrH 566 F 100 b), who held that they committed suicide upon receiving a secret message from Hermokrates. 151 Nic. 23.1; Th. 7.50.4 (see the helpful remarks by Andrewes in Gomme et al., 1970, pp. 428-29). 152 Nic. 30 = De garrul. 509A. 153 Verdegem, 2010, p. 419. Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 ISSN 0258-655X 94 Anthony Podlecki events in mainland Greece, the Aegean could be termed flamboyant by those and Western Anatolia, he had at his prepared to put up with it, or if not, disposal excellent sources, which he shockingly outrageous. Plutarch names put to good use: Thoukydides until Thoukydides four times, but perusal of 411 BCE and Xenophon’s Hellenika Ziegler’s apparatus of testimonia shows thereafter154. Since it appears that that he was intimately familiar with what Plutarch was working on this Life at he clearly recognizes as his best source. the same time as the Nikias155, he could He repeats the famous formulation re call on Philistos of Syracuse (whom gard ing Alkibiades’s basic character he cites by name three times in Nic., flaw, his παρανομία κατὰ τὸ σῶμα; though not here in Alc.) for the Sicilian (Alc. 6.3 = Th. 6.15.4). In chapter 11 debacle. The amount of information— Plutarch takes up the matter of Alki or was it misinformation?—regarding biades’s phenomenal success in the Alkibiades’s alleged involvement in Olympic chariot races, probably those the Eleusinian Mysteries travesty and of 416 BCE. In the speech Thoukydides wrote for Alkibiades in which the latter the herm defacement was enormous, explained to the Athenians why they and Plutarch does his best to navigate should support his plan to annex Sicily, through the plethora of material, mainly he referred to his having won first, oratorical but also in part documentary, second and fourth prizes (6.16.2), but purporting to be authentic, and credible. Plutarch knows that the victory ode For Alkibiades’s early years before commissioned by Alkibiades from his first appearance on the public Euripides has his chariots coming in stage there were family traditions of first, second and third156. Plutarch the Salaminioi and Alkmeonidai as names Thoukydides twice again later, well as a galaxy of anecdotal material in connection with the notorious ostra illustrating his subject’s rather unique cism of Hyperbolos (Alc.13.4 = 8.73.3) personal qualities: the lisp, somewhat and in the affair of the travesty of the unusual oratorical style and at times Mysteries in 415, where Plutarch exotic dress, and a lifestyle that remarks that Thoukydides, unlike later

154 Available to Plutarch and also probably consulted, if only sporadically, were the continuous accounts of Ephoros and Theopompos (filtered for us through the surviving narratives of Diodoros of Sicily and Cornelius Nepos respectively). 155 In fact, the Nikias probably antedates the Alkibiades, and the apparent cross-reference to the Alc. at Nic. 11.2 may be an interpolation (Russell, 1966, p. 37, n. 2). 156 Alc. 11.3. To the three lines Plutarch quotes here he adds two more at Dem. 1.1 (Euripides T 91a - 91b Kannicht 2004; Page, PMG nos. 755, 756; cf. Isoc., 16.34). Gomme et al., 1970, pp. 246-47, give various attempts to resolve the conflicting versions. ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 Plutarch in Fifth-century Athens 95 writers, passed over in silence the city, but if you rear him to fully grown, names of Alkibiades’s accusers. make sure to play along with his Besides in connection with the habits” (1431-32), and reflecting what was probably the universal Athenian victory ode Euripides’s name comes up reaction to Alkibiades at this point twice more. To him Plutarch attributes in their history, “[the city] longs for the remark, “For good-looking men him, but hates him, and wants to have even their autumn looks good” and him back” (1425159). From Eupolis’s comments that this was especially true Demes he quotes a line describing of Alkibiades157, Despite his show of Phaiax, one of Alkibiades’s political frugality and simplicity of life while at rivals, as “an excellent prattler, totally Sparta, in his feelings and actions he unable to speak” (Alc. 13.2, PCG fr. was really, Plutarch says, adapting a 116). Plutarch then goes on to mention a famous line from Euripides’s Orestes speech that Phaiax composed “Against (v. 129, spoken by Elektra of the Alkibiades” in which he alleged that apparently grief-stricken Helen), “the Alkibiades used the city’s ceremonial same woman as of old” (Alc. 23.6). gold and silver vessels for his own Plutarch again dips into his reper dinner parties160. Plutarch moves on to tory of Komoidoumenoi by poets of the infamous ostracism of 417 BCE and Old Comedy. From Aristophanes’s cites 3 verses from Plato Comicus about Wasps (early 422 BCE) he cites three Hyperbolos, whose “actions deserved li nes poking fun at Alkibiades’s lisp his fate, although the man himself and (vv. 43-46158; Alc.1.6) and, in a more his slave tattoos [?] did not; ostracism serious vein at Alc. 16.3, two passages was not invented for people like him”161. from Frogs of 405 BCE, the celebrated Later in the Life Plutarch quotes from maxim, “Best not to rear a lion in the the comic writer Phrynikhos a passage

157 Alc. 1.5, repeated with slight variants at Reg. et imp. apoph. 177A and Amat. 770C (allegedly said by the poet at the court of Arkhelaos of Macedon, as he planted a kiss on the forty-year-old tragedian Agathon). 158 With the clever pun κόλακος (flatterer) for κόρακος “crow” in v. 45. MacDowell, 1971, p. 134, in a useful note on v. 44, explains that Alkibiades’s lisp was “a ‘Chinese’ form (l for r), which modern speech therapists call ‘lambdacism’”. 159 A scholiast passes on the information that the line is adapted from Ion of Chios’s Guards. 160 Alc. 13.3. Scholars are divided whether it is this speech that has been transmitted as no. 4 in the works of Andokides (thus, [Pseudo-] Andokides IV), which may have furnished Plutarch with other items in the Life. Russell, 1966, p. 43, suggests Plutarch may have known the speech only indirectly. 161 Alc.13.9, PCG fr. 203; the lines are repeated at Nic. 11.6-7. Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 ISSN 0258-655X 96 Anthony Podlecki of 5 lines to fill in some details of the the best informed in historical matters charges brought against Alkibiades for of all the philosophers”163. At Alc. 16.8 allegedly desecrating the Mysteries. Plutarch cites a certain Arkhestratos for Thoukydides, Plutarch says, failed to the witticism that “Greece could not give the names of Alkibiades’s accu handle two Alkibiadeses”, and when he sers, but in the passage he cites from returns to this in the Life of Lysander, Phrynikhos they are identified as Dio Plutarch mentions that Theophrastros kleides and Teukros162. was his ultimate source for this piece of 164 Here and twice in the Moralia (De information . prof. 80D, Praec. ger. 804A) Plutarch Not surprisingly, the name of the describes Alkibiades’s rather odd but rhetor Andokides comes into Plutarch’s apparently very effective style of public account of the Hermokopidai scandal. speaking, citing favourable evaluations According to Hellanikos of Lesbos by οἱ κωμικοί and Demosthenes (21 (whom Plutarch cites frequently in Against Meidias 145). He was an effec the Theseus but only here in these ti ve speaker (πάντων δεινότατος), but Lives) Andokides claimed descent 165 166 so deliberate in his choice of what he from Odysseus . From Antiphon considered to be the mot juste that he Plutarch reports two stories vilifying would pause, often for long intervals, and Alkibiades that Plutarch himself re thus gave the impression that he was at a jects, pointing out that Antiphon was loss for words. Both here and at Political prejudiced against Alkibiades. He cites Precepts 804A, Theophrastos is credited Antisthenes the Socratic for the name of as the source for this piece of information, Alkibiades’s Spartan nurse, Amykla, and and Plutarch goes out of his way to praise it seems likely that Plutarch drew on him him as “the most diligent in research and also for other items of personalia167. As

162 Alc. 20.7, PCG fr. 61. 163 Alc. 10.4 tr. Scott-Kilvert; FHSG fr. 705. Russell, 1966, p. 43, n. 1, suggests it was from Theophrastos’s περὶ ὑποκρίσεως. There is a parallel of sorts with Perikles, who was said to have prayed, before addressing the assembly, that “no expression that was not germane to the matters at hand should occur to him” (Praec. ger. 803F; Plutarch goes on to describe, on Theophrastos’s authority, Alkibiades’s halting delivery). 164 Lys. 19.5; FHSG fr. 618. 165 Alc. 21.1; FGrH 4 F 170 b (cf. Nic. 13.3 the “Herm of Andokides”, so called because it was the only one spared by the mutilators). 166 Alc. 3.1, fr. 66 Blass. Cf. Th. 8.68.1 with the discussion by A. Andrewes in Gomme et al., 1981, p. 170 (“by far the most important testimony we have” regarding Antiphon). 167 Alc. 1.3; FGrH 1004 F 2, with the extended discussion by J. Engels, 1998b, p. 97. ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 Plutarch in Fifth-century Athens 97 he had in the Life of Kimon Plutarch defeat at Delion in 424 BCE (Alc.7.6, again draws on the “oligarch” Kritias, Symp. 221A). In the Comparison 42 [3]. quoting three verses from an elegy in 3 (a recap of the Life of Coriolanus 15.4) which Kritias claimed credit for having Plutarch quotes Letter IV (321C) for a proposed the decree for Alkibiades’s description of the contrast between the recall in 407 BCE168. two men in terms of αὐθάδεια, which Plato termed the “companion of solitude”. Among Plutarch’s named fourth- It was a fault of Coriolanus that was century sources priority belongs to conspicuously lacking in Alkibiades, who Plato. Plutarch cites him for the name of was famously affable and approachable. Alkibiades’s tutor, Zopyros169, and draws on him again later for the description Ephoros and Theopompos are each of how the “stream of beauty [from named once only, at Alc. 32.2, where we the lover]” flows into the beloved and learn that they along with Xenophon— “fills the soul of the loved one with love and unlike the theatrical Douris of in return”(Alc. 4.4, Phaidros 255D). Samos—were relatively sparing in their D. A. Russell noted that in describing descriptions of Alkibiades’s triumphal Alkibiades’s conflicted erotic attachment return to Athens in spring 407 BCE. to Sokrates Plutarch drew heavily on a Commentators have looked for signs of parallel passage in the Symposion170. additional borrowings in passages where Plutarch recounts the episode of Sokrates Plutarch provides information that can rescuing the wounded Alkibiades at be paralleled in the accounts of Diodoros Potidaia in 432/1 BCE (Alc. 7.3-4 from of Sicily and Cornelius Nepos, who have 171 been seen as surrogates for, respectively, Symposion 220 E ) and a story in which 172 the roles were reversed, with Alkibiades Ephoros and Theopompos . on horseback protecting Sokrates as he Of various anecdotes connecting trudged along on foot after the Athenian Alkibiades with his guardian and mentor

168 Alc. 33.1, fr. 3 West. From fr. 4 West we learn that in his elegy On Alkibiades Kritias complained that, since Alkibiades’s name would not fit into hexameters, he had to place it in the second, iambic, line of the couplet. 169 Alc. 1.1 from the First Alkibiades (problematically ascribed to Plato), where the man is identified as a Thracian, whom Sokrates describes unflatteringly as “a tutor so old he was perfectly useless” (122B, tr. Hutchinson. Alkibiades’s aversion from playing the aulos also probably comes from this dialogue (Alc. 2.5, Pl., Alc. 1 106E). 170 Alc. 6; Symp. 216; see Russell, 1966, p. 40. 171 Russell, 1966, p. 41, notes that Plutarch has modified Plato’s account and added a few details which “have probably come from Isocrates 16.29”. 172 Thus (from Ziegler’s testimonia), Diodoros (Ephoros) in chapters. 10, 12, 20, 22, 23, 25- 28, 30-37 and 39; Nepos (Theopompos) in chapters 18, 19, 22-25, 32, 33, 35-39. Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 ISSN 0258-655X 98 Anthony Podlecki

Perikles perhaps the most noteworthy is end of course, we cannot know what the story of how Alkibiades went to his Plutarch left out, but what he gave his guardian’s house but was turned away readers was a memorable portrait of on grounds that Perikles was too busy to this fascinating, strange and ultimately receive him because he was preparing tragic personality. to make an accounting to the people, to which Alkibiades retorted, “Wouldn’t Bibliography it be better to see how you could not Bakola, E., render an account to them?”173. - Cratinus and the Art of Comedy, Ox ford, 2004. The Alkibiades seems to me to be Beneker, J., the most compulsively readable of - The Passionate Statesman: Eros and these fifth-century lives, even more Politics in Plutarch’s Lives, Oxford, so perhaps than the Themistokles and 2012. Perikles, which are more varied and Blamire, A., complex, and undeniably of greater - Plutarch: Life of Kimon, London, 1989. value as historical documents. The Calabi Limentani, I., task Plutarch had set himself was to - Plutarchi Vitae Aristidis, Florence, present his readers with a clear and 1964. credible account of an important Greek Collard, C. & Cropp, M., personage, to be set off against a parallel - Euripides: Fragments, Aegeus-Melea ger, Cambridge, Mass., 2008. Roman figure, in this case Coriolanus. Connor, W. R., Plutarch was remarkably successful in 174 - Theopompus and Fifth-Century Athens, this enterprise . If there was anything Cambridge, Mass., 1968. that might have presented a problem to Develin, R., a biographer, it was perhaps the over - Athenian Officials 684-321 B.C., Cam abundance of source material about the bridge, 1989. personal side of his subject: what to Dodds, E. R., include and what to reject from so many - Plato: Gorgias, Oxford, 1966. examples of his subject’s self-important Dunbar, N., outbursts and bizarre behaviour? In the - Aristophanes: Birds, Oxford, 1995.

173 Alc. 7.3. Variations of this at Reg. et imp. apoph. 186E, Diodoros 12.38.2-3, Val. Max. 3.1, ext. 1; Aristodem. 16.4. Russell, 1966, p. 41, commented that this story “belongs to the mythology of the causes of the war”. 174 Concluding a characteristically erudite and helpful analysis of chapters 1-16, Russell, 1966, p. 47, criticizes Plutarch’s anecdotal style for its “loose structure, alarming in its incoherence”. To me this seems rather harsh, and it is outweighed by the liveliness and readability of the finished product. ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 Plutarch in Fifth-century Athens 99

Engels, J., Leurini, L., - “[FGrH] 1002 (= 107): Stestimbrotos - “Ione di Chio in Plutarco”, in A. Pérez of Thasos”, in G. Schepens (ed.), Jiménez & F. Titchener (eds.), Valore Felix Jacoby, Die Fragmente der letterari delle opere di Plutarco: griechischen Historiker Continued, Studi offerti al Professore Italo Gallo Part Four: Biography and Antiquarian dall’ International Plultarch Society, Literature, Leiden, 1998a, pp. 40-77. Málaga, 2005, 249-63. - “[FGrH] 1004: Antisthenes of Athens”, Levi, P., in G. Schepens (ed.), Felix Jacoby, Die - Pausanias: Guide to Greece, Volume 1: Fragmente der griechischen Historiker Central Greece, Harmondsworth, 1971. Continued, Part Four: Biography and Antiquarian Literature, Leiden, 1998b, MacDowell, D. M., pp. 84-111. - Aristophanes: Wasps, Oxford, 1971. - “[FGrH] 1012: Phainias of Eresos”, in Marr, J. L., G. Schepens (ed.), Felix Jacoby, Die - Plutarch: Life of Themistocles, War Fragmente der griechischen Historiker mins ter, 1998. Continued, Part Four: Biography and Mirhady, D., Antiquarian Literature, Leiden, 1998c, - The Political Thought of Theophrastus: pp. 266-351. A Critical Edition of the Named Texts Fortenbaugh, W. W. & White, S. A., with Translations and Commentary, - Aristo of Ceos, New Brunswick NJ, Ann Arbor, 1992. 2006. Nikolaidis, A. G., Gomme, A. W., - “Plutarch’s Methods: His Cross- - A Historical Commentary on Thucy references and the Sequence of the dides, Volume I: Introduction and Com Parallel Lives”, in A. Pérez Jiménez mentary on Book I, Oxford, 1945. & F. Titchener (eds.), Historical and - A Historical Commentary on Thucy Biographical Values of Plutarch’s Works: dides, Volume II: The Ten Years’ War Studies Devoted to Professor Philip A. Books II-III, Volume III: The Ten Years’ Stadter by the International Plutarch War Books IV-V.24, Oxford, 1956. Society, Málaga, 2005, 283-323. Gomme, A. W., Andrewes, A., & Dover, K. J., Pelling, C. B. R., - A Historical Commentary on Thucydi des, - “Plutarch and Thucydides”, in P. A. Volume IV: Book V.25-VII, Oxford, 1970. Stadter (ed.), Plutarch and the Histo - A Historical commentary on Thucydides: rical Tradition, London, 1992. Volume V: Book VIII, Oxford, 1981. - “Truth and Fiction in Plutarch’s Lives”, in C. B. R. Pelling, Plutarch and History: Holden, H. A., Eighteen Studies, Swansea, 2002, 117-41. - Plutarch’s Life of Pericles, Chicago, Perrin, B., 1894. - Plutarch’s Themistocles and Aristides, Hellmann, O. & Mirhady, D., New York, 1901. - Phaenias of Eresus, New Brunswick Podlecki, A. J., NJ, 2015. - “Review of Joachim Schwarze, Die Jones, C. P., Beurteilung des Perikles durch die atti - “Towards a Chronology of Plutarch’s sche Komödie und ihre historische und Works”, JRS, 56 (1966) 61-74. historiographische Bedeutung [Zetemata

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 ISSN 0258-655X 100 Anthony Podlecki

vol. 51] (Munich: C.H.Beck, 1971)”, in ‘Athenaion Politeia’, Oxford, 1981. Athenaeum, 51 (1973) 429-34. - Thucydides: History II, Warminster, 1988. - Plutarch, Life of Pericles: A Companion Russell, D. A., to the Penguin Translation with Intro - “Plutarch, ‘Alcibiades’ 1-16”, PCPhS, duction and Commentary, Bristol, 1987, 192, n.s. 12 (1966), 37-47. reprinted 1990. Verdegem, S., - Perikles and His Circle, London, 1998. - Plutarch’s Life of Alcibiades: Story, - “Anecdote and Apophthegm in Plu Text and Moralism, Leuven, 2010. tarch’s Athenian Lives”, in A. Pérez Jimé Wade-Gery, H. T., nez & F. Titchener (eds.), Valori letterari - Essays in Greek History, Oxford, 1958. delle opere di Plutarco: Studi offerti al Waterfield, R., Professore Italo Gallo dall’ International - Plutarch, Greek Lives: A Selection of Plutarch Society, Málaga, 2005, 367-78. Nine Greek Lives, Oxford, 1998. Rhodes, P. J., Yunis, H., - A Commentary on the Aristotelian - Plato: Phaedrus, Cambridge, 2011.

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 53-100 Side by Side by Plutarch by Frances B. Titchener Utah State University [email protected] Abstract Like many authors of his time, Plutarch associated specific characteristics and vocabulary with barbarians, notably superstition, great numbers, tremendous wealth, and the like. When he uses this language to describe non-barbarians, he is able to import a subtle negativity to his undertaking without distracting from his main narrative. The Life of Nicias furnishes a useful case study. Key-Words: Barbarians, Comparison, Superstition, Wealth, Nicias.

hink Plutarch, think of groups since it is clear from his parallel1. Scholars of many uses of the related term that his biographies can much like Americans and Canadians2, not get away from Plutarch and barbarians in their many the idea of compa different forms were old friends3. That rison:T Greek to Roman, past to pre barbarians were another group whose sent, victor and conquered. Plutarch thoughts, ideas, or sayings Plutarch notably liked to use groups of people— wished periodically to represent as a Greeks, Romans, Spartans, kings and whole, rather than one at a time, is clear emperors, women—to compare against from his lost Quaestiones Barbaricae4. other groups of people or individuals. We have a pretty good idea of what that We should add barbarians to that list work was like, extrapolating from the

1 Humble, 2010, passim. 2 I’d like to acknowledge the hard work and vision of my colleagues, particularly Noreen Humble, in bringing about this conference. A meeting of the North American sections has been long overdue. 3 Schmidt, 2002, counts over 950. 4 #139 Lamprias catalog.

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 101-110 ISSN 0258-655X 102 Frances B. Titchener

Greek and Roman questions a series writings were a form of resistance of questions with answers, touching against the Roman domination (see e.g. on barbarian religious practices, insti Swain 1996, Duff 1999)”6. tutions, and ways of living5. Building Nikolaidis examined Plutarch’s on the work of scholars who have treatment of Greeks and barbarians, identified a series of attributes or traits noting specific traits and attitudes. For considered “barbaric” by Plutarch, I instance, barbarians tend to be super will agree with them here that Plutarch stitious, show inappropriate and in defines certain adjectives or attributes tense emotion, especially when mourn as “barbaric” and hence implicitly ne ing, crave excess wealth and luxury, gative. I argue further that he at least and treat their captives savage ly. He sometimes uses them to add a negative assembled a useful list of characteristics flavor to his depiction of non-barbarian for Greece/Greek/in a Greek way, and individuals, using Nicias and the barbarian/barbarian-like/in a barbarian Nicias-Crassus pair as case studies. way, emphasizing that “in making Barbarian behavior has been well- these distinctions Plutarch does not documented by Plutarch scholars see Greeks and barbarians in black and 7 for many years and Plutarch uses the white terms” . Under “Greek” we are terms barbarian, barbaric, barbarous, not surprised to see words like arête, etc., to describe not only different na pronoia, praotes, and philanthropia, tionalities, but also the behavior of while under “barbarian” we are equally individuals. Real barbarians were peo unsurprised to see kakia, thrasos, dei ple like Persians and Gauls, but evi sidaimones, and baruthumoi. dently not Macedonians or at least not In addition to the earlier mentioned always, nor, indeed Romans. T. Sch traits including savagery, boldness, midt, for example, suggests that Ro immense wealth, and overwhelming mans did not count as barbarians, but numbers, Schmidt adds a general group rather as Greeks, for contrast purposes: of traits he calls phaulotes, “vileness” “Plutarch’s presentation of barbarians which includes faithlessness, cowardice, seems to agree rather with the idea of a wickedness, and superstition. But he, conciliatory attitude of Plutarch towards like Nikolaidis, also emphasizes that the Romans (as defended e.g. by Jones some barbarian characteristics have 1971, Boulogne 1994, Sirinelli 2000) positive sides to them, in that barbarians and not with the view that Plutarch’s can exhibit courage, intelligence, and

5 Schmidt, 2009, p. 171. 6 Schmidt, 2002, p. 70, n. 7. 7 Nikolaidis, 1986, p. 244. ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 101-110 Side by Side by Plutarch 103 wisdom, making them a little more characteristics, Schmidt further argues complicated8. Indeed, F. Brenk com that Plutarch is not actually interested pellingly describes the mixture of in barbarians’ political thought, but is attraction and revulsion we feel at the simply trolling for good examples10: physical depiction of Gauls, with their With the barbarians, and especially Celtic faces, mustaches and wild hair, the barbarian monarchy, Plutarch has and their extreme solutions to problems set up a negative standard by which (i.e. assassination): “The single Dying the Greek and Roman leaders are Galatian has a distinctive Keltic face, or may be judged. It works through and hair treated and arranged in a exempla and may thus be deduced by disgusting fashion, at least to Greek and the reader himself even without explicit Roman taste. Also disruptive are the non- statements by Plutarch. The barbarian classical mustache and the distinctive monarchy is a powerful example of torque around his neck”. Who would not what a king should NOT be. be in favor of Kamma, the heroine of This predilection for exempla fits the Celtic version of the Lucretia myth? in well with the accepted notion of Kamma was married to an important Plutarch’s use of foils as a device, man among the Galatians, too important particularly in the Parallel Lives, as for the evil Sinorix to simply assault. pointed out by many scholars, many After Sinorix murdered her husband and times, including myself, most notably proposed marriage, Kamma prepared in connection with the life of Nicias11. a poisoned wedding cup, drained half Schmidt astutely notices in connection herself, and then watched her new with De fort Alex. (328A-329A), that “… husband drink the fatal draft. Having Plutarch uses the barbarians—the savage succeeded in murdering her aggressor, and lawless populations of Asia—as a she spent the day and a half it took her to foil to bring out the great achievements die dancing in victory after his demise, of Alexander and the superiority of the “a mixture of heroism and homicide, Greek political system”12. But since we civilization, and barbarity”9. are on the subject of Nicias, let us look at Despite this appreciation of the foils, or comparison, or parallelism in that potential positive side of barbarian biography and in the Nicias-Crassus pair.

8 Schmidt, 2002, p. 58, and 1999, pp. 239-70. 9 Brenk, 2005; the two quotations are from pp. 94 and 98. 10 Schmidt, 2004, p. 235. 11 See Mossman, 1988; Titchener, 1996; Titchener, 2013; Zadorozhnyi, 1997. 12 Schmidt, 2004, p. 230. Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 101-110 ISSN 0258-655X 104 Frances B. Titchener

The Life of Nicias. pairs occur elsewhere in the life: at Throughout his biography, Nicias the beginning, Pericles is contrasted is actively contrasted with another with Thucydides, as well as Nicias, individual. In the earliest part of the and Cleon is contrasted first with biography, it is Pericles (3.1). After Pe Brasidas, and then with Alcibiades. In ricles’ death, Nicias is “put up against” an interesting parallel, toward the end Cleon (antitagma, 2.2) until the latter’s (26.1-2), Gylippus himself is contrasted death (9.2), at which time Alcibiades with his Syracusan counterparts, and becomes Nicias’ foil. Plutarch first then Gylippus and Hermocrates together contrasts Cleon and Alcibiades (9.1). are contrasted with Eurycles and the It is clear that Alcibiades will take up popular front. where Cleon left off being a thorn in Contrast continues to be an overt Nicias’ side: “Once freed from Cleon, device at the end of chapter twenty- Nicias had no opportunity at all to seven, where Nicias laments the contrast lull and pacify the city, but having between the Athenians’ glorious safely set matters on the right track, intentions and ignominious end, and his stumbled badly, and was immediately men lament the unfair irony of Nicias shoved into war by the power and dying in command of an expedition impetuosity of Alcibiades’ ambition” from which he more than anyone else (9.2). Later (11.1) Plutarch refers to had tried to dissuade the Athenians, the feud between Nicias and Alcibiades and the discouraging failure of his becoming so intense that ostracism many expensive religious services. was invoked. After Alcibiades’ recall, But contrast is also a more subtle Nicias faces off against Lamachus framing device, as can be seen through (15.1). However, after an explanation Plutarch’s discussion of Nicias’ piety. of why the two generals were not Most of chapter three is concerned with equals (15.3-4), Nicias becomes the Nicias’ outlay of wealth on dedications sole actor on the stage until Lamachus’ and choruses, whereas the beginning death (18.3). Nicias’ solo, as it were, of chapter four discussed his obsession coincides with the dramatic climax of with divination. Yet the end of chapter the life, and the peak of his success. twenty-three and the beginning of When Gylippus enters the scene chapter twenty-four present Nicias’ (18.5), however, almost halfway through piety as ignorant, useless, and ultimately the narrative, Nicias’ fortunes decline dangerous superstition. We admire rapidly. In the latter portion of the Nicias’ piety at the beginning; by the end biography, Nicias is contrasted both we sneer at his superstition. with his fellow general Demosthenes, I suggest that Plutarch uses these and with Gylippus also. These sub- and traits like them not only to compare

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 101-110 Side by Side by Plutarch 105 his subjects to one another (Nicias and hard to pin down why that is. This pair Crassus) and to various foils (Crassus has been seen by some as negative, and Parthians; Nicias and Hiero), like Alcibiades-Coriolanus, or Antony- barbarian and otherwise, but also to Demetrius. This is a little confusing in add dimension to a biographical subject that Nicias, conspicuous for religious who may or may not be a barbarian piety, should be a tragic figure whose himself (i.e. Nicias). Schmidt, indeed, fate was ἥκιστα ἄξιος (“least worthy”) has noted how “With remarkable because of his devotion to religion. consistency, the negative characteristics Surely Crassus, whose money came of barbarians are used as a foil to bring from proscriptions, fire sales and slave out the good qualities of the Greek and trading was worse than Nicias. But that Roman heroes”13. The more of these is not really clear. traits a biographical subject possesses, To look closely at how Plutarch or the more Plutarch chooses to focus compared his two subjects, I suggest on those traits, the more uncomfortable we look at Nicias side-by-side as part we feel, and the more uncertain about of a Duff-style book15, separate the what we are meant to emulate. proem, compare it closely with its The Nicias-Crassus pair. parallel life, Crassus, and then conclude with the Synkrisis. We will then see a To what extent does this barbarian- pervasive structure dependent on both style language or signifiers make the biographies, which throws the true the biography of Nicias the way it is, themes into deeper relief. This structure i.e. unpleasant? Nicias is unpleasant has been seen before. R. Seager noted enough that I wondered in the past it particularly in Crassus, although he why Plutarch even wrote about him. I attributes it to Plutarch’s failure to appre 14 concluded at the time that a pair was ciate complicated narrative16: “So in needed for Crassus, already underway general the life leaps from one landmark as part of the simultaneous preparation to the next: Spartacus, the consulship, for the Roman Lives so brilliantly the coalition, the second consulship and illuminated by Chris Pelling (1980). finally Carrhae”. Further, concerning Nicias is a very hard guy to like, even Plutarch’s source material for the Ni if one sympathizes with him, but it’s cias, Duff notes that while Alcibiades

13 Schmidt, 2002, p. 58, and p. 70 where he notes that “Dio makes the same rhetorical use the barbarians as a foil, although with less insistence than Plutarch”. 14 Titchener, 1991. 15 See Duff, 2011. 16 Seager, 2005, p. 110. Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 101-110 ISSN 0258-655X 106 Frances B. Titchener uses Thucydides sparingly, Nicias re greedy (Crassus). There is a significant lies heavily on Thucydides despite the military action that acts as an exemplar promise to be useful and not redundant17. of the military career (Pylos for Nicias, Both of these observations can be the Servile War for Crassus), and explained by the organization of the Nicias- then the catastrophic final campaigns Crassus book. Plutarch is controlling his (Sicily for Nicias, Parthia for Crassus), material so that his sequences are parallel. followed by a kind of coda. There are The major themes of personality type framing pairs of bad omens in the same are established, cowardly (Nicias) and places of each biography.

Introduction to the Book: Nicias 1: “Since we agree that it is not out of line to compare Crassus to Nicias, and the Parthian disaster to the Sicilian”, then on to source criticism on Thucydides, Philistus, and Timaeus. Nicias Crassus 2: personality = timid 2: personality = greedy 3: Crassus used hard work and preparation 3: Nicias used money in lieu of rhetorical to overcome those more naturally gifted powers like those of Pericles (Caesar, Pompey, Cicero) 7: Cleon as foil. Pylos episode: theme of 7. Spartacus as foil, but: “This was the cowardice and dangers of catering to the base beginning of his rivalry with Pompey.” 7-9: Pylos episode; enter new foil, Alcibiades 8-12: Servile war; enter additional foil, Caesar 12: Nicias does not want to go to Sicily 16: Crassus is elated to go to Mesopotamia 16-17: BAD OMENS: Ateius, cursing lunatic 13: BAD OMENS: Meton, Altar of the gods; (w. incense); trips over Publius who has fallen Adonia; Herms; Socrates outside Ishtar’s temple 14: Athenians arrive in Sicily 18: Parthian campaign begins 23: BAD OMENS: wrong cloak; heavy 23: BAD OMENS: eclipse standards 28: Nicias’ death 31: Crassus’ death 29-30: prisoners’ fate; news reaches Athens 32-33: Parthian production of Bacchae

In the Synkrisis Plutarch recapitulates • Money: How they got it and what the themes of both Lives, in the same they did with it. order as in the biographies, establishing • Political career: Nicias was subser these points of comparison: vient to the base and obsessed with

17 Duff, 1999, p. 24.

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 101-110 Side by Side by Plutarch 107 safety; Crassus was violent but contended close attention to their teachers so that against worthy opponents; however, he they not miss the hidden fruit on the can’t compete with the Peace. vine. He advises study of the diffe • Base Motives: Nicias let Cleon in rences between the language the poets and abandoned Athens to the inferior. use for good and bad characters, pro That’s how he got stuck with Sicily. He viding many examples from Homer. He didn’t want war, but got it. Athens sent ends this chapter curiously, saying: Nicias out unwilling, and his city hurt him. Crassus did well against Spartacus 30C: ταῦτα μὲν οὖν ἱκανὰ because there were good men running πε ρὶ διαφορᾶς, ἂν μὴ κἀκεῖνο things. He wanted war, but didn’t get it. βου λώμεθα προσλαβεῖν, ὅτι τῶν He hurt his city. Τρώ ων ἑαλώκασι καὶ πολλοὶ • Public Stance: Nicias was right to ζῶν τες, οὐδεὶς δὲ τῶν Ἀχαιῶν, καὶ warn about Sicily; Crassus was wrong τῶν μὲν ὑποπεπτώκασιν ἔνιοι τοῖς to push for Parthia. πολεμίοις, ὥσπερ ὁ Ἄδρασ τος, οἱ Ἀντιμάχου παῖδες, ὁ Λυκάων, • Military conduct: Nicias came αὐτὸς ὁ Ἕκτωρ δεόμενος περὶ close; disease and envy overcame him; τα φῆς τοῦ Ἀχιλ λέως, ἐκείνων δ᾽ Crassus didn’t give fortune a chance to οὐδείς, ὡς βαρβαρικοῦ τοῦ ἱκε help him. τεύειν καὶ ὑποπίπτειν ἐν τοῖς • Divination: not a factor because ἀγῶ σιν ὄντος, Ἑλληνικοῦ δὲ τοῦ although Nicias was devout and Crassus νιό κᾶν μαχ με νον ἢ ἀποθνῄσκειν. an unbeliever, they both died the same way. This is enough on the subject of diffe rences, unless perhaps we desire to • Manner of death: Nicias was led add, that of the Trojans many were taken by false hope to surrender, and Crassus was led by false hope to destruction. alive, but none of the Achaeans; and that of the Trojans some fell down at the feet Final Judgement of the enemy, as did Adrastus, the sons of Antimachus, Lycaon, and Hector himself Nicias’ personality, timid and co begging Achilles for burial, but of the ward ly, in the end made his death more Achaeans none, because of their con shameful than Crassus’ personality, viction that it is a trait of barbarian peoples greedy and grasping. to make supplication and to fall at the That’s a pretty half-hearted denun enemy’s feet in combat, but of Greeks to ciation of Nicias, who seemed to be conquer or to die fighting. winning (or losing) the race up to that Plutarch is done with examining the point. What’s the coffin’s final nail? One differences between “good” and “bad” clue may lie in Quomodo Adolescens. Homeric figures, and the coda he chooses About half-way through that essay, to add has to do with surrendering. Plutarch cautions young people to pay Plutarch carefully puts this sentiment Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 101-110 ISSN 0258-655X 108 Frances B. Titchener into the mouths of the ancient Greek In light of the differences warriors, but he has gone to some in Plutarch’s aim and method, trouble to do so. The “fall at the feet” discussions of his use of Thu verb, ὑποπίπτειν, is based on the same cydides should differentiate bet verb used in Nicias (προσπεσὼν, 27.4). ween the two genres, since “The threads used as the warp in the But is it possible to use a Moralia composition of the Moralia be quote to illuminate something in the come the woof in the Lives, and Lives? Is there only one Plutarch, or those yarns which form the warp not? Is there a parallel Plutarch, an anti- in the Lives are found again in Plutarch? I have heard both sides of this the woof of the Moralia. question argued with great eloquence and by the most learned of scholars. In the Parallel Lives, Thu Unitarians say that one way or another, cydides is a source of informa Plutarch is Plutarch, and distinctions tion. In the Moralia, he is, addi between Lives and Moralia cannot be tio nally, a source of ornamental categorically assigned18. Separatists quo tations. Therefore, it is my say that Lives and Moralia are written contention that it is frequently for different purposes entirely, and that Thucydides the stylist whom the rhetorical nature of the Moralia Plutarch cites in the Moralia, makes it difficult to transfer inferences but almost always Thucydides the historian that Plutarch cites thus derived. Yet some essays seem in the Parallel Lives. There can to have plenty of connection to the be no question of Plutarch’s ap Lives or their subjects, such as An preciation of Thucydides as an Seni or Praecepta. The Quaestiones artist, and there can be no ques may be notebooks or kinds of outlines tion of Plutarch’s fondness for (hypomnemata) for use in Lives. The the liberal use of γνωμολογίαι. disagreement is the same when it comes Perhaps Plutarch felt that the si to examining Plutarch’s use of sources. multaneous use of Thucydides as So, for example, it has been argued historian and ornament was so mehow distasteful—that one or that Plutarch’s use of Thucydides is the other was appropriate but not very different in the Moralia than in both. Perhaps he felt that Thu the Lives, and that this difference stems cydides’ eloquent writing style 19 from the genres themselves : would interfere with the point

18 For discussion on this subject, see Nikolaidis, 2008, especially the Introduction, Section 2.a (How Plutarch deals with other genres), and Section 3 (Moralia in vitis). 19 The first quotation is from Babbitt, 1927, p. xii, the second from Titchener, 1995, pp. 194-5.

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 101-110 Side by Side by Plutarch 109

of the biographies, whereas it the deciding factor in who was the would enhance the flow of the more shameful, the bigger barbarian, essays. The best explanation is Crassus or Nicias. Crassus, as a Roman, that in the Parallel Lives, Plu had a definite barbarian flavor to him tarch used Thucydides as a pri which Plutarch and his contemporaries mary source, while in the Mora- would have considered natural. But for lia he is one of many secondary sources, frequently consulted Plutarch, barbarian attributes in a Greek in one of Plutarch’s notebooks, were harder to overlook or forgive, and where his admiration of Thu his characterization of Nicias using cydides’ writing style made the those attributes condemns the general historian an important ingredient in an oblique and disconcerting way. in Plutarch’s own version of Bartlett’s Familiar Quotations. Bibliography Here I suppose that I have shifted Babbitt, F., the argument to whether or not there - Plutarch Moralia. Vol. 1 (Loeb Classical Library), Cambridge, 1927. is only one Thucydides, but I am Boulogne, J., comfortable with the idea of one - Plutarque: un aristocrate grec sous Plutarch who has different facets, and l’occupation romaine, Villeneuve-d’Asq, so I will press the point that I want to 1994. apply Plutarch’s comment in Quomodo Braund, D., Adolescens to the final sentence of the - “Dionysiac Tragedy in Plutarch, Cras Synkrisis between Nicias and Crassus. I sus”, CQ, 43 (1993) 468-74. think part of the “negativity” in Nicias, Brenk, F., certainly in the oddly flat final judgment - “The Barbarian Within. Gallic and Ga latian Heroines in Plutarch’s Erotikos”, of the Synkrisis, comes from Plutarch’s in A. Pérez Jiménez & F. Titchener deliberate use of characteristics and (eds.), Historical and Biographical Va language typically associated with bar lues of Plutarch’s Works. Studies devoted barians. Great wealth, superstition, to Professor Philip A. Stadter by the In and cowardice signified barbarians, not ternational Plutarch Society, Málaga, 2005, 93-106. Greeks. The end of the Synkrisis, with its Duff, T., spe cific reference to surrender making - Plutarch’s Lives: Exploring Virtue and his death more shameful, reinforces Vice, Oxford, 1999. the idea that Nicias was an individual - “The Structure of the Plutarchan Book”, who did not fit in with aristocrats like ClAnt, 30 (2011) 213-78. Pericles and Alcibiades, or street- Geiger, J., fighters like Cleon and Hyperbolus. - “Lives and Moralia: How Were Put Asunder What Plutarch Hath Joined Wealthy, superstitious, and cowardly, Together”, in A. Nikolaidis (ed.), The Unity the general’s surrender in Sicily was of Plutarch’s Work: ‘Moralia’ Themes in

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 101-110 ISSN 0258-655X 110 Frances B. Titchener

the ‘Lives’, Features of the ‘Lives’ in the der Stockt (eds.), Sage and Emperor: ‘Moralia’, Berlin, 2008, 5-12. Plutarch, Greek Intellectuals, and Ro Humble, N. (ed.), man Power in the Time of Trajan (9-117 - Plutarch’s Lives: Parallelism and Pur A.D.), Leuven, 2002, 57-71. pose, Swansea, 2010. - Plutarque et les barbares: la rhétorique d’une image, Louvain, 1999. Jones, C., - Plutarch and Rome, Oxford, 1971. Seager, R. (ed.), - Plutarch. Fall of the Roman Republic Mossman, J., (Penguin Classics), London, 2005. - “Tragedy and Epic in Plutarch’s Alexan der”, JHS, 108 (1988) 83-93. Sirinelli, J., - Plutarque de Chéronée: un philosophe Nikolaidis, A., dans le siècle, Paris, 2000. - “Ἑλληνικός-βαρβαρικός. Plutarch on Greek and Barbarian Characteristics”, Swain, S., WS, 20 (1986) 229-44. - Hellenism and Empire: Language, - The Unity of Plutarch’s Work: ‘Moralia’ Classicism, and Power in the Greek Themes in the ‘Lives’, Features of the World, AD 50-250, Oxford, 1996. ‘Lives’ in the ‘Moralia’, Berlin, 2008. Titchener, F., Pelling, C., - “Plutarch the Architect: structure as art - “Plutarch’s Adaptation of his Source- in the life of Nicias”, in G. Santana Material”, JHS, 100 (1980) 127-39. Henríquez (ed.), Plutarco y Las Artes, Madrid, 2013, 249-54. Schmidt, T., - “Plutarch’s Use of Thucydides in the - “Barbarians in Plutarch’s Political Moralia”, Phoenix, 49 (1995) 189-200. Thought,” in L. De Blois (ed.), The Sta - “The Structure of Plutarch’s Nicias”, in tesman in Plutarch’s Works. Vol. 1. (Pro J. A. Fernandez Delgado & F. Pordo ceedings of the Sixth International Con mingo Pardo (eds.), Estudios sobre Plu ference of the International Plutarch So tarco: Aspectos Formales. Atti of the ciety, Nijmegen/Castle Hernen, May 1-5, IV Simposio Español sobre Plutarco, 2002.), Leiden, 2004, 227-35. Salamanca, 1996, 351-56. - “Les « Questions barbares » de Plutar - “Why did Plutarch Write about Nicias?” que: un essai de reconstitution”, in M. AHB, 5.5/6 (1991) 153-58. Chassignet (ed.), L’étiologie dans la pensée antique, Turnhout, 2009, 165-83. Zadorojnyi, A., - “Plutarch’s Timeless Barbarians and the - “Tragedy and epic in Plutarch’s Cras Age of Trajan”, in P. Stadter & L. Van sus”, Hermes, 125 (1997) 169-82.

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 101-110 Notes & Varia

1. Necrologicae pero no en mérito y valor). Ploutarchos n.s. se honra de haber contado con am El año 2016 ha sido especialmente bos en su equipo de dirección (Italo duro con la International Plutarch So Gallo durante los primeros años) y de ciety. Aunque esperadas, las pérdidas de redacción (Françoise Frazier hasta el nuestro primer Presidente, Italo Gallo, último día, cuando aún revisaba las en el mes de abril y de Françoise Fra pruebas de la Bibliografía de 2012 zier, en diciembre, han ensombrecido que son en este volumen un canto a su la actividad de todos nosotros, espe fortaleza). Como responsable de re cial mente de quienes tuvimos la suerte dacción y en nombre de todo el Comité de conocerlos y aprender de su ejemplo de la Revista, agradezco a Paola Volpe y como personas y de su magisterio como a Olivier Guerrier y Olivier Munnich las servidores rigurosos de la Filología. palabras dedicadas al recuerdo de Italo y Con Italo Gallo el destino ha sido par de Françoise, respectivamente, en unas ticularmente cruel, aquejado por una hermosas páginas que sin duda todos larga enfermedad que anuló una de sus los miembros de esta comunidad plutar más preciadas cualidades, su brillante quista compartimos. capacidad racional. En cuanto a Fran çoise, quienes hemos convivido con Aurelio Pérez Jiménez ella en los últimos años y sabíamos de I. “Ricordo di Italo Gallo” sus problemas de salud, admiramos aún (Padula, 20 aprile 1921 – Salerno, 24 más su férrea voluntad para agarrarse a aprile 2016) la vida y su energía, ilusión y disciplina para dejarnos a todos los plutarquistas Ricordare Italo Gallo non è per me dos magníficos trabajos que sin duda compito facile: la commozione è ancora serán un referente y mantendrán viva tanta perché Egli ha lasciato a tutti su memoria durante muchos años. Uno noi, studiosi e plutarchisti, una eredità es la reedición revisada de su libro di conoscenza e di affetto che sarà sobre las Vidas de Plutarco, reseñado en impossibile dimenticare. este mismo volumen por Carlos Alcalde Egli cominciò la Sua attività di (infra pp. 124-127). Y el otro es el libro docente nella scuola secondaria superio que abrirá la nueva colección plutarquea re e fu impareggiabile professore prima de Brill y en el que se reúne parte de sus a Cava dei Tirreni (SA) - dove più tardi opera minora (menores en extensión, tornò da preside - e poi al liceo Tasso

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 111-120 ISSN 0258-655X 112 Notes & Varia di Salerno. Dall’esperienza scolastica Venendo al teatro, in uno studio dal ricavò profonda consuetudine con i titolo Un dramma satiresco arcaico in classici greci e latini, ma anche l’habitus testimonianze vascolari del territorio mentale di tenere sempre presente il salernitano, egli sottolineava come la complesso rapporto fra la cultura latina documentazione vascolare potesse in e gli ascendenti greci: l’insegnamento alcuni casi rivelarsi particolarmente nei Licei gli conferì inoltre la rara ca fruttuo sa per l’esegesi e, a volte, finanche pacità di illustrare anche i testi più indispensabile: prendendo in esame complessi con limpida ed esemplare le pitture di un cratere attico a volute chiarezza. Divenuto nell’allora Ma dissepolto a Padu la e intrecciando l’ico gistero professore di Civiltà greca e poi nografia con la letteratura, Gallo, ad di Papirologia nella nascente Facoltà esempio, avanzava l’ipotesi che più di un di Lettere dell’Università di Salerno, Eracle satiro si potesse parlare di Saturoi e, più tardi, ordinario di Letteratura kleptoi pre-eschilei. Nel volume Teatro greca nell’Università Federico II di ellenistico minore Gallo ha esaminato Napoli e poi nuovamente nell’ateneo lo stretto rapporto fra commedia nuova salernitano in quest’ultimo, Italo Gallo e filosofia, pubblicando i men fram ti di fu il promotore non solo della costi Batone, Damosseno, Sositeo satiresco tuzione del Dipartimento di Scienze e Macone: con una punta di orgoglio, dell’Antichità, ma anche del dottorato ma anche di non comune umiltà - che è di ricerca in Filologia classica, nonché dote sincera degli uomini di vera cultu organizzatore di convegni e seminari di ra - amava ricordare che proprio il Suo livello internazionale. Sositeo era stato segnalato negli addenda dei Tragici minores di B. Snell. Complesso e infinitamente ricco è il Suo itinerario culturale, ma qui mi Ed ancora e soprattutto Plutarco, vorrei soffermare su tre aspetti della testimonianza - Egli diceva sempre - Sua ricerca e produzione scientifica: la ricca, varia, poliedrica della cultura e biografia, il teatro greco ellenistico e, della vita greca - e non solo - in tutte le infine, il nostro Plutarco. sue espressioni e in tutto l’arco storico da Omero ai suoi tempi. A Plutarco ln Nascita e sviluppo della biografia Gallo ha dedicato più di venti anni. È greca Gallo affermava che era necessa stato presidente della International rio associare alla ricerca testuale una Plutarch Society, fondata nel 1984, approfondita analisi storico-culturale promotore della “Red tematica Plu dei contenuti, non trascurando quelle tarco”, che vede oggi impegnati studiosi che Egli definiva “implicazioni socio di undici università europee, e della lo giche e comunicazionali” di questa pubblicazione del Corpus Plutarchi Mo forma letteraria. ralium. Ricordo il I Convegno di studi

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 111-120 Notes & Varia 113 su Plutarco (Roma 23 novembre 1985) man cabili carenze, che proprio il CPM dove furono gettate le basi di questo au avrebbe dovuto colmare. Un traguardo, dace progetto editoriale che sembrava quello intravisto fin da subito da Italo allo ra difficilmente realizzabile: di Gallo, che oggi possiamo dire - non ottanta opuscoli del Cheronese bi senza un pizzico di orgoglio e di sognava dare una traduzione italiana (e soddisfazione - raggiunto. Dopo il in alcuni casi si trattava della prima), De adulatore et amico, numerosi altri un commento filologico, storico e lette opusco li sono stati pubblicati: oggi sia rario, e allestire un testo critico che mo in attesa dell’uscita del n. 51, a cura ri chiedeva necessariamente una nuova - forse non è un caso - di un giova ne e accurata collazione dei codici, volta a studioso salernitano, di quella Salerno completare e perfezionare le ricogni zio che Italo Gallo tanto ha amato e alla quale ni precedenti. Un lavoro lungo, artico lato tanto ha lasciato. Di Italo Gallo voglio e difficile quello dell’editore tarcheo plu infine ricordare anche i Suoi studi sulla immaginato per il CPM e Gallo, come storia di Salerno e della sua provincia era Sua abitudine, volle essere il primo a perché l’amore per la classicità è andato mettersi in gioco, pubblicando (insieme a in Lui sempre di pari passo con l’amore Emidio Pettine) il De adulatore et amico per la Sua terra e per la grande tradizione e indicando così a noi altri la strada culturale che ad essa ha fatto onore: a Lui da seguire, il metodo soprattutto per la infatti dobbiamo ancora la rifondazione stesura degli apparati delle varianti e della Società di Storia Patria e la ripresa delle congetture e delle fonti. Una strada delle pubblica zioni della rinata Rassegna quella tracciata da Gallo che, come storica salernitana. detto, aveva un traguardo tanto chiaro Italo Gallo era un uomo dotto, equa quanto ambizioso: fare del Corpus nime, ricco di una profonda humanitas, Plutarchi Moralium, iniziativa scienti fatta di cultura e signorilità, che abbiamo fica voluta e finanziata da tre importati ri cordato e onorato nel momento in Università del Mezzogiorno, (Salerno, cui la nostra comunità di colleghi e - Napoli - L’Orientale e Palermo), una permettetemi - di amici è stata colpita eccellenza italiana e, grazie anche al dalla notizia della Sua scomparsa. In contributo di numerosi editori e esegeti pochissime ore di quel doloroso 24 europei, internazionale, meritevole aprile 2016 anche la mailing-list della perciò di affiancare nelle biblioteche e International Plutarch Society è andata sulle scrivanie degli studiosi i volumi colmandosi dei messaggi di tanti che di collane celebri quali Teubner, Loeb non hanno voluto far mancare una testi e Les Belles Lettres. Di questi volumi monianza sincera di dolore e di affetto lo stesso Gallo aveva evidenziato fre o un aneddoto, quasi sempre utile a quentemente i pregi, ma anche le im sottolineare la grandezza dello stu

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 111-120 ISSN 0258-655X 114 Notes & Varia dioso, ma ancor più dell’uomo e del narration biographique : composition maestro. “Guida intellettuale, fonte et signification des « grandes scènes » di ispirazione e anima”, così lo ricorda dans les Vies), sous la direction de celui in un messaggio l’amico Aurelio Pérez qui restera, toute sa vie, son « patron » : Ji ménez, una presenza vivissima in Jean Sirinelli. Après avoir assuré des tutti i convegni plutarchei, anche se cours pour les pré-agrégatifs de l’ENSJF età e malattia lo avevano già costretto (1982-1987), et avoir été pensionnaire a restarne lontano, ma mai assente. de la Fondation Thiers (1984-1987), Saggio, generoso, aperto verso i più puis avoir été nommée Maître de giovani e verso ogni iniziativa capace Conférences à l’Université Stendhal- di unire sedi universitarie e docenti Grenoble III (1989), elle soutient en di molteplici località, “un gigante 1991 son Habilitation à Diriger les degli studi plutarchei” - così lo ricorda Recherches, sur un dossier portant sur affettuosamente Philip Stadter - che les Vies, avec un travail original Morale mancherà tantissimo a tutti noi, ma che, et Histoire dans les Vies Parallèles. come detto all’inizio di questo ricordo, ci En 1997, elle est élue Professeur à ha lasciato in dono un’eredità di contri l’Université Paul Valéry-Montpellier III, buti e di lavoro che dovremo, dobbiamo puis en 2006 à l’Université Paris Ouest proseguire non senza di Lui, ma per Lui. Nanterre La Défense. En 2012, elle Paola Volpe Cacciatore est nommée membre senior à l’Institut Universitaire de France (IUF). II. Francoise Frazier Françoise Frazier est l’auteur d’une (Paris, 17 février 1959 - Paris, 14 œuvre philologique et scientifique de décembre 2016) première importance. Elle est d’abord une des meilleures spécialistes de Françoise Frazier s’en est allée le 14 Plutarque, qu’elle n’a cessé, tout au décembre 2016, des suites d’une longue long de sa vie, de pratiquer. On lui maladie, et elle laisse son entourage, doit en particulier, outre des dizaines tous les plutarquisants et encore plus d’articles, de nombreuses éditions et particulièrement notre Réseau européen, traductions de Plutarque (Collection la RED, dans une indicible solitude. des Universités de France, Classiques En 1978, elle intègre brillamment en poche, Garnier Flammarion), et l’École Normale Supérieure de Jeunes surtout Histoire et Morale dans les Vies Filles (ENSJF) du Boulevard Jourdan Parallèles de Plutarque, dont elle – ou « ENS Sèvres ». Première à avait souhaité, en 2016, proposer une l’agrégation de Lettres Classiques seconde édition, revue et augmentée. (1981), elle soutient, trois ans plus tard, Sa bibliographie, ses séminaires et ses sa thèse de doctorat (Plutarque et la cours montrent également qu’elle s’est ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 111-120 Notes & Varia 115 préoccupée de toute la tradition et de de journées de travail et de colloques, tous les genres, d’Homère à Plutarque, manifesta une autre qualité qui caractérise et au-delà : la poésie (épique, tragique, les très grands savants : la capacité, comique, bucolique), l’histoire (Thucy sans démagogie, à sortir de ses études dide, Polybe), les orateurs, la philo sophie premières pour s’ouvrir à des domaines (Platon, Aristote, Philon d’Alexandrie, nouveaux, au point que Françoise était Epictète et Plotin), le roman (Achille également devenue une spécialiste de la Tatius), la littérature grecque chrétienne. Renaissance à part entière. En témoigne notam ment son livre On gardera d’elle avant tout l’ex Poétique et création littérair e en Grèce pression d’une éthique, au meilleur ancienne (Presses Universitaires de sens du terme, nourrie de ses chers Franche-Comté, 2010). Grecs autant que d’une foi profonde, Elle avait la passion de la trans par laquelle tout instant avec elle était mission, dans cette exigence mêlée lesté de plénitude et de grandeur, d’une d’humilité qui caractérise les plus grands gravité qui allait de pair avec la gaité, professeurs. Elle incarnait ce que l’école dans une conciliation sans cesse har des hellénistes français a produit de monieuse du passé et du présent. Cha meilleur, et fournit à cette communauté que rencontre mêlait le travail le plus une œuvre qui doit servir de base à ceux in tense à des conversations, ensuite, qui s’inscriront dans son champ. sur l’art, la musique, les voyages, le Elle était également très engagée tout autour de mets choisis et de cham dans le Réseau européen Plutarque et pagne, dans la droite ligne des Propos l’International Plutarch Society, dont de table. Et cela toujours avec une ex elle ne manquait que rarement les ceptionnelle attention aux autres, une congrès. Correspondante pour la France façon de se mettre à la place, si rare ; à Montpellier puis Nanterre, elle permit Françoise Frazier possédait deux des à l’un des auteurs de ces lignes et à plus belles vertus humaines : la délica l’Université Jean Jaurès de Toulouse de rejoindre la RED. On le dut à son tesse et l’élégance. intérêt de toujours pour la réception eu Le dernier colloque de la RED à ropéenne « moderne » de Plutarque, qui Paris (Ulm et Nanterre), en septembre l’avait conduite à collaborer dès son dé 2016, intervint au moment où la ma but en 2003 à l’entreprise d’édition des ladie accentuait ses ravages. Françoise Œuvres morales et meslées d’Amyot tint à tout organiser elle-même, à rece (1572), dont elle devint très vite le fer voir jusqu’au bout ses amis français et de lance et à bon droit la co-responsa étrangers. Elle ne put qu’ouvrir, par une ble. Ce travail entre hellénistes et seizié admirable conférence rue d’Ulm, ces mistes autour d’un texte majeur, socle journées, qu’elle avait conçues comme

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 111-120 ISSN 0258-655X 116 Notes & Varia

« testamentaires ». Il y eut alors de la 3. A propósito de una Tesis Doc solennité, mais aussi – elle le sut – de la toral sobre Plutarco joie. En ses derniers mois, ses proches assistè rent à une fin où elle confortait Álvaro Ibáñez Chacón, Los Parallela ceux qui allaient rester, et qui fut minora atribuidos a Plutarco (Mor.305A- ponctuée par un dernier livre, Quelques 316B): introducción, edición, traducción y as pects du platonisme de Plutarque. comentario, tesis doctoral, Universidad de Philosopher en commun. Tourner sa Málaga, 2014. Editada por el Servicio de pensée vers Dieu (à paraître chez Brill), Publicaciones y Divulgación Científica de tout ceci constituant sa mort, et donc la Universidad de Málaga y depositada en tout ce qui l’avait précédée, en exem su Repositorio Institucional (http://riuma. ple absolu, à l’antique. Dans le texte uma.es/xmlui/handle/10630/8488). d’hommage qu’elle écrivit lors de la En octubre de 2014 se defendió disparition de Jean Sirinelli, le 14 sep en la Facultad de Filosofía y Letras tembre 2004, elle mentionnait le titre du de la Universidad de Málaga la tesis dernier chapitre de Plutarque de Chéro arriba citada de Álvaro Ibáñez Cha née – Un philosophe dans le siècle « La cón, docente de lenguas clásicas en Paix du Soir ». Françoise s’est étein Edu cación Secundaria y Bachillerato y te une nuit, prématurément, mais sans profesor asociado en el Departamento doute en paix. Ceux qui l’aimaient et de Historia Medieval y Ciencias y qu’elle aimait sont aujourd’hui orphe Técnicas Historiográficas de la Univer lins ; mais ils sont également respon sidad de Granada. El trabajo, dirigido sables, face à son immense héritage. por quien suscribe estas líneas, obtuvo Olivier Guerrier la máxima calificación del tribunal juz Olivier Munnich ga dor, compuesto por los Dres. Aurelio Pérez Jiménez y Jorge Martínez Pin

2. Note by F. B. Titchener na (Universidad de Málaga), José The three contributions of Pelling, Luis Calvo Martínez (Universidad de Podlecki, and Titchener, along with Granada), José María Candau Mo that of Philip Stadter in the most recent rón (Universidad de Sevilla) y Vicen volume of Ploutarchos (12 (2015) 65- te Ramón Palerm (Universidad de 82), were presented at the first meeting Zaragoza), y desde poco después pue of the North American Sections of the de consultarse en acceso libre en el International Plutarch Society, held in Repositorio Institucional de la Univer Banff, Calgary, Canada, 14-16 March, sidad de Málaga (RIUMA). 2014. The complete program may Como es sabido, el opúsculo co be found here: http://www.usu.edu/ nocido con el nombre de Parallela ploutarchos/banff.htm. minora se ha transmitido dentro del

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 111-120 Notes & Varia 117 corpus de los escritos morales de mayoría de los plutarquistas, pero apor Plutarco, pero su contenido (41 pares tan un valioso análisis en detalle de de narraciones emparejadas con cri las circunstancias que propiciaron la terios poco ortodoxos y trufadas de incorporación de los Parallela mino anacronismos e incongruencias respec ra al conjunto de las obras del Quero to a la tradición cultural grecolatina) ha nense, lo que sirve al autor para sos suscitado continuas sospechas entre los tener la hipótesis de que el opúsculo estudiosos, que lo han considerado tra pudo transmitirse de forma anónima dicionalmente como pseudepígrafo, es y acabar adscribiéndose a Plutarco decir como falsamente atribuido al Que durante el proceso de recopilación de ronense. Partiendo de esta communis los Moralia a causa de sus semejanzas opinio, el trabajo de Ibáñez Chacón argumentales y narrativas. de dica su extensa “Introducción” (pp. Esta parte introductoria del trabajo 7-129) a la aplicación de determinados es el resultado de un análisis pormenori cri terios modernos para la indagación zado del texto de los Parallela minora, pseudepigráfica, una metodología ya que se presenta editado, traducido y empleada por otros estudiosos del texto comentado en lo que constituye el y que confirma la inautenticidad de la núcleo del trabajo (pp. 131-486). Res obra; sin embargo, la investigación se pec to al texto, se trata en realidad de dife rencia de las precedentes no sólo una revisión (más que una editio editio en el orden de la exposición de los cri num, como lo llama el autor) a partir terios de análisis, sino también en el de las ediciones aparecidas desde el estudio detallado de los posibles refe siglo XVIII, con la que no se pretende rentes indirectos, en la ubicación de reconstruir un supuesto original hoy la obra en su contexto sociocultural y per dido, sino evidenciar la naturaleza literario, con especial atención al Cor resumida y entrecortada del opúsculo pus Plutarcheum, y sobre todo en la tal como se ha transmitido1, es decir, con sideración, no siempre observada, con numerosas lagunas, corruptelas e de la naturaleza epitomada del texto inconsistencias propias de un texto epi tal cual se ha conservado. En general, tomado (aunque debemos señalar que, las conclusiones del estudio no difieren si aplicamos un concepto de obra abier mucho de las opiniones vertidas por la ta, en algunos pasajes concretos podría

1 Según sabemos por comunicación personal, el autor, tras una serie de artículos publicados con posterioridad a su tesis y que desarrollan diversos aspectos de ella (transmisión textual, tradición ecdótica, pervivencia), está trabajando actualmente en una verdadera edición nueva del texto de los Parallela minora a partir de la colación de todos los manuscritos conocidos, tal como se le recomendó en su día por parte del tribunal juzgador.

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 111-120 ISSN 0258-655X 118 Notes & Varia hablarse de adición más que –o en vez de– elementos (argumento, estructura for epitomación). En cuanto a la traducción, mal, métrica, espacios, escenografía, es correcta en general y trata de reflejar etc.) desde la perspectiva de la poética de modo fiel el estilo tosco y desgarbado neo clásica española, de la cual su autor del texto griego, salvo casos puntuales en fue un gran teórico, poco estimado en que se hace necesario retocarlo para una su época y prácticamente olvidado en la mejor comprensión del sentido original. ac tualidad. Este apéndice podría de en Tras la traducción, ofrecida en páginas tra da antojarse superfluo, en el sentido enfrentadas junto con el texto griego y de que no parece encajar con facilidad su aparato crítico, se incorpora a cada en una tesis que consiste básicamente en narración un comentario de sus aspectos una edición y comentario histórico-lite esenciales, que permite sopesar el lugar rario a los Parallela minora, pero, muy ocu pado por el pseudo-Plutarco en la tra al contrario, consigue convertirse en dición literaria grecolatina, teniendo en una aportación novedosa y curiosa des cuenta, sobre todo, la singularidad de la de el punto de vista de la pervivencia de mayor parte de lo narrado en el opúsculo y la obra, como muestra casi única de la relacionándolo con géne ros o subgéneros tra dición del tratado pseudoplutarqueo, afines como la para doxografía, las com más allá de los comentarios existentes pilaciones de uariae historiae y la histo sobre las traducciones humanísticas riografía más sensacionalista. de los Moralia en general y de los Pa rallela minora en particular, en un ca El trabajo se completa con un apén mino iniciado por la versión latina de di ce final (pp. 487-640) que presenta un Guarino a finales del siglo XV y con es tudio de un interesante ejemplo de la tinuado por la de Gracián un siglo más tra dición de los Parallela minora en la tarde y luego también por algunas tra li teratura española: la tragedia Ciane de gedias neoclásicas italianas que tienen Siracusa o Los bacanales, compuesta co mo argumento precisamente la na por Cándido María Trigueros a me rratio pseudoplutarquea en la que se diados del siglo XVIII a partir del argu basa la tragedia de Trigueros. Del valor mento de una de las narrationes pseu de este amplio apéndice del trabajo de doplutarqueas (en concreto Par. min. Ibáñez Chacón para el campo de los es 19B). La tragedia, que se conserva tudios de tradición clásica en general y manuscrita en varias bibliotecas espa para un mejor conocimiento del teatro ñolas (una de ellas privada) y perma neoclásico español del siglo XVIII y de necía inédita hasta la fecha, se ofrece la figura de Trigueros en particular, es pulcramente editada, con notas abun buena prueba el hecho de que, apenas dantes y en general atinadas y un am un año después de defendida la tesis, plio análisis introductorio de todos sus fue publicado como monografía in

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 111-120 Notes & Varia 119 dependiente por el Servicio de Publi aunque con efectos evidentemente be caciones de la Universidad de Cádiz2. néficos, la numeración corrida se con vier te en nueva numeración en cada pá Cierra el trabajo un nutrido apartado gi na) no consiguen empañar en absoluto de “Referencias bibliográficas” (pp. 641- el valor de este imponente trabajo de 749) que relaciona estructura da mente la Ibáñez Chacón, al que en junio del amplísima bibliografía manejada, aunque pasado año concedió la Sociedad Es se echa en falta una mayor jerarquización pañola de Estudios Clásicos con todo de esa biblio grafía en el apartado de merecimiento el 2º premio a la mejor Varia, así como, por la cantidad de fuentes tesis doctoral correspondiente a 2014. primarias y secundarias concernidas, Un trabajo que sin duda deberán tener algunos índices específicos (al menos un muy en cuenta a partir de ahora los es index locorum, deseablemente también tudiosos de los Parallela minora, al un index nominum et rerum notabilium) ha ber logrado conjugar con notable que hubieran facilitado la consulta o bús acierto tres aspectos esenciales de la queda de pasajes, ideas o nombres con investigación literaria: el análisis de cretos en un estudio de tanta envergadura. la obra en sí misma tras una revisión Esta última crítica, a la que podemos pro funda del texto transmitido, el es añadir unas pocas erratas (no más de tres tudio del contexto sociocultural que o cuatro detectadas, en una obra de más la produjo, y la investigación de su re de 750 páginas) y un pequeño despiste percusión en la tradición occidental. en la numeración de las notas (a partir Juan Francisco Martos Montiel de la página 81, de manera imprevista Universidad de Málaga

2 Cándido María Trigueros, Ciane de Siracusa o Los Bacanales, estudio preliminar y edición crítica de Álvaro Ibáñez Chacón, Cádiz: Editorial UCA, 2015.

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 111-120 ISSN 0258-655X (Página deixada propositadamente em branco) Book Reviews

Jann Bremmer, Initiation into the cretos, como el culto a Deméter en Mégara Mysteries of the Ancient World, De (ap. 1), o las fuentes órficas, eleusinas y Gruyter, Berlin-Boston, 2014, 256 pp. helenístico-judías que confluyen en la com ISBN 978-3-11-029929-8. posición del libro VI de la Eneida (ap. 2). Los cultos mistéricos disfrutaron de El resultado de ese panorama general es gran difusión durante más de un milenio a especialmente perspicaz debido a que Brem lo largo y ancho del Mundo Antiguo. El en mer se apoya en testimonios de la más diversa torno de secretismo que los caracterizaba, ín dole para corroborar o refutar las variantes sin embargo, parece haberlos protegido de cultuales que se han atribuido a los ritos los curiosos, por lo que hoy contamos con mistéricos. Por un lado presenta numerosos poca información específica sobre sus ri testimonios literarios. Dentro de esta cate tos y usos. J. Bremmer, profesor eméri goría encontramos autores paganos de la to de la Universidad de Groningen y gran Antigüedad, como Heródoto, Aristófanes, especialista en Religión Griega y Cristia Platón, Sófocles, Diodoro Sículo, Plutarco, nismo Primitivo, tiene amplia experien Teón de Esmirna o Máximo de Tiro ‒la cia en el tema, como demuestran sus mu ma yoría de ellos a menudo disculpando la chas publicaciones: «Greek maenadism falta de información detallada debido a la reconsidered» (1984), «Manteis, magic, imposibilidad de exponer el contenido se mysteries and mythography: messy margins cre to de los misterios‒, y autores cristianos of polis religion?» (2010) y «The place of de la Antigüedad tardía, como Clemente de performance of Orphic Poetry (OF1)» (2012) Alejandría y Gregorio Nacianceno ‒que sue pueden servir como botón de muestra. len criticar o menospreciar los cultos que En Initiation into the mysteries of the describen‒. Por otro lado recurre a numerosos ancient world, Bremmer ofrece una pano testimonios iconográficos, epigrá ficos y nu rá mica de cómo eran y cómo evolu ciona mis máticos que concretan y definen mejor ron los ritos de varios cultos iniciáticos: su análisis de los diferentes procedimientos los misterios de Eleusis (capítulo 1), los cultuales –sirvan de ejemplo «Distorted ideals cultos de Samotracia (cap. 2), los ritos ór in Greek vase-painting» (2009), «Panegyris fico-báquicos (cap. 3), los misterios de Coinages» (2008), o «A law in the city ori gen griego durante época Helenística y Eleusinion concerning the Mysteries» (1980), Ro mana (cap. 4), los cultos a Isis y Mitra aunque la extensa y actua lizada bibliografía (cap. 5) y, finalmente, la influencia de este final ofrece muchos más−. tipo de religión en el desarrollo del Cristia Obviamente, Bremmer no podía pres nismo (cap. 6). Como apéndices, añade dos cindir de las grandes monografías sobre los estudios que profundizan en aspectos con cultos mistéricos del s. XX. Las referencias

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 121-128 ISSN 0258-655X 122 Book Reviews a G. E. Mylonas (Eleusis and the Eleusinian de vestimenta reglamentaria (353DE); el Mysteries, 1961) o W. Burkert (Ancient uso de ciertos símbolos o formulas secretas Mystery Cults, 1984), con los que concuerda (611D); el papel fundamental de la música o discrepa según la ocasión, son continuas a en determinadas etapas de los ritos (759B); lo largo del libro. Pero lo interesante, desde la alternancia entre gritos y silencio entre mi punto de vista, es que la erudición de los participantes (81D); la abstención de Bremmer no se limita a estudios sobre el ciertos alimentos por parte de los sacerdotes entorno griego y oriental en el que se desa (352F, 353DF); las preguntas sobre el tipo rro llaban estos cultos. Incluye en su trabajo de vida ética seguida por los que iban a ser numerosas referencias a estudios que solo iniciados (con respuestas cargadas de iro tangencialmente tienen conexión con su te nía en boca de espartanos, en 217D, 229D, ma, pero que, sin embargo, contribuyen a 236D); o las normas de etiqueta a que que su análisis sea mucho más fino y depu estaban sujetas las mujeres durante su par rado. En el capítulo que dedica a los mis ticipación en los misterios (842A). terios eleusinos, por ejemplo, repara en el Un texto que sobresale entre aquellos en estado eufórico que podían presentar los los que Plutarco trata el tema de los cultos participantes tras completar el recorrido mistéricos es el fragmento 178 (Sandbach). que separa Atenas de Eleusis, apoyándose En cierra una espléndida descripción de las en un estudio neurológico sobre los valores contradictorias emociones que sentían los liberadores de una larga caminata (p.7). ini ciados durante y después del proceso Entre las fuentes antiguas a las que recu de iniciación. Quizá Plutarco se sentía su rre Bremmer, Plutarco ocupa un lugar im ficientemente cómodo para hacer una des por tante. No podía ser de otro modo, pues cripción tan detallada porque en este texto, el interés de nuestro autor por la religión de en realidad, alude a las almas que alcanzan su época y contexto histórico-cultural (Gre su destino final: establece un paralelo entre cia bajo el Imperio Romano) es amplio y los verbos morir y ser iniciado (τελευτᾶν - en su obra; y no menos se refleja en ella τελεῖσθαι ) y compara la experiencia post- su curiosidad por los cultos de iniciación y mortem de las almas con la que tienen los particularmente por religiones más o menos que van a ser iniciados en los misterios, ligadas a la cultura grecorromana, pero en usando emociones tales como el terror, los cual quier caso muy populares en su época, escalofríos, el sudor y la admiración –esta como la egipcia. De ahí que a él debamos descripción puede ser puesta en correlación en gran medida nuestro conocimiento de con otra que aparece en 943C, donde nue muchos detalles concernientes a misterios vas emociones (confusión, alegría, espe como los de Eleusis y Samotracia, o a divi ranza) se suman al catálogo−. Es el texto nidades como Isis o Dioniso (en cuyos mis de Plutarco más recurrente en el libro que terios él y su mujer estaban iniciados, según estamos reseñando: Bremmer lo utiliza sus propias palabras en 611D). cuatro veces en distintos capítulos y subra De las casi 50 referencias a la obra de ya con acierto su plástica y cautivadora ex Plutarco que aparecen a lo largo del libro, la posición de sentimientos. gran mayoría son de Moralia, como era de Es interesante notar la firme postura que esperar. Su testimonio sirve para aclarar as mantiene el autor sobre el secretismo de pectos cultuales tales como: la importancia estos cultos. Una postura que, por otra parte, del mistagogo como maestro y guía de los ya reflejó en su trabajo «Religious secrets van a ser iniciados (765A y 795E); el tipo and secrecy in Classical Greece» (1995),

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 121-128 Book Reviews 123 hace más de dos décadas. En su opinión, el to res que no osaban revelar detalles por ambiente de secretismo que rodea a estos mie do a ser denunciados o castigados−, así cultos representa únicamente el carácter re como el hecho de que existan casos de en ligioso y ritual de los mismos, y no tiene re juiciamiento por una revelación indebida o lación alguna con su contenido. En sus pro por mofa de los rituales ‒como fue el caso pias palabras: «It is the very holiness of the de Alcibíades y la mutilación de los Her ri tes that forbids them to be performed or mes‒, aboga en contra de la postura defen re lated outside their proper ritual context. dida por Bremmer. […] Contrary to what many moderns seem Plutarco es uno de esos autores que no to think, there was no esoteric wisdom to be osan desvelar más de lo que les está permi found in the ancient Mysteries, no Da Vinci ti do (364E) y su obra refleja la existencia Code to be deciphered» (p. 18). de interesantes nociones esotéricas en los He de reconocer que me cuesta compartir cul tos iniciáticos. En 352D, al hablar de su opinión a este respecto. A lo largo de va los auténticos iniciados en los misterios rias décadas se ha desarrollado una viva de Isis, Plutarco expresa la impor tancia de po lémica en torno al posible contenido aplicar la razón para estudiar y analizar la eso térico en los campos de la filosofía y verdad que subyace en los ritos. Con ello la religión griega; especialmente en lo que parece indicar que el mero hecho de par concierne a las doctrinas no escritas de ti cipar en ellos no es suficiente, sino que Platón o a los sucesos acontecidos en este hay que investigar e interpretar el auténtico tipo de cultos mistéricos de los que no se sig nificado de su contenido –algo que, ob podía hablar ante los «no iniciados». Re via mente, no estaría al alcance de cualquie ferencias a un contenido esotérico, a una ra y para lo que sería necesaria cierta pre verdad superior, alcanzable únicamente por paración−. En 382DE equipara el más alto aquellos que habían cumplido con su deber grado de iniciación (ἐποπτεία) con el más y habían ascendido a las más altas etapas alto grado en el estudio de la filosofía, afir de la iniciación, aparecen ya en la obra de mando que quien supera ambos llega a un Platón (Banq. 210-211, Fedón 69c, Fedro estado de comprensión total, instantánea y 250c, Teeteto 155e-156a), por lo que pa permanente de la verdad absoluta. Parece, rece que la relación entre filosofía, inicia por tanto, que Plutarco tampoco compartiría ción y teleología existía ya desde el siglo la postura defendida por Bremmer. IV a. C. Es cierto que, en sus inicios, los Dejando a un lado estas opiniones per cultos mistéricos no debieron estar rela sonales en un debate aún controvertido, cionados con una experiencia cercana e creo que el único aspecto que podría cri in dividual con la divinidad ni con la vida ti carse en el análisis de Bremmer es cierta más allá de ultratumba. No obstante, con ten dencia a extrapolar determinados usos el paso del tiempo el contenido ritual fue de un culto, que conocemos por los testi siendo alegorizado, y el saber teológico y mo nios conservados, a otros cultos de los fi losófico pasó a formar parte de estos ritos que no se conserva documentación alguna ini ciáticos, como el propio Bremmer apunta relativa a esos usos en concreto. Con ello (p. 99). Por otra parte, creo que el hecho de no insinúo que la información que ofrece que se mantuviera de manera rigurosa a sea errónea, pues es muy probable que la lo largo de tantos siglos el secretismo que mayoría de los cultos compartieran ras conllevaba la participación en estos ritua gos en sus procedimientos −el propio au les −aspecto destacado por numerosos au tor alude a este fenómeno («It is a fair

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 121-128 ISSN 0258-655X 124 Book Reviews assumption that Greek initiations learned Antiguo ha fascinado siempre al hombre from one another», p.14)−. No obstante, moderno. la extrapolación que Bremmer hace en Luisa Lesage-Gárriga ocasiones no cuenta con soporte textual o de Universidades de Málaga y Groningen otro tipo y, aunque pueda ser sugerente, no me parece metodológicamente aceptable pa ra el historiador de las religiones. Por men Françoise Frazier, Histoire et morale cionar un ejemplo: Bremmer propone que dans les Vies parallèles de Plutarque, los misterios dionisíacos probablemente em Paris, Les Belles Lettres, 2016, 505 pp. pe zaban con un baño, dado que así sucede en ISBN 978-2-25-132895-9. los misterios de Eleusis y Samotracia; pero previa mente ha asumido que no tenemos Este libro es en lo esencial el que, in dicio alguno sobre la pureza de los par con el mismo título, publicó la autora el ticipantes en este culto (p. 104). año 1996, también en la editorial Belles Lettres. Presenta, sin embargo, importantes En cualquier caso, y salvo estos pe novedades que comentaremos al final: queños detalles de menor importancia, un “Préface à la seconde édition” y un creo que Initiation into the mysteries of “Appendice : L’ écriture biographique et les the ancient world posee un alto valor cien hommes de Plutarque”. tí fico y está escrito de una manera clara y con un lenguaje accesible a un públi co De la edición de 1996 he conocido dos amplio al que sin duda llega en sus pre reseñas a través de http://www.persee.fr: tensiones divulgativas. La manera con la una de Jacques Schamp en Revue belge de que el autor expone el contenido, direc ta y philologie et d’histoire 76, 1 (1998), An sin complicaciones, cercana a la actualidad y tiquité – Oudheid, pp. 226-228, y otra de con no pocas referencias a la cultura popular, Alain Martin en L’antiquité classique 70 acerca con éxito un tema tan especializado, (2001), pp. 262-263. Ambos, aunque echan como es el de los misterios antiguos, al de menos algunos aspectos que no se tratan público moderno. La comparación de una en el libro, coinciden en elogiar su importante participante que ense ñó sus pechos durante aportación a los estudios plutarqueos por la los rituales con el desafortunado incidente profundidad de la investigación, su excelente de Janet Jackson en un concierto hace calidad científica y acertada estructura, ade unos años (p. 7) o la alusión al best seller más del elegante estilo de Mme Frazier. Se de Dan Brown (p. 18), mencionado líneas añade a esto la utilidad del index locorum y arriba, son buenos ejemplos de ello. El de la nutrida (y en la nueva edición, actua historiador de elas religiones encuentra en lizada) bibliografía. este libro una síntesis clara de los logros La de Martin es muy breve y esque de Bremmer a lo largo de muchos años de mática. La de Schamp, bastante más amplia, crítica e investigación sobre la realidad de los ofre ce un buen resumen y comentarios, en misterios antiguos; el estudioso de Plutarco general acertados, por lo que no daré cuenta encuentra en él acerta dos análisis de bastantes pormenorizada del contenido del libro y pasajes del Queronense pertinentes al tema de solo destacaré algunos de sus aspectos más las religio nes de iniciación; y el lector común, relevantes. no especializado, tiene en este libro una buena En la primera parte del libro, titulada oportunidad para descubri uno más de los ri “Entre histoire et biographie : le bios, genre cos perfiles con que la religión del Mundo moral original”, F. Frazier analiza con acier

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 121-128 Book Reviews 125 to y perspicacia los rasgos que hacen de las también tiene en cuenta a los personajes Vidas paralelas un género moral original al secundarios), método considerado por J. que llama bios, siguiendo la denominación Schamp algo simplis ta; pero, dado que del propio Plutarco (cf. Alex. 1.2), con el coincide con los proce dimientos de Plutarco significado de “modo de vida”; es decir, no en la construcción de las biografías, no puedo es una biografía en sentido moderno con una considerarlo sino acertado. secuencia cronológica lineal y permanente Un aspecto importante no señalado en en la que se puede observar la evolución las reseñas precedentes es que el examen de de un personaje, sino una biografía moral con intención ejemplarizante en la que la las Vidas de F. Frazier tiene como base fun cronología (aunque haya una sucesión tem damental el texto. Esto es algo evidente en poral básica, que también adquiere valor la tercera parte del libro, en la que la autora moral) carece de importancia y es alterada realiza un estudio de todos los matices de con frecuencia para configurar mejor el re las virtudes junto con un análisis detallado trato moral del personaje. Tal falta de aten del léxico (lo que J. Schamp reconoce). ción a la continuidad cronológica y a la Pero la atención al léxico es constante a causalidad, esenciales en la historiografía, todo lo largo del libro (incluidas las par dife rencian también de este género las Vidas tes añadidas en la nueva edición), y no so plutar queas. La relación con la historiografía lo en el campo semántico de las virtudes es, sin embargo estrecha, pues Plutarco to y los vicios. La autora observa todas las ma de ella los hechos relacionados con el expresiones lexicales, a menudo de carác ter personaje, pero seleccionándolos, manipu formular, con las que Plutarco estruc tura la lán dolos y modificándolos, aislándolos y narración, como las partículas o palabras con foca lizándolos en la acción del héroe con las que introduce un tema, un comentario o independencia de su contexto histórico. De unas conclusiones, o que organizan una esta forma, los datos de la historiografía se secuencia, y que con frecuen cia inciden en el transforman en “material biográfico” igual valor moral del contenido. A menudo llama que los pequeños detalles y las anécdotas también la atención sobre los elementos que reve lan el carácter del personaje. Todos sintácticos que contribuyen a la focalización los elementos de la biografía giran en torno en la acción y el carácter del héroe (como a él y se focalizan en su acción. A través de verbos principales y sujetos) y relegan a estos materiales, Plutarco escruta los vicios y otros perso najes o hechos históricos al papel las virtudes del hombre de Estado que ejerce de mero contraste o de marco escénico en su actividad en su ciudad. El bios, en suma, el que tiene lugar la acción del héroe (par es la narración y la descripción de la acción ticipios apositivos, genitivos absolutos, ora política y del comportamiento moral del ciones subordinadas). También se pone de héroe. Esos son los dos aspectos analizados manifiesto la contribución de laspre ex sio con minuciosidad en la segunda y la tercera nes concretas y de la sintaxis al valor moral parte del libro, tituladas respec tivamente “La de las biografías, pues resaltan las acciones y peinture d’ une action poli tique : principes los rasgos del carácter del héroe que se ofre moraux et civiques dans les Vies” y “La cen como ejemplo. pein ture d’ un comportement moral : vertus La “Conclusion” al final de las tres par et individualisation des héros”. tes en que se estructura el libro ofrece un Como se puede deducir solo por los títulos excelente y breve resumen del mismo, de de los capítulos, la autora centra su estudio semboca en la apreciación de los grandes en la figura del héroe ta pro gonista (aunque héroes del pasado como los grandes

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 121-128 ISSN 0258-655X 126 Book Reviews servidores de su patria, por lo que las vir com partir su carácter moral e incluso ser tu des que Plutarco observa en su carácter uno de sus elementos. Pero la diferencia son siempre virtudes cívicas. Mediante fun damental estriba en que lo primordial esos modelos del pasado que presentan las en las biografías de Plutarco es el estudio Vidas paralelas, Plutarco nutre el ideal cívi del carácter. En ellas, el cuadro histórico co contemporáneo con una visión greco-ro es necesario porque constituye la situación mana de la civilización que es heredera del exterior a la que debe responder el héroe, pe pasado y a la vez totalmente de su época. ro el retrato de este se centra en su carácter, El “Préface à la seconde édition” ofre la manifestación de sus virtudes y defectos, ce, como dice el subtítulo, un “bilan et que se muestran en los grandes hechos y perspectives de la recherche sur les Vies sobre todo en los pequeños detalles. Tal re Parallèles”. Frente a quienes toman las Vi lación entre la historia y la moral, y la im das paralelas como obra historiográfica, portancia del carácter en el bios destacan la autora afirma su lectura de las mismas en los prefacios de la Vida de Alejandro y de la Vida de Nicias. Otro prefacio al que como obra moral pues, aunque admite la F. Frazier da una importancia especial es al po sibilidad de su uso como documento his de la Vida de Paulo Emilio: la historia de tórico, la voluntad del autor no es hacer una los grandes hombres es como un espejo en obra histórica. Coincide con otros estudio el que el autor se mira para conformar su sos de Plutarco en la dimensión literaria y propia vida a la imagen de las virtudes de moral de las biografías pero, frente a las aquellos. Gracias a su familiaridad no solo limitaciones que ve en los estudios narra con la Historia, sino también con la práctica tológicos, propone una reflexión que sin de escribir, acoge la memoria de los hombres tetice todos los aspectos estilísticos, an mejores en su pensamiento y lo dirige hacia tropológicos, políticos y morales que for los ejemplos más bellos. La enseñanza man parte de cada Vida no como un esquema moral, por tanto, alcanza primero al autor y fi jo sino con la flexibilidad que requiere ca después al lector de las biografías. da personaje según su carácter y virtudes. Por todo ello, F. Frazier invita a leer los ca La escritura de Plutarco atiende a todos pítulos del libro reflexionando sobre la es los detalles que constituyen la textura de la vida humana y todos los elementos de su critura y el sentido que la creación textual situación en el mundo. La originalidad de tiene para el autor y para el lector. su obra moral va más allá de la mera mo El otro componente nuevo del libro es el ralización, y da una visión de los aconteci apén dice, constituido por dos artículos que mien tos que se centra en un carácter (ethos) la autora había publicado con anterioridad, y a la vez está llena de matices, pues es sen y que son una profundización y matización sible tanto a los diversos rasgos de las virtu de temas ya tratados en los capítulos del des que conforman la individualidad de los libro original. El primero lleva el título héroes como a las particularidades de todas “Bios et Historia. L’ écriture biographique las circunstancias que reclaman una respues ta dans les Vies Parallèles”. La autora, que determinada por parte del héroe. La práctica va a centrar su estudio en los prefacios de de la escritura es una invitación a comprender tres Vidas, parte de la consideración de la un comportamiento humano y a reflexionar biografía como un género flexible tanto en sobre el propio comportamiento, invitación sus múltiples formas como en sus relacio válida tanto para el autor como para el lector, nes con la historiografía, con la que puede que puede sacar sus propias conclusiones.

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 121-128 Book Reviews 127

El otro artículo del apéndice “Histoire et La complejidad, rica variedad y profun Exemplarité. Les Hommes de Plutarque”, didad intelectual del libro son imposibles vuel ve a definir y matizar la noción deBios , de abarcar en esta breve reseña, que es un de raíz filosófica, como “modo de vida”, por ho menaje muy modesto, pero también muy lo que se centra en la descripción del carác sincero, a la eminente helenista y excelente ter del personaje que se manifiesta ante los persona que fue la profesora Françoise Fra de más. La integración del personaje en la zier. El sentimiento de tristeza por su pérdida so ciedad humana hace que la fama de sus queda en parte mitigado por el recuerdo de acciones inspiradas por su virtud provoquen su generosidad y por la permanencia de sus una admiración que induce a imitarlas, pues obras admirables y fructíferas. el carácter, a la vez que se manifiesta, tam Carlos Alcalde Martín bién se forma en las acciones. Pero, más Universidad de Málaga que héroes ejemplares, las Vidas presen tan momentos ejemplares en los que se New Collective Publications muestran las virtudes (y también los de (2015-2016) fectos, ya que Plutarco es consciente de This section notifies immediately Plu la imperfección del ser humano). Las Vi tarchists the content of recent collective das, en opinión de la autora, representan works, the review of which should consist of los “combates de la virtud” con todas las summaries of each contribution and would circunstancias exteriores subsumidas en only anti cipate and make useless their later la noción de tyche, que abarca todo lo review in the Bibliography section. que el hombre encuentra y debe afrontar. Erratum. A los “hombres de Plutarco” se les puede caracterizar como “grandes naturalezas” Dans le recueil d’articles de P. A. Stadter, signalé dans le numéro de l’an propensas a las grandes aciones y a bor dernier, Plu tarch and his Roman Readers, dear lo sublime y a veces lo trágico. La Oxford University Press, 2015, l’Auteur cultura literaria de Plutarco se muestra no nous indique une correction à apporter solo en su arte como narrador, sino tam aux pages 73 n. 19 and 233 en lisant, non bién en la manera de presentar a sus hé pas L. Mestrius Florus Plutarchus, mais L. roes como encarnación de la civilización Mestrius Plutarchus. he lénica, sentida como algo común para R. Ash, J. Mossman & F. B. Titchener griegos y romanos, por lo que pertenecen (eds), Fame and Infamy. Essays for Christo a un imaginario histórico, moral y literario pher Pelling on Characterization in Greek representativo de toda “la Antigüedad”; and Roman Biography and Historiography , y, además de constituir ejemplos por una Oxford University Press, 2015, ISBN: actitud determinada, ofrecen una imagen de 9780199662326, 448 pages. la humanidad a la vez próxima y lejana. Le vaste éventail d’intérêt de Christo El juicio global sobre esta nueva edición pher Pelling se reflète dans le volume que del libro coincide plenamente con el que lui ont offert ses collègues et les études sur vertió J. Schamp sobre la primera edición: la caractérisarion dans l’historiographie et “Le livre jette un vif éclairage sur la technique la biographie antiques, une question, qu’il de composition et la signifi cation des Vies. a grandement contribué à faire avancer, Ingénieux et brillant, il est, de surcroît, fort couvrent ici un large espace de temps, bien écrit … Incontestablement, Mme d’Hérodote à Dion Cassius, côté grec, de Frazier a bien mérité de Plutarque. Cicéron à Suétone et au-delà côté latin. Pour

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 121-128 ISSN 0258-655X 128 Book Reviews n’être donc pas consacré au seul Plutarque, The Dividing Line: Theological/ Reli un quart du volume (6 chapitres sur 24) est gious Arguments in Plutarch’s Anti-Stoic consacré au Chéronéen : Polemics, by Rainer Hirsch-Luipold. Chapter 6: Plutarch, Herodotus, and the The Cruel Consistency of De sera Historian’s Character by John Marincola. numinis vindicta, by Jan Opsomer. Chapter 9: Aspect and Subordination in Psyche in Plutarch’s Works, by Paola Plutarchan Narrative by Timothy E. Duff. Volpe Cacciatore. Chapter 10: Dressed for Success? Clothing II. Literary Versatility in Plutarch’s Demetrius, by Judith Mossman. Plutarch’s Simonides: A Versatile Gent Chapter 11: ‘The Love of Noble Deeds’: leman?, by Ewen Bowie. Plutarch’s Portrait of Aratus of Sicyon by Plutarch’s Flawed Characters: The Perso Philip Stadter. nae of the Dialogues, by Frederick E. Brenk. Chapter 12: Plutarch’s Numa and the Dionysus and the Structure of Plutarch’s Rhetoric of Aetiology by Matthew Fox. Table Talk, by Judith Mossman. Chapter 13: Plutarch and Dio on Cicero Tragic Colouring in Plutarch, by at the Trial of Milo by Lynn Fotheringham. Christopher Pelling.

J. Opsomer, G. Roskam & F. B. III. The Versatile World of the Lives Titchener (eds), A Versatile Gentleman. The Serio-Comic Life of Antony, by Consistency in Plutarch’s Writing. Studies Mark Beck. offered to Luc Van des Stockt on the occasion The Nature of Virtue and the Need for of his retirement, Leuven University Press, Self-Knowledger in Plutarch’s Demosthe 2016, ISBN 978 94 6270 076 5, 304 pages. nes-Cicero, by Jeffrey Beneker. Dans l’introduction, F. B. Titchener “This Topic Belongs to Another Kind rappelle tout ce que Plutarque et les Plutar of Writing”: The Digressions in Plutarch’s quistes doivent à Luc Van der Stockt, à com Life of Coriolanus, by Geert Roskam & mencer par la création en 2007 de la collec Simon Verdegem. tion Plutarchea Hypomnemata, qui accueille ce volume d’hommage, pour continuer avec Sulla’s Three-Thousand-νοῦμμοι Apart sa Présidence à la tête de l’International ment: Plutarch’s Problematic Code-Switching, Plutarch Society de 2008 à 2011 et les by Philip A. Stadter. nombreuses rencontres par lui organisées (à IV. A Versatile Paideia Leuven en 1996, 2001, 2006, 2009 et 2013, Who Was Eucles? Plutarch and His à Delphes en 2004). Sont ensuite présentés Sources on the Legendary Marathon-Run les sujets variés traités par les contributeurs, ner (De gloria Atheniensium 347CD), by en accord avec la diver sité des intérêts de Lucia Athanassaki. l’auteur ancien et de son spécialiste moderne. De Plutarchi Malignitate, by Heinz Gerd Sont ajoutées en appendice la liste des élèves Ingenkamp. de L. Van der Stockt et leurs publications. Consistency and Criticism in Plutarch’s On trouve encore en fin de volume la bi Writing Concerning the Laws of Solon , by bliographie et un index locorum. Delfim F. Leão. I. Plutarch’s Versatile Philosophy Selenographic Description: Critical An Plutarch the Philosopher and Plutarch no tations to Plutarch, De facie 944C, by the Historian on Apatheia, by John Dillon. Aurelio Pérez Jiménez.

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 121-128 BIBLIOGRAPHY SECTION

ARTICLES

AN ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 2012

Stefano Amendola - Serena Citro - Mariella De Simone - Timothy Duff - Françoise Frazier - Angelo Giavatto - Rainer Hirsch-Luipold - Lautaro Roig Lanzillotta - Luisa Lesage-Gárriga - Delfim Leão - Vicente Ramon Palerm - Fabio Tanga - Maria Vamvouri - Ana Vicente

VOLUMES REVIEWED IN THIS SECTION ABBREVIATIONS

• As artes = L. de Nazaré Ferreira, P. et N. Simões Rodrigues (eds), Plutarco e as artes. pintura, cinema e artes decorativas, Coimbra, 2010, 2e éd. 2012. http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/exlibris/ aleph/a21_1/apache_media/54HX2MA4ST388SVY5A4B4KE1QUB7GE.pdf • Harmonia = G. Bastianini, W. Lapini, M. Tulli (éds.), Harmonia. Scritti di filologia classica in onore di Angelo Casanova, Firenze, 2012. • Lash of Ambition = G. Roskam (ed.), The Lash of ambition. Plutarch, Imperial Greek literature and the Dynamics of “Philotimia”. (Collection d’ études classiques. 25), Louvain [u. a.]: Peeters, 2012. • N., K., D. = J. R. Ferreira, D. Leão & C. A. Martins de Jesus (eds.), Nomos, Kosmos & Dike in Plutarch. XII International Congress of the “Réseau Thématique Plutarque”, Coimbra, 2012. • Plutarque de l’Âge cl. au XIXe s. = O. Guerrier (ed.), Plutarque de l’Âge classique au XIXe siècle. Présences, interférences et dynamique. Actes du Colloque international de Toulouse (13-15 mai 2009), Jérôme Millon, Grenoble, 2012. • Religious and Philosophical Discourse = L. Roig Lanzillotta, I. Muñoz Gallarte (éds), Plutarch in the Religious and Philosophical Discourse of Late Antiquity, Brill, 2012.

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 129-160 ISSN 0258-655X 130 Bibliography Section

S. Amendola, «Un nomos atopos? Gli Efo ma carica vi potrebbe essere, da parte ri e i baffi degli Spartani. Nota esege dell’autore, una conoscenza piuttosto tica a De sera num. vind. 4.550B», in approssimativa delle distinzioni gerar N., K., D., 121-136. chi che all’interno del sistema militare Nelle opere superstiti di Plutarco è citato ro mano. Vengono quindi presi in esame tre volte il singolare divieto, promulgato a i passi delle Vite e dei Moralia, in cui i Sparta, che proibiva agli Efori sparta ni, centurioni si rendono protagonisti di entrando in carica, di lasciarsi crescere azioni memorabili; è il caso, ad esempio, i baffi: nella Vita di Cleomene (Cleom. nella Vita di Cicerone, del centurione 9.3), nel De sera numinis vindicta (550B), Eren nio, che per ordine di Marco Anto nel fr. 90 Sandbach (= Arist. fr. 539 Rose), nio uccide Cicerone e gli recide la testa appartenente al perduto commentario e le mani; emerge dalla narrazione plutarcheo agli Erga di Esiodo. La lettura dell’episodio la fedeltà incondizionata parallela dei tre testi mostra, da un lato, il del centurione nei riguardi del suo supe modus citandi plutarcheo; il Cheronese, riore; ed è la fedeltà, insieme allo spirito infatti, riadatta l’episodio dei baffi degli di abnegazione e al coraggio, uno dei Efori a seconda del contesto in cui è valori che il Cheronese pone maggior inserito, e della funzione diversa che esso mente in rilievo nel delineare il profilo svolge nel Bios e nel trattato morale. dei centurioni di cui riferisce vicende ed Dall’altro, consente una discussione filo aneddoti. Il giudizio positivo di questi logica sulla tendenza degli editori moderni uomini, di cui si evidenzia la capacità a uniformare quanto più possibile i tre sia di percepire gli umori dei soldati sia testi, scelta che appare quantomeno discu di relazionarsi efficacemente con gli tibile considerate appunto le differenze tra ufficiali, è solamente in parte offuscato da i contesti e le tipologie testuali. (M.D.S.) alcuni episodi riferiti nei Moralia. (S.C.) M. G. Angeli Bertinelli, «I centurioni ro E. Argaud, « Peut-on “demeurer d’accord” mani secundo Plutarco», in B. Cabouret, sur Plutarque ? Réflexions sur la no A. Groslambert et C. Wolff (éds), Visions tion de superstition dans les Pensées di de l’ Occident romain. Hommages à Yann verses sur la comète », in Plutarque de Le Bohec, Paris, 2012, 347-374. l’Âge cl. au XIXe s., 233-246. Quale premessa all’analisi dei passi in Écrit par une spécialiste du XVIIIe siè cui Plutarco fa menzione di centurioni, la cle, dont l’objet premier est la pensée studiosa introduce una questione termi de Bayle, cette communication montre nologica di non trascurabile importanza, com ment celui-ci, en appuyant sa ré relativa al modo in cui tale carica veniva flexion sur la traduction des Œuvres indicata nella tradi zione letteraria greca. morales et meslées d’Amyot mais aussi Se per i termi ni κεντουρίων e ἑκατοντάρχης, sur la traduction plus récente du Traité rispettivamente traslitterazione (o presti de la superstition proposée par l’érudit to) e traduzione del latino centurio, non pro testant Tanneguy Le Fèvre (Saumur, sorgo no incertezze, più problematica è 1666), donne aux Pensées diverses sur l’identificazione del centurione con il la comète l’allure, au moins de prime λοα χ γός ed il ταξίαρχος, termini che gli abord, d’un nouveau traité de la su autori greci adoperano per riferirsi anche persti tion. E. A. rappelle à quel point le ai centurioni, ma non esclusivamente ad texte de Plutarque est alors loin de faire essi. Anche in Plutar co si riscontra un uso consensus et le tour de force que consti tal volta ambi guo dei termini, per cui non tue la mise en accord sur le Traité de la sempre è possibile riconoscere il grado superstition des auteurs, éditeurs, pré dell’ufficiale militare di cui l’autore sta faciers, et Père de l’Eglise. Il s’agit ainsi par lando; all’origine di tale incertezza de tenter de mesurer les enjeux exacts terminologica per definire una medesi du texte de Plutarque et du statut de la

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 129-160 Bibliography Section 131

superstition dans le développement de mo rale, politique et esthétique sur l’argumentation baylienne. (F.F) l’enthousiasme » (247). Le Chéronéen E. Avocat, « Plutarque l’Intempestif, des inspi re tout d’abord le « mythe du Ca hom mes de la Révolution à Jaurès », in ton anglais » dont témoigne le succès Plutarque de l’Âge cl. au XIXe s, 263-274. de la pièce d’Addison en 1713. À tra E.A nuance les critiques acerbes des vers ce personnage emblématique de détracteurs de l’anticomanie révolu Caton (enrichi de traits de Cicéron) tion naire dénonçant le recours massif se construit une représentation dont à l’auteur des Vies parallèles comme la critique du De stoic. rep. permet symptomatique du double régime aussi de montrer les contradictions in d’illu sion dont elle procède – illusion ternes. Mais la question plus propre au sur la nature du modèle et sur son climat anglais, celle de la pluralité des application – et choisit de se tourner religions, joue aussi pour actualiser la vers « une affinité d’un autre ordre », référence à Plutarque. Dans la Lettre la forme du parallèle, qui fonde sur l’enthousiasme de Shaftesbury, on une dialectique de la répétition, de trou ve une citation « très classique » du l’invention et de l’émulation sur laquelle De superstitione comparant la liberté les révolutionnaires s’efforcent de bâtir intellectuelle de l’athée à celle du cro leur propre rapport à l’Antiquité : « le yant ; l’idée, épicurienne, qu’un cœur corpus des Vies s’est aussi présenté dé barrassé de toute passion religieuse, à eux comme une œuvre ouverte, à se rait plus conciliant amène à la distinc récrire ». Dans ce jeu des réécritures de tion de deux enthousiasmes, celui, dé Plutarque, qui s’attache à corriger le vasta teur, du fanatisme, mais aussi ce dévoiement des idéaux et des principes lui, plus prometteur, du philosophe, où révolutionnaires »(265), E.A. distingue est sollicité aussi le Non posse. John les articles de Camille Desmoulins Tren chard de son côté développe un – en particulier dans le dernier numéro concept nouveau d’« histoire naturelle (non publié) du Vieux Cordelier, où de la religion » dont F. B. montre qu’il sont sollicités Solon, Cicéron, Caton s’inspire aussi d’une relecture de la d’Utique et Antoine (265-266) – et la référence à Plutarque. Enfin, la diver tragédie de Marie-Joseph Chénier, si té de l’œuvre du Chéronéen, à égale distance de la littérature, de l’histoire Caïus Gracchus (266-268). Il montre et de la philosophie, lue comme une en fin les prolongements de ce dialogue transgression du genre, sert de para chez Jaurès qui, à la fin de son Histoire digme pour « interroger l’identité de la so cialiste de la Révolution française, philosophie morale et politique ». (F.F.) se réclame de « la triple inspiration de Marx, de Michelet et de Plutarque » F. Becchi, «La nozione di giustizia nel suo (268) et, dans la forme même, reprend sviluppo storico: la giustizia come valore le parallèle (272). (F.F.) primario del pensiero etico e politico di Plutarco», in N., K., D., 139-151. F. B adelon, « Lectures anglaises de Plutar e Fin dai tempi di Omero, l’ideale di que au XVIII siècle. Interférences et giusti zia è sempre stato a fondamento dynamique », in Plutarque de l’Âge cl. e del pensiero dei Greci. Con Platone e au XIX s., 247-261. Aristo tele, in particolare, esso giunge Spécialiste de la philosophie morale alla sua più chiara formulazione: il et politique anglaise du XVIIIe s., F. B. pri mo considera la giustizia ‘virtù rappelle que « dans la première décennie dell’anima’, il secondo ne sottolinea il du XVIIIe s., une rencontre intellectuelle ca rattere politico. A operare una sintesi se produit en Angleterre entre l’œuvre delle due visioni alla luce delle più mo de Plutarque et une réflexion religieuse, derne teorie stoiche e aristoteliche è

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 129-160 ISSN 0258-655X 132 Bibliography Section

Plu tarco, il quale considera la giustizia adopted a clear anti-Stoic attitude. un ideale tanto etico quanto politico, Despi te this, it is possible to find the in una virtù tra le più perfette, che con fluen ce of Stoic doctrines in his work, sen te al politico di agire a vantaggio an issue which, as Becchi rightly claims, della comunità, e di riconoscere ciò still needs a satisfying explanation. This che è bene e ciò che è male sulla base is especially noteworthy in regard to di principi morali che un’appropriata the passions, where we find strictly Pla educazione ha reso ben saldi. (M.D.S.) tonic positions beside notions of a clear F. Becchi, «The Doctrine of Passions; Plu Stoic matrix: even as he openly critici tarch, Posidonius and Galen», in Reli zed Chrysippus’ view of passion as a gious and Philosophical Discourse, 43-54. mistake, Plutarch nevertheless appears Plutarch’s view of the passions was al to have combined a Platonic view of so clearly Platonic-Aristotelian, since affections with the Stoic doctrine of he conceived of them as arising in the diastrophe, which explained how due irrational part of the soul when ratio to weakness of the mind, passions may na lity appears to have lost control of appear to drive people to vice. Indeed, the soul complex. On Moral Virtue, Plu tarch attacked his contemporaries for example, he even distinguishes for being in a state of ‘mental poverty’ between practical and theoretical vir brought about by their false opinions; tue on the basis that the former exclu allo wing first for bad habits, this state si vely deals with the irrational part forms at the end a second nature that of the soul and with taming emotions. pre vents people from being free from This, of course, implies his view of the error. According to Becchi, Plutarch did passions as important contributors not actually contradict himself: in line to the tonus of the soul and of metrio with Posidonius but anticipating Galen, patheia as the only way to deal with Plu tarch asserted that ignorance and passions in a proper way. In On Moral bad habits may sometimes incline to Virtue, Plutarch frequently refers to passions even those people who lack Aristotle’s Nichomachean Ethics in vio lent passionate impulses and have or der to assess his view of virtue as a a sound rational part of the soul. mesotes. Admittedly, his position is so Becchi’s analysis of numerous passages metimes far from clear, often due to from Moralia and Lives provides an Plu tarch’s active involvement in the overview of Plutarch’s view of passions philosophical discussions of his time: as “affections causing pain and fear sometimes Plutarch purposefully used in men not prepared by reason to bear Stoic terminology to turn it polemically bad luck”. In fact, lack of philosophical against them; other times, the lack of trai ning may cause inconsistencies and clari ty results from the tradition he is anomalies both in people with good following, be it Stoic, Cynic or other. natural qualities and in great charac Francesco Becchi’s article on Plu ters. Wisdom should therefore be reve tar chean ethics, “The Doctrine of the red as most important and perfect art, Passions: Plutarch, Posidonius and as the culmination of both good reputa Ga len”, intends to tackle difficulty. As tion and all human endeavors. (L.R.) a scholar with a profound knowledge of M. Beck, «Plutarch», in I.J.F. de Jong Plu tarch’s ethics, to which he has devoted (ed.), Space in Ancient Greek Literature. nu merous studies, Becchi attempts to Studies in Ancient Greek Narrative, de termine Plutarch’s position on ethics Leiden-Boston, Brill, 2012, 441-462. mo re clearly. As he affirms, Plutarch’s Dans ce troisième volume des Studies ethi cal affiliation was mainly that of in Ancient Greek Narrative dirigées a Platonist and as such he regularly par I. de Jong, après Narrators, Narra

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 129-160 Bibliography Section 133

tees, and Narratives in Ancient Greek rencontre avec Cléopâtre et du ch. 28, Literature (Mnemosyne. Suppl. 257), 1. En conclusion, M. B. revient sur 2004 et Time in Ancient Greek Litera l’influence que ses propres voyages ont ture (Mnemosyne. Suppl. 291), 2007, pu avoir sur Plutarque et met en avant le M. Beck reprend une étude de l’espace rôle de patron des arts dévolu par lui aux déjà esquissée dans un article de 2011 hommes d’État (Périclès, Cimon, Solon, «Plutarch as a transmitter of space in Lycurgue en particulier) dont l’action the Lives» recensé dans le précédent se voit encore dans leurs cités – sur numéro de Ploutarchos (vol. 12, 2015, l’importance contemporaine de ce type 96-97), où, dans la suite de la thèse d’évergésie, voir M. Piérart,« Restaurer de J. Banta sur Romulus et Numa, et embellir pour la plus grande gloire il insistait sur le modèle bakhtinien. des dieux » recensé in Ploutarchos, vol. L’espa ce ici, avec les monuments qui 11, 2014, 180), et les oppose aux excès l’occu pent, n’est pas vu sous une lumiè d’ambition d’un Alcibiade ou d’un re documentaire, mais dans son exploi Antoine, Alexandre constituant une figu ta tion littérair e. Il revient donc d’abord re exceptionnelle. (F.F.) sur le passage qu’il juge capital pour la conception de l’espace de Plutarque, C. Bevegni, «Espressioni della humanitas Per. 1-2 (complété par 13, 1-2) et qui, in Angelo Poliziano: presenze e riusi jou ant du double sens possible d’ἔργα delle Quaestiones Convivales di Plu et μίμησις, conférerait aux monuments tarco nei Miscellanea», in L.S. Tarugi de Périclès (et non de Phidias) une (ed.), Feritas, Humanitas, Divinitas mê me valeur incitative à la vertu qu’à come aspetti del vivere nel Rinasci ses actions. Sur ces bases sont trai mento, Firenze, 2012, 105-116. tés, comme illustrant les relations en Nei Miscellanea (nella Centuria prima tre espace et législateurs, d’abord e più diffusamente nella Centuria se «Theseus, Romulus and Numa» (445- cunda) si ravvisa lo spiccato interesse 450) puis «Solon and Lycurgus» (450- di Angelo Poliziano per svariati ambiti 452), l’accent étant à chaque fois mis della conoscenza, quali le discipline sur les traces laissées par leur action scien tifiche e le res antiquariae. Nella dans l’espace de la cité. Si les héros sua attività esegetica l’umanista fa ri sui vants sont regroupés sous le sous- cor so ad una molteplicità di fonti gre titre, «Space and Generals» (452), che e latine, non solo profane, ma an l’analyse excède de loin cette annonce. che cristiane, aspetto, quest’ultimo, di Thémistocle et Camille sont l’un et significativa rilevanza e innovazione, l’autre des sauveurs de la patrie, pour co me ben evidenziato da Bevegni. In lesquels l’espace de celle-ci et les (re) particolare, nel contributo viene esa constructions ont joué un grand rôle. minata attentamente la presenza e il À un moindre degré, Cimon a aussi riuso, nei Miscellanea, dell’opera plu contribué à l’embellissement d’Athènes. tarchea Quaestiones convivales, di Avec Caton l’Ancien, l’accent est mis cui lo studioso ha individuato almeno sur une certaine distorsion entre espace sette citazioni. Il contenuto di tali cita public et espace privé, tandis que les zioni non è limitato ad un unico cam rêves de conquête d’Alcibiade marquent po di indagine, ma spazia dalla mu sa φιλοτιμία. Suivent Alexandre (458- si ca, alla medicina, ai mores. Nella 459) et l’imitation manquée d’Antoine Centuria prima Plutarco viene citato durant la campagne parthique, où, da Poliziano tre volte, nel primo caso selon une très jolie formule, «Space per indagare sull’origine del termine conquers Antony, he is not conqueror of naulium, afferente alla sfera musicale; space» - j’ai dans le même esprit suggéré nel secondo caso al fine di approfondire que le temps lui échappe à partir de la una problematica medico-scientifica re

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 129-160 ISSN 0258-655X 134 Bibliography Section

lativa all’uso del vino quale antidoto syncrisis géante (l’expression est de con tr o la cicuta; infine per soffermarsi nous), remplaçant celle qui manque à su una curiosità di carattere antiquario la fin des deux Vies, sans qu’il soit pré ri guar dante gli hieronicae. Nella Cen cisé laquelle des deux trajectoires est turia secunda le Quaestiones vengo préférable. (T.S.) no citate per analizzare, ad esempio, M. Bonazzi, «Theoria and Praxis: On questio ni filologiche quali l’uso del Plutarch’s Platonism», in T. Béna termine rechedipna in un verso di Gio touil (ed.), Theoria, praxis, and the ve nale, emendato dall’umanista in tre contemplative life after Plato and chedipna; ed ancora, Plutarco è citato Aristotle (Philosophia antiqua. 131), per spiegare alcuni termini e tradizioni Leiden, Brill, 2012, 139-162. le ga ti al contesto del simposio, quali Il lavoro mira a mettere in luce una spe il sostantivo symbola e l’uso traslato ci ficità del platonismo di Plutar co, vale di umbra. In definitiva, lo studio di a dire la rivendicazione dell’importanza Bevegni consente di osservare che nei e dell’utilità pratica della filosofia oltre Miscellanea Poliziano, maturato come i limiti del mero dibatti to accademico. uomo e studioso, non solo si mostra, Contrariamente ai platonici suoi contem co me in passato, attento a questioni po ranei, Plutarco rinuncia ad assegnare di interesse antiquario, ma estende ed alla theoria il ruolo di fine in sé, senza per approfondisce le sue ricerche in ambi to questo implicare una difesa a oltranza scientifico, ragion per cui la sua filo della vita attiva. In effetti, l’essenza del logia può essere definita “totale”. (S.C.) platonismo risiede ai suoi occhi pro A. Billault, « Modèles historiques et ana prio nel fatto di trascendere i limiti logies biographiques: César, Alexan del problema e sostenere la necessità dre et Plutarque », in B. Cabouret, dell’unione di theoria e praxis. Coeren A. Groslambert et C. Wolff (éds), Visions te mente con lo spirito polemico che per de l’ Occident romain. Hommages à corre una parte consistente della pro Yann Le Bohec, Paris, 2012, 399-412. duzione plutarchea, tale posizione emerge La question posée dans cet article est in maniera contrastiva attraverso la cri de savoir « si la rivalité entre César et ti ca dello stoicismo (nel de stoicorum Alexandre alléguée par Plutarque se repugnantis) – accusato di limitarsi reflète dans la composition des Vies qu’il alla mera teorizzazione dell’impegno leur a consacrées et si elle ne s’y traduit politico o di realizzarlo in maniera con pas par des analogies narratives in traddittoria – e l’epicureismo (alla fine dui sant des comparaisons implicites. » dell’adversus Colotem). In questo senso, (p. 400). Selon l’auteur, la réponse le due scuole rivali sono associate nella est : oui. Il le prouve en examinant en misura in cui l’esaltazione del bios parallèle les deux Vies en question se scholastikos operata dalla prima rimanda lon les grands thèmes suivants : la for a un ideale egoistico e distaccato assi ma tion des deux héros, leur rapport à mi labile all’hesychia epicurea. I plato l’argent, les liens avec leurs soldats, ni ci, invece, fedeli all’ideale collettivo leur attitude face au pouvoir absolu et, del nomos, propongono una forma di enfin, les circonstances de leur mort. Il attività che è coerente con i conte nuti appa raît ainsi que tantôt l’un des deux teoe r tici della loro filosofia, giudicata hé ros est supérieur à l’autre et vice-ver dottrinalmente superiore allo stoicismo sa, tantôt ils se valent, mais que le lec e all’epicureismo. In questo senso, Plu teur est constamment invité à faire des tarco difende un’autentica identi fica comparaisons entre les deux sur la ba zione tra il bios theoretikos e il bios se du récit de Plutarque, qui se révèle praktikos, ancorata all’autentico fonda en fin de compte comme une sorte de men to della vita umana, la teologia. Si

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 129-160 Bibliography Section 135

può così parlare di «teologia politica». for nire un’adeguata difesa rispetto alla Essa è fondata sul principio dell’assimi fi ducia nella sola evidenza sensibile, lazione al divino che costituisce un punto pro pria dello scetticismo ontologico ed cardine del platonismo impe riale e che epistemologico a cui si oppone. (A.G.) si realizza nello sforzo di persegui re la P. A. Bos, «Plutarch on the Sleeping conoscenza e la virtù proprie al divino Soul and the Waking Intellect and per il tramite della riflessione filo sofica: Aristotle’s Double Entelechy Con quella del filosofo diventa così agli occhi cept», in Religious and Philosophical di Plutarco una figura di riferi mento della Discourse, 25-42. vita politica. (A.G.) In this article, P.A. Bos affirms that M. Bonazzi, «Plutarch on the Difference Plu tarch’s corpus allows us to assess between Academics and Pyrrho the extensive influence of Aristotle’s nists», OSAPh, 43 (2012) 271-298. pu blished and unpublished writings. Lo studio affronta la questione del In this and other previous works, Bos rapporto di Plutarco allo scetticismo also asserts that Plutarch’s testimo nella coscienza che chiarirlo permette ny is essential to disproving the deve di illuminare la natura del suo plato lopmental view of Aristotle’s thought nismo. La questione è complicata dalla that reigned in the twentieth century divergenza degli specialisti sullo scetti due to the influence of W. Jaeger and cismo di Plutarco, che esitano tra F.J.C.J. Nuyens. As a matter of fact, l’escluderlo dalla sua filosofia, attribuirlo Plu tarch affirms the fundamental unity a una fase limitata della sua carriera o of Aristotle’s published and unpublished definirlo come cifra caratterizzante del works, showing that there was no con suo pensiero. Dopo un riferimento alla tradiction or opposition between the complessità seman tica e storica dell’idea views Aristotle explored in his published stessa di ‘scetticismo’ nell’Antichità, dialogues and the theories he more l’autore affronta la posizione di Plutarco systematically exposed in the lectures rispetto all’Accademia ellenistica qua contained in the corpus. The analysis le doveva emergere in particolare nel of particular Aristotelian echoes in trattato perduto Sulla differenza tra the works of Plutarch provides enough pirronisti e accademici (CL 64), serven material to support this view. This is dosi di passi di opere tramandate, come particularly the case in Bos’ revision and le Questioni conviviali e soprattutto redefinition of Aristotle’s definition of the il Contro Colote. Quest’ultimo scritto soul. Taking the myth of a “dreaming mostra in particolare che l’empirismo Kronos” at the end of Plutarch’s De epi cureo, giudicato come inevitabilmente facie as a starting point, Bos engages in scettico da Plutarco e parzialmente asso a far-reaching analysis of Aristotle’s view ciato al pirronismo, è criticato dagli acca of the soul as a double entelechy. After demici, secondo Plutarco, sulla base del reviewing Aristotle’ s famous definition dualismo platonico, filtrato, quest’ultimo, of the soul as the “first entelechy of a attraverso l’interpretazione plutarchea natural body which potentially possesses di Arcesilao secondo cui l’esistenza del life and is organikon”, Bos shows that the mondo intelligi bile è necessaria per “na tural body” is nothing but the vital giusti ficare la possibilità stessa della vita heat, which Aristotle frequently referred umana, vita che sarebbe impossibile la to in a variety of ways, and that it serves dimensione sensibile fosse la sola realtà. the soul as an instrument for its typical Lo scetticismo del platonismo accade psychical functions. The term organikon mico, di natura «metafisica», è dunque in the quoted definition should therefore agli occhi di Plutarco coerente con la not be translated as “equipped with or filoso fia platonica e ha come scopo di gans” but rather as “serving as an

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 129-160 ISSN 0258-655X 136 Bibliography Section

instrument”, a translation for which an stoicorum repugnantis (1045B-F), che interesting passage of Plutarch’s Platonic fa riferimento a un critica crisippea ri Questions also provides good support. In volta ai filosofi che teorizzano la pre order to explain in which way the soul is senza di un movimento (kinêsis) o di the entelechy of this natural body, Bos una facoltà (dynamis) «accidentale» o launches a full analy sis of the double sense «contingente» (epeleustikê) dell’anima. with which “entelechy” is used in On Si tratterebbe di una sorta di movimento the Soul 2.1, which shows that Aristotle lo calizzato nell’hêgêmonikon dell’ani conceived of the soul as an entelechy in a ma che sarebbe in grado di realizzare double way: when described as “asleep” de gli impulsi in seguito all’intervento the soul is seen as forming a unity with di cause esterne. L’autore del lavoro its instrumen tal natural body; when the con sidera che tali filosofi siano da in tellect is referred to as “waking ente iden tificare con gli accademici, con lechy” it is because it is free of any bodily trariamente a quanti ipotizzano che covering. (L.R.) si tratti di altri stoici o di epicurei. In F. E. Brenk, «Plutarch and “Pagan Mo questo senso, la critica di Crisippo non notheism”», in Religious and Philoso è rivolta ad Aristone di Chio e ai suoi phical Discourse, 73-84. se guaci, promotori della nozione di Brenk ofrece una panorámica actua epeleusis, ma piuttosto ad Arcesilao e ai li zada de la influencia que el plato suoi successori, che elaborarono la pro nismo y el estoicismo ejercieron en la pria teoria dell’azione in polemica con plasmación y desarrollo del monoteís Zenone e con i suoi discepoli, finendone mo. En tal sentido, un examen atento per integrare, a scopo dialettico, la ter del tratado Isis y Osiris revela la inter minologia. (A.G.) pretación platonista que Plutarco adopta I. Calero, «Plutarco y su interpretación sobre la figura de Osiris, al que denomina de algunas leyes griegas concernientes ‘la inteligencia y la razón’. En síntesis, a la familia y propiedad», in N., K., Plutarco reduce lo divino a un solo Dios D., 53-65. al cual quedan subordinados los dioses En ciertas obras, Plutarco se pronuncia tradicionales. Asimismo, Sobre la E de sobre leyes de época greco-arcaica y Delfos patentiza en buena medida (hechas clásica, La profesora Calero revisa los las diferencias oportunas) una posición testimonios oportunos y concluye que, similar. Con todo, si esos postulados en la exégesis de los nómoi agamíou, doctrinales fueran particularmente im de las disposiciones sobre la exención por tantes para Plutarco, habríamos espe otorgada a los hijos para alimentar a los rado la presencia de los mismos en otros padres, de las leyes sobre la ilegitimidad en sayos de la producción plutarquea. aneja a los hijos de matrimonios mixtos (V.R., A.V.) y de la normativa sobre los daños cau R. Caballero, «The Adventitous Motion sados por animales, Plutarco combinó of the Soul (Plu., De Stoic. repugn. la interpretación correcta de los datos 23, 1045B-F) and the Controversy con explicaciones anacrónicas o ausen between Aristo of Chios and the tes de rigor jurídico. (V.R., A.V.) Middle Academy», in Religious and G. Cammagre, «Plutarque dans l’Ency Philosophical Discourse, 55-72. clopédie de Diderot et d’Alembert», in Il lavoro riguarda il dibattito tra lo Plutarque de l’Âge cl. au XIXe s., 191-202. stoi cismo e l’Accademia di Arcesilao G. M. présente sa réflexion comme in torno alla questione cruciale del une tentative « d’évaluer au travers du desti no e dell’azione umana. Esso si prisme de l’Encyclopédie l’intérêt que concentra in particolare sul § 23 del de présentait Plutarque pour les rédacteurs

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 129-160 Bibliography Section 137

d’un vaste ouvrage, composé sur près de nom secondaire au bas de la liste des vingt ans, qui avait la double ambition nouveaux platoniciens de l’époque d’être un conservatoire des savoirs impériale (« Platonisme »), mais ses et de changer “la façon commune de traités de polémique et sa réfutation des penser” (Diderot) ». L’étude s’engage Stoïciens sont mis à contribution à une d’abord sous un angle matériel et époque où le stoïcisme antique est en quantitatif. Cité dans 513 articles -dont passe d’être annexé par les matérialistes. 366 de Jaucourt, chargé à partir du L’ensemble montre que, dans les années tome V de l’histoire et de la géographie-, 1750-1765, Plutarque reste une des Plutarque est le quatrième auteur lectures favorites de l’élite. (F.F.) antique le plus sollicité, après les deux H. Campangne, « Poétique de l’Instant Pline -essentiellement Pline l’Ancien, tragique; la place et l’influence des mais les deux ne sont pas explicitement Vies de Plutarque dans la définition distingués-, Strabon et Cicéron, devant du tragique en France 1600-1650 », in Pausanias, Tite-Live et Tacite, alors Plutarque de l’Âge cl. au XIXe s., 55-68. qu’il est à peu près absent des deux H. C. rappelle d’abord la méfiance, grands dictionnaires historiques de toute platonicienne de Plutarque vis- l’époque, le Moreri et le Trévoux. Dans à-vis de la tragédie, du théâtre, et du les citations - explicitement référées ou drame (cf. Demetr. 19, De laude 545F non - les Vies Parallèles dominent lar -rectifier le 745F de la n. 4, p. 55, De ge ment, tandis que parmi les Moralia, malign. Her. 870C). Il n’en fut pas viennent, par ordre décroissant, les moins aussi une source inépuisable de Quaest. Rom. (20), les Quaest. conv. personnages et de situations tragiques, (10), le De Iside (7). On trouve aussi production qui s’accompagne dans le De def., le De exilio, le De facie, la période 1600-1660 de toute une le De superst. Les avis divergent déjà série de débats portant sur les formes sur l’authenticité du De placitis et le et la fonction de la dramaturgie et De musica est toujours cité à partir de d’Aubignac, dans La pratique du théâ la traduction de M. Burette. Pour les tre (dans la seconde moitié du siècle), traductions, celle d’Amyot est aussi di le place, aux côtés de Lilus Giraldi versement jugé, fruste pour Voltaire, et d’Athénée, dans la catégorie des plei ne de charme pour Jaucourt. Cité auteurs qui « en plusieurs endroits ont com me historien-géographe, écrivain touché les plus importante maximes du et penseur, Plutarque lui-même fait Theatre ». Pour étudier les optiques l’ob jet de réserve surtout sous l’angle variées dans lesquelles les auteurs reli gieux, où la quantité de prodiges dramatiques classiques du XVIIe s. ont rapportés participe au mieux du défaut relu Vies et Moralia, H. C. s’appuie de rationalité des hommes de l’Antiquité sur un corpus d’une dizaine de pièces (Jau court), au pire d’une crédulité bien écrites entre 1600 et 1645, en particulier peu philosophique (D’Alembert). Jau Les Lacènes de Montchrestien (1601), court, dans une veine proche de l’an inspirés de Cléomène (56-59), Coriolan, tiquomanie, voit en lui une source qui Aristoclée –inspirée des Amat. narr.- et per met de faire revivre l’Antiquité et les La mort d’Alexandre de Hardy (59-63 exemples et anecdotes étoffent ses ar et 64-65), Crisante -inspirée du Mul. ticles d’une matière romanesque. Il y virt.- de Rotrou (63) et enfin Le grand reprend avec beaucoup d’émotion tel Timoléon de Saint-Germain (1641) et ou tel passage des Vies parallèles (199- La mort de César de Scudéry (1637) qui 200). Enfin, si le style de Plutarque emprunte à César et Antoine, et com n’est l’objet d’aucune critique, il n’est, porte un « prologue en forme de dia dans l’histoire de la philosophie, qu’un lo gue allégorique, où le roi Louis XIII

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 129-160 ISSN 0258-655X 138 Bibliography Section

est explicitement comparé à Alexandre, A. Casanova, «Plutarch as Apollo’s Priest in tandis que Richelieu fait figure de nou Delphi», in Religious and Philosophical veau César ». (F.F.) Discourse, 151-158. C. Carasco, « La Conjuration des Grac El profesor Casanova efectúa una revi ques de Saint-Réal (1695) ou l’im sión crítico-textual de importancia so pos ture du concept de liberté de Plu bre los pasajes plutarqueos en los cuales el Queronense menciona su actividad tarque au Grand Siècle », in Plutar e (aceptada en la tradición filológica más que de l’Âge cl. au XIX s., 145-160. acreditada) como sacerdote de Apolo La Conjuration des Gracques (1695) en Delfos. (V.R., A.V.) est une œuvre sans doute apocryphe, parue dans la seconde partie des Œu E. Chayes, « La référence à Plutarque dans l’œuvre de L’Accademia degli Incogniti vres posthumes de Saint-Réal et réim de Venise », in Plutarque de l’Âge cl. au pri mée sous son nom jusqu’au milieu e e XIX s., 9-28. du XIX siècle. L’auteur a pris de nom En 1635, les Académiciens vénitiens breuses libertés face au modèle de Plu appelés Incogniti publient une série tar que. Tout en conservant le cadre de Discours qui gravitent autour de narratif des Vies de Tiberius et de Caïus l’in connu, de l’indéfini et du principe Gracchus, il a infléchi l’intrigue dans le du contraire, et dont le dernier, celui sens de la manipulation machiavélique de Marino dall’ Angelo, parle de « La et de l’amertume augustinienne. Em gloi re du néant ». Nous proposons bellissement du texte plutarquéen par une analyse des références que les In des discours inédits, des parenthèses cogni ti font à Plutarque et essayons moralisantes du narrateur ou par l’am de mettre en lumière sa fonction dans plification, voire la dramatisation de ces Discours subversifs, témoignant cer tains épisodes, cette monographie d’une libertas philosophandi étonnante. sur les frères Gracques témoigne des Douze ans après la parution de leurs choix politiques et moraux de Saint-Réal. Discorsi, apparurent les Glorie de gli (D’après le résumé de l’auteur) (F.F.) In cogniti, o vero gli huomini illustri dell’accademia de’ signori Incogniti di A. Casanova, «La giustizia nel Grillo e la Venetia. (Présentation de l’Auteur) conclusione del dialogo», in N., K., D., 181-189. Ph. Chométy, « La réception de Plutarque dans la poésie d’idées au XVIIe siècle », Nel dialogo Bruta animalia ratione uti, e detto anche Gryllus, manca del tutto in Plutarque de l’Âge cl. au XIX s., 29-44. L’auteur se propose « d’éclairer les una sezione dedicata alla giustizia, una transfor mations de (la) représentation delle quattro virtù fondamentali sia se (de Plutarque) en philosophe » et de tra condo Platone sia secondo Aristotele. cer quelques pistes s’inscrivant « dans Ta le assenza, tra le altre cose, può le projet plus vaste d’une étude sur la suppor tare l’ipotesi, formulata da alcu réception des sciences et des philosophies ni studiosi, che l’opera sia incompleta, de l’Antiquité dans la poésie d’idées ». e che il finale sia andato perduto. Une première partie (29-34) s’attache à sa Tutta l’argomentazione del dialogo è figure, bien établie, de grand philosophe tuttavia paradossale, e come tale non ha (dont l’origine est peut-être AP XVI bisogno di essere dimostrata, né seria 331) et montre que cette représentation mente confutata. La possibilità di con « n’est pas seulement significative de la futare con argomentazione seria è pro survivance de l’humanisme, mais aussi de ba bilmente affidata agli alunni, e forse l’appropriation mondaine de son œuvre » agli stessi lettori. (M.D.S.) (34). Une seconde partie, davantage en

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 129-160 Bibliography Section 139

forme de répertoire, le considère comme tarque de Jean de Pierrefeu (1925), se source philosophique et envisage à la dessine, au tournant des XIXe-XXe siècles, fois l’usage fait de certaines traductions un « nouveau Plutarque ». Quelques ci sentencieuses d’Amyot ou la pratique plus ta tions peuvent être utilisées dans les originale de La Fontaine dans ses Fables deux premiers, qui ressortissent à la pa [Cor. [6, 3-5] et Les Membres et l’estomac ro die, et présentent la caractéristique [Fables III 2], Cras. et La besace [I 7], d’être illustrés, mais il s’agit avant tout, Démosth. et Les Loups et les Brebis [III 13] plus largement, de remettre en cause le -P.C. ne donne pas les références précises cul te des grands hommes, soit que l’on de Plutarque]; d’autres rapprochements, s’en prenne directement à Plutarque, sont suggérés avec Conv. Sept. sap., soit que l’on saisisse ce modèle pour Quaest. conv., V. X orat., De garrul., De lib. tourner en dérision de prétendues gloi educ., Apopht. lac., An seni (36); pour la res contemporaines, soit encore, au len philosophie natur elle, Plutarque participe de main de la première guerre mondiale, au débat sur l’âme des bêtes, en particulier avec De soll. anim. et Bruta animalia, qui avec Pierrefeu, que l’on remette radica font l’objet de controverses de Montaigne le ment en question la possibilité même de à Descartes. Face à l’apparition de l’esprit « plutarquiser ». (D’après la présentation cartésien, Plutarque est encore pris au de l’Auteur) (F.F.) sérieux - moyennant une christianisation K. Demoen & D. Praet, «Philostratus, du savoir transmis - par La Mesnardière Plutarch, Gorgias and the End of Plato’s (utilisant De plac. II 20) et Saint-Martin Phaedrus», CQ 62 (2012) 436-438. (Crass.). Enfin le commentaire de Goulart Les auteurs, après avoir rappelé les à La Sepmaine de Du Bartas reflètent discussions d’authenticité suscitées par l’encyclopédisme de Plutarque. (F.F.) la Lettre 73 de Philostrate, consacrée D. N. Clay, «In the wake of Atlantis. The à la gloire de Gorgias, dont Platon lui- continuators of Plato’s Atlantikos Logos même aurait été un émule, reviennent from Theopompos to Plutarch», in sur l’appel final lancé à la destinatrice, Harmonia, 233-248. Julia Domna, de « persuader Plutar El Atlantikos Logos de Platón atrajo a que » de se rallier au même avis, fau filósofos, historiadores y escritores de te de quoi il méritera une épithète peu ficciones utópicas. En efecto, sirvió de flatteuse que Philostrate tait. À par modelo a otros autores como Teopompo, tir de la proposition d’Anderson de Evé mero o Jámbulo, autores griegos rapprocher cette invitation curieuse à que comenzaron la colonización de is con vaincre un mort de la fin du Phè las y tierras imaginarias (Meropis, dre (269b-c et surtout 278b-e, où So Isla de Pancaya, Islas del Sol) con el cra te se dit chargé par les Muses d’une descubrimiento de sociedades en las commission pour Homère et Solon), ils que Grecia podía verse reflejada en la distancia. El alcance de la Atlántida de proposent comme épithète dévalori Platón puede recogerse igualmente en satrice λόγων συγγραφέα (278e1-2) que algunos ecos en De facie in orbe lunae mé rite celui qui se rend indigne d’être de Plutarco. (V.R., A.V.) appelé φιλόσοφος. (F.F.) M.-F. David de Palacio, « L’“anti-Plutar P. D esideri, «Plutarco e la storia: una que”: Variations germanique, améri lettu ra obliqua dei dialoghi delfici», caine et française entre 1860 et 1925 », in in Harmonia, 295-307. Plutarque de l’Âge cl. au XIXe s., 319-336. Constatato come Plutarco abbia prati A partir de trois œuvres : le Plutarch Resto cato nel contempo la storia ed altri tipi red : an Anachronatic Metempsychosis de di scrittura letteraria e quanto sia raro Thomas Worth (1862), le Zürcher Plutarch e sorprendente che le sue opere si siano de Hugo Blümner (1909) et l’Anti-Plu ampiamente conservate, Desideri pro

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 129-160 ISSN 0258-655X 140 Bibliography Section

po ne una lettura dei Dialoghi Delfici in G. D’ippolito, «Motivi antifisiognomici vista di una comprensione dell’origine e nella cultura greca da Omero a Plu dei caratteri degli interessi storiografici tarco», in Harmonia, 315-328. dello scrittore di Cheronea. Attraverso Riconosciute grosso modo due fasi l’analisi di alcuni significativi passi di De (una etica, l’altra parascientifica) nello defectu oraculorum, De E apud Delphos svi luppo del pensiero fisiognomico e De Pythiae oraculis lo studioso offre nella Grecia antica, il contributo di G. anche una interessante interpretazione D’Ippolito intende mostrare come un delle Vite Parallele, lasciando emergere ve ro pensiero antifisiognomico traspaia con dovizia di suggestioni quelli che solo anteriormente al consolidamento posso no essere considerati i principi ispi teo rico della disciplina, riconoscendo ra tori dell’attività storiografica di Plu in Plutarco una forma di fisiognomica tarco. Nel dettaglio, in qualità di sacer ‘di namica’. A tal proposito, citati sva do te delfico, il Cheronese sarebbe stato riati esempi omerici, teognidei, euri protagonista di una partecipazione attiva pi dei, di Clemente Alessandrino e del alla vita organizzativa del santuario di co mico Filemone, senza dimenticare Apollo che si configurava non solo qua il cosiddetto cerchio della letteratura le valorizzazione di un importante monu so cratica, l’autore giunge a delineare, men to alla grecità, ma anche in maniera an che tramite il riferimento a ritratti complementare come ferma volontà di (coe renti o paradossali) stilati da Plu rior ganizzare da una parte il passato, e tar co nelle Vite, l’idea plutarchea, mu dall’altra il futuro della Grecia. (F.T.) tuata dalla tradizione socratico-pla P. D esideri, «Silvestro Centofanti et la to nica, della possibilità di realizzare philosophie de Plutarque», in Plu coe rentemente la virtù etica anche su tarque de l’Âge cl. au XIXe s., 309-318. pe rando le caratteristiche naturali ne Le dossier n. 748 du Fondo Manoscritti ga tive attraverso ragione, educazione de la Biblioteca Universitaria di Pisa ed esercizio. (F.T.) con tient 571 papiers de différents for L. de Nazaré Ferreira, «A lenda de Aríon mats, qui font partie du consistant legs e a influência de Plutarco na Arte Oci de Silvestro Centofanti, professeur dental», in As artes, 15-68. d’histoi re de la philosophie à l’Uni [«The legend of Arion and the influence ver sité de Pise du 1842 au 1849, of Plutarch in western art»] mort à Pise le 6 de janvier 1880. Les After a fist part dedicated to the repre 481 premières pages de ce dossier sen tation of the dolphin in Greek art (in contiennent des matériaux se rappor particular Minoan frescoes, coins, and tant au travail que le professeur pisan a dédié à Plutarque sur plusieurs vase painting), this study focuses on the dizaines d’années : un travail dont le literary and iconographic sources of résultat le plus important fut la pu Arion’s legend, with special attention blication, en 1850, d’un Saggio sulla to Herodotus (Histories 1.23-24) and vita e sulle opere di Plutarco. L’examen Plutarch (Banquet of the Seven Sages de ces papiers permet de mesurer 18.160E-19.162B). In the third and last l’ampleur et la profondeur des intérêts part, the author discusses the influence de Centofanti pour les écrits philo of Arion’s legend on Western art, based sophiques de Plutarque, et sa capacité on the selection of four examples: the de les utiliser en fonction de son ob tapestry entitled The Island of Fortune jectif politico-culturel prééminent : (from The Honours series), the emblems bâ tir un fondement idéologique à la of Alciatus, an Indo-Portuguese quilt construction d’une nation italienne. from the National Museum of Ancient (Présentation de l’Auteur) Art in Lisbon, and Arion & the Dol

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 129-160 Bibliography Section 141

phin, a libretto for opera written by l’histoire des hommes illustres « dans le Vikram Seth. The study includes two particulier »); « Plutarque critiqué pour annexes: the first one assembles the li la forme, mais loué pour le fond » (167- te rary sources of Arion’s legend, and 169, qui distingue l’imperfection de la the second provides a brief note on the langue et du style « si mal arrangés » du influence of Plutarch’s works on Fle sens « bien assis »du texte et du génie mish tapestry. (D.L.) créatif de l’auteur dont sont louées M. Durán Mañas, «Pericles, ¿un modelo de imagination et raison, tandis que les ΔΙΚΑΙΟΣΥΝΗ?», in N., K., D., 23-40. reproches devenus traditionnels -cré Para comprender el significado del dulité, embellissement- soulignent un con cepto de justicia en Plutarco se lleva trait antique qui n’engage pas la vé a cabo un análisis de los usos en las racité des auteurs); enfin, « Plutarque otras Vidas y también en la propia de et le comparant comparé » (169-171, Pericles. Si bien su biografía comienza où est affirmée la préférence de Dacier, des tacando este principio moral en Pe pour les Vies contre les Moralia, et, ri cles, resulta que Plutarco desarrolla à l’intérieur des premières, pour les en mayor medida otras virtudes suyas, synkriseis). Il en ressort une lecture di por lo cual señalar este principio moral dac tique, traditionnelle, mais non sans en sus personajes constituía un tópico. nuan ces, puisque cette valeur didactique De hecho, en relación con Pericles, est tantôt positive et tantôt négative. destaca más su moderación, indicada Loin de toute « plutarchomanie », Da igual mente al comienzo de la Vida, que cier participe plutôt d’une culture « ro manocentrique » et, pour lui comme su justicia. (V.R., A.V.) pour l’ensemble des classiques, Plutar E. Foulon, « Le Plutarque de Dacier », que reste d’abord le plus romain des au in Plutarque de l’Âge cl. au XIXe s., teurs grecs. (F.F.) 161-172. F. Frazier, « Le “dialogue” de Joseph Après Amyot, Dacier, qui a consacré de Maistre et de Plutarque. Quelques une trentaine d’années aux Vies, ouvre re marques textuelles sur la version le premier volume de sa traduction, par maistrienne des Délais de la justice une « Epistre au Roy » et une Préface divine », in Plutarque de l’Âge cl. au char gées de réhabiliter et promouvoir XIXe siècle, 289-305. Plu tarque et les Vies. La première, à « Traduction libre, et, sur quelques un niveau pratique, montre comment points, expressément maistrianisée » tirer profit des Vies, miroir du Prince, (J. Moubarak), les Délais de la justice tandis que la seconde, à un niveau plus divine apparaissent en effet à l’examen théorique, montre « comment concevoir com me le fruit d’un passionnant travail et se représenter, sinon même évaluer d’appropriation, clairement exposé et juger les Vies de Plutarque ». C’est dans la préface : « il était essentiel, y sur elle que porte l’analyse, sous quatre est-il expliqué, de ne point m’exposer à rubriques : «le genre des Vies : histoire lui faire tort en mêlant mes pensées aux et poésie » (164-166, où Dacier se siennes », d’où l’adjonction en fin de souvient d’avoir traduit la Poétique et volume de la traduction d’Amyot, la la voit en Plutarque la synthèse des deux mise entre astérisques de « tout ce qui contraires que sont histoire et poésie), n’est point de Plutarque » et en itali « Plutarque père de la petite histoire » ques de ce qui, dans ces expansions, lui (166-167, où il résout par l’idéal de est emprunté à Plutarque ; ont été aussi vérité et la représentation de la vie- supprimés quelques passages «nullement même le paradoxe de donner à l’histoire essentiels et dont la substance même a une dimension universelle en faisant été conservée », mais surtout la forme

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 129-160 ISSN 0258-655X 142 Bibliography Section

mê me du dialogue. Les conséquences, D. Futter, «Plutarch, Plato and Sparta», importantes, en sont d’abord étudiées : Akroterion 57 (2012) 37-51. créa tion d’un nouveau « portail mais D. F. part du constat que Plutarque trien » (293-297), puis manière dont dans la Vie de Lycurgue présente la Mais tr e articule la discussion et le gou constitution mixte de la cité spartiate vernement de la Providence, sans plus comme un idéal social et politique pour s’appu yer sur telle ou telle intervention, Platon. Or, dans la République c’est un mais en exploitant l’élargissement de ré gime d’aristocratie méritocratique la perspective temporelle présente dans que Platon met en avant, un régime le texte grec, du châtiment immédiat au incompatible avec une constitution châtiment dans l’au-delà (297-299). En mixte. Plutarque aurait-t-il mal tre les deux, Plutarque s’est attardé sur compris la philosophie politique de la vie de remords aux chapitres 10-11: Platon ? D. F. s’efforce de résoudre totalement repensés par Maistre ils sont, cette antinomie en s’appuyant sur à titre d’exemple, étudiés en détail, texte, la signification du mot ὑπόθεσις ajouts et notes, pour illustrer la méthode (Lyc. 31.2) pour dire que d’après de lecture de Joseph de Maistre et son Plutarque la construction de la cité dialogue avec le texte (299-304). (F. F.) idéale de Platon est une sorte d’idéa F. Frazier, « Ordre et désordre dans la lisation et de projection de la Spar pensée de Plutarque. Réseaux lexicaux te de Lycurgue. D. F. se penche aussi et problématiques philosophiques au sur la signification du mot πολιτεία tour de δίκη, κόσμος, νόμος », in N., (Lyc. 31.2) en expliquant que le terme K., D., 215-242. recouvre aussi des institutions sociales F.F. ilustra el concepto de orden en et économiques mises en place par Plutarco a través de un estudio léxico de Lycurgue non restreintes à la seule los términos δίκη, κόσμος, νόμος y sus forme du gouvernement spartiate. Il respectivos antónimos. Partiendo de la exa mine ensuite ces institutions à Sparte concepción clásica de estos términos y qui parfois présentent des aspects dé analizando los pasajes en los que Plutar mocratiques et démontre qu’il existe co los usa en sentido abstracto, la autora des différences notoires au niveau de muestra su evolución y destaca el valor l’organisation de deux cités. Cela dit des que adquiere para nuestro autor la idea correspondances apparaissent égale de la necesidad de orden (y de “puesta ment entre l’organisation économique en orden”, simbolizada a menudo por et sociale de Sparte de Lycurgue d’un un estado previo de caos y desorden). cô té, et la cité de Platon de l’autre. La Esta idea se ve reflejada en todos los cité platonicienne peut être vue com ámbitos, tanto en los planos cosmológico me une extension idéalisée de Sparte y metafísico, como en los campos de de Lycurgue telle que Plutarque la la psicología, la política y la ética, que représente. D’après D. F., les affirma afectan directamente al ser humano. F.F. tions de Plutarque au sujet de la parenté concluye su análisis describiendo los casos des deux régimes obéissent à une logi en los que Plutar co utiliza la expresión que rhétorique de sa part. (M.V.) Ζεὺς ἀριστο τέχνας (donde Zeus, demiurgo A. Gefen, « Les écrivains contre Plutar pla tóni co, cumple con su función de crea que: Détournements, critiques et réé dor y ordenador del mundo y de la realidad cri tures des Vies parallèles aux XIXe humana), puesto que en ellos conflu yen et XXe siècles », in Plutarque de l’Âge varios de los ámbitos arriba mencionados cl. au XIXe s., 337-350. y permiten esclarecer los diferentes niveles À tant de siècles de distance, ce n’est de ordenación necesa rios en cada uno de plus guère le texte, mais un certain ellos. (L.L.) mo dèle plutarquien qui joue un rôle

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 129-160 Bibliography Section 143

déterminant dans la constitution, entre construit une première partie autour de le XIXe et le XXe siècle, de contre-mo la « Désacralisation de l’éthos héroïque dè les d’écriture biographique servis guerrier » (134-139), qui se décompose en contrepoint à l’historiographie po en « Alexandre : subversion de la figure sitive (de Han d’Islande de Victor Hu du conquérant » (134-138), « Hercule et go aux Hommes Illustres de Jean Rou Thésée : remise en cause de la figure du aud en passant par les railleries de héros » (138-139), avec, en appendice, Bouvard et Pécuchet ou les Vies ima « Disqualification ironique des tentatives ginaires de Marcel Schwob, de la con de divinisation », et enfin « Alexandre tre-historiographie romantique à la et la promotion de nouvelles valeurs » pensée par cas des sciences de l’hom (139-140 -il est à noter que le spécialiste me contemporaines, en passant par de Plutarque y reconnaît des traits déjà les géométries obliques de Michel Fou soulignés par le Chéronéen, même s’ils cault). Moquées, déconstruites ou réin sont mis ici au service de la définition ventées, les Vies parallèles servent tour d’une monarchie moderne). La seconde à tour d’exemple des puissances de la partie, plus propre à l’auteur classique, spéculation littéraire sur les détails et les s’intitule « De la vie au dialogue des variations des existences particulières, morts : inflé chissement d’un genre et refus de lieu de rêverie poétique, d’empathie de l’exemplarité » (140-144). Intégrant associative, et, d’autre part, de repoussoir au genre lucianesque, souple et peu face aux dangers de l’héroïsation officielle codifié, du dialogue des morts le parallèle plu tarquien, réinterprété dans une et aux spectres des téléologies morales. perspective de rivalité et de surenchère (D’après le résumé de l’Auteur) (F.F.) qui met en lumière les aspects les moins S. Grémy-Deprez, « Plutarque dans les Dia recommandables des héros, Fénelon logues des Morts de Fénelon », in Plu condamne de facto l’exemplarité « qui tarque de l’Âge cl. au XIXe s., 131-144. était de mise dans les Vies »(142) ou La source plutarquienne domine lar que, du moins, la lecture courante, et en ge ment dans l’œuvre de Fénelon (37 particulier classique, croyait y voir. (F.F.) dia logues sur 53 sont inspirés du Chéro J.-L. Guichet, « Rousseau et Plutarque, néen), mais, au-delà de ce constat quan l’influence “moderne” d’un ancien », titatif, S.G. étudie comment, dans un in Plutarque de l’Âge cl. au XIXe s., contexte historique de réévaluation du 221-232. héros, liée à la contestation du « roi de Centrée sur la « modernité » de l’influen guerre », le précepteur du fils du Grand ce de Plutarque, dont la présence « n’est Dauphin déplace l’éclairage moral sur pas massive et continue, mais presque les Vies les plus célèbres afin de battre toujours émiettée à l’extrême », cette en brèche la gloire du roi conquérant étude s’efforce de préciser la forme et de préciser les devoirs du souverain, de cette influence. Sans se limiter à un étayant son propos sur « une réflexion simple usage rhétorique des nombreux souterraine sur le genre littéraire le plus exempla fournis par le corpus plutar approprié pour exposer cet idéal, et la quien (en premier lieu par les Vies), confrontation entre le genre du dialogue Rousseau leur confère aussi une très des morts et de la vie » (133). Prenant haute charge émotionnelle et en fait une pour exemples des dialogues mettant en sour ce active et constante de méditation, scène Alexandre, Thésée et Hercule (soit non pas « simple magasin d’exemples et II « Hercule et Thésée », XXV, « Alexandre de modèles », mais « magasin d’idées » et Aristote », XXVI « Alexandre et (225), matériau anthropologique sur le Clitus », XXVII « Alexandre et Diogène » quel fonder sa réflexion. Surtout la réfé et XLIV « César et Alexandre »), S. G rence à Plutarque permet au citoyen de

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 129-160 ISSN 0258-655X 144 Bibliography Section

Genève de prendre de la distance avec dei dades comunes en su época como la société parisienne de son époque et de Dikaiosyne, Themis y Nomos no se pro jeter un modèle anthropologique et encuentran en la obra conservada salvo po litique en rupture, annonciateur de la en las citas, mientras que hay otras Ré volution et de la République. De cette que utiliza con frecuencia: Adrastea, « libre inspiration », J-L.G donne pour las Erinis, Poiné, Nemesis y Dike. Las exem ple l’utilisation de Caton l’Ancien divinidades y personificaciones aparecen où Plutarque « est d’abord le témoin sai del modo consagrado por la tradi ción, sissant d’une réalité éthique et politique distribuidas de modo desigual entr e Vidas opposable aux raisonnements captieux y Moralia, con un uso particular mediante et aux objections relativistes qu’on lui el que Plutarco pretende exponer su idea adresse » (228-229), et surtout la longue de la justicia divina. (V.R., A.V.) citat ion dans le livre II de l’Émile du De esu carnium (non référencée) à H.-G. Ingenkamp, «Ploutarchos symphi l’ino tr duction révélatrice : « Quoique lotimoumenos», in Lash of Ambition, ce morceau soit étranger à mon sujet 19-30. je n’ai pu résister à la tentation de le À partir de l’utilisation du mot symphi transcrie r ». (F.F.) lotimoumenos par Plutarque, l’auteur se livre à un certain nombre de réflexions E. Hamon-Lehours, « Plutarque, Source ponctuelles, accompagnées de remarques d’inspiration de l’iconographie fé de critique textuelle, sur la signification minine », in Plutarque de l’Âge cl. au de ce terme (a) pour Plutarque lui-même XIXe s., 89-102. (sur la base d’un passage du De E apud L’étude se concentre sur deux œuvres pictu rales d’Elisabetta Sirani, Timoclée Delphos, 385A-B), (b) en lien avec un (91-94) et Porcia (94-97), dont le sujet eut con texte politique plus large (à partir une abondante postérité dans la suite du d’un extrait du De laude ipsius, 542B) siècle. Un regard sur la peinture française et (c) en accord avec les principes dans les siècles postérieurs montre que rhétoriques de la Seconde Sophistique la fortune iconographique de Plutarque (en comparaison avec un texte d’Apulée se répand en France majoritairement tiré des Florides, XVI, 17-18). (T.S.) entre le XVIIIe et le XIXe s. et y est alors Gh. Jay-Robert, « Ulysse et Circé réin plus vigoureuse qu’en Italie (97). elle ne ven tés par Plutarque: d’un savoir di compte cependant que peu de femmes, vin à un savoir naturel », in A.N. Pena pré sentées en groupe ou en couple, com (ed.), Révélation et apprentissage dans me Coriolan et sa femme, Antiochus et les textes grecs et latins, Lisboa, 2012, Stratonice, Antoine et Cléopâtre -cette 177-185. dernière étant la seule à figurer sou C’est sur le dialogue satirique Gryllos vent seule. La comparaison met en relief de Plutarque que se penche l’auteur de l’originalité d’E. Sirani, dont les œuvres cet article pour le comparer dans un émanent d’une connaissance de l’ouvrage premier temps au chant X de l’Odyssée plutarquien d’une part, et d’une volonté dont il s’inspire et qu’il réécrit de façon de faire émerger une écriture artistique iro nique. G. J-R montre que ce dialogue philogyne d’autre part. (F. F.) est une « création d’une péripétie iné di te » dont le protagoniste est Gryllos, M. Herrero de Jáuregui, «DIKE y otras un tout nouveau personnage. Ce com deidades justicieras en la obra de pagnon d’Ulysse transformé en porc Plutarco», in N., K., D., 161-180. prend le contrepied d’Hermès tout en Acerca de las principales divinidades se servant, comme lui, de la parole pour de la justicia que aparecen en la obra con vaincre son interlocuteur et parvenir de Plutarco, desvela este estudio que à ses fins. L’auteur démontre, dans un

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 129-160 Bibliography Section 145

deu xième temps, que le point nodal de la ción el nombre de Yaco, en compa cette réécriture est le logos ainsi qu’une ración con las fuentes literarias que nou velle définition du savoir. Gryllos documentan el nombre, permite inferir uti lise plusieurs procédés rhétoriques que, en los Misterios de Eleusis, la car l’enjeu pour lui est de vaincre par identificación entre Yaco y Dioniso re la parole qui, dans ce traité, devient sul ta fehaciente. Ello justifica que, en apprentissage, « presque un exercice d’école ». Contrairement à Hermès los pasajes correspondientes, Plutarco dont la parole prend la forme d’une ci te a la divinidad por el nombre que ré vélation, Gryllos fait l’usage d’une juz gaba más apropiado en la procesión pao r le sophistique et démonstrative qui eleu sina: Yaco. (V.R., A.V.) est justement du côté de l’apprentissage. D. F. Leão, «The Eleusinian Mysteries and Quant au savoir, il tire sa force de la Political Timing in the Life of Alcibia capacité à développer de façon naturelle des», in Religious and Philosophical les vertus propres à chaque espèce. Discourse, 181-192. Gryllos défend la supériorité de l’inné Como es sabido, la Expedición a Sici sur l’acquis en niant l’importance de lia del 415 a.C. se vio precedida de l’instruction. Mais un paradoxe surgit, d’après l’auteur : Gryllos se sert du logos sen das manifestaciones impías en que tout en soulignant son inutilité. (M.V.) Alcibíades fue inculpado por sus ene mi gos políticos. En lo concerniente a la A. I. Jiménez San Cristóbal, «Jueces, Mu tilación de los Hermes, Leâo acepta premios y castigos en el Más Allá de las explicaciones de Tucídides y de Plu Plutarco», in N., K., D., 243-260. En numerosos pasajes plutarqueos se tarco, en la idea de que constituyó un trata la inmortalidad del alma y las fe nómeno de vandalismo callejero con for mas de existencia después de la venientemente explotado por los sec muer te. En primer lugar destacan los tores anti-Alcibíades (quienes desea juicios de Minos, Radamantis y Éaco, rían involucrar al estadista como que determinan si las almas van a la conspirador del régimen democrático). Isla de los Bienaventurados o al Tár En cuanto a la Profanación de los Mis taro. A éste último van las almas injus terios, se habría tratado de una cele tas que deben rendir cuentas ante divi bra ción sacrílega, un grave delito ni dades vengadoras y sufrir castigos de impiedad, habida cuenta que la de purificación; por otra parte, las ‘re presentación’ de los Misterios se al mas justas reciben un merecido re habría efectuado en un contexto reli conocimiento y recompensa por sus giosamente inapropiado. El caso es que accio nes en la otra vida. La autora pro nuevamente los enemigos de Alcibíades porciona una comparación con los tex explotaron la situación para (ligando tos previos que trataron estos asuntos, las dos acciones aquí citadas) justificar en tre los que destaca indudablemente el carácter provocativamente irreligio la escatología platónica, estableciendo so, híbrico, de Alcibíades. (V.R., A.V.) sus semejanzas y diferencias, puesto G. Lepan, « De la Morale à l’Ethique: Plu que Plutarco configuró su propia con tarque dans Emile et Les rêveries », in cep ción de la vida en el Más Allá desde Plutarque de l’Âge cl. au XIXe s., 203-220. el punto de vista literario, filosófico y Des deux lectures de Plutarque par religioso. (V.R., A.V.) Rousseau, celle du citoyen et celle du A. I. Jiménez San Cristóbal, «Iacchus « philosophe de l’âme, penseur-explo in Plutarch», in Religious and Philo ra teur de l’intimité » (H. Arendt), G.L. sophical Discourse, 125-136. choi sit de se consacrer à la seconde, Un análisis pormenorizado de los cin « tout en livrant des clés de sa possible co pasajes plutarqueos que traen a co conciliation avec l’usage “politique” »,

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 129-160 ISSN 0258-655X 146 Bibliography Section

à partir d’un corpus limité: « le livre presencia en las siguientes obras: Ama IV d’Emile, occupé par le traité des torius, Amatoriae Narrationes, Coniuga passions et l’éducation de la pitié, et lia Praecepta, Mulierum Virtutes y Con les Rêveries III et IV », l’unité de ces solatio ad Uxorem. (V.R., A.V.) textes pouvant se faire « autour de la Ch. Mazouer, « Les Mulierum Virtutes de no tion de “vie” et d’“histoire d’une Plutarque et la tragédie française du âme”, âme nécessairement singulière XVIIe siècle », in Plutarque de l’Âge cl. dont l’identité est à interroger » (203). au XIXe s., 45-54. Elle relève d’entrée que les Vies ne sont Entrant en résonance avec l’exaltation pas cantonnées à un usage politique entre 1630 et 1650, avant la Fronde, de ou historique et que la méditation la femme forte et de l’héroïsme féminin, des Œuvres morales est « tout aussi le Mulierum virtutes a été la source de la prégnante en général, et même plus im dernière décennie du XVIe s. à 1661 d’un portante à la fin de sa vie » (204). Une peu moins de dix pièces de théâtre. C. première partie traite de questions de M. distingue sept pièces autour de qua méthode (204-208), articulées autour tre héroïnes : Arétaphila (Pierre du Ryer, des notions d’universel et de singulier Arétaphile), Camma (Jean Hays, Cam d’une part, de morale (réduisant mate; La Caze, Cammane; Thomas Cor l’homme à la raison) et éthique (pre neille, Camma, reine de Galatie), Chio nant en compte raison et sensibilité) mara (Rotrou, Crisante) et Timocléia d’autre part. Est ensuite examinée « la (Alexandre Hardy, Timoclée, ou La Juste vie d’Émile »(208-213) -avec une in Vengeance; Morel, Timoclée, ou La Gé sis tance portée sur la liberté morale, nérosité d’Alexandre). Il s’agit de montr er l’usa ge moral de l’étude des « vies par com ment ces dramaturges passent du récit ti culières », l’histoire, les bagatelles (où bref à la forme théâtrale, les déplacements cha cun est vraiment soi) et les héros (ce opérés (48-51) et les figu res d’héroïnes qui que tous ne sont pas, et qui de toute façon s’en dégagent (51-54). (F. F.) ne doit pas empêcher Émile d’être lui- M. Meeusen, «Matching in Mind the Sea mê me). Enfin viennent « les Rêveries: Beast’s Complexion. On the Pragma “l’his toire de mon âme” » (213-219), e tics of Plutarch’s Hypomnemata and dont la III porte en exergue le célèbre Scientific Innonvation on the Case vers de Solon, « Je vieillis en apprenant e of Q.N. 19 (916BF)», Philologus 156 touj ours », tandis que la IV prend appui (2012) 234-259. sur une lecture du De cap. ex inim. util. L’auteur de cet article se penche sur le Plutarque apparaît ainsi, non comme Quaestiones Naturales de Plutarque, un un maître, mais plutôt comme un inter traité qui, d’après lui, mérite un examen locuteur permanent, voire à de certains plus approfondi. Il avance l’hypothèse moments, un consolateur. (F.F.) que ce traité est une sorte de « cahier C. A. Martins de Jesus, «Kosmos and its de notes », composé de plusieurs ὑπο derivative in the Plutarchan works on μνήματα destinés à être incorporés love», in N., K., D., 87-99. dans d’autres traités. Il se penche aussi Estudio del uso que Plutarco hace del sur les caractéristiques et la fonction término kosmos y sus derivados, que pragmatique d’un tel « cahier de no manipula a fin de servir a sus intereses tes » tout en se demandant s’il a été para caracterizar la posición de las mu com posé pour un usage personnel jeres en contextos de relaciones amo ou pour publication. Il pose aussi la rosas. Este análisis desvela los prin question de sa place dans le corpus cipios morales y filosóficos que alenta des œuvres de Plutarque. A partir de la ban a Plutarco, muestra la influen cia question Q. N. 19 (916BF) qui concerne de la teoría platónica y se centra en su l’ha bileté de l’octopus de changer de

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 129-160 Bibliography Section 147

couleur, M. M. montre en quoi consiste meant to fit into the anti-Hellenic con le travail de l’auteur : les explications text in which he lived, in an effort to relatives au phénomène se basent sur re-establish contact with the exegetical les travaux de différents philosophes tradition of Greek philosophy. (L.L.) tels Théophraste, Empédocle, Démo A. M. Milazzo, «Contributi al testo dei cri te, Platon etc. Mais on y trouve aussi Moralia di Plutarco», in Harmonia, certains éléments novateurs. L’ori 547-552. gi nalité de Plutarque consiste dans L’autore si sofferma su alcuni passi l’utili sation conjointe de deux théories estrapolati dai Moralia plutarchei (in existantes pour expliquer le phénomène particolare da An virtus doceri possit, et dans la prise en considération d’un De sera numinis vindicta, Maxime au tre élément d’explication : la texture cum princ. philos. disserendum, De de la peau de l’octopus. M. M. examine sollertia animalium, De esu carnium e par la suite l’utilisation par Plutarque Bruta ratione uti) cercando di portare de ce phénomène de metachrosis dans il proprio contributo ecdotico e con d’autres textes. Son intégration est faite getturale. Tra le altre proposte, parti dans l’optique d’une évaluation morale colarmente interessante risulta la solu des personnages plutarquiens, plus zione di aplografia per omoteleuto pro précisément dans des cas de change spettata per De sera 551BC ed ipotizza ments de caractère et d’attitude. M. M. ta per De sollertia 968A. Inoltre pare avance l’idée que les résultats de l’en convincente la congettura proposta quête étiologique de phénomènes natu per An virtus doceri possit 440A come rels étaient vraisemblablement des an che la modifica della punteggiatura τόποι à utiliser dans d’autres textes ; sugge rita per De sollertia 959C, mentre quant au traité, il était sans doute pour l’in tervento su De esu carnium 994AB è l’au teur un ouvrage de référence dans prodotto di un lecito sospetto di corru son travail d’écriture. (M.V.) zione testuale. (F.T.) M. Meeusen, «Salt in the Holy Water: I. Muñoz-Gallarte, «The Colors of the Plutarch’s Quaestiones Naturales in Soul», in Religious and Philosophical Michael Psellus’ De omnifaria doctri Discourse, 235-248. na», in Religious and Philosophical Israel Muñoz Gallarte’s chapter shows Discourse, 101-124. the value of Plutarch’s treasury of The author delves into the encyclopaedic echoes of notions vaguely or firmly work of the medieval scholar Psellus, in held in late antiquity. Muñoz Gallarte or der to identify and analyse Plutarch’s fo cuses on an intriguing subject that is pre sence in it. Psellus deals with Pla strictly connected with the widely attes to nic psychology and metaphysics, for ted belief of the soul’s descent from the which his main source is Proclus, and divine region into the world of move with physics, physiology and astro ment and decay. In fact, this view can be nomy, topics all related to the sensible found in a variety of contexts cove ring realm for which he draws from Plu the very wide spectrum from Plato to the tarch’s Quaestiones Naturales. In the Chaldean Oracles. More specifically, follo wing chapters, M. M. analyses how the focus of this chapter is the belief— Psellus worked with his source, for a derived from the intersection between thorough investigation from a textual myth, religion, astrology and philo perspective will allow to understand sophy—that during the soul’s descent his working methods and will show how through the planetary spheres, the pla he understood and dealt with Quaestio nets give the soul different powers, nes Naturales. In this sense, his adap traits, vices or passions that, depending tation of both form and content was on their positive or negative character,

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 129-160 ISSN 0258-655X 148 Bibliography Section

help or bother the soul during its earth paraison avec Achille Plutarque établit ly life. Muñoz Gallarte focuses on the in directement une interrelation entre asso ciation of passions with certain co ces trois chefs militaires. (M.V.) lors which turn up in pagan, Christian M. R. Niehoff, «Philo and Plutarch as and Christian apocryphal texts with a Biographers: Parallel Responses to view to determining the extent to which Roman Stoicism», G.R.B.S. 52 (2012) we can establish a common background 361-392. for views that are clearly related. (L.R.) Maren Niehoff diskutiert Philon als M. Nerdahl, «Exiling Achilles: Reflections einen wichtigen Vorläufer der ethischen on the Banished Statesman in Plu Biographie Plutarchs. Vergleichend tarch’s Lives», CJ 107 (2012) 331-353. in terpretiert sie beide im Kontext der Michael Nerdahl part du constat que kultu rellen und philosophischen De dans les Vies de Camille, d’Aristide batten im 1.Jh. als Antwort auf das in et de Coriolan de Plutarque, les Rom gängige stoische Paradigma, wo personnages principaux sont comparés à bei sie bei Plutarch Alkibiades und Achille lorsqu’ils se trouvent sur le point Nikias, bei Philon die vita Mosis exem d’affron ter l’exil ou lorsqu’ils rentrent de pla risch herausgreift. In einem ab l’exil. Le retrait du héros homérique du schließenden Teil sucht sie im Anschluss combat constitue ainsi une toile de fond an Richard Sorabji (unter Heranzie qui permet de mieux saisir l’évaluation hung programmatischer Aussagen Se mo rale des chefs plutarquiens. La com necas) den fundamentalen Einfluss des paraison entre Achille et Camille révè le römischen Stoizismus auf die Biogra leurs différences du point de vue de leur phie schreibung der beiden griechi schen vertu et met en évidence la modération Au toren zu erweisen. (R.H-L) de Camille; Aristide est, quant à lui, présenté aux antipodes d’Achille lorsque, M. R. Niehoff, «Philo and Plutarch on alors qu’il est sur le point de quitter Homer», in Ead. (ed.), Homer and the Athènes pour partir en exil, il prie pour Bi ble in the eyes of ancient interpreters que les Athéniens n’affrontent jamais une (Jerusalem studies in religion and situation aussi catastrophique et qu’ils se cul ture. 16.). Leiden [u. a.]: Brill, souviennent de lui. De son côté Coriolan, 2012, 127-154. face à l’exil, ressemble à Achille et réagit e In ihr m Vergleich kennzeichnet Nie mê me de manière plus excessive que lui. hoff das (Wieder-)Einführen eines ka Il subit par ailleurs une mort prématurée no nischen Textes als Grundlage phi à l’instar d’Achille. loso phischer Überlegungen als ent D’après Nerdhal, le paradigme scheidende Neuerung, die es Philon d’Achille constitue un « baromètre » er laubte jüdische Tradition und plato qui permet une plus subtile évaluation nische Philosophie miteinander ins Ge mo rale des héros. Ainsi, les vertus de spräch zu bringen. Poetische (Homer), Camille et d’Aristide sont mises clai philosophische (Platon) und reli giöse re ment en évidence alors que Coriolan Tradition (Moses) werden so auf der appa raît comme un exemple négatif. Suche nach der Wahrheit nebeneinander Nerdhal avance l’hypothèse que les gestellt. Dies gelingt durch eine aristo réac tions différentes des trois héros se telische inspirierte Interpretation. Die justi fient par leur origine : Plutarque Untersuchung Plutarchs konzentriert cher che probablement à montrer qu’un sich auf De audiendis poetis . Der Aufsatz Athé nien réagit différemment d’un Ro schließt mit einigen kontrastie renden Be main. Quoi qu’il en soit, Nerdhal dé mer kungen zu Ps.-Plut. Über Leben und montre clairement que grâce à la com Dichtung Homers. (R.H-L)

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 129-160 Bibliography Section 149

A. G. Nikolaidis, «Aspects of Plutarch’s dell’anima, in particolare nella Virtù Notion of Philotimia», in Lash of am morale. In questo scritto la posizione bition, 31-54. pla tonica è ritenuta conciliabile con il La φιλοτιμία se desarrolla especialmente dua lismo psicologico plutarcheo nella en los ámbitos de los hombres de estado y mi sura in cui la parte irascibile e la par generales, por lo que Plutarco la detalló te concupiscibile sono ricondotte alla pormenorizadamente en sus Vidas. Así, se parte non razionale dell’anima. L’iden presenta aquí un análisis de la naturaleza tificazione di tale parte è cruciale per de la φιλοτιμία een los repr sentantes por assi curare il ponte tra la psicologia e excelencia de esta cualidad, especialmente l’eti ca: lo sforzo morale dell’individuo Tito Flaminio, Fabio, Agesilao, Temís dev e concentrarsi nel tentativo di limi tocles, Alcibíades, Coriolano, los Gracos ta re gli eccessi passionali di tale sfera y César, a fin de comprobar las afirma essenziale della sua persona. (A.G.) ciones de los prólogos de la Vida de Fo V. Paci, « Le rôle et l’influence de Plutar ción y Mulierum virtutes, sobre si las que dans la composition des Annales diversas manifestaciones de φιλοτιμία Galantes de Grèce de Madame de se deben a las diferencias de caracteres Villedieu », in Plutarque de l’Âge cl. o a las distintas condiciones políticas au XIXe s., 103-114. y sociales. A través del pormenorizado Si la source majeure à laquelle Mme de aná lisis de los variados ejemplos des Ville dieu a puisé pour la composition vela el Profesor Nikolaidis algunas ca de ses Annales galantes de Grèce est racterísticas de esta cualidad, el uso sans aucun doute Hérodote, l’influence que los personajes hacen de ella, y el de Plutarque (et, en particulier, du De valor conferido por Plutarco, de modo mulierum virtutibus), bien qu’il ne soit que circunscribe su consideración co jamais cité, doit aussi avoir été déci mo virtud y como pasión destructiva y si ve. Elle est sensible, dans l’incipit también constructiva. (V.R., A.V.) justi ficatif légitimant qu’on « di(se) au J. Opsomer, «Plutarch on the division of jourd’hui quelque chose des dames » — the soul», in R. Barney, T. Brennan on sait en effet que, plus largement, son § Ch. Britten (eds), Platon and the œu vre a contribué à répandre les idées Divided Self, Cambridge Univ. press, fé ministes dans les années 1630-1650, 2012, 311-330. et que les Apophtegmes comme les Ver Lo studio intende ricostruire la teoria tueux faicts des femmes (Amyot) ont dell’ani ma di Plutarco a partire dai ai dé l’affirmation du concept de vertu testi che affrontano il tema in maniera hé roïque au féminin. Dans le détail, il discor siva e non dialogica – le Questio sert de source, pour la récupération ni platoniche, La generazione dell’ani de « l’histoire secrète » de Solon, qui ma nel Timeo e La virtù morale – ma si part de Solon 10 avant de basculer dans appoggia anche su opere quali Il volto l’imaginaire et surtout fournit au per della luna e Il demone di Socrate. L’ana son nage fictif majeur, Praxorine, des li si segue due assi principali. Il primo traits d’Arétaphila. (F.F.) ri guarda il rapporto di continuità tra M. Pade, «The Fifteenth-Century Latin psi cologia e cosmologia, tra l’anima in Versions of Plutarch’s Lives: Exam di viduale umana e l’anima del mondo: ples of Humanist Translation», in J. la prima condivide in particolare la Glucker & C. Burnett (eds), Greek struttura della seconda e possiede come into Latin from Antiquity until the quest’ultima tanto una dimensione cine nineteenth century (Warburg Institute ti ca quanto una dimensione cognitiva. colloquia. 18), London, 2012, 171-186. Il secondo affronta invece il rapporto Questo saggio va ad aggiungersi a di Plutarco alla tripartizione platonica diversi altri rilevanti interventi che la

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 129-160 ISSN 0258-655X 150 Bibliography Section

studiosa ha dedicato alle traduzioni (l’ambition) est largement reconnue umanistiche plutarchee e alle pecu com me une caractéristique romaine, lia rità dell’arte versoria di diversi in mê me si, dans le corpus de Plutarque, terpreti, che nell’Umanesimo si sono elle est statistiquement davantage pré cimentati nel rendere in latino le bio sente dans les Vies grecques et joue un gra fie del Cheronese. In particolare, il rôle particulièrement important dans contributo delinea con efficacia il qua celles des héros spartiates. Il nous offre dro entro cui avviene la ricezione e la en suite une sorte de parcours historique fruizione del testo plutarcheo nel XV à travers la philotimia des Romains. secolo e specialmente in Italia, dove le Dé butant par Flamininus, il montre que Vite si affermano come una delle letture la philotimia de celui-ci est avant tout pre ferite e quindi tradotte dal greco con une ambition personnelle, qui lui fait maggiore frequenza: in questa note vole pré férer une paix signée sous son nom diffusione delle biografie del Cheronese à une victoire militaire remportée par e delle rispettive versiones gio ca un d’au tres (une attitude qui aurait pu être ruolo fondamentale l’opera del dotto bizantino Emanuele Crisolora e della fa vorable à la Grèce, si la philonikia des scuola che si raduna intorno al suo Grecs n’avait pas conduit celle-ci à sa magistero. Venendo alla parte del saggio pe rte). Poursuivant avec les Gracques, dedicata alle diverse tecniche versorie l’au teur voit chez eux une philotimia adottate dagli esegeti delle Vite, di d’or dre politique, assez naturelle en grande interesse e originalità risulta soi, mais dont l’excès s’avérera fatal. l’ana lisi dell’uso e riuso di termini e/o En ce sens, elle préfigure la crise de la espressioni tratti dai classici latini e im République, marquée par la philotimia pie gati nelle traduzioni plutarchee per de grands hommes comme César et ren dere con più efficacia e in una forma Pom pée, qui les pousse à se battre entre maggiormente accessibile al pubblico eux aux dépens de l’État. Toutefois, se dei lettori il lessico e il contenuto lon l’auteur, si l’acclimatation des Ro dell’originale testo greco. (S.A.) mains aux grands hommes ambitieux J. N. Pascal, « Plutarque de la Jeunesse. Plu a d’abord été destructive, elle les a fi tarque des Jeunes Demoiselles, Plutar na lement conditionnés pour accepter que Français… Quand Plutar que signi cette nouvelle forme de pouvoir et, dès fiait “dictionnaire biogra phique” à visée lors, être prêts pour la monarchie, con éducative (1760-1850) », in Plutarque de trairement à la Grèce, qui n’a pas sur l’Âge cl. au XIXe s., 173-189. vécu aux excès de philotimiai. (T.S.) Comme l’indique le titre, dans l’abon A. Pérez Jiménez, «Fatalismo, providencia dan te production de dictionnaires bio y responsabilidad humana en las Vidas gra phiques, entre 1750 et 1850, les diffé de Plutarco», in Harmonia, 697-707. rents «Plutarque de la jeunesse» («Plu Pérez Jiménez analiza el papel distin tar que des jeunes gens», «Plutarque guido con que ciertos héroes y estadistas des demoiselles», etc.), qui ne sont pas de la Vidas acometen sus empresas a loin de constituer une catégorie à part tenor de la religiosidad inhe rente a los en tière et, à l’évidence, une catégorie mismos y su enfoque de la concepción foisonnante du livre pédagogique de divina y de la fortuna. De este modo, los jeu nesse, ne conservent du Chéronéen personajes positivamente religiosos, de que le nom, synonyme de collection de eusébeia contrastada (como Fabio), hacen biographies. (F.F.) primar la responsabilidad de las acciones C. B. R. Pelling, «Plutarch on Roman humanas sin desdén de la divinidad; Philotimia», in Lash of Ambition, 55-68. mientras que los líderes sometidos a L’auteur commence par préciser qu’à una deisidaimonía negativa (el caso de l’époque de Plutarque, la philotimia Nicias es paradigmático) muestran una

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 129-160 Bibliography Section 151

pasividad en su inacción política, víctimas tonista sobre la Providencia divina, se de su miedo y superstición erróneos. En corresponden en buena medida con las síntesis, Plutarco acepta la existencia opiniones que los contemporáneos de de la Providencia y del Destino pero no Plutarco sostenían sobre estos fenóme el fatalismo : es la responsabilidad o la nos. (V.R., A.V.) irresponsabilidad de los dirigentes po J. Pinheiro, «O sentido de dike nas bio líticos la que, en última instancia, resul gra fias de Aristides e Catão Censor», ta determinante. Finalmente existe un in N., K., D., 41-51. número de personajes (entre otros, Te [«The meaning of dike in the biographies mís tocles o Alejandro) los cuales actúan of Aristides and Cato-the-Elder»] contra las manifestaciones divinas o las The biographic pair Aristides-Cato-the- readaptan a voluntad propia. (V.R., A.V.) Elder allows a comprehensive analysis A. Pérez-Jiménez, «ΝΟΜΟΣ como cri of the meaning of dike and other words terio de valoración ética en las Vidas with the same etymological root. Given Paralelas», in N., K., D., 5-21. the context in which these terms are En el esquema doctrinal de Plutarco, used, we propose to evaluate their value la justicia es reputada como la más di in shaping the profile of both characters vina de las virtudes humanas. La ley, as members of a community, and the su correlato esencial, comparece en ways in which Plutarch combines the la producción del Queronense como individual level of analysis with the categoría jurídico-filosófica y, asimis need for the society to identify and mo, como criterio literario para definir respect the principles related to dike. las características político-morales de [Published Abstract, slightly revised] un mandatario. De este modo, la aten A. Rodrigues, «Political reforms in the ción a legisladores como Licurgo, Solón Lives of Lycurgus and Numa: divine y Numa posibilita analizar la condición revelation or political lie?», in N., K., de la actividad legislativa. Por añadi D., 67-83. dura, una selección de testimonios re Se trata de un análisis de los pasajes per lativos a dirigentes de importancia re ti nentes de Plutarco que, en principio, vela la atención de los personajes sea ex plican las innovaciones legislativas a la justicia, sea a la conveniencia co de Licurco y de Numa como normas yuntural ; ya al respeto del nómos, ya sancionadas por inspiración divina. En a intereses estrictamente personales. rea lidad, es probable que nos hallemos (V.R., A.V.) ante una mistificación de índole política A. Pérez-Jiménez, «Plutarch’s Attitude cu ya práctica Plutarco no parece re towards Astral Biology», in Religious probar: el antecedente ideológico de and Philosophical Discourse, 159-170. tal asunción debería remitirse a Pla Mediante el análisis de ciertos pasa tón quien, en La República (389 c-d), jes pertenecientes a los Moralia (par plan tea la posibilidad ética de asumir ticularmente a Isis y Osiris ; y al Co una instrumentalización de estas carac mentario sobre los ‘Trabajos y los terísticas siempre que el objetivo sea Días’ de Hesíodo), el autor efectúa una noble, es decir, que redunde en bene propuesta de lectura renovada donde ficio de la ciudadanía. (V.R., A.V.) se patentiza la influencia astral (espe J.-M. Rohrbasser, « Les Délais de la Jus cialmente del sol y de la luna) que, al tice divine: la théologie noire de Jo de cir del Queronense, repercute en la seph de Maistre », in Plutarque de bio logía de plantas y de animales. En tal l’Âge cl. au XIXe s., 275-288. sentido, los planteamientos de Plutarco, Centrée sur la pensée de Joseph de sin contradecir sus convicciones de pla Maistre, cette communication rappelle

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 129-160 ISSN 0258-655X 152 Bibliography Section

d’abord le texte grec de base et décompose in volved in the developments of the phi la réfutation de la thèse épicu rienne lo sophical school and provided unique en sept étapes, puis dessine quelques testimony for conceptual issues that grands traits de réécriture, en insistant would only achieve definitive form in sur les ajouts dont chaque type (insérés Plotinus and Neoplatonism. As an ob dans le texte entre astérisques, en notes server, Plutarch was a sensitive chro de fin de texte, en notes de bas de page) nicler of events he experienced in a a une fonction spécifique, les premiers, less direct manner and often provided philosophiques, étant les plus intéressants. a more detached point of view about Après avoir sélectionné et examiné au the numerous religious practices and fil du texte les thèmes qui lui semblent currents that permeated the building of importants (« dogmatisme », « retar d », ancient pagan religion and the philoso « remords », « instrument », « exempla phical views of other schools. ri té », « transmission », « ordre », « pre Plutarch’s testimony therefore is essen— s cience » et « déterminisme »), J.-M. R. tial to reconstructing and understanding conclut en avançant la notion de « théo the philosophical and religious worlds dicée noire », entendant par là la con of late antiquity. The copious quotes or ception d’une Histoire déterministe fon allusions to his person and work in an dée sur la nécessité du mal. (F.F.) tiquity bear witness to his central im L. Roig Lanzillotta, «Introduction: Plu por tance in the philosophical map of tarch at the Crossroads of Religion an tiquity. Plutarch’s role in the history and Philosophy», in Religious and of ancient religiosity is as central as the Philosophical Discourse, 1-13 one he plays in the history of ancient Plutarch of Chaeronea, who was born phi losophy, since his testimony also to a wealthy family in 45ce, received the re veals itself to be essential for the best education at home and abroad. He assessment of numerous general and frequently traveled to Rome, Alexandria par ticular religious issues, as with phi and Athens; while in Athens he probably losophical issues. (L.L.) attended the lectures of Ammonius, who L. Roig Lanzillotta, «Plutarch’s Idea influenced his adoption of Platonism. of God in the Religious and Philoso However, he spent most of his life in his phical Context of late Antiquity», in hometown of Chaeronea, where he later Religious and Philosophical Discour founded a sort of philosophical school se, 137-150. or academy in which family, friends It is well known that in The Malice of and pupils could meet and discuss phi Herodotus (857F–858A), Plutarch re lo sophical issues. Due to his social jec ted Herodotus’ motto pan phthoneron provenance and education, he developed kai tarachodes and accused the historian a rich political career and social life in of blasphemy and malice. According to which he was acquainted with most of the the traditional interpretation, Plutarch prominent political and cultural figures was reacting against a view of the gods of the period. He is therefore a first-rate as “utterly envious and always ready witness to the cultural life of late antiquity. to confound us”. However, such an in The works of Plutarch, notably his ter pretation clearly misses the point Moralia but also his Lives, provide us of Plutarch’s criticism: first of all, the with exceptional evidence, since they tra ditional interpretation seems to rely cover both the insider and outsider on an over-interpretation of Herodotus’ perspectives. As a priest of Apollo at con ception of the divinity that interprets Del phi he witnessed pagan religion as “envious” (phthoneron), which we and ancient religious experience; as a may perhaps rather translate as “avari Midd le Platonist he was also actively cious, stingy”. In the second place, for a

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 129-160 Bibliography Section 153

thinker such as Plutarch who was so well bien se observa en Proclo un enfoque versed in the Timaeus and who had such más sistemático de carácter filosófico a refined and elevated view of the divine, (V.R., A.V.) the attack on Herodotus’ misconcep tion R. Scannapieco, «Mysteriodes -theologia; of the divinity—and his labeling Hero Plutarch’s fr. 157 Sandbach between dotus nota bene as blasphemous and Cultual Traditions and Philosophical malicious—must concern some more Models», in Religious and Philosophi fundamental aspect of the divinity than cal Discourse, 193-214. the sheer attribution of envy to god. Plutarch’s role in the history of an Taking this passage from The Malice cient religiosity is as central as the of Herodotus as a starting point, Roig one he plays in the history of ancient Lanzillotta illuminates numerous aspects phi losophy. One may even contest of Plutarch’s role as an interpreter, a the separation of philosophy and reli theologian and a philo sopher. Comparing gion in his work, claiming that such a this work with other Plutarchean passages distinction reveals itself to be arti ficial. that comment on the divine helps us to This idea may perhaps also be extrapo clarify both Plutar ch’s point of criticism la ted to the whole historical period of and his view of the divinity. Plutarch’s la te antiquity, in which the confluence views on the divine should be placed in the between philosophy and religion or re context of the Middle Platonists’ reception of Timaeus 29E, the locus classicus for li gion and philosophy marks off spiri the definition of God’s goodness and his tua lity . This blend comes to the fore in implicit creative activity. More specifi Ro sario Scannapieco’s chapter. The cally, his views should be placed in the ana lysis of fr. 157 Sandbach is the star con text of Middle Platonic theodicy that ting point for a wide-ranging study of denied any divine responsibility for the Plu tar ch’s view of myth and his eclectic appearance of evil or imperfection in the approach to its interpretation. It shows realm of creation. In echoing and com Plu tar ch’s interest in the theme of con menting upon Plato’s words, Middle Pla ju gal love, which was also present in tonists were mainly concerned with God’s his dialogue On Love and which also creative impulse, the stainless goodness un der lies the Egyptian myth in On Isis behind it and the impossibility of making and Osiris. The author uncovers close him responsible for anything imperfect ideological connections between the that resulted from his activity. (L.L.) texts by analyzing the rhetorico-formal structures of the fragment in which Plu G. Roskam, «Socrates and Alcibiades: A notorious skandalon in the later tarch seems to have suggested a mystico- Platonist tradition», in Religious and re ligious interpretation of reality (L.R.) Philosophical Discourse, 85-100. T. A. Schmitz, «Sophistic Philotimia in La conexión entre un filósofo y un es Plutarch», in Lash of Ambition, 69-84. ta dista constituye una circunstancia tra Establece la diferencia que existía para dicional en la cultura universal. Sucede Plutarco entre la ambición propia de un que el consabido amor que Sócrates al personaje y la ambición que el autor bergó por Alcibíades fue un tópico lar personalmente denomina sofística, para gamente explorado habida cuenta la cuya definición proporciona un listado idiosincrasia de los protagonistas. Con la de elementos que caracterizarían esta presente contribución, Roskam estudia la competitiva conducta. Esta sofística valo ración del mencionado tópico en dos philotimia se desarrollaba en ámbitos pla tonistas tardíos : Plutarco y Proclo. pú blicos e institucionalizados, pero La interpretación al respeto de ambos tam bién en niveles privados. A través au tor es resulta esencialmente acorde, si de una serie de pasajes de la obra plu

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 129-160 ISSN 0258-655X 154 Bibliography Section

tar quea se expone este fenómeno y el autoridades) en función de su fiabilidad modo en que Plutarco lo conocía y en documental. (V.R., A.V.) ten día que debía ponerse en práctica N. Simões Rodrigues, «‘Least that’s what (V.R., A.V.) Plutarch says’. Plutarco no cinema», A. Setaioli, «The Daimon in Timarchus’ in As artes, 139-272. Cosmic Vision (Plu. De Genio Socr. 22, [«‘Least that’s what Plutarch says’. 590B-592E)», in N., K., D., 109-119. Plutarch in cinema»] In the Timarchus’ myth in Plutarch’s De Many of the movies that the film industry genio Socratis, the daimon is conceived has devoted to Antiquity, especially as the highest part of the human soul, to Classical Antiquity, owe their ba currently referred to as “intellect” sic arguments to the works of Plu (νοῦς) and wrongly believed to be in tarch. Such is the case of Julius Caesar (J. ter nal. By contrast, in two speeches L. Mankiewicz, 1953), Spartacus (S. pre ceding and following the myth (by Kubrick, 1960), Cleopatra (J. L. Man Simmias and Theanor, respectively), ckiewicz, 1963), Alexander (O. Stone, the daimon is a superior entity assisting 2004), and 300 (Z. Snyder, 2007). This each man in multiple ways. This is pa per analyzes the relationship between Plu tarch’s way to harmonize Plato’s the scripts of these films and Plutarch’s diffe rent pronouncements concerning texts, both the Vitae and the Moralia, the personal daimon –an attempt anti con cluding that the work of the author ci pating later developments found in of Chaeronea was as fundamental to Plotinus. [Published Abstract] Western culture during the medieval Ma de F. Silva, «Registo e Memória. Arria times and modernity, as it is in no e Plutarco sobre Alexandre», in the contemporary period. (D.L.) J. A. Ramos & N. Simoens Rodrigues N. Simões Rodrigues, «Nomos e kosmos (eds), Mnemosyne kai Sophia, Coim na caracterização do António e da bra, 127-148 (https://bdigital.sib. Cleópatra de Plutarco», in N., K., D., uc.pt/jspui/handle/123456789/134) 101-107. Con base en sendos textos relativos a la [«Nomos and kosmos in the characte figura de Alejandro (el histórico de la rization of Plutarch’s Antony and Cleo Anábasis de Alejandro, de Arriano, y el patra»] biográfico de la Vida de Alejandro plu Although words like nomos and kos tar quea), la autora se propone indagar mos are almost absent in Plutarch’s en el manejo respectivo que ambos es bio graphy of Antony and Cleopatra, cri tores efectuaron sobre las fuentes the concepts they imply support the orales, los documentos escritos, los au thor’s construction of the Life. The testimonios plásticos y arqueológicos “bigamist” relationship between An pertinentes. Esta pesquisa permite ve to ny, Octavia and Cleopatra as well ri ficar una comparación sobre los pos as Antony’s uncontrollable passion for tu lados metodológicos y la posición Cleo patra are examples of the absence que, en consecuencia, adoptan Arriano of law and order in Mark Antony’s life. y Plutarco. Así las cosas, Arriano pri [Published Abstract] ma los criterios historiográficos y P. Simões Rodrigues, «Um percurso te estético-literarios para conformar su mático no tempo: As Vidas Paralelas composición, con distinción de los de Plutarco e a pintura europeia do testimonios creíbles de los invero século xvi ao século xix. Primeriras símiles. Por su parte, Plutarco, de un abordagens», in As artes, 69-138. modo más general, jerarquiza las fuen [«A thematic path in time: Plutarch’s tes disponibles (citando profusión de Parallel Lives and the European paint

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 129-160 Bibliography Section 155

ing from the 16th to the19th century. personnages retenus, P. A. S. souligne First Approaches»] l’essentiel pour son propos : leur ambition The chapter analyzes, in a long-term d’inscrire la philosophie dans l’exercice perspective, Plutarch’s Parallel Lives de leurs responsabilités publiques -si as a thematic source for the history of diffé rent qu’en soit le niveau. Il examine European painting. The analysis is carried en suite les motivations de chacun, en out by two complementary approaches: s’appuyant sur leur carrière et leurs the contribution that themes based on écrits, d’abord pour Marc-Aurèle (à par literary sources gave, on the one hand, tir des Pensées), puis pour Arrien (en to the representation of an idea of history accor dant une importance particulière à and, on the other, to the consolidation and l’Ana base), enfin pour Plutarque (pour prestige of the history of painting between le quel sont mises en avant les Vies, qui the 16th and 19th centuries. (D.L.) par ticipent de l’ambition de contribuer à P. J. Smith, « “Notre cher Plutarque”. créer l’esprit nouveau voulu par Trajan Ma dame de Charrière lectrice de Plu en haussant la sensibilité morale de la tarque », in Plutarque de l’Âge cl. au classe politique). Il rappelle enfin que XIXe s., 115-129. l’am bition n’est pas sans provoquer des P.J.S. souligne l’importance qu’a eue tensions internes : Plutarque s’expose, en Plu tarque pour Isabelle de Charrière cultivant de hautes amitiés romaines, à (1740-1805) au point de lui inspirer, à la des contraintes peu compatibles avec la fin de sa vie, en réponse à l’annon ce d’un philosophie, l’ambition d’Arrien, comme abrégé ds Vies, le projet (jamais réalisé) le montre sa carrière, n’est pas exempte d’une « extension de celles de ces vies d’un esprit de compétition et de succès qui qui me paroissent les plus intéressantes », s’écarte de l’esprit de service prôné par à commencer par celle de Cicér on. La Épictète, gloire et immortalité reviennent supériorité qu’elle lui accorde « tient sans doute au fait qu sa lecture peut constamment dans les Pensées. C’est s’appliquer à la vie (mondaine) con cependant la noble ambition qui, dans les temporaine » et il lui sert de référence trois cas, l’a emporté. (F.F.) pour juger figures et événements de son P. A. Stadter, «Plutarch cites Horace: temps. Il est aussi une des principales (Luc. 39.5)», in Harmonia, 781-793 sour ces d’information sur l’Antiquité, (Reprinted, with minor changes, in un modèle de discours historique, fait P. A. Stadter (2015), Plutarch and his de modération et tout en nuances, un Roman readers, Oxford, 138-148). exem ple de réussite stylistique (elle le It is generally assumed that Plutarch’s lit en traduction française ou en an reference to Horace, Epistles 1.6 at Luc. glaise), une aide thérapeutique, voire 39.5, his only explicit citation of a Latin une source de consolation. Mais, si poet, cannot have been based on direct sa « lecture partagée meuble une so reading. This article, building on an cia bilité », elle ne peut susciter cette earlier one about an allusion to Cicero’s « intimité heureuse » que procurent les Lucullus in Luc. 42.4 (Stadter in Studies classiques français, La Fontaine, Mo devoted to Professor Frederick E. Brenk lière et Mme de Sévigné. (F.F.) 2010, 407-418) argues on the basis of P. A. Stadter, «The Philosopher’s Am Plutarch’s knowledge of Latin, and of bition: Plutarch, Arrian and Marcus the context of the citation in Plutarch’s Aurelius», in Lash of Ambition, 85-97 Lucullus, that Plutarch had indeed read (Reprinted, with minor changes, in Horace directly, probably recording P. A. Stadter (2015), Plutarch and his the passage in his notes for later use. Roman readers, Oxford, 199-211). An appendix argues that, in Plutarch’s Après avoir rappelé en introduction fa mous statement about his knowledge ce qui factuellement peut unir les trois of Latin in Dem. 2.4, he claims that he

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 129-160 ISSN 0258-655X 156 Bibliography Section

is able to appreciate Latin style. Two ome rico, ma è in grado di utilizzarlo, examples (Caius Gracch. 17.9; Caes. attra verso frequenti rimandi letterari, 50.3-4) show Plutarch’s sensitivity to per rafforzare il suo intento satirico nella features of Latin style and desire to dimostrazione della superiorità degli capture them in Greek. (T.D.) animali sugli esseri umani, eviden ziata sul P. A. Stadter, «Staying up late: Plutarch’s piano fisico, etico e intellettivo: più degli reading of Xenophon», in F. Hobden, uomini, gli animali si avvicinerebbero Ch. Tuplin (eds.), Xenophon. Ethical a caratteristiche che le stesse divinità Prin ciples and Historical Enquery, posseggono. Il riferimento omerico al Leiden-Boston, Brill, 2012, 43-62. cavallo di Achille, in particolare (19, 408- Partant du constat qu’il existe entre 417), dimostra come l’animale, cui Era Plu tarque et Xénophon de grandes si aveva dato il dono della parola (dono che mi litudes en tant qu’auteurs, penseurs avrebbe perso a causa delle Erinni), sia et citoyens engagés, cet article très bien por tatore di un ideale di giustizia in tutto structuré examine, dans l’ensemble du coe rente con la categoria del ‘giusto’ in corpus plutarquéen, les mentions (cita Omero. (M.D.S.) tions ou allusions) que le Chéronéen fait des œuvres de l’Athénien (dont il était M. Tröster, «Plutarch and mos majorum manifestement très familier), en par in the Life of Æmilius Paullus», ticulier le Banquet, la Cyropédie, les AncSoc. 42 (2012) 219-254. Mémorables, l’Economique, la Consti Plutarch’s Aemilius gives a favourable tution des Lacédémoniens, l’Anabase portrait, praising the subject’s quali ties et le Cynégétique. Il ressort de cette as a wise and traditionalist statesman at ana lyse détaillée que Xénophon est home and a philanthropic and philhellenic bien plus qu’un modèle stylistique ou benefactor abroad. Although his policies une source historique pour Plutarque, are characterised as distinctly ‘conser mais que le Chéronéen se réapproprie va tive’, Aemilius succeeds in winning l’œu vre de son illustre prédécesseur uni versal popularity, thus bridging the di et la transforme pour l’inclure dans vide between Senate and people. Only his son propre discours et l’adapter au unruly troops, led astray by demagogues, contexte de son époque, usant à cette fin temporarily disturb the general consen de techniques telles que la construction sus. Throughout the narrative, Aemilius intertextuelle, l’usage d’exempla, la strives to educate the people around réappropriation de citations, la mise en him: his sons and his peers, Roman contexte d’informations ciblées, le re citizens and soldiers, foreign peoples and cours à des phrases ou des images par leaders. While many of these features ticulièrement frappantes pour soute nir sa can also be found in the wider historical propre argumentation, les allusions à des tradition, Plutarch adapts them to suit his anecdotes bien connues, et bien d’autres. own interests and objectives. The same À cet égard, selon l’auteur , Plutarque applies to his representation of Roman se révèle un digne repré sentant de la political life in the Middle Republic, Renaissance grecque des deux premiers which sometimes resembles a golden age siècles de notre ère. (T.S.) of ancestral virtue and at other times is M. Tozza, «Animali parlanti e giustizia characterised by decay and indiscipline. in Plutarco ed Omero», in N., K., D., Aemilius upholds and enforces the 191-200. political and moral standar ds cherished Nel dialogo Bruta animalia ratione uti by Plutarch and by the Roman tradition Plutarco non solo dimostra una co of mos maiorum. (Published abstract, noscenza ampia e approfondita del testo slightly shortened) (T.D.)

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 129-160 Bibliography Section 157

M. Vamvouri Ruffi, «Physical and Social Wie kann man das Verhältnis von Plu Corruption in Plutarch», in P. Bosman tarch und Apuleius bestimmen? Van (ed.), Corruption and integrity in ancient der Stockt konzentriert sich auf das je Gree ce and Rome (Acta classica. Supple wei lige Interesse an der ägyptischen mentum. 4.). Pretoria, 2012, 131-150. Göttin Isis. Zwar bleibt der Leser nach Dada la complejidad de la noción de seiner Analyse mit keinerlei klar iden “corrupción” en la Antigüedad, la ti fizierbaren Parallelaussagen zurück, autora limita el estudio al campo se die einen Weg von Plutarch zu Apuleius mántico del verbo διαφθείρω en las zeich nen ließen. Die kontextuelle Deu obras de Plutarco, en las que indica tung des gemeinsamen Interesses an corrupción tanto física como moral o Isis erweist die beiden Darstellungen política. De este modo, se sirve Plu aber ein Ausloten zweier Hemisphären tar co de metáforas fisiológicas de la in nerhalb des einen mittelplatonischen corrupción moral y, asimismo, reco Koordinatensystem. (R.H-L) mienda remedios fisiológicos y socia les. Mientras que la corrupción físi ca G. Van Kooten, «A Non-Fideistic In conduce a la enfermedad y a la muerte, terpretation of pistis in Plutarch’s y la corrupción moral aparece descri Writings: The harmony between pistis ta como una enfermedad, no la trata and knowledge», in Religious and Phi de ese modo necesariamente en el ca losophical Discourse, 215-234. so de corrupción política. Plutarco la «In this paper I would like to challenge desaprueba pero en ocasiones la con the straightforward applicability of mo sidera oportuna, especialmente cuando dern categories such as “belief”in the atañe a una actuación por el bien de la study of ancient philosophers such as ciudad y no concierne directamente a Plu tarch». Sur ces bases, après avoir sus ciudadanos. (V.R., A.V.) ad mis [216] l’existence de passages où L. Van der Stockt, «Economia in heaven l’on peut trouver ce que nous appelons and on earth. Plutarch’s nomos un sens “fidéiste” –affirmation sur la between rhetoric and science», in N., quelle, tout en souscrivant à la décla K., D., 203-213. ra tion de principe initiale, j’aurais El profesor Van der Stockt examina los pour ma part quelques réserves : voir testimonios en los cuales el Queronense F. Frazier, « Philosophie et religion estudia la importancia mayor de la dans la pensée de Plutarque. Quelques religión y de la filosofía comparadas réflexions autour des emplois du mot con las medidas legislativas en el πίστις », Études platoniciennes V (2008) ámbito de la política. Sucede que, al 41-61, recensé in Ploutarchos n.s. 9 decir del platonista Plutarco (y como (2011/2012) 124) – G.v.K. se livre à se despr ende de Sobre la cara de la luna un réexamen systématique des sens de 927 A-B), el cosmos es responsabilidad πίστις (dont le principe de classement de un creador, el soberano Zeus, artista pourrait être plus nettement indiqué), y orfebre cuya ‘persuasión’ (la cual se soit successivement « The “Religious” juzga un agente divino) se impone a las Mea ning of Πίστις » (217-222, à propos leyes de la naturaleza y debiera consti de De frat. amor. 483C, De Is. 377B-C, tuir sencillamente una recurso modélico De superst. 170F, Amat. 756A-C, De Is. para los legisladores. (V.R., A.V.) 359F-360A, Non posse 1101A-C, De L. Van der Stockt, «Plutarch and Apu adul. 35E-F); «Two Forms of Πίστις: leius; Laborious Routes to Isis», in Misfounded Faith and Strengthened W. H. Keulen (ed.), Aspects of Apu Faith» (223-224, avec Qu. conv. 624A et leius Golden Ass. The Isis Book. A Sept. sap. Conv. 151F, auxquels s’ajou Collection of Original Papers, Gro te Arist. Rhet. 1355b35); « Πίστις as ningen, 2012, 168-182. Persuasion » (224-226, avec De garr.

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 129-160 ISSN 0258-655X 158 Bibliography Section

503D, Adv. Col. 1114D-E); «Πίστις in nese ha affrontato anche in altre opere: the Sense of Trust» (226-227, avec Sept. in particolare, l’indagine condotta sulla sap. conv. 160E, Non posse 1099D, Qu. quaestio dedicata alla baskania pone in conv. 627E, Sept. sap. conv. 164D); risalto il legame - tematico e lessicale - «The Philosophical Use of πίστις and con i frammenti 1 e 2 (detti “Tyrwhitt”) πιστεύειν» (227-233: Cons. ad ux. 610B- nei quali Plutarco tratta delle passioni D, 611D, 612A-B; fr. 178; De Alex. fort. che toccano il corpo e/o l’anima. Anche 328A-B; Qu. conv. 627E; Sept. Sap. conv. il malocchio ha una dimensione etica/ 164D, Amat. 756B, 756C-757C, 763B-C, in teriore fortemente legata a quella fi 764A, 763E, De Is. 369B-E). (F.F.) sica/esteriore: l’aspetto dello jettatore, P. Volpe Cacciatore, «La giustizia del infatti, altro non è che una proiezione saggio: una polemica di Plutarco con del male e della malvagità che inquina tro gli Stoici», in N., K., D., 153-160. la sua psyche. (S.A.) La studiosa rilegge la concezione plu S.A. Xenophontos, «Plutarch’s Compo tar chea della Giustizia attraverso un sitional Technique in the An Seni Respu serrato confronto con le interpretazioni blica Gerenda Sit: Clusters vs. Pattern», che di Dike si ritrovano in Platone, AJPh 133 (2012) 61-91. Aristo tele e specialmente nel pensiero La presencia de grupos de pasajes stoi co. In particolare, in base all’ esegesi paralelos en An seni respublica gerenda dei frammenti 35-39, viene evidenziato sit y Non posse suaviter vivi secundum il valore politico della giustizia - intesa Epicurum desvela, de acuerdo con las co me la più alta delle virtù civiche - e il teo rías de la escuela de Lovaina, un rappor to che essa ha con la vita della fuerte «cluster» que, en opinión de la po lis e con le leggi che tale vita sono autora, podría estar indicando que, chia mate a regolare. Una visione poli de las obras estudiadas, la primera ti ca della giustizia, quella proposta dal obra tomó como fuente a la segunda. Che ronese, evidentemente lontana da Por otra parte, el elaborado patrón quella stoica, che pone costantemente de pensamiento compartido por An in risalto come Dike sia invece legata seni respublica gerenda sit y Praecepta a quella legge naturale capace di tenere insieme l’intera umanità. (S.A.) gerendae reipublicae no constituye un «cluster» sino que Plutarco reutiliza un P. Volpe Cacciatore, «“Cicalata sul fascino mis mo material ajustándolo a diferentes vulgarmente detto jettatura”: Plutarch, con textos, de forma que ambas obras se Quaestio convivalis 5. 7», in Religious complementan. (V.R., A.V.) and Philosophical Discourse, 171-180. A partire da una ricognizione degli echi A. Zadorojnyi, «Mimesis and the (plu) classici presenti nell’opera settecentesca past in Plutarch’s Lives», in J. Grethlin Cicalata sul fascino volgarmente detto & C. B. Krebs (eds), Time and Narra jettatura dell’intellettuale e giurista tive in ancient historiography. The napoletano Valletta, un trattato che “plupast” from Herodotus to Appian, susci tò tra l’altro l’approvazione di Be Cambridge, 2012, 175-198. ne detto Croce, la studiosa indaga il fe A.Z applique à l’œuvre de Plutarque nomeno della baskania come descritto le concept de «plupast», par quoi il da Plutarco nella quaestio. Nella faut entendre ce qui, dans un ouvrage tratta zione di un argomento così pe historique, renvoie à un passé antérieur cu liare quale il malocchio il registro à celui du récit, et l’inscrit dans la sto rico s’intreccia costantemente con perspective de la Seconde Sophistique quello filosofico-etico. Nello scritto plu en mettant en avant les notions, centrales tarcheo, inoltre, è possibile cogliere la à cette époque, d’exemplarité et de mi ripresa di temi e immagini che il Chero mesis. Il en résulte un exposé en trois

ISSN 0258-655X Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 129-160 Bibliography Section 159

par ties, la première passant en revue Per. 2.4, prétendument en contradiction l’en semble des emplois de mimesis chez avec Per. 2.2 (181); or, dans les deux Plu tarque, la deuxième proposant une passa ges, la construction et donc le ty pologie des passages qui signalent sens sont différents : ζῆλον … ἀγωγὸν l’imitation par un homme d’un autre εἰς μίμησιν fait de l’imitation l’action qui lui est historiquement antérieur à laquelle on est porté, ἠθοποιοῦν οὐ (“intradiegetic mimesis”) distinguant τῇ μιμήσει τὸν θεατήν, ἀλλὰ τῇ ἱστορίᾳ les cas (A) où cette imitation est reven τοῦ ἔργου τὴν προαίρεσιν παρεχόμενον di quée par le ou les personnage(s), (B) la présente comme le moyen par lequel où les gens de l’époque interprètent le bien provoque cette action et forme ain si son comportement, (C) où ce le caractère; la notion essentielle juge ment est porté par le narrateur ou dans cette seconde phrase est celle de sa source. Enfin, la troisième analyse προαίρεσις, le choix volontaire, fruit un cas d’intertextualité, la description d’une connaissance de l’action, oppo du camp fastueux des Pompéiens sée à une simple réaction imitative du (Pomp. 72, 5-6), qui serait inspirée du spectateur, et étape nécessaire d’un récit d’Hérodote après Platées (9, 80, passage à l’acte délibéré : elle renvoie 1 et 9, 82, 1-2). Tout en reconnaissant à l’anthropologie de Plutarque, telle que ce motif est devenu un topos -ce qui qu’il l’expose e.g. in Cor. 32,7. (F.F.) fragilise le rapprochement-, A.Z le pousse E. Zanin, « Dramatisation et Moralisation néanmoins en arguant que “the plupast des Vies dans la tragédie moderne », in yields an occasion for metahistorical Plutarque de l’Âge cl. au XIXe s., 69-87. mimesis between comparable situations” L’importance de Plutarque comme (195) et suggère la création par là d’un sour ce de sujets tragiques à partir de la parallèle entre César et Pausanias, dont Cléo pâtre captive de Jodelle étant bien le relais (“the intertextual bridge”) serait con nue, E.Z. se propose d’« esquisser Alexandre, lui-même placé dans une des hypothèses pour expliquer cette in situation compa rable et modèle de César fluence, qui tient sans doute au grand et plus encore de Pompée. L’auteur de succès que connut l’œuvre de Plutarque, ces lignes avoue peiner à ne pas voir là d’abord dans ses versions latines et en une surinterprétation abusive, entraînée suite dans la traduction d’Amyot » (69), par la thématique du volume. Mais, plus mais qui peut tenir aussi à la forme généralement –et c’est un défaut que et à la structure même des Vies. Elle risquent tous les ouvrages thématiques de en prend pour exemple Antoine (qui ce genre– c’est le prisme du “plupast” et pose en particulier la question de la le cadre large de la réflexion sur l’iden metabasis, 70-76) et César (pour lequel tité grecque qui frustrent quelque peu le est examiné le problème de la causalité, spécialiste de Plutarque, car ils amènent 76-79). Revenant sur Antoine (79 sq), à ne plus tenir assez compte ni des E.Z essaie enfin de montrer comment contextes particuliers (importants dans la les Moralia (De sera, De fato, De fortu deuxième partie), ni de l’anthropologie de na) ont contribué à fonder dans un pre Plutarque (essentielle pour sa conception mier temps une morale de la tragédie, de la mimesis morale). mo rale ambiguë qui révèle une causalité En annexe, je voudrais profiter de ce ré complexe (81), mais tend à se simplifier à su mé pour esquisser une explication du par tir des années 1630 et à évoluer dans contraste entre historia et mimesis de le sens d’une plus grande clarté. (F. F.)

Ploutarchos, n.s., 13 (2016) 129-160 ISSN 0258-655X (Página deixada propositadamente em branco) Constitution for the International Plutarch Society

1. Purpose of the Society. The Society exists to further the study of Plutarch and his various writings and to encourage scholarly communication between those working on Plutarchan studies. 2. Organization. The Society is constituted of national sections formed by the members of the Society living in each country. The national sections may function as independents units, with their own officers, constitutions and by-laws. 3. Duties of the Officers. The President is the official head of the Society and is responsible for planning and implementing programs to further the Society’s goals. His chief duty is to see that regular international meetings are planned. The responsibility for hosting and organizing the details of the meetings belongs to the national society hosting the meeting. 4. The President of the Society is selected by the heads of the national sections from among their own number, for a term of three years. The Editor of Ploutarchos & of Ploutarchos, n.s., the Secretary-Treasurer, and the President-Elect are likewise chosen by the heads of the national sections for a term of three years. The terms of the Editor and Secretary-Treasurer may be renewed. The heads of the national sections serve as an advisory board to the President. 5. The President-Elect assists the President, and succeeds automatically to the Presidency at the end of his three-year term. The outgoing president will remain as Honorary President for the following period of three years. 6. The Editor of Ploutarchos is responsible for the preparation and production of Ploutarchos (electronic Bulletin) and Ploutarchos, n.s. and arran- ges for its distribution, either directly to members or through the national sections. The Editor and the President jointly appoint the Book Review Editor. 7. The Secretary-Treasurer, who may be identical with the Editor, is responsible for the general correspondence of the Society, for maintaining the membership list, and for collecting dues and disbursing money for expen- ses. The chief expense is expected to be connected with the distribution of Ploutarchos, n.s. 8. Amendments. This constitution may be amended, or by-laws added, by a majority vote of the national representatives. XIth International Congress of the International Plutarch Society. The Dynamics of Intertextuality in Plutarch (University of Fribourg, Switzerland)

1) From 10 to 13 May 2017, the University of Fribourg (Switzerland) will host the XIth of the IPS. The conference will focus on the dynamics of intertextuality in Plutarch. Its aim is to explore the various aspects and functions of intertextuality in the works of Plutarch (Parallel Lives and Moralia) from a literary, historical, philosophical, moral, religious and scientific perspective. The conference is open to the members of the International Plutarch Society and to any person interested in the topic, from the academic world or the general public, as well as to PhD students and junior researchers working on Plutarch or on intertextuality. 2) Organizers: Thomas Schmidt (Fribourg); Maria Vamvouri Ruffy (Lausanne); Rainer Hirsch-Luipold (Bern). 3) Scientific board:Mark Beck (South Carolina); Aristoula Georgiadou (Patras); †Françoise Frazier (Paris X - Nanterre); Delfim Leao (Coimbra); Chris Pelling (Oxford); Aurelio Pérez Jimé- nez (Málaga); Geert Roskam (Leuven); Paola Volpe Cacciatore (Salerno). 4) Topics: It is widely recognized that Plutarch’s works aim to bring the readers to reflect upon and thus to improve their own existence and way of life. It is also well known that this educational goal is achieved by constant hints of, or references to, philosophers, historical and mythical figures, authors and traditions that Plutarch invites the reader to (re)discover. In so far as they integrate this rich historical, literary, philosophical, religious, medical and more widely scientific heritage, Plutarch’s works are a mine of knowledge of the past. In this perspective, intertextuality is an indispensable part of the study of his works. The conference will focus on the various aspects and functions of intertextuality in Plutarch. In their abstracts and communications, the participants will be asked not only to indicate the aspect of intertextuality they are interested in, but also to specify the functions of intertextuality, interdiscursivity, intratextuality or intergenericity, used as interpretative tools. I. Aspects of Intertextuality A. In his works, Plutarch uses specific intertextual devices such as quotation, reference, allusion, pastiche and intertextual play with various authors (Homer, Xenophon, Plato, etc.) as well as with various traditions presented by those authors. B. Plutarch’s works include frequent references or allusions to other texts within the Plutar- chean corpus. This intratextuality is a precious tool for the interpretation of anecdotes, exempla, traditions, arguments, terminology, etc. C. At places, Plutarch’s texts closely follow certain types of discourse without referring to a specific author or text. In such cases, it is preferable to speak of interdiscursivity, i.e. about the presence of medical, religious, judicial and political discourse in Plutarch’s texts. These discourses disclose themselves in the use of specific lexical fields, metaphors, comparisons, etc. D. Plutarch’s works make use of, or reference to, different so-called literary genres (intergenericity). By integrating or gesturing towards one or several of these genres within a specific work, Plutarch enriches his texts as an author (auctorial genericity). II. Functions of Intertextuality A. The educational goal and the rhetoric of proof: to what extent do references, quotations or allusions to specific texts, discourses or literary genres, work for Plutarch’s educational program and for his argumentation? It becomes increasingly clear that Plutarch reworks the material he uses in order to adjust it to his educational/argumentative goal which may even include twisting the meaning of – for instance originally Stoic – terminology. B. The construction of the Self: a) to what extent does a specific aspect of intertextuality de- pict and emphasize self-representation and self-exploration? Plutarch uses intertextual material not only to construct an image of himself – as a person, an author, a priest, a philosopher and so forth - but also to create a certain vision of the intellectual and social community. b) Does Plutarch’s allusiveness create an impression of the ideal reader that the real reader may feel flattered by or inspired to emulate? C. The delight of the reader: how does intertextuality promote the delight and the pleasure of the interlocutor or the reader? D. The memory of the reader: this deals with reception and the dynamics of Plutarch’s intertextuality that the reader himself constructs. Which Plutarchean allusions does the reader use in order to construct the intertextual links in cases where intertextuality is not clearly indicated by the author? E. The constitution of the text itself: to what extent are intra- and intertextuality necessary to resolve critical problems concerning the textual transmission of Plutarch’s works? 5) Registration: The registration for the congress will start in December 2016. All practical information (programme of the congress, hotel bookings, registration fees, etc.) will be com- municated at that time. Scholarly Journal of the International Plutarch Society VOLUME 13 (2016) • ISSN 0258-655X

UNIVERSIDAD DE MÁLAGA. SPAIN

VOLUME 13 (2016) UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY. LOGAN, UTAH, USA