Plutarchs - Rise and Fall of Athens - Book Report/Review Example

? Plutarch's - Rise and Fall of Athens Theseus is considered to have been a great Athenian king who achieved great respect for his role in the destruction of many foes who were considered to be either treacherous or evil. Because of this, he was considered to be a man of valor and an honored member of the Athenian royal family. Despite this, Theseus is a man who shows no respect for the women who come to his life because whereas he is a great leader, the fact the he brings women to his life and then suddenly abandons them is a vice which ends up hurting him eventually. In addition, while he ends up becoming the king of Athens after the death of his father Aegeus, making great reforms that ensure that the lives of his people is greatly improved, he eventually turns into a dictator, often seeking to protect his power from those whom he considers to be threats to his authority (Cooper, 2007). One would say that the treatment of the people of Athens by Theseus is not justified since as a leader, he is supposed to put the interests of his people first, regardless of their origin or class. The actions of Theseus are based on the assumption that only he should control all the means of production and that he alone should reap all the benefits at the expense of the people o Athens who are increasingly feeling the burden of his rule. He does not consider the fact that since they are denied their rights; the common people within Athens might at one time decide to rise up against his rule, with him losing his power. Instead of being cautious in his treatment of the Athenians, Theseus treats them with contempt, hence ensuring that he is the target of their continued dislike and hatred. The fact that he is a man of royal blood does not justify his actions towards the Athenians, because they also have rights within the state and the fact that he actively denies them these rights is a violation of his responsibility as a leader. Theseus eventually becomes unpopular in Athens and loses his power in death when he is thrown off a cliff by Lycomedes of Skyros. Thus comes to an end the life of a man who was a great hero and founder of the city of Athens but a failure in the administration of the state that he has created. Themistocles was an Athenian leader who, uncommonly for that time, did not come from the Athenian nobility and he was instead born of an obscure family. His mother was a woman from Thrace and because of this fact, Themistocles was considered by many Athenians, as he was growing up, as an outsider. This man who would later become an Athenian hero was not raised within Athens proper but within the so called immigrant section o the city. Burt while this may have been the case, Themistocles was a man who had a natural cunning and he put this characteristic to good use. He managed to persuade those boys who were born to the Athenian nobility to exercise with him in the immigrant district of the city and this ensured that he was able to bring down the barriers which made the immigrant community and the native Athenians distinct from each other. According to Plutarch, Themistocles was, from his childhood, preoccupied with becoming a leader within Athens, and because of this, he prepared for public life with a zeal which was uncommon for the boys of hi station in life. Even his teacher recognized the fact that he was a very ambitious boy and that it was because of this ambition that he would not end up being as insignificant as the other children who grew up with him in the immigrant district. The introduction of democracy in Athens ensured that men such as Themistocles were provided with the opportunity to take an active part in the public life of this city and the cunning and ambitious man took advantage of this opportunity to rise up in the ranks of the powerful people of Athens (Zadorojnyi, 2006). While he did all that he could to ensure that he gained power through his active wooing of the poor masses of Athens, he was also careful not to alienate the nobility of the city, thus, he had many friends among the latter who would serve him well throughout his later political career. However, while he was a great leader, Themistocles also had a number of vices which can be considered to be bad traits in leadership in the current world because not only was he cunning and played his rivals against one another, but he was also corrupt, often taking bribes in exchange of favors, and all these he did for the sake of fulfilling his own personal interests. Even after his ostracism from Athens, he would eventually go into the service of the Persian Empire where he would end up being the governor of the province of Magenta in Asia Minor. Aristides was an Athenian leader during the Persian wars who was a contemporary of Themistocles as well as the latter’s archrival in the politics of Athens. While it was a fact that these two leaders were rivals, they often showed great consideration towards each other and at times allied in matters which were for the good of their city. While this may have been the case, Aristides often portrayed himself to be the opposite of Themistocles so that where the latter was considered to be corrupt and unjust; he was portrayed as honest and just. While Themistocles gained most of his support from the poorer sections of the Athenian society, Aristides based most of his power on the nobility and it is this which ensured his success in the political life of Athens as well as his downfall (Hertzoff, 2008). One would suggest that he was of the belief that nobility were the natural leaders of the Athenian society because it is they who had the resources to be able to govern the city effectively. Without the nobility in society, then its very fabric would disintegrate, resulting in chaos. It can further be said that Aristides chose to gain most of his support from the nobility because of his belief that the commoners are wrong in their insistence that attempting to control the actions which were traditionally reserved for the ruling class were the best option for forging equality in society. However, the fact that he looked upon the commoners with contempt is a clear indication that despite being a man of valor in battle, he was not equipped sufficiently to take on the day to day problems of the common people of Athens. While this may have been the case, the reputation of Aristides as a just man was no exaggeration because of the fact that some of his own actions, despite being a hindrance to his political career did not deter him. An incident is given where a commoner once came to Aristides and asked him to help him write Aristides’ own name on a tablet for a vote that was meant to ostracize him. Another individual would most likely not have accepted to do so or would have instead written the name of his rival, but Aristides chose to oblige the commoner and promptly wrote his own name on the tablet. It was this vote that would eventually force him into exile and would lead to the end of his political career but not his public life. References Cooper, C. (2007). Making Irrational Myth Plausible History: Polybian Intertextuality In Plutarch's Theseus. Phoenix, 61(3), 212-233,392. Hertzoff, A. (2008). Eros and moderation in Plutarch's life of Solon. The Review of Politics, 70(3), 339-369,336. Zadorojnyi, A. V. (2006). Plutarch's Themistocles And The Poets. American Journal of Philology, 127(2), 261-292. Read More