The Lives of the Noble Grecians and Romans - Plutarch Crassus - Assignment Example

Plutarch Crassus Introduction What was the main purpose of Plutarch, when he wrote biographical reflections aboutthe strong military leaders? Did he want to appreciate or to appraise the leaders? No, Plutarch wanted to show that even the strongest personalities and the greatest politicians and rulers of the world can be a perfect example of moral degradation. It is a kind of ethical and moral lesson, which is taught by the ancient philosopher to the contemporaries. The readers should achieve virtue after having read the biographies of the great politicians. Moreover, sometimes it is necessary to take into account inappropriate behavior of the great ancient leaders and it would be better to focus on their strengths and not on their vices. There is no need to focus on the biography of Crassus if not to consider moral and ethical implications provided by Plutarch in this biography. There is a lot of incongruence and the biography of Crassus is rather imbalanced. The way Plutarch describes Crassus head, which is served to the Parthian king is a way of ambitious depiction of the negative side of glory. There are two main drawbacks, which Crassus has: the first one is his ambition and the second one is avarice. The Life of Crassus Plutarch is a magnificent bibliographer. The lives of ancient Greeks are highly informative and the personalities, who were described by Plutarch, are extraordinary and leading people of the ancient times. The main feature of bibliographical discussions by Plutarch is the reflection of his personal opinion. The Life of Crassus is evidently considered from a negative perspective. On the example of Crassus Plutarch intends to teach a moral lesson to his readers. The main negative feature of Crassus was his avarice. Moreover, this vice was dominant over all other vices, because the other vices could be crossed by the vice of avarice (Plutarch, The Life of Crassus). This claim was positioned by Plutarch in the beginning of biography of Crassus. Therefore, the readers consider Crassus from a negative perspective. Other virtues of Crassus are opposed to the main vice of the main character. Plutarch underlines the main vice of Crassus in an intensive manner (Zadorojniy, 1997). Otherwise, the readers would not be so much concerned about avarice as the main vice of Crassus. In such a way, Plutarch positions greed as the main destructive feature of Crassus. Still, Crassus is positioned as a kind man and we cannot claim that this character is bad to the bones. He is a kind person and a talented politician of Rome. He shows his openness and hospitality. His talent of the speaker cannot be denied. Crassus managed to talk to the public eagerly (Konrad, 1994). He often helped people in time and thus people relied on him greatly. Moreover, Plutarch positions kindness of this politician as one of the main virtues. He also claims that with the help of his eagerness to help others, Plutarch managed to retain his power in Rome. We can see that Crassus lend money to other people, he lends a helping hand to people, who need his support and help them even in the court. He takes care of other people attentively. The fact that people liked Plutarch, underlines the main feature of ancient leader or politician, which contributes much to his power, is popularity (Bonta, 2005). Still, for making good to his people, Crassus wants to get a payback from other people. The most noticeable point is that Plutarch opposes goodness of the nature of Crassus to his ability to remain a good person. Moreover, his greed is often interfered with his virtues and unfortunately it overweighs his virtues. “and he used to lend money to his friends without interest, but he would demand it back from the borrower relentlessly when the time had expired, and so the gratuity of the loan was more burdensome than heavy interest” (Plutarch, p. 321). We can see that he helped others, but they had to pay a too high price for it. Nevertheless, all attempts of Plutarch to help others resulted in his evident greediness. Plutarch underlines political inconsistencies of Crassus. He is often involved in quarrels; his strength was only in his popularity among people. An overall positioning of Crassus as a greedy man indicates the fact that his virtues are often absorbed by his gluttony. Greed destroyed the life of Crassus. He was very much concerned about his own personal enrichment. Crassus even dies because of his greediness. Moreover, Crassus is much concerned about potential military victory (Konrad, 1994). He was not directed by his pure mind. Plutarch claims that Crassus ignored any piece of advice of his generals. Therefore, The Life of Crassus is a set of moral lessons given to the readers. The first lesson may be considered as the following one: there is no need to strive only for triumph and glory, because life is the most important thing. Moreover, it should be noted that the most valuable thing for any human being is life itself. It is necessary for Crassus to be much concerned about a personal well-being he does not even think about the destiny of his soldiers (Plutarchs Lives of Nicias, Crassus, Aratus and Theseus). The main drawback of Crassus was that he did not care much about the people around him and he used his soldiers only to reach his goal. The second lesson should be found in the following issue: there are no answers to the questions, which arise in life. It is impossible to think about the results of all activities of a human being. Life is a flux of events, which cannot be stopped. We can see that during the last days of his life Crassus ignored pieces of advice from other people. In such a way, he died sooner than it could be. Unfortunately, a popular politician had a short-sighted mind (Clough and Plutarch, 1932). This drawback of the main character described by Plutarch informs the readers about the necessity to become philosophers and gain their own experience, but listen to people around them as well. There was a need to have an open mind in order to listen to pieces of advice from other people. Consequently, it should be noted that there is a need for people to thank for what they have and be satisfied with the things they have. Moreover, Plutarch underlines the necessity to promote one’s strength. On the contrary, Crassus promoted his reckless ambitions and not his strength of mind. Soldiers of Crassus did not respect him for his reckless ambitions; they were much more concerned about their own lives and were afraid to lose them because of Crassus neglect. Moreover, Plutarch introduces an opposition of lives of Spartacus and Crassus. Plutarch introduces a theme of military opposition on the example of Spartacus. The latter is opposed to Crassus throughout the biography. Spartacus is an unprecedented warrior and fighter and he is a person, who is greatly involved in the revolt. There are two contradictory characters introduced by Plutarch. Especially these contradictions are evident on the example of Crassus. This main character has the barbaric and the Hellenized features; his character is mild and threatening at the same time. On the one hand, he is strong, but on the other hand he is helpless because of his short-sighted mind. Crassus reflects integrity of the Roman Empire. It is evident that this character is full of logic and is striving for the order. Moreover, Crassus plays a role of a mediocre strategist and he wants to position himself as a military leader and genius. Even when his head is served to the guests, they talk about him as about a kind of prey: We bring from the mountain A tendril fresh-cut to the palace, A wonderful prey. Consequently, Plutarch shows how easily a person may turn into a prey and there is no matter, whether you are a leader or an ordinary man, the death is equal for everyone. There are two roles played by Crassus: on the one hand this man is a political leader and on the other hand, he has an assigned role of a military leader, but he does not have an in-born charisma and ability to solve military conflicts himself (Stadter, 1992). Crassus wants to conquer Pompey, but at the same time the attempts of the politician are opposed to military talented Pompey (Crassus, Marcus Licinius). Spartacus is reflected as a better warrior and he can provide his army with relevant decisions. Unlike Crassus, Spartacus was killed in the battle. Still, a lucky fortune of Crassus does not characterize him as a perfect general, but as a gallant poser. Crassus is supposed to be a man, who put an end to war. Unfortunately, hundreds of lives were lost. Still, Crassus did not feel a lucky fortune himself. He was not assured in his almighty powers during military conflicts. He was much more concerned about the ovation and acknowledgement of his talent. Therefore, we can see that bibliography of Crassus is inconsistent and is saturated with personal reflections of Plutarch. Moreover, Plutarch as a biographer implies expressive writing strategies. In accordance with the commentary to the book about the life of Plutarch, “Light and shade are as necessary to a character as to a picture, but a man who devotes his energies for years to the study of any single persons life, is insensibly led into palliating or explaining away his faults and exaggerating his excellencies until at last he represents him as an impossible monster of virtue” (The Project Gutenberg eBook. Plutarchs Lives, Volume I, Introduction). Moreover, it should be noted that Plutarch avoids writing a complete chronicle of each persons life. The readers get informed about the most important and remarkable events from the lives of the greatest persons. The hero’s power, his life strategies and beliefs gradually disappear by the end of the biography. The main hero dies and the readers have a chance to analyze the value of his life. Conclusion Unfortunately, the biography of Crassus is not very accurate and the facts are often confused. Still, it should be noted that Plutarch shows, in such a way, a kind of cynicism toward the almighty hero of his biography. His main character has the same drawbacks as all other mortar human beings do. Nevertheless, the greatest attention of the society paid to his works can be explained by his representation of morality as the highest virtue, which is dominant above different vices. Plutarch is a great philosopher and a biographer and there is no doubt about it. Unfortunately, there is a lack of objectivity and too much attention is paid to unimportant details or the main vices of Crassus. Moreover, this ancient character is positioned as a vice and short-sighted strategist and is very often criticized for his lack of concern about and surplus ambition. Works cited 1. Bonta, Steve, 2005. The Rise of Caesarism: The Weakened Roman Republic Was Crushed by Julius Caesar, a Charismatic Military Leader Who Exploited His Popularity with a Roman People Who Desired Security above All Else. The New American, January 10, pp. 34+. 2. Clough, Arthur Hugh, and Plutarch, 1932. Plutarch: The Lives of the Noble Grecians and Romans. Translated by Dryden, John. New York: Modern Library. 3. Crassus, Marcus Licinius. [online]. Available at: http://www.roman-empire.net/republic/crassus.html [Accessed 15 December 2011]. 4. Jones, C. P., 1971. Plutarch and Rome. Oxford. 5. Konrad, C. F., 1994. Plutarchs Sertorius: A Historical Commentary. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. 6. Plutarch. The Life of Crassus. [online]. Available at: http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Plutarch/Lives/Crassus*.html [Accessed 15 December 2011]. 7. Plutarchs Lives of Nicias, Crassus, Aratus and Theseus. [online]. Available at: [Accessed 15 December 2011]. 8. Stadter, Philip A., ed. 1992. Plutarch and the Historical Tradition. New York: Routledge. 9. The Project Gutenberg eBook. Plutarchs Lives, Volume I.  [online]. Available at: http://history-world.org/plut1.pdf [Accessed 15 December 2011]. 10. Zadorojniy, V., 1997. Tragedy and Epic in Plutarch Crassus. Hermes, 125(2), pp. 169-182. Read More