LIFE OF PLUTARCH. AS, in the progress of life, we first pass through scenes of innocence, peace, and fancy, and afterwards encounter the vices and disorders of society; so we shall here amuse ourselves a while in the peaceful solitude of the philosopher, before we proceed to those more animated, but less pleasing objects he describes. Nor will the view of a philosopher's life be less instructive than his labours. If the latter teach us how great vices, accompanied with great abilities, may tend to the ruin of a state;—if they inform us how Ambition attended with magnanimity, how Avarice directed by political sagacity, how Envy and Revenge, armed with personal valour and popular support, will destroy the most sacred establishments, and break through every barrier of human repose and safety; the former will convince us that equanimity is more desirable than the highest privileges of mind, and that the most distinguished situations in life, are less to be envied than those quiet allotments, where science is the support of Virtue. Pindar and Epaminondas had, long before Plutarch's time, redeemed, in some measure, the credit of Baotia, and rescued the inhabitants of that country from the proverbial imputation of stupidity. When Plutarch appeared, he confirmed the reputation it had recovered. He shewed that genius is not the growth of any particular soil; and that its cultivation requires no peculiar qualities of climate. Cheronea, a town in Boeotia, between Phocis and Attica, had the honour to give him birth. This place was remarkable for nothing but the tameness and servility of its inhabitants, whom Antony's soldiers made beasts of burthen, and obliged to carry their corn upon their shoulders to the coast. As it lay between two seas, and was partly shut up by mountains, the air, of course, was heavy, and truly Baotian. But situations as little favoured by nature as Charonea have given birth to the greatest men; of which the celebrated Locke and many others are in stances. Plutarch himself acknowledges the stupidity of the Baotians in general; but he imputes it rather to their diet than to their air: for, in his treatise on Animal Food, he intimates, that a gross indulgence in that article, which was usual with his countrymen, contributes greatly to obscure the intellectual faculties. It is not easy to ascertain in what year he was born. Ruauld places it about the middle of the reign of Claudius; others, towards the end of it. The following circumstance is the only foundation they have for their conjectures. Plutarch says, that he studied Philosophy under Ammonius, at Delphi, when Nero made his progress into Greece. This, we know, was in the twelfth year of that Emperor's reign, in the consulship of Paulinus Suetonius and Pontius Telesinus, the second year of the Olympiad 211, and the sixty-sixth of the Christian Era. Dacier observes that Plutarch must have been seventeen or eighteen at least, when he was engaged in the abstruse studies of philosophy; and he, therefore, fixes his birth about five or six years before the death of Claudius. This, however, is bare sup position; and that, in our opinion, not of the most probable kind. The youth of Greece studied under the philosophers very early; for their works, with those of the poets and rhetoricians, formed their chief course of discipline. But to determine whether he was born under the reign of Claudius, or in the early part of Nero's reign, (which we the rather believe, as he says himself, that he was very young when Nero entered Greece :) to make it clearly understood, whether he studied at Delphi at ten, or at eighteen years of age, is of much less consequence, than it is to know by what means, and under what auspices, he acquired that humane and rational philosophy which is distinguished in his works. Ammonius was his preceptor; but of him we know little more than what his scholar has accidentally let fall concerning him. He mentions a singular instance of his manner of correcting his pupils. Our master (says he) having one day cbserved that we had indulged ourselves too luxuriously at dinner, at his afternoon lecture, ordered his freedman to give his own son the discipline of the whip, in our presence; signifying, at the same time, that he suffered this punishment, because he could not eat his victuals without sauce. The philosopher all the while had his eye upon us, and we knew well for whom this example of punishment was intended." This circumstance shows, at least, that Ammonius was not of the school of Epicurus. The severity of his discipline, indeed, seems rather of the Stoic cast; but it is most probable, that he belonged to the Academicians; for their schools, at that time, had the greatest reputation in Greece. It was a happy circumstance in the discipline of those schools, that the parent only had the power of corporal punishment: the rod and the ferula were snatched from the hand of the petty tyrant: his office alone was to inform the mind: he had no authority to dastardize the spirit: he had no power to extinguish the generous flame of freedom, or to break down the noble independency of soul, by the slavish, debasing, and degrading application of the rod. This mode of punishment in our public schools, is one of the worst remains of barbarism that prevails among us. Sensible minds, however volatile and inattentive in early years, may be drawn to their duty by many means, which shame, and fears of a more liberal nature than those of corporal punishment, will supply. Where there is but little sensibility, the effect which that mode of punishment produces is not more happy. It destroys that little though it should be the first care and labour of the preceptor to increase it. To beat the body is to debase the mind. Nothing so soon, or so totally abolishes the sense of shame; and yet that sense is at once the best preservative of virtue, and the greatest incentive to every species of excellence. Another principal advantage, which the ancient mode of the Greek education gave its pupils, was their early access to every branch of philosophical learning. They did not, like us, employ their youth in the acquisition of words: they were engaged in pursuits of a higher nature; in acquiring the knowledge of things. They did not, like us, spend seven or ten years of scholastic labour in making a general acquaintance with two dead languages. Those years were employed in the study of nature, and in gaining the elements of philosophical knowledge from her original economy and laws. Hence all that Dacier has observed concerning the probability of Plutarch's being seventeen or eighteen years of age when he studied under Ammonius, is without the least weight. The way to mathematical and philosophical knowledge was, indeed much more easy among the ancient Greeks, than it can ever be with us. Those, and every other science, are bound up in terms, which we can never understand precisely, till we become acquainted with the languages from which they are derived. Plutarch, when he learned the Roman language, which was not till he was somewhat advanced in life, observed that he got the knowledge of words from his knowledge of things. But we lie under the necessity of reversing his method; and before we can arrive at the knowledge of things, we must first labour to obtain the knowledge of words. However, though the Greeks had access to science without the acquisition of other languages, they were, nevertheless, sufficiently attentive to the cultivation of their own. Philology, after the mathematics and philosophy, was one of their principal studies; and they applied themselves considerably to critical investigation. A proof of this we find in that Dissertation which Plutarch hath given us on the word ", engraved on the Temple of Apollo at Delphi. In this tract he introduces the scholastic disputes, wherein he makes a principal figure. After giving us the various significations which others assigned to this word, he adds his own idea of it; and that is of some consequence to us, because it shews us that he was not a polytheist." says he, Thou art! as if it were , Thou art one. I mean not in the aggregate sense, as we say, one army or one body of men composed of many individuals; but that which exists distinctly must necessarily be one; and the very idea of being implies individuality. One is that which is a simple Being, free from mixture and composition. To be one, therefore, in this sense, is consistent only with a nature entire in its first principle, and incapable of alteration or decay." So far we are perfectly satisfied with Plutarch's creed, but not with his criticism. To suppose that the word should signify the existence of one God only, is to hazard too much upon conjecture; and the whole tenor of the heathen theology makes against it. Nor can we be better pleased with the other interpretations of this celebrated word. We can never suppose, that it barely signified if; intimating thereby, that the business of those who visited the temple was enquiry, and that they came to ask the Deity if such events should come to pass. This construction is too much forced; and it would do as well, or even better, were the interpreted, if you make large presents to the God, if you pay the priest. Were not this inscription an object of attention among the learned, we should not at this distant period of time, have thought it worth mentioning, otherwise, than as it gives us an idea of one branch of Plutarch's education. But as a single word, inscribed on the Temple of Apollo at Delphi, cannot but be matter of curiosity with those who carry their enquiries into remote antiquity, we shall not scruple to add one more to the other conjectures concerning it. We will suppose then, that the "was here used, in the Ionic dialect, for, I wish. This perfectly expressed the state of mind of all that entered the temple on the business of consultation; and it might be no less emphatical in the Greek than Virgil's Quanquam O! was in the Latin. If we carry this conjecture farther, and think it probable, that this word might, as the initial word of a celebrated line in the third book of the Odyssey, stand there to signify the whole line, we shall reach a degree of probability almost bordering on certainty. The verse we allude to is this: Ει γαρ εμοι γοσσευδε θεοι δυναμιν παραθειευ! "O that the Gods would empower me to obtain my wishes!" What prayer more proper on entering the temple of the Gods, particularly with the view of consulting them on the events of life. If it should be thought that the initial word is insufficient to represent a whole verse, we nave to answer, that it was agreeable to the custom of the ancients. They not only conveyed the sense of particular verses by their initial words, but frequently of large passages by the quotation of a single line, or even of half a line; some instances of which occur in the following Lives. The reason of this is obvious. The works of their best poets were almost universally committed to memory; and the smallest quotation was sufficient to convey the sense of a whole passage. These observations are matters of mere curiosity, indeed; but they have had their use for they have naturally pointed out to us another instance of the excellence of that education which formed our young philosopher. This was the improvement of memory, by means of exercise Mr. Locke has justly, though obviously enough, observed, that nothing so much strengthens this faculty as the employment of it. The Greek mode of education must have had a wonderful effect in this case. The continual exercise of the memory, in laying up the treasures of their poets, the precepts of their philosophers, and the problems of their mathematicians, must have given it that mechanical power of retention, which nothing could easily escape. Thus Pliny tells of a Greek called Charmidas, who could repeat from memory the contents of the largest library The advantages Plutarch derived from this exercise appear in every part of his works. As the writings of poets lived in his memory, they were ready for use and application on every apposite occasion. They were always at hand, either to confirm the sentiments and justify the principles of his heroes, to support his own, or to illustrate both. By the aid of a cultivated memory too, he was enabled to write a number of cotemporary Lives, and to assign to each such a portion of business in the general transactions of the times, as might be sufficient to delineate the character, without repeated details of the same actions and negociations. This made a very difficult part of his work; and he acquitted himself here with great management and address. Sometimes, indeed, he has repeated the same circumstances in cotemporary lives; but it was hardly avoidable. The great wonder is, that he has done it so seldom. But though an improved memory might, in this respect, be of service to him, as undoubtedly it was, there were others in which it was rather a disadvantage. By trusting too much to it, he has fallen into inaccuracies and inconsistencies, where he was professedly drawing from preceding writers; and we have often been obliged to rectify his mistakes, by consulting those authors, because he would not be at the pains to consult them himself. If Plutarch might properly be said to belong to any sect of philosophers, his education, the rationality of his principles, and the modesty of his doctrines, would incline us to place him with the latter academy. At least, when he left his master Ammonius, and came into society, it is more than probable, that he ranked particularly with that sect. His writings, however, furnish us with many reasons for thinking, that he afterwards became a citizen of the philosophical world. He appears to have examined every sect with a calm and unprejudiced attention; to have selected what he found of use for the purposes of virtue and happiness; and to have left the rest for the portion of those whose narrowness of mind could think either science or felicity confined to any denomination of men. From the Academicians he took their modesty of opinion, and left them their original scepticism: he borrowed their rational theology, and gave up to them, in a great measure, their metaphysical refinements, together with their vain, though seductive, enthusiasm. With the Peripatetics, he walked in search of natural science, and of logic; but, satisfied with whatever practical knowledge might be acquired, he left them to dream over the hypothetical part of the former, and to chase the shadows of reason through the mazes of the latter. To the Stoics, he was indebted for the belief of a particular Providence; but he could not enter into their idea of future rewards and punishments. He knew not how to reconcile the present agency of the Supreme Being with his judicial character hereafter; though Theodoret tells us, that he had heard of the Christian religion, and inserted several of its mysteries in his works. From the Stoics too, he borrowed the doctrine of fortitude: but he rejected the unnatural foundation on which they erected that virtue. He went back to Socrates for principles whereon to rest it. With the Epicureans he does not seem to have had much intercourse, though the accommodating philosophy of Aristippus entered frequently into his politics, and sometimes into the general economy of his life. In the little states of Greece, that philosophy had not much to do; but had it been adopted in the more violent measures of the Roman Administration, our celebrated Biographer would not have had such scenes of blood and ruin to describe; for emulation, prejudice, and opposition, upon whatever principles they might plead their apology, first struck out the fire that laid the commonwealth in ashes. If Plutarch borrowed any thing more from Epicurus, it was his rational idea of enjoyment. That such was his idea, is more than probable; for it is impossible to believe the tales that the Heathen bigots have told of him, or to suppose that the cultivated mind of a philosopher should pursue its happiness out of the temperate order of nature. His irreligious opinions he left to him, as he had left to the other sects their vanities and absurdities. But when we bring him to the school of Pythagoras, what idea shall we entertain of him? Shall we consider him any longer as an Academician, or as a citizen of the philosophical world? Naturally benevolent and humane, he finds a system of divinity and philosophy perfectly adapted to his natural sentiments. The whole animal creation he had originally looked upon with an instinctive tenderness; but when the amiable Pythagoras, the priest of Nature, in defence of the common privileges of her creatures, bad called religion into their cause ;-when he ought to soften the cruelty that man had exercised against them, by the honest art of insinuating the doctrine of transmigration, how could the humane and benevolent Plutarch refuse to serve under this priest of Nature? It was impossible. He adopted the doctrine of the Metempsychosis. He entered into the merciful scheme of Pythagoras, and, like him, diverted the cruelty of the human species, by appealing to the selfish qualities of their nature, by subduing their pride, Hist. Nat. lib. vii. cap. 24. Nothing of Plutarch's is now extant, from which we can infer, that he was acquainted with the Christian religion. and exciting their sympathy, while he shewed them that their future existence might be the condition of a reptile. This spirit and disposition break strongly from him in his observations on the elder Cato. And as nothing can exhibit a more lively picture of him than these paintings of his own, we shall not scruple to introduce them here: "For my part, I cannot but charge his using his servants like so many beasts of burden, and turning them off, or selling them when they grew old, to the account of a mean and ungenerous spirit which thinks that the sole tie between man and man is interest or necessity. But goodness moves in a larger sphere than justice. The obligations of law and equity reach only to mankind, but kindness and beneficence should be extended to creatures of every species; and these still flow from the breast of a well-natured man, as streams that issue from the living fountain. A good man will take care of his horses and dogs, not only while they are young, but when old and past service. Thus the people of Athens, when they had finished the Temple called Hecatompedon, set at liberty the beasts of burden that had been chiefly employed in the work, suffering them to pasture at large, free from any other service, It is said, that one of these afterwards came of its own accord to work, and, putting itself at the head of the labouring cattle, marched before them to the citadel. This pleased the people, and they made a decree, that it should be kept at the public charge so long as it lived. The graves of Cimon's mares, with which he thrice conquered at the Olympic games, are still to be seen near his own tomb. Many have shewn particular marks of regard, in burying the dogs which they had cherished and been fond of; and amongst the rest, Xantippus of old, whose dog swam by the side of his galley to Salamis, when the Athenians were forced to abandon their city, and was afterward buried by him upon a promontory, which to this day is called the Dog's Grave. We certainly ought not to treat living creatures like shoes or household goods, which, when worn out with use, we throw away; and were it only to learn benevolence to humankind, we should be merciful to other creatures. For my own part, I would not sell even an old ox that had laboured for me; much less would I remove, for the sake of a little money, a man grown old in my service, from his usual lodgings and diet; for to him, poor man ! it would be as bad as banishment, since he could be of no more use to the buyer than he was to the seller. But Cato, as if he took a pride in these things, tells us, that when consul, he left his war-horse in Spain, to save the public the charge of his conveyance. Whether such things as these are instances of greatness or littleness of soul, let the reader judge for himself." What an amiable idea of our benevolent philosopher! How worthy the instructions of the priest of Nature! How honourable to that great master of truth and universal science, whose sentiments were decisive in every doubtful matter, and whose maxims were received with silent conviction! * Wherefore should we wonder to find Plutarch more particularly attached to the opinions of this great man? Whether we consider the immensity of his erudition, or the benevolence of his system, the motives for that attachment were equally powerful. Pythagoras had collected all the stores of human learning, and had reduced them into one rational and useful body of science. Like our glorious Bacon, he led Philosophy forth from the jargon of schools, and the fopperies of sects. He made her what she was originally designed to be, the handmaid of Na ture! friendly to her creatures, and faithful to her laws. Whatever knowledge could be gained by human industry, by the most extensive inquiry and observation, he had every means and op portunity to obtain. The priests of Egypt unfolded to him their mysteries and their learning: they led him through the records of the remotest antiquity, and opened all those stores of science that had been amassing through a multitude of ages. The Magi of Persia co-operated with the priests of Egypt in the instruction of this wonderful philosopher. They taught him those higher parts of science, by which they were themselves so much distinguished, astronomy and the system of the universe. The laws of moral life, and the institutions of civil societies, with their several excellencies and defects, he learned from the various states and establishments of Greece. Thus accomplished, when he came to dispute in the Olympic contests, he was considered as a prodigy of wisdom and learning: but when the choice of his title was left to him, he modestly declined the appellation of a wise man, and was contented only to be called a lover of wisdom.t Shall not Plutarch, then, meet with all imaginable indulgence, if, in his veneration for this great man, he not only adopted the nobler parts of his philosophy, but (what he had avoided with regard to the other sects) followed him too in his errors? Such, in particular, was his doctrine of dreams! to which our biographer, we must confess, has paid too much attention. Yet, absolutely to condemn him for this, would, perhaps, be hazarding as much as totally to defend him. We must acknowledge, with the elder Pliny, Si exemplis agatur, profecto paria fiant; or, in the language of honest Sir Robert de Coverly, "Much may be said on both sides." However, if Pliny, whose complaisance for the credit of the marvellous in particular was very great, could be doubtful about this matter, we of little faith may be allowed to be more so. Plutarch, in his Treatise on Oracles, has maintained his doctrine by such powerful testimonies, that if any regard is to be paid to his veracity, some attention should be given to his opinion. We shall therefore leave the point, where Mr. Addison thought proper to leave a more improbable doctrine, in suspense. Yet When Zeno consulted the oracle in what manner he should live, the answer was, that he should inquire of the dead. Assiduous and indefatigable application to reading made a con siderable part of the Greek education; and in this our biographer seems to have exerted the greatest industry. The number of books he has quoted, to which he has referred, and from Hist. Nat. lib. x. cap. Val. Max. lib, viii. cap. 15. Val. Max. b. viii. cap. 7. 75. xiii which he has written, seems almost incredible, when it is considered that the art of printing was not known in his time, and that the purchase of manuscripts was difficult and dear. His family, indeed, was not without wealth. In his Symposiacs, he tells us, that it was ancient in Chæronea; and that his ancestors had been invested with the most considerable offices in the magistracy. He mentions in particular his great-grandfather Nicarchus, whom he had the happiness of knowing; and relates, from his authority, the misfortunes of his fellowcitizens, under the severe discipline of Antony's soldiers. His grandfather Lamprias, he tells us, was a man of great eloquence, and of a brilliant imagination. He was distinguished by his merit as a convivial companion; and was one of those happy mortals, who, when they sacrifice to Bacchus, are favoured by Mercury. His good-humour and pleasantry increased with his cups; and he used to say, that wine had the same effect upon him, that fire has on incense, which causes the finest and richest essences to evaporate. Plutarch has mentioned his father likewise; but has not given us his name in any of those writings that are come down to us. However, he has borne honourable testimony to his mem ory; for he tells us, that he was a learned and a virtuous man, well acquainted with the philosophy and theology of his time, and conversant with the works of the poets. Plutarch, in his Political Precepts, mentions an instance of his father's discretion, which does him great honour. "I remember," says he, "that I was sent, when a very young man, along with another citizen of Charonea, on an embassy to the proconsul. My colleague being, by some accident, obliged to stop in the way, I proceeded without him, and executed our commission. Upon my return to Charonea, when I was to give an account in public of my negociation, my father took me aside, and said, my son, take care that in the account you are to about to give, you do not mention yourself distinctly, but jointly with your colleague. Say not, I went, I spake, I executed; but we went, we spake, we executed. Thus, though your colleague was incapable of attending you, he will share in the honor of your success, as well as in that of your appointment; and you will avoid that envy which necessarily follows all arrogated merit." Plutarch had two brothers, whose names were Timon and Lamprias. These were his associates in study and amusement; and he always speaks of them with pleasure and affection. Of Timon in particular he says, "Though Fortune has, on many occasions, been favourable to me, yet I have no obligations to her so great as the enjoyment of my brother Timon's invariable friendship and kindness." Lamprias too he mentions as inheriting the lively disposition and good-humour of his grandfather, who bore the same name. Some writers have asserted that Plutarch passed into Egypt. Others allege, that there is no authority for that assertion; and it is true, that we have no written record concerning it. Nevertheless, we incline to believe that he did travel into that country; and we found our opinion on the following grounds. In the first place, this tour was a part of liberal education among the Greeks; and Plutarch, being descended from a family of distinction, was therefore likely to enjoy such a privilege. In the next place, his treatise of Isis and Osiris shews that he had a more than common knowledge of the religious mysteries of the Egyptians; and it is therefore highly probable, that he obtained this knowledge by being conversant amongst them. To have written a treatise on so abstruse a subject, without some more eminent advantages than other writers might afford him, could not have been agreeable to the genius, or consistent with the modesty of Plutarch. However, supposing it doubtful whether he passed into Egypt, there is no doubt at all that he travelled into Italy. Upon what occasion he visited that country, it is not quite so certain ; but he probably went to Rome in a public capacity, on the business of the Charoncans. For, in the life of Demosthenes, he tells us, that he had no leisure in his journey to Italy to learn the Latin language, on the account of public business. As the passage here referred to affords us further matter of speculation for the life of Plutarch, we shall give it as we find it. "An author who would write a history of events which happened in a foreign country, and cannot be come at in his own, as he has his materials to collect from a variety of books, dispersed in different libraries, his first care should be to take up his residence in some populous town which has an ambition for literature. There he will meet with many curious and valuable books; and the particulars that are wanting in writers, he may, upon inquiry, be supplied with, by those who have laid them up in the faithful repository of memory. This will prevent his work from being defective in any material point. As to myself, I live in a little town; and I choose to live there, lest it should become still less. When I was in Rome, and other parts of Italy, I had not leisure to study the Latin tongue, on account of the public commissions with which I was charged, and the number of people who came to be instructed by me in philosophy. It was not, therefore, till a late period in life that I began to read the Roman authors." From this short account, we may collect, with tolerable certainty, the following circum stances: In the first place, Plutarch tells us, that while he was resident in Rome, public business and lectures in philosophy left him no time for learning the Latin language; and yet, a little before, he had observed, that those who write a history of foreign characters and events, ought to be conversant with the historians of that country where the character existed, and the scene is laid but he acknowledges, that he did not learn the Latin language till he was late in life, because, when at Rome, he had not time for that purpose. We may, therefore, conclude, that he wrote his Morals at Rome, and his Lives at Charonea. For the composition of the former, the knowledge of the Roman language was not necessary: |