Ambleside Online Plutarch's Life of Aemilius Paulus

study by Anne White

This term's Plutarch study is about Aemilius Paulus, usually called Aemilius. (If you're looking him up online, you might also try reversing the names. Even Plutarch occasionally reverses them.)

Did you ever notice that in many of Plutarch's lives, there's a second, often well-known, person that you need to know about to follow the story, and often a particular event such as a war that the story centers around? In the life of Fabius, you learn about Hannibal and the Punic wars; in Crassus, you read about Spartacus. This story follows the same pattern. The event is the Third Macedonian War, from 171 to 168 B.C.; and the second character is Perseus, who was the last king of Macedon until he was conquered by the Romans at the end of the war. In fact, in the history encyclopedia, Perseus gets his own entry, but Aemilius Paulus does not! Nevertheless, Plutarch gives Aemilius credit for the Roman victory, and praises him because "though he conquered so great and so rich a realm as that of Macedon [which gave Rome control over much of the Eastern Mediterranean], yet he would not touch, nor see any of the money."

One of the resources we have at our house is The Timechart History of the World, published by Third Millennium Press. If you have a similar timeline, now is the time to get it out and find the time period when the Roman Republic was starting to swell all over the other nations' colour bands. The shape of the Roman blob on our timeline  is quite different from the long, narrow stripe of Alexander the Great's empire (which seems to explode from nowhere and shows that his empire covered many countries but for a comparatively short time). The Roman blob starts out as a regular-sized "stripe" like most of the others, but suddenly begins to swell up around 300 B.C., and blots out most of the known world for about the next seven hundred years.

Looking back again at Alexander's empire, we can see the string of rulers who followed him as kings of Macedon, and Plutarch refers to several of these during the story. It's a little confusing because some of them share names.  The main ones for our purposes are Philip V and his son Perseus.

However, we won't get into the war with Perseus until Plutarch has introduced us properly to Paulus Aemilius.

Recommended Text

The notes are based on Dryden's translation. It can be found several places online; this one is fine. You can use another translation, but you will have to look up your own vocabulary.

Recommended Omissions

I found two sections that I thought could or should be omitted. The first is in the paragraph starting "What most annoyed the army was the want of water"; I would read only as far as "escaping from its confinement into the vacuum they afforded" and skip the whole rest of the paragraph.   (This will be part of lesson 5.)

The other is part of a paragraph that I would omit for reasons of length. In the paragraph starting "The Macedonians were always accounted great lovers of their kings," I would stop at "contained what was real and true" and skip the rest of the paragraph. This is at the end of lesson 8. Even Plutarch admits he is wandering a bit here.

------------------------------------------------------

LESSON ONE

Introduction

Plutarch begins this story of Paulus Aemilius in a very traditional way, with a family tree. Don't worry too much about all the details of his ancestors; the most important thing here is that he came from a family with a good reputation. (See the vocabulary note about Lucius Paulus.)

If you've done some of the previous studies about Rome, you may have looked up the ranks of the different Roman officials. From top to bottom, the governing officials were dictator (this position was filled only during times of crisis), consul, praetor, aedile, quaestor, and tribune.  (There was more than one of each at a time-two consuls, eight praetors, etc.)  There were also censors, who were usually ex-consuls. The first several lessons follow Paulus Aemilus through his positions as aedile, praetor (but a specially honoured praetor), and consul (twice). He had a second, separate position as an "augur," a special kind of fortune-telling priest. (The Random House College Dictionary defines it more formally as "one of a body of ancient Roman officials charged with observing and interpreting omens for guidance in public affairs.") Plutarch says that Aemilius took this job so seriously that he raised it to an art form.

He also took his role as military commander very seriously; Plutarch finds it noteworthy that he actually taught (instructed, coached) the soldiers under his command. So far we get a picture of someone definitely out of the ordinary; perhaps someone who raised being a Roman to an art form?

Vocabulary

patrician -- noble
Lucius Paulus -- an ancestor of Paulus Aemilius, who was co-consul with Fabius and died at Cannae (Plutarch refers to Lucius Paulus as Paulus Aemilius in his Life of Fabius).
Cannae -- a battle against the Carthaginians in 216 B.C., where the Romans were badly defeated
oratory -- the art of speech making
the vulgar -- the common people
aedile -- see note in introduction
augur -- see note
prodigies -- weird happenings
faults of inadvertency -- mistakes people (priests) might make through ignorance
laxity -- looseness in keeping the rules
give a precedent for remissness in important duties -- increase peoples' tendency to slip up in more important things
to ingratiate himself -- to make himself popular

Section to Read - From the beginning to "proper training and disciplining of the citizens."

Narration and Discussion

What characteristics distinguished Paulus Aemilius from other young men of his time?

Explain how Aemilius raised the position of augur to "one of the highest arts." As Christians, we are told to have nothing to do with divination and so might think his work was repulsive or dangerous; other people might just find the whole thing silly. Can you neverthless explain what positive aspects his attitude shows about his character?

More about Aemilius and the priests: how did he explain his worry about allowing laxity even in small religious matters? Do you think this is a good principle for our own lives? (For older students: might such attention to detail eventually become excessive legalism?)

In regard to the training of his army, Aemilius "esteemed victory over enemies itself but as an accessory to the proper training and disciplining of the citizens." (Remember that citizens were also soldiers.)    How was this an unusual belief for a Roman commander?

LESSON TWO - You Can't Keep a Good Man Down

Introduction

Plutarch continues the introduction to Aemilius and covers the years leading up to the war with Perseus.

The structure of this passage needs a little explaining. The first paragraph tells the story of how Aemilius and his army put down a Spanish uprising. At the end of the paragraph, Plutarch gets a little bit sidetracked into an explanation of Aemilius's marriages and who his daughters married (later on). Then, Plutarch says, back to the story: Aemilius is now consul and leads a battle against the Ligurians. He hopes to be made consul again, is somewhat disappointed by the results, but still finds lots to keep him busy.

Vocabulary and Notes

"The Romans were engaged in war with Antiochus the Great" - Because most of the Roman army was already tied up with another war, Aemilus (as praetor) was asked to lead troops against an uprising in Spain.

the advantage of the ground -- the best place to fight
there was barely enough left to answer his wife's dowry -- a modern-day equivalent would probably be "there was barely enough left to pay off the car lease."
Fabius Maximus, who was five times consul -- this is the Fabius we have studied previously
Scipio Africanus -- the general who defeated Hannibal, also discussed in the life of Fabius
cousin-german -- usually a first cousin; "german" here means "true, genuine"
their neighbourhood to the Romans -- their nearness to the Romans     
razed only the fortifications -- knocked down only the protecting walls
meeting with a repulse -- being rejected

Section to Read - From "Whilst the Romans were engaged in war" to "the most affectionate father in Rome."

Narration and Discussion

What were the acts most worthy of remark in Aemilius's first consulship? How did he react when he was passed over for a second consulship?

Why did the Romans not want to "utterly destroy the Ligurians?" How did they punish them instead?

Aemilius as homeschooling dad: describe the educational curriculum of the children of Aemilius. Is it anything like yours? (If you're not familiar with grammar, logic and rhetoric, you might be interested in researching them.)

Discuss these quotes:

"Proud of his virtue that kept him poor."

"History suggests a variety of good counsel of this sort, by the way, to those who desire to learn and improve."

Something to compare: Timoleon spent a long time out of the limelight as well, before he was called to lead a major battle. Do you think these times of waiting were useful in some way in preparing Timoleon and Aemilius for the things they were called to do later on?

LESSON THREE: THE FAMILY TREE OF PERSEUS

Introduction

In Plutarch's list of the rulers of Macedon (the beginning of the second paragraph of this section), skip over the first Antigonus and Demetrius; zero in on "Antigonus, called Gonatus." This Antigonus Gonatus had a son named Demetrius, who reigned only a short time, died, and left his son Philip as a boy king. Since boy kings need someone to help them rule (a regent), Philip's regent was his stepfather, a cousin to the late king, whose name was also Antigonus (also called Antigonus Doson). Plutarch explains what happened next: "At first they only styled him regent and general, but when they found by experience that he governed the kingdom with moderation and to general advantage, gave him the title of king."

Philip, the boy king who was temporarily replaced by his stepfather, "in his youth gave great hopes of equalling the best of kings...." but (after he came to rule himself) was beaten by the Romans. He afterwards prepared for war again, strengthening his army, gathering weapons-and then died suddenly. (Plutarch says Philip might have died of grief over the fact that he had had his own son Demetrius executed, because of a plot contrived by his other son Perseus.) (Yes, this is the third Demetrius mentioned here already; the Macedonians seemed to repeat names a lot.)

Perseus was called "mean" and "sordid." It is said that he lacked courage and was noted for his covetous character. It was even rumored that he might not be a true prince at all; that he might have been the son of palace servants (see Plutarch's explanation). At least that might have explained his seeming lack of princely character. However, in this section at least, he was also a very good commander, and he used what his father had stored up to gain some advantage over the Romans.

(You might want to look at a map of the ancient world when you get to the last paragraph of this lesson; look at Gaul and Illyria, and find the Danube and the Adriatic Sea. Gaul is a little confusing because sometimes (later on in history) it refers to the present-day country of France; in this case, it would be more a part of Germany if these Gauls lived near the Danube. Illyria is the area right across the Adriatic from Italy, now called Croatia.)

Vocabulary

their commanders - the Roman commanders
the remainder only of his father's routed forces - the Macedonian army had been defeated under the father of Perseus, Philip V
in his minority - with the king being under-age
cousin-german - first cousin
inconsiderable - not worth bothering about
corn - grain
calumnies - deceitfulness, treachery
a war by the by - just something to do to pass the time
irruption - invasion

Section to Read: From "This was the time, in public matters" to "by the shore of the Adriatic Sea."

Narration and Discussion

As the first two lessons gave us the background to Aemilius Paulus, the section tells the history of his enemy Perseus. Why did the Romans think it "scorn that Perseus should think himself an enemy fit to match the Romans?" (For older students: how does the Macedonian history that Plutarch tells explain Perseus's attitude?)

Why do you think Perseus was so successful in his first attempts against the Romans, if he was as cowardly and sordid as Plutarch says?

LESSON FOUR

Introduction

Success and leadership often seem to be a matter of attitude.  Aemilius Paulus, at the age of almost sixty, is unanimously chosen as consul for the second time, because Rome is in desperate need of a general who will act like a general. When he "lays it on the line" and tells the Romans that he has to be given total command, they quickly agree-they have nothing to lose, and the world to gain.  Perseus, on the other hand, begins to lose control, because he doubts his own ability to be in full authority.

Vocabulary

being advertised of these things -- hearing of these things
by favour or solicitation -- by choosing someone based on their campaigning skills, or on who their friends were
threescore -- sixty
importunity -- persistence
acceded -- agreed
they wanted a general -- they needed a general
to sue for consulship -- to run for consul
if they confided in him -- if they trusted him, had confidence in him
a happy issue -- a successful conclusion
ten thousand horsemen of the Basternae -- ten thousand cavalry soldiers from Gaul (the Gauls were noted for their skill in horsemanship)
professed soldiers -- professional soldiers
husbanded -- harvested

Section to Read: From "The Romans, being advertised of these things" to "sent against him with an army." (Just for length, you may want to read only to "as if it had belonged to someone else"; skip over the next bit; read this sentence, "Whereas Perseus, abounding in wealth, would not preserve himself, his children, and his kingdom, at the expense of a small part of his treasure; but chose rather to be carried away with numbers of his subjects with the name of the wealthy captive, and show the Romans what great riches he had husbanded and preserved for them" and stop there.)

Narration and Discussion

Why did Aemilius say that he didn't need to thank the people for choosing him as consul the second time? Explain the rules he set out in his speech. Why was he so adamant that he must be fully in charge? How did the people react to this? (See especially the last sentence of the paragraph.)  

Older students may be interested in studying what the Bible says about authority and obedience; Charlotte Mason's books also discuss these topics. If your students have read Laura Ingalls Wilder's Little Town on the Prairie, you may want to use the example found there of authority used or misused in the classroom (the story of the teacher Miss Wilder).

What general reasons does Plutarch give for the Romans' success against Perseus? How did the covetousness (stinginess) of Perseus end up being the one piece of good luck (vs. skill) that worked in Aemilius's favour? (What happened to the ten thousand horsemen Perseus planned to hire?) Discuss the saying that "empire was to be purchased by money, not money by empire." How does this line up with what the Bible says about the source and proper use of wealth? (Check out Psalm 50:10; also Psalm 112.)

LESSON FIVE

Introduction: The Battle of Pydna

The armies of Aemilius and Perseus meet at the foot of Mount Olympus. Perseus has four thousand cavalry soldiers and about forty thousand foot soldiers; the number of Roman soldiers is not given, but one of the Roman leaders, Scipio Nasica, said that his division had "three thousand Italians that were not Romans, and his left wing [consisted] of five thousand"; it appears that the Romans were somewhat outnumbered. (The second link below says that there were about 38,000 Romans and 44,000 Macedonians.) However, Aemilius seems to have been amazingly calm about that, and "lay still for some days" trying to find a way around, over, or through the mountain, to surround the Macedonians on the other side.

Links About the Battle

http://www.barca.fsnet.co.uk/pydna.htm
http://www.answers.com/topic/battle-of-pydna-1 (as well as giving general information, this page contains a chart comparing strengths, casualties, etc.)

Vocabulary

adversary -- enemy
For he had four thousand horse -- Perseus had four thousand calvary soldiers
phalanx -- a body of troops in close array
But he, in the meantime -- refers to Aemilius
Mount Olympus -- for photos of Mount Olympus, you might want to look at http://www.greecetravel.com, click on Macedonia. A Google search by Images will also bring up a number of photos.
Temple of Apollo -- also called the Temple of Zeus

Section to Read: From "Aemilius, coming against such an adversary" to "conveyed the whole army down into the country." Note recommended omission (from "Although there are some, indeed, who deny" to "But of this enough.")

Narration and Discussion

What does it mean that the Roman soldiers were too ready "to teach their general his duty?" How did Aemilius rebuke them? What is the duty of a soldier, according to Aemilius?

Explain the Romans' strategy for surrounding the Macedonian army.

LESSON SIX

Introduction

Plutarch stretches the story out a lot here, giving detailed descriptions of the arrival of the Romans at Pydna, the sacrifices Aemilius made, and what the troops looked like. Like a "wise pilot" or an orchestra conductor, Aemilius waits for the real battle to begin and then directs the action. And still it has only begun.

Vocabulary

stop before Pydna -- stay where he was, at Pydna
pitching his camp -- setting up his camp
phalanx -- soldiers in a  close formation
cast up -- can mean either to add up, or to throw (as in a shovelful of dirt). In this case, I believe "to cast up trenches" is a war maneuver in which you build fortifications of dirt as protection or to climb up on.
hecatomb -- a public sacrifice of 100 oxen

Section to Read: From "After this event, Perseus" to "two furlongs distance from the Roman camp."

Narration and Discussion

(There probably isn't a lot to discuss in this passage in terms of character or moral decisions. For something creative, you might want to interview Aemilius's second-in-command, Scipio Nasica, who seems to be the source of much of Plutarch's story; or write a report from his point of view.)

Compare the Roman and Macedonian reactions to the eclipse of the moon. Give a reason why Aemilius was "no novice in these things."

Discuss the ways that Aemilius showed wisdom as he led his troops.

LESSON SEVEN

Introduction

The battle continues, and the Romans have a real challenge: breaking through the porcupine of spears and shields called a phalanx. At first it seems that it can't be done, but a weakness does appear, helped by the fact that Perseus suddenly seems unavailable to lead the Macedonians.

Photo of a phalanx formation: http://www.ancientbattles.com/WAB_Macedonians/MacTactics00.htm

Plastic model set showing Macedonians with sarissas: http://www.plasticsoldierreview.com/Review.asp?manu=ZVE&code=8019
 
Vocabulary

dissembled -- ignored
basely -- in a cowardly manner
ensign, standard -- a flag (or something else raised on a pole) that represents a ruler or a specific group
sarissas -- lances up to 18 feet long
palisade -- fence made of stakes (as in a fort)
interstices -- gaps between things or parts
cohort -- in an ancient Roman legion, a division of 300 to 600 men
the chosen men -- refers to the Macedonians

Section to Read: From "The battle being begun" to "it was far in the night when they returned."

Narration and Discussion

Plutarch says that the force of the Macedeonian phalanx "consists in common action and close union." Describe how the Romans managed to break through the phalanx. Is there a lesson here for the body of Christ? See Romans 12:4,5; 1 Cor. 1:10; 1 Cor. 12:14, 27.

What are the two explanations given for Perseus's failure to lead his troops? Compare his actions with those of Aemilius.

LESSON EIGHT

Introduction

The tension in this passage comes from Aemilius's fear that he has lost his favourite son, Scipio, in the battle. Scipio does show up eventually, though, which allows his father to fully enjoy the victory over Perseus. Perseus "shows his true colours" in defeat, by blaming everyone else, telling sad stories to get money out of some Cretans, and killing those who criticize him.

Note on Scipio: There is a bit of confusion in Plutarch's story about exactly which Scipio we are talking about in this passage (and in earlier ones). Back in lesson 2, Plutarch said that Aemilius's younger son was adopted by "the son of Scipio Africanus, his cousin-german, and was by him named Scipio." That made it sound as if the older Scipio was the one who later defeated Hannibal in Africa, but it was in fact Aemilius's son who did so.

On this very critical webpage about Aemilius: http://www.barca.fsnet.co.uk/aemilius-paullus.htm, it is explained that Aemilius's son was "adopted by the son of Scipio Africanus and became P. Cornelius Scipio Aemilianus." (Older students may want to read more of the page and compare that view of Aemilius with Plutarch's view of him, both as written in his Life and in the comparison with Timoleon. For instance, Plutarch insists (in the comparison) that Timoleon and Aemilius both had a "reputation of having behaved themselves with an uncorrupted integrity in all the affairs they managed....".)

A biography of Scipio is available here: http://scipio-aemilianus-africanus.biography.ms/ .

Vocabulary

requisite -- necessary
diminution -- diminishment
immolation -- sacrifice
preternatural -- supernatural
"he concluded that he had perished" -- refers to Aemilius and Scipio

Section to Read: From "All the others were met by their servants with torches" to "contained what was real and true." (The rest of that paragraph can be omitted.)

Narration and Discussion

Explain why the soldiers acted so immediately and vigorously when it was feared that Scipio had been killed. What does this say to you about their regard for Aemilius (or was it just for Scipio)? (If you read the criticism of Aemilius online (see the note above about Scipio) , are their actions still logical? How could you explain the difference in views?)

Discuss this sentence: "Thus Fortune, deferring her displeasure and jealousy of such great success to some other time, let Aemilius at present enjoy this victory, without any detraction or diminution." Does this foreshadow trouble ahead for Aemilius? (Discuss foreshadowing if you need to.)

Discuss how Perseus blamed others for his defeat. What does this show about his character?

LESSON NINE

Introduction

Again we see the contrast between Perseus and Aemilius. Perseus just can't seem to get past a run of bad luck; he is cheated out of his possessions while trying to escape, his children are prisoners, and there is nothing for him to do but grovel before Aemilius.  Instead of being pleased at having Perseus throwing himself at his feet, Aemilius is saddened, angered, and embarrassed for Perseus, and has him taken away. After dispensing a bit of philosophy, he sends his soldiers off for some "R and R" and heads to Greece, where he sees the sights in Delphi and Olympia, and generously hosts some games and banquets for the Macedonians...out of King Perseus's treasury.

Vocabulary  

Cnaeus Octavius -- see note just below
Samothrace -- an island in the North Aegean. See more: http://www.csun.edu/~hcfll004/samothr.html .
He, however, playing the part of the true Cretan -- refers to Oroandes, not Perseus
flying -- escaping
vice -- a sin or weakness of character
exonerate -- remove blame from
more than your deserts (sic) -- more than you deserved
put his army into garrisons -- sent his soldiers off for a rest  
nice exactness -- nice here means picky, with attention to detail

Note on Cnaeus Octavius

While searching for any information on Cnaeus Octavius, I found an interesting document that parallels much of Plutarch's story, Marcus Junianus Justinus's Epitome of the Philippic History of Pompeius Trogus, Book XXXIII, translated, with notes, by the Rev. John Selby Watson in 1853. Here's the bit of it that mentions Octavius (it's online at  http://www.forumromanum.org/literature/justin/english/trans33.html  .

"In this engagement, Marcus Cato, the son of Cato the orator, while he was fighting, with extraordinary bravery, among the thickest of the enemy, fell from his horse, and continued his efforts on foot. A number of the enemy gathered about him when he fell, with loud shouts, as if they would kill him as he lay on the ground, but he, recovering himself sooner than they expected, made great slaughter among them. The enemy flocking round him, however, to overpower him with their numbers, his sword, as he was aiming at a tall fellow among them, fell from his hand among a troop of his opponents; when he, to recover it, plunged in among the points of the enemy's weapons, protecting himself with his shield, while both armies were looking on, and, having regained his sword, though not without receiving many wounds, he got back safe to his friends, amidst a loud shout from the enemy.3 The rest of the Romans, imitating his boldness, secured the victory. King Perseus fled, and arrived, with ten thousand talents, at Samothrace; and Cnaeus Octavius, being sent by the consul in pursuit of him, took him prisoner, with his two sons Alexander and Philip, and brought him to the consul.

"Macedonia, from the time of Caranus, who was the first that reigned in it, to Perseus, had thirty kings; under whose government it continued for nine hundred and twenty-three years, but possessed supreme power for only a hundred and ninety-two.4 When it fell under the power of the Romans, it was left free, magistrates being appointed in every city; and it received laws from Paulus Aemilius, which it still uses.

"As to the Aetolians, the senators of every city in the country, whose fidelity had been suspected, were sent, together with their wives and children, to Rome; where, to prevent them from raising any disturbance in their country, they were long detained; and it was not without difficulty, and after the senate had been wearied with embassies from the cities for their release, that they were allowed to return to their own country."

Section to Read: From "But to proceed" to "neither they nor their wives ever made use either of silver or gold."

Narration and Discussion

Discuss Aemilius's response to Perseus's groveling, especially this line: "Distressed valour challenges great respect, even from enemies; but cowardice, though never so successful, from the Romans has always met with scorn." This might be an interesting part to act out or to write as a dramatic scene.

You may also want to re-read Aemilius's speech just after this, beginning "Is it meet...". You might compare this with some of Solomon's writings in Ecclesiastes.

Tell some of the things Aemilius did or saw during his holiday in Greece. (You might write a letter home telling some of them.) Was it in character for Aemilius to have his own statue placed on the pedestal that was intended for the statue of Perseus in Delphi? How did he explain it?

How did Aemilius deal with the conquered Macedonian people?

Explain his saying that "there was the same spirit shown in marshalling a banquet as an army; in rendering the one formidable to the enemy, the other acceptable to the guests."

For older students: in the last lesson, I suggested that you might look at some more critical views of Aemilius (see the link given in Lesson 8). If you did, you might also want to include these points from this lesson's reading in your picture of Aemilius: "For as he passed, he eased the people's grievances, reformed their governments, and bestowed gifts upon him...." and so on. Does this fit with the corrupt view given on the website? Was Plutarch perhaps mistaken about Aemilius's good character?

LESSON TEN

Introduction

Two things happen in this passage: first, Aemilius (uncharacteristically, but under orders from Rome) leads an attack on the cities of the region of Epirus. Second, the army returns to Rome, where the soldiers immediately begin to grumble about the tiny reward they were given for their part in those attacks. (Plutarch has said before that Aemilius did not touch Perseus's money, but put it into the public treasury; however, he's not clear about whether or not Aemilius took much personal reward from the attacks on Epirus.) The whole thing escalates into a vote as to whether Aemilius should be allowed his triumph at all; but a speech by Marcus Servilius decides the question.

Vocabulary

concord -- harmony
Epirus -- a region of Greece; for more information, see http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Epirus .
give the soldiers....the pillage -- give them the right to the spoils
triumph -- a triumphal parade given to a victorious general
calumnies -- lies
ignominy -- disgrace
sedition -- treason, disloyalty

Section to Read: From "Having thus settled everything well" to "which was performed after this manner."

Narration and Discussion

Discuss this sentence: "Yet what was given to each soldier, out of so vast a destruction and utter ruin, amounted to no more than eleven drachmas; so that men could only shudder at the issue of a war, where the wealth of a whole nation thus divided turned to so little advantage and profit to each particular man." Does Plutarch feel that this sacking of the cities was worth it for a reward of only eleven drachmas apiece? What do you think? (Would he have approved of it more if the reward had been greater?)

In this passage, we have the first agreement with the criticism of Aemilius that has been written elsewhere (such as that on the website discussed earlier). What is the basis of this criticism? Does it seem to have been justified, or just sour grapes?

What a great scene the "triumph" part would be for acting out! There is of course the difficulty of needing great numbers of Romans! Could you find a way around it? Alternate activities might include writing Marcus Servilius's speech in poetic form (as Shakespeare might have done if he had used this scene); or discussing the logic of his argument (what does he mean by "with our own wounds [we] have been taught how to judge of the valour or the cowardice of commanders?")

LESSON ELEVEN

Introduction

The Romans throw a three-day parade in celebration of the victory over Perseus--who of course is the "guest of honour." And that's all!

Vocabulary

greaves -- leg armour
sarissas -- very long spears (see previous lessons)
frocks -- uniforms, costumes
libation -- drink offerings to the gods
diadem -- crown
forbear -- suppress, prevent
effeminate -- womanish
raillery -- making fun of something     

Section to Read: From "The people erected scaffolds in the forum" to "an equal share of good and evil."

Narration and Discussion

Describe the triumph in any way you want: verbally, in a drawing, in another way?

Did Perseus have a choice about being part of the spectacle (and being made a spectacle of?) What do you think of the choice he made?

Explain the very last sentence of the passage, about the gods wanting to lessen any mortal happiness that is too great. How is this different from the Christian perspective?

LESSON TWELVE

Introduction

A headline on our local sports page today says "Such-and-such-an-athlete due for a change in fortune." How little things have changed since Plutarch's time! The hint in the last lesson that nothing could remain perfect is fulfilled, as two of Aemilius's sons die at the time of his triumph. But in typical Aemilius fashion, he accepts his loss philosophically ("I knew something bad would probably happen, so I'm just glad it happened to me personally and not to the whole city of Rome"). The rest of the passage describes his time as censor, his retirement years, and his final return to Rome--appropriately--to make a sacrifice.

Vocabulary      

sully -- pollute, spoil
an honourable period -- a successful conclusion
studied -- attempted
the Appii -- the political followers of Appius
importunity -- persistence; constant annoyance
licentiously -- wildly, without restraint
clemency -- mercy

Some trivia about a Latin derivative: what English word comes from the Roman prison called the Carcer?

Section to Read: From "Aemilius had four sons" to the end.

Narration and Discussion

Discuss Aemilius's speeches about courage and resolution. How did his actions show that he believed in what he said? Is it true "that Fortune never conferred any great benefits that were unmixed and unattended with probabilities of reverse?" How could a Christian viewpoint turn that belief inside out? (See Romans 8:28.)

Flash-forward to the days of Scipio and Appius: Discuss what Appius said about Aemilius more or less "spinning in his grave" over his son's attitude towards the common people.

What do you think are the most significant points Plutarch brings out about the death and funeral of Aemilius? How do they reflect his life?