Composición del Teseo y Rómulo de Plutarco

8/14/2019 Composicin del Teseo y Rmulo de Plutarco

1/16

American Philological Association

Plutarch's Compositional Methods in the Theseus and RomulusAuthor(s): David H. J. LarmourReviewed work(s):Source: Transactions of the American Philological Association (1974-), Vol. 118 (1988), pp. 361-375Published by: The Johns Hopkins University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/284177.

Accessed: 28/10/2011 19:06

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

American Philological Associationand The Johns Hopkins University Pressare collaborating with JSTOR to

digitize, preserve and extend access to Transactions of the American Philological Association (1974-).

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhuphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/284177?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/284177?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=jhup


2/16

Transactionsof the AmericanPhilologicalAssociation118 (1988) 361-375

PLUTARCH'S COMPOSITIONAL METHODSIN THE THESEUS AND ROMULUS 1

DAVID H. J. LARMOURTexasTechUniversityIt is a criticalcommonplaceto say that theParallel Lives are neither"history"nor"biography"n themodemsense. Plutarch'smain interest s the characterofhis subjects, and his main aim is to draw moral lessons for his readers.2Thejuxtapositionof two Lives, one Greek and one Roman, serves this moralpur-pose: as C. P. Jones puts it:

To study virtue in action, it was useful to observe two examples indifferent contexts: the observer could then distinguish what wasessential to each virtue from what was accidental. A Greek and aRoman paired together made a particularlyrewardingsubject, sincethe difference of their backgrounds ensured a clear view of thevirtue which they had in common. (106)In addition,most pairsof Lives are followed by a Synkrisis,in which Plutarchassesses the behaviourand character f eachprotagonistundervariousheadingsandassigns moralsuperiority o one or theother.Given this approach,a question naturallyarises as to how far Plutarch'smoral purpose led him to mould his apparentlyobjective narrative n such away as to facilitate the drawing of instructive comparisons and contrastsbetween two Lives. In otherwords, how manyof the parallelsand differencesare fortuitousand how manycontrived?To answer this fully would, of course,requirean exhaustivestudyof all the pairs,3but theTheseus andRomulusmay

1 The following works will be referred to by the author's surname only: F.Brommer, Theseus, Die Taten des griechischen Helden in der antiken Kunst undLiteratur (Darmstadt 1982); F. J. Frost, "Plutarch and Theseus," CB 60.4 (1984)65-73; H. Herter, "Theseus," RE Suppl. 13.1045-1238; C. P. Jones, Plutarch andRome (Oxford 1971); C. B. R. Pelling, "Plutarch's Adaptation of his Source-Material," JHS 100 (1980) 127-40; J. B. Carter in W. H. Roscher, Lexicon dergriechischen und rimischen Mythologie (Leipzig 1924, repr. Hildesheim 1965);D. A. Russell, Plutarch (New York 1973). Citations from the Lives follow theTeubner edition of K. Ziegler (Leipzig 1960-80).2 Cf. Pelling, 135: "His interest is character, 6Ooq... iography will oftenconcentrate on personal detail, and may abbreviate its historical narrative; itsconcentration will be the portrayal of character, and its ultimate purpose will beprotreptic and moral." See, for example, Alex. 1.1-2; Pomp. 8.6-7; Cim. 2.2-5.3 See P. A. Stadter, "Plutarch's Comparison of Pericles and Fabius Maximus,"GRBS 16 (1975) 77-85, who raises the issue in general and discusses it withreference to a particularpair of Lives: he points out (77) that the purpose of theLives is "to make clear the moral qualities of the heroes who are being described"


3/16

David H. J. Larmourbe expected to illustrate Plutarch's modus operandimore clearly than most,since, in dealingwith two legendary igures,he was presumablyess constrainedthanusualby theclaims of widely-acceptedand reliablehistoricaldata.Indeed,he remarks n the opening chapterof the Theseus that he is going to write oftimes which mightbe said to be the preserveof wondersand fables, poets andmythographers, oubt andobscurity 1.3).The similarities between Theseus and Romulus are set out in a kind ofProoemium (Th. 2). These are six in number:each man (1) had a mysteriousand uncertainparentageandwas reputed o be of divine descent;(2) performedwarriordeeds; (3) was responsiblefor the foundation or synoecism) of one ofthe world's two great cities; (4) perpetrated he rape of women; (5) suffereddomestic misfortuneand the resentful anger of a relative; and (6) came intoconflict with his fellow-citizens in lateryears.The two Lives, moreover,followthe same basic pattern:birth-rearing by foster-parents-prodigious youthfulbehaviour-warriordeeds-death of a close relative-foundation (orsynoecism)and organizationof a greatcity-more warriordeeds-unpopularity-death-veneration. On the moral plane, each Life charts the rise of a warrior andstatesman, hroughhis strengthandvirtue,andhis subsequent all throughprideandtheabandonment f his formerways (cf. Rom.26.1).A parallel patternis also discernible in certain importantepisodes. Forexample, the synoecism of Athens and the foundation of Rome (Th. 24-26;Rom. 9-13) both takeplace after the deathof a close relative (Theseus' fatherand Romulus'brother),directlyor indirectlycausedby theprotagonistof eachLife. Each hero attends to the utterancesof the Delphic oracle (Th. 24.4-5;Rom. 9.3) and each institutes religious festivals (Th. 23.2-3; 24.3-4; 25.5;Rom. 21-22.1). Both rulers receive outsiders willingly (Th. 25.1; Rom. 9.3)and divide the populationinto groups,takingcare, at the same time, to ensurethatthe relationshipbetween the groupsis harmonious Th.25.2; Rom. 13).Such similarities and parallels as these are not contrivances of Plutarch.Nevertheless, there are a couple of peculiarities. For instance, the statement(Rom. 9.3) that it was in obedience to an oracle from Delphi that Romulusthrew open the sanctuary of the god of Asylum to all comers is rathersurprising. Parke and Wormell believe that this oracle was not a Roman

and comments 78) that"we mightexpecteach life to be influencedandsubtlyshaped by its mate, as Plutarchsearches to bring out the similarities anddifferencesof his heroes."PellingdiscussesPlutarch'smanipulationf detail insix of the RomanLives (those of Antony, Brutus,Caesar,Cato, CrassusandPompey):he finds devices for (a) abridgingsource-materialthe conflation ofsimilar items, chronologicalcompression),(b) expandinginadequatematerial(fabricationof circumstantialdetails or of contexts) and (c) organizing thenarrativen a pleasingmanner chronologicaldisplacement nd the transferal fitems fromone charactero another);ee also his "Plutarch'sMethodof Work nthe RomanLives," JHS 99 (1979) 74-96; D. A. Russell, "Plutarch'sLife ofCoriolanus,"JRS 53 (1963) 21-28; C. P. Jones,"Plutarch," ncient Writers:Greeceand Rome(New York1982),2.961-983, esp. 969-71; 973-77.

362


4/16

Plutarch'sCompositionalMethodstradition;4 ones (89) notes that therewere manyattemptsby later historians ostrengthenthe mythological and historical links between the Romans and theGreeks, and sees this as a typical example. It is also possible, however, thatPlutarchchose to include this detail-or even invented t-simply as a device tolink the two Lives in some way in the mind of the reader,since there are somany references to the Delphic oracle in the Theseus (3.5; 5.1; 18.3; 24.4-5;26.5).5There is another,much more obvious, use of this techniqueof assocationby Plutarch. The role of Heracles in the Theseus is large and important,somuch so that it almost causes an artistic imbalance in the early sections.6Heracles is, of course, connected with Rome, even if not directly withRomulus, throughthe tradition hat he fought with Cacus on the future site ofthe city7and that he was the fatherof Pallas andLatinus;8 husit is no surprisethatPlutarch ncludes a referenceto the tradition hatRomawas thedaughterofTelephus, the son of Heracles, in his discussion of the origin of the name ofRome. In two otherplaces, however,references are made to Heracleson whatseem to be the flimsiest of pretexts:at 9.6, after recountingthe omen of thevultures, Plutarchnotes that Herodorus Ponticus says that Heracles too wasonce very glad to see a vulture,and then launches into a digression on birds.Anotherjarring importationof Heracles occurs in 5: Acca Larentia was thefoster-motherof the infants and so the Romans sacrifice to her; but, we areinformed,they also pay honours to anotherLarentia,namely the one who wasvisitedby Heracles. The storyis then told at length.9

4 The Delphic Oracle (Oxford 1956) 1.65-66; R. M. Ogilvie, A Commentaryon Livy books1-5 (Oxford1965) 62 notes that Cos and Cyrenewere promptedby Delphicoracles to establishplacesof asylum.See also Carter4.184-85.Note also atRom. 28.4-6, Plutarch omparesProculus'storyof his meetingwith the divine Romulusto the Greek tales of Aristeas of ProconnesusandCleomedesof Astypaleia, he latterof which includesa consultation f the oracleat Delphi.6 He appearsat 6.5-9; 7-8.2; 11; 26.1; 29.3-5; 30.4-5; 33.1-2; 35.1-3. Theclose connection between Theseus and Heracles appears to be traditional:DiodorusSiculus,for instance,remarksat 4.59.1 that,now that he has describedthe deedsof Heracles,he will speakof Theseus,since he emulated helaboursofHeracles and went to Athens by land, 1TkoTil; i v Tfi; 'HpacK3iou; a&p?cfi;.Cf.Isoc., Helen 23: the highestpraisethat can be given to Theseus s that he won afame rivalling that of his illustriouscontemporary--o yiap go6vovToiq; inko;?KooaniuoavTo taaparcXt[aiotS, a'kXi Kict Toi; t7St76?ciaactv F?XpioravTo Toi;aCxroi, Xp?7ovTa xTToYY?V?Ei.TCOIOiVT?;.7 Also mentioned at Mor. 315c (from Dercyllus); cf. Livy 7.3-15; Virgil, Aen.8.185-275; Ovid, Fast. 1.543-86; Prop. 4.9.1-20; Dion. Hal. 1.39-42; Serviusad Aen. 8.190.8 See Dion. Hal. 1.43; Livy (1.7.1) notes that the worship of Heracles at theAra Maxima was the only foreign worship adopted by Romulus (cf. Virgil, Aen.8.185); see Ogilvie (above, note 4) 55-56.9 Cf. Mor. 272F-273E (= Quaest. Rom. 35); Livy 1.4.7; Dion. Hal. 1.84; 87;Macrob. 1.10. 1-17; Aul. Gell. 7.7.8; Tzet. ad Lyc. 1232.

363


5/16

David H. J. LarmourSuchreferences to Heraclesin the Romulusmaywell havebeen introducedin orderto preservethat balanceof similarityand differencebetweentheLives

which is necessaryfor the success of the projectand its morallesson. To haveHeracles play such an important role in the Theseus without somecorrespondingmention, at least, in the account of Romulus, would create anawkward asymmetry. These references serve to join the two Lives by yetanother, albeit rather thin, thread in the reader's mind and to enhance theparallelism.They appear,moreover,to be characteristic f Plutarch'smethod-therearesimilar,apparentlyunmotivated, eferencesto Socrates n theAristidesand Cato Maior, to Agamemnonin theAgesilaus and Pompeyandto Plato intheLycurgusand Numa.10Having outlined the similarities, we may now consider the differencesbetween the two Lives. The categoriesof similarityset out in Th. 2 are pickedup in the Synkrisis,wherethey andthey alone, form the basis of the discussionof the differencesbetweenTheseus and Romulus.11H. Erbse has established heimportanceof the Synkrisiswith regardto Plutarch'scompositionalmethod.12Heconcludes:

die in dem Rahmenparten zusammengestellten Gemeinsamkeitenund Verschiedenheiten...gleichsam das Geriist beider Lebens-geschichten bilden. Sieht man von Exkursen und gelehrtenZwischenbemerkungen ab, so laBt sich behaupten: jede der inProoimion und Epilog genannten Kategorien wird im Verlauf derDarstellung erliutert, und umgekehrt fungiert jeder tragendeBestandteil der Bibliographie als Manifestation der genannten(oder vorausgesetzen) Charakteristika.(409)Detailedexaminationof thenarrative f the TheseusandRomulus ndicatesthat it is, to a significant extent, writtenwith the Synkrisis in mind. Plutarchfrequentlypaves the way for the formalpresentationof the differences between

10 I am grateful to Prof. David Sansone for this observation; Arist. 1.9; 27.3-4and Cato Mai. 7.1; 20.3; 23.1; Ages. 5.6; 6.7; 9.7 and Pomp. 67.5 (cf. Syn.4.4); Lyc. 5.10; 16.6; 29.1; 31.2 and Numa 8.2; 20.8-11.11 Category (2) is dealt with in Syn. 1 and 4.2; (3) in Syn. 4; (4) in Syn. 6; (5)in Syn. 3. 5 and 6.5; and (6) in Syn. 2. Only category (1) is not taken up indetail in the Synkrisis, for the obvious reason that it (obscure parentage andreputed divine descent) has relatively little to do with the differences in lifestyleand characterdiscussed therein.12 "Die Bedeutung der Synkrisis in den ParallelbiographienPlutarchs,"Hermes84 (1956) 398-424; in general, the Synkrisis has been woefully neglected byscholars; Jones, in his essay on Plutarch (see above, note 3), comments (969)that the sykriseis deserve more attention: they are "not mere appendices to theLives, but vital to understandingtheir moral purpose. Moreover, they have theirpart in the architecture of the Parallel Lives and are designed to show thedifferences between the heroes just as the prefaces show their similarities." Apartfrom Erbse's article, which includes a survey of the contributions of previouscommentators on the Lives, see especially F. Focke, "Synkrisis," Hermes 58(1923) 327-68; S. Costanza, "La synkrisis nello schema biografico di Plutarco,"Messana 4 (1956) 127-56; and the comments of Russell 110-16.

364


6/16

Plutarch's Compositional Methodsthe Greek and the Romanby a carefulmouldingof the biographicalnarrative.He recounts particularincidents in a tone designed to arouse approval ordisapproval in the reader.13He also pronounces on the motivation behindvarious actions and therebytries to colour our view of the hero's behaviourinadvanceof the explicit moral statements n the Synkrisis.14More specifically,he controls the narrativeby choosing certain traditionsand versions from themass of materialat his disposaland thenpresentingthese as the accountsmostworthyof credence and acceptance.'5 f he mentionsalternativeversionsto theones he prefers,he usually rejects them explicitly16or, moreoften, implicitly(either by telling them in an unconvincing manner,17or by placing themsecond,'8 or by referring back to only one particularversion later in thenarrative19).

In spite of the loss of most of the sources mentioned n theLives, we maygo some way towards proving that Plutarch's narrativerepresents a rathertendentiousgatheringand presentationof "the evidence."Different versionsofmanyof the events describedin the Theseus and Romulusappear n the works13 E.g. the description of Menestheus' activities in Athens while Theseus wasabsent, in which the authorialpreference for Theseus is quite apparent:see 32.1-2 and the discussion (with note 37) below.14 E.g. the suggestion that Romulus took no action against the killers of Tatiusbecause he was glad to be rid of his co-ruler: see 23.4 and the discussion below.15 The suggestion that Plutarch deliberately chooses to include or emphasizecertain versions and to omit or play down others is not new: for example, Jones(88-94), in his discussion of the Romulus, argues that the choice of the morefavourable accounts of particular events (the death of Remus, the foundation ofRome, the rape of the Sabines etc.) indicates that Plutarch was basicallysympathetic to Rome. Frost contends that Plutarch's careful selection of materialfor the Theseus was dictated by a fundamentallyrationalist approachto history.16 E.g. the discussion of the rape of Helen (Th. 31), where he first notes thatHellanicus says Theseus E'ipa4 xra xnpt X'iiv 'EX.vnv and then cites twoalternative versions in which Theseus is not the aggressor; he concludes,however, that the tradition in which Theseus is the instigator of the rape is themore probable and that it has more witnesses in its favour.17 E.g. the Megarian writers' views of Sciron (Th. 10.2): oi 5_ Meyap6OcvroTyYpa9?ig; o6aooc xTTp aa5icovT?e; Kica xTCtiok?,ACxpovp,'c cataZtpcoviSrnv, i07iok?uoi~vT?t,coo{O'pptoTIilv o00e? XToTIv yeyovevat TOVZcKipcovd(pacciv.18 E.g. the tradition that the Crommyoniansow was really a female robber (Th.9). Unless the second or third version of an event is given special emphasis, thefirst is likely to take root more firmly in the reader's mind, as Plutarch wasdoubtless aware.19 In Th. 20, Plutarch offers four different accounts of the fate of Ariadne: (1)Theseus abandonedher and she hanged herself; (2) Theseus left her for Aigle andshe was taken to Naxos; (3) Theseus' ship was driven off course and he putAriadne ashore on Cyprus, but while trying to save his ship he was carried out tosea again. By the time he got back, Ariadne had died in childbirth;(4) there weretwo Ariadnes: one was marriedto Dionysus, the other was deserted by Theseus. At29.2, however, Plutarch cites only the version that Theseus left Ariadne becauseof his passion for Aigle (cf. note 52 below).

365


7/16

David H. J. Larmourof several otherancientwriters: f theseoccurin writerswhomPlutarch eferstoin this pair (e.g. ,Dionysius of Halicarnassus[Rom. 18. 8]20or Philochorus[see note 26 below]), or in writers he is known to have had access to (e.g.,Apollodorus [Lyc. 1.3] or Livy [Cam. 6.2; Luc. 28.8; Marc. 11.8; 24.5 etc.]),then it is possible, if not probable, hathe deliberatelychose not to use theminhis narrative.21Let us begin with the warrior deeds of Theseus and Romulus. Theseusfights several monsters (8-11), the sons of Pallas (13), the Marathonianbull(14), the Minotaur 19), the Amazons (26-7), and the Centaurs(30). Romulusbattles Numitor's herdsmen (7), Amulius (8), the Sabines (16-18), theCamerians (24), and the Veians (25). In general terms, Plutarch says thatTheseus punished the wicked, visiting upon them the violence they wereinflicting on others (KoX&acovxoVS; 7ovrlpot;... v 6i8 ot; Tpo7not; Tf;Eacxtcv d68tiaSo; Sti Kcat na%ovwc;, Th. 11.3); he likewise describesRomulus and Remus as famous for drivingoff robbers,catching thieves andrescuing the victims of violence (o6 Xrlcxag a&XaCaoat caKXaicka EXivK(ai paCo; EeXEO(XatTO ;a61KovtgE:vouVo,om. 6.5).But, interwovenamong the accounts of these exploits are certaindetailswhich seem to betokenthoseverydifferencesbetweenTheseus andRomulus tobe pointed out later in Syn. 1-namely that Romulus acted out of fear andnecessity (5t'&avy,Krrv), while Theseus set out to performnoble deeds of hisown accord (cK nipoatpefeoo;, ou6ev6; avayaovTo;...at o&p'Ea 'o).22In Th. 6.6-9 and 7 (cf. 11), Plutarchrelates how the young Theseus was firedby the glorious exampleof Heracles to do similardeeds. This is dwelt uponat

20 Cf. Alc. 41.4; Pyrrh. 17.7; 21.13.21 Similarly, versions in writers Plutarch probably did not use, or could nothave used, are valuable in that they testify to the existence of variant traditions,with which Plutarch may have been familiar through some other source. Frost(66) comments thus: "when he does not mention some incident or variant that isfound in Apollodorus, or Diodorus, or Pausanias, we should not conclude that hedoes not know it, only that for some reason he decided to exclude it from hisnarrative."On Plutarch's sources in general, see A. H. L. Heeren, De fontibus etauctoritate vitarumparallelarum (G6ttingen 1820); H. Peter,Die Quellen Plutarchsin den Biographien der Romer (Halle 1865); G. Gilbert, "Die Quellen desplutarchischen Theseus," Philologus 33 (1874) 44-66; K. Ziegler, "Ploutarchos,"RE 21.1 (1951) 636-962, sect. 4.7; W. C. Helmbold and E. N. O'Neill,Plutarch's Quotations (Baltimore and Oxford 1959); C. Theander, "PlutarchsForschungen in Rom," Eranos 57 (1959) 99-131; R. H. Barrow,Plutarch and hisTimes (Bloomington 1967) 150-61; Jones, 81-7; Russell, 42-62; F. Frost,Plutarch's Themistocles (Princeton 1980), esp. Ch. 2. Ziegler's edition (vol. 5)contains indices of Greek and Roman authors cited in the Lives. Useful summariesof material on the legend of Theseus are to be found in Brommer, Herter andRoscher, 5.678-760. For Romulus, see Carter,4.174-209 and C. J. Classen, "ZurHerkunftder Sage von Romulus und Remus,"Historia 12 (1963) 447-57.22 Cf. Pelling 131-32 on Plutarch's different treatment of the motivation forthe same actions in different Lives and on how in Pomp., for instance, he tries toillustrate the protagonist's ?riXae?ia by showing his alertness (53.9; 54.2; 57.6etc.).

366


8/16

Plutarch'sCompositionalMethodssome length, with an explanationof how Theseus and his idol were related(7.1). We are told thatby night,Theseusdreamedof his cousin's achievementsand, by day, grew more and more determined o follow his example (6.9). Hethought it an "awful and intolerable"(6etvov... cait ozKc VEcctv) state ofaffairs that Heracles should do all these thingswhile he disgracedhimself, hisreputedfather and his real one, by not displayingsimilarmanifestationsof histrue birth(7). He thereforerefused,in spite of warningsandpleas from Aethraand Pittheus, to take the safer sea-routeto Athens,preferring o go across themonster-riddenand,a fact mentionedno fewer thanthreetimes within the spaceof two chapters (6.2-3; 7-8; 7.2). Why all this emphasis on the fact thatTheseus was "raring o go," so to speak?Because Plutarch s going to argueinthe Synkrisisthat this distinguishesTheseus from Romulus on the morallevel.This is confirmed by details in the accounts of other incidents: in 9.1,Plutarchtells us thatTheseus "wentout of his way" (68obinoiappyov)to findandkill the Crommyonian ow-no meancreature he, by the way (ou (pqciov,iv 0rpiov)-so that he would not be thought (by whom?) to performall hisexploits "undercompulsion" (npoS;avayiciv).23 In 14.1, Plutarchsays thatafter his arrival in Athens, Theseus was "eager to get busy" (Evcpy6; EtvoctpouX6etvo;) and wentoff to fight the Marathonian ull. Apollodorus,however,reportsthatit was at the instigationof Medea thatTheseus had to do this (Ep.1. 5.6).24 In 17.2, Plutarch describes how, when the time came round fordrawinglots to see who would enjoy the melancholyprivilege of being sent toMinos, Theseus volunteeredto be includedin the group-he thoughtit wrongnot to share in the misfortuneof his fellow-citizens. We are given Hellanicus'alternativeversion thatTheseus was personallychosen by Minos (17.3),25butthis has less impact by virtue of being placed second. Once again, Theseus'enthusiasm for the fray is emphasized:Toii8TloCEo%OvncatrpaOappDvovrxocKai?ycXrlyopobvxo'; G EtpcdxEr'Tatbv MtvcoraDpov 17.4).As for the war with the Amazons later, Plutarch writes (26.1) thatPhilochorus,whom he cites frequently n theLife,26andsome others(whom hedoes not name) thinkTheseus joined Heracles on his campaign and receivedAntiope as a reward,27but himself chooses to follow "themajorityof writers,includingPherecydes,HellanicusandHerodorus,"who report hatTheseusmadethe voyage on his own account (i6t6ooxoov), after the time of Heracles,and

23 As mentioned above (note 18), the rationalized version that "the sow" wasactually a strikingly awful female robber is placed second and given lessemphasis (Frost does not mention this); presumably, for Plutarch, no womancould be as impressive an opponent for Theseus as an angry sow.24 Cf. 1st. Vat. Myth. 1.18.48; Diodorus, like Plutarch, has Theseus go on hisown initiative; see Brommer 35-37.25 Cf. Diod. Sic. 4.61.3; Apollodorus (Ep. 1.7) gives both versions and Schol.ad 11. 18.590 appears to suggest that the lot simply fell upon Theseus togetherwith the other victims. Otherwise, the consensus seems to be that he volunteered:see Brommer 35-37; Herter 1111-12.26 14.3; 16.1; 17.6; 19.4; 26.1; 29.4; 35.3.27 Eur. Heracl. 215-18; Aristides 38.486 (2.723 Dind.); Zenob. 5.33; seeBrommer,119-23.

367


9/16

David H. J. Larmourtook the Amazon captive with his own hands.28Nor, he adds, should we thinkthatthe war with the Amazons was a trivial((pacXov-the same wordused ofthe Crommyonian ow at 9.1) or "womanish" yuvaKcteov)enterprise.In 29.3-4, we are told that Herodorus does not credit Theseus withparticipation n any of the other greatevents of the day, except for the battlebetween the Lapithsand theCentaurs.29 lutarchgoes on to mention, however,that others say Theseus was with Jason at Colchis,30helped Meleager kill theCalydonianboar31 nd, moreover,performedmany glorious deeds on his own,without asking for any ally (aotTrbvgetvxot pLSev;SouVfaot&o 6STOevxa).32As a result,thephrase"Look AnotherHeracles "became currentwithreferenceto him. He also states as fact the tradition hat TheseushelpedAdrastusgatherin the bodies lying around he walls of Thebes.33

The feeling that this repeated emphasis on Theseus' volunteering toundertakeheroic tasks is designed to lay the groundfor the Synkrisisreceivessome confirmationfrom the Romulus,where the characterizationof the heroand the tone of thenarrative renoticeablydifferent.Forexample,theoverthrowof Amulius is described(7-8) in a fashion which suggests that chanceplayedamore importantrole in the matterthanany desire on the partof Romulus andhis brotherto performa noble deed. When Remus is captured, t is Faustuluswho takes the initiative, calling upon Romulus to rescue his brother;Plutarchalso hints thatambition was a motivatingfactor:npo6repov 'binvi[TTETo KCainoape6SilXouoooiTovroovov rpooXvovTag l gtKp6v(ppoveiv(8.1). When theshowdown finally comes, Amulius makes no real attemptto save himself SitTo&alopeivKoat rtapdaterOat8.8). In some otherversions of the story,34 heaction is more planned,Romulus' leadershipmore assertive. As leader of theRomans, of course, Romulusdoes show himself to be a very capablewarrior,but he is not portrayedas possessing the same kind of moraldriving-forceasthatwhichdirectsTheseus.BothTheseusand Romuluseventuallycame intoconflict with theirfellow-citizens. In Syn. 2, Plutarchdistinguishes between them thus: each deviatedfrom the properform of monarchy-Theseus in the direction of democracy,Romulus towards tyranny;that is to say, they acted like a demagogue and adespot respectively. Theseus' error,however, arose from (ptXavOpco7ia ndEnteiKeta, Romulus' from (ptiauria and xakXC7reno;.With this neat distinction in the Synkrisis, we might expect the narrativeto stressTheseus'democratic,andRomulus'tyrannical,endencies.And,indeed,28 Cf. Apollod.Ep. 1.16;Paus. 1.2.1;and(apparently)Diod. Sic. 4.28. 1.29 Cf. HomerII. 1.265;2.742;Isoc. Helen 26; Diod. Sic. 4.70.3; Apollod.Ep.1.21; see Herter,1158-61.30 Cf. Apollod. Bibl. 1.9.16;Hyg. 14; Stat.Ach. 1.71-72; Theb. 5.431; seeBrommer133-34; Herter1206-7.31 Cf. Apollod.Bibl. 1.8.2; Paus. 8.45.6; Zenob.5.33; see Brommer135-36;Herter1205-6.32 See Brommer124-41.33 Cf. Isoc., Helen 15.31;Dion. Hal. 5.17.5; Paus. 1.39.2;see Brommer,124-25; Herter,1208-10.34 Livy 1.5-6; Dion. Hal. 1.80-84; Diod. Sic. 8.3.

368


10/16

Plutarch'sCompositionalMethodsTheseus comes off ratherbetter thanRomulus. After the death of Aigeus, hesucceeds to the throne and effects the synoecism of Athensapparentlywithoutviolence. Potentialobjectors,we aretold,"fearinghis power,whichwas alreadyconsiderable,andhis daring(Tqv x6Xgav),35 hose to be persuaded,rather hanforced, to agree" (24.2). Apollodorus, however, reports (Ep. 1.11) that whenTheseusbecameking of Athens,he killed the sons of Pallas,50 in number,andall otherswho might oppose him, and thus secured the whole governmentforhimself. In Plutarch'saccount,Theseus kills the Pallantidswhen he is declaredsuccessor by Aigeus, shortly after his arrivalin Athens (13). Furthermore,ascholiast on Euripides'Hippolytus35 quotesa passagefromPhilochoruswhichtells how Theseus went into exile for a year at Troezen to be purified for thekilling of his cousins; he took his wife Phaedra with him.36Presumably thishappenedsome time afterthe death of Aigeus. Anothertradition,preservedinPausanias (1.28.10), has Theseus stand trial for murderin the Delphinium,where he was acquittedon the plea of justifiable homicide. Plutarchdoes notmention thePallantids n connectionwithPhaedraandmakes no reference o thebanishmentat all. Since there is clear evidence that he knew of the traditionofthe exile (he mentions it twice in the Moralia [112D;607A]), we can be certainthat he deliberatelyexcluded it from the Theseus-perhaps because it wouldmake Theseus appear in a bad light, or because there was no tradition of asimilarperiodof exile in accounts of the life of Romulus.The generally favourabledepictionof Theseus' political actions continuesafter the accountof the synoecism:Theseus is said (24.4-5) to have laid asidethe royal power (riv pawitcixv &apCigcf. dacicKErO ovcapX6cv,25.3]), as hehadagreedto do beforehand,andto have proceededto arrange he government(&tiK6o?tet Tv itoXtftiocv). n so doing, he was acting in accordancewith thewishes of thegods, for theDelphicoraclehadadvisedhim to counsel his people(p3ouDeIetv) only. When it comes to Theseus' rift with the Athenians, theactivities of Menestheusarereported n a less thansympathetictone (32.1-2).He was the first to act like a demagogueandget intothegood gracesof themob(X p oT0;...E7;t9e:evo; 'TET 1aoy7co)T?V IKcct 7pO6; aptv okXp6uxXEye'oac).37 Plutarch also suggests that the war with the Tyndaridaegreatlyfurtheredhis schemesandaddsthatsomesay hepersuadedhemto marchagainst Athens. When Theseus, on his return,wantedto rule (apXetv is used,not ,govapXEtv) as before, and to direct the state (Kca0lyeio0oa Tob7coXte6(tcvxo;), he found the people "corrupted"(6tepOGxpgetvov)and35 Not, it seems, being used in a negativesense here: cf. Rom. 6. 3, whereRomulusandRemusaredescribedas courageous ndr6Xokav5Xco;&veicXrlicXov?ToVT?e;.36 FGrH 328 fr. 108 (Jacobybelievesthe exile was inventedby Euripides);Eur.Hipp. 34-37; Paus. 1.22. 2; Pollux 8. 119.3 Note the difference between this and the terms used (25.3) to describeTheseus' courtingof the multitude:7pwro;g &XcktXvepog;TOvo6Xov. In fact,the whole accountof Menestheus' ctivities s renderedn ratheroaded anguage:he "stirredup"(a-ovixarT)nd"provoked"xapo3~4ve)the chief men of Athensand "confused" (?tErapatTex) and "made hostile" (or, perhaps, "misled")(6tcpaXkk?ev)hemassof thepeople.

369


11/16

DavidH. J. Larmourunreceptive (35.4). When he tried to impose his will upon them, he "wasovercome by demagogues and factions" (cKaer:e? a7gyoE?iro eKOC ctarOeoa-aotdalCo) and, finally, despairing of his cause, he left the city and went toScyros. The whole picture s one of a wise leader,anxiousto do his best for hiscity, being forced out by opportunistic ndunscrupulous emagogicelements.38WithRomulus,the case is ratherdifferent.Rumblingsof the arrogant ideof his personalityare heardintermittently hroughout he Life. In 6.3, we aretold that Romulus as a youth gave the impression that "he was born tocommandrather hanobey"and that he andhis brotherwere on good termswiththeirneighbours,butregarded he king's officials as no better thanthemselves,payingno attentionto theirangerandthreats 6.4). In 7.1, they aresaid to haveignoredthedispleasureof Numitorandtaken nto theirbandmany poormenandslaves,39 thus "inducing the beginnings of rebellious boldness and daring"(0paoou; &XioaTUrcricouaii (ppovilgaxos apxaP; Ev8t66vTe;). After therestorationof Numitor,Plutarchsays the pairwere notprepared o stay in AlbaLonga unless they could be its rulers,so they decided to found a city of theirown. Otherpossible reasons for thisdecisionaregiven-the desire to live in theregion in which they were reared40and the reservations of the Albans abouthavingthebrothers'motleybandof followers as theirfellow-citizens41-but theopening sentence of the discussion carries most weight by virtue of itsposition,42 and thus contributes significantly to the characterizationof thebrothersas ambitiousyoung men.

38 Consider also the discussion of Theseus' death: there are various accounts, asPausanias records (1.17.4). Several sources have him remain in the Underworld(e.g. Homer Od. 11.631; Polygnotus' painting apud Paus. 10.29.9; Virgil Aen.6.617-18; Prop. 2.1.37), while others report that he died on Scyros (AristotleAth. Pol. fr. 4). Pausanias thinks the most plausible scenario is the following:when Theseus returned to Athens from the Thesprotians, Menestheus had himexpelled. He set out for Crete, but was blown off course to Scyros, where he wastreated with honour on account of his family and his achievements. For thisreason, Lycomedes had him killed. According to Apollodorus (Ep. 1.24),Lycomedes himself threw Theseus over a cliff. In Plutarch's version, an additionalelement is present (35.6): the suggestion that Lycomedes killed Theseus as afavour to Menestheus (rCi M?vevo0i Xaptg6ie?voq). This serves to blacken thelatter further and, hence, to increase the moral stature of Theseus. Menestheus,moreover, ruled as king (Eacicevoe, 35.7) afterTheseus' departure.39 Plutarch emphasizes the numbers of poor and slaves: xo3koXi; ugEv&X6poU;,nokkot; 6? 85oDkoq;;Livy (1.8.6) describes the adherents as turba omnis sinediscrimine, liber an servus esset, avida novarum rerum; Dionysius, however, says(2.15.3) that all fugitives except slaves were welcome. See Jones 91.40 Cf. Livy 1.6.3-, who also cites overpopulation as a consideration.41 Cf. Dion. Hal. 1.85.2, who says Numitor was afraid that the newcomersmight conspire against him.42 Jones, in the course of his argument that the Romulus is pro-Roman, alsonotes (90) that Plutarch chooses to promote this as the reason for the foundationof the city.

370


12/16

Plutarch'sCompositionalMethodsIn 10, we learn that Remus was killed by Romulusor Celer.43Livy (1.7.2)says he died either in a riot or at the hands of Romulus. Dionysius of

Halicarnassus 1.87) prefersthe riot, but mentionsCeler too. Diodorus(8.6.3)says Celer was responsible,but acted on Romulus' orders.It is also, perhaps,significant that in Plutarch'sversion Romulusdoes not show much sorrow athis brother'sdeath-he simply burieshim in the Remoniaandgets on with thetask of building his city. This is very different from Dionysius' account(1.87.3) of how Romulus was so afflicted by grief andrepentancethathe lostall desire to live andwas only persuaded o go on by Larentia.Serviuspreservesa tradition n which the deathof Remus is followed by a plague, which abatesonly when a curulechair,sceptreand crownareplacedbesideRomulusutpariterimperareviderentur adAen. 1. 276 [cf. 292]).44Significantly,Plutarch'sbriefaccount of Remus' death and its aftermath (together with the apparentnonchalanceof Romulus)is also in starkcontrast o his descriptionof Theseus'reactionto the news of the deathof Aigeus (Th. 22.4).The same tendencytowardsubtly blackeningRomulus in the narrative npreparationor the moralevaluationsof the Synkrisiscan be seen in Plutarch'saccount of the death of Tatius.The affair is somewhatcomplicated(Rom. 23-24.2): some followersof Tatiusheld upsome ambassadors romLaurentum ndkilled them. Romulus wantedto punish the robbers,but Tatius used delayingand diversionary actics. The friendsof the slain ambassadors, herefore,killedTatius while he and Romulus were officiating at a sacrifice in Lavinium.Romulus buried Tatius iEVTi4co, but "did absolutely nothing"(navxracatvtiLetrLToev) boutbringinghis killers to justice. When the Laurentianshandedthem over, Romulus let them go, saying thatmurderhad been paid back withmurder.Some people thoughthe was glad to be rid of his colleague. Afterthis,following the waragainstFidenae,a plaguefell uponthe landand,when it alsoaffected Laurentum,everyoneagreed that it was a resultof the miscarriageofjustice for the death of Tatius and the murderedambassadors.It abatedonlywhen Romulus finally punished both groups involved. Thus runs thePlutarchean ccount.Two pointsmaybe notedhere:(1) The other majoraccount of the affair which survives, that of Dionysius(2.51-53.1), paints a more favourablepicture of Romulus and a much moreunfavourableone of Tatius.In thisversion,Romulushands over Tatius' men toLaurentian epresentatives.Tatiusrushes to assist his friends(one of themwasactuallya relationof his) andhelps themescapeon the way to Laurentum.Notlong afterwards,when he and Romulus are sacrificing, the Laurentianskill43 Jones (90) arguesthat Plutarch"putslast, and lays most stress upon, theagency of Celer" and comparesSyn. 5.1, but it is questionablewhetherthismuch can reasonablybe extractedfrom the text; also, we might just as wellcompareSyn. 3, in whichRomulus s the guiltyparty.44 Note also that Plutarch Rom. 5) is one of only two writers(the other isDion. Hal. [1. 86. 3]; see Carter4. 180-83) who suggestthatRomulusactuallydeceived Remusin the matterof the augury:"somesay, however,thatwhereasRemustrulysaw the birds,Romulus ied abouthis, but thatwhen Remuscameover to him, thenhe saw the twelve."Carter 181) sees this version as late andintended denCharakteres Romulus u schwarzen."

371


13/16

DavidH. J. Larmourhim.45Romulus forbids the killers fire and water and they are broughtbeforehim; when they plead, 6tKatotepc, that they only avenged violence withviolence, he sets them free.(2) Livy (1.14.1-4) makes no mention of the plague. Dionysius refers to afamine (Xtgoi), during which the people of Fidenae attacked some Romansupply-boats(2.53.2), and to a laterplague (v6ooot)Xotiu,i;),46 duringwhichthe Camerians attacked a groupof Roman colonists (2. 54. 1)-Plutarch alsorefers to this attack,but places it duringthe Tatiusplague (24. 3-4). The linkbetween theplagueandthe murderof Tatiusis madeonly by Plutarch:whetherhe invented it, or found it in a source now lost to us, is pretty muchimmaterial;the point is that it serves to cast Romulus' actions in a very badlight, by suggesting that he had to be drivenby superhuman orces to see jus-tice done.47In 26, Plutarchsays thatRomulus,like all those who havebeen raised to aposition of power and authority,eventually became haughtier,renouncedhispopular ways and turned towards a monarchical form of government (ei;povapXCiav).48 His very appearance, in fact, made him unpopular-he wore ascarlet tunic and a purple-embroideredoga, and sat on a reclining throne.Hewas surroundedby the Celeres and Lictores. The patricianswere treatedwithcontempt (27.1-2) andthey hadonly theirname andregalialeft andassembledin the council-chambermore from custom than for giving advice: Etira OtyliCpoOTOCTTovTO; l}KpOcOVTO, Oai i Tp6OTEpOtO E6oy7.tEVOVEKElcVCmn)eO aotxv IoXXLy nEtxoveovEOV; &ir3XXarrovTo.n the end, Romulusinsulted the Senate outrightby dividing up land and returninghostages to theVeians withoutits consent.

45 Dionysius also cites (2.53.4) the version of Licinius Macer, who reports thatTatius went to the town on his own, to persuade the Laurentians to showforgiveness; Plutarchperhaps chooses to have Romulus present at the sacrifice asa further illustration of his improper behaviour-in allowing the murder to takeplace at all.46 Perhaps the famine and the plague are one and the same-confusion mayhave arisen (particularlyif Dionysius was using Greek sources) from the fact thatkitg6; and XotiL6o are very similar. Alternatively, cf. Pelling 127-29 onchronological displacement.47 Jones (93) is less than convincing when he asserts that "the story of thedeath of Tatius is told so as to absolve Romulus of all blame." The argumentthatRomulus failed to punish the killers of Tatius, not because he was glad to be ridof him, but in order to avoid causing an outbreak of faction-fighting among hissubjects is somewhat tendentious: Plutarch does not use a purpose clause; hesimply states the fact that there was no trouble: rov 6E tpay.drcov ov56vSIETapat?ev, o6? 6St?eaxaiaoe roi; Xaptivou;...(23.5). Also, the occurrence ofthe plague hardly supports the view that the story is told "so as to absolveRomulus of all blame."48 The terminology is significant: Theseus' desire on his return was to rule(apXEtv) as before and direct the state (Kaco0ly?ioat 'roixcoxt-To?{LaTro), asreported in Th. 35.2; cf. Dion. Hal. 2.56.3.

372


14/16

Plutarch'sCompositionalMethodsOther sources testify to strainedrelationsbetweenRomulusandthe Senateand to his unpopularbehaviour,49 ut as far as the outwardtrappingsof power

are concerned, Livy mentions only the Celeres in connection with Romulus'lateractions(theothersare discussed earlierat 1.8 andarepronouncednecessaryfor gainingrespectfor the law), while Dionysius describesthe Lictoresand thetoga in his account of the reign of Tarquinius 3.61.2). Dio Cassius seems tohave dealt with these topics, includingRomulus' red shoes, but it is not clearthat he did so in the context of Romulus' later conduct.50Plutarch's uxtaposingof the details of the outward symbols of royal power and the account ofRomulus' degenerationto tyrannical ways looks very much like a device tointensifythe reader'sdisapproval.Then there are the rapes. In Syn.l, Plutarch criticizes Theseus on threegrounds:(1) for carryingoff so manywomen;(2) because, in the case of Helen,he was too old;51and (3) because he most probablyacted "out of hubrisandlust."Romulus,by contrast,took only one Sabine wife and treated her and allthe others in an exemplaryfashion. Moreover,the results of his actions wereessentially good forRome, whereas Theseus' involvementsbroughtnothingbuttroubleto the Athenians.This criticism of Theseus is foreshadowed in the narrative. At 29.1-2,Plutarchcondemnsthedishonourableacts which had unfortunate onsequences(thosewithAnaxo,thedaughtersof Sinis andCercyon,Periboea,Phereboeaandlope) and says that it was a passion for Aigle which caused him to abandonAriadne-something tLirKaXXiv...r16e icpe':ovoav.52 The process beginsearlier than this, however, with the sad tale of Perigune, daughterof Sinis,which is inserted, somewhat incongruously (but not innocently), into theaccount of Theseus' fights with the monsters on his way to Athens (8.3-5).The pictureof the young woman supplicatingthe plants to help her hide is sotouching and pathetic that it contributes much to the negative impression weformof Theseus when he impregnatesher,gives her to someone else andgoesoff in searchof new adventures.This incident,relatedearly in theLife and insome detail, sets the tone for Theseus' future encounters with women. The

49 E.g. Livy 1.15; Dion. Hal. 2.56.1-4; Dio Cass. 1.5.7.50 Cf. Zonaras 7.4; Ioann. Laur. Lyd. De Mag. 1.7.51 Cf. Isoc. Helen 18-19; other accounts make Theseus less than fullyresponsible: Diod. Sic. 4.63 (Pirithous persuaded him to do it); Paus. 1.41.4 (hewanted to be related to the Dioscuri); see Brommer93-96.52 Cf. Theoc. 2.45-6; Cat. 64; Ovid Her. 10, A. A. 1. 527-64, Met. 8.172; seealso Brommer 86-92; Herter 1133-41. It should be noted, however, that bothhere and in his lengthy discussion of the relationship between Theseus andAriadne in Th. 20, Plutarch eschews mention of other traditions more favourableto Theseus-(1) that Ariadne was taken away by force from Theseus by Dionysus(Apollod. Ep. 1.9; Diod. Sic. 4.61. 5; Paus. 10.29.3); (2) that Athena toldTheseus to leave Ariadne and go to Athens (Pherecydes fr. 148); (3) that Ariadnewas killed by Artemis on Naxos for going with Theseus when she was alreadybetrothed to Dionysus (Od. 11.321).

373


15/16

David H. J. LarmourPerigune episode is, in effect, the first instance of the behaviour to whichAriadne alls victimlater.53

In contrast, the rape of the Sabine women is, as Jones (92-3) shows,presentedin as favourablea light as possible, by imputing positive motives toRomulus well before the event. The idea thathe simplywanted to go to warandmade an unprovokedattack s rejected(14.1).54In 9.2, we are told that therapewas not an act of hubris, but of necessity, and that the women were treatedrEIptLTtx;afterwards. At 14. 2, Plutarch says Romulus hoped to make theoutragean occasion for some sort of union with the Sabinepeople, and at 14.7,we are again reminded that the rape was committed, not out of hubris orcriminality, but "with the fixed intention of uniting the two peoples in thestrongest bonds" (outgciL tctt Kaiocd vacyaytv ei; Tca6Tb xt yevrl xTiatpYtclacS; avayKoct; 8toavor0evaSc;). Livy thinks the motive was to getwives (1.9.1; 13.3.7). Dionysius (2.1.1) gives threepossible reasons:scarcityof wives, the desire for war and the hope of unitingwith the Sabines,and, likePlutarch,prefersthe last-mentioned.Finally, we may consider the domestic misfortunes. In Syn. 3, Plutarchsuggests thatthesecalamitieswere,to some extent,causedby thecharacteristicsand passions of the men involved. Both Theseus and Romulus behaved withunreasoningangerin dealingwith a son anda brother espectively,but Theseus"was overthrownby a heavier blow" and was driven to do wrong by threepowerful forces: "love, jealousy and the lies of a woman." Also, Romulus'anger led to direct action and the most regrettableresults, while Theseus'consistedof "onlyabusive words"and "anold man'scurse"-the restwas due to"theyouth'sown badluck"(somethingof an understatement f Theseus' role inmost versions).In the narrative, oo, the storyof Hippolytus s mentionedin a remarkablycursory fashion (Th. 28.2): there is nothing to add to what the poets say.Plutarcheven casts doubt on the authenticityof the name Hippolytus-andhence moves us furtheraway fromEuripides'tragedy-by recordingPindar'salternativeappellation,Demophoon.References to Hippolytusin the Moralia(28A; 314A-B) show thatPlutarchwas familiarwith the canonicalEuripideanversion, which makes its way into several other accounts of the life ofTheseus,55but, clearly, a moredetailedaccountin his Theseus would make itratherdifficult to argueagainstRomulus so effectively in theSynkrisis.Later, the discussion turns to how Theseus treatedhis fatherand mother(Syn. 5.2; 6.5), and to Romulus'behaviour owardshis motherandgrandfather(Syn. 5). This time the Romancomes off better,for he saved his mother fromdeath and helped his grandfather,"doing him no harm,either deliberatelyor

53 The story does not appear in any other extant source; Brommer's suggestion(6) that Paus. 10.25.7 contains a shortened version is not convincing.4At Mor. 268B, however, Plutarch contrasts the 7toEitKOb;Kai &p?iLavtoSRomulus with the ciprlvtK6;Numa.55 E.g. Diod. Sic.4.62; Apollod. Ep. 1.17-19; Paus. 1.22; 2.32.1-4; cf. Schol.ad Od. 11.321; Ovid, Met. 15.497-505; Herter 1183-97.

374


16/16

Plutarch'sCompositionalMethodsaccidentally."Theseus, however, by forgettingto changehis sail, to all intentsandpurposesmurdered is father.He mayalso have abandonedhis mother.

Let us look at the narrative. We are told (9.1) that after the death ofAmulius,Romulus andRemus,amongother otherthings, "paid fittinghonoursto theirmother"-a pious little detailwhich does notappear n otheraccounts.56Theseus' forgettingaboutthe sail is usuallyattributed o his grief over the lossof Ariadne,57but Plutarchsays he forgot on account of his joy ('i6 Xapaq,22.1) at his success in outwittingMinos. As for his mother,Plutarchsays heleft her with Helen in the chargeof Aphidnusat Aphidnae,while he went offwith Pirithous n search of Aidoneus'daughter 31.3-4). When the Tyndaridaestormed the town, Aethra was taken captive. Although he cites Hereas'statement that Theseus fought in the battle, Plutarch concludes that it isunlikely that he was present when his mother was captured(32.7), therebyemphasizinghis neglectfulness. This parallels the carelessness which caused,albeit indirectly, hedeath of Aigeus.58It is by the use of such devices as these, then, that Plutarch fashions anarrativewhich manages both to enhance the parallelsbetween Theseus andRomulus and, more importantly, to display in their actions those traits ofcharacterand moralitywhich are to be delineatedin the Synkrisis.As we haveseen, thereis muchsubtletyemployedin theprocessof "leading" hereader-acertain emphasis here, a hint or a suggestion there. The result is a polishedveneer of objectivity which almost, but not entirely, succeeds in coveringPlutarch'sdidacticism. Assuming that the same processes are at work in theotherLives (and,given Plutarch'swell-documentedpracticeof manipulatinghissources in general, this is surelya valid assumption), t seems appropriatehatdue attentionbe given to the Synkrisis:thereare at least as manyreasons forreading it first, before tackling the narrative,as there are for readingit in itsintendedposition.59

56 Indeed,therewas a versionin which Ilia was killed by Amulius:Dionysius(1.79) cannotdecide;Livy says (1.4.3) she was imprisoned;Dio (Tzet. ad Lyc.1232) seems not to thinkshe was killed.57 Cf. Apollod.Ep. 1.10; Diod. Sic. 4.61.10.58 Cf. Apollod. Bibl. 3.10.7, Ep. 1.23; Paus. 1.41.4. Diodorus (4.63.3-5)gives an accountwhich is less hostile to Theseus:he left his best men behindtoguardhis mother and Helen and tried to dissuadePirithous rom going on hisquest,but,when he insisted,was boundby his oathsto accompany im.59 I shouldlike to thankDavid Sansone,AristoulaGeorgiadouand the TAPAreviewers for their helpful comments and suggestions.

375

Documents

Composición del Teseo y Rómulo de Plutarco