Humanitext Reader

Plutarch · Comparison of Agis and Cleomenes and the Gracchi Brothers §1.1-1.4

Comparison of Their Nature, Upbringing, and Wealth

Passage 1 of 5 · Greek

Summary

Following the completion of the biographies of Agis, Cleomenes, and the Gracchi, the author initiates a parallel comparison of the four figures, focusing on their character, upbringing, and attitude toward wealth.

§1.1ἡμῖν δὲ καὶ ταύτης πέρας ἐχούσης τῆς διηγήσεως ὑπολείπεται λαβεῖν ἐκ παραλλήλου τῶν βίων τὴν ἀποθεώρησιν, τοὺς μὲν οὖν Γράγχους οὐδʼ οἱ πάνυ τἆλλα κακῶς λέγοντες καὶ μισοῦντες ἐτόλμησαν εἰπεῖν ὡς οὐκ εὐφυέστατοι πρὸς ἀρετὴν ἐγένοντο Ῥωμαίων ἁπάντων, καὶ ροφῆς τε καὶ παιδεύσεως ἐκπρεποῦς ἔτυχον· §1.2τἡ δὲ Ἄγιδος καὶ Κλεομένους φύσις ἐρρωμενεστέρα φαίνεται τῆς ἐκείνων γενομένη, παρʼ ὅσον οὔτε παιδείας μεταλαβόντες ὀρθῆς, ἔθεσί τε καὶ διαίταις ἐντραφέντες ὑφʼ ὧν οἱ πρεσβύτεροι πάλαι διεφθόρεισαν, αὑτοὺς ἡγεμόνας εὐτελείας καὶ σωφροσύνης παρέσχον.
Since this narrative also has reached its end, it remains for us to take a comparative view of these lives. Now, as for the Gracchi, not even those who otherwise speak very ill of them and hate them have dared to say that they were not by nature the most finely gifted for virtue of all Romans, and that they did not enjoy an outstanding nurture and education; but the nature of Agis and Cleomenes appears to have been more robust than theirs, inasmuch as, without having shared in a correct education, and having been brought up in customs and ways of life by which their elders had long since been corrupted, they presented themselves as leaders of frugality and temperance.
§1.3ἔτι δὲ οἱ μέν, ὅτε λαμπρότατον εἶχεν ἡ Ῥώμη καὶ μέγιστόν ἀξίωμα καὶ καλῶν ἔργων ζῆλον, ὥσπερ διαδοχὴν ἀρετῆς πατρῴας καὶ προγονικῆς ᾐσχύνθησαν ἐγκαταλιπεῖν οἱ δὲ καὶ πατέρων τἀναντία προῃρημένων γεγονότες, καὶ τὴν πατίδα μοχθηρὰ πράττουσαν καὶ νοσοῦσαν παραλαβόντες, οὐδέν τι διὰ ταῦτα τὴν πρὸς τὸ καλὸν ἀπήμβλυναν ὁρμήν.
Furthermore, the former, at a time when Rome possessed her greatest luster and highest prestige, and a zeal for noble deeds, were ashamed to abandon, as it were, the inheritance of paternal and ancestral virtue; whereas the latter, though born of fathers who had chosen the opposite course, and receiving their country in a wretched and diseased condition, did not on this account at all blunt their impulse toward the noble.
§1.4καὶ μὴν τῆς γε Γράγχων ἀφιλοχρηματίας καὶ πρὸς ἀργύριον ἐγκρατείας μέγιστόν ἐστιν ὅτι λημμάτων ἀδίκων καθαροὺς ἐν ἀρχαῖς καὶ πολιτείαις διεφύλαξαν ἑαυτούς· Ἆγις δὲ κἂν διηγανάκτησεν ἐπὶ τῷ μηδὲν ἀλλότριον λαβεῖν ἐπαινούμενος, ὃς τὴν οὐσίαν τὴν ἑαυτοῦ τοῖς πολίταις ἐπέδωκεν, ἄνευ τῶν ἄλλων κτημάτων ἑξακόσια τάλαντα νομίσματος ἔχουσαν.
Moreover, as for the freedom from love of money and the self-control toward wealth on the part of the Gracchi, the greatest proof is that they kept themselves pure from unlawful gains during their offices and political administrations; but Agis would even have been indignant at being praised for taking nothing that belonged to others, since he gave up his own estate to his fellow-citizens, which, apart from his other possessions, contained six hundred talents in money.
πηλίκον οὖν ἐνόμιζε κακὸν εἶναι τὸ κερδαίνειν ἀδίκως ὁ καὶ δικαίως πλέον ἔχειν ἑτέρου πλεονεξίαν ἡγούμενος;
How great an evil, then, did he think it was to gain wealth unjustly, when he regarded even having more than another justly as a form of greed?

Notes

  1. §1.1ἡμῖν δὲ καὶ ταύτης πέρας ἐχούσης τῆς διηγήσεως ὑπολείπεται λαβεῖν — The genitive absolute `ταύτης πέρας ἐχούσης τῆς διηγήσεως` (since this narrative has reached an end) expresses cause, and is followed by the infinitive phrase `λαβεῖν ... τὴν ἀποθεώρησιν` (to take a comparative view) acting as the subject of the impersonally used verb `ὑπολείπεται`. `ἡμῖν` is a dative of interest.
  2. §1.2παρʼ ὅσον οὔτε παιδείας μεταλαβόντες ὀρθῆς — A clause introduced by the conjunctional phrase `παρʼ ὅσον` (inasmuch as). Although the grammatical subject of the main clause is the feminine singular `ἡ φύσις` (the nature), a 'constructio ad sensum' (construction according to sense) occurs here, with the participles `μεταλαβόντες` (having shared in) and `ἐντραφέντες` (having been brought up) appearing in the masculine plural nominative, referring to the actual agents, Agis and Cleomenes.
  3. §1.4κἂν διηγανάκτησεν — `κἂν` is a crasis of `καὶ ἄν`. The particle `ἄν` combined with the aorist indicative `διηγανάκτησεν` expresses a past potentiality or a conclusion of a condition contrary to fact (he would even have been indignant).

Cite this passage

Plutarch, Comparison of Agis and Cleomenes and the Gracchi Brothers §1.1-1.4. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0007.tlg053.humanitext-grc2:1.1-1.4

Please note the AI-draft status of the translation and the date accessed.

Translation, notes and summary are AI-generated drafts, revised through reader feedback.