You are on page 1of 14

Philanthrpia and

Plutarchs Theseus

Philautia

in

by Maria do Cu Fialho
By its very nature Theseuss Life is part of a literary genre where
ambiguity between historical facts and romantic fiction1 is
present. The facticity derives from history and the fiction from
what Aristoteles believed to be the poetic discourse a degree of
universality that history possesses to a much lesser extent.
Thus, the biography serves a didactic and moralizing goal by
making use of the facts in the lives of the individuals that may
potentially be shaped in such a way as to turn the fate of these
individuals into a positive or negative exemplum for the reader,
and to illustrate the writers strong beliefs about history, politics,
moral standards, etc.
In the particular case of Theseus and Romuluss Parallel
Lives, from the very beginning we encounter two founders.
Furthermore, these are the only two biographies by Plutarch
about founders whose existence is merged with the mythical
origins of the cities to which they are connected: Athens and
Rome. Plutarch is aware of this and so it is for this reason that
the proem to these two Lives has an unusual nature, which
results from the peculiarity of these two heroes, who belong to
distant and vague eras and whose historical accuracy is difficult
to verify, thereby making them prone to legend and fable.
Plutarch tries to ensure as much as possible that muthodes is
subordinated to logos, thereby following his systematic principle
in the Vitae2: May I therefore succeed in purifying Fable (to
muthodes), making her submit to reason (logoi) and take on the
semblance of History.
In the biography of Theseus, Plutarch achieves this by
exposing the legacy of information and different traditional
versions that he has to the methodological use of various
1
H. Bauz, Humanismo y acciones en Las Vidas de Plutarco, in J. Ferreira
(ed.), Plutarco Educador da Europa, Actas do Congresso, Porto, Fundao Eng. Antnio
de Almeida, 2002, p. 183.
2
Vit. Thes. 1. 3. For the English translation of Plutarchs quotations I borrow B.
Perrins (Loeb Classical Library, 1967).

72

Maria do Cu Fialho

reasoning procedures these procedures are clearly explained


and defined by Carmine Ampolo in the preface to his bilingual
edition of the Lives of Theseus and Romulus.3
The contraposition of documented sources or the listing of
those documents that corroborate one another throughout
Theseuss Life, confirms, as C. Ampolo noted, that Plutarch
wrote the prologue within the rhetorical framework that is
typical of introductions to historical works.4 Not only do they
follow a rationalistic way of thinking, but they are also aimed at
protecting their author from criticism of inaccuracy.
Plutarch recognises that distance in time in relation to the
loss of information about the life of Theseus contributed to the
obscuring of distant events. However, according to him the
history of more recent events raises other difficulties such as
distortion, whether subjective or premeditated, as carried out by
poets. Plutarch admits to this in the Life of Pericles (13. 14-16),
in a clear reference to the harm caused by comedy.
Above all, the comparison made between Theseus and
Romulus is due to the fact that both individuals are linked to
the origin of Athens and Rome, two cities which are similar to
each other.
At first, Theseus is called oikists, founder, and Romulus is
called patr, father. This latter word expresses a visceral, much
deeper relationship with the city that was founded, than oikists.5

Plutarch, Le Vite di Teseo e Romolo, a cura di C. Ampolo e M. Manfredini,


Verona, Fondazione Lorenzo Valla, 19932, p. xii sqq.: when Plutarch is faced with the
two opposing versions, he chooses the most credible and the most proven one (the
author mentions this in Thes. 31. 2); this attitude of his leads him to omit famous
episodes in the life of Theseus, or to refer to them rationally, as occurs in much of
what is said about the expedition to Crete. The same restriction of the Fantastic
occurs in the traditional episode relating to Pirithouss descent to Hades, in the same
manner of the Atthidographers. Sometimes, when faced with equally credible versions,
Plutarch simply reproduces them. Lack of trust is systematic in poets, mainly in comic
poets, and also in tragic poets, especially in Euripedes. Poets versions are only
accepted when they are confirmed by other sources.
Ampolo points out, in his intoduction to the text and translation, another
element of Plutarchs rationalism, which is his preference for traditional versions that
are related to the establishment of a cult confirmed by its continuance or by the
existence of places where it met in the past. Ampolo also observes Plutarchs need to
separate divine action from that of human.
4
Le Vite di Teseo e Romolo, p. x-xi.
5
Thes. 1. 5.

Philanthrpia and Philautia in Plutarchs Theseus

73

In order to bow to the tradition of an oikists Theseus of


Athens, Plutarch used this terminology and introduced a
difference of degree in the role of the founder. In this way he
prepares the grounds for the highlighting of the distance
between the actions of Aegeuss son and that of Rhea Sylvia
through the verbs he used. Theseus brought together (sunoikise)
Athens while Romulus founded or built (ektise) Rome.6
The verb ktiz indicates action of a much further reach than
the former. Ktiz means to create from nothing and to set up
rules. It also implies a previous concept of the whole and its
fulfilment with a robustness that guarantees stability and
durability; whereas sunoikiz presupposes reconversion, that is to
say, the abandonment of a place or habits and the creation of a
new space and new common rules Theseus will have to destroy
the local pritaneis so as to impose a pritaneus that is common to
everyone.7
The efficacy of his undertaking will, in this way, derive from
the human ability to make the project last by means of
continually exercising a wise balance and this demands the
determined intervention of a governor. In the sunkrisis of the
biographies of both individuals, Plutarch will decisively choose
to elevate Romulus over Theseus and prepares to do this right
from the first moment.
Will the difference between Romulus and Theseuss actions
in founding the cities, by any chance, express itself in a rooted
difference between the stability of aniktos Rhm8 and the
adventure of the uncertainty in the democracy of Athens? Will
the profile of each of the individuals reveal the nature and the
character of the work that they carried out?
I will concentrate my analysis on Theseus, in particular, and
the guiding principles that shape his character and govern his
behaviour in Plutarchs work. Naturally, this leads me to talk
about the way in which Plutarch used the traditional
information about the founder of Athens in correlation with his
view on the foundations and qualities of the work that was
created sunoikismos and the Athenian democracy. As C.
Ampolo points out, Plutarch used the cultural memory duly
6

Ibid. 2. 2.
Ibid. 24. 3.
8
Ibid. 1. 5.
7

74

Maria do Cu Fialho

subjected to the filter of rationalization, whenever the accuracy


of the historical sources were lacking, in order to give
consistency to Theseuss life.9
Theseus causes controversy with regards to his origin and to
his characteristic features. I am particularly open to H. Walkers
thesis presented in his book Theseus and Athens10 and supported
by H. Herter,11 according to which Theseus was originally a
local hero in the rural part of Northeast Attica.
Marathon and Aphidnae are indeed the settings where some
of the oldest events of the myth took place, such as the fight
against the bull or the concealment of Helen, who had been
kidnapped as a child. The decoration of the Stoa poikil in
Athens, according to Pausaniass description (I 15. 3) continues
to be a result of Theseuss attachment to Marathon. The hero
was represented there as if he were rising up from the ground to
fight the Persians in Marathon. This resembles the scene
described by Herodotus regarding the Persian attempt to steal
the treasures from the sanctuary of Delphi when two local
heroes, Philacus and Autonous arise from their sacred tombs in
order to help to expel the enemy from the territory.12
The mythical birth of Theseus in Troezen may, therefore, be
part of a later period of expansion in knowledge about the hero
and of his welcoming, if we bear in mind that, before the
settlement of the Dorians in the region, it seemed to have been
inhabited by Ionians, who obviously would have come from the
North.
Various bronze tripods were found in Olympia, probably
dating from the VII century B.C. and in which we can see the
Minotaur in the typical shape that we recognise in figurative art,
that is, with a human body and a bulls head.13 The myth of the
Minotaur was connected to Athens because of the human
tribute that this city sent to Crete and because of Theseuss
liberating role. Therefore, does the bronze image mean that the
9
La paideia degli eroi fondatori ledicazione e la giovinezza nelle Vite di Teseo
e di Romolo, in J. Ferreira (ed.), Plutarco Educador da Europa, p. 281 sqq.
10
H. Walker, Theseus and Athens, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1995, p. 9
sqq.
11
See, from H. Herter, the article Theseus der Joner, Rheinisches Museum,
vol. 85, 1936, 177-239. See also RE s.v. Theseus.
12
Herodotus VIII 38-39.
13
See Walker, Theseus and Athens, p. 16.

Philanthrpia and Philautia in Plutarchs Theseus

75

city had by that time already adopted the hero as its own, even
though there is no indication of a fight or of the presence of
someone who beat the Minotaur? One should point out that the
oldest image of the fight between the hero and the monster of
Crete can be seen on a Cycladic amphora which dates from the
first half of the VII century B.C. and which can be found in the
museum of Basel.
Nevertheless, a unique genealogy and mythical geographical
origin stems from peoples increasing acceptance of the hero
throughout the Hellenic lands. Thus, he who, par excellence,
will become the guardian hero of Athens, the creator of
sunoikismos and the figure that will come to symbolize the values
of Athens14 is the son of the union between Aegeus, a
descendent of the local people of Attica, and a woman from the
house of Pelops Dorian, of course, par excellence.15 Plutarch
explains that this alliance was consummated by mistake (apat)
or by chance from a misinterpreted oracle.16
This decentralized origin of the son of the Athenian
monarch, in relation to Athens, means that he will have to go
through Troezen to reach Athens, until he obtains his fathers
approval and is adopted by the city. It is a road of adventures
and dangers copied from those of Heracles, as Plutarch
acknowledges.
The intellectual of Chaeronea talks about the infancy and
the adolescence of a Theseus who was brought up in secret
under a false paternal reference that of Poseidon and who is
later faced with the true paternal reference, that of a human
father at the start of his manhood by means of tokens
hidden under the rock that he was able to remove. Thus, the
hero learns of his true identity, but the two above references are
important to what Walker calls double or ambiguous identity,
even despite Plutarchs rationalized version.17 This is evident
14

As it is well known, this idealization is a consequence of a time of crisis and it


is evident in Euripidess Supplicants or in Sophocless Coloneus.
15
Walker, in chapter 2 of Theseus and Athens shows how the profile of the hero
undergoes changes, even in the 5th century, that result from the projection of
concepts of government and the role of the governor in that period or from the
questioning of the political structures and their efficacy.
16
Thes. 3. 5.
17
Le vite di Teseo e Romolo, chapter 3. The author states that, in Bacchylides,
Theseus is considered to be the son of Poseidon. However, there are still traces of that

76

Maria do Cu Fialho

when Theseus tries to assert his image and follows a criterion of


demanding and outstanding behaviour, which he imposes on
himself because he is publicly regarded as the son of a god and
because of the way in which he seeks to present himself in front
of his true father.18
Thus, Theseus chooses to travel across land through Athens
instead of going by sea because this was the most difficult route
and the one that would enable him to show his courage, and he
also calculates the effect that his public arrival at the city would
have.
Ampolo19 remarks that the many aspects that make up the
image of Theseus resulted in different explanations of his true
original dimension: among these is that of Heracless copy, or
the Ionian hero, or the hero who initiates rites of passage from
ephebism to adulthood for example the episode of the
adventure in Crete and of the rescue.
It seems to me that, in Plutarch, Theseus gathers features
that prove the merging of readings and various projections on
the image, giving it complexity and contradictions that become
inalienable from the profile presented to us. If, indeed, the
expedition to Crete can reflect an initiating and centrifugal ritual
that begins in Athens, to then go back to this city and fully show
the young mans self-assertiveness and exuberance, then, I think
that the route taken from Troezen to Athens should be
considered a similar ritual because it shows a change from
childhood and maternal protection to paternal presence and
paternal acceptance. As Plutarch points out, he travels on his
way without using a name and faces several obstacles which he
overcomes so that in the end at a banquet he can publicly
display, in the face of Aegeus, the paternal weapon which will
become his symbol and which will be recognised even if he does
not make himself known.
The similarities between Heracles and Theseuss deeds and
the affinity between the two characters give Plutarch an
important reason to choose the itinerary followed by Aegeuss
son his route to Athens through Megara instead of by sea.
affiliation, even later on, such as in Euripidess Hippolitus. Only this way does the
reason for the three wishes that Poseidon grants Theseus make sense.
18
Thes. 7. 2. And also the rivalry towards Heracless example.
19
Le vite di Teseo e Romolo, p. xxvi-xxvii.

Philanthrpia and Philautia in Plutarchs Theseus

77

Plutarch does not give us much information about Theseuss


education and only mentions that Theseus was raised by his
paternal grandfather, Pittheus, sophotatos, who, however, had a
practical wisdom that was certainly used with talent to persuade
Aegeus to become close to Aethra, and would have been passed
on to his grandson as mtis, which was demonstrated in the
deeds in Crete and that was more suitable of the prototype of
the Ionian hero. On the other hand, we only know the name of
Theseuss tutor, Connidas20 there is no reference to his
pedagogical strategy or to its efficacy. Plutarch seems to use this
procedure to emphasize another aspect in Theseuss education
the paradigmatic example of Heracless actions, which was
passed on through stories that caused him to be greatly admired.
This is the reason behind the choice of the route to Athens21: In
like manner Theseus admired the valour of Heracles, until by
night his dreams were of the heros achievements, and by day his
ardour led him along and spurred him on his purpose to achieve
the like.
Theseuss similarity to Heracles is shaped by the intellectual
man of Chaeronea based on his beliefs about the pedagogical
role of the example given by illustrious actions performed on the
human soul and which he frequently refers to in his writings of
moral philosophy. Everything occurs in such a way that it is as if
Plutarch wanted to draw attention to the educational and
formative potential of the Lifes themselves, which he writes
through the pedagogical example of Heracles.
Plutarch dedicates one of the most beautiful and expressive
parts of the Lives to the pegagogical example the beginning of
Pericless biography22:
A colour is suited to the eye if it its freshness, and its pleasantness as
well, stimulates and nourishes the vision; and so our intellectual
vision (dianoian) must be applied to such objects as, by their very
charm, invite it onward to its own proper good.
Such objects are to be found in virtuous deeds (en tois aparets
ergois); these implant in those who search them out a great and
zealous eagerness which leads to imitation.

20

Thes. 4.
Thes. 6. 7.
22
Per. 1. 3-4.
21

78

Maria do Cu Fialho

The works born from aret which are platonically changed into
an equivalent to good, and whose beauty obliges, and fascinates
the human soul into admiring it, thus becoming a driving force
behind human behaviour, act by stirring those who become
familiar with them to feel a natural desire to imitate (mimsis), to
emulate and to equal them (zlos kai prothumia).23
Plutarch picks up again this line of thinking and extends it
in the same Vita (in 2. 1-2).
For the polygraph of Chaeronea, that charm that the works
of aret exerted on the developing soul presupposes in the latter
a predisposition which is also innate aret and that, after
receiving the stimulus of a paradigmatic action which imposes
itself in the form of a spectacle, aspires to rise above the
superiority of this action and match forces with it in a healthy
emulation that is translated into actions.
Thus, the dangers that Theseus faced on his journey to
Athens and the wrongdoers who were punished and destroyed
show the active effect of the example on a young man whose
predisposition to philantrpia and to megalophrosun is carried
out through actions that aim to exert courage and to clear the
way for those who come after him. That series of adventures
appears in Plutarchs account and it is part of an accomplished,
coherent and non-dispersed journey toward the paternal figure.
Ampolo notes the care that Plutarch takes with his account of
the early youth of his heroes so that he can point out the
potential of the characteristics that will dominate their lives.24
In an impulse of generosity and by practising the strength of
the example, Theseus offers to be part of the group of hostages
that Minos is to be given. This behaviour draws admiration
from the Athenians because of his grandeur of soul (phronma)
and because of his devotion to the people (dmotikon).25
Thus, Plutarch puts aside Hellanicuss version and
contradicts it when Hellanicus asserts that the city did not hold
a draw to choose the young men and maiden women that it
23

With regards to the role of emulation as one of the essential parts in the moral
education of the characters in Plutarchs Vitae, and the place that the reference to zlos
occupies in the particular development of the scheme of the biographies see A. P.
Jimnez, Plutarco. Vidas paralelas I, introd. traduction y anotaciones, Madrid, Gredos,
1985, p. 100-105.
24
La paideia degli eroi fondatori, p. 282-285.
25
Thes. 17. 2.

Philanthrpia and Philautia in Plutarchs Theseus

79

would send, instead it was king Minos himself who came to


choose them and also he who chose Theseus in the first
place....26
The oikists, founder of rites, the liberator of paths and of
the Athenian youth lacks the ability of exercising asksis
reason on the irrational part of the soul.27 Even in the grandeur
of spirit that leads him to face danger, he realises the impulsive
element that forces him to succumb to a pleasure in the shape of
an uncontrolled ers this causes his ruin. Plutarch makes
reference to more than a dozen women who Theseus took by
force or seduced and abandoned leading up to the climax of his
hubris of hdon, which was reached with the kidnapping of
Helen whilst she was still a child28: But one may suspect that
these deeds of his were done in lustful wantonness.
This fact means that, in the case of Theseus, the promising
qualities that he showed in his youth will enter into progressive
conflict with the strength of his emotional impulses that he will
be unable to control. In this way he will be the victim of his
own disturbed soul and will put at risk the good order of the
city that he governs. It is not generosity, daughter of impulse,
that must guide the actions of a governor, but rather his
devotion to the common well-being. Even if the impulse again
results in the release of someone, because it is an impulse, and
albeit a generous one, it continues to represent a form of
imprisonment of man by irrational forces, as occurs with eros. In
the first case it is a form of philautia which has beneficial
consequences, whereas in the latter case philautia will have
disastrous consequences.
If, for Plutarch, human misfortunes cannot always be
blamed on the gods, but rather on chance and human actions,
which when combined with tukh can lead man to pain,29 then
certainly the philosopher perceived Theseuss fate as an example
of that principle and the very sunkrisis proves this30 and he
26

Ibid. 17. 3.
See A. Prez Jimnez, Vidas paralelas, I, p. 35 sqq. about the asksis as one of
the main conditions to obtain virtue.
28
Rom. 35. 2.
29
See A. Prez Jimnez, Atitudes de lhombre frente a la Tyche en las Vidas
Paralelas de Plutarco, Boletin del Istituto de Estudios helenicos, vol. 7, 1973, p. 101110.
30
Rom. 32. 1.
27

80

Maria do Cu Fialho

sees the kidnapping of Helen as one of the causes for the


discomfort and the sedition (stasis) of the Athenian people
against their governor.31
Due to a structural flaw in his character, the creator of
sunoikismos did not know how to give stability and solidity to a
social bond which is the basis of the structure of an organized
society marriage. On the other hand, Romulus who was the
founder and builder of Rome used this bond as the cornerstone
of Roman society and as one of the pillars for the political
conciliation and alliance that strengthened the state and caused
Rome to prosper32:
Romulus, on the other hand, in the first place, although he carried
off nearly eight hundred women, took them not all to wife, but
only one, as they say, Hersilia, and distributed the rest among the
best of the citizens. And in the second place, by the subsequent
honour, love, and righteous treatment given to these women, he
made it clear that his deed of violence and injustice was a most
honourable achievement, and one most adapted to promote
political partnership. In this way he intermixed and blended the
two peoples with one another, and supplied his state with a flowing
fountain of strength and good will for the time to come.

Moreover, the creator of synecism, who was a man of impulsive


actions, was unable to develop, through exertion and pertinacy,
the rational qualities of the good governor, even simply as the
guardian of the laws, in such a way as to be able to give some
consistency to the new form of the City. Pleasure, in the form
of ers, acted as an element of dispersion and centrifugal force
that uprooted him from Athens. He promised isoimoiria to the
people, but in fact only divided them into social classes without
equal rights.33 He also promised them a government without a
king and a democracy, in which he should only be commander
in war and guardian of the laws, while in all else everyone
should be on an equal footing.34 However, he distanced himself
31

Thes. 31 sqq.
Rom. 35. 2-3. For a better understanding of the importance of the text in the
context of the sunkrisis in the biography of Theseus and Romulus, see H. Erbse, Die
Bedeutung der Synkrisis in den Parallelbiographien Plutarchs, Hermes, vol. 84, 1956,
p. 398-424.
33
25. 1-2.
34
24. 2.
32

Philanthrpia and Philautia in Plutarchs Theseus

81

from the city and let the people advance without a guide and
become dependent on demagogues and on their own hidden
vices. He let then the various social classes fight one another.35
What does Theseus find when he returns to the city, his soul
disturbed, after having given free reign to emotional impulses?36
But when he desired to rule again as before, and to direct the state,
he became involved in factions and disturbances; he found that
those who hated him when he went away, had now added to their
hatred contempt, and he saw that a large part of the people were
corrupted, and wished to be cajoled into service instead of doing
silently what they were told to do.

In Plutarchs opinion, the role of the ideal governor, which he


compares to the role of the monarch who acts in the same
orderly manner with which reason works on the soul, is far from
this exceptional figure, but rather tainted by contradictions and
by structural flaws that will lead to his exile and death when he
throws himself off the top of a rock.
His death may be interpreted as the paradigmatic image of
the life trajectory of the figure, which rose to the highest possible
level and fell into the abyss this being an anthropological view
that is very dear to ancient archaic Greek poetry, to classical
tragedy37 and to the Histories of Herodotus. This means that,
despite the fact that Plutarch despises the accounts of poets, he
presents us with an almost tragic life trajectory of a heroic figure,
the difference being that the founder of Athens lacks the
necessary awareness of limits and mistakes, typical of tragic
heroes.
In conclusion, Theseus seems to have amongst his qualities
and weaknesses, those qualities and weaknesses of his own city,
in tight symbiosis, and this is something that Plutarch would
have consciously planned so that the vices and the magnitude of
the creator of sunoikismos would take on an archaic dimension,
etymologically speaking. In my opinion, Theseuss praxis shows
the etiology of the flaws and contradictions of the Athenian
democracy and his fate uncovers the anticipation of the fate of a
city that had an exceptional political and cultural splendour
35

32. 1 sqq.
35. 2.
37
See, for example, the 4th stasimon of King Oedipus.
36

82

Maria do Cu Fialho

marked by philantrpia and megalophrosun, but which did not


have the asksis that would mitigate against the greed for power
and profit.
The fact is that asksis works through the wise and
determined action of the governor, in a monarchy the
governor is attentive to his own moral balance as a source of
competence to secure the harmony of the state of which he is in
charge.38
That balance is difficult to achieve and it requires constant
vigilance, and the frontier that separates it from degeneration
into democracy or into tyranny is diminished, following the
Aristotelian model of the vices as moral perversions of the
mesots, pointing in opposite directions. For Plutarch,
democracy and tyranny are both styles of adulterated
government, and although they are opposite to each other, as
hamartmata, they come from the same source the loss of the
just relationship between the governor and the power that he
has, stemming from either philantrpia or philautia,39 and which
will change the governor into a demagogue or a tyrant. This is
highlighted in the sunkrisis40:
Although Theseus and Romulus were both statesmen by nature,
neither maintained to the end the true character of a king, but both
deviated from it and underwent a change, the former in the
direction of democracy, the latter in the direction of tyranny,
making thus the same mistake through opposite affections. For the
ruler must preserve first of all the realm itself, and this is preserved
no less by refraining from what is unbecoming than by cleaving to
what is becoming. But he who remits or extends his authority is no
longer a king or a ruler; he becomes either a demagogue or a
38
A. Prez Jimnez makes the supposition, through examples, that the Vitae and
their final sunkrisis, including that of Theseus and Romulus, are frameworks, of tacit
application, for the reading of the history of Rome in I A.D. (Las Biografias de
Plutarco como medio de propaganda imperial?, in A. Prez Jimnez, J. Ribeiro
Ferreira, M. C. Fialho (ed.), O retrato literrio e a biografia como estratgia de teorizao
poltica, Coimbra-Mlaga, Imprensa da Universidade/Universidade de Mlaga, 2004,
p. 49-64).
39
Rom. 31.
40
On the function of sunkrisis in the Biographies, see Ch. B. R. Pelling, Synkrisis
in Plutarchs Lives, in F. E. Brenk and I Gallo (ed.), Miscellanea Plutarchea. Atti del I
Convegno di studi su Plutarco (=Quaderni del Giornale Filologico Ferrarese, vol. 8,
1996), p. 83 sqq.; T. Duff, Plutarchs Lives. Exploring Virtue and Vice, Oxford, Oxford
University Press, 1999, chapter 8 (Synkrisis and Synkriseis in the Parallel Lives) and
chapter 9 (The Politics of Parallelism).

Philanthrpia and Philautia in Plutarchs Theseus

83

despot, and implants hatred or contempt in the hearts of his


subjects. However, the first error seems to arise from kindliness
(epieikeias) and humanity (philanthrpias); the second from
selfishness (philautias) and severity (khalepottos).

Plutarch points out the negative presence of philautia in


Romuluss character. Therefore, we can say that it is also visible
in Theseuss behaviour, because eros leads him to follow his own
pleasure, forgetting the city, and that the role of philautia as an
increasing restriction which is not overcome by Theseuss moral
qualities of philantrpia and megalophrosun is more and more
present in the final phase of his life. It is also one of the
responsible elements that provoke a tension that affects the rule
and that contaminates the city.
Plutarch uses the Aristotelian model of pairs of opposite
vices to point out the differences between the Greek and the
Roman leader (and the supremacy of one of them). My question
is: comparing the presentation of the life of Theseus with the
sunkrisis, did not Plutarch force, by convenience, this separation
of the vices of such a complex mythological hero? The fate of
Theseus prefigures the fate of the powerful Athenian democracy,
which was the centre of vibrant culture and thought, identifiable
with philanthrpia and megalophrosun. However, the end of
Theseus and the end of Athenian democracy and supremacy
were due, in a great part, to the philautia of the supreme power
of both and to their fights for internal and external
preponderance.
MARIA DO CU FIALHO
University of Coimbra, Portugal

You might also like