How to Be a Leader Read online

  HOW TO BE A LEADER

  ANCIENT WISDOM FOR MODERN READERS

  How to Be a Leader: An Ancient Guide to Wise Leadership by Plutarch

  How to Think about God: An Ancient Guide for Believers and Nonbelievers by Marcus Tullius Cicero

  How to Keep Your Cool: An Ancient Guide to Anger Management by Seneca

  How to Think about War: An Ancient Guide to Foreign Policy by Thucydides

  How to Be Free: An Ancient Guide to the Stoic Life by Epictetus

  How to Be a Friend: An Ancient Guide to True Friendship by Marcus Tullius Cicero

  How to Die: An Ancient Guide to the End of Life by Seneca

  How to Win an Argument: An Ancient Guide to the Art of Persuasion by Marcus Tullius Cicero

  How to Grow Old: Ancient Wisdom for the Second Half of Life by Marcus Tullius Cicero

  How to Run a Country: An Ancient Guide for Modern Leaders by Marcus Tullius Cicero

  How to Win an Election: An Ancient Guide for Modern Politicians by Quintus Tullius Cicero

  HOW TO BE

  A LEADER

  An Ancient Guide to Wise Leadership

  Plutarch

  Selected, translated, and introduced

  by Jeffrey Beneker

  PRINCETON UNIVERSITY PRESS

  PRINCETON AND OXFORD

  Copyright © 2019 by Princeton University Press

  Published by Princeton University Press

  41 William Street, Princeton, New Jersey 08540

  6 Oxford Street, Woodstock, Oxfordshire OX20 1TR

  press.princeton.edu

  All Rights Reserved

  Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

  Names: Plutarch, author. | Beneker, Jeffrey, editor, translator, writer of introduction. | Plutarch. Moralia. Selections. | Plutarch. Moralia. Selections. English.

  Title: How to be a leader : an ancient guide to wise leadership / Plutarch ; edited, translated, and introduced by Jeffrey Beneker.

  Description: Princeton : Princeton University Press, [2019] | Series: Ancient wisdom for modern readers | In Ancient Greek with parallel English translations on facing pages.

  Identifiers: LCCN 2019019549 | ISBN 9780691192116 (hardcover)

  Subjects: LCSH: Plutarch—Translations into English. | Leadership—Early works to 1800.

  Classification: LCC PA4368 .A23 2019 | DDC 873/.01—dc23

  LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2019019549

  British Library Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available

  Editorial: Rob Tempio and Matt Rohal

  Production Editorial: Ali Parrington

  Text and Jacket Design: Pamela L. Schnitter

  Jacket/Cover Credit: The Athena Giustiniani, or Giustiniani Minerva. Parian marble. Antonine Roman copy, 2nd century. Detail. Prisma Archivo / Alamy Stock Photo

  FOR HELEN AND LUIS

  CONTENTS

  Introduction ix

  Notes on the Translation and Greek Text xxi

  To an Uneducated Leader 1

  How to Be a Good Leader 41

  Should an Old Man Engage in Politics? 191

  Important Persons and Terms 341

  Notes 365

  INTRODUCTION

  If you were a builder or stonecutter in the year 100 CE and happened to live near Chaeronea, a small city in central Greece, you might have been hired by Plutarch for a public works project. He would have been in his mid-fifties, too old to perform any heavy lifting himself, but eager to represent the people of Chaeronea and to supervise your work. And if you asked him why he—a learned and prolific writer who had studied in Athens, lectured in Rome, and made connections among the highest ranks of imperial society—bothered with such mundane local matters, like the installation of roofing tiles and the pouring of cement, he would have said, “I’m not building these things for myself, but for my native city.” “City before self,” in fact, might have been a motto that you heard him repeat quite often. It was certainly the basic principle of his political thought, especially as that thought is expressed in the three essays included in this collection: To an Uneducated Leader, How to Be a Good Leader, and Should an Old Man Engage in Politics?

  For centuries leading up to Plutarch’s time, the city had been the fundamental political unit of the Greek world. Often referred to as city-states, Greek cities before the advent of the Roman Empire were independent entities, with their own armies, foreign policy, trade, and political systems. Under Roman control, and so in Plutarch’s day, they remained semi-independent, no longer involved directly in wars or foreign affairs, but still responsible for managing their internal matters, such as sponsoring festivals, raising funds, deciding legal disputes between citizens, and, of course, building public works. The city, then, was the environment in which Greek politicians operated. The English word “politics” is in fact borrowed from Greek and derived from polis, the word for city.

  An underlying assumption of Plutarch’s essays is that all who wished to become civic leaders first had to gain the confidence of their constituents, that is, of their fellow citizens. They practiced politics, and so built their reputations, by speaking in court, holding elected office, and performing benefactions and voluntary service. The rostrum, or speaker’s platform, is especially important in Plutarch’s view of political life. There politicians had their greatest visibility, as they attempted to persuade (and sometimes to trick) their fellow citizens into supporting their programs through legislation, decrees, and the allocation of funds. Leaders could expect to win prestige when the city prospered, and to be blamed when it did not. The accumulation of prestige (and the avoidance of blame) might lead in turn not only to election to more important offices, but also to civic honors and high-profile assignments, such as an embassy to a Roman official or an appointment to a prominent council or priesthood. It is important to note that these politicians were not professionals. They were elite men whose wealth allowed them the leisure for public service, and whose status could be established or enhanced through civic leadership. They would even be expected to use their fortunes to benefit their cities, by funding building projects, for example, or sponsoring festivals. Thus, politics was a place for aristocrats to perform the obligations of their rank and to compete against one another.

  The political arena, in fact, was quite similar to the athletic arena, and Plutarch frequently employs the language of athletics—speaking of contests and competitors—to describe the interaction of politicians. As in sports, so in politics there were races to be won, which produced its own problems. Civic leaders might become focused on their own success rather than on the welfare of the state, conceiving of elections, for example, as competitions to be won mainly for the sake of winning, and interpreting electoral victory as proof of their general superiority. In such an environment, Plutarch’s putative motto, “city before self,” could easily be inverted, as politicians sought not only to enhance their reputations, but also to promote their friends and to enrich themselves at the public’s expense. Their fellow citizens could become tired of all the winning, however, even when the winners had the city’s best interests at heart, and so rather than praising successful politicians, the people might begin to envy them. Envy, in turn, often inspired attempts to derail a politician’s ascendant career by means of factional opposition and personal attacks. None of this was good for a city’s well-being.

  In the three essays presented here, Plutarch seeks above all to emphasize that political leaders must subordinate their own interests to those of the state. Or, rather, he argues in various ways that the welfare of the individual and the welfare of the state are one and the same thing. Thus, he expects the successful political career to be established first and foremost upon an individual’s character an
d personal integrity. The better the person, the better the leader; and the better the leader, the better the state. He makes this argument directly in To an Uneducated Leader, where it takes a theoretical form. In the other two essays, however, Plutarch grounds his advice and arguments in the lived experiences of great (and sometimes failed) leaders of the past. His essays are in that sense a roll call of the most famous political and military leaders of Greco-Roman history. He is aware, however, that times have changed, and that the leaders of the past commanded large armies and governed powerful cities, while those of his day operated in a more restricted sphere: Rome lurks ever in the background, furnishing peace and political stability, but also ready to crush the overly ambitious leader who reaches too far. Plutarch is careful, therefore, to distill from his examples the essence of wise political leadership rather than simply to promote greatness. We read, for example, how Themistocles and Aristides set aside their partisan rivalry whenever they were representing Athens abroad; how Cato the Elder dedicated his life to serving Rome but refused any and all material honors; how Theopompus, king of Sparta, surrendered some of his power in order to make the monarchy more stable; and how Epaminondas of Thebes took the same pride in overseeing the streets as he did in leading the army. Relying on the experiences of these and dozens of other historical figures, Plutarch makes examples from the past relevant to his contemporary audience, and in the process, he has made them relevant to a modern audience as well.

  Plutarch was uniquely suited to write these theoretical and practical essays. Both a native of Greece and a citizen of Rome, he lived during the first and early second centuries of the modern era. Though he called Chaeronea home, he traveled widely, made friends among the Roman elite, and held a priesthood at Delphi. His vast knowledge of politics, philosophy, and history gave him a unique ability not only to observe and evaluate his own time, the period when the Roman Empire was at its height, but also to reflect on both the Greek and the Roman past. His most ambitious literary project was the Parallel Lives, a series of biographies that pair the life of a Greek statesman with that of a Roman in a single book. He also wrote many essays, collectively known as the Moralia, on diverse topics, including politics, ethics, philosophy, and religion. The essays in this book come from that collection.

  Both the Parallel Lives and the Moralia were read widely for more than a millennium after Plutarch’s lifetime, especially in the Greek-speaking realm of the Byzantine Empire. They were first translated into French and English during the sixteenth century, when they began to influence political thinkers and authors, most famously Shakespeare. In the eighteenth century, the Parallel Lives in particular were read for their insight into leadership and government by some of the American founding fathers, who might well have imagined themselves as modern-day Greeks and Romans. Thus, they probably found men like Pericles and Cato to be inspiring role models. Times have changed again, however, and so has the profile of the modern leader. Although Plutarch imagined a male politician, his focus on general principles of leadership make his essays accessible to anyone involved in democratic politics, not just in their native city, but at the state and national levels as well.

  NOTES ON THE TRANSLATION AND GREEK TEXT

  Because Plutarch read so widely in Greek literature, he often expressed his thoughts by quoting from literary texts. In the essays collected here, Plutarch frequently invokes the words of Homer, Pindar, Sophocles, and Euripides, among others. When he does so, I have provided the specific references in the notes. At times he quotes from literature that has been lost to us and for which we lack even the names of the authors and the titles of the works. In those cases, I have put the words or phrases in quotation marks but have not included any reference.

  Plutarch also names many historical figures and sometimes employs technical terms, especially when referring to offices in the Roman political system. For some of these people and terms, the essays themselves explain their meaning, or a simple note is sufficient. For the others, especially those that appear frequently, I have provided very brief biographies and definitions in an appendix.

  As mentioned in the introduction, Plutarch’s essays emphasize general principles of leadership that apply to everyone. Even so, he assumed a male readership and that anyone practicing politics would also be male. In places where he expresses this assumption by using masculine pronouns, I have taken the liberty of broadening his view by making the translation gender neutral. Even so, he sometimes uses examples that will strike the modern reader as archaic: the Persian king should be master of his wife, for instance, or managing the household is women’s work. These are artifacts of Plutarch’s world, and I have let them stand in translation.

  The Greek text published here comes from Plutarch, Moralia Volume X (Harvard University Press, 1936) in the Loeb Classical Library, with only minor changes. The three essays in this volume have the following titles in the Loeb edition: To an Uneducated Ruler (Ad principem ineruditum), Precepts of Statecraft (Praecepta gerendae reipublicae), and Whether an Old Man Should Engage in Public Affairs (An seni respublica gerenda sit).

  HOW TO BE A LEADER

  TO AN UNEDUCATED LEADER

  In this brief essay, Plutarch refutes the notion that the benefit of holding office is merely the opportunity to exercise power. This is the myopic stance of uneducated leaders, whom he portrays as insecure and afraid of the people they govern. Educated leaders, conversely, are primarily concerned with the welfare of their constituents, even at the expense of their own power or safety. A leader becomes educated, in Plutarch’s view, by exposure to philosophy, and in particular to moral philosophy. The greatest benefit to be derived from this sort of education is the development of the Logos, or Reason, which is essential to controlling one’s emotions and impulses. Leaders who allow themselves to be governed by Reason will in turn govern their cities benevolently. The uneducated leader, on the other hand, is plagued by greed, paranoia, and a false sense of grandeur.

  Plutarch holds out god in this essay as the ideal to which leaders should compare and assimilate themselves. This god, however, is not one of the deities of the polytheistic Greek religion, but rather a philosophical concept that Plutarch has borrowed from Plato. It represents a pure Reason and the perfection of moral virtue. Plutarch conceives of this deity as existing in the heavens, where the sun becomes its physical manifestation. And just as the sun in the sky represents the perfection of the deity, so the leader who is governed by Reason exhibits an example of virtue to the citizens of a city, and, even more, this virtuous leader may in turn make the citizens virtuous. Thus, good political leadership depends not on formulating and executing particular policies, but on the moral development of the leaders themselves.

  1. The people of Cyrene were entreating Plato to write laws for them and to reorganize their constitution, but he declined, claiming that it would be difficult to establish laws for the Cyreneans because they were so well off. “For nothing is so naturally haughty” and harsh and hard to govern “as a man” who has acquired a reputation for success.1 For the same reason, it is difficult to act as an advisor about governing to those who hold office, because they are afraid to accept Reason as their own governor, for fear that it will make them subservient to the obligations of their office and so reduce the benefit of their power. These people do not know the example of Theopompus, king of the Spartans, who was the first in Sparta to involve the ephors in the affairs of the kings. When his wife reproached him with the complaint that he would leave to his children an office that was weaker than the one he had received, he replied, “Actually it will be stronger, to the same degree that it is more stable.” For by letting go of the excessive and absolute character of his office, he escaped envy and so avoided danger. And yet, when Theopompus diverted royal power to the ephors, which was like diverting the current of a great stream, he deprived himself of whatever power he granted to them. Reason that has been conditioned by philosophy, however, once it has been established as a counselor
and protector of the one who governs, removes the unstable element of power and leaves behind what is sound, just as happens when we apply Reason to the maintenance of our health.

  2. Most kings and leaders, however, lack sense, and so they imitate the unskilled sculptors who believe that their colossal statues appear great and strong when they fashion their figures with a mighty stride, a straining body, and a gaping mouth. These kings and leaders, because they speak with a low-pitched voice, cast a harsh gaze, affect a cantankerous manner, and hold themselves aloof in their daily lives, suppose that they are imitating the dignity and solemnity of leadership. In fact, they are not at all different from those colossal statues, which on the exterior possess a heroic and divine facade but inside are filled with earth and stone and lead.2 In the case of the statues, however, this weight keeps their upright posture stable and steady, while uneducated generals and leaders are oftentimes tripped up and toppled over by their innate foolishness. For they establish their lofty power upon a pedestal that has not been leveled, and so it cannot stand upright. Moreover, just as a builder’s rule is first established straight and unbending, and then is used to correct the alignment of everything else through adjustments and juxtapositions with respect to it, in the very same way those who govern must first achieve governance of themselves, straighten out their souls, and set their character aright, and then they should assimilate their subjects to themselves. For the one who is tipping over cannot straighten up someone else, nor can the ignorant person teach, the disorderly establish order, the disorganized organize, the ungoverned govern. But most leaders misunderstand this, thinking instead that the greatest benefit in governing is the freedom from being governed themselves. Take the king of the Persians for instance: He believed that everyone was his slave except for his wife, over whom he ought especially to have been the master.