Opinion: Cato the Elder by Plutarch

Commonly referred to as Censorius (the Censor), Sapiens (the Wise), Priscus (the Ancient), or Major, Cato the Elder, or Cato the Censor, (to distinguish him from his great-grandson, Cato the Younger) known for his conservatism and opposition to Hellenization.
The telling of Cato the Elder by Plutarch, a Greek historian and biographer (C.A.D. 46-120) (Platzner, 2008), reveals not only Cato the man, his virtues, or the lack there of, but also a bias introduced into Plutarchs storytelling. His sources are suspect as he is noted for observation and criticisms rather than critical analysis. Plutarchs depiction of Cato appears to be that of a man’s covetous wanting, rather than that of a detached observer (Duckworth, 2002).

These being the case, Plutarch’s observations are more emotional than consistent with his observations, unstable and predetermined, being that a Greek was documenting the heroic, or not, exploits of a great Roman Soldier. It appears that Plutarch was unable to draw into his perception surrounding his own world view, the fact that a man such as a Roman warrior was able to forgo fortune and favour, and pursue a life of service and quite possibly, the prospect of immortality, or maybe even godhood, which was quite possible with Roman Law (Republic, 2011).

The ten best quotes by the ancient Roman statesman Cato the Elder! (234 BCE – 149 BCE) See all quotes by Cato
Cato was a consul and Lawyer as well as the valiant soldier, one Plutarch himself describes, even though he delivers this idealism through a veil of disbelief and posturing. Cato could have achieved immortality or godhood, I do not yet know, but all of Plutarch’s ideals, placed upon Cato the Elder, achieved an immortalisation of this Roman soldier, whether intentional or not.


Works Cited:
Duckworth, C. P. (Ed.). (2002). Plutarch – Fall of the Roman Republic, Revised edition. (R. S. Rex Warner, Trans.) Wales & Duckworth: Penguin Books.
Platzner, S. L. (2008). Introduction to Greek Myth: Distionctive Qualities of Greek Literary Myth. In S. L. Platzner, Classical Mythology: Images and Insights (5th ed., pp. 21-22). Sacramento: California State University.
Republic, H. -T. (2011, June 13th). Lecture 1. Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.

Opinion: Buia appears to behold democracy as its intentionality infers

I loved studying the fall of the Roman Empire

The question asked was: Which community was more successful, Buia or Florence?

My critique:

The birth of democracy was to be ‘of the people for the people.’ Although the birth of Athenian democracy retains connotations of elitism and slavery, its intention was born of a desire for an equilibrium for all peoples, and for this they were declared ‘responsible and guilty,’ and to be ‘punished as Justice demands.’

As Buia’s democratic practices evolved, their communal existence became exceptional as Buia’s residents exercised their rights as ‘a group of individuals who together, created a community and reinforced the custom of mateship/relyship (Reciprocity).

Reciprocity: is made up of a series of acts each of which is short run altruistic (benefiting others at a cost to the Altruist), but which together typically makes every participant better off.

Successful communities are born through reciprocity, ie: mateship and/or the barter system. Communities attain equilibrium through the coalescence of different class structures, whether they be peasantry, wealthy, educated etc… without all classes, their cannot be societies, even today.

In one of our lectures, the lecturer refers to the societies of the times and their requirement for slaves (a forced peasantry, encapsulated member of the ‘slave class.’). Our lecturer states that a christian could not have a christian, become a slave for them, therefore slaves were to be shipped in from foreign lands and this is what makes up successful communities.

Think about all the menial disgusting jobs that ‘someone’ had/has to do, jobs such as silage workers, road kill workers. A class of human ‘must’ perform these duties so that other classes can get through their day, performing other duties, so that other classes of people can function in a manner to which they have become accustom.

Do people stop and think in the 21st century, about which class of human decides where their food comes from? What class of human created a concoction of chemicals that was shipped of by wharfys (another class of human), to the farmer (another class of human), who was supplied their genetically modified seeds, possibly by the same class of human who created the chemicals which were shipped off to the farmer to be planted and fertilised with the chemicals to create crops in a shorter time frame, that went into the plant, which inturn creates(d) an opportunity for another class of human, who reaps what has been sown, and passes their crop onto another class of human who creates a bowl (created by another class of human) of ‘wheaties?’

The milk favoured (by another class of human), for your enjoyment, with possible tuberculosis, which can be passed to humans via the lack of a pasteurization process, if another class of human does not perform their duties accurately, and of course lets go those few steps further and genetically modify our ‘edible’ vegetation, cattle, sheep, pigs, chickens (meat) etc… by another class of human, and the ultimate class of human would be the one who is able to forgo all the above classes and simply clone what is required.


Just my opinion lol and stream of consciousness.

Something to leave you with 🙂


(Tomorrow I will begin to share some more thoughts about ancient Rome and the fall of the Roman Republic – it is really exciting stuff)