03-05-2013, 09:03 PM
Hi, to me Plutarch was more of a biographer than a historian. Sorry I have to quote Wikipedia here
"Plutarch was not concerned with history so much as the influence of character, good or bad, on the lives and destinies of men."
He often seems critical of Crassus's decisions and seems to have had a high regard of Cassius. But he obviously had now lost sources. Gareth C. Sampson in his book "The Defeat of Rome In The East" mentions some earlier writers whose works are now lost, who Plutarch may have gathered some information about the battle from. They were
1. Livy "History Of Rome" who wrote some 142 books of which only the first 45 survive. Many scholars feel that every account on Roman History written after him was based upon his work.
2. Niclolas of Damascus "Universal History" . Served at the court of Herod the Great. He wrote a universal history of the East in 144 books of which nothing survives except a few fragments. He would have provided an authoritave account of the war and not purely from a Roman point of view.
3. Quintus Dellius "History of the Parthian Wars" written in First Century BC who during the 2nd Roman Civil War he served under Cassius. Plutarch used him as a source for his biography of Mark Antony.
4. Appollonius "History of the Parthian Wars".Appollonius who was Publius Crassus freedman which meant he may have accompanied his master to the East and who remained devoted to the memory of his master and he was probably present at the battle.
5. Actual survivors of the battle who returned to Rome in 20BC.
The only surviving Parthian sources are "The Babylonian astronomical records" which as well as recording astronomical data they record some of the historical actions of a particular year. My apologies to those who have the book but to those who haven't I hope this helps.
"Plutarch was not concerned with history so much as the influence of character, good or bad, on the lives and destinies of men."
He often seems critical of Crassus's decisions and seems to have had a high regard of Cassius. But he obviously had now lost sources. Gareth C. Sampson in his book "The Defeat of Rome In The East" mentions some earlier writers whose works are now lost, who Plutarch may have gathered some information about the battle from. They were
1. Livy "History Of Rome" who wrote some 142 books of which only the first 45 survive. Many scholars feel that every account on Roman History written after him was based upon his work.
2. Niclolas of Damascus "Universal History" . Served at the court of Herod the Great. He wrote a universal history of the East in 144 books of which nothing survives except a few fragments. He would have provided an authoritave account of the war and not purely from a Roman point of view.
3. Quintus Dellius "History of the Parthian Wars" written in First Century BC who during the 2nd Roman Civil War he served under Cassius. Plutarch used him as a source for his biography of Mark Antony.
4. Appollonius "History of the Parthian Wars".Appollonius who was Publius Crassus freedman which meant he may have accompanied his master to the East and who remained devoted to the memory of his master and he was probably present at the battle.
5. Actual survivors of the battle who returned to Rome in 20BC.
The only surviving Parthian sources are "The Babylonian astronomical records" which as well as recording astronomical data they record some of the historical actions of a particular year. My apologies to those who have the book but to those who haven't I hope this helps.
Regards
Michael Kerr
Michael Kerr
Michael Kerr
"You can conquer an empire from the back of a horse but you can't rule it from one"
"You can conquer an empire from the back of a horse but you can't rule it from one"
