INTRODUCTION The Greek and Roman Parallel Stories (sometimes called the Parallela Minora ) are a puzzle. The use of some strange and barbarous forms, the substitution of the aforesaid On προειρημένος see W. Schmid, Der Atticismus , iii. pp. 147 ff. for the usual pronoun of reference (though this is, to be sure, a prominent characteristic of the work of Polybius), and above all the atrocious style in which the work is written make it impossible that this could reasonably be regarded as the work of Plutarch, Contrariwise see Parthenius, translated by S. Gaselee, in the L.C.L. p. 289 note. though some scholars, fortunately unknown to Hartman, have actually regarded this work as one of the sins of Plutarch’s otherwise stainless youth. Yet a work of this name is included in Lamprias’s list, No. 128 under the title Διηγήσεις Παράλληλοι Ἑλληνικαὶ καὶ Ῥωμαϊκαὶ and several of these tales are quoted in full Only the first, however, is assigned to Plutarch. in almost the exact words of our ms. text by Joannes Stobaeus. But the excessive ineptitude of the language quite excludes the possibility that the work before us can be Plutarch’s, if indeed he ever wrote a book of this sort. S. Luria,in Rheinisches Museum , lxxviii. (1929) p. 94, has suggested that the Parallela and the De Fluviis Bernardakis’s ed. vol. vii. pp. 282-328. are parodies after the manner of Lucian’s True History ; and both Hercher and Hartman have expressed the opinion that both works are by the same anonymous author, chiefly because it is difficult to imagine thato such fools as the author of each discloses himself to be could ever have lived ! The confusion that the author (ingeniously?) introduces, the forced simplicity of his glaring misnomers, his many references to authorities that Hercher Plutarchi libellus de fluviis (Leipzig, 1851). Schlereth, however, has severely criticized Hercher’s conclusions. On the sources of De Fluviis see Atenstädt, Hermes , lvii. pp. 219 ff. has attempted to show never existed, Yet Müller receives them all as Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum. It has not been thought worth while to include in the notes the references to Müller, since no additional information is to be found there. All the references, however, will be found in the recent Teubner edition. all have been thought to suggest that the Parallela is a parody of the comparisons in the Lives ; but J. Schlereth, in his excellent dissertation De Plutarchi quae feruntur Parallela Minora (Freiburg, 1931), has with great learning and acumen attempted to disprove this thesis. It must be noted that many of the points which Plutarch has selected for comparison in the Lives , that is, in the so-called Συγκρίσεις , are very tenuous, not to say inept. They would lend themselves readily to parody. On the Σύγκρισις see further F. Focke, Hermes , lviii. pp. 327 ff. His work may be consulted by anyone who may be curious about the sources, the language, or the purpose of the Parallela Minora . Wilhelm Schmid ( Philologische Wochenschrift 1932, coll. 625-634) has reviewed Schlereth’s work with great care. Both Schmid and Nachstädt hold that the citations from otherwise unknown authors are genuine, not falsifications of the compiler. Nachstädt, accordingly in the Teubner edition of 1934, gives all the references, and also adds, for convenient comparison, the most important passages from Stobaeus, Lydus, and a gnomologicum Parisinum , published by Sternbach in 1893, which seem to have the same original as the text of the present work. The greater part of mankind think that tales of ancient events are inventions and myths because of the incredible elements which they contain. But since I have discovered that similar events have happened in this modern era, I have singled out crises of Roman history; and, to parallel each ancient happening, I have subjoined a more modern instance. I have also recorded my authorities. Datis, the Persian satrap, came to Marathon, a plain of Attica, with an army of three hundred thousand, encamped there, and declared war on the inhabitants of the country. The Athenians, however, contemning the barbarian host, sent out nine thousand men, and appointed as generals Cynegeirus, Polyzelus, Callimachus, and Miltiades. When this force had engaged the enemy, Polyzelus, having seen a supernatural vision, lost his sight, and became blind. Callimachus was pierced with so many spears that, dead though he was, he stood upright Contrast Lucan, iv. 787 compressum turba stetit omne cadaver ; Ammianus Marcellinus, xviii. 8. 12. ; and Cynegeirus, seizing hold of a Persian ship that was putting out to sea, had his hand chopped off. Cf. Herodotus, vi. 114; Stobaeus, Florilegium , vii. 63 (iii. p. 328 Hense). Hasdrubal the king seized Sicily and declared war on the Romans. Metellus was elected general by the Senate and was victor in the battle in which Lucius Glauco, a patrician, seizing hold of Hasdrubal’s ship, lost both his hands. This Aristeides the Milesian relates iii the first book of his Sicilian History ; from him Dionysius Siculus learned the facts. Xerxes with five million men anchored near Artemisium and declared war on the inhabitants. The Athenians were in confusion and sent Agesilaüs, the brother of Themistocles, as a spy, although his father Neocles had seen in a dream his son deprived of both his hands. Agesilaüs, arriving among the barbarians in Persian garb, slew Mardonius, one of the king’s bodyguards, supposing him to be Xerxes. He was arrested by the bystanders and led in bonds to the king. The aforesaid king was about to offer sacrifice at the altar of the Sun, and Agesilaüs placed his right hand upon the altar; and when he had endured the cruel torture without a groan, he was freed from his bonds, whereupon he declared, All we Athenians are men of this sort; if you do not believe me, I will place my left hand also on the altar. Xerxes was frightened and gave command that he be kept under guard. Stobaeus, Florilegium , vii. 64 (iii. p. 330 Hense). This Agatharchides the Samian relates in the second book of his Persian History . Porsenna, king of the Etruscans, made a foray on the other side of the river Tiber and warred against the Romans; he intercepted their abundant supply of grain and oppressed the aforesaid with famine. This passage is repeated in 307 d, infra . The senate was in confusion; but Mucius one of the nobles, with the consuls’ authorization, took four hundred men of his own age in civilian dress, and crossed the river. He observed one of the tyrant’s bodyguards distributing provisions to the officers and, supposing him to be Porsenna, killed him. When he was led to the king, he put forth his right hand into the sacrificial fire; and dissembling his torments with a stout heart, he said with a smile, Ruffian, I am free, whether you will or no. Know that there are against you even now in your camp four hundred of us that seek to slay you. Porsenna was frightened, and made a truce with the Romans. Cf. Livy, ii. 12. This Aristeides the Milesian relates in the third book of his Histories . When Argives and Spartans were contending for the Thyreatis, the Amphictyonic Assembly decreed that three hundred of each should fight, and the country should belong to the victors. The Spartans accordingly made Othryades their general, and the Argives made Thersander theirs. In the battle two of the Argives survived, Agenor and Chromius, who brought to their city the report of their victory. But when the battlefield was deserted, Othryades revived and, supporting himself on spear-shafts broken in two, despoiled and stripped the corpses of their shields; and when he had erected a trophy, he wrote with his own blood upon it: To Zeus, Guardian of Trophies. And when the two peoples still disputed over the victory, the Amphictyonic Assembly, after a personal inspection of the battlefield, decided in favour of the Spartans. Cf. Herodotus, i. 82; Stobaeus, Florilegium , vii. 68 (iii. p. 333, Hense); Valerius Maximus, iii. 2. ext. 4. Stobaeus quotes the story on the authority of Theseus, and, while his account has quite the same context, there is a great difference in wording. Thus Chrysermus in the third book of his Peloponnesian History. The Romans in a war with the Samnites elected Postumius Albinus general. He as consul 321 b.c. accodring to Livy, ix. 1. ff., but his death after his defeat was not so dramatic as is here depicted. He was ambushed at a place called the Caudine Forks (it is a very narrow pass) and lost three legions, and himself fell mortally wounded. But in the dead of night he revived for a little and despoiled the enemy’s corpses of their shields. With these he set up a trophy and, dipping his hand in his blood, wrote upon it: The Romans from the Samnites to Jupiter Feretrius. But Maximus, surnamed the Glutton, Gurges; cf. Macrobius, Saturnalia , iii. 13. 6. was dispatched as general and when he had come to the place and had seen the trophy, he gladly accepted the omen. He attacked the enemy and conquered, and taking their king prisoner, sent him to Rome. Thus Aristeides the Milesian in the third book of his Italian Histories .