Talk:Plutarch

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of the WikiProject for Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors who write Wikipedia's Classics articles. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Biography (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 
WikiProject Greece (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greece on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Philosophy (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Religion (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Dates of birth and death and Travels to Rome[edit]

According to the Teaching Company and the links at the bottom of the page he was born in 46. According to the Teaching Company he lived beyond 127. I do not know the proper way to say he lived beyond 127 so I wrote "beyond 127". But feel free to change it if it is "127+" or "127?" or whatever.

According to Encyclopedia Britannica, he "died after 119", so I'm guessing this is one of those things that are full of scholarly dispute. --maru (talk) Contribs 03:06, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Right. There's debate about his date of birth and as well his date of death. Instead of placing all the debate in the main parts of the article, it would be better to use the Notes section to discuss it, alongside the Timeline which will try to be as conservative as possible.-BiancaOfHell 19:26, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

How is it that the introduction to this article states unequivocally that Plutarch went to Rome at least twice, while the introduction to the translation by Dreyden says it was at least once, with no evidence to indicate otherwise?

Right. Some say he spent 40 years in Rome, which is largely refuted. Some say he went to Rome once, others say he went to Rome twice. Some say he went to Alexandria after his studies, others say no. There is a lot of debate about Plutarch's biography. I'm suggesting going with what is conservative and what Scholars think is largely correct, and placing all the interesting arguments for and against in the Notes section, alongside the Timeline to it's right.-BiancaOfHell 19:26, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

listing of Lives in chronological order[edit]

The following was posted in the article by 65.148.17.110 (talk • contribs) and moved here by —Charles P. (Mirv) @ 15:39, 22 November 2005 (UTC).

It would be good if someone could include a listing of the Lives in chronological order, for this resource is not easily found elsewhere on the web.

Not easily found? Has it been found? By chronological order you mean when Plutarch wrote/finished them, or chronological order of the Greek lives and then the Roman lives? A listing of the chronological order of some of the Roman lives and the Roman Emperors and Plutarch and his contemporaries lifetimes exists at http://www.constitution.org/rom/plutarch/intro.htm.-BiancaOfHell 19:35, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Other Plutarchs?[edit]

I was going through Britannica's website, improving some of our math bios, when I came upon what appears to be either an error, or major omission. Specifically, I was working on Proclus. EB's article says "At Athens he studied under the Greek philosophers Plutarch and Syrianus, whom he followed as diadochos (Greek: “successor”), or head of the Academy founded by Plato c. 387 BC."

This is all well and good, except for the minor problem that Proclus was born 410 CE, and Plutarch worked in the 100s and such CE. So, either two entire biographies (in both Wikipedia and Britannica) are completely screwed up by centuries, or there is some other Plutarch who was important enough to either be almost or actually the head of Plato's Academy (I think he was in fact the head preceding Proclus, as the EB quote mentions him and Syrianus- our article on Syrianus has him succeeding Proclus, implying that Plutarch was the preceding head). Thought you guys should know, if for disambiguations reasons alone. --maru (talk) Contribs 03
16, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
http://www.goddess-athena.org/Encyclopedia/Friends/Proclus/ says
"Then Syrianus presented Proclus to Plutarch, sun of Nestorius, his predecessor, who due to age was forced into semi-retirement. But Plutarch accepted Proclus as auditor of his courses."
If it helps any. --maru (talk) Contribs 03:50, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
It is a little known fact that many Greek names famous in the West today were very common in ancient Greee & hence we should not be suprised at this turn of events... There are several Thucydides' for example, several Socrates' and so on. Plutarch (the author of the Lives) could not have followed Plato as head of the academy since he wrote about evens occuring centuries after this succession is said to have occured. For example, Plutarch writes about Caesar's murder (47 BCE or thereabouts) so he couldn't possibly have been around in 387 BCE... --Mikkerpikker 04:04, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
It still bothers the hell out of me- it means that if I link to Plutarch like I want to, I am misleading the reader, who almost certainly does not know that about common Greek names (for instance, Proclus was taught math by a "Heron". I already know that this is a different Heron from the Heron, and so I did not link it, but what about a user hip to the ways of Wikipedia, who decides to manually rectify this mistake by editting or going directly to the Heron article? Now I have to insert a nasty parenthetical note noting that this is not the Heron you were expecting.); besides, I think being the head of the Academy is noteworthy enough there should at least be a bare mention. Not to mention a number of other sources have screwed up this side note- the Britannica article misleads one by omission, and http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Mathematicians/Proclus.html, the MacTutor article, normally a reliable source, sends you to the wrong/famous Plutarch when you click on the link! --maru (talk) Contribs 04:15, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
A way to get around the "nasty parenthetical note" you are referring to is to use the Greek convention, i.e. to name people by their cities. So Plutarch (as in the guy who wrote the Lives) would be "Plutarch of Chaeronea" and the Plutarch who succeeded Plato would be "Plutarch of Athens" (or whatever). Mikkerpikker 23:29, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Lost works of Plutarch[edit]

Has there been any discussion, or any published work, on his lost works? Haiduc 12:59, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

According to the 1971 Encyclopedia Britannica the first pair of Parallel Lives, Epaminondas and Scipio, are lost. Are there others?
BiancaOfHell 15:14, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
I think it's essential that a proof of these lost works is done. Where does it say that they did in fact exist at some point? Apparently there is a listing but where can I go to see this listing?-BiancaOfHell 13:05, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
I don't have any specific information about this, but presumably other writers whose work has been preserved would have referred to reading such and such by Plutarch. I haven't read all of the the Parellel Lives, so I don't know if there is any reference within them or not. I'm sorry that I couldn't be of more help. --Kyoko 13:21, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

"Even the lives of such important figures as Augustus..." It looks like Perseus has the North translation of the Life of Octavius Agustus Caesar. Is it a pseudopigraphic work, or is this statement particially incorrect and in need of modification?

In the Parallel Lives article it says "The Perseus project also contains a biography of Caesar Augustus appearing in the North translation, but not coming from Plutarch's Parallel Lives" Here's the link to the text: [[1]] So I don't know where this biography came from and why it has such a low key presence amongst his works. Is there still in fact a Life of Augustus from the Lives to be found? -BiancaOfHell 17:59, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Broken Link[edit]

Broken link, External links - biography of Plutarch

Impossible[edit]

this may relate to Maru's question but while looking for a quote on the spartans i found "Come back with your shield,-- or on it", as sort of rejoicing phrase for the women of Sparta as the men left to fight, it said that Plutarch reported this, but how is this possible, the hieght of military Sparta was three centuries before the birthdate of Plutarch, so how is this possible? Thrawst 06:18, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Google and the Straight Dope are your friends: http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mspartanmoms.html. --maru (talk) contribs 07:01, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Plutarch's Influence[edit]

The first couple of sentences in this section are incoherent, the apparent victim of editing. They do not make sense. What is being said about Shakespeare, for example? If it intends to convey that Shakespeare based some of his plays on the Parallel Lives, that is not contained in this sentence.


I've heard that he based specifically Julius Caesar and Antony and Cleopatra on Plutarch's lives of Caesar, Brutus, and Antony. I'm not sure where I read it, though - possibly in Michael Grant's The Ancient Historians. I'll check when I'm at home and have access to said book. --Jim Henry 17:16, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
Here is a quote from Aubrey Stewart's introduction to his 1894 translation of Plutarch's Lives:
Amyot's spirited French version was no less spiritedly translated by Sir Thomas North. His translation was much read and admired in its day; a modern reviewer even goes so far as to say that it is "still beyond comparison the best version of Parallel Lives which the English tongue affords." Be this as it may, the world will ever be deeply indebted to North's translation, for it is to Shakespeare's perusal of that work that we owe 'Coriolanus,' 'Antony and Cleopatra,' and 'Julius Caesar.'
--Jim Henry 16:03, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

I believe the two biggest authors influenced by Plutarch are Shakespeare for his plays, and Montaigne for the development of the Essay. The Influences section should probably reflect this. BiancaOfHell 16:17, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Plutarch's Influence on Dante?[edit]

I've heard that Dante was influenced but how? is it significant? BiancaOfHell 08:53, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Quotations[edit]

These quotes should be boxed up (like in the Demosthenes article) and placed appropriately in sections that will discuss the works of Lives and Moralia, ESPECIALLY if they come from there. Plutarch had a lot of influence on moralists, etc... and some of these quotations are examples of his wisdom that influenced those that came after. BiancaOfHell 12:59, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Plutarch Scholars[edit]

What books, or editions with introductions, forewords, etc.. that talk about Plutarch's life and work are out there? BiancaOfHell 15:18, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Regarding the philosophy of Plutarch of Chaeroneia one might look at The Middle Platonists: 80 B.C. to A.D. 220 by John Dillon (Ithaca, 1996, Revised Edition). It has a chapter "Plutarch of Chaeroneia and the Origins of Second-Century Platonism" (pp 184 - 230) that concentrates on Plutarch's philosophy. In a note to this chapter (p. 185) Dillon recommends Plutarch by D. A. Russell (London, 1972) for "the whole man, essayist, historian, teacher, conversationalist, statesman." I am unfamiliar with Russell so I cannot comment on this books worth. But Dillon is a well-respected academic who is recognized as an expert in the history of Platonism. Pomonomo2003 01:48, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to put it in References. Is that allowed when the book hasn't even been glimpsed? Better for a bibliography perhaps? Either way, Amazon has a new Edition of said book (Plutarch by D.A. Russell) and it looks like it has a goldmine of information. Going to get it. Thanks. -BiancaOfHell 19:07, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
  1. R.H. Barrow, Plutarch and His Times (1967, reprinted 1979)
  2. C.J. Gianakaris, Plutarch (1970), are good general introductions that list further reading.
  3. C.P. Jones, Plutarch and Rome (1971), begins with a useful biography and continues by tracing his career under various Roman emperors.
  4. D.A. Russell, Plutarch (1973), provides a literary evaluation.
According to Additional Reading at Britannica Online -BiancaOfHell 22:29, 11 December 2006 (UTC)


For too much information see Bibliography on Plutarch at <http://www.utexas.edu/depts/classics/chaironeia/bibliography.html> -BiancaOfHell 17:29, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

That's an extremely useful bibliography, but I don't think it's been updated since the late '90s. --Akhilleus (talk) 18:23, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Life of Plutarch[edit]

A number of authors have written a 'Life of Plutarch's it seems. Here's the beginnings of a list. Please add to it if you come across more.

  1. North's 'Life of Plutarch'
  2. Dryden's 'Life of Plutarch'
  3. Arthur Hugh Clough, writes introductions to Dryden's translations of Lives
  4. Rualdus wrote a Life of Plutarchus on the Paris folios that is a basis for much knowledge on Plutarch's life.

-BiancaOfHell 11:34, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Translations and their Translators[edit]

  1. In english what are the major and respected translations?
  2. Did Dryden translate all of Plutarch's works? He translated Lives from the Greek original
  3. Did Thomas North?

North, Sir Thomas, 1535?–1601?, English translator. He is famous for his translation of Plutarch, entitled Lives of the Noble Grecians and Romans (1579), which he made from the French of Jacques Amyot. This work, ornate but vivid, was a source for many of Shakespeare's plays, among them Antony and Cleopatra and Julius Caesar, and was a major influence in the development of Elizabethan prose.

  1. North versus Dryden versus?

North translated from Amyot's French translation, whilst or while Dryden translated from the Greek original

  1. What of Amyot's French translation?

-BiancaOfHell 13:59, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

And Dryden did not translate much of Plutarch at all. The Dryden edition is just that: he was the general editor, lending his name for the saleability of the thing, but a large team did the actual work, each individual taking one of the Lives. Bill 18:41, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Would you mind citing your source, and incorporating that knowledge into the Translations section? I'm not sure if the way I've done it, separating into French and English translations sections, is the best way, since Amyot's was the start of a translation that went through many languages. The whole thing is a lot more complicated than any section breakdown could possibly convey.-BiancaOfHell 18:53, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Emphasis On?[edit]

What to cover about Plutarch is a question on my mind. His biographical information is sketchy. A lot of questions on the size of his family, his travels to Rome, his career. The importance of his works and criticisms of it seems to be more interesting. Anyone have any good advice? -BiancaOfHell 15:21, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Notes Section[edit]

Stuff whose deduction must be explained:

  1. birth date
  2. death date
  3. travels to Rome and Alexandria, when and for how long?

-BiancaOfHell 00:05, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Diaphram[edit]

The life timeline at the end lists "Invented diaphram" but there is no reference made to this in the page - this needs to be addressed by at least a short section. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 164.107.193.183 (talk) 20:33, 4 April 2007 (UTC).

It was just a vandal doing his/her thing.-BillDeanCarter 19:50, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Death date[edit]

This date is rather vague, but the sentence should be placed perhaps someplace other than "Work as magistrate and ambassador", right? Is there any info pertaining to his later life? Sedonaarizona 18:49, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Vegetarian[edit]

I see that Plutarch is categorized as a vegetarian, but why is no mention of this made in the article? Given that vegetarians were exceedingly rare then, and the fact that he wrote essays extolling the virtues of vegetarianism, it seems relevant to me.--Hraefen Talk 00:21, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Certainly. Which articles of his were about vegetarianism or mentioned his vegetarianism? Are there any historians you know who have mentioned the rarity of vegetarianism back in those days? I hope the categorization wasn't a form of vandalism long overlooked.-BillDeanCarter 00:45, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
  • The book Heretic's Feast by Colin Spencer (pp. 98-101) says that Plutarch's Moralia contains the Essay on Flesh-Eating and Rules for the Preservation of Health, both of which discuss vegetarianism. That same book also addresses the rarity of vegetarianism in those times and discusses the philosophers that embraced it.--Hraefen Talk 05:26, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 04:22, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Latin Translations[edit]

The article says, "there is one translation of Parallel Lives into Latin" which it describes as being made in the 18th century, pour le dauphin. Meanwhile, above in the article is a photograph of a 15th century Latin edition of the same. Clearly either there was more than one Latin translation, or it was not made pour le dauphin. Rwflammang (talk) 13:39, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Plutarch=Unreliable[edit]

In Pyrrhus article, a user has added the pov sign with the arguement that Pyrrhus' sources came from the unreliable author Ploutarch... This is off course an anti-encyclopedic action. It is really sad that famous authors like Plutarch are so badly criticized and the worst, without a single argument against him! (he said that he was Greek...so unreliable)Alexikoua (talk) 20:30, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

well i have some arguments against him. some of his stories cannot be checked in any other source. second, in his paralells lives he pretends to be neutral but the romans always look better than the greeks in comparsion. If you care about my opinion, he was in the roman´s pockets 201.29.161.165 (talk) 22:25, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Revert to BC/AD date format[edit]

There has been a violation of WP:ERA in that no discussion or concensus was done on this article's talk page after the 29th October 2010 before the date format was changed from BC/AD to BCE/CE. Therefore I propose that the date format be reverted back to that of 29/10/10 should no one object and voice reasons why this should not occur. 78.146.132.102 (talk) 19:53, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Term for this?[edit]

Hi, newbie here. Not sure if this is the right way to discuss this sort of thing, but:

In the section "Parallel Lives": "...went to tremendous effort (often leading to tenuous comparisons) to draw parallels between physical appearance and moral character"

This strikes me as being sort of Chaucerian, (this certainly isn't the right term, as Plutarch predated Chaucer by many years). Does anyone know if there's a term for this kind of literary attribution of moral/personality characteristics to physical ones? (I'm thinking something along the lines of Phrenology). I feel like there is a term, but it escapes me at the moment... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rodaen (talkcontribs) 06:31, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Oh ok, nevermind - I think I found what I was looking for in the related links of Phrenology: Physiognomy. Thanks anyways. Rodaen (talk) 06:49, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Plutarch delphi 1.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion[edit]

Image-x-generic.svg An image used in this article, File:Plutarch delphi 1.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Plutarch delphi 1.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 08:54, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

File:Plutarch delphi 1.jpg - question[edit]

Head of a philosopher - Archaeological Museum of Delphi.jpg

Anyone know if there is any reason to suppose that this image of the bust added by User:Odysses on 22 February 2011‎, is in anyway reliable? It's confidently described as "Statue of Plutarch, at the Museum of Delphi," but the only evidence Odysses seems to have put forward for this identification is the fact that a similar picture is used as thumbnail [2] at livius.org. Pasicles (talk) 20:58, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't know, but I'm mystified that the bot tells us of speedy-deletion nomination, when the only notice given at Commons is of a question about the factual accuracy of the description. I think you are missing that Odysses says that s/he took the picture (is the copyright holder). I am willing to suppose that if Odysses visited the museum at Delphi, took the picture, and uploaded it with that description, then that is how it is described at the museum. Wareh (talk) 19:44, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
The speedy-deletion nomination refers to an earlier version of the file (apparently the one on livius.org). Odysses replaced it with a self made photo on 1 March. This made me wonder if the sequence of events was (1) Odysses uploads thumbnail from livius.org where its used to illustrate an article on Plutarch, and added description to that effect, (2) thumbnail was nominated for speedy-deletion for copy-vio, (3) Odysses pops into local museum in Delphi (or looks in his holiday snaps) and takes picture of same bust and uploads it regardless of how it might actually be described at the Delphi Archaeological Museum. The thing that makes me suspicious is that precisely the same sequence of events occurred with this picture of "Heraclitus", which I'm pretty darned certain has never been formally identified as Heraclitus or anyone else.
I would certainly be surprised if this bust has been securely identified as Plutarch - it just looks like an anonymous bust like so many other anonymous busts which survive from the ancient world. A search for "bust of plutarch" or "statue of plutarch" on Google Book Search gives me nothing other than Greek/Roman references to such statues having once existed. Pasicles (talk) 17:32, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
Well for now I've left a note at User talk:Odysses. Maybe that will give us an answer to these speculations. Wareh (talk) 18:25, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
I have now found similar pictures of this bust on a number of webpages: [3], [4], [5], and its pretty clear that it's identified merely as a bust of an "unknown philosopher". At best, all I can find is that Plutarch is merely a possible suggested identification [6]. Pasicles (talk) 19:48, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
Seems clear enough. I think this is a reasonable basis on which to rewrite the image description at Commons and to get rid of any inappropriate usages of the image. Wareh (talk) 19:53, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
Okay, I've put in a rename request over at Commons for this image to be moved from File:Plutarch delphi 1.jpg to File:Head of a philosopher - Archaeological Museum of Delphi.jpg. Pasicles (talk) 19:42, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

The Delphi Archaeological Museum that I've visited in the past and I've taken several pictures, describes this bust as "a portrait of Plutarch, Plotinus or a philosopher", ranking Plutarch as the most probable candidate. The livius.org website is possitive about this bust been of Plutarch. I've also seen this bust as a cover page on a couple of books about Plutarch. Although I am not 100% certain that this bust is of Plutarch, yet Plutarch is the most probable candidate. Do we have another statue of Plutarch at any other museum? Odysses () 13:38, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

FYI, this is a modern copy of the bust of Plutarch at present day Chaeronea. And more uses throuht the internet: [7], [8], [9]. Odysses () 16:07, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
Okay that's fine -- but in my mind this seems to prove that this is a "bust of an unknown philosopher". Websites such as livius.org often use a "best guess" anonymous bust to illustrate an ancient figure when there is isn't a definitive bust available. It is interesting that there is a modern copy at Chaeronea, which is being used as a "portrait" of Plutarch. Clearly the fact that Plutarch has been suggested as one possible candidate for this bust has lead it to becoming an unofficial portrait. At best, if you want this picture to go back onto this page, then the caption should say something like "Bust of a philosopher - tentatively identified as Plutarch". But before you do that, could you please upload a high resolution version of this bust from your picture collection -- just the raw image taken by your camera will be fine -- and state clearly when you took the photograph and where. Thanks. Pasicles (talk) 13:25, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
On your comments above you say "in my mind this seems to prove that this is a "bust of an unknown philosopher. Websites such as livius.org often use a "best guess" anonymous bust to illustrate an ancient figure". OK, this is your opinion. In my mind livius.org is doing a fine job and they probably have more solid evidence regarding the identity of a portrait before displaying it in their essays. And do you suppose that the makers of the bust of Plutarch at present day Chaeronea, which you have removed from the description of the file would bother to produce a copy of Plutarch's bust without making sure that this is Plutarch indeed?
Do you seriously propose that greekhotel.com which you provide in the file description is a more reliable source regarding ancient philosopher portraits than livius.org?
Please do not remove sources and links such as the bust of Plutarch at Chaeronea, that are against your opinion, unless you properly justify your action. -Odysses () 17:59, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

List of examples where the mentioned bust is possitively identified as of Plutarch[edit]

Head of a philosopher - Archaeological Museum of Delphi.jpg
  • The University of Adelaide
University of Adelaide
  • The Complete Collection of Plutarch's Parallel Lives Comparisons (Illustrated) by Charles River Editors (Editor), John Dryden (Translator)
Parallel Lives
  • Delphi Classics - Plutarch
Plutarch
  • United Architects – Essays
Essays
  • mmdtkw.org
Plutarch
  • timeone.ca
Plutarch
  • akorra.com
Plutarch (46 – 127 A.D) Plutarch]

In other languages:

  • egypte.dominiquecardinal.fr/
Biographie de Plutarque
  • histoire-pour-tous.fr
Plutarque, penseur grec
  • hellinon.net
Κείμενα του Πλούταρχου στα αρχαία Ελληνικά
  • viotikoskosmos.wikidot.com
Πλούταρχος ο Χαιρωνεύς
  • filosofico.net
PLUTARCO DI CHERONEA

The above examples by Universities, such as The University of Adelaide, Institutions, authors etc. are traditionally considered more reliable than the greekhotel.com which is provided in the file description to confuse the identiτy of this bust. If the above Universities, Institutions, authors etc. positively identify this bust as of Plutarch, then Wikipedia should also identify it as such -Odysses () 18:32, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Odysses. I'm sorry you are upset about this. It was not my intention to make you angry. Can I first make it clear that I did not remove the bust of Plutarch at present day Chaeronea link from the image file description -- I am quite happy for it to be part of the file description, which is why I left it in there, because I agree that it is interesting that there is a modern sculpture that uses this bust as a template. I do not dispute that this might be a bust of Plutarch -- all I am disputing is that this bust which has been dug out of the ground at some point is definitely Plutarch -- if there isn't an inscription and if there isn't a definitive identifying feature, then its impossible to know. As I said before, websites often use a "best guess" anonymous bust to illustrate an ancient figure when there is isn't a definitive bust available. This is not at all unusual -- other ancient busts of philosophers such as this one of Plotinus are similarly uncertain.
You are quite right to question whether the greekhotel.com site is a reliable source. The reason why I used it is because they are actually quoting the caption used at the Museum of Delphi. Sorry to disappoint you, but if you look at this this picture of the bust on Flickr and zoom in then you will see the writing that says "Marble bust from a herm. It has tentatively been recognized as a portrait of Plutarch, Plotinus or a philosopher of the Neoplatonic school, but not enough clues are available for a definitive identification of the portrayed man" -- this is how the Museum of Delphi describes the bust. As I said before, I don't mind if this bust appears on the page, but it should say that the identification is uncertain -- I am very willing to compromise on this.
The issue which needs to be cleared up, however, is the copyright status. Are you Odysses, the copyright holder of this photograph as you claim to be? If you are then I will happily reinstate this picture to this article myself. Pasicles (talk) 19:38, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi Pasicles and thanks for your comments. I'm glad that we are having a nice and constructive discussion in this talk page on the identity of this bust. I'm sorry if I have given you the impression of been upset, my intension was to support my edit and bring some useful reference and info from reliable sources. I just realized that you moved the bust of Plutarch at present day Chaeronea to the bottom of the description. My sincere apologies.
Since my record of my old photos was of low quality and low resolution, I decided to make a visit again at the Museum of Delphi, (and at Chaeronea) as it's only a short trip, to get some new digital photos and info. I even spoke to the museum attendants and one of them was happy to talk about their "beloved bust of Plutarch" for which they are proud to own the one and only original item. Of course, they mentioned that, just to be "on the safe side" they'd leave a small possibility for the bust to belong to another Neoplatonic philosopher, just as per description of the Delphi museum plate, which you have mentioned above.
Thanks for your example of the bust of Plotinus. I see that although Plotinus' bust, as you said is "uncertain", it is shown on the Wikipedia article of Plotinus.
It would be nice to do the same by showing Plutarch's bust in Wikipedia and also mention the uncertainty that it might belong to another philosopher.
I have now uploaded a high-resolution photo of this bust taken at the Museum of Delphi and I hope it's better, more useful than the previous one and without any copyright issues. Odysses () 21:02, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
Plutarch and herm.jpg

To make this issue more complicated, the Museum of Delphi displays this bust of Plutarch/philosopher (left) next to a headless herm (right). The description given for the herm is: Headless herm of a votive with the bust of Plutarch, set up by the people of Delphi around 125 AD. What the museum doesn't make clear is whether the head on the left once stood on the herm on the right, since they appear to be made approximately the same period of time, of the same type of marble and they were both uncovered near the southeast corner of the temple of Apollo at Delphi. Odysses () 07:57, 22 June 2013 (UTC)