Summary
Montaigne steps into the role of defense attorney for two of his greatest intellectual heroes: the Roman philosopher Seneca and the Greek biographer Plutarch. When critics attack these writers he's learned so much from, Montaigne can't stay silent. He methodically dismantles their arguments, showing how modern critics often misunderstand ancient figures by judging them through contemporary eyes. For Seneca, accused of being corrupt and hypocritical, Montaigne argues that his accuser relies on unreliable sources and ignores the philosopher's own writings that clearly demonstrate his virtue. For Plutarch, criticized for including 'impossible' stories like the Spartan boy who died rather than reveal his theft, Montaigne counters that we shouldn't judge what's possible based only on our own limited experience. He provides vivid examples of extraordinary human endurance from his own time - peasants tortured during civil wars who refused to break, women who would rather die than abandon their beliefs. The chapter reveals Montaigne's deep loyalty to his intellectual mentors while showing his sophisticated approach to evaluating sources and evidence. He argues that great souls throughout history have capabilities that might seem impossible to ordinary people, but that doesn't make them fictional. This defense becomes a meditation on how we judge others and the danger of assuming everyone shares our own limitations.
Coming Up in Chapter 89
Next, Montaigne turns to a curious historical tale about Spurina, exploring how one man's unusual choice reveals deeper truths about human nature and the complex relationship between beauty and virtue.
Share it with friends
An excerpt from the original text.(~500 words)
DEFENCE OF SENECA AND PLUTARCH The familiarity I have with these two authors, and the assistance they have lent to my age and to my book, wholly compiled of what I have borrowed from them, oblige me to stand up for their honour. As to Seneca, amongst a million of little pamphlets that those of the so-called reformed religion disperse abroad for the defence of their cause (and which sometimes proceed from so good a hand, that ‘tis pity his pen is not employed in a better subject), I have formerly seen one, that to make up the parallel he would fain find out betwixt the government of our late poor King Charles IX. and that of Nero, compares the late Cardinal of Lorraine with Seneca; their fortunes, in having both of them been the prime ministers in the government of their princes, and in their manners, conditions, and deportments to have been very near alike. Wherein, in my opinion, he does the said cardinal a very great honour; for though I am one of those who have a very high esteem for his wit, eloquence, and zeal to religion and the service of his king, and his good fortune to have lived in an age wherein it was so novel, so rare, and also so necessary for the public good to have an ecclesiastical person of such high birth and dignity, and so sufficient and capable of his place; yet, to confess the truth, I do not think his capacity by many degrees near to the other, nor his virtue either so clean, entire, or steady as that of Seneca. Now the book whereof I speak, to bring about its design, gives a very injurious description of Seneca, having borrowed its approaches from Dion the historian, whose testimony I do not at all believe for besides that he is inconsistent, that after having called Seneca one while very wise, and again a mortal enemy to Nero’s vices, makes him elsewhere avaricious, an usurer, ambitious, effeminate, voluptuous, and a false pretender to philosophy, his virtue appears so vivid and vigorous in his writings, and his vindication is so clear from any of these imputations, as of his riches and extraordinarily expensive way of living, that I cannot believe any testimony to the contrary. And besides, it is much more reasonable to believe the Roman historians in such things than Greeks and foreigners. Now Tacitus and the rest speak very honourably both of his life and death; and represent him to us a very excellent and virtuous person in all things; and I will allege no other reproach against Dion’s report but this, which I cannot avoid, namely, that he has so weak a judgment in the Roman affairs, that he dares to maintain Julius Caesar’s cause against Pompey [And so does this editor. D.W.], and that of Antony against Cicero. Let us now come to Plutarch: Jean Bodin is a good author of our times, and a writer of much...
Master this chapter. Complete your experience
Purchase the complete book to access all chapters and support classic literature
As an Amazon Associate, we earn a small commission from qualifying purchases at no additional cost to you.
Available in paperback, hardcover, and e-book formats
Intelligence Amplifier™ Analysis
The Road of Defending Your Teachers
When our intellectual influences are attacked, we respond as if our own judgment and identity are under assault.
Why This Matters
Connect literature to life
This chapter teaches how to assess the reliability of critics and distinguish between credible evidence and motivated attacks.
Practice This Today
Next time someone criticizes a person you respect, ask: 'What's the source of this criticism, and what might motivate it?' before accepting or rejecting it.
Now let's explore the literary elements.
Terms to Know
Reformed religion
Protestant Christianity, which broke away from the Catholic Church in the 1500s. Montaigne refers to Protestant pamphlets attacking Catholic figures like Seneca and Cardinal Lorraine. This was part of the religious wars tearing France apart during his lifetime.
Modern Usage:
We see this same pattern when different political or religious groups publish attack pieces against their opponents, often twisting history to make their point.
Cardinal of Lorraine
A powerful French Catholic church leader who advised King Charles IX. Protestant writers compared him to Seneca to make both look bad - saying they were corrupt advisors to weak rulers. Montaigne defends both men against these attacks.
Modern Usage:
Like when political opponents try to link a current politician to some controversial historical figure to damage their reputation.
Parallel
Drawing comparisons between different people or situations to make a point. Protestant writers tried to create a parallel between ancient Rome under Nero and 16th-century France under Charles IX, casting both as corrupt regimes.
Modern Usage:
Politicians and pundits constantly draw parallels between current events and historical disasters to score points in arguments.
Prime ministers
Chief advisors to rulers. Montaigne discusses how both Seneca (to Emperor Nero) and Cardinal Lorraine (to King Charles IX) served as their rulers' main counselors, making them targets for criticism when things went wrong.
Modern Usage:
Like a CEO's right-hand person or a president's chief of staff - they get blamed when the boss makes unpopular decisions.
Ecclesiastical person
Someone who holds an official position in the church hierarchy. Montaigne notes it was rare and valuable to have someone of Cardinal Lorraine's high birth and ability serving in both religious and political roles.
Modern Usage:
Today we might see this in religious leaders who also have political influence, though we're usually more suspicious of mixing church and state.
Deportments
How someone conducts themselves - their behavior, manners, and way of carrying themselves in public. Critics claimed Seneca and Cardinal Lorraine had similar corrupt deportments as advisors.
Modern Usage:
We judge politicians and public figures by their deportment - how they act in interviews, their body language, whether they seem trustworthy or sleazy.
Characters in This Chapter
Seneca
Defended philosopher
Roman philosopher and advisor to Emperor Nero, attacked by Protestant writers as corrupt and hypocritical. Montaigne defends him as one of his intellectual heroes, arguing that critics misunderstand him by relying on unreliable sources instead of reading his actual writings.
Modern Equivalent:
The respected mentor whose reputation gets trashed by people who never actually read their work
Plutarch
Defended biographer
Greek writer who told stories of great historical figures, criticized for including 'impossible' tales. Montaigne defends him by arguing that extraordinary people can do things that seem impossible to ordinary folks, providing examples from his own time of incredible human endurance.
Modern Equivalent:
The history teacher accused of telling tall tales because the stories seem too amazing to be true
Cardinal of Lorraine
Political figure under attack
Powerful French Catholic advisor to King Charles IX, compared unfavorably to Seneca by Protestant critics. Montaigne actually thinks this comparison honors the Cardinal, showing his respect for both men despite the critics' intentions.
Modern Equivalent:
The seasoned political advisor who gets dragged through the mud by the opposition party
King Charles IX
Weak ruler
French king served by Cardinal Lorraine, compared by Protestant writers to the tyrannical Roman Emperor Nero. This comparison was meant to make both the king and his advisor look bad during France's religious civil wars.
Modern Equivalent:
The embattled president whose every decision gets compared to history's worst leaders
Nero
Historical tyrant
Infamous Roman emperor known for cruelty and excess, served by the philosopher Seneca. Protestant writers used him as a symbol of corrupt rule to attack the French Catholic monarchy and its advisors.
Modern Equivalent:
The historical villain everyone compares current politicians to when they want to make them look terrible
Key Quotes & Analysis
"The familiarity I have with these two authors, and the assistance they have lent to my age and to my book, wholly compiled of what I have borrowed from them, oblige me to stand up for their honour."
Context: Opening his defense of Seneca and Plutarch against their critics
Montaigne admits his debt to these writers and feels honor-bound to defend them. He's transparent about borrowing from them extensively, showing intellectual honesty. This reveals his loyalty and his belief that we owe something to those who've taught us.
In Today's Words:
These guys taught me everything I know, so I'm not going to sit here and let people trash them.
"Yet, to confess the truth, I do not think his capacity equal to so difficult and stormy a government as that wherein he had so long a hand."
Context: Honestly assessing Cardinal Lorraine's abilities while defending him
Even while defending the Cardinal, Montaigne admits he may not have been perfectly suited for such a turbulent time. This shows Montaigne's commitment to truth over blind loyalty - he can defend someone while still being realistic about their limitations.
In Today's Words:
Look, I like the guy, but running a country during a civil war might have been over his head.
"I have formerly seen one, that to make up the parallel he would fain find out betwixt the government of our late poor King Charles IX. and that of Nero, compares the late Cardinal of Lorraine with Seneca."
Context: Describing a Protestant pamphlet that attacked Catholic figures by comparing them to ancient Romans
Montaigne exposes the propaganda technique of drawing historical parallels to score political points. The word 'fain' suggests the writer was stretching to make this comparison work, revealing the dishonesty of such attacks.
In Today's Words:
I saw this hit piece that was really reaching to make our dead king look like a Roman tyrant and his advisor look like a corrupt philosopher.
Thematic Threads
Identity
In This Chapter
Montaigne's identity is so intertwined with his intellectual heroes that attacking them feels like attacking him personally
Development
Builds on earlier themes about how we construct ourselves from the ideas and people we admire
In Your Life:
You might feel this when someone criticizes a mentor, teacher, or influencer who shaped your professional approach
Class
In This Chapter
Montaigne defends classical authors against modern critics, showing how intellectual allegiances create social divisions
Development
Continues exploration of how cultural knowledge creates class boundaries and loyalties
In Your Life:
You see this when people defend their educational background or dismiss others' learning sources as inferior
Social Expectations
In This Chapter
Critics expect ancient figures to behave by modern standards, missing the context of their times
Development
Extends earlier discussions about judging people by inappropriate standards
In Your Life:
You might catch yourself judging older family members by today's values instead of understanding their generation
Human Relationships
In This Chapter
The deep loyalty Montaigne feels toward writers he's never met shows how intellectual bonds can be as strong as personal ones
Development
New thread exploring how we form relationships with ideas and their creators across time and distance
In Your Life:
You form similar bonds with authors, podcasters, or online teachers whose ideas resonate with your experience
Personal Growth
In This Chapter
Montaigne's defense reveals how we protect the sources of our own development and learning
Development
Builds on themes about how we construct our evolving selves through chosen influences
In Your Life:
You might defend a book, course, or mentor that changed your life, even when others question their value
You now have the context. Time to form your own thoughts.
Discussion Questions
- 1
Why does Montaigne feel compelled to defend Seneca and Plutarch against their critics?
analysis • surface - 2
What does Montaigne's fierce loyalty to his intellectual mentors reveal about how we form our identities?
analysis • medium - 3
Think about a teacher, coach, or mentor who shaped your thinking. How do you react when someone criticizes their methods or ideas?
application • medium - 4
When you need to give feedback that challenges someone's trusted methods or influences, how could you do it without triggering defensiveness?
application • deep - 5
What does this chapter teach us about the difference between defending ideas and defending our ego?
reflection • deep
Critical Thinking Exercise
Map Your Influence Network
Draw a simple map with yourself in the center. Around you, write the names of 5-7 people who significantly shaped how you think about work, relationships, or life. For each person, note one key idea or approach you learned from them. Then honestly assess: if someone criticized these influences today, which ones would make you most defensive and why?
Consider:
- •Notice which influences feel most central to your identity
- •Consider whether your defensiveness protects the idea or your ego
- •Think about how you can separate useful wisdom from personal attachment
Journaling Prompt
Write about a time when someone criticized a person or method that was important to you. How did you react, and what did that reaction teach you about yourself?
Coming Up Next...
Chapter 89: The Story of Spurina
Moving forward, we'll examine different appetites compete for control of our lives, and understand extreme solutions to personal struggles often backfire. These insights bridge the gap between classic literature and modern experience.