Seneca and the Stoics on the Equality of the Sexes By

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Seneca and the Stoics on the Equality of the Sexes By SENECA AND THE STOICS ON THE EQUALITY OF THE SEXES BY C. E. MANNING In ion, E.V. Arnold, in his fundamental work on Roman Stoicism writes: "There seems every reason to believe that the equality of men and women, though at the time seemingly paradox- ical, was generally accepted by the earlier Stoics and adopted as a practical principle in Stoic homes. The whole treatment of human nature by the Stoics applies equally to man and woman, and points to the conclusion that as moral agents they have the same capacities and responsibilities. Seneca in writing to a great lady of philosoph- ical sympathies, states this as his firm conviction .... We need attach no importance to the more distinctively masculine views which Seneca occasionally expresses to the effect that woman is hot-tempered, thoughtless, and lacking in self-control, or to the Peripatetic doctrine that man is born to rule, woman to obey; for these sentiments, however welcome to individual correspondents, were not rooted in Stoic theory" 1). Yet we know that as one of Nero's chief advisers, Seneca combi- 1) E. V. Arnold, Roman Stoicism (Cambridge 1911). - A. J. Voelke, Les rapports avec autrui dans la philosophie grecque d'Aristote à Panétius (Paris 1961) follows much the same line. P. 118, "Au point de vue social toutes les barrières entre l'homme et la femme, le Grec et le barbare, l'esclave et l'homme libre perdent leur signification aux yeux des Stoiciens. La femme n'est pas par essence différente de l'homme - elle peut aspirer à la même vertu que lui et se vouer tout à la philosphie". In fact he suggests that this tendency achieved its full fruition under the Roman Empire, loc. cit. n. 64, "Ce n'est cependant qu'à l'époque impériale chez Séneque et Musonius que le Stoicisme semble avoir envisagé autrement qu'une façon théorique cette égalité entre les sexes". For a discussion of the rôle of women within marriage see Voelke, op. cit., 149-152, and E. Elorduy, Die Sozialphilosophie der Stoa (Philologus, Suppl. 28, Heft 3, Leipzig 1936), 194 ff. Elorduy regards Seneca as more liberal in his attitudes to marriage than some of his contemporaries and explains this by reference to Spanish custom. 171 ned with Burrus to resist the influence of Agrippina 1) and was foremost in preventing her attempt to hear legations sitting beside her son, for the thought of a woman on the imperial dais was frightening 2). Moreover, in his writings, Seneca imposes the adjec- tive muliebris on moral failings and viyilis on such philosophy and action that he approves 3). To give way to the passions was consider- ed particularly woman-like, and muliebris is always an adjective of contempt. It was women who were most inclined to rage and in this they were to be compared with an ignobilis bestia rather than one of the kings of the animal world 4). To be stirred by insult was the particular shortcoming of women and children 5) and characters so influenced were "weak by nature, womanlike and, through lack of real injury, petulant " 6) . Similarly grief and anxiety seemed to be particularly characteristic of women. Tears flowed readily and public parading of grief was common 7) . Helvia should banish such things, and Polybius should bear his grief viyiliter, for to do other- wise is humile ac muliebre. In the same way women are moved to pity by the tears, even of the guilty and, described by the contemptuous diminutive muLieyculae, they betray the hallmarks of a Pusillus animus 8). How are we to regard these actions and words of Seneca. Are we simply to say that "philosophers do not practise what they preach", a charge levelled against Seneca in his own lifetime 9) and that Seneca's use of language leaves much to be desired, that he was, in Quintilian's famous phrase in philosoPhia parum diligens ? 1°). 1) Tacitus, Annals XIII 2. 2) Tacitus, Annals XIII 5. 3) Seneca, Ad Helviam 12, 4 Zenoni a quo coepit rigida ac virilis sapientia. E. Elorduy, op. cit., 197, has noticed this same problem, and explains the subordination of woman to man by reference to the male-female elements in the Stoic cosmos. The present writer feels that a far more plausible explana- tion is provided by the development of the Stoic doctrine of Χαθ�Χoντα. 4) Seneca, De Clementia 15, 5. 5) Seneca, De Ira I 20, 3. 6) Seneca, De Constantia Sapientis 10, 3. 7) Seneca, N.Q. IV praef. 16; Ad Helviam 3, 2; Ad Polybium 6, 1-2. 8) Seneca, De Clementia II 5, 1. 9) Seneca, De Beata Vita 17-21 for the theme, and esp. 20, 1 Non prae- stant Philosophi quae loquuntur. 10) Quintilian, Inst. Or. X 1, 129. .
Recommended publications
  • Stoicism and the Virtue of Toleration
    STOICISM AND THE VIRTUE OF TOLERATION John Lombardini1 Abstract: This article argues that the Stoics possessed a conception of toleration as a personal and social virtue. In contrast with previous scholarship, I argue that such a conception of toleration only emerges as a product of the novel conceptions of the vir- tue of endurance offered by Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius. The first section provides a survey of the Stoic conception of endurance in order to demonstrate how the distinc- tive treatments of endurance in Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius merit classification of a conception of toleration; the second section offers a brief reconstruction of the argu- ments for toleration in the Meditations. Introduction In his history of the concept of toleration, Rainer Forst identifies its earliest articulation with the use of tolerantia in Stoic philosophy. Though the word tolerantia first occurs in Cicero, it is used to explicate Stoic doctrine. In the Paradoxa Stoicorum, Cicero identifies the tolerantia fortunae (the endurance of what befalls one) as a virtue characteristic of the sage, and connects it with a contempt for human affairs (rerum humanarum contemptione);2 in De Finibus, endurance (toleratio) is contrasted with Epicurus’ maxim that severe pain is brief while long-lasting pain is light as a truer method for dealing with pain.3 Seneca, in his Epistulae Morales, also identifies tolerantia as a virtue, defending it as such against those Stoics who maintain that a strong endurance (fortem tolerantiam) is undesirable, and linking it
    [Show full text]
  • Augustine's Criticisms of the Stoic Theory of Passions
    Faith and Philosophy: Journal of the Society of Christian Philosophers Volume 20 Issue 4 Article 3 10-1-2003 Augustine's Criticisms of the Stoic Theory of Passions T.H. Irwin Follow this and additional works at: https://place.asburyseminary.edu/faithandphilosophy Recommended Citation Irwin, T.H. (2003) "Augustine's Criticisms of the Stoic Theory of Passions," Faith and Philosophy: Journal of the Society of Christian Philosophers: Vol. 20 : Iss. 4 , Article 3. DOI: 10.5840/faithphil20032043 Available at: https://place.asburyseminary.edu/faithandphilosophy/vol20/iss4/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at ePLACE: preserving, learning, and creative exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faith and Philosophy: Journal of the Society of Christian Philosophers by an authorized editor of ePLACE: preserving, learning, and creative exchange. AUGUSTINE'S CRITICISMS OF THE STOIC THEORY OF PASSIONS T.H.Irwin Augustine defends three claims about the passions: (1) The Stoic position dif­ fers only verbally from the Platonic-Aristotelian position. (2) The Stoic position is wrong and the Platonic-Aristotelian position is right. (3) The will is engaged in the different passions; indeed the different passions are different expressions of the will. The first two claims, properly understood, are defensible. But the most plausible versions of them give us good reason to doubt the third claim. 1. A full exploration of Augustine's reflexions on the nature of the passions would introduce us to some of his central moral and theological concems. I do not intend to undertake this full exploration. I want to discuss his claim about the proper interpretation of the Stoic conception of the passions in relation to the Platonic and Aristotelian view.
    [Show full text]
  • Seneca's Concept of a Supreme Being in His Philosophical Essays and Letters Robert James Koehn Loyola University Chicago
    Loyola University Chicago Loyola eCommons Master's Theses Theses and Dissertations 1947 Seneca's Concept of a Supreme Being in His Philosophical Essays and Letters Robert James Koehn Loyola University Chicago Recommended Citation Koehn, Robert James, "Seneca's Concept of a Supreme Being in His Philosophical Essays and Letters" (1947). Master's Theses. Paper 641. http://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_theses/641 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses and Dissertations at Loyola eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of Loyola eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License. Copyright © 1947 Robert James Koehn SENECA'S CONCEPT OF A SUPRE.'ME BEING IN HIS PHILOSOPHICAL ESSAYS AND LETTERS BY ROBERT J. KOEHN, S.J. A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF ~qE REQUIREMENTS FOR A MASTER OF ARTS DEGREE IN THE CLASSICS AUGUST 1947 VITA AUCTORIS Robert James Koehn was born in Toledo, Ohio, on September 2, 1917. After attending St. James parochial school, he entered st. John's High School in September 1931. Upon his graduation in 1935 he attended St. John's and DeSales Colleges before entering the So­ ciety of Jesus on September 1, 1937. He matriculated at Xavier University, Cincinnati, and received a Bachelor of Li­ terature degree in June 1941. Following his transfer to West Baden College, West Baden Springs, Indiana, in the summer of 1941, he entered the graduate school of Loyola Uni­ versity, Chicago, in the Classics.
    [Show full text]
  • Epictetus, Stoicism, and Slavery
    Epictetus, Stoicism, and Slavery Defense Date: March 29, 2011 By: Angela Marie Funk Classics Department Advisor: Dr. Peter Hunt (Classics) Committee: Dr. Jacqueline Elliott (Classics) and Dr. Claudia Mills (Philosophy) Funk 1 Abstract: Epictetus was an ex-slave and a leading Stoic philosopher in the Roman Empire during the second-century. His devoted student, Arrian, recorded Epictetus’ lectures and conversations in eight books titled Discourses, of which only four are extant. As an ex- slave and teacher, one expects to see him deal with the topic of slavery and freedom in great detail. However, few scholars have researched the relationship of Epictetus’ personal life and his views on slavery. In order to understand Epictetus’ perspective, it is essential to understand the political culture of his day and the social views on slavery. During his early years, Epictetus lived in Rome and was Epaphroditus’ slave. Epaphroditus was an abusive master, who served Nero as an administrative secretary. Around the same period, Seneca was a tutor and advisor to Nero. He was a Stoic philosopher, who counseled Nero on political issues and advocated the practice of clemency. In the mid to late first-century, Seneca spoke for a fair and kind treatment of slaves. He held a powerful position not only as an advisor to Nero, but also as a senator. While he promoted the humane treatment of slaves, he did not actively work to abolish slavery. Epaphroditus and Seneca both had profound influences in the way Epictetus viewed slaves and ex-slaves, relationships of former slaves and masters, and the meaning of freedom.
    [Show full text]
  • The Pseudo-Senecan Seneca on the Good Old Days: the Motif of the Golden Age in the Octavia
    The Pseudo-Senecan Seneca on the Good Old Days: The Motif of the Golden Age in the Octavia Oliver Schwazer I. Introduction In his fabula praetexta entitled Octavia, the playwright stages the historical events that occurred during the reign of the last Julio-Claudian emperor in 62 CE.1 Following the divorce from his wife Octavia and re-marriage to another woman, Poppaea Sabina, the emperor gives the order for the former to be exiled. Neither a thorough dispute with his advisor Seneca2 nor the interventions of the pro-Octavia Chorus of Romans can deter Nero from his decision to put down the riots amongst the populace by using the sentence of Octavia as a warning.3 For a number of reasons, the Octavia has always been one of the most intriguing and in many ways most controversial pieces of Latin literature. While the fact that this play has been almost fully preserved can be regarded as extremely gratifying, not least because it stands in contrast to the number of praetextae known to us from no more than a few fragments, or even just one, it is particularly its textual transmission that has overshadowed scholarly dispute. Due to its sharp opposition to the eight mythological plays — excluding the Hercules Oetaeus of doubtful authorship — doubts have been raised about the assumption that the Octavia has been transmitted in manuscripts along with the tragedies now unanimously assigned to Seneca the Younger. To many researchers it seems inconceivable that the earlier advisor and later adversary of Nero would choose to appear as a dramatis persona on stage, particularly in a play where the contemporary emperor was presented in such a disreputable light.
    [Show full text]
  • Platonic and Stoic Passions in Philo of Alexandria Loren Kerns George Fox University, [email protected]
    Digital Commons @ George Fox University George Fox Evangelical Seminary 2013 Platonic and Stoic Passions in Philo of Alexandria Loren Kerns George Fox University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/gfes Part of the Christianity Commons, and the Church History Commons Recommended Citation Kerns, Loren, "Platonic and Stoic Passions in Philo of Alexandria" (2013). George Fox Evangelical Seminary. Paper 6. http://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/gfes/6 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ George Fox University. It has been accepted for inclusion in George Fox Evangelical Seminary by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ George Fox University. Kings College London Platonic and Stoic Passions in Philo of Alexandria A Dissertation submitted to The School of Arts and Humanities In Candidacy for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Theology and Religious Studies By Loren Kerns London, United Kingdom July 2013 Copyright by Loren Kerns, 2013 All rights reserved. Abstract Philo of Alexandria forged his theory of the soul and its passions while expositing the meaning of Torah. Though writing as a Jewish teacher and disciple of Moses, his biblical reflections display a strong orientation toward Middle-Platonic philosophy. On the topic of the soul and its passions, however, Philo also exhibits significant Stoic influence. The introduction notes Philo’s apparent incompatible use of both the complex Platonic and the monistic Stoic psychological models. After assessing the degree to which Philo understood 'passion' to be a type of Stoic impulse or opinion (chapter one), chapter two demonstrates that Philo consistently drew upon the Stoics’ depiction of all passions as irrational, excessive, and unnatural.
    [Show full text]
  • Justus Lipsius and the Post-Machiavellian Prince
    © Copyright, Princeton University Press. No part of this book may be distributed, posted, or reproduced in any form by digital or mechanical means without prior written permission of the publisher C hapter O ne Justus Lipsius and the Post-Machiavellian Prince In his fine 1991 study of Neostoic ideology and the painting of Peter Paul Rubens, the classicist Mark Morford wrote that Justus Lipsius ‘is now little known except to students of Seneca and Tacitus and to intel- lectual historians of the northern Renaissance’.1 Given the growing num- ber of studies devoted to Lipsius and his various legacies since Morford’s book appeared, we might want to add students of early modern political thought and some scholars of literature to his list. Outside these particu- lar corners of the academy, however, levels of Lipsius consciousness re- main fairly low. He returned to the heart of European political life, in a manner of speaking, when the Justus Lipsius Building in Brussels opened in 1995, providing a new home for the European Union’s Council of Ministers. One might have thought it appropriate that such a building be named for a distinguished Belgian political writer who argued against the excesses of patriotism and in support of a European peace based on prin- ciples of mutual toleration, and whose books circulated extensively throughout the greater part of the territory of today’s EU. According to an EU press release, however, the building was in fact named for the Brus- sels street that used to connect rue de la Loi and rue Belliard and had been demolished to make way for its construction.2 Who was Justus Lipsius? He was born in 1547 in Overijse in Brabant.3 He studied at the Jesuit college in Cologne from 1559 and was for a short while, from 1562 to 1564, a novice member of the order.
    [Show full text]
  • The Old Roman Senate and the Young Tyrant Nero
    The Old Roman Senate and the Young Tyrant Nero. The Athenians passed many laws against tyranny (Ostwald 1955, Gagarin 1981, Teegarden 2012) and drew inspiration from the tyrannicides Harmodius and Aristogeiton (McGlew 2012), but in the famous Tyranny Decree of 337/6 they specifically penalized any collaboration between the Council of the Areopagus and a Tyrant (Ostwald 1955). This law was passed at a time when conservatives like Isocrates were arguing that the Areopagus was the legitimate deliberative body of Athens under its Ancestral Constitution (Finley 1986). The Tyranny Decree of 337/6 suggests that the Athenians were not fully convinced by such arguments and believed that a council of former magistrates might not be the greatest guardians of liberty. In Rome the power of such a council of old boys (senatus) and the maintenance of the ancestral constitution were an everyday reality, not a nostalgic ideal (North 1990). By “transferring elections to the Senate” at the accession of Tiberius, the Senate had thrown away its legitimacy and was codependent on the emperor. It was also free to collaborate as much as it pleased with the “subtle tyranny” of the principate, without fearing any punishment from the Roman people. As the Athenians might have predicted, the Senate offered no resistance even to Nero, whose principate could not have survived without its assistance (Talbert 1984). The Stoic ideology of the Senate allowed for a few spectacular suicides but did not inspire any real opposition to the new monarchy itself (Brunt 1975, Schofield 2015), and it rejected the example set by the tyrannicides Brutus and Cassius (Sedley 1997).
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of the Philosophy of Lucius Annaeus Seneca
    Loyola University Chicago Loyola eCommons Master's Theses Theses and Dissertations 1941 Analysis of the Philosophy of Lucius Annaeus Seneca Gabriel Connery Loyola University Chicago Follow this and additional works at: https://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_theses Part of the Classical Literature and Philology Commons Recommended Citation Connery, Gabriel, "Analysis of the Philosophy of Lucius Annaeus Seneca" (1941). Master's Theses. 111. https://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_theses/111 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses and Dissertations at Loyola eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of Loyola eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License. Copyright © 1941 Gabriel Connery .ANALYSIS OF THE PHILOSOPHY .OF LUCIUS ANNA:EUS SENECA .BY BROTHER GABRIEL CONNERY, F. S.C. A Thesis Submitted in Partial Ful~illment o~ the Requirements ~or the Degree o~ Master o~ Arts at LOYOLA UNIVERSITY APPRECIATION The writer gratefully acknowledges his indebtedness to Brother Julius Hugh, F.s.c., Ph.D., Brother Leo of Mary, Ph.D., and Brother Dennis, F.s.c., M.A., whose thorough understanding and efficient teach­ ing of the principles of Scholastic Philo­ sophy and Classical Latin were of invalu­ able aid in the development of this study. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION • • • • • • • • • PAGE 1 CHAPTER I Seneca: Education and Political Back- ground • • • • • • • • 4
    [Show full text]
  • A Commentary on the De Constantia Sapientis of Seneca the Younger
    1 A Commentary on the De Constantia Sapientis of Seneca the Younger Nigel Royden Hope Royal Holloway, University of London Submitted for the degree of PhD 1 2 Declaration of Authorship I, Nigel Royden Hope, hereby declare that this thesis and the work presented in it is entirely my own. Where I have consulted the work of others, this is always clearly stated. Signed: ______________________ Date: ________________________ 2 3 Abstract The present thesis is a commentary on Seneca the Younger’s De constantia sapientis, one of his so-called dialogi. The text on which I comment forms part of the Oxford Classical Texts edition of the dialogi by L. D. Reynolds. The thesis is in two main parts: an Introduction and the Commentary proper. Before the Introduction, there is a justificatory Preface, in which I explain why this thesis is a necessary addition to the scholarship on De constantia sapientis, on which the last detailed commentary was published in 1950. The Introduction covers the following topics: Date; Genre (involving discussion of what is meant by the term dialogus and the place of De constantia sapientis in the collection of Seneca’s Dialogi as a whole); Argumentation: Techniques and Strategies (including a discussion of S.’s views on the role of logic in philosophy); Language and Style; Imagery; Moral Psychology (an analysis of Seneca’s account of the passions); The Nature of Insult (including types of insult, appropriate responses to insults, and interpretation of the meanings of two of the verbal insults presented by Seneca); and Legal Aspects (the question of the distinction between iniuria and contumelia in legal terms and what sorts of actions were pursued by an actio iniuriarum in Seneca’s day).
    [Show full text]
  • Commentary on Seneca's De Clementia
    THE AGES DIGITAL LIBRARY HISTORY COMMENTARY ON SENECA’S DE CLEMENTIA by John Calvin Used by permisson from E.J. Brill Publishing All Rights Reserved © 1969 B o o k s F o r Th e A g e s AGES Software • Albany, OR USA Version 1.0 © 1998 2 THE TEXT OF THE PRESENT EDITION The text of the De Clementia is here basically printed from Calvin’s edition of 1532, not from any sort of antiquarian interest, but simply because this Commentary refers very specifically to this text, and to no other. We have, of course, a much better text today than Calvin had four hundred years ago; but if we want to understand his Commentary and that is the aim of the present publication — then we cannot work with any other text than that which he himself prepared for the presses of Louis Blauwbloem in the Rue de St. Jacques, Paris. In preparing the critical apparatus which is to be found at the bottom of each page, I have not attempted to do anything more than 1. to indicate where, and in what way, Calvin deviated from the standard edition published by Erasmus in 1529, and 2. to indicate the most important differences between Calvin’s text and the texts of current modern editions like that of Hosius (1914), Prechac (1921), and Faider (1928). In doing so, I have tried to be as explicit as possible, keeping in mind the abhorrence inspired in the mind of a student by a critical apparatus consisting of nothing but single little words or fragments of words.
    [Show full text]
  • Thesis Template
    Aspects of Evil in Seneca’s Tragedies by James Munroe Lynd A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Classics University of Toronto © Copyright by James Munroe Lynd 2012 Aspects of Evil in Seneca’s Tragedies James Munroe Lynd Doctor of Philosophy Department of Classics University of Toronto 2012 Abstract This thesis explores the theme of evil in Senecan tragedy through the prism of his Stoic principles, as they are illustrated in his philosophic treatises, with special reference to de ira, de clementia, and naturales quaestiones. The introduction defines evil and situates this study in the historical context of Julio-Claudian rule at Rome. In addition, I sketch the relative chronology of Seneca’s works and chart Seneca’s interest in the myths on display in Greek and Roman tragedy. Chapter One, “The Beast Within,” investigates the contrast of the civilized and uncivilized behaviour of Seneca’s characters in the Phaedra, Thyestes and Hercules Furens. I argue that although Seneca’s characters represent themselves as creatures of civilization and the city in their rejection of wild nature and their embrace of the values of civilization, in their words and actions they repeatedly revert to the wild landscape and bestial appetites that lurk outside the safety of the city walls. In Chapter Two, “Anger,” I examine the emotion of anger as represented in the Medea and compare that tragic exploration with Seneca’s discussion of the emotion in the de ira, where it is called the greatest vice. I conduct an extensive comparative investigation of the language of Seneca’s treatise de ira and his tragedy Medea.
    [Show full text]