sign in sign up
<<
Home , Albertino Mussato, Apatheia, Cleanthes, Consolation, De Vita Beata, Helvidius Priscus

Seneca and His World Elizabeth Asmis, Shadi Bartsch, and Martha C. Nussbaum vii

Seneca once remarked of that it was his death by hem- lock that made him great (Letter 13.14). With reason: Socrates’ death demonstrated the steadfastness of his philosophical principles and his belief that death off ered nothing to fear. When Seneca himself, then, was ordered to commit suicide by in 65 CE, we might well believe ’s account in his Annals (15.63) that the Roman Stoic modeled his death on that of Socrates, discoursing calmly about phi- losophy with his friends as the blood drained out of his veins. In Tacitus’s depiction we see, for once, a much-criticized fi gure living up to the principles he preached. Seneca’s life was mired in political advancement and disappoint- ment, shaped by the eff ects of exile and return, and compromised by his relationship with the emperor Nero—fi rst his pupil, then his advisee, and fi nally his murderer. But his many writings say little about his political career and almost nothing about his relationship with Nero except for what can be gleaned from his essay On Clem- ency, leaving us to turn to later sources for information—Tacitus, , and Dio Cassius in particular. We know that Seneca was born to a prominent equestrian family in Corduba, Spain, some time between 4 and 1 BCE. He was the second of three sons of Helvia and Lucius Annaeus Seneca (the youngest son, Annaeus Mela, was the father of the poet ). The elder Seneca had spent much of his life in Rome, and Seneca himself was brought to Rome as a young boy. There he was educated in and later became a student of the philosopher Sextius. But his entry into political life was delayed, and when he did enter upon the cursus honorum late in Tiberius’s reign, his ill health (he had asthma and possibly tuberculosis) was a source of diffi culty. In any case his career was cut short. He sur- vived Caligula’s hostility, which the sources tell us was thanks to his talents in oratory, but was sent into exile on Corsica by Claudius shortly after Caligula’s death in 41 CE. The charge, almost certainly false, was adultery with Caligula’s younger sister, Julia Livilla. Seneca spent his time in exile in philosophical and natural study and wrote

C5241.indb vii 4/12/10 2:00:03 PM the Consolations to Helvia (his mother) and to (Claudius’s freedman secretary), revealing in the latter how desperately he hoped to be recalled to Rome. viii When Seneca did return in 49 CE, it was under diff erent auspices. Claudius had recently remarried, to Germanicus’s daughter Agrip- pina, and she urged him to recall Seneca as tutor to her son, the twelve-year-old Nero. Claudius already had a younger son, Britan- nicus, but it was clear that the wily Agrippina wished to see her own fl esh and blood on the throne. When Claudius died fi ve years later, Agrippina was able to maneuver Nero into position as emperor—and Britannicus was dispatched by poison shortly after, in 55 CE. From 54 until his infl uence waned at the end of the decade, Seneca acted as Nero’s advisor, together with the praetorian prefect Sextus

Seneca and His World Afranius Burrus. We know he wrote a speech on clemency for Nero to deliver to the Senate soon after his accession, and Seneca’s own essay On Clemency may contain some inkling of his strategy to keep the young emperor from running amok. Seneca’s use of the term rex, or king, applied to Nero by analogy in this piece, is surprising from a Roman senator, but he seems to have hoped that fl attering Nero by pointing to his limitless power and the value of clemency would be one way to keep him from abusing that power. Both Seneca and Burrus also helped with the civil and judicial administration of the empire. Many historians, ancient and modern, feel that this early part of Nero’s reign, moderated by Seneca and Burrus, represented a period of comparative good rule and harmony (the “quinquennium Nero- nis”). The decline started in 59 CE with Nero’s murder of Agrippina, after which Seneca wrote the emperor’s speech of self-exculpation— perhaps the most famous example of how the philosopher found himself increasingly compromised in his position as Nero’s chief counsel. Certainly as a Stoic, Seneca cuts an ambiguous fi gure next to the others who made their opposition to Nero clear, such as Thra- sea Paetus and Helvidius Priscus. His participation in court politics probably led him to believe that he could do more good from where he stood than by abandoning Nero to his own devices—if he even had this choice. In any case, Seneca’s infl uence over Nero seems to have been considerably etiolated after the death of Burrus in 62. According

C5241.indb viii 4/12/10 2:00:04 PM ix Seneca and His World 4/12/10 2:00:04 PM ow of ow nally sat in uential philosophical move- nally on ranks in our estimation may rest uence over the centuries. In Seneca’s own lifetime own lifetime In Seneca’s the centuries. uence over

Because of his ethical writings, Seneca the early with well fared Because of his ethical writings, one P. Suillius attacked him on the grounds that, since Nero’s rise since Nero’s Suillius attacked that, him on the grounds one P. charging by sesterces he had piled up some 300 million to power, on loans in Italy Suilliushigh interest and the provinces—though to the Balearichimself was no angel and was banished Islands for he seems defense, In Seneca’s an embezzler and informant. his life and despite engaged in ascetic habits throughout to have takes beata) Life (De vita his essay On the Happy In fact, his wealth. be richthe position that a philosopher may as long as his wealth is properlyspent and his attitude to it is appropriately gained and Where Seneca fi detached. Christians—hence the later forging of a fake correspondence with Christians—hence of a fake correspondence the later forging in antiquity of critics, already fair share he had his Paul—but St. between contradiction the apparent the main charge arising from and his own “externals” his Stoic teachings on the unimportance of he never gained for this reason Perhaps amassing of huge wealth. Musonius Stoic the C. “Roman Socrates,” the accorded the respect writings have even though Seneca’s in 65, Nero banished by Rufus, infl had far more A Short to Introduction most infl Stoicism is one of the world’s to Tacitus, Seneca tried to retire from his position twice, in 62 and 62 in Seneca twice, position his from tried to retire Tacitus, to Seneca seems occasions, on both him refused Nero Although 64. In 65 CE largelycourt the to have himself from absented after 64. him replace and to kill Nero a plot came the , nephew Although Seneca’s Calpurnius Piso. C. with the ringleader, Seneca himself Lucan was implicated attempt, in this assassination seized opportunity the Nero to Nonetheless, was probably innocent. but (so Seneca cut his own veins, old advisor to kill himself. his order the fl age hindered tells us) his thinness and advanced Tacitus Paulina, Pompeia His wife, ow faster. the blood fl a hot bath to make Nero. from also tried on orders was saved to commit suicide but our ability the life of to tolerate the various contradictions posed by this philosopher in politics. original Starting and teaching of the three the works from ments. Stoicheads of the Greek school—Zeno BCE), of Citium (335–263 blood. When a dose of poison also failed to kill him, he fi When kill him, a dose of poison also failed to blood. C5241.indb ix (331–232 BCE), and (ca. 280–207 BCE)—it be- came the leading philosophical movement of the ancient Greco- Roman world, shaping the development of thought well into the x Christian era. Later Greek Stoics (ca. 185–109 BCE) and (ca. 135–51 BCE) modifi ed some features of Stoic doctrine. Roman thinkers then took up the cause, and Stoicism became the semioffi cial creed of the Roman political and literary world. (106–43 BCE) does not agree with the Stoics on metaphysical and epis- temological matters, but his ethical and political positions lie close to theirs, and even when he does not agree, he makes a concerted eff ort to report their positions sympathetically. Roman Stoics Seneca, (mid-fi rst to early second century CE), Musonius Rufus (ca. 30–ca. 102 CE), and the emperor (121–80 CE,

Seneca and His World emperor 161–80) produced Stoic works of their own (the last three writing in Greek). The philosophical achievement of the Greek Stoics, and espe- cially that of Chrysippus, was enormous: the invention of propo- sitional , the invention of the of language, unprec- edented achievements in moral psychology, distinction in areas ranging from and epistemology to moral and political philosophy. Through an accident of history, however, all the works of all the major Greek Stoics have been lost, and we must recover their thoughts through fragments, reports (particularly the lengthy accounts in Laertius’s Lives of the Philosophers, in Cicero, and in ’s skeptical writings, since the Stoics are his primary target), and the works of the Roman thinkers—who often are adjusting Stoic doctrines to fi t Roman reality and probably contributing creative insights of their own. This also means that we know somewhat less about or physics than about Stoic , since the Romans took a particular interest in the practical domain. The goal of Stoic philosophy, like that of other philosophical schools of the Hellenistic era, was to give the pupil a fl ourishing life free from the forms of distress and moral failure that the Stoics thought ubiquitous in their societies. Unlike some of their competi- tor schools, however, they emphasized the need to study all parts of their threefold system—logic, physics, and ethics—in order to un- derstand the and its interconnections. To the extent that a

C5241.indb x 4/12/10 2:00:04 PM xi Seneca and His World 4/12/10 2:00:04 PM nd even nd dent belief in a rationally ordered universe, universe, a rationally belief in dent ordered .) Rejecting traditional anthropomorphicCandide.) Rejecting traditional reli-

Stoic the idea of the boundless ethics begins from worth of the held that the universe is a rationally ordered whole, Stoic whole, rationally is a universe held that the physics ordered rational capacity in each and every human being. The Roman Stoics rational capacity in each and every human being. (Thus, understood this capacity to be centrally practical and moral. that people who had a natural tal- they did not think unlike , and they better than people who didn’t, ent for mathematics were skeptical evenbecame and more that the study of logic had more equal in human were They held that all practical much value.) capacityworth by of their possession of the precious to choose they This, ranking some ends ahead of others. their lives, and direct this power animals: was what distinguished human beings from said, they most other ancient schools, (Unlike of selection and rejection. since they had little concern for the morality of animal treatment, thought that only moral capacity and good entitled a being to respect came into the world like little ani- they said, Children, treatment.) with a natural orientation self-preservation toward but no un- mals, shift a remarkable would however, Later, derstanding of true worth. innate human nature: their possession of set up by already take place, the beauty become able to appreciate of the capacitythey would for had shaped the entire choice and the way in which moral reason Roman such as Cicero believed truths the moral uphold he could Cicero such as Roman of Stoicism a confi without eventsin the most trivial (such as earthquakes or distressing and This order good order. overall thunderbolts) signs of the universe’s dignity based on the inherent and worthwas also a moral order of The Stoics the moral capacitiesand every of each rational being. everything was deterministic: believed that this order happens of ne- believing that human free “compatibilists,” also But they were cessity. They engaged in will was compatible with the truth of determinism. making lasting Aristotelians, “incompatibilist” spirited with debates contributions will controversy. to the free and that everything rea- for the best of happens in it happens that that is pilloried in its Leibnizian incarnation, (It is this position, sons. in Voltaire’s the Stoics the name gave to the rational and providential gion, fi and they could principle as a whole, animating the universe he held a heretical position (one shared many centuries later by Im- many centuries later by shared heretical position (one he held a manuel Kant). C5241.indb xi universe. This recognition, they said, should lead people to respect both self and others in an entirely new way. Stoics were serious about (human) equality: they urged the equal education of both slaves and xii women. Epictetus himself was a former slave. Stoicism looks thus far like an ethical view with radical political consequences, and so it became during the Enlightenment, when its distinctive emphases were used to argue in favor of equal political rights and more nearly equal economic opportunities. However, the original Stoics maintain a claim of great signifi cance for politics: moral capacity is the only thing that has intrinsic worth. Money, honor, power, bodily health, and even the love of friends, children, and spouse—all these are held to be things that one may reasonably pursue if nothing impedes (they are called “preferred indiff erents”),

Seneca and His World but they have no true intrinsic worth. They should not even be seen as commensurate with moral worth. So when they do not arrive as one wishes, it is wrong to be distressed. This was the context in which the Stoics introduced their famous doctrine of , freedom from the passions. Defi ning the major emotions or passions as all involving a high valuation of “external goods,” they argue that the good Stoic will not have any of these dis- turbances of the personality. Realizing that chance events lie beyond our control, the Stoic will fi nd it unnecessary to experience , anger, fear, or even hope: all of these are characteristic of a mind that waits in suspense, awestruck by things indiff erent. We can have a life that truly involves joy (of the right sort) if we appreciate that the most precious thing of all, and the only truly precious thing, lies within our control at all times. Stoics do not think that it is at all easy to get rid of the cultural errors that are the basis of the rejected passions: thus a Stoic life is a constant therapeutic process in which mental exercises are devised to wean the mind from its unwise attachments. Their works depict pro- cesses of therapy through which the reader may make progress in the direction of Stoic virtue, and they often engage their reader in just such a process. Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius describe processes of repeated meditation; Seneca (in On Anger) describes his own nightly self-examination. Seneca’s Letters show the role that a wiser teacher can play in such a therapeutic process, but Seneca evidently does not think that even he himself is free from erroneous attachments. The

C5241.indb xii 4/12/10 2:00:04 PM Seneca and His World xiii 4/12/10 2:00:04 PM ed

er by caring too much about external goods. If one sees the caringabout external goods. er by much too is an example of a genre that we know to have been common have know to that we genre is an example of a

There was also much debate about whether the Stoic was also much norm of There Because of their doctrine of value, the Stoics actually do not pro- Because of their doctrine of value, encouraged people to detach themselves from bad politicalapatheia encouraged people to detach themselves from Certainly aid and comfortevents in a way that gave to bad politics. politics (a theme in from to counsel retirement known Stoics were un- permission for retirement, Nero’s own life as he sought Seneca’s thought to believe that upheaval was they were and successfully), reports that Brutus (a Platonist) than lawless tyranny. worse questioned potential coconspirators in the assassination of Julius tryingCaesar by that Stoic to determine whether they accepted that lawless tyranny than worse was with him, norm or believed, only of assassins. selected for the group non-Stoicscivil strife; were treatment of each person; thus Seneca their urges masters not to beat of each person; treatment of slavery, About the institution them as sexual tools. or use slaves Seneca that argues than silence: and worse is silence, there however, so the external sortre- does not true is internal freedom, freedom for treatment advocates respectful similarly, Musonius, ally matter. But as for changes in including access to a Stoic education. women, role and to a domestic women ned the legal arrangements that confi arguing he too is silent, them, death over of life and males power gave will manifest their Stoicthat women virtue in the domestic context. Some Stoics Roman that political thought do appear to have liberty and thus died supporting republican institu- was a part of dignity, but whether this attention to external conditions was con- tions, profound (Certainly Cicero’s sistent with Stoicism unclear. remains grief the attitude of a Stoic, the loss of political was not over freedom death.) than was his agonizing grief his daughter’s over any more pose radical changes in the distribution of worldly goods, as one as one pose radical changes in the distribution of worldly goods, dignity for the of all human beings regard might suppose equal dignifi does require equal respect They think that require. would “wise man” is in that sense a distant ideal, not a worldly reality, par- worldly not a reality, ideal, a distant sense is in that “wise man” process therapeutic aid in the A large ticularly Stoics. the Roman for of the horribleis the study societies (including deformities that one’s own) suff may as- this clearly and even love enough, honor, ugly face of power, On Thus Seneca’s true toward virtue. making the progress sist one in Anger in Stoicism. C5241.indb xiii During Nero’s reign, however, several prominent Stoics—including Seneca and his nephew, Lucan—joined republican political move- ments aimed at overthrowing Nero, and lost their lives for their ef- xiv forts, by politically ordered suicide. Stoics believed that from the moral point of view, national bound- aries were as irrelevant as honor, wealth, gender, and birth. They held that we are, fi rst and foremost, citizens of the universe as a whole. (The term kosmou polites, citizen of the universe, was apparently fi rst used by Diogenes the Cynic, but the Stoics took it up and were the real forefathers of modern cosmopolitanism.) What cosmopolitan- ism meant in practical terms was unclear, for the reasons already given—but Cicero thinks, at any rate (in On Duties, a highly Stoic work), that our common human dignity entails some very strict lim-

Seneca and His World its on the reasons for going to war and the sort of conduct that is permissible in it. He thus adumbrated the basis of the modern law of war. Cicero denied, however, that our common humanity entailed any duty to distribute material goods beyond our own borders, thus displaying the unfortunate capacity of Stoic doctrine to support the status quo. Cicero’s On Duties has had such an enormous infl uence on posterity in this that it is scarcely an exaggeration to blame the Stoics for the fact that we have well worked-out doctrines of international law in the area of war and peace, but no well-established understand- ing of our material duties to one another. Stoicism’s infl uence on the development of the entire Western intellectual tradition cannot be underestimated. Christian thought owes it a large debt. is just one example of a Christian thinker steeped in Stoicism; even a thinker such as Au- gustine, who contests many Stoic theses, fi nds it natural to begin from Stoic positions. Even more strikingly, many philosophers of the early modern era turn to Stoicism for guidance—far more of- ten than they turn to or Plato. Descartes’ ethical ideas are built largely on Stoic models; Spinoza is steeped in Stoicism at every point; Leibniz’s teleology is essentially Stoic; Hugo Grotius bases his ideas of international morality and law on Stoic models; Adam Smith draws more from the Stoics than from other ancient schools of thought; Rousseau’s ideas of education are in essence based on Stoic models; Kant fi nds inspiration in the Stoic ideas of human dig- nity and the peaceful world community; and the American founders

C5241.indb xiv 4/12/10 2:00:04 PM xv Seneca and His World 4/12/10 2:00:04 PM cant ed most clearly uences. uential works of Cicero, of Cicero, uential works uence the Americanuence trans- nostri)—the Stoics—in his writ- uence of philosophers in their own who can gure motivate others to become ers from previous Stoics by welcoming some aspects of previous Stoics welcoming ers from by

Seneca all with applyingis concerned above Stoic ethical prin- The Stoic infl uence on the history uence im- has also been of literature The Stoic infl ciples to his life and to the lives of others like him. The question The question of others like him. ciples to his life and to the lives that dominates his philosophical writings is how an individual can quest for virtue the and happiness is In his eyes, achieve a good life. the assaults places the successful person above that endeavor a heroic Seneca transforms the this end, To of fortune and on a level with god. into an inspirational fi like him by his gentle humanity and joyful tranquility. Key topics are Key topics are his gentle humanitylike him by and joyful tranquility. oneself from how to free adversity with providence, how to reconcile Epicurean philosophy along with other infl philosophy Epicurean by Panaetius and Posidonius, who introduced some Platonic some who introduced and Ar- and Posidonius, Panaetius by istotelian elements while adapting Stoicism to Roman circumstances. Senecadiff mense. In the Roman world, all the major poets, like other educated all the major poets, Roman world, In the mense. acquainted with Stoic and alluded to them often ideas were Romans, Virgil and Lucan perhaps particularly are signifi in their work. Stoicism Seneca’s by He declares his allegiance es himself as a Stoic. Senecaidentifi ( people” “our repeatedly referring to are steeped in Stoic ideas, including dignity of equal the ideas and Stoicsteeped in are ideas, also deeply which infl cosmopolitanism, of Because works the leading Thoreau. Emerson and cendentalists reading were all these thinkers StoicismGreek had long been lost, they were little Greek, Because read many of them Stoics. the Roman primarily and Seneca. Cicero reading Later literary European marked traditions also show in this regard. Roman litera- uence of uence—in part via the infl traces of Stoic infl and in part the infl through ture, but often by uenced Stoic thought, themselves infl time who were the infl of their own reading also through Aurelius. and Marcus Seneca, to other considerable independence in relation he exercises Yet ings. While committed to upholding basic Stoic he is doctrines, Stoics. experiencehe recasts them on the basis of his own as a Roman and follows a he In this respect of other philosophers. a wide reading tradition of Stoic philosophical innovation exemplifi C5241.indb xv passions (particularly anger and grief ), how to face death, how to dis- engage oneself from political involvement, how to practice poverty and use wealth, and how to benefi t others. All of these endeavors are xvi viewed within the context of a supreme, perfectly rational and virtu- ous deity who looks with favor on the eff orts of humans to attain the same condition of virtue. In the fi eld of politics, Seneca argues for clemency on the part of the supreme ruler, Nero. In human relations, he pays special attention to friendship and the position of slaves. Overall, he aims to replace social hierarchies, with their dependence on fortune, with a moral hierarchy arranged according to proximity to the goal of being a sage. Seneca’s own concerns and personality permeate his writings. The modern reader learns much about the life of an aristocrat in the time

Seneca and His World of Claudius and Nero, and much about Seneca’s personal strengths and weaknesses. At the same time, there is also much in the work that transcends the immediate concerns of Seneca and his period. Some topics that resonate especially with a modern audience are his vision of humans as members of a universal community of mankind, the respect he demands for slaves, his concern with human emo- tions, and, in general, his insistence on looking within oneself to fi nd happiness. What is perhaps less appealing to the modern reader is the rhetorical elaboration of his message, which features an undeni- able tendency toward hyperbole. Most of all, Seneca’s own character strikes many readers as problematic. From his own time on, he was perceived by some as a hypocrite who was far from practicing what he preached. Some of Seneca’s writings (in particular, his Consolations to Polybius and his mother Helvia, and his essay On the Happy Life) are obviously self-serving. As Seneca himself suggests (Letters 84), he has transformed the teachings he has culled, in the manner of bees, into a whole that refl ects his own complex character. The Stoics divided logic into dialectic (short argument) and rhetoric (continuous exposition). There is not much to be said on dialectic in Seneca’s writings except that he shuns it, along with for- mal logic in general. Every so often, however, he engages in a satirical display of fi ne-grained Stoic-type reasoning. The point is that carry- ing logical precision to excess is futile: it does not make a person any better. Quibbles of all kinds should be avoided, whether they involve carrying through a minute line of argument, making overly subtle

C5241.indb xvi 4/12/10 2:00:05 PM Seneca and His World xvii 4/12/10 2:00:05 PM ects. He knows how to vary ects. Senecaords scope for the greatest gures. He himself hovers over the proceedings the proceedings over He himself hovers gures. , to physics. Yet the entire work work the entire Yet physics. to Questions, Natural

We have only sparse details about how the Stoics viewed rhetoric. only have about how the Stoics sparse details viewed rhetoric. We Seneca“in the judgment writes 45.4) that while he believes (Letters Given Seneca’s ethical aims, it is perhaps surprising de- that he ethical aims, Seneca’s Given What is clear about Seneca, however, is that he used the full panoply is that he used What however, is clear about Seneca, rhetoricalof Roman of his philosophi- persuade readers methods to stunning meta- His writingsof vivid examples, full are cal message. ringing sound eff pointed sayings, phors, previ- he also claims something for his own judgment: men,” of great which they ous philosophers left us, by things to be investigated some engaged for themselves if they hadn’t discovered might indeed have Granted that Seneca shows special investigative in useless quibbles. a his moral teachings too are fervor in his cosmological inquiries, verbal distinctions, or indulging in abstruse indulging or philological interpreta- verbal distinctions, Seneca knows the reader makes sure While the point, making tion. wanted to. his own game if he the quibbler at he could beat casual to soaring conversation from exhortation and bitter his tone, his text with a varied He peoples cast of characters: denunciation. friends, hypothetical objectors, the implied audience, the addressee, historical fi opponents, the mind Seneca As insists repeatedly, ethical aim. has an overarching narrowly to survey human concerns is uplifted venturing beyond by The contemplation of the physical world com- the world as a whole. showing the full context of human action: plements moral action by caring as he administers lives for human see god in his full glory, we In the spirit of (who championed a the world as a whole. Seneca also intersperses ethical messages through- rival philosophy), he emphasizesThus that humans must out his physical inquiries. with death and natural disasters, such as natural events, confront against human misuse and he warns courage and gratitude to god; and the decadence that accompanies progress. of natural resources physics aff of inquiry, Of all areas He ranges over to Stoicmaking additions and corrections doctrine. to his the Presocratics from the whole history of physical inquiries, upon the Stoics. to improve own time, votes a large work, a large work, votes as watchful friend and sometime foe. Following Cleanthes, he inter- Cleanthes, Following as watchful friend foe. and sometime sperses forcefully even more to impel the reader into his prose task of self-improvement. the toward C5241.indb xvii product of his own judgment and innovation. What he contributes is a new vision rather than new theories. Using certain strict Stoic distinctions as a basis, he paints a new picture of the challenges that xviii humans face and the happiness that awaits those who practice the correct philosophy. In agreement with Stoic orthodoxy, Seneca is un- compromising about diff erentiating between external advantages and the good, about the need to eradicate the passions, about the perfect rationality of the wise person, about the identity of god with Fate. What he adds is a moral fervor, joined by a highly poetic sensibility, that turns these distinctions into springboards for action. The Stoic sage was generally viewed by critics as a forbidding fi gure, outside the reach of human capabilities and immune to hu- man feeling. Seneca concedes, or rather emphasizes, that the sage

Seneca and His World is indeed rare; he remarks that the sage is like a phoenix, appearing perhaps every fi ve hundred years (Letters 42.1). As he sees it, the sage’s exceptional status is not a barrier to improvement; it inspires. Seneca gives real-life immediacy to the sage by citing the younger Cato, op- ponent of , as an example. Cato, indeed, is not just any sage; Seneca says he is not sure whether Cato might even surpass him (On Constancy 7.1). In this he is not blurring Stoic distinctions, but highlighting the indomitable moral strength of a sage. Through Cato and numerous other examples from the Roman past, Seneca fuses the Stoic sage with the traditional image of a Roman hero, thus spurring his Roman readers to fulfi ll their duties by emulating both at once. Below the level of sage, Seneca outlines three stages of moral progress, demarcated according to our vulnerability to irrational emotions (Letters 75). There is the condition very near to that of being a sage, in which a person is not yet confi dent of being able to withstand irrational emotions (the so-called passions, pathê). Just below it is the stage in which a person is still capable of lapsing, and at the lowest level of progress a person can avoid most irrational emotions, but not all. Below these are the innumerable people who have yet to make progress. Seneca has nothing to say to them; he wants to avoid them, lest he be contaminated. What he does allow is that persons who are still struggling to become good may give way to grief initially; but he insists that this period must be brief. The Stoics talk “big words,” he says, when they forbid moans and groans; he’ll

C5241.indb xviii 4/12/10 2:00:05 PM Seneca and His World xix 4/12/10 2:00:05 PM Thyes- Hercu- , ), not ), Furens , , the probably spurious and 23.4). Still, he insists, these words words these insists, he Still, 23.4). Letters to do that has nothing joy lled with a serene ight in the contemplation of god. This with- ight in the contemplation of god. , there remain only fragments. These These only remain fragments. there of the Phoenissae ,

;

Looking toward Roman heroism, Seneca portrays moral progress Looking Roman heroism, toward not only externals but a person must confront make progress, To , , are “true”; and his aim is to lead, as much as he can, to the goal of to the goal as he can, as much is to lead, his aim and “true”; are the wise Like everyone, externals. attitude toward a dispassionate that look momentarily initial shocks—reactions to prone person is involuntary these are emotions—but like irrational to be responses sage Seneca’s calmness immediately the succeeded of judgment. by is fi is kind to others and as an arduous struggle, like a military campaign or the uphill storm- struggle, as an arduous viciously attacking The enemy is fortune, position. ing of an enemy’s Her opponent of the most cruelher victim in the form disasters. fortune to the conquered if he resists but he will have may succumb, people or simply other the disasters come from from In reality, end. own or Seneca commonly cites death (whether one’s circumstances. rich His own life is and illness. torture, exile, one), that of a loved He goes so far as to advocate adversity as a means of with examples. but he also allows (with a view to his own making moral progress, a help to the person who is are circumstances that favorable wealth) still struggling to make progress. Drawing Plato, inspiration from look within oneself. all, above also, is a soul that seeks to free there Seneca is a god inside; tells us there Seneca to with- invites the reader of the body. the dross itself from particular so as to both meditate on one’s draw into this inner self, condition and take fl Senecan survivehand there eight ( Seneca’s From adopt a more gentle tone ( tone gentle a more adopt take in externals. that other people pleasure with the ephemeral easier when But it’s drawal can of a very occur in the press life. active and so Seneca associates one is no longer fully caught up in politics, politics to withdraw from moral withdrawal with his own attempt He insists that he will continue to help the end of his life. toward like other Stoics. his philosophical others through teachings, tes les Oetaeus undergone many vicissitudes in fortunedramas have throughout including the spurious C5241.indb xix the centuries; however, they are no longer criticized as being mere fl awed versions of the older Greek dramas in which much of Seneca’s subject matter had already been treated. While Seneca’s plays were xx once mined only for the light they shed on Roman Stoic philosophy, for examples of rhetorical extravagance, or for the reconstruction of missing plays by Sophocles and his fellows, the traits that once marked the dramas as unworthy of critical attention now engage us in their own right. Indeed, they are the only extant versions of any Roman tragedy, the writings of other dramatists such as Marcus Pacuvius (ca. 220–130 BCE) and Lucius Accius (ca. 170–86 BCE) hav- ing been lost to posterity. It is thus only Seneca’s version of Roman drama, translated into English as the Tenne Tragedies in 1581, that so infl uenced the tragedians of the Elizabethan era.

Seneca and His World Seneca may have turned his hand to writing drama as early as the reign of Caligula (37–41 CE), although there is no way of determin- ing exactly when he began. Our fi rst reference to the plays comes from a famous graffi to from the Agamemnon preserved on a wall in Pompeii, but we can only deduce that this was written before the eruption of Vesuvius in 79 CE; it is of little actual use in trying to date the dramas. Stylistic analysis has not provided us with a sure order of composition, though scholars seem to agree that the and the Phoenissae are late eff orts. Certainly we are unable to make claims about their dating with respect to the Essays and Letters, despite the very diff erent tones of Seneca’s prose and his poetry—a diff erence that led some readers, including the fi fth-century churchman and orator Sidonius Apollinaris and after him Erasmus and Diderot, to speculate (erroneously) that there might have been two Lucius An- naeus Senecas at work on them rather than one. This confusion about the authorship of Seneca’s writing may seem natural, given the argument that Stoicism fails as a way of life in the dramas. Whether it fails because its adherents are too weak to resist the pull of desire or emotion, because Stoicism itself is too dif- fi cult to practice successfully, because the universe is not the locus of a divine Providence, or because the protagonists are so evil that they fail to see Providence in action, is open to argument; a metaliterary view might even suggest that plotlines inherited from mythology provide the force that condemns a Cassandra or a Polyxena to death at the hands of a Clytemnestra or a Ulysses, with Seneca taking

C5241.indb xx 4/12/10 2:00:05 PM Seneca and His World xxi 4/12/10 2:00:05 PM ces the ned tragedy as ne red wine, but but wine, ne red 2.26.31 ), Discourses 2.26.31 ), ce itself, while xenia ce itself, dent Sophoclean mani- of myth. Dressed in royal regalia, Thyes- regalia, Dressed in royal of myth.

Other Senecan protagonists have more lasting doubts than Other lasting doubts than Senecan more have protagonists The rest is, well, the stuff well, is, The rest tes sits down to enjoy a heartytes sits down to enjoy stew fi and some Thyestes about the value of earthly success. Oedipus asks: “Joys any Oedipus asks: about the value of earthlyThyestes success. confi And unlike his more man in power?” his satiated belches soon turn into howls of horror as the delighted soon turn into howls of horror his satiated belches the meal is made up provenance: him of his dinner’s informs Atreus an explicit Is there own sons. Thyestes’ bodies of of the dismembered the viewethical followed of If we or philosophical message here? who defi 135 CE), 55–ca. Epictetus (ca. another Stoic, precisely illustrates the might concludewe Thyestes that the story of In Seneca’s (or haute cuisine). folly for power of giving in to a desire such a clear object lesson seems undermined however, treatment, triumphant as reigns that Atreus the fact a number of factors: by the undeniable echoes of Stoic exhortation in the the drama ends; and the fragility adviser; of civic and impotent counsels of Atreus’s sacrifi values—the hellish scene in which Atreus religious precisely a travesty of sacrifi represents children adviser or The (the ancient tradition of hospitality) still worse. fares in many ect is featured a nurse mouthing Stoic eff platitudes without nurses to and Medea all have Clytemnestra, Phaedra, of the plays: even though their advice counsel them against their paths of action, plays Creon a is invariably distorted back and thrown in their faces. . in the Agamemnon similar role the beginning of From is clearly he feels the answer no. festation, what happens “when chance events befall fools” ( “when chance events befall fools” what happens advantage of this dramatic fact to suggest the inexorable workings workings the inexorable suggest fact to dramatic of this advantage the Thyestes Consider the futility and of struggle it. against of Fate ver- though Seneca’s (a topic often dramatizedthe Late in , meet the eponymous he exile as We onlysion is the have). one we to his children—only life the man who drinks pauper’s praises the he out of earthenware cups can be truly fear, and without happy to the palace at Argos them—but when invited to return reminds he allows exile, of his the source Atreus, conniving brother his by back afterhimself to be lured only about giving a token hesitation “I follow he says to his son, “Sequor,” up his newfound . luxurious but in following his appetite for the life he does the you”; Stoic.opposite of the good C5241.indb xxi the play, the Oedipus provides striking contrasts to its Greek prec- edent, whose emphasis on the discovery of identity yields here to the overwhelming sense of pollution aff ecting Oedipus. The king, xxii anxious even as the drama opens, worries that he will not escape the prophecy of his parricide, and suspects he is responsible for the plague ravaging Thebes. Despondent, he hopes for immediate death; his emotional state is far diff erent from that of the character at the center of Sophocles’ play. Seneca’s version also features Creon’s report of the long necromantic invocation of Laius’s ghost in a dark grove, something absent in Sophocles. Even the sense that the characters’ interaction onstage fails to drive the drama makes sense in the con- text of Seneca’s forbidding and inexorable dramatic world. Causality and anagnorisis (dramatic recognition) are put aside in favor of the

Seneca and His World individual’s helplessness before what awaits him, and the characters’ speeches react to the violence rather than motivate it. The pollution of the heavens by humans goes against Stoic phys- ics but fi nds its place in the plays. The Stoics posited a tensional relationship between the cosmos and its parts; according to this view, the or vital spirit that subtends all matter results in a cos- mic sympathy of the parts with the whole. “All things are united together . . . and earthly things feel the infl uence of heavenly ones,” as Epictetus (Discourses 1.4.1) puts it. But what we see in the dramas is a disquieting manifestation of this sympatheia: the idea that the wickedness of one or a few could disrupt the rational and harmonic of the entire cosmos represents a reversal of the more orthodox Stoic viewpoint that the world is accessible to understanding and to reason. Thus we see the universe trembling at Medea’s words, and the law of heaven in disorder. In the Thyestes, the sun hides its face in response to Atreus’s crime; in the Phaedra, the chorus notes an eclipse after Phaedra’s secret passion is unveiled. Horrifi c portents presage what is to come in the Troades. In Seneca’s dramas, unlike in Greek tragedy, there is no role for civic institutions or the city to intervene in this relationship. The treatment of the gods is similarly unorthodox. Although Jason calls upon Medea to witness that there are no gods in the heavens, the very chariot in which she fl ies away is evidence of the assistance given her by her divine father. The gods are there; the problem is that they are unrecognizable. Seneca’s great antiheroes like Medea and Thyestes are troubling

C5241.indb xxii 4/12/10 2:00:05 PM Seneca and His World xxiii 4/12/10 2:00:05 PM ts icting icting rst-order rst-order , the mes- , Troades ts Thyestes—and befi Thyestes—and ts ce and murder on stage. on stage. ce and murder 1000) or that Atreus 1000) or that Atreus (Oedipus ts (an) Oedipus”

271). Such metatheatricality 271). seems to draw upon the Thyestes

And spectators do exist—we, the theater audience or the recita- And spectators do exist—we, This leads in turn to a metatheatrical tinge in several of the plays. a metatheatricalThis leads in turn to in several tinge of the plays. ering on one another. In a famous line from the In a famous line from ering on one another. tion audience. Scholars question of whether long debated the have tion audience. as argued by It is possible, staged in antiquity. dramas were Seneca’s the tragedies the nineteenth-century Leo, German scholar Friedrich be unusual (but it would written only;were for recitation inter alia, animal sacrifi not impossible) to represent Atreus” ( Atreus” to performconcern of the traditional Roman elite exemplary actions ethical exemplarity by to generate one’s audience, for an approving that spectators for it exist. making sure whether the original but audiences The question is unresolvable, with us the they shared room, in the recitation in the theater or were in this they un- and full knowledge of how the story turn out, would comfortably themselves. plotting antiheroes some of the resembled Senecan in watching our pleasure tragedy unfold might seem Indeed, these characters take in infl to assimilate us to the pleasure reports of the scene of murder senger who brings news of Astyanax’s “The to a theater—that compared his death—which he has already suff says of his recipe, “This is a crime that befi saysrecipe, of his , for example, Medea seems to look to prior of versions for example, In the Medea, her own storyexactly what to discover for her persona, is appropriate remarks after putting out his eyes, in the same way that Oedipus, that “This face befi not only because they often triumph, but because the manner of because but of manner the not only because often they triumph, triumphtheir in the aspiring point of the goal can Stoic: resemble exhorting themselves a certain to take up the world, towards stance order the moral in rejecting ties, familial and social in abandoning trying and in of self- up to a form to live of the world them, around just like his tyrants, Seneca’s “better,” to be judged have hood they construct a private autonomous world and themselves around sages, only the self- Not do they borrow which nothing can penetrate. in which the arsenal, of the Stoic’s exhortations self-reproving and a fi with the self suggests a split between dialogue conducted but they also adopt judging self, desiring self and a second-order worthy of them as a guiding ts or is what befi the consideration of principle—always outcome. with a negative C5241.indb xxiii greater part of the fi ckle crowd abhors the crime—and watches it” (1128–29). Here, in the tension between sadistic voyeurism and hor- ror at what the drama unfolds, we can recognize the uncomfortable xxiv position of the spectator of Seneca’s despairing plays.

Senecan Drama after the Classical Period The fortunes of Senecan drama have crested twice: once during the Elizabethan period, and again in our own day. Although Seneca him- self never refers to his tragedies, they were known in antiquity at least until (ca. 480–524 CE), whose Consolation of Philosophy draws on the themes of Seneca’s choral odes. The dramas then largely dropped from sight, to reemerge in 1300 in a popular edition and commentary by Nicholas Trevet, a Dominican scholar at Oxford.

Seneca and His World Trevet’s work was followed by vernacular translations in Spain, Italy, and France over the next two centuries. In Italy, an early imitator was Albertino Mussato (1261–1329), who wrote his tragic drama Ecerinis to alert his fellow Paduans to the danger presented by the tyrant of . In England, the Jesuit priest and poet Jasper Heywood (1535–1598) produced translations of three of the plays; these were followed by Thomas Newton’s Seneca His Tenne Tragedies Translated into English in 1581—of which one tragedy was Newton’s own The- bais. The dramas were considered to be no mere pale shadow of their Greek predecessors: , Salutati, and Scaliger all held Seneca inferior to none on the classical stage. In Scaliger’s infl uential treatise on poetry, the Poetices libri septem (1561), he ranks Seneca as the equal of the Greek dramatists in solemnity and superior to Euripides in elegance and polish (6.6). The Elizabethan playwrights in particular took up Seneca as a model for translation or imitation. T. S. Eliot claimed that “No author exercised a wider or deeper infl uence upon the Elizabethan mind or upon the Elizabethan form of tragedy than did Seneca,” and the consensus is that he was right. It is perhaps little wonder that Seneca appealed to an age in which tragedy was seen as the correct vehicle for the representation of “haughtinesse, arrogancy, ambition, pride, iniury, anger, wrath, envy, hatred, contention, warre, murther, cruelty, rapine, incest, rovings, depredations, piracyes, spoyles, robberies, re- bellions, treasons, killings, hewing, stabbing, dagger-drawing, fi ght-

C5241.indb xxiv 4/12/10 2:00:05 PM Seneca and His World xxv 4/12/10 2:00:06 PM , 1615, nd much argued that Antonio’s Re- Antonio’s uence in one Thyestes as ghosts speak- xtures and John Marston’s and John Marston’s uence with its taste for revenge, rape, rape, its taste for revenge, uence with Refutation of the Apology for Actors

A to criticize both Seneca’s and Cor- Oedipus to criticize both Seneca’s Senecanuence of such fi ve acts. ve but at the same time claimed that his main debt was The Spanish Tragedy The Spanish ,

famously opine that “Senecafamously cannot opine that nor Plautus be too heavy Phèdre we see the infl we

The bleak content of the dramas was often of tied to the notion ering the audience enjoyment. The Jesuit Martín Antonio Delrio ering the audience enjoyment. ing from beyond the grave, graphic violence, obsession with revenge, with revenge, obsession graphic violence, the grave, beyond ing from use of stichomythia, and even structural such as choruses, features and division into fi the play taught the correction of morals by example, as well as simply as well example, of morals by the play taught the correction off ] is always . . “Seneca [ . that he wrote of the former, versions; neille’s and Philo- pointed sentences, running after expression, pompous The for the Study proper than the Stage.” more sophical notions, used Seneca as a model dramatist Jean Racine (1639–1699) French for his the Romantics did not fi surprisingly, Not to Euripides. in orescence of interest an effl however, Recently, to like in Seneca. both the literary and the performance aspects of Senecan drama and the staging scholarly monographs, newhas produced editions, adaptation Sarah are Kane’s here Noteworthy of some of the plays. Michael Elliot in May 1996; York performed in New Love, Phaedra’s (1551–1608) defended the use of Roman drama in a Christian educa- a masked instructionprovided suggesting that it in wisdom, tion by after the middle of the Nonetheless, him. as did Mussato before The drama fell largely into disrepute. seventeenth century Seneca’s Restoration poet John Dryden (1631–1700) took the opportunity in to his own the preface ing, butchery, treachery, villainy, etc., and all kind of heroyicke evils of heroyicke all kind and etc., villainy, treachery, butchery, ing, (John whatsoever” Greene, Seneca and Shakespeare all read in Marston, Marlowe, Kyd, p.56). his infl drama shows of their and much at school, in Shakespeare’s at Elsinore The itinerant players form or another. Hamlet Titus Andronicus that is Shakespeare’s but it (2.2.400–401), too light” Senecanshows the greatest infl III Richard and Macbeth, and insanity. human cookery, decapitation, brooding of unrestrained, the presence exemplify on the other hand, plays in such as Similarly, ambition in the power-hungry protagonist. Thomas Kyd’s a moral lesson. Already Trevet’s preface to the preface Trevet’s Already a moral lesson. venge C5241.indb xxv Rutenberg’s May 2005 dramatization of a post-holocaust Oedipus at Haifa University in Israel; and a 2007 Joanne Akalaitis production of the Thyestes at the Court Theater in Chicago. xxvi A note on the translations: they are designed to be faithful to the Latin while reading idiomatically in English. The focus is on high standards of accuracy, clarity, and style in both the prose and the poetry. As such, the translations are intended to provide a basis for interpretive work rather than to convey personal interpretations. They eschew terminology that would imply a Judeo-Christian moral framework (e.g., “sin”). Where needed, notes have been supplied to explain proper names in mythology and geography.

For further information

Seneca and His World On Seneca’s life: Miriam T. Griffi n, Seneca: A Philosopher in Poli- tics (Oxford: 1976) and Paul Veyne, Seneca: The Life of a Stoic, trans- lated from the French by David Sullivan (New York: 2003). On his philosophical thought: Brad Inwood, Seneca: Stoic Philosophy at Rome (Oxford: 2005), and Shadi Bartsch and David Wray, Seneca and the Self (Cambridge: 2009). On the dramas: A. J. Boyle, Tragic Seneca: An Essay in the Theatrical Tradition (New York and London: 1997); C. A. J. Littlewood, Self-Representation and Illusion in Senecan Trag- edy (Oxford: 2004); and Thomas G. Rosenmeyer, Senecan Drama and Stoic (Berkeley: 1989). On Seneca and Shakespeare: Robert S. Miola, Shakespeare and Classical Tragedy: The Infl uence of Seneca (Oxford: 1992) and Henry B. Charlton, The Senecan Tradition in Tragedy (Manchester: 1946).

C5241.indb xxvi 4/12/10 2:00:06 PM