Tvsculanarvm Dispvtationvm
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
M. TVLLI CICERONIS TVSCULANARVM DISPVTATIONVM DE LIBRO PRIMO COMMENTARIVS dissertatio quam ad summos in philosophia honores ab amplissimo doctorum ordine exoniensi rite impetrandos scripsit Steven M. Kennedy Submitted to the University of Exeter as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Classics in October 2010. This thesis is available for Library use on the understanding that it is copyright material and that no quotation from the thesis may be published without proper acknowledgement. I certify that all material in this thesis which is not my own work has been identified and that no material has previously been submitted and approved for the award of a degree by this or any other University. Signature: Acknowledgements I wish to express my deepest thanks to Professor Christopher Gill for his help and sharp editorial eye. He encouraged me to roam freely in my topic, cuius auctoritas non obest mihi qui discere volo, if I may borrow from my author. I am also very grateful to the entire Department of Classics and Ancient History for their continual support over the years. I owe much to Matthew Wright, Karen Ni Mheallaigh, and Rebecca Langlands for their guidance in teaching and their friendship and kind advice in all matters both academic and otherwise. And to the exuberant graduate community I worked in; to Genevieve Hill for her love and beauty; to Sharon Marshall who freely took on the weighty task of proofreading and whose soundness of mind saved me from many errors; to Rowan Fraser, Jodi Flores, Kyle Erickson, Kiu Yue, Elizabeth Dollins, James Smith for their energy, their learning, and their example, I greatly indebted. Finally, to my parents for their unending faith I dedicate my labour. Contents Introduction 4 1 Circumstances of composition and general character of the work . 4 2 The Style of the Tusculans and Paideia Romana . 7 3 Cicero’s Treatment of Philosophy . 10 4 On the Text . 10 Conventions and Abbreviations 13 Editionum Sigla 15 TEXT AND COMMENTARY 19 3 Introduction § 1.—Circumstances of composition and general character of the work. It is generally agreed that Cicero wrote the Tusculan Disputations1 sometime between July and August of 45B.C.2, even if the date of composition cannot be determined precisely. Most of our evidence for its dating is internal. There are some hints in his letters that he could have been working on it as early as May3 but at least we know that Cicero was working on it during June 45B.C. The De Finibus had been completed by the end of this month and its fourth book is mentioned in the Tusc. as having lately been read.4 Additionally, at Tusc. 1.8 Cicero recalls Brutus’ recent departure from the Tusculan villa, which Schmidt (Briefwechsel, p. 53) argued occurred on July 20, 45B.C.,5 but there can be no certainty to whether the purported date of the dialogue was true to life. In the later Div. 2.3, Cicero states that the three books of the De Natura Deorum were finished (perfectis) after the publication of the Tusc. Cicero had started collecting material for that work on August 5th, and so we can can assume the composition of the Tusc. was taking place sometime between July 20th and August 5th. However, I do not find that these dates can be accurate since it would mean that Cicero had worked at nearly twice the rate at which he composed the De Finibus by writing each book of the Tusc. in three days. Cicero was usually at work on more than one philosophical text at a time and it is likely that during this period he had finished his Consolatio, was largely finished with the Fin., and was also working on both the N. D. and the Tusc., as well as collecting material for his proposed Sen. Indeed, as I discuss below, we do see that these works show a remarkable internal resemblance. The eventual publication of the Tusc. was not until over a year later, on May 23, 44B.C.6 As for the fictional date of the dialogue, Pohlenz has argued that the five days on which these disputations supposedly took place were June 16–20 45B.C., shortly after the departure of Brutus (nuper discessum) while Cicero was in the company of several friends.7 Because of its close connection with Cicero’s Consolatio, I favour the earlier dating, at least for the first book. Schmidt, however, placed the dramatic date later, sometime between July 15–20. More recently, scholars have argued that the dates of the letters which Schmidt used to arrive at his own dating were incorrect; the letters which spoke of Brutus’ departure were not in written in July but in August.8 Because of these discrepencies, there still remain some serious difficulties in matching the dates 1The title comes from Cicero himself who refers to the work in Div. 2.3 cited below; for the commonly appendend subtitle de contemnenda morte, cf. Att. 15.4.2, and my n. on 1, 1. 2Marione: Cronological Ciceroniana, p. 215. 3Att. 13.32.2. 4Tusc. 4.32, quia legi tuum nuper quartum de Finibus. 5cf. Att. 13.1 6We read that on May 18, 44B.C. Cicero expressed his pleasure that Atticus enjoyed the first book Att. 15.2.4, quod prima disputatio Tuscualana te confirmat sane gaudeo. Also Att. 15.4.2, redeamus ad Tusculanas disputationes. 7Pohlenz: Tusculanae disputationes, p. 24. 8See Taylor (Chronology of Cicero’s Letters, p. 231) and my n. to 4, 8. Circumstances of composition and general character of the work 5 mentioned in the Tusc. to those of the calendar. We are left in some doubt when it was written and the actual time of year in which the dialogue was supposed to take place. It may seem a small point but the dates of Cicero’s fictional dialogues can be significant. For example, Cato had committed suicide in 46B.C., yet in the dramatic dialogue of Fin. 3.8, Cicero portrays him as alive and well. He is busy reading Stoic philosophy during a holiday while the public games are being held in Rome, and has gone to the country for relaxation (ludis commissis ex urbe). These games were the ludi uictoriae Caesaris first held in 45B.C. and such a coincidence invests the text with deep political significance when we hear Cato begin his discussion of the highest Stoic good. But in the Tusc., we are unable to set down firmly the time of year in which it occurs. This obscurity of time was appealing to Gildenhard.9 He observed that many of Cicero’s dialogues take place during a public holiday, but the Tusc. by contrast could take place at any time in the summer or autumn. This fact, he claims, implies that Cicero had plenty of free time to hold these conversations now that he had been removed from his duties of public business by Caesar’s reign. So he argued that Pohlenz’s earler dating to June 45B.C. is void of any political significance, whereas the departure of Brutus in July 45B.C. was to meet Caesar returning victorious from Spain. Gildenhard’s position seems attractive but I do not think that we can really attribute our inability to determine the date of the Tusc. accurately to Cicero’s deliberate design. Scholarly work on the Tusc. has, in my opinion, placed far too much emphasis on the broader ‘political’ context in which it was written. After Caesar’s African victory, and his subsequent victory in Spain, Cicero’s political position remained relatively unchanged though his attitude towards it did not. In 46B.C., the year previous to the writing of the Tusc., we read in Cicero’s correspondence that he is holding ‘school’ with some of his younger contemporaries, and his description of these seem to be the model which created the dramatic setting for our dialogue.10 During this time, he was instructing many of this younger contemporaries in the art of speaking, and yet many of these men were firmly in the Caesarian camp, including his son-in-law Dolabella. Though Cicero had ‘lost his own public kingdom’ he found an outlet for his energies and talent for oratory in these schools.11 Cicero was surrounded by Caesar’s men and yet he was able to speak his mind even then quite freely, and though often warned that this looseness of his speech might land him in trouble with the dictator, he said that he had no need to worry since he was quite safely in the hands of a number of men close to Caesar. I do not doubt that the political situation had been bitter in many ways to Cicero, and all the more so because he had lost many friends in the wars. But at this time he did seem to enjoy his new activities.12 His new position and all this activity was driven away in the following year by the death of his daughter Tullia. In April of 45B.C., only one month before Cicero wrote his Consolatio whose material formed so much of the foundation of the Tusc. we read Servius’ gentle chastisement during Cicero’s deepest period of mourning, noli committere, ut quisquam te putet non tam filiam quam rei publicae tempora et aliorum victoriam lugere.13 How else can we understand this phrase except that Cicero had placed politics far beneath his own personal grief? The degree to which Cicero had been affected by the loss of this daughter offended the sensibilities of numerous Romans who were beginning to question the reason for his absence from Rome.