INTRODU CTION TO THE PHILOSOPHY OF CICERO

RrcunnoMcKr.oN

T. TIIN INFLUENCE OF CICERO tf-HE influcnce of Cicero'swritings and the intcrpretatio I of his carecr run in threadsof dcbarethrough the majoi changesof lVcstern civilization.He participatedin the event which led to the fall of the RomanRepublic, in the first century n.c.,and his writings laid the grounds of an analysisof the con- flict between freedom and despotismand of the causesof the decline of constitutionalgovernment; he has been quoted as exampleand as authority, with extravagantenthusiasm and equally extravagantcontempt, whencver men have speculate on the beginningsof Caesarismand inrperialism.His philoso phy wasan importantingredient in the constructionof a Chris- tian doctrineand the establishmentof scholasticlogic from the fourth to the sixth century e.o.;and many of the scholarswho declaredthemselvcs in revolt againstscholasticism, during the period of the Renaissancea thousand years later, derivedtheir inspirationand weaponsfrom Cicero. The philosophcrsand politiciansrvho undertook during the eighteenthcentury to constructa new philosophybascd on thc new scicnceand con- genialto the principlesof constitutionaldemocracy rcturned to a renewed study of his works. The characterof Cicero, as well as his ideas,has entered into the discussionsthat have determined mafor turns of doctrine and policy; but, what is more important, the distinctionswhich underlay the discussion,whether it eventuatedin Cicero's con- clusion or in oppositio.rto it, have been influencedsignificantly by Cicero's fonnulation of problems and oppositions.Even his harshestcritics have usually condemnedhim in his own t€fmsr lrl CICERO IN fRODUCTION H.is strength of 1nd hls weaknesslie in the simplicity and the and achievement.De Quincey'sinsight into the peculiariry adaptabilityof thr"distinctions by which hc cxpjainei his time Cicero'splace in thc political disputesin which he was en- and traced the history of idcasind of forces'that culminate tangledapplics also to disputcsabout his ideasand character: in thc instirutionsand mannersof Rome.Cicero's fundament he has not bcnefitedfrom the uncertaintiesof partisanPlato"; cisionand courage.As evidencethat Cicero ncver failed in the and he made use of Ciccroniandoctrines in nvo rvays rvhich dutiesof a good citizen,Quintilian cited the nobiliry of his con- becametraditional in later Christian literature: the skepdca duct as consul,the rare intcgrity of his provinciai administra- argumentsof the Academicsrcpeated by Cicero are indicatio tion, his refusalof offce under Caesar,and the firmnessof his that he hasa higher spiritualinsight than he exPresses'for the mind, yielding to neitherhope nor fear,during the Civil Wars, paradoxesof iuitice and self-interest and the rational refuta- rvhich camehcavily upon him during his oldage.s euintilian iion of providenceand miraclesPresent problems which can could-explain Cicero's tendency to boastof hislxploits in his be resolvedonly by Christianiry;on the other hand,the Stoic speeches,as well as the hesitancyand timidiqy disclosedin his distinctions berween moral righmess (honesta) and usefulnes letters; and he found in Cicero both the closestapproxima- (utilid) from Cicero's On Dttties and the proofs for the im- rion to the perfect orator and also the standardof liteiary taste mortaliry of the soul from the TbsculanDisptttdtions (which is lrl trl CICERO INTRODUCTION known by the title On the Blessed llso Lif e) canbe adaptedto constancywhich he found in Cicero'sletters. But, like Jerome, higher Christianuses. Antbrose borrowed not only the title of he fearedthat he might be thought a poor Christianbecause he his n,ork On thc Duties of Ministers from Cicero's Ott Dutics declaredhimself so much a Ciceronian.He argucdthat there is but alsothc nraindivisions of his subject,rectified and supple nothingin Cicero contrary to the word of Christ,but he added mcntcd by the conceprionof a furure life rvith its rewards and that he would abandonany philosopher-Plato,Aristotle, or punishmcnts.Jcrome confessedthat he found the sryle of the Cicero-if he contradictedthe tenetsof Christianity.Erasmus crude rvhcn prophets he returned to them rfter reading the satirizcdthe excessiveCiceronians who modeledthcir stylc on classics; and the library rvhich he took with him to the deser the vocabularyand syntaxof Cicero,but he thought thc nroral in Syria and the pleasurewhich he found in Ciceroin the midst doctrinesof Ciceromore Christianthan much of the discussio of his fastingso troubled his consciencethat he dreamedhe rvas of theologiansand monks,and he would willingly haveburned judgment accuscdbefore the seatof God of beinga Ciceronia the theologicalworks of Duns Scotusto savethe philosophic rathcr thana Christian.?Augustine told of the profoundspiritual treatisesof Cicero. Pomponazzi,on the other hand, found in cffect nradcon hirn by the readingof Cicero'sHortenshu, tn Ciceroarguments against the immortality of the souland against introduction to philosophy;he constructedhis City of God in providenceand miracles.Augustine had usedCicero's treatise oppositionto Cicero'sarguments against providencc and to his On the Ndture of the Gods and On Diainotion as a source of conceptionof the republic; and his elaborationof a merhod argumentsto show the insufficienciesof paganrcligions; during of interprctntionin his rvork Oz ChristianDoctrine depend the Renaissancethey were usedas a sourceof argumentsagairrs Iargely on distinctionsborrorved from Ciccro'srhctoric, such religion as such and againstthe principle of authority. From asthe fundanrentaldivision of the problemsprescnted by Scrip- that tradition there originateddoctrines that have beencalled ture into of discovcry t'athc- problems and statcmcnt,concerned, re- variously "rationalism,""libertinisnt,t' "free thoughtr" spectivel.y,with thingsand signs.Boethius, a century latcr, laid ism," and "deism"l and in that tradition "rationalism"acquired the foundationsof medievallogic by borrorving fronr Cicero its modernconnotation of "skepticism."Voltaire also connected the samcdistinction betiveen discovery and fudgmentor state- Cicerorvith that tradition rvhenhe exclaimed:"We hissedthem ment to nrarkthc nrniorclivisions of the "Aristotelian"logic and off the stagethen, thosc rudc scholastics,rvho ruled ovcr us by substitutinga discussionof conlnonplaces,in the Cicironian so long; we honor Cicero,tvho taught us horv to thinl<."Phi- nlanner,for the Aristoteliandiscussion of scientificfirst prin- losophywas also reformed under the inspirationof Cicero in ciples. attempts,like that of Nizolius in his reatise On thc Tlue Prirt' During the Renaissance,Cicero served as inspiration to many ciples and Thrc Redsonof Philosophizing against Pseudo-phi' of the reactionsagainst scholasticism: his style was used as a losophers,to join scienceand literarure,philosophy and elo- modelto correct the barbarismsof medievalLatin; his rhetoric quence,theory and practice,by the mcthodsof discoveryand suggestedreforms in logic, dialectic,and scientificmethod; his iudgmentelaborated in Cicero'srhetoric. subordinationof theory to practiceand his identificationof the In the eighteenthcentury Cicero was admiredboth for his wise man with the man of action were fundamentalassump sryle and for the "spirit of freedom" manifestedin his activities tionsin the pragmaticphilosophies, programs of education,sys- asa public man in the lastdays of the RomanRepublic. Gibbon tcmsof and utopian speculations iurisprudence, political of the describedhim as a "library of eloquenceand reason": period. Petrarch expressedadmiration for Cicero's intellectual powersand amazementet his commandof language.Everything I read.with applicationand pleasure,all the episdes,all the ora- tions,and the mbit imponant dreatisesof rhetoric and philosophy pleasedhim in Ciceroexcept the ficklenessof characterand in- and asI read,I rpplauiiedthe observationof Quintilian,thet every I+l tsl CICERO INTRODUC'TION studcntmay of hisown iudgc proficicncyby the satisfactionwhich from referenceto him, has been used on both sidesof most hc rcceivcs-from-theRoman oritor. I tr.t.d fhcbeautics of languag The reasonsfor the pcrsistence,univcrsality, and I brcrthedthc spirit of frccdom,and I imbibcdfronr his nr"""pls aid discussions. cxlmplcsthc ptiblicand privatc scnsc of a mln. Ciccroin Lat:in,and ambiguiryof the usesto which his ideasand llis examplehave Xenophonin Grcck,are irrdecd the two ancienrswhom I would first bcenput'are to bc found in the paradoxcsthat dcvclop,fromthe proposeto a,libcralscholar; not only for themerit of their sryleand simpli distincdonson which his philosophyis based.He sought ..rdmirable sentiments,but for the lcssons,which may be ipplied to effecta union of wisdomand eloquence-of things and words, almostto cverysituation of publicand private life.8 res and aerha-and his oradonsring with referencesto thcir Hume distinguishedbenveen the easyand practicalphilosophy happy conlunctionor unfortunateseParation' So far as rvords rvhich considersman as born to action, and the accurateand are Concerned,he found it necessaryto invent new tcrms to profound philosophy,rvhich views him in the light of a reason expressphilosophic ideas in Latin; yct the charmsof his style ablebeing and sceksthe causesand principlesof humannature. led enthusiastsin the Renaissanceto avoid innovationsand limit He observedthat the mosr durableand iustestfame has been their vocabularyto the words he had used.So far asthings are acquiredby the easyphilosophy and that therefore the fame concerned,his treatmentof "discovery" hasinspired methods of Ciccro flourishedin his day, while that of Aristotle was in logic, in rhetoric, and in scientificmethod that havc seemc utterly dccayed.But, although Hume sratedhis own prefer- to their critics,in turn, to be suitedto uncoveronly the struc- ence for the more abstrusephilosophy, the speculativephi- ture of language,not the natureof things.The impossibilityof losophyrvhich he devclopedtends, like Cicero's,to Academic discoveringthe hiddcn narureof thingsdetermined his prefer- skepticisrn,and it dcpendson the useof devicesof Ciceronian cncefor Academicskepticism-thc avoidance of vain and mcan- rhetoric on problcmsof logic, psychology,morals, politics, and inglessinquiries into the nature of things and the rvcighing.of history.Argumcnts from Cicero'spolitical philosophy and fronr piobabilitiesadequate for purposcsof action. His slicpticisn his orationswerc promincntin the Amcrican and French revo- hasfrequcntly bein usedas a basisfor dogmltisrllon thc ground lutions.John Adamsquotes him in defenseof a mixed form of that hiJ moral argumentsdcpend on highcr principlcsthan he government-a fusion of regal, aristocratic,and popular func- states;and his argumentsfor probabilismhave bccn rcversc tions-and adds: "As all agesof the world have not produced on the ground that the probabiliticsof naturaloccurrcnccs may a grcater statesmanand philosopherunited than Cicero, his be calculatedbut that the use of the snmescientific mcthod in aurhoriry should have great l'eight."o The eulogy of Washing- moral questionsis unprofitableor unsuccessful.He argued.for ton as "Father of His Country" was borrowed from the title the applicationof philosophyto the livesof men and of nation bestowedon Cicero by the Roman Senate.Montesquieu con- and piaisedthe idial of bringing learningout of the shadorvc sidcredCiccro one of the greatestspirits that evcr lived and seclusionof the scholar'sstudy, not only into sunlightand dust, thouglrt his soul always lofty, when it was not weak;lo and but into the battle line and the center of the conflict;rr but Brissotpraised his careeras a model for that of the aspiring during the Middle Ages "activity" and the applicationof ph-i "encyclopedicorator" of revolutionaryFrance. losopfiy to "life" could be found in religion, and the 'practical" Cicero'sinfluence in the two thousandyears since his death was-iudgedaccording to wisdom,while in the Renaissancethe hasbecn persistent,wid:spread, and ambivalent.His ideasand applicattn of philos6phy to life adiustedphilosophy to a civic his example are prominent at every turn of inquiry and dis- id6aland to thCexigencies of daily problsmsfrom which it must cussion in the West; his influencc moves from field to field, grow.l2 This striving for theory ioined to Practice,fc'r leisure from literature to practical politics, from rhetoric to logic, from (otium\ in the serviCeof activity (negothnn),could be achieve philosophy to science;his authority or his doctrine, detached if philosophy were ioined to rhetoric and if wisdom madeuse of [6] lrl CICE,RO INTRODUCTION

eloquence.But the efforts to effect that ioining have usually pursuitof commonaspirations, and embodyinga constitutional cncounteredeither a distinctionbetrveen an easyand a recon- ?ormand applying a rirle of law, in which cultural,philosophic, dite philosophy,both of which employ methodsborrowed from and religious-values will haveconscquencesin determining Pr?c- rhetoric to make them attractive and sound, or a distinction tical aciion without the prior impoiition of a common doctrine between methods suited to the manipulation of signs and the and in which communicationwill be adequateto keep the peo- discovery of things, both of which are applied to the analyse ple aware of problems and alert in the defenseof rights and and proofs of all kinds of knowledge.Finalln the relationsof ireedom.The-srudy of the philosophyof Cicero turns on the freedomand power are cnmeshedin theseparadoxes of truth statementof problims and the developmentof meansfor their and persuasion:the clloiceberween the hesitanciesand ineffec- solution. In Cicero's view of philosophy the problems rvere tivenessof Cicero and the decisivenessand deliberatenessof those of a great practical civilization and a powerful consti- Caesar,between the ideal of socialharmony by appealto the tutional gov-ernmdntthreatened by revolution and destroyedby rule of law and the ideal of order by public administration dictatorJhip;and the meanswhich he recommendedto solve affects even the interpretation put on the history of the last them are philosophic distinctionswhich can be learned by daysof the RomanRepublic and the causesof its destruction.r practical tnen as well as by technical-philosophers and can be Theseparadoxes ere all reflectedin the judgmentsthat havc appliedin the courseof a busy life, in which, as Crassussug- bcenpassed on Cicero and in the marksof his continuinginflu- gdted, "what cannotbe learnid-quickly,lvill neverbe learne ence.He is little reador admircdtoday; yet the distinctionsto it ,ll.'itn They are problems which are in desperateneed of which he gavecurrency and the emphaseswhich he madehave reformulationtoday, and they are solutions u'hich deservere- become commonplaces.We, too, have a profound respect for examination. culture and ideas;but we read philosophyas Cicero read the II. THE LIFE AND TIMES OF CICERO Greeks, discarding subtleties,reducing differencesand distinc- The philosophy of Cicero reflectsthe political and socialcon- tions, and iustifying contemplationby its uses.Our philosophies Philo the Academic)as an cnrbassyof philosophcrs,consisring of Diogenesthe Stoic, .rvellis thc study of literaturc with Archias the poct' rhctoric Carncadesthe Acaclcmic,and Critolausthe Peiipatctic.2rNerv rvith Molo, and larv with Q. Mucius Scaevola,the Pontifex political, rcligious,and philosophicdoctrines seemed ro many .i\{axinrus,and his nephcw of the same name' Hc protrabl R.omansno lessdangerous to Rolnan moral tradition, family completedhis pocm on his countryman Marius (rvhich is dis- discipline,and ancestralcusroms than the delicaciesof art ani .urr.d in the openingpagcs of the Larls) and his translationof literature did. Cicero mcntionsthe elder Cato'sdisapproval of Aratus' astronomicalpocm Phacnomena bef ore he rvastwentyi pocts.The sameCato reproachedthc S,enatefor permitting the more than twenty-fir'e yearslater' in 6o, he translatedArarus Athenian.philosopher-ambassrdcrsto remain in Rome solong work on meteorology, the I'rognosticr.When he l'as abou andurgcd greaterexpedition in actingon their petition,in orde- twenry he wrote a shott treatiscon rhetoric calledOtt Inaen' that they might return to their schoolsto teachGreek childrcn tion.He speaksslightingly of this youthful rvork later,26but it horvevcr thev pleased,while the Roman youth nrighr again was probably the most influentialand widely rcad rvorlPlatonism,Aristotelianism, and Stoicism), to Pompey,who had beena firvoriteofficer undcr Sulla;Caesar and in Rhodesunder Poseidoniusthe Stoic. In Asia Minor he who wasihe ncphcrvand presurnptivepolitical heir of Marius, studied.oratoryunder Xenocles, Dionysius, and Menippus,and hadalso supportid the law, doubtlessas a neansof securingthe in Rhodeshe resumedhis work under'Molo, who correcred the withdrawaibf Pompey frotn Rome.During Cicclo's consulat excessesof his overornate sryle of oratory and who is said to his three orations against the agrarian law proposed by t-he have remarkedafter one of'his declamationsin Greek: .,you tribune Rullus defeaieda mcasurewhich combineda plan for have.my p.raiseand admiration, Cicerrr, and Grecce my piry, much-neededagriculrural refornrs with the creationof a cont- for that culturc and.eloquencewhich wcrc the only glories'tha missionthat wolld haveadvanced the ambitionsof Caesarand remainedto hcr will now be transferredby vou'tj Rome."2 Crassus.In 65 he had ccnsidereddefending Catiline on a charge Cicero looked upon philosophy of extortion; l.relatcr looked uPon the suppressionof the con- - as one oi tire sourccsof his eloquence,2sand, conversely,he cited the philosophicmaxim spiracyof Catilineand thc executionof the chie-f.conspirato to be found in his orationsas evidenceof-his eariy and con- ai thegreat achicvement of his consulshipin 63.This movement tinued concern with philosophy.r, He beganhis forensic career led b/ a bankrupt patrician, brought together ruined nobles, in 8r s.c. with civil and cri'miiral..r.r, iin order, as he puts it, veter;ns of Sulli's army, and starving, dispossessedPeasant to be ableto enter the forum alreadytrained and not learn.as Cicero'spart in putting down this conspiracyand the enmiry mostpoliticians did, by pracice in tie forum.soOne of his drst of Clodius (resuitingfiom Cicero'srefusal to commit periury caseswas in defenseof SextusRoscius, one of the victims of in order to supportClodius in his defenseagainst the accusatio the lawlessnesswhich accomparriedthe dictatorshipof Sulla; of sacrilegeiniidental to one of his escapades)led to his being and Cicero's attack in that speechon Chrysogonus,the freetl- outhv/ed-for putting a Roman citizen to death without uial. man,andagcnt of Sulla,was probably a cause6oth of the inter- On the adviceof Caio, Cicero lvent into exilefrom March, 58, ruption of his career for rwo yeari of study and travel from to September,j7. 79 to 77 and of the suiking popular esteem'shownfor him in Ciiero's letters,like his orations,were an instrumentin the his later political career.On his ieturn to Rome he enteredupon applicationof his politicalphilosophy. His correspondencewith a political.career,in which he moved rapidly from quaestoi in hls fricnds, rvith his brother Quintus, with Brutus, and particu- 75, aedileaeoileinrn 69,og, andano praetor tnin 66 to consul in 63. lnIn his election larly with Atticus was the meansby which he securedinfor- in 63 he defeatedCaesar's candidates, Antonius and Catiline; maiion concerning what was going on and varying interpre- and his successhas been taken as a sign of middle-classreacdon tations of movemints and causes'They reveal him trying to to rumors of revolutionary schemesto solve the problems of apply, in shifting moodsof enthusiasmand. despair,-constant the times and of Caesar'srmbition to take advantageof the aitbied plans, dipending on differing estimatesof men and discontent and disturbance. parties,io achievewhat he viewed as a constant end. In retro- Cicero'sorations are a record of his dificulties in interpreting ipect, the letters and the speechesof Cicero are the most im- facts and inapplying his political philosophy.The sevenorationi pbrtant ancient authority fbr the history of his times from the againstVcrres in 7o led ro the condemnaiionof the praetor, who year 68,when the letters'begin,almost to the year of his deathin had for three yearspillaged the province of Sicily and who had 43. Cicero thought history closely related to oratory' and he ex- the support of the aristocracy in his uial; the oiation for Fon- pressedthrough the interlocutor in one of his dialoguesthe con- teius in 69 is in defenseof a governor against the charge of viction that hl ought to write a history of Rome.st One of his extortion in Gaul. Cicero spoke in 66 in fivor of the Ma-nilian contemporaries,Cornelius Nepos, reiterated Cicero's iudgment [ [ ] CICDRO INTRODUCTION that he should havewritten a history, sincemen were uncerrain isticsof speeches,and the kinds of questions;the Paradoxesof when ht died, "whether history oi the Republic lost more".B the Stoici,in 46; the Tbpics,in 44, which Presentsan analysisof but Neposalso thought that the sixteenbooks of Cicero'sletter the commonplacesemployed in thc discoveryof argumcnts. in the interval to Atticus went far to supply the placeof sucha history: Two of thJ philosophicaltreatises wcrc writtcn between Ciccio's reiurn from exile and thc Civil lVars: the Whocver readsthem docsnot havemuch need rrf sequential a his- Repablicwas begunin and completedin 5r (althoughlater, tory of thosetimes. For there,all the detailsconct,rning ihe rivalrie 54 beforehis death,Ciccro wrotc, in Ort Divination, of grcarnrcn, the faults of lcaders,the revolutions of thjRepublicare in 44,the ycar thc rudder of so.scr.forththat nothing in tlrcmis lcfr in doubt,and it c:rrieasily bc thri'ihc Rcpublic was comPoscdwhile hc'"held srid that prudcncebccomes.in a manncrdivination. For Ciccro'no thc Statc"),and the Ldwsias hcgunin 52.Thc grcatbulk of onll'prcdictedfuture events which did indeedoccur in hisorvn lifc- his philosophicconrpositiotr rvas conrplctcd rvith cxtr_aordinar time, but alsorendered oracles worthy of a prophetconcernin .p.cd, *itiin thc spice of nvo years:Cortsolation, Hortensius eventswhich are now comingto prss.33- i"aOnGlary (u'hichhave survived only in the high rcPutatio in antiquity) as well as Cicelo hadresisted Caesar's efforts to conciliatehim, and he had and wide influenccthat they acquired Acadentics,On Ends,Tbsuilarz Disprttatiotts, Nann'e of the failed in his efforts to dissuadePompey from ioining rhe crra the i On Fat e, O n F ri end s hi p, and lition rvith Caesarand Crassusin 6o.His lettersduririg his exile G od s, Ott O td A ge,On D iuinat on, rvritten from to After thc assassinati arc full of despairfor the strte; butt on his r€turn to-Rome by On Dtrties wereall 45 44. on l\'larch r Cicero laboredin his lctters,in his decreeof the Senatein 57,he laboredhopefully for the re-est.b- of Caesar 5, 44, of which fourtecnsurvive, and lishmentof constitutionalgovernment.-Thesl hopes were cut Philippicsagainst A{ark Antony, sccurcsttPPort for thc old consti- short by the renervalof the coalitionat Luca in and Cicero in hisovertures to Octavianto 56, governors savedhimself frorn a secondexile by recantarion.He rvithdrerv tution fronr the Senate,the people,and the provincial the proscriptionsof from public life, advocatedthe grant of extraordinarypowers He rvasassassinated on Deiember 7, 43,in to Pompcy to deal with the increasirrganarchy and confusion A4arkAntony. in thc tirnc of Ciccro deter- and returnedfrom his administrationof the provinceof Cilicia, The issueiwhich u'crc dccidcd the fatc of a strongand successfulconstitutional govern- fronl 5r_to 5o, hopeful of a triumph, in time to join Pompey nrined the art of self- againstCaesar in thc Civil Wars that beganin ment. The early Romanshad in a high dcgree 49. rvhich rvcre associ Cicero'srhetorical trearises, like his philosophicworks, were governmcnt,but the frcedomsand virtues with the safetyof Rome and rvith its wrirten during the intervals and interruptions of his political ited in Roman tradition rvorld did not survivethe career.The three books Oz the Orator, in which he setsforth developmentinto a dominant porver economicand socialdislocations which accompaniedconqucst histheory of rhetoric,were written in 55.The Brutus,a history The broad linesof oppositionof classes,interests, and section of famousRoman orators and a critical iudgment of their quali- of parties,alliances, and con- ties as speakers,and the Orator, an inquiry into the qualities of were reflectedin the formation spiraciesto advanceparticular solutions of problemsinvolved the perfect orator, were both written in 46. The three works the of largeestates and were intended to form a single whole, in which rhetoric was in the extensionof the franchise, growth the concentration of treated in theory, in historical developmeng and in concrere the increaseof slave labor in agriculrure, and the dcclineof Italian in- ideal manifestation.In addition ro these,Cicero wrote several pauperpopulations in the towis, the adequacyof the measuresadvo- lesserbooks on rhetoric: the Diaisions of Oratory, probably in ausiry. Tie problem of catedfor theiolution of theseand numerousother interrelate 54, which sets forth the iheory of rhetoric in three parm de- the of specialinterest voted,.respectively,to the resourcesof the orator, the character- problemswas complicated by pressures ] [ [ 'z CICERO INTRODUCTION and the forces of political opposition" which made it possible IU. CICNNO'S CONCDPTION OF PITILOSOPIIY for any ambitious politician or general to find some group to virtuc and of follow him in any schcme,in the hope of rectifying its own Philosophy,according to Ciccro,is a sourcc-oJ The vcry cxist- rvrongs. Ultimately, in the riotous anarchy, which rcsulted in strensthof ihttt.t.t, aJu'cll asan cnd in itsclf' thc noblcstusc of virnres part from basicneeds and oppositionsand in part from the un- .n.."ofvirtue dcpcndson its usc,and statc and in the realization in fact, scrupulousnranipulation of ambitious men, all solutions tended is in the gou.tnni.nt of the of the tcaching of philosophcrs'In Oz Duties, toward dictatorship. The popular party, which sought eco- not in w-ords, barcly a ycar beforc his death' Cicero cxplains,in nomic reforms, put its reliance in its appealto Marius on mili- completed of that paialleibetwccn practicalpolitics and the teach- tary nreansof enforcing measuresof dubiouspolitical or eco- term's ins of philosophy,the circumstincesthat led him to thc comPo- nomic efficacy and reachedits final phasein the dictatorship of rifion if his piril6sophictreatises' When the-Republicl'ad fallen Caesar,who was more efficient, lenient, and moderatethan con- under the absotutecontrol of a despotand thc affairsof state temporarieshad expccted.But Caesar'ssolution of political and were seized by men more concerned to ovenhrow' than to economicproblems consisted in the concentrationof executiv reform, the constitution and whcn the forum and Senatelverc authority, and he died rt the handsof republicanassassins. The closedio him, he devotedhimself to philosophicqucsdons in constitutionalparty of the center,rvhich soughta readiustmen lieu of political counseland action, recognizingthe fact that of the harmony of classesand a redistributionof the power of his coun'trymenwere little acquainted.rvith-thatlo'''e of wisdom politicaloffices rvithin the old constitution,was forccd periodi- which is a sourcenot only of virrue but alsoof mentalenioy- cally into alliancervith the conservativeforces of the aristocracy ment and relaxntion.siUnder the circumstances'nlorcover' to in an effort to avoid violent partisan solutions and reached its inrtruct vouth who had bcen led astrayin the moral laxiry of final phasein Cicero's picture in one of the lost books of the the timJ was itsclf a serviceto the Republic,since, if even a Republic of a "leading man of the city" (princeps ciaitdtis) few of them wcre set in the right way,-they might havewide who rvould be motivatedin the exerciseof his patriotic duties influenceon the state.ss only by love of glory.s{ Cicero died a victim of the proscrip- The philosophvwhich is expoundcdin the philosophictrea- tions which were part of the reorganizationof the Republic by tises,as'a substituic and as a suPPortfor politicalaction, has been on Cicero' the Secondtiumvirate of i\Iark Antony, Octavian, and Lepi- the subiectof iuclgmentsas vi.rious al ihosepassed sryle' He rva dus, after having supported Octavian, the heir of Caesar.The character.his poliiical operalions,and his Prose manv medicvaland Renais autocratic rule of the Empire grew out of "the restoration of hishlv csteemJdas a philbsopnerby john .itlitbury, Coluccio Salutati,and the Republic" under a princeps similar in externalsto the ideal ,ri".'*rit..., like of of action, like rvho held drawn by Cicero, and it associatedthe name of Caesarwith po- i..ont.ao Bruni; and men Jeffers'ln, of Cicero as a statesmanand an orator' found litical prerogativesand divine honors. But the world has con- a low opinion very much to their taste' Montaigne, on the tinued to contemplateand to pursue,under varying forms, the his ohilosorrhy delighied in Cicero's letters and thought his elo- ideal of a communiry wtich unites all nations of men under its othJr hand', quenceincompaiable and neve-r-tobe- equaled, i'rt, in the works universalscope and all classesof men under its equal iustice and which were most useful to Montaigne's purposes' he found which is strong enough to remove material inequitiesand to re- Cicero's philosophy, and especiallyhis moral philosophy' tedi- sistcoalitions of power in its pursuit of idealscommon to diverse *t, f"ff 'of *in'a,'and on..warding, sinceit is constructedof traditions, faiths, and philosophies. of no use to one "Aristotelian dispositionsof pare" which are

lrsl [ CICERO INTRODUCTION who desiredonly to become more wise, not more learnedor the Romansof that period were familiar with philosophyand more eloquent.s?Erasmus extended (based Cicero'saccount on aithoughthey setdown in writing their civil law, their orations Aristotle) of the turn in the history of thoughr by which Socra- and the monumentsof their ancestors,"they pursuedthis most tes first brought philosophy down ro eart[ from the contcm- ampleof all arts,the disciplineof living well, in their livcsrather plation of.-natural things far removed frorn the problenrs of than in thcir writingsr"rr *n't. earliergcnerations of Romans commonlife and introduced it into the homesof n-ren;accord- who had performedglorious deeds without the aid of lcarning, ing to Erasmus'addition, Plato and Aristotle tried to introduce hadbeen educated by naturerather than by philosophy.{2When philosophy into the courts of kings and into the senareand the Cicerobegan to write, therefore,he fclnd no bookson philoso- tribunals, rvhile Cicero placed it on the proscenium where, phy in Latin exceptsome popular expositions of Epicureanism through him, it learned to speakin such faihion that even the which hehad not readbut of which he exprcsseda low opinion.r commo-n^mancould applaud.s8 Erasmusfound that his enioy- He wasundecided whether this dearthof Latin writings on phi- ment of Cicerohad increased grew ashe older not onlv becau.s losophywas due to the absorptionof his ancestorsin practical of the divine feliciry of Cicero'sst/le but becauseof ihe purity affairsor to their iudgmentthat such reflectionsshould not be of his eruditeheart, which influencedErasmus' spirit andmade brought to the attention of the unlearncd;and he complaine him consciousthat he had becomebetter.30 Scholars of the last frequently that the Latin languagewas unsuitedto the exPres hundred years have not been disposedto give Cicero an im- sion of philosophicsubtleties without the invention of nerv portant place in the history of philosophy: he is rreatedas a rernrsand novel constmctions.His formulationof his orvn phi- rhetorician rather than as a philosopher,whose philosophic losophy, consequentiy,is intricately interwoven with an inter- wlitilg-s, as Cic.ero himself recognized, were mere copiei in pretationof the history of culture, the nature of philosophi rvhich hc contributed only the words;{oas a man of affairs, method,and the interrelationsof philosophicdoctrines' ,Much lvho, in bare restatement, degradedthe theoretic speculation of the criticism and interpretationof his philosophyis based of the Greeksto ,,eclec- practicalRoman applications; or aJan in turn, on a different conception of culture' of philosophy, tic," who wove togerhersimplified forms of doctrineswhich he andof the relationof philosophicschools; and most of the esti- found pleasingatgng the teners,frequently contradictory, of matesof his accomplishmentsare by standardslvhich are con- opposedschools. Since his works contain many discussionsof sideredand questionedor reiectedin his philosophicdialogue whose philosophers writings have been losq they have often Cicero's writings are the oldest and most considerablesource been read not for philosophic arguments but for information of informationconcerning the developmentsof philosophydur- about rvritings rvhich he is presumedto havecopied closely and ing the period between the death of Aristotle in 3zz n'c. and his for hints by which to reconstrucr the history of earlier philoso- own philosophic compositions in the middle of the first cen- or for symptoms phy by which to diagnosethe Romin mind tury n.c. Sincethe speculativeachievements of the Greeks may and culture. be iudged in the woiks of Plato and Aristotle' which are inadi- According to Cicero, interest in philosophy was no older in quately reflected in Cicero's treatment of them, the contras Rome than the generation of Scipio the Younger and Laelius, between Greek theory and the Practical applications of phi- who appearas interlocutors in his dialogues,On Old Age (the losophy in Cicero's writings is translatedplausibly into histori- action of which takesplace in r5o), and Republic (the dramatic cal iausesto be found in the speculativenature of the Greeks date of which is r29, the year of Scipio'sdeath), while Laelius as contrasted with the genius of the Romans. The is Practical the chief speakerinOn Friendsbip (which takesplace in rz9, relation between theoretic and practical is itself the subiect of a few days the mysterious after death of Scipio). But, although analysisand dispute in the writings of these philosophers,and Iro] I rr ] CICERO INTRODUCTION the historicalinterprctrtion of the characterof times and of thought and its cxpression.and,thefaculty--of speaking, which racesdcpcnds on myth, sclcction,and imaginativeconstruction they-found in staiesmenlikc Lycurgus, Pittacus,and Solon, ns wcll as on plrilosophicprinciplcs. i\{oreover, Ciccro's rrear- aswell asin mcn like Pythagoras,Dctnocritus' and Ana-\agoras nrentof philosophycontinues a disputccurrcnt in Greececon- who devotedthemsel'es to ihe knowlcdgeof thingsrathcr than ccrningrhctoric, sophistic, and plrilosoplry, rvhich wasreflecte to the governntentof states.In antiquity the trvo wisdoms,or in thc rvriting of history asrvcll asin litcrary criticism,philoso- arrs,of-action and sPcech were lnscParablein the carecrsof men phy, and the conduct of life. The oppositionwas betweenthe like Themistocles,Pcricles, and Thcramcnes;and therc were conccprionof the "wisc ntan" asone who is traincd to speakon alsoprofcssionll tcachcrs of tlrc cloublcwisColn, Iikc Grlrgias any subicctand that of the "wise man" as one rvho lSophists,which con- cloquence,his tEachinghad the cffcct of lirniting thc applicarion sisted,according to the fornrer's criticism,ln the practice of of tLe term "philosophy" to knorvledgeof sublcctnlattcrs and rhetoric rvithout consiclcrationof the grounds of rrguments. of introducinga fals6siparadon of the art of thinking-fromthe Their contcnrporary,Isoclatcs, on thc orhcr hand,arg"ued that art of speakirig.aaAristotle re-cstablishcdthe union of philoso- rhetoric is thetruc philosophy,and he nmackedthe Sophistsfor phy ani eloqiencewhcn his disdainfor Isocrateslcd him to scparatingphilosophy from its practicalapplications in speech irni.rtakc thc tcnchingof rhetoric to show thc inadcquacicsof and action. Isocratcsexpoundcd in dctail his low opinion of Isocrates'doctrine;46and histrcatnlent of logic or thc PrecePt spcculativephilosophcrs, rvho, for all thcir prctensions,could of discoursc(disserendi) includcd both dialecticand rhetoric'{ not agrccon the natureof things or on the number of the ele- The relation of philosophyto rhctoric, thercforc, is tirc re- ments.and his even lower opiiion of philosopherswho pro- lation of contentto exprcision,atrd mestcry and useof the one fessedto have scienti6cknowledge of moral questions.Man derlcndon competencein the othcr. Cicero was convincedthat cannotattain a positivescience of what to do or what ro say; Platorvould havedistinguished himsclf in forcnsicoratory and a "wise man" is one rvho can coniectureconcerning courses of that Demostheneswould have done well in philosophyif each actionto dctermineprobabilitics; and a "philosopher"is onewho had applied himself to the other's field, and hc thought occupieshimself with the arts by rvhich he hopesto gain such that the santewas true of Aristotle andIsocrates, each of whom, insight.There is no art of implantingvirrue or justicein men, engrossedin his orvnprofcssion, undervalucd thnt of the other'r7 but mendo becomebetter if they conceivean ambitionto speak Siice stylc is insepaiablyioined with 5u['lcct matter, thc re- well, if they possessa desireto persuade,and if they ser iheir latlon binveen the two mav be discusscdin either rhctoric or heartson achievingtheir advantage. philosophvlfor philosophersfacc problcrnsof style, and ora- Cicero lvas very much influencedby Isocratesnot only in lorr pr6bi..t of'proof.'Philosophy-,sophistic, oratory' Poetry' his oratoricalsryle but alsoin his reduction'of philosophiccon- and iristory can 6e distinguishcdfrom-one anothe-r,bymean siderationsto rhetoricaldevices and in his emphasison the prac- of style. that of the phi-losopher-tends to be deliberateand tical. His applicationof the argumentof Isocrates,moreover, gentle,although the languageof Pl*to and Dcmocritus,inspite permitted him to removethe oppositionberween the philoso- 6f th" fr"t th-atthey wrote in prosc,is sotnetirnesconsidere phers and the rhetcricians,berween Aristotle and Isocrates.As Doetrv: it doesnot employ woids and phrasesthat catch the Antonius retells the history of in rh1'thmicalperiods; and oratory in On tbe Orator, the iopoirt fancy, nor is il arranged Greeksincluded under the name"wisdom" both the methodof it ii better adaptedto question-and-answerdisputation than to I r,l [ I CICERO INTRODUCTION long speeches.The sophistuses all rhe ornamentsof the foren- sations,on the other hand, are probable and are adequateto sic orator,but for the purposeof soothingand delightingrather direct the conduct of the wise man.62The old Socraticmethod thanofarousing or persuading,and he seeksideas that areneatly of arguingagainst an adversary'sposition was for the PurPose put rather than leasonable.The poet differs from the orator of diJcoveringmost readily the probabletruth;63 for Socrates primarily in that he is more bound with respectto rhythm and who had listenedto the teachingsof the naruralphilosophers freer in the choicc of words; and he is similar to the oraror in wasthe first to call philosophydown frorn the hcavensand put his use of ornamentsand in his unlimited freedom in choice of her in the citiesand homcsof men and set her problemsabout subject matter.{8 History is closer to oratory than any other life and moralsand about things good and evil. But his nrany- branch of litcrature.The standardby which history is judged sidedmethod of discussion,the variety of the subiectsto which is truth, while in poetry it is generally pleasure.roConversely, he applicdit, and the greatnessof his genius,as immonalized in rhetoric, originally part of philosophy,is the counterpart of the dialoguesof Plato,had the effect of producing many war- dialectic,which rvasone of the threeparts of philosophyrecog- ring sectJofphilosophers until the originalmethod rvas rcnewcd nizcd hy most of the schoolsof Cicero'sday. The whole con- by Carneadci,one of Plato'ssuccessors as hcad of the Acadenry, tcnt of the liberaland humanearrs is comprisedin a singlebond rvho rcstoredSocrates' practice of conccalinghis orvn opinion, of union, since, however they are conceived in the different removingthe errors of others,and seekingthe most probable schoolsof philosophy,there is aninterdependence berween those solutionin every discussion.ra threeparn;ofphilosophy: (r) dialectic,rhe aftofreason anddis- The task of ihe philosopher, consequently,is to argue for course, (z) the scienceof truth and falsity; physics,the investi- and againstall the ichools for the PurPoseof discoveringthe qationof the natureof things;and (3) morals,the study of con- truth; and this was Cicero'sundertaking in his philosophy.He duct and the good.60The basicproblems of philosophyare to acknowledgedthat he had not attainedsuccess in it; for it is a be found in the two forms of the relationsbetween words and difficult taJk to understand any of the systemsof philosophy things and betweenstatement and action treated,respectively singly,much lessmaster them all.65All the great philosophers- in rhetoricand in philosophy.The orator shouldbe ableto bor- Anaxagorns,Democritus, Empedocles, Parmenides, Xenophane row subtlety and content from philosophy and repay the loan Socratis,and Plato-agree that nothing can be known with cer- with richnessof style and ornamentsof speech.drThe philoso- taintv,56and the disagreementsof philosophersare groundsfor pher shouldbe able to determinetruth and falsiqy,probabiliry doubting both the sensesand reasonas sourcesof certainty'6 and untrustrvorthiness,in argumentsand conclusionsand hence Indccd, the only differencebetween this philosophicattitude reducethe disagreementsof philosophersand placephilosophy and the philosophieswhich professto contain positiveknorvl- at the serviceof virtue and action. Cicero found the solution edgeis that the denialof the possibilityof certaintypermits the to both problems in the philosophy of the New Academy. examinationof many doctrinesas probable rvhich cannot bc The method of the New Academy was to ergue againstevery known certainly,and it openswide fieldsof inquiry and action proposition and to pronounce positively on nothing. It tvas the rvhich are closedby dogmatism.68The rviseman suspendsfudg- method originated by Socrates,renewed by Arcesilas, rein- ment andwithholds assentto doubtful things,and he finds proba- forced by Carneades,and, in Cicero's day, professed by his bility sufficient for action. teacher,Philo of Larissa.The assumptionsof the method were Sincethe discussionof philosophicproblems consists in ad- not that nothing is true but rather that true sensationsare so vancingarguments against all philosophicpositions,Cicero's-ph mixed with false sensationsand resemblethem so closely that losophy is expressedin the exanrinationof a great many philoso- there is no infallible guide to iudgment and assent.Many sen- phiei which are grouped under three heads:the Academic, the I r+) [ ,s] CICERO INTRODUC ION Epicurean,and the Stoic. The Academic school, in turn, is dif- cationto Stoicism;for Epicuruswas no nroreoriginal than Zeno, ferentiated into the Nerv Academy, professedby Cicero and and little truth remainedeven in the doctrinesthat lre reformu- Cotta in the dialogues,and the Old Academy, establishedin latedat secondhand. Cicero's repudiation of Epicurusis socom- reactionto the New Academy bv Antiochus of Ascalon and plete that anotherspcaker in the dialogueremarks that he has professedin the dialoguesby bicJro's friends, Varro, Lucullus, almostexpelled Epicurus from the ranks of philosophcrs-hi and Brutus, with occasionalaid from Hortensius.The list of physicsis unoriginaland false;he hasno dialectic;and his doc- thosewho had practicedthe method of the New Acadcmy is trine that plcasureis the suprcmegood is an crror:and unorigi- extensive,as Cicero interprets the history of philosophy. The nal.60Cicero expressescontenrpt for the Latin popularizcrsof methodwas invented by Socrates;and Plato,who set fonh the Epicureanism,like Amafiniusand Rabirius,Toand he mcntions argumentsof Socratesin so nrany volumes,must be numbere the great Epicureanpoct Lucrctius only once, in onc of his amongits adherents.60Aristotle and the Peripateticsarc closeto letters,in spitcof the ancienttradition that he cditedthe rvorks thisphilosoph/, since they arc followersof Socratesand Plato.0 of l,ucretiusafter the poet'sdcath.7l The method was revived by Arcesilasand systematizedby Car- The interprctationof the historv of philosophysuggcsted by neades,tu'o of Plato'ssucccssors as head of the Acadcmy, in the rcturn to the Old Acadcntv,rvlrich u'asadvocatcd by An- oppositionto Zeno, the founder of Stoicism,and Chrysippus tiochus,scts the schoolsof philosophy in clifferent relations one of his succcssorsas head of the school.ol The followersof the Old Academyagrccd in recognizingSocra- Zeno did not diffcr, accordingto Cicero, from the body of tes as the first to applv philosophyto ordinary lifc and to thc doctrineelaborrted by the Academicsand the Peripatetics;02he affairsof menand in dcscribingthc nrcthodby which hc affirrncd wasan inventorof ternrsrether than a discovererof ideas.68The nothing himsclf but refuted othcrs;but thcy pointcd out thnt' true and refined philosophy rvasstarted by Socrates,and it later in spite of tl'ris,he spcnt all his discoursespraising virtue and found its home among the Peripatetics;the Stoicsexpressed the exhortingmankind tu the zealouspursuit of virtue and that his samedoctrines in differentlanguage; the Middle Academicsdis- professionof ignorancervas ironi<:. Beginning tvith Plato,there cussedthe points of controversy between the two,8{ and they originateda philosophvu'hich had two nantes,the Academic found a differenceonly of terminologybeween the Stoicsand and the Peripatetic,l)ut $'asa singlesystenl. Both schoAmafinius and Ra- nizing thag althoughknowledge originated in the senses,truth birius,were concernedentirely rvith obviousmatters and dis- rvasiudged by the mind and not by the sensesand that the cri- cusscdthem in ordinary language,with no art, no definitions terion of truth was thereforein the f orm, or what Plato called ll+l I ls ] CICDRO IN'I'RODUC'I'ION thcidca.tt2 Ciccro's defensc of thc slollllcs cndsand thc analysis of therelation of tlrclau's of mento natuta Thc ccrrtcrof Ciccro'sphilosophic inquirics is found in tnoral larv,which Ciccroapplied to all thc philosophcrsthat hc con- rnd political problcms,and the part of philosophyrvhich givcs sidered.In the processof thc argunrcntone changeof extrcrn dircction and unity to thc other parts is nrorals.The Socratic inrportanceto latcrnroral and political philosophy occurs rvith- method,rvhich Ciccro professcdtu crnploy,is not unrelttcd to our opposirionancl rvith little cxplicit norice.Both Plato and Socrates'acconrplishmcnt in turning philosophyfrom spccula Aristotle had rccognizecla urrivcrsaljusticc cornmon to all nrcn tion on naturalphcnomcna to investigationof thc affairsof mcn, but they hadanalvzcd polirical institutions in tcrmsof the ciry- rvhichCiccro rcfcrs to rcpeatcdly.Thc cnrphasisin logic on dis- statcand on thesupposition that therervere profound differcncc co\rery and thc inclusion of rhctoric rvithin logic reflcct this l)etlvcenGrceks and bnrbarians.The SophistGorgias and the practicnlintcrcst even in thc applicltionsof mcthod to inquiric orrtor Lysiashad urged the comrnon interestof Grcclrs,nnd into thc natureof things;and physics ltas moral consequenccs not Isocrrteshad dcvotedhis most seriousefforts to thc unificatio only in thc rcmovalof supcrstitionand fear but dircctly in the of Grecce;the Sophists had bascd larv on convcntionand intcrcs cffectsof thc knorvlcdgcof nntureon thc orgflnizationof hunlan ratherthan on nature;and onc earlv Socratic school, thc Cynics associationsand in the rnoraicontettt and satisfactionof knorvl- had hclclthat r.viscmcn cvcryt'hcre fornr a sinqleconrrriunit edgc.Finally, the uniry t'hich isintroduccd into the_orgrnizatio andthat the rviscman is a citizrcnof tlreu'orlcl. In bicero'sdiscui- of philosophyby this practicalemphasis influcnces Cicero's con- sionof earlicrphilosophers, nll schoolsagrce-rvhethcr they take ccptionof morals,for moralsincludcs not only ethics,in the nar- thebasis ofvirtue to be rcasonor thepassions and rvhethcr they rorv scnsc,but politics and rhetoric, and it shouldproperly be think larv to consistin reasonor convention-on the common callcd"politics,t' as it rve.sby Aristotle and the carly Pcripatetic natureof man,and thcy find thc associationsof nrcnas broad as andAcadcnrics.l6r mcn'scommunications, embracing all gods and men or extendin Aristotlchad cnticizcdthc dc6nitionof virtuc nslXenocrates,Aristotle, and the whole Platonic Ne$' Academvto presentthe Stoic distinctionsrs most prob- schoolregardcd honor asthe highestgood, Zeno consideredit able.loo Ilo] lr' l C I CERO INTRODUCTION The foundationsof politicsnrc found in silnilarntodificatiorr which existsnowlrere on earth;1?3it nccds no cnactmcntsor laws of the doctrincsof the schools.Ciccro statcshis purposein tlrc sinccit is rulcd by philosophcrJAthens (who was a srudent of Gorgias the Sophisr before he came to Socrates); the Elean-Ere- dian, founded by Phacdo (for rvhonr Plato nanrcd tiie dialosue s'hich recounts Socrates' final conversation and death); the Cyrlnaic, founded by Aristippus of Cyrene(rvlio studied rvith rhe Sophisrs); and- Tne Acroenrc ScHoor, founded by Plato (+z8il-l+8/l); inlluenced by the Pythagoreans, Fferacleirus, and Socrates \ ,. rw a"ohy The Lyceun (The Old Academy) (The Peripatetic School) Speusippusof Athens founded by Arisrode 38"1/3 Head of Academy348/7- 3zz/| tts/8 o\ il ll XenocrrtesofChalcedon Theophrastus Head 339/8-315/q Hcad of Lyceum 3::/r- 288/6 Polemo of"Athens Ht^o 3t5/4-z7o/69 Straro of ll,r,prr.* THe Eprcune-cx ScHooL, .// Flea,d,288/6-z7z/68 founded bv Epicurus of t'ffEu II Athens (34:/r -zjr /o) ; rcrd z7o./6s-268/4 Lvcon of Tioas the books of Democritus / 'Head t68-228,/i z7z (ca. Tne Srorc Scnoor. (Cranror. tf, ci""ro 46r;/59-3,-oi 69) ; studied founded bv Zeno of Ci:ium '-Aiodirica s'ith the Pletonist Pamphilos -rts, i. 9. 3ar ii. a1. ll (ca. rvirh I (Cicero De Natura Deoram 96-264/);-scudicd Oi, iiii"i ul i'. trZi,r_ Xenocrates and Polenro th cultnae iii' 6' rt) ll i. t6. 7t) and rvith Neusiph- Academics, crate. rh" cynl (Hieronvmus of Rhodes ;lnes. a Democritean influ- ic, and Diodorus Cronus ind z. Second'Acadeny Cf. Cicero rlca,leuict ii. enccd bv Pvrrhonien skep- Stilpo the Mcgarians; con- (The ll'liddlc Acadenrv) ticisnr (ilir. i. :6. 4:. r3r; f)e Fittibusii.3.8f., 73) troversieswith Arcesilas,fcl- Ncgative di:rlcctic and with- ll of assent il lorv-student under Polenro holdine t ll Foundid bv Arccsilrr tl ll FIetJ z6'6/4-z4r/o lr Eptcunmxs Srorcs Ac.roenttcs Pentprrettcs Hemarchns of l\t;'tilcne ' Cleanthes of Assos f,ecvdes of Cyrene Aristo of Keos Head of Epicurcin Schoc,l Head of Stoic School Head z4r/4o-zz4/zt Head rz8l5?-? z7r/v? 264/ z r Cf, CiceroDe Finibusv. 5. 1-231,/ lblekles r4. Ch'yrippuJl Herd tz4/zz-z16/5? Herd ll 43/z-zo8/5 Evander Zenoof T,llus Herd z1615?-? Head zo8l5-? il Hegesinus of Pergamon tl tl ll 3. Third Acadeuy II (The New Academy) tl Probabilism il Founded by Cameades Diogenes tfie Babylonian; in Head ?-I37l5 Critolaus Rome r55 In Rorne I5; In Rome I55 Cicero De Re Publica idi. tl Panaetius'Lr ruroa", @a. 6. 8-g; De Oratore i. I t. .15 DiodorusiJf a'." - r8i-rro) Cicero De Finibtts v. 5. 14 3 tf . Acadenica'i. z. 5i De Crt"s of *tsus ! Finibus iv. 28.79; De Offi- Head r3r/o?-rz7/6 ciis ii. t7.6 tl Cleitomachus of Crrthegc (Poseidonills of Apameia Ica. tlerd n7/6-tro/g r35-5t l tl Fourth Acadany (PhiloJemus of Gadara) Cicero heard him in Rhodes 4. (Renerval of Nerv Acadcmy-) cf. De Dittinatione il lg/18; Philo of Larissa Phaedrus i. rz; ft.; De Nanra 5;. Head r Iol9€8? Teacher of Cicero in Rome Deonmr ii.34.88) (Cicero srudied under hirn 9o; and of Cicero and At- in Rome, 88; cf. Acade- ticus in Athens 79178 mica ii. 47. r43; i. 4. r 3 tl tl Andronicus of Rhodes Zeno of Sidon 5. Fifth Acadnny Tenth head after Aristotle; Tlught Cicero and Atticus (Retum to Old Acadenry) editor of. Aristorle's rvorks in Athens 79178 Antiochus of Ascalon il Head 68?-after 5r. Cretippus of Pergrmon Patron of Cicero Teacher 79,/78 Cf. De Divinatione i. t. t; Friend of Cicero in Rome nn.l A.h.ns *+lggrf,i Ffl€E?ee FaFI 1?111 l+lr; il[; l;*$illaiEiE,liileg 1€i irilfii *11 Eiel li:I l i l;i II lEi}ii}iflil! 'i1f$l €il$*i+liilEfi$*u:iiF E€a$ii'$i ["$iiFFigii+iiiilsFil;i i i' $+TiaF i1[i CICERO INTRODUCTION treatiseof Panaetius.Cicero acknorvledgcshis borrowings from ZnLtr.n,F,r,A History of Eclecticinn in Greek Philosopby,pp, Panactiusin the first two booksof On Duties; the third showsthe 146-7r.Tlanslated by S.F. Anpyxe. London,1883. influenceof Poseidonius.Ciccro says that he is not merelyuans- Anuor,o,E,Y. RomanStoicism. Cambridge, England, r9rr. lating from Panaetius;and, in tht-rseportions of his writings in Tnurrrr, W. S., and Scnwenn,L, History of RomanLiterature Vol.I. London,r89r. which u'e areable to comparehis forrnulationof doctrineswith Crenx,A. C. ln: cxistingsources, such as Plato'sRepnblic rnd Latas and Aris- "Ciceronism," EnglishLiteratule and the Classic pp. r18-45.Oxford, r9rr. tode'sTbpics, the modificationsrvhich he introducesare consid LrvrN,T. W. Sir LecturLslntoductory to the PhilosophicalWrit- erable.both in the orientationand use of the argumentand in the ingsof Cicero.Cambridge, England, r87r. mannerof expressingit. SruNe,G. H., and Surrr, S. B. (trans.).On the Cormnonweal MarcusTltllius Cicero. Columbus, Ohio, 1929.Excellent introduc- tion to the politicalphilosophy of Cicero,pp. rng. SELECTEDBIBLIOGRAPHY Lrrivrex,!r, Cicero'sDoctrine of Natureand Man. New York, r93o GENERAL WORKS ON CICERO Hnxnv, M.Y. The Relationof Dognatism and Scepticismin the Philosophicphiloso,hic Tleatises of Cicerc.Cicero.New York,york. r9r5.rorr. Borssrnn,G. Cicno and His Frimds: A Sndy of Rotnan Society in Rerrv, K. C, Studietin the PbilosophicalTbrminololTbrminology of Luuetius the Thnes of Caesdr.Translated by A. D. JolrEs,3d ed. New York, I9OJ, and Cicero.New York, r9o9. CorvrLL, F. R. Cicero and the Rontdn Republic. New York, 1948 A graphic treatment of the economic, social, political, and intel- lectualcircumstances of Romc in Cicero'stimes, It hasa good brief list of books on the variousaspects of the study of anciEntRome. Fnrscn, H. Cicero's Fight for the Rcpublic: The Historical Back- ground of Cicero's "Philippics." Copcnhagen, 1946. Fnouoe,J.4,. Caesar:A Sketch,New York, r88r. Hesrer.r, H.l. This Was Cicero: Modcrn Politics in a Roman Tbga. Nerv York, 1942. Prrensex, T. Cicero: A Biograpby. Berkeley, Calif., r9uo. Rrcurrnos,G, C. Cicero: A Study, Boston, 1935.' Rorrr, J. C. Cicero and His Influence, Boston, 1923.teats all as- pectsof Cicero'sinfluence except the influenceof his philosophy irrhi.h *". reservedfor anothei volumc of the serics"'Our be6t to Greeceand Rome." Srnrrn, E. G. Cicero of Arpinum: A Political and Literary Biog- rupb!.New Haven' 1914. Tevron, H. Cicero: A Sketch of His Life and Works' Chicago, 1916 Wnxrr, F-N. Eternal Lausyer: A Legal Biography of Cicero.New York, 1947.

THE PHILOSOPHY OF CICERO Rrrrr'n, H.The History of Ancient PhilosophyrlV, 99-16r. Tians- lated by A. J.W. Nonnrsox.London, 1846. I e+l lrsl NOTES INTI(PUCTTDI

r. lrdr(hcirr. r. rrr" r" lljlra rc n 3. fl|d,ra l.tf-l _a Tb dr Qdrcy, {lsu.. Hi*lid d C*d frptt; {lo. rl'|l tr' rr ttr pdairyh ft c d Gqo Ljr L b b lgdld by 6. 6d s*c ft dffiar d tu c- rlEl b rfrfp( b fu 6l r:tt d*n cu,rcln, d L cn b Uf{4ty h. U-rry i lforq. *' fi irfrifu1 pg _ba&rd&6. Erc.h;ot rE cb d& cn pilcrli:d b: br-inrttif od rfioccl Dr fuFc? dL FLL ltt rt.:D b.rG.. rltt-6a6 p-rd rL qurE o rlil h r dcr L d rrnG dpglEi o ft g: lm cirt rrc rdd -rff..- li to -a' rftrc frE'-r rtf r: &i I Etr-- t:-E Ead'l*t.J * Xil& l3r (rr'J.dtt 11n ryt)'F rtt 6. tbhnDiirl rt 7. tgffi d d toclb ry.p e;*ttrb+ EttF, $t-r6r. t A*|/risryppt flfbdfr0Ht(htu4 rpll),s6 s hb etGouru, hfa (Tb Veb d tCtr.ea-. .ACbfulAb trc, rgtrLIV, !9t). tc, ?* fus (@n db flti.ifl I 6cr). eL ffi*p n-b cB aib a:ht b i*h a & rn4*tif arpryrlt :lflffilf*.h,'dklbtucr Hadfu 6radc ai 6. Fidcd lfr r I|. tq, rGbo ra fi Br Glre $ii h fr- ffidl Arr Ed fi pdl fr i11+' Htr-.l b r.h &t- Lfu, rrU.E-Nc r (AprI,ryl). rl fura I t. 6Giuprub dl. A flrl. CE (I*,t &rL,, rlr), FF Flat +r**, ril 6- d D.& Gbd, Orr d h DrpnlrFiEr (!{rr fr.t, tgf}r F llrq* ta Dc Otrr E rl In cf. na rs li{|. d r$ rr d Orrt-.dEonrlh|&E5.e-i* illEtSEErsD[ED-3D-Eg - [.rr I NOTES TO PAGES 9-l I Nrrf BS TO PAGES 2 t-17 vidcbomur, nrm nurimc philcophrbomur" (Da Natma Dcornn 1!, TLtculanacDi urtstionesi, 3,.6;ii. l. 71iv.3.6. Lr.6). $, Dc Ontorc iii. r5.56-16.6r. 15.Dc Fe PublicaiL rr. rr-rr. 6.. Tirsc.ulttueDisp,,tationes i, 1.7iDc antorc iii 3y. r4r; Dc br- ii. rd De Nout Dcotwtt iL 6r. 156 Dc Lceibut i" ?. tl, uentione r. 7-3. 8. q6.De Finibus r7. DeRe hblicer{ 13.r3. v. {. tr.. t8. Ihid.i"69.$66.7o. 47.DeOficiisLu4 r9 Dcl*dbaq\Lt. rt-rrr tt. tg-tor r7.37,rnd18.39 q8,Orator 19.6r-ro. 68iDe Lcgifut L 4. lr; Dc Oraorc ri. tt. TUtcr.IaE Ditpirrrrlt L l-1. 6 5r-t6. 7o. 'Gtt. Ibid.iv. r. t-t.57DcOrcrorc ii.37. r595G g. De Legibusi,r.9-2.c.. It. PlutrrrchPa&lLioctrCao rt. r-t. 5o. Thtculmtac Ditpttationet v. ,+ 6/8-agi.d. Dc Finifus iil ll. :3. $rcmius Dc Atffih a RMU tg. 7r-2..7.tt7r-zr..ir,.ivr7. rv. ,, t-Si-Acadmiceit-!i ac6cmtce L l,t, tg.rg. Thc rnc diffculty dutrcurty oEof tlt3dro prob,ptoD- * Btutt 12.654. Clslo lus enodrcr rpcdrcr in drc didogue. lcm which Cicero ft*i ry *'riting-philoeophyin l,rtin b. b:n th" h9 hlr onc 6f -drc intirtbcuton b bL ftid Atticu* tdrizc 6c comperircn of Cro wie Lyftr wtilt i$fd lact -thet 6c-iy Ac* (d. demicedemict epologizctPp.log,rr for using tcrmr litc.tc'philocophy,''rlrctorig' GoGFohrd prwned u hb osn irtenrcnt bU. t5. 193). Plu' t'phyricq" trrch Drofci.t b bc uorblc b udcrstrnd drc compcrim of Crto 'phyricq""phyricq" rnd "didectic.'which"di"didectic,'which hevcdrcedydrdrceily bcenbetn nenrrliz:dninrnliz:d frcmfrom the Greck, end for hrAu1g (Acdctnia rnd Lid$ (Co z. z) bot rcportl widrout comnsn drrt np crllcd tenru litc lqtry". L 7. Crm i Rsrun D:moadtm (Cco 4. r). 4icf.Dc Fkifut iii. r. Sh Cicrro sinilerly rpol6gizld for invcoting r.t.D.Orarrtcr.z.g. dretermmonlfu for the dcsigne.l6l rf oniof-thc fictdr of philoeophf $. De hocrrritt*L7.9 (Dc Fetol r). jr, rz. Plutrrdr Pcdlcl Livct,Ciocto + 45t. D! Fgto2.1; Dc Ontorc i r;. 15-yo;iii.6. tr-u; Ontm 7. tr-r1iDcPmtitioneOrootie i. I},r,crdc,u Dbge*ct t l4 Ortor t. rt-rt. {o. r39; Etrrruttr. rro, rg.r+g. tg DcNrrrzrlDcoruir-g,6. 52,DcNanraDcotnnl t. rr-rr. 3o Drnrrrgc arr. 59, l|tculnae Dhgutttiout L 4 8- y. Dcl*gibrlt'r t.-g 54 lbid. % + rerri Dc DinirutfumciL 7r. r5o. ii. fnc. io frw 6c pe Vhit llhtttilrc'Cotrr,|il Ncptt Qw tj. Dc NtrztaDcotrnttL 5. lr-rr; Act,iemicel rt 44. *iernurica"C. !ftlm (L.ip4: rtTr).p rrr. 96. Acdcnica iiu 27. 7t-t4 76. it. De &ccllc&sWs rro,Anics 16 t-+ t7. IbU. ii 14.7lt-3o.98. Ot Rt Pldlliet r. 7. g d. rfryudae Dc Cinilrrr Dci v' t7i g, Ibid, ri" r.8. * Ibid.ld.rt,T+ tU--.;. Atdcgr viii rr. ss, Dc Ofr* iL r. r-r. 6.Ct.D€ Dtsffirrc ii r. r-r. TiDc Rc b, DcOftcibil.r.t. piStict i ,.l-1; Acdcttdct L t. 7r t, n i L t F1. &. Acedanical n. g-q6. $. Dc lrlstuiolr iL r. r-l 6t. Dc Finihtt in r.31, ir. Mmic. I*t Etsdt'Livtc IL chrD. r,'L:r Livrcr" ((Euwc^t 61. lbid.fl r. tr Dc Re Ptbliceiil 8. rr. ci*ol}tcs dc-Llicbt dc Monign,cd. A-ArndnFud [PuL rgrtl' 6+ n tcsbrraeDhputaionet ln 3.6. 69.Ibid.n rr. 3r-rr. 36. Hl?'i*''ffi';*.ff"ffi.:rtr 6. Dc Finibut iv.6 r4-& ro, dla didorucl of PLlo tlu$' dihg thc mcn dlcy tt'cst' co' 67. Dc Ofrclit i. r.6 and iii 4. ro '!'l 8. Dc Fffibtt iii rz.4r; iv. r. r-r; Dc NauaDcorwnlT. r& 6* DcFlnibtzcLt,zGtT. n;;d,d,-p.-sH;TFEff s fih" rnd H. Iti- Au:o [dor4 re4]' v' 338 . 7o. Tlttcttloue Dhpuatiottct il l. 6; il l. Z; in 3. i:; Acdcdcc ",- Lt.t. r9). Cf. Clarc n tcdas Dbg *t v' + to-rr' tg. Elrrrnur,o?.ry'P.r* 7, Ail Quixnnn Fntrm ii c. r. Jcrome'r trrnsletion of drc e. Ad Atticnt ril tr. Cbonicae of Eusebiusconoins drc following cotqy for dre ycrr tgrr h, Tlttadm DfuPafuaettu,1. 54. rftcr Abnhem, or 9,1r.c.: 'Tinrs Lucrctiuq pocCir born, *yho,hrv- Lillcd hinrsclf by hb,'wn hrnd b. ttU. i t, t td-Dc FHbt t IiL 3.r r. Cf. Dc Ofuit L rt. t I t. ing bccn meddencdby e lovc-potioq [6r+] [6'sl NOTES TO PAcES r/-35 N(,TES TO PAGES t 5_4' in his fony-fourdr ycar, rfter hc hrd wrincn, in thc intcrvcb of his ro5-.Ibid,ii 6. r8;.:f. I cadaniceiL p. 97. inslnityi scvcnl bools which Cbcro letcr rcviscd" (5. Hictotymi 1c6,.Brutu rt. t3t. ro7. Inap_ctltio Cbtmicre Eutcbii Pmtpbili lPanologie Lcrizc, )O(Vil, D_cOntorc ii 37. 165. 5rrr5l). tc/d,,Ibid.ii 38.16r.- 72.Acdanin 14. r5-r8;ii. j. rl. rq. lbid.iii. 19.7r. 7. Ibid.L8.ll-g rs. rro, Ihid.iil rr.8o. 7+ I,W:Lro.37, rr.413iL g. r5. rrr. Academicaii.6. 161. r9 7J. tot8. t. t3-tt. trt. IM. i.8. 3c.3r. ?6. IbU. iL g. rg. rr1. Ibid. ii rt.9r-3o. 9,46. rqz-q1.tq6 7l7.lffid. iL rr.697r. tt4 Dt Oramc iii.36. r47. rtg. Acdctnice __7&._ConttaAndanicot iil r?. t7-rq $ (Panologit Lntiaa i. t. 3t; iL-3 1. ro7-34. r r 13cf. Dc Fini}altiil 5. rg. )OgU,9t{Js). tt6. Dc Oraoc i. 1r. 186--r. 187. 79. TbtctdrlncDispatiout v. 14.68{9; DcOratorc L 15.68{9; rr7. DcP.Jtitionc Oroode"o. lro Actdctnica I t. 19. r tt. Dc Nrrra Dcotun i, i. 57,'U. trgl 8c Chrrlc. furdcn Pdn c, Collecud Papnr 3.4ar (Crmbridgc, QcFirdbrr L6. r7-rr. Mrrr, t933), llt, r79. rzo.Ibid. in y. rr-r3. rtt. Dc Norr.eDcotutt 8t. Rttc&nc Dispio*t I rt. lfp. L 3r. tr -3r. 82. Iffi.L ro. rr. rtt, Ibid.L ro 53-51. 81. Accdcndcal4. r7-rt; DcOficiitll.utiDcOntorc iil rt.67; tt3. Ioid. L 8. rt-ro r4. tzq. Ibid. L Tbtadaue Dbguabut il f . 9. 16 43-17.4y. tt5. Ibid. Dc Nowe Dcuu;L g. ui Acda niceL n. 4p,-qrta4 79. ii u.54-58. 4 rz6. Ibid.iL 13.r4-r139 89,Acadcmicelt 3o-3r. 6" IUd.,L 8.3o tt7. Dc Divhwiou il7r. r48. rr8. Dc Nonnt Dcotutt t7. IM.L t. tg. L 7. 6. 8. n lcr.lae Dbnwioaot v. ra 68; Dc l4ibu L r4. 6r. rzg l,)c Diaiutio* i 3. rt; il 14.31-16. ln ?r. tto. r7o.lbid.L9.5, b. Togdcer.GliDe Oraon ii 38. rg7-3i 163.Crocro rcmctime chenrcr hir arnrinolow rnd epplicr drc ann rab dhrctendimdrc t3t. lffi. ii 5o.ro3. Ibid.i.+ il t-4. rr. en of ludgrncnq in cditrrs td'dhc rcrio imtcrdcadi(d. Dc Fraibat ryt. Z; 3. iv. to). t31. Ibid. t f.8+. a r1rylbid. iL rr. rg j. rr. go. Dc Fild,lfutL 7. u. tt. 7o. y. De FaoL t r1g.Dc Fiaibu v. r,7, gz. Tbpictr.& 176.Ibid.%+9. t77. Acedenia L 6. zq-7. tg. gt. DGOraorc iL 3t. t6o %+ ro. t78^Ibid. L rr.39 * DcFinibu tlg gi. Ofio? ttt-rri DsFini}zs ii.tt t7. lbid.il 36 r16-38.rrr. tt. rp. IbU. Br'zrr.t tttstl. iL 39 ru-4o. rrtl 6. !t. tqr. Tlncfurc Fffibr.t iii. rr. Ditpttionet i r3. 3o;Dc l*gbu: [ & ra ot I)c 7r. rg. TltcthucDitpoaiout ma.iv.4.8-ro; DeOraorc il38. 157-59 I 16.36. *. t q3. Dc N awa Deonnn li n. t8. 9 Acedcnica i t+ ?t,r8. 9t-3o 9t. iil rr.4o. 44 De Finihs iv.5. rr-rr; Acdadce iL qr. rr7-r8iDt Scaec tcn, DcFfrbtt tuc 2r.7?. rct. Ontot tt!-tt. rr3i Dc Fkibus r49. Dc L.gibat iL r. r. rc2. Btutttgn.\oiiAcdanica i. t. 3r; Otoot tt. ,r,6 ii.6. rz. 8c gryy L 4. rr-r4;Dc Finihsil r+ 6-+6 r+t. Lctth.t L 2,t1. rc7. Acdenicalz. S. Qe T. t7. rca DcFinihlcir.T.zt. rq8. Dc Lcgtbu il l i-ro [616J [6rz] NOTE9 TO P.dGES 45-t5 r+9. lbid.il 7. 15-16. rgo. Fng. z,De Lcgibut,quoted by hctentius, Instituionct Di- vinte v.8. ro. r5r. Dc Firnbativ. r. g-3.6. r5z. Ibill.L 9 :9-3r, rr. 1r. 19. Ihid.l 13.4113. ry4 lbid.i. 7. t3-zgiii. 34.r r3-rj r55. lbid. iii g. lr. ry6. Ibid.iii ro.33-35. t57. Ibid.ut. 5. 164. zz. rg8.lffi. iii r:.4r. ryg lbid.in r.5-3.7. rdn^Ibid.iv.6 r4-8. ro rdr. Ibid.v.+ rr-t. t+ $t. Acadcmica15. 19-6 r3. $y lbiil. i" ro.3y-39. 64 Dc Frnibatv.6 16-8. rr. 165.Augusinc Dc Civiutc Da rix. 11(Pattologh lttine,XLl, 6rr-r4). ldf,. Dc ltgibat i ro g3-rr.56. $7. Dc Ofrcib i r-r.6 16f,.Ibid.iii r.Z. fi* Ibid.iiia ro ryo. Del*giktt I tl.lftc. r;t. Dc Re PfiIicairi- 8. r3' rr. r8-t3. r3' 18.r8. l7z. DeLcgibrlitig.tg.-Repubiic rf3. Pfeto ir. 59rA-B; cf. ibid. v. 11tCr4;lC; vil reoD-F- " q4 Dc RcPty'rticeil r. r-3. ry5.Ibid.il rr. rr-r13o 5r. v6. Dc Lcgtbutli t6. 77-t7.37- nt.Ibill.iila rr. ry&. Dc Re Phlica L ro. 33. v9. Del*gibzcll.t.4 18o.Dc Re Pfrliue vil r. l. l3r. Ibiel.ilLy14.