CHAPTER TWO
LAW AS IMPLANTED LOGOS: CICERO AND THE STOICS ON NATURAL LAW
It will have been observed from the preceding chapter that a rather remarkable coincidence of terminology exists between Dionysius bar Salibi's commentary on the Letter of James, Cicero's De Legibus, and the Apostolic Constitutions. In each work the term "implanted" (EJ..l I P. A. Vander Waerdt describes the "detailed consideration" of the problem presented in his recent dissertation as "never previously attempted"; see "The Stoic Theory of Natural Law" (Ph.D. diss., Princeton University, 1989) 5. Cf. the ear lier studies of H. Koester, "NOMOL Law was a subject to which the Stoic philosophers devoted a significant amount of attention. Treatises on the subject are associ ated with the most important names in the early movement: Zeno, Cleanthes and Chrysippus all wrote works entitled On Law or On Laws, as did Sphaerus and Diogenes of Babylon.2 Unfortunately these works are entirely lost to us, with the exception of a couple of impor tant fragments from Chrysippus's On Law. In fact, Cicero's De Legibus is by far the most extensive treatment of natural law that has been preserved from antiquity. The use of this treatise for reconstructing the early Stoic theory, however, is complicated by the fact that Cicero's primary source may have been Antiochus of Ascalon, a philosopher who had left the skeptical Academy to form his own breakaway "Old Academy," and whose thought represented a blend of Stoic and Platonic elements.3 Accordingly, while it is clear by all accounts that the theory of law presented by Cicero is essentially the Stoic theory,4 a number of authors have variously identified this or that detail of Cicero's account as departures from Stoicism. This question will in fact impinge on our discussion precisely at its most America, 1987) 79-94. On Cicero's De Legibus in particular L. P. Kenter, M. Tullius Cicero, De Legibus: A commentary on book I. (Arnsterdam: Adolf M. Hakkert, 1972); S. Benardete, "Cicero's De Legibus I: Its Plan and Intention," AlP 108 (1987) 295-309. Note also those studies published since the appearance of Vander Waerdt's dissertation: G. Striker, "Following Nature: A Study in Stoic Ethics," Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 9 (1991) 1-73, esp. 35-50; P. Mitsis, "Natural Law and Natural Right in Post-Aristotelian Philosophy. The Stoics and their Critics," ANRW 2.36.7 (1994) 4812-50; J. G. DeFilippo and P. T. Mitsis, "Socrates and Stoic Natural Law," Ihe Socratic Movement (ed. P. A. Vander Waerdt; Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1994) 252-71. See also Vander Waerdt's own more recent studies: "Philosophical Influence on RomanJurisprudence? The Case of Stoicism and Natural Law," ANRW 2.36.7 (1994) 4851-4900; "Zeno's Republic and the Origins of Natural Law," Ihe Socratic Movement, 272-308. 2 See the index in SVF 4, p. 100, under v6I-1o~. :1 The most recent and sustained argument far this position is that of P. A. Vander Waerdt, "The Stoic Theory of Natural Law"; see also idem, "Philosophical Influence on Roman Jurisprudence." Far a sketch of the earlier discussion of the question see L. P. Kenter, De Legibus, 9-10. A good introduction to Antiochus of Ascalon is found in J. Dillon, 1he Middle Platonists: 80 B.G. 10 A.D. 220 (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1977) 52-106. + This point will become clear over the course of this chapter, and is at any rate not disputed in the secondary literature. Vander Waerdt's approach is properly cau tious: "Cicero's account provides acheck against which to evaluate the evidence that does survive from the early Stoa, but not a starting point for our enquiry" ("The Stoic Theory of Natural Law," 30). Nonetheless, he finds significant conti nuity from Zeno to Cicero (ibid., 28)-and this despite his strenuous argument that Cicero's source was Antiochus of Ascalon.