FOOTNOTES

Musonius.

130.To the same period as Seneca belongsC. Musonius Rufus, in whom however we observe distinctly, what we may conjecture had also been the case with Attalus, that ethical teaching is becoming divorced from philosophical theory, and so the Cynic standpoint approached. Musonius was a preacher with a singular impressiveness of address. Speaking from the heart on matters of direct moral import, he won respect even from those who were least willing to be guided by him. He disdained the applause of his hearers, desiring instead to see each one tremble, blush, exult, or stand bewildered according as the address affected him[110]. ‘If youhave leisure to praise me,’ he said to his pupils, ‘I am speaking to no purpose.’ ‘Accordingly,’ said one of them, ‘he used to speak in such a way that every one who was sitting there supposed that some one had accused him before Rufus: he so touched on what was doing, he so placed before the eyes every man’s faults[111].’ Amongst his pupils were Aulus Gellius the antiquarian, Epictetus, and a certain Pollio who made a collection of his sayings (ἀπομνημονεύματα Μουσωνίου), of which extracts have been preserved for us by Stobaeus. They consist of moral maxims (χρεῖαι) such as ‘Live each day as if your last[112],’ ‘Nothing is more pleasurable than temperance[113],’ and discourses or ‘diatribes’ (διατριβαί) dealing with subjects such as discipline, endurance, marriage, obedience to parents, and so forth[114]. In elevation of standard these writings stand higher than those of the early Stoics; and the influence of Musonius was so great that we may almost regard him as a third founder of the philosophy.

His part in politics.

131.In public life Musonius played a conspicuous part; he was the Cato of his generation, trusted by all parties for his absolute rectitude of character, and respected for his fearlessness; but he was much less out of touch with the real conditions of the Roman world. When inA.D.62 Rubellius Plautus found himself unable to quiet Nero’s suspicions of his loyalty, it was believed that Musonius encouraged him to await his end calmly, rather than attempt rebellion[115]. After the conspiracy of Piso, Musonius was banished from Rome by Nero, together with most of the eminent personalities of the capital[116]. On Nero’s death he returned to Rome, and when the armies of Vespasian and Vitellius were fighting in the suburbs of the city, the senate sent delegates to propose terms of peace. Musonius joined them, and ventured to address the common soldiers, expatiating on the blessings of peace, and sternly reproving them for carrying arms. He was roughly handled and forced todesist. Tacitus speaks severely of this unseasonable display of philosophy[117]; and certainly Rome would not have been the gainer if the issue had remained undecided[118]. But that such an attempt was possible in defiance of all military discipline speaks much both for the courage of the speaker and for the respect in which his profession was held. Musonius continued to play an honourable part in public life during the reign of Vespasian, and retained the confidence of the emperor even at a time when his advisers secured his assent to a measure for expelling other philosophers from the capital[119].

Euphrates and Dio.

132.In the reigns of Titus and his successors pupils and converts of Musonius played not inconspicuous parts in public life. Amongst them was oneEuphrates, of Tyre or Epiphania (circ. 35-118A.D.), who in his day won all hearts and convinced all judgments. ‘Some persons,’ says Epictetus, one of his fellow-pupils, ‘having seen a philosopher, and having heard one speak like Euphrates—and yet who can speak like him?—wish to be philosophers themselves[120].’ Pliny made his acquaintance in his native land, and was filled with affection for the man. He found his style dignified and sublime; but especially he noticed its sweetness, which attracted even his opponents. His personal appearance was even more charming; he was tall, handsome, and the proprietor of a long and venerable beard. His private life was beyond reproach, and he was devoted to the education of his family of two sons and one daughter[121]. He appears to have completely achieved the reconciliation of philosophy with worldly success.

More ascetic in temper wasDioof Prusa (circ. 40-117A.D.), who was first an opponent but afterwards a follower of Musonius[122]. A Stoic in theory, a Cynic in practice, he assumed the shabby cloak, and wandered as a physician of souls. His eloquence succeeded in calming a mutiny of soldiers whichfollowed on the death of Domitian, and won for him from a following generation the title of the ‘golden-mouthed.’ He was held in high honour both by Nerva and by Trajan. A large number of his harangues are still extant.[123]

Epictetus.

133.The influence of such teachers was at any rate widespread, and if we suspect that Stoicism was already losing its intensive force as it extended the sphere of its influence, in this it did but obey what we shall see to be its own law of creative activity[124]. We still have to consider the two teachers who are of all the most famous and the most familiar; not however because they most truly express the substance of Stoicism, but because they have most deeply touched the feelings of humanity. These areEpictetusof Hierapolis (circ. 50-130A.D.) and Marcus Aurelius, who later succeeded to the principate. The contrast between their positions has often excited comment, since Epictetus was born a slave, and only obtained his freedom in mature years, that is, after the death of Nero in 68A.D.In reality it is characteristic of the times that so many men of foreign and even servile origin rose to positions of eminence and became the associates and teachers of men of high official rank. In the great slave households, in particular, of imperial Rome unequalled opportunities lay open to talent; the ‘educational ladder’ was everywhere set up to encourage the youth to make the best of his gifts. Further, just as young nobles were frequently enamoured of slave girls, so far superior to the ladies of their own class in wit, gentleness of manners, and loyalty in the face of all terrors and temptations[125]; so their elders found a delight in the company of the thoughtful and intellectual men who came to the front through the competition of the slave schools. Thus the emperor Claudius chose his ministers amongst his freedmen, provoking thereby the sneers of the Roman aristocracy, but greatly advancing the good government of the Roman empire; and it was Epaphroditus, himself a freedman of Nero, who sent the young Epictetus to study at the feet ofMusonius Rufus. Epictetus was a man of warm feelings and clear head; his addresses, recorded for us by his hearer Arrian, serve admirably to stimulate the domestic virtues and to keep alive the religious spirit; but his teaching lacks the force which befits the training of a statesman or a king. In logic he inclines too much to suspense of judgment, in ethics to resignation. But he did not altogether miss the Socratic force: in his youth he had gone about inquiring of his neighbours if their souls were in good health, and even when they replied ‘What is this to you, my good man? Who are you?’ he had persisted in giving trouble. Only when they raised their hands and gave him blows had he recognised that there was something wanting in his method[126]. Other young philosophers, he felt, lacked this energy, and were men of words, not deeds[127]. Like other philosophers, he was expelled from Rome by Domitian inA.D.89, when he retired to Nicopolis; there he gave lectures till the time of his death[128].

His Cynism.

134.Epictetus was a vigorous opponent of the group of young philosophers who delighted to display their talent upon the intricacies of the Stoic logic, and in his early youth he was taken to task by his teacher Musonius for underrating this part of philosophy[129]. He came however to see the great importance of a thorough training in the methods of reasoning, so that in practical life a man should distinguish the false from the true, as he distinguishes good coins from bad. In physics he lays stress chiefly on theology, and the ‘will of God’ fills a large place in his conception of the government of the world. In his treatment of practical ethics he makes free use of illustrations from the social life of his own day: he finds examples of Socratic strength in the athlete and the gladiator; and he makes it clear that the true philosopher is not (as many believe the Stoics to hold) a man devoid of natural feeling, but on the contrary affectionate and considerate in all the relationsof life. He has a special respect for the Cynic, who appears in his lectures not as the representative of a differing philosophical system, but as philanthropist, teacher, comforter, and missionary. There is indeed in the addresses of Epictetus a complete fusion of Stoicism with Cynism; and we trace in them pictures not only of the Cynic system as a whole, but also of individual teachers like Antisthenes and Diogenes, profoundly different from and much more human than the representations of them familiar through other literature; they are in fact pictures of Cynic teachers passed down or idealized by the members of their own sect. By their side stand the pictures of Ulysses the sage and Heracles the purger of the world, as they must have been described from generation to generation by Cynic orators to their hearers amongst the poor and the unhappy.

Arrian.

135.In the second centuryA.D.the professed teachers of Stoicism must have been very numerous; with the death of Domitian persecution had passed away. The philosophers were everywhere held in high esteem, and in turn their whole influence was used in support of the existing state of society and the official religion. In the early part of the centuryFlavius Arrianus(circ. 90-175A.D.) is the most eminent of Stoics; and it was noted that his relation to his teacher Epictetus much resembled that of Xenophon to Socrates. To him we owe the publication of the ‘discourses’ (διατριβαί) which he heard Epictetus deliver. InA.D.124, when lecturing at Athens, he won the favour of the emperor Hadrian, and was appointed by him to high public offices, in which he shewed himself a wise administrator and a skilful general; inA.D.130 he received the consulship; and later he withdrew to his native town of Nicomedia in Bithynia, where he filled a local priesthood and devoted himself to the production of works on history and military tactics. To Stoic doctrine he made no direct contribution.

Rusticus.

After Arrian had given up the teaching of philosophy for public lifeQ. Junius Rusticussucceeded to the position he left vacant. To him, amongst other teachers belonging to various philosophical schools, was entrustedthe education of the future emperor M. Aurelius, who gives us the following picture of the teaching he received:

‘From Rusticus, I first conceived the need of moral correction and amendment; renounced sophistic ambitions and essays on philosophy, discourses provocative to virtue, or fancy portraitures of the sage or the philanthropist; learned to eschew rhetoric and poetry and fine language; not to wear full dress about the house, or other affectations of the kind; in my letters to keep to the simplicity of his own, from Sinuessa, to my mother; to be encouraging and conciliatory towards any one who was offended or out of temper, at the first offer of advances upon their side. He taught me to read accurately, and not to be satisfied with vague general apprehension; and not to give hasty assent to chatterers. He introduced me to the memoirs of Epictetus, presenting me with a copy from his own stores[130].’

In Rusticus we may confidently trace a successor of the school of Musonius and Epictetus.

Marcus Aurelius.

136.M. Aurelius Antoninus Pius(121-180A.D.) is commonly spoken of as ‘the philosopher upon the throne,’ but this description may be misleading. Aurelius was in the first instance a Roman prince; to the institutions of Rome and to his own position as their chief representative he owed his chief allegiance. He was undoubtedly an apt pupil of the courtly philosophers by whom he was surrounded; he deliberately chose philosophy in preference to rhetoric, and of the various schools of philosophy his judgment ranked Stoicism highest. He was fairly well instructed, but by no means learned, in its doctrines; he adhered with sincerity, but without ardour, to its practical precepts. In the leisure hours of a busy life it was his comfort and his relaxation to express his musings in the form of philosophic reflections. But his attitude towards Stoicism is always that of a judge rather than that of an advocate; and much that the school received as convincing reasoning he rejected as ingenious pleading. Hence a large part of Stoic doctrine, and almost the whole of its detailed instruction, disappears from his view; but we have the advantage that the last of the Stoic writers brings out into clearer relief those features of this philosophy which could still rivet attention in his own time,and which therefore form part of the last message of the ancient world to the coming generations.

His belief in the cosmos.

137.It follows at once from the judicial attitude of Marcus Aurelius that he cannot countenance the Stoic claim to certainty of knowledge. The objection of opponents that the wise man, who alone (according to Stoic theory) possesses such knowledge, is nowhere to be found, is sustained:

‘Things are so wrapped in veils, that to gifted philosophers not a few all certitude seems unattainable. Nay to the Stoics themselves such attainment seems precarious; and every act of intellectual assent is fallible; for where is the infallible man[131]?’

Yet Aurelius does not relapse into scepticism. One doctrine at least is so convincing that he cannot for a moment doubt it; it does after all shine forth as true by its own light. It is that all things are ultimately one, and that man lives not in a chaos, but in a cosmos:

‘All things intertwine one with another, in a holy bond; scarce one thing is disconnected from another. In due coordination they combine for one and the same order. For the world-order is one made out of all things, and god is one pervading all, and being is one, and law is one, even the common reason of all beings possessed of mind, and truth is one: seeing that truth is the one perfecting of beings one in kind and endowed with the same reason[132].’

From the belief in a cosmos he is led on to a trust in Providence; theoretically, because the doctrine of the chance clashing of atoms is out of harmony with the belief in ultimate unity; practically, because in such a conviction only man can find a starting-point for his own activity. The choice is to him all-important; either Fortune or Reason is king, and claims allegiance from all.

‘Is it the portion assigned to you in the universe, at which you chafe? Recall to mind the alternative—either a foreseeing providence, or blind atoms—and all the abounding proofs that the world is as it were a city[133].’‘The world is either a welter of alternate combination and dispersion, or a unity of order and providence. If the former, why crave to linger on in such a random medley and confusion? why take thought for anythingexcept the eventual “dust to dust”? why vex myself? do what I will, dispersion will overtake me. But on the other alternative I reverence, I stand steadfast, I find heart in the power that disposes all[134].’

‘The world is either a welter of alternate combination and dispersion, or a unity of order and providence. If the former, why crave to linger on in such a random medley and confusion? why take thought for anythingexcept the eventual “dust to dust”? why vex myself? do what I will, dispersion will overtake me. But on the other alternative I reverence, I stand steadfast, I find heart in the power that disposes all[134].’

His piety.

138.Aurelius makes full use of the Stoic proofs of the existence of the gods, but it soon appears to us that his attachment to the established religion was not in any way founded upon philosophical arguments. In discussing this point he displays a certain heat which we have not yet had occasion to notice:

‘If indeed they [the gods] take no thought for anything at all—an impious creed—then let us have done with sacrifice and prayer and oaths, and all other observances by which we own the presence and the nearness of the gods[135].’

Finally, he breaks away altogether from philosophy and rests his convictions on personal experience:

‘To those who press the question, “Where have you seen the gods, whence your conviction of their existence, that you worship them as you do?” I reply—first, they are visible even to the bodily eye; secondly, neither have I set eyes upon my soul, and yet I do it reverence. So it is with the gods; from my continual experience of their power, I have the conviction that they exist, and yield respect[136].’

One further argument he held in reserve; the sword, the cross, and the stake for the ‘atheists’ who refused to be convinced. He was, after all, a king[137].

Ethics.

139.In ethics, Aurelius states the main principles of Stoicism with clearness; but he altogether ignores the Stoic paradoxes, and does not trouble himself with any detailed theory of the virtues and vices. Firmness of character is to him the supreme good.

‘Be like the headland, on which the billows dash themselves continually; but it stands fast, till about its base the boiling breakers are lulled to rest. Say you, “How unfortunate for me that this should have happened”? Nay rather, “How fortunate, that in spite of this, I own no pang, uncrushed by the present, unterrified at the future!” The thing might have happened to any one, but not every one could have endured it without a pang[138].’

But in spite of these doctrines, we trace throughout his pages a tinge of melancholy. Too apt a pupil of Epictetus, he had learnt from him the principles of submission and resignation, but he had not acquired the joyous confidence of an older period, through which the wise man, even if a slave, felt himself a king. Rather, though a king, he felt himself in truth a slave and a subject to the universe that was his master. He would not go against the universal order, but he hardly felt the delight of active cooperation. In this sense he represents to us the decadence of Stoicism, or (to put it more correctly) Stoicism coloured by the decadence of Rome.

Absorption of the soul.

140.On the question of continued existence after death Aurelius takes up and emphasizes the teaching of Epictetus, ignoring the fact that other Stoic teachers, from Zeno to Seneca, had taken larger views or at least allowed themselves an ampler language. There had been, indeed, a change in the point of view. The early Stoics, occupied with the question of physics, had insisted upon the indestructibility of substance, and the reuniting of the ‘spirit’ (πνεῦμα) with the all-pervading spirit from which it came at the beginning. The Roman school concerned itself more with the question of individuality and personality. Accepting fully the principle that that which is born must die, it comes to the definite conclusion that that which we trace from the mother’s womb through infancy and youth, through success and failure in life, through marriage and the family ties onwards to weakness and dotage, must reach its end in death. The ‘I’ cannot survive the body. The future existence of the soul, if such there be, is no longer (as with Seneca) a matter of joyful expectation, but of complete indifference.

Epictetus had expressed this with sufficient clearness:

‘Death is a change, not from the state which now is to that which is not, but to that which is not now. Shall I then no longer exist? You will not exist, but you will be something else, of which the world now has need; for you also came into existence, not when you chose, but when the world had need of you[139].’

Aurelius constantly repeats the doctrine in varied forms:

‘You exist but as a part inherent in a greater whole. You will vanish into that which gave you being; or rather, you will be re-transmuted into the seminal and universal reason[140].’‘Death put Alexander of Macedon and his stable boy on a par. Either they were received into the seminal principles of the universe, or were alike dispersed into atoms[141].’

‘You exist but as a part inherent in a greater whole. You will vanish into that which gave you being; or rather, you will be re-transmuted into the seminal and universal reason[140].’

‘Death put Alexander of Macedon and his stable boy on a par. Either they were received into the seminal principles of the universe, or were alike dispersed into atoms[141].’

Preparation for death.

141.The saddened outlook of Marcus Aurelius upon life harmonizes well with the resignation with which he contemplates a death, which for himself individually will be the end. Hence it is that his reflections so often make the thought of death a guiding principle of ethics; he who has learnt to look forward calmly to his last act has learnt thereby to abide patiently all the troubles which postpone it. Thus the last message of the princely philosopher, as of his predecessor, is that men should ‘bear and forbear’:

‘Contemn not death, but give it welcome; is not death too a part of nature’s will? As youth and age, as growth and prime, as the coming of teeth and beard and grey hairs, as begetting and pregnancy and the bearing of children, as all other operations of nature, even such is dissolution. Therefore the rational man should not treat death with impatience or repugnance or disdain, but wait for it as one of nature’s operations[142].’‘O for the soul ready, when the hour of dissolution comes, for extinction or dispersion or survival! But such readiness must proceed from inward conviction[143].’‘Serenely you await the end, be it extinction or transmutation. While the hour yet tarries, what help is there? what, but to reverence and bless the gods, to do good to men, “to endure and to refrain”? and of all that lies outside the bounds of flesh and breath, to remember that it is not yours, nor in your power[144].’

‘O for the soul ready, when the hour of dissolution comes, for extinction or dispersion or survival! But such readiness must proceed from inward conviction[143].’

‘Serenely you await the end, be it extinction or transmutation. While the hour yet tarries, what help is there? what, but to reverence and bless the gods, to do good to men, “to endure and to refrain”? and of all that lies outside the bounds of flesh and breath, to remember that it is not yours, nor in your power[144].’

His yearnings.

142.Aurelius was no teacher of Stoicism in his time: his thoughts are addressed to himself alone[145]. But the happy accident that has preserved this work, which for nine centuries was lost to sight[146], enables us to obtain a view of this philosophy from which otherwise we should havebeen shut out. We do not go to Aurelius to learn what Stoic doctrine was; this is taken for granted throughout the book; but we can see here how it affected a man in whom the intellectual outlook was after all foreshortened by sympathies and yearnings which had grown up in his nature. The traditional criticism of the school as being harsh, unsympathetic, unfeeling, breaks to pieces as we read these ‘thoughts’; rather we find an excess of emotion, a surrender to human weakness. A study of Stoicism based on the works of Aurelius alone would indeed give us but a one-sided picture; but a study in which they were omitted would certainly lack completeness. He is also our last authority. In the centuries which succeeded, other waves of philosophic thought washed over Stoicism, and contended in turn with more than one religion which pressed in from the East. Yet for a long time to come Stoic principles were faithfully inculcated in thousands of Roman homes, and young men taught in childhood to model their behaviour upon the example of Zeno, Cleanthes, and Epictetus formed the salt of the Roman world. If in riper years they joined, in ever increasing numbers, the Christian church, they brought with them something which the world could not afford to lose.

FOOTNOTES[1]Dill,Roman Society, p. 340.[2]‘omnis natura habet quasi viam quandam et sectam quam sequatur’ Cic.N. D.ii 22, 57. ‘est tuae prudentiae sequi eius auctoritatem, cuius sectam atque imperium secutus es’ad Fam.xiii 4, 2. ‘The sense of the word has been obscured by a false popular etymology which has connected the word with the Latinsecare‘to cut,’ Skeat,Etymological Dictionary, p. 537.[3]See above, §111.[4]‘dicebat modesta Diogenes et sobria’ A. GelliusN. A.vi (vii) 14, 10.[5]For a full account of his life and teaching see Schmekel,Philosophie der mittleren Stoa, pp. 1-9.[6]Strabo xiv 5, 16.[7]Ind. Stoic. Herc. col. 51.[8]‘discipulus Antipatri Panaetius’ Cic.Div.i 3, 6.[9]‘credamus igitur Panaetio a Platone suo dissentienti? quem omnibus locis divinum, quem sapientissimum, quem sanctissimum, quem Homerum philosophorum appellat’Tusc. disp.i 32, 79.[10]Fin.iv 28, 79.[11]‘tristitiam atque asperitatem fugiens Panaetius nec acerbitatem sententiarum nec disserendi spinas probavit’ib.[12]ἦν γὰρ ἰσχυρῶς φιλοπλάτων καὶ φιλοαριστοτέλης, ἀ[λλὰ κ]αὶ παρ[ενέδ]ωκε τῶν Ζηνων[είω]ν τι δι[ὰ τὴ]ν Ἀκαδημίαν καὶ [τὸν Περίπ]ατον. Ind. Herc. col. 61, quoted by Schmekel, p. 379.[13]‘quam vellem Panaetium nostrum nobiscum haberemus! qui cum cetera, tum haec caelestia vel studiosissime solet quaerere’ Cic.Rep.i 10, 15.[14]‘ain’ tandem? etiam a Stoicis ista [de optima republica] tractata sunt? non sane, nisi a [Diogene Stoico] et postea a Panaetio’Leg.iii 6, 14.[15]See below, §310, note 52.[16]‘[accepi] Publi Africani in legatione illa nobili Panaetium unum omnino comitem fuisse’ Cic.Ac.ii 2, 5.[17]This date is determined on circumstantial evidence by Schmekel, pp. 2, 3.[18]‘Scylax Halicarnasseus, familiaris Panaeti, excellens in astrologia, idemque in regenda sua civitate princeps’ Cic.Div.ii 42, 88.[19]‘omnes enim trahimur et ducimur ad cognitionis et scientiae cupidinem; in qua excellere pulchrum putamus; labi autem, errare, nescire, decipi, et malum et turpe ducimus’Off.i 6, 18; ‘cum sit is [Panaetius], qui id solum bonum iudicet, quod honestum sit, quae autem huic repugnent specie quadam utilitatis, eorum neque accessione meliorem vitam fieri, neque decessione peiorem’ib.iii 3, 12.[20]‘quod summum bonum a Stoicis dicitur, id habet hanc, ut opinor, sententiam, cum virtute congruere semper, cetera autem, quae secundum naturam essent, ita legere, si ea virtuti non repugnarent’Off.iii 3, 13.[21]‘Panaetius, cum ad Q. Tuberonem de dolore patiendo scriberet ... nusquam posuit non esse malum dolorem’Fin.iv 9, 23; see however below, §322, note 132.[22]See below, ch. xiii.[23]‘cuius [veri investigationis] studio a rebus gerendis abduci contra officium est. virtutis enim laus omnis in actione consistit; a qua tamen fit intermissio saepe, multique dantur ad studia reditus’ Cic.Off.i 6, 19.[24]He was however a skilled grammarian; see Schmekel, p. 207.[25]He wrote a book ‘on providence’; how far he or Posidonius is Cicero’s authority for the treatment of the subject inNat. de.ii has been much disputed; on this point see Schmekel, p. 8, n. 4.[26]‘id de quo Panaetium addubitare dicebant, ut ad extremum omnis mundus ignesceret’ Cic.N. D.ii 46, 118.[27]Schmekel, p. 309, and below, §211.[28]Παναίτιος πιθανωτέραν εἶναι νομίζει καὶ μᾶλλον ἀρέσκουσαν αὑτῷ τὴν ἀϊδιότητα τοῦ κόσμου ἢ τὴν τῶν ὅλων εἰς πῦρ μεταβολήν Ar. Did. fr. 36 (Diels).[29]Schmekel, p. 309.[30]‘vim esse divinandi [Panaetius] dubitare se dixit’ Cic.Div.i 3, 6.[31]He came from Apamea in Syria, but is often described as ‘of Rhodes,’ as the latter part of his life was spent there.[32]Schmekel, pp. 9, 10.[33]ib.p. 428.[34]Reid,Cic. Acad.Introd. p. 5.[35]Cic.Tusc. disp.ii 25, 61.[36]N. D.i 44, 123; ii 34, 88.[37]‘ecce Posidonius, ut mea fert opinio, ex his qui plurimum philosophiae contulerunt’ Sen.Ep.90, 20.[38]See below, §195.[39]Also thede Divinationeand the first half ofTusc. disp.i; Schmekel, p. 98, etc.[40]‘de divinatione libros edidit ... quinque noster Posidonius’ Cic.Div.i 3, 6.[41]‘animi vitae necessitatibus serviunt, disiunguntque se a societate divina, vinclis corporis impediti’ib.49, 110.[42]‘deflagrationem futuram aliquando caeli atque terrarum’ib.49, 111.[43]See §322, note 132.[44]ὁ Ποσειδώνιος [τὸ τέλος εἶναι εἶπε] τὸ ζῆν θεωροῦντα τὴν τῶν ὅλων ἀλήθειαν καὶ τάξιν Clem.Strom.ii p. 416B(Schmekel, p. 270); see also below, §321, note 125.[45]Schmekel, p. 62.[46]See below, §214.[47]Diog. L. vii 90; Schmekel, pp. 291, 292.[48]Diog. L. vii 127.[49]Schmekel, p. 294.[50]See below, §352.[51]‘plenus est sextus liber de officiis Hecatonis talium quaestionum; sitne boni viri in maxima caritate annonae familiam non alere? in utramque partem disputat, sed tamen ad extremum utilitate officium dirigit magis quam humanitate’ Cic.Off.iii 23, 89.[52]ib.23, 90.[53]‘nullius addictus iurare in verba magistri, | quo me cunque rapit tempestas, deferor hospes’ Hor.Ep.i 1, 14 and 15.[54]‘qui erant Athenis tum principes Stoicorum’ Cic.Ac.ii 22, 69; cf.de Or.i 11, 45.[55]Ind. Stoic. Herc. col. 52 (Schmekel, p. 16); but see Pauly-Wissowa s. v.[56]i.e. the earlier part of the first centuryB.C.[57]Diog. L. vii 34.[58]‘mihi nimis videtur submisisse temporibus se Athenodorus, nimis cito refugisse’ Sen.Dial.ix 4, i.[59]‘apud Athenodorum inveni:—tunc scito esse te omnibus cupiditatibus solutum cum eo perveneris, ut nihil deum roges, nisi quod rogare possis palam’Ep.10, 5. But it is possible that the quotations are from the younger Athenodorus.[60]Cic.Off.ii 24, 86; but some think that Cato’s friend was an earlier Antipater.[61]Plutarch,Cato minor65-67 and 69.[62]Reid,Academics, p. 2.[63]‘Diodoto quid faciam Stoico, quem a puero audivi, qui mecum vivit tot annos, qui habitat apud me, quem et admiror et diligo?’ Cic.Ac.ii 36, 115.[64]ad Att.ii 20, 6.[65]Tusc. disp.v 39, 113.[66]vii 1, 2, 24 and 28.[67]‘verba haec Hieroclis Stoici, viri sancti et gravis: ἡδονὴ τέλος, πόρνης δόγμα· οὐκ ἔστιν πρόνοια, οὐδὲ πόρνης δόγμα’ A. Gellius,N. A.ix 5, 8.[68]For a fair-minded estimate of Cicero’s services to philosophy see Reid,Academics of Cicero, pp. 10-28.[69]See next section.[70]‘de tertio [cum utile et honestum inter se pugnare videantur] nihil scripsit [Panaetius]. eum locum Posidonius persecutus. ego autem et eius librum arcessivi, et ad Athenodorum Calvum scripsi, ut ad me τὰ κεφάλαια mitteret’ Cic.ad Att.xvi 11, 4. ‘Athenodorum nihil est quod hortere; misit enim satis bellum ὑπόμνημα’ib.14, 4.[71]He was head of the Academy at Athens, where Cicero heard him in the year 79-78B.C., and was patronized by Lucullus.[72]‘eadem dicit quae Stoici’ Cic.Ac.ii 22, 69. ‘erat, si perpauca mutavisset, germanissimus Stoicus’ib.42, 132. See further J. S. Reid,Academics of Cicero, Introd. pp. 15-19, and notes toAc.ii 39, 123 and 40, 126.[73]‘Brutus tuus, auctore Aristo et Antiocho, non sentit hoc [sc. nihil esse, nisi virtutem, bonum]’Tusc. disp.v 8, 21. ‘si addubitas, ad Brutum transeamus, est enim is quoque Antiochius’ad Att.xiii 25, 3. See also below, §432.[74]‘tu nihil errabis, si paulo diligentius (ut quid sit εὐγένεια, quid ἐξοχή intelligas), Athenodorus Sandonis filius quid de his rebus dicat, attenderis’ad Fam.iii 7, 5.[75]For the identification of the writer Didymus with Areius the ‘philosophus’ of Augustus, see Diels,Proleg.pp. 80-88.[76]‘[Augustus] eruditione etiam varia repletus per Arei philosophi filiorumque eius Dionysi et Nicanoris contubernium’ Suet.Aug.89.[77]Sat.ii 6, 73-76.[78]Sen.Dial.vi 4 and 5; see below, §377.[79]‘Empedocles, an Stertinium deliret acumen’ Hor.Ep.i 12, 20; ‘insanis et tu, stultique prope omnes, | si quid Stertinius veri crepat’Sat.ii 3, 32 and 33.[80]Teuffel,Röm. Lit.250, 4.[81]‘ne me Crispini scrinia lippi | compilasse putes’ Hor.Sat.i 1, 120 and 121.[82]Teuffel, as above, 3.[83]Hor.Sat.ii 3.[84]Hor.Ep.i 1, 108.[85]‘sublimem altioremque humano fastigio [Attalum] credidi’ Sen.Ep.108, 13.[86]Sen.Ep.108, 14-16.[87]ib.110, 14-20.[88]‘Attalus Stoicus dicere solebat; malo me fortuna in castris suis quam in deliciis habeat’ib.67, 15.[89]Sen. Rhet.Suas.2, 12.[90]‘teneros tu suscipis annos | Socratico, Cornute, sinu ... tecum etenim longos memini consumere soles, | et tecum primas epulis decerpere noctes. | unum opus et requiem pariter disponimus ambo, | atque verecunda laxamus seria mensa. | ... nescio quod certe est, quod me tibi temperat, astrum’ Pers.Sat.v 36-51.[91]See above, §124.[92]Sen.Ep.108, 17.[93]ib.13-23.[94]‘sapientem esse me dico? minime’Dial.xii 5, 2; ‘multum ab homine tolerabili, nedum a perfecto, absum’Ep.57, 3; ‘ego in alto vitiorum omnium sum’Dial.vii 17, 4.[95]‘si respublica corruptior est quam ut adiuvari possit, ... non nitetur sapiens in supervacuum’ib.viii 3, 3.[96]‘in hoc me recondidi et fores clusi, ut prodesse pluribus possem. posterorum negotium ago. illis aliqua, quae possint prodesse, conscribo. salutares admonitiones litteris mando, esse illas efficaces in meis ulceribus expertus. rectum iter, quod sero cognovi et lassus errando, aliis monstro’Ep.8, 1 to 3.[97]‘cuius libros adtingere nullum pretium operae sit, quod oratio eius vulgaria videatur et protrita, res atque sententiae aut inepto inanique impetu sint aut levi et causidicali argutia, eruditio autem vernacula et plebeia’ A. Gellius,N. A.xii 2, 1.[98]Quint.Inst. Orat.x 1, 125-158.[99]‘potioribus praeferri non sinebam’ib.126.[100]‘tum autem hic solus fere in manibus adulescentium fuit’ib.125.[101]‘eandem sententiam miliens alio atque alio amictu indutam referunt’ Fronto, p. 157.[102]How capable Seneca was of continuous exposition we may gather from his excellent discussion of the ‘causes’ of Aristotle and Plato, inEpistle65: see below.[103]‘non quia mihi legem dixerim nihil contra dictum Zenonis Chrysippive committere, sed quia res ipsa patitur me ire in illorum sententiam’ Sen.Dial.viii 3, 1; ‘nostram [opinionem] accipe. nostram autem cum dico, non adligo me ad unum aliquem ex Stoicis proceribus. est et mihi censendi ius’ib.vii 3, 2.[104]‘si omnia argumenta ad obrussam coeperimus exigere, silentium indicetur; pauca enim admodum sunt sine adversario’ Sen.N. Q.iv 5, 1.[105]‘non tempero mihi, quominus omnes nostrorum ineptias proferam’ib.iv 6, 1.[106]See the notes to §177.[107]‘si hominem videris interritum periculis, intactum cupiditatibus, inter adversa felicem, in mediis tempestatibus placidum, ex superiore loco homines videntem, ex aequo deos, non subibit te eius veneratio?... non potest res tanta sine adminiculo numinis stare’Ep.41, 4 and 5.[108]See below, §209, note 112.[109]‘idem facit sapiens; nocituram potentiam vitat, hoc primum cavens, ne cavere videatur’Ep.14, 8; ‘circumspiciendum ergo nobis est, quomodo a vulgo tuti esse possimus’ib.9.[110]A. Gellius,N. A.v 1, 3 and 4.[111]Epict.Disc.iii 23, 29.[112]Stob. iii 1, 48.[113]ib.5, 21.[114]Specimens are given below, especially in ch. xv.[115]Tac.Ann.xiv 59; Henderson,Nero, p. 143.[116]Tac.Ann.xv 71.[117]Hist.iii 81.[118]‘reipublicae haud dubie intererat Vitellium vinci’ib.86.[119]See below, §447.[120]Disc.iii 15, 8;Manual29.[121]Pliny,Ep.i 10.[122]‘quid nostra memoria Euphrates, Dio, Timocrates, Athenodotus? quid horum magister Musonius? nonne summa facundia praediti, neque minus sapientiae quam eloquentiae gloria incluti extiterunt?’ Fronto,Ep. ad Aur.i 1 (Naber, p. 115).[123]SeeLeben und Werke Dion’s von Prusa, by H. von Arnim. Berlin, 1898.[124]See below, §216.[125]See the story of Epicharis in connexion with the conspiracy of Piso, in Tac.Ann.xv 57.[126]Epict.Disc.ii 12, 17 to 25.[127]‘plerosque istos, qui philosophari viderentur, philosophos esse eiuscemodi “ἄνευ τοῦ πράττειν, μέχρι τοῦ λέγειν”; id significat “factis procul, verbis tenus” A. Gellius,N. A.xvii 19, 1.[128]ib.xv 11, 4 and 5.[129]Epict.Disc.i 7, 32 and 33.[130]M. Aurelius,To himself, i 7 (Rendall’s translation).[131]To himself, v 10.[132]ib.vii 9.[133]ib.iv 3.[134]M. Aurelius,To himself, vi 10.[135]ib.vi 44.[136]See further, §§457and458.[137]M. Aurelius,To himself, xii 28.[138]ib.iv 49.[139]Epict.Disc.iii 24, 93 and 94.[140]M. Aurelius,To himself, iv 14.[141]ib.vi 24.[142]ib.ix 3.[143]ib.xi 3.[144]ib.v 33.[145]Rendall,M. Aurelius, Introd. p. cxii.[146]ib.cxv.

[1]Dill,Roman Society, p. 340.

[2]‘omnis natura habet quasi viam quandam et sectam quam sequatur’ Cic.N. D.ii 22, 57. ‘est tuae prudentiae sequi eius auctoritatem, cuius sectam atque imperium secutus es’ad Fam.xiii 4, 2. ‘The sense of the word has been obscured by a false popular etymology which has connected the word with the Latinsecare‘to cut,’ Skeat,Etymological Dictionary, p. 537.

[3]See above, §111.

[4]‘dicebat modesta Diogenes et sobria’ A. GelliusN. A.vi (vii) 14, 10.

[5]For a full account of his life and teaching see Schmekel,Philosophie der mittleren Stoa, pp. 1-9.

[6]Strabo xiv 5, 16.

[7]Ind. Stoic. Herc. col. 51.

[8]‘discipulus Antipatri Panaetius’ Cic.Div.i 3, 6.

[9]‘credamus igitur Panaetio a Platone suo dissentienti? quem omnibus locis divinum, quem sapientissimum, quem sanctissimum, quem Homerum philosophorum appellat’Tusc. disp.i 32, 79.

[10]Fin.iv 28, 79.

[11]‘tristitiam atque asperitatem fugiens Panaetius nec acerbitatem sententiarum nec disserendi spinas probavit’ib.

[12]ἦν γὰρ ἰσχυρῶς φιλοπλάτων καὶ φιλοαριστοτέλης, ἀ[λλὰ κ]αὶ παρ[ενέδ]ωκε τῶν Ζηνων[είω]ν τι δι[ὰ τὴ]ν Ἀκαδημίαν καὶ [τὸν Περίπ]ατον. Ind. Herc. col. 61, quoted by Schmekel, p. 379.

[13]‘quam vellem Panaetium nostrum nobiscum haberemus! qui cum cetera, tum haec caelestia vel studiosissime solet quaerere’ Cic.Rep.i 10, 15.

[14]‘ain’ tandem? etiam a Stoicis ista [de optima republica] tractata sunt? non sane, nisi a [Diogene Stoico] et postea a Panaetio’Leg.iii 6, 14.

[15]See below, §310, note 52.

[16]‘[accepi] Publi Africani in legatione illa nobili Panaetium unum omnino comitem fuisse’ Cic.Ac.ii 2, 5.

[17]This date is determined on circumstantial evidence by Schmekel, pp. 2, 3.

[18]‘Scylax Halicarnasseus, familiaris Panaeti, excellens in astrologia, idemque in regenda sua civitate princeps’ Cic.Div.ii 42, 88.

[19]‘omnes enim trahimur et ducimur ad cognitionis et scientiae cupidinem; in qua excellere pulchrum putamus; labi autem, errare, nescire, decipi, et malum et turpe ducimus’Off.i 6, 18; ‘cum sit is [Panaetius], qui id solum bonum iudicet, quod honestum sit, quae autem huic repugnent specie quadam utilitatis, eorum neque accessione meliorem vitam fieri, neque decessione peiorem’ib.iii 3, 12.

[20]‘quod summum bonum a Stoicis dicitur, id habet hanc, ut opinor, sententiam, cum virtute congruere semper, cetera autem, quae secundum naturam essent, ita legere, si ea virtuti non repugnarent’Off.iii 3, 13.

[21]‘Panaetius, cum ad Q. Tuberonem de dolore patiendo scriberet ... nusquam posuit non esse malum dolorem’Fin.iv 9, 23; see however below, §322, note 132.

[22]See below, ch. xiii.

[23]‘cuius [veri investigationis] studio a rebus gerendis abduci contra officium est. virtutis enim laus omnis in actione consistit; a qua tamen fit intermissio saepe, multique dantur ad studia reditus’ Cic.Off.i 6, 19.

[24]He was however a skilled grammarian; see Schmekel, p. 207.

[25]He wrote a book ‘on providence’; how far he or Posidonius is Cicero’s authority for the treatment of the subject inNat. de.ii has been much disputed; on this point see Schmekel, p. 8, n. 4.

[26]‘id de quo Panaetium addubitare dicebant, ut ad extremum omnis mundus ignesceret’ Cic.N. D.ii 46, 118.

[27]Schmekel, p. 309, and below, §211.

[28]Παναίτιος πιθανωτέραν εἶναι νομίζει καὶ μᾶλλον ἀρέσκουσαν αὑτῷ τὴν ἀϊδιότητα τοῦ κόσμου ἢ τὴν τῶν ὅλων εἰς πῦρ μεταβολήν Ar. Did. fr. 36 (Diels).

[29]Schmekel, p. 309.

[30]‘vim esse divinandi [Panaetius] dubitare se dixit’ Cic.Div.i 3, 6.

[31]He came from Apamea in Syria, but is often described as ‘of Rhodes,’ as the latter part of his life was spent there.

[32]Schmekel, pp. 9, 10.

[33]ib.p. 428.

[34]Reid,Cic. Acad.Introd. p. 5.

[35]Cic.Tusc. disp.ii 25, 61.

[36]N. D.i 44, 123; ii 34, 88.

[37]‘ecce Posidonius, ut mea fert opinio, ex his qui plurimum philosophiae contulerunt’ Sen.Ep.90, 20.

[38]See below, §195.

[39]Also thede Divinationeand the first half ofTusc. disp.i; Schmekel, p. 98, etc.

[40]‘de divinatione libros edidit ... quinque noster Posidonius’ Cic.Div.i 3, 6.

[41]‘animi vitae necessitatibus serviunt, disiunguntque se a societate divina, vinclis corporis impediti’ib.49, 110.

[42]‘deflagrationem futuram aliquando caeli atque terrarum’ib.49, 111.

[43]See §322, note 132.

[44]ὁ Ποσειδώνιος [τὸ τέλος εἶναι εἶπε] τὸ ζῆν θεωροῦντα τὴν τῶν ὅλων ἀλήθειαν καὶ τάξιν Clem.Strom.ii p. 416B(Schmekel, p. 270); see also below, §321, note 125.

[45]Schmekel, p. 62.

[46]See below, §214.

[47]Diog. L. vii 90; Schmekel, pp. 291, 292.

[48]Diog. L. vii 127.

[49]Schmekel, p. 294.

[50]See below, §352.

[51]‘plenus est sextus liber de officiis Hecatonis talium quaestionum; sitne boni viri in maxima caritate annonae familiam non alere? in utramque partem disputat, sed tamen ad extremum utilitate officium dirigit magis quam humanitate’ Cic.Off.iii 23, 89.

[52]ib.23, 90.

[53]‘nullius addictus iurare in verba magistri, | quo me cunque rapit tempestas, deferor hospes’ Hor.Ep.i 1, 14 and 15.

[54]‘qui erant Athenis tum principes Stoicorum’ Cic.Ac.ii 22, 69; cf.de Or.i 11, 45.

[55]Ind. Stoic. Herc. col. 52 (Schmekel, p. 16); but see Pauly-Wissowa s. v.

[56]i.e. the earlier part of the first centuryB.C.

[57]Diog. L. vii 34.

[58]‘mihi nimis videtur submisisse temporibus se Athenodorus, nimis cito refugisse’ Sen.Dial.ix 4, i.

[59]‘apud Athenodorum inveni:—tunc scito esse te omnibus cupiditatibus solutum cum eo perveneris, ut nihil deum roges, nisi quod rogare possis palam’Ep.10, 5. But it is possible that the quotations are from the younger Athenodorus.

[60]Cic.Off.ii 24, 86; but some think that Cato’s friend was an earlier Antipater.

[61]Plutarch,Cato minor65-67 and 69.

[62]Reid,Academics, p. 2.

[63]‘Diodoto quid faciam Stoico, quem a puero audivi, qui mecum vivit tot annos, qui habitat apud me, quem et admiror et diligo?’ Cic.Ac.ii 36, 115.

[64]ad Att.ii 20, 6.

[65]Tusc. disp.v 39, 113.

[66]vii 1, 2, 24 and 28.

[67]‘verba haec Hieroclis Stoici, viri sancti et gravis: ἡδονὴ τέλος, πόρνης δόγμα· οὐκ ἔστιν πρόνοια, οὐδὲ πόρνης δόγμα’ A. Gellius,N. A.ix 5, 8.

[68]For a fair-minded estimate of Cicero’s services to philosophy see Reid,Academics of Cicero, pp. 10-28.

[69]See next section.

[70]‘de tertio [cum utile et honestum inter se pugnare videantur] nihil scripsit [Panaetius]. eum locum Posidonius persecutus. ego autem et eius librum arcessivi, et ad Athenodorum Calvum scripsi, ut ad me τὰ κεφάλαια mitteret’ Cic.ad Att.xvi 11, 4. ‘Athenodorum nihil est quod hortere; misit enim satis bellum ὑπόμνημα’ib.14, 4.

[71]He was head of the Academy at Athens, where Cicero heard him in the year 79-78B.C., and was patronized by Lucullus.

[72]‘eadem dicit quae Stoici’ Cic.Ac.ii 22, 69. ‘erat, si perpauca mutavisset, germanissimus Stoicus’ib.42, 132. See further J. S. Reid,Academics of Cicero, Introd. pp. 15-19, and notes toAc.ii 39, 123 and 40, 126.

[73]‘Brutus tuus, auctore Aristo et Antiocho, non sentit hoc [sc. nihil esse, nisi virtutem, bonum]’Tusc. disp.v 8, 21. ‘si addubitas, ad Brutum transeamus, est enim is quoque Antiochius’ad Att.xiii 25, 3. See also below, §432.

[74]‘tu nihil errabis, si paulo diligentius (ut quid sit εὐγένεια, quid ἐξοχή intelligas), Athenodorus Sandonis filius quid de his rebus dicat, attenderis’ad Fam.iii 7, 5.

[75]For the identification of the writer Didymus with Areius the ‘philosophus’ of Augustus, see Diels,Proleg.pp. 80-88.

[76]‘[Augustus] eruditione etiam varia repletus per Arei philosophi filiorumque eius Dionysi et Nicanoris contubernium’ Suet.Aug.89.

[77]Sat.ii 6, 73-76.

[78]Sen.Dial.vi 4 and 5; see below, §377.

[79]‘Empedocles, an Stertinium deliret acumen’ Hor.Ep.i 12, 20; ‘insanis et tu, stultique prope omnes, | si quid Stertinius veri crepat’Sat.ii 3, 32 and 33.

[80]Teuffel,Röm. Lit.250, 4.

[81]‘ne me Crispini scrinia lippi | compilasse putes’ Hor.Sat.i 1, 120 and 121.

[82]Teuffel, as above, 3.

[83]Hor.Sat.ii 3.

[84]Hor.Ep.i 1, 108.

[85]‘sublimem altioremque humano fastigio [Attalum] credidi’ Sen.Ep.108, 13.

[86]Sen.Ep.108, 14-16.

[87]ib.110, 14-20.

[88]‘Attalus Stoicus dicere solebat; malo me fortuna in castris suis quam in deliciis habeat’ib.67, 15.

[89]Sen. Rhet.Suas.2, 12.

[90]‘teneros tu suscipis annos | Socratico, Cornute, sinu ... tecum etenim longos memini consumere soles, | et tecum primas epulis decerpere noctes. | unum opus et requiem pariter disponimus ambo, | atque verecunda laxamus seria mensa. | ... nescio quod certe est, quod me tibi temperat, astrum’ Pers.Sat.v 36-51.

[91]See above, §124.

[92]Sen.Ep.108, 17.

[93]ib.13-23.

[94]‘sapientem esse me dico? minime’Dial.xii 5, 2; ‘multum ab homine tolerabili, nedum a perfecto, absum’Ep.57, 3; ‘ego in alto vitiorum omnium sum’Dial.vii 17, 4.

[95]‘si respublica corruptior est quam ut adiuvari possit, ... non nitetur sapiens in supervacuum’ib.viii 3, 3.

[96]‘in hoc me recondidi et fores clusi, ut prodesse pluribus possem. posterorum negotium ago. illis aliqua, quae possint prodesse, conscribo. salutares admonitiones litteris mando, esse illas efficaces in meis ulceribus expertus. rectum iter, quod sero cognovi et lassus errando, aliis monstro’Ep.8, 1 to 3.

[97]‘cuius libros adtingere nullum pretium operae sit, quod oratio eius vulgaria videatur et protrita, res atque sententiae aut inepto inanique impetu sint aut levi et causidicali argutia, eruditio autem vernacula et plebeia’ A. Gellius,N. A.xii 2, 1.

[98]Quint.Inst. Orat.x 1, 125-158.

[99]‘potioribus praeferri non sinebam’ib.126.

[100]‘tum autem hic solus fere in manibus adulescentium fuit’ib.125.

[101]‘eandem sententiam miliens alio atque alio amictu indutam referunt’ Fronto, p. 157.

[102]How capable Seneca was of continuous exposition we may gather from his excellent discussion of the ‘causes’ of Aristotle and Plato, inEpistle65: see below.

[103]‘non quia mihi legem dixerim nihil contra dictum Zenonis Chrysippive committere, sed quia res ipsa patitur me ire in illorum sententiam’ Sen.Dial.viii 3, 1; ‘nostram [opinionem] accipe. nostram autem cum dico, non adligo me ad unum aliquem ex Stoicis proceribus. est et mihi censendi ius’ib.vii 3, 2.

[104]‘si omnia argumenta ad obrussam coeperimus exigere, silentium indicetur; pauca enim admodum sunt sine adversario’ Sen.N. Q.iv 5, 1.

[105]‘non tempero mihi, quominus omnes nostrorum ineptias proferam’ib.iv 6, 1.

[106]See the notes to §177.

[107]‘si hominem videris interritum periculis, intactum cupiditatibus, inter adversa felicem, in mediis tempestatibus placidum, ex superiore loco homines videntem, ex aequo deos, non subibit te eius veneratio?... non potest res tanta sine adminiculo numinis stare’Ep.41, 4 and 5.

[108]See below, §209, note 112.

[109]‘idem facit sapiens; nocituram potentiam vitat, hoc primum cavens, ne cavere videatur’Ep.14, 8; ‘circumspiciendum ergo nobis est, quomodo a vulgo tuti esse possimus’ib.9.

[110]A. Gellius,N. A.v 1, 3 and 4.

[111]Epict.Disc.iii 23, 29.

[112]Stob. iii 1, 48.

[113]ib.5, 21.

[114]Specimens are given below, especially in ch. xv.

[115]Tac.Ann.xiv 59; Henderson,Nero, p. 143.

[116]Tac.Ann.xv 71.

[117]Hist.iii 81.

[118]‘reipublicae haud dubie intererat Vitellium vinci’ib.86.

[119]See below, §447.

[120]Disc.iii 15, 8;Manual29.

[121]Pliny,Ep.i 10.

[122]‘quid nostra memoria Euphrates, Dio, Timocrates, Athenodotus? quid horum magister Musonius? nonne summa facundia praediti, neque minus sapientiae quam eloquentiae gloria incluti extiterunt?’ Fronto,Ep. ad Aur.i 1 (Naber, p. 115).

[123]SeeLeben und Werke Dion’s von Prusa, by H. von Arnim. Berlin, 1898.

[124]See below, §216.

[125]See the story of Epicharis in connexion with the conspiracy of Piso, in Tac.Ann.xv 57.

[126]Epict.Disc.ii 12, 17 to 25.

[127]‘plerosque istos, qui philosophari viderentur, philosophos esse eiuscemodi “ἄνευ τοῦ πράττειν, μέχρι τοῦ λέγειν”; id significat “factis procul, verbis tenus” A. Gellius,N. A.xvii 19, 1.

[128]ib.xv 11, 4 and 5.

[129]Epict.Disc.i 7, 32 and 33.

[130]M. Aurelius,To himself, i 7 (Rendall’s translation).

[131]To himself, v 10.

[132]ib.vii 9.

[133]ib.iv 3.

[134]M. Aurelius,To himself, vi 10.

[135]ib.vi 44.

[136]See further, §§457and458.

[137]M. Aurelius,To himself, xii 28.

[138]ib.iv 49.

[139]Epict.Disc.iii 24, 93 and 94.

[140]M. Aurelius,To himself, iv 14.

[141]ib.vi 24.

[142]ib.ix 3.

[143]ib.xi 3.

[144]ib.v 33.

[145]Rendall,M. Aurelius, Introd. p. cxii.

[146]ib.cxv.

Back to Index Next