Member-only story
Stoicism and Skepticism: when Seneca mentions Cicero — Part I
I have been practicing Stoicism for seven years now. And recently I developed a keen interest in Skepticism, particularly of the kind articulated by the Roman statesman and philosopher Marcus Tullius Cicero (106–43 BCE). So the other day it occurred to me: does Seneca (who lived from 4 BCE to 65 CE) ever mention Cicero? He does, many times, though sometimes admiringly and at other times critically. As it should be.
What follows are some highlights, with a little commentary of my own. The idea is to explore how Seneca, a major exponent of Stoicism who nevertheless considered himself an independent thinker open to borrow from other philosophies (“not as a deserter, but as a scout,” Letter II.5) regarded Cicero, whose allegiance was to a different school but who was nevertheless well disposed toward the Stoics. Hopefully, we’ll learn something valuable from these two giants of the Roman world.
Seneca mentions Cicero so frequently that I’m splitting my commentary into two posts. In the current essay I will focus mostly on the Letters to Lucilius, as well as on one passage in the Letter of Consolation to Marcia. Let’s begin.
“If Marcus Cicero had fallen at the time when he avoided those daggers which Catiline aimed equally at him and at his country, he might have died as the savior of the commonwealth which he had set free: if his death had even followed upon that of his daughter, he might have died happy. He would not then have seen swords drawn for the slaughter of Roman citizens, the goods of the murdered divided among the murderers, that men might pay from their own purse the price of their own blood, the public auction of the consul’s spoil in the civil war, the public letting out of murder to be done, brigandage, war, pillage, hosts of Catilines.” (To Marcia, on Consolation, XX)
Seneca here is writing to his friend Marcia, who had lost an adult son a few years earlier and was incapable of overcoming her grief. As part of his attempt at persuading Marcia that she needs to move on, Seneca mentions a number of notable Romans who would have been happier had they died earlier, implying that her son might actually have lived a worse life had he survived. (We don’t know whether Marcia found this particular argument convincing.) One example brought up…
