Moral Letters to Lucilius
Moral Letters to Lucilius
by Seneca (Lucius Annaeus Seneca)
THE LITERARY WORK
A series of short essays in the form of letters; written in Latin between 63-65 ce.
SYNOPSIS
Seneca uses the personal letter to discuss everyday life in the early Roman Empire and to delineate his Stoic philosophy.
Events in History at the Time of the Letters
Lucius Annaeus Seneca was born in Cordova, Spain, around 3 bce, to a father who was an imperial administrator and a well-known student of rhetoric, or the art of persuasion. Since he and his father had the same three names, the two men are often referred to as Seneca the Elder and Seneca the Younger; how-ever, the son’s fame far outstripped that of the father. In his old age, Seneca the Elder collected model debates and speeches of advice for his sons, including arguments about problems in criminal or civil law cases. Educated in Rome for the law, Seneca the Younger became a prominent figure in the fledgling Roman Empire. Early on, he was attracted to Stoicism, an influential philosophical movement of his day, and went on to become one of its most eloquent advocates and practitioners. Some lingering criticism of Seneca has centered on the disparity between the tenets of Stoicism that he advocated, which often stressed rejection of material possessions, and his own vast wealth. Banished to Corsica (41-49 ce) for political reasons, Seneca enhanced his literary reputation by writing tragedies and philosophical essays during his exile. The empress Agrippina had him recalled to Rome in 49 ce to tutor her son, the young, future emperor Nero (reigned 54-68 ce). Thereafter, along with a leading official named Burrus, Seneca administered Rome. Tiring of the intrigues of public life and recognizing his own vulnerability after Burrus’ death, Seneca went into seclusion in 62 ce until he was forced to commit suicide by a decree that Emperor Nero handed down in 65. He left behind an impressive body of writings. Only his essays, letters, and tragedies have survived, though Seneca produced speeches and dialogues in his lifetime as well (see Phaedra, also in Classical Literature and Its Times). It was in the final phase of his life, while in retirement, that Seneca composed the Moral Letters. In them, he comments on various subjects—for example, the elements of Stoicism—focusing on choices about how to live and die.
Events in History at the Time of the Letters
Political intrigue and upheaval
Five emperors reigned during Seneca’s lifetime, an age of upheaval and intrigue in which his own fortunes rose and fell.
31 bce-14 ce Reign of Emperor Augustus; Seneca born in Cordova, Spain around 3 bce, and moves to Rome as a young child
THE MORALLY FLAWED RULER
A series of civil wars following Julius Caesar’s assassination left Rome morally depleted. Feeling his responsibilities as emperor keenly, Augustus embarked upon a campaign of moral improvement. For example, he passed laws regarding marriage and male-female relations. Augustus reigned for four decades (27 bce-14 ce) and was followed by a series of successors who grappled with many of their own grave character flaws. His stepson, the emperor Tiberius (14-37 ce), was suspicious of everyone, while Tiberius’ grandnephew Gaius (Caligula) is remembered for sadism during his reign (37-41 ce). After Caligula’s assassination by members of his own Praetorian Guard (household troops), Claudius, Caligula’s uncle and Augustus’ grandson, became emperor (41-54 ce). A wise and clever man, Claudius unfortunately fell prey to the schemes of Messalina, his third wife, whom he had executed, and Agrippina, his fourth wife, who murdered him. Both women plotted endlessly and had people murdered with abandon. Before she served him poisoned mushrooms, Agrippina had Claudius adopt her 12-year old son Domitius (Nero) and had Claudius recall Seneca from exile to tutor the boy. Nero became emperor (54-68 ce) upon Claudius’ demise, ruling with a brutal hand, killing even his mother and stepbrother. Incensed by his excesses and bolstered by rebellion in the western provinces, the Senate finally declared Nero a public enemy (68 ce), whereupon he took his own life. Civil war followed, marking the end of the Julio-Claudiarn dynasty. Rome entered into a chaotic period, the Year of the Four Emperors (68-69 ce) before the advent of a new family of rulers (the Flavian dynasty).
14-37 ce Reign of Emperor Tiberius; Seneca begins his political career as a public official (a quaestor, recordkeeper and financial controller of the military or civil treasury)
37-41 ce Reign of Caligula; Seneca becomes well known as an orator, a lawyer, and a writer; he rises to position of senator
41-54 ce Reign of Claudius; Seneca is recalled to tutor Nero after being exiled to Corsica for eight years (41-49 ce)
54-68 ce Reign of Nero; Seneca tries to curb Nero’s excesses; semi-retires, writes Moral Letters, receives order to take his own life
(Adapted from Motto, Seneca: Moral Epistles, p. 18)
The era was fraught with political strife, due perhaps partly to the fact that Rome never had adopted a clear rule for succession to the throne. The political instability had a direct effect on Seneca because, as a member of the Roman upper class, he chose a life of public service to the empire, rising to the position of senator under Caligula and administering the empire during the early rule of Nero. Of the five emperors who ruled during Seneca’s lifetime, all but Augustus appear to have been inept. Our ancient sources for the period write from a senatorial perspective highly critical of the early emperors. From their pages, each of Augustus’ four successors emerges as noteworthy mostly for the murders that took place during his reign, particularly among members of the upper classes. None of the ruling class was safe from plots surrounding its members. In fact, Seneca himself was condemned to death twice, once reportedly by Caligula, a sentence that was commuted when Caligula learned Seneca was sickly and wouldn’t live long anyway, and later by Claudius, who chose to send Seneca into exile rather than execute him. Thanks to these reprieves, though he suffered from asthma and other physical ailments, Seneca lived to be almost 70 years old before Nero forced him to commit suicide. His two narrow escapes with his life at least partly explain Seneca’s pre-occupation with death and suicide in his Moral Letters, which he began to write when he was well into his sixties. Because of his sickly constitution and the political instability surrounding him, death was frequently on his mind.
Seneca’s political position was always precarious. In his writings, there is evidence that he realized how fragile it was, indeed how fragile the position of any prominent public servant in the early empire was. Nevertheless, believing public service to be his duty, he embarked on a political career. Beginning as a lawyer, Seneca was soon recognized as a polished public speaker, a rhetorician. He grew skilled at persuading listeners to support his position or view. No doubt this skill helped him become a senator and then serve as one until he was exiled to Corsica (41-49 ce) on trumped-up charges. He tutored the young Nero as requested, gaining some influence over the future emperor. After Nero’s ascension in 54 ce Seneca and Burrus, leader of the Praetorian Guard, managed to control Nero’s excesses until 59 ce. Rome therefore experienced a time of stability, known as the Quinquennium Neronis (54-59 ce). However, restraining Nero’s depraved and immoral character proved increasingly difficult.
In 62 ce Burrus died, from poisoning perhaps by Nero, and the risk to Seneca’s own life increased. Seneca requested Nero’s permission to retire from public life, but the emperor refused, whereupon Seneca went into semiretirement. As Tacitus tells us, “He dismissed his entourage, and rarely visited Rome. Ill health or philosophical studies kept him at home, he said” (Tacitus, p. 329). He left Rome for a life of study, writing, and seclusion. This lasted until 65 ce, when Nero uncovered a conspiracy to murder him and to put Gaius Calpurnius Piso, a popular and wealthy orator, on the throne. The plot gave Nero the excuse he needed to wipe out suspected enemies. Seneca, his two brothers, and his nephew (the poet Lucan) accordingly lost their lives (Africa, p. 99). Accusing the Christians of participating in the conspiracy, Nero persecuted them too.
In his Annals of Imperial Rome (also in Classical Literature and Its Times), the ancient historian Tacitus movingly recites Seneca’s last moments after Nero sends word demanding Seneca’s suicide. Seneca requests but is denied the chance to leave a will, so he says the following to his assembled friends:
Being forbidden to show gratitude for your services, I leave you my one remaining possession, and my best: the pattern of my life. If you remember it, your devoted friendship will be rewarded by a name for virtuous accomplishments.… Surely nobody was unaware that Nero was cruel!… After murdering his mother and brother, it only remained for him to kill his teacher and tutor.
(Tacitus, pp. 363-364)
Teacher and philosopher to the end, Seneca offered his friends this one final piece of advice before committing suicide, a way of dying he discussed often in the Letters. He cut his arms, but the lifeblood seeped out too slowly, so he “severed the veins in his ankles and behind his knees” as well (Tacitus, p. 364). Then he drank poison, but without result since his limbs were already cold and numbed to the substance. Slaves then lowered him into a bath of warm water, and he sprinkled some on them, calling the gesture an offering to the god Jupiter (Zeus). Finally they carried Seneca into a bath of hot vapors, where the Stoic philosopher suffocated to death.
ROMAN SUICIDE AND SENECA’S SUICIDE
Directing someone to commit suicide instead of executing the person was a common occurrence in Rome. The emperor or Senate could order an accused man to take his own life The practice may stem back to a belief that a noble should not be executed by others (Motto, Seneca, p. 39). While at one time Roman generals threw themselves on their swords to commit suicide, the more common form was by slashing the wrists. Tacitus’ account suggests that Seneca modeled his suicide on that of Socrates and Cato the Younger, two men he admired greatly. In fact, when Seneca did not bleed to death, he drank hemlock, as Socrates had, to hasten the process.
From religion to philosophy
During Seneca’s lifetime, Roman state religion was still a dominant force in public life. This religion revolved around a pantheon of native and imported gods, and the empire did not require by law that the people believe exclusively in it; on the contrary, a variety of religious beliefs could be practiced simultaneously. Romans mostly practiced their various observances through rituals conducted to soothe and satisfy the gods. In large part, religious belief was a matter of observing the practices of one cult or another by performing rites and ceremonies rather than by adopting fierce beliefs or moral ways of action. When they wanted to deal with moral behavior and ethical issues, thoughtful Romans opted to join various philosophical schools. Preeminent among these were Epicureanism and Stoicism.
In general, the Roman view of philosophy was quite different from later European and American definitions, which saw it as some kind of abstract system of belief. Like the Greeks be-fore them, the Romans viewed philosophy as a system to live by, a set of values to base their lives on and to aid them in practical decisions that they had to make on a daily basis. Seneca also saw philosophy, particularly Stoic philosophy, as a set of principles to base his actions on. The Stoic philosophy permeates his Moral Letters; no matter what his subject, he incorporates Stoic thought, making it the driving force of his life.
Stoicism
Seneca received a solid education directed by his father. Tutored by leading practitioners and teachers, he studied philosophy as well as rhetoric, or the art of speaking or writing to persuade. His father, a rhetorician, favored rhetoric for Seneca’s preparation and advancement in his career, but clearly the young man had a preference for philosophy. In any event, he attributed his skill in speech and behavior to the study of these two subjects. His ability in rhetoric won him fame and wealth as a lawyer at an early age, while his philosophical views gained him recognition as a writer. Although Seneca studied all the major schools of philosophy in his day, he became a leading spokesman for Stoicism. The movement traces its roots back to Zeno of Citium (335-263 bce), who developed his own system of philosophy, establishing a school in Athens that still existed during Seneca’s lifetime. Except for a brief Greek work (“Hymn to Zeus”), the philosophy’s only surviving complete writings are by three ancient Romans: Seneca (4 bce-65 ce), Epictetus (c. 55-135 ce), and Marcus Aurelius (121-180 ce). Refining his Stoic beliefs throughout his literary career, Seneca reached the peak of expression about them in his last work, the Moral Letters. Although clearly devoted to Stoicism, he often refers to a competing philosopher, Epicurus, and another leading school of philosophy of his era—Epicureanism.
Deriving its name from the stoa (porch) in the agora (marketplace) at Athens where its members gathered, Stoicism was a philosophy embraced not only by Romans but also by many of the earlier Greeks. The Stoics taught that adherence to the wisdom achieved by the use of reason was the ultimate good. Although they developed a complex cosmology, their view on ethics has been most influential in Western history and philosophy. In fact, our word stoic—used for someone who is indifferent to the passions or unaffected by the changes in fortune in life—comes from the name given to the practitioners of this school.
Stoics believed that wisdom was the chief virtue and vice alone was evil. How did they de-fine wisdom and vice? Wisdom was living according to nature, or the divine cosmic plan; everyone had a role to play and one progressed by learning what that role was. Reason guided a person’s search for this role while helping the person subdue his or her passions. On the other hand, vice was equated with foolhardiness, which led to a dissolute life where the passions predominated. Everything but wisdom and vice was neutral or indifferent. In other words, poverty, pain, and death were not evils just as wealth, health, and life were not virtues. They were neutral, with some neutrals being preferred to others. Stoicism taught that the wise person is unaffected by poverty or riches because he or she recognizes that they do not matter. A wise man seeks to be as good as he can given the circumstances of his life, and to bear all, no matter what fortune has in store for him, even if it calls on him to sacrifice his life, as in Seneca’s case. Concerned about more than the individual, the Stoics taught that progress also involved showing regard for people with whom one shares close ties and, beyond that, for all humankind. The Stoics further believed that only a wise one, a perfectly rational person entirely free from passion, was wholly in tune with the divine cosmic plan and that few if any such people had ever existed (except for perhaps Socrates).
Originally adherents believed there were no gradations to the formula: one could only be wise or foolish. And since it is exceedingly difficult to be wise, there were a few sages, at best, and mostly foolish people, given that almost all humans fall short of perfection. However, Seneca and others believed there was a third group, those not yet wise, or virtuous, but making moral progress. Seneca never considered himself a sage. He said he was far from one, but he would have considered himself and his friend Lucilius members of this third group, because while not perfect, they were continually striving to be virtuous by shunning false judgment about what is good (for example, wealth) yet following “good” feelings such as kindness and friendship. In fact, this striving to be better is one of the main moral teachings of the Letters: Seneca is constantly pointing out the path to virtue to his friend and, also, to himself.
Though they lived in a world dominated by belief in many gods, Stoics saw a divine presence everywhere, ordering all things. Seneca called this belief “the God within us” (Seneca, Letter 41, Ad Lucilium Epistulae Morales, pp. 273-279; all excerpts that follow are from this bilingual edition). This God within us, he teaches, is manifested in the behavior of the truly good person, one who remains calm in the face of adversity. When we encounter such a person and such conduct, we feel the person is divinely inspired, that God must be touching him or her. The reason for the calm, Seneca tells us, is that in this good person is “reason brought to perfection in the soul” (Letter 41, p. 277). A human being achieves “the highest good… if he has fulfilled the good for which nature designed him at birth… to live in accordance with his own nature. But this is turned into a hard task by the general madness of mankind; we push one another into vice” (Letter 41, pp. 277-279). In spite of what the mass of humanity believes, the good person listens to this internal God because nature, fortune, or God—whatever one calls this force—controls events. Human beings have no choice but to abide by the dictates of this controlling force. But the truly free person is the one who makes a rational choice to follow these “rules of nature.” In this instance, one’s reason controls one’s passions and not the other way around.
Epicureanism
Another less popular, practical philosophical movement in Rome, one that Seneca continually mentions in the Moral Letters, is named after its founder, Epicurus (341-270 bce). Epicurus was a Greek who believed the sole goal of life was happiness through pleasure. He was convinced that a person’s aim in life is to attain pleasure and avoid pain. To determine what is moral, the person considers what brings plea-sure to his or her senses. Epicureanism seems to be a very individual, selfish philosophy. In fact, some Epicurean groups advocated cutting themselves off from other people and the state, and denounced marriage and kinship relationships. Some even valued friendship from a purely selfcentered viewpoint.
While these attitudes led a number of Romans to indulge in the rampant pursuit of pleasure, Epicurus held very different ideas regarding plea-sure and pain. First of all, he believed it was more important to avoid pain than to seek pleasure. He felt just being alive without problems was satisfactory on a physical level and that mental plea-sure was more satisfying than physical pleasure. Likewise, mental pain was more acute than physical pain. In this same vein, spiritual satisfaction makes life enjoyable for old people who have lost the capacity for intense physical pleasure. He also taught that fear of death is groundless because at death we simply cease to be; therefore, we cannot be punished in future worlds. Nevertheless, adherence to the right philosophy and belief in God are the underpinnings of a satisfying life. Although technically speaking anything is permissible, in practice Epicurus advocated an austere way of life centered on friendship and kindness and moderation of one’s appetites. Because Epicureanism accepted women and slaves as equal
SENECA, ST. PAUL, AND CHRISTIANITY
perhaps because of Seneca’s beliefs in a God within each, arson as well as a universal human brotherhood and equity among human beings, his views were seen as compatible with Christianity, Pronouncements scattered throughout his writings resemble Christian scripture. In fact, some early Christian thinkers saw his beliefs as comparable to their own. He, for example, advised viewing slaves as fellow humans when others still viewed them as property. This was a notion gaining momentum but still quite radical at the time. The new Christian religion expressed belief in a brotherhood of man and emphasized character, not the external trappings of this world. An-other similarity lay in Christian beliefs and Seneca’s statement about treating people as you would be treated. This parallel may account for the existence of some phony correspondence between Seneca and St Paul; which was actually written after their lifetimes, in the Middle Ages, Although often attached to Seneca’s Letters, the correspondence is clearly a forgery. While in reality the two men lived at the same time, there is no historical evidence that they ever met or corresponded. There is an interesting historical footnote in the fact that in 53 ce St. Paul is known to have encountered Seneca’s older brother, Gallio, the proconsul of the southern Greek province of Achaea, The Christian New Testament’s book of Acts 18:12-17 reports that the local Jewish community took Pauf to court in a case over which, as proconsul at the time, Gallio presided. Seneca’s brother decided in Paul’s favor, and the meeting was over,
to everyone else and promoted happiness and the good life as preeminent goals, some Romans frowned on the movement.
Many of the tenets of Epicureanism and Stoicism overlap. This is evident in the numerous times Seneca quotes and/or refers to Epicurus in the Letters. Although Seneca often speaks of Epicurus as a rival, it is evident that he admires much of Epicurean thought. In fact in his philosophical essay “On the Happy Life,” Seneca remarks that Epicureanism “has a bad name, is of ill repute, and yet undeservedly” (Seneca, Moral Essays, vol. 2, p. 131). But ultimately Epicureanism and Stoicism are at odds in their worldviews. The Epicurean is grounded in this world, seeking happiness or pleasure and self-contentment as primary goals. His or her focus is on the individual and denies the existence of a God concerned with human affairs. In contrast, the Stoic philosopher seeks not pleasure but adherence to reason and, consequently, freedom from slavish devotion to the passions. Believing in a God dwelling within each person, but not an afterlife, the Stoic seeks perfection by following the dictates of this God. The conviction is that these dictates are grounded in reason and the natural order, even when they call for the sacrifice of one’s health or wealth.
Roman social elements
One of the most interesting aspects of the Letters is Seneca’s commentary on social phenomena in ancient Rome. The modem reader can learn much about Roman life from Seneca’s keen observations on gladiatorial games, the baths, and slavery, for example. Perhaps even more valuable are Seneca’s conclusions regarding these activities, for he uses every opportunity to discuss what such observations teach us about how to exist in the world and how to live our lives.
The gladiatorial games exhibited in the Roman Coliseum fill him with moral outrage (Seneca, Letter 7). These spectacles staged in amphitheaters pitted armed men against each other in life-or-death contests. The men were condemned criminals, slaves, prisoners of war, or paid volunteers who fought to the death with swords, tridents, and other weapons. Sometimes women and dwarves were used as well. By Seneca’s day, these “games” had become very popular free events that were often sponsored by the emperor. Seneca was particularly offended by the gladiatorial contests—in effect, executions—in which naked pairs of condemned men flailed away at each other with different weapons. Yet his letters move beyond these executions, using them as a vehicle to discuss his real subject. After carefully describing the scene, Seneca tells us how abhorrent to everyone these activities should be, but his key lesson is about how morally dangerous it is to follow the majority. “Lay these words to heart, Lucilius,” he declares, “that you may scorn the pleasure which comes from the applause of the majority. Many men praise you; but have you any reason for being pleased with yourself, if you are a person whom the many can understand? Your good qualities should face inwards” (Letter 7, p. 37).
There are many such lessons in the Letters, moral teachings that surface while discussing current customs, from the public baths to slavery. The Roman baths (Letter 56) were public bathing facilities provided by the emperors for the people. Often quite elaborate social gathering places, they could consist of a complex of buildings with many functions—changing rooms, hot and cold pools for bathing, a swimming pool, gymnasium, and exercise facilities. In Seneca’s letter, he describes the goings-on in the baths over which he lives, as well as the continual noise associated with these activities, but his central point is that external noises ought not to disrupt the study of a man at peace with him-self. In his letter on slavery (Letter 47), he turns to the subject of human interrelations. Slavery was a mainstay of the Roman Empire during Seneca’s day. While population counts differ, one source estimates 5 million free inhabitants and 2-3 million slaves in Italy in 14 ce, totals that show how pervasive slavery was (Adkins and Adkins, p. 341). Slaves often came from being prisoners of war or children of slaves, and they were generally of the same race as their owners, although from foreign lands. Yet many of the middle-and upper-class Romans who kept slaves regarded them as mere property, as items to be bought, used, and sold. In keeping with this reality, Seneca’s letter on slavery centers not on abolishing the practice of it (he him-self owned slaves), but on treating one’s slaves humanely. He, like the rest of Rome, accepts slavery as a fact of life. Romans owned slaves. Slave labor, to a large degree, kept their empire running and made it possible for a well-to-do few to be supported by the unfortunate many. Seneca’s main concern is for the compassionate treatment of one’s slaves, not as inhuman pieces of property but as fellow human beings.
The Letters in Focus
Contents summary
The Moral Letters consist of 124 letters from Seneca to his friend Lucilius, an administrator in Sicily at the time. It is unknown whether Lucilius was a historical person, a pseudonym, or a contrived addressee. Whether or not he wrote the Moral Letters to an actual friend, Seneca intended them for wider circulation. They are in fact short essays posing as letters and ranging from under one page (Letter 28) to 18 pages in length (Letter 90). Their titles are the invention of modern editors, not Seneca. While Seneca advises his friend about moral and ethical issues in the letters, they often begin with comments about everyday activities, such as the hard-ships of travel (Letter 57). Chief among Seneca’s overall concerns is how to achieve wisdom and, therefore, virtue. In his view, this is the key to living the good life uninfluenced by one’s surroundings. Prominent among his topics are at-tempts to answer questions such as, What is the good life? How should we choose to live our lives? What has meaning? Can we be self-sufficient? What is the nature of friendship?
Throughout the letters, Seneca quotes famous authors and then discusses their words. The Greek poet Homer, the Roman poet Virgil, and, oddly enough, his fellow philosopher and competitor Epicurus seem to be his favorites. Every letter begins “Greetings from Seneca to his friend Lucilius” and ends with a final “Farewell.” As time passed, Seneca gave up offering Lucilius a “thought for today” in each letter, which he had promised him early in the correspondence. Many of these pithy sayings come from Epicurus, such as, “Whoever does not regard what he has as most ample wealth, is unhappy, though he be master of the whole world” or “The fool with all his other faults, has this also,—he is always getting ready to live” (Letter 13, p. 83). Up to about Letter 30, many of the missives center on such a wise saying, or at the very least it serves as a kind of gem to justify the existence of the letter.
A summary of three letters illuminates the whole series, since each letter aims at instructing Lucilius, Seneca—and the reader—on how to live the good life.
Letter 3
“On True and False Friendship.” In this short letter Seneca discusses the nature of friendship, a subject of great importance to the Stoics because their belief in the brotherhood of humanity led to great value being placed on personal friendships. Seneca begins his letter by discussing the difference between polite usage of the term friend, on the one hand, and a true friend-ship, on the other hand. The advice he offers his friend Lucilius is to choose friends carefully but, once a friend has been chosen, to trust that person implicitly: “Indeed I would have you discuss everything with a friend”; once someone becomes a friend, “welcome him with all your heart and soul” (Letter 3, p. 11). Some people confide in everyone and some in no one, but Seneca sees both positions as extreme, for we should share everything with a few intimate friends. This view is based on the Stoic notion that friends share mutual interests: what concerns my friend concerns me. The letter’s moral lesson trumpets the importance of friendship in a productive life.
Letter 12
“On Old Age.” Narratively speaking, not much takes place in Seneca’s letter on old age. Seneca begins with a personal anecdote before
A SAMPLE OF SENECA’S TEACHINGS
“Virtue alone affords everlasting and peace-giving joy”
(Letter 27, “On the Good which Abides,” p, 195)
“The place where one lives, however, can contribute tittle to-wards tranquility; it is the mind which must make everything agreeable to itself”
(Letter 55, “On Vatia’s Villa,” p. 371)
“The only harbor safe from the seething storms of this life is scorn of the future, a firm stand, a readiness to receive Fortune’s missiles full in the breast, neither skulking or turning the back. ”
(Letter 104, “On Care of Health and Peace of Mind,” p. 203)
“For nature does not bestow virtue; it is an art to become good.”
(Letter 90, “On the Part Played by Philosophy in the Progress of Man” p. 429)
“It is with life as it is with a play,—it matters not how long the action is spun out, but how good the acting is.”
(Letter 77, “On Taking One’s Own Life,” p, 181)
“To have whatever he wishes is in no man’s power; it is in his power not to wish for what he has not, but cheerfully to employ what cornes to him”
(Letter 123, “On the Conflict between Pleasure and Virtue,” p, 425)
meditating on the larger meaning of growing old. He has been visiting his country home just outside Rome and is surprised to see it dilapidated, which the caretaker explains is due to the building’s age. Seneca reflects on how he built the house himself. This and several similar events during his stay cause him to realize that he, too, is old. But old age is nothing to recoil from; we should relish old age. He goes on to observe that each of us should contemplate every day as our last because, young or old, we can’t tell what Fortuna (fortune) has in store for us. However, if we live to the morrow we should happily accept that. Next, he observes that life is divided into parts—circles, each larger one encompassing a smaller circle. Then, after a historical anecdote about a friend (Pacuvius) who celebrates his own funeral every day because he knows he may die any day in a hostile land, Seneca quotes lines from the Aeneid (also in Classical Literature and Its Times), “I have lived; the course which Fortune set for me is finished” (Letter 12, p. 71). These stories seem to illustrate the truth of living every day as fully and honorably as possible: “And if God is pleased to grant another day, we should welcome it with glad hearts” (Letter 12, p. 71). He ends with the pithy quotation he promised Lucilius in each letter (this one attributed to Epicurus): “It is wrong to live under constraint; but no man is constrained to live under constraint” (Letter 12, p. 59).
Letter 47
“On Master and Slave.” In this letter Seneca offers an opinion on slavery that is grounded in Stoic thought: all people are created equal. However, Seneca’s view was in the minority; even some Stoics would have disagreed. While they espoused a brotherhood of humanity, many of them had not yet extended this idea to everyone, including slaves. Certainly the majority of the upper class would not have accepted the view that slaves belonged to this brotherhood, given the common notion of them as just property. Abolition, it should be noted, was never the issue. Most members of the upper class, whether Stoic or not, owned slaves and accepted the practice. Instead, the issue was whether to conceive of one’s slaves as human beings or as mere merchandise. Seneca never advocates eliminating slavery; rather he stresses treating slaves well. People should do so, he says, because we are all equals and no one ever knows when he or she might become a slave. The only thing that separates humans is their character, not the external trappings of their lives. Consequently every human being should treat every other human being with courtesy and respect, no matter what the difference between their stations. In a statement fairly close to the Golden Rule, Seneca admonishes, “But this is the kernel of my advice: Treat your inferiors as you would be treated by your betters” (Letter 47, p. 307).
In this letter, as elsewhere, Seneca uses an existing social institution (slavery) as a vehicle to discuss a person’s character and how one ought to live on a daily basis. Seneca’s interest in slavery leads to a larger consideration; he ruminates on both how people should value character, not social station, and how fortune controls us all. When commenting on the treatment of slaves, he proposes “to value them according to their character, not according to their duties. Each man acquires his character for himself, but accident assigns his duties” (Letter 47, p. 309). Of course, this advice is at the very core of Stoicism, which views one’s character as created, while one’s station in life is an accident: “So he is doubly a fool who values a man from his clothes or his rank, which is indeed only a robe that clothes us” (Letter 47, p. 311).
Roman rhetoric and the Letters
Roman writers studied rhetoric from an early age. They knew the five aspects of rhetoric well: invention, arrangement, style, memory, and delivery. The anonymous Latin text Rhetorica ad Herennium, written around 84 bce, is the first text to discuss all five aspects and provides a view of what scholars have termed the “Roman rhetorical tradition,” which existed for several hundred years. The text discusses the aspects with particular emphasis on style, describing 64 figures of speech a rhetorician might use (antithesis, metaphor, onomatopoeia, etc.). Seneca, who was strongly influenced by this rhetorical tradition, showed particular concern for style, as indicated by his Letters.
In the Letters Seneca’s style is succinct and expressed in everyday language. Often he adopts a chatty, informal tone, whether the topic is crowds (Letter 7) or the attributes of the soul (Letter 113). Despite their casual style, the letters always employ rhetorical devices—sententia (epigrams), anaphora (repeating the same word at the beginning of a succeeding phrase or sentence), and repetitions of the same thought in seemingly endless variations. Seneca also worked tirelessly on the rhythms of Latin prose. These devices come together in Letter 12, on old age, and in Letter 34, when Seneca praises Lucilius for learning his lessons on life well:
Fruits are most welcome when almost over; youth is most charming at its close; the last drink delights the toper—the glass which souses him and puts the finishing touch on his drunkenness.
(Letter 12, p. 67)
If the farmer is pleased when his tree develops so that it bears fruit, if the shepherd takes pleasure in the increase of his flocks, if every man regards his pupil as though he discerned in him his early manhood,—what, then, do you think are the feelings of those who have trained a mind and moulded a young idea, when they see it suddenly grown to maturity?
(Letter 34, p. 242)
Both examples include an odd juxtaposition of several epigrams that reveal the same thoughts but use different images. In the first example, the epigrams are joined through parallel structure; the second example joins them by the repetition of if. What is not apparent in either ex-ample is Seneca’s care with prose rhythms and cadences: “It was characteristic of Greek and Latin formal prose to be self-consciously rhythmical, and the effective use of prose-rhythm was seriously discussed by rhetorical theorists” (Costa in Seneca, 17 Letters, p. 4). Because Seneca and other Silver Age (14-180 bce) writers stressed style and rhythm so much, their work has been criticized both by their contemporaries and later critics as sacrificing substance to form.
Sources
The Letters are really a continuation of a classical tradition of introspection and meditation on the meaning of life. Plato, in his Apology (also in Classical Literature and Its Times), has Socrates tell the Athenian jury at his trial, “The unexamined life is not worth living” (Plato, pp. 71-72). Many sages after Socrates spoke and wrote about the profound importance of this concept. In the final analysis, the subject of Seneca’s Letters is living with heightened awareness.
There is very little that is new in Seneca, but he gives existing ideas brilliant shape. For example, he certainly did not originate the Golden Rule (treat others as you would have them treat you in the same situation); however, he states a similar rule in his letters in elegant fashion. An eclectic work, the Letters borrows from Homer, Virgil, Epicurus, and other thinkers known to educated Romans. Consequently the Letters contain much that Seneca’s fellow Romans would have found familiar; his great talent is to state the familiar in stunning language.
The epistolary sequence, the form of a series of letters, was not new to the Romans: there was already an existing tradition in the genre. Many people had written and published such a sequence, most notably Cicero (Letters to Atticus and others) and Horace (verse epistles). Demetrius even discussed it as an important form in his On Style. However, Seneca’s series was unusual. Many cite his Letters as the beginning of a new form—the literary essay—because his sequence was different from any that had preceded it. Other epistolary sequences were either formal and serious, or they were informal but mundane. Seneca’s Letters broke new ground by being informal yet full of meditative speculation, by exploring one serious subject or another in a conversational tone. This new form of literary essay was an important genre for future writers such as Michel Montaigne of France and Francis Bacon of England. Beginning with Bacon, many essayists have proclaimed their indebtedness to Seneca’s Letters.
Reception and impact
Seneca was often criticized by people in his own and in later ages. They complained about his style and his life. In the first instance, the criticism centers on his seeming emphasis on form over substance. Caligula, for example, faulted his work for not being sufficiently unified and denounced him as a “mere textbook orator” (Caligula in Suetonius, p. 180). Quintilian, a teacher of rhetoric, took Seneca to task for trying too hard for epigrammatic brevity. Ever since these early reviews, critics have continued to discuss the relationship between form and content in Seneca’s writings.
In attacking Seneca the man, critics of his own era focused on the disparity between what he espoused and how he himself lived. Seneca was tutor and advisor to one of the most immoral and depraved of Roman emperors—Nero. For his critics, this relationship tainted him. Furthermore, while Seneca preached that wealth was immaterial and one’s station in life did not matter, his critics pointed out that he was the equivalent of a millionaire and lent money to others for a profit. They cited his vast estates, his income from vineyards, and his beautiful gardens superior to the emperor’s as evidence that he was a hypocrite. Such criticisms have dogged his work to this day.
But other more approving voices have countered these critics by focusing on his works. What does it matter, they say, if Seneca was rich or curried favor with Nero? The important Seneca is the persona created in the Letters, a man who is mortal and vulnerable like the rest of us, who makes mistakes daily but wrestles with life to become a better man and live honorably. Herein lies Seneca’s achievement and the importance of his Moral Letters.
—Larry S. Ferrario
For More Information
Adkins, Lesley, and Roy A. Adkins. Handbook to Life in Ancient Rome. New York: Facts on File, 1994.
Africa, Thomas W. Rome of the Caesars. New York: John Wiley, 1965.
Grant, Michael. The World of Rome. Cleveland: World Publishing, 1960.
Hoderich, Ted, ed. The Oxford Companion to Philosophy. New York: Oxford University Press, 1995.
Motto, Anna Lydia. Seneca. New York: Twayne, 1973.
_____. Seneca: Moral Epistles. Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1985.
Plato. The Last Days of Socrates. London: Penguin, 1980.
Seneca, Lucius Anneaeus. Ad Lucilium Epistulae Morales [Moral Letters to Lucilius]. 3 vols. Trans. Richard M. Gummere. London: William Heinemann, 1961.
_____. Letters from a Stoic. Trans. Robin Campbell. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1987.
_____. Moral Essays. Vol. 2. Trans. John W. Basore. London: William Heinemann, 1958.
_____. 17 Letters. Trans. C. D. N. Costa. England: Aris & Phillips, 1988.
Sorenson, Villy. Seneca: The Humanist at the Court of Nero. Trans. W. Glyn Jons. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984.
Suetonius. The Twelve Caesars. Trans. Robert Graves. New York: Penguin, 1989.
Tacitus. The Annals of Imperial Rome. Trans. Michael Grant. Baltimore: Penguin, 1966.