MASTER NEGA TIVE NO. 92-81151 MICROFILMED 1993 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES/NEW YORK as part of the "Foundations of Western Civilization Preservation Project" Funded by the NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE HUMANITIES Reproductions may not be made without permission from Columbia University Library COPYRIGHT STATEMENT The copyright law of the United States - Title 17, United States Code - concerns the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. archives are a reproductio m^k Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and uthcrized to furnish a photocopy or other One ot these specified conditions is that the photocopy or other reproduction is not to be "used ^or any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research ? user makes a request for, or later uses, a photoccpv or reproduction for purposes ir excess of "fair use, tnat user may be liable for p /right infringement. This institution reserves the right to refuse to accept a copy order if, in its judgement, fulfillment of the order would invcf'-".^ -;-:M;-i^-or n^ '^^X' ""-^-^DV-'Ulh: :JW. AUTHOR: MONDS, THOMAS T LEY T 0^wr "« 1W m -tSi^ I n STRE THE ELDER SE TED CA PLACE: LTIMORE D A TE : 896] COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES PRESERVATION DEPARTMENT Master Negative # BIBLIOGRAPHIC MICROFORM TARGET Original Material as Filmed - Existing Bibliographic Record 87S05 FS ■ n Simonds, Thomas Stanley, 1862- Tho themes treated by the elder Seneca; dis^er- ! tation... by Thomas Stanley Simonds, BaltimoJ^e , Friedenwald , ^1896] 100 p. 23|- cm. Biblio(praphy, p. 98-100. Thesis (Ph.D.)» Johns Hopkins university, 1896 Restrictions on Use: 384nft7 FILM SIZE: ^ t^ ;?7 TECHNICAL MICROFORM DATA //a REDUCTION RATIO: IMAGE PLACEMENT: lA (UA^ IB IIB _ DATE FILMED:___^-j^3J. INITIALS_^l^/.l HLMEDBY: RESEARCH PUBLICATIONS. INC WOODBRIDGE. CT c V Association for Information and Image Management 1100 Wayne Avenue, Suite 1100 Silver Spring, Maryland 20910 301/587-8202 Centimeter 12 3 4 5 iiiiliniliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiilii UJ 6 7 8 iiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiilii 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 mm iiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiii rrr TTT Inches 1 1.0 I.I 1.25 Li^ 128 2.5 yo "' III" 1^ l£ 2.2 U 1^ ■** 140 2.0 u 1- ^ 1.8 1.4 1.6 IT I MPNUFflCTURED TO fillM STRNDPRDS BY APPLIED IMAGE, INC. 01 (li *d (/» » r 'm ■i • - ffl The Themes Treated by the Elder Seneca 8?Se5 TS ©olumbiu ^luiucvsitiT in the CCitvj of IJlcxu ^lovU XibvavM • GIVEN BY DISSERTATION Presented for the Degree of Ph. D., Johns Hopkins University June, 1896 BY THOMAS STANLEY SIMONDS ZU ^or6 (gafttmore (prcee THE FRIEDENWALD CO. BALTIMORE, MD. m 1I r The Themes Treated by the Elder SeftexJa^ : u ::- ••• i r • • • • • • •- • • * • '0 • • • • « DISSERTATION Presented for the Degree of Ph. D., Johns Hopkins University June, 1896 BY THOMAS STANLEY SIMONDS Z^t Bov^ (gafttmore (pttetf THE FRIEDENWALD CO. BALTIMORE, MD. CONTENTS. t • • I • • • « • • • • • • • •• • - • • • • • • • • • • • » * • • . • • \ U3 CO J \ \ '^ PART I. i iciacc ,, ,. ,, ..,.,,,,., I. — Rhetoric in general 1. Evolution of the late rhetoric a. Asian schools b. Causes of the decline of Greek oratory 2. Political and social conditions favoring the evolution of rhetoric at Rome a. Oratory among the Romans b. Decay of oratory at Rome II. — The Roman rhetoricians 1 . Their position in the new fabric of the state 2. Their method of instruction a. Various kinds of declamations in the imperial period. - . . b. Character of the declamations of the imperial period. . . . c. Influence of rhetoric on other branches of literature 3. The character and attainments of the rhetoricians PAGB s 7-14 7 8 8-9 9 9-12 12-14 15-3S 15-17 17-20 21-22 23-33 33-35 35-38 PART II. I. — Seneca the Elder 39-52 1. His life 39-42 2. His character 42-44 3. His writings 44-47 4. Value of his rhetorical wriciugs 47-50 5. His attitude toward rhetoric and rhetoricians 5C-52 II. — MSS. and editions of his rhetorical writings 53-5^ '• M^^ 53-55 55-56 PART III. Editions I. — The sources of the Suasoriae and Controversiae 57-68 II. — Classification of the subjects of the Suasoriae and Controversiae 68-70 III. — Parallels of the subjects discussed in the Controversiae of Se- neca, the Declamations of the pseudo-Quintilian, and Cal- purnius Flaccus 71-81 IV. — The legal aspects of the Controversiae 82-98 Bibliography 98-100 ^ O^^ 277528 I i !•• > \ 'V PREFACE. The writings of Seneca the Elder, as well as the declamations preserved under the names of Quintilian and Calpurnius Flaccus, mtroduce us to a peculiar and characteristic phase of mental and literary activity. This activity has neither the charm of youth nor the repose of maturity, but is rather that of degeneration and decay. Antique mental life is presented in these writings as it verged on its second childhood, and it will not be without interest to sketch briefly on the basis of Seneca's writings this phase of classical literature, to state its causes and, as far as may be, to trace to their sources the examples of it which remain. T \ / \ <. ^ 1 ' > > • I • • > > t t • • * , • * , • • » t , ^ ' . • It • » • • • • I » » » • » • • • » ■ • , J » PART I. I. — Rhetoric in general. I. Evolution of the late rhetoric. Of all the species of Roman literature none traces its origin to Greece more directly than rhetoric, and it will not therefore be withnnt advantage to consider briefly rhetoric as distinguished from the old orntory among the Greeks. It was Isocrates who gave to Greek eloquence its finish and pc]i>ii ami. what is perhaps of greater importance, iniused into it an ethical element. It attained its height in Demosthenes. Arisluiic- HI Ins Rhetoric gave it a scientific basis. But very early there manifested itself in oratory a tendency to go astray, which provoked thu censure o{ Isocrates," and the sharp attacks of Plato.' Its decline was steady. After the downfall of Athenian freedom scarcely one great orator can be mentioned. Signs of deca\- or at least of a lack ol productiveness are already shown ill Dinarchus, who was an imitator.' The style also became lax and weak.' In subjugated Athens there was no longer a field for oratorv, which accordingly emigrated to the free and fiourishing cities of Asia-Minor. There it exhibited great activity but in a dreadhilly artificial and distorted manner. We refer to the so-called Asian style. ' ('f. Blass, Dte ■^rieihiscJic Bendsaynkcit, p. 7S sq.; Geschichtc dcr attiscJien F't rcdsarnknt ii, i>. 41 ; Spengel, Ueber das Stiidnivi dc7- Rhetorik ba den Alt 01, p. 8. - Cf. 10 (Hel.) I scj.; i i (Busir.) 9. 49. ' Cf. Phaedr. 267 A scj. ^Cf. Dionysius Wi^Wc^.xwTi^'i.w'i, Dc Di7iarcho judiciufti c. 5 : ". . .wiiyv a77h Kill -'II A>/ii:)n\'if I'/Kov \'(if)nK7/]i)()r. or nd? inra euiu?/aar(}\ ''^ Blass, Di<^ griech. lu-ytds., p. 15; Susemihl, Geschichte der griechischen Litteratur in dcr Alexandrinerzeit, 1S92, ii, p. 461. •'("f. Cicero, De oratore ii, 23, 95 : p • ••• . ••» who lived :tbf)^K.25o,U..G,Ais.-?^i*rded as the founder ur at any rate the torei)t*n<;pr-sei>ta^.;v ejoi; %<« A:.ian school/ Hegesias's diction was nuiikvU Uy a. ^tdying after metaphors and n-juies, an indulgence In jrJr^fjslrci- p^n^ and puerile witticisms, and by a hick of di-nity and sincere feeling. In his attempt to imitate the simple periodic structure of Lysias, he minced evervth;ng into short sentences to uh;ch he added the frequeiu use of hyperbaton.- It n:av be said in general that the Asinn stvlc is distinguished from the old Attic by its affectation, tnigaliv of verbal ornament, aiul inanity of thought.* b. CciHses of the decline of Greek oraiory.—W'ha Seneca says m reterence to R )m.in eloquence is applicable t.> tlu- Gn, ian also and to human achievement in general: " fato (piodnn cuius maligna perpetiiaque m rebus (.mnibiis lex est, ut ad siiniminn perducta rursus ad mfunum velocius (iuideni (juam ascender.mt, ^'•f. mass Dij griech, Bereds., p. 25; Susemihl, Gesch. der griech, Liftcrat. ii, pp. 463 sq. Cf. Strabo xiv, 64S : '' avtSpeq tV tyevoirro yvupifiot Md'i'vrfTec 'Hy^a/af re 6 pr/Tup, bg 7)p^e fidliara rov 'Ac^avov 7.tyofikvov l^if^jov 6inil>^e!par rb Ka^earijc l^og Tb 'Arr/Ao^ . . . - ; Blass. D/, gr:ec/i. Bcreds.. pp. 5. 16, following Dion. Ii.,1. De ant,;, orrj. ;-;,. i. dates the Asian >chu..I „oi tr..in Ilcgesia.. l-ut iV )J the death of AIexan tenerain ille quoquc iniitari !.v>iain vult . . . saltat incidens particulas. Et is .juide.n non nnnu> >enteP,tus peccat quam verbis, ut non quaeret (lueui a;. pellet nieptiuu. qui iliuni ro^. i (pii illo vitio, (juoii ah Heuoia noverit"; loid. Ixix, _-,.): '-Sunt etian fluxit infrin<;endis concideiuiisnu e nunicns in ciuoddani -enus abitu'ttiin incidant versicuU.rum simillin.um '"; Dion. Hal., /V .o,^:rosU,,n. rn^cmm c. xviii, who quotes from the History of Hegesias to i;iu>uate hisstvle; ,{. also Blass, Die ^ncch. BercdsamkeH, pp. 31 .q. and Su^ennhi, G.sJi:c':Ud,r griech. Litt., p. 467. '•For a more detailed description of the Asian style compare (^icer.-, Brutus xcv, who distinguishes two divisions r,f it. the sententious and the verbose, and mentions their principal representatives, cf. also .'•;,/. xir, 51. For the relation of the Asian scho' Freeman, J/istory oj Federal Cover nmcut i, p. 221 ; cf. Seneca, Braef. Controv. i, 8 sq. '■"^Jebb, The Attn Orators ii, p. 446. // \ lO THE TIIK-MES TRI'.ATf.U iiV THE ELDER bENECA. THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER FEXEC.\. II period took no interest in theories and teehnirn] treatises on oratory. Even the writing down ot spt'cchc'S atttr deli\t r\ was rarely if ever resorted to.' ' The theory and techniqnc ol doqutnce do not begin to receive attention among the Romans ht lore the middle of the second century 1^>. C. in const qutnce of the great oratorical activity of that period, all the wa^rks ol which seem to be rhetorically colored. This development took place nnchr the influence of Greece. Rhetoric was, as it were, the inheritance of the Greek nation, and when her own independeiua- was at an tnd, it was to Rome that her children carried tlieir talents.'' Many Romans received lessons from Greek rhetoriciari-, and i>t first the Greek language was predominantly employed in ihetoru^il exer- cises.'" There was at first a strong opj)os;ti(ai at Rome to Greek rhetoric and rhetoricians, led by Cato and tho>e- like-minded to him f' but after the Gracchi, who were more Hellenic in their tastes, Greek rhetorical art began to tx^rcise a cor.sidc rable in- fluence on Roman oratory, and belore loc H. C. llurid Asiamsm had its admirers at Rome.'" It was in fact in its As\an form that Greek rhetoric became the teacher ot tlie Roman>. but it was ra)t until about 90 B. C. that L. I^lotius Galliis and otlu is otablished a school and taught the principles of rhetoric m Latin. *'•* Accoi cl- ing to Blass,- L.Crassus ( 140-91 H. C.^ and M. .Antonins i 143-S7 B. C.) were the first Roman orators who were intluenced by lleile- '■' Cf. Seneca, /'/"(/f/', re;//;-. 1,9: *' ille enim vir (■>€. Cnto) qniri nit i* orator est . . . 7'ir boi:H< dicetui, f'i )itus.'^ " Cf. Blass, Die griec/usc/w Jycredsarnktif, \^Y>. 104 f., 115; Marx, Chauvi- iiismiis ic?idSihu!ri'fo!-fn^ p. 13. '•'• Cf. Cicero, Jhiitus Lxxxix. 310: " ConuuetitaLar declan^itans . . . ; idque faciebani iiuiltuiii ttiam Latine, secn, K.^niiscJif Ge- schichte ii, p. 246; Marx, op. at., p. 12. 1" Ct. Blass, i'ud.; Jfbb, T/ie Attn- (hiit.'rs ii, \^\ 446 sq. i»Cf. Rohde, /Jf? i^iuchischc R.^nuiiiy p. 28S. I'' Cf. Quintilian, Instit. Or.it.u, 4.42: "Latinos vero dicendi praecep- tores extremis L. Crassi tcniporil>us coepisse Cicero auctor est; quorum insignis maxime Plotius fuit"; Seneca, Praej. Conho:. ii, 5; Suetonius, De cLir. rhet. 2 ; Cicero, De orat. iii, 24, 93, cf. also Marx, Cu !urifi:s»:us loui Schiilreforui, p. 15 ; Cucheval, Hist, de IWlc.;. ro)/:. 1, p. zi.\. "•^^ Die griech. F^ereds., p. 120. "-i^ t X J K } \ ■ nism. M. .Antonins was also the first after Cato to write a rhetori- cal treatise in Latm.' The most important work on the subject is the treatise Ad Hercmiiiun, ascrit)ed to Cornificius and probably written some years previous to 80 B. C. It is of the same char- a'^ter as the C^reek manual of Anaximenes,*" only brought up to date and adapted to the more practical requirements of Roman oratorv.'*'' Latin rhetoric indeed always remained essentially a Greek forni of mental discipline, and as such became eyentually a great and lasting force for the ruin of Latin literature.*' We wit- ness at Rome a repetition of the process which took place in Greece. The different styles or rather manners ol oratory arose in succession at Rome; the pure Asian is represented by Quintus riortensms; the Atlicizing or eclectic style, which was developed in tile Rhodian school, by M. Tullius Cicero,'" and the pure Attic style, upheld a.m ong the Greeks by Dionysius Halicarnassus, by C. Licinius Calvus.'** The victory of the old Attic oratory over Asianism at Rome and in Greece, and the other provinces as well, dates from about 60 B. C, but even from the middle of the second century a reaction had set in against this unwdiolesome and unnatural outgrowth. A struL^gle against it arose in Pergamum especially.'^' He:m.igoras of Temnos also and his school about the middle of the second century B. C, subtle and scholastic as his system was, " did good service by reviving the conception of oratory not as a knack but as an art, and so preparing men once '-' Ct. (J'nntilian, Inst. Orat. iii, i, 19; Cicero, Z-^/z/z/j- xliv, 163 ; Dc orat. I, 21, 94 ; 4S, 20S. -- It is also called Rhetor, ad Alexandrian and was ascribed to Aristotle, but it is now generally agreed that it is a work of Anaximenes of Lamp- sacus ; Susemihl alone disputes this, and thinks it originated as a connect- ing link between the Isocratean and Ilermagorean methods at the begin- ning or iu the middle of the third century B. C. -^Cf. Spengel, Ueber das Siudiuni der RJietorik^ p. 102, and in Rheinisch. Museiitn, xviii (1S63), ]). 487. '^K,'f. Marx, CJiauiinisiniis n. Sc/iulref., pp. 17 . 18. '■^^ Cf. Dion. Hal., De Din.jud. c. S; Cicero, Orator viii, 25 ; Briitiis xiii, 51 : " Khodii saniores et Atticorum similiores"; Quint., Inst. Orat. xii, 10, 18 : " Genus Rhodium quod velut medium esse"; comp. also Rohde, Der i^rieeh. Roman, p. 289; Susemihl, Gesch. der griech. Litt. ii, p. 489; Wes- termann, Gesehichte der Reredsavikeit i, p. 176 § 81, and Blass, Die griech. Beredsamkeit, ]). 4 .89, who, however, thinks that the school of Rhodes did not deserve the credit accorded to it. -^ For a characterization of him comp. Seneca, Controv, vii, 4, 6 sq. •' Cf. Susemihl, Geseh. der grieeh. Litt. ii, p. 482 sq. f I ) 12 Tin-: T I [ K .\ 1 1£ s T R I-: a t i- d v. y Tin-: ELDER SENECA. more to discern the true artists and the lalse."-'- lUit the decisive battle acrainst Asianism was foui>ht and won at Roiiu- especially throucrh the acrency of Apollqdorus of Peroanmni, loo-iS ]]. C, the teacher of Augustus.-' The principal cause i..r the defeat of Asianism is probably the fact that its pompous and inane jin^linjr could not satisfy the o-reat and practical needs of Roir.an i)uhlic Hie, and therefore the sturdy Roman orators abandon(cl their liv- ing Asianic teachers for the immortal masters of the old Attic eloquence. ^^ b. Decay of oraiory at AW/^.— The victory of old Attic oratory over Asian rhetoric at Roi-,e was of short duration. " Oiii(l ^^r. Litt. ii, pp. 473 . 502 sq.; \\\2.^^, Die gr. BereJs.. j)p. 3 . 149 . iGo. '"Cf. Kohde, Der griech. Kofn.:i:, p. 289. '^ J'rae/atto i'onf)-^:. i, 6 sci. •'■''Cf. Diulogus de orat^'rihi^ (ascrihcd U) 'facitu>) c. 30: "Ma-na clcpi- entia sicut rtamma materia alitur et motibus cxcitatur d ureiulo cIarc^clt . . ."; c. 4[: "(Juid enini (sc. at the preseiu dav as cotnpareci with the former time of the republic) opus est longis in senatu sententiis. cum optimi cito consentiant:* quid multis apud contionibus cum dercpuMica non imperiti at multi delibcretit, sed sapientissimus et unus . . . .^ " cc. 3O-4 1 are all extremely interesting on this point. / J \ J \ t ' f TliE TIIK.MKS TKKATKD BY THE ELDER SENECA. 13 fierce rivalries and contentions of parties and party leaders And soon despotism on the one hand and its counterpart servility on the other, attained such proportions as to stifle all noble and high- spirited thought and action. Seneca complains bitterlv over the literary aufo-da-fcs which came into use in his time for the di'^ci- phne ot refractory minds.- In addition to this the prosperhy and wealth which came to the Roman empire under Augustus contributed their part toward obliterating all remnants of the old Roman simplicity and engendering a taste for superficial splendor and a striving after display.- A lively scientific and literary activity did indeed spring up ;- circles were formed for the promo- tion ot culture and literary taste; we need only recall Maecenas This age in the mental history of Rome may be not inaptly likened to that of Louis the Fourteenth of France. But what this literary activity gained in breadth it lost in depth and earnestness of purpose ; it aimed merely at the brilliant, the piquant, and the interesting ; it was marked by flippancy and entire subordination of matter to form. This change in the spirit of Roman literature exhibited Itself m the evolution of that diction which is designated as " Sliver Latin." The vocabulary became changed ; new words and phrases were invented and many of those hitherto in use were lost or rejected ; the syntax was simplified, numerous short sentences replacing a less number of long ones ; the useof abstract substantives became frequent ; in the periodic structure parataxis took the place of hypotaxis; natural expressions gave way to rhetorical figures ; the lines separating prose and poetry became obliterated ; objectivity was replaced by subjectivity and arbitrari- ness ; sublimity and depth of diction were supplanted by an arti- ficial elegance. Of all this the rhetors represented in the works clothe elder Seneca are the type, and Quintilian in vain opposed It." This great change in the tendency and aims of Roman literature manifested itself in the most marked degree in the art ^Praif. Coutr. x. 5 sq.: - Effectum est enim per inimicos ut omnes eius (sc. r. Labieni) libri comburerentur ; res nova et inusitata supplicium de studiis sumi " ; cf. also ^^7. '^Cf. llainmer, Batriige zu dm 19 grossc;i quiniiUamschen Declamaiionen, P- 3- •*^Cf. Hernhardy, Grjindriss der romisc/ie?i Liiteratiir, p. 75. Literary facts as well as explicit testimonies show that no preceding age possessed more susceptibility to fine, sometimes supernne, form or a more cultivated taste. ^'=Cf. Koerber, Uei'er de7i Rhetor Seneca, pp. 24 sq. H THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. of eloquence. Naturally so, for this department of mental activity can thrive icd. Un tlic ()th',-r h.md speech-making and speech hearino- were deeply rooted in tlie Roman nature. Hence, when the lorum became dull, spcecli-mak- inf^ retired to the schoolroom to continue there a shach>\\y lite. Rhetoric supplanted oratory, rhetoricians took the place of ora- tors, and speakin^^ was superseded by declaimino;.'' Yvi another reason for tlic development < a those schools ot rhetcHic may be found in the tact that already in Cicero's time and still movr after- wards, jurispruden>:e attained at Rome an importance beiore unheard oi. It assumed an independent position .nal treated rhetoric as it had been treated b}- it — with disregard. The orator when in court found himself under the control ot the jud^e, by whom he w.is compelled to lully realize his suborcbnate position and to conthie his discourse closely to his subject."" Rhetoric, thus driven Irom political lile and repressed m the (omts, came to be treated as an art or science independent oi all otlu is, au end in itself, its value consisting; in the formal training it gave tlie mind. ^' Even in the time of the elder Seneca, wheu the rhet(jricians and the rhetorical schools were in the height of their prosperity, the language still distinguished between dicer-' and declamare^ as also between orator and rhetor or dcclamator. Compare Sen., Praef. Controz'. i, 12: "ipsa decla- matio apud nullum rinti(]uuni auctorem ante Ciceronem et Calvum inveniri potest, ciui declaniatii.iK in a dictione distingua ; ait enim declaniare iam sc non nifciiocritci . diccre bene ; alteram iniMt donic^- ticae excrcitationis cs>t', alleruni vt-rac (iicticnis . . . "; ('ontt. wx, i. 20: " De colore ir.ter maxinios et oratores et ciccianiatorcs (!i - putatuni est. . . Pasianus et Albucius et praeter oratores magna novomm rhetotum nianus . . .""; Suas. vi, ii : •' Itaciue Cas>ius Sevfrus aiebat alios clecla- masse, Varium Geminum vivuni consilium dedisse." '"Cf. Speni;el, Ue^er das Stnd:ur>i, etc., p. 25. Tacitus, I)ial(\i;ns c. 19: •'Qui (sc. indices) vi et pote>tatc, nun iure ant lei^ibus cof^noseunt, nee accipiunt tempora, sed con>tituunt, ncc expectaiulum habent oratorem dum illi libeat de ipso nei^oiio dicere, >cd saepe ultro admovcnt atcjue alio transgredientem revocant at festmare >e testantnr " ; fjuintilian, lustit. Orat. iv, 1, 72 ". . . si sit praeparatus satis etiam sir.e hoc index""; iv, 5, 10: '• P"estinat enim index ad id, quod potent;>sinium est." f-^ / \ il THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. IT. —The roman rhetoricians. 15 I. Their position in the new fabric of the state. It iias l)een already stateci' that L. Plotius Gallus was the first to open a school for Latin rlietoric about 90 R. C. This does not of course imply tliat there had never previously been instruction and exercise at Rome in the art of speech-making. Thus Lucius Praeconius of Lamivium, surnamed Stilo, although not a profes- sional teacher, had oathered a!)(;ut !iim ten years before a select circle ot youn^ men lor tlie purpose of reading old authors and probai)ly also to oive them some training m the thec^rv and prac- tice of speecli-making.-" Hut before Bhmdus no native Roman of position had be( ii a professional teacher of rhetoric, the ])rofession indeed [)eaiL^ looked upon as disgraceful and hence practiced only by libcrfini.'^ Piotius found many imitators and follouers. In vain It. id tlie censors as early as 92 P. C. issued an edict against these schools.'- Thev rctuauicd hencetorth a permanent institu- tion ol the Roman hanpire. In the imperial epoch rhetorical schools sprang up everywdiere.'^ It was tor the interest of the ruh'is to favor their establi>hment and development, inasmuch as thev diverted the public mind from the great constitutional changes wluiii liad taken place and caused the loss of public discussion to be kit less keenly. The public too favored these schools because in them dving liberty lingered longer than in the forum and the senate, which were under the immediate control of the ^overmtient." These schools, moreover, met the demand of the times tor a general and broad culture. As it had been for- merlv claimed by Isocrates that oratory should be regarded as unitino; in itselt all the element of culture'"' and that even the name ^^ Sec above, p. 10. ***Ci. Momn!>en, R:'t}ii-c':e Geschichte ii, p. 425. ^' Cf. .Seneca, i'raef. Contr. ii, 5: " (^)ui (sc. Blandus) primus eques Romanus Komae docuit ; ante ilium inter libei tino.s praeceptures pulcher- nmae disciplinae continebantur ct minime probabili more turpe erat docere quod honestum erat discere." *'-Cf. Cicero, De oatcre iii, 24,93; Gellius, AV/^.r Att. x\\ 11 ; Tacitus />id/. c. 35; Suetonius, Ih' clar. rhet. c. I ; Cucheval, Hnt. de V e'loq. rom 1, pp. 2 2-1 SCj. ^■'Cf. Hulsebos, De ediu. ci :nsf. apud Ko/n., p. IC9. Ct. Morawski, J)£ rhet. lat., p. 16. u ^'N'^'.'^/. (2) 5 sq. 39; Ibziv/}. (4) 47-49. l6 THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. of philosophy should be bestowed upon it/*"' so now a training in the art of rhetoric was considered as the foundation of a liberal education and the fitting preparation for the higher wilks of life."" The stndv of rhetnr-c thus hrld nearly the same place as was occupied later by the " iiin}ianioray Ever, an ethical force was ascribed to it.'" Seneca relates' iiiat Au-u,-iii> was present together with Agrippa at a decLtmation of Latro, and that the rhetor Gains Silo was also heard L-y AuL;n>tns/'° Later, chairs of rhetoric were ehtahlislied and endowed 1 v th.e state.'' Wspasian was the first to do this. ' Hadrian, n )ted lur his Pinihellenisn], established at Rome the Athenacnni which was hen(^ci(.rth snp- ported by the emperors and which |)()ssc ssfd a chair oi rhetoric.'^ The emperors themselves entrusted their children to the rlietor- ical schools for education. ' Marcus Aurelins att( nded the lectures of Hermo^^enes even atter lie i)ecanu' empert.r. It may be tairiy assumed that most ot' the large cities oi Itaiv had their '^" Kara riiv an adth c-st^ his sun Mtla : " eh){|ucnti,ie tantum studeas ; facilis ah iiac in oniacs artcs (iiscur^u^ e>t ; in>t i uit ctiani quos n(»n sibi extrcet "' ; cf. also Theo. rrogynnuumata {Rhetores Gr.it. /, ed. Spengel. ii, 70): " /} ritv 7Tf}())v/Lii>aa/LiaTuv aoKT/mg ov fjLovov roiq fii'A'/MVOi priTO- pevtiv, a/.Aa Kai el Tig // ttoitjtcjv tj ?.oynKoic}v // aX?iuv tivuv Aoyuv (Vuvafiiv i^e/.ei (j.eTax^LpiCea-&ai. eoti yap ravra olovei ^efieAia Tzdcjjq Tfjg riiv Idyav \i)i:aq ..." *- Cf . Theo, i/>id. 60 ; " Kai ^t/v 1) 6ia rfjq XP^^^^ yv/umaia ov fxovov nvd iVvvafiiv koyuv kpydC^eraiy aAAa kqI x(»I<^'^ovti ij^oq kyyvjivaCofikvuv ijfjLuv rnlg tuv aoipcjv dTTocp^Eyfiaanr' Anstuies, Or. 45, 72 (ed. Dindorf): " rerrapwv otTon^ ^opiuv T^f aperi/q (sc. (ppoif/aeioc, acjcppoavvr/r^ diKaiuavvr]^^ dvdpeiag) dnavTa did Trjg pr^ropiKi/g TTEmHTfTai, Kai hirep h a6fia(ri yv/uvaariKy Kai larpiKi/, tovt' ev ti (fnxjiKy Kal Toig T0)v 7t6ae(oi; Trpdy/iaai >;//-. :n dm \cy gross, quintil. I)c\L, })i). 5. jS sq. ^-'Cf. Sueton., l'es/>. c. iS : "Frunus c nsco Latinis (iiaeciscjuc rheto- ribus annua centena constituit." Hul^ebos, /)^ ,duc. ft :nsf. a/ud Kcm., pp. lOl sq. •'•■'Cf. Friedlander, I\irstcdlung dcr Lit:cr.itu) ^cs.'.iJitc Koms iii, p. 3 4; Rohde, Der griech. Roman, p. 291. ^■'Cf. Rohde, /. c.\ Ilainmer, I^atr. zu doi \') gr. .juit:t. Dccl., j). 29. '^'Cf. Dio Cassius, Ixxi, i, 2. / \ ! 1 THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. 17 teachers of rhetoric.^« From the middle of the first century A. D. the African schools also assumed importance;'" so much so that by the time of Juvenal the best advice which that writer would give to a rhetor desirous of makin- his fortune was that he should 00 to Africa.- Thence in the time of Hadrian came Trunto ol Cirta, ' who had so lonor and so triumphant a career at Rome as pleader and rhetor: "Orator, consul, teacher of two emperors," as an inscription declares.'" 2. Their method of insimctioji. The preparation of the pupil for the rhetorical school w^as the task ot the -ranimarian, whose duty it was to drill him in the forms and syntax and to initiate him to a certain extent into the national literature. The orammarian, however, often was not content with this important but humble task and trespassed on the field of the rhetorician." As a consequence the pupil came from the .grammarian to the rhetorician poorly trained in the elements of lan^^ruaj^e and literature. In the rhetorical school itselfthe training was a gradual progression from easy exercises to more difficult.*''^ It began with the composition of narratives and essays on oiven themes and subjects from mythology, epi- deictic speeches and commonplaces, as on vice, virtue, folly,' etc., monologues of historical or mythical persons reciting the reasons for and against decision {suasoriae). As the last and most diffi- cult stage of the exercises, use was made of fictitious judicial cases in which the pupils took the parts of plaintiff, defendant or advo- cate [controversiae). Obviously also the delivery and the trainmg of the memory were not neglected. But as Quintilian complains about the grammarians, so does he likewise about the rhetors that they considered it beneath their dignity to trouble themselves much about the elementary exercises of their art and were too 56 Cf. Friedlander, Darst. der Litt. Roms iii, p. 394; Rohde, Der gr. Roman, p. 301. On the prominence of the schools of Gaul cf. Hainmer, J^eitr. zu den ujgr. ,/iant. Dec!., pp. 29 sq.; Morawski, De rhet. Lat , p. i. ' •'' Cf. Monceaux, Lcs AfruaniSy pp. 5S sq. ^Cf. Sat. vii, 147-9. Cf. Monceaux, Les Africains, pp. 211, sq.; Simcox, Lat. Lit., p. 243. Cf. Orelli, Inscr. Lat. 11, 76. ^' Cf. Quintilian, Lnst. Orat. ii, i , i sq. ; " Rhetores utique nostri suas partes omiserunt et grammatici alienas occupaverunt." '^^ Quint il., ibid. I. 9. 5',* «0 1 \ i8 THE THEMES TREATED CV iUL ELDER SENECA. fond of hurrying their pupils into the more acl\ancecl stage of declamations.'^' As regards their manner ot imparting instruction in the rhetorical art, some masters did all the talking themselves, i. e. they declaimed and the students mert^ly listened ; others began with a recitation which was followed by a discussion between teacher and students ; while still otlu-rs allowed the pupils to declaim.' The dec I am at i on ts [coiityovcr.^iac and siiaso- riae) of the rhetoricians of the imperial period havt- become pro- verbial for speech marked by at'tectation. insincerity, hollow pathos, fancifulness, inanity of thought and similar characteristics. They did not make their appearance endowed with these {|uali!ies all at once. They h.ive quite a long history, and that history confirms the statement previously made that it seems to be inherent in the nature ot artistic speech to go astray again and again from the path of naturalness and truthfulness. The introduction of recitations on tictitious themes as an exer- cise in oratory is ascribed either to Demetrius Phalereus," or to Aeschines while living in exile at Rhodes." Hut it may be ^'^ Ibid. I, 2: *' Nam et illi declamare modo et sciciUiam dtH-lamaiuli ac facultatem tradere officii sui ducunt." *^' Cf. Seneca, 6't';;//c'r'. ix, 2, 23: " Xeque enini illi (>i\ I.atroni') nios erat quemquam audire declamanteni ; dcclansabat ipse taiituiu ei aicbat se non esse magistrum, sed exeniplum ; nee uHi alii contigissc scio cjuam a{)ud Graecos Niceti, apud Romanos Lalroni, ut discipuli noi^ audiri desidera- rent, sed contenti essent audire " : cf. al>o Koerher, l'i!t> dm Khitor Sen., pp. 30 sq.; Friedlander, iKirst. drr L:ff. Kotfis lii, pj). 3SS-<)0 ; Moniiii^en, /' m. Gesch. ii, p. 427 ; Ilainmer, Ihitr. zu Jcu 19 f^^r. .juuH. IK\l., p. 6 ; Rohde, Di'r i^riech. Roman, pp. 295 sq. ^''Cf. Quintilian, lns.\ (drat, ii, 4, 41 : " Xam fictas ad imitationem fori ♦onsiliorumque materias apud Graecos dicere circa Deinctriuni Phalereuni instituturu fere constat. An ah ipso itl genus exercitationis Mt inventuni, ut alio quoque libro sum confessus, paruni coniperi ; ^^ed ne hi quidem qui hoc fortissime affirmant, ullo satis idoneo auctore nituntur." ^^ Philostratus who flourised in tlie first half of the third century A. 1). in his Vitae Sophistaruni i, 1. iS (ed. Kavser), makes Aeschines, tiie founder of a Second Sophistic winch invented the standard characters of the decla- mations, — the rich, the poor, tlie brave, the tyrant, (sc. // (5fiT£/)a acxfuaTiKTj) Tovg nevTjraq vTveTinrcjraTO Kai rovg TT/ovaiovg mi rov^ apiarovg Kal Tovg rvpdin>ovg Kal rag e'lg ovofia vTro^eaeig^ f(i>' df ;/ laTOf)in ayei rjp^e 6e r^f fxev 'apxniorepag Topytag 6 AeoDTlvor h' OerraAoif, rr/f de devrepag Alox'^v/j^ 6 ' Arpofif/Tov^ rijv fiev 'Ai^r'/vr/ai Tzo^.LTLKUiv Ik-eooiv Kapio. df: Evofxi'/J/aag Kal 'VoAu) Kal fxeTex^ipKf^vTo Tag awnx'^ioeig o'l uh' a-n A'lnxi-vov Kara rix^'W ^* ^^ ^^^ Topylov Kara to do^av ; cf. also <^uintil., Instit. Orat. xii, 10, 19: "Aeschines enim, cpii hunc (sc. Rhodum) exilio delegerat locum, intulit eo studia Athenarum ..." 1^ f 1' / \ V >■ THE THEMES TRI:ati:1) I;V TIIF, ELDER SENECA 19 truthtully said that ever since eloquence was treated as an art, some kind of exercises has been practised in connection with It. Protagoras caused his pupils to learn by heart examples ot such eloquence as were most frequently used. Aristotle in Cicero's Bnitus mentions these commonplaces as having been composed in writing.'^ In a similar manner Gorgias taught his pupils by models, especially such as either exalted or depreciated things.- In fact, all orators in all times have been obliged to tram themselves for appearance in public by some sortofexerci.se in declaiming, only they have made a practice of declaiming on the same themes on which they were afterward to speak or write, while the ;/£/.c'r'/.' which arose at the end of the fourth century B. C were on fictitious subjects with characters which became stereo- typed. The Peripatetic and Academic schools had exercises in ^iai-z and loci cormjiunes of different kinds/' The !iilzr ' f / \ V THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SEXECV 21 a. Various kinds of dcclamatiojis in the ifuperial period. — As the methods ot teaching varied so also did the exercises em- ployed.'' The passage quoted from Seneca'^ gives the key to then- division. He says : " Declamabat autem Cicero non quales nunc controversias dicimus, ne tales quidem, quales ante Cice- ronem dicebantur, quas thesis vocabant Controversias nos dicimus: Cicero causas vocabat." It would thus seem that we should distinguish three periods of the declamation: i. In the tmie previous to Cicero there were declamations on 'V/in:z and NrJ//£^.'c, which Cicero renders by " quaestio " and "causa" respectively. The difference between them is that the ^>i<7iz is the discussion of a case in a general, indefinite manner, without attaching it to definite per- sons and circumstances, while the o-J»V;^r: on the other hand has them, so that it becomes more special, individual, and concrete." "Ct. .Suetonius, Df clar. ?-/iet. c. I : "Ratio dicendi nee una omnibus." '^ Fjafj . Contr. i, 12. '■'Cf. Cicero, J)i iiivcntionc i, 6, 8: "Nam Hermagoras quidem nee quid dicat atteudere nee quid policeatur intelligere videtur, qui oratoris mate- riam in causam et quaestionem dividat. Causam esse dicat rem, quae habebat in se controvt-rsiam in dicendo positam cum personarum cettarum inteiposiiione ; quam nos quoque oratori dicimus attributam . . . Quaes- tionem autem appellet, quae habeat in se controversiam in dicendo posi- tam sine certarum personarum interpositione ad hunc modum : Ecquid sit bonum praeter honestatem ? verine sint gensus .^ quae sit mundi forma? quae sit solis magnitudo.?" Cf. Thiele, iy.v-w<7i'7?;77j, pp. 30 sq. Thiele says that Hermagoras understood by ruatr any :/,-;//ia {— -poS/Jifjia) of a general nature. "He recommended to the orator to speak not only ;7z/t7;- xiv, 46 previously quoted. Cf. also Quintil., Inst. Orat. iii, 5, 5 sq. : "Item convenit quaestiones esse aut infinitas aut finitas. Infinitae sunt, quae remofis personis ettemporibus ei locis ceterisque similibus in utramque partem tractantur, quod Graeci •^''T/i dicunt, Cicero propositum, .... alii quaestiones philosopho conve- nientes, . . . Finitae autem sunt ex complexu rerum, personarum, tem- porum, ceterorumque ; quae i-^nhai,; aGraccis dicuntur, causae anostris. In his omnis quaestio videtur circa res personasque consistere." The render- 32 THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. The '^^/'T.'T then embraced themes on anything and e\n vtliino^, and to the same catei>orv of themes of a i^eneral and indt-hnitt^ nature beloni^ also thr loci coinfjiunes.''^ which were nuich in lci\n»r at Rome in tht- earlv period on acc()unt ot thrir simplicity." 2. Al)0ut the time (^f Cicero arose the 'j-zo'^em; (causae^, /. <^.,as Stated in note 79, exercises on s[)ecialized casts, with the intro- duction of definite persons and circumstances; they were tormed from real life, either in its daily routine in the courts, or taken from history which included also mytholoi^y."' The r^/z^w/d' .ilso included such exercises as were known later by the name of su(isnr/(U\ for which history and mythology oft'ered am{)le material/ 3. In the im{)erial period, althouj^h they may not ha\-e been entirely unknow^n before Au^^ustus."' there came into vo;^uedecla- mations on entirely fictitious themes taken from the realm o! the imagination; of these we have s{:)ecimens in the Controversiae of Seneca and the declamations which hear the name oi Quin- tilian." ing " proposituni " for \9fo^c is used by Cicero in 7>//. ;? .m , 79: Depart. orat. 1,4: " consultatio " ; 18, Ci : " propositum " again,; both combined \n De oral, iii, 28, 109: " quasi propositaci)nsvritati(i." Of the definitions of the Greek rhetoricians ; that of Theo in his ~fH)yvfii>daiiica 21, Si, and i'icierit's Introduction to Cicero, /)e orat. ii, 'i 2. ^Cf. f u ere soletis, ut, causa aliqua posita consimili cau^ai am earum, quae in forum deferuntur, dicatis quam niaxime ad vcntattm accommo- date"; Suetonius, De clar. rhet. c. i ; Cicero, De inventiotfe i, 49, 92; cf. also Friedlander, Darstellmig der Litt. Rom iii, p. 388. ^3Cf. Blass, Die gr. Bereds., p. iii. ^ Ibid., p. 108. ^^Cf. Bonnell, De mut. sub prim. Caes. eloq., p, 17. Honnell observes that the word *' suasoria " does not occur at all in Cicero, while " controversia " occurs only with the meaning of dispute or quarrel, strife ('*scd rixam et pugnam significans "). > THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. 23 X \ } b. Characicr of iJic declamaiions of the imperial period. — It is well known that the chief characteristics of the declamations in voi^ue durinij the imperial period were that they were not practi- cal, that they io;nored real life, disre,^arded truth, and indulged in the paradoxical and absurd. " The rhetorical school," says F^riedlander,'" ''created for itself in the course of time its own fan- tastic world, which was separated from life by a wide chasm over which no bridu:e was leading." This rhetorical departure was not an absolutely new one. As remarked above, artistic speech seems to have always had a tendency to deviate from verity and natur.ilness. Examples may be found earlier than Asianism. Thus Corax of Syracuse, who lived at the beginning of the fifth century B. C, is alleged to have defined rhetoric as -ziHouq ny^'utf(oyn-^ aud his disciple and successor Tisias, the first to write on the technique of rhetoric,'' teaches in regard to the finding of arguments that the orator is not to concern himself about the truth but to be content with the ir/.uz, to make anything appear probable or improbable just as it suits his interest.**^ Protagoras promised to teach r''/> i\rzui /.ayir, /.outzm -mzl^.^'^ The " ^i^x^'^i " of Anaximenes was openly proclaimed to have no other object than to furnish any one who followed it, be he right or wrong, with the means to defeat his adversary even if the latter were indisputably in the right, and to deceive the judge.'" "Many a celebrated oration of antiquity," says Spengel,"'^ "is nothing else than an incontestable proof that external splendor and brilliancy con- cealed the truth by the appearance of truth." The Tetralogies of Antiphon (orations xiii-xv) exhibit in their arguments much sophistical casuistry and chicanery. We find oratory constantly ^ Darstt-ilu?!.: der Lilt. Kotns iii, p. 391. ^''Cf. Cicero, De inventione ii, 6: "Ac veteres quidem scriptores artis usque a principe illo atque inventore Tisia . . . "; Plato, Phaedr. 267a 273-' f.; An^t.. Ruet. ii, 24 (S5)engel, Khet. gr. i, 116 sq.). The work is referred to as that of Corax. "^Cf. Aristotle, Rhet. ii, 24 (Spengel, Rhet. Cr. i, 167): '' (paiverai fiev ovv afjLipoTepa eiKot'-a, iari <)€ to fXEv Eimq to (^e nvy oTr/wf, a/lX' (ocKEp EipTjTat.^^ He illustrates by an example ; cf. also Spengel, Deber das Studium, etc., p. 8. ^Cf. Plato, Phaedr. 267a; Kx\s\.., Rhet. ii, 24 (Spengel, Rhet. Gr. i, 167); Aristophanes, Clouds, 112-15; Gellius, Aoct. Att. \, t,, -j ; Diogenes Laer- tius, 9, 32 ; Socrates also was charged with this, cf. Plato, Apology 19b. ^Cf. Spengel, Ueber das Studium, etc., p. 9. *^ Ibid. p. 14, cf. the numerous examples in illustration of this observa- tion, pp. 14-16. 24 THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. applying itself to futile discussions and absurd and perverse para- doxes. Pericles is said to have engaged in discussion with Prota- goras an entire day on the following case : A Pentathlete in the races inadvertently killed with his spear the Thessalian Spitinos ; the question was, who was the author of the accident : The Pen- tathlete because he hurled the spear, or those in charge of the race because they arranged it in such a manner, or finally the spear itself because it passed in such a way as to hit the unfortu- nate Spitinos.'^ Isocrates complains of those composers of epideictic speeches who selected the most paradoxical topics for their subjects.^^ Thus Polycrates (born before 436 B. C.) composed speeches in defence of Busiris and in accusation of Socrates,'* eulogies on Clytaemnestra," on mice," pots, and voting pebbles." Others praised the lot of beggars and exiles," made a hero of Paris,*" or selected salt and drinking-vessels as objects of encomium.^"" Among the Romans we find traces of these exer- cises in Cornificius and Cicero.^"^ With the rhetoricians of the imperial epoch such exercises became the rule and what is of more importance still, not exercises as a means preparatory to cases in real life, which was their import even w t!i \hv Asian orators, but they came to be regarded as an end in themselves.^"- As such they attained an extraordinary importance. I.ife in iha forum antl in the courts was considered as a trade, to which were attached coiitempo- ^ Cf. Plutarch, Fn-uhs c. 35. "^ 'E/*ii^/; ( 1 o i I t . : '* ttai rivet; ol fiiya (pfjovovmvy i/v vKddeaiv cltottov Kal -rrapado^uv TTOnjadjuevoi irepi ravrijc dvEKTug e'lKeiv (^WT/i^tjai k. t. ^.."; Borf. (us 41) ; cf. Spengel, [\-nc-r di!s S'uj:in>.'^ etc., i). 17. An example of this fictitious ora- torv l)y Lysias is given 111 I'lato's Phaedr. 231 A-zji C. ^■* Cf . Isocrates, I>"";. (11), 4 sq. '-^ Quintilian, Inst. Orat. ii, 17. 4. ^''Aristotle, Riu't. ii, 24 (Spenge!, Rhct. Graec. i, 165). "' Cf. Alexander Rhetor, Spengel iii, 3. ^* Cf. Isocrates 'K/j-'iV/ (10), 8. ^•*Cf. Aristotle, Rhet. ii, 24 (Spengel, A'- i<^Cf. Plato, Svmp. 177b. •^" Cf. Cicero, Dc invent, ii, 40, 118: habeto ; si habuerit publica esto." ^^■-'Cf. Klass, l)u- -ru'C'i. Bereds.^ pp. 60 sq. ^^^■^ Epist. li, 3. :c\'. Graec. i, 163). " Mcretri.x corunaiii auream ue THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. 25 ( / \ .' ^v ^ ) rary: "Annum sexagesimum excessit et adhuc scholasticus tantum est; quo genere hominum nihil aut simplicius aut sincerius aut melius; nos enim, qui in foro verisque htibus terimur, multum malitiae quamvis nolimus addiscimus, schola et auditorium, ut ficta causa, ita res inermis, innoxia est nee minus felix senibus praesertim."^"* As regards the subject-matter of the coniroversiae of Seneca and the declamationes of the pseudo-Quintilian, all the themes are taken from the domain of jurisprudence. This seemed the least dangerous ground for a display of rhetorical pyrotech- nics under an autocratic rule. There was the additional advan- tage that these subjects allowed a great variety of interpretation and argument and afforded opportunity for a display of rhetorical ^j.j 105 gy^ aside from the judicial formula to which the treatise is attached all is imaginary. ^''^ Many of the cases on which the judi- cial discussions are based, those for instance bearing on tyrants and tyrannicide,^"' have no application to Roman life, and most of them are unnatural, extravagant, absurd and not infrequently indecent. Of the 74 themes in Seneca's Controversiae, 19 have to *^Cf. Spengel, Gelehrte Anzeigen der bayrischen Akademie der Wisseti' schaften xlvii (1858), pp. 10 sq. '"•' rf. I.atro in Seneca, Controv, ix, 4, 9 : *' In lege . . . nihil excipitur, sed multa, quamvis non excipiantur, intelleguntur et scriptuni legis angustum, interpretatio diffusa est"; cf also Koerber, Ueber den K/utor Seneca^ p. 37. '^Cf. some of the themes : Seneca, Conir. i, i : Liberi parentes alant aut vinciantur ; i, 2 : Sacerdos casta ex castis, pura e puris sit.; i, 5; Raj)!, I rai^tnris aut mortem aut indotas nuptias optet ; (^uintilian, Dcclavi. ccxhv : C*^ii ck])osituni infitiatus fuerit, cjuadrupluni solvat, etc. Petro- nius. Sat. i (directed against the rhetoricians) 11. 10 sqcj. enumerates some of the subjects treated in the rhetorical .^^chools : " Piratas cum catenis in litore stantcs ; tvrannos edicta scribentes, quibus imperent filiis, ut patrum suonun ca[>ita praecidant ; responsa in pestilentiani data, ut virgines tres ant ]'! ui cs inimolent ur " ; Tacitus, yj/ as an entertaining book " (the Gesta Romanoruvi) ; in De Sen. Contro:. :>: (it'st. Rom. adhih. Friedlander gives parallel passages from both works. "-Cf. Seneca, Contr. i, i, 3, 4, 7 ; vi, 2, 7 ; vii, 7 ; x, 3, \ ; Friedl.inder, Darstell. dcr Litt. Kotns iii, pp. 392 sq. ; <^)aintilian. Peel, ccxxn, ccxxiii. ^'■•Cf. Hainmer, Hcttr.zu den kj ^^ross. quintil. Decl., \>. 7. ^"Cf. Juvenal, Sat. iv, 17. ^'^Cf. C^'jir'ti^i^"' Inst. Orat. viii, 3.71 in protest: "Naturam intucamur, banc sequamur. Umnis elociuentia circa opera vitae est, ad se refert quisque quae audit, et id facillime accipiunt animi, quod agnoscunt." •r I i / '^ |i and surprising turns of thought and expression^^*^ — the " inopina- tum " at any cost — so that the treatise became a mosaic of in- volved dicieria}^' Having no attainable object, nothing to stir the heart and rouse the emotions, the rhetor could only by lorce of imagination enter into the spirit of his theme, finding all the points of opportunity it afforded for displaying the elegance ol his style and his skill in speaking on any subject, for and against, making " the small great and the great small. "^'' The character- istics of the oratory of the declamators are thus compared with the oratory of the courts by Cassius Severus : "Ego tamen et propriam causam videor posse reddere ; adsuevi non auditorem spectare, sed iudicem ; adsuevi non mihi res})ondere, sed adver- sario ; non minus devito supervacua dicere quam contraria. hi scholastica quid non supervaciann est cum ipsa supervacua sit? Indicabo tibi affectum meum : cum in foro dico, aliquid ago ; cum declamo, id quod bellissime Censorinus aiebat de his, qui honores in munici[)iis ambitiose peterent, videor mihi in sornniis laborare. Deinde res ipsa diversa est: totinn aliud est pu guar e, aliiid venti- lare. Hoc ita semper habitum est, scholam quasi ludum esse, forum arenam.""' These hothouse orators when exposed to the "* Besides the speaking by contemporaries on stock subjects, we find that the same themes were declaimed upon repeatedly, cf. Seneca, Contr. ii. 3 with Quintilian, Ihui. cccxiix ; Contr. ii, 5 with Vecl. ccli ; Contr. iii, 9 witii Ih',I. ccclxxx ; Contr. iv, 4 with Decl. ccclxx ; Contr. vi, 5 with Decl. ccc ; Contr. vi, 6 with Deol. cccliv ; Co)itr. ix, 6 with Decl. ccclxxxi ; Contr. X, 2 similar to Decl. cclviii. How completely this artificiality of both mat- ter and form became identified with antique rhetoric, and how persistently it held its own may be noted from the fact that the Dictiones of Ennodius at the end of the fifth century A. D. are still busy with the old themes of step-mothers, tyrannicides, etc., although there is a marked decadence in the manner of their treatment. Cf. Ennodius, Diet, xv and xviii. ""Cf. Seneca, Praef. Contr. i, 21 : Nihil est iniquius his, qui nusquam putant esse subtilitatem, nisi ubi nihil est praeter suhtilitatem. "" Cf. Plato, J'haedr. 267 A. Again we find in Ennodius's Epistle on Education the old familiar claim that rhetoric is the crown of the sciences, able to make black white and white black : " Post apicem divinitatis ego ilia sum, quae vel commuto si sunt facta vel facio. ... Si noster tantum, — non siringunt criniina quemquam Nos vitae maculas tergimus artis ope Si nives constct merito quis teste senatu. Cogimus hunc omnes dicere nocte satum." A sweeping claim indeed for the " pomposa recitatio." Cf. Ennodius, Atnhrosio ct l^eato^ Opusc. vi, pp. 407, 408, ed. Hartel. _ "'M'f. Seneca, /'raef. Contr. iii, 12 sq. See also Praef. Contr. ix, 2. I 28 Tin: THEMES TREATED P.V THE ELDER SEXECA. fresh air of real life, were entirely out of their element and became confused: "Aoedum istos declamatores produc in senatum. in forum; cum loco mutabuntur ; velut adsueta clauso et delicatae umbrae corpora sub divo stare non possunt, non imbi em ferre. non solem sciunt, vix se inveniunt, adsuerunt enim suo arbitrio ciiserti esse. Non est quod oratorem in hac puerili exercitatione spectes. Quid si velis gubernatorem in piscina aestimare? """ 7^he rht-tor Porcius Latro l)eintr called to defend a relation, became so con- fused under the open sky of the forum that at his request the court was transferred to a basilica.'-^ The orij^inal object of these exercises, viz. to prepare for actual life, was entirely lost sii^htol.'-^ The whole affair was a piece of the.itrical ostentation to amuse the audience and satisfy the vanity of the teacliers.'"' Hence the selection of subjects fit for grandiloquence,'-' for the inflated vanity of the rhetoricians was one of the roots of the evil. They did not care for the truth or even i^^ood sense, but to win the a{)plause ot the public. Complaints of the vociferous clamors of the schools are numerous. ''' Still in fairness it should be added that not all the blame was laid ui)on the rhetoricians by those of their contempo- raries who deplored most bitterly the corrupting intluence ol this ^'^ IHd., Praef. Contr. iii, 13 sq. ''' Ibid., Fraef. Contr. ix, 3 ; ci'. al>o Quintilian, h:s(. {>>at. x. v i'"^. '-'■- Cf. Seneca's idea of an exercise as he describes it. Praef, Cofifr. ix, 4 : Non est autem utilis exercitatio, nisi quae open simillinia e.-^t, m qiK^d exercet ... '■■^•HJf. Quintilian, Itisttt. Of\:t. ii, 10, S sq : "Nam si foro non prat.i)atat ; aut scaenicae ostentationi aut turiosae vociferationi simillimuni est . . . " ; cf. also vii, 2, 54 ; x, 2, 12 ; 7, 21. '■-'•* Cf. Morawski, IK^ rJiet. /ki, De rhet. Idt ., p. 8, foot note. , I ( / \ i / vv 'I TH Ill-.MI-S TkKATF.D BY THE ELDER SEXECA. 29 kind of education. It was demanded by the superficial tendency of the time, and the rhetoricians as children of their time simply met this demand. False oratory was an effect more than a cause: ". . . talis hominibus fuit oratio qualis vita." ^"'^ Petronius, who attacked the rhetors in the most unsparing manner, says :^^' " Nihil nimirum in his exercitationibus doctores peccant, qui necesse habent cum insanientibus furere. . . . Quid ergo est? parentes obiurgatione digni sunt, qui volunt liberos suos severa lege proficere. . . ." Tacitus"' says : " Quis enim ignorat et eloquentiam et ceteras artes descivisse ab ilia vetere gloria non inopia hominum. sed desidia iuventutis et negligentia parentum et inscientia praecipientium et oblivione moris antiqui.' • >' 129 The Controversiae. — The form and division of the Controversiae are given in the title of Seneca's works : " Oratorum et rhetorum sententiae, divisiones, colores." 1. The Seniejiiiae, like the inventio, contain the material neces- sary for judging the case ; they give the opinions of the different rhetors with regard to the legal status of the case under consider- ation, 7. e. whether the legal formula premised is applicable to the case, and if so, how far? This is subdivided \xi\o pars prior and pars altera (or with the second part introduced by contra^, giving the pro and con or the acciisatio and defensio. 2. The divisio, like the disposiiio, analyzes and arranges the material into various qiiaesiiones or points of view from which the case is argued. Seneca''" points out that the divisio of the rhetor- icians of his time became more subtle than that of former times. As a matter of fact the divisio was often split up into endless sub- divisions, without gain to either clearness or force. As a rule moreover the divisio consisted of a mere skeleton of the quaes- tiones and their subdivisions.'^' 3. The colores are the extenuating reasons for a punishable '^^ Seneca philos., P.pisi. 1 14, i sq.; cf. also Cucheval, Hist, de V eloq. rom, i, p. 235 ; ii, p. 368. '••■• C. 3 sq. '•^ Dialoi^us c. 28. i-'^Cf. also Quintilian, Inst. Orat. ii, 4. I5 sq. (on the vanity of the parents) ; I'ersius, Sat. iii, 46 sq. ' •<' Contr. i, I, 13. '■^Cf. Seneca, Praef. Contr. vii, 2, where Albucius is reproached for treating the divisio more fully. As an example may be given the divisio i, 3, 8. A vestal for the sin of incest was thrown from the Tarpeian Rock, \ 30 THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. deed, whcii however were not founded upon facts but merely invented oy the rhetoricians.'^^ In fact the colores were the revelling ground for the wits of the rhetoricians where they indulg^ed to the full in subtleties, casuistries, and absurdities of invention. Their methods of defence may be shown by the following example. In defence of one, who maimed exposed children and then forced them to beg for his benefit, Gallio adduces :'" '' Egentem hominem et qui ne se quidem alere necdum alios posset, sustulisse eos, qui iam relicti sine spe vix spiritum traherent, quibus non iniuria fieret, si aliquid detraheretur, sed beneficium daretur, si vita servarelur. Faciant invidiam, dicant alicui oculos deesse, alicui manus dicant illos per hunc tarn misere vivere, dum fateantur per hunc vivere." He even attempted to set up this brute as a public benefactor: "Adeo .... haec res non nocuit reipublicae, ut possit videri etiam profuisse : pauciores erunt qui exponant filios." The condition of a slave should be looked upon in a favorable light because: " Et nos nuper servos fuisse. Rettulit Servium regem.''^^*' If an historical fact was involved and the case as it really occurred did not suit the pleader, he had no scruple about altering it.' 135 but was not killed. The issue is : Whether she ought to be thrown a second time. Latro makes the following divisio : " Utrum lex de incesta tutam esse velit quae deiciatur nee pereat ; an damnata, etiamsi innocens post damnationem adparuit, deici non debeat; an haec innocens sit; an haec deorum adiutorio servata sit." Cestius then subdivided the last question: ♦' An dii immortales humanarum rerum curam agant ; si singulorum agunt an huius egerint." Fuscus Arellius offers the f.)llowing divisio : "Utrum incestae poena sit deici an perire ; utrum providentia deorum an casu ser- vata sit; si voluntate deorum servata est, an in hoc, ut crudelius periret." Comment is needless. 133 The rhetoricians themselves made a distinction between defensio and color, cf. Seneca, Cotitr. vii, 6, 17 : ''A parte patris magis defensione opus esse dicebat Latro quam colore." The color also served to give a weak point, which was to be defended, a plausible aspect. It also served to mention things under another name for the sake of decency, cf. Quintilian, Inst. Orat.'w, 2,88: Id interim ad solam verecundiam pertinet, unde etiam mihi videtur dici color. Tacitus {Dialogus c. 20) speaks of the " color sen- tentiarum " as parallel to the ♦' niter et cultus descriptionum," where it i^ probably equivalent to our color or vividness of speech. Cf. also Ernesti, Rhet. lex.\ Mayor's edition of Juvenal on Sat. vii, 155. '^''Seneca, Contr. x, 4, 15. 13* //^/V/. vii, 6, 18. i3» Cf. ibid, vii, 2, 8 : " Declamatoribus placuit parricidi reum fuisse . . .," cf. Hainmer, Beitr. zu den ig gross, quintil. Decl.^ p. 6. THE THEMES TREATED B\ THE ELDER SENECA. 31 ( 1 y I / ^\ ( .- The Suasoriae. — While the Controversiae were taken from the genus iudiciale, the Suasoriae belonged to the genus delibera- tivum and related to historical or mythical persons, answering the question what some such person was to do in a certain condition or situation. Hence in contrast to the Controversiae, irto the Suasoriae names were introduced. In the curriculum of the rhe- torical schools the Suasoriae, being the more simple and easy, were the exercises used in the beginning; the Controversiae being more varied and complex, formed the last state in the training of the future orator.^^^ A Suasoria may be simple, merely the ques- tion whether a certain thing is or is not to be done ;"' or duplex, where there is a choice between two alternatives f^ or triple, where there are three alternatives.^^'^ The Suasoriae are generally char- acterized by the absence of an artistic plan and arrangement of the parts ; the speaker approaches the subject without an intro- ductory proem and discusses it in an elevated sometimes excited and even harsh tone.^'" In the Suasoriae stress was laid not so much on the argumentation as on the description of the effects which might result from taking or omitting the step under deliber- ation/'^ The division of the Suasoriae is likewise simple. They consist of two parts; the first may be termed iraciaiio; it gives the formal discourse on the question. The second part, super- scribed divisio, is an informal and personal review or report by Seneca of the sayings and comments of the rhetoricians, inter- mingled with reminiscences, anecdotes, and an occasional excur- sus. As has been already stated, the defects of the declamations 13^ Cf. Westermann, Geschichte dtr Beredsamkeit ii, p. 267 §81 ; Tacitus, Dial. c. 35 : "Ex his suasoriae quidem, tamquam plane leviores et minus prudentiae exigentes, pueris delegantur, controversiae robustioribus adsig- nantur." 1" Cf . Seneca, Suas. i and vi. ^^ Ibid, ii ; iii ; iv ; v; vii. •39 Cf. Quintilian, Inst. Orat. iii, 8, 33: " Pompeius deliberabat Parthos an Africam an Aegyptum peteret." For the Suasoria simple and duplex cf. I. c. 19 sq. ^^ Cf. Quintilian, /. c. 8, 58 sq., 69. He censures this as an error of the declamators. •41 Hence Ovid's fondness for Suasoriae and aversion to Controversiae, cf. Seneca, Contr. ii, 2, 12 : •' Declamabat autem Naso raro controversias et non nisi ethicas ; libentius dicebat suasorias ; molesta illi erat omnis argumentatio"; cf. also Praef. Contr. ii, 3; iii, 10 sq. 32 THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. of the imperial period were in general the same as those of Asianism,— lack of moderation, false pathos, a childish striving for the *'inopinatum" in thought and form, frigid a^rreiV/xot, perverse ingenuity, and an ostentatious display of the speaker's art instead of its concealment. At the same time it must be admitted that some of the rhetoricians handled this apparatus with great skill and even with elegance. The following are a few examples taken at random : " Nullum iam tibi vulnus nisi per cicatricem imprimi potest";"^ " Charybdis ipsius maris nau- fragium";''' •'Duplici beneficio uxori suae obligatus est: quod non est occisus et quod occidit";"^ '' Ciceronis proscriptio fuit occidi, mea occidere";"'^"Modum tu magnitudini facere debes, quoniam Fortuna non facit. . . Alexander orbi magnus est Alex- andro orbis angustus est " ; "« '' Ergo tibi, soror, ut honestos habeas liberos, adulterandum est?";"' ''Amisi uxorem, liberos, patri- monium, fortuna mihi nihil praeter laqueum reliquit, iste nee laqueum";^*'' " Quidquid avium volitat, quidquid piscium natat quulquid ferarum discurrit, nostris sepelitur ventribus, qu.tcie nunc cur subito moriamur : mortibus vivimus.'"*^ Instances of lack ot ??iO(i/^s j.nd indicium \\\ descriptions of cruelty and other abhorrent things are found in Contr. x. 4. 2 and ix, 2, 4. linw far the rhetoricians mnld go in silliness and .ihMirdity is shuwn in Praet. Contr. vii, S, where Albucius asks; " yuare calix si cecidit frangitur, spongia si cecidit non iran-itin :-^ ' To which Cestius aptly replied: "head illinn eras, declainahit vohis. quare turdi volent, cucurbitae non volent." Instances cMliis sortnnoht be multiplied indetinitely. Favorite digressions ol ilu- rhetor were inveiohings against the corruption of the times,''" and moralizint^s on the instability of fortune.'"'^ Still there are found anion- these excrescences of an overstrained imagination real -ems of wisdom: " Optinnis virtutis finis est, antequam dehcias des- inere";'" '' Magni pectoris est mtrr secund.i moderat 10 " ; -^^^ "Magisdeos miseri quain beati (olunt'V"' ■"Nulla satis pudica est de qua quaeritur " ;' ■' '-I.udit de suis lortuna muiuaihns et quae dedit aulert. quae ai)stiilit reddit, nee unquam tuiius ^'^^ Suas. i, 13. ^'^ Snas. i, 3, '** Contr. ii, 5, 5. '*^ Contr. vii, 6, 2. ^^'^ Contr. i, S, 3. '*^ Contr. vii, 2, \\. '*« Conty. V, I, 1. ^'^ Praef. Contr. x, 9. '^Cf. Seneca, Coitr. ii, 7, i. iS'Cf. Contr. ii. I, I ; V, I ; cf. also Moraw>ki, De rhct. lat., pp. 5, u >q. >" CoKtr. i, S, 3. ^^^Suas. i, 3. '^^ Contr. viii, i, 2. '^ Contr. i, z, i. > THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. / y J \ V Y I 33 est illam experiri quam cum locum iniuriae non habet";^^* the three hundred Laconians at Thermopylae say : '' Electi sumus, non relicti."''' The form of the declamations is characterized by the same artificiality as their subject-matter. In general it bears the stamp of the Silver Latinity,— a certain studied smoothness, correctness, and elegance, the confusion of prose and poetic diction, of which the author of the Dialogus de Oraioribiis complains,"* as if all attention should be given to the form instead of the substance,"^ a copious use of the apparatus of tropes and figures and especially of the antithesis.^^° Here again is a lack of 7nodus and iudiciimi. So, for instance, in Seneca, Suas. vi, 5 on Mark Antony : " Quae Charybdis est tam vorax ? Charyb- dim dixi, quae, si fuit, animal unum fuit; vix me dius fidius Oceanus tot res tamque diversas uno tempore absorbere potuis- set "; or Contr. vii, 3, 8, the metaphors used by Muredius: "Abdi- cationes suas veneno diluit . . . mortem meam effudit." c. hijltieyice of rhetoric on other branches of literature. — Con- sidering the important position accorded to the rhetorical schools and riietoric itself in liie mental life of the imperial epoch, it is not surprising that the school declamations aflected the tone and stvlt' of otlirr dejxrrtments of literature. It should be remembered th;a 111 the rhetorical works of Seneca, the declamations bearing the nameofOuintilian.and the (iky-owQ Epiiojnae decc7n rhetornvi ))ii)io> U})! o! Calpiirnius Maccus, we have but a small remnant of liiose productions ot the schools which were spread abroad in book form. There must have grown up a sort of " corpus declamationnm " as a thesaurus for the benefit of aspirants to the art ol speaking.^*^^ Moreover although the subjects discussed in ^^^ Cont> . V. 1. I. 13T Suas. ii, 4. '^®Cf. Tacitus. Dialogus c. 20: " Exigitur enim iam ah oratore etiam poeticus decor, non Accii aut I'.icuvii veterno inquinatus, sed ex Horatii et Vc rgilii et Lucani sacrario prolatus "; Seneca, Suas. iii, 4 : " Fuscus Arel- lius Vergilii versus voluit unitari ""; Ouintilian, Inst. Orat. ii, 4, 3 ; " . . . . arcessitis desci ipiionibub, in quas plerique imitatione poeticae licentiae ducuiitur.'* ^^Cf. Sei!C( a, i'ontr. vii, 4, 70 ; ix, 2, 27. ^^^^ Cf. I'ersius, A"<7.', i, 85 sq. •' . . . crimina raMS l.ibrat in antitiietis, doc- tu> posuisse figura- l.auciatn ' bellum hoc ' ! " '*' This may be infcired Irom Seneca, Praef. Contr. i, 19 ; cf. also Main- nicr, Beitr. zu den ig gr. quint. Dccl., \<. 9, 34 THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. the schools were out of touch with actual life, the schools them- selves influenced living men. Single sayings of the rhetoricians were widely promulgated and became a kind of e'r^a T.zeftoe^^ru}^^ The mannerisms of the rhetoricians, with their confusion of prose and poetic diction, with their '' egressio7ies'' for the sake of variety, in splendid descriptions of men, cities, mountains, the sea, etc.,^^^ crept especially into the historical works of the time.^'^ It would seem that while in this epoch the various kinds of literature became mixed, — a characteristic of a nervous and unsettled period, — the line of demarcation between rhetoric and history was particularly effaced.^^^ Among the poets the one most influenr( d by rhetoric was Ovid,^^* as Euripides among the Greeks. Persius at the age of sixteen became the pupil of the rhetor Cornutus and remained his devoted adherent for the rest of his life.'*' Lucan as a fellow -pupil of Persius, also surrendered himself to the fasci- nating iniluence ol Cornutus,'*^* and liic Pharsalia affords many exani[)les of epicuramnintic power acquired in tlic rhctc^-ricnl ^®'^ Cf. Seneca, .S/^aj. ii. lo: •' Recolo nihil fuisse me iuvene tani notum, quam has explicationes Fusci, quas nemo nostrum non alius alia incli- natione vocis velut sua quisque modulatione cantabat ": <^)uintilian, lust. Orat. viii, 3, 76 : " Quae me iuvene uhique cantari solebant "; 'I'acitus, Dialogiis c. 20 : " luvenes . . . imti solum audire seel ctinm rcfrne donnini aliquod inlusne ct ciigmun memoria volutu ; ti;u1unt(juc invin m ac saepe in colonias ac provincias suas scribunt, sivc sciimi> aiiquis ari^uta ct bicvi sententia afful^it, sive li.)cu> exquisite f* j)octico tultu ciiituit"'; k{ also Morawski, Ih r':ct. Lit., pj). 4 ^(|. ^^3 Cf. Quintiiian, Inst. Orat. '\\\ :;, \2. ^^'^ Op. cit. X, 2, 21 : " Id (juoquc vitainlum, in quo niai^iui jku^ crrat. ne in oratione poctas nobis ct histuric<>>, in iilis C)pfn!)U> oratorcs at (icclania- tores imitatulos putenuis. Sua cuupic piopo>ita kx, suus cuicjuc decor tst "; ct. also Lucian IJcJf {Stllaropuiv fT( ; , ,- 13 ^(j. j; ; Spengcl, i'c''u-r das Studinni, etc., p. 2S ; Hlass, Pic gmch. J^erads., p. 146 scj. '^ Cf. Seneca, Sur.s. v, S : "... sententiain . . . dignam quae vel in ora- tione vel in historia ponatur"; Pliny, A//j/. ii, 5: "Nam descriptiones locorum, tquae in hoc libro freqiientiorcs erunt. non histonce tantum, sed paene poetice prosequi fas est "'; Morawski in /.ettscurift fur die , stcrreu':- ischeti Gyrnmisien xliv (1881), pp. 97 sc[. '•'''' Cf. Seneca, Contr. ii, j, S : "... I.atronis admirator fuit (sc. Ovid) . . . adeo autem studiose Latronem aniavit ut multas illius sententias in versus suos transtulerit . . . "; cf. also Gruppe, (Juac'st. Ann., pp. 36 sq.; Cucheval, Hi St. de iViot/. rorn. i, pp. 288 sq. '**'Cf. I'ersius, Sat. v, 22-65; '^i*-^ Cassias Ixii, 2Q. '^'" Cf. Monccaux, Lc, Afritains, p. 186; (Juintilian, Inst. Orat. x, i, 90. THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. 35 / \ ^ school.^^' The rhetor Septimus Severus had as his intimate friends the poets Statins and Martial ; the former dedicated to Severus, Silvae iv, 5 (cf. 1. 29-52), and the latter dedicated to him four of his epigrams.^'" The declamations had a no less marked influence upon the tragedies of the younger Seneca.^'^ As the declamations contain among much chaff many precious grains, so was their influence on Latin literature not an unmixed evil. On this point the judgment of Bernhardy is as follows : ''The weak as well as the brilliant points of the authorsof that time have their final cause in the declamation ; if on the one hand we are dis- turbed by their cut up, inflated and hasty manner, they on the other hand nw* to rhetoric, which was developed to the extreme, an elasticity arai krenness of thought which compensates for the shapelessness and tastelessness which are met with here and there." ^''"^ 3. llie cJiaraiicr and atiaunjitnts of tJie rhctorichuis. It h IS l)f -n stated already that after the emperors took the rhetorical schools under their protection, the social status of the rheti^rs became in a measure a respected and honored one. Rich men eno^ac^red rhetors to i.;ive exhibitions of the declamatory art for the entertainment of i;uests in their own houses. ^"^ At other times they delivered their discourses in schools, at their homes, or in public places such as basilicas and theaters. Rhetoricians were often the companions of prominent men : so Albucius Silus of Plan- cus,'"' Timagenes of Pollio.'" What a colossal opinion of their own importance and that of their art the rhetoricians had, may be seen from Aper's exi)Osition in Tacitus, Dialogus c. 5-7.^"' It may '^"Cf. Lucan, Pharsalia iv, 185, S23. *'<>Cf. Monceaux, /. <:., p. 189 sq. '"'Cf. Leo, De Sni. frag. id>s. crit., pp. 147 sq. Seneca's tragedies are " I )eclamationes ad tragoediae amussim deductas et in actus deductas." *'-Cf. Bernhardy, Grtindnss dcr rcDiiscJiiyi Litttratur, p. 282. '■'•Cf. Suetonius, De rir. ill. c. 7 : " ^L Antonius Grypho docuit primum in Divi Tulii domo pueri adhuc, deinde in sua privata"; Gruppe, Qiiaest. Ann., p. 27. '■*Cf. Suetonius, Dt' rJici. clar. c. 30. '■^ Cf. Seneca philos., De Ira iii, 23. '■HJf. for instance c. 7 end : "Quid? fama et laus cuius artis cum ora- torum gloria comparanda est ? Qui tarn inlustres et in urbe . . . non solum apud negotiosos et rebus intentf)S sed etiam apud vacuos at adulescentes quibus modo recta indoles est et bona spes sui." / 36 THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. be safely asserted that the immoderate vanity, conceit, and rivalry of the rhetoricians, which led them to make a display of their skill and acumen an end in itself, or rather //w end, and to adopt every expedient to draw attenton to it, was a leading cause of the perversion of oratory at that time. As niioht be expected of men who lived, moved and had their l)ein_o in an unreal world and whose lite-work was confined within the lour walls of a school- room, the rhetoricians must have been as a rule un{)ractical and pedantic. As Koerber^" remarks, this may have been imj)lied in the name " scholasticus," which was j4i\en to them. Thus Seneca^"' says with reference to Bassus who endeavored in his declamations to imitate the force and earnestness ol an orator ol' the forum: "Nihil est indecentius quam ubi scholasticus lorum, quod non novit, imitatur. Amabam itaque Capiionem .... bona fide scholasticus erat.''"' And Seneca'"" relates that Albucius affected in his declamations, vul^^arities and low t expressions in order not to appear as a scholasticus. The rhetoricians took their task and the preparation tor it very easily.'"' When origi- nality was lacking they were content to a[)proi)riate the mental property of others, changing or omitting a word.'"-' Still there were individual exceptions who were earnestly devoted to their art, and endeavored to cultivate and perfect it. So for instance Latro.^'^* Moreover there was not an absolute lack of able men with sound judgment and clear insight, who made no secret of their opinion of the unwholesome character of the school decla- mations and the shortcomings of the rhetoricians. The crushing judgment of Cassius Severus^"' has been quoted already. Mon- ^'^ Ueber di}i Rhetor Seneca^ pp. 44 scj. ^"^^ Fyaef. Contr. x, 12, ^"'■'Cf. Tacitus, Dtaloi^us c. 35: "At nunc adulescentuli nostii dctiucuntur in scaenam scholasticoruni, qui rhetores vocantur "; Koerber, I'eicf den Rhet. Seneca, p. 45, foot note 212 : " In the same mLaning Tctronius in his first Satire employs the word ' inipracticus,' /. .r. 'scholasticus, qui in unibia sub tecto vitani agit/ according to an old giosbary on i'etronius." ^*^ Praef. Contr. vii, 3 sq. ^^* Cf. Seneca, Praej. Contr. i, 10: " (^uis est, cjui memoriae studeat ? Quis, qui non dico magnis virtutibus, sed suis placeat ? Sententias a diser- tissimis viris iactas facile in tanta hominum desidia pro suis dicunt."' ^®2 Cf. Seneca, Contr. x, 5, 20: "Multi sunt, qui detracto verbo aut mutate aut adiecto putent se alienas sententias lucri fecissc." ^®^ Cf. Seneca, Praef. Contr. i, 2-}^. ^®*Cf, Seneca, Praef. Contr. iii, 12 sq. / / THE THEMES TREATED CY THE ELDER SENECA. 37 tanus V(Mienus speaks in terms no less sharp of the vanitv and want of conscientiousness of the rhetoricians.^" To a certain degree they seem to have exercised a mutual criticism.^"'' From the lact that the rhetoricians were allowed to harangue freely against tyranny, to exalt tyrannicide in the most glowing terms, and to kill off their imaginary tyrants to their heart's content, unmolested by the actual tyrants who were sitting on the throne,^" it may be inferred that they were regarded as a harmless sort of people and that they exercised no influence whatever on the movements of political life. Reference has been made to the possibility that the emperors favored the rhetorical schools as a safety-valve for the lingering remnant of the old Roman love of liberty. Real life as it seems went on its course ignoring them as it was ignored by them. So likewise the dissensions of the various rhetorical sects^'" must have been a harmless matter, merely in the nature of personal attachments to individual masters, and not as in the warring philosophical schools, a differ- ence of principles, ''•' for the obvious reason that professionally the rhetoricians had no principles. It cannot, however, be too strongly emphasized that they could never have attained such a height of foolishness and such an absurd feeling of self-importance had they not been strongly supported by the public opinion of the times, ^'' and the reason for this strong support has in it an '^ //'/■/,, Frdef. Contr. ix, 1 scj. "*/A;,/., Contr. i, 2, 22; vii, 5, 7; ix, 6, 13; Koerber, Ueber defi Rhet, ■6V;/., pp. 52 sq. ^^H^f. Bonnell, De mut. sub. pmu. Caes. Elo.j., p. 29. ^^Cf. Quintilian, Inst. Orat. ii, 11, 2. '^''Cf. Hlass, Die gricch. Pereds.^ p. 157. '•" Fronto, perhaps the most courted and flattered of all the rhetoricians, expresses on almost every page of his writings his fatuous consciousness that the whole universe has its eyes fixed upon him (cf. Ad amicos, i, 12); that nothing exists outside of rhetoric ; that rhetoric is the queen of the world, and that P>onto is the king of rhetors. His sorrow and disappoint- ment when his imperial pupil, Marcus Aurelius, turned from rhetoric to philosophy, are amusingly characteristic of the man (cf. Monceaux, Les Africains, pix 215, 227 sq.). To explain such ridiculous vanity it is neces- sary to remember that the whole world then thought of Fronto what he thought of himself. He was compared by his contemporaries to the ancient Greek orators and to Cato, and pronounced their superior (cf. Monceaux, //'/(/., pp. 221 sq.). So well did he understand the prevailing taste that for a long time cultivated Rome " Frontonized "; his age recognized and 38 THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SEXECA. element of pathos. The Roman, filled with the memory of the glory that had been, — the reality gone from his citizenship, from his oratory, and from his religion, — attributing to rhetoric an ethical power strong to help, turned to it as an end in itself/" his only link with the past, his only means of education lor tiie present ; clinging to it with a sort of despairing frenzy lest if sacred rhetoric should perish, with it should vanish from the world his only hope for the future. Only from this point of view can be comprehended rightly that intense devotion to an artificial thing, — a devotion which inevitably defeated its own purpose. admired itself in his works (cf. Mnnccaux. /'■;./., p. 2;,9). Uiifoi tunatel v for Fronto's reputation in modern times, the disc(>ver\ of a portion 'i V^"C eyyvfiva^ofitvcjv i]fxi)V Tolq rcjv aoocjv cnToodiy/naaiv ^^] cf. also K'l)b, Zav Attic Orators ii. p. 54. / ♦ ' / /' v r T!!i-: riii-.M!:.- r!^!..\ri:i) \\\ 1 n i-: elder seneca. 39 PART II. I. — Seneca the Elder. I. His life. For a long time it was the fate of the elder Seneca not only to be overshadowed by his greater son the philosopher, but to be entirely merged in him, so that his writings were attributed to his son and always combined with those of the latter. It was Raphael of Volaterra, who lived until the beginning of the sixteenth cen- tury, who first distinguished Seneca the Elder trom Seneca the philosopher."- The confusion between father and son was fully cleared up later by Justus Lipsius.^'' To this amalgamation of the two is {)robably due the fact that the pracnomeyi of the father is differendy given. The MSS. have either L (Lucius) which is the praenomen of the philosopher, or omit it entirely, while the name of Marcus is first mentioned by Raphael Volaterra. This may have originated, as Koerber surmises, ^■'' from the fact that it was customary among the Romans to give children the praenomen of the irrandlather, and as the children of Mela^'' and of Seneca the philosopher'-"' bore the name of Marcus, it was assumed that this was the praenomen of the elder Seneca also.'-'' The praenomen ' *' In his Ccnifnentariormn urhajionwi octo et fri^iuta libri Anthropol. 1. 19 (Rai)hael Maffeius Volaterranus); cf. .-\ntonius Ilispalensis, Bibliotheca His fan a -'ftus i, 1 . ^■*-'' Elector itr/i liher \ (appeared in 15S0). '■^ Ucl'cr deti Rhetor Seneca, p. 4. 1^' The poet M. Lucanus. I'^'^Cf. Seneca philos., Consol. ad Helv. iS, 4. '''"H. J. Muller, in the preface to his edition of Seneca Rhetor (Vindo- bonae mdccclxxxvii), \). viii, thinks it probable that father and son were confounded because they had the same praenomen. Wolftlin (AV/. Mus. 1., (1S95), p 320) assumes that the praenomen is Lucius on the ground that Quintilian, 7;/^/. Orat.x, i, i 25, mentions the philosopher simply as Seneca, while ibid. loi, 114 he speaks of T. Livius and C. Caesar to distinguish the historian from the poet Livius, and the dictator from another Caesar, as also Varro Aticinus is cited by Priscian 10, 3, to distinguish him from M. Varro of Reate. Wolfflin argues that Quintilian would have marked the distinction of praenomen between the Senccas, father and son, had such a distinction existed. This argument does not seem very convincing as Quintilian is speaking only of philosophers, so that there was no possible ambiguity as to which Seneca he meant. 40 THE THEMES TREATED I'.V THE ELDER SENECA. therefore must be regarded as uncertain. Seneca was bcun at Cordova in Spain.^" His family was wealthy'" and belonged to the equestrian order.'^' " The date of his birth can be only approx- imately established by the combination of other data. Seneca himself says'"' that but for the civil war which kept him in his native province, he would have had the opportunity ol hearing Cicero declaiming with the two great men who bore the toga praetexta. By these are to be understood Hirtiusand I'ansa who were consuls in 43 B. C..- ^ and Seneca mu^t refer to this very year. The question of Seneca's age at this time depends on another, viz. at what age pupils usually entered the rhetorical schools. Koerber-'" assumes in consideration of the confusion of the courses of the grammatical and rht-torical schoo's nuntioned above,'' that boys entered tht- rhetorical schools at the early age of ten. and would accordingly fix the birth of Seneca in the year 53 B. C. But even granting that some boys may have come when ten years old under the training of the rhetoricians, it is not likely that one would be sent at that tender age from a distant province to the metropolis for the sake of study. It st-ems sater theretore not to fix upon any year as the certain date of birth but to leave it undecided between 60 and 53 B. C.'^ It is generally assumed that Seneca visited Rome twice.'"' As regards the date of his first coming, it would seem from the passage Praef. Contr. i, ii ni '■'"Cf. Seneca philos., E/^t^^r., ix [VA. Ilaase) : '•Nunc !uiinin(;u.i tuu deplora, Corduba, vatem . . . Hie tuus quondam nmgnus tua gloria eivis hi- figar scopulo"; Seneca, J'raff. Contr. 1. i i : •• Hellorum civiliuni furor . . . intra coloniam meam nie continuit "; Martial, i, 61, 7 : "Duosquc Scnecas unicumque Lucanum facunda loquitur Cordui)a.'' ^^*Cf. Seneca philos.. Cons ad Hei: . 14,2. -<^'Cf. Tacitus, Annalcs .xiv, 53: " Egone, equei,tri et provinciali IolO ortus proceribus civitatis adnumcror." -^''^ Praef. Contr. i, 11. ■-"■'Cf. Suetonius, Dc clar. rhet. c. i : "Cicero ad praeturani usque Graece declamavit ; Latine vero senior quoque, et quidcni consulibus Ilirtio et Pansa, quos discipulos et grandcs praetcxtatos vocabat "; ci. also Cicero, Ad Fam. vii, 33, i ; ix, 16. 7. ''^^Uefwr den Rhct. Soiua, p. 3. w l>age 17. -"^Cf. Clinton, /■(/.(•// //^//c-zz/cx ill, p. 20i,2(.l edition, who adopts 61 15. C. as the date of Seneca's birth. 2^^' Cf. Seneca, J'rac-f. Contr. iv, 3 : '' Audivi auteni illuni (sc. Asinium Pollionemj et virideni et postea iani seneni." This i)assage, quoted by \s.Qtxhtx {Ueber den Rliet. Sentca, p. 4) in support of this assumption, does not seem at ail decisive. f.i ' \ . I' K THE THEMES TREATED TV THE ELDER SENECA. 41 quoted in Note 198, that he left Cordova soon after the death of Cicero. This date is also supported by two other passages of the same preface jji^ 13 and 24, in which Seneca relates that he lived in close triendship with Porcius Latro from early boyhood ("a prima pueritia "). and that he heard him recite his first Controversia while still a youth ("admodum iuvenem ") in the school of MaruUus where he was himself a student.''" On the other hand the civil wars which prevented him from going to Rome during Cicero's lifetime, did not cease before 29 B. C'' How long Seneca re- mained in Rome on his first visit is not known. We may assume that he staid there long enough to complete his rhetorical edu- cation.' ' Returning to Cordova he married Helvia who belonged to an old conservative family and who seems personally to have been a woman of no common parts.''" By this marriage there were three sons: Novatus, who was adopted by the rhetor L. Junius Gallio, Lucius Seneca the philosopher, and Mela the father of the poet Lucan.-^^ The latest possible date of Seneca's second coming to Rome is 4 A. D. For Asinius Pollio, of whom he says :■'- " Audivi ilium et viridem et postea iam senem " (on which words, especially postea, Koerber and Gruppe base their theory of a double visit) died 5 A. D. And at least five years later Seneca must have been still at Rome.''' The date of Seneca's death can be ascertained only approximately. On the one hand it is certain that he was still alive in 34 A. D. For in Suas. ii, 22 he speaks of the accusation raised against Scaurus Mamercus by Fus- cus, and the extinction of the Scaurus family in the person of this Mamercus. This accusation was made in 32 A. D.,'^' and two 2«H:f. Koerber, Ceher dm Rhet. Sen., p. 5; Gruppe, Qiiaesi. Ann., p. 25. ^*'Cf. Haunim, De rhet. Grace, a Seneca in Suas. et Contr. adhib., p. 12. Baunun assumes this date for Seneca's first coming to Rome and offers the exjKanation that the youthful recitation of Latro and the teaching of Marubus occurred in Cordova. '"• Cf. Koerl)cr, C\-(>er den Rhet. Sen., p. 6; Gruppe, Quaest. Ann., p. 25. Gruppe assumes tiiat he did not leave Rome before 16 B. C. •'^"Cf. Seneca philos., Consol. ad Ileh ., passim, especially xiv sq. -" They are introduced in this order in the prefaces to the Controversiae, except in that to book ix, where Lucius is wanting. '•'"'^ Praef. Contr. iv, 3, ■"Cf. Seneca, Contr. i, 3, 10, where he mentions "Varus Quintilius tunc Germanici gener ut praetextatus "; Gruppe, Quaest. Ann., pp. 25 sq. -'^Cf. Tacitus, Annales vi, c. 9 : " Appius Silanus Scauro Mamerco simul ac Sabmo Calvisio maiestatis postulantur " (under Tiberius). \ I 42 THE THEMES TRK ATF.D I'.V Till'. F.T.DF.R SI'XI'.CA. years after, another accusation induced Maniercus to commit sui- cide, by which, as Seneca says, his family became extinct.-'" On the other hand Seneca did not survive the banishnRiit ol his son Lucius, which took place in 41 A. D.," and accordm^l)- the date of his death is to be set between 34 and 41 A. D. These limits may be narrowed if Suetonius's account of the deatli ol Tiberius is an extract from Seneca's lost historical work, the existence ot which is attested by Seneca the philosopher.-^' The })assa^e ol Sueto- nius"' reads: "Seneca eum (sc. Tiberium ) scribit, iniellecta delec- tione exempturum annulum (juasi alicui tiadituium parumper tenuisse, dein rursus aptasse dii^ito et comprtssa sini>tia manu iacuisse diu immobilem, subitoque vocatis ministns ac iieniine respondente consurrexisse nee procul a lectulo deficieritil)us viri- bus concidisse." In this case Seneca wuuid at lea.-^t ha\c siu'vived Tiberius who died 37 A. D.-'^ 2. His chiDactey. The character of Seneca is reflected especially in the preiaccs to the sini^le books of the Controversiae, in which he writes m an unaffected epistolary style as a lather to his children, m a tone which bears the stamp of sincerity and conviction. We recognize a man of the old sterling, almost severe Roman, character alter the pattern of M. Porcius Cato, of whom he was a great admirer.''" '•^^"' Cf. Tacitus, //';a'. c. 29 : '• Mamcrcus dein Scaurus rursuni postulalur . . , ab Servilio et Cornelio accusatorihus adultcriun: Liviae. niagdir.in sacra obiectabantur. Scaurus, ut diL;ivutn vctcnbus Aemiliis, (lainnationem anteit, hortante Sextia uxore, quae iucitametUum mortis et paiticeps tnit." '^'^This follows from the pa-^sages in Cons. ad Hen. li, 4 S(|.: "Cati-si- mum virum, ex cjuo mater trium liberoruni eras, extulisti. Lupeiui tibi luctus nuntiatus e>t omnibus cjuidem absentibus liberis, i[uasi dc indu'-tria in id tempus coniectis malis tuis, ut nihil es>et ubi se dolor tuu^ reclinaret. Transeo tot pericula, tot nietus, quos sine intervallo in te incursantes, pertulisti; modo in eundem sinum, ex quo ires nepotes emi\>. S-10 ; Tcuffel, //isi. 0/ Rom. Lit. % 269. 5. •"oCf. Praef, Contr. i, 9. i / ' ",^ V ■! THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. 43 He passes a censure"' upon the corruption and laxity of the times, to which there are numerous allusions in the Controversiae,*-- and probably goes too far and exaggerates, as is usually the case with the huidator iemporis acti. Seneca indeed exhibits some traces of the rii^or ajitiquusr He disapproved of the higher education of women, "propter istas quae litteris non ad sapientiam utuntur, sed ad luxuriam instruuntur." In his earlier years he took part in political hfe and was not indilTerent to political ambitions and honors ; but later lie regarded political life as beset with dangers com{)ared with which the life of a scholar afforded a safe harbor but little exposed to the storms of fate."' As far as we know e\-en as a scholar his activity was confined to writing, for although it is certain that he passed much of his time in the rhetorical schools, where alone he could have acquired his vast knowledge of con- temporary rhetoric, there is nothing whatever to show that he took any active part in them or that he has the slightest claim to the title of rhetor which has been given him. Seneca show^s himself again as an old Roman of the Catonian type in his unconcealed antipathy to the Greek rhetoricians and Greek culture in general. In fact he overlooks no opportunity of giving the Greeks a re- buke : compare for instance Praef Contr. i, 6 : ''insolens Graecia"; Contr. X, 4, 23: "Graecas sententias in hoc refero, ut possitis aestimare, primum quam facilis e Graeca eloquentia in Latinum transitus sit et quam omne, quod bene dici potest, commune omnibus gentibus sit, deinde ut ingenia ingeniis conferatis et cogitetis Latinum linguam facultatis non minus habere, hcentiae minus " ; compare besides : Contr. i, 6, 12 ; i, 7, 12; i, 8, 7 ; ii, 6, 12, ix, 2, 29. Still his sense of justice occasionally compels him to accord praise to the Greeks, as in Contr. x, 4, 18, but even this he usually qualifies with a**nescio an" when the Greeks have the advantage in a comparison with the Roman rhetoricians as in Contr. i, 4, 10 and i2.^-"' As regards Seneca's attitude toward --' Cf. Fraef. Contr. i, 2, 8 sq. 23. 2-- Cf. i, 7, 5 ; ii, 4, 10 ; x, 4. 17 sq. '^'^Thus Contr. iv. 6 he considers it a weakness (" imbecillus animus") in liaterius who had lost six sons, to burst into tears in the midst of a dis- course which recalled his loss ; cf. also Sen., Consol. ad Helv. xvii, 3 : " Patris mei antiquus rigor . . . Virorum optimus, pater meus,maiorum con- suetudini deditus." '-'•' Cf. Praef. Contr, ii, 3 sq. -■'Cf. liuschmann. Character der gruchiseJie7i Rhetoren beim Rhetor Seneca, pp. 1, 2 ; Koerber, Uei'er den Rhet. Sen., pp. 63 sq. k 44 Till-: TIIK.MES IREATElJ KV TliE ELDER SENECA. THE TiiEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. 45 the political conditions of his time, it may be said that he was on the whole reconciled to the change from the confusion and unrest of the later period of the Republic to the imperial rule, although the love of liberty, especially so far as it concerned the freedom of the scientific spirit, was still alive in his breast. He is in complete svmpathy with Aui^ustus whom he terms a "clementis- simus vir," "'' and praises for allovvinj^ to a certain extent freedom of speech."" But he is tully aroused to ire by the literal v auto-da-fcs of his time."-" He has, however, no sympathy for those toolhardy persons who would rather risk their heads than forego some seditious saying.-"'-' 3. His 7criiino;s. The rhetorical writings of Seneca which have survived under the title "Oratorum et rhetorum sententiae, divisiones, colores," consist of one book of Suasoriae and ten books of Controversiae.'""* The first contains seven themes, of which the beeinnint' is incom- plete, and Bonnell is perha})s ri^ht in thinking that they repre- sent only a small remnant of the original number of Suasoriae, possibly not even the whole of the first book.*'' Of the ten books of Controversiae, only five, viz. i, ii, vii, ix and x, have the decla- mations, thirty-five in number, in full, although even these exhibit many lacunae. -^^ Of the thirty-nine Controversiae of the other books, viz. iii, iv, v, vi and viii, there are in existence only the ^■'^ Praef. Contr. iv, 5. ■-'-'" Cf. C(?///'r. ii, 4, 5 : " Tanta auttm sub ciivo Augusto liheitas fait, ut praepotenti tunc M. Agrippae non defuennt qui ignohilitateiii cxprobra- rent." It was by no means an excessive freedom of speech wiiich Augu>tus left to the proud Romans. -'-'^ Cf. Praff. Contr. x, 6, where he says of the burning of tlu- writings of Labienus : " Bono hercules publico ista in poenas ingeniorum versa crude- Htas post Ciceroneni inventa est"; § 7 : ** Facem studiis subdtrt'. ct in monumenta disciplinarum animadvertere quanta et quam non contti.ia cet- era materia saevitia est." ■-'**Cf. Contr. ii, 4, 13 : "... sed horum non possum misercri, cjui tanti putant caput potius quam dictum perdere." -^"'That the division of the Controversiae into books originated with Sen- eca himself, is shown by the fact that each book is introduced bv a piciace. '-'^^ Cf. Bonnell, Df niut. sub. prirn. Caes. cio<;., \). 22: " Videtur autem, quae ad nos pervenerunt septem (sc. Suasoriae) exigua tantum j)ars a Sen- ecae libris mandatum f uisse, fortasse ne primus quidein liber integer, quo certe numero antiquissima vSuasoriarum editio Veneta inscribitur." -'■'-The ignorance of the copyist played special havoc in transcribing the dicta of the (xreek rhetoricians ; cf. Buschmann, C/it:r. an- ^-^r/^, v. h'/if!. beini Rhet. Seneca, p. 3. Excerpts.''' In this loss it is some consolation that the valuable prefaces to books iii and iv have been preserved. In regard to the date of composition of the writings we know that Seneca pro- duced them in extreme old age."' For a more precise date the same points come under consideration which were discusseci c i n- cerning the date of his death, 7. e. they must have been written between 34 and 41 A. D. Schanz''' would limit this interval to the first years of Caligula's reign, because, he thinks, during the reign oi Tiberius, Seneca would not have dared to quote in Suas. vii, 19 from the book of Cremutius Cordus, which had been officially burned, in a work which was intended not only for his sons but lor the public. Schanz quotes Praef. Contr. i, 10: "Quaecunque a celeberrimis viris facunde dicta teneo, ne ad quemquam priva- tim pertineant, populo dedicabo." But this is not at all conclu- sive. Seneca may have intended his rhetorical writings, which he composed m the first place at the request and for the benefit of his sons, for the general public, yet not have delivered them to the j)ublic during his lifetime, but entrusted this matter to his sons, so as not to come into conflict with the tyrannical Tiberius even if he censured him in his book.-"" The Controversiae were com- ^^33 (^f. Bursian in the Preface to his edition of Seneca, p. vii sq., concern- ing the date ot origin and the value of tlie E.xcerpts : " Controversiarum libros magna fuis>e etiani apud posteriores aevi homines auctoritate ex eo collieerc liceat, quod saeculo fere quarto vel quinto p. Chr. n. extitit qui illas ad scholaruin, ut mihi videtur, usus in epitomen redegerit, praefationes autem sive epistulas ad tilios datas, quas Seneca singulis libris praemiserat integras in banc exerptorum collectionem transtulerit, exceptis praefa- tiouibus libri quinti, sexti, octavi, et noni, quas cur omiserit rationem reddere non ])ossumus. Epitimator autem quisquis fuit in negotio suo exsecjuendo nee satis petite nee satis diligenter est versatus ; nam, ut omit- tam quod j)!uiinia ex aibitrio suo immutavit, hand raro sententias tarn arte cum abis connexas ut sine damno ab illis divelli non possent, nexu exsolutas ita posiiu ut legentibus nobis ineptae omnique sensu destitutae videantur . . . (^)uin ctiam est ul)i sententias a Seneca positas, quia non intellexerat prorsus corruperit '"; zi. Y^ow\\z^x, Qtiaest. in Sen. patr. crit.^ p. 12; H. J. Midler m the Preface to his edition of Seneca, p. xxii. '*'*Cf, Seneca, Iraef. Contr. i, 2 : " Sed cum multa iam mihi ex meis des- ideranda senectus fecerit, oculorum aciem retuderit, aurium sensum hebe- taverit, nervorum tirmitatem fatigaverit ..." '^^-'' Ceschic/ite (ler rotnischen I.itteratiir u,-^. 200; cf. also Bursian in the Preface to his edition of Seneca, p. vii. •'^'i'hat he entrusted scjme works to his son Seneca the philosopher, for publication, follows from the passage of Seneca philosopher, fragm. 98 (ed. Haase iii, p. 436); cf. Koerber, Ueber den K/iet. Sen., pp. 9 sq. / 46 THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. 47 posed before the Suasoriae.-'^' The primal y reason of SciKca's writing his rhetorical works was the request ot hi^ sons who desired to beconie .icquainted witli tht- sayini^s oi the rhetoricians in order to form an independent judgment on them." ~ At the same time the work was intended for the general public eventu- ally."'" Still a third motive was to rescue some ol the prcniinent rhetoricians from oblivion or irom wiiat is worse, misrepresenta- tion.-'" Besides the Suasorlae and Controversiae, Seneca composed an historical work on the period from the beginning of ilie ( ivil wars down to his own time, and, as it would seem, some other works which have been lost. This would follow h'om what his son says in irai^m. 9S: "Si quaecunque composuit i)ater nuns et edi voluit, iam in manus populi eniisissem, ad clar::atem nommis sui satis sibi ipse prospexerat : nam nisi me decipit pietas, cuius hon- ■-^■' Cf. Seneca, Contr. ii,4,8: " <^uae dixerit (^c I.atn^) suo loco rcclclarn cum ad suasorias vt nero." This ))a-^age confirms the opinion tliat the Suasoriae extant do not represent all which were edited l>v Senec a as he would scarcelv have failed to reproduce tliis long Suasoria t-t his Ix-uned Latro. In the MSS. and most of the editions the Suasoriae are placed be- fore the Controversiae in accordance with the gradation adopteti fot instruc- tion in the rhetorical schools, wheie the Sua-oiiae being easier came first. Cf. Schott in his Preface, p. 7 : " Ltsi non me fugit ControveI^ia^ piiusedi- disse AL Aniiaeum quam Suasorias, has enim Controversia \ii pxanittit, tamen feci libenter ut has illis ordine anteponerem, cum tradendarum artiuni Methodo, quae perfaciliora notaque, ad ea quae difficilia magis, obscura atque ignota sunt, viam sternit, tum piiorum editionuni exemplo Frobinii, etc.'' Cf. Teuffel, Hist, of Rcvi. Lit. % 269, 7 ; IL J. Mailer ( I'rcface, p. viii) thinks it might be concluded from the circumstance that the end of the Controversiae and the beginning of the Suasoriae are wanting, that in the older MSS. now lost, the Suasoriae were preceded 'n- the Controversiae. The lacuna could thus be easily explained by the loss of several leave> or an entire quaternion. But if the Suasoriae preceded the Controversiae this lacuna may be easily accounted for in another way, viz. the beginning and end of a book are the first to suffer all kinds t)f vicissitudes. '-3SCf. Praef. Contr. i, i : " Jubetis ... ah illis (sc. declamatoribus) dicta colligere, ut, quamvis notitiae vestrae subducti sint, tamen non credatis tantum de illis, sed et iudicetis." •-'39 Cf. Ibid. \ 10. ■'*''Cf. Ibid. § II : " Ipsis cjuoque multum praestaturus videor, cpiibus ob- livio imminet, nisi aliquid quo niemoria eorum producatur, posteris trad- itur. Fere enim aut nuUi conimentarii maximorum declamatornm extant aut, quod peius est, falsi. Itaque ne aut ignoti sint aut aliter quam debent not!, summa cum fide suum cuique reddam." \y\ ^ estas etiam error est, inter eos haberetur, qui ingenio meruerunt lit puris scriptoruin tituiis nobiles essent. Quisquis le^^ieset eius historias ab initio bellorum civilium, unde primum Veritas retro obiit, paene uscjue ad mortis suae diem, maoni aestimaret scire, quibus natus esset parentibus ille,qui res Romanas. . . ." Whether the '' quaecuncpie "' refers to works besides the history, and whether these works were independent treatises on rhetoric as Koerber^" surmises, is, althouoh very likely, not certain. Nor does the pas- sage seem conclusive which is quoted by Quintilian from a Con- troversia ot Seneca to support the view that Seneca published declamations of his (Avn. For Koerber's arguments"'' to prove that this passai^e is not trom one of the Controversiae, /. e. which Seneca merely collected and which were afterward lost, are not decisive. The tone and tenor of the passage in question are entirely in keeping with the style of the Controversiae which we find in the collection of Seneca,*'" and the theme is in a degree parallel to that of Contr. vi, 7. 4. Value of Jus rhetorical uuritiji^s. The rhetorical writings are the richest and most trustworthy source of our information on the methods and condition of the study of rhetoric, and since rhetoric, as has been said above, com- prised the whole of what we term a liberal education, we may add of the pursuit of liberal studies and general culture in the ages of Augustus and Tiberius. It is true, they do not convey an adequate picture of the schools of that time; the individual declama- tion is not presented as it was delivered and discussed in some detinite place and at a definite time, but solely with regard to its contents. For since most of the themes were stereotyped and in vogue in various schools, Seneca reproduced what he has heard on each of them in several places and on several occasions.^** 241 Ueber den Rhd. Sni.. p. 22. ^'■-' Loc. cit. -^'•Cf. Quintilian, hist. Orat. ix, 2, 42: "Nov! vero et praecipue decla- matores audacius nee mehercule sine motu quodani imaginantur ; ut Seneca ista in controversia, cuius summa est, quod pater filium et novercam indu- cente altero filio in adulterio deprehensos occidit : Due, sequor ; accipe hanc senilem manum et quocunque vis imprime. Et post paulo, Aspice, in- quit, quod diu non credidisti. Ego vero non video, nox oboritur et crassa- caligo." ■-'" Cf. 5.v lii.uked by clearness, [)recision. purity of ex|)ression, and a r- -inai .md perspicuous periodic structure. In the declamations the influence of the Silver Latin is predominant. The cjuestion arises, to whom are the diction I'.nd ^t}de of the^e (^the Conti oversiae and Suasoriae) to be attni)Uted ? 1 lave we in them a fan h mi leprodaic- tion in f^arm and contents of the saymi;s oi each rhetorician to whom they are ascribed ; or did Seiieea tree Iv -ixe ilie ila u< Ins of the rhetors his owai form ^ This latter view is achipted iiy Teuffel.-'' But the diiterence between the lanc:nai^e oi theprelaces and that ot the declamations, .md alsomthe m. inner of expression of the ditlerent rhetoricians, is so marked th.it it would sec in that Seneca endeavored also to reproduce the peculiarities of the style of the individual rhetors. This is the view adopted \>v AL Sander''" and H. T. Karsten.'" Tliey re,^ard the worchin- oi the declamations as an attempt on the part of Seneca to rejjrotiuce the varyin^i;- styles of the diftereiit speakers, and .i{)peai to the fict that Seneca had no other sources for his work than h;s memory which, good as it was, could not be exj-ecteci to be absolutely faithful as regards the details of the mode o; ( xpression, They 2*^ Cf. Schott, Dc auci. ei decl. rat., p. 5. ** De cuius scriptoris stylo ita iudicare non dubiteni, nihil esse in lingua l.atina, cum a Cicerone Fabioque discesseris, scripto purius et elegantius." ^^Cf. Praef. Contr. i, 7. 11; Suas. vi, i 4 sq. '^' Hist, of R.^rn. Lit. % 269. 6. 2*^ Quacst. in Sci:. rUc't. synS., p. 4 sq.; Der Sprachgebrauch des Rhet. A /in. Sdii. i. p. 1 sq. ^^^ De eloc. rhet. i/ual, inven. :>i .-hin. Sen. suas. et contr, ^ pp. 9 sq. \ THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. 49 / ^ I ^\ remind us, liowever, that Seneca refers with pride to the prodigious power of his memory, which bordered on the miraculous."" Besides, as Karsten observes, it is not at all impossible that Seneca assisted his memory by consulting the vari(;us collections of declamations in current use, to the existence of which he often refers.''' Does it not seem altogether probable that Seneca had also notes taken by himself while listening to the declamations? Many of the epigrammatic phrases scattered throughout his work are so good that it seems as if they must be in the exact words of the speakers who uttered them. Sander and Karsten remind us that the 'haracteristics of the style of the different rhetoricians, as given by Seneca in the prefaces, are really verified by the sayings quoted from them afterwards. It is shown that the st\le of the individual rhetoricians as represented in Seneca's work, differs not only in a general way but also in some definite details."' Still it seems necessary to assume that the stylistic peculiarities of the individual rhetors are somewhat effaced, as even a most ])henomen tl i]iem jutl<^nu r,t on some saying ot a rhetor or disc»i>ses some passage Irom a poet, which is but loosely connected with the scholastic subject in hand. Mc-t of all he delii'htsin reminiscencesand anecdotes concci nin^ the rhetor- icians and others."'^" Occasionally even a jest is v«. nture(i upon.*" If all this interfeies with the ohjeclixity ol Sepicca's nariation, aid confirms the opinion ex{)ressed above that we fnui m the Contro- versiae and Suasoriae Ijut an inadecjuate j)!cture o! tiie i;!e and action of the rhetorical schools, still we may assert that Sem ca was a subjective writer with a very powerful memorv winch enabled him to reproduce the characteristics of the ctitieient rhetors, and this intermingles somethini^ ot" lile, fiesh arai warm, with the cold subtleties and casuistries ot the main l)oii\- ol the work. 5. His attitude toicard yJi-'toric and the rhetoriciaus. Seneca approached the work of rccordin;^ liis reminiscerices of life in the schools with much cheerfulness and pleasure' and is most enthusiastic about the art and study ot rlutoric, wliich in his opinion is the noblest of all pursuits'"' and the means oi •-'^ Seneca sometimes states explicitly that he has oinitti-d ceitans pas- sages of the discourses, and gives a biiel tiint ut the oniutetl jxntK i>. cl. Contr. i, 8, 10 : " Hie e.xempta " ; ii, 0, 25: " 111c vitioium exprobai.o"; vii, G, 13 : " Deinde de aniniu ser\i,'" etc. ^^•^ Cf. Conlr. vii, i, 27; Suas. i, 16; ii, ic. -^•' Cf. Ct'w/r. ii, 2, 12 ; ii, 4, 1 1 ; vii, 3, y; vii, 4, 6 ; ^"/<...f. iii, 5 sq. --'•'' Cf. Co)itr. X, 5, Z%. -'='"Cf. Praef. Contr. i, i : " Ex:gitis rem magis iucundam mihi quaiu taciie . . . iucunduui mihi redire in antiqua studia ujeiioresque ad annt>> rcspi- cere." ^-'^Cf. Fracj. Conir. ii, 3 : " pulcherrima discipUna.'' \ V i r [ » THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. 51 entrance to all liberal culture.'*" But he is not a blind devotee to any and every kind of rhetoric. He complains bitterly of the condition of the art in his own time''' and distinguishes the decla- matio from tlie " solidum scripti genus.'"^' In several passages m the prefaces he lavs down rules on the art of rhetoric : the student siiould ac(|uamt Inmself with several models: "Quo plura exempla inspccta sunt, ])lus in eloquentiam proficitur. Non est unus, cpianiMs })raecipuus sit, imitandus, quia nunquam par fit imitator auctori . . . ."^^ The endeavor to imitate deprives one of firmness ol judi^ment ; " Hoc ill! (sc. Albucio) accedebat incon- staiitia iudicii: (juem proxime dicentem commode audiebat imitari volebat."- ' Subtlety of thought must be concealed in order to be effective.""' He condemns severely the use of sordid and obscene expressions.-'"' The style should have vigor without straining for elaborate and exaggerated effects.''' The fulness of expression should not l)e overloaded."'" The discussion should be clear and simple, but solid.'" The argumentation should be neither clumsy nor involved.'"' As a sum total of the qualities of a good speaker, according to Seneca's view, may be added his characterization ol Cassius Severus: " Omnia ergo habebat, quae ilium, ut breve declamaret, instruerent : phrasin non vulgarem nee sordidam, sed electam, genus dicendi non remissum aut languidum, sed ardens et concitatum, non lentas nee vacuas explicationes, sed plus sensuum quam verborum habentes, diligentiam, maximum etiam mediocris ingenii subsidium.'"'^ Seneca's comments and criti- cisms, embodying his views and principles in detail, are inter- spersed among the savings of the individual rhetors, over some of whom he grows quite enthusiastic, as for instance Latro,''-and Crassus Severus.''' Others are pointed out in contradiction to these worthy exponents of their art, as being conspicuous for stupidity and absurdity.'" Still all are dealt with fairly and no est ; lit a 26* 263 966 VtiT 268 970 '.'72 •-■74 ribU Ct. //'/(/., 3 : " Facilis ab hac (-c. elucjuentia) in omnes artes discursus instruit etiani quos non sibi exercct." Cf. Prafj. Con!) . i, 6 sq. ; Praif. Contr. iii, i ; Pracf. Contr, x, 12. Cf. Conir. i, 8, 16 ; Szias. vi, 16, Praef. Contr. i, 6. ''^ Praef. Contr. vii, 4. -^'■'Cf. Praef. Contr. i, 21, Cf. Contr. i, 2, 22 sq. ; Pracf. Contr. iii, 7 ; Pracf. Contr. vii, 359. Cf. Praef. Conir. ii, 1 ; Praef. Contr. iv, 7 ; Contr. ix, 2, 28. Cf. Praef. Contr. ii, 1. -6''Cf. Praef. Contr. iii, 7. Cf. Pracf. Contr. vii, i ""''"^ Praef. Contr. Vu, 7. Cf. J'raef. Contr. i, 13 sq. '^'^Ci. Pracf. Contr. iii, i sq. Cf. on this point IJuschmann's interesting essay : Die ^^enfants ter- s ' unter den Rhetor en dcs Seneca. 52 THE TIIKMES TREATED BY THE KLDllR SENECA. good point is left unnoticed ; a tt^licitous ex{)ression receives praise even if it be senseless ; a ^ood thoiii^ht even if it be ])()orIy expressed. It is true that in Seneca's criticisms censure predomi- nates over praise. He does not mince matters; epithets like '' insanus, stultus, puerilis, ineptus, furiosus," are frequent ; there is no lack of bitin^^ sarcasm : "Antonius Atticus inter has pueriles sententias videtur palmam meruisse "r'' " Corvo rhetori testimo- nium stuporis reddendum est";'*' " Sparsum hoc colore decla- masse memini, hominem inter scholasticos sanum, inter sanos scholasticum."-"' On Seneca's attitude toward the Greek rhetori- cians we have already spoken. He was i)y no means, however, a petty, morose pedant and scold; he is thoroui^hly genial and has no idea of puttino^ the fetters of rii^id rules upon rhetoric : *' Nee sum ex iudicibus severissimis, qui omnia ad exactam regulam derigam : multa donanda ingeniis puto ; sed donanda vitia non portenta sunt.""" And what some of the rhetors accom- plished in absurdity and perversion of truth and good taste was " portentous " indeed. To hear or read these puerilities was a different thing from slowly and carefully writing them down, — a task to try the patience even of so grave and dignified a man as Seneca shows himst^lf to have been. This same Seneca who yielding to the request of his sons, undertook the task with pleasure and enthusiasm, expresses toward the end utter weari- ness and disgust: " F'ateor vobis," he addresses his sons, *' iam res taedio est. Primo adsilui velut optimam vitae meae partem mihi reducturus : deinde iam me pudet tamquam din non seriam rem agam. "2Ty If an estimate of Seneca's mental attainments is to be drawn from his extant rhetorical writings, it may be said that there is nothing in them to show a man of extraordinary capacity. The finesse and acumen of Dionysius Halic.irnassus or Ouintilian are lacking in him. Still his judgment, if not always fine, is sound. This is the more admirable when we consider that he passed a great portion of his time while at Rome in an artificial and narrow- ing sphere. His style by its clearness and siniplicity reminds us of the golden age of Latin diction. His place in Latin liter- ature is that of the standard authority on the spirit and tendency of the art of rhetoric at the beginning ot the imperial reirime. ■"^Suas.u, i6. ^■''^Ih'ci. 21. ■''• Co/ifr. j, 7, 15. '' /'rr.tf. C'ufr. x, 10. '-''■'' Praef. Coitr. x, i ; cf. Koerber, Uc'er den hh.t. .SV;;., pp. 59 ^q. k f^ v*^ *. A THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA II.— Manuscripts and Editions. ':^1^ A full description of the various MSS. and editions is given by H. J. Miiller in the Preface to his edition (1887) of the elder Seneca. The leadmg facts are briefly summarized below. I. Maniiscripis. The MSS. ot Seneca's writings divide themselves into two classes, — ist. those of the original work of Seneca as far as it is extant, /. r. the Controversiae Books i, ii, vii, ix and x exclusive of the Prefaces to books i and ii, and the seven Suasoriae ; 2nd, those containing the Excerpts of books i, ii, iii, iv, vii and x. \sf AfSS. 0/ the Controversiae and Suasoriae. — i. Codex Ant- verpiensis (A), parchment, loth century, corrected probably in 1 6th. Lacunae in Contr. ii, 5 ; ix, 2 ; Suas. ii, 7. 2. Codex Bruxellensis (B), formerly Cusanus, parchment, loth century, corrected in i6th. Lacuna in Contr. x, 5. Written by two hands. 3. Codex Vaticanus (V), parchment, written toward the end of the roth century and shortly afterward corrected by another hand, again slightly worked over in the 15th century. All three of these codices show by their agreement in many corrections and omissions, as well as in the manner of writing the Greek words, that they go back to a common archetype (C), but they were derived iVom two different copies of it : viz. A and B, which are closely akin to one another, from one, and V from the other. As regards the critical value of A, B and V, A and B are more faithful to the archetype and therefore of greater authority, while V is characterized by many interpolations of a talented and learned emendator. Bursian gives B the preference over A ,'^"' while H.J. Miiller and Konitzer'" and Kiessling^'^ accord equal merit to both. The corrections of A and B came mostly from editions and have therefore no other critical value than that of conjectures. ■*'^"Cf. Bursian's edition, Preface, p. x : "Nihil tamen isti scribae ex arbi- trio suo mutaverunt, ita ut codex quamvis corruptissimus ubique tamen veri vestigia nulla interpolatione obscurata nobis offerat quibus solis insistendum est ei qui auctoris verbis et recenscndis et emendandis pris- tinuin suum splentlorem his libris reddere conatur." -'' Quaat. ifi Sen. patr. , rit., pp. 4 sq. '^""^ Beitr. zur I't-.xdskrit. Jes RJict. Sen., p. 32. 54 THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. 4. Codex Toletanus or Covarruvianus (T), parclniunt, co|)ied from V in the 13111 century an;l corrected iirohtl-ly m the i6th. 5. Codex Brib^ensis ( Bv), parchment, copied tVom Tin tlie 15th century before it was corrected. Hoth T and H\ are therrtorelor critical purposes to a o-reat extent superseded by \\ from which they are directlv or indirectly derived. 6. Codex Yaticanus (v), parchment, 15th century, very small characters. 7. Codex Bruxellensis (D), paper, 15th century, with all the Greek omitted, a blank space beino^ left fur it. Corrected l)y two hands in the same century. It contains the declamations <^f the pseudo-Quintilian, the Controversiae antl Suasoriae of Seneca, and the bcL^innini^ of the Dialo^^us attributed to I^icitus. 8. The lour codices used by Schott, — Covarruvianus, Bruotnsis, Vaticanus and Aucrustodunensis. Of these the hrst two were treated under 4 and 5 ; the Vaticanus can be identifit d neither with V nor v mentioned above under 3 and 6; the Aucrustodu- nensis has disappeared.'-"^ 2nd MSS. of the Excerpts of the Coutroi'rysiae.— i. Codex Montepessulanus (M), parchment, gth or loiii century, corrected shortly afterwards by a second hand and much later by a third. The Excerpts are preceded by the Declamations of the pseudo- Quintilian. 2. Codex Parisinus (P) (formerly Colbertmus), parchment, 13th century. 3. Codex Parisinus (S) (formerly S orbonianus), parchment, 13th century. Closes with the word " actio " in Excerpt vi, 7. 4. Codex Admontanus, parchment, 12th century. 5. Codex Berolinensis, parchment, 14th century. Contains an *' Expositio tmtris Nicholai " wdiich is of importance for the text- criticism in so far tliat in some cases Seneca's words can be more easily found out from the notes in which they are quoted lor explanation than from the text of the scribe. There are many other manuscripts of the Excer{)ts. The -^3Cf Wo^^^s De Soi. rhct. auatt. cod. MSS, Sc'iott, {>. 6. Hofig considers it very probable that all four go back to one archetype, p. S, Schott and Hofig range them in respect to value and importance in the following order : Covarruvianus, Vaticanus, Brugensis, Augustodunensis. They were all written on parchment and contained the Cireek ; p. 12 sq. discusses their relations to one another and to the archetype. \ I \ / V THE THEMES TREATED liV THE ELDER SENECA. .^n Moatepessulanus is by far the best of all. Although carelessly written by an ii^norant scribe, it is quite free from interpolations, with which the others are teeming. According to HotTmann the MS. lUMst akin to the Montepessulanus is the Admontanus,'** although the latter is neither derived from nor a copy of the former, the Admontanus being from a separate codex which, however, contained many corrections and erasures. 2. Editions. The Excerpts are found among the works of Seneca the philoso- pher, printed at Naples in 1475, reprinted in 1478. Thv' first edition of the Suasoriae and Controversiae (in this order), with the prefaces of books vii, ix and x and some of the works of Seneca the philosopher, was printed at Venice in 1490 and ai^ain in 1492 and 1503. In this edition the Greek words are omitted. The editio Frobeniana was brought out by Erasmus at Basle in 15 15. It is like the Venetian edition except that in it the Suasoriae and Controversiae follow the Excerpts without the interposition of some of the smaller works of the philosopher Seneca. John Mervagen and Bernard Brand printed an edition at Basle in 1557 in which the Controversiae precede the Suasoriae. The Greek is omitted. The R(Kiian edition of Muretus, printed in 1585, claims " Com- plures lacunas quae erant in controversiis, etsi non omnes (quis enim hoc mortalium praestet?) explevit ex codice multae aetatis at fidei de bibliotheca Vaticana." The order of the books is the 2®^ ( )n the value of the MSS. of the Excerpts for restoring the text of the Controversiae, since the Excerpts were prepared from an older and better codex than the archetype of the existing MSS. of the Controversiae and Suasoriae, and since they alone contain the prefaces of the first four books of the Controversiae, cf. Spengel, Gelehrtc Afizeii^eu der hayrischen Akad- emif dn- WissenscJiaftni xlvii (1S5S), pp. i-io; Kiessling, KJi. Mus. xvi (i8(3i). pp. 50 sfj. ; Hc:tr. znr Texteskrit des KJut. Seti., pp. 32 sq. ; Konitzer, Quae- St. : >! Sm. f-dfr. crit., p. 12; Hoffmann, Veher eine Adniont. Pergam- Handu-hr. der E.w.dcs i:lt. Sen., p. 174. Hoffmann gives a full description and estimate of the Admontanus, based on a comparison with the Antver- piensis and Hruxelknsis on one hand, and the Montepessulanus on the other, cf. pp. 173. 178. Hoffman also thinks that the Parisinus and Sor- bonianuN came from the same source as the Admontanus, cf. p. 178. ? i6 THE TIIKMES TRKATi:i) P.V Till: KL1)1:r Sl'MLCA, same as in the Hervai^ian edition, hut the Excerpts of l)ooks i. ii, vii, ix and x are (initted. The editions thus far mentioned attrihuted tlie Controversiae and Siiasoriae to Seneca the i)hilosopher, and accorchn^ly iomed them to his worics. The first to edit them separateh- was Nicolaus Fahtr at Paris in 1587. The Controversiae comt' first. then the Suasoriae, and then the Excer|)ts f Declamations). Andreas Schott of Heidelber^ in 1603. Of this there arc several reprints, " cumuberioribus notiset coniecturis Nic. Fahri, Andr. Schotti, I. Gruteri, Fr. Jureti, 1. Lipsii, lo. IVtrcii. Fcr. Rinciani, I. Opsoroei." As stated above, this edition was Ijascd on the four codices, — Toletanus (Covarruvianus), Hrm^msis, Vaticanus, and Au^^ustodunensis, the preference <^ivcn in the first. . J. F. Grontn-ius at Lyons in 1649. The corrections of Tole- tanus (t), which Schott incorporated into his edition, p.issed mto that of Gronovius and thence into the Vul^-ate or Elzevir edition ot 1672. This contains the valuable prefices. notes, ami in-emons emendations of Ivaber, Schott, Gronovius, and especiallv of Johannes Schulting. Conrad Bursian, Leipzio^, 1857, based on the Antverj»iensi> and Bruxellensis (preference <^Mven to the latter;. The Vaticar.us was not known to Bursian. Adolph Kiesslin^^ Leipzior, 1872. Kiesslinq made u-e <.f the critical material accumulated since Bursian's edition. FI. J. Miiller, Vienna, Prague and Leii)zig, 1887. V / 1 -% ;• V l| THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA, 0/ PART IIL-THEMES OF THE SUASORIAE AND CONTROVERSIAE. I. — The sources. From what has been said in Parts I and II in regard to the subjects treated by the writers of Suasoriae it is apparent that the inquirer as to the sources whence these subjects were drawn, is conlronted by a vagueness and confusion in the material with which he has to deal, which make detinite statements difficult in most cases and in many impossible. Two facts may be premised with certainty. First: that at the period of Seneca the Elder a great amount of rhetorical material had accumulated " in stock," as it were, for the free use of the declaimers. We find traces of this accu- mulation from the time of Sulla, when the productions of the rhetoricians seem to have first taken on a Roman coloring. With the opening of schools of rhetoric in Latin, modelled on the Greek, there would naturally arise a Latin paraphrasing of the topics on which the teachers of the Greek schools had so long employed their skill. The Suasoriae, owing to their simpler nature, seem to have reached a complete development earlier than the Controversiae. Thus we find in Ad Hereniimvi iii, 2, 2 as a subject of deliberation, whether " Karthago tollenda an re- liquenda videatur " ;"• " ut si Hannibal consulat cum ex Italia Kar- thaginem arcessitur, in Italia remaneat an domum redeat an in Aegyptum profectus occupet Alexandriam "; " ut si deliberet senatus captivos ab hostibus redimat an non " ;-""' " ut si deliberet senatus (bello Italico) solvatne legibus Scipionem ut eum liceat ante tempus consulem fieri "; '* ut si deliberet senatus bello Italico, sociis civitatem det an non " ; iii, 5, 8 ; "qui a Poeno circumsessi deliberant, quid agant.'"'' All these subjects may be placed as ^■'■* Cf. Cicero, Dc inv.\,%, 11 : " si Karthaginem relinquerimus incolumeir. num (juid .sit incomrnodi ad rem publicani preventurum " ; and ;7'/i/. 12, 17: " utrum Karthago diruatur an Karthaginensibus reddatur an eo colonia de- ducat ur." '-"''^Cf. Cicero, Dc Orat. iii, 28, 109 : " placeatne a Karthaginensibus cap- tivos nostros redditis suis recuperari ?" ■"' Cf. Cicero, /^tw;/z'. ii, ^7, 171: "necesse est Casilinenses se dedere Hannibali . . . nisi si nialunt fame perire . . . sive velint Casihnenses se dedere sive famem perpeti atque ita perire, necesse est Casilinura venire in Hannibalis potestatem. ' 58 THE TIIEMF.S TREATED P.V THE ELDER SEXEC \. parallels to those of the seven extant Suasoriat^* of Seneca. In .-Id Hereyinhcm i, 3, 5 we find as the snhject of a declamation '' pro viro forti contra parricidani " ; in i, 14, 24 arc found two subjects of Controversiae. viz. '" ut ille, qui de eo servo qui dominum occi- derat, supplicium sunipsit, cui trater esset, antrquani tabulas testa- menti aperuit, ciim is servus testamento manumissus esset " ; " ut ille. quid ad diem commeatus non venit. quod aquae interclusis- sent " ; in i, 15, 25 is found another, viz. "ut Orestes, cum se detendit in matrem conferens crimen." These three subjects seem to have been taken from the Greek rhetoricians.-" Many other sub- jects of Controversiae are found in Ad Ilcrcnnhim. :is i, 1 3, 23 on the conflict of four difterent laws in the case of Malleolus the matricide, viz. ''Si furiosus existet, ad;^natum j^entiliumque in eo pccuni- aque eius potestas esto " ; " Qui })arentem necasse iudicatus ( rit, ut is obvolutus et obligatus corio devehatur in prolluentem." "Paterfamilias uti super familia ])ecuniave sua les^averit, ita ius esto." " Si paterfamilias intestatus n^^oritur, tamilia pecuniaque eius adi^natum orentiliumque esto."-"' Ad IlertniiinDi i, 14, 24: *' ut Caepio ad tribunos plebis de exercitus amissione." "" The fourth book o( Ad Ilcrcnnium is full of extracts from Controver- siae, while Irom Cicero's Dc ini-oii'uvic a lon^ list mi^^ht be made out, the subject-matter bein^ taken from both Rom.m and Greek history. As examples of the tormer compare Cicero, Dc inv. i, 30, 48: '' velut [Horatii factum a populoapprobatum. cpiod occid;t sororem, cum ilhi devictum Curiatium hostem detleret ; velut] Gracchi patris factum ...."; ii, 26, 78, also on thekillinii o! his sis- ter by Horatius. As examples trom Greek historv : i, 30. 47 : " nam si Rhodiis turpe non est portorium locare. ne Hermocreonti quidem turpe est conducere " ; ii, 23, 69: "cum Thebani Lacedaemo- nios bello superavissent et fere most est Graiis, cum inter se bellum i^essissent, ut ei, qui vicissent tropaeum aliquod in fmibus -^~Cf. Quintilian, hist. Oral, vii, 4, 14 sq. ; Cicero, Dc mi. i, 13, iS ; ii, 31, 96 ; nuintilian, /. <, 4, S, -*^^Cf. Cicero, Dc inv. ii, 50, 14S, where the first, third and fourtli laws stated above are mentioned and the |)uni>hnient prescribeci bv the vcroiul is said to have been inflicted, the name of the criminal however not i>t,- ntz; given. The point at issue is the same in both cases, viz. whethei the guilty man had or had not the right to make a will. For other later cases ot the crossing of laws cf. Seneca, Contr. ix, 13; ^s did the Sirens sing? "-''^ It seems prob- able that this occurred durin^y Tiberius's voluntary exile at Rhodes, as we know that while there he w^as in the habit of attendin;^ the rhetorical schools. At this time, wdiich nearly coincides with that of the elder Seneca's second coming to Rome, both the accumulation of subjects for declamation and their development in artificiality and absurdity seem to have been well-nioh complete. The second fact which may be definitely asserted in connection with the subjects employed by the declaimers, is that from this vast i^eneral fund of fact and fantasy, the rhetoricians appropriated whatever portions suited their purpose, changing and arranging at will, without a thought of the ultimate originals and without concern tor their accurate reproduction. The subjects of Seneca's Controversiae as also of the Declamations of the pseudo-Quin- tilian and Calpurnius Flaccus, by their very nature exclude the possibility of an exact and indubitable tracing to their origin. In their extant form and conception, at least, they were born in the exuberant fancy ot the rhetoricians, when and by whose agency in each c.ise it is now impossible to ascertain. A great many of the themes must undoubtedly have come to the Latin rhetorical schools from the Greek, as is evident from the political and social conditions they presuppose ; this will be shown below in individual instances by reference to the rhetorical writings o^ Hermogenes. As has been said above, and as will be proved by a comparison of Seneca's Controversiae with the Declamationes of the pseudo-Quintilian and Calpurnius Flaccus, many of the sub- jects had l)ecome stereotyped as school exercises, passing from one rhetorician to another and from one school to another through the various periods and phases of rhetorical study. When once a 291 Cf. Suetonius, 77/'. c. 70. 6o THE THEMES TKi-AIi;!) i;V ITIE KI.DF.R SKXKCA. THE THEMES TREATED BY THE EEUER SENECA. 6i stock of subjects had accumulated, it required but little imagina- tion to form new ones by sh\i4htly varying; the old. Thus one of the themes most hiohly favored in the schools seems to have been the disinheritincr of a son-"-' . Now a fatlur may disinlu rit a son for marryincr against his will, for refusing to slay his adulterous mother, for declinino; to be adopted by a rich man. for killing his adulterous brother, etc. The same variety of treatment is possible with many other subjects as a glance at euher Seneca or the pseudo-Quintilian will show. The inthK-nce of analogy also must have been very o^reat in this constant and kaleidoscopic rearrangement of elements already at hand. In tracing the sources of the themes treated by Seneca, as well as ot individu.il dicta in his writings, it is necessary to guard continually against assuming as their /07iU\^ passages in earlier classical writers which, although strikingly similar, are themselves also derived trom a common original. Coincidence must not be mistaken tor deriva- tion. These /o?i/6's are in many cases utterly lost or hopelessly obscured, and one might search for them in vain througliout the whole extent of pre-Augustan classical literature. No al)solute rule of discrimination can be laid down. The following pages are an effort to classify the themes treated by the elder Seneca and to give what has been ascertained about the origin of surh as may with reasonable certainty be traced to a definite source. The work is largely tentative but will not be without value if it shali interest others to search lor additional facts along the same lines.*''^ S^rasoria i. Alexander deliberates whether he shall cross the ocean. The theme and the discussion in the Divisio, in regard to addressing a ruler, were probably suggested by the speech of the philosopher Anaxarchus, in which he proposed, after the subjuga- tion of Asia by Alexander, that the latter should be deified and receive divine homage in the manner of the Persian kings. Callisthenes as a defender of Greek manliness protested agamst ■'»- In the pseudo-Quintilian there are 22 cases of disinheritance; for Seneca cf. the classification of subjects below. -••^•^Cf. Dirksen, Ueber die durch die griechischen und lateinischcn Rhe- toren angewendete Methode der Auswahi und Benutzung von r.ei^pulen romisch-rechtlichen Inhalts. Af'/uiud/un^c;! der K,>ii^l:chni Akadcmtr ,/,,- Wissensckaften. Berlin, 1847, i, pp. 4S-77. s, i ' if this fulsome adulation but met with a tragic end.^'" In Contr. vii, 7,19 Seneca mentions that when this Suasoria was delivered on a certain occasion, in the rhetorical school, a voice exclaimed: '■ Qiiousque invicte," which of course recalls Cicero's first oration against Cataline. The subject of this suasoria seems moreover to have been one of the stock topics of the schools, as it is among those enumerated by Quintilian as current among the rhetori- cians."'*'' The theme is, however, based on an historical fact.^'"**^ Siiasoria ii. Tiie three hundred Lacedaemonians sent against Xerxes, when the three hundred sent from all Greece have fled, deliberate whether they themselves shall flee. The historical kernel of this second Suasoria is the assembly of the several Greek contingents at Thermopylae and their subse- quent dismissal by Leonidas, King of the Spartans.""' On the question of " trecenti " vs. " treceni " Bursian remarks : " Cum per totam suasoriam (excepting ^5 5) semper de * trecentis ' sermo fiat .... rhetor finxisse statuendus est e singulis Graecis urbibus quotquot viribus pollebant, trecenos milites Spartanis auxilio missos fuisse, quod non magis contra historiae fidem peccat quam quae de Cimone, Phidia, Parrhasio, Popillio, aliis referuntur." As may l)e seen from the account of Herodotus the other Greeks did not flee but were dismissed by Leonidas."''' ■ Suasoria iii. Agamemnon deliberates whether he shall immolate Iphigenia, since Calchas asserts that otherwise the voyage cannot take place. The theme of this Suasoria was well known from the tragedians, and therefore it is not at all surprising that the rhetoricians made use of such a tavorite subject. In fact, it seems to have been one of those most [popular in the schools. Compare Petronius, i, 6 : " Ingens scholasticorum turba in porticum venit, ut apparebat, ab - "' Cf. Cuitius, viii, 1, 45; v, 13; Arrian, iv, 9, 4; Plutarch, Alex, cc. 50 sq. ' Cf. I)ist. C^ri;/. iii, 8, lO; vii, 4, 2. ■• "^ Cf. Curtius, ix, <} : " Ptrvicax cupido incessit (sc. Alexandrum) visendi Occanuin adeundique terminos mundi." ^^" Cf. Herodotus, vii, 220 sq. '-' Cf. also Cornelius Nepos, Thernist, 3. 62 THE TIimfES TREATED V.\ U ELDER SENECA. extemporabili dechiinatione nescio cuius, (|ui Aoanu mnomV sua- soriam exceperat ": cL also Quinlilian, hist. Orat. ii. i- r -. Lucretius considered it worthy of some {)atheiic- \erses : •' Kt raoestum simui ante aras adstare j)arenteni Sensit vi lumc propter ferrum celare ministros, Adspectuque suo lacrinias ettundare civis. Muta metu terram genibus submissa petebat." ■*''' Suasoria iv. Alexander the Great deliberates whether he shall fiitrr Ikibylon when by the response of the augur he had been forewarned of danger. The theme of this Suasoria is taken from history. Compare Arrian, vii, l6, 5 : " A/i^auditoq dk wq rov Tiypr-a. -itzainr, ^h; 'r rrrf.-aT'.u ,p,^^3r, IhvrMn. i:z\ Ba^ulO.y.o'^ hrahna izt>yy/i.ou(Tt> a>>-ul \u./jj[ Anymt xa: d-ayayuyrzq a-n t(7j> ira-fxo-^ idiu>7<> i-inyily rryj l-\ Uafiohh'.o^ ihin'.;, /j'ry:,,, y„.n yzyn-.tyn^'. ociui; ix nrj Ueitv zoo IW^Xoo !>.y^ -//-;- ayannb i>i ehat zry^ -dnann. -;y ,- llayiokar^a t> - (Z Ti>r-: roi/ Sk d-nxir>a.rr>h/.: aozoi^ ^-''y"' [~"'\\ i'.'>n'.-:nr (>»o: : ' IA/>r;c o' ' !j.r^ -in,:; nnann.- dcnnrr, aozuz /^r/)- 77^> (7Z{> dyor. -a;,uM,l,- aAAa .K-zniz/Mr^ -uuz ho fiau.n, ' " Compare also Pompeius Trogus, P^pitome of Justinus. Philippicarum xii. Suasoria v. The Athenians deliberate whether they shall remove their Persian trophies, since Xerxes threatens 10 return unless they do so. The only element of reality in the subject of this Suasoria is the reference to the custom of i)reserving trophies taken from defeated foes. Sua Sen id vi. Cicero deliberates whether he shall implore mercy from Antony. The fictitious argument of this Suasoria was suggested by the enmity between Cicero and M. Antonius, wliich led to the violent death of the former. Moreover this theme and that of the next Suasoria also, seem to have belonged to the stock subjects of the rhetorical schools.'"" It may be said that the signal success of Cicero's Hfe and its tragic end were favorite t(»})ics with tlie lat( r Roman writers in oencral."'^^ '.",1:1 Dc rer. nat. i, 95 sq. ^^"^'Ct; Ouintilian, his!. Orat. iii. S. 46. ■^"' Cf. Mornvvski, De r/ict. 'a.'., pj). lOs.j. I i ' f Till: JilEMES TREATED UV THE ELDER SENECA. 6 Suasoria vii. Cicero deliberates whether he shall burn his own writings, since Antony promised him security if he should do so. On the theme of the seventh and last Suasoria compare what was said above in regard to the sixth. Compare also Suas. vi, 14: "Solent enim scholastici declamitare: deliberat Cicero an salutem promittente Antonio orationes suas comburat. Haec inepte ficta cuilibet videri potest." Coniroversia i, i. Patruus abdicans. — Liberi parentes alant aut vinciantur. Two brothers, one of whom had a son, disagreed. When the uncie became needy the nephew against the prohibition of his father supported him. Being disinherited by his father for this, he was silent. He was adopted by the uncle who by receiving an inheritance became rich. Then the younp man's father be^ran to sutTer want and was supported by his son against the prohibi- tion ot the uncle, who thereupon disinherited the young man. The subjects of the support of the aged, and disinheritance were two of the revelling grounds of the declaimers, cf. Contr. iii, 19; vii, 4 ; Ouintilian, Decl. maj., 5; Quintilian, hist. Orai. v, 10, 16 and vii, 6, 5. Coiitrovcrsia i, 3. Incesta saxo deiciatur. A priestess, accused of incest, before she was hurled from the rock invoked Vesta. She remained alive and was demanded again tor a repetition of the penalty. This is a fictitious law of the schools, for by Roman law an incestuous i)riestess was buried alive. The penalty imagined by the rhetoricians may have had its origin in a confusion of the w^ell- knovvn story of Sappho's precipitating herself from a rock on account of misfortune in love, and the fact that traitors in the early time at Rome were thrown down from the Farpeian Rock. In 273 B. C. a Vestal was hanged.'"' Contr over sia i, 4. Fort is sine manibus. A brave man, who had lost both hands in war, caught his wife and her paramour in Jiagrajitc and ordered his son to kill them. •^°-Cf. Orosius, iv, 5, 9. 64 THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. u hfr('i]|)()n The young man refused, and the adulterer escapee the son is disinherited. This theme i.^ very similar to tliat of QuintiHan. DecL 330. It was very likely suggested per contrarium b\ tlie story of Orestes.'"' Controvcrsia i, 5. Raf^tor duarum. A man raped two maidens m tiie same nieht ; one demanded his death, the other marriage. This seems to have l)een af-ivoritc sul)ic(^t witii botli tlie Romrm and Greek rhetoricians, and was in all probability transferred irom the latter to the Roman schools. Ii is introchiecd by Hermogenes in his '' r.^pi rcSv iMnd. She could not be torced to tell. AUerward the husband killed the tyrant and divorced Ins wile on the charge of barrenness, as she had borne him no children m a period of five year>. She bued him for ingratitude. I THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. 6q I his law {Dioyaii actio), like so many made use of in the declamations, was an Attic one.'*^^' A similar case of iniusti rc- pudii ir. treated in Quintilian, Decl. 251. only that in this latter case the wite wa> raped and demanded marriage instead of the death of the ravisher. The subject of wite and tyrant is also inliuduced b}- Hermogenes, '' '-i,\ -dr. azamur.^ ""'•"■' in the follow- ing form : A wife showed her husband the way to a tyrant, a secret which no one else had been able to discover. The husband killed the tyrant and then accused his wife of adultery with him. Controversia iv, 2. Sacerdos integer sit. The Pontifcx L. Caecilius Metellus lost his eyesight while rescuing the i\iiLidiiu:n irom tlie burning temple of Vesta. There- upon the priesthood was denied him. Thi> theme is taken from history ; the occurrence took place B. C. 24r.^«' Controversia iv, 5. Priviqnns medicus. A man disinherited his son. The latter studied medicine, and wlivn hi- t.ither fell ill and was given up by the other physicians, restored him to health. I ie was thereupon restored to his father's favor. His step-mother having fallen ill was also des|)aired of by the physicians. Tlu- lather asked the son to cure her and upon his refusal disiPihented him. Thir. theme seems to be evidently from the Greek as it is used by Lucian in the ** aiznxr^purzoiiVMK; '» 308 30-^ Cf. Quintilian . hist. Orat. iii, 11, 4 sq. ^•^^Cf. S pen gel, A''/."/. Grace, ii, 171. Controversia v, 5. The well kn ).\n story o!' Parrhasius and the captive. Controversia \\ 6. Raptus in veste muliebri.— Lex : Impudicus contion( {irohibeatur. A lair youtli made a wager that he would walk m public dressed in female auire. 1 1- did so, and was raped by ten youths. He brought action against tliem on a charge of violence and they ^ Cf. Valerius Maximus, ii, 6, 6 de Areopago ; v, 3 dc Phocione. •^•Spengel, Khet. Graec. ii, 137. ^'^ Cf. Livy, Epitome xix. ^""Cf. Quintilian, Inst. Orat. vii, 2, 17. 66 THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. were convicted. Beii\^ excliukcl iion] ti.c public assembly by the in;ii^istrate, the youii^ man br(ju;^l\t acticn a;n a charge of insult. This theme was not foundeci on a fict'ticns law ( f (lu- scIk^oIs but on the Attic code.'"' Hermooenes in his " re/Zs rwv '"'" uses as an example the case of a youth who used cosmetics, and was thereupon charged with -op^eia, Controversia w 7. Trecenti ab inu)eratore non recejjti. — I ex : Nocte |::0!tas aperire in bello non liceat. Three hundred captivts fleeino^ from the enemy came t( the oates at nieht. The commander would not o{)cn to them and they were killed before the gates. Atter a victory the com- mander was charged with injuring the state. This theme must have been current in the Greek schools also, as it is given by Hermogenes " -ip\ zopianuz, " {1! " V 311 Coniroi'cnia vi. 5. Iphicrates reus.— Lex : Qui vim in iudicio fecerit, capite pnni- atur. Iphicrates, having been twice defeated in battle l^y the king of the Thracians, concluded a treaty with him and married his daughter. When he returned to Athens and ple;;ded his cause certain Thracians were seen about the court firmed with knives, and Iphicrates himself, although a defendaiU, diew his sword. When the judges were calUd upon to gi\c their opinion they openly pronounced for an acquittal. Iphicrates was thereup-un accused of having used violence in court. This theme appears to be taken from history, but with the lacts a good deal modified. Xenophon^' states that Iphicrates carrad on war against the Thracians. Cornelius Nepos, Jphicraic> 2. 1: " Bellum cum Thracibus gessit ; Seuthem socium Athemensaim in regnum restituit "; compare also Aeschinus. --,": -'//"/-/'£ lynt^na-n 7c:/--./r/,^ ---c Ay.,,- zocu)>ra £r:£ooLt£vo^ ;: -onow.r^ ./. T'/c w/-^ i't yuTjtiaai'^ ' '>•, ca>7Xn.-n' 2«>Cf. Aeschines against Timarobus. ^'i Cf. Spengcl, K/wt. Cr.u- . ii. 1..6. 310 Cf. Spcnoel, AV/^/. (;>,.yc-. ii, 147- ^^'^ Hellen. iv, 8, 34 ^'j. a^T,r-ATFn BY THE ELDER SENECA. THE THEMES TREATED BY ^1 ,,, .Tra sT.s., .. .- ZXlZ.d m Quintilian, DecL 386.^ pdrr^^r The same topic is treateu Cont)'Oi'trsia vi, 7. De.ncns .l»i ''1'" ^■^'^^'* "'"'''":;ed t second wile. When one of ., ,„,.., ,.vn.. '-; -- - :r,:."h, the phy.cians .a,d ,he the young men svu. .11 n.. ^^^^ father compelled the causeofhis,llnesswasulovea,.ur ^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^ ^^^^ son at the sword . P",'° ;"„,,,, The father gave up h.s confessed that he loved h,. "^P ;' "^.^ j ,,;,,, insanity by his ^•ife to him ana thereupon was charge "'''"' '""■ ■ , n, ,lru this thetne is taken from the history of It seen.s evident tha t gtratonice to his s,ck son Seleueus ^^^ ^^'\^ ^ "'treated in Quint.lian, Decl. 2,. Antiochus." A s.milar case s tr ^^^^^ .^ ^^^.^ ,^^^^^ ,„d Calpurnius Flaccus ^-/^ f ' ^^ ,^, ,,,her yields his wife ZV: -^t:;^::-'"""-^ -ght m aduUery w.h hts former wile. Controversia vii, 2. Popilius Ciceronis ^-^'^^^ ^^^,,,ks made on Suasoriae vi Compare on this theme tnc and vn."' Controversia vii, 6. Demens qui servo filiam lunxit. distresses. The A tyrant permitted ^^^Zr. one who had a son chief men of the state fled -d-^^^ ^,,,,,ged their mis- and a daughter. While ..11 ^ '^ ^^'^ ^,^5, fate. After the tresses his slave s,.ved the ''^fT/^^^^ ,he slaves were tyrant w,.s k.lled and the f^^'^'^J^^^ ,y his master who c^ucihed. But the J^f -J^ '^^ ^^ ^ l^.pon the son charged gave him his daughter as a wuc. his father with insanity. ^ j^^ Volsinii, the This theme was -'^-^ ;;;:;.:':,: Looming enervated by inhabitants of a city m l-">™ ,^;j,,,ir slaves and freedman. excessive luxury, --.^^-^P^;;; ,;, ory by the rhetoricians.- The tyrant is an addition made to the > .»(■( I'lutarch, /'.■".•.•.-'•■'"- =^' '^ 3.M-f. ,V,so l.ivy, /v^/. cxx. ^ ^^^^^.^^_ .^_ . .. Amelias Victor, 3.6 Cf. Valerius .M.'.xn..>^..ix, 1, i.x- - . n,. -ir:! alnstnbui c. .vxxvl. 68 THE THEMES IKE. VIED BY THE ELDER SENECA. Coyiircrcersia \\\\^ C\ Pater naufragus divitis socer. A rich iiian three times importuned a poor man to i^ive him his daui>;hter in marriat^e, and the poor man three times rctused, but havintr started with his daughter on a v(\vai,^e he was shipwrecked on the estate of the rich man who a^ain asks tor the daut;hter as his wiff. The poor man wept in silence. After the marriai4e they return to the city where the poor man wishes to lead his daughter before the magistrate, but the rich man opposes this. This theme may easily have been formed on the analogy of Plautus, Triiumi. Act iii, Scene 2, where the {)oor but proud Lesbonicus refuses to give his sister to Lysiteles without a mar- riage portion. Coniroversia ix, 2. Maiestatis laesae sit actio. The proconsul Plamininus, at the request of his mistress while at table, who said that she never nad witnessed a decapitation, had a condemned man executed. He is thereupon accused of laesae viaiesiatis. This theme is based upon an historical fact. L. Flamininus was expelled Irom the senate by Cato when censor in 184 B. C, because of his conduct seven years before, whtn he wantonly killed a chief of the Boii, who had taken refuge in his camp. Valerius Maximus agrees with Seneca that this was done to please a mistress, while Valerius Antias, cited in Livy, xxxix, 43, gives a similar >tory. Livy and Plutarch say that the cruel act was done to please a favorite boy."' II. — Classification. A. — TJie Siiasoriac, I. — Simple (whether something is or is not to be done), i, vi. Duplex (a choice between two alternatives), ii, lii, iv, v. vii. II. — According to the sources: 1. Historical, iv. 2. Suggested by an historical occurrence, i, ii. 3 Derived from the poets, iii. 4. Fictitious, V, vi, vii. ^I'Cf. Livy, xxxix, 42; Cicero, De souctut- 12; I'lutarca, Cato r. 17; l^''hiftii)u)ius c. (S; Valerius .\Lixiimi<, 11 9, 3; Auieliu- Victor, P-: .///r illiistribus 47. > ^ THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. B. — T/ie ConiroTersiae, i. — General character of the suit. 69 r : I. Criminal \ 2. Civil : • ■ 11, 7. iii. 5> 9- iv, I, 4, 6. V, I, 6, 7. vi, 3, 4. 5< 6, 8. vii, 3, 5> 7. 8. viii, I, 6. ix, 2, 4, 5, 6. l^'. I. 4. 5, 6. i, I, 4' 6, 7, 8. ii, I, 2. iii, I, 2, 3, 4, 6,8. iv, 3. 5. 8- -i V, 2, 4, 5. vi, I, 2. vii, I, 4. viii, 2, 3. x, 2. i, 2, ii> 3' 4» 5. 6. iii, 7. iv, 2, 7. V, 3, 8. vi, 7. vii, 2, 6. viii, 4, 5. ix, I, 3- X, 3. II.— According to the point at issue (/. e. the question to be decided, or the charge brought). 1. Admission of a tyrant to office, v, 8. 2. Adultery, iv, 7 ; vi, 6. 3. Claims of the blinded, iii, i. 4. Damage to property, iii, 6 ; v, 5. 3. Affecting the political or social status : \ 70 THE THEMES TREATED WV THE ELDER SENECA. THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SEXECA. 71 6. 8. 9- 10. 1 1. 12. 13- 14. ^5- 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23- 24. 25- 26. 27. 28. 29. , iv. 8. 6 I X Deception {circimiscriptio), vi, 3. DesecFcition of a tonil), iv, 4. Disinheritance {abdifatio). i, i, 4. 6, S ; ;i. i. 2 iv, 3, 5 : V, 2, 4 ; vi, 1,2; vii, i ; \ Force unlawfully applied {vis), ix, s- Force in court {I'is in indicia), vi, 5 ; Force and intimidation [ids et mcius Ingratitude {im^^rati actio , ii. 5 ; ix, Injury to the person {ininria), iv, i : Insanity, ii, 3, 4 ; vi. 7 ; vii, 6 ; x. 3. Laesac 7naiesiatis, ix, 2. Laesae rtdpnhlicac, v, 7 ; x, 4, 5. Malejicitim, v, i. Maltreatment ^malac tracticviis actio Misbehavior (dc 7)wribus), vii, 2. Parricide, iii, 2 ; v, 4 ; vii, 3, 5 ; ix. 4. Poisonin^^, iii, 7 ; vi, 4, 6 ; vii, 3 ; ix, 6 Priestly integrity (moral and physical Punishment of rape, i, 5 ; iii. 5 : vii, 8. Reward of bravery, iv, 7. Sacrilege, viii, i, 2. Seditious meeting {coettcs ct ctvicnrsus'^K iii, S. Slaves, punishment of, iii. 9 ; \i!i. 3; ^ci. \ ii, 6.) Suicide, refusal of burial to, viii, 4. Support of parents, i. i. 7 : vii, 4. Treason, vii, 7 ; (cf. x, 6.) in X, 2, 4 ; 1, 6. in, IV, 6 \', 2 N • iv, 2 ; vi, 8. III. — Side issues (/. e. wnth what the action is concerned). 1. Adultery, rape and incest, i. 2. 3. 4, 5 ; ii, 3, 7 ; iii, 5. 8 ; iv, 3 ; V, 6 ; vi, 8 ; vii, 8 : viii, 6 : ix, i , 6. 2. Exposed children, ix, 3 : x. 4. 3. Mistresses, ii, 4 ; ix, 2. 4. Pirates, i, 6. 7 ; iii, 3: vii, i, 4. 5. Poor and rich, ii, i ; v, 2, 5 : viii. 6 ; x, i. 6. Step-mother and step-children, ii, 7 ; iv, 5, 6 ; ix. 5, 6. 7. Suicide, v, i ; viii, i, 3, 4. 8. Tyrants and tyrcmnicide, ii, 5 ; iii, 6 : iv, 7 ; v, 8 : ix, 4. 9. Valiant man (^fortis), i, 4, 8 ; iv, 4 ; viii, 5 ; x, 2. ^ *v III. — Parallels of thf: subjects discussed in the Con- IKOVICRSIAE OF SeXECA, THE DECLAMATIONS OF THE PSEI'DO-QUIXTILLVX, AXD CaLPURNIUS FlACCUS. I. Subjects idcjitical. Seneca, ii, 3 — Qaintilian, 349. A ravisher must perish unless within thirty days he appeases his own father and the father of the ravished. A ravisher appeased the father of the ravished but not his own. He charges him with hisanity."'^" Seneca, ii, 4 — Calpurnius Flaccus, 30. A m.m disinherited his son; the latter betook himself to a courtesan and begot a son by her. Being ill he sent for his father; when he had come he commended his son to him and died. After his death his father adopted the child ; he is charged with insanity by his other son."'-^ Seneca, iii, 5 — Calpurnius Flaccus, 33. A ravished woman may require either the death of the ravisher, or that he shall marry her without dowry. ■^*" A ravisher demands that the ravished one be produced (so that she may make her choice). The father does not permit. ^"^ Seneca, iii, 9 — Quintilian, 380. A master being ill asked his slave to give him poison, the latter refused. The m.ister provided by his will that the slave should be crucified by the heirs. The slave appeals to the tribunes.'^" Seneca, iv, 4 — Quintilian, 369. Action for desecration of a tonib. During a war in a certain state a valiant man, who had lost his arms in battle, took the arms from the tomb of another valiant man. After fighting bravely he restored the arms. He received the reward (of bravery) but was accused of desecration of a tomb.^"^ ^'" Cf. Qaintilian, Inst. (haf. ix, 2, 90. ■"' Tne slight variations in the theme as given by Calpurnius Flaccus do not affect the point at issue. These are that the father disinherited the son on account of his love affair, and that he only wished to adopt the child, '■■^Cf. Seneca, i, 5 ; vii, 8 ; viii, 6. ■^-' In Calpurnius Flaccus the father forcibly restrains the woman. 3" Quintilian adds that the master had promised the slave his liberty. 3-3 In Quintilian the substance of the theme is given in a shorter form. > ,r^ ^^2 THE THF^[ES TREATED P.V TIIF. ELDER SENECA. Seneca, vi, 5 — Quintilian, 3S6. He who uses violence in couit should suffer capital punish- ment. Iphicrates hav no; been sent aoainst the kini; of the Thracians and conquered t^ice in battle, concluded a treaty with ii;m and married his daughter. When he had retunicMi to Athens and was brought before a court, some Thracians were seen about armed with knives, and the defendant himself drew a sword. When the judges were cailed upon to pronounce judgment they openly acquitted him. He is accused of using vioknce in court.-'' Seneca, vi, 6 — Quintilian, 354 — Calpurnius Maccus, y). Action for poisoning. A man who had a wife and bv her a marriageable dauuliter, informed his wite to whom he intended to give the daughter in marriage. The wnfe said : " She shall die sooner than man y ihat man." Tlie daughter died betore the wedding day with suspicious signs of cruel treatment and poisoning. The tather put a maid- servant to the torture: she said that she knew nothing about poison but she did know about the adultery of her mistress with that man to whom he was intending to give his daughter in mar- riage. The tather accused his wife of poisoning and aduiterv. '*- Seneca, vii, 3 — Quintili.tn, 17. A son who had been three times disinherited and torgiven was surprised by his father in a retired part of the hou.-c pre- paring a potion. WTien asked what it was he sa.id it was poison, and that he wished to die; he [)oured it ( ut. I le is aoeust d of parricide."" ^■-■* Quintilian limits himself to the brief statenuut that Ipliicratcs . aine into court girded with a sword and brought witli hitn C<)t\s king ot the Thracians. 2-^ In Quintilian the episode of the torture and ronfes-inn i.f the ina;.;-s(T- vent is wanting; suspicion against the wife ari>c> fnun he r saxing : " Siie shall die before she marries," and from the f.icc t! at tiie husband h.ad ^t en her secretly conversing with the handsome voung man to whom he betrothes his daughter; cf. also Hermogenes, ~e[n Tdv GTaouoi\ -"^ptrtigel. A''-'. (,r,:et. ii, 143. ■^-•' In Quintilian the dramatic touch is added tl)at the father ordered the son to drink the mixture. THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. 73 . ,' ( ■^ I -^ J I V Seneca, vii, 8 — Quintilian, 309. A ravished woman may request either the death of the ravisher, or that he shall marry her without dowry. '''^' A woman who had been ravished when produced in court chose marriage. The young man who was defendant denied that he was the ravisher. He was condemned, and the woman then chose his death although he was then willing to marry her. The man protests.'"' Seneca, viii, i — Calpurnius Flaccus, 41. A magistrate may inflict punishment upon one who has con- fessed. A woman who had lost her husband and two sons handed her- self. Her third son cut the rope. She, when a sacrilege had been committed and the perpetrator was being sought for, told the magistrate that she was the guilty party. The magistrate wishes to inflict punishment on her on the ground of her confes- sion. The son objects.^^^ Seneca, ix, 6— Quintilian. 381 — Calpurnius Flaccus, 12. A poisoner may be tortured until she discloses her accomplices. A man after the death of his wife, by whom he had a son, mar- ried another wife and by her had a daughter. The young man died, and the husband accused the step-mother of poisoning him. Having been condemned, she said under torture that her daughter was her accomplice. The daughter is demanded for punishment. The lather defends her."" 2. Subjects more or less cognate. Seneca, i, 4 — Quintilian, 330. He who surprises an adulterer with an adulteress and kills them shall be without guilt. It shall be permissible even for a son to punish adultery in his mother. •"•" Cf. Seneca, i, 5 ; iii, 5 ; vii, 8 ; viii, 6. 3'^^ In Quintilian it is stated that she wished freedom of choice after the conviction. 8'^Mn Calpurnius Flaccus she has lost her husband and three sons out of four. 330 In Quintilian this theme is given briefly with the addition that the son died " ambiguis signis." Calpurnius P^laccus uses the same phrase. f 74 THE TTTEMES TRE MED VA' THE ELDER SENECA. IIli: niEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SEXECA. 75 A valiant man who liad lost his hands in war sur[)risecl an adulterer with his wife by whom he had a son now a youn^ man. He ordered his son to kill but he did not. The adulterer escaj)ed, and he disinherited his son.'" In Quintilian the filial piety of the son towards his mother, at the expense of his injured father, is in a different iorm. A man repudiated his wife on a ehar^i^e ot adultery ; his son l)y her came to him and told him that he w.is in love with a courtesan. His father gave him money, and with it he sui)p()rted his mother, who was in want, without the knowledge of his father. When his father found it out he disinherited his son. Seneca, i, 5 — Quintilian, 270 — Calpurnius Flaccus, 49. A ravished woman may require either the death of the ravisher, or that he shall marry her without a dowrv.'" A man ravished two women the same night ; one requires his death, the other marriage. In Quintilian the act was per[)etrated on one of twin sisters. The victim hanged herselt". but the father produced the other in court and instructed her to require the death of the ra\isher. The young man, supposing that this was the woman whom he had ravished, was condemned. When the deceit w.is found out the father was accused of murder. In Calpurnius Flaccus the case is the same as in Seneca, but the point at issue is different. The court decided for the more humane demand; after the marriage the other woman bore a child (by the ravisher). The latter exposed it, but the husband of this other woman took it U[) and began to rear it; whereupon he is accused by his wife ot ma/ae iyaciatioiiis. Seneca, i, 6 — Quintilian, 376. A man captured by pirates wrote to his father in regard to a ransom, but was not ransomed. The daughter of the pirate-chief compelled the man to swear that he would marry her if he were set free ; he swore to do so. She left her father and followed the young man. After returning to his fluher he married her. An orphan appears on the scene whom the young man's fither com- 3'>' From the context it would seem that the father's command to the son was to kill both the guilty parties. ^3- Cf. Seneca, iii, 8 ; vii, S ; viii. 6. i f . r mands him to marry after dismissing the daughter of the pirate- chief Upon his refusal he is disinherited. In Quintilian it is the daughter of a benefactor who is in the case. A man when dying offers to reveal to a young man, whom he has brought up as his own son, his true ])arentage if he will take an oath that he. will marry the daughter whom the dying man is leaving. The young man swore to do so. Being received by his real father after the death of his benefictor, upon his refusal t'> marry a rich orphan, he is disinherited. Seneca, i, 7 — Quintilian, 5. Let children care for their parents or suffer punishment. A man killed one brother w'ho was a tyrant, and another whom lie had caught in adultery, although his father entreated him not to do so. Being captured by pirates he wrote to his father in regard to a r.msom. The father wrote to the pirates oftering them a double sum if they would cut off liis son's hands. The pirates released the son who, afterward, when his father was in want, did not su[)port him. In Quintilian the same point is at issue, but the circumstances are ditferent. A man had two sons, one respectable, the other dissipated. Both went abroad and were captured by pirates, whereupon the profligate became ill. Both wrote home in regard to a ransom. The father turned all his property into money and came to them. The pirates told him that he brought only enough to redeem one. and that he might choose whichever he wished. He ransomed the one who was ill, who died while on his way home. The other made his escape and when his father demanded supi)ort, refused. Seneca, ii, 2 — Quintilian, 357. A husband and wife took a mutual oath that if one died the other would not survive. The husband went abroad and sent a messenger to inform his wife that he was dead. Thereupon she threw herself from a height, but survived. She is commanded by her father to leave her husl)and, and on her refusal is disinherited. In Quintilian it is a wife who complains about her husband to her father and is commanded by the latter to keep the peace. But afterward when her husband had been blinded on account of adultery and she refused to desert him, she is disinherited. 76 THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. Seneca, ii, 5 — Quintilian, 251. A wife, who was tortured bv a tyrant to force lier to declare whether she knew anything of a j)lot formed by her hu>i)and t;>r the murder of the tyrant, persevered in denyin^^ Afterward lur husband killed the tyrant. As she bore no childrc n f( r five years her husband divorced her under the pretext of barrenness. An action is brought for incrratitude. In Quintihan it is a case oii?iius/i repudii, the union havini^^ taken place after a rape, when the woman had her choice between the death of the ravisher and marriacre, which marriaoe the hu-band now tries to dissolve on the charge of barrenness. Seneca, ii, 7 — Quintilian, 325 and 363. A man who had a beautitul wife went abroad. A merchant from foreign parts settled in the neighborhood, and three limes made proposals to the woman. otTering her drifts. She, however, reiused. The merchant died, and by his will made the beautiful woman heir of all his property, adding the eulogv : " I found her chaste." She entered upon the inheritance. Her husbar.d reti:rned and accused her of adultery on suspicion. In Quintilian 325 a rich man and a poor man are neighbors. There was a rumor that the poor man's pretty wife was unduly intimate with the rich man, with the connivance of her husband. The latter was accused of procuring Ucnociyiif). but was ac{}uitted. The rich man died leaving the poor man heir to all his propertv, adding: '' I ask you to restore this legacy to that person of whom I made a request." The poor man's wife demands the legacy as '* fidei commissam." In Quintilian 363 the poor man with the beautiful wife is solicited three times, with an offer of gifts by the foreign merchant, that he may let him his wife for an immoral purpose. The hus- band sends a wardrobe-maid in the garb of a matron. An action is brought for mala traciatio. Seneca, vi, 7 — Quintilian, 291— Calpurnius Flaccus, 46. There may be an action for insanity. A man who had two sons married again. When one of the young men fell ill, and was at the point of death, the physicians declared that the trouble was a mental one. The father forced the son at the sword's point to disclose the cause. He said that ^ \\ THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. 77 • - / >v he was in love with his step-mother. The father gave up his wiie to him. and was thereupon charged by his other son with insanity. In Quintilian and Calpurnius Flaccus it is one of the sons who, at the instance of his father, gives up his wife to his lovesick brother. The latter afterwards finds his wife in adultery with her former husband and kills them. For this he is disinherited by his lather. In Calpurnius Pdaccus it is distinctly stated that the second husband kills both; in Quintilian only the woman is mentioned as beino- killed. Seneca, vii, 3 — Quintilian, 377. A son who had been three times disinherited and forgiven was surprised by his father in a retired part of the house prei)aring a potion. When asked what it was he said it was poison and that he Wished to die; he poured it out. He is accused of par- ricide.''' In Quintilian 377 the son is driven to this desperate deed because his father was about to send him for the third time to militarv service. Seneca vii, 4 — Quintilian 6 and 16. Let children care for their parents or suffer punishment. A man who had a wife and a son i)y her went abroad ; being c rharged with lorce unlawfully apj)lied. In Calpurnius Pdaccus a repudiated wiie, who had a son, .liter repeated attempts witiiout success to obtain a ree(^nriliation with iier hus;)and, uttered a threat that she would aveni;e lurselt. The husband gave the bov a step-motlK-r, and the bov died with suspi- cious signs ot cruel treatment and poisoning. The twtj women accuse each other. The circumstances in the two declamations aie much the s.tme, but the jutlicial poiiU at issue is in one case 7-/,v, in the "tliei hitmi- cide.^'' It there be more ul!C;7 i, 2 h 7 vi, 7 vii, 3 vii, 4 vii, 5 viii, 3 vni, 6 ix, 4 ix, q P.seudo- Quintilian. 270 376 5 251 325 and 363 291 6 and 16 I and 2 257 362 2=;8 Calpurnius Flaccus. 49 46 4' U 6 • S2 THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. IV. — Tm: I.fj.AL Aspects uf ihk Cu.NTKuvLKbiAi. of Seneca. Co}it> . 1,3. Law: Let the incestuous priestess be huiled iVoiii a rock. A priestess accused ot incest before she was hurled troni tlie rock invoked Vesta. She remained ahve, and was demanded again for a repetition ot'the penaUy.'^^ The Vestals vowed chastitv tor thirty years, and severe penal- ties were appointed for the violation of this vow, as it was believed to provoke the wrath of the gods u})on the country. The ponti- fices — later the emperors — sat in judgment on the offending Vestals. In the earliest times thev were scourged to death, but from the time of Tarquinius Priscus '" they were buried alive, although according to Orosius '" in 273 B. C. a Vestal was hanged. Those convicted were carried on a !)icr in silence through the streets and. at'ter being scourged, "' were* iuimured ahve with some ibod and a candle in a small subterranean vault in the Campus Sceleratus at the Colline gate '" The male accomplice was scourged to death in the market place.^*'"' According to Dio Cassius " he was alter the scourging 22^ That this is a reference to a fictitious law of the schools was stated above, p. 63. 33' Cf. Dion. Hal., Antiq. Rom. i, 78. 338 IV, 5, 9. •■''Cf. Dion. Hal,, A>itiq. Kom. ix, 40. 3*^ Cf. ibid, ii, 67 ; viii, 89 ; Livy, viii, i 5, 7 sq.: " Eo anno Minucia Vestalis suspecta primo propter niundiorem iusto cultum, insimulata deincie apud pontifices ab indice servo cum decreto eorum iussa esset sacris ab.stinere familiamque in potestate habere, facto iudicio viva >ul) terrani ad portam Collinatn dextra viam stratam dcfossa Scelerato Canipo ; credo incesto id ei loconomen factum"; ibid, xxii, 57, 2 : "Quae Vestales eo anncj Epiniia atque Floronia, stupri conpertae, et altera sub terra, uti nios est, ad portam Collinam necata fuerat, altera sibimet ipsa mortem consciverat "; ;/'/(/. K[)it. xiv: " Sextilia, virgoVestalis,damnata incesti.viva defossa est " (but the pas- sage contains nothing about the punishment of the male accomplice to which Rein refers). Servius ad Verg., ,-/^//. xi,2o6; Plutarch, A'um. to ; Fab. Max. 18 ; Juvenal, Sat. iv, 8 sq. ■* Incestus, cum quo nuper vittata iacebat san- guine adhuc vivo terram subitura sacerdos"; IMiny, Epist. iv, 11; St, Augustine, De Civitate Dei iii, 5; Zonaeus, viii, p. 326, ed. Dind. ^*' Cf. Dion. Hal., Antiq. Roin.wW, 89; ix, 40; Livy, xxii, 57, 3: " L. Cantilius scriba pontificis, quos nunc minores pontifices adpellant, qui cum Floronia stuprum fecerat, a f)ontifice maximo eo usque virgis in comitio caesus erat, ut inter verbera exspiraret." ^■*-' Ixxix, 9. \ r \ THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. 83 Strangled in prison. P,ut tliis was not the original punishment. Tlie punislinunt ot the criminals was lollowed by great expiatory sacritices to avert diseases and other visitations of the gods.^"" This {)enaliy rt-mained in force as long as the institution of the Vestals was in existence, even under the Christian emperors.'" Conir. i, 4. Law : Let the man who surprises a man and woman in adultery be with.out l)lame if he kills both. Law : Let it be lawful even lor a son to punish adultery in his mother. A valiant man who had lost both hands in war, caught his wife and her j)aramour in jiaoyajitc and ordered his son to kill them. The young man refused and the adulterer escaped, thereupon the son is disinherited."*' In the earliest times the husband who apprehended his wife zVi Jlagrajite was allowed to kill her''' and to avenge himself on the adulterer according to his pleasure. The same right was accorded to the wile's father. They were, however, obliged to kill both parties or neither. '' The Lex Julia of Augustus allowed only the father to kill both or neither under certain conditions, while the liusband could not kill his wife under any condition, and the adulterer only when he wdspcrsoiia infainis, inhonesia, or vitior.^^^ 343 Dion Hal., Antiq. Rojfi. \\\\,'6()\ ix, 40; Plutarch, Quaest. Rom. 83; Livy, xxii, 57, 4 sq.: " Hoc nrfas cum inter tot, ut fit, clades in prodigium versiim t-sset, dt'cemviri libio.- adiie iussi sunt, et O. Fabius Pictor Delphos ad oraculiini missus est sciscitatiim, quibiis precibus suppliciisque decs possent placare, et quaenam futura finis tantis cladibus foret. Interini ex fatalibus libris sacrificia aliquot extraordinaria facta." ^■*-' Cf. Eusebuis, Chron. a. 2107. — Cf. on this subject Rein, Criminalrecht, pp. 876-S. Rein, //'/,/., p. 877, foot note, quotes Dion. Hal., Antiq. Roth, ii, 69; Val. Ahix. viii, i, 5; St. August., De Civitate Dei x, 16; Pliny, Nat. Hist. xxviii, 2, for the story that the Vestal Fuccia was acquitted of the charge through a miracle, and her accuser disai^peared in an inexplicable way. For another such case Rein refers to Herod, i, 10. ■^■•^ For the possible mythological source of and the parallels to this theme compare above, p. 64. '•^*Cf. Aul. (iell. x, 23; Seneca, De ira i, end. ■'^"Cf. Quintilian, Inst. Orat. v, 10, 104 ; vii, i, 6 sq. ; Decl. 277. 279. 284. -9'- 335- 347. 379 i Calpurnius I'laccns 46; Seneca, Contr. ix, i. Cf. I'aiillu-^, ii, 20, I sq. ; Rem, Criminal: ., pp. 835-44. ;>i- \ 84 THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. CoJity. i. 5. Law : A ravished woman may choose either tlie death of the ravisher or marriage without a dowry. A man ravished two maidens in the same night : one demanded his death, the other marriage.^*'-* In the Lex Julia de :i rape is considered as :/>■. and was at first punished with aquae ct i^nis infcniictio, afterward with exile. Later capital punishment was inflicted, but this was unusual. " Co)itr. iii, 2. Parricida acquis smtentiis absolutus. A certain man accused his son of an attempt at parricide. When the judges were equally divided in opinion, the young man was acquitted. Whert-upon his father disinherited him. In ancient times a special commission {quac^torcs) w.is ap- pointed, at first by the kings, in the republican epoch by the people, to judge cases of parricide.' ' The penalty was drowning in a sack.^'' The Lex Cornelia dc sicariis mentions parricide. The Lex Pompeia treats especially de parricidis ; it defines as parricide "Qui patrem, matrem, avum, aviam, fratrem, sororem, patronum, patronam occiderit."'" The punishment of the cideus''-" was retained tor the murder of parents and grandparents ; lorthe murder of other relations aquae et ignis interdictio was decreed. The Lex Pompeia threatened attempted parricide {e. g, the preparation of poison) in the same manner as if it were accomplished. The crime must be absolute and manifest. The Lex Pompeia remained in torce under the emperors. For the culeus there was sometimes substituted burn- ing, or throwinor to wild beasts.''"' ^■^^Cf. above, p. 64. ■*50Cf. Rein, Critfimalr., pp. S6S scj. 3^1 Cf. Pomp., 2, § 32 ; 1). de orig. iur. 1. 2. 352 Cf. Ad HercH. i, 13; Livy, A//'. Ixviii ; Orosius, v, 16. 353 Cf. PauUus, V, 25. 3**Cf. Modestinus, 1. q. pr. D. h. t. : "Poena parr, more niaiorun\ haec instituti est, ut parricida virgis sanguineis (;. f. red) verberatus, deiiule culeo (of leather, cf. Juvenal, xiii, 155) insuatur cum cane, gallo, galhna et vipera et simia, deinde in mare profundum culeus iactetur" ; c'icero, Ros,. Amer. 25.26, 69-72; <^aint., Did. 299; Ad Iic'>cn. i. 13; Cicero, /V im'ent. ii, 50, 149. ■'*' Cf. Rein, Crimmalr., pp. 449-63. I r THE THEMES TRiAli:!) UY THE ELDER SENECA. 8; Conir, iii, 8. Olynthius pat^r reus concursus. Law: Let it be a capital offence to make a meeting and assembly. Alter the conquest of Olynthus an aged Olynthian came to Athens with his youthful son. The Athenians decreed citizen- ship to all the Olynthians. Having been invited to dinner by a voluptuous young man the old man came with his son. When a suggestion was made of debauching llie son, the father fled while the young man was forcibly retained. The father began to lament before the house ; the house was burned ; ten voung men perished, among them the son of the Olynthian. The father is charged with holding an assembly. For the import and the legal aspects of the coetiis. compare Livy, ii, 28, i : " Tum xaxo plebs incerta, quales habitura consules esset, coetus nocturnos, })ars Esquiliis, pars in Aventino, facere, ne in foro subitis trepidaret consiliis, et omnia temere ac fortuito ageret "; 32, i : " Timor inde patres incessit, ne si dimissus exer- citus foret, rursus coetus occulti coniurationesque fierent "; cf. also XXX, 15; xxxix, 15. The Declamation aj>ainst Catiline, which is ascribed to M. Porcius Latro, mentions the alleged ordinance of the Twelve Tables : " Ne quis in urbe coetus nocturnos agitaret," and the Lex Gabinia declares : 'Qui conciones ullas clandestinas in urbe conflavisset, more maiorum capitali supplicio multaretur." Compare also Cicero, Pro Su/la, 5, 15 : " Ule ambitus iudicium tollere ac disturl)are primum conflato voluit gladiatorum ac fugi- tivorum tumuliu, deinde id quod vidimus omnes, lapidatione atque concursu." — Rein, Cri77iiualr., pp. 473. 520 sq. Contr. iv, i. Pater a sepulchris a luxurioso raptus. While a certain man who had lost three children was sitting by their tomb, he was carried away forcibly by his wanton son to some near-by garden where, having been shaven and his clothing changed, he was compelled to take part in a banquet. When released he brings an action for iniuria. The action of this controversia comes under the heading of iniuria status iibertaiis.'^'-'- .■556 Cf. Rein, Ki'^ni series Priiat^-ccJit^ p. 348. 86 TiiE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. Contr. iv, 4. Armis se[)ulohri victor. Law: Let there bt- an action f ;i ton.b. Durino a war in a certain stale a valiant man, having lost his arms in battle, took other arms troni the tomb ol^ a hero. Me fought bravely and replaced the arms. At'ter receiving a reward he is charged with violation ot a tomb. For the legal aspects of this theme, compare Aynm. .Ifarr. xvi, 8; Cass. Var. iv, 18. Un ier the emperors srpulchri violatio was a crimen extraordinan'um. and was severely punished; dtS})oiling corpses, if done 7?ia7iu armata, capitc: \i sine armis. condnn- 7iaiione ad jneialla.^ ' Contr. iv, 8. Patronus operas remi>sas reprtens. Law: Let what is etfected by violence and intimidation be invalid. A patron defeated in a civil war and proscribed, threw himself on the protection ot a Ircedman. He was received by him. and asked to give up all claim to his servict-s. The patron gave up his claims with a signed renunciation. When he was restored to his position he demanded the services. The freedman protests. In this theme may be a suggestion ol the laithtul Tyndarus in the Captivi of Plautus. The liberties was obliged to assume the name of his tormer master {patronus) and if he died without issue the patronus became his heir. The patronus could also, like a tather, claim obedience and respect from the libertus, and the latter was compelled to fulfil what he had promised at his manumission— ^/(';/^?, munera, bona, operae. He was even obliged to confirm these promises by oath after the manumission.'" CoJitr. V, I. Laqueus incisus. Law: Let there be an action at law on a charge of malicious injury not in the code. '^^' Cf. Rein, Crivtnuilr., pp. SSqq sq. 3i^Cf. Rein, Romisches I'rivatr., pp. 2S5 sq. On the insolence of the freedmen and on the two kinds ot manumission (one bv the praetor winch conferred all the rights of a Knnuni citi/en, tlie otlur l)v tlie writing or declaration of the mastei, wiiich convt\ci: a degree of liberty, but did not give the freed rank amone, the citizen-^), cf. Tacitu-^. Attn, .xiii, 20, 27. ^ <# ^^ I r THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. 87 A certain man, having suffered shipwTeck and having lost his wife and three children by the burning of his house, hanged him- seli. A certain one of the passers-by cut him down, and was brought to trial l)y the man he had saved on a charge of malicious injury. Suicide was not considered by the Romans as a crime. On the contrary it is commended by Roman writers. ^'^ Nevertheless hanging one's self seems to have been at all times considered as an ignominious mode of death and to have entailed the loss of honorable buriaL'"*" Contr. V, 4. Damnatus parricidi alligans fratrem. Law: Let the man who has given false testimony be bound under the control of him against whom he has testified. A lather went away with one of his two sons; the young man returned alone. He was accused of parricide by his brother and condemned. On account of an intervening festival the punish- ment, in accordance with the law, was postponed, and the father returned. The one convicted accused his brother of giving false witness and seized and confined him. His father commanded him to release his brother and upon his refusal disinherited him. Faisum testimonium according to the Twelve Tables was pun- ished by hurling iVom the Tarpeian rock.^"' Contr. V, 5. Domus cum arbore exusta. Law: Let the man who has knowingly inflicted an injury pay fourlold, the man who did so without knowing, the simple amount. A rich man asked his poor neighbor to sell him a tree which he said was in his way. The poor man refused. The rich man set fire to the plane-tree, with which the house also burned. For the tree he promises tourfold, for the house the simple value. ^5''Cf '^Qx\tz2., De prozidiutia 2,3; Consol. ad Marc. 22; Tacitus, Anfi. vi. 29, 30 ; xii, 59 ; xiii, 30 ; Hist, ii, 49 ; Pliny, Epist. i, 12, 22 ; iii, 7, 16; Cicero, De pji. iii, iS. ^*'" Cf. Rein, Criminalr., pp. 883-6 ; Servius ad Verg., Aen. xii, 603 ; Orelli, Inscr. .^404. ■^''' Cf. Rein, Crnninalr.. pp. 767.788 sq.; Gellius, Noct. Att. xx, T. Cases of action for this crime, Livy, iii, 24 sq., 29 ; iv, 21. 88 THE TTTEMES TREATED P.V THE ELDER SENECA. A law of the Twelve Tables provides that the illej^^al destruction of other people's fruit trees or vines shall be paid for at the rate of twenty -five asses for each tree.^'" Cojiir. vi, 2. Exul pater fundo prohibitus. Laws : Let it be unlawful to aid an exile with shelter and food. Let the man condemned for accidental manslaughter be exiled tor five years. A certain man who had a son and a daughter, being contlenuied for accidental manslaughter and having gone into exile, was in the habit of coming to an estate near the boundary. His son discov- ering this punished the bailif The bailif shut out the father who thereupon began to visit his daughter. She was accused oi having harbored an exile Init was acquitted by the adx'ocacy ot her brother. After the live years the lather disinherits the son. Exilhan was the prohibition of residence in a certain country or city, with a command to live in a certain place. During the epoch of the kings and in the republican period it comprised voluntary banishment as well as the penal aquae ct i^^^nis ijito dictio. In the times of the emperors this latter })assed over into the deportatio. Deportatio was for lit'e, and entailed the loss ot ciiiias and confiscation of property. Alongside of this severe torm ot banishment there was inflicted a milder degree, the icic^aiio, which was not followed by loss of civitas and confiscation. The five grades of banishment were : i)i iyisidam deportatio ; depor- tatio ; in insiiiani relei^atio ; in perpciuum relei^^atio ; in ienipus relegatio.^'^''^ Contr. vi, 3. Mater nothi lecta pro patre. Laws : Let the elder brother divide the patrimony, the younger take his choice. Let it be lawful to acknowledge a son by a bondwoman. A certain man having a legitimate son, acknowledged another by a bondwoman and died. The elder brother made such a division that the whole patrimony was placed on one side and on the other the mother of the illegitimate son. The younger brother chose his mother, and accused his brother of detrauding him. •'*-Cf. Rein, 6>/////«u/r., p. 33 '^; Pliny, Xat. Hist, xviii, i ; Gaius, Covi- vientary to the Tiuehe I'aiucs iv, 11. ^^^ Cf. Rein, Crirnmair., p. 915. ^ \ k f r 1 if TIIF. TIIKMES TREATED DY THE ELDER SENECA. 89 The " circumscriptio " of this case might come under sielliona- tns, which implied the taking of advantage in regard to property without necessarily coming under doliun ox fiirtuju."'"^ Contr. vi, 5. Iphicrates reus. Law : Let whosoever ofiers violence in a court of justice be liable to capit.il punishment. Iphicrates having been sent against the King of the Thracians after being thrice defeated in battle concluded a treaty with him and married his daughter. When he had returned to Athens and was on his trial certain Thracians armed with knives appeared about the court, and the detendant himself drew his sword. When the judges were summoned to give their decision they publicly voted lor an acquittal. Iphicrates is accused ot oflfering violence in a court of justice.^^ A[)pearance in the court or in the contio wMth arms for an evil pur|>ose came under the Lex Julia,'"^^'' under vis pnbiica (in distinc- tion trom vis privata) which was |)unished by aquae et i^nis interdictio:'"'' Contr. vi, 6. Adultera venefica. Law : Let there be an action at law tor poisoning. A certain man who liad a wife and a marriageable daughter by her intormed his wife to whom he was intending to betroth the daughter. The wife said : " She shall die sooner than marry that man." The girl died before the marriage day with suspicious signs of cruelty and poison. The father put a maid-servant to the torture. She said she knew nothing about poison but she did know of the adultery of her mistress with him to whom the father intended to betroth his daughter. The man charges his wife with poisoning and adultery. The earliest punishment for murder by poisoning as related by Livy, •■ took place 332 B. C. The most prominent men died 3«^ Cf. Rein, Criminalr., pp. 331 sq. Rein says that the Roman defi- nition i)f stellii)n.i:us was quite indctinite. "' i-\)r the historical basis of this Controver>ia see above, p. 66 sq. '**'*' Mentioned in Cicero, r/iil. i, 9 sq. 3^' Cf. Rein, Cnvunah ., pp. 745. 750. 3*^viii, 18, 2 sqq., where it is, iiowever given as a tradition. I 90 THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. mysteriously^'"'' until n miid-servnnt revealed to the aedile <,). Fabius Maxiinus the tact that women ot' hi^^h position ut re pre- pariiiiT and ilistributini^^ poison. With the consent ot the senate the matter was followed up, and a nn:ni)er oi wonicr, were tound engao-ed in the {)reparati()n ul" ptjison. Wlicn thf\- were com- pelled to drink their own preparations tucnt\- ot" them (iicci, and in the pursuance ot the investit^ation al)out one hun(h-c(i and seventy were condemned. (The manner oi" pnu'slmu-nt is not recorded.) The at^air was also considered as a pyodi'^iu7}i requiring expiation, and a dictator was chosen tlaii fi^^oidi causa f'^ In 1S4 H. C. the [)raetor Q. Naevins sat in iudonicnt on nun-ders by poison which otten occurred in the country towns about Rome, and according to Valerius Antias two thousand people were found guilty.''^ Two years later on the sudden death of C. Cal- purnius Piso and other prominent men a sus{>icion of poisi^ning arose, and by a senatus consultum tl^e praetor C. Chiudms was given charge ot the quatsiio concernin^i; murch rs bv ])o;son in the city and vicinity, and the praetor C. Maenius the quaesiio outside. Of those condemned in the city only Quarta Hostilia, the wife of the nuudered consul, is mentioned. Her ouiit was pro\ ed by numerous witnesses.''' C. M.ienius tound so much to do outside the city that he wrote to the senate that he h.id aireadv condemned three thousand persons and that the numljer of the suspects was constantly growing in consequence of new informations. In the following year the praetor urbanus P. Mucins Scaevohi held an investigation of cases of murder l)v poison in the citv and vicinity.''' investigations were a^ain held at the time of the third Punic war, and two i)r();nincnt matrons, Publia the wife of Postinnius Albinus, and Licinia thewite of Clautiius Asel]u>, were accused of having poisoned their husbands, and ])ut to death l)y the sentence of a family court {iudiciiun domcsiiciu?i).'' The last accusation tor poisoning recorded |)rior to the Lex Cornelia is that of Q. Varius Flybrida, known through the Lex Varia. He was executed " summo cruciatu supplicioque."'' ^*'*"Cum primores civitatis s;mili!)us n^^rbis eodeiiuiue ferme nmiics eveiitu niorerentur." ^™Cf. Valer. Max., ii, 5, 3; Urosius. iii, 10. ^"' Cf. Livy, xxxix, 41. ^'--'Cf. ;•.'./. xl, 37. 373 cf. thJ. xl, .^3 sq. 3-4 ». Cognatoriini decreto ncctae sunt." Ci. Livv, A.>./. xlviii ; \'altr. Max., vi, 3, S. ^'^Cf. Cicero, Dc fiat. deor. iii, 33, Si. '.* . i \ \ J r ) THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. 91 Durino the civil war between Marius and Sulla with otiier evils and crimes, ijoisoning also increased.''' Sulla endeavored to check these evils l)y his Lex (hence called Cornelia) de sicariis et veneficis. The tilth division treats of murder by poisoning, and declares that the praetor or iudex quaestionis shall judoe " qui- cumque lecerit, vendiderit. emerit, dederit (sc. venenum)."^"' The penaltv, as also for other kinds of murder and arson, was aquae et ii^mis inierdiciio for freemen and death for slaves.''' In the imperial period the punishment for murder was more severe : deportaiio in insulam for altiores, execution for Jionesiiores, while humiliores were thrown to the wild beasts or put on the cross. A senatus consultum extended the compass of " venenum," and punished all those who used a 7?iedica77ie7iiuni through which the life or health of the person taking it was endangered (?. e. medicines to bring about conception or abortion). Under Augustus three accusations of murder by poison are recorded: against Moschus a rhetor of Pergamus, who was defended by Asinius Pollio and C. Manlius ;'"' against Apollo- dorus, also a rhetor o( Pergamus, who was detended by the same Asinius Pollio. Apollodorus was condemned, and went into exile at Massilia f' against Nonius Asprenas, a friend of Augustus, who was accused by Cassius Severus of poisoning one hundred and thirty guests. He was likewise defended by Asinius Pollio.'"^ Udder Tiberius occurred the poisoning of Germanicus in 19 A. D. bv Cn. Piso and his wife Piancina perhaps not without the connivance of the emperor who was jealous of Germanicus. Before his death Germanicus demanded that his friends should become the accusers of Piso. The senate conducted the investi- gation and Cn. Piso, despairing of the result, committed suicide. Piancina was at first pardoned at the intercession of the Empress Agrippina, but after the death of the latter in 33 A. D. she was 3''H'f. Cicero, /';<) Clucutto 54. S"?" Commonly abbreviated : Lex CorneHa de Sicariis. 37^ Cf. Cicero, Pro Cluait. 54. 3"''' Cf. ;/'/ pre- pared by the notorious Lociista, and the physician Xenophon completed the deed. " Aori|)j)ina also caused the poisoning of Junius Silanus, proconsul in Asia, In- P. Cel^r and lletius ; another of her victims was Narcissus tlu- h-eedman of Claudius."' Locusta also assisted in the poisonini^ of Brittanicus by Nero in 55 B. C. She had been condemned loni; bef )re, but on account of her great skill was kept in custody and forced lo be the tool of prominent persons.'"' Nero also caused the treednien I)ory{)horus and Pallas to be poisoned.''"' It may be noted that under Domitian poisoning was verv fre- quent, especially by means of poisoned needles.'''' Conlr. vi, 7. Demens qui filio cessit uxorem. Law : Let there be an action at law for madness. A man having two sons married a second wile. When one of 38»Cf. Tacitus, .-^;/;;. ii, 69-S2 ; ill, lO-lS; vi, 26; I)i(, CasMus. Ivii. iS ; Suetonius, Tihcr. 52; VitelL 2; Cali<^. 1.2; I'linv, lf:st. X.it. xi. ^7 ; Znn- aeus, xi, 2. la Tacitus Ami. iii, iz sq. it )s related that Emilia l.cpida, who was charged with feigning that she iiad given birth to a child ]>v Tul)- has Quirinus her husband, and was further charged with adulteries, i)oison- ings, and treasonaole dealings with the Chaldeans about the fate and continuance of the imperial house, was interdicted from tire and water ; ibid, iv, 22 it is stated that Xumantina was accused of having, by cb.aniis and potions, disordered the brain of her husband. Ct. 1 acitus, Ann. iv, S-i { ; Dio ("assius h li, 22 ; Iviii, 11. 3S^Cf. Tacitus, Ann. xii, 66 sq; Dio Cassius, Ix, 34; Suetonius, Claud. 44 sq. 3®«Cf. Tacitus, Ann. xiii, i ; Dio Cassius, Ixi. 6. Ut. iacitus, Ann. xiii, 15 sq.; Dio Cassius, Ixi, 7 ; Suetonius, .\V;c' 33 3*^Cf. Tacitus, Ann. xiv, 65. 3S^Cf. Dio Cassius, Ixvii. u. On this whole subject comi)are Rein, Crimmalr., pp. 406-S. 410. 414. 419. 426 sq. THE TIIl-.MKS TREATED BY THE ELDER SEXECA. 93 ' f ( / ^ I the voung men was ill nigh unto death the physicians said that the cause of his illness was a mental trouble. When the father compelled the son at the sword's point to tell him the truth the young man confessed that he loved his step-mother. The father gave up his wife to him, and thereupon was charged with insanity by his other son. '"^ The Twelve Tables place a mature person of unsound mind under the care of his kinsmen iag7iaii) or where he has none under that of his gens {^oitilcs):''^ Contr. vii, 7. Law : Let there be an action at law^ for treason. A father and son desired military command ; the son was pre- ferred over the father, and having engaged in battle with the enemy was captured. An embassy of ten was sent to ransom the commander. While they were on their way the father met them with gold, and informed them that his son had been crucified, and that he himself had carried the gold for his ransom too late. When they reached the crucified commander he said to them : " Beware of treason." The lather is accused of treason. Proditio consists in i. Treacherous or cowardly surrender ol territory or people to the enemy. 2. Desertion. 3. Going over to the enemv. 4. Inciting a foreign enemy to war against Rome. 5. Probably any support of the enemy (with arms, money, release of hostages, etc.). The punishment was death, including hanging on the arbor iufelix, hurling from the Tarpeian rock''''" and exe- tion with the axe. '' \x\ the time of the emperors the davinatio memoriae,'' consisting of tearing down the house of the con- 3^ For the historical suggestion in this theme, and the parallels to it, see above, p. 67. ;''" Cf. Rem. /V/r'<7/r., pp. 259 sq.; Ad Ilcren. i, 13; Cicero, Tusc. Disp. iii, 5 ; Dc :n:\ ii, 50 : " Si furiosus est agnatorum gentiliumque in eo pecu- niaque eiu> potestas csto ; " Varro, De re rust, i, 2 : " Mente est captus atqae ad agnatos et gentiles est dediicendum." Rein remarks that no great stress 1- ti) be laid on the various expressions, as they have no legal import- ance, as every person of unsound mind, whether //^r/*?^?^^- ox demens, was placed under cm atio. ■-'Cf. L;vv, vii, 20, 12; Dion. Hal., Rom. ^////V/. viii, 78 ; Seneca, Z^i? zVa: i, 16, -*«•* Ct. Livy, ii, 5, S ; 41,9; viii, 20, 8 ; x, i ; Dion Hal., Rom. Antiq.s, 8. 39tCl. ^^)uintilian, Ins!. Oral, iii, 7, 20: " post mortem adiecta quibusdam ignominia est." 94 THE lilEML:; 1 SEATED LV THE ELDER SENECA. THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. 95 victed," was a n >t uncommon occurrence. Somctinu's also coni- mand was -^ivcn that no neinber ot the tainily shoiikl bear the name ot" the criminal/"' nor were his relations allowed to mourn for him. His property also was conhscated. '" The Lex Julia de rnaiesiate, issued l)v Caesar, prescribed the same penalty of aquae et i!:;n:s inicrdictio for all kinds of treason.^^* Contr. viii, i. Orbata post la(|ueum sacrile^a. Law: Let a mao;istrate inflict punishment on one who has confessed i^uilt. A woman havino- lost her husband and two s(ms hani^ed her- self, but a third son cut her down. She, when a sacrilege had been committed, and the per[)etrator was bein^ souj^ht lor, told the magistrate that she was the i^uilty party. The ma-^isirate wishes to inflict punishment on her on the i^jround of her contes- sion. The son protests. Sacrilei^iuin was a term at first applied to the despoilini^ of a temple, the theft of sacred objects. In the imperial period the term was given a wider sco[)e, embracing anv outrage on religion, any wicked deed which implied a violation of the sacred and moral order, especially lack of respect toward the emperor, heresy, disturbance of worship, etc. I'Acn in the earlier [)eriod, however, sacrilegium in the wider sense was prohibited and regarded as an act deserving the severest punishment. Ol great importance in regard to this crime was the Lex Julia pccidatiis (i. e. the unlawful appropriation of public pro{)erty ). It read: " Ne quis ex pecunia sacra religiosa publicave auterat, neve inter- cipiat neve in rem suam vestat." Compare also the definition of 3*^ Cf. //'/. Arrordino to the decision ascribed to Roniidus,' the fatlicr was obhecd Im tore exposing the child to show it to five neighbors who weie to examine whether the child was deformed or to be expo-< d on account of its sickliness. Diony^ius llalicarnassus adds that the father was obliged to bring up male children and the first-born daught'-r. This latter statenitiit ot Dion. liai. (hM> not i'ully accord with the first, accordmg to which all (•lril(ir(ii iu :oie being exposed had to l)e shcown to neighbors. The Twelve Tables also command that sickly and deformed t hiidren "he exposed. The exposure and killing ot the deformed ^" focduin ac turpe pro- ditfium " ' w^as even ret>arded as a sacred dnt\', h>t the state mi^ht suffer some calamitw*" lUit lathers acted quite ari)itrarri\' on this matter, and exposed their otl-pring for other reasons than detor- mity and weakness, as for instance on account ot })o\(^rty, suspicion that they were children of another man, etr., without beini; inter- fered with by the state. An in>tance oi ex[josure m tlie come- dians is Terence, IIccx. \\\. 3, 40. Dio Cassins, xlv, i, relates that Octaviamus was intended tor t\\p(wntf i)\- hi> tather i'eiau>e it had been announca-d to him that tl;e ehild would heroine the ruler of Rome, and Suetonius, Orfav, 65, rel.ites that the child of Julia, grandchild of Augustus, was exposeci hv (oniu^ard of the emperor because born in adulterv. The tre<[Uent o((-(nrrnce of exposure in the {)rovHices is attested bv Plnu-, I\f>i.>i. x, 71 sq.'" 405 By Uion. H.il., Autitr lined to declare it a crime. The penalties were made more and more severe until it became a capital otlence.""® As xv^^wx^^ gesta per vivi vietumquc, L. Octavius, an older con- temporary of Cicero, proclaimed an edict called after himy'6';7;/?^/a Octaviana: "quod \i metusve causa gestum erit. ratum non habeto."^"^ Conir. ix, 4. Law : Lei the han.d.^ be cut olf of the man who has struck his f ithelX .\ tvrant suiitmoned to his citadel a fatht r with his two sons, and commanded the young men to strike their tather. One of them threw himseb headlong, the other carried out the command ot the tyr.trit anein«^ received into his friendship killed him and received .1 reward. I lib hands are demanded and his tather deiend> hnn. In i untie done to parents were regarded as atroces*^^ and were in th<' iniix ri.il epoch reterred for punishment to the praefectus nrl'i>, m the provinces to the governor: "sifilius matrem aut pairum ( /. c. parentes m intinitmn, grandparents, etc.), quos vene- rari oportet, contunu-liis 1 this iniuria is more specifically detailed as (0)i:i(iii})i and puhare^ afficit, vel impias manus eis infert ; praetectus urbis delictum ad publicam pietatem pro modo eius \ iridicabit."*" Coiir. X, 1. Let tiiere be an action at law tor injury. A man who had a son and a rich enemy was tbund slain but despoiled of nothing which he had. The young man persisted m tollowing the rich man in shabby ;.4arments. The rich man brought him to a court of justice and demanded that he should .iccuse him if he had any suspicions. The poor man said : "I will accuse vou when I can." When the rich man became a can- didate tor public office and was rejected he accused the poor man ot injury. 408 Cf. Keiii, Crtminalr., pp. 44^-4- *(»'■• Cf. Rein. l'rivatr.,\^\i, 503 sq. ; Cicero, hi T^rr. i, 50; lii, 65; Ad Quint, iratr. i, i, :i ; Seneca, Cojitr, ix. 3. *'OCf. Ulpum vii.. v^ S. *^^ Cf. Rein, C) nninalr .. J). 3S2. .tib^^&iai^mmMakMiSa^mKaba^ 98 THE THEMES TREATED BY IHE ELDER SENECA. The definitions o{ inmria m the successive edicts of the prae- tors, reaching down to the imperial period, ci)iua:!iLd liic decision that ail iiiiiiria was committed' " si ad invidiam alicuius veste hio-u'hr: utatur aut s(inai:daant si barbani deniittat. etc., "*^* since mourning' earb was waun t<» indicate tliat a criminal acticii was pending; over some one.*^' BiBLiOiiRArnv. Bernhardy, (irundriss der rumischeii Liltciatiir. l>iaun- scluveig. 1865. Blass, Die ofriechische Beredsamkeit in dem Zeitalter von Alexander bis auf Au;austus. Berlm. 1865. , Geschichte der attischen Beredsamkeit. Leipzi^;. 1887. Bursian. Edition of Seneca. Leipzig. 1857. Cuchevab Histoire de Telocpience romaine depnis la mort de Ciceron jusqu' a I'avenement de I'empereur Hadrien. 1893. Clinton, Fasti Hellenic!. 1851. Freeman, History of F'ederal Government. 1863. Friedlander, Darstellung der Sittenoeschichte Roms. 1890. Hulsebos, De educatione et institutione apud Romanos. 1875. Jebb, The Attic Orators. 1876. Mayor, Edition of Juvenal. 1880. Mommsen, Romische Geschichte. Monpeaux, Les Africains, 6tude sur la litterature Latine d'Afrique. 1894. Miiller, H. J., Edition of Seneca. Vienna, Prague, and Leipzig. 1887. Niebuhr, M. Tullii Ciceronis orationum pro M. Fonteio et {)ro Rabirio fragmenta, T. Livii Lib. xci tragmentum plenius et emen- datius, L. Senecae fragmenta ex membranis Bibliothecae Vati- canare. Rome. 1S20. Rohde, Der griechische Roman. 1876. Schanz, Geschichte der romischen Litteratur. Schott, Edition of Seneca. 1627. ■*^-Cf. Digest. [Piindecfae') I,. 15 § 27, dc iniuria. *^'Cf. Rein, Cnnnnalr ., p. 305. \ THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. 99 i Simcox, A History of Latin Literature from Ennius to Boethius. 1883. Sii>emihl, Geschiclue der griechischen Litteratur in der Altx- andrinerzeit. Leipzig. t8q2, rcatfi'i. Historv of Rnman Literature. 1891. Thiele, Hermagoras, Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Rhetorik. Strassburg. 1893. Westermann, Geschichte der Beredsamkeit in Griechenland und Run). Leipzig. 1833. Periodicals. Dirksen. Abhandlungen der Kdniglichen Akademie der Wis- senschatten. Berlm. 1847. i, |)p. 48-79- S})en!4el, (iclehrte Anzei<^rn der baynschen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Ahmich. 1858. Vol. xlvii, pp. 1-30. Kiessling, Rheinisches Museum. 1861. Vol. xvi, pp. 50-61. S[)enoel. Rheinisches Must^um. 1863. Vol. xviii, pp. 481-526. Morawski, Zeitschrift fiir die usterreichischen Gymnasien. 1 88 1. Vol. xliv, pp. 1-12. Rhode, Rheinisches Museum. 1886. Vol. xli, pp. 170-igo. Monographs, Bonnell, De mutata sub primis Caesaribus eloquentiae Romanae condicione, imprimis de Rhetorum scholis, commen- latK) historiea. Berlin. 1836. Spen.ocl, Leber das Studium der Rhetorik bei den Alten. Munich. 1842. Hotie, De Senecae rhetoris quattuor codicibus mss. Schottianis ad Krielericani Haasium professorem Vratislaviensem epistula. Gdrlitz. 1858. Koerber, Leber den Rhetor Seneca und die romische Rhetorik seiner Zeit. xMarburg. 1864. ivonitzer, Quaestiones in Senecam patrem criticae. Breslau. 1864. Kiesslm^, Beitrage zur Texteskritik des Rhetor Seneca. Breslau. 1S64. Hoffmann, Leber eine Admonter Pergament-Handschrift der Excerpte des alteren Seneca. Posen. 1867. Friedlander, De Senecae controversiis in Gestis Romanorum adhibitis. Re^imonti. 1871. I) lOU THE THEMES TREATED UY THE ELDER SENECA. Sander, Q-inestiones in Seiv^cain rhetorein synlacticae. Greifsw.ikl. 1S72. Gruppe, Quaestiones Annaeanae. Sedini. 1S73. Sander, Der Sprachgebraiich des Rhetors Annaeiis Senec.i. No. i. Berlin. 1877. Buschaiann, Charakteristik der ^^riccliischen Rhetorik. Parchim. 187S. Leo, Dj Sciieoae traq^oodiis observationes critical. r,erlin. 1S78. Karsten, De elocutione rhetorica ([ualis invmitur in Annaei Senecae siias oriis el controversiis. Rotterdam. 18S1. Buschmann, Die " eiitanis terribles " unter den Rhetoren des Seneca. 1883. Bannim, De rhetoribus crraecis a Seneca in suasoriis et controversiis adhibitis. Kreuzburi;. 1S85. Morawski. De rhetoribns latinis. Cracow. iS()2. Hainnier, Beitrii^^e zu den 19 L;ru,.scren Qumtilianlschen Dec- kimationen. Mnnich. 1893. Marx. Chauvinisnuisund Schulreforni ini Akerthuni. Breshm. 1894. \ v> ^^ \ VITA. Natus sum anno MDCCCLXII m pago Massachusetts, in oppido Beverly. Lilteraruni dementis domi imbutus in numerum discipulorum Universitatis Harvard receptus sum, quae anno MDCCCLXXXIV testimonio A. B. (mao^na cum laude) me donavit. Postea per sexennium litteras Latinas Graecasque in scholisinMassadiusettsetin Baltimore docebam,nonnullis quoque discipulis singulis mecum adscriptis. Cum iam in docendo versa- rer,sodalis creatussum seminarii philologici in Universitate Johns Hopkins cuius exercitationii)us magna cum utilitate mea per quat- tuor annos interfui. Anno MDCCCXCIV ad Universitatem Oxford ir.e contuli ubi litteris antiquis per unum annum optram dedi. ill. prots. Kllis et Macdonell optimis consiliis me adiuvanti- bus. Deinde in (;ermainam profectus in Universitate Bonn ill. prots. Biiciieler et Usener exercitationibus adfui aestate anni MDCCCLXCV. Ill profs. Gildersleeve, Bloomfield, Warren bene de me meritis gratias ago singulares autem Warren qui semper fautor exstitit studiorum meorum benignissimus. y lOO THE THEMES TREATED BY THE ELDER SENECA. Sander O laestioacs in Senooain rhctorcni syntactic. le. Greifswakl. 1S72. Gruppe, Quaestiones Annaeanae. Sedini. 1S73. Sander, Der Sprachi^ebrauch des Rhetors Annaeus Seneca. No. i. Berlin. 1877. Buschniann, Charakteristik der griechischen Rhetorik. Parchim. 1878. Leo, De Scneoae traoroediis observationes criticat-. r)erbn. 1878. Karsten, De elocutione rhetorica qualis invmitur in Annaei Senecae suasoriis et controversiis. Rotterdam. iSSi. Buschniann, Die " cntants ternbles " unter den Rhetoren des Seneca. 1883. Baumm, l)e rhetoribus crraecis a Seneca in suasoriis ct controversiis adhibitis. Kreuzbur<;. 1885. Morawski. De rhetoribus hitinis. Cracow. 1X92. Hainnier, Beitriij^e zn dt^n 19 groiseren Oiuntiiianischen Dec- kimationen. Munich. i8i;)3. Marx. Chauvinisnuis and Schuirelorni ini Alterthum. Breslau. 1894. t 1= t 1' ■<> VITA. N?^tns sum anno MDCCCLXII m pa^ro Massachusetts, in oppich) F>ev.Mly. Litterarum elenientis domi imbutus in numerum discii)uloruin Universitatis Harvard receptus sum, quae anno MDCCCI.XXXIV testimonio A. B. (ma<>na cum laude) me donavit. Postea per sexennium litteras Latinas Graecasque in schohsin Massachusetts etin Baltimore docebam,nonnuhis quoque discipulis sini.;ulis mecum adscriptis. Cum iam in docendo versa- rer,sodaIis creatussum seminarii philcjlogici in Universitate Johns Hopkins cuius exercitationii)US ma^na cum utilitate meaperquat- tuor annos intertui. Anno MDCCCXCIV ad Universitatem Oxford me contuli ubi litteris antiquis per unum annum operam dedi. ill. prots. Kllis et Macdonell optimis consiliis me adiuvanti- bus. Deinde in (;ermamain profectus in Universitate Bonn ill. prots. Bucheler et Usener exercitationibus adfui aestate anni MDCCCLXCV. Ill prots. Gildersleeve, Bloomfield, Warren bene de me meritis oratias ago singulares autem Warren qui semper fautor exstitit studiorum meorum benignissimus. 'V I 4 t I i ■im f:^ m^ *r**^ ) COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES This book is due on the date indicated below, or at the expiration of a definite period after the date of borrowing, as provided by the rules of the Library or by special arrange- ment with the Librarian in chsirge. DATE BORROWED DATE DUE DATE BORROWED DATE DUE <«kA.^ 28Sep'44 *PB 2 9 "SZ 1 •1 C2a(t14l)M100 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 0026051974 \' ^ C F S It, »*-;. ^m .'i^ ^•v- :.-• *v ■•'• '••<• ■••••"■■'•' r-V-.--- ;■■ ^••- >-| /> ■•••. •;' »4 •• ••'•■ . X : ift fe i f '••''''^ '