Roman Stoicism being lectures on the history of the Stoic...

[81]ib. 34, 122-124.

[82] ‘venustatem muliebrem ducere debemus, dignitatem virilem’ ib. 36, 130. In the same spirit Epictetus says ‘we ought not to confound the distinctions of the sexes’ Disc. i 16, 14.

[83] Cic. Off. i 35, 127.

[84] ‘nec vero audiendi sunt Cynici, aut si qui fuerunt Stoici paene Cynici, qui reprehendunt et irrident, quod ea quae re turpia non sint, verbis flagitiosa ducamus; illa autem, quae turpia sint, nominibus appellemus suis’ ib. i 35, 128; ‘Cynicorum autem rationem atque vitam alii cadere in sapientem dicunt, si quis eiusmodi forte casus inciderit, ut id faciendum sit: alii nullo modo’ Fin. iii 20, 68.

[85] ‘habes scholam Stoicam, ὁ σοφὸς εὐθυῤῥημονήσει. ego servo et servabo (sic enim adsuevi) Platonis verecundiam. itaque tectis verbis ea ad te scripsi, quae apertissimis agunt Stoici’ Fam. ix 22, 5. See also above, § 318.

[86] ‘rem ineptissimam fecero, si nunc verba quaesiero, quemadmodum dicam illum matelam sumpsisse’ Sen. Ben. iii 26, 2.

[87]Dial. vi 20, 3.

[88] σωφροσύνην δ’ εἶναι ἐπιστήμην αἱρετῶν καὶ φευκτῶν καὶ οὐδετέρων Stob. ii 7, 5 b 1.

[89] τὴν δὲ σωφροσύνην περὶ τὰς ὁρμὰς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ib. 7, 5 b 2.

[90] μανείην μᾶλλον ἢ ἡσθείην was the expression of Antisthenes, see Diog. L. vi 3; ‘voluptas est ... res humilis, membrorum turpium aut vilium ministerio veniens’ Sen. Ben. vii 2, 2.

[91] ‘intellegitur appetitus omnes contrahendos sedandosque esse’ Cic. Off. i 29, 103.

[92] See above, § 319. It does not seem possible to accept Pearson’s view (on Z. fr. 128) that Zeno intended πόνος to be the προηγμένον, and ἡδονή the ἀποπροηγμένον; but both he and his successors undoubtedly recognised the value of πόνος (toil) as a discipline. The following remarks communicated to the writer by Mr Pearson throw much light on a really difficult question. ‘Even the Cynics are forced to admit that not all “pleasure” is to be condemned (the evidence is in Zeller’s Socratics, p. 308), but the only form of it which deserves consideration is that which is the result and after-effect of πόνος. In other words, it may be argued that true pleasure is the cessation of pain (Plat. Phileb. 44 B). The glorification of Heracles the toilsome hero corresponds; but pleasure as understood by the vulgar is unhesitatingly to be rejected. Zeno was the inheritor of all this, and, if he ever said that ἡδονή was προηγμένον, his remark can only have applied to the ἀπονία-ἡδονή; and such certainly was the view of Chrysippus (Plut. Sto. rep. 30, 2).’ In the passage here referred to from Plutarch ἀπονία takes the place of ἡδονή as a προηγμένον; so also in Stob. ii 7, 7 e and Cic. Fin. iii 15, 51. See further §§ 347, 371.

[93] ἡδονή as an advantage is contrasted with πόνος (suffering) as a disadvantage in the list attributed to these writers in Diog. L. vii 102.

[94] Cic. Fin. ii 21, 69.

[95] Κλεάνθης μήτε κατὰ φύσιν αὐτὴν [ἡδονὴν] εἶναι μήτ’ ἀξίαν ἔχειν ἐν τῷ βίῳ Sext. math. xi 74 (Arnim iii 155).

[96] Arnim iii 136, 155.

[97] ‘sit impudens, si [voluptas] pluris esse contendat dulcedinem corporis, et titillationem, ex eave natam laetitiam, quam gravitatem animi’ Cic. Fin. iii 1, 1; ‘quis mortalium per diem noctemque titillari velit?’ Sen. Dial. vii 5, 4; ‘quidni ista bene penset cum minutis et frivolis et non perseverantibus corpusculi motibus?’ ib. 4, 4.

[98] ‘voluptas habet quiddam simile naturali bono’ Cic. Leg. i 11, 31; ‘[voluptas] condimenti fortasse nonnihil, utilitatis certe nihil habebit’ Off. iii 33, 120; ‘voluptatem natura necessariis rebus admiscuit, non ut illam peteremus, sed ut ea, sine quibus non possumus vivere, gratiora nobis illius faceret accessio’ Sen. Ep. 116, 3; ‘[virtus voluptatem] non praestat, sed et hanc; nec huic laborat, sed labor eius, quamvis aliud petat, hoc quoque adsequetur’ Dial. vii 9, 1. That this view was held by Chrysippus appears from Diog. L. vii 86 (cf. Arnim iii 229 a); see also above, notes 92 and 93.

[99]Eth. N. x 7.

[100] ἡδονὴ δέ ἐστιν ἄλογος ἔπαρσις ἐφ’ αἱρετῷ δοκοῦντι ὑπάρχειν Diog. L. vii 114 (of Chrysippus); ‘hoc interest, quod voluptas dicitur etiam in animo, vitiosa res, ut Stoici putant, qui eam sic definiunt; sublationem animi sine ratione, opinantis se magno bono frui’ Cic. Fin. ii 4, 13; ‘vitium esse voluptatem credimus’ Sen. Ep. 59, 1.

[101] ‘quam [perturbationem] Stoici ἡδονήν appellant, ego malo laetitiam appellare, quasi gestientis animi elationem voluptariam’ Cic. Fin. iii 10, 35. Sometimes Cicero translates with more fulness by laetitia gestiens or nimia; Tusc. disp. iv 6, 13.

[102] Παναίτιος δὲ [ἡδονήν φησί] τινα μὲν κατὰ φύσιν ὑπάρχειν, τινὰ δὲ παρὰ φύσιν Sext. math. xi 73 (Arnim iii 155).

[103] See below, §§ 371, 402, 403. On the whole subject see further Hicks, Stoic and Epicurean, pp. 110 to 112.

[104] ‘Antipater Tyrius, Stoicus, qui Athenis nuper est mortuus, praeterit[am] censet a Panaetio valetudinis curationem. valetudo sustentatur notitia sui corporis et observatione, quae res aut prodesse soleant aut obesse, et continentia in victu omni atque cultu corporis tuendi causa, postremo arte eorum, quorum ad scientiam haec pertinent’ Cic. Off. ii 24, 86.

[105] ‘hanc sanam et salubrem formam vitae tenete, ut corpori tantum indulgeatis, quantum bonae valetudini satis est ... cibus famem sedet, potio sitim extinguat, vestis arceat frigus, domus munimentum sit adversus infesta corporis’ Sen. Ep. 8, 5; and so Musonius, below, § 381.

[106] Epict. Disc. iii 22 and 26.

[107] See above, § 304.

[108] Diog. L. vii 129; ‘Stoici sapientem amaturum esse dicunt’ Cic. Tusc. disp. iv 34, 72.

[109] ἐπιβολὴν φιλοποιΐας διὰ κάλλος ἐμφαινόμενον Diog. L. vii 130; ‘[Stoici] amorem ipsum conatum amicitiae faciendae ex pulchritudinis specie definiunt’ Cic. as above. The ἐπιβολή or conatus is a variety of the ὁρμή or appetitio, Hirzel p. 390.

[110] Not of course new in any absolute sense; in the country at least such relations must always have been common.

[111] Diog. L. vi 96-98.

[112] See above, § 300, and § 306, note 29; and below, §§ 431, 439, 444, and 446.

[113] ‘in consensu vidui caelibatus nemo uxorem duxit, nisi qui abduxit’ Sen. Ben. i 9, 4.

[114] Stob. iv 22, 25; and see further, §§ 406, 407.

[115] Diog. L. vii 106.

[116] ‘non contemnet se sapiens, etiamsi fuerit minimae staturae; esse tamen se procerum volet’ Sen. Dial. vii 22, 2.

[117] ‘unicum tibi ornamentum pulcherrima et nulli obnoxia aetati forma’ ib. xii 16, 4.

[118] ‘contra naturam est, faciles odisse munditias’ Sen. Ep. 5, 4; ‘non splendeat toga, ne sordeat quidem’ ib. 5, 3.

[119] ‘unus omnium parens mundus est: ad hunc prima cuiusque origo perducitur’ Ben. iii 28, 2; ‘[philosophia] stemma non inspicit ... animus facit nobilem’ Ep. 44, 1 and 5.

[120] Diog. L. vii 106; Cic. Fin. iii 15, 51.