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

395. We have now set forth the Stoic theory of ethics, both in its high philosophic framework and in its more detailed treatment, in which it prescribes what is to be done and what to be left undone, and how the soul is to be disciplined in health and medicined in sickness. It remains for us to study the application of the system to individual cases, a matter which perhaps lies outside the scope of philosophy as understood at the present day, but is an essential part of the work of churches and social organizations. This department of philosophy was termed by the ancients ‘precepts,’ or (more fully) ‘advice, dissuasion, admonition, exhortation, consolation, warnings, praise, reproof’ and so forth[1]; by some philosophers, as for instance by Aristo of Chios, it was held in contempt, by others (less inclined to Cynism) it was considered alone worthy of pursuit[2]. But the steady conviction of the main body of Stoic teachers was that theory and precept must go hand in hand[3]; that moral principles have no strength apart from their daily application[4], and that practical suggestions apart from a sound and reasoned system are like leaves cut from the bough, without lasting greenness[5]. Since precepts apply directly to individual persons and particular circumstances, they presuppose some relationship between teacher and hearer[6]; the latter must be either a convert to the school or one who has grown up under its influence.

In the Roman period the department of precepts is of increasing importance; we have something to learn from Antipater, Panaetius and Cicero, but we find much more material in the lectures (διατριβαί, ‘diatribes’) and letters of Musonius, Seneca, Epictetus and other teachers of the period of the principate.

396. The ‘precepts’ which we find illustrated by our various authorities are not easily systematized, but they have all the more the charm of personal intimacy; through them we are admitted to the home life of the Stoics. As Seneca wrote to Lucilius, so every day did Stoic fathers, Stoic teachers, Stoic jurists, address those who came within their influence. Believing every man to have the seed of virtue in him, they had confidence that by their words it would often be stirred to life[7]; and that in other cases, in which the promising shoot had become overshadowed by ignorance or evil habits, it would by the same means begin to grow again[8]. But the full benefits of precepts could only be seen where they fell on well-prepared ground, and formed part of a training extending from infancy to the grave; where the instructor could daily ensure their enforcement and observe their effect. This opportunity was necessarily found most often in the teaching of the young; and the Stoic system of precepts, though not restricted to one period of life, was to a large extent a foreshadowing of a ‘Theory of Education.’ It was under all circumstances guided by the rule of ‘little by little.’ Precepts must be few[9], and must be in themselves easy for the individual to carry out[10]; but by steady practice great things will be accomplished.

397. Since the value of precepts depends on the personal influence of the instructor, it is clear that his example will be of the greatest importance, and we may first ask what the discipline is to which he himself submits. Here the Cynic teacher seems to have the advantage, for he lives in the sight of all men; and the Indian, who allows himself to be scorched or burnt to show his contempt for pain, makes a still more forcible appeal[11]. The Stoic does not parade himself in this fashion, but neither does he lock the door of his private life against any who wish to examine it[12]. In the early morning he shakes off sleep, rousing himself to do the day’s work of a man[13]. Having clothed himself, he turns his mind towards his Maker, and sings his praises; he resolves during the coming day to cooperate in his purposes, and to bear cheerfully any burden that may be placed upon him[14]. He will then give a short time to gymnastic exercises for the good of his health[15]; after which, if his strength allows it, he will take, winter or summer, a plunge into the cold bath[16]; next comes the slightest of meals[17]; then a short nap or reverie[18]. From this he is aroused by the stir around him, and he then applies himself to the day’s studies, being careful to alternate reading and writing, so that his mind may be neither exhausted by the latter nor relaxed by the former[19]. Later on he will consider his practical duties towards his relatives, his friends, and society in general. He will order his household and settle the disputes of his dependents.

He will visit his friends, saying a word here and there in season[20], but not (like the Cynics) to all and sundry[21]. He will encourage those who are making progress in virtue, and sharply warn those who are in danger of a fall[22]. He advises a young mother to nurse her child at her own breast; and when he meets with objections, points out the wisdom and propriety of obeying the prescriptions of nature[23]. Returning home, he will again enjoy some slight bodily exercise, joining perhaps in a game of ball; his thoughts however will not always turn on success in the game, but he will consider how many principles in physics and ethics may be illustrated by it[24]. Now that evening comes on, he sits down to a meal (not over-elaborate) in the company of one or two favourite pupils[25]. Afterwards comes the temptation to burn the midnight oil in gathering seeds of wisdom for the morrow from the well-thumbed manuscript of Cleanthes or, it may be, of Epicurus[26]. Retiring to his chamber, he will examine his conscience, review the events of the past day, and be at peace with himself before he sleeps[27].

398. With the training of children the Stoic teacher is perhaps not altogether familiar, but he knows its importance[28]; it must be based on simplicity and austerity, for just at this time indulgence and luxury are most dangerous stimulants to the passions[29]. The child must learn to eat and drink in a mannerly way[30], to refrain from loud talking and laughing[31], to express himself in respectful and graceful words[32]. He must be taught to do right before he can understand the reason why[33], or else by doing wrong he will make it difficult for himself afterwards to do right; he must be ruled until he can rule himself[34]. For this reason we give children proverbs (sententiae) or anecdotes (χρεῖαι) to write out and learn, such as ‘honesty is the best policy’ or ‘Socrates being asked of what city he was ...’; and these short pithy sayings sink deep[35]. But in the school life of children no attempt must be made to grapple with the real problems of life, because these are too hard for them, though parents often forget this objection[36]. Games and amusements may be permitted; for though in discussions on high principle the Stoics may be entirely opposed to ‘relaxation of soul[37],’ yet in practical life they freely admit its importance[38]. All dealings with children should be gentle; the discipline of the rod has long ago been abandoned by all sensible parents and teachers[39].

399. Soft living is at all ages to be avoided[40]. It is in these days a danger to the bodily health; for when a man is accustomed to be protected from a draught by glass windows, to have his feet kept warm by foot-warmers constantly renewed, and his dining-room kept at an even temperature by hot air, the slightest breeze may put him in danger of his life[41]. Those who envy men who ‘live softly’ forget that their character becomes soft thereby[42]. In particular clothing should not be such as altogether to protect the body from heat in summer, and from cold in winter. It is better to wear one shirt than two, best still to have only a coat. Then again, if you can bear it, it is better to go without shoes; for after all to be shod is not very different from being fettered, and runners do not use shoes[43]. So also avoid luxurious furniture; of what use is it that couches, tables and beds should be made of costly woods, and adorned with silver and gold? We eat, drink, and sleep better without these things. In all these matters the Spartans set us a good example; for while disease injures the body only, luxury corrupts both body and soul[44].

400. Boys and girls must be educated alike. This nature teaches us, for we train colts and puppies without any regard for the difference of sex. The true education of children is in the practice of the virtues, and these are the same for men and for women. Women need Wisdom to understand the ordering of a household, Justice to control the servants, Soberness that they may be modest and unselfish. But they also need Courage; in spite of the name ‘manliness’ (ἀνδρεία), this is not a virtue reserved for men. Without it women may be led by threats into immodest acts. Females of all kinds fight to defend their young; the Amazons too were good fighters, and it is only for want of practice that women cannot do the same to-day. That men, being the stronger, should do the heavier work, and women the lighter, is an arrangement which is often convenient, but circumstances may require the contrary. Girls at any rate must learn equally with boys to bear suffering, not to fear death, not to be in low spirits about anything that happens; to avoid grasping habits, to love equality and benevolence, and to do no harm to man or woman[45].

401. Children should obey their parents, but in the spirit of reason. We do not obey a father who gives orders for the treatment of a sick person contrary to those of the physician; nor one, who being himself ill, demands things that are not good for him; nor one who bids his son steal, or appropriate trust funds, or sacrifice his youthful bloom. We do not even obey him when he tells us to spell a word wrongly or strike a false note on the lyre. If your father forbids you to philosophize, show him by your manner of life, by prompt obedience, by good temper, by unselfishness, how good a thing philosophy is. But after all, the command of the universal Father is more urgent upon you; which is, to be just, kind, benevolent, sober, high-souled; above labours and above pleasures; pure from all envy and plotting. You need not assume the outward appearance of a philosopher; for the power of philosophy is in the innermost part of the soul, which the father can no more reach than the tyrant[46].

402. The fancy of young men is easily attracted by the vision of virtue, but it is hard for them to persevere; they are like soft cheese which slips away from the hook by which it is taken up[47]. We must therefore put before them an ideal which appeals to them, and in which the advantages of fixed purpose and severe training are apparent to the eye. Such is the training of the athlete, the gladiator, and the soldier[48]. The teachers of wrestling bid the pupil try again after each fall[49]; the trained boxer is eager to challenge the most formidable opponent[50]. The gladiator has learnt the lesson that pain is no evil, when he stands up wounded before a sympathetic crowd and makes a sign that it matters nothing[51]. But most of all the soldier’s oath serves as an example, when he pledges himself to serve Caesar faithfully all his life: let the young philosopher pledge himself to serve his God as faithfully, to submit to the changes and chances of human life, and to obey willingly the command to act or to suffer[52]. Without effort, as Hesiod has taught us, no greatness can be attained[53].

403. In youth bad habits are apt to acquire some strength before they can be rooted out, and it will be well to anticipate this evil by exercising body and soul in advance in a direction contrary to that of the most common temptations. The teacher will therefore give to his precepts an exaggerated character, reckoning upon human frailty to bring about a proper standard in practice[54]. Thus since luxury is a chief enemy of virtue, the body should at least occasionally be brought low. A practice approved by the example of eminent men is to mark out from time to time a few days for the exercise of the simple life; during this time life is to be maintained on coarse bread and water, in rough dress and all the surroundings of poverty[55]. Since Cynism is a ‘short cut to virtue[56],’ philosophers may well employ the methods of Diogenes for short periods, as a corrective to any tendency to excess; rich people do as much for love of change[57].

404. On the question of personal appearance there is much to be said on both sides. Foppishness is a disagreeable vice, and it is contemptible that a young man should smell of perfumes. On the other hand a total disregard of appearances is not approved by the Stoics; ‘it is against nature’ says Seneca ‘to be averse to neatness in appearance[58].’ In these outward matters a sensible man will conform to fashion, nor will he wish to make the name of philosopher still more unpopular than it is[59]. The founders of Stoicism laid it down that men and women should wear the same dress; but the later teachers laid stress on the natural distinction of the sexes; and to men the beard should be an object of just pride, for it is more becoming than the cock’s comb, or the lion’s mane[60]. This is to the Stoic a point of honour; he should part with his head more readily than with his beard[61]. But the beard may be trimmed; for, as Zeno has observed, nature provides rather against the ‘too little’ than against the ‘too much,’ and reason must come to her help. Women do right to arrange their hair so as to make themselves more beautiful; but for men any kind of artistic hair-dressing is contemptible[62].

405. The young should train themselves alternately to bear solitude and to profit by society[63]: since the wise man is never dependent on his friends, though none can take better advantage of them[64]. In living alone a man follows the example of the deity, and comes to know his own heart[65]. But solitude must not be a screen for secret vices; a man only uses it rightly when he can without shame picture the whole world watching his hours of privacy[66]. The right choice of friends calls for true wisdom; for the soul cannot but be soiled by bad company[67]. The only true friendship is based on the mutual attraction of good folk[68]; therefore the wise are friends one to another even whilst they are unacquainted[69]. It is well to consider much before choosing a friend, but afterwards to give him implicit trust[70]; for a true friend is a second self[71]. Such friendship can only arise from the desire to love and be loved[72]; those who seek friends for their own advantage, will be abandoned by them in the day of trial[73]. In the companionship of well-chosen friends there grows up the ‘common sense,’ which is an instinctive contact with humanity as a whole, making each man a partner in the thoughts and needs of all around him. This feeling is a principal aim of philosophy[74]. But the young philosopher should make no enemies; he should be free from that dislike of others which so often causes a man to be disliked, and should remember that he who is an enemy to-day may be a friend to-morrow[75].

406. As the young Stoic passes from youth to manhood, he will turn his mind towards marriage as a political and social duty[76]; but if he is really touched by the divine flame, he will also find in it that enlargement of his own sympathies and opportunities of which the wise man is always glad[77]. Under the Roman principate we observe a rapid development of personal sympathy between husband and wife; and though in society girls who attended philosophers’ classes had an ill name as being self-willed and disputatious[78], yet it is from this very circle that the ideal of a perfect harmony of mind and purpose was developed most fully. Musonius often speaks on this subject:

‘Husband and wife enter upon a treaty to live and to earn together, and to have all things in common, soul, body and property. Unlike the lower animals, which mate at random, man cannot be content without perfect community of thought and mutual affection. Marriage is for health and for sickness alike, and each party will seek to outrun the other in love, not seeking his own advantage, but that of his partner[79].’

‘A man should look for a healthy body, of middle stature, capable of hard work, and offering no attraction to the licentious. But the soul is far more important; for as a crooked stick cannot be fitted with one that is straight, so there can be no true agreement except between the good[80].’

Seneca is reticent as to marriage, but we have no reason to doubt that his life with Paulina was typical of the best Stoic marriages. Thus he excuses himself for taking more thought for his health than a philosopher should, by saying that the happiness of Paulina depends upon it. ‘Her life is wrapped up in mine, for its sake I must take care of my own. What can be more delightful than to be so dear to one’s wife, that for her sake one becomes dearer to himself[81]!’

‘In the present state of things, which is like that of an army placed in battle order, is it not fit that the Cynic should without any distraction be employed only on the ministration of God? To say nothing of other things, a father must have a heating apparatus for bathing the baby; wool for his wife when she is delivered, oil, a bed, a cup; and so the furniture of the house is increased. Where then now is that king, who devotes himself to the public interests,

whose duty it is to look after others; to see who uses his wife well, who uses her badly, who quarrels, who administers his family well, and who does not? Consider what we are bringing the Cynic down to, how we are taking his royalty from him[83]!’

To this very definite conception of a celibate order of philosophers, devoting themselves to the good of humanity and entitled thereby to become the rulers of society, Musonius makes the following reply in advance from the true Stoic standpoint:

‘Marriage was no hindrance to Pythagoras, Socrates or Crates; and who were better philosophers than they? Since marriage is natural, philosophers should set the example of it. Why else did the Creator separate the human race into two divisions, making the honourable parts of the body distinct for each, and implanting in each a yearning for the other, but that he wished them to live together and to propagate the race? He who would destroy marriage, destroys the family and the commonwealth. No relationship is so essential or so intimate; friend does not agree so well with friend, nor does a father feel so keenly separation from his son. And why should a philosopher be different from other men? Only that which is unbecoming is a hindrance to a philosopher; but by doing his daily duty as a man he will become kindlier in disposition and more social in his thoughts[84].’

408. The head of a household must have a means of living; and therefore the making of money (χρηματισμός, cura rei familiaris) comes within the range of precepts. The Greek writers recognised three proper means of livelihood; (i) from kingship, that is, to be either a king or a king’s minister or general; (ii) from politics, that is, by acting as a magistrate or a judge; (iii) from sophistry, that is, by teaching philosophy to those who are wishing to learn[85]. To each profession there are obvious objections; indeed the sharp critic of Stoicism can see no reason why a wise man, who lacks nothing, should trouble himself about money-making. Each of the three professions named assumes the existence of men willing to be guided by philosophy, and these are not easily found. If pupils are taken, the question arises whether fees should be paid in advance or not. Now it is certainly more reasonable that a student should only pay if he profits by his teaching; but on the other hand no one can absolutely promise to make a man good in a year, and deferred payments are often found unsatisfactory[86]. Under the Roman principate we hear little of the professions connected with public life; but it is clear that the teacher and the physician are held in special regard[87]. Seneca has not the breadth of mind to respect the painter or the sculptor, any more than the wrestler or the stage-engineer[88].

Yet Chrysippus had suggested a bolder standpoint when he said that ‘the wise man will turn three somersaults for a sufficient fee[89]’; and no rule can be laid down except that a man should earn his own living without injuring his neighbour[90]. Agriculture, as a calling favourable both to health of body and to innocence of soul, continued to be praised, but was seldom practised except as an amusement[91].