725. Philosophical Life in Cicero's Letters by Sean McConnell

725.  Philosophical Life in Cicero’s Letters by Sean McConnell.  This book is well worth reading.

He enjoyed peaceful walks and quiet places. Villa San Marco

In the 2nd century Cicero’s letters were highly respected for philosophical content. His letters now are mined for other reasons:  ambiance of the period, current ideas, current events, archeology, etc.  This book is meant to reveal his rich philosophical understanding and his contribution to thought via his letters.  This book covers 63 B.C. to 45 B.C.  Throughout there is this common theme:  whether otium (theoretical reflection) is better than political activity or not.  I.e. honestum versus utile as he discusses in De Officiis.

The organization of the letters has been done by themes by ancient editors but some parts of the organization may be due to Cicero himself.  If this is so, Cicero never intended the bulk of these letters to be private in the absolute sense.  

Cicero’s letters, this book maintains, often contain reference to complex philosophical discourse which requires the reader to re-create the background for the letter at hand.

What makes a philosophical letter?  If it is directly connected to some philosophical problem.  What makes a letter philosophical?  If the letter makes allusions to philosophical problems and these impact the point of the letter.

Cicero’s dialogues discuss the place of philosophy in Roman politics.  Philosophy is not an escape but a means of participation in it.  The dialogues assume an interest in political philosophy.  The point or one of the points of this book is that Cicero in his letters shows an interest in these subjects before he wrote the dialogues.

So McConnell takes letter 20 (1.9 Frick) of 54 BC.  It is good to keep in mind that before his exile Cicero seemed to feel that philosophy was for otium and separate from politics.

This letter, letter 20, written after his return from exile, is addressed to Lentulus Spinther.  Lentulus politely questions Cicero and new apparent political alignment.  Cicero defends his recent actions in support of Pompey and Caesar.  In his argument Cicero uses arguments from Plato’s Laws, his 7th Letter, his 5th Letter.  Since the letter was meant for wide circulation it can be safely assumed that he expected his audience to be familiar with these works.  Cicero does not mention the specific works but only the author.

Cicero explains his support for Caesar in Plato’s terms.  Whereas Plato explains why he does not participate in politics, Cicero explains how his own situation requires participation but does so in terms of Plato’s thoughts.  Useless opposition brings no benefit to the Republic but he can bring benefit by applying philosophical ideas to political concerns.

In a letter of 59 BC, Cicero refers to his interest in philosophy as an intellectual pursuit.  This is in contrast to this letter where philosophy is viewed as political activity.  At this time philosophy  was an escape from public turmoil.  He used philosophy to reflect on his own predicament.

In 50 BC, Cicero told Atticus that he had two choices A) support Pompey/Republic and attack Caesar or B) foster concordia.  B) entailed a great deal of potential for criticism for cowardice and desertion of the Republican cause.  Cicero chose B.

Before going further, it seems important to point out that Sean McConnell uses the old numbering system, not Shackelton Bailley’s.  It seems he prefers this, I am guessing because the old system preserves the old thematic classification system.  

Cicero, a Roman Plato,  portrays himself in a sense as Plato does in his 7th Letter.  It seems that Cicero wrote De Re Publica and De Legibus in imitation of Plato and his  letters provide the appropriate parallel.

In letter 9.10 Cicero explains his actions in light of Pompey’s desertion of Rome and departure from Italy.  Cicero uses the image of a bird desiring to take flight.  This is a clear reference to Plato’s 7th where he expresses the desire to take flight from the clutches of Dionysius at Syracuse.

In 9.13 Cicero quotes Plato when he discusses a request which had been made by Caesar:  “the requests of tyrants are mixed with compulsion.”  This letter must be interpreted in the context of other letters to Atticus and the 7th Letter.  In 9.6 Cicero encloses Caesar’s letter to himself.  It is full of familiarities and chumminess but also contains hints that Cicero now supports Caesar, since Cicero has not left Italy.  So there is familiarity but also a forceful tone to the letter.

The letter of Caesar was no doubt read by others.  This could imply, with a kind interpretation, that Cicero and Caesar are buddies.  So with this Cicero must deal.

So we go back to 9.10.  The beginning of the letter has elements of introduction to a philosophical treatise.  The letter is presented as a means of therapy for himself in these difficult times.  But the author suggests that the letter was meant for a wide audience.

Cicero begins to answer the charge  that he has abandoned Pompey and then begins to offer a defense.  At times Cicero felt that he had made the correct decision not to follow Pompey but now the circumstances have changed and he is full of regret.  So he presents himself as a true republican who has the republic at heart. He depicts Caesar and Pompey as Sullans.  This would appeal to a large number of people.  Cicero quotes Atticus’ previous letters 14 times.  Why?  This is another hint that this letter was meant for a wide range of readers.  The conclusion of 9.10 suggests that other people were supposed to read it.  We know for a fact that Cicero re-read Atticus’ letters to compose this letter.  We need to interpret this letter in terms of Plato’s 7th. 

Plato’s 7th justifies his willingness to apply his system for the benefit of all.  But as circumstances have changed, he desire to leave Syracuse but can not, as he is in sort of a  prison.  Plato creates pity for himself.  This image Cicero adopts for himself- for people to see him a a Roman Plato.  Cicero too wants to leave Italy but can not.  Philosophy is to no avail with a powerful figure, so Cicero wishes to pursue otium again.

Cicero the Philosophical Advisor

Analysis begins with Letter 7.11.  To review events leading up to this letter.  

1.  Cicero decides to return to Italy to pursue concordia or as victory for the good guys.

2.  Amicitia tied Cicero to both Pompey and Caesar.

3.  He found it difficult to decide which side was beneficial to the Republic.

4.  Cicero considers peace better than war.

5.  Cicero was aware of criticism of not supporting Pompey.

Thus Cicero concluded that he should take part of philosophical advisor.  This would help him avoid problems connected with 1-5.  Evidence for this role found in 7.11.  He uses the term the good, moral goodness, the shadow of goodness which conjures up Plato’s allegory of the cave.  Thus his point is that Caesar does not have a concept of the divine good, not even the imitation of it found in common life.  Socrates said that those who see only the shadow are not fit to rule.  No rational person would seek tyranny since it brings misery.  Of course, none of this reflects well on Caesar.

Clearly Cicero has been studying Plato.  This allows those reading Cicero’s letters to view him as a philosophical advisor who is expressing his thoughts, that he is thinking of the Republic.  These are qualities which Romans would admire.

In book eight of the letters, Cicero uses philosophy to evaluate who was happy and to figure out how philosophy could benefit the Republic..  

Socrates served as an example to Cicero of philosopher who stayed in Athens under the 30 Tyrants instead of leaving to practice his philosophy.  

This contrasts with how Cicero felt later in March when he wished that he were out of Italy.  But circumstances had changed.  So his inactivity before March makes sense in light of enough info to make an informed decision.

The letters of book 8 continue a display of using Plato as argument.  When Pompey flees Italy, Cicero once thought that there was a glimmer of the good in his eyes.  This is a reference to the Republic of Plato of a leader who has left the cave and seen the truth in the sun.  It also recalls the Phaedrus. Clearly such a suggestion indicates that Cicero was not very impressed with Pompey’s lack of understanding of the light of truth.

In 8.11 Cicero’s version of Plato’s advisor is combined with his own ideal statesman in De Re Publica.  Here are the similarities between the letter and Plato’s 7th:

1.  Cicero sees his theory presented in De Re Publica as capable of practical use, as the goal of the ideal statesman is the happy life of the citizen.

2.  Like Plato, Cicero worries that people will think that his time spent theorizing had nothing to do with practical application.  

3.  By desiring concordia Cicero only desires  what is good for citizens.  He is not grasping at power as Pompey and Caesar have been doing.

4.  Cicero makes the point that he has an uphill battle dealing with those who have their own interest not the interests of the populace at heart. Just like Plato with Dionysius.

Cicero thus presents himself as the moderator rei publica, as he is the only one who seeks happiness for citizens.  This also makes it clear that his theorizing has very practical application.  Thus he has become a philosophical advisor.

In 8.11 Cicero asks Atticus for a copy of Demetrius of Magnesia’s On Concord.  This work was dedicated by Demetrius to Atticus.  Cicero wanted to use its ideas to launch his own peace mission.  But when the consuls left Italy, the plan was abandoned.  It is clear from 8.11 that Cicero was writing to both Caesar and Pompey in terms of the need for concord.  Why though would Cicero want On Concord when he had his own De Re Publica?  Demetrius’ work may have been written in terms of a Roman audience.

When Political Life goes Wrong

The actions of Caesar and Pompey are so repulsive that Cicero’s philosophical options have caused him to contemplate a return to otium.   In letter 9.4 Cicero present a series of questions almost too difficult to answer in terms of the present situation.  Cicero has tried to remain involved in politics using philosophy but it is now clear that like Plato’s bird he must fly away.

But Cicero still faces a response to Caesar’s letter asking for Cicero’s gratia, dignitas and consilium. 

So when Cicero examines Caesar’s letter in terms of Plato’s comment that the requests of tyrants are mixed with compulsion- the conclusion seems to be that compulsion is hidden among gentle persuasion.  An essence of liberty is the option of saying no.  Caesar presented no option.

The New Plato and the New Dionysius.

Cicero realizes that he like Plato in the grasp of Dionysius was under the thumb of Caesar for he was not free to say no.

These letters show that Cicero applied his philosophical studies to events of the day. It is as though he realized that he needed a context that was similar to his own yet different in order to help organize his own thoughts and decisions.

Here McConnell discusses the influence and use of Dicaearchus in Cicero’s letters and works.  

One view championed by Theophrastus favored the contemplative life over that of the active life.  His argument was this- the most excellent part of human is the mind.  It is the divine part of the body.  It appears that Dicaearchus may have been an opposing view within the Peripatetic group.  

Dicaearchus’ views appear in De Re Publica- namely that the application of virtuous conduct is superior to knowledge of virtue.  The part to be played by philosophy in human life with a strong practical twist may come from Dicaearchus- i.e. philosophy is the tool by which the ideas of the ideal republic can be maintained.

This chapter also shows that Cicero employs ideas not just from Aristotle and Theophrastus but also from Plato and also someone like Dicaearchus.

In chapter 4 McConnell covers Cicero’s use of Stoic ideas.  In 46 BC, letter 9.22 covers the philosophical debate between the Stoic and Peripatetics concerning the proper rolls of modesty and freedom of speech.  The Stoics believed that there is no such thing as obscene language- thus a philosopher may call something by whatever word something actually is.

Prior to the Civil War there was much more freedom of expression than after 46 BC when Caesar had defeated the Republican forces in Africa.  The author claims that Cicero uses the Peripatetic approach to present that argument of the Stoics, showing that the Peripatetics can achieve the same results without damaging social norms of behavior.

He evidently came under criticism for being alive in that Stoic ideals required death in terms of what Caesar did. But Cicero argues that this is not the only alternative.  So using Stoic argument, he asserts that his mode of life is proper. He used Plato and Socrates as historic examples of wise people who lived under tyranny and found ways to express disapproval. 

Some Stoics believed that speech and action required moderation based on circumstances. So by displaying a modicum of support for Caesar, he is able to maintain his influence and at the same time give subtle hints as to his real thoughts.  

This letter gives insight into a better understanding of Cicero’s Paradoxa Stoicorum- that Stoic ideals can be manifested in academic terms without being so harsh and direct and confrontational.

The last chapter covers Cicero’s letter of advice to Caesar.  The letter does not survive but it can be reconstructed from remarks made by Cicero to Atticus.  It was modeled on a letter by Aristotle to Alexander where he advises Alexander to work toward true glory by working for the benefit of the Republic not for oneself.  This was the sticky part for Cicero because he felt that Caesar’s glory was false- in as much as it was all for himself.  Cicero also realized that after Alexander became king that he rapidly became a tyrant.  The problems presented by the letter became one increasing impossibility.  The letter was written and submitted to Caesar’s advisors- so many suggestions and concerns were expressed that Cicero abandoned any revision.  But the point is that Cicero yet again used another work to attempt to fit it into Roman acceptance.  

The main point of the book is that Cicero’s letters are not just a source of facts or entertainment or banter but a serious way to present philosophical issues in terms of active Roman politics.  It also shows that Cicero derived much good from a wide range of philosophical systems.  And that he was constantly thinking of ways it could be useful to Romans.  It also shows that familiarity with these ideas was assumed in his letters.  Cicero meant his letters to be read in conjunction with his philosophical pieces.  These philosophical references in the letters ask the reader to think in terms of the piece referenced in the letter in order to have better understanding of what is written in the letter.

Signed,

The Obstinate Classicist