Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-r6qrq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T16:07:27.232Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Panaetius, Scipio Aemilianus, and the Man of Great Soul

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 September 2023

Jonathan Barlow Open the ORCID record for Jonathan Barlow [Opens in a new window]
Jonathan Barlow*
Affiliation:
Trinity College, University of Melbourne, Australia
*
Email: jbarlow@trinity.unimelb.edu.au
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In the second half of the second century BC, a single personality became ascendant in the Roman Republic. Scipio Aemilianus assumed the mantle of the first man in Rome from 146 BC until his death in 129 BC. Modern biographers of this leading statesman have drawn different conclusions about the influence of Greek ethics on the life of Scipio, either that he possessed a Hellenistic way of thinking or that he was a traditional Roman aristocrat. Much debate turns on historiography and the question of the usability of sources like Cicero for the history of the second century BC. This article focusses on de Officiis Books 1–2 and the issue of Cicero's debt to the writing of the Stoic philosopher Panaetius of Rhodes, Scipio's friend and tutor. I argue that sufficient evidence exists in the references to Scipio in Off. 1–2 to demonstrate that Panaetius had characterised Scipio as influenced by the Stoic way of living and explicitly as a Roman example of the virtue of greatness of soul. This argument is supported by corroborating evidence from Polybius, Scipio's friend and confidant, who also wrote about him in his Histories.

Keywords

PanaetiusScipio AemilianusCicerode OfficiisPolybiusStoicism
Type
Research Article
Information
Antichthon , Volume 57 , 2023 , pp. 35 - 55
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Australasian Society for Classical Studies

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alesse, F. (1994), Panezio di Rodi e la tradizione stoica. Naples.Google Scholar
Alesse, F. (1997), Panezio di Rodi. Testimonianze. Naples.Google Scholar
Alesse, F. (2015), ‘Panaetius of Rhodes’, Oxford Biographies: Classics. New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arena, T. (2012), Libertas and the Practice of Politics in the Late Roman Republic. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Astin, A. E. (1967), Scipio Aemilianus. Oxford.Google Scholar
Atzert, C. (ed.) (1963), M. Tulli Ciceronis De Officiis. 4th edn. Leipzig.Google Scholar
Barlow, J. (2018), ‘Scipio Aemilianus and Greek Ethics’, CQ 68, 112–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barlow, J. (2022), ‘Scipio Aemilianus and the Morality of Power’, Historia 71, 27–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Behrends, O. (2014), ‘Tiberius Gracchus und die Juristen seiner Zeit – die römische Jurisprudenz gegenüber der Staatskrise des Jahres 133 v. Chr.’, in Avenarius, M. and Möller, C. (eds.), Okko Behrends: Zur römischen Verfassung. Göttingen, 17–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braund, S. (2009), Seneca: De Clementia. Oxford.Google Scholar
Brouwer, R. (2021), Law and Philosophy in the Late Roman Republic. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brunt, P. A. (2013), ‘Panaetius in De Officiis’, in Brunt, P. A., Studies in Stoicism, ed. Griffin, M. and Samuels, A.. Oxford, 180–242.Google Scholar
Drogula, F. K. (2019), Cato the Younger: Life and Death at the End of the Roman Republic. Oxford.Google Scholar
Dyck, A. R. (1996), A Commentary on Cicero, De Officiis. Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
Edelstein, L. and Kidd, I. G. (eds.) (1989), Posidonius I: The Fragments. 2nd edn. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Erskine, A. (1990), The Hellenistic Stoa: Political Thought and Action. London.Google Scholar
Friedländer, P. (1969), ‘Socrates Enters Rome’, in Friedländer, P., Plato 1: An Introduction. 2nd edn. Princeton.Google Scholar
Gill, C. (1993), ‘Panaetius on the Virtue of Being Yourself’, in Bulloch, A., Gruen, E. S., Long, A. A. and Stewart, A. (eds.), Images and Ideologies: Self-definition in the Hellenistic World. Berkeley, 330–53.Google Scholar
Gill, C. (1994), ‘Peace of Mind and Being Yourself: Panaetius to Plutarch’, ANRW II.36.7, 4599–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gill, C. (2019), ‘Stoic Magnanimity’, in Vasalou, S. (ed.), The Measure of Greatness: Philosophers on Magnanimity. Oxford, 49–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffin, M. T. and Atkins, E. M. (eds.) (1991), Cicero: On Duties. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Hadot, I. (1970), ‘Tradition stoïcienne et idées politiques au temps des Gracques’, REL 48, 133–79.Google Scholar
Heumannus, C. A. (1712), Parerga critica. Jena.Google Scholar
Inwood, B. (2022), Later Stoicism 155 BC to AD 200: An Introduction and Collection of Sources in Translation. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaerst, J. (1929), ‘Scipio Aemilianus, die Stoa und der Prinzipat’, Neue Jahrbücher für Wiss. und Jugendbildung 5, 653–75.Google Scholar
Klein, J. (2016), ‘The Stoic Argument from oikeiōsis’, OSAPh 50, 143–200.Google Scholar
Lefèvre, E. (2001), Panaitios’ und Ciceros Pflichtenlehre: Vom philosophischen Traktat zum politischen Lehrbuch. Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Long, A. A. (1995), ‘Cicero's Politics in De Officiis’, in Laks, A. and Schofield, M. (eds.), Justice and Generosity: Studies in Hellenistic Social and Political Philosophy. Cambridge, 213–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, A. A. and Sedley, D. N. (1987), The Hellenistic Philosophers. 2 Vols. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Mattingly, H. B. (1986), ‘Scipio Aemilianus’ Eastern Embassy’, CQ 36, 491–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mohay, G. (2008), ‘The Notion of Megalopsychia in Polybius’, Szabo, A. and Vargyas, P. (eds.), Cultus Deorum: Studia Religionum ad Historiam. Vol. II: De Rebus Aetatis Graecorum et Romanorum. In Memoriam István Tóth. Pécs, 888–97.Google Scholar
Morrell, K. (2017), Pompey, Cato, and the Governance of the Roman Empire. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morrell, K. (2021), ‘Review of Fred K. Drogula: Cato the Younger, Life and Death at the End of the Roman Republic’, BMCRev.Google Scholar
Most, G. W. (2016), ‘The Rise and Fall of Quellenforschung’, in Blair, A. and Goeing, A-S (eds.), For the Sake of Learning: Essays in Honor of Antony Grafton. Leiden, 933–54.Google Scholar
Münzer, F. (1900), ‘P. Cornelius Scipio Aemilianus Africanus (no. 335)’, RE 7, 1439–62.Google Scholar
Newman, R. J. (2008), ‘In umbra virtutis: Gloria in the Thought of Seneca the Philosopher’, in Fitch, J. G. (ed.), Seneca. Oxford, 316–34.Google Scholar
Nicolet, C. (1965), ‘L'inspiration de Tibérius Gracchus (A propos d'un livre récent)’, REL 67, 142–58.Google Scholar
Philippson, R. (1929), ‘Panaetiana’, RhM 78, 337–60.Google Scholar
Pohlenz, M. (1934), Antikes Führertum: Cicero De Officiis und das Lebensideal des Panaitios. Leipzig/Berlin.Google Scholar
Pohlenz, M. (1949), ‘Panaitios’, RE 18.3, 418–40.Google Scholar
Roskam, G. (2005), On the Path to Virtue: The Stoic Doctrine of Moral Progress. Leuven.Google Scholar
Schmekel, A. (1892), Die Philosophie der mittleren Stoa in ihrem geschichtlichen Zusammenhange. Berlin.Google Scholar
Schofield, M. (1995), ‘Two Stoic Approaches to Justice’, in Laks, A. and Schofield, M. (eds.), Justice and Generosity: Studies in Hellenistic Social and Political Philosophy. Cambridge, 191–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schofield, M. (2012), ‘The Fourth Virtue’, in Nicgorski, W. (ed.), Cicero's Practical Philosophy. Notre Dame, 43–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorabji, R. (2015), Moral Conscience through the Ages: Fifth Century BCE to the Present. Oxford.Google Scholar
Stone, A. M. (2008), ‘Greek Ethics and Roman Statesmen: De Officiis and the Philippics’, in Stevenson, T. and Wilson, M. (eds.), Cicero's Philippics: History, Rhetoric, Ideology. Auckland, 214–39.Google Scholar
Straaten, M. van (1946), Panétius: sa vie, ses écrits et sa doctrine. Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Straaten, M. van (1962), Panaetii Rhodii fragmenta. 3rd edn. Leiden.Google Scholar
Theiler, W. (1982), Poseidonios: Die Fragmente. 2 Vols. Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tieleman, T. L. (2007), ‘Panaetius’ Place in the History of Stoicism: With Special Reference to his Moral Psychology’, in Ioppolo, A. M. and Sedley, D. N. (eds.), Pyrrhonists, Patricians, and Platonizers: Hellenistic Philosophy in the Period 155–86 BC. Naples, 104–42.Google Scholar
Tweedie, F. (2015), ‘Appian's Characterisation of Scipio Aemilianus’, in Welch, K. (ed.), Appian's Roman History: Empire and Civil War. Swansea, 169–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vimercati, E. (2002), Panezio: Testimonianze e frammenti. Milan.Google Scholar
Vimercati, E. (2004), Il Mediostoicismo di Panezio. Milan.Google Scholar
Vimercati, E. (2007), ‘Tre studi recenti sull’oikeiosis e sul fondamento della morale Stoica,’ RFN 4, 573–608.Google Scholar
Visnjic, J. (2021), The Invention of Duty: Stoicism as Deontology. Leiden/Boston.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Volk, K. (2021), The Roman Republic of Letters: Scholarship, Philosophy, and Politics in the Age of Cicero and Caesar. Princeton.Google Scholar
Walbank, F. W. (1979), A Historical Commentary on Polybius. 3 Vols. Oxford.Google Scholar
Walsh, P. G. (2000), Cicero: On Obligations. Oxford.Google Scholar
Welch, K. (2019), ‘Cassius Dio and the Virtuous Roman’, in Osgood, J. and Baron, C. (eds.), Cassius Dio and the Late Roman Republic. Leiden, 97–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winterbottom, M. (ed.) (1994), M. Tulli Ciceronis: De Officiis. Oxford.Google Scholar