Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c4f8m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T14:49:47.778Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Princely Republic*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 June 2014

Peter Stacey
Peter Stacey*
Affiliation:
Department of History, UCLA
*
pstacey@history.ucla.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article examines Seneca's theory of monarchy in De clementia. It focuses in particular on Seneca's appropriation and redefinition of some key terms within Roman political thought in order to present his theory as an account of the restitution of liberty to the res publica under the government of the virtuous princeps. By relocating the Roman body politic to a Stoic moral universe, Seneca is able to draw upon parts of his philosophical inheritance in order to substantiate his claim in some depth.

Keywords

SenecaStoicismRoman political thoughtRoman imperial ideologyRoman monarchyclementialibertasres publica
Type
Articles
Information
The Journal of Roman Studies , Volume 104 , November 2014 , pp. 133 - 154
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2014. Published by The Society for the Promotion of Roman 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.)

Footnotes

*

For their valuable comments on various parts of my argument, I need to thank Catharine Edwards, Valentina Arena, Christopher Kelly, Greg Woolf, Catherine Steel, David Sedley, Brad Inwood, Eric Nelson, Philip Pettit, Quentin Skinner and Angus Gowland. I am particularly grateful to Malcolm Schofield for his generosity and patience in discussions of the issues under examination here.

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Andrew, E. 2004: ‘The Senecan moment: Patronage and philosophy in the eighteenth century’, Journal of the History of Ideas 65.2, 277–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arena, V. 2011: ‘Three conceptions of liberty: Roman sumptuary legislation’, European Journal of Political Theory 10.4, 463–89Google Scholar
Arena, V. 2012: Libertas and the Practice of Politics in the Late Roman Republic, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
Bartsch, S. 2006: The Mirror of the Self: Sexuality, Self-Knowledge, and the Gaze in the Early Roman Empire, Chicago, Ill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartsch, S., and Wray, D. (eds) 2009: Seneca and the Self, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
Bellincioni, M. 1984a: ‘Clementia liberum arbitrium habet (Sen. clem. 2,7,3). Significato di una metafora’, Paideia 39, 173–83Google Scholar
Bellincioni, M. 1984b: Potere ed etica in Seneca: clementia e voluntas amica, BresciaGoogle Scholar
Bobzien, S. 1998: Determinism and Freedom in Stoic Philosophy, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Connolly, J. 2009: ‘Fear and freedom. A new interpretation of Pliny's Panegyricus’, in Urso, G. (ed.), Ordine e sovversione nel mondo greco e romano. Atti del convegno internazionale, Cividale del Friuli, 25–27 settembre 2008, Pisa, 259–78Google Scholar
Edwards, C. 1997: ‘Self-scrutiny and self-transformation in Seneca's letters’, Greece and Rome 44, 23–38Google Scholar
Foucault, M. 1986: The History of Sexuality Vol. 3: The Care of the Self, trans. Hurley, R., New YorkGoogle Scholar
Foucault, M. 2005: The Hermeneutics of the Subject. Lectures at the Collège de France, 1981–2, ed. Gros;, F. trans. Burchell, G., New YorkGoogle Scholar
Gill, C. 1998: ‘Personhood and personality: The four-personae theory in Cicero's De officiis’, in J. Annas (ed.), Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 4, 169–200Google Scholar
Gill, C. 2006: The Structured Self in Hellenistic and Roman Thought, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Griffin, M. T. 1976: Seneca: A Philosopher in Politics, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Griffin, M. T. 2000: ‘Seneca and Pliny’, in Rowe, C. and Schofield, M. (eds), The Cambridge History of Greek and Roman Political Thought, Cambridge, 532–58Google Scholar
Griffin, M. T. 2013: Seneca on Society, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Geuss, R. 2001: Public Goods, Private Goods, Princeton, N.J.Google Scholar
Hijmans, B. L. Jr. 1970: ‘Conscientia in Seneca: Three footnotes’, Mnemosyne 23.2, 189–92Google Scholar
Inwood, B. 2005: Reading Seneca, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Inwood, B. 2009: ‘Seneca and self-assertion’, in Bartsch and Wray 2009, 39–64Google Scholar
Ker, J. 2009: ‘Seneca on self-examination: Rereading On Anger 3.36’, in Bartsch and Wray 2009, 160–87Google Scholar
Long, A. A. 1996: ‘Freedom and determinism in the Stoic theory of human action’, in Long, A. A. (ed.), Problems in Stoicism, London, 173–99Google Scholar
Long, A. A. 2001: Stoic Studies, Berkeley, Calif.Google Scholar
Millar, F. 2002: The Roman Republic in Political Thought, Hanover, N.H.Google Scholar
Molenaar, G. 1969: ‘Seneca's use of the term conscientia’, Mnemosyne 22.2, 170–80Google Scholar
Morstein-Marx, R. 2004: Mass Oratory and Political Power in the Late Roman Republic, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
Nussbaum, M. C. 1994: The Therapy of Desire, Princeton, N.J.Google Scholar
Pettit, P. 1997: Republicanism: A Theory of Freedom and Government, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Procopé, J. F. 1988: ‘Greek and Roman political theory’, in Burns, J. H. (ed.), The Cambridge History of Medieval Political Thought, Cambridge, 21–36Google Scholar
Roller, M. B. 2001: Constructing Autocracy: Aristocrats and Emperors in Julio-Claudian Rome, Princeton, N.J.Google Scholar
Schofield, M. 1991: The Stoic Idea of the City, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
Schofield, M. 1995: ‘Cicero's definition of res publica’, in Powell, J. G. F. (ed.), Cicero the Philosopher, Oxford, 63–81Google Scholar
Schofield, M. 1999: ‘Social and political thought’, in Algra, K., Barnes, J., Mansfeld, J. and Schofield, M. (eds), The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy, Cambridge, 739–69Google Scholar
Schofield, M. 2012: ‘The fourth virtue’, in Nicgorski, W. (ed.), Cicero's Practical Philosophy, Notre Dame, Ind., 43–57Google Scholar
Seneca 1995: Moral and Political Essays, ed. Cooper, J. M. and Procopé, J. F., CambridgeGoogle Scholar
Seneca 2001: L. Annaei Senecae, De clementia libri duo, ed. Malaspina, E., AlessandriaGoogle Scholar
Seneca 2009: De clementia, ed. Braund, S., OxfordGoogle Scholar
Sharples, R. W. 2005: ‘Ducunt volentem fata, nolentem trahunt’, in Maso, S. and Natali, C. (eds), La catena delle cause. Determinismo e antideterminismo nel pensiero antico e contemporaneo, Amsterdam, 197–214Google Scholar
Skinner, Q. 1998: Liberty before Liberalism, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
Skinner, Q. 2002a: ‘Classical liberty, Renaissance translation and the English civil war’, in Skinner, Q., Visions of Politics, Cambridge, vol. 2, 308–43Google Scholar
Skinner, Q. 2002b: ‘A third concept of liberty’, Proceedings of the British Academy 117, 237–68Google Scholar
Sorajbi, R. 2006: Self, OxfordGoogle Scholar
Stacey, P. 2007: Roman Monarchy and the Renaissance Prince, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
Veyne, P. 2003: Seneca, trans. Sullivan, D., New YorkGoogle Scholar
Wallace-Hadrill, A. 1982: ‘Civilis princeps: Between citizen and king’, Journal of Roman Studies 72, 32–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, B. 2008: Shame and Necessity (2nd edn), Berkeley, Calif.Google Scholar
Wirszubski, C. 1950: Libertas as a Political Idea at Rome during the Late Republic and Early Principate, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
Wood, N. 1988: Cicero's Social and Political Thought, Berkeley, Calif.Google Scholar
Zöller, R. 2003: Die Vorstellung vom Willen in der Morallehre Senecas, LeipzigGoogle Scholar