445. Upon the fall of Nero the ‘old Romans’ came for a short time into power under the principate of Galba, and amongst others Helvidius Priscus, Thrasea’s son-in-law, returned from exile. From the account of Tacitus he appears to have been a very sincere adherent of the Stoic school.
‘He was not like others who adopt the name of philosopher in order to cloak an idle disposition. He followed those teachers who maintain that only the honourable is good, and only the base is evil; power, nobility, and other things external to the soul being neither good nor evil. He designed so to fortify himself thereby against the blows of fortune that he could play his part in public affairs without flinching[102].’
His first act on returning to Rome was to commence a prosecution of the accuser of Thrasea. The senate was divided in opinion as to the wisdom of this step, and when Helvidius abandoned the suit some praised his charity, whilst others lamented his indecision[103]. He resumed his attempt, as we shall see, at a later time.
His fall.
446. Vespasian was undoubtedly tolerant in his views: his reign began with the restitution of honours to the deceased Galba, and the much-respected Musonius[104] seized the opportunity to attack in the senate P. Egnatius Celer, whose treachery had brought about the fall of Soranus[105], for false evidence. The trial was postponed, but resulted a little later in the condemnation of Celer[106]. Public opinion took the side of Musonius: but the accused found a champion in Demetrius the Cynic philosopher, and at least defended himself with the ability and courage of his sect. Thereupon Helvidius resumed his prosecution of the accuser of Thrasea; but the emperor, now anxious to let bygones be bygones, refused to approve[107]. This second failure appears to have embittered Helvidius: his opposition to Vespasian became open and insulting, and brought about his death[108]. The life of his wife Fannia was worthy of the two Arriae, her grandmother and her mother. Twice she followed her husband into exile; a third time she brought this punishment upon herself, by encouraging his friend Senecio to publish his biography, supplying him with the materials, and openly justifying her action. In her private life she had singular charm and affability; and her death appeared to Pliny to close an era of noble women[109].
Renewal of the Stoic opposition.
447. It seems probable that the Stoic nobles found the low birth of Vespasian as intolerable as the tyranny of Nero; at any rate they soon resumed their attitude of opposition to the government, and the punishment of Helvidius, if intended as a warning, proved rather a provocation. It appears that he and the ‘old Romans’ began a systematic propaganda in favour of what they called ‘democracy[110],’ that is, the government of the Roman empire by the senatorial class; and they probably involved many professed philosophers in this impracticable and reactionary movement. Vespasian resolved on expelling all the philosophers from Rome. From this general sentence the best known of all, Musonius, was excepted[111], and we must infer that he had shown the good sense to keep himself free from political entanglements. In spite of this act of Vespasian, Stoicism continued to gain ground, and during the greater part of the period of the Flavian dynasty met with little interference.
Persecution by Domitian.
448. But towards the end of the reign of Domitian a more violent persecution broke out. Arulenus Rusticus had been tribune of the plebs in 66 A.D., and had then proposed to use his veto in an attempt to save the life of Thrasea Paetus[112]. In 69 A.D. he was praetor, and as such headed an embassy sent by the senate to the soldiers under Petilius Cerealis. On this occasion he was roughly handled and wounded, and barely escaped with his life[113]. After many years of quiet, he was accused in 93 A.D., when Pliny was praetor, of having written and spoken in honour of Thrasea Paetus, Herennius Senecio, and Helvidius Priscus; he was condemned to death and his books were destroyed[114]. Senecio was condemned at the same time for having written the biography of Helvidius Priscus, and for the further offence that since holding the quaestorship he had not become a candidate for any higher office[115]. About the same time were banished Artemidorus, the most single-minded and laborious of philosophers, whom Musonius had selected out of a crowd of competitors as the fittest to claim his daughter in marriage[116]; Junius Mauricus, brother of Arulenus Rusticus, who had joined Musonius in the attempt to secure the punishment of the delatores of Nero’s time[117]; Demetrius, and Epictetus[118]; and further many distinguished ladies, including Arria and her daughter Fannia[119]. But from the time of the death of Domitian in A.D. 96 the imperial government became finally reconciled with Stoicism, which was now the recognised creed of the great majority of the educated classes at Rome, of all ages and ranks. As such it appears in the writings of Juvenal, who not only introduces into serious literature the Stoic principle of ‘straight speaking,’ but actually expounds much of the ethical teaching of Stoicism with more directness and force than any professed adherent of the system.
Stoic reform of law.