Lucius Annaeus Seneca: Anger, Mercy, Revenge (review)

Abstract

Reviewed by: Lucius Annaeus Seneca: Anger, Mercy, Revenge Michael Fournier Robert A. Kaster and Martha C. Nussbaum (trans.). Lucius Annaeus Seneca: Anger, Mercy, Revenge. The Complete Works of Lucius Annaeus Seneca . Chicago : University of Chicago Press , 2010 . Pp. xxvi + 247 . CDN $51.95 . ISBN 9780226748412 . This is one of a planned eight volumes in the new series from University of Chicago Press, The Complete Works of Lucius Annaeus Seneca, edited by Elizabeth Asmis, Shadi Bartsch, and Martha C. Nussbaum. Natural Questions, translated by Harry M. Hine, and On Benefits, translated by Miriam Griffin and Brad Inwood, have already appeared. For this volume Robert Kaster has translated De ira and De clementia, and Martha Nussbaum the Apocolocyntosis. The editors’ short essay “Seneca and His World” introduces the series, providing overviews of both his philosophical works and his tragedies. Each of the three works in this volume also has its own translator’s introduction. Particularly helpful is Kaster’s introduction to On Anger, which provides a sketch of the structure and argument of the work, as well as an account of its connections to On Clemency. Nussbaum’s discussion of the occasion and purpose of Apocolocyntosis and her account of the genre of Menippean satire are also valuable, though the lack of any notes in her introduction is frustrating (where, a reader might wonder, does one find the account of Claudius wrestling a killer whale? [201]). While none of the works in this volume could be described as “in need” of a new English version, the translations found here not only contribute to the titular goal of the series but also live up to the stated purpose of providing faithful yet idiomatic translations “intended to provide a basis for interpretive work rather than to convey personal interpretations” (xxvi). The editors vow to “eschew terminology that would imply a Judeo-Christian [End Page 410] moral framework (e.g., ‘sin’)” (xxvi), and this is generally the case. However, at one point in his translation of On Anger Kaster in fact renders nihil peccavi by “I’m without sin” (53), showing that he does not rigidly adhere to the principle where it would compromise his translation. The choice of title for this volume is slightly unusual, opting for the more elegant and thematic Anger, Mercy, Revenge in place of a simple yet unwieldy list of the contents (On Anger, On Clemency, The Pumpkinification of Claudius the God). Revenge is a clever way of redescribing the Apocolocyntosis, as well as a subtle indication of the rationale behind collecting these three works in one volume. De ira, one of the 10 works which the manuscripts call Dialogi, and its natural companion piece, the treatise de Clementia, are often paired by editors and translators. The addition of Apocolocyntosis, a difficult-to-categorize satirical work about the divinization of Claudius dating from early in Nero’s reign, makes a good deal of sense not only in terms of the chronology of Seneca’s writings but also in terms of its content. Among the reasons the Senecan authorship of Apocolocytosis has been doubted is the fact that the work revels in its own sense of revenge and thus is at odds with the more or less Stoic teachings of De ira and De clementia. It is not clear why Mercy appears in the title of the volume, as Kaster entitles his translation On Clemency. Comparisons with randomly selected passages in the Latin text show that Kaster’s translations are extremely accurate. He uses “clemency” for clementia throughout, a surprisingly rare choice among English translators, most of whom prefer “mercy.” In fact, a nice continuity between On Anger and On Clemency is added when Kaster renders deprecator animus accessit with “your mind has interceded to plead for clemency” (86). As this translation makes clear, clemency is not simply juridical. It is first and foremost a virtue, and one that is essential for the self’s control of anger. For a cognate virtue, Kaster uses “strictness” for severitas, to my mind a great improvement over the traditional use of the English cognate “severity.” Perhaps more important for those with a philosophical interest in Seneca, a look at crucial definitions and philosophical arguments...