It frequently happens that individuals will criticise someone else’s mistakes more readily than they will admit their own. We all find our own psychological defences hard to overcome and Seneca was the paramount example.
When he became tutor to Nero, the future Roman Emperor, it didn’t take long for Seneca to realize that Nero was a psycho. In his mid-teens, Nero was already displaying alarming cruelty and paranoia. The encroaching danger was written on the wall.
Seneca possessed sufficient experience and psychological savvy to figure out that, considering the structure of the Roman political system, Nero’s character flaws were incurable. Neither Nero’s mother, Empress Agrippina, nor any court officer, dared to challenge Nero.
In normal circumstances, bad experiences will help tame the wildness of teenagers. Through trial and error, teenagers learn that one must think before jumping, and that aggressiveness is an obstacle to cooperation.
Nero never went through those experiences because he was isolated by his institutional role; he wasn’t the Roman Emperor yet, but people feared him all the same.
Officers and servants obeyed Nero’s orders without asking any questions, even if they could have checked with Empress Agrippina. They feared that, if they angered Nero, his revenge would be swift and lethal.
Why Seneca made a grievous mistake
Seneca made a large mistake at that point. The principles of Stoicism call for accepting the inevitable, but it’s crucial to tell apart the inevitable from the inconvenient or unpleasant.
The longer Seneca stayed on his job, the more entangled he became in the power machinery. Empress Agrippina entrusted him with managing part of the imperial estate, a delegation that allowed Seneca to enrich himself legally.
Seneca did so with alacrity, but should have known that the story was likely to end badly. As Nero got closer to ascending the throne, his abuses and cruelty grew exponentially. On some occasions, he required Seneca to collaborate.
A commitment to Stoic virtue should have prompted Seneca to jump ship and swim away as fast as he could. Nero’s evil, deranged personality was a clear and present danger, but didn’t prevent Seneca from adopting countermeasures.
Seneca was in his late fifties. He could have asked Empress Agrippina’s dispensation from his official functions to retire to live in the countryside, far away from Rome. Or he could have feigned some illness that prevented him from working, and go into retirement anyway.
From the 5th Letter to Lucilius, I draw the conclusion that none of us gets to live exactly the life we want, and that philosophy helps us make the best of our circumstances. Yet, there is a large difference between not living exactly the life we want and giving up all responsibility for how we live.
It was wrong for Seneca to conclude that he had no choice. He should not have waited for Nero’s ascension to the throne before going into retirement. He should not have collaborated with a machinery that, sooner or later, would wipe him out.
Passivity and inconsistencies did Seneca in
Eventually, Seneca asked to go into retirement when he was already sixty-six, but it was too late. Nero let him go, but kept him under surveillance. Seneca knew about Nero’s crimes, and his knowledge could potentially become dangerous.
Seneca did not enjoy his retirement for long. One and a half year later, Nero ordered his execution because he believed him to be involved in the Pisonian plot, one of the many attempts to have Nero assassinated.
The events resemble what had happened twenty-four years earlier with Claudio’s edict, sending Seneca into exile. Seneca wasn’t given the opportunity to contest Nero’s accusations and ask for a judicial review.
Since Nero had allowed Seneca to kill himself instead of being executed by soldiers, Seneca committed suicide in a way similar to Socrates’. The only difference is that Seneca opened his veins instead of drinking hemlock.
Stoic hagiography presents Seneca’s acceptance of death as a gesture of great wisdom, hiding the fact Seneca had painted himself into a corner. His suicide seems pointless if we remind ourselves that he could have adopted countermeasures several years earlier.
Seneca could only blame himself for his passivity and moral confusion. He knew perfectly well that Nero was evil and that, by staying in his vicinity, he would be risking his life. He knew as well that it wasn’t worth it to keep working for Agrippina for the sake of accumulating wealth.
History leaves no doubt about the fact that Seneca knew he was playing with fire. His tragic death delivers the most crucial lesson from his biography: We should not accept as inevitable situations, risks and threats that we can still counteract.
I must hasten to clarify that Seneca did not imply that life is hopelessly full of tears or that we should not fear death at all. Those interpretations would constitute excuses for passivity and conformism in the face of severe danger.
If we apply ourselves, we can do better than Seneca. Let us not forget that today’s world offers wide, broad opportunities to proactive individuals; let’s eschew passivity, excessive fear and the temptation to regard inconvenience as impossibility.
If you are interested in applying rational ideas in all areas of activity, I recommend my book “Consistency: The key to permanent stress relief.”
Related articles
Key Seneca’s insights to implement today
How to use Seneca’s philosophy today
Philosophical lessons from Seneca’s life (Part 4)
Philosophical lessons from Seneca’s life (Part 2)