A Note on the Text and Interpretation of Cicero, De Fato 35

De fato 35 is part of Cicero's argument against the Stoic theory of causation. He claims in general that the Stoic chain of causes consists of antecedent but not efficient causes. To the examples cited in the previous chapter he adds verses from the opening of Ennius’ Medea exul (lines 208–11 Jocelyn = FRL 2 and TRF 89.1–4) containing the Nurse's lamentation over the origins of the Argonautic expedition that led, ultimately, to Medea's current mental distress. Then follows the question quorsum haec praeterita? and the answer quia sequitur illud, ‘nam numquam era errans mea domo ecferret pedem | Medea, animo aegro, amore saeuo saucia’, non ut eae res causam adferrent amoris , citing Ennius, Medea exul 215–16 Jocelyn = FRL 2 and TRF 89.8–9. Editors and commentators have struggled to explain the relation of the answer to the question. Here it is argued that the relation becomes clear if one adopts non for non and punctuates with a query after amoris . The sense will be: ‘Why have these past events been cited? In view of the sequel ... was it not so that they bring on the cause of love?’ In other words, the Nurse, like the Stoics in Cicero's view, cites antecedent events as if they were efficient causes

Antecedent (behavioral psychology · Argument (complex analysis · Art · Causation · Cicero · Epicureanism · Epistemology · Interpretation (philosophy · Linguistics · Literature · Psychoanalysis · Relation (database · Classical Antiquity Studies · Classical Philosophy and Thought · Medicine · Organic Chemistry Synthesis Methods · Philosophy · Psychology · Social Psychology