Luciano Canfora and Julian Stringer (eds)
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- September 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780748619368
- eISBN:
- 9780748670734
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Edinburgh University Press
- DOI:
- 10.3366/edinburgh/9780748619368.003.0035
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Archaeology: Classical
Plutarch presents the reconciliation of Brutus and Cassius in his Life of Brutus. Cassius is driven to make peace by one politically decisive consideration: everyone he approaches with the proposal ...
More
Plutarch presents the reconciliation of Brutus and Cassius in his Life of Brutus. Cassius is driven to make peace by one politically decisive consideration: everyone he approaches with the proposal of a violent attempt to eliminate Caesar replies that he would be party to it only if Brutus were to take the lead. Should Brutus refuse, then any such enterprise must be considered a failure, precisely because Brutus had rejected it. This is why Cassius decided to restore the contact with Brutus that had been broken off when he found himself competing with him for the praetorship.Less
Plutarch presents the reconciliation of Brutus and Cassius in his Life of Brutus. Cassius is driven to make peace by one politically decisive consideration: everyone he approaches with the proposal of a violent attempt to eliminate Caesar replies that he would be party to it only if Brutus were to take the lead. Should Brutus refuse, then any such enterprise must be considered a failure, precisely because Brutus had rejected it. This is why Cassius decided to restore the contact with Brutus that had been broken off when he found himself competing with him for the praetorship.
Luciano Canfora and Julian Stringer (eds)
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- September 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780748619368
- eISBN:
- 9780748670734
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Edinburgh University Press
- DOI:
- 10.3366/edinburgh/9780748619368.003.0036
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Archaeology: Classical
Having related the reconciliation of Brutus and Cassius, Plutarch informs us that both began to get in touch with their friends. But he really only relates the steps taken by Brutus. According to ...
More
Having related the reconciliation of Brutus and Cassius, Plutarch informs us that both began to get in touch with their friends. But he really only relates the steps taken by Brutus. According to Plutarch, Brutus received only two notes: both from persons who had had very close ties to Cato and would later die at Philippi in the republican ranks — Statilius and Favonius. Favonius, the fanatical Catonian, said that ‘civil war is worse than illegal monarchy’. Statilius was scornful, and said that ‘it did not become a wise and sensible man to be thrown into turmoil and peril for the sake of feeble and foolish folk’.Less
Having related the reconciliation of Brutus and Cassius, Plutarch informs us that both began to get in touch with their friends. But he really only relates the steps taken by Brutus. According to Plutarch, Brutus received only two notes: both from persons who had had very close ties to Cato and would later die at Philippi in the republican ranks — Statilius and Favonius. Favonius, the fanatical Catonian, said that ‘civil war is worse than illegal monarchy’. Statilius was scornful, and said that ‘it did not become a wise and sensible man to be thrown into turmoil and peril for the sake of feeble and foolish folk’.
Andrew Lintott
- Published in print:
- 2008
- Published Online:
- May 2008
- ISBN:
- 9780199216444
- eISBN:
- 9780191712180
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199216444.003.0020
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, European History: BCE to 500CE
The death of the consuls at Mutina left a vacuum at the summit of the administration at Rome, which in the short term gave more scope to those like Cicero who were pursuing the interests of the ...
More
The death of the consuls at Mutina left a vacuum at the summit of the administration at Rome, which in the short term gave more scope to those like Cicero who were pursuing the interests of the conspirators and wished to maintain the fight with Antonius. This chapter focuses on Cicero's correspondence for three more months, which mainly consists of campaign reports by the commanders of the armies and Cicero's replies, sometimes encouraging and sometimes revealing the fragility of the situation in Italy. The correspondence with Marcus Brutus; and how, upon his death, Cicero' life became a weapon in literary struggle between the new Caesar and his opponents are discussed.Less
The death of the consuls at Mutina left a vacuum at the summit of the administration at Rome, which in the short term gave more scope to those like Cicero who were pursuing the interests of the conspirators and wished to maintain the fight with Antonius. This chapter focuses on Cicero's correspondence for three more months, which mainly consists of campaign reports by the commanders of the armies and Cicero's replies, sometimes encouraging and sometimes revealing the fragility of the situation in Italy. The correspondence with Marcus Brutus; and how, upon his death, Cicero' life became a weapon in literary struggle between the new Caesar and his opponents are discussed.
T. P. Wiseman
- Published in print:
- 2009
- Published Online:
- January 2009
- ISBN:
- 9780199239764
- eISBN:
- 9780191716836
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199239764.003.0010
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, European History: BCE to 500CE
Before 133 BC, the Roman republic had solved political crises by compromise and without violence; after that year, murder was acceptable in Roman politics, and the civil wars followed. Was it what ...
More
Before 133 BC, the Roman republic had solved political crises by compromise and without violence; after that year, murder was acceptable in Roman politics, and the civil wars followed. Was it what Tiberius Gracchus did that made the difference, or what was done to him? The former, according to the optimate tradition, was followed by Cicero — as if legislation in the People's interest were enough to justify killing the legislator. This chapter investigates the history of that idea, and its application by Cicero and Brutus to the murders of Clodius and Caesar. It is clear from the Pro Milone and from Cicero's correspondence that the optimates automatically equated successful popularis politicians as Greek tyrants, and applied Plato's analysis of the ‘tyrannical man’ as a self-evident justification for murder.Less
Before 133 BC, the Roman republic had solved political crises by compromise and without violence; after that year, murder was acceptable in Roman politics, and the civil wars followed. Was it what Tiberius Gracchus did that made the difference, or what was done to him? The former, according to the optimate tradition, was followed by Cicero — as if legislation in the People's interest were enough to justify killing the legislator. This chapter investigates the history of that idea, and its application by Cicero and Brutus to the murders of Clodius and Caesar. It is clear from the Pro Milone and from Cicero's correspondence that the optimates automatically equated successful popularis politicians as Greek tyrants, and applied Plato's analysis of the ‘tyrannical man’ as a self-evident justification for murder.
Ann-Cathrin Harders
- Published in print:
- 2010
- Published Online:
- January 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780199582570
- eISBN:
- 9780191595271
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199582570.003.0003
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, European History: BCE to 500CE
In Republican Rome, it was a father's task to instruct his son and turn him into a worthy representative of his family. However, social reality did not confirm the picture of an exclusive ...
More
In Republican Rome, it was a father's task to instruct his son and turn him into a worthy representative of his family. However, social reality did not confirm the picture of an exclusive father-to-son relationship since the concept of imitatio patris was challenged by high mortality rates as well as divorce and remarriage. It can be shown that the fragmentation of Roman families was countered by substitute parenting, especially by cognate kin or by the single mother herself thereby offering an alternative role model. However, the primary aim of Roman socialization, the ideal of imitatio patris to perpetuate the agnatic lineage not only in name but also in action, was thus missed and was replaced with the exercise of imitatio alieni. To outline the alternatives to paternal socialization, four different cases of surrogate parenting is discussed in which the impact on the moulding of tradition can be observed.Less
In Republican Rome, it was a father's task to instruct his son and turn him into a worthy representative of his family. However, social reality did not confirm the picture of an exclusive father-to-son relationship since the concept of imitatio patris was challenged by high mortality rates as well as divorce and remarriage. It can be shown that the fragmentation of Roman families was countered by substitute parenting, especially by cognate kin or by the single mother herself thereby offering an alternative role model. However, the primary aim of Roman socialization, the ideal of imitatio patris to perpetuate the agnatic lineage not only in name but also in action, was thus missed and was replaced with the exercise of imitatio alieni. To outline the alternatives to paternal socialization, four different cases of surrogate parenting is discussed in which the impact on the moulding of tradition can be observed.
Jon Hall
- Published in print:
- 2009
- Published Online:
- May 2009
- ISBN:
- 9780195329063
- eISBN:
- 9780199870233
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195329063.003.0004
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Literary Studies: Classical, Early, and Medieval
This chapter examines three types of face-threatening act that regularly occur in the social interaction and correspondence of Roman aristocrats: making requests, issuing refusals, and offering ...
More
This chapter examines three types of face-threatening act that regularly occur in the social interaction and correspondence of Roman aristocrats: making requests, issuing refusals, and offering advice. As the discussion shows, various conventionalized expressions of redressive politeness arose in Roman epistolary manners in order to ease the social tension often caused by these situations. Typical strategies used when making a request include acknowledging explicitly the imposition upon the addressee and offering a ready-made “out” (a valid reason for refusing). Conversely, when issuing a refusal, a Roman patron would often be careful to give reasons for his decision and to show that the refusal was not an easy one to make. Finally, when offering advice (especially to powerful peers), the Roman aristocrat frequently took pains to stress that such suggestions should not be taken to imply a certain ignorance on the part of the addressee. The extent to which this strategy prevailed shows again the Roman grandee's concern with personal status and dignitas. This latter topic is analyzed with reference in particular to the letters of Pompey and Decimus Brutus, and to the conventionalized use of the Latin phrase ut facis.Less
This chapter examines three types of face-threatening act that regularly occur in the social interaction and correspondence of Roman aristocrats: making requests, issuing refusals, and offering advice. As the discussion shows, various conventionalized expressions of redressive politeness arose in Roman epistolary manners in order to ease the social tension often caused by these situations. Typical strategies used when making a request include acknowledging explicitly the imposition upon the addressee and offering a ready-made “out” (a valid reason for refusing). Conversely, when issuing a refusal, a Roman patron would often be careful to give reasons for his decision and to show that the refusal was not an easy one to make. Finally, when offering advice (especially to powerful peers), the Roman aristocrat frequently took pains to stress that such suggestions should not be taken to imply a certain ignorance on the part of the addressee. The extent to which this strategy prevailed shows again the Roman grandee's concern with personal status and dignitas. This latter topic is analyzed with reference in particular to the letters of Pompey and Decimus Brutus, and to the conventionalized use of the Latin phrase ut facis.
Jon Hall
- Published in print:
- 2009
- Published Online:
- May 2009
- ISBN:
- 9780195329063
- eISBN:
- 9780199870233
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195329063.003.0006
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Literary Studies: Classical, Early, and Medieval
This chapter considers the role of polite language in the political negotiations that followed Caesar's assassination in 44 B.C. It examines in particular the correspondence of Mark Antony with the ...
More
This chapter considers the role of polite language in the political negotiations that followed Caesar's assassination in 44 B.C. It examines in particular the correspondence of Mark Antony with the leaders of the conspirators, Marcus Brutus and Cassius Longinus, and the letters exchanged between Cicero and Munatius Plancus. In the former case, Brutus and Cassius appear to deploy a highly respectful and restrained manner in order to present themselves as solid, conservative types, an image necessary given their radical use of violence against Caesar. Antony, by contrast, seems to have adopted a harsher, more abusive style in his later public letters in order to define himself more starkly as a Caesarian staunchly opposed to the assassins. In the following year, Cicero and Munatius Plancus employed affiliative politeness with remarkable energy during their high-stake political negotiations. The latter's eventual defection to Antony highlights the duplicitous potential inherent in this type of language, even though both parties seem to have been well aware of the political game they were playing. In this connection, Cicero's correspondence with Octavian and Dolabella during this period is also examined.Less
This chapter considers the role of polite language in the political negotiations that followed Caesar's assassination in 44 B.C. It examines in particular the correspondence of Mark Antony with the leaders of the conspirators, Marcus Brutus and Cassius Longinus, and the letters exchanged between Cicero and Munatius Plancus. In the former case, Brutus and Cassius appear to deploy a highly respectful and restrained manner in order to present themselves as solid, conservative types, an image necessary given their radical use of violence against Caesar. Antony, by contrast, seems to have adopted a harsher, more abusive style in his later public letters in order to define himself more starkly as a Caesarian staunchly opposed to the assassins. In the following year, Cicero and Munatius Plancus employed affiliative politeness with remarkable energy during their high-stake political negotiations. The latter's eventual defection to Antony highlights the duplicitous potential inherent in this type of language, even though both parties seem to have been well aware of the political game they were playing. In this connection, Cicero's correspondence with Octavian and Dolabella during this period is also examined.
Luciano Canfora and Julian Stringer (eds)
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- September 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780748619368
- eISBN:
- 9780748670734
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Edinburgh University Press
- DOI:
- 10.3366/edinburgh/9780748619368.003.0034
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Archaeology: Classical
There is a tradition that pays particular attention to the role of Cassius in the events leading to Caesar's murder. It emerges here and there in the sources and may well provide a valuable element ...
More
There is a tradition that pays particular attention to the role of Cassius in the events leading to Caesar's murder. It emerges here and there in the sources and may well provide a valuable element of information. The clearest text is also the most interesting: Plutarch's account of the coup at the beginning of his Life of Brutus, which uses sources very close to the events and the protagonist. Describing the beginning of the conspiracy, Plutarch tells how Brutus was gradually won over by Cassius to the idea of eliminating the ‘tyrant’ by assassination, despite the very high favour he enjoyed with Caesar. Here Plutarch uses a particularly significant expression: ‘Indeed, had he wished it, he might have been first among Caesar's friends and exercised the greatest power; but the party (hetairia) of Cassius drew him away from such a course’. In the rest of his account Plutarch clearly describes the further efforts of ‘Cassius' hetairia’ to draw Brutus in.Less
There is a tradition that pays particular attention to the role of Cassius in the events leading to Caesar's murder. It emerges here and there in the sources and may well provide a valuable element of information. The clearest text is also the most interesting: Plutarch's account of the coup at the beginning of his Life of Brutus, which uses sources very close to the events and the protagonist. Describing the beginning of the conspiracy, Plutarch tells how Brutus was gradually won over by Cassius to the idea of eliminating the ‘tyrant’ by assassination, despite the very high favour he enjoyed with Caesar. Here Plutarch uses a particularly significant expression: ‘Indeed, had he wished it, he might have been first among Caesar's friends and exercised the greatest power; but the party (hetairia) of Cassius drew him away from such a course’. In the rest of his account Plutarch clearly describes the further efforts of ‘Cassius' hetairia’ to draw Brutus in.
Miles Geoffrey
- Published in print:
- 1996
- Published Online:
- October 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780198117711
- eISBN:
- 9780191671050
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198117711.003.0006
- Subject:
- Literature, Shakespeare Studies
This chapter considers one indisputable source of the plays: Sir Thomas North's translation of Jacques Amyot's translation of Plutarch's Parallel Lives. In determining to what extent Shakespeare ...
More
This chapter considers one indisputable source of the plays: Sir Thomas North's translation of Jacques Amyot's translation of Plutarch's Parallel Lives. In determining to what extent Shakespeare found his constant Romans in Plutarch, it suggests that one reason for his choice of Brutus, Antony, and Coriolanus as protagonists is that their Lives can be read as a kind of triptych on the theme of constancy. Plutarch, of course, did not design such a triptych: it is the Renaissance translators, Amyot and North, who make it into a central issue by using the words ‘constancy’ and ‘constant’ to translate a variety of Greek expressions. What emerges from the Lives, in North's translation, is an Aristotelian pattern of virtue as a mean between excess and defect: Brutus embodying the virtue of constancy, Antony its defect, inconstancy, and Coriolanus its excess, willful obstinacy.Less
This chapter considers one indisputable source of the plays: Sir Thomas North's translation of Jacques Amyot's translation of Plutarch's Parallel Lives. In determining to what extent Shakespeare found his constant Romans in Plutarch, it suggests that one reason for his choice of Brutus, Antony, and Coriolanus as protagonists is that their Lives can be read as a kind of triptych on the theme of constancy. Plutarch, of course, did not design such a triptych: it is the Renaissance translators, Amyot and North, who make it into a central issue by using the words ‘constancy’ and ‘constant’ to translate a variety of Greek expressions. What emerges from the Lives, in North's translation, is an Aristotelian pattern of virtue as a mean between excess and defect: Brutus embodying the virtue of constancy, Antony its defect, inconstancy, and Coriolanus its excess, willful obstinacy.
Harold Fisch
- Published in print:
- 1999
- Published Online:
- October 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780198184898
- eISBN:
- 9780191674372
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198184898.003.0001
- Subject:
- Literature, Poetry, Shakespeare Studies
This chapter analyses Act II, scene i, in Julius Caesar, where the conspirators meet to plot the assassination. The scene lights up not the individual quirks of Brutus but the frightful moral chasm ...
More
This chapter analyses Act II, scene i, in Julius Caesar, where the conspirators meet to plot the assassination. The scene lights up not the individual quirks of Brutus but the frightful moral chasm between the Roman world and our own. It is no longer a matter of strange language; it is not that Brutus is off-key, momentarily out of touch with reality. It is that we, the audience, have suddenly become aware of reality — a reality of the most shattering kind and different from our own. On seeing the strange and horrifying actions of Brutus and his friends, Shakespeare’s audience would inevitably call to mind a contrary ritual, of which this might seem to be a caricature, namely, that of Pontius Pilate who had washed his hands before the multitude, saying he was innocent of the blood of the crucified Saviour.Less
This chapter analyses Act II, scene i, in Julius Caesar, where the conspirators meet to plot the assassination. The scene lights up not the individual quirks of Brutus but the frightful moral chasm between the Roman world and our own. It is no longer a matter of strange language; it is not that Brutus is off-key, momentarily out of touch with reality. It is that we, the audience, have suddenly become aware of reality — a reality of the most shattering kind and different from our own. On seeing the strange and horrifying actions of Brutus and his friends, Shakespeare’s audience would inevitably call to mind a contrary ritual, of which this might seem to be a caricature, namely, that of Pontius Pilate who had washed his hands before the multitude, saying he was innocent of the blood of the crucified Saviour.
Luciano Canfora and Julian Stringer (eds)
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- September 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780748619368
- eISBN:
- 9780748670734
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Edinburgh University Press
- DOI:
- 10.3366/edinburgh/9780748619368.003.0028
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Archaeology: Classical
With Cato dead at Utica, laudationes of the republican martyr and model Stoic followed one upon another. It was Cicero, with his innate imprudence, who inaugurated the series of posthumous ...
More
With Cato dead at Utica, laudationes of the republican martyr and model Stoic followed one upon another. It was Cicero, with his innate imprudence, who inaugurated the series of posthumous commemorations whose political significance as ‘opposition’ is plain. At the request of Marcus Junius Brutus, Caesar's favourite, but Cato's nephew and admirer, Cicero began writing a Laus Catonis as early as April 46 bc, as soon as the news reached Rome of Cato's suicide in Africa.Less
With Cato dead at Utica, laudationes of the republican martyr and model Stoic followed one upon another. It was Cicero, with his innate imprudence, who inaugurated the series of posthumous commemorations whose political significance as ‘opposition’ is plain. At the request of Marcus Junius Brutus, Caesar's favourite, but Cato's nephew and admirer, Cicero began writing a Laus Catonis as early as April 46 bc, as soon as the news reached Rome of Cato's suicide in Africa.
Luciano Canfora and Julian Stringer (eds)
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- September 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780748619368
- eISBN:
- 9780748670734
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Edinburgh University Press
- DOI:
- 10.3366/edinburgh/9780748619368.003.0037
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Archaeology: Classical
Speaking in the Senate on 19 September 44 bc, in the absence of Cicero, Antony made a serious accusation: ‘When Caesar had been slain, Brutus, whom I name with respect, at once lifting high his ...
More
Speaking in the Senate on 19 September 44 bc, in the absence of Cicero, Antony made a serious accusation: ‘When Caesar had been slain, Brutus, whom I name with respect, at once lifting high his bloody dagger, shouted for Cicero by name, and congratulated him on the recovery of freedom’. From Brutus' remark Antony concluded, perhaps rightly, that Cicero was not unaware of the conspiracy. In the Second Philippic, a savagely Demosthenian reply that was never delivered, Cicero accurately quotes Antony's words and hits back with a detailed and deadly polemical retaliation: he recalls the blackest stain on Antony's ‘Caesarian’ career — his complicity in the plan to assassinate Caesar the previous year, shortly after Munda. Cicero's reminder was also a gift to Octavian, since at the time he actually published this damaging pamphlet he was already in touch with Octavian.Less
Speaking in the Senate on 19 September 44 bc, in the absence of Cicero, Antony made a serious accusation: ‘When Caesar had been slain, Brutus, whom I name with respect, at once lifting high his bloody dagger, shouted for Cicero by name, and congratulated him on the recovery of freedom’. From Brutus' remark Antony concluded, perhaps rightly, that Cicero was not unaware of the conspiracy. In the Second Philippic, a savagely Demosthenian reply that was never delivered, Cicero accurately quotes Antony's words and hits back with a detailed and deadly polemical retaliation: he recalls the blackest stain on Antony's ‘Caesarian’ career — his complicity in the plan to assassinate Caesar the previous year, shortly after Munda. Cicero's reminder was also a gift to Octavian, since at the time he actually published this damaging pamphlet he was already in touch with Octavian.
Luciano Canfora and Julian Stringer (eds)
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- September 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780748619368
- eISBN:
- 9780748670734
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Edinburgh University Press
- DOI:
- 10.3366/edinburgh/9780748619368.003.0041
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Archaeology: Classical
The conspirators lost everything in the moment when they left the body of the dictator unattended and abandoned the idea of getting rid of it by throwing it into the Tiber. The Caesarians begin to ...
More
The conspirators lost everything in the moment when they left the body of the dictator unattended and abandoned the idea of getting rid of it by throwing it into the Tiber. The Caesarians begin to regain ground when they were able to make political and emotional capital out of the corpse, whose cumbrous presence weighed increasingly heavily, and in the end decisively, on Roman politics. In the very first moments after the murder, Brutus and the others make every possible effort to get the situation under control. Their efforts were mostly doomed to failure. The fact that for a brief moment they seemed to have succeeded is demonstrated by Antony's panic: he dressed as a plebeian and fled. Brutus tried to talk to the senators, but they were bent on fleeing with all speed from the scene of the attack they witnessed. Neglecting to dispose of the body and proceeding to a renunciation of all Caesar's works, they could think of nothing better than to go to the Capitol, waving their daggers and calling on imaginary citizens to ‘make the most of their freedom’. In the space of a few hours the conspirators lost all the advantages of surprise and the confusion of their opponents, by trying to present to the people some abstract ‘freedom’.Less
The conspirators lost everything in the moment when they left the body of the dictator unattended and abandoned the idea of getting rid of it by throwing it into the Tiber. The Caesarians begin to regain ground when they were able to make political and emotional capital out of the corpse, whose cumbrous presence weighed increasingly heavily, and in the end decisively, on Roman politics. In the very first moments after the murder, Brutus and the others make every possible effort to get the situation under control. Their efforts were mostly doomed to failure. The fact that for a brief moment they seemed to have succeeded is demonstrated by Antony's panic: he dressed as a plebeian and fled. Brutus tried to talk to the senators, but they were bent on fleeing with all speed from the scene of the attack they witnessed. Neglecting to dispose of the body and proceeding to a renunciation of all Caesar's works, they could think of nothing better than to go to the Capitol, waving their daggers and calling on imaginary citizens to ‘make the most of their freedom’. In the space of a few hours the conspirators lost all the advantages of surprise and the confusion of their opponents, by trying to present to the people some abstract ‘freedom’.
John Dugan
- Published in print:
- 2005
- Published Online:
- January 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780199267804
- eISBN:
- 9780191708152
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199267804.001.0001
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Prose and Writers: Classical, Early, and Medieval
This study investigates how Cicero (106-43 BCE) uses his major treatises on rhetorical theory (De oratore, Brutus, and Orator) in order to construct himself as a new entity within Roman cultural ...
More
This study investigates how Cicero (106-43 BCE) uses his major treatises on rhetorical theory (De oratore, Brutus, and Orator) in order to construct himself as a new entity within Roman cultural life: a leader who based his authority upon intellectual, oratorical, and literary accomplishments instead of the traditional avenues for prestige such as a distinguished familial pedigree or political or military feats. Eschewing conventional Roman notions of manliness, Cicero constructed a distinctly aesthetized identity that flirts with the questionable domains of the theatre and the feminine, and thus fashioned himself as a ‘new man’.Less
This study investigates how Cicero (106-43 BCE) uses his major treatises on rhetorical theory (De oratore, Brutus, and Orator) in order to construct himself as a new entity within Roman cultural life: a leader who based his authority upon intellectual, oratorical, and literary accomplishments instead of the traditional avenues for prestige such as a distinguished familial pedigree or political or military feats. Eschewing conventional Roman notions of manliness, Cicero constructed a distinctly aesthetized identity that flirts with the questionable domains of the theatre and the feminine, and thus fashioned himself as a ‘new man’.
Sean Alexander Gurd
- Published in print:
- 2011
- Published Online:
- January 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780199837519
- eISBN:
- 9780199919505
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199837519.003.0003
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Literary Studies: Classical, Early, and Medieval, Prose and Writers: Classical, Early, and Medieval
Cicero conceived literature as a social undertaking in which texts not only expressed the preferences of communities engaged in their revision, but by being the topic of discussion could also be used ...
More
Cicero conceived literature as a social undertaking in which texts not only expressed the preferences of communities engaged in their revision, but by being the topic of discussion could also be used as the basis for community formation. I believe that this led Cicero to articulate a surprising view on literary finish: he valued the incomplete over the complete precisely because what was not yet perfect could be discussed and therefore serve as the site of communal dialogue.Less
Cicero conceived literature as a social undertaking in which texts not only expressed the preferences of communities engaged in their revision, but by being the topic of discussion could also be used as the basis for community formation. I believe that this led Cicero to articulate a surprising view on literary finish: he valued the incomplete over the complete precisely because what was not yet perfect could be discussed and therefore serve as the site of communal dialogue.
John Dugan
- Published in print:
- 2005
- Published Online:
- January 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780199267804
- eISBN:
- 9780191708152
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199267804.003.0004
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Prose and Writers: Classical, Early, and Medieval
This chapter examines what constitutes, and how one may cultivate, a properly masculine self. It argues that Brutus creates a teleological history of Roman rhetoric in which Cicero, with a potent ...
More
This chapter examines what constitutes, and how one may cultivate, a properly masculine self. It argues that Brutus creates a teleological history of Roman rhetoric in which Cicero, with a potent ambiguity, presents himself as the end of his narrative: he is both the culmination of the history of rhetoric and the conclusion of that tradition in a Rome dominated by Caesar. It adds that in the Brutus, self-fashioning appears as literary polemic, particularly in Cicero's attacks against the ‘Atticists’, who constructed their regime of oratorical purity and restraint in opposition to Cicero's alleged ‘Asianist’ bombast, license, and emotionalism. It narrates that the Brutus defends Cicero's oratorical style and that it gave further evidence of the content of their polemics, a dispute which applies literary aesthetics to the body and this indicates that these disputes over style involved issues fundamental to these orators' selfhood.Less
This chapter examines what constitutes, and how one may cultivate, a properly masculine self. It argues that Brutus creates a teleological history of Roman rhetoric in which Cicero, with a potent ambiguity, presents himself as the end of his narrative: he is both the culmination of the history of rhetoric and the conclusion of that tradition in a Rome dominated by Caesar. It adds that in the Brutus, self-fashioning appears as literary polemic, particularly in Cicero's attacks against the ‘Atticists’, who constructed their regime of oratorical purity and restraint in opposition to Cicero's alleged ‘Asianist’ bombast, license, and emotionalism. It narrates that the Brutus defends Cicero's oratorical style and that it gave further evidence of the content of their polemics, a dispute which applies literary aesthetics to the body and this indicates that these disputes over style involved issues fundamental to these orators' selfhood.
Clyde E. Fant and Mitchell G. Reddish
- Published in print:
- 2003
- Published Online:
- November 2020
- ISBN:
- 9780195139174
- eISBN:
- 9780197561706
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/oso/9780195139174.003.0040
- Subject:
- Archaeology, Biblical Archaeology
In ancient times Patara possessed one of the best harbors on the Lycian coast. Modern visitors will be forced to use their imaginations to visualize the ...
More
In ancient times Patara possessed one of the best harbors on the Lycian coast. Modern visitors will be forced to use their imaginations to visualize the port of Patara, since the harbor eventually fell victim to the effects of silting from the Xanthos River. Today a beach and sand dunes cover the mouth of the ancient harbor, while the inner part of the harbor is now a marsh. Patara served as the port city for Xanthos, the leading city of the region of Lycia, which was located about 6 miles up the Xanthos River. Patara is located on the southwestern shore of Turkey, due east from the island of Rhodes. It is situated about halfway between Fethiye and Kale, near the present-day village of Gelemiş, about 3.5 miles south of the modern road (highway 400) that runs along Turkey’s Mediterranean shore. Patara is approximately 6 miles east of the mouth of the Xanthos River. A stream from the Xanthos flowed into the sea at Patara and deposited the river’s silt there. Important in the past because of its harbor, the area around Patara is known today for its 11 miles of excellent, sandy beaches. Supposedly named after Patarus, a son of Apollo, the city was famous in antiquity for its Temple of Apollo (no archaeological evidence of the temple has yet been found) and the oracle of Apollo. According to ancient tradition, Apollo liked to spend the winter at Patara and thus the oracle of Apollo was operative only during the winter months. Pottery finds at Patara provide evidence for a settlement here as early as the 6th century B.C.E. In 334–333 B.C.E. Patara, along with several other Lycian cities, surrendered to Alexander the Great. During the subsequent Hellenistic period, the city came first under the control of the Ptolemies and then the Seleucids. Ptolemy II Philadelphus (r. 282–246 B.C.E.) expanded the city and renamed it Arsinoe in honor of his wife, but the new name never took hold. In 196 B.C.E., the Seleucid ruler Antiochus III of Syria captured several Lycian cities, including Patara.
Less
In ancient times Patara possessed one of the best harbors on the Lycian coast. Modern visitors will be forced to use their imaginations to visualize the port of Patara, since the harbor eventually fell victim to the effects of silting from the Xanthos River. Today a beach and sand dunes cover the mouth of the ancient harbor, while the inner part of the harbor is now a marsh. Patara served as the port city for Xanthos, the leading city of the region of Lycia, which was located about 6 miles up the Xanthos River. Patara is located on the southwestern shore of Turkey, due east from the island of Rhodes. It is situated about halfway between Fethiye and Kale, near the present-day village of Gelemiş, about 3.5 miles south of the modern road (highway 400) that runs along Turkey’s Mediterranean shore. Patara is approximately 6 miles east of the mouth of the Xanthos River. A stream from the Xanthos flowed into the sea at Patara and deposited the river’s silt there. Important in the past because of its harbor, the area around Patara is known today for its 11 miles of excellent, sandy beaches. Supposedly named after Patarus, a son of Apollo, the city was famous in antiquity for its Temple of Apollo (no archaeological evidence of the temple has yet been found) and the oracle of Apollo. According to ancient tradition, Apollo liked to spend the winter at Patara and thus the oracle of Apollo was operative only during the winter months. Pottery finds at Patara provide evidence for a settlement here as early as the 6th century B.C.E. In 334–333 B.C.E. Patara, along with several other Lycian cities, surrendered to Alexander the Great. During the subsequent Hellenistic period, the city came first under the control of the Ptolemies and then the Seleucids. Ptolemy II Philadelphus (r. 282–246 B.C.E.) expanded the city and renamed it Arsinoe in honor of his wife, but the new name never took hold. In 196 B.C.E., the Seleucid ruler Antiochus III of Syria captured several Lycian cities, including Patara.
Susan Treggiari
- Published in print:
- 2019
- Published Online:
- February 2019
- ISBN:
- 9780198829348
- eISBN:
- 9780191867927
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/oso/9780198829348.001.0001
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, European History: BCE to 500CE
Servilia is often cited as one of the most influential women of the late Roman Republic. Though she was a high-born patrician, her grandfather died disgraced and her controversial father was killed ...
More
Servilia is often cited as one of the most influential women of the late Roman Republic. Though she was a high-born patrician, her grandfather died disgraced and her controversial father was killed before he could stand for the consulship. She married twice, but both husbands, Marcus Iunius Brutus and Decimus Iunius Silanus, were mediocre. Her position in society and (it may be conjectured) her contacts, personality, ability, and charm gave her influence. It is likely that she masterminded the distinguished marriages of her one son, Brutus, and her three daughters. During her second marriage she entered on an affair with C. Iulius Caesar, which probably lasted for the rest of his life, a fact which also suggests her charm and her exceptional intelligence. The patchiness of the sources means that a full biography is impossible, though in suggesting connexions between the evidence and the possibilities open to women of similar status this volume aims to reconstruct her life and position as a member of the senatorial nobility and within her extended and nuclear family. The best attested period of Servilia’s life, for which the chief source is Cicero’s letters, follows the murder of Caesar by her son and her son-in-law, Cassius, who were leaders among the crowd of conspirators in the Senate-house on the Ides of March 44 bc. We find her working to protect the assassins’ interests and defending her grandchildren (by the Caesarian Lepidus) when he was a public enemy and his property threatened with confiscation.Less
Servilia is often cited as one of the most influential women of the late Roman Republic. Though she was a high-born patrician, her grandfather died disgraced and her controversial father was killed before he could stand for the consulship. She married twice, but both husbands, Marcus Iunius Brutus and Decimus Iunius Silanus, were mediocre. Her position in society and (it may be conjectured) her contacts, personality, ability, and charm gave her influence. It is likely that she masterminded the distinguished marriages of her one son, Brutus, and her three daughters. During her second marriage she entered on an affair with C. Iulius Caesar, which probably lasted for the rest of his life, a fact which also suggests her charm and her exceptional intelligence. The patchiness of the sources means that a full biography is impossible, though in suggesting connexions between the evidence and the possibilities open to women of similar status this volume aims to reconstruct her life and position as a member of the senatorial nobility and within her extended and nuclear family. The best attested period of Servilia’s life, for which the chief source is Cicero’s letters, follows the murder of Caesar by her son and her son-in-law, Cassius, who were leaders among the crowd of conspirators in the Senate-house on the Ides of March 44 bc. We find her working to protect the assassins’ interests and defending her grandchildren (by the Caesarian Lepidus) when he was a public enemy and his property threatened with confiscation.
Cristina Rosillo López
- Published in print:
- 2013
- Published Online:
- January 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780199641895
- eISBN:
- 9780191746130
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199641895.003.0017
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, European History: BCE to 500CE, Ancient Greek, Roman, and Early Christian Philosophy
This chapter considers the average orators of the Republic, reasonably talented and who had a fair success in politics. Cicero describes in his Brutus orators who had no talent (ingenium) but who ...
More
This chapter considers the average orators of the Republic, reasonably talented and who had a fair success in politics. Cicero describes in his Brutus orators who had no talent (ingenium) but who gained recognition through their industry (industria). Examples of the ‘common orator’ are the Scribonii Curiones, a three-generation family of orators, grandfather, father and son. Curio pater was sometimes laughed at by his audience and once even abandoned by the bystanders during a trial. However, the three of them could deliver effective political speeches and thus build prestige and authority. This essay explores these three orators in order to understand how the mass of the common orators acted and employed their oratory skills in competitive politics. In the case of the Curiones, the fragments and testimonia of their speeches show their rhetorical strategies and their effectiveness in decision-making from the period of C. Gracchus until the outbreak of civil war in 49 bc.Less
This chapter considers the average orators of the Republic, reasonably talented and who had a fair success in politics. Cicero describes in his Brutus orators who had no talent (ingenium) but who gained recognition through their industry (industria). Examples of the ‘common orator’ are the Scribonii Curiones, a three-generation family of orators, grandfather, father and son. Curio pater was sometimes laughed at by his audience and once even abandoned by the bystanders during a trial. However, the three of them could deliver effective political speeches and thus build prestige and authority. This essay explores these three orators in order to understand how the mass of the common orators acted and employed their oratory skills in competitive politics. In the case of the Curiones, the fragments and testimonia of their speeches show their rhetorical strategies and their effectiveness in decision-making from the period of C. Gracchus until the outbreak of civil war in 49 bc.
Andrea Balbo
- Published in print:
- 2013
- Published Online:
- January 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780199641895
- eISBN:
- 9780191746130
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199641895.003.0019
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, European History: BCE to 500CE, Ancient Greek, Roman, and Early Christian Philosophy
Marcus Iunius Brutus was one of the most important politicians active at the end of the Republic. Cicero gives a very positive judgment of Brutus’ oratorical skills, but none of his speeches has ...
More
Marcus Iunius Brutus was one of the most important politicians active at the end of the Republic. Cicero gives a very positive judgment of Brutus’ oratorical skills, but none of his speeches has survived complete, and the fragments of his orations have not aroused much interest among scholars. This chapter provides a re-evaluation both of Brutus’ eloquence and its links with his understanding of philosophy, and of his relationship with contemporary Roman politicians and parties. The links between Brutus’ speeches and politics are clear and important: all his orations are connected with some of the most difficult situations during the late Roman republic: Pompeius’ dictatorship (52 bc); the defences of Titus Annius Milo (52 bc) and king Deiotarus (47 bc); the laudatio of Cato Uticensis (45 bc); and the oratio in contio Capitolina, pronounced the day after Caesar’s death.Less
Marcus Iunius Brutus was one of the most important politicians active at the end of the Republic. Cicero gives a very positive judgment of Brutus’ oratorical skills, but none of his speeches has survived complete, and the fragments of his orations have not aroused much interest among scholars. This chapter provides a re-evaluation both of Brutus’ eloquence and its links with his understanding of philosophy, and of his relationship with contemporary Roman politicians and parties. The links between Brutus’ speeches and politics are clear and important: all his orations are connected with some of the most difficult situations during the late Roman republic: Pompeius’ dictatorship (52 bc); the defences of Titus Annius Milo (52 bc) and king Deiotarus (47 bc); the laudatio of Cato Uticensis (45 bc); and the oratio in contio Capitolina, pronounced the day after Caesar’s death.