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/9780199216444.003.0010
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, European History: BCE to 500CE
This chapter discusses Cicero' consular candidature and consulship. Cicero was elected consul by the unanimous vote of all the centuries required to give him the necessary majority. There is no ...
More
This chapter discusses Cicero' consular candidature and consulship. Cicero was elected consul by the unanimous vote of all the centuries required to give him the necessary majority. There is no existing correspondence for his consular year; he left a public record of that year in the form of a commentary written in both Latin and Greek, which unfortunately no longer survives. Furthermore, in the middle of 60 BC he wrote up a number of his consular speeches for publication. The first two were the speech to the senate on 1 January and that to the people on the agrarian law; the third one supporting the praetor Otho over the segregation of the equites in the theatre; the fourth the defence of C. Rabirius against the treason charge; the fifth a speech in opposition to the restoration of privileges to those proscribed by Sulla; the sixth Cicero's address to the people when he surrendered the right to go to a province. There followed four Catilinarian Orations and an appendix of two brief speeches on the agrarian law. Of these, the four Catilinarians, the whole of the speech to the people on the agrarian law, part of the preceding speech to the senate on 1 January, another brief speech on the same topic, and a fragmentary text of the pro Rabirio are considered.Less
This chapter discusses Cicero' consular candidature and consulship. Cicero was elected consul by the unanimous vote of all the centuries required to give him the necessary majority. There is no existing correspondence for his consular year; he left a public record of that year in the form of a commentary written in both Latin and Greek, which unfortunately no longer survives. Furthermore, in the middle of 60 BC he wrote up a number of his consular speeches for publication. The first two were the speech to the senate on 1 January and that to the people on the agrarian law; the third one supporting the praetor Otho over the segregation of the equites in the theatre; the fourth the defence of C. Rabirius against the treason charge; the fifth a speech in opposition to the restoration of privileges to those proscribed by Sulla; the sixth Cicero's address to the people when he surrendered the right to go to a province. There followed four Catilinarian Orations and an appendix of two brief speeches on the agrarian law. Of these, the four Catilinarians, the whole of the speech to the people on the agrarian law, part of the preceding speech to the senate on 1 January, another brief speech on the same topic, and a fragmentary text of the pro Rabirio are considered.
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/9780199216444.003.0002
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, European History: BCE to 500CE
This chapter discusses the texts of Cicero' speeches. It is shown that some of the texts of speeches were not delivered by Cicero. The problem of the forensic speeches is also considered.
This chapter discusses the texts of Cicero' speeches. It is shown that some of the texts of speeches were not delivered by Cicero. The problem of the forensic speeches is also considered.
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/9780199216444.003.0013
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, European History: BCE to 500CE
This chapter focuses on Cicero's correspondence and speeches following his return to Rome. These cover the defence of property, friends, and optimates. It then discusses the pro Sestio, which marked ...
More
This chapter focuses on Cicero's correspondence and speeches following his return to Rome. These cover the defence of property, friends, and optimates. It then discusses the pro Sestio, which marked the close of an enormous parenthesis in Cicero's career. In December 60 he had decided to hold to his traditional line of optimate politics in spite of an invitation to join Caesar, Pompey, and Crassus. Refusal of the invitation led to exposure to Clodius, exile, guilt, recovery of status, and a desperate attempt to expunge guilt by apologia and assertion of impeccable optimate credentials. This reached a climax in pro Sestio. It led nowhere, and Cicero found his debt to Pompey in particular requiring him to abandon the ‘good men’.Less
This chapter focuses on Cicero's correspondence and speeches following his return to Rome. These cover the defence of property, friends, and optimates. It then discusses the pro Sestio, which marked the close of an enormous parenthesis in Cicero's career. In December 60 he had decided to hold to his traditional line of optimate politics in spite of an invitation to join Caesar, Pompey, and Crassus. Refusal of the invitation led to exposure to Clodius, exile, guilt, recovery of status, and a desperate attempt to expunge guilt by apologia and assertion of impeccable optimate credentials. This reached a climax in pro Sestio. It led nowhere, and Cicero found his debt to Pompey in particular requiring him to abandon the ‘good men’.
James M. May
- Published in print:
- 1988
- Published Online:
- May 2015
- ISBN:
- 9780807817599
- eISBN:
- 9781469616322
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- University of North Carolina Press
- DOI:
- 10.5149/northcarolina/9781469616322.001.0001
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Archaeology: Classical
By its very nature, the art of oratory involves character. Verbal persuasion entails the presentation of a persona by the speaker that affects an audience for good or ill. This book explores the role ...
More
By its very nature, the art of oratory involves character. Verbal persuasion entails the presentation of a persona by the speaker that affects an audience for good or ill. This book explores the role and extent of Cicero's use of ethos and demonstrates its persuasive effect. The book discusses the importance of ethos, not just in classical rhetorical theory but also in the social, political, and judicial milieu of ancient Rome, and then applies his insights to the oratory of Cicero. Ciceronian ethos was a complex blend of Roman tradition, Cicero's own personality, and selected features of Greek and Roman oratory. More than any other ancient literary genre, oratory dealt with constantly changing circumstances, with a wide variety of rhetorical challenges. An orator's success or failure, as well as the artistic quality of his orations, was largely the direct result of responses to these circumstances and challenges. Acutely aware of his audience and its cultural heritage and steeped in the rhetorical traditions of his predecessors, Cicero employed rhetorical ethos with uncanny success. The book analyzes individual speeches from four different periods of Cicero's career, tracing changes in the way Cicero depicted character, both his own and others', as a source of persuasion—changes intimately connected with the vicissitudes of Cicero's career and personal life. It shows that ethos played a major role in almost every Ciceronian speech, that Cicero's audiences were conditioned by common beliefs about character, and finally, that Cicero's rhetorical ethos became a major source for persuasion in his oratory.Less
By its very nature, the art of oratory involves character. Verbal persuasion entails the presentation of a persona by the speaker that affects an audience for good or ill. This book explores the role and extent of Cicero's use of ethos and demonstrates its persuasive effect. The book discusses the importance of ethos, not just in classical rhetorical theory but also in the social, political, and judicial milieu of ancient Rome, and then applies his insights to the oratory of Cicero. Ciceronian ethos was a complex blend of Roman tradition, Cicero's own personality, and selected features of Greek and Roman oratory. More than any other ancient literary genre, oratory dealt with constantly changing circumstances, with a wide variety of rhetorical challenges. An orator's success or failure, as well as the artistic quality of his orations, was largely the direct result of responses to these circumstances and challenges. Acutely aware of his audience and its cultural heritage and steeped in the rhetorical traditions of his predecessors, Cicero employed rhetorical ethos with uncanny success. The book analyzes individual speeches from four different periods of Cicero's career, tracing changes in the way Cicero depicted character, both his own and others', as a source of persuasion—changes intimately connected with the vicissitudes of Cicero's career and personal life. It shows that ethos played a major role in almost every Ciceronian speech, that Cicero's audiences were conditioned by common beliefs about character, and finally, that Cicero's rhetorical ethos became a major source for persuasion in his oratory.
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/9780199216444.003.0003
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, European History: BCE to 500CE
This chapter argues that historians must not only consider what the texts of the speeches actually represent, but also the orator's preference for persuasiveness over truthfulness. It is shown that ...
More
This chapter argues that historians must not only consider what the texts of the speeches actually represent, but also the orator's preference for persuasiveness over truthfulness. It is shown that in the speeches, Cicero does not signal possible inventions by marks of diffidence. One example of falsehood in a forensic speech is Cicero's account in his defence of Milo with regard to the death of Clodius at Bovillae. The technique of inserting a relatively brief and unadorned lie into a mass of other narrative or argument, which may itself be a misrepresentation of the facts, is identified. Another technique is the falsehood by implication through tendentious description.Less
This chapter argues that historians must not only consider what the texts of the speeches actually represent, but also the orator's preference for persuasiveness over truthfulness. It is shown that in the speeches, Cicero does not signal possible inventions by marks of diffidence. One example of falsehood in a forensic speech is Cicero's account in his defence of Milo with regard to the death of Clodius at Bovillae. The technique of inserting a relatively brief and unadorned lie into a mass of other narrative or argument, which may itself be a misrepresentation of the facts, is identified. Another technique is the falsehood by implication through tendentious description.
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/9780199216444.003.0019
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, European History: BCE to 500CE
This chapter begins with a discussion of Cicero's speech that he termed as his Philippics. The first part of this speech is a defence of his departure and return, portraying it as a response to ...
More
This chapter begins with a discussion of Cicero's speech that he termed as his Philippics. The first part of this speech is a defence of his departure and return, portraying it as a response to Antonius' own behaviour: he had been waiting and hoping for the res publica to return at long last to the authority of the senate. The second half of the speech is couched as a proposal, but rapidly becomes a denunciation of both the contents and the methods of Antonius' recent legislative activity and of the cooperation of the presiding consul Dolabella in this. On 19 September, Antonius delivered a counterattack in the senate, in which he claimed that Cicero had been behind the plot to kill Caesar. Cicero composed an answer to Antonius, which embodied the most powerful invective of his that survives — the Second Philippic. The last surviving letters to Atticus and the period of remaining Philippics are discussed.Less
This chapter begins with a discussion of Cicero's speech that he termed as his Philippics. The first part of this speech is a defence of his departure and return, portraying it as a response to Antonius' own behaviour: he had been waiting and hoping for the res publica to return at long last to the authority of the senate. The second half of the speech is couched as a proposal, but rapidly becomes a denunciation of both the contents and the methods of Antonius' recent legislative activity and of the cooperation of the presiding consul Dolabella in this. On 19 September, Antonius delivered a counterattack in the senate, in which he claimed that Cicero had been behind the plot to kill Caesar. Cicero composed an answer to Antonius, which embodied the most powerful invective of his that survives — the Second Philippic. The last surviving letters to Atticus and the period of remaining Philippics are discussed.
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/9780199216444.003.0009
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, European History: BCE to 500CE
Cicero's method when defending in the repetundae court was to discount testimony rather than to examine evidence. He sought to portray his client as a good man defending Rome's empire against hostile ...
More
Cicero's method when defending in the repetundae court was to discount testimony rather than to examine evidence. He sought to portray his client as a good man defending Rome's empire against hostile foreigners. This chapter considers cases that required a different approach. The facts were often well known, at least in general terms, and the prosecution was supported by Roman witnesses whose character could not be casually denigrated. On the other hand, there was more scope for arguing about the interpretation of the law and of the defendants' actions in relation to the law. The difference between rhetorical strategies in different public courts has been well characterized. It was not just a question of variation in the quantity and quality of evidence for different charges: it depended on the nature of the offence. In cases where the political element was stronger, the definition of the offence had been left vague, even ambiguous, by the legislator — probably deliberately, because the judgement was expected to be political, rather than purely criminal. Here, there was more opportunity for defending counsel to argue, not merely that his client was a ‘good man’, but that the actions of his that were being prosecuted were justifiable.Less
Cicero's method when defending in the repetundae court was to discount testimony rather than to examine evidence. He sought to portray his client as a good man defending Rome's empire against hostile foreigners. This chapter considers cases that required a different approach. The facts were often well known, at least in general terms, and the prosecution was supported by Roman witnesses whose character could not be casually denigrated. On the other hand, there was more scope for arguing about the interpretation of the law and of the defendants' actions in relation to the law. The difference between rhetorical strategies in different public courts has been well characterized. It was not just a question of variation in the quantity and quality of evidence for different charges: it depended on the nature of the offence. In cases where the political element was stronger, the definition of the offence had been left vague, even ambiguous, by the legislator — probably deliberately, because the judgement was expected to be political, rather than purely criminal. Here, there was more opportunity for defending counsel to argue, not merely that his client was a ‘good man’, but that the actions of his that were being prosecuted were justifiable.
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/9780199216444.003.0004
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, European History: BCE to 500CE
The pro Quinctio has been viewed as Cicero's first sortie into forensic oratory, made under the shadow of Sulla's domination and the proscription of his opponents. However, in the exordium to the pro ...
More
The pro Quinctio has been viewed as Cicero's first sortie into forensic oratory, made under the shadow of Sulla's domination and the proscription of his opponents. However, in the exordium to the pro Quinctio, Cicero refers to his previous cases — presumably private cases, such as Quinctius', and apparently undertaken earlier under Sulla's dictatorship. He must have performed well enough in these to impress Sulla's friend, the actor Quintus Roscius, who, as Quinctius' brother-in-law, was the intermediary in arranging that Cicero took over this case when the previous advocate M. Iunius was called away as a legatus. This chapter discusses the nature of the case, the organization of the speech, the origin of the dispute, vadimonium documents, continuation of the dispute, and the relative strengths of the cases.Less
The pro Quinctio has been viewed as Cicero's first sortie into forensic oratory, made under the shadow of Sulla's domination and the proscription of his opponents. However, in the exordium to the pro Quinctio, Cicero refers to his previous cases — presumably private cases, such as Quinctius', and apparently undertaken earlier under Sulla's dictatorship. He must have performed well enough in these to impress Sulla's friend, the actor Quintus Roscius, who, as Quinctius' brother-in-law, was the intermediary in arranging that Cicero took over this case when the previous advocate M. Iunius was called away as a legatus. This chapter discusses the nature of the case, the organization of the speech, the origin of the dispute, vadimonium documents, continuation of the dispute, and the relative strengths of the cases.
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/9780199216444.003.0008
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, European History: BCE to 500CE
This chapter examines Cicero's defense speeches. These include the defence speech for M. Fonteius, whom Cicero may have already promised to defend at the time of the trial of Verres; Cicero's defence ...
More
This chapter examines Cicero's defense speeches. These include the defence speech for M. Fonteius, whom Cicero may have already promised to defend at the time of the trial of Verres; Cicero's defence of L. Valerius Flaccus — spoken ten years later in Caesar's first consulship some time after the trial of C. Antonius and shortly after the passage of Caesar's own lex de repetundis; and Cicero's defense of Scaurus. What survives of these defence speeches shows on a smaller scale Cicero wrestling with the problem that faced Hortensius when he defended Verres. Each of the defendants had almost certainly committed offences against the lex de repetundis, even if some of them were more in the nature of improprieties than gross violations of its norms. In these speeches Cicero dismisses prosecution witnesses and their evidence, rather than arguing with them. Instead, he appeals to the general achievement of the defendants in promoting the interest of Rome's empire and to their basic decency. This was the ‘defence of good men’ which at the end of the fifth Verrine he programmatically claimed as his new métier.Less
This chapter examines Cicero's defense speeches. These include the defence speech for M. Fonteius, whom Cicero may have already promised to defend at the time of the trial of Verres; Cicero's defence of L. Valerius Flaccus — spoken ten years later in Caesar's first consulship some time after the trial of C. Antonius and shortly after the passage of Caesar's own lex de repetundis; and Cicero's defense of Scaurus. What survives of these defence speeches shows on a smaller scale Cicero wrestling with the problem that faced Hortensius when he defended Verres. Each of the defendants had almost certainly committed offences against the lex de repetundis, even if some of them were more in the nature of improprieties than gross violations of its norms. In these speeches Cicero dismisses prosecution witnesses and their evidence, rather than arguing with them. Instead, he appeals to the general achievement of the defendants in promoting the interest of Rome's empire and to their basic decency. This was the ‘defence of good men’ which at the end of the fifth Verrine he programmatically claimed as his new métier.
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/9780199216444.003.0005
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, European History: BCE to 500CE
This chapter examines another speech by Cicero. The year after pro Quinctio, Cicero undertook his first criminal defence — that of Sextus Roscius of America — and from then on seemed to have had a ...
More
This chapter examines another speech by Cicero. The year after pro Quinctio, Cicero undertook his first criminal defence — that of Sextus Roscius of America — and from then on seemed to have had a regular practice in both private and criminal cases. The speech for the actor Quintus Roscius relates to another private suit arising from a partnership (societas). It was delivered some time after Sulla's dictatorship and is rhetorically more sophisticated. The issue in the speech stemmed from events around the eighties BC and relates to people of similar status to those in pro Quinctio. Like pro Quinctio, the speech provides valuable evidence for private law procedure in the late Republic and for the law of partnership. It also reveals the types of argument an orator needed to deal with such legal issues. In the surviving text, Cicero seems to be deliberately making matters as confused as he can. Based on the structure created by the partition, Cicero moves from arguments drawn strictly from law to arguments from equity, derived from Roscius' character and the history of the partnership. In this later section, he called into question allegations made by the prosecution, which involved the legal interpretation of more than one point of fact from the past, largely damaging to Roscius. Cicero seems indeed to have tried to rewrite the legal history behind the case. The reconstruction of the narrative and the legal argument are discussed.Less
This chapter examines another speech by Cicero. The year after pro Quinctio, Cicero undertook his first criminal defence — that of Sextus Roscius of America — and from then on seemed to have had a regular practice in both private and criminal cases. The speech for the actor Quintus Roscius relates to another private suit arising from a partnership (societas). It was delivered some time after Sulla's dictatorship and is rhetorically more sophisticated. The issue in the speech stemmed from events around the eighties BC and relates to people of similar status to those in pro Quinctio. Like pro Quinctio, the speech provides valuable evidence for private law procedure in the late Republic and for the law of partnership. It also reveals the types of argument an orator needed to deal with such legal issues. In the surviving text, Cicero seems to be deliberately making matters as confused as he can. Based on the structure created by the partition, Cicero moves from arguments drawn strictly from law to arguments from equity, derived from Roscius' character and the history of the partnership. In this later section, he called into question allegations made by the prosecution, which involved the legal interpretation of more than one point of fact from the past, largely damaging to Roscius. Cicero seems indeed to have tried to rewrite the legal history behind the case. The reconstruction of the narrative and the legal argument are discussed.
