Search Results

This chapter examines in detail seven letters from Cicero's correspondence in order to establish some of the conventions of linguistic politeness typically used in more formal epistolary exchanges between Roman aristocrats. These seven letters include missives from Cicero to C. Matius, Marcus Crassus, Cassius Longinus, Scribonius Curio, Acilius Caninus, and L. Culleolus, as well as one from M. Marcellus to Cicero. These letters show the important role played by conventionalized polite language in aristocratic correspondence and in particular by the following linguistic strategies: expressions of thanks and appreciation, pledges of help and support, emphatic assertions of pleasure, assertions of goodwill and congratulations, compliments (often wittily phrased), and the commemoration of family ties and previous friendly services. Overall, these letters demonstrate the value placed on the politeness of respect in circles where personal dignitas received great emphasis, as well as the significance of conventionalized affiliative politeness and polite fictions for individuals attempting to forge cooperative political alliances.

This chapter explores the more manipulative and self-interested uses of affiliative politeness among Cicero's correspondents. It suggests that at times it is difficult for us to distinguish between hypocritically fawning remarks (blanditiae) and conventionally supportive polite fictions. The contextual cues on which Cicero would have based his own judgements are often unavailable to the modern reader. Several letters are examined in order to illustrate these interpretative challenges: Cicero's exchanges with Mark Antony in 49 B.C and 44 B.C., a letter from Cassius Parmensis to Cicero, and letters from Marcus Lepidus to Cicero. In several instances we may well suspect deceptive intentions on the part of the writer, and such hypocrisy seems to have been a regular feature of Roman political life. The exploitation of this potentially deceptive language was facilitated to a considerable degree by the conventionalized use of polite fictions in everyday aristocratic correspondence.

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.